[CALL TO ORDER]
[INVOCATION]
[MINUTES]
[PLATS]
[ZONING]
[00:12:34]
[00:12:35]
CURRENTLY ALLOWS COMMERCIAL MULTIFAMILY AND TOWNHOME USE[00:12:39]
WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THAT WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE BE ALLOWED IN ADDITION TO PERMITTED USE, I THINK YOU ASKE TO THE QUESTION WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK IF WE CHOSE NOT T PURSUE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE.IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING AS LON AS WE STAY WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE PERMITTED USE WE DO NOT HAVE TO COME BACK.
>> WE WILL HAVE MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT, THAT'S NOT MY UNDERSTANDING SO WE WILL NEED TO COME BACK TO THAT.
>> AS LONG AS WE USE IT. >> I UNDERSTAND, EXCUSE ME, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT ALSO I ASKED IF THE SCHEMATIC PLAN WA IN THE PD THE ONE WITH THE RETAIL AND ALL OF THAT. THE ANSWER WAS YES .
>> RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND. ARE WE BEING ASKED TO CHANGE THE USE OR CHANGE THE CONCEPT PLAN? WHAT IS IN THIS?
>> THE REQUEST AMENDING BOTH THIS IS THE ADDITION OF ALLOWABLE USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE AMENDMENT T THE CONCEPT PLAN. BOTH ARE BEING REQUESTED.
>> OKAY ALL RIGHT. >> OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A EVOLUTION. LAST WEEK THE LATES CONCEPT PLAN, BUT SO HERE WHEN WE ARE ASKING IS JUST AN ADDITIONAL USE WITHIN WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ADD A SINGLE-FAMILY USE. WE FELT LIK THE SINGLE-FAMILY USE ALONG THE NORTHERN SIDE IS A BETTER OFFER AND BETTER TRANSITION FOR THI AREA AS OPPOSED TO THE COMMERCIAL USE ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED. SO CURRENTLY THERE'S A 60 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. WITH THIS IF WE CHOOSE TO PROCEED WITH RESIDENTIAL THE 60 FOOT SETBAC WOULD NOT APPLY AND THAT IS REFLECTED IN THE ACTUAL TEXT O THE ZONING ORDINANCE. IF WE
[00:15:01]
CHOOSE NOT TO DO THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENT THE SETBACK WOULD STILL APPLY. WE WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT SO IF THIS GOES AWAY THE 60 FOOT SETBACK STILL APPLIES. WITH RESPECT TO THE , THE TREES AND YOU ARE CORRECT THERE IS THE ALLEY, AND EXISTING ALLEY WE PROPOSED TO PUT IN , SOME KIND OF LANDSCAPE, TREES AS A BUFFER AND THEN THERE WILL BE A SECONDARY ALLEY WHICH IS SOLELY TO ACCESS THESE RESIDENCES. OU CONCEPT NOW IS THE GATE ON TH NORTHWEST THERE WILL BE A GATE AT THE NORTHWEST END THAT WILL BE BLOCKED FOR USE AND PROVIDE ONLY FOR EMERGENCY AND UTILITY USE. RESIDENCE WILL NOT BE TRAVERSING THE ALLEY, THEY WIL COME IN ON THE NORTHEAST CORNE , THAT CONNECTS TO THE CURRENT EXISTING PORTION OF THE PUBLIC STREET. IT WILL BE GATED WHERE IT ENTERS THE PROPERTY. AND THE THEY WILL ENTER AND TURN AND COME TO THE RESIDENCE. SO THE PUBLIC WILL NOT GENERALLY BE ABLE TO COME IN AND GET IN AND NOT HAVE A PLACE TO TURN AROUND THE ONLY FOLKS IN THERE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE GATE ACCESS. AN WHEN THEY GO TO LEAVE THEY WILL GO BACK OUT THROUGH THE DRIVE O ONE OF THE OTHER GATED ENTRANCE IS ON THE PROPERTY. BECAUSE THIS IS A GATED SENIOR LIVING COMPLEX THERE WOULD BE SOME KIND OF FENCE AROUND THE THIS WHAT KIND OF FENCE THAT LOOKS LIKE TODAY WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO SAY. THERE WILL BE A SECURITY FENCE THAT ENCOMPASSE THE ENTIRE SENIOR LIVING PROJEC SO THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT THER NOT BEING A FENCE SEPARATING, THERE WILL BE A FENCE IN ADDITION TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED.REQUIRING THE FENCE? >> WE WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO THE FENCE, WE WOULD LIKE SOME DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE MATERIAL SHOULD BE SO THAT IT CAN BE APPROPRIATE FOR WHAT WE ARE DESIGNING. BUT I THINK IF YOU WERE TO REQUIRE A FENCE AS LONG AS HE LEFT US WITH DISCRETION T PUT IN AN APPROPRIATE FENCE I THINK THAT WOULD BE OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? THE MICROPHONE AND SEE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND EVERYTHING
AGAIN PLEASE? >> MY NAME IS TIM WATSON 2550 CLOVERLEAF RESIDENCY OF OVER 3 YEARS AND BUILT THE HOUSE THERE FINISHED IN 1986. RAISED FIVE CHILDREN AND MY WIFE IS DECEASED, SHE PASSED A FEW YEAR BACK IN 2014 THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY SENTIMENTAL TO ME. I A NOT GOOD AT PROFESSIONALLY SPEAKING BUT I WANTED TO GET DOWN TO THIS. THIS ALLEY, THE FENCE AND OTHER THINGS. THIS ORDINANCE, 22 2014 FIRST RATING AND SECOND RATING AND HAS THE ATTACHMENT TO IT. ITEM 3 SAYS NO ACCESS EASEMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SOUTHERN ALLE IN THE CLOVERLEAF SUBDIVISION WHICH I AM THANKFUL THEY HAVE CHANGED TWO OF THEM ON THIS ORIGINAL PLAN THAT THEY WERE PLANNING TO DO. POSSIBLY AT MY REQUEST POSSIBLY OTHERS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT ON THE ABANDONED RIGHT-OF-WAY THA HAVE BEEN IN THIS ON TO ACU
[00:20:04]
DRIVE AREA. THE OTHER EASEMENT ON THE WEST SIDE IT MAY BE ON THE WEST SIDE, I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I'VE NOT SEEN IT THAT CLOSE IF IT'S GOING TO BE AT THE VERY CORNER OR JUST 50 OR 60 YARDS UP. I DON'T KNOW WHER IT'S GOING TO BE. IF IT IS AT THE END OF THE LITTLE ACCESS TO THE SMALL HOMES ALLEY OR TH DRIVEWAYS CONNECTING THEM, IT WOULD COME OUT RIGHT AT THE VER CORNER. WE HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFI THAT COMES UP AND DOWN THAT ALLEY NOW. IT NEARLY NEEDS TO BE MADE A STREET IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO CARRY THE TRACK THAT IT CARRIES. I DON'T WANTTO GO DOWN THAT TRAIL RIGHT NOW >> MR. WATSON. HAVE YOU GUYS SEEN THIS? THIS DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE IN YOUR ALLEY.
>> IT'S NOT OUR ALLEY, WHAT WE ARE GETTING AT IS A SEVEN FOOT SOLID FENCE REQUIRED UPON DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THIS ALLEY WHICH IS THE VERY SOUTH LINE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY WANTED TO PUT IN BERMS AND HAVE THE BACKS OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS BUILT THERE SO WHEN THE TRACTOR-TRAILERS UNLOAD, CONTAINERS, THEY WOULD BE DUMPED BACK THERE SERVICING STORES IN CHRISTMASTIME WHEN THEY BRING SIX OR SEVEN UNLIKE WALMART 50 OR 60 OR 100. THEY WOULD LAY THERE UNTIL THEY BROUGHT THAT STUFF OUT AFTERWARD. THANKSGIVING OR LABOR DAY, SEPTEMBER WHEN THEY START CHRISTMAS NOW SHOPPING. NEIGHBORS, THEIR 51 HOUSES BASICALLY BUILT FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. WHEN WE DISCUSS THIS AND HAD THIS TO DEAL WITH AN THE ANXIETY OF IT. THE ACU CAN BUILD WHATEVER THEY WANT THERE THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT THEY START WITH A PARKING LOT FOR THE NEW STADIUM. THE PARKING LOT DOES NOT MAKE MUCH MONEY.
>> SO LET ME ASK YOU IF I UNDERSTAND THIS. YOU ARE SAYING THAT THE NO ACCESS EASEMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED ALONG SOUTH SIDE OF SOUTHERN ALLEY? SO THER WOULD BE NO ACCESS EASEMENT AN THEN A SOLID SEVEN FOOT SOLID FENCE REQUIRED ALONG THE LINE AND YOU ARE OKAY WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS? THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING TO KEEP IN PLACE?
>> YES. THE SOLID FENCE WAS STATED BECAUSE ON THE EAST SID OF THE DEVELOPMENT THE STADIUM WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, WHEN RAY SCOTT DEVELOPED THE AREA HE PUT IN A SEVEN FOOT SOLID WALL. BETTER THAN THE ONE AT FAIRWAY OAKS MADE OUT OF CINDERBLOCK THAT CRACKS AND BREAKS. THIS ONE ON TOP OF THE HILL AND UPON THAT DID NOT MOVE OVER IN THE 30 YEARS I LIVED THERE. THAT'S WHAT WAS MENTIONED FROM OTHERS AT THAT TIME THAT A SEVEN FOOT SOLID WALL , SO WE DON'T CARE WHAT
IT'S MADE OUT OF. >> THIS SAYS SEVEN FOOT SOLID
FENCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT. >> WHAT THEY ARE WANTING TO PU IN IS A BAR FENCE OR CHAIN FENCE. THEY HAVE A GATED OR DID HAVE A GATED COMMUNITY BY THE BASEBALL FIELD WITH ACCESS ONLY BY CODE . THEY TOOK THAT DOWN IN NEARLY 2 DAYS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE NEW FENCE OR NOT. ON THE WEST SIDE OR THE EAST SIDE OF THE SCHOOL OR IF IT'S ALL NEW.
