[4) Consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit for proposed revisions to the building materials for a building located at 1050 Bunton Creek Road in the Goforth Road Overlay District. (CUP-25-0147)]

THAT IS APPROVED. NEXT WE HAVE OUR CONSIDER AND POSSIBLE ACTION. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE BUILDING MATERIALS FOR A BUILDING LOCATED AT 1050 BUNTON CREEK ROAD AND THE GOFORTH ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT CUP DASH 25 0147, MISS SHARP. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, KAYLA SHARP, SENIOR PLANNER. LET ME SKIP THROUGH SOME OF THESE REAL QUICK TO GET TO THE NEXT ONE. SORRY ABOUT THAT. SO THIS ONE IS A CUP FOR 1050 BUTTON CREEK. SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER WE SAW THIS ONE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.

THEY ARE NOW COMING BACK WITH A NEW APPLICATION AND HAVE TWO OPTIONS TO PROPOSE TO YOU TONIGHT. SO JUST KIND OF BRIEF RUNDOWN. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A REVISION TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS FOR A PROPERTY IN THE GOFORTH ROAD OVERLAY. THE APPROVED MATERIALS CONSISTED PRIMARILY OF STONE VENEER AND STUCCO. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS CONSIST OF STUCCO, BRICK AND WOOD LOOK FIBER CEMENT PANELS, AS WELL AS SOME KIND OF LOOKS LIKE TUBING AS WELL. THE ORIGINAL CUP WAS APPROVED IN SEPTEMBER 2023, AND CONSTRUCTION STARTED SHORTLY AFTER. DURING THE FINAL SITE INSPECTION IN APRIL OF 2025, IT WAS DISCOVERED THE BUILDING MATERIALS WERE CHANGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND THEN, LIKE I SAID PREVIOUSLY, ALL SAW THIS RECENTLY. A CUP FOR THE REVISED MATERIALS WAS CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION AND DENIED. BACK IN AUGUST, THE APPLICANT'S RATIONALE. THEY PROVIDED A LETTER OUTLINING THE REASONS FOR THE CHANGE THAT INCLUDED SOME COST CONSTRAINTS AND A DESIRE TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE ESTHETICS OF NEWER DESIGNS IN THE AREA. SO, RATHER THAN APPEALING THE COMMISSION'S PREVIOUS DECISION TO COUNCIL, THE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT. ONE CHANGES THE COLOR OF THE STUCCO TO A MORE NEUTRAL TONE, ADDS WOOD TUBING ACCENTS, AND THEN MAINTAINS THE BROWN WOOD LOOK FIBER CEMENT PANELS. OPTION TWO ALSO CHANGES THE COLOR OF THE STUCCO TO A MORE NEUTRAL TONE. ALSO ADDS THE WOOD TUBING ACCENTS, BUT PAINTS THE WOOD LOOK FIBER CEMENT PANELS TO A GRAY COLOR THAT CLOSELY MATCHES THE ORIGINAL APPROVED CUP. SO, JUST FOR REFERENCE, HERE IS THE ORIGINAL APPROVED CUP. AND THEN THE CURRENT CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS A PHOTO. SO HERE IS OPTION ONE. SO LIKE I SAID CHANGES THE STUCCO COLOR, ADDS THE THE WOOD TUBING, KEEPS THE WOOD LOOK FIBER CEMENT PANELS. SOME RENDERINGS OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND THEN HERE IS WITH THE GRAY OPTION. SO KIND OF BETTER ALIGNS WITH WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. AND THE RENDERINGS FOR THAT AS WELL. SO THE BUILDING IS FULLY CONSTRUCTED. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE GO FORTH ROAD OVERLAY ALSO DOES NOT HAVE SPECIFIC BUILDING MATERIAL OR ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS, LIKE THE I35 OVERLAY HAS. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF EITHER OF THE PROPOSED OPTIONS. SO YOUR OPTIONS TONIGHT ARE TO APPROVE EITHER OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO AS PRESENTED. APPROVE EITHER OF THOSE OPTIONS WITH MODIFICATIONS OR DENY THE REQUEST, AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF EITHER OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO. AND I WILL SAY WE ALSO DO HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM THE THE APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT AS WELL, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. IN THE PRESENTATION. IT MENTIONS THAT THE ONE OF THE RATIONALE FOR CHANGES WAS TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE ESTHETICS OF NEWER DESIGNS IN THE AREA. WHAT NEWER DESIGNS SPECIFICALLY ARE WE REFERRING TO? SO THAT WAS COMING FROM THE THE OWNER'S LETTER. SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, THERE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN ANY NEW DESIGNS IN THAT SPECIFIC AREA. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SIMILAR PROJECTS TO THIS ONE IN KYLE, KIND OF IN THE GENERAL

