[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on Certain Amendments to Chapter 150, entitled “Unified Development Code,” of the Code of Ordinances, City of McKinney, Texas to: (a) Article 1 (General Provisions) and particularly to Sections 106 (Transition from Previous Ordinances), 108 (Maintenance, Enforcement, and Penalties), (b) Article 2 (Zoning Regulations) and particularly to Sections 201 (Administration), 203 (Procedures), 204 (Zoning Districts), 205 (Use Regulations), 206 (Development Standards), (c) Appendix 2A (Approved Plant List), (d) Article 4 (Tree Preservation) and particularly to Sections 402 (Tree Preservation Standards), 403 (Tree Protection Measures), 404 (Tree Removal Procedures), 405 (Tree Mitigation and Replacement), and (e) Article 9 (Terms and Definitions) particularly to Section 902 (Definitions)]

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THEN THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED. CONSENT ITEM OKAY. SO NOW MOVE TO THE REGULAR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. SO THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM 260001M LIKE MARY CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER DISCUSS ACT ON CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 150 ENTITLED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF MCKINNEY, TEXAS TO A ARTICLE ONE GENERAL PROVISIONS, AND PARTICULARLY TO SECTIONS 106 TRANSITION FROM PREVIOUS ORDINANCES. SECTION 108 MAINTENANCE, ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES B ARTICLE TWO ZONING REGULATIONS AND PARTICULARLY TO SECTIONS 201 ADMINISTRATION. SECTION 203 PROCEDURES 204.

ZONING DISTRICTS 205. USE REGULATIONS 206 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SEE APPENDIX TWO A APPROVED PLANT LIST D ARTICLE FOR TREE PRESERVATION, AND PARTICULARLY TO SECTIONS 402.

TREE PRESERVATION STANDARDS 403 TREE PROTECTION MEASURES 404. TREE REMOVAL PROCEDURES, 405 TREE MITIGATION AND REPLACEMENT, AND E ARTICLE NINE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS, PARTICULARLY TO SECTION 902 DEFINITIONS. THAT'S A MOUTHFUL. I'M SO SORRY. CAITLIN SHEFFIELD, CHIEF PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. SO BEFORE YOU TONIGHT TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT WE ARE WANTING TO DISCUSS WITH YOU, AND THEN ALSO CITY COUNCIL AT MARCH 3RD.

[00:05:01]

SO SOME BACKGROUND, WE DID THAT MASSIVE CODE OVERHAUL AND THAT WAS ADOPTED IN NOVEMBER OF 2022.

SINCE THEN, WE HAVE BEEN CONTINUING MONITORING THE TRENDS AND ANY OF THE LANGUAGE WITHIN THE UDC AND PROPOSING AMENDMENTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. SO HERE WE ARE, TWO DIFFERENT BUCKETS, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT. SO ONE IS FINE TUNING TYPOS, CLARITY, APPROVING IMPROVING USABILITY. AND THEN THERE'S THESE THIS OTHER BUCKET OF PROCEDURAL IMPROVEMENTS, MODIFICATIONS OF USES AND DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATIONS PLEASE LET ME KNOW. I'LL PAUSE ON EACH SIDE SO WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE AS WELL. SO FOR THOSE FINE TUNING AMENDMENTS, THOSE TYPOS, REFERENCE UPDATES, EDITORIAL CLARIFICATIONS, THAT IS THROUGHOUT ARTICLE ONE, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE TWO ZONING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE FOUR TREE PRESERVATIONS AND ARTICLE NINE DEFINITIONS. SOME PROCEDURAL AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TONIGHT. ONE WOULD BE UPDATING SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE ASK FOR ON ANNEXATION EXHIBITS, ZONING EXHIBITS, SITE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT EXHIBITS, AS WELL AS SITE PLAN EXHIBITS.

WE'RE ALSO INCLUDING SOME REQUIREMENTS UPDATES FOR TREE PERMITS, TREE PRESERVATION PLANS, AS WELL AS AERIAL TREE EXHIBITS. PROCEDURALLY, WE ARE INCLUDING A PROVISION THAT THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER HAS THE ABILITY TO FORWARD ANY CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. ADDITIONALLY, WITH COAS OR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT THEY WOULD EXPIRE ONE YEAR AFTER APPROVAL IF THEY DO NOT HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED, OR IF THE SITE PLAN OR THE BUILDING PERMIT HAS SUBSEQUENTLY LAPSED. TELL ME ABOUT THE I'VE GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. THERE'S A COUPLE OF CHANGES THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE US PRACTICE. IT'S NOT GOING TO GO IN HERE, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT WHENEVER, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH ETJ DISTRICTS AS WE ARE VIRGINIA AND EL DORADO AND 380. AND WHEN PROJECTS BROUGHT BEFORE US, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A LARGER GLOBAL PICTURE OF WHERE IT IS INSTEAD OF 200FT RADIUS. OKAY. SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT'S DOWN THE ROAD AND WHERE THE ROADS ARE GOING TO BE AND RELATED TO THE PROPERTY. OKAY. I'D JUST LIKE TO WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION WHEN IT'S PRESENTED TO US. AND I HAD ONE OTHER COMMENT. OKAY. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE SENDING NOTICES TO ETJ PERSONNEL, PEOPLE THAT ARE WITHIN THE DISTRICT. IT WOULD ALLEVIATE A LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING AND MIGHT MAKE THEM FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO SOMETHING TO THEM TRYING TO DEVELOP THE AREA. SO I WANTED TO REQUEST THOSE TWO THINGS. OKAY, CERTAINLY. WELL, I'LL TAKE NOTE OF THOSE THIS EVENING. AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE INTERNALLY AS STAFF AND THEN LET YOU ALL KNOW WE WON'T BE ABLE TO INCLUDE THOSE IN AMENDMENTS TONIGHT UNLESS THAT'S INCLUDED IN A MOTION OR WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MARCH 3RD ADOPTION AT COUNCIL. BUT WE ARE PROPOSING ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO THE UDC SOMETIME IN THE SUMMER, AND WE CAN INCLUDE THOSE AS WELL IN THERE. IF ANY CHANGES IN THE CODE ARE NEEDED.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO TELL ME WHAT THE REASONING BEHIND THE C OF A FOR WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER RECOMMENDING. WHAT'S THE THOUGHTS BEHIND THAT. CERTAINLY.

SO WE DO HAVE CASSIE BUMGARNER HERE. SHE IS THE PLANNING MANAGER OVER THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT. SO I'LL LET CASSIE SPEAK TO THAT. THANK YOU.

