Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:02]

>> GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO CITY OF ROWLETT ZONING AND PLANNING FOR JULY 14, 2020. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CITIZENS' INPUT. THIS IS WHERE CITIZENS IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT CAN ADDRESS THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION ON ANY ISSUE WHETHER IT'S ON THE AGENDA OR NOT. USUALLY IT WOULD BE BEST IF IT WAS NONAGENDA ITEMS. I WOULD TIME THOSE PEOPLE AT THREE MINUTES. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE NO

SPEAKERS FOR OUR CITIZENS INPUT SESSION? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> AT THIS TIME, WE'LL CLOSE THE CITIZENS INPUT SECTION MOVE ON TO ITEM 4A CONSENT AGENDA.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM WHICH IS CONSIDER THE MINUTES THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING OF JUNE 23, 2020. DID EVERYBODY HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT? QUINN, YOU ARE VOTING SINCE I DON'T SEE LISA HERE. COMMISSIONERS, EVERYBODY HAVE A

CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES? >> YES. >> YES.

>> ANY ISSUES, MOANS, COMPLAINTS? I'M READY FOR A MOTION.

MR. COTE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

>> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? MR. ENGEN. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

ALL IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND. STEVE, ARE YOU ABSTAINING? >> ABSTAIN.

>> OKAY. 6-1. THERE WE GO.

[5A. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Cypress Creek Rowlett, LP, to rezone the approximately 14.30-acre tract from Limited Office Commercial (0-1) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Multi-Family-Suburban (MF-S) Uses in order to develop the site with a 248 unit apartment complex. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Old Rowlett Road and Big A Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. ITEM 5A.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY CYPRUS CREEK ROWLETT TO REZONE 14.3 ACRE TRACT FROM LIMITED OFFICE COMMERCIAL 01 DISTRICT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN USES IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH A 248 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. MISS BRADLEY, ARE YOU PRESENTING

THAT? >> I AM. >> YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. SO THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A REZONING FROM LIMITED OFFICE TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN USSES AND IT IS A PROPOSAL FOR 248 UNITS IN A COMPLEX, APARTMENT COMPLEX. AS YOU CAN SEE AT THE TOP, YOU SEE THAT IT IS ZONED 01 AND IF THIS REZONING IS APPROVED IT WOULD BECOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE 14.30 ACRE TRACT IS TWO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES TODAY HAVE BARNS AND A PASTURE WHERE THERE ARE GRAZING ANIMALS ON THE PROPERTY.

THE SITE HAS 530 FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG OLD ROWLETT ROAD. THERE IS A COLLECTION OF MATURE TREE CANOPY THAT COVERS THE NORTH SOUTH/NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. NOW, SO TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BACKGROUND AS FAR AS SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN TO, THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY YOU WILL FIND 138 UNIT SENIOR LIVING FACILITY WHICH IS ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. UNDEVELOPED CITY PARK, WHICH IS LIMITED OFFICE 0-1 DISTRICT. TO THE EAST IS SINGLE FAMILY, NINE ZONING DISTRICT AND TO THE SOUTH IS PLAN DEVELOP GENERAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL. ALSO ANOTHER TRACT OF UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT IS FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE AND GENERAL AND COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL USE WHICH IS A PLAN DEVELOPMENT WITH MIXED COMMERCIAL USES.

TO THE WEST YOU WILL FIND UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT IS B-2 DISTRICT AS WELL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT PLAN DEVELOPMENT REZONINGS, WE LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE IT IS A GUIDING TOOL. WITHIN THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT DESIGNATES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE.

THIS IS A MIX OF MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY COMMERCIAL ALONG BIG A ROAD AS TALKED ABOUT BEFOREHAND WITH THE SURROUND USE LAND PATTERNS AND THESE HAPPEN TO BE A KEY INGREDIENT SUPPORTING THE

[00:05:06]

RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT USES. THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS ENTIRELY RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT PROVIDE A RETAIL COMMERCIAL COMPONENT WHICH IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE AREA DESIGNATED FOR OFFICE USES WHICH IS IN ADDITION FOR THE SURROUNDING AREAS, IF APPROVED THE OPPORTUNITY WOULD REMAIN LOST. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO WITH THE PROPOSED PLAN DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN, AS YOU ARE AWARE, IT IS PROPOSED FOR 248 UNITS.

TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN, AND ALSO AN OVERVIEW OF THE SITE, YOU HAVE TEN BUILDINGS WHICH ARE LOCATED IN THE RED. THAT CONSISTS OF 72 ONE-BEDROOMS, 104 TWO-BEDROOMS, 64 THREE-BEDROOMS AND EIGHT FOUR BEDROOMS. 486 PARKING SPACES WHICH INCLUDES GUEST PARKING WITHIN THAT 486 PARKING SPACES. ALSO, YOU CAN SEE IN THE YELLOW, YOU HAVE A PLAYGROUND, PAVILION AND POOL. IN THE GREEN, YOU HAVE SPORTS COURT/FIELD AND IN THE BLUE YOU WILL HAVE A CLUBHOUSE. ALL WITHIN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO SOME OF THE PROPOSED PD COMMISSIONS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, BECAUSE IT IS DIFFERENT THAN OUR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN DISTRICT AND DOESN'T MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT.

SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WILL CHANGE IS THE FLOOR AREA MINIMUM MAXIMUM DENSITY WHICH WITH THE CURRENT DISTRICT, YOU WOULD REQUIRE 2500 MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING.

17.4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THIS PD PROPOSES 18.64 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

MINIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR DWELLING UNIT DOES NOT PROVIDE ONE. MF-S PROVIDES 700 SQUARE FEET.

PD IS REQUESTING THE MINIMUM IS 608 SQUARE FEET. WITH THIS SITE, THERE ARE SETBACKS THAT THEY ARE REQUIRING WHICH ARE A LOT MORE THAN IF THEY WERE BUILDING IN 0-1 DISTRICTS AND MF-S DISTRICT. MINIMUM SET BACK IS 25 FEET ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL OR BACKS TO LOCAL STREET FOR 30-1 DISTRICT, 25 IF ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL OR BACKS TO LOCAL STREET AND THE PROPOSED PD CALLS FOR 89 FEET. THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

THE MINIMUM REAR SET BACK 25 FEET OF ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL OR BACKS TO LOCAL STREET FOR 0-1. MF-S, 25 FEET AND THE PD IS PROPOSING 91 FEET.

MAXIMUM STORAGE FOR 01 DISTRICT IS THREE STORIES, MF-S IS 35 OR TWO STORIES AND THEY'RE PROPOSING A MAXIMUM HEIGHT PD FOR 37.6 FEET FOR THREE STORIES. NOW, SCREENING WITH SIDE OR REAR YARDE EED A ADJACENT, 0-1 OR M DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT. WHAT THEY ARE REFIRING IS 8 FOOT WOODEN BOARD ON BOARD FENCE. THAT WILL BE ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO WITH THE LANDSCAPING BUFFERS WHICH WE USE AS BUFFERS BETWEEN DIFFERENT USES, WE HAVE TO THE WEST 0-1 DISTRICT WOULD CALL FOR A 15 FOOT BUFFER WITH ONE CANOPY AND TEN EVER GREEN SHRUBS. THIS WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MF-S DISTRICT. PD IS PROPOSED TO HAVE THAT AS WELL.

TO THE EAST WHICH IS WHERE THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS LOCATED, 0-1 DISTRICT WOULD BE A 15-FOOT BUFFER WITH A SCREEN. MF-1 DISTRICT WOULD REQUIRE TEN WITH ONE CANOPY TREE FOR 35 FEET AND TEN EVER GREEN SHRUBS, PD IS REQUIRING ONE CANOPY TREE PER 50 FEET.

TO THE NORTH BECAUSE IT IS COMPATIBLE THEY WOULD REQUIRE A 15 FOOT BUFFER WITH A MASONRY WALL OR LIVING SCREEN. FOR THE PD, MF, IT WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH A 6 FOOT BUFFER WIDTH. TO THE SOUTH, BECAUSE IT IS ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, AS WELL AS TO THE WEST, THEY WOULD CALL FOR A RIGHT OF WAY BUFFER FOR 15 FOOT BUFFER WIDTH WITH

[00:10:05]

ONE CANOPY TREE PER 35 FEET. APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THAT AS WELL IN THEIR PD STANDARDS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. NOW, THERE ARE ALSO SOME OTHER PD CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE ARE TAKING A LOOK AT, THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT WOULD DEVIATE FROM OUR CODE REQUIREMENTS. SECTION 77305 REQUIRES A FACILITY WITHIN 200 FEET OF EVERY DWELLING. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FACILITY WITHIN 300 FEET.

AND THE REASON THEY ARE PLACING IT AT SUCH A DISTANCE IS BECAUSE THEY FEEL THEY WOULD LOSE A LOT OF PARKING AND IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR TRASH PICKUP. ALSO, THE BUILDING ORIENT AATIO DOES STATE IN OUR CODE BUILDING LOCATION ORIENTATION STATES NO FRONT WALL OR MULTIFAMILY SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN 40 FEET OR SIDE STRUCTURE OR FRONT WALL OF ANY OTHER MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE.

BUILDING 5 AND 6 WOULD NOT COMPLY WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. SO IF THEY WERE TO ADJUST THIS, THIS MAY THROW OTHER BUILDINGS OFF WITH SPATIAL COMPLIANCE. SECTION 77-508E.2-A REQUIRES A 160 FOOT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF ANY MULTIFAMILY BUILDING. BUILDING 9 DOES NOT MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MAXIMUM BUILDING LENGTH OF 240 FEET.

APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO TO MITIGATE THIS REQUIREMENT.ON- NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA.

ALSO WITH STORAGE FACILITY, THEY WILL DEVIATE FROM 77-508. OUR CODE DOES REQUIRE FACILITIES TO BE ENCLOSED FOR BICYCLES AND OTHER BELONGINGS. TYPICALLY TO BE ACCOMMODATED WITH THE INDIVIDUAL UNIT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE CLOSET, STORAGE CLOSETS ON THE BALCONY OF EACH UNIT. SUM OF ADDITIONAL DEVIATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO THE CODE IS PARKING. WE REQUIRE THE PARKING TO BE 0.25 GUEST PARKING PER UNIT.

APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 5% WITH THAT. SO THEY WOULD ONLY BE PROVIDING 12 SPACES, WHICH FOR OUR CODE BASED OFF THEIR UNIT COUNT, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE 62 SPACES. APPLICANT IS JUSTIFYING THIS REQUEST SAYING PARKING RATIOS WORK WELL WITH THEIR PRODUCT. THE LAST ONE IS OUR MONUMENT SIGN THAT COMPLIES WITH THE MONUMENT SIGN COMPLIES WITH THE HIGH END AREA. HOWEVER, THE BASE OF THE MONUMENT SIGN WILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE CODE. REQUIREMENT FOR THE RDC IS TWO FEET. THE BASE THEY ARE PROPOSING IS 1 FOOT 4 INCHES.

THEY WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE DEVELOPMENT IF IT NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA.

SO AS STATED BEFORE, TO THE EAST THERE IS RESIDENTIAL LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE UNDEVELOPED LAND. AND THEY ARE PROPOSING TO HAVE POSSIBLY THREE STORY, FOUR STORY BUILDINGS AND TO MITIGATE THIS, THEY PROPOSE TO DO A STEP DOWN TWO STORIES ADJACENT TO THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AND ALSO SET BACK THE BILLINGS 90 FEET.

ALSO WITH AN ADDITION TO THIS MITIGATION THAT THEY PROPOSE TO MAINTAIN PRIVACY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE HOME TO THE EAST, THEY WILL PUT IN THE WOODEN BOARD, EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT WITH WAX MYRTLES AND WHITE OAK CANOPY TREES. THE TREES WILL HAVE A MINIMUM HIGH OF 12 FEET AT PLANTING AND WILL OBTAIN A HEIGHT OF 20 FEET. YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURE BELOW WHAT IT WILL PLAN OUT TO BE WITH ALSO SHOWING THE LINE OF SIGHT WITH INDIVIDUALS PEERING TOWARDS THE BUILDINGS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO JUST TO PROVIDE YOU A LITTLE INFORMATION AS FAR AS IF THIS IS APPROVED. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION WILL HAPPEN TO BE FROM TWO MAIN INGRESS/EGRESS POINTS OFF BIG A ROAD.

