[1. Call to Order, Roll Call, and Establishment of Quorum]
[00:00:04]
WELCOME, EVERYONE TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MONDAY, JUNE 5TH.
WE HAVE TWO NEW COMMISSIONERS, JESSICA WALDEN AND MATT BLANSETT.
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON AN OPEN SESSION ITEM, FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND GIVE THE STAFF.
UM. QUORUM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
AND WILL YOU STAND FOR THE INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY MR. BLANSETT? FATHER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN TOGETHER THIS EVENING.
I ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE AS WE MAKE DECISIONS.
AND THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITY.
FATHER. I PRAY FOR EVERYONE HERE AND ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT OUR CITY.
PRAY FOR OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, OUR LOCAL LEVEL, STATE LEVEL AND FEDERAL LEVEL.
FATHER. AND WE THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT YOU PROVIDE US EACH DAY TO LIVE IN A IN A IN A COUNTRY WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE HAVE FREEDOMS AND WE ARE ABLE TO TO LIVE OUR LIVES AND CREATE A COUNTRY THAT IS HONORING OF YOU.
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 JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLANSETT.
EACH PERSON WILL BE ALLOWED UP TO THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
NO DISCUSSION OR ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AT THIS MEETING ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THIS AGENDA OTHER THAN TO MAKE STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO A CITIZEN'S INQUIRY OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO THE INQUIRY.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? NO. I WILL NOW CLOSE ITEM THREE AND MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.
[Consent Items]
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? I DO. I WISH TO PULL ITEM SIX AND SEVEN.OKAY, SO WE HAVE ITEM FIVE AND EIGHT THROUGH TEN.
WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THOSE ITEMS. I'LL MOTION TO APPROVE FIVE, EIGHT, FIVE AND EIGHT THROUGH TEN.
I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HERMANN TO APPROVE FIVE AND EIGHT THROUGH TEN.
UNANIMOUS ON FIVE AND EIGHT THROUGH TEN.
SIX IS TO CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON THE ANNA STATION BLOCK A LOT 1 FINAL PLAT APPLICANT ONM LIVING.
[Items 6 & 7]
THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED, SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS BY THE ENGINEERING CIVIL PLANS.COMMISSIONER WALDEN, WHAT WERE YOUR QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? ON THE EASTERN BORDER OF THEIR FINAL PLAT, THEY'RE SHOWING A 15 FOOT DE.
I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THAT WAS FOR.
YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT HERE? YES.
[00:05:01]
IT WASN'T LISTED AS AN EXISTING ONE.I'M GOING TO ASK WES LAWSON, OUR CITY ENGINEER, TO COME UP.
LEAVE THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ACTUALLY ON THE EASTERN DEVELOPMENT AND ITS CONVEY THE WATER THAT WE'RE COMING OFF OF THAT SITE WHEN IT WAS STILL VACANT DOWN TO STORM SYSTEM THAT'S IN BRYSON AND IT GOES INTO THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION SO.
BUT I THINK THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS ON THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S USED FOR.
THEY'RE ALSO SHOWING TO BUILD AN APARTMENT BUILDING RIGHT IN THAT EASEMENT.
NOT LOOKING AT THE SYMBOLS. I DON'T REMEMBER ANYTHING BEING IN THERE.
I KNOW THERE'S A STORM SYSTEM TO THE SOUTH THAT COMES OUT OF THE DETENTION POND.
IT GOES INTO THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
BUT I DON'T I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE STIPULATE APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS.
COULD THIS BE JUST A LOT TO LOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT TOO.
IT'S POSSIBLE IF THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE NEEDING FOR DRAINAGE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT IS, BECAUSE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE CHANNEL ALONG THERE IS PROBABLY THAT WAS MY THOUGHT TOO.
SO I FIGURED MAYBE THAT WOULD SUFFICE.
AND SO I WAS QUESTIONING WHY THE NEED FOR THE 15.
IS THAT YOUR ONLY QUESTION ON ITEM NUMBER SIX? SORRY. I ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS.
