Aug 18, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission

[001 Staff review of the cases that were heard by City Council in the last sixty (60) days.]

[00:00:18]

>>> BEFORE CITY COUNCIL COMPLAINT ON COMMISSION LAST 60 DAYS.

IF YOU REMEMBER, WE HAD THREE THAT WERE RECENTLY ANNEXED IN THE CITY LIMITS.

THEY WERE ALL VOLUNTARY ANNEXATIONS. WHEN THE FIRST ANNEXED THEY WERE GIVEN A TEMPORARY AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION .

THE LAST PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THESE TWO HAVE A PERMANENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THEY ALL WENT OVER COUNSEL AND COUNSEL AGREED WITH THE RECOMMENDATION AND THEY APPROVED EACH ONE OF THOSE.

THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES. ONE ON ASTRID LANE IN TWO LOCATED OFF LEGISLATE STONE LANE. THE FINAL CASE WAS METHODIST HOSPITAL. THEY WERE REQUESTING TO AMEND THEIR PB TO INCLUDE ASSIGNED PLAN. THAT WENT BEFORE A PLANNING ZONINGCOMMISSION .

IN THE PLANNING ZONE COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL ALL THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO ADOPT THE PLAN TO BE A PART OF THEIR ORDINANCE AND THIS WILL BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.

THE COUNCIL AGREED WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULATION AND IMPROVE THEIR SITE PLAN AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE. THOSE WERE ALL THE CASES THAT WENT FORTH FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALSO WENT OVER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE LAST 60 DAYS.

AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> THEIR OWN QUESTIONS FOR THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS.

[Consent Agenda ]

DO I HAVE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? THE MINUTES FOR JULY 21, 2020 MEETING OUR APPROVED. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA IS PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR FIRST ITEM IS CONDUCTED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE 3.5 ACRES. FROM AGRICULTURE AID PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL US . THAT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. >> THAT WILL NOT BE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

IF ANYONE IS HERE FOR THAT NIGHT, THAT WILL BE RE-NOTICED. THE NEXT ITEM IS AGENDA ITEM

[005 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of The Arbours, being ± 56.432 acres of land, situated within the A.J. Lawrence Survey, Abstract No. 625, City of Midlothian, Ellis County. The property is located to the west of North Walnut Grove Road, between Steeplechase Road and Shiloh Court/Shiloh Road (Case No. PP09-2020-103).]

THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAN WOULD CONSIST OF 56 ACRES AND CONTAINED 45 RESIDENTIAL AUDITS AND FOUR COMMON AREA LOTS. RECENTLY THIS WAS REZONED TO A PLANNEDDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 131 FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES . THE PROPOSED LUMINARY PLAQUE DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AS STATED IN THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE TO SECTION 212 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THIS ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE A

PUBLIC HEARING. >> QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? >> MOVE APPROVAL.

>> MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? ITEM AGENDA NUMBER FIVE UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS

[006 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance for a Specific Use Permit for an additional building wall sign on Lot 4R, Block A, Green Hollow (commonly known as 621 Highlander Avenue), presently zoned Planned Development District No. 36 (PD- 36) (Case No. SUP09-2020-101).]

ISLANDER AVENUE . >> IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR SIGN ORDINANCE, WE ALLOW FOR ONE BUILDING SIGN TO BE LOCATED ON A WALL THAT IS FACING A PUBLIC STREET OR RIGHT AWAY.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 4.0 618 AND SECTION 4.60 17, IT DOES STATE IF THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON A CORNER LOT AND HAS FOR ENGINES ONTO ROADS THEY CAN COME BEFORE THE ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN ADDITIONAL WALL SIGN.

[00:05:05]

THIS TIME. >> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE

TO SPEAK? >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC STATEMENT.

HEARING NONE, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> SO MOVED. >> TO I HAVE A SECOND? PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED IN DISCUSSIONS OR MOTIONS COULD WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN.

ALL IN FAVOR? THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM

[007 Conduct a public hearing consider and act upon an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a secondary dwelling unit on Lot 46, Block C, Crystal Forrest Estates Phase V (commonly known as 3240 Katy Kourt East), presently zoned Single-Family One (SF-1) District (Case No. SUP10-2020-102).]

ESTATES COMMONLY KNOWN AS 3240 KATIE COURT EAST. >> IN ACCORDANCE TO SECTION 2.04, IT WAS RECENTLY CHANGED THROUGH A TEXT MINUTE TOALLOW FOR SECONDARY DWELLINGS TO BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT . THERE IS PROVISION THAT THEY MUST MEET ALL THE MEMORY REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS SECONDARY DWELLINGS. ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IS AT THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA OF THE SECONDARY DWELLING SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 PERCENT OF THE AIR-CONDITIONED FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY DWELLING. IF AN APPLICANT CANNOT REACH THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AT THE TIME, THEY CAN COME BEFORE THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO EXCEED ANY OF THESE REQUIREMENTS STATED IN SECTION 3.570 ZERO. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO BUILD A SECONDARY DWELLING IN ACCORDANCE TO SECTION 2.04 OF THE PROVISION WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA.

THEY ARE THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL EXCEED THE ALLOWED USE. RIGHT NOW THE SECONDARY DWELLING IS A TOTAL OF 2004 INTUNIV 52 SQUARE FEET. THEY ARE REQUESTING IN THE TOTAL SECONDARY DWELLING IS 1917 SQUARE FEET, WHICH INCLUDE 604 SQUARE FEET THAT IS GRETCHEN 250 SQUARE FEET AND PORCHES. THE PORCHES IN THE GARAGE COUNT TOWARD THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE. THE PROPOSED ADDITION WE FEEL IS CONCISE WITH OTHER SECONDARY DWELLINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED THERE IS ANOTHER ONE WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY WHEN SECONDARY DWELLINGS REQUIRE ONE ORIGINALLY RENTED EXCEED THE MAXIMUM THRESHOLD YOUR RECORD WE DO FEEL THE PROPOSED INCREASE WOULD NOT FALL OUTSIDE THE ORDINANCE. WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR. WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER IN RESPONSE REQUESTING A PRIVACY FENCE BE CONSTRUCTED TO BLOCK THE VIEW OF THE SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

>> I WANT TO RESTATE THE SECONDARY DWELLINGWILL MEET ALL THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS THAT MEANS PRIMARY , AS TO BE A DESIGN SIMILAR TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME HER IN. >> I ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION.

THE APPLICANT WAS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO THE END OF 2017.

>> I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT. THE APPLICANT, I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE HERE THAT CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION WE DID DROP OFF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FORMS AND FOR EACH YOU REQUESTING SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT YOU TOWARD THOSE FORMS BUT I BELIEVE THERE ARE TWO THEM. SO WHEN WE GET THE PUBLIC

HEARING PORTION, REFER TO THOSE DOCUMENTS. >> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? STEP FORWARD AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

>> BRANDON ROGERS. I'M REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNERS AS THEIR BUILDER THERE IS A

[00:10:01]

WAS THE EXACT SAME FOOTAGE. THIS ONE IS JUST A HAIR SMALLER.

BUT I'M JUST REPRESENTING THEM. THEY DID BY THIS, I BELIEVE, TO WHERE THIS WILL BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE THE GRANDFATHER AS FAR AS THE PERMIT RULES.

BUT THAT IS THE ONLY STIPULATION I THINK THAT THERE WAS AS FAR AS OWNERSHIP.

>> DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE OWNER BOUGHT THE HOUSE? >> I DON'T GET I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE ACTUAL PURCHASE WAS, BUT I BELIEVE SINCE IT TRANSFERRED OWNERSHIP THAT IS

WHEN IT MADE IT SO THEY GET THOSE. >> OKAY.

I GUESS WHAT I AM GOING FOR IS THAT AREA WAS ANNEXED DECEMBER 2017.

EVERYONE IN THAT AREA HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO AS THEY PLEASE SINCE IT HAS BEEN BUILT.

I FIND IT STRANGE THE CITY WOULD TAKE WHAT IS A NONCONFORMING USE PROPERTY AND START PUTTING STIPULATIONS ON IT.I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT WE HAVE EVER IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS TURNED DOWN A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT, ESPECIALLY ON A LOT OF THE SIZE.

SO I JUST WANT TO TREAD LIGHTLY ON THE. >> UNDERSTOOD.

OKAY. WE HAVE ONE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO SUBMITTED A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM.THANK YOU, SIR. I'M SORRY.

BILL HEILMAN? IS HE PRESENT? OKAY.

I AM SEEING A SHAKE OF THE HEAD THAT HE IS NOT PRESENT. I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND IT DOESN'T SEEM TO INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT HE IS A POSTER UNOPPOSED.

SO AT THIS POINT I'M UNSURE HOW TO READ THAT. I ONLY SAW ONE.

SOMEONE MENTIONED THERE WAS TO A NUMBER SEVEN? JUST THE ONE? OKAY. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO MAY NOT OF COMPLETED A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? SEE NONE I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE QUICK MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DARE. DO I HAVE A SECOND?ECOND BY COMMISSIONER KOHLER. ALL IN FAVOR? PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS? >> I WOULD ONLY JUST REITERATE THE AREA THAT THIS IS A LARGE PORTION OF IT SECONDARY UNITS. THE ACTUAL HOUSES.

IT WOULD BE BEYOND OUR SCOPE TO REQUIRE TO PUT IN FENCING RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL.

. ANOTHER WAS CONCERNED WITH SECONDARY DOODLING UNITS ABOUT ÃSECONDARY RESIDENCE AS BEING BECOMING LIKE A FULL-BLOWN HOUSE.

I THINK GETTING INTO MICROMANAGEMENT PEOPLE DO WITH THEIR POOL HOUSES, THAT'S NOT AN EMPTY OF MEANING TO BE CONCERNED AS A CITY. FOR THAT REASON I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DALE.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

THE NEXT ITEM. YES, SIR? THIS IS NUMBER EIGHT.

OKAY. THEY WANT TO BE CLASSIFIED AS THAT? OKAY. WITH THAT CLARIFICATION WE WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian’s Zoning Ordinance and map by establishing the initial zoning classification as Single Family-One (SF-1) District, for a property that is approximately 11.013± acres out of the SA & MG Company Survey, Abstract No. 1048. The property is commonly known as 3860 Plainview Road. (Case No. Z30-2020-95).]

COMMONLY KNOWN AS 3860 PLAINVIEW ROAD. >> ON AUGUST 11 THE CITY COUNCIL DID ADOPT AN ORDINANCE FOR A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF THESE 11 ACRES AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 43 OF OUR TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. ALL TERRITORIES ANNEXED INTO THE THE IS CLASSIFIED AS AGRICULTURAL ZONING UNTIL PERMANENT ZONING IS ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL BOARD STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PROPERTY BE PERMANENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS THROUGH NOTIFICATIONS WERE MAILED TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET REALLY DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSE.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING REQUEST IS PRESENTED AND I CAN TAKE ANY

QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SEE NONE, DOES THE APPLICANT

[00:15:11]

HEARING. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER OSBORNE. ALL IN FAVOR? THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED DURING ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTIONS I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER DARREN. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DALE. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS

[009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian Comprehensive Plan and Thoroughfare Map by removing a Thoroughfare as depicted in Exhibit “A” by removing a portion of a proposed 150-foot rural parkway on F.M. 875 from its intersection with Skinner Road on the west and the proposed 120-foot wide north/south major thoroughfare to the east (Case No. M15-2020-107).]

TO THE EAST. >> THIS REQUESTED AMENDMENT TO OUR PLAN WOULD REMOVE AN EAST-WEST THOROUGHFARE THAT CONNECTS FM 875 TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TO THE EAST THROUGH THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THE LOCATION OF THIS WORLD PARK FOR THIS PROPOSED PARKWAY ENCUMBERS PROPERTY, WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN TALKS OF DEVELOPING IN THE NEAR FUTURE.OF THOSE ALIGNMENTS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND THEY ARE GENERAL IN NATURE, THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN IS A ROADWAY PRESERVATION DOCUMENT, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF A NETWORK NECESSARY TO SUPPORT GROWTH IN OUR AREA.

THE PLAN DOES INDICATE WHERE WE SHOULD PRESERVE RIGHT AWAY SO AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS OR AS TRAFFIC INCREASES IN THESE AREAS, OUR AREA HAS SUFFICIENT SPACE TO DEVELOP APPROPRIATE FACILITIES TO HANDLE SUCH NEW HOMES, NEW TRAFFIC. THE SECTION OF ROADWAY THIS FALL COMPLETELY WITHIN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AND GIVEN RECENT LOSS THAT PASSED RELATED TO ANNEXATION HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE SUBJECT AREA IS EXPECTED TO REMAIN COMPLETELY UNDER COUNTY AUTHORITY. TO REMOVE THIS LINE OR SHIFT THIS ALIGNMENT WILL PROBABLY IMPACT COUNTY RESIDENTS YOUR STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THE COUNTY ACTUALLY CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE COUNTIES THOROUGHFARE PLAN PRIOR TO THE CITY AMENDING ITS PLAN DURING OUR CITY HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE COUNTY.

THE COUNTY DOES PLAN TO PRESENT AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMISSIONERS COURT NEXT MONTH AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER. IS MORE OR LESS RELATED TO FM 1387, BUT THEY CAN ADD THIS TO THE AGENDA ITEM AS WELL TO TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES REQUIRED ARE THE CHANGES REQUESTED HERE ON 875. THE CITIES WITH AND ACT ACCORDINGLY TO ALIGN WITH THE COUNTIES CHANGES WHICH WILL PROVIDE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ALL THREE OF OUR PLANS FOR THAT IN OUR CITY AND THE COUNTY. AT THIS TIME STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS AMENDMENT TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR IT ONCE ITEM IS THOROUGHLY VETTED TO THE COUNTIES PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, IT SHOULD THEN BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE CITY.

AND WITH THAT I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> IF WE DO NOT YET DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT BEFORE WE WERE PRESENT THIS? THERE'S NOT LIKE A SIX MONTHS?

>> AS LONG AS WE DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. >> IT IS NOT A ZONING CHANGE.

>> UNDERSTOOD. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE TO PRESENT ANYTHING IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST FOR THIS CHANGE? SO, STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS TOM WINTERS WITH ENGINEERING CONCEPTS AT 201 " THE RIGHT TO APPRECIATE MARCUS PRESENTATION. HE GIVES US THE FACTS AND I APPRECIATE THAT. WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TO LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE.

THIS IS COMPLETELY IN THE ATG. PROBABLY WILL NOT EVER BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY FOR IN WE ARE ONLY ASKING TO REMOVE THIS SECTION. WE ARE NOT ASKING TO RELINE IT TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT ANYONE ELSE. BASICALLY FOR THIS CONNECTOR GOES, THIS 125 OVER HERE IS COMPLETELY IN THE CITY CONTROL. NOTHING ELSE TO THE SOUTH IS IN THE COUNTIES CONTROL. WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE COUNTY PROCESS AS WELL.

I ACTUALLY MET WITH THE COUNTY ENGINEER AND THE COUNTY PLANNER AND THEY AGREE WITH OUR REALIGNMENT HERE. THE MAJOR ARTERIAL WHICH IS SKINNER ROAD THAT GOES UP AND HITS AT WALNUT GROVE FOR THE NEW TRAFFIC INTERCHANGES GOING TO BE IN ANYTHING THE COUNTY

[00:20:02]

THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SELL IT BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE OFPIECE OF PAPER.

RELAYS YOU NEED A PLAN . YOU HAVE TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, BUT WE THINK WE WILL PUT A REALLY NICE ONE ACRE DEVELOPMENT HERE WITH A NICE AMENITY PACKAGE AND PUT AN REALLY NICE DEVELOPMENT HEAR FROM YOU WE CAN'T DO IT WITH 150 FOOT SWAP IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. THAT'S KINDA OUR REASONING AND WE JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT

OUT THERE AND SEE WHAT YOU GUYS THINK. >> YOU ARE LOOKING AT PUTTING A

ONE ACRE LOTTHERE? WHAT CORRECT . >> AND WHERE DO YOU PROPOSE TO PEOPLE WHO BUY THOSE ONE ACRE LOTS, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO GE TO DOWNTOWN?

WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO GO UP SKINNER ROAD . >> AND SO ALL THE TRAFFIC ÃIF THEY ARE GOING TO GO EASTBOUND THEY WILL STILL HAVE YOU SKINNER ROAD?

>> THEY CAN USE 875. >> THAT WILL TAKE 875 S. AND GO ALL THE WAY OVER TO SARDIS TO

TAKE THAT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. AS IT EXISTS TODAY.

>> INSTEAD OF A THOROUGHFARE THAT WOULD GET THEM ONTO 287 MUCH SOONER?

>> I DON'T KNOW. IF YOU WOULD FOR THIS BLUE LINE THERE, AND CROSSES WERE 287 BUSINESS AND 287 SPLIT. WAS LIKELY IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY, THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE A CONNECTION POINT AND IT WILL BE PROBABLY AN OVERPASS BECAUSE IT IS TOO CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION TO HAVE ON AND OFF RAMPS. I DON'T KNOW THAT IS GOING TO GET THEM TO 287 ANY QUICKER PERMISSION BUT WITH THE GREEN LIGHT YOU SEE THERE, WE DO ACCOMPLISH SOME EAST-WEST AND THE PURPLE LINE DOWN HERE IS THE EXISTING 875.

>> I HAVE A SIMPLER QUESTION AND THINK THAT COMES IN THE PLAY BEFORE THAT EVEN.

IT IS NOT EVEN AWARE JURISDICTION IN THE END. SO IT SEEMS SOMEWHAT FOOLISH TO COME TO US FIRST BEFORE GOING TO THE OTHER AUTHORITIES. IF YOU LIKE WE AREAHEAD OF THE GAME .IF THEY DON'T PUT ON PAPER THEY ARE COOL WITH THIS DISAPPEARING, THERE'S NO NEED

FOR OUR ACTION AT ALL IS WHERE I SEE IT. >> WE ACTUALLY HAD A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY AT THE SAME TIME THE COUNTY WANTED THE CITY TO GO FIRST IN THE CITY ONE OF THE COUNTY TO GO FIRST. I HAVE APPLIED TO THE COUNTY AS WELL FOR IT I MET WITH THEM, THEY ARE OKAY WITH IT. STAFF IS OKAY WITH THIS IF THE COUNTY DOES IT. I MET WITH THE CITY AND THEY ARE ON BOARD FOR INSULIN GOING TO CONCURRENTLY, TRYING TO CONCURRENTLY DO IT ALL AT ONE TIME.

>> TO THAT, CAN WE NOT GIVE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL PENDING EQUAL INPUTS FROM THE OTHER AUTHORITIES? BECAUSE IF THEY SAY NO IT REMOVES OUR NEED TO DO ANYTHING, BUT IF THEY SAY YES AND THAT SOLVES WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WHERE WHY ARE WE

THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. >> GOOD POINT. >> I THINK OF I HAD THE EFFECTIVE DATE WOULD HAVE TO BE BASED ON REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STATEMENT.

CONCERN AT THIS TIME? >> IT'S CONDITIONAL. >> I HATE TO PUT YOU ON THE

SPOT. >> IT'S A LITTLE TRICKY. BUT IT CAN BE DONE.>> IF IT

[00:25:03]

DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING . THE STAFF REPORTING SIDE OF THE COUNTY CHANGES THAT THE CITIES CAN'T CONCUR FORGET AND WE WILL BE ON THE COUNTIES AGENDA SEPTEMBER 22.

>> WE WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. SOMETHING FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE TAYLOR'S PARCEL THEY ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP?

>> I BELIEVE IT IS ON 86 ACRES AND THEY ALSO HAVE THE 40 ACRES ADJACENT TO IT.

THERE'S A TOTAL OF 130 AND THERE. 139 ACRES.

>> IS THERE ANY TOPOGRAPHY OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT DEVELOPMENT OF THIS ROAD?

>> THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT CREEK CHANNEL THERE THE GOES DOWN THE MIDDLE OF IT AREA THERE THAT MOVES OFF FOR GRANTED, THAT LINE IS JUST A SUGGESTION. IT IS NOT SET IN STONE.

