Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit for Self-Storage (Extra Space Storage), Located Approximately 610 Feet East of Custer Road and on the South Side of Bloomdale Road (REQUEST TO BE TABLED)

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit for Self-Storage (Extra Space Storage), Located Approximately 610 Feet East of Custer Road and on the South Side of Bloomdale Road (REQUEST TO BE TABLED)]

THE FIRST ITEM IS 230005 ESSER P PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR SELF STORAGE.

EXTRA SPACE STORAGE 600FT EAST OF CUSTER ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BLOOMINGDALE ROAD.

MISS SHEFFIELD. THANK YOU.

CAITLIN SHEFFIELD, PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE ITEM BE TABLED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CONTINUED TO THE JUNE 27TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

THIS IS AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS NOT BEING POSTED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE TIME REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE, AND I WILL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. QUESTIONS.

SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TABLING THE ITEM BECAUSE THE APPLICANT DID NOT GET THE POSTING SIGNS UP IN THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF TIME. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

AND THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF THAT? YES, SIR. OKAY.

CONTINUING TO THE 27TH.

ANYONE ELSE. ALL RIGHT.

THIS THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED.

IF YOU'VE MADE THE EFFORT TO BE HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO.

BUT PLEASE KNOW WE WILL BE LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM.

SO SEEING NO ONE RUSH TO THE PODIUM, I'M GUESSING NO ONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS.

SO WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE THE ITEM TILL THE JUNE 27TH PLANNING ZONING MEETING.

MOTION BY MR. MANZI TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TO TABLE THE ITEM UNTIL THE JUNE 27TH, 2023, PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

I'LL SECOND MR. HAGSTROM SECONDS A MOTION.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

MOTION CARRIES A VOTE OF SEVEN IN FAVOR ZERO AGAINST.

THE ITEM HAS BEEN TABLED UNTIL THE JUNE 20TH JUNE 27TH, 2023 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

OUR NEXT ITEM IS 23-0043 SP PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER DESIGN EXCEPTIONS FOR A SITE PLAN FOR

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on Design Exceptions for a Site Plan for a Retail Development, Located Approximately 670 Feet South of Highlands Drive and on the East Side of South Lake Forest Drive]

A RETAIL DEVELOPMENT.

670FT SOUTH OF HIGHLANDS DRIVE ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKE FOREST.

MR. CHAIRMAN, PLEASE SHOW THE RECORD THAT STEPPING DOWN.

ON, JAKE. PERRY.

I'LL STEP DOWN THIS ITEM ALSO.

BOTTOM 20 3-0043 SP TWO.

JAKE THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. VICE CHAIR. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION.

JAKE BENNETT, PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY.

THERE ARE THREE REQUESTED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GOODY GOODY LIQUOR STORE SITE PLAN.

TYPICALLY, SITE PLANS ARE APPROVED AT THE STAFF LEVEL.

HOWEVER, WHEN VARIANTS SUCH AS THESE ARE REQUESTED, THEY ARE BROUGHT IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ON 1.4 ACRES.

THE FIRST OF THE THREE DESIGN EXCEPTIONS IS TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE SCREENING DEVICE ALONG THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THE SECOND IS TO ORIENT A LOADING BAY TOWARD AN ADJACENT RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, AND THE THIRD IS TO PROVIDE THE LOADING BAY WITHIN 200FT OF A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY.

WHILE THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES, IT IS BEING USED AS THE AS A CHANNEL FOR THE COTTONWOOD CREEK.

THE NEAREST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT IS APPROXIMATELY 300FT AWAY.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE EASTERN RED CEDAR CANOPY TREES SPACED EVERY 20 LINEAR FEET BETWEEN THE IMPROVED AREA ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE SCREENING DEVICE WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTALS AS PART OF SITE PLAN SUBMITTALS IN 2018 FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH.

DUE TO THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED CREEK CHANNEL ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN OR DISTANCE TO THE NEAREST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT AND THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF THE ALTERNATIVE SCREENING USED BY THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE

[00:10:02]

REQUESTED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS DUE TO SOME CONCERNS FROM RESIDENTS REGARDING THE USE.

I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THE USE IS ALLOWABLE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE ONLY CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS ITEM ARE FOR THE REQUESTED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS.

ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN EXCEPTIONS AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR JAKE? STAFF? JAKE.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A ZONING MATTER, BUT A DESIGN EXCEPTION.

SO IT IS ALLOWABLE IN THE LETTER OF INTENT.

IT'S A 15 ZERO ZERO ZERO SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.

3000 FOR A WAREHOUSE IS WAREHOUSE ALLOWABLE? THERE IT IS AT A IT'S ESSENTIALLY JUST A STORAGE AREA.

IT IS ALLOWABLE AT A CERTAIN RATIO.

SO IF THIS WAS TO EXCEED A CERTAIN RATIO BECAUSE WE HAVE MEDICAL DOCTORS IN THIS AREA, WE HAVE OTHER RETAIL.

THIS COULDN'T BECOME A STRAIGHT WAREHOUSE TYPE FACILITY.

NO, SAY SOME RETAIL FRONT TO A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE.

THAT'S CORRECT. I BELIEVE WAREHOUSE IS ONLY ALLOWABLE IN OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.

THIS IS ZONED PD, BUT WITH A BASE ZONING OF I BELIEVE IT'S PG OR C TWO FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF.

SO THE CITY COULD CLAIM IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ITS ZONING IF IT WAS TO TURN INTO A FULL.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

AND AS FAR AS THE GREENERY TO THE BACK, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE DONE UP AND DOWN BECAUSE OF THAT GREEN BELT.

YES, SIR. LIKE I SAID, THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, NOT IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH, BUT THERE IS A LOT IN BETWEEN THEM.

THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES FURTHER TO THE NORTH ARE PROVIDING THE EXACT SAME SCREENING AS SHOWN HERE ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

IT'S THESE EASTERN RED CEDARS RIGHT ALONG HERE, WHICH IT'S NOT SHOWING ON THERE NOW.

I SEE. BUT IT'S THE EASTERN RED CEDARS ON THE FAR EAST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS.

YOU ALSO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO REVISE THE SITE PLAN FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.

YEAH, THAT'S A ONE OF THE STANDARD KIND OF COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE WHENEVER WE STILL HAVE SOME MINOR COMMENTS WORKING THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS AND THAT'S THOSE CONDITIONS AS WELL.

SO YEAH, VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, JAKE, WHAT ABOUT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT? WHAT'S THE MINIMUM FOR THAT? I BELIEVE IT IS.

IT'S ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 250FT² OF BUILDING AREA.

THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING RIGHT AT THE MINIMUM NUMBER.

WHAT THAT MINIMUM NUMBER IS, I FORGET.

IT'S 60. 60.

OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.

SO THEY'RE PROVIDING RIGHT AT THE 60 WITH THE FIRE REVISION POSSIBLY CHANGE THE SPACES THAT THEY HAVE HERE? NO, THE COMMENT THAT THEY HAD I THINK WAS JUST POTENTIALLY SHIFTING THEIR FTC, WHICH THEY HAVE ROOM TO DO THROUGH ONE OF THOSE TERMINUS ISLANDS, I BELIEVE. AGAIN, I'M NOT A REVIEWER FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE, BUT THAT'S WHAT I RECALL WAS ONE OF THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS.

SO THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THE APPLICANT HERE? YES, SIR.

GOOD EVENING. IF YOU DON'T MIND STATING YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

DAVID JOHNSON 1820 CATTLE DRIVE PROSPER, TEXAS 75078.

UM, SO I GUESS THE QUESTIONS HERE ARE YOU'VE HEARD THE COMMENTS ON THE DISCUSSION OF THE WAREHOUSE TO THE RETAIL AND THAT IT MUST STAY A MAJORITY OF RETAIL OR IT WOULD BE A NON COMPLIANCE. DOES THAT MEET WITH WHAT YOU'RE EXPECTING FROM THE SITE? YEAH. AND I WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT.

I MEAN, I LISTED IT AS WAREHOUSE.

TECHNICALLY, IT'S JUST STORAGE FOR OUR STORE.

WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE WAREHOUSE QUOTE UNQUOTE AT OUR STORES.

IT'S IT'S PROBABLY JUST A MISLABEL, BUT IT'S SIMPLY STORAGE FOR THE PRODUCT THAT'S PUTTING ON THE SALES FLOOR.

AND WITH THE BAY DOOR ORIENTED TOWARDS A RESIDENTIAL.

WHAT ARE TRADITIONALLY THE DELIVERIES TO AND FROM THE STORE TIMING AND HOURS, USUALLY OUR DELIVERIES WILL TAKE PLACE RIGHT AROUND FROM ABOUT 10 A.M.

TILL ABOUT 1 P.M.

