[0:23] I think we have a very good group.

[0:36] Sorry. Prepare

[1:29] Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. The time is 6:31. Let the record indicate

[1:34] that a quorum plus uh an alternate is here tonight and that the agenda has

[1:41] been duly posted. And Alex, did we have anybody sign up

[1:45] for citizens communication? >> No, sir.

[1:48] Okay. So, we will move on to consent agenda and we have one item on there

[1:55] which I assume nobody wants to pull off for individual consideration.

[2:01] If not, uh I will entertain a motion. >> Move to approve the consent agenda item

[2:08] 3A. >> All right. Is there a second?

[2:10] » I'll second that. >> There's a motion, second on the floor.

[2:13] All in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed or abstain? Motion carries

[2:18] unanimously. At this time, we will move on to our regular agenda, item 4 A,

[2:23] which is consider and make recommendations to city council about

[2:27] the church, church of uh Jesus Christ later Latterday Saints located on the

[2:34] northwest corner of Waco and Village Parkway. Alex,

[2:37] » thanks very much, chairman. This is the request as you say it is a for a site

[2:41] plan for the Latterday Saints church that's located on the northwest corner

[2:45] of Waco and village. Uh this is the aerial image of the subject property the

[2:49] 8 acre 8 acres in question. Uh you have the site plan before you. It shows an

[2:54] approximately 21,000 square foot uh church the associated elevations uh as

[3:00] well as the 300 proposed parking spaces. Uh there is a detention pond on the far

[3:05] south edge of the property. Uh and this request is in conformance with the

[3:09] resoning request that was approved by city council back in October. Uh so city

[3:14] city city staff is recommending approval of this site plan as recommended as

[3:18] presented. Glad to answer any questions you may have.

[3:20] » Is there a representative from the church here tonight?

[3:24] » Yes, sir. >> Would you like to add anything to what

[3:26] Alex said?

[3:33] » All right. As we get into discussion, we might have some questions.

[3:36] » Thank you, >> Alex. Okay, I'll open it up to

[3:40] commissioners for questions. >> Alex, is this any different than what

[3:42] was proposed earlier? >> Uh, no. There was a slight relocation of

[3:47] the the dumpster. Um, otherwise, no, it's essentially

[3:51] » still open spaces on either end. And >> Yes, sir.

[3:54] » Parking lot hadn't changed. None of that.

[3:56] » No, sir. They added some parking landscape parking islands islands per

[4:00] the PD uh approval. And we had talked about deceleration

[4:07] lanes and things like that. I don't see these in there. Is that off the table or

[4:12] where are we with that? >> I would defer to the uh the consulting

[4:15] engineer on this one. They are still work the civil uh plans are still under

[4:19] review with text dot and city staff. They're not reflective on the site plan,

[4:23] but they the applicant can comment on where they are with text and uh any

[4:27] warrants for del lanes uh for this subject property.

[4:30] » All right. Do you have an answer to that?

[4:39] » Sir, can you please step up to the microphone so we can

[4:43] maybe state your name and for the for the record again once again?

[4:46] » Thank you. Um Brian Boro with Bowman Consulting Group uh here as the civil

[4:51] engineers on the project. Um to answer your question, uh we're working with Tex

[4:56] Dot as well as city staff. Um as of right now, uh the deceleration lanes

[5:02] will be part of the design. Um but nothing is um until we go through

[5:08] further comments, we can't um I can't comment whether it's there or not.

[5:12] » So if text dot allows it, >> yes.

[5:16] » Do you plan on having deceleration lanes and acceleration lanes?

[5:20] » Yes. >> Okay.

[5:22] » Yeah. >> All right.

[5:25] » Do we need to put that in the recommendation? That's probably going to

[5:28] happen. >> So, I do have a question though.