I DIDN'T SEE HIM. HI ROB MCCLANAHAN ONM LIVING, DURING OUR COMMENT PERIOD BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER THE THEY ASKED IF WE WOULD DISCHARGE PARTIAL DETACHMENT FROM THE NORTH SIDE INTO THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT EXISTING SO THAT NOT ALL OF IT WAS GOING DOWN TO THE POND.
AND SO THAT'S SIMPLY KIND OF THAT HALF OF THE SITE IS GOING TO DIRECTLY DISCHARGE INTO THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO OVER DETAIN INTO THE DETENTION POND AT THE SOUTH END SO WE WON'T BUILD A BUILDING ON TOP OF THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
IT'LL BE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, ESSENTIALLY.
AND THAT MIGHT BE A DISCREPANCY JUST IN THE TIMING OF WHEN WE GOT THE COMMENTS AND REVISED THINGS.
SO I'M SURE IT'LL ALL TRUE UP DURING THE REVIEW PERIOD WITH [INAUDIBLE].
AND YOU PULLED ITEM SEVEN AS WELL.
WHAT WERE YOUR QUESTIONS FOR ITEM SEVEN? I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION ON THIS ONE THEY REFERENCED THE OTHER FINAL PLAT FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST FOR THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
SO ARE YOU AWARE IF THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO IN A FLOODPLAIN? THAT'S WHEN I WENT BACK TO LOOK AT THE NORTH POINT CROSSING PLAT.
ORIGINALLY BEFORE GREEN MEADOWS WAS DEVELOPED, THERE WAS NO FLOODPLAIN ON THIS PARCEL.
BUT IT DOES NOT CHANGE THIS PROPERTY'S.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? NO. IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEMS NUMBER SIX AND SEVEN? I'LL MOTION TO APPROVE.
I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER WALDEN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MARTIN.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES. UNANIMOUS.
[Items for Individual Consideration]
CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND ARTICLE 9.07 TREE PRESERVATION.[00:10:06]
MR. ALTOBELLI.ROSS ALTOBELLI, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO WE'VE PUT THIS ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.
THERE HAS BEEN MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AS IT RELATES TO OUR TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, AND THERE ARE SOME CONFLICTING ORDINANCES THAT WE HAVE.
THERE ARE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE IN PLACE THAT DON'T FULLY GET INTO WHAT A PROTECTED QUALITY TREE IS, NOR WHAT A SPECIMEN TREE IS. THERE'S ALSO A PROCESS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CALLING THE PROCESS A PLAN SUBMITTAL AND WE'RE CALLING IT A PLAT SUBMITTAL. THEN WE'RE CALLING IT SOMETHING ELSE.
SO I'M GOING THROUGH THE REGULATIONS, SIMPLIFYING THE REGULATIONS, ENSURING THAT EVERYTHING IS DEFINED CORRECTLY, AND THEN THE BOTTOM LINE, JUST ENSURING THAT THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE IS JUST DOING THAT.
THAT WAY WE'RE GETTING RID OF THE CLEAR CUTTING.
HOWEVER, WE ALSO DIDN'T HAVE IN THEIR REGULATIONS AS RELATED TO PENALTIES AS IT RELATES TO.
SO WE'VE ESTABLISHED A FEE STRUCTURE FOR THAT AS WELL.
SO THESE ARE THINGS IN WHICH WE'LL BE BRINGING FORWARD IF THE PLANNING AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL HAVE A DETAILED PRESENTATION AT THAT TIME. SO I PROVIDED A SAMPLE MOTION.
IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE STAFF TO LOOK INTO AND TO ENHANCE OUR REGULATIONS.
I'LL MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS ACT ON AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 9.07 TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE WITHIN CHAPTER NINE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.
I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION BY MYSELF AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CLEMENS.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM NUMBER 12, CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON THE WHITE ROCK SUBDIVISION BLOCK A LOTS 1 THROUGH 5 FINAL PLAT APPLICANT SIRIVEN LLC, MRS. MECKE. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A FINAL PLAT.
IT IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, BUT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE ETJ SOUTH OF WEST WHITE STREET OR EAST WHITE EAST 455 AT THAT POINT.
