[1. Call to Order / Roll Call]
          [00:00:06]
          FOR OUR. ALRIGHT. GOOD EVENING. THIS IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18TH, 2025. PROSPER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER AT 612. 
          APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY. PLEASE NOTE FOR THE RECORD, ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER JACKSON, WHO INDICATED HE WOULD BE OUT OF TOWN THIS WEEK. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION. THOSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION MUST COMPLETE THE PUBLIC COMMENT REQUEST FORM LOCATED ON THE TOWN WEBSITE OR IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 
          IF YOU'RE ATTENDING IN PERSON, PLEASE SUBMIT THIS FORM TO THE BOARD CHAIR OR A STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING. WHEN CALLED UPON, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. ITEM TWO THIS EVENING IS A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SO IF EVERYONE WILL PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND 
          [CONSENT AGENDA]
JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS OUR CONSENT AGENDA. THIS EVENING. WE HAVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS THREE A AND THREE B. DID ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANYTHING OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION? AND IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS THREE A AND THREE B. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER HAMILTON. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE MULTIPLE SECONDS. I THINK COMMISSIONER CARSON WAS FIRST. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING COMMISSION CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS THREE A AND THREE B, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. AND THE MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 0. THANK YOU. 
          CITIZEN COMMENTS. THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON ANY TOPIC. HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO DISCUSS OR TAKE ACTION ON ANY TOPIC NOT LISTED ON THIS AGENDA. PLEASE COMPLETE A PUBLIC COMMENT REQUEST FORM AND PRESENT IT TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE MEETING. I UNDERSTAND WE DO HAVE SEVERAL COMMENT REQUEST FORMS THIS EVENING. I THINK PERTAINING TO AN AGENDA ITEM. AND AT THAT TIME WHEN WE GET TO THAT AGENDA ITEM, THAT WILL BE THE TIME TO COME UP ON THAT. BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE HAVE, ANY OTHER COMMENT REQUEST FORMS ON ANY OTHER TOPIC BESIDE THAT AGENDA ITEM THIS EVENING. OKAY. SO IF YOU DO HAVE THAT FORM, MAKE SURE TO TURN THAT FORM IN IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY, FOR THAT REGULAR AGENDA ITEM HERE IN A MOMENT. WE DID NOT MIND. WELL WE 
          [Items 4 - 6]
HAVE THE ONLINE. YEAH. IF YOU DID ONLINE WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU. SO LET'S MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. SO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN FOR A RESTAURANT. RETAIL BUILDINGS ON GATES OF PROSPER BLOCK E LOTS THREE R1 AND THREE R2 ON THREE ACRES. LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PRESTON ROAD, 425FT SOUTH OF FIRST STREET. THIS IS CASE D, VAP DASH 24 0142, AND ON THIS ONE I WILL NEED ON ACTUALLY REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX. THEY WERE TABLED AT THE LAST MEETING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO I'LL NEED A MOTION TO PULL THOSE ITEMS OFF THE TABLE. AND LET'S DO THAT. VOTE FOR ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX PLEASE. SO MOVED. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO PULL FOUR, FIVE AND SIX OFF THE TABLE. DO I HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HAMILTON. SECOND. SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HARRIS. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF PULLING FOUR, FIVE AND SIX OFF THE TABLE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. 
          AND THAT MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 0. THEN I'LL TAKE IT BACK TO TOWN STAFF TO TALK ABOUT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON. AS STATED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAVE THESE THREE ITEMS ARE TIED IN TOGETHER FOR THE GATES PROJECT BLOCK E, LOTS THREE R1 AND THREE R2. WE HAVE A SITE PLAN, A REPLAT AND A FACADE PLAN. WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE FOR ALL THREE OF THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS TO GO OVER WHAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER. PREVIOUSLY OUR LAST MEETING, THERE WERE SOME ISSUES WITH THE WITH THE SITE PLAN AND JUST THE WAY IT WAS LAID OUT, THE WAY IT WAS LAID OUT. AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE AT THE MOMENT TO GO OVER THE CLEAR UP ANY MISUNDERSTANDINGS FROM THAT SITE PLAN. AT THIS AT THIS TIME, YOU WANT TO BRING THE APPLICANT UP TO THE. YES, SIR. YES, SIR. IF YOU ARE ON THE. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS SCOTT SHEATH ON THE BLUE STAR LAND. THIS IS RACHEL CARUS WITH KIMLEY-HORN. SHE'S OUR ENGINEER. 
          AND SO I GUESS THE FIRST MATTER IS JUST TO FIND OUT IF YOU GUYS HAD ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS BEFORE I. THE CREDIT. YEAH, TO SET THE STAGE A LITTLE BIT. AND I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO OUR 
          [00:05:03]
QUESTIONS FROM OUR COMMISSIONERS HERE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WITH THIS IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          LAST MEETING, JUST A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND THE DRIVE THRUS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND SO I'LL KIND OF OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY OTHER DIRECT QUESTIONS OR MAYBE TALK IF THERE'S A DEFINITE NEED FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH. IS, IS THAT GOT TO BE THERE OR IS THERE ARE THESE SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'RE READING THIS, IT SAYS FOR A BANK AND RETAIL RESTAURANT. I MEAN, DO WE KNOW IF THAT'S A BANK? YOU MIGHT KIND OF GIVE US A BACKGROUND OF WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE, WHAT IS NEEDED, WHAT'S NOT NEEDED, ETC. SO, YEAH, A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS. AS YOU KNOW, THE LAST YEAR WE PUT IN THE DUTCH BROTHERS COFFEE SHOP DOWN IN THE SOUTH. PRIOR TO THAT, THE CAR WASH AND THE 7-ELEVEN HAD ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED. THIS IS KIND OF THE REMAINING PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THIS PARTICULAR TRACT. AS THINGS ARE GOING GOING AROUND IT, YOU KNOW, WITH CRAIG STREET BEING IMPROVED AND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE COMING UP THIS YEAR, WE JUST FELT THE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH THIS SITE OUT. SO THERE'S NOT JUST A GAPING CONSTRUCTION HOLE LEFT OUT THERE. WE ALREADY KNOW. WE LOOKED AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS ABOUT WHAT WOULD FIT THERE AND HOW THAT MIGHT LOOK. YOU KNOW, FROM ONE BUILDING TO TWO BUILDINGS TO I THINK WE LOOKED AT A THREE BUILDING OPTION AT ONE TIME AND SEEMED TO LAND ON THIS ONE AS THE MOST EFFICIENT USE OF THE SITE. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THESE ARE SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS. WE'VE HAD INTEREST FROM BANKERS. WE'VE HAD INTEREST FROM, YOU KNOW, YOUR TYPICAL RETAIL STRIP TYPE USERS FOR THE LARGER BUILDING. WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTRACTS ON ANY OF THEM AT THIS TIME. AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS SET UP WHAT WORKS THERE. AND SO SET IT UP, LIKE I SAID, SO THAT IT'S POSSIBLE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW THERE WAS THERE WERE QUITE A FEW I DID I DID WATCH A LITTLE BIT OF THE VIDEO. I DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE MEETING LAST TIME, BUT I DID SEE THE VIDEO. AND I THINK A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS INITIALLY SEEM TO BE BASED UPON THE FACT THAT THERE'S SO MUCH INFORMATION ON THE SITE PLAN THAT'S REQUIRED THAT DOES TEND TO CLOUD UP THE SITE PLAN AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO DISCERN WHAT'S GOING ON THERE AND EVERYTHING. SO WE PREPARED WE RACHEL PREPARED THIS CLEANER SITE PLAN DRAWING AND ACTUALLY PUT SOME DIRECTIONAL ARROWS ON THERE SO YOU COULD SEE HOW THE TRAFFIC FLOWS AND HOW IT'S ALL PLANNED OUT. I DID GO LOOK AT SOME OTHER SIMILAR TYPE USES IN DIFFERENT PLACES, AND OF COURSE WE'VE DONE SEVERAL AS WELL. AND SO NONE NOTHING THAT WE'RE DOING HERE SEEMS UNUSUAL. OR OR LIKE I SAID, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS COMPLICATED. IT IS A SMALL AREA, NO DOUBT IT'S A SMALL AREA, BUT WITH THE, YOU KNOW, WITH PEOPLE IN THOSE SMALL AREAS, THEY'RE THEY'RE LOOKING TO, YOU KNOW, THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT. THEY'RE DRIVING IN TYPES OF AREAS WHERE THERE'S LOTS OF RETAIL, LOTS OF DIFFERENT DRIVEWAYS COMING AND GOING. WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THAT THERE WAS ANY ISSUES WITH THE FLOW OF THE TRAFFIC AS IT LAYS OUT. I KNOW THERE WERE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS LIKE, WHERE'S THE ATM FOR THE BANK? HOW DO YOU GET TO IT? WELL, WELL, YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH TIME WE WASTED TALKING ABOUT ATMS. NOW THERE'S NOT AN ATM ON HERE. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S. BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE SIMPLIFIED PLAN FOR THIS EVENING. SO. SO WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, I'M LIKE I SAID, I'M I'M GLAD TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT, MIGHT RELATE TO WHAT WE HAVE HERE. QUESTIONS. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THE SIMPLIFIED VERSION HERE. 
          THIS IS ALL OVER. SOME QUESTIONS I HAVE HERE. THE SIMPLIFIED VERSION. THE DRIVE THRUS HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES HERE. WHEN I SEE THE SIMPLIFIED VERSION ON THE SO-CALLED BANK OKAY, DO YOU HAVE A SIMPLIFIED VERSION. SO THE STOPPING POINT BEING THERE IN THE BOARD LAST POINT CORRECT. ON THE SITE PLAN, THAT'S A COMPLICATED SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT SOMEWHERE OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SOUTHWEST IN THAT GREEN AREA. SO I'M STILL CONFUSED BY THIS SITE PLAN, WHERE'S THE SITE? RIGHT HERE. YOU NEED TO GO ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. THIS SAYS THAT'S WHERE THE LABEL IS LOCATED. BUT IT SHOWS DRIVE THROUGH STOPPING POINT RIGHT THERE IN THAT LITTLE GREEN AREA. WHEREAS ON WHEN IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING. SO I'M STILL CONFUSED. 
          YEAH, YEAH YEAH YEAH I SEE WHERE IT IS ON. WHAT I'M SEEING HERE IS POINTING IN THAT IT'S GOING TO BE THAT. NO. OKAY. SO I'M PROBABLY TRACKING THE WRONG ARROW HERE. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. 
          SO IT'S GOING OFF OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO AGAIN I'M JUST STRUGGLING WITH THAT. YOU KNOW I 
          [00:10:11]
THINK THE STILL THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE HERE IS THIS YOU KNOW IT'S SUCH A TIGHT PIECE OF PARTY. LET ME ASK THIS IF WHY WOULD WHY ARE THESE TWO BUILDINGS TO FILL IN THIS SPOT WITH? ONE BUILDING USED TO BE A MORE APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS. WELL, WE HAVE A GREAT CHANGE, A GREAT DIFFERENTIAL ON THE SITE. AND THAT CREATES A NEED YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE GRADES IN THE BUILDING. AND SO IT'S A LOT EASIER TO CHANGE THE GRADE WHEN YOU SEPARATE THE BUILDING. AND WHAT IT DOES WITH TWO BUILDINGS THOUGH IT DOES CREATE THIS PASS THROUGH IS GOING TO BE. EASY PREY. WHICH ONE? WHICH CONCERNS ME. SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED, YOU KNOW, I THINK I THINK TO ME THAT'S THE MAIN CONCERN I HAVE. LET'S JUST DRIVE THROUGH AND USE THAT FASTER GROWTH. SO. AND IT'S NOT A GIVEN YOU, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH IS IT. 
          TODAY. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A GIVEN. IF YOU KNOW IF A DIFFERENT USER COMES ALONG IT'S NOT A BANK. YEAH. IT'S JUST THE CLOSED OFF OKAY. OR IT COULD BE TAKEN OUT. MATTER OF FACT, IF SOMEBODY COMES ALONG BEFORE WE BUILD IT AND WE KNOW THEY DON'T NEED IT, THEN YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK. SO JUST CUT TO THE CHASE. IF, IF THE DRIVE THROUGH WAS ELIMINATED ON THAT, THAT WHAT DOES THAT DO TO YOU OR WHERE Y'ALL ARE AT. I MEAN IS THAT. NO, I GUESS I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE I KNOW YOU GUYS MIGHT NOT SEE HOW WHETHER OR NOT HOW IT WOULD BE SERVICED, BUT IF WE FEEL IT IS SERVICEABLE. I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW WHAT'S THE ISSUE WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH? I THINK THE ISSUE IS WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING VISUAL ON PAPER, AND IT MAY NOT COME OUT TO BE THAT AND BE SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT, THAT THAT'S WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH THE UNKNOWNS. I THINK IT'S A COMMUNICATION ISSUE. I THINK IT'S COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF TO THE COMMISSION ON THIS CASE AND VICE VERSA. WE'RE LOOKING AT IMAGES THAT IN THE END, AND I THINK THAT BECOMES HARD TO DECIPHER WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WELL, TO TWO QUESTIONS, I GUESS, BECAUSE BECAUSE I'M WITH THE CHAIR HERE, IF, IF THAT WAS GOING TO BE WHATEVER, USE FOOD OR WHATEVER USE THE LEFT BUILDING BECOMES, LET'S JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE. I WILL MAKE THAT CLEAR. CANNOT BE FOOD WITHOUT COMING BACK FOR AN ISSUE. OKAY, OKAY. DRY CLEANING, A BANK, WHATEVER THE THINGS ARE THAT YOU CHOOSE TO USE LIKE THAT. OKAY, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING. HOW DO YOU SERVICE A DRIVE THROUGH WHEN YOU'RE GOING OPPOSITE TO THE WHERE THE DRIVE WOULD BE? IF IT'S A TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A BANK, I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU KNOW WHICH BANK YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH, BUT YOU KNOW BANKS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SEE THE PERSON. THEY JUST HAVE VACUUM TUBE NEXT TO YOUR CAR WITH A SPEAKER, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE A TV SCREEN THAT NOTHING MORE THAN THAT CAN DO WITH THE SPEAKER AND ALL THAT, YOU KNOW. SO YOU DON'T HAVE THAT FACE TO FACE. YEAH, YEAH, IT WAS DRIVE THROUGH. IT WOULD BE ON YOUR DRIVER'S SIDE, PUT IT THAT WAY. SO IF YOU DID THAT, WHETHER THAT WOULD BE A, AN ATM OR A TELLER, WHATEVER THE SITUATION WOULD BE. DO WE HAVE ROOM THAT YOU WOULD STILL GET YOUR ESCAPE LANE? AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE STAFF HAS STUDIED THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THERE. 
          AND OR THEN WOULD IT BE COVERED. AND DOES THAT REQUIRE SHOULD THAT BE ON A SITE PLAN? IF THERE'S A CANOPY OR A COVER THAT'S ESPECIALLY OVER A DRIVE THROUGH AS OPPOSED TO LIKE AN AWNING? I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE WE'RE KIND OF HUNG UP. IS IT JUST IT DOESN'T FEEL ACCURATE TO WHAT YOU WANT TO BUILD. LIKE WE WANT TO GET YOU TO GET YOU TO IT. YES. WE JUST IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE ALIGNED TO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GO BUILD. AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE YOU'RE WORKING A LITTLE BIT. YOU DON'T HAVE YOUR TENANT YET, RIGHT? YOU'RE KIND OF WORKING SPECULATIVELY. AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING BASED OFF OF WHAT WE KNOW ON PREVIOUS DESIGNS. OKAY. 
          SO THOSE THOSE ARROWS, THE WAY THAT THEY ARE DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN IS FULLY INTENDED FOR THAT DRIVE THROUGH TO WORK FROM LEFT TO RIGHT ON THE PAGE. YES. SO A QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION, I SUPPOSE, FOR THE STAFF FROM OUR WORK SESSION. SO IF THAT WERE THE WERE THE CASE WHERE THIS IS A BANK DRIVE THROUGH WITH A BASICALLY AN ATM ON THE LEFT IN THE MIDDLE, WOULD THAT DRIVE THROUGH BE APPROVED ULTIMATELY? I CAN'T REALLY ANSWER THAT WITHOUT SEEING WHAT WHAT THE END 
          [00:15:07]
PRODUCT WAS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. I WOULD SAY POSSIBLY, YES. I MEAN THAT THAT KIND OF CONFIGURATION IS SIMILAR TO A COUPLE OF THE BANKS AROUND TOWN, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT HAVE THE SHOOTS, SO TO SPEAK, WHERE YOU'RE ON ONE SIDE AND IT GOES ACROSS THE TOP IN THE TUBE AND, AND THEY DON'T ALL HAVE CANOPIES. SO IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT THE FINISHED PRODUCT IS. 
          AND THAT I THINK IS PROBABLY A FUNCTION OF WHO THE BANK ACTUALLY IS. YEAH, THAT THAT WAS MY LARGEST ISSUE WITH THE SITE PLAN WAS IF, IF THAT DRIVE THROUGH WOULD NOT ACTUALLY BE APPROVED TO CODE TO FLOW THAT DIRECTION, MY ISSUE WAS US APPROVING SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW WOULD NOT BE APPROVED. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A LITTLE MORE NUANCED THAN SIMPLY A BLACK AND WHITE ISSUE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS OR COMMENTS? I APPRECIATE APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE AND THE EXTRA INFORMATION. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BE DIFFICULT BY ANY MEANS, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THESE SHOULD GO THROUGH A LITTLE, LITTLE SMOOTHER THAN MAYBE HERE THEY DID ON THIS ONE. I THINK IT'S JUST THE DESCRIPTIONS AND THE PICTURES AND EVERYTHING, AND KNOWING WE'RE DOING A SPECULATIVE CASE AND JUST AND WE, YOU KNOW, LAST MEETING WE PROBABLY HAD SOME INCORRECT INFORMATION TOO AT THAT TIME. SO. NO, WE APOLOGIZE. 
