[00:00:01]
AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KYLE TO ORDER.
CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CHAD MEYER HERE, HERE.
MCCALL CHRISTIE HERE, DARA HERE, JACE HERE, JAMES HERE, HERE.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS CITIZENS COMMENTS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO PROVIDE A CITIZENS COMMENT CAN SPEAK NOW SEEING NO ONE.
I WILL SAY THAT I HAVE NO ONE TO SPEAK DURING NICE CITIZEN COMMENTS HERE.
DEB, DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY WHO IS CALLED IN OR HAS TO BE READ? NO.
I WILL CLOSE CITIZEN'S COMMENTS,
[3. CONSENT]
ITEM NUMBER THREE.CAN I HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR? YES.
WE APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM THREE A CAN I HAVE A SECOND WITH A SECOND? I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
[A
Consider a comprehensive plan amendment to add Manufactured Home Subdivision Districts ‘M-2’ and ‘M-3’ to the ‘New Town Community District’ in the Comprehensive Plan, for a property located at 600 Bebee Road in the City of Kyle, Texas. (Hadsell Estate – Z-21-0075)
- Public Hearing (Second of Two Public Hearings)
- Recommendation to City Council
IT'S THE SECOND OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE IS NO ONE IN HOUSE TO SPEAK.
DEB, DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I BELIEVE THE AGENT, UM, FOR THAT ITEM IS ONLINE.
UM, OKAY, NICOLE, I AM, I'M REALLY HERE JUST TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
IF THERE ARE ANY, I REALIZED THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.
NOT REALLY NECESSARILY ABOUT OUR PROJECT OR OUR PROPERTY, BUT I AM HERE IF YOU ALL HAVE QUESTIONS.
I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
RIGHT? ONE SECOND HERE, BEAR WITH ME ONE MOMENT.
BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE, UM, A REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, UM, FOR THE NEW TOWN COMMUNITY DISTRICT, WHICH IS IN THE, ESSENTIALLY IN THE NORTH PORTION OF THE CITY OF KYLE AT FLANKS, UH, THE
UM, AND WE GENERALLY DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT.
UM, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE A CONDITIONAL, UM, REVIEW WHEN IT COMES TO A REZONING REQUEST.
UM, WE'RE OKAY WITH THE IDEA OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT ALSO IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE IN EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE, WHENEVER WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, EVEN WITHIN THIS DISTRICT.
SO WE DON'T WANT IT AS A RECOMMENDED DISTRICT, BUT WE DO WANT TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER IT IF, UM, STAFF BELIEVES IT'S AN APPROPRIATE AREA.
IF SOMEONE COMES FORWARD, UM, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THEN BECAUSE THE PROPERTY THEY'RE WANTING EVENTUALLY TO DEVELOP A SPECIFIC PROPERTY WITHIN THE NEWTOWN DISTRICT, BUT THEY CAN'T BECAUSE THIS, THE MTA AND THREE ZONING DISTRICTS AREN'T IN THERE YET.
UM, SO THEY HAVE TO START WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IF THAT GOES THROUGH, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH ANNEXATION, UM, ZONING, SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN, ALL THE STEPS.
SO THIS IS JUST THE VERY FIRST STEP.
UH, THE NEWTOWN COMMUNITY DISTRICT IS A, IS AN AREA THAT IS ACTUALLY HAS QUITE A BIT OF DIVERSE, UM, LAND USE TYPES.
I MEAN, IT HAS EVERYTHING FROM RETAIL, SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY, A LITTLE BIT OF WAREHOUSE.
UM, YOU CAN PROBABLY FIND IT IF YOU, IF YOU JUST PUT YOUR FINGER ON A POINT TO A MAP, YOU CAN FIND AN INTERESTING LAND USE TYPE.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE OKAY WITH THE IDEA OF ADDING MORE ADDITIONAL LAND USES TO THIS POINT.
