[0:00] New evening, busy day, it's all in a lot of people voting. That's very exciting. I'd have to see everyone else vote. We're starting tonight, the final clock meeting, typically with work session, but we're going to do a joint meeting with our awesome park and recreation board.

[0:15] So we have about 45 minutes ish to kind of hear from y'all and get your input, but I know I speak for colleagues on city council when we say thank you very much for being here. Carving time out of here today. Thanks for everything we do.

[0:27] Um, we really appreciate it. The, um, I'll just really briefly say, uh, I'm gonna talk to

[0:35] much because from my perspective, at the whole purpose of us meeting is honestly to hear

[0:40] from you. I guess not for us to talk at you, or even to like a, like a, back and forth. It's

[0:46] literally just to hear your perspective. So that way we can best inform ourselves of the council,

[0:50] we rely heavily on your feedback or expertise and what you do. So when I look at the youth sports

[1:00] discussion, big picture, I think it's discussed the killer sports authority but I think that's

[1:07] part of the picture really the big picture isn't so much the sports authority. The city council

[1:14] at a strategic meeting, was it June?

[1:17] June?

[1:19] June?

[1:19] Time flies.

[1:21] Where does strategic meeting in the question presented as a council was, how do we elevate

[1:27] the programming around these sports?

[1:31] We have a lot of kind of documentation on opportunities to address and improve the programming.

[1:38] But I, you know, just speaking for myself as a dad and a coach, a particular, I look at it as who are we here to serve, right?

[1:48] We're all here to serve parents, families and kids.

[1:51] We wanted to be a community focused, family from the conversation.

[1:56] And so I'm personally most interested, and I think it would make sense to kind of go along the room.

[2:02] And here your idea is on how you think we could help the families and the kids and help improve those opportunities.

[2:11] Because when you look at it from an insular like inside town hall conversation, what board committee, that's part of it.

[2:18] That's a very important component.

[2:20] But we're a local reason we're sitting here and talking about these sports because we all agree as a city council.

[2:26] And I know you agree as well, not speaking for anyone, but I know as a Parks and Recreation Board, you agree that

[2:31] Any opportunity we have to elevate the programming, quality of life around such a significant

[2:37] portion of our community, you should seize that.

[2:39] So if you have ideas, maybe even a crazy idea that you haven't said to anyone and you

[2:44] want to throw it out there and now it's the time.

[2:46] I don't think there's a bad idea and so that's all I really wanted to say.

[2:51] It's not so much about sports authority this, parks and recreation board that at least

[2:55] for me, it's where the idea is to move color forward, particularly in this case as a relates

[3:01] to use for its programming.

[3:03] We don't start any of our meaningful conversations without the cowboy, let's say you counsel

[3:07] joining us.

[3:07] Councillor Wally, how are you?

[3:08] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:10] I'm very grateful.

[3:10] Thank you.

[3:11] I apologize for my charge.

[3:13] No, you're okay.

[3:14] So does that make sense?

[3:17] Good to go.

[3:18] Okay.

[3:19] I don't know who wants to start, not pick on anyone, but maybe Caitlin, you want to?

[3:26] Can I refer to the end, I feel that I've filed this advantage because that's not with my colleagues in the creation of these parts.

[3:32] So I'm scared of that.

[3:33] I was not supposed to, so if I could refer and delay.

[3:36] Sure.

[3:37] Yeah.

[3:38] Absolutely.

[3:39] Think.

[3:40] If you guys could frame a little bit more.

[3:42] Since we have a tight time frame, so there's a 45 minute clock on this, right?

[3:47] So if you could take it one step further.

[3:51] Since we need this a rare opportunity to get a joint session with Council Sue, we want to make the most of it.

[3:56] So if you could maybe further articulate what your objectives are specifically from an outcome of perspective for tonight.

[4:05] You know, what would you, I know you would like to hear some thoughts related to, you know,

[4:12] We have the subcommittees that we have that model that we've followed on the part 40.

[4:19] We take on different assets.

[4:20] So we had a sports park, subcommittee and we can give you some feedback from that group in relation

[4:27] to some of the things that we've heard related to sports authority and how that works.

[4:31] But if there's something other than the sports authority,

[4:34] topically that you want to cover in this joint session, then if you get this sort of frame

[4:39] that for us, so we don't get off the task.

[4:42] Yeah, at least for me, and this was kind of what we stated as a city council.

[4:46] It's literally to just get your ideas and your input on the Youth Sports Program space.

[4:54] So it could be...

[4:55] So what does success look like, which is what you're asking Felix?

[4:58] It's literally you providing...

[5:00] Your feedback and your thoughts and your ideas us. That's success. You know, how the city council decides to move forward, you know, we will rely on that feedback.

[5:12] So there's not really a right-wrong answer. I'll just tell you, I have impressed personally to do a better job articulating my why.

[5:21] And part of this, I try to be really, like, really polite, especially when we're in this building and maintaining a certain level of decorum.

[5:27] But I've just seen some really problematic issues in our youth sports community.

[5:32] I've seen extremely racist behavior with coaches and referees.

[5:39] I've experienced and seen really abusive coaching that have been perpetuated over time.

[5:45] I've seen families disenfranchised on a routine basis while our associations ignore their violence.

[5:51] It's all kind of held back because I view this as such a great opportunity

[5:57] To bring the community together and talk about opportunities to really enhance programming

[6:03] and quality life for families, so I think it's a fiery language and sometimes it sounds

[6:08] like I'm talking in circles, I'm sure, but at the end of the day for me, what's success

[6:12] like is a dad and a coach is making sure that we provide excellence in our programming,

[6:18] however you measure that and really it's going to be a sport by sport discussion, you know,

[6:27] are not the same.

[6:28] And so we're going to have to do no matter what,

[6:30] how we get there in my mind anyway.

[6:33] We're going to have to do a really deep dive

[6:35] on each of these sports and opportunities

[6:37] to improve the trophy.

[6:39] That can be schedules, practice locations,

[6:42] team formation, coaching, improvement.

[6:46] We also have to parse out what is the city's role

[6:49] and responsibility in this, right?

[6:51] And so I think the heart of that currently today

[6:53] as you know, as well as anyone Felix and Jay and Tom in particular, is we have contracts with

[7:02] these associations. So how do we embed, first of all, we develop those expectations and then

[7:07] how do we embed those expectations in the contracts themselves? Is that help?

[7:13] Are we operating as a landowner and a amenity owner?

[7:20] Yes.

[7:23] That's how you would define the city?

[7:26] Yes sir.

[7:28] Yes sir.

[7:29] Pardon and Stuart.

[7:30] Yes sir.

[7:33] So I think starting at that and creating a framework,

[7:37] I think the thing that unites sort of all of us in the room

[7:40] is that we all want to put a better product out there for use sports.

[7:44] I think we're all agree that we want to improve use sports in the experience for everyone,

[7:50] and that are what level of sport that they're playing no matter what sport they're in in the city of California.

[7:55] So I think we're all united in that objective.

[7:58] I think that there's been a lot of talk about how to get one thing if you go back from the

[8:07] Historically, as a park board we have, you know, we've asked Council to give us the opportunity to take on more responsibility to get a little more granular to, and that's where the subcommittee idea was born out of that, where we could go a little deeper, you know, the idea of the committees of three, so we're not violating Thomas, so we can go deep on a subject matter, do the research, go out and meet outside of our, you know, out of our, a lot of meeting times on a monthly basis, and we could do research and work as a team, too.

[8:37] to take the time to go deep and research subject matter, bring it back to the park board, make recommendations to park board KVC and ultimately to council related to matters of policy and the construct of different things that we're doing.

[8:52] So the sport park was one of those subcommittees you've seen other committees on trails and Johnson Root Park and some of the other great work that our team has done over the years.

[8:59] That's been a process to get those opportunities throughout the years from the first year that I was on the park board we met four times in that entire year.

[9:12] So the last time, one of the things that in anticipation of the sports park being developed in the expansion of the park and knowing that we had work to do with these associations and the quality of the work product that was there in the offering that we had available in the city.

[9:26] As we said, you know, we wanted to take on these agreements, they have been updated for years.

[9:32] And we thought this is something we need to address.

[9:34] We also saw an opportunity, because we knew, it's kind of one of those if you build it, they're going to come.

[9:39] There's going to be more demand on that park.

[9:41] There's going to be an opportunity to expand the opportunity to, you know, maybe rent it, turn it in,

[9:47] those type of things.

[9:48] Things that didn't exist before.

[9:49] We didn't have rent those before.

[9:51] We didn't have turns before.

[9:52] So we wanted to get in front of that.

[9:53] then so your predecessor said go for it, you know, go ahead and write those agreements, take those on and which we will

[10:00] That opportunity in that task. So in effort to do that, we went in and we went deep. We went to the β, we went to the β, almost all of the, yeah, that guy.

[10:10] Yeah that guy. That guy.

[10:15] So we went deep on that, we studied that we looked at other cities, we looked at everything from the fee structures and, you know,

[10:29] practices from others to come up with some recommendations that we have made throughout, you know,

[10:34] over the last couple of years really, and work together with staff. And so, you know, you've seen

[10:39] those in pieces and parts that we've made recommendations for council and to others. And so that,

[10:45] you know, I don't want to do all the talking on one of my colleagues to talk, but I've just

[10:49] to try to set the framework and the foundation for this. There's been a lot of effort that's been

[10:54] forward on this. And our desire was to actually to do more, to take on the opportunity to manage

[11:02] this, to get in front of it, to also to address some of the concerns that you had to actually

[11:07] make sure that the associations are living up to the standards that we put forward in those documents.

[11:12] To make certain that those documents are adhered to, because we do understand that there are

[11:18] of some things that were sort of happening, you know, they weren't necessarily managed

[11:24] for a study because we didn't have somebody necessarily on top of them.

[11:28] And we wanted to make certain that we put that the documents were, we paired them down,

[11:35] we made them something that we thought were the documents that we could actually make certain

[11:42] that they made.

[11:44] They were applicable to the sports that were out there.

[11:46] had some new sports that came out, that came out, you know, with the lacrosse and others.

[11:51] So we wanted to make sure that they were representative of all the sports that were utilized

[11:56] in the sports park and to that end, you know, you have some sports out there that have different

[12:02] levels.

[12:02] They have not just recreational sports, but they have the lead and select levels, but we wanted

[12:07] to preserve.

[12:09] You know, it's the first and foremost, as we all agree, it's, you know, recreational sports

[12:13] want to preserve the opportunity for records first and foremost. So again, with all that in mind,

[12:19] we try to create these user agreements that address those issues and that were enforceable.

[12:24] And then the second piece to that was to allow us to add the opportunity once we've put

[12:30] out those fingers placed to add the opportunity as a park board to have some governance over that

[12:34] and to enforce those. And I guess that's part of what brings us here today because in sort of the

[12:39] The emphasis of that, the evolution of that, you know, the things that are essential of this sports authority and others, maybe taking that on.

[12:48] And what we've said is we think we have the capacity to take that on.

[12:51] We would like to manage that.

[12:54] And that's a big part of what's brought us here today for discussion.

[12:59] And one of the things that I think that I don't know about the rest of my colleague,

[13:03] to the one of the things I know of, certainly, I hope that we can address as a group,

[13:07] because that's certainly out there in the air,

[13:11] whether or not this is the form that we're going to address that.

[13:14] If we're going to address that tonight or not,

[13:16] that I do think that we believe, even in the user agreements

[13:22] that we've put forward, we think there's a mechanism to manage that

[13:27] and do it well as a park board and still address a lot

[13:33] of the issues and concerns that you've raised.

[13:35] And maybe not just you, it was the mayor, but others on council and raised, and still, I think we can all accomplish these goals together, and put that product out there that we'll make all of us proud for the view sports programs that we have here in California.

[13:50] Great.

[13:51] So that's my takeout, and I'll defer to them.

[13:53] There's lives.

[13:54] Well, I try to follow on people with them.

[13:56] And I got immediately disabled.

[13:58] It's like all of us.

[13:59] I mean, I've always, I've always, the first job.

[14:02] I didn't back there. We're not gonna forget about you sir. You want us to up here? We can get their safe. You can survive.

[14:08] You're on the subject of the issue. Come on, yeah, you should probably go in.

[14:11] What's the case? I'm a spirit in the end. I'm going to the right room.

[14:14] You'll see what's going on.

[14:16] Okay, that is a...

[14:18] Well, I'm going to work.

[14:19] Well, let's try.

[14:20] Like you've been hearing that.

[14:21] Well, I'm getting it here. I know for council tonight.

[14:24] With the Boone for Tech and Lair, you weigh all thoughts on the sports authority.

[14:29] On Parks and Rec, if you think Parks and Rec do it, if you think subcommittee will be helpful,

[14:34] bandwidth related to that, and the issues that the Mayor spoke to, if you think contracts right now can speak to that,

[14:42] or manage those issues and so how, if not, when we upgrade to contracts, that's one of the sort of that

[14:47] end year, it's just going 45 minutes. I know that's what we want to hear.

[14:50] There's a lot of things, Parks and Rec, can talk about the point of y'all being here to be really specific

[14:54] because the stamp to the presentation.

[14:57] Yeah, and I was the sad one thing, it's not like a one-end.

[15:01] Like I've talked with, personally with Mr. Mirror, Mr. Blakey, like a lot about the thought that these sports of course, so I think it, you know, yes, it is part of the input, it's also too.

[15:16] I would almost answer a question with the question because it is like we're seeking your feedback, you know, what do you think recreational sports could look like and how from a programming perspective could we better deliver that service?

[15:30] Anyone want to go?

[15:32] Thank you for inviting us and for the conversation.

[15:36] I had the opportunity to be a KYA parent from, I think, my son started at 6U.

[15:45] He's now a freshman in high school, so we were with KYA.

[15:49] It's a whole time. We had a great experience.

[15:51] I do know that there are challenges, and I really wish I could have got to enjoy the new sports park more.

[15:58] But we won't go there.

[16:01] I feel like over the last eight or so years that we've been

[16:06] part of the sports organization,

[16:10] I don't feel like we had a voice of the customer,

[16:13] voice of the community type feedback,

[16:17] that the angry people are going to bubble up.

[16:19] The happy people will get a referral like, hey,

[16:22] go play at KLA or go to play at KSA.

[16:26] And you get those both polarizing perspectives, right?

[16:32] I think, you know, as people that have been participating or people that may have left the organizations that have utilized the park,

[16:40] I think we really need to, to dig deep and find out where there are opportunities, not just the ones that have bubbled up to your level.

[16:50] But as a community as a full, I mean personally, I really, we'd really enjoyed our experience.

[16:57] My husband coach, you know, that really helped, you know, we didn't have any battles with that.

[17:01] I mean, sometimes I didn't agree with him.

[17:04] But overall it was a very good experience.

[17:07] All of our kids were color kids, you know, color, color, important words.

[17:11] But color ISD kids, and it worked very well.

[17:16] And it was very successful and we had a lot of fun.

[17:18] You love me, love our experience.

[17:21] Like I said, there are work challenges.

[17:24] I think getting that feedback, getting candid feedback,

[17:28] and in a manner that can be collected and reviewed

[17:30] and observed to see, you know, hey, if you live in here

[17:35] and you're playing in a flower mound

[17:37] or you're playing at softly or you're playing at Holyville.

[17:40] Why?

[17:40] What was the reason?

[17:42] Was there not a team?

[17:43] Was there not a coach?

[17:44] Did you have a racist issue or whatever?

[17:48] I think that would be good to get some people back there.

[17:53] I love our facilities.

[17:56] I think knowing and having a passion with the Parks and REC,

[18:01] some of these people it worked very hard on getting it to where it's not now.

[18:07] And they have a very big vested interest.

[18:09] So I do think the Parks and REC team can help provide some of the governance around policies

[18:16] to help improve, but I do think we need to have a further discussion on how do we find out

[18:23] where this gaps are? Yeah. Thoughts saying anything else, I completely agree. Very well stated.

[18:31] Okay. What? Um, I like how you went from like, last, I'm lying this second.

[18:36] Well, no, it's talking, it makes me uncomfortable and I'm usually hyper-directed. I don't mean to like,

[18:41] mitigate. I'm in, on no team of this. With this agreement and the potential,

[18:45] free of order that is going to turn potentially in fact Parks and Recreation and what their

[18:49] adherence is. My couple of reservations are one, like I'm not a parent that's actively

[18:53] involved in these sports. My input is not going to be strong because I'm not an active participant

[18:57] that I don't feel the political pain. So we sit in this room and obviously there's political

[19:01] tension behind it. I am not privileged to accept part of it. So to create an opinion on how

[19:06] we use sports should be run when I don't participate in it is tough. From the outside perspective,

[19:11] when you have use sports, yes things get escalated and elevated. If you create a board that

[19:16] we need to now oversee the governance of this, is this going to be a very short duration to

[19:20] create these contracts. Once they are, then what is that for do they are on out? Is it like a short

[19:25] derived?

[19:28] I mean, it's going to take one to two years to kind of bear these out. And then the oversight,

[19:32] I would imagine would be relatively low. So then does the prudence come from there and the people

[19:36] that now are managing the associations to keep them accountable, because we don't have to do staff

[19:40] dollars tax to be able to do that. Then I can see if we're living in perpetuity that

[19:45] can take that on in its entirety for the duration of what use sports would look like.

[19:49] If we're just going over a use agreement that's been set forward that there might be some

[19:53] discrepancies between and I think as adults we can work through redline those and be able

[19:56] to navigate without onboarding a secondary team that now has to...

[20:00] We caught up to speed. It's speed is of the essence to be able to outline these before we put forth these agreements. Having a team that's put hundreds of hours into it is going to probably get us there faster than creating a new one. So, or, making it joint between somebody else and honoring the time put in, honoring the time put in. I also understand if it's not in the direction that council wants to go. We need to pivot, we need to be in the animal to that. But I think that it's the direction of these things that we need to fair it out with the intent as opposed to what is the long term.

[20:29] goal of this board is versus ours and again I don't mean to be hyper direct and cut through but I just don't want to talk in these

[20:36] You know, I just hit them when we're trying to get to the key to it. So that's my peripheral. I did not put the hundreds of hours in

[20:43] I support the work they've done. I also need to like type I'm not in these sports anymore

[20:47] We were tech one. No, so I don't have that insight. But I want there's yeah, that's awesome. But you play. I did absolutely

[20:54] The idiosyncrasies of every town are different and playing 30 years ago is a lot different than what the sports looked like now

[21:01] Was I am a lean athlete and did all the things yes, that's also where my question for recreational sports

[21:11] I'm sorry

[21:12] When you're talking about recreational sports, I did not have experience in recreational sports. Our our intent was to win and that was it was more cut for it

[21:22] So I don't have the inside of to what recreational sports look like.

[21:25] So it's not that I don't have a lot to contribute to this argument.

[21:28] It's where I differ to my colleagues as to where we're going to navigate this on an

[21:32] issue where I come and leave all things considered with this sports agreement.

[21:36] So that's where my whole new respect is deferring, but here is my little bit of oversight.

[21:41] Yeah, I think, I'm going to make sure to have it down on CERO,

[21:46] the way I synthesize it,

[21:48] what's the mission moving forward? Is it to provide an

[21:52] answer countability update agreements for both?

[21:57] Yeah, because if it's an answer countability, then you're saying,

[22:02] you know, maybe additional bonds here, additional bonds here could help,

[22:08] if it's to update agreements, then maybe, you know, we don't need. So, I'm

[22:12] tracking, I think what you're saying is that kind of, yeah, okay, okay,

[22:16] All right.

[22:17] That's super awful.

[22:20] I'll go

[22:23] first.

[22:24] I'd say anybody that's surprised that use sports and people that are not happy.

[22:32] That's a surprise to anybody living under a rock.

[22:37] A, B, I think the city operating as a landowner and an amenity owner and partnering with

[22:46] various associations to produce use sports activity in that sports park is the right way to go.

[22:54] And any move by the city to move towards operating those leads and those associations,

[23:02] I think that's a money pit, weight map.

[23:07] That being said, I'd be the first to admit and suggest that we need to hold those associations

[23:14] more accountable than we're doing today. I have not been privy to the comments or the instances

[23:21] of racism or favoritism or whatever the things that somebody has collected that information.

[23:31] I don't know where it came from or under what context, but I won't say that that does exist.

[23:40] At the same time, I think if we were to modify the user agreements, and then hold people accountable to those user agreements.

[23:49] The last part board meeting, K-Y presented to us, and they dug themselves a deep hole by admitting that they were not honoring the terms of the user agreement.

[24:02] They were making arbitrary decisions about fees out to the city based on whatever the hell they wanted to

[24:09] In turn and that's wrong and they need to be held accountable and we need when we come to know that

[24:16] When we come to know that they are delayed and their responsiveness to us for information that's supposed to be to us three weeks before the season starts and they don't bring it and

[24:28] The staff allows that to happen, but we'll get it when we get it in that but staff in a precarious position, that's BS and it ought to be fixed.

[24:39] I guarantee that the Department can hold those associations accountable, we can assist staff to make sure that that happens.

[24:50] We don't need another body to support the city staff.

[24:57] We are happy to support the city staff.

[25:00] I think better to do with my session.

[25:04] That said, I also knew you were asking for ideas, Mr. Mayor. I think we're all operating on third party information. We need somebody on the city staff that is present and accounted for when that amenity is being utilized so that we can come to know for ourselves when things go awry.

[25:27] Yeah, I'm just to say council staff did a good job, this last budget allocating funding for that, and I think you're aware of the KVC allocation that we wrapped in this last budget, so it's my way of agreeing with you.

[25:43] I'm a staff support perspective, but I just want you guys all on that.

[25:48] I was on a roll.

[25:50] I don't know.

[25:51] I don't know.

[25:53] I think I was personally surprised at how challenging the associations that I've just been.

[26:03] And I think we ought to increase the reporting frequency of the associations to the park board

[26:09] from annual to quarterly, or monthly, or hourly, or whatever, to hold them accountable.

[26:19] And third, I think we ought to let Park and Recreation Board take a shot at that.

[26:27] We developed the user agreements, the term is up here in February and March of 2027.

[26:34] we need to be on half of that. We need to gather in, but from everybody around this table to

[26:39] make sure that those user agreements define all of the aspects of the management and reporting

[26:47] and accountability. We expect from those youth associations and then we ought to hold them accountable.

[26:54] I also think that as you stated Mr. Mayor, each sport is unique in their needs.

[27:00] We need to send a very KYA, KYA, and my humble opinion, is a baseball organization that is tacked on football and cheer, and everything else we want to have separate user agreements with separate associations for every sport.

[27:18] And for sports like basketball, they don't utilize any city facilities.

[27:24] Why the heck are we?

[27:26] Why that heck are we today a party to the degree to use our agreement?

[27:31] When we don't have any say in that, if we're the landowner in the, and the amount of the owner, why do we care what basketball does?

[27:41] Basketball do what basketball does.

[27:44] That may exist for volleyball as well.

[27:50] Think I'll leave it there.

[27:51] All right.

[27:54] We'll start, sir.

[27:57] Good for that.

[27:58] Oh, I'm going to get a gap.

[28:00] I don't know.

[28:01] Pretty much like what he said.

[28:03] And it fits also.

[28:04] And he has some kind of belt.

[28:05] He's a big deal out there.

[28:07] I was thinking, when KWA presented to us the other night,

[28:11] that they were going to bring us some financials.

[28:13] And pretty much like it was a history of KWA,

[28:14] when it started, when we were a half.

[28:17] And the numbers are OK.

[28:18] They just don't have them.

[28:19] But it just doesn't have a Jordan flashed her spreadsheets up and we were miles apart.

[28:28] How would dad do that, sorry Tom?

[28:29] Well, there's a K-way annual presentation, if they send their baseball guy.

[28:35] That's the only person that came to me.

[28:38] He's just seen your guy there, I believe, but still, I don't even know who the president is.

[28:44] I think it's kind of built to be, you know, out there, as far as there should be an oversight.

[28:53] I don't know what's going to be the parts of the right board.

[28:55] I think we can do it.

[28:56] I know we can do it.

[28:58] As a source of the worry, I think we can do that.

[29:01] If we can get the numbers from these teams, I've never heard anything about racism.

[29:06] You know, you know, you also go out there and I'm hoping that never happens.

[29:09] If it has, it's terrible.

[29:12] But I'm kind of going to reflect on what he said.

[29:16] We can do it, and I believe we've been here long enough on the board that we can set

[29:21] here.

[29:23] So that's just what I can.

[29:25] Well, I'll set.

[29:28] I think I come in on some of the things that my fellow Parks Board members have said.

[29:34] But I do agree.

[29:36] I believe workhouse is going, is this is that we should have strong agreements and they

[29:40] be governed by the city as the landowner. We have some level of ability and obligation to

[29:50] govern what's happening out there. I think that if the use of agreements today don't have

[29:58] the teeth that they need in order to...

[30:00] But she, the city's objectives,

[30:04] been, you know, to Jay's point, we need to be having those conversations to update those user agreements before they're resigned.

[30:10] To Nicole's a point about getting feedback from the community. I don't know if this is the answer, but since we're just throwing things on the wall.

[30:18] We did a survey for Johnson and Park that received tremendous feedback, anonymous feedback from the community. That way, they only had to tell us as much about themselves as they felt.

[30:29] We made a lot of questions optional, maybe something like that to get it feedback from the everyday user who's willing to get it.

[30:40] As far as do we have the bandwidth to govern it?

[30:45] I certainly think that it's not unreasonable to give us a shot.

[30:49] And if we're not meeting your objectives, it's your prerogative to spin up another group if you've deemed that appropriate.

[30:57] your elected officials. We're here to help you. As far as the sports authority presentation

[31:04] that I watch, I would just say that if you do screw up another organization, like here,

[31:09] Caitlin, say, and I'll reiterate it myself. I'm not a youth sports parent out at the sports

[31:14] park, so I wouldn't have that perspective in supporting you in that regard. I have so worry

[31:21] that if the youth sports association is all current youth sports parents who are actively

[31:26] using the park, then there is also a conflict of interest there as well. So do you need

[31:32] current use force parents at the table? Absolutely, you need their inputs. Wouldn't be

[31:37] effective without it. But if it is all use of current use force parents, not former use

[31:42] sports parents or but just all current, then intentionally or unintentionally their teams to

[31:49] get preferential treatment, their children to get preferential treatment, their friends to get

[31:52] financial treatment. So consider how you might balance that and also our meetings are recorded.

[32:00] I know that not all committee meetings are not all commissions that you guys have stood up

[32:06] are recorded. I would encourage this commission to be recorded for your protection and theirs,

[32:15] so that it doesn't look like backdoor deals are happening because it's all on camera.

[32:21] That's a great one. Yep. No, that's great.

[32:25] I do, but I want to say one thing. Oh, thank you.

[32:32] As a grandparent that had both their children, I used the park before.

[32:38] I mean, it's like two different worlds.

[32:41] So it's been interesting for me because it's out of my realm here,

[32:47] because I've always been doing a senior stuff as you don't know.

[32:50] And so, I can see where they're at, you do the youth getting their games together, learning

[32:58] a lot of things from it, you know, if you have a team like I was talking to someone

[33:02] else the other day.

[33:04] If you have a team whether you're a professional football player or whatever, it doesn't make any

[33:09] difference.

[33:10] You're a team.

[33:10] It's not one guy's job, and I think this is how this comes around personally, but no,

[33:18] I've been listening, trying to see what's most important or maybe I'll fit into it.

[33:25] I might fit into it other things that might help.

[33:29] Yeah, that's great.

[33:32] You know, it's all in a, you know, it's sure the board come back to you if you don't mind.

[33:38] See if you have anything.

[33:39] I mean, honestly, he probably can't speak for council saying that.

[33:43] It's like, we would love to spend more time with you guys tonight.

[33:47] It's probably the biggest monster, the biggest agenda, not a monster, the biggest agenda that I've seen since we've been on City Council.

[33:54] And so, just so you know how important it is that we get your feedback, you know, good news of my colleagues for bringing you guys to the table.

[34:02] Because this is, you know, all the time important, this isn't important for you five minutes or so.

[34:08] I just want to say something about the whole concept of sports authority and parks and operation boards.

[34:13] Right now today, and I don't have a little laundry list of people that I can contact and say apply, that's not the purpose.

[34:21] But there is a tremendous appetite in the community to get them more involved.

[34:26] We have a lot of volunteers that want to help out.

[34:30] And so that's kind of, I'm going to kind of pin that and say, hey, that's a question that if we have folks with good acumen expertise, how do we get them engaged?

[34:41] the sports authority could be one. I also, I never viewed it as an either or equation.

[34:47] Like, I view, like, in my brain, the sports authority was additive if it was to be created.

[34:53] It's not like, okay, they're doing use sports, so let's ignore all the great work and feedback from the Fartherer.

[35:00] Recreation Board like that will be a completely myopic approach. Really, it's a way to bring conceptually, if you think about it, it's a way to bring more people to the table to create fan, to get a free, large volume of community feedback.

[35:14] So I just wanted you to know today,

[35:16] for the loss of what council decides to do,

[35:18] I think all of us would say, it's not like an either of work.

[35:22] It's, you know, it really should be a collaborative approach.

[35:25] And so even if a sports authority is created,

[35:29] at least my expectation would be that they're working in concert

[35:32] with our Parks and Recreation Board team, KDC,

[35:35] so you staff, et cetera.

[35:36] So I just wanted to get that out there

[35:37] because I didn't want you to think it was, you know,

[35:40] one of the other.

[35:41] But viewers, but, you know,

[35:43] Thanks for allowing us to be here and I think to just summarize a couple of things first.

[35:49] I'm super proud of this team.

[35:51] I think we have an exceptional board.

[35:54] And I can tell you they serve this community very, very well.

[35:58] And they go deep on all their subject matter.

[36:00] And even though they're not in a serious sports park,

[36:04] subcommittee, they have thought about this subject.

[36:07] and we talked about it and going deep in our monthly meetings and I think there are a couple

[36:14] things just to resonate maybe in closing.

[36:17] I don't think it's a matter of accountability that we're addressing, not necessarily

[36:22] governance.

[36:24] It's really, we're talking about accountability issues out there and we're all agreed that

[36:29] there needs to be more accountability and I believe we can deliver that accountability

[36:33] for you, for what you're wanting, and you know, I think we were looking for a strict adherence

[36:39] to those agreements. And we're also saying that we would like to put some more teeth in those

[36:45] agreements, even when we wrote them the first time, this is the first guy that said, Aaron said,

[36:50] I'd like him to even be tougher. You know, we tried to make him, we actually tried to put more teeth

[36:55] in them than they had existed previously. So, we want to be empowered to, to come in and step

[37:03] in that, and enforce those, and be empowered to, to help people accountable.

[37:08] Can I ask you one question?

[37:10] What does that mean?

[37:12] Like, want to be able to, yeah, counsel and powers, do they can your mind?

[37:15] So do you want to be able to call the sports, do you want to be able to have, until you

[37:21] have leverage right now, because the sports groups can rent the fields, for example.

[37:29] If they don't turn in their documents, if they're not doing it, if they're not

[37:32] applying to the agreements, then they don't have the privileges out there on the fields.

[37:36] There are things that we can do today to make them compliant.

[37:39] But we need to be able to then know that we can go ahead and start pulling those triggers.

[37:45] And we can start, you know, we can step in there and have staffs back.

[37:49] We can call them into the part-porting.

[37:51] If you also read the agreements, we can assemble the people to adjudicate problems and rise

[37:58] of the level of the things you talked about where they're in breach of the agreement and things

[38:02] that are terrible, like you dressed like races and most things that have no place in the

[38:06] city of Calor any of the in sports organizations.

[38:09] Those boards, that mechanism exists in the agreements and we can put those in some of those

[38:13] boards and that board would be made up of my people that would be assembled at your direction

[38:21] council and and collaborate with our board and TECC. So then do you need a message from us to do that work because like in my mind just

[38:33] Yes, contractually like we've already passed the user agreements we've already made the expectations prettier.

[38:39] So I just I don't know and this is actually helpful not just in the situation and you know like blame the rookie mayor.

[38:45] Right. I'm excited to take the fall.

[38:46] Oh, like, I guess, do you need to pass the results?

[38:49] We need to see if you were policy.

[38:51] No disrespect there, but if you were called,

[38:54] if you were called J. Tom and I sat right there

[38:56] when their mosaic sat in that seat.

[38:59] And we said, in power us to do these things.

[39:01] And power, let us take on these agreements,

[39:02] and let us write these things, and let the parkboards

[39:05] step in and do some of these things.

[39:06] Because the parkboard was more of a titular head type

[39:09] of thing that we weren't policy makers.

[39:11] We are a conduit for you.

[39:13] We are a voice of a community that brings things

[39:16] But we really never have been any kind of an enforcement mechanism.

[39:20] It's never been, that's never been in our purview.

[39:23] But we're asking that a view. Yes, we'd like to be able to step in there and do those things.

[39:27] And I think we have, you've seen the group here that I think can, if and power, we can certainly do it.

[39:35] And as Ashley said, give us the opportunity.

[39:37] And if you're not happy with the product, then you know, then you can step in and create an alternative.

[39:44] Okay, so I guess here and we're going to have to, you know, have a council that from a process perspective and I'm going to be quiet and if there's, you know, anyone else feel like we need to get anything out we can.

[39:56] Probably need to think about, like, what that sort of,

[40:01] And powering language looks like when we're trying to communicate to boards and commissions.

[40:08] So that way there's peer direction because I don't want anyone to spin their wheels or waiting on.

[40:12] I don't know any year wants a board or commission waiting on us to provide feedback on their seeking direction.

[40:19] So we'll just figure out which is how to figure out the right mechanism to get that feedback on it.

[40:24] I'm trying to add, I think the other, which we're saying, we have the levers and we recognize

[40:29] that actually we also want to make sure council is comfortable and we'll support staff when

[40:33] we have to implement those levers and I think that's something that we clearly say what we're

[40:37] looking for.

[40:38] Yes, I mean, it's one thing, you know, to talk about empowerment, I think what you're trying

[40:41] to sell, so it's it's it's verbal, like council providers, specific vision for you guys

[40:46] and like if we're having issues with racism, for saying in the conference law, for it's

[40:51] We heard about this, can you guys handle it using the contracts?

[40:54] Is that what you're talking about?

[40:56] Yes, that's what I think.

[40:57] We asked in the KYA presentation, do you document discreeds your conflicts or code of

[41:03] conduct issues?

[41:05] The financial loss.

[41:08] We can't go.

[41:10] They can't even tell the same thing.

[41:11] They can't even tell the same thing.

[41:12] They can't even tell the same thing.

[41:12] That's actually a rule.

[41:14] That's true.

[41:15] Yeah.

