Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:01]

DECEMBER 1ST, TWENTY TWENTY MEETING TO ORDER.

IS THIS MICROPHONE ON?

[1. Call to order]

YOU CAN HEAR ME? OK, MAYBE WE DON'T NEED IT RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S NO ONE IN THE-- NOT TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.

BUT WE'RE HERE AT THE SOCIAL DISTANCE BECAUSE WE ARE EXPECTING SEVERAL PEOPLE LATER ON IN THE EVENING TO SPEAK ABOUT A COUPLE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT ITEMS. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT.

FIRST THING ON THE AGENDA, I'D LIKE TO INVITE PASTOR REED FORWARD AND HE'LL LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE.

OK.

NEXT, WE HAVE THE CONSENT ITEMS AND WE'LL BE VOTING ON THOSE LATER ON THIS EVENING,

[3. Discuss all items on tonight's agenda. No action will be taken and each item will be considered during the Regular Session.]

BUT I'LL GO THROUGH THEM.

ITEM FOUR A, APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 17, 2020 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING .

ITEM B, APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 17, 2020 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

ITEM C, CANCELING THE DECEMBER 15 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

ITEM D, APPROVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE ITEM E, APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF CISCO WIRELESS ACCESS POINTS, WIRING AND INSTALLATION.

AND THAT'S IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS.

ITEM F, APPROVE FACILITIES UTILIZATION AGREEMENT WITH DRAGON YOUTH FOOTBALL FOR THE TWENTY TWENTY ONE, TWENTY TWENTY TWO SEASON.

ITEM G, APPROVE OF FACILITIES UTILIZATION AGREEMENT WITH GRAPEVINE SOUTHLAKE SOCCER ASSOCIATION FOR THE TWENTY TWENTY ONE, TWENTY TWENTY TWO SEASON.

ITEM H, APPROVE A FACILITIES UTILIZATION AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHLAKE CARROLL LACROSSE ASSOCIATION.

TWENTY TWENTY ONE TO TWENTY TWENTY TWO.

[00:05:03]

ITEM I, APPROVE THE FACILITIES UTILIZATION AGREEMENT WITH LADY DRAGON LACROSSE FOR TWENTY TWENTY ONE, TWENTY TWENTY TWO.

AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WEST PART CIRCLE TW KING AND S.H.

114 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, AND THAT'S IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

ITEM K, APPROVE AN ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RPGA, AND THAT'S IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED TWO MILLION DOLLARS.

ITEM L, APPROVE AN ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AND THAT'S DESIGN SERVICE FOR THE WATER LINE IMPROVEMENTS AT EAST HIGHLAND FROM NORTH CARROLL AVENUE TO NORTH EXCEED ONE HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED TWENTY DOLLARS.

ITEM M, APPROVE A LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH TARRANT COUNTY FOR THE JOINT RESURFACING OF NORTH CARROLL AVENUE, AND THERE'S NO DOLLAR AMOUNT THERE.

ITEM N IS BLANK.

ITEM O, REJECT ALL BID PROPOSALS FOR THE KIRKWOOD BOULEVARD ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.

ITEM P, APPROVE AN ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE 16 INCH WATER MAIN CROSSING AT NORTH WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED SIXTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

ITEM Q, APPROVE ZA TWO ZERO DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE EIGHT, PRELIMINARY PLATS FOR LIGHTS ONE THROUGH FOUR BLOCK A AND THAT'S AT TWENTY FOUR FIFTY CROOKED LANE.

THAT IS ALL ON THAT ONE.

ORDINANCE NUMBER FOUR EIGHT ZERO, DASH SEVEN SEVEN FIVE.

ALSO KNOWN AS ZA TWO ZERO DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE TWO.

FIRST READING, ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR TWENTY THREE ELEVEN LONESOME DOVE ROAD.

THAT ONE HAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JANUARY 5TH TWENTY TWENTY ONE.

AND.

THAT'S IT ON THAT ONE.

ITEM S, ORDINANCE NUMBER FOUR EIGHT ZERO, DASH SEVEN SEVEN SIX, WHICH IS ALSO ZA TWO ZERO DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE SIX.

FIRST READING ZONING CHANGE IN CONCEPT PLAN FOR 1507 E DOVE ROAD AND--.

AND THAT WILL BE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN, HELD ON JANUARY 5TH, TWENTY TWENTY ONE.

AND ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS ANYONE WANTS ADDED TO CONSENT TONIGHT? NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO CALL THE REGULAR SESSION TO ORDER.

[1. Call to order.]

SO AT THIS POINT, I HEREBY ADVISE YOU WE'RE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT

[2.A. Executive Session]

TO THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION FIVE FIVE ONE POINT ZERO SEVEN ONE TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY.

AND WE'LL BE BACK AT 7.

OK, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC, I'M VERY

[3. REPORTS]

EXCITED NOW TO INTRODUCE THIS BILL.

SO AS THE COUNCIL KNOWS FROM THE APPROVAL AT OUR LAST MEETING IN NOVEMBER, THE SOUTHLAKE GRANT PROGRAM WILL BE AWARDING GRANTS FOR SOUTHLAKE BUSINESSES IN THE AMOUNT OF UP TO TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS.

THE APPLICATION PERIOD DOES START THIS THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3RD, AND WILL RUN FOR APPROXIMATELY SIX WEEKS UNTIL JANUARY 15TH OF NEXT YEAR.

THERE ARE THREE GRANT PRIORITY TIERS, AS I MENTIONED, TO COUNCIL AT OUR LAST MEETING.

AND THE GRANT FUND USES COULD BE USED FOR ANY KIND OF OPERATIONS FOR THAT BUSINESS HERE IN SOUTHLAKE.

OF COURSE, THE BIG PROVISION HERE BEING THAT THEY CAN'T USE IT FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES LIKE THEIR RESIDENTS AND SO FORTH.

WE DO EXPECT THE GRANT AWARDS TO BEGIN IN LATE JANUARY, EARLY FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR.

OF COURSE, IF WE CAN EXPEDITE ANY OF THIS RIGHT AFTER THE CLOSING DATE, WE WILL DEFINITELY DO THAT.

AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE DO HAVE THAT WEBSITE ALREADY UP.

SO ANYONE LOOKING FOR INFORMATION ON THE PROGRAM AND THE APPLICATION COULD GO TO SOUTHLAKEBUSINESSGRANT.COM.

THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE SCREENSHOTS.

FOR SOME OF THE INFORMATION ON THE GRANTS, THERE ARE SOME TABS, IF YOU NOTICE THE RED SQUARE THAT BUSINESS OWNERS CLICK ON TO GET SOME OF THE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF ELIGIBILITY AND THE AWARD TIERS.

AND AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE, THEY'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A BUTTON, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND OF YOUR SCREEN, WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE APPLICATION WILL OPEN ON DECEMBER 3RD.

SO THAT BUTTON WILL JUST KIND OF TURN TO OPEN APPLICATION.

BUT WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL ON THIS PROGRAM?

[00:10:04]

COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS? I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT THEN.

I WAS GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY ELSE A CHANCE.

BUT NOW THIS IS OUTSTANDING.

I THINK THE CITIZENS IN SOUTHLAKE, THE TAXPAYERS NEED TO KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO HELP OUR SMALL BUSINESSES GET THROUGH COVID.

THE NUMBERS ARE SKYROCKETING FOLLOWING THANKSGIVING AND WE MAY BE UNDER GOVERNOR ORDERS AGAIN TO MAKE SOME CHANGES IN THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT CAN BE IN RESTAURANTS, THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT CAN BE IN SOME OF OUR BUSINESSES.

AND SO THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

THE TIMING OF THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO SAY IS THAT CITIES AREN'T DOING THIS.

YOU KNOW, MOST OF OUR COMPANIES HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF PPP MONEY, IN MANY CASES, SMALL BUSINESS LOANS AND THE TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR GRANT, TARRANT COUNTY HAS PUT TOGETHER A GRANT PROGRAM FOR BUSINESSES.