          WE LIKE I SAID, THIS IS THESE ARE PURELY SPECULATIVE BUILDINGS. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CREATING. THE MARKETING THAT OF THE BANK BUILDING OR MARKETING IS A DIFFICULT RESTAURANT RETAIL STRIP. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE SETTING THEM UP, HOPING TO SET THEM UP FOR SUCCESSFUL, YOU KNOW, USERS IN THAT CATEGORY. THIS IS ALL GREAT FOR OUR ZONING ALLOWANCES. YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT REQUESTING. SO WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T EXPECT THIS WOULD BE A BIG ISSUE. IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT SITE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO WITH, YOU KNOW, SMALL SIZE OR NOT OR NOT FROM THE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF GOOD USE OF SPACE. AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THIS ONE WORK. AND LIKE I SAID, YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WORK WHERE IT CAN WORK. AND THAT'S NOT ALWAYS GOING TO BE ABSOLUTELY I APPRECIATE IT I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. ONE OTHER QUESTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF THIS ONE, IF THE BUILDING ON THE RIGHT IS A RESTAURANT, I ASSUME THAT HAS A HIGHER PARKING LOAD THAN TRADITIONAL RETAIL OR SIMILAR TO RETAIL. HAS THAT BEEN FACTORED INTO THIS SITE PLAN? AND THE COUNTS MATCH THE INTENDED USES? YES. OKAY, I ASSUME SO. I JUST WANTED TO ASK TO MAKE SURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS. YOUR QUESTIONS. ON THE I'M NOT I WANT TO MAKOLLOW WHERE YOU WERE WHEN YOU WERE TALKING. YOU WERE SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY BEING COULD IT BE SWITCHED OR WOULD IT BE OR IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE? YEAH. YES, SIR. I THINK IT DID ANSWER MY QUESTION. I MEAN, IN OUR WORK SESSION WE WERE DISCUSSING THAT THAT FLOW BECAUSE IN OUR INITIAL MEETING WE HAD THOUGHT THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN ATM ON THE BUILDING AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT WAS GOING TO WORK WHEN THE DRIVER'S SIDE IS ON THE LEFT. SO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH CODE OR NOT WAS WAS MY QUESTION. 
          BECAUSE IF I KNOW THAT SOMETHING'S NOT GOING TO BE APPROVED OR THERE'S NOT THE CODE, I'M GOING TO HAVE AN ISSUE VOTING FOR A SITE PLAN JUST ON PRINCIPLE. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NUANCED AND THAT IT WOULD BE LOOKED AT. BUT YOUR YOUR PRESUMPTION IS THAT IF THERE IS A DRIVE THERE, THERE WILL BE SOMETHING ON THE LEFT OF THE CAR. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. 
          THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR THE LOVE. YOU HAVE TO REQUIRE THAT YOU ALWAYS HAVE A PASSENGER WITH YOU TO GO TO THE BANK. SO ANY QUESTIONS? I THINK I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH QUESTIONS. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ON ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX? DEPENDING ON HOW OUR MOTION HERE DO WE NEED TO TACKLE THESE ONE AT A TIME OR CAN THEY ALL GO TOGETHER. IF YOU ALL ARE COMFORTABLE AND DON'T NEED ANY MORE, EXCUSE ME ANY MORE INFORMATION ON FIVE AND SIX? I'M FINE IF YOU WANT TO DO THEM TOGETHER. BECAUSE THE FACADE PLAN ON ITEM SIX THAT IF THOSE PICTURES ARE THAT'S IT'S JUST GOING TO LOOK LIKE THAT, RIGHT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR YOUR PLAYER. WELL WE'RE GOOD. YEAH. THANK YOU. WE'RE I'M. Y'ALL ARE DONE WITH US. I'LL TAKE IT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONERS ON REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR IF WE'RE READY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? ON THOSE ITEMS? MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND 
          [00:20:01]
SIX. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER BLANSETT TO APPROVE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX. DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER. FEAR ON THAT. ALL COMMISSIONERS IN FAVOR OF APPROVING REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS FOUR, FIVE AND SIX, SUBJECT TO TOWN STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. WE'VE GOT FOUR IN APPROVAL. ALL THOSE AGAINST, TWO AGAINST. PLEASE NOTE FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER KARSON AND COMMISSIONER HAMILTON ARE AGAINST THOSE. BUT THE MOTION TO APPROVE FOUR, FIVE AND SIX IS APPROVED 4 TO 2. NEXT UP IS REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 
          [7. Conduct a Public Hearing and consider and act upon a request for a Planned Development for Townhomes on H. Jamison Survey, Abstract 480, Tract 1, on 8.3± acres, located on the north side of Richland Boulevard and 680± feet east of La Cima Boulevard. (ZONE-24-0018)]
NUMBER SEVEN. THIS ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOMES ON H. JAMISON SURVEY ABSTRACT FOR 12 TRACT ONE ON 8.3 ACRES. LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RICHMOND BOULEVARD, 680FT EAST OF LASEMA BOULEVARD, THIS IS CASE ZONE DASH 20 4-0018. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION. THANK YOU. 
          CHAIR. SO, MIKE, CHAIRMAN DANIEL SAID THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOMES ON THIS PROPERTY. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA. THE PROPOSAL IS TO CONSTRUCT 53 TOWNHOMES WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE ON 8.3 ACRES. THE HISTORY OF THIS TRACT IS. IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT TWO WITH THE BASE ZONING OF COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. 
          HERE IS THE FUTURE LAND USE EXHIBIT. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS WHERE THE TRACT IS. AND SO IT IS THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THIS IS US HIGHWAY 380 DISTRICT AND OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. THE US HIGHWAY 380 DISTRICT RECOMMENDS A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT USES SPECIFICALLY FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. THIS DISTRICT RECOMMENDS THEM TO BE MEDIUM OR HIGH DENSITY USES TO SERVE AS A BUFFER BETWEEN MORE INTENSE ACTIVITY ALONG US HIGHWAY 380 AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS. TO THE NORTH. YOU CAN SEE HERE. HERE IS THE CURRENT ZONING. SO EVERYTHING HERE SURROUNDING IT IS PD TWO, INCLUDING THE TRACT IN QUESTION TO THE NORTH. IT IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SIX, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY. AND HERE IS KIND OF JUST A CHART SHOWING ALL OF THAT. 
          HERE IS AN EXHIBIT OF THE LAYOUT FOR THIS AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE THE TOWNHOMES ARE HERE WITH THE DRIVE RUNNING THROUGH THERE. THERE'S CLUBHOUSE THERE AND OPEN SPACE ON THE EASTERN SIDE. SO FOR DENSITY, THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR TOWNHOME DISTRICT REQUIRES A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF TEN UNITS PER ACRE. THIS PROPOSAL IS A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE. THE DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR THIS SO THAT TYPICALLY FOR TOWNHOMES, THE. THE RANGE IS TWO RANGES, 3 TO 8 UNITS. EXCUSE ME. THIS ONE, THEY'RE PROPOSING 2 TO 6 UNITS TO BE TOWNHOMES. THE FRONT SETBACK IS TYPICALLY 25. IN THIS DISTRICT IT WOULD BE TEN. THE SIDE SETBACK UNIT TO UNIT IS ZERO. AND BOTH THE SIDE SETBACK AT THE END OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS TEN. 
          THIS WOULD BE FIVE ADJACENT TO A STREET. IT WOULD BE 15 FOR EITHER ONE. THERE IS NO REGULATION FOR A SIDE SETBACK ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY FOR TOWNHOMES, BECAUSE IT INCLUDES THAT AS RESIDENTIAL AND THERE'S NO SETBACKS FOR RESIDENTIAL TYPICALLY. BUT IN THIS PD, THERE WOULD BE A TEN FOOT SETBACK BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH AND THESE TOWNHOMES. THE REAR SETBACK WOULD BE 20FT. THERE'S ITS REAR ENTRY FOR THESE TOWNHOMES. THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE STRUCTURES WOULD BE TEN INSTEAD OF 20. TYPICALLY, IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE LOT AREA. THE LOT AREA FOR THESE WOULD BE 1700 AS OPPOSED TO 2500. AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH WOULD STAY THE SAME AT 20. THE MINIMUM LOT DEATH WOULD DECREASE A LITTLE BIT BY 15 WOULD BE 85 INSTEAD OF THE TYPICAL 100. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD STAY THE SAME AT 2.5 STORIES LESS THAN 40FT, AND THE LOT COVERAGE WOULD INCREASE BY 10% FROM 55 TO 65. THESE ARE THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES CURRENTLY ALLOWED ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TWO. SO THIS IS EVERYTHING THAT'S ENTITLED TO GO THERE. CURRENTLY. IF THE ZONING STAYED THE SAME. IT IS A LONG LIST OF USES, SO I WON'T SPECIFY EACH ONE. THEY WERE IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT I'LL JUST LET YOU GUYS READ THROUGH THEM AS I SCROLL THROUGH HERE. 
          [00:25:13]
IT'S. THAT'S THE LAST ONE. OKAY. SO ALL OF THOSE USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT CURRENTLY. SO ALL OF THOSE ARE ENTITLED TO GO ON THAT TRACT. IF THEY MET ALL OF OUR STANDARDS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE WITH THIS PROPOSAL, THE ONLY USE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THAT TRACT IS TOWNHOMES FOR THE BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN FOR THE BUILDING MATERIALS ALLOWED FOR THE TOWNHOMES. THESE ARE THE MATERIALS ARCHITECTURAL CONCRETE BLOCK, CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL, CLAY, BRICK, GRANITE. MARBLE, METAL, STONE, MANUFACTURED AND NATURAL STUCCO. SO PRIMARILY MASONRY MATERIALS FOR THE BUILDING DESIGN. CEMENTITIOUS CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS MAY CONSTITUTE UP TO 20% OF THE ARE. FOR STORIES OTHER THAN THE FIRST STORY, ANY PORTION OF THE UPPER STORY, EXCLUDING WINDOWS THAT FACES HIKE AND BIKE TRAILS, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PARKS OR STREETS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 80% MASONRY. THE EXTERIOR CLADDING OF CHIMNEYS SHALL BE BRICK STONE, EITHER MANUFACTURED OR NATURAL, OR STUCCO. WHEN I SAY STUCCO, IT'S THE THREE STEP STUCCO. THREE CEMENT, STUCCO. IT'S NOT THE TYPICAL. IT'S MORE OF A MASONRY MATERIAL. CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS MAY BE USED FOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, INCLUDING BAY WINDOWS, CHIMNEYS, NOT A PART OF AN EXTERIOR WALL, COLUMNS, GARAGE DOOR HEADERS, ROOF DORMERS, WINDOW BOX OUTS, OR OTHER ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, AND METAL SURFACES WILL NEED TO BE AFFIXED FOR THE ROOFING. STRUCTURES WILL HAVE A CEMENT SLASH, CONCRETE TILE, CLAY TILE COMPOSITION, SLATE OR STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF. METAL ROOF SHALL BE NON REFLECTIVE COLORS. 
          WHICH SHINGLES ARE PROHIBITED? A MINIMUM OF 65% OF THE SURFACE AREA OF THE COMPOSITION. ROOFS SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM ROOF PITCH OF THREE BY 12, AND A MINIMUM OF 75% OF THE SURFACE AREA OF CEMENT, TILE, CLAY, TILE, CONCRETE, TILE, SLATE OR SLATE PRODUCTS, OR STANDING SEAM METAL SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM ROOF PITCH OF THREE BY 12. HERE, KIND OF SOME EXHIBITS OF JUST HOW THESE WOULD LOOK. I THINK THAT'S THE CLUBHOUSE. FOR LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE. 
          ALONG RICHLAND BOULEVARD. THERE WILL BE A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE EASEMENT, OR MUSE SPACE, ADJACENT TO THE TOWNHOME UNITS THAT ARE FRONTING ON RICHLAND. THERE'S A TREE REQUIREMENT, SO ALL TREES ON THE SITE MUST BE AT LEAST THREE CALIPER INCHES. A MINIMUM OF 11 CALIPER INCHES ARE REQUIRED ON EACH LOT, AND A MINIMUM OF TWO TREES THAT ARE FOR CALIPER INCH MINIMUMS SHALL BE REQUIRED IN THE FRONT OF ALL LOTS, AND SO THE REMAINING THREE INCHES FROM THAT 11 CAN BE LOCATED ANYWHERE EITHER ON THE FRONT OR THE BACK. AND THEN FOR SHRUBS, ALL REQUIRED SHRUBS MUST BE AT LEAST THREE GALLONS, AND A MINIMUM OF 20 SHRUBS SHALL BE PLANTED IN THE FRONT YARD OF ALL LOTS. FOR THE OPEN SPACE, 20% OF THE DEVELOPMENT HAS TO BE OPEN SPACE. FIVE FOOT TRAILS WILL BE PROVIDED THROUGH THE MUSE AREAS, THE OPEN SPACE AND AROUND ANY RETENTION PONDS, AND THERE WILL BE A COMMUNITY CLUBHOUSE FOR RESIDENTS IN ONE OF THE OPEN SPACE AREAS. AND SO THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. SO YOU SEE KIND OF HOW THE TRAILS GO AROUND THERE. AND THERE'S THE TENSION AND THERE'S THE CLUBHOUSE AND ALL THE LANDSCAPING IN THE FRONT ALONG RICHLAND FOR PARKING. 
          THEY'RE REQUIRED FOUR SPACES PER UNIT, TWO IN AN ENCLOSED GARAGE AND THEN TWO IN A DRIVEWAY, AND THEN ADDITIONAL PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED ON THE INTERNAL STREET, ON THE INTERNAL RESIDENTIAL STREET, ON STREET, AND THEN IN THE COMMUNITY CLUB AREA. IF YOU CAN SEE, TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT, THERE'S SOME. HERE. THEY ADDED SOME OFF STREET REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING FOR THAT AMENITY AREA. IN CONCLUSION, NOTICES WERE SENT OUT FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7TH. WE HAVE RECEIVED 18 LETTERS OF OPPOSITION UP TO DATE. I THINK EIGHT WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AND THROUGH EMAIL AND PROVIDED TO YOU WAS PROBABLY THE REMAINING TEN. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS CASE DUE TO THE REMOVAL OF THOSE USES. GETTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THIS PROPOSAL. CHAIR. PROCEDURALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK ME QUESTIONS. FIRST, I SAW THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WE DO HAVE A BUNCH OF CITIZENS HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAPPEN, I THINK ABSOLUTELY. LET'S LET'S ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AS WE NORMALLY DO, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT OPEN OUR PUBLIC HEARING, HAVE OUR APPLICANT COME UP AND THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH THOSE QUESTIONS. SO FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS POINT. YES. COMMISSIONER HAMILTON. THE PARKING CAN YOU SHOW WHERE VISITORS WOULD PARK. I KNOW YOU SAID IT'S ON STREET 
          [00:30:06]
BUT I THINK THE REAR ENTRY GARAGE IS. SO IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S MUCH ROOM FOR PEOPLE TO PARK FROM. I WISH I COULD ZOOM IN ON THIS, SO LIKE THESE ARE RARE ENTRY, BUT THERE ALSO. SO THERE HAVE TO BE TWO SPACES FOR AN ENCLOSED GARAGE AND THEN AT LEAST TWO SPACES IN EACH DRIVEWAY FOR PARKING. SO IF THERE WAS ANY VISITORS THERE, ASSUMING THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE TOWNHOMES DIDN'T HAVE FOUR CARS, THEN REALISTICALLY A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T USE THEIR GARAGE FOR CARS, AND PEOPLE WITH PICKUP TRUCKS TEND TO HAVE TO PARK THEIR CARS IN THE DRIVEWAY OR THE STREET. SO I GUESS I WAS CONCERNED WITH THE LOT SIZE AND WHERE VISITORS, TRUE VISITORS, WOULD PARK. I MEAN, IS IT REALLY JUST THE WHATEVER TEN OR SO SPACES I GUESS THAT IS OVER BY THE CLUBHOUSE, OR IS THERE ANY OTHER PLACE THAT I'M MISSING? I WON'T BE SPECIFIC. SO THERE'S CLUBHOUSE AREA PARKING. THE REST OF THE VISITOR PARKING THERE WILL BE ON THIS INTERNAL RESIDENTIAL STREET AND ON THIS CONCEPT PLAN, BECAUSE IT'S A CONCEPT PLAN AND NOT SPECIFICALLY A SITE PLAN. THOSE AREAS AREN'T SHOWN AND THEIR ENTIRETY ON THE RESIDENTIAL STREET, BUT THERE WILL BE, OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THE ROAD IS WIDE ENOUGH TO ALLOW FOR PARKING ALONG THAT RESIDENTIAL STREET. OKAY. AND THE REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO TOWNHOME FOR PD TWO. THIS JUST JUST APPLIES TO THE SLIVER OF TRACT LAND. IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANY OF THE REST OF PD TWO ON THE REST OF THIS TRACT. RIGHT. IT'S JUST THIS LITTLE SLIVER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. YES. OKAY. AND TWO AND A HALF STORIES. SO THREE STORY TOWNHOME ON THOSE HOUSES THAT THOSE TOWNHOMES THAT BACK YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'RE SIDE INSTEAD OF THE NORMAL YOU KNOW FRONT TO BACK. ALL THOSE WINDOWS ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE LOOK LIKE THEY WOULD BE FACING THOSE HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE RIGHT BEHIND THEM. IS THAT CORRECT. SO ORIGINALLY WHEN THEY FIRST CAME IN, THE TOWNHOMES WERE ORIENTED TO WHERE THE I THINK THE REAR YARD WOULD BE FACING. WOULD BE FACING THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. AND SO THE THOUGHT PROCESS WOULD BE BETTER FOR THESE TWO SIDE ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. INSTEAD OF BACKING FOR THAT PURPOSE OF PRIVACY. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN IDEAL FIX TO THAT, BUT I THINK OUR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS DECIDING INSTEAD OF BACKING TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA WAS A BETTER FIX. OKAY, I GUESS THAT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE YOU'D HAVE WINDOWS MUCH CLOSER THAN YOU WOULD HAVE HAD IT BEEN ORIENTED THE OTHER WAY, AND ANY OTHER USE WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS INTENSE FOR THOSE HOMEOWNERS THAT BACK TO IT. I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW, YOU KNOW, THE REQUEST IS TO ADJUST THE MINIMUM LOT LOT DEPTH FROM 185FT AND THE WIDTH FROM THE. SOME OF THE OTHER SETBACKS, I GUESS, OR LOT AREA. YEAH, THE MINIMUM LOT AREA HAS INCREASED AS WELL. AND I GUESS I'M TRYING TO SEE WHERE I GUESS WE'RE MOVING FROM A LOWER DENSE WHERE THE LOWER DENSITY IS IT JUST BECAUSE OF A RETENTION POND THAT'S NOT REALLY USABLE, OR THE DENSITY INTENSE FOR WHERE THE ACTUAL STRUCTURES ARE. SO THE DENSITY, IF THEY JUST WENT BY THEIR I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ENTITLED, BUT TYPICALLY THE TOWNHOME, IF THEY JUST WENT BY A NORMAL TOWNHOME DISTRICT, IT'S TEN UNITS PER ACRE. SO THEY'RE PROPOSING SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE DENSITY. SO IT IS LESS DENSE THAN IT COULD BE. TYPICALLY IF THEY JUST WENT FOR THE NORMAL TOWNHOME DISTRICT. 