[5:30] » Okay. >> When you added the islands, did that

[5:34] parking spots >> description says 300 spots. When I count

[5:40] them all, it's only >> um so we're going through some

[5:45] iterations. The last one that we did, we've added um an extra row uh closer to

[5:51] the detention pond on the east side, uh closer to Village Parkway. Um, so the

[5:57] what you see here is going to be evolving as we go through review with

[6:02] city staff.

[6:07] » Other questions, comments, concerns. >> Okay, back to what he just said though.

[6:13] If once we if this is the site plan, this is the site plan. It doesn't

[6:16] change. Correct.

[6:20] » I can use this microphone. So we are recommending approval of this the um we

[6:25] did receive the site plan 30 days ago and by uh operation of law we're

[6:30] presenting the site plan uh the recommendations of approval are on the

[6:33] screen before you and it's it is subject to engineering review. So to the extent

[6:37] that during civil review diesel lanes are added or parking is added that

[6:40] becomes reflective in the plan set but nothing fundamentally um in terms of

[6:46] increased building area, additional structures or anything more intense to

[6:50] the property can be uh changed without planning and zoning commission approval

[6:54] » such as parking that he said. Did you just

[6:57] » Yeah, additional additional parking to the south end of the site, additional

[7:01] row of parking would be considered a minor deviation that would be approvable

[7:05] through our engineering process. >> So, based upon what I'm hearing, he's

[7:09] adding 20 parking places that are not reflected in the site plan. Is that

[7:13] correct? So, um my response is once we go through

[7:17] city um review and it is noted that we require an additional amount of parking

[7:24] spaces, uh we will do so. >> This is a city review, is it not?

[7:28] » It is. It's this is a recommendation to the city council to approve.

[7:35] » So, do we need to make that part of our conditions on our motion?

[7:42] I believe the conditions currently there um are established with what we we'll go

[7:47] through with civil engineering review. >> I would concur with that that the that

[7:52] the condition of approval that this is subject to textile and city engineering

[7:56] review and approval would would capture the the the additional parking.

[8:01] » Okay. But it would not catch the acceleration and deceleration lanes. So

[8:07] we can add that as a >> I believe it would actually be part and

[8:10] parcel of the review by texttop. But if you would like to make it expressly an

[8:14] expressed condition of approval so that it's clear and obvious that's the con

[8:18] that's certainly the purview of the commission

[8:20] » unless unless text dot says no. >> Correct.

[8:24] » Okay. >> Yeah. Anything else from the commission?

[8:30] I would entertain a motion to approve

[8:35] this item with the two staff recommendations plus

[8:40] uh adding acceleration and deceleration lanes along uh highway five as allowed

[8:48] by text. >> So move.

[8:51] » Okay. Is there a second? >> Second.

[8:53] » There's a motion and second on the floor. Is there any further discussion?

[8:58] If not, all in favor signify by saying I.

[9:01] » I. >> Any opposed or abstain? Motion carries

[9:05] unanimously. We really appreciate it. We welcome you to town.

[9:09] » Thank you so much. Have a good evening. >> Thank you.

[9:12] » At this time, we will move on to item 4B, which is to make a recommendation,

[9:17] city council, regarding a site plan for a convenience store, which would be a

[9:21] 711 with fuel pumps at Panther Parkway and Kelly Lane. and this is NRJ.

[9:29] » Thanks very much, chairman. As you stated, this particular item on the

[9:33] agenda, item 4B, is a request for a site plan recommendation to city council

[9:37] regarding a 7-Eleven. It is located within the Manua Mud District. Um,

[9:43] before I begin, uh, I did just want to state that both items, uh, 4B and 4C on

[9:49] your agenda this evening are for site plan approval. And effectively what the

[9:53] site plan approval as we sort of just discussed is this is a document that

[9:58] ensures compatibility of the site layout with the development agreement that was

[10:04] approved back in 2008. Uh and so for example that the land uses are

[10:10] permitted, the parking that's provided is adequate, that the the setbacks are

[10:15] satisfied and so forth and so on. And so I just wanted to be clear that the the

[10:20] two items on the ag on the agenda are for recommendation approval of the site