THERE IS A CREEK THERE UNDERNEATH THAT LINE SO THAT WOULD NEED TO MOVE OFF THE CREEK.AND THERE IS SIGNIFICANT TOPOGRAPHY. WE ARE GOING TO KEEP THE CREEK AREA IN THE TREES AND ALL THAT AS IS.WE ONLY HAVE 80 SOMETHING LIGHTS ON 130 ACRES.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DO WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE Ã THANK YOU. WE HAVE NO ONE THAT HAS SUBMITTED A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM.DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC WHO IS NOT ALREADY SIGNED UP? CINQ NONE I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILL.

DO I HAVE A SECOND?LL IN FAVOR? WHY.

I WANT TO SAY I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT ANYTIME WE GET RID OF ROAD PLANS WHEN THERE IS SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND WE ARE REMOVING THAT WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERATION AND TOPOGRAPHY. IT IS OH HOW WINDY THIS PROPERTY. THE CAN'T AVAILABLE HUNDRED 30 ACRES LOSS IS A GOOD ROAD TO GET TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE. THAT'S THE MAJOR CONCERN ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT.

RELAYS THEY WILL HAVE TO GIVE UP PART OF THEIR 120 ACRES. THE CITIES GOING TO ASK FOR ESSENTIALLY A GRANT FOR THIS. THAT A SORT OF TRAVELING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME THE CITY CONDEMNED IT AND PAID FOR IT THE PEOPLE WOULD BE JUSTLY COMPENSATED THAT THEY WILL CONTINUE TO GET IT IS IN A HARDSHIP AS IT IS RIGHT NOW IN A RURAL AREA.

I'M JUST NOT APPRECIATING THE ARGUMENT. WILLING TO HEAR OTHER ISSUES.

>> THAT WOULD PROBABLY ALSO THE FACT WE MIGHT BE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE HERE AND NEED TO PUNT IT DOWN UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE OTHER AUTHORITIES.

AND AT THAT POINT, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO COME BACK FORTH AND AT THAT POINT BRING SOME PLAN FORWARD AS TO HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DEVELOP IT OUTIF THEY WERE ABLE

TO DO SO . >> IS THAT A MOTION? >> COULD YOU RESTATE THAT

MOTION? >> I THINK WE SHOULD DENY IT AS PRESENTED OR AGREE WITH STAFF

HERE AND THEN ÃI DON'T KNOW IF I CAN LEGALLY. >> YOU ALREADY HAVE THE PUBLIC

HEARING ON IT. >> DEFER ACTION ON IT UNTIL.

>> AND WE PUT THE STIPULATION THAT IF ELLIS COUNTY GRANTS THE REMOVAL THAT BEFORE WE

RECONSIDER WE WOULD NEED TO SELL SEE HOW WE PLAY OUT? >> THEY WILL BE ON THE AGENDA

IN SEPTEMBER ANYWAY. SO WE WITH NO. >> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT

WE APPROVE IT CONTINGENT ON THE COUNTY APPROVAL. >> WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION AND

SECOND. DO YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW? >> I WITHDRAW IF WE WANT TO

MAKE ITEASIER . >> CONTINGENT ON APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY.

[00:30:09]

>> I WOULD WANT TO VOTE ON MINE BECAUSE MINE ACTUALLY TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE ROAD AND THAT IMPACT IN AND OF ITSELF OR IN THE SUPPORT YOU BROUGHT FORTH TO BLANKET APPROVE IT WITHOUT SEEING HOW IT'S GOING TO DEVELOP OUT COULD CAUSE AN ISSUE WITH THE ROADS IN THE END.

I THINK BEFORE WE OFTEN SAY WE CAN REMOVE IT, WE WILL NEED TO SEE WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK

LIKE AND THE DENSITY IMPACT THERE OF. >> THAT WE COULD DO THE SAME

THING WITH A DEFERRAL, RIGHT? >> WE CAN. BUT IF WE HAD GONE WITH HIS STRAIGHT APPROVAL AS WELL AS ELLIS COUNTY. WE HAVE AMOTION AND SECOND .

WE HAVE A SODA SUGGESTION CAN I TAKE A SHOT AT REPHRASING IT? >> I WOULD PHRASE THE MOTION AS WE ARE GOING TO DEFER THE MOTION TO THE OCTOBER AGENDA AND RECONSIDER AT THE OCTOBER HEARING BASED UPON WHAT OCCURS IN THE COUNTY HEARING. AND WE ALSO WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO RESUBMIT ADDITIONAL SUPPORT TO SHOW PLANNING FOR THIS CHANGE AND

HOW IT WILL BE ACCOMMODATED. IS THAT A FAIR RESTATEMENT? >> YES, SIR.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. AND WE ARE NOW ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10 ON THE AGENDA, WHICH

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 33.445± acres out of the Granville Kirk Survey Abstract No. 604, described in Exhibit “A” hereto, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to Planned Development District No. 134 (PD-134) for residential uses. The property is located on the south side of Mockingbird Lane, between Pheasant Drive and Abbey Court approximately 3,000 feet west of Walnut Grove Road (Case No. Z28-2020-108).]

>> THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE REASON TO ALLOW 98 RESIDENTIAL LOT SOUTH OF MOCKINGBIRD ROAD THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, WHICH REQUIRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF FOUR ACRES IN SIZE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN WHAT WE CALL THE URBAN MODULE LOW-DENSITY OF OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THIS MODULE CALLS FOR LOT AREAS OF A MINIMUM OF 7500 SQUARE FEET. BASED ON THE LOT SIZE IS PROPOSED, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A THOUSAND TO 12,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. THIS DOES CONFIRM WITH THE URBAN MODULE PRETTY IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE PROPOSED STREETS, LOTCONFIGURATION AND PARKING AREAS . THIS TABLE HERE SO THE BREAKDOWN OF THE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL ZONED VERSUS THE PROPOSED. OR COMPLEMENT THE STATE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD MINIMIZE FRONT ENTRY ROGERS AS THESE ARE TO BE LOCATED TO THE REAR OF LOTS. OR SUCH GRUDGES SHOULD BE OBSCURED FROM VIEW.

I WANT TO MAKE A POINT THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FRONT END GRUDGES OF 65 PERCENT. YOU'RE LOOKING AT 65 THE 98 HOMES TO BE FRONT ENTRYGRUDGES . I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT ONE ITEM IN THAT TABLE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THE REPEATED NOTE IS A 600 SQUARE-FOOT PROPOSED GARAGE IT IS 450 SQUARE-FOOT.

ON TOP OF THAT WE WANTED TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THESE. ANYTHING ON FRONTLOADING IS GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SITE ENTRY OR J STRING. THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THEY PLAN TO PUT WOODEN GARAGE DOORS ON THE OUTSIDE WITH ANYTHING THAT IS THREE-CAR GARAGE OR MORE IS GOING TO FOLLOW OUR GENERAL ZONING REQUIREMENT THERE IS ONE ROAD THAT HAS BEEN ADDED FOR FUTURE CIRCULATION AND CONNECTIVITY VERSUS BIZ. 107 ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AN ADDITIONAL ROADSTEAD BE ADDED AROUND LOT SEVEN THREE THIS AREA HERE. THAT IS CREATING A BREAK IN THE ROADWAY LINK. WE DO FEEL I WOULD CONSIDER THIS A PRETTY LONG BLOCK LENGTH WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY TYPE OF BRAKES. THE SITE PLAN DOES INCLUDE OVER FOUR ACRES OF COMMON AREA, PARK SPACE, TRAILS, AMENITIES INCLUDE EQUIP PLAYGROUNDS, SHADE, STRUCTURE,SOCCER FIELD . IS A STRAIGHT SHOT SHOWING SOME OF THESE AMENITIES AND ALSO INCLUDES BASKETBALL COURTS AND THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE A TIERED RETAINING WALL FOR SEATING. USUALLY IT IS REQUIRED ALL THESE AMENITIES BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO US ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS. THE APPLICANT IS US REQUESTING

[00:35:07]

STAFF IS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS FROM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST.STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS AND THIS IS AFTER WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE COMPREHENSIVEPLAN AS WELL AS SECTION 5 OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH COVERS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENTS .AS ONLY 98 LOTS THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND DOES MEET OR EXCEED THE LOT OF THE SECONDARY AND PRIMARY AMENITIES THAT WE WOULD EXPECT. SO WITH THAT APPROVAL, WE DO HAVE SOME CONDITIONS I HAVE LISTED APPEARS. WE WOULD EXPECT THAT THERE BE NO FRONT ENTRY, WHICH WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE FEEL IT CAN ALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SITE ENTRY OR J STRING. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A ROAD STUB, SOMETHING LOCATED ALONG THIS AREA HERE THAT REALLY BREAKS THAT BLOCK LENGTH OF.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WOULD EXPECT THE TRAILS THEY ARE PROPOSING TO BE AT LEAST EIGHT FEET WIDE. RIGHT NOW THEY ARE PROPOSING ONLY 60 IN OUR LAST CONDITION WOULD BE AGAIN NO BUILDING PERMITS BE ISSUED UNLESS ALL AMENITIES HAVE BEEN BUILT.

SO WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY IN THE

MIDDLE OF THAT? >> MR. VASSEL. >> ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FIRST SINCE YOU ARE IN SUPPORT? DID I SEE THAT CORRECTLY? THANK YOU, SIR. JUST ANNOUNCED YOUR ADDRESS TO

THE BOARD. >> MY ADDRESS IS 3440 MOCKINGBIRD IN THE MIDDLE HERE BETWEEN THIS U-SHAPED. WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS SEVERAL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

AND A BUILDER, I'VE BEEN IN TH REAL ESTATE BUSINESS MY WHOLE LIFE .

ALL THIS LOOKS REAL GOOD TO US. WE WORKED WITH THE ENGINEERS HERE AND WE WORKED OUT A LOT OF ISSUES. I THINK THE CITY HAVE. AND THAT WE HAD.

AND SO THE ONLY THING I MIGHT COMMENT ON THIS ISAND BUILT HOUSES, BUILT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL . YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE GRUDGES.

I SEE NO PROBLEM WITH PUTTING GRUDGES ON THE FRONT OF THESE HOUSES IN THE BACK OF IN FACT, IT WOULD BE BETTER REALLY VIEW IF YOU HAVE THEM IN FRONT. AND I THINK THE CITY WILL BE

PUTTING IT ON THE SIDE OF THE REAR, IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.THERE WAS

PUSH FOR THAT IN THE PAST. >> I CAN SEE THE ON THE LARGER LOTS, BUT ON THE SMALLER LOTS IT MAKES SENSE TO ME TO PUT THEM IN THE FRONT. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY

UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WHEN ASKED ME. >> I NOTICED YOU HAVE PUT A STOP TO THE SOUTH. SO IT'S POSSIBLE YOU MIGHT BE DEVELOPING YOUR PROPERTY IN THE

FUTURE? >> IS POSSIBLE, BUT MORE THAN LIKELY EVENTUALLY WE WILL SELL THE PROPERTY AND THAT IS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE FOR THE DEVELOPER. IF I WAS GOING TO DEVELOP THIS LIKE MR. BLOOMFIELD IS, I WOULD WANT ONE THERE FOR SURE.THAT WE YOU GO RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND EVENTUALLY TYING IN WHERE YOU WANT TO. WOULD BE A LOT EASIER AND A LOT SIMPLER FOR THE CITY AND EVERYBODY.> IS FORWARD THINKING.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU OWN THE LAW.

THAT IS WHERE I LIVE. >> HOW MANY ACRES DO YOU HAVE LEFT THERE?

>> 23 OR 24 AFTER WE SELL THIS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> WE HAVE ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL SIGNED UP. GREG BLEVINS. MR. BLEVINS.

PLEASE COME UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE COMMISSION.

>> MY NAME IS GREG BLEVINS AND I RESIDE AT 1102PHEASANT DRIVE .

[00:40:01]

>> GIFTED DIRECTOR QUESTIONS AND THEN WE CAN DIRECT THEM TO THE APPLICANT.

>> SORRY ABOUT THAT BUT I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I JUST SAW THE DRAWING AND THE LAYOUT. HOW ARE THEY BUTTING UP TO THE HOUSES THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING? RIGHT NOW I AM SHOWING A PART COMING UP TO MY BACK FENCE.

>> USUALLY IF IT IS A PART, ARE YOU BACKING UP ON THE GREEN SPACE ON THE RIGHT SIDE?

>> LEFT SIDE TOP. >> LEFT SIDE TOP. OKAY.

USUALLY IF IT BUTTS UP AGAINST RESIDENTIAL IT'S GOING TO BE A WOOD FENCE.

IF IT IS AN OPEN SPACE OR AN AREA IT MAY BE WROUGHT-IRON. WE WILL FIND OUT FROM THE

APPLICANT WITH THAT IS. >> THE OTHER THING IS I KNOW PROGRESS IS IMMINENT NO MATTER WHERE YOU GO. ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE SEEN IN MY TRAVELS THE IN IN THE MILITARY, WE DECIDED TO SETTLE BECAUSE IT WAS FAMILY AND IT WAS A LOW-KEY LIFESTYLE.

VERY HOMEY, FRIENDLY. I HAVE SEEN THAT CHANGE IN EVERY CITY I HAVE BEEN IN.

EVERY SMALL TOWN. AND THAT'S WHAT I AM SEEING HERE NOW.

YOUR INCREASE IN TRAFFIC IS NOT BEING CONTAINED. YOUR INCREASE IN CRIME RATE, I HAVE HAD SEVERAL NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE ALREADY MOVED AWAY BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE.

THEY DON'T TRUST THEIR OWN CAMERAS. WE HAVE HAD PEOPLE COMING BY OUR HOMES AT NIGHT. AND WITH THE INFLUX IN THE BOOM IN THE ECONOMY AND THE HOUSING, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR HOME LIFE. THIS LOW-KEY FRIENDLY HOMESTYLE PLACE WE HAD IS GONE.

THANKS. >> THANK YOU SIR. I'M SORRY, I THINK WE SKIPPED OVER THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IF YOU WOULD APPROACH AND STATE YOUR NAME AND GO AHEAD AND PRESENT WHAT YOU HAVE AND IF

YOU COULD ANSWER MR. BLEVINS QUESTION BEFORE YOU FINISH. >> ONE OF THE OWNERS OF FIELD HOMES FOR NUMBERS OF PLANNING AND ZONING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION. I WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF BECAUSE MARCO COVERED IT WILL.

I WENT BACK TODAY AND LOOKED WE BUILD ABOUT 650 HOMES IN THE LAST 12 YEARS OR SO.

ABOUT 2000 OF YOUR CITIZENS LIVE IN HOMES THAT WE BUILT. AND THINK WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD FEEL AT THIS POINT FOR WHAT IS POPULAR HERE. THIS IS A CAROLINA PLAN.

VERY TYPICAL. IT HAS THE WOOD GARAGE DOOR, WHICH WE HAVE DONE THE WOOD CEDAR GARAGE DOOR IS A STANDARD BECAUSE WE DO REALIZE THE GARAGE DOOR IN TIMES IS A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE FRONT ELEVATION. IT REALLY DOES SET OUR HOUSE APART IS THE VARIETY OF THE NUMBER OF WINDOWS AND A VARIETY OF SIZES.

EVEN IF YOU HAVE A HOUSE THAT HASN'T A SIDE ALLEY, IF ALL THE WINDOWS ARE 3050 AND THE ONLY HAVE EIGHT UP IN THE HOUSE, THIS IS A MORE ATTRACTIVE LOOK. WE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PLAN AND MR. VESSEL WORKING WITH US. WE HAD BOUGHT THE LONG NARROW STRIP ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY ALREADY THERE HE WAS OUR NEIGHBOR PARIS AND WE WERE ABLE TO WORK WITH HIM TO COME UP WITH THIS PLAN THAT WOULD GIVE US A REALLY QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE WON'T BE A LOT OF THROUGH TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH IT.

AS MARCO SAID, BECAUSE OF THE RESTRICTIONS ON IT AS FAR AS HOW IT PLAYS OUT, WE USE THE TRAFFIC CIRCLES FOR A STATIC AS WELL AS TRAFFIC CALLING. SO YOU DON'T END UP WITH THE SPEEDWAYEFFECT . AND WE WERE ALSO ABLE TO USE THEM AS A LANDSCAPING FEATURE COULD MARCO DID A GOOD JOB TALKING ABOUT THE PARKS, BUT THIS IS ONLY 98 HOMES.

WE WILL HAVE A SOCCER FIELD, BASKETBALL GOALS, PLAYGROUND FOR THE YOUNGER KIDS AS WELL AS A GAZEBO, WHICH WE SEE AS A DESTINATION FOR PEOPLE WHO WOULD GO OUT AND WALK THEIR DOGS OR TAKE THEIR KIDS TO RIDE THE BIKES AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE HAVE A MIX OF LOTS. 8000 FOOT MINIMUM AND A BUNCH OF 12S BUT OUR AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS 10,600 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS A VERY GOOD SIZED LOT IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT.

THERE ARE PRODUCT PICTURES AGAIN. YOU SEE IT IS REALLY DIVERSE ELEVATIONS IT HAS A CUSTOM LOOK. WE DO A LOT OF THE EIGHT FOOT FRONT DOORS, PORCHES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THE SECOND FLOOR.

[00:45:02]

IS TO GET TWO CARS INSIDE THE GARAGE. >> WHAT IS THE DIMENSIONS.

>> WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE A 500 FOOT. A TYPICAL GARAGE IS A 20 FOOT DEEP, 10 FOOT WIDE SO WE WOULD BE TO HAVE. TYPICALLY ONLY FOR THE AND 30 FEET WIDE. YOU CAN TELL THIS IS EXECUTIVE HOUSING.

WE HAVE HIGH ENERGY EFFICIENCY. EVERYTHING IS LED STANDARD NOW. EVEN THE GARAGE DOORS ARE INSULATED, PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTATS, SMART HOUSE TECHNOLOGY, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS TO REDUCE THE WATER USAGE. AS HE COULD TELL BY THE AERIAL MARK SHOWED, THIS CONSISTENT HOMES ON THREE SIDES. OUR LOTS ARE BIGGER THAN THE LOT SURROUNDING US ON THE THREE SIDES. WE WOULD BUILD NEW FENCING ON THE BACK OF HOURS SO THOSE NEIGHBORS WOULD GET A NEW FENCE IF THEY HAVE AN OLDER ONE. ESTIMATE OUR AVERAGE SALES PRICE A LITTLE OVER 4000 FOR THIS IS ABOUT 40 MILLION PROPERTY VALUES IS ONE OF THE OTHER THING BLOOMFIELD DOES IS ONE OF THE ONLY BUILDERS THAT DOES IS WE ARE ABLE TO ROUTE OUR PURCHASES SO THE SALES TAX GOES TO THE CITY BUT I LOOKED IT UP LAST YEAR AND WE WERE ABLE TO GENERATE APPROXIMATELY 50,000 OF SALES TAX IN THE CITY.

WE HAVE BEEN RUNNING AT THAT RATE FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW. IS PROPERTY WOULD GENERATE ANOTHER 50,000 ITSELF. WE HAVE DESIGN IN THE LAST YEAR NEW SWING ENTRY GARAGE DOORS.

THOSE ARE SHOWN HERE. ONE OF THE ADVANTAGES IS YOU DON'T HAVE A GARAGE DOOR THAT FACES THE FRONT WHERE THE DISADVANTAGES IS WITH YOU TO OUTSIDE SWINGS WERE THESE INTERNALS, YOU END UP WITH A LOT MORE CONCRETE THAT GOES DOWN.

DRIVES EXPENSE UP AND GIVES YOU MORE OF A CONCRETE LOOK AND MAKES IT NICER BASKETBALL, WHICH I LIKE TO PLAY. IT ALSO TAKES ABOUT 600 SQUARE-FOOT OUT OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE SO THAT REDUCES YOUR FLEXIBILITY FOR DESIGN IN THE ARCHITECTURE SO YOU LIMIT THE NUMBER OF SECONDARY BEDROOMS YOU COULD HAVE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

A LOT OF PEOPLE, IF THEIR PARENTS ARE COMING TO VISIT WHEN THEY HAVE OLDER RELATIVE LIVING WITH THEM, THEY DON'T WANT THEIR GUESTROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

SO THE FRONT ENTRY FACILITATES. YOU CAN SEE THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER IS A FOUR CAR GARAGE, WHICH WE ARE ALSO DOING BECAUSE PEOPLE TEND TO HAVE MORE AND MORE VEHICLES.

IN CONCLUSION, THANK YOU FOR HAVING WINGFIELD BE A PART OF MIDLOTHIAN.

