[00:00:01]
UH, I WILL CALL THE CITY OF HU
[Planning and Zoning Committee on July 2, 2024.]
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR TUESDAY, JULY THE SECOND, 2024 TO ORDER ROLL CALL.UM, COMMISSIONER STEWART HERE.
SO WE HAVE A FULL HOUSE TONIGHT.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TONIGHT? YES.
EVERY PERSON HERE IS MAKING A PUB.
DID YOU SEE MY EYES? I WAS EXCITED.
SO WE WILL OPEN IT AND CLOSE IT AT 8:02 PM CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 4.1.
CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR SCHEDULED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 4TH, 2024.
ITEM 4.2 CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED HE HU MEGA TECH CENTER.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION AS OUTLINED IN THE REPORT CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 173.995 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OF LAND NINE LOTS LOCATED ON US.
ITEM 4.3 CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST TO EXTEND THE LIDELL WALKER PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION TEN TWO OH THREE EIGHT SIX.
ITEM FOUR, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED COTTONWOOD CREEK PHASE SIX, FINAL PLAT, 36.373 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OF LAND 120 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THREE OPEN SPACE DRAINAGE LOTS LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 1 32 AND NORTH FM 1660 SOUTH.
ITEM 4.5 CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED GOAL OF PHASE TWO FINAL PLAT 34.713 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OF LAND 148 LOTS LOCATED ON FM 1660 SOUTH.
UH, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL 4.4 AND 4.5.
OKAY, SO THE CONSENT AGENDA NOW CONSISTS OF ITEMS 4.1, 4.2, AND 4.3.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT CONSENT TO CONSENT.
AGENDA ITEMS 4.1, 4.2 4.3 AS STATED, I'LL SECOND IT.
UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR ITEMS 4.1, TWO AND THREE.
ALRIGHT, ITEM 4.4, UH, 4.4 AND 4.5 FOR THAT MATTER.
UH, UH, WITH DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, IT SOUNDED LIKE THESE WERE, UH, THESE COULD BE APPROVED WITH, UH, CONDITIONS.
SO IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEN LET'S GET THIS BUSINESS KNOCKED OUT AND GET 'EM ON THEIR WAY, IS KIND OF MY THINKING ON IT.
SO, UH, WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD, UH, FOR 4.4, WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD STAFF BE LOOKING AT? UH, IF YOU COULD JUST STATE THAT IT'S PER THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE, UH, NOTED ON STAFF'S COMMENTS, THAT'S PART OF THE ATTACHMENT.
SO NO, NO CHANGES TO THE STAFF COMMENT PORTIONS.
SO WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT SHEET? I DIDN'T KNOW IF ANYONE NEEDED TIME TO LOOK.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION ON 4.4
[00:05:01]
IS A DRAINAGE PLAN.COMMENT ON ONE OF THE LAST PAGES OF THE STAFF COMMENTS ON 4.5.
AND THEN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE STAFF NOTES START ON PAGE 1 0 2.
ON PAGE FOR THE ONLINE PACKET IT'S SHOWING IS PAGE 1 0 8 OR, UM, THAT'S FOUR FIVE.
4.5 WHAT PAGE ONE OH OH FOR FOUR FIVE.
4.5103 FOR 4.4? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES.
SO YEAH, THAT, THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION ACTUALLY.
THE, UH, UH, FOR 4.4, THE PLAT IS SUB UH, STAFF REVIEW.
THE PLAT IS SUBJECT TO THE SHOT CLOCK AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL PER STATE LAW.
UH, STATE LAW ALSO SAYS THAT WE COULD APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENIES.
SO IF WE TAKE THIS OFF THE CONSENT ENT AND APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS, THAT'S STILL OKAY.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 4.4 WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE STAFF COMMENTS ARE ADDRESSED AND CORRECTED.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, VICE CHAIR HUDSON TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITIONS AND TO APPROVE WITH THE STAFF CONDITIONS.
APPROVE WITH THE STAFF CONDITIONS.
STAFF CONDITIONS AND THE COMMENTS.
IT DOESN'T GIMME A LOT OF ROOM TO WRITE RIGHT THERE.
AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORRIS? NOPE.
I THOUGHT I HEARD IT WAS URBAN.
CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION REALLY QUICKLY? I'M SORRY.
SO IF YOU GO TO PAGE 69 OF 235, IT'S TALKING ABOUT LIKE WHERE THINGS NEED TO BE SENT TO.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS PART OF WHAT THE CITY ASKED FOR THERE TO BE CLARIFICATION, BUT IT INDICATES IN HERE THAT IF THERE'S ANY CORRESPONDENCE TO THE CITY THAT IT NEEDS TO GO TO OTIS JONES CITY MANAGER.
NOW, UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT'S NOT INCORRECT.
THAT WAS PART OF AN AGREEMENT THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PACKET.
SO THAT STILL STANDS EVEN IF THAT PERSON'S NO LONGER.
JUST EVEN IF IT'S A NEW CITY MANAGER THAT, OKAY.
HEY, I'LL JUST GO TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
THAT'S JUST, UH, ONE OF THE SIGNATURE PAGES ON THE TAIL END OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT NEEDED TO BE INCLUDED IN WHAT GETS CORRECTED.
SO THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
[00:10:05]
OKAY, NOW, UH, WHERE WERE WE? OKAY, I WAS ABOUT TO GO AHEAD.SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION FOR 4.42 APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS THAT STAFF ADDRESSED AND COMMENTS THAT COMMENTS ADDRESSED? COMMENTS? YEP.
NOW THEN ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE SAME MOTION, HOPEFULLY THAT WE APPROVE 4.5 WITH THE CONDITIONS OF MEETING WITH THE CONDITIONS IDENTIFIED IN STAFF.
A LITTLE MORE ROOM TO WRITE THAT TIME.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR HUDSON, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LAWYER TO APPROVE 4.5 WITH CONDITIONS IDENTIFIED IN STAFF COMMENTS.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE MEADOWBROOK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
PUD 87.8 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OF LAND LOCATED OFF FM 1660 SOUTH.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS FOR THE RECORD.
ASHLEY BAILEY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR.
THIS ITEM, UH, WAS BEFORE YOU JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO.
UM, SINCE THEN, BEFORE THE FIRST READING, UM, SORRY, BEFORE THE SECOND READING AT CITY COUNCIL, THERE WAS A ROADWAY CHANGE.
SO YOU WILL SEE THE UPDATED DOCUMENTS IN YOUR PACKET.
THIS SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAD SEEN BEFORE.
IT STILL IS A BASE ZONING OF SINGLE FAMILY TWO WITH COMMERCIAL B TWO AT THE SOUTH END, UM, STILL IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAW THE LAST TIME.
UM, MAINLY IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE RIGHT OF WAY ALIGNMENT ON THE FAR EAST SIDE.
UM, AND THAT IMPACTED THE DENSITIES JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UM, TECHNICALLY WITH THAT 10% ALLOWANCE, HAD THIS BEEN APPROVED BY COUNSEL, I COULD HAVE DONE THIS ADMINISTRATIVELY BECAUSE IT WAS NOT APPROVED BY COUNSEL.
I'M BRINGING IT BACK TO YOU JUST SO THAT YOU SEE WHAT'S OCCURRING.
NORMALLY THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD JUST UPDATE YOU WITH DURING MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, BUT JUST FOR TRANSPARENCY, WE ARE BRINGING THIS ONE BACK TO YOU.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS HERE WITH THE PRESENTATION, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT, JUST TO HEAR THE OVER UNDER OF THE CHANGES.
BUT EVERYTHING ELSE, IT MEETS ALL OF THE PEG CRITERIA.
UM, IT IS SUB IN CONFORM WITH THE, UM, NEWEST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE OSA 2040.
UM, EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS PROJECT IS WHAT WE HAD BEEN LOOKING FOR.
UM, AND AGAIN, IT MEETS WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY, IT WAS JUST BECAUSE IT HAD NOT YET BEEN APPROVED BY COUNSEL.
I WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE APPROVAL FOR THE 10%.
SO WITH THAT, UM, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND STAFF RECOMMENDS, UM, APPROVAL.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? SEE NONE.
WE WILL OPEN IT AND CLOSE IT AT EIGHT 15.
AND WOULD THE, UH, WOULD Y'ALL LIKE TO SPEAK AND LET US KNOW WHAT THE CHANGES ARE? DO YOU WANT US TO
ABBY HON WITH LIONHEART REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER MEADOWBROOK.
AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE CHANGES RIGHT ON THIS, UH, IMAGE UP HERE, THAT KIND OF HASHED LINE THERE TO THE SIDE, UM, THAT IS THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS NOW, UH, PART OF THE, THE TRACT.
WE'RE, WE'RE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AND I CAN SHOW YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PRESENTATION, BUT WE'VE ALWAYS, OR THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT WE'LL GO THROUGH QUICKLY.
SO THIS PROJECT IS REALLY, THESE WERE THE,
[00:15:01]
THESE ARE THE FIVE GOALS THAT WERE PART OF THIS PROJECT FROM THE BEGINNING.WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT, UH, FOR A WHILE.
UH, BUT ATTAINABLE HOUSING IS A BIG PIECE OF THIS.
SO THIS PROJECT, WE'LL HAVE BOTH, UH, DETACHED AS WELL AS ATTACHED HOUSING.
UM, DESIGN STANDARDS ARE COMING WITH THIS AS PART OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S ALSO PART OF THIS PROJECT.
MEANINGFUL PARKS AND OPEN SPACE IS A BIG PIECE OF THIS.
SO, UM, AS YOU SEE THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PRODUCT, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'LL SEE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THAT YOU'VE GOT OPEN SPACE THAT'S REALLY WEAVING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, WE'VE GOT REALLY ACTIVATED AND CONNECTED COMMUNITY.
THERE'S OVER THREE QUARTERS OF MILES OF TRAILS THAT RUN ALL THROUGH THE PARK SYSTEM.
UM, AND ABOUT THREE QUARTERS, UH, ARE, SORRY, 15 ACRES, UM, OF PARK, UH, WITHIN THE PROJECT.
UM, AS I SAID, WE'VE GOT A MIX OF PRODUCT TYPES FROM DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY OF SEVERAL DIFFERENT LOT SIZES TO SOME ATTACHED TOWN HOMES.
UH, SOME DUPLEXES, UH, ALL MIXED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.
UH, DESIGN STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT GO ALONG WITH AN ATTACHED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
UM, TRAILS AND PARKS THAT AGAIN, UH, WE HAVE A, A LARGE PARK, UH, DOWN IN THE BOTTOM WITH AN AMENITY CENTER.
UH, BUT WE'VE ALSO REALLY WORKED ON TRYING TO WRAP THAT UP INTO THE, INTO THE DEVELOPMENT.
WE HAVE TRAILS THAT RUN ALONGSIDE, UM, OF PARKS AND ALONGSIDE OF, UM, SOME OF THE MAJOR ROADS, UM, THAT, UH, AGAIN, WE'VE THREW ALL, ALL THROUGHOUT AND REALLY MAKING SURE TO, AND, AND MAKING THIS AN ACTIVE, ACTIVE COMMUNITY AND TRYING TO GET PEOPLE OUT.
WE'VE GOT SHADE TREES AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO REALLY TRY TO SHADE THOSE, UH, THE WALKWAYS.
UM, IT'S HOT OUT THERE IN TEXAS RIGHT NOW, SO, UM, SO THAT'S ALL WE'VE GOT AND, UH, WE'RE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU'RE SAYING.
IT'S DEFINITELY A NEEDED PIECE.
UM, BASED ON THAT NEW RIGHT OF WAY PIECE, IS IT ACCOMMODATING FOR THE POTENTIAL REALIGNMENT OF 1660 ONCE THE SOUTHEAST LOOP COMES IN? IS THAT WHY THE CHANGE WAS REALLY THERE? YES, SIR.
AND THEN, UH, MY ONLY COMMENT IS ME PERSONALLY, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME SORT OF PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO THE COMMERCIAL AREA, WHETHER IT BE TRAIL OR WHATEVER.
IT'S MORE OF A WALKABLE COMMUNITY AT THAT POINT.
YES, THERE WILL BE TRAILS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT AND IN THAT, UH, OPEN SPACE AREA AS WELL AS SIDEWALKS ALONG, UM, ALL OF THE ROADS THAT COULD GET YOU THERE.
HOW MUCH LAND ARE YOU, UH, GONNA HAVE FOR COMMERCIAL THERE? THAT'S A ONE ACRE TRACK THERE.
UM, I WILL SAY WITH, UH, SOME OF THE REALIGNMENT OF, UH, 1660 THERE, UH, WITH THE NEW HU ARTERIAL, UH, THAT SITE IS NOT AS, UH, 1660 THERE IS IN THAT AREA IS NOT AS PROMINENT OF A, OF A RETAIL SPOT BASED ON THE REALIGNMENTS.
AND THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FLOODPLAIN, UM, ON THAT FRONTAGE.
AND THE FLOODPLAIN THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, IS THAT THE REVISED, UPDATED VERSION OF THE FLOODPLAIN THAT WE JUST SAW? YES, RECENTLY.
AND I GUESS THE LAST PART, UH, DID, IS THAT OPEN SPACE, THE PASSIVE PARK AREA DOWN THERE, IS THAT UH, HOA PARK? YES, SIR.
JUST THEN THAT WOULD NOT NEED PARK BOARD APPROVAL.
THERE'S, THERE'S A GOOD PERCENTAGE OF IT THERE THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN AS WELL, SO, YES.
UM, A QUESTION FOR INTERNAL, I MEAN, I LIKE HOW THIS IS SET UP.
WILL THE ACTUAL, I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA HAVE ALLEY LOADED GARAGES FOR AT LEAST SOME PORTION OF THIS, OR MAYBE MAJORITY OF THIS.
WILL THE ACTUAL MAIN ROADWAYS BE WIDE ENOUGH FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING ON THE ROADWAYS AS WELL? YES, SIR.
AND THERE'S ACTUALLY AN ADDITIONAL PARKING, UH, VISITOR PARKING REQUIREMENT OVER AND ABOVE THE TRADITIONAL TWO PER TWO PER BED.
UM, SO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM THE BUILDING IS 10 FOOT, BUT I MEAN, THE BUILDING GOES UP TO 10 FEET.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE CAN DO WITH ANY OTHER HOUSE RIGHT NOW TOO.
WHAT TYPE OF STREET TREES ARE YOU PLANNING ON PLANTING? THERE IS A MIX OF STREET TREES THAT IS, AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE WORKED ON WITH STAFF, IS TO IDENTIFY THOSE TREES.
WE'VE GOT MONTEREY OAKS, BALD CYPRUS, RED OAKS, UM, AND RED MAPLE.
[00:20:05]
OKAY.I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE SOMETHING LIKE CRATE MYRTLES BECAUSE THEY WON'T DAMAGE THE STREET AND THE SIDEWALKS, THE ROOT SYSTEM AS WELL.
UM, BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT SAY
GO BACK TO THE, THE STREETS, THE 22 FOOT, 22 FEET TRAVEL LANE, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE INLAID KIND OF EIGHT FOOT PARKED STREET PARK.
I, I HAD ACTUALLY, THIS IS FOR CITY, UM, BUT THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT, UM, I ASSUME THE WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPA IT DOESN'T, WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EXTRA FOR THE WASTEWATER WATER ALREADY THERE.
THAT WOULD ALL BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THEIR SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
AND THE ANNEXATION, THIS WILL BE ANNEXED PRIOR TO, UM, THE READING AT COUNCIL.
UM, SO THERE COULD BE OTHER DOCUMENTATION, BUT THAT'S ALL SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE'RE WORKING ON WITH THEM.
AND THEN THAT SER GETS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION AND THEIR MUNICIPAL SERVICE AGREEMENT.
SO TYPICALLY THAT'S GONNA COME IN MORE AT PLATTING.
WHERE, WHERE EXACTLY IS THIS OFF OF? 1660 SOUTH WATCH FIRST HOUSE IS, IF YOU LOOK BEHIND, YOU WATCH, IS IT PAST THE, UH, FIRE STATION ON 1660 SOUTH? MM-HMM.
IS IT WHERE THEY'RE CUTTING THE ROAD IN NOW? IT'S WHERE CROSSES THE CREEK, THAT PARK SPACE JUST BEFORE IT CROSSES THE CREEK RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE THAT PARK SPACE IS WHERE THE CREEK IS.
SO WHO'S TAKING CARE OF THE LANDSCAPING? A LIGHT THERE? HHHO.
IT'LL BE PROBABLY MORE WE CAN ASK.
YEAH, WELL THAT'S WHAT THE TIA YEAH.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM 5.12.
OKAY, SO THIS IS CONSIDERED A NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER, RIGHT? I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER BACK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHAT THAT WAS DICTATING REGARDING COMMERCIAL, LOCAL COMMERCIAL FOR IT.
I DON'T THINK IT SPECIFIED AN AMOUNT THAT WAS REQUIRED, DID IT? ACREAGE WISE PER FULL, SO NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER IS TYPICALLY GOING TO BE MORE 50 50 BECAUSE THIS IS MID-BLOCK, IT DID NOT MAKE SENSE TO REQUIRE THE 50 50 IN ADDITION TO THAT, THIS WAS IN PRIOR TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP BEING APPROVED FULLY.
SO ONE THING THAT WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT HEAVILY ON IS TO GET THE ATTAINABLE HOUSING AND SOME COMMERCIAL THAT WOULD BE WALKABLE, WHERE IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE ALONG 1660.
BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ON THE HARD CORNER FOR WHERE, UM, THE HU ARTERIAL AND THE SOUTHEAST OR EAST WILCO HIGHWAY IS GOING TO, UM, HAVE A CROSSING, IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO THEN HAVE THEM ADD SOMETHING MIDBLOCK.
THAT'S ALSO NOT A GREAT PRACTICE.
UM, SO WE DID GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF A PASS BECAUSE THIS PROJECT YEAH.
AND THE IDEA OF IT PREDATED WHAT WE HAD COME IN AND CHANGED ON THEM.
NOW I HEAR THAT EXCEPT IT IS STILL AT A MAJOR INTERSECTION OF THE POTENTIAL EXTENSION OF CR 1 32, WHICH MIGHT BE THE FUTURE 1660 COMING ON THE EAST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO IF YOU CAN SEE BEHIND YOU, THE INTERSECTION IS ACTUALLY OFFSET FROM THIS PROJECT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON IS THEY DON'T HAVE ANY, I MEAN IT IS BY A LITTLE BIT, BUT YEAH, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY DEVELOPABLE AREA AND A LOT OF THAT INTERSECTION IS STILL IN THE FLOODPLAIN.
SO THAT AREA THAT YOU'D BE ABLE TO DEVELOP WOULD BE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT INTERSECTION MOST LIKELY.
SO YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DEVELOP ANY COMMERCIAL ANYWHERE ALONG.
I KNOW, UH, I KNOW IT WOULD TECHNICALLY BE MID-BLOCK, BUT THERE WOULD BE NO DEVELOPABLE COMMERCIAL ALONG THAT WHOLE EAST SIDE.
WE CAN REALLY ONLY FIT ABOUT ONE ACRE IN THERE OF COMMERCIAL.
THERE COULD BE, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE
[00:25:01]
REQUIRED, SINCE THEY WERE ALREADY IN AGAIN, WE SAID LET'S GO WITH THE ORIGINAL PLANS, UM, RATHER THAN HAVE THEM REDESIGN EVERYTHING AND THEN NOT KNOWING EXACTLY WHERE THAT RIGHT OF WAY WAS GOING TO GO FOR THE COUNTY, UM, IT WAS JUST GONNA MESS UP THE WHOLE FLOW OF THE WALKABILITY OF THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.SO THIS MEETS MORE SO THAN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER.
THIS REALLY WORKS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF THE, UM, DESIGNATION OF THAT COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE HAD DONE.
SO THE VILLAGE ON VILLAGE CONCEPT RATHER THAN A FULL NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER.
NOW I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT ITEM FIVE ONE AS PRESENTED.
ANYBODY SECOND? I'LL SECOND I I'LL SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 5.1 AS PRESENTED, UH, WITH, UH, BY COMMISSIONER STEWART AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORRIS.
ITEM 5.2, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPOSED PENSKE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
35.8 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OF LAND FROM MULTIFAMILY AND AN ORIGINAL ZONING TO PUD AT THE TIME OF ANNEXATION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INNOVATION BOULEVARD.
JUST WAITING FOR THIS TO COME BACK UP.
UM, IN THE MEANTIME, UM, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THIS PROJECT, UM, THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN LIEU OF ANNEXATION THAT WAS DONE IN 2012 FOR THE MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY.
A SMALL PORTION OF IT ACTUALLY DID GET ANNEXED BACK IN 2021 AND DONE MULTIFAMILY AT THE NORTH END.
UM, BUT THAT PROJECT DID NOT MOVE FORWARD.
SO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR HU SOAR 2040 DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL THAT DOES ALLOW FOR THIS MUCH HIGHER DENSITY USE THAT YOU'RE SEEING PROPOSED HERE.
UM, AND WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AND REALLY THE GREAT THING ABOUT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS THIS SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO WHAT REALLY WHAT THE UDC SAYS.
THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING ASKED FOR ARE TO LIMIT SOME OF THE USES JUST TO BE SECONDARY OR ANCILLARY TO THAT MAIN USE OF, UM, TWO SEPARATE, UM, TWO SEPARATE DEALERSHIPS WITH THE SUPPORTING USES.
AND THEN ALSO REALLY DEFINE IF THEY WANTED TO BE MORE INTENSE AND ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO DO SOME COLLISION CARE THERE, WHICH AGAIN, WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR THAT IT WOULD BE ALSO THEN SECONDARY TO THOSE TWO USES THAT IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, ANY CARS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE WORKED ON WOULD THEN BE FURTHER SCREENED.
UM, BUT THIS REALLY FITS IN, IN THIS CORRIDOR.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE USES THAT WHEN YOU GET TO TALK TO SOMEBODY AND SAY, I THINK WE WANNA DO THIS, YOU'RE LIKE, YES, HOW DO WE MAKE THIS ACTUALLY HAPPEN? SO, UH, WITH THAT I CAN GO THROUGH SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING, UM, ASKED FOR.
UM, REALLY HERE'S JUST A EXAMPLE OF THE SITE PLANS.
YOU'LL SEE THE DRAINAGE, UH, AND THEN THE POTENTIAL FOR SCHNEIDER TO GO THROUGH.