THE ISSUES WITH THIS FINAL PLAT IS IN REGARDS TO THE STREETS, THE LOT, FRONTAGE AND THE WASTEWATER.
IN TERMS OF THE STREETS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO NOT DEDICATE RIGHT OF WAY.
THE ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS AND THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A ANY STREET FRONTAGE CURRENTLY.
THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO THE FIVE LOTS CURRENTLY FROM 455.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S FIVE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES THAT ACCESS THIS THROUGH THIS ACCESS EASEMENT, TWO OF THE FIVE PROPERTIES HAVE FRONTAGE ON 455, BUT THE OTHER THREE DO NOT. SPLITTING THIS ONE LOT INTO FIVE LOTS WOULD ADD A FOUR MORE HOUSES TO IT, MAKING A TOTAL OF NINE PEOPLE SHARING THIS PRIVATE EASEMENT.
COLLIN COUNTY REVIEWS ALL OF THE SEPTIC APPLICATIONS.
ON-SITE SEWAGE FACILITY REVIEW, PART OF THEIR DEFINITION FOR THE ON-SITE SEWAGE FACILITY IS THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A USABLE ONE ACRE. AND IN THAT DEFINITION OF USABLE, IT CAN'T INCLUDE ROADWAY EASEMENTS OR ANY SORT OF UNUSABLE EASEMENT LIKE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
AND THEN EACH LOT WOULD ALSO HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
[00:15:02]
AND THE FOUR LOTS, LOTS TWO THROUGH FIVE ARE ALREADY ONE ACRE OR 1.08 ACRES.THEREFORE, IT IS VERY UNLIKELY THAT THE COUNTY WOULD APPROVE THE SUBJECT APPLICATION.
WHEN I SPOKE TO MISTY BROWN, WHO IS OVER THE SEPTIC REVIEW FOR THE COUNTY, THEY HAD NOT GOTTEN TO THEIR APPLICATION YET AS OF LAST WEEK, BUT IT WAS CONCERNING TO HER TO SEE THAT MANY EASEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY.
THEREFORE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
YOU CAN CHOOSE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL, BUT YOU MUST PROVIDE REASONS AND THEY CAN'T BE ARBITRARY.
OR YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL, WE RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE.
AS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 12? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE THE FIRE LANES.
YOU SAID THAT IT WILL BE AN ISSUE FOR THE FOR THE TRUCKS TO GET DOWN.
BUT THAT'S WHY IN OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR WITH CONDITIONS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS IS THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN ORDER TO MEET AN EQUIVALENCY. OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? I'M GOING TO GO WITH NO ON THAT ONE.
IS, IS THIS AGENDA ITEM? IS IT ANNEXATION AND APPROVAL? NO. OKAY. IT'S JUST THE FINAL PLAT.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN WE GET THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AGAIN UP THERE? THANKS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [INAUDIBLE] NO.
IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 12? I MOTION FOR DENIAL DUE TO 9.02.081, 9.020.087 AND 9.020.090.
I SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER WALDEN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER NYLEC.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES FOR DENIAL AND IT'S UNANIMOUS.
EXCUSE ME. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.
CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON A REQUEST TO REZONE TWO PLUS ACRES LOCATED 370 PLUS OR MINUS FEET EAST OF HIGHWAY 75, 510FT SOUTH OF WEST WHITE STREET FROM C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO ALLOW FOR THE USE OF SELF STORAGE MINI WAREHOUSE WITH MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. APPLICANT IS ANNA 31 RETAIL LP, MR. ALTOBELLI. YES, WE PROVIDED TO YOU.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A TABLE REQUEST FOR THIS EVENING DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE CONTINUING TO REDEFINE THEIR REQUEST AS WELL AS WORK WITH SOME OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN SHAPING ACTUALLY THIS EXISTING LOT.
THEREFORE, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED AND HELD OPEN UNTIL THE THURSDAY, JULY 6TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, AND I PROVIDED A MOTION FOR YOU ALL TO FOLLOW, IF THAT'S YOUR CHOICE.