[00:15:01]

BUTTON CREEK AREA, BUT NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT IN THAT IMMEDIATE VICINITY. BUT SOME OF THE NEWER STUFF ALONG BUTTON DOES KIND OF CLOSELY MATCH WHAT THIS ONE IS LOOKING LIKE. OKAY, COOL. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOT FOR STAFF BUT FOR THE APPLICANT IF WE CAN. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS ROY PINEDA WITH PANETTA CONSTRUCTION. AND ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERSHIP AND MYSELF, I WANTED TO SINCERELY APOLOGIZE FROM DEVIATING FROM THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED ELEVATIONS. IT WAS NOT OUR INTENT TO NOT BE COMPLIANT WITH THE BOARD'S DECISION. I'VE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS SOME SIX, SEVEN DEVELOPMENTS HERE IN THE CITY OF KYLE, AND I NEVER TRIED TO NOT BE COMPLIANT WITH THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS. IT'S JUST THAT THIS IS THE FIRST ONE INSIDE OF AN OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND SO WE DIDN'T, I THINK, REALLY FULLY UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF FOLLOWING EXACTLY WHAT WAS APPROVED. SO WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL TRYING TO WORK WITH US ON SOME OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO TRY AND KEEP THE COST IN CHECK FOR THE OWNERSHIP. SO THANK YOU. OUTSIDE OF THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT. COMMISSIONER.

COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU FOR SHOWING UP TONIGHT AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS AND PRESENTING TWO OPTIONS FOR US TO CONSIDER. DO APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK AS WELL. THANK YOU. I WANT TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WOULD BE PROHIBITIVE TO GO BACK TO THE DESIGNS AS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN IN PRACTICE, AND WHY IS GOING BACK TO THAT APPROVED? NOT POSSIBLE? SOME OF THE THINGS IS THAT JUST FOR ONE, THE MATERIALS THAT WERE CALLED OUT IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, LIKE SOME OF THE PORCELAIN, FIRST OF ALL, THE SIZES THAT WERE CALLED THAT WERE CALLED OUT IN CENTIMETERS, AND WE JUST DIDN'T THINK ONE THE COST WAS WAS A FACTOR. SECOND WAS JUST HOW DURABLE THE MATERIALS WOULD BE OVER TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, THE OWNERSHIP HAD RECENTLY COMPLETED ANOTHER COUPLE OF PROJECTS AND SOME OF THE MATERIALS THEY USE ON THE OTHER PROJECTS THEY REALLY LIKED AND WANTED TO INCORPORATE INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT LED US TO WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. AND YOU BELIEVE THAT THE TWO OPTIONS PRESENTED WOULD HAVE MORE DURABLE MATERIAL THAT WOULD LAST LONGER THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED? YES. AND CAN YOU GIVE US ANY KIND OF SCOPE AS TO WHY IT IS COST PROHIBITIVE TO GO BACK TO THE AS APPROVED? IT'S JUST NOW EVERYTHING IS DONE NOW, AND WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK TO SEEK ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO TRY AND RETROFIT EVERYTHING TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVED ELEVATIONS. AND THERE'S NOT A VIABLE OPTION TO GO BACK TO THAT APPROVED DRAWINGS. I'D LET THE OWNERSHIP ANSWER THAT QUESTION. IT'S THEIR MONEY, NOT MINE. SO.

