[00:00:08]
          THANK YOU. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. 
          WE WILL CALL THIS TO ORDER. THE FIRST SECTION IS THE CITIZENS INPUT WHERE YOU CAN ADDRESS ON ANY SUBJECT FOR THREE MINUTES. AT THIS TIME, I WILL TURN THE CITIZENS INPUT SECTION OF THE AGENDA OVER TO MISS HALLMARK. WELL, I MEAN IF THEY HAVE SOMETHING NOT ON THE AGENDA, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THEY WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON THEY HAVE THREE MINUTES APIECE. IF THERE IS SUCH -- OKAY. 
          THEN WE WILL JUST HAVE THOSE PEOPLE SPEAK DURING THAT WHEN WE HAVE THOSE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. ASSUMING THERE'S NOBODY ELSE, WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE CITIZENS INPUT SECTION AND MOVE 
          [3. CONSENT AGENDA]
ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONERS, DID EVERYBODY GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES? AUGUST 5TH, 2020. DID EVERYBODY GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THAT? ANY ISSUES? ANY COMPLAINTS? MR. COTE, YOU HAVE AN ISSUE IN 
          >> THE ONLY ISSUE IS THE ATTENDANCE WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING. 
          IT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED TO INCLUDE MYSELF AND TO EXCLUDE STEVEN WHIT EBB. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. YOU'RE RIGHT. SINCE YOU POINTED THAT OUT. 
          I'M READY FOR A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH THE CORRECTION 
          THAT WAS NOTED. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MS. ESTEVEZ. ANY DISCUSSION? THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH THE CHANGES OF THE ATTENDANTS TO REFLECT WHO WAS AT LAST MEETING. 
          ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX TO NOTHING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW WE MOVE ON TO ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. 
          WE HAVE THREE ITEMS TONIGHT. THE FIRST ITEM, ITEM 4 A. ITEM CONSIDERING FOR SAMANTHA 
          [4A. Consider and take action on a request by Samantha Renz, Evolving Texas, for a Final Plat of Residences of Long Branch Lot 1, Block A. The 8.2-acre site is located at the northwest corner of Kyle Road and Rowlett Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]
RENTZ FOR RESIDENTS AT LONG BLACK A. THE 8.2 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KYLE ROAD AND ROWLETT ROAD IN ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. 
          >> I WILL BE PRESENTING THAT THIS EVENING. MR. COTE. 
          FIRE AWAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION TO COME UP. JUST A MOMENT, PLEASE. AND FOR THOSE WATCHING AT HOME, SOMETIMES THIS ELECTRONIC STUFF IS KIND OF HARD TO FANAGLE AS I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL AWARE. 
          THANK YOU LAURA. NEXT, WHEN YOU CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE WHEN YOU GET THAT UP. GREAT. THANK YOU. 
          SO THIS IS A SINGLE LOT PLOT FOR 8.2 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KYLE ROAD AND ROWLETT ROAD. THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT IS ZONED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR LIMITED COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL C 1 USES IN MULTIFAMILY. THE MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN USES DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN FINAL PLATTED HAS BEEN DEVELOPED WITH A MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT COMPLEX. THIS PLAT DOES ESTABLISH THE BOUNDARIES, EASEMENTS AND FLOOD PLANE LIMITS WHICH CROSS FROM THE NORTHWEST DIRECTION TO SOUTHEAST NEAR THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS HERE IS THE PLAT ITSELF. 
          THE FINAL PLAT. THIS PROPERTY WAS PRELIMINARILY PLATTED BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2018. YOU CAN SORT OF SEE THERE'S A LOT ALSO TO THE NORTH WHICH WAS 
          [00:05:03]
ALSO INCLUDED IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT WAS DEDICATED FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE THE LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL COMMERCIAL USE; THE C 1 ZONING REFERENCED EARLIER. THAT IS NOT INCLUDED ON THIS FINAL PLAT BUT WOULD BE REFERENCED HERE THAT IT WAS INCLUDED IN THAT PRELIMINARY PLAT. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE APPROVAL FOR ALL THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE ROWLETT CODE AND TEXAS CODE HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. 
          I WOULD ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> COMMISSIONERS, CAN WE SWITCH TO THE OTHER VIEW THERE? SO I CAN SEE EVERYBODY. THERE WE GO. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? MS. ESTEVEZ, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? 
          >> REFRESH MY MEMORY, I THOUGHT A FINAL PLAT HAD TO BE APPROVED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION. 
          IN THE INSTANCE OF MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL, THEY CAN DO THE BUILDING PERMIT AND THEN THE 
          FINAL PLAT COMES AFTER. FOR MULTI-- >> LOOKS LIKE THEY ALREADY BUILT IT. IT WAS BUILT OUT. IS IT NOT BUILT OUT? 
          >> IT'S NOT BUILT OUT. THEY HAVEN'T RECEIVED CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. 
          IT HAS BEEN TO COMPLETION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? 
          I'M READY FOR A MOTION ON THIS FINAL PLAT. >> MR. ENGEN. 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT. >> WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE. MR. WENTON. SECOND. 
          >> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL IF FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT, MR.ENGEN'S MOTION RAISE YOUR HAND. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT ITEM HAS BEEN APPROVED. ITEM 4 B. 
          [4B. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on request by Jeffrey Dolian, Kimley-Horn and Associates Company for an amendment to Planned Development (PDC-2) District (ORD-044-17) and approved concept plan to decrease the required number of parking spaces from 518 to 405. The 10.98 acres site is located approximately 228 feet east of the intersection of Chiesa Road and Lakeview Parkway in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY JEFFREY DOLIAN FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C 2 DISTRICT ORD-044-17 AND APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN TO DECREASE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FROM 518 TO 405. 
          THIS 10.9 ACRE SITE, .98 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED APRIL 2, '28 FEET EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF CHIESA ROAD AND LAKE VIEW PARK WAY IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MOSELEY. I WILL WAIT UNTIL THIS POPULATES SO I CAN SPEAK TO IT. 
          >> YES, MA'AM. SORRY, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. 
          LAURA, CAN YOU TELL ME THE NAME OF THE PRESENTATION. >> IT'S LAKE VIEW CENTER. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU LAURA. OKAY. 
          SO, THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT FOR THIS PROPERTY IS IT'S TO AMEND THE EXISTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND IT WAS A PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR PD COMMERCIAL. 
          FOR THE REDUCTION OF PARKING FROM 518 PARKING SPACES TO 405 PARKING SPACES. 
          AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN HERE, WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, AND ALSO THE PREVIOUS, WELL THE EXISTING CONCEPT PLAN TODAY THAT THEY HAVE WAS A PROVED IN THE PREVIOUS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. JUST TO PROVIDE YOU SITE DATA AND ACCESS. THE SITE IS 10.9 ACRES AND IT IS BEING DEVELOPED WITH A 272 UNIT AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITY. IT WILL HAVE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS FROM LAKE VIEW PARK WAY. 
          ONE WILL BE A RIGHT TURN DECELERATION IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION. 
          THE OTHER WILL BE A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ON THE WESTERN MOST DRIVEWAY. 
          THAT WILL ALL BE FROM LAKE VIEW PARK WAY. NEXT SLIDE, LAURA. 
          SO TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY AS TO WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. 
          THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WAS APPROVED ON DECEMBER 17TH, 2017. IT WAS REZONED FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND SINGLE FAMILY SF NINE TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C2 TO ALLOW FOR AGE RESTRICTED 
          [00:10:02]
APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR A MINIMUM OF 30 YEARS USE. UNDER THAT REZONING, IT WAS REVIEWED UNDER THE MULTIFAMILY SF 7, SORRY, MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN WHICH WAS THE CLOSEST TO THE LIST BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITIES. THE OWNER IN THE PD HAS AGE RESTRICTED REQUIREMENT AND THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC PARKING REQUIREMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. IT WAS REVIEWED UNDER THE MULTIFAMILY. THIS IS 1.25 FOR ONE BEDROOM. 1.25 FOR STUDIOS AND ADDITIONAL TO THE BEDROOM COUNTS. AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE TABLE BELOW, THIS ACTUAL TABLE PERTAINS TO ACTUALLY WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED. WHERE IF THEY HAVE A TOTAL UNITS OF 272 UNITS, OUT OF THOSE 272 UNITS, THEY HAVE 152 ONE BEDROOMS. AT 673 SQUARE FEET AND THEY HAVE 1.5 AT THAT 1.5, WHICH REQUIRES 228 PARKING SPACES. 
          62 BEDROOMS THAT ARE 869 SQUARE FEET AND THEY ARE AT A RATE OF 1.75, THIS WOULD REQUIRE 105 PARKING SPACES AND 60 STUDIO APARTMENTS AND AT A RATE OF 1.2, WHICH REQUIRES 75. 
          AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR GUEST PARKING WHICH IS 0.25, WHICH IS 272 BASED ON 272 UNITS,A THE A RATE OF 0.25, WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM 68. SO THE TOTAL DID COME UP WITH DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OF PARKING. THEY FOUND THEY COULD FIT 468 SPACES TO 508. 
          THE SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED WITH 506 ON MARCH 4, 2019 AND APPROVED THIS WAY BECAUSE IT DID NOT COMPROMISE THE ROWLETT CODE FOR MULTIFAMILY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          SO TO JUSTIFY THE STUDY AND WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING LESS PARKING, THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A STUDY WHICH WAS PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET. THEY OBSERVED TWO 55 PLUS LIVING FACILITIES AND THEY CONDUCTED SITE ASSESSMENTS ON A WEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY. 
          AND THIS WAS FOR EVERGREEN AT ROWLETT. LOCATED OFF OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND SAVANNA AT GATEWAY IN PLANO. SO EVERGREEN IN ROWLETT IS 136 UNIT COMPLEX. 
          THEY FOUND THAT THEY ONLY UTILIZED 82.2 PARKING SPACES PER UNIT. 
          TOTALLING 113 PARKING SPACES. SATURDAY THEY DETERMINED THEY ONLY USED, THE DEMAND WAS FOR 0.7 PER UNIT, TOTALS 107. 66 SPACES AND THEY BASED THIS ON A RATE OF 1.2 SPACES OF DWELLING UNIT. THIS ALSO WAS WHEN THEY REVIEWED IT. 
          THEY BASED THIS RATE OFF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THEY HAD IN THE METRO PLEX AREA. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. ALSO WHEN THEY TOOK INTO ACCOUNT, IT'S 292 UNITS AND THEY LOOKED AT WEEKEND PARKING WHICH ONLY UTILIZED 0.76 TOTALS 177 PARKING SPACES. 
          SATURDAY THE PARKING DEMAND WAS UTILIZED ONLY 0.5 PARKING SPACES BUT TOTAL OF 150 PARKING SPACES. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO NOT HOW MANY PARKING SPACES THAT ARE AT SAVANNA AT GATEWAY. 
          IT WAS NOT PROVIDED IN THE JUSTIFICATION. BUT THAT WAS THE NUMBER THAT THEY CAME UP WITH. SO WITH THIS STUDY THAT THEY BROUGHT FORTH. 
          THEY CONCLUDED 1.4 PARKING SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT WOULD MEET DEMAND FOR THE LAKEVIEW SENIOR FACILITY. BASED ON THAT PARKING RATIO, AT THAT RATE, 386 PARKING SPACES WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THE 272 UNITS. BUT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 
          [00:15:05]
405 PARKING SPACES. ALSO INTO, ALSO SUPPLEMENT THIS PARKING REDUCTION OF THE 405 PARKS SPACES. THEY WOULD PROVIDE A BUSES SCHEDULE WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS OF THE FACILITY. NEXT SLIDE. HERE I'M PROVIDING A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO SITE PLANS. THAT WERE PROPOSED. THE EXISTING SITE PLAN SHOWS THE PARKING LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE FLOOD PLAIN AREA AND ALSO IF YOU LOOK TO THE SOUTH OF THE EXISTING CONCEPT PLAN, YOU WILL SEE THERE WAS PARKING LOCATED TO THE SOUTH. 
          AND ALSO SOUTH, NORTH SOUTH GOING AGAIN PERPENDICULAR. AND ALSO YOU WILL SEE FUTURE, THE FUTURE DETENTION POND AS WELL. NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN, THEY ARE TAKING AWAY PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE AND REMOVE FROM THE BOTTOM, WHERE THEY WOULD EXPAND THE DETENTION POND TO THE BOTTOM. AND DOWN TO THE BOTTOM IS A CHART THAT SHOWS WHAT IS EXISTING, WHICH IS 518 PARKING SPACES VERSUS 405 SPACES AND FUTURE DETENTION POND WILL GO FROM 8787 SQUARE FEET TO 20,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          THERE WILL BE A DECREASE IN PARKING AND INCREASE IN FLOOD PLAIN AND ALSO PERVIOUS SURFACE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. SO, WITH THAT, WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES WITHIN THE 200 AND 500 FOOT AREA. 200 FEET THERE WAS ONLY 11 NOTICES SENT. 
          WITHIN THE 500 FOOT AREA, THERE WAS 12 NOTICES SENT AND ONLY ONE RESPONSE CAME BACK WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA WHICH WAS ONE IN FAVOR. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          SO THE REQUEST WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF OFF STREET PARK TO GO 518 TO 405. AND THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN THAT REFLECTS THE CHANGES AS SHOWING THAT THE PARKING IS REMOVED AND INCREASED IN THE DETENTION POND AND ALSO WITH THIS APPROVAL, WE ASK FOR THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. 
          THAT THIS PROVIDED TRANSPORTATION TO ALLEVIATE THE INDIVIDUALS VEHICLES BY SOME SCHEDULE OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICE FIVE DAYS A WEEK FROM APPROXIMATELY 10:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M. WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS AND ALSO BECAUSE MENTIONED BEFORE, IT DID HAVE A 30 YEAR MINIMUM RESTRICTION ON THE AGE RESTRICTED CATEGORY ON THIS PROJECT. 
          WE ASK THAT IF THIS CHANGE, THE PARKING WILL COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS PLACED AT THAT TIME. 
          AFTER THE 30 YEAR MINIMUM IF THEY CHANGE IT WILL COMPLY TO THE PARKING PERMITS. 
          THIS STATES IT'S EXPLICITLY AGE RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          SO THIS CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AND ALSO HAS A BRIEF PRESENTATION AS WELL TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL. 
          IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THEM THAT YOU HAVE. 
          >> THANK YOU MS. BRADLEY. COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS BUT I AM GOING TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE APPLICANT MAKES A PRESENTATION. IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO THE REST 
          OF FELLOW COMMISSIONERS? >> YES. THAT'S WHAT WE WILL DO THEN. 
          WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT AND LET THEM MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION ASK ASK QUESTIONS AND HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING. APPLICANT. 
          STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          >> SURE, MY NAME IS JEFFREY DOLIAN. 13455 NOEL ROAD IN DALLAS, TEXAS. 75240. I'M THE APPLICANT ON BEHALF OF SONOMA ADVISORS AND THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PARKING STUDY AS WELL AS THE TD REVISION SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW EARLIER THIS YEAR. WHAT I'M SHOWING ON THE SCREEN. 
          I HAVE A VERY SHORT PRESENTATION. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO GET INTO MORE DETAILS OF THE KIND OF PARKING STUDY THAT WE DID. I JUST WANTED TO MENTION A FEW 
          [00:20:01]
THINGS. WE LOOKED AT TWO FACILITIES ONE BEING EVERGREEN AT ROWLETT BECAUSE WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT A CEREAL USE FACILITY WITHIN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. AND THEN SECOND WE LOOKED AT SAVANNA AT GATEWAY, THE REASON BEING IS THAT FACILITY IS OWNED BY THE SAME OWNER AS THIS PROPERTY AND SO WE ALSO FELT THAT WAS IMPORTANT, EXCUSE ME, PERSONALITY TO LOOK AT A FACILITY THAT MAYBE UTILIZED IN THE SAME WAY AND ATTRACT THE SAME TYPES OF RESIDENTS WITH SIMILAR TRANSPORTATION PHILOSOPHIES AS THEY WOULD AT THEIR SAVANNA AT GATEWAY JUST UP THE ROAD IN PLANO. 
          AS TARA OUTLINED. WHAT IS NOT IMPORTANT TO US IS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THEY PROVIDED BUT THE DEMAND. THE NUMBER THAT AREED AT THE FA. SO WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN THERE AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HAND CORNER OF EACH TABLE IS THE OBSERVED DEMAND THOSE FACILITIES AND THERE'S TWO COLUMNS, ONE BECAUSE WE WANTED TO LOOK AT A DEMAND PERDWELLING UNIT. 
          SO IN ESSENCE, PER RENTABLE UNIT AND ALSO A DEMAND PER BEDROOM AT EACH FACILITY JUST IN CASE OR AS I I GUESS YOU MAY EXPECT THE UNIT MIX WILL BE DIFFERENT. SO WE WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE INDIVIDUAL DEMANDS WERE. AND SO WE'RE SEEING THE OBSERVED DEMANDS THAT DEPENDING ON THE TIME OF DAY IN WHICH FACILITY WE'RE AT, RANGED FROM ABOUT BEING ABOUT HALF A PARKING SPACE PER BEDROOM TO ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A PARKING SPACE PER DWELLING UNIT. 
