May 11, 2021 Frisco - Planning and Zoning Commission

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES [NOISE] 6-0, ITEM 2 IS APPROVED WITH THE ADJUSTMENT.

ITEM 3, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING ON APRIL 27TH, 2021.

ANY COMMENTS ON THESE MINUTES, ANY CORRECTIONS, OR DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM 3?

>> SO MOVED.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COLBERG.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 6-0, ITEM 3 IS APPROVED.

ITEM 4, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON APRIL 27TH, 2021.

COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THESE MINUTES OR MOTION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 4.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOX.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 6-0, ITEM 4 IS APPROVED.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

CONSENT AGENDA, THIS IS ROUTINE AND NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS, ANY COMMISSIONER OR MEMBER MAKING SUCH REQUESTS PRIOR TO A MOTION TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEMS MAY CONSIDER ITEMS INDIVIDUALLY.

ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS MAY DO SO WITH THE MAJORITY APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSION.

WE HAVE ITEMS 5 THROUGH 18 THIS EVENING.

ARE THERE ANY THAT NEED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, OR DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEMS 5 THROUGH 18?

>> SEEING NONE, MOVE TO APPROVE ITEMS 5 THROUGH 18.

>> [NOISE] MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KENDALL.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? [NOISE] MOTION CARRIES 6-0, ITEMS 5 THROUGH 18 ARE APPROVED.

FOR THOSE WATCHING, THAT INCLUDES THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FOR THE ATB AT FRESH MARKETPLACE.

[NOISE] SO THAT'S PRETTY EXCITING FOR A LOT OF US HERE.

>> THANK YOU. ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US FROM SAN ANTONIO.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> IT LOOKS LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE DISCUSSED THAT ONE.

>> [LAUGHTER] THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A GOOD THING. ALL RIGHT.

TONIGHT, WE HAVE FIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE AGENDA,

[19. Public Hearing - Replat: Frisco Square, Block A, Lot 1R-1 (RP21-0009): Frisco Square, Block A, Lot 1R-1 (RP21-0009)]

[00:05:01]

AND I WANT TO REVIEW THE PROCESS.

EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS PRECEDED BY A STAFF INTRODUCTION OF REQUEST.

[NOISE] THE APPLICANT IS THEN PERMITTED 10 MINUTES TO MAKE HIS OR HER PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION.

FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF AND APPLICANT BY THE COMMISSION, THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK ARE WELCOME TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

ALL SPEAKERS, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT, NEED TO COMPLETE THE SPEAKERS CARD AND PROVIDE IT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

IF THERE ARE ORGANIZED GROUPS IN ATTENDANCE, WE SUGGEST THAT YOU SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO PRESENT YOUR POSITIONS.

PLEASE AVOID REPEATING WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS, OTHER THAN STATING THAT YOU AGREE WITH THEIR COMMENTS.

PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU ONLY HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, REPEAT APPEARANCES TO THE PODIUM ARE NOT PERMITTED.

AFTER ALL PERSONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER TESTIMONY WILL BE PERMITTED UNLESS THE CASE IS TABLED TO A FUTURE DATE AND THE COMMISSION INCLUDES IN THEIR MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO A FUTURE MEETING.

AFTER CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF OR THE APPLICANT.

PLEASE NOTE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ONLY MAKES A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ZONING CASES.

UNLESS THE COMMISSION DENIES THE CASE AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT APPEAL THE DENIAL, FINAL ACTION REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AS TO WHEN THE CASE WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

[NOISE] FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING IS ITEM 19, PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT, FRISCO SQUARE, BLOCK A, LOT 1R-1, RP21-0009.

FRISCO SQUARE BLOCK A, LOT 1R1, RP21-0009, OWNERS COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF PLANO SUBSIDIARY, LP AND HDA FORCE PART, LLC.

>> THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONERS, I AM CINDY JACKSON, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DIVISION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

>> WELCOME.

>> THANK YOU. THE PROJECT TONIGHT WAS SUBMITTED ON APRIL 12TH, 2021.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 30-DAY EXTENSION AS PERMITTED UNDER HOUSE BILL 3167, TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL TIME TO ADDRESS STAFFS REVIEW COMMENTS.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE OR DENY A ONE-TIME 30-DAY EXTENSION, AND THIS ITEM WILL THEN BE PLACED ON THE JUNE 8TH, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR EITHER APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL, DEPENDING ON THE APPLICANT'S ABILITY TO SATISFY ALL OUR STAFF'S COMMENTS.

SINCE THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL NEED TO BE CONTINUED AND THE ITEM TABLED TO THE JUNE 8TH, 2021 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACCEPT THE 30-DAY EXTENSION REQUEST, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND TABLE THE ITEM TO THE JUNE 8TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

>> ALL RIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 6-0, PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME?

>> I THINK WE COULD MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> I'M SORRY.

>> THAT'S OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SECOND COMMISSIONER COLBERG'S MOTION? OKAY. MOTION IS DENIED. DO I HAVE ANOTHER MOTION, COMMISSIONER COLBERG?

>> MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND CONTINUE FOR 30 DAYS.

>> SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE JUNE 8TH PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING?

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COLBERG.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KENDALL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 6-0, ITEM IS TABLED AND CONTINUED TO JUNE 8TH.

>> AYE [OVERLAPPING].

>> SORRY, I WASN'T PICKING ON COMMISSIONER COLBERG. [OVERLAPPING]

>> OH, I KNOW.

[20. Public Hearing - Replat & Final Plat: Tri J Survey, Block A, Lots 1 & 2 (RP21-0014)]

>> ITEM 20, PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT AND FINAL PLAT, TRI J SURVEY, BLOCK A, LOTS 1 AND 2, RP21-0014, OWNERS WILLIAM AND CARROLL [INAUDIBLE] , 2020 BENEFICIARY TRUST IN JOHN AND MELINDA FAULKER. I HOPE I SAID THOSE PROPERLY.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPLAT IS TO COMBINE SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS INTO TWO SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS.

THIS PROJECT WAS SUBMITTED ON APRIL 12TH, 2021.