WE HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AND BEEN LOYAL THROUGH THE TOUGH TIMES WE ARE EXCITED TO HAVE THIS PROJECT. I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL WITH THE 35 PERCENT WITH OUTSIDE SWINGS THAT WOULD GIVE US A LETTER DIVERSITY. I WOULD ALSO REQUEST THAT WE HAVE THE STREETS TO ON THE CELL THAT WILL PROVIDE FOR THE EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE REST OF THE PROPERTY. OTHER STUFF THERE TO UNDERSTAND IT IS A LONG STRETCH OF STREET, BUT THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE BREAKS IT UP. WE WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PULL 20 PERMIT SO WE COULD BUILD MODEL SPECS AT THE SAME TIME WE ARE BUILDING THE AMENITIES. I THINK WE HAVE DEMONSTRATED IN ALL OUR PROJECTS THAT WE DO GET OUR AMENITIES COMPLETE FOR THIS WILL BE A SINGLE FACE PROJECT BUILT IN THE FIRST PHASE.

BUT I WOULD ACCEPT THE CONDITION WE BUILT THOSE BEFORE PERMITS IF THAT IS WHAT IT TOOK TO GET THIS APPROVED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH! LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND HOW YOU WANT TO AMEND THE COMMISSION TOREVIEW WENT UP TO 65 PERCENT TO BE FRONT ENTRY

GARAGE IS, CORRECT? >> CORRECT . >> OKAY.AND YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THE ROADS DOWN NEAR LOCK SEVEN BLOCK D? AND THEN WHAT ABOUT NUMBER

THREE WITH THE TRAIL WITH? >> WE WOULD DO THE EIGHT FOOT. WE DID IT AS A SIX FOOT BECAUSE IT WASN'T REALLY CONNECTING INTO A LARGE CITY TRAIL SYSTEM PROGRAM AND BE INTERNAL TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS WHY WE HAVE SIX, BUT WHO WOULD DO THE EIGHT AS A CONDITION GETTING THIS

APPROVED. >> YOU ARE ASKING FOR 20 PERMITS BEFORE.

>> BEFORE THE AMENITIES ARE COMPLETE. TYPICALLY WE WILL BUILD THE STREETS IN ALL THE UTILITIES AND WE CAN GET SUBDIVISION ACCEPTANCE AND WE WILL NOW HAVE THE WATER METERS AND THAT KIND OF STUFF SO WE CAN BUILD THE AMENITIES IT WOULD BE CAN'T BUILD THE AMENITIES DURING DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ELECTRICITY OR THE WATER

METERS AND STUFF TO DO THE IRRIGATION AND THINGS. >> UNDERSTOOD.

[00:50:01]

UNDERSTOOD. >> I WILL ACCEPT THAT TO GET THE SPREAD.

BUT I THINK IT IS IN PROBABLY EVERYBODY'S INTEREST TO LET A START ON IF YOU HOUSES.

>> YOU ARE ASKING FOR BASICALLY 20 PERCENT BEFORE YOU INSTALL AMENITIES? WHAT YEAH. I'M JUST GETTING A PERMIT SO I CAN START A HOUSE.

>> AND THEN MR. BLEVINS HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR ABUTTING PROPERTIES.

>> NEAR THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO OR PROPERTY ADJACENT TO MOCKINGBIRD ROAD WE ARE LOOKING AT A LARGER RIGHT AWAY, WHICH IS WHY OUR LINE DOESN'T LINE UP WITH HIS.

I HAVE BEEN OUT THERE FOR SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN REPAIRED. OME OF THEM ARE IN BETTER CARE AT THIS POINT. WE WILL BUILD ONLY FENCES AT OUR COST ALONG THOSE LOTS.

WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT AS PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE NOT BUILDING A HOUSE BY HOUSE, WE WOULD BUILD IT ALL UP FRONT PARTLY BECAUSE FOR THE FENCES MAY BE FALLING DOWN WHERE THEY ARE DOWN, WE ASSUME TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A GOOD FENCE AND IT KEEPS THE TRASH ON

OUR SIDE AND GIVES PEOPLE KIND OF A CLEAN AESTHETIC. >> EXCEPT THE CONDITION IS A DEVELOPER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO BUILD THE FENCING WITH ADJOINING PROPERTIES?

>> CORRECT. >> I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS IN THERE OR NOT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> IS THIS PRIVATE TO THE

NEIGHBORHOOD? >> THIS WOULD BE AN HOA PART. YOU DON'T EXPECT PEOPLE FROM

THE SURROUNDING AREAS TO COME? >> I'D BE HAPPY TO DEDICATE IT TO THE CITY.

I HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WHERE I HAVE DEDICATED PARKS TO THE CITY, BUT I HAVE AT MY HOA OBLIGATED TO MAINTAIN IMPORTANT A FINE THE HOA GETS UPSET WITH US LATER ON EVEN THOUGH IT FACILITATES GETTING STUFF DONE.

BEING A WALKING NEIGHBORHOOD. I WILL THROW THIS OUT THERE FOR HIM ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED BY THE STAFF AND BY ELECTED OFFICIALS IS TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT OR UNIQUE. OUR ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WAS TO BUILD THE TRAIL ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET LIVING THIS ENTIRE AND NOT TO HAVE A SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE AND REALLY JUST CREATE THIS WALK ABILITY WHEN YOU COULD RIDE YOUR BIKE AND STUFF WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE RESPECTED STAFFS ADVICE WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE UNDER THE STANDARD SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. BUT WE DEFINITELY SEE THISAS BEING A WALKING NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE GAZEBO . WHETHER SOMEONE IS GOING TO HAVE THEIR KIDS SOCCER TEAM PRACTICE THERE, I THINK YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THAT, BUT WE ARE NOT BUILDING THIS IS A PARK FOR EVERYBODY.

HATE TO TAKE THIS POSITION. THIS CASE IS KIND OF STRANGE FOR ME IN REVIEW, BUT IT'S KIND OF LIKE WHEN YOU GET AN APARTMENT BY THE POOL YOU WILL HEAR SOME POINT NEWS.

YOU GET A HOUSE BY THE PARK, YOU'RE GOING TO GET PARK TRAFFIC.

AND SEEING AS IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A CITY PARK, IT'S ACTUALLY USUALLY LESS TRAFFIC THAN YOU THINK .

I WOULD SAY THE ONLY POSITIVE HERE IS YOU DON'T HAVE ÃYOU HAVE TRAFFIC CIRCLES WHERE ODDS ARE YOU PROBABLY ARE GOING TO SEE SOME VEHICLES PARKED AROUND THIS CUL-DE-SAC.

[00:55:03]

THAT IS SHOWN BY HOW THE SITE PLAN IS. IF THE APPLICANT WAS OPENED ADDING SOME SORT OF PARALLEL PARKING HERE WERE WHITENING THOSE TRAFFIC CIRCLE AREAS TO ENSURE THAT, THAT WOULD HELP OUR MS FOLKS AS WELL, OUR FIRE TRUCKS GET AROUND, TRASH TRUCKS GET AROUND. BUT AGAIN, I HAVE SEEN THESE TRAFFIC CIRCLES IN ONE OTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY. I THINK IT IS HILLSTONE ESTATES.

THAT IS KIND OF CAUSED SOME ISSUES BECAUSE YOU HAVE DRIVEWAYS THAT FRONT ALONG THE TRAFFIC CIRCLES. AND THAT CAN BE A REAL PROBLEM. HERE LUCKILY THERE TRAFFIC CIRCLES THEY HAVE OPEN SPACE ON EITHER SIDE, BUT THAT IS STILL GOING TO BRING FOLKS WORKING ON

THOSE AREAS AS WELL. JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. >> I THINK YOU BRING UP A REALLY GOOD POINT. ONE THING IS THE TENSION GOING IN THERE AND THE SOCCER FIELD WE WILL DO IT AS A FLAT. IT'S GOING TO SERVE AS A DETENTION.

WE WILL DO THIS STAIRSTEP THAT MAKES FOR SEATINGWITH THE GRASS .

I WOULD SAY WE DO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WE COULD LOOK AT ONE IS JUST THE SPACE AND THE OTHER WOULD BE TOPO AND WHETHER WE CREATED AN INSET FOR PARALLEL PARKING OR I HAVE HAD GOOD LUCK DOING STRAIGHT: PARKING BECAUSE I CAN GET MORE SPACES AND THEN IT ALSO SERVES WHEN SOMEONE IS HAVING A PARTY OR AN EVENT AT THE HOUSE, YOU CREATED PARKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'D BE WILLING TO LOOK AT THAT. BUT WITHOUT HAVING LOOKED AT THE TOPO AND FIGURED IT ALL OUT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I CAN COMMIT TO ADD THIS POINT.

>> I HATE TO HAVE YOU REPORT YOURSELF, BUT I NEED CLARIFICATION FROM GO BACK WITH

A DETENTION PORTION OF THIS WOULD BE. >> YOU HAVE GOT WHERE THE

SOCCER FIELD IS, IT WILL SERVE AS DISSENSION IN A PEAK EVENT. >> WHEN YOU SAY PEAK EVENT, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? BECAUSE THE SOCCER FIELD WILL BE UNDER WATER ALL THE TIME.

IT BECOMES NOT USABLE.

SO WE GET AROUND IT SO WE CAN MAKE IT FUNCTIONAL. IF YOU HAVE A RELATIVE SMALL RAIN EVENT, THERE IS JUST DRAINAGE COMING THROUGH THERE, IT WOULD GO INTO THE CONCRETE

PILOT CHANNEL AND THAT WOULD WORK ITS WAY AROUND. >> WE BUILT A LOT OF THE PONDS AROUND MIDLOTHIAN AND THEY SET DRY AND UNUSED THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE TIME.

THIS IS A WAY TO CREATE SOME FUNCTIONAL. >> I LIKE THE IDEA.I JUST WANT TO BRING UP FIELDS ARE HARD ENOUGH TO KEEP GRASS ON AS IT IS.

WHEN YOU ADD IN ANY TYPE OF WATER THAT GOES THROUGH THEIR NEW KIDS IT COULD BECOME A GRAS LIST AREA WHICH BECOMES A PROBLEM FOR THE HOA. I AM INTERESTED TO SEE.

I'VE NOT SEEN THIS BEFORE SO I'M SOMEWHAT INTERESTED TO SEE IF THAT IS A BETTER USE OF AN AREA, LIKE YOU HAVE MENTIONED. IT MIGHT WORK OUT GREAT. I JUST WANT TO BRING IT UP.

>> WE HAVE AN ENGINEER HERE SO HE CAN TELL US WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE

RETENTION VERSUS. >> THEY ARE NOT USING IT AS AN AMENITY.

THEY USING IT AS A TEMPORARY HOLDING SPACE. >> THERE WOULD BE AN OUTFALL.

>> IT GOES INTO THE CREEK. GO AHEAD. >> I LOVE TO SEE THE OUTFALL PUT ESPECIALLY WITH THE RESOLUTION WATER BACKING UP INSIDE OF THAT.

>> WORN RUSSELL FROM CIVIL ENGINEER. DOES THIS HAVE A LASER ON IT? OKAY. IT IS RIGHT HERE. IT WILL COME IN, WE WILL TAKE THAT IN THE PILOT CHANNEL ALONG THIS EDGE. AS IT IS NEEDED, THIS WILL BE

ON THE GREAT GOING TO THAT CORNER. >> WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

ATTENTION AND RETENTION? >> RETENTION HAS ONLY HELD WATER FOR A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO DID NOT SIGN UP WHO WISH TO SPEAK. IF YOU WILL.

[01:00:09]

YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND SPEAK NOW AND FILL THAT OUT. >> JAMES WROTE MY WIFE STEPHANIE AND I LIVE AT 917 ABBEY LANE THE ONE HOUR QUESTION WAS ALREADY ANSWERED BY THE JUDGMENT FROM BLOOMING FIELD REGARDING THE FENCE LINE ALONG THEIR.

WE ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE PARK THERE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. WE DID NOT PUT UP A FENCE AND REMOVED IN FIVE YEARS AGO HE WOULD BE LOVED THE VIEW WE HAD THERE.

AND GENTLEMEN LIVES THERE AND WE LOVE WATCHING HIS COWS COME BY HERE THEY GIVE US THE EVIL EYE WHEN THEY ARE BARBECUING, BUT THE OTHER QUESTION WE HAD WAS ÃWHAT'S THAT? OH YEAH. WE DIDN'T PUT UP THE FENCE LINE AND THAT QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED. WE LEFT SIX TREES ALONG THERE AND THEY HAVE GOTTEN FAIRLY LARGE AND THE URGENT OVER INTO THE AREA WHERE THESE ARE GOING TO BE BUILT.

WILL BE OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A HOMEOWNER AS FAR AS TRIMMING THEM BACK OR WHAT ARE WE GOING

TO NEED TO DO? >> THERE YOUR TREES. IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING BETTER TO TALK TO THE DEVELOPER BEFORE YOU LEAVE AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT MOVIE WANTS TO SAVE THOSE TREES IF HE IS A PARK THERE AND YOU COULD MAYBE REACH SOME KIND OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AS NEIGHBORS ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THAT GOING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE, BUTGENERALLY WE HAVE A TREE ON YOUR PROPERTY THAT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY . BUT YOU CAN ALWAYS WORK OUT SOME TO THE CONTRARY WHATEVER YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBOR WANT TO WORK OUT.

>> TO GET UP WITH THE BUILDER NEIGHBOR. >> THE DEVELOPER IS YOUR NEIGHBOR. IF IT'S A COMMON AREA CONTACT POINT IN FIGURING OUT LONG-TERM

HOW TO HANDLE THOSE. >> ARE HOME IS BLOOMFIELD HOME SO WE KNOW SOME OF THE FOLKS

THERE. THANK YOU. >> IF YOU FILL OUT THAT FORM THAT WOULD BE GREAT. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR IT DO I HAVE A SECOND?SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HILL.

ALL IN FAVOR? THE HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE FOUR CONDITIONS IF WE ARE WANTING TO APPROVE THAT WE NEED TO DECIDE HOW WE WANT TO HANDLE THAT.

I KIND OF WANT TO WALK THROUGH THOSE AND SEE IF WE HAVE DISCUSSION.

THE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED NO FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS AND I KNOW THAT WAS A POSITION THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN IN THEPAST BY CITY COUNCILS . PERSONALLY I'M NOT SURE I'M TOTALLY IN FAVOR OF IT IT WOULD IN A COUPLE OF THE HEARINGS THE CITY COUNCIL IS BACKED AWAY AND ALLOWED FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. IN MY OPINION IT'S A QUESTION OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THOSE AND I THINK IT IS A GOOD THING TO HAVE DIVERSITY IN THE PRODUCT AND BREAK IT UP.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS?HAT DOES EVERYONE THINK ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE ON THAT? ASKED FOR 35 PERCENT J SWING AND 65 PERCENT FRONT ENTRY DOES ANYONE FIND THAT ACCEPTABLE? IT'S EASIER WHEN WE MAKE ONE BIG MOTION IF WE HAVE IT TOGETHER.

>> I JUST WANT CONSISTENCY. I JUST WANT TO SEE SOME CONSISTENCY.

>> PART OF WHAT WE ARE LEARNING IS WHAT COUNSEL WILL PASS AND NOT PASS.

AND TO GET WITH THE PREVIOUS COUNSEL THAT SAID THEY DIDN'T LIKE.

THEY HAVE THE ATTITUDE WITH FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. AS I HEARD IT STATED, PEOPLE WILL LEAVE THE GARAGE IS OPEN AND WE WILL SEE ALL THE JUNK. A LOT OF FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS NEXT TO US AND IT CREATES MORE LABOR NEIGHBORLY THING. PEOPLE SET OUT BY THE GARAGE IS AND SOME PEOPLE FIND IT NOT AESTHETICALLY PLEASING FOR IT THINK IT IS HOW YOU VIEW THE

WORLD. >> THAT IS SOMETHING WE ALWAYS HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND.

HOWEVER, ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN UP.

LOOK AT THOSE THINGS AND I AM SEEKING A LOAN . WE ARE TRYING TO BRING FORWARD IN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS ALMOST IDENTICAL, IF NOT EXCEEDING WHAT IS AROUND IT.

[01:05:01]

UNITS IN ACRE THAT I HAVE VOTED DOWN FOR THEY ALWAYS SAID THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE IN IN FIELD AREAS LIKE THIS. I DON'T WANT TO SEE 200 ACRES DEVELOPED LIKE THIS WHERE IT IS OPEN COUNTRYSIDE. I WANT TO SEE SOMEONE WHO HAS CHALLENGES LIKE IF THEY ARE PUTTING 33 ACRES IN HORSESHOE PLACE, IS WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF BAXTER ONE SIDE FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL ON THE OTHER AND YOU HAVE TWO CHURCHES THERE, IT'S AN INFILL AREA THAT WILL NOT AT TRAFFIC ISSUES BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVESHORT TRIPS TO GET TO WHERE THEY NEED .

I THINK WE NEED TO WORK WITH SOMEONE ON THIS KIND OF INFILL. AND FOR THE SAME REASON, I'M A LITTLE MORE ACCOMMODATING. THINK THE BEST WE ARE GETTING FROM COUNSEL IS WE CAN BACK OFF ON THE NO FRONT ENTRY. EVEN THOUGH WE HAD AN ORDINANCE PASSED.

WHAT ABOUT THE ROAD STOP? AND YOURS IS OVER THERE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, RIGHT?

>> RIGHT. ORIGINALLY WHEN WE SAW THIS PLAN THEY HAD MORE GREEN SPACE AND THEY HAD A ROADSTEAD LEADING THIS DIRECTION HERE AND THEY STILL HAD A PARK THERE AS WELL TO I BELIEVE THEY JUST HAD ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE HERE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT.

THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN WE SAW. WE TALK TO THEM ABOUT A SOUTHERN ROADSTEAD THEY REMOVED THIS STUB AND BROUGHT THE STUB INSTEAD.

WE WERE LOOKING FOR BOTH. AND AGAIN, WE ARE LOOKING AT BLOCK LANES AT THE END OF THE DAY. THIS BLOCK LINKS DOES EXTEND ALL THE WAY UP TO THIS ROAD, ALTHOUGH OUR RULES AND REGULATIONS DO STATE AS LONG AS YOU HIT SOME OPEN SPACE THAT CAN ALMOST COUNT ESSENTIALLY AS AN INTERSECTION AS WELL. WE STILL FEEL THIS IS ENTIRELY WAY TOO LONG, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE THAT TRAFFIC CIRCLE. IT HELPS, BUT JUST FOR CIRCULATION PURPOSES. AND AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE A LARGER SCREEN VIEW OF THIS, BUT ALL THESE HOUSES HERE ON THE SITE AT KENSINGTON DID NOT ACCOMMODATE FOR A ROAD BUT ALL THESE DID NOT ACCOMMODATE FOR A ROADSTEAD. THE ONLY ROAD STUB THAT LOOKED AT FUTURE CONNECTIVITY WAS THIS SUBDIVISION HERE, WHICH WAS DONE YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS AGO. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO STAY TRUE TO OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS

AS FAR AS SHOWING CONNECTIVITY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. >> THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS STILL HERE. WOULD YOU APPROACH, PLEASE? YOU ONLY INTERIOR PROPERTY YOU OWN THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE. DO YOU HAVE ANY INTENT IN THE FUTURE OF CONNECTING THE ROADS TOGETHER?> KNOW THE RENT I DON'T PRINT I HAVE DEVELOPED THE PROPERTY BEFORE.

I'M GETTING A LITTLE BIT OLD TO BE DOING THAT NOW SO I DON'T DO IT ANYMORE.

BUT IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE THIS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE BILLS AND HOUSES ON THE SITE WHERE THE PARKING STUFF IS. AND HAD HE HAD A STUB THERE, THIS WOULD LOOKED A LOT DIFFERENT AS FAR AS FUTURE TRAFFIC AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE THAT.

NOT THAT WE ARE GOING TO SELL IT TO HIM. WE MAY SELL IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE SOMETIME. BUT STILL, IT'S A BENEFIT TO WHOEVER HAS THAT STUB FOR SURE.

BECAUSE EVENTUALLY YOU CROSSROADS IN THERE AND MAKE IT ONE BIG ONE.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> I THINK THE STUB MAKES SENSE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A STOP THERE. BUT I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THE

STUB PLACEMENT. >> SO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE ONE LOT HAS GOT TO GO? TALKING ABOUT. BECAUSE THAT BE INTRODUCED AT SOME TIME TO PUT A STOP THERE.