OKAY. DO I NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING OR JUST READ THIS AND CALL IT? I WOULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:20:03]
OKAY. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:20 P.M..AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE OR NO.
OKAY. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER CARDS FOR THIS ITEM? NO. OKAY, I MOVE THAT THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13 BE TABLED AND HELD OPEN UNTIL THURSDAY, JULY 6TH, 2023 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7 P.M.
SECOND. I MOTIONED FOR I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLANSETT.
OH I CAN'T CLOSE IT. HOLD IT OPEN.
NEVER MIND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
DISCUSS ACTION ON THE ANNA RETAIL ADDITION BLOCK A LOT NINE CONCEPT PLAN APPLICANT.
THIS WAS CONTINGENT ON ITEM NUMBER 13, SO IT WILL BE TABLED AS WELL.
I JUST RECOMMEND NO ACTION BE TAKEN.
I SECOND. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MARTIN.
ITEM NUMBER 15 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.
CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON A REQUEST TO REZONE 2.4 PLUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WHITE STREET, 635FT EAST OF FERGUSON PARKWAY FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 709-2015 SF-E SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 673-2014 TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO ALLOW FOR AN OFFICE RETAIL AND RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT IS NOVUS NDT REALTY LLC.
GOOD EVENING. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS TO DO A STRAIGHT REZONING TO A C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR A AN OFFICE RETAIL AND RESTAURANT TYPE USE.
THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN CALLS OUT FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
THIS ITEM DOES THE DEVELOPMENT DOES CONFORM WITH THAT AND.
THE DEVELOPMENT IS BASICALLY DESIGNED TO PROVIDE FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS.
IT IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, I CAN CERTAINLY ANSWER THOSE.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE AS WELL.
DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? NO, NO.
I DO HAVE ONE. OKAY. GO AHEAD.
CORRECT. SO THERE WAS A VERY OLD HOUSE OR BUILDING THAT WAS ON IT THAT WAS TAKEN DOWN.
SO THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE IS THE ONE YOU'RE REFERRING TO? YEAH. OKAY. AND THEN THIS ONE WAS PART OF THIS.
AND IF YOU RECALL A FEW MONTHS BACK, THEY ACTUALLY DID A REPLAT TO TAKE THIS LOT OUT OF THIS SUBDIVISION HERE, BECAUSE THIS WAS OWNED BY THE HOA AT ONE TIME AND IT WAS SOLD TO THE DEVELOPER FOR THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT WAS NEVER TAKEN OUT OF THAT PD, WHICH IS WHY THE DEVELOPER IS COMING FORWARD WITH A ZONING CASE.
YEAH, THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:24 P.M..
DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOPE. ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER CARDS FOR THIS ITEM?
[00:25:02]
ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:25 P.M.AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM NUMBER? NO. THE BUILDING NEXT TO THIS THAT IS THE OIL CHANGE PLACE, RIGHT? YES, IT IS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 15? I MOTION TO APPROVE.
I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WALDEN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER NYLEC.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THIS IS ALSO CONTINGENT ON ITEM NUMBER 15, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, YES. OKAY.
I WILL MOTION FOR APPROVAL ON THAT.
I'LL SECOND. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MARTIN.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM NUMBER 17 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.
CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH ZONING ON 54.9 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF US HIGHWAY 75 AND COLLIN COUNTY OUTER LOOP ROAD TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, HOTEL AND PRIVATE CLUB BANQUET HALL WITH MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. APPLICANT IS BHADRESH TRIVEDI / DOSTI PARTNERS, LLC, MRS. MECKE, I HOPE I PRONOUNCED ALL THAT CORRECTLY.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COLLIN COUNTY OUTER LOOP AND 75.
THIS PROPERTY DOES HAVE A PRE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT FROM PREVIOUS YEARS.
THIS PROPERTY IS CHALLENGED BY THE DAM, THE RESERVOIR THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE DAM.