AND THIS IS NOT THAT RIGHT AWAY, ALIGNMENT COULD MOVE SLIGHTLY.
UM, SO JUST KEEP THAT AS A LITTLE BIT MORE CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE.
BUT CERTAINLY A LOT OF THE REQUESTS THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR IN HERE ARE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD'VE ALREADY DONE.
I DID FIND OUT, UM, WE, I DID SOME DIGGING AND THE ZONING, UH, MAP IS CORRECT THAT U CHECK IS STILL ZONE SINGLE FAMILY.
SO I DEFINITELY WANT TO DIG INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT CERTAINLY WE DON'T WANT TO PENALIZE A COMMERCIAL, UM, BUSINESS FRONT THAT'S COMING IN FROM HAVING TO BUFFER FROM SOMETHING THAT DOES IS NOT DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT HOW WE CAN OVERCOME THAT IN THE FUTURE.
UM, BUT THAT IS ONE OF THE REQUESTS OF JUST COULD WE NOT HAVE TO BUFFER LIKE WE'RE BUFFERING AGAINST SINGLE FAMILY THAT'S FULLY UNDERSTOOD.
THAT IS ONE OF THOSE HOLDOVER ITEMS. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE THAT IN THE CODE WHEN WE USED TO ALWAYS ANNEX THINGS AND THEN APPLY THE ORIGINAL ZONING, WE WOULD APPLY SINGLE FAMILY ONE ZONING.
SO WE ALSO HAD A RECENT ZONING APPLICATION OVER THERE THAT IT WAS STILL, IT'S AN ACTIVE INDUSTRIAL USE AND IT HAS BEEN SINCE IT WAS ANNEX AND STILL ZONE SINGLE FAMILY.
SO THERE ARE A LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT IN OUR ZONING MAP THAT, UH, WE ARE ASKING TO, UM, MOVE AWAY FROM JUST FOR THIS PUD.
BUT AGAIN, ANY OF THE REQUESTS THAT WERE, UM, MADE WITH THIS PUD STAFF WAS ON BOARD WITH AND WE WORKED EXTENSIVELY WITH THE APPLICANT.
[00:30:01]
AT, YOU KNOW, USES FULLY OCCURRING INSIDE THE STRUCTURE, UM, TO GRANT AND ALL OF THEM ARE THE MINIMUM DEVIATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED.SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OUTSIDE OF, UM, SORRY, LISTED WITHIN THE UDC RIGHT NOW.
IT'S NOT GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT ANY OF THE LAND WITH ANY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL, CULTURAL, RECREATIONAL OR AESTHETIC VALUES, ALTHOUGH IT IS A PRETTY PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE WILL BE SOME PARKLAND FEES THAT WILL BE PAID.
IT IS PRESERVING SOME LAND FOR THE OPEN SPACE.
OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE DOING THEIR OWN DETENTION ON THAT SOUTH END.
UM, IT WILL HAVE ADEQUATE STREETS, FIRE PROTECTION WATER.
THE REST, UH, WE DID NOTIFY 32 OWNERS.
UH, WE RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN FAVOR, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY REALLY GREAT.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS THAT, UH, WE CERTAINLY WERE EITHER NOT GETTING ON A PUSHBACK OR PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT ALONG A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND PRETTY MUCH SANDWICH BETWEEN INNOVATION BOULEVARD AND, UM, ONE 30.
UM, SO WITH THAT, STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED PUD MEETS THE INTENT OF THE PUD REVIEW CRITERIA AND WE RECOMMEND COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PUD TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THE CONDITION THAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND JOURNEY STUDY WILL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ARE MOVING TOWARDS TO TRY TO GET THOSE IN EARLIER SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A LOT OF THOSE THINGS DETERMINED AND IF THE TA NECESSARY, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UM, THIS IS A REALLY JUST STANDARD, IT'S NOTHING ABOUT THE PUD THAT WE HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH.
IT'S JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE WE COME BACK TO YOU THAT WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE OTHER ITEMS IRONED OUT FOR YOU.
WITH THAT, THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU WOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS DIRECTLY FOR THE APPLICANT.
OTHERWISE WE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AND DOES A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:33 PM IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:33 PM ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE? I HAVE A HANDFUL, SO IF THE APPLICANT COULD COME UP HERE, I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.
HI THERE, CAN I HAVE YOUR NAME? MY NAME IS PETER CSRO, UH, FROM GRAVES DOOR IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, AND I REPRESENT PENSKE.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THIS DOCUMENT.
AND ON, UM, 7.1, IT'S THE LIGHT POLE HEIGHT.
IT'S TALKING ABOUT OUTDOOR LIGHTING AND IT SAYS THAT AUTO DEALERSHIP USE, UM, AUTO DEALERSHIP USES ARE ENCOURAGED TO IMPLEMENT LIGHT REDUCTION MEASURES.
SO THAT WORD ENCOURAGED IS VERY INTENTIONAL, I THINK.
UM, CAN WE HAVE IT WHERE THAT IS IMPLEMENTED, WHERE THOSE LIGHT REDUCTION MEASURES ARE IMPLEMENTED IN THIS ESTABLISHMENT? I KNOW WE DO HAVE SPECIAL, UH, LIGHTS FOR THE FACILITIES THAT DIM AT NIGHT.
UH, I HAVE SOME PENSKE REPRESENTATIVES HERE THAT CAN TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THOSE TYPES OF LIGHTS IF YOU, IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
I THINK WE'RE PLANNING TO INCORPORATE THEM AT, AT THIS SITE? YES.
IS THAT Y'ALL DO ABSOLUTELY INSTALL THEM WHEN YOU DO THIS.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY WHEN THIS HAS BEEN BUILT OUT, UM, I'M HOPING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SALES VEHICLES OR ANY VEHICLES THAT ARE ON, UM, DISPLAY TO BE PURCHASED IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, I'M HOPING THAT ALL OF YOUR SALES VEHICLES, YOUR INVENTORY IS OUT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
WE, WE ARE AWARE THAT, UH, SCHNEIDER BOULEVARD IS GOING TO BE EXPANDED.
WE ARE WILLING TO DEDICATE PROPERTY FOR SCHNEIDER BOULEVARD.
UH, WE HOPE NOT TO PAY FOR BUILDING SCHNEIDER BOULEVARD, BUT, UH, OUR ACCESS IS GONNA COME ON INNOVATION AND, BUT WE ARE GONNA BE DEDICATING PROPERTY AND WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY VEHICLES IN THAT AREA.
FOR ANY ENTRANCE INTO YOUR FACILITY.
MY MY HOPE IS THAT THERE'S NOT ANY VEHICLES THAT ARE PART OF YOUR EXISTING INVENTORY THAT ARE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR ANY TRAFFIC OR ARE YOU REFERRING TO 18 WHEELERS? RIGHT.
I'M REFERRING TO 18 WHEELERS, BUT I'M ALSO REFERRING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS OR ANYBODY ELSE.
LIKE I JUST HAVING A SALES VEHICLE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN KEEP THEM OUT OFF THE, OKAY.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS THE, UM, THIS LOCATION, WILL THAT BE WHERE YOU STORE ALL OF YOUR INVENTORY, INCLUDING YOUR LIKE ADDITIONAL, LIKE YOUR 18 WHEELERS THAT COME IN AND BRING YOU YOUR INVENTORY? THEY'RE GONNA GO TO THIS LOCATION THAT IT'S, SO THEY NEED TO BE, THE 18 WHEELERS WILL BE A COM.
THEY'LL BE ALSO USING THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS MENTIONED, UM, IN THIS
[00:35:01]
DESIGN, RIGHT? THEY, I BELIEVE SO, YES.THEY DO COME ONTO THE PROPERTY.
HI, I AM JEFF ANDERSON WITH PENSKE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP.
I HEAD UP ALL OF OUR DEVELOPMENT AND, UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
BUT YES, ALL OF THE VEHICLES WILL BE STORED ON THAT SITE.
THEY WILL ALL BE DELIVERED TO THAT SITE WITH CAR CARRIERS.
BUT THE SITE IS GONNA BE DESIGNED SO THE CAR CARRIER COME OFF THE ROAD ONTO OUR SITE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SPECIAL AREA WHERE THEY'RE DROPPED OFF, FUELED, PREPPED, AND THEN THE CAR CARRIERS LEAVE.
SO THERE WILL BE NO, AND, AND THAT'S FOR DELIVERIES OF PARTS AND OTHER THINGS.
SO THERE WILL BE NO LARGE TRUCKS STAGING ON THE ROAD AND IMPEDING TRAFFIC, ANYTHING TRAFFIC, EVERYTHING WILL BE INSIDE THE PROPERTY.
AND THIS IS SALES AND SERVICE.
SALES AND SERVICE? THAT'S CORRECT.
UH, IF I CAN ADD ONTO THAT REAL QUICK.
SO THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY SATELLITE, UH, OVERFLOW LOTS ANYWHERE? NO.
THIS, THIS SITE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO HANDLE THE, ALL THE CAPACITY OF ALL THE CARS THAT WE NEED.
I, I'M, I'M THINKING SPECIFICALLY OF THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP ON I 35 OLD SETTLERS.
THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF THE CAR DEALERSHIPS HAVE OVERFLOW LOTS IT SEEMS LIKE.
AND THAT'S WHY, THAT'S PART OF THE REASON FOR COMING HERE AND HAVING SUCH A LARGE SITE THAT, SO THAT WE CAN CONTAIN IT ALL ON ONE SITE AND NOT HAVE THE NEED TO HAVE THINGS STAGED ALL OVER.
YEAH, IF YOU'RE NOT IMPEDING TRAFFIC, THEN GOOD FOR Y'ALL.
AND JUST, JUST REFERRING BACK TO YOUR EARLIER QUESTION ABOUT THE LIGHTS.
SO FOR US, WE WANT TO DIM THE LIGHTS AT NIGHT JUST FROM A ENERGY AND COST SAVINGS.
SO WE'RE SET UP, WHAT WE DO WITH ALL OF OUR FACILITIES THAT WE BUILD GROUND UP IS ONE, IT'S ALL LED LIGHTING.
SO IT'S LESS, IT'S MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND THEN IT EVERY, IT HAS A BUILT IN, UH, CONTROL SYSTEM TO ALL OF OUR EXTERIOR LIGHTING SO THAT WE SET THE TIME AND IT'S USUALLY ABOUT 10 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT BECAUSE BY THAT TIME EVERYONE'S OFF THE SITE, IT WOULD DIMM TO 50% OF ITS LIGHTING CAPACITY AND BE THERE FOR THE WHOLE NIGHT LONG.
AND THEN IN THE MORNING IT STRIKES BACK UP.
BUT, SO THAT'S GOOD FOR YOU GUYS.
THE LAST QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS REGARDING THE SIGNAGE FOR, FOR THIS LOCATION.
SO COULD YOU SPEAK CLOSER TO YOUR MICROPHONE PLEASE? SORRY.
THE THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS IN REGARDS TO SIGNAGE.
SO, AND I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANY REQUEST IN HERE TO HAVE ONE OF THOSE, I DON'T EVEN WANNA GUESS HOW MANY FEET TALL THE SIGNS ARE.
LIKE IF YOU GO DOWN MOTOR ROW IN AUSTIN.
SO MY, MY INTERPRETATION OF THIS IS Y'ALL ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH HU HUDDLE'S CURRENT REQUIREMENTS WITH SIGNAGE AND YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A FLAG IF I'M CORRECT.
ON THE HIGHWAY FRONTAGE OF I THINK 50 FEET.
THEN WE WOULD HAVE A SMALLER SIGN ON INNOVATION BOULEVARD, I THINK SENSE 15 FEET.
UM, AND WE WILL HAVE A LARGE FLAGPOLE.
I THINK IT WAS 80 FEET THAT WE REQUESTED.
SO I'M SORRY IF I DON'T HAVE THESE NUMBERS EXACTLY.
NO, THAT'S, YOU ARE DOING AMAZING.
AND I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SPEAK RIGHT NOW.
BUT YES, THERE ARE SOME, IT'S UNDER, IT'S JUST AFTER LIGHT OUTDOOR LIGHTING.
THERE'S SOME SECTION DIAGRAMS. OH, RIGHT BELOW IT.
PAGE, WELL THAT'S THE WORDING.
AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER EXHIBIT.
BUT WHEN STAFF REVIEWED THIS, THIS MAKES SENSE THERE.
WE KNOW THAT ONE 30 IS ELEVATED, SO THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ON THE ONE 30 FRONTAGE.
WE DO KNOW THAT, THAT HONESTLY, A LOT OF TIMES THOSE LARGER SIGNS, THEY REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT MORE REVIEW ON THE BUILDING PLAN SIDE 'CAUSE WE HAVE TO GET WIND LOAD CALCULATIONS.
BUT THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY THING THAT, BUT THAT'S A STANDARD INTERNAL.
UH, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ACCESS ONLY FROM INNOVATION.
'CAUSE IF YOU'RE FROM COMING, IF YOU'RE GOING NORTHBOUND ON ONE 30, IT'S JUST A MESS TO ZIGZAG OVER TO GET ONTO INNOVATION OR YOU, AND THERE'S NO, RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO EXIT TO LIME LOOP TO COME THAT WAY.
UM, BUT I DO SEE IN YOUR REPORT FROM STAFF IS THAT YOUR, UH, UH, IN ADDITION, THE NORTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD ALONG THE TRACK WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESS.
IS THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'LL BE ABOUT PHASED IN OR DONE FROM THE GO IF THE ROAD IS EXTENDED ACROSS TO THE, TO THE WEST.
THIS IS THE NORTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD.
SO THE NORTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD WE DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO.
IF IT'S EXTENDED, WE SPECIFICALLY DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO FROM DOT.
BUT YOUR STAFF'S, YOUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION SAYS IN ADDITION, THE NORTHBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD ALONG THE TRACK WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESS IN
[00:40:01]
THE CONVERSATION THAT THAT COULD BE DONE WITH THIS ITEM FOR TRAFFIC.WE HAVE TO GET TEXT OUT APPROVAL.
THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHERS.
WELL, I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR THIS EXTENSION OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD.
'CAUSE ALL THOSE BUSINESSES THERE THAT WE COULD HAVE POTENTIAL, IT'S JUST NOT FOR YOU GUYS.
UM, I'M JUST CONCERNED IN THE INTERIM, ALL THIS TRAFFIC, UH, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE A HUNDRED PERCENT'S GONNA BE COMING FROM ON INNOVATION.
THE ACCESS OF THAT IS A, IS A NIGHTMARE FROM THE NORTH OR THE SOUTH.
AND ONLY WAY YOU REALLY CAN GET TO IT IS FROM NORTHBOUND.
AND YOU GO THROUGH A LIGHT UNDERPASS, YOU GO A THOUSAND FEET, MAKE A RIGHT TURN TO A THOUSAND FEET.
THE, THE NORTHBOUND IS, IS NOT TRAFFIC CONTROLLED.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO THERE.
AND ALL THE TRAFFIC, INCLUDING 18 WHEELERS ARE GOING THROUGH THAT PATH.
WHAT'S OUR PLANS FOR THE, THAT ROADWAY FROM GETTING ACCESS FROM SH ONE 30 NORTHBOUND TO GO THROUGH THE LIGHT UNDER 79 TO TAKE A RIGHT ON THAT LITTLE BITTY STUB THAT PEOPLE DUMP ALL THEIR TIRES ON.
AND THEN TO GO NORTHBOUND ON INNOVATION, THEN TO TAKE A LEFT ACROSS TRAFFIC AGAIN TO GET INTO PENSKE'S.
SO FOR THIS, I WOULD SAY THAT SITE IS STILL, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT AN APPROVED SITE.
SO THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE TO GET INTO ONCE WE GET INTO, UM, THE PLATTING TIAS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
UM, BUT CERTAINLY WITH WHERE WE ARE ON THE CIP AND THEN ALSO, UM, THE MOBILITY MASTER PLAN THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE JUST KIND OF IN FLUX RIGHT NOW.
SAY NO TO DEVELOPMENT WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE, FIGURE OUT THE REST OF IT.
IT'S MORE OF JUST WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A PICKLE THAT WE RIGHT.
IT, IT'S PROBABLY OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THIS DECISION MAKING TODAY.
IT'S PICK SOMETHING WE'VE GOTTA, BUT I WANT BRING IT UP TO EVERYBODY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO US, THE CITY STAFF AND THEN WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPERS.
BUT I REALLY, I REALLY ENJOY THIS PROJECT.
I LIKE, I LIKE WHAT, I MEAN, CURRENTLY THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION OTHER THAN INNOVATION BOULEVARD RIGHT.
SO WE DON'T REALLY HAVE RIGHT.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT IF, UH, THE ROAD TO THE, TO THE NORTH WAS EXPANDED, UM, SORRY, I DON'T KNOW THE ROAD NAME, BUT, UH, POTENTIALLY THERE COULD BE ACCESS OFF OF THAT ROAD TOO.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMEWHAT OFF IN THE FUTURE.
THERE'S ALSO, I WILL, I WILL SAY THAT IF, WHEN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT A TRAFFIC STUDY, OUR USE ACTUALLY DOES NOT CREATE THAT MUCH TRAFFIC FOR THE SIZE OF THE SITE.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE TYPICALLY HAVE 50 CUSTOMERS A DAY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THE SALES SIDE AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A HUNDRED ON THE SERVICE SIDE.
CAR CARRIERS COME ONCE A WEEK, MAYBE PARTS COME NIGHT.
WELL, I'VE BEEN TO THE ROUND ROCK SERVICE AREA AND THERE'S 75 AN HOUR GOING IN NOW THAT'S SERVICE.
I'VE, I'VE BEEN THERE
SO, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT LIKE A, A HOUSING UNIT WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING AND GOING ALL DAY LONG.
IT, IT, YOU KNOW, THE TRIPS ARE MUCH LESS THAT THAT UTILITY NEEDS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE, WE DON'T USE A WHOLE LOT OF WATER.
WE DON'T, UH, USE A WHOLE LOT OF, UH, WASTEWATER.
SO SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE, I THINK GOOD, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW BIG THE SITE IS, WHAT WE'LL BE USING THERE.
SO HOPEFULLY THAT'S A POSITIVE.
I THINK MY POINT IS, IS TO BRING IT UP FOR STAFF AND FOR THIS COMMISSION AND TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS AS WE COME UP WITH OUR IDEAS AND FURTHER ANALYSIS.
AND WE'RE ALSO EXCITED ABOUT THIS LOCATION NEXT TO THE, UH, TECHNICAL SCHOOL AND ENTERING INTO PARTNERSHIPS WITH THEM AND HOSTING JOB FAIRS AND, AND, UH, NICE.
VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT POSSIBILITY.
I MEAN, ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOR US, OUR MOST DIFFICULT HIRE IS TECHNICIANS TO WORK IN OUR, IN OUR SHOPS.
IT'S JUST THAT IT'S, IT'S IN A DIFFICULT POSITION TO FILL.
SO WITH THE TECHNICAL COLLEGE TO DEVELOP MORE, UH, EMPLOYEES AND MORE TALENT THERE, WE WOULD BE EXCITED TO DO.
AND, AND I'M, I'M ALSO IN AGREEMENT ABOUT THAT BUFFER FOR SNYDER.
I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S A WASH.
AND WE WILL, I GUESS CINDY WORK ON THAT.
UM, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON, UH, PAGE ONE.
WELL, REAL QUICK, BUT GOING BACK TO THE SCHOOL THING, WOULD Y'ALL ALSO PARTNER WITH THE HIGH SCHOOL TEAMS THAT, THAT HAVE A HUNDRED PERCENT ABSOLUTELY.
BECAUSE I KNOW THEY'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR PARTNERSHIPS ON THOSE.
PENSKE DOES A LOT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN ALL OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT THEY'RE IN WITH THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, WITH THE, THE ISDS AND SO ABSOLUTELY.
AS, AS FAR AS THE SCHOOLING GOES WITH THAT, JUST, I KNOW THIS ISN'T PERTAINING NECESSARILY TO PNZ, BUT DOES TOYOTA HAVE KIND OF A MASTER
[00:45:01]
MECHANIC PROGRAM? I KNOW OTHER AUTO MANUFACTURERS DO HAVE THAT KIND OF PROGRAM.SO YES, THERE ARE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF CERTIFICATION, BUT NOT JUST TOYOTA PENSKE.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ROUGHLY 200 STORES IN THE US MM-HMM.
AND WE INTERNALLY HAVE WHAT WE CALL AN ELITE TECH PROGRAM.
AND SO WE HAVE INTERNAL COMPETITION JUST COMPANY WIDE ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO DEVELOP WHO'S, WHO'S ULTIMATELY THE BEST TECHNICIAN WE HAVE IN OUR WHOLE COMPANY.
AND IT, AND IT COMES DOWN TO A GROUP OF MAYBE 20, 20 GUYS THAT GET TOGETHER, OR 20 TECHNICIANS THAT GET TOGETHER ONCE A YEAR.
AND THEN THEY HAVE A ONSITE COMPETITION.
AND IT'S, A LOT OF TIMES IT'S AT ONE OF OUR RACE SHOP, AT OUR RACE SHOPPING NORTH CAROLINA AS PART OF OUR PENSKE RACING ORGANIZATION.
AND THEN THE WINNER GETS TO GO TO THE INDIANAPOLIS 500 AND BE IN THE SUITE.
SO IT IS A BIG OH, THAT'S COOL.
UH, PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE WITHIN OUR COMPANY.
I, I GUESS WHAT I, I, I'VE KNOWN PEOPLE WHO HAVE GONE THROUGH, UH, DIFFERENT PROGRAMS SPONSORED BY AUTO MANUFACTURERS AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY BEEN ABLE TO EARN COLLEGE CREDIT WHILE GETTING PAID AND WORKING.
MARK MANAGES OUR BUSINESS FOR TOYOTA.
I'M THE GENERAL MANAGER OF BROWN ROCK TOYOTA.
SO NEXT TIME YOU COME TO SERVICE, YOU COME SEE ME.
WE HAVE, UH, AN ACTIVE PARTNERSHIP WITH, UM, WITH THE COLLEGE IN, UM, IN ROUND ROCK.
UH, OUR T 10 PROGRAM, WHICH IS WHAT IT'S CALLED, IT'S SPONSORED BY TOYOTA.
THE T 10 SHOP IS ACTUALLY THERE.
WE RECRUIT OUT OF THE AREA HIGH SCHOOLS.
