Feb 25, 2025 City Council Meeting

>> THAT'LL TAKE US TO AGENDA ITEM 4 WORK SESSION, ITEM A,

[4. Work Session.]

PARTICIPATE IN A JOINT WORK SESSION WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FACILITATED BY KIMLEY-HORN ON THE ANNA 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.

>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS.

TONIGHT, WE HAVE KIMLEY-HORN AND MARK BOWERS FROM KIMLEY-HORN, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CONSULTANT BACK WITH US TO GIVE US AN UPDATE AND SUMMARY OF WHAT OCCURRED DURING THE PUBLIC PROCESS, AND TO DISCUSS NEXT STEPS.

PLEASE WELCOME MARK BOWERS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, STEPHANIE. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE ANNA CITY COUNCIL, CHAIRMAN OF THE ZONING COMMISSION, AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS.

AGAIN, MY NAME IS MARK BOWERS.

I'M A PLANNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WITH KIMLEY-HORN, THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.

TONIGHT, I HAVE WITH ME TAYLOR BALDWIN FROM KIMLEY-HORN, WHO SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE MET AT SOME OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD OR AT THE PUBLIC MEETING.

SHE'S BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN WORKING CLOSELY WITH US TO DEVELOP THIS PLAN.

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION TONIGHT, AS STEPHANIE INDICATED.

WE WANT TO JUMP RIGHT INTO IT.

NUMBER 1, WE WANT TO TEE UP THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE LAST TIME WE GOT TOGETHER.

THAT INCLUDED AN OPEN HOUSE AND AN ONLINE SURVEY.

THEN FOLLOWING THAT, WE WANT TO SHARE SOME OF THE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF WHAT WE HEARD BACK FROM THE COMMUNITY TO INCORPORATE INTO THE PROCESS.

SPECIFICALLY, WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THE PLACE TYPES AGAIN, SHARE THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT, AND HAVE SOME DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION FROM YOU, AND THEN GO THROUGH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND HAVE DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON THAT FOLLOWING PRESENTATION OF THE COMMENTS RECEIVED, AND THEN TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS.

JUST TO REMIND YOU OF THE PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH, WE STARTED OFF WORKING WITH P&Z AND COUNCIL AND REALLY GOING THROUGH AN AUDIT OF THINGS THAT WERE WORKING FOR YOU IN THE PREVIOUS VERSION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IT TURNS OUT THAT MUCH OF IT WAS WORKING PRETTY WELL FOR YOU, BUT THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT YOU WANTED US TO TWEAK.

WE REALLY FOCUSED IN ON THE PLACE TYPES IN THE LAND USE PLAN THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

THEN I'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THE MAPS AND HOW THAT EVOLVED TO THE MAP THAT WE TOOK TO THE PUBLIC IN DRAFT FORM FOR FEEDBACK TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE RESULTS OF THAT DIRECTION THAT WE RECEIVED.

AS AN OVERVIEW OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, COMMUNITY FEEDBACK WAS FACILITATED AS FOCUSED ON THE DRAFT PLACE TYPES AND THE DRAFT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IN EARLY FEBRUARY.

THERE WERE MORE THAN 430 TOUCH-POINTS WITH ANNA'S NEIGHBORS FROM FEBRUARY 4TH TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR FEEDBACK WERE ADVERTISED THROUGH THE PROJECT WEBSITE, QR CODE, AND DIRECT LINK SHARED AT THE COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE, PUBLIC OUTREACH, IT WAS PROMOTED THROUGH EVENTS, MAILING LISTS, AND SOCIAL MEDIA THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

IN FACT, WE SAW A BIG PUSH AT THE VERY BEGINNING WITH FOLKS THAT WERE GOING TO THE SURVEY,

[00:10:03]

AND THEN AS THINGS STARTED TO SLOW DOWN AGAIN A LITTLE BIT, THEN WE PUSHED IT OUT AGAIN OR CITY STAFF ASSISTED US IN PUSHING IT OUT AGAIN ON FACEBOOK.

THE OPEN HOUSE WAS CONDUCTED ON FEBRUARY 6TH AT THE SUE EVELYN RATTAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FROM 6:00 PM-8:00 PM.

THE FORMAT CONSISTED OF 19 BOARDS AT DIFFERENT STATIONS.

WE HAD WELL OVER 80 PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP AT THE FACE-TO-FACE OPEN HOUSE OVER THAT TWO-HOUR PERIOD.

THE EVENT WAS COME AND GO SO THAT PARTICIPANTS COULD SPEND AS MUCH TIME AS THEY DESIRED AT EACH STATION AND REALLY SPEND TIME WITH EACH OTHER DISCUSSING THINGS THAT THEY LIKED OR DISLIKED ABOUT THE PLAN.

ONLINE SURVEY ESSENTIALLY WAS AVAILABLE TO ANNA'S NEIGHBORS FROM FEBRUARY 4TH-14TH.

THE FORMAT MIRRORED THE OPEN HOUSE.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS APPLES TO APPLES.

IF WE ASKED HIM A QUESTION AT THE OPEN HOUSE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ASKING THE SAME QUESTIONS ON THE SURVEY.

GENERAL DEMOGRAPHICS, THERE WERE 349 RESPONDENTS THAT LIVED IN ANNA, WHICH IS ABOUT 98.87%, ABOUT 18.7% OR 66 OF THE RESPONDENTS WORK IN ANNA, 81% WORK ELSEWHERE, AND THEN 43.5% WERE MALE AND 56.4% WERE FEMALE.

THE AVERAGE RESPONDENT AGE WAS 47 YEARS OLD.

LET'S GET INTO SOME OF THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE PLACE TYPES, AND AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED WITH YOU FOLKS, AND WE WENT THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF DETAILED DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH, ELIMINATED SOME PLACE TYPES AT THE LAST JOINT MEETING THAT WE HAD WITH YOU.

WE ENDED UP ADDING ONE BACK IN PRIOR TO GOING TO THE COMMUNITY AT THE OPEN HOUSE.

ESSENTIALLY, THEY'RE THE COLOR PALETTE THAT ARE USED TO REPRESENT THE DIFFERENT PLACES THAT COULD EXIST IN ANNA IN THE FUTURE.

THEY WERE BASED UPON THE PLACE TYPES THAT WERE USED IN THE PREVIOUS LAND USE PLAN AND THE ANNA 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AT THE JANUARY 28TH OPEN HOUSE AND DURING THE ONLINE SURVEY, PEOPLE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT THOSE SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PLACE TYPES, LIKE WE ASKED YOU TO DO AT ONE OF YOUR JOINT WORKSHOPS AND TELL US WHAT SHOULD CHANGE RELATED TO THE CHARACTER INTENT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY LAND USES, AND THE IDENTIFYING FEATURES.

THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH, SOME DIFFERING OPINIONS RELATED TO THE EMPLOYMENT MIX AND MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSING PLACE TYPES, AND I'LL SHARE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON WHAT WE HEARD RELATED TO THOSE.

THE SURVEY RESPONDENTS WERE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE CURRENT DIRECTION OF THE PLACE TYPES.

TO GET INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE RURAL LIVING PLACE TYPE.

AS WE GO THROUGH THESE, IF YOU SEE A CHECKMARK NEXT TO THE COMMENT, THESE WERE ACTUAL COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED OR SUMMARIES OF THE DIRECTION THAT WE RECEIVED.

IF YOU SEE A CHECKMARK, IT'S ESSENTIALLY SAYING THAT YES, THAT IS ALREADY A PART OF THE PLACE TYPE, OR IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS INTENDED TO BE A PART OF THE PLACE TYPE THAT WE CAN CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT IF WE NEED TO.

ON RURAL LIVING, PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO SEE MORE GREEN AND OPEN SPACE, STRONG SUPPORT FOR EXPANDING THAT PLACE TYPE CITYWIDE, A DESIRE TO PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THAT RURAL LIVING CHARACTER, FUTURE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT SHOULD PRIORITIZE WALKABILITY AND CONNECTIVITY, PREFERENCE FOR LARGER SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, WHICH AGAIN, IS THE FOCUS OF RURAL LIVING, SUPPORT FOR AGRICULTURAL AND FARMING USES, AND IMPLEMENT RESTRICTIONS TO LIMIT OR PROHIBIT APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH AS YOU CAN SEE, IS NOT ALLOWED WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR PLACE TYPE.

THE NEXT ONE WAS ESTATE LIVING.

HERE YOU START TO SEE THINGS OTHER THAN A CHECK.

WHEN IT'S JUST GOT A LINE NEXT TO IT, IT'S SAYING, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE AND DOCUMENT IT SO THAT YOU KNOW THAT GOING FORWARD, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING NECESSARILY THAT WE CAN COVER IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT FIRST ONE, FEWER HOA RESTRICTIONS, THAT'S NOT TYPICALLY SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S MORE OF A POLICY DIRECTION FOR THE CITY.

AGAIN, PREFERENCE FOR LARGER LOTS.

SINGLE-FAMILY ESTATE OR THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL IS 1-5 ACRES, DESIRE TO SEE FEWER HOMES BEING BUILT.

CERTAINLY, THAT'S THE CASE WITHIN ESTATE RESIDENTIAL, LIMIT ON SUBDIVISIONS.

WE REALLY SAID THAT THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL MAY OR MAY NOT BE A PART OF A SUBDIVISION.

THEY MENTIONED WANTED TO SEE RELIABLE AND SAFE TRANSPORTATION THAT CONNECTS TO THE AREAS THAT HAVE THAT ESTATE RESIDENTIAL.

>> THE NEXT ONE IS SUBURBAN LIVING.

[00:15:03]

PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO LIMIT DENSE HOUSING TYPES.

ON THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE LOT SIZES, YES, AT THE LOWEST END AT 6,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT IT REALLY RANGES FROM 6,000 SQUARE FEET TO ONE ACRE.

THAT WAS A DISCUSSION WE HAD WITH YOU.

>> EARLY ON THAT YOU REALLY WANTED TO SEE SOME LARGER LOT SIZES WITHIN THAT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

FOLKS SAID THEY WANTED TO CREATE A BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN A STATE AND SUBURBAN LIVING.

WE THINK THAT THAT CAN CERTAINLY BE ACCOMMODATED BASED ON TRANSITIONS AS NEIGHBORHOODS START TO LAY OUT BETWEEN THOSE COMMUNITIES, AND WE CAN MENTION THAT IN SOME WAY AS THAT BEING PART OF THE VISION FOR SUBURBAN LIVING.

DESIGNATING CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUNDS AND PARKS AS SECONDARY USES.

WE ALREADY HAVE PARKS AND AMENITIES AS PART OF THE IDENTIFYING FEATURES, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY ADD IT AS A SECONDARY USE.

FOLKS SAID PRESERVE SOME LAND AS UNDEVELOPED RURAL.

WHAT WE SAID THERE IS THAT'S REALLY A PART OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE LAND USE PLAN.

IT'S NOT SAYING WITHIN, WE SUGGEST YOU NOT GO INTO SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL AND SAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RURAL LIVING WITHIN SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL, BUT THAT YOU WOULD LOCATE THE RURAL LIVING WHERE IT'S DESIRE TO BE LOCATED ON YOUR LAND USE PLAN AND HANDLE IT THAT WAY SO THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE PRECISE AS TO WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THERE.

THEN INCREASE LOT SIZES TO PREVENT HOMES FROM BEING TOO CLOSE TOGETHER.

AGAIN, WE THINK THERE IS A RANGE THERE WHILE IT IS AT THE LOW END, 06,000 SQUARE FEET, IT DOES GO UP TO ONE ACRE WITHIN THOSE AREAS.

COMPACT RESIDENTIAL WAS THE PLACE TYPE THAT WE ADDED AT THE LAST MEETING, AND THAT WAS REALLY TO ACCOMMODATE THE MORE OF THE SUBURBAN STYLE OF DENSER DUPLEX TOWNHOME, THOSE TYPES OF PRODUCTS.

IF YOU'LL RECALL IN THAT DISCUSSION, WE SAID, WE'RE REALLY NOT RECOMMENDING THAT PLACE TYPE WHERE THE OLD PLAN HAD COMPACT RESIDENTIAL LARGE SWATHS ACROSS THE CITY.

WE HEARD FROM YOU THAT THERE WASN'T A DESIRE TO HAVE THAT ALL OVER THE CITY THAT WE WANTED TO LIMIT IT.

REALLY, THIS COMPACT RESIDENTIAL IS INTENDED TO BE IN THOSE AREAS WHERE IT'S ALREADY BEEN ZONED OR IT ALREADY EXISTS AS A BUILT NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT FOLKS DID SAY THEY WANTED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF STORIES OF DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADPLEXES TO TWO, STOP BUILDING APARTMENTS ON 75 AND FIVE ON WHITE STREET.

THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH LANES TO ACCOMMODATE TRAFFIC.

AGAIN, THAT'S MORE OF A LAND USE DISCUSSION, BUT WE CAN TALK THROUGH THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE LAND USE.

THEN DEFINE CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USE.

I THINK IN THE REPORT ITSELF, WE CAN IDENTIFY WHAT WE MEAN BY CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL AS WE UPDATE THIS.

URBAN LIVING. FOLKS SAID REMOVE CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES FROM URBAN LIVING.

WE HAD A QUESTION MARK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU MIGHT WANT A SCHOOL, YOU MIGHT WANT A LIBRARY.

YOU MIGHT WANT FIRE STATIONS WITHIN THOSE AREAS.

THAT WASN'T A COMMENT THAT WAS HEARD BROADLY, BUT IT WAS A COMMENT THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF.

OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ONE IS THAT YOU STILL ALLOW FOR THOSE TYPES OF USES THAT ARE GOING TO BE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THAT OVERALL PLACE TYPE AND YOUR CITY AS A WHOLE.

STRATEGICALLY LOCATE THE URBAN LIVING TO HELP ALLEVIATE ROAD CONGESTION.

AGAIN, THAT'S A LAND USE DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK THE AREAS THAT ARE SHOWING THAT ARE MORE AT MAJOR ROADWAYS RATHER THAN IN RESIDENTIAL STREETS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, AND THEN LIMIT THE EXPANSION OF THIS PLACE TYPE.

FROM THE PREVIOUS LAND USE PLAN TO THE CURRENT LAND USE PLAN, WE HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY CUT BACK ON SOME OF THOSE AREAS THAT WERE SHOWN ON THE MAP AS URBAN LIVING.

COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.

FOLKS SAID HERE ATTRACT A HIGHER CLASS HOTEL.

AGAIN, WE PUT A QUESTION MARK NEXT TO THAT BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL IS REALLY INTENDED TO BE THAT SMALLER SCALE CONVENIENCE TYPES OF NEEDS THAT MIGHT BE LOCATED VERY CLOSE TO A NEIGHBORHOOD OR IN SOME OF THE RURAL AREAS AT AN INTERSECTION, AND WE DID INCLUDE HOTELS AS A PART OF THE NEXT PLACE TYPE, I'LL BE SHOWING YOU.

THROUGH PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS, WE THOUGHT THE DIRECTION WAS THAT YOU WANTED THE HOTELS AND THAT ONE.

IF YOU COME BACK AND TELL US YOU'D LIKE TO SEE HOTELS AS PART OF THIS ONE, TOO, WE COULD CERTAINLY DO THAT, BUT WE FELT THAT BASED ON THE SCALE AND THE ACTIVITIES,

[00:20:04]

THE TRAFFIC AT HOTELS, IT MIGHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.

FOLKS SAID REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PIZZA STORES, SMOKE SHOPS, LIQUOR STORES.

OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL PUT THE LAND USE IN PLACE, BUT THOSE TYPES OF THINGS WOULD COME THROUGH LATER ZONING, AND THEN ENCOURAGE MORE QUALITY SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS.

THAT'S A THEME WE'VE HEARD THROUGHOUT THAT FOLKS WANTED TO SEE SMALL BUSINESSES, LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT WERE REALLY ECCENTRIC.

REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS.

THIS IS THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE HOTELS LISTED AS A PRIMARY USE.

PEOPLE SAID THEY WANTED MORE HEALTHY GROCERY OPTIONS.

CERTAINLY, THIS PLACE TYPE WOULD ACCOMMODATE THAT DESIRE.

IT'S ATTRACTING THOSE PARTICULAR RETAILERS.

INTEREST IN ATTRACTING UPSCALE RETAILERS NEED FOR MAJOR RETAIL ANCHORS, SUCH AS TARGET AND HEB, MORE GROCERY STORES IN GENERAL.

DEVELOPMENT SHOULD HAVE A COHESIVE AND WELL-PLANNED EXTERIOR.

AGAIN, SOME OF THOSE IDEAS, WE CAN WORK INTO DESCRIPTIONS OF WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY RELATED TO THE PLAN, BUT THEY DON'T NECESSARILY CHANGE THE OVERALL INTENT OF THE PLACE TYPE.

I THINK IT ADDS RICHNESS TO IT.

DOWNTOWN COMMENTS WERE VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH THE PLACE THAT WE ARE SHOWING WITH THE PLACE TYPE, CREATE A TOWN SQUARE FOR COMMUNITY EVENTS, WIDER STREETS, WALKABLE, PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED, MAKING THIS A DESTINATION POINT FOR THE CITY.

ADDING A PARKING GARAGE COULD CERTAINLY BE ACCOMMODATED WITH THE PLACE TYPE AS IT'S BEEN WRITTEN.

PARK AND OPEN SPACE AREA BEING INCORPORATED INTO THE PRIMARY PLANNING OF THE LAND USE.

AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT TOWN SQUARE, HISTORICAL.

YOU SEE WORDS IN THE PLACE TYPE, IDENTIFYING FEATURES, HISTORIC CHARACTER, CULTURAL DESTINATION.

I THINK A LOT OF THOSE IDEAS WERE MORE OR LESS REINFORCED THROUGH THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED.

THEN EMPLOYMENT MIX WAS THE NEXT ONE.

YOU SEE SOME CHECKS, SOME MINUSES, AND YOU START TO SEE AN X ON THIS ONE.

A LOT OF FOLKS SAID, WE SUPPORT THIS FOR JOB CREATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND THAT'S ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE ORIGINAL 2050 PLAN.

THE NORTH ARROW THAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY IS WE WANT TO CREATE A BALANCED COMMUNITY WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE AND WORK AND WE WANT A JOBS-TO-RESIDENTIAL BALANCE SO THAT FOLKS CAN WORK HERE AND LIVE HERE AND NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO GET ON 75 AND DRIVE SEVERAL MILES TO GO TO A JOB.

AGAIN, MANY SUPPORTED THIS PLACE TYPE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SOME FOLKS SAID IT SHOULD BE STRATEGICALLY LOCATED TO MINIMIZE TRAFFIC CONGESTION.

CERTAINLY, THAT SHOULD BE THE CASE.

AGAIN, WE POINT OUT THAT'S A LAND USE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE IT'S LOCATED IN THE CITY.

STRICT BUILDING REGULATIONS RELATED TO HEIGHT, LIGHT POLLUTION MUST BE ENFORCED.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PASS ON TO STAFF AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND SOME OF THE ORDINANCES THAT YOU HAVE FOR THIS TYPE OF USE IN THE COMMUNITY AND THIS TYPE OF ZONING THAT MAY GO IN PLACE IN THE FUTURE.

THEN WE HAD THE COMMENT HERE.

SOME RESIDENTS DIDN'T WANT THIS PLACE TYPE IN ANNA AT ALL.

ON THE NEXT ONE RELATED TO THE INDUSTRIAL, THERE WERE SOME FOLKS THAT SAID, WE DON'T WANT THIS PLACE TYPE IN ANNA AT ALL.

AGAIN, WE WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WAS SOME COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED.

IT WASN'T THE OVERRIDING COMMENT, BUT FOR TRANSPARENCY, WE WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE THAT THERE WERE SOME FOLKS THAT SAID, WE REALLY WANT TO MAINTAIN ANNA AS IT IS TODAY, AND WE DON'T WANT GROWTH, SO OUR PREFERENCE IS THAT WE NOT BRING ADDITIONAL TYPES OF USES TO ANNA.

THESE WERE A PART OF YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PREVIOUSLY.

IN FACT, AGAIN, EMPLOYMENT WAS A KEY THING.

OUR APPROACH SO FAR HAS BEEN TO LIST LOCATED IN STRATEGIC AREAS WHERE YOU WANT TO SEE IT AND NOT ALLOW IT IN THE AREAS YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE IT.

DESIRE TO ATTRACT CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS TO THE AREA.

THAT'S CERTAINLY ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE EMPLOYMENT MIX, DESIRE FOR MORE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY LISTED THERE.

IMPLEMENT A CAP ON BUILDING HEIGHTS TO MAINTAIN ANNA'S CHARACTER.

I THINK THOSE ARE COMMENTS TO KEEP IN MIND AS YOU LOOK AT YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES AND IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN IN THE FUTURE, AND THEN AVOID HIGH-RISE DEVELOPMENT REALLY IN THAT SAME VEIN.

THEN MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSING.

THIS IS WHERE THERE AGAIN, CONCERNS ABOUT INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION, NOT DESIRED IN ANNA BECAUSE FOLKS WANT TO PRESERVE THE SMALL-TOWN FEEL.

[00:25:01]

WE SAID THERE WERE SOME MIXED OPINIONS, SOME SUPPORT THE JOB OPPORTUNITIES, BUT SOME OPPOSED IT DUE TO POTENTIAL IMPACTS WITH PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

SOME FOLKS SAID TO SOLVE THAT, REALLY, YOU COULD PLACE IT ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF THE CITY.

AGAIN, THAT'S A LAND USE PLAN ISSUE.

TO US, WE WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU MAINTAIN YOUR EMPLOYMENT PLACE TYPES.

WELL, YOU'VE GOT THE RETAIL PLACE TYPES THAT ARE CERTAINLY PROVIDING SOME EMPLOYMENT.

BUT FOR THE DIVERSITY OF EMPLOYMENT, THE MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE.

IN MANY CASES, WHAT WE'RE SEEING TRENDS TODAY IS SOME OF THAT WAREHOUSE IS BECOMING DATA CENTERS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE BIG IMPACT ON YOUR TRAFFIC, BUT THEY NEED A LARGE SPACE AND THEY CERTAINLY NEED ELECTRICAL POWER.

ANYWAY, WE WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF ALL OF THAT.

AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT, WHAT WE'RE REALLY INTERESTED IN IS BASED ON THE COMMENTS, ARE THERE SOME THINGS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE US CHANGE ON THE PLACE TYPES GOING FORWARD AND WE CAN GO BACK TO ANY OF THEM? I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

>> COUNCIL COMMISSION, ANYTHING?

>> I'LL START OFF. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT 2050 PLAN, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED, CORRECT? THERE'S A LOT OF GREEN ON THE CURRENT, WHICH IS RURAL A LITTLE BIT OF ESTATE LIVING, THE YELLOW.

BUT THEN YOU LOOK AT THE NEW PROPOSED.

THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF MUSTARD.

FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE I'M DOING A STATE OR ROYAL LIVING IS WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY AT.

>> IF I CAN MOVE FORWARD, SO IF THERE AREN'T ANY COMMENTS ON THE PLACE TYPE.

>> WE'RE GOING THERE. I THOUGHT WERE.

>> THAT'S THE NEXT STEP, BUT I'M HAPPY TO GO THERE.

>> I WAS EXCITED TO TRY TO JUMP AHEAD. I APOLOGIZE.

>> NO PROBLEM. REGARDING THE TWO [INAUDIBLE]

>> HOW'S THAT? PERFECT. REGARDING THE THREE XS.

WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT VOTE OUT OF THE MAJORITY, DOES THAT MAKE UP?

>> WE WANTED TO SHOW A WIDE VARIETY OF COMMENTS.

IN SOME CASES, PEOPLE VOTED MORE ON SOME PLACE TYPES THAN OTHERS.

THIS PARTICULAR PLACE TYPE DID NOT RECEIVE A WHOLE LOT OF VOTES.

IT WASN'T A HUGE NUMBER OF VOTES, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED, THEY WERE SAYING THAT THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE PLACE TYPE. YES.

>> GOT YOU. I WAS TRYING TO GAUGE IS THIS 5%, 10%, 50%, NEARLY 100%.

>> I CAN SAY IT WASN'T 100 BECAUSE WE ALSO HEARD THAT PEOPLE WANT TO SUPPORT THE JOB OPPORTUNITIES WITH THIS PLACE TYPE.

>> THANKS.

>> AND I GUESS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS THAT THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PLACE TYPE.

SOME COMMUNITIES HAVE MADE A DECISION THAT WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO ALLOW CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES, CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT TYPES, CERTAINLY, I THINK, FROM A TAX-BASED STANDPOINT WE ENCOURAGE THEM UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING NOXIOUS.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, WHICH WOULD BE A MORE NOXIOUS USE FOR YOUR RESIDENTIAL.

BUT CERTAINLY FROM THE STANDPOINT FOR TAX-BASED DIVERSIFICATION AND BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES THAT AREN'T 100% SUPPORTED BY YOUR ROOFTOPS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE IT SO JUST FROM A DIVERSE COMMUNITY STANDPOINT, TAX BASE AND FISCAL BALANCE, WE TYPICALLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU HAVE MULTIPLE OPTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT PLACE TYPES TO TOUCH ON DIFFERENT MARKETS OUT THERE.

BUT THE BALANCE OF THOSE IS REALLY UP TO EACH COMMUNITY AS TO WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE.

>> I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING THAT.

THE REASON I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE IS, I WOULD SAY WEEKLY.

I HEAR MANY PEOPLE WHO LIVE AROUND HERE SAYING, I WISH THERE WAS A JOB AROUND HERE.

I WAS HAVING TO DRIVE INTO DALLAS OR OTHER PLACES.

[00:30:05]

I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT THIS DISCONNECT IS.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> I'M GOING TO PIGGYBACK OFF WHAT YOU JUST SAID THERE.

CONS MCCARVER. A LOT OF TIMES THESE THINGS ON THE SURFACE ARE NOT REAL POPULAR.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE ARE STILL LOOKING AT, I DON'T KNOW.

I'D HAVE TO ASK TERRI DOBY TO COME UP WITH NUMBERS, AND I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT, BUT WE ARE PROBABLY STILL PRETTY CLOSE TO 70% OF OUR GENERAL FUND IS SUPPORTED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX.

YOU CAN'T SURVIVE THAT. THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS TARGETED AROUND 40-50%.

>> ON YOUR PREVIOUS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BASED ON THE LAYOUT OF THE LAND USES BY 2050, THAT WAS THE BALANCE WE WERE TRYING TO HELP YOU ACHIEVE BY THE MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL BASED ON VALUE PER ACRE, WHICH IS DRIVING THE TAX BASE.

IT WAS REALLY ABOUT TRYING TO FIND THAT BALANCE IN THE COMMUNITY WITH MULTIPLE USES ACCORDING TO TAX BASE.

>> COFFEE DONUTS AND PIZZAS AREN'T GOING TO PROVIDE THAT TAX BASE.

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT HAS COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL? I BELIEVE THAT'S THE ONE WHERE THEY WERE ASKING TO ADD HOTELS TO THAT ONE, IS THAT CORRECT? WE CURRENTLY HAVE HOTELS LISTED UNDER THE REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER, WHICH IS THE FOLLOWING PLACEHOLDER.

I'M JUST CALLING ATTENTION TO IT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING WORKED ON OR PROPOSED, A LOT OF THEM THAT AREA FOR THE REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER IS OFF OF HIGHWAY 75, WHICH MAKES IT VERY USER FRIENDLY FOR PEOPLE TRAVELING THAT NEED TO STOP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT THAT HAVE FAMILIES.

WE ALSO HAVE ADJACENT COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ON THIS.

MY OPINION, I DON'T REALLY SEE THE NEED TO PUT IT IN BOTH COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL OR REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER.

DOES ANYBODY AGREE WITH THAT? THEY'RE TYPICALLY IN THE SAME AREAS, EXCEPT FOR THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, YOU'LL SEE FEATHERED IN LIKE ON WHITE STREET AND SOME VARIOUS AREAS WHERE THEY SEE POTENTIAL GROWTH AND GIVING THE CONVENIENCE OF MAYBE A GAS STATION OR A SHOPPING CENTER FOR THE FURTHER OUT WEST AND EAST THAT YOU GO.

>> I AGREE THAT WOULD BE REDONE.

>> I JUST WANT TO CALL ATTENTION TO THAT ONE.

THAT WAS STOOD OUT TO ME THE MOST OF THE COMMENTS BACK.

THEN FOR MY TEAM ON PLANNING AND ZONING, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS EXACT PRESENTATION E MAILED TO US SO THAT WE CAN SEE AND WE CAN HAVE THE COMMENTS BECAUSE THE HANDOUT WE HAVE DOESN'T HAVE THEM.

IT'LL BE EASIER TO REMEMBER THE COMMENTS IF WE HAVE THE COMMENTS.

THAT WAY, WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE LISTENING TO ALL OUR TAXPAYERS, OUR PATRONS, OUR NEIGHBORS.

>> THE OTHER THING I'LL POINT OUT IS THAT THE FULL REPORT ON THE COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE AND ON THE COMMUNITY SURVEY WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE IN THE COMING WEEKS, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET A COPY OF THE PRESENTATION WITH THE SUMMARY OF THE COMMENTS.

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE COMPACT? NEW WINDOW ORANGE 1? I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NAME.

THE ONE COMMENT THAT STOOD OUT ON ME IS THE STOP BUILDING APARTMENTS ON 75 AND WHITE.

IS THAT REALLY FIT WITH THAT OR YOU?

>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING IN ON 75 AND WHITE ARE NOT NECESSARILY DUE TO A LAND USE DESIGNATION.

THEY'RE DUE TO ZONING THAT'S BEEN PUT IN PLACE IN A LOT OF CASES.

>> I WAS JUST QUESTIONING BECAUSE IT REALLY DOESN'T FIT WITH THE WHOLE COMPACT WE CREATED THE COMPACT RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE OF THE DUPLEXES AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

>> NO. THE COMPACT RESIDENTIAL DOES NOT INCLUDE APARTMENTS.

IT IS DESCRIBED.

>> I GUESS I WAS QUESTIONING WHY THAT NOTE IS ON THAT.

>> WELL, THAT COMMENT WAS MADE ON THAT PLACE TYPE.

WHAT WE FIND TYPICALLY IS THERE'S A LOT OF STREAM OF THOUGHT AND SOMEBODY SAYS, I WANT TO MAKE THIS COMMENT.

I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHERE TO MAKE IT.

FOR TRANSPARENCY REASONS, WE DON'T WANT TO JUST MOVE COMMENTS ALL OVER THE PLACE AND SAY THAT APPLIES MORE THAN THAT.

WE SHOW IT EXACTLY WHERE THE COMMENT WAS MADE.

>> I'M SURE APARTMENTS WAS PROBABLY THE MOST WRITTEN WORD THAT NIGHT ANYWAY, EITHER BEING YES OR NO.

>> THERE WERE SOME MENTIONS OF APARTMENTS THROUGHOUT.

I THINK WHAT WE FOUND IS THROUGH THESE PLACE TYPES THAT WE HAVE SCALED BACK FUTURE LOCATIONS FOR APARTMENTS.

WE'VE GENERALLY SO OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE A LOT OF AREAS THAT ARE ENTITLED FOR APARTMENTS TODAY.

BUT THE NEW LAND USE PLAN IS NOT NECESSARILY DRIVING A LOT OF

[00:35:03]

NEW APARTMENTS BEYOND WHAT'S BEEN ENTITLED OR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE ON YOUR OLD PLAN.

IN FACT, SOME OF THE ONES ON YOUR OLD PLAN, I'LL POINT OUT IN JUST A MOMENT, HAVE BEEN THE URBAN LIVING HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM A LOT OF THOSE AREAS.

>> IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ASKING COMMISSIONER JESSICA WALDEN.

THE TWO THAT YOU SAID COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND WHAT? WHAT'S THE SECOND ONE? REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER?

>> YES.

>> I DON'T SEE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER, MORE IT'S COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER IS THE SAME?

>> REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER IS REALLY MORE FOCUSED ON BIG BOX TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT DRAW FROM A LARGER REGION THAN YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.

>> IT'S LIKE SOMEWHERE LIKE ON STACEY ROAD AND ISLAND WHERE THE PICTURES ALMOST LOOK LIKE THAT'S WHERE YOU TOOK THEM FROM, BUT I'M SURE THEY'RE NOT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING.

>> IT'S MORE AND YOU SEE THE PRIMARY USES OR BUSINESS PARKS, HOTELS, ENTERTAINMENT CENTERS.

WHEN YOU SEE PEOPLE SAY, WE WANT TO SEE WHOLE FOODS, TRADER JOE'S, TARGET, HEB.

THOSE ARE REALLY THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN A REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER VERSUS THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS MAYBE STANDALONE BUILDINGS, IT MAY BE A BANK, IT MAY BE A DOCTOR'S OFFICE.

IT'S SOME OF THE SMALLER THINGS THAT MAY BE SERVING A GROUPING OF NEIGHBORHOODS, RATHER THE ENTIRE REGION AROUND ANNA.

THAT WAS WHERE THE DISCUSSION CAME ABOUT SOME OF THOSE ON THE LAND USE MAP THAT I PREVIEWED A MOMENT AGO.

WE'VE GOT LITTLE CIRCLES AT SOME OF THE INTERSECTIONS IN THE RURAL LIVING AREAS.

OUR THOUGHT WAS WE'VE NOT HEARD PEOPLE SAY IN A RURAL LIVING AREA AT AN INTERSECTION THAT YOU WANT TO SEE A HIGH CLASS HOTEL.

I DON'T REALLY SEEM LIKE IT WENT MORE WITH THE REGIONAL ACTIVITIES.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE MAP, SO I'LL SAVE THAT FOR LATER.

I LEARNED THAT FROM A WHILE AGO. THANK YOU.

ABOUT THESE TWO. THANK YOU.

>> IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON THE PLACE TYPES, THEN WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE DRAFT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

IF YOU'LL RECALL, THERE WAS A PREFERRED SCENARIO THAT WAS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCUMENT, THE 2050 PLAN, THAT PREFERRED SCENARIO WAS NOT TIME CONSTRAINED.

IT WAS SAYING, WELL OUT INTO THE FUTURE, WHAT MIGHT THE FUTURE LAND USES LOOK LIKE IN ANNA? THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN WAS ESSENTIALLY CONSTRAINED BY POPULATIONS IN 2050.

IT SAID, WHERE DO WE THINK WE GROW BY 2050? THE DIRECTION WE RECEIVED AT AN EARLIER MEETING WAS, LET'S REMOVE THE PREFERRED SCENARIO AND LET'S UPDATE THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND REPLACE THE PREFERRED SCENARIO, BUT IN DOING SO, LET'S LOOK BEYOND 2050.

THAT WE'RE NOT CONSTRAINED BY THE POPULATION AND WHAT DEVELOPMENTS COMING BASED ON THAT FUTURE POPULATION, BUT LOOKING BEYOND THAT, WHAT CAN WE BE LOOKING TOWARDS? ESSENTIALLY THE UPDATED LAND USE PLAN SHOULD ALSO REFLECT THE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED SINCE THE PREVIOUS PLAN WAS ADOPTED.

THIS IS THAT PREFERRED SCENARIO, AND LET ME PULL UP A COUPLE OF NOTES HERE IF YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME.

ON THE PREFERRED SCENARIO, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT REALLY ON THAT WEST SIDE OF TOWN, THERE WERE AREAS THAT WERE RURAL LIVING, ON THE FAR WEST REACHES BEYOND THE RIVER.

THEN THERE WERE AREAS MORE TOWARDS 75 THAT TRANSITION TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL.

THEN AT SOME OF THE MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, YOU SEE SUBURBAN LIVING, YOU SEE CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL, AND YOU SEE MUCH MORE DENSE.

THE IDEA IN THAT PREVIOUS PLAN WAS LIST CREATE SOME CENTERS OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD TRANSITION FROM HIGHER DENSITY CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL WITH SOME RETAIL DOWN TO SUB-URBAN RESIDENTIAL TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL TO RURAL LIVING.

THEN ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN, YOU SEE GOING EAST FROM DOWNTOWN ANNA,

[00:40:02]

THAT FUTURE PREFERRED SCENARIO SHOWED SUBURBAN LIVING IMMEDIATELY EAST, TRANSITIONING TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL, THAT LIGHTER YELLOW, AND THEN TRANSITIONING TO RURAL LIVING ON THAT SIDE.

TAKING THAT MAP IN THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL AND P AND Z TO LOOK BEYOND 2050.

WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK THAT PREFERRED SCENARIO AND PREPARED THIS PLAN BASED UPON THE NEW PLACE TYPES.

THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE BROUGHT FORWARD AT THE JOINT WORK SESSION, AND ESSENTIALLY THIS BASE MAP WAS SAYING, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WERE ESSENTIALLY SHOWING UP ON THAT PREFERRED SCENARIO.

YOU CAN SEE RURAL LIVING IN PRETTY MUCH THE SAME PLACES, TRANSITIONING TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL, SUB-URBAN RESIDENTIAL, SOME POCKETS OF URBAN LIVING, AND THEN ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN, TRANSITIONING TO SUB-URBAN LIVING TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL AND RURAL LIVING.

I THINK BETWEEN THE TWO PLANS, WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO WAS GIVE YOU A PLAN THAT INCLUDED THE NEW PLACE TYPES THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH AS A STARTING POINT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE PLAN, IT WAS THE THE PREFERRED SCENARIO BEYOND 2050.

WE WEREN'T LOOKING TO MAKE WHOLESALE CHANGES BECAUSE WE WANTED TO SHOW YOU, THIS IS WHAT ANNA WOULD EXIST AS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN WITH THE NEW PLACE TYPES.

BASED ON THAT, WE HAD THAT WORK SESSION WITH YOU AND WE GAVE YOU THE LITTLE STICKERS AND SAID, PUT STICKERS ON AREAS AND TELL US WHAT YOU WOULD CHANGE FROM THIS FOR THE FUTURE.

FROM THAT, WHAT WE FOUND IS THERE WAS A DESIRE ON THAT WEST SIDE.

THIS IS WHAT CAME OUT OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH P&Z AND COUNCIL.

THE FEEDBACK YOU GAVE US, WE THEN DEVELOPED THIS PLAN.

ON THE FAR WEST SIDE, WE HAVE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL RATHER THAN THE RURAL LIVING.

THEN RATHER THAN HAVING ESTATE AND SUB-URBAN AND CLUSTER AND URBAN LIVING, IT REALLY STARTED TO TRANSITION TO WHERE IT WAS MORE SUB-URBAN.

BASED ON THAT FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED.

THEN ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN, YOU SEE THAT SOME OF THE AREAS THAT WERE TRANSITIONING FROM SUB-URBAN TO A STATE, THAT THAT LINE MOVED SOMEWHAT EAST FROM WHERE IT WAS IN THAT ORIGINAL PLAN, RIGHT THERE.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO COMPARE THE PLANS AND REMEMBER HOW WE TRANSITION TO WHERE WE WERE.

IN FACT, THIS IS INCLUDING THIS SHOWS THE SUB-URBAN AND THEN THE ESTATE AND THEN THE RURAL.

THEN THIS IS REALLY SHOWING ON THAT EAST SIDE OF TOWN THE SUB-URBAN AND ESTATE GOING ALL THE WAY TO THE CREEK AND THEN RURAL ON THE FAR EAST SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE 121 CORRIDOR.

THAT WAS THE TRANSITION OF THE PLAN AND AT THE LAST MEETING, WHAT WE DETERMINED WITH COUNSEL AND P&Z WAS THAT THIS WAS THE PLAN WE SHOULD TAKE TO THE COMMUNITY.

NOT AS A FINAL LAND USE PLAN, BUT TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT CHANGES WOULD YOU MAKE TO THIS PLAN? THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT.

THESE DOTS ARE THERE FOR A REASON.

ESSENTIALLY THIS HEAT MAP, THE DARKER THE CIRCLES, YOU SEE, THE DARK RED, THE PURPLES, THE LARGER AREAS ARE WHERE WE RECEIVED A WHOLE LOT OF COMMENTS.

THEN THE LIGHTER CIRCLES AND SMALLER CIRCLES, FOR INSTANCE, IN AREA ONE, WE DIDN'T HAVE SO MANY COMMENTS, AND IN FACT, IN SOME AREAS, WE DIDN'T REALLY GET COMMENTS AT ALL AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING.

BUT WHAT WE TRIED TO DO WAS CLUSTER SOME OF THESE COMMENTS ON AREAS THAT HAD SIMILAR LAND USE PATTERNS ON THE MAP BECAUSE WE THOUGHT, IF PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT A CERTAIN AREA, THEY'RE PROBABLY COMMENTING ON THE SAME ITEMS THEY'RE SEEING ON THE LAND USE PLAN.

LET'S CLUSTER SOME OF THOSE.

WE CLUSTERED THEM AS AREA ONE THROUGH AREA 10.

VERY QUICKLY, I WANT TO GO THROUGH.

AREA 1 AND FOR LACK OF A BETTER GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, WE'RE JUST SAYING FAR SOUTHWEST ANNA.

THAT'S THAT SOUTHWEST CORNER ON YOUR ORIGINAL ON THE PREFERRED SCENARIO, PREVIOUSLY, IT WAS RURAL LIVING.

THEN ON THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, IT WAS I BELIEVE, UPGRADED ON THAT DRAFT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL.

[00:45:02]

THE COMMENTS WE HEARD, PREFERENCE FOR RURAL LIVING, VALUE OF GREEN SPACE, PREFERENCE FOR SMALL BUSINESS AND FAMILY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WE THINK SMALL BUSINESSES THROUGH THOSE RETAIL NODES THAT WE'RE SHOWING ON THE MAP COULD CERTAINLY OCCUR THERE.

OPPOSITION TO HIGH DENSITY HOUSING.

CURRENTLY, IF YOU'LL KEEP IN MIND, WHAT WE'RE SHOWING RIGHT THERE IS A STATE RESIDENTIAL, AND WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMENTS IN THE CLUSTERS OF DOTS WERE A PREFERENCE FOR RURAL LIVING IN AREA 1.

AREA 2. YOU'LL SEE A SIMILAR TYPE OF COMMENT, A PREFERENCE FOR RURAL LIVING IN A STATE RESIDENTIAL.

IN THIS AREA, IT'S ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE WE HAD TRANSITIONED BASED UPON THAT JOINT WORK SESSION TO SUB-URBAN LIVING.

PART OF THE DISCUSSION AT THE LAST WORK SESSION WE HAD IS THERE HAVE BEEN INVESTMENTS IN WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IN THIS AREA.

PART OF THE SUBURBAN WAS BASED UPON BEING ABLE TO SERVE IT WITH WASTEWATER.

BUT THE COMMUNITY, AGAIN, A LOT OF THE COMMENTS WE GOT WERE RELATED TO RURAL LIVING, A STATE RESIDENTIAL, STAY CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE PLAN.

THIS IS SOMEWHAT CONSISTENT WITH THE PREFERRED SCENARIO, BUT WE DIDN'T SHOW THIS LEVEL OF SUB-URBAN LIVING IN THAT AREA, AS PEOPLE WERE REACTING TO HERE.

>> LET'S SEE. AREA 3, AND NOW WE'RE UP CLOSE TO 75.

IT'S THAT AREA WEST TO 75, BUT YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF THE DOTS WEREN'T NECESSARILY ON 75.

THEY WERE ON THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS MORE TO THE WEST.

PREFERENCE FOR RURAL LIVING, ESTATE LIVING, OPPOSITION, HIGH DENSITY, SUBURBAN.

AGAIN, THOSE ARE SOME OF THOSE AREAS THAT CAN NOW BE SERVED BY YOUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT.

ON THE CURRENT PLAN, WE'RE SHOWING SUBURBAN, BUT IN THIS AREA, THOSE WERE THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED. AREA 4.

NOW YOU START TO SEE THERE WERE SOME AREAS THAT HAD QUITE A FEW COMMENTS BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING INTO THE DARKER RED CIRCLES AND SOME PURPLE CIRCLES.

PEOPLE SAID, AMENITIES FOR FAMILIES, WANTING TO SEE PRESERVATION OF THE AREA, INSTEAD OF DEVELOPMENT, CONCERNS WITH TRAFFIC CONGESTION, PREFERENCE FOR RURAL LIVING OR ESTATE, COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES WE'RE SEEN IN THAT AREA.