          I THINK THIS COULD JUST MOST SIMPLY BE DESCRIBED AS THE RESIDENTS AT THESE FACILITIES, YOU KNOW THE REASON THEY'RE MOVING TO A FACILITY LIKE THIS IS THEY WANT A LITTLE LESS OF AN INDEPENDENT LIFESTYLE WHERE YOU MIGHT EXPECT SOMEONE LIVING IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. 
          SO THEY MOVE TO A FACILITY LIKE THIS THAT PROVIDES SOME AMENITIES, THAT PROVIDES FRIENDS AND OTHER RESIDENTS THEY CAN HANG OUT WITH AND DO ACTIVITIES WITH AND THEREFORE REALLY JUST SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCES THE DEMAND ON THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THANK YOU. 
          SO, THIS WAS A SUMMARY TABLE THAT WE PROVIDED IN OUR PARKING STUDY. 
          THERE'S KIND OF THREE THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT, TARA OUTLINED THE FIRST ROW HERE. 
          CITY CODE REQUIRED PARKING. THIS IS BASED ON A MULTI-FAMILY USE WHICH AGAIN WE WOULD FROM A PARKING STANDPOINT WE DON'T FEEL LIKE MULTIFAMILY IS THE MOST APPLICABLE USE FOR WHAT THIS PROPERTY IS IN TERMS AN AGE-RESTRICTED SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. 
          SO, THE NEXT PIECE OF DATA THAT WE USED IS THE ITE TRIP GENERATION. 
          THEY ARE BASICALLY A NATIONAL PUBLICATION THAT LOOKS AT TRANSPORTATION DEMANDS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS AT A NATIONAL LEVEL AND THEY LOOK AT INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT A LIMITED NUMBER OF USES, MAYBE 40 OR 50 USES A CITY MAY HAVE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          THEY LOOK AT LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF DIFFERENT USES AND SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID FOR OUR STUDY THEY LOOK AT WHAT ACTUAL DEMANDS FOR THESE VARIOUS USES ARE. AND COME UP WITH A RECOMMENDED PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR EACH OF THOSE USES. SO, WHAT THEY HAVE IS AGE RESTRICTED SENIOR LIVING. WHICH WE THINK IS OBVIOUSLY VERY COMPARABLE TO WHAT OUR PROPOSED USE IS AND THE RESEARCH ON ITE, THEY RECOMMENDED A MINIMUM PARKING RATIO OF 0.9 PARKING SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT. THEY DON'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON A PER BEDROOM BASIS. 
          SO IF YOU ARE TO USE THAT 0.9 FACTOR AND APPLY IT TO OUR 272 DWELLING UNITS, YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE WHAT I TE IN ESSENCE WOULD RECOMMEND FOR THIS FACILITY. 
          LASTLY, WE LOOK AT THE OBSERVED DEMANDS FOR THE TWO FACILITIES THAT I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY. 
          IF YOU TAKE THE HIGHEST OF THOSE, AND APPLY IT TO OUR UNIT MIX OF 272 DWELLING UNITS OR 332 BEDROOMS, YOU GET A RECOMMENDED PARKING SUPPLY OF 204. ONE THING THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THE IDEA IF YOU LOOK AT COMPARED ITE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE OBSERVED DEMAND. 
          [00:25:07]
I THINK THERE'S GOOD CORRELATION THAT CAN BE MADE IN TERMS OF THE ITE DEMAND OR RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER IN THIS CASE, ABOUT 20% HIGHER THAN OBSERVED DEMAND. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE FROM A NATIONAL PUBLICATION STANDPOINT THEIR MINIMUM RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE HIGHER THAN OBSERVED DEMAND. YOU DON'T WANT TO END UP IN A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE ARE PARKING ON STREET BECAUSE THERE'S NO OTHER SPACES AVAILABLE. 
          LAST LINE IN THIS SLIDE IS SPECIFIC TO THE PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          WHAT WE LOOKED FOR HERE IN TERMS OF OUR PROPOSED SUPPLIES, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A COMPROMISE BETWEEN ALL OF THESE NUMBERS. I THINK YOU KNOW, FROM A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING STAND POINT, I WOULD HAVE NO HESITATION RECOMMENDING THE ITE, USING THE ITE RATE AND RECOMMENDING 245 SPACES. WE WANTED TO FIND A COMPROMISE AND FELT LIKE THAT WAS A PROPOSED SUPPLY OF 386 STRICTLY FROM A PARKING STUDY STANDPOINT. AS TARA MENTIONED, WE ARE PROPOSING 405 SPACES. SO WE ARE COMING IN ABOVE WHAT ARE KIND OF MINIMUM RECOMMENDATION WAS IN OUR PARKING SUMMARY. AND IF YOU COULD KINDLY GO TO THE LAST SLIDE. WE JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW BENEFITS OF THE PARKING REVISION. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS IN ESSENCE AVOID PAVING MORE AREA IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT AND OBVIOUSLY ON THE PROPERTY THAT WILL JUST NEVER BE USED FROM A PARKING STAND POINT. SO FIRSTLY, WHAT WE'RE OFFERING IS MORE LANDSCAPE AREAS FOR RECREATION AND USE BY THE RESIDENTS. I THINK MANY TIMES WHEN YOU SEE THIS REQUEST COMING IN. WHAT I THINK THE DEVELOPER IS PROBABLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISHES REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARK TO GO INCREASE THE BUILDABLE AREA ON THE PROPERTY. 
          IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, IT'S ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. 
          AND ACTUALLY NEARING THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. SO THAT'S NOT THE GOAL OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. THE BUILDINGS ARE ALREADY FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, ALREADY ERECTED. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO INCREASE THE BUILDING AREA. 
          JUST TRYING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PAVEMENT THAT WOULD NEVER BE USED BY RESIDENTS FOR PARKING. 
          I THINK THERE'S ALSO A NOTED STORMWATER BENEFIT BY REDUCING THE PARKING FROM ABOUT 100 SPACES AND JUST FOR THOSE THAT AREN'T IN THE TECHNICAL NUMBERS LIKE I AM EVERY DAY, I WANTED TO EQUATE IT OUT TO REAL WORLD NUMBERS AND PARKING OR THE WATER RUN OFF SAVINGS IS 1200 GALLONS A MINUTE WHICH WOULD FILL 2800 BATHTUBS DURING A HUNDRED YEAR EVENT. 
          BY CONVERTING SOME OF THESE PAVED AREAS INTO OTHER AREAS. THEN LASTLY, THERE'S THE OBVIOUS ISLAND EFFECT, AS THE METRO PLEX BECOMES MORE DENSE. THE PAVEMENT IS GOING TO SOAK UP THE HEAT AND WE'RE ALREADY SEEING TEMPERATURES SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER IN THE CITY THAN WE DO OUT IN THE SUBURBS AND EVEN OUTSIDE OF THE SUBURBS. BY NOT PAVING IN HALF ACRE THERE'S A BENEFIT FROM A HEAT ISLAND STANDPOINT. THAT IS THE END OF KIND OF PRESENTATION I PREPARED. I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND I KNOW AS WELL THAT BILL FISHER IS ON THE LINE TO REPRESENT THE OWNER AND HE CAN BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER 
          QUESTIONS AS WELL. >> THANK YOU MR. DOLIAN. COMMISSIONERS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER OR MR. DOLIAN. IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR HAND I WOULD RECOGNIZE YOU. I WILL START WITH MR. COTE. MR. COTE. 
          YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >> THANK YOU. MY QUESTION CONCERNS THE "STUDY". I WOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED YOU WOULD PROBABLY GET BETTER NUMBERS IF YOU HAD MORE THAN ONE DAY TO COUNT NUMBERS. BUT THE OTHER QUESTION IS THE VALIDITY OF THOSE NUMBERS CAN ONLY BE MEASURED BY ALSO INCLUDING FOR US THE TOTAL OR THE PERCENT OCCUPANCY OF THOSE TWO AREAS YOU WERE STUDYING. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU'RE 
          [00:30:10]
DOWNTOWN ROWLETT BUILDING IS ONLY 70% OCCUPIED, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T SAY THAT EQUATES 
          TO ALL PARKING SPACES YOU NEED. DO YOU HAVE ANY FEEL FOR THOSE? >> YEAH. 
          FIRST I CAN MENTION THE DATA COLLECTION THAT WE DID, WE LOOKED AT TWO DAYS. 
          A WEEKDAY AS WELL AS A WEEKEND. WE GOT TWO NUMBERS THERE AND WENT OUT AT MULTIPLE TIMES ON EACH WEEKDAY AND WEEKEND. ON THE WEEKDAY, WE WENT OUT THREE TIMES THAT DAY TO EACH FACILITY TO DO PARKING COUNTS AND ON THE WEEKEND, WE WENT OUT AT TWO TIMES AND I CAN GET INTO MORE DETAILS ON THE TIMES. BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE. WHEN WE EXPECT TO SEE PEAK PARKING DEMANDS. AS AN EXAMPLE ON THE WEEKDAY, WE WENT OUT ON WEDNESDAY. 
          MIDDLE OF THE WEEK. WE EXPECT FEWER PEOPLE TRAVELLING OVER THE WEEKENDS. 
          MAYBE THEY DON'T COME UNTIL MONDAY OR TUESDAY. WE SEE WEDNESDAY AS PEAK DEMAND. 
          5:35, 8:45 AND 11:45. WE EXPECTED EVERYBODY TO BE AT HOME AND EVERYBODY IN THEIR RESIDENCES TO UNDERSTAND THE PEAKS. FROM THE OCCUPANCY STAND POINT. 
          BILL, CAN YOU GIVE US AN IDEA OF THE OCCUPANCY OF YOUR PLANO LOCATION WE STUDIED PLANO RARELY 
          CLOSES -- >> MR. FISHER. LET ME INTERRUPT YOU. 
          CAN YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND STATE YOUR NAME. >> I'M BILL FISHER WITH SONOMA HOUSING ADVISORS. MY ADVICE IS 16812 DALLAS PARK WAY. 
          DALLAS, TEXAS, 75248. WE OPERATE SAVANNA GATEWAY. WE HAVE DONE OVER 3000 SENIOR INDEPENDENT FACILITIES. THEY ARE FULL WITH A WAIT LIST AS IS THE SAVANNA GATEWAY. 
          SO, BOTH THESE COMMUNITIES ARE FULL DURING THIS RELEVANT TIME. THE BEST EXAMPLE IS THE ONE IN ROWLETT. THEY HAD MORE TIME WITH THE VARIANCE. 
          WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT LUXURY OF THE TIME BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE FINANCING PROGRAMS THAT RICK SHEFFIELD AND THE FINANCING CORP. THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. RICK IS ON IT AND I WILL ASK HIM TO ADDRESS IT TOO. 
          THE HOUSING FINANCE CORP IS THE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. 
          THEY OWN THE LAND. RICK AND HIS BOARD ARE THE GENERAL PARTNER. 
          THEY MAKE ALL THE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS ON IT. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS A RATIONAL PARKING APPROACH TO INDEPENDENT SENIOR LIVING BASED ON EXPERIENCE BACKED UP BY THE STUDY AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE'RE DOING ENVIRONMENTAL WORK. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN. THE PARKING ELIMINATED IS IN AND AROUND A CREEK. 
          WE'RE TAKING PRESSURE OFF THE CREEK AND THE FLOOD PLAIN WITH THIS CHANGE. 
          YOU CAN'T IMAGINE WE WOULD DO ANYTHING TO UPSET ADEQUATE PARKING AT OUR PROPERTY. 
          THE BENEFITS YOU GET FROM ROWLETT FINANCING CORP INVOLVED. IF WE ARE COMPLETELY WRONG AND WE WON'T BE, IT'S NOT LIKE THE LAND IS GOING TO BE USED FOR BUILDINGS, IT WILL BE GREEN BELT ON THE PROPERTY AND RICK AND HIS FOLKS WOULD BE THE DECISION MAKERS TO COME BACK AND ADD PARKING. UNLIKE MANY OTHER OPTIONS, THIS WOULD NOT BE AN END ALL BE ALL. 
          >>  MR. COTE, I SEE YOU TRYING TO CUT IN HERE. YOU WERE TRYING TO GET YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED. IT WAS ANSWERED WITH 100% OCCUPANCY COMMENT. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. THE OTHER QUESTION ON YOUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN WHERE YOU SHOWED THE REMOVAL OF THE PARKING SPACES, THERE'S APPEARS THERE'S A BUNCH OF THEM WITH X'S THROUGH THEM, WHAT DOES THAT INDICATE? I DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THE -- CAR PORTS. OKAY. EXCELLENT. 
          THANK YOU. MR. WHITTON. I'M CURIOUS WHY THE PARKING WASN'T DONE BEFORE COMING BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND NOW WE'RE REDUCING AND CHANGING THE REQUIREMENTS. I'M WONDERING WHY THAT WASN'T DONE THEN. 
          [00:35:01]
IF THAT MAKES SENSE? NOW WE'RE TAKING AWAY 100 SPACES. 
          WE DON'T KNOW 30 YEARS FROM NOW WHAT WILL BE, I GET IT, THERE'S PROBABLY ROOM. 
          ONCE YOU PUT A DETENTION POND IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO ADD PARKING SPACES SHOULD THE AGE RESTRICTION GO AWAY. BUT MAINLY, YOU KNOW PERSONALLY, MY DEAL IS WE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A MESSAGE TO THE DEVELOPERS GOING FORWARD. WE WANT TO HAVE ALL OF OUR DUCKS IN A ROW. I GET IT THINGS IN CONSTRUCTION BUT COMING BACK AND BACK BEFORE COMMISSION, MAKING CHANGES THAT ARE LESS THAN DESIRABLE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT PUBLIC WOULD REALLY LIKE. AND IT'S BETTER IF WE CAN DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE WHEN WE COME ACROSS AS OPPOSED TO AFTER IF THAT MAKES SENSE. WHO IS YOUR QUESTION TO? 
          TO STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER? >> THE DEVELOPER. >> MR. FISHER. 
          OR DOLIAN. YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT? >> WE CERTAINLY APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BRINGING IT SOONER. WE KNEW WE WOULD BE FOR LESS PARKING. 
          THE NATURE OF THE FINANCING PROGRAM THAT THE HOUSING CORPORATION PARTICIPATES IN TO SEE THESE DEVELOPMENTS MAKE A REALITY HAVE INCREDIBLY TIGHT TIMELINES. 
          THE PLANNING AND PERMITTING PROCESSES IN ROWLETT LIKE ALL CITIES IN NORTH TEXAS TAKE A LOT OF TIME. WE RAN OUT OF TIME TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FINANCING RICK AND HIS TEAM HAD IN PLACE TO MAKE THIS A REALITY. WE ARE ONLY ASKING YOU TO DO THIS ON THE BASIS OF DETERMINING IT IS OF VALUE AND IT IS OF A PUBLIC BENEFIT. 
          WE HAVE TO STOP PUTTING LARGE AMOUNTS OF PAVING DOWN THAT ARE UNNECESSARY. 
          IT CREATES RUN OFF, IT CREATES POLLUTION. IT PUTS PRESSURE ON THE FLOOD PLAIN. IT PUTS PRESSURE ON THE CREEK. IT PUTS PRESSURE ON OUR NEIGHBORS. SO WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING YOU AND THEN ULTIMATELY BASED UPON YOUR RECOMMENDATION, THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE A MORE RATIONAL PLAN THAT IS MORE SENSITIVE TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN THE AREA THAT WE'RE IN PARTICULARLY THIS CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE CREEK. 
          WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK RICK TO JUMP IN AND YOU KNOW. >> MR. SHEFFIELD. 
          INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO PEOPLE THAT MIGHT NOT KNOW YOU AS WELL AS I DO. 
          JO THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. >> RICK SHEFFIELD. 3610 BELLIUS STREET IN ROWLETT. 
          I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. WHAT MR. FISHER SAID IS TRUE. 
          SOME OF THE TAX CREDIT TIMELINES IN THE SECTION 42 THAT IRS GOVERNS ARE EXTREMELY TIGHT. 
          WE HAD A WHIRLWIND TO WORK THROUGH. THE MAIN POINTS I WANTED TO ADD. 
          AS BEING THE GENERAL PARTNER OF THE DEVELOPMENT HERE WITH SONOMA AND RISE, GIVES US LOCAL CONTROL. THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT TYPICALLY HAVE WITH A MARKET RATE DEVELOPER. THE TWO AMENDMENTS OR M MODIFICATIONS THAT STAFF WANTED TO HAVE ON THERE MAINTAINING THE 55 PLUS, WE CAN ENSURE THOSE ARE MAINTAINED. 
          THIS, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE ESSENTIALLY IT'S BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. 
          SHOULD SOMETHING HAPPEN MR. WINTON, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT NOT PUTTING PARKING BACK. 
          THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT NOT PAVING AND TURNING INTO GREEN SCAPE AND OPEN LAND. 
          SHOULD GOD FORBID SOMETHING HAPPEN 32 YEARS FROM NOW AND THAT CHANGES, THE LAND IS STILL THERE TO ADD THE PARKING BACK. IT JUST WOULD INCREASE THE BURDEN AT THE STREAM. 
          I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> THANK YOU MR. SHEFFIELD. 
          DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONERS ANY OTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME? 
          I HAVE SEVERAL. >> I HAVE ONE. MS. ESTEVEZ. 
          CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME OKAY? YES. SO THIS DECISION WAS NOT BASED 
          ON ISSUES RELATED TO THE FLOOD PLAIN? >> WHO YOU ARE ASKING THAT TO? 
          >> TO THE DEVELOPER. >> NO. IT'S ABSOLUTELY STAFF HAS EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE ADEQUACY OF DETENTION. THE CONCERN ABOUT RUN OFF. 
          PART OF MR. DOLIAN'S STUDY, THEY DID THE PARKING STUDY, BUT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ASKED US AND WE PROVIDED A COMPLETE FULLY DEVELOPED FLOOD PLAIN ANALYSIS OF THE CREEK FROM OUR SIDE OF LAKEVIEW PARK WAY ALL THE WAY DOWN PAST THE PROPERTY THAT THE HOUSING 
          [00:40:03]
FINANCE CORP OWNS WITH US TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. SO FLOOD PLAIN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WERE THE PRIMARY CONCERNS. THIS ISN'T SAVING MONEY. 
          THIS IS ABOUT BETTER LIVING ENVIRONMENT AND LESS PRESSURE ON THE CITY'S INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          IT'S VERY MUCH AN EFFORT TO REDUCE IMPERVIOUS COVER WHICH PREVENTS FAST FLOW WATER RUN OFF AND WHATEVER CONTAMINATES BUILD UP ON THE PARKING. I APPRECIATE YOU ASKING THAT. 
          THE ENVIRONMENT IS ISSUE HERE. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME? ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A FEW. HOW LONG HAS KIMLY HORN BEEN 
          INVOLVED? >> SINCE 2019. >> I NOTICE THERE'S A LARGE DETENTION POND IN THE PLAN, THE PROPOSED PLAN THAT WASN'T THERE IN THE ONE THAT WE APPROVED. 
          WHY IS THAT DIFFERENT? >> GOOD EVENING MR. CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONERS. 
          HOW ABOUT MR. COHEN. THE GUY I WAS TRYING TO GET AN ANSWER FROM. 
          >> I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE. AS MR. FISHER SAID EARLIER, WE RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE ACCURACY OF THE DETENTION POND AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED. WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS WERE RELEASED, THAT WAS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE EXCLUDED FROM ANY APPROVAL BECAUSE WE WERE NOT SATISFIED WITH THEIR DESIGN AND THEY HAVE SINCE ADDRESSED IT. THEY ARE STILL ADDRESSING IT BUT THEY ARE, IT'S LOOKING MUCH BETTER. I NEED A FINAL PLAN ON THAT POND 
          NOW. >> LET ME ASK YOU A GENERAL SCOPE HOW THESE THINGS WORK. 
          WHEN DEVELOPERS COME ALONG WITH PROJECTS AND YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH STORMWATER RUN OFF AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND THE DEVELOPERS, I'M NOT SPEAKING PER SE TO THIS PROJECT BUT GENERALLY TO ANY PROJECT, HOW DOES THAT WORK? FROM WHAT I REMEMBER, THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT YOU CAN EITHER USE A DETENTION POND ON SITE OR YOU HAVE TO HOOK IT TO THE CITY STORMWATER DRAIN, CAN YOU GO INTO THAT? HOW THAT, THERE'S THE TRADE OFF 
          THERE. >> NO. THE RULE IS THAT, WELL, OKAY. 
          LET ME BACK UP. IF THE STORM DRAIN HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPED SITE. THEY COULD HOOK ON DIRECTLY TO THAT STORM DRAIN. 
          BECAUSE THAT STORM DRAIN WOULD BE SIZED TO RECEIVE THE DEVELOPED FLOWS FROM THAT SITE. 
          THAT'S SOMETIMES THAT'S TRUE AND SOMETIMES THAT'S NOT TRUE. THAT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT WHEN 
          THE DEVELOPMENT COMES IN. >> SO, WASN'T A, I MEAN IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, IN CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS IN GENERAL, WOULDN'T YOU NOT AGREE THAT BUILDING A DETENTION POND IS A LOT MORE COST EFFECTIVE THAN BUILDING A LARGER DETENTION POND IS A LOT MORE COST 
          EFFECTIVE THAN BUILDING A LARGER STORM DRAIN SYSTEM? >> IF YOU MEAN BUILDING A LARGER 
          STORM DRAIN -- >> TO HANDLE -- >> DOWN STREAM OF THE PROJECT, 
          YES. >> I WOULD CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THAT. 
          >> AS THE PLAN WAS INITIALLY SUBMITTED TO US, I HAD ASSUMED THAT THAT HAD BEEN LOOKED INTO. 
          IS THAT NOT RIGHT? >> WELL, DON'T FORGET IN THIS CASE THERE REALLY IS NO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM TO HOOK ON TO. IT'S A CREEK. THEY'RE DISCHARGING TO THE CREEK AND IT IS NOT JUST ANY CREEK, IT IS A FEMA STUDIED REGULATED FLOOD PLAIN CREEK. 
          CHANGING THE WATER SURFACE ELEVATION IN THE CREEK, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAD THE CAPACITY TO HANDLE THE EXTRA STORMWATER, CHANGING THAT WATER SURFACE ELEVATION IS, WELL 
          IT'S PROHIBITED AT ALL DOWN STREAM. >> OKAY. 
          AND SO A DETENTION POND WAS THE LOGICAL CHOICE TO DO. >> YEAH. 
          [00:45:05]
MY POINT IS, MY POINT IN THIS QUESTION IS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE STAFF YOU KNOW, KNOWS I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. BUT WHAT I DO KNOW IS SOMETIMES THINGS HAPPEN IN PROJECTS THAT CHANGE MIDWAY OR SOMETHING IS RECOGNIZED THAT COULD BE AN ADDITIONAL COST TO A DEVELOPER AND SO ONE WAY TO ALLEVIATE THAT COST IS TO MAKE A LARGER DETENTION POND AND TO DO THAT, YOU HAVE TO TAKE AWAY PARKING SPACES. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S NOT 
          WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE. AM I CORRECT? >> I WOULD -- 
          >> MY POINT IS, THIS IS NOT TURNED ABOUT PARKING PER SE. IT'S ABOUT STORM DRAINS. 
          AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M WRONG AND YOU'RE RIGHT THAT THIS IS DISCUSSED. 
          RIGHT NOW >> OKAY. I WOULD SAY THAT THERE WAS AS I SAID BEFORE, THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE SIZE OF DETENTION POND. 
          SO, YOU MAY, I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO SEE THAT THE ELIMINATION OF THOSE SEVERAL PARKING SPACES THAT WERE NEXT TO THE DETENTION POND WHERE YOU SAW THAT DETENTION POND GROW FROM SMALL TO BIG. THOSE PARKING SPACES WERE PROBABLY ELIMINATED. 
          I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE DEVELOPER. IT LOOKS TO ME THEY WERE ELIMINATED TO ENLARGE THE DETENTION POND, BUT THE 100 OR SO PARKING SPACES UP ALONG THE CREEK ELIMINATION OF THOSE PARKING SPACES, I DON'T BELIEVE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DETENTION POND SIDING. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE CITIZENS OF ROWLETT KNOW WE'RE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. 
          COMMISSIONER MOSELEY. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE ALTHOUGH THE CONVERSATIONS STEMMED FROM UNDERSTANDING AND MODELLING OF THAT DETENTION FACILITY, AS THIS PROGRAM BEGAN TO EVOLVE AND COME CLOSER TO FRUITION, IT WAS REALIZED THOSE PARKING SPACES, THE STANDARDS PROVIDED WERE BASED ON MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WE HAVE. 
          WE DON'T HAVE SPECIFICITY RELATED TO THIS SPECIFIC USE. I WOULD CONCUR WITH THE APPLICANT THAT LESS CONCRETE IS BETTER THAN MORE CONCRETE. HOWEVER YES, ABSOLUTELY, A NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES WERE REMOVED RESULT OF MODELLING FROM THE DETENTION FACILITY THAT IS REQUIRED. BUT AFTER FURTHER THOUGHT AND THIS IS THE CONVERSATION WE HAD, WITH THE APPLICANT AND THAT'S WHY IT'S TAKEN A LITTLE WHILE TO GET TO YOU. 
          WHY DON'T WE RE-EVALUATE HOW MUCH PARKING IS REQUIRED. WE SAID BRING BACK DATA AND SHOW US WHAT THOSE PARKING RATIOS ARE. IT EVOLVED IN THIS MANNER, THAT'S HOW THE CONVERSATION STARTED. THEY DID A DEEPER DIVE AND INVESTIGATED IF THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO PRESERVE THE SITE IN TERMS OF NOT PROVIDING 
          MORE CONCRETE THAN NECESSARY AND REDUCING THE RUN OFF. >> THANK YOU MA'AM. 
          I WANT TO ASK THIS TO STAFF AS WELL. REFRESH MY MEMORY ON THIS 30 YEAR SENIOR FACILITY DEDICATION. WE SAW IT MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION. 
          WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENT THAT EXISTS RIGHT NOW? 
          AS FAR AS THE DEED RESTRICTION GOES. >> YOU'RE SAYING EXIST RIGHT NOW 
          THAT -- >> AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. IS THERE A 30 YEAR, THIS HAS TO 
          BE A SENIOR YEAR FOR 30 YEARS. >> FOR A MINIMUM OF 30 YEARS. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. IS THAT RIGHT? WE HAVE 30 YEARS GUARANTEED THIS 
          WILL BE A SENIOR FACILITY. >> CORRECT. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT. WE HAVE THAT 
          IS >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. 
          WELL AT THIS TIME. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTION. MR. WINTON. 
          >> THIS WAS TO MR. COHEN. YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TENSION POND. 
          I KNOW AS WHERE THE CREEK RUNS TOWARDS WOOD SIDE DRIVE, THEN WE HAVE A NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BEING DEVELOPED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WOOD SIDE AND THERE'S ANOTHER CREEK BEFORE PIN RIDGE 
          [00:50:11]
CIRCLE. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF A 8,000 SQUARE FOOT OR WHATEVER DETENTION POND VERSUS 20,000? DEPENDING ON WHICH WAY WE GO WITH THAT, WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THAT BEING THAT WOOD SIDE DRIVE CUTS ACROSS THAT CREEK BECAUSE THE NEW RESIDENTS OF WOOD SIDE WOULD BE THE FIRST ONES POSSIBLY IMPACTED. IF THAT MAKES SENSE WHERE I'M 
          GOING WITH THAT. EITHER WAY. >> SO THEY DID DO A STUDY. 
          THEY LOOK AT A ZONE OF INFLUENCE WHICH IS A POINT DOWN STREAM WHERE THE SUBJECT FACILITY REPRESENTS 10% OF THE WATERSHED AT THAT POINT IN THE DOWN STREAM POINT IN THE STREAM. 
          AND THEY DID DO SOME ANALYSIS. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. DOLIAN TO CHIME IN. 
          HE KNOWS THE NUMBERS BETTER. THE OVERALL NET EFFECT WAS IF I RECALL, WHEN THEY LOOKED AT IT, THERE IS ACTUALLY A DROP IN THE FLOW RATE BUT LET ME TURN THIS OWNER TO MR. DOLIAN. 
          >>  SURE. WE DID WHAT WE CALL A DOWN STREAM ASSESSMENT TO LOOK AT THE EXISTING STUDIED FLOOD PLAIN TO SPEAK TO YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, WE LOOKED AT THE EXISTING FLOWS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN BEFORE THIS PROJECT EXISTED. AND THEN WE LOOKED AT THE FLOWS THAT WE WOULD EXPECT WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN AT THE WOOD SIDE ROAD CROSSING AFTER THE PROJECT WAS BUILT ASSUMING THE DETENTION POND AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED. I SHOULD SAY IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED BY THE ENGINEER FOR THE SITE AND MODELLED THOSE TOGETHER. 
          WE FOUND THERE WOULD BE A 20 CFS. CUBIC FOOT PER SECOND DECREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF FLOW ACROSSING ON THE WOOD SIDE ROAD CULVERT. THAT IS A RESULT OF THE DETENTION POND THAT WE WERE PROPOSING AND CREATES NET VALLEY STORAGE IN THE FLOOD PLAIN. 
          THERE'S WATER TO GO AND GETS INTO THE TIMING OF IT. I THINK TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE'RE LOOKING AT 20 CFS DECREASE AS A RESULT. PEAK FLOWS AS A RESULT OF THIS 
          PROJECT. >>  MR. WINTON. DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? 
          >> IT DID. IF WE GO WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE PARKING SPACE, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LESS WATER DOWN STREAM WHICH SHOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ANY OF THE 
          RESIDENTS DOWN STREAM. AM I CORRECT? >> YEP. 
          I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. 
          COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL TURN THIS OVER TO MISS HALLMARK TO CONDUCT THE PUBLIC HEARING. KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES OR LESS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. YOU HAVE THE CON. THANK YOU SIR. 
          WE WILL QUICKLY REVIEW THE PROCESS FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS. 
          WE ASK THAT CALLERS PLEASE MUTE BACKGROUND.NICS IN THE - AND CALLERS WILL BE RECOGNIZED BY THE LAST FOUR DIGITS OF THE PHONE NUMBER OR HOW THEY HAVE BEEN SIGNIFIED ON THE LIST. 
          EXCUSE ME, ONCE RECOGNIZED ACHAIRMAN MOSELEY COMMENTED, YOU WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THE SOUND WILL BE MUTED AT THE END OF YOUR TIME. 
          IF YOU SUBMITTED YOUR COMMENTS VIA E-MAIL EARLIER IN THE DAY OR WEEK. 
          THEY WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD. WE HAVE A FEW CALLERS ON THE LINE. PASTOR HYATT AND HUDDLESTON. I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB 
          AND SELLING YOU'RE THE NEXT >> THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >> THANK YOU. CALLER LISTED AS GALAXY A 6. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON 
          THIS ITEM? >> I AM WAITING FOR THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. 
          >> THANK YOU. JASON BROWN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON 
          THIS ITEM? CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> HELLO. 
          [00:55:04]
          >>  YES, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? >> OKAY. 
          FIRST, I'M SORRY. THIS IS NOT DALROCK ROAD PROPERTY. 
          >> NO, SIR. THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM. >> I'M SORRY. 
          I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET IN. WE WILL CALL ON YOU AT THAT TIME. 
          THANK YOU. RICHARD MYERS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? NO, I'M ALSO HERE FOR THE NEXT ITEM. 
          >> OKAY. THANK YOU. CALLER LISTED AT LG STYLO 4 PLUS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. 
          WE DON'T HAVE ANY CALLERS FOR THIS ITEM. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MS. 
          NICKS. >> I DO NOT HAVE ANY E-MAILS FOR THIS ITEM. 
          ALL RIGHT. WELL AT THIS TIME. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          COMMISSIONERS. DISCUSSION ON THE AGENDA ITEM? I WILL START WITH MR. 
          >> NO. I'M GOOD. >> OKAY. 
          I WILL MOVE ON TO MR. ENGEN. >> I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT THE USES OF THE VAN IS ESSENTIAL. HAVING A COUPLE OF VANS AND HAVING BEEN IN A LIVING ASSISTED FACILITIES, THEY EVENTUALLY ENDED UP USING THE VAN A LOT. IT CAN REDUCE HAVING CARS IN THE PARKING LOT AND HAVING THE LARGER DETENTION POND IS AN EXTREMELY BETTER BENEFIT FOR 
          THOSE DOWN THE ROAD. >> THANK YOU SIR. MR. COTE. 
          DISCUSSION? NO. JUST WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE THE OWNERS GOING AHEAD AND DOING A STUDY AND PROVIDING US THAT INFORMATION. 
          AND I AM MORE THAN HAPPY WITH REDUCING THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND THE AMOUNT OF 
          CONCRETE AND RUN OFFS. SO WE'RE >> 
          >> DISCUSSION? >> NO. NO COMMENTS FROM ME. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I ASKED SOME QUESTIONS SOMETIMES. 
          I'M NOT LOOKING FOR NEFARIOUS PLOTS. WE HAVE SEEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN, WE APPROVE PROJECTS, PLANS AND THEN A YEAR LATER THINGS CHANGE. 
          SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC KNOWS OUR STAFF DOES LOOK AT THIS CLOSELY AND THEY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THEIR EXPERTISE. WE HAVE ENGINEERS ON STAFF. 
          THAT LOOK AT THESE THINGS. WE'RE NOT ENGINEERS AS I SAID. WE'RE CITIZENS THAT HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THIS. 