COULD WE GET AN ANSWER TO THAT? WE'RE BASICALLY ASKING IS COULD WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVED ELEVATION? I MEAN, WHAT WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY? WE HAVEN'T COME UP WITH THE TOTAL COST OF WHAT THAT WOULD COST OWNERSHIP. SO IT'S I'M SURE DIFFICULT FOR HIM TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW. THE COST BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO. YEAH. HOW WOULD YOU SAY TO YOU THAT. YES. OKAY. JUST IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK. YEAH. SURE, SURE. YEAH. SO I'M JUST KIND OF ON WHAT ROY WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE INITIAL MATERIALS THAT WERE CALLED OUT, THIS IS A GOOD EXTERIOR ELEVATION RENDERING, RIGHT? AS FAR AS THE COLORS AND, AND STUFF OF OF HOW YOU KNOW IT SHOULD BE. HOWEVER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU BY CHANCE HAVE THE LIKE THE ORIGINAL LEGEND OF THE TYPE OF MATERIALS, THE TYPE OF MATERIALS, BUT THE TYPE OF MATERIALS THAT THE ARCHITECT HAD INITIALLY SUBMITTED WAS SOMETHING MORE ALONG OF LIKE WHAT YOU WOULD SEE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, LIKE BIG GRANITE, YOU KNOW, TILES, SLABS, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU PASTE ON THE SIDE OF A BUILDING AND STUFF MORE SOMETHING LIKE YOU'D PROBABLY SEE ON THE SIDE OF BOB BULLOCK MUSEUM, YOU KNOW. AND SO, YEAH, I MEAN, THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD, YOU KNOW, INJECT A CONSIDERABLE HIGHER AMOUNT COST, YOU KNOW, AS OPPOSED TO KIND OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE WITH OPTIONS ONE AND TWO AND JUST TRYING TO RETROFIT AND MAYBE BETTER, YOU KNOW, FROM WHERE WE'RE AT, TRYING TO MATCH THE COLOR, YOU KNOW, MORE OF THE COLOR RENDITION OF WHAT INITIALLY WAS APPROVED AND AT WHAT POINT FROM SUBMITTING DESIGNS TO THIS COMMISSION AND FINAL CONSTRUCTION AND IDENTIFICATION, THAT IT WAS NOT THE APPROVED MATERIALS, WAS IT DETERMINED THAT THAT WASN'T A VIABLE OPTION AND THAT MATERIALS HAD TO BE CHANGED? AT WHAT POINT DID THAT OCCUR? NOT QUITE SURE. ANSWER THAT QUESTION JUST BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE THE PROJECT ORIGINALLY PRIOR TO THE BOARD GIVING THE APPROVAL ELEVATIONS, THE OWNERSHIP ASKED FOR A BUDGET ON THE INITIAL DRAWINGS, WHICH WEREN'T THE FINAL DRAWINGS. AND SO THINGS WENT ALONG, AND I GUESS THERE WAS JUST A LACK OF

[00:20:03]

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE ARCHITECT AND THE OWNERSHIP AS TO WHAT THE ULTIMATE APPROVAL WAS. THAT WAS ONE. AND THE SECOND THING THAT I CAN SAY IS, AFTER HAVING BUILT THE OTHER PROJECTS, IS THAT AT THE POINT OF LIKE THE PRE-CON THAT WE HAD WITH THE CITY, I GUESS BECAUSE WE HAD HAD OTHER BUILDS WITHIN THE CITY, THEY REALLY DIDN'T EVEN REQUIRE A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING, RIGHT? TO TO SAY, HEY, JUST UNDERSTAND, THIS IS AN OVERLAY DISTRICT AND YOU HAVE TO COMPLY. WHAT WAS APPROVED? THERE WAS NO DISCLOSURE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AT THAT TIME, OR ELSE I WOULD HAVE MADE SURE THAT I COMPLIED. SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS WE'VE CHANGED SOME OF THE EXTERIOR FINISHES AND LOOKS AND IT WASN'T AN ISSUE, JUST WE MADE THAT MISTAKE HERE. SO THE INTENT WAS NEVER TO GO AGAINST THE COMMISSION'S, YOU KNOW, APPROVAL. APPROVED ELEVATION. SO THAT'S IT. AND OF THE TWO OPTIONS PRESENTED, DO EITHER OPTION PRESENT BETTER, MORE DURABLE MATERIALS THAN THE OTHER? I THINK THEY'RE BOTH TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT'S ESTABLISHED. IT'S MORE TRYING TO SEE WHAT COLOR SCHEME WOULD FLOW BETTER WITH WHAT THE COMMISSION IS WANTING TO SEE INSIDE OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT.