THE APPLICANT DID NOT RESUBMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SCHEDULE.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND FOUND THAT IT FAILS TO MEET THE CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, ZONING ORDINANCE, ENGINEERING STANDARDS, AND OTHER APPLICABLE CODES.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL AND DISAPPROVAL FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

AT THIS TIME, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> YEAH. I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

HAS THIS HAS AN EXTENSION ON IT AT ALL, AND WE DON'T EXTENSION?

>> HAS IT BEEN REQUESTED?

JOHN, DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXTEND IT IF IT HASN'T BEEN REQUESTED?

[00:10:02]

>> NO, THEY HAVE TO REQUEST TO.

>> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW.

ARE THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? WOULD THEY CARE TO SPEAK? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KELLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR, OR AGAINST THIS ITEM THIS EVENING? SIR, WHY DON'T YOU COME.

>> HI.

>> HI. JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> JAN FOLKER, 3 STONEBRIAR WAY, NEXT DOOR TO THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

WE JUST PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND MOVED IN ON NOVEMBER 1ST OF THIS YEAR, MOVED FROM OUT OF STATE.

WE SPENT LOTS OF MONEY TO GET A BIG LOT, WHICH ALL THESE LOTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE VERY SPECIAL, AND ALL THESE LOTS ARE UNIQUE.

WE LOOKED AT LOTS AND LOTS OF HOUSES IN THE FRISCO AREA AND WE CHOSE STONEBRIAR CREEK BECAUSE WE ALL WANTED SPACE AND LAND.

THIS WOULD IMPACT US DRAMATICALLY, AND IMPACT OUR PROPERTY VALUES DRAMATICALLY IN A NEGATIVE WAY IF THIS WAS ALLOWED TO PASS SO STRONGLY OPPOSING THIS.

I'M NOT SURE EVEN HOW IT WOULD WORK FROM A DRAINAGE PERSPECTIVE IF THEY DID BREAK IT UP.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT SPEAKING FOR ALL OUR NEIGHBORS THAT ARE NOT HERE IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT, WE ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS WHATSOEVER, AND I CAN'T SEE ANY POSITIVE OUTCOME TO PROPERTY VALUES OR FRANKLY, THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THIS WERE TO PASS.

BUT PLEASE HAVE YOU CONSIDER VOTING AGAINST THIS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU. IF YOU COULD TAKE ONE OF THESE BLUE SPEAKER CARDS RIGHT THERE, RIGHT ON THE TOP OF THE PODIUM, AND FILL IT OUT AND HAND IT TO GAYLE OVER THERE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR, OR AGAINST THIS ITEM?

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

JUST TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS SIR, MY UNDERSTANDING ON THIS ONE IS ACTUALLY TAKING SEVEN LOTS AND CREATING TWO.

MAKING BIGGER LOTS, NOT SMALLER LOTS.

BUT THIS ITEM, IF IT COMES BACK UP IN FRONT OF US AGAIN, IT WOULD BE A NEW ITEM, SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND SPEAK AGAIN, OKAY? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR.

BECAUSE IT MORE LIKELY WILL GET DENIED TONIGHT UNLESS I HEAR SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM OUR FOLKS OVER HERE.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A DISAPPROVAL AND A DENIAL ON THIS DUE TO NOT HAVING A COMPLETE PLAT.

DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE, DISAPPROVE ITEM NUMBER 20 FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF'S REPORT AND DELEGATE STAFF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE REASONS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COLBERG.

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSE? ITEM 20 IS DISAPPROVED AND DENIED.

>> SIR, THANK YOU FOR COMING.

I'D RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO REACH OUT TO STAFF, THE CITY STAFF, AND ADVISE OF YOUR CONCERNS, AND SO THEY CAN GET INTO THE RECORD AS WELL WHEN THE NEW CASE COMES FORWARD.

>> WILL DO. THANK YOU

>> THANK YOU. ITEM 21 PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT,

[21. Public Hearing - Replat: Preston Ridge Addition, Block A, Lot 1 (RP21-0015)]

PRESTON RIDGE EDITION BLOCK A LOT 1 RP21-0015.

OWNERS; COLLIN COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT.

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.

THIS REPLAT, AS PRESENTED, CONFORMS TO THE SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN THAT WAS STAFF APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 24TH, 2021.

THE REPLAT PROPOSES TO REMOVE A PORTION OF A PRIVATE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT, A WATER EASEMENT AND FIRE LANE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN RED HERE, AND DEDICATE A NEW FIRE LANE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AND WATER EASEMENT TO SERVE THE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDITIONS AS SHOWN IN GREEN.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

>> THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE AND WOULD THEY CARE TO SPEAK? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> IT'S ALL MOVED.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CONE.

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD CARE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM THIS EVENING?

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COLBERG. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?

[00:15:03]

DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM?

>> VOTE TO APPROVE ITEM 21 IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN.

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

ZONING, MAIN STREET HOMES, Z21-0009.

ITEM 21 IS APPROVED.

ITEM 22 PUBLIC HEARING,

[22. Public Hearing - Zoning: Main Street Homes (Z21-0009)]

OWNERS; MAIN AND COIT HOME BUILDERS, LLC.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU ALL TONIGHT IS A REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY SHOWN HERE FROM AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE-FAMILY 7.

THIS REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH, AS WELL AS THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION OF BUSINESS PARK FOR THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST.

THE APPLICANT DID HOLD AN HOA MEETING IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.

WHILE STAFF WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE DURING THAT MEETING, THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THERE WAS ONE RESIDENT IN ATTENDANCE AND THAT RESIDENT VOICED GENERAL SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT.

THIS REQUEST IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AS WELL AS THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND YOU DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF TONIGHT FOR APPROVAL AS SINGLE-FAMILY 7.

WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE.

>> MY ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE, WHAT IS THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY 7?

>> THERE IS NOT AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY 7.

>> OKAY. THIS IS TOO SMALL TO DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON ANYMORE.

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> JONATHAN CAN I ASK A QUESTION?