          I TRUST STAFF'S JUDGMENT AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CHANGES AS SUBMITTED. 
          IF WE HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION, I'M READY FOR A MOTION. 
          MS. ESTEVEZ. >> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND TO APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TWO ITEMS THAT WERE PRESENTED BY MS. BRADLEY IN THE PRESENTATION 
          APPROVAL WITH THE TWO ITEMS ADD. >> STIPULATION OF TRANSPORTATION. 
          >>  MR. WINTON'S HAND IS RAISED. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE BY STAFF. 
          THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS AS STIMULATED BY STAFF. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? SEEING NONE. WE WILL TAKE THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR. 
          RAISE YOUR HANDS. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR FIVE, SIX. THE MOTION CARRIES 6-0. 
          [4C. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Kevin Harrell, Skorburg Company, on behalf of property owner Brian Hyatt, Cornerstone Assembly of God, to rezone the subject property from Single-Family Residential (SF-10) District and Limited Office (O-1) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Single-Family Residential (SF-5) Uses to develop the site with 99 single-family homes and 2 common area lots. The 21-acre site is located on the west side of Dalrock Road, approximately 760 feet south of Schrade Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY KEVIN HARRELL, SKORBURG COMPANY ON BEHALF OF BRIAN HYATT, CORNER STONE ASSEMBLY OF GOD TO REZONE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF 10 AND LIMITED OFFICE 01 DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SINGLE FAMILY SF FIVE. USES TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH 99 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND TWO COMMON AREAS LOTS. THE 21 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED ON DALROCK ROAD. 
          750 FEET FROM SCHRADE ROAD. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE FIRST THING. WHY THIS IS BACK TO US. 
          AND THEN WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. >> AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON AUGUST 4TH, THIS APPLICATION 
          [01:00:07]
WAS REMANDED BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. THE APPLICANTS DECIDED THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE REMANDED BACK BECAUSE THEY HAD EXTRA ITEMS TO PROVIDE WITHIN THIS REQUEST. 
          AND FOR, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED BY PLANNING ZONING AS WELL TO GO TO BE REVIEWED AGAIN BY CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON THIS PROPERTY. SO IT WAS REMANDED BACK. 
          FOR THEM TO ADD ADDITIONAL ITEMS AND PLANNING AND ZONING TO CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL ITEMS 
          WITHIN THIS APPLICATION. >> THANK YOU MS. BRADLEY. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          >> OKAY. JUST WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION TO COME UP REAL QUICK. THANK YOU LAURA. OKAY. 
          SO AS YOU STATED BEFORE. THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM SF 10 TO PLANNED DISTRICT TO SF 5 USES AND PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP THE 21 ACRE SITE WITH 99 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND 2 COMMON AREA LOTS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE THE MAPS SHOWING THE EXISTING ZONING AND THEN THE PROPOSED ZONING. SO THE EXISTING ZONING, YOU HAVE SF 10 AS PART OF THE REQUEST AND 01 IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THAT. FOR THE PROPOSED, IT WILL BE ALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. 
          >> CAN YOU INTERRUPT JUST FOR A SECOND. SINCE, I MEAN WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION. CAN YOU MAKE SURE AND POINT OUT TO US THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT WE APPROVED OR DISAPPROVED, WHAT WAS SUBMITTED PRIOR AND WHAT HAS CHANGED NOW. 
          >> I WILL, THIS NEXT SLIDE IT WILL LIST THE CHANGES. >> I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT 
          YOU. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> NO PROBLEM. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. AGAIN YOU EXPLAINED THAT IT'S THE 21 ACRE SITE WITH TWO ZONING DISTRICTS SF 10 AND 01 AND IT'S LOCATED ON DALROCK AND HAS A MATURE TREE CANOPY TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. SO, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY, YOU ASKED BEFOREHAND. THE CITY COUNCIL DID REMAND IT BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. 
          THEY PROVIDED ADDITIONAL ITEMS. WHICH NOW PROVIDING THESE ADDITIONAL ITEMS, IT'S SO LOTS 20-43 ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY, THEY'RE PROPOSING A 20 FOOT SETBACK FOR TWO STORE HOMES AND WILL KEEP THE SETBACK FOR 10 FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY STORY HOMES. 
          ALSO THEY'RE PROPOSING AND ALREADY PROPOSED COMMON AREAS, THEY PROPOSE TO PUT IN ADDITIONAL AMENITIES INCLUDING, PLAYGROUNDS AND BENCHES AND PICNIC TABLES. 
          AT LEAST ONE PICNIC TABLE AND TWO BENCHES AND PLAY GROUND. AND PROVIDE 3 ADDITIONAL TREES ABOVE WHAT WAS, YOU REVIEWED AT THE LAST MEETING ON THE JUNE 23RD MEETING. 
          THEY ALSO INTEND TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE FROM 1500 TO 1850 SQUARE FEET. 
          LAST TIME AT PLANNING AND ZONING, IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THEY WERE GOING TO CONSTRUCT THE SOUTHERN STREET. THEY HAVE PROVIDED LANGUAGE IN THEIR PD TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT AND MAKE SURE IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THEIR PHASE. SO THOSE ARE BASICALLY THE FOUR ELEMENTS THEY PROVIDED FOR THIS NEW REVIEW VERSUS WHAT THEY PROPOSED LAST TIME. 
          I WILL GO BRIEFLY THROUGH WHAT THEY PROPOSED LAST TIME IN COMPARISON TO WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TODAY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. AS YOU KNOW, THE SURROUNDING AREA, IT HAS A PRESCHOOL, THE FIRE STATION, AGE RESTRICTED LIVING FACILITY. 
          DAY CARE AND CHURCH. TO THE EAST THERE IS A CEMETERY. SINGLE FAMILY AGAIN AND TO THE SOUTH AND WEST IS ALSO SINGLE FAMILY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          WITHIN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AS LAST TIME, IT'S ABOUT AN AVERAGE OF 2121 SQUARE FEET FOR THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT. THEY PROPOSE TO HAVE A 1850 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM VERSUS THE 1500 THEY HAD PROPOSED LAST TIME. SO WE DO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE 
          [01:05:05]
PLAN AGAIN AND AS IT STATES, WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, THE 6000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM OF LOTS. THEY DO FALL INTO THE CLASSIFICATION OF MEDIUM DENSITY BECAUSE THEY'RE LESS THAN 7000 SQUARE FEET. THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING MULTIFAMILY BUT THEY ARE STILL MEDIUM DENSITY BECAUSE OF THE LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE LOT SIZE. NEXT SLIDE. NOW SOMETHING THAT WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION WITH THIS NEW APPLICATION THEY PROPOSED BEING REMANDED BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING, WE'RE TAKING A LOOK AT SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOODS. TO DEFINE SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE FOUND IT'S A FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENT OF A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNALITY. 
          WITH THE SUSTAINABILITY COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOODS GOING HAND IN HAND, YOU PROVIDE RESIDENTS BOTH OF MENTAL AND PHYSICAL SENSE OF PLACE AND BELONGING. 
          YOU HAVE INTERIOR PARKS THAT CAN BE FOCAL POINTS FOR ALL HOMEOWNERS AND INTERCONNECTED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOODS AND FEATURE HOMES THE STREET BLOCKS SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED THROUGH CONNECTIVITY. EVEN THOUGH THEY ADDED NEW ITEMS, IT STILL DOESN'T INCORPORATE MIXED HOUSING TYPES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS IT NOT CREATE A SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S LACKING THE ELEMENTS PROVIDED I STATED ABOVE. JUST GOING TO HIGHLIGHT WHERE THEY HAVE MADE THE CHANGES AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE RED. THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT AREA HAS BEEN INCREASED 1800 SQUARE FEET AND THEN ALSO WITH THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK, IT IS 20 FEET FOR TWO STORIES. 
          THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ONE STORY HOMES. BUT THIS WOULD ONLY BE THROUGH LOTS 23-43. SO IT'S ABOUT 20 LOTS OF THE 99 LOTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE THIS SETBACK IF IT'S A TWO STORY HOME. THEY ARE STILL REQUESTING NOT TO HAVE ALLEYS AND FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. THEY ARE REQUESTING THE SAME BACKS OF HAVING 50, HAVING 20 FEET IN THE FRONT AND 10 IN THE REAR. 
          AND ALSO THE 36 FEET OR 2 AND A HALF STORIES ABOVE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          THEY WILL NOT BE PROVIDING A TRADITIONAL PRIMARY ENTRY FEATURES AS PROVIDED. 
          THEY DO HAVE THE OPEN SPACE THAT THEY WILL BE SUBSTITUTING FOR THE PRIMARY OPEN SPACE WHICH IS A LITTLE OVER AN ACRE AND A HALF. AND I WILL TALK MORE TO THAT AS SOON AS WE GET TO THE SITE PLANS THAT YOU WILL SEE WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. OKAY. SO AGAIN THESE ARE THE VARIANCES THEY HAVE. INCREASING THE BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 32 FEET TO TWO STORY. 
          TO 36 FEET AND TWO-AND-A-HALF STORIES AND THEY ARE DECREASING THE REAR AND ELIMINATING THE ALLEYS AND ONLY PROVIDING FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. THEY ARE PROVIDING TWO OPEN SPACE ABUTTING DALROCK NEAR THE SUBDIVISION. IN LIEU OF THE RDC ENTRY WAY REQUIREMENTS. NEXT SLIDE LAURA. SO, THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE AGAIN TO DECREASE THE REAR SETBACK FOR LOTS 20 THROUGH 43 LOCATED ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY TO ALLOW FOR 20 FOOT SETBACK FOR TWO STORY HOMES. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AMENRITIES TO THE TWO LARGE OPEN SPACES FOR PICNIC TABLES AND PLAY GROUND AND INCREASE THE MINIMUM DWELLING FROM 1500 TO 1850 AND ADD PD CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO RESIDENTIAL PERMITS AND PLAN TO EXTEND THE EXISTING FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK TO FIVE FEET WITH A LONG DALROCK ROAD. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. NOW IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE TWO SITE PLANS. 
          THE SITE PLAN STILL REMAINS THE SAME PRESENTED TO YOU ON JUNE 23RD. 
          STILL THE SAME 99 LOTS. WITH THE NEW LANDSCAPE PLAN THEY HAVE PROVIDED, IF YOU'RE LOOKING A THE SCREEN, IT WILL BE TO YOUR RIGHT. THEY DO SHOW IN THIS NEW PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN, A PLAY GROUND THAT WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER AND 
          [01:10:08]
MAINTAINED BY THE HOA AND SHOW THEY WILL BE PROVIDING PARK BENCHES WITH TRASH RECEPTACLES AND A SIDEWALK SITE THAT WILL BE INTERNAL TO ALL RESIDENTIALS AND ALSO THROUGH THE PATH OF THE OPEN SPACE AREAS. AND THEY ALSO WILL BE PLANTING ADDITIONAL TREES, THEY PROVIDED ABOUT THREE MORE TREES TO THIS PLAN VERSUS WHAT WAS PROVIDED LAST TIME. 
          SO THAT RIGHT THERE WILL SHOW YOU IF YOU CAN MAKE IT OUT THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. 
          IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. BEFOREHAND THERE WAS NOT ANY PLAY GROUND OR BENCHES OR AMENITIES SUCH AS PARKING SPACES TO ALLOW FOR INDIVIDUALS TO PARK TO GET TO THE PARK AS WELL. 
          AND NOW THEY'RE PROPOSING PARKING SPACES, PLAY GROUND AND ALSO TRAIL SO TO SPEAK THROUGH THE OPEN SPACES. AND ALSO TRASH RECEPTACLES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          AGAIN, I WILL TURN THIS TO JEFF AGAIN. HE HAS PROVIDED THIS INFORMATION AGAIN AS FAR AS TRAFFIC CIRCULATION. JUST TO REITERATE WHAT THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION WILL BE, I WILL ASK JEFF TO PROVIDE QUICK INFORMATION ON THAT. 
          >> AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ENTRY INTO THE DEVELOPMENT, THERE WILL BE TWO ACCESS POINTS. 
          THE NORTHERN ACCESS POINT LINES UP WITH WATERS WAY. THEY ARE PROPOSING A LEFT TURN DEDICATED LEFT TURN LANE AND THE NORTHBOUND DIRECTION ON DALROCK TO GET INTO THE SUBDIVISION. 
          THE SOUTHERN ACCESS POINT IS A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ONLY ENTRY FEATURE. 
          ENTRY AND EXIT FEATURE. THE MEDIAN PREVENTS LEFT TURN MOVEMENTS AT THAT ACCESS POINT. 
          NEXT SLIDE LAURA. THE AND THIS REALLY HASN'T CHANGED SINCE THE LAST SUBMITTAL. THE LAST PRESENTATION PROPOSAL BY THE DEVELOPER. 
          THERE IS A PRETTY GOOD STORM DRAIN INFRASTRUCTURE ON DALROCK AND IT DISCHARGES DIRECTLY TO LAKE RAY HUBBARD AND ODDLY ENOUGH, THIS IS A SITUATION WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT DURING THE LAST PRESENTATION, THAT STORM DRAIN SYSTEM IS DESIGNED AND HAS THE CAPACITY TO HANDLE THIS DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT THE NEED FOR DETENTION AND SO IT AFFORDS DIRECT DRAINAGE CONNECTION FOR THIS SUBDIVISION TO DRAIN UNDER DALROCK AND INTO LAKE RAY HUBBARD. 
          I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL THE SLIDES THERE ARE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          YEAH. SO, AGAIN WITH THIS, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE TREE MASS AND THE OPEN SPACE, THEY WILL BE PRESERVING THIS IN THEIR COMMON OPEN SPACES. 
          AND WE WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE SHOWN ON THE TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION PLAN AND OBSERVE AS MITIGATED, WE'RE EXPECTING IT WILL BE LOW MITIGATION THAT WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE TREES TO BE REMOVED AND THEY WILL INCORPORATE INTO THEIR OPEN SPACES. 
          TREES ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE TO THE SOUTH AND WEST MAY BE AFFECTED IN ORDER TO INSTALL A WOODEN FENCE. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK REAL QUICK -- WEST AND TO THE SOUTH, AND TO THE EAST LOWER SOUTHEAST, THEY WILL BE PUTTING A WOODEN FENCE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          NOW, TO THE NORTH PORTION, THE WOODEN FENCE AND AS YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE USES THAT ARE INCOMPATIBLE TO THE RESIDENTIAL USE. SO IT WOULD BE UP TO THE NEIGHBORS OR THROUGH THIS PD TO SEE IF THAT'S A SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO SUSTAIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE THERE VERSUS HAVING A MASONRY WALL BETWEEN THE TWO 
          [01:15:01]
USES. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO HAVE A FENCE. 
          THEY MAY NEED A LITTLE MORE ITEMS TO BUFFER THEIR RESIDENTS WHEN DEVELOPMENTS BEGINS. 
          ALSO IN ADDITION, TREES WILL BE PLANTED WITHIN THE TWO COMMON OPEN SPACES. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. AGAIN YOU CAN SEE THE SITE AS PROVIDED BEFORE FROM NORTH OF SITE, THE LOCATION FOR ENTRY FEATURES OR THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES WILL BE SAVED. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. AGAIN THIS IS FROM THE EXISTING ALLEY. 
          YOU HAVE TWO TREES ADJACENT TO THE ALLEY. THOSE WOULD BE REMOVED FOR HOUSING TO BE DEVELOPED THERE. NEXT SLIDE LAURA PLEASE. AGAIN YOU WILL SEE FROM THE NORTHEAST UP TO THE NORTH, THE PROPERTY AS WELL. WHERE THE BASE EXISTING BASEBALL RECREATION FIELD IS LOCATED. SO, WE SENT OUT NOTICES AGAIN. WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA, 66 WERE SENT OUT. SIX RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION. IN THE 500 FOOT AREA, 97 WERE SENT OUT AND 1 WAS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND TWO IN FAVOR. IF YOU CAN LOOK TO YOUR RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE THE MAP, IT WILL SHOW THE OPPOSITION AND THE ONES THAT ARE FAVORED. 
          THE ONE IN OPPOSITION ARE IN RED. THE ONES THAT ARE FAVOR ARE IN GREEN AS YOU CAN TELL THERE. SOME ARE IN THE 500 AND SOME OF IN THE 200 FEET. 
          NEXT SLIDE LAURA. NOW WITH THIS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST, FROM REZONING, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO SF 10, AND LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR SINGLE FAMILY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THESE CONDITIONS ARE PART OF HELPING TO HAVE A SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE AND WE FEEL THAT LOTS ABUTTING THE EXISTING ALLEY WAY WILL BE UTILIZED WITH VEHICLE ACCESS WITH NO FRONTING GARAGES AND PERMITTED ON LOTS 20-35. ALL LOTS ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD HAVE A LOT NO LESS THAN 7000 SQUARE FEET. 