[41:16] on here and it's not up to date, you know, put this out there, regardless of how the, I think

[41:23] the direction goes, you know, we've got to move forward one way or the other. And you know,

[41:29] this is not necessarily, I'm sensitive to the fact that you guys are awesome at that you signed

[41:35] up to volunteer for a community on the Parks and Recreation Board. Like if you take a big set

[41:39] back and you're like, man, if you want to pick the best humans in a community, it would be that people

[41:43] volunteer for this sort of endeavor. I always felt people as I think I

[41:49] coached over 100 games in the last year, and there's only one thing

[41:51] more dramatic than you sports sometimes, and not to pick on, you know, colleagues

[41:57] on the school board, but sometimes they go a little bit farther, and that's not

[42:01] just color. So just to give you heads up, I do anticipate it's going to be a

[42:07] pretty dynamic topic of conversation. And in those conversations, there

[42:12] can be frustrations, and that's okay for my perspective, and I think everyone in this room.

[42:18] But that's also not, I'm sensitive of the fact that's not necessarily what everyone

[42:22] signed up for, is to just sit and talk about these sports at Nazium.

[42:26] It's certainly a passion point for myself and many others, but I just want to thank you again

[42:32] for being here.

[42:33] It's an open dialogue, open conversation, and I can't re-emphasize enough that no matter

[42:38] which way the sports authority goes, the bigger picture is the outputs and the people

[42:42] we serve and a few at this point we're all united on that from it's just how do we get

[42:47] there and how do we get there with urgency and without too much delay so is that reasonable?

[42:55] Awesome.

[42:56] Well, unless there's anything else for the good of the order we're only two minutes later.

[43:01] Thank you.

[43:02] Thank you.

[43:03] Thank you.

[43:04] We're going to adjourn the work session for a few and then we'll reconvene into the great

[43:10] There's a great y'all submitting here on this.

[45:07] All right. We're back at a great joint work session and joint meeting with Fox and our creation board. Again, thank you to all the great folks serving on that group.

[45:18] I'm going to kind of go through the review of the agenda items a little bit quicker. So if I go through fast college, just kind of, you know, throw something.

[45:28] That being said, have a healthy list of executive session items.

[45:34] We also have a few work session items, or old business.

[45:41] We have the high school girls rode the team coming in.

[45:46] So I love my cowboys with the home, but it will be fun.

[45:49] Fun to recognize that.

[45:54] Does anyone have any questions about the consent items?

[45:57] So you want us to go through one by one,

[46:04] give me a second to pause and read your consent. Any questions on consent?

[46:10] I think that I'll be required to just kind of come up with procedural perspective.

[46:14] No, I'll probably out there.

[46:18] Now, we're meeting your views and the agenda items is pretty much our discussion.

[46:28] So.

[46:29] So I guess I do have one question.

[46:30] Sure.

[46:31] Maybe for a while, so.

[46:33] about the winding and jammer at 1709.

[46:38] The intersection that's being redesigned

[46:40] is at 1709's Chandler.

[46:44] And that's full of westbound to northbound movements.

[46:49] That movement just to jump in, curve.

[46:52] OK, no, no, no.

[46:53] See, there's drag.

[46:54] The roadway is too narrow and make that turn.

[46:56] If there's a southbound vehicle, let's stop.

[46:59] So this is all, this is all with better current budgeted projects.

[47:03] That's correct.

[47:06] The design, that's good.

[47:08] The design is no more important.

[47:10] Are we going to build it?

[47:11] It's a very broad topic.

[47:13] Because there's not a sidewalk there.

[47:15] Along here.

[47:16] Because that's something we can play on now.

[47:18] Is that it?

[47:19] None of that's going to be part of it, right?

[47:20] At this time, not.

[47:22] But it doesn't take much.

[47:24] Move way till.

[47:25] Twenty-three.

[47:26] And then the arms.

[47:27] Yeah.

[47:29] I know.

[47:34] Mr. Mayor, I just had a question on the, because we talked about it earlier and it's kind of neat, so I just wanted to kind of maybe have the cheap talk a little bit about the body cameras and the tators.

[47:47] So just, no, I had some kind of general questions, so these are the body cams, those are just a kind of a place problem that we have right now.

[47:54] correct correct and then what's the kind of the life span on on on body

[48:00] camps. So I think the five years we'll have to renew the contract and if this

[48:04] happens over a place all the body camps. Okay five years. Okay five years they

[48:08] hold it and then if they break or then they just send us a new and that's part of the

[48:11] deal. We don't have to buy new and it's just an automatic replacement. Okay and then

[48:15] we'll be struck through the contract over punished all of them again. And the tasers

[48:19] tasers are going to those taser tens that we talked about when I gave the CCPD

[48:23] presentation but those instead of having just two deployments and hope they work and

[48:28] hopefully get a connection there's 10 individuals deployments and all you have to have

[48:33] as two connections of the 10 to make it work so you have a lot better chances to succeed.

[48:41] A lot of the other good part of that is that once these tasers are taken out of a holster

[48:45] and automatically activates all the bodyworm cameras in the area and that's not that's even if

[48:51] They're not killer PD folks, if they have X on products,

[48:54] it's going to automatically activate the video in this proximity

[48:57] to capture what's going on.

[49:00] And then I was talking with the mayor and he had volunteers.

[49:04] You wanted to demo that for sure.

[49:05] I did.

[49:07] That's what I did.

[49:08] All 10.

[49:09] I think he said next level.

[49:10] He said all 10.

[49:12] I think that's what we're trying to say.

[49:14] I think that's what we're trying to say.

[49:15] I think he said he wanted to ride the light.

[49:17] Right.

[49:17] We can make that.

[49:18] We have a soundtrack.

[49:20] We can cut behind it.

[49:20] Thank you sir.

[49:23] Yes sir, for sure.

[49:24] Moving on.

[49:24] No, that's great.

[49:26] That's great.

[49:26] I think we're going to need to say it some video ideas.

[49:29] I did have a quick question.

[49:34] It was...

[49:35] You bikes?

[49:36] Yes sir.

[49:38] Can you give us a really like 30 seconds?

[49:41] Yes sir.

[49:41] We had a question because a primarily farmers market

[49:45] every Saturday, busy, busy, busy, and now more and more

[49:48] bikes in rollerblades and other type of wheeled conveyses are going through there and they

[49:55] were just really concerned about someone getting circuits in no restriction and so they

[49:59] are asked if there's something to do.

[50:00] So this, what this is going to do is that there are going to put something in the application for anyone who wants to do a special event. If they are wanting to prohibit e-vites and those things within their event, they can request it. It will go into spur application, will look at it, approve it, or park should wreck, will look at it, approve it. And if it's approved, then we'll have signs developed to be able to post that those specific events. So won't be just all the time they can't write them. It'll be just for those special events and that gives us something enforceable if they're at those events.

[50:28] could the like for question come in like get the science themselves at all maybe put them out

[50:32] or what kind of science they're going to talk about what we're working with public works

[50:35] trying to generate these. We haven't worked into the weeds that yet so that's going to be something

[50:40] for the policy. So from like a logistics kind of just thinking this out. If if my spurred

[50:49] encompasses an area that actually also takes over parts of the trail system the people wouldn't

[50:56] be able to rise their bikes or e-bikes or scooters or whatever on the trail even though that's

[51:02] what the intended purpose of the trail is.

[51:04] Yeah, so even we agree to have the event there that occupies those trails and that's why

[51:08] there needs to be an approval by Parks and Reconnaissance to look at the overall purpose of

[51:13] is that event that's taken over this area when the intended use of the trails are for these things

[51:17] in the events going to be there. We need to look at the justification of why they don't look

[51:21] there to see, and then we'll make a decision based on the best interests of the most people.

[51:27] The electric kettle lights, you know, we want to be able to regulate that all the days,

[51:32] we want to be able to regulate that. Farmers market makes sense. All the other events,

[51:36] they can request it doesn't mean they get it. It'll be between parks and racking us to determine.

[51:40] Well, I guess the one thing that jumps out of me is there's this part of the end of the

[51:45] farmer's market encompasses that trail that crosses the bridge and then proceeds down a long

[51:51] So we would put signs so that it's it's it's not including that they could

[51:56] do you want a long parallel pair of pair of bear creek but would it make that turn in

[52:00] just that isolated trail that the majority of the farmers market is on that's where

[52:04] they would be registered. I just want to make sure we weren't limiting everybody else's access.

[52:10] That's exactly what we're hoping for. Those weird gaps so I'm going to show up.

[52:14] Yeah. So that's what we'll look at all all those requests to make sure we're the

[52:18] Thank you, sir.

[52:20] Good.

[52:20] Good discussion.

[52:22] Anything else on consent?

[52:23] Number four.

[52:25] Okay.

[52:26] You and I discussed it just briefly.

[52:28] Thank you.

[52:29] I know it's because it's over 50,000.

[52:32] The residents are paying.

[52:34] Yes sir.

[52:34] So explain to me why I know it's over 50.

[52:37] I'm getting that far.

[52:38] That's not the hard part for me.

[52:40] So why is it something that the council's looking at?

[52:44] If the residents are covering the expense.

[52:46] So the Monday they bring it as a revenue and it stands alone by itself as a revenue being brought in.

[52:53] This is an expense for paying to a contractor.

[52:55] So because we are literally paying a contractor over 50,000,

[52:59] Council has to prove that expenditure.

[53:00] Even though it is an offset expenditure.

[53:03] Okay, so there are seven bucks, goes into a copper.

[53:05] Yes.

[53:06] Does it reimburse the city?

[53:08] Yes.

[53:09] All the other special.

[53:11] That is the next.

[53:12] Right question.

[53:13] Thanks.

[53:14] Two more questions.

[53:14] question?

[53:16] All right.

[53:18] You found a question long concern?

[53:20] We can have a moment.

[53:22] Yeah.

[53:22] Great.

[53:24] All right.

[53:24] You do have the old business.

[53:26] The Smith Springs Project and the items that you'd like to staff looking to before

[53:30] the regular meeting.

[53:31] I was just going to ask if we had provided.

[53:35] There was a little bit of a type of response from the council.

[53:38] Some reservations about possibly doing the commercial sooner or at least the brewery.

[53:43] us wondering if there's been any change on their approach

[53:47] of they as the applicant changed or added anything

[53:50] or come to staff with any differences in their approaches?

[53:55] Yeah. They did provide a data presentation this afternoon.

[53:58] I haven't had a chance to look through it, but they didn't

[54:01] send any updated development centers or anything like that.

[54:05] I'll just say this now, Stan and I were talking

[54:09] about what you did before the meeting.

[54:11] And this is just good to know, especially for myself as well, but whether it's on this item or any item if an applicant withdraws their application during the meeting while we're deliberating, then that will withdraw our need to move forward on that item.

[54:29] I don't know what to expect, I haven't been told that by the applicant, but you know conceptually is if we start asking for conditions and things like that as part of a PD or a plane development and the applicant withdraws during those deliberations that essentially items move and the existing zoning would be what it controls.

[54:51] Is that I get it?

[54:53] Right Sam?

[54:54] Yeah.

[54:54] Okay.

[54:55] One more time.

[54:56] Yeah.

[54:57] Oh, he got to get to head north of Sam.

[54:59] So, I'll pick it up.

[55:00] Can I ask if I could go on who I'll met with a representative from the group? Can I ask that?

[55:05] Yes, of course.

[55:06] Since the last meeting did anybody else agree with?

[55:09] Somebody from that group?

[55:11] I did.

[55:13] Not a person.

[55:15] So it's some form of fashion.

[55:17] Okay.

[55:18] But not together, right?

[55:20] Not together, yes.

[55:22] Yeah.

[55:22] It's clear for the right.

[55:23] Yes.

[55:24] Yeah, the applicant was reaching out.

[55:26] I'd have had it not.

[55:27] Yeah.

[55:27] And it was at the right to ask a question with this group.

[55:30] You're going to get an answer, but yeah.

[55:33] All right.

[55:34] Good question, Mayor Frotem.

[55:36] New business.

[55:38] We have a PD request going from 36,000 to 25,000 square foot.

[55:44] The problem is that I put in development on 2.9.3 acres.

[55:47] Any questions on that item?

[55:49] I do have a question for Sarah.

[55:51] The 25,000 square per person nation of this family, because the smallest law of this 28,

[55:58] something, and the average is 30,000, something, which is 2,000, and I feel it's good

[56:03] for it to make her thinking.

[56:06] The 25 SF designation, how does that determine why is it something else?

[56:14] We don't have, so ours, any districts, our residential buildings, districts are done

[56:18] increments of that 5,000. So they couldn't go and we have to have something for their base

[56:23] zoning that they're doing their development standard off of. So they can't do SF-3.

[56:30] Because some of their lots are less than SF-3, so they still like their SF-25.

[56:35] But you were a point if we actually wanted to do an increments of the bells. I'm not saying we need to.

[56:40] We have a capability. That's the best way we would have to...

[56:53] And it's always based on the smallest lot in the development.

[56:58] And that's a pretty standard thing as opposed to average.

[57:01] And it is because we don't offer variances for mean.

[57:07] You can come in and ask for a variance if you're a lot with your depth.

[57:11] You're set back, but you have to meet that minimum size of the law.

[57:15] Otherwise, you're not meeting that base on it.

[57:17] We don't give you a very hint for being small in this law size.

[57:21] Whether you're doing a subdivision of two lots or something like this, or a couple of members.

[57:32] If body sin, a letter in favor from Gina States.

[57:43] There's 17 total support letters.

[57:46] I don't know for sure that any of them are from Gina States.

[57:49] There was a few game of state's resonance that spoke during the planning and zoning commission

[57:54] hearing with some concerns, but also some support.

[57:58] I don't know that any of them put anything in writing.

[58:01] Thank you.

[58:09] Any questions on the regional needs plan?

[58:12] For that related item, any questions on the needs too?

[58:16] I'm going to presume not.

[58:18] But to your point, Councilman Vernon, that's why.

[58:20] I like the fact that we have a plan development discussion because it kind of gets

[58:23] do some of those details. It's not just a straight zoning, it has such 25. You have your small

[58:28] slot at 28,000 being proposed, so it allows us to kind of get in the details. And also, too,

[58:33] if you didn't know what I know, Councilman Wattley and most of us remember, but if you didn't,

[58:38] state law has not preempted our ability to, you know, get into building materials, and those discussions

[58:44] like how much masonry and development. So a plan development is actually pretty advantageous for us

[58:49] have those conversations with an applicant.

[58:53] All right.

[58:55] H3, NCP for subgroup coffee, any questions on H3?

[59:01] I've got some concerns about this one.

[59:04] Sure.

[59:04] Any questions for staff to kind of look out or research or anything like that?

[59:07] On, when they submit stuff on this and they ask for existing trees to be left

[59:13] and that would suffice for their tree on, let's just say, the west side.

[59:18] There's two Bradford pairs that are sitting at this property in about a 20-inch.

[59:26] 18 inches on the on the west side.

[59:28] Yeah, that's why there's so many variants that's related to landscaping.

[59:31] They are increasing the amount of landscaping currently out there, which is not much.

[59:37] Basically, just what we talked about that's foot and a half on the west side.

[59:42] But they're not really meeting the code in several different areas in terms of landscaping.

[59:47] And that's what a lot of them, they're varying since they're going to do.

[59:50] Because one tree they're asking to leave there, those branches have seen their better day.

[59:55] And they'll make good Halloween trees.

[59:58] And I'll let them out.

[1:00:00] Okay, speak more to it. And I know what you're talking about. I think they would also respond with the new

[1:00:07] ownership that's taken over. They're very much hoping to improve the irrigation and improve the overall

[1:00:12] maintenance of the site versus what's been done on the last couple decades that they can get that

[1:00:17] property. But they'll be here to speak a little bit more about the point.

[1:00:21] Good. And to his point, I guess it's like it is now because it was a long time ago before we had

[1:00:28] a lot of audiences that were acquired, certainly not only in state of existence, but in

[1:00:33] distance out the road, both both both. That is its concrete.

[1:00:38] That building was actually built before the UED existed, and even better a little bit of

[1:00:44] the timeline in his presentation.

[1:00:47] All right, good questions. It's a good time to build, may I put up time?

[1:00:52] And that age for a site plan amendment, for that for updates and all of these corner of

[1:00:57] So the question in paid order, you question on age 4,

[1:01:02] age 5,

[1:01:03] like talking to these supports, but I thought we talked about enough.

[1:01:06] Any questions for staffs?

[1:01:06] I'll look into it.

[1:01:10] We'll go ahead and go into a executive session

[1:01:16] specifically

[1:01:19] under section 551, zero-eight-seven,

[1:01:24] of the Texas government code, the liberation,

[1:01:26] regarding economic involvement in negotiations,

[1:01:28] as we're related, and listen on the agenda,

[1:01:30] to a one-piece pine street in 200-color parkway.

[1:01:34] All right, we're an example.

[1:01:35] And if you really think that it's kind of going through different concepts,

[1:01:40] so we had probably four or five different versions of concepts.

[1:01:46] I'm like very different concepts.

[1:01:48] So we were like the first one was something for a very different time.

[1:01:52] This is what we're presenting here.

[1:01:55] And then sort of clearly as it was not sort of what we just wanted.

[1:01:59] And so we might be another sort of, we weren't closely with the artists.

[1:02:03] So I'm really, a lot of back and forth with the artists and presenting it multiple times too.

[1:02:08] We're just saying, fighting, landing on this particular concept of agency.

[1:02:12] Awesome.

[1:02:13] So I guess we're very well.

[1:02:15] Awesome.

[1:02:15] Great.

[1:02:15] That's well.

[1:02:16] We're really appreciative of you and of them for being so involved.

[1:02:20] I mean, this is, you guys step enough to the table, or even see step enough to the table

[1:02:24] to activate this space.

[1:02:26] So I guess my question is just from like a process perspective.

[1:02:29] Erin, Anna, this might be where you chime in.

[1:02:34] Is it Kent?

[1:02:36] I was going to say another name.

[1:02:38] I thought I asked.

[1:02:39] So, Kent, my question is for city staff.

[1:02:43] So, from a process perspective, would it be appropriate

[1:02:45] for maybe sending this as part of a Thursday report or a Friday report

[1:02:50] and then collectively, that's not collectively,

[1:02:53] but individually, as council, we could provide ideas and thoughts

[1:02:58] to the city manager and you and as a economic development director, just from a process perspective that we still have the opportunity to do that.

[1:03:09] So I'll chime in, I think.

[1:03:13] Kim and Jesse, if I can, Mrs. Sarah, I know one of the concerns that Jesse from Regency and particular had is that she got the budget for the mural for this year.

[1:03:25] And so we actually offered to bring them to work session tonight and schedule them for PNZ

[1:03:31] next week and then counsel for the third because they were wanting to get through the process

[1:03:35] of which.

[1:03:37] But we could certainly, we received the concepts of Dr. Nane and we could certainly

[1:03:40] forward them on this evening.

[1:03:42] Yeah.

[1:03:43] So what I'm thinking for time sake, because we want to be super respectful of Regency and the

[1:03:48] design team's time, is maybe we just get an update in the third or fourth year and then

[1:03:54] And I think it's colleagues if you guys have ideas or things that you want to see, that

[1:04:01] a lot here and hopefully provide pretty quick feedback to read the sea on what we like,

[1:04:10] maybe other ideas.

[1:04:12] I'm usually the worst to ask about hard work because you see all I address every day.

[1:04:18] So, folks, can that cast just clear that this can make?

[1:04:21] So, are you saying you want us to provide opinions on

[1:04:24] if we wanted something else?

[1:04:25] Or opinions on the lettering, is it like, is it,

[1:04:28] is it a fake supply for the birds and flowers?

[1:04:31] That's why I think it's both, right?

[1:04:34] So, I think option one would be, you have tweaks to this.

[1:04:38] That's a great question, tweaks modifications

[1:04:40] to this rendering, do you like the blue or the yellow,

[1:04:44] et cetera, you know, concept one or concept two.

[1:04:46] And then if you have other ideas,

[1:04:47] I mean, I know Shannon, Councilman D'Aberley and Mayor for some, when we met with

[1:04:52] Regency in person, you know, is a really exciting discussion and I'm excited. It's on the

[1:04:58] work session, but the whole idea was to make it.

[1:05:00] Get this Keller theme this possible. That was kind of the genesis of this whole discussion. So I actually think it is a great question. At least for me, we'll probably be both. So we can tweak this design and also send it put for other ideas if everyone's open to that.

[1:05:14] Can't, what is the timing looked like for you and the designer and agency on your end if you had to make substantial changes or changes in general?

[1:05:23] what they didn't discount it.

[1:05:26] I think it's just full of the pain process of the RST kind of being able to finish this.

[1:05:33] It would take about six weeks to do it.

[1:05:36] Because it is the first location one is five bars.

[1:05:41] So it's all the details.

[1:05:43] So we're going to leave about roughly about six weeks.

[1:05:48] So I think it is, I think it will just be more likely

[1:05:51] How's it done?

[1:05:52] It does.

[1:05:53] Then I speak for myself.

[1:05:55] What is your budget?

[1:05:56] You're at?

[1:05:57] That's dope.

[1:05:58] Well, this is Desi from Regency.

[1:06:00] Hi, does he?

[1:06:02] Hi.

[1:06:02] So, our fiscal year, and we would like to have this done.

[1:06:08] We did by December 20th.

[1:06:11] Okay.

[1:06:12] That's our full on this.

[1:06:14] I think our other December, which is, I know we were already working on the application

[1:06:20] process for the year, which we have a deadline and we need to have that submitted by tomorrow

[1:06:26] to go to the PMZ next week and then the city comes along with the leader for the committee,

[1:06:33] and so there's a little bit of concern on back and as I remember, it was a lady that

[1:06:41] what does that look like on the approval timeline, like the entire process timeline together

[1:06:50] I don't know if I'll just kind of get it out there for the sake of time and I don't think it should

[1:06:55] so you guys don't at all because if you know you could get off the call and have a maybe one of your other

[1:07:00] underings you want to you want to present that one as well at playing it zoning I think staff me way in it and

[1:07:06] stand a few other ideas I think for a process you just move through the process present what you have

[1:07:11] to playing it zoning and then we'll walk into both of them at the same time meaning we'll also

[1:07:16] council provide feedback and ideas and a lot of opportunities at the city manager and that's

[1:07:22] sure that Jesse keep you guys on track from the time you perspective we certainly want that because

[1:07:26] we're you know really appreciative and excited about about the partnership so is that you guys

[1:07:33] I think it's going to be very serious.

[1:07:34] Is that okay?

[1:07:36] All right.

[1:07:37] Thank you guys.

[1:07:38] Any last questions?

[1:07:40] I can say it's going to speed it down.

[1:07:42] Speed it a bunch.

[1:07:44] In a slow direction, if we ask for significant changes from this artist.

[1:07:50] So if you're asking for a water tower and training each painting, then it's going to.

[1:07:58] It's not going to get done by December 20th.

[1:08:01] Do you need to have that completed by December 20th or a purchase order created by December 20th?

[1:08:08] I don't think you can't see me doing their posts.

[1:08:12] I don't think, but substantially completed it by December 20th.

[1:08:20] Okay, when it's over...

[1:08:22] Yeah.

[1:08:23] And if you're talking about,

[1:08:26] You know, some of the items you mentioned at the water tower in the trains, if you're talking about, maybe adding those in, as well, you know, you call it Easter eggs, into the existing design, and you can make it to level the better that I had.

[1:08:44] But what we're going to be doing today is that if you're talking completely changing the direction of the design,

[1:08:54] That's where the little lady and tiny happened is that's good to know

[1:09:00] But yeah, I also wanted to add also I think there's some

[1:09:03] possible weather issues that could occur in the

[1:09:07] I could delay the process

[1:09:10] No, that's that's awful well

[1:09:58] There's some sort of water in your mouth.

[1:10:00] There are plans in the guy, just as we all thought it was a very strategic decision to have the people, pictures in front of House report again, Instagram moments, versus being really large, like obvious images.

[1:10:32] especially the two small walls. Those are such perfect sort of like solid Instagram moments where we all need to call out.

[1:10:39] And as soon as we start putting ourselves straight into one of the scale, then as you have a piece of that.

[1:10:45] So while we liked a lot of our other concepts that had sort of like obvious connections,

[1:10:52] we felt that they didn't service the bigger picture goal, which

[1:11:05] is true.

[1:11:05] So I think we're happy and we would love to hear

[1:11:18] the way both consultants,

[1:11:40] of course we'd like to have the things on Easter eggs as

[1:11:50] well.

[1:11:51] Yeah, Aaron, so we have a summer clock, how much time do we have for this topic in your opinion?

[1:11:58] We probably two more minutes at that. We need to move on to the next meeting, and I think the feedback I'm getting from you all is give us some, give us some input and design to share with them.

[1:12:08] So you're about to go on with this look good in vibrant regardless of what you think to the question.

[1:12:14] Yeah.

[1:12:14] Well, they already have developed some of those earlier designs.

[1:12:17] Why do they just show what those all look like?

[1:12:20] Because they've already been brought to some extent.

[1:12:23] They're really a point in the wheel.

[1:12:25] Let's just look at those as well.

[1:12:26] But I also need the viewpoint.

[1:12:28] I don't know how difficult it is to make like another rendering,

[1:12:30] especially if they've already have stuff sitting around.

[1:12:32] You're going to be easier.

[1:12:33] I'm 100%.

[1:12:34] But your question.

[1:12:35] I hope the issues we did happen with this.

[1:12:39] It's a lot of the stuff that was earlier,

[1:12:43] so we've really struggled with the way to keep it more current

[1:12:48] and modern with some of those design elements.

[1:12:53] And that was part of the biggest trouble.

[1:12:57] This is a very large area, and we don't want to

[1:13:01] You know, three years kind of feel like it already looks weird a little bit.

[1:13:06] You love her just to have a bit in your life scene.

[1:13:12] And so that's something else to kind of remind myself of as well as we go through this.

[1:13:18] Right.

[1:13:18] And originally part of the time, sort of work is very realistic rendering.

[1:13:24] So that's a little bit interesting.

[1:13:25] So it was a way for us to also keep in time with the hiding point.

[1:13:29] And also, it's like there were, you know,

[1:13:35] so if you hear something, that may just be paid.

[1:13:37] It's using a pay-by, as opposed to having to have

[1:13:42] some journalists come back out and crew create the same thing.

[1:13:46] Well, I just want to say this.

[1:13:48] What mayors is from when we first met with y'all.

[1:13:51] Moving pretty quickly, we appreciate y'all doing this

[1:13:54] and investing in that site for what we're envisioning.

[1:13:56] It's definitely the y'all were kind of alluding to the future of that area.

[1:14:01] The mural looked great and so appreciate it.

[1:14:05] Absolutely.

[1:14:06] All right, good discussion.

[1:14:07] So we'll get feedback to Aaron, Sarah, via Thursday or four, and staff, you'll work with

[1:14:14] the Registing Team to kind of have a food conversation on different ideas and face off

[1:14:18] these back tonight.

[1:14:20] All right, let's go to our 7 o'clock, now that was 7 o'clock.

[1:15:14] Under our city council meeting today, we're starting a little bit late, but for good reason, a lot of exciting projects that we've been discussing as a community and as city council. So, thank you all for being here. As always, we're going to go ahead and start with our invocation by Mr. Steven Springer with Global Presence Ministries. Good evening, sir. Thanks for being here. Again, honor to be here and just to real blessing.

[1:15:42] You know, in Washington, D.C. about a week and a half ago,

[1:15:47] and we had a small group of faith leaders

[1:15:49] that met with the president as well as other leaders

[1:15:51] from our nation.

[1:15:52] And one of the guys shared this interesting story

[1:15:54] with me about how we could how prayer got started

[1:15:56] and continued to happen actually even within our Congress.

[1:15:59] And I just really am grateful that this is part of just what

[1:16:02] we do here at our council meetings as well.

[1:16:04] And I just want to just share this here.

[1:16:06] And this is on June 28, 1887, during the constitutional convention,

[1:16:11] Benjamin Franklin called upon the American founding fathers to seek God's wisdom and guidance for establishing this great nation and its government.

[1:16:21] At 81 years of age he declared, the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth that God governs in the fairs of men.

[1:16:32] He reminded his delegates of God's faithfulness during America's struggle during its independence declaring our prayer sir

[1:16:40] We're heard and they were graciously answered

[1:16:43] Frank a continue to urge that prayer be offered each morning before the conducting of the convention's business and

[1:16:50] Recognizing that a nation's future cannot rest upon human wisdom alone

[1:16:56] And so I just want to just declare a prayer. So father we just thank you for this day

[1:17:00] And we thank you for this group of leaders that are before us this night God, and I just pray that that you would just give to them God

[1:17:08] The wisdom that they need the righteous this in the truth Lord. I say poor out your divine wisdom upon our mayor upon our council members God

[1:17:16] I just even declare over our police chief and over our fire chief and really all those that serve in this city God

[1:17:22] But you grant discernment, would you grant integrity and courage to all of us, Lord?

[1:17:28] Lord, I just declare, would you establish your justice and righteousness through this

[1:17:32] counsel and through this city?

[1:17:34] And God, would you protect and provide and bring your peace and blessings upon this great

[1:17:40] city of Calar?

[1:17:42] God, turn our hearts to you.

[1:17:44] And let this city fulfill its God-given purposes as a light and a blessing to the great

[1:17:48] state of Texas.

[1:17:49] And God, I just declare tonight, let your kingdom come, let your will be done on earth as it is in heaven in Jesus name. Amen. Amen.

[1:18:00] If you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance,

[1:18:31] one in indivisible.

[1:18:42] We have a great audience tonight, and I would love to think it's over our work session items, but I actually think it's to help recognize the Keller High School girl's rodeo team.

[1:18:57] We're

[1:19:02] going to recognize each one of you individually for all of your successes, but what I'd like to do is go ahead and invite Miss Cherry Mason and then Sailor Grace if you would mind coming up as representatives and tell us a little bit about everything you're accomplishing learning and tell us about your sport.

[1:19:28] Good evening, Keller.

[1:19:29] So joining me up here, I have my incredible grandmother, as well as the Keller High School

[1:19:35] Radio Teen Sponsor.

[1:19:36] So I'm going to let her have a few words, and then I'll dive in to really what we're

[1:19:39] about.

[1:19:40] Thank you, Bob.

[1:19:41] We appreciate invitation to be here tonight

[1:19:45] as Taylor is my granddaughter.

[1:19:50] I graduated from high school from Keller High School back in 1980, and I told my age a

[1:19:55] little bit.

[1:19:55] I did rodeo for Keller High School, so you know that I'm thrilled when she started

[1:19:59] support.

[1:20:00] Here's a go, and I'm going to go through this journey. She is a senior this year, so this will be my last year to be by my girls. But I won't be away from it. But I will go on to what her college wrote you. Thanks, Taylor.

[1:20:16] As we can all tell, she's pretty emotional about this, but I would just like to say a few words

[1:20:22] before I get into really what color radio is about this woman who I am so lucky to call my grandmother,

[1:20:29] puts color radio above all, and it is truly incredible to see how much she puts in this sport

[1:20:36] and how selfish she is, selfless she is, she is going to complete opposite of selfish.

[1:20:42] I apologize for my grammar mess up, but I would just like to appreciate her publicly in just how

[1:20:49] incredible she is and all that she does for Calarodio.

[1:20:53] So, I'm on the cross for her, absolutely.

[1:20:55] Thank you all so very much.

[1:20:59] So, going into what Calarodio is, we are a team of 10 girls, however we have nine joining us right

[1:21:04] now.

[1:21:05] One girl is living it up and Hawaii, lucky her.

[1:21:08] So, Keller Rodeos, a part of the North Texas High School Rodeos Association, and that is

[1:21:14] out in Sargonaut.

[1:21:15] We have the incredible opportunity to travel across the region, competing in Rodeos.

[1:21:20] That is a association of 68 schools, which will end up growing to about 90 to 100 by the

[1:21:27] end of the year.

[1:21:28] And that includes schools from Waxahatchi, all the way to Keller.

[1:21:33] So that is across the whole North Texas region and we have about 350 rodeo athletes with us and we compete every weekend

[1:21:42] From the hot summer days to the cold winter days. We are out there showing our grit and what the point system looks like

[1:21:51] Is the Keller rodeo girls go out and compete every weekend and we earn points to our team and right now

[1:21:57] is sitting in the highest we have been sitting in the last seven years. We are 23rd out of 68 teams with an all-girl team.

[1:22:06] And that is impressive because all these other teams have boys in the rough stock events.

[1:22:11] The roping and we are a team of barrel racers, goat tires and pole vendors.

[1:22:16] So that's pretty darn impressive. So currently we are work. Yes, thank you so very much.

[1:22:25] We have a few rodeos left, about six, and then we have our finals in May, and we are all in pretty good standings.

[1:22:34] So yeah, we're doing pretty well for Keller, and this is really great to see because it is a dying breed.

[1:22:41] And you all know that Keller used to have a very rich western way of life.

[1:22:46] We had a very competitive rodeo team, and I'm so grateful to be a part of a team that is preserving that.

[1:22:53] from the bottom of my heart, and on the behalf of Keller Rodeo team, we want to thank you all so

[1:22:59] very much for your recognition and support of Keller Rodeo on the Western Relay of Life and Keller.

[1:23:05] Absolutely. Yeah.

[1:23:13] I don't know how anyone follows that. That's the last time I introduced you

[1:23:17] to you to speak before me. That's a great sailor. And that's a special recognition of your

[1:23:22] grandmother. I wondered. I didn't know. Yeah, she is pretty cool. Yeah, she is pretty cool.

[1:23:28] You're a little biased and that's a good thing, that's a good thing, so we are, it's actually

[1:23:34] our honor to recognize all of you. We're really proud of the accomplishments of our young folks,

[1:23:43] our student athletes, and so what we'd like to do is just call you up one by one present you with

[1:23:51] certificate of recognition, but we want you to know that not only are we proud to have you here,

[1:23:56] but we want to see you compete in May.

[1:23:58] So if you wouldn't mind, keep us updated on your progress,

[1:24:02] and then, you know, if you ever have a trophy,

[1:24:04] you want to drop off.

[1:24:05] We'll probably display it in the front of town hall here,

[1:24:09] but on behalf of myself, Kyle Exon City Council,

[1:24:12] and all 47,000 residents just want to give you

[1:24:14] a round of applause and congratulate you

[1:24:16] on all that you're achieving,

[1:24:17] and we'll continue to achieve this season.

[1:24:19] So thanks for being with me.

[1:24:40] Amelia, Missaloff.

[1:24:47] Avo Wadley, Lisa Sharky,

[1:24:58] Kinley Hill,

[1:25:02] Mary Rees Harris,

[1:25:10] Morgan Cousins,

[1:25:16] Sailor Walters,

[1:25:22] Sienna Hoar,

[1:25:31] Vivian Mathews.

[1:27:16] I'm going to jump on the mic one more time and let everybody know that Keller rodeo has a Facebook page. It's just Keller high school rodeo team and if you feel led to keep up with Keller rodeo

[1:27:27] Just go ahead and start just up and give us a follow and y'all will be letting the loop with that.

[1:27:32] Thank y'all for all the sweet recognition.