          WHEN DOES I'M I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO QUESTIONS. BUT YOU ASKED A GOOD ONE OR YOU SAID SOMETHING INTERESTING. WHEN DOES A TOWNHOME DISTRICT BECOME A MULTIFAMILY. IT CANNOT. IT'S IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. AT LEAST IT'S DIFFERENTIATED. TOWNHOMES IN OUR ORDINANCE ARE VIEWED MORE AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THERE'S NO BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN TOWNHOMES AND RESIDENTIAL, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO IT'S NOT VIEWED IN THE SAME LIGHT AS MULTIFAMILY.. AND WOULD THEY BE SPECIFICALLY PREVENTED FROM BASICALLY TAKING THIS DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATING IT AS A MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY? IF THIS WERE APPROVED, THEY COULDN'T, BECAUSE THE ONLY USE THEY'D BE ALLOWED TO DO IS TOWNHOMES. WELL, I KNOW FROM A PHYSICAL PERSPECTIVE, BUT THERE ARE 
          [00:35:04]
RENTAL COMMUNITIES OF TOWNHOMES. SO THE IDEA IS THAT THESE WILL BE SOLD TO INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO WITH IT. YEAH. AND I'M SURE THERE CAN BE CONDITIONS PUT ON THIS THAT ALLOW FOR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING OR WHAT YOU'RE WANTING ON THAT. BUT I THINK THAT IT WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED TO BE OWNED AND NOT RENTED. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'VE GOT A FEW QUICK ONES, IF THAT'S OKAY, MR. CHAIR. GO AHEAD. YOU BET. SO YOU ANSWERED MY FIRST QUESTION ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS A FOR SALE TOWNHOME COMMUNITY. DO WE HAVE A FEEL FOR HOW HOW BIG THE TOWNHOMES WILL BE FROM A SQUARE FOOTAGE PERSPECTIVE? 1700 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S THE LOT AREA AT LEAST. I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY HOW BIG THE DWELLING UNITS WILL BE, BUT THE LOTS WILL BE AT LEAST 1700. 
          OKAY, AND THE TOWNHOMES THEMSELVES, WILL THEY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN OWNER'S ASSOCIATION? YEAH, YES. TYPICALLY THAT'S WHAT WE WILL DO. OKAY. A QUICK QUESTION REGARDING THE HEIGHT. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A GRADE ON THE SITE WHERE IT MOVES DOWN TOWARD 380. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE PACKET THAT ACTUALLY HAD THE ELEVATION. SO DO WE HAVE A FEEL FOR WHERE THE TOP OF THESE TOWNHOMES ARE GOING TO SIT IN RELATION TO THE BACKYARDS OF THE OF THE HOMEOWNERS? I WE DON'T HAVE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING KIND OF MAYBE THE ENGINEER CAN SPEAK TO THAT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING KIND OF WHERE THAT PLACEMENT WOULD BE SPECIFICALLY. OKAY. AND I THINK MY LAST QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT. SO IN THEORY, ANY ONE OF THOSE PERMITTED USES COULD BE BUILT UP TO 40FT IN THE CURRENT PD. CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO TO EXPAND ON THAT, IF ONE OF THE OTHER USES WAS BUILT UP TO 40FT, IT WOULD INVOKE DIFFERENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. CORRECT? POTENTIALLY, IF THERE'S NO REGULATIONS IN THE PD THAT SPECIFY THE DISTANCE, WE'D DEFAULT OUR ORDINANCE. AND THERE ARE SOME DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS BASED ON HEIGHT FOR THAT. SO POTENTIALLY YES. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S A PRETTY IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO THIS. OKAY. REAL QUICK BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING I'M DEFINITELY GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANT. OVERALL, A DECREASE IN THE LOT COVERAGE OR I'M SORRY, THE INCREASE IN THE LOT COVERAGE, A DECREASE IN THE LOT AREA AND THEN LESS DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES. THESE CHANGES ARE THESE THINGS THAT YOU ARE THESE THE KINDS OF CHANGES THAT YOU GET FROM THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT LIKE IS THIS COMMON? ARE THESE COMMON REQUESTS OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE OUT OF THE ORDINARY, OR THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU'VE HAD THIS TYPE OF. I PERSONALLY COULDN'T SPEAK TO THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S DIFFERENT. TYPICALLY, WHEN THEY PRESENT TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS, IF THIS IS STANDARD FOR PROPOSED TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, I KNOW WHAT OUR ORDINANCE SAYS, BUT IN TERMS OF OTHER ONES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, I DON'T KNOW THE ONLY REASON WHY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BEFORE WE BEFORE I PRESENT TO THE APPLICANT THAT THESE ARE NOT THIS IS NOT A RESPONSE TO A CHANGING INDUSTRY. SOMETIMES WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO COME BEFORE US, AND WE HAVE ORDINANCES THAT ARE ON FILE AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT MAY NEED TO BE UPDATED. AND THEN THEY COME TO US AND THEN WE HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT HAPPENING HERE. YEAH. AND I JUST CAN'T CONFIRM THAT. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IN A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. DO YOU KNOW OFF THE TOP I KNOW THAT'S A VERY. IT ACTUALLY DEPENDS ON THE DEVELOPMENT AREA AND THE BASIN THAT IT'S IN AS FAR AS DRAINAGE AND SO FORTH. BUT I WOULD TELL YOU PROBABLY THE MOST COMMON AVERAGE ACROSS THE BOARD IS 45, NO MORE THAN 50 WHEN YOU GET SWIMMING POOLS AND OUTDOOR PATIOS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS. THAT'S HELPFUL. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? THANKS TO APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS IN ATTENDANCE THIS EVENING. AND SO I THINK THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION. AND WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. JUST PLEASE REMEMBER TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. TRISTAN PAW I'M WITH SPIRES ENGINEERING. I AM REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER. THE DEVELOPER IS ACTUALLY OUT OF COUNTRY RIGHT NOW. AND SO MOSTLY TONIGHT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE 
          [00:40:03]
SOME TECHNICAL BACKING TO WHAT WE'VE DONE. MY ADDRESS IS 109 PARK CIRCLE MCKINNEY, TEXAS 75069. SO I DON'T HAVE A FORMAL PRESENTATION FOR THE PROJECT. I APPRECIATE DESCARTES RUNNING THROUGH. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF FOR A FEW MONTHS ON THIS. OUR CLIENT ACTUALLY OWNS EVERYTHING TO THE SOUTH OF RICHLAND BOULEVARD HERE. AND I THINK REALLY THE DESIRE WAS ACTUALLY WHEN WE FIRST APPROACHED STAFF TO PROVIDE A TRANSITIONAL USE THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. BETWEEN ALL THE COMMERCIAL, THE 380 BUSINESS CORRIDOR AND THE RESIDENTIAL USE TO OUR NORTH. AND SO A COUPLE OF THINGS JUST THAT I THINK PROVIDE GOOD CONTEXT. WHEN WE FIRST CAME TO STAFF, WE DID HAVE ALL THE TOWNHOMES BACKING THAT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. AND YOU CAN IMAGINE KIND OF LIKE THE ONES YOU SEE FRONTING RICHLAND. THERE WAS ABOUT THAT MANY UNITS BACKING, AND DAVID AND AKARI HAD A GOOD RECOMMENDATION TO INSTEAD SIDE, YOU KNOW, JUST FIVE UNITS TO THAT COMMUNITY SO THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, 45 UNITS BACKING UP TO THOSE LOTS JUST TO KIND OF REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF KIND OF RESIDENTS BACKING THERE. SO THAT WAS A BIG LAYOUT CONSIDERATION. THE OTHER THING IS THIS SITE IS JUST VERY CONSTRAINING FOR A TOWNHOME USE SPECIFICALLY, YOU COULD PROBABLY FIT SOME OF THESE OTHER USES THAT IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR A LITTLE BIT BETTER. THE OFFICE SPACES, THE, YOU KNOW, THE THERE'S A LOT OF USES ON THAT LIST THAT I THINK, I THINK MOST OF THE PEOPLE I'VE READ THROUGH THE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION AND GOT TO VISIT WITH A FEW PEOPLE, BUT I THINK MOST OF THE CONCERN IS WITH THE RESIDENTS TO THE NORTH AND WHAT'S COMING IN ON THIS PROPERTY. AND I THINK, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, MOST OF THOSE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED ON THIS TRACT WOULD BE A MUCH WORSE USE TO HAVE BACKING UP TO YOUR RESIDENTIAL HOME THAN A TOWNHOME COMMUNITY. SO OTHER THINGS THAT WE CONSIDERED THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT. COMMISSIONER FURRY BROUGHT UP DON'T KNOW IF I'M PRONOUNCING THAT RIGHT, BUT THE ELEVATION CHANGE AND SO THAT IS A BIG ENGINEERING ELEMENT. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT A 4 TO 6 FOOT WALL. AND THE TOWNHOMES ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE LOWER THAN THAT RESIDENTIAL SITE BECAUSE OF THE DROP. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT WALL WE'LL HAVE A 6 TO 8 FOOT SCREENING WALL. AND SO YOU'RE ALREADY TAKING ABOUT OUT ABOUT 10 TO 12FT OF THAT ELEVATION OF PEOPLE KIND OF LOOKING INTO THE BACKYARDS THERE. AND SO I THINK THAT HELPS THE DISCUSSION A LOT. 
          ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THE CONCERNS WAS TRAFFIC. WE'RE BUILDING RICHLAND BOULEVARD WITH THIS TRIANGLE PIECE, AND WE'RE CONNECTING THE EXISTING FROM LASEMA ALL THE WAY TO TOCOI. AND SO IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO HELP THE TRAFFIC QUITE A BIT, PROVIDING ANOTHER PARALLEL CUT THROUGH WITH PARALLEL TO 380 HERE FROM LASEMA DACOIT. AND THEN I THINK MAYBE THE LAST THING I'LL SAY AND THEN OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MAY HAVE IS I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME CONCERN WITH THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE PROVIDED A DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, BUT THESE HOMES WON'T BE BUILT FOR ANOTHER 2 TO 3 YEARS. AND I HAD SOMEONE TELL ME EARLIER TODAY THAT THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, I THINK RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH EXPANSIONS. AND SO WE DON'T ANTICIPATE 53 TOWNHOMES TO PROVIDE A BURDEN TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. REALLY, A LOT OF THE USERS FOR THESE PROPERTIES, WHICH ALSO I JUST THE DEVELOPER, LET ME KNOW THAT THE AVERAGE PRICE IS ABOUT 650,000 FOR THESE TOWNHOME UNITS. AND SO LIKE YOU CAN SEE IN THE RENDERINGS, IT'S KIND OF A HIGHER SCALE TOWNHOME, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD MAYBE SEE IN CRAIG RANCH OVER IN MCKINNEY. IF YOU'VE BEEN IN THAT CORRIDOR THERE. BUT A LOT OF TIMES IT'S MAYBE AN OLDER POPULATION THAT'S GETTING A TOWNHOME. THERE'S LESS MAINTENANCE, THE FRONT YARDS TEN FEET, AND IT'S USUALLY A LANDSCAPED TEN FEET. I GUESS I MIGHT SPEAK TO A COUPLE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT ALREADY CAME UP. THE DIFFERENCE IN TOWNHOME STANDARDS IS MOSTLY BECAUSE OF THE SITE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE HERE. WE'VE WE'VE WE'RE MEETING THE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR A 20 FOOT DRIVEWAY IN THE REAR, WHICH ALLOWS THE CARS TO BE FULLY FREE FROM THE SIDEWALKS, AND THEN THE TEN FOOT IN THE FRONT, AGAIN, WE FEEL IS ADEQUATE. IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR TOWNHOME COMMUNITIES TO HAVE THAT REDUCED FRONT YARD. 
          IT'S MOSTLY LANDSCAPED. THE PAD SIZE FOR TOWNHOMES IS TYPICALLY 55 TO 60FT IN DEPTH. THESE ARE 55, SO THEY'RE ON THE SMALLER END OF THAT. BUT I THINK TO DAVID'S POINT TOO, ON LOT COVERAGE, THE DIFFERENCE FROM A SINGLE FAMILY LOT THAT MIGHT HAVE A POOL AND OTHER, YOU KNOW, GAZEBO IN THE BACK OR A PERGOLA IN THE BACK. THESE TOWNHOMES REALLY YOU CAN GET UP TO THAT 65% COVERAGE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE SOME OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL USES IN YOUR YARD THERE. OTHER QUESTIONS. THERE ARE THESE STREETS ARE 31FT BACK TO BACK. AND SO WE'VE WORKED WITH FIRE AND ENGINEERING. WE'VE GOT A FULL FIRE LANE AVAILABLE AND A FULL EIGHT FOOT OF ON STREET PARKING. WE HAD IT STRIPED ORIGINALLY ON THE NORTH SIDE AS KIND OF DEDICATED, AND THEY ACTUALLY ASKED US TO TAKE THAT OFF JUST TO PROVIDE IT AS LOOSE ON STREET PARKING. AND SO 
          [00:45:04]
THERE'S ACTUALLY ALMOST ONE SPACE FOR EVERY UNIT HERE WITH THE ON STREET PARKING AND THE, THE SEPARATE PARKING LOT THERE. AND SO FOR TOWNHOMES IT'S QUITE A BIT. THERE'S FIVE SPACES PER UNIT, WHICH IS A HIGHER END FOR WHAT WE WOULD ANTICIPATE BEING MAYBE TWO PEOPLE PER UNIT. THERE IS GOING TO BE AN HOA. THAT'S THAT'S A REQUIREMENT BY THE CITY. AND THEN YEAH, I THINK THAT'S MOST OF THE COMMENTS THAT I PICKED UP. BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE. I'LL START OFF THE QUESTIONS HERE. AND I MAY HAVE MISSED IT IN THE PACKET READING THROUGH THE MATERIAL, DO WE HAVE ANY PICTURES OF THE ELEVATIONS OF WHAT THE BORDERING TOWNHOMES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BACKYARDS? DO WE HAVE ANY OF THOSE IN THERE TO LOOK AT? I MAY HAVE MISSED THAT I DON'T YEAH. AND I I'M I'LL JUST CAVEAT WITH I'M NOT THE ARCHITECT THAT PROVIDED THESE. BUT WE DO HAVE ELEVATIONS WITH THE SIDE LOOK. SO I WOULD SAY IF I WAS IN THE BACKYARD OF ONE OF THOSE HOMES WHAT WOULD I SEE I GUESS, YEAH, I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE THE SIDE OF THAT BUILDING THAT THAT JUST LIKE THAT. OKAY. BASED BASED UPON THE ELEVATION DROP, HOW MUCH WHERE WOULD THEY START SEEING? WHAT WOULD THEY SEE? YEAH, IT PROBABLY BE ABOUT HALFWAY UP THAT THAT FIRST THAT MIDDLE WINDOW. SO YOU'D YOU'D BE ABLE TO SEE ON THE TOP LEVEL THERE. BUT I THINK IN THE SAME WAY, YOU KNOW, THIS COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BE AT A HIGHER ELEVATION. THE ROOF GOES ABOVE, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO REALLY HAVE A LOOK DOWN AS WELL. I'M ASSUMING THERE'S A MIX OF TWO STORY AND ONE STORY BUILDINGS BACKING UP TO THIS TOWNHOME COMMUNITY. BUT AGAIN, WE FEEL LIKE IN WORKING WITH STAFF THAT IF IT'S NOT THIS, YOU HAVE A 40 FOOT TALL OFFICE SPACE THAT'S GOT MAYBE PARKING LOT LIGHTS AND OTHER THINGS THAT A RESIDENT WOULD PROBABLY NOT WANT MORE SO THAN ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBOR BEHIND THEM. OKAY, I HAD A. SO THIS IS SORT OF A LARGER QUESTION FOR ME. WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BASED ON AND PLEASE CORRECT ME BECAUSE I AM LESS EXPERIENCED IN SOME OF THIS AS SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE, FAR LESS READ. WELL READ AS MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES. BUT I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I'M SEEING, OKAY, YOU'RE INCREASING THE LOT COVERAGE. SO INHERENTLY DECREASING THE AMOUNT OF YARD SPACE, YOU'RE DECREASING THE OVERALL LOT AREA. SO FROM 2500 TO 1700. AND THESE ARE THE STANDARDS. SO THESE ARE MAXIMUMS WHICH MEANS THAT YOU CAN GET LOWER THAN THIS. YOU JUST OR I'M SORRY. THESE ARE MINIMUMS. MINIMUMS RIGHT. THE DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES DECREASING THAT. RIGHT. SO ESSENTIALLY THE CURRENT PRODUCT WOULD LOOK LIKE A BIGGER HOME ON A BIGGER LOT SIZE OR MAYBE A SLIGHTLY SMALLER HOME BECAUSE YOU'RE INCREASING THE MAX FOR THE, THE COVERAGE OF THE OF THE LOT. BUT SURE, YOU HAVE A REGULAR SAME SIZE HOME, SMALLER YARD WITH LESS ROOM BETWEEN YOUR NEIGHBOR. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU DOING THAT INTENTIONALLY TO MEET SOME SORT OF INDUSTRY NORM, OR ARE YOU INTENTIONALLY DOING THIS TO YOU? FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE SOME BETTER PRODUCT? BECAUSE THIS READS TO ME AS A WORSE PRODUCT THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY REQUIRE AND PROSPER. AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, I HAVE TO KNOW THAT THERE IS A COMPELLING REASON TO DECREASE THE QUALITY OF WHAT WE HAVE HERE. SO THAT'S SURE. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE. YEAH, NO, FOR SURE. IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I THINK SOME OF THE WE DIDN'T APPROACH THIS NECESSARILY FROM USER INDUSTRY TRENDS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO IMPLEMENT HERE. THESE ARE INDUSTRY STANDARDS. I'LL JUST SAY AS AN ENGINEER THAT'S DONE A LOT OF TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS AND OTHER CITIES, A 20 FOOT REAR YARD FOR A DRIVEWAY IS PRETTY STANDARD. AND THEN AGAIN, THE TEN FOOT ON THE FRONT OF THESE TOWNHOMES BECAUSE OF THE REDUCED MAINTENANCE IS PRETTY STANDARD. I DON'T KNOW, I'M I'M PROBABLY NOT AS VERSED TO SPEAK TO PROSPER'S 25 FOOT FRONT YARD. IT ADDS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY ON THIS ELEVATION HERE, IT WOULD ADD ANOTHER FIVE FEET FOR WHICH WOULD REALLY JUST BE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT. AND THEN I BELIEVE IT'S 15FT. SO THE FRONT YARD IN THIS ELEVATION HERE WOULD GO FROM 10 TO 5. BUT ONE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT HERE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE REDUCING IT, IS ALL OF THESE LOTS FRONT ON TO AMUSE. AND SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 25FT. SO ALONG RICHLAND BOULEVARD THERE'S A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH A 12 FOOT TRAIL. AND THESE LOTS WILL FRONT ONTO THAT. SO YOU REALLY ALMOST HAVE A FILL OF A TEN FOOT FRONT YARD, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 25FT OF GREEN SPACE AND TRAIL. 