BIG A ROAD WILL BE THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE, BUT OLD ROWLETT ROAD WILL BE THE EMERGENCY ACCESS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO JEFF TO PROVIDE SOME MORE INFORMATION

[00:15:02]

ABOUT THE DRAINAGE CONSIDERATION WITHIN THIS PROJECT. >> OKAY.

THERE WE GO. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I WAS GOING TO ASK TO COVER THE DRAINAGE AND SOME OF THE TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS. THE SITE, THE PROPOSED SITE SITS AT THE TOP OF A WATER SHED. THIS SITE DRAINS THROUGH THE LIBERTY CREEK ADJACENT TO SUBDIVISION NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ULTIMATE DISCHARGE IS TO A FLOOD PLAIN ALONG A STREAM THAT EVENTUALLY GOES TO THE LAKE. THE SITE IS ABOUT 13.2 ACRES, MAYBE 14 ACRES.

I SAW THAT EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION. THE RUNOFF, EXISTING RUNOFF NOW GOES THROUGH THE LIBERTY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 3.5 ACRE FOOT DETENTION POND. THIS POND WILL LIMIT THE DISCHARGE FROM THE SITE TO WHAT IS EXISTING RUNOFF TODAY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. SO, THEREFORE, IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE ANY ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE LIBERTY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DOWNSTREAM RECEIVING WATERS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS SITE DEAL WITH THE ADJACENT ROADWAYS. THESE ADJACENT ROADWAYS, AS WE'VE COVERED EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION, ARE BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

THESE ROADS ARE CURRENTLY SUBSTANDARD ASPHALT ROAD WAYS. ASPHALT ROAD WAYS DO NOT MEET CURRENT CITY CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. CURRENT CITY CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS CALL FOR A CONCRETE PAVEMENT WITH CURB AND GUTTERS AND A TREATED BASE.

AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTO AT RIGHT, WHICH IS A PHOTO OF BIG A ROAD IN FRONT OF THE PROPOSED SITE. IT IS AN AT FAULT STREET, TWO LANE ASPHALT STREET AND THERE ARE NO CURB AND GUTTERS. IT IS EITHER A DITCH OR RUNS OFF TO THE ADJACENT LAND.

THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY CALLS FOR BIG A ROAD TO BE A TYPE C-2 LANE UNDIVIDED COLLECTOR ROAD. A TYPE C COLLECTOR IS 38 FEET WIDE.

OF COURSE, IT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED OF CONCRETE. OLD ROWLETT ROAD IS A SIMPLE MINOR RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY. MINOR RESIDENTIAL ROAD WAYS IN THE CITY STANDARDS ARE 31 FOOT WIDE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRE DEVELOPERS TO IMPROVE SUBSTANDARD ROAD WAYS. ONE OF THOSE SECTIONS TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPER BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR HALF OF THE ROADWAY. THAT BASICALLY MEANS THAT THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OTHER HALF. SO THE CITY WOULD PARTNER WITH THE DEVELOPER TO IMPROVE THE ROADWAY TO ITS FULL WIDTH. WE GENERALLY DON'T CONSTRUCT HALF ROADWAYS FOR VARIOUS REASONS. ONE GOOD REASON IS THAT AN ASPHALT ROAD WAY IS AT ONE WAY. THE CONCRETE ROAD WAY IS TYPICALLY LOWER TO ACCOUNT FOR THE DRAINAGE ALONG THE DITCHES THAT WOULD CURRENTLY LINE THE ASPHALT ROAD.

SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN GRADE AND ELEVATION. BUT IT ALSO IS JUST IMPRACTICAL IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE JOINT BETWEEN THE TWO WOULD TEND TO DEFAULT OR FAIL.

IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD IDEA. WHEN WE GET A PROJECT LIKE THIS AND THE DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTES TOWARDS THEIR HALF OF THE ROADWAY, THE CITY TYPICALLY PARTNERS WITH THE OTHER HALF.

HOWEVER, CURRENTLY THE CITY HAS FUNDS FOR OTHER STREET PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND SO WE

[00:20:01]

WOULD RATHER THAT THE DEVELOPER ESCROW THAT SHARE OF HIS COST. THEY HAVE SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE THAT SHOWS APPROXIMATELY $530,000 WOULD BE ESCROWED TO IMPROVE BOTH BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD. THAT INCLUDES THE INTERSECTIONS AS WELL. THAT'S THE END. I'LL THROW IT BACK TO TARA.

>> THANK YOU, JEFF. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO WE SENT OUT NOTICES ON JUNE 26TH, 2020. WE SENT OUT 37 TO THE 200 PUBLIC NOTICE AREA AND 54 TO THE 500 FOOT PUBLIC NOTICE AREA. SO WITHIN THE 200 AREA, WE'VE RECEIVED FOUR IN OPPOSITION AND ONE IN FAVOR. AND WITHIN THE 500 AREA, WE'VE RECEIVED TWO IN OPPOSITION AND THREE IN FAVOR. IF YOU LOOK TO THE MAP ON YOUR RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE RED THE NOTICES THAT WERE IN OPPOSITION AND THE GREEN THE ONES THAT WERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.

AND WITHIN THE AREA THAT THEY ARE ALIGNED IN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA.

SO JUST TO PROVIDE YOU AN OVERALL PICTURE OF OUR LIMITED OFFICE 0-1 DISTRICT, 0-1 TAKES THE FORM OF SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. AT THIS TIME THE CITY HAS A TOTAL OF 50.01 ACRES OF 0-1 DESIGNATED AREA. 2.203 AREAS OF THIS LAND IS ALREADY DEVELOPED. IF THE PD IS APPROVED ONLY -- 0-1 DISTRICTS SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED BECAUSE THIS ALLOWS NEIGHBORHOODS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS. THE MAP TO THE RIGHT SHOWS THE DISTRICT, WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED IN THE CITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SO THE RECOMMENDED STATION OF THIS PD REQUEST IS DENIAL. WE FOUND THAT IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT REDUCES THE ALREADY LIMITED 0-1 ZONING OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY DIMINISHING THE OPPORTUNITIES TO DIVERSIFY THE TAX BASE AND THE PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY DOES NOT OFFER A SUITABLE TRANSITION BETWEEN LOWER DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL USAGE AND HIGHER ENTRANCE COMMERCIAL USES WHICH IS OFTEN THE USES FOR LIMITED 0-1 PROPERTY.

THAT COMPLETES THE PRESENTATION. I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION. >> COMMISSIONERS, IS IT OKAY IF WE HOLD QUESTIONS UNTIL AFTER THE APPLICANT HAS THEIR PRESENTATION TO MAKE? OKAY. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE MR. SHEFFIELD AND SOMEBODY ELSE THERE.

I CAN'T READ YOUR NAME BECAUSE IT'S -- MR. BUMP, OKAY.

IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND MAKE

YOUR PRESENTATION. >> SURE.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. COMMISSIONER, BOARD MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS CASEY BUMP. IF IT IS OKAY WITH ALL OF YOU, I'D LIKE TO ASK MR. SHEFFIELD TO GO FIRST BECAUSE WE ARE PART OF

THE TEAM TOGETHER HERE. >> THAT'S FINE.

YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD.

MR. SHEFFIELD CAN IDENTIFY HIMSELF, HIS NAME AND ADDRESS,

WE'D APPRECIATE IT. >> RICK SHEFFIELD, ROWLETT, 75008. I'M SPEAKING IN MY CAPACITY AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE FINANCE CORPORATION.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, CITY STAFF, EVERYONE LISTENING AT HOME, GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS, I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE TO THANK YOU. I KNOW FULL WELL THE SACRIFICE YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES MAKE TO DO THIS VOLUNTEER JOB.

MUCH APPRECIATE IT. I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN WITH A QUOTE FROM THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SECTION OF THE 2019 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE WITH REGARD TO HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

QUOTE, AS IT RELATES TO FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MANY EXPRESS INTEREST IN CREATING MORE AFFORDABLE DIVERSE HOUSING.

PARTICIPANTS BELIEVE THIS WOULD PROVIDE FULL CIRCLE HOUSING AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ATTRACTION.

OVERALL IT WOULD STOP CREATING DIVERSE OPTIONS WHICH PLAY A

[00:25:02]

MAJOR PART IN SPURRING FUTURE GROWTH IN THIS COMMUNITY, END QUOTE. SURPRISINGLY THOUGH THE FUTURE MAP IN THE PLAN'S UPDATE IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPROPRIATE ZONING OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.

OUT OF THE HUNDREDS OF ACRES AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, THE ONLY LAND ZONED APPROPRIATELY FOR AFFORDABLE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS ON THE OUTER EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS NOWHERE NEAR BUSINESS OR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.

EVEN THAT PROPERTY ISN'T AFFORDABLE WITH ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED TO DEVELOP THAT LAND.

COMMISSIONERS, THERE IS A DISCONNECT SOMEWHERE.

THIS CITY HAS MANY HARDWORKING TAXPAYERS LIVING PAY CHECK TO PAY CHECK TO MAKE ENDS MEET AND THEY ARE NOT BEING SERVED.

IN FACT, HUD ESTIMATES THERE ARE 12 MILLION RENTER AND HOME OERPB HOUSE HOLDS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT SPEND MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR ANNUAL INCOME ON HOUSING. AS YOU KNOW, FAMILIES COULD PAY MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR HOUSING ARE CONSIDERED COST BURDENED AND HAVE DIFFERICULTY PAYING FOR OTR EXPENSES.

AS OF THIS SPRING, THIS CITY HAS 3586 APARTMENT HOMES BUILT OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH ANOTHER 2872 APPROVED.

OF THESE 6,000 PLUS HOMES, THEY'RE A GRAND TOTAL OF 76.

YES, ONLY 76 HOMES UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR MIDDLE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. THAT IS LESS THAN A 1.2% SHARE.

WE ARE IN DIRE NEED OF MORE HOUSING FOR INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES THAT EARN BETWEEN $35,000 AND $50,000 A YEAR.

THESE HARD WORKING TAXPAYERS ARE PEOPLE THAT YOU MEET AND DO BUSINESS WITH EVERY DAY. YOUR DRY CLEANER, THE BANK TELLER, THE GROCERY STORE CASHIER, FLORIST, YOUR CHILD'S TEACHER, THE MEDICAL ASSISTANT AT YOUR DOCTOR'S OFFICE, ENTRY LEVEL POSITIONS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THE LIST GOES ON.

WE NEED TO MAKE A PLACE FOR THESE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

MARKET STUDIES HAVE SHOWN ROWLETT CAN ABSORB 1,000 AFFORDABLE UNIT FORCE FAMILIES. YES, THE NEED IS DIRE AND IS REAL. ALL OF THOSE DATA ARE BEFORE THE ADVENT OF THE CORONAVIRUS. YOU CAN FIND ARTICLES THAT DISCUSS HOW THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE'S INCOMES AND JOBS HVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS.

PEOPLE ARE LOSING JOBS AND HAVING TO ACCEPT LOWER PAYING JOBS JUST TO PAY THE RENT AND BUY FOOD FOR THEIR FAMILY.

MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO HOUSE THESE CITIZENS ARE NEEDED QUICKLY. WE FEEL THE LOCATION FITS THE REQUESTED ZONING. ADJACENT TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY, THE EVERGREEN SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS FOCUSED ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SENIORS.

TO THE SOUTH IS A SPATTERING OF BUSINESSES IN THE INDUSTRIAL USE CATEGORY THAT SPAN JUST A PORTION OF BIG A ROAD.

ANY TIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, IN MY OPINION, WOULD BE WASTED.

BUSINESSES HAVE SHUTTERED, COMERCIAL VACANCY RATES ARE INCREASING AND THE ECONOMIC FUTURE IS NOT GOOD FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. WE DISCUSSED IT WITH THE CITY'S OWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

MOST OF THE WORKERS AND DEVELOPERS ARE TAKING A WAIT AND SEE ATTITUDE. IT MAY BE SOMETIME BEFORE YOU SEE THAT DEVELOPMENT. WE FEEL THAT ADDING FAMILIES HERE WITH MORE DISPOSABLE INCOME AS A RESULT OF LOWER RENT ALONG WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT OFFERED BY THE DEVELOPER WILL HELP TO RE-ENERGIZE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALL ALONG BIG A RAD EVEN FURTHER TO THE EAST THAN IT IS NOW. ADDITIONALLY, THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL PROVIDE HOUSING FOR WORKERS THAT ARE GOING TO BE CRITICAL TO THE SUCCESS OF SAPPHIRE BAY. ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ESTIMATED 7500 JOBS CREATED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH OVER 2,000 OF THOSE JOBS BEING IN THE SERVICE AND HOSPITALITY SECTOR.