>> SURE.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY SOMETHING YOU JUST SAID, THE LAND TO THE WEST OF THIS.

I THINK YOU SAID THAT IT WAS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, THAT IT WAS BUSINESS?

>> SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> IT IS SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

SORRY IF I SAID BUSINESS BUT YEAH, IT'S SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU.

>> SURE. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

>> COMMISSIONER KELLY, YOU HAD A QUESTION?

>> HAS MAIN STREET HOMES DEVELOPED ANYTHING ELSE IN FRISCO?

>> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

>> OKAY. I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THEY COME UP WITH.

>> ABSOLUTELY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? LET ME ASK THAT QUESTION.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? WOULD THEY CARE TO SPEAK? ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> IT'S ALL MOVED.

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 60.

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM THIS EVENING?

>> CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN.

>> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COLBERG. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ALL RIGHT.

THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, 11 ACRES, CERTAINLY, WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A LARGER TRACK OF LAND WITH US TO THE WEST SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT CONNECTIVITY IS THROUGH AND SO FORTH, BUT I THINK THIS IS THE BEST USE OF THIS LAND MYSELF IN TERMS OF 11 ACRE TRACK LIKE THIS.

I'M PERSONALLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, BUT I'LL OPEN IT UP TO ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.

>> I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE AS OF SEVEN ON THIS PIECE, JUST INTERESTED TO SEE THAT THE PRODUCT THAT THE BUILDER WILL BE BRINGING FORWARD.

>> I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE AGREED TO BUILDING STANDARDS TO BE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> THIS WILL BE ADHERING TO THE FIRST SCALE BUILDING STANDARDS, WHICH IS EXCELLENT.

MR. CONE, YOU LOOKED LIKE YOU HAD A QUESTION?

>> JUST TO FOLLOW WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

>> STAFF DID CONFIRM THAT IF THIS GETS APPROVED FOR SF7 AND IF THE LAND TO THE WEST WERE TO GET APPROVED FOR SF OR FOR SOME KIND OF RESIDENTIAL THAT THERE WOULD BE THE CONNECTIVITY ON THE ROADS GOING THROUGH, IT WON'T BE A DEAD END OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT'LL HAVE THE CONNECTIVITY YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT?

>> YEAH. I BELIEVE HASKELL HAS TO GO THROUGH BASED OFF THE THE PLAN HERE?

>> YES. WHEN THEY COME IN FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE'LL WORK WITH THEM TO ENSURE THAT THEY CONNECT TO HASKELL AND PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY TO THE WEST TO SET THAT UP FOR FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

>> THEY'LL HAVE TO HAVE A CONNECTIVITY THROUGH HASKELL AND THROUGH TO MAIN STREET, CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> EXCELLENT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? DO I HAVE A MOTION?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 22 AS RECOMMENDED BY IT'S STAFF.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINDLE,.

>> AGAIN.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COLBERT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> [OVERLAPPING] AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES, ITEM 22 IS APPROVED.

>> CONGRATULATIONS. ITEM 23,

[23. Public Hearing - Zoning Ordinance Amendment: Amendment to Zoning Ordinance (ZA20-0009)]

PUBLIC HEARING AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE, ZA 20-0009 OWNERS, CITY OF FRISCO.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 13TH, 2021, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINATES TO UPDATE COMMERCIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE STANDARDS.

THE CAUDAL PUBLIC HEARING WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSIONS WORK SESSION HELD ON NOVEMBER 10TH, 2020.

[00:20:02]

THE SEEMING I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH, FOUR OF THE MAIN CATEGORIES DISCUSSED BY THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION [NOISE] AND THEN HOW THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WERE DRAFTED TO ADDRESS THESE.

THE FIRST WAS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, PLACEMENT AND OVERALL PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE, THE COMMISSION SUPPORTED STANDARDS THAT REGULATE THE PLACEMENT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THIS EVENING PROHIBIT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT, SIDE OR REAR YARDS OF THE LOT.

THE COMMISSION ALSO SUPPORT A STANDARDS THAT REGULATE THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE FOR ACCESSORIES STRUCTURES, THIS EVENING STAFF IS PROPOSING TO ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO COVER A MAXIMUM OF 10 PERCENT OF THE LOT AREA.

THE NEXT CATEGORY IS FABRIC COLOR AND CORPORATE IDENTITY SIGNAGE, THE COMMISSION STATED THE PREFERENCE FOR FABRIC CANOPIES TO HAVE COMPLIMENTARY OR SOLID COLORS, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, DO PROPOSE A SOLID COLOR AND NO PATTERNS.

NEON AND FLUORESCENT COLORS ARE PROHIBITED AS PART OF THESE PROPOSED STANDARDS.

IN ADDITION, THE COMMISSION STATED [NOISE] THE CONCERN THAT FABRIC CANOPIES COULD BECOME SIGNAGE, AN ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITY.

NOTE THAT THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS PROHIBIT ANY TYPE OF SIGNAGE ON THE CANOPY IN THE INCIDENTS WHERE COLOR IS USED, THAT REPRESENTS THE BRAND, THAT IS CONSIDERED A CORPORATE IDENTITY, OUR ZONING ORDINANCE ALREADY ADDRESSES CORPORATE IDENTITIES AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVAL TO UTILIZE.

THE NEXT CATEGORY IS THE FABRIC CANOPY MINIMUM STANDARDS.

THE COMMISSION DID STATE THE PREFERENCE TO ADOPT MINIMUM STANDARDS, AND SOME OF THE SAMPLES I THINK ARE GOING AROUND THIS EVENING.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS DO PROVIDE STANDARDS FOR A MINIMUM 10-YEAR WARRANTY, COVERING FRAME, TEARING, FADING, AND DISCOVERING, A MINIMUM WIND LOAD OF 150 MILES PER HOUR, AND A MATERIAL CONSISTING OF VINYL, POLYESTER VINYL, AND OR ACRYLIC FABRIC.

LASTLY, THERE IS DISCUSSION ON COLUMN DESIGN AND PLACEMENT AND THE COMMISSION'S SUPPORT IS SPECIFYING COLUMN COLOR, THESE STANDARDS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, DO REQUIRE THAT THE COLUMNS BE PAINTED WHITE, BLACK, OR DARK BROWN.