[01:10:06]

BUT THERE'S NO REASON TO PUT IT THERE. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU, SIR. I'M GOING TO REOPEN THE FULL PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT.

SO WHERE ARE WE AT.WE SAYING WE WANT TO PUT ANY STUB IN? WHAT'S THE CONSENSUS HERE?

>> THAT WILL TAKE A LOT OUT, WILL IT NOT? >> WHAT IS ON THE SIDE OVER

HERE? NO HOUSES. >> IT COULD END UP BECOMING.

>> THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT AT SOME POINT PROBABLY?

OVER HERE ON THE RIGHT BY THE PARK. >> YES.

THIS AREA HERE IS DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY. >> IT ONLY GOES TO ABOUT I THINK THIS POINT RIGHT HERE GOING DOWN.

>> OKAY. HELPED ME UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE STUB.

THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE THERE. WHERE IS IT GOING TO GO.

WHAT IS ITS PURPOSE IN THE FUTURE. >> FOR CONNECTIVITY.

IT'S MORE ABOUT TRYING TO GET AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOODS. >> WOULD IT CONNECT TO

KENSINGTON? >> IT WOULD CONNECT TO THIS PROPERTY.

>> IT WOULD PREVENT 1/3 LEG AS LONG AS THESE. >> ALL TRAFFIC THE QUESTION IS OUR WE GOING TO ALLOW A DUMP ON MOCKINGBIRD AND WAITER IN IS A PROBLEM HERE BECAUSE THE WAY THIS IS WITH THE NORTH-SOUTH STUB YOU BASICALLY WILL HAVE ANOTHER INTEREST ON THE MARKING

BURDEN. >> WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANOTHER Ã WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT SPACING REQUIREMENTS HERE. SPOKE I WAS LOOKING AT THAT AND WITHOUT A CONNECTOR PLUGGING IN, WE REALLY HAMPERED THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MIDDLE LOT WE CAN'T DUMP THE TRAFFIC.

YET OF AN INGRESS. >> OUR CUL-DE-SACS CAN ONLY BE 600 FEET.

>> GIVE THE BIG FRONT PROPERTY, WHICH HELPED TO DEVELOP AN IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, YOU COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I THINK HAVING THE STUB ACTUALLY BENEFITS MAYBE NOT THE CURRENT LANDOWNER, BUT IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO SELL THE PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE.

I AM WITH YOU ON THAT. I WOULD WORD IT IS BASICALLY WE HAVE AN EAST-WEST CONNECTOR, PROVIDED THAT SHALL NOT BE TAKEN OUT OF GREEN SPACE CURRENTLY PRESENTED, WHICH LEADS US TO THE DEVELOPERS AGREED TO THE STAFFS RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH COMES TO THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUES. GIVEN THE DEVELOPERS HISTORY, I DON'T THINK THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PERMIT. AND THINK IT GETS MODELS DOWN AND LET PEOPLE SEE WHAT IS THERE AND THE AMENITIES BUILT AT THE SAME TIME THAT IS HOW YOU SELL IT AND MOVE IT.

ANYBODY DISAGREE OR CONCERNS? >> THEY ARE OFFERING 65 PERCENT OR 64 UNITS OF THE DWELLING

SHALL HAVE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. >> YES.

I THINK WE CAN HAVE LESS THAN THAT. LIKE 50 PERCENT.>> THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING NO FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR 65 PERCENT OF FRONTLOADING.

YOU THINK IT TO BE LIMITED TO 60 PERCENT? >> I THINK WE NEED TO COMPROMISE THEIR. WE HAVE HOUSES IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE HAVE

INSISTED ON. >> MR. CHAIR, I WOULD SUBMIT THE MOTION WITH THE CHANGE.

>> I WILL READ THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OSBORNE TO APPROVE WITH 65 PERCENT FRONT ENTRY GRUDGES, 35 PERCENT J SWINGS AS CONDITION ONE, SECOND THAT A ROAD STUB THE AT AN EAST-WEST NO REDUCTION IN THE GREEN SPACE, READ OF THE TRAILS SHOWN

[01:15:01]

20 PERMITS PER AND EMMA STATED THAT. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO BE ADOPTED BY COMMISSIONER OSBORNE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DARRELL. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? ONE OPPOSITION BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. THE MOTION CARRIES FOR THE NEXT

[011 Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of .132+/- acres being Lot 1, Block 2 of the Hales Addition (more commonly known as 323 South 9th Street), by changing the zoning from Residential Three (R-3) District to an Urban Village Planned Development District (UVPD) to allow for professional and/or medical office uses (Case No. Z29-2020-109).]

OFFICIAL OR MEDICAL USES. >> THE PROPERLY LOCATED AT 323 S. NINTH STREET IS CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL THREE DISTRICT TO URBAN VILLAGE PLAN DEVELOP INDUSTRY TO ALLOW FOR PROFESSIONAL AND OR MEDICAL OFFICE USES. THERE IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS 1473 SQUARE FEET. WITH PROPERTY AROUND IT IS GENERALLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL, HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS ZONED FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICEUSES . THEIR REQUEST TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE AS IS AND ARE NOT PLANNING ON TURNING IT DOWN. IT WILL BE TAKEN OUT THE CHIMNEY, PUTTING IN WINDOWS IN THE FRONT TO ADD THE FRONT FACADE AND THEY WILL BE REMOVING THE SURROUNDING FENCING. YOU WANT TO MAKE IT BLEND IN MORE TO THE NORTH.

AS PART OF THE REQUEST THEY ARE REQUESTING THE PARKING LOT TO BE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE TO THIS IS AN EXISTING PAVED ALLEYWAY. BUT THEY ARE REQUESTING IS TO USE PARKING WHERE THE GARAGE IS LOCATED IN THE REAR THREADED PORTION OF THAT RIGHT NOW FROM THIS PORTION WILL ONLY GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. IT DOESN'T ENCROACH INTO THE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SMALL PORTION OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY OVER THERE WILL BE A RIGHT AWAY AGREEMENT THAT WILL HAVE TO GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL TO BE APPROVED FOR THE REAR PARKING. THIS IS SIMILAR TO OTHER TDS WE HAVE ADDED THE ORIGINAL TOWN FOR THE WHOLE PURPOSE IS TO REDEVELOP LOTS AND PROVIDE INFILL DEVELOPMENT TO PROMOTE REVITALIZATION IN THESE AREAS FOR THE PROPOSED USE IS MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND IT DOES MEET WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

19 LET US NOT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 20 FEET AND ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZEROCAME BACK IN A POSITION . STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF THE ENCROACHMENT GRANT THE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

AT THISTIME . >> WE HAVE DONE THAT RIGHT AWAY ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT BEFORE

IN VARIOUS CASES FOR THE CITY? >> WE HAVE DONE WITH VARIOUS DEVELOPMENTS.

ESPECIALLY IN THE ORIGINAL TOWN OR WE HAVE ISSUES. >> THIS IS CURRENTLY A

RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE? >> YES, SIR. >> BASICALLY THEY WANT TO SELL

IT AND CONVERT IT? >> THEY WANT TO CONVERT IT INTO ÃI DON'T KNOW IF THEY PLAN ON SELLING IT. THAT WOULD BE LEFT UP TO THE DEVELOPER.

>> THIS DECISION HERE HANDLES THE ABILITY TO DO THAT?>> IT CHANGES THE USE.

>> REVITALIZATION AND IMPROVEMENT IS WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP, BUT I AM SEEING A LOT IN THIS ELEVATIONS THE BASICALLY SAYS IT'S GOING TO STAY THE SAME OUTSIDE.

WE ARE JUST CHANGING. >> CORRECT. AND IT WILL BE IS THAT THEY KEEP THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE SIMILAR TO THE SURROUNDING AREA.

WHAT WE WANT TO TRY TO AVOID IS BRINGING, AVOID PEOPLE COMING IN AND TEARING DOWN SOME OF OUR MORE OLDER STRUCTURES THE RADIO SEEN A LOT BROUGHT IN ANOTHER DEVELOPERS WHERE THEY HAVE PUT ON NEW FACADES ON AND FIX IT UP THERE THEY ARE REQUESTING TO DO THE SAME.

THEY ARE NOT DOING AS MAJOR CHANGES TO THE FACADE. THEY ARE REQUESTING TAKE OUT THE BRICK CHIMNEY, ADD MORE WINDOWS. AS MORE WINDOWS IN THE FRONT SEE YOU HAVE THAT SO IT IS MORE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. SIMILAR TO THE DIRECTIVES OF

[01:20:04]

THE NORTH. >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> JUST ONE MORE. THEY ARE REQUESTING TO REMOVE THE FENCE ON THE PROPERTY LINE?

>> RIGHT. THEY WANT TO MOVE THE FENCE OVER THE FENCE IS ONLY ABUTTING THE OFFICE. ALSO GOES RIGHT HERE ALONG THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SO THEY WANT TO MOVE ALL THAT. IT IS A CHAIN-LINK FENCE AND IT WOULD BLEND IN WITH THE REST OF

THE AREA. >> IS THE APPLICANT HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY WISH TO MAKE TO THE COMMISSION?

PLEASE. >> PAUL PENFOLD, 810 NORTH PRESTONSTREET .

THE FENCE WAS ALREADY ENCROACHING ON THE PROPERTY. THAT ACTUALLY MADE IT LOOK LIKE THE PROPERTY WENT A LOT FURTHER THAN IT DID WE FOUND THAT WITH THE SURVEY IT WAS ACTUALLY A RIGHT AWAY THERE. SO NO PROBLEM REMOVING ANY OF THAT STUFF.

THERE WAS A PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY WAS ALWAYS ENCROACHING.

APPARENTLY THEY'VE BEEN USING THE RIGHT AWAY FOR A LONG TIME. BUT WE ARE JUST GOING TO CLEAN

ALL THAT UP AND MAKE IT LOOK PRETTY. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

WE HAVE NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. SINGH NONE, I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILL AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. ALL IN FAVOR? PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

DO I HAVE A MOTION, DISCUSSION? >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL. DO IHAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND . >> WE HAVE A DISCUSSION POINT? OKAY.

TO CLARIFY, THAT IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILL WITH THE Ã TWO APPROVED WITH RECOGNITIONS BY STAFF AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DEREK IS THE SAME. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND HAS BEEN APPROVED.

[012 Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the development and use of 19.255± acres located in Planned Development District No. 81 (PD-81) and described in Exhibit “A” hereto by amending section 2(a) of Ordinance No. 2018-13 to authorize single-family residential as a permitted use and adopting development regulations and a Planned Development site plan. The property is generally located at the northeast corner of Hawkins Run Road and 14th Street (Z17-2020- 066).]

HAWKINS RUN ROAD AND 14TH STREET. >> MELISSA ORIGINALLY CAME IN, THEY ADDED ONTO OVER THE YEARS. AND PORTION OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND HERE. BECAUSE ACROSS THE STREET, ACROSS 14TH STREET AND COMES TO THIS ENTIRE AREA. THIS PORTION IS CURRENTLY THE BASE USE OUR COMMUNITY RETAIL AND SO IS THIS AREA. WE DO HAVE A REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO REZONE ONLY THIS PORTION OF THE EXISTING PLAN DEVELOP MEANT TO OFFER A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPERTIES SURROUNDING THIS RESIDENTIAL, UNDEVELOPED.

THE OF THE FUTURE SCHOOL SITE RATE YEAR. WE HAVE FUTURE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE. YOU HAVE PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, EVIDENTIAL, KROGER DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE MEDICAL OFFICES. THE PROPOSED REQUEST ONCE AGAIN IS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHERE THEY ARE REQUESTING TO BUT IN HIS 97 RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH APPROXIMATELY, WHICH WOULD BRING OUT THE Ã19.25 97 RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

THEY HAVE A COUPLE LOTS ON HERE THAT ARE DESIGNATED FOR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS.

WITHIN OUR PROVISIONS WE SEE THE PLAN DEVELOP MEANT DISTRICTS HAVE THAT FIVE PERCENT OPENSPACE . FIVE PERCENT AS TO BE OPEN SPACE OR FIVE ACRES, WHATEVER IS GREATER. RIGHT NOW THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THEY ARE PUTTING IN IS PROXIMATELY 3.37 ACRES, WHICH IS BELOW THE FIVE ACRE MINIMUM, HOWEVER, WHEN YOU BRING OUT THE PERCENTAGE BASED OFF THE LAND SIZE, IT'S 19 PERCENT OF PROPERTY AREA.

THEY ARE GOING TO OPEN SPACE. WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOW THEY ARE USING THE OPEN SPACE WE LIKE TO SEE A MINIMUM OF FIVE ACRES. WHAT THEY ARE DOING AND HOW THE IN PRORATED THE PROPOSED OPEN SPACE AS THEY MADE IT USABLE THROUGH THEY INCORPORATE IT WITHIN THE THEME OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT. AS YOU COME IN ANY OF THESE

[01:25:02]

THESE ARE ALL LANDSCAPES. THESE POCKET PARTS ON THE SIDE. AROUND THIS YOU HAVE PARALLEL PARKING TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THESE AMENITIES. ALSO, THESE POND FEATURES WILL ALSO BE WATER FEATURES. BOTH OF THESE WILL.UT THEY INCORPORATE A TRAIL GOING AROUND AND THEY WILL HAVE BENCHES, GRASS AREA AROUND BOTH OF THESE.

MORE PARKING FOR VISITORS TO COME IN SO YOU DON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE WITH PARKING.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALSO HAVE LIMITATIONS ON HOW OFTEN YOU CAN REPEAT THE DIFFERENT BUILDING ELEVATIONS. YOU CAN'T REPEAT MORE THAN ÃIN 75 ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.

YOU CAN'T REPEAT. THE SAME ELEVATIONS. THESE ARE THE PROPOSED ABOUT THE ELEVATIONS LOOK LIKE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS WILL BE.

IF YOU GO TO THE TABLE WITHIN YOUR ORDINANCE, I HAVE A BREAKDOWN.

I WILL GO TO THAT NOW. THE MINIMUM LOT IS 40 FEET IF IT IS AN INTERIOR LOT AND 45 FEET IF IT IS ACURRENT LOT , THEY ARE REQUESTING NO MORE THAN 20 DWELLING UNITS CONSTRUCTED IN THE PROPERTY FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. NON-FRONT LOADING GRUDGES MAY INCLUDE SITE ENTRYGARAGE IS, FRONT FACING FOR MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES .THE PROPOSED LOTS THAT WILL BE FRONT ENTRY OF THE LOTS THAT SURROUND THIS RIGHT HERE.

THEY WANT TO UTILIZE FRONT ENTRY ON THESE ONCE ONLY. THE NEXT ONE IS 70 PERCENT WITH A MINIMUM, THE MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE NOT BE LESS THAN 1500 SQUARE FEET OF AIR-CONDITIONED LIVING AREA. ONCE AGAIN AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, ONE OF THE WAYS THEY ARE INCORPORATING THE OPEN SPACES HEAVILY LANDSCAPING AT, MAKING AND SO IT IS ENTICING FOR THE PUBLIC TO ENJOY CREATING VARIOUS DIGITAL CORRIDORS AS YOU WALK ALONG THESE TRIALS AND USING THESE OPEN SPACES TO INCORPORATE INTO THE CITY TRIAL PLAN.

IF YOU LOOK AT HOW IT IS DELIVERED, WHICH IS LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF 14TH STREET.

THERE IS AN EXISTING SET THAT WILL GO INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT. STAFFRECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REQUESTS . ONE OF THE PORTION I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS PROPERTY IS SPLIT INTO THREE DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MAJORITY IS IN THE NEWTOWN MODULE. THE NEWTOWN MODULE DOES PROMOTE A BALANCE OF ASSORTMENT OF DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS. AND PROMOTE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, HIGHER DENSITIES, MIXED USE WITH COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE DO FEEL DUE TO THE MAJORITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT BE LOCATED WITHIN THE TOWN MODULE WITH THE FUTURE LINE IS PLAN FOR THE OTHER TWO DISTRICTS THAT IT DOES FALL UNDER IS A SMALL PORTION THAT FALLS UNDER COUNTRY MODULE AND ANOTHER PORTION FALLS UNDER THE URBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 1 TO 3 ACRES FOR THE URBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE IS ÃI APOLOGIZE.

URBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE THE LOTS ARE 700 SQUARE FEET. 7500 AND WOULD LET ME PULL OUT MY CALCULATOR. APPROXIMATELY NEWTOWN MODULE ALLOWS YOU, BREAKS IT DOWN INTO A SINGLE-FAMILY FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL, COMMERCIAL OR PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.

[01:30:06]

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THE APPLICANT LIKE TO DO A

PRESENTATION? >> AND TERRENCE JOE. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US IN TODAY. KNOW WE HAVE WORKED ON SOME OF THESE AREAS FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

WE STARTED IN HAWKINS MEADOWS IN THIS LARGER TRACK IN 2015 AND IT HAS GROWN INTO A VERY NICE SUBDIVISION OF MIXED USE. WE HAVE COME IN WITH A FEW DIFFERENT IDEAS ON THIS P.D.

AND WE REALLY WORK DILIGENTLY WITH STAFF AND SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ON THIS LAYOUT. THE HIGH DENSITY USE IN THIS AREA, WE TRIED TO SAY ÃTRYING TO STAY REAL CLOSE TO WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS.

I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT WE GET A MAJORITY OF THE HOMES WITH REAR ENTRY GARAGE IS.

I WILL APOLOGIZE FOR THE ELEVATIONS.I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I DIDN'T SEND YOU THE ELEVATIONS WITHOUT A GARAGE ON THE FRONT OF IT. SO THE ONES IN YOUR PRESENTATION ARE ONLY FOR THE PARK. I NEED TO CLEAN THAT UP.

I APOLOGIZE. OR OTHER ELEVATIONS DO NOT SHOW A GARAGE BECAUSE THEY ARE RARE ENTRY. ALMOST 80 OF THE UNITS ARE REAR ENTRY LOADS.

THE ELEVATIONS SAME HOUSES. AGAIN I APOLOGIZE. I'M EMBARRASSED ABOUT THAT.

WE BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE HIGHQUALITY . AS HIS EXECUTIVE HOUSING.

THE BUILDERS WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR BUILDING UP IN NORTH ARLINGTON IN MERIDIAN.

THE PRODUCT YOU SAW THERE WAS FROM THAT SUBDIVISION. WE DON'T NEED IT BY PRICE BUT THOSE HOMES HAVE BEEN RANGING 300 $350,000. THIS IS NOT LOW-END BY NO STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. IT APPEALS TO A CERTAIN BUYER. SOME FOLKS DON'T WANT THE YARD.

SOME FOLKS DON'T WANT A BIG HOUSE AND THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF REASONS WHY.

AND WE BELIEVE ESPECIALLY WITH SOME OF THE NEW THINGS COMING ONLINE AND IN PARTICULAR THE HOSPITAL, THERE WOULD BE A GREAT NEED FOR THIS TYPE OF HOUSING AND SOMETHING THAT IS EXPENSIVE. SOMETHING THAT IS NICE. SOMETHING THAT THESE ARE STARTER HOMES. WE ARE NOT TARGETING THAT MARKET AT ALL.E ARE PROUD OF THE LAYOUT. WE THINK IT HAS NICE SPACE, NICE AMENITIES.

WE THINK THE SUBDIVISION WILL HELP DRIVE MORE RETAILS. NOWADAYS THAT WILL BE TOUGHER THAN IT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST, BUT WE BELIEVE THESE EXTRA ROOFTOPS WILL HELP US FILL IN THE REST OF THE SITE WORKING WITH THE STEPHEN SINS AND WORKING WITH THE FOUR ACRES UP THERE. THEY ARE WORKING WITH US AS WELL TO TRY TO GET SOME RETAIL USERS ON THOSE TRACKS ALONG WITH US. I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE

TO ADD A FEW QUESTIONS IN THE AM HERE TO HELP. >> ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. I NOTICED THE MINIMUM SETBACK

IS FIVE FEET. >> I HAVE MY ENGINEER HERE I APOLOGIZE NOT HAVE THAT ANSWER.

>> LUCKY IS THE LOTS ADJACENT TO THE PARK AND SINCE THOSE ARE FRONT ENTRY THE HOMES ARE PUSHED BACK. THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE WHERE IT IS FIVE FOOT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ENGINEER? I SEE NO ONE IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. I SEE ONE HAND RAISED. WOULD YOU APPROACH, SIR? AND IF YOU WOULD, OFYOU FILLED OUT ? YOU HAVE? I'M SORRY, LEE WHITE. I AM SORRY. I WAS OFF BY ONE.