[00:05:01]
DISTRICT IS A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION DISTRICT, EXCUSE ME, A MANUFACTURED HOME SUBDIVISION DISTRICT WHERE IT'S, UM, WHERE THE LOTS ARE OWNED FEE SIMPLE AND ALL THE LOTS ARE ON SINGLE FAMILY OR ON, UH, PUBLIC ROADS.UM, THE MP3 DISTRICT IS IT FUNCTIONS VERY SIMILAR EXCEPT, UM, THE LOTS ARE, UM, ARE LEASED AND THEY'RE ON PRIVATE INTERNAL DRIVEWAYS OR PRIVATE ROADS WHERE SOMEONE COMES IN AND MOVES IN THEIR HOUSE, BUT THEN THEY PAY A COMPANY, UH, A MONTHLY RENT TO DO SO, UM, DEPENDING ON, SEE, THEY'RE BOTH, THEY'RE BOTH VERY SIMILAR.
UM, THEY HAVE THE SAME MINIMUM, LOT SIZES, MINIMUM LOT WITH SETBACKS, ALL THAT KIND OF FUN STUFF.
UM, BUT WE DO SUPPORT IT AND, UH, WE RECOMMEND, UH, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ALSO SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO, UM, ADD IT AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? I HAVE SOME GENERAL QUESTIONS ON MODULAR HOUSING, BUT MAYBE THIS ISN'T THE TIME SINCE IT'S, SINCE WE'RE JUST WORKING ON THE, ON THE, UM, ON THE PLAN.
SO I'LL, I'LL ASK THOSE THAT ARE NOT AT ANOTHER TIME.
UM, UH, AS LONG AS WE'RE DOING JUST UPDATES TO, UM, ADDING THESE, I JUST WANNA ASK A QUESTION.
IS THERE AN M ONE AND IS THERE A REASON WE'RE NOT, IS IT JUST BECAUSE OF THE REQUEST WASN'T TO ADD, JUST TO ONLY ADD M TWO AND THREE, IF WE'RE ADDING THEM TO AN M THREE, I'M JUST WONDERING, SHOULD WE ALSO CONSIDER ADDING KNOW, IS THERE AN M ONE AND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? YES, SIR.
UM, THERE IS AN M ONE, UH, HOWEVER IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR, UM, EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOME SUBDIVISIONS OR PARKS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, UH, FOR WHEN THEY ARE ANNEXED IN.
THAT'S THE ONLY TIME THERE CAN BE
UM, AND SO BY AND LARGE, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THAT THE WAY THERE.
UM, GIVEN THE FACT THAT LINK, GO AHEAD.
THE WAY THEY'RE DIFFERENT IS SINGLE LOT SINGLE MANUFACTURED HOME PROPERTIES, RIGHT.
IS THAT, HOW IS THAT HOW LAKESIDE CAME IN, HOW YOU BROUGHT LAKESIDE IN? NO.
AND TWO AND THREE ARE FOUR COLLECTIONS OF MOBILE HOMES.
ONE OF THEM IS AN INDIVIDUAL SERIES OF A FEE SIMPLE LOTS.
THE OTHER IS FOR A PARK WHERE TYPICALLY THERE'S A GROUND LEASE WHERE YOU MAY OR MAY NOT OWN THE UNIT IN WHAT YOU LIVE.
SO, AND ONE VERY SMALL INDIVIDUAL, LOTS, M TWO AND THREE ARE FOR LARGER PROJECTS.
THE CLIENT WHO CAME FORWARD IS DEVELOPING A PIECE OF LAND THAT AS WAS MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT IS TECHNICALLY NONCONFORMING FROM A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STANDPOINT.
IT IS LAWFUL AND CONFORMING AS IT EXISTS, IT WAS DEVELOPED LAWFULLY AND CONFORMING.
IT EXISTS LAWFULLY AND CONFORMING.
THEY ARE ALLOWED TO EXPAND WHERE THEY ARE, BUT THIS NEW PIECE OF LAND IS CURRENTLY IT'S THE HOLE IN A DONUT OF LAND THAT'S UP THERE AND IT'S ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY.
AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO DEVELOP INTO THAT.
WELL, THEY WILL NOT GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO EVEN ASK THE QUESTION TO, TO APPLY M TWO AND OR M THREE ZONING TO THAT, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S SIMPLY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS, IS MUTE ON M TWO AND M THREE.
SO THE FIRST STEP FOR THEM IS TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY WOULD EVEN ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF M TWO M THREE BEING IN THIS FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT.
IF WE DECIDE THAT YES, THEY MAY ASK THE QUESTION, THEN WE'LL PROCEED TO THE NEXT PART.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE EMOTION, SOMEONE, ANYONE MANAGER.