CASSIE. NO PROBLEM. SO CURRENTLY WE CAN ALREADY FORWARD OUR APPLICATIONS THAT ARE IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. CURRENTLY, AS THE CODE IS WRITTEN, WE ACTUALLY, AT THE STAFF LEVEL HAVE TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THOSE IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. WE WOULD JUST LIKE THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO FORWARD THE COMMERCIAL AREA APPLICATIONS AS WELL. OKAY. SO IS THAT THEN TAKING THE APPROVAL OF DENIAL OUT OF YOUR HANDS AND PUTTING IT ON THE ON THE BOARD, IS THAT THE. NO. SO WE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO DO IT AT A STAFF LEVEL. OKAY. BUT IF IT'S IF STAFF IS UNCOMFORTABLE OR FEELS THE THE NEED TO BRING IT TO THE BOARD FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE WOULD HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO SO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS BEFORE I MOVE FORWARD? I DO LIKE THE ONE YEAR CAVEAT THERE. I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. IN TERMS OF USE REGULATION AMENDMENTS. STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT TRADITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COULD BE PERMITTED IF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IS APPROVED IN C2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. AND THEN

[00:10:02]

FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT PERMITTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WOULD BE PERMITTED IN C-1 TWO AND THREE, AS WELL AS 0102 I1, I2 GOVERNMENT COMPLEX AND AIRPORT DISTRICT. OKAY. YES, SIR. REFRESH MY MEMORY OR UNDERSTANDING ON THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WHEN THEY PASSED THE LATEST LAWS IN TEXAS, MULTIFAMILY COULD GO IN ANY COMMERCIAL AREA ZONING, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO THERE ARE SOME STIPULATIONS IN THE CODE. AND SB 840, SENATE BILL 840. WHAT STAFF FOCUSED ON IS ABIDING BY WHAT IS NOW REQUIRED IN THAT SENATE BILL OR THE NEW STATE LAW REGULATIONS. AND SO THERE IS A FORM OF MULTIFAMILY IN OUR CODE THAT IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED BASED ON THE THE NEW LAW. WHAT WE DID IS FOCUS ON THE FORM AND THE PRODUCT TYPE. AND SO CURRENTLY A TRADITIONAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THAT DISTRICT UNLESS IT'S COUPLED WITH A MIXED USE. BUT THEY COULD NOW REQUEST A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IF THIS IS APPROVED IN THAT C2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. WHY? WHY IS THIS IN C2 AND NOT C1 ALSO? SO CURRENTLY C1 AND C2 IS WHERE COTTAGE STYLE MULTIFAMILY WOULD BE PERMITTED. THAT IS WHERE WE'VE GONE WITH IT.

CORRECT. MINIMUM THREE UNITS. MAXIMUM OF EIGHT UNITS IN A BUILDING. I REMEMBER THAT NOW.

YEAH. AND SO WE ARE PROPOSING THAT FLEXIBILITY. IF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION, COUNCIL ULTIMATELY APPROVES A TRADITIONAL MULTIFAMILY PRODUCT IN A C2 DISTRICT. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO THIS IS JUST TO ALIGN WITH THE THE HOUSE BILL. IS THAT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE ON THIS. SO OUR CODE CURRENTLY ALIGNS WITH WHAT THE THE HOUSE BILL REQUIRES THAT THIS IS JUST TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY. IF TRADITIONAL MULTIFAMILY IS DEEMED APPROPRIATE IN A CERTAIN LOCATION THAT IS ZONED C2. OKAY. SO OUR CODE, OUR CODE MEETS THE CRITERIA AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE LAW. BUT WE JUST WANT TO ADD THAT FLEXIBILITY. IF A SITE IS APPROPRIATE AND HAVE THAT AVENUE AS AN OPTION, IT WOULD STILL COME BEFORE COMMISSION FOR THE FOR THE SUB. CORRECT. YOU WOULD SEE THAT AS A RECOMMENDING BODY AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE APPROVAL AUTHORITY OKAY. SOME CHANGES TO THE USE DEFINITIONS OR USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. WE ARE PROPOSING FOR PASSENGER VEHICLE FUEL SALES. IF FUEL PUMPS OR ISLANDS ARE LOCATED AT LEAST 250FT FROM A PROPERTY LINE OF A RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONE, CURRENTLY, THE CODE REQUIRES THAT PROVISION IF YOU'RE ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY, ATTACHED OR DETACHED DUPLEX, TRIPLEX OR QUADPLEX. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THIS PROVISION WOULD BE REQUIRED AGAINST ALL RESIDENTIAL USES, INCLUDING MULTIFAMILY. THE OTHER CHANGE THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING FOR PASSENGER FUEL FUEL SALES WOULD BE THAT NO MORE THAN TWO FUEL SALES WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN 1000FT OF A ROADWAY INTERSECTION. CURRENTLY, THAT PROVISION EXISTS, BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE THAT DISTANCE DISTINGUISHED IN THERE. AND SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO ADD THAT WITHIN 1000FT, TO PROVIDE SOME PARAMETERS OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AND HOW MANY WE'RE COUNTING WITHIN THAT INTERSECTION AREA. OKAY.

[00:15:03]

THAT WOULD BE ONE LARGE INTERSECTION. SO WE WOULD GO FROM THE EDGE OF THAT THE SERVICE ROADS AND COUNT OUT 1000FT. WELL I MEAN WE JUST APPROVED THE ONE ON THE CORNER OF 75 VIRGINIA. AND THAT REQUIRED A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT BECAUSE THAT WHOLE INTERSECTION WAS WOULD BE NOW FOR GAS STATIONS. THAT MADE TWO. BUT WE COUNTED THE OTHER ONES ON THE OTHER SIDE RIGHT AT THE SAME TIME. YES, WE WOULD COUNT THAT ENTIRE 75 AND VIRGINIA AS ONE INTERSECTION. BOTH SIDES ARE CONSIDERED ONE IN EVERY DIRECTION. ALL FOUR. SO WHAT WE APPROVED WOULD NOT GO ALONG WITH THIS. SO THIS PROVISION ALREADY EXISTS. WE'RE JUST ADDING THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT ON HOW FAR WE WOULD LOOK. SO THE PROVISIONS OF THE TWO NO MORE THAN TWO FUELING STATION BY RIGHT WITH A STAFF APPROVAL, WE'RE ADDING THE 1000FT WHERE WE WOULD LOOK TO COUNT HOW MANY THERE ARE. BUT THE ITEM THAT CAME BEFORE YOU THAT WAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AND THEN ULTIMATELY APPROVED BY COUNCIL WAS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST, WHICH IS WHAT WAS NEEDED IF THIS CRITERIA IS NOT MET. SO STAFF WOULD LOOK TO APPROVE BY RIGHT WITHIN 1000FT IS THE CRITERIA. NOW, ANYTHING THAT STAFF CAN APPROVE WOULD COME BEFORE A SPECIFIC USE AS THE ONE ON THE CORNER ADJACENT TO SPROUTS DID PREVIOUSLY.