AND SO THE DIFFERENCES ARE PRIMARILY COLOR AND NOT MATERIAL OR NOT REALLY COST DIFFERENCES ON ON YOUR TEAM. CORRECT? NO, NOT NOT RIGHT NOW OUTSIDE OF JUST, YOU KNOW, ADDING THE STEEL TUBING AND THE OTHER BLACK STEEL TUBING THAT'S GOING TO BE INTRODUCED AS WELL.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S MAINLY THE, THE, THE COST CHANGES TO WHAT'S HERE. BUT WE FEEL LIKE THE MATERIALS THAT WERE USED ARE GOOD EXTERIOR FINISHED MATERIALS AND ARE LONG LASTING AND DURABLE. HOW QUICKLY CAN EITHER OPTION BE IMPLEMENTED? I THINK WITHIN THREE WEEKS TO FOUR WEEKS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS REALLY A PAINT. THEY'RE PAINTING THE MATERIALS THAT ARE IN PLACE, INCLUDING ADDING THE TUBING HERE, BUT THIS IS REALLY PAINT MODIFICATIONS, SO I DON'T THINK THE MATERIALS ARE BEING CHANGED. IT'S MAINLY THEY'RE GETTING THE TUBING. YES. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU. THANKS. OKAY. YOU HAVE OPTION ONE. OPTION TWO. WE WOULD NEED SOMEONE TO COME FORWARD WITH A MOTION AND SECOND IT. AND THEN WE CAN, I GUESS DISCUSS AND VOTE ON THAT. MAYBE TOGGLE FROM OPTION ONE. OPTION TWO. ONE MORE TIME. SO EVERYONE OPTION ONE. THE MAIN CHANGE HERE IS GOING TO BE THE STUCCO AND THE TUBING. AND THEN TWO WOULD PAINT THE THE FIBER CEMENT PANELS GRAY AND THEN THE STUCCO COLOR IN TUBING AS WELL. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION TWO. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT. SECONDED.

OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION TWO FROM COMMISSIONER KAUFERT AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HOUCK. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? YEAH. ONE QUICK THING I THE REASON WHY I DO LIKE OPTION ONE IS BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE PAINTED. SO WITH THE MATERIAL BEING REPAINTED, IS IT GOING TO FADE OVER TIME AND MAYBE EVENTUALLY NOT? YOU KNOW, THE LAST THING YOU WANT IS A BUILDING TO START CHANGING COLOR DUE TO IT BEING PAINTED.

SO. THAT'S WHY I WAS GOING TO GO WITH OPTION ONE. WITH OPTION ONE. IN LOOKING AT THAT BUILDING IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS NEIGHBORS, I THINK OPTION ONE FITS BETTER WITH THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS. I DO THINK OPTION TWO ON PAPER LOOKS NICER, BUT I THINK OPTION ONE FITS MORE IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS NEIGHBORS. I ALSO STILL REALLY DON'T LOVE THAT IT'S NOT WHAT WAS APPROVED. I DON'T LOVE THAT THERE'S APPROVAL MECHANISMS THAT WEREN'T FOLLOWED, AND THAT WE'RE AT THE POINT TODAY OF MAKING A CORRECTION, RIGHT? I, I AGREE, I DON'T THINK WE WERE DEALT A GOOD HAND. BUT, YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BULLDOZE THE ENTIRE BUILDING AND START FROM GROUND UP. SO, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE TODAY. AND I THINK OPTION ONE IS A GOOD OPTION SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL OF PAINT CHIPPING AND EVENTUALLY FADING. I THINK THAT'S MY MY VOTE FOR OPTION ONE. CAN I MAKE A CLARIFICATION? ARE THE CEMENT THE FIBER CEMENT PANELS THAT ARE CURRENTLY INSTALLED? DO THEY NOT HAVE A COATING SYSTEM APPLIED TO THEM? THEY DO SO THE CURRENT PANELS ARE PAINTED AS WELL, PROBABLY FACTORY PAINTED OPPOSED TO FIELD PAINTED. IT'S BASED ON TYPE OF FINISH OKAY. JUST A

