[1. Call to Order, Roll Call, and Establishment of Quorum. ] [00:00:03] GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO THE CITY OF ANNA PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING FOR NOVEMBER 3RD. THE TIME IS NOW 6:05 P.M.. ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT AND QUORUM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AT THIS TIME. I ASK THAT YOU ALL RISE FOR THE INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY COMMISSIONER MARTIN. DEAR HEAVENLY FATHER, GRANT US CLARITY AND WISDOM AS WE CONSIDER THE NEEDS OF TODAY AND THE POSSIBILITIES OF TOMORROW. WE ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR GRACE. AMEN. AMEN. AT THIS TIME, ANY PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING AN ITEM ON THIS MEETING AGENDA THAT IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ALSO, AT THIS TIME, ANY PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION REGARDING AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE 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 STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO A NEIGHBOR'S INQUIRY, OR RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO THE INQUIRY. MOVING ON TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT, DIRECTOR KALEB KENTNER. [4. Director's Report. ] THANKS. I AM GETTING THIS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. I'M GOING TO COME DOWN HERE IN FRONT OF YOU SO I CAN SEE ALL OF YOU. THE ANGLE'S KIND OF HARD OVER THERE AT THAT SIDE OF THAT. I JUST WANTED TO QUICKLY KIND OF JUST GO OVER SOME OF THE PROJECTS. AND WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING A FEW OF THESE THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT I GET YOUR INPUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME OF THESE THINGS. SO YOU'VE BEEN GETTING A MONTHLY REPORT THAT KIND OF SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT THE PROJECTS WERE, WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM, WHERE THEY'RE GOING AND WHAT THEIR CURRENT STATUSES ARE. AND SO THIS IS KIND OF A ROUGH DRAFT. WE KIND OF WENT BACK IN TIME THROUGH SEPTEMBER. WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL CONTINUE TO ADD TO THIS, AND WE'LL GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO ALL PROJECTS THAT HAVEN'T YET BEEN ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT ON THEM. AND SO THAT WAY YOU CAN SEE ALL THE PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE YOU AND HOW LONG IT'S TAKING SOME OF THEM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE DURING THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT, I'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER ALL THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE. SO IF THIS APPEARS TO BE SOMETHING THAT WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO YOU, AND I BELIEVE IT WILL. SO YOU GUYS CAN KIND OF KEEP UP ON SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS AS WE GO. AND THEN A LOT MORE INFORMATION WILL BE COMING. SOME ADDITIONAL REPORTS WE'RE WORKING ON TO PRESENT TO YOU. AND THAT'LL BE AVAILABLE TO REALLY THE CITIZENS AND ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED IN IT IN REGARDS TO THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENING WITHIN THE CITY. WE'RE THE LAST LITTLE OVER A MONTH NOW. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON SOME EFFICIENCIES NOT ONLY EFFICIENCIES FOR STAFF, BUT FOR DEVELOPERS ON THEIR SIDE OF REVIEWING HOW WE'RE DOING THINGS AND HOW WE CAN DO THEM BETTER. AND AND NOT ONLY PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT BETTER PROCESS, NOT ONLY FOR, STAFF TO REVIEW WITH THE DEVELOPERS, BUT FROM DEVELOPERS TO BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS. BECAUSE EACH ONE OF OUR PROCESSES ARE IMPORTANT, AND EACH ONE OF THEM NEED TO BE SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD FOR EVERYONE TO TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. WE'RE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT PARTS. FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE WE'VE REVIEWED AND ARE LOOKING AT ARE INCLUDING THE USE OF RESOLUTIONS THAT YOU GUYS CURRENTLY HAVE IN YOUR PACKETS THAT WE USE IN THE PACKETS. THAT'S AN ADDED STEP THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT WE WILL BE REVIEWING THAT PROCESS AND STREAMLINING THAT PROCESS AND BRINGING THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN CONFORMITY TO HELP EXPEDITE YOUR ACTIONS AND WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU WITH PACKETS THAT GET BIGGER AND BIGGER. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO STREAMLINE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL FOR YOU. AND WE'LL BRING FURTHER DETAILS ON THAT. BUT FOR NOW, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON THIS REPORT, [00:05:04] PARTICULARLY THAT WE COULD ADD TO THAT IF NOT, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH DETAILING THIS AND GET IT INTO A LITTLE MORE SOLID FORM FOR YOU AT YOUR NEXT MEETING. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ITEM SIX FOR CONSENT ITEMS. [6. Consent Items. ] AT THIS TIME, DOES ANY COMMISSIONER WISH TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT. IF ALL COMMISSIONERS WILL PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE. SORRY, GUYS, I SKIPPED A STEP. IT'S A MONDAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SECOND. I HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COMMISSIONER MARTIN AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER STEWARD. AT THIS TIME, PLEASE, ALL CAST YOUR VOTES. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUS. MOVING ON TO ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. [ 7. Items For Individual Consideration and Public Hearings.] CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON RECOMMENDATION ON AN ORDINANCE. REGARDING A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH ZONING OF A PROPERTY TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT SF 6.0 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FERGUSON PARKWAY, 400 PLUS OR MINUS FEET SOUTH OF ELM STREET. CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE ETJ. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION ON THE WEST SIDE OF FERGUSON PARKWAY. IT'S BOUNDED BY OAK HOLLOW AND LAKEVIEW ESTATES. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF SUBMITTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND AN ANNEXATION PETITION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ZONING REQUEST. SO THEY'RE PROPOSING 76 DETACHED LOTS THE SF SIX ZONING WITH A FEW MODIFICATIONS. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IDENTIFIES THIS PROPERTY AS SUBURBAN LIVING. AND THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN IDENTIFIES SOUTH FERGUSON AS 120 FOOT MAJOR ARTERIAL. THEY HAVE FOUR PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THE FIRST ONE BEING TO ALLOW A CUL DE SAC TO BE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 200FT INSTEAD OF 400FT, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEN FEET IN LOT DEPTH FOR HOMES BACKING TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. SO IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT, A 120, A TYPICAL REQUIRED LOT DEPTH IS 120. WE WOULD REQUIRE 130. REMOVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEM AND ADOPTING LANDSCAPE DESIGN ENHANCEMENT PLAN, AND WHICH I'LL GET INTO. AND THEN INCREASING THE LOT COVERAGE OR THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT FROM 50% TO 55%. THE NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEM IS LOCATED IN OUR, IT'S A REQUIREMENT WITHIN OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. SO BASED OFF OF THE DRAWINGS THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED, I WAS ABLE TO CALCULATE 16 POINTS OUT OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, 35 POINTS. AS YOU CAN SEE WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SORT OF WAIVERS WHEN IT IS UNDER 200 DWELLINGS. AND THEN THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ENHANCE THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED. AS OF RIGHT NOW, OUR REGULATIONS ONLY REQUIRES ONE TREE PER 40 LINEAR FEET AND THEN THE ENHANCED MEDIAN. THE ENHANCED MEDIAN IS SOMETHING THAT IS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN POINTS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT HAD PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL LAST WEEK WERE THESE FOUR STYLES OF HOMES. AND WE RECEIVED ZERO RESPONSES. WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE MODIFICATIONS WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT WE RESTRICT THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES TO WHAT THEY SHOWED, AS WELL AS REQUIRING A HOUSE REPETITION PLAN. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. SO I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE WITH THE PRESENTATION. OKAY. AT THIS TIME. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:15 P.M.. DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THE 50 BY 120 FOOT LOTS. WOULD THAT INCLUDE A PORTION OF THE STREET? [00:10:07] NO, NOT LIKE URBAN CROSSING. THE LOT WOULDN'T GO TO THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. NO. THE RIGHT OF WAY WILL BE 50FT. SO YOU'LL HAVE A HOUSE A LOT, 50FT RIGHT OF WAY. AND THEN ANOTHER LOT. COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK A COUPLE SLIDES TO SEE THE FOUR THINGS THAT THEY ASKED. THANK YOU. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ITEMS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING? DO WE REMOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEMS FOR DEVELOPERS BEFORE? THE NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEM WAS ADOPTED IN 2019 AS PART OF A LARGER SET OF REGULATION CHANGES TO BOTH THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE LANDSCAPE AND SIGN REGULATIONS. NOBODY HAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED TO REMOVE IT, BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT AT WHAT POINT DOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEM KICK IN, BECAUSE IF SOMEONE'S DOING A FOUR LOT PLAT OUT IN THE ETJ, THERE'S NO WAY THEY COULD MEET THE POINT SYSTEM. BUT THEY DO. THEY ARE GOING TO BE ASKED TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS, RIGHT? IN THIS CASE, YES. YEAH. OKAY. ON THE HOUSE REPETITION PLAN, WHAT DO YOU SEE YOUR DEPARTMENT REQUIRING FROM THAT? LIKE EVERY THREE HOUSES, EVERY FOUR HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET. OUR REQUIREMENT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS EVERY FOUR HOUSES CAN REPEAT. SO IT'S THREE HOUSES. IT'S ONE HOUSE AND THEN ONE, TWO. AND THEN THAT THIRD ONE CAN BE THE SAME. WHAT ABOUT ACROSS THE STREET? IT'S NOT ALLOWED ACROSS THE STREET, BUT IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT BEHIND. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE DESIGNS? I'VE GOT A QUESTION ON THIS. THE SO REMOVING THE POINT SYSTEM AND ADOPTING THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN ENHANCEMENT PLAN. THIS IS IT, RIGHT? THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. THEY'LL ADD IN SOME MORE TREES AND THEN THEY'LL THE ENTRY MONUMENT, THEY'LL BEEF THAT UP. OKAY. IT'S FAIRLY SIMILAR TO WHAT ANNA TOWN SQUARE DID WHEN THEIR PLAN DEVELOPMENT WAS FIRST ADOPTED. DID YOU WANT TO SEE THE DESIGNS OF THE HOUSES? YEAH. THE FRONT ELEVATIONS AGAIN, PLEASE. YEAH. SO THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT FOR MASONRY PERCENTAGE. SO WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY WOULD BE AGREEING TO A MASONRY. AND I CAN LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK MORE ON THAT. CAN YOU SHOW THE POINTS ONE MORE TIME? ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GET THE APPLICANT UP HERE? OKAY. THANKS, LAUREN. AT THIS TIME, DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION. KELBY GOLDEN ONYX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, SIX MIMOSA PLACE, RICHARDSON, TEXAS. ALSO HERE WITH MY PARTNER BRITTEN CHURCH VENTURES ON THIS PROJECT. SO GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. AGAIN, THANK YOU, LAUREN, FOR THE PRESENTATION. I'LL KIND OF START OVER JUST TO MAKE SURE I DON'T MISS ANYTHING, AND YOU'LL FEEL FREE TO STOP ME IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SO AS LAUREN SAID, THIS SITE IS ABOUT 18 ACRES. IT'S ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TAYLOR AND FERGUSON. AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS SITE IF YOU LOOK ON THIS MAP, IS DIRECTLY TO THE WEST. YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE OCALA ESTATES. OCALA ESTATES IS ZONED SF 6.0, WHICH MEANS IT WAS 50 BY 120 LOTS. AND TO THE WEST YOU GOT LAKEVIEW ESTATES OR SORRY. TO THE EAST YOU HAVE LAKEVIEW ESTATES THAT WAS ZONED VIA A PD FOR SF 6.0 AND SF 7.2. [00:15:03] SO THAT WAS 50 AND 60 FOOT LOTS AND SO. AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT THIS SITE PLAN, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE DOTTED LINE. I KNOW IT DOESN'T SHOW UP GREAT ON THE PRESENTATION, BUT THAT'S THE ANNA CITY LIMITS. SO THIS THIS PROJECT AS IT SITS TODAY IS ACTUALLY IN THE ETJ. IT'S NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS. AND SO THAT IS PROBABLY THE KIND OF THE, THE REASON FOR US COMING HERE. SO WE ACTUALLY HAD A CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO. I THINK A LOT OF STAFF AND OTHER MEMBERS HAVE SEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROPOSED USES. AND THEN IF YOU IF YOU TAKE A STEP BACK LIKE THIS, THIS PROJECT, THE CITY, YOU KNOW, IS NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF USES THAT CAN CAN BE ALLOWED. BUT YOU HAVE SF 6.0. DIRECTLY WEST AND TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE SF 6.0 AND 7.2 DIRECTLY TO THE EAST. AND SO WE YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE INTENT WAS LIKE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE WORKING THROUGH DIFFERENT USES LIKE, LET'S GO TO COUNCIL, LET'S GO TO P&Z. LET'S SEE IF THERE'S AN AGREEMENT THAT WE CAN HAVE TO ANNEX AND FIND SOMETHING THAT'S MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS EXISTING USES. SO WE WENT TO A WORKSHOP. I GUESS THAT WAS LAST WEEK, AND, AND PRESENTED THIS TO COUNCIL, AND THIS IS OUR INTENT HERE WITH YOU ALL. SO THIS IS, AGAIN, THIS IS A DEAL FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING, ETCETERA, THAT DEAL THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE ETJ. AS LAURA MENTIONED, HERE'S KIND OF THE HIGH LEVEL TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AGAIN, WE WOULD AGREE TO VOLUNTARILY ANNEX THESE THESE LOTS WOULD BE ZONED VIA PD FOR SF 6.0. SO 50 BY 120, 5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACKS, 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACKS. WE DO HAVE A FEW VARIANCES THAT LAUREN MENTIONED OUT THAT I'LL GET TO ON THE NEXT SLIDE. THE THE SITE PLAN CURRENTLY LAYS OUT FOR ABOUT 76 LOTS. OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT THROUGH ENGINEERING, SO THAT MIGHT DECREASE AS WE GET THROUGH THE FINAL DRAINAGE STUDIES. BUT AS WE'RE PRESENTING TO THIS COMMISSION RIGHT NOW, IT'S ABOUT 76 LOTS. IN EXCHANGE FOR THE ANNEXATION, WE ARE REQUESTING THE CITY CONSENT TO A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU ALL KNOW, FERGUSON IS A MAJOR ARTERIAL THAT RUNS THROUGH THE SITE. THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY HAS ABOUT 750FT OF DIRECT ACCESS OFF OF FERGUSON WHICH WE WOULD DEDICATE THE REMAINING RIGHT OF WAY ALONG OUR SITE AND IN OUR PLAN. AGAIN, BASED ZONING OF SF 6.0 WOULD BE VIA PD. WE ARE REQUESTING A MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 55%. WE THESE ARE THE VARIANCES THAT WE WENT THROUGH. WE WOULD REQUEST THE ADDITIONAL TEN FEET OF LOT DEPTH THAT IS REQUIRED TO ANY CITY ARTERIAL. THAT'S MOSTLY JUST BECAUSE ON A SITE THIS SMALL, AGAIN, THIS IS ONLY 18 ACRES. THAT EXTRA TEN FEET, WE WOULD END UP LOSING LIKE 20 TO 30 LOTS. IT WAS REALLY HARD TO FIGURE OUT THAT ADDITIONAL TEN FEET. SO WE'RE ALL THESE LOTS ARE 6000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM. IT'S JUST THAT CORNER ALONG FERGUSON WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE TEN FOOT DEEPER THAN THE ADDITIONAL LOTS. AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE OUR SUBDIVISIONS TO OUR WEST AS WELL. WE WOULD REQUEST A VARIANCE FOR THAT CUL DE SAC. YOU CAN SEE WE WOULDN'T MEET THE MINIMUM CUL DE SAC LENGTH OF 200FT. OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE DETAIN TO THE SOUTH, THAT CUL DE SAC IS JUST BY MODES OF TERMINATION, IT'S GOING TO BE SHORTER THAN 200FT. WE WOULD GIVE THE CITY A MASONRY CONTROL SO WE WOULD AGREE TO 70% MASONRY. WE DID DEFINE THAT. I THINK AS ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS MENTIONED, WE WOULD DEFINE THAT AS LIKE A NICE BOARD AND BATTEN TOO, BECAUSE AS ONE OF YOU CAN SEE, ONE OF THESE ELEMENTS IS ONE OF THESE THESE HOMES HAS MORE OF A CRAFTSMAN STYLE AND THAT THAT BRINGS IN DIFFERENT DIFFERENT FACADES THAT MAY NOT MEET THAT PARTICULAR BRICK ELEVATION. AND THEN LASTLY, WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE ON THE LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT CHECKLIST. I KNOW Y'ALL HAD THE SLIDE UP THERE. SO THAT CHECKLIST IS OBVIOUSLY STARTS OUT FOR AND IT SCALES UP FOR BEGINNING OF MPCS AT 200 LOTS. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT, THAT CHECKLIST, IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO MEET THAT CHECKLIST WITHOUT BUILDING AN AMENITY CENTER ON 18 ACRES AND 76 LOTS, IT'S LIKE THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN RUN AN AMENITY CENTER. THE MAINTENANCE COST ALONE ON THESE 76 HOMEOWNERS WOULD COMPLETELY PUT ME OUT OF THE MARKET. I'D MUCH RATHER BUILD A NICER HOME PRODUCT, SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, BUILD, DEDICATE ALL THE RESOURCES INTO AN AMENITY CENTER. IT JUST WASN'T REALLY DESIGNED FOR THESE SMALLER PROJECTS. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THAT VARIANCE. WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ENTRANCE ON FERGUSON STANDS OUT. AND SO WE'VE WE WOULD RATHER PUT OUR MONEY INTO WHAT THAT CORRIDOR LOOKS LIKE. WE WANT IT TO STICK OUT AND POP OUT FROM, FROM DIFFERENT SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE IN ANNA TODAY. A LOT OF IT. YOU CAN SEE WE'RE ALMOST TWO TIMES TWO AND A HALF TIMES WHAT THE REQUIRED TREE COUNT IS. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY ON THE THREE INCH CALIBER TREES THAT ARE ALONG THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY. SO WE THIS IS GOING TO BE A LIVING SCREEN, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE INTERMITTENT PER THE CITY OF ANNA ORDINANCE, SHRUBS THAT WILL ALSO BE IN BETWEEN THOSE LARGER CALIBER TREES. [00:20:06] SO IT'S GOING TO BE ACTUALLY A REAL LIVING SCREEN. BEHIND THAT, WE'LL DO A MASONRY WALL YOU KNOW, OPEN TO FEEDBACK. BUT THIS IS A YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE THIS IS NOT A CHEAP WALL. THIS HAS THREE DIFFERENT STONE VARIATIONS. WE THINK IT WOULD LOOK REALLY NICE. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT SITE PLAN, WE WILL HAVE A DIVIDED ENTRY ON THE NORTH ENTRY. AND I'LL GET TO WHAT WE KIND OF EXPECT THAT TO LOOK LIKE. SO HERE'S KIND OF AN EXAMPLE OF OUR ENTRY MONUMENT. IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE MODERN. ANOTHER THING I'LL POINT OUT IS PER THE LANDSCAPE CHECKLIST, THIS THIS ENTRY MONUMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE 15FT OR TALLER, WHICH I THINK IS WOULD NOT MAKE SENSE HERE. LIKE, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO WANT AN ENTRY MONUMENT THAT'S 15FT TALL. AND SO OBVIOUSLY WE THINK THIS LOOKS REALLY GOOD. THIS WOULD HAVE TWO OF THESE CAST IRON PILLARS AND THEN A MORE MODERN STONE COLUMN AT THE END. WE'RE GOING TO DO SEASONAL COLORS ON THE ENTRY MONUMENT. WE THINK THIS IS GOING TO LOOK REALLY GOOD. IT'LL BE WELL DESIGNED, BUT IT DOES NOT MEET THE OBVIOUSLY THE CURRENT LANDSCAPE CHECKLIST FOR, FOR FOR THOSE REASONS. AS I SAID EARLIER, LIKE A LOT OF THIS IS US TRYING TO MAKE THE, YOU KNOW, THE CASE AND DECISION OF DEVELOPING VERSUS ETJ VERSUS ANNEXING. AND SO I WANT TO PORTRAY THE FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY VERSUS US ANNEXING PROPOSED AS COMPARED TO US DEVELOPING THE ETJ. SO AS WE SIT TODAY, OBVIOUSLY THE CITY WOULD STAND IF WE IF IT WENT THROUGH WITH THE ETJ DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE ZERO MONIES ON THE AD VALOREM TAXES. IF WE WERE TO ANNEX THERE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 7.6 MILLION THAT WOULD BE GENERATED IN AD VALOREM TAXES OVER. THAT'S A 30 YEAR SPAN. THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL 390,000 IN IMPACT FEES. AND ALSO, ALL SAID TOGETHER, THIS IS ABOUT $8 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE TO THE CITY FROM THE ANNEXATION. SO I WANT TO GO THROUGH THE HOME ELEVATIONS AND WANT TO POINT OUT THIS, THIS HAS TAKEN US A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE WE DO WANT THIS, THIS PROJECT TO STAND OUT. LIKE, I THINK I PRESENTED THIS TO COUNCIL TWO WEEKS, I'LL SAY THE SAME THING AGAIN. IF YOU LOOK AT ANNA FROM 2015, THERE'S BEEN ABOUT 5500 BUILDING PERMITS PULLED IN THE CITY OF ANNA, AND IT'S CLOSE TO 80 TO 90% OF THOSE ARE RIGHT AT THE MEDIAN HOME VALUE IN ANNA OF 423,000. WE WOULD LIKE TO POSITION THIS COMMUNITY A STEP ABOVE THAT. WE THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INVENTORY IN THE ENTRY TO STARTER HOME MARKET, AND BEING A STEP ABOVE THAT COULD POSITION, YOU KNOW, THIS COMMUNITY REALLY WELL BECAUSE WE'RE NOT COMPETING WITH SO MUCH OF THE OTHER SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE IN THAT LOWER PRICE MARKET. THESE WILL NOT BE MILLION DOLLAR HOMES. AND I'M NOT TRYING TO TELL YOU THAT, BUT I DO THINK THE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE 425 AND THE 700, THERE'S A GREAT SPOT AND A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE EMPLOYERS COMING IN TO ANNA AND THAT'S THE TARGET WE WANT TO HIT. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THESE ELEVATIONS. I THINK THEY BRING A UNIQUE TOUCH. AGAIN, HERE'S THE TUDOR STYLE. THIS KIND OF ARTICULATES A HIGHER ROOF PITCH. A LOT OF THIS IS 8/12 INTO 10/12. YOU CAN SEE KIND OF THE, THE STONE HEADERS ON THE WALLS ARTICULATED GARAGE DOORS. THIS IS CRAFTSMAN. CRAFTSMAN. I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF THE ELEVATION. BUT TO LAUREN'S POINT, WE WANT TO DO WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL ON REPETITION. AND WE HAVE WE'RE AGREEING TO STANDARD REPETITION. AND THIS JUST HELPS BREAK UP THE MONOTONY ON A STREET ELEVATION VIEW. WHEN YOU HAVE SOME HOMES THAT AREN'T 100% BRICK. AND SO WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN THESE STREETS AND YOU SEE EVEN IF IT'S 1 OR 1 ON THE STREET OR TWO ON THE STREET, THIS JUST MAKES IT LOOK LIKE A MUCH NICER SUBDIVISION. THIS IS TEXAS VERNACULAR. THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST EXPENSIVE ELEVATION. A LOT MORE ELEMENTS. THIS IS THINK OF TEXAS HILL COUNTRY STYLE. YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THIS ONE. THIS IS MUCH MORE STONE THAT YOU CAN SEE IN THE FRONT ELEVATION, THE USE OF METAL ROOFS ON THE PORCH. I THINK THESE WOULD BE A GREAT ELEVATION. A LOT, A LOT OF CEDAR PILLARS ON THIS. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE MODERN FARMHOUSE, THESE ARE HIGH CONTRAST COLORS AND ELEVATIONS. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE ARTICULATED GARAGE DOORS A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE GARAGE DOORS. I DON'T LIKE NOT HAVING THE WINDOWS ON THE GARAGE DOOR. SO THAT'S ONE ELEMENT YOU'LL SEE IN A LOT OF THESE HOMES AS WELL AS JUST THE USE OF BOARD AND BATTEN, WHICH IS, I THINK, A NICE CHANGE UP FROM JUST DOING 100% BRICK HOUSE. AND IT LOOKS JUST THE SAME HOME OVER HOME. SO I THINK I WANT TO GET TO SOME OF LAUREN'S COMMENTS, BUT I THINK THE BIG PICTURE AS WE KIND OF VIEW THIS DEAL IS WE VIEW THIS AS LIKE A DECISION BETWEEN THE ANNEXATION, RIGHT, OF WHAT CAN BE DEVELOPED VERSUS NOT LIKE, WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS EITHER WAY. AND THAT WAS OUR WHOLE INTENT OF TRYING TO GET TO COUNCIL EARLY, TRYING TO GET TO YOU ALL EARLY TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK. BUT I THINK ONE, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS DEVELOPMENT FIRST, IT PROVIDES THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY AND DESIGN CONTROLS TO MAINTAIN THE SAME STANDARD AT A BUT EVEN A HIGHER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS. [00:25:04] SECOND, IT'S A IT'S A FINANCIAL BENEFIT FOR THE CITY. IT PAYS TO PLAY RIGHT. SO THIS STILL GENERATES OVER $8 MILLION OF REVENUE BY ANNEXATION THE CITY OTHERWISE WOULDN'T HAVE. AND LASTLY, WE VIEW THIS AS A PARTNERSHIP. LIKE WE WANT THIS TO BE A CATALYST FOR OTHER DEVELOPMENTS TO KIND OF HIT THAT SPACE THAT ANNA HASN'T HAD WHICH IS A STEP ABOVE THE STARTER HOME AND KIND OF LAUNCH US INTO MORE OF THAT, MORE OF THAT SPACE ON OTHER DEVELOPMENTS. SO I WOULD, ONE COMMENT I SAW IN LAUREN'S REPORT WOULD BE THAT WE REQUIRE THAT THESE FOUR ELEVATIONS BE INCLUDED IN THE PD, WHICH I SAW ON THAT. AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT'S REALLY HARD TO DO IN A DEVELOPMENT. I MEAN, THE BEST CONTROL I'M GIVING YOU ALL IS THAT I'M AGREEING TO A HOME PRICE ON THE PD. RIGHT. I THINK YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THERE. IT'S $580,000. BETTER THAN ANY ORDINANCE. BETTER THAN ANYTHING I CAN PROVIDE YOU IF I DON'T HIT THAT 580. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM. I'M IN DEFAULT OF MY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE I'M AGREEING TO THAT I WON'T LET THESE HOMEOWNERS HAVE A CERTAIN TAX RATE EQUIVALENT. SO YOU GUYS HAVE THE BEST CONTROL. AND THE BIGGEST PICTURE IS LIKE, IF WE'RE GOING TO ANNEX, THIS IS GOING TO BE A MARKET DECISION. WE'RE BRINGING HIGH QUALITY ELEVATIONS. WE WANT TO WE WANT TO MAKE THIS PROJECT STICK OUT. BUT WE HAVE THERE'S AN ELEMENT OF, OF OF WHAT THE MARKET BUYER IS GOING TO USE THAT. WE HAVE TO REMAIN THAT FLEXIBILITY. SO WE WOULD REQUEST THAT TO NOT HAVE THE THE LANGUAGE IN THERE WITH THE FOUR DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS THAT THAT WAS IN THE STAFF COMMENTS. WITH THAT I'LL OPEN UP TO ANY QUESTIONS. APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME. SO I'M JUST GOING TO THROW IT OUT THERE. SINCE YOU BROUGHT THAT UP LAST. YOU HAVE FOUR DESIGNS YOU PUT UP HERE AND THEN NOT TO INCLUDE IT. DO YOU HAVE OTHER DESIGNS IN YOUR BACK POCKET OR ARE YOU JUST TRYING TO LEAVE IT AS YOU HAVE SOME OPEN WIGGLE ROOM? WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM. WE HAVE TWO BUILDERS WE DO HAVE. I DO ENVISION THERE BEING PROBABLY 3 TO 4 SINGLE STORIES. RIGHT. AND THAT WAS THE REQUEST FOR THE, THE THE LOT LOTS MAXIMUM. NOT BECAUSE I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT OR MONOTONY WISE. IT'S JUST WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO SERVE. I'M A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPER. WHEN I LOOK AT DEVELOPMENTS, I WANT THIS GENERATION, THIS GENERATION AND THIS GENERATION ALL TO BUY HOME, EVEN IF IT'S 78 LOTS. AND THOSE SINGLE STORY HOMES DO ALLOW FOR AN OLDER GENERATION. HONESTLY, SEE MOST DEVELOPMENTS. I'VE DEVELOPED OVER 10,000 LOTS. THOSE END UP BEING THE HIGHEST PRICED HOMES, SO THE HIGHEST PRICED FINISHED HOUSE. BUT WE NEED THE FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW A SMALL NUMBER OF THOSE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. SO YOU MENTIONED BUILDERS. ARE YOU WILLING TO TELL US WHO THE BUILDERS ARE SO THAT WE CAN GET AN IDEA OF HOW THESE FACADES ARE GOING TO CHANGE IF WE DON'T RESTRICT YOU TO THE FOUR THAT YOU'VE PRESENTED TONIGHT? WELL, THERE'S NO BUILDER SITE LIKE. I KNOW THERE'S NOT ONE SIGNED UP YET. YOU NEED TO SEE WHERE THIS GOES WITH IT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY OF THOSE DECISIONS. BUT I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHO YOU'RE IN TALKS WITH SO THAT I CAN KIND OF GET MY HEAD WRAPPED AROUND WHAT THE FACADES COULD POTENTIALLY CHANGE TO LOOK LIKE. YEAH, YEAH. I MEAN, THESE ARE THESE ARE PRIVATE. BOTH OF THESE, THESE ARE TWO DIFFERENT BUILDER ELEVATIONS. THEY'RE PRIVATE HOME BUILDERS. NEITHER ONE OF THEM IS IN ANNA TODAY. I AM, AND Y'ALL HELP ME WITH THIS. I'M SLIGHTLY CONCERNED ON A PUBLIC SETTING ACKNOWLEDGING WHICH BUILDERS IT IS. THAT PUTS ME IN A LITTLE BIT OF A TOUGH SITUATION. YEAH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY IF YOU WANTED TO SHARE IT. SO FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO SAY I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. LOOKING HERE, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GUYS PROVIDED A FINANCIAL OVERVIEW. THAT'S VERY HELPFUL. IT'S A QUESTION I DON'T HAVE TO ASK YOU. I ALSO SAW WHEN YOU PRESENTED A COUNCIL THAT YOU DID A ROADWAY SUPPLY VERSUS DEMAND THAT WAS ATTACHED TO OUR MEETING MINUTES. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT AS WELL. IT HELPS ALLEVIATE SOME OF MY QUESTIONS. I DIDN'T SEE ON YOUR PLAT, YOUR PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT'S BEING PRESENTED, ANY KIND OF ROAD WORK FOR FERGUSON PARKWAY? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL TALKED TO THE CITY WITH OR HAVE ANY INTENTIONS ON ADDRESSING? YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND THAT WAS PART OF THE SUPPLY VERSUS DEMAND. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT FERGUSON RIGHT NOW CAN YOU ALL SEE THAT EXHIBIT ON Y'ALL'S SCREEN? OKAY. SO BLUE IN THAT EXHIBIT IS THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT FERGUSON, I MEAN, THAT THE CITY HAS OBTAINED TODAY, YELLOW IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DEDICATE VIA THE PLAT, AND IN RED IS WHAT THE CITY HAS NOT YET OBTAINED. SO THERE'S REALLY THREE OPTIONS FROM FERGUSON AND MY ULTIMATE GOAL ON PRESENTING ALL THIS MATH IS LIKE I WANT TO PAY MY FAIR SHARE. THIS IS NOT. BUT I ALSO WANT US TO BE WISE IN MAKING THIS DECISION. SO THERE'S THERE'S KIND OF THREE OPTIONS AS I VIEW FERGUSON. THE FIRST OPTION IS WE AS PART OF OUR DEVELOPMENT, WE BUILD AROUND THE MISSING RIGHT OF WAYS. AND AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS POINTER WORKS BECAUSE THIS DID NOT WORK AT COUNCIL, SO I'M NOT GOING TO TRY, BUT LET'S SEE. OH MY GOSH, LAUREN, THIS IS CRAZY. [00:30:04] DON'T MAKE ME DO THIS. SO WE WOULD LITERALLY. SO IT'S STARTING RIGHT HERE. YOU'D HAVE TO CURVE BACK IN AND THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU'D FERGUSON WOULD BE BUILT TO RIGHT HERE. AND THEN WE GOT TO START CURVING IT BACK OUT TO MISS THIS RIGHT AWAY. THAT IS NOT BEEN OBTAINED. THERE'S TWO ISSUES WITH THAT. ONE ARE INGRESS AND EGRESS IS REALLY COMPLICATED ON THE SLOPE ENTRANCE. THE SECOND IS WE'RE BOTH GOING TO HAVE WE BOTH WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO, TO BUILD THIS ROADWAY THAT WOULD BE ABOUT 1400 FEET OF ROADWAY THAT WE WOULD BUILD ONLY 300FT OF. IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE PART OF THE CITY'S FUTURE PLAN FOR FERGUSON. AND IT ALSO COSMETICALLY JUST DOESN'T LOOK RIGHT. THE SECOND