WE DO, UM, HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO ADD MANUFACTURED HOME SUBDIVISION DISTRICTS, M TWO AND M MP3 TO THE NEW TOWN COMMUNITY DISTRICT IN THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN.
IT, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EDITING IT CONDITIONALLY THOUGH.
I SHOULD HAVE, UM, YES, IT WOULD BE CONDITIONALLY.
DO, DO I NEED TO RESTATE THE MOTION? OKAY.
[00:10:02]
ALL RIGHT.UM, UH, W WE ADD MANUFACTURED HOME SUBDIVISION DISTRICTS, M TO AN MP3, TO THE NEW TOWN COMMUNITY, TO DISTRICT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL USE.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
[B
Consider a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map amendment to reclassify approximately 20 acres of land from ‘Farm District’ to ‘Regional Node District’ and the remaining approximately 87 acres of land from ‘Farm District’ to the ‘New Settlement District’ for property located at the north corner of the intersection at SH-21 and E FM 150. (FM 812, LLC - JD’s Market - Z-21-0076)
- Public Hearing (Second of Two Public Hearings)
- Recommendation to City Council
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO RECLASSIFY, APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES OF LAND FROM FORM DISTRICT TO REGIONAL, NO DISTRICT.
AND THE REMAINING APPROXIMATELY 87 ACRES OF LAND FROM FARM DISTRICT TO THE NEW SETTLEMENT DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTH CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF S H 21 AND EAST FM ONE-FIFTY FM EIGHT ONE TWO LLC, J D IS MARKET Z 21 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN SIX.
THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM.
I WILL OPEN THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING.
IS ANYBODY ON THE PHONE OR ANY EMAILS? NO, MA'AM OKAY.
NO PHONE, NO EMAILS, NO ONE HERE.
I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WELL, I CAN SEND FOR THE RECORD AGAIN.
UM, BEFORE YOU WENT UP PETITION NUMBER Z DASH 21 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN SIX.
UM, LET ME SHARE THIS REAL QUICK.
UM, FM ROAD EIGHT, 12 LLC, UH, IS BEING REPRESENTED BY STEVE AND JAMESON FROM CC JAMESON CIVIL ENGINEERING.
UH, THEY ARE LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD AND MAKING, UM, UH, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THIS HARD CORNER AT SH 21 AND EAST F-150.
UM, THEY WANT TO TAKE, UH, THE VERY CORNER OF IT TO 20 ACRES OF, UH, FROM THE REGIONAL NODE PERSPECTIVE, AND THEN ALSO A NEW TOWN DISTRICT FOR THE REMAINING PORTION OF IT.
AND RIGHT HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE INTERSECTION AND THE PROPERTY THEY'RE LOOKING AT.
UH, RIGHT NOW IT'S, UH, IT'S OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, BUT THERE'S A NON ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IF THEY DO ANYTHING IN VIOLATION OR ANYTHING THAT TRIGGERS, UM, THE ACT OF ANNEXATION VIA THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY WILL BE BROUGHT INTO THE CITY.
UM, THEY PROBABLY WILL ANYWAY, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY DO HERE.
SO RIGHT NOW, UM, ALL OF THIS PARCEL IS WITHIN THE AG ZONING OR THE, EXCUSE ME, THE FARM LANDSCAPE, UH, THE FARM LANDSCAPE IN THIS PART OF THE CITY, AS MANY OF Y'ALL KNOW FROM RECENT DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST YEAR, UM, IS AN AREA THAT HAS IT'S LOW INTENSITY OF USE.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ON ACRE OR HALF ACRE, LOTS, YOU KNOW, LARGE, LARGE ENOUGH, LOTS FOR SEPTIC FIELDS, UM, AG FOR, FOR ROW CROPS, UH, ANIMALS IN THAT.
AND THERE'S ALSO A LITTLE TINY BIT FOR CALLED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR, UM, VERY, VERY LIMITED RETAIL.
UM, IN THAT CASE, IT'S LIKE NO BIGGER THAN AN ACRE AS AN AGGREGATE SIZE.
UM, THE REASON IS BECAUSE UP UNTIL THE LAST YEAR OR SO, THERE'S NOT REALLY BEEN AN AVAILABILITY FOR WASTEWATER IN THIS AREA.