EXACTLY RIGHT. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IN LANDSCAPING. WE WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE THE ABILITY TO REQUEST A DESIGN EXCEPTION TO MODIFY THE WIDTH OF A REQUIRED ADJACENCY BUFFER. SO IF YOUR USE REQUIRES AN ADJACENCY BUFFER BASED ON PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO YOURS. FOR AN EXAMPLE, MULTIFAMILY REQUIRES A 20 FOOT ADJACENCY LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE ABILITY TO REQUEST A DESIGN EXCEPTION TO MODIFY THAT IF SO NEEDED. FOR PARKING. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE PARKING RATIO FOR MEDICAL OFFICE OR DENTAL CLINIC BE ONE SPACE PER 400FT■!S, SO CURRENTLY IT IS ONE SPACE FOR 300. IN OUR GENERAL OFFICE IS 1 TO 400. WE ARE PROPOSING THAT MEDICAL OFFICE OR DENTAL CLINIC AND GENERAL OFFICE ALL ALIGN WITH THE ONE SPACE PER 400FT■!S. FOR THE AMENDMENTS IN THE TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OR ARTICLE, WE ARE PROPOSING CHANGES TO CLARIFY WHEN TREE PRESERVATION OR MITIGATION IS REQUIRED FOR SPECIMEN TREES. AND THEN WE ARE ALSO INTRODUCING A REQUIREMENT THAT REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL BE PLANTED WITHIN 90 DAYS OF A NOTICE OF VIOLATION. IF THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED. CAITLIN, I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION. SORRY, RELATED TO THE LANDSCAPING, IS THAT DESIGN EXCEPTION GOING TO BE HANDLED BY STAFF OR IS IT GOING TO COME BEFORE US? IT WOULD COME BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND ONE OTHER QUESTION.

WHEN THE TREES NEED TO BE PLANTED WITHIN 90 DAYS, ARE YOU ALSO SPECIFYING THE TYPES OF TREE THAT NEEDS TO BE THE REPLACEMENT TREE. SO TYPICALLY BASED ON WHAT HAS BEEN REMOVED, THERE IS A RATIO OF CANOPY TREES THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. AND SO THIS PROVISION WOULD SET A TIME FRAME WHEN THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE PLANTED. OKAY. YES. IS THERE FINE FINES ASSOCIATED IF IT'S NOT PLANTED WITHIN THE 90 DAYS OR I'LL LET KATE JUMP IN HERE. WE ARE WORKING ON THE FINE COMPONENT THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO BRING FORWARD DURING THE SUMMER AMENDMENTS, BUT WE HAVEN'T NAILED OUT THE ENTIRE DETAILS OF THAT YET. SO WE'RE JUST BRINGING THIS PROVISION HERE. OKAY. TODAY, HOW MUCH TO ADD FROM THAT? WE ARE GOING TO COME WITH A SUMMER PROVISION BECAUSE Y'ALL MAY REMEMBER WE DID BRING THE VIOLATION BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING AND Y'ALL HAD SOME HESITANCY LAST TIME. AND SO WE'VE BEEN GOING BACK, WE'VE BEEN WORKSHOPPING, AND WE ARE ALMOST READY FOR Y'ALL TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW AN UPDATED VIOLATION SECTION. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO NEXT STEPS TONIGHT WE'RE BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO PRESENT THE PROPOSED CHANGES. THESE ARE SLATED TO BE TAKEN FORWARD TO THE MARCH 3RD CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATIONS. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT I CAN HELP ANSWER? NO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO AT THIS TIME, WE'D LIKE TO OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC HEARING. IF ANYBODY IS HERE, THEY'D LIKE TO SPEAK REGARDING ANY OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE JUST PROPOSED. KINDLY APPROACH. SEEING AS THERE'S NONE, ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS FOR A MOTION? DO WE DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING? WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. NOBODY. NOBODY. I'LL

[00:20:03]

MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE. ITEM 260001M. OKAY. COMMISSIONER LEBEAU HAS MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE ITEM 260001M SECOND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATLEY. KINDLY CAST YOUR VOTE. OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WILL BE FORWARDED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR MARCH 3RD MEETING FOR THEIR FINAL ACTION. OKAY, NOW WE MOVE ON TO ITEM

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Design Exception to a Site Plan for Restaurant Uses, Located at 8515 and 8525 West University Drive]

250094. SP CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS ACT ON A DESIGN EXCEPTION TO A SITE PLAN FOR RESTAURANT USES. LOCATED AT 8515 AND 8525 WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE. YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CHAIR WOODARD JAKE BENNETT, PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. THIS IS A SITE PLAN FOR TWO PROPOSED RESTAURANTS LOCATED NEAR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 380 AND CUSTER. TYPICALLY, SITE PLANS ARE APPROVED AT THE STAFF LEVEL. HOWEVER, WHEN DESIGN EXCEPTIONS ARE REQUESTED, THEY ARE BROUGHT IN FRONT OF PNC FOR ACTION, THE DESIGN EXCEPTION BEING REQUESTED TONIGHT IS FOR A FIVE FOOT REDUCTION TO THE STREET LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PROVIDE A 20 FOOT WIDE BUFFER, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE WEST GROVE. DEVELOPMENT STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR FOR THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REDUCTIONS IN THE UDC, AND AS SUCH, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. JAKE. THIS IS JUST TO BRING IT INTO LINE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. YEAH. SO ON THE TOP OF THIS EXHIBIT HERE ON THE NORTH SIDE, THAT BECAUSE OF THE WIDENING OF 380, WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE 25 FOOT WIDE BUFFER. INSTEAD, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 20 FOOT WIDE BUFFER. SO JUST A FIVE FOOT REDUCTION TO MATCH EVERYTHING THAT'S TO THE WEST AS WELL AS WHAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPING TO THE EAST AS WELL. OKAY. NOW THE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND ALL THAT ARE EVERYTHING ELSE IS BEING MET. THE DESIGN EXCEPTION IS ONLY FOR THE FIVE FOOT REDUCTION. YEP. AGAIN, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. THANKS, JAKE. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR CONCERNS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM, KINDLY APPROACH. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR MOTION FROM ANY COMMISSIONER? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM. OKAY.