SOME DAYS WERE CLOSED AND SATURDAYS THAT WE DON'T TAKE ANY DELIVERIES.

ALL THE WHOLESALERS, LIKE MANY, THEY'RE ALL CLOSED ON THE WEEKENDS.

SO ALL OF OUR DELIVERIES ARE DURING THE DAY.

AND I'M SORRY, DURING THE WEEK AND DURING THE DAY.

SO NOW THERE THERE COULD BE TIMES WHERE WE WOULD BRING A VAN FROM OUR CORPORATE OFFICE AND HOTSHOT UP A COUPLE OF CASES OF PRODUCT, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, ANY BOX TRUCKS OR ANYTHING ELSE WILL BE DURING THE WEEK.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? JUST CLARIFY.

SOMEONE MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THE FIRE.

IT WAS IT'S JUST PERTAINING TO THE FTC AND WE HAD THE FTC AT AN EXTERIOR DOOR AND WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL AND SHOWING RIGHT THERE ON THE SITE PLAN, AND THEY'VE TENTATIVELY APPROVED THAT.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY, THE THE USES TO BE RETAIL ORIENTED 100%, IT'S NOT TO ACTUALLY HAVE BUSINESSES WHERE YOU CAN RUN OUT AND DELIVER TO ALL THE

[00:15:05]

RESTAURANTS. AND SO I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE TECHNICAL TERM IS THERE, BUT THERE'S SOME OF THE LIQUOR STORES I KNOW RUN OUT AND THEY HAVE WHERE THEY'RE NOT SELLING TO RETAILERS, THEIR CUSTOMERS THAT COME INTO THE STORE, BUT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THESE VANS THAT ARE COMING ALL DAY LONG RUNNING TO RESTAURANTS.

AND SO IT'S KIND OF A QUASI RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT, BUT ALSO KIND OF A WAREHOUSE SIDE.

SO JUST SO IN 2001, WE HAD A GOODY GOODY HAD A WHOLESALE DIVISION, AND WE WERE IN THAT BUSINESS AND WE SOLD THAT BUSINESS TO A LOCAL COMPETITOR AND WE NO LONGER DO ANY WHOLESALE.

SO ALL OF OUR BUSINESS IS STRICTLY RETAIL AND THAT WOULD BE FOR HOME OWNERS OR RESIDENCES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

WE DO NOT SELL TO ANY COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION THAT THE LOADING DOCK BASED ON THE DRAWING, IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.

YEAH. I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN.

YEAH. YEAH. THE LOADING.

MAYBE. LET ME SEE IF I CAN.

MAYBE IT'S EASIER TO POINT.

YEAH. DO.

I'M SORRY. SO, LOADING? YEAH. THE ANNOTATION BUTTON FOR SOME REASON ISN'T WORKING ON OUR SCREEN.

OH, THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT SHOWING.

SO HERE'S MY QUESTION.

SO THERE'S THERE'S A THERE'S A GREEN BELT BEHIND THERE.

YES. AND THEN THERE'S RESONANCES BEYOND THAT.

RIGHT. AND THERE'S A CUL DE SAC KIND OF DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS LOCATION.

YEAH. DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW FAR IT IS FROM THE DOCK TO THE CUL DE SAC? WE CAME UP WITH 363FT.

NOW THAT'S TO THE ROOF LINE, TO OUR OVERHEAD DOOR.

OKAY. I WAS TRYING TO GET A FEEL.

I COULDN'T TELL IF IT WAS 100FT OR SO.

IT'S OVER 300FT. THERE'S A 100 FOOT SETBACK RIGHT THERE.

AND THEN IF YOU CAN STAY CLOSE TO THE MIC SO WE CAN PICK YOU UP.

I'M SORRY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. YEAH, WE CAME UP WITH 300 AND I THINK 363FT FROM OUR OVERHEAD DOOR TO THE ROOF LINE TO THE EVE OF THE CLOSEST HOME.

THANK YOU. YEAH. IN ADDITION, WE DID WE MINIMIZE THE OVERHEAD DOOR AS WELL.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE, BUT NORMALLY THERE ARE 12 FOOT HIGH.

WE MADE THEM TEN FOOT JUST TO MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THIS, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME FOR YOU TO COME FORWARD.

IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT? SEEING NO ONE HERE TO SPEAK.

DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR DISCUSSION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONS AND THE STAFF REPORT.

I'LL SECOND THAT. I HAVE A MOTION BY MR. WOODRUFF TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO APPROVE THE ITEM PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE NOTED EXCEPTIONS.

I HAVE A SECOND BY MR..

MR. BUETTNER, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I DON'T MIND VOTING.

OH, YES, TERRY. THIS ITEM PASSES WITH A50 VOTE WITH TWO ABSTAINS THAT STEP DOWN. THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK THIS GOES ON FOR ANY FURTHER TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO IT IS THE FINAL APPROVAL.

NEXT TIME. TWO THREE DAYS, 000 TO SUP.

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit Request to Allow a Stealth Telecommunication Structure (Craig Ranch NW Cell Tower), Located at 8770 Stacy Road]

PUBLIC HEARING. HEARING TO DISCUSS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUESTS FOR A STEALTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS STRUCTURE.

CRAIG RANCH NORTHWEST CELL TOWER LOCATED AT 8770.

STACEY ROAD.

MR. BENNETT. YES.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A STEALTH TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER AT AN EXISTING SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

STEALTH TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS ARE PERMITTED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITHOUT AN SUP IF THE HEIGHT DOES NOT EXCEED 75FT AND THE PROPOSED SETBACKS MEET OR EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.

HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A STRUCTURE THAT EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT LIMITATION AND DOES NOT MEET THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS WHY THIS ITEM IS BEFORE YOU.

TONIGHT, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A 105 FOOT TALL STEALTH TOWER ENCASED WHOLLY WITHIN A 110 FOOT TALL MONUMENT STRUCTURE. THE MONUMENT STRUCTURE WILL BE PLACED ON A WESTERN CORNER OF THE EXISTING SELF STORAGE FACILITY AND WILL BE PLACED APPROXIMATELY 25FT FROM THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND 30FT FROM THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.

WHILE THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE DOES NOT MEET THE HEIGHT OR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, THE PROPOSED MONUMENT WILL FULLY ENCASE THE TOWER AND THE MONUMENT WILL BE TUCKED BACK IN A

[00:20:09]

COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY OFF THE CORNER OF TWO MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS.

THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE WEST AND SOUTH ARE ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND THERE IS A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH.

THE CLOSEST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 785FT AWAY.

THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH IS FOUR STORIES IN HEIGHT, AND THE NEAREST PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY ARE CUSTER ROAD, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 565FT FROM THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE, AND STACEY ROAD, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 700FT FROM THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE.

DUE TO THE ADJACENT LAND ZONINGS AND USES AND THE TOWER BEING PLACED WITHIN A MONUMENT, STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE PROPOSED HIGH END LOCATION IS APPROPRIATE AND SHOULD PROVIDE A NECESSARY UTILITY TO THE AREA.

AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, JAKE. QUESTIONS ANYONE.

SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT SIX SOMEWHERE IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS, ROUGHLY.

WE APPROVED A CELL TOWER ON THIS ROAD FARTHER UP TO THE NORTH.

JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ONE'S STILL MOVING FORWARD OR IF THIS IS A REPLACEMENT TO THAT TOWER.

THIS ONE'S NOT NECESSARILY A REPLACEMENT THAT AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THAT OTHER TOWER THAT'S I BELIEVE IT'S BETWEEN STONEBRIDGE AND EL DORADO AND ALONG CUSTER, THAT ONE IS STILL MOVING FORWARD.

I THINK THEY'RE WORKING ON THE SITE PLAN STAGE RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY DID GET AN APPROVED FOR THAT A FEW MONTHS BACK.

SO. ANYONE ELSE THAT ONE TO THE NORTH IS OKAY HAS TO ALSO WORK THROUGH THE STONE BRIDGE HOA ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS.

THAT'S CORRECT. I BELIEVE THAT ONE.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S STONE BRIDGE OR CRAIG RANCH.

THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY IN CRAIG RANCH.

SO BUT THEY BOTH HAVE THEIR OWN ELEVATIONS OR VIEW OR DO YOU HAVE ANY YOUR PRESENTATION, THE ELEVATION HERE? YEAH, I BELIEVE THERE IS ONE HERE IN A FEW SLIDES.

AND THIS IS ACTUALLY THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION.

THIS HASN'T BEEN SO BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION STAFF DOES NOT WE DO NOT REQUIRE FACADE PLAN REVIEWS HERE.

IT'S OUTSIDE THE HSA, BUT THIS WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE CRAIG RANCH, THEIR COMMITTEE, WITH THEIR HOA.

AND I BELIEVE I DON'T THINK THAT THIS ONE'S FINALIZED YET.