AND THEN WITHIN THE BLUE LINE, THERE CAN BE NO INHABITABLE BUILDINGS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CE-3 PLAN CENTER PLAN CENTER DISTRICT WITH HOTEL PRIVATE CLUB WHEN CONSTRUCTED WITH OR ADJACENT TO A HOTEL WITH SHARED PARKING, BANQUET HALL AND MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
THEY ALSO STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT WE DEFINE A BANQUET HALL SINCE THERE WASN'T REALLY THAT USE.
THE REASON FOR PRIVATE CLUB WOULD BE IF THEY NEED A TABC LICENSE.
AND THEN THEY ALSO ARE ESTABLISHING DESIGN STANDARDS TO GO ALONG WITH THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THEY WOULD BE REMOVING THE SCREENING REQUIREMENT WHEN IT'S ABUTTING OR WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN AND DAM AREAS AND THEN SCREENING NOT BEING REQUIRED BETWEEN MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENT USES.
AND THEN FOR THE REFUSE FACILITIES IN THE C-3 DISTRICT.
IT DOESN'T TECHNICALLY TALK ABOUT MULTIPLE FAMILY USES IN THE REFUSE, BUT AS WE HAVE SEEN IN OTHER CASES, OUR MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICTS DO HAVE STANDARDS FOR TRASH.
THEY'RE REQUESTING THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDINGS BE FOUR STORIES AND 45FT WITH A MAXIMUM OF 45FT.
THE REASON FOR THIS IS IT BEING SO FAR AWAY FROM ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
FOR THE PRIVATE CLUB AND BANQUET HALL PARKING.
THEY'RE PROPOSING A ONE SPACE PER 250FT² OF GATHERING FLOOR.
AND THEN IF IT WERE TO BE CONSTRUCTED NOT NEXT TO A HOTEL, IT WOULD FALL UNDER THE PRIVATE CLUB.
ONE SPACE PER 100FT² OF GATHERING FLOOR SPACE.
[00:30:07]
USE AND RANCHING AND AGRICULTURE DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE.THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET THE CHARACTER INTENT.
AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DO WE KNOW IF A DAM BREACH ANALYSIS HAS BEEN PERFORMED? I WILL HAVE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT.
HE'LL COME UP DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU SAVED THAT FOR HIM. DO YOU HAVE ANY ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:31 P.M..
DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION.
MATHIAS ALBERT 2600 NETWORK BOULEVARD, SUITE 310 IN FRISCO, TEXAS.
I'M HERE WITH BOHLER ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER AS THEIR ENGINEER.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I'LL JUMP RIGHT IN ON THE DAM BREACH ANALYSIS.
IT'S IN PROGRESS WORKING WITH THE COUNTY AND TCEQ.
IT'S A SEVERAL YEAR PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THAT AND RUN THROUGH THAT.
AND SO THE LANDOWNER WANTED TO PUSH FORWARD WITH ZONING.
SO IT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS WORKING WITH THE COUNTY.
IT'S A HIGH I FORGET THE LANGUAGE.
THEY USE THE HIGH FLOOD ZONE AREA.
AND SO WHAT'S LIKELY GOING TO BE THE DETERMINATION IS THEY'LL HAVE TO RAISE THE DAM BY THREE FEET IN ORDER TO REACH THAT HIGH FLOOD CLASSIFICATION. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE EXHIBITS YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU.
THOSE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT HEIGHT INCREASE TO THE DAM.
THAT ANSWERED MY NEXT QUESTION.
WE'RE FULLY PREPARED FOR THAT.
BUT. I THINK LARGELY AS WE LOOK AT THIS SITE AND WE TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE TOPOGRAPHY IS A HUGE CHALLENGE WHERE YOU'VE GOT A 30 FOOT DAM ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE.
YOU'VE ALSO GOT THE INTERSECTION OF THE OUTER LOOP AND THE 75 FRONTAGE ROAD RIGHT THERE.
THAT INTERSECTION SITS ABOUT 35FT ABOVE THE EXISTING GRADES ON THIS PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WE'RE AWARE OF THE FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ONCE OUTER LOOP REACHES ITS FINAL BUILD OUT AS WELL.
AND EVEN FROM THE EXIT RAMP FROM 75, WHICH IS FURTHER SOUTH OF THE OUTER LOOP HERE.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL IS COMING FROM HERE.