I THINK THERE WERE MAYBE SOME CONCERNS WITH RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY TO URBAN LIVING, NOT WANTING TO SEE THAT PROXIMITY IN THE AREA.

AGAIN, THIS IS AGAIN THAT AREA JUST EAST OF 75.

THEN WE GO INTO THE DOWNTOWN ANNA AREA, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, WANTING TO SEE DOWNTOWN AREA IMPROVEMENTS, DESIRE FOR MIXED-USE URBAN LIVING, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE SHOWING IN THIS AREA, BUT ALSO HAVING A VALUE FOR GREEN SPACES AND CONSERVATION WITHIN THE AREA.

AREA 6.

THAT'S EAST ANNA.

WE'RE I GUESS MORE NORTHEAST OF DOWNTOWN.

THAT'S AN AREA THAT WE WERE SHOWING AS A STATE RESIDENTIAL.

PEOPLE SAID, SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE GOT WERE RURAL CHARACTER AND PRESERVATION, OPPOSITION TO URBAN AND HIGH-DENSITY DEVELOPMENT.

AGAIN, WE'RE SHOWING A STATE RESIDENTIAL IN MUCH OF THIS AREA.

WANTING TO SEE SOME COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN HERE, CONSERVATION, AND GREEN SPACES, AND THEN WANTING TO SEE SOME ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT SUGGESTIONS.

AREA 7.

THAT'S UP ON THE BORDER, ON THE EDGE OF YOUR ETJ CITY LIMITS IN THAT AREA, RURAL CHARACTER PRESERVATION, PRESERVATION OF RURAL, COMMUNITY, AND AGRICULTURAL RESPECT.

AGAIN, THIS AREA IS AN AREA THAT WE'RE SHOWING AS A STATE RESIDENTIAL, AND FOLKS ARE SAYING, WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO SEE A STATE, WE WANT TO SEE RURAL.

AREA 8 IS ESSENTIALLY THE 121 CORRIDOR.

PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO SEE MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE.

BUT THEN ON THE OTHER END OF THE SPECTRUM, PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO SEE RURAL LIVING ALONG 121.

RESIDENTIAL AND COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AREAS WERE DESIRED ALONG THAT AREA.

IT WAS REALLY A MIXED BAG ALONG THERE.

THEN AREA 9.

THAT'S THAT SOUTH ANNA.

IT'S REALLY THAT COLLIN COUNTY OUTER LOOP.

PEOPLE SAID RATHER THAN WHERE WE'RE SHOWING A LOT OF

[00:50:01]

THE MANUFACTURING AND DISTRIBUTION AND OFFICE WITHIN THOSE AREAS, EMPLOYMENT MIX.

PEOPLE SAID THEY HAD A PREFERENCE FOR SUBURBAN LIVING IN THAT AREA. KEEP IT SUBURBAN.

I'M SORRY, THAT IS SOUTH ANNA.

THAT'S THE AREA JUST NORTH.

LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK.

THAT WAS THE AREA BETWEEN DOWNTOWN AND THE OUTER LOOP AREA THAT I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT, AREA 9.

AGAIN, PREFERENCE FOR SUBURBAN LIVING.

NOW, SUBURBAN LIVING IS THE PRIMARY PLACE TYPE THAT WE WERE SHOWING, BUT WE ALSO HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS IN THAT AREA ABOUT CONCERNS ABOUT APARTMENTS IN THE AREA.

WE'RE NOT SURE IF THERE'S SOMETHING RECENT THAT'S OCCURRED THERE, BUT PEOPLE SAID THEY WANT TO KEEP IT MORE SUBURBAN.

THEN AREA 10, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

PRESERVATION OF SUBURBAN RURAL CHARACTER, PREFERENCE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY, AND THEN KEEPING SOME COMMERCIAL AND MANUFACTURING IN POCKETS, BUT NOT MAKING THE WHOLE CORRIDOR THAT IS OUR TAKEAWAY FROM THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED THERE.

I KNOW THAT'S A LOT TO DIGEST.

WE TRIED TO BREAK IT DOWN AREA BY AREA AND TRIED TO TELL YOU WHAT WE WERE HEARING FOR EACH AREA.

BUT AGAIN, AS WE CAME FORWARD WITH THE DRAFT LAND USE PLAN, THE INTENT OF THAT PLAN WAS TO TAKE TO THE COMMUNITY AND GET SOME FEEDBACK.

REALLY, THE QUESTION WE HAVE IS, ARE THERE AREAS WHERE WE SHOULD CONSIDER CHANGES TO THAT UPDATED FUTURE LAND USE PLAN SO THAT WE CAN GET SOMETHING IN ALIGNMENT WITH YOUR FINAL WISHES?

>> I NOTICED ON THESE MAPS, YOU HAVE THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT WAS AND THEN THE PROPOSED ONE HERE.

I SEE THAT IT'S DONE AWAY WITH A LOT OF PARKLAND.

AM I INTERPRETING THAT CORRECTLY?

>> WHERE IS THE PARKLAND? OUR INTENT WAS NOT TO DO AWAY WITH PARKLAND.

>> WELL, ON THIS MAP, YOU'VE GOT THE DARK GREEN, WHICH IS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.

>> WELL, YEAH, IT'S FOR AGRICULTURAL, YES.

>> THEN ON THIS MAP, IT'S NO LONGER THERE.

>> THE PARKS ARE THE DARKEST GREEN. LET'S SEE.

THAT DARK GREEN THAT YOU SEE UP BY WESTMINSTER ON THAT MAP, ON THIS MAP.

THEN THE PARKS ARE STILL SHOWING UP WITHIN SOME OF THE SUBURBAN LIVING JUST EAST OF DOWNTOWN.

IF THERE ARE PARTICULAR AREAS THAT WE NEED TO ADD PARKS BACK IN THAT WE MISTAKENLY TAKE OUT, WE WOULD SURE DO THAT.

>> WELL, WHAT I'M SEEING ON THIS MAP.

YOU'VE GOT THE GREEN HERE, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE GREEN HERE.

THEY'RE GENERALLY ALONG THE CREEK BEDS IN THE RIVER THAT'S THERE.

>> BUT THAT WAS RURAL LIVING.

>> RIGHT. BUT IT LOOKS LIKE, AND OTHER PEOPLE WILL INTERPRET THIS AS WELL, THAT THE PARKS HAVE JUST BEEN GONE.

>> WHAT'S CHANGED IS THAT RATHER THAN RURAL LIVING, THAT IT'S BEING SHOWN AS DEVELOPED AREAS WITH SUBURBAN LIVING.

BUT IT'S NOT PARKS, IT WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RURAL LIVING.

>> ON THE PREVIOUS FUTURE LAND USE PLANS, INCLUDING THE ONE PRIOR TO CURRENT STAFF, THE FLOODPLAINS WERE SHOWN AS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.

WE STILL HAVE OUR PARKS MASTER PLAN THAT IDENTIFIES AREAS WHERE PARKS NEED TO BE LOCATED AND TRAILS NEED TO BE LOCATED.

THAT'S NOT GOING AWAY, IT'S JUST ALONG THOSE RIVERS.

WE'RE NOT SHOWING IT AS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.

IT'S STILL FLOODPLAIN.

MOST OF IT'S STILL NOT DEVELOPABLE WITHOUT SOME FLOOD STUDY.

MOST OF THESE AREAS WHERE THE RIVERS ARE HAVE NEVER HAD A FLOOD STUDY.

BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT AND THE PARKS PLANNING MANAGER, DARREN WALKER IS GOING TO BE UPDATING THE PARKS MASTER PLAN, AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ALSO INCORPORATE IN THAT.

>> FOR CLARIFYING, I'M SORRY FOR NOT UNDERSTANDING WHERE YOU WERE HEADED.

>> KELLY. SORRY, COUNCILWOMAN HERNDON.

DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER TO PERHAPS SHOW THE FLOODPLAINS STILL ON THE MAP, BUT MAYBE LABEL THEM SOMETHING DIFFERENT OTHER THAN GREEN, SO THERE'S NOT AN ILLUSION OF GRANGER THAT THAT WOULD BE A DEDICATED PARK SPACE?

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION TO IT BECAUSE LOOKING AT IT NOW,

[00:55:05]

IF I INTERPRET IT THIS WAY, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT MAY INTERPRET IT THAT WAY, TOO.

THE REASON WE DID AWAY WITH THE OTHER MAPS IS TO TAKE AWAY THE CONFUSION THAT IT WAS CAUSING.

>> MY ONLY CONCERN IS IF WE ADD THAT THERE ARE FLOODPLAINS, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO MISCONSTRUE THAT AS WE'RE SAYING THAT'S UNDEVELOPABLE LAND.

LET THEM DO THEIR HOMEWORK, LET THEM DO THE FLOOD STUDIES, AND LET THEM FIGURE THAT OUT ON THEIR OWN.

BUT I DO SEE A BENEFIT IN HAVING THEM SHOWN.

>> IT'S VERY COMMON IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES FOR US TO SHOW THE FLOODPLAINS AS A GREEN COLOR AND JUST CALL IT OUT AS A FLOODPLAIN.

BUT THIS PARTICULAR PLAN, WHEN WE DID IT SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THE DECISION WAS MADE NOT TO GO THAT DIRECTION.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO SHOWING THE FLOODPLAINS ON HERE AND LABELING THEM AS SUCH?

>> OKAY. I CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

>> THANKS.

>> NOW BACK TO MY MUSTARD COMMENT. LET ME EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT.

IF YOU GO BACK TO THE CURRENT, THERE'S A LOT OF RANCHING, RURAL LIVING, AND THEN A LITTLE BIT OF STATE LIVING RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE OF THE ZONING AND EVERYTHING IN THE PAST WHAT'S IN PLACE.

NOW, IF YOU GO TO THE PROPOSE, THE ONLY RURAL LIVING OR ESTATE LIVING THAT IC IS WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY AT MAINLY WAY EAST OR WAY WEST.

I FEEL WE OVER-FLOODED THE WEST SIDE OF 75 WITH SUBURBAN LIVING, SO THAT'S MY OPINION ON THAT.

I DON'T THINK WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE SUBURBAN LIVING.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MIXTURE, LET'S JUST SAY IT THAT WAY.

THEN MY QUESTION OR MY CONCERN ON THE MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE AND EMPLOYMENT MIX, I THINK WE'RE MISSING THE BOAT ON THAT.

I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH ANYONE THAT SAYS WE DON'T NEED IT.

IF IT'S DONE RIGHT, AND IF YOU SEE HOW THE DEVELOPING IS BEING DONE NOW IN OTHER CITIES, IT'S CLEANER.

IT'S NOT WHAT THEY ARE USED TO.

IF WE CAN DO THAT AND ATTRACT THOSE TYPE OF BUSINESSES, WHAT'S GOING ON IN MCKINNEY IN THE AIRPORT, WHAT'S GOING ON NORTH OF US IN SHERMAN, I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE MORE OF THAT, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT SHOULD BE ON 121.

WE'RE PUTTING URBAN LIVING AND WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? URBAN LIVING AND SUBURBAN LIVING ALL DOWN 121.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE CITY SOUTH OF US, THEY DO HAVE SOME HOMES AND BUSINESSES ON 121, BUT JUST NORTH OF TOWN, THEIR MAIN AREA, IT'S MANUFACTURING AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE OF THE GRAY AND MAYBE PUSH IT AWAY FROM THE AREA 10, I BELIEVE, ON THE MAP, LIKE THE PEOPLE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT.

MAYBE PUSH IT AWAY FROM THERE AND MOVE IT TO 121.

BUT I KNOW WE CAN'T CHANGE SOME OF IT IN AREA 10 BECAUSE OF WHAT'S ALREADY GOING ON RIGHT IN THAT AREA.

BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON AREA 9 AND THE APARTMENTS AND WHY THE HOT SPOT IS BECAUSE IT'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX IS MIXED WITH A FEW HOUSES, IT'S ON AN AREA 9.

>> IT'S EXISTING.

>> YEAH, IT'S ANNA TOWN SQUARE.

>> IF I CAN FOLLOW ON AND THEN I'D LOVE TO GET MORE COMMENTS, SO WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ON THIS VERSION OF THE PLAN, THE RURAL LIVING IS TO THE FAR EAST SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS IN AREA 1 ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CREEK THAT THAT SHOULD BE RURAL LIVING.

IF YOU START TO TRANSITION FROM RURAL LIVING INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL, ARE YOU SAYING TRANSITION FROM RURAL LIVING TO A STATE SO THAT WE'RE STARTING?

>> FADE IT OUT INSTEAD OF ALL ONE AND THEN A SECTION OF A STATE.

>> THEN ALONG THE OUTER LOOP, ASSUMING THAT THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT WE SHOULD SHOW MORE OF THE MANUFACTURING ON 121, WHAT MIGHT WE REPLACE IT WITH THE OUTER LOOP WILL BE MORE [OVERLAPPING].

>> WELL, I THINK WE MIGHT BE BEHIND THE VOTE ON THAT BECAUSE OF WHAT'S ALREADY BEING BUILT RIGHT THERE.

THERE'S STILL SOME UNDEVELOPED LAND THERE AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN THE WORKS OR NOT,

[01:00:04]

BUT I FEEL EVEN IF WE DON'T REPLACE IT, LET'S JUST MOVE SOME MORE MANUFACTURING OFF OF 121 BECAUSE IT IS WHAT COUNCILMAN ELDEN BAKER SAID EARLIER.

WE GOT TO GET DOWN TO THAT 40%, 50% INSTEAD OF 70%.

I FEEL THE MANUFACTURING IS WHAT IS GOING TO DO IT FOR US.

>> OKAY. ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS?

>> YEAH. IF I COULD PICK YOU BACK ON COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE].

COULD YOU GO BACK TO YOUR HEAT MAP, PLEASE? IF WE LOOK AT AREA 1, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S REALLY GOING ON OUT THERE YET, MAYBE SOME SMALL STUFF, BUT AREA 2, AND IF I THINK BACK TO THE TABLE WE HAD THREE TABLES WORKING AT DECEMBER MEETING.

I DON'T REMEMBER THE TABLE THAT I WAS ON PUTTING ALL OF THAT TO THE WEST YELLOW.

>> I WANT TO HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PICTURE OF THAT ONE BECAUSE JUST TO PIGGYBACK CAN HELP YOU OUT, I DON'T REMEMBER OUR TABLE HAVING SUBURBAN LIVING OUT THAT FAR EITHER.

I THINK WE FLOODED THE STICKERS IN THAT AREA WITH THE RIGHT COLORS, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.

>> IF YOU LOOK AT AREA 2, SOME OF THAT SHIP HAS ALREADY SAILED BECAUSE OF THE LIBERTY HILLS DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S TIGHT.

THERE'S GOING TO BE 1,800 LOTS IN THERE, SOME OF THEM 35 AND 40 FEET WIDE.

BUT TO THE WEST OF THAT, THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SPACE THERE THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, COUNCILMEMBERS AND COMMISSIONERS TO TURN THAT BACK TO THE MORE RURAL OR ESTATE LIVING CATEGORY AT THIS POINT.

THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION.

>> TRANSITION AREA 2 FROM THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALREADY SET, THAT SUBURBAN TO ESTATE LIVING INTO RURAL LIVING SO THAT YOU'RE TRANSITIONING TO THE RURAL.

>> THAT'S AREA 2 AND AREA 1 THOUGH, CORRECT? NOT JUST 2 SO MAKE SURE WE'RE INCLUDING AREA 1 AS WELL.

>> WHAT I HEARD ON AREA 1 IS THAT IT WOULD TRANSITION TO RURAL LIVING AND THEN AS YOU GET INTO AREA 2, IT MIGHT TRANSITION TO THE ESTATE, AND TO CONTINUE THAT TREND, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES. AREA 1 AND AREA 2 IS ALREADY GONE.

>> I HAD HEARD THE COMMENT EARLIER THAT AREA 1 WAS MORE REMOTE, HARD TO GET TO, BUT I HADN'T HEARD FROM OTHERS.

AM I HEARING THAT AREA 1 SHOULD REMAIN RURAL OR URBAN?

>> NO. NOT NECESSARILY.

I JUST WANT TO ASK EVERYBODY UP HERE A QUESTION.

AREA 2, AREA 3, FOR THE MOST PART, 10 YEARS AGO, WAS RURAL LIVING.

IT WAS RURAL LIVING FOR A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT REASONS AND THOSE REASONS WERE THERE WERE NO WATER.

THERE WAS NO SEWER.

THERE WAS NO INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THAT IS NOW GOING AWAY.

IF WE SAY AREA 2 AND AREA 1, WHICH I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, AREA 1 IS NOT VERY FAR OFF FROM BEING DEVELOPED BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING IN THIS VACUUM OF ANNA, WHAT IS SOUTH OF AREA 1, AND IT'S MCKINNEY, WHICH IS BUSTING AT THE SEAMS AND COMING TO THE NORTH.

THAT'S POINT NUMBER 1. POINT NUMBER 2 IS ANYBODY GOING TO BE SETTING UP HERE 10 YEARS FROM NOW AND SAYING, AREA 2 IS RURAL LIVING, WHAT ARE YOU DOING PUTTING 1,800 HOMES OVER THERE? BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ZONING PROPERTIES RIGHT NOW, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE SETTING A VISION AND THAT VISION IS SUPPOSED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH GROWTH AND THE POSSIBILITY OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN THERE.

WHEN I SEE YOUR MAP, I'M COMPLETELY FINE WITH YOUR MAP.

IF THAT MEANS THAT AREA 2 NEVER HAS ANYTHING HAPPENED TO IT, THEN I'M COMPLETELY FINE WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT THE LAND OWNERS THAT OWN THE LAND MADE THE DECISION NOT TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN BUILD HOMES OR NOT BUILT HOMES, BUT WHEN WE LOCK OURSELVES IN TO THAT'S RURAL LIVING, THEN IT'S EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE RURAL LIVING.

THEN FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND THEY'RE LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? YOU'RE BUILDING RIGHT BESIDE MY HOUSE? IT'S BECAUSE THE LAND OWNER WANTED TO SELL THE HOME OR THE LAND.

IT'S BECAUSE THERE WERE WATER, THERE WAS SEWER, AND THEN YOU HAD A DEVELOPMENT THAT WANTED TO COME IN AND DEVELOP THE PROPERTY.

I FOR ONE, DON'T WANT TO BACK US INTO A CORNER TO WHERE 10 YEARS FROM NOW, IT WON'T BE ME, SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BE UP HERE ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND BEING LIKE, HEY, I'VE GOT FIVE ACRE LOT, AND I'VE GOT THESE TREES, AND YOU'RE TRYING TO LET SOMEBODY COME IN AND BUILD 1,800 HOMES BESIDE ME, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.

I'M OKAY WITH IT BEING YELLOW.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED ANY OTHER WAY UNTIL SOMEBODY MAKES A DECISION TO TRY AND DEVELOP.

TOM, THAT MIGHT BE YOU.

I DON'T KNOW. I'M SURE IT WON'T, BUT YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> BUT ARE WE LOCKING OURSELVES IN ANYTHING ACTUALLY,

[01:05:02]

BECAUSE OUR PREVIOUS PLAN SHOWED ALL OF THAT AS RURAL OR ESTATE LIVING, AND NOW IT'S 1,800 HOMES.

WE DIDN'T LOCK OURSELF ANYTHING THERE.

IF YOU LISTEN, EVERY ONE OF THOSE ZONES, PEOPLE COMMENTED THEY WANT TO KEEP SOME RURAL ELEMENT AND ESTATE ELEMENT TO THE CITY.

THE SMALL TOWN FEEL.

WHERE DO WE PUT THAT IF IT'S NOT OUT IN SOME OF THOSE AREAS?

>> IT CAN STILL HAPPEN THERE. IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> BUT IF YOU MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THIS, IS ANYBODY GOING TO CONSIDER DOING THAT? THAT'S MY THOUGHT.

>> SURE. WHY WOULD THAT YELLOW ON THAT MAP BECAUSE THE OTHER COLOR ON THAT MAP DIDN'T CHANGE THEM FROM BUILDING 1,800 HOMES.

WHY WOULD THAT COLOR RIGHT THERE, STOP SOMEONE FROM COMING IN AND BUYING 30 ACRES AND MAKING FIVE ACRE LOTS? IT SHOULD NOT STOP THAT BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WE'RE ZONING THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, AND WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT. THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW.

>> NOBODY IS ZONING TO PROPERTY.

>> THE SAME THING. IF IT'S GREEN, DOESN'T KEEP SOMEBODY FROM COMING IN AND MAKING IT YELLOW, BUT IT SHOWS A VISION OF SOME ELEMENT OF THIS CITY STAYING RURAL OR ESTATE VERSUS JUST A BUNCH OF SMALL HOMES.

WE'RE GROWING. WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.

THERE'S JUST A FEW NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE ANYTHING LARGER THAN 60 FOOT LOTS.

WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO WORK AT TI, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE MAKING UPWARD OF SIX FIGURES GOING TO BUY THEIR ONE ACRE LOTS? [OVERLAPPING]

>> SURE. ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THAT'S ON THE CITY COUNCIL.

I THINK THAT'S ON P&Z.

IN THE FUTURE, I AGREE WITH YOU 1,000%.

I THINK IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

I THINK IT'S UP TO THE P&Z, WHEN TELUS COMES THROUGH, WHEN ALL THESE PLACES COME THROUGH, AND THEY'RE LIKE, HEY, WE'VE BOUGHT 3,000 ACRES, AND THEN WE PUT IT ON THEM TO TRY AND FORCE THEIR HAND TO SAY, WE WANT 100 HOMES OR WE WANT 50 HOMES ON ACRE LOTS OR HIGHER, CAN YOU DELIVER THAT? IF YOU CAN'T DELIVER THAT, THEN HOW CAN WE HELP YOU DELIVER THAT? I AGREE WITH YOU, 1,000%.

I DO WANT ONE ACRE LOTS, TWO ACRE LOTS.

DO I THINK THAT IN 15 YEARS FROM NOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE 5,000 10 ACRE LOTS OVER THERE? NO, THERE'S JUST NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT WANT TO BUY THOSE, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

I LIKE THE WAY THAT IT'S FLOWED THAT WAY.

I'M OKAY WITH WHAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE.

THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I WOULD HAVE AND IT GOES BACK TOWARDS 121 WAS, AND I AGREE WITH KEVIN ON THAT.