IN ADDITION, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT COLUMN PLACEMENTS SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT HINDER VEHICLE DOORS, THESE AMENDMENTS DO PROPOSE THAT THE COLUMNS BE PLACED SO AS NOT TO IMPEDE THE OPEN-ENDED VEHICLE DOOR AND TO PREVENT COLUMNS FROM EXTENDING INTO THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF A PARKING SPACE.

WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THIS EVENING OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS AS IN THE PACKET AS TYPICAL, RED AND STRIKE THROUGH ARE THE DELETIONS AND BOLDED BLUE ARE THE ADDITIONS.

WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

>> YEAH. WE TALKED ABOUT 150 MILE AN HOUR WIND RESISTANT, I'M LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF THESE PARTICULAR VENDORS AND THEY HAVE DIFFERENT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS, THEY HAD BRAKING FORCE, TEARING AND STRENGTH, AND SO FORTH.

HOW DOES THAT COMPARATIVELY SPEAK WITH THESE? WHAT'S THE RIGHT MEASUREMENT BASED OFF HOW THE INDUSTRY MEASURES THIS?

>> THE 150 MILES PER HOUR IS AN OVERALL STRUCTURAL SUPPORT.

NOT JUST THE FABRIC, IT'S THE WHOLE STRUCTURE.

THIS IS A STANDARD THAT THE PARKS HAS USED IN THEIR REQUIREMENTS AND WE WORKED WITH PARKS FOR WHAT THEY USE IN THEIR PARKS AND THIS IS A STANDARD THAT THEY HAVE USED FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

>> OKAY. SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S KNOWN AND PROBABLY WHY MR. WHEELAND'S HERE.

[LAUGHTER] SPENDING ANOTHER TUESDAY EVENING HERE IN CHAMBERS.

THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

COVERAGE IS 10 PERCENT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. COVERAGE IS 10 PERCENT.

>> WHEN WE HAD I THINK WAS THE HONDA OR THE AUTOMATION DEAL, WHERE THEY WANTED TO PUT THE ENTIRE BACK OF THE PARKING LOT, COVERED THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. YOU'RE REFERENCING A ZONING REQUEST PREVIOUS, I THINK IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE WAS PROPOSED TO HAVE CANOPIES ON IT, THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.

JUST SO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON HOW STAFF CAME TO 10 PERCENT, WE EVALUATED ALL THE DIFFERENT SITES THAT ARE CURRENTLY USING BOTH METAL AND FABRIC CANOPIES,

[00:25:01]

THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE THAT WE FOUND WAS, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THIS CAR WASH, THIS WAS ALSO PRESENTED DURING THE WORK SESSION AND IT CAME OUT TO 15 PERCENT, AND AS YOU CAN SEE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF COVERAGE ONSITE.

WE REALLY FELT THE 10 PERCENT MAXIMUM STILL ALLOW FLEXIBILITY TO PROVIDE THESE FOR EITHER USERS OR IN THIS CASE, WITH A CAR WASH, WE'VE GOT THE VACUUM BAYS AND SO FORTH.

HOWEVER, WOULDN'T TAKE OVER THE SITE AND THAT'S WHERE THAT 10 PERCENT MAXIMUM CAME FROM.

>> I WANT TO LET WHEN YOU FINISH.

>> NO, I'M GOING TO HOLD MY COMMENT ON THE 10 PERCENT UNTIL I HEAR FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

>> NOT WITH [INAUDIBLE] 10 PERCENT, BUT I HAD A QUESTION, IS THERE ANY THE RIGHT VERBIAGE RULING ON OUR SOLAR PANELS ALLOWED ON TOP OF THESE, OR THEY'RE ALL NOT ALLOWED, OR IS IT JUST BY PROJECT? [OVERLAPPING] THE SOLAR PANELS LIKE IN THIS CAR WASH, COULD THEY PUT SOLAR PANELS ON THAT OR IS THAT IMPACTFUL IN ANY WAY?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A RESTRICTION AGAINST THAT.

>> THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PUT SOLAR PANELS, BUT ONLY IF THEY WANTED TO.

WE HAVE PEOPLE INQUIRING ABOUT IT, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY STANDARDS TO RESTRICT IT OR ENCOURAGED IT.

IT'S TOTALLY UP TO THE [OVERLAPPING] PROPERTY OWNER IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

>> IT'S NOT A RESTRICTION.

>> COMMISSIONER CONE, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAD A QUESTION.

>> RIGHT, OKAY.

>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE 10 PERCENT THAT CHAIRMAN COX WAS TALKING ABOUT, IS THERE A MECHANISM IN PLACE FOR AN APPLICANT TO REQUEST WAIVE THAT OR TO EXCEED THAT, AND IS THERE JUST A MECHANISM IN PLACE WHICH IS IT ABSOLUTE 10 PERCENT?

>> THERE'S NOT A MECHANISM PROVIDED WITH THESE STANDARDS THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO INCREASE ABOVE THE 10 PERCENT.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> MR. KELLY, YOU HAD A QUESTION?

>> IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, BUT I RECALL THE CONVERSATION PRETTY CLEARLY.

I THINK YOU'VE CAPTURED EVERYTHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. NICE JOB.

>> I THINK THIS IS VERY WORKABLE AND I LIKE WHAT YOU'VE GOT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS AT THIS TIME?

>> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING].

>> GO AHEAD.

>> MS. COLBERG.

>> I'D LIKE TO SECOND WHAT COMMISSIONER KELLY SAID.

I HAVE NEVER FELT MORE UNDERSTOOD OR LISTENED TO BETTER.

WHEN I GET HOME I WILL [LAUGHTER] TELL MY HUSBAND.

[LAUGHTER] REALLY YOU ALL DID AN EXCELLENT JOB WITH THIS IN A LOT OF HIGH DETAIL AND I'M SUPER IMPRESSED.

>> THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING]

>> I THINK IT'S ANOTHER ADDITION TO THE EXCELLENT STANDARDS THAT WE PUT HERE, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT IN THE END.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME ON THAT.