THANK YOU. >> AS YOU SAY, MY NAME IS LEE WHITEHEAD.

MY WIFE DEBORAH NIGHT WITH A 1080 MOUNT ZION, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE EAST. WE LIVED HERE FOR JUST UNDER 10 YEARS AND WE HAVE BEEN WATCHING

[01:35:03]

AND WE APPLAUD YOUR COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL. IN BALANCING THE DESIRES OF THE BUILDERS AS WELL AFFORDING FOR THE REASONABLE PROTECTION OF THOSE OF US WHO LIVED HERE FOR MANY YEARS. JOB WELL DONE. AND THIS IS IN FACT WHAT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO DO RIGHT NOW. IS DESIGNED, THIS DEVELOPMENT PRESENTS US WITH TWO MAIN CONCERNS. NUMBER ONE, THE ALLEY DESIGN WILL HAVE TRAFFIC FOR THE WAY WE LOOK AT IT AT LEAST NINE AND POTENTIALLY UP TO 14 HOUSES GOING RIGHT ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS RELEVANT BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH ON PROPERTIES FOUR AND HALF ACRES, OUR HOUSE SITS NEAR TO THE PROPERTY LINE IN QUESTION.

AND OUR POOL IS EVEN CLOSER AND IS ONLY ABOUT 15 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

AND RIGHT NOW THE DESIGN AS WE ARE READING AND PROPOSES A WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALONG THAT AREA, WHICH IT IS A FULLY SEE-THROUGH DESIGN AND WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE DEGRADATION OF OUR PEACEFUL ENJOYMENT OF OUR PROPERTY, AS WELL AS POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THE PROPERTY VALUE. NOT EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE UNDER A MICROSCOPE SUCH AS THAT.

WE WOULD FEEL A MORE OPAQUE SCREENING WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.

SOMETHING OF THE SAME HEIGHT THAT WILL PROTECT US FROM THOSE EFFECTS.

AND ADDITIONALLY WE WOULD LIKE TO ENSURE THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UPKEEP AND THE REPAIR OF THE BOUNDARY FENCE.THE OTHER CONCERN THAT WE HAVE IS ABOUT RAINWATER RUNOFF. THE WAY THAT LAND LIES, THE PITCH RUNS DOWN FOR THE NORTHEAST WHICH IS OUR PROPERTY.

AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, OUR HOME. AND OUR IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEAR TO THAT AREA. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT DUE TO DIFFERENCES IS BEING USED AND GIVEN IN ANALYZING THE DRAINAGE SCENARIO. THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE PLANNING AND ACCOMMODATION FOR THAT. AGAIN, WE FULLY UNDERSTAND WE LIVE IN AN ATTRACTIVE LOCATION ONE WHERE THE OR THE OTHER WE WILL HAVE NEW NEIGHBORS.ND WE ARE NOT ADVERSARIAL IN PRINCIPLE TO MR. JOCE DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T CHECK FOR OR AGAINST.

WE CAN WELCOME THIS PROGRESS, WE KNOW IT BRINGS NEW TAX REVENUE TO OUR CITY AND THE AMENITIES, ALONG WITH A FLOURISHING AREA WE JUST SIMPLY DON'T FEEL IT IS FAIR FOR ALL THESE THINGS TO COME WITH THE IMPAIRMENT OF OUR OWN WELL-BEING AND PROPERTY VALUES.

IN CLOSING, WE ARE RELYING ON YOU WILL ON THE COMMISSION TO SAFEGUARD THOSE OF US WHO ALREADY CALL IT HOME AND HAVE FOR MANY YEARS AND MOST NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE DENSIFICATION OF OUR TOWN. AND WE ARE RELYING ON YOU TO BE OPEN TO CONSTRUCTIVE INPUT SO WE CAN FEEL COMFORTABLE WELCOMING YOUR LATEST DEVELOPMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

I IMPLORE YOU TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS BEFORE YOU MIGHT

APPROVE THISPROJECT . >> THANKS MR. WHITEHEAD. GOING UP AGAINST THE DETENTION

POND OR RETENTION POND? >> I AM JUST SOUTHOF THAT . >> AND CURRENTLY YOU PREFER A WOOD SCREENING FENCE? CLICK SOMETHING THAT IS MORE OPAQUE, YEAH.

>> DOES THE STAFF ÃMR. JOE, IS THERE AN ISSUE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT?

>> IN FACT, DURING OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF, IT'S INTERESTING THIS WOULD COME UP BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED WAS THE BIGGER HOMES THIS BACKS UP TO.

IN FACT, MIKE ADAMS MADE THE SUGGESTION TO AM GOING TO BLAME HIM OR GIVE HIM THE CREDIT, I SHOULD SAY. HE SUGGESTED WE DO FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS ON THAT ROW ABOUT NINE LOTS AND THAT WE WOULD HAVE PRIVACY FENCE BACK THERE. I AM FOR IT.

AND I BELIEVE THE STAFF WAS FOR IT. WE WERE A LITTLE BIT HESITANT AND TRY TO HAVE MORE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS BECAUSE CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL DO NOT LIKE THAT. BUT THAT WOULD GET US UP TO 29, ALMOST 29 PERCENT WHICH IS IN VERY MANY. AND WE WOULD DO THAT. AND TRYING TO PUT MYSELF IN HIS

[01:40:04]

I MOVED FROM ANNE SWILLE. WE HAVE A POOL AND I WOULDN'T LIKE THAT.

I AM VERY MUCH WILLING TO DO THAT AND WE THINK WE CAN GET THAT, MAKE THAT COMPROMISE.

THE BUILDER HAS POST PRODUCTS. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO THEM. >> AND IN THE BACKYARD THERE

WOULD BE A PRIVACY FENCE. >> OKAY. >> WOULD THERE BE LOT TO LOT

DRAINAGE? >> NO. I CAN EVEN ANSWER THAT ONE.

WE ARE GOING INTO THE RETENTION POND IN ITS A LOT OF IT. WE ARE GOING TO IMPROVE IT.

IT WILL GO THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PARK AND CUT ACROSS. AND DOES GOOD NORTHEAST.

GETS OVER THERE INTO THAT BIG CREEK. IT WILL BE GREAT.

AND WILL IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE THERE.>> MR. WHITEHEAD, YOU SATISFIED?

>> THE ONE COMMENT I WOULD MAKE IS CANDIDLY AND MR. JOE, THANK YOU.

WHETHER WE ARE LOOKING AT A BACKYARD OR WHETHER WE ARE LOOKING AT AN ALLEYWAY, I DON'T THINK WE PARTICULARLY CARE ABOUT THAT. IS JUST MORE THAT THERE IS SOME MANNER AND BLOCKAGE OF DIRECT LINE OF SIGHT. THAT IS REALLY OUR MAIN

CONCERN. >> I BELIEVE MR. JOE WILL WORK WITH YOU.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> THANK YOU. >> TRENTON, CAN YOU PULL THIS UP IN A LIFE MAP SO I CAN SEE HIS PROPERTY AND APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY LOTS COVER IT?

>> HIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT HERE. THERE ARE 8 TO 9 ÃEIGHT LOTS RIGHT HERE AND THEN THERE IS A STREET CONNECTIVITY RIGHT HERE FOR FUTURE CONNECTIVITY AND THERE IS ONE LAW THAT FACES

THIS WAY. >> TRENT, AS A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER WHEN YOU HAVE ANY

ISSUES WITH THOSE FEW LOTS BEEN FRONT ENTRY? >> WAS DEVELOPED I DON'T THINK THEY WILL HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT IN THIS AREA. I MEAN, AND DEFINITELY DOES CHANGE THE FLOW. IT DISTRESSED THAT WE SHOULD PROHIBIT FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS SERIOUS I WOULDN'T BE CONCERNED ABOUT CHANGING THAT.

>> WHAT IS THE FUTURE USE OF THE OTHERS? >> THE FUTURE USE?

WHAT WERE THE ALLEYS ARE BORDERING. >> ALLTHAT IS RESIDENTIAL .

THERE IS A SMALL PORTION WHERE THE FUTURE ROAD WILL DIVIDE IT IS FOR THE NEW SCHOOL SITE WOULD BE LOCATED. THE PROPERTIES ARE ALL DIRECTED TO THE WESTERN NONRESIDENTIAL ZONE. BUT THEY ARE UNDEVELOPED AT THIS POINT.

>> POINT THAT OUT TO ME AGAIN, IF YOU WOULD.

WHITEHEADS PROPERTY IS RIGHT THERE. AND BELIEVE THAT GOES A LITTLE MORE NORTH. YOU CAN PROBABLY BETTER ANSWER.

>> 15 FEET. >> WHAT I WAS SAYING WAS I DON'T THINK THE SIX FOOT ONE FENCE IS ENOUGH FOR THAT RUN BECAUSE THE AMOUNT ARE SMALLER NARROWER LOTS.

IS A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC BACK HERE BOTH ON THE LOWER SIDE DOWN HERE PRETTY FIGURE HALF OF THOSE ARE GOING OUT THIS WAY AND HAVE FOR GOING ON THE ENTIRE PROPERTY LINE.

>> THINK IF WE GO TO FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS FOR THAT SECTION THEY SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH ONE'S AROUND THE PARK ANYWAY EVERYTHING YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL BACK LOTS BACKING UP THE SO THEN I THINK A WOOD FENCE IS FINE. BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU HAVE YOUR DUMP TRUCK ÃOR TRASH TRUCKS GOING DOWN THERE. I THINK SWITCHING NOT TO FRONT

[01:45:11]

COMPROMISE AND MAKE THAT COMPROMISE. >> THESE ARE SINGLE-STORY HOME

. >> AND WE CLOSE TO PUBLIC HEARING?

>> NO. >> ARE THE SINGLE-STORY HOMES? >> IS ALLOWED TO GO UP TO

STORIES. >> THIS ONE SECTION QUICK. >> ANYMORE IN THE DEVELOPMENT

IS ALLOWED TO GO TO STORIES. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS TRY TO COME AROUND KROGER. WE HAD 18 UNITS ACROSS THE STREET AND THE11 ACRES OVER THERE . THIS IS FIVE ACRES PER FIVE UNITS PER ACRE. I THINK THE PRICE VALUE IN THE PRICE POINT IS A GROUND-LEVEL

GOOD DEVELOPMENT IN THOSE AREAS FOR THE EXECUTIVE LEVELFLOWS . >> I AGREE WITH THAT.

AS MUCH AS I DON'T LIKE TO SEE HIGHER DENSITY THINGS, I AGREE WITH THAT.

AND ON THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, THIS IS A BETTER FIT, BUT I THINK WE OWE IT TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE NOT GOING ÃWERE NOT GOING TO SUBDIVIDE FOUR ACRES NEXT TO IT. SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO BE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT.

>> TO A CERTAIN DEGREE I DON'T KNOW. >> IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DENSITY

CHANGE. >> IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DENSITY CHANGE, THE AMOUNT LANDS DEVELOPMENT IS SET ON WHAT HAS GONE IN THE, THE KIND OF WORK WERE A LOT OF THE HOUSES ARE ORIGINALLY ALONG MOUNT ZION BOUGHT OUT BY KROGER BECAUSE LIVING FOR THOSE FOLKS ARE AT IS NOT THE IDEAL PLACE TO HAVE THE RESIDENTS. THE BIG LARGE LOT RESIDENT.

THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SELL THAT BY SQUARE FOOT IN THE COMING YEARS OF ALL GOES GOOD IN OUR DEVELOPMENT IS THE WAY IT IS. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU NEED IF YOU WANT TO SELL THAT BY THE SQUARE FOOT IS ROOFTOPS AROUND THEIR. NICE HOUSES AND DENSITY.

YOU CAN PUT A RESTAURANT OR A BUSINESS THERE OR IN OFFICE. RIGHT NOW IT IS AN INCONVENIENCE. I THINK IN THE FUTURE IT WILL BE A BENEFIT TO THAT PROPERTY.

I THINK AS MR. WHITEHEAD SAID, HE WOULD BE OKAY WITH A SIX FOOT FENCE AND I THINK THE DEVELOPER HAS SAID HE IS OKAY WITH SWITCHING TO FRONT ENTRY GRUDGES, WHICH WOULD MEAN WE WOULD HAVE BACKYARD TO BACKYARD IN THIS AREA, WHICH IS A LIKE USE.

IT'S RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THERE WOULD BE 29 FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS ON THE PROPERTY AND OF THE ALLEY ON THE EAST SIDE THEY REMOVED. AND THAT AT LEAST THE SIX FOOT FORWARD ON BOARD WITH A STEEL AFFORDS THEY CONSTRUCTED. AS A SCREEN.

SHALL BE FROM BLOCK B. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA Ã WHY DON'T WE TAKE A BREAK. WHEN WE TAKE A BREAK. FIVE MINUTES AND WE WI ARE RIGHT. WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD AT 7:58 PM THE NEXT ITEM ON THE

[013 Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance by amending and restating the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 118 (PD-118) as set forth in section 2 of Ordinance No. 2020-07 and inclusive of all exhibits. The property is located at the south west corner of South 14th Street and Mt. Zion Road (Case No. Z26-2020-106).]

SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH 14TH STREET IN MOUNT ZION ROAD. >> BACK IN FEBRUARY THIS PROPERTY WAS REZONED TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 11 .

BACK IN FEBRUARY THEY ADDED THIS PORTION TO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND THE CHANGE THE OVERALL SITE PLAN. AT THE TIME WE HAD APPROXIMATELY SIX BUILDINGS

[01:50:04]

DUE TO VARIOUS INSTANCES IN THE ECONOMY, THE BACK OFF THE RESTAURANT MODEL IN THIS.

THEY WANTED TO REMOVE THAT AND THEY WANTED TO RE-CHANGE THE FORMAT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU. IT HAS 6 BILLIONS THAT ARE OPEN FOR PROFESSIONAL AND MEDICAL OFFICE USES AND OTHER USES ALLOWED IN THE COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT. IF THEY DO ANY SORT OF NEWS THAT IS ALSO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE OR MEDICAL OFFICE THAT WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PARKING, THEY WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL AND GET THAT AMENDED IN THE ORDINANCE. THE BUILDING SITE IS ONCE AGAIN CHANGING.

YOU WILL SEE A MINOR INTERCHANGE FOR THE MAJOR FLOW THE DEVELOPMENT HAD A LANE GOING RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE. BUT THEY ALSO HAVE BECAUSE IT WAS A RESTAURANT USES, HAVE THIS COME THROUGH HERE AND THERE WAS ANOTHER PARKING ALL UP AND DOWN HERE.

PROFESSIONAL OFFICE REQUIRING LESS PARKING IN A RESTAURANT DOES FOR THE MAXIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT OF ÃWAS BROUGHT DOWN. THE PROPOSED REQUEST THEY HAVE BEEN FOR NEW STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL . THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH BUILDING WILL MIRROR EACH OTHER. THEY ARE STILL HEAVILY LANDSCAPED AND THEY ARE PUTTING MORE LANDSCAPING RIGHT HERE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR, ZERO CAN BACK IN OPPOSITION AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE, WITH THE APPLICANT

LIKE TO PRESENT ON THIS OR MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL PRESENTATION? >> $18,075 PARKWAY.

OWNER AND DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY. AS TRENT STATED, BASICALLY IT REFLECTED WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE LAST NINE MONTHS. AND WE HAVE HAD OUR REAL ESTATE BROKER IS HERE AND HE CAN ATTEST TO IT. WE HAVE LOST TO 12,000 SQUARE FOR TENANTS IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS BECAUSE WE COULDN'T PROVIDE IN BUILDING FOR THEM THAT MET THE QUALIFICATIONS. QUITE FRANKLY WE COULDN'T GET ONE STARTED QUICK ENOUGH.

SO WE ARE HERE TO MEET THE DEMAND AND HOPEFULLY GET SOMETHING STARTED AS SOON AS WE GET TO THE PEOPLE HERE IN THE COUNCIL. WE ARE READY TO ROLL.

>> EXCELLENT. >> WE HAVE TIM SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS.>> KIM WIENS, 3800 STEEPLECHASE. REPRESENTING MY COMPANY POINTS REAL ESTATE.

I DIDN'T REALIZE YOU MOVED TO THE CENTER CHAIR HERE. CONGRATS.

JUSTREAL QUICK, I KNOW IT IS LATE. WANTED TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR THIS . AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, IN A LOCAL COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKER HERE IN TOWN AND THE DEMAND FOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL SPACE MEDICAL OFFICE, PARTICULARLY CONTINUES TO BE IN HIGH DEMAND HERE. I'M WORKING THREE DEALS RIGHT NOW ANYWHERE FROM 2 TO 5000 SQUARE FEET. ALL I CAN SHOW THEM HIS EXISTING RETAIL BUILDINGS. SO I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS.

I WOULD LOVE TO BRING THESE PEOPLE HERE AND DOCTORS AND NURSE PRACTITIONERS TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THEM TO MEDICAL SPACE SO WE CAN BRING THEM TO TOWN. AND AM EXCITED ABOUT LONG-TERM, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WILL HELP US BRING MORE RESTAURANTS HERE.

THE BATTLE THAT WITH MY RESTAURANT CLIENTS AND WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE LUNCH TRAFFIC GETTING PROJECTS UP LIKE THIS. WE ALL KNOW THOSE FOLKS ARE OUT TO LUNCH 4 TO 5 DAYS A WEEK.

THIS IS THE KIND OF THING IS A RESIDENT FOR 25 YEARS AM EXCITED ABOUT AND WOULD

APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU . >> IS ANYONE ELSE DID NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEE NONE, I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A SECOND?ALL IN FAVOR? WOULD PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANY DISCUSSION, MOTIONS? SPOKE MOTION TO APPROVE SPOKEN MOTION TO APPROVE. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

[01:55:04]

ITEM NUMBER 13 IS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA,

[014 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 966.35± acres out of the Robert Hosford Survey, Abstract No. 533, JL Blanton Survey, Abstract No 1284, Jourdan Powers Survey, Abstract No 838, William Lick Survey, Abstract 620, John Early Survey Abstract No 3473, Joseph Witherspoon Survey, Abstract No. 1137, Isaac Cooper Survey, Abstract No 226, Elizabeth Rice Survey, Abstract No. 929, AR Newton Survey, Abstract 807, West Wilkins Survey, Abstract No 1162, J Kyser Survey, Abstract No 597, Z Heath Survey, Abstract No 455, Puerta Irrigation Company Survey, Abstract No 1240 and the James P. Neill Survey, Abstract No 1387, by changing the zoning from Planned Development District No. 75 (PD-75) to a new Planned Development District (PD) for a mixed-use development which includes residential, commercial and industrial uses. The property is generally located north of U.S. Highway 287, between South Walnut Grove Road and Rex Odom Drive (Case No. Z21-2019-141).]

THE PROPERTY ISGENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF US HIGHWAY 87 , 287 BETWEEN SOUTH WALNUT

GROVE ROAD AND REX ODOM DRIVE. MR. ROBINSON? >> LAST TUESDAY WE HAD A WORKSHOP WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR THE APPLICANT DID PRESENT TO YOU THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CALLED BRIDGEWATER, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE DIAMOND J DEVELOPMENT. WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE WORKED WITH THEM GOING TO THE ORDINANCE, GOING TO THE VARIATIONS. WE JUST GOT THE MOST RECENT VERSION JUST THIS AFTERNOON AROUND AROUND 11:00 THIS MORNING.

WE ARE IN THE PROCESS GOING THROUGH THAT ORDINANCE, READING IT, MAKING COMMENTS I DID PROVIDE A COPY FOR EACH ONE OF YOU THAT IS IN FRONT YOU. IT WAS DELIVERED TO US TODAY.

I ALSO ADDED IN THE REVISED RECOMMENDATION PERTAINING TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

IN THE STAFF REPORT, WE HAD VARIOUS THINGS WE WERE RECOMMENDING THAT IF THIS WERE APPROVED, IT WOULD BE REQUIRED. ONCE AGAIN AS I STATED PREVIOUSLY, WE ARE STILL GOING TO THE ORDINANCE YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU AND CONFIRMING EACH ONE YOU HAVE MET OR NOT BEEN MET. SOME AREAS ON CONDITION NUMBER TWO, I DO APOLOGIZE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO STOP ME.