AS YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS FROM POTENTIAL EMPLOYERS IS, WHERE ARE MY WORKERS GOING TO LIVE? WITHOUT AFFORDABLE OPTIONS FOR THESE WORKERS, THEY'LL HAVE TO COME FROM OUTSIDE ROWLETT, DRIVING LONGER DISTANCES, CONTINUING THE CYCLE OF BEING TOSSED FROM THEIR HOME.

IF ROWLETT WANTS TO BE KNOWN AS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN WORK, LIVE AND PLAY, WE NEED HOUSING IN THIS CITY.

WE NEED THEM TO EAT IN OUR RESTAURANTS AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMIC SUCCESS OF ROWLETT. THEY HAVE WORKED HARD TO CONNECT WITH THEIR FUTURE NEIGHBORS AND THEY RECEIVED UNANIMOUS SUPPORT

[00:30:01]

FROM THE ADJACENT LIBERTY CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD.

I PERSONALLY HAVE WORKED WITH THESE PROFESSIONALS AND SEEN FIRST HAND HOW THEY GENUINELY CARE ABOUT PEOPLE, HOW THEY CARE ABOUT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE AND HOW THEY CAN HELP CREATE ADDITIONAL ECONOMIC GROWTH IN ROWLETT.

LASTLY, LIKE ALL DEVELOPERS WITHIN THE HSC WORKS THEY ARE POSITIONED TO PAY THE CITY ITS DUE THROUGH A PILOT AGREEMENT.

THEY'RE ALSO WORKING WITH THE CITY TO EVALUATE AND PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF SURROUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE ALL WHILE CONSIDERING THE NEEDS OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE ANY IMPACT IT MAY HAVE.

NOW YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTENT AND ITS EXECUTION.

YOU CAN MAKE A STATEMENT TONIGHT THAT ROWLETT WELCOMES ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR JOB PAYS THEM.

I, THEREFORE, URGE THE COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THIS ZONING REQUEST.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR ATTENTION.

>> MR. BUMP, BACK TO YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

GOOD EVENING, CHAIR, COMMISSION. I AM HERE, YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN OUR CEO AND FOUNDER STEWART SHAW.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

THIS HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A JOURNEY FOR US.

AS MR. SHEFFIELD SHARED WITH YOU, THIS ALL STARTED BACK IN FEBRUARY, OF US GOING TO PRESENT OUR PROPOSITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP. WE HOPED WE LEFT THAT MEETING WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF SUPPORT FROM THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT WERE THERE AT THE TIME.

AND ALSO, WE THEN WENT TO CITY COUNCIL AND RECEIVED A RESOLUTION WITH NO OBJECTION. SO WE DO HAVE SOME HISTORY IN WORKING WITH YOUR COMMUNITY. ALL SINCE THEN WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH YOUR STAFF, YOUR TEAM MEMBERS IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT AND THEY HAVE BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH.

SO WITH THAT, CAN I GET THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

BONNER CARRINGTON IS AN AUSTIN BASED COMPANY.

TEXAS OWNED. WE DEVELOP CONSTRUCT, LEASE, MANAGE AND MAINTAIN THESE COMMUNITIES ON A FOREVER BASIS.

WE ALSO WILL BE PARTNERING WITH A FAITH BASED NONPROFIT TO BUILD COMMUNITY AT CYPRESS CREEK IN OLD ROWLETT.

WE HAVE COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS AND WE ARE ACTIVE IN AUSTIN, HOUSTON, DALLAS AND AMARILLO REGIONS.

YOU CAN SEE OUR PORTFOLIO THERE. EVERY ONE OF THESE COMMUNITIES CYPRUS CREEK IS A GENERAL POPULATION, ANYONE OF ANY AGE CAN RENT THERE. THE MARIPOSA BRACKET AGE IS 55 AND OLDER. EVERY ONE OF THESE COMMUNITIES IS BUILT UNDER THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM.

THEY ARE DESIGNED AND MAINTAINED AND MANAGED BY US ON A FOREVER BASIS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO WANTED TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WILL LOOK LIKE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS THE CLUBHOUSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS A VIEW OF THE POOL FROM THE CLUB HOUSE.

ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE YOU CAN SEE THE FITNESS CENTER, WHERE IF YOU ARE INTO WORKING OUT, YOU CAN SEE YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS AT THE POOL, SO YOU CAN HAVE CLOSE ACCESS TO THEM.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. JUST ANOTHER VIEW OF THE POOL AND THE AMENITY AREAS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS A VIEW OF THE COURTYARD. I'LL HAVE MANY OF THEM IN THESE.

RIGHT UP FRONT IS A PLAY SCAPE. THIS IS GREAT FOR THE YOUNGER KIDS. THEN YOU HAVE A PAVILION OFF TO THE RIGHT THAT WILL HAVE BARBECUE PITS.

YOUR POOL IS OFF TO THE LEFT. WHAT YOU CAN ALSO NOT SEE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA IS A SPORT COURT, WHICH I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE IN ANOTHER SLIDE HERE. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? THIS IS THE SPORT COURT.

YOU CAN SEE THE PAVILION IN THE BACKGROUND.

THIS SPORT COURT IS DIVIDED INTO TWO PARTS.

ONE PART FOR THE YOUNGER KIDS, WHICH IS THE CLOSEST TO US ON THE SCREEN. THEN YOU HAVE THE BASKETBALL FOR THE OLDER KIDS. OUR INTENTION ON HOW WE DESIGN OUR AMENITIES AND HOW EVERYTHING WORKS TOGETHER SO THAT IT SERVES THE COMMUNITY WELL AND YOU CAN BE AT A GATHERING AND HAVE YOUR KIDS ALSO PLAYING AT THE SPORT COURT.

OUR ACTIVITIES ARE REALLY SELF-CONTAINED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. AND THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS,

[00:35:01]

WHICH YOU CANNOT SEE, BUT IT IS ON THE SITE PLAN, IS THE SPORTS FIELD, WHERE THERE IS ACTUALLY ACCESS TO BE ABLE TO KICK A SOCCER BALL AROUND AND BLOW OFF SOME STEAM.

IN AN ERA WHERE KIDS ARE NOT ABLE TO GO ANYWHERE, CERTAINLY SINCE COVID HAS HIT, WE HAVE ACTIVITIES FOR THEM TO REMAIN ACTIVE IN THEIR COMMUNITY WITH THEIR FAMILIES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE CLUBHOUSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS A COMMUNITY KITCHEN IN THE CLUB HOUSE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE BUSINESS CENTER WHERE WE'LL HAVE APPLE COMPUTERS FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ACCESS AND USE FOR HOMEWORK. THERE WILL BE PRINTERS.

THEY CAN COME HERE AND DO THEIR HOMEWORK OR IN TODAY'S CASE, HOME LEARNING. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS THE ACTIVITY CENTER THAT'S CONNECTED TO THE CLUB THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE RESIDENTS TO LIVE OUT JUST BY MEANS OF HAVING A DEPOSIT. THEY CAN USE IT FOR BIRTHDAY PARTIES, AFTER SCHOOL EVENTS, COMMUNITY GATHERINGS, ANY NUMBER OF EVENTS THERE IN THE COMMUNITY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE INSIDE OF THE FITNESS CENTER. THE POOL IS TO THE RIGHT.

WE USE STATE OF THE ART FITNESS EQUIPMENT.

JUST REALLY MAKE IT OPEN AND INVITING IN A PLACE WHERE SOMEONE CAN ENJOY COMING IN AND WORKING OUT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS A VIEW OF ONE OF THE KITCHENS. EARLIER WE MENTIONED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY. AND SO THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AFFORDABLE UNITS AND MARKET RATE UNITS WILL BE THE FINISH OUT. THIS IS A MARKET RATE UNIT THAT WOULD HAVE GRANITE COUNTER TOPS. AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL HAVE VERY SIMILAR DESIGNS BUT THEY WON'T HAVE GRANITE.

THEY WILL HAVE THE EXACT SAME FLOOR SPACE TO ENJOY WITH THEIR FAMILIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS A VIEW BACK TOWARD THE KITCHEN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS ONE OF OUR ORIGINAL COMMUNITIES CYPRESS CREEK. THIS WAS BUILT IN 2004.

THESE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN IN 2016. SO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT WE INVITE YOU ALL, EITHER ON A HOSTED VISIT OR AN UNANNOUNCED VISIT, TO COME AND SEE WHAT OUR COMMUNITIES ARE LIKE.

THEY LOOK JUST AS GOOD WHETHER WE'RE VISITING WITH YOU OR WHETHER YOU GO ON YOUR OWN. WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHEN WE GO TO AREAS JUST LIKE THIS THAT SHOP US. BACK IN DRIPPING SPRINGS, THE MAYOR OF DRIPPING SPRINGS CAME OUT TO THIS COMMUNITY AND POSED AS RESIDENTS AND CHECKED UP ON US AND CAME BACK WITH A GREAT REPORT THAT THEY WOULD ACTUALLY ENJOY LIVING IN THIS COMMUNITY AND WOULD WELCOME IT IN THEIRS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO, ONE THING THAT SETS US APART IN OUR INDUSTRY IS THAT WE PARTNER WITH APARTMENT LIVES A CHRISTIAN MINISTRY OUT OF DALLAS. AND THEY HELP US BY PUTTING A CARE TEAM IN THE COMMUNITY. WHAT A CARES TEAM DOES IS, THEY ARE THERE TO CREATE COMMUNITY. THEY'RE THERE TO GREET OUR RESIDENTS. THEY ARE THERE TO PROVIDE FELLOWSHIP. THEY ARE THERE IN TIMES OF NEED, IN TIMES OF STRUGGLES. DURING COVID, SINCE THEY CAN'T GO DOOR TO DOOR, HAVE BEEN COMING UP WITH NEW WAYS TO REACH OUT TO THE RESIDENTS. THEIR WHOLE PREMISE IS TO CREATE COMMUNITY. BY DOING SO, THEY ARE LIVING OUT THEIR MISSION THROUGH THEIR CHRISTIAN MINISTRY WITH APARTMENT LIFE. AND IT IS VERY UNIQUE AND REALLY BRINGS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT PRESENT IN APARTMENT COMMUNITIES THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE.

AND SO IT REALLY SETS US APART. IN THIS PHOTO ARE THE FAMILIES.

TA AND PAM STARTED LIVING AT THE COMMUNITY.

TA STUDIED AND BECAME A SHERIFF DEPUTY AND WENT ON AND SERVES THE COMMUNITY OF GEORGETOWN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO YOU ALL HAVE SEEN THE LOCATION MAP.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE SEE THE AREA AROUND US, WE THINK WE ARE A GOOD TRANSITION BETWEEN THE RETAIL THAT IS ALREADY EXISTING, WHERE OUR RESIDENTS AND THE COMMUNITY CAN ALREADY GO VISIT.

[00:40:03]

AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OPEN TRACTS AROUND US THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR RETAIL OR OTHER USES.

WE THINK WE REALLY DO COMPLEMENT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE AREA.

THE FOCUS OF MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP WAS TO BUILD COMMUNITIES, GET FEED BACK, FIND OUT WHAT THEY LIKE, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE, IF WE ARE GOING TO BE NEIGHBORS.

ONE OF THE RESULTS THAT CAME OUT WAS THE SCREENING PLAN WE SHARED WITH YOU ALL EARLIER. SO THIS ORIGINALLY STARTED WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND EAST SIDE. WE WERE OPEN TO THE IDEA OF BUILDING A PORTION OF OUR ROADWAY TO MAKE THE TURN LANES.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAID THEY NEEDED TURN LIGHTS.