>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS.

>> THANK YOU, ANTHONY AND STAFF.

I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.

ONE OF THE ITEMS WE TALKED ABOUT AND YOU SEE IT IN THIS PICTURE HERE IS BRICKS AROUND FORMER POST.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN, THE WAY I READ IT THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT? [OVERLAPPING]

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> [OVERLAPPING] IT'S GOT FOUR DIFFERENT COLORS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THE INSTANCE OF BRICK IS ONLY REQUIRED IF IT IS A WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE, LIKE A [INAUDIBLE] OR SOMETHING THAT YOU'D PROBABLY SEE MORE AND IN AN OPEN SPACE AREA AND THAT'S TO HELP PREVENT ROTTING SO YOU DON'T WANT THE WOOD POLE COMING ALL THE WAY DOWN.

WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE CANOPY STRUCTURES, THE MASONRY IS NOT REQUIRED, THAT BRICK OR STONE IS NOT REQUIRED ON THE COLUMN.

IT CAN BE EXPOSED CONCRETE OR STEEL PAINTED ONE OF THOSE COLORS.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT AND THEN TO JUST EXPAND ON YOUR ANSWER TO COMMISSIONER COHEN REGARDING THE ABILITY TO GO OVER 10 PERCENT, DOES THAT WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WITH COUNCIL FINAL APPROVAL HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPROVE OVER 10 PERCENT, OR WOULD THAT BE SET IN THE ORDINATES IF MADE PART OF THE ORDINATES?

>> WELL, TO APPROVE EVERY 10 PERCENT, YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF MECHANISM TO ALLOW FOR WITHIN THESE STANDARDS. [OVERLAPPING].

>> YOU HAVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OR IT'S THE ONLY MECHANISM.

>> RIGHT, AND THEN I WOULD SUGGEST SOME TYPE OF CRITERIA OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE GUIDANCE TO STAFF AS TO WHAT SITUATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT ACCEPTABLE VERSUS NOT.

>> REASON I'M STRUGGLING IS I ACTUALLY FREQUENT THIS BUSINESS THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. I WAS THERE TWO DAYS AGO.

WHILE IT'S OVER 10 PERCENT, IT'S ACTUALLY A PLEASANT BUSINESS AND IT'S VERY NICELY DONE.

THE BRICK SURROUND ADDS QUITE A BIT OF AESTHETICS TO THE STRUCTURES AND THIS IS A CAR WASH.

THEY NEED THESE STRUCTURES [OVERLAPPING] AND TO SERVE THE PUBLIC.

I THINK GREAT WORK, GREAT RESPONSE TO WHAT WE SAID.

[00:30:01]

I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE 10 PERCENT GIVEN THIS AS AN EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE OVER 10 PERCENT AND NOT BEING A MECHANISM TO GO OVER THAT, AND THE BRICKS AROUND AND MAYBE THAT'S A COMPENSATING FACTOR THAT CAN BE PART OF A MECHANISM TO DO OVER 10 PERCENT.

[OVERLAPPING] OTHER THOUGHTS.

>> I THINK I'D LIKE TO GET PUBLIC INPUT IF WE HAVEN'T AND THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THIS BECAUSE I DO THINK THIS IS THE DISCUSSION POINT FOR TODAY.

IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH THAT OR IF YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE CAN ASK MORE QUESTIONS UP PUBLIC INPUT.

>> I HAVE ONE MORE CLARIFYING QUESTION CHAIR.

>> GO FOR IT.

>> ANTHONY ON THE COLORS THE WAY I READ IT AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING THE SAMPLES BECAUSE SEVERAL OF US ARE VISUAL LEARNERS.

[LAUGHTER] I AGREE WITH YOUR DECISION TO THE COMPLIMENTARY.

I THINK THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, SO THANKS FOR THINKING THROUGH THAT.

BUT IS THERE ANY MECHANISM TO USE THAT TERM AGAIN, TO ENSURE IF THEY CHOOSE A COLOR, [OVERLAPPING] LOUD OR CLASHES.

>> OFFENSIVE.

>> THERE'S OPINION THERE.

COLOR IS OPINION. THERE'S A CULTURE PIECE TO THAT AS WELL, WHICH IS GREAT.

THAT'S WHY WE LIVE IN THIS CITY HAS GREAT CULTURE.

BUT YOU DON'T WANT THINGS TO STAND OUT, AND THAT'S A REALLY HARD THING TO WRITE IN AN ORDINANCE.

>> SURE, ABSOLUTELY.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY EXAMPLES OF SOMETHING, ONE OF YOUR WORDS WAS LOUD.

>> I THOUGHT WE ADDRESSED THAT CONCERN BECAUSE WE ELIMINATED STRIPES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT'S THE SOLID COLORS.

[OVERLAPPING] WE'RE NOT PUTTING ICE PALETTES ARE PRETTY MUCH ACCEPTABLE.

>> JUST TO THAT MORE RATHER WORK SESSION BACK IN NOVEMBER, WE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME ON THEM AND THAT'S WHY THE COLORS ARE MENTIONED BASED ON THAT WORK SESSION WITH THE COMMISSION.

>> TO YOUR POINT, THAT CAN'T PUT A BIG SIGN EITHER ON THE STRUCTURE OR AS PART OF THE STRUCTURE THAT SAYS, HEADS AUTOS.

>> I SUSPECT THAT WITH A LOT OF THE COLOR, IF IT IS NOT A MORE NEUTRAL TONE OF GRAY, OR BLACK, OR BLUE WILL BE IN THE FORM OF A CORPORATE IDENTITY.

I SUSPECT THAT IF YOU'RE WORKING WITH A COMPANY AND THEY DO TEND TO BE USING MORE LOUD COLORS, SOMETHING LIKE A BRIGHT RED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT CORPORATE IDENTITY PROTECTION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD COME INTO PLAY WHERE THEY'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS AND RECEIVE A SPECIAL APPROVAL TO DO THAT.

I WOULD SUSPECT WE'LL SEE SOME OF THAT AS WELL.