CONDITION NUMBER TWO TALKS ABOUT THE AMENITIES. ONE OF THE THINGS OF THE WORKSHOP THAT WAS DESCRIBED THEN ASKED BY CITY COUNCIL WAS THAT THERE BE MORE DETAIL PROVIDED FOR THE AMENITIES THE WHAT TYPE AMENITIES WOULD BE THE MAIN PRIMARY COMMUNITY CENTERS. THEY DID PROVIDE THAT AND THAT IS ON PAGE 13 OF 44 OF APPENDIX 1 OF THE ORDINANCE. WE DO HAVE QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE SIZE OF THE POOL THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING 2500 SQUARE FEET. AND THE DESCRIPTION TALKS ABOUT HOW THE 2500 SQUARE FEET WILL INCORPORATE A BATHROOM. SO WE JUST HAVE SOME LOGISTICAL QUESTIONS FOR THEM.SOME OF OUR CONCERNS IS THAT HOLE LARGE ENOUGH TO SERVE OVER 2000 RESIDENCES AS THE MAIN COMMUNITY CENTER. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I THINK THEY ARE PREPARED FOR THAT NOW, DIFFER BACK TO THE APPLICANT IS THE OPEN SPACE.

BOTH COUNSEL AND PLANTINGS ON COMMISSION WANTED IT WITH THE ORDINANCE.

WE ARE STILL LOOKING FOR THAT AND ARE NOT FOUNDED AT THIS POINT IN TIME FOR THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK ON THAT. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WAS USES BROUGHT BY MR. ALTON DURING THE MEETING IS CURRENTLY IN SECTION 2.04 THERE ARE CERTAIN USES WE DON'T ALLOW BY RIGHT IN OUR COMMUNITY RETAIL ANDCOMMERCIAL DISTRICTS . SOME OF THOSE USES THEY HAVE LISTED FOR USES THAT REQUIRE DIRECTORY SERVICE REQUIRE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, RESTAURANTS OVER 1000 SQUARE FEET ALSO REQUIRE SEP THROUGH GROCERY STORES REQUIRE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, CONVENIENCE STORES WITH GASOLINE SALES ALSO REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

THEY WENT BACK AND REVISED THOSE USES AND THERE ARE SOME THEY DID GO AND AGREE WITH STAFF. STAFF THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPLICABLE WITH RESTAURANTS UNDER 2000 SQUARE FEET BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT ANY THING OVER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. WE STILL HAVE HESITATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EXPLAINED AT THAT MEETING ABOUT ALLOWING OTHER USES SUCH AS A GROCERY STORE AND CONVENIENCE STORE THAT SELLS CASTLING SALES TO BE PERMITTED. THOSE ARE SOME OUR HESITATIONS

[02:00:07]

IN ONE OF THOSE PROVISIONS IS THEY DID PUT ON PAGE 8 OF APPENDIX 1 THAT ALL NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS SITE PLANS ARE REQUIRED TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. THAT WOULD NOT BE THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, THAT WOULD BE THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS AND OTHER LARGER DEVELOPMENTS WHERE IT REQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL REVIEW. INTO HAS SET IN NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS REQUIRED TO BE APPROVED BY THEIR BOARD. BUT IT IS ALSO REQUIRED THE SITE PLAN TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SO THEY ARE REQUESTING SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR AS WE GO FROM THE WORKSHOP. THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE REGARDING ÃI'M SURE WE TALK ABOUT IT MORE LANGUAGE RESERVING THE AMENITIES AND ADDING MORE DETAILS TO THE TIMING OF THOSE AMENITIES. THE RECOMMENDATION YOU HAVE BEEN FROM YOU IS SOMETHING STAFF THOUGHT OF. WINDSOR MONIES WOULD BE REQUIRED.

WE WOULD BE OPEN TO DISCUSSION FOR ANY OF THAT CHANGING. AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT TO MAKE SURE THE DENSITY IS ITERATED IN THE WORKSHOP THAT COUNSEL WERE SPURRED BY THE DENSITY, THE DEVELOPER 2.7 Ã2.74 ONE UNITS PER ACRE DEPENDENT UPON IF IT IS INCLUDING OR EXCLUDING FLOODPLAIN. THEY WILL CLARIFY THAT TONIGHT. BUT IN THE WORKSHOP THEY WANTED SOME SORT OF DENSITY REFERENCE IN THE DOCUMENT AND SO STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND WHATEVER THE DOCUMENT AS WELL. IN BRIEF, WE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS.

THE REVISIONS TO TAKE THEM LONGER TO GET BACK TO US FOR THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE RECOMMEND DENIAL. WE DO STILL HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

MOST ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR, ZERO CONDUCT IN APOSITION . I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST YOU GIVE THE APPLICANT MORE TIME THAN THREE MINUTES TO PRESENT THE PROJECT AND PRESENT THE QUESTIONS AS WE THINK IT WILL

BE A MORE IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION AS REQUIRED. >> WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE TO

MAKE A PRESENTATION? >> GOOD EVENING. PHIL LOOK WITH PROPERTY COMPANY 3001 BLOCK STREET DALLAS TEXAS 75205.GOOD TO SEE YOU GUYS AGAIN.

WE APPRECIATE THE TIME TONIGHT. SORRY THAT WE WON'T KEEP YOU TOO LONG HERE, BUT WE HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT WILL CLEAR UP SOME OF THESE ITEMS. WE ALSO INCLUDED NOT A LOT OF PICTURES THAT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN BEFORE . IN ORDER IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I WILL LET AARON WALK THROUGH THE. IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE THAT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO SEE SOME OF THE RENDERINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE CAN WORK ON THAT. BUT WE CAN CLARIFY A LOT OF THESE ISSUES THAT I DON'T SEE THE ONE HE DID, BUT THE ONE HE SENT OUT LAST WEEK WE HAVE A LOT OF ANSWERS AND WE CAN DO THAT AFTER THIS WHOLE PRESENTATION.

>> GOOD EVENING FOR AARON WITH MESA DESIGN GROUP 2001 NORTH LAMAR STREET DALLAS TEXAS THROUGH THE LAND PLANNER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TO RECOGNIZE.

WE'VE BEEN HERE A COUPLE TIMES DURING PRESENTATIONS. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE. WE WILL GIVE YOU THE HIGHLIGHTS.

BUT WE ALSO WANT YOUR FEEDBACK ON SOME OF THESE ELEMENTS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT FOR THIS IS THE PRESENTATION HIGHLIGHTED WITH HANOVER PROPERTIES OFFICE WOULD HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE ON THE CORRIDOR AND THIS IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE WORK SESSION LAST YEAR.

LET ME JUMP INTO SOME OF THEIR EXPERIENCE IN THE REGION. OVERALL THE PROJECT WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS 967. THIS IS THE NORTHERN PORTION A DIAMOND J, THE LAND NORTH OF 287. THIS IS REZONING THAT PART INTO A NEW PD.

THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE MIXTURE USES. THERE'S A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT ALONG THEFRONTAGE OF 287 THAT WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 23 ACRES .

THERE IS AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY AND ON THE EAST SIDE FOR THE AIRPORT, ABOUT 43 ACRES.

[02:05:03]

TO THE DENSITY CALCULATION. WILL BE LOOKED AT WITH THE DENSITY WAS ON THE TOP WHEAT NETTED OUT THE FLOODPLAIN. REALLY EVERYTHING OUTSIDE THAT WE CAN DEVELOP IS 840 ACRES.

WE TOOK OUT THE NONRESIDENTIAL USES, THE COMMERCIAL AND THE INDUSTRIAL LAND.

SO YOU'VE 776 ACRES DEVOTED TO DEVELOPABLE LAND OUTSIDE OF FLOAT PLANE, OUTSIDE OF EASEMENTS FROM OUTSIDE THE NONRESIDENTIAL USES . WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES. WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED AND WE HAVE TOWNHOMES.

THE TOTAL OF 2125 HOMES IS ALL OF YOUR RESIDENTIAL. TOWNHOMES AND SINGLE-FAMILY.

2125 HOMES UNDER GROSS ACREAGE EQUALS 2.74 IN CHANGE. WE JUST SAID 2.8.

IF IT WAS JUST THE SINGLE-FAMILY COMPONENT, 1965 OFF THE SINGLE-FAMILY EXCLUDING THE 20 ACRES OF TOWNHOMES, IT'S ABOUT 2.6. TOTAL RESIDENTIAL ABOUT 2.8 UNITS PER ACRE. OVERALL MENTION THIS IS REZONING THE NORTHERN PROPERTY.

WE SHARED A LOT OF THE AMENITIES WE ARE PUTTING TOGETHER.

IT'S BASICALLY FROM THE CURRENT DIAMOND J LOOKING AT REDUCING THE DENSITY, DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPES WE ADDED LARGER UNITS. THE ONE THIRD ACRE PRODUCT AS WELL AS 40 FOOT PATIO HOMES. SO WE HAVE SIX RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPES.

IS OF THE SAME STUFF. SIX DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES. ON THE LEFT WE HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPE I. 35 UNITS. OF THE 1965 AT LEAST 35 OF THESE HAVE TO BE NEAR PRODUCT TYPE I. WHICH ARE IN MINIMUM LOT SIZES OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET. MINIMUM HOME SIZES OF 3000. RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPE II THREE OF THESE ARE SPRINKLED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT FOR THOSE ARE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 10,000SQUARE FEET . WE HAVE A MINIMUM 200 OF THOSE UNITS OF THE 1965.

HOMESITES A MINIMUM OF 2500 SQUARE FEET. THE 70 FOOT PROTOTYPE.

THESE ARE MAXIMUM 390 UNITS. WE PUT A MAXIMUM ON TYPES THREE, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX AND WITH A MINIMUM ON TYPES ONE AND TWO. THIS IS 8400 SQUARE-FOOT LOT THE MINIMUM SIZE OF 2200. RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPE FOR, THESE ARE TYPICALLY ABOUT 60 FEET WIDE. THAT HAS A MAXIMUM OF 620 UNIT , MINIMUM SIZE HOME SIZE OF 20 . MINIMUM SIZE OF 2000 SQUARE FEET.

AND WE HAVE YOUR 50 FOOT LOTS OF MAXIMUM 620 MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS 6000 SQUARE FEET WITH MINIMUM HOME SIZE 1800 SQUARE FEET. IF YOU REMEMBER, LAST TIME WE PRESENTED THE PLAN WE HAD THESE PATIO HOMES, WHICH ORIGINALLY THEY WERE SPRINKLED AROUND THE CENTRAL PROMENADE. WE ACTUALLY MOVED THESE OFF TO THE ADJACENT NORTH AND SOUTH ON THE CENTRAL GREEN SPACE. SO THESE ARE MAXIMUM OF 144. IS A ARE TYPICALLY 40 BY 110 FOOT PATIO. SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SAW AT THE RADIUM, THAT IS WHAT WE SHOWCASED THE LAST WORKSHOP WITH ALLIE PRODUCT FOR THE NICE FRONT PORCHES HAD A LITTLE BIT SMALLER LOT PRICKLY LITTLE BIT LESS MAINTENANCE. SIMILAR TO THE PRODUCT YOU SAW EARLIER ON ONE OF YOUR CASES. WE HAVE ABOUT A 20 ACRE PARCEL ON THE SOUTHEAST PART OF THE PROPERTY. THIS IS A NICE TRANSITION FROM THEIR WAY TO 87 IN THE COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE INTO THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS. WE ARE TALKING THIS EIGHT UNITS PER ACRE SOMEONE HUNDRED 60 TOTAL UNITS. ANIMAL LOT SIZES 2000 SQUARE FEET WITH A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF 1200.IS 160 OF YOUR 2125. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED WORKING WITH THE CITY ENGINEER ON ALL THE DIFFERENT ROAD SECTIONS IN THE ROAD TYPOLOGIES ARE IN AND YOU BROKEN THIS DOWN INTO SEVEN DIFFERENT PROTOTYPES THROUGH THE WHOLE POINT, IFYOU REMEMBER, WHEN WE COME AND WE WANT THIS TO BE AN INVITING COMMUNITY FOR ITS WE DON'T WANT HAD THESE BIG BARRIERS AND THIN WALLS . YOU WILL SEE HERE AS YOU DRIVE IN THE RED ROADS WERE ABSOLUTELY UNLOADED SO HE WOULD BE LOOKING ACROSS AND HOMES WILL BE FACING ONTO A GREEN BELT. AND SO YOU WILL BE DRIVING ON

[02:10:02]

WE PULLED THOSE 40S AWAY THROUGH THE 40S WITH THE LOTS FRONTED ON THE MAIN ENTRY DRIVE. WE PULLED THOSE 40S INTO A DIFFERENT SPOT AND PUT THAT AND RELOCATED THAT WITH THE 80 FOOT LOTS TO SEE THE LARGER PRODUCT 30 OF THE J SWING IN THE DRIVEWAYS ARE ACTUALLY SETBACK SO YOU DON'T SEE THOSE FROM THE FRONT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. IN THIS THE PROPOSED P.D. SAID OLD WOMAN UNITS MAY HAVE FRONT

ENTRY GARAGES. >> THERE IS A SECTION IN THERE THAT STIPULATES ALL TYPE I AND TWO PRODUCTS WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A J SWING. ALL TYPES FIVE AND SIX, I'M SORRY SIX AND TOWNHOMES FOR THOSE OF YOU PATIO HOMES FOR THOSE WILL ALL BE ALLIE.

AND THE WITHIN RESIDENTIAL TYPES, A MINIMUM OF 20 PERCENT HAVE TO BE J SWING.UT TYPES ONE AND TWO ARE TO BE JASON. BASICALLY THIS FLEXIBILITY ON TYPE III.

THERE ARE THREE POINTS THAT SPELL OUT THE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.

THAT IS SOME OF WHAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH. IN THE FRONT LOADED UNITS WOULD

REALLY BE YOUR PORTION OF YOUR TYPE III IN YOUR FOUR AND FIVE. >> THESE ARE THE ENTRY FEATURE . NONE OF THIS HAS CHANGED SINCE WE PRESENTED BACK IN THE FALL.

WE LOOKED AT THE ENTRY FOR THIS IS EXAMPLE OF HOW THE MAIN ENTRY OFF OF WALNUT GROVE, YOU WILL COME IN.HIS IS WHAT WE MEAN BY THERE IS A GREEN BELT. YOU'RE NOT HAVING DRIVEWAYS FRONTING ON TO THE MAIN DRIVE. BUT YOU WILL STILL HAVE THE SINGLE LOADED ROADWAYS.

WE ARE SPENDING MORE MONEY WITH PUSHING THE GREEN SPACE BACK IN THE BUILDING THESE TYPE WALLS AND ENTRY FEATURES.HAT WE'RE DOING IS HAVING THIS EXPERIENCE COME IN.

IS ABOUT THE SCREEN AND AMENIT . AS YOU DRIVE THROUGH YOU WILL BE LOOKING TO THE LANDSCAPE AND YOU WILL SEE IN THIS CASE 70 OR AN 80 FOOT WIDE LAW WHICH ARE TO OUR LARGEST THREE TYPES THAT YOU WILL BE LOOKING ACROSS THE GREEN SPACE AND YOU WILL SEE THE FRONT OF THOSE HOMES. WE WON'T HAVE THAT OPEN AND INVITING FEELING AS YOU COME IN. AND AS YOU TRANSITION IN THIS CASE, YOU TRANSITION INTO THE PROMENADE WHICH HAS YOUR SLIPPED STREET WITH YOUR LARGE CENTRAL PARK IN THE FRONT.

SECONDARY ENTRY IS THE SAME WAY. THIS IS THE ENTRY SOLITUDE 87 COMMERCIAL ON BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE A PROPOSED SITE ALLOCATED FOR BOTH SCHOOL DISTRICTS. THIS WOULD BE. AS YOU DRIVE AND THERE IS A NICE LARGE GREEN BUFFER AND YOU LOOK ACROSS THE GREEN BELT AND SEE THE FRONT OF THE HOMES.

AND THEN WE HAD OUR THIRD ENTRY ON THE NORTH SIDE AS WELL.IS THAT TRANSITION WHEN YOU COME OFF OF WALNUT GROVE OR 287 THAT ULTIMATELY IT TRANSITIONS INTO HOMES ON STREETS.

THIS IS THE CONCEPT, THE TOPOLOGY IS A CHARACTER WE WILL ESTABLISH WITH OUR HEART-SHAPED FUTURES. EVERYTHING FROM MAIN ENTRY FUTURE.

THIS WILL BE OUR SIGN WALLS AT THE PERIMETER, WHETHER SMALL NET ROTOR 287.

AND THEN AS YOU DRIVE IN, THE IDEA IS AS YOU COMMIT YOU START TO EXPERIENCE SOME OF THESE OTHERELEMENTS, WHETHER IT IS THESE LARGE TOWER COMPONENTS , THE SMALL PEDESTRIAN PERGOLAS.

THOSE WILL BE SOME OF THE BREADCRUMBS WE CALL IT AS YOU DRIVE AND START SEEING THESE FEATURES. THEY ARE ALSO PROGRAMMING ELEMENTS SO THEY ARE NOT JUST A TOWER YOU CAN LOOK AT THROUGH THESE ARE FEATURES THAT GET SPRINKLED THROUGHOUT OUR TRAILS OR THEY WILL BE PAUSING POINTS AND SO FORTH. IN THE LARGE CENTRAL PROMENADE HAS A LARGE PAVILION THAT WOULD BE BUILT IN THE FIRST PHASE AS PART OF THE AMENITY PACKAGE.

[02:15:03]

WE WANT TO HAVE IT VERY INVITING. IT'S LIMITED SCREENING REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF SINGLE ROADWAYS FOR YOUR LARGE 80 FOOT LOTS ARE FACING ONTO THE ROADWAYS AND FACING THE CREEK WAYS IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

IN AREAS WHERE WE DO HAVE THE TRANSITION, FOR INSTANCE OVER HERE WHERE WE HAVE LOTS BACKING UP TO THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL, WE HAVE ESTABLISHED SCREENING STANDARDS WITH OUR SCREEN WALL REQUIREMENTS, OR LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. HE WAS EITHER SCREENING ALONG THE TRANSITIONS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE COMMERCIALS. SOME OF OUR ENTRIES WERE WE TRANSITION ALONG WALNUT GROVE. WITH AN IDEA OF THIS IS GOING TO HAVE LIMITED SCREENING.

WE WANT YOU TO SEE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSES AS WE DRIVE THROUGH THIS PROJECT.

THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE MAIN FRONT ARRIVAL. WALNUT GROVE HERE.

THIS IS YOUR MAIN ENTRY. WHAT WE'VE BEEN CALLING THE CENTRAL PROMENADE.

THE AMENITY CENTER IS THE FINAL ENTRIES WERE YOU DRIVE IN. YOU ARRIVE TO THE PROJECT THROUGH THE CENTRAL PROMENADE AND IT IS SET THERE OVERLOOKING THE LAKE.

SO FROM A FACING STANDPOINT, YOU'RE PHASE 1 IS GOING TO BE OLDER GREEN SPACE AND AMENITIES UP UNTIL RIGHT HERE. THAT WILL BE YOUR LARGE PAVILION IN PHASE 1. AS WELL AS YOUR ENTRY TOWER IN YOUR ENTRY COMPONENTS IN YOUR GREEN BELTS AND YOU PHASE 2 WOULD ULTIMATELY BE YOUR AMENITY CENTER SITE HERE THAT HAS MULTIPLE POOLS, BATHROOMS AND DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. WE LOOKED AT FROM THE AMENITY CENTER IS THIS IS THE GORGEOUS LOCATION WHEN YOU ARE DRIVING IN ON THE ENTRY DRIVE. YOU WILL BE LOOKING FOR WHAT WE CALL THE GREAT LAWN READ THAT WILL BE A NICE BIG EVENT SPACE OR WE CAN DO, THE HOA CAN DO A LOT PROGRAM EVENTS FOR THE EASTER EGG HUNT OR PUMPKIN PATCH ETC. SO WE NESTLED WHAT WE CALL THE ACTIVE ZONES. THAT IS WHERE YOU HAVE SOME OUTDOOR BATHROOMS AND YOU HAVE YOUR POOL AND A PARKING LOT HERE. THAT SHOULD BE YOUR FIRST PHASE. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THE SECOND PHASE WILL BE WHAT WE HAVE CALLED EITHER ANOTHER POOL OR MAYBE A SPLASH PAD INSTEAD OF A POOL.