WE WERE LOOKING FOR AN OPTION THAT WOULD CREATE A WIN-WIN FOR THE AREA. ADDITIONALLY THERE'S THE MARTIN DRIVE ROAD TO THE SOUTH THAT WOULD CONNECT TO THE MAIN HIGHWAY THERE. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE OWNER AND BROKER A NUMBER OF TIMES TO TRY TO SECURE AN EASEMENT TO ALLOW THAT ROAD WAY TO BE BUILT. THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED AT THE TIME. WE'LL CONTINUE TRYING AND SHOULD THAT OPTION CHANGE, WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD IN WORKING WITH THE CITY TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE THIS A WIN-WIN FOR EVERYONE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO YOU CAN SEE OUR SITE PLAN HERE. THIS WAS OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THE SPORTS FIELD ON YOUR LEFT.

THE AMENITIES BEING THE PLAY SCAPE IN THE MIDDLE, THE PAVILION, THE POOL. OFF TO THE RIGHT IS ANOTHER PAVILION AND THE SPORTS COURT. SO EVERYTHING IS DESIGNED HERE SO THAT OUR RESIDENTS CANNOT HAVE TO CROSS PARKING TO COME IN AND ENJOY THE AMENITIES. IT IS VERY INTENTIONAL HOW THIS IS LAID OUT, SO THAT YOU CAN GO AND YOUR KIDS CAN BE THERE PLAYING AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THEM CROSSING A PARKING LOT BEFORE THEY GO USE THE SPORTS FIELD OR THE PLAY SCAPE. AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL THINK YOU'D LIKE TO SEE, WE'RE OPEN TO IDEAS HERE. WE ARE GOING TO BE A PART OF YOUR COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME. AND SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING HERE THAT YOU JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT, PLEASE LET US KNOW AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. WE STARTED OUT WITH A NEIGHBOR.

WE STARTED OUT WITH MANAL. IF WE NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. NEXT PAGE, PLEASE.

THIS WAS THE SCREENING PLAN WE SHARED WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT GOES IN AND SHOWS WHERE THE FAST GROWING WAX MYRTLES WILL BE PLANTED ALONG THE FENCE TO CREATE A HIGHER BUFFER FOR THE NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE THEIR HOMES CLOSEST.

AND THEN THE TREES THAT WILL BE PLANTED AT THE ENDS OF THE TWO STORY BUILDINGS WHERE THERE WILL NOT BE BALCONIES SO THE VIEWS TO THE NEIGHBORS' HOMES WILL BE TAKEN AWAY BY THE LANDSCAPING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. MR. SHEFFIELD SPOKE ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND SO REALLY WE DO THINK WE COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WE'RE PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE CITIZENS OF ROWLETT. IN A SECOND YOU MIGHT WONDER WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING MEANS AND WHO WE'RE SERVING HERE.

SO IF WE START TO DIVE INTO THIS, WE'RE REALLY SERVING THE WORKERS OF YOUR COMMUNITY. ONE MISCONCEPTION WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS THAT IT'S SECTION 8 OR THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE JOBS.

I CAN TELL YOU EVERY RESIDENT IN OUR COMMUNITY IS GOING TO HAVE A JOB. THEY HAVE TO HAVE INCOME.

THE OTHER PART IS, ONCE THEY QUALIFY TO LIVE IN A UNIT, THEY ARE NOT RESTRICTED FROM BETTERING THEMSELVES BY GETTING A PROMOTION OR BETTERING THEIR FAMILY.

SO CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? SO, WITH LIMITED INCOME RESTRICTIONS -- GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO WE WILL BE SERVING RESIDENTS IN A SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD THAT MAKES AROUND $36,000.

TWO PEOPLE, $41,000. WHICH COULD BE A SINGLE PARENT.

THREE PEOPLE COULD BE A SINGLE PARENT AND TWO KIDS OR FOUR PEOPLE COULD B JUST A FAMILY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

PROPOSED RENT FOR THOSE UNITS RUN FROM $905 TO $1372 FOR THE FOUR BEDROOM. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

ONE THING YOUR TEAM ASKED WHO WILL WE BE SERVING? BASED ON OUR RESEARCH, WE TOOK WHAT WE THINK ARE THE TWO LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT WHICH IS DARLINGTON AND

[00:45:04]

THE CITY OF ROWLETT. THESE WERE THE EASIEST WHERE WE COULD PULL EXISTING JOB POSTINGS OR JOB CATEGORIES TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHO WOULD QUALIFY TO LIVE IN THESE APARTMENT HOUSES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WE'LL JUST KIND OF GO FAST HERE. ON A ONE PERSON HOUSE HOLD WITH A $36,000 LIMIT, YOU'VE GOT EVERYTHING FROM A BUS DRIVER TO TEACHER'S AIDE TO SECRETARIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. YOU CAN SEE THE LIST GOES ON AND ON HERE. FIELD TRUCK DRIVER, SECRETARIES, FACILITY LEASING SPECIALIST, CULINARY SPECIALIST.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. TWO PEOPLE HOUSEHOLDS.

THE JOB LIST JUST KEEPS GOING HERE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THESE ARE A BUNCH OF YOUR MAIN TEAMS AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. THEN YOU GET INTO THREE PERSON, MORE OF YOUR OFFICE POSITIONS AND MARKETING SPECIALISTS.

EVEN SOME SUPERVISORS FOR LOOKS LIKE CATERING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THEN YOU HAVE YOUR FOUR AND FIVE. WE CAN REALLY SERVE ANYONE OF ANY SPECTRUM AT ANY OF THESE JOB LEVELS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE CITY OF ROWLETT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO IN THIS CATEGORY, YOU CAN JUST START TO SEE HUMAN RESOURCE ASSISTANT, BUILDING MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN. IN THE TWO PERSON YOU HAVE DEPUTY, CITY SECRETARY, CITY MARSHAL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THREE PERSON WATER QUALITY TECHNICIAN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST.

LARGER CATEGORY, YOU HAVE LIBRARIAN, ACCOUNTANT.

SO WE REALLY CAN SERVE THE WORKING FOLKS OF YOUR COMMUNITY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

IN JANUARY WE MET WITH THE HOA PRESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBERS AND HOSTED A MEETING, AS MENTIONED. THEN WE HAD A TOUR OF THE CYPRESS CREEK, ONE OF OUR CYPRESS CREEK COMMUNITIES WITH THE PRESIDENT. THEN WENT TO THE HOA MEETING AND THE BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO SUPPORT US.

THEN FEBRUARY THROUGH JULY, WE'VE BEEN IN A COVID SITUATION AND WE HAVE JUST BEEN IN CONTINUAL COMMUNICATION AND UPDATES WITH HOA AS WE GO AND REMINDING THEM THAT WE'RE PART OF THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE.

HERE WE GO. EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED TO DATE. WE'RE NOW AT PLANNING AND ZONING AND REQUESTING YOUR APPROVAL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THAT REALLY CONCLUDES WHO WE ARE.

I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT MAY BE ON THE SITE PLAN THAT GO TO PLANNING CONDITIONS. WE ARE OPEN TO WORKING THIS OUT WITH YOU ALL. WE WANT TO BE PART OF YOUR COMMUNITY. WE WILL BE A PART OF YOUR COMMUNITY. AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR

APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU, MR. BUMP.

COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU AS I SEE YOU ON THE SCREEN.

I SEE MR. COTE'S HAND. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. THIS QUESTION IS FOR MR. BUMP.

THE MARKET VALUE, THE NUMBER OF MARKET VALUE UNITS VERSUS AFFORDABLE VALUE UNITS IN THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, IS THERE A PERCENTAGE THERE YOU CAN TELL ME?

>> YES, SIR. CURRENTLY, WE ARE PROPOSING 100% AFFORDABLE UNITS. HOWEVER, WE WOULD CONSIDER BEING ABLE TO PUT IN 10% TO 15% OF MARKET RATE.

WE HAVE THE OPTION TO ADD IN SOME MARKET RATE, IF THAT WAS A

RECOMMENDATION. >> NOT A RECOMMENDATION OR PREFERENCE, I WAS JUST CURIOUS. MARKET VALUE LOOK OF A KITCHEN

VERSUS AFFORDABLE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER? RAISE YOUR HAND. I HAVE A QUESTION.

THIS IS, I THINK, FOR MR. COHEN AND MAYBE THE DEVELOPER.

THAT CONCERNS THAT DETENTION POND.

LOOKING AT IT, AND RIGHT NOW THAT'S AN EMPTY FIELD AND IT DRAINS DOWN TO THE NORTHEAST THROUGH THAT LIBERTY NEIGHBORHOOD INTO THE CREEK. WELL, IT'S A DIRT LOT WITH GRASS

[00:50:04]

GROWN ON IT RIGHT NOW. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF ASPHALT UP THERE, WHAT KIND OF CONSIDERATIONS ARE INTO THAT THAT MAY CHANGE? I MEAN, IT SEEMS TO ME -- AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER -- THAT ONCE YOU PAVE A LOT OF THIS AREA, IT'S GONNA AFFECT THAT RUNOFF. ISN'T IT? I UNDERSTAND THE DETENTION POND WILL BE THERE TO CATCH THAT BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE A BIG RAIN STORM AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'VE GOT SOME FLOODED HOUSES DOWN THERE AT LIBERTY CREEK.

JEFF? >> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT -- I

WASN'T SURE WHEN YOU STARTED. >> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE

PROPOSED DETENTION POND. >> I WASN'T SURE WHETHER YOU

WERE GETTING AT WATER QUALITY. >> NOT WATER QUALITY.

I'M TALKING QUANTITY. WHAT I'M CONCERNED WITH IS THAT THE HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE EAST, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DISCUSS RISK INVOLVED WITH HIGH WATER FLOW THROUGH

THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. >> WELL, WE HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS. THAT'S WHAT WE HOLD THE DESIGN TO. SO THEY ARE BOUND TO LIMIT THEIR RUNOFF TO WHAT IS EXISTING TODAY FOR A CERTAIN DESIGNED STORM.

AND WHEN WE REVIEW THE DESIGN DRAWINGS, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THAT. BUT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY REPORT THAT INDICATES THAT THEY CAN PUT A POND THERE THAT WILL ACHIEVE THT PURPOSE.

>> ISN'T IT SORT OF AN OPTION OF A DEVELOPER TO EITHER INCLUDE A DETENTION POND OR PULL IT INTO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM.

ISN'T THAT KIND OF AN EITHER/OR KIND OF THING?

>> NOT REALLY EITHER/OR. THE DETENTION SYSTEM SERVES ONE FUNCTION, AND THAT IS TO LIMIT THE RUNOFF.

MANY TIMES THERE'S NOT A NATURAL DRAINAGE CHANNEL TO DISCHARGE TO, SO THE DETENTION PONDS WILL GO INTO A STORM SYSTEM.

A NATURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM LIKE THIS IS AVAILABLE AND THERE'S NO REASON THAT IT CAN'T GO TO THAT AS WELL.

>> IS THERE A STORM DRAIN SYSTEM COMPONENT OF THIS PROPOSAL?

>> INSIDE THE SITE THERE IS THAT LEADS TO THE DETENTION POND.

BUT THEN THERE IS A STRUCTURE FROM THE POND TO THE OUT FALL POINT, AND THAT OUT FALL POINT IS A NATURAL CHANNEL.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. COHEN.

MR. ACCOUNT -- COTE, I SEE YOUR HAN.

>> THAT NATURAL CHANNEL TRAVERSES THE EAST AND GOES UNDER DIPLOMACY DRIVE AND AMBASSADOR LANE.

TWO CULVERTS WHICH WERE SIZED FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT BUT NOT NECESSARILY FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT PLUS AN ADDITIONAL --

>> IT'S BEEN AWHILE SINCE I LOOKED AT THE AS BUILT RECORD DRAWINGS, BUT I WOULD BE SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THEY DID NOT INCLUDE THAT FIELD THAT IS PROPOSED AT CYPRESS CREEK AS PART OF THE DRAINAGE AREA FOR THAT SYSTEM.

IT WAS PROBABLY ACCOUNTED FOR AS UNDEVELOPED.

>> I SEE MR. BUMP IS RAISING HIS HAND THERE.

YES, SIR. >> THE DETENTION POND WILL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED TO CATCH ALL OF THE RUNOFF FROM OUR SITE IN A RAIN EVENT AND WILL ALLOW IT TO BE RELEASED AT THE LEVELS THAT IT IS CURRENTLY COMING OFF OF THAT SITE.