I KNOW MY COMPANY WAS ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE DENTON COUNTY GRANT.

THAT MONEY PAID MY PAYROLL FOR THE WHOLE WEEK AND FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE TO STEP UP AND FILL THAT NEED THAT CONTINUES, WHETHER IT'S BRIDGING THE GAP TO PAY YOUR EMPLOYEES, WHETHER IT'S TO BE ABLE TO PAY YOUR RENT THAT MONTH.

TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS TO A SMALL BUSINESS IS HUGE MONEY.

SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

FIVE THOUSAND IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

AND SO THAT THE MONEY COMES FROM OUR SALES TAX, WHICH IS PRIMARILY FROM PEOPLE THAT COME IN TO SOUTHLAKE FROM OUTSIDE OF OUR COMMUNITY TO SHOP.

YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS COMPLAIN, RIGHTLY SO, ABOUT TRAFFIC AND SOUTHLAKE.

BUT THE FLIPSIDE OF THAT IS THAT PEOPLE ARE COMING HERE AND THEY'RE SPENDING MONEY.

AND WE REALLY-- IT REALLY IS VERY SIMILAR TO A RAINY DAY FUND BECAUSE WE'RE WE ABLE TO FREE UP A MILLION DOLLARS OF THAT MONEY TO GET IT BACK TO THE BUSINESSES THAT GENERATED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT REFLECTION ON THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.

DEFINITELY.

AND THERE'S DEFINITELY BEEN A LOT OF INTEREST, MAYOR.

WE JUST POSTED OUR SOCIAL MEDIA ON AFTERNOON.

AND I'VE ALREADY HAD A HANDFUL OF EMAILS TO ME PERSONALLY ASKING ME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

SO THAT INTEREST IS DEFINITELY STILL OUT THERE.

AND I'M REALLY GLAD THAT PEOPLE ARE KEEPING AN EYE ON OUR CHANNELS TO SEE WHAT SUPPORT WE HAVE OUT THERE FOR THEM.

AND I THINK IT'S MORE THAN INTEREST.

IT'S NEED, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE ARE BUSINESSES THAT ARE STILL HURTING THAT HAVE BEEN CRUSHED BY THIS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK I'M REALLY PROUD OF THE COUNCIL FOR STEPPING UP AND UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP, MAYOR, AND PROVIDING THE FUNDS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR OTHER THINGS.

OH, SURE.

AND PRIORITIZING THE RECOVERY IN SUPPORT OF SMALL BUSINESS, THEN, YOU KNOW, I JUST ENCOURAGE ALL SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS IN SOUTHLAKE TO SELF GOVERNANCE A LITTLE BIT.

I MEAN, THIS IS A LIMITED PROGRAM IN THE SENSE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO GIVE TEN THOUSAND BUCKS TO EVERYONE WHO APPLIES.

SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST I WOULD ENCOURAGE IF YOU'RE A SMALL BUSINESS IN SOUTHLAKE AND TECHNICALLY YOU QUALIFY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE MADE PAYROLL, YOU'VE BEEN STRONG, YOU'RE OPEN, YOU HAVE SALES, I'M THINKING OF MY BUSINESS, I'M NOT GOING TO APPLY, I QUALIFY, I'M NOT GOING TO APPLY.

WE DON'T NEED IT.

LET'S SAVE THIS FOR THE FOLKS THAT REALLY NEED IT, BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME BUSINESSES THAT ARE GASPING FOR AIR RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP IT.

OUR BUSINESSES WILL ONLY SUCCEED IF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY SUCCEEDS.

AND I WANT TO ALSO CLARIFY THE MONEY'S NOT LAYING AROUND ANYWHERE.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE A PIGGY BANK.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO POSTPONE SOME PROJECTS, BUT WE'RE BETTING ON THE WE KNOW THAT IF OUR BUSINESSES SUCCEED, THEN THAT SALES TAX REVENUE WILL COME BACK TO SOUTHLAKE.

SO IT'S REALLY AN INVESTMENT IN OUR FUTURE AND MOVE THINGS AROUND A LITTLE BIT.

WE DID ALSO GET HELP FROM THE COUNTY WITH A LOT OF OUR COVID EXPENSES.

SO STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING ON FILING THOSE REPORTS.

AND SO WE SAW SOME OF THAT MONEY THAT'S COMING BACK IN TO OFFSET SOME OF THE OVERTIME, SOME OF THE EXPENSES, ESPECIALLY IN DPS, THAT WE CAN FREE UP OTHER MONEY AND OTHER PLACES TO HELP OUR BUSINESSES.

SO WE WILL BE A SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO BE A SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY IF OUR BUSINESSES CONTINUE TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

MAYOR, I WOULD JUST ADD THAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO THIS IN LIGHT OF REDUCING PROPERTY TAX RATES AS WELL.

[00:15:02]

AND SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WHAT OUR STAFF HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO AND THE DECISIONS THAT PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE MADE, THEY ALL KIND OF GO HAND IN HAND IN A CRITICAL TIME.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL VERY SOLVENT, RUNNING VERY EFFICIENTLY, ABLE TO PROVIDE THIS UNPRECEDENTED GRANT.

AND IN DOING IT, WHILE BEING ABLE TO LOWER PROPERTY TAX RATES IS REALLY AMAZING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW.

SO SHARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, TELL ALL YOUR FRIENDS, TELL ALL THE BUSINESSES WHERE YOU DO BUSINESS AND PLEASE SHOP LOCALLY, SPEND MONEY LOCAL, TIP BIG.

IT REALLY IS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE, ESPECIALLY THE RESTAURANTS.

THEY-- I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'RE GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS IF OUR NUMBERS CONTINUE TO GO UP.

OK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DAN.

CITY MANAGER'S REPORT.

NOTHING SCHEDULED THIS EVENING.

NEXT, WE HAVE A MOTION ON CONSENT, BUT WE DID GO OVER ALL THE CONSENT ITEMS

[CONSENT AGENDA]

EARLIER THIS EVENING.

AND I DO HAVE TWO PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS AS PERTAIN TO ITEM Q AND ONE GENTLEMEN WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE'RE JUST DOING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TONIGHT.

COUNCIL APPROVED THIS ITEM ON OCTOBER THE 20TH OF 2020 AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED IT, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SIX TO ZERO ON NOVEMBER 13, 2020 AND NOVEMBER 19, 2020.

SO THAT'S WHY IT'S ON CONSENT TONIGHT.

BUT IF SOMEONE I HAVE A MR. BOBBY TO AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD, SIR, AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

MY NAME'S BOBBY SOUTHLAKE.

MY CONCERN IS FROM WHISPERING WOODS DOWN TO EAST SIDE AND THE WEST SIDE OF THE CROOKED LANE.

RIGHT NOW THEY'VE GOT OF THE SO THAT TELLS ME THEY'RE NOT GOING TO UP TO DRAIN THE WATER AWAY FROM US.

IT'S TWO PROPERTIES ON EAST SIDE THAT THIS AFFECTS.

AND THEN THE REST OF IT IS CLOSED UP NO.

AND THE TWO RESIDENTS ABOVE IT, THERE'S NOT THAT MANY DRAINAGE DITCH.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GETTING ON OUR PROPERTY, NOT JUST YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE MET WITH SOME ENGINEERS FROM THE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S STORM DRAINAGE PEOPLE LAST WEEK.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO GO BACK.

BUT IT JUST IT DOESN'T LOOK TOO PROMISING TO ME.

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU DON'T MAINTAIN THE-- YOU KNOW, THE ROAD DITCH.

IT'S NOT LONG AGO THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO GO OVER THESE TWO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

I JUST APPRECIATE IF YOU CONSIDER GIVING US SOME WATER DRAINAGE.

HE SAID STAFF HAS REACHED OUT TO YOU TO MEET WITH YOU ABOUT IT.