          AND THEN THE SAME FOR THE UNITS THAT THAT'S COMMUNITY SPACE, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT THAT DOESN'T BELONG TO THE DOESN'T BELONG TO THE HOMEOWNER. YEAH. THE PLATTED LOT IS LESS. SO WE CAN'T REALLY CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF THE EVALUATE BECAUSE THAT'S I MEAN, IT'S COMMUNITY SPACE. IF YOU BUY THAT HOUSE, THAT'S NOT PART OF THE VALUE THAT YOU'RE PURCHASING, RIGHT? YOU'RE JUST 
          [00:50:04]
THAT'S SURE. AND THEN THAT'S THAT'S PLANNING, RIGHT. YOU MIGHT DETERMINE IN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU MIGHT REDUCE THAT AMOUNT OF SPACE. RIGHT. SO THAT COULD CHANGE AS WELL. YEAH. AND WE DO HAVE TO PROVIDE. WELL JUST A COUPLE THOUGHTS. WE DO HAVE TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 20% OPEN SPACE. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO MEET THAT IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY SPACE THAT YOU MENTIONED. BUT IT IS A FACTOR I THINK THE DIRECTION THAT WE TOOK MORE SO WAS THE DENSITY NEEDED TO MAKE TOWNHOMES WORK ON THIS TRACT. AND AGAIN, JUST FEELING THAT THIS IS A BETTER USE. OUR CLIENTS DOING OTHER COMMERCIAL USES TO THE SOUTH OF RICHLAND. AND SO THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, END USERS AND BUYERS THAT COULD DO THAT HERE. BUT JUST FILLING THIS IS A BETTER USE. WE ACTUALLY STARTED WITH ABOUT 70 TOWNHOMES. AND AS WE WENT THROUGH THE ENGINEERING AND THE CLUBHOUSE AND THE DETENTION AND TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION STAFF COMMENTS, WE NOW HAVE 53. SO WE WERE AT THE TEN UNITS PER ACRE, AND NOW WE'RE AT LIKE 6.3 UNITS PER ACRE. AND SO SOME OF THAT IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS LED TO US KIND OF DECREASING SOME OF THOSE SETBACKS TO WHERE THEY'RE STILL FEASIBLE ENGINEERING WISE, BUT THEY ALSO MEET WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO. YEAH. OKAY. YES. GOOD. WHAT. OH YEAH. WELL THAT'S GOING TO BE HIT AND MISS TONIGHT. BUT MY LIST IS LONG. THE WHY DID YOU GUYS PRIORITIZE WHAT YOU'RE CALLING A MUSE. 
          WHICH IS WHY DID YOU PRIORITIZE THAT OVER ANY SORT OF A GREEN SPACE OR SEPARATION TO THE RESIDENTS BEHIND IT? BECAUSE I FIND THAT A LITTLE I MEAN, I GET THE HIKE AND BIKE AND I LOVE THAT ABOUT PROSPER. I WOULD NOT ADVOCATE FOR THAT TO GO AWAY. BUT YOU PUT A LOT OF GREEN SPACE TO, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER COMMERCIAL USE GOES SOUTH OF THIS, AS OPPOSED TO CREATING A GREEN SPACE BEHIND TO GIVE THE RESIDENTS SOME BUFFER. IT SEEMS A LITTLE BACKWARDS, JUST FOR SOME INSIGHT. YEAH, SURE. WE'RE WE'RE ACTUALLY REQUIRED TO DO A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG RICHLAND. IT KIND OF PROVIDES THAT SAFETY BUFFER FROM THE RESIDENTS TO THAT THOROUGHFARE. 
          WE DO HAVE THE SCALE ON THIS. YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETIME IT MAY BE A LITTLE HARD TO SEE, BUT THERE IS FOR LOTS FIVE, SEVEN AND NINE. THERE'S ABOUT 15FT OF SEPARATION THERE BETWEEN THAT REAR PROPERTY LINE AND THESE HOMES. AND THEN IT GETS TO ABOUT TEN FEET ON LOT ONE WHERE IT PINCHES A LITTLE BIT. AND THAT WAS REALLY WORKING WITH FIRE TO HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM FOR THAT SIDEWALK AND SOME ZONES THERE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO YEAH, THAT AGAIN, NOT TO GO BACK TO THE SITE CONSTRAINTS, BUT AS WE LAID OUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALREADY SHORTENED THE REALLY TO THE MINIMUM THAT WE CAN HAVE ON TOWNHOMES TO MAKE IT FEASIBLE. AND THEN WE TURNED THAT PART OF US ASKING FOR THE TWO UNITS INSTEAD OF THREE WAS WE CAN'T FIT THREE UNITS THERE. AND YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, WANT TO DO A SINGLE TOWNHOME BUILDING LOOK A LITTLE SILLY. BUT SO THAT'S PART OF THAT DISCUSSION. AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE THERE'S NOT REQUIREMENTS ON THE SCREENING. 
          BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE PUT IN HERE THAT THE DEVELOPER IS OPEN TO DOING. IN ADDITION TO THAT RETAINING WALL, A SCREENING WALL MASONRY ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE TO HELP CREATE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN ESTHETIC BUFFER THERE. I THINK SOME CONTEXT FOR YOU, FOR THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD YOU'RE ADJACENT TO, MOST OF THOSE HOMES HAVE A MINIMUM OF 10 TO 15FT OF SETBACK ON EACH SIDE. SO THE HOUSES MOSTLY ARE 25, 30FT APART. AND SO I THINK WHENEVER YOU'RE GOING TEN FEET UP AGAINST THEIR FENCE, I WOULD ASSUME, AND I THINK SOME OF THE COMMENTS REFLECTED THAT, THAT, THAT THAT'S NOT REALLY REFLECTIVE OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD OF A THOUSAND HOMES TO THE NORTH. THAT'S ALL PRETTY CONSISTENT. AND THAT WAS PROBABLY WHY A LOT OF THOSE RESIDENTS PROBABLY PURCHASED IN THAT PROBABLY PART OF WHY THEY CAME TO PROSPER. AND I UNDERSTAND THINGS ARE CHANGING, BUT THEY BOUGHT THOSE HOMES, INVESTED IN THOSE FOR A BIT OF PRIVACY AND A BIT OF SEPARATION FROM THE NEIGHBORS. AND IT FEELS LIKE THEY'RE GETTING BUILT RIGHT ON TOP OF, PARTICULARLY WITH THREE FEET OR THE THREE STORIES OF ELEVATION. SO JUST YEAH, A COUPLE COMMENTS TO THAT TOO. I THINK THE OTHER COMMERCIAL USES, I DON'T I THINK THE SETBACKS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT, BUT SOME OF THEM COULD BE ONLY A 20 FOOT SETBACK. 
          AND SO IT'S REALLY ONLY MAYBE A 5 TO 10 FOOT DIFFERENCE IN HORIZONTAL, WHICH I DON'T KNOW FULLY HOW MUCH YOU FEEL, BUT I THINK THAT'S WORTH NOTING. AND THEN THE CLUBHOUSE IS ALSO A SINGLE STORY. I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE CLUBHOUSE, AND BUT THAT WILL EVEN, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR POINT, ALMOST BE THE ROOF EAVES WILL BE LEVEL WITH THAT TOP OF THE SCREENING WALL. AND SO YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE PEOPLE IN THAT CLUBHOUSE AT LEAST LOOKING INTO THOSE BACKYARDS. SO OUT OF CURIOSITY, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW IF YOU WERE REQUIRED FOR THIS TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT TO MEET THE CURRENT PROSPER STANDARDS AS IT RELATES TO SETBACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? HOW MANY UNITS WOULD YOU GET OUT OF IT IF WE JUST FOLLOW THE TOWNHOME STANDARD CORRECT DIRECTLY, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WE WOULD. WE WOULD LOSE ALL TWO, FOUR, SIX, EIGHT, TEN UNITS ON THE NORTH SIDE, AND SO WOULD PROBABLY BE AROUND 43 UNITS TOTAL. AND YOUR CONTENTION IS THAT THAT'S NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWNHOMES. YEAH, I THINK EVEN 
          [00:55:06]
THE 53, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, IS A STRETCH FOR THE DEVELOPER, BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THE USE IS MORE WARRANTED IN THIS MARKET THAN ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL THIS FAR OFF OF 380. BUT AGAIN, WE WERE THERE WAS A LOT OF PUSH FOR 65 TO 70 WHEN WE STARTED THIS THING. AND EVEN UP UNTIL A WEEK OR SO AGO, WE HAD 55 AND WE DROPPED AN ADDITIONAL TWO TO PROVIDE THE OFF STREET PARKING. 
          IT'S KIND OF A LAST A LAST MINUTE COMMENT. SO I THINK THE DEVELOPERS EAGER TO WORK WITH STAFF TO MAKE THIS WORK, BUT I THINK IT'S WE'RE AT THAT KIND OF PROBABLY LOWER LIMIT OF THE DENSITY THAT'S NEEDED. SO HOW DID YOU GET TO THE 70 ORIGINALLY, I GUESS? WAS IT REDUCING THE STANDARDS FURTHER, OR IS THERE WAS THERE A PHYSICALLY A PLACE ON THIS PLOT THAT YOU THE CLIENT WAS PROBABLY JUST TEN UNITS PER ACRE, PER PROSPER'S ZONING. AS WE STARTED LAYING THIS THING OUT, OUR FIRST STAB AT THIS WAS TO DO WHAT WE WOULD SAY IS A TRADITIONAL MEWS TOWNHOME, WHICH IS REALLY JUST A FIRE LANE IN THE REAR, AND OUR PAVEMENT WAS QUITE A BIT LESS ON THE FIRST DRAFT THAT WE DID. AND WE REALLY WE ACTUALLY HAD LOTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT STREET. 
          AND IT WAS, YOU KNOW, ABOUT 24FT JUST BIG ENOUGH FOR A FIRE LANE. AND THAT WAS JUST, AGAIN, THE FIRST AS WE HAD THE DEVELOPMENT MEETING AND STARTED GOING THROUGH COMMENTS AND ENGINEERING AND FIRE MARSHAL THAT BEGAN TO EVOLVE INTO WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. QUICK QUESTION. SO YOU HAVE THIS CLUBHOUSE, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S THE ONLY SORT OF COMMUNITY AMENITY THAT YOU HAVE, RIGHT, FOR, FOR THAT AREA. AND THAT IS GOING TO BE AND THAT CLUBHOUSE IS FOR THE OWNERS OF THOSE TOWNHOMES. I'M ASSUMING THEY'LL GET A KEY FOB OR SOMETHING WHEN THEY COME IN. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. SO I. IS THERE ANYTHING WAS THERE ANY THOUGHT IN POTENTIALLY TAKING THAT SAME AREA AND PROVIDING AN OPEN PUBLIC SPACE THAT NOT JUST THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THOSE TOWNHOMES CAN USE, BUT THE COMMUNITY AROUND CAN USE IT, PERHAPS A PARK OR OUTDOOR FOR KIDS TO PLAY OR PUBLIC POOL OR ANY NUMBER OF THINGS. SURE. WAS THERE ANY THOUGHT GIVEN INTO THAT? YEAH. WE DIDN'T HAVE A CLUBHOUSE WHEN WE STARTED. WE JUST HAD THE KIND OF TRAIL SYSTEM THAT CONNECTS AND THE RETENTION POND THERE, AND THEN REALLY JUST OPEN SPACE. AND IT WAS REALLY KIND OF THROUGH THE COORDINATION WITH STAFF THAT THE DESIRE WAS, HEY, WE WANT TO PROVIDE A CLUBHOUSE THAT IT CALLS FOR A HIGHER LEVEL OF COMMUNITY. IT'S GOING TO ALLOW SOME HIGHER PROPERTY VALUES FOR THESE TOWNHOMES WHERE THEY HAVE A SPACE THAT THEY CAN GO. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE ENDED UP HERE. SO JUST AND THIS WOULD HELP HOPEFULLY THIS COULD POTENTIALLY HELP JUST MY PERSPECTIVE ON THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS. YOU'RE BRINGING SOMETHING INTO A COMMUNITY OBVIOUSLY AWARE AND ACTIVE COMMUNITY. THIS IS MORE THAN JUST SAY A BUSINESS DEAL. AND I'M NOT ASSUMING THAT THAT'S HOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT OR THE DEVELOPER IS, BUT THERE IS A GIVE AND TAKE WITH THAT COMMUNITY, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE GOING GOING TO A COMMUNITY AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE YOUR EXISTING STANDARDS FOR THE HOMES, WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE IT BECAUSE WE GOT TO WE NEED TO DO THAT IN ORDER TO MAKE IT WORK. 
          YOU'VE GOT TO PROVIDE SOMETHING TO THAT COMMUNITY TO MAKE IT MAKE SENSE. RIGHT. SOME AMENITY TO GO INTO A COMMUNITY AND TO BUILD SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND THEN TO HAVE, AS BEST AS I CAN SEE, A CLUBHOUSE THAT WILL ONLY BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING IN THOSE TOWNHOMES, PROVIDES NOTHING TO THAT COMMUNITY. AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR STANDARDS TO BE CHANGED ON YOUR BEHALF. YOU'RE ASKING THAT COMMUNITY TO CHANGE THE STANDARDS FOR YOU AND PROVIDE LITTLE TO NOTHING IN RETURN. THAT'S A VERY DIFFICULT ASK, A VERY DIFFICULT, UNLESS YOU HAVE A TREMENDOUS PRODUCT. RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED, IS THIS CLUBHOUSE SOMETHING THAT AT LEAST WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY IN SOME WAY? RIGHT. OR MAYBE YOU COULD HAVE LED WITH HERE ARE SOME COMMUNITY THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TO BRING THEM INTO THIS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST A QUESTION ABOUT THAT PIECE AND THAT THAT MAKES IT A VERY CHALLENGING SITUATION HERE. SO THANK YOU. AND THAT ONE OF THE THINGS IS I, I'M SPEAKING AS THE ENGINEER ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENT. SO I ALSO WANT TO TAMPER A LITTLE BIT OF THE NEGOTIATIONS REALLY CAME FROM THEM AND THE CITY. AND SO THEY MAY BE OPEN TO SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU'RE MENTIONING. AND, AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS, ONE BENEFIT IS PART OF THE OTHER AGREEMENT THAT WAS MADE WITH PD TWO IS WE ARE BUILDING THIS FOUR LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY IN THE 12 FOOT SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ROAD. AND SO THAT'S A HUGE SERVICE TO THE CITY TO HAVE THAT NOW OPEN. AND THE PEDESTRIAN WAYS CONNECTED THERE. AND THEN I'LL JUST ADD THAT WE DO ALSO HAVE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS. AND THAT'S A LITTLE ATYPICAL. BUT A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THE CLIENTS COME AND WANT TO DO A PD, THEY'LL WORK WITH STAFF AND THE PLANNING AND 
          [01:00:02]
ZONING BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL TO GET THOSE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS. SO YOU CAN KIND OF UPHELD UPHOLD THAT QUALITY. AND I KNOW THAT WAS ALSO A GIFT FOR THE CLIENT. MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. SO I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO BOGGED DOWN ON THE ELEVATION HERE. ARE YOU FAR ENOUGH ALONG IN THE ENGINEERING TO KNOW WHAT THE ELEVATION OF THOSE TOWNHOMES ALONG THE BACK OF THE HOUSES ON AMISTAD, WHAT THE ELEVATION OF THOSE WOULD BE? WE'RE NOT. OKAY, SO IT'S PART SPECULATION THAT IT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE ALONG MIDWAY UP THE TOWN. YEAH. WE'VE DONE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING FOR A FEASIBILITY REALLY FROM A COST PERSPECTIVE. AND WE'VE LOOKED AT THE GRADING ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THERE WILL FOR SURE BE A MINIMUM FOUR FOOT WALL ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE. BUT AS FAR AS IF IT, YOU KNOW, GETS UP TO 6 TO 8FT, WE'RE NOT SURE. OKAY. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED WERE PRIVACY CONCERNS, WHICH I UNDERSTAND, WHICH IS WHY I'M TRYING TO KIND OF NAIL DOWN WHAT THE YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT ELEVATION CHANGE IS. 
          DO YOU KNOW HOW LARGE OR HOW LARGE THE PROPOSED HOMES WOULD BE FROM A SQUARE FOOTAGE PERSPECTIVE? I KNOW YOU SAID 650,000 ESTIMATED PRICE. ANY IDEA WITH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. THE 20 BY 55 SQUARE FOOT. YOU KNOW, I I'D BE GUESSING I DON'T HAVE THE FLOOR PLANS FROM THE ARCHITECT ON WHAT THAT IS. THANK YOU. AND I THINK MY LAST QUESTION SO IS, IS YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN THIS ONLY THE TOWNHOME PORTION, OR DOES YOUR INVOLVEMENT WITH THIS PROJECT PRE-DATE? IT'S JUST A TOWNHOME. WE'RE JUST A RESIDENTIAL ENGINEER. OKAY. I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE OTHER DISCUSSIONS WERE ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAVE GONE ON THIS PARCEL. I KNOW THAT THAT WOULD TRIGGER DIFFERENT SETBACKS AND DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR INVOLVEMENT WAS JUST THE TOWNHOME. SO THAT'S IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP. SO ALONG THE LINES OF THE EXCUSE ME, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE QUESTION, WHAT WHAT'S THE BEDROOM MAKEUP OF THESE TOWNHOMES? WE'RE TALKING TWO BEDROOMS, THREE BEDROOMS, A MIX OF THAT OR WHAT DO YOU KNOW THAT. YEAH, I WOULD BE GUESSING AGAIN, NOT HAVING THE FLOOR PLANS, BUT I ASSUME THEY'RE 2 TO 3 BEDROOMS AS A MINIMUM JUST BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT. OKAY, BUT I WOULD BE GUESSING BASED ON PAST PRODUCTS THAT I'VE SEEN. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. ON THE ELEVATION PIECE, I WOULD SAY I WENT BY AND LOOKED AND LOOKING. 