SO WE HAVE ACTUALLY FIVE T 10, UH, STUDENTS RIGHT NOW.
WE BUY THEIR TOOLS, THEY COME AND WORK WITH US WHEN THEY'RE OFF.
UM, WE GO TO THEIR CLASSES, WE TEACH, THEY COME TO OUR, OUR DEALERSHIP AND, AND, UH, AND WORK.
WE GIVE THEM, UM, ASSURED JOBS WHEN THEY COME OUT.
UM, AND WE RECRUIT OUTTA THE HIGH SCHOOLS.
I WOULD LIKE TO, TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, UM, WE'RE VERY, WE'RE VERY INTERESTED IN WORKING WITH, UH, WITH, UM, IT'S A EAST WILLIAMSON COUNTY HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER THAT YOU HAVE HERE.
WE'VE BEEN RESEARCHING THEM VERY DEEPLY AND WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN REACHING OUT TO THEM AND OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THEM IS GONNA BE VERY IMPORTANT QUITE HONESTLY.
UM, THE, UM, JAMIE EMBER, WHICH IS A PERSON THAT HELPED ME OPEN UP THE HONDA LEANDER LOCATION, UM, SHE'S VERY GOOD AT GRASSROOTS CAMPAIGNS.
UH, WE SET UP A LOT OF, OF GRASSROOTS, UM, HANDLING THE, THE LOCAL LITTLE LEAGUES, THE, UH, BEING IN THE PARADES, YOU KNOW, BEING IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND THAT'S A BIG PART FOR US, IS TO BE A PARTNER IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO WE HAVE A LOT OF PLANS, UM, TO MOVE MY LOCATION OVER HERE, UM, BRING ALL, ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES OVER HERE, BUT ALSO FROM YOUR LOCAL ESTABLISHMENTS, RECRUITING, HIRING, AND, AND SUPPLEMENTING OUR, OUR STAFF.
SO IT'S ABOUT 130 EMPLOYEES THAT'LL BE MOVING FROM ROUND ROCK TO HUDDLE.
I JUST HAVE A HALF A YEAR AND A HALF.
WE'LL BE UP TO ABOUT 2 20, 2 30.
UM, WE HAVE A LOT OF PLANS THAT, AND LIKE YOU SAID, WE'RE MOVING FROM, LIKE YOU SAID, WE'RE VERY SEGMENTED RIGHT NOW.
I THINK YOU WERE MENTIONING SEGMENTED.
WE DO HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, UH, SUPPLEMENTAL LOTS, BUT WE'RE MOVING OVER HERE TO, UH, TO ASSUAGE THAT.
JUST AND INCREASING OUR SERVICE CAPACITY SIGNIFICANTLY TO, I'M, I, I SAID I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS.
I LOVE YOU GUYS OVER AT ROUND ROCK.
I WASN'T TRYING TO BE DISPARAGING.
UM, ON, ON ONCE, PAGE 1 78, IT TALKS ABOUT MAX GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT.
SO IT SAYS 3.5 ON PAGE 1 78 VEHICLES INTENDED FOR SALE OR RENT SHALL NOT BE LIMITED TO A GROSS WEIGHT OF LESS THAN 7,500 POUNDS.
SO THERE'S A COUPLE REASONS FOR THAT.
UM, SO TRUCKS ARE GETTING MUCH HEAVIER, BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ELEC, UH, ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND THE BATTERIES, THEY EVEN GET HEAVIER.
SO WHAT WE DIDN'T WANNA DO IS LIMIT IT TO A TYPICAL CAR OF 3,500 POUNDS OR 4,000 POUNDS, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN A NEW TOYOTA TUNDRA PICKUP ELECTRIC COMES OUT AND THIS THING WEIGHS 7,000 POUNDS.
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE CAN'T SELL IT HERE.
SO THAT, THAT'S REALLY THE REASONING.
IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE BIG, HUGE TRUCKS.
THAT WAS WHAT I WAS, MY MIND WAS GOING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A BIG MOBILE HOME, NO FACTORY RESET.
SO YOU SAID, SO IT, IT'LL ALL STILL BE TOYOTA COER TOYOTA VEHICLES, BUT SOME OF THEM COULD BE ELECTRIC.
SO YOU'RE MENTIONING ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AND I COULD BE WRONG, CURO DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF LOCATIONS WHERE YOU CAN CHARGE YOUR ELECTRIC VEHICLE IF YOU'RE NOT CHARGING IT IN YOUR HOME.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL WOULD CONSIDER IS HAVING LIKE A BAY OF CHARGING STATIONS AT YOUR LOCATION? GOOD QUESTION.
WE WILL HAVE SOME CHARGING CAPACITY.
BUT THE, THE CHALLENGE FOR US IS THAT DURING THE DAY, PEOPLE COULD USE IT, BUT AT NIGHT WE HAVE TO LOCK OFF OUR PROPERTY SO PEOPLE CAN'T STEAL CARS OFF OF THE PROPERTY.
SO DURING BUSINESS HOURS THERE WOULD BE SOME CHARGING AVAILABLE, BUT OFF HOURS WE WOULD NOT HAVE THAT.
[00:50:01]
THANK YOU.UM, I DO HAVE A P AND Z QUESTION NOW.
UM, THERE'S A LITTLE TINY SLICE OF LOOKS LIKE 0.641 ACRES AT THE EXTREME NORTH END.
WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THAT
WE, WE DON'T HAVE PLANS TO DEVELOP IT.
IT'S, IT'S NOT CONTIGUOUS TO OUR PROPERTY.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY VALUABLE TO US AT THAT POINT.
IT'S, IT'S JUST THIS LITTLE ORPHAN PIE SLICE OVER THERE ROAD WHEN THEY PUT IN THE POINT SLOT SERVICE CHARGING STATION, JUST, JUST BECAUSE STATION SHAPE THE PROPERTY AND THE WAY THE ROAD IS SHAPED, YOU JUST END UP WITH THAT AWKWARD PIECE.
BUT MY ASSUMPTION IS IT JUST WOULD BE A PIECE THAT DOESN'T GET DEVELOPED.
WELL, YEAH, MAYBE YOU COULD PUT SOME CHARGING STATIONS ON THAT.
ON 1 79 IT TALKS ABOUT GATEWAY OVERLAY DESIGNATION.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S A HOLDOVER FROM THE UDC THAT WAS PARTLY IMPLEMENTED, BUT NOT ALL THE WAY.
SO, UM, THIS IS JUST, THAT'S 3.8.
UH, IT'S JUST A HOLDOVER IN THE UDC.
UM, WHAT DOES IT MEAN, GATEWAY OVERLAY? IT WAS THOUGHT OF TO DO AN ENTIRE DISTRICT ENTERING INTO THE CITY.
BUT THE ISSUE WITH IT IS THAT A LOT OF TIMES IT WAS THEN PROHIBITING THESE LARGER, IT WAS DONE BACK IN 20 11, 20 12 TIMEFRAME.
BUT A LOT OF THAT BECAUSE OF STATE LAW AND THEN ALSO WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGING, IT'S NOT REALLY APPLICABLE TO THIS AREA.
I THINK YOU'LL SEE THAT EVEN WITH SOME OF THE OLDER UDC THINGS.
LIKE THE DEFINITION FOR THE CAR WEIGHTS.
THAT'S, THAT WAS GREAT FOR 2010 MM-HMM.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE SOME OF THOSE HOLDOVERS THAT WE ARE JUST CLEARING UP IN THIS PD BECAUSE IT'S THIS UDC THAT WE HAVE TO REFERENCE.
IT'S A LEGACY STUFF THAT'S NOT OKAY.
AND, UM, THIS GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY SOME OF THE USES THAT WE WANTED TO DO WERE PROHIBITED MM-HMM.
SO WE'RE, THAT'S WHY WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAR.
NO, I LIKE WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING.
THE LAST THING, AND THIS MAYBE OUTSIDE BEFORE YOU GET THE DEVELOPMENT, I CAN'T FIND WHERE IT WAS, BUT IT SAYS PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO.
SO THE TOYOTA BUILDING, THE, THE MAIN BUILDING IS PHASE ONE.
AND WE HAVE, UH, I THINK IT'S 10 ACRES THAT'S STILL RESERVED TO THE SOUTH.
THAT WILL NOT ACTUALLY BE DEVELOPED AT THIS TIME.
IT'LL, IT'LL REMAIN DEVELOPED.
AND THERE'S ANOTHER BUILDING DOWN THERE THAT'S FOR A SECONDARY FRANCHISE.
UH, COULD BE A COLLISION CENTER, IT COULD BE MULTIPLE, BUT IT WOULD BE AUTOMOTIVE RELATED.
IT WOULD BE AN ACCESSORY TO WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING.
SO, UM, THAT, BUT WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT FRANCHISE YET.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA BE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, COUNSEL
WELL I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 5.2.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE 5.2 AS PRESENTED WITH THE STAFF CONDITION IN THE, UH, NOTED IN THE STAFF REVIEW.
AND WHO SECONDED? MORRIS, THAT WAS YOU.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR HUDSON TO APPROVE WITH STAFF CONDITIONS NOTED IN STAFF REVIEW AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MORRIS.
Y'ALL GET IT BUILT IN A MONTH.
DRIVE ALL THE WAY DOWN ALSO IN BIG TIME.
NOW WE GOT TOYOTA DEALERSHIP Y'ALL.
ITEM 5.3, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPOSED STROMBERG PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
372.121 ACRES MORE OR LESS OF LAND FROM AGRICULTURAL SINGLE FAMILY TO RURAL FROM AGRICULTURAL SINGLE FAMILY RURAL TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 1 32.
GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS.
YOU MAY RECALL, I BELIEVE A LOT OF YOU WERE ACTUALLY ON
[00:55:01]
THE COMMISSION WHEN WE DID THIS FEATURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT A FEW YEARS AGO.MM-HMM
SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU NOW IS THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT SAME PROPERTY.
UM, IT IS JUST SOUTH OF THE MEGA SITE AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS PUD IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU MAY BE USED TO SEEING BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO SIMILAR BUT A LITTLE DISSIMILAR UM, DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED IN THAT.
SO THEY'LL HAVE AN OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO.
SO, UM, JUST FOR THE HIGHLIGHTS, UH, BOTH OF THE SCENARIOS MEET THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, IN ONE INSTANCE WE CAN JUST GO STRICTLY WITH THEIR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT THAT THEY DID BECAUSE WE WOULD STILL UM, ALLOW FOR THAT.
THE OTHER MORE CLOSELY MEETS THE HU SOAR PLAN ONLY BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, LENDS TO THE 50 50 BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, BUT THEN ALSO HAS THIS OTHER COMPONENT TO ALLOW FOR THIS BUSINESS PARK AREA DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO WHAT WILL LIKELY BE KNOWN AS THE SAMSUNG HIGHWAY, WHICH IS THAT EAST WEST UM, COUNTY ROAD 1 32 CORRIDOR, UH, LEADING RIGHT OVER INTO SAMSUNG.
BUT ALSO BECAUSE THE FLUCTUATING MARKET.
SO SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN THIS WAS THOUGHT OF, IT MADE SENSE TO PLAN FOR MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
UM, NOW IT PROBABLY MAKES A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY NEED TO ALLOW FOR SOME OF THAT INDUSTRIAL UM, TO COME IN THERE.
YOU CAN SEE ON THEIR DISALLOWED USES, THEY'RE NOT LOOKING TO ADD THINGS IN THAT WOULD NOT ALSO THEN LEND ITSELF TO STILL HAVING THE RESIDENTIAL.
AND THEN THE WAY THAT THEY'VE UM, CREATED THESE MASTER PLANS.
UM, OH NO IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.
SORRY, I THOUGHT IT WAS IN HERE.
UM, IT ACTUALLY HAS THE HIGHER INTENSITY SINGLE FAMILY ADJACENT TO THE CARL STERN RIGHT OF WAY.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE THAT COMPONENT IN SCENARIO TWO, BUT THEN YOU WOULD STILL HAVE CARL STERN BOULEVARD, YOU WOULD HAVE THE HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THEN IT GOES INTO THE LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, SO BOTH OF THOSE DO COMPLY WITH THAT.
SO I CAN CERTAINLY ANSWER QUESTIONS.
WE CAN GO THROUGH LINE BY LINE IF YOU WANT TO.
BUT AGAIN, BOTH OF THESE SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM TO EITHER THAT FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT OR WHAT WE HAD DISCUSSED WITH HU SOAR.
UM, THEY ARE PROPOSING TO HAVE UM, MORE OF THE NATIVE ADAPTIVE PLANTINGS THROUGHOUT.
THEY ARE LOOKING AT HAVING A LITTLE BIT WIDER SIDEWALKS THAT ARE UM, CLOSER TO THE COMMERCIAL AREAS AND IF THERE ENDS UP BEING A SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SO IF SCENARIO ONE IS THE FINAL CHOSEN, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE THOSE LARGER SIDEWALKS EVEN CLOSER TO A POTENTIAL SCHOOL SITE IF THAT WERE TO WORK OUT.
UM, THERE ARE ALSO SIGNALS, PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T SEEN PROPOSED IN ANY OF THE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENTS.
BUT ALSO A REALLY NICE LITTLE UM MM-HMM
AND WITH THAT, THE LAST THING THAT I KNOW STAFF AND COMMISSION HAS TALKED ABOUT BEFORE IS THERE'S A MINIMUM DRIVEWAY LENGTH AND THAT IS FOR EITHER THE FRONT OR THE REAR.
AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT AT LENGTH BECAUSE IN OTHER ALLEY LOADED INSTANCES YOU HAVE THE SMALLEST DRIVEWAY, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY FUNCTION ALL THE TIME.
SO THEY HAVE ACTUALLY ADDED THAT IN AS WELL.
SO THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THE ALLEY WITH THIS PUD, BUT IF THEY HAVE BUILDERS WHO WANT TO DO ALLEYS, THEY WOULD HAVE THAT EXTRA UM, SETBACK THERE AS WELL.
SO THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME GIVES IN THE PUD BETWEEN EITHER SCENARIO ONE OR SCENARIO TWO.
BUT AGAIN, STAFF IS ON BOARD WITH EITHER OF THOSE SCENARIOS AND THIS PUD IS NOT REQUESTING THAT YOU PICK ONE, IT'S JUST SAYING THAT IF THEY WOULD, UM, THEY CAN GO FORWARD TO THE MARKET WITH THESE OPTIONS AND THEN THEY WILL BE CHOOSING WHICH SCENARIO TO GO FORWARD WITH ONCE THEY REALLY KNOW HOW THIS IS BEST GONNA BE MARKETED.
AND A LOT OF THIS REALLY DOES AGAIN JUST GO BACK TO THE FLUCTUATIONS IN THE MARKET AND WE STILL DO WANNA SEE THE ATTAINABLE HOUSING COME IN.
YOU'LL SEE WITH THE PROPOSAL, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE GETTING HERE.
SO IT WOULD BE IN THAT WALKABLE, IT'S JUST ESSENTIALLY MEADOWBROOK BUT MUCH LARGER BECAUSE IT HAS A LOT MORE SPACE.
UM, AND THEN THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT NON-RESIDENTIAL USE UP ALONG WHAT WE KNOW IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR CORRIDOR NOW.
SO WITH THAT PUBLIC HEARING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:00 PM IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? PUBLIC HEARING? THEY DON'T NEED TO SIGN UP.
WHAT PUBLIC HEARING? OH, GOOD EVENING.
THE ONE CONCERN I HAVE, UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE.
IT'S UH, LARRY HAYGOOD AND WE'RE ON COUNTY ROAD 1 34.
[01:00:02]
AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPMENT WILL GO RIGHT ON OUR BACK PROPERTY LINE AND FROM OUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY LINE INTO OURS GOING PAST OUR HOUSE AND THROUGH A STOCK TANK, THERE'S A BIG WATER DRAINAGE AREA.AND WHEN WE GET A GOOD THUNDERSTORM OUT OF THOSE FIELDS WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT, A LARGE VOLUME OF WATER COMES OUT OF THERE AND ACROSS OUR LAND PRETTY CLOSE TO THE HOUSE.
AND SO THAT'S ONE CONCERN I HAD, HOW THAT WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF.
AND IT WOULD ALSO AFFECT A LOT OF WILDLIFE THAT IS IN A KIND OF A STOCK POND AREA THERE.
BUT YEAH, MY MAJOR CONCERN THERE IS DRAINAGE.
DID YOU SAY 4 0 4 OR 1 0 4? UH, 1 34.
AND COMMISSIONERS, UH, HIS LETTER SHOULD BE PART OF THE PACKET.
I DID SEND ONE IN, I EMAILED HIM.
IT'LL BE PART OF THE PACKET ALWAYS.
ARE WE ABLE ASK QUESTIONS? DO WE NEED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? DID YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS? YEAH.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AT 9 0 2.
YEAH, I DON'T SEE THAT LETTER.
OH, YOU KNOW, IT CAME IN ON SUNDAY.
IT'S IN THE PACKET NOW WHEN IT CAME IN TO COUNSEL AND I WAS THINKING IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN OUR PAPER PACKET.
ANGEL MAY HAVE PUT IT IN THE PAPER VERSIONS.
I'M SEEING ONE LETTER, BUT IT'S, UH, IN FAVOR.
FROM A BRETT ROGERS, BY THE WAY, THAT ONE CAME IN SUNDAY NIGHT.
WE, WE ARE IN RECEIPT OF THAT ONE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS PRINTED OUT FOR EACH OF YOUR PACKETS AT YOUR YEP.
ALRIGHT, COMM, ANY QUESTIONS? I GOT A FEW.
OKAY, LET'S, I'LL LET Y'ALL GO FIRST.
I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK CLARIFICATION.
SO AS OF TODAY, THIS COULD BE RESIDENTIAL.
IF IT IS, WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY UNITS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GROWTH, LIKE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT IT'S LARGE.
THE REASON WHY I'M, I'M BRINGING THIS UP, IS WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS TRAFFIC ON CARL STERN, THE EXPANSION OF CARL STERN, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
LIKE, I'M JUST, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE SET UP TO ACCOMMODATE THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ADDITIONAL HOUSING UNITS WE'RE EVEN TALKING AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT'S EVEN UNDERSTOOD OR IF IT NEEDS TO BE AS FOR THEM TO GET APPROVAL FOR THE PUD.
BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY MIND WRAPPED AROUND LIKE HOW LARGE OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT THIS IS.
AND I'M NOT GRASPING IT RIGHT NOW.
WELL ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE THERE'S MULTIFAMILY AND EVERYTHING ELSE MIXED INTO IT.
AND IF IT'S RIGHT THERE ON 1 32, THAT NATURALLY WILL CAUSE TRAFFIC ONTO 1 99, WHICH WILL CAUSE TRAFFIC ONTO, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
DID YOU SAY THE DEVELOPER'S HERE? YES, THE DEVELOPER IS HERE.
I MEAN, STAFF CAN ANSWER SOME OF THIS FOR YOU.
UM, ONLY BECAUSE YOU'LL SEE THAT WE HAVE THE ACREAGE AMOUNTS IN THE CONCEPT PLAN.
SO WE HAVE THE ACREAGE AMOUNTS.
IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR PUD, UM, WITH, UM, I CAN'T BRING THAT OVER.
IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR ACREAGE AMOUNTS IN THE PUD AND I'M, CAN YOU GIMME WHAT YOUR PAGE NUMBER IS? 'CAUSE I'VE ALREADY GONE THAT'S WHAT THIS IS 2 33.
THAT'S PART OF THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT IN THE PUD ITSELF, IN THAT DOCUMENT, IT DOES BREAK DOWN WHAT THE ACREAGE TYPES WOULD BE AND THE, UM, PERCENTAGE OF THE ACREAGE, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S OVER 300 ACRES, THAT'S GOING TO BE THE BEST WAY TO PROVIDE THE BREAKDOWN.
UNDERSTANDING THAT 370 ACRES IS A VERY LARGE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY.
CAN WE GET THE DEVELOPER AT? SURE.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU THE DEVELOPER WHERE THE I'VE ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE DEVELOP CRYSTAL HARRIS WITH GRAY ENGINEERING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY HOUSES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO THE MAX UNIT COUNTS THAT WE WOULD BE ANTICIPATING ARE ALL WITHIN THE REGULATIONS OUTLINED IN THE PERCENTAGES, LIKE ASHLEY WAS TALKING ABOUT.
UM, DEPENDING UPON THE ACTUAL, UM, VARIATION OF PRODUCT THAT GOES
[01:05:01]
IN, WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING WITH STAFF ON ANY TRAFFIC CONCERNS OR UTILITY CONCERNS.UM, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH ALL THE SAME PROCESSES AS ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT WOULD IN ANTICIPATION.
YOU'RE SAYING PERCENTAGES, SO CAN YOU SAY LIKE, THE LOW WOULD BE X AND THE HIGH WOULD BE SURE.
AS FAR AS HOUSES, I CAN CERTAINLY GIVE THAT TO YOU.
UM, CRYSTAL 'CAUSE ONLY 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA KNOW OUR FULL UDC.
SO ESSENTIALLY IT JUST USES OUR BASE ZONING THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
SO IF THEY CAME IN AND JUST INDIVIDUALLY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY, ONE SINGLE FAMILY TWO, LIKE FOR, UM, I BELIEVE FOR SINGLE FAMILY ONE, IT'S UP TO 12 UNITS.
I WANNA SAY AN ACRE OR MAYBE THAT'S SF 200,004 TO 12 UNITS PER AC.
I MEAN I KNOW THAT THOUSAND UNITS PLUS IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP PORTION THAT THEY ACTUALLY GAVE, THAT WAS PART OF THEIR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.
I BELIEVE WHEN IT WAS ALL RESIDENTIAL, THEY WERE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY UP TO AROUND 1300 UNITS.
THIS MIX IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BETWEEN SCENARIO ONE AND SCENARIO TWO.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN THAT, BUT YOU'RE STILL LOOKING AT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNITS BECAUSE 3 76 HOT YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, AND IT'S OVER A THOUSAND FOR THE ONE AND THEN PROBABLY HALF THAT FOR THE OTHER.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A BIG SWING THERE, BUT THERE ARE DENSITY LIMITATIONS OUTLINED IN THE PUD FOR EACH OF THOSE SECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT.
AND HOW ARE YOU ADDRESSING, UM, THE GENTLEMAN'S CONCERN REGARDING FLOODING AND ANY TYPE OF DRAINAGE? SURE.
SO THAT WON'T IMPACT ANY OTHER RESIDENT OUTSIDE OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT? ABSOLUTELY.