YOU KNOW, WITH THAT, LAUREN MENTIONED THE ANNEXATION.
THAT'S A PART OF THIS PACKAGE.
I THINK THAT'S THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM WE HAVE IS THE ANNEXATION AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE SHOWING A LITTLE OVER 100 ROOM HOTEL.
I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY PROBABLY NEEDS AND HAS ON A WISH LIST.
I KNOW FROM A TAX STANDPOINT, THAT'S USUALLY A HUGE WIN FOR THE CITY AS WELL.
BUT THE BASE ZONE IS C-3 COMMERCIAL, WHICH STILL ALLOWS A LOT OF OTHER USES.
IF IF THINGS CHANGE, IF SOMEHOW THE THE DAM IMPACTS THE USES THAT ARE AVAILABLE THERE THAT DO INCLUDE A LOT MORE TYPICAL COMMERCIAL USES, YOU KNOW, RESTAURANTS, RETAIL, THOSE TYPES OF USES WOULD STILL BE PERMISSIBLE IN THE BASE ZONING OF THIS PD.
[00:35:07]
I'M SURE STAFF WOULD WORK WITH US TO UPDATE THE CONCEPT PLAN AND THAT LANGUAGE THAT WOULD BE NEEDED, BUT THAT WOULD STILL FIT WITHIN THE INTENTS OF OF THIS PD. UM, WE HAD MET WITH CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR JUST TO KIND OF AS A WORKSHOP ON THIS, AND I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DIALOG AND SOME FEEDBACK THAT CAME OUT OF THAT THAT'S REFLECTED IN THIS PLAN.I KNOW ONE OF THE BIG THINGS IS, IS THE WEST SIDE OF 75 WITH COLLIN COUNTY COLLEGE, YOU KNOW, PURCHASING THAT LAND AND NO HOUSING BEING A PART OF THAT. AND I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES WE GET FEEDBACK THAT EVERYONE WANTS RETAIL.
THAT'S AWESOME. THAT'S A HUGE WIN FOR THE CITY AS WELL IS A LOT OF TIMES THE HOUSING IS A CATALYST FOR THOSE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS TO TAKE PLACE ON THIS PARTICULAR PD, BUT IT ALSO SUPPLIES THAT WORKFORCE.
IT SUPPORTS SOME OF THOSE OTHER ELEMENTS JUST NATURALLY BY THE NATURE OF THE MULTIFAMILY USE.
I KNOW THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A HIGH 60-70% ONE BEDROOM USE, AND THAT PD RECOMMENDATION REFLECTS THAT UNDERSTANDING, NOT TRYING TO TAX AND PUT A BURDEN ON THE ISD WITH MORE AND MORE FAMILIES THAT ARE COMING IN.
UM, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, REALLY A LACK OF SINGLE FAMILY ADJACENCY HERE.
THAT'S A LOT OF WHERE SOME OF THESE REQUESTS ARE COMING FROM.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY THIS PARCEL IS BEING SLATED FOR A RESIDENTIAL USE OTHER THAN SINGLE FAMILY.
IT'S THE DAM, IT'S THE FLOODPLAIN, IT'S THE ELEVATION CHALLENGES AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE PD THAT WE'VE PRESENTED, WE'RE NOT INCREASING DENSITY, WE'RE NOT DECREASING THE MULTIFAMILY PARKING OPEN SPACE. SOME OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THE CODE AS BEST AS WE CAN.
AND I THINK SOME OF THE PD STANDARDS AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE REFLECTIVE OF THAT.
BUT WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE.
I'LL BE HERE TO HELP YOU GUYS MAKE A CONSCIOUS DECISION.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? SO THE BANQUET HALL, YOU HAVE IT LISTED AS 19,200FT².
ROUGHLY HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU ANTICIPATE BEING ABLE TO HOLD IN THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE? THAT'S A I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER OF WHAT THAT CAPACITY WOULD HOLD.