[1:27:35] Thank you.

[1:27:36] Thank you.

[1:27:40] Insayler, when we get it on, what are the kids call these days?

[1:27:44] Insta and Facebook and Meta and we'll try to make sure we tag you.

[1:27:48] That's awesome.

[1:27:49] Hey, keep it up.

[1:27:49] Thanks for being here.

[1:27:51] Take care.

[1:27:51] Have a great evening.

[1:28:01] Absolutely.

[1:28:01] Thanks for being here.

[1:28:12] Okay.

[1:28:13] Next up is persons to be heard.

[1:28:15] This is a time for the public to address the city council on any subject.

[1:28:19] However, the Texas Open Meetings Act prohibits the city council from discussing issues which the public has not been given three business days notice.

[1:28:26] Issues raise, maybe refer to city staff, for research and possible future action.

[1:28:29] Each speaker will be allowed three minutes to speak.

[1:28:32] Do we have anyone that wants to speak during persons to be heard?

[1:28:38] If not, we'll go ahead and move on to our consent agenda.

[1:28:43] F1, consider approval of the minutes of the Tuesday, October 6, 26 right there to the council meeting.

[1:28:47] After you consider our solution authorizing the City Manager to execute a three-year agreement with that of OX of Houston, Texas for the purchase of Zoom phone,

[1:28:54] it's Citywide Cloud-based phone system through the State of Texas Department of Information Resources, cooperative purchasing program for the Information Technology Department.

[1:29:02] F3, consider our solution approving a proposal from accident and price incorporated through the Bibord contract 743-24 for the purchase of body-one cameras,

[1:29:11] as Taser 10 devices in a related equipment, virtual reality training equipment, camera and public safety

[1:29:16] technology systems, software licensing services warranties and the latest port equipment

[1:29:20] in the amount of not to exceed $1,094,094,645 cents or a 60 month period.

[1:29:29] If there's any volunteers who want to try out the Taser, please let me know.

[1:29:32] I was volunteered during work session to try those out.

[1:29:35] should be fun. F4, consider our solution in approving the contract with Metro Fort Meals on Wheels of Rono.

[1:29:42] Texas, an amount not to exceed 8,000 for fiscal year 26, 27, and authorizing the

[1:29:47] manager to execute our related purchase documents. A five consider our solution

[1:29:51] awarding a construction contract for the 26th sanitary sewer replacement

[1:29:55] project to ESCO incorporated and authorizing the city manager to execute our

[1:29:59] document.

[1:30:00] At the city, at six, consider our resolution approving a professional services agreement with Wade Truman,

[1:30:04] co-operated at forward taxes. The purpose of providing engineering design services related to the

[1:30:08] Chandler Road and Keller Parkway Intersection Improvements project for the public works department and authorizing

[1:30:14] the city manager to execute all documents relating there to behalf of the city. If so,

[1:30:18] consider our resolution approving a professional services agreement with Wade Truman, co-operated

[1:30:22] at forward taxes for the purpose of providing engineering design services related to the 26th, 27 annual

[1:30:27] Street Maintenance Project for the Public Works Department, an authorized and city manager to

[1:30:31] execute all documents relating there, too.

[1:30:34] F-8, consider an ordinance, amending the City of Keller Code of Ordinance's Chapter 18

[1:30:38] traffic, Article 10, roller skating, roller blading, skateboarding, electric bicycles, and

[1:30:43] use of other similar devices by amending Section 18-1000.

[1:30:48] Blading to prohibited use of certain devices in and around city facilities in Section 18-102

[1:30:53] relating to election bicycles, providing several ability clause, providing

[1:30:57] appellity, and providing an effective date. That item we've already acted on this

[1:31:01] issue, but just for anyone watching that item is really when there's a

[1:31:05] a spur permit that an organizer has, then that will allow them to help

[1:31:11] request enforcement of, you know, e-bike laws related to that event. So,

[1:31:15] be kind of on a case-by-case basis, but it's a good item for council. The questions

[1:31:21] As I can send.

[1:31:22] Otherwise, we'll entertain a motion.

[1:31:24] Mayer Protem.

[1:31:25] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[1:31:26] I move.

[1:31:26] We approve consent items F1 through F8 as presented.

[1:31:30] Thank you, sir.

[1:31:31] Councilwoman Brennan.

[1:31:33] I'll second.

[1:31:34] We have a motion a second.

[1:31:35] I'll see if there's any further discussion.

[1:31:37] Let's vote.

[1:31:43] All right.

[1:31:43] Seven.

[1:31:43] All right.

[1:31:43] Off to a good start.

[1:31:45] Next up, old business.

[1:31:48] G1.

[1:31:49] Consider an ordinance for approving a planned development zoning change from commercial.

[1:31:53] And light industrial to plan development.

[1:31:55] to use for Samantha Springs Commerce, a proposed planned development on 15.63 acres consisting

[1:32:00] of 31 Brownstone units, approximately 8.19 acres of non-residential development and approximately

[1:32:06] 3.27 acres of open space, legal describes as lots 1 through 3, block A and lot 2, block B of

[1:32:13] Samantha Springs Commerce Park Edition, located on the east side of North Main Street, approximately

[1:32:17] 1,250 feet northeastern, the Johnson Road, North Main Street intersection, and address as a

[1:32:22] and North Main Street, Jason Kloch, catalyst commercial applicant, Joe McCombs, is the owner.

[1:32:28] All right.

[1:32:30] Sir?

[1:32:31] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:32:31] Sarah Hensley, Director of Development Services.

[1:32:34] As a reminder, this item was tabled from the October 6th City Council agenda.

[1:32:39] I do have the same staff presentation that I'm happy to go through or kind of skip through.

[1:32:44] The applicant has also brought their own updated presentation if you want to skip to that mayor completely at your.

[1:32:50] I think that.

[1:32:51] Unless there's anyone on council wants to read the same presentation that you're last meeting,

[1:32:54] then let's go ahead and skip to the applicant if you don't mind Sarah.

[1:32:57] Thanks for offering.

[1:33:06] Mayor council and manager.

[1:33:08] I just thank you for your courtesy and the opportunity to present this case.

[1:33:13] In front of you, I'm going to go through,

[1:33:20] oops, Sarah had this already organized.

[1:33:22] So I'm going to go briefly.

[1:33:24] This is the proposal in front of you again,

[1:33:26] that consists of 31 brownstones in a graded retail,

[1:33:30] and then the adaptive reuse of the existing brewery

[1:33:35] and the church and the bottling facility.

[1:33:37] This is the view down the center of the promenade.

[1:33:41] That's proposed.

[1:33:42] And again, this would be the street view of the brownstones.

[1:33:47] As just a refresher, we've spent a lot of time

[1:33:49] designing this project to work with the existing infrastructure

[1:33:52] and putting together something that leverages what's already on the ground but creating

[1:33:59] something that's destination and walkable with pedestrian connectivity and we've done

[1:34:04] a very good job of buffering this to the Jason Neighborhoods. This is an example of the concept

[1:34:10] plan that's proposed in front of you. I won't go through the details in the zoning but we've

[1:34:15] to modify this intentionally to make sure that this zoning plays out as presented on paper.

[1:34:22] When completed, this project would bring approximately $700,000 in additional revenue,

[1:34:28] 39% of the commercial is already in place with the brewery church and bottling facility.

[1:34:35] Again, these are owner occupied brownstones.

[1:34:39] we've committed to an HOA and will certainly be happy to work with staff to ensure that those

[1:34:46] are deed restricted and that the city attorney feels comfortable that those regulations

[1:34:51] are in place. And again we've exceeded the open space requirements and know that something

[1:34:56] that's very important to color. Under this proposal.

[1:35:00] Those will, we're including uses that include restaurants and cafes, breweries, winery, distillery with tasting room, offices, medical fitness, civic, and this would also include the approval of brownstones that would consist of 2500 square feet, again, no apartments. I want to underscore that.

[1:35:21] And then there are some other uses, the bars and the brewery and the outdoor entertainment

[1:35:27] grocery up to 25,000 square feet hotel like manufacturing.

[1:35:30] Some of those other uses would be required to go in front of you through the SUVP process.

[1:35:37] We do want to keep the light manufacturing only because of the bottling facility if we do

[1:35:42] reopen the brewery and that's the strong desire that we would need that facility because

[1:35:46] the brewery building is not large enough to accommodate that.

[1:35:49] And there's several things obviously under this proposal that would have been allowed in commercial or industrial that we've excluded by right.

[1:35:58] There's a lot of discussion and last meeting about the phasing.

[1:36:03] So again, the justification for this proposal is that the majority of the commercial already exist.

[1:36:11] All the proposed new commercial would be built as proposed.

[1:36:14] We need the Brownstones to activate the project and there's also, you know, there's going to be lender requirements and we talked about the debt coverage ratio and the requirements of filling the buildings.

[1:36:27] To do that ride is going to take time and obviously if we build spec buildings and try to lease those obviously be more pressure on the project and the type of tenants that we want to curate.

[1:36:38] Well, we won't be able to be pre-leased immediately, and that's going to obviously have to happen in second and sequence.

[1:36:47] There's a substantial amount of carry costs. The Mr. McCombs, the owner, is done a lot of improvements.

[1:36:53] On the site that is certainly very expensive, all of those improvements are to benefit the project and the development is proposed.

[1:37:02] So there's already a strong incentive that's built in place, just in terms of carry cost alone

[1:37:09] that will be incentivized, there's really no plan B, we'll talk about that in a second.

[1:37:16] In the PD Council proves, or staff, the detailed site plan, there's capped number of units,

[1:37:24] the plan cannot increase.

[1:37:25] These are unoccupied and de-districted, there'll be a traffic impact analysis required

[1:37:30] with the first site plan, and the zoning obviously creates the guarantee that the city wants

[1:37:35] the needs.

[1:37:37] The market and the financing, the lender requirements are going to control the timing.

[1:37:42] And so, and I know about the city is ambitious to start the commercial development and

[1:37:47] finalize the project and I know Mr. McCones is as well just because of the carry cost.

[1:37:53] All of the brownstones would be built in one phase, and then again, the rest of the phasing

[1:37:58] would be based on pre-leasing, and then again, there's strong motivation to advance the commercial

[1:38:04] just because of the carry costs alone. There's no way out of this project that we haven't

[1:38:10] built into Plan B, the only way out is to actually activate the project to monetize it through

[1:38:14] the rent that would be created through the sale of brownstones or the leasing of the commercial.

[1:38:21] I know there's some discussion, and I think you guys can decipher the nuances between this and

[1:38:28] We want to be very careful, we certainly want to present this case within integrity in the facts.

[1:38:34] I'm not over-promise and under-deliver.

[1:38:37] But this is a different product than center stage.

[1:38:40] These are brownstones.

[1:38:41] These are feon, we're not asking for any rentals.

[1:38:43] In fact, we're guaranteed that there won't be any rentals as part of the project.

[1:38:48] Unlike that project, there's already a substantial amount of the commercial that's already built.

[1:38:52] That's ready for activation.

[1:38:53] And there's a substantial amount of infrastructure on the ground to support that.

[1:38:57] And really unique merchandising.

[1:39:00] I know there are some commitments in terms of restaurants and types of tenants.

[1:39:04] We've created a merchandising strategy and really a regime that fits very nicely within the elevations that we're shown that they're really mainly geared towards national and regional credit tenants.

[1:39:18] That can accommodate duplication.

[1:39:20] and we're not dependent on a destination restaurant,

[1:39:22] this competing with all the other outside nodes.

[1:39:24] These are a summer moon coffee,

[1:39:28] or other types of restaurants,

[1:39:30] plodies, or other amenities that could service the area

[1:39:32] that aren't necessarily dependent on one destination restaurant

[1:39:35] that would compete with a lot of other regional nodes in place.

[1:39:40] And again, just as a reminder,

[1:39:42] this side infrastructure is already there,

[1:39:44] it is own, it is own light and industrial,

[1:39:47] and all the infrastructure is in place.

[1:39:49] the church's own commercial, but the remainder of the project is own light industrial.

[1:39:56] That does allow, again, a very sort of litre.

[1:40:00] Liberal use, zoning regime, and we're restricting a majority that, unless it is really geared towards more lifestyle centers.

[1:40:09] So no auto repair, no service, no light manufacturing, unless it's an SGP, and again, that'd be associated with bottling facility.

[1:40:16] No outside storage, a lot of the things that would be allowed in light industrial are preclude and specifically preclude and intentionally, at least from this proposal.

[1:40:25] This aligns with their future land use plan.

[1:40:28] I know Sarah would have mentioned that as she

[1:40:29] represented her deck as well.

[1:40:32] But the future land use plan calls for commercial

[1:40:34] along the frontage in patio garden and town homes.

[1:40:38] And so again, very much aligned with the city's vision

[1:40:40] and your policy document that would be the backbone

[1:40:43] for future zoning hearings.

[1:40:47] And again, being very prescriptive on the type of uses

[1:40:52] that's in the PD versus what would be allowed in the light industrial zoning.

[1:40:58] We've made a lot of uses.

[1:40:59] I'm going to show you a few that are proposed.

[1:41:01] We've gone through and made some recommendations in the use charts.

[1:41:05] We've upgraded the standards and the brownstone since P&D at P&Z.

[1:41:09] We've approved.

[1:41:10] We've integrated your standard approvals for each phase.

[1:41:15] We've capped the number of units and we've added additional restrictions on signage.

[1:41:21] And again, we would adhere to the 377 overlay with the tree preservation and add additional

[1:41:28] conformance protections for the city, specifically all baked in the form-based code zoning.

[1:41:35] I know Councilwoman Brennan and several had some issues with the use charts and the zoning.

[1:41:43] So we've addressed, I think, any of those that would be controversial, as you can see, we've removed

[1:41:48] accessory dwellings to attach private garages or we're proposing to remove group homes

[1:41:53] antennas, assembly of electronic instruments, newspaper printing, tool, rental, wind turbines,

[1:42:01] light manufacturing, wholly enclosed, except we would want that to be reserved as an

[1:42:05] SUP for the modern facility.

[1:42:07] And the rest of those we've relegated to basically SUP with your permission.

[1:42:13] And so, I think we've done a good job, at least in terms of posing, addressing many if not all of the use considerations desired.

[1:42:25] And then again, this is a slide that we presented, but I know there's been some question about the viability.

[1:42:31] We do have a builder that's committed to building all 31 brownstones in one phase.

[1:42:37] They've been building in this market and your peripheral markets and feel very confident that this would be very successful product.

[1:42:43] And we think it would be very complimentary to the vision that we've laid out in front of you.

[1:42:49] So with that, we request approval and also we would approve,

[1:42:54] request approval of the Companion Future land use plan amendment to the mixed use.

[1:42:59] If the zoning is approved and we appreciate your time and consideration.

[1:43:05] Before I close, I just want to reiterate,

[1:43:10] The zoning does not allow Plan B, so I know there's been discussion about the phasing and what

[1:43:16] happens with the remainder of the project. Right now the project essentially is vacant with really

[1:43:21] no game plan. The other alternative would be to work within the confines of the existing

[1:43:27] light industrial zoning and obviously we would continue to activate those buildings in a way

[1:43:34] that it aligns with the corridor, but there's no plan being.

[1:43:38] So if the only issue against us in the city would be timing, and so if it takes longer,

[1:43:44] the site would be vacant where the commercial property isn't till a commercial is developed,

[1:43:49] but the property is currently vacant today.

[1:43:52] So essentially, it would be a creative.

[1:43:55] In addition to all the other things we mentioned, the developer, the owner's carry cost

[1:43:59] is the incentive, it's substantial, and there's only way, the only way out with that would

[1:44:05] be to activate the project.

[1:44:08] And so I think that not only does the zoning provide assurance, I think, the incentive for

[1:44:12] the developer, obviously, is to activate the project.

[1:44:15] And he's highly motivated to do that.

[1:44:18] We strongly believe that the Brownstones are necessary and would be a creative to activate the

[1:44:22] commercial.

[1:44:23] They're important to the project.

[1:44:24] It'll legitimize as the mixed use, but we need the activation of that.

[1:44:27] And I understand, if we could mandate that all the commercial gets built, you know, I think that would be a nice to have.

[1:44:37] I understand the request and the petition, but they're also financing hurdles and lease up hurdles.

[1:44:44] You know, if we had brought a user-driven, you know, entertainment that was the driver and the Brownstones were the accessory.

[1:44:50] I understand that would be maybe different.

[1:44:51] But we're assuring and guaranteeing that this project gets built.

[1:44:55] We want to make sure that we do it right and again forcing commercial and advanced, which forced us.

[1:45:00] That we probably wouldn't pursue if we could be patient and do it right and execute the vision before you.

[1:45:10] Obviously, there's opportunity cost.

[1:45:13] With the Brownstones, we're going to activate the TERS with New Advillorum.

[1:45:17] And so that could be a creative to this project, but also the remainder of the TERS in the corridor.

[1:45:22] So delaying that was essentially delay additional revenue.

[1:45:25] And the commercial is not hypothetical, there's already 40,000 square feet, approximately 40,000 square feet of commercial in the ground.

[1:45:33] So again, that deviates this from any other project.

[1:45:37] And over requiring that really delutes the catalyst, you know, not being able to build the brown stones.

[1:45:44] Essentially, we think would delay also the attraction of the project for future commercial tenants and the right commercial tenants.

[1:45:51] And so, I know there's been a lot of discussion, and I know there's a lot of history with

[1:45:57] the owner, so you know, when it was Joe's time to serve, he stepped up into the right

[1:46:01] thing and served.

[1:46:03] I know when there was a freeze, there was a water issue, Joe stepped up into the right

[1:46:06] thing.

[1:46:06] When there was a right away needed, Joe stepped up to do the right thing, but what's important

[1:46:11] here is I think we're giving color the opportunity to do the right thing and I really, we've

[1:46:16] very little controversy in terms of the vision and we think this proposal is the right thing for

[1:46:22] Keller and we certainly respect your time. It's been a very good process. We expect, we

[1:46:27] appreciate your thoroughness and we hope that you will say yes to the proposal at hand. Thank you.

[1:46:36] Thank you. Appreciate sharing the updates. I'm clear those are updates from our last council

[1:46:42] based on discussion from the last city council meeting in terms of the use chart.

[1:46:54] So you revised those in advance with it presenting to us.

[1:46:58] We did not revise the PD but we're suggesting that we would be willing to revise these and I think as an aid to council if you know if you all wanted to make these adjustments, these are certainly changes that we think would be appropriate.

[1:47:11] But we did not submit a revised PD between the last meeting this meeting just in case the distance changes.

[1:47:16] Yeah, you answered my question.

[1:47:17] Thank you, sir.

[1:47:18] Thank you, sir.

[1:47:19] All right. Any questions for staff or the applicant?

[1:47:38] So, Kelly, remind me, Stan, or Council.

[1:47:41] Did we commit to keeping the public hearing on this item open?

[1:47:46] That's meeting. I thought so. Okay.

[1:47:49] So, that's a commitment that I made and so we're going to follow through on it.

[1:47:55] If there's a member of the public that would like to speak,

[1:47:58] Now's your time.

[1:47:59] We all feedback is good feedback in the city of color.

[1:48:03] A degree or a disagree, and as we want to open that opportunity, we do have that be

[1:48:06] Brian.

[1:48:07] Sign up to speak.

[1:48:08] That's the only card I have though, so if anyone else would like to speak, and please feel

[1:48:12] free to join this Brian?

[1:48:19] Good evening, Mayor and Council and City Manager.

[1:48:22] Again, thank you all for your service.

[1:48:23] I know what it takes.

[1:48:25] Debbie Brian, 760 Mount Gilly, I'd be right.

[1:48:29] Here we are again.

[1:48:29] I'll keep this short to sweet.

[1:48:32] Please think hard long and hard before you approve this

[1:48:35] without the commercial coming first,

[1:48:37] like South Lake did.

[1:48:39] We met with a gentleman who is very experienced

[1:48:42] in this industry, a lot of commercial development.

[1:48:45] And he confirmed what we believe.

[1:48:48] He works a lot in this,

[1:48:50] and he said the chances of this being viable

[1:48:52] in this location by the tracks

[1:48:55] and just, you know, this surrounding area.

[1:48:57] He just said the chances of this being viable are slim that those were his words. It's slim

[1:49:05] Please make him build a commercial first if they believe in it

[1:49:08] I don't have a problem with him doing the Brownstone's after that then if it's you know if we need to put high density in there

[1:49:15] Fine, but if we I think the commercial needs to come first it just does

[1:49:19] I mean self-like like we know a way to seven years and they believed in their

[1:49:23] Project I feel like if they believe in this they'll do that

[1:49:26] Two more businesses have recently closed, it's in her stage, a rumble boxing and one other

[1:49:33] one I can't remember the name of it.

[1:49:35] So I just think flex space or like my friend who came last time Kazmir, a mystery who's

[1:49:41] been a realtor for 38 years here, she didn't think it was a good idea either and she felt

[1:49:47] like a wedding venue with like guest cabins would be a great fit here, if they had several

[1:49:52] guest cabins to stay the weekend, that would be awesome.

[1:49:55] So there are other things that I think would be more viable in the space of nothing.

[1:50:00] And against Joe, nice guy. I just don't want more empty buildings. I don't think it's a good look for

[1:50:05] Keller to have more empty buildings sitting around, like we already have several right now that have gone under.

[1:50:11] So we just have to be really careful on how we develop the rest of our commercial land. So just think about it. Thank you.

[1:50:19] Thank you. Anyone else, would you like to speak during Persia's to be heard?

[1:50:24] It's not.

[1:50:25] I'll go ahead and motion that we close the public hearing or said persons to be heard.

[1:50:30] I'm at the public hearing.

[1:50:31] So I made the motion in Councilman Wattley.

[1:50:34] All right.

[1:50:34] Motion in a second.

[1:50:35] Let's vote.

[1:50:39] All right.

[1:50:40] Public hearing is officially closed.

[1:50:43] So any questions for staff or the applicant?

[1:50:47] Any further questions?

[1:50:52] Councilman Armstrong.

[1:50:55] I'd like to thank Mr. Clons for meeting with me last week on discussing some things.

[1:50:59] I still have some issues with not bringing commercial forward along with the Brownstones evenly equally.

[1:51:07] I like what Mr. McCones is presenting here as a project for Keller, but I think Presidents in Keller has set a standard that

[1:51:16] too many people in this community have reached out saying,

[1:51:21] get some skin in the game, more than what's there now, and I know Joe has a ton of skin in the game up there already.

[1:51:28] I know him. I've known him for 30 something years here in Keller. He's going to do a good project if it gets approved.

[1:51:35] But I cannot support this unless there's some commercial coming with it at the same time.

[1:51:42] All right. Thanks, Councilman.

[1:51:49] Is there an update on the, because I was dancing around the, trying to get at the brewery concept?

[1:51:55] Where do we leave that discussion and what's the current intent with both the brewery and the church site?

[1:52:02] Yeah, I think when we had our discussions kind of preparing for the Zoning application,

[1:52:09] you know, I think we've committed, I think it would make sense to activate the brewery.

[1:52:14] There's going to be some design time involved in preparing for the Brownstones, main construction

[1:52:21] time, and so I feel, you know, confident that if, you know, the residents would want that

[1:52:27] It's all, and I think we discussed early on to that commitment.

[1:52:31] So we discussed with the owner, and I think we see the brewery being activated in conjunction with the approval of the zoning case which would accommodate the Brownstones.

[1:52:42] And the church is next.

[1:52:43] We'll have to go through a full evaluation of the church building, but certainly the church building would be next.

[1:52:50] We haven't done a building study to identify if that building can be salvaged.

[1:52:56] or in terms of adaptive reuse for sort of an indoor outdoor entertainment.

[1:53:02] I think we've mentioned some of the users that we've actually toured an entertain

[1:53:05] with and so that's the next step.

[1:53:07] Studying that building is figuring out if we can use the bones of it or

[1:53:12] redeveloping that site to accommodate hopefully an indoor outdoor entertainment user

[1:53:16] that would also require us to come back for an SEP.

[1:53:20] We recognize that but that would be after starting a construction

[1:53:25] and that getting the church going is our number two priority.

[1:53:28] So, when you say full evaluation,

[1:53:32] you know, explain it to me like I'm in kindergarten for a second.

[1:53:36] You know, I did pretty good speaking the second graders a day, but, you know,

[1:53:39] that's kind of the level.

[1:53:40] What does that mean for my dollars and cents perspective for an applicant?

[1:53:44] Like, what are you talking? Like, from around budget perspective,

[1:53:46] the investment in doing that study, you know,

[1:53:49] what kind of information would you be looking together?

[1:53:51] Obviously, structural and things that, you know,

[1:53:55] But what does that mean when you say a full of valuation?

[1:53:59] So we would look at what the feasibility of redesigning that building would be.

[1:54:03] So facilities assessment, MEP, mechanical to again looking at the design of that,

[1:54:08] figuring out if it would be cost prohibitive to keep the building and rescanning it

[1:54:15] or reconstructing it or actually tearing it down and building something on the site of that.

[1:54:21] and we're probably talking somewhere $150,000 to do that study.

[1:54:26] Okay, that's helpful, thank you.

[1:54:28] Yes, sir.

[1:54:39] Right, Councilwoman Brennan.

[1:54:42] I appreciate you working with us

[1:54:45] and our long conversation about the usage table

[1:54:48] and going through that one by one.

[1:54:51] I'm, you know, taking our feedback in that regard.

[1:54:55] So I appreciate that.

[1:54:57] I'm going to sound like a broken record,

[1:54:59] but I'm...

[1:55:00] Really, I love the development, I love the way it looks. I don't mind the Brownstones, the commercial development part of it, is like the real keystone to me, the way that that looks. And that's to me, that's what sells the entire package. And so like I said in the last city council meeting, I really struggle with building the Brownstones and then waiting till there's, you know,

[1:55:30] of fiscal ability to build the commercial because the ability to have successful commercial

[1:55:37] space is a long highway 377 has been slim. And so it's not, I mean, I'm not an expert, I can't

[1:55:46] say whether or not commercial viable there or not, but in center stage it hasn't been so much

[1:55:52] and that's just right up the road. So I'm not going to change my mind if we're not going to

[1:55:58] phase the way this development is done. I wish I had a better answer because I think it's

[1:56:04] gorgeous. I really do. It pains me to say this but we don't want another center stage.

[1:56:11] We hear about it all the time. Those of us in this selected position do listening to the

[1:56:16] folks in color. So that would be my input but thank you for your time and thanks for working

[1:56:21] with us. Appreciate it.

[1:56:25] I do have a question on the commercial residential piece, and if we don't have the answers right now from a historical timeline perspective, what on the center stage topics, more for staff, do we know rough numbers on what commercial versus residential is on center stage?

[1:56:49] Do you mean like that?

[1:56:51] And when they came in and did their PD back, and I'm only asking you to remember eight years ago, not that long.

[1:56:58] But when they came in for their PD, do we remember the Roth proportional?

[1:57:06] I don't, unfortunately, I guess depending on how you look at it, I wasn't in this in the sea at the time.

[1:57:13] But I don't remember I'd break down a residential versus commercial in terms of the entire project percentage.

[1:57:20] Okay,

[1:57:29] so Councilman Brennan had a great reference point.

[1:57:33] It's 24,000 square feet commercial.

[1:57:39] Community and long area of music hasn't happened yet.

[1:57:44] Single family homes have happened, four and seventy five apartments.

[1:57:47] So we know the rough square footage of the residential.

[1:57:51] I guess that would be the question.

[1:57:52] We could put a pin in that for the moment.

[1:57:56] I think it's Councilwoman.

[1:57:58] I've still people, Councilwoman Brenner is the most prepared,

[1:58:01] maybe out of anyone that I've served with and not to embarrass you,

[1:58:03] but that's awesome.

[1:58:07] She helps us do our homework.

[1:58:10] The, here on this project, what is the,

[1:58:15] do we know the proportional, like the percentage,

[1:58:18] rough percentage of light and industrial versus commercial on the current base zone,

[1:58:30] My last follow-up on the, like, the portionality issue is, you know, under the proposed PD,

[1:58:38] what would the residential versus, and Jason, you might actually know this, residential versus commercial.

[1:58:50] I know there were residential's only three acres out of the 16 acres, roughly 20% in terms of land area of the 76,000 square feet of commercial.

[1:59:00] I'd have to do 31 times 2,500 square feet to get the probably the residential.

[1:59:13] Mayor, to answer your question in terms of the zoning breakdown right now.

[1:59:22] The portion of the zone commercial right now only makes up about 1.94 acres of the entire project.

[1:59:28] The rest is lightened as real currently.

[1:59:30] It's a 1.94 acres, and then the proposed commercial space is what footprint, in terms of acreage.

[1:59:38] It's probably an easier way to break it down.

[1:59:41] 8.19.

[1:59:43] So basically 8.19 and 1.94 to 8.19 acres.

[1:59:49] Of non-residential development is how I phrase that in this staff, I know.

[1:59:53] Yeah, and I'm not asking these questions for like an academic exercise or for fun, but...

[2:00:00] You know, when I'm part of my analysis anyway is when I'm sitting up here thinking about the best community benefit or what's best for a color, you know, I don't just have like a 510 year horizon, and I think we all think the same way, like what is the 20, 30, 40, even 50 year horizon, and one of the thoughts I had between the last council discussion and the one today is, I will say I do like the fact that, unless a future council,

[2:00:30] change is the PD that we're locking in six point sum out acres additional commercial space

[2:00:38] on 377 and the reason I like it is a long term play for Keller is because if you look at

[2:00:44] any demographer or folks more steep than the growth of the DFW Metroplex than I would say

[2:00:51] that Keller or you know places close to us will be the center of the Metroplex and so I do

[2:00:57] think and I agree, there's some short-term challenges and what a short-term mean. I don't know.

[2:01:03] The market will dictate. I think there are just challenges in the commercial space.

[2:01:07] But I will also say, from a long-term play for Keller, we're hearing pretty unanimously from

[2:01:13] speakers and colleagues on council. You know, don't have a big issue with the Brownstones.

[2:01:20] That to me has been addressed both from the public and also council. It's really about the timing

[2:01:27] So, I guess when I wait the timing factor, just speaking for myself, I wait the timing factor as much as a long-term play for Keller in the opportunity to lock in, you know, six plus acres of additional commercial space.

[2:01:41] So, I just wanted to throw that out there as information.

[2:01:46] It was, it was, it was informative for me and, sorry Sarah, I should have gotten you these questions like a week ago.

[2:01:51] I just have been, my brain's been occupied with a lot.

[2:01:54] So,

[2:01:57] either questions or comments,

[2:02:01] colleagues,

[2:02:18] all right, we do have a motion from Councilman

[2:02:21] Wattley.

[2:02:22] But Councilman, if you mind, stating your motion, and then we'll see if there's a second.

[2:02:26] Sure.

[2:02:27] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:02:28] It's certainly.

[2:02:29] Gentlemen, I'd like to let you have this project and it really pains me to be in the position

[2:02:42] I'm in.

[2:02:43] But as I love it, I love the chanset, I love everything about it.

[2:02:50] I have no issue with the ground stones, none whatsoever.

[2:02:57] I know that some of my colleagues had met with somebody else individually.

[2:03:02] I've met with all the due individuals as well.

[2:03:05] And I know Joe, he's been a part of Scheller for decades, his family is deeply rooted here and I would love to see this project happen.

[2:03:22] That being said, what I did since the last council meeting, was I met with someone who is bipartisan in this situation,

[2:03:34] as far as they're not color-based, they're not, they have no reason to favor this one way or

[2:03:42] another. And but they're very experienced commercial people.

[2:03:51] And based on their feedback

[2:03:52] because the commercial element of it at this point is boxed on the north to south and the east.

[2:04:01] It only has traffic on 377 and has no connectivity to harm us in farms for walkability

[2:04:14] in the trail, which is unfortunate at this time.

[2:04:19] But the commercial developers I met with who had nothing to do with this area of color,

[2:04:26] but I just explained the situation,

[2:04:32] felt that the commercial element, especially just had

[2:04:38] very little chance of succeeding at the level that we would like to see it.

[2:04:45] And the cause of that, if there was any way possible to start this commercial at the same time

[2:04:55] as the brown slums, if it were possible to bring them.

[2:05:02] To me, this would be a no-brainer. But if we have to do the brownstone's first, and that is a absolute

[2:05:14] prerequisite to make this happen, unfortunately, cannot be in favor of it. I'm going to do the very

[2:05:29] I'm comfortable saying that I do not wish to do, which at this time I'm going to emotion

[2:05:35] and make a motion to deny.

[2:05:38] Thank you.

[2:05:40] All right.

[2:05:40] Thanks, Councilman.

[2:05:49] Yeah.

[2:05:49] There is a second.

[2:05:50] Mayor Proton?

[2:05:53] Uh, for all the reasons the Councilman Wally said, but the same concerns, uh, I second.

[2:06:01] So, I do have a question and it doesn't require an answer, um, for, for

[2:06:08] colleagues, you know, if I'm sitting in the owner's position, I would be looking for feedback

[2:06:14] on what, like what percentage phasing actually means.

[2:06:18] Because one of the abilities that we have, we're all saying essentially kind of something

[2:06:23] similar thoughts, which is we like the concept, we're concerned about the commercial.

[2:06:29] So what sort of assurances can we use on this plan development to secure those goals?

[2:06:38] I mean, what's like when are we saying commercials have built at the same time as residential?

[2:06:45] Do we mean literally one square foot for one square foot or do we have any thoughts on what that actually looks like?

[2:06:54] Because our thoughts might be different, and let me tell you where I'm going, you know, maybe

[2:07:01] to lead to a constructive conversation, maybe it won't, and we'll recognize the motion

[2:07:05] in the second.

[2:07:06] But we always also have additional dialogue if necessary, and any one of us feels that way.

[2:07:13] So like if I'm sitting in Mr. McComb shoes, and I hear a city council and Mayor say, hey look,

[2:07:18] We'd like to start reactivating the site with commercial and then they come up here and they say,

[2:07:24] hey look, we're going to start to reactivate it and 39% of the buildings already exist.

[2:07:30] And we're going to do that even before we're going to do the brewery before the residential.

[2:07:34] And then we're going to commit using cowboy math numbers 150,000.

[2:07:41] I realize you're committing that anecdotally.

[2:07:43] It's not a contractual commitment or anything like that.

[2:07:44] So I don't want to miss speak, but the intent anyway is to start doing a full feasibility

[2:07:50] study on the existing structure.

[2:07:52] I guess what we're essentially saying is that's not far enough, and so that as a council,

[2:07:58] and so the next logical question is what is far enough?

[2:08:02] And that's right, like just speaking from myself, that's where I would be a little bit

[2:08:06] perplexed if I was the applicant of not kind of understanding the vision of council for

[2:08:10] this space.

[2:08:12] If it's like a one for one square foot, you know, hey, for every square foot, you do residential,

[2:08:16] you know, 50, if you want to do a percentage base, that's fine.