SO WE'LL HAVE A DRAINAGE STUDY THAT WILL DO, WE'RE REQUIRED BY LAW TO NOT HAVE ANY, UM, NEGATIVE IMPACTS DOWNSTREAM OF OUR PROPERTY.
SO WE'LL HAVE DETENTION PONDS TO HELP ALLEVIATE ANY OF THOSE DRAINAGE CONCERNS.
HOW MUCH PARK LAND IS GONNA BE AVAILABLE, DO YOU KNOW? YEP.
YOU CAN GIMME A, A ROUGH IDEA.
SO I'D, I'D SAY THAT WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE COMPLYING WITH THE CITY'S ORDINANCE IN TERMS OF PARKLAND DEDICATION.
WE ALSO HAVE TRAILS THAT WE'RE OFFERING UP TO INCORPORATE.
UM, AS ASHLEY WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF VARIATION BETWEEN THE TWO, UM, LAYOUTS RIGHT NOW.
IT'S REALLY HARD TO TO KNOW WHICH DIRECTION THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO GO.
UM, AND THAT PARKLAND DEDICATION WILL BE BASED ON THE END USES FOR UM, EACH OF THE SCENARIOS.
ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND WITH WHERE WE ARE WITH THE FUTURE WITH THE PARKS PLAN RIGHT NOW, IT DIDN'T REALLY INCLUDE ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF OUR CITY LIMITS, WHICH WAS CONTINUALLY CHANGING.
SO WITH THAT, WE KNOW THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE OPEN SPACE.
WE KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TRAIL SYSTEMS, BUT THIS IS ONE THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK FAIRLY CLOSELY WITH PARKS AS THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THEIR MASTER PLAN REWRITES OF THEIR, UM, TRAIL MASTER PLAN AND THEIR PARKS MASTER PLAN OVERALL.
AND THEN SEE IF ANY OF THIS ACTUALLY DOES CONFORM WITH WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR OR IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT MAYBE THEY WOULD EXPAND THAT SCOPE AS THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO OUTSIDE OF THEIR MASTER PLAN.
UM, BUT I WOULD EXPECT WE'D HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
AS ALWAYS, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE PARKS FEE IN LIE.
UM, AND SO THE NON-COMMERCIAL AREA WOULD TYPICALLY ALWAYS PAYS THAT.
UM, IT WOULD BE MORE THE RESIDENTIAL AREA COULD SEE THAT WE MIGHT HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DEDICATION AND FEE POTENTIALLY JUST BECAUSE OF THE LEVEL OF CONNECTIVITY THROUGH HERE, ESPECIALLY IF IT DOES MEET UP WITH ANY, UM, ANYTHING THAT THE PARKS AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN ENDS UP HAVING IN IT.
REFERENCE THE TABLE BELOW THAT, BUT THE SENTENCES, THE SCENARIOS CLOSELY FOLLOW THE UNI, THE UDC DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AS ADOPTED WITH ONLY A FEW DEVIATIONS.
SO IT HAS A UDC STANDARD AND THEN THE PUD REPLACEMENT STANDARD.
AND I ASSUME THAT'S FOR BOTH SCENARIO ONE AND TWO.
SO THE, THE LOT WIDTH GOES FROM 45 FEET TO 26 FEET MINIMUM.
SO, UH, THAT'S ONE JUST BRINGING IT UP.
UM, ON THE NEXT PAGE FOR MULTI HOUSEHOLD, 10.40 3.42, INSTEAD OF A 20 FOOT SPACING BETWEEN BUILDINGS, WE'RE NOW AT 10 FEET.
WE'VE GONE FROM A 35 FOOT MAX TO 50 FOOT MM-HMM.
AND WE'VE GONE FROM DENSITY OF 14 TO 20 TO 30 DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.
SO JUST BRINGING THESE UP TO ATTENTION, THAT'S A, IT'S ONLY A FEW DEVIATIONS.
IT'S NOT VERY LINE ITEMS ARE, BUT THE DEVIATIONS ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.
UM, AND IT'S NOT REALLY A QUESTION FOR FOR YOU, BUT SURE.
SO THE DEVIATIONS THAT ARE REQUESTED, A LOT OF THINGS THAT YOU'LL SEE COMING OUT EITHER BETWEEN WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT FOR THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS, UM,
[01:10:01]
OR EVEN WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY REVIEWED WITH THE UDC, UM, AND THEN ALSO WHAT WE KNOW IS COMING FORWARD WITH STATE LAW, UM, IT NARROWLY FAILED THAT WE WILL HAVE STILL BE ABLE TO HAVE LOT SIZE MINIMUMS. SO ONE THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING IS, AND THAT'S COMING FROM THE STATE.SO ONE THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING, BECAUSE WE ARE DESIRING, UM, ATTAINABLE HOUSING, IS THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO WORK ON THOSE LOT SIZES.
A LOT OF TIMES WHAT YOU'LL SEE ON 26 FEET, THAT'S NOT, UM, I CAN'T SAY NOT STANDARD THAT'S DOUBLE NEGATIVE.
UM, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE LOTS OF THAT WIDTH WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT ATTACHED UNITS.
AND SO THAT ACTUALLY GIVES THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE ATTACHED UNITS SO YOU HAVE MORE OF THE WALKUP UNITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I BELIEVE IT IS IN, UM, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IF NOT IN THE SNAPSHOT, I THINK IT'S IN THE SNAPSHOT THAT IT ACTUALLY SHOWS KIND OF WHAT TYPES OF THE MULTIFAMILY.
SO THAT PAGE SHOULD BE IN THERE ON THE FRONT AND BACK.
UM, AND SO THE LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, ONE THING THAT WE WOULD GIVE ON IS THAT HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF DEVIATION.
WHAT WE CONSIDER OUR DENSITIES RIGHT NOW IN THE UDC IS NOT VERY STANDARD ON HOW IT'S BEING CALCULATED.
UM, MOST DO GROSS AND WE DO NET.
SO IT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THE WAY THAT WE CALCULATE THEM, UM, CURRENTLY, BUT 30 UNITS AN ACRE, ALTHOUGH THAT DOES SOUND FAIRLY INTENSE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT IN, IN TERMS OF HOW THAT FUNCTIONS IN A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ALL OF THE VARIED UM, TYPES OF HOUSING, IT'S NOT THAT MUCH.
YOU'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE FINAL PRODUCT.
AND CERTAINLY I JUST WANNA MAKE NOTE TO EVERYBODY.
UM, I I THINK STAFF WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE, I KNOW I WAS MORE COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
I'LL JUST SPEAK ON BEHALF OF STAFF.
IT WAS, THERE WAS SO MATT DISAGREE.
'CAUSE YOU COULD ESSENTIALLY GO UP ANOTHER STORY.
IT PROVIDES ANOTHER BUFFER TO LET YOU THEN STEP DOWN ON THE DENSITY.
UM, AND IT'S REALLY PART OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT CERTAINLY KNOWING WHERE STATE LAW IS LIKELY HEADED IN THIS NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, UM, THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT PREEMPTIONS FOR ALL LOT SIZES AND WE WILL NOT HAVE LOT SIZES SIZE MINIMUMS IN THIS STATE.
UM, THAT IS ONE THING THAT WE'RE CERTAINLY LOOKING AT.
WELL THE, ON THE, FOR ON THE BUILDING HEIGHT, IT'S, IT'S THE, THE, THE, UM, REPLACEMENT STANDARD PD REPLACEMENT STANDARD IS FOUR STORIES.
SO IS THAT GONNA BE, I KNOW THE, THE FINAL PRODUCT WILL DEFINE THIS, BUT IS THAT GONNA BE STAGGERED? I MEAN, YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE FOUR STORIES NEXT TO SOMETHING OUTSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT.
IS THAT STAGGERED? IT GETS HIGHER AS YOU GO IN OR JUST SOMETHING TO, TO LOOK AT OR, UM, IT DEFINITELY COULD, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE IT IN THERE RIGHT NOW.
TYPICALLY THE ONLY TIME THAT WE STAGGER THOSE HEIGHTS IS SOMETHING, UH, YOU SEE OUT THAT WAY.
AND THEN THE MULTI-FAMILY WAS ALREADY, UM, ZONED AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT'S THERE AND UM, WHAT MIGHT BE COMING IN, THEN WE TYPICALLY DO GO LOWER TOWARDS THE MULTIFAMILY, I'M SORRY, TOWARDS THE SINGLE FAMILY AS MORE OF A BUFFER ON THIS BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING AT A MORE DENSE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
WE, I WOULDN'T TYPICALLY THINK THAT WE WOULD STAGGER CERTAINLY IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT'S GONNA BE DISCUSSION FOR THE PROPERTY FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE ANY LIKE CLOSE TO WHERE THERE COULD BE A HOME THAT'S BUILT, RIGHT.
THAT COULD BE AT A HIGHER WHATEVER HEIGHT MY CONCERN.
AND THEN THEY CAN SEE INTO THE ALREADY EXISTING RESIDE BACKYARD AND PROPERTY.
BUT LIKE, SO FOR RIGHT NOW, THIS IS ALL JUST GREENFIELD, BUT HE'S, SHE'S NOT A FUTURE.
IF THERE'S A POTENTIAL, WE KNOW THIS IS ZONE, WE KNOW IT'S GREENFIELD NOW, BUT WHEN THEY BUILD IT RIGHT, LIKE THEY COULD, THEY HAVE THE, IF THIS PASSES RIGHT, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY I WOULD TO BUILD SOMETHING.
I WOULD HONESTLY HOPE THAT WITH A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY, WHOEVER IS BUILDING IN THERE, IS BEING, UM, TRANSPARENT AND HONEST WITH THE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF SAYING, THIS IS ALSO WHAT YOU'RE BUYING INTO.
THIS IS THE COMMUNITY TYPE FEEL AND THIS IS WHAT COULD GO NEXT TO YOU.
WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE CLOSE TO WHERE THIS WILL BE BUILT? IS THERE ANYBODY THAT, AND I'M TRYING TO ENVISION IT NOW.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S HOUSES, BUT THEY'RE VERY SPREAD OUT.
RIGHT? BUT IS THERE ANYBODY THAT LIVES CLOSE BY TO THIS PROPERTY LINE THAT COULD HAVE SOMEBODY MOVE IN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND SEE INTO THEIR BACK KITCHEN, OUT WINDOW, WHATEVER OUT HERE? WELL, I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT IF THAT IS A CONCERN, AGAIN, I WOULD, UM, SEE IF THE DEVELOPER'S WILLING TO MAKE, AND, AND IT ALSO DEPENDS ON WHICH SCENARIO.
IF, IF THERE IS MORE QUITE INDUSTRIAL TO THE NORTH HALF, THEN THAT WOULDN'T BE AS SUCH A RESTRICTION FOR LARGE.
I DON'T THINK I WOULD WANT A COMMERCIAL THAT'S TRUE ESTABLISHMENT EITHER.
BEING THAT CLOSE TO MY PROPERTY LINE AND BEING ABLE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY, I, I JUST
[01:15:01]
DON'T KNOW WHAT IS AROUND THERE.AND I WOULD LIKE TO AVOID HAVING EXISTING RESIDENCE AS BEING IMPACTED BY ANYTHING LIKE THAT IF POSSIBLE.
IS THERE, IS, IS THERE ANY WAY AS FAR AS THIS, THE REPLACEMENT STANDARD, AGAIN, WE HAVE DON'T WITHOUT SAYING THE FINAL PRODUCT, BUT WOULD THESE BE APPLICABLE TO SCENARIO ONE? I MEAN WOULD THE, WOULD BE DIFFERENT WAIVERS FOR SCENARIO ONE THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULDN'T BE APPLICABLE TO SCENARIO TWO OR VICE VERSA? OR THEY JUST GONNA BE ACROSS THE BOARD? IT'D BE ACROSS THE BOARD FOR BOTH.
THE ONLY THING THAT WOULDN'T APPLY IN SCENARIO ONE IS THE USES IN THAT MORE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA UP ALONG 1 32 BECAUSE THAT USE DOES NOT EXIST IN SCENARIO ONE.
UM, ONE THING BACK TO, UM, BACK ON TWO 10 WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT AN INTERNAL TRAIL SYSTEM CON CONNECTING LAND USES.
AND HOW DOES, IS THIS GOING TO O OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO INTEGRATE THIS INTO THE EXISTING TRAILS OR THE EXISTING PLAN FOR TRAILS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AND OUR, WHAT IS IT? MOBILITY PEDE PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY PLAN.
SO THAT'S TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT THEY KNOW TO BE ABLE TO INTEGRATE THEIR INTERNAL TRAILS TO OUR EXTERNAL POTENTIAL TRAILS.
SO ONCE WE GET INTO THE FULL DESIGN ASPECT, THAT WOULD BE THINGS THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS THE MOBILITY MASTER PLAN.
UM, AND THEN ALSO THE OTHER MASTER PLANS THAT WE HAVE IN THE WORKS RIGHT NOW.
SO I WANNA GO BACK TO, UM, MR. HAYGOODS QUESTION ABOUT THE DRAINAGE.
UM, I'M SURE Y'ALL HAVE LIVED IN YOUR HOUSE FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
HAS IT EVER FLOODED? UM, JUST FOR THE RECORD, CAN WE HAVE, CAN YOU PLEASE COME BACK UP? I'M SORRY BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE YOU ON THE I'M SORRY, JUST FOR THE RECORDING, I GET IN TROUBLE FOR IT TOO 'CAUSE I DON'T ALWAYS SPEAK INTO THE MIC.
NO, IT'S NEVER FLOODED THE HOUSE.
AND YOU'VE BEEN HERE IN 2001 2015? YES.
AND, AND YOU'VE NEVER HAD A FLOOD ISSUE? NOT NOT IN THE HOUSE, NO.
SO I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE FOR YEARS AND, AND HOUSES LIKE THE HAYGOODS HOUSE AND DEVELOPERS COME IN AND SAY, NO, WE BY LAW WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE DO X, Y AND Z.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO MAKE SURE, SINCE THEY ARE COMING UP HERE, TAKING THEIR TIME BECAUSE THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR SPACE, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMETHING DOES CHANGE AND THEIR HOUSE DOES FLOOD, THAT Y'ALL ARE GONNA HELP THEM WITH SOMETHING? BECAUSE 30 YEARS, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT FLOODS IN NOVEMBER OF 2001.
THERE WAS A MAJOR ONE IN MAY OF 2015 AND I'VE SEEN SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOST THEIR HOUSES AND THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO FIX IT.
AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE SINCE THEY'RE TAKING THE TIME TO COME VOICE THEIR CONCERNS THAT WE'RE MAKING SURE WE'RE HELPING THEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
YEAH, I CAN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER, WE'RE JUST ENGINEER SO IT'S NOT OUR MONEY TO PLAY WITH.
BUT YES, ABSOLUTELY WE'RE UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO BY LAW ENGINEERING WISE CALCULATION WISE, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE'S ANYTHING ABOVE AND BEYOND UM, WE CAN TALK TO THE DEVELOPERS ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, TO CLARIFY BACK WITH WHAT YOU STARTED WITH, THE SCENARIO A OR SORRY, SCENARIO ONE VERSUS SCENARIO TWO.
ARE WE CHOOSING THAT DURING THIS MEETING OR IS THAT OPTIONS THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL GET TO CHOOSE FROM? JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE LATTER.
THEY'RE PROPOSING TWO SEPARATE SCENARIOS SO THAT THEY COULD, THE DEVELOPER COULD MARKET UM, TWO SEPARATE SCENARIOS.
SO THE PUD SPECIFICALLY WILL NOT DICTATE THEN THE PERCENTAGE OF COMMERCIAL OR ANY OF THAT BASED ON HOW WE WILL NOT SURE WHICH SCENARIO THEY'LL BE GOING WITH.
NO, I WOULD NOT AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
I WOULD SAY THAT WITHIN THE PUD, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE, I'M SHOWING TWO 19 OF 2 35.
UM, IT HAS THE DEVELOPMENT RATIO FOR THE TWO SCENARIOS.
UM, SO SCENARIO ONE HAS THE 90 10 RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL AND THEN FURTHER BREAKS IT DOWN SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IN A SNAPSHOT FOR UM, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND SCENARIO TWO HAS THE SAME EXCEPT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT RATIO AND SCENARIO TWO, IS IT MORE OF A 50 50 BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL AGREE.
AND THEN FURTHER BREAKS THAT DOWN.
[01:20:01]
IF, LET'S SAY THAT THIS IS APPROVED AT COUNCIL AND THEY GO FORWARD TO THE MARKET AND THEY GO, OKAY, WELL SCENARIO TWO REALLY IS THE WINNER, THEN WHAT THEY WOULD END UP DOING IS SUBMITTING THE PRELIM BASED ON SCENARIO TWO.AND THAT'S WHEN IT WOULD THEN BE SET INTO MOTION THAT SCENARIO TWO IS THE ONE THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
I THINK THAT WAS THE ANSWER I WAS LOOKING FOR.
SO WHEN IT COMES BACK A PRELIMINARY PLAT, THAT'S WHEN THEY'LL BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHICH OF THE SCENARIOS WORKS BASED ON.
AND SO THAT'S THEN WHEN WE WOULD END UP KNOWING, OKAY, THIS IS A SCENARIO THEIR TIAS WOULD BE BASED ON THAT THEIR DRAINAGE ANALYSIS WOULD BE BASED ON WHAT THEY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T HAVE THOSE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE MM-HMM
I WAS JUST LOOKING 'CAUSE I MEAN BASED ON THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH IS WHAT IT IS, I MEAN SCENARIO TWO DOES NOT WORK WITH THAT PERIOD.
SO I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW THAT WHEN THEY COME BACK, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE AT LEAST TO SOMEWHAT DEGREE CONFORMING TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION.
SO YEAH, FOR, SO FOR COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY NEED TO HAVE 50 50 RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL.
IF THEY WANT TO MEET THE HU SOAR 2040 PLAN, SINCE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, WE WOULD ESSENTIALLY SAY THAT THEY CAN DO THAT.
SO WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT DOING IS A RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL 50 50.
BUT IT'S THAT PART OF THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE MORE AKIN TO THE BUSINESS PARK MORE THAN JUST THE RETAIL COMMERCIAL ASPECT.
AND WHY ON PAGE 2 33 THAT SN YOU HAVE OF THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS? THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE NOTED AS IT, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 85 15.
UH, THAT'S JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME.
SO IT HAS 85 RESIDENTIAL, 15 NON-RESIDENTIAL AND THEN FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TYPES, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT 75% RETAIL.
WITH SOME OTHER USES FOR OFFICE MAYBE INDUSTRIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IS NOT CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE MAIN DEVIATION FROM THAT IS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A SECTION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL THAT WOULD BE MORE OF THE INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK AREA.
AND THEN FOR THE REMAINDER OF THAT COMMERCIAL, UM, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE THAT 10% NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN ANOTHER 10% ALLOWANCE FOR BETWEEN B ONE AND B TWO.
SO THEY'RE EXCEEDING ON THE, THEY HAVE THE 50 50, BUT WITHIN THEIR OWN LITTLE DEVELOPMENT TYPES THEY WOULD BE EXCEEDING 'CAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE ABOUT 20% COMMERCIAL, NOT 15.
THAT WOULD UM, THANK YOU FOR THAT WOULD UM, FIT BETWEEN WHAT HA HAS STATED.
SO WITHIN THE AREA OF KIND OF, IF YOU THINK OF IT LIKE THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IS KIND OF JUST ALONG THAT HIGHWAY.
UM, AND THEN THE REMAINDER OF THAT WOULD BE CONFORMING BECAUSE THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE NECESSARY COMMERCIAL TO MEET THAT LIKE 85 15.
BUT OVERALL THE WHOLE THING IS 50 50 BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL.
BUT I'M SAYING THAT'S STILL NOT MEETING THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUIREMENT.
'CAUSE I MEAN WE REDID THAT TO EXPLAIN THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MORE OF A, A SPLIT WHERE IT WAS STILL MAJORLY FOCUSED ON RESIDENTIAL MM-HMM.
BUT WHEN I LOOK AT SCENARIO TWO, YOU'RE NOW TURNING, I FORGOT THE, I'M TRYING TO READ THE SMALL PRINT PERCENTAGE.
THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IS NOW, UM, PROBABLY ABOUT 40 ISH PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, WHICH WAS WITH COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS WAS NOT ALLOWED.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY IF, IF IT'S NOT GOING, ARE WE ALSO SAYING THAT IT'S POSSIBLY NO LONGER GOING TO FOLLOW THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, EITHER OF BEING A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD? 'CAUSE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE INTENDED THAT AREA TO BE.
AND WE DID ALL THAT WORK AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE REALLY NEED TO CHANGE THAT NOW AND SAY WE NEED THIS POSSIBILITY.
I IT'S POSSIBILITY, POSSIBILITY OF SCENARIO TWO OF HAVING THAT LARGE INDUSTRIAL SPACE WHEN THAT WAS NOT WHAT WE INTENDED ORIGINALLY.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION.
I WOULD SAY THAT THE AREA IN SCENARIO TWO THAT IS STILL THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL STILL SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS, WHICH IS WHAT IS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT STILL SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THAT AREA IS ESSENTIALLY REMOVED FROM THAT INDUSTRIAL AREA.
WHERE YOU WOULD BE THEN ALLOWING IS THAT THAT INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK AREA WOULD ALSO BE ALLOWED BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF, NOW THAT WE KNOW THE SAMSUNG HIGHWAY'S COMING IN AND THE EVER-CHANGING AREA ALONG THE MEGA SITE.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE REQUEST IS, IS WITH THIS PUD, WOULD YOU ALLOW THEM TO SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM TO THE HU TO SOAR WITH SCENARIO TWO, UM, WHERE THEY HAVE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL THAT SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE MIX OF USES
[01:25:01]
THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WITH THE ADDITION OF THE BUSINESS PARK AREA OR NOT.AND IF YOU SAY NO, THEN YOU SAY NO.
THAT'S UP FOR THE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE.
AND AGAIN, I'M, I'M JUST, I'M PUSHING BACK 'CAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY.
I MEAN WE DID ALL THE WORK FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP UPDATES IN THE COMP PLAN TO IDENTIFY THIS TO BE A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
I MEAN WE STILL WEREN'T EXACTLY SURE WHAT THAT AREA KIND OF FRONTING THE EXTENDED 1 32 AREA WAS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
UM, AND IT MIGHT BE A TRANSITION ZONE AND THAT MIGHT BE THE IDEAL PLACE FOR IT.