>> SORRY. >> WE HAVE HAD TWO FIRES THAT I HAVE PICTURES OF FROM FIREWORKS FROM THE BASEBALL FIELD. THEY HAVE EARNED THE FIELD UP TO WHERE THE PAVEMENT IS AND JUMPE
[00:25:04]
OVER CONSIDERING NOW WE RIGHT NOW TWO ALLEYS AND HOUSES HAVE HAD FENCES BURNED AND BUSHES I THE YARDS BURNED FROM FIREWORKS THEY SAID IF THERE IS A ALLEY THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS IN AND OUT UP UNTIL PRAIRIE SONG WAS BUILT WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTHWEST OF US RIGHT TO THE WEST OF US. THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WAS PUT IN AND THE DEVELOPER PROMISED NEIGHBOR HE WOULD PUT IN A SOLID WALL. THEN HE FOUND OUT HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST AND HE BACKED OUT AN DIDN'T DO IT AND WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE ALLEY WE HAVE AN I UNDERSTAND . ANYWAY. IF I HAVE TALKED TO 75 FOR 80% OF THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY ARE NOT ANGRY AT ACU, THEY ARE HAPPY TO HAVE THEM. A LOT OF THEM HAVE FAMILY THAT WORK THERE. A LOT OF THEM DO THINGS OF THAT NATURE BUT THEY SAID A SEVENFOOT SOLID. >> WE'VE GOT IT, I SEE IT AND WE WILL ADDRESS THAT IN A LITTL BIT.
>> I'M NOT ARGUING ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THE EASEMENT. IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET 10 FOOT OFF THE CODE THAT SAYS COMMERCIAL AND IF THE BUILDING , THE ELDER CARE HOME OR NOT ELDER CARE, BUT ELDER RETIREMENT CENTER , IT IS, IF IT IS 10 FEET OR 20 FOOT THAT'S THEM WE JUST WANT THE LAW LIKE WE HAVE ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH TRAFFIC AND TRASH AND W DON'T WANT WALK THROUGH. WE
HAVE ENOUGH TRANSIENTS. >> LET'S LET SOME OF THE FOLKS
COME UP . WE UNDERSTAND. >> YOU CAN FIND ME.
>> WE MAY NEED YOU IN A MINUTE
>> AFTER PICK UP MY GRANDDAUGHTER AND MIDDLE SCHOOL
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEET BAC .
>> COMMISSIONERS THANK YOU FO LISTENING TO US. I AM BUTCH NELSON 2550 SUNNYBROOK JUST OU OF THE ZONING , BUT I THINK THI DOES APPLY TO ALL OF US IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE THING THAT HAS NOT BEEN MENTIONED, FIRST I ACU DRIVE IS A CLOSED DRIVE HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ACCESS IT THAT'S THE FIRST THING, COME OF OF AND MAKE A SLIGHT TURN COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IF YOU LIVE AT ACCESS YOU COME PAST THE HOUSES AND DOWN THE ALLEY TO GET INTO YOUR HOMES FROM THE BACKSIDE WHERE THE DRIVEWAYS AND GARAGES ARE. THAT MEANS IF THEY PUT ANOTHER ACCESS NEXT TO IT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A TRAFFIC JAM AND I THINK THAT'S THE MAJOR PROBLEM THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT ACU HAS NOT ADDRESSED. WE MET WITH THEM THEY SAID IT WAS NOT THEIR PROBLEM IT IS YOUR PROBLEM IT I THE CITY'S PROBLEM SO YOU WILL REPRESENT THE CITY. THE PROBLE IS THIS YOU ARE PUTTING TOO MAN PEOPLE WOULD TOO MANY CARS IN A SMALL AREA ALL WAY TO GO UP AND DOWN. YOU HAVE ALLEN RIDGE, YOU HAVE 300 APARTMENT UNITS WITH 600 CARS YOU KNOW BETTER THAN WE DO. YOU HAVE A HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING A NEW HIGH SCHOOL, YOU HAVE SCHOOLKIDS GOING AND COMING. AT 8:00 IN THE MORNING OR 3:00 IN THE AFTERNOON. THERE ARE MAJOR TRAFFIC PROBLEMS GOING TO BE CAUSING TRAFFIC PROBLEMS FOR US COMING OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, TRAFFIC PROBLEMS FOR THE FOLKS IN ALLEN RIDGE AND FOR THE APARTMENTS AND THEY WANT TO PU ANOTHER HOTEL DOWN THE STREET.
THEY'VE ONLY GOT ONE WAY TO GO ON THE ACCESS ROAD OR COME DOWN JUDGE ELY. SO THERE IS A MAJOR TRAFFIC PROBLEM. THERE'S GOING TO BE A MAJOR TRAFFIC PROBLEM COMING INTO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. WHERE THE CARS GOING TO GO ONTO JUDGE ELY AND YOU HAVE A MAJOR TRAFFIC JAM AND THEY SAY IT'S YOUR PROBLEM NOT THEIRS.
AM HERE WANTING TO BRING IT UP TO YOU ALL. AS I SAID PREVIOUSL ACU NEEDS TO STAY IN EDUCATION BUSINESS AND LET DEVELOPERS DO
[00:30:03]
DEVELOPMENT WORK. ANY QUESTIONS?>> SO YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHERE THIS KIND OF IS THE Y THING AND JUDGE ELY. TALKING ABOUT FUN TRAFFIC.
>> THAT'S RIGHT COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OFF OF JUDGE ELY AND YOU MAKE A SLIGHT TURN AND COME INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE AND PARK ON THE ALLEY GO PAST THE ENTRANCE AND TURN AND COME DOWN THE ALLE WAY. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO PUT ANOTHER ALLEYWAY THERE GOING T RUN THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE . THE WAY I SEE IT WHEN THEY BUILT THOSE BUILDINGS UP ON , THEY SHOULD HAVE BUILT A FENCE IN. LOOKS LIKE HAVE BROKEN THEIR AGREEMENT. THEY SHOULD HAVE BUILT A FENCE THEN WHEN THEY DID THAT BUT THEY DIDN'T AND NOBODY HAS COMPLAINED, WITH AL THAT'S GOING ON NOW WE'RE COMPLAINING WE WANT THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE. I DON'T CARE WHAT IT IS, IT NEEDS TO BE EIGHT FOO SOLID FENCE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO GROUPS OF PEOPLE COMING INTO ONE SMALL AREA. ON THE OTHER END YOU'VE GOT HOUSES. THAT'S A PRETTY SHARP TURN ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT, WE DON'T KNOW WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT BUT THAT IS A SHORT CORNER AND A LOT OF PEOPLE NOW COME OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC ON JUDGE ELY AND THE TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE COMING OUT ON THE BACKSIDE AND GOING TO ROUNTREE AND COMING DOWN ROUNTREE OVER TO THE SIGNA LIGHT BECAUSE THE LIGHT AT JUDG ELY , IF YOU HAVE BEEN THERE AT 5:00 IN THE AFTERNOON THERE IS TRAFFIC JAM.
>> UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> AS A PROPOSAL WE BOUGHT DR TEAGUE'S HOUSE IN 2017 SO WE HAVE NOT BEEN THERE AS LONG AS TIM , BUT WE WERE TOLD BY A NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BUILD A GREEN BELT ON THE FENCE THAT TIM WAS TALKING ABOUT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION. THERE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE A FENCE BUILT, THEY'RE GOING TO CALL IT A GREE BELT TO THIS DAY THERE IS NOTHING BUT GRASS SO THEY HAVE NOT DONE BUT THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO IN ANOTHER OCCASION. I WISH SEVERAL OTHER LADIES WOULD'VE COME BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPOKEN ABOUT THAT BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO COME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YE
MA'AM. >> GOOD AFTERNOON I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO COME AND EXPLAIN OUR FEELINGS AND OUR CONCEPT ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE HAPPENING. OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT EXACTLY. >> WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME
AND ADDRESS PLEASE? >> I'M SORRY. BETTY WEISINGER AND I LIVE AT 2518 SUNNYBROOK COURT , THE FIRST CUL-DE-SAC AS YOU COME INTO SOUTHERN MEADOWS. CLOVERLEAF GOES FURTHER ON AND THEN TURNS INTO ANOTHER CUL-DE-SAC. I APOLOGIZ FOR THAT, I'M NERVOUS. I DO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO B HERE BUT I WANT TO POINT OUT AGAIN, WHAT MR. NELSON HAS SAI ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT WILL PROBABLY LIVE THERE . SENIOR CITIZENS.'S I FEEL LIKE ALREADY I AM IN JEOPARDY WHEN I LEAVE MY COMPLEX BECAUSE THE BUSINESS AT ALLEN RIDGE IS VERY SUCCESSFUL FOR THESE PEOPLE. THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB WITH THAT, BUT IT ALSO ADD TO THE TRAFFIC. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WILL BE 231 UNITS A ALLEN RIDGE APARTMENT COMPLEX SO THAT'S 231 CARS TWO PEOPLE LIVING IN AN APARTMENT YOU ARE LOOKING AT 462 CARS. COLLEGE KIDS ROOM THREE OR FOUR ROOM THREE OR 4 TO 1 APARTMENT, YOU COULD END UP WITH 982 CARS I THINK IT IS JUST IN THOSE COMPLEXES OF APARTMENTS. AND THEN YOU ADD WHAT IS PROPOSED T THE SENIOR CITIZENS AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER 300 TO 40 CARS. AT THE INTERSECTION COMIN AND GOING. WHAT I HAVE IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS UP THER FOR SOME REASON AND THINGS
[00:35:03]