[2:08:21] But that's, that's where, you know, I just want to kind of voice that because that would be a question

[2:08:25] I would be seeking clarity on.

[2:08:28] May you put time?

[2:08:29] Mr. Mayor, don't necessarily like the way you phrase that in the sense of, but I mean,

[2:08:35] if you were for it, I would assume you would have made a motion of prove it.

[2:08:38] That said, I think we spoke a lot for almost over an hour last meeting in this meeting and

[2:08:44] we was pretty clear in relation to what happened at center stage.

[2:08:48] I thought Councilman Wattley was pretty clear.

[2:08:51] What he was looking for in the lack of better way of putting at scientific reasoning with

[2:08:57] business professionals and getting to that point.

[2:09:00] It's one of the least fun.

[2:09:02] This is an enjoyable as a Council member for something that looks as beautiful in this amazing

[2:09:07] amazing but we're elected to make tough decisions and do what's best for the city as a whole and in this case

[2:09:13] This is something that we want to work and if there's a way that there's funding to do it at the same time

[2:09:18] I think that's pretty clear

[2:09:20] If I was gonna I think it would be a really arbitrary to say a square foot to a square foot

[2:09:25] I think

[2:09:27] There was funding for a phases and we're doing commercial at the same time or even before it

[2:09:32] I think that's what council's been saying but

[2:09:34] But I hope that answers your question.

[2:09:37] Yeah, I mean, I certainly didn't intend to.

[2:09:39] I wasn't trying to make any sort of statements.

[2:09:42] I'm not really sure what comments that I made

[2:09:43] that were not as appreciated.

[2:09:45] I was literally just looking at it

[2:09:47] from a fact-based perspective.

[2:09:49] So I think basically the feedback is, as I would synthesize it,

[2:09:56] we don't know to the mayor pro-times point,

[2:09:58] we don't really exactly have the phone.

[2:10:00] For the site, but instinctually, the feedback is probably not enough. That's the feedback I'm hearing from colleagues.

[2:10:11] I don't want to misrepresent that, so if you all want to jump in and tell me I messed up and that's fine.

[2:10:18] But I just think this conversation is healthy. They spend a lot of time going through the process, and I want to make sure that we continue to do our

[2:10:29] That being said, we have a motion from Councilman Watley

[2:10:33] and then the Mayor Pro time is seconded for denial.

[2:10:37] Unless there's any further questions or discussion.

[2:10:39] Let's vote.

[2:10:49] I need to retract my vote.

[2:10:51] I was in favor, so I was against the denial.

[2:10:54] So that's all me.

[2:10:55] It will be six for denial and then one against the denial.

[2:11:01] That's my bad.

[2:11:09] All right, thanks for coming in.

[2:11:11] I appreciate the applicant, Mr. McComb,

[2:11:13] things we're going through the process and hopefully, you know, we can find a path forward to activate

[2:11:20] this site. So, thanks for coming in today.

[2:11:24] All right, G2. Is there any,

[2:11:29] what do we say?

[2:11:31] We need to take action

[2:11:32] stand?

[2:11:35] Okay. All right, great. So, there's a public hearing on G2. So, if anyone from the public would like to

[2:11:41] speak on G2, it's a public hearing to consider a resolution proving a future land use plan amendment for

[2:11:46] from retail commercial and patio garden town home to mixed use for 15.63 acres.

[2:11:52] Leave it as legally described as the site location we just considered.

[2:11:56] So, it's any members of the public that would like to speak on this item,

[2:12:04] not.

[2:12:04] I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.

[2:12:08] All right, Councilman Wolfe, I second.

[2:12:10] All right, motion to second, let's vote.

[2:12:16] Public hearing is closed.

[2:12:18] Any questions for staff on this item?

[2:12:21] Not. I'll go ahead and make a motion to deny G2, Councilman Wattley.

[2:12:28] Sure. Thank you, sir. Motion to second.

[2:12:30] Let's further discussion. Let's vote.

[2:12:41] Okay.

[2:12:43] H1. It's a public hearing,

[2:12:45] considering an ordinance proving a plan.

[2:12:47] It's public hearing, considering an ordinance,

[2:12:49] excuse me, approving a plan development,

[2:12:50] zoning chain from single family residential.

[2:12:52] 36,000 square foot lots.

[2:12:54] To plan development, single family residential 25,000 square foot lots.

[2:12:57] For Providence, I propose my development on 20.9 3 acres,

[2:13:00] legally described as a lot one block three of the

[2:13:02] color high school subdivision located on the north side of

[2:13:04] Johnson Road.

[2:13:05] Approximately 20 degrees square feet.

[2:13:07] Yeah, 20 degrees feet east.

[2:13:09] Excuse me of the Johnson Road and Borland Road intersection.

[2:13:12] Address is 9-0-1.

[2:13:13] Johnson Road.

[2:13:13] Curtis Young applicant.

[2:13:15] KLRSD is the owner.

[2:13:17] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:13:18] Kaufmanman planner one.

[2:13:21] Have the aerial zoning maps shown here.

[2:13:23] Subject property is currently zoned SF36.

[2:13:27] I can get a look at the concept plan provided by the applicant.

[2:13:32] They are requesting a plan development zoning change for Providence, which is a proposed

[2:13:36] 22 residential lot subdivision with two open space lots.

[2:13:41] The proposed project is located on the north side of Johnson Road adjacent to Keller

[2:13:45] High School, on approximately 20.93 acres, with 2.36 acres of open space.

[2:13:54] Again, the properties currently zoned SF-36, the proposed zoning, will be SF or PDSF-25.

[2:14:05] So that's a planned development zoning with a base zoning district of single family residential,

[2:14:09] 25,000 square foot lots.

[2:14:12] The surrounding properties to the north, east, and west are zoned SF-36, and then to the south,

[2:14:20] SF-8.4 with the KIs, the overlay.

[2:14:24] The applicant has also submitted a future-line use plan amendment from low-density single family and semi-public to medium-density single family.

[2:14:35] This is on the agenda as a separate item.

[2:14:37] The properties of the north, east, and west are designated low-density single family and to the south, semi-public with color high school property.

[2:14:48] Here's a look at the proposed development standards, comparing to the base UDC requirements.

[2:14:55] for the minimum loss size, they are actually proposing a 28,000 square foot.

[2:15:00] The minimum law size, of course, SF-25, would hold a required 25,000. The average

[2:15:05] law size of this development will be 32,100-naked square feet. The minimum law width

[2:15:14] does meet the base UDC requirement at 120 feet, whereas the minimum law width on a curve

[2:15:21] or cold-to-sack lot will be an exception to the UDC requirement at 100 feet, whereas the base

[2:15:29] with typically require 120.

[2:15:33] There are also exceptions requested for a lot coverage where typically their requirement

[2:15:38] would be 30% by main building and 50% total.

[2:15:43] They are requesting 40 and 60%.

[2:15:48] The setback requirement does meet the base zoning at 35 feet.

[2:15:54] The side yard, the UDC typically requires 10% of the lot width but not to exceed 15 feet.

[2:16:00] The applicant is proposing 12 feet, but with a minimum separation between structures to be 24 feet and then a minimum side yard on a corner lot adjacent to a street to be 20 feet.

[2:16:12] The rear yard set back actually exceeds the UDC requirement at 20 feet.

[2:16:17] Typically only 15 feet is required and then similarly the minimum dwelling size is proposed to be 3500 square feet where the UDC base owning only requires 2400.

[2:16:31] Regarding elevations, the applicant is proposing 100%

[2:16:34] masonry on the front elevation, and then all of their elevations

[2:16:39] will be a minimum of 80% masonry, which

[2:16:41] does align with the requirements of the UDC.

[2:16:44] Additional standards for way to roofing garage and driveway

[2:16:47] materials were included in the proposed development standards.

[2:16:52] We're grudding landscaping.

[2:16:53] The applicant is proposing that all front yards

[2:16:55] shall be fully landscaped with a minimum of either two

[2:16:58] minimum 3-inch canopy trees or 1-minimum 3-inch

[2:17:03] caliper canopy tree and 1-2-inch caliper

[2:17:06] understoy tree, n10 shrubs.

[2:17:10] Whereas the UDC offers a little bit less flexibility,

[2:17:13] typically requiring just a minimum of two large

[2:17:15] canopy trees with a minimum 3-inch caliper.

[2:17:18] And the front yard of all new single family uses.

[2:17:24] We're running open space.

[2:17:25] The applicant is proposing two open space lots,

[2:17:28] which will total 2.36 acres, which is 11.27 percent of the gross acreage of the property, which is, again, just under 21 acres.

[2:17:40] Sidewalks will be built along the street frontage of each lot, and the sidewalks will be five feet in width.

[2:17:45] There will be a pedestrian connection to the sidewalk along the street frontage to be built within lots, 14 and 15, and the adjacent open space lot.

[2:17:54] You can see that shown on the concept plan there.

[2:18:01] So this is the wall and fence diagram included with the application.

[2:18:07] Go ahead and walk through it here.

[2:18:09] On the western boundary of let me get my laser pointer.

[2:18:15] You can see that.

[2:18:16] So on the western boundary of loss 14 and 15,

[2:18:19] as well on the southern boundary of lot.

[2:18:22] 15, that will be a six foot iron fence.

[2:18:26] only the northern boundary the intention will be to retain repair or replace the existing

[2:18:33] fence, depending on the condition of that fence. Moving over to the eastern side of lots

[2:18:40] five and six, I can it'll be the six foot iron fence and then around lots one through four,

[2:18:47] including the southern boundary of lot one, a six foot masonry wall is proposed,

[2:18:52] which would be an exception to the UDC on the southern boundary of Lont 1, because typically

[2:19:00] a lot adjacent to open space would be required to have the open-style fencing.

[2:19:07] And then along the southern boundary adjacent to the remaining care, Steve Facilities A,

[2:19:14] a footwood fence is proposed, which, again, would be an exception to the base UDC requirements

[2:19:19] as typically the requirement would be for a screening wall

[2:19:23] to separate non-residential and residential uses.

[2:19:30] The lots will be accessed by a gated private street

[2:19:33] built to the standard city of Keller specifications.

[2:19:35] You can take a look at the elevations

[2:19:38] of both that entry feature and an portion

[2:19:42] of that screening wall it will tie into.

[2:19:48] The preliminary drainage and utility plan was provided.

[2:19:52] The applicant will be required to provide a full set

[2:19:54] of civil plans that made CUDC requirements.

[2:19:58] Tripped generation form was provided by the...

[2:20:00] Applicant, and then again, the applicant is proposing one gated vehicular entrance off Johnson Road,

[2:20:07] near that southeastern corner of the property.

[2:20:11] This is a summary of all of the places where they

[2:20:15] proposed standards deviate from the base UDC requirement. Again, just summarizing every thing I've

[2:20:22] read previously.

[2:20:27] On September 10th, the city milled out 28 letters of notification to all

[2:20:34] and public feedback has been included in the agenda packet.

[2:20:39] These September's 22nd Planning and Zoning Commission meeting commissioners recommended

[2:20:43] approval of the PDZoning Changer Quest as presented by a vote of 41,

[2:20:50] section 8.02, D1E of the UDC states

[2:20:53] that we're considering as the Owing Changer Quest the Planning and Zoning Commission

[2:20:56] and City Council shall consider the following factors.

[2:20:59] Whether the use is permitted by the proposed change will be appropriate in the immediate area

[2:21:03] concerned and the relationship to the general area in the city as a whole.

[2:21:08] Whether the proposed change is in a court of existing or proposed plans,

[2:21:12] the amount of vacant land currently classified for similar development in the vicinity and elsewhere in the city.

[2:21:18] The recent rate at which land is being developed in the same zoning classification as the request.

[2:21:24] How other areas designated for similar development will be or unlikely to be affected.

[2:21:29] And any other factors which will substantially affect the health safety morals or general welfare.

[2:21:36] Again, the request is to consider a plan development zoning change from single family residential

[2:21:43] 36,000 square foot lots to plan development, single family residential 25,000 square foot lots for

[2:21:50] Providence, the proposed planned development, again, the consisting of 22 residential lots and 2.36 acres of open space.

[2:22:00] Council has the following options when considering this request,

[2:22:02] approveest submitted, approve of modifications, table or deny,

[2:22:09] and the applicant does have a presentation

[2:22:11] of their own food.

[2:22:13] I'd like to move into that.

[2:22:15] If the applicant wants to come and make their presentation now, they can.

[2:22:32] Good evening, Council. Welcome back, Mayor.

[2:22:36] Thank you, thanks.

[2:22:38] My name is Curtis Shon with the Sage Group,

[2:22:40] 550 Silicon Drive and South Lake.

[2:22:43] Happy to be in front of you again today.

[2:22:45] And I'd like to explain the project we're presenting to you today.

[2:22:50] And give you our reasons for why we feel like this is an excellent project

[2:22:56] from High Quality Project for Keller and asked for your approval.

[2:23:01] It's about 21 acres on the north side of Johnson currently owned by the Keller ISD.

[2:23:08] It's cross-challenge from Keller High School.

[2:23:12] They do have some facilities there, some tennis courts and parking and storage of equipment.

[2:23:20] But the rest of this has been deemed as excess property to the school district and therefore

[2:23:26] They put it out for bid to interested potential buyers to develop it and we're my client.

[2:23:40] David Washington has won the bid until we're here to show you what our proposal is

[2:23:46] and hopefully gain your support on this.

[2:23:49] It is because it's a school district property, partially a land use plan for some of my

[2:23:56] public, even though they own it.

[2:23:58] There's a portion of it that's load density, single family.

[2:24:03] We're surrounded on three sides by a load density, single family, but of course, the

[2:24:07] high school across the street is the semi-public.

[2:24:10] It is owned SF-36.

[2:24:15] This is the property, and I'd like to kind of take you through the process that we use to analyze this.

[2:24:24] Number one, we know it's ZonedSF-36.

[2:24:28] We know that that's important to a lot of people.

[2:24:32] But we feel analyzing the property that just to straight SF-36 isn't the best solution here.

[2:24:41] And I want to take you through why we've felt that way.

[2:24:46] We're not asking for an increase in density.

[2:24:49] This density of slightly only one block per acre is similar

[2:24:54] to SF-36 density.

[2:24:58] And in fact, if you take our average block.

[2:25:00] Size and average and take the share of the open space that we are showing here, which isn't required in straight-SF 36-Zoning, and apply that open space to each of the 22 lots, your almost 37,000 square feet, until area per lot for each of the lots and open space together.

[2:25:27] Why didn't we just do a straight SF-36?

[2:25:30] Well, a couple things.

[2:25:32] We're trying to make this project a high quality project that relates to its immediate neighbors in a positive way.

[2:25:41] First thing, the only neighbors that are actually touching us are to the north there along here.

[2:25:49] We have open space to our west.

[2:25:53] We have open space to our east plus even though it's owned SF36,

[2:25:58] it's a church with a large parking lot directly to our east.

[2:26:04] That's not a residential use and it's something that I think we had to consider

[2:26:10] in doing this.

[2:26:11] We've got the ISD uses in here.

[2:26:17] And, of course, the high school across the street.

[2:26:21] We felt it was important to respect our immediate neighbors to the north.

[2:26:26] And the best way we can do that is by lining up our lotlines directly with their lotlines.

[2:26:33] Now, wider than their lotlines, not sure closer together than their lotlines,

[2:26:39] but we thought this is the way to best replicate the lots that are directly to the north of us.

[2:26:46] And respect those people and basically have them look out on lots that are similar if not exactly like theirs.

[2:26:57] So that's the one thing that we determined in this.

[2:27:03] But one of the other issues we're having is between our northern property line and this property line.

[2:27:11] We have a little bit less than 450 feet of distance.

[2:27:18] The minimum lot depth for a straight SF-36 is 200 feet.

[2:27:23] If you do 200 feet plus 200 feet plus a 50 foot standard road, you need 450 feet there,

[2:27:29] just to fit in the minimum lot depth on that.

[2:27:34] And even if we had 450 feet and put it in the middle there, the lots to the north of us,

[2:27:39] 165 feet wide, those lots 200 feet by 165 would be 33,000 square feet.

[2:27:47] So we just don't have the room for a standard thing there.

[2:27:51] We thought it would be better to go the PD route, add nice things like open space and

[2:27:56] customize this to fit the site and do the right thing for our neighbors.

[2:28:06] We also, basically, the majority of the side is not really

[2:28:11] treeed.

[2:28:12] There is just in the eastern area,

[2:28:16] groves of trees there.

[2:28:18] And we wanted to make sure that we were doing the right thing for those trees as well.

[2:28:23] There is drainage going through there,

[2:28:27] that leaves the tension pond.

[2:28:29] It was built with Gina State's north of the church side there.

[2:28:33] and enters the site about in this location comes down to a lake in this location and then goes into the

[2:28:40] drainage channel that's on the north side of Johnson. Ultimately going to the west, just past the

[2:28:47] southwest corner of the property into the drainage that goes south from there, it joins the

[2:28:52] the gene states drainage and in that location.

[2:28:57] So a typical solution here would be to take that drainage,

[2:29:03] run it down the rear of all those flat lines on the east there,

[2:29:06] to that drainage ditch along Johnson,

[2:29:10] and in an open channel.

[2:29:12] But if we were to do that, then we would

[2:29:15] have to take out the trees between us and the parking lot

[2:29:18] and the church.

[2:29:20] We didn't think that was the best way

[2:29:21] to accomplish this. So with some expense, extra expense, we're going to take that drainage

[2:29:32] between lots, four and five, to the street, and then down underground along the front

[2:29:41] of those lots, next to the street, down to the drain's chow. What that allows us to do

[2:29:47] is to save those trees along the rear of those lots and provide a nice buffer between us and the church and the parking lot.

[2:29:57] And it would probably be better.

[2:30:00] They're from the church standpoint as well on that. So, and yes, those lots are the smallest

[2:30:08] lots on here at 28,000 plus square feet. But look what they're next to, they're next to a

[2:30:12] parking lot in a church. They're not put next to any other residential. And so unless you drove in

[2:30:19] here, you would know what the difference is. The remainder of the lots along the north side, some

[2:30:29] them are even larger than 36,000 square feet, eight, nine, ten there, because we have greater

[2:30:37] depth there.

[2:30:39] What the PD process allows us to do here is to customize this to fit the site in a high-quality

[2:30:47] way that we think, compliments our neighbors and works well here.

[2:30:56] In the Southwest corner, we've decided to extend a pathway along from the end of this down into this.

[2:31:08] And this can be an open space area that our residents can use as well as people passing by on Johnson.

[2:31:15] This is an intended to be a private park or anything.

[2:31:18] But there's, it will be nicely landscaped in there.

[2:31:26] On the front here, we've got a nice set back between Johnson and the first lot here.

[2:31:33] And what we're asking for here is a private street,

[2:31:38] gated community entry and that location there.

[2:31:41] We think, with that addition, we can really make the homes that are built in here,

[2:31:47] something extra special. A lot of buyers really appreciate the security that comes with

[2:31:56] a gated entry and we know Caler is not a high crime city but nonetheless that's something

[2:32:03] that ensures that these things will be extra special and really nice lots and homes that are built in here.

[2:32:14] Calvin went through the fence diagram, I can get into the details of that if you'd like.

[2:32:24] Anyway, here's our landscape plan.

[2:32:27] Each lot is going to have at least a couple trees in the front yard.

[2:32:31] And of course, the whole lot will be landscape.

[2:32:33] It'll be trees and shrubs and other things all around these homes

[2:32:38] and in the backyard as well.

[2:32:42] Between our entry road, and here we're going to do a nice buffer of trees here that pretty much

[2:32:50] screens off all of this from the road as you enter here in the lots on the other side.

[2:32:57] Then of course we have opaque fence along the back here.

[2:33:01] Where we're adjacent open space, we have rod iron fence.

[2:33:05] things, but we think that lots of Jason open space should be

[2:33:10] right iron.

[2:33:11] The exception of course here is that the entry, this is open space,

[2:33:16] but it's also our entry and next to the Johnson Road

[2:33:19] through a fair and so closing here is a, it may

[2:33:23] spring wall and also may spring wall between us

[2:33:26] up through a lot of four here because we're next to

[2:33:30] what's, you might call it commercial use, parking,

[2:33:33] a church, a lot of activity there, and we think that the Mesh River wall will screen that

[2:33:40] better and as well as the noise. Here's what the, we're proposing for the entry, you can

[2:33:48] see the gates would be located in the second median here, giving someone who doesn't gain

[2:33:54] the ability to turn around and exit,

[2:33:59] and then, of course, you know, we need to have a nice sign,

[2:34:04] design for the gates in here, and then this will be the, the rot iron design and the,

[2:34:11] the mace removal of the design in here.

[2:34:15] The homes in here, typical homes in here are going to be nice custom homes.

[2:34:20] This is not intended to be built to a sold-do large volume builder.

[2:34:26] These are what we marketed toward custom home builders with nice looking custom homes in here.

[2:34:32] They're all be different.

[2:34:35] These are just some examples of the kind of homes that we would expect to see in here and fit on these size lots well.

[2:34:45] So that's the project, some of the nuts and bolts of why we came up with this design and

[2:34:51] told our rationale behind it.

[2:34:54] My client David Washington would like to come up and address you also and then I'd be happy

[2:34:58] to answer any questions you have.

[2:35:00] Thank

[2:35:05] you. Thanks, Curtis. I give you mayor, council members. My name again is David Washington. Address is 944 North Pearson Lane here in

[2:35:13] Keller, Texas. My wife and I have lived in Keller for 20 years now. We have a son, this is a junior at

[2:35:19] Keller High School. He's a big cross country runner. He's on the Keller High School varsity cross country team.

[2:35:25] And we're headed to regional's out on Lubbock on Sunday. We've got a lot of great young athletes here in

[2:35:32] The daughter is a sophomore, Keller High School.

[2:35:36] She's currently president of the Keller 4H Club.

[2:35:39] She's on the Keller FF 18 shows lands

[2:35:42] and Heather this year that she's showing.

[2:35:46] So we try to stay involved in the community,

[2:35:49] and especially in our kids' activities.

[2:35:52] We've enjoyed raising our family here in Keller.

[2:35:54] We want to take our community to thank all of you

[2:35:56] for your service to our city here.

[2:35:59] Um, originally from the area grew up in Kaliville, family moved to Kaliville in the early 70s.

[2:36:05] I've had family, this was during Keller since the 1950s, uh, so been coming to Kali

[2:36:09] in nine time of life, uh, as you can imagine over the last 50 plus years of my life.

[2:36:14] I've seen a lot of growth and a lot of changes and a lot of development in this area.

[2:36:19] And I believe that gives me a pretty good idea of the types of questions and comments and concerns

[2:36:24] that come along with rezoning and development of our property.

[2:36:27] So that being said, I want to give you a few minutes worth of background information on my partners

[2:36:32] and I'll tell you a little bit about our development, history, engineering,

[2:36:36] color, and projects we've developed and I'll also give you some details about the property

[2:36:43] and our planning over the last several months.

[2:36:47] And I've been developing a neighborhood in the surrounding area for over 25 years.

[2:36:52] Our first project during Keller was Sherry Groves'

[2:36:55] Faves.

[2:36:56] That's the intersection of Keller Smithfield and Shade Grove Road.

[2:37:01] We started that project back in 1999, believe it or not.

[2:37:05] Since that time, we developed several other communities here in Keller.

[2:37:09] The Danbury Parks neighborhood on the Keller Smithfield,

[2:37:11] just north of Shade Grove and north of Billage Trail.

[2:37:16] I'm brought around over to Ramp.

[2:37:18] and see the Sadie Hallowe space neighborhood is on Sadie Road Road,

[2:37:24] over towards Indian No. Trail, but it's just east of Keller Smithfield,

[2:37:31] the Newton Ranch Development and Keller Smithfield and Johnson Road,

[2:37:34] as well as the cobblestone parks development on Ruth Snow

[2:37:37] and the Woodford Development on Ruth Snow that immediately east of the

[2:37:42] Keller Hospital football stadium.

[2:37:44] So I feel like we've got a pretty good long history hearing

[2:37:47] or probably projects that we've developed, in addition, my partner developed the River

[2:37:52] Dance Neighborhood, and along our own street in the Old Town of Keller, and we've been active

[2:37:58] developing other neighborhoods and surrounding cities such as Caliville and Orfuch and Hills

[2:38:03] with Tog and Fort Worth. In addition, we also own two commercial buildings here in Keller.

[2:38:09] So, we live here in Keller, we enjoy doing a business in Keller and, you know,

[2:38:17] We're excited about the opportunity to bring you another development here.

[2:38:22] A little history in the property is originally owned by the Gene family,

[2:38:26] part of the property in 1956.

[2:38:29] I had the opportunity to sit down and talk to Gene, Gene, and Gene several weeks ago,

[2:38:33] and learned a little bit about their history with the property.

[2:38:37] The Gene family sold the land for the killer method of search next door many years ago,

[2:38:43] and then was around the year 2000 that they sold this 38 years to Kettaraya State for the

[2:38:48] Tennessee facility and the bus parking. They more recently sold the remainder of the property

[2:38:54] till an hour homes, who developed and built the homes in the Gina States neighborhood.

[2:39:00] It was around the end of last year that Kettaraya State declared this portion of that 38 years

[2:39:05] track as excess property and had began marching in the property for a sealed bid sale.

[2:39:10] We did submit an offer on the property, I believe they received seven offers on the property.

[2:39:17] But we were not the winning bid.

[2:39:18] The winning bid on the property was a national home building group who had aspirations of putting in higher density and a lot more loss.

[2:39:26] And we have planted at night.

[2:39:28] I believe after a couple of meetings with City staff and in conversations that they decided to withdraw their offer,

[2:39:37] which allowed us the opportunity to move forward with our plan and the plan we bring here

[2:39:42] to get in touch.

[2:39:45] A little bit about our plan and the encourage us to touch on a lot of this.

[2:39:50] We've considered several different plans on the property.

[2:39:52] Curtis came up with three or four different site plans to start with several of those

[2:39:57] out of the 24-Lot, you know, we...

[2:40:00] Our first priority was to be a good neighbor to being in the state. They were well established

[2:40:09] neighborhood with high quality homes and expensive homes. We ended up taking the loss out of

[2:40:16] our north property on to mass their side yard lines. We felt like that was the right thing to do.

[2:40:25] and made us more compatible with their property.

[2:40:31] The problem we run into, you know, the cursor works here, but with that we have right here and this portion of the property is approximately 448 foot of width.

[2:40:44] You take away 50 foot for the street right away and that leaves us 398 foot, but you split that between the lots on the north and the south side.

[2:40:53] and we got lots that are approximately 199 foot deep.

[2:40:58] The minimum loss required in SF36, the minimum line depth,

[2:41:02] excuse me, required in SF36, as well as SF30 that are pulling out,

[2:41:07] is 200 foot, so we simply cannot meet the minimum line depth required in that area.

[2:41:16] Our loss here at joining genus states, the minimum line width in SF36 as well as SF30,

[2:41:23] is a hundred and forty foot. If you notice all of our lots here along the north side with

[2:41:29] the exception of this one on the end, or a hundred and sixty-five foot wide. So we've made

[2:41:34] our lots twenty-five foot wider than what required by the ordinance in order to try and

[2:41:40] begin neighbors serve our friends and our dean of states.

[2:41:45] Our zoning requires the Gannas for 22 residential lots on 21 acres, and in 22.4 acres

[2:41:51] of open space, and we've got an average lot size of just over 32,000 square foot.

[2:41:58] So, I'm just shy of about 36,000 square foot number, but again, with dimensions and the

[2:42:05] shape of the project and the property that we have here, we're a little bit limited and I hope

[2:42:10] we could do down here on the well stand.

[2:42:13] We have, and we have requested an eight foot wooden fence, backing up to the tennis courts

[2:42:20] the best parking facility. The reason for that, there is an existing six-foot metal

[2:42:27] fence around the best parking facility as well as a 10, maybe 12-foot tall fence around

[2:42:34] the tennis courts that has a black mess up or a screen. You know, ordinance requires a six-foot

[2:42:44] And again, it's not a deal breaker for us, but we feel like an eight-foot wooden fence

[2:42:50] in this area would give us a little bit more height, a little bit more protection for

[2:42:57] and what we have there with the school.

[2:42:59] And I'm sure you'll see heavy landscape in the back of these lots as well with the size

[2:43:05] and the quality homes and the price range homes we're talking about.

[2:43:09] So, we feel like a lot of the noise and activity going on here in the school property can be

[2:43:15] mitigated with, you know, pepper-fencing and landscaping.

[2:43:21] One of the other design elements, purpose, touch time, you know, two different options with

[2:43:25] our drainage.

[2:43:26] We could have cleared a drainage easement along the back of these lots and taken the water

[2:43:30] straight out to Johnson Road and the existing drainage easement.

[2:43:36] What we decided would be a better option, and the reason we did this was to say there's

[2:43:40] many trees as possible.

[2:43:43] We were taking a swarm sewer pipe from here between lots four and five out to the street.

[2:43:51] And then we went underground with a swarm sewer pipe all the way down to the drainage movement.

[2:43:59] And the trees are always a critical issue, and a point out, you know, a trees are valuable

[2:44:03] for developers as well, you know, they add value for our loss.

[2:44:08] Everybody loves to have trees in their yard.

[2:44:10] The cost of the storm sewer, we've got an estimate from our civil engineering on that,

[2:44:15] is approximately $200,000.

[2:44:18] So, you know, it just shows our efforts to spend money to make this a quality development

[2:44:23] and try and save as many trees as we can on the property.

[2:44:27] One of the other things that we want to do, I know from attending school board meetings,

[2:44:33] that there's a need for a restroom facility.

[2:44:36] Here are the tennis courts.

[2:44:38] I think right now there may be a port of potty here

[2:44:40] or the cities have to run across the street

[2:44:42] to the high school to use a restroom.

[2:44:45] We've got a water and sewer line coming up our street here.

[2:44:49] So we've told the school district that we want to leave them.

[2:44:53] Hey, it's Henry Stewart's shut out and a water stop out.

[2:44:58] It's probably up in this area.

[2:44:59] We haven't.

[2:45:00] I decided on an exact location, but I will leave that for the end, so they've got the option in the future to come in and build that registering facility, which I think will really help out the tennis court there.

[2:45:12] A little about the builders we're talking to.

[2:45:16] We're talking with several local home builders, many of which living in Calar had been building homes in Calar for 34 years or longer.

[2:45:24] A couple of the names might get her beading and might have built in our developments in the

[2:45:30] past.

[2:45:31] Very high quality builder and building nice honours, Greg read and will read just by the

[2:45:38] will with water for classic honours.

[2:45:41] Will started water for homes, back in, I'm wondering, say it was early 70s, they've been

[2:45:47] building in color in the area since then, will pass away a couple of years ago with some

[2:45:52] and Greg is running the business and Greg is very active in building, you know,

[2:45:57] right now he's got a couple of homes in South Lake that are well above the $2, $3,000,000 mark.

[2:46:04] He is a very high quality builder and Greg lives here in Keller, as well as UM Builder.

[2:46:11] That UM Builder is a sound now in which he's used for both individual home builders.

[2:46:18] Sam's son, Will, is now involved and we met with Will, we want through his model homes.

[2:46:24] They are currently building a greenway park upon North Main Street.

[2:46:29] I think greenway parks, average wild size, is closer to 20, 25,000 square foot, there are

[2:46:35] 100 foot wide, but he's had two homes on the market up there, one's currently at 2.3 million

[2:46:42] and one is at 2.5 million.

[2:46:45] to date has built up only 14 homes in Greenway,

[2:46:50] Power Up, and I've all been around $2 million in up.

[2:46:54] These are actually pictures of homes that in

[2:46:57] Builder has built in Greenway,

[2:46:59] Power Up that are on the ground that have been sold.

[2:47:02] Again, we're going to be marketing this,

[2:47:04] and let's go back to the data entry that we wanted to do.

[2:47:09] We feel like that'll add to the value of OOS,

[2:47:11] and we'll be marketing this project to

[2:47:14] high quality builders, and we do anticipate the average value of the loss of to exceed $2,000.

[2:47:26] A little bit without again, I think it's a conservative estimate with $2,000,000.

[2:47:31] But based upon the current market conditions, we estimate that the average home size and

[2:47:36] will be around 5,000 for a foot and have never sells price of over 2,000, excuse me, 2 million

[2:47:43] dollars, which will add over $44 million in tax base to City of Keller and Keller ISD.

[2:47:51] And just to put that in the perspective for you a little bit, these 22 homes with a city

[2:47:57] of Keller are giving the credit for the 20% home static sense, and that would be over 100,000 dollars

[2:48:04] year and then come to the city of Keller, but more importantly, I want to point out the existing

[2:48:10] tax rate for Keller ISD. These 22 homes will provide almost $450,000 in income to

[2:48:19] Keller ISD. And I think that's really where it's needed, you know, quite a bit with what's

[2:48:24] going on with the district and school funding. So hard to believe, but with a bond of coming

[2:48:29] up for election year and everything going on, I think that $450,000 is important.

[2:48:36] A little bit about our community outreach, which is 26 letters to the joining homeowners, as well as the Gina State Patriot Way.

[2:48:44] Keller, nothing to search.

[2:48:47] At the PNZ, we have four people speak.

[2:48:50] We have three neighbors here on the north side.

[2:48:53] I believe it was this lot, this lot, and this lot that all spoke.

[2:48:57] And our boy, they're journaling in favor of our development.

[2:48:59] They were appreciative of us lining up our lotlines.

[2:49:06] And the Hudson's concerns with Vincent,

[2:49:08] if I understand correctly the way they described it.

[2:49:11] There's an existing barbed wire fence on the property line.

[2:49:15] So when their homes were built, the billboard built their fences

[2:49:17] a couple foot inside of their lot.

[2:49:22] And we promise to work with them and we won't

[2:49:24] in the record tonight as saying we want to work with them.

[2:49:27] And we will come back and build the wooden stock eight fence along the property line.

[2:49:33] The six foot or eight foot, I think it's what the preference is, but again, we'll get with

[2:49:37] them on the side of what everybody wants.

[2:49:41] But we will build a new fence right along the property line so that they can reclaim that area

[2:49:46] in their backyard.

[2:49:49] We did have one neighbor speaking opposition here with over on our west side across the Green

[2:49:55] channel. That was all. We currently do not have any money in.

[2:50:00] Opposition in Dean of States, I think they're all very complementary of the development.

[2:50:07] I know there's a lot of opposition letters in Indian, and I'd like to take a chance to address that a little bit.

[2:50:16] Being a resident hearing teller, it's very important to me to do a good job, and to strive to make everybody happy.

[2:50:23] Again, I want to be living here in color for a long time and working here in color for a long time.

[2:50:29] A lot of the comments that came in, I believe there were around 30 of the opposition letters that included the same paragraph.

[2:50:41] I'd like to read that to you and try to address it. You know, we have 30 people coming on it. I think it's important to try and address that.

[2:50:47] But there's no good reason to change his own name on the second one being provenance.