HOWEVER, I MEAN JUST LOOKING AT THE SCENARIO TWO OF BASIC LAY DOWN, I MEAN YOU'RE TAKING 40 ISH PLUS PERCENT OF THE AREA AND TURNING IT INTO A BUSINESS PARK, WHICH WAS NEVER THE INTENT OF OF UH, COMPLETING.
IT WASN'T THE ORIGINAL VISION.
SO I MEAN, AND I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT.
I MEAN IF THE REST OF THE COMMISSION FEELS THAT'S OKAY TO DO, THEN WE CAN GO WITH IT AND CHANGE WHAT THE ORIGINAL COMP PLAN INTENT WAS WITH THAT AREA BECAUSE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT COMING IN AND NEW INTENT AND EVERYTHING.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION.
I JUST WANT TO EXPAND ON YOUR QUESTION WITH THE SAME QUESTION.
SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THIS WORK TO, FOR THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MADE, MADE A REQUIREMENT OR RESTRICTION MM-HMM.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO DEVIATE FROM THAT JUST BECAUSE IT'S NEAR SAMSUNG OR BECAUSE OF SAMSUNG? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING? I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE AN APP, UM, THAT WOULD BE AN APPLICANT QUESTION ON WHY THIS WAS THEIR PROPOSAL.
BECAUSE WHAT STAFF IS UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS THEIR PROPOSAL BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER WANTS OPTIONS ON HOW TO MARKET THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
BUT, BUT I WOULDN'T WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT.
I'M ASKING THE COMMISSION IS COMMISSIONER LEE IS IS THAT WE WENT THROUGH THIS EFFORT TO CREATE THIS STANDARD, BUT NOW BECAUSE OF THESE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, ARE WE WILLING TO GIVE A WAIVER? AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER LEE IS YES.
I'M JUST THAT'S WHAT ASKING THE QUESTION IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
SO I I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS TO DECIDE.
HUH? THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSION HAS TO DECIDE.
AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I'M JUST BRINGING UP THE PIECE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE HAD ALL AGREED TO IN THE COMP PLAN.
AND I'M, AND I'M SAYING IT'S POSSIBLE, LIKE I SAID, THAT SLIGHT TRANSITION ZONE, SINCE WE HAVE THE MEGA SITE TO THE NORTH, THERE MIGHT BE A REASON WE NEED TO TRANSITION BEFORE WE GO STRAIGHT RESIDENTIAL RIGHT TO THE SOUTH OF IT.
BUT THAT WAS NOT WHAT WE AGREED TO WITH THE COMP PLAN.
SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO BRING IT TO RESIDE ATTENTION THAT WE WOULD BE TECHNICALLY POTENTIALLY WAVERING THAT IT MIGHT BE ALSO WHEN THEY COME BACK WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AT SOME POINT THAT THEY MIGHT JUST GO SCENARIO ONE AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT, BUT IT'S STILL LEAVING THE OPTION OPEN FOR THEM TO COME SCENARIO TWO AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL UP THERE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE ATTENTION.
I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH A BUNCH OF SCENARIOS BECAUSE THEN IT GOES BACK TO THE DEVELOPMENT OVER IN MM-HMM.
SO, UM, I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH JUST HAVING AN OPEN-ENDED OPTION FOR PUDS OR WELL THIS WILL COME BACK TO US FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT.
AND I THINK THAT WILL DEFINITELY SET, SET THE COURSE AS FAR AS WHICH SCENARIO THEY'RE GOING TO BE GOING WITH.
YOU KNOW, I IF THEY'RE GOING SCENARIO ONE, THE PLATT'S GONNA LOOK COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM SCENARIO TWO.
SO BUT WHAT PREVENTS THEM FROM CHANGING IT HALFWAY THROUGH DEVELOPMENT ALSO? WELL, WELL, WELL THAT'S, THAT'S THE THING.
PRELIMINARY PLAT, WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US, THEY WILL HAVE TO DICTATE IN THERE WE ARE DOING SCENARIO ONE OR SCENARIO TWO MM-HMM.
AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE AT THAT POINT, HEY, THEY WENT FULL SCENARIO TWO AND WE CAN SAY NO, NOT HAPPENING.
BUT THE PART THAT I DON'T LIKE IS THE PUT IS THE PUT VERBIAGE IS STILL NOT DEFINED SET IN STONE.
I WON'T LOOSEY GOOSEY IS NOT THE RIGHT TERM.
CAN'T THINK OF THE RIGHT TERM.
AND SO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO HOLD THEM TO.
SOMETHING SPECIFIC AS, AS A, AGAIN, THIS ISN'T A STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT, BUT THE STAFF DO WE COME BACK AND SAY, WELL MAYBE IN SCENARIO TWO WE WANT MORE RESIDENTIAL AND LESS
[01:30:01]
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.LIKE THIS BUILDING ONE A IS 1.6 MILLION SQUARE FEET.
WHAT IF WE, I MEAN IF THAT'S A 1 MILLION SQUARE FOOT AND THIS GETS COMPACTED, I MEAN IT DOESN'T, IT STILL, IT IT DROPS IT FROM 40% TO 25% WHERE A REQUIREMENT WAS 15%.
IS THAT, IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT FOR THE RATIO FOR COMMERCIAL ANYWAYS? ASSUMING YOUR ESTIMATE OF 40% IS CORRECT AND 15% IS THE STANDARD.
DO WE COME BACK AND SAY, DOES CITY COME BACK TO THE APPLICANT AND SAY WE WANT A SMALLER FOOTPRINT OF INDUSTRIAL OR OR NON OR OR COMMERCIAL NON RESIDENTIAL AND WE WANT A LARGER RESIDENTIAL.
AND WHETHER THE APPLICANT CAN FIND DEVELOPERS THAT IF THAT DOESN'T, IF THAT FOOTPRINT ISN'T COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET, THEN MAYBE THEY BACK OUT OR WHATEVER.
BUT IS THAT POSSIBILITY YOU CAN REQUEST CHANGES TO THIS AS A COMMISSION? OKAY.
COULD LOOK AS AN ALTERNATIVE OF A, A GREATER PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL AND A LESSER PERCENTAGE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL.
THERE CAN BE RECOMMENDATIONS OR MOTIONS OF APPROVAL, UM, THAT UM, EITHER THE APPLICANT CAN AGREE TO OR SAY WE'D LIKE TO TABLE AND TALK TO THE DEVELOPER TO SEE IF THEY'RE AMENABLE TO THOSE CHANGES COMING OUTTA THE COMMISSION.
OR IT COULD BE SOMETHING WHERE, UM, P AND Z MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION AND THEN COUNSEL IS THE DECIDER OF WHAT THEY ARE, UM, KNOWING WHAT P AND Z IS RECOMMENDING AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO GO ALONG WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.
WHAT IS A COMMISSION THINK ABOUT ASKING FOR, I GUESS A SCENARIO THREE? I, WELL, I, I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT ASK FOR THAT.
I WOULD, I WOULD EITHER SAY, AND THIS IS JUST ME PERSONALLY, THAT WE WOULD EITHER ONE SUGGEST THEM TO GO BACK AND GET CLOSER TO FOLLOWING THE ACTUAL COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS DESIGNATION 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY IN.
OR UNLESS THERE'S A TIMEFRAME THAT IT'S GONNA HURT TO ACTUALLY TABLE IT AND HAVE THE DEVELOPER COME BACK AND EXPLAIN WHY POTENTIALLY THEY COULD NOT CONFORM MORE TO, TO THIS.
WELL, BEFORE, BEFORE WE GO ABOUT TABLING ANYTHING
YEAH, YOU MAY WANNA TAKE A NAP.
UM, FIRST AND FOREMOST ON THE TABLE IN THE, UH, IN THE SUMMARY OF REQUEST, I DON'T SEE ANY CHANGES WHATSOEVER TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR THE DATA CENTER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
ALL WE HAVE DEFINED IN HERE IS SF ONE, SF TWO AND MULTIFAMILY.
UM, OKAY, HERE LET ME GET INTO IT.
THERE IS A SEPARATE SECTION UNDER PROHIBITED LAND USES THAT GOES INTO WHAT USES WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AS FAR AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OTHER THAN PROHIBITED.
IT WOULD MATCH THE LI AND THERE IS A SECTION HERE SPECIFICALLY ON DATA CENTERS BECAUSE THOSE ARE DONE BY SPECIFIC USE PERMIT THAT WENT INTO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, UM, SHIELDING AND REQUIRED BUFFER YARDS.
UM, YEAH AND THAT'S IN COVERED IN THE STACK REPORT TO ESSENTIALLY MATCH WHAT IS IN THE CODE BUT ALLOW IT BY RIGHT IN THIS SECTION.
JUST BECAUSE COMING BACK FOR SUP, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ALREADY HAVE A PUD DOES GET A LITTLE AWKWARD MM-HMM.
UM, AND SO WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT IS DIFFERENT BUFFER YARDS.
THEY INCLUDED THEIR RIGHT OF WAY ALIGNMENT TO SHOW HOW IF A DATA CENTER WAS ALLOWED IN SCENARIO TWO AND IT WAS DONE BY RIGHT.
THAT THIS IS HOW FAR AWAY IT WOULD BE.
AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE FULL WIDTH OF THE STREET, WHICH IS 120 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THAT RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT.
UM, NEXT ITEM IS, UH, AGAIN, UH, THIS IS ON PAGE TWO 12.
UH, SPACING BETWEEN BUILDINGS IS GOING FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET FOR MULTIFAMILY.
ANY IDEA HOW FIRE FEELS ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY CLOSE FOR MULTIFAMILY, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE TALKING 50 FEET HIGH.
SO FOR THAT, THE 2021 IFC DOES HAVE DIFFERENT BUILDING REQUIREMENTS.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA BE THAT CLOSE, THAT IS ONE THING THAT A LOT OF TIMES YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT ALL YOUR FIRE RATED WALLS AND ALL THOSE MULTIFAMILY UNITS ARE ALREADY SPRINKLED.
SO A LOT OF TIMES THAT'S LESS OF A CONCERN NOW 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO GO UP AND THAT'S WHERE THEY USE THEIR LADDER TRUCKS AND FIGHT IT FROM THE OUTSIDE.
YOU KNOW, CAN I BORROW SOME SUGAR
UM, THE DRAINAGE STUDY WILL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO
[01:35:01]
PRELIMINARY PLAT.THAT'S MAINLY, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE, AT HOW THE WATER FLOWS AND WE WILL SEE THAT BEFORE WE SEE THE PLAT.
AND IF IT DOESN'T WORK, I KNOW A COUPLE OF US ON HERE ARE PRETTY HARDCORE WHEN IT COMES TO WATER FLOW.
SO YEAH, IF IT DOESN'T WORK, WE'RE NOT GONNA APPROVE IT.
AND THEN GETTING DOWN TO, UM, I'M LOOKING AT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT B SCENARIO ONE, SCENARIO TWO, PAGE TWO 19.
IT'S NOT ACTUALLY 2 32, 2 33, 2 34.
SO, UM, KIND OF SORT OF MAKES SENSE ON SCENARIO ONE.
THE, UH, I'M GONNA CALL IT INTERIOR ROADWAY THAT, UH, THAT KIND OF NORTH SOUTH ROADWAY THAT TWISTS AND TURNS A LITTLE BIT.
CAN I, IS THERE, UH, ANY RATIONALE FOR HAVING THAT COLLECTOR THERE COMING OUT ONTO, UH, LOOKS LIKE, UH, CARL STERN, JUST THAT, THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION FOR WHERE THE COLLECTOR INTERSECT A ARTERIAL AS OPPOSED TO IT BEING ACTUALLY OVER BY THE DATA CENTER ENTRANCE, ET CETERA? I NEED TO GET TO THAT.
SO THE, THE, THE SCENARIOS ONE AND TWO, THE, THE LAND ALLOCATIONS AND THE SPECIFIC LAYOUT IS ALL VERY CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE.
RIGHT? LIKE WE'RE JUST TRYING TO LOCK IN THE, THE PERCENTAGES OF LAND USE, THE ACTUAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND SHOWING THAT ACCORDINGLY.
BUT THEN THE INTERNAL COLLECTORS AND LOCAL STREETS WITHIN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS WILL ALL BE UM, DETERMINED.
AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS, UH, THE NEXT PAGE RIGHT BEFORE THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS ON 2 33.
SO THIS WOULD BE I GUESS 2 32.
UM, WHAT IS GOING SOUTH OF 1 32 AND EAST OF THIS PROPERTY? IS THAT CURRENTLY COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS? IS IT CURRENTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL? WHAT, WHAT DO WE HAVE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY? BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING HOUSES OR TOWN HOMES OR SOME SORT OF RESIDENCES ON THE EAST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY AND IF WE'RE GONNA PUT THOSE ADJACENT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, I SEE THAT AS A CONFLICT.
UH, EVERYTHING SURROUNDING THIS IS ALL COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE ONLY DEVIATION WOULD BE THAT NORTHERNMOST AREA FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
SO WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE OR IT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT SOMETHING SOUTH OF 1 32, BUT NEXT TO LET'S SAY THIS DATA CENTER WOULD WANT TO GO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND DO A SIMILAR P BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT ADJUSTING THE FUTURE LAND USE ALONG 1 32 IF WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ALONG THERE RATHER THAN COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS AND LOOK AT DOING MORE OF THE EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT.
WHAT DOES THE EMPLOYMENT CENTER HAVE AS REQUIREMENTS? I CAN'T REMEMBER.
EMPLOYMENT CENTER IS UM, ESSENTIALLY BUSINESS PARK LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
IT'S FOR THE LARGER USERS WITH UM, SOME SUPPORT COMMERCIAL WITHIN IT.
BECAUSE IF 1 32 REALLY IS GONNA BE, WHAT IS IT, THREE LANES EACH DIRECTION, TWO LANES EACH DIRECTION.
EVENTUALLY IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THREE LANES.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE THIS GIANT ROAD.
BUT, BUT, AND WHO'S PAYING FOR, I DON'T THINK, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I DON'T THINK THE EAST WEST VERSION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THAT.
I THINK THE NORTH SOUTH, THAT'S NORTH SOUTH VERSION IS NOT WHEN IT CUTS EAST WEST.
NO, EAST WEST IS GOING TO BE YEAH.
CURRENT CURRENTLY THAT WAS NEVER THE PLAN.
WELL CURRENTLY IN TAYLOR IT IS THREE LANES EACH DIRECTION.
SO THE COUNTY'S COVERING THAT THEN.
SEE THE SMART GUY IN THE BACK IS GONE.
CAN YOU TO THE, BECAUSE WHEN ONE, SORRY, SIDEBAR HERE BECAUSE WHEN 1 32 IS COMING NORTH SOUTH ACROSS MM-HMM,
[01:40:01]
GOING TO TECHNICALLY CUT EAST WEST, BUT IT'S ALSO THEN GOING TO TEE OFF AND MAYBE BE THIS FUTURE 1660, WHO KNOWS? BUT IT'S ALSO GOING TO GO NORTH, SOUTH BESIDE COTTON BROOK.ALL THE WAY DOWN TO MEET 1660.
THAT WAS THE PART I THOUGHT WAS GOING TO BE THE SIXTH LANE.
NOT SOME RANDOM ROAD THAT'S GOING TO JUST PARALLEL 79.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS, I'M I'M THINKING BACK TO OUR CONVERSATIONS.
SO, UH, THE COUNTY'S PLANS ACTUALLY SHOW SIX LANES NORTH, SOUTH ON WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE HU ARTERIAL.
AND THEN THEY ARE WIDENING COUNTY ROAD 1 32.
ACTUALLY THEY'VE GIVEN US THE SCHEMATIC AND ASK US TO WIDEN COUNTY ROAD 1 32 EAST HORSE.
UH, TO LINE UP WITH THE SAMSUNG HIGHWAY.
SO YEAH, IT, WE ARE LOOKING, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK AT? WHAT LOOK LIKE THOUGH SIX LANES IS, IS IT SIX LANES ON 1 32? I BELIEVE SO, YES.
THAT'S WHY THAT FRONTAGE ROAD IS REALLY PRIMED FLIGHT P IT IT IS PRIME LAND.
BUT I'M SAYING INDUSTRIAL WITH THOSE CHANGES THAT HAVE JUST COME UP, MATT, THOSE, THOSE COUNTY CHANGES CAME UP WITHIN THE LAST SIX, NINE MONTHS.
THE, FOR 1 32, I DON'T KNOW WHEN, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT STARTED.
I KNOW WE GOT THE FINAL SCHEMATICS AFTER I GOT HERE AND I'VE BEEN HERE 18 MONTHS AND WE GOT 'EM.
SO MAYBE SIX MONTHS AGO, IF I'M PICKING UP WHAT YOU'RE THROWING DOWN, IT DEFINITELY GOT HERE AFTER THE WIDTH OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY WITH WHAT WE WERE PLANNING FOR IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THAT FEATURE LAND USE MAP, IT HAS CHANGED SLIGHTLY.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT YES, IN THE COMING YEAR WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT AMENDING SOME OF THOSE FEATURE LAND USE MAPS BECAUSE OF THIS.
OH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE KIND OF ON THE SAME SHEET NOW.
COUNTY CHANGED THE PLAN FOR THAT ROAD AND EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT PAYING FOR IT IT RIGHT.
BUT COUNTY CHANGED THE PLAN FOR THAT ROAD.
WE SHOULD PROBABLY PIVOT A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT WE'RE WILLING TO PUT ALONG THAT ROAD AND THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE BUFFERING, WHICH IS YOUR POINT.
THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE BUFFERING.
THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF A LOT OF STUFF AND YES, THIS IS NOT A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BUT GIVEN WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE COUNTY'S INTENT YEAH, I, I THINK IT KIND OF MAKES SENSE TO PUT A SCENARIO TWO SITUATION FORWARD.
I STILL NEED TO WRAP MY MIND IF IT'S OKAY AROUND THE TRAFFIC PIECE BECAUSE IF WE'RE SAYING THAT 1 32 IS GONNA BE SIX LANES AND ACCORDING TO THIS, IF I'M A RESIDENT AND I LIVE HERE, YOU'RE EXPECTING ME TO USE 1 32 PROB FOLLOW ME IF I'M RIGHT, YOU'RE TELLING ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IF I NEED TO GET TO 79, I NEED TO GET ON 1 32 AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THE FLYOVER ISN'T EVEN GONNA BE BUILT YET.
SO THEN I'M GONNA GO TO 1 99 RIGHT.
OR I'M GONNA HOPE THAT THIS CARL STERN THING IS EXTENDED, BUT WHO'S DOING THAT AND WHEN THAT'S ON OUR CIP RIGHT.
THAT'S, SO I'M TRYING TO LIKE GRASP, IF I LIVE HERE, HOW AM I MOVING AROUND? BECAUSE I LIVE IN CROSS CREEK, WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO HERE.
AND THERE'S ABOUT 500 HOMES WHERE I LIVE TODAY, WHICH IS HALF OF WHAT THIS COULD BE.
AND THE TRAFFIC IS ALREADY NIGHTMARE, NOT FUN
SO I'M TRYING TO ENVISION WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE ONCE ALL OF THESE ROADS ARE EXPANDED AND ALL OF THIS LIKE SIX LANE.
'CAUSE IF I'M GOING TO EXIT ONTO 1 32 ON A SIX LANE, THAT'S LIKE A HIGHWAY EXITING FROM MY HOUSE.
LIKE HOW I'M STRUGGLING TO WRAP MY MIND AROUND.
IT'S PART OF WHAT I'M THINKING LOGISTICALLY HOW THIS WILL WORK.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT I'M THINKING.
IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCENARIO TWO AND EVERYTHING NORTH OF CARL STERN.
CARL STERN AND IN BETWEEN CARL STERN AND, AND 1 32 MM-HMM.
BUT CARL STERN IS ALREADY BAD AS IT IS WITH CREEK BEND.
AND THERE'S, AND THERE'S NO CURRENT, THERE'S NO CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN BETWEEN THIS AND LENNAR.
CARL STERN'S NOT GONNA BE EXTENDED IN THE NEAR FUTURE EXACTLY.
SO THAT ROAD IS NOT GONNA GO ANYWHERE.
BUT IT WILL GO TO THE NORTH SOUTH, WHICH WILL ALLOW YOU TO TAKE A, YOU'RE NOT DUMPING FROM THE HOUSE ONTO, YOU GOTTA CROSS THE RAILROAD TRUCK.
NO, YOU'RE NOT DUMPING FROM THE HOUSE
[01:45:01]
ONTO A SIX LANE.YOU'RE DUMPING FROM THE HOUSE ONTO PROBABLY A FOUR LANE.
FOUR LANE THEN TO A SIX LANE, THEN GOING UP TO A SIX LANE.
MY OTHER OPTION IS TO GO SOUTH.
WHICH WOULD BE TO THE HIGHWAY THAT 1660.
UH, THIS, THAT'S THE, I THINK WE NEED TO GET THAT.
YEAH, WE'LL GO DOWN TO 1660 AND EVENTUALLY YEAH, YEAH.
SO THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE HEAD, HEAD SOUTH TO THE ACTUAL FREEWAY.
I MEAN PART OF THAT WOULD BE, PART OF THAT WOULD BE, I KNOW WITH EAST WILCO HIGHWAY, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE ANY UPDATED SCHEMATICS NOW THAT THEY'RE GONNA ACTUALLY START THE NEXT PHASE, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF SOME OF THEIR CURRENT EXITS WERE ACTUALLY LINING UP WITH ANY OF THESE PROPOSALS.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE MY MIND IS GOING.
LIKE HOW DO YOU THIS FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE IF THE SAMSUNG HIGHWAY IS GONNA BE SIX LANES, I'M ASSUMING THERE'S GONNA BE AN EXIT RIGHT THERE OFF OF EAST WILCO HIGHWAY.
YOU NEED LIGHT, BUT THERE ALSO NEEDS TO BE AN EXIT SPECIFICALLY AT WHERE THIS ARTERIAL MEETS THE NEW SAM OR THE NEW EAST WILCO HIGHWAY.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S HAPPENING EITHER.
WHICH ARTERIAL ARE YOU REFERRING TO? THE COUNTY ROAD 1 32.
OH MY GOSH, I'VE BEEN SITTING TOO LONG.
SO THIS IS THE NEW HIGHWAY COMING HERE.