COMMISSIONER BUCKNER MAKES A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM.

SECOND, BY COMMISSIONER CRAIG LEBO. LEBO. KINDLY CAST YOUR VOTE. OKAY. THIS MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, 7 TO 0. OKAY, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. AGENDA ITEM 250018. SUP. CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Specific Use Permit Request for a Drive-Through Restaurant, Located Approximately 1,030 Feet West of North Custer Road and on the South Side of US Highway 380 (West University Drive)]

HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS. ACT ON A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A DRIVE THRU RESTAURANT LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1030FT WEST OF NORTH CUSTER ROAD AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF US HIGHWAY 380. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AGAIN. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN SOP FOR A DRIVE THRU RESTAURANT NEAR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 380 AND CUSTER. THE ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY REQUIRES THE APPROVAL OF AN SOP. DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES. LAST YEAR, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO THE UDC SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PROXIMITY OF DRIVE THRUS TO RESIDENTIAL USES. THE AMENDMENTS, OR THE AMENDMENT, REQUIRES DRIVE THRUS TO BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 200FT FROM THE RESIDENCES THEMSELVES. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A DRIVE THRU APPROXIMATELY 66FT FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINES. AS PART OF THE PROCESS, THE APPLICANT ALSO REQUESTED REQUESTS A DESIGN EXCEPTION TO PROVIDE PARKING SPACES WITHIN TEN FEET FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINES. STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THE REQUEST MEET THE INTENT OF THE UDC, AND AS SUCH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. JAKE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? WHAT'S THE DISTANCE? GOING TO BE IF CONSTRUCTED AS THEY WANT? YEAH. SO THE SPEAKER BOX FOR THE

[00:25:02]

DRIVE THRU ITSELF IS ONLY ABOUT 66FT FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINES TO THE SOUTH.

YEAH. WITH IT BEING 250, I MEAN, THIS SIDE ISN'T EVEN REALLY APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR A DRIVE THROUGH. YEAH. I MEAN, BASED ON THE CRITERIA THAT AND THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT PROCESS THAT CITY COUNCIL ADDED WITH THE UDC AMENDMENTS LAST YEAR, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS COMING FROM AS WELL. YEP. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? OKAY. THANK YOU JAKE.

THANK YOU. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED. IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING, YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. KINDLY APPROACH. COULD WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT BEFORE APPLICANT? YEAH. IF YOU COULD GIVE US A ONE WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME UP FIRST. SORRY. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS OUR APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING.

CAN WE COME UP. HI. THANK YOU. HI. MY NAME IS IBRAHIM. I'M WITH BENCHMARK GROUP AND OUR ADDRESS IS 1801 NORTH LAMAR STREET, DALLAS. ANY QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. SO WHAT TYPE OF YOU ALREADY HAVE A TENANT IN MIND FOR THIS PROPERTY OR YOU DO.

YES. THIS BUILDING WILL BE DELIVERED AS A COLD DARK SHELL WITH SUPPORTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND VEHICULAR CIRCULATION. BUT OUR PROPOSED FUTURE TENANTS ARE GOING TO BE TWO TENANTS ONE A NATIONAL QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A SINGLE LANE DRIVE THROUGH, WHICH WILL BE A GROUP A2 OCCUPANCY, AND THE OTHER IS EXPECTED TO FALL UNDER GROUP B BUSINESS OR GROUP M MERCANTILE MERCANTILE CLASSIFICATION OKAY, YOU DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC TENANT OR IT'S NOT PRE-LEASED OR UNDER A2. WE ARE EXPECTING QDOBA MEXICAN GRILL, BUT ON THE THE ADJACENT TENANT, WE DON'T HAVE A POTENTIAL TENANT YET.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE DRIVE THROUGH IS IS GOING TO BE FOR THE QDOBA MEXICAN GRILL OKAY.

IF I MAY SPEAK RICHARD ARCHITECT WITH THE SAME COMPANY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE WEST, IT HAS A DRIVE THROUGH, AND I BELIEVE THERE MAY EVEN BE ANOTHER ONE FURTHER WEST THAT DOES SO. SO WE'RE NOT REALLY AFFECTING THIS, THIS RESIDENTIAL AREA ANY FURTHER THAN OTHER ONES ARE ALREADY AFFECTING IT. AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOUR NEW AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE, BUT CONSIDERING THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, I THINK THAT YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER APPROVING THIS PARTICULAR SITE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WHERE'S THE DUMPSTER LOCATED ON THAT? THE DUMPSTER IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH. IS THAT THAT SOUTH SOUTHWEST CORNER? SOUTHWEST CORNER IS. IT IS OVER 51FT AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. RIGHT THERE. CAN YOU CAN YOU DRAW IT ON THE ON THE SCREEN? IS IT THAT SOUTHWEST CORNER? IS THAT THE DUMPSTER? YEAH. SOUTHWEST CORNER. WELL THAT'S RIGHT THERE. THERE. YEAH. YEAH. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR OUR APPLICANTS? THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, KINDLY APPROACH. SORRY TO HAVE YOU COME UP TWICE. MY NAME IS CARRIE ALBERT. ALBERT ENTERPRISES, AND THIS IS OUR 12 ACRE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE PURCHASED A FEW YEARS AGO. WE PURCHASED IT FROM THE SELLER WHO IS ACTUALLY THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ON THE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS. AND IT WAS BUILT. IT WAS DESIGNED ORIGINALLY FOR

[00:30:03]

EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE. THAT IS OUR RETAIL STRIP CENTERS THERE, THERE THAT WE DO HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH ON THE EAST END CAP FACING THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