          THEY ARE PROPOSING JUST STRAIGHT ACROSS 6000 SQUARE FEET. WE CAN SEE THEY CAN PROPOSE A MIXTURE OF SOMETHING NO LESS THAN 7000 SQUARE FEET. THE OPEN SPACE AMENITIES REGARDING TREES, TRAILS, BENCHES, PLAYGROUNDS AND BENCHES SHALL BE PROVIDED. 
          IF THEY WANT MORE, THAT WOULD BE A PLUS. OPEN SPACE SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL LOTS. AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. IT ONLY SHOWS THERE'S TWO COMMON AREA SPACES WHICH ARE TO THE FRONT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT LEAVES OUT LOTS OF LOTS TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE WEST THAT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET TO THE OPEN SPACE TO CREATE THAT SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND THAT SENSE OF SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PROVIDE WALKING DISTANCE FOR THE REST OF RESIDENTS WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          NUMBER FIVE, PROVIDE LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS TO PROVIDE A PHYSICAL SEPARATION. 
          THESE WILL NEED TO BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOA. AS STATED BEFORE IN THE TREE CANOPY SLIDE, PROVIDING A FENCE WHEREAS WITHIN THE INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES TO THE NORTH, WE SEE MORE OF A MASONRY AM A STRONGER BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO USES. THE MINIMUM DWELLING AREA SHALL BE NO LESS THAN 1850 SQUARE FEET. AND ALSO WE CAN SEE IF THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT OF 2,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR LOT THAT IS ABUT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN PROPERTY LINES. 
          THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE LAURA. 
          THIS COMPLETES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. 
          THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION THEY CAN SHARE. WE ARE AVAILABLE AND THE DEVELOPER IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. THANK YOU MISS BRADLEY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE DEVELOPER? MR. ENGEN. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? 
          [01:20:02]
          YOU'RE ON MUTE. >> SORRY, QUESTION FOR TARA AND FOR JEFF. 
          JUST, I KNOW THERE HAS NOT BEEN A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE YET. IS THE DEVELOPER GOING TO PAY FOR THE MEDIAN STRIP OF REPAIR WORK. IT THAT HAS TO BE EXTENDED. 
          WILL THE DEVELOPER PAY FOR THAT? >> THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >> JUST WANT TO CHECK. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR WOULD WE RATHER WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE DEVELOPER MADE THEIR PRESENTATION? SEEING THAT, MR. DEVELOPER, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. 
          IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> GOOD EVENING. 
          I AM ADAM BUCEK. I REPRESENT SKORBURG. WE HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION TO SUMMARIZE THE INFORMATION THAT THE COMMISSIONERS I'M SURE WERE WANTING TO KNOW. 
          WHICH IS HOW DID WE GET BACK HERE AND AFTER THAT, PRESENTATION, I WOULD APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME POINTS TO CONSIDER. I ASK ASK TO DISCUSS SOME POINTS IN THE STAFF REPORT WE RECEIVED ABOUT 10 O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY. WE JUST HAD TO DO A QUICK TURN AND WANTED TO GIVE THE COMMISSION ON SOME HIEMGHLIGHT ITEMS ON THAT AND AFTER THAT HOPE TO HAVE YOUR FAVOR ON THAT. HERE'S OUR SLIDE SHOW. JUST GO THROUGH IT FAIRLY QUICKLY. PROPERTY LOCATION, ZONING REQUEST SUMMARY, THE PD ENHANCEMENTS SINCE THE LAST TIME I WAS BEFORE YOU ON JUNE 23RD. YOU HAVE TO TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. ONE WAS ABRUPTLY ENDED. HAD A COUPLE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT FELL ILL. THEN WE HAD A SECOND WHERE WE RESUMED THE DIALOGUE AND CITY COUNCIL AFTER FINISHING THE PUBLIC HEARING DIALOGUE, THEY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO REMAND US BACK TO YOU FOR RECONSIDERATION BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE REQUEST AND THINGS WE WERE HAPPY TO INCORPORATE. WITH STAFF GUIDANCE AND COUNCIL FEED BACK. 
          WE WILL HAVE A SLIDE AND WINDSOR HOMES WILL BE OUR COMPANY IF BUILDING IN LAKE SHORE IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. YOU KNOW OUR PRODUCT. AND I'M GOING TO SHOW SOME SHOTS OF WINDSOR PRODUCT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION. 
          WE KNOW WHERE IT IS. I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          OFF DALROCK ON SCHRADE OFF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          THIS IS A LITTLE ZOOM IN OF OUR LAYOUT IMPOSED. WE HAVE THE PENINSULA FAMILY. 
          WE HAVE A 1500 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM PD AND THE SECTION TO THE SOUTH 80 BY 140 TYPICAL PD. 
          AS STAFF TALKED ABOUT, THEY PULLED COUNTY TAX RECORDS ON THE SOUTH AND SAID THE AVERAGE OF THE HOMES IS 2100 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S THE PD MINIMUMS AND WITH OUR PD MINIMUM. 
          WE'RE 50 SQUARE FOOT HIGHER. WE HAVE THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY AND AN AGE-RESTRICTED MULTIFAMILY HIGHER DENSE USE AND DENSITY AT THE HARD CORNER OF SCHRADE AND DALROCK. 
          WE HAVE FUTURE PLANNED FOR SINGLE FAMILY TO THE NORTH AND THE CHURCH CORNER STONE CHURCH RETAINED PLAN IS TO THE SOUTH. IT WILL BE THE SOUTHEAST. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CORNERSTONE CHURCH FOR SOME TIME NOW. 
          WE WILL CREATE, THIS WILL BE A LONG LASTING HIGH QUALITY COMMUNITY AND NOW HAS ACTIVE HOPE SPACES WHICH STAFF DID A GREAT JOB OUTLINING AND PROVIDES A DIFFERENT PRODUCT WHICH IS A VIRTUE OF THE RDC THAT IS A LOGICAL TRANSITION BETWEEN THE PENINSULA AND THE MORE INTENSE USES I EXPLAINED TO THE NORTHEAST. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          ZONING REQUEST SUMMARY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THESE ARE 99 LOTS TYPICAL 50 BYE 120. MINIMUM 6000 SQUARE FEET. FRONT ENTRY. 
          [01:25:01]
HIGHLIGHT THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE INCREASED FROM 1500 BEFORE YOU BEFORE AND INCREASED TO 1850. GOT POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THAT. THAT'S THE MINIMUM, THAT IS NOT OUR STANDARD AND A MINIMUM REQUIREMENTMENT OUR HOMES GO UP TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. 
          OUR AVERAGE WILL BE MUCH HIGHER THAN 1850. THAT IS THE MINIMUM TO INCREASE TO AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. SO THIS WILL BE A HIGH QUALITY TRANSITION ZONING WITHIN A VERY POPULAR HIGH DEMAND, HIGH QUALITY PRODUCT THAT WILL FIT IN NICELY FOR THE AREA. 
          A DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE. NOT THE 60 FOOT LOTS TO THE WEST OR THE EAST. 
          WE HAVE A 50 FOOT PATIO HOME VERY HIGH QUALITY HIGHER THAN THE ADJACENT COMMUNITIES. 
          OFFER PRICE POINT ON THESE NOT COUNTING OPTIONS IS GOING TO ANTICIPATE TO BE A RANGE BETWEEN $117 A FOOT TO $175 A FOOT. THOSE HOMES GO UP TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SINCE OUR JUNE 23RD MEETING, I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE PD ENHANCEMENTS AND STAFF HIGHLIGHTED THE MAJOR ONES. THEY WERE A FEW MORE THINGS DISCUSSED IF YOU HAPPEN TO WATCH THE COUNCIL MEETINGS. THEY UNANIMOUSLY REMANDED US TO YOU. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO WASTE ANYBODY'S TIME IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE SOME FAVORABLE THINGS TO SAY. WHICH THEY DID. 
          SO, NUMBER ONE, THE ASSURANCE THAT STREET B GETS CONSTRUCTED. INCREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 1850. WHEN WE'RE HAPPY TO DO TO EXCEED THE PENINSULA BY 50 SQUARE FEET. 
          NUMBER THREE, RESTRICT THE LOTS THAT ABUT THE PENINSULA TO THE SOUTH AND WEST. 
          I HAVE A DOUBLE ASTERISK. I WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD OUR CURRENT PD INCLUDES AN OPTION BUT WE ARE GOOD WITH WHATEVER THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE WITH RESPECT TO THAT ITEM. WE ARE FLEXIBLE. 
          NUMBER FOUR, MAKE THE TREE PRESERVATION AN OPEN SPACE. THAT WAS LED BY STAFF AND WE WORKED WITH THEM AND THINK THAT'S A GREAT IMPROVEMENT TO THE PLAN THAN WE HAD BEFORE. 
          NEXT SLIDE. NUMBER FIVE SUBJECT TO CHURCH AND INDUSTRY APPROVAL. 
          IMPROVE TO FIVE FEET TO COMPLY WITH RDC AND INCORPORATED FIVE FOOT SUBWALKS. 
          ALL TRAILS AND LEAD SIDEWALKS. EVERYTHING IS FIVE FEET. NEXT SLIDE. 
          THE NEXT HANDFUL GIVE YOU A PICTURE AND ZOOM IN OF THE ITEMS. THE WAY WE ADDRESSED THAT, NO RESIDENTIAL PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED UNTIL FULL CONSTRUCTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE DONE AND WILL BE DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE PHASE. 
          STREET B IS THE HIGHLIGHTED BLUE SEGMENT. PAVEMENT. 
          WE WOULD NOT GO OUT THERE AND DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AND ENCOURAGE ALL THAT DEBT AND RISK AND NOT BUILD THIS ROAD. SO, YOU HAVE IN THE PD WRITTEN ASSURANCE THAT WILL HAPPEN. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE INCREASED THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 1850. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NUMBER THREE, RESTRICT LOTS OF ABUTTING PENINSULA. 
          THE CURRENT PD PROPOSED RESTRICTS THE SHADED LOTS TO BE EITHER SINGLE DWELLING UNITS OR TWO STORIED DWELLING UNIT. YOU WOULD HAVE A REAR SETBACK OF 20 FEET. 
          WE'RE HAPPY TO FOLLOW YOUR PREFER. IF YOU PREFER ONE OPTION OR THE OTHER, WE'RE HAPPY EITHER WAY. THIS PROVIDES THE MOST ARCHITECTURAL PROVIDE AND BREADTH OF HOUSE PLANS WE CAN OFFER. SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE PROPOSED THIS AS AN OPTION BUT WANT TO BE CLEAR, IF YOU HAVE ONE PREFERENCE STRONG PREFERENCE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WE'RE GOOD EITHER WAY. INCORPORATE ACTIVE OPEN SPACE. 
          THIS IS A LARGE OPEN SPACE THAT WE ADDED ENHANCED LANDSCAPING PLAN. 
          PLAY GROUND WITH ADJACENT PARKING. PARK BENCHES AND WALKING TRAILS. 
          THIS IS CATERED TO TREE PRESERVATION. IT'S ACTUALLY 1.9 ACRES IN OUR 
          [01:30:11]
OPEN SPACE WE'RE PRESERVING HERE. 1.5 IN THE MAIN ENTRANCE AND ANOTHER 1.4 ACRES. THIS OUTLINES THE DENSENESS OF THE TREES WHICH IS RIGHT WHERE WE WANTED IT AND PURPOSELY DESIGNED THE OPEN SPACE AROUND. THIS IS AN ENTRY STATEMENT YOU JUST CAN'T BUILD. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. INCORPORATING ACTIVE OPEN SPACE, WE HAVE GOT THE PLAY GROUND IN YELLOW. THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT ON THE PICNIC TABLES. THERE ARE FIVE ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. IT SAYS ONE IN STAFF REPORT, BUT THERE ARE FIVE. 
          WE LOCATED THEM WITH THE RED STAR. AND THE PARK BENCHES THERE ARE TWO. THEY ARE NOT INDICATED. THEY ARE AT THE BOTTOM NEAR THE SECOND ENTRANCE AND BUT THERE ARE TWO SPECIFICALLY IN THERE AND THAT WAS SOMETHING STAFF'S REPORT DID NOT HAVE THAT DETAIL. IT IS IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND IT'S ON THERE. NEXT SLIDE. SO, IN ADDITION TO THE WALKING TRAILS I MENTIONED, THOSE ARE FIVE FEET WHICH CIRCULATE THE OPEN SPACE. 
          WE HAVE PLAY GROUNDS WHICH WILL MAKE IT EASY TO BRING THEIR KIDS TO. 
          WE HAVE TO PARK IN FRONT AND LET THEIR KIDS PLAY. NEXT SLIDE. 
          >> WE HAVE AT THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE, WE ARE COLLABORATIVELY AGREED TO WORK WITH CORNERSTONE CHURCH TO SUBMIT A SIGN. IT HAS TO BE CONFERRED AND AGREED TO WITH THE CHURCH AND THE CITY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ITEM SIX AND 7 WAS INCORPORATE THE FIVE FOOT SIDEWALKS IN OUR TRAILS AND OUR SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT. 
          WHICH WE HAVE DONE. INCLUDING ALONG DALROCK ROAD TO COMPLY WITH THE RDC. 
          AS WELL AS OUR INTERIOR SIDEWALKS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          NEXT SLIDE. SO, ON THE BLUE IS WE SEE THE SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL BY THE DEVELOPER AROUND THE CEMETERY. RED WE HAVE THE SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG WITH THE PLAY GROUND SPACE GOES AND THE SIX FOOT FENCE. SO THEY DON'T GET DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND THE SIX FOOT MASONRY TO HAVE THE OPEN LOOK INTO THE PRESERVATION AREA. BY THE DEVELOPER. 
          SPEAKING OF BY DEVELOPER. I WANT TO REITERATE AND CONFIRM FOR THE COMMISSIONER WHO ASKED, YES TO THE EXTENT ANY OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE TURN LANE OR TRAFFIC STUDY ARE REQUIRED, THAT'S ON US. LANDSCAPED SCREENING EXAMPLES. JUST TO GIVE YOU EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. NEXT SLIDE. LASTLY, THE SLIDE SHOW WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT. I SAID OUR BUILDING COMPANY, WINDSOR HOMES HAS BEEN LUCKY TO HAVE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF LOTS AND NEED THIS OPPORTUNITY. HERE'S OUR PRODUCT. HERE'S OUR BEAUTY SHOTS. 
          YOU KNOW OUR PRODUCT. IT HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. IT'S BEEN HIGH QUALITY. 
          AND WINDSOR WILL BE BUILDING IN THERE IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. 
          NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE'S OUR TABLE FOR PROJECTED PRICE POINTS. 
          WITH AN 1850, MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE. SO WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T, WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR PLAN THAT IS HAVE THAT. THE TERMS WE ARE GOING TO AVERAGE MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT. WE WILL GO UP TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. 
          THESE PRICE POINTS DO NOT INCLUDE OPTIONS. FOLKS WHO HAVE OPTIONS, WE CAN ACCOMMODATE AND DO THAT FOR MOST OF OUR HOME BUYERS. THESE ARE OUR BASE PRICE WE ANTICIPATE FOR THE COMMUNITY. THE BASE PRICE IS A HIGH VALUE. NEXT SLIDE. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY SLIDE SHOW. AS I MENTIONED, SINCE WE GAVE YOU THE STAFF REPORT. 
          WE WOULD LIKE A FEW MOMENTS TO JUST EXPLAIN, LET ME EXPLAIN SOME OF THE OUR POINTS TO 
          [01:35:05]
CONSIDER. I WILL GO OVER AS QUICKLY AS I CN. 
          ON PAGE SIX, I DON'T EXPECT TO YOU TURN THROUGH THE REPORT BUT YOU'RE WELCOME IF YOU HAVE IT. 
          ON PAGE SIX REGARDING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN POINTS, STAFF'S REPORT SAYS THAT THE PROPOSED DENSITY AND LOT SIZES ARE NOT CONGRUENT TO THE ZONES SF 10. A MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE UNIT OF 2100 OR IN THE VICINITY. THE MINIMUM OF THE PENINSULA IS 1800. 
          TO THE SOUTH IT'S 1800 AND TO THE WEST IT WAS 1500. BUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR HOMES WILL BE GREATER THAN 1850. 1850 IS JUST THE MIN PUM. SO, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I REITERATED THAT. REGARDLESS OF THE HOUSE SIZE, OF THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENT HOMES, OUR PD REQUIREMENT IS HIGHER THAN THEIR MINIMUM. OUR PRICE WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BE HIGHER. WE RESTRICTED THE ADJACENT HOMES HWEVER THE CITY PREFERS. 
          WHETHER THE 20 FOOT SETBACK OR HYBRID. WE ARE GOOD EITHER WAY. 
          OUR PD REQUEST IS LOGICAL. IT'S A TRANSITIONAL ZONING. PROVIDING A DIFFERENTIATED PRODUCT FROM WHAT IS ALREADY OUT THERE WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING. 
          AND IT'S A GREAT LOGICAL FIT BETWEEN THE MORE INTENSE USES TO THE NORTHEAST. 
          AS STAFF STATES ON PAGE 7. IT CALLS FOR A MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT IN OUR TREE PRESERVATION IN THE PARK AREA. THE RESIDENTS DO NOT WANT MULTIFAMILY. 