YOU SAID STAFF HAS REACHED OUT TO YOU TODAY.

WELL, THAT'S I THINK THAT'S GOOD.

SO, OK, WHERE IS ROB? I'M SORRY.

AND MY NECK IS BOTHERING ME.

I CAN'T TURN ALL THE WAY.

SO DO YOU FEEL GOOD MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THE DRAINAGE IS TAKEN CARE OF? OK, SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU.

THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH US.

AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE CARE OF THAT.

THANK YOU.

OK, THANK YOU, SIR.

THANKS FOR COMING DOWN TO SPEAK.

OK, WITH THAT, IS THERE A MOTION ON CONSENT? YES, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS FOUR A THROUGH FOR S, KNOWING THAT WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 4C, WE'RE CANCELING THE DECEMBER 15TH, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM FOUR D, WE'RE APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE CAROL MONTGOMERY TO PROVIDE A MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOWANCE, NOTING THAT ITEM FOUR M IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK AND THEN ALSO NOTING WITH RESPECT TO ITEM FOUR Q, WE'RE APPROVING ITEM THAT ITEM, CASE NUMBER ZA TWENTY DASH ZERO ZERO FIVE EIGHT PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LOTS ONE THROUGH FOUR BLOCK A FOR GMI AT SOUTHLAKE AT TWENTY FOUR FIFTY CROOKED LANE IN SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER TWENTY

[00:20:04]

FOURTH, TWENTY TWENTY AND PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER THREE DATED NOVEMBER TWENTY THIRD TWENTY TWENTY.

AND KNOWING THAT PER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, THE CITY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE HAVE MET ON SITE WITH THE RESIDENT WHO HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE DRAINAGE ISSUES.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

OK, AMY, CAN YOU CALL? WHERE IS EVERYONE? SO SORRY.

CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE YES.

YES.

YES.

YES.

YES.

RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC FORUM WHERE WE INVITE PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD AND

[5. Public Forum]

SPEAK ABOUT ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON THE PUBLIC ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING.

I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT CARD, KATRINA IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND IF YOU WILL PRONOUNCE YOUR NAME CORRECTLY FOR ME AND YOUR ADDRESS.

AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO SPEAK.

GREAT.

YEAH, YOU CAN BE THERE, AND IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, THANK YOU.

HI, GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS KATRINA IT'S MY FULL NAME.

I RESIDE AT TWO ZERO EIGHT TEAKWOOD LANE IN LEWISVILLE, TEXAS.

I AM HERE AT YOUR MEETING, THOUGH, BECAUSE I HAVE CHILDREN THAT LIVE IN SOUTHLAKE AND I'M ALSO INVOLVED AS A VOLUNTEER AND ALSO ON THE SPECIAL BOOSTER COMMITTEE AT A LOCAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HERE IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

THE REASON I DECIDED TO COME FORWARD TONIGHT IS BECAUSE I, FIRST OF ALL, WANT TO JUST APPLAUD EVERYBODY HERE FOR HAVING THE HUTZPAH AND THE GUTS TO COME OUT IN SPITE OF A GLOBAL PANDEMIC AND ALLOW US TO EXERCISE OUR RIGHT TO DEMOCRACY, BECAUSE I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT DEMOCRACY IS SOMETHING THAT WE PRACTICE AND THAT WE EXERCISE.

SO KUDOS TO EVERYBODY HERE, INCLUDING THE AUDIENCE THAT CHOSE TO DO JUST THAT.

WITHOUT GETTING TOO MUCH INTO CERTAIN DETAILS, BECAUSE I WANT TO RESPECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE PENDING INVESTIGATION, I FELT THE URGENT NEED TO COME BEFORE YOUR COUNCIL TO EXPRESS A POSSIBLY A POTENTIAL LEARNING OPPORTUNITY OR TO BRING TO LIGHT A SERIOUS CONCERN I HAVE REGARDING MY RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN AND MY FEELING SAFE IN THIS COMMUNITY.

I WOULD URGE COUNCIL TO PLEASE CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT I WILL SAVE.

YOUR POLICE OFFICERS ARE REALLY AMAZING AND THEY'VE BEEN HELPFUL.

BUT I'VE ALSO SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL SOME MEDICAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO A CASE.

AND I HAVE ASKED YOUR POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PLEASE PUSH MY CASE, WHICH I'M NOT-- I'M ACTUALLY THE VICTIM OF AN ASSAULT.

AND THE POLICE IN YOUR DEPARTMENT CLASSIFIED THAT AS A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR.

BUT I AM PETITIONING YOUR COUNCIL TO REALLY WORK WITH YOUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE I PRESENTED TO EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER.

AND REALLY, TRUTHFULLY, IN YOUR HEART, ASK YOURSELF, DO YOU THINK MY LIFE MATTERS? DO YOU THINK THAT MY LIBERTIES AND MY RIGHTS TO PROTECTION AND EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW AND OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, OUR TEXAS CONSTITUTION AND MY RIGHTS AS A PERSON STOP IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF A SOUTHLAKE JURISDICTION? AND I WOULD ARGUE, NO, THEY DO NOT.

SO PLEASE REMEMBER TO STAND UP FOR WHAT'S RIGHT.

I KNOW THE RIGHT THING IS FOR US TO ALL STICK TOGETHER.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO THROW PEOPLE'S NAMES IN A PUBLIC FORUM UNDER THE BUS.

BUT I WILL SAY, YOU KNOW, I'M A REAL PERSON AND I PETITION YOU TO PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE MATTER THAT I'VE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

GREAT.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING FORWARD.

NORMALLY NEXT ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL TAKE UP ITEM SIX A-- LET ME ASK BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING? SEEING NO ONE.

WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO SKIP FORWARD AND WE ARE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM SIX D, WHICH IS

[6.D. Ordinance No. 480-773 (ZA20-0049), 2nd Reading, Zoning Change and Development Plan for The Conservation on property described as Lot 10, Block 2, Harbor Oaks Subdivision, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and Tract 5, Rees D. Price Survey, Abstract No. 1207, Southlake, Texas and located at 2970 Burney Lane and 3185 Southlake Park Dr., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District and "SF-1A" Single-Family Residential District. Proposed Zoning: "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development District. SPIN Neighborhood #2. PUBLIC HEARING]

THE SECOND READING ZONING CHANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSERVATION.

SO I WILL GET BACK TO SIX A, B AND C FOLLOWING THAT.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THIS IS YOUR SECOND READING ON THE ZONING REQUEST FOR THE CONSERVATION, ALSO KNOWN

[00:25:02]

AS BURNEY ESTATES.

AS COUNCIL IS AWARE WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF PRESENTATIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

SO I'LL JUST QUICKLY GO OVER THE CHANGES SINCE YOUR FIRST READING AND ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN THAT YOU HAD AT YOUR LAST MEETING REGARDING THE CROSSING THE ROADWAY CROSSING OVER THE I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE COUNCIL, BECAUSE OF OPPOSITION FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD, A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE THIS CASE.

AND THAT IS SIX AFFIRMATIVE VOTES BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

I BELIEVE COUNCIL KNOWS THE ACRES IS THIRTEEN POINT ONE ACRES AND LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS YOUR FIRST READING MOTION, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS ADDRESSED WITH THEIR RESUBMITTAL.

IT INCLUDES THE APPLICANTS WILLINGNESS TO MOVE THE CUL-DE-SAC TO THE WEST, INCREASE THE LOTS ACREAGE FOR LOT SIX AND SEVEN.

ALSO, THE APPLICANT HAS PRESENTED TWO OPTIONS ON OPTION A, WHICH IS A THE ROADWAY COMING OFF BURNEY TO THE WEST, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE HARBOR OAKS PROPERTY.

AND THERE IS AN OPTION B SHOWING A ROADWAY ALIGNMENT ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THIS LOT, WHICH COUNCIL WILL NEED TO CONSIDER.