AND SO WE CANNOT GO AND SET UP A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GOING TO FLOOD ANYONE NEXT TO US. SO WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING AT OUR LOCATION AND CAPTURE IT IN THAT POND AND RELEASE IT IN A PREDEVELOPMENT FLOW TO GO OFF THE SITE. YOUR TEAM CAN PROBABLY VERIFY THAT. THAT'S TYPICALLY HOW IT WORKS.

>> ALL RIGHT. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.

THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE MR. SHEFFIELD OR MR. BUMP.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE IS A PORTION IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I'M AWARE OF THAT.

MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE GOING TO BE A MECHANISM OR I'M PROBABLY ANSWERING MY OWN QUESTION.

I DON'T THINK THERE CAN POSSIBLY BE A MECHANISM WHERE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE WORKING IN THIS CITY. THEY COULD BE LIVING IN THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND WORKING IN GRAND PRAIRIE.

IS THAT NOT A FACT? >> IF I MAY, I'LL JUST RESPOND

[00:55:05]

TO THAT. THE REASON WE'RE NEEDING THESE LOWER RENTS ARE DUE TO PEOPLE BEING COST BURDENED.

PART OF THAT COST BURDEN, LIKE I MENTIONED WITH SAPPHIRE BAY, PEOPLE HAVE TO GET THEIR WORKERS FROM ELSEWHERE.

PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO DRIVE 30 MINUTE FORCE A $13 AN HOUR JOB.

SO YOU WANT THAT HOUSING IN THE AREA WHERE JOBS ARE.

ARE THERE GOING TO BE PEOPLE THAT DON'T WORK IN ROWLETT LIVING THERE? PROBABLY.

BUT I WOULD THINK THE VAST MAJORITY WOULD BE VERY LOCAL JUST DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE JOBS AND WHAT THEY'RE EARNING.

>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTION? MR. ENGEN, I SEE YOUR HAND RAISED. YOU'RE ON MUTE.

>> YEAH, HAD TO GET THAT OFF. THIS QUESTION IS FOR CITY STAFF.

SO LET'S TURN IT AROUND. I'M CURIOUS IN KNOWING MORE.

BECAUSE IF WE'VE ALREADY HAD THIS SET ASIDE FOR ZONING, WHAT IS THE DEMAND WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY FOR THIS TYPE OF A PROPERTY? IF WE'RE NOT SEEING MUCH GROWTH, MAYBE WE SHOULD THINK DIFFERENTLY.

BUT IF WE'RE SEEING -- WE'RE KIND OF IN A TIME FRAME RIGHT NOW WHERE LOT OF COMMERCIAL STOPPING, PEOPLE ARE RETHINKING, DO WE NEED ALL THESE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IF WE CAN WORK FROM HOME. I GOT TO THROW THE QUESTION OUT BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT TIME. WHAT ARE WE SEEING WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY? IS THERE A BIG NEED FOR THIS?

>> MR. ENGEN, I'LL FIELD THAT QUESTION.

AS IT RELATES TO WHAT IS ON THE GROUND FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, IN TERMS OF WHAT IS THE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY? IS THERE AN UPTICK IN COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE DEVELOPMENT? AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IN LIGHT OF WHAT YOU'VE MENTIONED, I THINK IT WILL BE A TEMPORARY CONDITION.

WE MAY SEE AN UPTICK. WE SEE AN UPTICK IN OUR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS SO TO SPEAK.

NOW, AS IT RELATES TO THIS SPECIFIC USAGE, IF YOU REVIEWED THE STAFF REPORT, IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE ISSUE IS NOT THE FACT THAT THIS IS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX, MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX. THE ISSUE IS THE LOCATION OF IT.

SO IN TERMS OF WHAT HAVE WE SEEN AND DO WE NEED TO REVISIT OUR NONRESIDENTIALLY OWNED PROPERTIES, SUCH AS OUR COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE DISTRICT, WE HAVE A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF OFFICE DISTRICT ZONING IN OUR COMMUNITY IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. AND SO IF WE START CHANGING LAND USE PATENTS NOW, WE WILL SEE THAT AS WELL.

THAT IS WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THIS ZONING DISTRICT FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE, FROM A LAND USE ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE. ADDITIONALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE OFFICE 1 DISTRICT, IT SERVES AS A PHYSICAL SEPARATION AND CREATES A BUFFER DUE TO ITS TRANSITION.

THAT'S A KEY INGREDIENT IN BUILDING THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL AND HOUSING. AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAN COME IN THE FORM OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. HOWEVER, THIS LOCATION, UNFORTUNATELY, FROM AN ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE COULD LEAD TO THE DEGRADATION OF OFFICE OR RETAIL AND COULD COMPROMISE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET ON BIG A ROAD.

>> DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. ENGEN?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER? MR. COTE, I SEE YOUR HAND. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. THIS QUESTION, I GUESS, WOULD BE EITHER MR. SHEFFIELD OR MR. BUMP.

I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION WILL ACTUALLY OWN THE PROPERTY? AND WON'T PAY ANY TAXES ON THAT PROPERTY.

THE DEVELOPER WILL AGREE TO A PILOT AGREEMENT OR SOMETHING.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? >> SURE, I'D BE HAPPY TO.

EXACTLY THE WAY IT WORKED ON THE SENIOR DEAL WE DID ON 66 ON THE EASTERN SIDE. THE HFC DOES HOLD TITLE TO THE LAND. WE, IN TURN, THEN LEASE THAT TO THE DEVELOPER WHO PUTS THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY WHICH CREATES THE ADDITIONAL TAXABLE VALUE.

THEY AGREE TO A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF CITY TAXES, THE CITY'S PORTION OF THE TAX AND THEN SCHOOL AND COUNTY TYPICALLY GO THROUGH THAT. DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION?

>> SO, YES, THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION, BECAUSE NOW WE'VE GOT

[01:00:01]

249 OR SO UNITS GOING TO SCHOOL IN THE GARLAND INDEPENDENT DISTRICT BUT NOT PAYING FOR THAT.

AM I CORRECT? >> WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT STATEMENT IS CORRECT BUT IF YOU LOOK AT ACTUAL NUMBERS AND I HAVE TALKED WITH SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS OF PISD, THAT THEY DON'T TYPICALLY SEE A HUGE UPTICK IN STUDENTS FROM MULTIFAMILY.

THAT YOU DO HAVE SOME, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME DEGREE THAT YOU TYPICALLY SEE WITH SINGLE FAMILY COMING IN.

>> I'M NOT SURE -- >> THERE MIGHT BE A BETTER

ANSWER FOR THAT AS WELL. >> MR. BUMP, ANYTHING TO ADD?

>> TO GO BACK, THE RESIDENTS -- TALKING ABOUT WHERE THE RESIDENTS COME FROM AND WHERE THEY WORK, WE SEE A NUMBER OF THE RESIDENTS COMING FROM THE AREAS THAT THEY'RE ALREADY IN BECAUSE THEY WANT TO WORK AND LIVE IN THE AREA WHERE THEY ARE AT. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE DO GO THROUGH THIS IS THAT THEY WANT TO STAY IN ROWLETT.

THEY WANT TO BE AROUND ROWLETT. SO WE DO THINK THESE WILL BE THE FOLKS THAT WILL BE SERVING YOUR COMMUNITY.

WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME? WE CAN ALWAYS ASK THEM QUESTIONS AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SEEING NONE, THANK YOU BOTH. AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING AHEAD.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. BY DOING SO, TOSS IT OVER TO MISS HALLMARK WHO WILL HANDLE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. JUST A QUICK NOTE TO THE CALLERS WHO ARE ONLINE. YOU WILL BE CALLED UPON BY THE LAST FOUR DIGITS OF YOUR PHONE NUMBER.

YOU WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND WILL BE NOTIFIED AT THE END OF YOUR TIME. SO THE FIRST PERSON WE HAVE ONLINE IS CALLER 0997. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION AT THIS TIME? OKAY.

CALLER 0997. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? OKAY.

NEXT CALLER. CALLER 1047, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? CALLER 1047, IF YOU COULD PLEASE MUTE THE MEETING IN THE BACKGROUND.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME? WE'LL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT FOR THE DELAY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS? I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PROPERTY TAXES. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU GOT 250, 40 RESIDENTS BUT THEY DON'T PAY ANY SCHOOL TAX.

>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK CALLERS TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES

BY THEIR NAME AND THEIR ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS TOM ELDREDGE AT

6001 ELRIS DRIVE IN FLOWER HILL. >> PLEASE CONTINUE, SIR.

YEAH, GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> OKAY.

YEAH. I DIDN'T QUITE CARE FOR THE OPINIONS, THE DEVELOPER GOT 40 MINUTES PLUS TO TALK ABOUT THEIR SIDE OF THINGS. I DON'T QUITE SEE A DISCONNECT EITHER THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH LOW INCOME HOUSING IN THE AREA. WHAT ELSE HERE?

[01:05:03]

OF COURSE, THIS IS A BUSINESS. THE OPINIONS OF A DEVELOPER IS NOT NECESSARILY THE HOMEOWNER OR THE PEOPLE, THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE HERE, THE BACKBONE OF ROWLETT, THE HOMEOWNERS.

THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT FOR PROFIT.

SO I WANTED TO SAY THAT. I LOOKED AT REVIEWS OF OTHER PROPERTIES THAT THEY HAVE. ABOUT TRASH, CRIME EXCESSIVE ANI ANIMALS, EXCESSIVE TRASH AND NOISE. I ALSO SEE THAT WITH 248 PROPERTIES OR HOUSES THERE, THERE'S GONNA BE POSSIBILITY OF 300 CARS. SO WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT NOISE BY THE ADDED VOLUME OF CARS ON THE ROADS HERE.

THINGS LIKE THAT. THAT'S A BIG CONCERN.

I'M DEALING WITH 24 HOUR ROAD TRAFFIC.

I LIVE ON ROWLETT ROAD. BACK OF MY HOUSE IS ON ROWLETT ROAD. ROWLETT ROAD IS ZONED 24 HOUR INDUSTRIAL NOW. THIS IS JUST GONNA ADD TO THE NOISE OF EVERYONE THAT LIVES ON ROWLETT ROAD.

WHAT ELSE HERE? I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE, ROWLETT IS SORT OF A DRIVE THROUGH TOWN. LOT OF PEOPLE DRIVE THROUGH ROWLETT. I DON'T SEE THAT A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE WILL BE WORKING IN ROWLETT.

LOT OF PEOPLE I KNOW WORK 15 MILES OVER CLOSER TO I-75 OR OVER PLANO OR UP THE TOLL WAY IN INDUSTRY.

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INDUSTRY. THERE'S A LOT OF SERVICE INDUSTRY HERE, BUT NOT A LOT OF TECHNICAL INDUSTRY.

MY VOTE IS NO TO REZONE THIS. I'D MUCH RATHER SEE SOME OFFICES, DOCTORS, HEALTH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT GO IN.

THE DRAINAGE LOOKS LIKE A BIG ISSUE AS WELL.

I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE STUDIED.

I GUESS I'M DONE. >> JUST IN TIME.

YOUR TIME'S UP. THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER, WE DON'T HAVE A PROPERTY --

>> YOU HAVE TO HANG ON THERE, SIR.

WE'RE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN WE RECOGNIZE YOU AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER WITH.

>> THANK YOU. >> THAT WAS THE END OF OUR

CALLERS, CHAIRMAN. >> I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A BUNCH OF WRITTEN RESPONSES, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> YES, WE DO. >> SAME RULE WOULD APPLY.

THREE MINUTES FOR EACH ONE AND NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE WRITTEN

INPUT, I GUESS. >> I ONLY HAVE -- A LOT OF THEM ONLY HAVE NAMES BECAUSE THEY CAME IN BY E-MAIL.

I'D READ THEIR NAMES. >> JUST DO WHATEVER YOU CAN DO.

THANK YOU. >> THIS IS STEVE MARKS.

DEAR COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS A 45 YEAR RESIDENT OF ROWLETT, I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF THE CYPRESS CREEK 248 APARTMENT COMPLEX. PLEASE VOTE NO TO THIS.

NEXT MARTHA MOCKS, I AM VOICING MY NO, NO, NO, TO THESE APARTMENTS CYPRESS CREEK BECOMING GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED.

I'M A LONG TIME RESIDENT AND DON'T WANT THIS.

NEXT COMMENT, AMY WELKOWIZ, THE APARTMENTS ARE NOT A GOOD IDEA FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THERE'S GOVERNMENT HOUSING JUST DOWN THE STREET AT ROWLETT AND MILLER.