AND SO IT ACTUALLY STARTS TO STEP DOWN. THE IDEA IS WE NESTLED THE BUILDINGS AND PULLS INTO THE HILLSIDE SO WHEN YOU'RE SITTING THERE YOU CAN LOOK OUT AND SEE THE LAKE. AND THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE WE HAVE THE CLUBHOUSE, MINIMUM 2000 SQUARE FEET OF COVERED SPACE, SEPARATE PARKING LOT AND A PLAYGROUND.

SO YOU HAVE MORE OF YOUR CLUBHOUSE FACILITY ON ONE SIDE, YOUR FOOLS ON THE OTHER BUT EVERYTHING REALLY COMES ALONG WITH THIS GREAT LAWN IN THE MIDDLE, WHICH WOULD BE YOUR LARGE COMMUNITY SPACE. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THE AMENITY PROGRAMMING.

WE CAME UP WITH FOR TYPOLOGIES THREE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS.WILL SEE IN THE P.D. THERE IS A REFERENCE FOR COMMUNITY PARK AND THERE IS A MENU OF PROGRAM ELEMENTS WE HAVE TO BUILD.

WE DON'T WANT HAVE EVERY ONE HAVE THE SAME THING AND THEN THERE IS A SECOND LIST OF THESE ELEMENTS YOU HAVE TO TAKE THREE OF THESE FIVE FOR WHAT HAVE YOU.

THE IDEA IS THERE WILL BE A BASELINE THAT HAPPENS IN THE REBUILD THIS AND THERE WOULD BE SOME OPPORTUNITIES THAN FOR THIS ONE. WE DON'T WANT EACH ONE OF THE EXACT COMPONENTS. SOME OF THESE ARE NESTLED ALONG THE CREEK.

MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF USE. BUT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED ALL THOSE MINIMUMS AND MUST HAVES AND THEY HAVE LESS ABILITY FOR FUTURE PROGRAM.

WE OF THE FOR TYPOLOGIES FOR THE COMMUNITY PARK, THE PRIVATE PART CONTROL HEADS AND THEN THERE IS ALSO THESE GREEN ZONES, WHICH IS THE FOUNDATION OF THE MASTER PLAN.

WE CALL THESE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CORRIDORS. HE WAS HE A LOT OF THESE ARE BUILT ON EXISTING NATURAL FEATURES. THE PIECE RIGHT HERE IS WHAT FALLS ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY. IT IS AN OLD TREE LINE SO YOU HAVE SOME REALLY SIGNIFICANT TREES THAT HAVE GROWN IN THEIR. YOU INTEGRATED THE GREEN SPACE AND THE PLANS HE WOULD HAVE LOTS FACING ONTO THAT AND THAT WOULD BE LIKE A LINEAR TRAIL THAT WOULD SERVE AS AN AMENITY. WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE GREEN FINGERS OUT HERE WITH THE LAKE IN THE FLOODPLAIN STRETCHING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO ALL THESE PARKS ARE COMPONENTS THAT SERVE THE RESIDENTS BUT THEY CAN ALSO WALK DOWN AND EXPERIENCE THE NATURE AND THE OPEN SPACE AS WELL. AND SO THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF THE COMMUNITY PARKS IN THE P.D. THAT HAS A LANGUAGE SPELLED OUT HOW THE PROGRAM WOULD BE WITH EACH ONE OF THOSE TYPOLOGIES. FROM A FACING STANDPOINT, YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT LAST WEEK FOR THE PURPLE ZONE IS WHAT WE HAVE CALLED THE INITIAL PHASE WHO THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE BUILT THEY WON. ONE THE COMMENTS THE STAFF WAS WHEN THE AMENITIES ARE GOING TO COME ON BOARD WE ADDED LANGUAGE IN THEIR. EVERY OPEN SPACE THAT HAPPENS IN THAT BOUNDARY WILL BE DEVELOPED WHEN THAT HAPPENS OVER THERE WILL BE A SEQUENCE AND THEY WILL BUT THE ROADS IN THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE BUT THEN WHEN THEY DO THAT THERE IS

[02:20:03]

THIS PURPLE ZONE WILL BE DEVELOPED COHESIVELY AT ONE TIME IT ALL THOSE OPEN SPACES WITHIN THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED. SAME WITH THE RED ZONE IN THE BLUE ZONE, WHICH WOULD BE YOUR FUTURE PHASE AS WELL. WE ADDED THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE WITH CITY STAFF.

HERE IS A BLOWUP OF THE PHASE 1. WE HAVE WALNUT GROVE OFF THE MAIN ENTRY.

WE HAVE A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT HERE. WE ARE WORKING WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL ABOUT HOW WE CAN HANDLE 330 SO LOTS WITH ALL ACCESS COMING OFF OF WALNUT GROVE.

THE NEXT PHASE POTENTIALLY TO COME ON AFTER PHASE 1 IS WHAT WE CALL THE WISC PHASE.

THIS IS WHERE YOU HAVE ANOTHER 230 OR SO LOTS JUST EAST OF PHASE 1. PHASE I ENDS RIGHT HERE. THIS WOULD BE AN EXTENSION JUST OFF OF THAT AS WELL.

THIS IS ANOTHER EXHIBIT WE ADDED IN THAT ESTABLISHES THE PROGRAM.

PHASE 1 AMENITIES WILL BE EVERYTHING OUTLINED TO HEAR YOUR THAT WILL INCLUDE ALL YOUR ENTRY FEATURES, THE GREEN AMENITY ZONES. WE HAVE OUR LARGE TOWER, THE PAVILION AND THERE IS A LARGE CENTRAL SPACE AND AMPHITHEATER HERE AS WELL AND IN THE SECOND PHASE WILL BE YOUR COMPONENT OVER HERE INCLUDING THE AMENITY CENTER.

IN THE P.D. ESTABLISHED A TIMELINE FOR THE PHASE 1 AMENITIES SALES LANGUAGE THAT HAS TO HAPPEN WHEN THAT PHASE IS BEING BUILT. WE ADDED LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR THE AMENITY CENTER. OBVIOUSLY BUILDING THE POOLS AND CLUBHOUSE IS GOING TO TAKE MORE TIME SO THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THERE WITH THE TIMELINE AFTER A CERTAIN BUILDING PERMIT BUT THAT HAS TO BE COMPLETED. AND SO WE TRIED TO ÃWE ADDED THAT LANGUAGE IN TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMITMENT FOR THAT SECOND PHASE IS GOING TO BE YOUR POOL, YOUR INITIAL POOL WILL BE AT LEAST 2500 SQUARE FEET OF POOL AREA SECURITY WILL HAVE YOUR BATHROOMS, WHICH WILL BE YOUR OUTDOOR BATHROOMS SEPARATE FACILITY AS WELL AS THE PARKING LOT AND THE TRAILS THIS WILL PRINT THAT EXHIBIT SHOWCASED WHAT WE HAD FOR THE PHASE OF THE AMENITY CENTERS AS WELL. SO WE HAVE ÃANY QUESTIONS WE CAN GO THROUGH THAT.

WE ALSO CAN GO THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS FROM STAFFS REPORTOR ANSWER ALL YOUR

QUESTIONS . JUST LET US KNOW. >> ARE YOU STILL INSISTING YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS THESE VARIOUS THINGS? YOU DON'T WANT IT FOR THE RESTAURANTS IN THE STORES AND CONVENIENCE STORES? WHAT WE HAVE A DETAILED SITE PLAN WE ADDED ANDTHEREFORE THAT .

THROUGH THAT PROCESS THAT IS ONE WAY OF DOING IT. TO ME A DRIVE-THROUGH IS NOT THAT ÃDOESN'T NEED, IN MY OPINION, WILL HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON IT, IF YOU HAVE A DETAILED SITE PLAN PROCESS FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH, THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THERE AND YOU CAN MAKE YOUR COMMENTS ON THAT FOR THAT AS WELL. SUITE EVERY PAGE SAID THIS IS CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE. THAT IS A SECOND QUESTION IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT ARGUMENT, AND LOOKING AT THE DETAILED SITE PLAN RIGHT HERE

THAT SAYS THIS IS CONCEPTUAL AND TO CHANGE. >> IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FOR THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES HAVE TO COME IN WITH A SITE PLAN. IF THERE IS A GUY WHO WANTS TO BUY A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND HE WANTS TO PUT A BANK ON IT FOR THE CURRENT ZONING SAYS THAT HAS TO COME TO STAFF WITH A SITE PLAN AND THEN TO COUNSEL. TO GET APPROVAL FOR THAT SITE PLAN.

FOR THE NONRESIDENTIAL USES. >> ALL YOUR EXHIBIT ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE HAVE THE NOTE ON IT THAT THEY ARE ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE. AND THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THAT.> IS TO SEPARATEISSUE. MY ISSUE IS , AND PROBABLY MANY LEGALS INPUT WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT WHEN PROCURING THE PUBLIC IS TO WEIGH IN ABOUT ISSUES WITH NEW DEVELOPMENTS.

AND THAT WILL BE AN IMPORTANT PROCESS THEY HAVE HAD FROM THE FLYING J, WHICH IS REJECTED THE LOCAL WALMART IN THE PAST I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING IN DOESN'T GUARANTEE THAT SORT OF INPUT OF THE COMMUNITY ON THE FUTURE OF THE CITY. THIS WILL SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THERE ARE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT YOUR PROJECT FOR THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND I'M GOING TO PASS THIS OVER TO COMMISSIONER DARREN AND LET HIM ADDRESS SEVERAL OF THE WAY IT IS PRESENTED. IAM LOOKING FOR CERTAINTY AND

ABILITY TO CONTROL THINGS GOING FORWARD . >> TOLD ME AT THE SUB FIRST IN THE CONCEPTUAL SECOND. AS FAR AS SEP GOES, WE ARE FINE SATAN CASTLING STATIONS HAVE DEBIT SEP AND KEEPING STORAGE WITH OR WITHOUT THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.ESTAURANTS OVER 2000

[02:25:04]

I WOULD ASK FOR THAT. AND THOSE ARE THE THREE THAT WERE LISTED HERE FOR THE SEPS WE ADDED IN THERE FOR THE OTHER ONE, WE TOOK IT OUT IF HE DIDN'T IS A GROCERY STORE THAT

HAS HEAVEN SEP. >> THAT WAS ONE OF MY BIG CONCERNS.

>> THE WAY THIS HAS WORKED IN THE PAST WE HAVE USED THE SAME TYPE OF MODEL FOR THE P.D. IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS A PART OF THE DOCUMENT. WHEN WE COME IN TO STAFF, STAFF HAS TO LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT IS PART OF THE P.D. AND WHAT OUR PLANS LOOK LIKE AND THEY DETERMINE IF IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT IS PART OF THE PD.

IF IT IS NOT, THEY DON'T APPROVE IT. IF IT IS, THEY APPROVE IT.

THAT IS HOW THE CONCEPTUAL DRAWING CANNOT CHANGE WITHOUT COMING BACK TO YOU ALL AND ASKING FOR A VARIANCE IN THAT OR STAFF COMING AND WE DO A PHASE AND SAYING IT DOESN'T

MATTER CONCEPTUAL DRAWING.>> THE REASON I BROUGHT IT UP AS YOU WERE TALKING WAS BECAUSE IT SOUNDED AS THOUGH THE FACT THAT THERE WAS DETAILED SITE PLANS WAS BEING USED AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR SKIPPING THE SEP PROCESS YOU BROUGHT UP THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT IN THEIR. MY CONCERN IS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SIZE AND TIMELINE OBVIOUSLY IT IS GOING TO BE YEARS. PROBABLY BY THE TIME THIS IS DONE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ANYTHING LIKE WE ARE LOOKING NOW.

THINGS EVOLVE, THINGS CHANGE. WHAT I HAVE SEEN HAPPEN IS THROUGH AMENDMENTS AND CHANGES AND ADDITIONS AND SUBTRACTIONS, WE START TO REFERENCE NOT THE ORIGINAL LETTER OF OUR ORDINANCES PART OF OUR AGREEMENTS. BUT WE DO IS WE HAVE COME THREE OFF OF THAT NOW WE ARE SAYING WE ONLY WANT 20 PERCENT MORE OF THE ONE THAT WAS 30 PERCENT OFF AND BEFORE YOU KNOW IT WE ARE SO FAR OUT OF WHERE WE WERE WITH NO ONE EVEN KNOWS ANYMORE.

>> IT'S A PLAN DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE END UP HAVING THE PROBLEM ÃFREQUENT COMPROMISES BASED ON BEAUTIFUL PLANS WITH AMENITIES AND EVERYTHING ELSE WE GRANT COME FROM ISIS AND THE DEVELOPER COMES BACK AND SAYS WE CAN DO EXPERT AND WE WILL DO X -30 PERCENT.

>> WE WANT TO DO THIS AS WELL, WHICH IS AN AND OF AND OF ITSELF.

ADDITIONALLY FURTHER FROM WHERE WE WERE. >> FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK WAS ON THE BOARD FOR THE REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT DIAMOND J MORE THAN ONCE.

LONG AND HARD TOO MUCH DEBATE ABOUT THE FRONT ENTRYGARAGE IS AND WE CAME TO A COMPROMISE ON IT . AND SAY ESSENTIALLY I DID THE MATH AND IS LIGHT ANDCRUNCHING IT, YOU HAVE 200 TOWNHOUSES IN 20 PERCENT OF THE OTHER ONES ARE 120 UNITS .

WE HAVE 1800 HOMES Ã1700 HOMES THAT CAN A FRONT ENTRYGARAGE IS .

IS A SMALL PORTION OF US. >> TELL ME WHAT YOUR MATH IS. >> YOU ALL THE 80 FOOT LOTS, WHICH IS A MINIMUM OF 200 OF THOSE LOTS. THAT IS 200 DIFFERENT THAN ANY

OF THE 40 FOOT LOT , WHICH IS HOW MANY? >> 344.

OF ALL THE TOWNHOMES THROUGH 160. AVENUE 20 PERCENT OF WHAT?

>> THAT'S ANOTHER 60 DEGREES YOU ARE OVER 500 LOTS. THERE'S A LOT OF LOTS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE FRONT ENTRY FOR ALL THOSE LOTS ARE IN PROMINENT SPACES.

THERE ON THE FRONT OR MOST OF THE DRIVING GOES THROUGH. BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT COMING BACK AND ASKING FOR MORE. 2500 HOMES AND NEVER HAD ONE AMENDMENT. AND WE DID THAT. I'M NOT SAYING THERE ARE NOT PEOPLE THAT DO THAT, BUT WE DON'T DO THAT. YOU LOOK AT OUR DEVELOPMENT AND SEE THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT. LUMPING US IN WITH SOMEBODY ELSE BECAUSE OF YOUR PAST EXPENSE, I GET THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHO I AM, BUT I'M GOING TO FIGHT THAT BECAUSE THAT IS NOT OUR REPUTATION. AND WE DO NOT COME BACK AND ASK FOR MORE.

TO TAKE TIME AND SPENT OVER A YEAR SO FAR TALKINGABOUT THIS TO GET IT RIGHT , TO KNOW THAT WE CAN EXECUTE THE PLAN THAT WE ARE DOING AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK AND ASK.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS COME BACK AND HAVE HIM GO GOTCHA.BUT IF SOMEONE DID THAT, YOU SHOULD SAY NO. YOU MADE YOUR BED UPFRONT. YOU HAVE TO LAY IN IT AND IF YOU CAN DO WITH THAT YOU WILL BE STUCK WITH IT. AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY.

AND I HAVE SAID THAT. SO I DON'T LIKE BEING LUMPED IN WITH PEOPLE COME BACK.

[02:30:07]

THAT IS NOT OUR DEAL. >> ACTUALLY VISITED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ON SATURDAY I LIKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THINK IT'S A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD.

ALSO GREAT AMENITIES, THE HOUSE IS A VERY NICE. I'M NOT SURE THE TREND OF WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR OFF OUR ORIGINAL PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE LOOKED FOR THROUGH THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS, EVEN KIND OF THE LOTS. AND THINK THERE IS A PLACE FOR YOUR PROPOSALS. I LIKE HOW SOME OF THE FRONT ENTRY, THE DOORS THE BACK ENTRY GARAGE IS ALONG THE ALLEYS AND HAVE AN OPEN GREEN SPACE BETWEEN THE HOUSES SORT OF A COMMUNITY AREA. WE KIND OF APPROVED MR. JOBES PRESENTATION WITH THE SMALL HOUSES WERE THERE WAS ALREADY DENSITY. REALLY LIKED IT.

I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW WITH THIS PRETTY MENTIONED PLANNING FOR THE STAFF HAS A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE AT RIGHT NOW GOING FORWARD FOR THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF GRAY AREA IN A LOT OF ROOM TO MOVE WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS WITHOUT SUVS AND CONCERNS. THEY EXPRESSED THE IDEA THAT THESE ARE CONCEPTUAL PLANS AND WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND REVIEW THEM. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THE WHOLE PLAN GOING FORWARD. DO YOU THINK THIS IS ALL THE PLAN WE NEED OR DO WE NEED MORE

PLAN? >> IF YOU WANT, NO ONE WILL COME UP HERE AND DRAW CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND SAY I HOPE YOU APPROVE THIS BECAUSE I JUST SPENT $400,000 ON CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. THIS IS THE BEST WE CAN DO AND IT IS TIED TO THE PD.

THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS 300 Ã 3.5 ACRES. 3-POINT UNITS PER ACRE.

AND WE CAN DO A LOT MORE THAN THE CURRENT ZONING AND WHAT WE ARE DOING RIGHT NOW.

2165 CAN GO UP TO 2728, 2900 HOMES. A LOT OF THOSE CAN BE FRONT ENTRY. A LAW. SO WHAT WE ARE RESTRICTING IS THE FRONT ENTRY IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT IT CURRENTLY HAS WE ARE PUTTING THOSE OUTSIDE THE VISIBLE AREAS AND WE ARE RESTRICTING OURSELVES ON BUILDING MATERIALS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ENTERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT BACK IN DECEMBER. WE SAT IN FRONT OF COUNSEL AND SAID WE ARE GETTING READY DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT. YOU LIKE THIS PLAN? WE SAY WE LIKE THE PLAN.

RESTRICT OURSELVES ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT KNOWINGNESS.

WE TOOK A LEAP OF FAITH THERE ON THIS PLAN THAT EVERYBODY SAID THEY LIKED IN DECEMBER.

AND SO FOR PEOPLE TO COME BACK NOW AND CHANGE THEIR MIND, OF COURSE THAT IS THEIR PREROGATIVE, BUT WE'VE CHANGED ANYTHING. THE ONLY THING WE ARE ARGUING WITH ABOUT THE TEXT IS IN THE PD. SPECIFIC USEPERMIT .

I JUST ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. THAT'S FINE. CONCEPTUAL PLANS MOST OF US THE ABILITY TO PROVE THAT. WE WANT A VARIANCE, WE HAVE TO COME TO YOU WILL END ESCORTED FOR TO WANT A VARIANCE, WE LIKE WHAT WE DECIDED AND WE WANT TO BUILD THAT.

WE HAVE DONE A LOT OFPULMONARY GENUINE A NUMBER SO WE KNOW THE COST TO BUILD A PLAN SO WE CAN AFFORD IT , NOT JUST PUT SOMETHING ON A PIECE OF PAPER INSIDE WE MADE A MISTAKE ON THE ESTIMATE AND IT WILL NOT WORK. WE HAVE DONE THIS SEVERAL TIMES AND WE HAVE A TRACK RECORD.

AND I WOULD BEG OF YOU TO LOOK AT THE TRACK RECORD EVERYTHING WE HAVE ASKED THAT WE HAVE DON , I'LL GRANT. AND HER LONGEST. IT'S BEEN A GREAT PARTNERSHIP, IT'S BEEN A GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH STAFF AND THEY HAVE GONE WHAT THEYASKED FOR AND MORE .

WE WANT TO DO MORE THAN WHAT WE ARE SHOWING YOU. WE WANT TO DO MORE THAN THAT.

I DON'T THINK ÃBELIEVE IT UP TO STAFF TODAY SAY THIS, BUT THE DISAGREEMENTS ARE IN THE TEXT. IS ON THE PLAN. IS IN THE TEXT ON HOW THAT IS BEING WRITTEN TO TIME THE AMENITIES AND TO KEEP OUR FEET TO THE FIRE.

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO BUILD THAT? WE SAID WE WOULD START IN 400 PERMIT AND IT HAS TO BE DONE WHEN LOOK NINE MONTHS LATER. WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T DO THAT? YOU DON'T ISSUE MORE PERMITS FOR YOU ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER THERE IS YEAR THAT BUILDS WALNUT GROVE IN SERVICE ROADS AND MD FOR US TO GET REVENUE.