[10:24] plans. Um but uh before we get into the specific items uh related and relevant

[10:30] to the site the site plan consideration is obviously the adjacent roadway and

[10:36] the other adjacent roadway is Kelly Lane. Uh, as you can see here on the

[10:40] I've pieced together the two site plans and on the east side of the property you

[10:44] can see that um both site plans are reflective of 45 feet of rideway

[10:49] dedication for Kelly Lane. Uh so I just want to take a moment and provide a

[10:53] little bit of information and hopefully clarification on uh where things stand

[10:58] with Kelly Lane. Uh because last week the city council did consider a few

[11:05] items related to Kelly Lane. Uh the city council did not consider the site plans.

[11:10] Site plans go before the planning and zoning commission prior to going to the

[11:14] city council. And so I want to make sure that it's clear the various and

[11:17] different requests that are being presented before the various bodies.

[11:24] Uh so I'll start uh with the fact that Kelly Lane

[11:29] depending on which document plan exhibit plat that you look at there have there

[11:34] have historically been variable and different alignments of Kelly Lane. Uh

[11:40] you can see on the far left side the original 2008 agreement shows Kelly Lane

[11:44] veering off to the southeast. the 2003 comprehensive plan and the master

[11:49] thoroughfare plan within that shows Kelly Lane aligned due south in this the

[11:54] current alignment of Kelly Lane. Um also the the ride ofway widths and sections

[12:00] have been variable. Uh last week at city council, the city council did approve a

[12:07] formal amendment request to the development agreement, an amendment to

[12:12] the 2008 development agreement that effectively

[12:18] showed Kelly Lane aligned due south along the current alignment of Kelly

[12:22] Lane and also defined it as a as a four-lane divided roadway within within

[12:29] that within that 90 ft of rideway. Um so that that amendment um did take

[12:36] place and was approved. Um as a companion item to that, the city council

[12:41] did also consider a memorandum of understanding from the developer uh

[12:47] regarding the construction of Kelly Lane. And uh as you can see on the this

[12:53] the slide at the the top end of this uh particular page um it Kelly Lane

[12:59] adjacent to this the subject property the 26 acres has been divided into three

[13:04] segments. Uh the developer and applicant at the city council meeting were

[13:09] effectively requesting to allow for the construction of Kelly Lane in three

[13:14] segments. Um, and along the the the bottom part of

[13:19] the slide here, you'll see a a current proposal for uh the construction of two

[13:24] additional lanes of concrete adjacent to uh the urgent care, which is on your

[13:30] agenda this evening, as well as the 7-Eleven site plan. Uh in the midst of

[13:35] cons in the midst of discussion at the city council meeting, there was some

[13:40] confusion about whether or not and how much many of the two existing lanes of

[13:44] asphalt would remain during construction. So, the item was tabled

[13:49] and since that meeting, city staff, our engineers have met with the developer,

[13:53] their engineers, and we've been able to confirm that the proposal on the table

[14:00] uh that will go to city council next month would be to allow for two

[14:03] additional concrete lanes of Kelly Lane to be constructed

[14:08] while the two existing asphalt lanes that are currently there would remain

[14:12] open uh and functional throughout the construction phase. So ultimately

[14:17] meaning there would be four lanes of vehicular traffic adjacent to this

[14:21] property. Uh and further furthermore the applicant will uh request city council

[14:26] consider that the two adjacent segments uh follow later. So I just wanted to be

[14:31] abundantly clear about the site plans are on the agenda tonight. The

[14:34] development agreement that was approved uh and the memorand of understanding

[14:39] that's still uh in consideration. >> Let me make sure that I heard it

[14:44] correctly. They are asking to do it in three sections. Is it still in three

[14:50] sections or is it down to two sections? >> Three.

[14:52] » Three. Okay. >> The first segment being the far south

[14:56] end adjacent to the proposed developments that are on your agenda.

