[00:00:05]
EVENING AT SIX PM, WELCOME TO THE CITY OF MCKINNEY'S PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF TUESDAY. FEBRUARY 28 2023 THAT COMMISSIONERS THAT YOU SEE SEATED BEFORE YOU HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. AND WE SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THAT SAME CITY COUNCIL. TONIGHT IF YOU ARE PLANNING ON SPEAKING ON AN ITEM A FEW HOUSEKEEPING THINGS FOR YOU BEFORE YOU COME TO THE PODIUM IF YOU WILL FILL OUT ONE OF THE YELLOW SPEAKER CARDS. THOSE ARE LOCATED ON THE TABLE ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE ROOM. THEN WHEN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND YOUR CONCERNS. COUPLE OF THINGS. WE ARE GLAD YOU'RE HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT IN MCKINNEY. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE CITIZENS HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO WHEN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS. YOUR CONCERNS. WHEN YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT, YOU SEE A YELLOW LIGHT ON THE SCREEN TO YOUR LEFT. AND THEN WHEN YOU'RE THREE MINUTES IS UP, YOU'LL HEAR A BUZZER. WE APPRECIATE YOU STICKING WITH THAT SCHEDULE THAT IS IMPORTANT TO OUR PROCESS. SO WITH THAT WE WILL START OUR UNIT. THE FIRST ITEM WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT DOES NOT HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE THE MINUTES OF OUR LAST MEETING FROM FEBRUARY. THE 14TH. 2023 SO ANYONE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON? AN ITEM THAT DOES NOT HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED. ALRIGHT SINGER WILL MOVE ON CALL FOR A MOTION
[CONSENT ITEMS]
ON THE CONSENT ITEMS WHICH IS 23 DAYS. 0133 THE MINUTES THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING IN FEBRUARY. 14 2023 REMEMBER MOTIONS. MOTION APPROVED GOODS APPROVED THE MINUTES MOTION. MR MAN'S EITHER APPROVED THE MINUTES OF OUR LAST PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. SECONDED BY MR WOODRUFF . WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.YEAH. THAT EMOTION CARRIES THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN IMPROVED MEMBERS. WE HAVE TWO PLANTS ON
[PLAT CONSIDERATION UNDER TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 212]
OUR LIST TONIGHT ESTABLISHED, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF BOTH OF THOSE IF IT'S OKAY, WE'LL READ THE CAPTIONS TOGETHER AND THEN TAKE ONE MOTION. FIRST ITEM WOULD BE 23-00 TO 8 FP. CONSIDER A FINAL PLAN FOR LOT ONE BLOCK A OF THE WILLOW WOOD PARK. THIS IS ONLY EAST EAST OF PARKDALE DRIVE , 600 FT SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD, 2 78. AN ITEM 23-0031. FP FINAL PLANT FOR LOT ONE BLACK SEA. THE WILLOW WOOD BLOCK C, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TELEPHONE, ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD, 2 78 MEMBERS, QUESTIONS OR MOTIONS. DO WE NEED UM. HERE. WE GOT A LOT OF MOVING PARTS GOING ON HERE. ARE YOU YOU HAVE BOTH OF THEM, OKAY? SORRY ABOUT THAT . I'D LUMP THEM TOGETHER, AND I APOLOGIZE. I DID NOT GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO SPEAK. SIR THE FIRST REQUEST IS FOR A FINAL CLAD TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY NINE ACRES INTO ONE LOVE FOR A PARK. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST OF PARKDALE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 600 FT. SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD, 2. 78 STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS AND I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. NOT SEEING ANY QUESTIONS YOU UNDER THE NEXT ONE. ALSO THANKS. REQUEST IS FOR AGAIN A FINAL PLATT. THIS IS FOR TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 4.774 ACRES OF LAND. INTO ONE LAW FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH TELEPHONE, ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD . 2. 78 STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS AND I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. MEMBERS QUESTIONS, MR WOODRUFF. NOTHING MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEMS WITH CONDITIONS, AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. EMOTIONAL IMAGE REMAINS AND APPROVED THE PLANTS FOR THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORTS SECOND, MR TAYLOR, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HE'S CASTOR OF A. HI. AND THEN[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit Request to Allow for a Service Center Expansion (Pat Lobb Toyota), Located at 3350 South Central Expressway (REQUEST TO BE TABLED)]
MOTION CARRIES WILL NOW MOVE TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. FIRST ITEM IST 22-00 TO 0 ISSUE P. A[00:05:07]
PUBLIC HEARING. TO CONSIDER SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A SERVICE CENTER EXPANSION. LOEB TOYOTA. THIS IS AT 33 50 SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY. LEXIE GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. THIS REQUEST IS REQUESTED TO BE TABLED INDEFINITELY WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DUE TO A NOTIFICATION ERROR. ANY QUESTIONS? LIKE TO SEE IT DISTRACT. WHAT WAS THE DEFICIENCY? THERE WAS A NOTIFICATION ERROR. BUT THEY WANT TO TABLE INDEFINITELY. YES.SO WE NEED TO NOTICE THAT AND IT SHOULD BE ON AN UPCOMING OKAY, SO OKAY, SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN TABLE AND DEFINITELY OKAY. YOU MEAN YOUR OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
ANYONE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THIS PROPOSED S U P FOR PET LOBE, TOYOTA. OKAY WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC CARRYING AND TABLE THE ITEM INDEFINITELY. MR MAN'S ON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TERRIBLY AND MEN DEFINITELY SECOND BY MR LEBOW, WE NEED DISCUSSION. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE. HI. THAT'S A MOTION CARRIES THE PUBLIC. GREEN HAS BEEN CLOSED IN THE ADAM TABLE AND DEFINITELY AND WE WILL RE NOTIFY WHEN IT RESURFACES RIGHT NEXT TIME TO TWO DAYS, 0033 S P
[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Variance to a Site Plan, Located at the Northeast Corner of South McDonald Street and East Christian Street]
A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A VARIANCE TO A SITE PLAYING. THIS IS AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH MCDONALDS STREET. AND EAST CHRISTIAN STREET. IS THIS YOUR LAST ITEM? NO, YOU WILL BE SEEING ME AGAIN. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT THE CORNER OF MCDONALD AND CHRISTIAN STREET, AS NOTED TYPICALLY, SITE PLANS ARE REVIEWED. AT THE STAFF LEVEL. HOWEVER THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE, WHICH REQUIRES CONSIDERATION BY THE PNC THIS EVENING, AND THIS CASE WAS REVIEWED UNDER OUR OLD CODE BEFORE NEW CODE WAS ADOPTED IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR. IT DOESN'T MEET ALL THE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE OLD CODE . BESIDES THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AS FOLLOWS. THE APPLICANT HAS SATISFIED ALL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT EXCEPT FOR PROVIDING A 20 FT LANDSCAPE FOR A LONG BOTH ROAD FRONTAGE IS HERE ON CHRISTIAN AND ON MCDONALD. THE APPLICATORS REQUESTING TO REDUCE THE NORMALLY REQUIRED 20 FT. BUFFER TO 10 FT. ALONG BOTH STREET FRONTAGE IS DUE TO SITE LIMITATIONS, INCLUDING