I'LL LET THE APPLICANT KIND OF SPEAK TO THAT ON HOW FINALIZED OR HOW FAR ALONG THIS DESIGN IS.

BUT THIS IS KIND OF A ROUGH A RENDERING OF IT.

SO. BESIDES THE ONE TO THE NORTH, THE ONE THAT WE ALSO DID IN CRAIG RANCH, I GUESS IS STILL MOVING FORWARD.

YES, I BELIEVE THAT ONE'S IT'S A LITTLE IT'S CLOSE TO TWO MILE.

YEAH, IT'S COLLIN MCKINNEY.

IT'S SO IT'S TO THE SOUTH SOUTHEAST A LITTLE BIT.

A COUPLE MILES, SO.

ANYONE ELSE. JAKE.

THANK YOU. IS OUR APPLICANT HERE? YES, SIR. THIS OVER HERE.

WHAT I USE. YEAH. YEAH.

MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS PETER KAVANAGH.

MY ADDRESS IS 1620 HANLEY DRIVE IN DALLAS, REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS MCKINNEY SELF-STORAGE, AND THE APPLICANT IS ANTHEM DEBT.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO'VE BEEN FOLLOWING MOBILE TELEPHONE ANTENNAS FOR QUITE A WHILE, LIKE MYSELF, A NUMBER OF OF SITES NOW ARE ACTUALLY BUILT BY TOWER COMPANIES AND LEASED TO THE TO THE CARRIERS.

SO IN THIS CASE, WE WILL WE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT THIS FACILITY INITIALLY.

WE WILL HAVE T-MOBILE IN THAT.

AND VERIZON, WE THINK PRETTY QUICKLY, AT&T WILL BE IN THERE.

THE ONLY OTHER COMPANY OUT THERE IS DISH NETWORK.

IF YOU'VE HEARD OF THEM, YOU THINK OF A TV COMPANY, BUT THEY'RE IN FACT IN THE CELLULAR BUSINESS NOW.

AND SO LIKELY ALL OF THESE COMPANIES WILL BE IN THIS THIS STRUCTURE.

AND THAT'S WHY THE STRUCTURE IS AS TALL AS IT IS.

IT ALLOWS EVERYBODY TO GO BASICALLY ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.

THE DESCRIPTION PRETTY MUCH DESCRIBES WHAT WE WERE DOING.

ALL ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING IN THE CORNER OF OF THE SELF STORAGE.

WE ARE PUTTING A MASONRY WALL ALL THE WAY AROUND OUR FACILITY AND OF COURSE ADDING LANDSCAPING ALONG THE OUTSIDE.

IF YOU HAPPEN TO DRIVE OUT TO THE SITE TODAY, YOU WILL SEE A WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALONG THIS WEST PROPERTY LINE OF THE FACILITY, AND WE WILL

[00:25:10]

REPLACE THAT WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH A MASONRY STRUCTURE ALL THE WAY AROUND OUR SITE.

WE HAVE TO MOVE THE WE HAVE TO MOVE THE THERE'S A CURRENTLY WE'RE GOING.

THERE IS A THE DUMPSTERS THERE.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE HIM DOWN INTO HERE STILL WITHIN THE SITE OF THE OF THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

THERE'S THE THE RENDERING OF THE SITE.

AND BY THE WAY, YOU MENTIONED CRAIG RANCH.

WE DO HAVE TO GET APPROVAL OF THE CRAIG RANCH ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL GROUP.

WE HAVE THAT.

I THOUGHT WE SUBMITTED IT WHEN WE FILED THIS, BUT WE IN FACT, DO HAVE THAT.

IT'S A LETTER FROM ACTUALLY MR. CRAIG SIGNED HIMSELF.

AND THEN A NUMBER OF OUR RENDERINGS ARE STAMPED AND SIGNED BY CRAIG RANCH.

SO WE ALREADY HAVE THAT THAT APPROVAL.

AND I'LL LEAVE THAT WITH YOU IN CASE IT DIDN'T GET TO TO YOU.

THERE'S OUR ONE OF THE THINGS THAT EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW IS WHAT ARE THESE DARN THINGS GOING TO LOOK LIKE? THIS IS THE BASE WE'RE TRYING TO MATCH.

THE THE BRICK AND STONE OF OUR OF OUR EXISTING FACILITY.

GIVE YOU A SENSE THERE'S THERE'S THE FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY RIGHT HERE ALONG THERE.

THERE'S THERE'S THE STRUCTURE.

ANOTHER LOOK AT IT FROM A DISTANCE THERE'S A STRUCTURE.

AGAIN AND ONE MORE TIME FROM OUT ON THE CORNER.

THERE IT IS, BACK IN THE BACK.

I THINK WE DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF LOCATING.

WE'RE ABOUT 400FT FROM BOTH STREETS INTO INTO THE PROPERTIES WHICH WERE THE ACTUAL FACILITY WILL BE ONE OF THE CONCERNS.

PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHERE ARE OTHER ANTENNAS ARE LOCATED.

YOU ALL MENTIONED ONE UP ROUGHLY THERE.

THAT'S JUST NORTH OF US.

I BELIEVE VERIZON PERSONALLY, IF YOU CAN SAY THAT ABOUT A CORPORATION, DID THAT ONE.

AND THEN OVER ON THE GOLF COURSE, THE SALESMANSHIP CLUB GROUP THAT SORT OF RUNS THE GOLF TOURNAMENT DID THAT ONE AND THAT'S OVER ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE GOLF COURSE.

AND THAT PRIMARILY, I UNDERSTAND, IS AT&T WILL BE ON THERE, PROBABLY OTHERS WILL BE ON THERE, TOO.

BUT A SHORT ANSWER ON LOCATIONS OF THESE THINGS IS ROUGHLY A MILE APART NOW.

SO MANY OF US USING PHONES.

SO THAT'S MY THREE MINUTES.

SO I THINK I'D STOP HERE AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU, ANYONE.

GOOD. THANK YOU.

WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

MR. CAVANAUGH.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

IF YOU'VE COME TONIGHT AND WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS PROPOSED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

A MOTION BY MR. MANZOOR TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM AS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND. SECOND BY MR. LOBO. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

AND THAT THIS MOTION CARRIES AND WILL BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR FINAL ACTION ON JULY THE 18TH, 2023.

KAVANAUGH YOU'RE FREE TO GO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM 23-0007 SUP PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit Request to Allow for Outdoor Commercial Entertainment (McKinney Flour Mill), Located at 601 East Louisiana Street]

TO ALLOW FOR OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT.

MCKINNEY FLOUR MILL.

THIS IS AT 601 EAST LOUISIANA STREET.

MISTER BENNETT. YES.

THANK YOU AGAIN, MISTER CHAIRMAN.

SO THIS IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A COMMERCIAL OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AT THE MCKINNEY FLOUR MILL.

THE FLOUR MILL IS LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY FIVE AND SITS IN BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT SITES OF THE FUTURE MCKINNEY CITY HALL AND TUBBS BREWERY CAMPUS.

THE MTC ZONING REQUIRES AN SUP TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS.

THE PROPOSED OUTDOOR AREA WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 3300FT² IN SIZE AND WILL INCLUDE A STAGE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER SEATING AREA AND PLAY AREA.

THE PROPOSED SPACE WILL BE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO AN EXISTING OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT SPACE ON THE FLOUR MILL SITE WITH SIMILAR COMPONENTS AND SIZE.

THE NEAREST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT IS APPROXIMATELY 250FT FROM THE PROPOSED OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AREA AND IS SEPARATED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL LOTS AND STREETS.

WELL, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT USES.

THE SITE IS STILL REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE QUIET ZONE REGULATIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 70 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, WHICH THE APPLICANT IS ALREADY AWARE OF DUE TO THE DISTANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL USES AND THE RELATIVELY SMALL SIZE OF THE OUTDOOR SPACE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

[00:30:01]

THANK YOU, JACKIE. QUESTIONS? SCOTT IN THE PAST WE ACTUALLY APPROVED FOR TUBS, SO AN OUTDOOR VENUE AREA.

THEY COULD OPERATE FOR SPECIFIC HOURS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIMES PER DAY OR MONTH.

I THINK WE GOT RID OF THE THE AMOUNT OF TIMES, BUT WE HAD SOME SPECIFIC TIMES THEY COULDN'T OPERATE.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO THAT IS WITHIN THE QUIET ZONE REGULATIONS OF OUR CHAPTER 70 IN OUR CODE.

AND I BELIEVE IT'S AFTER 10 P.M.

OR 1030 SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND AFTER 11:00 OR 1130 AT NIGHT ON FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS.

AND THEN I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOME TIME OVERNIGHT AS WELL AS FOR THE SPECIFIC HOURS, I'M NOT COMPLETELY 100% SURE ABOUT THAT, BUT I CAN SEND THOSE TO YOU.

