Oct 22, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

[A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[00:00:06]

GOOD EVENING. THE TIME IS 6 P.M. WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? IT'S GOING TO BE LED BY COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE TO PRAY. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC OF WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. MAY BE SEATED. GOOD EVENING. TODAY IS TUESDAY, OCTOBER THE 22ND, 2024. THE PLANNING AND ZONING

[B. REGULAR SESSION - CALL TO ORDER]

PLANNING TECHNICIAN, MR. TRENT CARROLL. DIRECTOR. WE HAVE HERE THIS EVENING CHARLES BREWER. MR. MONROE IS OUR PLANNING MANAGER, AS WELL AS OUR ATTORNEY, MR. CALEB SMITH. ENTERING AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME AS WE HAVE, COMMISSIONER GRAHAM. MR. COMMISSIONER GRAHAM, JUST TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED THAT WE HAVE DECIDED TO TABLE THE ELECTIONS TO THE END OF THE MEETING. IF WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE HERE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONERS ARE

[D. CITIZEN APPEARANCES The Planning and Zoning Commission invites citizens to address the Commissioners on any topic not already scheduled for Public Hearing. Citizens wishing to speak should complete a "Citizen Comment Card" and return it to the table prior to the meeting. In accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, the Planning and Zoning Commission cannot take action on items not listed on the agenda. However, your concerns may be addressed by City Staff, placed on a future agenda, or responded to by some other course. Anyone desiring to speak on an item scheduled for a Public Hearing is requested to hold their comments until the Public Hearing on that item]

YOU ARE ALLOWED TO DO SO. AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MISS JORDAN WILLIAMS, DO WE HAVE ANY

[E. CONSENT AGENDA Any item may be withdrawn from the consent agenda and acted on separately. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the approval of each item in accordance with Staff Recommendations.]

[00:05:04]

[1. Conduct a Public Hearing to consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding the applicant's request to amend PD-193 with base zonings of Single Family-8 (SF-8), SF-9 and SF-10 with deviations to a new PD-193 with base zoning of SF-8 with deviations. The property consists of 5 tracts of land and is legally described as being Tracts 6, 8, 9 and 10 in the R.T. Bandy Survey, Abstract 115 and part of Lot 1A in Block 1 of the First Southern Baptist Church Amendment Addition. The property is located at the northeast corner of S. Polk Street and E. Parkerville Rd. The property consists of approximately 50.35 acres of land and is addressed as 800, 803, 811, 819 and 901 E. Parkerville Rd. The applicant is John McKenzie of M&A Devco and the property owner is Legacy Grove Development LLC. (Case No. Z-1530-24)]

AGAIN THIS IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST PARKERVILLE AND SOUTH POLK STREET. THE DRAWING ON THE RIGHT IS A JUST TO GIVE YOU A BEARING OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS HIDDEN LAKES, WHICH IS BEING DEVELOPED BY FIRST TEXAS HOME.

THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE RIGHT OF THAT IS THE RECENTLY PLATTED PARKERVILLE MEADOWS, WHICH IS ALL OF EIGHT LOTS WITH NO DEVIATIONS. AND THEN WE HAVE THE MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX HERE, AND THEN YOU HAVE DESOTO RANCH AND OAKMONT TO THE NORTH. ON SEPTEMBER THE 7TH, 2021, PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONDUCTED BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF FOUR TRACTS OF LAND LOCATED AT 308 EAST PARKERVILLE ROAD FROM EXISTING SF 12 TO A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH BASE ZONINGS OF SF 12 CONSISTING OF 11 LOTS, SF NINE CONSISTING OF 20 LOTS. SF EIGHT CONSISTING OF 46 LOTS AND A MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT TO CONSIST OF 155 UNITS. A MOTION PREVAILED BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 1 TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S ZONING CHANGE. REQUEST IN THAT CASE WAS Z 1449 DASH 21. ON MAY, THE 17TH. THE PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF THE SAME TRACTS OF LAND FROM THAT EXISTING SF 12 TO A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH BASE ZONINGS OF SF TEN FOR 31 LOTS. SF NINE FOR 26 LOTS AND SF EIGHT FOR 120 LOTS WITH DEVIATIONS. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WAS 177 LOTS TOTAL.

THE APPLICANT'S DEVIATION REQUESTS INCLUDED THE REQUEST FOR NO ALLEYS THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION, FRONT ENTRY GARAGES FOR ALL OF SF EIGHT AND ALL OF SF NINE, 75% GARAGES WOULD BE SIDE ENTRY OR J ENTRY FOR THE SF TEN LOTS. THE MINIMUM LOT AREA FOR THE SF EIGHT LOTS WOULD BE 6500FT■S. A MOTION PREVAILED BYA VOTE OF 7 TO 0 TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, WITH THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE FOR ALL STRUCTURES BE 2000FT■S, WHICH IS AN SF TEN, AND THE AMENITIES WOULD BE PROVIDED AS SHOWN ON THEIR SUBMITTED CONCEPT PLAN. THAT WAS CASE 1472 DASH 22. THIS IS TAKEN FROM THAT ORDINANCE THAT WAS APPROVED TO

[00:10:09]

WHAT WOULD BE HEAVILY DISCUSSED BY STAFF AND BY THE APPLICANT IS THE FACT WHEN THEY CAME THE FIRST TIME AND LET US GO BACK TO THIS, THE THIS PLAN, THIS WILL BE HELPFUL. WE KNOW TODAY THAT THE FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THIS PROPERTY ACTUALLY STRETCHES ALL THE WAY OVER TO POLK STREET. I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU A DRAINAGE PLAN LATER TO GIVE YOU A CLEARER INDICATION OF HOW MUCH STORMWATER IS RECEIVED INTO THIS PROPERTY. IT COMES FROM A PORTION OF THE APARTMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF POLK, AND FROM THE TWO PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARKVILLE. BUT I'LL GET INTO THAT DETAIL LATER. BUT AS YOU SEE, THE AT THAT TIME THE DEVELOPER WAS PROPOSING TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP HIS COMMUNITY TO WHERE HE WAS ONLY GOING TO HAVE HIS RETENTION OR DETENTION POND IN THIS TOP NORTH NORTHEAST SECTION OF THE PROPERTY. AND DEVELOPED OVER THIS PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HOMES. BUT AS WE WILL TALK ABOUT LATER, WHEN THEY WENT INTO MORE OF THE DETAILED PRELIMINARY DESIGN, THEY FOUND OUT THAT THAT WAS NOT FEASIBLE. AND THAT IS WHY THEY'RE COMING TO US TODAY TO PRESENT ANOTHER A PLAN, WHICH I WILL GO INTO ON SEPTEMBER THE 9TH, 2024.

APPLICANT JOHN MCKENZIE OF M&A DEVAULT, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, LEGACY GROVE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER. WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED, SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO THE CITY REQUESTING TO REZONE THE APPROVED PD 193 WITH THOSE THREE BASE ZONINGS TOTALING 177 LOTS WITH DEVIATION TO A NEW REVISED PD 193 WITH BASE ZONINGS OF ONLY SF EIGHT KEEPING THE SAME APPROVED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL LOTS 177, BUT ALSO WITH DEVIATIONS. THE APPLICANT'S DEVIATION REQUEST WERE. EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING TO BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE HAVING NO ALLEYS THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION, HAVING 100% SF EIGHT LOTS THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION, HAVING A SMALLER MINIMUM AREA LOT FOR THE SF EIGHT LOTS, WHICH HE'S REQUESTING 6500 INSTEAD OF THE 8000 AS APPROVED FOR SF EIGHT.

HAVING A SMALLER MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FOR THE SF EIGHT, LOT 50FT INSTEAD OF 70FT. HAVING A SMALLER MINIMUM SIDE YARD FOR THE SF LOTS, FIVE FEET INSTEAD OF SEVEN FEET, AND JUST UNDERSTAND IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIVE FEET BETWEEN EACH HOME. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FROM THE HOME TO THE PROPERTY LINE, COMPARING IT TO THE NEIGHBORS YOU'RE ACTUALLY HERE TALKING ABOUT TEN FEET DISTANCE BETWEEN THE HOMES VERSUS SEVEN FEET ON BOTH SIDES WOULD GIVE YOU 14FT BETWEEN THE STRUCTURES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ALSO NOT HAVE THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT AREA BEING ESTABLISHED AS 2000FT■S, PER THE ORDINANCE, BUT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A SLIDING SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT OF DWELLINGS, WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS TO BE 2000FT■S AND A CERTAIN PERCENTAE BEING 6000 AND 8000FT■S. THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, AND WE WILL AGAIN, WE'LL GO INTO MORE DETAILS, BUT THE CHANGES THAT YOU HAVE HERE, INSTEAD OF HAVING ONE ENTRANCE OFF OF POLK, THEY'RE NOW PROPOSING TWO. ALSO, YOU'RE SEEING WHERE THIS LARGER FLOODPLAIN IS REMAINING AND THE DRAINAGE I WILL GET INTO LATER. THAT'S COMING OFF THE WEST FROM PART OF THE APARTMENTS AND SOUTH ON BOTH SIDES OF PARKVILLE ARE STILL COMING INTO THIS SECTION OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MS4 AND THEN BEING DISCHARGED TO THE CHANNEL WHERE THE NATURAL WATERS WERE FLOWING ANYWAY. SIMILAR TO THE PD THAT WAS

[00:15:06]