A LOT OF WHERE THAT BANQUET HALL PLACEMENT AND SIZING IS DRIVEN OFF OF THE ADJACENCY WITH THE HOTEL AND THOSE TWO BEING HOPEFULLY SYNONYMOUS WITH EACH OTHER, WHERE IT'S NOT AN EVENT VENUE WHERE THERE'S NOWHERE TO STAY, IT'S NOT A CONVENIENCE FOR PEOPLE COMING TO VISIT ANNA. AND SO THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THAT'S COMING INTO PLAY IS ALMOST IT ACTS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A SEPARATE BUILDING ALMOST IS A LARGER CONFERENCE CENTER, THINGS LIKE THAT TO ATTRACT COMPANIES AND BUSINESSES AND EVENTS ALL TO THE CITY OF ANNA.
BUT I'M NOT SURE OF WHAT THAT EXACT CAPACITY WOULD BE FOR THAT BANQUET HALL.
ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC OR THE CITIZENS HERE IN ANNA, LIKE MAYBE A RENTABLE SPACE? YEAH, THAT WOULD BE THE INTENT IS IT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR FOR RENT OR FOR LEASE FOR PRIVATE EVENTS.
IS THERE A REASON WHY YOU WOULDN'T CONSIDER DOING THAT? THERE MIGHT BE A SECURITY FENCING, BUT IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE A SOLID MASONRY SCREEN FENCE.
THAT WOULD BE MORE FOR VISIBILITY.
SO BETWEEN THE THE TWO PHASES OF MULTIFAMILY IS WHERE THAT FLOODPLAIN LIES.
THERE IS VEGETATION THROUGH THAT AREA.
NOW, THE INTENT WOULD BE TO TRY TO PRESERVE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
IT WOULD JUST KIND OF TAKE THAT AWAY.
SO I BELIEVE HOW THE STANDARDS ARE PRESENTED IS IT'S NOT A SOLID MASONRY SCREEN WALL, BUT ORNAMENTAL FENCING OR DECORATION OR WHATEVER THE TERMINOLOGY IS, WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IN THOSE AREAS.
AND THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE, YEAH, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A 30 FOOT TALL DAM, WHICH SAME THING.
[00:40:06]
YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, I'VE GOT ONE. THE IN REGARDS TO THE PARKING, ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS WAS THAT UP TO 36 OF THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES FOR THE PRIVATE CLUB BANQUET HALL TO BE ALTERNATIVE PARKING SERVICE OTHER THAN ASPHALT OR CONCRETE.IS THAT JUST LIKE GRAVEL? IN TERMS OF EXACT MATERIAL? IT MIGHT BE GRAVEL, IT MIGHT BE MORE JUST, YOU KNOW, GRASS THAT'S JUST PARKED ON EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.
REALLY, THE INTENT BEHIND THERE IS IT'S AN EVENT CENTER.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ROUTINELY USED.
IT'S GOING TO BE AS THEY HAVE EVENTS AND BIGGER EVENTS THAT THAT A LOT OF TIMES WE'VE SEEN SOME INSTANCES WHERE THESE EVENT CENTERS IT COULD BE A LOCAL CHURCH THAT JUST NEEDS A SPACE AND THEY'VE GOT A CONGREGATION.
EVEN SOME OF THOSE SMALLER EVENTS PROBABLY DON'T REACH THAT OVERFLOW PARKING.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE THAT'S PRESENTED AS OVERFLOW PARKING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO [INAUDIBLE].
I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON IT, BUT WILL THERE BE ANY ALCOHOL SALES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT YOU GUYS TRY TO OBTAIN FOR A LICENSES? TO BE HONEST, IT'S TOO EARLY TO SAY RIGHT NOW.
SURE. PART OF THE THE WORK FROM A PREVIOUS CITY I WORKED IN A LOT OF THE EVENT VENUES.
THEY WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE A TABC LICENSE.
I'VE SEEN A LOT OF SUP REQUESTS FOR THAT FOR AN EVENT VENUE AND THAT JUST MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER FOR THE APPLICANT IF THEY DO NEED TO HAVE THAT TABC LICENSE IN ORDER TO HAVE IT BE AN EVENT VENUE FOR LIKE A WEDDING AND HAVE, YOU KNOW, BARTENDERS COME.