SO YEAH, BECAUSE WE'D LOVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THERE.

I KNOW THIS IS A LITTLE BIT FARTHER AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL, BUT IT'S SIMILAR IN USE AND NEXT TO EACH OTHER.

YEAH, IT WOULD BE FOLLOWING THE SAME REQUIREMENT AS TUBS AND ALSO THE EXISTING OUTDOOR AREA THAT'S EXISTING RIGHT HERE TODAY JUST TO THE WEST.

SO THEY WOULD ALL BE FOLLOWING THE SAME REQUIREMENTS.

INITIALLY ON TUBS, THE CITY HAD RECOMMENDED A MUCH TIGHTER SCHEDULE WITH A LIMIT OF HOW MANY EVENTS PER YEAR.

AND I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION FELT THAT OUR ZONING WITH THE QUIET ZONE AND OUR REGULAR SOUND ORDINANCE WAS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN TRYING TO JUDGE HOW MANY COUNTS WE HAD EACH TIME.

AND ON THIS ONE, I THINK YOU HAVE IN THE YOUR REPORT THAT IT'S 10 TO 7, 10 P.M.

TO 7 A.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAYS, QUIET.

AND THEN 11:30 P.M.

TO 7 A.M.

ON FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS.

YES. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO SHUT IT DOWN BY THEN.

YES. YEP. THIS IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOPS, A GREATER DISTANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL.

THIS IS JUST NORTH OF TUBBS.

SO THE FUTURE CITY HALL IS TO THE NORTH OF VIRGINIA STREET.

AND THEN SOUTH OF GREENVILLE IS WHERE TUBBS IS GOING.

IN AT THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL, I BELIEVE IS A BLOCK TO THE EAST.

AND THEN I THINK THERE'S SOME TO THE SOUTHEAST AS WELL ACROSS FROM TUBBS.

SO WOULD BE UNDER OPERATING UNDER THE SAME OPERATING HOURS AS ANY PLACE DOWNTOWN WOULD BE OPERATING.

YES, SIR. AS FAR AS WITHOUT. OTHER QUESTIONS.

JAKE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS OUR APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT? YES, SIR. HELLO, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSION BOARD.

THIS IS JAMES BRESNAHAN HERE WITH THE FLOUR MILL OPERATION THAT WE'VE WORKING ON.

AND MY ADDRESS IS 2805 PIERCE HALL IN MCKINNEY, TEXAS.

TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT FROM WHERE YOU SIT AS ONE OF THE OWNERS, WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AND HOW YOU SEE THIS THIS DEVELOPING? YES, THANK YOU. THE THE FLOUR MILL, IN ADDITION TO HAVING TENANTS THERE THAT HAVE RETAIL SPACES, WE ALSO HAVE AN EVENT BUSINESS THERE.

SO WE HAVE WEDDINGS PRETTY MUCH EVERY WEEKEND.

AND THIS IS AN ADDITION TO THE WEDDING BUSINESS THAT WE HAVE.

SO WE HAVE THAT OUTDOOR SPACE THAT IS JUST TO THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED SITE AND I'M TALKING ABOUT TEN FEET AWAY.

WE HAVE OUTDOOR VENUE THERE NOW, AND SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE EVEN BEEN THERE.

WE HAVE PARTIES THERE AND IT'S AN APPETIZER, APPETIZERS AND COCKTAIL HOUR.

AND WE DO ADHERE TO THE 11 P.M.

THAT'S WHEN WE SHUT DOWN ON WEEKENDS.

WE DO HAVE OUTDOOR I HAVE A STAGE THERE THAT HAS OUTDOOR MUSIC.

SO THIS IS AN ADDITION TO THAT.

IT'S GOING TO WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL TURF, ARTIFICIAL TURF GROUND THERE ON THAT SITE.

SO WE DON'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO HAVE FOOD THERE.

MAYBE JUST APPETIZERS, BUT NOT LIKE MACARONI AND CHEESE.

AND WE DON'T WANT THAT ENDING UP ON THE BEAUTIFUL TURF.

SO WE WANT TO HAVE AN OUTDOOR VENUE WHERE WE HAVE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DECOMPOSED GRANITE AS THE THE GROUND.

AND IF FOOD GETS SPILLED THERE, WE CAN JUST SWEEP IT UP AND OFF WE GO.

MANY OTHER QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE TONIGHT THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS PLANNING ZONING REGARDING THIS PROPOSED ESSER, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

AND MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. LANZA TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM AS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND. SECOND BY MR. LEBEAU. ANY QUESTIONS? I DID HAVE ONE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD? MACARONI AND CHEESE IS PROHIBITED NOW.

IT'S GOING TO BE LOUD OUT THERE.

IT'S PROHIBITED ON THE TURF.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

[00:35:07]

AND THIS MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF SEVEN IN FAVOR AND ZERO AGAINST THE MOTION WILL BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR FINAL ACTION AT THE JULY 18TH, 2023, CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

THAT WILL BE YOUR NEXT STOP HERE IN THESE CHAMBERS, MR. PRESIDENT, ON JULY THE 18TH, ADD THE MACARONI AND CHEESE BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE DENIED IT.

NEXT ITEM IS 22-0061Z3A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Request to Rezone the Subject Property from “PD” - Planned Development District and “REC” - Regional Employment Center Overlay District to “PD” - Planned Development District, Located approximately 335 Feet South of Silverado Trail and on the East Side of Alma Road]

RSG TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

THIS IS 335FT SOUTH OF SILVERADO TRAIL ON THE EAST SIDE OF ALMA ROAD.

MISTER BENNETT. YES.

THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OFF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALMOND SILVERADO TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

MANY OF THE SPACE LIMITS ARE SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE NEW MF 30 ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE UDC.

THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED SOME LIMITATIONS TO BETTER SUIT THE PROPERTY'S LOCATION ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

THESE COMPONENTS INCLUDE NOT ALLOWING ANY DWELLING UNITS WITHIN 100FT OF THE EASTERNMOST PROPERTY LINE AND PROVIDING AN EIGHT FOOT TALL MASONRY SCREENING WALL INSTEAD OF A SIX FOOT WALL. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT TO A MAXIMUM OF 35FT IN THREE STORIES AND A MAX DENSITY OF 23 UNITS TO THE ACRE.

WHEREAS THE MF 30 DISTRICT WOULD PERMIT FOUR STORIES WITH NO MAX HEIGHT AND 30 UNITS PER ACRE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS THE URBAN LIVING PLACE TYPE IN THE ONE MCKINNEY 2040 COMP PLAN.

THIS PLACE TYPE SUPPORTS A MIX OF HOUSING OPTIONS, INCLUDING APARTMENTS AND HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DUE TO THE COMP PLAN.

DESIGNATION SURROUNDING LAND USES ACCESS TO TWO ARTERIAL ROADWAYS AND THE ENHANCED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

PROPOSED STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED REZONE AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, JAKE. MEMBERS QUESTIONS STATE TO THE EAST.

WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

YES, SIR. TO THE WEST.

WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

YEAH, TO THE NORTH AND NORTH WEST.

WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL? YES. SILVERADO GETS DOWN TO TWO LANES WHEN IT GETS TO CUSTER BECAUSE THERE'S NO BRIDGE COMPLETED AND NO EXPANSION DOWN THERE YET.

AS FAR AS THE EXIT, I BELIEVE SO, YES.

AND THIS PRODUCT IS INFERIOR TO WHAT WE HAVE AT 121.

AND ALMA, RIGHT NOW, AS FAR AS THE WRAPPED APARTMENTS COMPARED TO THIS.

YEAH, I BELIEVE THAT ONE IS QUITE A BIT HIGHER DENSITY AND LIKELY FOUR STORIES AT THAT LOCATION IF IT'S ON 121 ANY ANYONE.

EXITING SILVERADO HERE YOU'VE GOT AN ELEMENTARY ACROSS THE STREET.

YOU'VE GOT AN ELEMENTARY DOWN SILVERADO, YOU'VE GOT A MIDDLE SCHOOL FURTHER SOUTH ON ALMA, YOU'VE GOT A MIDDLE SCHOOL ON STACY AND YOU HAVE ANOTHER HIGH SCHOOL ON STACY, CORRECT.

SO ANYONE LEAVING HERE HAS MULTIPLE SCHOOL ZONES ARE PROBABLY GOING TO PASS THROUGH IN ORDER TO EXIT.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

ON THAT SIDE. AND AS FAR AS THE OTHER QUESTION WAS, WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THEY HAVE PARKING SPACES PER DWELLING WOULD BE LIMITED TO A HALF PER BEDROOM.