WE'RE IN THE PROCESS. WE ARE SELLING THAT ONE ACRE TO THIS DEVELOPER FOR HIM TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO WITH THE FRANCHISE THAT HE OWNS, WHEN THEY WHEN WE DEVELOPED ALL THIS, THAT WAS THERE IS LIKE A TEN FOOT BRICK FENCE, 12 FOOT FENCE THAT'S BEHIND OUR DEVELOPMENT THAT ALIGNS BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS WELL, TO KEEP DOWN THE NOISE AND ANY KIND OF. PARTICULAR NOISE MATTER THAT THAT THE COMMERCIAL MIGHT BE HAVING WITH THE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL. BUT THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HOW MUCH YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT ALL THIS, BUT THERE WAS A BUILD TO RENT COMMUNITY THAT, THAT THEY WERE GOING TO PUT BACK THERE. AND THEN D.R. HORTON CAME IN LATER AND ACTUALLY PURCHASED ALL THE LAND TO TO BUILD THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. BUT, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF CLARIFY THAT AND EXPLAIN WHAT THERE IS A WALL THERE THAT SEPARATES THE TWO TO KEEP DOWN THAT NOISE. SO THAT WALL GOES ALL THE WAY ACROSS BEHIND THIS PROPOSED LOCATION. I'M SORRY. SO THAT WALL EXTENDS ALL THE WAY. IT'S THE ENTIRETY OF THE WHOLE 12 ACRES. WHEN WAS THAT OTHER RESTAURANT BUILT? THE OTHER RESTAURANT, THE OTHER DRIVE THROUGH. WE'RE JUST NOW GETTING A CEO ON THIS, ON THAT SHELL, BUILDING, ON THAT RETAIL SHELL BUILDING. THE BUSINESSES ARE NOT OPEN YET, BUT THERE IS A BLACK ROCK COFFEE THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OF AVIATION WAY, WHICH IS ABOUT JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT FLOODPLAIN. OKAY. I WAS I WAS THINKING THAT THAT THE BUILDING JUST TO THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED LOCATION WAS ALREADY IN BUSINESS. IS THAT NOT. IT IS NOT OKAY. IT IS NOT. IT SHOULD. BARRIOS MEXICAN RESTAURANT OPENS UP ON MARCH 5TH, AND THAT'S THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE BUILDING. RIGHT. OR IS THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH END CAP? NO, THE DRIVE THROUGH END CAP IS ON THE EASTERN. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. YEAH.

THE BARRIOS IS ON THE WESTERN PORTION THAT OPENS MARCH 5TH. THE EASTERN PORTION IS NOT LEAST YET. RIGHT. HAS THE EAST THE END CAP THERE ON THE EAST WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH. HAS IT BEEN APPROVED OR ARE Y'ALL STILL IN THE PROCESS ON THAT ONE? YES. YEAH. THE DRIVE THROUGH HAS BEEN THE THE DRIVE THROUGH WAS APPROVED FOR THIS FOR THIS PROJECT ALREADY. YEAH.

THERE IS A THERE IS A TENANT THAT WILL BE GOING IN THERE OKAY. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE FOR MR. ALBERT. THANK YOU. OKAY. DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. SO IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, KINDLY APPROACH.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS LOGANATHAN KANNAPPAN. I'M A NEARBY HOMEOWNER TO THIS PROXIMITY. I JUST I JUST KNOW THE PLAN LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE SOME RESTAURANT AND THAT IS GOING TO BE DRIVE THROUGH SPEAKER. MY REQUEST IS LIKE THE SPEAKER SHOULD NOT LIKE FACE THE HOMEOWNER DIRECTION SO THAT THE VOICE CAN BE REDUCED. IF IT IS LIKE FACING TOWARDS THE TOWARDS THE WEST OR THE EAST, LIKE INSTEAD OF THE SOUTH. WE ARE, WE ARE, WE ARE ON THE SOUTH, THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SO THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND IF THEY, IF THEY PLANT HIGH, HIGH TOLERANCE TREES TO TO REDUCE THE NOISE, IT WOULD ALSO BE A GOOD ADD ON AROUND THE FENCE. I'M NOT OPPOSING IT, BUT JUST GIVING RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE DUMPSTERS I JUST NOW SAW IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY CLOSE TO THE WALL I THINK. SO IT'S ON THE SOUTHWEST. IF THERE IS A ANOTHER LOCATION, IF THEY COULD AVOID THAT ALSO, IT WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO LIKE REDUCE NOISE TO THE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. SO IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, KINDLY APPROACH.

OKAY? SEEING AS THERE ARE NONE, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM.

COULD WE GET JACOB ONE MORE TIME? SORRY. MY NAME IS MILES KELLY AND I WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER THAT'S PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY FROM CARRIE ALBERTS, AND WE'RE BUILDING A STRIP CENTER WITH QDOBA MEXICAN EATS ON THE WESTERN END. WE'VE DONE 8 OR 9 DIFFERENT SUBMISSIONS TO THE CITY STAFF TO GET TO THE POINT. TODAY, WE JUST DIDN'T SUBMIT IT. AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS OVER THE LAST 4 OR 5 MONTHS GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE IT TODAY. IF YOU LOOK TO THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING, YOU CAN SEE WHAT

[00:35:04]

CARRIE'S BUILT AND YOU'LL LOOK DRIVE THROUGH LANES ALREADY THERE, DUMPSTERS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED. THE ISSUE IS THIS WE'VE BEEN UNDER CONTRACT FOR OVER A YEAR AND TWO MONTHS NOW, AND DURING THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING THIS, THE ORDINANCE CHANGED TO WHERE IT REQUIRED ANYTHING, ANY COMMERCIAL USE WITH A DRIVE THROUGH COMPONENT TO BE WITHIN 250FT OF RESIDENTIAL. WE HAD AN SUP CARRIE BUILT THAT BUILDING DIDN'T NEED SUP DID THE BUILT FOR BLACK ROCK COFFEE, DIDN'T SUP, AND THEY ALL BACK UP TO THE SAME RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

SO WE'RE KIND OF SITUATION WHERE WE REALLY WANT TO BUILD THIS BUILDING AND HAVE A CORDOVA THERE. CORDOVA IS NOT TRADITIONALLY A DRIVE THROUGH. IT'S A CASUAL DINING RESTAURANT.