[15:02] Uh any development that occurs north of the urgent care would prompt segment two

[15:07] which goes north of Thompson Drive encompasses the intersection so there

[15:11] can be circulation through to Thompson Drive and any any adjacent any

[15:16] development north of Thompson Drive would trigger the third and final

[15:19] segment. So if 7-Eleven comes a year ahead of urgent

[15:25] care, they still have to do the cement through to past urgent care.

[15:33] » Yes, the there would be an obligation that that segment that's shown in the

[15:38] red box that would extend up to the north of the urgent care even if the

[15:44] urgent care were not to develop.

[15:49] That's proposal. >> So question

[15:55] that's dealing with the current plaques that we're looking at or the site plans

[15:59] we're looking at and then they wanted to continue to build out the road as the

[16:05] land develops. Is there any kind of assurance or any kind of plan as to how

[16:10] they develop the next part of that? Because if they go back and they develop

[16:14] the the the end on the far north side first, are they going to leave the gap

[16:18] in the middle? Are they going to complete both sections at the same time?

[16:22] Or are they going to develop from south to north in order? Because if they go in

[16:28] there and they develop towards the towards section three, the far north end

[16:33] first and they don't do the whole road, that's going to be a problem. Uh the

[16:37] memorandum of understanding does include a term that says that that all that the

[16:42] roadway has to remain contiguous. >> Okay.

[16:44] » And expressly goes on to state that if you were to get a development at the far

[16:48] north end, it would trigger the construction of the whole road.

[16:51] » That's that's what I was asking. Thank you.

[16:54] Alex, you stated that the asphalt current asphalt,

[16:59] » what about after? It would remain after construction uh as as the two northbound

[17:04] lanes. Uh the two new concrete lanes would remain as southbound lanes and it

[17:08] would remain there if and until property adjacent to it developed or the county

[17:14] or got funding or it was annexed into the

[17:18] city and the city had funding, but there there would be no imminent plans that

[17:21] I'm aware of to improve the east lanes at this time. Um, so how are you going

[17:29] to move five? How how many feet is that? 300

[17:34] feet. So you're going to have got 300 feet of new concrete.

[17:43] Let's say it's 300 feet. Um, so you're going to have two

[17:48] northbound lanes of Kelly Lane for 300 ft. Then you're going to bottle it down

[17:54] to one lane. concrete goes away.

[18:00] » Much like on Lincoln Park. >> Yeah, except you got a lot more traffic.

[18:06] » More traffic, >> but that gives you a stick.

[18:09] » Okay, Alex, we're sorry to interrupt. >> I just wanted to provide some context

[18:13] some to some of the discussions in terms of what's on the agenda this evening.

[18:16] And again, those that that those items were pertinent to this discussion. Uh

[18:20] the 7-Eleven does it's a 4,800 um square foot convenience store, six fuel

[18:26] islands, 12 pumps uh with 36 parking spaces. Uh jumping ahead to the next

[18:32] item on your agenda, just to to get it out there, the the medical office or

[18:36] urgent care is an 8,500 square foot uh facility with 43 parking spaces. And I

[18:42] will note too, I I guess it's shown on the earlier exhibit, there is cross

[18:45] access uh that's that's required and you'll see in staff recommendations

[18:50] later that uh we are recommending that the 7-Eleven be uh approved amongst

[18:55] other things with the condition that there is a sec that second point of

[18:59] access out to Henry Hines Expressway be provided so that there are two points of

[19:03] access. >> What about turning left off of Kelly

[19:05] Lane into those two office two businesses?

[19:13] There would be two points of access, one on the urgent care and another on Kelly.

[19:17] » So, so if I'm going north on Kelly Lane and I want to turn into the 7-Eleven,

[19:23] how do I do that? >> You can see there's a black asphalt

[19:26] transition um that would be provided to allow for that left turn movement.

[19:34] » So, does this still include half a median?