AND THEY SAID ENCLOSED PARKING SHALL BE PROVIDED AT NO LESS THAN 30% OF THE REQUIRED PARKING PLACES, AND IT DEFINES ENCLOSED PARKING TO CONSIST OF ANY COMBINATION OF ATTACHED GARAGES, ATTACHED CARPORTS, DETACHED GARAGES AND DETACHED CARPORTS.

SO CARPORTS ARE, BY THE DEFINITION OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ENCLOSED PARKING.

YEAH, I'LL HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS REMOVED, BUT I GUESS NOT.

I THOUGHT IT WAS ENCLOSED WAS SIMPLY JUST GARAGES.

BUT. AND AS FAR AS OUR REZONING LATELY, WE ZONED THE SPC TO BE DEVELOPED AS JEFFERSON APARTMENTS DOWN THERE.

SO THAT'S THERE'S APARTMENTS BEING CONSTRUCTED CURRENTLY ACROSS FROM THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ON STACY AT THIS MOMENT THERE'S TWO MORE APARTMENTS GOING UP AT ALMA AND 121 AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE WHICH THAT ONE ACROSS FROM THE MIDDLE SCHOOL IS 320 UNITS AND CRAIG RANCH, WE HAVE THE LUX AND THE TIME.

WE'VE ALSO ZONED SENIOR LIVING APARTMENTS AT COLLIN MCKINNEY AND ALMA.

WE'VE ALSO GOT APARTMENTS ZONED FOR COLLIN MCKINNEY, ALMA THAT'S STILL TO BE DEVELOPED ALREADY DOWN THERE.

AS FAR AS THAT GOES, YOU GO TO RIDGE AND STACY IN THAT AREA.

UM, AND WE HAVE THE SPRINGS, THE SOHO, THE MILLENNIUM, MCKINNEY SQUARE, RALEIGH HOUSE GO OVER ON SILVERADO, AND THAT'S WHERE CITIES DENIED BEFORE APPLICANTS BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THERE WAS TOO MUCH CONCENTRATION OF APARTMENTS.

SO WE HAVE DISCOVERY, THE ALDI AND AVENUES ALSO EXISTING OVER THERE.

[00:40:04]

NOW PART OF THE STAFF REPORT NOTES THAT STAFF'S GOT THE ADDITION OF PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY PRODUCT IN THIS LOCATION TO HELP BOOST RESIDENTIAL INVENTORY WHILE FURTHERING THE GOAL OF A GREATER MIX OF HOUSING TYPES.

THIS IS GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS THAT WE HAVE.

PROBABLY THREE DOZEN IN THAT AREA UNDER CONSTRUCTION OR TO BE CONSTRUCTED OR EXISTING AT THIS TIME.

WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS HERE BEFORE ABOUT THE MIXED MISSING MIDDLE DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES THINGS FOR FAMILIES.

I MEAN, MY THOUGHT HERE IS WE'VE ALWAYS HARD TO FIND A PLACE FOR THAT MISSING MIDDLE.

AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST APPROVING ANOTHER ITEM POTENTIALLY THAT'S TELLING YOU TO COME TO MCKINNEY.

YOU CAN EITHER BUY A $530,000 HOUSE OR YOU CAN GET A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN MIDDLE AND WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY CREATING THAT MIX OF HOUSING FOR THIS AREA. WE HAVE FIVE SCHOOLS AND WE'RE MOVING APARTMENTS FURTHER INTO RESIDENTIAL AREAS WHERE IT'S ALREADY SURROUNDED AND THERE'S NO LACKING APARTMENTS IN THAT AREA. WE'RE ZONING ALREADY.

I UNDERSTAND IT'S ON THE BORDER OF THE SUBURBAN URBAN BECAUSE THE SILVERADO.

BUT THAT ALSO ENTAILS MANY OTHER TYPES OF HOUSING THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN THAT AT ALL.

BUT WE JUST KEEP DOING APARTMENTS.

JUST. WE WE HAD LOOKED AT EARLIER THIS YEAR DOING A TOWNHOME PRODUCT.

THE APPLICANT COULD PROBABLY TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THAT.

WE HAD A PRE-DEVELOPMENT MEETING WITH THEM BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TOWNHOMES AND A TOWNHOME PROJECT.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FULL WIDTH, RIGHT, OF WAYS AND ALLEYS TO SERVICE THOSE.

AND SO IT REALLY CRUNCHES UP THE SITE.

AND THEY HAD LOOKED AT AN APARTMENT PRODUCT AS BEING MORE VIABLE FOR THEM.

AS TO THAT, I'LL I'LL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS THAT.

THE APPLICANT PURCHASED IT WITH THE CURRENT ZONING AND NOT WITH APARTMENT ZONING.

AND I KNOW IT FURTHER GRAZERS THEIR PROFIT AND I'M NOT AGAINST PROFIT AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENT GOES, BUT WE'RE ALSO PUTTING IT IN AN AREA SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL AND WE'VE HAD COUNCIL MEMBERS DISCUSS BEFORE THE NEED FOR ENTRY LEVEL PRICE POINTS IN ORDER TO GET YOUNGER FAMILIES INTO MCKINNEY.

AND WE KEEP TAKING THAT LAND OFF BY JUST GIVING DEVELOPERS OF APARTMENTS GREATER PROFIT, OFFERING CONCENTRATION.

AND THIS PRODUCT IS MUCH LESS THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN CRAIG RANCH ALREADY AS FAR AS QUALITY.

LIKE COMMISSIONER WOODROOFE STATED LAST TIME WE HAD A MEETING AS FAR AS THE WRAP PRODUCT AROUND 75 AND 121 OF 26 STORIES WRAP FOR QUALITY OVER JUST GARDEN.

THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE LOWER QUALITY APARTMENT IN THAT WHOLE AREA.

NO ONE ELSE. JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU ON THE USE COMPARISON TABLE.

WE HAVE P IN QUOTES, PRIVATE AND P FOR PERMITTED.

JUST WENT TO DELTA FOR PRIVATE REALLY MEANS.

YEAH. SO THAT WAS JUST KIND OF THEM ADDING THEIR AMENITIES INTO THAT AND SO PRIVATE MEANS THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE CHARGING PEOPLE TO COME IN AND USE THEIR POOL OR USE THEIR DAYCARE OR ANY OF THOSE AMENITIES THAT THEY'RE USING ON THERE.

AND THEY JUST ADDED THAT INTO THE USES.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT THE PRIVATE MEANS IS IT'S JUST FOR THEIR IT IS ANCILLARY TO THE.

YEAH. JUST FOR THEIR PROJECT.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR.

OTHER QUESTIONS.

MR. BENNET. JAKE, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. IS OUR APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT? YES, SIR. I HAVE A PRESENTATION I BELIEVE THEY'RE GOING TO PULL UP.

AND WHILE THAT'S OCCURRING, I'LL JUST SAY, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS TREY JACOBSON.

I'M A LAND USE CONSULTANT.

MY ADDRESS IS 124 EAST EDGEWOOD PLACE IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.

I'M JOINED WITH SOME REPRESENTATIVES OF MANATT CONSULTING, WHO'S THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR THE PROJECT.

AND WE ARE REPRESENTING LANDMARK COMPANIES, WHICH PROVIDES AND HAS BEEN DEVELOPING IN THIS MARKET THROUGHOUT TEXAS, THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, VERY HIGH QUALITY DEVELOPMENT OF ALL TYPES IN THIS MARKET.

THEY'RE DOING A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE SITE IS.

THIS IS ALMA ROAD.

THE SITE IS LARGELY BURDENED BY A TALL RADIO TOWER AS THIS IS THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE SITE, WHICH IS A SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

THIS IS THE VERY SOUTH EAST SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF THE SITE.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LAND USES THAT ARE PERMITTED UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.

THIS IS A PD THAT GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2008.

THERE ARE SOME THAT, QUITE FRANKLY, TO SOME OF THE RESIDENTS AREN'T PARTICULARLY ATTRACTIVE TO THEM.

AND WHAT YOU AND AND REALLY NOTHING IS DEVELOPED ON THIS SITE AND DURING THAT TIME WHAT'S NOT MENTIONED BUT IT'S IN THE LAND USE TABLE PROVIDED BY STAFF IS THAT WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, MULTIFAMILY IS ALSO PERMITTED HERE.

AND AS YOU LOOK AT LAND USE DECISIONS, OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW, THE CONTEXT OF WHAT'S AROUND THERE IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT ON THE CORNER OF SILVERADO AND ALMA IS WHAT

[00:45:06]

I WOULD DESCRIBE AS A LEGACY HOME AND BUSINESS.

THERE'S A HOME, BUT BEHIND IT, QUITE FRANKLY, THERE'S A ALMOST SEMI-INDUSTRIAL TRUCK FACILITY THERE.

THE RESIDENTS IN THE AREA DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT IT IS.

AND THAT IS THE NATURE OF THE ACTIVITY.

THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY.