HAVEN'T CHANGED AND THAT IS SINCE AUGUST 3RD. SO I AM NOT SURE THE ALLEYWAYS THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT, BUT YES OUR PEOPLE HAVE TO USE THE ALLEYWAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE GARAGE OPENS UP. SO I HAVE ALSO DISCOVERED PEOPLE WANTING TO AVOID THE INTERSECTION AT SOUTHERN OUT OF SOUTHERN MEADOW AND JUDGE ELY AND AMBLER. IT WILL COME AND TAKE THE ZIGZAG, GO THROUGH THE ALLEY EITHER TO THE ROUNDTREE, JOHN STEVENS AND THEN GO OVER AND COME OUT AT TH LIGHT ON CAMPUS COURT JUST TO AVOID THE INTERSECTION AND THE RED LIGHT SO THAT HAS ADDED W HAVE A BOILING POT THERE AND I IS BEGINNING TO RUN OVER A LITTLE BIT. MY MAIN CONCERN WITH THIS AS I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS THINKING ABOUT THE SENIOR CITIZENS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PUT IN THE NEW PLOT OR POSSIBLY COULD BE. IF WE ARE NOT AWARE OF SENIOR CITIZEN LIMITATIONS, WE HAVE THEM AND WE HAVE TO ADJUST AS WE GET OLDER AND THERE ARE TIMES WE DON'T THINK FAST ENOUGH, WE DON'T REACT FAST ENOUGH , WE CANNOT SEE WELL ENOUGH . WE HAV ACHES WE CAN TURN OUR HEADS T SEE THAT WAY OR THAT WAY AND SO A BURDEN TO SENIOR CITIZENS JUST TO READ THE ATMOSPHERE THERE IS TOO MUCH FOR THEM. I I HAD TO LIVE THERE WHERE I AM NOW I FEEL A LITTLE PROTECTED AND I AM USE TO IT. HAVE TO COME IN THE SAME DRIVEWAY THAT THE NEW PEOPLE HAVE TO COME IN. SO AS MR. NELSON SAID WE HAVE TRAFFIC JAM THERE. ANOTHER THING THAT BOTHERS SENIOR CITIZENS IS GLARING NEON LIGHTS. JUDGING DISTANCES, AL ARE PRESENT AND WILL BE THERE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS TO DEAL WITH AT THAT INTERSECTION. RIGID BONES, NECK AND SHOULDERS REFLEXES, EVEN TO SHIFT GEARS, LOOK AT THE LIGHT, USE YOUR HANDS TO TURN MAKES EYE AND HAND CORONATION, WHEN YOU'RE NORMAL SOMETIMES YOU DON'T HAVE GOOD COORDINATION. I WANT TO FINISH BY SAYING IT IS GOOD T IMPROVE, IT IS GOOD TO DEVELOP BUT WE MUST, AT THIS POINT, THINK OF OUR CITIZENS FIRST.ASKED THE ACU FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE TO THINK OVER THEIR PLAN TO PUT SENIORS AT THIS BOILING POINT AND IT I ALREADY BOILING OVER AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE ZONING COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS THOROUGHL AND TO THINK DEEPLY BEFORE MAKING A DECISION ABOUT THIS REQUEST TO CHANGE THE PURPOSE THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE TO PUT SENIOR CITIZENS AT RISK. THAN YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TO YOU AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYON ELSE? SURE. WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU AT THE END.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY HUSBAND SMUG A FEW MINUTES AGO I APPRECIATE THIS MEETING TODAY SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME THING THAT ARE ISSUES AND THINGS, NOT TRYING TO RAISE A RUCKUS BUT WANT TO GO BACK TO THE FIRST ISSUE BROUGHT UP THAT ANYTHING CAN GO UP, I HATE TO PUT IT LIKE ACU ACCORDING TO THE FIRS ORDINANCE IT CAN GO MULTI FAMILY, IT CAN GO SENIOR CITIZEN OR ALL THESE DIFFERENT WAYS AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER MEETING O ORDINANCE, THAT REALLY DOES NO MAKE SENSE. YOU DON'T PROPOSE CERTAIN PLAN AND THEN SAY IT CAN BE ANYTHING. IF THERE IS A CHANGE AND I THINK A MOTION NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED . IF THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE PURPOS OF THIS ZONING REQUIREMENT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP TO BE DISCUSSED YOU CAN'T JUST GO FROM RETAIL TO MULTI-, TO SINGLE-FAMILY, TO WHATEVER AND THAT WOULD BE ONE OF MY PRIMARY PROBLEMS. ALSO TO THROW RETAIL INTO THAT, YOU TALK ABOUT
[00:40:04]
TRUCKS AND THINGS GOING THROUG THE ALLEY THAT WOULD BE USED B HOMEOWNERS AND CARS AND WHERE THE TRASH IS, ET CETERA THAT IS NONSENSE. THERE IS NO WAY, I SHOULDN'T SAY NO WAY, IT IS REALLY UPSETTING AND DISTURBING TO THINK IT COULD G RETAIL. I DON'T MIND IF THEY HAVE RETAIL SOMEWHERE IN THERE BUT STAY AWAY FROM THE ALLEY AN THE HOMEOWNERS, STAY AWAY FROM THE OLDER PEOPLE, STAY AWAY FRO THE TRASH AND THAT WOULD MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE TO US. ONE OF M PRIMARY CONCERNS IS THAT WELL I THINK THAT'S ENOUGH, I WON' GET CARRIED AWAY. ANYWAY I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION AND HOPE YOU WILL PAY ATTENTION PARTICULARLY TO THE FLIP-FLOP ACCORDING TO THE WAY THE WATER FLOWS OR WHAT SOMEBOD WANTS AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME.THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION. >> THANK YOU.
AND ONE SUBJECT THAT HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP AT LEAST NOT A LOT IS THAT OF PRIVACY. THAT I WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH NOT ONLY THE PROPOSAL THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU ALL ABOUT IT, THE SINGLE-FAMILY AND THE THREE-STORY, BUT ALSO THE FENCE PLAYS A BIG PART IN PRIVACY ARE AND IMAGINE IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE , IF THE SINGLE LEVEL HOMES ARE CLOSEST TO THE FENCE CLOSEST TO THE ALLEY THERE IS NOT AS BIG OF A PROBLEM OF PRIVACY, THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM WITH THE PEOPLE IN COUNTRY MEADOWS YARD HOUSES AND EVERYTHING ABLE TO BE LOOKED AT FROM THESE OTHER, FRO THE BUILDINGS. IF THERE IS THE THREE-STORY BUILDING CLOSEST T THE BACK YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT WOULD BE A CONCERN TO THE PEOPL THAT LIVE IN COUNTRY MEADOWS.
YOU HAVE THREE STORIES OF PEOPL LOOKING INTO THEIR HOUSE AND YARD AND INTO THEIR BUSINESS SO THAT IS THE THING WE REALLY WANT , IF THEY DO BUILD THE SINGLE-FAMILY AND THE THREE-STORY BUILDING THE SINGLE-FAMILY WOULD BEST BE BUILT NEXT TO THE , TO THE ALLEY. AND THEN THE PRIVACY OF THE FENCE IS GIVING US PRIVACY, IT'S ALSO CUTTING DOWN ON TRAFFIC, IT'S ALSO CUTTING DOW ON TRASH. A LOT OF THINGS THE FENCE DOES AND THEN THE TREES THAT COULD HAVE OR SHOULD HAVE , SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT ON JUDGE ELY SIDE WHERE THE FENC IS NOW, ALSO DOES SOMETHING TO BLOCK THE PRIVACY OF COURSE OF JUDGE ELY, THE WALL, BUT TREES WERE TO BE BUILT AND NOW WE SEE A NEED FOR THE TREES BECAUS WE HAVE THE THREE-STORY STUDEN HOUSING ACROSS THE STREET FROM US. OUR NEIGHBORS SAY THAT WHEN THEY HAD , WHEN THEY WERE SEEIN THAT BEING BUILT THERE WERE WORKERS RIGHT UP THERE ABLE TO SEE INTO THEIR BUSINESS. SO THAT IS PRIVACY, ANOTHER FACET AND ANOTHER CONCERN. THANK YOU
WANT TO COME BACK UP? >> THANK YOU MR. TURMAN. TO BRING THIS BACK THE QUESTION TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT SINGLE-FAMILY USE IS APPROPRIAT USE IN THAT SPOT. WE HAVE ASKED FOR THAT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE WE THINK THAT IS A GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE MULI-STORY RETIREMENT APARTMENTS.
PROVIDING, CAN YOU GO TO THE CONCEPT PLAN? THAT PROVIDES TH SETBACK AND PRIVACY. SO YOU KNO OUR ONLY, SO CURRENTLY THE NORTHEAST CORNER CONNECTS TO A PUBLIC STREET, ACU DRIVE AND THAT'S WHERE THE GATE WILL BE A THE POINT WHERE IT CONNECTS. W
[00:45:05]
HAVE NO INTENTION OR DESIRE TO ENTER THE ALLEY THAT IS OF CONCERN. OUR RESIDENTS WILL HAVE NO PURPOSE FOR GOING BACK THERE. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE IS THE EMERGENCY EXIT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER WHICH WILL BE GATED FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES T COME THROUGH. SO WE WILL NOT BE ADDING TRAFFIC TO THE ALLEY THA IS OF CONCERN. SO THE QUESTION REALLY IS, THAT STRIP ALONG TH NORTHERN SIDE IS IT APPROPRIAT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY PATIO SMALL LOT HOUSES. THAT'S THE QUESTIO WE HAVE FOR YOU TODAY. THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC. IF YOU DENY THE REQUEST FOR SINGLE-FAMILY, THIS FACILITY CAN GO IN AS PLANNED WITHOUT THE SINGLE-FAMILY. THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE WILL BE THERE MINUS THE NINE COTTAGES. SO THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC , THAT IS NOT QUESTION FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TODAY, THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE AND A GOOD USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE AREA. ANY QUESTIONS I CANANSWER? >> CLARIFY ONE MORE TIME SO I UNDERSTAND. LOOKING AT THE MAP THEY SEE THE SAME THING WE ARE SEEING? ON HIS SCREEN. ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE THAT IS ACU
DRIVE. >> THE NORTHEAST CORNER.
>> THE ROAD UP AND DOWN THE PAG ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.
>> ACU DRIVE NO LONGER EXISTS EXCEPT IN THE LITTLE, CAN YOU G TO THE BURIAL. OKAY. IT IS CLOSED TO THE POINT WHERE IT
ENTERS THE ACU PROPERTY. >> IT DOES NOT GO SOUTH IT GOE
SOUTH ONTO AMBLER . >> ACTUALLY IT JUST AS STANCHIONS TO KEEP YOU FROM DRIVING DOWN. THERE IS A BARRIER. ACU DRIVE WAS CLOSED THROUGH TWO AMBLER IN 2015 OR 16 OR 14. SO SO, RIGHT THERE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, ACU DRIVE . ACU DRIVE HAS A DEAD END WHERE YOU HIT THE HASH
PROPERTY. >> GO BACK TO THE CONCEPT PLAN SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO ROA GOING SOUTH SO NOW THE ROAD GOING EAST TO WEST, WHERE DOES THAT GO?
>> THAT COULD EXIT OUT TO JUDGE ELY. THERE IS, ACU DRIVE NO LONGER EXISTS SO AS YOU LOOK HERE AND YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THERE IS THE EASEMENT GOING THROUGH BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL LOTS THAT FRONT ON AMBLER AND THIS PROPERTY SO THERE WILL BE A DRIVE THAT EXISTS BEHIND THE .