          I HAVE LOOKED AT SEVERAL OF THEM AND SAID WE'RE NOT A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER. 
          IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO LOSE THAT TREE PRESERVATION AREA. OUR PLAN SAVE SAYS THE TREES AND WOULD BE LESS DENSE THAN MOST WOULD BE. REGARDING DENSITY POINTS ON PAGE 8 OF THE STAFF'S REPORT. AS SHOWN ON THE TABLE OF PAGE 8, SF 10 IS 4.4 UNITS PER ACRE. 
          STAFF'S TABLE SAYS OURS IS 4.7. STAFF DID HAVE IT CORRECT. BASED ON THE 99 LOTS ON 21.65 ACRES. EITHER WAY, WE'RE NOT MUCH HIGHER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED AND CERTAINLY LOWER IF WE INCLUDE A MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT IF WE SCRAPED THE TREE PRESERVATION. ON PAGES NINE AND 10, REGARDING REAR SETBACKS FOR LOTS 20-43. 
          THOSE ARE ADJACENT TO THE PENINSULA ON THE WEST. STAFF'S REPORT WAS SAYING IT'S AN INCONSISTENT CONCEPT TO HAVE A REQUEST OF 10 FOOT SETBACK IN LIGHT OF HAVING VERSUS 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. OUR POINT IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE THE VARIETY OF PLANS FOR ARCHITECTURAL VARIETY AND STREETSCAPE ATTRACTIVENESS. A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT THAT. 
          HAVING A 10 FOOT SET BACK GIVES A 90 FOOT DEEP PAD. WE CAN CERTAINLY BUILD HOMES WITH AN 80 FOOT PAD. IF THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THE COMMISSION WANTS OR COUNCIL WANTS, WE'RE GOOD TO HAVE AN 80 FOOT PAD. IT JUST ELIMINATES OUR TOP SELLERS. ON PAGE 10, THE HARD SCAPE PLAN DOES INCLUDE FIVE PICNIC TABLES. 
          NOT JUST ONE. IT'S SPECIFIED IN THE HARD SCAPE PLAN. 
          ON PAGE 12 SAYS WE DO NOT INCLUDE A LANDSCAPE BUFFER. AND THINKS MORE OPEN SPACE SHOULD BE GIVEN. I WOULD SAY WE FEEL OUR PD AND OPEN SPACE IS HIGHLY APPROPRIATE, IT'S ALMOST TWO ACRES. ABOUT 1.9 SOMETHING. 
          AND IT IS THE MATERIAL, IT'S LOCATED IN AN AREA WHERE THERE'S MATERIAL NEED FOR IT. 
          WHICH IS THE AGE RESTRICTED MULL MULTI-FAMILY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY OR IS OWNED BY THE CHURCH. 
          SO IF ANY EVENT. NOBODY BUYING A HOME IN LAKE SHORE VILLAGE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE AND SOMEONE IS GOING TO BUY A HOME AND SAY I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. 
          [01:40:06]
THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER OR OPEN SPACES IS WARRANTED AND WE ARE PRESERVING THE PROPERTY THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD. THE TREES. THAT WOULD NOT HAPPEN IF WE GO WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN WITH MULTIFAMILY ON THE PROPERTY. 
          ON PAGE 12, OF THE STAFF REPORT, THERE'S A SUGGESTION THAT WE INCREASE THE AC SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM 1850 TO 2000. 1850 IS HIGHER THAN THE ADJACENT PDS AND THE MINIMUM. 
          OUR HOMES WILL AVERAGE MUCH HIGHER. IT WILL BE MATERIALLY COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE ABUTTING PENINSULA. AS OUR HOMES GO UP TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. FOR THE RECORD, IF IT MATTERS AND THE COMMISSION DOES NOT WANT US HAVE ANYTHING 1850 TO 2000 ABUTTING THE PENINSULA. STAFF'S REPORT SUGGESTS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE BE 7000 SQUARE FEET. IF WE DID THAT, WE WOULD HAVE VERY ANGRY HOMEOWNERS IN THE PENINSULA. THEY DO NOT WANT OUR LOTS TO BE SHARING THE ALLEY. THAT IS A VERY BIG CONCERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. 
          THAT'S WHY WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONTEMPLATED. THE RESIDENTS DON'T WANT THAT ALLEY AND WE WOULD BE LOSING FOUR LOTS AND MY QUESTION WOULD BE FOR WHAT PROPER? JUST TO CREATE A DIFFERENT LOOK ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET IN TERM OF SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WOULD NOT MAKE SENSE. IT WILL STRIP THE VALUE OUT OF THE LAND. LOWER THE TAX BASE TO THE CITY BY FOUR HOMES AND INCREASE HOA FEES TO MAINTAIN THEIR HOA AMENITIES. IF THAT'S THE GOAL, LET ME KNOW WHAT I WILL SEE WHAT I CAN DO. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE GOAL. IT WOULD YOU BE MUCH BETTER TO HAVE A DIFFERENTIATED PRODUCT AND BE HARMONIOUS THROUGHOUT. COUNCIL REMANDED US BACK WITH WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU. ON PAGES 12 TO 13, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ALLEYS. 
          TO WHICH I WOULD SAY THIS, NUMBER ONE, MOST BUYERS DO NOT WANT ALLEYS. 
          THEY TAKE A WAY FROM PRIVATE BACKYARD AND USEABLE OPEN SPACE. STAFF MADE A COMMENT THAT OUR REQUEST FOR THE 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK IS IN CONFLICT WITH STATEMENT. 
          I WOULD SAY THAT'S NOT TRUE. AND PEOPLE WANT A BIGGER HOUSE AND MORE YARD. 
          WHAT IS WRONG WITH OFFERING BOTH FOR VARIETY? A 10 FOOT RARE SETBACK PROVIDES ANOTHER OPTION. AND WILL WOULD DESTROY THE TIERING SYSTEM AND THE WAY IT LINES OUT FITS PERFECTLY WITH THIS PROPOSED PD. FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE LAST FEW THINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE P AND Z RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          I WOULD SAY NUMBER ONE, THE PROPOSED REZONING THOUGHTFULLY PRESERVES THE HEAVILY TREED AREAS WHICH PROPERLY SERVES AS AN ACTIVE OPEN SPACE AND A NATURAL BUFFER FOR THE MORE INTENSE USES TO THE NORTH. THE TREND OF THE PROPOSED SIZED HOMES AGAIN IS ON THE PROPOSED SIZE LOTS IS IRREFUTABLE. OUR HOMES GOING UP TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. 
          THE SURROUNDING AREA DOES NOT WANT MULTIFAMILY. THE COMP PLAN IS SF 10. 
          SF 10 IS 4.4 UNITS AN ACRE AND OURS IS 4.6. VERY CLOSE. 
          AND IF WE HAD MULTIFAMILY INCORPORATED, WE LOSE THE TREE PRESERVATION AREA, ANGER NEIGHBORS AND HIGHER DENSITY THAN WHAT IS PROPOSED TONIGHT. THE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY BEFORE CLOSING REMARKS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT I CAN DO BETTER, SO I GUESS I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, I KNOW WE RECEIVED 13 LETTERS OF SUPPORT, I HAVE BEEN TOLD PROBABLY MORE BUT I HAVE IN MY HAND 13. YET ONLY TWO WERE IN THE PACKET. I KNOW ALSO FOR A FACT THAT A COUPLE OF THEM WERE NOT ROWLETT RESIDENTS AND MAYBE MORE. I DON'T HAVE ALL THE ADDRESSES. 
          BUT I DO KNOW SOME OF THEM WERE. AND THEY WERE SENT IN MORE THAN 24 HOURS IN SOME CASES, FIVE OF 
          [01:45:08]
THEM WERE SENT FOUR OR MORE DAYS BEFORE THE STAFF REPORT WENT OUT. 
          THEY DIDN'T GET IN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT RESIDENTS DID. MAYBE I GAVE THEM BAD INSTRUCTION. THERE'S MORE THAN WHAT IS IN THE STAFF REPORT IN SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT. SO, IN CLOSING, IF STAFF'S REPORT, THE PROPOSING IS CRITICIZED FOR HAVING SMALLER LOTS IN SF 10. BUT IN MANY AREAS SEVERAL REFERENCES ARE MADE IN THE VALUE OF HAVING A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES TO CREATE A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD. FLEXIBLE LOT SHAPES WILL ADD SI DIVERSITY. 
          OUR REQUEST DOES JUST THAT. IT RECOMMENDING MORE OF THE SAME AND PRAISING DIFFERENTIATION AND DIVERSITY. WHEN WE DO A DIFFERENT PRODUCT, WE SAYING IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE. 
          WE HAVE COME UP WITH A HIGHLY AMENITIZED PLAN BETWEEN EXISTING USES AND THE COUNCIL THOUGHT HIGHLY ENOUGH OF TO UNANIMOUSLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER AND WE ASK FOR YOUR FAVORABLE VOTE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          >> THANK YOU. I SEE PASTOR HYATT IS WAITING. HE AS THE APPLICANT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES FOR HIS PRESENTATION. IF HE HAS SOMETHING TO SAY, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND INCLUDE PASTOR HYATT NOW. AS PART OF THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION. SO HE'S NOT LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN DO THAT MISS HALLMARK. CAN WE PUT PASTOR HYATT TO STATE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY. IT'S NOT FAIR TO HIM TO BE LIMITED IN THE REGULAR PUBLIC HEARING THING TO JUST THREE MINUTES. CAN WE PUT PASTOR HYATT ON. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. FIRST BEFORE I READ MY STATEMENT, I WANT TO EXPLAIN, I KNOW STAFF MENTIONED ABOUT, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TOGETHER ON THIS COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS. THERE'S NO GREEN SPACE AVAILABLE TO THE SOUTH AND WEST, OUR FACILITY IS SET UP TO SERVICE NOT ONLY THEM OBVIOUSLY BUT ALSO THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WALKING, THERE'S OTHER TRIES TO THE SOUTH OF WHERE OUR BUILDING IS. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOWED UP THERE, A WALKING AREA. A GREEN SPACE BEHIND OUR CHURCH THAT WILL BE USED FOR EVENTS THAT CHURCHES DO THAT WE DO. AND OBVIOUSLY WE LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE CAN IMPACT PEOPLE WITH THE SERIOUS NATURES OF LIFE AND SO. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO MENTION THAT. 
          WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO WITH CITY COUNCIL, WITH SKOBURG, ADAM AND HIS TEAM. 
          90% OF OUR CHURCH FAMILY WANT TO THIS HAPPEN. A FEW OF THEM MAYBE SPEAKING TONIGHT. BUT, I WANT TO READ WHAT I HAVE AND LET THE MEETING GO ON. 
          AGAIN MY NAME IS BRIAN HYATT. THE LEAD PASTAR ON THE CORNERSTONE CHURCH AND A RESIDENT OF ROWLETT AND RESIDE ON WOOD SIDE ROAD AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU INSIGHT OF WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT TO US THAT YOU SUPPORT AND PASS. CORNERSTONE CHURCH AND SKOBURG COMPANY HAS WORKED COLLABORATIVELY TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY, THE CHURCH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SKOBURG AS WELL. WE HAVE WORKED HARD TO ENSURE THE BEST FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY HAVE BEEN PRESERVED AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED THIS LARGE GREEN AREAS SO THE HOMEOWNERS CAN ENJOY THE OUTDOORS AND HAVE A VIEW OF LAKE RAY HUBBARD. 
          SOMEONE BUILT A HOUSE ACROSS FROM US AND DOESN'T FIT IN AT ALL. 
          BUT, KIND OF BLOCKS THE VIEW. YOU CAN STILL SEE THE LAKES. IT BENEFITS WINDSOR HOMES. 
          EXCELLENT CRAFTMANSHIP THAT FIT THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY. THE MINIMUM OF 1850, 6000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. YOU KNOW THE REAL ESTATE MARKET IS HOT. 
          [01:50:01]
THE YOUNGER GENERATION, THEY DON'T WANT MORE YARD. THEY WANT MORE HOUSE. 
          ON WOOD SIDE, I WALK EVERY MORNING NEARLY PASSED THE WINDSOR HOMES GOING UP FROM PEARSON ELEMENTARY. THEY'RE JUST ABOUT ALL SOLD. IF YOU HAVE EVER LIVED NEAR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND THE TRAFFIC. ALL THAT WAS DONE WITH THAT IN MIND, SO, I SEE THESE HOMES BEING BUILT, FRONT ENTRY, NO ALLEYS. 
          THEY ARE BEAUTIFUL AND SELLING QUICKLY. CURRENT HOME VALUES WILL NOT BE HINDERED. IT WILL RISE AND GIVE MORE TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY IN LISTENING TO THE CITY BUDGET, OUR CITY IS GOING TO NEED MORE TAX MONEY. THE HOA WILL PRESERVE THE COMMUNITIES AND PROPERTIES. THERE IS A PRECEDENCE SET BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THIS TYPE OF REZONING. THERE'S A REASON, HOPEFULLY YOU WILL SUPPORT IT. 
          ROWLETT IS ONE OF BEST CITIES TO LIVE IN STATE AND NOT ONLY THE COUNTRY. 
          THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL ADD TO. LASTLY, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IT DOES FOR OUR CHURCH. 
          WE HAD THAT LAND SINCE THE EARLY 90'S AND WE HAVE HAD MUCH DIFFICULTY TRYING TO SELL. 
          IT'S TOO MUCH FOR US TO HANDLE. AS FAR AS MAINTAINING AND ALLEY ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 
          AND SO WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR AN OPPORTUNITY AND THAT HAS COME THE LAST TWO YEARS AFTER WAITING MORE THAN 15 TO 20 YEARS TO FIND A BUYER. THIS WILL HELP US IN OUR NEW CAMPUS THAT WE'RE BUILDING AND ALSO OUR MINISTRY OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVE WITHIN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. MOST OF YOU KNOW THE TORNADO JUST MISSED US. 
          WE WERE ABLE TO OPEN UP THE FIRST RELIEF CENTER THAT NIGHT. WHETHER A TORNADO OR SOMEBODY NEEDING FOOD, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO. THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS COMMISSION TO SUPPORT A MEASURE THAT WILL HELP OUR COMMUNITY AND EMPOWER OUR FUTURE AS A CHURCH THAT EMPOWERS THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE'RE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COMMUNITY. IT'S A PROFOUND AND PIVOTAL MOMENT FOR THIS COMMISSION TO STAND WITH CORNERSTONE AND FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND AS WELL AS SKOBURG. 
          SO SKOBURG HAS ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THEY REMANDED US BACK TO YOU HOPING YOU WILL CONTINUE THE CONTINUITY WE ESTABLISHED WITH THEM AND SKOBURG TO CHANGE FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. I APPRECIATE YOU SERVING ON THIS COMMITTEE. 
          I'M FINISHED. >> THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME? IF YOU HAVE ANY, RAISE YOUR HAND AND I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU. SEEING NONE, I WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PORTION. 
          THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MISS HALLMARK WHO WILL CONTACT THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          YOU HAVE THE CON. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST TO REMIND OUR CALLERS, WHO WILL BE SPEAKING TO PLEASE MUTE ANY BACKGROUND NOISE. BEFORE YOU START SPEAKING. 
          FIRST IS CALLER LABELED AS GALAXY A 6. DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS 
          ITEM? >> YES, I WOULD PLEASE. >> CAN YOU PLEASE REMIND THIS IS 
          A THREE >> COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. 
          >> I AM RICK BENTLEY. 220 LANE. I AM A MEMBER OF CORNERSTONE. 
          I AM DEFINITELY FOR THE REZONING OF THE CORNERSTONE PROPERTY. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING WHAT IT BRINGS WITH THE CHURCH. 
          THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR HARD WORK AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. 
          >> THANK YOU SIR. JASON BROWN. >> OKAY. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES , SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. 
          JASON BROWN, 8401 MARTHA LANE. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE COMMITTEE. 
          I APPRECIATE WHAT THE PASTOR SAID AND I BELIEVE SKOBURG IS PUTTING IN A NICE PROPERTY. 
          [01:55:01]
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE PLANNED USE. TO MAINTAIN THE STN. 
          THERE'S PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND THE OTHER DIRECTION. FOR EXAMPLE EXAMPLE WE KEEP CALLING IT THE PENINSULA. IT'S CALLED CAMBRIDGE ESTATES. I WOULD NOT MAKE ASSUMPTIONS TO ALLOW THE PEOPLE TO MAKE THE PRODUCT LOOK A LITTLE MORE COMMISERATE. 
          YOUNG FAMILIES DON'T LOOK FOR LOTS WITH NO SIZES. WE'RE SAYING THIS IS A INTRODUCTORY HOUSE. THERE'S A REASON THIS COMMITTEE EXISTS. 
          IT'S NOT TO LISTEN TO THE BIASSED PARTIES THE CHURCH OR SKOBURG OR THE CONGREGATES. 