I MENTIONED, THE RADIO ANTENNA, WHICH IS SHOWN IN GREEN, AND THEN THERE'S A SMALL RETAIL CENTER.

AND THEN EVEN FURTHER SOUTH THERE IS A PET FACILITY.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S IN AND AROUND THERE.

AND OF COURSE, COMSTOCK ELEMENTARY IS IMMEDIATELY NORTH TO THIS.

AND IT'S IT IS IMPORTANT IN CONTEXT FOR THE DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, AS PART OF OUR PROJECT AND OUR PROCESS, WE DO A LOT OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH WITH THIS.

THIS IS A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.

I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO THIS GROUP, BUT IT'S BEEN ONGOING SINCE 2000 OR I'M SORRY, LAST YEAR WE ACTUALLY WENT AHEAD AND REACHED OUT AS PART OF OUR PROCESS AND SENT NOTICES TO AND INVITATIONS REALLY TO ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200FT ASKING, INVITING THEM TO A A INFORMATIONAL MEETING AT THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH THERE RIGHT ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

AND NOT MANY PEOPLE SHOWED UP FOR THE FOR THE MEETING IN JANUARY.

BUT THE ONES THAT DID HAVE WERE IN FAVOR OF DOING SOMETHING RESIDENTIAL AND GETTING AWAY FROM SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL USES, QUITE FRANKLY.

AND THEY WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH IS THEY MADE A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR SITE ENHANCEMENTS, WHICH JAKE HAD MENTIONED.

I WILL MENTION FURTHER BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY MORE WE'VE INCORPORATED THOSE INTO THE PD STANDARDS.

WE HEARD ALSO THAT THAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE SOME OF THE MULTIFAMILY DESIGN, THE BIG URBAN LOOK.

THEY WANTED MORE OF A TOWNHOME LOOK.

AND THEN THEY MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A NEED FOR NOT JUST 1 OR 2 BEDROOM UNITS.

THEY WANTED TO SEE SOME MORE A MIX OF THOSE.

SO TO MY SURPRISE, OUR CLIENT ACTUALLY STOPPED THE PROCESS, STOPPED AND REDESIGNED THE PROJECT.

WE CAME BACK AND DID ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR WHERE WE I SHOULD SAY, BY THE WAY, GOING BACK, IT WAS A TRADITIONAL MULTIFAMILY PROJECT, KIND OF A GARDEN STYLE PROJECT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED.

WHEN WE CAME BACK IN APRIL AND PRESENTED AGAIN, WE NOTIFIED ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS.

I PERSONALLY SENT THOSE LETTERS ONLY TO NEIGHBORS.

HUSBAND AND WIFE ATTENDED.

THEY WERE IN THE MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO'VE ATTENDED THESE MEETINGS ARE ADJACENT TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THEY HAD AGAIN, NO OBJECTION TO THE PROJECT.

THEY JUST ASKED FOR ONE THING, AND THAT WAS IN FACT, WE ADJUST THE LOCATION OF A DUMPSTER AND WE'VE INCORPORATED THAT FEEDBACK INTO THE FINAL DESIGN, WHICH I'M GOING TO PRESENT HERE TO YOU.

OH, SORRY. MY APOLOGIES.

SO IT'S HARD TO DISCERN OFF OF THIS PLAN, BUT OTHER THAN THE MULTI, THERE IS A SINGLE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING IN THE MIDDLE OR TOWARD THE SOUTH.

THAT'S THE BIGGEST BUILDING SET THERE.

THAT'S A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING AND MORE OF AN URBAN KIND OF FRAME.

EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S AROUND THAT IS A STANDALONE TOWNHOME BUILDING.

IT'S NOT UNDER YOUR TOWNHOME ZONING.

WE'RE DOING IT AS A MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE IT'S INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS ON ON THE ON THE LOT.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.

BUT IT'S DESIGNED, INTENDED TO BE A TWO STORY TOWNHOME TYPE PRODUCT THROUGHOUT DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS.

YOU CAN SEE SOME HAVE GARAGES, SOME HAVE CARPORTS.

THERE ARE SOME.

STANDALONE GARAGES.

I'M NOT AWARE OF STANDALONE CARPORTS ON THIS PROJECT AND IF THAT'S A CONCERN OF THE OF THIS COMMISSION, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S REMOVED IF THAT'S SOMEHOW IN THIS DOCUMENT, BUT THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

JUST TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE PD STANDARDS THAT HAVE EMERGED THROUGH THIS PROJECT.

JAKE TOUCHED ON IT.

THERE'S OF COURSE, LANDSCAPE BUFFERS THAT ARE REQUIRED.

THEY'RE 35 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING ON BOTH SILVERADO AND ALMA.

WE ALSO HAVE, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH ADDITIONAL SCREENING WITH SOME AT LEAST MEDIUM GROWTH TREES.

FIVE CALIPER MINIMUMS ON THE START ON PLANNING.

OF COURSE, THE SCREENING REALLY IS MASONRY WALL.

WHAT'S SHOWN IN RED ARE SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL, EXCEPT FOR, AS JAKE NOTED, THAT EASTERN BOUNDARY ALONG THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THEY HAVE REQUESTED EIGHT FOOT.

SO WE'VE INCORPORATED THAT IN THE DESIGN.

WHAT'S SHOWN IN YELLOW, THOSE ARE MEANT TO BE A MIXED TYPE OF ELEMENTS THAT ARE MEANT TO INCORPORATE WITH THE LANDSCAPING ON THE FRONT.

SO THOSE WILL NOT BE ALL MASONRY, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME COMBINATION OF THAT IN WROUGHT IRON AND AND LANDSCAPING PER CITY CODE MAX, 35 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE SITE EXCEPT FOR THE FIRST 100FT OFF THAT EASTERN PROPERTY LINE.

WE CANNOT DO ANY AS JAKE JAKE DESCRIBED IT, WE CANNOT DO ANY RESIDENCE UNITS THERE.

[00:50:04]

BUT WE COULD DO A ONE STORY DETACHED GARAGE THERE AND THAT'S WHAT'S PLANNED THAT REALLY ALONG THAT WAY TO CREATE A BUFFER ALONG WITH DRIVE AISLES SO THERE WON'T BE ANY UNITS, THERE WON'T BE ANYTHING OVER ONE STORY IN THAT LOCATION.

AND WHILE IT'S 35FT MAX HEIGHT IN REALITY, OTHER THAN THAT ONE BUILDING WHICH HAS SOME 35 THREE STORY COMPONENTS TO IT, EVERYTHING ELSE IS GOING TO BE A TWO STORY PROFILE TYPE OF TOWNHOME LIKE PRODUCT.

THIS SHOWS THE ACCESS POINTS, THE PRIMARY ACCESS POINT OF THIS PROJECT IS ON ALMA.

WE ARE VERY COGNIZANT OF THE SCHOOL ON SILVERADO.

WE DON'T WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.

WE UNDERSTAND IT'S CONGESTED.

WE'VE ALL BEEN AROUND SCHOOLS.

WE KNOW HOW IT BECOMES.

HOWEVER, WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A SECONDARY POINT OF ACCESS FOR FIRE CODE PURPOSES AND THAT IS OUR SECONDARY POINT.

IT WILL IT'S NOT SHOWN THERE, BUT IT WILL BE CONTROLLED ACCESS AND GATED AS WELL.

BUT AGAIN, THE PRIMARY ACCESS DRIVE AND ENTRY IN GUIDE AND ENTRY POINTS WILL BE ON ALMA.

I CAN, I HAVE I'LL SKIP OVER THIS, BUT I CAN COME BACK.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I CAN ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT ON BOTH ENDS OF IT.

THAT'S THE NORTH SIDE AND THAT'S THE SOUTH SIDE.

OF COURSE, YOU CAN SEE THE DETENTION POND AND THE DRAINAGE WHICH SERVES THE AREA.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE SCALED DOWN THE SIZE OF THE DENSITY AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS.

WE'VE ALSO CHANGED THE MIX, YOU KNOW, ADDING MORE THREE BEDROOM UNITS TO THE MIX.

WE AGAIN, WE ARE NOT ONLY PROVIDING THE REQUIRED PARKING, BUT OVER ACTUALLY OVER COVERING IT AS WELL.

THIS IS WHAT THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT IS CONTEMPLATED BEING.

IT'S A FARMHOUSE STYLE DESIGN.

IT'S I MEAN, THERE'S LOTS OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO DESIGN APARTMENTS, VERY URBAN, MODERN.

WE'RE TRYING TO FIT SOMETHING IN THAT'S DIFFERENTIATED AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN CONTEXT IN THE AREA.

THIS IS SOME OF THE AGAIN, WHAT THE ARCHITECTS ARE CONTEMPLATING.