NEXT COMMENT, KEVIN PRIVATE 35306TULIP LANE, ROWLETT.

I HAVE LIVED AT THIS ADDRESS SINCE 2009 AND MY GRANDPARENTS LIVED HERE FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE ME.

MY PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THE FIELD POND AREA THAT USED TO BE A HORSE PASTURE. I AM WRITING TODAY REGARDING THE PROPOSED REZONING CLOSE TO MY HOME, CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS.

FIRST OF ALL, I BELIEVE THE POXIMITY OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL ANYINGIVELY IMPACT THE PROPERTY VALUES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT WILL LEAD TO AN INCREASE IN CRIME IN THE AREA. SECOND, THERE WILL BE A LARGE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC IN THE AREA. THIRD, BUILDING AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO NATURE, INCLUDING LOTS OF TREES, BIRDS AND KRE CREATURES THAT LIVE IN THE AREA.

[01:10:01]

THE PROPOSED REZONING DOES NOT SUPPORT THOSE VALUES.

I AM CONCERNED WITH WHAT THIS AREA IS BECOMING AND I'M ASKING YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO TO THE PROPOSED REZONING AND TO CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS. OKAY.

NEXT COMMENT. BRIDGET MOOREHEAD.

WE LIVE ON TULIP LANE. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THIS. WE DO NOT WANT MORE APARTMENTS HERE. TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED SINCE THE SENIOR AMOUNTS AS WELL AS THE NEW OFFICE SPACE AWAY FROM THE SENIOR APARTMENTS. OLD ROWLETT ROAD IS A SMALL STREET WHICH IS OFTEN FALLING APART AND RIDDLED WITH POT HOLES AND CANNOT TAKE THE INFLUX OF TRAFFIC.

BIG A ROAD IS NOT MUCH BETTER. BIG A ROAD HAS SEEN A LOT MORE TRAFFIC ON IT AND PEOPLE SPEED DOWN IT.

I CAN'T COUNT HOW MANY TIMES ACCIDENTS HAVE ALMOST HAPPENED BECAUSE OF PEOPLE DRIVING FAST DOWN BIG A ROAD.

WE MOVED HERE BECAUSE WE LIKED THE SMALL TOWN FEEL.

WE WERE TOLD NOTHING BUT A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK WOULD BE BUILT BEHIND OUR HOME. WE UNDERSTAND GROWTH IS INEVITABLE BUT WE HAVE LIVED IN AREAS BEFORE THAT WERE ALL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND ONCE APARTMENTS CAME INTO THE AREA CRIME INCREASED. WE ALREADY ARE SEEING CRIME INCREASE AROUND HERE AS MORE AND MORE PEOPLE MOVE FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND RENT OUT THEIR HOMES.

BRINGING APARTMENTS RIGHT BY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WILL NOT HELP INCREASE OUR HOME VALUE. NO HOMEOWNER WANTS TO LOOK OUT THEIR WINDOW AND INSTEAD OF SEEING TREES AND NATURE, NOW HAVE TO LOOK AT AMOUNT BUILDINGS.

THIS IS NOT A WISE LOCATION TO PUT MORE APARTMENTS WITH ALL THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS BEING BUILT AROUND HERE, YOU ARE INCREASING THE FRUSTRATION IN THE LIVES OF YOUR CURRENT RESIDENTS BY INCREASING TRAFFIC, MORE WEAR AND TEAR ON THE ROAD AND NOT GIVING US MORE TO ENJOY. SURROUNDING CITIES HAVE SO MANY OPTIONS, BETTER DINING OPTIONS, ETC.

ALL WE KEEP GETTING ARE APARTMENTS, FAST FOOD AND DENTISTS. WE ASK FOR YOU TO VOTE NO.

I KNOW MANY NEIGHBORS ARE TALKING ABOUT MOVING OUT OF ROWLETT. IF YOU APPROVE THIS PROJECT, WE SHALL AS WELL. VOTE NO, PLEASE.

REPRESENT THE WISHES OF YOUR CURRENT RESIDENTS.

I'M A PARENT AND HAVE KIDS WHO ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THE AGE WHO LIVE OUT. I UNDERSTAND THEY NEED A PLACE TO MOVE OUT TO. THERE ARE ALREADY SO MANY OPTIONS IN ROWLETT, WE DO NOT NEED THEM ON EVERY BARE SPOT OF LAND. JOHN HOLLY.

DEAR CITY COUNCIL. MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE JUST OFF OLD ROWLETT ROAD. ROWLETT CURRENTLY HAS ENOUGH APARTMENTS BEING BUILD LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES UP ROWLETT ROAD.

NOT TO MENTION EVER GREEN SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX SITTING ON OLD ROWLETT ROAD. WE ARE WANTING TO CRAM WAY TOO MUCH IN A SMALL AREA THAT'S NOT MEANT FOR IT.

IT WILL CAUSE MORE TRAFFIC THAN BIG A ROAD CAN HANDLE.

THAT STRETCH IS ALREADY BUSY ENOUGH WITH DRIVERS WHO DON'T PAY ATTENTION. IT WILL NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE PROPERTY VALUES OF THE HOME DIRECTLY IN THE AREA AND TAX PAYING RESIDENTS OF ROWLETT, WE DO NOT WANT ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. NEXT COMMENT.

AMY HIRE, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE REZONING OF THE LAND ON BIG A ROAD TO ALLOW FOR CYPRESS CREEK DEVELOPMENTS TO TAKE PLACE.

WE PURCHASED OUR HOME WITH ZONING IN MIND.

THIS WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT OUR PROPERTY VALUE.

BIG A ROAD HAS ENOUGH CHANGE. LIBERTY CREEK RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN PATIENT BUT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

NEXT COMMENT IS ANDREA JOHNSON MORELLO.

VOTE NO. PLEASE VOTE NO TO REZONE.

MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN LIBERTY SUBDIVISION SINCE 2001.

WE HAVE ENJOYED THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO WALK WITH OUR DOGS AND FAMILY. WE DO NOT WANT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX BUILT RIGHT BEHIND OUR HOUSE.

WE DO NOT NEED MORE APARTMENTS. THEY ARE BRINGING OUR SCHOOLS DOWN, RAISING OUR PROPERTY TAXES SO THE CITY CAN EARN DISCOUNTS.

NO MORE APARTMENTS. THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THAT CAN BETTER SUIT THOSE APARTMENTS. BIG A ROAD IS NOT ONE OF THEM AND CANNOT SUPPORT THEM. PLEASE DO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE THE APARTMENTS. NEXT COMMENT, I AM AN 18 YEAR RESIDENT OF ROWLETT AND BOTH OF MY PARENTS WERE BORN AND RAISED IN ROWLETT. WE CHOSE ROWLETT BECAUSE OF THE GREAT TOWN IT WAS AND THE AFFORDABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I HEAR THAT THE CITY IS WANTING TO APPROVE GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE APARTMENTS ON BIG A ROAD. AS A TAX PAYING CITIZEN, I ASK THAT THE CITY DOES NOT VOTE TO REZONE IT RESIDENTIAL BUT KEEP IT COMMERCIAL. WE DO NOT NEED MORE APARTMENTS

[01:15:02]

IN ROWLETT MUCH LESS GOVERNMENT ASSISTED HOUSE.

OUR SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY BEYOND CAPACITY WHICH PUTS THE BURDENS ON SCHOOLS, STAFF, ETC. PEOPLE ON BIG A ROAD WERE PROMISED COMMERCIAL ZONING. WE NEED YOU TO UPHOLD THAT.

I HAVE SEEN MORE PANHANDLERS, ETC, IN ROWLETT.

WHY IS THE CITY ALLOWING THIS TO HAPPEN AND NOT ADDRESSING IT? I DON'T WANT TO SEE MY CITY TAKE OVER BY THE HOMELESS.

I HAVE ALWAYS FELT SAFE. I DO NOT WANT SOMEONE KNOCKING AT MY WINDOW BEGGING FOR MONEY WHEN STOPPING FOR A RED LIGHT.

PLEASE DO WHAT IS RIGHT BY THE BUSINESS OWNERS ON BIG A AND KEEP IT ZONED COMMERCIAL AND TAKE CARE OF THE HOMELESS POPULATION. THANK YOU, A LONG TIME CONCERNED CITIZEN. NEXT COMMENT.

ANDY STRIPE. INTERESTING HOW A SHORT FIVE DAY YEARS AGO WHEN THE CONCEPT OF REZONING THE AREA BIG A AT OLD ROWLETT ROAD TO RESIDENTIAL WAS SHOT DOWN DUE TO POPULATION DENSITY ISSUES ALONG WITH VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CONCERNS.

NOW WHY DOES IT MAKE ANY COMMON SENSE TO PUT UP A 240 PLUS APARTMENT IN THE SAME AREA WITH THE POPULATION DENSITY OF MORE THAN DOUBLE VERSUS HOMES AND PUT MORE THAN 245 VEHICLES ON A TWO LANE ROAD WITH ON ONE PUBLIC ACCESS, ROWLETT ROAD.

PLEASE VOTE NO ON THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS.

PLANNING AND ZONING HAS LET THE APARTMENTS TO DOUBLE.

WHAT GIVES? WHY? NEXT COMMENT. ARNOLD KINSLY 35301 ASTOR LANE.

I AM ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS.

THERE ARE TOO MANY APARTMENTS IN ROWLETT AND ROWLETT DOES NOT NEED A HIGHER POPULATION DENSITY.

INDUSTRY INFRASTRUCTURE IS OVERTAXED ALREADY.

WATER PRESSURE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS TERRIBLE.

ADDING APARTMENTS IN THIS LOCATION WILL MAKE IT WORSE.

IN ADDITION TO BEING HOME TO APARTMENTS IN GENERAL, THIS IS A RENT SUBSIDY PROJECT. WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME SHORT TERM MONETARY BENEFITS, I AM UNAWARE OF WHAT THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE FROM THE STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

THE LONG TERM COST ASSOCIATED WITH RENT SUBSIDY UNITS IS ALWAYS TOO HIGH. I HAVE SEEN MANY CHANGES IN ROWLETT IN THE 30 PLUS YEARS I HAVE LIVED HERE.

AT ONE TIME REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT WAS HEADED TOWARD LARGER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THAT WAS THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

NOW THE CITY HAS BEEN OVERRUN WITH APARTMENTS AND THAT IS THE WRONG DIRECTION. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS TO BE BUILT. NEXT COMMENT.

BIANCA GILLIAM. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I LIVE IN THE FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE PLANNING COMMUNITY OF CYPRESS CREEK. I AM WRITING TO OPPOSE THIS COMMUNITY. I AM NEW TO ROWLETT AND HAVE BEEN HERE OVER A YEAR. THE SMALL TOWN FACTOR WAS A HUGE PART IN OUR DECIDING ON THIS TOWN.

MY HUSBAND IS FROM A SMALL TOWN SOUTH OF HOUSTON.

COUPLED WITH THE 15 MINUTE COMMUTE WITH MYSELF, WE THOUGHT WE FOUND THE IDEAL PLACE TO PUT DOWN ROOTS AND START A FAMILY.

ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS BIG A ROAD AND HOW I CAN TAKE IT TO SO MANY PLACES IN ROWLETT.

I LOVE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND FEEL LIKE I'M IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE YET BE SO CLOSE TO EVERYTHING.

CYPRESS CREEK IS NOT ONLY A THREAT TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BUT TOWN. VERY LITTLE IS LEFT IN THE SMALL TOWN CHARM OF ROWLETT. THE LITTLE LAND LEFT BEHIND IS BEING SWALLOWED UP AND DESTROYING THE INTEGRITY OF THIS TOWN. I HAVE HEARD COUNTLESS PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT MISSING HOW THE TOWN WAS NOT EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO. WHAT YOU MAY CALL PROGRESS IS THE MEANING OF WHAT THIS TOWN HOLDS DEAR.

I HAVE SEEN PROGRESS, I HAVE STUDENT TAUGHT SEVEN YEARS AGO.

IT WAS THE PLACE TO BE. I ALWAYS KNEW THAT IF LIFE BROUGHT ME BACK HERE, I WANTED TO SETTLE IN THE GARLAND AREA.

I REFUSE TO GO THROUGH CERTAIN PARTS ANY TIME OF DAY.