DIFFERENT MANNER. THE ONLY WAY TO GET IN THE DEVELOPMENT IS TH
ONE ENTRANCE OFF OF JUDGE ELY? >> NO. YOU WILL BE OLD ENTER FROM THE SOUTH COMING UP BETWEE COMMERCIAL DRIVES OR FROM THE
EAST TO WEST. >> THERE IS A ENTRANCE OFF OF
AMBLER. >> YES THERE IS AN EXISTING DRIVE BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL THAT CONNECTS BACK TO THAT STRIP . SO RIGHT THERE IN THE UPPER RIGHT THAT WOULD BE THE NORTHEAST CORNER. THERE IS GOING TO BE A GATE THAT WILL BE GATED. THE RESIDENCE ALONG THE ALLEY WILL BE OVERCOME THROUGH
BUT NOBODY ELSE. >> ANYBODY WHO LIVES WITHIN TH GATED COMMUNITY WOULD BE ABLE TO GO THAT WAY OR THEY WOULD B ABLE TO COME SOUTH AND GO EAST THROUGH THE OTHER EXIT.
>> IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER THAT IS ONLY THE EMERGENCY.
>> THAT IS LEFT PURELY FOR FIR AND UTILITY CIRCULATION SO IT IS POSSIBLE AND WE SHOWED THE PLAN WE MAY SLIDE HOUSES FURTHER TO THE SOUTH OR FURTHE SOUTH YES. SLIGHTLY SO WE CAN MAKE THAT A PRIVATE STREET THROUGH THERE. WE HAVE NOT
[00:50:01]
DECIDED WHETHER OR WHAT WE WANT TO DO THAT IF WE MAKE IT A PRIVATE STREET WE WILL HAVE TO BUILD TO CITY REQUIREMENTS BUT THEN THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO PLANT THE LOTS AS STANDALONE AS OPPOSED TO A CONDO ASSOCIATION. WE ARE TRYING TO GO TO THE DESIGN ELEMENTS RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT WOULD PROVIDE AEMERGENCY CIRCULATION. >> THE CONCEPT PRESENTED IN 2014 OR 2015 WHERE THE HOUSE O THE FURTHEST WEST SIDE BASICALLY THE ROAD RATHER THAN TYING TO ACU DRIVE TIED OVER T
JUDGE ELY. >> SEVERAL ROADS PASSED THROUGH
. >> THIS ROAD ON THE FAR NORTH SIDE KIND OF WHEN IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED AS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN THAT CONCEPT THIS ROAD BASICALLY KEPT EXTENDING OUT EAST UNTIL IT HIT JUDGE ELY. AND THEN BEHIND THE LAST HOUSE ON THE FAR WEST BASICALL WAS A BIGGER CEMENT PLOT THAT ALLOWED A FULL CIRCULAR TURNAROUND FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS BEHIND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
>> YES THAT IS WHEN IT WAS CONTEMPLATED TO BE COMMERCIAL.
OR ACU DRIVE WHICH IS HOW THEY GET TO THE SUBDIVISION. JUST
FOR CLARIFICATION. >> I DON'T SEE THE PLAN.
>> IT IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN THE PACKET.
>> I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE DESIGN PLAN WAS IN 2016 WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED, BUT THAT'S WHEN THIS WAS CONTEMPLATED TO BE A COMMERCIAL FULLY COMMERCIAL CONCEPT AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO SCALE BACK TO RETIREMENT.
>> I AGREE THAT THE SINGLE-FAMILY TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION. IS MORE APPROPRIATE BUFFER THAN TRYING, BUT I CAN ALSO UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION WITH THE LACK OF A SOLID FENCE AND ATTACHING INTO AN EXISTING ALLEYWAY WHEN THERE HAVE BEEN CONCEPTS PRESENTED TO THIS GROU IN THE PAST THAT HAD NO TOUCH OF THE ALLEYWAY WHATSOEVER. SO THAT IS WHERE I'M TRYING TO BALANCE IN MY HEAD. I AGREE TRAFFIC IS AN ISSUE AND PROBLEM, BUT TODAY'S HEARING I ABOUT LAND USE AND WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE USE OF
THE LAND. >> WE WANT TO COME BACK UNDERSTAFFED CONDITION AND ADDRESS THE REMOVAL OF THE WALL AND THE NO ACCESS ISSUE. THERE WERE TWO COMPETING ORDINANCES ONE WHEN THEY ABANDONED ACU DRIVE AND CAME BACK AND DID THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THEY DID NOT COME TOGETHER AT THAT TIME THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AT THAT TIME. IT NEEDS TO BE
CLEANED UP. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> THANK YOU, APPRECIATE IT. >> MR. WATSON?
>>, BUT TO THE MIC SO WE CAN HEAR YOUR. FOR ALL THE MILLION
OF FANS ON TV. >> I AM TIM WATSON FROM CLOVERLEAF LANE. MARGARET STREET WHICH WAS ABANDONED IN THAT TIME WHEN THEY BANDED ACU DRIVE AND ALL THAT MARGARET CAME OFF OF ROUNDTREE ON THE WEST SIDE CAME ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND IT WAS PROPOSED T GO THAT FAR. AND COVER THAT WHICH WOULD'VE GAINED A DIFFERENT ENTRANCE AND EXIT SINCE IT WAS ALL CHANGED. GOIN TO BE MADE ANOTHER WAY. THAT DOESN'T EXIST, BUT SOMETHING I DIDN'T MENTION IS UTILITY IN THE AREA AND STUFF AND EVERYTHING IS SUPPOSED TO BE PU UNDER GROUND. IT NEVER WAS AND THERE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT I HAVE FORGOTTEN BECAUSE I CAN'T MAKE NOTES OF EVERYTHING. BUT THERE IS A LOT OF ISSUES SO I WANTED
TO MENTION THOSE. >> THANK YOU.
>> YES OR. >> ALL DUE RESPECT TO COUNCIL.
THEY CAN MOVE THE HOUSES FURTHER DOWN AND THAT WOULD BE FINE. HOWEVER, IF YOU'RE COMIN IN FROM THE EAST TO THE SUBDIVISION YOU HAVE GOT TO TURN ON A SHORT STREET, MAKE A TURN INTO THE SUBDIVISION OR KEEP GOING STRAIGHT INTO OUR
[00:55:03]
ALLEY. I DON'T CARE IF THEY PU A GATE UP , I DON'T CARE IF THE PUT A 40 FOOT FENCE UP, THEY START TO GO BY THE ALLEY TO GE INTO THEIR ALLEY IF THEY BUILD IT. THERE IS STILL GOING TO BE TRAFFIC JAM UNLESS YOU BUILD A MAJOR INTERSECTION TO HANDLE AL OF THIS AND AS YOU ALL SET, ACU DRIVE IS CLOSED. THE GOING TO REOPEN TO GET TO THEIR PIECE O LAND? I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT I A POINT, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO WITH IT IT HAS TO HAVE TWO ALLEYS IN A SMALL DISTANCE. THANK YOU.>> YES SIR. >> ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSIT 1600 CAMPUS COURT. I HAVE SOME HISTORY ON THIS SO MAYBE THAT WILL BE HELPFUL. I WAS HOPING YOU WOULD BE EASIER TO GO TO TH TECHNICAL PIECES WITH THE ATTORNEY. THIS IS A PLAN, SOMETHING WE TRIED TO CREATE AS THE MOST CONSERVATIVE PLAN.
THERE ARE WAYS WE CAN POTENTIALLY BACK OFF. TWO THINGS I'VE HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THE MEETING MOS COMMONLY IS THE CONCERN ABOUT THE ALLEY WHICH IS WHY WE TRY TO CREATE THIS SUCH THAT THERE CAN BE ENTRANCE AND EXIT OUT OF ACU DRIVE , BUT THERE IS NO AC DRIVE, THAT WOULD BE NOT REOPENED AS ACU DRIVE THAT WOULD BE A PRIVATE DRIVE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS COMMUNITY. SO INGRESS OR EGRES OUT OF THE STREET THE OLD ACU DRIVE IS THE WAY WE ANTICIPATE PEOPLE GOING IN AND OUT. WE DID LEAVE THE ONE AREA UP ABOVE FOR THAT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER BUT WE CAN ALSO SHOOT IT STRAIGHT OUT TO JUDGE ELY. DOES NOT HELP THE TRAFFIC THAT WE CAN SHOOT IT OUT THAT WAY A OPPOSED TO GOING UP TO THE NORTHEAST. OUR CONCERN AS WE EXPRESSED AT THE MEETING WAS EMERGENCY EGRESS , INGRESS AND EGRESS. THOSE ARE CERTAINLY CHANGES WE CAN MAKE AND THAT W CAN LOOK AT. SO WE DON'T THINK IT IS DESIRABLE FOR OUR FOLKS TO HAVE TO GO TO THE ALLEY EITHER. NUMBER TWO , AS IT CAM BACK TO US, THE CITY SAID IF WE MAKE THE CHANGE IT CAN BE SCREENED WITH TREES. THE INTENT IS TO PUT A FENCE BACK THERE. IF WE NEED TO PUT A SOLID FENCE WE CAN DO THAT. I IS STILL RESIDENTIAL WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE SOMETHING AS NICE AS POSSIBLE AND A SOLID FENCE IS NOT ALWAYS AS NICE AS SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE SEE THAT COULD USE WROUGHT IRON OR OTHER THINGS. BUT IF THAT IS THE ISSUE WE CAN DO IT. WE DON' THINK IT WILL BE AS NICE BUT THAT'S FINE. OUR RESIDENTS WILL HAVE LANDSCAPING TO COVER THEI SIDE OF THAT. THOSE ISSUES AR SOMETHING THAT AGAIN YOU ARE SEEING THE MOST CONSERVATIVE LOOK AT THIS, NOT ULTIMATELY WHERE WE WILL PROBABLY GO WIT ALL OF THESE ISSUES AND CAME OUT OF ULTIMATELY WHAT THE CIT RECOMMENDED. THE FINAL POINT BEING RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC AND ALL THE ISSUES WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THERE IS ALREADY THE ABILITY FOR US TO BUILD MOST OF THIS AND A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS. IF WE DID GO BACK TO THAT, THEN ALL OF THE ORIGINAL PLANS AND REGULATIONS WOULD GO BACK INTO EFFECT.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY ELSE? SEEING NO ON I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING I GUESS THERE ARE MULTIPLE THINGS HERE. FIRST OFF, IN LIGHT OF THIS ORDINANCE. DID THIS ORDINANCE GET OVERWRITTEN BY SOMETHING ? OR IT IS STILL
IN EFFECT? >> THAT ORDINANCE IS STILL IN EFFECT, THAT'S THE EXISTING ABANDONMENT ORDINANCE FOUR MARKET STREET AND A COUPLE OTHER ALLEYS.
>> SO BY SAYING A BUFFER WITH THAT OVERRIDE THIS?
>> NOT NECESSARILY THE TYPE A BUFFER WOULD BE IN PLACE ADDITIONAL TO IT. OUR CONDITION IS TO COME BACK AND AMEND THAT PARTICULAR ORDINANC AS WELL.