APPLICANT HAS ALSO PROVIDED AN EXHIBIT SHOWING DEPICTING THE CURB AND GUTTER OPTION AT THE BURNEY LANE ENTRANCE INTO THE SUBDIVISION.

ALSO, THE APPLICANT DRAINAGE ENGINEER IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE CHANGES FROM THE FIRST READING.

THE CUL DE SAC HAS BEEN SHIFTED TO THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET.

THE WILDLIFE EASEMENT, WHICH IS SHOWN IN GREEN, HAS BEEN BETTER DEFINED.

THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A WILDLIFE AND A ACCESS EASEMENT TO THE CORE PROPERTY BETWEEN LOTS ONE AND TWO.

I MENTIONED THE CURVE TRANSITION AREA ALONG BURNEY HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND THAT'S ON THIS EXHIBIT IN YOUR POCKET.

THE ALIGNMENT OF THE CUL DE SAC IS TO THE WEST AND ANYWHERE FROM 20 TO 22 FEET FROM WHAT YOU SAW AT FIRST READING.

ANOTHER CHANGE IS THE COMPENSATORY STORAGE AREA, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER ON LOT 2.

IN ORDER TO CROSS THE FLOOR AGISTMENT, ANY AREAS THAT ARE USED FOR A BOX CULVERT ARE COLUMNS FOR A BRIDGE STRUCTURE.

THAT STORAGE AREA MUST BE PLACED SOMEWHERE ELSE.

AND SO THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR.

THAT AREA IS SHOWN ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER WILL BE THE AREA WHERE THE ELEVATION WOULD BE BROUGHT DOWN TO THE 572 TO REPLACE ANY STORAGE THAT MAY BE DISPLACED WITH THE BRIDGE OR STRUCTURE CROSSING FOR THE ROADWAY.

SO AT YOUR LAST MEETING, THE APPLICANT CAME FORWARD WITH SOME FLEXIBILITY ON THE CUL DE SAC IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE AREA WHERE THE EITHER THE BRIDGE STRUCTURE OR THE BOX COVER ACROSS THE FLOWAGE EASEMENT.

AT THAT MEETING, COUNCIL ASKED THE APPLICANT TO GO BACK AND MEET WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

AND AS A COUNCIL, YOU WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THAT ROADWAY WOULD BE LOCATED.

THE APPLICANT HAS DONE THAT.

A LETTER FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET, WHICH IS ON THE SLIDE, WHICH SPEAKS TO CONDITIONAL POSSIBILITY OF A PERMIT.

THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT PLANS TO THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND SEEK APPROVAL ONCE THE ENGINEERING FULL ENGINEERING PLANS ARE DEVELOPED.

THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIDN'T INDICATE THAT EITHER A ROADWAY STRUCTURE COULD BE AT THE 572 OR A BRIDGE STRUCTURE COULD BE USED IN LIEU OF A CULVERT OR AT GRADE CROSSING AT THE INITIAL LOCATION PROPOSED.

SO WE'RE BACK ESSENTIALLY TO THAT INITIAL LOCATION THAT YOU EXPECTED TO SEE AT YOUR SECOND READING.

SO THIS IS A COMPARISON, THE FIRST READING ALIGNMENT IS SHOWN IN RED AND THE RELOCATION TO THE CUL DE SAC TO THE WEST IS SHOWN IN GRAY, AND THAT WOULD BE THE LOCATION PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT THIS EVENING.

YOU DO HAVE TWO OPTIONS.

AN OPTION A, WHICH IS SHOWN HERE, WHICH IS THE SOUTHERN LOCATION, THE LOCKED IN

[00:30:07]

BLOCK TO HARBOR OAKS, AND THEN A OPTION B, WHICH IS TO THE NORTH.

EITHER OPTION, THE LOCATION OF THE ROADWAY THROUGH THE FLOWAGE EASEMENT, THE 572 REMAINS THE SAME ON EACH OF THE OPTIONS.

SO THOSE ARE THE MAJOR CHANGES.

THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

COUNCIL? I KNOW WE HAD SEVERAL QUESTIONS ON THIS, SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND ANYTHING THAT KENT CAN ANSWER FOR US ON THIS PROJECT.

OK.

THEY WANT TO HEAR FROM THE DEVELOPER.

IS THE DEVELOPER PRESENT OR THE APPLICANT, RATHER? I GUESS.

YEAH, CAN I SAY SOMETHING FIRST BEFORE YOU SPEAK? SO WE SOUND FUNNY TONIGHT, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE HAVING THE MEETING HERE AT THE MARK AND BECAUSE OF SOCIAL DISTANCING AND WE KNEW WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANTED TO COME BE IN THE AUDIENCE.

SO WE DID IT FOR THE SAFETY OF THE AUDIENCE.

BUT PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS WE'RE ALSO BROADCASTING TO ANYONE WHO'S WATCHING ON THEIR COMPUTER AT HOME OR TV, BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE VERY POPULAR TOP TEN AND WE'RE COMPETING AT THE BACHELORETTE TONIGHT.

SO, YEAH, WHAT ARE THE CHANCES? THAT BEING SAID, SO THE MIKES ARE FUNNY.

SO YOU CAN HEAR ME IN THE AUDIENCE AND YOU CAN HEAR ME ON THE COMPUTER, BUT THE OTHER MICROPHONES THAT ARE REALLY SET UP FOR THE RECORDING.

AND SO WHEN THESE FOLKS TALK, THEY'RE GOING TO JUST HAVE TO TALK LOUD SO YOU CAN HEAR THEM IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM.

SO WE REALIZE THAT IT'S KIND OF A WEIRD SITUATION BUT W WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE CAN BE HERE SAFELY TONIGHT.

OK, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

BEFORE I GET STARTED WITH MY PRESENTATION I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE LAST MEETING.

I JUST WANTED TO APOLOGIZE ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND MY TEAM.

WE DIDN'T COME PREPARED LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE.

SO I'M SORRY THAT WE WASTED YOUR TIME THEN.

IT ACTUALLY HAS TURNED OUT TO BE A GOOD THING.

WE APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US THE TABLE.

WE WERE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND KIND OF GET SOME OF OUR DUCKS IN A ROW.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE I PUT THAT UP FRONT AND CENTER.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH.

NEXT TIME, JUST BRING DONUTS DEAL.

AND ENOUGH FOR THE AUDIENCE.

WELL, I AM PLEASED TO PRESENT THE CONSERVATION TONIGHT.

I JUST WANTED TO START OUT.

YOU GUYS HAD ASKED US TO GO BACK TO THE CORE.

MY PARTNER, TROY LEWIS AND MR. REPRESENTED.

WE GOT A LETTER FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS THAT SAYS DEFINITIVELY THAT WE CAN PUT A ROAD IN THE AREA OF THE LOCATION THAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

SO AS WE GET STARTED WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WE LOOKED AT THE NEIGHBORS.

WE THOUGHT, OK, HOW CAN WE BE MOST COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? IF YOU LOOK AT THE AREA HERE, THIS SHOWS ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF HARBOR OAKS AND THEN EXTENDS ON TO THE EAST AND THE WEST.

ALL OF IT IS SF1A.

SO WITH THAT IN MIND, AS WE WENT TO OUR LANDOWNERS TO BEGIN WITH, WE THOUGHT, WELL, LET'S DO SF1A ONE ACRE LOTS.

SO WE STARTED WITH THIS PLAN HERE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE ALL ONE ACRE LOTS.

THE ACCESS COMES OFF OF BURNEY LANE.

AGAIN, TRANSITION TO THAT PINCH POINT THERE THAT WE REALLY KIND OF DON'T HAVE ANY SAY OVER AND WENT DOWN.

THIS LAYOUT GAVE US TEN LOTS ON THE MILES PROPERTY WITH THE ADDITIONAL LOT BEING ON HARBOR OAKS.

AS WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS, TALK WITH CITY STAFF, SPOKE WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THAT THIS WAS PALATABLE.