>> A DOUBLE MOTION OPEN TO BUCKING.

>> YOUR BOOK TOKEN BUCKING.

>> MOTION BY MR. MORGAN.

>> SECOND BUCKING CHECK OVER ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES SIX-ITEM.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM HERE THIS EVENING SEEING NONE?

>> MOTION BY MR. KELLY.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COHEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES [INAUDIBLE] PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY.

I THINK 10 PERCENT IS LESS THAN THE OPEN SPACE THAT WE'RE HAVING AN ANALOG OF THESE PROJECTS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S ENOUGH BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S ENOUGH LATITUDE.

THE GOAL BEHIND THIS WAS NOT TO COVER THE BACK PARKING LOT OF AN AUTO-PLACE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT YET PROVIDE IF AN AUDIENCE OR RIGHT PLACE TO LET PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF THEIR CARS AS WELL AS OVER SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE.

I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADJUST FOR THAT.

MY QUESTION FOR JOHN IS, IS THERE A WAY TO WRITE THE ORDINANCE TO HAVE A STANDARD? I THINK A STANDARD NEEDS TO BE MORE THAN 10 PERCENT.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE 15 PERCENT OF 20, AND THEN HAVE ANY DEVIATION OF THAT AT THE APPROVAL OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

SINCE THIS IS SOMETHING NEW, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE HAVING IT [INAUDIBLE] STAFF CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION TO INCREASE SO BECAUSE ONE OF THE STANDARDS, SO IT GETS VERY ARBITRARY.

SO IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT COMMISSION WANTS TO RECOMMEND INCREASING PERCENTAGE, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT.

THEN SINCE WE'RE DONE WITH ALL OTHER AUDIENCES IF WE FIND THAT IT NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED,

[00:35:05]

WAIT FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS AND SEE IF IT NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED UPWARD OR DOWNWARD OR LEFT THE SAME.

>> HOW MANY OF THE SITES THAT WE LOOKED AT WERE ABOVE 10 PERCENT?

>>THIS WAS THE ONLY SITE THAT IS ABOVE.

AGAIN, THIS IS MAINLY DUE TO THE LOT SIZE.

YOU'RE DEALING WITH A SMALLER LOT.

LIKE THE FIRST GO FLIERS EDITION, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT STARTED THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION OF FABRIC CANOPIES.

THIS IS ABOUT 2 PERCENT OF THE SITE.

ACTUALLY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN 2 PERCENT.

>>YES IT COULD BE BECAUSE WE DON'T ALLOW THIS.

[LAUGHTER] IT'S NOT PART OF OUR ORDINANCE [OVERLAPPING]

>> EVEN LOOKING AT OTHER LARGE PROJECTS I CALL OFFICE PARK FOR INSTANCE.

THEY WERE LESS THAN 5 PERCENT.

[OVERLAPPING] HOW PARKS CENTENNIAL MEDICAL CENTER, THERE CANOPIES COVERED LESS THAN 5 PERCENT OF THE SITE.

>> ANTHONY ON OTHER CAR WASHERS, WHAT WERE THEY?

>> THEY WERE AT ABOUT 10.

THE OTHER ONE WE LOOKED AT ON PRESTON.

THERE WERE TWO ON PRECEDENT WE LOOKED AT, BOTH WERE ABOUT 10 PERCENT.

>> WE HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS HERE.

I KNOW COMMISSIONER KENDALL WAS FIRST.

>> YES. MY UNDERSTANDING, I'VE HEARD SAYING IS THERE A MECHANISM TO INCREASE IT? IN MY OPINION, I THINK THERE'S ALREADY ONE IN PLACE THAT'S UP HERE.

IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN THE SIGN ORDINANCES.

WE HAVE A VERY STRINGENT [INAUDIBLE] ORDINANCE THAT MAKES THE CITY GREAT, AND THE MECHANISM TO CHANGE THAT IS GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

>> THEY HAVE ASSIGNED VARIANCE PROCESS.

>> PROCESS. BUT I FELT IF SOMEONE CAME WITH A 12 OR 13 PERCENT SCREENING THAT THEY WANTED, THEY WOULD COME UP AND ASK FOR OUR VARIANCE.

>> THEY CAN'T. >> THAT'S WHAT JOHN IS SAYING, THEY CAN'T ASK FOR A VARIANCE.

>> WELL, NOT A VARIANCE, BUT I MEAN, IT'LL BE RECOMMEND FOR STAFF DENIAL, AS US, WE COULD STILL APPROVE IT.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A WAIVER CRITERIA TO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO BE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS.

WITH A SIGN VARIANCE, THERE'S FOUR CRITERIA THAT STAFF HE USES TO EVALUATE IT, AND THE COMMISSION NEITHER AGREES OR DISAGREES WITH THAT.

BUT TO ARBITRARILY, I THINK YOU'RE GOING DOWN A DANGEROUS ROAD BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CRITERIA.

SO IF IT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER, JUST LIKE ON THE SUNBURNS, WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE USED TO EVALUATE IT? YOU COULD TABLE THIS FOR A MONTH OR TWO AND GIVE US YOUR THOUGHTS WHAT SHOULD BE FACTORED IN, BUT I WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE IT JUST, HEY, CAN I MAKE A REQUEST BECAUSE I CAN SEE SOMEBODY SAID YOU GRANTED IT OVER HERE, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?

>> DO YOU HAVE A FOLLOW-UP?

>> WELL, I GUESS WITH THAT SAID, IF YOU'VE SAID WE ONLY HAD ONE, TWO AND ALL OF THE FRISCO THAT'S GONE ABOVE THE 10 PERCENT AND MAJORITY ARE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THAT THREE AND EIGHT PERCENT, IT SEEMS LIKE 10 IS A PRETTY FAIR NUMBER.

>> THIS HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED.

THOSE PEOPLE ARE DOING AND HAVE BROKEN OUR ORDINANCES TO BEGIN WITH SO THAT MIGHT BE THE REASON.

>> [INAUDIBLE] AUDIENCE THOUGH HAD BEEN ALLOWED, WE'VE ALWAYS HAD.