RIGHT NOW IT'S GONNA BE THE UM, THREE LANE ROAD, BUT EVENTUALLY THAT WILL NEED TO BE AN INTERCHANGE OFF EAST WILCO HIGHWAY.
THIS I'M ASSUMING WILL BE, IF IT'S A SIX LANE FREEWAY, SAMSUNG HIGHWAY, THIS WILL PROBABLY ALREADY BE AN INTERCHANGE WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION.
UM, THIS PROBABLY WON'T BE, 'CAUSE IT'S A MORE CARL STERN PROBABLY WILL BE.
'CAUSE IT'S MORE OF A SMALLER ARTERIAL.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT SHE'S GETTING AT IS IT'S ALSO THE TIMING OF ALL OF THIS.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE DONE IN THREE OR FOUR YEARS.
SO IT'S GONNA STILL BE A VERY SMALL ROADWAY.
AND EAST WILCO HIGHWAY FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE IS JUST GONNA BE A THREE, MAYBE FOUR LANE ROADWAY.
YOU, YOU HAVE ALL OF THIS DUMPING OUT ONTO REALLY LIKE TWO SMALL ROADWAYS THAT WE'RE NOW WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUES WITH A THIRD OF THE SIZE OF THE SUBDIVISION DUMPING OUT ONTO EVEN BIGGER ROADWAYS.
YOU SAID THAT MUCH BETTER THAN I DID.
I I DO HAVE SOME ANSWERS FOR THOSE QUESTIONS.
I'M, TELL US WHO YOU ARE PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SETH MERRICK, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF GRAY ENGINEERING.
UM, MAYBE I CAN START FROM THE KIND OF THE, THE PLAN WEST OR SOUTH SIDE OF THIS PROJECT.
SO THIS ORIGINALLY INCLUDED A, A PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WAS ACQUIRED BY WILLIAMSON COUNTY FOR THE EAST WILCO HIGHWAY.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MM-HMM.
SOUTH SIDE OF THE COMMERCIAL TRACK THERE, UM, THE COUNTY ACQUIRED A A, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT 20 ACRES OF THIS TRACT.
UM, PARTIALLY FOR THE HIGHWAY, PARTIALLY FOR DETENTION FACILITIES, WHICH WILL BE GREAT.
UM, IN TERMS OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL, UH, CONTROL ON DRAINAGE.
SO THE SCHEMATIC FOR THE EAST WILCO HIGHWAY HAS BEEN RELEASED FOR YEARS.
UM, WE HAD THAT AS WE WERE LAYING OUT THIS PLAN THAT SIX LANE ARTERIAL, WHICH IS THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THIS SITE, IS A FUTURE INTERCHANGE ON THE EAST WILCO HIGHWAY, AS IS THE, THE SAMSUNG HIGHWAY, OR AS THEY'RE CALLING IT, 1 32 ON YOUR, YOUR SIDE OF 33 49.
SO THO THOSE ARE ALL ACCOMMODATED ON THE, AND AND THIS IS AVAILABLE ON WILLIAMSON COUNTY'S WEBSITE.
AND I THINK Y'ALL PROBABLY SEEN THAT OVER TIME.
UM, SO THAT'S, UM, WHY THESE ROADWAYS ARE WHERE THEY ARE.
WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS WITH H AND TB, WHO'S THE, THE PROGRAM MANAGER FOR WILLIAMSON COUNTY AND ALSO ADAM BOATWRIGHT, THE, THE COUNTY ENGINEER FOR WILLIAMSON COUNTY.
HE HAS SEEN THIS AND BEEN IN MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH, WITH MATT AND, UH, ASHLEY, US H AND TB.
EVERYBODY HAS SEEN THIS LAYOUT THE WAY IT SITS.
AND ALL THE ROADWAYS ARE SITUATED EXACTLY AS REQUESTED BY BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY AND HNTB AS THE PROGRAM MANAGER.
UM, IN TERMS OF HAVING FUTURE ACCESS DOWN TO THE, THEY'VE ALREADY BROKEN GROUND AND IF YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN THE PICTURE THAT'S THE CONTRACT'S AWARDED, THEY'RE UNDERWAY.
WE'VE HAD CONTRACTORS REACH OUT ABOUT DISPOSING OF SPOILS ON THIS SITE.
UH, THERE'S ALMOST NO INSTANCE WHERE THAT WON'T BE COMPLETED BY THE TIME A ANY HOME IS BUILT ON THIS.
WE HAVE PRELIMINARY PLAN, FINAL PLAT CONSTRUCTION PLANS, HOME CONSTRUCTION, ALL ALL TO BE DONE BEFORE, UH, ANY TRAFFIC COULD BE GENERATED BY THIS SITE.
SO THAT SOUTHEAST LOOP OR WELL EAST WILCO HIGHWAY WILL BE IN PLACE BY THE TIME ANY DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS ON THIS TRACT.
SO WOULD YOU AS A DEVELOPER BE OPEN TO HELPING SHARE THE COST OF EXPANDING CARL STERN SINCE YOUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE NEEDING IT? WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE Y'ALL JUST ENACTED SOME $14,000
[01:50:01]
A LOT, UH, TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES,SO, UM, TWO THINGS THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO APPROVE THAT.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, UM, I I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, UH, COMMISSIONER LEE WHO MENTIONED THAT, UH, THERE'S A GAP BETWEEN, UM, LENNAR'S COTTON BRICK DEAL, WHICH WE DID AT OUR, OUR PREVIOUS FIRM AS WELL.
UM, AND CARL STERN IS IT'S SHOWN GOING THROUGH THIS TRACT.
UH, IN, IN THAT SENSE, I WOULD SAY, UH, IT, THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY IF THEY WERE GOING TO CONDEMN RIGHT AWAY.
AND, AND REALLY THAT'S ETJ, SO THAT, THAT DOESN'T SEEM MM-HMM,
ALTHOUGH ONCE UTILITIES HAPPEN, Y'ALL ARE BUILDING A NEW WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, WHICH IS WHY NOTHING OUT HERE IS EVER BEEN DEVELOPED.
UM, ONCE THAT'S IN PLACE, ONCE THE EAST WILCO HIGHWAY IS IN PLACE, I THINK YOU COULD REASONABLY EXPECT DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN IN THAT AREA.
AND ANY DEVELOPER THAT'S ON THE THE CITY'S ROADWAY PLAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN ON THE CITY'S ROADWAY PLAN.
I, I DON'T THINK IT'S A STRETCH TO THINK THAT THAT CONNECTION BETWEEN CARL STERN, UH, UM, WOULD HAPPEN IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
AND THEN ALSO WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD SAY MOST OF THAT TRAFFIC WOULD LIKELY BE COMING TO THE EAST FROM YOU LIVE IN CROSS CREEK.
UM, MOST OF THAT TRAFFIC WOULD LIKELY BE COMING THIS WAY TO GET ON EAST WILCO HIGHWAY AS OPPOSED TO GOING, UH, THAT DIRECTION OTHER THAN FOR SCHOOL DROP OFF TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING, WHICH IS ALREADY BAD.
UM, AND, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, MOST LIKELY A NEW SCHOOL ENDS UP IN THIS PROJECT IF IT'S DEVELOPED PRIMARILY FOR, UM, RESIDENTIAL USE.
SO TIED TO THAT QUESTION AS FAR AS WHAT ROADWAYS YOU ALL ARE PLANNING, PLANNING TO DEVELOP, WOULD YOU ALL BE DEVELOPING THE CARL STERN EXTENSION AT LEAST ON YOUR SECTION OF THE ROADWAY? AND WOULD YOU ALSO BE DEVELOPING THE ARTERIAL ALONG THE EAST SIDE THAT'S ALSO CROSSING PART OF YOUR PROPERTY? SO CARL STERN IS KIND OF A FOREGONE CONCLUSION.
THAT'LL BE CONSTRUCTED THROUGH THE, THE SITE.
UM, IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH OF THE NORTH SOUTH ARTERIAL GETS CONSTRUCTED, UM, I THINK THAT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON THE RESULTS OF A TIA, UM, MM-HMM
SINCE THIS PROJECT'S BEEN ANNEXED, IT WOULD BE MOST LIKELY A, A PIT, UM, NEGOTIATIONS FOR THAT HAVE NOT TAKEN PLACE.
UM, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHERE THE, THE OVERSIZING OF STREETS NO TIA WOULD EVER REQUIRE A SIX LANE ROADWAY TO BE BUILT FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE.
SO I WOULD SAY IN GENERAL, UM, THIS TRACT IS DEDICATING A, A TON OF LARGE SCALE ROADWAY RIGHT AWAY.
AND THEN HOW MUCH OF THOSE ROADWAYS GET GETS BUILT WOULD BE DETERMINED IN, AT SOME LEVEL BY COST PER PARTICIPATION FROM EITHER THE CITY OR THE COUNTY AND THEN POTENTIALLY SOME KIND OF NEGOTIATION RELATED TO A BID.
SO WHAT I GOT FROM THAT IS, YES, FOR CARL STAR EXTENSION, BECAUSE IT'S TOTALLY WITHIN YOUR REALM, BUT FOR THE NORTH SOUTH OR NORTH SOUTH ARTERIAL, MOST LIKELY THERE WOULD BE NO DEVELOPER COSTS TO BUILD THAT.
IT WOULD ONLY JUST BE, NO, I'M SAYING IF THAT, IF THERE'S NO, UM, PARTICIPATION FROM THE CITY OR COUNTY, IT WOULD LIKELY END UP AS BUILDING A COUPLE LANES OF THAT TO PROVIDE SOME CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN 1 32 AND EAST WILCO HIGHWAY.
BUT, UH, A STREET OF THAT MAGNITUDE IS A THOUSAND BUCKS A LINEAR FOOT.
I MEAN THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITIVE.
AND AGAIN, THE INTENT WOULD BE YEAH, YOU GUYS NOT BUILDING OUT A FOUR LANE HIGHWAY THERE, BUT JUST BUILDING OUT A FACILITY FACILITY EITHER.
AND, AND I'M SORRY ASHLEY, IT'S PROBABLY LATE AND I FORGOT.
AT WHICH STAGE DO WE VERIFY WHICH PORTIONS THE DEVELOPER IS GONNA ACTUALLY BUILD OUT ROADWAY WISE, WHAT THEY WILL FUND? IS THAT AT THE FINAL PLATING? NO, TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE WITH THE TIA AND PRELIM.
SO A PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE, WE WOULD KNOW THEN.
I MEAN, 'CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT YOUR PROPORTIONALITY AND WHAT SCENARIO THEY'RE GONNA BE DOING BECAUSE THE SCENARIOS COULD ALSO THEN HOWEVER IT DEVELOPS COULD POTENTIALLY CHANGE OH, ABSOLUTELY.
BUT AT PRELIMINARY WE WOULD KNOW THAT.
YEAH, IT'S GONNA BE A BIG PRELIMINARY.
'CAUSE THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'RE, I MEAN, JUST 'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO KNOW, OKAY, WELL HOW MUCH ROADWAY IS GOING TO BE NEEDED AND AT WHAT, WHAT'S THE TIMING OF THE ROADWAYS? YES.
SO KIND, KIND OF GOING BACK TO MY, MY THINKING WITH, YOU KNOW, RELOOKING ALONG 1 32, BECAUSE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY CHANGING, THE COUNTY'S CHANGING THE GAME ON US, THAT NORTHEAST CORNER, CARL STERN, UM, ON THIS IS SCENARIO ONE, BUT THE TOWNHOME YES, EXACTLY.
UH, IF CARL, IF THERE'S CARL STERN AND, UH, 1 32, IF THAT CORRIDOR BECOMES AN EMPLOYMENT CORRIDOR MM-HMM.
[01:55:01]
GOING TO BE, UH, RIGHT NEXT TO SOMETHING.ARE, DO YOU GUYS HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO KIND OF PIVOT ON THAT IN TERMS OF SCENARIO ONE? UM, AND, AND I I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
WE'RE TALKING CARL STERN IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROJECT.
AND ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 1 32 IS ON THE, UH, FOUR SIDE ON, ON THIS SIDE.
SO REALLY IT'S JUST, IF THIS WERE, WOULD THERE BE OPPOSITION IF WE ENDED UP WITH LOOKING AT THIS IN THE FUTURE, IF SCENARIO ONE WERE TO BE THE CHOSEN, WELL IF SCENARIO ONE, THEN THAT'S AN ARGUMENT AGAINST US NOT CHANGING THE FUTURE LANE MAP.
BUT IF WE DO GO WITH SCENARIO TWO, WHICH INCLUDES A DATA CENTER AND IS GOING TO BE A, I'M GONNA SAY A HIGH VALUE, ESPECIALLY WITH A SIX LANE HIGHWAY.
UM, THEN THATS, SO THEN FOR THIS, WOULD YOU WANT TO SEE THAT THIS PORTION MORE COMMERCIAL WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE COMMERCIAL OR MORE, UH, THIS PORTION HERE WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE COMMERCIAL OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR MAYBE ANOTHER DATA CENTER OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
SO HOW READILY COULD YOU PIVOT ON THIS PORTION OF SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWN HOMES, MULTI-FAMILY AND TOWN HOMES? IS THAT SOMETHING YOU GUYS WOULD BE CAPABLE OF DOING OR, BECAUSE HONESTLY I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO CONFLICTS WITH RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES AND IF THERE'S A TRANSITION ZONE, LIKE WE'VE TEND TO BUILT IN, A LOT OF THAT'S ALLEVIATED.
BUT IF THIS DOES, IF THE COUNTY'S CHANGED THE GAME PLAN ON US AND WE NEED TO PIVOT, HOW FLEXIBLE ARE YOU GUYS TO PIVOT? SO I'D SAY IN TERMS OF, OF THE P LANGUAGE UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT RATIOS FOR SCENARIO TWO, THE RESIDENTIAL IS INDICATED AS A MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE.
SO IF THERE DID WANT TO BE MORE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES TO HELP, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TRANSITION FROM THE HIGHER USES TO THE LOWER USES, LOWER RESIDENTIAL USES, THAT WOULD BE, UM, ALLOWABLE WITHIN THE PUD.
BECAUSE YEAH, THIS, THIS SCENARIO TOO MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME, BUT ONLY IF THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES THAT AREN'T INVOLVED IN THIS DECISION TONIGHT ARE COMPATIBLE, COMPATIBLE USE.
YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER LEE BROUGHT UP THE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT THE, UH, COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD SCENARIO TWO IS NOT THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO ADHERE TO COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS ON A JOINT ADJACENT PROPERTIES, THEN IT REALLY DISCOURAGES SCENARIO TWO.
THE, THE SCENARIO TWO SPEAKS TO THAT OPPORTUNITY TO TRANSITION FROM A HIGHER USE TO A LOWER USE, LIKE Y'ALL DESCRIBED EARLIER, THE CONCERN ABOUT A RESIDENTIAL HOME BEING BACKED UP TO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT'S ALREADY GOING IN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 1 32, WHICH IS THE HUD OMEGA SITE.
SO UNLESS YOU ALLOW WITHIN, UM, THE PUD TO HAVE A CONTROLLED TRANSITION, UM, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE THAT SCENARIO EVEN IF YOU ARE FULLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLU.
I MEAN WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THIS THING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN WITH OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG 1 32 IF WE DON'T MAKE A CHANGE.
AND, AND THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT UP INITIALLY BECAUSE I, I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE THERE MIGHT NEED TO BE A BUFFER, BUT I ALSO FEEL LIKE THIS IS TOO MUCH OF A BUFFER.
IF WE ALREADY HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IN THE MEGA SITE, THEN I DON'T, I PERSONALLY DON'T FEEL WE NEED TO ADD A WHOLE NOTHER SECTION OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, BECAUSE THEN WE'RE NOT BUFFERING.
IF WE'RE ALREADY GONNA HAVE A SIX LANE HIGHWAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE NECESSARILY NEED TO ADD MORE BUFFER, BECAUSE THEN WE'RE GONNA GET TO THE POINT OF, OKAY, NOW WHERE IS THE NEXT BUFFER? 'CAUSE CARL STERN INITIALLY IS PROBABLY GONNA BE A TWO LANE ROADWAY WITH A TURN LANE.
IT MIGHT STAY A TWO LANE ROADWAY WITH A TURN LANE FOR A WHILE.
I KNOW THE CURRENT SECTION IN HUDA IS NOT GONNA GROW 'CAUSE THERE'S NO SPACE TO GROW.
SO IT MIGHT STILL BE THAT THERE.
SO THAT'S NOT GONNA BE A BUFFER.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHY I'M THROWING THAT OUT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO BRING THAT BUFFER ANYMORE SOUTH.
WE'LL HAVE TO, UH, WE'LL HAVE TO COME TO, I THINK, BUT IT, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF DROP THAT IN EVERYONE'S BRAIN THAT YEAH.
[02:00:01]
MAY NEED TO RELOOK AT THIS.ONE LAST THING I, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU SAID.
UHOH, DID YOU SAY BUILDING HEIGHT? 'CAUSE I'M JUST NOW READING THIS.
DID YOU HAVE CONCERNS FOR MULTIFAMILY? 'CAUSE WE'RE ALLOWING IT TO GO FROM 35 FOOT.
I TO 50 FOOT NOW WITH FOUR STORIES.
WHY, WHY ARE WE COMPLETELY BLOWING THE UDC OUT NOW AND ALLOWING THIS OR WHICH PART? MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING HEIGHT.
WE'RE GOING FROM 35 FOOT ALLOWANCE TO 50 FOOT.
SO TO ALLOW FOR FOUR STORIES, THAT'S FOUR STORIES IS PRETTY STANDARD AND MULTIFAMILY RIGHT NOW.
SO WITH WHERE DEVELOPMENT IS REGIONALLY MM-HMM.
50 FEET DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG ASK.
UM, JUST BECAUSE THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MORE HIGHER DENSITY.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET INTO MORE URBAN CORE.
UM, AND THE WALKABILITY STANDARDS, IS THAT ALREADY IN OUR UDC CHANGES THOUGH? ARE WE ALLOWING THAT IN OUR UUD C REWRITE? UH, I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK.
I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER IF I READ THAT.
WELL, WE'RE ALLOWING, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A APARTMENTS NOW.
THERE ARE SOME PUDS THAT ARE ALLOWING FOR TALLER.
YOU CAN GET A LITTLE BIT TALLER ALONG SOME OF THE CORRIDORS.
BUT ALSO I WOULD SAY THE WAY THAT WE DESCRIBE A HEIGHT IN THE UDC RIGHT NOW IS A LITTLE STRANGE.
WE DON'T GO TO THE TOP OF THE DECK.
WE SAY IT'S TO THE, UM, TO THE VERY TOP OF THE PARA PITT.
WHICH, WHICH WILL, WHICH WE'RE FIXING THAT VERBIAGE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE, IF YOU LOOK AT A HOTEL MM-HMM.
I WAS LIKE, WELL MY, MY BIG THING WITH THIS ONE BEING 50 IS IT'S NOT ADJACENT TO A MAJOR ROADWAY.
I THINK CARL STERN WAS CONSIDERED A MAJOR COLLECTOR IN THE MOBILITY MASTER PLAN.
WELL IT'S LABELED AS AN ARTERIAL, BUT YEAH.
IT SHOULD NOT BE AN ARTERIAL IN THE SCENARIOS.
IT'S LABELED THAT IT'S, I KNOW IT'S 120 FEET WIDE, SO I BELIEVE THAT FITS INTO MORE OF THE MAJOR COLLECTOR OR MINOR ARTERIAL STANDARD 20 FEET.
NOW YOU'VE GOT TWO LANES EACH WAY WITH A CONTINUOUS LEFT FOR THE MOST OF IT.
BUT, BUT WELL, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO THE TOWN HOMES AND THE MULTIFAMILY WOULD ALL THEN BE ALLOWED TO BE FOUR STORIES TALL.
IS YOUR CONCERN MORE THAT IT'S A BUDDING RESIDENTIAL? WELL, A BUDDING RESIDENTIAL AND NOW WE'VE GOT THE EAST SIDE VERY DENSE AND VERY TALL, WHICH DEFINITELY CHANGES THE CONFIGURATION IN THE FIELD OF HURO BECAUSE YOU GET OFF MM-HMM.
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU THINK HUD IS THE TREND.
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHY OUR UDC RIGHT NOW ONLY HAS WHAT, 35 FOOT THREE STORIES.
I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER THEN IF WE WANT TO MM-HMM.
WELL, BECAUSE WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT DENSITY AND WE'RE ALREADY, WHAT'D WE ALREADY SAY? WE HAVE LIKE A THOUSAND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THIS.
WE'RE, WE'RE COMPRESS, WE'RE COMPRESSING THE LOT SIZES, HUNDRED TO 1200.
WE'RE COMPRESSING THE LOT SIZES AND SO ON.
AND THEN WE'RE ALSO GOING TO GIVE EXTRA MM-HMM.
PLUS, I MEAN, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON, I DON'T THINK I'M QUITE FOR THAT EITHER.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING WE WANT TO PUT IN THE CONDITION FOR APPROVAL? BUT THAT HAS TO CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE CONCLUDED ANYTHING ELSE WE WANTED TO CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE ACTUALLY WANNA PUT ANY VERBIAGE ABOUT THE WHOLE SCENARIO A OR SCENARIO ONE VERSUS TWO THING, OR IF WE'RE JUST GONNA WAIT TILL PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THAT.
WELL, IF WE'RE GONNA DO PRELIMINARY PLAT, I MEAN IF WE'RE GONNA DO A HEIGHT, IF WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION, DO WE NEED TO DO THAT BEFORE THEY DO A PRELIMINARY PLAT? YES.
BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE DISCUSSION WE HAD FOR A WHILE ABOUT THE WHOLE, ARE WE, ARE THEY GONNA FOLLOW THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN? IF THEY ARE, HOW ARE WE ADDRESSING THAT? ARE WE JUST WAITING UNTIL PRELIMINARY PLAT AND MAYBE THEY'LL BE FINE AND JUST DECIDE TO GO WITH
[02:05:01]
SCENARIO ONE AND WE'RE GREAT.WELL, IF WE HOLD OFF UNTIL PRELIMINARY PLAT, THEN THAT, THAT ALLOWS THEM TO MARKET AND COME UP WITH ONE OR THE OTHER.
I MEAN, BACK ON PAGE TWO 11, YOU KNOW THAT THOSE, THAT TABLE, YOU KNOW, THOSE FOUR CONCERNS I HAD ABOUT THE MM-HMM.