[19:38] » Not quite. It's about 4.5 ft and we've discussed that. We will have to pick up

[19:42] the remainder of the median um with the eastern lanes if once they're developed

[19:47] east side. >> But we have there is the requirement for

[19:51] a curb on the east side of the southbound lanes. That

[19:57] would effectively be the edge of the future median

[20:02] » except for where the opening would come across.

[20:03] » Oh, correct. Yes, sir. >> I don't

[20:08] just I don't think one section is going to be enough. I think it needs to be the

[20:12] whole. >> Well, but that's not what we're here.

[20:16] » I know. I know. I know. >> Has Alex finished his presentation?

[20:20] » Uh, yes, sir. I mean, with that, I do have um slides at the end that have

[20:23] staff recommendations which are not too dissimilar to the ones in our previous

[20:27] item, subject to engineering, subject to other things, but we can get to that.

[20:30] Um, but those effectively uh conclude my comments um with the construction of

[20:38] Kelly Lane. Uh, however, uh, the city council sees fit to approve it in

[20:43] conjunction with the site plans as you have before you. Uh, these site plans do

[20:47] meet the terms of the development agreement. Uh, and so with that, I would

[20:50] conclude my comments. Gladly answer any questions. Uh, you do have

[20:54] representation from the developer in attendance. Uh, and should there be any

[20:58] further discussion, I've got additional slides and aerials if the commission

[21:01] needs to see them. >> I do want to ask so

[21:09] you're going to have

[21:15] they're going to put in a construction equipment.

[21:25] And with Tinsley Meadow, we did have a a routing plan for construction traffic. I

[21:29] will I will let the developer discuss sequencing and and um circulation of

[21:34] construction traffic. I'm I'm just not aware of what the intent is.

[21:37] » Okay. >> One more question on the median. If they

[21:41] only have to put in four and a half feet and it's scheduled for 17 feet, who's

[21:45] responsible for the rest of that? >> The eastern adjacent property.

[21:49] » So, they're going to have to put up for more than half the meeting.

[21:52] » Yes, sir. And and that's a that's a great point. It's it's a function of the

[21:55] situation we're in. But yes, sir. And we've just we have we've sort of started

[21:59] toiling in some of the details about lighting and landscaping and other

[22:02] features like that that those are going to be significant considerations that

[22:06] need to be made. But yes, sir.

[22:10] Okay. Let's get the question that was asked

[22:13] over here by representative the developer

[22:19] here. Are they

[22:24] Okay, please state name and who you're with.

[22:30] » Uh Tom Coppen with Kimley Horn and Associates were representing the urgent

[22:34] care property. >> Okay.

[22:35] » And Irwin GMA with Guggenheim Development Services representing the

[22:38] developer for 7-Eleven. >> Okay. And the question was asked which

[22:44] the development that was north of this

[22:50] we required to put in the entrance to uh that subdivision

[23:01] from the service road before the development. and that that was

[23:08] clearly marked as a construction entrance.

[23:14] Uh, and I would imagine that that's going to be made as a recommendation

[23:19] tonight. Is that an issue? >> That's acceptable. As you've seen out

[23:23] there over the last few months, uh, there's been sewer infrastructure being

[23:27] put in the ground. Obviously, the detention basin to the south has been

[23:31] constructed in preparation for these uh these improvements and access for all of

[23:36] that work was off of the frontage road. >> Okay. Thank you.

[23:41] Open up to commissioners for other questions, comments.

[23:51] » All right, we have staff making four recommendations.

[23:58] uh which are pretty standard. Approval of civil engineering plans. Uh receipt

[24:04] review and approval of road plans for Kelly. A second point of access for on

[24:11] 75 and approval of a plat subject to property and adjacent detention pond

[24:16] including easement and rideway dedication necessary for development.

[24:21] And a fifth one that would be added to that in our motion, I would assume,

[24:27] would be that all the that it have a clearly marked construction entrance off

[24:32] of 75

[24:36] with that. Would somebody like to make a motion? move to recommend and we

[24:44] city council to approve with the staff recommendations and the addition that we

[24:49] have a construction entrance to clearly enabled and installed before they begin

[24:54] vertical construction. >> Is there a second to that motion?