THEY STILL WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE FOR THE TABC LICENSE.
IS THAT INCLUDED IN THE RESTRICTIONS? NO, THIS RESTRICTION WOULD JUST BE CHANGING THE PRIVATE CLUB FROM AN SUP TO PERMITTED BY RIGHT.
THE TABC RULES FOR THE CITY SECRETARY ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE ZONING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER CARDS FOR THIS? NO, I'M HAPPY TO COME BACK UP IF THERE'S MORE QUESTIONS.
NO, I THINK I THINK IT'S A TOUGH SITE BECAUSE OF THE SETBACKS FROM THE DAM AND THE TCEQ.
I MEAN, THE TOPOGRAPHY IS CHALLENGING.
YEAH, IT'S IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH TO DO HIGHER EDUCATION OR OFFICE COMPLEX, I THINK THERE.
I MOTION TO PASS WITH THE STIPULATIONS FROM THE CITY RECOMMENDATIONS HERE.
I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER NYLEC.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND, AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HERMANN.
ALL IN FAVOR? AND MYSELF IS ALSO A YES.
MRS. MECKE, THIS ITEM IS CONTINGENT ON NUMBER 17, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ON ITEM NUMBER 18? I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 18.
I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR FROM COMMISSIONER CLEMENS FOR APPROVAL? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLANSETT.
[00:45:12]
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.ITEM NUMBER 19 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.
CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON A REQUEST TO AMEND A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 860-2020 AND ESTABLISH THE SAME ZONING ALLOWANCES ON 2.53 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FUTURE NORTH STANDRIDGE BOULEVARD, 700 PLUS OR MINUS FEET SOUTH OF WEST ROSEMONT PARKWAY. APPLICANT IS MANTUA 30 PARTNERS LTD, MRS. MECKE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ESTABLISH A ZONING ON TWO TRACKS CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE ETJ BY INCLUDING THEM INTO AN EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORY ABOUT THIS SITE.
BACK IN DECEMBER OF 2019, THE DEVELOPER, CENTURION AMERICAN, HAD COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL SHOWING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE EXPANDING THE VILLAGES OF HURRICANE CREEK INTO WHAT'S NOW CALLED THE VILLAGES OF HURRICANE CREEK NORTH, AS WELL AS SHIRLEY COMMERCIAL.
A PART OF THE SITE WAS ALREADY IN THE CITY LIMITS SHIRLEY COMMERCIAL.
THE REST OF IT WAS IN THE ETJ.
IN 2020, THEY ESTABLISHED THE ZONING FOR THE CITY PORTION SHIRLEY COMMERCIAL, WHICH ESTABLISHED A COMMERCIAL MULTIFAMILY AS WELL AS A SLIGHT PORTION THAT WOULD BE IN THE TOWNHOME SECTION ON THE WEST SIDE OF [INAUDIBLE] BOULEVARD IN 2020.
THEY DID THE ANNEXATION FOR VILLAGES OF HURRICANE CREEK NORTH, AND DURING THAT PROCESS IT WAS WE DIDN'T HAVE A GIS MANAGER AT THE TIME TO VERIFY THE METES AND BOUNDS, AND SO IT WAS INADVERTENTLY MISSED THAT THERE WAS A SLIVER THAT WAS MISSED FROM THE ANNEXATION.
AFTER THE FACT, THE COUNTY CONTACTED US AND SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS MISSING.
IT WAS PART OF THE CONCEPT PLAN.
AS YOU CAN SEE, ABOUT HALF OF THE TWO AND A HALF ACRES IS GOING TO BE FUTURE [INAUDIBLE] BOULEVARD.
CURRENTLY IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IT WILL SHIFT OVER TO THE WEST SIDE.
IT'S RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION.
AND THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS? TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:47 P.M..
DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? NO. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? NO. ALL RIGHT.
I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:48.
AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF.
I WILL MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER 19.
I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WALDEN.
ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
I WILL MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 7:49 P.M..
THANK YOU ALL FOR ATTENDING.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.