AND, AND FOR TOWN HOME, THAT DOESN'T SOUND UNREASONABLE.
AND THEN THE, UM, THE SPACING BETWEEN BUILDINGS FROM 20 TO 10, BUT TALKED ABOUT THAT.
BUT I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH TWO OTHER, AT LEAST TWO OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE FOUR STORIES IN THE 50 FOOT.
SO THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT, WOULD WE PUT SOMETHING IN TODAY? MM-HMM
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD, HOW WE, WHAT VERBIAGE WE WOULD USE.
SO IF WE TAKE AWAY AN ENTIRE LEVEL OFF OF ALL THESE APARTMENTS THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IF THIS SOMEONE HAS WHAT TWO WHERE THEY'RE WANTING TO PUT IN MULTI-FAMILIES, DOES THAT MEAN A THIRD APARTMENT COMPLEX IS GONNA GO INTO THIS COMPLEX TO MAKE UP FOR IT? BECAUSE WE TOOK RID OF A TO LAY OF A FLOOR, THEY PUT THE FLOOR SOMEWHERE ELSE.
I MEAN THEY'RE, THEY'RE FINANCIALLY HAVING TO JUSTIFY.
I HATE THE FACT THAT IT, IT'S A FOUR STORY THOUGHT PROCESS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN HU A VERY LONG TIME AND IT IS MY SMALL TOWN.
BUT I MEAN, WHAT ARE WE, IF WE PUT THAT IN THE VERBIAGE AND THEN THEY COME BACK WITH TWO MORE APARTMENT COMPLEXES TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS OF A FLOOR, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE PROJECT? I MEAN, THIS IS ALSO CONCEPTUAL STAGE THOUGH, SO ABSOLUTELY.
I'M JUST, I'M BEING THE DEVILS ADVOCATE.
THEY BACK AND REMOVE A WHOLE MULTIFAMILY SECTION AND DECIDE TO DO MORE SINGLE, WHICH IS FINE.
BUT I'M JUST SAYING LIKE, I MEAN IF WE JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO BE THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE ON THIS ONE.
HERE'S A, I GUESS PROCEDURAL QUESTION.
COULD WE, COULD WE APPROVE THIS AND THEN DIRECT THAT IT COMES BACK WITH SCENARIO ONE, SCENARIO TWO PRIOR TO PRELIMINARY PLAT SO THAT WE CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THAT PART? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO TABLE IT, WOULDN'T WE? YEAH, THAT WOULD JUST BE A, THEY HAVE TO TABLE, I DON'T THINK WE CAN APPROVE IT AT ALL.
IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT YOU WANT THEM TO WORK OUT FOR THE CONCERNS, THEN I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE A TABLE.
'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW OF A WAY TO SAY YOU'RE TECHNICALLY APPROVED BUT NOT BECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GAIN IS THE ABILITY TO MARKET.
UM, IF IT'S AN ISSUE OF THE HEIGHTS, I'LL TELL YOU, I LOOKED WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED RIGHT NOW FOR MULTIFAMILY WOULD BE GOING TO A 45 FOOT STANDARD, WHICH THIS IS ONLY FIVE FEET MORE.
SO THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT FOUR STORY.
SO EVEN IN THE NEW UDC WE'RE LOOKING AT, FOR THOSE LARGER MULTIFAMILY UNITS TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY, WE MIGHT NEED TO RELOOK THAT UDC RE RIGHT NOW.
AND CAN I ASK A CLARIFICATION QUESTION? YEAH.
IS THAT OKAY? UM, IN TERMS OF THE BUILDING HEIGHT, IS IT, IS IT THE ROOT CONCERN BEING THE HEIGHT IN GENERAL, THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION IN RELATION TO OTHER DEVELOPMENTS OR THE DENSITY? LIKE WHAT, WHAT DO YOU THINK IS, SO MY, MY PROBLEM IS NOT THE DENSITY AT ALL.
I'M, I'M FINE WITH TOWN HOMES, I'M FINE WITH THREE STORY TOWN HOMES, ET CETERA.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE REALLY LOVE ABOUT HURO IS THAT SMALL TOWN FEEL.
AND IF WE'RE DROPPING FOUR STORY APARTMENTS ALONG CARL STERN AND ALONG THIS ARTERIAL THAT WILL LEAD DIRECTLY TO EAST WILCO HIGHWAY, THAT'S GONNA BE THE FIRST THING THEY SEE WHEN THEY GET OFF OF EAST WILCO HIGHWAY IS NOT GONNA BE HIPPOS.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE, OH LOOK, THIS LOOKS SO CUTE AND QUAINT.
IT'S GOING TO BE TOWN HOMES OR APARTMENTS RIGHT UP ON THE STREET 50 FEET TALL.
THAT IS NOT THE CHARACTER SMALL ANYMORE OF HURO OR AT LEAST THE CHARACTER OF HURO THAT PEOPLE WANNA RETAIN.
I MEAN, OUR VERY FIRST BUILDING THAT'S MORE THAN THREE STORIES IS A PARKING GARAGE.
[02:10:01]
YEAH, OUR PARKING GARAGE IS THE BIGGEST BUILDING IN TOWN.OUR HOTELS ARE ONLY THREE STORIES.
THE ONES THAT ARE ACTUALLY BUILT, THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE ACTUALLY BUILT, I'M TALKING ABOUT BUILT.
WE APPROVED A FOUR STORY, BUT YES, IT HADN'T, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST BUILDING IN TOWN IS A PARKING GARAGE AND THAT HAS CAUSED A LOT OF HEAT
I, YOU KNOW, TO, TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE TO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GONNA BE GOING DOWN 1 32 AND YOU'RE GONNA SEE THE, THE MEGA SITE THERE.
SO IT'S LIKE YOU CAN'T REALLY HAVE THE, THE HU RURAL FEEL RIGHT NEXT TO THE MEGA SITE.
SO TRYING TO TRANSITION THAT, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
AND IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME CLARIFICATION LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN ADD IN THE POD TO HELP ALLEVIATE THAT FEEL AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THEN, THEN SURE.
BUT I, I THINK MY BIGGEST THING IS AS LONG AS IT KIND OF LIKE FLOWS AWAY AND SO LIKE IF THE BIGGER STUFF IS CLOSER TO THE MEGA SITE AND THEN IT FLOWS AWAY TO MORE HU FEEL, THE FURTHER AWAY IT GETS LIKE THAT WOULD IDEALLY BE WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE.
JUST SO THAT YOU DO GET THAT GRADUAL BACK TO HU RIGHT.
AND MY, MY CONCERN WITH THIS PARTICULAR NO PROPERTY IS THAT THE SOUTH END IS REALLY CLOSE YEAH.
TO THE FREEWAY, THE EAST WILCO AND YOU KNOW, SO RIGHT.
AND THE MEGA SITE'S UP CLOSER TO THE OTHER SIDE.
IF YOU HAVE IT WHERE IT FLOWS BECAUSE THE, THE THING IS, IS THE MEG YEAH.
THE MEGA SITE'S GONNA HAVE THE BIGGER BUILDINGS.
SO HAVE THE BIGGER BUILDINGS WITH IT AND HAVE THE SMALLER STUFF.
MM-HMM
BUT, YOU KNOW, STACKING THE, LIKE THE MULTIFAMILY AND I'M LOOKING AT UH, THIS ONE HERE, SCENARIO TWO, MULTI-FAMILY IS PRETTY MUCH RIGHT AFTER, RIGHT.
A RIGHT WHEN YOU GET OFF OF EAST WILCO, YOU'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY FOUR STORY 50 FEET TALL RIGHT THERE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AS DRIVING DOWN CARL STERN POTENTIALLY 50 FEET TALL.
SO COULD WE PUT SOMETHING IN THERE WHERE, BUT SHE THE A APARTMENT CLOSER TO THE GOT NOW ON INNOVATION.
SORRY, YOU'VE GOT THAT NOW ON INNOVATION.
THE APARTMENTS THEY'RE BUILDING THERE, THEY'RE FOUR STORIES.
HOW THOSE NOT SMALL ANYMORE GUYS.
YOU GOTTA GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD.
I WISH IT WOULD'VE REMAIN SMALL TOO, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO, WE NEED TO FACE THE FACTS.
HUDU IS NOT GOING TO BE SMALL ANYMORE.
I'M GONNA SAY, HERE'S THE THING.
HUDU IS NOT GONNA BE SMALL 'CAUSE WE'RE GOING LIKE CRAZY.
BUT IF WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO AFFECT THAT, THAT GROWTH IS STILL MANAGEABLE 'CAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE NOT IN A MANAGEABLE STAGE ANYMORE.
THAT GROWTH IS STILL MANAGEABLE.
THAT WE CAN ALLOW IT TO BE HEIGHTS THAT STILL MAKE SENSE, BUT STILL FUNCTION FOR WHAT WE NEED THEN THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN AFFECT.
THAT WAS THE INTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN, LIKE WE STATED MULTIPLE TIMES.
WE STILL WANT THAT HUDDLE FEEL WITH MANAGEABLE GROWTH.
IF WE CAN DO THAT BY RESTRICTING THE HEIGHTS THAT WE'RE ALLOWING, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
LIKE WE, EVEN THAT DATA CENTER THAT WE ALLOWED TO GO IN, I DON'T REMEMBER HOW MANY FEET IT IS, BUT IT'S WAY BEYOND ANYTHING WE EVER WANTED TO BE BUILT.
BUT WE ENDED UP ALLOWING THAT LIKE ONE TIME 120 I THINK ADDITION.
SOME CRAZY NUMBER THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWING ANYWHERE ELSE BECAUSE JUST BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE A ONE TIME THING.
WE'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW THAT EVERYWHERE.
SO IT'S THE SAME THING WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WITH THIS.
DO WE REALLY WANT THAT MOVING FORWARD? 'CAUSE IF WE ALLOW THIS AND WE TRULY LET THAT CHANGE GO THROUGH THE UDC THAT I DIDN'T REALIZE WAS PART OF IT, THEN WE WILL NOW HAVE FOUR STORY.
EVERYTHING WILL BE FOUR STORY.
THAT'S MY, MY THAT'S MY PERSONAL FEELINGS.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
WHAT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IS HOW MANY THERE ARE.
I MEAN WE GOT 900 GOING IN HERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY S**T THEY'RE PROPOSING.
I, I MEAN I DON'T, MY PROBLEM IS THE NUMBER OF APARTMENTS.
BUT I THINK ALSO THE CONCERN IS, IS WHAT'S THE TRANSITION BETWEEN A FOUR STORY AND THEN ONE STORY SF ONE.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S, I I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT WE'RE NOT SMALL AND FOUR STORIES ARE INEVITABLE THROUGHOUT.
I MEAN NOT THROUGHOUT, BUT SCATTERED THROUGHOUT.
BUT WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRANSITION, YOU KNOW, HAVING
[02:15:01]
A FOUR STORY NEXT TO, YOU KNOW, TO THE, TO THE, THE SAY TO THE EAST.BUT I THINK THE DEVELOPER WE'RE ASKING TO APPRECIATE THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING AND I'M, I'M NOT A DEVELOPER, BUT IF YOU TRANSITION THAT, YOU KNOW, FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO, TO HIGHER MULTI AS YOU GET TO, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S APPLICABLE OR VALUABLE AND I DON'T WANT A DEVELOPER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRANSITION.
SO I'M GONNA THROW OUT THIS 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN TALKING FOR THIS.
WELL I PROPOSE, I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION YET.
I'M JUST PROPOSING THAT WE TABLE THIS.
WE ASK THE DEVELOPER, WELL WE ASK THE ENGINEERS TO TELL THE DEVELOPERS TO COME BACK WITH, UM, EITHER ONE A PROPOSAL THAT HOW THEY CAN CONFORM WITH THE SCENARIO ONE, IF THERE'S ANY REASONS THAT THEY NEED TO DEVIATE FROM THAT WITH THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT THEY LOOK AT THE MULTIFAMILY PIECE TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO GO LARGER THAN THE ALLOWED HEIGHT THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT THAT IN MORE TRANSITION ZONES.
UM, AND THEN I SWEAR THERE WAS ONE OTHER THING THAT WE, IS THERE ANOTHER THING THAT WE LOOKED AT OR IS THAT THE ONLY TWO OH YEAH.
AND THE STREET THING THAT, THAT THEY ACTUALLY LOOK AT HOW THEY CAN HELP BEFORE WE GET TO PRELIMINARY PLAT, WHICH ROADWAYS THEY COULD INTEND HELPING BUILD OUT, UM, TO HELP WITH THE TRAFFIC UNDER A THOUSAND DOLLARS OF LINEAR
UM, SO WOULD THAT, I JUST, WOULD, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WE'D BE AMENABLE TO YOU? I LIKE THAT WOULD WHAT YOU HAVE JERICHO, OH, SORRY JE GO AHEAD.
I JUST, I FEEL LIKE WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT SCENARIO ONE WHERE IT'S, YOU KNOW, SEEMS MORE FOCUSED ON SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE WANT COMMERCIAL AND SO WE KEEP KIND OF WELL, SO LET, WELL LET ME CLARIFY.
SO SCENARIO ONE IS FOLLOWING THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH ACTUALLY HAS 15% COMMERCIAL IS A REQUIREMENT.
UM, SCENARIO TWO IS NOWHERE NEAR THAT.
IT'S ALLOWING 50% COMMERCIAL TO INCLUDE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
NO, I, I I'M, I I'M, I UNDERSTAND.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE LITERALLY FOR TWO HOURS TALKED ABOUT HOW WE'RE TRYING TO BRING IN MORE COMMERCIAL INTO THIS TOWN AND WE'RE ABOUT TO HAVE THEM GO BACK AND BE LIKE, HEY, WE WANNA REALLY FOCUS ON SCHEMATICS ONE WHEN WE'RE KIND OF CONTRADICTING WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT FOR TWO HOURS IN THE OTHER PLAN WHERE WE REALLY WANNA LOOK AT MORE BRINGING IN MORE COMMERCIAL BECAUSE COMMERCIAL IS WHAT'S GONNA OFFSET TAXES AND OFFSET YES.
COSTS AND WELL, AS LONG AS WE DON'T REBATE THEM, BUT YES.
WELL EVEN IF WE REBATE THEM FOR A FEW YEARS, EVENTUALLY IT WILL
AND, AND WE, YOU KNOW, IF WE CONTINUE TO, TO JUST FIND AND FIGHT FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THESE SMALLER, SHORTER BUILDINGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THEN WE ARE GONNA END UP BECOMING JUST A BEDROOM COMMUNITY THAT'S GONNA PUSH A LOT OF RESIDENTS OUT BECAUSE WE CAN'T AFFORD TO, TO PAY FOR MORE SCHOOLS.
WE CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY FOR MORE.
AND IF THEY'RE DOING A 50% COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THE MEGA CENTER.
WHY NOT? WELL, I, I HEAR YOUR POINT.
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE THOUGH, I AM ALL ABOUT COMMERCIAL.
THAT'S WHY I WAS A BIG ADVOCATE FOR THIS COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS THING THAN WE DID BECAUSE THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR AT LEAST 15% COMMERCIAL, I WOULD'VE WENT MORE THAN THAT.
BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT BECAUSE I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE THERE.
BUT IN B ONE B TWO TYPE STUFF, SO SHOPPING CENTERS, LOCAL COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, STUFF LIKE THAT, BECAUSE IT'S BY NEIGHBORHOODS, WE NEED TO HAVE WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY WALK LESS THAN A QUARTER MILE AND GO TO RETAIL.
IT WAS NOT LET'S BUILD THESE HUGE ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL AREAS BECAUSE WE'RE STILL GETTING THE SAME INTENT FROM THE SMALLER SCALE COMMERCIAL.
WITH ACTUALLY ALLOW HAVING SOMETHING THAT THE RESIDENTS WILL USE.
THE RESIDENTS ARE NOT GONNA USE THE INDUSTRIAL PARK UNLESS THEY WORK THERE.
WE'RE WE'RE ALLOWING IT TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE, SOMETHING THE RESIDENTS CAN UTILIZE WITH STILL REQUIRING THEM TO PUT THAT IN.
I KNOW IT'S ONLY AT 15% VERSUS POTENTIALLY, I MEAN, WITH THE OTHER ONE, THEY'RE STILL PUTTING THE 15% LIKE LOCAL COMMERCIAL IN, SO THEY'RE REALLY ONLY PUTTING ABOUT 30% IN OF INDUSTRIAL.
SO I AGREE THEY'RE, THEY'RE ADDING INDUSTRIAL, BUT THAT'S STILL NOT HELPING THE RESIDENTS WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT THEY WANT TO UTILIZE.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO A WORLD WHERE WE'RE JUST NOT GOING INTO STORES AS MUCH AS WE USED TO.
[02:20:01]
ISN'T LIGHT INDUSTRIAL NOW THAN IT IS STOREFRONT MOM AND POPS, THINGS LIKE THAT.MORE PEOPLE ARE DOING STUFF AT HOME AND USING ETSY AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO SEND THEIR STUFF OUT.
AND IT'S SAVING THEM STOREFRONT MONEY AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
AND SO I DON'T WANNA LIMIT US DOWN TO THESE LITTLE BITTY CHUNKS OF COMMERCIAL SPACE FOCUSING, TRYING TO STAY IN THAT SMALL TOWN FEEL IN THIS PROPERTY WHEN HALF OF IT CAN BE THAT SMALL TOWN FEEL AND HALF OF IT CAN BLEND IN WITH THE MEGA SITE AND WE CAN GET SOME SERIOUS MONEY COMING INTO HU TO HELP OFFSET EVERYTHING ELSE WITH LESS WATER USE, LESS WASTEWATER USE, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BECAUSE THESE INDUSTRIAL PLACES DON'T USE NEAR THE WASTEWATER, NEAR THE WATER ISSUES.
AND THEN WE DON'T END UP LIKE GEORGETOWN WHO HAS A HUGE DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN'T GET WATER TO IT RIGHT NOW AND THEY'RE FIGHTING THE DEVELOPMENT STARTED AND NOW IT'S PAUSED BECAUSE IT CAN'T GET WATER.
LIKE THAT'S WHERE MY ARGUMENT IS WITH THE TWO DIFFERENCES.
UH, I I HAVE A SUGGESTION FOR YOU ON THE BUFFERING BETWEEN FOUR STORY, MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY.
SO THAT ONLY OCCURS IN, IN ONE LOCATION IN THIS PLAN, AND IT'S ON SCENARIO ONE.
IF YOU SEE THE, THERE'S THE LINE SORT OF THE, THE POND.
SO THE BREAD IS COMMERCIAL, RIGHT.
AND ALSO MAYBE THE SCALE IS KIND OF THROWING YOU OFF.
IF YOU LOOKED AT THE, THE LAST ONE FOR MEADOWBROOK, THAT WAS A ONE ACRE.
THESE, LIKE THE SMALL ONES ARE, ARE MINI ACRES.
UM, SO THERE'S, THIS IS A 37 ACRE POND.
SO THE, THOSE COMMERCIAL, IT'S A LAKE.
THEY'RE LIKE THREE ACRES EACH AROUND THE, THE TRAFFIC STORE.
UM, SO THERE'S LIKE A, YOU KNOW, A DOZEN ACRES OF COMMERCIAL THERE.
UM, BUT MAYBE IF ON THAT ONE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE FOUR STORY MULTIFAMILY AND UH, FOUR STORY MULTIFAMILY IS COMING OUT WHERE I'M LOOKING OUT OVER IT IN MY BACKYARD.
UM, SO YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE ZOOM.
UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REALLY BIG.
UM, THAT ZOOM SO PANNING TO THE WEST, WE COULD DO CALL IT MAYBE A 75 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE AND A FOUR STORY.
IF IT, IF IT DOES END UP BEING FOUR STORY, THERE'S A POSSIBILITY ENDS UP BEING THREE STORY MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE TRACT, UM, ALONG THAT INTERFACE BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE MULTIFAMILY.
I MEAN, I I NOBODY WANTS A 20 FOOT BUILDING SEPARATION OR 30 FOOT BUILDING SEPARATION AND YOU ANGLE IT WHERE THEIR WINDOWS OR THEIR BALCONIES OF THE APARTMENT ARE NOT FACING THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
LIKE I THINK THAT WOULD BE MORE OF A SITE PLAN TYPE TYPE OF, SORRY, BEING AHEAD OF MYSELF, BUT I, I'M SORRY, BUT I THINK YOUR INTENTION IS IN ALIGNMENT.
SO I'M TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THERE BECAUSE IT REALLY IS, IT, IT'S JUST OFF THE EDGE OF THE SCREEN THERE, BUT THERE'S REALLY ONLY THAT ONE INTERFACE BETWEEN MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY ON THE ENTIRE SITE PLANT THE OTHER.
WELL I THINK WE WERE ALSO LOOKING AT THE TOWN HOMES THOUGH.
'CAUSE THE TOWN HOMES COULD ALSO THEN BE FOUR STORIES.
I DIDN'T THAT NO, I, THAT, THAT'S ON A, A MAXIMUM OF THREE STORIES ON THE, ON THE TOWN.
AND, AND WHAT WE, WHAT WE DID IN A PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT IS WORK TALKED WITH THE DEVELOPERS AND WE WENT FROM A THREE STORY TO A TWO STORY ABUTTING, THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT TO IT.
WE DID THAT, UH, JUST NORTH OF AL LOOP.
WE DID ANYTHING WITH AN 85 FEET, LINEAR FEET OF SINGLE FAMILY WAS GONNA BE LIMITED TO TWO STORIES.
ANYTHING WITH A HUNDRED AND THEN ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT UP TO A HUNDRED FEET WOULD BE ABLE TO BE TALLER.
AND MAYBE WE COULD WORK SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN HERE SO THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HUGE STRETCH OF OPEN LAND, BUT IT COULD BE A TWO STORY APARTMENT, SINGLE FAMILY HOME, TWO STORY APARTMENT, THREE STORY APARTMENT.
OR, OR A A DRAINAGE POND, A LIKE A DETENTION POND OR, SO I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS WE CAN DO ON SITE PLANNING TRAIL THAT KEEPS THE BUILDINGS SOMETHING FURTHER APART THAT ISN'T JUST YEAH.
JUST, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE IT OPEN LAND NECESSARILY.
IT COULD BE A KIND OF A STEPPED APPROACH.
ASHLEY, IF YOU MENTIONED 85 FEET, I MEAN, I, I'D THROWN OUT 75 YEAH.