OPTION IS THAT WE BUILD JUST WITH WHAT'S IN OUR RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT. SO THAT WOULD JUST BE WITHIN YELLOW. YOU WOULD HAVE A BARRICADE ON THE NORTH END, A BARRICADE ON THE SOUTH END. THAT IS FROM A CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT, DEFINITELY FEASIBLE. RIGHT. THERE'S TWO CONCERNS THERE. COSMETICALLY, DOES IT MAKE THE MOST SENSE? RIGHT. LIKE YOU'RE LITERALLY BUILDING A ROAD AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO A NICER SUBDIVISION, AND YOU HAVE BARRICADES ON BOTH SIDES. THE SECOND THING IS US BUILDING THAT ROAD, RIGHT? WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PAY OUR FAIR SHARE AND THEN OVER SOME THE COST TO BUILD FERGUSON. LISTEN THAT'S JUST THAT SPAN OF FERGUSON AND THAT AND THIS IS BASICALLY MY ANALYSIS. YOU CAN SEE HERE, I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THIS REALLY QUICKLY AND HOPEFULLY THIS MATH MAKES SENSE. SO I AGAIN COMMISSIONER. TO YOUR POINT, I TRY TO I ALWAYS TRY TO COMPARE HOW MUCH HOW MUCH SUPPLY ARE WE PUTTING ON THE ROADWAY SYSTEM VERSUS HOW MUCH DEMAND ARE WE PUTTING ON THE ROADWAY SYSTEM. THOSE THOSE TWO ARE NEVER GOING TO BE 100% EQUAL, AND I'M ALWAYS WILLING TO TAKE THE BIGGER SHARE OF IT. BUT I THINK THIS IS AN EQUATION THAT OBVIOUSLY WE ALL HAVE TO LOOK AT. AND SO FOR US TO BUILD THE PORTION OF YELLOW THAT IS THE FERGUSON WITHIN OUR PROPERTY WE WOULD BE SUPPLYING THE CITY WITH IN TODAY'S DOLLARS, ABOUT 1.2 MILLION OF ECONOMIC VALUE OF ROADWAY. I GOT THOSE NUMBERS FROM THE CITY OF ANNA 2022 CIP UPDATE BY TAKING THE VEHICLE MILE AND THEN PUT AN ECONOMIC VALUE PER THE CIP. SO THERE'S NO ASSUMPTIONS HERE. THIS IS IN Y'ALL'S PUBLISHED UPDATE. THE DEMAND I'M PUTTING ON THAT THAT ROADWAY SYSTEM IS CLEARLY JUST THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEES TIMES THE NUMBER OF UNITS. AND SO THERE'S ABOUT A $830,000 GAP BETWEEN THAT. WE'RE ALWAYS MORE WILLING TO PAY MORE THAN OUR SHARE. BUT THAT'S ABOUT THREE TIMES, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH. I MEAN, SO FROM THE ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY TEST, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE SOME HELP IF THAT WAS THE OPTION THE CITY HAD. YOU ALSO GOT TO CONSIDER Y'ALL WOULD BE WE WOULD IN PARTNERSHIP BE BUILDING THIS ROAD. YOU WOULD START MAINTENANCE ON IT. AND THERE IS NO BENEFIT THAT ANYBODY HAS ON THAT PROPERTY UNTIL UNTIL THE NORTH AND SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY ARE OBTAINED. WE THINK THE BEST OPTION IS LET US PAY INTO THE ROADWAY IMPACT FEES, DEDICATE THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR FREE, AND PUT THAT LET YOU PUT THAT MONEY IN A BUCKET FOR WHEN THIS ENTIRE SPAN OF FERGUSON IS READY TO BE BUILT. THAT WOULD BE OUR THAT'S OUR REQUEST FROM THIS COMMISSION AND COUNCIL. CHAIR, IF I COULD, FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON JUST A COUPLE THINGS, IS I JUST WANT TO ENSURE, AS YOU GUYS ARE DELIBERATING AND MAKING YOUR DECISIONS ON THIS, IS IS THAT THE FINANCIAL ASPECT IS OUTSIDE OF YOUR SCOPE OF REVIEW AND AND THE ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY. HE'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. WE CAN'T POSSIBLY ASK HIM TO PAY MORE THAN, THAN THE COST WOULD BE FOR THAT. THAT WILL ALL BE THINGS THAT WILL BE REVIEWED IN DETAIL BY THE CITY ENGINEER ON THE ON THOSE ITEMS. THE CONCERN I THINK THE ORIGINAL QUESTION AND CONCERN WAS IN REGARDS TO REQUESTING DETAILS ON THOSE. AND THOSE DETAILS ARE IMPORTANT. THAT'S WHY STAFF INCLUDED THOSE IN THERE. AND I THINK WITH THE DEVELOPERS CONSENT, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN WORK OUT IN DETAIL. AND IT MAY BE SOMETHING YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE IN DETAIL BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION ON THAT. THAT'S YOUR CALL ON THAT. BUT SEEING THOSE DETAILS ON WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING REQUESTED BECAUSE IMAGES DON'T NECESSARILY STICK WHEN IT COMES TO THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. AND [INAUDIBLE] AREN'T AREN'T IN YOUR PURVIEW EITHER. THAT'S UNDER THE UNDER THE COUNCILS. AND SO SOME OF THOSE DETAILS WILL BE ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT IN THE ZONING AND TYPICALLY THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT. SO IT'S AS TRANSPARENT FOR THE DEVELOPER AND FOR THE CITY ON WHO'S DOING WHAT AND WHAT. WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS THAT THOSE BE EQUAL IN THE SAME. WHAT'S REQUIRED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS ALSO WE PUT THAT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS WELL. SO THAT WAY IT'S CLEAR, CONCISE, AND IT LIMITS ANY CONCERNS IN THE FUTURE OVER ANY MODIFICATIONS FROM THAT. [00:35:04] AND OUR GOAL AND I THINK THE GOAL OF THE COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT TO HAVE A LOT OF CHANGES BE PREPARED TO, TO COME WITH THOSE PRODUCTS AND THE THINGS THAT PROVIDE THE HIGHEST QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING FOR. AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT THAT THOSE DETAILS BE SOMETHING THAT ARE IMPORTANT. GOOD QUESTIONS. GREAT QUESTIONS. AND I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS THAT IF THE DEVELOPERS NOT PREPARED YET TO, TO TO MAYBE PUT PUT THAT DOWN, MAYBE WE GIVE US SOME TIME TO GET THOSE DOWN FOR YOU SO WE CAN SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT IT IS. SO IT GIVES HIM THE FLEXIBILITY AS A DEVELOPER ON THE PROJECT AS WELL AS YOU, THE CONFIDENCE IN KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE YOU'RE REQUESTING OR RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL. SO. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKER CARDS FOR THIS. BEFORE WE START, SARAH RIJINO, IS THIS AN ITEM THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO SPEAK TO? I DON'T HAVE WHICH ITEM YOU'RE WANTING TO SPEAK TO LISTED. OKAY. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND COME ON DOWN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR US. I THINK THEY ANSWERED EVERYTHING I'M TRYING TO THINK. HI, I'M SARAH RIJINO. I LIVE AT 1500 SOUTH FERGUSON PARKWAY. SO I'M JUST DIRECTLY I GUESS IT'S NORTH OF THE PROJECT. SO I HAD JUST A FEW QUESTIONS, AND I BELIEVE THEY'VE ANSWERED EVERYTHING. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE ROAD AS WELL. SO IF THE ROAD WAS GOING TO BE BE REDONE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU KNOW, WITH A LOT OF HOUSES, 76 HOUSING PROJECTS THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT. AND HOW THAT WAS GOING TO LOOK AND HOW WE WERE GOING TO GET IN AND OUT OF FERGUSON AND STRAIGHT TO 455. IF WE WERE GOING TO CONNECT OUT TO THE OUTER LOOP AND HOW THAT WAS GOING TO LOOK. AND THEY ANSWERED SOME OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE STARTED THAT I HAD JUST ON THE DRAINAGE FROM OAK HOLLOW, THEY HAD A DRAINAGE POLE. AND SO THEY ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS FOR ME EARLIER. SO MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE ROADWAY NOW. SO WE COULD GET THAT ONE FIGURED OUT. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE GINA KUHN. OKAY. WE APPRECIATE THAT. YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR ME? SORRY. GINA KUHN. I LIVE IN LAKEVIEW ESTATES, 1613 SHOREWOOD. THANK YOU. MY CONCERN WITH THIS PROJECT. AND SHE MAY HAVE COVERED SOME OF IT, BUT I COULDN'T REALLY HEAR HER THAT WILL ONE, THE TRAFFIC. IS THIS GOING TO BE IN CONJUNCTION WITH ANY OF THE WORK ON FERGUSON, THE WIDENING OF FERGUSON? WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS LOOKING TO START THIS PROJECT? AND IS THIS PROJECT REALLY NEEDED IN THIS LITTLE SMALL AREA WHEN WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF OTHER HOMES BEING BUILT THROUGHOUT THE CITY? AND ARE THOSE HOMES GOING TO BE ACQUIRED? I MEAN, THIS IS A 76 PROJECT, 76 HOME PROJECT. I GET IT FROM HIS STANDPOINT, BUT I'M THINKING OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE AREA. THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ALONE, THAT'S GOING TO BE COST. I'M LOSING MY VOICE. THAT'S GOING TO BE CAUSED DURING THIS, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE IF FERGUSON WAS WIDER ALREADY, IT MAY NOT BE SUCH A PROBLEM. BUT WITH THE SCHOOL AND THE SCHOOL ZONE, SOMETIMES AT 4:00 OR 415, THE TRAFFIC IS BACKED UP IN FRONT OF THE LAKEVIEW ESTATES ENTRANCE, TRYING TO PICK UP THEIR CHILDREN. SO I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING DUMP TRUCKS AND ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO CLEAR THE LAND, AND THEN PICK UP ALL THE STUFF THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PICK UP THOSE BIG TRUCKS THAT PICK UP THE JUNK AND TAKE IT TO THE DUMP. I JUST, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED ARE BEING CONSIDERED. [00:40:05] I KNOW THIS IS YOUR JOB TO DETERMINE IF THESE PROJECTS NEED TO BE DONE, BUT WHAT I'M HOPING IS THAT YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE AREA THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY HAVING THIS PROJECT PUT IN SUCH A SMALL AREA. THOSE ARE REALLY NICE HOMES AND THEY'RE REALLY NICE PRICE POINTS, BUT I THINK MAYBE THERE'S A BETTER PLACE THAT THEY CAN GO BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN BETWEEN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD WITH LOWER PRICE POINTS. AND THEN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A MEDIAN PRICE POINT. SO. MY HOPE IS THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT BE ADMITTED TO TAKE PLACE, AT LEAST IN THIS AREA, CONSIDERING ALL THE UPHEAVAL THAT IT'S GOING TO CAUSE US. BUT WE DON'T HAVE A TIME FRAME YET. IS THAT CORRECT? COULD BE YEARS. WE'LL ASK THE DEVELOPER THAT. PARDON ME. WE'LL ASK THE DEVELOPER THAT. WE DON'T KNOW. BUT WE'LL ASK THAT QUESTION HERE A SECOND. YEAH. ANYWAY, I MIGHT BE AN OLD FOLKS HOME BY THEN, BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO BRING MY CONCERNS TO THE THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HOPE YOU FEEL BETTER. OKAY. AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:46 P.M. AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. OBVIOUSLY, I HAVE THAT ONE QUESTION ABOUT TIME FRAME. SO IF Y'ALL ARE OKAY, I'M GOING TO ASK THE DEVELOPER TO COME BACK UP. CAN YOU TOUCH BASE ON THAT A LITTLE? I KNOW THIS IS ALL CONTINGENT ON WHAT WE VOTE TONIGHT, ETC., BUT RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING, IF APPROVED HERE TONIGHT? WE STILL HAVE ABOUT NINE MONTHS OF ENGINEERING LEFT. AND SO THAT PUTS US KIND OF LATE SUMMER OF NEXT YEAR TO START CONSTRUCTION. CONSTRUCTION WILL TAKE US ABOUT 18 MONTHS. AND SO ALL SAID, WE'RE A LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS FROM HAVING THE HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE BASED ON THIS PRICE POINT WE DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO SELL. YOU KNOW, THE HIGHER PRICE POINT, THE SLOWER THE HOME BUILD THE HOMES WILL COME UP. AND SO I THINK IT'S ABOUT A THREE AND A HALF YEARS UNTIL YOU SEE THIS WHOLE PROJECT, YOU KNOW, ALL 76 HOMES BUILT IS THE 18 MONTH, LIKE YOUR CIVIL WORK, YOUR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, ETC., GETTING. EXACTLY. EVERYTHING BUT VERTICAL. YEP. WATER, SEWER. PAVING, GRADING. I APPRECIATE IT, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER IN THIS AREA, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DO SEE WHAT THEY'RE FACING AS FAR AS THAT ADVERSITY FOR THE AREA. WE GOT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT IT'S ALREADY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO WE'RE NOT HERE TONIGHT TO DENY IT FOR WHAT IT'S ZONED FOR, TO NOT ALLOW IT. WE'RE HERE TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING US AND TO VOTE ON THAT. SO MY QUESTIONS ARE TO Y'ALL. DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING FOR THE CHANGES AND THE EXCEPTIONS? I THINK TECHNICAL QUESTION FOR THE STAFF. SO HE'S ASKING FOR NOT TO DO THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES BECAUSE OF A PRICE POINT. BUT THE PRICE POINTS IN A PD, RIGHT. THE RECOMMENDATION WE DON'T HAVE ANY SAY OVER A PD. SO HE'S ASKING US TO APPROVE IT WITHOUT ANY ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, ANY STIPULATION IN THE HOPE THAT IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO GO WITH THE PD, IT WOULD BE INCLUDED. IS THAT WHAT I'M GATHERING? THAT'S BASED ON WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED AND WHAT'S BEING STATED THERE? YES. BUT I WOULD SUGGEST AND RECOMMEND THAT THAT BE ALL PART OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT YOU PUT TOGETHER AS WELL. AND THAT'S MIRRORED. IT WILL BE THEN MIRRORED IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. SO PUTTING THE DETAILS OF, FOR EXAMPLE, HE MAY HAVE ANOTHER BUILDER THAT'S GOING TO BUILD VERY SIMILAR. AND SO THESE WOULD BE JUST IMAGES OF POTENTIAL CONCEPT. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE'S WILLING TO PUT THE DETAILS OF, FOR EXAMPLE, WINDOWS ON THE GARAGE DOORS INSIDE THAT AS PART OF THIS PLANNED ZONING AND THE DETAILS OF THE PITCH OF THE ROOFS AND THE ARTICULATIONS AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS, THOSE DETAILS WOULD GO INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND TO THE ORDINANCE BOTH. SO THAT WAY IT'S IT'S MIRRORED IN BOTH AND AND, AND THERE'S NO MISTAKE ABOUT WHAT HE'S, WHAT HE JUST DESCRIBED TO YOU THAT, [00:45:02] THAT THEY WANT TO DO AND THEREFORE WHAT WILL THEN BE EXPECTED IN 18 MONTHS TO TO TWO YEARS WHEN THE FIRST HOME GOES UP. COMMISSIONERS IF I COULD ADD ON TO THAT THE THE ACTION TONIGHT FOR ITEM 7.A IS A RECOMMENDATION ON THE ZONING THAT THEN GOES TO CITY COUNCIL TO BE APPROVED BY THEM. SO Y'ALL TONIGHT AREN'T DECIDING ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE WILL BE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE RESTRICTIONS. THOSE WOULD BE A SUBJECT MATTER FOR NEGOTIATION POINT AS AS KAYLA POINTED OUT IN THE DA, AND THEN IF THEY ACCEPT THOSE AND, YOU KNOW, THE TOTALITY OF THE DEAL, THE TWO THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE OFFERING, THEY WOULD THEN BE BAKED INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, INTO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THAT'S SPECIFIC FOR THE PD AS WELL. SO YOU COULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CITY COUNCIL ONLY PROCEED WITH APPROVAL OR STICK TO THAT WHEN THEY'RE NEGOTIATING THE THE PD, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCLUDES IT. MAKE THAT A CONDITION FOR THE PYD, WHATEVER. YOU CAN DISCUSS THOSE ISSUES, BUT YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ON THEM AND YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO BE MAKING THE FINAL DECISION ON THEM. THAT'S IN CONTRAST TO ITEM 7.B, WHICH IS A PLAT APPROVAL. YOU'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING THAT DOCUMENT AS DRAFTED, BUT YOU CAN'T ATTACH A BUNCH OF CONDITIONS TO IT IN THE PROCESS OF THAT UP OR DOWN. THAT'S A PROCEDURAL APPROVAL STEP. AND JUST TO NOTE, 7.B IS CONTINGENT ON 7.A OR WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THAT REGARDLESS OF HOW WE MOTION ON 7.A. THEY THEY ARE NOT DEPENDENT. THEY'RE NOT INTERCONNECTED ON EACH OTHER. THE PLAT IS GOING TO IT HAS TO BE ASSESSED BY THE STANDARDS OF OUR CURRENT SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, AS IT EXISTS ON THE BOOKS TODAY, AND EITHER UP OR DOWN VOTED BASED ON WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THOSE STANDARDS. THE ZONING AND PD ASPECT IS KIND OF ENTIRELY SEPARATE. NOW, IF THEY DON'T GET THE ZONING ACCOMMODATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE PLAT TO WORK IN THE ULTIMATE EXECUTION, THAT WILL BE A SEPARATE ISSUE POTENTIALLY LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD. BUT BOTH ITEMS NEED TO BE CONSIDERED AT TODAY'S MEETING. THANK YOU. ANYBODY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? CONCERNS? YEAH. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD POINT SYSTEM. I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOKED AT A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WERE REQUIRED TO GET POINTS, LIKE YOU CAN'T DO THAT ON THE SMALL LOT, SO THAT DOESN'T BOTHER ME. AND OVERALL, I'M ON BOARD WITH IT. YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU. I JUST, I ALSO THINK THAT RESTRICTING THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IS IS A CHALLENGE. ALL FOUR OF THOSE WERE ALONG SIMILAR LINES. AND I WILL SAY WITH ANY AND I THINK THERE'S SOME REALLY NICE SINGLE STORY HOMES THAT ARE ALMOST EVEN BIGGER, THAT SELL A LOT BETTER. SO WE WOULDN'T WANT ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO BE PRECLUDED FROM IT. IN THAT CASE, IF NO ONE ELSE HAS ANY COMMENTS OR WANTS TO DISCUSS IT, I'LL ASK IF WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. SO MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MODIFICATIONS, WITH BOTH. YES. WITH BOTH. YEAH. SO THAT'LL BE TO RESTRICT THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES AND TO REQUIRE A HOUSE REPETITION PLAN WITH EACH NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. NO NO NO. ALL MOTION TO APPROVE WITH JUST REQUIRING THE HOME REPETITION PLAN. I'LL SECOND THAT. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE FROM COMMISSIONER HERMANN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VOLLMER. AT THIS TIME, ALL COMMISSIONERS PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. LOOKS LIKE THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING ON TO ITEM 7.B CONSIDER DISCUSS ACTION ON RESOLUTION REGARDING THE THOMPSON GROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT. OWNER CONSTANTINE FAMILY TRUST. SO YOU GUYS HEARD HIM EARLIER. THIS IS JUST US REVIEWING THE PLAT FOR APPROVAL. AS LONG AS IT MEETS ALL PLANNING AND ZONING REQUIREMENTS I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. ALL COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON THE AGENDA. [ 8. Future Agenda Items] [00:50:03] AT THIS TIME, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY IDENTIFY ISSUES OR TOPICS THAT THEY WISH TO SCHEDULE FOR DISCUSSION AT A FUTURE MEETING. THE ONLY THING I REALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS WE HAVE THE HOLIDAYS COMING UP. LAUREN, IF YOU COULD REITERATE THE DATES THAT WE HAVE FOR THE DECEMBER AND JANUARY MEETING, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY CONFLICTS WITH THAT, JUST LET US KNOW SOONER THAN LATER. I KNOW WE ALL HAVE PLANS AND FAMILY THINGS TO DO. DECEMBER 1ST AND JANUARY 5TH. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO DISCUSS? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT? A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU GUYS. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.