I ALSO AGREE WITH YOU AS WELL, I THINK THAT 121, I THINK WE NEED TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE AGGRESSIVE ON IT BECAUSE IT'S BUILDING OUT LIKE CRAZY.

IF YOU LOOK AT ANNA, YOU'VE GOT HIGHWAY 75, AND YOU GOT HIGHWAY 121.

HIGHWAY 75, OTHER THAN 35 IS THE LARGEST NORTH SOUTH RUNNING ROAD THAT COMES INTO TEXAS, 121 IS NOT FAR OFF FROM THAT.

I KNOW WHY IT'S LIKE THIS BECAUSE THERE'S NO WATER.

LIKE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP OUT THERE UNLESS YOU WANT TO SPEND $15 MILLION FOR A WATER LINE.

I GET IT, BUT I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FASTER THAN WHAT WE THINK, HONESTLY, SO WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT NOT CRAZY WITH IT, BUT WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DEPTH ON IT IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> BY MORE AGGRESSIVE, ARE YOU SAYING MORE EMPLOYMENT OR JUST MORE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE?

>> WELL, LET'S JUST GET CRAZY AND THINK ABOUT WHAT 121 DOWN IN MCKINNEY AND TO YOUR SOUTHWEST.

THINK ABOUT THAT. A LOT OF IT IS MORE EMPLOYMENT.

LIKE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT TOYOTA FACTORY, YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT ALL THAT DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT AROUND THERE, AND IT JUST KEEPS GOING AS YOU START COMING UP TO 121.

I SEE THAT.

THEN THEY'VE GOT MULTI-FAMILY MIXED IN THERE AND ALL THOSE THINGS, AND THAT'S GREAT, BUT I SEE THAT R121 IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY DIFFERENT FROM THAT.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW FAST THAT HAPPENS.

>> WE'VE HEARD FROM A COUPLE OF FOLKS, 121, LET'S LOOK MORE AT GETTING MORE EMPLOYMENT IN THAT AREA.

>> YES.

>> SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT PEOPLE MAYBE DIDN'T WANT ON THE OUTER LOOP IS GENERAL CONSENSUS WITH THAT DIRECTION, OR ARE THERE OBJECTIONS TO THAT FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH MAKING THOSE TYPES OF CHANGES?

>> ON THE OUTER LOOP, I WOULD EVEN CHALLENGE PEOPLE THINK ABOUT WHAT THE OUTER LOOP IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN I THINK SIX YEARS, THAT'S A SIX LANE HIGHWAY.

POTENTIALLY, I THINK IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS AND DON'T QUOTE ME ON THIS, BUT I THINK THEIR PLAN IS TO TAKE IT TO AN EIGHT LANE HIGHWAY.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE A HOME BY AN EIGHT LANE HIGHWAY.

I DON'T KNOW MANY PEOPLE THAT DO.

FROM 75-121, I SEE THAT BEING MORE OF JOB CREATION OF WHERE PEOPLE CAN GO TO WORK AND GET OUT OF THEIR CAR,

[01:10:04]

GET IN THEIR CAR AND DRIVE UP FIVE OR SIX ROADS AND GO TO THEIR HOUSE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT TO LIVE BY THE OUTER LOOP. THAT'S JUST ME.

>> I'M GOING TO PUSH BACK AS WELL.

WE HAVE A DOUBLE MINDED SET OF VOTING HERE.

WE HAVE PEOPLE COMMUNICATING THAT THEY WANT THE SMALL TOWN FEEL.

THEN THEY'RE SAYING, DON'T BUILD COMMERCIAL ON THE HIGHWAYS, WE WANT TO HAVE HOUSING ON THE HIGHWAYS.

THAT IS NOT A SMALL TOWN FEEL.

THERE'S NO AMOUNT OF HOUSING ON THE HIGHWAY THAT'S GOING TO FEEL CLOSE KNIT LIKE THE REST OF THIS COMMUNITY.

I WOULD SAY THAT LET'S GIVE A LITTLE BIT HERE, COMMUNITY.

THERE'S A HUGE REQUEST FOR AMENITIES IN THIS CITY.

HUGE REQUEST FOR MORE PUBLIC SAFETY, MORE PARKS, MORE FUN, MORE RESTAURANTS, BUT IF WE, COLLECTIVELY ALL OF US, IF WE CLIP THE COMMERCIAL IN WHAT WILL BE THOSE SOUGHT AFTER COMMERCIAL AREAS, WHERE YOU'VE GOT TWO MAJOR THOROUGH FARES BEING CONNECTED BY ANOTHER THOROUGH FARE THAT'S GOING TO EXPAND THE EAST WEST PART OF THE COUNTY AND YOU SAY, NO, WE WANT HOUSES THERE.

WE HAVE FINANCIALLY SABOTAGED THIS CITY.

I THINK THAT'S A VERY BAD MOVE.

AS FOR THE CONVERSATIONS ON THE WEST SIDE, THIS IS WHAT WILLS AND TRUST ARE FOR.

I LOVE THE COMMUNITY THAT'S OUT THERE.

YOU COULD CALL THIS THE 2100 PLAN INSTEAD OF THE 2050 PLAN.

THIS IS THE GENERAL MOVE THAT THIS CITY IS GOING TO GROW BECAUSE IT IS A LIVING ENTITY, AND THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE THAT CONTINUE TO COME HERE, BUT FOR EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO PROTECT THEIR SPIRIT SONG TYPE PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUT THERE, MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS BULLETPROOF AND MAKE SURE YOUR HEIRS KNOW IT'S BULLETPROOF, AND THAT WILL PROTECT IT, BUT WHEN THE LAND OWNER WANTS TO SELL, JUST LIKE WE SAW RECENTLY WITH THE OLD PROSPER LIBERTY HILL STUFF, WHEN THEY WANT TO SELL, THEY'RE GOING TO SELL AND THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN.

OUR JOB AS COUNCIL, IS TO PROTECT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY SO THAT IT FALLS WITHIN OUR ANNEXATION SO THAT WE CAN GOVERN, SUPPORT AND PROTECT IT AND THAT'S WHAT THIS PLAN COMMUNICATES.

LOVE OR HATE IT. I THINK THIS IS A PROPER DIRECTION.

>> THEN WHAT BETTER WAY TO PROTECT IT THAN TO BE MORE STRICT OUT THAT WAY? NOW WE'RE OPENING IT UP TO ALL SUBURBAN LIVING.

TO BACKFILL ON WHAT COUNCILMAN BILLS SAYS, WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE WHAT MCKINNEY'S DOING.

JUST LIKE ALAN DIDN'T CONTINUE WHAT THE CITY SOUTH OF THEM DID WITH THE DARK RAIL. THEY STOPPED IT.

WE DON'T HAVE TO BE LIKE ANY OTHER CITY.

WE CAN STILL BE ANNA.

IF CHAMBERSVILLE AND MCKINNEY IS BUILDING UP TOWARDS AREA 1, WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE THE SAME EXACT HOUSES THAT THEY'RE BUILDING.

WE CAN BREAK THAT UP.

AREA 1 AND AREA 2 DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE MORE.

I'M NOT SAYING MORE RURAL LIVING, BUT MORE ESTATE LIVING, WHERE IT STARTS AT ONE ACRES AND GOES UP TO FIVE ACRE LOTS.

SUBURBAN LIVING ENDS AT ONE ACRE LOTS.

I'M LOOKING FOR MORE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL THAN ANYTHING IN AREA 1 AND AREA 2 BECAUSE IT STARTS, IT GIVES P&Z THE TOOL TO TURN DOWN OR TO GO BACK AND FORTH WITH THESE DEVELOPERS, LIKE WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY OF FOSTER CROSSING.

IT GIVES THEM THAT TOOL, IT GIVES THEM A GUIDELINE.

I THINK WE'RE OPENING OURSELVES UP IF WE PUT ALL SUBURBAN LIVING WEST OF 75.

WE NEED MORE ESTATE.

WE HAVE TO CREATE IT AND WE CAN ALWAYS BACKTRACK LIKE WE'VE DONE BEFORE, BUT I'D RATHER BACKTRACK THAN OPEN THE DOOR WIDE OPEN FOR THEM TO COME IN AND BUILD MORE STUFF LIKE MCKINNEY AND SMALLER HOMES AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I'M JUST DONE DOING THAT.

>> I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN TOT EN.

YOU ACTUALLY BEAT ME TO IT IN LIEU OF GOING WITH THE RURAL AREA.

I WAS GOING TO SAY THE EXACT SAME THING.

EVEN IF THEY'RE KNOCKING ON OUR BACK DOOR OVER IN AREA 1,

[01:15:02]

WHY DON'T WE GO AND TRANSITION TO THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL? KEEP HEARING A LOT OF THESE, WE NEED MORE AREAS FOR THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE WORKING IN SHERMAN TO COME HERE, TO WANT TO LIVE HERE, TO WANT TO BUILD HERE.

NEXT TO THE CHAMBERSVILLE AREA, MAKE IT THAT.

YOU'RE AGREEING THAT YOU WANT HOUSES THERE, BUT YOU'RE SAYING YOU WANT THE LARGE LOT LINE HOUSES SO PUT THEM THERE.

THEN LIKE COUNCILMAN BILLS SAID, THAT DOESN'T ALLEVIATE TELUS GROUP COMING IN HERE AND BUYING IT ALL UP.

WE ALREADY SAID WE WERE OKAY WITH HOUSES BEING THERE, BUT THAT CAN HOLD PLANNING AND ZONING, MAYBE TO RESTRICT WHAT HOUSES THEY PUT IN THERE.

EVEN IF THEY WANT TO GO WITH SMALLER LOTS THAT DON'T MEET THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE 1-5 ACRE LOTS, THAT LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN FOR THEM TO COME IN AND PRESENT SOMETHING REALLY GOT THAT WOW FACTOR TO ALLOW US TO CHANGE THAT.

I AGREE, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE OF THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL NEAR THE CHAMBERSVILLE AREA.

THEN I ALSO AGREE WITH PUTTING MORE MANUFACTURING AND WAREHOUSE AND MAYBE EMPLOYMENT MIX OVER OFF OF SAM RAYBURN.

MAYBE NARROW DOWN THE URBAN LIVING OR PUSH IT BACK FURTHER OFF OF THE 121 AND PUT YOUR MANUFACTURING, YOUR WAREHOUSE, YOUR EMPLOYMENT MIX.

I THINK URBAN LIVING, THAT'S A GREAT SPOT FOR IT TOO, BUT TAKE IT OFF THE ACTUAL SERVICE ROADS OF THE 121 AREA, AND MAYBE PUT IT IN SOME OF THE YELLOW WHERE THE SUBURBAN LIVING IS SHOWN.

>> IT'S JUST MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THE JOBS.

>> YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING WHEN YOU MOVE TO AN URBAN LIVING AREA.

YOU KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE BACKED UP AGAINST WAREHOUSES, MANUFACTURING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. YOU KNOW THAT.

THAT'S WHERE YOUR YOUNGER PEOPLE TEND TO GO ANYWAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOUR THEATERS ARE, YOUR ACTIVITY, YOUR STUFF TO DO.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT AREA BECAUSE I ALSO AGREE 121 IS GOING TO BE OUR BREAD AND BUTTER.

THAT'S WHERE OUR MONEY IS GOING TO COME IN AND OUR REVENUE IS GOING TO BEGIN.

I ALSO AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN BILLS THAT IS HERE SOONER THAN LATER.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR GENERALLY EVERYBODY.

THE PEOPLE UP ON DAIS.

THE STATE LEGISLATURE RESTRICTED US ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO, ROUGHLY THAT WE CAN'T REWRITE AND WE CAN'T INVOLUNTARILY ANNEX ANYBODY.

WHERE I'VE ALWAYS HAD A PROBLEM WITH THIS, AND WE'VE RUN UP AGAINST IT CONSTANTLY.

IS ANYTHING THAT'S NOT IN OUR CITY LIMITS RIGHT NOW AND IS NOT ZONED, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE PUTTING ANY COLORS ON IT AT ALL TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST BECAUSE SOMEBODY'S GOT TO KNOCK ON OUR DOOR AND SAY, HEY, CAN WE COME IN BEFORE WE CAN AND THAT'S GOING TO BE THEIR DECISION, NOT OURS.

I ALMOST WOULD SAY, LET'S KEEP IT AS THE BIGGEST CATEGORY YOU GOT, THE ESTATE ONE FOR ANYTHING THAT IS NOT IN OUR CITY LIMITS PRESENTLY BECAUSE MY BIGGEST PROBLEM HAS ALWAYS BEEN TELLING PEOPLE WHAT WE CAN'T CONTROL.

WE CAN'T DO THAT.

HOW THAT WRAPS AROUND, THE ONLY OTHER THING I'LL ADD IS I'M AGREEING WITH EVERYBODY ELSE.

I'M NOT CHALLENGING WHAT YOU DID.

I'M SURE YOU DID A GREAT JOB AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

IF THIS IS WHAT CAME UP, I'M GOING TO TAKE MY FAIR SHARE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND SAY, I MESSED SOMETHING UP BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I'M LIKE, I DON'T LIKE THAT MUCH MUSTARD, BUT THAT'S ALL I GOT.

>> JUST TO RESPOND FOR A MOMENT.

IT IS COMMON THAT EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD REQUIRE SOMEBODY TO COME INTO YOUR CITY LIMITS FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT WHAT THE LAND USE SHOULD BE, WHAT THE ZONING SHOULD BE.

IT IS VERY COMMON FOR COMMUNITIES, EVEN WITH WHAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE DID A FEW YEARS AGO TO STILL LOOK AT THEIR ENTIRE ETJ AND SAY, WHAT DO WE ENVISION THAT TO BE? BECAUSE THE IDEA IS THAT IF SOMEBODY DOES WANT TO COME INTO YOUR CITY LIMITS, THAT WAY YOU'VE ALREADY GOT AN IDEA BASED ON THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THEN THAT GETS INTO WHAT THE OTHER PEOPLE UP HERE HAVE SAID.

THE MORE YOU RESTRICT THAT, THE MORE YOU'RE ELIMINATING THE OPPORTUNITIES, BECAUSE IT GETS IN PEOPLE'S HEAD THAT THIS IS WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.

THAT'S WHERE I'M ALWAYS TORN.

>> THAT'S THE KEYWORD, THE ACCEPTABLE.

>> LET ME TRY TO SUGGEST WHAT I'M HEARING, AND THEN YOU CAN TRY TO HEAR THE VARIOUS VOICES AT THE COUNCIL.

THERE WAS A QUESTION A MOMENT AGO, AND I DIDN'T RESPOND TO IT, BUT SOMEBODY SAID, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE TODAY IN HERE? THIS PLAN WAS BASED ON HAVING NO SEWER.

WHEN WE DID THIS PLAN, THERE WAS NO SEWER ON THAT WEST SIDE OF TOWN.

SINCE THAT PLAN WAS DEVELOPED, SEWER WAS PUT IN PLACE.

BASED ON THE SEWER BEING THERE,

[01:20:01]

THERE WAS AN INVESTMENT IN SEWER, WHICH ESSENTIALLY OPENS UP SOME PROPERTIES FOR A HIGHER INTENSITY.

RURAL LIVING, IF THERE'S NO SEWER, YOU DON'T WANT TO GO ANY BIGGER THAN 1-2 ACRE LOTS IF THERE'S NO SEWER.

REALLY, THE THING THAT CHANGED BETWEEN THEN AND NOW IS THAT ADDITION OF THE ABILITY TO SEWER IN AREA.

THE AREAS THAT COULD BE SEWERED PREVIOUSLY WERE IDENTIFIED BY THE ORANGE COLOR.

BUT BASED ON THAT, THERE IS STILL THE ABILITY TO GO INTO THOSE THAT ARE STILL LESS LIKELY ON THE OUTSKIRTS.

AS A PLANNER, WHAT I WOULD LOOK AT IS SAY, HOW DO YOU TRANSITION THIS PLAN FROM 75 THROUGH THOSE AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY RIGHT FOR INVESTMENT AND ALREADY HAPPENING WITH YOUR SUBURBAN, AND THEN AT SOME POINT, WE TRANSITION TO A STATE LIVING.

I'VE HEARD SOME CONSENSUS COME BACK THAT INSTEAD OF GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO RURAL, AT LEAST START TO SHOW A STATE ON THAT WEST SIDE OF TOWN.

IF I WERE TO WALK AWAY WITH WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR, AND THEN ALONG 121, LOOK AT A LOT MORE EMPLOYMENT ALONG THERE BECAUSE THAT'S YOUR CASH COW RIGHT THERE WHERE YOU WANT TO GET A LOT MORE EMPLOYMENT, AND THEN ALONG THE OUTER LOOP, I THINK I'VE HEARD MORE CONSENSUS WITH KEEPING EMPLOYMENT THERE THAN PUTTING RESIDENTIAL THERE.

I THINK THE MAIN ISSUE THAT IT'S REALLY COMING DOWN TO IS DO WE GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO A STATE RESIDENTIAL OR ALL THE WAY DOWN TO RURAL LIVING IN SOME AREAS? WE CAN TAKE A TIGHTER LOOK AT THE SEWER AREAS AND SAY, IF THERE ARE AREAS OVER HERE THAT WON'T BE COVERED BY THE SEWER, THEN CERTAINLY WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AND SAYING, DO WE MOVE THOSE TO RURAL LIVING? IF NOT, THEN PERHAPS MOVE IT TO A STATE.

IS THAT A GOOD APPROACH OR WHAT ARE WE MISSING?

>> I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO GO THAT DIRECTION.

>> ANY MAJOR HEARTBURN?

>> LIKE I SAID, I'M FINE WITH MORE ESTATE LIVING BECAUSE IT STARTS AT ONE ACRE, IT DOESN'T END AT ONE ACRE.

>> EXACTLY

>> I AGREE WITH YOU, KEVIN.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH ROLE I WANT TO PICK UP ON THE WEST SIDE BECAUSE I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT THAT BEING THE INCH PIN THAT COMES UP IN FRONT OF PLANNING AND ZONING EVERY TIME AND SAYS, I WANT MY COWS.

THIS IS RURAL LIVING. YOU GUYS AGREED TO IT AGAIN WHEN YOU REVISED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I DON'T LIKE LOCKING US INTO THAT ON THE WEST SIDE AT ALL.

I WOULD RATHER START WITH A STATE RESIDENTIAL AND THEN GO FROM THERE.

LIKE I SAID, THAT DOESN'T TAKE AWAY THE SMALLER HOUSES OR THE SUBURBAN LIVING OR EVEN THROWING URBAN LIVING OUT THERE, BUT I DON'T LIKE US LOCKING BACK DOWN TO MORE OF THAT AREA OVER THERE.

>> I WASN'T SUGGESTING, BY THE WAY.

>> I DIDN'T TAKE IT THAT WAY EITHER.

I'M HEARING THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO A STUDY TO SEE WHERE WE HAVE WATER, WHERE WE DON'T.

WHERE WE HAVE IT NOW IS GOING TO COMPLETELY CHANGE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW OR 20 YEARS FROM NOW.

MAYBE ANNA GOES AND STARTS PUTTING STUFF ON THE BOND AND PUTS MORE TAXPAYERS PUT SOME STAKE IN THERE AND WE START BUILDING OUR OWN ROADS OUTSIDE OF DEVELOPMENT.

MAYBE WE GO OUT AND WE CHANGE THINGS AND WE DECIDE TO DO INFRASTRUCTURE OUTSIDE OF DEVELOPERS.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO CHANGE IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS OR WHAT'S GOING TO GET APPROVED.

I DON'T WANT TO LOCK US DOWN TO SAY NOTHING IS GOING TO BE BUILT OVER THERE AS FAR AS INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE NEXT 10-50 YEARS.

>> WHENEVER YOU REDO THE MAP, DON'T JUST CHANGE THE STATE LIVING IN AREA 1.

WE'D LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF IT IN AREA 2 AS WELL.

>> DO A FADING EFFECT.

>> WE WILL START OFF BY LETTING THE SEWER SHED, DEFINE IT, AND WE'RE CONVINCED SEWER CERTAINLY [OVERLAPPING]

>> THE WHOLE SEWER THING AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ONLY CAN SUPPORT SO MUCH.

NO MATTER HOW MANY SEWER LINES WE HAVE, WE CAN'T LET THAT DICTATE WHAT DEVELOPMENT WE'RE GOING TO PUT THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE A SEWER LINE THERE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WAY DIFFERENT.

>> CAPACITY [OVERLAPPING]

>> IF WE BUILD YOUR SUBURBAN LIVING WITH 6,000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES AND 1,800 OF THEM ALL UP AND DOWN AREA 2, WE'RE GOING TO NEED SOMETHING DIFFERENT BESIDES OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.

I DON'T WANT SEWER LINES OR WATER LINES TO DICTATE ANY OF OUR DEVELOPMENT.

MAYBE ROADS, BUT NOT SEWER LINES AND WATER LINES.

>> I THINK WE CAN TAKE A SHOT AT MAKING SOME CHANGES.

THE THING THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS WHEN WE WENT TO THE PUBLIC, WE DID NOT THINK, HEY, HERE'S THE FINAL PLAN. TELL US YOU LOVE IT.

WE PUT A PLAN OUT THERE WITH AN INTENT OF GETTING REACTION SO WE COULD BRING THAT TO YOU AND HAVE

[01:25:02]

THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT DEVELOPS THE PLAN THAT'S SUITABLE FOR YOUR COMMUNITY BASED ON THAT BACK AND FORTH.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS TONIGHT.

THE ONLY OTHER THING I HAD IS NEXT STEPS.

LET'S SEE. WE WILL TAKE THE FEEDBACK TONIGHT, AND I THINK I SUMMARIZED IT AND HOPEFULLY KAYLA CAPTURE THAT, I'M SURE STAFFED IT AS WELL SO THAT WE CAN START TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THAT DRAFT FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOP IT INTO A PREFERRED LAND USE PLAN.

WE WILL ALSO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE PLACE TYPES, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO PUT HOTELS IN THE LOWER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL AREAS.

I THINK A LOT OF WHAT WE HAD WAS CHECKING THE BOXES, AND NOW IT'S COMING DOWN TO ADDING SOME LANGUAGE HERE AND THERE TO CAPTURE THE WEALTH OF INFORMATION WE GOT FROM THE COMMUNITY.

WE'LL UPDATE THE PLACE TYPES IN THE PREFERRED LAND USE PLAN, AND THEN WE'LL PREPARE UPDATES TO THE 2050 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT.