SO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN F IS A MIRROR, IS THAT LIKE, YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE HIGH INTENSITY VIEWS, UH, BUT MOVING FORWARD IN THE NEXT TWO, COUPLE OF YEARS, AND I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT TIMELINE.
UM, THE WATER PROVIDER OUT HERE HAS NOW, WHICH HAS COUNTY LINE, UM, ESPECIALLY UTILITY DISTRICT, UH, RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE STATE TO, TO HAVE, UM, WASTEWATER LINES AS WELL IN WASTEWATER LINE SERVICES.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE BUILDING A WASTEWATER LINE, UH, SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SH 21 AND EAST F-150 AND ALSO BE INSTALLING, UM, UM, SERVICE LINES FOR THIS WASTEWATERS AVAILABILITY.
SO THERE IS FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT, YOU'RE ROUGHLY IMMINENT.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A WAY THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO WASTEWATER.
AND SO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NEEDS TO BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THAT AS WELL FOR HIGHER INTENSITY ABUSE.
UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING A REGIONAL NODE ON THIS HARD CORNER WITH NEW SETTLEMENT BEHIND IT.
THEY, UM, THIS WHOLE INTERSECTION IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A REGIONAL NODE, UM, WITH WASTEWATER.
IT IS A SECONDARY ACCESS POINT MAJOR
[00:15:01]
ACCESS POINT INTO THE CITY OF KYLE.UH, SH 21 IS A, IS A BACKUP ROUTE TO THE PARALLELS.
I HAVE 35 TO GO FROM SAN MARCUS INTO AUSTIN, EVEN OVER IN THE BACKDROP.
AND IT'S HEAVILY USED BY REGULAR JUST PEOPLE DRIVING THE CARS ALSO BY TRUCK TRAFFIC, UM, AND EAST F-150, WHICH IS ALSO A TEXDOT ROAD IS ALSO HEAVILY USED BY TRUCK TRAFFIC AS WELL.
THERE IS AN EXPECTATION MOVING FORWARD THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE A HIGHER INTENSITY ABUSE HERE, WHETHER IT'S STRIP RETAIL OFFICES, HIGHER DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL, WHAT HAVE YOU, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN SOON.
AND THEY'VE REQUESTED TO CHANGE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REFLECT THAT NOW THEY DID HAVE, UM, IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR PROJECT, FOR THEIR PROPERTY ONLY.
OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE TAKEN IN THE WHOLE, UM, INTERSECTION, UM, WHICH IS WHY YOU SEE IT AS THIS ONLY, UM, FROM A REGIONAL NODE PERSPECTIVE, UM, RETAIL SERVICES, UM, IS EXPECTED ON THIS HARD CORNER, UM, AS PER THE REQUEST THEY ARE LOOKING AT
SO WITH THAT, UM, STAFF HAS ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM SUPPORTING, UM, THEIR REQUEST.
AND WE ASK THAT Y'ALL REQUEST OR, UM, VOTE TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL AS WELL.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR US COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS? OH, I THOUGHT WE WERE LOOKING AT MAYBE MAKING THE REGIONAL NODE A QUITE A BIT BIGGER THAN THAT AT ONE POINT.
WE HAD LOOKED AT THE, THE GENERAL AREA OF THE INTERSECTION OF ONE 50 AND 21.
UM, THIS IS REALLY, THIS IS A REQUEST FROM A SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS COME FORWARD FOR, WITH A REQUEST FOR A SINGLE PROPERTY BE ASSIGNED, UM, STARTING AS EARLY AS PROBABLY THE MIDDLE OR LATE LAST SPRING.
THIS APPLICANT HAD COME FORWARD AND SAID THAT THEY WANTED TO UNDERTAKE THIS CHANGE.
UM, WE HAD ASKED THAT THEY DELAY THEIR REQUEST AND INSTEAD, JUST COME ALONG WITH THE CITY THROUGH OUR PROCESS, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO REFLECT THE POPULATION CHANGE AND THE ETJ EXPANSION, UM, THAT PRODUCT, THAT PROJECT GOT DELAYED AND THE APPLICANT ASKS, WELL, WHAT, WHAT IS THEIR OUTLET? DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT? OR CAN THEY COME FORWARD? SO RATHER THAN DELAY THEM ANY FURTHER, UM, CAUSE THEIR PROJECT IS IMPORTANT.