[2:50:54] Keller is a tree city, and we are tired of seeing our open space, the stripped away just for the sake of mine.

[2:51:03] So, you know, the property's always been private property.

[2:51:07] I'm not aware of this ever being declared open space.

[2:51:09] We do have open space in genus space and the channel on the west and the grand channel.

[2:51:15] we want to add it out. It's always been something that I like to do as a developer to

[2:51:20] include a lot of open space at the entry and along the roads. You can put a pocket

[2:51:27] park back here in the community and it's private and you know, it benefits some of the owners,

[2:51:34] especially ones that live next to it. But when you put open space like this and right now this

[2:51:39] just an open field, what we envision is coming in and doing a

[2:51:43] Crayon, walk path, landscaping and whatnot.

[2:51:47] This is a bit of pit for all of color.

[2:51:49] You know, you think about the traffic that goes down Johnson Road.

[2:51:52] And instead of looking at a, you know, a hard,

[2:51:55] mulberry wall here, you've got green space and open space.

[2:51:59] And I think that matters to all of color and all of the community here.

[2:52:11] We're spending over $200,000 to try and save as many trees as we can on these lots.

[2:52:18] You know, Greenwich is a critical issue as we all know.

[2:52:22] You know, we see a lot of Greenwich issues.

[2:52:24] Some of the older neighborhoods in Keller.

[2:52:26] Hard Greenwich, again, comes in here around lots four and five,

[2:52:31] and goes down through the middle of these lots.

[2:52:33] So we've got to do something to provide for that drainage, you know, we don't want to build a lot to and have lots three and four vacant and water draining on the lot to.

[2:52:44] So we came up with the idea to come along with these common lot lines and go ahead and clear and I do an earth and swell in that area.

[2:52:55] So that, if you did build a lot to first, the water coming on a lot for good that, as well, and carry out to the street where it should be, same thing for a lot for a lot to.

[2:53:08] I don't know what you're going to alleviate a lot of ringing issues that we have here.

[2:53:15] One of the comments that I'm feeding in on here says we support reasonable growth, but not high-density housing.

[2:53:23] more in the comments, the United States has large lots and does not have an unreasonable

[2:53:28] number of homes stacked on top of each other, such as the Providence Development. Several

[2:53:34] references to high density and clear cutting of trees, in which we will not do. I was curious

[2:53:41] about that. I went today with Lake of San Fernando, and I forgot the opposition letters, and

[2:53:48] download it, the three phases of final class for being the state.

[2:53:52] And at the same state, you've got a total of only one hundred and four lots, one hundred and twenty three acres.

[2:54:02] But that equates to this point eight five blocks per acre, almost one block per acre.

[2:54:08] If you run that same map on our development, you know, we're twenty two lots on twenty one acres,

[2:54:14] our overall density of 1.0 or loss predictor.

[2:54:20] So, I know we've had to make some adjustments because we can't meet that SF-36 or SF-30

[2:54:26] minimum in some areas because of the dimensions of our property, but overall the density

[2:54:32] of our project is very comparable, if not close to identical, to what we have in genitals.

[2:54:39] Again, we're submitting a PDs, I don't mean it does not give us the right to change our plan

[2:54:45] and send in and build $25,000 for it last without having to re-sign it as I don't mean

[2:54:49] that through this whole process of year.

[2:54:52] So, our PDs' zoning is what you have here, the proof and I, that's what we have to build

[2:54:57] in every night can be significant modifications.

[2:55:00] On this, you know, obviously we have to start from scratch.

[2:55:04] So, that pretty well sums it up for me, free searcher, if you're time here.

[2:55:10] We think provenits is going to be another high quality development.

[2:55:13] Be a great benefit for color.

[2:55:15] And we respectfully request approval, let's submit it.

[2:55:19] Thank you.

[2:55:19] Thank you, sir.

[2:55:30] Each one.

[2:55:32] This is a public hearing.

[2:55:35] What do you want for the public to speak on item h1?

[2:55:38] Yes, sir.

[2:55:38] And

[2:55:51] then on deck, council, former council member Brian, you'll be up, and then what's your name, sir?

[2:55:58] Brian Bennett.

[2:56:00] Nice to meet you.

[2:56:01] And just, okay.

[2:56:03] I've got your address here here in Keller, right?

[2:56:06] Yes, sir.

[2:56:07] All right.

[2:56:07] Thanks for being here.

[2:56:09] I'm Mr. Mayor, City Council.

[2:56:11] Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

[2:56:13] I'm one of the 28 individuals who is notified regarding this project.

[2:56:18] Now, I have to admit, you know, I was attracted to the

[2:56:21] Keller, it's a family, family, family, location, a lot of open space, and it's something

[2:56:28] that's worth preserving.

[2:56:30] When I initially got the letter, my wife and I were concerned about the change and density.

[2:56:36] And I attended the Planning and Zoning Committee meeting on the 22nd.

[2:56:41] I have to admit, courtesy and daily, they did a great job of addressing some of the concerns,

[2:56:47] line things up in the north, and I was impressed by my neighbors that they were satisfied

[2:56:53] with some of the developments that were included, some of the concerns concluded in

[2:56:59] their planning.

[2:57:01] My concerns initially were, I believe, used to mention Mr. Mayor, about the long-term use

[2:57:08] of color, and looking at what the increase intensity might be, I think there's a great job

[2:57:14] of looking at 28,000 square feet for their lots.

[2:57:18] But the lot coverage for the main building,

[2:57:20] going from 30 to 40% is a 14% increase in density.

[2:57:26] The total lot coverage going from 50 to 60%

[2:57:28] is a 20% loss of open space.

[2:57:31] And the compliant community open space,

[2:57:33] although there is a nice drawing there,

[2:57:37] is 11.27% versus the unified development code requirement

[2:57:42] of 15% is a 24% reduction in open space.

[2:57:49] For the record, I'm not opposing this particular development.

[2:57:53] I was very pleased to see that my neighbor's reaction to that in the north.

[2:57:57] My concern is long term for development for Keller.

[2:58:02] I'm new to Keller.

[2:58:03] I was attracted to Keller because of its environment and it's open space.

[2:58:08] And I just want to make sure that this is not a change in direction.

[2:58:12] I want to see our community continue to thrive, I want to see our community continue to be family friendly.

[2:58:20] But I also welcome ongoing development.

[2:58:23] We can't have undevelopment areas for forever.

[2:58:25] So what's the right mix?

[2:58:27] And that's my only concern is making sure that this body continues to take a look at the interest of the city of Keller.

[2:58:35] And all of our residents both now and the future residents who will be part of this community.

[2:58:41] And just hope there's an open dialogue to make sure that we have all the open space and

[2:58:47] address the community issues going forward.

[2:58:50] And I hope that's the case for this development as well as other developments in the future.

[2:58:55] So thank you for your time and your consideration.

[2:58:57] Thank you, Mr. Bennett.

[2:58:58] Appreciate you being here.

[2:59:00] Welcome to Keller.

[2:59:04] It's Brian.

[2:59:06] Hello again.

[2:59:09] I urge you to stick to the zoning on this one.

[2:59:14] Many, I think, 99 or 100% of all the developments,

[2:59:18] Mr. Washington mentioned all were pretty drastic

[2:59:23] down zoning in the city.

[2:59:26] So he's already gotten a lot of down zoning accomplished

[2:59:30] recently down Johnson on the end of Johnson at

[2:59:34] there. So I don't think he's hurting for business any time soon. But I have a most respect

[2:59:43] form and what he does and he is right to ask for whatever he wants. They aren't really

[2:59:47] need topography issues, major topography issues on this land that I know of. And

[2:59:57] it's a good example how they can build its own.

[3:00:00] And make it pretty and have open space in the middle that like it does, or the fountain is. And I just don't see a reason why we need to do this, allowing these zoning changes over and over and over, just invites more zoning change requests.

[3:00:15] When I was on council, we didn't have that many coming because we were comprised of people who wanted to do right by the citizens who listened to the citizens and they knew the chances of them getting that down zoning was slammed.

[3:00:27] So we really didn't have that many to deal with.

[3:00:30] Our meetings were shorter.

[3:00:31] It was nice.

[3:00:32] We were out here at 9 or 10 o'clock.

[3:00:34] At the lightest were like, this was correct.

[3:00:36] So not that that's the reason you should do it.

[3:00:39] But anyway, I don't think no data centers.

[3:00:43] No what?

[3:00:44] Data centers?

[3:00:45] Data centers?

[3:00:45] No data centers?

[3:00:47] Oh, data centers.

[3:00:48] No, no, no, no, we didn't have that.

[3:00:49] Thank goodness.

[3:00:51] So I don't think the tennis courts play tennis, as you all know.

[3:00:59] One of our members of our group here, Kate, over there, she's the one to the west, she wrote to an email about this, she says she can hear, well, there's the tennis courts, but she hears the buses starting at 630 in the morning inside her house.

[3:01:13] I don't know why anybody would want to be any closer to that bus parking lot than they have to be.

[3:01:19] but that's going to be a very big annoyance plus the band playing across the street that they

[3:01:23] already endure. The tennis court, she says there's tennis balls all back there behind there

[3:01:28] all the time and the light, you've got the tennis court lights. So I think a better solution might

[3:01:34] be to put the street right along there and just put bigger lights, three or four million dollar

[3:01:39] houses on the north side maybe. I'm not sure why he feels like they need to line up

[3:01:43] property line to property line along the back. If he builds disowning he can always come as for a

[3:01:48] we know for the lot dimensions that we gave variances on that kept on 36, but if they

[3:01:55] needed to make some of the lots wider and not quite as deep, we're good with that,

[3:01:59] you know, just keep the zoning so the density stays the same. So I encourage

[3:02:04] all to deny this and have them build its zoning, come back with a different concept. Thank

[3:02:09] you. Thank you.

[3:02:12] Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak on item H2, to me, H1?

[3:02:21] Excuse me, sir.

[3:02:29] And now this isn't what I'm reading.

[3:02:31] Mine's going to be short and sweet.

[3:02:33] But in America, I don't want to name a draw to have it.

[3:02:35] I have it in a more original color.

[3:02:39] So I think that this project, and just so you know,

[3:02:43] I am a residential real estate broker.

[3:02:45] My office is a serial killer.

[3:02:47] So I deal with the people coming into town

[3:02:51] of people wanting to move to our city, the people who want to stay in our city, the people

[3:02:54] who don't want to have to move to other areas to be able to move into homes and to a development

[3:03:00] like this.

[3:03:01] I know that we've lost a lot of people who'd like to stay in color, who've moved out to

[3:03:04] our guy, who've moved out to Justin, who moved out to other places to be able to do a development

[3:03:08] like this.

[3:03:10] Yes, it's a little bit smaller than what the zoning is set up for, but I think they've done

[3:03:15] a really good job of putting together a project that works for color, that works for

[3:03:20] space, and sometimes, yes, we have to be a little bit flexible in how we move these lots

[3:03:25] around. And at the end of the day, in order to be able to create a development like this,

[3:03:30] it has to be economically feasible as well. And Ms. Bryant's idea of moving the street,

[3:03:36] great idea does that make the project to where now the homes have to be four and five million,

[3:03:42] to be able to afford the property to be able to do the development. I think that we're getting to

[3:03:47] point to where the capital is in place for development and

[3:03:54] colors, as far as the cost of the homes.

[3:03:57] And in order to make these lots to make less lots in this

[3:04:00] development, the home value is going to have to increase.

[3:04:04] So all of this just simply to say, I like what they've done.

[3:04:07] I like that they put the care into making a nice project.

[3:04:11] I think that these will sell.

[3:04:13] And yes, tennis courts and all of those things in place,

[3:04:16] My previous life before real estate was automotive related, and I'm trying to word this correctly, so let's say it.

[3:04:26] So I met a guy who was an old-time and they had a really old car on the lot, and loved used car a lot.

[3:04:32] And I said, who'd ever buy that? And he said, Rodney, there's an ask for every seat.

[3:04:36] And so with that said, there's a buyer for every home. Yes, I said it. There's a buyer for every home.

[3:04:42] And so I believe that we have folks who are moving here who won't mind the tennis courts, they won't mind the buses in the morning for a few minutes, and they will buy these homes.

[3:04:51] And so I'm in favor of this project, I think it's a very nice project.

[3:04:55] I've seen the homes that they're referencing in the other neighborhood, very beautiful homes. She should drive through there.

[3:05:00] And if you have it, and that's all I've got to say. Thank you.

[3:05:03] All right. Thank you, sir. Anyone else, like to speak on item H1?

[3:05:12] Not motion, the close of public hearing.

[3:05:17] Council of Wattley.

[3:05:20] All right. We have a motion a second. It's vote.

[3:05:25] Public hearing is closed. Questions for staff for the applicant?

[3:05:36] Mayor Brotam.

[3:05:38] My question is pretty quick, just one real quick.

[3:05:40] What was the, and I'm sorry I had to step out for a quick second.

[3:05:43] Did y'all mention a price point you're targeting for these?

[3:05:46] Just at a curiosity.

[3:05:49] I know it's early in the project, but I just kind of went home.

[3:05:52] Yeah, the homes.

[3:05:53] Is that right over $2 million?

[3:05:54] A brand, okay.

[3:05:55] Yeah, I've compared to Greenway Park and what's going on there.

[3:05:58] That's kind of the brometer for, I think, what we're doing here.

[3:06:03] And again, there's a home on the market there for $2.3 currently.

[3:06:06] another for 2.6, part 2.5, excuse me. So, you know, it would be about two years before

[3:06:14] these loss are actually on the ground already to build. We've approved tonight, we've got

[3:06:18] to go through the detailed site plan process. We then have to craft the construction plans and

[3:06:24] if they should review it. You would probably be a year before we grow ground and then another

[3:06:30] year of construction. So, if you continue to find, it could be $3 million.

[3:06:34] Yeah, depending on the market, I have more questions by asking later on my colleagues

[3:06:38] have a bunch of questions.

[3:06:40] Thank you.

[3:06:41] Sir.

[3:06:41] Carlson Wally.

[3:06:43] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:06:45] Hey, Curtis Dave.

[3:06:47] How are you?

[3:06:47] Hello, Mr. Speaker.

[3:06:48] You know, I'm just saying hey, I've seen you in here many times, and you've seen me here

[3:06:57] as well.

[3:06:59] Gentlemen, Ms. Brian had a very, very good point in the fact that the North to South border

[3:07:10] on the Western half that borders the bus lots.

[3:07:16] I understand it doesn't make the U.D. see a requirement of 200 foot lot depth, but a variance

[3:07:25] for that, it's very, and I'm just speaking for me, I'm a proponent of SF-36, and if a developer

[3:07:36] tells me, hey, my watch for 185 feet, but I'm making up for in width and I'm still having

[3:07:45] SF-36. I have no problem with that. Again, I'm one voice out of seven, but I believe my

[3:07:54] Council members would probably not have a problem with that.

[3:08:00] There are no topography issues that I can see that was force you into this situation.

[3:08:08] If you lost a couple of lots, I think you should stay with Zoning, NSF-36.

[3:08:16] You're putting a, you said most of the homes, I believe David said most of the homes would

[3:08:22] five thousand's worthy that's a pretty good size house.

[3:08:30] And with

[3:08:35] the lot sizes you have

[3:08:37] and a five thousand's worth of home and I envision Gina States and only four of your

[3:08:53] much as 8,000 smaller, the winter of 28, something. There's 7,000 in some change. I live in a

[3:09:04] 2,000 square foot home, 2100 square feet, and I imagine three and a half of my houses footprint

[3:09:14] stationed away from a lot, or that much stationality in the state, with a home there's still

[3:09:21] the same size as the 5,000 square foot home in the United States, and the impermanible

[3:09:27] surface and everything else.

[3:09:30] And I just don't see that as a win-win for the city or a resident, Sharon Teller.

[3:09:38] However, I applaud you for the private street, the entrance, I am totally for that.

[3:09:46] You've done a lot of very nice things with the property.

[3:09:50] I understand the open space part of that is the fact that all you can do with it, you can't put houses on it, on that open space in the corner.

[3:10:00] So, bottom line is I applaud what you've done, but I can't support it, and I'm sure my fellow

[3:10:08] council members to stick with zoning, strictly because, and I quote a former colleague of mine

[3:10:18] who is on council, zoning is the law. You have to give me a compelling reason, and I don't

[3:10:26] see enough compelling reasons here, certainly, a variance for the depth of the law is not

[3:10:38] an issue and I just don't see it.

[3:10:41] So unfortunately, I can't support this, I appreciate you 100% and hope you'll be able to

[3:10:46] come back and SELP 36.

[3:10:49] Yes, sir.

[3:10:53] I appreciate your comments, Councilman Wally.

[3:10:59] The reason I think the PD is a superior approach to this than straight zoning gets to what

[3:11:07] you're talking about.

[3:11:08] If you gave us a variance on the depth of those locks, 16, 17, 18, 11, 12, 13 in that area,

[3:11:19] to make them 36,000 square feet loss, we'd have to make them much wider than the lots

[3:11:26] where next year. Some of those our neighbors then would be backing up to two different

[3:11:32] homes as opposed to just one. We think the superior solution is to keep the

[3:11:37] lot lines lined up and that naturally leads to lots that are slightly less than 36,000

[3:11:47] square feet, they're 32, 33, 34, 1,000 square feet. No one standing on the street is going

[3:11:53] to be able to notice the difference there. But that's what you can do with a PD. It gives you

[3:11:59] the ability to address situations like this, ask for some exceptions to, in my opinion, come up

[3:12:07] with the superior solution. So that's why we've done that. As I said, to begin, this is basically

[3:12:14] the same density is a straight 36,000 square feet. If you take the open space and add it

[3:12:20] these lots, we're well over 36,000 square feet, average area, non-street area per

[3:12:27] lots. So I just wanted to explain. That's why we've done this. We feel it's an understand

[3:12:32] what you're saying, but we feel this is a spirit solution. I appreciate what you're saying

[3:12:38] And I remember that from your presentation.

[3:12:42] I had it for not in that.

[3:12:45] I just don't see the officer in the lines,

[3:12:47] property lines, it's been an issue.

[3:12:49] But thank you, sir.

[3:12:51] I appreciate that.

[3:12:52] All right.

[3:12:52] Good question.

[3:12:54] Councilwoman Brennan?

[3:12:57] All right.

[3:12:57] I've got a lot here.

[3:12:58] I have questions for out on the whoever.

[3:13:01] First of, I'm just going to make a comment that the average

[3:13:04] lot size is 32,108 square feet, which is three quarters of an acre compared to SF36, which

[3:13:13] is 0.83 acres. So it's not a huge difference in my brain. So two, I'm just going to put

[3:13:22] that out there in the beginning. First common I have is lots one through four are the little

[3:13:29] lots, little so to speak relative, more than half an acre, 28,000 ish from 1 through 4.

[3:13:40] If you actually through 1 through 5, if you take out one of those lots, so you go from 22 homes

[3:13:47] to 21 homes, those lots 1 through 5, which would become 1 through 4, would average 35,481 square

[3:13:57] which is closer to pretty darn close to SF-36 at the intent of the zoning.

[3:14:04] And so, I mean, I look at 22 homes going down to 21 homes.

[3:14:10] I mean, I don't see that that's a big of a deal.

[3:14:14] If you want to speak to that, please, and why you maybe you can't do that,

[3:14:18] or you can't do that, that would be great.

[3:14:21] Well, I will say that obviously the reason we made those small odds there is

[3:14:26] because of the adjacency, as I talked about it in my presentation.

[3:14:30] And I'm sure you're that, as far as whether we can lose one of those locks

[3:14:36] and make them larger, I'll defer to my client on that.

[3:14:45] No, I understand what's like that in the consideration, you know, lots of one for proof

[3:14:53] or their feedback up to a parking lot on one side and a parking lot on the other side

[3:14:57] on the tennis courts.

[3:15:00] I'll take that in consideration. I appreciate that input. But I don't think if we give up those last

[3:15:18] $420 foot wide need to buy that out by the poor remaining loss.

[3:15:24] I still don't think they would get $36,000.

[3:15:27] No, I'll give $30,000 about $35.

[3:15:31] Yeah, I did the math on average.

[3:15:34] And I think, you know, like I think Ms. Bryant spoke to it, you know,

[3:15:38] variances on lot lists and those sorts of things.

[3:15:41] Those are somewhat no brainers for us sometimes.

[3:15:44] So I wouldn't let that concern you as much.

[3:15:46] I just, I know the appetite around these parts lately is to kind of keep our zoning to 36

[3:15:54] fast, even though 36 is not exact number.

[3:15:57] Thank you for your time.

[3:15:58] Close.

[3:15:59] I mean, you're talking, your average three quarters of an acre per home versus 0.83 acres per

[3:16:05] home.

[3:16:05] So I'm just going to put that out there.

[3:16:07] So think about that, eliminating the home between 1 and 5.

[3:16:11] Second common I want to make is I live one of your charts.

[3:16:15] you can actually see my house.

[3:16:16] I live this on the top left-hand corner here

[3:16:19] at the very end of that development.

[3:16:22] I know what a hot mess the high school is

[3:16:25] with all those teenagers all Roman around

[3:16:28] before school after school football games, all that stuff.

[3:16:32] So a recommendation I have because this is a gated community.

[3:16:36] I know that you intended it to be a gated community

[3:16:39] for a vehicular traffic, but I think,

[3:16:43] I mean, I'll speculate, that people moving into a gated committee

[3:16:47] also like the privacy from pedestrian traffic.

[3:16:51] And so a couple of kind of weakness, as I see in the way

[3:16:55] that is laid out now, that's, I think, pretty easy to fix,

[3:16:59] is you have a rod iron fence along the western side

[3:17:04] of your entryway road.

[3:17:06] That's right up against parking lot for the tennis courts.

[3:17:10] I know why you wanted to do the rod iron

[3:17:12] because you got the green space and it's pretty and all that stuff, but you've got a parking

[3:17:17] lot full of teenagers parking in their car. I don't think that this necessarily is scenic

[3:17:22] red. And I can see some teenagers wanting to climb that right-iron fence to get into that

[3:17:30] subdivision. And so I would suggest that Masonry Wall that you have in the front, that

[3:17:36] maybe you would do that as well along that stretch. I mean, to hide you to hide the parking

[3:17:41] And then kids would be, I think, less apt to go climb across.

[3:17:45] That's one point about that.

[3:17:47] On the other end of the subdivision, you have the walking trail.

[3:17:51] We have that really nice screen space that you had, which is great.

[3:17:55] But the walking trail links right into the end of that cul-de-sac,

[3:17:59] in between people's homes.

[3:18:01] I would recommend, I have no problem with the path of doing that.

[3:18:04] Maybe put like a code on a gate or something.

[3:18:08] If I lived in one of those two houses and teenagers could go back out there to make an out or whatever they're doing up to no good.

[3:18:16] I'm sure, you know, going over there and in between in between the houses walk around.

[3:18:21] I think I'd have a hard time with that if I spent $2 million on a house.

[3:18:26] So that's a suggestion is to put some gates there that would be basically then for the residents.

[3:18:33] They could exit and utilize the trail versus people walking through that subdivision

[3:18:37] and keep in the privacy for pedestrian traffic as well as vehicle or traffic.

[3:18:43] And then the most northern edge of the subdivision, I'll listen to P&Z, actually twice,

[3:18:51] just to try to make sure I understood everything that was being discussed.

[3:18:54] So in addition to replacing the fencing there to match the eight foot that's required by the

[3:19:02] in the States H.O.A., because their fence lines are a little too short, once you remove the

[3:19:09] barbar, you put the fence on the property, you got a little bit of gap, and I think you

[3:19:14] had agreed in P and Z that you would make up a little offset difference for people's fences,

[3:19:20] so they have a completely fence end.

[3:19:22] That's correct.

[3:19:23] I've put out about the bead restriction that they have some more of a gentleman mentioned,

[3:19:27] but they do have bead restrictions on the type of fence thing, and, you know, as far as

[3:19:31] And so I'm what's good for Dean of States is good for

[3:19:34] Providence, you know, we want to be as compatible with the

[3:19:37] home and with the quality that they have in that development.

[3:19:40] I think we need to meet or exceed that quality with our

[3:19:42] development. So sure. Yeah. I mean, as if for life and

[3:19:47] things and whatever their degree restrictions will

[3:19:49] acquire, I'm sure we're happy to meet that there. Okay.

[3:19:52] Um, and then let's see, my notes and more

[3:19:55] scrutiny scrappy that I want them to be.

[3:19:57] Um, and then the trees so that I

[3:20:00] Know that area of the clump of trees that's just to the west of the mess at this church, because I run by it in a wee hours of the morning, and sometimes you hear a rustling like there's going to be some animal. It's going to jump out in front of me in the dark or something, but it's a lot of really closely dense trees. You got that retaining pond back in there. You're not going to just clear-cut that, right? You're going to, you're going to put in the road, and you have to do some preparation of the lots, and so speak to the clear-cut, because I hear a lot of input from residents,

[3:20:29] about trees and the worrisome thought that they would just clear cut all those trees.

[3:20:36] No, we wouldn't clear cut. This diagram that I showed earlier, the orange area would be

[3:20:43] area where we'd have to do some fill. A lot of that isn't trees, a lot of that is the pond that's

[3:20:49] in this location here. The green areas we feel would always remain trees. The area of the middle

[3:20:58] that's neither colored orange or green is where the home builder, the homeowner, would decide

[3:21:06] the layout of their home and hopefully work with some of the trees in there to save those

[3:21:11] as well. To right now it drains diagonally across here into this pond and out. So we're going

[3:21:20] have to capture the drainage, otherwise, you know, four is going to drain onto three, which

[3:21:27] is going to drain onto two, you know, it's et cetera, et cetera.

[3:21:31] So what we're posing to do is capture each of the drainage in the side property lines and bring

[3:21:39] it to the street where it will go underground. So on the property line, they'll have to be some

[3:21:44] trees cleared for soil to go in there. But the center of the lock and the rear of the lock,

[3:21:50] We're hoping to save a significant number of those trees.

[3:21:54] Obviously, where the house goes and the dryway goes and all that stuff will have to be removed.

[3:21:58] But I think this is the most effective way to develop that area and still save the maximum number of trees.

[3:22:05] That's what I kind of think of to your, to your point.

[3:22:08] I watched Gina States being built because it was just right there.

[3:22:11] We walked through it every day and watched the progress of the houses being built.

[3:22:14] They had a bunch of trees in there and they just left them all there and then as homes would come in,

[3:22:19] And you could see the tape around the trees

[3:22:21] at that particular building decided to keep

[3:22:24] based on whatever the footprint of their house was.

[3:22:26] So I'm picturing something like that.

[3:22:27] It would be, these are custom homes,

[3:22:30] and it's going to be up to their person building that home

[3:22:32] to the side which trees to keep and what you could use to stay.

[3:22:35] And I think, I just want to hear that you don't just plan

[3:22:38] on clear cutting that time.

[3:22:39] We do not.

[3:22:41] That's going to be part of Marshall over a grading plan

[3:22:44] and everything else.

[3:22:45] Okay. Those are, those are my comments.

[3:22:49] I will add on to the trees.

[3:22:51] I have walked this area.

[3:22:53] A lot of it was crawling and biting my way through,

[3:22:56] but a pretty lost one to four.

[3:22:59] I did not see any quality trees.

[3:23:02] It's mainly the scrub top trees that are growing there.

[3:23:06] Obviously for quality trees, we won't save those.

[3:23:10] I think it will be good to save the trees in the backyard.

[3:23:13] And I obviously, the bill work in the side on the building pad,

[3:23:18] you know, where to position the home, the front side,

[3:23:20] and the significant trees that are there.

[3:23:22] That's one of the good things that are going with the testing

[3:23:25] builder.

[3:23:26] Starting here along a lot, five, five, six, and seven.

[3:23:30] It's where you run into a grow of the native post-occurators,

[3:23:35] really, really nice trees through there.

[3:23:37] You can see how that extends over into the church property,

[3:23:40] we have again up in the genus states in their backyard.

[3:23:44] Flying just to pay what you're going to see with Providence,

[3:23:47] very similar to what you see in the genus states.

[3:23:51] The freeze are in on the house and the backyard.

[3:23:54] Every effort will be made to save those and build the homes around them.

[3:24:00] We would just have to clear and build the trees in a lot of way to get this tree.

[3:24:03] You know, understood what you said about access on a gate here, you know, that's not a big deal.

[3:24:14] I don't think we're worried about pedestrian traffic in Keller or the, you know, a type of community we have here.

[3:24:22] The data, the entry is just nice to cut down on the amount of drive through traffic and people pulling in and realizing it's a dead end and then coming out.

[3:24:30] You know, being a father of young kids, I know, we live on several acres in North

[3:24:36] Hiller, and I know one of the complaints that my son has had specifically is

[3:24:42] wanting to go hang out with his buddies, and he can't walk to anybody's house, so

[3:24:45] rather by being anybody's house was one of North Pearson, so you know, I've seen this being

[3:24:51] an opportunity for kids to go through and visit the plains and genus states and back

[3:24:56] fourth I'd be really neat I have a sidewalk because of the

[3:25:00] Actually, I'm here from all the way up into the United States. I don't know if the United States should be receptive to that or not, but you know, I like the walkability aspect of it, especially for the kids when they're on their bike. I wouldn't visit her friend.

[3:25:15] Of course, we can still do that and have a gate key on it. They're friends.

[3:25:21] I think you're suggesting we talked about that, didn't you?

[3:25:24] I think the, I think the, I kidding.

[3:25:26] Lakes that things have some of that.

[3:25:28] We're like a little keypad.

[3:25:29] And people in that living that subdivision know what the code is,

[3:25:32] and you don't have to carry a key around with you.

[3:25:34] And you can go in and out and use that path,

[3:25:36] but it would prevent people from walking in and out that subdivision,

[3:25:39] kids and whatnot.

[3:25:42] And then also the, and the other thing of the,

[3:25:45] looking at removing one house long that stretch.

[3:25:47] So I think that probably most people as a whole would not be opposed to this development because

[3:25:54] you'd be very, very close to the intent of 36 SFF.

[3:25:57] OK.

[3:25:58] And then again, you mentioned the wall here.

[3:26:02] I think you can do as much with iron-fencing and landscaping in a little bit warmer.

[3:26:11] Nice for look.

[3:26:12] and then having a cold hard, nice, merry-waw,

[3:26:15] but understand your, you're, you know,

[3:26:17] where you're coming from on that.

[3:26:19] And if it takes, you know, building a nice,

[3:26:22] merry-waw there, we will gladly do that.

[3:26:24] This is not that big of a deal with us.

[3:26:28] Our thoughts work just, you know,

[3:26:30] as you pull down the street,

[3:26:31] we've got an awesome open space here,

[3:26:32] planning a world of trees to make an ice park away.

[3:26:35] And we can still do that with the, with the fence here.

[3:26:43] So I think I said enough. Thank you.

[3:26:50] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:26:52] So I don't want to re-till O-ground, but could you re-explain again on the east side of the property for the lots that are below SF-36?

[3:27:06] Why it is that you can't make those a little bigger and you gave a good explanation

[3:27:13] But I'm an Aggie some a little slow, so could have you just kind of walked me through that one more time. Well

[3:27:19] I can handle this part. This is a the proud graduate of the University of Texas

[3:27:23] You know I said you are right I promise to talk real slow and not you've been a big word. It's got to emancipate the words

[3:27:34] So, yes, to answer your question, the property line, the proposed property line here,

[3:27:42] at the width of this area is 448 foot. The required minimum lot depth in SF-30 and SF-36

[3:27:53] is 200 foot, and you're required to have a 50 foot round of way for a straight. So, as you

[3:28:02] 100 foot of debt for the last summer on the South and then a 50 foot right of way get 455.

[3:28:11] Unfortunately, we're 448 foot, we're two foot shy of that minimum.

[3:28:16] So we cannot meet the required minimum lot debt of both S-30 and S-30-6.

[3:28:23] I don't mean because of the dimension of the property that we have there.

[3:28:28] but make better sounds.

[3:28:30] Yeah, I appreciate that.

[3:28:32] And so then if we go a little further east to where I think

[3:28:35] you said you had to fight and crawl your way through the woods,

[3:28:38] I said, yeah, hear that right.

[3:28:41] For those lots, why is it that those can't get a little bigger?

[3:28:46] Well, they could.

[3:28:49] If we follow councilmember Brennan's suggestion

[3:28:52] to lose a lot there.

[3:28:55] But the reason they're not as large as the others

[3:28:57] is what they're next to.

[3:29:00] There are plenty deep plots, okay?

[3:29:03] But they're next to a park and lawn and a church.

[3:29:05] They're not next to any other lots here in, you know, no residents will live next to them,

[3:29:12] no residents will even know what it is there.

[3:29:15] So because of our dimensional issues elsewhere, we thought that that was a place we could

[3:29:22] put these kind of lots in there and still meet the base density for this F-36, so that's why we did it that way.

[3:29:32] Was that answering your question?

[3:29:35] It does, so you could.

[3:29:38] You always could.

[3:29:40] Whether it's a good idea or not is another issue.

[3:29:44] And then can you speak a little bit too to the drainage again?

[3:29:48] I'm just, because you mentioned something about water spilling out on the road.

[3:29:51] I just want to, what does the drainage look like?

[3:29:56] Yeah, let me go back here.

[3:29:57] Here's the existing drainage well.

[3:30:00] Those through the property. And it's not a particularly deep swell or a huge river. It just drains the, you can see where the blue line, oops, you can see where the blue line,

[3:30:14] let me go.

[3:30:16] Starts up here. This is a detention bond that was built with Gina States here. So this detains water and then lets it out over a period of time.

[3:30:27] and it flows into this existing swell that also drains the back of the church property right in here.

[3:30:37] So those come together in this location and kind of go diagonally across this area.

[3:30:44] We're going to have to deal with that drainage somehow because you don't want drainage coming through the middle of lots across where the homes are to be.

[3:30:52] So our choices are, typically what you would do in this situation, because the shortest point between point A and point B,

[3:31:00] this is where we're trying to get to.

[3:31:02] There's a drainage swell along the north side of Johnson here.

[3:31:05] The easiest way to do it would be to capture that drainage and go straight down this property line to that drainage swell.

[3:31:12] From there, it easily flows into the major system there.

[3:31:17] But if we did that, we would have to cut that soil which would remove the trees between us and the parking lot and the church and all the activity over there.

[3:31:28] We thought that a better solution, albeit more costly, would be to capture that drainage and bring it straight across here and then take it down underground in that street there, which is what we're showing here.

[3:31:47] It would capture it, it would go in between Mods 4 and 5 and then go into an underground pipe.

[3:31:55] It would be right along the front edge of this road and then into this drainage whale down here.

[3:32:02] So that was all done in the effort to save trees and keep a buffer between us and the church and the parking lot over there.

[3:32:09] That's our reason for doing that.

[3:32:12] Thank you very much.

[3:32:13] Appreciate it.