[01:00:06]
PROPONENT WHO WANTS TO BUILD TH DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE IT TO B SOLID AND THE ORDINANCE EXISTS SAY FOR THE SOLID WALL WHY WOULD WE LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT? SO WE CAN HAVE EMERGENCY ACCESS OR SO THE PROPONENT COULD HAVE AN EMERGENCY ACCESS TO THE NORTHWEST THE NONACCESS EASEMENT SOLID WALL . MOSTLY BECAUSE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS ON THAT ABANDONMENT ORDINANCE REQUIRES THE NON-ACCESSEASEMENT. >> NON-ACCESS EASEMENT PRIMARILY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICL ACCESS TO THIS?
>> I BELIEVE SO, YES. WHEN THE LOT WAS PLATTED THE NONACCESS WAS NOT PLACED THERE BUT THEY WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN THE NONACCESS AND NOT USE IT AS ACCESS, BUT CLEAN IT UP. BY
AMENDING THE ORDINANCE. >> THAT'S WHY YOU WANT TO GET RID OF THE ACCESS SO YOU HAVE EGRESS EMERGENCY ACCESS.
>> YES. >> OKAY I'VE GOT A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT THE QUESTION THAT IS BEFORE US IS , TO ME IT IS THREE-PART QUESTION. ONE IS AND MAYBE I AM INTERJECTING, THE FIRST PART IS IT ACCEPTABL TO PUT RS SIX ZONING IN THIS P BECAUSE IT'S NOT THERE ORIGINALLY THAT'S THE FIRST
QUESTION. >> SINGLE-FAMILY YEARS.
>> YES INSIDE THE PD AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DISAGREE WITH THAT, WE THINK THAT IS GOOD USE OF THAT. AND IT IS APPROPRIATE TO PUT IN. THE THING I AM BACK TO IS IT'S ALWAYS THE THING , SAY THAT WE DO THAT BUT WHAT'S TO SAY THEY CAN'T TAKE THE PLAN AND DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH IT? THEY CAN SAY LET'S MOVE THE MULTI FAMILY ALL THE WAY BACK AND PUT THE RS SIX SOMEWHERE ELSE AND THAT WAS MY QUESTION AROUND IS THE CONCEPTPLAN IN THE PD AND WILL THIS CONCEPT PLAN REPLACE THAT PLAN IN THE PD? OR IS THE PD WHAT I'VE GOT EARLIER WAS THE PD IS WIDE OPEN WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT WHEREVER WE WANT. I DON'T THINK IT IS THAT WAY BUT MAYBE IT IS.
>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE BOUND BY THE CONCEPT PLAN, IT COULD VARY A LITTLE BIT IN THIS CONCEPT PLAN . THE LDC GIVES US A WAY TO JUST A LITTLE BIT, MAINLY WITHIN 10 OR 15% OF DWELLING UNITS WERE BETWEEN TH CONCEPT PLAN AND WHAT THEY ARE
PROPOSING. >> IN GENERAL THE CONCEPT WE'RE GOING TO ADD RS SIX, PUT IT T THE NORTH WITH THIS BUFFER WITH MULTIFAMILY I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PLAN HONESTLY. IF YOU HAD WHAT YOU WANT TO DO THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO DO. SO I THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS IF IT HAPPENS THIS WAY.
>> CORRECT BEFORE THEY COULD PROPOSE ANOTHER DIFFERENT TYPE OF USE THEY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE CONCEPT PLAN TO MEET THE
NEW PROPOSED USE. >> OKAY SO AND I WILL GO BACK OKAY SO THIS ITEM 3 IS REALL SOMETHING THAT'S NOT FOR THE
COMMISSION. >> IT IS A RECOMMENDATION , WE ARE RECOMMENDING THEY WOULD AMEND THE TERMS OF ORDINANCE 22 ON 2014. WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY AMEND TH
TERMS OF ORDINANCE 22, 2014. >> BUT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING
WE ARE APPROVING. >> WE ARE RECOMMENDING THEY
[01:05:03]
WOULD COME IN WITHIN THREE MONTHS TO ATTEMPT TO AMENDTHAT. >> WOULD THE AMENDMENT HAVE TO COME BEFORE US? MAYBE THESE GUYS HAVE IT, I AM WAY OFF SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT W ARE DOING.
>> IN THE IDEAL WORLD THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE FOR THE THOROUGHFARE I MEAN FOR THE ABANDONMENT AGREEMENT AND WITH THE ABANDONED CONDITION TO BE MODIFIED AT THE SAME TIME THE PLAT SO LOOKING AT THE PLAT YOU WOULD HAVE ALL THE SPECIFIC DIMENSIONS ON THE PLAT DOCUMEN AND YOU RUN THE PLAT AND THE MODIFICATION FOR THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT LANGUAGE AT THE SAME TIME. SO YOU CAN SEE IT ALL BETTER. RIGHT NOW THE CONCEPT PLAN IS SOMETHING TO YOUR IMAGINATION A LITTLE BIT. THERE ARE DEFINITELY ISSUES WIT THE GEOMETRY OF JUDGE ELY , SOME GOOD POINTS I THINK THE PLAT WOULD HELP TO RESOLVE THOSE. YOU ALSO HEARD ACU SA THEY HAVE SOME OTHER OPTIONS THAT THEY COULD CONSIDER REGARDING ACCESS. I DON'T REALLY WANT TO HOLD THIS DISCUSSION UP BECAUSE THOSE AR OTHER ISSUES.
>> THAT'S MY POINT, MY POINT I ADDING RS SIX TO THE PD ON THI CONCEPT PLAN IS GOOD I'M NOT SURE I AGREE WITH ABANDONING NONACCESS AGREEMENT AND GETTIN AWAY FROM THE FENCE IN THIS
AGREEMENT. >> YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO NECESSARILY ABANDON THE ORIGINA ALLEY ABANDONMENT LANGUAGE OR WHERE IT SAYS THERE IS NONACCESS EASEMENT OR NONACCES REQUIREMENT YOU CAN SAY NONACCESS EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY
VEHICLES. >> IF WE DON'T, IF WE LEAVE THE NONACCESS AGREEMENT IN PLAC IT FORCES THEM TO TAKE THE TRAFFIC SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND IT DOES NOT ALLOW THEM TO COME IN THROUGH A GATE OVER THERE I DON'T THINK.
>> I WILL PUT ON MY FIREMAN SAT FOR A MINUTE AND FIREMAN LIKE MULTIPLE WAYS TO GET TO AND FRO AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.
>> UNDERSTAND BUT THEY HAVE A NONACCESS AGREEMENT IN PLACE.
>> THE PLAN YOU ALL HAD , THE PLAN FROM 2015 THROUGH 2016 HA A ROAD FROM JUDGE ELY THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO TURN AROUND WITHOUT TOUCHING THEIR ENTRANCE OR THEIR ALLEY. THAT WAS PROVIDED SO THAT IS WHAT I THINK CLINT IS TRYING TO GET AT THE FENCE WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT LANDSCAPING THE CITY OWNS THAT. THAT IS NOT OWNED BY ACU SO THE CITY OWNS THAT'S OF THE CITY WILL CONTROL HOW THAT ENTRANCE GETS IN AND THEY WILL CONTROL HOW IT COMES IN HERE. S YOU KNOW I'M NOT SURE, I THINK THE CONCEPT PLAN IS A GOOD PLAN NOT SURE I AGREE WITH THE NONACCESS AGREEMENT AND I THIN THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THEY CAN
DO. >> THANK YOU FOR GOOD POINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND YOU HEAR THE EXPLANATION FROM THE UNIVERSITY AND THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS THEY MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS WE WILL CONTINUE THIS 30 DAYS COME BACK IN OCTOBER AND LET THEM WORK TOGETHER TO SEE WHAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH. I AM WITH YOU IT IS A VERY GOOD SITE PLAN, IF THIS IS APPROVED THE CONCEPT PLAN GOVERNS SO THEY COULD COM BACK WITH RETAIL BUT THIS IS STILL THE CONTROLLING DOCUMENT FOR THIS ENTIRE PORTION OF THE PD. SO YOU HAVE THAT PROTECTIO , THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS THAT PROTECTION BUT IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE THE USE THEY CAN BUT THAT GOES BACK BEFORE THE GROUP
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. >> HERE IS WHERE I AM, AS MR CHAIRMAN WHERE I AM AT, I THOUGHT WE WERE BEING ASKED TO AMEND THE TERMS OF PD 157 TO ALLOW RS SIX.
>> WE ARE. >> WE ARE NOT BEING ASKED TO
GET RID OF THE ORDINANCE. >> WE ARE NOT THAT'S WHY WE
HAVE CONDITION . >> TO ME, CONDITION OF THE THREE IS ADDRESSING THE ORDINANCE.
>> IT IS THE CONFLICT THE PROBLEM IS IF WE APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN YOU APPROVE IT LIKE YOU CAN SEE NOW THE APPROVAL WOULD BE IN CONFLICT WITH THAT ORDINANCE. THAT'S
[01:10:05]
WHY I'M SAYING IF IT'S POSSIBL THEY COULD GET THAT APPLICATIO TO ABANDON TO GO BACK TO THE ALLEY EASEMENT LANGUAGE TOGETHER AND BRING IT TOGETHER WITH THIS. SO WE CAN SEE IT ALIN TOTALITY. >> DOES THE ORDINANCE DOING SOMETHING WITH THE ORDINANCE DOES IT COME TO THE PLANNING AN ZONING OR GO STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL?
>> WE TAKE IT TO YOU. YOU HAVE DONE SEVERAL CLOSURES AND OTHE
THINGS. >> THE SAME THING THAT GOES WIT THIS. SO LOOK AT IT IN ITS TOTALITY, THIS PIECE WITH THE ALLEY PIECED TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE THE TWO THINGS WORK TOGETHER AS ONE AND NOT HAVE DIFFERENT THINGS.
>> DO YOU SEE MY QUESTION? >> YES WHY NOT HAVE THEM BOTH AND THE RE-PLAT , IT WOULD BE GOOD TO SEE IT AFTER THIS
ABANDONMENT AS WELL. >> LIKE I AM SAYING IN THE IDEA WORLD ALL THREE SHOULD BE ON THE HEELS OF EACH OTHER OR TOGETHER. WE CAN DEFINITELY GE THE EASEMENT LANGUAGE AND THE P ON THE SAME PAGE AND THE PLAT CAN COME IN. I DON'T THINK THE ARE AT THE STAGE OF COMING IN WITH A PLAT BY NEXT MONTH.