WE DID A LITTLE BIT OF OUR RESEARCH, WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE FORMER CASES THAT HAD COME THROUGH.

IN FACT, THE LAST TIME THAT CAME THROUGH IN 2008, THE CITY COUNCIL AT THAT TIME IN THE MEETING NOTES SAID BACK A PLAN THAT SHOWS SEVEN LOTS ON THE MILES PROPERTY.

SO SOME TWELVE YEARS LATER, HERE WE ARE.

OK, NEIGHBORING PARCELS.

AS WE DID OUR CALCULATIONS AND TRIED TO FIGURE OUT HOW BEST TO FIT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WANT TO SEE, WELL, WHAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY LOOK LIKE? SO AS YOU COME ALONG BURNEY LANE, YOU CAN SEE HERE THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE FOR THESE COMPARABLE LOTS OF OUR NEIGHBORS ON HARBOR OAKS IS ONE POINT FIVE SIX ACRES.

OUR AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS ONE POINT FIVE ACRES.

SO JUST FROM A SIMPLE AVERAGE LOT SIZE CALCULATION, WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ANOTHER ISSUE WE WANTED TO ADDRESS WAS HOW CLOSE ARE WE TO OUR NEIGHBORS? SO WE DID SOME MEASUREMENTS HERE AND DID SOME SETBACKS TO SHOW EXACTLY HOW FAR WE ARE FROM OUR NEIGHBORS ON HARBOR OAKS.

AND JUST AS A COMPARISON TO SHOW HOW FAR THEY ARE FROM EACH OTHER AND ALSO ACROSS BURNEY LANE AS YOU GO TO THE EAST.

[00:35:01]

SO JUST FROM A GLANCE AT THESE FIGURES, WE'RE VERY COMPATIBLE FROM A SETBACK STANDPOINT AND FROM A DISTANCE STANDPOINT.

OK, AT FIRST COUNCIL REQUEST, THERE WERE SEVERAL BULLET POINT ITEMS THAT YOU GUYS REQUESTED FROM US.

AND WE'LL GO WITH THOSE JUST BRIEFLY.

THE FIRST ONE BEING TO MOVE THE CUL DE SAC FURTHER TO THE WEST.

WE HAVE DONE THAT.

WE ALSO BUILT THE ROAD A LITTLE FURTHER TO THE WEST.

HERE IN THIS AREA HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE ROAD KIND OF GOES A LITTLE MORE TO THE WEST.

THIS, OF COURSE, IS THE PLAN A, LITTLE BIT OF SPACE THERE AS YOU MOVE THE CUL DE SAC TO THE WEST.

WHAT THIS ENABLES US TO DO WAS MAKE ALL OF THESE LOTS IN THIS LOWER SECTION GREATER THAN 60000 SQUARE FEET.

SO THE ONLY LIGHT IN THE WHOLE OUR WHOLE PROPOSAL THAT'S LESS THAN SIXTY THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IS THE LOT NUMBER ONE THERE.

OPTION B OR PLAN B MOVES THE ROAD TO THE NORTH.

WE FELT LIKE THIS ALLEVIATED TWO ISSUES OR TWO CONCERNS FOR OUR NEIGHBORS.

ONE, THE ROAD A LITTLE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE FREDRICKSON'S MOVING ONTO THE NORTH SIDE AND THEN FROM INTO HER HOME.

BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE HER CIRCLE DRIVES.

SO SHE'S MUCH FURTHER SOUTH THAN THAT.

ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE DID MOVE ALSO MOVE ON, PLAN A MOVE THAT ROAD FURTHER AWAY FROM MR. SO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO DO THE BEST WE CAN TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND TO MAKE THIS AN EXCELLENT SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.

OK, SO TWO PLANS HERE.

THESE ARE BOTH PLAN A.

PLAN A WITH CURBS ON THIS SIDE AND PLAN A WITH THE ONLY POINT FOR HERE THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT CURBS ALLOW US TO REMOVE LESS TREES.

A CURB AND GUTTER STREET DOESN'T IMPACT THE TREES IN THE SUBDIVISION AS MUCH AS ALMOST FOUR PERCENT MORE TREES WOULD HAVE TO COME DOWN IF WE DO SECTION HERE ON THE PLAN A TO THE RIGHT.

NOW, I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT HERE THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO TRANSITION FROM A GUTTER.

SO WE BETTER FIT THE BURNEY LANE FEEL AND ESTHETIC.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR WE ARE PROPOSING A SMALL SECTION OF BAR DITCH, JUST NOT THE COMPLETE ROAD BEING A BAR DITCH.

THIS IS OUR PLAN B LAYOUT THAT ALSO SHOWS WHAT THE IMPACT ON TREES WOULD BE.

YOU CAN SEE HERE SIXTEEN POINT SEVEN PERCENT OF THE TREES WILL BE REMOVED WITH A CURB AND GUTTER STREET WITH THE ROAD ACCESS TO THE NORTH OF NOW, THESE NUMBERS DO INCLUDE THE PAD SITES HERE, AS WELL AS THE COMPENSATORY STORAGE AREA FOR THE CORNER THERE.

AGAIN, SIXTEEN POINT SEVEN PERCENT WITH THE PLAN B CURB AND GUTTER.

TWENTY ONE PERCENT WITH A BAR DITCH SECTION.

I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT EVEN AT THIS TWENTY ONE PERCENT, WE'RE STILL WELL ABOVE THE THRESHOLD FOR THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN.

ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO ASK MR. DRAINAGE HERE.

HE'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE ON THAT THAN I WILL.

SO YES.

MR. PLEASE.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS RICH I LIVE AT 112 KEYSTONE IN SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS.

WE ALL KNOW WE'RE IN TEXAS.

I GUESS.

I HAVE NOT BEEN BRIEFED ON THE USE OF THIS.

SO IF YOU GIVE ME A MINUTE, OK, I THINK I'VE GOT IT.

SO I'M HERE TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS IN PARTICULAR OR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

ON THE SITE HERE.

THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A CONTOUR MAP SHOWING THE LAYOUT OF OUR STREET AND ALL OF THE DRAINAGE TO US FROM OFF SITE IN THIS AREA AND THAT COLLECTS IN TWO DIFFERENT DRAWS AND COMES TO THIS FAMOUS CROSSING HERE AND THEN GOES OFF DOWN TOWARDS THE LAKE.

THE BACKS OF ALL OF THESE LOTS WILL JUST NATURALLY DRAIN AS THEY DO TODAY WITH ESSENTIALLY NO INTERRUPTION.

SO THAT IS THE GENERAL PREMISE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

I GUESS I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT EROSION FIRST.

THE-- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PICTURE, IF YOU ARE CLOSER TO IT, IT'S A LITTLE EASIER.

BUT THIS IS BASICALLY I'M STANDING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DRAWER TAKING THIS PICTURE.

AND THERE WHAT YOU SEE ARE A LOT OF ROCKS.

THEIR LEAVES ARE COVERING THEM UP.

BUT THIS IS BASICALLY A ROCK BOTTOM.

THIS IS IMPORTANT FROM THE EROSION STANDPOINT BECAUSE IT WILL BE BREAKING UP ANY FLOW THAT COMES THROUGH THERE.

AND I'VE CALCULATED THE AMOUNT OF FLOW GOING THROUGH THE STRAW.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE NATURAL SHAPE OF THIS CREEK.

[00:40:04]

IT DRAINS ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE ACRES, NOT VERY MUCH WATER.

AND THE 100 YEAR FLOW, WHICH IS EXTREMELY RARE, FLOWS ABOUT THAT DEEP ABOUT A LITTLE LESS THAN A FOOT.

THE VELOCITIES IN THIS WILL BE LESS THAN SIX FEET PER SECOND.

THEY ARE LESS THAN SIX FEET PER SECOND TODAY.

THEY'LL BE LESS THAN SIX FEET PER SECOND.