WE DECIDED TO LET THEM MOVE AHEAD INDEPENDENTLY OF THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE UNDERTAKING HAD HAD THEY WAITED AND THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED NATURALLY, QUOTE UNQUOTE, UH, ON ITS OWN.
IF THE CHANGES THAT WE HAD PROPOSED WERE TO BE RATIFIED.
BUT, UM, THAT, THAT PROCESS IS JUST PICKING UP AGAIN TONIGHT.
AND THESE FOLKS WANT TO GET STARTED FASTER THAN THAT.
SO YOU'RE NOT WRONG, BUT THEY'RE STARTING ON A LITTLE PHASE OF IT THEMSELVES, THE CITY WITH ANY LUCK, WE'LL BE ABLE TO COME ALONG AND MAKE THE, THE, THE, THE REGIONAL CHANGE WHEN WE DO THE ENTIRETY OF THE MAP LATER THIS SUMMER.
SO IT'S NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS RIGHT NOW, CORRECT? UH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
YEAH, SO THEY, I MEAN, THEY CAN'T DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, BUT THEY COULD, THEY COULD PROCEED FORWARD WITH THIS ANYWAY.
UM, WE LEAVING ANYTHING OFF THE TABLE, UH, AS A CITY WHERE WE WISH WE WOULD'VE HAD A MUCH BIGGER REGROUP.
I THINK IT'S ADVANTAGEOUS TO BOTH FOLKS THAT, THAT THIS AREA, THAT OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP REFLECT WHAT THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT WE EXPECT AND FOR THEM TO COME FORWARD AND BE INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, RECEIVE CITY SERVICES AND BE A PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO IT'S, WIN-WIN FOR THE CLIENT AND FOR THE CITY.
SO THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS, WHETHER THEY'D GO THROUGH WITH IT ON THEIR OWN POTENTIALLY.
UM, BUT A COMMERCIAL SITE THAT DOESN'T HAVE WATER WASTEWATER FROM THE LOCAL PROVIDER MIGHT, MIGHT BE MORE CHALLENGING, NOT IMPOSSIBLE, BUT MORE CHALLENGING.
JUST TO CONTINUE ON THAT, WHEN WE WERE TALKING
[00:20:01]
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUR IDEAS FOR WHAT WE CALL THE EAST GATEWAY DISTRICT AND WHAT MIGHT BE IN THAT GENERAL AREA LATER, THE EAST GATEWAY DISTRICT FOR MY UNDERSTANDING WAS PLANNED TO BE DENSER THAN THE, UM, UM, THEN THE, THE, THE, THE NEW SETTLEMENT DISTRICT AS FAR AS.AND SO, UH, UH, DID, DID YOU, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS, ASSUMING BOTH HAPPEN, WE, WE, IF WE DID APPROVE THIS AND THEN THE EAST SETTLEMENT DISTRICT THEN DID HAPPEN, WOULD WE HAVE NEW SETTLEMENT DISTRICT ON THE MAP THEN EAST SETTLEMENT DISTRICT, THEN ANOTHER SMALL PIECE OF NEW SETTLEMENT DISTRICT SEPARATE? NO.
WHAT WE'LL HAVE IS NEW SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS THE EXISTING, ALMOST EXISTING BOUNDARY, AND THEN MOVING, UM, BEYOND THAT WOULD BE EAST GATEWAY, RIGHT.
AND THAT WILL GO ALL THE WAY TO 21.
ON TOP OF EAST GATEWAY WOULD BE THE SUPER REGIONAL NODE THAT WOULD BRING ALONG WITH IT ADDITIONAL, UM, ENTITLEMENTS THAT COME FROM THAT FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT.
SO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR TONIGHT ESSENTIALLY IS A LITTLE PIECE OF THAT OVER OVERLAY OF FUTURE LAND USE AREA OF FUTURE LAND USE DISTRICT.
SO IF YOU LOOK WHAT I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, LET ME CHECK AND SEE WHAT, WHAT WE'LL SHOWING RIGHT NOW ON THE SHARED, UM, DO WE HAVE THE, IT'S NOT UP NOW, HE'S SHARING THE LAND USE DISTRICTS OF THE ENTIRE CITY.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SUPER REGIONAL NODE, YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE SUPER REGIONAL NOTE OF WHAT WE HAVE AT 1626.