THAT'S PROBABLY AT LEAST TWO MONTHS AWAY AT THE EARLIEST.
FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD. SPEAKING WITH ADMIN ABOUT IT.
THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO AT LEAST GET THIS PD AND THE ALLE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE. LOOKING AT A STAT PERSPECTIVE WE HAVE A BIGGER BUFFER AND TREES, USUALLY IT'S THREE FEET TALL. WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD GIVE THEM THE PRIVACY , BUT IF THEY WANT A FENCE THEN THAT IS THEIR PREFERENCE, THEN IT WOUL MEAN I WOULD HAVE GO BACK AND DO AS MUCH SURGERY TO THE ACCES
EASEMENT AS WE ARE THINKING. >> AGAIN I WANT TO HEAR FROM TH REST OF YOU AND I AM BACK AND FORTH HERE, WHAT IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH ABANDONING THE ACCES EASEMENT? GIVE US JUST A
SECOND. >> OUR COMPANY , BUT I AM CONFUSED WHAT ARE WE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON TODAY.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.
>> IN A NUTSHELL ON THE USE A YOUR CHAIRMAN HAS SAID SEVERAL TIMES THAT BASICALLY THE BASIC ISSUE. SHOOTING A FAMILY BE ALLOWED IN THIS PD WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN AS SHOWN WHERE IT PLACES ON THE PROPERTY WITH A SINGLE FAMILY NEEDS TO GO. SO THAT'S ONE OF TWO THINGS. ON THE USE OF SINGLE FAMILY AND TH CONCEPT PLAN AND CONDITION ONE AND TWO SPEAK TO THE POINT AN THE REASON WHY WE HAD NUMBER THREE IS BECAUSE IF YOU APPROV IT THAT WAY THIS LANGUAGE WOUL NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH ANOTHER ACTION CITY COUNCIL HAS TAKEN TO ABANDON THE BACK ALLEY SO THERE WOULD BE INCONSISTENCY O WHICH THING PREVAILS AND GENERALLY YOU DON'T LIKE TO HAV CONFLICTING ORDINANCES.
>> I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THOS IN CONFLICT CONSIDERING THEY HAVE SHOWN OTHER PLANS OF ACCESSING IT WASN'T FOR RESIDENTIAL IT WAS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES BUT THEY HAVE SHOWN WAYS WHERE THAT'S NO IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE IT WAS DEVELOPED IN SUCH A WAY TO ALLOW FIREMEN AND POLICE TO GET BACK THERE SO I FEEL LIKE THERE IS A WORLD WHERE WE CAN APPROVE SINGLE-FAMILY AS POTENTIAL USE AND NOT NECESSARILY TOUCH THE EASEMENT WITHOUT I MEAN THAT'S POSSIBLE
>> GIVE US A MINUTE. >> SO THERE IS THE EXISTING P THAT INITIALLY HAS THE CONCEPT PLAN AS PART OF THE PD AND THE ARE ASKING TO ADD IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY. SO THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE HAVING WITH THE LAYOUT OF THE CONCEPT PLAN AND HOW IT LINES UP WITH EVERYTHING SO, ONE OPTION THAT I SEE IS
[01:15:01]
TO AMEND THE PD WITHOUT THIS ADDITIONAL CONCEPT PLAN WHICH ONLY APPLIES TO PART OF THE ENTIRE PD. AND THEN THE RULES THAT APPLY TO THAT PD COULD BE LOOKED AT SEPARATELY WHETHER THEY WANT TO DEDICATE A NEW ALLEY OR LOOK AT CHANGING THE ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING. ORDINANCES IF IT HAS BEEN RE- PLAT THE ORDINANCE IS IN EFFECT AND THERE MAY BE A DIFFERENT SOLUTION BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE CONCEPT PLAN AS SUBMITTED IS CAUSING THE TROUBLE AND IT IS TO PLAY JUST ON PART OF THE PD IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO AMEND THE PD TO AMEND THAT UNLESS WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CONCEPT PLAN. I KNOW THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET THE ENTIRE PLAN IT MAY B THAT IT MIGHT NEED TO BE LABELED RS SIX OR SOMETHING. AND IT MIGHT BE THAT YOU WOULD TABLE TO DO IT THAT WAY BUT THAT IS ONE OPTION BECAUSE THIS CONCEPT PLAN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT FOR THE ENTIRE PD, THE CONCEPT PLAN EXISTS FOR TH ENTIRE PD, THIS CONCEPT PLAN IS ONLY ADDED TO ONE PORTION OF THE PD. I THINK IT'S KIND OFTRIPPING THINGS UP A LITTLE BIT >> CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? IT WILL HELP CLARIFY THIS. OKAY. THE EASEMENT THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT SAYS THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS CAN THAT STAND ON IT OWN AND ALLOW EMERGENCY PERSONNEL AS NEEDED TO HAVE ACCESS? WOULD WE NOT HAVE TO CHANGE THINGS TO GO BACK THERE IF IT IS A GATED SPACE GOING TO BE USED BY THESE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS SECTION IT WOULD STILL BE A NON-ACCESS AGREEMENT ONLY ALLOWING PERSONNEL. I'M NOT SURE , BUT CLARIFICATION.
>> I DON'T KNOW I AM PREPARED T ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.
>> I THINK A 30 DAY CONTINUANC WILL ANSWER SOME OF THE LITTLE QUESTIONS MIGHT NOT BE A BAD WAY TO PURSUE THE FUTURE WITH
THIS. >> I WOULD RECOMMEND TABLING TH CASE UNTIL OCTOBER SO STAFF CA WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO WORK OUT THE KINKS THAT THEY ARE FOUND DURING THIS PROCESS.
>> ONE OTHER THING THAT IS A PROBLEM WITH THE OTHER ENTRANCE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES THAT ARE TO CLOSE TOGETHER SO THE CITY OWN THE OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY. SO THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ISSUES
TRYING TO MAKE IT ALL WORK. >> I AGREE I FOUND IT CONFUSING I DO NOT SEE THE ORDINANCE AS BEING TIED , IF IT WAS ME AND I LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL BACKING UP TO ME AS OPPOSED TO APARTMENT COMPLEX FO WHOEVER, THAT MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME THAN A COMMERCIAL LOT, HOWEVER THEM NOT WANTING THEI ROAD , WITH ACU DRIVE HAVING BEEN ABANDONED IT IS A ROAD THAT ONLY EXISTS TO GET TO THE SUBDIVISION AND THEM NOT WANTING THE ROAD TO BE AN ENTRANCE TO A FACILITY I SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE WHEN THE ROAD WAS ABANDONED AND WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED AND A FENC WAS STATED TO BE THERE. SO THAT'S WHERE MY BRAIN IS NOT GETTING IT.
>> WE ARE HUNG UP ON THE NO ACCESS AGREEMENT.
>> I UNDERSTAND. SO LET ME OPE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN AND THEN HEAR FROM THESE GUYS UNLESS YOU WANT TO CONTINUE. I WILL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> ACU IS WILLING TO STIPULATE TO THE FENCE, AGREE TO MAINTAIN THE FENCE BACK THERE. SO THEY ARE FINE WITH THAT. I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOUR SIT PLAN FROM THE CONCEPT , THAT INCLUDED A 60 FOOT COMMERCIAL SETBACK. SO THAT 60 FEET GAVE ENOUGH SPACE TO HAVE THE HAMMERHEAD TO TURN AROUND. NOW YOU HAVE DONE AWAY WITH 60 FEET BY ALLOWING US TO PUT SINGLE-FAMILY AND THERE IS NO LONGER ENOUGH ROOM TO PUT A HAMMERHEAD IN FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND WHICH IS WHY THEY NEED THAT NORTHWES CORNER TO EXIT. SO YOU KNOW W DON'T NEED IT FROM A DEVELOPMEN STANDPOINT AND USE STANDPOINT, WE THINK THAT IS SOMETHING CIT FIRE MARSHAL WILL REQUIRE, THAT THEY HAVE THE CIRCULATION THROUGH THERE. THAT'S THE SOLE
[01:20:05]
REASON FOR GETTING INTO THE NONACCESS ISSUE.>> THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RESIDENTS HAVING GATE AXIS
VERSUS ONLY FIRE. >> THE NORTHWEST CORNER WILL
SOLELY BE FOR FIRE. >> I'M SAYING THE NORTHEAST
CORNER SHOULD BE FOR FIRE. >> THAT PORTION IS STILL A PUBLIC ROAD SO YOU REFERRED TO IT AS THEIR ROAD, THE CITY OWNS AND MAINTAINS THAT ROAD. IT IS THE CITY'S ROAD SO THE CITY INCLUDING ACU IS ENTITLED TO USE AND CONNECT TO THE ROAD. IT DOES NOT ALONG TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ROAD HAS NOT BEEN ABANDONED AND IS NOT THEI PROPERTY. TO SAY IT IS THEIR ROAD, ALL TEXT DOLLARS PAY FOR THE MAINTENANCE ON THE ROAD. NO JUST THERE'S. SO THAT NORTHEAS CORNER IS LEGITIMATE ACCESS ASSUMING THAT THE PLANT WORKS OUT AND CAN MEET THE PLANT REQUIREMENTS BUT THE NORTHWEST CORNER REALLY THAT'S WHERE WE ARE ACCESSING THE NO ACCESS EASEMENT, THE NORTHEAST CORNER WE ARE NOT IN THE NO ACCESS EASEMENT. SO , BUT AFTER DISCUSSING ACU WILL STIPULATE TO MAINTAINING THE FENCE ALONG THAT SIDE IN ADDITION TO THE CLASS A BUFFER.
>> OKAY THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE MA'AM YES. IF YOU GOT SOMETHING YOU CAN COME HERE AND TALK TO ME. YES MA'AM,.. YES
MA'AM. >> 'S SOME OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT YO KNOW ABOUT I DON'T. IS A SINGL FAMILY HOME CONSIDERED A THREE-STORY DEVELOPER?
>> NO HE'S ARE INDEPENDENT THINGS. WHEN YOU ARE SAYING TH THREE-STORY COMPLEX THAT IS MULTI-FAMILY. MULTI FAMILY IS ALREADY ALLOWED IN THIS PD. WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED IS SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR, THEY ARE ASKING TO COME IN AND MODIFY THE PD T ALLOW SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE BACKING UP TO THE SUBDIVISION. THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR WHICH WE ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT IS A GOOD THING TO HAVE. MUCH BETTER THAN HAVING THE COMMERCIAL BACKING.