          NOW I, I DON'T WANT TO SECOND GUESS YOU'RE AN ENGINEER AND I AM NOT. BUT IT DOES NOT. IT DOES NOT FEEL AS IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CROSS SLOPE, BUT THE PROPERTY FROM THE RESIDENCE ONTO THIS PROPERTY LOOKS TO BE FAIRLY CONSISTENT. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S A LARGE. YEAH, AGAIN, I HAVEN'T STUDIED IT JUST FROM WALKING IT, DRIVING IT THIS WEEK TO SEE WHAT WE WERE UP AGAINST. SO I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE DON'T STATE THAT. MAYBE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE SIGNIFICANT SCREENING THERE THAT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT ACTUALLY END UP ONCE YOU DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. SURE. OH, WELL, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION TO ONE SIMPLE QUESTION. DID DID YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOMEOWNERS AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS NORTH OF YOU DURING ANY OF THIS? I DID NOT, AND I'M NOT AWARE OF IF THE CLIENT DIDN'T HAVE I'M NOT AWARE OF THE CLIENT DID NOT. DO YOU OTHER STAFF KNOW WHETHER THERE WERE ANY ANY CONTACTS MADE WITH THE HOA OR HOMEOWNERS TO DISCUSS THIS? WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY. 
          NO. I'M ASKING STAFF, PLEASE. THANK YOU. WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY. NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I MEAN, BECAUSE TYPICALLY I WOULD THINK IN A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NEXT TO A HOME, HOME, A RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT'S ALREADY ESTABLISHED, THERE'D BE SOME DISCUSSION. I WOULD ALWAYS ENCOURAGE THAT BEFORE TO HAVE WORKED OUT SOME OF THE CONCERNS BEFORE YOU GET HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I KNOW YOU MENTIONED YOU DON'T YOU DON'T KNOW YET THE HOME SIZES. SO DOES THAT MEAN YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE SORT OF PERCENTAGE MIX OF HOMES ABOVE OR BELOW A PARTICULAR RANGE? YOU GOT THE IF YOU GET THESE MINIMUM STANDARDS LOWERED, IN THEORY, YOU COULD PRETTY MUCH BUILD EVERY SINGLE HOME ACCORDING TO THE MINIMUM MINIMUM LOT SIZE. LIKE YOU COULD JUST GO RACE TO THE BOTTOM AND MAXIMIZE THAT, RIGHT? YEAH. DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY FRAMEWORK OF HOW YOU MIGHT BE DOING THIS TO GIVE US SOME UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE FULL DEVELOPMENT WOULD EVEN LOOK LIKE? YEAH, BECAUSE OF THE SITE CONSTRAINTS. I THINK THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT YOU'RE SEEING TODAY IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE COME IN, AND THE ELEVATIONS REALLY AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE. MAYBE AGAIN, I DIDN'T PROVIDE THE ELEVATIONS GRAPHICALLY, BUT THE FIRST FLOOR IS THE GARAGE ON THESE TOWNHOMES. AND SO THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE A TON OF VARIANCE FROM ONE STORY, TWO STORY, YOU KNOW, TWO AND A HALF. BUT JUST IN TERMS OF THE SIZES, YOU KNOW, A THREE BEDROOM IS GOING TO LOOK DIFFERENT THAN A TWO BEDROOM VERSUS IT'S GOING TO LOOK DIFFERENT THAN A ONE. I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK A LITTLE DIFFERENT. AND HOW MANY TWO BEDROOMS YOU PUT THERE VERSUS HOW MANY THREE VERSUS HOW MANY? ONE MAKES A DIFFERENCE. 
          [01:05:05]
RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU COULD JUST DECIDE, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE CAN MAKE A LOT MORE BY JUST PUTTING ALL OF THEM A BUNCH OF ONE BEDROOMS, MAYBE A COUPLE THREE, PRICE THEM UP AT A PREMIUM AND THEN CALL IT A DAY. THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M WONDERING, DID YOU HAVE SOME IDEA OF THAT THAT WE CAN TIE TO THIS? IF YOU DON'T, THAT'S OKAY. IT'S JUST I DON'T FROM THE ARCHITECT AND I DON'T HAVE THE FLOOR PLANS. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE WORK TO SET MINIMUMS AND, YOU KNOW, GO FROM THERE. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. DO YOU KNOW WHO THE BUILDER IS? YEAH. IT'S A GROUP CALLED MATTHEWS BUILDING. THE CUSTOM BUILDER. THAT'S THE ARCHITECT, AT LEAST, THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH ON ALL THE STANDARDS AND EVERYTHING. THEY'RE THE ARCHITECTS AND INTERNAL ARCHITECT TO THE BUILDING COMPANY. SURE, BUT WOULD WOULD THESE BE DEVELOPED BY THE OWNER? I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEY DO. OR IS IT GOING TO BE BASICALLY SOLD TO A COMPANY THAT BUILDS THESE THINGS IN THE IN THE NORMAL COURSE? I DON'T I'M NOT SURE. AND I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE WAY HE'S SET UP TO SPEAK TO THAT PART. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME IN THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN. WE MAY HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS LATER, BUT I APPRECIATE I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR CARRIE. YEAH. GO AHEAD. TARKARI. SO IN THIS DEVELOPMENT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD OUT RICHLAND BOULEVARD, RIGHT. SO WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH COMES THROUGH, WOULD THEY BE DEVELOPING IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER BECAUSE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT OR THE DEVELOPMENT FURTHER SOUTH? IS THAT A REQUIREMENT? I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. RICHLAND BOULEVARD, HE SAID THEY'RE BUILDING OUT RICHLAND TO BUILD THIS TOWNHOME COMMUNITY. IF THEY'RE SAME DEVELOPERS DEVELOPING SOUTH OF RICHLAND, WOULD THEY HAVE TO PUT IN THE ROAD TO DEVELOP THAT PART ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RICHLAND AS WELL? OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YES. AND LIKE THE MEDIANS AND THE DRIVES WOULD HAVE TO CONNECT AND LINE UP WITH THIS PROPOSAL, WHETHER THIS TOWNHOME COMMUNITY GOES FORWARD OR NOT. RICHLAND WOULD GET BUILT OUT BY THIS DEVELOPER, WHETHER THEY DEVELOP THE TOWNHOME COMMUNITY OR TO THE SOUTH. CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. GOOD QUESTION, COMMISSIONER HAMILTON. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF STAFF TURNOVER, BUT ONE OF THE RESIDENTS SHARED, I GUESS THERE WAS SOME NEGOTIATION ON THE ALIGNMENT OF RICHLAND BOULEVARD AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST. DOES ANYBODY ANYBODY KNOW? I KNOW YOU'RE ALL LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT. I'M NOT AWARE OF I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT EXTENT, BUT I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH THE RESIDENTS ON AMISTAD AT SOME POINT TO WORK WITH WHERE THE ALIGNMENT OF RICHLAND BOULEVARD WAS GOING TO GO, AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ANY HISTORY TO THAT. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER FACTS, I WAS CURIOUS. YEAH, I DON'T I'M BY SAYING I'M NOT AWARE OF IT. I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING NO, THAT'S WRONG. I'M SAYING NO, I HAVEN'T BEEN IN A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. SO BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT IT. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. MAY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS LATER. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NUMBER SEVEN THIS EVENING. AND SO I KNOW WE HAVE SOME MEMBERS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT MAY WANT TO STEP FORWARD THIS EVENING AND SPEAK. 
          I KNOW WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THE ONLINE REQUEST FORMS, EMAIL, ETC. IF ANYONE DOES WANT TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. ALL I ASK IS WHEN YOU DO COME FORWARD, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND THIS EVENING I DON'T THINK THIS WILL BE AN ISSUE. WE DO LIMIT IT TO THREE MINUTES, BUT PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STEP FORWARD. WE DO APPRECIATE ALL OUR CITIZENS BEING HERE. JUST SO Y'ALL KNOW, PLANNING AND ZONING. WE'RE ALL CITIZENS TOO. 
          WE'RE A RECOMMENDING BODY TO THE COUNCIL. SO THIS SAME CASE WILL COME UP TO THE COUNCIL ON MARCH THE 11TH. IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. SO THANK YOU. LET ME JUST ADD LET ME JUST ADD TO THAT. I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DID ALSO SEND LETTERS AND EMAILS THROUGH EMAIL. WE APPRECIATE GETTING FEEDBACK FROM CITIZENS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT. SO IT'S NICE TO HAVE YOU HERE. BUT FOR THOSE THAT COULDN'T BE HERE, IT'S NICE TO HAVE THEM ONLINE AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S INFORMATION. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS CHERYL CONDE. I'M AT 1911 CYPRESS LAKE LANE, PLACE OF LASEMA. I AM IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE. CHANGE THAT WOULD CONVERT THE DESIGNATED ■RETAIL SPACE INTO A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT. WHILE WE RECOGNIZE THE NEED FOR BALANCED GROWTH, THIS CHANGE WOULD HAVE LONG TERM NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON OUR COMMUNITY, LOCAL ECONOMY, AND INFRASTRUCTURE. ONE LOSS OF ECONOMIC BENEFITS. THE CURRENT ZONING FOR RETAIL SPACE WAS ESTABLISHED TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH, CREATE JOBS, AND PROVIDE CONVENIENT SERVICES TO RESIDENTS BY REPLACING IT WITH TOWNHOMES. WE BELIEVE OR I BELIEVE MY FAMILY, WE WILL LOSE POTENTIAL BUSINESS INVESTMENTS, JOB OPPORTUNITIES AND TAX REVENUE THAT RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS 
          [01:10:03]
GENERATE. FUTURE COMMERCIAL SERVICES SUCH AS GROCERY STORES, SMALL BUSINESSES, DINING SUCH AS WHAT YOU HAD ON THE EARLIER SLIDE WILL BE PERMANENTLY LIMITED, FORCING RESIDENTS TO TRAVEL FURTHER FARTHER FOR BASIC NEEDS. TWO INCREASED TRAFFIC AND INFRASTRUCTURE STRAIN A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SCALE WILL INTRODUCE HUNDREDS OF NEW RESIDENTS TO THE AREA AND CREATE ISSUES OF HIGHER TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON ALREADY BUSY ROADS. ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON PUBLIC SERVICES LIKE SCHOOLS, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS AND UTILITIES, INCREASED WEAR AND TEAR ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRING FUTURE TAXPAYER FUNDING IMPROVEMENTS. THREE INCOMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY NEEDS. THIS ZONING CHANGE DISREGARDS THE ORIGINAL URBAN PLANNING VISION FOR MIXED USE COMMUNITY. FOR OUR MIXED USE COMMUNITY, INSTEAD OF COMPLEMENTING EXISTING RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL AREAS, THE INTRODUCTION OF DENSE RESIDENTIAL HOUSING ALTERS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND REDUCES THE COMMERCIAL ACCESSIBILITY THAT WAS INTENDED FOR THIS SPACE. IT ALSO DIMINISHES THE WALKABILITY AND VIBRANCY THAT RETAIL SPACE CAN CONTRIBUTES TO THE AREA. FORGIVE ME, I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE. THIS IS MY VERY FIRST TIME. YOU'RE DOING GREAT FOR PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE UNCHECKED DEVELOPMENT, ALIGNING, ALLOWING. RATHER, THIS ZONING CHANGE SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPERS TO REQUEST SIMILAR RECLASSIFICATIONS, FURTHER ERODING COMMERCIAL ZONES AND LEADING TO DISORGANIZED URBAN CENTERS. INSTEAD OF REZONING THIS SPACE FOR TOWNHOMES, I URGE THE COMMISSION TO ENCOURAGE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT ALIGNS WITH THE COMMUNITY'S LONG TERM ECONOMIC GOALS, REQUIRE A MIXED USE APPROACH. IF RESIDENTIAL IS INTRODUCED, ENSURING THAT RETAIL, RETAIL AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES ARE PRESERVED. CONDUCT FURTHER IMPACT STUDIES ON TRAFFIC, SCHOOL ENROLLMENT, AND PUBLIC UTILITIES BEFORE CONSIDERING A ZONING CHANGE. THIS DECISION WILL SHAPE THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY FOR DECADES. WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO REJECT THIS REZONING PROPOSAL AND PRIORITIZE SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH THAT BENEFITS ALL RESIDENTS. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW UP TO THE ENGINEERS ASK SORRY QUESTION. I MEAN, COMMISSIONER FERRY'S QUESTION TO PIGGYBACK THAT REGARDING THIS WAS I'M TRYING TO THINK IT WAS A QUESTION REGARDING THE I GUESS YOU WERE TAKING IT TO SIMILAR SPACES. HAVE YOU RESEARCHED THAT IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER, ARE THERE OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HE OR HER OR THEY HAVE CREATED, AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE TEN YEARS OUT? IF IT'S WITHIN FIVE YEARS, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE CURRENTLY? THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND YOUR TIME AND PREPARATION. AND I KNOW THE DEVELOPER, I THINK WAS MAKING NOTE OF YOUR QUESTION. SO APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. AND AS WELL AS TOWN STAFF. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION, I JUST WANT TO START OFF THANKING YOU ALL AND THE TOWN STAFF. I MEAN DEFINITELY A THANKLESS, THANKLESS JOB FOR WHAT YOU GUYS DO. AND LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROSPER OVER THE PAST YEAR, YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN BUSY. SO THANK YOU AGAIN. I'M MY NAME IS BRADLEY HAMPTON. I'M A RESIDENT IN LASEMA, 1140 AMISTAD DRIVE IN THE PHASE ONE SUBDIVISION. FACING THAT BACK AREA. SO REALLY WANTED TO START OFF. AND BASICALLY WE'VE BEEN EXCITED AND EAGER ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT LAND RIGHT BEHIND OUR HOMES FOR SOME TIME. I MEAN, EVEN THE PAST EIGHT YEARS SINCE I MOVED IN, REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT'S GOING TO GO THERE. A LOT OF THE USE CASES THAT YOU HAD ON THE SCREEN, WE WOULD LOVE SOME OF THOSE. I MEAN, I THINK THOSE WOULD BE WELCOME ADDITIONS TO OUR COMMUNITY AND SERVICES. WE REALLY NEED THAT. OFTENTIMES, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGHT 380 TO DRIVE OVER TO 75 TO GET, OR WE'RE TRYING TO DRIVE ACROSS OVER AND FIGHT OVER TO 423 TO GET. SO THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT I THINK WOULD BE AN AMAZING ADDITION TO OUR COMMUNITY IN THAT AREA. COMMISSIONER HARRIS, I KIND OF WENT DOWN THE SAME PATH YOU DID WHEN I STARTED LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN AND LOOKING AT THINGS, AND I'M LIKE, OKAY, YOU GOT INCREASED COVERAGE, YOU GOT DECREASED HOME SIZES, YOU GOT SACRIFICES TO SETBACKS. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT I COULD ONLY IMAGINE THEY WERE DOING JUST IN THE SENSE OF, HOW CAN WE CRAM AS MANY UNITS AS POSSIBLE INTO THIS SLIVER OF, OF EIGHT ACRES? THAT HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD DEVELOP THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PRECEDENTS IS ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE 40FT TALL. AND I KNOW THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS CAN GET UP TO 40FT TALL. I PROBABLY LOOK CRAZY OUT THERE WITH MY TAPE MEASURE 
          [01:15:02]
TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT IN THE FIVE MILE STRETCH THAT I LOOKED AT IN THE IN THE US HIGHWAY 380 DISTRICT, THIS WOULD BE THE TALLEST STRUCTURE FROM BASICALLY PRESTON ALL THE WAY TO CUSTER. SO THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN SAYING THAT A WAREHOUSE COULD BE 40FT TALL, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THOSE 40 FOOT TALL WAREHOUSES THAT BACK UP TO RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN PROSPER. SO IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT DIFFERENCE FROM ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD GO THERE. ADDITIONALLY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT ADDING IN SETBACKS, I THINK THAT THE CITY OF FAYETTE, TEXAS VERSUS MCFARLAND STATED THAT THE CITIES ARE ALLOWED. THE TEXAS COURT SIDED WITH THE CITIES, THAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO SET LARGER SETBACKS FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF RESIDENTS. AND THIS TIES INTO REALLY ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES WITH THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT IS THE PRIVACY AND SAFETY OF HOMEOWNERS. IF YOU LOOK AT LASEMA HOMES, ESPECIALLY ON THAT AMISTAD TRACK, IT'S A NORTH SOUTH FACING HOUSE, AND THE SOUTH OF OUR HOUSE IS OUR LIVING ROOMS, OUR DINING ROOMS, OUR KITCHENS, OUR BACKYARDS, OUR OUR KIDS BEDROOMS. AND I DON'T CARE IF YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT RETAINING WALL OR A FOUR FOOT FENCE, FIVE FOOT FENCE, IF YOU'RE A THREE STORY BUILDING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE STARING INTO MY KIDS BEDROOM EVERY NIGHT, AND THAT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PUT A PERMANENT BLIND IN MY KID'S BEDROOM BECAUSE I HAVE THESE HOMEOWNERS, YOU KNOW, CONDOS OR TOWNHOMES OVERLOOKING AND BEING ABLE TO STARE INTO MY KIDS ROOMS. NOW, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S VARIATIONS OF THAT. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROSPER ZONING CODE 160.07087, IT REQUIRES DEVELOPMENTS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND AS I MENTIONED, WHEN I LOOKED AROUND AND THERE'S NO OTHER 40 FOOT STRUCTURES EVEN CLOSE TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANYWHERE AROUND THERE, A 40 FOOT TOWNHOME TEN FEET FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE INCOMPATIBLE, WOULD NOT BE COMPATIBLE, AND IT WOULD VIOLATE THIS PRINCIPLE IN MY VIEW. ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, MATCHING THE MATCHING THE SCALE ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THERE'S CITIES THAT HAVE DONE STUFF ABOUT THAT. FOR EXAMPLE, TEXAS IN ROCKWALL COUNTY ALSO MANDATES 30 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITS NEAR RESIDENTIAL ZONES. SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE THE POWER TO CONTROL AND BE ABLE TO DICTATE THAT. LISTEN, YOU CAN BUILD THESE. YOU JUST HAVE TO BUILD THEM IN A WAY THAT'S ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. THAT MAKE SENSE, BECAUSE A TOWERING 40 FOOT, YOU KNOW, TOWNHOME NEXT TO THIS SINGLE STORY NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE OR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE PRETTY OBTRUSIVE. ANOTHER BIG IMPACT THAT I DIDN'T REALLY HEAR TONIGHT WOULD BE THE TRAFFIC SAFETY GOING FROM 380 ON TO LASEMA BOULEVARD. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'VE IF ANYBODY'S TAKEN THAT LEFT TURN FROM 380 TO THE TO LASEMA LATELY, BUT I'M SCARED TO DEATH WITH MY KIDS IN THE BACK OF THE CAR THAT I'M GOING TO GET SLAMMED AT 65 MILES AN HOUR BY A SEMI IN THAT LEFT LANE. WHO DOESN'T SEE IT COMING? AND I DID DID THEATH. ON IF YOU HAVE THESE 53 TOWNHOME UNITS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OVER 100 DAILY TRIPS TAKING LEFT ON THAT LASEMA BOULEVARD. SO WE ALREADY HAVE ARE OVER CAPACITY ON THAT LEFT HAND TURN. AND SO WE'RE INCREASING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF DANGER TO OUR COMMUNITY WHEN WE HAVE EVEN MORE CARS BACKED UP TRYING TO TAKE THAT LEFT HAND TURN. SO, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THIS IS CONSIDERED TO GO FORWARD, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND WE DO IS IF THE APPLICANT PAYS FOR OR THE DEVELOPER PAYS FOR A INDEPENDENT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. IN PROPER SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE 160.028, WE CAN MANDATE THAT DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS TO INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES. AND SO IT'S SOMETHING WHERE IF WE'RE GOING TO DECIDE TO ADD IN 53 NEW TOWNHOMES, WE SHOULD PROBABLY LOOK AT WHAT IMPACT IS THAT GOING TO HAVE ON THAT LEFT HAND TURN LANE, AND WHAT DANGER DOES IT POSE TO US IN OUR COMMUNITY TRYING TO GET IN AND OUT OF THERE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ROCK TRUCKS THAT GO ACROSS THE STREET AND ARE PICKING UP, YOU KNOW, TONS OF DIRT LEFT AND RIGHT AND SPITTING UP ROCKS. SO I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR POINTS THAT I KNOW A LOT OF YOU HAVE ALREADY HEARD AND SEEN THE SCHOOL OVERCROWDING IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED. ONE THING I DIDN'T SEE WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOLSOM ELEMENTARY. THAT'S RIGHT. IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE GETTING AN ADDITIONAL 300 DUAL LANGUAGE STUDENTS. NOW. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT IS. MAYBE IT'S NOTHING. BUT WHEN YOU START ADDING IN AND START COMPOUNDING THESE OF ADDITIONAL 53 TOWNHOMES, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 300 DUAL LANGUAGE STUDENTS PLUS, PLUS, PLUS, WE HAVE ROGERS MIDDLE SCHOOL THAT'S ALREADY HAS ALMOST 11 OUT OUT BUILDINGS THAT ARE PORTABLE BUILDINGS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO TRY TO KEEP STUDENTS, YOU KNOW, TO BE TAUGHT WHILE THE SCHOOL'S GOING THROUGH CONSTRUCTION AND THE COMMUNITY IS GROWING. SO I THINK SCHOOL OVERCROWDING IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. AND THEN THE LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING INSUFFICIENCIES THE ONE AREA I 
          [01:20:04]
DOVE INTO ON THE PLAN THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER, THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT WAS THE LANDSCAPING. 