>> [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING]. THERE'S FACTOR THERE TOO.

COMMISSIONER KELLY HAD A COMMENT?

>> YEAH. IT'S ALMOST LIKE IF YOU WANTED TO PUT SOME CLAUSE IN THERE FOR HOW YOU WOULD APPROVE A VARIANCE WOULD BE PRETTY DIFFICULT TO DO IT TONIGHT.

SO MY THOUGHT IS WHERE JOHN WAS RECOMMENDING THAT WE GO WITH EITHER 10 OR 15 PERCENT, I'D BE HAPPY WITH EITHER ONE AND GIVE IT A COUPLE OF YEARS AND REVISIT IT, I THINK YOU SUGGESTED.

NORMALLY THESE THINGS TAKE THREE YEARS TO WORK THEIR WAY UP AND THEN WE TAKE THAT APPROACH.

SO I WOULD BE HAPPY WITH EIGHT OR 10 OR 15, WHICHEVER THE COMMISSION WANTS TO.

>> I PERSONALLY THINK HAVING A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN THE ORDINANCE, 15 PERCENT GIVES A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR DESIGN AND SO FORTH.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF IT, I JUST THINK THAT IT COULD BE BENEFICIAL.

SOME SOLUTIONS THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY USE TODAY THAT COULD DECREASE CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND SO FORTH.

I JUST WANT A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY PERSONALLY IN THIS, BUT THAT'S JUST AN OPINION.

I'M NOT LOADED UNLESS YOU GUYS TIE.

>> FROM A VARIANCE PROCESS, WHAT'S YOUR OPINION ON CREATING SOME SORT OF VARIANCE PROCESS MECHANISMS WITHIN THIS?

>> I DON'T WANT TO OVER-ENGINEER THIS AT THIS POINT.

I THINK IF THERE IS A LOT OF INKS OVER IT AND WE NEEDED THE VARIANCE PROCESS, WE COULD BRING THAT FORWARD AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE AT THE TIME THAT'S REQUIRED.

[00:40:03]

QUITE FRANKLY, WE HAVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A VARIANCE PROCESS.

BUT I THINK I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO RESTRICTIVE FROM A ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVE TOO TIGHT ON FLEXIBILITY FOR CAR WASHES LIKE THIS AND OTHER THINGS.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. I LIKE TO GET MORE OPTION TO DEVELOPER.

BUT YET, WE KNOW WHAT WE DON'T WANT, WHICH IS A SEA OF CANOPIES.

I THINK 15 PERCENT, IT WOULD VIOLATE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH BY KEEPING THE SEA OF CANOPIES OUT MYSELF, BUT A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY, PERSONALLY.

>> I'D AGREE. I FREQUENT THIS LOCATION AND I DON'T FEEL IT'S OVERBUILT WITH CANOPIES, THE ONE IN FRONT OF US.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THE 15 PERCENT.

JUST ASK, MY REQUEST OF STAFF IS, IF YOU'RE GETTING SOME DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND SAYING THIS IS OVERLY RESTRICTIVE, JUST PLEASE BRING THOSE COMMENTS BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND THEN SEE IF IT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER INSERTING A VARIANCE PROCESS.

IT WOULD NOT BE EASY BECAUSE WE WANT TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO STAFF, AS JOHN MENTIONED, SO YOU KNOW WHEN TO PUT UP THE YIELD SIGN APPROPRIATELY.

>> FAIR ENOUGH.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION.

>> COMMISSIONER CORLBURG.

>> JOHN, WITH THIS, THEN GO TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IF SOMEBODY HAD GOTTEN DENIED AND WE'LL SAVE THIS CAR WASH NEEDED 17 PERCENT.

IS THAT THEIR NEXT STEP?

>> IN THEORY, NO. BECAUSE THAT'S A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP, AND SO THAT'S NOT WORTHY OF A VARIANCE.

BUT AS A THING DAVID WAS MENTIONING, AFTER ABOUT THREE YEARS, WE GOT A GOOD IDEA IF IT'S WORKING OR NOT.

IF SOMEBODY IS INQUIRING ABOUT SOMETHING WRONG, IT MIGHT BE THE LAST ONE, WE'RE GOING TO HOLD TO THE ORDINANCE.

I LIKE TO GET A FEW CASES OUT THERE TO SEE IF IT'S JUST ONE PERSON.

WRITING AN ORDINANCE JUST FOR ONE PERSON, I DON'T RECOMMEND THAT.

LET'S SEE IF THERE'S A TREND THERE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE THE CASE, BECAUSE AS ROB POINTED OUT, THERE'S A COST FOR DOING THIS, AND THE ONLY PLACE I'LL SEE THAT HAPPENING IS PROBABLY ON LARGER PROJECTS, NOT ON SMALL ONES.

>> JOHN, IF IT WAS A LARGER PROJECT, IT COULD BE A PD AND HAVE ITS OWN REQUIREMENTS.

>> I THINK WE DIFFER.

> WELL, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE USE OF PD AS A STAFF MADE.

A PD IS NOT TO BE USED TO CIRCUMVENT THE ORDINANCE.

IT'S SOMETHING TO BE CONSIDERED IN AN OVERALL PROJECT.

BUT IF IT'S THE ONLY THING THEY'RE REQUESTING A PD FOR, WE'LL NOT BE SUPPORTIVE.

>> BUT IT WOULDN'T BE, WE WOULDN'T BE A PD JUST FOR THIS FOR SURE.

>> QUITE FOR STAFF?

>> STAFF, AS YOU'RE RECOMMENDING 10 PERCENT, IF WE WERE TO FAIL TONIGHT THAT IT'S 15 PERCENT, WOULD YOU WANT US TO GO WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE EXCEPTION CHANGING TO 15 PERCENT OR WOULD YOU WANT US TO TABLE IT FOR YOU TO DIGEST IT MORE?

>> I MUST SAY IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT 15 PERCENT, MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION TONIGHT.

>> BUT I WAS WONDERING WITH STAFF GO, WE WOULD LIKE TO REALLY THINK THIS THROUGH.