[00:25:03]

CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR STAFF. I GUESS IF WE DENY BOTH OPTIONS WHAT HAPPENS THEN? SO IF IF BOTH OPTIONS ARE DENIED HERE TONIGHT, THEY'LL ESSENTIALLY HAVE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. THEY CAN EITHER APPEAL THAT DECISION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND THEN CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER THESE OPTIONS. OR THEY CAN DO KIND OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE TONIGHT. THEY CAN APPLY AGAIN AND CHOOSE TO COME BACK. I WILL SAY RIGHT NOW THE BUILDING HAS A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, AND THERE ARE TWO TENANTS THAT HAVE TEMPORARY CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. SO WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO WORK TO NOT HAVE TO REVOKE THOSE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT THERE IS KIND OF THAT ■AT PLAY AS WEL. YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T GET TO SOME SORT OF DECISION, IT MIGHT GET TO THE POINT WHERE THE CITY HAS TO REVOKE A A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WHICH WE REALLY DO NOT WANT TO DO, DEFINITELY DON'T WANT HAVE TO. BUT THERE IS THAT POSSIBILITY. THANK YOU.

OKAY, SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW IS TO APPROVE OPTION TWO. IF IF WE WANT TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT ONE I THINK WE HAVE TO CLOSE THAT MOTION BEFORE WE COULD POSSIBLY CONSIDER ANOTHER ONE. IF THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSION DECIDED TO DO, I WITHDRAW MY SECOND. IS THAT A THING? WE CAN STILL VOTE ON IT. VOTE ON IT? YEAH, GO FOR IT. IT JUST MIGHT NOT WIN. OKAY.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON IT? OKAY. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH OPTION TWO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. SAY NAY. NAY NAY. OKAY.

THAT MOTION DOES NOT PASS. I GUESS THAT MEANS IT FAILS. MOTION FAILS. WE NEED A NEW MOTION. YEAH, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION ONE. OKAY, SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION ONE FROM COMMISSIONER SERRANO AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER COPELAND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? OKAY, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. I GUESS.

AGAIN, IT'S FOR STAFF. SORRY. THE RENDERING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THE COLOR FOR THE STUCCO LOOKS KIND OF GRAY. AND THEN ON THE ILLUSTRATION OF THE LIKE THE ELEVATIONS, IT LOOKS MORE LIKE A LIKE A CREAMY OR WARMER WHITE COLOR. WHICH COLOR ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO GET.

WHAT ARE WE APPROVING? ARE WE APPROVING THE DRAWING OR THE IMAGE? I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DISCREPANCIES JUST BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, AN IMAGE. IT'S NOT ACTUALLY WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THE BUILDING. THEY SHOULD HAVE A COLOR LISTED SPECIFICALLY THERE. BUT I IMAGINE IT WOULD BE KIND OF MORE OF LIKE A CREAMY WHITISH GRAY. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GETTING A THUMBS UP. SO. OKAY. YEAH, I LIKE THE THE CREAMIER WHITE COLOR. I THINK IT PLAYS BETTER WITH THE, THE WOOD TONES AND STUFF INSTEAD OF A COOL GRAY. SO THAT WAS MY ONLY LITTLE QUESTION THERE. IT'S IF I COULD READ IT CORRECTLY. IT LOOKS LIKE IT SAYS SHERWIN-WILLIAMS ALABASTER. OKAY. HOW WOULD YOU SAY YEAH, THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. YEAH.

YEAH. SO IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY AND MATCH MORE OF LIKE THE ACTUAL PICTURE COLOR RENDITION. AND SO LIKE YOU JUST STATED, IT IS MORE OF LIKE A GRAY. SO WE, YOU KNOW, SELECTED A COLOR BASED OFF THAT. HOWEVER, I AGREE WITH YOU IN, IN GOING WITH THIS.