ESSENTIALLY, THAT REPORT WILL BE THE SAME REPORT WITH AMENDMENTS TO THREE CHAPTERS THAT ARE BEING AMENDED: THE LAND USE, THE STRATEGIC DIRECTION, AND THE IMPLEMENTATION CHAPTER.

THEN ANNA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE UPDATE ON MARCH 18TH, AND THEN ASSUMING THERE'S A POSITIVE DIRECTION THERE.

CITY COUNCIL WILL CONDUCT A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FOR ADOPTION ON MARCH 25TH.

THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED. AGAIN, I KNOW IT WAS HARD WORK TONIGHT.

I APOLOGIZE FOR GOING LONG, BUT I THINK IT WAS GOOD CONVERSATION. THANK YOU.

>> HEY, SIR.

>> SIR, REAL QUICK. I GOT ONE THING FOR YOU AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER ME TONIGHT.

I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOMETHING FOLLOW ON.

Y'ALL ARE IN SO MANY AREAS THROUGHOUT PRETTY MUCH TEXAS, AND I VALUE THE KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE.

THE BIGGEST QUESTION THAT I HAVE ASKED MULTIPLE PEOPLE AT MULTIPLE LEVELS, AND I FEEL LIKE WE HAVEN'T GOT A REALLY GOOD ANSWER.

HOW CAN WE AS A CITY, INCENTIVIZE SMALLER DEVELOPMENTS TO PROVIDE GATED COMMUNITIES, WITH ONE ACRE, ONE-AND-A-HALF ACRE LOTS, LIKE YOU GO TO CERTAIN PLACES AND I'M NOT GOING TO NAME THEIR NAME BECAUSE THEY'RE A RIVAL.

BUT YOU GO THERE, AND THEY'VE GOT MORE LARGER HOMES ON LARGER LOTS, AND SO HOW ARE THEY FINANCIALLY ABLE TO DO THAT? WHAT ARE THEY DOING FOR THAT DEVELOPER IN ORDER TO INCENTIVIZE THEM? BECAUSE I'M OKAY WITH INCENTIVIZING DEVELOPERS ON 2,000 HOMES, 5,000 HOMES.

THAT'S COMPLETELY FINE AND IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

IS THERE A PACKAGE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE, SO THEN WE GET OUT THERE BY TOM'S HOUSE, AND THERE'S A 25 ACRE LOT OR A 30 ACRE LOT, HOW CAN WE INCENTIVIZE A DEVELOPER THAT WANTS TO COME IN AND BUY THAT AND DO ONE ACRE LOTS ON IT OR WHATEVER? I KNOW Y'ALL SEE THAT ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THOSE POCKETS GOING TO THE WEST.

IF WE COULD JUST GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM Y'ALL IN WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE TO MAKE IT WORK, YOU CAN EVEN EMAIL IT TO ME. I DON'T CARE.

I THINK WE CAN DO SOME RESEARCH AND GET THAT FOR YOU.

THEN THE SECOND THING, I TOUCHED ON, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND UPDATING IT.

>> AWESOME.

>> YOU GUYS HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SO MUCH SINCE THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED.

THERE'S SOME NEW THINGS YOU MIGHT DO, AND ONE OF THOSE MIGHT BE CONSIDER THESE TYPES OF INCENTIVES IN PUTTING SOMETHING IN PLACE.

>> YES, SIR.

>> CLEMENTATION ITEM.

>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOURS TIME.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSION.

>> I JUST WANT TO REMIND ALL THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER SCHEDULED MEETING IN MARCH OF THIS MONTH, SO PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THAT.

IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE EMAIL ME AS WELL AS STAFF.

>> WELL, SEEING NO OBJECTION AT THIS TIME, I'LL ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL PORTION OF THIS AT 7:30 PM.

>> I WILL ADJOURN THE PLANNING AND ZONING AT 7:30 PM AS WELL.

>> I'M GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY ABOUT A FIVE OR SO MINUTES TO TAKE A BREAK, AND THEN WE'LL START UP THE REGULAR COUNCIL.

THANK YOU, P&Z COMMISSION FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.

GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.

[1. Call to Order, Roll Call, and Establishment of Quorum.]

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA, WE'LL MEET ON FEBRUARY 25TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM.

[01:30:01]

THE ANNA MUNICIPAL COMPLEX COUNCIL CHAMBERS LOCATED AT 120 WEST 7TH STREET TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. WELCOME TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON AN OPEN SESSION AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT THE OPINION SPEAKER REGISTRATION FORM AND TURN IT INTO THE CITY SECRETARY BEFORE THE MEETING STARTS.

I AM NOW GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER FOR THE RECORD.

ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.

AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK COUNCIL MEMBER BAKER IF HE WOULD DO OUR PLEDGE AND INVITATION, PLEASE.

>> GOD, ONCE AGAIN, WE COME BEFORE YOU.

WE JUST ASK FOR YOUR SPIRIT TO GUIDE US AS WE CONDUCT OUR CITY'S BUSINESS, THAT WE JUST ASK FOR YOUR WISDOM THAT WE CAN MAKE WISE CHOICES IN EVERYTHING WE DO, WE GLORIFY YOU.

IN JESUS NAME I PRAY. AMEN.

>> AMEN [OVERLAPPING]

>> 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.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> THANK YOU. THAT WILL TAKE US TO AGENDA ITEM 3, NEIGHBOR COMMENTS.

[3. Neighbor Comments.]

AT THIS TIME, ANY PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AN ITEM ON THIS MEETING AGENDA THAT IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

ALSO AT THIS TIME, ANY PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THIS MEETING AGENDA.

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 SPECIFIC STATEMENTS OF INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO A CITIZENS INQUIRY OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO THE INQUIRY.

AT THIS TIME, I DO HAVE TWO CARDS.

FIRST UP, WE HAVE TONY BELLEFONTE.

>> GOOD EVENING. I'M TONY BELLEFONTE WITH 2934 PECAN GROVE DRIVE.

WHAT I WANTED TO DISCUSS WAS THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING.

IT SEEMED THAT THERE WAS CONFUSION OR SOMETHING ON MY PART, BUT I LOOK AT THE COUNCILMAN, THERE'S A JUDGE AND A JURY.

I ALSO LOOK AT WHERE WE HAD ALL THOSE PEOPLE HERE.

THE DEVELOPERS, THE PROSECUTOR AND THE PEOPLE THAT WERE AGAINST A PROPOSAL ON WEST WORCESTER CROSSING AS THE DEFENDANTS.

IT APPEARED TO ME THAT SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE REALLY INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPER.

SOME OF THEM TALKED ABOUT GOING OUT TO LUNCH WITH THEM, SOME TALKED ABOUT PRIVATE BUSINESSES.

OTHERS TOLD US THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS REALLY GOOD AND WE WANTED TO WORK WITH THEM AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

I JUST THINK THAT WAS INAPPROPRIATE.

I THINK THAT THE COUNSELORS AS BEING JUDGES GOING TO PASS, WHETHER THE PROSECUTORS, THE DEVELOPER, OR THE DEFENDANTS, THE RESIDENTS SHOULD RECUSE THEMSELVES IF THEY'RE HAVING A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM.

I KNOW THAT SOME OF YOU FOLKS UP THERE ON THE COUNCIL ARE VETERANS AND I AM TOO.

WE TOOK CERTAIN OATHS, WE LIVE A DIFFERENT LIFE THAN A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT NEVER SERVED THE COUNTRY.

IT JUST LOOKED IMPROPRIETY TO ME.

I'M NOT ACCUSING ANYBODY OF ANYTHING.

I'M JUST BRINGING IT UP FOR FUTURE BECAUSE YOUR DECISIONS AFFECT ALL OF US AS NEIGHBORS, AFFECT ALL OF US AS A CITY, AND WHAT GOES ON HERE CAN BE LASTING FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME, AND IT'S LIKE SUNSHINE.

I'VE TALKED TO SOME PEOPLE I UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT TRANSPIRED HERE THE LAST TIME IS LEGAL.

I'M NOT ACCUSING ANYBODY OF NOT DOING ANYTHING ILLEGAL.

I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT LOOKED THAT IT JUST WASN'T PROPER.

THAT'S ALL I REALLY WANT TO SAY.

THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK TO YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MR. BELLEFONTE. NEXT CARD IS ALEXIA SWAIN POLE.

>> I'VE KNOWN YOUR NAME FOR 10 YEARS.

I JUST MISPRONOUNCED IT RIGHT HERE, SO SORRY. [LAUGHTER]

>> IT'S ALEXIA [INAUDIBLE], I'M AT 2104, SABLE WOOD DRIVE, IN ANNA.

I AM TALKING ABOUT THE LIBRARY.

I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE LIBRARY PROJECT FOR 10 YEARS NOW, AND I AM CURRENTLY THE PRESIDENT OF BOTH THE FRIENDS OF AS WELL AS THE FOUNDATION.

I AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE LIBRARY POLICIES IS ON THE AGENDA.

I'VE HAD THE PLEASURE TO WORK WITH MANY OF YOU,

[01:35:01]

AS WELL AS WITH THE CITY STAFF, PARTICULARLY MARK AND NOW ED AND SUSIE.

I JUST REALLY WANT TO SAY WHAT A PLEASURE THIS HAS TRULY BEEN.

IT REALLY HAS BEEN A VERY LONG JOURNEY, AS A LOT OF YOU VERY WELL KNOW.

YOU'VE ALL HAD THE PLEASURE OF LOOKING AT THE BUILDING BEING BUILT UNDER CONSTRUCTION AS IT CURRENTLY IS, AND IT IS SLATED TO BE OPENED IN SEPTEMBER.

IT REALLY HAS BEEN A GREAT UNIFIER HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT AGE YOU ARE, WHAT RACE YOU ARE.

IT REALLY DOES NOT MATTER.

THE FACT OF MATTER IS THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY BIG COMMUNITY PROJECT, AND REALLY HAS TAKEN SO MANY PEOPLE TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

I REALLY WANT TO SAY AGAIN, WHAT A GREAT VISION THIS HAS BEEN, WHAT A GREAT GIFT THIS IS FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR CITY.

I REALLY WANT TO SAY WHAT A TRUE HUMBLING EXPERIENCE THIS HAS BEEN.

I REALLY WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU FOR BEING PART OF THIS JOURNEY AND REALLY JUST WHAT A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL TAKE THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR REPORTS.

[4. Reports.]

RECEIVE REPORTS FROM SEF OR THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST.

ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST INCLUDE EXPRESSIONS OF THANKS, CONGRATULATIONS, OR CONDOLENCE, INFORMATION REGARDING HOLIDAY SCHEDULES, AND HONORARY STATUTORY RECOGNITION OF A PUBLIC OFFICIAL, PUBLIC EMPLOYEE, OR OTHER CITIZEN, BUT NOT INCLUDING A CHANGE IN STATUS IN A PERSON'S PUBLIC OFFICE OR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT.

A REMINDER ABOUT AN UPCOMING EVENT, ORGANIZED OR SPONSORED BY THE GOVERNING BODY, INFORMATION REGARDING A SOCIAL CEREMONIAL OR COMMUNITY EVENT ORGANIZED OR SPONSORED BY AN ENTITY OTHER THAN THE GOVERNING BODY THAT WAS ATTENDED OR IS SCHEDULED TO BE ATTENDED BY A MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY, OR AN OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE OF THE MUNICIPALITY, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS INVOLVING AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PEOPLE IN THE MUNICIPALITY THAT HAS ARISEN AFTER THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA.

ITEM A IS RECEIVE REPORT ON RECENT PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEMS. MR. MARK MARCHAND.

>> MAYOR, IF I CAN JUST UNDER REPORTS, BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN FRONT OF YOU.

IF I CAN GO AHEAD AND HAVE MARK COME DOWN BECAUSE HE'LL BE GIVING A REPORT ON THE PARKS ITEM.

BUT ALSO, IF I COULD HAVE ED VEAL AND SUSIE BIBB AND JEFF, YOU CAN COME DOWN TOO.

THIS IS OUR SMALL BUT MIGHTY LIBRARY TEAM.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MARK AND LET HIM TELL YOU WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.

>> THANKS, RYAN. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

MARK MARCHAND, DIRECTOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES.

IT IS MY HONOR THIS EVENING TO PRESENT TO EACH OF YOU.

THERE'S THE BOOKS IN FRONT OF YOU.

A COUPLE WE WANT TO HOLD UP AND SHOW OUR NEIGHBORS WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE.

YOU HAVEN'T OPENED IT YET? NO, IT'S SAFE. I PROMISE.

YEAH. YOU ARE NOW OFFICIALLY CARD CARRYING MEMBERS OF THE ANNA COMMUNITY LIBRARY.

A LOT OF VERY FANTASTIC WORK HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED SO FAR THANKS TO MR. VEAL AND MS. BIBB.

MR. FREETH HAS MADE SURE THAT THE TRAININGS ARE RUNNING ON TIME THROUGHOUT THIS PROJECT.

THE ANNA COMMUNITY LIBRARY APP IS NOW AVAILABLE THROUGH THE APP STORE ON YOUR PHONE, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN EXPLORE.

OUR DIGITAL LIBRARY IS ABOUT READY TO GO LIVE, SO A LOT OF INFORMATION IS GOING TO BE PUSHED OUT TO OUR NEIGHBORS VERY SOON.

YOU HAVE ACCESS TO BETWEEN 3 - 500,000 DIGITAL TITLES RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO ROLL THIS OUT.

WE JUST WANTED TO SAY, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU TO ALEXIA AND ALL OF THE VOLUNTEERS WHO SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS FOR YEARS WORKING HARD ON THIS.

IN MY ENTIRE CAREER OF PUBLIC SERVICE, I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE A PART OF SOME GREAT TEAMS, SOME GREAT PROJECTS.

I'VE GOTTEN TO RENOVATE LIBRARIES, BE THE START OF BUILDING LIBRARIES, EXPANDING LIBRARIES, AND BRANCHES.

BUT AS MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD ME SAY, I NEVER GOT TO BUILD ONE WHERE THERE WASN'T ONE BEFORE.

THIS WAS REALLY AN HONOR FOR ME TO GET TO COME TO BE A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY AND HELP ALL OF YOU MAKE THIS VISION A REALITY.

THE NEIGHBORS ARE THE ONES THAT DESIGN THAT LIBRARY FROM THE INSIDE OUT, ALL THE SERVICES, THE PROGRAMS, THE SPACE ALLOCATION.

THE LIBRARY JUST APPEARED FROM THAT PROCESS.

I'M GOING TO TELL YOU COMPLETELY WITH UNBIASED, JUST HONESTY, YOU KNOCKED IT OUT OF THE PARK.

IN THAT BUILDING OVER THERE I FOUND NOTHING ABOUT THE SPACE ALLOCATION THAT I DON'T LIKE.

KUDOS TO ALL OF YOU AND THANK YOU. THANKS TO THE TEAM.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MARK.

>> THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU, GUYS.

[APPLAUSE]

[01:40:01]

>> I WANTED TO COME TO YOU ALL VERY BRIEFLY, JUST UPDATE YOU ON WHAT THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD HAS BEEN UP TO LAST COUPLE OF MEETINGS.

A LOT OF PROJECTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

THEY'VE BEEN GETTING REPORTS ON THOSE OPERATIONALLY.

SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD IN THEIR PROGRESS.

THEY'VE BEEN GETTING UPDATES ON THOSE AS WELL.

A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN REALLY EXCITING IS THAT THEY HAVE HAD THE VERY DIFFICULT TASK OF RECOMMENDING AT LEAST TWO NEW PARK NAMES FOR NEW PARKS THAT ARE COMING ONLINE TO YOU ALL.

THERE'S ANOTHER ONE YET THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING TO YOU VERY SOON.

THAT'S A DAUNTING TASK, AND THAT'S A LEGACY LEVEL TYPE THING.

SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS, THAT'S SOMETHING THEY'VE BEEN REVIEWING AS PART OF OUR PROCESS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS. THOSE ARE GROWING.

WE HAD ABOUT HALF A DOZEN OF THEM COME IN WITHIN A SPAN OF ABOUT TWO WEEKS.

WHEN NORMALLY OUTSIDE OF MY DEPARTMENT'S PURVIEW AND OUR RESPONSIBILITIES, THERE'S NOT THAT MANY THAT COME IN DURING THE YEAR.

THE COMMUNITY IS REALLY GETTING EXCITED, AND VIBRANT AND INVOLVED AND ENGAGED AND WANTING TO DO THINGS.

IT'S WONDERFUL AND GIVES THEM SOME REALLY MEANINGFUL THINGS TO TAKE PART IN.

COUNCILMAN TOTEN, IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR YOU WANT TO ADD, I KNOW THAT AS WE APPROACH THE BUDGET SEASON, THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD IS GOING TO BE VERY ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN PARTICIPATING IN OUR SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST, OUR CAPITAL PROJECT LIST THAT WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU ALL, PRIORITIZING SOME OF THOSE AS A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU ALL.

WE'VE GOT SOME NEW MEMBERS. THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET TO KNOW OUR PARK SYSTEM AND BEING ENGAGED AND BEING OUT THERE.

THEY HAVE DISCUSSED RECENTLY ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF CREATING SUBCOMMITTEES TO BREAK THOSE TASK UP.

THAT'S SOMETHING THEY'RE GOING TO DISCUSS AT THE NEXT MEETING AS WELL.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL CERTAINLY BE HAPPY TO TRY TO ANSWER.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, BEFORE YOU ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF MARK, THE LAST POINT IS SOMETHING I DO WANT TO GET FEEDBACK ON OR AT LEAST HAVE YOU PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO MARK AND OUR RECREATION TEAM.

THIS IDEA OF SUBCOMMITTEES, JUST TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT, OUR FORMER DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION BOARD HAD SUBCOMMITTEES WHEN IT WAS FORMED.

NOW, IT WAS 11 MEMBER BOARD, IT WAS A LITTLE LARGER, BUT WE TRIED OUT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IDEA.

WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT IT STARTED OFF HOT, BUT THEN THEY FADED.

WE FOUND THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEES WEREN'T THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO REALLY GET THE BOARD COMMUNICATING AND WORKING TOGETHER.

I ONLY PROVIDE THAT AS CONTEXT.

I WOULD LIKE YOU GUYS TO PROVIDE SOME OF YOUR THOUGHTS TO MARK AS YOU THINK ABOUT THIS.

BUT THEY ARE LOOKING TO TRY TO CREATE SUBCOMMITTEES, AND WE'VE DONE IT IN THE PAST, SO WE HAVE SOME HISTORY ON IT.

I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO ALL OF YOU AS THAT PARKS BOARD LOOKS FOR SOME GUIDANCE FROM COUNCIL ON THAT.

>> I'LL SPEAK ON IT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE LAST MEETING.

I THINK I WAS OUT OF TOWN FOR WORK.

BEING ON COUNCIL WHEN THE SUBCOMMITTEES WERE PART OF THAT ONE BOARD.

I MEAN, HE'S RIGHT. AT FIRST, IT WAS ALL GUNG HO.

BUT THEN IT JUST DIED AWAY.

FROM WHAT I WAS HEARING ON WHENEVER THE SUBCOMMITTEES WERE INTRODUCED TO THE PARKS BOARD IT WAS MORE SO LET'S KEEP AN EYE OUT ON WHAT'S BEING BUILT, WHAT'S GOING ON.

I DON'T THINK THE PARKS BOARD IS MEANT TO DO THAT AND POLICE ON HOW THINGS ARE BEING BUILT OR NOT SO MUCH POLICE.

I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ENTIRE PARKS BOARD BE INVOLVED IN ALL OF OUR PARKS.

I THINK THAT'S WHY MOST OF THEM WERE APPOINTED BECAUSE THEY HAD A PASSION FOR IT.

IN THE INTERVIEW COMMITTEE SEEN IN EACH INDIVIDUAL, YOU VISIT THE PARKS OR YOU'RE A PARENT THAT HAS KIDS THAT PLAYED SPORTS, SO YOU'RE INVOLVED IN THAT SO EVERYBODY SEES IT.

I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANYTHING ELSE ON THEM.

WE'RE ALREADY ASKING A LOT.

NOT REALLY A LOT. I MEAN, WE SHOW UP TWO TIMES A MONTH.

THEY SHOW UP ONCE A MONTH, BUT I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANYTHING MORE OR ANY OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES THAT'S GOING TO GET IT IN THE WAY OF ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED THEM TO DO SUCH AS LIKE THE MASTER PLAN.

ALONG WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THE PARKS MASTER PLAN WE'RE DOING IT SEPARATELY THIS YEAR INSTEAD OF FOUR YEARS AGO WHERE WE DID IT ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

HOPEFULLY, IT GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAILED.

BUT I'M AGAINST INDIVIDUAL COMMITTEES.

I'D JUST LIKE TO KEEP IT PARKS BOARD AND LET THEM DO IT AS WE ORIGINALLY PLANNED.

[01:45:03]

>> I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE THAT BACK TO THEM.

YOU MENTIONED THE PARKS' MASTER PLAN, AND YOU'RE RIGHT.

THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT'S ABOUT TO COME WITH THAT. THANK YOU.

>> I'M GOING TO TAG ON WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN TOTEN SAID.

THE COMMITTEES, I DON'T THINK ARE NEEDED.

IF YOU WANTED TO GO TO A PARTICULAR MEMBER WOULD FOCUS ON A SPECIFIC ITEM OR SOMETHING IF THERE'S MORE BACKGROUND RESEARCH OR WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE.

BUT EVERYBODY ON THE PARKS BOARD NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON WITH THAT BOARD.

WHEN YOU GET INTO COMMITTEES, YOU GET LITTLE SILOS OF INFORMATION AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S EFFICIENT.

>> ALSO I THINK IT JUST OPENS UP THE DOOR FOR IF WE HAVE A PARKS BOARD MEMBER SAYING, HEY, YOU'RE PUTTING THE WRONG WATERPROOF FAUCET OR FREEZE PROOF FAUCET OR YOU'RE NOT WELDING THIS GATE CORRECTLY ON A GATE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S NOT THEIR JOB WHILE THEY'RE THERE.

THAT'S NOT EVEN OUR JOB UP HERE TO POLICE WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES.

I'LL JUST LIKE TO KEEP THEM DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING NOW.