THIS PICTURE SHOWS THE CORNER OF POLK AND PARKVILLE. AND THEN THE DRAWING ON THE LEFT IS THEIR SECOND ENTRY CANOPY TREES, LANDSCAPING THROUGHOUT. NOW THESE TWO ARE KIND OF PUT SIDE BY SIDE, BUT IT SHOWS HIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DEALING WITH THE DRAINAGE RETENTION POND. HE ACTUALLY IS MEETING WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO GO THROUGH AS FAR AS THE CITY IS LOOKING TO ESTABLISH A GREEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACE ORDINANCE THAT HAS USABLE AMENITIES WITHIN OPEN PARK SPACE. AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE DRAWING, HE'S PROPOSING AN ENTIRE WALKING PATH AROUND THE AREA. I WILL NOTE THAT THIS WALKING PATH WOULD NOT BE CONNECTING TO THE WALKING PATH THAT IS RUNNING EAST WEST FOR THE DESOTO RANCH. SO THIS IS ALL SELF-CONTAINED WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY. THE DRAWING ON THE LEFT WILL SHOW A PAVILION SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED BEFORE, BUT STILL MORE LANDSCAPE AREA, BUT A CONTINUOUS WALKING PATH UP TO THE SECOND SECTION HERE. THEY WILL BE HAVING A SITTING AREA HERE, BUT THEN A WALKING PATH GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH WITH LANDSCAPIN. THE DEVELOPER HAS PROVIDED WE REQUESTED SOME ELEVATIONS.

AGAIN, NOTE A HOUSE BILL WAS PASSED THAT DID RESTRICT THE CITY FROM BEING ABLE TO REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN BUILDING STANDARDS, BUT WE WANTED YOU TO SEE WHAT HIS PRODUCT WAS. WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THE DEVELOPER AT THIS TIME. AT THE TIME WE LAST SPOKE, DOES NOT HAVE A BUILDER ON HAND AT THIS POINT. HE'S DEVELOPING HIS PROPERTY AND THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL.

BUT THIS IS SOME ILLUSTRATIONS THAT HE'S PRESENTED FOR THIS PROJECT. NOW THIS IS THE DRAINAGE MAP THAT WAS DONE WITH THE CITY OWNED 22,001. AND I WILL ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THIS DARKER BLUE REGION THAT IS THE ENTIRE FLOODPLAIN FOR THIS CORNER OF THE CITY, THIS STREET GOING NORTH AND SOUTH IS EWELL AND POLK AND POLK STREET. THIS ROAD GOING EAST WEST IS PARKVILLE. SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE'S A LARGE PORTION OF THE APARTMENTS THAT IS DRAINING INTO THIS SUBDIVISION. NOT ALL OF IT COMES INTO THE DRAINAGE POND THAT YOU SEE.

THERE'S ANOTHER OPENING THAT IT GOES INTO ALSO, BUT ALSO SOUTH OF PARKVILLE. I MENTIONED THERE ARE PROPERTIES THIS HAS TO FLOW DOWNHILL. AND THE CHANNEL YOU SEE A TRIBUTARY THREEAB, THAT'S ONE OF THEM. THIS IS THE SECOND ONE. THEY JOIN UP AND EVENTUALLY LEAVE THIS SUBDIVISION AND GO TO THE BIG TEN MILE CREEK. SO THIS IS A MAJOR COMPONENT OF WHY THE DEVELOPER IS COMING BACK, BECAUSE OF WHAT HE FOUND OUT DURING THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE THAT HE COULD NOT REDUCE HIS AMOUNT OF RETENTION OR DETENTION SPACES THAT HE'S REQUIRED WITH THE CITY BEING AN MS4 MUNICIPAL STORM SEPARATE SEWER SYSTEM. HERE IS THE MAP OF THE BLACK AREA. IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING REQUESTED TO BE ZONED. THE BLUE IS THE STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE TO SEND NOTICES OUT TO ANYONE WHO OWNS PROPERTY WITHIN 200FT, ASSOCIATED WITH THE BLUE AREA.

WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES TO EVERYONE WITHIN THE 200FT, AND WE DID AS THE CITY REQUIRED.

SEND OUT COURTESY NOTICES FOR THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS BETWEEN 200 AND 400 PEOPLE. WHAT YOU SEE IS THE PURPLE COLOR IN REFERENCE TO THE BLUE AGAIN. WE SENT OUT THE WRITTEN NOTICES. WE DID RECEIVE FOUR NOTICES BACK. TWO OF THEM WERE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THIS PROJECT. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY NOTICES WITHIN THIS 200 BOUNDARY OF ANY PROPERTY OWNER IN OPPOSITION. WE DID, HOWEVER, RECEIVE I DID RECEIVE 11 EMAILS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE AREA THAT ALL SPOKE IN OPPOSITION. AFTER YOU OPEN YOUR PUBLIC HEARING, I'LL COME BACK AND READ THEIR COMMENTS. THEY'VE ASKED US TO READ THEM INTO THE RECORD, BUT WE WILL TALK. THEY'RE 11 IN THE AREA THAT ARE IMPOSED FOR SUPPORTIVE. TWO OF THOSE WERE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT.

AGAIN, WE WILL BE COLLECTING THE PUBLIC NOTICES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BECAUSE

[00:20:05]

IT IS ACTUALLY TWO PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICTS. THE PINK AND THE AND THE KIND OF THE GOLD COLOR AND I'VE JUST SHOWN YOU WHERE THAT IS THE DRAWING ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. IT DOES SHOW PARKVILLE BEING SIX IN THAT SECTION OF POLK, AND YOU'LL BE SEEING FOUR LANES, BUT IT'LL HAVE QUICK, EASY ACCESS TO GET OUT OF THAT COMMUNITY. HERE'S A MAP TO LET YOU SEE WHAT COUNCIL DISTRICT IS IN. THIS IS PLACE THREE. COUNCILWOMAN NICOLE RAPHAEL, AND IT ACTUALLY THE PURPLE. I MEAN, THE BLUE, WHICH DIAGONALLY ACROSS IS. PARKER. COUNCILWOMAN PIERRE PARKER'S OKAY. IN SPITE OF LOSING LAND WITHIN THIS 50.35 ACRE TRACT OF LAND DUE TO IT BEING DETERMINED BY THE DEVELOPER'S ENGINEER THAT THE EXISTING STORMWATER DRAINAGE FLOODPLAIN AREA WITHIN THIS TRACK WOULD NEED TO REMAIN. IT IS STAFF'S OPINION THAT THIS TRACK OF LAND CAN STILL BE PROPERLY DEVELOPED WITH A COMBINATION OF SFT AND SF NINE AND SF EIGHT RESIDENTIAL LOTS. WHAT WE ARE SAYING HERE IS, WHILE IT MAY NOT BE CARVED UP EXACTLY HOW IT WAS WHEN IT WAS APPROVED IN 22, THERE MAY BE STILL THAT POSSIBILITY OF BEING CARVED UP TO HAVE THE THREE DISTRICTS. THE DEVELOPER WILL PROBABLY SPEAK ON THAT TO LET YOU KNOW HIS POSITION ON WHY HE IS REQUESTING THE SF EIGHT STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT ALL OF THE APPLICANT'S MINIMUM LOT AREA, MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, OR MINIMUM SIDE YARD DEVIATION REQUIREMENTS. STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO HAVE 100% FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. A PART OF THAT REAL TRIGGER IS, YOU KNOW, REALITY. THE CITY HAS, WITH ITS NEW CONTRACT WITH REPUBLIC WASTE, NOW HAS A TRASH CONTAINERS AND THAT WE'RE FEELING THAT ALL THE CONTAINERS WOULD BE LEFT AT FRONT. SO WE JUST EXPRESSED A CONCERN WITH THAT. WE'RE JUST BRINGING FACTS TO YOU. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND BY MOTION, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO AMEND PD 193 WITH THE BASE ZONING OF SF EIGHT, SF9 AND SF TEN WITH DEVIATIONS TO A NEW PD 193 WITH THE BASE ZONING OF SF EIGHT WITH DEVIATIONS. I'LL ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS YOU MAY HAVE ON STAFF REPORT. THANK YOU, MR. BREWER FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. ARE THERE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME? I DO, YES. COMMISSIONER BELL. GOOD EVENING, MR. BREWER. THE CURRENT PD, THE ONE THAT WAS THAT WAS PASSED, DOES ALLOW FOR THEM TO HAVE FRONT FACING GARAGES FOR SF EIGHT AND NINE LOTS. CORRECT? CORRECT. 100%. AND THE ONLY STIPULATION WAS ON THE SF TEN LOTS. CORRECT. THEY ADDED A PERCENTAGE OF WHAT NEEDED TO BE SIDE OR J ENTRY. GOT IT. AND ONE OTHER ONE OTHER THING. THE CURRENT PLAN PURPOSELY STIPULATED THAT ALL DWELLING STRUCTURES SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 2000FT■S. IS THAT CORRECT? WHEN IT WENT TO COUNCIL BEFORE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS COUNCIL PUT IN. THE 2000FT■S IS THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE FOR SF TEN LOTS. AND SO THAT ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED THAT ALL LOTS WITHIN THAT SUBDIVISION WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE OF 2000FT■S. GOT IT. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION IS REGARDING THE ORDINANCE. MR. BREWER. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE MY INFORMATION CORRECT IN THE ORDINANCE. IT ALLOWS FOR 3.5 HOMES PER ACRE. THAT'S THE DENSITY. THAT'S ALLOWED FOR. IS THAT CORRECT? PER THAT ORDINANCE? YES. OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, THE DENSITY REQUIREMENT IS ESTABLISHED FOR THE MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS. IT IS ESTABLISHED IN OUR ZONING REGULATIONS AS 18 UNITS PER ACR. AND SO DO WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT DEALING WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL? I'M NOT KNOWING OF IT. OKAY. NO. THE REASON JUST FOR MY CLARITY, THE REASON I WAS ASKING IS WHEN I DID DO 3.5 AND I DIVIDED IT INTO THE 50.35 ACRES, IT CAME OUT TO 176.225