          AND IF YOU LOOK AT EVEN THE REQUIREMENTS ON THE CALIPER OF TREES THAT ARE ARE BEING PUT IN THERE, THE TREES THAT THEY RECOMMENDED WERE 11 CALIPER INCHES OF TREES. NOW THOSE ARE PRETTY IMMATURE TREES THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE YEARS TO DEVELOP AND GROW INTO SOME TYPE OF PRIVACY AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND AROUND THE ENVIRONMENT. AND AS A PHASE ONE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE TREES THAT ARE ALREADY VERY MATURE AND VERY DEVELOPED. SO HAVING THIS NEW NEIGHBORHOOD WITH VERY SMALL TREES WOULD REPRESENT A STARK DIFFERENCE IN IN HOW THE COMMUNITY LOOKS. AND SO THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT I KEPT LOOKING AT AS FAR AS WHAT ARE WE SHORTCUTTING AND WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO SKIMP ON SO WE CAN CRAM AS MANY UNITS IN THIS AS, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO DEFINITELY WANT TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY LOOKING AT THAT FROM ALL ALL POINTS OF VIEW. SO WITH THAT, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I THINK OUR PRIVACY AND SAFETY IS ONE OF THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITIES. I REALLY WANT TO SEE OUR RESIDENTS COME TOGETHER. I HAVEN'T SEEN THIS MUCH ACTION IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN A LONG TIME, AND IT'S SAD THAT IT TAKES SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO DO IT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I REALLY LIKE THAT WE'RE COMING TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND FOCUSING ON ISSUES THAT THAT MATTER TO US. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. THANKS FOR BEING HERE. HI, I AM CARRIE ALVAREZ. I LIVE ON 1150 AMISTAD AND I APOLOGIZE. I'M GOING TO READ MY NOTES OFF MY PHONE HERE, SO I ECHO SIMILAR SENTIMENTS SPOKEN TONIGHT CONCERNING TRAFFIC, SCHOOL CROWDING AND NOISE. WE HAVE LIVED IN PROSPER FOR 13 YEARS, MOVING HERE WHEN IT WAS A SMALL, TIGHT KNIT COMMUNITY. WE PUT THREE KIDS THROUGH PROSPER HIGH SCHOOL, ONE THROUGH ROCK HILL, AND HAVE TWO SURPRISE TODDLERS THAT HAVE MANY MORE YEARS IN PROSPER ISD. THERE'S A REALLY BIG DIFFERENCE TO US BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL. MOST LIKELY COMMERCIAL WILL BE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 8 TO 5, OR A CHURCH THAT OPERATES A FEW NIGHTS AND SUNDAYS. MULTI MULTI HOME ZONING IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TO ME. THIS IS JUST ABOUT MONEY. THIS IS THE EASIEST WAY FOR THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE THE MOST PROFIT POSSIBLE. THE DEVELOPER REPRESENTATIVE HIMSELF TONIGHT JUST SAID THE OFFICES AND OTHER USES WOULD BE EASIER TO HAVE IN THIS AREA, AS THEY KNOW THAT IT WILL BE HARDER TO SELL COMMERCIAL IN THIS ODD SLIVER, AS IT IS FURTHER FROM 380. THESE TOWNHOMES WOULD HAVE A PROPENSITY TO BE RENTALS, POSSIBLY WITH PEOPLE WITHOUT DEEP ROOTS TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          EVEN AT A 650,000 PRICE POINT. THAT'S THE LOW END FOR HOMES IN PROSPER. THEY WILL MOST LIKELY BE INVESTMENT PROPERTIES. THIS IS PROSPER, NOT DOWNTOWN DALLAS OR DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY. WE HAVE PLENTY OF OTHER UNDEVELOPED LAND IN OTHER AREAS TO BUILD TOWNHOMES AND MULTI-UNIT HOUSING. THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MULTI UNIT AND TOWNHOMES TO US IN LECCIMA THEY'LL HAVE A CLUBHOUSE. IT DEFINITELY SOUNDS LIKE A MULTIFAMILY. YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE TO CRAM AS MANY HOMES AS POSSIBLE INTO A SMALL SPACE JUST FOR SOMEONE TO TURN A BIG PROFIT. THE PLAN INCLUDES OPEN SPACE TO RICHLAND, LANDSCAPING TOWARDS RICHLAND, BUT EVERYTHING BACKS UP RIGHT INTO OUR COMMUNITY. SO IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYTHING IS FRONT FACING THE ROAD WHERE NO ONE LIVES. INSTEAD OF HELPING US OUT IN OUR HOMES THAT ARE DIRECTLY BEHIND IT, YOU KNOW, EVENTUALLY THIS COULD REDUCE THE PROPERTY VALUES ON OUR STREET AND IN THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD OF LASEMA. I WILL SAY THAT THE FIRST WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT THIS WAS ABOUT LAST WEEK, WHEN SOME RESIDENTS ON THE STREET RECEIVED LETTERS IN THE MAIL AND POSTED IT ON OUR FACEBOOK FACEBOOK PAGE. SOME DID NOT GET THE LETTER. SOME WITHOUT FACEBOOK HAVE NO IDEA WE'RE HERE TONIGHT. THERE'S OTHER RESIDENTS, PEOPLE IN WILLOW RIDGE. I THINK OTHERS THAT HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC IN THE SCHOOLS THAT WOULD ALSO OPPOSE THIS PLAN. WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL TODAY AT 530, 30 MINUTES BEFORE THIS STARTED FROM OUR HOA. SO THIS IS LIKELY THE FIRST THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT. I WILL SAY TO MR. HARRIS'S POINT, WE HAVE PARKS. WE HAVE TWO POOLS. HAVING NECESSARILY AN OPEN SPACE I DON'T THINK IS GOING TO CHANGE OUR OPPOSITION. WE'VE BEEN GOOD NEIGHBORS AND CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY OVER THIS LAST DECADE, AND ALTHOUGH THE COMMUNITY IS GROWING AT A RATE I WISH WE COULD SLOW DOWN, WE UNDERSTAND GROWTH IS PROGRESS, BUT LET'S MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE. NOW WE ARE ONLY APPROVING A SMALL SLIVER OF LAND, BUT YOU KNOW, IF IT GETS APPROVED, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO CONTINUE IT TO THE LEFT, POSSIBLY CONTINUE IT TO THE SOUTH. WE WOULD SET A PRECEDENT TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE AREA. IF YOU LIVED IN THE AFFECTED HOMES, WOULD YOU WANT 53 TOWNHOMES IN A CLUBHOUSE BUILT DIRECTLY BEHIND YOU WITH EXTRA NOISE, CARS, PARTIES AND PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT? WE'RE USED TO A QUIET LIFE WITH AN OCCASIONAL TRAIN WHISTLE OR COW MOOING BEHIND OUR HOMES. SO LET'S JUST CONTINUE THAT SMALL TOWN FEEL THAT CAUSED MOST OF US TO MOVE HERE ORIGINALLY. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENTS. APPRECIATE IT. ALL. 
          [01:25:07]
RIGHT. HELLO, MY NAME IS VANESSA MANLEY. I LIVE AT 1440 AMISTAD. I WOULD LIKE TO BRING A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A EMOTIONAL STANDPOINT TO THE COUNCIL. I MOVED HERE WITH MY NOW EX-HUSBAND IN 2020 AND OUR TWO SMALL CHILDREN, AND WE FELL IN LOVE WITH PROSPER BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE HOMES AND THE FACT THAT THE HOMES WERE NOT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. UNFORTUNATELY, I BECAME A SINGLE MOM NOT TOO LONG AFTER AND SORRY IF I GET EMOTIONAL. I SAVED EVERYTHING I HAD. I'M SORRY. I SAVED EVERY PENNY I HAD TO GET BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M FOUR STREETS AWAY FROM MY EX-HUSBAND. WE THANKFULLY CO-PARENT VERY WELL. MY GOAL WHEN I GOT DIVORCED WAS TO KEEP MY KIDS IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AS, SO THEY WOULD HAVE THEIR SCHOOL AND THEIR FRIENDS AND BOTH HOUSES. MY BIGGEST FEAR WHEN I GOT DIVORCED WAS THAT MY KIDS WOULD PREFER LIVING WITH THEIR DAD. I'M SORRY. ONCE I GOT, ONCE I GOT THE HOME, ONCE I GOT MY HOME, THAT FEAR QUICKLY WENT AWAY. THEY LOVED THE HOME. THEY LOVED BEING ABLE TO WALK TO THEIR DAD'S. THEY LOVED BEING ABLE MY SON. LAST SUMMER WE HAD WEEDS THAT WOULD GROW UP TO THE TOP OF THE FENCE, AND MY SON WOULD CLIMB OVER THE FENCE AND PET THE COWS AS THEY WERE EATING THE WEEDS. AND HE LOVED ONE. ONE DAY OUR DARN DOG ESCAPED AND HE HAD TO TRAIPSE THROUGH THE COW PATTIES TO GET THE DOG. AND IT WAS A HORRIBLE MESS. BUT I KNOW THAT'S GOING AWAY. BUT I KNOW THAT I BOUGHT THE HOUSE KNOWING THAT SOMETHING WOULD BE BUILT BACK THERE, BUT I ALSO BOUGHT THE HOME. SORRY. THANK YOU. I ALSO BOUGHT THE HOME KNOWING BELIEVING THAT THE TOWN OF PROSPER WOULD KEEP THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS IN MIND. SORRY I HAD THIS ONE. 
          HERE. SORRY I LOST MY NOTES. THIS IS SOFTER. THANK YOU. IT'S MY DUTY AS A PARENT TO KEEP MY KIDS SAFE TO MAKE. TO LET THEM FEEL SAFE. AND AS I MENTIONED, IT IS IT'S NOT ONE OF MY FEARS THAT IF SOMETHING HAPPENS BEHIND THAT, WHETHER IT'S WHETHER IT'S LOUD NOISES AND PARTIES OR A POTENTIAL RACE TRACK BEING THAT ROAD THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT AND SLAMMING INTO MY FENCE WHEN MY KIDS ARE PLAYING, I DON'T WANT MY KIDS TO COME TO ME TELLING ME THEY PREFER TO BE AT THEIR DAD'S. SO THAT IS ONE OF MY FEARS. AGAIN, I KNOW I'M JUST ONE PERSON, BUT I PLEASE ASK YOU TO PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION TO. AND THEN. I GUESS I'M SORRY I'VE GONE OFF OFF MY NOTES. BUT WHEN SOMETHING IS BUILT THERE ALSO, PLEASE JUST KEEP NOT ONLY THE SAFETY BUT THE ESTHETICS. AND I DON'T WANT SOMEONE PEERING INTO MY HOME. I KNOW MY NEIGHBORS FEEL THE EXACT SAME WAY. AND IF THERE IS A WALL, JUST MAKE IT AS PRETTY AS YOU CAN AND PUT SOME TREES AND GIVE US THAT SMALL TOWN FEEL. AND THAT'S THE REASON WE BOUGHT THESE HOMES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO THIS REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. DID WE HAVE ANY OTHER MEMBERS THAT ARE HERE THIS EVENING THAT WANTED TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? I APPRECIATE EVERYONE THAT'S HERE. THE COMMENTS I KNOW COMING UP TO SPEAK IS SOMETIMES DIFFICULT, AND YOU ALL EACH DID A WONDERFUL JOB MAKING YOUR POINT. SO APPRECIATE YOU REPRESENTING YOUR COMMUNITY AND REPRESENTING PROSPER BECAUSE EVERYONE MATTERS IN PROSPER. SO WITH THAT, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN. BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, DID ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOR THE APPLICANT? ONE THING I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT PROCESS BEFORE, WHILE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THAT IS COMMISSIONER HAMILTON, WE'RE GOING TO START WITH YOU ON THIS ONE BECAUSE COMMISSIONER FUREY IS NEWER. I DIDN'T WANT TO PUT HIM ON THE SPOT FIRST, BUT NEXT TIME HE WILL BE PROBABLY AND WE'LL GO THROUGH OUR COMMENTS ONCE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, JUST TO CLARIFY, YES, WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF THAT COMES. OKAY. YEAH. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ONE AT 
          [01:30:01]
THIS TIME. NO. OKAY. LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM SEVEN. AND I'M GOING TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF INFORMATION HERE. AND COMMISSIONER HAMILTON, I'M GOING TO START WITH YOU IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS. AND WE'LL KIND OF WORK OUR WAY ACROSS, I GUESS MY FIRST COMMENT IS AND THIS IS FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT, IF WE HAVE ANY ZONING CASES COMING BEFORE US THAT ARE NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA, I THINK WE SHOULD RECOMMEND TO THAT APPLICANT THAT THEY MEET WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND HAVE A DIALOG WITH THEM. IT IS MUCH BETTER IF WE HAVE THE COMMUNITY WORKING TOGETHER, THE DEVELOPER AND THE HOA THAT NEIGHBORS PROPERTY TO KIND OF WORK THROUGH THE CONCERNS. SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS CAN BE ADDRESSED. OBVIOUSLY, SOME OF THEM MIGHT NOT BE ADDRESSED, BUT IF WE HAVE THAT COLLABORATION FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, I THINK IT MAKES IT FOR A LOT BETTER SITUATION. AND IT GIVES THE NEIGHBORHOOD TIME TO ALSO PROCESS WHAT'S GOING ON AND EVEN UNDERSTAND BETTER WHAT'S HAPPENING IN A PROJECT. SO THAT WOULD JUST BE MY REQUEST MOVING FORWARD. I DON'T THINK WE HA&-PO PEOPLE WE MEET WITH. YEAH. SO THAT'S THAT WAS JUST MY REQUEST. 