>> THE WHOLE THING WAS CONSIDERED SINGLE-FAMILY , I SORT OF FIGURED THAT OUT AND IT DID NOT WORK. THANK YOU.
>> TIM WATSON I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. COUNTRY MEADOWS WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT . OVER THE YEARS UNDERSTAND IT EXPIRED AT A CERTAIN POINT AN NOW WE HAVE WHERE PEOPLE CAN EITHER RENT THEM AND THEY CAN HAVE FOUR, FIVE, SIX COLLEGE STUDENTS LIVING IN IT WITH FOUR, FIVE OR SIX CARS PLUS THEIR GIRLFRIEND, BOYFRIEND OR VISITORS. IF THIS IS AND WE ARE OKAY THAT IS GOOD SINGLE-FAMILY BEHIND US. CAN WE GO BACK AND GET OUR SINGLE-FAMILY REQUIREMENT FOR THE AREA SO WE CAN GET RID OF RENTAL PROPERTIES?
>> I DON'T KNOW , THAT'S A DIFFERENT TIME FOR A DIFFERENT
DISCUSSION. >> RIGHT, I KNOW IT IS. THIS I
WHAT COMES UP. >> I'M SURE YOU'RE SUBDIVISION IS STILL DESIGNATED AS PATIO HOME.
>> BRIGHT, PATIO HOME SINGLE-FAMILY LIVING IS WHAT I USED TO BE. I'M NOT A LAWYER O ANYTHING AND I DON'T KNOW ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT I HAVE HAD PEOPLE SAY WHEN THINGS GO TO THE RENTAL PROPERTY THEY REALLY WISH THEY WOULD'VE NEVER GONE. I HAD NOT BOUGHT THAT MUCH REAL ESTATE IN MY LIFE.
THAT'S WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH. I USED TO LIVE AT EAST NORTH 13TH AND THOSE AREAS AND WE DEALT WITH THE RENTAL PROPERTIES AND GARAGE PROPERTIES AND ALL THE PARKING . MORE AND MORE COULD GO, THANK YOU. THAT IS WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT AND SOMETHIN ELSE THEY HAVE ALWAYS SAID THEY PUT A SPECIAL FINISH OUT O
[01:25:05]
JUDGE ELY WHERE CLOVERLEAF CAM OUT TO CONNECT TO THE NEW JUDGE ELY AND THEY WOULD DO SOMETHIN ABOUT THE ALLEYS AND THAT'S WHERE THIS STUFF IS COMING TOGETHER. IT IS A MESS AND THAT'S NOT FINISHED OUT AND THERE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SIDEWALKS GOING ALL THE WAY COMPLETELY FROM I- 20 ALL THE WAY TO SOUTH THE 11TH BE ABLE TO ACCESS BY CONCRETE SIDEWALK OR SOMETHING. YOU CAN ALMOST D THAT EXCEPT WHEN YOU COME IF YOU ARE ON A POWER CHAIR OR SOMETHING AND COME TO THE BANK AREA YOU GO INTO THE DITCH THA DRAINS ACU GOING DOWN RAINEYCREEK. >> YES SIR AND ALL OF THOSE ARE SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE NEED TO BE DISCUSSING TODAY.
>> ALL RIGHT, THERE IS A LOT O UNFINISHED BUSINESS THAT HAS
TAKEN OVER 10 YEARS. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK WITH A MODIFIED PLAN. THAT SHOWS A POTENTIAL ALTERNATE ACCESS NOT USING ACU DRIVE AND PRESENT TO YOU. TO TABLE THE CONDITION UNTIL THE OCTOBER MEETING GO AHEAD AND GIVE US THE RS SIX APPROVAL WITHIN THE PD, JUST AMEND THE PD TO GRANT RS SIX BECAUSE THAT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO GO FORWARD WITH ENGAGING PLANNERS AND DESIGNERS AND ARCHITECTS AND ALL THAT STUFF WE NEED TO DO. WHILE WE COME BACK AND PRESENT A SEPARAT , HOW WE DEAL WITH IT THE
NONACCESS ISSUE. >> CAN WE DO THAT?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE. IT IS NOT ON THE SCREEN AS PART OF THE POWERPOINT, BUT MY ONLY THOUGHT IS TO MAKE SURE THE CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN THAT'S PART OF TH CURRENT PD , MAKE SURE THAT R SIX DOES NOT NEED TO BE DESIGNATED ON THAT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE, I THINK IT WOULD WORK , BUT WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCE.
>> WE ARE ONLY RECOMMENDING BOARD. SO NOTHING CAN HAPPEN UNTIL IT GOES TO THE COUNCIL. S I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN WE COULD
SAY THAT. >> WE CAN TAKE A RECESS AND I COULD TAKE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE I CANNOT ANSWER THE QUESTION WITHOUT HAVING A CHANC TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL PD AGAIN
AND LOOK AT THE CONCEPT PLAN. >> IF IT GOES THE WAY THEY SAID, THEN I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING RS SIX
WITHOUT A CONCEPT PLAN. >> RIGHT, THERE IS A CONCEPT PLAN PART OF THE PD ALREADY. WHAT I AM SAYING IS I'M NOT SUR IF THE AREA NEEDS TO BE, LIKE TYPICALLY PD CONCEPT PLANS WILL HAVE LIKE THIS COLOR IS WHATEVER THE ZONING IS, THIS COLOR IS THIS AND I CAN REMEMBER HOW THIS LOOKS.
>> WE WOULD BE FINE IF YOU DESIGNATED THE NORTHERN STRIP AND IT'S NOT JUST RS SIX, IT WOULD BE PATIO HOME AND RS SIX WOULD BE THE DENSE OR THE LARGEST.
>> IF WE SAID AND I STILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SO LET'S
GO AHEAD. >> WE HAVE HEARD YOU ON THE ISSUE OF ACU DRIVE SO WE WANT TO GO BACK AND COME UP WITH THE EASTERN ACCESS THAT POTENTIALLY GOES OUT TO JUDGE ELY ADDRESSING THAT.
TO DO THAT. >> DURING THIS MEETING , I SUGGEST IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE BOARD THAT WE RESET .
>> LET'S HEAR FROM MR. NELSON AND I THINK WE ARE OKAY. OKAY QUESTION. DO YOU ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO OVERRIDE AN ORDINANCE
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL? >> WE ARE ONLY A RECOMMENDING BOARD, THAT IS PART OF THIS. WHAT WE WOULD BE VOTING ON HIS WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THE ORDINANCE BE OVERRIDDEN. IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE OVERWRITING THE ORDINANCE. SAME WITH THE ZONING CHANGE WE ARE ONLY RECOMMENDING
[01:30:01]
>> WE ONLY HAVE AUTHORITY OVER PLAT.
>> YOU CAN ALREADY ORDINANCE SO THE ORDINANCE IS IN PLACE UNTIL
COUNCIL OVERRIDES. >> WE MIGHT RECOMMEND. RIGHT
NOW . >> THEY CAN VOTE IT DOWN, TOO.
>> I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO I THINK AND I THINK THIS IS WITHIN OUR RECOMMENDATION. WE CAN RECOMMEND. MURRAY WHAT MR. MURRAY RECOMMENDED. WE CAN SAY THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THIS TRACK BE REZONED BE ALLOWED IN THE PD TO BE RS SIX. WITHIN OUR RIGHT WE CAN MAKE THAT
RECOMMENDATION. >> I BELIEVE SO BUT IN THE PAS I KNOW YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED CERTAIN WORDING OR CONDITIONS AND MADE MOTION AND SECOND VOTE AND THEN GO BACK AND DRAFT IT THE WAY YOU VOTED TO DRAFT IT.
>> RIGHT, THAT DOES NOT SAY WE ARE OKAY WITH TAKING OFF THE ORDINANCE PART. IT IS NOT OPEN UP THE WHOLE PD TO BE RS SIX, I WOULD LIMIT TO ALLOW THEM THE CHANCE TO GO DESIGN AND COME
BACK WITH ANOTHER CONCEPT. >> DO YOU NEED A RECESS TO
VERIFY? >> IF YOU WANT ME TO TAKE A MINUTE TO LOOK AT THE CONCEPT PLAN AS IT EXISTS I WOULD FEEL
BETTER ABOUT DOING THAT. >> YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT IF YO WOULD LIKE FOR US TO RECESS. DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH SAYING THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THIS TRACT BEING RS SIX IN THE PD ALLOWING RS SIX TO BE IN THE NORTHERN PORTION. YOU CAN WRIT
IT IN. >> I MAY BE MISSING SOMETHING I WOULD SAY IF WE CAN TAKE A FIVE OR 10 MINUTE RECESS AND LE ME LOOK AND SEE WHAT CONCERNS STAFF HAS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M GIVING A GOOD ANSWER.
>> OKAY. ALL I HAVE TO DO IS SAY WE WILL TAKE A 10 MINUTE RECESS? OKAY. DO WE NEED TO GO INTO?
>> NO , BUT YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT ANY OF THE BUSINESS JUST 10 MINUTE RECESS AND WE WILL COME BACK YOU NEED TO SAY ANYTHING OR CAN I PRESENT WHAT YOU TOLD ME?
>> I SPOKE TO YOU AND YOU CAN CONVEY.
>> WHAT KELLY SAID IS THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH THE RS SIX WITH TH FIRST TWO CONDITIONS. PUT THE CONDITIONS BACK UP THERE, DID THE FIRST TWO AND NOT THE THIRD AND THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN THAT JUST APPLIES TO THIS WES SIDE OF THE PD BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE CONCEPT PLAN THAT COVERS THE WHOLE PD. IT DOES NOT NEED TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE WORDING CHANGES TO TH ORDINANCE THAT ALLOW AS
PRESENTED THAT ALLOW RS SIX. >> WE CAN APPROVE RS SIX WITH THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS IN TH CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTED AND JUST NOT INCLUDE THE THIRD CONDITION.
>> THE SAME ORDINANCE THAT THEY WOULD BE NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE PRESENTED IN YOUR PACKET , THE DRAFT ORDINANCE OTHER THAN REMOVING THE THIRD CONDITION AND REMOVING THE CONCEPT PLAN. THAT WAS THE ADDITIONAL CONCEPT PLAN.