[00:25:05]

THANK YOU. AND THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD FOR YOU IS YOU SAID THAT YOU RECEIVED FOUR RESPONSES IN FAVOR OF IS THAT CORRECT? I KNOW WE HAD THREE IN OUR NOTES, BUT YOU RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL WE RECEIVED ANOTHER ONE. OKAY. AND DID YOU SAY IT'S WITHIN THE 200 FOOT, TWO OF THEM WITHIN 200FT. AND ONE OF THEM REPRESENTS THE PROPERTY OWNER, AND I'M NOT SURE OF THE OTHER PERSON. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE FOR YOU. THANK YOU. ANY BUT BEFORE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. I HAVE A QUICK YES. MR. GRAHAM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION. YOU SAID THAT YOU RECEIVED 11 IN OPPOSITION. YES, SIR. BUT THEY WEREN'T IN THE 200 OR 400.

CORRECT. YOU SAID IN THE AREA. CORRECT. DO YOU HAVE LIKE A MILE RADIUS OF WHERE THIS IS GOING TO BE OR JUST. I DON'T KNOW, SIR, BUT IT I HAD A LOT OF THEM IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA TO THE NORTH, BUT I ALSO HAD SOME AS FAR AS COCKER HILL. OKAY. AND YOU SAID YOU READ THOSE AT THE.

YES, SIR. OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE ANOTHER. ALL RIGHT. MR. BELL. MR. BREWER, THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTLY NEXT TO WHERE THIS ONE IS PROPOSED TO BE. DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT ALL OF THOSE LOTS ARE SF EIGHT? NO, THE ONE MOST IMMEDIATE IS. LOOK AT THIS DRAWING HERE. IT WOULD BE WHERE YOU SEE IT ALREADY KIND OF CARVED OUT THAT'S HIDDEN LAKES, WHICH IS THE BUILD OF FIRST TEXAS SF 12. OKAY. THE EIGHT IS THIS ONE NEXT TO IT THAT JUST GOT PLATTED THROUGH YOUR COMMISSION. AND THE P AND , WHICH IS CALLED PARKVILLE MEADOWS. THAT DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE SHAMIR HOMES. IT'S THAT'S ACADEMY WAY GOING DOWN TO THE SCHOOL. SO THE ENTRANCE IS GOING TO BE JUST WEST OF ACADEMY WAY, GOING INTO PARKVILLE MEADOWS. GOT IT. I DON'T SUPPOSE YOU KNOW THE DETAILS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT. I DO, I JUST DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME. I CAN GET THAT INFORMATION.

IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT. YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT WHEN YOU GET TIME. MR. BREWER, ONE MORE QUESTION BEFORE WE LET YOU GO. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR THAT THIS LAND ORIGINALLY STARTED OUT AS SF 12. CORRECT. AND WHEN THEY CAME TO US, WE'VE ALLOWED DEVIATIONS TO BRING IT DOWN TO FOUR TENS, FOUR NINES AND F EIGHTS. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, MR. GRAHAM. OKAY, SO QUICK QUESTION ON. THERE IS OTHER HOMES BEING CONSTRUCTED IN THE SAME AREA. CORRECT. WHICH IS HIDDEN VALLEY WITH FIRST TEXAS HOMES HIDDEN LAKES, HIDDEN LAKES, FIRST TEXAS HOME AND SOON AFTER THEY CONSTRUCT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, SHAMIR HOMES THAT SF EIGHT PROPERTY TO THE EAST. OKAY. AND THEIRS WILL BE SFA. YES, WITH NO DEVIATIONS WITH NO DEVIATIONS. OKAY. AND THEN FIRST TEXAS SF 12. YES.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU, MR. BREWER. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME AT THIS TIME, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO BE OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU WILL NEED TO FILL OUT ONE OF THESE FORMS AND YOU CAN GET THOSE FROM MISS WARNER JORDAN AT THE AMBASSADORS DESK. AND IF YOU WOULD FILL THAT OUT AND HAND IT TO HER, SHE CAN BRING IT TO US. IF YOU WANT YOUR POSITION KNOWN, BUT DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK, WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU WOULD STILL FILL OUT ONE OF THESE FORMS, AND YOU CAN PUT IT IN THE RIGHT HAND CORNER CORNER, NOT SPEAKING. SO ALL I HAVE AT THIS TIME IS JUST TWO. IS THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? YES. ALL RIGHT THEN. YES. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED BY, DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL RIGHT.

[00:30:03]

AT THIS TIME, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN. IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO PRESENT THIS EVENING, WE'RE INVITING YOU TO COME AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME WHEN YOU COME, PLEASE ONLY STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE. FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. YOU WILL NOT BE UNDER A TIME LIMIT. COME APPROACH. BUT BY PRESENTING, KNOW THAT AFTER YOUR PRESENTATION YOU WILL HAVE QUESTIONS. YOU COULD GET QUESTIONS FROM THESE COMMISSIONERS OR ANY OF THEIR THOUGHTS OR CONCERNS. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. MY NAME IS JOHN MCKENZIE. I'M WITH M&A DEVELOPMENT. I RESIDE IN ALLEN, TEXAS, RIGHT NOW. OKAY. I ALSO HAVE WITH ME SEAN FAULKNER, MY ENGINEER, AND STEVEN DARLING, MY LAND USE. SO I'D LIKE TO NUMBER ONE THANK STAFFS MR. BREWER. HIS ENTIRE STAFF HAS BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE IN WORKING WITH US SINCE FEBRUARY. IS WHEN WE DECIDED TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT. AND SO THEY'VE BEEN VERY ACCOMMODATING UP UNTIL THIS POINT. AND HELPING US OUT, GETTING EVERYTHING READY. SO I JUST WANT TO WALK THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY AND THEN WE'LL KIND OF THIS WILL KIND OF GUIDE US INTO WHAT WHAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT, WHICH IS IN FEBRUARY, WE WERE WORKING WITH THE LANDOWNER NOW, MR. HARGROVE, AND REALIZED THAT HE HAD A PD FULLY APPROVED. AND SO US AS DEVELOPERS LOOK AT THAT AND SAY ESSENTIALLY THE HEAVY LIFTING HAS BEEN DONE AND WE'RE OFF TO THE RACES AS FAR AS BUILDING. AND SO WE TOOK THE PD 193, ESSENTIALLY INSTRUCT OUR ENGINEERS TO BEGIN THE PROCESS, GET EVERYTHING READY AND GET READY FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT. SO DURING THAT PROCESS, WE GOT READY TO SUBMIT PRELIMINARY PLAT ON MAY 13TH. AND PRIOR TO THAT MAY 13TH MEETING, WE HAD JUST ANOTHER DRC MEETING WITH STAFF JUST TO GET EVERYTHING PREPPED.

AND THEN THAT'S WHEN IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT THERE WAS A DRAINAGE PLAN THAT NEEDED TO BE REVIEWED BACK FROM 2001. AND SO THIS WAS KIND OF OPENING ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DISCOVER. RIGHT? SO AT THAT POINT WE SAID WE NEED TO TABLE THE FACT AS FAR AS DEVELOPING, SUBMITTING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND WE LOOKED AT THE PD AND SAID, OKAY, SO WITH THE SFA SF9 SF TEN, THERE'S 177, 177 LOTS AND WE'RE NO LONGER ABLE TO GET EVERYTHING TO ESSENTIALLY FIT AFTER THE BUILDABLE ACREAGE DECREASED BY SEVEN ACRES. SO WHAT WE DID THEN IS COME BACK AND KIND OF REENGINEER RE CONCEPT PLAN. AND WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS ACTUALLY A COMPARISON OF THE TWO, WHICH IS A GREAT ILLUSTRATION OF WHAT WAS APPROVED. AND BACK IN 2022. AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. AND WE'RE KEEPING THE SAME GEOMETRIC SHAPE AND SAME LOTS. YOU ASKED ABOUT DENSITY, SAME 3.53.51, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER COMES OUT TO BE, 177 AND WE'RE KEEPING ALL THAT INTACT. WE LOOKED AT THE PD 193 AND ALSO TAKING THE KEEPING THE SAME LANGUAGE AS FAR AS WHAT WAS APPROVED, BASICALLY, THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE PD CURRENTLY VERSUS THE PD 193 OR YOU KNOW, THE COMPARISON. SO HERE YOU'LL SEE THE DRAMATIC INCREASE OF OR THE DRAMATIC DECREASE IN BUILDABLE ACREAGE. BASICALLY IN THAT FAR SOUTHWEST CORNER THERE. AND IN DOING SO THERE'S ESSENTIALLY WE'RE TRYING TO SALVAGE THIS PROJECT TO WHERE WE CAN PUT GOOD PRODUCT AT THIS CORNER TO BENEFIT THE CITY, CREATE NEW TAX BASE, CREATE NEW RESIDENTS WHILE MAINTAINING THE EXACT LANGUAGE FROM THE ORIGINAL PD, WHILE ALSO TAKING KIND OF A BAD SITUATION AND TURNING IT TO GOOD. IS CREATING A ENHANCED OPEN SPACE. SO OUR GOAL IS TO TAKE SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BUILDABLE NOW AND MAKE IT BUILDABLE WHILE CREATING MORE LIVABLE SPACE AND ENHANCING A WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A VERY NICE PARK IN OPEN SPACE WITH WALKING TRAILS. MORE LIVABLE SPACE. WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IS THE TREND OF I KNOW THAT THERE'S THE CONCEPT OF THE 200 ZERO