>> NO. I THINK THAT'S FINE.

>> I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S AN ARBITRARY NUMBER, BUT IT'S A NUMBER.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> IT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF SCIENCE BEHIND THAT PROBABLY OTHER THAN LOOKING AT THE PROJECTS THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE.

WE DIDN'T GO DOWN TO CARROLLTON TO LOOK AT PROJECTS.

WE DID DO A STUDY ON IT.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHY I WANTED A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR NOW.

WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE IT LATER IF WE NEED TO. COMMISSIONER CONE.

>> YEAH. COMMENT JUST ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE HERE.

I THINK THIS IS WHAT'S CONVINCING ME AND MAYBE A LOT OF US, ANTHONY, THAT 15 PERCENT MAKES SENSE.

THIS SITE RIGHT HERE, IS THERE ANYTHING ON THIS SITE THAT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE IF IT WAS RESTRICTED TO 10 PERCENT AND THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO HAVE ALL THOSE COVERINGS ON THERE? IS THERE ANYTHING THAT STOOD OUT TO STAFF AS THIS IS TOO MUCH?

>> NO, NOT FOR MY ANALYSIS, NO.

I THINK THE SITE FUNCTIONS WELL, IT'S A TYPICAL CAR WASH AND AGAIN, YOU'RE DEALING WITH A SMALLER LOT SIZE SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT INCREASES THAT PERCENTAGE QUITE A BIT.

>> OKAY, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, BECAUSE I THINK UNIQUENESS OF A CAR WASH IS IT'S GOING TO BE A SMALL FOOTPRINT WHERE THEY WANT TO HAVE MOST OF THE COVERED.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OFF THE TOP MY HEAD BESIDES A CAR WASH THAT MIGHT WANT THIS MUCH COVERAGE FOR [INAUDIBLE].

>> I WOULD THINK THAT MAINE AND KAISER THAT PROBABLY HAS LARGER THAN 10 PERCENT COVERAGE AS WELL.

>> SECOND FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, ANTHONY, IF YOU WERE DOING A CAR DEALERSHIP, IT SAYS 15 PERCENT OF THE LOT AREA, 10 PERCENT 15 PERCENT WHERE WE SETTLE ON, IS THAT OF THE ENTIRE ACREAGE OF A 50-ACRE DEVELOPMENT? [OVERLAPPING]

>> THAT'S RIGHT, YES.

>> I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE 15 PERCENT BASED ON THIS PICTURE HERE.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I DRIVE PAST THIS ALL THE TIME.

[00:45:03]

THIS ISN'T MY NEIGHBORHOOD HERE, SO.

>> IT'S NOT FAR FROM WHERE YOU LIVE.

>> THE FACT THAT IT'S NEVER JUMPED OUT TO ME AS BEING ANYTHING OBNOXIOUS OR CLASHING OR ANYTHING WEIRD, IT NEVER CAUGHT MY EYE IN A NEGATIVE WAY.

>> COMMISSIONER MORGAN, DO YOU HAVE A THOUGHT ON THIS?

>> I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY EXTRA THOUGHTS THAT I HAVEN'T PROBABLY HEARD OF.

>> ARE YOU SIT ON 10 PERCENT OR YOU CARE ABOUT 15 PERCENT?

>> I CAN GO 15 PERCENT.

I WOULDN'T CALL IT ARBITRARY EITHER, BUT I DO LIKE THE EXTRA, JUST A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY THERE, I THINK 15 PERCENT IS OKAY. I CAN SUPPORT THAT.

>> COMMISSIONER CORLBURG.

>> I'M FINE WITH THAT AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU, MR. KELLY.

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER ISSUES OR QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS? ALL RIGHT. DOES SOMEONE WANT TO GIVE ME A MOTION WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF 15 PERCENT?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 23 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF CHANGING SECTION F3 FROM 10 PERCENT TO 15 PERCENT.

>> ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OF 10 PERCENT?

>> IS IT STATED ANYWHERE ELSE?

>> JUST THAT ONE.

>> IT'S THE ONLY ONE.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOCHS.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KENDALL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES.

6-0 ITEM 23 IS APPROVED WITH THE ADJUSTMENT.

>> REGULATIONS.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.

>> I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PIECE OF WORK AND I THINK IT'S A VALUABLE THING FOR THE CITY.

>> A LOT OF WORK.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. [OVERLAPPING]

>> I THINK YOU GUYS DID A GREAT JOB ON LISTENING TO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH AND.

>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

>> I APPRECIATE IT.

[24. Results of the May 4, 2021 City Council meeting.]

>> ITEM 24, RESULTS OF THE MAY 4TH, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THOSE RESULTS OF THE MAY 4TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING WERE PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THAT? OUR LIST AS ITEM 25 SCHEDULED FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS.

[25. Schedule of future discussion items.]

I KNOW COMMISSIONER MORGAN HAS SOMETHING THAT HE WANTED TO DISCUSS. YOU'RE GOING TO LEAD THE WAY?

>> OH, I WAS. [OVERLAPPING]

>> HAPPY BIRTHDAY AGAIN TO JOHN FROM THE COMMISSION.

>> [OVERLAPPING] HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU, HAPPY BIRTHDAY DEAR JOHN, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU.

>> FOR THOSE OF YOU [APPLAUSE] WHO MAY BE WATCHING, HIS FACE IS RED.

>> SO 64 IS IT?

>>> THANK YOU ALL. WE'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT A FEATURE DISCUSSION ITEMS LIKE THE AGE PER FIT.

ANY OTHER FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT WE HAVE TO BRING UP TO STAFF? JOHN, WHAT DO YOU HAVE? ANYTHING?

>> NOTHING AT THIS POINT.

[LAUGHTER]

>> I THOUGH I WAS GOING TO GET OUT HERE AND 7:18, AND SO IT'S 7:19.

COMMISSIONER, ANYTHING? ALL RIGHT.

THAT LEAVES US ONE ITEM.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?

>> WE CAN ADJOURN.

>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOCHS.

>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES 6-0.

WE ADJOURN AT 7:19 PM. THANK YOU ALL.