I THINK YOU'RE GETTING WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
AND, AND I THINK MOST OF THAT STUFF DOES NORMALLY HAPPEN WHEN DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS COHESIVELY.
I'M ASSUMING THAT PROJECT KIND OF CAME IN NEXT TO EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IS DIFFERENT.
[02:25:01]
IS TRUE.YOU'RE DEVELOPING THIS WHILE YOU'RE DEVELOPING THE SINGLE FAMILY.
NO DEVELOPER IS GOING TO, YOU KNOW, CUT OFF THEIR NOSE DESPITE THEIR FACE AND, AND CAUSING COMPATIBILITIES.
NOT NO DEVELOPER, BUT MOST OF 'EM
HAVE WE BEATEN THIS GOOD
I MEAN, I, UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE SOMETHING TO TALK THROUGH, I WOULD STILL RECOMMEND TABLING IT BECAUSE OF THE WHOLE SCENARIO ONE VERSUS SCENARIO TWO PIECE.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE PERSONALLY AREN'T IN, IN AGREEMENT EITHER HOW WE WOULD WANT THAT TO GO EITHER.
SO I THINK IT, I WOULD PERSONALLY RECOMMEND THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THEM TO COME BACK WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A, AGAIN, CLARITY ON CAN THEY GET CLOSER TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ARE THERE REASONS WHY THEY CAN'T GO CLOSER TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD? IF, IF, IF THAT WAS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE TIME ASPECT FOR YOUR ATTORNEY? IS THIS A SIX WEEK OR SIX MONTHS OR THE, THE QUESTION IS, WHY, WHY DID THEY WANT TO DO BUSINESS PARK NEXT TO OR OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL NEXT TO THE EXISTING OR, OR PROPOSED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL? AND HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO EXPLAIN THE, THE BUFFERING THERE IS? I I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS WHAT THE WOULD BE.
SO, SO THE QUESTION IS MORE BASED ON, I MEAN, SO BASED ON WHAT WE AGREED TO AS A CITY, NOT THAT LONG AGO, THIS AREA WAS A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOCUSED ON A NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL WITH STILL ABOUT 15, 20% COMMERCIAL.
BUT THE COMMERCIAL WAS SUPPOSED TO BE LIGHT OR LOCAL COMMERCIAL SHOPPING, WHATEVER, RETAIL, ALL THAT.
BUT SCENARIO TWO IS GOING COMPLETELY AWAY FROM THAT VIA THIS PUD AND GOING TO 50% COMMERCIAL AND 35% OF THAT OR MORE BEING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHICH WAS NEVER EVEN ALLOWED IN A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PIECE.
SO IN REALITY, IT'S NOT EVEN MEETING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO START WITH.
AND SO THAT'S KIND OF THE QUESTION AS TO WHY, WHY DOES IT NEED TO TRANSITION TO THAT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PIECE BEING THERE SINCE IT'S NOT FOLLOWING WHAT THE, THE CITY'S PUTTING OUT NEEDS TO BE.
UH, MAYBE SOME HISTORY ON THE PROJECT, UM, WHERE WE, WE DID THE FLU AMENDMENT, UM, SO WE WERE HERE FOR ALL THAT.
I THINK SOME OF YOU PROBABLY SAW US AT THAT POINT.
UM, I MIGHT HAVE HAD MY HAIR DOWN, I CAN'T REMEMBER.
UM, SO THE, THE DISCUSSION THERE WAS MOVING THIS FROM OPEN SPACE TO THE, THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, I MEAN THE, THE MEGA SITE WASN'T REALLY GETTING A LOT OF TRACTION AT THAT TIME.
SO AS ANNOUNCEMENTS ROLLED IN, I THINK YALE'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT'S BEEN KILLING IT IN TERMS OF BRINGING THAT IN.
UH, THE 120 FEET WAS, UM, WE GOT A TEXT FROM OUR CLIENT, UH, PROBABLY THE SECOND THAT THAT HIT THE AUSTIN BUSINESS JOURNAL AND A COUPLE OF THOSE THINGS PUSHED THEM TO SAY, HEY, WE'D LIKE TO CONSIDER THIS OPTIONALITY.
UM, WE'RE NOT SURE IF IT'S GOING TO BE AS MARKETABLE TO SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPERS COULD BE MORE MARKETABLE TO, UH, BLIGHT INDUSTRIAL TYPE DEVELOPERS.
AND WE OBVIOUSLY TONED DOWN, UH, YOU KNOW, ALLOWABLE USES RELATIVE TO THE OUTRIGHT ZONING.
UM, SO I THINK KIND OF WALKING THROUGH HOW, HOW THEY GOT TO THAT LO LOCATION, UM, WE ALSO HAD A, AN OPTIONALITY THAT WAS ENTIRELY INDUSTRIAL THAT, UM, ASHLEY VERY CLEARLY STATED DIDN'T FIT, UM, AT ALL WITH THE GUIDELINES.
I THINK SHE WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT THIS ONE GETS A LOT CLOSER IN TERMS OF THE MIX OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUFFERING TO THE RESIDENTIAL.
I MEAN, THIS, THIS PROJECT'S BEEN UNDERWAY.
UM, MY CLIENTS CLOSED ON THIS THREE YEARS AGO AND A LOT OF THINGS.
AND, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON PROJECTS IN HUDU FOR, FOR YEARS.
I'VE ENTITLED 8,000 LOTS IN HU UH, A LOT HAS CHANGED IN THREE YEARS IN HU AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THIS PROJECT HAS GONE THROUGH MANY ITERATIONS.
I THINK YOU SAW THE ALL SINGLE FAMILY LAED LAND PLAN.
THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL LOOKED AT WHEN WE DID THE FLU AMENDMENT.
UM, THAT, THAT A LOT HAS CHANGED SINCE THAT, THAT LAST TIME THAT WE WERE HERE.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHY YOU'RE SEEING THAT REQUEST.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW THAT MUCH WOULD CHANGE IF WE WENT BACK TO OUR CLIENT AND SAID, UM, WHY DO YOU WANNA DO THIS? I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE MORE ALONG THE LINES OF THAT IS WHAT WE WANNA DO.
BUT IT'S A LITTLE TOUGH TO SAY IN THE MARKET RIGHT NOW AS AN EXAMPLE, MULTIFAMILY WAS THE HOTTEST THING EVER WHEN WE DREW THIS AND THERE WERE THREE MULTIFAMILY TRACKS ON IT.
UH, YOU COULDN'T SELL MULTIFAMILY OUT HERE TO SAVE YOUR LIFE RIGHT NOW.
I THINK THAT WAS A, A CONCERN COMMISSIONER WORDS THAT, THAT YOU HAD.
UM, IT, IT'S NOT MARKETABLE RIGHT NOW.
IT SIMPLY WON'T BE DEVELOPED FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND UNTIL THE MARKET CATCHES BACK UP.
SO, UM, JUST, IT'S A, IT'S A MOVING TARGET WHEN YOU'RE KIND OF THE FIRST PROJECT IN THE, IN THE AREA THIS FAR AWAY FROM THE EDGE OF IDAHO.
[02:30:06]
SO I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING THAT WE HAVE THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SCENARIO TO THIS.I THOUGHT, OH, I, I LOOKED AT IT AND I, WHAT I GOT FROM THAT WAS THAT IF YOU WERE TO GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND SAY, CAN YOU MEET, CAN YOU GET CLOSER TO THIS? AND WHAT WOULD THAT, WHAT WOULD THAT TAKE? HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE? AND IS IT EVEN VIABLE OR FEASIBLE? I GUESS PART OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS NO, IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF THE MARKET PRESSURE, MARKET SITUATION, BUT ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE DEVELOPER, I'M NOT TO SAY REFUSING, BUT THEY'RE UNABLE TO, TO MEET OR TO, TO GET ANY CLOSER TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD AS HUDU IS SPECIFIED THAN WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW? I I I THINK YOU'RE SEEING THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IN OPTION ONE AND I THINK IF YOU TOLD THEM TO TRY TO GET ALL THE WAY THERE, THEY WOULD COME BACK WITH A REQUEST TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE OPTION TWO ON, ON THE PLAN.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OPTION ONE, THE RESIDENTIAL.
I I, I THINK WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT, UH, THAT THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY MORE LIKELY SCRAP OPTION ONE AND SIMPLY SAY THAT TWO OPTION TWO IS THE PROJECT FOR NOW.
AND IF THAT FAILED TO GAIN TRACTION IN THE MARKETPLACE, THEN GO BACK TO, TO OPTION ONE AFTER THE FACT.
WELL, I HEAR THAT, BUT I'M, I'M GOING TO PUT THE REALITY OUT OF THOUGH THAT UNLESS THIS IS APPROVED IN THE PUD IN REALITY, OPTION TWO CANNOT HAPPEN.
I WHAT I'M SAYING IS I THINK THEY WOULD PRIORITIZE OPTION TWO MM-HMM.
BUT OPTION TWO ISN'T VIABLE FOR THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO IT WOULD BE DENIED.
SO ARE WE ARE, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? MM-HMM.
BECAUSE IF WE GO BACK TO WHAT JERICHO WAS SAYING, RIGHT? LIKE I I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE SAYING WE WANT THE RESIDENTIAL VERSUS WHY WE'RE SAYING WE WANT THE COMMERCIAL.
BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, I LOVE THE IDEA OF HAVING A STRONGER TAX BASE THAT'S NOT PEOPLE IN, IN THEIR HOMES.
SO IF WE, IF WE REMOVE THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW IT CAME TO BE, RIGHT? RIGHT.
AND WE TALK ABOUT THE REALITY OF WHAT THE SITUATION IS THAT WE HAVE THE MEGA SITE AND THIS IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT LITERALLY.
SO THERE'S, IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE THAT TYPE OF COMMERCIAL AND THE SAME VICINITY THAT CLOSE TO SAMSUNG.
LIKE TO ME IT MAKES SENSE TO GO DOWN THAT PATH RATHER THAN HAVING 1200 HOMES POTENTIALLY, OR PEOPLE LIVING THERE.
TO ME, AND, AND I GET LIKE I WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS FAR AS LIKE THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD PIECE.
BUT IF WE TAKE ALL OF THOSE THINGS AWAY AND LOOK AT REALITY FOR WHAT IT IS AND HOW THIS WILL GET PAID FOR AND HOW WE'RE DOING THINGS WITH OUR TAX MONEY THAT WE'RE GETTING IN, LIKE TO ME IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO HAVE THE COMMERCIAL GROWTH AND PUSH FOR THAT.
I'M JUST SAYING WE'RE MAKING A REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEVELOPER AND THE, AND, AND, AND ENGINEERING AND APPLICANT TO COMPLY WITH COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T, MAYBE WE SHOULD MAKE THIS SITE NOT A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHY, WHY ARE WE, WHY ARE WE THE ORIGINAL, THE ORIGINAL REASON I BROUGHT THIS UP WAS BECAUSE WE AS A COMMISSION AND AS A CITY BARELY EVEN A YEAR AGO RIGHT.
CRAZY STATED THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED THIS AREA TO BE.
AND IF WE WERE ALREADY REVERSING THAT RIGHT.
STATING WE ARE NOW GOING TO CHANGE THAT BECAUSE REALLY NOTHING'S CHANGED IN THAT PAST YEAR-ISH OF WHAT'S COMING IN.
WE STILL KNEW MEGA A SITE WAS HAPPENING.
ONLY CHANGE I NOW KNOW IS WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SIX LANE HIGHWAY ON 1 32
WELL YOU WON'T SEE THAT FROM HERE.
UM, BUT I'M, I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHAT WE STATED A YEAR-ISH AGO.
AND SO IF WE ARE CHANGING THAT NOW, THEN WE NEED TO REALLY THINK THROUGH THAT WITH OTHER THINGS.
'CAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST PIECE HERE.
[02:35:01]
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME ALONG.SO IF WE'RE GONNA CHANGE ALL OF THOSE AWAY FROM WHAT WE ORIGINALLY DECIDED AND FORCE THEM BIGGER NOW TO ALLOW THEM MORE FLEXIBILITY TO PUT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ALONG THAT WHOLE STRIP, THEN I AGREE.
BUT THAT'S GONNA INVOLVE CHANGING ALL OF IT.
RIGHT? WELL, SCENARIO ONE, IT COMES VERY CLOSE TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHY ARE WE ASKING THEM TO DO THAT? BY GIVING THEM THESE BIG WAIVERS ON THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN IT, WE JUST SHOULD CHANGE THEIR REQUIREMENTS UPFRONT INSTEAD OF WAIVING SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO, BUT WE'VE NOW DECIDED WE CAN'T DO, OR WE'RE GONNA REVISIT THAT FROM, FOR ME, AFTER ONLY ONE YEAR, WHY ARE WE, WHY ARE WE MAKING SCENARIO TWO CONFORM TO THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN IT CAN'T? THAT WASN'T THE, THE INTENT IS NOT FOR SCENARIO TWO TO CONFORM SCENARIO ONE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN CONFORM TO THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE.
I THOUGHT THIS PUD THESE WAIVERS WERE TO ALLOW SCENARIO TWO.
NO, THE WAIVERS ARE JUST THAT THE PUD OR THE WHOLE THING, THE PUD IN TRUE FASHION JUST BLOWS OUT ANYTHING THAT'S IN UDC IF IT'S WRITTEN IN THE PUT RIGHT.
AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE BLOWING OUT THE UDC WHEN IT COMES TO EITHER WHAT THE FUTURE LAND USE IS, A COUPLE OTHER SPECIFIC THINGS ABOUT HEIGHTS AND ALL OF THAT THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THIS PUT.
SO THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING IS WE JUST NEED TO DECIDE ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT BEING AN OPTION? DO WE JUST WANNA WAIT UNTIL THE PRELIMINARY COMES BACK AND SAY THIS IS GOOD.
AND THEN HOPE WITH THE PRELIMINARY, IF THEY COME BACK AND NOW DECIDE THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN LIKE 75% INDUSTRIAL, THAT WE'RE GONNA BE FINE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT AT THIS POINT.
OR DO WE WANT TO ADDRESS IT AT THIS POINT? I DON'T CARE EITHER WAY REALLY NOW, I MEAN AS LONG AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON IT SOME WAY OR THE OTHER.
MY, MY, I GUESS IN ONE SENTENCE, IF THEY'RE UNABLE, IF THE THE SITUATION IS UNABLE TO MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS AND IT'S NOT MAKE THEM, IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
THAT'S REVISIT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO WELL AND IF THIS DEVELOPER'S BEEN SITTING ON THIS LAND FOR THREE YEARS AND IS FINALLY WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE MEGA SITE GETTING THAT LARGE BUILDING COMING IN AND THEY'RE WANTING IT TO BE MORE OF THE TWO OPTION AND WE COME BACK AND SAY, NOPE, THEN THEY'RE JUST NOT GONNA DEVELOP.
AND THEN IT'S JUST GONNA SIT THERE AND THEN IT'S JUST WASTED MONEY.
WE COULD POTENTIALLY GET TO START WORKING ON THE 10,000 PAGE
CIP WE'VE GOT GOING ON AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND IF WE JUST KEEP DOING THIS WITH DEVELOPERS AND JUST KEEP TELLING THEM, NOPE, NOPE, NOPE.
I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE GONNA EVENTUALLY BECOME THE PLACE THAT TELLS PEOPLE NO AND DEVELOPERS ARE GONNA STOP BUYING OUR LAND, STOP COMING TO OUR TOWN AND WHICH THEY'RE NOT GONNA DO.
THEY'RE GONNA KEEP COMING BASED ON WHAT IS GOING IN AROUND THE AREA.
THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP COMING AND WE STILL WORK WITH THEM WELL ON IT.
I'M JUST, AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONFORMING TO WHAT THE CITIZENS WANTED, WHAT WE DECIDED ON TO NOT CHANGE THAT TOO MUCH.
WELL WHY DON'T, 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DOT, WE JUST MAKE A MOTION ON THIS, MOVE THIS RECOMMENDATION FORWARD AND WAIT FOR THAT PRELIMINARY TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
BECAUSE ALL THIS DISCUSSION, YEAH, IT GOT A LOT OF ANSWERS AND EVERYTHING, BUT IT DIDN'T REALLY GET US ANY FURTHER THAN WE WERE WHEN WE STARTED.
SO I THINK MY OPINION IS THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT AND WAIT FOR THAT PRELIMINARY SO WE CAN SEE WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO WITH IT.
WELL, I, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT IF WE DO END UP GOING WITH OPTION TWO, I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT WE LOOK AT CR 1 32 CORRIDOR AND POSSIBLY RE DESIGNATING THAT FROM COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD TO, YOU KNOW, THE SPACE BETWEEN CARL STERN AND AND CR 1 32.
YOU KNOW THAT, THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR THERE, MAYBE WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT TRANSITION BASED ON THE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE LAST YEAR, 18 MONTHS.
THAT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT OUR ACTION TONIGHT.
BUT IT IS, IF WE GO WITH THIS, THEN WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE'RE USING THE LAND IN BETWEEN CARL STERN AND 1 32.
SO MAKE SOME GOOD NOTES ON THAT AND BRING THAT UP WHENEVER
[02:40:01]
IT DOES COME BACK AROUND.BUT I, I, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
AND I'M, I'M STILL STILL AGAINST THE, THE HEIGHT
WELL I WILL MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT ITEM 5.3 AS WRITTEN AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL AS WRITTEN.
COURSE I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT.
I THINK THIS IS OUR FIRST ONE,
WELL, IF IT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT THAT THE MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING HEIGHT REMAIN PER THE UDC AND NOT BE INCREASED TO 50 FEET, WHICH IS YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST, WHICH IS THE 35 FEET.
SO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST.
YOU NEED A SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT, BUT I DO NEED A SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT.
HEARING NONE, THE AMENDMENT DIES.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO ACCEPT ITEM 5.3 AS WRITTEN AND RECOMMEND IT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
MOTION PASSES FIVE TO TWO DEVELOPMENT.
BRING YOUR HAIR DOWN NEXT TIME SO I'LL KNOW WHAT YOU
ITEM NUMBER SIX, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT.
SHE HAS NOTHING
WHEN DID THE RED LINES GO? I THINK I NEED TO READ THAT BACK IN APRIL.
I THOUGHT YOU HAD SOME NEW ONES.
I THOUGHT YOU HAD SOME NEW ONES.
YOU LETTERS ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT FROM, THAT HAVE BEEN SENT TO OUR UDC CONSULTANT.
UM, THEY ARE WORKING ON THOSE.
I KNOW SEVERAL OF YOU DID ATTEND THE WORKSHOP.
COUNCIL GOT UPDATED ITEMS JUST BASED ON THAT.
BUT I ALSO REITERATED TO THEM THAT BECAUSE THE NIGHT OF THAT WORKSHOP, THE ADMIN OR THE CHANGES IN THE RED LINES HAD JUST BEEN, UM, SENT OVER TO OUR CONSULTANT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PROVIDE TO THEM.
AND I REITERATE THAT TODAY THAT I DON'T HAVE ANY NEW CHANGES TO THAT.
SO I DIDN'T WANT THEM TO SEE THE OLD STUFF AND THEN COMMENT ON THINGS WE'D ALREADY COMMENTED ON, ON.
UM, SO THAT IS STILL FORTHCOMING, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY LINGERING COMMENTS, LET ME KNOW.
ARE WE HAVING ANY MORE NEWS? WE'LL, JUST AFTER THE HOLIDAY, IT'S, IT WAS TOO FRANTIC BETWEEN THAT MEETING AND THEN, UM, A LOT OF STAFF WAS OUT FOR THE TEXAS CITY MANAGER ASSOCIATES AND MEETING DOWN IN SOUTH PADRE, UM, AT THE END OF JUNE.
SO THIS IS, AND THEN THIS IS A SHORT WEEK TOO, SO I WAS LIKE, WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING FOR THAT SHORT TIMEFRAME.
UM, BUT YOU WILL SEE THEM, THEY WILL JUST BE OPTIONAL AS UM, AS CAN, AS YOU CAN ATTEND ON THOSE, UM, DURING LUNCHTIME TEAMS, MEETINGS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, ONCE AND THAT'LL JUST REALLY, IT REALLY JUST WILL COINCIDE WITH WHEN WE GET THE RED LINES AND WE'LL START HAVING THEM AGAIN.
UM, SO THAT WE HAVE BUILT IN TIME JUST IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR US OR WHEN'S OUR NEXT MEETING? OUR NEXT MEETING FOR P AND Z IS NOT UNTIL AUGUST 6TH.
WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING ON THE 16TH.
AND SO WHO'S GOING TO THE CONFERENCE IN ALLEN? UM, YEAH, I BELIEVE RICK IS GOING.
AND I THOUGHT WE HAD ONE MORE.
UM, I KNOW THE THIRD PERSON, I BELIEVE BRIAN GOT IN.
WANNA SAY YOU DID MAYBE I KNOW YOU HAD REQUESTED.
SO WE WERE LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO SEE, 'CAUSE I KNOW ORIGINALLY WE SAID TWO, POSSIBLY THREE.
I DID HAVE A STAFF MEMBER LEAVE.
UM, BUT SEEING IF WE CAN MESH THAT TOGETHER, I'M NOT LIKE TO GO, I DON'T, I'VE STILL GOTTA CHECK 'CAUSE I NEED TO CHECK WITH, UM, BECAUSE I THOUGHT YOU WERE ON THE ORIGINAL.
I THOUGHT WE HAD THE THREE ON THE ORIGINAL AND THEN BRIAN WAS UP POTENTIAL JUST BECAUSE WE HAD SOMEONE LEAVE STAFF.
BUT I GOTTA SEE IF I CAN FLIP THAT FROM STAFF TO NOT, 'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S ALL STAFF IF I CAN, THAT'S FINE.
NO, 'CAUSE I THINK YOU WERE ON THE ORIGINAL LIST, RIGHT? BRIAN WAS IN AFTER THAT.
UM, WHOEVER IS GOING WILL, YOU'LL GET YOUR CONFIRMATION FROM ANGEL 'CAUSE SHE WAS IN CHARGE OF ROOM
[02:45:01]
AND, UM, BOARD, BOARD SIGN UP THINGS, THE DETAILS.SO SHE IS THE ONE WHO IS BOOKING EVERYTHING.
UM, AND I WILL MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS GET YOUR, UM, YOUR CONFIRMATIONS FROM THAT.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, ADJOURNMENT.
IF I DON'T HEAR ANYBODY DISAGREE, WE WILL ADJOURN AT 10 46.