THE EXISTING DEPTHS AND LEE OUT OF THE LOT. THE APPLICANT IS UNABLE TO MEET THE 20 FT BUFFER REQUIREMENT ON BOTH FRONTAGE IS WITH THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION AND THE SITE FEATURES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED WITH DEVELOPMENT. SIMILAR LANDSCAPE OF FOR WITS ARE SEEN ACROSS MCDONALD'S STREETS. SO THESE ACT WITH VARY, BUT MANY ARE LESS THAN 20 FT. AS THEY STAND NOW, MOST NOTABLY, THERE IS A PARCEL DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE PLANNING PHASE THAT WAS REZONED 2016 TO HAVE FIVE FT LANDSCAPE OF FIRST LONG ALL STREET FRONTAGE IS THAT'S GENERALLY WHAT, UM WE'RE LIKELY TO BE SEEING ALONG THAT STRETCH OF MCDONALD SO DUE TO CONFORMANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS IN THE AREA, AND EXISTING SITE CONSTRAINTS JUST STOPS OPINION. PROPOSED VARIANTS WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I DID PASS OUT OF CITIZEN COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED BEFORE THE MEETING TODAY AND I WILL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. LEXI NOT TOO LONG AGO, WE HEARD VERY SIMILAR STORY REQUEST. ON VIRGINIA STREET COMING INTO TOWN, SO THIS PROPERTY SITS CLOSER TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CLOSER TO DOWNTOWN. IT'S GOT 30 FT ON THE CORNER, BUT THE 10 FT. THE OTHER PROPERTY ALSO HAD THE 30 FT WITH A 10. FT HAD NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES THAT ALSO HAD A LITTLE LESS OF THE 20 FT BUFFER. UM IT WAS COMMERCIAL. STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF IT. UM THIS BODY VOTED AGAINST THAT SEND IT TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT BODY VOTED AGAINST IT. ALSO NAMING WITH SOME OF THEIR UM, CONSIDERATIONS. THAT THESE WERE THEIR AFFAIRS INTO THE DOWNTOWN AND HISTORIC DISTRICT. THAT 20 FT BUFFERS WERE NEEDED RELATED TO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS UNLESS. FOR SOME REASON, THEY COULD YOU POTENTIALLY A PD TO REDUCE SOME USES OUT OF THOSE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN WHICH THEY FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE 10 FT BUFFER. SO THE CITY COUNCIL TURNED THAT PROPERTY DOWN ALSO[00:10:06]
WHAT'S DIFFERENT BETWEEN THAT CASE IN THIS CASE? AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY LOCATION AND REQUEST.SO WHAT? YOU'RE CORRECT THAT THEY ARE RELATIVELY SIMILAR CASES SO THAT PROPERTY WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE CLOSER TO 75 OF THEM. START DISTRICT. THIS ONE'S DIRECTLY ON MCDONALD STAY. BOTH ARE FOUR SIMILAR, RELATIVELY SMALL SCALE RETAIL USES. SO THE MAIN THING THAT STAFF WAS LOOKING AT FOR BOTH THAT REQUEST AND THIS ONE WOULD BE THE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENT. THE IMPACT ON POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA AND THE NEIGHBORS, AND IT WAS OUR OPINION THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS ALREADY EXISTING AND WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT. THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL ON BOTH THE PREVIOUS REQUEST AND THIS REQUEST. THAT'S WHY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HAS NOT CHANGED, BUT YOU ARE CORRECT AND IS RELATIVELY SIMILAR TO THE OTHER SITE. STAFF HAS BEEN CONSISTENT IN THEIR INTERPRETATION OF IT OVERALL, BUT WE'VE ALSO GOT A, UM DECISION BY A CITY COUNCIL ON A LIKE KIND OF REQUEST IN WHICH THEY DENIED IT AND SENT IT BACK WAS CONSIDERATION. EVERYTHING MAY LOOK AT IT AS A P D. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT? YES. OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS YOU. WON LEXI. THANK YOU AS OUR APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT. SURE.
GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS WINDS IN ACROSS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 17 20, WEST VIRGINIA HERE IN MCKINNEY. UM. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS CLIENT FOR QUITE AWHILE ON THIS SITE, AND WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CONSTRAINTS ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WE'VE WORKED. THROUGH AND WITH THE SPECIFIC SPECIFICALLY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. UM, WE HAVE . OBTAINED VARIANTS FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. TO WORK WITH THIS SITE. UM, THE REASON FOR THE. REDUCED THE LANDSCAPE SETBACK. WAS SO THAT WE COULD MAKE THIS PARTICULAR RETAIL BUILDING PARK ON HERE, SO WE WOULD HAVE BEEN APPLYING FOR EITHER A VARIANCE OF EITHER THE LANDSCAPE SETBACK OR A PARKING VARIANTS. WE JUST FELT THAT. WITH THE CONFIGURATION. OF THIS LOT WHERE IT'S LOCATED THE ADJACENT BUSINESSES. WHAT'S BEING OBTAINED IN THE GENERAL AREA THERE. THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER. TO GO FOR THE LANDSCAPE VARIANTS AND JUST ENSURE THAT WE . DRESSED IT UP A LITTLE BETTER, NICER. LANDSCAPING AS YOU. ARE AWARE THAT JUST NORTH I BELIEVE IT'S JUST NORTH OF THIS IS WHERE THE CHICKEN EXPRESS WAS THAT CAUGHT FIRE. AH WE FEEL THIS IS A LITTLE MORE KIND OF ON THE OUTSIDE FRINGES OF IT AND AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THERE'S NO UPCOMING REDEVELOPMENT OF ANY OF THE AREA. SOUTH OR NORTH OF HERE, EXCEPT FOR MAYBE THAT LOT. BUT BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THE TRACK. BUT THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE CHOICE BETWEEN GOING FOR THE LANDSCAPE VARIANTS VERSUS PARKING VARIANTS. QUESTIONS. ABOUT THE LAND NORTH OF THAT GOING TOWARDS IDA, IS THAT THAT'S UH, OPEN LAND. THESE ARE BOTH VACANT LODGE AND THERE WAS AN EXISTING BUSINESS ON THAT, UH, PROPERTY. BUT BELIEVE US SINCE BEEN 20. THIS THIS TRACK THAT YOU HAVE IS A 200.36 ACRES, AND I JUST WONDERED IF YOU COULD COMBINE A BIGGER TRACK . THEY'RE GOING WITH THAT EXTRA LAND GOING UP TO IDA. AH, THE ARE MY CLIENTS, UH, SAID THAT HE TRIED TO OBTAIN THAT PROPERTY. THEY COULDN'T COME TO TERMS ONLY HE DIDN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT AND CONSTRUCT THE BUSINESS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
WELL, THERE. WHAT BUSINESSES ALL WILL BE IN THIS BUILDING OR OR YOU'RE AT A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT
[00:15:04]
BUILDING. THIS IS A 30. 3200 IT'S A SINGLE WE USE BUILDING. IT'S GOING TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE STORE. OKAY SO IT'S I MEAN, SO IT'S ON A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT OF LAND AND 0.36 ACRES WITH NO GAS PUMPS PUMPS. JUST A CONVENIENCE STORE CORRECT. OTHER QUESTIONS. MR ZEN. THANK YOU. WE MAY HAVE YOU COME BACK UP AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, OKAY? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU'VE COME TONIGHT AND WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS PLANNING ITS OWN REGARDING THIS PROPOSED ISSUE. P. PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM. YES, MA'AM. HELLO MY NAME IS REBECCA COLE MANERO. AND I OWNED THE LOTS THAT ARE SUPPOSEDLY EMPTY LOTS AND YES, WE HAVE ATTEMPTED. WE HAVE MADE MANY ATTEMPTS TO TRY TO DEVELOP. BUT DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE ACCOUNT, THE CITY UM THE PLANNING AND ZONING, KEEP GOING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND THEY DON'T THEY WON'T BUDGE. SO IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES. WE HAVE THE RESOURCES. WE AND WE JUST WE I WANT TO MAKE A GALLERY PAINT GALLERY FOR MY SON. AND, UM SO IT'S THE SAME CONSTRAINTS THE SAME. VARIOUS ISSUES. FOR THE. SITE PLAN CASE 22-0033 S P AND THEY DENIED IT. THEY WON'T THEY WON'T SEE IT. THEY WANT TO OVERSEE THE VARIANCES. SO I AM NOT GOING TO GIVE PARKING LOT VARIANCES ON MY LAND. BECAUSE IT WAS THE SAME THE SAME REASON THAT THE SAME CONSTRAINTS THAT THEY'RE HAVING TO GO THROUGH. I HAD TO GO THROUGH, TOO. AND THEY WERE THEY WERE DENIED. I DON'T WANT TO CONVENIENCE STORE ANY LIQUOR STORE NEXT TO MY LOT. I'M GONNA NEED PARKING SPACE AS WELL. SO. I OWN BOTH A LOTS AND NO ONE