          REGARDING THIS ZONING CASE. I PERSONALLY DON'T SUPPORT IT FOR MANY REASONS. I DON'T LIKE THE REDUCTION OF SETBACKS. I DON'T LIKE THE LOT SIDING TO THE HOME, BECAUSE ALL THE WINDOWS ARE ON THE SIDES THAT WILL FACE THE HOMEOWNERS THAT IT BACKS UP TO. I DON'T LIKE THE PARKING SITUATION. I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE OPEN SPACE IS UNUSABLE ON THE FAR CORNER, BECAUSE IT'S NOT LAND THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED. I DON'T LIKE 40 FOOT TALL TOWNHOMES THAT ARE JUST REALLY TALL FOR THAT AREA, SO I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. I'M JUST VOICING MY OPINION ON THIS CASE AND I'LL BE READY TO MAKE A MOTION WHEN EVERYONE HAS HAD THEIR FEEDBACK. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMILTON. COMMISSIONER HARRIS. THANK YOU, MR. HAMILTON. AND THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT SPOKE. WHETHER YOU KNOW IT OR NOT, YOUR FEEDBACK DOES CARRY WEIGHT, A LOT OF WEIGHT. WE HAVE A LOT OF CASES WHERE WE DON'T GET PUBLIC FEEDBACK, AND WE'RE HAVING TO ASSUME WHAT WE THINK THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO THINK ABOUT THESE PROJECTS. IT'S EXTREMELY HELPFUL WHEN THAT BUCKET IS FILLED, WHEN WE KNOW WHAT YOU THINK, WE'RE ABLE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. IT MEANS A LOT. SO THANK YOU. AND FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO SPOKE, I ECHO THE COMMISSIONERS, OTHER COMMISSIONERS SENTIMENTS THAT YOU DID A GREAT JOB. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. MY CONCERNS WITH THIS PROJECT ARE A I DON'T I GENERALLY DON'T I DON'T LIKE REDUCTIONS IN OUR STANDARDS. RIGHT. WHETHER THAT MEANS REDUCING LOT SIZES, WHETHER THAT MEANS EVEN THE BUILDING MATERIALS ARE THERE, PEOPLE MOVE TO PROSPER FOR A REASON. I THINK WE NEED TO HOLD THOSE STANDARDS. IF YOU DO, I THINK YOU BETTER OFFER A PREMIUM PRODUCT WITH AN ABSOLUTE GREAT SET OF AMENITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU'RE ASKING TO REDUCE THOSE STANDARDS, AND I JUST DON'T SEE THAT HERE. AND MISS ALVAREZ, OKAY, THAT DID NOT MAKE MY DECISION. THEN PUTTING A PARK THERE WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED MY DECISION. BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT SPEAKS TO THE INTENT. AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO A COMMUNITY AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER THEM, THAT LETS ME KNOW A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THE INTENTIONS. AND THAT'S A CONCERN FOR ME. NOT KNOWING THE MIX OF HOME SIZES IS A CONCERN. THEY COULD JUST SHOOT TO THE MINIMUM ACROSS THE BOARD TO GET AS MUCH AS THEY WANT IN THAT SPACE, AND WE'D BE APPROVING IT. AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT. AND THE FINAL PIECE WAS, I DIDN'T REALLY TALK TO THE COMMUNITY. AND, YOU KNOW, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THIS CLOSE TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU KNOW, IT'S TOO EASY TO HAVE A SINGLE CONVERSATION. YOU COULD HAVE PUT SOMETHING ON FACEBOOK OR THE HOA FACEBOOK TO SAY, HEY, IF YOU ALL ARE AVAILABLE, WE'RE GOING TO BRING DONUTS. WE'LL JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO BRING DONUTS. DON'T. THAT'S OUR LEGAL RIGHT. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMUNITY TO POTENTIALLY GET THEM TO UNDERSTAND AND THEN YOU CAN GET THAT FEEDBACK, THEN NONE OF THIS WAS HAD OCCURRED. SO I'M PROVIDING THIS AS FEEDBACK, JUST IN CASE YOU DECIDE TO GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPER. ALSO THE DEVELOPER NOT BEING HERE, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL. SO HOPEFULLY YOU CAN BRING SOME OF THIS BACK. AND IF YOU MAKE ANOTHER RUN AT IT, YOU CAN TAKE A LOT OF THIS STUFF INTO CONSIDERATION. AND YOU KNOW, AND I ALSO TAKE THE POINT, A COMMERCIAL USE WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR YOUR 
          [01:35:03]
COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT POINT TO RAISE. BUT THOSE ARE MY THAT'S MY FEEDBACK. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HARRIS. COMMISSIONER CARSON WELL, I HAVE JUST A COUPLE OF OPINIONS, AS YOU MIGHT SUSPECT, BUT I WOULD SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS. THANKS TO THE ENGINEER THAT SPOKE, I THINK YOU DID A GREAT JOB AT LEAST GIVING US SOME INSIGHT. 
          AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN'T SPEAK ON BEHALF AT ALL THINGS, BUT I THINK YOU DID A GOOD JOB. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME BEING HERE AS WELL. AND I THINK TO STAFF OF TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO GET TO A YES, I THINK WE'RE ALWAYS A COMMUNITY THAT TRIES TO HELP FIND WAYS TO, TO PROGRESS AND DEVELOP IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY. SO I APPRECIATE THE STAFF PUTTING THE DUE DILIGENCE IN TO TRY TO GET TO SOMETHING THAT THAT'S APPROVABLE, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR ME, WE PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO THIS ONE. AND THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTS THAT CAME OUT TONIGHT IS PRETTY FASCINATING. AND FRANKLY, THAT'S PRETTY POWERFUL. I THINK WHENEVER WE DO A LOT OF ZONING CASES THAT ARE MUCH LESS COMPLICATED OR, SORRY, MUCH MORE COMPLICATED WITH MUCH LESS SUPPORT. SO I THINK THE MESSAGE I WOULD SAY IS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE COMMUNITY, BECAUSE IT MEANS A LOT FOR US AS CITIZENS AND NEIGHBORS OF YOURS AS WELL. I'M MY OPINION IS I'M NOT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. I CAN GIVE YOU A QUICK RUNDOWN, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S RESPONSIBLE TO DO JUST SO THAT THAT THE DEVELOPER UNDERSTANDS. BUT, YOU KNOW, A FEW THINGS I WOULD SAY ON THE POSITIVE SIDE. FIRST, I DO LIKE THE CONCEPT OF BUFFERING FROM A HEAVY COMMERCIAL USE TO A SINGLE FAMILY, BUT I THINK IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING LESS LESS DENSE THAT DOESN'T PROVIDE MORE CHALLENGES TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. SOME OF, LIKE THE OFFICE THAT'S ON FIRST, IS A NICE BUFFER WHERE IT'S LOW LEVEL, ONE STORY, STUFF LIKE THAT THAT'S NOT AS HIGH DENSITY. I THINK ON THE A FEW THINGS, I WOULD SAY THE DENSITY PER ACRE, I I'M, I TRUST THE ENGINEERING MATH BEHIND IT, BUT I DON'T SEE HOW YOU COULD GET MORE DENSE THAN THIS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S A THAT'S A CHALLENGE FOR ME. IT FEELS THIS FEELS LIKE A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. I KNOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARDS AND THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD GOVERN BY WHICH WE WILL. BUT IT DEFINITELY FEELS FEELS MORE OF A MULTIFAMILY THAN A TOWNHOME. THE SETBACKS IS A BIG DEAL TO ME. I UNDERSTAND A FEW OF THOSE ARE 15FT OR SO, BUT LIKE I SHARED IN KIND OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THOSE TWO PARTICULAR ON THE LEFT THAT ARE TEN FEET OFF OF THE FENCE AND TO HAVE A 40 FOOT HIGH HOUSE OR 35, WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING TO ME IS A DEAL BREAKER, PARTICULARLY WITH NO BUFFER OF LANDSCAPING. AND I UNDERSTOOD THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE SOUTH. SO THANK YOU FOR EXPANDING ON THAT. THE PERCENT MASONRY. YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE TAKING SOME LIBERTIES IN THIS IN WHAT WAS PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, THAT THOSE BIG ELEVATIONS THAT WOULD FACE THOSE RESIDENCES TO ME, YOU KNOW, THEY THEY DEMAND A LITTLE BIT OF A QUALITATIVE ASPECT OF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET A RESIDENT TO STARE AT A LARGE FACADE, AND WE'RE TRYING TO BE PRETTY, PRETTY, PRETTY LOW ON THE AMOUNT REQUIRED. SO I KNOW THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE CAN REQUIRE OR NOT, BUT THAT'S I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF A LOWER PERCENT MASONRY AND A HIGHER CEMENTITIOUS PERCENTAGE. I DON'T THINK THAT PROVIDES A BETTER QUALITY BILL. I DEFINITELY DON'T LOVE THE THREE STORIES. I THINK WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ON OTHER PROPERTIES. I KNOW THEY GET PORTRAYED AS A TWO AND A HALF, WHICH IS BY DEFINITION, BUT THOSE ARE THREE STORIES BY BY HEIGHT, THE LOAD OF SCHOOL AND THE DENSITY, YOU KNOW, IN THE AREA. YOU KNOW, ONCE THAT FENCE COMES DOWN, THERE'S A NICE LITTLE GOOD OLD FASHIONED BARBED WIRE WITH SOME COWS, BUT THAT'S GOING TO OPEN THAT HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL UP TO THE CONNECTOR, DOWN THE EASEMENT. AND I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BRING IF THIS WAS TO GET BUILT, IT'S GOING TO BRING A LOT MORE LOAD TO THE HIKE. AND BIKE TRAIL IS GREAT. THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK WE WOULD ALL SUPPORT. BUT TO THE PARKS THAT ARE ALREADY UNDER UNDER FIRE AND GETTING TORN UP BY E-BIKES AND OTHER THINGS RIGHT THERE AT FOLSOM AND ALL THE PLAYGROUND I THINK IS A IS A BIG CONCERN. WE TALKED ABOUT THE HEIGHTS OF THE MASONRY FENCE AGAIN, WHATEVER CAME TO OR WHATEVER WOULD COME TO FRUITION. 
          BUT I THINK A PLAN AND A LITTLE BIT MORE DUE DILIGENCE THERE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HELP THESE RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND HOW HIGH THAT WALL COULD BE OR WOULD BE AND WHAT THAT WOULD BE BUILT OUT OF. I THINK YOU MENTIONED MASONRY FENCE. I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN THE ENGINEER'S MOUTH, BUT I THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING PORTRAYED. THE TRAFFIC'S A VERY REAL CONCERN. 
          THIS IS A CRAZY AREA AND ONLY GETTING CRAZIER. AND I THINK THAT THE IMPACTED LOAD OF THIS VERSUS SOME 8 TO 5 STANDARD USES, WHEN YOU EXPECT A LITTLE BIT MORE TRAFFIC, IS DEFINITELY A NEGATIVE FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. ONE OF THE RESIDENTS BROUGHT UP IN AN EMAIL TO ME, JUST WHENEVER THERE'S A MINUTE OR DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS THAT ARE BUILT THAT HAVE NO AMENITIES, NATURALLY THE FOLKS GRAVITATE TO THE NEIGHBORING AMENITIES. SO FOR LASEMA OR WILLOW RIDGE, WHICH HAVE POOLS AND PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS AND PRIVATE PRIVATE AMENITIES, THESE FOLKS NATURALLY WILL TRY TO USE THOSE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THOSE. AND I DON'T THINK THAT 
          [01:40:04]
THAT LOAD IS A BURDEN THAT THE HOA SHOULD, SHOULD TRY TO MANAGE AGAINST. BUT IT'S SOMETHING WORTH WORTH TALKING TO THE HOA ABOUT. WE TALKED ABOUT THE SETBACKS. YOU KNOW, I, I APPRECIATE AND AGREE THAT DIFFERENT USES COULD BE DIFFERENT THINGS. AND YOU COULD PUT A 40 FOOT, THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING. BUT GIVEN SOME OF THE ONES THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE 40, 50FT AWAY. IT WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT. 
          AND I THINK THAT STARTS TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT THE RESIDENTS WOULD PROBABLY FEEL ABOUT A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THAT. I FIND IT ODD THAT WE'RE MORE WILLING TO PUT A DENSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO A LOT THAN WE WOULD A SCHOOL, AND WE REQUIRE THE SCHOOLS TO PUT GREEN SPACES AND LIVING SCREENS AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER THINGS. AND I THINK THAT'S A MORE FAVORABLE USE THAN A TOWNHOME. THE LOT COVERAGE WAS A QUESTION I ASKED SPECIFICALLY. THIS IS A VERY HIGH LOT COVERAGE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY NEXT TO IT. SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF COVERING EVERYTHING IN CONCRETE. I DON'T LOVE THE ON STREET PARKING. I KNOW IT'S NOT. YOU'RE NOT COUNTING THAT AS A REQUIREMENT, SO I DON'T WANT TO HOLD THAT AGAINST YOU. BUT WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING AN 18 FOOT WIDE GARAGE, I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY VEHICLES IN 2025 CAN FIT IN AN 18 FOOT GARAGE WITH AN 18 FOOT OR 20 FOOT PARKING AREA OR DRIVEWAY, IF YOU WILL. SO I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A PARKING ISSUE HERE AT SOME POINT. IF THIS WAS TO GET BUILT. I THINK THAT THE BIGGEST THING TO ME WAS THE LACK OF ENGAGEMENT, NOT HAVING THE DEVELOPER HERE AND THEN ALSO NOT ENGAGING THE RESIDENTS, PARTICULARLY THE ONES THAT WERE UP, UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY ITSELF I THINK IS A WAS A BIG MISS THAT MIGHT HAVE HELPED THE FOLKS THAT ARE OUT HERE IN THE AUDIENCE FEEL A LITTLE BIT BETTER ABOUT IT. SO I KNOW THAT WAS A LONG WINDED LIST, BUT I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL AND RESPONSIBLE TO THE TEAM THAT'S WORKING HARD ON THIS AND LET YOU KNOW WHERE MY STANCE WAS. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. GREAT JOB. THANKS, COMMISSIONER CARSON. COMMISSIONER BLANCHETT, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WELL, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT MORE TO ADD THAN I THINK. YOU JUST COVERED EVERYTHING. I WOULD JUST SAY THIS TO THE DEVELOPER. I PRETTY WELL, EVERYTHING THAT COMMISSIONER CARSON JUST STATED IS I WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT WITH I. I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PRODUCT TONIGHT. I, I DO WANT TO REITERATE SOME THINGS THAT AND IT'S BEEN MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES. I JUST BELIEVE AND THIS IS FOR STAFF AS WELL. I JUST BELIEVE ANYTIME THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS THAT IS GOING RIGHT NEXT TO A HOMEOWNERS OR TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO MEET WITH THE RESIDENTS FIRST. WHAT I WHAT WE HEARD TONIGHT IS THAT YOU HAD WITH WITH GREAT INTENTIONS, I THINK THE DEVELOPER TO TRY TO PUT A BUFFER HERE FROM OTHER LESS DESIRABLE USES THAT MAY BE GOING ON ON THE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RICHLAND. AND, AND SO I APPRECIATE THE DESIRE TO DO A BUFFER. BUT WHAT I HEARD FROM THE HOMEOWNERS IS THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER OPTIONS THAT WERE AVAILABLE IN YOUR BY RIGHT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE LIKED, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT WAS OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW THERE'S A BALANCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO TRY TO MAKE MONEY. HE'S GOT THAT'S WHAT HE'S DEVELOPED THE PROPERTY FOR. 
          AND I THINK HOMEOWNERS HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LIVE NEXT TO A VACANT LOT, IT'S NOT GOING TO STAY VACANT FOREVER. IT'S NICE WHILE YOU HAVE IT AND YOU IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THE COWS BACK THERE AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. I'VE LIVED IN THOSE KIND OF PLACES BEFORE, AND I ALWAYS FOUND OUT THAT THE COWS DON'T STAY. SO IT'S, IT'S YOU JUST HAVE TO KNOW THAT SOMETHING'S COMING. BUT I DO THINK THE DEVELOPER, JUST AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND, AND STAFF NEEDS TO RECOMMEND THAT DEVELOPERS TALK WITH THOSE THOSE HOMEOWNERS AND, AND TRY TO WORK OUT ALL THE PROBLEMS THAT WOULD BE HERE. I DON'T I DON'T LIKE TO HEAR HOMEOWNERS SAYING THEY JUST LEARNED ABOUT SOMETHING A WEEK AGO OR 530 TODAY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S JUST NOT FAIR. 
          IT'S NOT RIGHT ON FOR DEVELOPERS TO DO THAT TO THEIR TO THEIR NEIGHBORS, TO THEIR SUPPOSED NEIGHBORS. I WOULD SAY ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT I HAVE AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT IS ARE THE ARE THE TOWN HOMES THAT ARE RIGHT NEXT TO THE ON THE SIDE TOWNHOMES NEXT TO THE HOMES. I THINK THAT'S WAY TOO CLOSE AND DOES CREATE THE PRIVACY ISSUES AND EVERYTHING. SO THAT WOULD BE ONE OF MY PROBABLY THE TOP, TOP ON MY LIST OF THINGS I DON'T LIKE ABOUT THIS, BUT I WOULD. I ALSO AM CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF APPROVAL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT MAY HAVE SET SOME KIND OF A PRECEDENT FOR THE PROPERTY, THE VACANT PROPERTY THAT'S TO THE WEST OF IT. AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO SEE LINED UP ALL THE WAY ALONG RICHLAND HERE FROM LASEMA. AND SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS TONIGHT AND WOULD HOPE THAT IF YOU DO WANT TO CONTINUE IN THE PROCESS AND THE TOWN, OF COURSE IT WILL GO INTO TOWN COUNCIL, BUT THAT YOU'D MEET WITH THE HOMEOWNERS AND SEE WHAT YOU CAN FIND THAT WOULD WORK OUT WITH 
          [01:45:05]
EVERYBODY CONCERNED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLANCHETT. COMMISSIONER FIORE THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. SO THE DOWNSIDE TO GOING TOWARD THE END IS BASICALLY ALL OF YOUR THOUGHTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN SAID. BUT I'LL VERY QUICKLY GO THROUGH MY NOTES HERE JUST FOR THE RECORD. SO THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, TO EVERYONE THAT SPOKE, THAT IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL, AS OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE HAVE SAID AND HELPS SHAPE OUR IDEAS ON ON HOW WE MIGHT VOTE ON THIS DEVELOPMENT. I'LL ECHO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND THAT I'M NOT A FAN OF THE REDUCTION IN THE STANDARDS FOR THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT. IN GENERAL, I WOULD VIEW TOWNHOMES MORE POSITIVELY THAN THAN MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE OF THE OWNERSHIP ASPECT OF IT. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE 620 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS JUST TO THE EAST THERE, BUT THOSE ARE BUFFERED BY A MASSIVE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT AND TRAILS AND EVERYTHING. AND THESE ARE RIGHT UP AGAINST THE FENCE LINE OF THE HOMEOWNERS. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE SOME MORE DETAILS. I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ELEVATION. LIKE I WOULD LIKE WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE IN THAT TOTALLY FLESHED OUT AS FAR AS WHAT THE ELEVATION OF THOSE FOUNDATIONS WOULD BE AND HOW HIGH IT WOULD GO, THE SIZE OF THE UNITS. THE BUILDER. 