AND REASON I POINT THAT OUT IS TYPICALLY IN SOILS THAT HAVE A HIGH CLAY CONTENT, WHICH THESE DO, CLAY IS COHESIVE AND HOLDS THE SOILS TOGETHER.

SANDY SOILS ERODE MORE READILY THAN CLAY SOILS.

THIS AREA IS ALMOST AS WELL.

THE BASINS THAT ARE INVOLVED HERE ARE WHAT WE CALL HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP D, WHICH ARE CLAY SOILS AND WHAT THAT MEANS.

THERE'S TWO IMPORTANT FACTORS THERE.

FIRST, THEY TEND TO RUN OFF MORE WATER AND A NATURAL CONDITION BECAUSE THE CLAY SEALS UP THE SOIL AND ANY WATER THAT HITS IT RUNS OFF QUICKLY.

AGAIN, SANDY SOILS WILL JUST TEND TO KEEP SOAKING UP WATER, BUT NOT CLAY SOILS.

AND IN NORTH TEXAS, WE HAVE A LOT OF CLAY.

SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PREDEVELOPMENT AND A POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITION IS LESS BECAUSE THE PRECONDITION HAS A LOT MORE RUNOFF WITH IT.

THE NUMBERS THAT I USE TO CALCULATE THE DIFFERENCE, I USE WHAT'S CALLED RATIONAL METHOD, AND IT'S NOT VERY SOPHISTICATED AND IT ASSUMES THAT A LOT OF WATER JUST SOAKS INTO THE GROUND.

SO I'M REALLY-- I'M COMING UP WITH A DIFFERENCE OF RUNOFF.

I DON'T KNOW IF THESE NUMBERS WILL MEAN VERY MUCH TO YOU, BUT WE'VE GOT ABOUT 30 CFS MAYBE IN THE PRECONDITION AND FORTY IN THE POST CONDITION.

SO THE DIFFERENCE IN THIS PARTICULAR BED, AND I'VE DONE THE CALCULATIONS ON THIS CREEK THAT WE'LL HAVE ABOUT NINE AND A HALF INCHES OF FLOW GOING TO A LITTLE LESS THAN 11 INCHES OF FLOW, ALL BELOW SIX FEET PER SECOND.

SO THAT IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THIS HAS A VERY ROCKY CONFIGURATION TO IT, TELL ME THAT I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT EROSION AT ALL.

I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT IT AT ALL.

SO WE'RE BACK TO OUR EXHIBIT HERE, AND THIS SHOWS THE DRAINAGE PATTERNS THAT WE HAVE.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THE BLUE ARROWS, WHICH FRANKLY ARE A LITTLE HARD FOR ME TO SEE AT THIS DISTANCE, SHOW THAT THE ROAD IS GOING TO INTERCEPT SOME DRAINAGE.

SO IF YOU NOTICE, THERE'S AN AREA DRAINING TO AND THROUGH THE HOUSEMEN AREA TO WHERE OUR ROAD IS.

AND RATHER THAN THE WATER CONTINUING TO FLOW SOUTH TO THE FREDRICKS PROPERTY WILL BE INTERCEPTED BY THE ROAD.

SO THEY WILL BE GETTING LESS RUNOFF BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO INTERCEPT IT AND TAKE IT DOWN TO THE NATURAL LEVEL.

THE REST OF THE AREAS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FLOW AREAS, YOU CAN SEE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, HOW WE'RE GOING TO INTERCEPT SOME FLOW COMING FROM THE EAST, BUT THE DRAINAGE TO THE WEST WILL REMAIN PRETTY MUCH AS IT IS NOW.

I'VE OVERLAID HERE OUR ACTUAL DRAINAGE AREAS.

SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE AREAS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, FOUR OR FIVE ACRES TOTAL, INCLUDING THE AREA NORTH OF OUR ROAD AND SOUTH OF OUR ROAD COMING TO THIS AREA.

SO OVERALL, THE DRAINAGE IS FOUR OR FIVE ACRES IS A PRETTY SMALL DRAINAGE AREA.

AND THE NATURAL FLOW THAT THAT WILL FLOW TOWARDS THE LAKE THROUGH IS PLENTY FOR US TO CONVEY THE WATER, EVEN THE EXTREMELY RARE 100 YEAR STORM WITH NO PROBLEM AT ALL.

IT'S ONLY A FOOT DEEP EVEN.

AND THEN SO, YOU KNOW, SMALLER STORMS ARE GOING TO BE FOUR OR FIVE INCHES DEEP.

THERE ARE GUTTERS THAT FLOW IN SOUTHLAKE AND REGULAR STORMS THAT FLOW DEEPER THAN THAT.

SO IT'S REALLY NOT A LOT OF DRAINAGE FOR US TO TAKE CARE OF.

NOW ON THE CORE ISSUE.

I WANT TO THANK THE CORPS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, COORDINATING WITH THEM AFTER LAST TUESDAY'S MEETING TWO WEEKS AGO, WE DIDN'T JUST ONE MEETING WITH THEM THE NEXT DAY, WE GOT TO OVER THE NEXT THREE DAYS.

AND WE WERE ABLE TO DISCUSS VERY MANY OPTIONS WITH THEM AND GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THEY'LL ALLOW.

RANGER MATHENY JOHN MATHENY WAS VERY ACCOMMODATING TO OUR URGENCY BECAUSE WE KNEW WE NEEDED TO GET YOU HARD INFORMATION AND I FEEL LIKE WE'VE DONE THAT AND HE'S DONE THAT.

SO WE HAVE, I DON'T SAY THIS VERY OFTEN, 100 PERCENT CERTAINTY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE ROAD IN THE CONFIGURATION THAT WE'RE SHOWING YOU EITHER WITH ALTERNATIVE A OR ALTERNATIVE B, AND THAT COULD BE A ROAD BUILT ON FILM.

IT COULD BE A ROAD BUILT ON CULVERT STRUCTURE, OR IT COULD BE A BRIDGE WHICH WILL

[00:45:03]

BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS, I WOULD CALL IT BENIGN TO THE LANDSCAPE.

IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE A LITTLE PARK RIDGE, RATHER, BECAUSE WE CAN PUT PIERS DOWN IN THE 572 AND IF YOU CAN SUPPORT THE BRIDGE IN THE MIDDLE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE BIG STRUCTURE THAT I WAS WORRIED ABOUT IN THE LAST SITUATION.

AND I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH MR. BOYD SAID, I KNOW THE LAST MEETING WAS VERY AWKWARD.

YOU ALL HANDLED IT PERFECTLY.

IN MY VIEW.

IT WASN'T OUR INTENT.

THE THE INFORMATION THAT WE BROUGHT, FRANKLY, WAS NEW, OR AT LEAST MAYBE IT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN NEW.

BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO GET YOU ON A POSITION TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT I HAD TO COME BACK MONTHS LATER AND SAY, CAN WE TRY AGAIN? SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

I DIDN'T KNOW A BETTER WAY TO HANDLE IT, BUT I KNOW IT WAS AWKWARD AND I APPRECIATE THE MATURITY.

THE SOPHISTICATION OF THIS COUNCIL AND HANDLING IT THE WAY YOU DID CASUE TABLING IT HAS HAS MADE THIS MUCH EASIER FOR EVERYBODY IN THE PROCESS.

SO I WOULD THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. YES.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.

PERSONALLY, I DO KNOW NONE YOU PERSONALLY.

I WORRY ABOUT THESE KIND OF DETAILS.

I WANT YOU ALL TO APPROVE A PROJECT THAT YOU'RE PROUD OF.

I WANT TO DO A PROJECT THAT I'M PROUD OF.

I WANT OUR DEVELOPERS TO BE HAPPY WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

AND SO I HAD TWO MEETINGS WITH THEM, KIND OF WHAT IF SCENARIOS.

WE SPENT HOURS GOING OVER VARIOUS DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND WITH THE REAL ESTATE GENTLEMAN AT THE SECOND MEETING AND RANGER MATHENEY AT THE FIRST MEETING, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT WE'VE GOT MANY OPTIONS TO CROSS IT.