AND, AND, AND I, 35, THE, UM, ASSOCIATED LAND USE DISTRICTS THAT ARE BENEATH THAT ARE STILL PRESENT.
SO THERE, THERE ARE SECTIONS OF NEWTOWN COMMUNITY.
THERE ARE SECTIONS OF REGIONAL NODE.
THERE ARE SECTIONS OF MIDTOWN COMMUNITY THERE'S THERE'S SECTIONS OF THOSE UNDERNEATH THAT, THAT THAT'S THE SAME THING THAT WILL HAPPEN DOWN HERE AT THIS INTERSECTION.
THEY'RE JUST STARTING WITH THEIR LOT.
FIRST, WE ARE GOING TO CATCH UP LIKE WHAT COMMISSIONER SIRE SHIED MEYER HAD STATED.
WE HAD TALKED ABOUT PUTTING REGIONAL NODE ON THIS INTERSECTION, AND THE PLAN IS STILL TO DO THAT.
THEY'RE JUST GETTING A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF US.
CAUSE I MEAN, SPECIFICALLY OUR ONE-ON-ONE KIND OF WORRIES ME, YOU KNOW, PUTTING OUR ONE-ON-ONE AT THIS SPOT RIGHT.
THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE BEST USE OF THAT AREA.
AND, AND THAT'S MY ONE HANGUP ON THIS CHANGE.
UH, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ORIGINAL NOTE IS FINE.
UH, AND I THINK ASSIGNING THE REGIONAL NOTE IS PRETTY MUCH GOING TO TAKE OUR ONE-ON-ONE OUT OF THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF WHAT'S GOING TO END UP HAPPENING WITH ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHY WE HAD TALKED ABOUT NOT JUST ASSIGNING IT TO THE LOTS THAT FRONTS THE INTERSECTION, BUT ALL THE LOTS THAT FRONTS 21 AND CREATING A YES, YOU REMEMBER THE DISTANCE, THE BUFFER THAT WE HAD ASSOCIATED WITH IT, BUT IT'S A SERIES OF HUNDRED OF FEET, HUNDREDS OF FEET BACK FROM 21 THAT WILL BE A BUFFER THAT WILL ENCOMPASS ALL OF THAT.
AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, REGIONAL NODES ARE, ARE NOT LOW DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ANYMORE.
BUT I THINK, I THINK THERE'S A PLACE IN THE EAST GATEWAY FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, NOT, I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE A MAJORITY OF IT, BUT I THINK THERE'S A PLACE FOR IT.
MORE THAN HUNDREDS OF FEET BACK FROM 21 TO HUNDREDS OF FEEDBACK FROM 21 WILL BE, WE'LL BE A COMMERCIAL.
UM, I GUESS MY BIGGEST QUESTION FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT ALEX HAD JUST SAID, UM, IS IF WE ARE DOING THIS A DIFFERENT TIME THAN WHAT WE WILL BE DOING, UM, THE REST OF KIND OF THIS INTERSECTION, WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD THAT WE WILL END UP WITH OUR ONE-ON-ONE BEFORE WE ARE ABLE TO ASSIGN A, A REGIONAL NODE TO IT, IF THAT'S, IF THIS AREA IS EXPANDING ENOUGH TO HAVE ITS OWN LIKE GATEWAY EAST GATEWAY DISTRICT, THE ASSIGNMENT OF EAST GATEWAY AND THE REGIONAL NODE WILL HAPPEN AT THE SAME TIME RIGHT NOW, NEITHER OF THOSE ARE PRESENT.
SO WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD, I DON'T KNOW.
SOMEBODY COULD COME IN TOMORROW AND ASK THE CITY DOESN'T, WE'RE NOT USUALLY PARTNERS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD DO.
SO, ALTHOUGH MATHEMATICALLY POSSIBLE, I CAN'T NECESSARILY SAY THAT THAT WOULD BE PROBABLE PROBABLY FOR THE SAME REASON THAT I HAD THAT I HAD ANSWERED, UM, COMMISSIONER GUARA.
I THINK IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY THAT THIS IS AN EMERGENT CORRIDOR.
THIS IS MOST LIKELY NOT GOING TO BE SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL HIGHEST AND BEST USE ON BOTH SIDES OF ONE 50 DOWN, DOWN CLOSE TO 21.