I GREW UP IN FT. WORTH AND WAS TAUG NOT TO GO ANYWHERE EAST OF I 35. THAT'S NOT SAYING MUCH FOR GARLAND. I THOUGHT I FOUND A SAFE PLACE IN ROWLETT. BY ALLOWING CYPRESS CREEK IN, YOU WILL BE ALLOWING THE DEVALUING OF NEIGHBORHOODS.

YOU WILL TURN THIS TOWN INTO AN AREA THAT'S RUN DOWN LIKE FT.

WORTH. I TAUGHT OVER THERE.

WE WOULD LEAVE BY 4:30 EVERY DAY IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN IT STARTED TO GET DANGEROUS. ALL THE STUDENTS ARE ON THE APPROVED REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO TURN ROWLETT SCHOOLS INTO BY LETTING CYPRESS CREEK INTO OUR TOWN.

BY DOING SO, YOU WILL BE DRIVING OUT HARD WORKING FAMILIES THAT

[01:20:03]

HAVE GIVEN THIS TOWN SO MUCH. YOU WILL ALSO BE DESTROYING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION THE TOWN HAS TO OFFER.

YOU WILL HAVE THAT BLOOD ON YOUR HAND.

YOU WANT TO BE CAUGHT RED HANDED WHEN THE TOWN AND EDUCATION FALLS FLAT, WHEN BUSINESSES FAIL, WHICH THERE ARE SO MANY EMPTY STOREFRONTS IN THIS TOWN. THAT'S MORE PRESSING THAN THESE APARTMENTS. ALL OF THIS WILL BE ON YOU AND WHEN YOU NEED HELP TO TURN THIS TOWN AROUND THAT YOU DESTROYED YOU WON'T HAVE ANYONE TO TURN TO BECAUSE WE WILL ALL BE GONE BECAUSE YOU DROVE US OUT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TOWN.

AS A CITIZEN LIVING IN THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE PROPOSED CHANGE ON BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

BIG A ROAD IS A SMALL ROAD. IT CANNOT AND WILL NOT HANDLE THAT MUCH TRAFFIC. THERE ARE NO APARTMENTS GOING UP IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS. HOW ABOUT GIVING A CHANCE TO LET THOSE GROW AND SEE WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO THOSE SYSTEMS AS WELL AS OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM HERE IN ROWLETT? THE AREA IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THAT MUCH GROWTH IN A SMALL AMOUNT OF TIME. NEXT COMMENT.

AMY CARTER. I'M E-MAILING YOU REGARDING THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS THAT ARE REQUESTING A REZONE OF BIG A ROAD. I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER MY COMMENTS IN THE UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING.

I'M A BUSINESS OWNER 3702 BIG A ROAD.

I AM COMPLETELY AGAINST THE PROPOSAL OF REZONING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS.

I HAVE BEEN A ROWLETT SMALL BUSINESS FOR NEARLY 13 YEARS.

BEFORE RAPID, MY HUSBAND AND I OWNED A SMALL AQUARIUM STORE OFF HIGHWAY 66 MANY YEARS AGO CALLED SEA SCAPE.

WE RENTED FOR TEN YEARS. AFTER NUMEROUS INCIDENTS MAINLY AFTER DARK, WE DECIDED IT WAS BEST TO LOOK ELSEWHERE FOR A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT WAS NOT IN A WAREHOUSE DISTRICT.

AFTER DIFFERENT SEARCHS AND CONSIDERS, WE DECIDED TO PURCHASE OFF BIG A ROAD. IT WAS VERY OUT OF DATE AND NEEDED A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE MADE IT BEAUTIFUL.

WE LOVE THE AREA AROUND OUR BUILDING ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USE AND WE KNEW THIS AREA WOULD BRING BUSINESS GROWTH.

WE'VE BEEN EXCITED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL TO IT HAPPEN.

OUR BUSINESS RELIES ON REFERRALS FROM PHYSICIANS, CHIROPRACTORS, ETC. WE TOOK ALL OF THIS INTO CONSIDERATION BASED ON WHERE WE DECIDED TO PURCHASE.

WE ALSO HAVE A STOREFRONT. WE COULD HAVE EASILY FOR LESS MONEY MOVED OUR BUSINESS TO GARLAND BUT TO LIVE IN ROWLETT AND HAVE FOR OVER 30 YEARS WE WANTED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE ROWLETT AS OUR BUSINESS HOME. WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUED ON BIG A ROAD WITH PEOPLE SLEEPING ON PORCHES, PEOPLE EATING, DRINKING IN A PARKING LOT, ETC. THIS IS A BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND COULD HAVE SO MUCH BUSINESS POTENTIAL TO MAKE BIG A THRIVE BUT WE NEED THE SUPPORT FROM OUR CITY AND WE NEED FOR THIS TO BE DENIED SO THAT YOUR ROWLETT BUSINESSES WHO HAVE CONDUCTED BUSINESSES HERE IN YOUR CITY FOR YEARS AND YEARS CAN CONTINUE TO THRIVE. THIS PROPERTY IS MY INVESTMENT IN MY FUTURE AND FUTURE OF MY COMPANY AND PEOPLE THAT I EMPLOY. I NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THAT. WE HAVE ENOUGH APARTMENTS IN ROWLETT ALREADY. WE NEED MORE BUSINESS.

YOU WANT TO PUT MORE APARTMENTS HERE? PUT THEM IN RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, NOT OUR BUSINESS ZONES. THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME OUT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. NEXT COMMENT.

LAUREN FRANK 5813 IRIS DRIVE. I AM WRITING TO VOICE MY OPINION AS A RESIDENT LIVING NEAR BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

THIS AREA HAS A HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW, POOR STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND CHANGING KPHRERBL AREA INTO MULTIHOUSING IS WIDELY IRRESPONSIBLE. OUR LOCAL AREA IS OVERSATURATED WITH APARTMENTS ALREADY AND THERE'S PLENTY OF GREEN SPACE IN OTHER AREAS THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM MORE HOUSING DIVERSITY.

WITH THE RETURN OF CITY OFFICES RECENTLY JUST BUILT HERE I AM SEEING INCREASED DISPLACED WILD LIFE WHICH CAUSED OUR ANIMALS TO GO MISSING. IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO ADD 200 PLUS HOUSING UNITS IN A SMALL SPACE THRIVING WITH COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ALREADY. WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE NO AND KEEP THIS SECTION OF LAND COMMERCIAL.

NEXT COMMENT. FROM NANCY POTS.

MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE IN FLOWER HILL OFF BIG A ROAD.

WE ARE ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE BUILDING OF MORE APARTMENTS AT THE CORNER OF BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

WE HAVE LIVED HERE 23 YEARS AND HAVE SEEN SO MANY APARTMENTS BUILT AND NOTHING TO IMPROVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

ROWLETT NEVER GETS ANY SHOPPING OR RESTAURANTS.

IT IS TIME WE GET SOMETHING THAT WILL INTEREST RESIDENTS.

[01:25:02]

NO MORE APARTMENTS. NEXT COMMENT.

TERESA ALONZO. I'M A RESIDENT OF ROWLETT AND I WOULD LIKE TO VOICE MY CONCERN FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD. IT IS VERY APPARENT THE INFLUX OF NEW RESIDENTS, THE TRAFFIC CONTINUES TO INCREASE AND BRINGING DOWN OUR SERVICES AND QUALITY OF LIFE.

MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS HOW MANY CHILDREN WILL BE ADDED TO THE ALREADY OVERCROWDED SCHOOLS. MY KIDS ARE IN CLASSES THAT HAVE 28 TO 30 KID. OTHER CITIES HAVE LESS THAN 20.

FORGET ABOUT OUR NEW CHALLENGES, ADDING MORE CHILDREN WILL ONLY DECREASE THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION MY CHILDREN WILL RECEIVE. IT'S DISAPPOINTING TO SEE OUR SCHOOLS UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE CURRENT RESIDENTS AND MORE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WILL MAKE THIS LARGER AFFECTING YOUR CURRENT RESIDENTS AND OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE.

PLEASE CONSIDER THESE ASPECTS OF YOUR CURRENT CONSTITUENTS BEFORE APPROVING AN ALREADY OVERCROWDED SCHOOL SYSTEM.

NEXT COMMENT. JERRY DONOVAN.

PLEASE NO MORE APARTMENTS IN OUR SMALL COMMUNITY.

APARTMENTS ADD ABSOLUTELY ZERO TO THE COMMUNITY BESIDES TRAFFIC AND BUILDING EYE SORES AS THEY AGE.

AS A CITY OF ROWLETT, I HAVE SEEN OUR SMALL CITY CHANGE FROM A QUIET LAKE SIDE CITY TO AN OVERCROWDED LESS THAN FULFILLING COMMUNITY. IF TIMES WERE NOT LIKE THEY WERE, I WOULD BE SERIOUSLY LOOKING TO LEAVE THE CITY I HAVE CALLED HOME FOR 38 YEARS. PLEASE STOP WITH THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN OUR SMALL CITY. ENOUGH WITH MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS. YOU'RE TAXING AND RUNNING MOST MIDDLE CLASS CITIZENS OUT OF THE C CITY. THANK YOU.

NEXT COMMENT. BARBARA MASSEY SMITH 3416 BEACH STREET, ROWLETT. I AM UNABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE MEETING TONIGHT. I WANTED TO LET THE COUNCIL KNOW THAT I STRENUOUSLY OPPOSE THE ZONING REQUEST FOR THE APARTMENTS AT BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

LIVING DIRECTLY BEHIND THAT AREA, IT WOULD HAVE A STRONG IMPACT ON TRAFFIC FLOW AND CRIME RATES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

ALSO, WE ALREADY HAVE THE ADDITION OF MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN ROWLETT. WHY WOULD THE CITY WANT TO ADD MORE? THE STREETS ARE NOT ABLE TO HANDLE HEAVY TRAFFIC AS IS. NEXT COMMENT.

SHERYL BROWN. WE THE NEIGHBORS IN FLOWER HILL DO NOT WANT THIS AREA TO BE USED FOR MULTIFAMILY DWELLING.

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE CITY OF ROWLETT NEEDS ADDITIONAL APARTMENTS? WE STRONGLY URGE THE CITY TO VOTE NO. THANK YOU, FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. NEXT COMMENT.

JOHN WEEDEN, FREEDOM LANE, ROWLETT.

AS A CITIZEN OF ROWLETT, I AM HIGHLY OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FOR MULTIPLE REASONS.

THIS ZONING CHANGE IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE CITY MASTER PLAN.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL NOT SUPPORT THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS PROPOSED WITHOUT CREATING TRAFFIC AND A STRAIN ON PUBLIC SERVICES. LIBERTY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ALREADY BEEN AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST WHICH IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING HOME AND LOT SIDES IN THIS AREA.

THE NUMBER ONE GUIDING PRINCIPLE IN THE CITY MASTER PLAN IS TO VALUE THE NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS DOES NOT LIKE IT IS BEING VALUED. RATHER THE CITY IS LOOKING TO CAPITALIZE AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS.

THERE IS OTHER LAND THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR APARTMENTS AND SHOULD BE UTILIZED RATHER THAN CANNIBALIZING EXISTING PROPERTIES TO TAP GOVERNMENT DOLLARS.

THE CITIZENS TAX DOLLARS ARE THE COST OF DEVELOPING THE CITY MASTER PLAN AND CITY REPRESENTATIVES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW THAT PLAN. NEXT COMMENT.

ROBERT CUTRELL. DON'T ZONE FOR APARTMENTS BUT FOR RESIDENTIAL HOUSING INSTEAD SINCE TRAFFIC IS ALREADY AT THE MAXIMUM ON BIG A AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD WHICH ARE NARROW.

I TRAVEL THESE ROADS SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK.

THIS MAY CAUSE ACCIDENTS SINCE THE ROADS WILL NEED AT LEAST A TURN LANE. RESIDENT OF NEARBY NEIGHBORHOOD FARMER CITY. NEXT COMMENT.

RICHARD AND CINDY GOMEZ, 6114 AZALEA DRIVE.