WE PROBABLY DO LESS THAN 15% OF PEOPLE IN THE DRIVE THRU LANE. THEY TYPICALLY COME IN AND EAT INSIDE, YOU KNOW, COME IN AND PICK UP AND GO OUT. IT'S JUST MORE OF A FEATURE TO GIVE OUR CUSTOMERS ANOTHER WAY TO OBVIOUSLY COME TO OUR RESTAURANT. THE GENTLEMAN SPOKE ABOUT THE SPEAKER. THE SPEAKER IS FACING A 25 FOOT TALL RETAINING WALL BECAUSE THE SUPER WALMART IS THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF US, AND THERE'S ABOUT A 25 FOOT DIFFERENCE OF WHERE THE FINISHED FLOOR OF THAT WALMART IS AND THIS PROPERTY. SO THERE'S A HUGE RETAINING WALL ALONG THE WEST SIDE THAT OBVIOUSLY IS GOING TO BUFFER ANY SORT OF SOUND THAT MAY COME OUT OF A SPEAKER FOR A MENU ITEM, BUT WE JUST DON'T DO A LOT OF SALES THROUGH THE DRIVE THROUGH FEATURE. BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SERVICE FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT. THANK YOU, MR. KELLY. THIS ITEM HAS A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. SO IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, KINDLY APPROACH. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A ANY COMMENTS OR MOTION FROM ANY COMMISSIONER? I THINK THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND STAFF. CAN YOU COME BACK UP PLEASE? YES. Y'ALL WANT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE DISCUSSION. WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMMOCK. AND I HEARD A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATLEY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NOW OPEN DISCUSSION.

CAST YOUR VOTES, PLEASE. THIS IS JUST TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. JAKE, I HAD THREE QUESTIONS. I THINK I HEARD THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. WHAT'S PERMITTED FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING? THE PROPOSED HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. I MAY HAVE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THIS.

I BELIEVE IT'S RIGHT AROUND 20FT, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT TALLER, 20, PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT TALLER THAN THAT, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 30FT. I THINK IT'S JUST A SINGLE STOREY BUILDING. AND WHAT ABOUT THE DUMPSTER? HOW MANY FEET DOES THAT HAVE TO BE FROM A RESIDENTIAL? THE REQUIREMENT IS 20FT. SO THE DUMPSTER IS MEETING THE CODE HERE. I THINK IT'S RIGHT AROUND 50. MAYBE THE ONLY REASON THAT'S COMING BEFORE US IS BECAUSE OF THE MENU BOARD FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THE DUMPSTER IS IN COMPLIANCE. THAT'S RIGHT.

EVERYTHING'S IN COMPLIANCE. THERE IS. IT'S THE DISTANCE BETWEEN EITHER THE ORDER BOARD OR THE BUILDING FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE, WHICH AGAIN, THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IS 200FT. THIS IS 66. HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO THE ONE THAT'S BUILT TO THE WEST THAT FACES DIRECTLY SOUTH, AT LEAST BASED ON THE PLAN BEFORE US? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ACTUALLY HOW IT'S CONSTRUCTED, BUT YEAH, SO THAT ONE IS RIGHT ABOUT THE SAME AND MAYBE EVEN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, I WILL TELL YOU. SO THIS ONE CONSTRUCTION IS JUST FINISHING UP ON IT. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY'RE GETTING CEO OR PLANNING TO GET CEO HERE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. THIS WAS APPROVED WELL BEFORE THE AMENDMENTS CAME. SO COUNCIL HAD REQUESTED THOSE AMENDMENTS EARLY LAST YEAR BECAUSE OF ISSUES THAT WE'VE SEEN AROUND THE CITY, WITH DRIVE THRUS BEING SO CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE INTENT BEHIND THAT. YEAH. JAKE, WHAT IS THE BUFFERING BARRIER FROM THE BACK OF THIS PROPERTY TO THE HOME. WHAT'S WHAT'S THERE BUFFERING. YEAH. SO THERE'S A TEN FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN THE PARKING AND WHERE THE WALLS AT THE WALL THAT'S BEING PROVIDED. I THINK IT WAS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL. IT'S AN EIGHT FOOT TALL MASONRY WALL. EIGHT FOOT.

YEP. MASONRY. YEP. AND AS SHOWN IN THE PHOTO, IS THAT ELEVATED A FEW FEET ABOVE WHERE THE PARKING IT LOOKS LIKE THE PARKING AND DRIVE AISLE SITS BELOW. AND THEN IT GOES UP A FEW FEET BY GRADE. AND THEN THE EIGHT FOOT WALL THAT'S SO IT'S THAT'S PROBABLY THE 12FT THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT ABOUT THAT. YEAH. YEAH. AND THEN IS THERE A DROP OFF ON THAT EAST BOUNDARY. BECAUSE I THINK THAT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A MUCH TALLER ONE BETWEEN THEM AND THE WALMART ON THE EAST BOUND, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH SITS UP HIGHER. I MAY HAVE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT ONE. YEAH. I JUST THINK THIS IS A, EXCUSE

[00:40:04]

ME, A UNIQUE SITUATION AND WHERE THE ORDINANCE CHANGED AFTER THEY WERE ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, IS THAT CORRECT? NOT FOR THIS. SO THIS ONE IS THE VERY, VERY FIRST STEP OF THE PROCESS. I BELIEVE THEY SAID NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PREVIOUS ONE. THE PREVIOUS ONE.

THAT ONE WAS APPROVED WELL BEFORE THE. YEAH. BEFORE THE AMENDMENTS. I MEAN IT'S IT'S RUNNING 380. I MEAN IT'S, IT'S. I KNOW THIS ISN'T THE BAROMETER BY WHICH WE DECIDE, BUT. JUST GAUGING ON HOW MANY RESIDENTS SHOWED UP TO, YOU KNOW, TO I DON'T I DON'T EVEN THINK THE GENTLEMAN WHO CAME UP WAS OPPOSING IT. HE WAS JUST ASKING FOR OR MAKING A SUGGESTION THAT I THINK IS ALREADY IN PLACE. THAT'S KIND OF A PRETTY UNIQUE SITUATION. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OTHER ONE NEXT TO IT WAS APPROVED, BUT WITH COUNCIL JUST HAVING APPROVED THE CHANGE THIS LAST YEAR, I HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY GOING AGAINST IT SINCE I KNOW THAT WAS AN AGENDA OF THEIRS, WAS TO GET THAT REQUIREMENT APPROVED. SO OR THE LOWER OR THE RAISING OF THAT BUFFER. I'LL GO AHEAD. CAN I MAKE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CRAIG TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BUCKNER KILEY, CAST YOUR VOTES. OKAY. THIS ITEM DOES PASS WITH A MAJORITY, AND IT WILL GO ON TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACTION ON THE MARCH 3RD MEETING. OKAY, THAT BRINGS US TO OUR NEXT ITEM. ITEM 25-0170Z. CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Request to Rezone the Subject Property from “PD” - Planned Development District to “PD” - Planned Development District, Generally to Allow for a New and Unlisted Use (Hangar Home) and to Modify the Development Standards, Located Approximately 515 Feet North of Virginia Parkway and Approximately 550 Feet West of Virginia Hills Drive and Located 830 Feet North of Virginia Parkway and Approximately 640 feet West of Virginia Hills Drive]

HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS ACT ON A REQUEST TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. GENERALLY TO ALLOW FOR A NEW AND UNLISTED USE HANGAR HOME AND TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 515FT NORTH OF VIRGINIA PARKWAY AND APPROXIMATELY 550FT WEST OF VIRGINIA HILLS DRIVE, AND LOCATED 830FT NORTH OF VIRGINIA PARKWAY AND APPROXIMATELY 640FT WEST OF VIRGINIA HILLS DRIVE. ARACELI. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. AS MENTIONED, THIS PROPERTY HERE IS REQUESTING A REZONE FROM PD TO PD. YOU PROBABLY ARE FAMILIAR OR MAY HAVE HEARD THIS ONE BEFORE, NOT TOO LONG AGO. WE RECENTLY HAD THIS SECTION OF THE PROPERTY REZONED. BASICALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE SAME REQUEST WITH THE ANNOTATION ON THERE BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SHOW UP. JUST TO CLARIFY.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OH, THERE YOU GO. NOW WE CAN SEE IT. SO THE APPLICANT HAD COME BEFORE YOU REQUESTING THE SIMILAR REQUEST FOR TONIGHT. THESE ARE PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOMES WITH ATTACHED HANGARS. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING TO DO SINGLE FAMILY WITH ATTACHED HANGARS. NO OTHER REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING CHANGED EXCEPT GOING FROM TOWNHOME TO SINGLE FAMILY.

FOR THESE TWO SPECIFIC TRACKS, THE PROPERTY ALIGNS WITH THE USES THAT ARE EXISTING IN THE AREA AND NO OTHER CHANGES BEING PROPOSED. SO STAFF IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE REQUEST AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST HERE. AND I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

SO WHEN YOU SAY TOWNHOME, YOU MEAN IT COULD BE A DUPLEX VERSUS A SINGLE UNIT? NO. SO THESE WOULD BE SINGLE FAMILY. SO EACH LOT WOULD HAVE ONE HOME ATTACHED WITH A HANGAR AS OPPOSED TO A TOWNHOME CONNECTED. ALL THE UNITS WOULD HAVE BEEN CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER OKAY.

GOTCHA. THANK YOU. YEAH. NO PROBLEM. THE TRACT IN BETWEEN THESE TWO, IS IT GOING TO REMAIN WITH THE TOWNHOME OR IS IT. YES. THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY CHANGE TO THE TRACKS AROUND THOSE TWO PARCELS. BUT EVERYTHING AS MENTIONED IN THE PINK IS GOING TO BE SINGLE FAMILY MOVING FORWARD. YES. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR ARACELI? THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

IS OUR APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? YES, HE IS KELLY RICH. HI, I'M BRIAN HAMBURGER WITH

[00:45:02]

TEXAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AT 4888 PECAN PLACE DRIVE, MCKINNEY, TEXAS. 75071. THANK YOU. YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING TO DO HANGAR HOMES ON HERE. THAT WE DID TO EVERY LOT NORTH OF THE ONE NORTH OF THE NORTH TRACK THERE AND THE ONE IN BETWEEN. APPARENTLY THEY'VE GOT A PLAN THAT THEY'RE HAPPY WITH AND GOING TO DO A DUPLEX TYPE THING. BUT MARKET IS DRIVEN THAT PEOPLE THAT WANT THESE HOMES DON'T WANT TO BE ATTACHED TO ANOTHER HOME AND POTENTIALLY HAVE PROBLEMS WITH FOUNDATION, ROOF, WHATEVER. UNDERSTANDABLE SHARED WALL. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT IT'S PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT CAN'T AFFORD THESE THINGS THAT PEOPLE WITH AIRPLANES THAT LIKE TO LOOK AT AIRPLANES WHEN THEY'RE AT HOME. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISTER UMBERGER? ARE THESE DO YOU ALREADY HAVE CLIENTS THAT ARE WANTING TO BUILD ON THESE OR. YEAH, THERE'S SOME INTEREST IN IT. YEAH. AND THAT WAS THE BIGGEST THING THOUGH IS IT WAS IT TOWNHOMES AND EVERYBODY WANTED OUT THERE. BUT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO TOWNHOMES. SO YEAH MAKES SENSE OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH OKAY. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. SO IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR CONCERNS OR COMMENTS, KINDLY APPROACH. OKAY? SEEING AS THERE ARE NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR MOTION FROM COMMISSIONERS? I MOVE, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 25 0170Z. SECOND, A FIRST BY COMMISSIONER WHATLEY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE, AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CONRAD KILEY. CAST YOUR VOTES. OKAY. THIS MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, AND IT WILL BE FORWARDED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACTION AT THE MARCH 3RD CITY COUNCIL MEETING. OKAY, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 26-0001Z. CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on a Request to Rezone the Subject Property from “AG” - Agriculture District and “PD” - Planned Development District to “C2” - Local Commercial District, Located on the Southwest Corner of Virginia Parkway and South Jordan Road]

HEARING TO CONSIDER, DISCUSS, ACT ON A REQUEST TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM AG AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO C-2 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VIRGINIA PARKWAY AND SOUTH JORDAN ROAD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AGAIN. THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VIRGINIA PARKWAY AND JORDAN ROAD TO C-2 FOR COMMERCIAL USES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY, AND THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE IS ADJACENT TO FLOODPLAIN AND TRAILS FOR THE BONNIE WING PARK.

OTHER CORNERS OF THIS INTERSECTION ARE ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USES, AND MANY OF THESE PROPERTIES FOLLOW THE SAME DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AS THE PROPOSED C-2 DISTRICT. THE PROPOSED ZONING ALSO MEETS THE INTENT OF THE COMP PLAN, AS THIS AREA IS DESIGNATED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL PLACE TYPE. AS SUCH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REZONING AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. DOES ANY OF THIS TRACT WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN? I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE SOME ON THE WEST. IN THE SOUTH, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THIS IS COMPLETELY OUT OF IT OR NOT, BUT I BELIEVE MOST OF IT'S FALLING OFF TO THE WEST. SO WILL BE SOME LIMITATIONS THEN, BUT NOT NOT OVERMUCH. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? FOR WHAT? WHAT TYPE OF. BUSINESSES WOULD GO WOULD WOULD FALL INTO THE C2 CATEGORY? YEAH. I'LL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON WHAT THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. BUT THE C2 THAT'S KIND OF OUR MID-LEVEL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT C1, C2, C3, THIS IS OUR LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. SO IT WOULD PERMIT LIKE SIT DOWN RESTAURANTS, RETAIL, OFFICE, THOSE KIND OF USES PRIMARILY. YEAH OKAY.