HAS COME FORWARD TO ME ASKING FOR ANY ANY OFFERS. SO IT'S NOT A NEGLECTED I PAY. I WILL. I'M WILL WITHSTANDING WITH I AM IN GOOD STANDING WITH MY TAXES. I PAY THEM EVERY YEAR. IT'S A LOT OF MONEY FOR EMPTY LAND. I CAN'T BUILD ON AND I DO HAVE THE RESOURCES. BUT IT'S THE CITY. IT'S THE PLANNING AND ZONING. SO I JUST WANT TO JUST COULD COULD YOU CLARIFY WHICH PROPERTIES YOU OWN NORTH? THAT'S ON AND ON THE CORNER BY ALEXA, CAN YOU IT'S PRIME. SURE WE HAD A COLOR ON THE SCREEN. WE NEED TO KNOW WHICH LOTS SHE CURRENTLY OWNS. SEE, HERE'S SHORT AND HERE'S HERE'S CHRISTIAN. THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BUILD ON MCDONALD. SO I OWN THIS. THERE'S THE ALLEY. THERE'S IDA PROPERTIES. I DON'T. I OWN THIS ONE HERE, OKAY, TO NORTH MHM, RIGHT? RIGHT RIGHT. SHE DOES NOT OWN THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY THE GRASS. WE KEEP UP WITH THE ORDER THE ORDINANCE KEEPING WE CUT THE GRASS EVERY EVERYTHING. EVERY SUMMER. SURE IT'S GROWING. SO IT'S NOT AN WE. WE KEEP UP WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING AND TRYING EVERY WE KEEP TRYING. NOW WE HAVE THE SAME ISSUES. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.ANYONE ELSE WISH TO, UH SPEAK ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT. MOTION CLOSED . PUBLIC HEARING OF EMOTION DAMAGED REMAINS I TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING MANAGED TO WHAT EARLY? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. MOTION IS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MISTER WATLEY.
ROOM. WE'VE KIND OF QUICK UP HERE AND YOU TO KEEP UP. YES, MA'AM. I'VE ALL DAY. THE MOTION CARRIES A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED. UH JUST ONE NOTE FOR THE FILE. I THINK LEXI MENTIONED IT. WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER. THROUGH THE CITY'S PORTAL REGARDING THIS PROPERTY, AND IT WILL BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AS PART OF OUR MINUTES. FOR THOSE OF YOU WATCHING AT HOME. NOW QUESTIONS ANYONE. MR WOODRUFF.
[00:20:05]
UM I WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT THE EXACT RATIO THAT IT COULD BE REDUCED UNDER THE OLD CODE STANDARDS. UM, BUT THE ME. I WILL JUMP IN. I'M SO SORRY, LEXI, BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT THAT EXACT QUESTION. SAME BRAIN . UM IT WOULD BE DONE THROUGH A PARKING DEMAND STUDY AND SO WE WOULD HAVE THAT RATIO. THEY WOULD DO THE STUDY TO SEE IF THE CERTAIN USES THAT ARE PROPOSED AT THAT LOCATION COULD WARRANT A LESSER AMOUNT OF PARKING AT THAT LOCATION. IT'S NOT A VARIANCE.IT WOULD BE A PARKING DEMAND STUDY, SO IT WOULDN'T BE A TRUE VARIANCE PROCESS, BUT IT WOULD BE DIFFERING DIFFERENT FROM OUR STANDARD SITE PLAN PROCESS.
I'M GOING TO CHECK REAL QUICK BECAUSE I IT IS GREAT. UM. IT WILL BE APPROVED BY STAFF. UH IF THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DETERMINES THE INFORMATION OF SOMETHING ASSUMPTIONS IN THE PARKING STUDY AT REASONABLE AND ACCURATELY REFLECTS HMM. ANYONE ELSE? SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS. THE FRONT IS GOING TO OPEN TO THE SOUTH. OKAY? AND SO FACING HOW WE FIVE IS JUST GOING TO BE LIKE A BRICK WALL THERE. YEAH SO WE DID REVIEW FACADE PLANS SINCE IT IS IN THE H S A. AND IT WAS A REQUIREMENT. I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS. CREATE PLANE WELL, AND THAT'S LIKE. I'LL MAKE A COMMENT. I JUST THINK MCDONALDS STREET OUGHT TO SOMEWHERE. START CHANGING FOR THE BETTER AND NOT HAVE A THIRD ACRE LOT. VARIANCES. AND CONTINUE ON IN THE SAME TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST. SO WITH THAT I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. 220033 SP VARIANTS. YEAH I HAVE A QUESTION. UM SO WE HAVE A COMMENT FROM A RESIDENT BEHIND ONE SECOND, SO WE HAVE EMOTION. WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND. CAN WE FINISH? DISCUSSIONS WERE WELL HAVE DISCUSSION WITH THE QUESTION IS, CAN WE GET A SECOND ? NOW VERSUS CONTINUING CONTINUING ON IN THIS CONVERSATION? I'LL JUST DO A SECOND, BUT I WANT TO ADD TO THE FACT OF UM I MEAN, STAFF HAS BEEN CONSISTENT IN THE WAY OF INTERPRETING THIS. THIS IS AN ISSUE WITHIN VIRGINIA MCDONALD ALL THE OLD TOWN. UM AS FAR AS THIS GOES I DON'T SEE HURLEY.
ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS CASE AND THE CASE WE HEARD BEFORE THAT CASE DID REACH CITY COUNCIL DID GET TURNED DOWN. SEEMS LIKE CITY COUNCIL ONE OR MORE CONTROL WHEN THEY DID. GIVE UP THE 10 FT BUFFER AS TO WHAT WOULD GO THERE? UM, INSTEAD OF RECEIVING THE 20 FT BUFFER THAT THEY GOT LISTENING TO THE OTHER CASE THAT THEY HEARD SO WITH THAT. I SUPPORTED THE INITIAL ONE. BUILD ON, BUT THEY'RE SAYING AND CITY COUNCIL, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING WITH THE SECOND TURNING THIS DOWN SO CITY COUNCIL CAN HEAR IT AND DECIDE WHAT COMMERCIAL THEY WANT WITH A 10 FT BUFFER COMPARED TO 20 FT BUFFER. ALL RIGHT NOW WE HAVE HMM. SO. REMEMBER, MANSA. I DID WANT TO JUST CLARIFY WHEN IT COMES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE TECHNICAL AND CONSISTENT UNTIL WE RECEIVE A FORMAL POLICY OR DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL, AND SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE CHANGING OUR RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE COUNCIL DID TAKE AN ACTION ON IT. WHENEVER CITY COUNCIL DOES. GIVE US THAT FORMAL DIRECTION OR THAT FORMAL POLICY. THAT'S WHENEVER WE WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD WITH A DIFFERENT TYPE OF RECOMMENDATION. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO CHIME IN REAL QUICK, LESS SO ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, SIDE AND MORE ON JUST PROCEDURALLY, UM, THE THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST IF IT IS DENIED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT DENIABLE STAND UNLESS THE APPLICANT APPEALS TO CITY COUNCIL SO WILL NOT AUTOMATICALLY MOVE OVER TO CITY COUNCIL. IT WILL ONLY GO TO CITY COUNCILOR. IF THE APPLICANT PURSUES THAT, SO, JUST LIKE THE LAST CASE ON, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY THAT THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU DENIED HERE, IT'S NOT AUTOMATICALLY GONNA GO TO COUNCIL THEY COULD COULD END RIGHT HERE AT THE APPLICANTS SO CHOOSES. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION
[00:25:01]
BY MR LOBO TO DENY THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT IN A SECOND MANAGED TO MEN'S I NOW LET'S HAVE SOME DISCUSSION. YOUR BOYS ON THIS. NORTH END OF THE TABLE HERE. RIGHT YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION. I'M GOOD.ANYONE ELSE? YOU KNOW, THIS STRETCH OF MCDONALD NEEDS ALL THE HELP IT CAN GET. AND THIS IS A THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT. AND I WOULDN'T, UH, VOTE AGAINST IT BECAUSE IT 10 FT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. YOU WANT ANYTHING? HMM MY CONCERN FOR HIGHWAY FIVE IS WE'VE GOT. 89 10 CAR LOTS AND ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF STRETCH RIGHT THERE. MAN IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOUR CONVENIENCE STORES IN THAT SAME STRETCH AND I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FORWARD. I AGREE WITH WITH MR TAYLOR AND MR WOODRUFF. THIS AREA NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED AND REDEVELOPED. THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS NOT THE USE. AND THE QUESTION OF FORCES THAT IS A REDUCTION IN THE SETBACK. UM I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE APPLICANT. I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS OF THE ADVOCATE? I JUST DON'T SEE HOW THIS IS ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE LOOKED AT VIRGINIA OR THEIR REQUEST. SO, UM RELATED TO IT OTHER THAN SAYING MCDONALD'S TREATED DIFFERENT THAN VIRGINIA. AND WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR LOBO TO DENY THE APPLICANTS REQUEST AND A SECOND MAN, MR MAN'S EYE. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. NO. OKAY. THE, UM. MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICANTS REQUEST IS DENIED AND YOU HAVE TO DENIES IN ONE SENTENCE. HMM UH, MOTION. YEAH, WE NEED WE NEED TO TAKE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION. EMOTIONAL, MR WOODRUFF TO APPROVE THE ANIMUS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. SECOND SECOND MAN, MR TAYLOR. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES. BUT THIS MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF FOUR IN FAVOR AND THREE AGAINST THE APPLICANTS. REQUEST IS APPROVED. THIS ITEM DOES NOT GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MR ZEN. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ADAM TO TWO DAYS. 0086 SPF PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER
[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Variance to a Site Plan for a Multi-Family Development (Modera McKinney), Located on the East Side of Future Hardin Boulevard and Approximately 1,500 feet North of Bloomdale Road]
VARIANTS TO SITE PLAN FOR A MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MADEIRA MCKINNEY THIS IS ONLY EAST SIDE OF FUTURE HARDENED BOULEVARD. 1500 FT NORTH OF BLOOMINGDALE ROAD. SHEFFIELD THANK YOU. SO THE APPLICANTS PROPOSING A SITE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS WITH APPROXIMATELY 380 ACRES. THIS DEVELOPMENT TRACT MIGHT LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU . WE HAVE PROCESSED A GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN THE CONCEPT PLAN. THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS WELL AS HE COUNCIL LAST YEAR. SO TYPICALLY, PLANS CAN BE APPROVED. AT THE STAFF LEVEL.HOWEVER THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR TWO DEVIATIONS FROM THE TYPICAL STANDARDS AND OUR ZONING
[00:30:03]
ORDINANCE. ONE OF THE FIRST ONES IS THE SCREENING. VARIANCE UM, FOR ANY PARKING AREAS THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, ARE TYPICALLY REQUIRED TO BE SCREENED BY MASONRY WALLS, EARTH BERMS OR WROUGHT IRON FENCES WITH EVERGREEN SHRUBS. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SOFTER SCREENING DEVICE CONSISTING OF EVERGREEN SHRUBS LIKE THIS. LOCATION HERE. AND THEN TWO OTHER PAGES AS WELL. HERE. HERE. AND THEN THIS AGES. SHRUBS AS WELL. SO THE SECOND REQUEST THE APPLICANT HAS IS BRINGING BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS THE REDUCTION IN THE ENCLOSED PARKING STANDARD REQUIREMENTS SO TYPICALLY WITH OUR OLD CODE, MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE 50% OF THE UNITS WITHIN CLOSED PARKING SPACES. WITH OLD CODE THAT CAN BE REDUCED WITH APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE CITY COUNCIL FROM THAT 50% TO 30. THE APPLICANT IS BRINGING BEFORE A REQUEST TO REDUCE THAT INCLUDES PARKING SPACE FROM THE 52 THE 30% BUT THEY ARE STILL PROVIDING THE ADDITIONAL 20% FOR CARPORTS . SO IT IS AN EXTRA REQUIREMENT THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF BOTH OF THE APPLICANTS REQUESTS. WE FEEL THAT THE SCREEN DEVICE WILL PROVIDE A SOFTER SCREENING DEVICE BUT STILL MEETING THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. BOTH OF THESE REQUESTS DO ALIGN WITH THE NEW REQUIREMENTS IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE'VE ALSO FOUND THAT THESE REQUESTS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS ARE CONSISTENT. WE FEEL THAT IT WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OR ANY PROPERTIES ADJACENT. WITH THAT BEING SAID STAFF DOES RECOMMEND AGAIN SUPPORTIVE OF THESE REDUCTIONS IN THE VARIANCE REQUESTS BEFORE YOU AND I WILL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. YOU. WON CALEB. THANK YOU, SIR. APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT. MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON BOB ROEDER 1700 RED BUD SUITE 300 IN MCKINNEY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. I THINK THE CRITICAL ASPECT HERE IS AS CAITLYN SAID, IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS REALLY PERMITTED UNDER THE NEW CODE. WE JUST GOT CAUGHT IN THE OLD CODE. THE SCREENING VARIANCES ARE JUST FOR PARKING SPACES OF THREE OR FOUR. CARS THAT ARE PARKED VERY FAR.OFF OF THE EAST WEST ROAD THAT RUNS ALONG THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY. UM QUESTIONABLE WHETHER THEY NEED SCREENING ALL TO AVOID THE HEADLINES, BUT WE'RE PROPOSING TO JUST USE A LIVING SCREEN RATHER THAN TYPE OF PHYSICAL BARRIER. AND UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS FOR THE 30% IN CLOSE, WE GO ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO I WOULD REQUEST YOUR FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.