          INTERESTINGLY, WHEN I INITIALLY READ THROUGH THIS CASE, BEFORE I GOT TO THE COMMENTS, IT WAS I WAS THINKING, YEAH, I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE ELIMINATING A BUNCH OF OTHER USES THAT MIGHT BE LESS DESIRABLE BY RIGHT. AND PUTTING, YOU KNOW, SOME OWNERSHIP BASED TOWNHOMES HERE. BUT WHAT STRUCK ME MORE THAN ANYTHING WAS THAT THE CITIZENS THAT COMMENTED ON THOSE POTENTIAL USES WOULD HAVE WANTED THOSE RETAIL USES AND THOSE COMMERCIAL UNITS ON THAT PARCEL, RATHER THAN THE TOWNHOMES. SO ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT SPOKE, AND I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS AS PRESENTED TONIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. VERY WELL SAID AND APPRECIATE EVERYONE ON THE COMMISSION FOR YOUR THOUGHTS. APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS. AGAIN, AS IT WAS STATED EARLIER, NOT EVERY WEEK DO WE HAVE THAT MANY IN ATTENDANCE AND APPRECIATE THE PASSION AND LOVE FOR YOUR COMMUNITY IN THE TOWN OF PROSPER? I APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPER AND ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE IN TOWN. STAFF. I THINK THE INTENT HERE WAS TO DO SOMETHING, TO MAKE SOMETHING THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN A PERFECT PLAN BETTER. SO I THINK THE INTENT WAS GOOD, BUT I THINK THE EXECUTION KIND OF FELL SHORT, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE POINTS THAT ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED. BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, ANYTIME THESE TYPE DEVELOPMENTS COME FORWARD OR ZONING CASES COME FORWARD, THERE'S GOT TO BE A LOT OF COHESION AND A LOT OF TEAMWORK BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE EVERYONE MATTERS AND PROSPER. IT'S IN OUR MOTTO, RIGHT? SO WE'VE GOT TO WORK TOGETHER. NOW, BEING SAID, IF THIS DOESN'T DEVELOP TONIGHT, DEPENDING ON HOW THE VOTE GOES, YOU KNOW, IT'S STILL ZONED FOR RETAIL USES AND WHAT THAT LITTLE STRIP MAY END UP BEING BECAUSE IT'S A VERY UNIQUE PIECE OF LAND, IT NEEDS TO BE THE RIGHT RETAIL USES AND THE RIGHT TRANSITION RETAIL USES TO GO AGAINST AND TO BE COMPLEMENTARY TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND SOMETHING THAT'S OF VALUE. AND THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS ON THAT LIST THAT COULD BE OF VALUE. A LOT OF THINGS IN THAT LIST THAT MIGHT NOT BE WANTED AS WELL. TO YOUR POINT ABOUT COWS GOING AWAY, I THOUGHT I SAW A FEED STORE ON THERE AS ONE ITEM. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL SEE A FEED STORE IN PROSPER, BUT THAT WOULD REALLY BE COOL. BUT I DON'T THINK IT'D WORK. BUT. SO I APPRECIATE THE INTENT AND ALL THE WORK STAFF DID, AND THE DEVELOPER AND ALL THE FEEDBACK. AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, JUST TO HAVE MORE UNITS ON THE GROUND, BIGGER IS BETTER. THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. AND WE REPRESENT THE CITIZENS. WE ARE CITIZENS, WE ARE TAXPAYERS, AND WE WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE TOWN OF PROSPER. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR A MOTION AND OR A VOTE ON REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. OKAY, SO FOR THE RECORD, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER HAMILTON TO DENY REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. DO I HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECOND. SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HARRIS TO DENY REGULAR AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, ALL COMMISSIONERS IN FAVOR OF DENYING REGULAR AGENDA. 
          ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. AND I'VE GOT SIX. SO THAT MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 0. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED. AND AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS DENIED. SO THAT'S STEP ONE. NOW THIS GOES TO THE TOWN COUNCIL ON MARCH 11TH. AND SO THIS THIS SAME CASE WILL BE IN FRONT OF THE TOWN COUNCIL. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO YOUR COMMUNITIES THROUGH YOUR HOA AND OTHER VARIOUS MEANS. AND, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. SO THANK YOU. SO OUR NEXT ITEM 
          [8. Review actions taken by the Town Council and possibly direct Town Staff to schedule topic(s) for discussion at a future meeting.]
THIS EVENING ON OUR AGENDA IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, REVIEW ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE TOWN COUNCIL AND POSSIBLY DIRECT TOWN STAFF TO SCHEDULE TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION AT A FUTURE MEETING. 
          OKAY, SO PREVIOUS TOWN COUNCIL MEETING ON THE 11TH, THE ONLY THING ON THE AGENDA WAS THE PD ORDINANCE FOR 301 SOUTH COLEMAN STREET. TO ACCOMMODATE THAT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION THAT YOU GUYS SAW FOR FUTURE TOWN COUNCIL ITEMS. JUST CONSENT AGENDA. IT'LL BE NOTICE OF APPEALS AND THAT'S IT. NO REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS FOR TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE 25TH. FUTURE 
          [01:50:02]
ITEMS ON THE FOURTH. THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM CONSENT AGENDA IS STILL BEING WORKED THROUGH, SO IT'S TO BE DETERMINED FOR THE REGULAR AGENDA. WE DO ANTICIPATE THERE BEING A SWEEP FOR CHICK FIL A ON THE TOLLWAY THAT WILL BE IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS. THAT IS ONLY THING WE HAVE, BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO COMMISSIONER FUREY BROUGHT UP A DISCUSSION ABOUT SPRING BREAK FOR THE MEETING ON THE 18TH. DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WANTED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION TODAY OR WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT. 
          WELL, SO I THINK THE EARLIER THE BETTER. WHO WILL BE OUT OF TOWN ON MARCH 18TH? I'M GUESSING YOU'RE OUT. I WILL NOT BE OUT OF TOWN. IF WE HAVE THE MEETING, I WILL BE OUT OF TOWN IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MEETING. AND I'M 5050, SO I MAY, MAY OR MAY OR MAY NOT BE HERE. THAT'S NOT BEEN DETERMINED JUST YET, BUT I'LL BE HERE. YOU WILL NOT BE HERE. WAIT A MINUTE. MARCH 18TH IS SPRING BREAK TUESDAY, SO. ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY ELSE IS NOT GOING TO BE HERE. WELL, WE JUST, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO DELAY MOVING THINGS FORWARD IF WE HAVE A QUORUM. RIGHT. THAT'S THE KEY. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT COMMISSIONER JACKSON IF HE'S HERE OR NOT. THE 18TH. HE DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING LAST TIME. SO I THINK WE PROBABLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. SO I'D SAY LET'S. WE'RE ALL I THINK MOST WILL BE HERE ON THE FOURTH. LET'S LOOK AT THAT. LET'S SEE WHAT CONTENT YOU HAVE AND SEE IF THINGS CHANGE. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PUSHING EVERYTHING FORWARD. IF WE'VE GOT ENOUGH PEOPLE TO MAKE THE MEETING WORK. 
          SO I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT ON THAT. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT'S ALL I GOT TONIGHT. ALL RIGHT. WELL THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR WORK ON THAT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSION FOR WE GO TO JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHERE'S THE CHICK FIL A AT? OH, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. YES, WE TALKED ABOUT STARTING TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS ON THE UDC DEVELOPMENT AND HAVING MORE FREQUENT WORKSHOPS AND WHEN LIKE BEFORE MEETINGS, AFTER THE MEETINGS. FIVE 530 NEED TO REALLY COUNT ON A GOOD HOUR IN EACH OF THOSE THINGS TO REALLY BE ABLE TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD. SO WE WERE THINKING MARCH 4TH WOULD BE THE NEXT ONE, THAT THAT WE WOULD HAVE A WORKSHOP. AND SO THE TIME COMES INTO PLAY. THERE'S WE CAN CAN START THE WORKSHOPS AT FIVE, WE CAN START THEM AT 530 AND START THE MEETING AT 630. IF WE KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, WE CAN POST THEM THAT WAY OR WE CAN DO THEM AFTER THE MEETING. DO YOU ALL HAVE A PREFERENCE OF WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE? SO I HAVE A PROCESS QUESTION BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYONE KNOWS WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF OUR COMMISSION THAT ARE APPOINTED TO ANOTHER WORK GROUP, I GUESS, WITH MEMBERS OF TOWN COUNCIL. SO GLENN AND DAMON AND I THINK Y'ALL ARE MEETING IS NEXT WEEK EVEN, RIGHT MONDAY. SO HOW DOES THEIR WORK AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IMPACT OR GOING TO WHAT WE WOULD DO IN THIS WORK GROUP? I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS THIS GROUP VERSUS WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON WITH THEIR FELLOW TEAM THERE. SURE. WHAT WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW, AND I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE HAD INDIVIDUAL CONVERSATIONS WITH WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND JUST HEARD THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SOME OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT SPEED NUMBER TWO, AS WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, BEING ONE OF THE ONES THAT THAT COULD USE SOME WORK, BUT THERE ARE CHALLENGES WITH THAT RECENT LEGISLATIVE ACTION. I SAY RECENT OVER THE LAST 5 TO 6 SESSIONS, THE LEGISLATURE HAS DONE ITS BEST TO WHITTLE AWAY RIGHTS OF HOME RULE COMMUNITIES. AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS INVOLVE ZONING CHANGES AND TAKINGS ISSUES AND SO FORTH. AND FOR A TOWN TO INITIATE ZONING ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, IF THAT PROCESS IS TAKING AWAY SOMETHING THAT THE CURRENT OWNER ALREADY HAS, WHETHER IT'S A USE OR IT'S A RIGHT OR IT'S ANY NUMBER OF THINGS, YOU ARE SETTING YOURSELF UP IN MOST INSTANCES, IN MOST INSTANCES, TO BE SUED AND WHAT YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR IN THAT PROCESS IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE VALUE WAS BEFORE THE ACTION WAS TAKEN VERSUS AFTER THE ACTION. AND WHAT THAT MEANS, IN A NUTSHELL, IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DO. THOSE TYPES OF ZONINGS WE HAVE CURRENTLY 130 PDS, WHICH IS A LOT, AND QUITE A FEW OF THOSE ARE OLDER THAT WERE DONE BACK IN THE EARLY 2000 TO MID 2000, AND A LOT OF THEM HAVE THINGS THAT WE DON'T LIKE IN TODAY'S FORMAT. SO THIS GROUP, THE MAYOR AND THE MANAGER, WERE TALKING AND THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE A PLANNING GROUP 
          [01:55:02]
PUT TOGETHER, CONSISTING OF TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS TO P AND Z MEMBERS, THE MAYOR, THE MANAGER, ME AND TERRY WELCH, TOWN ATTORNEY. AND TO GO THROUGH ALL 130 OF THESE PDS OVER POSSIBLY SIX MONTHS PERIOD AND DETERMINE WHICH ONES MAY TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES IF THEY'RE OLD ENOUGH TO WHERE WHAT'S IN THEM IS NOT WANTED IN TODAY'S WORLD IS BY EITHER DEVELOPERS OR END USERS, OR WHAT HAVE YOU WILL HAVE. PEOPLE WILL COME IN AND WANT TO CHANGE THEM. AND SO WE'LL KIND OF SCRATCH THOSE OFF THE LIST. AND THEN THERE ARE SOME THAT MAYBE AREN'T BAD. WHAT WHAT IS PERMITTED IN THEM IS SOMETHING THAT IS DESIRED AND, AND QUOTE, ACCEPTABLE UNQUOTE, TO WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN TODAY'S WORLD. SO WE SCRATCH THOSE OFF THE LIST AND THEN WHATEVER IS LEFT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD DECIDE AS A GROUP WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGED. AND PERHAPS JUST THROW OUT SOME IDEAS ABOUT HOW THAT MIGHT OCCUR, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S STAFF CALLS THE OWNER AND BRINGS THEM IN AND SITS THEM DOWN AND SAYS, OKAY, YOU KNOW, LET'S SEE, WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF, OF MECHANISM? AND THAT'S WHAT THE PROCESS IS DESIGNED TO DO, IS JUST SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT THE BEADS. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A STANDING COMMITTEE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE ONGOING FOREVER. ONCE WE GET THROUGH THE LIST, WE'RE DONE AND WE'LL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BOTH P AND Z AND COUNCIL THAT THE COMMITTEE THOUGHT X, Y, AND Z, WHATEVER IT IS THAT THAT COMES FROM, FROM THAT ENDEAVOR. AND THAT'S WHAT THE PROCESS IS. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S DEALING WITH DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S DEALING WITH ZONING. YES. BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THE UDC PROCESS, WHICH IS THE CODE AMENDMENTS, CODE ADJUSTMENTS, PUTTING EVERYTHING WITH DEVELOPMENT IN THE SAME PLACE, MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO PRETTY MUCH ALL THE STANDARDS, ENGINEERING STANDARDS, PARKS, STANDARDS FOR DEDICATION AND STUFF FOR PARKS AND TREE MITIGATIONS, AND THEN POSSIBLE CHANGES TO SUBDIVISION AND ZONING AND ALL OF OUR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. SO THAT'S IT'S A MORE BROAD BASED PROCESS AND TAKES A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, BUT WE HAVE LESS TIME TO DO IT BECAUSE OUR TARGET IS TO TRY AND GET THROUGH 1ST OF MAY. NOW, IF WE CAN'T GET THERE AND WE CAN'T DO IT ALL PROPERLY, THEN WE'LL TAKE LONGER IF THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES. BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GOAL. IF YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW A TARGET, AND IF YOU DON'T, THEN IT'S NEVER GOING TO GET DONE. AND SO OUR TARGETS 1ST OF MAY. SO EVERYTHING WILL GO THROUGH P AND Z FIRST WITH THE UDC PROCESS. AND THEN IT WILL GO TO COUNCIL AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE. WE MAY HAVE ONE POSSIBLY TWO MORE JOINT MEETINGS AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. BUT THE WAY THAT WE'VE GOT IT DESIGNED IS WE BRING THINGS TO Y'ALL FIRST. WE TALK ABOUT THEM, WE GET YOUR FEEDBACK, YOUR COMMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE THEM TO COUNCIL AFTER THAT. AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 
          AND THE WORK SESSION TOOK PLACE. THE WORK SESSION IS DISCUSSING ITEMS ON THE CONSENT. WELL I THINK SO. I THINK WE HAVE TWO WORK SESSIONS. WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT. YOU GOT TWO DIFFERENT WORK SESSIONS THERE. SO COULD WE. YEAH. SO I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO LOSE OUR NORMAL WORK SESSION RELATIVE TO THIS CONTENT COMING UP. RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TIME THE OTHER MEETING NEEDS OR WHAT YOU'RE THINKING NEXT. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED AN HOUR FOR THAT OTHER MEETING. I THINK WE OUGHT TO. I THINK WE OUGHT TO PLAN ON AN HOUR, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION YOU'RE GOING TO START GETTING, AND WE'LL GET IT TO YOU BEFORE THE MEETING. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE GOING TO HAND IT OUT TO YOU AND SAY, OKAY, YOU GOT TEN MINUTES, READ IT AND THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. BUT STILL, I THINK THERE WILL WIND UP BEING DISCUSSION AND MAYBE THINGS WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT OR IDEAS THAT THAT YOU MAY HAVE. SO I THINK AN HOUR IS PRETTY, PRETTY REASONABLE. WE SHOULD HAVE WE NEED OUR WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS THE AGENDA ITEMS IN ADVANCE, HAVE OUR MEETING. AND THEN FOR THESE UDC DISCUSSIONS, THEY MIGHT BE 
          [02:00:05]
ACTIVE. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. YEAH. PERFECT. OKAY, SO IF YOU WANT TO YOU CAN SEE ME AFTERWARDS. SO LET'S DO THAT OKAY. LET'S JUST DO OUR 530 WORK SESSION FOR THE CONTENT OKAY. AND THEN IF THAT'S GOT TO BE POSTED THAT MEETING THOUGH, LET'S JUST MAKE SURE IT'S POSTED AS SUCH THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY DELAY TIME ON THAT. I GUESS IF WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT, DOES THAT WORK FOR SESSION? NO, WE CAN WE CAN JUST DO THAT AND CALL IT AT THE CONCLUSION. RIGHT. WE JUST POSTED IS AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED P AND Z MEETING. AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY. I MEAN, PUBLIC CAN HANG AROUND IF THEY WANT BECAUSE IT'S OPEN, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A SPECIFIC CASE OR SOMETHING. SO IT'S A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBLE, I THINK. I THINK THAT'LL WORK. AND THE UDC WON'T BE EVERY MEETING, BUT IT WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY BE AT LEAST EVERY OTHER MEETING OR ONCE A MONTH, DEPENDING ON HOW THAT WORKS OUT. YEAH, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE. YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MY ONLY REQUEST NOT TO SOUND NEEDY OR DRAMATIC, BUT IF YOU COULD DEFINITELY SEND THAT AHEAD OF TIME WITH A CLEAR ASK, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE LAST MEETING WE HAD A VERY CLEAR ASK WHERE WE LEFT THAT MEETING WITH MORE QUESTIONS UNANSWERED. SO FOR THE UDC YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YES AND NO. THAT THAT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT ABOUT THAT. IT WAS WAS PRIMARILY DESIGNED TO GIVE YOU THE 10,000 FOOT VIEW, SO TO SPEAK, OF WHAT WE'RE DOING, WHY WE'RE DOING IT, HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE AND SO FORTH. BUT WE'LL GET DOWN. WHAT WHAT WE'LL START DOING IS, IS GIVING YOU REAL INFORMATION. 
          YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE FIRST TWO SECTIONS OF WHAT WE'RE CHANGING AND SEE WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT WE'RE CHANGING IT TO AND WHY. AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT. AND IF YOU THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, GREAT. 
          THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT AND WHY AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. BUT YOU'LL HAVE REAL INFORMATION. NO WHAT IFS. MR. CARSON, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR ME? A SECOND AGO, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING A QUESTION. I WAS JUST ASKING WHERE THE CHICK FIL A ON THAT AGENDA. OH, IT'S PROPOSED TO GO NEAR THE HEB. OKAY, PERFECT. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE. 
          I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO, MOVED A MOTION AND A SECOND. COMMISSIONER. 
          HAMILTON. COMMISSIONER HARRIS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADJOURNMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOU
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.