AND ON THE, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT, THEY, UM, WELL, NOT THE OTHER SIDE, BUT THE, THE EXIST, THERE'S NOT AN EXISTING WASTEWATER AVAILABILITY AT THIS TIME, NOR IS OUR PLANT CONSTRUCTED
[00:25:01]
YET EITHER THEY HAVE TO BUILD ALL THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, COUNTY LINE, ESPECIALLY UTILITY DISTRICTS.SO IT WILL BE A COUPLE OF YEARS, UH, LIKELY BEFORE ANYTHING COMES ONLINE, BECAUSE IT TAKES A WHILE TO BUILD THAT STUFF IT'S NOT CHEAP AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO BUILD.
SO THERE'S A, WE'LL HAVE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO ON OUR SIDE.
SO GIVEN THE ANNEXATION STATUS OF THIS, WILL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE OR DISPROVE OUR
IF THE PROPERTY OWNER WERE TO COME FORWARD AND ASK FOR OUR ONE-ON-ONE OR OUR ONE-TWO, YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT OUR UNDERSTANDING, OUR EXPECTATIONS THAT THIS PROPERTY WILL COME FORWARD FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
WHAT'S THE BOLDING OF THOSE IN THERE FOR, WELL, WHERE ARE YOU LOOKING IN THE STAFF REPORT? OH, R S THE PR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT ORIGINAL NOTES.
FOR A REGIONAL NODE AND UNDER NEW SETTLEMENT COMMUNITY, YOU'VE GOT OUR ONE-ON-ONE AND OUR ONE, TWO BOLDED, THE, THE APPLICANT DID SPECIFICALLY STAY WITHIN THEIR APPLICATION THAT THEY WERE POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT
HOWEVER, HOWARD IS CORRECT WITH, WITH THE, WITH WASTEWATER COMING ONLINE WITHIN THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND THE IMMEDIATE AREA RIGHT OUTSIDE THE REGIONAL NODE, HIGHER DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL THAN 80 FOOT WIDE, LOTS OF 65 FOOT LOTS WILL BE AN ADVANTAGE, UM, TO A DEVELOPER.
SO ARE CHANCES ARE, IT WILL BE.
SO THERE, IF I WERE AN APPLICANT OR A DEVELOPER, I WOULDN'T WANT TO DO OUR ONE HOUR, WENT TO THERE I'D WANT TO GO HIGHER DENSITY.
THEY'D HAVE TO BUILD SEPTIC, WHICH WOULD TAKE A HALF ACRE TO AN ACRE LOT TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.
AND THEREFORE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT BECAUSE THE LAKE WORTH TOO MUCH MORE.
AND THEN THERE WILL BE, YEAH, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOVING AHEAD ON THE, ON THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A WASTE PART OF THEM.
THEY'RE HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNTY LINE, ESPECIALLY UTILITY DISTRICT.
UH, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNTY LINE AS WELL.
THE WASTEWATER IS IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
WHAT, WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING.
IT'S LOW RISK THAT IT WILL BE LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, JUST BECAUSE THE LAND'S TOO VALUABLE.
I DON'T LIKE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT A CLIENT WILL OR WON'T DO, ESPECIALLY IF THEY HAVEN'T HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ME, BUT I'M, I'M A REGIONAL GUY.
I'M A BIG PICTURE GUY IN COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING.
THE FURTHER EAST, WE MOVE ON ONE 50, THE CLOSER YOU GET TO 21, THE LESS CHANCE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO CONSUME LARGE LOT LOW DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL.
THE FURTHER YOU MOVE BACK TOWARDS PECAN WOODS, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH PECAN WOODS, WHICH IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ELEMENTARY AND THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, BUT IT'S, IT'S FURTHER BACK TOWARDS TOWN.
THE FURTHER YOU GET AWAY FROM 21, THE MORE LIKELY YOU'RE GOING TO GET INTO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, STUFF LIKE THAT.
BUT WHEN YOU GET TO THE HIGH-INTENSITY CORRIDORS, THE HIGH ACTIVITY CORRIDORS LIKE WE HAVE ON TWO STATE ROADS, STATE HIGHWAY 21, AND, AND FM 50, IS IT FM ONE 50 AT THAT POINT? I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE MONIKER IS, BUT EITHER WAY, UM, THOSE, THOSE TRAVEL, UM, THOSE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR QUITE A BIT OF TRIBAL AND AUTOMOBILE.