BUT THEY DO ALLOW ROADS TO CROSS THROUGH AND UNDER THE 572 CONTOUR, I MEAN, I COULD GIVE YOU EXAMPLES IN SOUTHLAKE NORTH BY CHAPEL AT KIRKWOOD CROSSING GOES DOWN UNDER THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN IS WELL BELOW THE 572.

BY THE WAY, WE'VE NOT SEEN A 100 YEAR STORM, WHICH IS EIGHT FEET OF ELEVATION BELOW THE 572.

AND THE QUESTION WAS ASKED OF ME TODAY WHETHER THE WAS ACTUALLY BELOW THE 572, WOULD THE RESIDENTS BE ABLE TO GET OUT OF THEIR SUBDIVISION? YEAH.

MY FIRST RESPONSE IS IF THAT MAKES AT 572, WE'VE GOT MUCH BIGGER PROBLEMS THAN THAT.

BUT SECONDLY, THEY'LL BE DRIVING THROUGH ABOUT THIS MUCH WATER TO GET OUT OF THEIR SUBDIVISION THAT'S NOT FLOWING.

IT'LL BE STILL, IT WILL JUST BE INUNDATED AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT VERY EASILY, EVEN IN THAT EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCE.

IT DOESN'T MEAN Y'ALL CAN APPROVE IT.

AND IF THEY DON'T, THEN WE DON'T.

BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, MY PERSISTENCE ON THIS ISSUE WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD WHAT I CONSIDERED 100 PERCENT GUARANTEE.

I DON'T JUST THROW THAT AROUND LIGHTLY.

THEY'VE GOT ROADS THAT I CAN POINT TO ALREADY THAT ARE LIKE THIS.

SO WE GOT EXAMPLES.

WE GOT HISTORY, WE'VE GOT PRECEDENT, WE'VE GOT THEIR WORD.

WE'VE GOT THEM ON THE RECORD SAYING THEY'VE SEEN IT AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY SEEN TWO DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS IN THAT LETTER.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T COME WITH ANY QUESTIONS TONIGHT.

[00:50:35]

SO IN THAT PROCESS, WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH ANY OTHER PLANNING PROCESS WE'VE GONE THROUGH WITH YOU ALL GETTING DETAILED SURVEY INFORMATION.

AND THEN WE'LL BE DOING ENGINEERING DESIGN AND REVIEW AND GOING THROUGH THE CITY.

AND THAT TYPICALLY TAKES THAT WHOLE PROCESS TAKES FOUR TO SIX MONTHS BY ITSELF.

SO WE WOULD BE SUBMITTING TO THE COURT VERY, VERY EARLY IN THE PROCESS WITH A MINIMAL AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE THEIR DECISION BY AS WE FINALIZE THE OTHER DETAILS.

SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT FOR THAT TIME PERIOD UNTIL THE FINAL APPROVAL COMES THE SITE WILL SIT AS IT IS.

YES.

YEAH.

THAT YOU AGREE WITH THAT? SO SO IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH A CONTINGENCY LIKE THAT, TO SAY NOTHING CAN OCCUR UNTIL YOU HAVE A FORMAL ARMY CORPS FOR APPROVAL.

THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, THE WAY AND I'M SURE YOU KNOW THE WAY IT WORKS, WE CAN'T START DOING ANYTHING OUT THERE UNTIL WE GET APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION.

SO I'M 100 PERCENT SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING OUT THERE UNTIL WE GET A SET OF CONSTRUCTION PRINCIPLES.

SO TO THAT POINT, YES, THE SITE WOULD SIT UNDISTURBED UNTIL WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ENGINEERING AND THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPROVAL OF OUR CONSTRUCTION PLANS.

THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY THIS GOES.

BUT ONE OF MY CONCERNS FOR THE NEIGHBORS, FOR THAT AREA WOULD BE A SITUATION WHERE THE PROJECT GAINS APPROVAL AND WHATEVER WORK COULD BE DONE WAS DONE CLEAR, CUTTING TREES, DOING WHATEVER THAT IS.

AND THEN THE CORPS SURPRISES YOU WITH THAT POINT ONE PERCENT CHANCE AND THEY SAY NO, AND IT PROBABLY DOESN'T HAPPEN.

AND NOW YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S SADLY BEEN TORN APART.

YOU KNOW, THE DIVISION, THE VIEW OF IT FOR A PROJECT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED THAT QUESTION.

SURE AND I'M COMFORTABLE COMMITTING TO YOU THAT WILL NOT START ANY CONSTRUCTION UNTIL WE HAVE APPROVE THAT CONSTRUCTION PHASE.

YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. THIS IS GOING BACK TO THE DRAINAGE, IT APPEARS FROM THIS CONCEPT THAT ANY DRAINAGE THAT WOULD OCCUR WOULD BE AFFECTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF, NOT TO ANY OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORS, BUT CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO IF THIS GOES TO AN APPROVAL AND WE'RE DECIDING BETWEEN OPTION A AND B AND WE'RE LOOKING AT BAR DITCHES VERSUS CURB CUTS AND GUTTERS, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DRAINAGE BETWEEN THE TWO AND THE CONCEPT THERE FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE? WHAT DO YOU ANTICIPATE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THE WATER SHEETING FROM THE ROADS AND CAPTURING THE WATER THAT WOULD BE COMING FROM THE EAST SIDE THERE AND GOING BASICALLY TO THAT 572 LINE? IT LOOKS LIKE.

SORT OF DRAW THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE CURB AND GUTTER SECTION IN THE BAR DITCH SECTION ? YEAH.

OK, SO I'VE ALREADY DESCRIBED WHAT THE SOILS ARE LIKE THERE.

THE BAR DITCH SECTION REQUIRES A LITTLE MORE ATTENTION SO THAT THERE'S NOT EROSION.

ALSO ON A BAR DITCH SECTION, YOU HAVE CULVERTS AT EVERY DRIVEWAY.

AND SO THERE'S A LITTLE MORE ATTENTION TO THE DETAIL THERE.

AND I'VE DONE SUBDIVISIONS IN SOUTHLAKE WITH BAR DITCHES, SO I'VE RUN INTO SOME OF THE AFTER EFFECTS WHERE MAYBE A HOME BUILDER PUTS IN A CULVERT ON A CORNER AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BIGGER THAN IT TURNED OUT TO BE.

SO WE HAD TO GO BACK AND TELL THEM, YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE THAT BIGGER AND THAT WHEN YOU HAVE TOO SMALL OF A CULVERT, YOU GET EROSION ISSUES RIGHT DOWNSTREAM.

TYPICALLY DOESN'T GENERATE WAY DOWNSTREAM OF THAT.

BUT WE CALL IT A SCOUR HOLE WITH THE DOWNSTREAM.

AND SO YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THOSE THINGS.

CURB AND GUTTER DURING CONSTRUCTION AT INLETS YOU HAVE EROSION CONTROL TO KEEP SEDIMENT FROM FILLING UP THE INLET.

BUT THAT'S KIND OF IT.

THE CURB AND GUTTER PROTECTS THE, YOU KNOW, FROM EROSION.

YOU JUST DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE SAME ISSUE.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH.

THANK YOU.

OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OH, NO.

OH, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT CAN YOU PUT PLAN B BACK UP ? ON LOT NUMBER 10 WHERE--.

SO THEIR ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTY, TO THEIR NEW HOME.

ARE YOU GOING TO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN OLDER HOME YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP

[00:55:04]

THERE.

IT'S OFF OF THE NEW PRIVATE ROAD, NOT OFF A BURNEY LANE, CORRECT? YES MA'AM, THAT'S CORRECT.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE AGREED TO, KIND OF KEEP THIS LOOKING THE SAME AS IT DOES NOW, WE WOULD REQUIRE THE NEW HOUSE THAT'S BUILT ON THAT LOT TO FACE TO THE EAST TO FACE BURNEY LANE.