[00:35:08]

A LOT OF THE HOMES BEING BUILT ARE ARE MORE TREND TOWARDS OPEN SPACE INSIDE. AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE. SO WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE IN THAT SCENARIO, BASED UPON THE CURRENT APPROVED 2000, WOULD BE SOMEWHAT OF A SLIDING SCALE, AS MR. BREWER INDICATED, TO WHERE A MAJORITY, 60% WOULD BE OVER 2000 OR 2000 PLUS. AND THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT MAYBE NOT NEED 2000. AND SO THERE WOULD BE A POTENTIAL SLIDING SCALE OF 16, MAYBE IT'S 10% 1600, AND MAYBE IT'S 30% 1800, SO THAT THERE ARE OTHER APPLICATIONS FOR OTHER RESIDENTS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THE 2000FT■S. WHEN WE THINK ABOUT RESIDENTS THAT WANT TO MOVE HERE TO DESOTO, WE THINK ABOUT ALSO WHETHER IT BE START UP FAMILIES OR WHETHER IT BE INDIVIDUALS MY AGE THAT ARE KIDS OR GRADUATED THAT ARE ALSO LOOKING FOR THAT LIVABLE SPACE TO SPEND TIME IN THE OPEN SPACE, THE TRAILS. ONE THING I WILL TELL YOU ON THE AMENITIES IS ALL THE AMENITIES THAT WERE APPROVED. PLUS MORE BEING THE WALKING TRAILS ARE NOW PROPOSED, SO THERE HAS BEEN NO DELETION OF ANY AMENITIES. EVERYTHING FROM THE PAVILION TO THE OTHER AMENITIES THAT WERE ALL APPROVED, ALL THAT STILL BEING PART OF THE PROJECT. ONE THING THAT WE DID DO IS MR. BREWER INDICATED WE HAVE HAVE NOW MORE OF A BOULEVARD ENTRANCE OFF OF POLK, WHICH I THINK FOR TWO REASONS. ONE IS IT'S GOING TO SHOW, WELL, TWO IS RIGHT.

WHEN YOU DRIVE IN, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE PARK, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE AMENITIES, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE PAVILION. AND I THINK THAT'S AN ADDED BONUS AS FAR AS THE ESTHETICS OF THE PROJECT ITSELF. SO WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS ESSENTIALLY WE ARE TRYING TO SALVAGE THIS PROJECT BECAUSE OF THE LOSS OF ACREAGE AND STILL MAINTAINING THE EXACT PD LANGUAGE THAT WAS APPROVED IN PD 193 BACK IN 2022 AND BUILD SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS GOING TO BE WELL WORTH IT. I HAVE MY ENGINEER BRIEFLY JUST TO TALK ABOUT THE DRAINAGE, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU KNOW THAT IS WHY WE'RE HERE. AND SO I'LL GIVE HIM A MOMENT TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. MY NAME IS SEAN FAULKNER, AND MY OFFICE IS CURRENTLY IN DALLAS, TEXAS, AS MR. MCKENZIE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT, WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE DRC PROCESS, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. THE LARGE AMOUNT OF WATER GOING THROUGH THIS SITE. MR. BREWER STEPPED THROUGH THE DRAINAGE AREAS THAT COME THROUGH OUR SITE. THE APARTMENTS TO OUR WEST AND THEN THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE SOUTH AS WELL IN THE EARLY CALCULATION, WE CALCULATED THAT COMING OFF OF POLK STREET AND THEN GOING UP TO OUR NORTH PROPERTY LINE, THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 1500 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OF WATER GOING THROUGH THIS AREA. THAT IS, I THINK THE DRAINAGE AREA IS ABOUT 300 ACRES TOTAL AT THAT POINT. SO THERE'S A LOT OF WATER COMING THROUGH OUR DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN ON THE OUR IMAGE ON THE RIGHT, WE HAVE COMPUTER PROGRAMS THAT WE CAN MODEL THE WHAT THIS WATER IS GOING TO DO AS IT GOES THROUGH OUR SITE AND THE AREA THAT'S HATCHED BLACK INSIDE THE GREEN AREA. THAT'S THE LIMIT OF HOW HOW FAR THE SPREAD OF WATER WILL BE WHEN IT GOES THROUGH OUR PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A COUPLE AREAS WHERE THERE'S ALREADY EXISTING PONDS. OUR PLAN IS TO MAINTAIN THOSE AND PROBABLY EVEN ENHANCE THEM TO PROVIDE DETENTION SO THAT THE PROPERTIES TO OUR NORTH DO NOT SEE ANY ADDITIONAL STORM RUNOFF FROM OUR DEVELOPMENT. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. MCKENZIE AND I ARE ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I GOT A QUESTION, MR. I'M LOOKING AT THIS MAP AND I CAN SEE WHAT LOOKS LIKE PART OF THE FLOODPLAIN INVADING A COUPLE OF LOTS UP HERE IN THE TOP ON THE

[00:40:07]

[00:45:02]

MINIMUM LOT WIDTH SHOULD BE 50FT AND MINIMUM SIDE YARDS SHOULD BE FIVE FEET. THAT LANGUAGE THAT WAS APPROVED IN PD 193 IS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT WE ARE HEARING TO, THAT OUR REQUEST IS TO ADHERE TO. WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS APPROVED. MR. BELL. MR. MCKENZIE, I'M JUST GOING TO ASK YOU STRAIGHT UP, WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT OUR STAFF'S OPINION THAT YOU CAN STILL BUILD THE SPLIT ZONING ON THE PROPERTY? YEAH, AGAIN, STAFF HAS BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH AND TO THAT POINT, WHEN WE LOOKED FINANCIALLY AT THIS PROJECT, IT'S 177 LOTS. SO BY BUILDING OR BY REDUCING THE BUILDABLE ACREAGE BY SEVEN ACRES DOES HAVE AN EFFECT ON OUR ABILITY TO BUILD 177 WITH ALL THREE ZONINGS, SF NINE AND SF TEN AND SF EIGHT. SO IT'S A MATH. IT'S A MATH PROBLEM. DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF HOW MANY LOTS YOU WOULD LOSE IF YOU BUILD ON THE CURRENT PD? YEAH, I THINK WE DID A STUDY ROUGHLY 50. YEAH, I THINK WE LOST ABOUT 50. WE LOST 50 LOTS, 50 LOTS. AND WERE THEY PREDOMINANTLY ALL IN A SINGLE ZONING SF OR EXACTLY. GOOD POINT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN ON THE LEFT, YOU'LL SEE THE PREDOMINANT AREA AFFECTED WAS THE 50S, THE SF EIGHT. OKAY, IT'S ESSENTIALLY AND SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO ADHERE TO ALL THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS APPROVED AND STICK WITH THE QUANTITY THAT WAS APPROVED. AND WE'RE JUST HAVING TO SHIFT EVERYTHING OVER TO THE RIGHT TO MAKE IT ACCOMMODATE. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. GRAHAM. QUICK, QUICK CLARIFICATION. BEFORE I GET TO MY QUESTION FOR MR. BUREAU, WHEN WAS THE ORIGINAL PD 193 APPROVED? 2220 22ND MAY 17TH, 2022. AND I'M ASKING THAT BECAUSE THE ALLEY QUESTION, I HAVE TO GO BACK TO IT BECAUSE SINCE THAT WE HAVE APPROVED AND NOW WE HAVE A CITY CONTRACT WITH TRASH. ARE YOU WHAT YOU'RE AWARE OF WHERE WE HAVE TWO PRETTY NICE SIZED BINS THAT GO INTO THE ALLEYWAYS, BUT NOW THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO IN THIS AREA. THEY WOULD ALL HAVE TO BE IN AT THE FRONT. AND I HAVE THAT AT MY HOME. OKAY. YEAH, JUST JUST NEED THAT FOR CLARITY. AND THEN WAS THE STATEMENT THAT YOU MADE AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD IT CORRECTLY, IS THAT THE CURRENT TREND OF HOMES OR YOU SAID 15 TO 16 TO 2000. WELL, YOUR YOUR CURRENT SF EIGHT RIGHT NOW IS MINIMUM 1550. RIGHT. AND I ASSUME THERE'S A REASON WHY YOU GUYS ALLOWED THAT TO BE A MINIMUM. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS WHAT WAS APPROVED AT 2000 VERSUS WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT STATUTE OF SF EIGHT, WHICH IS 1550. AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CREATE A BLEND. SO WE'RE WILLING TO TAKE AGAIN THE ORIGINAL PD 193 AT 2000 AND SAY A MAJORITY OF THOSE WILL BE RETAINED THERE. BUT WE'RE ALSO WANTING TO WORK WITHIN THE CURRENT SF EIGHT, WHICH IS 1550.