[3:32:14] I

[3:32:19] love the project David, we've discussed it and I think it's a good looking project I have some issues.

[3:32:26] Everything around you is 36,000 there's not a single lot in Gina States that's smaller than that.

[3:32:32] I would like for you to match that at the bare minimum.

[3:32:35] If it's I agree with Ms. Brennan, give up one, one and a half lots and you can make it happen.

[3:32:43] The trees that are on this property, out in the pasture where the horses are that everybody

[3:32:48] so wants to leave out there, those are mosquito trees, those are not a protected tree.

[3:32:53] They're a Texas tree, but they're not a protected tree in color.

[3:32:56] With your project, you will come in with better trees than that.

[3:33:00] I'll be at not natural to Texas some of them.

[3:33:03] And in that area that, unless you're tall, heart for crawling through it, but there's probably

[3:33:08] not one tree in there that's going to be knowledgeable as a protected tree, but what you're

[3:33:13] going to bring in with this project is going to be better than what's there. I'm not going

[3:33:17] to tell you how to spend your money. I'll tell you that I would like one less lot, but the trees

[3:33:23] and the cheaper route down the back of it, those are trash trees. They're still trees and I can't

[3:33:28] it. Those of you that love trees, I appreciate it too, but those trees are not going to stay there

[3:33:33] once you start disturbing that dirt.

[3:33:36] So, as it is now, I don't think I can approve.

[3:33:46] I'm just a quote by the jury.

[3:33:47] Did you say that if we deleted the one law,

[3:33:50] this is that,

[3:34:00] thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:34:02] Mr. Washington, David,

[3:34:06] you're nice spoke.

[3:34:08] And I express to you that my goal is to get us absolutely

[3:34:11] close to the underlying zoning as humanly possible.

[3:34:16] Well, I mean, I understand that sometimes there are lots that are just laid out, that make

[3:34:24] it next to impossible.

[3:34:27] And it's frustrating, I express my frustration to you, where it's clear when a developer

[3:34:34] has never made any effort to try to match the zoning.

[3:34:37] And I don't think that's the case here.

[3:34:40] But there have been projects that have come forward in the past where it's SF-36 and the

[3:34:46] square foot lots and in those instances it's just very clear they're trying to pack as many homes

[3:34:53] on to the property as they possibly can. In this case you're almost at one one home.

[3:35:00] And her acre is your little bit under that. But I like a lot of what you've presented. I like the sewer and water hookups for the tennis courts. I know that that has been a huge issue for the for the school district. It's been up to this point cost prohibited for them to run the sanitary sewer and water lines under the street to get them to that location.

[3:35:28] And while that's not our table, you know, I think that that indicates that you're looking

[3:35:37] out for other stakeholders not just, you know, yourself and how to make a profit on this.

[3:35:44] This, right, being a good neighbor, being a good community partner,

[3:35:51] not to rehash a lot

[3:35:53] what Councilwoman Brennan said, you know, these RSF 36,000 square foot lots, that is 0.82

[3:36:00] of an acre. You're currently at an average lot size of 32,000 when taking them all into

[3:36:07] consideration, which is at 0.73. If you were to remove one, one and a half to lots, you would

[3:36:15] either be just under or exceed the underline zoning.

[3:36:22] And so I would like to try to find a way

[3:36:27] for us to get this approved tonight for you,

[3:36:30] if you're willing to.

[3:36:32] I mean, would you prefer that we give you the opportunity

[3:36:35] to redraw this with less lots so that way

[3:36:38] you can try to meet the underline zoning

[3:36:41] with that required him to come back through the process

[3:36:44] Sir, could we do that from the day as, sir?

[3:36:48] You know, I think at first comes the flood tonight and we've got to keep moving forward.

[3:36:53] We've got to contract.

[3:36:54] We've got time and constraints in the contract.

[3:36:56] Sure.

[3:36:57] We like to know, you know, we'll get a product or not tonight.

[3:37:01] I'm not sure the reality is out there.

[3:37:04] But if we were to the way one of those lots,

[3:37:07] last one to five, and it's right that area,

[3:37:09] I have a feeling that I have four remaining ones.

[3:37:12] I think that's something that, you know, if we've got to do it, we've got to do it.

[3:37:16] We want to be the project, we're excited about it, and that's what it takes, and we're

[3:37:22] willing to do that.

[3:37:23] There's, yeah.

[3:37:24] I appreciate that.

[3:37:27] I, I, I, I, I

[3:37:36] had something else, and I just lost my train of thought.

[3:37:42] I'll leave it there, and if it comes back to me, I'll, I'll, I'll mess it, or, I'll,

[3:37:47] indicate another desire to speak, Mr. Mayor.

[3:37:51] Thanks, Councilman.

[3:37:52] Mayor, both of them.

[3:37:53] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:37:55] I'll ask you, I'll have a question for staff.

[3:37:57] I'll ask the one and a half for y'all first.

[3:38:00] I just spent almost, I spent a lot of money

[3:38:02] having to redo my foundation.

[3:38:04] And so I'm just curious, can you clarify for me

[3:38:07] because I wouldn't want the people that move there

[3:38:09] to have to read, you know, the ground shifting

[3:38:11] with the pond being there?

[3:38:13] I mean, y'all said y'all filled it in.

[3:38:16] What do y'all do to make sure there's not

[3:38:17] to be foundation issues, right, in that area?

[3:38:19] Because I've got to be honest out of ignorance,

[3:38:21] I don't know how you'll prevent that from happening.

[3:38:23] When there's a group of methods,

[3:38:25] we have performed a preliminary geotech on the property,

[3:38:29] which we're talking about as it's referred to as PDR,

[3:38:31] a potential vertical rise, as well,

[3:38:33] potential, as we up all of those,

[3:38:35] a lot of clay in the solos here.

[3:38:37] We dealt with it before.

[3:38:40] What I think you're going to have,

[3:38:42] and in this area, we have found that another development

[3:38:47] in color that where you have those native trees in the area that suck out of the moisture

[3:38:53] out of the soil so the clay is very, very hard and dry. So when you come in and you remove

[3:38:57] trees and build the house, you start getting rain and that clay will swell at crazy and you

[3:39:04] get a big PDR. I typically govers are 4, 4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2,

[3:39:13] 1,

[3:39:13] I expect some of these PDRs to be well about that.

[3:39:18] If different chemical injections and water injections, you can do, we found that on a project

[3:39:23] before and I didn't think it worked very well.

[3:39:26] The most popular method that I see, and you may have seen this with some of the commercial

[3:39:29] buildings.

[3:39:30] I know natural brochures there, and I tell our Smith to open in 1709, went through this process.

[3:39:38] It's called Moisture Conditioning, where they will come in and excavate out an envelope of the soil, you know, the geotech report will tell us, six foot, eight foot deep, that will move all that soil, and then they'll place it back while waiting it down to the soil to mix the soil up good.

[3:40:00] And then just completely swell the clay and then cover it with a piece of a polyclastic, and then build a foundation on top of that.

[3:40:11] So, which you have then is a fully swell, such right for your foundation, with less PVR, whatever you call that.

[3:40:21] And you can also haul off the soil and place it with a non-explanet of soil, I think moisture condition is probably the most positive.

[3:40:28] Yeah, I agree, but you also asked about the lake and the lake would be filled and compacted in layers.

[3:40:36] You know, there's processes for doing that.

[3:40:38] So the water would all be taken out obviously and then that would all, you know, the engineers will determine exactly how that needs to be done.

[3:40:48] Yeah, I just, I'm very sensitive that as I'm sure engineers to that up my house too.

[3:40:52] It was a crack through the moment, no, I appreciate the explanation, and that makes sense, and it sounds like you'll spend a lot of attention to detail in that matter.

[3:41:00] I had a lot of questions about drainage, but Jolavari answered that, because one of the pond there, and then the topography of it going, even all the water coming over from the Methodist Church, that's going to go there that they've been speaking to.

[3:41:14] My next question, I guess, is for staff and then maybe all can answer after it is in regards to traffic.

[3:41:20] I have to drop my daughter off a lot there and traffic is hideous twice a day.

[3:41:26] I guess with the traffic, I assume, did they have to do a traffic study?

[3:41:30] I mean, it's not a huge project.

[3:41:34] I'll talk for a minute and give a moment to make his way in here.

[3:41:37] If they did a trip generation form, I don't think the trips per day hit the threshold.

[3:41:41] for having to throw anything beyond that, but Alonzo can definitely speak to it in greater

[3:41:48] detail than I can.

[3:41:49] Yeah, it's only 22 lots, but I was curious if it had any effect because it is, and then

[3:41:55] also with the, I know we haven't heard it yet, but with Crowger coming over there, there's

[3:42:00] a lot happening in this little area right here, I want to see how it all interacts with each

[3:42:04] But if Alonzo is not walking this way right now, Alonzo,

[3:42:12] Chief is grabbing him, but we'll give him the second, while the Chief's coming, do you all want to add anything to that?

[3:42:17] It's okay.

[3:42:21] Generally, traffic generated by 20-some residential boxes, pretty small compared to the existing traffic on Johnson Road, and certainly when the school enter and exit happens, it's the other small.

[3:42:35] They're going to have to exit right coming out or God bless them if they're trying to turn left in the morning

[3:42:40] All right, I'll wait for a lawns of easier if not that's fine. Oh, he's coming. What would the

[3:42:47] I don't have been for just a second while waiting for a lawns of what would the

[3:42:51] How many lots would go on this parcel if it was a SF-36?

[3:42:57] Well,

[3:43:02] if it was better shaped

[3:43:04] No, I just mean like on this parcel like how many XF-30 locks SF-36 lots can be

[3:43:10] We probably, you know, lose a couple of locks.

[3:43:16] It's like a couple of my brain, I'm an Aggie too.

[3:43:21] So trying to quantify things, you know, like two or three.

[3:43:26] So what I hear, see, I can feel a buster.

[3:43:30] Thanks, Lanzo.

[3:43:31] The, basically, what I hear is from current based oning.

[3:43:34] If you have a couple additional houses, so that kind of informs the traffic question of what

[3:43:39] with the traffic impact be with this development as compared to current zoning, so a couple

[3:43:44] more houses.

[3:43:45] So, two more houses is typically, it's alone so can compare this, but for a single

[3:43:51] family home, there's typically during peak rush hour, you know, just over, here's a very

[3:43:59] little, how many trains are there?

[3:44:02] Alonzoone on public work's director, in short, when he comes to trip generation, we're looking

[3:44:07] before it requires off-street off-site improvements.

[3:44:12] You're hitting well beyond the 500-700-per-development thresholds.

[3:44:20] In this case, we've got, I think, it was 222.

[3:44:24] 22, lots of things.

[3:44:25] So, 220 trips per day is what we would expect.

[3:44:31] With the trip generation, this doesn't trigger any kind of additional study or off-site improvement

[3:44:37] requirements. Okay. Thank you. That's the questions I have for now. Thanks,

[3:44:41] all of them.

[3:44:46] discussion. Any other questions? We do have a motion from Council

[3:44:52] and Wally. So we can do that motion if you're ready, Councilman.

[3:44:59] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:45:00] Before I make the motion, Dave, I don't know what you contractually had done with the ISD.

[3:45:10] I live just north of Gina States. I mean literally, literally, right on the other side of the bancroft.

[3:45:20] And every Thursday, finally, Saturday night at this time of year. If I sit outside with my wife to enjoy the beautiful fall weather,

[3:45:27] I feel like I'm sitting in a pep rally listening to the high school band and the football

[3:45:35] games and and after some of the assignments from Councilwoman Vernon, you might so

[3:45:43] back to the ISD and say, hey, we're next to them. Bus part and light and blah blah blah.

[3:45:50] And they associate a better deal on the land and it's easier to drop a couple of lots.

[3:45:55] But the cause of the fact that it doesn't meet the zoning and I don't fill the transition,

[3:46:02] pelling enough reason to not meet zoning, then unfortunately I'm motioning to the

[3:46:11] delay.

[3:46:14] Thanks, Councilman.

[3:46:17] So in a second,

[3:46:23] I've been consistent over six years that always give a collegial second

[3:46:26] just to have an item heard in, for girls with my own thoughts on the matter.

[3:46:32] I just think we're delay-elected officials, so if we want to vote, then we motion

[3:46:36] to get a second.

[3:46:37] So I'll go ahead and second that motion, just out of colludiality.

[3:46:44] Mayor Pro Temp, so your name on the screen.

[3:46:46] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:46:48] I was kind of curious, and what Councilman Will was talking about, and I guess we can vote

[3:46:55] on this before, but if you're willing to get to the base line zoning to see where we get

[3:47:02] there, I know you're on a timeline. But we can see, I mean, I'll probably vote note to

[3:47:07] not on the first time, just because I want to see where we can get if you're willing to work

[3:47:12] with the city on this. But that's where I stand on this one.

[3:47:16] On the wild, is that right?

[3:47:18] Yeah, yeah, on the wild, it's making it for the, to be closer to the, we're willing to do that.

[3:47:22] You know, we're willing to do that, that's what it's like.

[3:47:29] You know, I'm trying to.

[3:47:30] We're addressing California, like I understand.

[3:47:34] We're looking on North Pearson.

[3:47:36] We can hear the bad end from our backyard.

[3:47:38] It's kind of a nice, nice, you know, pain to have.

[3:47:44] You know, the first thing we talked to with the builders

[3:47:47] was the bus park in the tennis courts.

[3:47:50] Obviously, that's the biggest negative, I think, where this deal, these guys are in the

[3:47:56] business of building homes and selling homes and there's concern that will probably be

[3:48:02] some of the last slots built on, but with the type of product they're building in the community,

[3:48:08] we think you build the right product in there and it's going to bring in traffic and that these

[3:48:12] I asked for that when I got to be valuable in Seattle.

[3:48:16] For comparison, I went out and measured, and our home says it's the last May 150 foot

[3:48:22] from North Pearson Lane in the front of our house.

[3:48:25] I'll office that at the house, I'm there in the front of the house, and traffic all day long,

[3:48:30] and I'm sure several thousand cars a day out in the North Pearson, you know, the quality

[3:48:34] and the homes that are built today, spray foam insulation, and why not, yeah, we're getting

[3:48:41] the occasional, you know, wild truck that goes by, you know, occasional, and being on sort of

[3:48:46] a fire truck going up here. But just the day-to-day traffic we have, it's not noticeable

[3:48:51] from our house, you know, it's filled up pretty time and pretty quiet. So, you know, I understand

[3:48:56] the concern, I appreciate the concern. I think it's something that we're kind of a way

[3:49:01] that we're going to build, we're from front to the way, and we can, we can, we can, we can

[3:49:11] If we take a vote on this and from the way it sounds, it looks like it would pass to deny.

[3:49:19] Does that kill the project right now or can they make the recommendation that they will accommodate?

[3:49:25] Yeah, I don't necessarily know that it kills the project.

[3:49:28] I don't know if it will pass or not.

[3:49:32] You know, I, you know, when we have a, you know, it's a golden rule, rule, true, there's

[3:49:40] how you want to be treated.

[3:49:41] So if I make a motion, then just out of collegiality, you know, I always hope that there's

[3:49:45] a second.

[3:49:46] So things don't die for lack of a motion.

[3:49:50] I'm personally, you know, interested in kind of the discussion.

[3:49:53] So I think procedurally, just from a process perspective, you know, my recommendation would

[3:50:00] At the vote, based on this motion, and then if there's another motion, if the, for example, the motion to deny fails, and then there's another motion, we just consider that motion on its merits.

[3:50:13] And I'm surmising that the motion would be to a motion to approve and eliminate a lot one from the PD application. In that case, if it were to gain four votes, it would be approved.

[3:50:25] We will do that tonight though.

[3:50:28] Yes.

[3:50:28] Yeah.

[3:50:28] It doesn't start them back to the process.

[3:50:30] The only thing that would start them back to the process is if the motion to deny is approved.

[3:50:38] So if a majority council denies the...

[3:50:42] Yes sir.

[3:50:43] Yes, a motion to deny would kill it.

[3:50:46] So if this motion stays as he is and it gets approved to deny this project what they're presenting tonight is gone.

[3:50:56] Yes sir.

[3:51:01] We're hoping it gets tonight. Yeah, so there's two past folks. So you can, um, you know, the motion doesn't pass.

[3:51:08] Yeah, they can't always bring it back to helpful. Yeah. Yeah. They could bring about the council.

[3:51:13] They could bring back the council. Um, you know, councilman Brennan had a question.

[3:51:18] And I'll go ahead and answer the procedural side of it. Question was, can you make a motion to amend the motion on the floor?

[3:51:24] That answer is yes, procedurally, you recognize the amendment before you recognize the original motion. That's true for all

[3:51:32] besides the sides of it, so

[3:51:34] You know if there's a motion to amend we can hear that

[3:51:38] You have a motion council woman

[3:51:42] I'd like to make a motion to amend

[3:51:45] I'd like to make a motion to amend what you've presented here to remove one lot

[3:51:51] between lots one through five

[3:51:54] and we space them so it's four and that gets you really darn close to thirty

[3:51:59] success, maybe just a little bit under, but I know we've approved just under thirty

[3:52:05] success in the past on other developments because it meets the intent. Thank you.

[3:52:11] So, I'll second that as well to kind of keep us moving along in the process and

[3:52:15] in the spirit of collegiality. I'll also kind of restate the motion to make sure that I

[3:52:23] the motion to deny and actually to be a motion to approve the item with the condition that

[3:52:30] lot one is removed from the project okay do you care what lot one three five it

[3:52:39] doesn't matter we would split it up and pre-make those lots larger so

[3:52:47] so when we remove remove lot one it would be oh yeah we could just remove lot one and then move

[3:52:54] So do you agree with how I restated it?

[3:52:57] Okay, so it's an emotion too.

[3:52:59] It's a motion to amend the motion on the floor.

[3:53:01] And the amendment is to approve the PD.

[3:53:05] As presented, except with the condition that.

[3:53:08] Lot one is removed and then you had some other thoughts on the

[3:53:11] Tensing that you want to do in corporate.

[3:53:15] Yeah, we need to talk about it.

[3:53:17] We move on warm and add that area to lots.

[3:53:21] two through five, two through five.

[3:53:23] Correct.

[3:53:23] It's better to have lots of water for about 30,000.

[3:53:26] And you can tell Robert's rules of order is not my strong point.

[3:53:29] I will admit it.

[3:53:31] All right.

[3:53:31] So I'm going to, I'm going to restate my amendment to the motion.

[3:53:35] My amendment to the motion is I would have put this development.

[3:53:39] If you remove, say, law one, and you replace the lots between what's currently

[3:53:44] law one and a lot five, because that one make those average up to about a little

[3:53:48] over 35,000 square foot lots.

[3:53:50] And I would amend, I would make an amendment to make that a masonry wall along the entryway on the left there that blocks that parking lot and keeps kids from climbing over the fence and then adding a gate with a code at the end of the cul-de-sac on the west side so that we don't have people walking into the subdivision that's intended to be gated.

[3:54:15] We think the gate and code should be at the southwest corner of a lot of 15.

[3:54:21] So people coming up from Johnson actually won't be able to go beyond the park.

[3:54:29] So then I think, and I don't know part of motion needs to be the fences along the back,

[3:54:34] which Gene, are you just going to do that?

[3:54:36] To be cold aside, Curtis, when I had an adjunct and we've got Rod Island coming down for

[3:54:40] here, we still have that.

[3:54:42] we don't want to run on, this is side by side.

[3:54:46] Those are comes out, we've got to have you here.

[3:54:50] Her intent here is to keep students and others coming

[3:54:55] out from Johnson and entering the project.

[3:54:59] It seems to be...

[3:55:00] That, you know, the path between 14 and 15. There's a, there's a trail that's between 14 and 15. You would have a gate at the very west corner of that path. There's a better, there's see that little black line, that little black line right there in your, yeah, right there would be a gate, so people can get out, but other people can't get in.

[3:55:29] That would be an amendment, and then the lastly, whatever we need to say about the

[3:55:34] Gina State's fence barrier, that we agreed to do that, that you would replace it with a

[3:55:39] foot fence, that meets their HOA code, and you would make up the difference of the little

[3:55:44] segments of fences now that will need to be extended, and that would be the extent of

[3:55:50] my amendment to the motion.

[3:55:51] Yeah, well stated, Sarah, does that give you what you need from a staff perspective?

[3:55:57] I just want clarification on when we're talking about and we're split in hairs, but the square footages on lots one through five are all different.

[3:56:08] So it sounds like the goal is to eliminate one lot.

[3:56:11] And that's roughly a little over 28,000 square feet and then spread it out, but it's okay if it's not the exact 28,299 square footage of

[3:56:23] lot, lot one, because like, lot four is a little less.

[3:56:29] Right.

[3:56:30] Yeah.

[3:56:32] So when they're preparing their site plan, they've got that.

[3:56:36] So, you pointed out the square footage difference.

[3:56:39] Thank you for that, Sarah.

[3:56:41] I want lots one through five.

[3:56:42] You're clear on the masonry wall on the east side

[3:56:45] that the councilman was referring to.

[3:56:49] And then west side?

[3:56:51] Yeah.

[3:56:52] West side.

[3:56:52] Right here.

[3:56:54] And then on the gate issue with the code,

[3:56:57] we're clear there, Sarah.

[3:56:59] And then the fence along the genus state,

[3:57:03] homes, we're clear on that.

[3:57:05] And so I guess,

[3:57:08] Did you have anything else Councilwoman?

[3:57:10] Well, and I think just to kind of clean up what we just all said there, I think, to remove a lot we could just specify a remove a lot number three.

[3:57:19] And we space all the rest of them between one and five.

[3:57:22] Great. I'm agreeable to that as well.

[3:57:23] We'll make it more specific. How about that?

[3:57:26] And then everything else that we've talked about just now.

[3:57:29] That's how I'd like them in my motion.

[3:57:30] Yeah, okay, so remove lot three.

[3:57:36] The mainstream wall, at a gate with code on the west,

[3:57:40] fence matching the standards along the genus days.

[3:57:44] Mayor Protem, do you have a comment?

[3:57:45] Yeah, just a quick point for those listening

[3:57:47] and those out there, using my colleague's Aggie Math

[3:57:50] which is usually far superior to what they do in Austin.

[3:57:54] It makes the,

[3:57:56] did a lot of size at 35,500, like 500 feet less than 600 per

[3:58:04] So, it's pretty darn close and I want to thank y'all for working with us and trying to do

[3:58:09] with the best for the city and for the surrounding areas as well as a lot of the

[3:58:12] stuff.

[3:58:13] Councilwoman Brennan brought up.

[3:58:14] Thank you for being willing to work with us.

[3:58:17] All right.

[3:58:18] So, let's do any further comments.

[3:58:19] We'll go and recognize Councilwoman Brennan's amendment to the motion on the floor.

[3:58:24] I'm the second.

[3:58:25] Any further discussions on this?

[3:58:27] If not, let's go and vote.

[3:58:30] So, if you want the project to move forward with those conditions, go ahead and vote approve.

[3:58:34] If you are against the project moving forward with those conditions, vote to nay or deny.

[3:58:40] No.

[3:58:42] Vote.

[3:58:42] Yes to approve with those conditions from Councilman Brennan.

[3:58:47] Okay.

[3:58:49] So, item passes, five, one, one.

[3:58:52] All right.

[3:58:53] Thank you for coming in.

[3:58:57] This evening, on our second new business item, so that's excited.

[3:59:01] All right, H2, it's a public hearing, consider our resolution of proving a good discussion

[3:59:05] of council.

[3:59:06] Thanks, Councilwoman Brennan, for going through and thinking in the project.

[3:59:10] H2, public hearing, consider our resolution of proving a few delanies plan amendment from

[3:59:14] some of my public and low-density single family.

[3:59:17] It's a medium-density, density single family, for 20.98 acres, leave the described as

[3:59:21] a lot more in block three of the color high school subdivision located on the north side

[3:59:24] Johnson Road approximately 20, 300 feet east of the Johnson Road and Borderland Road intersection

[3:59:28] and address is not only Johnson Road, Curtis Young, Applicant Killer SD is the owner.

[3:59:34] All right, is there a staff presentation on H2? Yes. Awesome. Thanks. Thank you, Mayor.

[3:59:40] Yes, alongside the previous item, they submitted a future line-use plan amendment application

[3:59:46] to go from semi-public and low-density single-family to medium-density single-family

[3:59:52] for the just under 21 acres, North Johnson Road development.

[4:00:00] Quick reminder on what our land use residential land use categories are. This is the going to the medium density single family and use category that's 15,000 square foot lots to adjust under 36,000 square foot lots.

[4:00:16] The surrounding flood designations properties to the north east and west are designated

[4:00:22] low-density single family to the south, some I public.

[4:00:27] We did a mail out 28 letters of notification to all property owners within 300 feet of the site.

[4:00:33] As well as a letter to the school district.

[4:00:38] September 22nd, planning and zoning commission meeting.

[4:00:41] Commissioners recommended approval of the flood amendment request as presented by a vote of five zero.

[4:00:48] See, Council has the following options when considering this request, approve as submitted, a table or deny.

[4:00:55] If you have any questions, staff and the applicant are available.

[4:01:16] Any questions for staff?

[4:01:18] This is a public hearing.

[4:01:20] Would anyone like to speak on this item?

[4:01:21] H2.

[4:01:27] All right.

[4:01:28] I've got a question.

[4:01:30] I've got a question.

[4:01:30] Thank you.

[4:01:31] Thank you.

[4:01:31] Well, let's go to the public hearing and then we'll go right to your question.

[4:01:34] That's our works for you, Councilman.

[4:01:35] Now you're good.

[4:01:36] You've got a head of motion.

[4:01:37] You're good. Motion to close the public hearing. Council on Armstrong. Second, the motion to close public hearing.

[4:01:44] All right. Motion to second. Let's vote. Public hearing is closed. All right. Council on will.

[4:01:49] You have a question. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Sarah, do we?

[4:01:54] The changes that we just made in the amendment would result in this still being low density.

[4:01:59] So, do we even need to take action on this item?

[4:02:04] The medium density classification goes up to 35,999 square feet.

[4:02:13] Okay, I thought it was SF or anything other.

[4:02:17] Thank you.

[4:02:23] I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve item H2 as presented.

[4:02:31] Councilman Armstrong.

[4:02:33] Second, the motion to approve is presented.

[4:02:35] All right, we have a motion.

[4:02:36] Second, unless there's any further discussion, let's vote.

[4:02:38] that

[4:02:45] items also prove five one one.

[4:02:50] H3.

[4:02:51] All right, so thanks for coming in tonight.

[4:02:53] I appreciate to throw a discussion on the application,

[4:02:56] and we appreciate you through the business and color.

[4:02:59] Have a good evening.

[4:03:00] Absolutely, thank you.

[4:03:03] All right, item H3 is a public hearing,

[4:03:07] consider an ordinance of proving a specific use permit

[4:03:09] for a drive through for seven group coffee

[4:03:11] on one point one one acre is located on the north side

[4:03:13] of Calar Parkway, located the corner of Calar Parkway

[4:03:15] Pator Road, Lee Lewis Fragd is one of the lead Wayne subdivision, so on Rethel and addressed

[4:03:20] I know one color Parkway, Drew Danoski is the applicant, he knows other Parkway LLC the owner.

[4:03:25] Thank you Mayor, good evening council.

[4:03:27] Evening flanters, plan 1, Ariel and Zona Mountain before you, subject property is zone

[4:03:32] retail.

[4:03:34] The applicant this evening is seeking a SUP for a drive-thru for seven group coffee.

[4:03:39] All drive-thru businesses in the city require approval of an SUP to operate.

[4:03:42] The applicant has also submitted a site plan with variances for this property.

[4:03:47] That application is on the agenda as a separate item.

[4:03:51] 7 brew coffee is a drive through beverage chain known for its fast service,

[4:03:54] energetic customer experience, and extensive menu customizable drinks.

[4:03:58] In addition to coffee, it will offer tea, smoothies, energy drinks, shakes, and flavored sodas.

[4:04:03] hours of operation are Sunday the Thursday 5.30 a.m. to 10 p.m. and Friday the Saturday 5.30 a.m. to 11 p.m.

[4:04:11] the applicant expects the business to open with 8 to 10 employees.

[4:04:16] As I mentioned earlier, they do have a proposed site plan that is on the agenda as a separate item.

[4:04:21] They would be requesting nine variances related to site layout, landscaping and parking.

[4:04:27] So, project property is zoned retail and designated retail commercial in the city's future

[4:04:32] land use plan, surrounding zoning and land use to the north this town center mixed

[4:04:36] use to the east and south as well to the west is retail and retail commercial.

[4:04:43] On September 10th, the city mailed out 11 letters notification for this public hearing

[4:04:47] and staff is not received any public feedback in response to this request.

[4:04:52] At the September 22nd, planning and zoning commission meeting commissioners recommended

[4:04:55] and approval DSUP by vote of 50.

[4:05:00] Section 8.02, F2A of the UDC states that when considering a superior quest, the city council shall consider the fallen factors.

[4:05:08] That the uses for harmonious and compatible with surrounding existing uses.

[4:05:12] The activities requested by the applicant are normally associated with the permitted uses in the base district.

[4:05:18] Then the nature of the use is reasonable and appropriate.

[4:05:21] Any negative impact on the surrounding area has been mitigated and that any additional conditions,

[4:05:25] to specify to ensure that the intent of the district purposes are being appelled.

[4:05:30] Again, the request before you this evening is a specific use permit to operate and drive

[4:05:34] through business and the retail zoning district.

[4:05:38] Council is the following options when considering SAP request, approve approve of modifications,

[4:05:43] table or deny, and staff and the applicant are here for any questions regarding the

[4:05:47] SAP.

[4:05:49] Excellent.

[4:05:50] Thank you.

[4:05:51] This is the public hearing.

[4:05:52] Would anyone like this?

[4:05:52] on item H3, not I make a motion to close the public hearing.

[4:06:01] Council and Wattley.

[4:06:02] Okay, hold your public hearing. All right, we got a motion in Mayor Pro time. Second. All right, motion

[4:06:07] in second. Let's vote.

[4:06:15] All right, any of you want to pose the closing of public hearing?

[4:06:21] Okay,

[4:06:21] public hearing is closed, the vote of 7-0. Any questions for the staff of the applicant?

[4:06:35] We

[4:06:35] closed this the first time ever we closed a public hearing without you. It was pretty

[4:06:40] groundbreaking.

[4:06:44] Unanimous by the way.

[4:06:47] Any questions for staff the applicant?

[4:06:53] Is the

[4:06:53] up here? I wonder. We're entertaining aren't we? Do anything you want to add? You say you're

[4:07:01] long enough.

[4:07:10] All you're asking for a P.D. We got questions. Just a marriage. And y'all do those all day

[4:07:18] My name is Roudanowski. I'm a Claymore engineering, 3231 hardwood road, Bedford, Texas,

[4:07:26] 76021. I'm coal blocker with a DOS the owner. We're 40403 north central expressway

[4:07:31] Dallas. So this item is just the SCP, so that's for the drive-through. There's currently

[4:07:36] drive-through around the building. The SCP would be for a new user, which is seven brews

[4:07:42] as well as the expansion of it and then I think we'll save all the fun for the next item.

[4:07:49] We're happy to answer any questions.

[4:07:51] Any questions for staff the applicant, like I'm asking otherwise we'll entertain

[4:07:53] a motion.

[4:07:55] Carlson Armstrong?

[4:07:57] Well, let's go after you have other tenants in that building and we'll just drive through

[4:08:03] effect those other tenants as well and I see what Chick-fil-A does and I see what summer

[4:08:11] moon does and 151 coffee all those places and if you're successful you will affect all those

[4:08:18] other tenants.

[4:08:21] How are you going to address that? So there's the existing drive through that goes

[4:08:24] around the back of the building and I'm going to see if I can just jump back to there we go.

[4:08:32] It goes around the north end and then up the south, south along the west side.

[4:08:41] So, we anticipate all the drive-through traffic entering from the rear of the building, so the drive-through doesn't start at the beginning.

[4:08:49] We've got that front parking field that's all for the other tenets in the front, and they really are completely separate.

[4:08:57] So, part of the proposal here that we're doing to facilitate the project is we're purchasing some land from Andy's next door.

[4:09:06] We're purchasing a strip of land along our north property line that takes our property line to the center of the existing fire lane to the north.

[4:09:14] So that's been reflected in the image on the screen already.

[4:09:18] But if you go to this page, you can see where the old property line is.

[4:09:23] It doesn't quite go all the way to that road.

[4:09:25] So that gives us the ability to move traffic off of paint or directly off of color, parkway along the east side of our property.

[4:09:36] And I'll jump back here to that site plan so you can oops, so you can see that.

[4:09:42] So if you're coming off of color parkway, you basically turn in right hand turn, you go straight back to the drive through and turn left in.

[4:09:49] or you're coming off paint or you're turning right onto the fireland of the north

[4:09:56] and then you can turn right into the site and basically do a little bit of a

[4:09:59] determine over into the...

[4:10:00] It's got dual dry through lanes. Similar to check the way, there's not a dedicated order point. They take orders on iPads. They have employees walking the line. That way, there's not a bunch of cars waiting to get to a single order point. And then they have runners that actually bring your coffee order in your drink order to your vehicle. So you don't actually have to wait till you get to the window to get your order. So if somebody that had a less complicated order or a smaller order say, that is not, at the front of the window, it's not a

[4:10:29] line and they got their order and they're in that outside line, they could, they could leave,

[4:10:34] they could get out without having to wait for everyone in front of them to get their order.

[4:10:38] So that helps keep the traffic moving through that drive through efficiently.

[4:10:42] So the two lanes is not both of them are not active.

[4:10:45] The outside lane will be for somebody to be able to get out.

[4:10:48] They are active. They are active.

[4:10:51] But the sequencing in which they take orders and, I don't know, it's, it's particularly

[4:10:56] if it's good enough for the case.

[4:10:59] We have a three-foot straight median that goes in between those two-12 foot lanes.

[4:11:04] That's where employees will be walking for that outside lane to take orders at the driver's side of the car.

[4:11:13] All right, good questions.

[4:11:16] Anything else?

[4:11:23] We'll entertain a motion.

[4:11:26] All right, Councilman Wally.

[4:11:30] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:11:30] Motion will approve.

[4:11:32] H3 has presented.

[4:11:34] All right, thank you, sir.

[4:11:35] Councilwoman Brennan.

[4:11:36] My second emotion.

[4:11:38] All right, we have emotion in a second.

[4:11:40] Let's go ahead and vote.

[4:11:44] All right, Councilwoman, well, H3, we're just voting real quick.

[4:11:51] That passes 7-0, H4, consider a resolution

[4:11:57] improving a site plan amendment with grants

[4:11:58] is for an existing 12,000, 17-square-foot.

[4:12:02] Multitent voting on the property,

[4:12:03] legally described as a lot.