[24:58] » Second. >> Okay, there's a second at the other end

[25:01] of the table. Is there any further discussion?

[25:05] » Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying I.

[25:08] » I. >> Any opposed? All right.

[25:11] » Any abstain? Motion carries 410. Uh and

[25:19] that is that on that one and we will move on to item 4 C which is the same

[25:25] location in the uh urgent care.

[25:31] And I think Alex, you've already said what you want to say on that one.

[25:36] Correct. And

[25:40] we would have the same four recommendations from staff plus the one

[25:45] from >> slightly different recommendations just

[25:47] based on the location. Okay, then let me move down to

[25:59] So there would be a staff recommendations of approval of the civil

[26:03] engineering receipt and reviewing of road plans for Kelly and approval of

[26:09] plat subject uh property including easement and rideway dedication

[26:14] necessary for the development and one added by commission would be the

[26:21] uh construction entrance. Is there any further discussion on this item?

[26:26] I'll entertain a motion uh that to approve this with the three staff

[26:32] recommendations plus the recommendation from commission that uh has construction

[26:39] entrance. I recommend that we uh make a motion to

[26:44] approve or recommend the city council we approve with the three staff

[26:49] recommendations.

[26:54] » Is there a second? >> I'll second.

[26:58] » Okay, there's a motion and a second on the floor. Is there any further

[27:01] discussion hearing? None. All in favor signify by

[27:05] saying I. I >> opposed. I

[27:08] » Any abstain? Motion carries 410. Thank y'all. Appreciate it.

[27:15] » Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Okay. And we're on to commission and

[27:21] staff comments. Alex,

[27:28] thank you chairman. I don't have many comments uh to make this evening. Um it

[27:32] is the intention of uh city staff to bring a draft of the comprehensive plan

[27:37] to the planning zoning commission meeting at your at your next regularly

[27:41] scheduled meeting. Um so we will continue to work on on that. Um

[27:49] otherwise I think that that pretty much concludes any comments I may have.

[27:53] » Okay. I have a couple uh one audience and commission and anybody in hearing

[28:00] distance. There is a meeting on March 9th at 12 noon that will be at the south

[28:07] campus that is text dot to talk about uh our intersection. Do I need to define

[28:16] what I'm talking about by intersection?

[28:20] » Okay. And I think we really need to have a good

[28:25] turnout. So invite your neighbors, friends, puppy dogs. You can bring your

[28:29] lunch with you. Do whatever you can to get there. There is also a link on the

[28:37] uh on the city's Facebook for a survey that Tex dot is doing. Uh that is about

[28:45] bike trails. And so uh you might uh

[28:50] » What time is it? >> There's a presentation

[28:52] » noon. >> That's at noon.

[28:54] » Noon. >> Yes. And they say you can bring your

[28:57] sack lunch or whatever. Uh, and

[29:04] let's see. Oh, and one other thing is, uh, I talked to Alex about it and like

[29:11] to put it on public record that we start adding to our agenda each month. Uh,

[29:18] some preliminary planning on our overlays.

[29:22] uh getting ready for we don't want to approve anything before our

[29:27] comprehensive plan is finished but we can get a head start

[29:32] uh and with commission's approval uh I'd like to direct uh our planning

[29:40] department to start that process to where we put in 30 or 45 minutes at each

[29:44] meeting. Uh, and I think the thing to start with is is downtown and work our

[29:51] way out for all the overlays that we have. Is that agreeable to everybody?

[29:57] » Okay. I will now open it up to any other commissioner for any closing comments.

[30:03] » Well, that was on that was at the South Gring.

[30:06] » Yes.

[30:12] » Hearing none. I >> you can in about two minutes.

[30:16] » Okay. >> Uh at this time I will declare this

[30:21] meeting adjourned at 7 o'clock. That's nice round timing.

Van Alstyne Planning and Zoning Commission, February 17, 2026

Transcript