SO WE'RE SAYING LET'S TRY BECAUSE ALL DEVELOPMENTS NEED SOME DIVERSITY AS FAR AS SIZE, RIGHT? YOU MAY HAVE OTHER FAMILIES OR INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY NOT NEED THE COMPLETE SIZE. SO WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT WAS APPROVED AND WHAT YOU HAVE NOW, WHICH IS 1550. AND SO I'M I'M SUGGESTING I THINK MR. BREWER INDICATED THE SUGGESTION THAT MAJORITY WOULD BE 2000 AND THEN A SLIDING SCALE. SO A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF 1,010% WOULD BE 1600 JUST FOR THAT NUMBER OF HOMES, WHATEVER THAT IS, 17 HOMES, THAT WOULD BE 1600. AND THEN 30% WOULD BE MORE OF A SLIDING SCALE IN BETWEEN TO 18. OKAY. BUT AND JUST FOR CLARITY, MR. BURROWS CITY COUNCIL STATED THAT THAT CLAUSE OF ALL OF THEM NEED TO BE 2000. YES. AT THE MEETING BACK IN 2022, AT 2022.

OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS GOING TO BE CAN YOU WANT TO I HAVE A STATEMENT AND A QUESTION.

MY STATEMENT IS, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED DUE TO THIS TRANSITION OF DEVELOPMENT? YOU GUYS SAID THAT YOU THOUGHT THEY DID SOMETHING. THEY DIDN'T DO

[00:50:05]

SO I'M CONCERNED. MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE OR DID YOU GUYS NOW RUN IT LIKE LIKE YOU GUYS HAD IT FROM THE BEGINNING AND DID EVERY STEP NEEDED AND POSSIBLE BEFORE BRINGING IT TO US AGAIN? YEAH, EXACTLY. SO I'VE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO THAT SIMPLE POINT NOT TO NOT TO BEAT UP ON MY ENGINEER, BUT WHEN WE HIRE, WHEN WE COME INTO A PROJECT, WE HIRE AN ENGINEER, WE BASICALLY GO THROUGH AND DO ALL THE SURVEYS, TOPO GEOGRAPHY, GEO GEOTECH WE'VE COMPLETED ALL THOSE SURVEYS. AND SO WE FEEL CONFIDENT OTHER THAN THIS DRAINAGE ISSUE, THAT'S THERE, THAT WE'RE AGAIN TRYING TO TAKE A PROJECT THAT IS IN LIMBO AND TAKE IT TO FRUITION. SO YOU HAVE RAN THIS PROJECT THROUGH THE PROCESS AS IF YOU HAD IT FROM THE BEGINNING. THAT'S CORRECT. PERFECT. AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION IS, WHAT HAVE YOU GUYS CURRENTLY OR WHAT IS IN THE PLANS? WHAT ARE YOU GUYS CURRENTLY PLANNING TO DO FOR THE DRAINAGE ISSUE? ENGINEER. SO CURRENTLY MOST OF THE DRAINAGE ENTERS OUR SITE. THE GREEN BUTTON. THERE'S CURRENTLY A CULVERT THAT COMES OUT FROM POLK STREET IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.

AND THEN THERE'S A SMALL POND RIGHT HERE AS IT ENTERS IN. SO WE'LL BE EXTENDING THAT CULVERT THROUGH THESE LOTS AND THEN OUT FLOWING INTO INTO HERE. AND THIS WILL BE ALL OPEN CHANNEL, YOU KNOW MAINTAINING THE PONDS AS BEST WE CAN WHILE ALSO PROVIDING SOME ADDITIONAL DETENTION SO WE DON'T FLOOD OUR, OUR DOWNSTREAM NEIGHBORS. AND THEN THE REST OF THE, YOU KNOW, WATER, YOU KNOW, SHEET FLOWS HERE. THESE LOTS BACK HERE DRAIN ONTO US. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE'LL CARRY THAT WATER THROUGH TO OUR OPEN AREAS AS WELL. THERE IS A POND UP HERE THAT SERVES DESOTO RANCH THAT PROVIDES THEIR DETENTION. OKAY. AND MY FOLLOWING QUESTION IS BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE IN THE LAST TWO FEBRUARIES WE'VE HAD HERE IN DALLAS IS THAT WE HAVE SOME DRAINAGE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT IN DESOTO, AND SOMETIMES THE WATER DOESN'T MAKE IT ALL THE WAY TO THE DRAINAGE BEFORE IT'S FROZEN AND TURNS INTO BLACK ICE AND CREATES A SAFETY ISSUE. YEAH. MY QUESTION IS, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH WATER WILL BE STREAMING ON THE OUTSIDE WHERE ANYBODY WOULD NEED TO WALK OR DRIVE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IN THE EVENT THAT IT DOES TURN INTO BLACK ICE, IT BECOMES A SAFETY ISSUE. THE THIS HAS BEEN A LARGE SUBJECT OF TOPIC AMONG THE ENGINEERING COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY AT INTERSECTIONS WHERE YOU SAY YOU YOU MENTIONED PEOPLE WALKING THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT, WHICH THAT COVERS WHAT WE CALL HANDICAP RAMPS. THEY STIPULATE, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN SLOPES THAT WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN. SOMETIMES THOSE AREN'T CONDUCIVE TO DRAINING WATER BECAUSE THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, RELATIVELY LOW, YOU KNOW, SLOPE.

SO WE PAID PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THOSE AREAS. NOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW IT IS AN ISSUE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S MORE OF AN ISSUE FURTHER UP NORTH WHERE THEY GET, YOU KNOW, FREEZES, YOU KNOW, FOR MONTHS AT A TIME. WHEREAS US, YOU KNOW, A WEEK IS ABOUT IT AT ANY PARTICULAR TIME. BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE PAY PARTICULARLY CLOSE, YOU KNOW, O. ATTENTION TO MAKE SURE THOSE AREAS DRAIN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. BUT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WHEN FREEZING RAIN HITS, THERE'S NOT REALLY ANYTHING YOU CAN DO. OKAY. AND WHAT'S YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION WITH THAT STATEMENT MADE DUE TO DRAINING BEING AN ISSUE ON THIS PROJECT? IS THERE ANY DO YOU THINK IT WILL BE AN INFLUX OR MORE OF THAT ISSUE IN THIS AREA DUE TO THAT VERSUS A DEVELOPMENT DOWN THE STREET? WELL, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES. SO YOU HAVE THE WATER THAT DRAINS NORMALLY IN THE STREET DOES. THAT'S THE WATER THAT DOES THE BLACK ICE THAT PEOPLE SLIP AND FALL ON.

AND THEN THE LARGER DRAINAGE SHED, THE 1500 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND, THAT 1500 CUBIC SECOND WILL NEVER ENTER A STREET. A STREET CAN HANDLE ON A VERY GOOD SLOPE, ABOUT 20 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND. SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 1500, YOU'RE WE'RE NOT EVEN IN THE SAME BALLPARK. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S STREET DRAINAGE AND THEN CHANNEL DRAINAGE. SO THE YOU KNOW, THE CHANNEL DRAINAGE WILL NEVER ENTER STREET. SO I DO NOT SEE THAT BECOMING AN ISSUE AS BLACK ICE AS FAR AS THE STREET IS CONCERNED. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE ENGINEER WHILE

[00:55:02]

WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THAT OUTFALL SO THAT WE CAN CONTROL THE WATER.

AND SO IT BACKS UP ON OUR PROPERTY IN A CONTROLLED FASHION AND NOT FLOOD PEOPLE DOWNSTREAM.

I'M SORRY. YOU SAID THAT THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT'S GOING THROUGH THIS PROPERTY IS HOW MUCH I MEAN, A VERY, VERY ROUGH CALCULATION IS ABOUT 1500 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND THROUGH THIS PROPERTY. YES. YES, SIR. AND YOU'RE THE ENGINEER ON THE ON THE PROJECT, CORRECT? YES, SIR.