AND I THINK THE SCREENING STOPS AT PNG. THE PARKING GOES ON THE COUNCIL BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MR ROEDER. THE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT. THIS IS BEING DEVELOPED UNDER A PD HAS PROVED APPROVED IN 1987. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU, MR ROEDER. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING OUT OF ME IF YOU COME TO NINE AND WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS, PLANNING AND ZONING REGARDING THIS PROPOSED VARIANCES SITE PLAN. PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM. MM. MR WOODWARD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVED THE ANIMUS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION . SECONDED BY MR LEBOW. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? CAST YOUR VOTE. I. THE MOTION CARRIES, UM MOTOR SEVEN IN FAVOR AND ZERO AGAINST THE AUTUMN WHEN WE SENT THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR FINAL ACTION AT THE MARCH 21 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY ON OUR AGENDA IS FOR ANYONE TO COME. SPEAK ON ANYTHING, NOT ON OUR AGENDA. NO ONE RUSHING TO THE PODIUM. IT'S THE SECOND TIME YOU'VE HIT THAT FALSE BUTTON. THE NEXT TIME I'M GOING TO CALL YOU OUT. NEXT TIME
[COMMISSION AND STAFF COMMENTS]
WILL BE COMMISSIONED COMMENTS OR STAFF COMMENTS ANYONE? I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. I STEPPED DOWN ON THIS TWO TIMES BEFORE. BUT SINCE THEN IT'S BEEN CLOSED. IT'S UH I HAVE NO INTEREST IN ANY FEES OR[00:35:02]
OWNERSHIP OR ANYTHING, SO I DID NOT RECUSE MYSELF. ON WHAT ITEM? ON THIS ITEM. GERMAN. THE LAST ITEM WE JUST HEARD. OR YOU JUST CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT? SORRY. WELL STILL, I GOT IT OUT THERE. YEAH OKAY. OKAY? UM I DON'T HAVE STAFF UPDATE. SO OUTSIDE NOTED UM, IN OUR LAST MEETING, LEXI IS MOVING OVER TO OUR LONG RANGE TEAM AND I INTRODUCED YOU ALTER RODERICK.HOWEVER, WE NOW HAVE BOOM MIKA AS WELL ON OUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND CURRENT PLANNING TEAM, AND SO, UH, I AM FULLY STAFFED IN CURRENT PLANNING. I AM VERY EXCITED, UH, SPENT A LONG TIME TO LONG RANGE PLANNING . THEY SHOULD BE FULLY STAFFED TO BY NOW. HOPEFULLY YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? CONGRATULATIONS. LIKES TO COME BACK AND SEE US. OKAY THANK YOU.
FOR WHAT YOU DO ALL OF YOU, MR ARNOLD. THANK YOU, MISS RAYMOND . CAITLIN WE DO NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I MOVE WE ADJOURN. MOTION ON MR WOODRUFF AND A SECOND BY SOMEONE, MISTER WATLEY DISCUSSION. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE OR VOTE. I. ALRIGHT IT IS 6
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.