[4:12:04] One hour block, one of the leeway in some division

[4:12:05] being one point, one one, an acre is located on the northeast corner,

[4:12:08] of Calar Parkway and Padoa Road intersections on retail,

[4:12:10] on address, not a link, a parkway, Dr. Danoski,

[4:12:13] applicant, DW, color parkway, LLC, owner.

[4:12:17] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:12:18] Ariel and Zony Mountain, before you,

[4:12:19] just as the applicant mentioned,

[4:12:22] they will be purchasing a portion of Andy's property

[4:12:25] to the east to accommodate for the two drive-thru lanes.

[4:12:30] Little background on this property,

[4:12:31] it was platted in 1999,

[4:12:33] and the existing multi-tenered building

[4:12:34] was built in 1984.

[4:12:36] Appleton intends to develop the site for Sembrou Coffee,

[4:12:39] as you saw in the previous agenda item, the other tenants will include the existing little

[4:12:44] seasers, Keller Donuts, and a potential new restaurant.

[4:12:49] Purpose of this item is to consider a request for a site plan with nine variances related

[4:12:54] to the subject property.

[4:12:59] EDC states that a minimum 30 foot landscape buffer adjacent to all thoroughfares with four

[4:13:03] more lanes is classified on the current comprehensive thoroughfare plan.

[4:13:07] Keller Parkways is a six lane roadway according to the city's thoroughfare plan, so a 30

[4:13:11] but buffer is required. The applicant requests to not provide the 30-foot landscape buffer

[4:13:16] a long-killer parkway. The next variance, UDC requires a minimum 15-foot landscape buffer

[4:13:23] adjacent to all other public streets. Subject property borders in North Peter Road, a regular

[4:13:28] public street to the west. The applicant requests to provide an 18-inch buffer along the west property

[4:13:34] line adjacent to the North Peter Road.

[4:13:38] The next variance, UDC requires a minimum 10-foot landscape

[4:13:42] buffer adjacent to side and rear property lines when adjacent to non-residential uses or

[4:13:46] zoning.

[4:13:47] This provision does not apply in cases of shared driveways or parking between lots.

[4:13:52] The proposed site plan is showing cross access to the east property so the applicant

[4:13:56] request to provide an eight-foot landscape buffer along the north property line and lieu of

[4:14:01] the ten-foot buffer requirement.

[4:14:05] UDC requires four-inch caliper canopy trees near the center of the 30-foot landscape buffer

[4:14:10] adjacent to thorough fares or four more lanes.

[4:14:12] the applicant request to not provide buffer trees a long-killer parkway.

[4:14:20] UDC requires all parking islands to be a minimum of nine feet and width in 20 feet and length.

[4:14:26] The applicant is proposing to install six parking islands.

[4:14:29] Four of those parking islands will have a minimum of nine feet and width in 20 feet and length matching the UDC.

[4:14:35] They are having two parking islands in front of the building to be measured at nine feet and width in 18 feet and length.

[4:14:41] So there are requesting to install two landscape islands that do not meet the UDC.

[4:14:49] UDC Section 9.02 G50 states the parking ratio for retail and personal establishment is one space for 200 square feet of rose floor area.

[4:14:57] Bringing their requirement to 61 regular space.

[4:15:00] Sight plan includes 55 Braggler and 3 accessible spaces, so they are requesting a variance to allow the site to be underparked by six spaces.

[4:15:11] UDC states that each standard off-street parking space shall be in accordance with the city design standards.

[4:15:18] UDC shows three options for 90 degree parking spaces. The existing parking spaces on the property measure at 18 feet in length without a wheel stop.

[4:15:28] And so the applicant is requesting to make all the parking spaces 18 feet in length without a wheel stop, which is what is currently on the property.

[4:15:38] Existing structure is approximately 12,000 square feet, and includes multiple tenant spaces.

[4:15:44] UDC states that foundation planting a minimum of five feet and width, which I'll be provided at the fronts and sides of buildings and child consists of a combination of ground covers, shrubs and ornamental trees.

[4:15:55] The applicant request to not install any of the required foundation planting.

[4:16:01] Section 50321 of the 2024 IFC states that all construction of fire apparatus access roads must comply with the current color UDC and the guidelines outlined in this section.

[4:16:13] Fire apparatus access roads must have an unobstructed width of at least 24 feet, including shoulders.

[4:16:20] The applicant request to provide a 20 foot wide, a fire lane adjacent to the front of the existing building in lieu of the 24 foot wide fire lane requirement.

[4:16:29] They did have a meeting with the fire marshal, and the fire marshal has stated that by

[4:16:34] restriping the existing fire lane will provide the necessary coverage.

[4:16:42] Proposed elevations show a combination of white brick and sandblast with a black and blue

[4:16:46] trim finish.

[4:16:48] And a breakdown of the materials used on each elevation is included in the agenda packet.

[4:16:55] Here's just a photo of the subject property currently, and I will point out that the post-site

[4:16:59] plan would remove the fuel tanks and the canopy.

[4:17:04] Applicant intends to maintain the two access points on Killer Parkway and the one access point on NorthPader Road.

[4:17:11] They're proposing cross access to the East neighboring property which will be dedicated as an emergency access easement.

[4:17:17] The applicant has submitted preliminary drainage plans for this development, but the applicant did not provide utility plans as this property is already developed.

[4:17:28] Subject property is designated retail commercial on the city's future land use plan and the surrounding land use designations are as follows.

[4:17:35] to the north-south and east are mixed use

[4:17:38] and to the west is retail commercial.

[4:17:43] Site-plane application, even with variances,

[4:17:45] does not require a public hearing,

[4:17:46] so no public hearing notifications

[4:17:48] were sent out to the surrounding property owners.

[4:17:50] Public had an opportunity to speak on the side

[4:17:52] of them during persons to be heard.

[4:17:56] Section 2.07, A2, of the UDC list,

[4:17:59] the following criteria for the council

[4:18:00] when considering a site-plentiment of variances,

[4:18:03] that there are special circumstances

[4:18:04] or conditions affecting the land involved,

[4:18:07] that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health safety or welfare,

[4:18:13] that the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other lands,

[4:18:19] that the granting of the variance will not constitute a violation of any other valid ordinance,

[4:18:24] that strict compliance with the regulations and or that the purpose of the regulations will be served to a greater extent by the alternative proposal.

[4:18:33] Here is just a recap of the variances requested this evening.

[4:18:38] It's kind of hard to see for number nine.

[4:18:39] That is regarding the 20-foot wide fire lane.

[4:18:45] City Council has the following options when considering a site plan,

[4:18:48] amendment with variances, approve as submitted with the requested variances,

[4:18:53] approve with modifications, table, or deny.

[4:18:56] And staff in the applicant are here for any questions.

[4:18:59] Thank you, sir.

[4:19:03] Any questions for staff for the applicant on item age four?

[4:19:08] Councilwoman Brennan?

[4:19:09] I do have some questions.

[4:19:11] I think first off for staff,

[4:19:13] the 20th and 20th foot with

[4:19:16] Fire Lane versus 24 foot.

[4:19:19] Did you hear from the fire marshall about that?

[4:19:23] I might have missed that comment.

[4:19:26] The applicant, oh, here she is.

[4:19:29] I'll let her talk to speak to it.

[4:19:30] All right.

[4:19:31] Our favorite fire marshall.

[4:19:33] So you okay with 20 foot instead of 24?

[4:19:35] Yes, so the on the top part of there you can see there is a wide enough

[4:19:40] Fire Lane that's going to be behind the building that does reach our hose reach

[4:19:44] requirements. We're keeping that 20-foot Fire Lane in the front mainly for

[4:19:49] access throughout there. We likely we could still operate off of it that's where it's

[4:19:54] at now, but we can reach every part of that building from that other Fire Lane.

[4:20:00] It only requires one side per code, so we could have abandoned the front one, but we still want that just from an access.

[4:20:07] I can't be able to get in and out of that parking lot.

[4:20:10] Okay, I want to make sure. Thank you, Stephanie, appreciate it.

[4:20:13] All right, and then for the applicant I had with some clarifications, may be I'm tired.

[4:20:19] These meetings go so late these days.

[4:20:23] So we're keeping their original building there, and we're just modifying the outside of it, right?

[4:20:29] And taking down the gas, the fuel.

[4:20:31] You take up a gas thing.

[4:20:33] And so part of this issue is that you had,

[4:20:37] is this project was approved a very long time ago.

[4:20:40] And I think Sarah told me it was before the UDC

[4:20:44] even existed codes.

[4:20:47] And so a lot of the kind of these skinny little areas

[4:20:50] that you have between the parking lot

[4:20:53] and the street and those sorts of things.

[4:20:55] I mean, it's there.

[4:20:57] And that's what it's been and you're kind of stuck with it if you're leaving the building exactly in the same spot.

[4:21:03] So I totally understand the logic of why you're having to do that.

[4:21:08] It's my understanding is we just kind of stuck with the state that's already there.

[4:21:12] It's been there for a very long time.

[4:21:14] Okay. I just want to clarify.

[4:21:15] We were scraping the site, you know, it would be different.

[4:21:18] But the goal is to reuse an existing building and bring better tenants to Keller.

[4:21:24] All right. May I approach them?

[4:21:26] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:21:28] Yeah, when I first thought I thought you all were rebuilding it, I was excited.

[4:21:31] But I'll be honest, I'm glad y'all are investing in it.

[4:21:34] And I was looking at it closer, it looks like it'll look good.

[4:21:38] I do have a couple of questions.

[4:21:40] The Y-No Foundation planners, I guess I wouldn't follow in that.

[4:21:44] So the South facade, which is the front, is actually covered.

[4:21:48] There's about an eight foot awning that covers.

[4:21:51] Nothing would grow even if we planted it.

[4:21:53] Even fake one, not kidding.

[4:21:54] That makes it fair enough.

[4:21:55] I've seen people do it. I don't know. I'm just good.

[4:21:58] I think that was just areas, especially here in Keller, where everything's living.

[4:22:02] And we prefer living, but it's also the aesthetic that we're going to have.

[4:22:06] And this is one of our most visible locations.

[4:22:08] Even traffic-wise as I'm sure you know, that's why you're investing in it.

[4:22:12] But it's an opportunity to beautify the area.

[4:22:14] And I appreciate y'all are doing that on the outside.

[4:22:16] Are y'all repaving the parking lot, too? Because there's a lot of holes in there.

[4:22:20] Just the damaged areas. The damaged areas.

[4:22:22] significant damage, we're removing that pavement and replacing it and then we are cutting in several

[4:22:28] landscape violence to add some greenery between the building and the street which does not exist

[4:22:33] at all today, especially since we can't provide that 40-foot buffer. So as you can imagine for

[4:22:38] a 12,000 square foot multi-tinent building, every parking space counts because we can't have enough

[4:22:43] parking for attendance where we're going to have a problem keeping them long-term. So every space

[4:22:49] that we have given up is a painful space

[4:22:53] that we've dedicated specifically to plan more trees.

[4:22:57] And that was intentional.

[4:22:58] OK, and I'll just say this.

[4:22:59] The other virgins is, don't bother me.

[4:23:01] Y'all are doing it in the best you can with a lot.

[4:23:03] You have, I appreciate all investing in the area,

[4:23:06] because we've been, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one

[4:23:08] in council that's been hoping that would happen,

[4:23:11] especially the damage to the parking in addition.

[4:23:15] So I look forward to what Y'all are doing.

[4:23:17] Y'all wish y'all best of luck.

[4:23:18] Thank you.

[4:23:18] Thank you, thanks.

[4:23:20] All right, Councilman Wattley.

[4:23:23] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:23:25] Excuse me.

[4:23:27] And this is really more of a curiosity.

[4:23:31] Are you maintaining the same challenge so you expect your turnover and then elevated

[4:23:37] Yeah.

[4:23:38] As you'd like to see, let's say.

[4:23:40] Yeah, we expect to turn over the entire building at some point.

[4:23:44] Currently, little Caesars in the Donuts have the longest term leases still in place.

[4:23:48] everything else is more or less they can handle it. We can get too very quickly. We have the goal

[4:23:53] us to bring newer better tenants to the shop of center. Absolutely. And if you're long-term planned

[4:23:59] to have the same number of tenants or maybe reduce that? I mean we could go either way. I mean we

[4:24:06] could have you know a bunch of 1200 square foot or 1200 in that 3000. So we just have to see.

[4:24:13] All right, I'm Edward, I'll show you our team more.

[4:24:15] Thank you.

[4:24:24] Thanks, Councilor Wally, Councilor Ancliffe.

[4:24:26] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:24:29] So to piggyback on, Councilman Wally's question,

[4:24:33] start sports, are they still sticking around?

[4:24:36] As of right now, they are, yes.

[4:24:38] Because they're a long, kind of term fixture

[4:24:41] in the community that sells really great Indian gear.

[4:24:45] So I hope they stick around and stay.

[4:24:48] We will do our best, absolutely.

[4:24:49] I'm pretty sure Cody Thorn got that back there with Community Impact, so we'll

[4:24:56] Councilman.

[4:24:57] That for a bit.

[4:25:00] Any other questions? If not, we'll recognize a motion. Councilman Armstrong?

[4:25:09] I've got several questions. And it pertains to the page 8 on all the things you're asking for on the

[4:25:16] variances. I'm not in agreement with you not providing some type of landscape buffer along the

[4:25:23] front. Everybody else along that parkway has significant amount of parkway grass and actually

[4:25:34] would like to say that I can't approve that, and I'd also like to make sure that if you

[4:25:40] have to put something there, that you actually put some sprinkle on it to make it grow.

[4:25:45] The 18-inch landscape muffler along the west side, and the packet also says that one of the

[4:25:57] Bradford pairs that have been standing ugly and dead for a number of years and it's mentioned

[4:26:04] and now that you'll leave one of those, I would like to see if we're going to allow an

[4:26:10] 18 inch only buffer there. I would like to see some significant improvement on that as far as

[4:26:15] the trees. I'm good with the 8 foot landscape buffer along the north.

[4:26:26] You have a power line in front

[4:26:27] of you along Keller Parkway, so I disagree with planting trees under that so that one I

[4:26:33] don't want to see a you and it in 10 years if the city requires you to plant a tree there.

[4:26:40] Install two landscape islands that don't meet UDC, you're already fighting a crunch on

[4:26:44] the parking.

[4:26:45] I'm okay with that.

[4:26:48] I'm okay with the under park by six spaces.

[4:26:51] I hope you get real busy and you really have a problem and Andy's doesn't like you when

[4:26:55] you're done.

[4:26:58] 18 feet in length without a wheel stop. I'm good with. If we're not going to do any foundation planning,

[4:27:07] then I would like to see that you do some potted plants on the sidewalks or something to give

[4:27:12] it some color. You're bringing in better tenants. I'd like for you to give them some reason to like going to work.

[4:27:18] And then the last one. Fire Martial address that one and I'm safe with that. Thank you. Thank you.

[4:27:26] You took two council norms strong point. You just heard some feedback out of those comments.

[4:27:31] What do you think you can reasonably incorporate in your site plan?

[4:27:35] One thing I do want to just clarify briefly is on the west side along paid.

[4:27:40] Or we've listed as an 18 inch buffer that sounds really small.

[4:27:44] Most of us three to four feet wide.

[4:27:46] But there's a pinch point because the curvature of that outside drive through lane.

[4:27:49] It gets down to a foot and half.

[4:27:51] So, we do have five new trees proposed in that area as well as some shrubs.

[4:27:56] There is a decent amount of space to plant, it's just at one little pinch point.

[4:28:03] Does you have any other items besides the median or the trees that you want to incorporate it?

[4:28:10] Are you good with having a grass out along the parkway between the sidewalk and the brick pavers?

[4:28:17] So, today, the existing brick paper sidewalk, and that actually is a budding the property line itself.

[4:28:29] So, that's why we have the variance of zero landscape setbacks, and it's because there is zero landscape setback today.

[4:28:35] And that's just the nature of the building.

[4:28:38] We did talk about that with P&Z, I believe that was a point that Dr. Scott brought up,

[4:28:46] at P&Z and in order to facilitate a buffer, we would lose 14 parking spaces.

[4:28:53] A 2-way drive aisle with 90-degree parking, required to have a 24-foot width.

[4:28:59] Right now we have less than that.

[4:29:01] It's between 22 and 20 feet wide, so it's already pretty tight.

[4:29:07] So we would lose 14 spaces.

[4:29:10] Now I will say when working with staff, we did have four additional parking spaces

[4:29:14] in the southeast corner, just south of that cross access, and here I can, oh, other way.

[4:29:27] Where I'm talking about is on the right here, south side of the sidewalk, take out some of

[4:29:33] those pavers. Yeah, I think what Drew was just mentioning is the property line currently

[4:29:38] about those pavers, and that's all owned by Techstock to the south of that. And so if we if we

[4:29:43] into our property, we're losing the 24-foot with, we're not even probably that today,

[4:29:49] at access drive and therefore, those spaces, and so we'd lose approximately 14.

[4:29:53] But I think what you're asking is maybe even south of that along the curb, between the sidewalk

[4:29:57] and the curb.

[4:30:00] I'm going to do a approach text out to talk about adding plants. It probably takes sort of some sort of license agreement or something. I will say they do not allow irrigation to be installed the right way. So, it's make that pretty tough to survive. We've fought that battle on many projects. Drip or spray. The only way they allow it is to put a spray hat on private property and spray into the right way, which in this case you'd be spraying over a sidewalk.

[4:30:24] It was from Algae, it'll be a sub by the highest quarter.

[4:30:29] Yeah, right.

[4:30:30] Colors, this is water.

[4:30:31] Yeah.

[4:30:36] Practice water future.

[4:30:37] Well, we had a little problem when you're in the road.

[4:30:39] We don't want that.

[4:30:41] Anything else, Councilman?

[4:30:42] The only other item, that parking lot is horrible.

[4:30:45] And I know you mentioned you're going to patch some areas.

[4:30:48] They have done a retopping of that parking lot.

[4:30:51] Probably three times in my tenure here in Keller.

[4:30:55] Yep, stick on a pig is still going to be lipstick on a pig.

[4:30:57] And you're going to try to put a new facade up, ask for new clients to come in, make a new project for it, be proud of it.

[4:31:06] And you almost have to have full will drive to go get a donut currently.

[4:31:11] So I would ask that you do something more than just patch.

[4:31:14] Yes, sir.

[4:31:14] We're looking into doing more than just patching.

[4:31:17] And more than just patching the, you know, the parts that we're ripping up.

[4:31:20] I was, I was drove it today before the meeting and it's in poor condition,

[4:31:24] especially the back little access drive here.

[4:31:27] that doesn't exist today, but people have made it on the list.

[4:31:31] I wouldn't suggest it, but yes, or we're looking into...

[4:31:37] All right, exactly, it's been made one, and not a good one.

[4:31:42] Thank you.

[4:31:42] Good discussion.

[4:31:44] Dr. Ancliffe?

[4:31:46] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:31:49] So are you happy with kind of some of, because I agree, so what he's trying to get at is that

[4:31:57] the way that it's currently set up right now, it'd be nice to see

[4:32:01] see some landscaping in that area. I would consider that to be a pretty important area

[4:32:08] within Keller. There's a lot of traffic there and so I think Councilman Armstrong is raising some

[4:32:13] really good questions about you know beautifying that at that such a word since we're throwing

[4:32:19] out all sorts of good comments tonight or quotes for Cody back there and I think more importantly

[4:32:24] I mean I assume that you came to Keller because you think this is a great place to invest and start a

[4:32:28] as well.

[4:32:31] Yeah, I mean, this is, and we know that this is the really the front door to your high school

[4:32:34] and it deserves better certainly than what it is today.

[4:32:37] So I think that's where he's trying to get out and, you know, and I support kind of some

[4:32:41] of the points that Councilman Armstrong was making about, let's, let's dress it up

[4:32:44] to the extent that we can.

[4:32:46] Yeah.

[4:32:46] Great comments.

[4:32:48] Thank you.

[4:32:49] The Lons, I did have a question.

[4:32:51] Would you mind speaking on, we were talking about the right away integration, would you mind

[4:32:57] that's correct. So when it comes to what goes in a right away, that's always the maintenance

[4:33:03] of the adjacent property owner. Text that refers to pay it over so they don't maintain it,

[4:33:09] but that doesn't prohibit the adjacent property from doing that. Excuse me. In terms of irrigation

[4:33:16] in the right away, that's actually allowed. That's where our green ribbons are all about. We put

[4:33:21] irrigation in the right away all the time, provided we take care of it, and I don't see

[4:33:27] how that would be anything different in this case.

[4:33:30] So, long story short, the applicant can irrigate the rightaway area we're talking about.

[4:33:36] There are multiple examples of that.

[4:33:40] Now, what would be as interactive of a water feature as I was describing what would be good?

[4:33:44] Maybe not that far.

[4:33:46] Yeah.

[4:33:46] But we could do it safely.

[4:33:47] I've had different experiences, but hearing that we'd be happy to work with staff.

[4:33:51] Okay, work would text directly to facilitate that.

[4:33:54] Okay. That's good.

[4:33:57] So, Councilman basically, I think the answer just to recate it is applicants, amenable to.

[4:34:03] We're agreeable, I should say, working on the irrigation at that right of where we're talking about.

[4:34:09] So, I think that's the subject of text approval.

[4:34:15] And we are adding 10 trees.

[4:34:17] to just counted between the building and killer parkway.

[4:34:19] So we are adding some landscape for sure.

[4:34:23] And the canopy is currently scheduled to come down

[4:34:26] at the first week in November.

[4:34:27] And the gas tanks, too.

[4:34:29] So it will already look better in the next two to three weeks

[4:34:32] or, you know, so.

[4:34:33] And there's no dumpster enclosure today.

[4:34:35] But we're going to build one, so.

[4:34:36] Awesome.

[4:34:37] There's no dumpster enclosure for that building.

[4:34:39] They just have a dumpster sitting out there.

[4:34:41] But we're going to build a masonry enclosure.

[4:34:44] Great.

[4:34:47] So we'll incorporate those, that feedback, as far as the irrigation, what are the feedback

[4:34:53] that we need to incorporate into, there's a motion on the floor we're going to recognize

[4:34:57] and appreciate Councilful Wally.

[4:35:00] I'm running for being patient while we discuss it.

[4:35:04] We incorporate some of these changes into the motion, council mawali. Sorry, council mawinkly, did you have another follow-up?

[4:35:10] Yeah, I just want to make sure too, because we were talking a lot about some of the landscaping and then the parking.

[4:35:15] So that when we take a, so if you're heading down 1709 heading west and you take a right like you're going to the high school.

[4:35:22] What does that area look like in terms of landscaping like what's being done?

[4:35:25] So, as you're heading north on on paid or what does that look like, five new trees?

[4:35:33] Yeah, if you pull up the applicant packet attachment and look at page 20, the full

[4:35:39] landscape plan is in there where you can see the trees kind of starting at that entrance

[4:35:43] off of paid or wrapping around all the way back to the entrance they're proposing on the

[4:35:48] north.

[4:35:49] It may just help you with the visual of where those trees are going to go and again it's

[4:35:53] page 20 of the attachment labeled applicant packet.

[4:35:57] Thank you, sir.

[4:36:00] All right.

[4:36:06] We're ready to recognize a motion from Councilman Watley.

[4:36:12] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:36:13] I, my motion was going to be to approve item H4 as presented, but it sounds like some of

[4:36:23] my fellow council members want to make some amendments to that.

[4:36:32] So, I should let you all and let them make a motion.

[4:36:37] Yeah, Councilman Armstrong, I can, you know, Councilman Brennan, did you want to...

[4:36:41] No, I didn't like that.

[4:36:44] Okay, so I'm going to make a motion to approve item H4, Councilman Armstrong.

[4:36:51] I'm going to volunteer you as the second.

[4:36:53] I just need you to iterate all of the requested changes we're talking about.

[4:37:01] on the request number one, that they will at least provide some landscape grass buffer out

[4:37:10] on the Keller Parkway side with irrigation. If approved by text, I'd like to select

[4:37:19] it to them. Okay.

[4:37:34] That's the only one, the rest of them they clarified. Okay. Great.

[4:37:38] or for clarification on that Councilman, I just want to make sure that would be not an obstacle

[4:37:46] with them moving forward with the rest of the site improvements because I think there

[4:37:52] is concern about the tech stock factor in that possibly slowing them down with the rest

[4:38:00] of the improvements.

[4:38:03] That's not a deal breaker for me, but I would like for it to be compatible with the rest

[4:38:08] of the businesses along there and also having grass.

[4:38:13] So, what language do you need to make sure that they can move forward without getting hung up?

[4:38:19] I don't know that I have suggested language.

[4:38:21] I just want to make sure we all understand that unless we tie that to something, like we will

[4:38:27] issue a CO, or we will not do their site final or something, I don't have any leverage to force

[4:38:33] that.

[4:38:33] I can ask them repeatedly, where are you at, and where are you guys at on the text

[4:38:37] audit navigation, but if we don't tie it to something, and it's difficult because I also

[4:38:45] know that the text is a bit of a wild card here.

[4:38:49] Okay, then amended to reflect the fact that they will get, will not be able to get a CO unless

[4:38:57] this is a dressed has presented tonight.

[4:39:03] They'll be agreeable to us,

[4:39:04] because then at least we could move forward

[4:39:06] with the project and in the coming back.

[4:39:09] The side of the table has been installed anyway.

[4:39:12] So, yep. Okay.

[4:39:13] As long as you guys are agreeable, it makes sense to me.

[4:39:16] I won't.

[4:39:17] Okay. So, we'll not be able to get a CEO

[4:39:20] for any new business or for seven brew,

[4:39:23] or what do we just so I know how to implement it?

[4:39:25] Seven brew is their big gun company.

[4:39:28] the rest of them are already there.

[4:39:32] Okay, so then I, and I don't, I think what I'm hearing is.

[4:39:36] Tell me what you want, Sarah.

[4:39:37] Okay, because I always think about, okay,

[4:39:40] how are we gonna administer this later down the road,

[4:39:43] then we would not, our office would not be able to issue

[4:39:46] the CEO for the seven brew until they provide

[4:39:49] a documentation that they hit either

[4:39:51] received approval from TechSaut to do the sought

[4:39:54] in the irrigation or denial.

[4:39:56] I think that's what you're looking for.

[4:39:57] for sure guys is timeline on the 7th brew.

[4:40:00] What's the, I mean, our plan's already done, our civil, all we've got about how quickly you want to mess up.

[4:40:09] So we're ready to, I mean, they would like us to get going and, you know, so they could start construction.

[4:40:14] So we can deliver the site to them, you know, sometime next spring-ish, and then they could start their work from there.

[4:40:21] And as I was saying that, I don't know, Santa, this is considered conditioning something for off-site improvements.

[4:40:28] Or because it would already be space that the required to maintain, is that okay?

[4:40:34] This is the right way, rather than someone else's property.

[4:40:38] Probably own property.

[4:40:41] Yeah, let's get these CO.

[4:40:43] Let's talk to any new CO.

[4:40:47] What are the seven brews or anything else?

[4:40:53] Reable.

[4:40:54] Yeah, we're a variable of that.

[4:40:55] Also, so you've got a different experience with text out.

[4:40:58] I kind of want to look out for this.

[4:41:00] So spring, you know, seven group comes in.

[4:41:02] They start doing their work.

[4:41:04] Let's ballpark it at a month or two.

[4:41:06] So we're talking about what may, June, right?

[4:41:11] Should be able to run any time to get an answer.

[4:41:12] Is that a reasonable amount of time for text out to get their work done?

[4:41:15] Yeah, we'll open it.

[4:41:17] Okay.

[4:41:18] All right.

[4:41:18] That was my concern as I didn't want you guys.

[4:41:20] And I think Councilman Armstrong as well.

[4:41:24] Okay.

[4:41:25] So, motion to approve item H4 with the landscape and irrigation conditions that's stated by Councilman Armstrong, who assume he's still second.

[4:41:39] All right.

[4:41:39] Any further questions for clarification?

[4:41:41] Any further discussion?

[4:41:42] It's not.

[4:41:43] Let's take a vote.

[4:41:48] Pass this seven on.

[4:41:50] Hey, thanks for investing in that area.

[4:41:53] That's, I think it's exciting to work that you're about to do and it's really going to

[4:41:58] You know, re-energize that property.

[4:42:01] So, thanks for doing that.

[4:42:07] Okay.

[4:42:08] All right, last item on new business, unless a staff would like to or excuse me,

[4:42:16] unless colleagues would like a presentation, I don't think we need a presentation on this item.

[4:42:22] I'll be really brief if you have that conversation.

[4:42:28] So, H5, consider an ordinance of the City Council to seek out our taxes and many of the City of

[4:42:32] Keller could ordinances by many chapter two of the administration by deleting article 9 reserved

[4:42:37] and adding a new article 9 in Keller Sports Authority Board, authorizing a publication and establishing

[4:42:41] an effective date.

[4:42:44] I just want to add a few brief comments that I haven't already stated.

[4:42:48] There might be a little bit of duplication.

[4:42:51] So this item was originally tabled, I think, about a month ago, and I think the questions

[4:42:56] is that we're asked or good, and the questions I've been asked since when I've been in

[4:43:01] the community have been primarily what's the vision? It really is, our North Star is,

[4:43:08] you know, I would argue, and I will state tonight, that our North Vision is serving our

[4:43:14] kids and the families that use our facilities and our sports facilities in Keller. I'll never

[4:43:20] forget the common as we've gone through our fact finding that youth sports is the front door

[4:43:24] up of any Texas town. And I think those words are true. And I think that's all of our

[4:43:28] North Star. So I appreciate the opportunity to further clarify the vision. And I think

[4:43:35] the objective is, as we heard from our Parks and Recreation Board tonight, is accountability.

[4:43:42] We've been talking about youth programming for the past six years. I've been on city council

[4:43:46] And at the end of the day, I actually do think after our strategic session, we're all aligned on making sure that we keep

[4:43:54] Keller families playing in Keller.

[4:43:57] I don't think any of us would have proved, actually, I know none of us would have proved some

[4:44:02] of the examples that I talked about tonight.

[4:44:05] We don't want to lose Keller families to other sports associations that's happening in

[4:44:09] masks.

[4:44:11] We certainly don't want verbally abusive coaches to be allowed to coach for years.

[4:44:14] I know we have a agreement on that, everyone in the room

[4:44:17] tonight during our joint meeting agrees.

[4:44:20] And it's just my opinion, both as a dad,

[4:44:23] as a sports coach, and as a mayor,

[4:44:25] that we can no longer stand by and wait

[4:44:27] when we have financial questions that are offered,

[4:44:30] or excuse me, financial questions that are being asked,

[4:44:34] almost as a whistleblower complaint,

[4:44:36] about how monies are being spent as an association.

[4:44:39] I think that deserves inquiry.

[4:44:42] And so that's our purpose.

[4:44:44] I've been asked by folks in the community, I was told at lunch the other day, you know, you need to be clear on vision.

[4:44:51] So I think we're aligned on that, but for folks watching, I know that I owe it to our staff, to our residents, to be clear.

[4:45:00] On why I think we all believe this discussion is important. It's rooted in the idea that we can do even better for

[4:45:07] our families. I believe that to my core, and I think that my colleagues do too.

[4:45:12] I think really the main question that we're wrestling with is not so much where we're going, but how we get there.

[4:45:19] And so I did find the joint work session to be helpful and informative.

[4:45:24] So I appreciate, you know, the opportunity to have that discussion, I'll just be really try to be really clear on this point.

[4:45:35] I view a sports authority as additive.

[4:45:40] It's the exact model that we used to allocate $50 million in taxpayer money to the Keller Sports Park.

[4:45:48] We created a task force, and that task force gathered a ton of community input.

[4:45:55] And so why not, you know, my comment would be, a couple of points, why not just use

[4:46:01] the existing model, our Parks and Recreation Board is phenomenal.

[4:46:05] I do think that they could perform some of this work.

[4:46:09] I think they've already proven that, but really that's not the question for me.

[4:46:12] It's a question of bandwidth, it's a question of capacity, it's a question of how important

[4:46:17] is this title, I think, excuse me, this item, I think we need to send a message to the community

[4:46:25] that this is really important.

[4:46:27] And so it is additive in my mind, I would imagine that this board would work in concert, hand

[4:46:33] in hand.

[4:46:33] And I even imagine that some parks and recreation board members could serve on both boards, but

[4:46:39] I don't imagine that every parks and recreation board member wants to entertain youth sports

[4:46:44] programming at this level.

[4:46:46] And so for those folks who signed up to serve on the Parks and Recreation Board, you know, I am sensitive to that.

[4:46:56] And I'm also, I also think that we need to, last thing I'll say, and I'll give you an example.

[4:47:02] I do think that we need to have more parents that have experience with use sports involved in the conversation.

[4:47:09] And how we do that, I'm open to ideas, I've suggested a few.

[4:47:13] I don't pretend to have the best ideas, but I think it's absolutely imperative.

[4:47:17] The example I'll leave you with this. It's not an emotional one.

[4:47:21] Flag football is one of the biggest areas of appetite for growth in the

[4:47:27] color community. I actually know a couple girls who we play basketball against that

[4:47:31] they literally go to a flag football school and they compete in state championships.

[4:47:35] It's pretty awesome. And when that idea was presented to the city using the

[4:47:39] current mechanism, it was immediately shot down, and I think that's not because of a lack

[4:47:47] of desire to be supportive. I don't think our Parks and Recreation Board was trying

[4:47:51] to be unsupportive. I think it was an acknowledgement that, you know, of this status quo,

[4:47:57] the associations run the business. And so at the end of the day, I think Keller, parents,

[4:48:02] Keller residents need a bigger and seated the table. And so that's why I do prefer the

[4:48:07] sports authority model. It's important to me, it's something that I ran on as mayor, but I'm

[4:48:12] one of 47,000 people. And so if you all have a better idea on how to get to that in North

[4:48:17] Star and get to the place where we're keeping Keller families playing in Keller, we're addressing

[4:48:24] quality of coaching, we're helping families grow and fellowship together, I'm all for it. So with that,

[4:48:32] those are my comments. It would be really curious and an open and interested in your feedback.

[4:48:37] Councilwoman Brennan?

[4:48:40] Yeah, I mean, I thought we had very good discussion day with Parks and Recreation Board.

[4:48:44] And the takeaway for me, that meeting was, they had the expertise, they've been involved in the sports part.

[4:48:51] And probably I'm looking for a very long time.

[4:48:54] They would like to have some additional enforcement capability.

[4:48:57] And I think we're pretty much going to go do that.

[4:49:00] Go enforce these user agreements if they're not being abided by.

[4:49:04] But they volunteered to step it up to meet the concerns and needs mayor that you have mentioned, gathering input from the community, I mean they've agreed to all that.

[4:49:18] So I don't have any problem with like a Keller Sports Authority, but I would say it would be within the current Keller Parks and Recreation Board.