I HAVE EVERY ÃIF I DON'T DO THIS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE BONDS FOR THIS WHOLE THING CAN JUST BLOW UP. AGAIN, WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME GETTING THROUGH THIS AND PUTTING A LOT OF HARD WORK. I'M NOT SAYING IT'S DONE BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE ÃI WAS LATE GETTING THE DRAFT AT 11:00 TODAY FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS NOT A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.

THERE IS STILL WORK TO GO THROUGH, BUT TO ME IN DECEMBER THE PLAN AND COUNSEL LIKED THE PLAN, WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE PLAN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MOVING OF THE REQUEST, MOVE THE 40 FOOT OFF THE MAIN DRAG SUPPORTING THE LARGER LOTS THERE. AND WE DID THAT AND RESTRICTED AND CAME UP WITH TIMING OF THE AMENITIES AND WE DID THE BUILDING MATERIALS.0 PERCENT MASONRY ON TWO STORIES. 100 PERCENT ONE STORIES TO THE FRONT OF THEM HAVE TO BE DONE.

[02:35:02]

BASED ON THAT PLAN. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT? IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT HAS SIGNED ÃANY OTHER Ã DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC? DO I HAVE A MOTION, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSE. DISCUSSION? >> I THINK WHERE I AM AT IS OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW THIS IS COMING. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT.

I WAS IN THAT DECEMBER MEETING. I DID MAKE THIS MEETING THIS WEEK, BUT I WAS IN THIS DECEMBER MEETING ON I KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING AND I KNOW YOU GUYS CAN PUT A LOT MORE STUFF.

YOU CAN DO A LOT MORE THAN WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING NOW, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT NEGATES THE FACT THAT WE NEED AMPLE TIME AS A CITY TO GO THROUGH AND OUT THE ICE AND CROSSED THE TEASE.

NOT TO SAY WHAT YOU ARE PUTTING FORWARD IN RECOMMENDING IS NOT 100 PERCENT, LIKE YOU SAID.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR EXTRA AND YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SAY SORRY, WE MISSED THE BAR. BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T NEGATE THE FACT THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE LEGAL TEAM, WE NEED SOME MORE TIME. THAT'S WHERE I AM AT.

>> I LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT. >> I KNOW IT REALLY WELL. I DO KNOW YOUR PROJECT.

>> WITH THE REMOVAL I'M KIND OF LEANING TOWARD FAVOR OF JUST MOVING FORWARD, BUT IT IS ALWAYS BEEN A HARD ONE TO SWALLOW FROM THE VERY BEGINNIN .

WE WORKED THROUGH THE OTHER PLAN. A LOT OF WAYS THIS VISION IS BETTER THAN WHAT IT WAS. AGAIN, I THINK THE SMALLER LOTS ARE A CONCERN BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT, BUT IT IS A TOUGH ONE. MR. BATEMAN, ARE YOU?

I SAW YOUR MIC ON. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK TRENT WHERE ARE YOU ON THIS.

>> THAT IS A HEAVY ENDED QUESTION. IT HAS BEEN A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM BUT I THINK WE WOULD HAVE SOME OPEN QUESTIONS REGARDING WE DO HAVE THAT HESITATION BUT AS SOON AS WE GOT THEREVISION TODAY , WE STARTED GOING THROUGH IT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. AMONG STAFF AND TRY TO GO OVER SOME OUR CONCERNS.

IT IS DIFFICULT WITH THIS IS SCHEDULED TO GO TO COUNSEL NEXT WEEK AND I THINK WE HAVE DEFINITELY A LOT MORE TO DO IN THE ORDINANCE TO COMPLETE IT. .

WE ARE TORN. WE WANT TO SEE THIS MOVE FORWARD.

450 IS WHEN I PRINTED THAT. >> IT WAS AN APPLE AND ORANGES DISCUSSION ABOUT 2.5 UNITS PER ACRE.

DIDN'T GO INTO THE DENSITY IS BECAUSE ONE OF THEIR CONCERNS IS IF FOR SOME REASON WE HAVE MAXIMUM NUMBER YOU CAN HAVE AS I WALKED. .

THEY DON'T WANT THE DENSITY TO BE IMPACTED BY THAT. THEY DON'T WANT TO BE WHERE THEY ARE SAYING IT IS 2.8 AND IT HAPPENS TO BE 2.1 WHICH THEY ARE AT 2 TO 81.

THEY WANTED ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY. THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT NOT STATING WHAT THE OPEN SPACE OR DENSITY WAS IN THE ORDINANCE FROM OUR CONVERSATIONS.

[02:40:16]

SOUTH OF 287. BUT I THINK AS I MENTIONED, IT IS THE WAY YOU USE YOUR OPEN SPACE FOR THEY ARE USING MORE EFFECTIVE IN THIS THAN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAN THEY WERE IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT. HERE IS A QUICK BREAKDOWN OF THE ÃTHIS RIGHT HERE IS BASED OFF OF WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AND SOME OF THE AREAS OF SOME THE COMPARISONS.

THE PREVIOUS ONES IS 50 FOOT. THIS IS 40 FOOT WITH 20 FOOT TOWNHOMES.

THERE ARE DIFFERENCES. AS YOU WERE SAYING, WHAT IS YOUR GIVEN TAKE.

IS AT THE OPEN SPACE, USING THE LARGER HOMES ALONG THE MAIN THOROUGHFARES.

IT'S OPEN FRIDAY CREATES MORE OF A SENSE OF PLACE THAT GIVES THAT USE OF COURT ORDER AND WHAT IT IS CREATING. IT'S REALLY A GIFT AND TAKE.

>> I WOULD SAY IT IS LESS THAN THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT.

>> THE INFORMATION WE PROVIDED AND THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK MORE ON THAT.

>> I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO THE DENSITY PART, BUT I BELIEVE IT IS 2.9.

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT APPROVED IN DECEMBER. >> EXISTING IS 3.5.

>> THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS 2.9. THAT I DID WANT TO REITERATE, WE HAVE DOUBTED OUR EYES BUT HAVEN'T CROSSED EVERY TEASE. IS NOT A BLACK-AND-WHITE ISSUE.

WE ARE PROGRESSING ALONG THE SPIRIT ANOTHER THING LIKE WHAT BEN SAID, WE DO HAVE THE TERMS. THEY DON'T HAVE A FUNDING MECHANISM AT THIS POINT THROUGH THEY CAN CASH FUND ALL OF IT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IS THEIR DESIRE. MOTHER IS BONDING ISSUES THAT WE STILL HAVE TO GET THROUGH. THERE ARE MECHANISMS IN THERE THAT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY PERTAIN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT THAT WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE CHECKS AND BALANCES WITH IT FOR THE COUNCIL AND EVERYTHING .

>> THAT IS WHERE I GO INTO THE BLACK AND WHITE. WHAT IS BLACK AND WHAT IS WHITE. A LITTLE MORE TIME FOR THEM IS A LAW LESS THAN A LITTLE MORE

TIME FOR US. WE HAVE A WEEK. >> I WILL SAY, TRENT GOT THE EMAIL 11:00 WITH THE LINK AND I GOT IN ABOUT 11:45 AM WE HAD A CONFERENCE CALL AROUND 1:30 P.M. AND BY ABOUT 4:30 P.M. ÃI KNEW WE HAD THIS MEETING. AT LEAST I HAD MY PART DEDICATED TO GET THIS THING DONE. I HAVE VESTED INTEREST IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND SO WE HAD AT LEAST A REDLINE SCANNED THROUGH AND LOOKED AT AND INITIAL CHANGES MADE ABOUT 4:30 P.M., 4:45:00 THIS AFTERNOON.

>> WHICH I BELIEVE IS WHAT TRENT HANDED OUT. >> MY ASSESSMENT FROM THE TECH STANDPOINT, THERE'S A HANDFUL OF ISSUES STUFF IS PRESENTED HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO PRESENT WHAT WE ARE ON REGARDING THE TIMING ON THE AMENITIES. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ÃTHIS IS A QUESTION I HAVE READ YOU TALK ABOUT THE COMMUNITY PARKS LANGUAGE. THAT IS A BIG DIFFERENCE WHETHER THAT PHASE ÃWE DON'T HAVE THE SIZES OF ALL THE PHASES. IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE WHETHER THAT PHASE HAS 150 LOTS VERSUS 400 BLOCK. NOW YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A PERCENTAGE OF HOMES. THERE ARE SOME ISSUES LIKE THAT THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO ASSESS YET. BUT I DON'T THINK IT IS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME.

[02:45:07]

HAPPEN. >> THAT IS MY POINT. HOW LONG HAVE WE'VE BEEN

WORKING ON THIS NOW? SEVERAL YEARS. >> THIS LAST ONE, LAST AUGUST BASICALLY FORGET WHAT IS ANOTHER 30 DAYS. IF IT'S GOING TO COME BACK BEFORE US WHAT IS ANOTHER 30 DAYS BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A VOTE IN FAVOR OF PUTTING

THIS CITY STAFF AND LEGAL IN A BIND. >> THE DEVELOPER MAY WANT AN UP

OR DOWN VOTE. >> MY QUESTION IS IF WE VOTE IT DOWN, WHAT IS.

>> LET ME DO THIS. LET ME REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF YOU WOULD SPEAK.>> YOU MIGHT CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS? I AGREE IT IS A TEXT THINK. I THINK STAFF IS ON BOARD WITH THE PLAN AND THE SEP IS WE CAN GET DONE IT FOR THINGS LIKE THE POCKET PARKS AND PARKS, IT'S GOING TO READ ANY PART POCKET COMMUNITY, NEIGHBORHOOD. FORGET ABOUT THE 100 PERMIT DIVIDEND HAS TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN 180 DAYS AFTER THE ACCEPTANCE OF THAT PHASE. I DON'T CARE WHAT BUILDING PERMITS ARE. THEY WERE TIED TO THE AMENITY CENTER AND NOT THE PARTS.

NEEDS TO BE STARTED AND FINISHED BY A CERTAIN TIME, BUT WHEN WE ARE PLANNING A PHASE, THIS GOING TO BE PARKS AND THERE ALWAYS BE A PARKS IN THE FACE.

AND CAN'T DO THOSE THINGS. YOU HAVE DRAINAGE AND ALL SORTS OF EASEMENTS.HAT WILL HANDLE

THE PARKS. >> THAT'S NOT THE LANGUAGE YOU SAID YOU.

>> IT IS EASY TO BUILD AND WRITE AND ORDINANCE. >> 30 DAY TABLE.>> IT'S EASY IF YOU WERE COMING TO BUILD A STRAIGHT DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU WILL DOES EVERYTHING AND PUT YOUR HOUSES IN A GRID AND YOU BUILD BUT EVERYBODY CALLS A PLAN A ROOFTOP.

THIS TAKES TIME AND WORK. I THINK YOU HAVE DONE A LOT OF THAT.ONE OF THE THINGS WE PUSH FOR IS TO TRY TO DO THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT. SOMETIMES THAT TAKES A LITTLE RISK. WE ARE IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT WITH SOMEBODY WHO CAME IN AND SAID WE WANT 3 TO 5 UNITS PER ACRE. THAT IS WHAT WE THOUGHT ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO. I WANT TO BUILD AS MANY HOUSES AS I CAN ON THIS PIECE OF DIRT AND I DON'T CARE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE WALK OF.

>> DON'T INCLUDE ME. [LAUGHTER] >> I'M GOING TO FLOAT A MOTION AND YOU CAN VOTE FOR IT, BUT I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS BY STAFF WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT IN REGARDS TO THE NUMBERS THREE THROUGH FIVE BE CHANGED TO STATE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE WHICH CURRENTLY STATES PROPERTY WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT MAY BE DEVELOPED AND USED FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES WITHOUT THE GRANT OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT BE LIMITED TO NUMBER ONE, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND MAYBE DEVELOP A DRIVE-THROUGH LANE. THAT'S THE ONLY THING WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR IT OTHERWISE I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH BY STAFF. IT IS GOING TO BE FOR THROUGH Ã WELL, THREE THROUGH SIX.

BECAUSE I'M CHANGING THREE BECAUSE OF NOTALLOWING DIRECTORIES FOR RESTAURANTS .

ONLY FOR BANKS. WE HAVE SPENT AN HOUR ARGUING ABOUT DRIVE-THROUGH WAS THE CHICKEN EXPRESS ONE NIGHT. I HAVE A SECOND BY THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN.

ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CALL IT TO A VOTE? >> THE APPLICANT DID JUST AGREE

TO ACCEPT A 30 DAY PAYMENT. >> I WOULD AGREE WITHTHAT . >> CALL IT TO A VOTE.

THE BOAT IS CALLED.LL IN FAVOR. THREE VOTES BY AND ANY OPPOSED? SO THREE VOTES OPPOSED. MOTION DOES NOT CARRY AS I UNDERSTAND THE RULES.

WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. >> TABLE IT FOR 30 DAYS AND PUT IT ON APPLICABLE. FORTUNATELY WE HAVE OPEN AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO WE

DON'T HAVE TO REPOST IT. >> I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DARREN AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OSBORNE. ALL IN FAVOR?

[02:50:04]

[015 Review and discuss notices and procedures.]

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK. >> SORRY IF I WAS A LITTLE

SCARY. [LAUGHTER] >>DAN ALTMAN : I UNDERSTAND IT IS A BIG PROJECT AND WE ARE ALL SCARED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR COMMUNITY IN THE LONG RUN.

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS AN ITEM THAT THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO BRING ONTO THE AGENDA REVIEW AND DISCUSS PROCEDURES.

WE HAVE DECIDED STAFF ONCE A PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS EVERY NOTICE IN OPPOSITION PARTICIPATION FORM WILL PROVIDE EACH ONE YOU A COPY IT'S ABOUT CHANGE ONE OF YOU AND STILL KEEP VARIOUS OPEN RECORDS PRIVACY.

THAT'S WHAT WERE DOING RIGHT NOW. WE BROUGHT THE BEFORE THE MEETING BEFORE YOU TO READ EVERY FORM OF AUTHORIZATION FOR EACH ONE OF YOU TODAY.

ARE OPEN TO ANY SUGGESTIONS OF WHAT YOU WOULD THINK WOULD BE BEST.

GENERALLY WITH OUR NOTICES WE DO WITH OPPOSITIONAL FAVOR IF THERE'S ANY MAJOR ISSUES OR WHATEVER THE KEY POINT ISSUES WE TRY TO STATE THOSE ISSUES IN THE MEETING.

HAPPY TO PROVIDE COPIES OF EACH NOTICE YOU RECEIVE.> ARE WE GONNA TELL PEOPLE WE WILL BE THERE ENTIRE COMMENTS IN THE RECORD. OR CAN WE SUMMARIZE THEM?

>>.

STUFF TO SUMMARIZE THE COMMENTS. THAT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION WITH WHAT'S A SUMMARY AND A HIGHLIGHT AND WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE SPEAKER OR THE WRITER.

THE OPTIONS ARE EITHER SUBMITTED EARLY AND HAVE YOU ALL REDONE.

HAVE THEM SUBMITTED TO THE RECORDS OF THE PART OF THE RECORDING OR SIMPLY SAY THEY

BEEN SUBMITTED. THOSE ARE THE STANDARD OPTIONS. >> CANNOT ADD COMMENTS HERE SINCE I'M THE ONE THAT BROUGHT THIS UP. CROSSMACK.

>> I WOULD LOVE TO. LET'S DISCUSS IT. >> FIRST OF ALL LET ME SAY THIS. NUMBER ONE WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE CRITICAL OF STAFF.

THAT WAS NOT MY INTENT WHATSOEVER. SECONDLY I SAT HERE IN THAT MEETING AND SINCE THAT MEETING I'VE GOTTEN FEEDBACK AS WELL. THE THING THAT CROPPED UP TO ME WAS PROBABLY POLITICIANS RIGHT ON POPULARITY SCALE WITH SNAKE HANDLERS RIGHT NOW.

I THINK ANYTHING WE CAN DO AS A CITY WHETHER IT'S PNC, COUNSEL, STAFF OR WHATEVER.

WE CAN SHOW FOR MAKING AN EXTRA EFFORT THAT PEOPLE ARE HEARD AND NOT GET CRITICISM LIKE WE

[02:55:02]

THAT WASN'T THE INTENT OF THIS. I DIDN'T WANT TO CREATE EXTRA WORK FOR THEM.

I LIKE YOUR IDEA. IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO A MEETING AND SPEAK THEY'VE GOT 3 MINUTES. IF THEY WANT TO SUBMIT SOMETHING IN WRITING, WHY CAN'T IT BE 3 MINUTES? IT TAKES AWAY FROM STAFF FROM HAVING TO TRY TO INTERPRET SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHICH I TOTALLY AGREE CAN GET YOU IN A LOT OF TROUBLE.

I LIKE THAT IDEA A LOT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT WHEN PEOPLE DO COME AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN PROPERLY REPRESENTED WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE WERE WE COULD SAY YES MA'AM OR YES SIR. HERE IT IS.

WE DEFINITELY ARE CONCERNED THAT YOU ARE HEARD. WHETHER IT'S COMMISSION OR COUNSEL OR WHOEVER. THEY GET TO SEE THE COMMENTS OR HEAR THE IN PUBLIC OR EITHER ONE. THAT WAS A WHOLE THING. I WASN'T TRYING TO BE CRITICAL

OF EVERYBODY WHATSOEVER. I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO TRUST US. >>.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW. BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE CHANGES WE HAD TO MAKE ALLOWANCES FOR PEOPLE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS ONLINE IN LIEU OF ACTUALLY COMING IN AND ATTENDING A MEETING. BECAUSE YOU'RE HAVING IN PERSON MEETINGS RIGHT NOW TECHNICALLY YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS. IF YOU'RE HOLDING A MEETING LIKE WE ARE TODAY WE'VE GOT THE CHAIRS SCATTERED ABOUT MOST OF THEM GONE.

PEOPLE STILL THE OPTION TO COME TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SPEAK.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT'S A HARD LINE YOU NEED TO TAKE. I'M SUGGESTING AND I WANT YOU TO BE WHERE THE BASICALLY CONTINUING TO ALLOW AS AN OPTION FOR PARTICIPATION OF PUBLIC HEARING AND ONLINE EMAIL COMMENT IS IN ESSENCE A CONCESSION THAT FOLKS ARE MAYBE NOT WANTING TO GET OUT. THEY'VE GOT TO UNDERSTAND IT IS A CONCESSION AND THAT THIS BOARD IS WANTING TO ALLOW THAT CONCESSION IN LIGHT OF THE TIMES THAT WERE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW. TO THAT END THERE'S GOTTA BE A LITTLE BIT UNDERSTANDING ON THEIR PART THAT PAY, IT'S A CONCESSION WE STILL NEED TO DO THE BUSINESS AND TREATED LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IS SPEAKING. WHEN I SUGGESTED THIS 5 MINUTE THIS OTHER CITY ABOUT 5 MINUTES INSTEAD OF 3. WHICH COULD GET ALONG SOME NIGHTS. THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED THAT WHATEVER IS WRITTEN GO AHEAD AND READ IT ON THE RECORD AND THEY USUALLY JUST ROTATED AROUND STAFF. AFTER HANDED OUT TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND THEY WILL BE THEM ONLINE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT SEEMED TO BE A GOOD COMPROMISE TO ALLOW PEOPLE WHO WERE AFRAID TO COME TO A PUBLIC MEETING OR PUBLIC HEARING.

THEY CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE WHICH IS HOW WERE SUGGESTING. IT IS AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY AND IN A WAY THAT YOUR ALLOWING FOLKS WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE BE HERE BUT WON'T AND CAN'T AND DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY COULD FOR THEIR PERSONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH.

>> I BUDGE RATHER RESPOND TO A COMPLAINT THAT THEY ONLY HAVE 3 MINUTES AND NOT RESPOND BECAUSE

IT'S EITHER STATEMENT. >> WE HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE THAT WILL ADDRESS IT AND EVERYONE'S HAPPY WITH THE CURRENT POLICY. SO NO SUGGESTIONS WITH CHANGE I THINK WERE ALL GOOD WITH THAT. I THINK WE SOLVE THE PROBLEM. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS ON THAT? ALL RIGHT. I GUESS WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE A MOTION OR TAKE ANY ACTION. ANY COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS OR STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS? ALL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.