>> I AGREE. I THINK IT WOULD BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO DO THAT FOR THAT BOARD.

>> DID THEY PROVIDE ANY CONTEXT AS TO WHAT THEY HOPED TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THESE SUBCOMMITTEE?

>> THEY DIDN'T PER SE.

IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AS AN IDEA IN A WAY TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE PARKS AND SERVICES AND DIFFERENT AREAS.

THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT ENGAGEMENT WITH NEIGHBORS SOME OF THOSE, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE PICKLEBALL OR AT THE SKATE PARK OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE COUNCIL IS THAT THOSE THINGS ARE OKAY AS THEY ACT AS A BODY ALTOGETHER.

>> IF THEY HAVE A FOCAL POINT, THEY WANT TO APPOINT FOR SOME SPECIFIC PROJECT OR SOMETHING, THAT'S FINE, BUT THEY ALL NEED TO BE ON THAT BOARD TOGETHER.

>> I ECHO THAT AS WELL.

WE'RE NOT TOO BIG THAT YOU CAN'T VISIT ALL THE PARKS ON A REGULAR BASIS.

I MEAN, I STILL DO.

I BELIEVE OUR ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THESE ADVISORY BOARDS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SELF ORGANIZING.

I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE TELLING THEM WHAT THEY ARE.

WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO, BUT I WOULD STRONGLY QUESTION WHAT THEY HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH BECAUSE WHAT I'VE FOUND WITH EVERY PARKS BOARD MEMBER WHO'S EVER SERVED IS THEY HAVE CERTAIN INTERESTS AND THAT'S THE AREAS THAT THEY FOCUS ON AT EVERY MEETING AND THE OTHER AREAS THEY JUST PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF INPUT OR A VOTE AS FAR AS WHAT THEY ADVISE.

WHAT IS IT? FIVE MEMBERS, SEVEN MEMBERS? YOU ALREADY HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE EACH INDIVIDUAL.

AS FAR AS THE MASTER PLANNING, I KNOW YOU'RE DOING NATURAL SPRINGS PARK, WHICH BY THE WAY, THAT PLAYGROUND IS VISITED HEAVILY.

KUDOS TO OUR STAFF.

KUDOS TO ALL THE VOLUNTEERS.

I'M GLAD THIS COUNCIL PUSHED IT THROUGH.

WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SEE THE MASTER PLAN FOR NATURAL SPRINGS PARK?

>> I DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE ON THAT.

I'LL GET WITH CIP TEAM AND YOU'LL CERTAINLY GET YOU ANSWER.

I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE.

>> I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING IT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> YEAH. THANK YOU. SEE THE FEELINGS OF THE COUNCIL REGARDING SUBCOMMITTEES RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

THE THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS WE MAY END UP WITH A SUBCOMMITTEE AND THEY START DIGGING IN THE WEEDS WHERE THEY DON'T NEED TO BE.

IT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE THERE FOR.

IT'S NOT WHAT THAT BOARD IS FOR.

I DON'T WANT THEM TO DO EXTRA WORK THAT THEY SHOULDN'T EVEN BE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

>> MAYOR MAY I REMIND EVERYONE THAT WE HAVE A SERVICE CALLED SEECLICKFIX THAT RUNS ON ANDROID, IPHONE, AND I THINK THE WEBSITE.

IF YOU DO SEE A PROBLEM, WHETHER YOU SERVE AS A MEMBER OR A NEIGHBOR OR WHATEVER, PLEASE REPORT IT IMMEDIATELY.

>> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE?

>> I HAVE ONE THING, MAYOR.

WELL, NOT FOR THE PARKS, I'M SORRY, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MARCHAND.

>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BRING IT TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION IF EVERYBODY DIDN'T KNOW.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT FOOTBALL.

CURRENTLY LAST WEEK, I THINK IT WAS LAST WEEK.

WE HAD A STATE CHAMPION WRESTLER, A YOUNG LADY NAMED ADDISON HUNT, ONE IN HER WEIGHT CLASS OUT OF ALL THE STATE IN 5A.

THIS PROGRAM IS VERY FRESH.

IT'S ONLY BEEN AROUND FOR FIVE OR SIX YEARS.

ACTUALLY, WE ARE 5A AND THEY WRESTLED IN 5A.

WE ALWAYS BEEN WRESTLING UP. I BELIEVE SHE'S A FRESHMAN.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

[01:50:01]

>> HOPEFULLY, THERE MIGHT BE THREE MORE RUNNING BEHIND IT.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO CONGRATULATE HER AND JUST BRING ATTENTION TO THAT.

>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? THAT'LL TAKE US TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE, WORK SESSION.

[5. Work Session.]

THIS WORK SESSION IS GOING TO BE WITH THE ANNA POLICE DEPARTMENT'S THREE YEAR STRATEGIC STAFFING PLAN.

CHIEF OF POLICE, MR. DEAN HABEL.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

SHORTLY AFTER I STARTED HERE IN ANNA AND JOINED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WE CONTRACTED WITH DR. ERIC FRITCH AND JUSTICE RESEARCH CONSULTANTS TO CONDUCT A FIVE YEAR STAFFING STUDY FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

WE'RE CURRENTLY IN YEAR THREE OF THAT FIVE YEAR STAFFING STUDY, AND WHAT WE LEARNED AS THE YEARS WENT BY IS THAT SOME OF THE INPUTS THAT WE USED, WE WERE OUTPACING THAT IN TERMS OF GROWTH.

WE REACHED BACK OUT TO DR. FRITCH, SHAVED OFF THE LAST TWO YEARS OF THAT FIVE YEAR STUDY AND HIRED HIM TO DO A THREE YEAR NEW STAFFING STUDY, STARTING WITH THIS FISCAL YEAR COMING UP, FISCAL YEAR '26.

FISCAL YEAR '25 IS CURRENTLY YEAR THREE OF THAT FIVE YEAR PLAN.

IN CONDUCTING THE STUDY HE'S GOT A VARIETY OF INPUTS THAT HE WILL DISCUSS WITH YOU ALONG WITH HIS METHODOLOGIES.

BUT HE ALSO DOES INTERVIEWS.

HE INTERVIEWED SIX PEOPLE AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING MYSELF, HE INTERVIEWED CITY MANAGER, RYAN HENDERSON AND THE BUDGET MANAGER, TERRI DOBY.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO HIM SO HE CAN GO OVER.

HE'S GOT A VERY BRIEF POWERPOINT, AND THEN WE CAN BOTH ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING.

>> I'M GOING TO TALK THROUGH THE THREE YEAR PLAN THAT WE DEVELOPED FOR YOU ALL.

BASICALLY, THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO SEE WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS DUE TO GROWTH.

SIGNIFICANT GROWTH IN NOT ONLY POPULATION, BUT REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS WORKLOAD ON THE PART OF THE POLICE.

I'VE BEEN DOING THIS TYPE OF WORK STAFFING ASSESSMENTS FOR AGENCIES I STARTED ABOUT 25 YEARS AGO.

STARTED DOING QUITE A FEW OF THEM ABOUT 15 YEARS AGO, AS YOU WERE TALKING EARLIER.

I REGARDING OTHER CITIES, I REALIZED I'VE DONE MANY ON HIGHWAY 75, SO I'VE DONE RICHARDSON, MCKINNEY, ALLEN, SHERMAN, DENNISON, AND THEN PRINCETON AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES AS WELL.

I'M IN THE DALLAS FORTH WORTH METROPLEX, SO I DO QUITE A BIT HERE, BUT I'VE DONE STUDIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND MANY STATES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, AND THEN I'VE DONE WORK INTERNATIONALLY AS WELL, WORKING WITH THE NORWEGIAN NATIONAL POLICE AND DOING SOME STAFFING SOME MODELING FOR RA SAUDI ARABIANS, SOME PLACES IN CANADA.

I DO THESE STUDIES, I FOLLOW THE SAME FORMAT, AND THAT'S THE METHODOLOGY THAT I USE.

I GATHER A LOT OF INFORMATION, DATA AND DOCUMENTS FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN LIKE YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND THINGS SUCH AS THAT FROM THE CITY.

AS CHIEF MENTIONED, I DID INTERVIEWS WITH PERSONNEL BECAUSE THE DATA WILL TELL ME SO MUCH.

I NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND INSIDE THE DEPARTMENT, WHAT PARTICULAR STAFFING CHALLENGES THAT THEY ARE FACING.

THEN I LOOK AT STANDARDIZED CONTEMPORARY BEST PRACTICES OR BEST OR CONTEMPORARY STAFFING STANDARDS IN ASSESSING THIS, AND THEN I BUILD STATISTICAL MODELS, ESPECIALLY ON THE PATROL SIDE TO TELL US HOW MANY PERSONNEL EIGHT.

WE'LL START WITH THE PATROLS, WHERE MOST OF YOUR PERSONNEL ARE, AND THAT'S TRUE FOR ANY POLICE DEPARTMENT.

BUT BASICALLY, I USE A MODEL THAT I BUILT ABOUT 25 YEARS AGO, AND IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT 38 DIFFERENT VARIABLES.

BASICALLY, IT'S A STANDARD WORKLOAD MODEL IN PARTS.

IT LOOKS AT CALLS FOR SERVICE, SEPARATED BY PRIORITY LEVEL, AND THEN BACKUP IT BOTH THE PRIMARY UNIT AND THEN THE BACKUP UNIT PERSONNEL THAT ARE NEEDED FOR THAT.

LOOK AT SELF-INITIATE ACTIVITIES.

THAT'S TRAFFIC STOPS AND THINGS SUCH AS THAT, ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES AND THEN LEAVE PERCENTAGE BASED ON SICK LEAVE, TRAINING, THOSE TYPES OF FACTORS.

THAT'S THE STANDARD WORKLOAD MODEL, BUT THEN WE USE PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES AS WELL FOR THE AGENCY.

WE LOOK AT BOTH ON THE RESPONSE TIME SIDE, WE LOOK AT WHAT RESPONSE TIMES YOU CURRENTLY HAVE, AND THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT WHAT YOU WANT REGARDING RESPONSE TIME TO CALLS FOR SERVICE.

WE LOOK AT IMMEDIATE AVAILABILITY.

WHAT THAT BASICALLY MEANS IS THAT ALMOST ALWAYS YOU DON'T WANT ALL OF YOUR PATROL PERSONNEL TIED UP ON OTHER CALLS FOR SERVICE WHEN AN EMERGENCY CALL COMES IN, AND SO WE MODEL THAT OUT.

[01:55:02]

THEN WE LOOK AT VISIBILITY AND THAT IS SEEING OFFICERS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, ON HIGHWAYS, ET CETERA, ARTERIAL, ROADWAYS, ET CETERA.

WHAT I DO INITIALLY, ONCE I RECEIVE THE DATA FROM THE AGENCY IS I BUILD WHAT I CALL A BASE MAP, AND THAT MODEL IS BASICALLY OFF YOUR PRIOR CALENDAR YEAR DATA.

IN THIS CASE, IT WAS 2023 WAS THE LATEST FULL CALENDAR YEAR WE HAD.

BUILT A BASE MODEL AND THE IDEA BEHIND THAT MODEL IS THAT I WANT TO USE YOUR ACTUAL DATA TO THEN BUILD A MODEL THAT TELLS ME HOW MANY PATROL OFFICERS YOU HAVE BASED ON HOW MANY YOU'VE ACTUALLY HAD IN THAT PARTICULAR CALENDAR YEAR.

THAT VALIDATES THE MODEL AND THEN I CAN MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO THE MODEL THEN PREDICT HIM ANY PERSONNEL YOU NEED IN THE FUTURE BASED ON MODIFICATIONS.

THE MODIFICATIONS FOR THIS MODEL, WHICH REALLY ARE SIMILAR TO THE MODIFICATIONS MADE THREE YEARS AGO, IS JUST THAT YOUR PACE OF INCREASED CALLS FOR SERVICE, OUTPACED THE MODELING THAT WE DID IS INCREASED CALLS FOR SERVICE AND BACKUP UNIT RESPONSES.

WE PUT IN FOR THE MODIFIED MODEL, WE PUT IN A 16.7% ANNUAL GROWTH AND CALLS FOR SERVICE.

YOU'RE RUNNING OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS, ABOUT A 16%, AND THEN YOU CLEARLY KNOW WHAT YOUR POPULATION HAS BEEN DOING OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS.

16.7 IS A REASONABLE NUMBER BASED UPON THE FACTORS THAT WE HAVE, PLUS WITH THE ADDITION OF SUCH THINGS AS APARTMENT COMPLEXES, ET CETERA COMING IN.

WE PUT IN 16.7% BASED ON NOT ONLY HISTORICAL, BUT THEN FUTURE GROWTH.

WE LOOKED AT SELF-INITIATED TIME AND WANTED TO MOVE SELF-INITIATED TIME TO A THIRD OF THE SHIFT, WHICH IS THE CONTEMPORARY STAFFING STANDARD THAT'S OUT THERE.

WE LOOKED AT RESPONSE TIMES, I WANT TO LOWER RESPONSE TIMES TO PRIORITY ONE CALLS FOR SERVICE.

THEY'RE VERY GOOD AS THEY STAND.

I MEAN, THEY'RE VERY GOOD AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY.

BUT WE WANT THE CHIEF AND THE COMMAND STAFF WANT A LOWER RESPONSE TIMES TWO AROUND FOUR MINUTES, FOUR PARTY ONE CALLS, EIGHT MINUTES FOR PARTY 2, AND THEN 10 MINUTES FOR PARTY 3, 4 AND 5.

TAKING THAT ALL INTO ACCOUNT ONCE THE BASE MODEL IS SET, THEN I CAN INPUT ADDITIONAL VARIABLES AND THEN BUILD A PREDICTIVE MODEL.

BASED UPON THAT, THAT'S WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION COMES FROM IS YOU'LL NEED 16 ADDITIONAL PATROL OFFICERS OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.

WHAT THAT BASICALLY IS GOING TO DO IS ALLOW YOU TO ALLOW YOU TO ANSWER THE CALLS FOR SERVICE, 16.7% INCREASE IN CALLS FOR SERVICE AND BACKUP UNIT RESPONSES OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, INCREASE SELF INITIATE TIME, AND BE ABLE TO DECREASE RESPONSE TIMES, BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN CALL LOADS PACE LIKE THEY ARE HERE IN THE CITY OF ANNA WITH 16% ANNUAL GROWTH.

IS THE PROBLEM BECOMES THAT OTHER PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES START TO SUFFER.

RESPONSE TIME START TO GO OUT, SELF-INITIATED ACTIVITY STARTS TO GO DOWN, AND YOU START GETTING THIS REALLY THIS DOMINO EFFECT.

IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP PACE WITH YOUR CALL LOAD.

JUST YOUR CALL LOAD ALONE INCREASES IS ABOUT 2-3 OFFICERS PER YEAR.

RECOMMENDATION IS FOR 16 ADDITIONAL PATROL OFFICERS THAT WILL GET YOUR PATROL STRENGTH TO 28.

CURRENTLY THERE I MEAN, TO 38, CURRENTLY IT'S 22, AND THEN FOUR CORPORALS AS WELL.

THAT'S THE PATROL SIDE OF WHAT WAS BUILT, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY MOST OF YOUR PERSONNEL HAVE SAID.

BUT THEN THERE'S SOME OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I MADE THAT ARE REALLY ABOUT THE GROWTH OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE GROWTH OF THE CITY AS WELL.

THE FIRST ONE IS ADDING A PATROL LIEUTENANT, AND SO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE ONE.

IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO HAVE A SECOND ONE.

BASICALLY, PATROL LIEUTENANT IS THE DAY LIEUTENANT, YOU NEED A NIGHT ONE.

YOU'RE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE YOU'VE GOT ENOUGH PERSONNEL PATROL PERSONNEL, WHERE YOU NEED ANOTHER COMMAND LEVEL PRESENCE ON THE PATROL SIDE, AND SO ANOTHER PATROL LIEUTENANT IS IMPORTANT.

I PUT THAT AND WE'LL SEE, BUT I PUT THAT AS A VERY NEAR TERM AS IN THIS COMING YEAR, NEEDING A SECOND PATROL LIEUTENANT.

I JUST TOO MUCH 22 OFFICERS PLUS BROTH, AND FOUR CORPORALS, FOUR SERGEANTS AND ONE PATROL LIEUTENANT IS CURRENTLY SUPERVISING ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE.

IT'S JUST TOO MUCH FOR THE ONE PATROL LIEUTENANT TO HANDLE, YOU'RE GETTING TO A SIZE WHERE YOU NEED THE SECOND ONE.

EVENTUALLY DOWN THE ROAD, I MAY BE HERE SAYING YOU NEED THREE AND FOUR, TWO BECAUSE THAT'S THE NEXT STEP AT SOME POINT IN TIME IN YOUR GROWTH.

YOU NEED TWO MORE DETECTIVES.

YOU HAVE FOUR CURRENTLY, AND REALLY THIS IS BECAUSE OF WHAT I LOOK AT IS I LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF CASES IN WHICH DETECTIVES ARE BEING ASSIGNED EACH MONTH TO SEE HOW THEIR WORKFLOW COMES IN EACH MONTH.

[02:00:01]

MOST CASES ARE SOLVED WITHIN THE MONTH.

USUALLY SOLVED WITHIN 30 DAYS.

I LOOK AT MONTHLY NUMBERS ON THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO EACH DETECTIVE.

YOU HAVE ONE ASSIGNED AT THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER, SO THAT PERSON IS FULL TIME THERE.

TAKING THAT INTO ACCOUNT, WE HAVE THREE DETECTIVES HERE, AND THEN YOU HAVE ONE THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FULL TIME NARCOTICS OFFICER.

IF WE TAKE THAT PERSON OUT, BASICALLY, YOU HAVE TWO WHAT WE WOULD CALL GENERAL ASSIGNMENT DETECTIVES, SO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE WORKING YOUR PROPERTY CRIMES AND YOUR VIOLENT CRIMES.

PUT TWO MORE IN THERE.

ONE'S REALLY NEEDED NOW, AND THEN BASED ON THE WORKFLOW, AND THEN ONE'S GOING TO BE NEEDED JUST BECAUSE AS THOSE 16% INCREASES IN CALLS FOR SERVICE OCCUR, SOME OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND WHICH ARE GOING TO HAVE TO INVOLVE INVESTIGATION BY DETECTIVE.

TWO DETECTIVES ARE NEEDED.

THEN I MADE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER.

YOU'RE AT THAT POINT WHERE YOU NEED A FULL TIME PERSON THAT BASICALLY DOES COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, DOES CRIME PREVENTION, WORKS WITH APARTMENT COMPLEXES.

HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS, ET CETERA, AND REALLY BECOMES LIKE THE PUBLIC FACE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WORKING WITH AGENCIES AND BUSINESSES AND THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES.

YOU HAVE ONE NOW THAT'S LIKE HALF OF A PATROL OFFICER AND HALF OF A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER, WHICH IS TYPICALLY HOW IT WORKS WHEN YOU'RE A SMALLER AGENCY, BUT YOU GET INTO THAT SIZE WHERE IT'S TIME TO CARVE OUT A FULL TIME COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER.

THEN RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT THAT IS FULL TIME TASKED WITH HANDLING THINGS NEEDED BY THE COMMAND STAFF, SO LIEUTENANTS AND ABOVE.

RIGHT NOW IT'S PARSED OUT TO PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY THAT IS A NON SWORN PERSON INSIDE THE DEPARTMENT.

AT SOME POINT IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A FULL TIME ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE LIEUTENANTS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ASSISTANT CHIEF AND CHIEF.

WE DON'T WANT THEM SPENDING THEIR TIME DOING THINGS THAT WE CAN GIVE TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

THAT'S THE NEXT STEP.

REST ON THE NON SWORN SIDE YOU'RE IN GOOD SHAPE OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, BUT THAT'S THE ONE ADDITION ON THE NON SWORN SIDE THAT I SAW.

THIS IS HOW I PAT THEM OUT.

IT'S 21 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.

I THINK FOR THIS COMING YEAR, FOUR PATROL OFFICERS, BUT THEN REALLY WE NEED THE PATROL LIEUTENANT, ONE OF THE DETECTIVES AND THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER AND THEN FY 27 IS THE SIX PATROL OFFICERS, AND THEN IN FY 28 IS SIX ADDITIONAL PATROL OFFICERS.

THAT'S WHEN THE SECOND DETECTIVE COMES IN AND THE ONE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT AS WELL.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR FOR ME OR THE TEAM.

>> JUST REAL QUICKLY, DO YOU GET THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT COMING IN AT THE THIRD YEAR? I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION.

I JUST I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT WE NEEDED THAT NOW.

I MEAN, WHAT'S THE JUSTIFICATION.

>> WE NEED IT NOW, YOU DID NOT HAVE SPACE FOR THE PERSON.

I WOULD VOTE I AGREE WITH YOU. THERE'S NOT A SPOT.

>> THAT WAS A QUESTION I HAD AS TO WHY THAT WASN'T COMING IN BECAUSE I KNOW THEY'RE BUSY.

>> IT NEEDED.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PHYSICAL SPACE.

YOU'RE SAYING CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, WE'RE FULL? DO WE HAVE ROOM TO EVEN ADD THE SEVEN OFFICERS NEXT YEAR?

>> WE EVEN ADD OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WORK IN THE OFFICE.

>> I GET THAT. THEY ALSO HAVE CARS AND THEY WE HAVE POLICE CARS.

>> THERE'S NO DOUBT ADDING OFFICERS EQUIPMENT.

>> THEN ALSO SO WE GOT TO LOOK AT THAT, COUNSEL.

I THINK CURRENTLY, I DIDN'T SEE IT ON THERE.

CHIEF, YOU MAY HAVE TO COME UP HERE.

OH, THERE YOU ARE. WE HAVE ONE TRAFFIC OFFICER?

>> CORRECT.

>> DOES HIS STUDY CALL FOR THAT, OR IS THAT YOUR CALL OR?

>> WHAT WE DO IS WE WOULD ASSESS THE NEED OF HAVING INDIVIDUAL A SECOND TRAFFIC UNIT VERSUS PATROL OFFICER AND THEY'RE INTERCHANGEABLE.

THE ROLES ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

THEY'RE BOTH OUT THERE IN THE SQUAT PATROLLING, JUST A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, SO WE COULD DO THAT IN TERM.

THE KEY FOR US IS GETTING THE PERSONNEL TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY.