THIS IS AN EXISTING PROJECT THAT THEY HAVE AND THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE CONTEMPLATING IS IS A FARMHOUSE TYPE OF TOWNHOME PRODUCT.

SO THIS AGAIN, KIND OF CHARACTER AND SCALE OF WHAT'S CONTEMPLATED HERE.

SO I WANT TO JUST BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT A TRADITIONAL GARDEN STYLE MULTIFAMILY PRODUCT.

I HEARD THE TERM WRAP.

IT'S NOT A WRAP PRODUCT.

IT'S THIS IS WHAT IS BEING CONTEMPLATED.

AS FOR OUR PROJECT IN THE DESIGN, SO THIS IS A HIGH QUALITY PROJECT.

IT IS MARKET RATE. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT WITHIN EVERY COMMUNITY ABOUT HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.

THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A HIGH QUALITY, HIGHLY AMENITIZED APARTMENT PROJECT.

AND EVERYONE THAT I'VE WORKED ON I'M ON HAVE BEEN IS AND I GUESS I'M A LAND USE CONSULTANT, SO I'LL JUST WRAP UP AND SAY AS A LAND USE MULTIFAMILY AT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION, TO ME MAKES IS THE PERFECT BUFFER BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE ACTIVITIES IN THE AREA WITH SOME OF THE SEMI INDUSTRIAL AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES THAT YOU HAVE THERE.

IT'S NOT JUST ME WHO FEELS THAT WAY, BUT A LOT OF OUR NEIGHBORS WE'VE TALKED TO.

I WOULD SAY THAT COMPARED TO A ACTIVE COMMERCIAL TYPE OF ACTIVITY THAT CURRENTLY IS UNDER THE ZONING, THIS IS ACTUALLY A MORE HARMONIOUS USE TO THE EXISTING SCHOOLS AND THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE THIS TRAFFIC IS IN RESIDENTIAL USE, LESS HAS LESS DRIVEWAYS, WHICH ALLOWS FOR A MORE WALKABLE STREET FRONT.

AND WE'RE GOING TO BE, OF COURSE, ENHANCING THAT WITH A LOT OF LANDSCAPING.

THAT 35 FOOT BUFFER AND THE TOWNHOME CONCEPT IS CREATES A DIFFERENTIATES IT AND ALSO I THINK IS MORE IN LINE IN KEEPING WITH SOME OF THE VERY CHARACTER OF SOME OF THE HOMES THAT ARE IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA.

SO VERSUS KIND OF YOUR TRADITIONAL MULTIFAMILY.

AND THEN FINALLY, THIS PRODUCT AND MULTIFAMILY GENERALLY IS GOING TO HAVE A HIGHER PROPERTY TAX VALUE THAN THE COMMERCIAL THAT'S OCCURRING IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT IS MY PRESENTATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TRY TO ADDRESS THEM AS I CAN.

THANK YOU. MR. JACOBSON.

OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.

IS ARE ALL THE UNITS LEASED PROPERTY? YES, SIR. WELL, I SHOULD SAY THAT'S THE INTENT THERE.

IT'S CONTEMPLATED THEY WITH MULTIFAMILY LIKE THIS, YOU CAN ALSO CREATE A CONDOMINIUM REGIME AND POTENTIALLY SELL THEM AT SOME POINT.

BUT OR EVEN START THAT WAY, THAT IS AN OPTION THAT IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.

SO I DON'T WANT TO TELL YOU DEFINITIVELY THAT'S GOING TO BE A FOR LEASE PRODUCT.

IT COULD BE A FOR SALE PRODUCT.

SO THE TOWNHOMES WOULD ALSO BE LEASABLE EVERYTHING.

YEAH, IT COULD BE AN INDIVIDUAL CONDO OR THE INDIVIDUAL TOWNHOMES.

YEAH, I SAID THAT RIGHT.

SORRY. IT'S NOT INDIVIDUALLY PLATED.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CONDOMINIUM TYPE PROJECT.

[00:55:01]

SO EVEN THOUGH YOU SAY THE CONDO TOWNHOME IS THE LOOK THAT PEOPLE WANT AND KIND OF MY POINT TO WHAT THE MIX OF HOUSING SHOULD BE UP THERE, BUT THIS IS STILL AN APARTMENT AND THE FEAR OF WHAT COMMERCIALLY WILL DEVELOP THERE.

NOTHING COMMERCIALLY HAS DEVELOPED THERE IN YEARS AS FAR AS THAT GOES.

IT'S NOT A VIABLE COMMERCIAL CORNER.

SO THE SELLING POINT OF, WELL, THIS IS GOING TO BE BAD COMMERCIAL AND SCARE EVERYBODY.

I DON'T QUITE BUY INTO THE FEAR MONGERING ALL THE TIME ON THOSE UNDERLYING USES AS FAR AS THAT GOES.

SO I DO AGREE WITH YOU ON THE TOWNHOME AND THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE.

I JUST DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE MULTIFAMILY APPEARANCE OF IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE HERE MATCHES WHAT WE'VE SEEN AS FAR AS OUR VIEW.

SO I THINK ONCE THOSE REGULATIONS WERE OR IF THEY WERE APPROVED, OPENS IT UP FOR TO BE SOMETHING QUITE DIFFERENT THAN THE PRESENTATION.

WE GOT FURTHER QUESTIONS.

IF YOU GO BACK TO THE FRONT FACADES, YOU HAD TWO FACADES THAT YOU SHOWED THERE AND KIND OF GOING THROUGH THIS LOOKING AT YOU HAD B ONE, B, TWO, B, THREE.

AND I THINK I'VE KIND OF DELINEATED.

GO BACK ONE MORE. I THINK IT SHOWS A LITTLE BIT EASIER WHAT I'M THINKING.

REALLY, IT IS MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE EACH UNIT GOING UP VERTICALLY THAT ISN'T ONE UNIT, RIGHT? IT'S BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT THESE STAIRWELLS OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT.

SO THE FIRST FLOOR COULD BE A ONE STORY ITSELF.

AND IT APPEARS IT'S A MULTI A TOWNHOME, BUT REALLY THE NEXT GUY IS GOING UP IN THE STAIRWELL IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S REALLY AN APARTMENT COMPLEX.

CORRECT. SO YOU HAVE GREAT EYES.

AND LET ME JUST NOTE THAT YOU'RE RIGHT, BECAUSE THE THIS IS ACTUALLY THE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING APARTMENT BUILDING CONCEPT AS OPPOSED TO THE TOWNHOME PRODUCT, THE TOWNHOME PRODUCTS.

THE OTHER PHOTO, THIS THIS IS MEANT TO BE THE DESIGN OF THE MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT MULTIFAMILY BUILDING THAT IS ON THE SITE PLAN.

SO BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO BACK AND YOU GO TO THREE STORIES, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY YOU DON'T HAVE ANY THREE BEDROOMS. SO IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE STACKED UNITS.

JUST TO CONFIRM, I MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU RIGHT, YOU ARE STACKING MULTIPLE UNITS.

IT'S NOT A TRUE TOWNHOME GOING IN THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING.

LET ME LET ME KIND OF HIGHLIGHT.

THIS. SO THE BIG LONG BUILDING THAT'S ON THE BOTTOM HALF OF IT, THAT'S THE THE APARTMENT BUILDING FOR THE BETTER TERM.

THE THE THE PICKLEBALL COURT ONE.

YES. YES.

WITHIN THAT ONE THAT THAT SURROUNDS THAT AND THE PLAYGROUND, THAT THAT WOULD BE THE APARTMENT BUILDING.

SO THAT GRAPHIC THAT WE WERE JUST THAT PICTURE, THAT IMAGE WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT WOULD BE THAT BUILDING.

OKAY. AND THEN IT WOULD HAVE MULTIPLE THREE FLOORS OF APARTMENT UNITS.

ON THERE. OKAY.

AND THEN ALL THE OTHER BUILDINGS ARE LITERALLY, TRULY A TOWNHOME CONCEPT.

ONE, TWO STORY. NOBODY ELSE IS ABOVE.

SOME STAND ALONE.

SO THEY WOULD BE MULTIPLE LEVELS.

SOME HAVE GARAGES, SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A ONE BEDROOM GARAGE.

SO IT'S.

INTERESTING. THANK YOU.

OTHER QUESTIONS? WE WANT. THANK YOU, MR. JACOBSON, FOR BEING HERE.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

IF YOU'VE COME TONIGHT AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS PLANNING AND ZONING REGARDING THIS PROPOSED REZONING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THE MOTION BY MR. MANSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECOND. SECOND BY MR. WOODRUFF. ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

MOTION IS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THAT MOTION CARRIES.

PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

SO IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR OF CITY STAFF WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST.

I'VE. JUST WAIT. I HAVE ONE MORE OF THE APPLICANT.

OKAY, GO AHEAD. GO.