AND HAVE YOU WORKED WITH THIS BEFORE? YES. MATTER OF FACT, AS I WAS A YOUNG ENGINEER, I DESIGNED DESOTO RANCH. OKAY, 20 SOME ODD YEARS AGO. OKAY. AWESOME. THANK YOU. SO I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE WITH THE, WITH THIS AREA. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MR. MCKENZIE, I THINK YOU WANTED YOUR OTHER GENTLEMAN TO SPEAK THIS EVENING. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE, PLEASE. YES, SIR. IT IS STEVEN, DARLING, AND I'M FROM DALLAS, TEXAS. ALSO, FORMER CITY STAFF FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. FOR ME, THIS WILL BE REALLY QUICK. AS JOHN MENTIONED, I'M JUST KIND OF HIS LAND USE GUY AND CONSULTANT. WE'RE ASKING OBVIOUSLY IS FOR APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT THE ONLY OPTION. AND SO WE ASK THAT IF FOR SOME REASON THE CITY ISN'T READY TO GO AHEAD AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL BY ITS COMMISSION, JUST THAT WE TABLE THE MATTER AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING WITH SOME OF THE CONSTITUENTS THAT WE HEARD SENT IN SOME OF THOSE EMAILS. GRANTED, THEY'RE STILL OUTSIDE THAT 200 AND 400 FOOT SPLASH ZONE, BUT JOHN MENTIONED THAT HE'S TAKING THIS PROJECT QUITE SERIOUSLY, AS IF HE'S HAD THIS PROJECT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. AND SO FOR THAT VERY REASON, IF THERE IS A NEED, WE CERTAINLY WOULD BE HAPPY TO MEET AND ADDRESS ANY CITY CONCERNS.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS YET. OBVIOUSLY, CITY STAFF WILL BE READING THAT INTO THE RECORD SHORTLY, BUT JUST AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CHANCE TO SIT DOWN WITH THEM, SEE IF MAYBE WE CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS BY TWEAKING LITTLE CERTAIN POINTS OF THE PROJECT AND THEN COME BACK TO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WITH POSSIBLY SOMETHING THAT'S SLIGHTLY TWEAKED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE HEARD, TOO. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, NOT HAVING HEARD THEIR CONCERNS, THERE'S NOT MUCH MORE FOR ME TO SAY UNLESS ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I DO. YES, SIR. IF I'M HEARING CORRECTLY, YOU'RE STATING IF WE CAN'T COME TO A IF WE, INSTEAD OF MAKING A DECISION TONIGHT, TABLE IT. SO TO GIVE YOU TIME TO SPEAK TO THE COMMUNITY. BUT AT THIS POINT, IF I'M CLEAR, THIS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DENY CORRECT THE. YES. JUST ON THE BASIS OF WHAT I HAD TOLD YOU IN MY PRESENTATION, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING PRIOR TO GOING TO TALK TO THE, THE RESIDENTS, TO FIX WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING? JOHN HAS CERTAINLY BEEN WORKING WITH CITY STAFF, TRYING TO GET THE PROJECT INTO ITS BEST CAPACITY. HOWEVER, IN MY EXPERIENCE, SOMETIMES PEOPLE DON'T MAKE THEIR OPINION KNOWN IN TERMS OF THE COMMUNITY UNTIL THE PROJECT IS VERY REAL AND THOSE SIGNS DO GO UP. BUT AGAIN, WE DO WANT AN OPPORTUNITY GRANTED, I WASN'T PART OF ANY OF THE PRE STUFF, BUT I AM HERE NOW SO IT WOULD BE NICE IF BEFORE A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, JUST IF WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ALSO WITH CITY STAFF AS WELL, NOT JUST MERELY THE RESIDENTS. I APPRECIATE THAT. IS THERE ANY ANYTHING YOU GUYS DIDN'T DO THAT PRIOR TO THIS MEETING? I ONLY DO WHAT I'M HIRED TO DO. SO SORRY ABOUT THAT. I WISH I GOT HERE SOONER. NO WORRIES. THANK YOU.

ANYTIME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. DARLING? MR. MCKENZIE, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU. YES, SIR. THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN. HOW LARGE WAS THE GREEN SPACE? OH, GOT THAT FOR YOU. OKAY, SO THE ORIGINAL OPEN SPACE WAS ORIGINALLY 5.89 ACRES, WHICH IN WE GO BY PERCENTAGE, WHICH IS 11%, 11.7% OF THE OVERALL PROJECT. OUR NEW PLAN SHOWS THAT IT WOULD BE 10.78 ACRES. SO IT JUMPS UP TO 21.4% OF THE PROJECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE REASON I WAS ASKING YOU THAT

[01:00:01]

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THOUGHT OF IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE MORE OPEN SPACES, IT GIVES YOU MORE OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE UNIQUE TO YOUR SUBDIVISION. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU ALL LOOK AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE TOTALLY UNIQUE, THAT NO OTHER SUBDIVISION IN DESOTO HAS BY.

YOU MENTIONED LET'S SEE, YOU TALKED ABOUT LIFESTYLE CHANGES. THE YOUNG FAMILIES. I AGREE WITH YOU. NOT EVERYBODY WANTS A300 ZERO SQUARE FOOT HOME THAT WOULD HAVE SMALL KIDS. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE OLDER PEOPLE WHO MAY WANT TO DOWNSIZE. SO AS I SAW THAT PARK, I WAS THINKING THERE WERE OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOU TO CREATE DIFFERENT AREAS FOR A KIDDY PARK, FOR A DOG PARK, FOR THE SENIOR CITIZENS. I MEAN, PICKLEBALL PEOPLE. YOU COULD REALLY CREATE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT, AND THEN YOU WOULD CREATE A DEMAND FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE WANTING TO COME INTO YOUR SUBDIVISION. WHEN YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU'RE ABLE TO GET PRIME PRICING, BECAUSE IF YOU WANT THIS, THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT YOU CAN LIVE. AND AS I REVIEWED THE CASE, I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE BEEN VERY GRACIOUS OR LENIENT WITH YOU ALL AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE FFA, WHEN THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU TO BUILD ON 6500 SQUARE FOOT, WHICH MEANS YOU SAVE 1500 SQUARE FOOT PER HOUSE. SO BY THE TIME YOU BUILD FIVE OF THOSE HOUSES, YOU HAVE ENOUGH LAND TO BUILD ANOTHER HOUSE AND IT KEEPS TRICKLING SO THEY ALREADY HAD APPROVED THIS AND WERE ALLOWING YOU TO BUILD MORE HOUSES. YOU WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. AND EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY BE LOSING ON ONE END, WE'VE ALREADY HELPED YOU OUT ON THE OTHER END BY ALLOWING YOU TO BUILD ON A SMALLER LOT. MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE BROUGHT UP THE TRASH BINS AND THINGS, BUT THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT A FRONT ENTRY. I MEAN, DESOTO IS REALLY KNOWN FOR HAVING THE ALLEYS IN THE BACK ENTRANCE AND A NICE ELEVATION ON THE FRONT. AND SO THEREFORE, WHEN YOU TAKE AWAY THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE A J SWING WHERE THEY CAN HAVE THAT NICE ELEVATION AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEE THE GARAGE DOORS TO THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE, THEN NOW YOU'RE REDUCING THE OPTIONS THAT PEOPLE COULD HAVE THAT MAY MOVE INTO YOUR COMMUNITY. SO I WOULD HOPE, AS MR. DARLING JUST SAID, IF WE COULD TAKE IT BACK, IF WE COULD TABLE IT, MAYBE YOU GO BACK AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DOING. I'M SAYING YOU MIGHT WANT TO RETHINK HOW DO YOU TAKE THIS OPEN SPACE AND CREATE SOMETHING THAT WOULD MAKE A GREATER DEMAND FOR, FOR YOUR PEOPLE? BUT I THINK THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN I MEAN, THEY'VE BEEN OVER BACKWARDS. THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU THE F EIGHT, THE F TEN, THE F NINE, WHERE IT WAS F F 12. SO THEY'RE REALLY ALLOWING YOU A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY. AND THEN THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU TO DO. NO ALEX. THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU TO DO THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. BUT TODAY YOU'RE COMING IN AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY AGREED UPON BEFORE YOU WANT THEM TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THOSE THINGS AND TO JUST ALLOW YOU TO, TO DEVELOP ALL FF8. SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO JUST THINK ABOUT THAT. AND, AND AS YOU HEAR THE COMMENTS THAT MAY COME FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THINK ABOUT THAT, ABSOLUTELY ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM WHILE HE'S HERE? ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO BE HEARING FROM THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE STATEMENTS THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE AND PLACE THEIR POSITION. MR. BREWER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START? YOUR GLASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WOULD LOOK FOR HIM AT SOME POINT. I KNOW THAT'S RIGHT.

OKAY. FIRST EMAIL THE RESIDENT NAME AND ALL OF THESE ARE DESOTO RESIDENTS. ALLISON. ALLISON, MY POSITION IS AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AND THE COMPLETION OF MORE HOUSING AND SPECIFICALLY HOUSING IN THAT SIZE, WHICH MORE THAN LIKELY THE ECONOMY WILL HAVE THEM OVERPRICED FOR THE VALUE. I REALLY THINK WE, DESOTO, SHOULD FOCUS MORE ON KEEPING OUR CITY AS A HOMETOWN VIBE WITH REASONS AND PLACES TO SPEND OUR MONEY. MOST PEOPLE LEAVE DESOTO TO EAT, SHOP, AND ENJOY EVENTS. WE NEED MORE THINGS HERE TO KEEP MONEY HERE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO FILL OUR CITY WITH APARTMENTS AND SMALLER HOMES TO BRING IN MORE RESIDENTS FOR REVENUE. VERONICA. VERONICA KELLY, THE CITY OF

[01:05:07]

WHEN I ATTEMPT TO GET AN APPRAISAL NEXT YEAR AND ONE OF THOSE HOMES IS SELECTED, I WILL NOT HAVE NEARLY AS MUCH EQUITY. ALSO, THESE HOMES WON'T BE AFFORDABLE. IT'S NOT EVEN ACCOMPLISHING THE GOAL. THE DEVELOPER CARES ABOUT MAKING MONEY AND NOT THIS COMMUNITY. WE

[01:10:01]

PLEASE DO NOT LET THE DEVELOPER BRING SMALL HOMES WITH FRONT FACING GARAGE. DEVELOPERS.

SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BUILD HOMES SMALLER THAN 2500FT■S. DEVELOPERS DISCRIMINATE AGAINST MINORITIES BY BUILDING SMALL HOMES AND CHARGING HIGHER PRICE. THEY WILL JUST AS MUCH THEY WILL JUST AS MUCH FOR A SMALL HOME AS A LARGE HOME. PEOPLE NEED MORE SPACE. BUILDING HOMES TOO CLOSE TOGETHER IS A SAFETY HAZARD, AND HOMEOWNERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DRIVE IN THEIR BACKYARDS. THESE HOMES HAVE NO ACCESS TO THEIR BACKYARDS. IT IS ALSO A FIRE HAZARD WHEN HOMES ARE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER. AND THE LAST ONE, PENNY LEVY KING. MY NAME IS PENNY KING AND MY HUSBAND'S NAME IS JAMES KING. WE ARE OPPOSED TO CASE NUMBER Z 1530 DASH 24, BECAUSE WE FEEL THAT THIS WILL LOWER OUR PROPERTY VALUE. THIS IS OUR PUBLIC ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH CASE Z 1530 DASH 24. MR. BREWER WAS THAT 8 OR 9 THAT YOU READ? I KNOW MISS VALENTINE IS HERE. SHE'S GOING TO SPEAK. TOTAL NUMBER OF EMAILS RECEIVED WAS 11, INCLUDING MISS VALENTIN.

OKAY. ALL IN OPPOSITION. AS I SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER FOR WAS RECEIVED THE NOTICES WITH TWO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT IN SUPPORT AND TWO OF THE NOTICES ALSO IN SUPPORT FOR A TOTAL OF FOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MR. GRAHAM, WOULD YOU MIND BEING THE TIMEKEEPER FOR ME? THREE MINUTES SINCE YOU'RE IN FRONT AND THEY CAN SEE YOU, MR. GRAHAM WILL GIVE YOU YOUR ONE MINUTE MARK BY RAISING A FINGER SO YOU'LL KNOW YOUR TIME IS SECONDS LEFT AT THIS TIME, MISS HOPE. STEPHENS, IF YOU'RE HERE. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE. FOR THE RECORD. OKAY.

GOOD EVENING. HOPE STEPHENS, DESOTO, TEXAS. AND I AM ONE OF THE RESIDENTS OF DESOTO RANCH COMMUNITY, WHICH THIS GENTLEMAN SAID HE WAS A DEVELOPER IN. OUR COMMUNITY IS RIGHT BEHIND THE APARTMENTS. AND SO I STAND HERE IN OPPOSITION BECAUSE ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I SELECTED MY HOUSE IS THAT I LOVED THE BLEND OF THE SIZES OF THE HOMES BETWEEN DESOTO RANCH, OAKMONT, WILDWOOD AND ALSO SUMMER MEADOW, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET ON PARKERVILLE FROM DESOTO RANCH. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLEMENTARY TO THE REST OF OUR COMMUNITIES. I WAS ONE OF THOSE MANY HOMEOWNERS THAT THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPER DID WORK WITH, AND WE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THAT DEVELOPER, AND IT IS DISAPPOINTING THAT WE'RE COMING TO THIS MEETING NOW, AND THERE HAS NOT BEEN MEETINGS WITH HOMEOWNERS, AS WE HAD EXPERIENCED BEFORE. THE SAME OWNER HAS THE LAND THAT INFORMATION COULD HAVE BEEN TRADED IN, BUT AS A HOMEOWNER, I AM ONE THAT HAS OUR COMMUNITY HAS HOMES, THE SMALLEST SIZE BEING AT LIKE 2100 UP TO 2700.

SO IT IS VERY CONCERNING FOR ME BEING ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WITH THE 2700 AND THERE'S HOMES LARGER THAN MINE, I'M CLOSE TO 2700 TO HAVE HOMES TO WHERE YOUR LARGEST IS GOING TO BE 2000FT■S.

AND FOR THE APPRAISAL, I DO TRULY BELIEVE THAT IS GOING TO BE A DIRECT IMPACT FOR MY HOME.

AND I HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT. IT IS NOT IT'S NOT COMPLIMENTARY TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE CONTIGUOUS TO THAT DEVELOPMENT AREA. I ALSO HAVE A VERY STRONG CONCERN THAT WITH EVERYTHING BEING FRONT FACING GARAGE, THAT WILL NOT LOOK APPEALING, IT WILL NOT LOOK VERY WELL TO OUR COMMUNITY. I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE HAVING REAR HAVING THE ALLEYWAYS WITH THE GARAGES, BUT THEN I ALSO HAVE HUGE CONCERN WITH THERE BEING THIS MUCH POPULATION RIGHT NEXT TO THIS BEAUTIFUL TRAIL THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S NOT EVEN, WHAT, FIVE YEARS OLD AND THAT THE IMPACT THAT IT IS GOING TO CAUSE TO THE PONDS THAT WE HAVE BACK THERE WITH THIS MUCH POPULATION COMING IN THERE, IT'S GREAT TO WHAT THEY'VE SAID THAT THEY PUT IN THERE FOR THEM, FOR THE TRAILS WITHIN THAT, BUT THAT IS FOR THOSE RESIDENTS. IT IS NOT COMPLIMENTARY TO THE CITY. AND WE'VE GOT A BEAUTIFUL TRAIL THERE. AND I JUST DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A GOOD

[01:15:03]

THANK YOU, MISS STEPHENS. AT THIS TIME, MISS VALENTINE, IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE FOR THE RECOR. DENISE VALENTINE, DESOTO, TEXAS AND I LIVE IN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS WILDWOOD, DOWNSTREAM TO WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT FOR THE FOR HIS DRAINAGE.

I AM, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY THAT I WAS JUST GOING TO READ THE LETTER. I'M GOING TO TALK AND THEN READ THE LETTER. I'M VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL ARE ASKING, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPER, AND WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS. WE MADE A DEAL. WE DID NOT WANT A LOT OF THESE SMALL LOTS NEXT TO US, BUT BECAUSE THEY AGREED TO BUILD LARGER HOMES AND LARGER LOTS IS WHY WE AGREED, BECAUSE THERE WAS A MIXTURE. SO TO HAVE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT EVEN A SF EIGHT LOT, THE DEVIATIONS THAT HE'S ASKING FOR REALLY TAKES IT DOWN TO SF SIX, WHICH IS NOT EVEN A ZONING THAT WE HAVE IN THIS CITY. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSED REVISION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY. THE PLAN PROPOSES NOT ONLY THE SMALLEST LOT SIZES AVAILABLE IN OUR ORDINANCES, BUT ASK FOR ADDITIONAL DEVIATIONS THAT MAKE EACH LOT BASICALLY THE EQUIVALENT OF AN FSQ SF SIX. I CONSIDER THIS LOT SIZE AND HOME SIZE UNACCEPTABLE NEXT TO MY COMMUNITY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I CONSIDER THIS UNACCEPTABLE IN THE CITY OF DESOTO. UNLESS THE PROPERTY PURCHASES WERE RESTRICTED TO SENIOR CITIZENS.

IN ADDITION TO THE SMALL LOT SIZES THEY ARE REQUESTING DEVIATIONS FROM OUR CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR ALLEYS AND REAR FACING GARAGES. THE PROPOSED DESIGN SEEMS TO ONLY BENEFIT THE DEVELOPER BY ALLOWING THEM TO KEEP THE SAME NUMBER OF LOTS ON A SMALLER, BUILDABLE AREA. THE ONLY PLAN THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED IN RECENT YEARS, WITH THIS LOT SIZE WAS OFF OF DANIEL DALE. IN THAT CASE, THERE WAS A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES, NOT JUST A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THIS PARTICULAR LOT SIZE. I CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A THREAT TO THE PROPERTY VALUE OF MY HOME AND MY NEIGHBORHOOD. THE HIDDEN LAKE SUBDIVISION IS DIRECTLY EAST AND NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY, AND IS BEING BUILT ACCORDING TO EXISTING CITY ORDINANCES. IT HAS BEAUTIFUL, SPACIOUS HOMES AND COMPLEMENTS OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE VOTE NO TO THIS PROPOSAL AND THANK YOU FOR PROTECTING OUR COMMUNITY. I ALSO WANT TO JUST GIVE A LITTLE BE CAREFUL OF DRAINAGE BEING EQUAL TO OPEN SPACE. THOSE ARE NOT THE SAME THING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, MISS VALENTINE. AT THIS TIME, APRIL MOFFITT. OKAY, YOU JUST WANT YOUR POSITION KNOWN. SHE'S AGAINST. SHE'S A DESOTO RESIDENT. ADRIAN MOFFITT. SAME. YES. OPPOSITION. DESOTO RESIDENT. ARE THESE ALL OF THE FORMS THAT WE HAVE? MR. ALL RIGHT. THEN, THE COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. IF NOT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOTION A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND, THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE TIME IS NOW 7:19 P.M. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. MR. BREWER. I THOUGHT I HEARD THE APPLICANT SAY THAT THE CURRENT SFATE CALLS FOR A MINIMUM OF 1500 SQUARE FOOT FOR, FOR, FOR BUILD BUILDING ON. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. AND SECTION 21 OF THE ZONING CODE IS THE SF EIGHT REGULATIONS. THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE IS 15 50FT■S IN SECTION 20, WHICH IS FOR SF NINE, SINGLE FAMILY SQUARE HOME SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE IS 17 50FT■S, AND IN THE SF TEN SECTION 19, THE

[01:20:01]

[1. Discuss and consider appointing a new Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission.]