WHAT WHAT'S ON THE BOARD? WHAT'S ON THE TV NOW AND IN THAT CREAMIER KIND OF MORE LIGHT TAN, YOU KNOW, COLOR WHICH WE CAN DO AS WELL. YEAH. OKAY. IT LOOKS LIKE OPTION ONE ALREADY INCLUDES THAT IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY THOUGH, RIGHT. YEAH. LET ME JUST MAKE SURE I ZOOMED IN ON THE, THE IMAGE ON MY IPAD. IT DEFINITELY SAYS IT'S STUCCO WOULD BE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS ALABASTER. SO IF WE COULD JUST COMMIT TO DOING THAT. THAT'S CORRECT. YES THAT'S CORRECT OKAY. YEAH. COOL. IT'S AN OFF WHITE SAYING. WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS THE IMAGE AT FIRST. YEAH. LOOKING AT THIS IMAGE. YEAH. IT'S ALABASTER. YES. CORRECT.

OKAY. THANKS GUYS. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING OPTION ONE FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. NAY. OKAY. THAT MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE HAVE CONSIDER APPROVAL

[5) Consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for nine proposed buildings, including six multi-family residential buildings, one mixed-use building, one leasing office/clubhouse, and one restaurant building, in accordance with the applicable Development Agreement, for property located at 1201 Seton Parkway. (CUP-25-0134)]

OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS UP FOR NINE PROPOSED BUILDINGS, INCLUDING SIX MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS, ONE MIXED USE BUILDING, ONE LEASING OFFICE SLASH CLUBHOUSE AND ONE RESTAURANT BUILDING. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR

[00:30:02]

PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1201 SEATON PARKWAY CUP DASH 250134 SHARP. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, KAYLA SHARP, SENIOR PLANNER. HAVE ANOTHER CUP FOR YOU TONIGHT. THIS ONE. THERE'S NINE BUILDINGS SO MIGHT TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER. BUT BEAR WITH ME AND FEEL FREE TO TO STOP ME ALONG THE WAY. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON ANYTHING. SO THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR NINE BUILDINGS LOCATED. IT'S BASICALLY BETWEEN THE HOBBY LOBBY AND ACADEMY AND SETON HOSPITAL, JUST TO KIND OF GET YOUR BEARINGS THERE. THEY ARE PROPOSING NINE BUILDINGS, INCLUDING SIX MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS, ONE MIXED USE BUILDING, ONE CLUBHOUSE, AND ONE RESTAURANT FOOD AND BEVERAGE BUILDING. A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THE I-35 OVERLAY. HOWEVER, THE DEVELOPER HAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH ESTABLISHED BUILDING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS. SO HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FOR YOU. I KIND OF TRIED TO LABEL THE BUILDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTED, BUT IT KIND OF JUMPS A LITTLE BIT ALL OVER THE PLACE. SO LIKE I SAID, JUST BEAR WITH ME. THERE SHOULD BE A LEGEND ON EACH PAGE AS WELL TO KIND OF HELP YOU KNOW WHERE YOU'RE AT. SO THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STREET FRONT BUILDINGS, FRONT ELEVATIONS, WHICH IS BASICALLY ANY BUILDINGS THAT HAVE THE FRONT FACADE FACING A PUBLIC STREET, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A MINIMUM 60% MASONRY, THAT BEING BRICK OR STONE OR STUCCO. HOWEVER, 40% MINIMUM MUST BE BRICK OR STONE.

THE REMAINING 20% CAN BE STUCCO, AND THEN THE REMAINING 40% CAN BE CEMENT. DECIDING WHICH IS LIKE THE FIBER CEMENT PANELS, HARDIEPLANK HARDIE BOARD, THINGS LIKE THAT, OR OTHER SPECIALTY MATERIALS. SPECIALTY MATERIALS CAN ONLY MAKE UP 15%, AND THIS ALSO APPLIES TO SIDE ELEVATIONS FACING PUBLIC STREETS AND THEN INTERNAL BUILDINGS FOR ALL ELEVATIONS MINIMUM OF 30% MASONRY, THAT BEING BRICK OR STONE OR STUCCO, 20% HAS TO BE BRICK OR STONE.