SO I'M JUST GOING THROUGH HERE, RIGHT? LOOKING AT YOUR B ONE. C ONE'S HOW THEY'RE SITTING STACKING ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.

RIGHT? SO YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF B ONES RUNNING ALONG SILVERADO THERE.

BUT THEN WE HAVE SOME B ONES ON THE STACKING OF THE MULTI-FAMILY PIECE.

YOU DID. I GUESS BECAUSE YOU COULD YOU ARE YOU'RE STACKING AB1.

WHAT GOES UNDERNEATH THE B ONE THEN.

YOU IF YOU'RE REFERENCING THIS PARTICULAR GRAPHIC.

I BELIEVE THAT THOSE ARE STACKED B1 UNIT CONFIGURATIONS ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER.

THEY ARE. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ARCHITECTS HAVE A CONFIGURATION OF EACH UNIT, AND SO THAT'S THE NOMENCLATURE FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE PARTICULAR UNITS.

SO THIS WOULD BE A THREE STORY IN THAT THERE WOULD BE THREE B1 UNITS ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER.

[01:00:04]

AND THAT I AGREE.

AND IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO BE ONE DOWN HERE, BUT THEN YOU HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF B ONES UP ALONG THE STREET.

SO I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU GOT A THREE STORY HERE IN A TWO STORY OVER THERE.

SO THAT'S I WAS JUST TRYING TO I WISH I HAD THE ELEVATIONS, TOO.

I DON'T HAVE ELEVATIONS TO ACTUALLY SHOW YOU AT THIS POINT.

IT'S JUST DESIGN CONCEPTS AS WE WALK THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S THE CONTEXT OF HOW WE'RE DOING IT.

OKAY. SORRY. I'M JUST DIGGING INTO THE DETAILS HERE.

ANYONE ELSE LIKE THE APPLICANT.

WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU.

I JUST GO BACK TO.

WE'VE BEEN GENEROUS WITH MULTIFAMILY TO THE SOUTH, BACK TO THE WEST AND BACK TO THE EAST.

AND WE'RE MISSING DEVELOPING THE MIX, MISSING MIDDLE OF HOUSING.

WE DON'T HAVE ENTRY LEVEL HOUSE POINTS FOR YOUNG FAMILIES.

WE HAVE FEWER RENTALS ACTUALLY FOR FAMILIES OVERALL, WE HAVE LOADS OF ONE BEDROOMS ALONG THE WAY, AND THIS PUSHES UP INTO THE BUNCH OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S POTENTIALLY OR OWNERSHIP AT AN ENTRY LEVEL POINT OR LESS DENSE RENTAL FOR FAMILIES CONSIDERING ALL THE SCHOOL ZONES.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A PLACE TO KEEP PUSHING MULTIFAMILY NORTH, AND I DON'T THINK THE ACCESS TO SILVERADO HELPS AND WE HAVE ZONED A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT MORE THAT'S STILL COMING OUT OF THE GROUND AND WILL BE COMING OUT OF THE GROUND FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IN THIS AREA.

SO I'M OPPOSED.

NO ONE ELSE. QUESTIONS.

COMMENTS.

I LIKE THE PROJECT.

IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S DIFFERENT.

IT'S CREATIVE.

I GIVE YOU GUYS A LOT OF CREDIT.

THE CREATIVITY OF MAKING A TOWNHOME LOOK OF A MULTIFAMILY.

I THINK YOU KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BEST USE IS HERE, BUT THIS IS NOT A USE I DON'T THINK IS A BAD USE AT THIS LOCATION.

THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER LAND IN MCKINNEY.

WE CAN CONTINUE TO BUILD PRODUCT FOR STARTER HOMES.

IN BACKING UP TO A STORAGE SELF STORAGE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PLACE IS ON THE HARD CORNER.

I KIND OF LIKE THIS PRODUCT. I'M ACTUALLY A FAVOR TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

WE RECENTLY PUSHED SELF-STORAGE NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL AND DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT ALONG THE WAY.

JUST DOWN THE STREET ON SILVERADO, ACTUALLY.

AND AS FAR AS ANY STARTER HOME HOMES, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE NORTH OF 380 BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY FREE THERE'S VERY LITTLE INFILL SOUTH OF 380.

IN ORDER TO DO A STARTER HOME, POTENTIALLY.

YEAH, BUT I THINK THIS ALSO HELPS THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE ESSENCE THAT ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS I DON'T FEEL HELPS THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS OVERCROWDING, PREVENTING OVERCROWDING. ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? OKAY, JAKE.

SO, JAKE, THERE'S THOSE TWO RESIDENCES TO THE TO THE TO THE NORTH.

ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM? COMMENTS GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS ZONING CHANGE? NOT SPECIFICALLY TO ME.

I'M NOT SURE IF TREY, IF YOU HAD HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM.

ME FOR COMMISSIONER, FOR MY CLARIFICATION.

ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SILVERADO? AND SO WE I'M TALKING ABOUT THE TWO THE TWO HOMES THAT ARE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SILVERADO.

OH, THAT THAT THAT ONE HOME ON THE CORNER.

YEAH. SO LIKE TO IT'S YEAH, YEAH.

THE ONE RIGHT HERE.

RIGHT. YEAH. NO, I BELIEVE IT'S A FAMILY OWNED BUSINESS.

BUSINESS IN THE BACK.

BUT I BELIEVE A FAMILY OWNS BASED UPON THE TAX RECORDS.

I SAW. FAMILY OWNS BOTH OF THEM.

AND IT MAY BE LIKE A FAMILY OF A FAMILY HELD A SPLIT INTO TWO.

RIGHT. I DROVE BY IT.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT LOOKS LIKE TWO HOMES WITH A LARGE LOT INDUSTRIAL LOOKING LOT BEHIND IT.

YEAH, I WE I PERSONALLY HAVE NOTIFIED THEM.

I'VE SENT THEM A LETTER.

I KNOW. OF COURSE THE STAFF WOULD HAVE SENT THE LETTERS.

WE'VE HAD SIGNAGE OUT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF IT.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO THEIR MIND, BUT I KNOW THAT WE'VE MADE THEM AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS.

ANYONE. ALL RIGHT.

MOTIONS. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION, INCLUDING THE SPECIAL ORDINANCE PROVISIONS

[01:05:05]

LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

HAVE A MOTION BY MR..

WOODRUFF TO APPROVE THE ITEM AS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY MR. HAGSTRUM. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? AND DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT, BRIAN? YOU BRING UP SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT CONTINUING TO REZONE FOR USES THAT MAY NOT FIT INSIDE THE BOX OF WHAT THE CITY HAS SAID THEY MAY WANT. I DO THINK THAT'S A VALID POINT.

I ALSO THINK THE SILVERADO ENTRANCE BEING EMERGENCY ONLY DOES HELP THAT COMSTOCK SCHOOL UP THERE.

I'M IN FAVOR OF OF THE SITE, BUT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT YOU DO YOU BRING UP VALID, VALID POINTS.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. WOODRUFF TO APPROVE THE ITEM AS STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND BY MR. HAGSTROM. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

AT THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM AS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED BY A VOTE OF SIX IN FAVOR AND ONE AGAINST.

THIS ITEM WILL BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR FINAL ACTION AT THE JULY 18TH, 2023, CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

THE NEXT ITEM 230040 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REZONE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM RG

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Request to Rezone the Subject Property from “RG 18” - General Residence District and “TMN” - Traditional McKinney Neighborhood Overlay District to “PD” - Planned Development District and “TMN” - Traditional McKinney Neighborhood Overlay District, Generally to Allow for Multi-Family Residential Uses and to Modify the Development Standards, Located on the Northwest Corner of Drexel Street and Throckmorton Street and on the Southwest Corner of Drexel Street and Throckmorton Place]

18 IN TRADITIONAL MCKINNEY NEIGHBORHOOD TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

THIS IS TO ALLOW FOR MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

THIS IS ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF DREXEL STREET AND THROCKMORTON STREET ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DREXEL AND THROCKMORTON PLACE.

MISS SHEFFIELD. THANK YOU, TERRY.

WOULD YOU MIND SWITCHING THE THE PRESENTATION OVER? I. CAITLYN YES.

YOU LEAN UP JUST A LITTLE BIT WHEN YOU WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION.

OH, YES. OR, JENNIFER, DO YOU HAVE ANY.

THERE WE GO. THANKS.

OKAY. OH, TOO LOUD.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CAITLIN SHEFFIELD, PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY.

SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 2.5 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY TO ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES AND TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. CURRENTLY, BOTH TRACKS ARE ZONED FOR RG 18 GENERAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND ARE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THOSE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CONTINUATION OF THE MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES, GIVEN THAT THE EXISTING ZONING ALLOWS FOR MULTIFAMILY AND THE REQUEST ALIGNS WITH THE URBAN LIVING PLACE TYPE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.