SO IT'S LESS LIKELY THAT THOSE ARE GOING TO BE CONSUMED LOW DENSITY.
SO IF IT MAKES NO SENSE THAT SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO DO OUR ONE-ON-ONE OR
AND LIKE WE KEEP SAYING, THEY, THEY, THEY DID REQUEST THAT SPECIFICALLY, BUT THIS IS ALSO NOT A ZONING QUESTION.
THIS IS A LAND USE DISTRICT, WHICH MEANS THERE'S MULTIPLE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT WE COULD CONSIDER IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT GOES THROUGH.
SO IF THEY'RE LOOKING FOR HIGHER DENSITY ITEMS, IT MAY BE THAT THEY GO FOR TOWNHOMES, OR MAYBE SOME SORT OF, UM, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OF MULTIFAMILY OR SOME LOWER DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY ON THE, WITHIN THE NEW SETTLEMENT DISTRICT, IF YOU WILL.
UM, THERE'S, THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS AS WELL.
SO EVEN IF IT SEEMS STRANGE THAT THEY REQUESTED
[00:30:01]
ZONING DISTRICT.AND THAT WOULD COME BEFORE US.
THERE'S, THERE'S NO ZONING THAT GETS ASSIGNED.
SO TONIGHT'S QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY WILL BE ABLE TO, WE'LL BE ABLE TO EVEN ASK THE QUESTION IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE THEM TO BE ABLE TO ASK THE QUESTION IN THE FUTURE STAFF GENERALLY RECOMMENDS THAT YOU DON'T EXEMPT YOURSELF FROM YOUR OWN GOOD JUDGMENT.
SO YOU DON'T CLOSE THAT DOOR TODAY, MAKE, MAKE THE, MAKE IT POSSIBLE IN THE FUTURE.
AND THE ANSWER MAY VERY WELL LIKELY BE NO, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THAT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT SHOWS THE ONE LOT AS REGIONAL NODE, THE REST OF IT IS NEW SETTLEMENT COMMUNITY.
I GOT A PRETTY BETTER THAN AVERAGE SENSATION THAT A LOT MORE LAND DOWN THERE IS GOING TO BE REGIONAL NODE, WHICH AT THAT POINT, OUR ONE-ON-ONE WOULD BE IN CONGRUENT WITH THE OTHER USES PERMISSIBLE AND REGIONAL NODE.
SO WHEN THOSE ZONINGS START TO COME FORWARD TO YOU AT THAT POINT, IT WOULD BE LESS AND LESS ATTRACTIVE.
AND THAT, THAT IS IN A PLANNING STANDPOINT, THAT CHANGE IS IMMINENT AND BY IMMINENT, I MEAN, IN THE NEXT, PROBABLY 12 TO 16 WEEKS, WHICH IS AT THE SCALE AT WHICH WE WORK THAT'S IMMINENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN I HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR? YES.
I, UH, I'M LOOKING FOR THE TITLE.
I MOVE, WE APPROVE ITEM FOUR, A FOUR B FOUR B, EXCUSE ME.
CAN I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? YEAH.
SO, UM, I, I, I, I WAS STILL A BIT WARY ON THIS, BUT, BUT EVEN IF SOMETHING DID HAPPEN IN THE MEANTIME WHILE IT WAS CONSIDERED, UH, THE NEW SETTLEMENT, UM, WELL, AS OF NOW EVERYTHING, A NEW SETTLEMENT EXCEPT FOR, OH, I IS, UM, CONDITIONAL.
SO, YOU KNOW, TH W WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDED
IT WOULD HAVE TO, WE'D HAVE TO THEN APPROVE.
IS THIS A GOOD SPOT FOR OUR ONE, ONE? AND SO, UH, EVEN IN THE MEANTIME, WE WOULD HAVE TO THEN APPROVE IT.
SO, AND I WOULD ALSO ADD OUR ONE, ONE IS LIKELY TO FAIL IF BROUGHT BEFORE US OR FROM SOME OF THE MEMBERS HERE, AT LEAST.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY, AYE.
MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR? YES, I MOVE.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED MEETING IS ADJOURNED.