THE REMAINING 10% CAN BE STUCCO, AND THEN 70% CAN BE CEMENT SIDING OR OTHER SPECIALTY MATERIALS. AND THEN THE RESTAURANT BUILDING. IT MIGHT ALSO BE CALLED FOOD AND BEVERAGE. BUILDING HAS TO BE 100% MASONRY AND GLASS, EXCLUDING DOORS AND ENTRANCES.

SO HERE IS ONE SIDE OF BUILDING ONE. THEY WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 30% MASONRY. HERE THEY PROVIDED 57. SO THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS. THEN YOU HAVE THE OTHER SIDE AGAIN. AND THESE ARE REALLY SMALL APPEAR. SO I'M GOING TO TRY AND READ THEM. BUT AGAIN REQUIRED TO HAVE 30% MASONRY. AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED 54%. AND THEN THIS SIDE, SINCE THIS SIDE FACES A PUBLIC STREET THEY ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE 60%. THEY PROVIDED 64% MASONRY. BUILDING. TWO. THEY WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE 30%. THEY PROVIDED 30%. THIS BUILDING KIND OF HAS A WEIRD SHAPE. SO LIKE I SAID, BEAR WITH ME. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO FOLLOW ALONG, BUT THAT KEY MAP WILL BE YOUR FRIEND HERE. KAYLA. I'M SORRY, CAN YOU GO BACK? ONE SLIDE. YES. THE FIBER CEMENT MINIMUM IS 40 AND THEY PROVIDED 36. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT SHOULDN'T BE. SO THERE'S NO MINIMUM REQUIRED FIBER CEMENT. THAT'S JUST A LABELING ERROR. THERE'S NO MINIMUM REQUIRED FIBER CEMENT. THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A MINIMUM MASONRY. THE REST CAN BE THE FIBER CEMENT.

THANK YOU. GOOD CATCH. ALL RIGHT. ANOTHER SIDE OF BUILDING TWO. THEY WERE REQUIRED 30% AND THEY'RE PROVIDING 32%. ANOTHER SIDE REQUIRED 30% PROVIDING 34%. NEXT SIDE REQUIRED 30% PROVIDING 30%. ANOTHER SIDE REQUIRED 30% PROVIDING 32%. AND THEN ANOTHER REQUIRED 30%, PROVIDING 32%. AND SHOULD BE THE LAST. OH NO, WE STILL HAVE ANOTHER SIDE BUILDING TOO.

REQUIRED 30% HERE, ALSO PROVIDING 30%. THIS BUILDING TWO HAS A LOT OF SIDES, AND THEN THIS ONE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE 30% MASONRY AND THEY'RE PROVIDING 31%. NEXT BUILDING ONTO BUILDING THREE. SO THIS ONE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE 30% MASONRY. THEY'RE PROVIDING 30%.

SAME HERE PROVIDING 37%. THIS SIDE IS PROVIDING 31%. AND THIS SIDE IS PROVIDING 52%. AND THIS

[00:35:17]

SIDE IS 31%. SO BUILDING FOUR REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 30% MASONRY. THEY'RE PROVIDING 41 ON THIS SIDE PROVIDING 40 ON THIS SIDE. NEXT BUILDING BUILDING FIVE. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 30% MASONRY PROVIDING 31 ON THIS SIDE PROVIDING 32% ON THIS SIDE, 32% ON THIS SIDE AND 41% ON THIS SIDE. BUILDING SIX. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 30% AND THEY'RE PROVIDING 52% ON THIS SIDE. THEY'RE PROVIDING 31% ON THIS ONE, 41 ON THIS ONE, AND 63% ON THIS ONE. AND BUILDING SEVEN, THIS IS OUR MIXED USE BUILDING. SO THIS WILL HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.

SO YOU'LL SEE A LOT MORE GLASS WITH THE WINDOWS AND DOORS HERE. BUT TAKING THAT OUT OF THE EQUATION WHAT THEY HAVE LEFT IS THEY'RE PROVIDING 61% MASONRY ON THIS SIDE. AND THIS WILL BE THE SIDE KIND OF FACING SETON PARKWAY. IF THAT KIND OF HELPS YOU FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU'RE AT.