          PLEASE RESPECT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN ROWLETT. THAT'S IT. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT IS RICHARD >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND 
          ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS RICHARD MYIRES. 209 ROCK WALL DRIVE. 
          I'M THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD AT CORNERSTONE. WE WORKED WITH SKOBURG TO CREATE A DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ENTIRE 34 ACRES WE OWN ON DALROCK. SEVERAL DEVELOPERS HAVE APPROACHED US. NONE THE SAME AS SKOBURG. WE HAVE SUBMITTED OUR PLANS TO BUILD A NEW CHURCH BUILDING ON THE REMAINING 12 PLUS ACRES. THE PROPERTY WILL CONSUME APRIL 5TH ACRES. THIS LEAVES SEVEN ACRES WE WILL LEAVE AS OPEN SPACE. 
          WHAT IS SHOWN AS SF 10. WE PLAN IT USE FOR YOUTH SPORTS AND OTHER OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES MAKING SURE THERE'S PLENTY OF OPEN SPACE. PLAN IS FOR THE CHURCH PROPERTY TO BE AVAILABLE TO DEVELOP TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND OPEN TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL. WE HAVE BEEN, WE HAVE HEARD COMMENTS REGARDING A SIGN ON THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE ON DALROCK ROAD. 
          THAT LAND IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE SALE. WE HAVE AGREED TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND SKOBURG IF A SIGN IS REQUIRED BY THE CITY BUT DON'T FEEL IT ADD US VALUE TO THE PROJECT. THE NEIGHBOR MOST AFFECT TO DO BY THE PROJECT AND SPENT MANY HOURS DESIGNING AND PLANNING INTO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENTIRE 34 ACRES. 
          OUR INTENT WAS AND IS TO DEVELOP A PLACE WHERE THE COMMUNITY CAN LIVE PLAY AND WORK AND WORSHIP. 
          I THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU, SIR. 
          NEXT IS PASTOR HUDDLESTON. >> PASTOR OF FREEDOM PLACE CHUCH IN ROWLETT, 3809 MAIN STREET. 
          I LIVE IN ROCKWALL COUNTY. THANK YOU FOR THE DEVELOPER AND PASTOR BRIAN FOR THIS. 
          I DO RESPECT THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER ABOUT THE CONCERN OF THE CONDITIONS THE WAY THE PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED. AGAIN, THINGS CHANGE AT TIMES DIFFERENT NEEDS OF THE COMMUNALITY AND I HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS THIS COMMISSION AND EVERYTHINGS USE GREAT DISCERNMENT IN THIS. THIS IS A GREAT COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE NEEDS OF THE CHURCH. 
          THE COMMUNITY AND THE DIRECT OF OUR CITY. I SHOULD HAVE SAID THANK EACH ONE OF YOU CITIZENS SERVING, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY AND EVERY ONE OF YOU. 
          THE HUNDREDS OF HOURS YOU'RE DOING TO SERVE THIS AND ALL THE OTHER PROJECTS I JUST, YOU HAVE A VERY UNIQUE CALLING. SOMETHING I COULDN'T DO. AND THE STAFF, THANK YOU AS WELL. I WOULD ASK Y'ALL TO CONSIDER THE GREAT RELATIONSHIP THE CHURCH HAS HAD IN THE NEEDS TO GO TO ANOTHER LEVEL OF MINISTRY. IT IS NON-PROFIT. 
          WE HAVE TO JUST LIKE OURSELVES, WE HAVE TO ACQUIRE FUNDING AND YOU KNOW ANGELS DON'T COME DOWN AND PAY OUR BILLS. WE HAVE TO PAY BILLS LIKE EVERY OTHER PERSON ON THIS EARTH. 
          THIS IS A UNIQUE PAPE PARTNERSHIP TO MEET THE NEEDS OF CITY AND THE COMMISSION WITH A SLIGHT VARIANCE AND THE CHURCH AS WELL. THIS CHURCH HAS BEEN HERE MANY DECADES AND SERVED THE CITY NOW WITH PASTOR HYATT. I THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE 
          [02:00:06]
CONSIDERATION WE GIVE OUR FULL SUPPORT FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION WITH THE DEVELOPER. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU PASTOR. NEXT IS CALLER LABELED AS LG STYLO 4 PLUS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES. 
          OKAY. CALLER LISTED AS VIKAY. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ANNUAL. -- ITEM. 
          CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. THAT'S IT FOR THE CALLERS. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO SUSAN TO 
          READ THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY E-MAIL. >> THANK YOU. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME >> YES, MA'AM. >> TONEY RORY. 
          10406 HUFFINES DRIVE ROWLETT. PLEASE ACCEPT THE LETTER FOR MY FULL SUPPORT IN CONSIDERATION, FURTHERMORE I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY GREAT RESPECT FOR CORNERSTONE CHURCH AND THEIR STRONG COMMITMENT TO THE ROWLETT COMMUNITY. THEY ARE A BLESSING TO THE COMMUNALITY. I BELIEVE THE HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WINDSOR HOMES AND SKOBURG WILL BUILD WILL BE GREAT FOR THAT AREA OF ROWLET. NEXT COMMENT. 
          DAVID BARNES. 8005 MARKET DRIVE. MY WIFE AND I FULLY SUPPORT THE CHANGE FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. WE HAVE BEEN RESIDENTS OF ROWLETT FOR 18 YEARS AND FULL I SUPPORT CORNERSTONE CHURCH. THEY HAVE BEEN A HUGE BLESSING TO OUR COMMUNITIES. 
          WINDSOR HOMES AND THE SKOBURG COMPANY WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL COMPLIMENTARY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. DONNA DAVIS. 4022 SHADY GLEN DRIVE, GARLAND, TEXAS. I SUPPORT THE CHANGE FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. 
          CAROLYN BRUMFIELD, ROWLETT. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I'M IN FAVOR AND YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT OF REZONING THIS PROPERTY. NEXT COMMENT. DIANA MYERS. 
          ROCK WALL, TEXAS. I AM IN SUPPORT TO DEVELOP NEW HOMES ON DALROCK ROAD. 
          RICK BENTLEY. I AM FOR THE ZONE CHANGE FOR SKOBURG ON CORNERSTONE'S PROPERTY. I AM EXCITED ABOUT GROWTH AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY. 
          DONNA TOWNSEND. A SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION CENTER INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY. 
          I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. CORNERCHURCH HAS GIVEN SUPPORT TO FIRST RESPONDERS IN ROWLETT. DURING THE TORNADO AND MORE RECENTLY IN THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC. I RESPECT SKOBURG'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY PRODUCTS 
          FOR ROWLETT. I URGE YOU TO RESPOND FAVORABLY. >> VICKI SUMMERS. 
          I AM ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THE SKOBURG COMPANY TO HAVE OUR PROPERTY REZONED. 
          SKOBURG AND WINDSOR HOMES DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB AND THIS PROJECT WILL BE NO DIFFERENT. 
          IT WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION AND CERTAINLY HELP CORNER STONE IN ENSURING A LONG LASTING FUTURE IN MULTIPLE WAYS. I AM MONICA SLOAN SIMMONS. I AM A MEMBER OF CORNERCHURCH. 
          WE BELIEVE THIS WILL BE A TREMENDOUS ASSET TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNALITIES. 
          SALLY GREGORY. 3313 PECAN RIDGE ROWLETT. I AM IN SUPPORT OF REZONING FOR SKOBURG DEVELOPMENT ON DALROCK ROAD THAT CORNERSTONE CHURCH OWNS. 
          I SUPPORT THE CHANGE FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. IT WILL GIVE A NEW LOOK TO THE 
          [02:05:02]
AREA. PEOPLE WILL HAVE EASY ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 30 OR HIGHWAY 66. 
          MANDY ALEXANDER. 408 STATE HIGHWAY. I SUPPORT SKOBURG'S REQUEST TO REZONE FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. BELICE CARTER. 8510 CHIESAN ROAD. 
          I FULL I SUPPORT FROM SF 10 TO S 5 FIVE. I SEE THE HOMES ARE HIGH QUALITY. THEY WILL BE COMPLIMENTARY ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          NEXT COMMENT. LISA HYATT. I AM A ROWLETT CITIZEN LIVING ON WOOD SIZE. I HAVE WATCHED PEARSON HOMES BUILD AND THEY ARE HIGH QUALITY. 
          I FULLY SUPPORT SKOBURG COMPANY REZONING ON PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND ECI LOCATED ON 8200 SCHRADE ROAD WHERE I AM PRINCIPAL. THESE WOULD BE GREAT FOR OUR SCHOOL COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THE NEXT COMMENT. 
          SUJA GEORGE, 1065 NORTH 5TH STREET NEW YORK. AND SUNNY GEORGE, 6801 AIMS BURY LANE ROWLET. THE PROPERTY WE OWN IS IN THE MIDDLE OF RECENT CHANGES. 
          THE APARTMENTS AND A LAGOON NOT PART FROM THE PROPERTY. A FIRE AND POLICE. 
          ELDER CARE, CHURCH AND A SCHOOL AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND HIGH TRAFFIC IMMEDIATELY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY. CURRENT ZONING REQUESTING REZONING AND THE NEIGHBORING LAND NEXT TO IT WERE PUT IN PLACE BEFORE MANY OF THESE REZONING WERE APPROVED. 
          IT WILL BE UNFAIR AND HARD FOR THE OWNERS, DEVELOPERS TO MARKET THE PROPERTY IN ITS CURRENT ZONING. WE STRONGLY VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING REQUESTED OR BETTER ZONING THAT WILL ENABLE THIS EMPTY LAND TO BECOME USEFUL AND BE ON THE TAX ROLL OF THE CITY OF ROWLETT. DEBBIE MAIN. I'M A MEMBER OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH AND MEMBER OF ECI SUPPORTING GRADES PRE-K THROUGH EIGHT. 
          WE SUPPORT MULTIPLE FAMILIES IN ROWLETT. I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THE SKOBURG COMPANY TO HAVE OUR PROPERTY REZONED. AS YOU KNOW SKOBURG AND WINDSOR HOMES DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB BUILDING HOMES IN OUR COMMUNITY. IT WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION AND ENSURE A LONG LASTING FUTURE. CRAIG SHILL, PASTOR, DEAR CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER CITY LEADERS. THIS E-MAIL IS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU FOR TONIGHT'S COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA ITEM 4 C AS IT RELATES TO CORNERSTONE. 
          PASTOR HYATT HAS BEEN A FRIEND OF MINE FOR MANY YEARS AND YOU KNOW HIS HARD WORK IN ROWLETT. 
          HE IS SOMEONE I LEAN ON. I'M WRITING TO SUPPORT HIM BECAUSE I KNOW HIM, HIS CHARACTER AND THE VISION HE HAS WITHIN OUR CITY. I HAVE PERSONALLY SEEN THE PLANS FOR HIS NEW CHURCH AND THE EXCITING IMPROVEMENT THIS WILL BRING TO THE CITY. 
          I HUMBLY ASK I TO VOTE IF SUPPORT OF BRIAN'S WORK. THANK YOU FOR THE WORK YOU DO FOR OUR CITY. I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY AND SELDOM APPRECIATED. 
          DAVID MAIN. I'M A MEMBER OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH. 
          I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT TO HAVE OUR PROPERTY REZONED. AS YOU KNOW, SKOBURG BUILDS A 
          QUALITY PRODUCT. THAT'S THE LAST COMMENT I HAVE. >> OKAY. 
          WELL SINCE WE HAD OUR PHONE PEOPLE AND WE HAVE OUR LETTERS, AT THIS TIME, WE WILL CLOSE TO DO PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS. DISCUSSION? 
          >> I WILL START WITH MR. WINTON. >> >> MR. ENGEN. 
          [02:10:06]
          DISCUSSION? >> OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          I WILL SAY THEY HAVE REALLY COME BACK TO THE DESIGN STAGE OF MAKING CHANGES HERE 
          >> FROM THE PREVIOUS TIME. WITH SF 10 WE ALWAYSMENTED -- WANTED TO STAY 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT THEIR WINDSOR HOMES. 
          THEY ARE REALLY NICE. I HAD WRITTEN DOWN IF WE COULD LOOK AT A LARGER LOT SIZE AND MINIMUM 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOME. I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP PROPERTY VALUES UP IN THE AREA AND IT IS PRIME PROPERTY WHICH IS SO CLOSE TO THE LAKE THAT EVEN IF WE WENT A LITTLE LARGER ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPERTY, THOSE HOMES WILL SELL. SO I JUST HAD THAT DOWN. 
          THERE WAS A COMMENT BY SOME LADY WITH REGARD TO AND DRAINAGE ISSUES. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THAT. IF THERE IS JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. COMMISSIONER ENGEN. IS THAT FOR ME TO TALK NOW? 
          DID WE LOSE CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. >> JUST GIVE HIM A SECOND. HE WILL CALL BACK IN. 
          HE PROBABLY CLICKED THE WRONG X. HOPEFULLIILY HE WILL CLICK BACK TO THE WEBSITE. 
          AS COCHAIR, I WILL JUMP IN. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE MR. COTE, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? 
          >> YES MA'AM. AND IT GOES ALONG WITH MARK AND MR. ENGEN'S COMMENT. 
          WE'RE ASKED TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON IN OUR FUTURE LAND USE PACKAGE AND ALSO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND WE ARE BEING ASKED TO CHANGE TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IS TO ALLOW PROJECTS TO COME TO FRUITION THAT INTEGRATE VARIOUS LAND USES. AND RIGHT NOW THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT DOESN'T HAVE ANY VARIOUS LAND USES, IT'S SINGLE FAMILY HOME. 
          AND SO, THE QUESTION IS, WHY AREN'T WE ASKING TO CHANGE IT FROM SF 10 TO SF FIVE WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO USE AS THEIR BASE CODE FOR THEIR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE REAL REASON IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SF 5 OUTSIDE THE LOT AND HOUSE SIZE. WE LOOK AT THAT AND YOU CAN SEE THAT ON PAGE EIGHT AND NINE OF THE STAFF REPORT, THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SF 5 AND PD FOR SF 5. 
          THEY ARE EXCEEDING THE LOT AND HOUSE SIZE FOR THE REQUIREMENT AND THEN THEY DON'T WANT TO PUT IN ALLEYS. THEY DON'T WANT TO DO L OR J HOOK GARAGES IT'S LIKE THEY HAVE A HOUSE THEY WANT AND THAT'S IT. IT'S A GOOD HOUSE. IT'S A PRETTY HOUSE. 
          AND IT'S PROBABLY BUILT EXTREMELY WELL. I'M NOT ARGUING THAT. 
          WHAT I AM ARGUING THOUGH IS THAT WE HAVE AN SF 10 PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT I'M NOT SURE 
          [02:15:06]
          WARRANTS CHARGING TO SF 5. >> OKAY. THANK YOU JOHN. 
          GO AHEAD MANAL. VICE CHAIR, ESTEVEZ, CHAIRMAN MOSELEY WILL BE JOINING US. 
          HE HAD TO REBOOT. JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE TO THAT. 
          GOES BACK TO THE QUESTION LIKE MR. COTE SAID. WHY CAN'T OUR DEVELOPER WORK WITH A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT? THEY HAVE BEAUTIFUL HOMES THAT WILL FIT IN THE LOTS. 
          IF WE DID FROM 2000 TO 3200 SQUARE FEET. WE DON'T HAVE ISSUES WITH BACKING UP WITH ANYBODY AND CONFORMS WITH EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE AREA. 
          >> LET'S GO AHEAD AND WAIT FOR CHAIRMAN MOSELEY. SHOULDN'T TAKE HIM FOR A MINUTE. 
          HE NEEDS TO HEAR THE REMARKS. >> I DON'T KNOW, DEPENDS ON WHAT SOFTWARE HE'S USING. 
          >> I WILL SHARE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WHERE I HAD A CATASTROPHIC FAILURE. 
          GRAB YOUR CELL PHONE. GET THE LINK. USUALLY IF YOU YOUR INTERNET IS DOWN AND YOU HAVE THE WIRELESS, THE CELL PROVIDER TO DO IT. IT'S NOT IDEAL. 
          IF YOU EVER FIND YOURSELF IN A JAM, THAT'S MY CRUTCH. AS AN IT PERSON, THAT'S A GOOD ITEM TO SHARE. THE NEXT TIP IS BETTER LIGHTING. VICE CHAIR. 
          IF THE COMMISSIONER CHOOSES, WE CAN HAVE A BRIEF RECESS IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES. 
          >> WOULD Y'ALL LIKE TO TAKE A THREE TO FIVE MINUTE BREAK? >> I THINK SO. 
          THIS HAS BEEN A LATE NIGHT. IT'S 8:51 ON MY COMPUTER. LET'S CONVENE AT 8:56. 
          ROGER THAT. BREAK TAKEN. 
          [02:24:07]
IS EVERYBODY THERE? BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE ANYBODY BUT LISA 
          >> YES. >> OKAY. WELL THEN LET'S CONTINUE. 
          MR.ENGEN, YOU WERE SAYING. >> I WILL START OVER WITH MY CONVERSATION. 
          WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS DONE TO BRING THIS TOGETHER TO TRY TO PUT THIS TOGETHER, I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING BECAUSE HE'S PUT TOGETHER THREE PARTS. A LOT OF OPEN SPACE TO GO. 
          I GUESS THE HARD PART IS DEALING THIS IS AN SF 10. AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE, THE CITY PEOPLE HAVE PUT TOGETHER, STAFF THAT WE WANT TO HAVE AT LEAST A MINIMUM OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. HE'S COMING BACK AND ASKING FOR 6000 SQUARE FEET THROUGH THE SF 5. I'M JUST OPENING UP DISCUSSION. CAN WE COME HALFWAY THROUGH IT 
          [02:25:04]
OR DO WE HAVE TO STICK STRICTLY WITH WHAT HE HAS? I WAS, THIS AFTERNOON WHEN I WAS REVIEWING EVERYTHING AND WRITING DOWN NOTES, I SAID IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET AT LEAST 2000 MINIMUM SQUARE FOOT HOUSE ON IT AND INCOME FROM 6000 AT LEAST, 7200 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          BUT, IT'S JUST A THOUGHT. I'M THROWING THAT OUT. I WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT 
          PERSON. >> I CAN'T CALL ON PEOPLE. SO COMMISSIONERS, I GUESS ONE AT A TIME, IF Y'ALL COULD JUST STATE YOUR CASE AND THEN WE'LL DO AS BEST WE CAN HERE. 
          THIS IS LISA, ESTEVEZ, I WILL GO NOW. >> OKAY. 
          THEY'RE DECREASING -- INCREASING THE DENSITY OF COURSE TO SELL MORE LOTS. 
          I'M REAL HAPPY WITH IT OR THE SETBACKS. THE CHURCH WANTS IT BADLY. 
          IT'S AN INTERIOR AREA. I LIKE THE FACT THEY HAVE THE LOTS ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION. THE ONLY THING THAT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IS CITY COUNCIL'S REQUEST TO DO A LITTLE MORE OF THE GREEN BELT TYPE AREAS TOWARDS THE WEST AND SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S THE ONLY HESITANT I'M ABOUT AT THIS POINT. 
          I WILL MOVE ON SOMEONE ELSE. NEXT PERSON. JUST SPEAK UP. 
          >> OKAY. THIS IS JOHN COTE. THE COMMENT THAT I HAD MADE WHILE YOU WERE GONE IN THE ETHER WAS THE FACT THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE BEING REQUESTED TO CHANGE A CURRENTLY DESIGNATED SF 10 TO PD AND AGAIN WHY THE PD? THAT'S, I MEAN WHY NOT JUST FIT INTO SF 5 OR SF 10 DEVELOPMENT AND IT STANDS OUT, FIRST OFF, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S VALIDITY TO ASK FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THAT SHOULD BE FOR MULTIUSE OR PROJECTS WITH VARIOUS LAND USES. 
          THIS IS JUST A PROJECT WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. SO, I KIND OF WONDER IF THAT'S TECHNICALLY CORRECT. THE OTHER I GUESS POSSIBLE THING IS, YOU CAN USE A PD IF YOU CAN'T, IF IT RESULTS IN A HIGHER QUALITY PRODUCT. THAT YOU CAN'T ACHIEVE USING OTHER SPECIFIC ZONING REQUIREMENTS. I DON'T SEE THIS FITS THAT AT ALL. THE AREA IS SF 10. IT'S AS MENTIONED BY COMMISSIONER ENGEN. IN A PRETTY PRIME PIECE OF REAL ESTATE RIGHT NEXT TO RAY HUBBARD. THERE ARE HOMES JUST ACROSS THE STREET THAT ARE PRETTY NICE. 
          VERY EXPENSIVE. I JUST DON'T SEE WHY WE CAN'T KEEP THE SF 10 ON THIS WITH THE DEVELOPER AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR ZONING CODES. 
          OR YOU KNOW, AGAIN. >> OKAY. DO WE WHAT WE HAVE LISTED FOR 
          THE DEVELOPMENT. >> THANK YOU. WHO ELSE HASN'T SPOKEN ON THIS? 
          >> THIS IS ROB SWIFT. I WILL GO NEXT AND BE BRIEF. YOU KNOW, I WILL JUST KEEP KIND OF CONTINUING WHAT JOHN SAID. WE HAVE AN AREA ZONED AS PD 10. WE SHOULD PROBABLY WORK WITHIN THE PARAMETERS. THE ARGUMENT I DIDN'T HEAR IS WHY WE NEED IT TO BE CUSTOM FY SITUATION OUT THERE. SO FOR ME, I JUST, I AM NOT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS SO DIFFERENTLY AND THERE'S SO MANY TWEAKS IN THE DEAL OUT THERE WHEN ON MY 
          INCLINATION IS FOLLOW THE ZONING IN PLACE WE PLANNED. >> THANK YOU MR. SWIFT. 
          ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVEN'T SPOKEN ON THIS? I CAN'T SEE ANYBODY. 
          SO, HAS EVERYBODY SPOKEN? >> I THINK MR. WINTON, DID YOU PASS? 
          >> YEAH. I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE QUESTIONS. I WOULD AGREE WITH FELLOW COMMISSIONERS I'M CONFUSED WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM SF 10 TO SF 5. I REALLY DON'T KNOW FROM THE 
          [02:30:14]
CHANGES, THEY WERE SIX OR SEVEN CHANGES AND DEVIATIONS FROM THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS THAT FOR A LACK OF BETTER DESCRIPTION, THIS WAS WHAT ZONING DOES THIS REALLY FIT IN BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MANY VARIATIONS INTO IT. I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHERE IT FIT BECAUSE WE'RE CHANGING IT. 
          SO, KIND OF FOLLOW ALONG WITH FELLOW THANK 
          >> JIM. >> YES YES, MA'AM. HAS EVERYBODY SPOKEN? 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION IF I CAN. >> SURE. 
          THIS GOES TO MANAL. I BEING WHAT I'M HEARING FROM EVERYBODY AND I'M FEELING THE SAME WAY, IS GENERAL JUST CONFUSION. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THIS SUBMITTAL 
          AND GIVE US A CITY PERSPECTIVE? >> SURE. COMMISSIONERS, THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO ENABLE A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ASKING FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE ZONES ON THE PROPERTY IT'S GOT TWO ZONINGS ON IT, 01 OFFICE ZONING WHICH HAS BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. 
          AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SINGLE FAMILY 10 ZONING PARAMETERS. WHEN WE AS STAFF WERE PLANNING PERSPECTIVE LAND USE PERSPECTIVE REVIEW SUCH APPLICATIONS, OUR GOAL IS TO STUDY THE SURROUNDING BUILT ENVIRONMENT, TO STUDY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TO MAKE A DETERMINATION FROM A COMPATIBILITY AND COMPLIMENTARY PLAN. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS CLEAR ON THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS FOR TWO PROPERTIES. ONE IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY COMPONENT TO REMAIN SF ZONING DESIGNATION AND THEN OF COURSE THERE IS A CAVEAT WHERE THE FRONTAGE IS ZONED AS MULTIFAMILY. IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT WAS VERY CLEAR WE FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES OF THE COMP PLAN. YOU HAVE TO ASSESS THOSE. 
          DETERMINE IF THEY'RE ACCURATE AND ONE OF ELEMENTS WE DIDN'T SEE GO OUT AND DEVELOP MULTIFAMILY USE. WE SAID LOOK AT TRANSITIONAL ELEMENTS THAT ALLOW FOR THE PROTECTION OF A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. ADDING TO THAT, WE ALSO EVALUATED NOT WHAT THE ZONING IS OF THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PATTERN, WE QUESTIONED WHAT IS THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT. WE CAN TALK ABOUT MINIMUMS. WE SAY WE HAVE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 6000 SQUARE FEET, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD HIGHER THAN THAT. 
          THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS SAYING IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT, LET'S CREATE THOSE MINIMUMS NOW. IT APPEARS THAT THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PROPOSED IS ALL BEING USED AS A TOOL TO DEVIATE FROM THE STANDARD ROWLETT CODE REQUIREMENT BY PROVIDING ALLEYS AND IF NO ALLEYS ARE PROVIDED TO PROVIDE J HOOK. 
          IN TERMS OF PROVIDING A DIVERSE HOUSING STOCK IS ONE OF OTHER ELEMENTS STAFF MENTIONED, ABSOLUTELY, IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE LOTS THEY'RE ALL AT 6000 OR 6200 SQUARE FEET. 
          IN OUR ANALYSIS WE SAID OKAY WE DO UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY WITH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. BUT TO HAVE COMPLIMENTARY PRODUCTS AS FAR AS THE ADJACENCY. THE OTHER COMPONENT REMAINS ABSOLUTELY THE OPEN SPACE THE APPLICANT PROVIDE SIDEDEDED PROVIDED IS GREAT. THEN THE QUESTION BEGS IS, YOU KNOW, ADDING SOME OF THESE ELEMENTS DOES IT RESULT IN [INAUDIBLE] AND THE APPLICANT HAS ACQUIESCED TO THAT. 
          ADDITIONALLY, WE KNOW THERE ARE SOME USES THAT ARE NOT RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE THAT ABUT THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND OUR CONCERN IS, ONCE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETED, AND ONCE WE HAVE NEIGHBORS AND RESIDENTS OF ROWLETT RESIDING IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE WANT TO MAKE 
          [02:35:01]
SURE THERE'S MINIMUM CAN HAVE THE. WE TALK ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY TO THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WE KNOW THEY HAVE A PHASED PROGRAM. WE WELCOME THEM AND SO EXCITED THEY ARE EXPANDING THEIR PRODUCT. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE TWO NEIGHBORS DON'T RUN INTO INCOMPATIBILITIIES FROM A NEIGHBOR STANDPOINT. 
          THE NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST IS THEIR PHASE THROUGH REPORTING OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THEY ALREADY SAID THAT WILL BE A REC AREA. IT WILL BE PLAYING FIELDS. THEN WE NEED TO MAKE SURE ARE THEY GOING TO BE ISSUED WITH NOISE? WITH LIGHTING? THERE'S ONLY A SIX FOOT WOOD FENCE THAT SEPARATING THE TWO USES SO WE'RE SAYING INCREASE SOME FORM OF SEPARATION TO CREATE THAT PHYSICAL SEPARATION TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD. THESE ARE ELEMENTS WE'RE RESTING WITH, OUR RECOMMENDATION, IT'S CLEAR IT SAYS WE DO APPROVE THE REQUEST BUT WITH THOSE CONDITIONS AND CAVEATS WOULD THE DEVELOPER CONSIDER INCREASING THE LOT SIZE. UTILIZING THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE OR IF YOU DON'T, PROVIDE J-ENTRY OR SWING DRIVE LOT. 
          INCREASE SOME OF YOUR LOT PRODUCT. HAVE THAT VARIETY IN YOUR OPEN SPACE AND YOUR LOT PRODUCT AND BUILDING PRODUCT. THAT IS WHAT THE CRUX OF THIS DISCUSSION HINGES ON. HOW DO WE CREATE THIS SUSTAINABLE FUNCTION. 
          IT DOESN'T JUST END HERE. ONCE THE HOPES ARE DEVELOPED AND ONCE THOSE HOMES ARE TURNED OVER WHERE YOU HAVE A HOMEOWNER' ASSOCIATION MINDING THE HOMES, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT COMMUNITY IS SUSTAINABLE. THAT THE ELEMENTS AND THE OPEN SPACE PASSABLE ACTIVE OPEN SPACE IS READILY ACCESSIBLE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ADJACENCIES HAVE THE COMPATIBLE ELEMENTS. THESE ARE ELEMENTS WE TRIED TO EXPLAIN IN THE PLANNING REPORT TO SHOW WHERE WE FEEL IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THOSE CONDITIONS OR PARAMETERS IN PLACE ON THE ON SET. AND TO NOT USE THE PD AS A TOOL TO DEVIATE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT 
          CRITERIA. >> MR. COTE, I SEE YOU HAVE YOUR HAND RAISED. 
          >> YES, ONE MORE QUESTION FOR MANAL IF YOU COULD. SEEING SHE KIND OF BROACHED THIS SUBJECT. AND THAT IS, THE ALLEY WAY, THE CURRENTLY EXISTING ALLEY WAY. 
          I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHY THE NEIGHBORS WOULD THINK HAVING A FENCE ON ONE SIDE OF THE ALLEY WAY IS ANY BETTER THAN HAVING NEIGHBORS ON THE SIDE OF ALLEY WAY. 
          IS THERE SOME TRUTH OUR VALIDITY THEY DON'T WANT ANYBODY USING THEIR ALLEY WAY? 
          >> I APPRECIATE THIS QUESTION MR. COTE. THE ALLEY IS A PUBLIC ALLEY. 
          IT'S DESIGNED TO BE USED FROM BOTH. SO IT HAS A CENTER LINE TO IT. 
          SEVEN AND A HALF ON ONE SIDE AND SEVEN AND A HALF ON THE OTHER SIDE. 
          THERE'S NO PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> MANAL,S THE ELIMINATION OF 
          THE J-SWING DRIVES BECAUSE OF THE REDUCTION IN LOT SIZE? >> OR WAS THAT JUST A THEY DON'T 
          WANT TO DO IT? >> I BELIEVE THEIR PRODUCT IS TO HAVE A FRONT LOADED PRODUCT ONLY. ALSO I AM FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, AND THE DEVELOPER PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, THE WIDTH OF THE LOT COMPROMISING THE ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY PROVIDE THAT PRODUCT. THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME LOTS. 
          HAVE THAT VARIETY IN LOT MIX TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE. >> MR. UTECH, DO YOU WANT TO 
          ANSWER THAT? >> I WAS GOING TO SAY YES. THAT IS CORRECT. 
          ON A 50 FOOT WIDE LOT. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO A GARAGE. 
          >> THANK YOU SIR. >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BECAUSE I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS. I DIDN'T GET, MS. ESTEVEZ, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? 
          [02:40:02]
          >> NO, I'M GOOD. BEFORE MY COMPUTER DIES, I JUST WANT TO SAY, MY CONCERN WITH THIS PROJECT IS YOU KNOW, I KNOW THE CHURCH HAS DONE A GREAT JOB FOR THE CITY OF ROWLETT. 
          WE WANT TO HELP THEM. WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW WE KNOW A LOT OF THEIR MEMBERS ARE CITY RESIDENTS. WE'RE LOOKING OUT FOR EVERY RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF ROWLETT. 
          WE HAVE EXISTING ZONING AND THEY HAVE SUBMITTED A PROJECT THAT'S BASED ON SF 5 OR EVEN SF 6 RESIDENCES. 100 RESIDENCES. I HAVE NEVER BEEN A SUPPORTER OF BUILDING, WE'VE HAD A FEW NEIGHBORHOODS GO IN THAT WERE SMALL IN NATURE, A FEW ACRES LIKE THE ONE MANORS ON MILLER THAT ARE SMALL FILL-IN PROJECTS. THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE OF PUTTING A 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. MY CONCERN IS THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE, BUT THE SIZE OF THE LOTS AND THESE ARE ALL FRONT LOADED HOUSES. I OBJECTED TO THIS WHEN IT WAS BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING BEFORE. I WOULD REALLY WISH THE DEVELOPER AND THE CHURCH WOULD GET BACK TOGETHER AND TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO ABOUT LARGER LOT SIZES BECAUSE THESE ARE TWO SMALL. THERE'S TOO MANY OF THEM AND THEY'RE ALL ALIKE. HAS EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK. 
          NOW I CAN SEE EVERYBODY. HAS EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK. 
          I'M READY FOR A MOTION. MR. COTE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE 
          THE REQUEST. MOTION TO DISAPPROVE. >> TAKE THE VOTE. 
          ALL IN FAVOR OF DISAPPROVAL, YES IS A VOTE TO DENY, TO DISAPPROVE. 
          ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, 6. OKAY. IT IS UNANIMOUSLY DISAPPROVED. 
          PRIOR TO CLOSING THE MEETING. I WILL NOT BE HERE AT THE NEXT PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AND TONIGHT IS MY LAST MEETING AS CHAIRMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO THANKS THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FOR APPOINTING ME. I HAVE SPENT SEVEN YEARS AND ENJOYED ALL OF YOU. I LIKE TO THANK MUNAL AND MS. BRADLEY AND FELLOW MEMBERS. 
          YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB AND I REALLY APPRECIATED YOUR COUNCIL AND ADVICE AND YOU HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB. AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION SOME OF THE PAST COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE A HELP TO ME AND THAT WOULD BE RICK SHEFFIELD. 
          DOC LUCAS AND CHRIS KILGORE. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE PUBLIC THAT STAYS INVOLVED AND COMES TO THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION OR AGAINST IT OR PEOPLE STAY AT HOME AND WATCH ON TELEVISION. 
          WE APPRECIATE THAT. IT'S BEEN A PRIVILEGE TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. 
          AND WE ARE COMPANY].
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.