>> THEN ALSO, CHIEF, DON'T TAKE THIS PERSONAL WHEN I ASKED THIS GENTLEMAN THE QUESTION.

WE HAVE HIGHWAY 75,

[02:05:02]

AND WE HAVE 121, AND SOON IN LET'S SAY TEN YEARS, OUTER LOOP IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.

DO YOU SEE A NEED FOR OUR TOWN TO HAVE A DOT OFFICER DEDICATED TO THAT?

>> COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OFF?

>> YES, SIR.

>> AT THIS POINT IN TIME OR?

>> THIS POINT IN TIME OR IN FIVE YEARS OR.

KEEP IN MIND, WE HAVE TWO TRUCK STOPS. KEEP THAT IN MIND.

>> I'M GOING TO GO WITH NO. THE REASON WHY I'M GOING TO GO WITH THAT WAS I JUST FINISHED IRVING. IRVING DOESN'T HAVE ANY.

WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU DO IS YOU HAVE YOUR TRAFFIC OFFICERS BUILD THAT UNIT UP AND HAVE THOSE OFFICERS TRAINED IN COMMERCIAL ENFORCEMENT SO THEY CAN DO BOTH TASKS RATHER THAN JUST HAVING CMB OFFICERS OFFICE.

>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.

>> THEN MCKINNEY.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER.

>> ONE OTHER CONSIDERATION. TOPIC IS, WE'RE DOING A LOT OF PARTNERSHIPS CURRENTLY WITH THREE OTHER CITIES WITH SALINA MELISSA AND PRINCETON.

PRINCETON HAS A FAIRLY ACTIVE CMP OFFICER THAT THEY HIRED ON A CERTIFIED FROM MCKINNEY.

MELISSA HAS A BUDDING PROGRAM AS WELL AS SALINA, SO WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY.

WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE.

THEY'VE GOT SOME THINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE, SO WE'VE GOT SOME INTERCHANGEABILITY THERE THAT WE CAN DO AS PART OF AN EXCHANGE.

WE'RE WORKING ON A CURRENT IA TO WORK MORE CLOSELY.

>> LIKE I SAID, DON'T TAKE THAT PERSONAL I ASKING.

I LIKE TO BE OUR OWN CITY AND NOT SHARE, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THE WHOLE SHARING ANOTHER OFFICER FROM ANOTHER CITY COME IN HERE AND DO THAT JOB IN OUR CITY.

IF YOU HAVE A PLAN, THEN I TRUST YOU.

>> I WOULD SAY THIS FINALIZE THE POINT MAYBE IS IS THAT THERE ARE OTHER NEEDS IN THIS DEPARTMENT.

THEY JUST GOT TO COME A LITTLE LATER AND THAT MAY BE ONE OF THOSE THINGS BECAUSE, 21 PERSONNEL OVER THREE YEARS IS A LOT, AND SO THERE WERE SOME POSITIONS I WAS LIKE, WELL, JUST MAYBE WHEN I COME IF I COME BACK IN FOUR YEARS IT WILL BE THE FOURTH YEAR THAT THEY START DOING THAT.

BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER NEEDS THAT I CAN FORESEE IN IT.

>> WELL, ONE OF THOSE NEEDS WOULD BE I'D LIKE TO SEE AN OFFICER DEDICATED JUST FOR PARKING ISSUES.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TICKET PRICES ARE FOR PARKING VIOLATIONS, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE LOOKING AROUND AT SOME OF THESE SUBDIVISIONS WHERE YOU'VE GOT OBSTRUCTED PARKING, PARKING TOO CLOSE TO THE STOP SIGN, PARKING ON UNAPPROVED SERVICES AND ALL OF THAT THING, TICKETING THOSE CAN PROBABLY PAY FOR THAT OFFICER ITSELF, AND THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE A LOT OF WORK FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AT THE SAME TIME.

WAS THAT IN YOUR STUDY ANYWHERE?

>> I MEAN, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IN THAT ROLE IS A PSO, PUBLIC SERVICE OFFICER, SO A NON SWORN PERSON.

IT'S A NON SWORN, SO IT'S CHEAPER THAN A SWORN PERSONNEL, AND THEY CAN BE ASSIGNED TO THAT.

PLENTY OF CITIES HAVE 1, 2, AND SOMETIMES EVEN MORE PSOS THAT DO REALLY A MYRIAD TASKS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT, AND ONE OF THEM IS THAT PARKING ENFORCEMENT SIDE OF THINGS.

I DON'T THINK YOU DON'T NEED A SWORN PERSON TO DO THAT.

WITH THIS PLAN, IN PARTICULAR, RIGHT HERE, AND IT GETS TO THE POINT OF THERE'S OTHER NEEDS IS THAT THE CORE NEED RIGHT NOW IS ON THE PATROL SIDE.

YOU'VE GOT TO GET PATROL RIGHT SIZED BEFORE YOU START GOING INTO THESE SPECIALIZED TASKS, WHETHER THAT'S CMB, OR WHETHER THAT'S PARKING.

PARKING CMB, CMBE CAN BE PARKING CAN BE DONE BY A NON SWORN PERSON.

I'D HAVE I'D DO THAT.

>> I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PARKING ISSUES HERE.

>> GOOD EVENING. THANKS FOR THIS.

WE REGULARLY ANNUALLY FIGURE OUT WHERE WE ARE AS FAR AS DISPATCH GOES.

WAS THERE ANY COMMUNICATION FROM THE OFFICERS OR IN YOUR INVEST YOUR REVIEW THAT SUGGESTED THAT WE'RE ANYWHERE NEAR NEEDING DISPATCH TO BE BROUGHT INTO THE ANNA?

>>NO.

>> AGENCIES SMALLER THAN YOU HAVE FULL-TIME DISPATCH, THEY'LL HAVE ONE PERSON.

THEY'LL HAVE FIVE OR SIX PEOPLE IN DISPATCH.

NO ONE REALLY BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION.

NOBODY REALLY DISCUSSED ANY PARTICULAR CHALLENGES THERE ARE WITH THE SO.

ANYTIME YOU SEND A CORE FUNCTION OFF TO SOMEONE ELSE, THERE ARE CHALLENGES THERE, BUT NOBODY REALLY BROUGHT THAT TO MY ATTENTION THAT THERE'S CHALLENGES WITH SO.

IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS EXPENSIVE TO CONTRACT THAT FUNCTION OUT THAN TO BRING IT IN HOUSE.

[02:10:09]

>> THANKS. AS FAR AS THE GROWTH MODEL, AND I'M ASSUMING THAT WE'RE GOING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION, WHAT PERCENTAGE POPULATION DID YOU SEE INCREASING, WHAT DID YOU USE FOR THESE?

>> WELL, I USED THE 16.7% ANNUAL INCREASE IN CALLS FOR SERVICE, BUT HOW I CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER WERE SEVERAL THINGS.

IT WAS, ONE, THE CALL FOR SERVICE INCREASES THAT OCCURRED OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS, WHICH HAS BEEN AT ABOUT 16.3% A YEAR, JUST CENSUS POPULATION INCREASES.

I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE CENSUS ITSELF, OUR CENSUS POPULATION SHOWS YOU AT ABOUT 19.4%, I BELIEVE, AND AN ANNUAL POPULATION INCREASE.

THEN REALLY IT'S THE TYPE OF RESIDENCES WHICH YOU'RE BRINGING IN.

MULTIFAMILY HOUSING SHOULD BRING MORE CALLS FOR SERVICE RENTALS.

WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE MORE CALLS FOR SERVICE, EVEN WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF POPULATION THAN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE OWNED.

I RECEIVED ONE THAT I DON'T REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC NUMBERS WHERE YOU'RE GOING FROM 1,500 SINGLE FAMILY, Y'ALL KNOW WHAT THIS INCLUDES 1,500 MULTIFAMILY UNITS LIKE 3,200 A YEAR AND A HALF, AND THAT'S IT.

IT WAS ALL OF THAT TAKEN THAT I GOT TO 16.7.

YOU'RE SAYING WITH THE AMOUNT OF APARTMENTS WE HAVE COMING TO ANNA, THE AMOUNT OF RENTALS THAT WE HAD POPPED UP IN THE PAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS, YOUR NUMBERS CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.

>> LET'S REITERATE THAT.

>> WELL, YES, BUT YOUR POPULATION ALSO INCREASED AUTOMATICALLY.

LOOKING AT THE LAST REPORT, I HAD DETERMINED BASED ON THIS POINT AND TIME, YOU'D BE AT AN 8% ANNUAL GROWTH RATE POPULATION AND YOU'RE AT 19%.

THAT THEN IMPACTED FALLS FOR SERVICE BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE YOU HAVE IMPACTS THE WORKLOAD OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

IT WASN'T JUST THAT ALONE, IT WAS ALL THOSE FACTORS.

>> WHEN YOU DO YOUR STUDY, DID YOU LOOK AT OUR ZONING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE FOR MULTIFAMILY?

>> I LOOKED AT THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT YOU HAVE.

>> THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION?

>> YES. WHAT I GOT, I'M GOING TO FIND IT REAL QUICK BECAUSE IT CAME FROM FROM YOU ALL, BUT YOU'VE GOT 1,350 EXISTING MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN 2024, AND YOU'RE MOVING TO 3,726.

>> SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT. THAT STILL ISN'T EVERYTHING THAT'S ALREADY ZONED MULTIFAMILY?

>> NO. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

NO, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S GOING TO END UP.

I AM GOING TO WORK ON A REPORT NOW, THEY'VE GOT 4,000 MULTIFAMILY UNITS, BUT THEY ZONED 15,000, AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO THROW OFF THE NUMBERS TOO MUCH.

>> I THINK WE MAY BE ZONED FOR 16,000 UNITS.

>> BUT TO THIS POINT, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY'RE COMING, SO IT WOULD THROW OFF EVERYTHING.

>> YES, AND IT'D BE A MUCH BIGGER NUMBER THEN.

>> I JUST APPRECIATE YOUR STUDY INCLUDES APARTMENT COMPLEXES, MULTIFAMILY, AND RENTALS.

I DIDN'T KNOW IT INCLUDED RENTALS, BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF THAT AS WELL.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. HENDERSON, AS FAR AS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT FOR THIS YEAR, WHAT DOES OUR BUDGET LOOK LIKE FOR THAT? HOW ARE WE LOOKING TO TRY TO HELP THAT WORK OUT?

>> WE ARE CURRENTLY ANTICIPATING HITTING THE NEEDS OF THIS STUDY, THIS BUDGET CYCLE.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU FOR BEING A LITTLE BIT FORWARD LOOKING ON THAT TOO.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

THAT BRINGS US TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6, CONSENT ITEMS.

[6. Consent Items.]

THESE ITEMS CONSIST OF NON CONTROVERSIAL OR HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS REQUIRED BY LAW.

ITEMS MAY BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY BY ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAKING SUCH REQUESTS PRIOR TO MOTION AND A VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEMS. COUNCIL, IS THERE ANYTHING ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT OF THIS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MAYOR I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 6A-N.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

[02:15:02]

THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM 7,

[7. Items For Individual Consideration.]

ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

WE'LL START WITH 7A.

CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SERVICE PLAN AGREEMENT FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES FOR 4.9 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BUDDY HAYES BOULEVARD, 385 PLUS MINUS FEET SOUTH OF ROSAMOND PARKWAY FOR 1,050-UNITS SELF-STORAGE MINI WAREHOUSE FACILITY.

DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, STEPHANIE SCOTT-SIMS.

>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MAYOR.

THIS ITEM IS PART OF AN ANNEXATION REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, OFF OF BUDDY HAYES BOULEVARD, OFF OF ROSAMOND PARKWAY, FOR A 1,050 UNIT SELF STORAGE OR MINI WAREHOUSE.

THIS ITEM IS FOR THE APPROVAL OF A SERVICE PLAN, WHICH IS FOR PROVIDING MUNICIPAL SERVICES, INCLUDING WATER, WASTEWATER, POLICE, AND FIRE SERVICE, FOR THE PROPOSED PUBLIC STORAGE FACILITY.

THE SERVICE PLAN IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF ANNEXATION, AND THE ANNEXATION IS THE NEXT REQUEST ON THE AGENDA.

>> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THIS?

>> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7A.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

THAT ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, TAKES US TO ITEM 7B.

WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REQUEST TO ANNEX 4.9 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BUDDY HAYES BOULEVARD, 385 PLUS OR MINUS FEET SOUTH OF ROSAMOND PARKWAY FOR 1,050 UNIT SELF STORAGE FACILITY. MISS SCOTT-SIMS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AREA ANNA LLC HAS SUBMITTED A PETITION TO ANNEX 4.9 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES OF LAND.

THE SERVICE PLAN AGREEMENT IS WHAT YOU JUST APPROVED ON THIS AGENDA, AND THE ZONING REQUEST IS ALSO THE NEXT ITEM ON THIS AGENDA.

THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMPANION ZONING REQUEST THAT YOU'LL HEAR MOMENTARILY.

>> AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:30 PM.

I DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS ON THIS.

NOTHING. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK? LAST CALL. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:31.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?

>> MRS. SCOTT, AS FAR AS THE PLANS GO, ON THE WEST SIDE, WE HAVE COMMERCIAL ON THE NORTH SIDE, WE HAVE COMMERCIAL.

I THINK ON THE SOUTH SIDE, IT'S COMMERCIAL AND POSSIBLY A HOSPITAL.

ON THE EAST SIDE, IS THAT TRACT ALREADY ZONED AND THE DEVELOPER FOR IT IS IT THE DR HORTON HOMES THAT ARE THERE? AS FAR AS PHASE, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF IT.

THERE'S A QUESTION THAT IS ABOUT TO COME UP.

>> THE EAST OF THE CREEK IS THE BLOOMFIELD MEADOW VISTA SUBDIVISION THAT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL NON ANNEXATION AGREEMENT THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS PART OF.

>> GOT YOU. MY QUESTION IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID IN AVERY POINT, WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE WINDOWS AND THAT STUFF ON THE SIDE OF THE FACILITY THAT FACES THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT PEEPING TOMS AND JUST OTHER NEFARIOUS THOUGHTS.

I'D LIKE TO SEE US MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S PART OF THE BUILDING STANDARD FOR THIS.

I DON'T MIND IT BEING ON THE SOUTH SIDE, WEST SIDE, NORTH SIDE, BUT ON THE EAST SIDE, THAT IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND I'D LIKE TO MINIMIZE ANY CONCERNS THERE.

[02:20:05]

>> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE?

>> MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7B.

>> BEFORE YOU VOTE, COULD YOU INCLUDE YOUR COMMENT IN THE ACTUAL MOTION?

>> YOU GO AHEAD.

>> I TAKE MY MOTION BACK?

>> YOU NEVER GOT A SECOND?

>> NO WAY.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN.

>> YES, THANK YOU.

WE CAN HOLD OFF UNTIL THE ZONING AND WE'LL INCLUDE THAT YOUR COMMENT IN THE ZONING AS A CONDITION OF THE ZONING.

>> THAT'S GOOD.

>> I'M SORRY.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION AGAIN TO APPROVE ITEM 7B.

>> WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, CAST YOUR VOTE? [LAUGHTER]

>> MOTION PASSES 6-1, TAKES US ON TO ITEM C, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

DISCUSS ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REQUEST TO ZONE 4.9 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BUDDY HAYES BOULEVARD, 385 PLUS OR MINUS FEET SOUTH OF ROSAMOND PARKWAY FOR 1,050 UNIT SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ZONE THE PROPERTY TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS C2 DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A SELF STORAGE MINI WAREHOUSE.

THE SITE WILL DEVELOP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN THAT WAS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT B OF YOUR PACKET, AND ALSO THE SITE SHALL DEVELOP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR SELF STORAGE MINI WAREHOUSE, WHICH WERE ALSO INCLUDED WITHIN YOUR PACKET.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IDENTIFIES THIS PROPERTY AS CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL IN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.

WHILE THE CLUSTER RESIDENTIAL PLACE TYPE DOES NOT INCLUDE NON RESIDENTIAL USES, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THE PROPERTY.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG BEHIND RETAIL AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL ZONING AND THE PHYSICAL FEATURES OF THE SITE MAKE THIS A SUITABLE LOCATION FOR SELF STORAGE MINI WAREHOUSE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

>> THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:35 PM.

I DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS ANYMORE ON THIS ONE AS WELL.

ANYTHING FROM ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE? LAST CALL.

I'LL BE CLOSING THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:35 PM.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON ITEM 7C?

>> TO COUNCILMAN CARVER'S QUESTION, BASICALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF TREES TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY.

IS THERE THE PLAN TO MAINTAIN THEN THOSE TREES THERE? I DON'T KNOW THAT A VISUAL ISSUE WOULD BE AN IDEAL THERE.

I DON'T KNOW. WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS?

>> THE NICE THING IS THEY'RE BRINGING THE WAREHOUSE TO US BEFORE THERE'S HOMES THERE, AND SO WE'RE NOT HAVING TO DEAL WITH THAT COMPONENT, BUT THE COMMENTS WERE VALID THAT PEOPLE WERE MAKING THAT THEY WANTED THEIR PRIVACY.

WITH THIS BEING AT THE HEIGHT THAT IT IS, I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HELP MAINTAIN THE PRIVACY OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN THE FUTURE.

I HAVE NEVER ONCE AT THE AVERY POINT LOCATION, SEEN ANY ISSUES, BUT THIS DID COME UP.

IF THE TREES ARE THERE AND THE TREES ARE GOING TO BE MAINTAINED WHAT HEIGHT THEY ARE, ARE THEY TWO STORY, THREE STORY, TALLER TREES? WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

>> IT'S OLD GROWTH, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HEIGHT OF IT IS.

>> AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL HERE, THERE IS A LARGE FLOODPLAIN AREA.

THAT'S ALL FLOODPLAIN WHICH WILL BE MAINTAINED.

THE BUILDING IS SET BACK PRETTY FAR I CAN'T SEE FROM HERE, BUT IT'S SET BACK PRETTY FAR FROM EVEN THAT FLOODPLAIN AREA.

[02:25:06]

TO COUNCILMEMBER BAKER'S COMMENT, I DON'T FORESEE THERE BEING AN ISSUE WITH A VISUAL, ANY TYPE OF VISUAL INTERFERENCE BY RESIDENTIAL.

>> WELL, I'M GOOD WITH IT. THE FLOODPLAIN DEFINITELY CREATES THAT BUFFER AND LINE OF SIGHT, AND IF WE CAN HAVE THOSE TREES KEPT IN PLACE, THEN I THINK WE HAVE QUALITY OF PRODUCT, AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS IS.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

>> THAT MOTION PASSES 6,1.

THAT WILL TAKE US ON TO 7D.

>> MAYOR, IF I COULD FOR A SECOND.

I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF THE AUDIENCE CAN SEE THAT.

IF YOU COULD CALL OUT THE OBJECTION.

>> FOR THE REST GOING UP THERE?

>> I MEAN, I DON'T MIND YOU DOING IT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM.

>> IT'S UP THERE.

>> YEAH, IT'S UP THERE.

>> IT'S DISPLAYED BEHIND YOU. THANK YOU.

THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 7D. SCARED ME THERE.

ITEM 70, CONSIDER TO DISCUSS AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SERVICE PLAN AGREEMENT FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES FOR 01,127.6 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF EAST ROSEMONT PARKWAY FM 2862, 980 PLUS OR MINUS FEET EAST OF NORTH LEONARD AVENUE, COUNTY ROAD 425 TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT, AGRICULTURAL MIXED USE, INDUSTRIAL ONE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NUMBER 202412-176.

MS. SCOTT-SIMS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS ITEM IS FOR THE APPROVAL OF A SERVICE PLAN, AGAIN, TO PROVIDE MUNICIPAL SERVICES, INCLUDING WATER, WASTEWATER, POLICE, AND VIRUS SERVICES FOR THE PROPOSED SHERLEY FARMS DEVELOPMENT.

THE SERVICE PLAN AGREEMENT IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION, WHICH IS THE NEXT ITEM ON THIS AGENDA.

THE DEVELOPER IS SEEKING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMPANION ITEM IN THIS AGENDA, WHICH IS, AGAIN, THE ZONING REQUEST, THE ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST.

THIS PROJECT WAS ALSO PART OF THE PREAPPROVED PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO HERE.

>> THANK YOU. COUNSEL? NO? MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7D.

>> MOTION IN A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

MOTION PASSES SEVEN NIL.

TAKES US TO ITEM 7E.

I HOPE I CAN GET THROUGH ALL THESE.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REQUEST TO ANNEX 127.6 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF EAST ROSEMONT PARKWAY, 980 PLUS OR MINUS FEET EAST OF NORTH LEONARD AVENUE, IN CONFORMANCE WITH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

MS. SCOTT-SIMS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE TELLS GROUP LLC HAS SUBMITTED A PETITION TO AX THAN 127.6 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES OF LAND, KNOWN AS THE SHERLEY FARMS DEVELOPMENT.

THIS ITEM THE ZONING REQUEST THAT IS ALSO ON THIS ITEM ON THIS AGENDA EXCUSE ME.

AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE SHERLEY FARMS DEVELOPMENT IS A MIXED USE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WILL INCLUDE FIVE ZONES OF DEVELOPMENT AS OUTLINED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT.

I WOULD BE READY FOR ANY QUESTION.

>> I'M GOING TO OPEN OUR PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:41 PM.

AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS ON THIS.

ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WANTING TO SPEAK ON THIS LAST CALL.

I'LL CLOSE THAT PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:42 PM.

COUNSEL, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

[02:30:06]

>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS ITEM.

IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, TAKES US ITEM F, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REQUEST TO ZONE 01,127.6 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF EAST ROSEMONT PARKWAY, 980 PLUS OR MINUS FEET EAST OF NORTH LEONARD AVENUE TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT, SLASH AGRICULTURAL MIXED USE INDUSTRIAL 1 IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

MS. SCOTT-SIMS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS REQUEST FOR ZONING IS FOR THE SHERLEY FARMS DEVELOPMENT.

AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THIS PROJECT IS A MIXED USE PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL INCLUDE FIVE DIFFERENT ZONES OF DEVELOPMENT, AS SHOWN HERE ON THE SLIDE, AND AS OUTLINED WITHIN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED, AND NO RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED FOR THIS.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTION.

>> PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN AT 8:43 PM.

SORRY. I WAS HEARING THINGS.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS, EITHER.

ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS? LAST CALL. CLOSING THAT PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:44 PM.

COUNSEL QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON ITEM F.

>> I MOVE PROOF.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, TAKES US ON TO ITEMS 7G.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR LIGHT AUTO REPAIR ON 0.8 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST WHITE STREET, 95 PLUS OR MINUS FEET EAST OF VICTORIA FALLS DRIVE, ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT REGIONAL COMMERCIAL PDC TWO. MS. SCOTT-SIMS.

>> LAUREN MACKEY PLANNING MANAGER.

>> THANK YOU. LAUREN, SORRY.

>> LET ME TRICK TO YOU. IT'S OUR FAULT.

THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AUTO PAIR LIGHT, WHICH THIS PROPERTY WAS ZONED IN 2003 AS PART OF THE VICTORIA FALLS SUBDIVISION.

AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE AERIAL IMAGE, THE VICTORIA FALLS SUBDIVISION COMPRISED OF THE SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH INCLUDE SUN VIEW CAFE, DAIRY QUEEN, AS WELL AS THE TEXAS BANK.

THIS IS THE LAST REMAINING PROPERTY THAT HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED YET.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, THAT THE SITE PLAN BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBIT B, THAT THE FACADE BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXHIBIT C, AND THAT THE SITE DEVELOP IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS FOR AUTO REPAIR LIGHT, WHICH STATES THAT THE ACTIVITY SHALL TAKE PLACE WITHIN THE ENCLOSED SPACE AND THAT THE BUILDING ITSELF SHALL BE 150 FEET FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

IT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE OCALO SUBDIVISION AND IS LESS THAN 150 FEET BY PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE, BUT THE FACILITY IS MORE THAN 20 FEET BACK FROM THE PROPER THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE ON WEST WHITE STREET.

THEREFORE, WE FEEL THAT IT IS IN CONFORMANCE.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

>> THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:46 PM.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS ITEM EITHER.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS? LAST CALL. I'LL CLOSE THAT PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:46 PM.

COUNSEL, COMMENTS QUESTIONS?

>> I'LL SPEAK. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THIS AND ACROSS THE STREET WHERE OCALO LANDS.

MOSTLY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OVER THERE,

[02:35:03]

THERE IS ONE AUTOMOTIVE RELATED ITEM.

THIS DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THE RIGHT FIT FOR THIS WITH THE EMERGENCE OF ALL OF THE MEDICAL TITLES.

THERE'S A LOT OF MEDICAL OVER THERE.

IS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON THEY THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE?

>> PART OF THE REASON WHY STAFF THINKS THAT IT IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION.

UNLIKE QUICK CAR, WHICH IS FURTHER DOWN THE STREET, THAT ONE IS IMMEDIATELY ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, WHEREAS THIS ONE DOES NOT ABUT A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, IT'S SURROUNDED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

>> SURE. THIS PARTICULAR RETAIL CENTER IS AN ANOMALY WITH EVERYTHING ELSE IS COMING UP OVER THERE.

I JUST FIND THIS TO BE ODD.

I'M ALSO CONCERNED AS FAR AS VICTORIA FALLS.

THAT'S A HORRIBLE INTERSECTION.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE THE ONE USED TO SUPPORT THIS, WHETHER IT'S COMING IN OR GOING OUT.

IF THIS IS APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO REQUEST THAT THERE IS NO U TURN SIGNS PLACED AT THE ENTRANCE OF VICTORIA FALLS SO THAT PEOPLE AT WHITE STREET BECAUSE OF THE CONGESTION THAT ALREADY EXISTS THERE.

I KNOW WE'RE GETTING A STOP LIGHT AND SOME TURN LANES INTO THERE, BUT THE NATURAL PROGRESSION ON THAT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE VICTORIA FALLS FOR THE EXIT.

I ALSO DON'T THINK THIS IS A GOOD COMPLIMENT TO THE BANK THAT'S THERE, SO I FEEL THIS IS VERY FORCED.

>> THE BANK IS THE ONE SELLING THE PROPERTY.

>> THE BANK.

>> CALL THE BANK.

>> DO WE KNOW OR CAN WE SAY WHO IT IS? WHAT TYPE OF SHOP IT IS? BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO ANSWER A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

>> THAT WILL REFER TO THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE.

>> TYLER ADAMS WITH THE GREEN LIGHT STUDIO, 100 NORTH COTTONWOOD DRIVE, 544 IN RICHARDSON.

I'M REPRESENTING INTEGRITY FIRST.

THEY ARE A SHOP THAT HAS A LOT OF LOCATIONS IN THE METROPLEX AND THEIR BUSINESS MODEL STARTING HAS BEEN TO BUY EXISTING FACILITIES AND REVAMP AND MAKE THEM INTO PREMIUM EXPERIENCE.

THEIR MARKET DIFFERENTIATOR GET A DEALERSHIP LEVEL EXPERIENCE, AND THAT'S WITH SERVICE, THAT'S WITH TECHNOLOGY AND THAT'S WITH FINISHES IN THE ENTIRE FACILITY.

I MEAN, YOU CAN SEE THIS IS OUR CONCEPT RENDERING AND YOU CAN SEE I DID PUT THE BANK IN THE BACKGROUND.

ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN WE STARTED DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM WAS LIKE, WE WANT TO SEE WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND WHAT NEIGHBOR IT'S GOING TO BE.

ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THIS SITE, LIKE WE FELT WAS APPROPRIATE, WAS BECAUSE OF BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT IS ON A STREET FRONTAGE, HOWEVER, IT'S ALREADY GOT A LOT OF BUILT IN SCREENING OF THE ACTUAL USES.

ALONG VICTORIA FALLS, AND THROUGH THAT WHOLE INTERSECTION RIGHT THERE, YOU ALREADY HAVE A LOT OF TREES, AND THEN WE'VE WORKED TO, OBVIOUSLY TO CONFORM TO THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND ADD MORE AS YOU GO ON.

I MEAN, I ACTUALLY WENT TO YOU CAN SEE ON THAT LEFT IMAGE, HOW MUCH IS ALREADY THERE.

BUT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOWING HOW BOTH WE ARE WALKING NOT ONLY FROM THE INTERSECTION AND CONFORMING TO WHAT YOU NEED ON 544, BUT ALSO SCREENING BETWEEN OUR USE AND THE BANK.

WE'VE DONE THAT BOTH FROM A SCREENING STANDPOINT AND THEN A BUILDING FINISH AND FACADE STANDPOINT TO COMPLIMENT WHAT'S ALREADY THERE WITH THE BANK.

WE DID TAKE ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE PUT TOGETHER THE FACADE AND HOW THAT BUILDING IS.

>> TO GO WITH THAT, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO.

IT LOOKS LIKE YOU WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND BECAUSE YOU TRY TO FIT IN WHERE YOU WERE GOING, CORRECT?

>> IT'S NOT ONLY FITTING IN, BUT IT'S ALSO SAYING, THIS IS NOT A CRAFTING FACILITY THAT I'M NOT GOING TO NAME NAMES, BUT THIS IS THIS IS A PREMIUM EXPERIENCE SHOP AND THE INVESTMENT THAT GOES INTO THE FACADE PART SHOWING THAT'S WHAT.

>> FROM LOOKING AT IT, I MEAN, THE CLOSEST ONE IS IN RICHARDSON MAYBE OR SOMEWHERE IN FRISCO.

[02:40:01]

BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OF THEM NEXT TO BANKS.

IT MIGHT FIT IN WELL, BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU NEED A BANK LOAN TO REPAIR SOME OF THESE CARS.

>> YOU KNOW THAT.

>> I'M A BLUE COLLAR WORKER MYSELF, SO I WELCOME TIGHT BUSINESSES LIKE THIS, SO I LIKE IT.

I LIKE HOW YOU WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND.

YOU FIT IN WHERE YOU'RE GOING.

YOU MADE YOUR OUTSIDE WHEN YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO, YOU MADE THE EXTERIOR, LOOK PROFESSIONAL, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> IS THIS MORE LIKE A PERFORMANCE SHOP OR A QUICK OIL CHANGE TOP OR SOMETHING IN BETWEEN?

>> I WOULD SAY SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN.

I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S A PERFORMANCE SHOP.

IT DOES CATER TO NICER VEHICLES, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN LIKE I CAN'T TAKE MY FORD FOCUS THERE IF IF I DIDN'T WANT TO.

BUT IT'S NOT I WOULDN'T CALL IT A PERFORMANCE SHOP BY ANY MEANS.

IT IS THEY DO DO REPAIRS, BUT WITH THE LIGHT AUTO, EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE DONE INSIDE.

YOU DON'T HAVE WRECKED CARS ON THE OUTSIDE OR ANY OF THAT OTHER STUFF.

I MIGHT CALL IT IN BETWEEN.

>> I KNOW THIS IS A ZONING CASE, BUT SINCE WE'VE ALREADY OPENED THE DOOR FOR THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE SPOT, WOULD YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MUCH THE AVERAGE REVENUE WOULD BE FOR A STORE LIKE THAT? I'M SURE YOU PROBABLY CRUNCHED A NUMBER SOMEWHERE.

I'M SPEAKING FROM SALES TAX, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION OF MY HEAD.

I'M MORE ON THE DESIGN BUILD SIDE OF THE BUSINESS.

I DON'T KNOW.

>> I WAS JUST DREAMING THAT MAYBE YOU WOULD KNOW THAT BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME SALES TAX REVENUE GENERATED UNLIKE SELF STORAGE AREA.

THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU.

>> THEN JUST AS A QUICK THING ON TRAFFIC, THIS USE ACTUALLY GENERATES, I WENT TO THE ITE TABLE AND IT'S A 28 WEEK DAY TOTAL TRIP GENERATION.

AS FAR AS RETAIL USES, THIS IS ONE OF THE LOWEST ONES.

>> REGARDING THE ENTRANCE TO THE FALLS, THERE IS A HARD RIGHT ANGLE.

THIS IS FOR THE CITY MANAGER.

BY THE WAY, I DO AGREE, IT'S A GOOD-LOOKING BUILDING.

NO KNOCKING YOUR SERVICE AT ALL.

IT'S JUST WHERE THIS IS GOING IN IS ALREADY PROBLEMATIC. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

I'VE HAD BUS DRIVERS COMPLAIN THAT CAN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THERE.

I KNOW WE'RE GETTING A LIGHT THERE THAT'S GOING TO ALLEVIATE, I HOPE, SOME OF THE CONGESTION THERE.

BUT GETTING A NO U-TURN ESTABLISHED THERE AND WORKING ON THE TURN LANE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THERE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE THIS IS NOW GOING TO THICKEN THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION.

>> COUNCILMAN, THE U-TURN, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ON 455, THE ROAD?

>> WE HAVE THE SIMILAR TRUCKS COMING THROUGH THERE, TRYING TO U-TURN THERE.

IT'S A NIGHTMARE HONESTLY.

>> UNDERSTOOD. IT'S 455 TEXAS ROAD.

WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEM ON THAT, AND THAT WILL REQUIRE THEM TO DO THEIR ANALYSIS AND COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION.

BUT WE WILL [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER].

>> WE'LL ASK THEM TO DO IT.

>> SURE.

>> THERE'S A OBVIOUS IN INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT UP HERE ON THIS COUNCIL.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SAFE.

WE'VE ALREADY HAD SOME SERIOUS ACCIDENTS RIGHT THERE, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO ADD MORE TRAFFIC.

I ASK THAT STAFF GET ON IT WITH TXDOT AND GET THIS PLACE MADE SAFE.

THANKS FOR THINKING ABOUT ANNA.

>> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE?

>> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7G.

>> HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

YOU CAN SEE IT. PASSED AS 6-1.

THAT'LL TAKE US TO 7H, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE CREATION OF CRYSTAL PARK, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2.

PURSUANT TO SECTION 372.009 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, EDC DIRECTOR, MR. BERNIE PARKER.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

[02:45:01]

MAYOR IF WE GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION BACKGROUND OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE PROCESS OF, HAPPY TO SAY THIS, THE FINAL STEP FOR CRYSTAL PARKS, HAVING A DISSOLVED IN RECREATING.

>> I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING 8:57 PM.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CORDS ON THIS AS WELL.

ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? LAST CALL.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR. AS MENTIONED, THIS HAS BEEN A FOUR-STEP PROCESS.

WE HAD TO, AND AS COUNCILMAN BAKER POINTED OUT LAST MEETING THAT THIS IS A HOUSEKEEPING ITEM THAT WE'RE DOING AT THE REQUEST OF BLOOMFIELD HOMES.

IN 2023, THE ORIGINAL PID WAS CREATED THAT DUE TO TECHNICAL ERROR WOULD HAVE ISSUES OR LEFT OUT VERBIAGE THAT WOULD FINANCE THE PRIMARY COMPONENT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH WATER AND WASTEWATER.

CONSULTING WITH OUR BOND COUNSEL, AS WELL AS THEIR REPRESENTATIVE THEIR ATTORNEY, THE EASIEST WAY TO DO THIS WAS TO DISSOLVE THE ORIGINAL PID AND THEN RECREATE ANOTHER ONE WHICH WE'LL DO NEXT ON YOUR NEXT ITEM AS FAR AS THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW RECREATED PID FOR CRYSTAL PARK FOR BLOOMFIELD.

THAT'S THE GENERAL GIST OF IT.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, AND ALSO OUR BOND COUNCIL IS HERE, MR. RUDY, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

>> COUNCIL, ANYTHING? I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:58 PM.

IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE.

IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

>> MR. MAYOR, WE ARE APPROVING 7H, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SEVEN H IS A PUBLIC HEARING?

>> I'M SORRY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU FOR APPROVING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I'M GOING TO MOVE US ON TO ITEM I.

CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON AN ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE CREATION OF THE CRYSTAL PARK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 AND ORDERING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SUCH DISTRICT, PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND CONTAINING OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. MR. PARKER.

>> MAYOR, AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY WHEN WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING, THIS IS THE RECREATION OF THE CRYSTAL PARK PID, AND THEREFORE EVERYTHING I MENTIONED PRIOR TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL RELEVANT, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE PERTAINING TO THAT.

>> COUNCIL?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> I DID. I CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:58 PM.

THANK YOU. NOW I ACTUALLY WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

>>I THINK [INAUDIBLE]

>> COUNCILMAN BAKER. THAT ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

TAKES US TO ITEM 7J.

CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER SECTION 372.009 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ON THE ADVISABILITY OF THE CREATION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF ANNA TEXAS TO BE KNOWN AS SHERLEY FARMS, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE BY CITY SECRETARY OF ANNA TEXAS, REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE TELLS GROUP AND SHERLEY PARTNERS ON DECEMBER 17TH OF 2024, WHICH STATED THAT THE CITY WOULD USE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO CREATE A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

ON JANUARY 15TH OF 2025, A PID PETITION WAS SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION, REQUESTING THE PUBLIC HEARING BE SET FOR MARCH 25TH, AS PER TEXAS STATUTE.

THEREFORE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING ADOPTING A RESOLUTION, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER SECTION 372.009 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, ON THE ADVISABILITY OF THE CREATION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF ANNA TO BE KNOWN AS SHERLEY FARMS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE BY THE CITY SECRETARY OF ANNA,

[02:50:03]

TEXAS, REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, SIR.

>> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS? WHAT IS OUR ACTION ON THIS ITEM HERE?

>> TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING DATE.

>> YOUR RESOLUTION HAD SET IT FROM MARCH 25TH.

>> IS IT IN THERE?

>> I DON'T SEE. [INAUDIBLE] I DON'T SEE IT HERE.

>> WAS THAT IT?

>> THAT'S [INAUDIBLE].

>> CLERK, WE DON'T HAVE THE VERBIAGE FOR THIS IN OUR PACKET.

>> DO WE JUST PUT THE DATE IN OUR MOTION?

>> JUST [INAUDIBLE].

>> YES.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> DON'T HAVE TO BE DATED.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> MARCH 25TH.

>> IN YOUR RESOLUTION, JUST POINT OUT MARCH 25TH [INAUDIBLE].

>> THAT CORRECTLY.

>> THE RESOLUTION SAYS DECIDED [INAUDIBLE] THE MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MARCH 25TH AT, DO WE HAVE TO PUT A TIME? AND THE LOCATION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MARCH 25TH, 07:00 PM AT CITY MUNICIPAL COMPLEX.

>> FOR PID CREATION FOR SHERLEY FARMS.

>> WAY TO WAIT THAT ONE OUT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, TAKES US TO 7K.

CONSIDER, DISCUSS, AND ACT ON AN ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANNA.

AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 1118-2024-08, WHICH ORDINANCE APPROVED A 2024 AMENDED AND RESTATED SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, INCLUDING REVISED ASSESSMENT ROLES FOR THE WOODS AT LINDSAY PLACE, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AS AMENDED, LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTY WITHIN IMPROVEMENT AREA NUMBER 2 OF SAID DISTRICT, AND ESTABLISHING A LIEN ON SUCH PROPERTY, PROVIDING FOR THE METHOD OF ASSESSMENT AND THE PAYMENT OF THE ASSESSMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

AS AMENDED, PROVIDING PENALTIES AND INTEREST ON DELINQUENT ASSESSMENTS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MR. PARKER.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

THIS IS ANOTHER HOUSEKEEPING ITEM FOR THE WOODS AT LINDSAY PLACE.

ON THE 27TH OF AUGUST, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED AN AMENDED AND RESTATED SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN THAT AMENDED AND RESTATED THE 2023 AMENDED AND RESTATED SERVICE ASSESSMENT PLAN IN PART TO LEVY NEW ASSESSMENTS, IMPROVEMENT AREA 2A AND IMPROVEMENT AREA 2B.

HOWEVER, THAT SAID ORDINANCE DID NOT INCLUDE MANY OF THE TYPICAL FINDINGS AND DETAILS NORMALLY CONTAINED IN AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS.

AT RECOMMENDATION OF BOND COUNCIL IN ORDER TO AVOID ANY POTENTIAL COMPLICATIONS WITH THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BOND COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND ORDINANCE NUMBER 118-2024-08 IN ITS ENTIRETY TO INCLUDE TYPICAL FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE IS ACCUSTOMED TO REVIEWING, AN ACTUAL BODY ORDINANCE.

THIS IS STAFF RECOMMENDS, CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SAID ORDINANCE 1118-2024, WHICH ORDINANCE APPROVED A 2024 AMENDED RESTATED SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, INCLUDING REVISED ASSESSMENT ROLES FOR THE WOODS AT LINDSAY PLACE, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

IF THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGING IS THE VERBIAGE, THE ASSESSMENT PLAN SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT NUMBERS ARE NOT CHANGING.

THEY ARE STILL VALID.

IT'S A TECHNICALITY THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CLEAN UP.

[02:55:04]

>> THANK YOU, MR. PARKER.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM K.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> A SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON THAT ITEM.

ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

TAKES US TO ITEM L. CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INCENTIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH RETAIL BUILDINGS. MR. PARKER.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, GOOD EVENING COUNCIL.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, THIS COMPANY THAT WE'RE TALKING FOR AN INCENTIVE AGREEMENT THIS EVENING IN BRAUM'S ICE CREAM AND DAIRY UNIT.

THIS PROJECT HAS PROBABLY BEEN THE QUEUE WITH THE CITY OF ANNA SINCE 2019 FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

THE FOURTH QUARTER OF LAST YEAR, THEY HAD SUBMITTED PLANS FOR REVIEW, BOTH FOR THEIR SITE PLAN AS WELL AS FOR THEIR BUILDING PLANS AS WELL.

A COUPLE OF OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WAS APPROACHED A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, SEEKING INCENTIVES, TRYING TO FIND OUT WAYS THAT THEY COULD GAP AND GET THIS PROJECT ACROSS THE LINE.

SOME OF THE CONSIDERATIONS WORKING WITH MR. PETERS, AND ALSO OUR CITY MANAGER AND OUR ATTORNEY AND THEIR ATTORNEY, CAME UP WITH A INCENTIVE PACKAGE THAT ADDRESSED THE ROAD IMPACT FEES.

I WILL SAY ON YOUR STAFF REPORT, THERE IS A TYPO, I PUT THE WRONG ONE IN THERE.

IT'S 50% OF THE 391,954, COST FOR ROADWAY IMPACT.

THE INCENTIVE TAKES OUT THAT THEY'LL PAY 50%, AND THEN THEY'LL RECEIVE A 50% CREDIT.

THERE IS A TIME FRAME ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

THEY'VE GOT 16 MONTHS TO COMPLETE THIS CONSTRUCTION.

IT'S A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT UNIT.

HAVE THAT DONE IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THAT CREDIT.

IF THEY MISSED THAT DATE, AND THEREFORE, THEY'D HAVE TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT.

I THINK PROJECTED ANNUAL SALES FOR BRAUM'S IS ANYWHERE FROM 2.4-3 MILLION GIVEN THE AVERAGE, WHAT THEY'VE HAD.

WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION.

I WILL SAY THIS AS FAR AS WHERE THE LOCATION OF BRAUM'S IS BEFORE OPENING UP, IS THE [INAUDIBLE] QUICK CAR.

THERE'S A VACANT LOT THAT'S ADJACENT TO THAT CONSTRUCTION [INAUDIBLE].

>> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?

>> I MOVE WE APPROVE.

>> BERNIE, BEFORE WE VOTE.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR STAFF PUTTING IN THE TIME LIMIT BECAUSE AS WE KNOW, WE DON'T LIKE PEOPLE GETTING INTO ZONING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT OR ASK FOR INCENTIVES AND JUST SIT ON IT.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR.

>> ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCIL? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON ITEM L.

>> I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING TO VOTE.

>> BECAUSE YOU'RE ON FACEBOOK?

>> NO ONE, YOU CAN'T DO. [LAUGHTER]

>> IT'S GETTING LATE.

>> I'M STILL NOT SEEING NOTHING.

>> IN THAT CASE, COUNCIL, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? I WOULD SAY THAT'S UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH..

IT RECORDED THE UNANIMOUSLY AS WELL.

IT HEARD ME. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU, MR. PARKER.

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM 8,

[8. Closed Session (Exceptions).]

CLOSED SESSION, UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS ANY ITEMS LISTED OR REFERENCE ON THIS AGENDA UNDER THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS.

TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.072, AND TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.087 AND TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.074.

DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO GOING CLOSED?

>> MAKE A MOTION GOING CLOSED.