WOULD IT PERMIT DAYCARE I BELIEVE DAYCARE WAS NOTED IN THE LETTER OF INTENT. YES. I BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED. OKAY. THANK YOU.

JAKE, YOU SAID OUR APPLICANT IS HERE. I BELIEVE SO, YES. GOOD EVENING. I'M BOB MEADOWS WITH RCM ENGINEERS, 1113 COLLINS BOULEVARD, RICHARDSON, TEXAS. AND WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR A

[00:50:04]

STRAIGHT C2 ZONING. OUR PROPOSED USES ARE LIKE A DAYCARE CENTER AS WELL AS RESTAURANT AND RETAIL. IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. WE DO NOT. THERE ARE SECTIONS WHERE THE FLOODPLAIN DOES IMPACT CORNERS OF THE PROPERTY, BUT WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF IMPACTING THAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. OKAY, NO MITIGATION OR REMEDIATION OF THE FLOODPLAIN.

JUST, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THAT GOES, WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH STAFF ON THAT. WE ARE ACTUALLY PREPARING A FLOOD STUDY AT THEIR REQUEST TO UPDATE IT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTING FLOODPLAIN. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? SO AS YOU'RE PROPOSING POSSIBLY A DAYCARE RESTAURANT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHAT IS GOING TO BE YOUR PRIMARY INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THIS PROPERTY. WOULD YOU ACTUALLY THERE WILL BE THREE DRIVEWAYS THAT WILL ACCESS THE PROPERTY ALONG JORDAN BOULEVARD OR JORDAN ROAD. AND ACTUALLY THEY'LL BE SEPARATED INTO TWO LOTS. THE RESTAURANT AND RETAIL WILL BE ON ONE LOT AND THEN IT'LL BE SEPARATED. THE DAYCARE WILL BE SEPARATED AS A SEPARATE LOT. OKAY. SO THEY WON'T BE IN THE SAME BUILDING OKAY. BUT THE TRAFFIC WILL BE MOVING IN AND OUT ON JORDAN, CORRECT AND NOT VIRGINIA. CORRECT. OKAY. AND BIFURCATED BY THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT RUNS EAST SOUTH OR EAST WEST. EXCUSE ME. ACROSS THE PROPERTY THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT. AND WE'RE LOOKING TO EXTEND THE EXISTING PIPES THAT ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROPERTY. SO ARE YOU THINKING THAT THE DAYCARE WOULD BE ADJACENT TO VIRGINIA? NO, NO, THE RESTAURANT RETAIL WOULD BE ADJACENT TO VIRGINIA. THE DAYCARE WILL BE ON THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO THE RESTAURANT WOULD STILL ONLY HAVE THE ONE ENTRY ON JORDAN. NO. THERE WILL BE EACH EACH LOT WILL HAVE THEIR OWN ENTRY. IN ADDITION, THERE WILL BE A SHARED ENTRY, INGRESS, EGRESS.

BUT WILL THERE BE ANY ACCESS OFF OF VIRGINIA? NO. NO. NONE OKAY. NO THAT THAT'S NOT ALLOWED. SO OKAY. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

OKAY. THIS ITEM DOES HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ATTACHED TO IT. SO IF YOU'RE HERE THIS EVENING AND YOU WISH TO SHARE YOUR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, KINDLY APPROACH. YES. MY NAME IS GARY DAVIS AND I RESIDE AT 2904 ROCK HILL ROAD, WHICH IS THE CORNER OF JORDAN AND ROCK HILL. RIGHT NOW. TODAY, THOSE THAT INTERSECTION JORDAN AND ROCK HILL ARE USED AS CUT THROWS TO GET BACK TO CENTRAL. BECAUSE VIRGINIA PARKWAY BACKS UP SO MUCH. THE ABSTRACT THAT'S ONLINE SHOWS THREE OUTLETS COMING OUT OF THIS, BUT IT DON'T. AND NOW THIS SHOWS IT BEING ONE SOLID LOT. IT HAS A DRAINAGE DITCH DOWN THE CENTER. AND WHETHER OR NOT THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO PUT IN A BOX, CULVERT OR WHATEVER TO TAKE THE WATER THAT COMES OFF OF THE EAST DOWN TO THE CREEK, THAT, THAT I DON'T KNOW, I DIDN'T DO THAT MUCH RESEARCH ON IT, BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME KIND OF TRAFFIC STUDY DONE BECAUSE DURING, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY WANTS TO GO SEE MY GRANDKIDS, EVERYBODY WANTS TO SEE THEIR KIDS PLAY SOCCER, BASEBALL, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. BUT WHEN THE SOCCER GAMES OVER, THEN IT BACKS UP FROM FROM VIRGINIA PARKWAY DOWN TO ROCK HILL ROAD WAITING ON THE RED LIGHTS. YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE TURNING, THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET ACROSS TO THE TO THE CAR WASH ON THE CORNER. YOU HAVE ABOUT 1000 FOOT FROM JORDAN, BACK TO THE BRIDGE TO THE CREEK, OR WHERE THE GUARDRAIL FOR THE BRIDGE STOPS. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE REALLY NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING LOOKED AT THERE TO PUT A RIGHT TURN LANE IN THERE, BUT THAT'S ONLY GOING TO GET THEM IN. THAT'S NOT GOING TO GET THEM OUT. AND LIVING THERE AND DEALING WITH IT ANY WAY YOU GO. IF I GO UP ROCK HILL, THEN I HAVE TO DEAL WITH TWO CAR DEALERSHIPS THAT THEIR EMPLOYEES, THEY DIDN'T BUILD ENOUGH PARKING SPACE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES TO PARK ON THE PREMISES. THEY PARK IN THE STREET. SO YOU KNOW, YOU AND YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS TRYING TO SQUEEZE PAST THEIR CARS. AND IF YOU GO AROUND NORTHBROOK, YOU HAVE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, WHICH HAS PEOPLE PARKING IN THE STREETS. SO THAT'S REALLY THAT'S MY CONCERN IS, IS THE THREE OUTLETS, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE DUMPING SIX ACRES WORTH OF PEOPLE PROVIDED THEY COVER UP THE DRAINAGE DITCH OUT