WE'LL START OVER AGAIN. MR. BELL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TABLE THIS UNTIL OUR MEETING TUESDAY, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELECT TONIGHT? OR IF THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE HAPPY TO VOTE, THEN I AM HAPPY TO VOTE. SO IS THAT A TONIGHT? WE CAN DO IT TONIGHT. YEAH. ALL RIGHT, MISS EDWARDS, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE COMMISSIONER, BUT I WOULD PREFER TO TABLE IT. THAT'S NOT FAMILIAR TO OFFER. TABLE. YEAH, OKAY. I'M GOING TO AGREE TO TABLE. IT JUST BECAUSE IT'S THEIR FIRST NIGHT. IT'S THEIR FIRST NIGHT. THEY HAVEN'T GOT TO MEET HER I THINK. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. IF I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO TABLE THE NOMINATION AND ELECTION PROCESS TO OUR MEETING ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER THE 29TH. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. ATTORNEY. SORRY. SINCE THIS IS TWO SEPARATE ITEMS AND TWO SEPARATE NOMINATIONS, WE

[01:25:03]

YEAH, THAT'S Y'ALL'S PREFERENCE. AND DECIDING HOW THAT MAKES LOGICAL SENSE TO Y'ALL. BUT YEAH, YOU COULD DO ANY COMBINATION I SUPPOSE, BECAUSE THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS. OKAY. WHICH ITEM DO YOU WANT TO VOTE ON? THE CHAIR. MISS LORETTA, DO YOU STILL WANT TO TABLE? WOULD YOU LIKE TO VOTE ON THE CHAIR TONIGHT? MR. CHAIR, MR. LEROY. YES. MR. DEWBERRY.

ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT, THEN WE WILL BE VOTING ON THE CHAIRPERSON THIS EVENING. WILL BE FOLLOWING THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. A PERSON CAN NOMINATE HIM OR HERSELF, OR THEY CAN BE NOMINATED FROM EITHER YOU THAT ARE SITTING ON THE DAIS. A NOMINATION DOES NOT NEED TO BE SECOND. AFTER THAT, I WILL STATE THE NAME OF THE NOMINEE AND ASK THE NOMINEE TO TELL US IF THEY WILL ACCEPT THE NOMINATION AT THAT TIME. THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO FURTHER NOMINATIONS AFTER THERE ARE NO OTHER NOMINATIONS, THEN WE WILL ENTERTAIN CLOSING THE NOMINATION. I WILL EITHER CALL FOR A NOMINATION, I MEAN FOR I WILL EITHER CALL FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE NOMINATION, OR YOU MAY CLOSE IT ON YOUR OWN BY MOTION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? AT THIS TIME, NOMINATIONS ARE IN ORDER FOR THE CHAIRPERSON. MR. VICE CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE VICE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER RAVENEL FOR THE POSITION OF CHAIR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD. AND I WOULD MOVE TO VOTE YES, TO HAVE HIM BE THE CHAIR. IT'S BEEN. MR. RAVENEL HAS BEEN NOMINATED FOR CHAIR POSITION. I DO ACCEPT THAT NOMINATION. OTHER NOMINATIONS. OTHER NOMINATIONS. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS. SO MOVED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? BY A ARE THERE ANY. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE THE VOTE? ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

AT THIS TIME, ALL OF THOSE THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF GARY RAVENEL FOR THE POSITION OF CHAIR PERSON FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE. THE AYES HAVE IT. MR. RAVENEL HAS BEEN ELECTE. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU. AND JUST COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR VOTE, AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE A LEADER AMONG US. AND THE ONE THING THAT I PROMISE TO DO IS TO BE PROFESSIONAL, TO OPERATE WITH INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. AND IF AT ANY TIME THAT I FAIL TO DO THAT, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU WOULD COME TO ME AND TELL ME SO THAT I CAN CORRECT ANY MISTAKES THAT I MAY HAVE MADE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING DOWN TO THE ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST, AND BEFORE WE ALLOW OTHERS TO SPEAK, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST INTRODUCE.

[2. Discuss and Consider appointing a new Vice Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission.]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. RELATIVE. THE NEXT POINT IS TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPOINTING A NEW VICE CHAIR FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN MOVED THAT WE WOULD TABLE THIS ITEM. SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE TABLE IT TO OUR NEXT MEETING. I SECOND THAT MOTION MOVED BY MR. DEWBERRY. SECOND BY MR. GRAHAM. ARE YOU READY FOR THE QUESTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF TABLING THIS UNTIL OCTOBER THE 29TH? OUR NEXT MEETING. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. SAY I, I THE AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. ALL. UNDER THE ITEMS OF

[H. ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST Discussion will be limited to the following pursuant to Gov’t Code 551.0415: (1) Expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; (2) information regarding holiday schedules; (3) a recognition of an individual; (4) a reminder about an upcoming Planning & Zoning events; (5) information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event; and (5) announcements involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety.]

[01:30:05]

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. WELCOME TO OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS. WE ARE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU WITH US, TO WORK WITH US AND WE WELCOME YOU. SO BECAUSE OF ALL OF US, ALL THE COMMISSIONERS, EVEN STAFF, THEY WILL BE A TRAINING SESSION ON THE 29TH. OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL BE LEADING THAT. THAT SESSION. SO THE TRAINING IS FOR EVERY ONE OF YOU BECAUSE WE ALL WANT TO HEAR THE SAME THING AT THE SAME TIME, SO THAT WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE WHEN IT COMES TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR WHAT IS EXPECTED OF YOU AND HOW YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO VOTE. WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO KNOW? OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL BE HERE.

MR. CALEB AND MR. JOE WILL BE WILL BE LEADING THAT SESSION. AND ANOTHER THING IS THAT OUR REGULAR MEETING WILL STILL CONTINUE ON THE 12TH OF NOVEMBER. THIS IS OUR REGULAR MEETING FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THERE WAS ALSO A PROPOSED JOINT MEETING ON THE 20 ON THE 18TH OF NOVEMBER. THIS WILL BE A JOINT SESSION WITH OUR CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE EDC. THIS IS TO DISCUSS THE HAMPTON ROAD CHARACTER CODE. WE WANT YOU ALL TO BE ON THE SAME PAGE OF WHERE THE STATUS, BECAUSE WE YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE HAD GOTTEN TO THAT POINT WHERE WE WANTED TO STAFF IT WITH THE CONSULTANT AND GOTTEN TO A POINT OF TRYING TO REZONE THE PROPERTIES AND CITY COUNCIL IS LIKE, NO, NO, I THINK WE NEED TO HOLD OFF AND REWORK THIS WHOLE THING. SO THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THIS STAFF WOULD WANT THE EDC. TIME IS 6 OR 6:00. NOVEMBER 18TH. THIS WILL BE A WORK SESSION THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL NORMALLY HAS. SO IT WILL IT WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE A PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE WE WANT YOU ALL TO BE TOGETHER TO HEAR ABOUT THIS AND TO GET OUR INFORMATION FROM YOU ALL CONCERNING THE HAMPTON ROAD CHARACTER CODE, SO THAT IS A POTENTIAL MEETING. WE WILL LET YOU KNOW ON THAT ON THE 12TH OF NOVEMBER OR EVEN ON ON MONDAY WHEN YOU COME FOR THE SESSION, ON TUESDAY, WHEN YOU COME FOR THE SESSION, WE WILL LET YOU KNOW ON THE FINAL. FINA? YES. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. YES. THE TRAINING, THE TRAINING IS NEXT TUESDAY AT 6 P.M. WE WILL BE IN IN THE CONFERENCE IN THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM, RIGHT IN. THERE WILL NOT BE HERE, BUT RIGHT BEHIND THAT WAL. MISS MONROE, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THAT TRAINING WILL LAST? THAT WILL BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR CALEB. I CAN'T IMAGINE MORE THAN AN HOUR. HOUR AND A HALF. OKAY. I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF IT WAS OVER AN HOUR. YOU'D BE SHOCKED IF IT'S OVER. I WOULD. I WOULD THINK SO. UNLESS WE JUST GET TO TALKING AND YOU'LL HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. THERE ARE A LOT OF DISCUSSION. I WOULD BE SURPRISED IF IT TOOK OVER AN HOUR. OKAY, THE REASON I ASKED, THERE ARE JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL CAN DISCUSS THEM DURING THIS TRAINING. IF WE HAD THE TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THAT. THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE OF THE LAST CASE THAT WE HAD IN SOME OF THE READING THAT I HAD DONE, YOU, YOU YOU INFORMED ME THAT I WAS USING THAT INFORMATION INCORRECTLY WHERE I CAN UNDERSTAND THE SINGLE FAMILY EIGHTS AND ALL LIKE THAT. BUT PERHAPS IF YOU ALL COULD GIVE US AN OVERVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE CONCEPT AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT, THIS TIME. BUT IF WE COULD LOOK AT DOING THAT DOWN THE ROAD, TRY TO WORK THAT IN SOME OF THE SOMEHOW, SOME WAY PD INFORMATION. OKAY, I'LL TRY TO PUT A NOTE AND SEE IF I CAN GET THAT IN. OKAY. THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD LIKE IS BECAUSE THE CASE, THE CASE THAT WE HAD LAST TIME THAT DEALT WITH THE COMP, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND. HELPING US UNDERSTAND HOW DO WE TAKE THAT INFORMATION AND UTILIZE IT WHEN WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS AS A COMMISSION, BECAUSE THERE IS JUST A LITTLE FOR ME, I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF. I WASN'T SURE EXACTLY HOW TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE INFORMATION I WAS GETTING,

[01:35:06]