AS A PROPERTY OWNER AND TAXPAYER, I FEEL THAT THIS PROPERTY IS USED FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE PROPERTY VALUES IN

[01:30:01]

THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL DECLINE. BRINGING IN LOW INCOME FAMILIES WILL CAUSE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND OVERCROWD OUR SCHOOLS. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THE DEVELOPERS ARE WILLING TO IMPROVE BIG A ROAD AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD. IF THAT IS THE DRAW TO CHAIN THE ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY, HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED THE FLOWER HILL SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN HERE FOR 30 PLUS YEARS WITH PLENTY OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS HAVE BEEN COLLECTED, PLENTY OF MONEY TO IMPROVE THOSE TWO ROADS. I UNDERSTAND DEVELOPERS HAVE DEEP POCKETS BUT DON'T SELL OUT TO THE PROMISE OF BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS. THERE'S A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY THAT WILL BE RIGHT NEXT DOOR. HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THE POSITION YOU ARE PUTTING THE OLDER CITIZENS IN.

WE HAVE HOMELESS PEOPLE WHO DRIVE THE DARK TRAIN AND PANHANDLE ON THE SIDE OF THE ROADS.

I THINK THIS IS GETTING WORSE AND WILL BE THE DOWNFALL TO OUR FINE CITY. THERE ARE OTHER PLACES WHERE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT OF THIS NATURE WOULD BE BETTER UTILIZED.

CONSIDER THOSE LOCATIONS INSTEAD OF DISRUPTING A QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE PEOPLE HAVE LIVED AND SHOPPED FOR DECADES.

PLEASE HEAR THE RESIDENTS OF FLOWER HILL AND TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OUR FEELINGS BEFORE VOTING YES.

NEXT COMMENT. KATHY MCNEIL.

TO WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN. PLEASE STOP WITH ALL THESE APARTMENTS. YOU ARE RUINING OUR ONCE WAS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. YOU ARE BRINGING MORE CRIME INTO OUR CITY DAILY. IT IS A TOTAL DISGRACE WHAT HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. NOTED TO MENTION A LIQUOR STORE ON EVERY BLOCK. THIS IS A DISGRACE TO OUR ONE COMMUNITY NOTHING BUT TURNING IT INTO THE HOOD.

EACH TAX INCREASE ON OUR HOME FOR WHAT YOU CALL GROWTH IS NOTHING MORE THAN PAYING FOR MORE POLICE OFFICERS TO PATROL CRIME. STOP WITH THIS.

I USED TO LOVE ROWLETT BUT I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND ANYONE TO BUY, REPB OR LIVE HERE. I MOVED HERE NOT WORRYING ABOUT MY DOORS LOCKED. NOW I HAVE INSTALLED CAMERAS, MY GARAGE HAS BEEN BROKEN INTO TWO TIMES, MY CARS THREE TIMES, ALL IN THE NAME OF GROWTH. APARTMENTS ARE NOTHING BUT CRIME CATCHERS. I WOULD NOT SAY ALL PEOPLE LIVING THERE ARE THIS WAY, BUT IT IS AN OPEN DOOR FOR THIS TO OCCUR. I'M 66 AND WORKED MY WHOLE LIFE AND MOVED HERE TO ENJOY MY RETIREMENT NOT KNOWING IT WOULD SOON BE THE HOOD WHEN I DID RETIRE.

I AM ONE MORE TRULY DISGUSTED RESIDENT OF ROWLETT ALONG WITH THOUSANDS OF OTHERS FEELING THE SAME WAY.

NEXT COMMENT. DEAR COUNCIL, I HAVE LIVED IN THE AREA OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND BIG A ROAD.

I AM TOTALLY AGAINST APARTMENTS COMING IN TO ROWLETT AS I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE SAID IN THE SAME PAST.

I KNOW BAPTIST CHURCH TRIED TO SELL SOME LAND A FEW MONTHS BACK. I HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER NOT ALLOWING THIS TO HAPPEN. WITH THE AMOUNT THAT TAXES HAVE GONE UP FOR HOMEOWNERS, IF YOU ALLOW THIS, I KNOW SEVERAL LONG TERM ROWLETT RESIDENTS THAT WILL BE LOOKING OUT BECAUSE THIS COUNCIL WILL NOT BE PUTTING ITS RESIDENTS' BEST INTERESTS AT HEART. NEXT COMMENT.

JOE QUINN. ROWLETT IS NOT THE COMMUNTY SETTING IT ONCE WAS. HAS NO ONE NOTICED HOW RAPIDLY WE'VE ALREADY INCREASED THE TRAFFIC, ALREADY MAKING ITSELF WELL KNOWN WITH ALL THE APARTMENTS BEING BUILT.

OH, BUT I GUESS THAT'S NOT HAPPENING NEAR YOUR RESIDENCES.

CAN WATER, SCHOOL, ELECTRIC KEEP UP WITH AND MAINTAIN THIS RAPID APRTMENT EXPLOSION? SURE, THE COPPERS ARE BEING FILLED WITH TAX REVENUES BUT WHAT WILL ALL THIS LOOK LIKE IN 20, 30 YEARS? WILL WE BE THE NEXT EXPANSION OF A RAPIDLY DETERIORATING CITY LIKE OTHERS AROUND US? PLEASE STRIVE FOR A MORE POSITIVE DIRECTION FOR ROWLETT, A COMMUNITY, CITY, THAT YOUR CHILDREN WILL BE PROUD TO KEEP YOUR FAMILIES LIVING, WORKING AND SHOPPING.

I HAVE LIVED HERE OVER 30 YEARS. MANY ARE STARTING TO QUESTION THIS FROM HERE FORWARD. NEXT COMMENT.

ALISHA BROWN, RAVENS NEST. DEAR COMMISSIONERS, I HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER THE VOICES OF THE RESIDENTS CONCERNING THE REZONING OF THIS. WE DO NOT WANT ANY MORE APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN ROWLETT. I HAVE LIVED HERE OFF AND ON MY WHOLE LIFE. FIVE YEARS I RETURNED AS I HAVE MANY FAMILY MEMBERS HERE. IN THE SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME, ROWLETT HAS APPROVED MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES.

SOME HAVE NOT EVEN FINISHED CONSTRUCTION, YET HERE WE ARE CONSIDERING ANOTHER ONE. THIS AREA IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC A 248 UNIT COMPLEX WILL ADD.

CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES ALONE HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO DAMAGE BIG A AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD. IS THIS ALSO IN THE DEVELOPER'S

[01:35:01]

BUDGET TO COMPLETELY REPAVE, NOT PATCH, THESE ROADS? HAVE ANY OF YOU DRIVEN THOSE ROADS LATELY? HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THE TOLL AND ADDED COST TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC WORKS.

WILL ANYONE HAVE DECENT WATER PRESSURE AGAIN? WHERE WILL THEY DO THEIR GROCERY SHOPPING? WITH ALL THE NEW HOUSING DEVELOPERS THAT ARE NOT YET COMPLETE, WE HAVE YET TO ADD OR EVEN ATTRACT ANOTHER GROCERY STORE. IF THERE'S A MAJOR STRUCTURE FIRE AND CASUALTY ACCIDENT ACROSS TOWN, ARE WE EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THAT? I KNOW THE BILL MUST BE HIGH IF YOU WANT TO GET YOUR TEETH FIXED OR YOUR NAILS DONE, WE ARE YOUR CITY. WE NEED MORE BUSINESSES, BETTER BUSINESSES TO BE ATTRACTED TO ROWLETT.

THE BURDEN OF TAXES ON THE HOMEOWNERS ARE PUSHING US OUT.

WE SAY PLEASE NO MORE APARTMENTS.

WE ARE TIRED OF OUR HOUSES NOT BEING HEARD.

THAT'S THE LAST ONE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LADIES.

I APPRECIATE YOUR SPEED READING CAPABILITIES, MISS NIX.

I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK AS WELL, MISS HALLMARK.

COMMISSIONERS, DISCUSSION TIME. I WILL JUST IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND YOU CAN STATE YOUR PEACE. MR. WINTON, FIRE AWAY.

DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD JUST HAVE TO SAY I THINK IT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY -- I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS NECESSARILY, JUST MY COMMENTS TO IT.

MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE CITIZENS OF ROWLETT.

THEY'VE BEEN VERY VOCAL IN LEADING UP TO THIS MEETING AND OBVIOUSLY, BY MY ACCOUNT, 28NAYS AND NONE FOR IN THERE.

SO I'M NOT FOR SURE WHERE THE ONES THAT ARE IN FAVOR NECESSARILY ARE, BUT I THINK IT'S OVERWHELMING THAT IT'S AGAINST. BEING THAT I HAVE GOT TO RESPECT THE WISHES OF THE CITY. PLUS THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT WAS HUGE.

WE NEED TO FOLLOW THAT PIECE OF IT.

BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE CITIZENS, I ABSOLUTELY CANNOT

SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. >> MR. BUMP, I SEE YOUR HAND IS RAISED BUT WE'RE FINISHED WITH THE PRESENTATION PORTION.

WE'RE AT OUR COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION TIME.

MR. SEGARS, ANYTHING TO SAY? >> YES.

VERY GOOD PRESENTATION. I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE PROJECT ITSELF. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THE CITIZENS OF ROWLETT HAVE BEEN LOUD AND CLEAR FOR SOMETIME NOW.

I AGREE WITH STAFF. THIS IS NOT THE BEST LOCATION.

WE HAVE SAID THERE ARE BETTER LOCATIONS, IN MY OPINION.

I WILL NOT BE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

>> MR. COTE. >> AGREE WITH BOTH MR. SEGARS AND MR. WINTON WHEN IT COMES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME, ENERGY AND EFFORT ON THAT. WE NEED TO SEE THAT THROUGH.

AS FAR AS THE CURRENT PRESENTATION, JUST FOR THE DEVELOPER, I'M NOT AT ALL FOR APPROVING HIS PROJECT JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT THAT IF YOU WANT TO DEVELOP SOMETHING HERE, THAT YOU ACTUALLY MEET THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THAT'S FOR ANYBODY IN THE FUTURE AS WELL.

THE OTHER THING THAT I FIND KIND OF INTERESTING AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF KICK BACK. I DON'T KNOW.

I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT IT, BUT THE ROWLETT HOUSING COMMISSION ACTUALLY, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDING AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL -- ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION PROMOTES RESIDENTIAL OWNERSHIP AND DEVELOPMENT THROUGH FINANCING OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS THAT ARE LONG TERM ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO THE CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS. I DON'T SEE THAT THIS ONE PROJECT ACTUALLY FITS HOMEOWNERSHIP NOR IS IT ECONOMICALLY BENEFIT FOR THE CITY AND THAT WITH TAXES NOT BEING PAID AND WE STILL NEEDING TO PROVIDE SERVICES.

IT'S ACTUALLY A NEGATIVE, SO I'M NOT AT ALL IN FAVOR OF IT.

>> I AGREE AND MUST FOLLOW ALONG WITH EVERYBODY ELSE.

IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT THAT WE DO LOOK AT EACH PIECE OF PROPERTY AND WE DO NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE THERE IS A DEMAND. BUT IN THIS SITUATION, WE NEED

[01:40:04]

TO STICK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE NEED TO GET BACK TO FINDING A STRONGER TAX BASE.

THE LAST THING THAT STUCK ON MY MIND IS THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF DEVIATIONS THAT DO NOT APPLY TO THE ROWLETT CODE SO I WILL NOT

BE IN FAVOR. >> MISS MCKEE.

>> I DON'T WANT TO PILE ON, BUT I AGREE ANDLY NOT BE

RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. >> MR. SWIFT?

>> TO ADD SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THERE, I JUST THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IT WHERE IT'S ZONED.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN AS A GROUP THAT WE HAVE A BIG NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ROWLETT BUT WE'RE AT SUCH A SHORTAGE OF THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF ZONING THAT I CAN'T SUPPORT CHANGING THE ZONING FOR WHAT WE HAVE.

>> I'LL JUST ADD THAT I'M IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE REST OF MY COMMISSIONERS. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR SOMETHING, FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR CITY.

I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE EFFORTS OF MR. SHEFFIELD AND MR. BUMP.

THIS IS TOO BIG OF A PROJECT AND THE WRONG PLACE.

I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT. THAT SAID, EVERYBODY'S HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK. I'M READY FOR A MOTION.

MR. ENGEN. >> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS PROPOSED PLANNING DEVELOPMENT.

>> DO I HAVE A SECOND? MR. COTE SECONDS THE MOTION.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? TAKE THE VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF DENIAL RAISE YOUR HAND. THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.