>> SO YOU ARE SAYING , PUT THE CONCEPT PLAN BACK UP PLEASE DO
THAT . >> THIS CONCEPT PLAN YOU WOULD NOT BE APPROVING BECAUSE IF YOU ARE SAYING YOU WANT TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO THE PD TODAY, THAT WOULD NOT CONFLICT IN ANY WAY WITH THE PREVIOUS ABANDONMENT ORDINANCE , THERE WAS CONCERN THIS MIGHT CONFLICT WITH THE PREVIOUS ABANDONMENT ORDINANCE AND THEN I UNDERSTAN THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT CHANGING THIS ANYWAY. SO IF YOU DON'T APPROVE THIS, YOU ALREAD HAVE A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE WHOLE PD THAT IS PART OF THE PD AND YOU ALREADY HAVE PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT WORKS AND DOES
NOT CONFLICT WITH ANYTHING. >> SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS W
[01:35:04]
CAN AGREE TO ADD RS SIX TO THE PD.>> CORRECT AS IT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE
CHANGE. >> CAN THE MOTION BE STRUCTURED TO MAKE THE STATEMENT WE ARE ADDING?
>> WE ARE NOT SAYING WHERE IT GOES INSIDE THE PD WE ARE JUST ALLOWING RS SIX IN THE PD. SO THE BUFFER STUFF DOES NOT NECESSARILY NEED TO BE THERE.
>> THAT IS UP TO YOU. IF YOU WANT TO PULL UP , I WOULD SUGGEST IF STAFF CAN PULL OF THE ORDINANCE THAT IS PART OF THE PACKET. THEN YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
>> THIS IS SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THE RS SIX IN ONE SPOT AND THAT'S WHY THE BUFFER IS IN . I GUESS MY POINT IS , I DON'T SEE WHY WE CAN'T APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN AS IT IS, THE JUST CANNOT PUT CONNECTORS IN W DON'T PROVIDE THREE AND WE ARE
NOT PUTTING THREE IN THERE. >> I WOULD ADD I DON'T KNOW WE NEED ITEM 2. LOOKS LIKE THEY WILL GO BACK ON SOME OF THOSE
THINGS. >> TECHNICALLY HAVE A SEVEN FOOT OPAQUE FENCE AS A TYPE-A BUFFER.
>> DOWNSIDE LET ME START WITH CONTINUATION. IF YOU FOLLOW THA ADVICE THEN WE WOULD HANDLE THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS INTO THE PLANNING PROCESS. THE DOWNSIDE OF FOLLOWING THROUGH THOSE PROCESSES IS THAT YOU WOULD LOSE YOUR ABILITY TO BE A PARTICIPANT IN THE EXACT DEFINITION OF DETAILS AND HOW THE CONCEPT PLAN WILL WORK OUT AND IT OVER TO THE LDC. SO WE DON'T HAVE AN MUCH POWER THROUG THE LDC AS WE DO THROUGH CITY COUNCIL AND TO THE PLANNING AN
ZONING COMMISSION. >> THAT'S WHY I LIKE THE CONCEPT PLAN. I LIKE APPROVING WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN.
>> I GUESS THE WHOLE ISSUE BECAME IF YOU APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN WITHOUT VISUALLY THEY HAVE NOT APPLIED
>> SO, IT WOULD JUST BE APPROVING THE CONCEPT PLAN WIT THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE FOR THE ABANDONMENT ORDINANCE AS IT READS YOU HAVE THE CONCEPT PLAN WITH THE DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE FENCED OFF. AND THE CONCEPT PLAN CAN BE CHANGED BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IF THEY ARE CHANGING THE CONCEPT PLAN MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK TO WHETHER THEY WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE WIT THE CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN AS PAR OF THE PD OR NOT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CONCEPT PLAN MAY CHANGE. THAT'S WHAT I
UNDERSTOOD. >> YES BUT AGAIN IN MY MIND TH CONCEPT PLAN CHANGED SLIGHTLY BUT IT IS STILL A CONCEPT PLAN SO THEY LOSE ONE HOUSE TO PUT A CIRCULAR DRIVE IN THERE BUT IT' NOT COMPLETELY WORKED OUT YET EITHER. IT IS STILL A CONCEPT.
TO NOT BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE ORDINANCE AND STILL STAY CLOSE
TO THE CONCEPT. >> YOU COULD DO THAT BECAUSE THE DRAFT ORDINANCE LABELS THE CONCEPT PLAN AS APPLYING ONLY TO PART OF THE WHOLE PD AND TH PD HAS THE LARGER CONCEPT PLAN
ALREADY AS PART OF THE PD. >> I WILL SAY AGAIN THE PLANNING STAFF THE RECOMMENDATION IS YOU TAKE 30 DAYS, LET THEM SEE WHAT THEY COME BACK WITH SO NEIGHBORS CAN SEE WHAT'S COMING IN AND HAVE YOU DELIBERATE AND MAKE YOUR OPINION ON THE SITE PLAN, TAKE THE SITE PLAN AS THE NEW CONCEPT PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCI TO ATTACH WHETHER THEY ARE LEAVING IT UP TO THE LDC BECAUSE THE ISSUES , THE CONCERNS ARE BIGGER THAN WHAT THE LDC IS DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE . WITH THE PLAN USE IT'S ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASON WHY YOU HAVE THE PD IN THE FIRS PLACE SO YOU CAN SEE FOR STATE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT AND WHAT YOU DON'T WANT, GET IT RIGHT TO
YOUR SATISFACTION. >> LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLI HEARING.
>> WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST IS , ONE OF TWO THINGS.
EITHER APPROVE AS SHOWN WITHOUT THE NORTHEAST CORNER .
IF I AM HEARING YOU CORRECTLY THAT CONGESTION OF THE NORTHEAS
[01:40:01]
CORNER IS OF MOST CONCERN. WE WILL THEN WORK ON OUR CONCEPT FOR EITHER MOVING FORWARD TO SHOW A DIFFERENT ACCESS TO THOS OR TABLE ALLOW US TO COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT PLAN. WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP MOVING THE PROCESS FORWARD. AS WE WERE VISITING IF WE CAN ADDRESS THE CONGESTION ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER AND HAVE ACCESS SOMEWHERE ELSE , I THINK WE STILL NEED THE CIRCULATION FOR THE EMERGENCY UTILITY SERVICE AND NORTHWEST CORNER BUT I THINK THERE MAY BE A WAY TO ADDRESS THE NORTHEAST ISSUE SATISFACTORY WHERE AT LEASTACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE. >> SO WHAT THE STAFF WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO TABLE THIS FO 30 DAYS, GET ALL OF THIS WORKE OUT AND BRING IT BACK THAT'S WHAT RANDY WAS SAYING. WE WOUL FILL, BUT DOING THAT, IF YOU ARE IN SOME KIND OF ISSUE HERE WHERE YOU NEED TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ON A TRUNCATED TIME SCHEDULE, THEN WE WOULD CONSIDER DOING SOMETHING SO WE COULD AT LEAST GET SOMETHING GOING INTO THE COUNCIL. BUT I THINK EVERYBODY'S PREFERENCE
WOULD BE TO TABLE FOR 30 DAYS. >> WE NEED TO KNOW IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH RS SIX OR IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO.
>> WE ARE ALL IN AGREEMENT WITH RS SIX.
>> IF WE GET THAT APPROVAL WE CAN ADDRESS THE ACCESS ISSUE BETWEEN NOW AND CITY COUNCIL .
>> NEXT TO CITY COUNCIL MEETIN , NOTHING IS REALLY DISCUSSED AND DECIDED AT THE FIRST MEETIN THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL ACTION WILL BE THE THIRD OF OCTOBER
>> SO YOU CAN APPROVE IT WIT THE CONDITIONS BASED ON THIS SITE PLAN AND IT BE REFINED, BE REFINED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO CIT COUNCIL CONSIDERING FOR AGENDA YOU CAN LET THE FIRST MEETING G BUT IF YOU WANT TO TAKE ACTION ON THE SECOND READING THAT WOUL BE THE TIMELINE, 30 DAYS WE MEET OR NEED TO HAVE IT ALL DONE 10 DAYS BEFORE . IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT READY IN TIME FO THE MEETING THEY CAN GO TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WE ARE SAYING WE WILL NOT TAKE ACTION. SO THEY CAN DO THE FIRST READING, AND DECIDE IF THEY ARE NOT READY OR IF THEY ARE READY FOR THE CONCEPT.
>> SO NOW MAYBE I AM BACK ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH KELLY WAS ON. IF WE JUST SAY RS SIX IS ACCEPTABLE IN PD 157 AND THAT' THE MOTION , THAT KIND OF TAKES THIS THING AND MOVES IT FORWARD. I MEAN THEY ARE STILL BLOCKED OFF WITH ACCESS EASEMENT THEY CANNOT GO ACROSS WITH A SEVEN FOOT FENCE THAT HA TO BE UP THERE. WE STILL HAVE THE SAME ACCESS ISSUES. I MEAN THE OTHER THING IT DOES IT OPEN UP RS SIX TO BE BUILT ANYWHERE IN THE PD RATHER THAN RIGHT THERE.
>> WE HAVE TO BRING THE SITE PLAN FORWARD. YOU CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATION NOT TO PROVE BU AS PART OF THE APPLICATION SPEAKING ABOUT AT THE STAFF REPORT, WE WILL AGREE TO TABLE
THIS. >> WE ARE TRYING TO PUSH IT FORWARD. YOU HAVE A GREAT PLAN WE ARE TRYING TO GET IT FORWARD
>> WE WANT TO GET SOME OF YOU APPROVE SO IT GOES FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION AND WE WANT TO SHOW THE NEIGHBORS WE ARE TRYIN TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERN BECAUS AT THE END OF THE DAY WHETHER WE ADDRESS NONACCESS ISSUE EASEMENT HERE OR IN A SEPARATE ZONING ACTION, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EMERGENCY SO WE WOULD AS SOON COME BACK IN 30 DAYS AND SHOW YOU A REFINED PLA THAT HOPEFULLY ADDRESSES SOME
OF THE CONCERNS. >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE
EVERYBODY'S PREFERENCE. >> WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SOME
[01:45:07]
THINGS. I THINK WE HAVE SOME IDEAS.>> I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC O CO HEARING. THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH US. I'M SORRY WE'VE TAKEN TWO HOURS TO GET TO THIS POINT THAT I THINK IT HAS BEEN A GOOD DISCUSSION. IT HAS EDUCATE US ON OTHER THINGS, THERE ARE OTHE THINGS THIS HAS POINTED OUT TO
US. >> MOTION TO TABLE THIS. I WILL MOTION TO TABLE. MOTION TO TABL AND SECOND?
>> WANT TO SECOND. VOICE VOTE OR DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE
>> NON-A POST. >> I THINK THAT'S THE AGENDA FO THE DAY. THANK YOU, APPRECIATE YOU ALL, THANK YOU ALL FOR STAYING WITH US. WE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.