[4:49:28] Some sort of subcommittee or something rather than having an entirely new board that just does this and I because I think I was pretty impressed with

[4:49:39] Parks and Rec stepping up and saying that. Yeah, they've got the bandwidth. They've got the expertise

[4:49:44] And they think they can go do this and they're going to see feedback from us and see back from the community

[4:49:51] So I was pretty happy with that, so maybe the bottom line is that I think the idea of a

[4:49:57] Keller Sports Authority could be done within exists.

[4:50:00] Think Hello Parks and Recreation Award, almost like a subcommittee or a subgroup or whatever you want to call it versus an entirely brand new committee.

[4:50:09] Yeah, so I think that's an idea worth considering in Council Wally. I do have one quick follow up and then we'll go to you.

[4:50:19] Um, do you favor the model of the, like, uh, just generally speaking, um, and I'm not trying

[4:50:27] to put you on the spot, but there's anyone favor the model of the sports park task force

[4:50:31] that we used. Because that's really the model that I imagine. It was extremely effective in how

[4:50:37] we collected feedback. It was extremely nimble. And it led to one of the biggest and best achievements

[4:50:42] that this city council has accomplished.

[4:50:46] My only concern with subordinating a group of folks

[4:50:51] as a subcommittee, is it just kind of

[4:50:53] sends a message that, yeah, it's important,

[4:50:55] but we're going to kind of keep the status quo.

[4:50:58] So, I'm not trying to put you on the spot council

[4:50:59] and bring in, but my only thought would be,

[4:51:03] if that's what we end up doing,

[4:51:05] then that's what we end up doing,

[4:51:06] and we can certainly nominate and fix folks

[4:51:08] to serve on the subcommittee, and that'll be perfectly fine.

[4:51:11] I'll just tell you in the past six years my experience has been and I think actually for

[4:51:17] the city as a whole task force model was extremely helpful and instructive in the process

[4:51:24] and what I really liked about it is it brought in new elements of community feedback.

[4:51:32] People that hadn't had input before were heard and heard at a higher level.

[4:51:37] So that's my kind of food for thought on that.

[4:51:40] But I'm open to the idea.

[4:51:42] So I think it's good comments.

[4:51:43] Thank you.

[4:51:44] Councillor Wattley.

[4:51:47] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:51:50] I thought we had a good meeting with the Parsons Lab.

[4:51:59] I never spoke, never said a word, but I listened, and what I heard was

[4:52:07] group of people who have a long history of washing with the person wrapped and trying to handle

[4:52:17] the sports organizations, I heard the word accountability used a lot and empowerment.

[4:52:27] And I personally think that we have a on-part and rep, we have a group of people who are hungry and have the ability to do what we need them to do.

[4:52:45] To do everything that the cellar sports authority would do, I believe they have the bandwidth,

[4:52:54] the appetite, and the ability, and I think we would be remiss not to give them the opportunity

[4:53:03] and empower them to draw the hard line in the sand, hold people accountable, and get

[4:53:12] impact and feedback from the community and I just in my opinion, but I think we would be

[4:53:21] remiss not to get them the opportunity to do that.

[4:53:26] Good comments, and I promise I'll be brief in my response.

[4:53:29] It's hard to capture six years of experience and a minute or less.

[4:53:34] We have had that opportunity as a parks and recreation board working with them.

[4:53:39] example I'll give you is the baseball fees. We spent more time talking about baseball fees

[4:53:47] with directly with the Parks and Recreation Board and asking them with working on that

[4:53:51] single issue. It got to the point where I was called in at the last minute along with our city

[4:53:57] manager at a quasi-emergency meeting with KYA and they were desperate, I don't want to

[4:54:09] And Erin, if I'm speaking, please correct me because I don't want to ever

[4:54:12] mistake something on the public record, but they were very concerned about the fact

[4:54:17] that they did not have feedback in time to start their season.

[4:54:21] And so what I'm trying to say without being negative on any one or any group of people is that

[4:54:28] the current model is leading to those results.

[4:54:31] And if we're comfortable giving a much bigger scope of work with the same mechanisms in place,

[4:54:37] My fear isn't the people in the room my fear is it's going to consume so much bandwidth that we're going to take that

[4:54:43] Very urgent issue with baseball fees and we're going to put it at scale and it's going to overwhelm a wonderful group of people and

[4:54:53] So councilman, you know in some ways it'd be like me kind of you know telling you how to you know

[4:55:00] Put up a horse ranch, like in my mind, it's like, yeah, I could probably nibble around the edges. I just don't know that I've done a very good job explaining how critical some of these decisions are and I have not had the opportunity to inform you guys of these decisions.

[4:55:18] excuse me of the process and the inefficiencies they're in. So, I just wanted to, you know,

[4:55:24] put it out there that we have been working feverishly with the Parks and Recreation Board,

[4:55:29] and it's starting to, it's just, it's led to some clunky things, and so maybe there's a way

[4:55:32] we can improve that as well. But I think your comments are good, and I agree with a lot of them.

[4:55:56] Mayor Protem. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Oh, it's late. I'll try to make a coherent statement with my

[4:56:02] brain trying to fall asleep. One things I wish we would have done and this is on Charles

[4:56:10] or excuse me, Councilman Rank leave and the mayor and I, we didn't really define kind

[4:56:17] of the specifics of the board, I don't know what I said, but whatever.

[4:56:20] Yes, Councilman Dr. Rank leave. I'm sure he's been called worse. But no, it would have been

[4:56:26] nice to think if we would have defined specifically gotten to the nuts and bolts like for

[4:56:31] feedback, what that means, whether, you know, it's email, feedback, or literal survey to

[4:56:37] all the players of the different leagues, and it's kind of the discussions, and, you

[4:56:41] know, there's things that have happened over the last six months that kind of got in the way

[4:56:44] of that. And I think it would have led to even more interesting discussion with Parks and

[4:56:50] Rec.

[4:56:55] I think there's the, you know, the sports park is the largest investment in

[4:57:01] history if I'm not wrong. And we want to put out a good product that we can for them. But at

[4:57:06] the same time, listening to Parks and Rec today, it does sound like they're hungry. And

[4:57:12] Mr. Mayor, I know we've talked about this because we're trying to put out the best product

[4:57:18] and with these kids, they only get like what? Before they start doing high school, they only get

[4:57:21] like four years out there. And so the pair, you know, it's a short window. And so I would say to

[4:57:27] I'm going to split the baby here to the point you're making is, you know, give parks and

[4:57:32] wreck a shot and if they are overwhelmed because you also made a comment there that was

[4:57:36] actually I thought really poignant is you don't want them to be stuck discussing, you

[4:57:41] sports 99% of the time and be overwhelmed by it if we do empower them because I actually

[4:57:46] thought that was a good point.

[4:57:47] I don't know if they wanted to do that as well.

[4:57:51] With this fake, you know, at least for now I'm actually okay with them doing it based on what

[4:57:55] They say, I think the core of this is we need to identify what changes need to be made to prevent

[4:58:04] some of the things that you mentioned in the previous discussion happening, as well as

[4:58:08] things like that we had some really good discussions about development of players.

[4:58:12] I'll give an example for those listening, you know, for youth football, making sure they're using the same

[4:58:17] schemes that use in the high school. And for baseball, having the high school baseball team involved

[4:58:22] employer development and so there's interaction and then also ways of tracking at the

[4:58:26] rec level, not select at the rec level, kids development through KWA or any of the other

[4:58:32] sports up into the high school and whether the city is a part of that providing a mechanism

[4:58:37] for that. So there's a lot of discussions that need to happen and I know the contracts are set

[4:58:41] in this coming summer where if we're going to amend them we need to do that. So if parks and

[4:58:45] rec takes us that's the charge I'd like to get them is to identify areas that are important

[4:58:50] of the parents if we need a survey to put it out there quickly and any other issues that we may

[4:58:55] have identified on the, I guess you call it our sports task force we did to me. But I, you

[4:59:01] know, time is of the essence because this thing does move quickly and these kids only have so

[4:59:07] many years at this level and those are some of the best memories of their life is the experiences

[4:59:12] that we'll have out there. So I hope that made sense. No, I'm sorry, but yeah, good comments. Dr.

[4:59:17] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[4:59:22] I think a couple of things.

[4:59:24] First, I'm, you know, it was very nice to be able to sit down and have kind of that joint meeting this this evening.

[4:59:30] I think we learned a lot.

[4:59:32] That we've learned a lot through the process of engaging with various stakeholder groups.

[4:59:38] I would say that I, you know, to Councilman Wattley's point.

[4:59:42] I mean, it's clear that Parks and Rec does want to have a role in this.

[4:59:47] You know, I think, you know, to his point about words like accountability, you know, wanting to be empowered.

[4:59:55] And I agree with count with the Mayor Protem.

[4:59:58] I do think that we-

[5:00:00] We probably do need to empower them to kind of play that role that I think they're hungry for, but I also understand

[5:00:07] your concern, which is, you know, the, the, the timeliness part of it. And so the question is, you know, we have a very good

[5:00:15] partner. They were a good partner during the development of the sports park. You know, we have the user

[5:00:29] that opportunity. Having said that though, I also like the idea because when we did talk about

[5:00:35] the sports authority in my mind and I'm glad that you said it, I always viewed it as this kind

[5:00:39] of complimentary group. And I think as we begin to talk about what that group does, you know, there

[5:00:45] were items at, you know, or topics such as, you know, it's maybe a group that could help with ideas

[5:00:52] about maybe concessions or leveraging basically better leveraging the sports part to generate

[5:00:58] potential revenue for the city, I think there was discussions about, you know, how you

[5:01:04] captured greater user input. I think one of the, one of the folks on person wreck this

[5:01:10] this evening said, you know, it would be great if we could have kind of the end user, the consumer

[5:01:14] or provide information to person wreck to improve the product or or to council. And so,

[5:01:21] not trying to make this overly academic, but I think there is a place for the sports authority.

[5:01:31] I think we need to define what that is, and I think part of it is feedback, but maybe there's another role.

[5:01:42] I just don't know what that is at this point, and I've been very clear from the beginning.

[5:01:46] I like the idea, I'm in support of the idea, but I also know that we've got a group of folks who have worked diligently with the city that are very interested

[5:01:55] and also engaging in being an active participant in this process?

[5:01:59] Yeah, I think those are good comments.

[5:02:02] The only open question, if anyone has solution,

[5:02:11] is we didn't use the Parks and Recreation Board.

[5:02:15] They were not the primary fact finder for the sports park.

[5:02:19] It was the Keller Sports Authority.

[5:02:21] And when we put at the Keller Sports Authority on the agenda, you know, it was a very, it was a, we viewed it at the time for right or wrong reasons.

[5:02:30] We view it as the starting gate. It was literally just on the consent agenda and then we approved it.

[5:02:35] And then we had robust discussions about how to improve the facility and allocated to this council's credit and and predecessors close to 50 million bucks.

[5:02:43] And so I guess just to be clear from a factual perspective.

[5:02:46] If the expectation of that group was the work in concert with the Parks and Recreation Board for sure because their input is very meaningful but I am like really concerned like what are going through boarding commission nominations and I'm looking at our current Parks and Recreation Board and I see big gaps in knowledge for like various sports that are important that I have gaps of knowledge on and I think we have a tremendous like I don't know how we make it additive without

[5:03:17] circumventing the Parks and Recreation Board or at least that being the

[5:03:19] perception. Because in my mind they would work harmoniously together and this group

[5:03:24] of knowledge experts would help inform a group of volunteers. But I can tell you

[5:03:32] bluntly that if we had tasked the Parks and Recreation Board with doing the sports

[5:03:37] park work and the fact finding, it would have consumed an overwhelming amount of time.

[5:03:44] And so what we had, we had representatives from the Parks and Recreation Board on that group.

[5:03:49] That makes sense.

[5:03:51] We didn't consume the whole board with that topic, because they were just frankly some

[5:03:54] folks that didn't volunteer.

[5:03:56] They're just as into park, trails, all that stuff.

[5:03:59] So I don't know, hopefully if you stick around long enough on these groups, these councils

[5:04:03] and stuff, you'll become the old person, but so I was kind of going back to five or six years

[5:04:08] ago.

[5:04:09] Councilman Armstrong.

[5:04:14] The impression I got tonight from the Parks and Rec Board coming in and sitting

[5:04:17] with us is similar to what I still have about this entire committee formation for the sports

[5:04:25] authority.

[5:04:29] I think we're circumventing their responsibilities. I know there's more to it than

[5:04:33] just the vendors as y'all call it that are out there and I think everybody's had good points,

[5:04:40] but I can't support establishing this sports authority when most of the people on the parks and

[5:04:49] and I kind of had a deer in the head like

[5:04:53] they're getting

[5:04:54] blindsided by this and having some authority taken from them.

[5:04:58] So that's my take on it.

[5:05:00] I cannot support this.

[5:05:02] Yeah. No problem. So, at the end of the day, if we're going to work with the Parks and Recreation, sorry, council, council law, I didn't, everyone else kind of spoke it. I'm going to.

[5:05:14] Yeah. So, let's just kind of move past the sports authority for a second, but stay on topic. So, what's going to happen in my mind is they asked us for a very direct charge.

[5:05:22] And so the charge will be generate, you know, the purpose of the sports authority in my mind was to be to generate

[5:05:30] bold ideas on how to improve youth sports from Keller's perspective.

[5:05:37] That includes a lot of factors retaining families from other associations.

[5:05:42] Some of that work is already in progress, includes, you know, making sure we're addressing coaching,

[5:05:49] practice locations, like all these things you hear.

[5:05:52] So if we send that charge to them,

[5:05:55] like, how would you, how do we do that?

[5:05:59] Because I'm operating the assumption that we still all agree.

[5:06:02] This is an important topic that we want to work on.

[5:06:08] How would, how do we send them that charge?

[5:06:12] Can I?

[5:06:13] Yeah, maybe what time?

[5:06:13] Sorry, I didn't know five to four.

[5:06:15] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[5:06:16] And that's a really good point.

[5:06:17] And that's kind of what I was getting to as I was trying to speak as I think if I can only speak for myself.

[5:06:23] I think if I would have done a better job in defining, you know, asking questions to define in specifically what this sports task force would do.

[5:06:32] I think that would have been a good guideline if we were taking this route.

[5:06:36] I know the items you spoke to, but one of the core things, the sports authority was to get feedback.

[5:06:42] I think besides hearing from KiAA once a year, I think quarterly is good, but I also think

[5:06:47] that's KiAA.

[5:06:48] I think whether we require in the contracts that they now provide surveys to all the families

[5:06:54] that participate with whatever questionnaire we create that Parks and Rec can create that

[5:06:58] we approve to get specific feedback.

[5:07:01] And then I think also to the charge of specific things we want to improve and of the holding

[5:07:08] their coaches accountable for the issues that you were mentioning too.

[5:07:11] I know they said that there was a mechanism in the contract, but obviously if those things

[5:07:15] occurred and that wasn't executed, wasn't working correctly.

[5:07:19] So I think maybe doing that, holding them to the letter of the contract.

[5:07:22] But I think the key thing, Mr. Mayor, is between now and July, identifying three, four,

[5:07:27] five things that specifically, what they've found from their meeting with QA, I think three

[5:07:34] or four things.

[5:07:35] But I think doing some type of survey and asking open-ended questions, maybe, if that's

[5:07:40] doable in that large number and to identify things to that we can push.

[5:07:45] I mean, we have a lot of expertise here.

[5:07:46] I think you said you coached on through games this year alone.

[5:07:49] But being specific and literally laying that out.

[5:07:54] Because then we find, because there's twofold, it's not just doing that.

[5:07:57] But it's finding out if they, like once we give them that specific charge,

[5:08:00] that's when we find out if they're able to do it.

[5:08:02] And also, if we end up creating sports authority say six months or now, it's too much,

[5:08:06] then we know specifically a better charge for the sports authority as well. So it's kind of two birds one stone with me

[5:08:15] Yeah, I don't care about six eggs your half dozen guys

[5:08:18] I just want to see action and accountability and a for on alignment on that and I think mayor

[5:08:24] Pro time here. I wasn't making the six eggs half dozen in relation to you

[5:08:28] I'm just trying to tell you guys where I'm at like the we can't stand by any more like I we've spent so much time

[5:08:34] So if I'm a Parks and Recreation Board member,

[5:08:37] and I'm listening to this, we're gonna have to figure out a way.

[5:08:42] I could personally spend about two hours and iterate a laundry list

[5:08:47] of items that are very substantive and real and youth sports.

[5:08:50] I don't think it's this council's job to get into that level of detail.

[5:08:53] I think that would bog down this council and this discussion.

[5:08:56] But I also want to make sure that I'm doing a good job working with you guys.

[5:09:01] And so, you know, I guess my recommendation is going to be that we need to give our city staff the list of items that are important to us from a youth sports perspective from a programming perspective and then the process from there would be that city staff would aggregate that list and then the charge would be for the parks and recreation board to come up with ideas to solve those items.

[5:09:31] To be really clear, one of the first items in Councilman Armstrong, I think you made a great comment

[5:09:37] A couple months ago, I don't know if you remember I do, but Keller needs a bigger seat at the table

[5:09:42] And I think that's gonna require some really heavy lifting from governance reform

[5:09:46] And I'm not putting words in your mouth Councilman, but functionally how that'll work is right now

[5:09:51] We have 11 members on KYA's board and I think one or two of them are residents

[5:09:58] I'm not clear they just had a lecture

[5:10:00] And then they have an updated website. And it's kind of hard to get in contact sometimes with folks who are all busy, but there will be substantive discussions that we're going to have to have. And so when we create this list, I'm going to be really clear in my own communication with our Parks and Recreation Board team that the old model of getting hung up on like a baseball fee issue for four or five months at a time. Like that model has to change.

[5:10:30] like we've got to act with more urgency and that's what I've been about this entire time and so

[5:10:35] if that's not an appropriate way to handle this from your perspective I need to know.

[5:10:40] I'll reserve my concerns about you know overwhelming the parks and recreation board and all

[5:10:44] on all that and I'm not going to bring up frivolous issues but here in a nice setting of meeting

[5:10:50] with representatives from the Keller Soccer Association in it took was an hour and a half or two hours

[5:10:58] just to talk about moving soccer one Saturday.

[5:11:04] And the reason we needed to do that was for construction,

[5:11:07] like it was black and white.

[5:11:09] And so this scope of work is going to be large,

[5:11:12] and I owe it to you, I owe it to our residents

[5:11:15] to be really clear on that.

[5:11:17] But from a process perspective,

[5:11:19] it's the world of council to work directly

[5:11:21] with the Parks and Recreation Board, Fantastic.

[5:11:23] I'm so excited that they're going to get engaged and I mean that but that list that we send

[5:11:31] to staff will probably have some volume and it's going to start with some really heavy items.

[5:11:38] I don't think you're going to ever change the culture of use sports until you look closely

[5:11:45] at the governing documents of those associations.

[5:11:48] Does that make sense?

[5:11:51] Did I say anything that ruffled feathers?

[5:11:56] This is going to be a heavy amount of volume that we're all going to get and frankly, the sports authority was one idea on how to help protect the city, our parks and recreation board.

[5:12:13] I am going to recommend, and I feel pretty strongly about this, I'll respect the idea of the parks and recreation board,

[5:12:23] Diving much deeper into this subject area, which was already in their, their bailiwick.

[5:12:29] But I do feel strongly that we, Councilman, frankly, I don't know if you said it, that we need to get some of these people who have very good subject matter expertise far beyond my own knowledge about sports that I know very little of.

[5:12:45] And charge the Parks and Recreation Board with creating a sports authority within their team.

[5:12:52] Because we have volunteers right now that are so excited and energized that this city council is willing to approach the subject.

[5:13:00] There have been people that have been waiting on this for a decade, plus.

[5:13:05] to see some action and so as part of that feedback and charge that we give the Parks and

[5:13:12] Recreation Board, one of my very strong recommendations is going to be that they create

[5:13:17] the sports authority and that we openly solicit names.

[5:13:22] They can supervise it, that's fine.

[5:13:25] But I think we need to allow people a conduit to get involved.

[5:13:29] I think that's really important that we don't have the same group of people making the same

[5:13:32] over and over. You know, I would say I'm one of 47,000. My kids are going to be fine, no matter

[5:13:38] which way this goes. This isn't really a decision that impacts my family as much, but that's

[5:13:43] my recommendation because I'm thinking about kids that maybe are being served today. And I know

[5:13:49] you guys are too.

[5:13:53] Yeah, Councilwoman Wolfe. Thank you, Schmer.

[5:14:01] I agree to you. I think accountability

[5:14:03] that he needs to be addressed with regards to the leagues and based on what we heard tonight.

[5:14:13] I think Parks and Rec want to do it.

[5:14:18] I don't think a new board would have any more authorities than we already give Parks and Rec.

[5:14:28] They would have to act on whatever direction we give them, because they're still recommending

[5:14:36] body regardless of what they're called.

[5:14:40] So I think the Parks and Rec could do this.

[5:14:44] I think we just need to give them clear marching orders, especially this concept of an adjudicated

[5:14:54] board that Chairman Mira brought up.

[5:15:00] I think could probably address some of the concerns that were raised in the meeting.

[5:15:08] And I think the addition of a staff member on site whose sole purpose is to basically function

[5:15:16] with regard to the sports park similarly like what Mike Bieber does at the point where he's the man in charge at that location

[5:15:23] and he's the point of contact that people can reach out to if they are having concerns

[5:15:29] if they want to bring to the light of the city.

[5:15:35] I think that would be a big first step is filling that role

[5:15:39] and getting somebody out there wearing a city of

[5:15:44] color shirt for that matter.

[5:15:47] So I think we're on track to meet the goals that you put

[5:15:54] put forward, and so yeah, that's kind of my two cents on it.

[5:15:59] All right, awesome things, Councilman Brennan.

[5:16:02] All right, so just to continue to beat this dead horse a little bit more.

[5:16:06] So what I'm thinking of is I think a lot of my fellow council members

[5:16:10] probably agree, I think, from what I've heard, is that the role of this

[5:16:15] additional board would be within the Keller Parks and Recreation Board.

[5:16:20] if it means that we need to put more people.

[5:16:24] If more people, if we need to say, okay,

[5:16:26] we need to have three more people on Parks and Rec,

[5:16:30] because the burden is so high that we don't think

[5:16:33] that they could do it adequately.

[5:16:35] And that's add more people to the Parks and Rec board.

[5:16:38] That's one comment.

[5:16:40] And in terms of their response time and what I perceive

[5:16:46] is being hand-ringing and discussing things for too long with time.

[5:16:51] Let's give them deliverables and deadlines.

[5:16:53] That's hold them accountable to meeting whatever list we come up with, we give them

[5:17:00] deadlines so that they have to come to us with what they suggest to fix that particular thing.

[5:17:07] So I think all these things that we're talking about can be done within the purview of parks

[5:17:13] wreck, even if it means adding some more people to Parks and Rec, if it looks like it's

[5:17:19] not going to be handled adequately by the people that we have there now.

[5:17:24] But it would still be under the purview of Parks and Rec, because that is their expertise.

[5:17:29] My suggestion from a teacher, excuse me, a procedure perspective would be that we just basically

[5:17:36] We use the task force model.

[5:17:40] We have folks and we should advertise if people want to get involved.

[5:17:45] We can have a list of folks, and this is what we do with the sports park task force.

[5:17:49] Here's a list of people on this group.

[5:17:51] For me, the biggest thing is making sure we have all the sports, like different sports

[5:17:55] representatives, people that have subject matter expertise and volleyball, etc., but have

[5:18:02] people work under the Parks and Recreation Board, I don't think we would add necessarily

[5:18:07] people to the board, but it would be additive and that like I'm talking like formally

[5:18:12] by ordinance. I think we will do for a subcommittee like that would be we would just say hey

[5:18:18] here's folks who want to get involved and be part of this working group. And I think that from a

[5:18:25] notice perspective because I'm thinking as much for Kelly right now as anyone. I think from a notice

[5:18:29] perspective, they would just fold into existing parks and recreation board meetings.

[5:18:34] Is that a great problem, Scully?

[5:18:36] From an ordinance perspective?

[5:18:40] I don't think so.

[5:18:43] Mayor Proza?

[5:18:44] Yeah.

[5:18:44] I'm just going to be quick.

[5:18:45] Like any, I think we're doing again what we've been doing.

[5:18:48] I'd say like, if we're going to empower parks and rack, let's let them make decisions based

[5:18:52] on facts.

[5:18:54] Based on the charge, we give them if they need more people, then we'll have more people.

[5:18:57] If we need more expertise, if they can't do it, that's fine.

[5:19:00] And I think we just need to clarify what we want.

[5:19:03] I think we should do that and we can find out pretty quickly.

[5:19:06] I mean, if the facts, like if we're doing fact-finding,

[5:19:09] we should listen to the facts, and the facts say we need more people great.

[5:19:14] I'd just, you know, I'd like to see for two months.

[5:19:17] They said we can handle it.

[5:19:18] I don't want to create more red tape.

[5:19:20] I think there's people out there that have a lot of expertise.

[5:19:23] Let's just see how it goes.

[5:19:25] I don't know.

[5:19:26] I just don't, like I feel like we didn't define what the board did.

[5:19:30] like and I'm a little bit mad at myself for doing that and then we're saying we're in

[5:19:33] creative subcommittee but we still haven't defined what it's going to do and so we're doing

[5:19:37] the same thing again but that I don't it's late I just think we're good yeah that

[5:19:43] a lot of the semantics I think we have done a really good job like we're providing accountability

[5:19:47] of the discussion and so maybe we haven't gotten to the level detail you're talking about but I

[5:19:51] I think as a group we've done that, just the Council of Wattley.

[5:19:57] Yes sir, thank you Mr. Mayor.

[5:20:00] Stand. In an effort to try and be as expeditious as possible and follow the matters in session

[5:20:08] to try and in city council by 9 PM, which we're quite sorry at this point. One example is the

[5:20:30] If it's a motion to deny, does that mean for right now, we do not create the sports authority or a motion to approve which means we create the sports authority based on how it is structured in this order.

[5:20:52] Correct.

[5:20:53] Okay, and I see we have a motion by

[5:20:58] a channel from there.

[5:20:59] I'm sure I'm sure I'm sure I'll prove this

[5:21:03] exposure to the cellular exposure to all of you.

[5:21:06] Is that right?

[5:21:08] Mike, can I, for the, to the point for this period of time,

[5:21:11] I'm going to try to short-circuit it.

[5:21:13] I think we take no action, okay?

[5:21:15] I don't think we need to talk about,

[5:21:16] like, we don't need to have a voter consult stand.

[5:21:19] I think what we do, and this is kind of what Shannon was saying,

[5:21:22] my recommendation, we just create a list

[5:21:24] items as a team, as a city council, we send those to staff, and those items are to be addressed

[5:21:30] as a list by the Parks and Recreation Board.

[5:21:36] All right.

[5:21:36] Our only job is to email, we don't need to take any action.

[5:21:39] Is that reasonable?

[5:21:41] No.

[5:21:42] I think it would be to email.

[5:21:44] Well, Michelle, we have to take some action on each file.

[5:21:48] We don't.

[5:21:49] Sam?

[5:21:55] I'm sorry.

[5:21:56] Do we have to change?

[5:21:57] We have to change.

[5:21:57] each fiber, can we go to our next item?

[5:22:00] No, you don't have to.

[5:22:01] Right.

[5:22:02] So, we can just move on.

[5:22:04] Yeah.

[5:22:04] But you just.

[5:22:05] Yes.

[5:22:07] All right.

[5:22:09] All right.

[5:22:09] As long as we're comfortable with, you know, engaging in this discussion and sending

[5:22:14] a list of items to staff, to work on, for Parks and Recreation Board to work on, that's the only

[5:22:20] feedback I'm looking for.

[5:22:21] Is everyone okay with that?

[5:22:23] Providing feedback.

[5:22:24] So that way we can give the parks and architect, parks and architect forward, our list of items.

[5:22:30] Good.

[5:22:35] Anything further?

[5:22:36] I would like to, I'm sorry.

[5:22:38] Yes, sir.

[5:22:38] I don't want to bring this issue up every meeting.

[5:22:42] We've table it once already.

[5:22:45] My motion will be to deny if we go that route as it's reading tonight,

[5:22:52] Because I feel like the Parks and Reg Department has been left out of the loop on the fact that they have not accomplished what this council has desired.

[5:23:03] So, yeah, it won't be on future meetings.

[5:23:07] Like in the next two months, I like the Mayor Pro Temps timeline.

[5:23:10] And I agree with you. It's been on the agenda too much. I agree with your comments. Thank you.

[5:23:16] Alright, unless there's anything else for the good of the order, our job is to send on this item, just to send Jordan and Aaron, our list of items, and then as a group, we agree that the Parks and Recreation Board is going to work on that list the best they can.

[5:23:30] Clear? Jordan? Clear Aaron?

[5:23:32] Yes sir.

[5:23:33] Awesome. Alright, we're going to adjourn and move into, uh, exact.

[5:23:43] They report even collect feedback and show updates that way, or if you so choose

[5:23:49] there and this items you'd be on the next city council agenda, I'll just leave that

[5:23:53] at your discretion.

[5:23:54] So, from my perspective,

[5:23:58] I think staff can go home, but for we'll need you for the first

[5:24:06] economic development and sound discussion.

[5:24:08] So wait, which ones Mr. Mayor?

[5:24:10] I will not be here for any work any more work session items. I only have the appetite for the executive session items.

[5:24:16] Oh, so if you guys want to go through that, that's fine with me.

[5:24:22] What I'm telling you here is that for those work session items,

[5:24:26] go out and need to tackle it by doing Thursday report or put it on a future meeting agenda.

[5:24:36] If you don't mind repeating the numbers, so I have that, I think that is 2-3, 2-8, 2-8, yes sir.

[5:24:43] Can I say something about the system of the ward, since that's happened in the Thursday?

[5:24:47] Just to remind everyone.

[5:24:49] Yeah, Thursday, 6-8-30, so up.

[5:24:51] Yeah, show up either.

[5:24:52] It'll be fun.

[5:24:54] And it's stressful.

[5:24:55] Yeah, stressful.

[5:24:57] City-time.

[5:24:58] The only one that we would need.

[5:25:00] And it's a quick action of these six. That's it. Something you need to be taken care of by thinking you look for the overcompany project. So it really will be, I can do this in just two seconds.

[5:25:11] So I'm going to be honest with you guys. I think we can just handle it by it. It's really good news about taking care of the U.S. 377.

[5:25:21] But I think from a formal action, like the need is to prove a contract, to be that, for what's the point?

[5:25:27] I'm sure everyone's comfortable with the letter, issuing a letter supports.

[5:25:30] Everyone's comfortable with that?

[5:25:32] I'm comfortable.

[5:25:34] There we go. That's what we need to hear.

[5:25:36] So we'll have this.

[5:25:38] We'll have you, we'll draft the letter for you to draft.

[5:25:41] We'll have you sign it, so we can get that in the time of the month.

[5:25:44] Yeah.

[5:25:44] I would like to exclude D4 on that for a better presentation that will under date.

[5:25:51] What's that?

[5:25:53] Yeah, I would be doubt you wouldn't that Aaron would find another agenda for it

[5:26:01] I agree. Well, I think yes, he always should be in childhood. Oh, yeah, he would have to find out future agenda

[5:26:07] And if you guys want to tackle tonight, welcome. I will be here.

[5:26:12] What we're adding, I think that hometown heroes, I think we need to, it needs to be discussed.

[5:26:19] Like, it shouldn't be just in a Thursday update. I think that's important.

[5:26:22] What about it?

[5:26:24] What's better?

[5:26:24] It's a little more.

[5:26:25] There was a number of items.

[5:26:27] There was a number of items in terms of things.

[5:26:28] Yeah, good.

[5:26:29] And I'm just following that thing.

[5:26:31] So, okay.

[5:26:32] Yeah.

[5:26:32] I appreciate this as being an item as being a veteran now.

[5:26:36] I don't have a spectrum in the heart of the world, so I think even so when you just clarify

[5:26:41] what we're discussing today, we're just moving to the next meeting.

[5:26:44] Yeah, I have a bandwidth right now, so I'll take you to the next meeting.

[5:26:52] So exactly what I said, deep to their DW through DA, you'll have to either collect you back

[5:26:58] from other, share updates, excuse me, do that there's a report or put it on your teacher

[5:27:02] at them.

[5:27:03] Is there?

[5:27:04] All right.

[5:27:09] So there is an attachment here that's got information about the candidates specifically, so we can make a decision.

[5:27:28] Yeah, we have some of the past, don't we call it?

[5:27:31] I don't remember one.

[5:27:32] A long time ago.

[5:27:33] We did.

[5:27:35] It was a while ago.

[5:27:35] I won't be voting on it.

[5:27:37] We...

[5:27:38] It doesn't matter to me.

[5:27:42] I get the email that I get to fashion, but if you guys want to act on it, you should.

[5:27:50] You can allow him out to read the data,

[5:27:52] out locating our future agenda,

[5:27:54] the next meeting is election day.

[5:27:56] Do you do anyone have any concerns about having a meeting on

[5:28:02] the midterm elections?

[5:28:03] We should do.

[5:28:04] Yeah, we should be the best.

[5:28:07] Usually.

[5:28:08] But those things are all built.

[5:28:09] Those things are all taken today.

[5:28:12] They didn't have those things on that.

[5:28:14] Yeah.

[5:28:15] Yeah.

[5:28:16] So Aaron's comment from

[5:28:19] I'll work with you on next meeting agenda in terms of making sure we have the ability to get to actually get to town hall.

[5:28:28] Okay.

[5:28:29] All right.

[5:28:29] Anything any other comments about that or can almost all our staff go on?

[5:28:36] Good night.

[5:28:37] Good night.

[5:28:38] All right.

[5:28:39] Thanks for your work.

[5:28:40] We're in exactly under the provisions side right earlier.

[5:28:42] Do you need me to read on?

[5:28:44] No.

[5:29:32] Okay, we're back from executive session. We do have one kind of administrative action to be taken and I believe there's a motion.

[5:29:44] I'm about to recognize from Mayor Proton.

[5:29:48] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's been a long day. A lot of work's been put into this.

[5:29:52] With that, I'd like to make a motion to authorize the city manager to negotiate an execute settlement agreements between

[5:29:58] and among the parties.

[5:30:14] All right, so we have a motion in a second. Is there any further discussion?

[5:30:25] Okay. Just for anyone that might be tuning in, I'll just a briefly state. This is kind of a, uh, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a,

[5:30:32] for the City Council to take to keep discussions on going from my perspective with the parties

[5:30:38] involved in the lawsuit. As soon as there's any official update to be had, we'll of course

[5:30:45] share that update timely and transparently with our residents. With that, let's take a vote.

[5:30:59] Passes to 7-0, Sorcerity Manager is going to keep the City Council up to date as appropriate.

[5:31:04] Unless there's any further questions or comments I'm going to go in the meeting.

[5:31:07] Seeing none, we're adjourned.

City Council on 2026-10-20 5:00 PM - Wednesday, October 14, 2026 - Oct 20th, 2026

Transcript