SO THIS ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, BEING A TWENTY FIVE FOOT ROAD, THIS WILL LOOK LIKE A DRIVEWAY TO THIS HOUSE UNLESS YOU KIND OF TAKE YOUR CAR AND DRIVE DOWN IT AND MAKE THE THE TURN THERE.

IS THAT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS NOW OR IS IT SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE LOT? NO, MAN, THERE IS A CIRCLE DRIVEWAY THAT COMES OUT CIRCLE.

YES MA'AM.

CORRECT.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I WENT OUT THERE.

OK, SO THAT CIRCLE DRIVE WILL GO COMPLETELY AWAY.

THERE WON'T BE ANY ACCESS TO THAT LOT OFF OF BURNEY OTHER THAN THE PRIVATE DRIVE INTO THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

YES, MA'AM.

OK.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, PLEASE.

ACTUALLY, REGARDING THE PROPERTY, I APOLOGIZE THE LADY'S NAME ACROSS THE STREET.

MS. VANZANDT.

YES, I KNOW IN SPEAKING WITH HER, EVEN WITH THIS PROPOSAL, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT THE SWINGING TRAFFIC LIGHTS WHEN YOU TURN RIGHT GRANTED, IT'S LOW.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD IF APPROVED.

BUT STILL, SHE HAD CONCERN ABOUT THAT.

AND I THINK THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT A BERM.

BUT I BELIEVE SHE PREFERRED NOT A BERM MORE OF AN AGRICULTURAL TYPE OF BARRIER TO HEADLIGHTS.

HAVE Y'ALL TALKED ABOUT THAT AND COME TO AGREEMENT.

NO, ACTUALLY, I WENT BACK AND DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, REACHED OUT TO MS. VAN ZANDT BUT SHE WASN'T PREPARED TO MAKE SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT BASED ON THAT.

YOU KNOW, THE PLAN A.

WE AMENDED THE ROAD.

SO THAT KIND OF SWUNG DOWN AND THOSE HEADLIGHTS WENT INTO THE GARAGE, THE FRONT FACING GARAGE RATHER THAN OUR HOUSE.

AND I THINK THAT PLAN B IS PROBABLY A MUCH BETTER OPTION FOR HER AS FAR AS THAT'S CONCERNED.

I MEAN, HER HOUSE IS DOWN HERE WELL BELOW WHERE PEOPLE WILL BE COMING OUT ONTO THE ROAD.

YOU KNOW, THERE'D BE NO HEADLIGHTS HITTING HER HOME AT THAT ON PLAN B.

OK, YOU HAD A QUESTION.

YEAH.

DO YOU HAVE A GRAPHIC OR PICTURE OF WHERE THAT AND THE CURB AND GUTTER STARTS? YES.

ON EACH PLAN WE DO.

LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND THAT, I CAN TELL YOU IT GOES IN.

IT STARTS ABOUT A HUNDRED FEET OFF OF BURNEY LANE AND THEN TRANSITIONS OVER THE NEXT 50 OR 75 FEET TO A CURB AND GUTTER.

AND IT'S CONSISTENT FOR BOTH OPTION A AND OPTION B.

LET ME SEE I'LL HAVE TO CYCLE THROUGH TO SEE IF I CAN GET TO THAT.

THERE'S OUR DRAINAGE AREA AGAIN.

SO WOULD ANY DRIVEWAYS EVEN INTERSECT WITH THE BAR DITCH SECTION? NO THERE WOULDN'T.

IT WOULD ALLEVIATE THAT CONCERN.

YOU KNOW, RICH RAISED ABOUT HAVING CULVERTS UNDER THE DRIVEWAY.

YOU CAN SEE HERE, I THINK THIS SHOWS THAT THIS SHOWS HERE WHERE PLAN A WHERE IT TRANSITIONS FROM THIS BEING BORROW DITCH TO CURB AND GUTTER STREET THERE.

WE JUST MAKE THAT REQUIREMENT FOR THE HOA THAT THAT NEW HOUSE THERE ON LOT TEN WOULD HAVE TO COME BEHIND AND GO THROUGH THE CURVE AND GUTTER.

SO THERE'D BE NO CONCERNS THAT SOUND RIGHT, 50 FEET OFF OF BURNEY? YES.

NOT A HUNDRED.

I APOLOGIZE.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS A COUPLE OF MEMBERS OF COUNCIL HAD WAS POSSIBLY REDUCING LOTS.

DID YOU CONSIDER THAT? YOU KNOW? NO.

AND HERE'S WHY.

WHEN WE STARTED THIS, AS I DESCRIBED IN OUR FIRST SLIDE, YOU KNOW, SF1A ACRE LOTS, WE COULD GET 10 LOTS ON THE THIS YOU KNOW, THIS AREA HERE.

YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STARTED OUR PROCESS, WE ACTUALLY WENT BACK TO OUR SELLERS AND SAID, HEY, WE CAN'T PAY YOU AS MUCH AS YOU GUYS WANT BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET 10 LOTS ON HERE.

AS YOU KNOW, ISSUES WITH SEPTIC TANKS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATABILITY.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT TENABLE TO LOSE A LOT.

WE FEEL LIKE THAT WILL COME IN WITH SOMETHING THAT'S VERY COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE DIDN'T GO FOR THE GUSTO AND SHOOT FOR THE MOON FOR TEN LOTS ON THE MYLES' PROPERTY WAS DOING RESEARCH FROM THAT 2008 CITY COUNCIL.

THEY SAID BRING BACK SEVEN LOTS ON THE MYLES'S PROPERTY.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE.

FAIR ENOUGH.

ONE MORE QUESTION.

YOU KNOW, WHEN WE APPROVE LIKE SPORTS LIGHTS NEAR RESIDENTIAL AREAS LIKE HIGH STADIUM TYPE LIGHTS, WE'RE VERY CAREFUL TO USE TECHNOLOGY THAT'S VERY DIRECTIONAL, IT LIGHTS JUST THE FIELD.

IT'S ALMOST DARK.

YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GET 10 YARDS OFF OF THE STADIUM.

I'M IGNORANT ON THIS SUBJECT RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL AREA.

IS THERE A WAY, AN OPTION TO LIGHT THE CUL DE SAC OR THE ROADWAY WITH YOUR STREET LAMPS THAT ARE EXTREMELY

[01:00:02]

THAT DOESN'T POLLUTE VERY FAR BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ALREADY HAVE A GOOD TREE BARRIER.

SURE.

TO THE EAST, YOU HAVE A PRETTY NICE.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

AND WE'RE ALSO CONSIDERABLY DOWNHILL FROM BURNEY LANE.

AS YOU GO FROM EAST TO WEST.

I WILL SAY THAT.

ARE THERE OPTIONS OUT THERE, THOUGH, TO TRY TO YES, THERE ARE SOME WHAT THEY CALL DARK SKY LIGHTS.

YOU COULD ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE COULD DO IS DO A BOLLARD THAT FACES DOWN ONTO SO IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, 12 FOOT POLE.

IT'S MORE OF A FOUR FOOT BOLLARD THAT DIRECTLY PUTS LIGHT ON THE CUL DE SAC.

I MEAN, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT THE NEIGHBORS BROUGHT UP AS WE WENT THROUGH OUR PROCESS AND HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS IS NO STREETLIGHTS AND THEY WANTED NO STREET LIGHTS IN THERE TO MIRROR OAKS.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WE'RE NOT PROPOSING STREET LIGHTS HERE JUST AS A CONCESSION TO THE NEIGHBORS.

AND IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU WARRANTED, HEY, WE'VE GOT TO PUT A STREET LIGHT ON THE CUL DE SAC THERE WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

I APOLOGIZE THEN BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT DID INCLUDE LIGHTS YOU'VE ALREADY MADE THAT CONCESSION.

YES, SIR.

NO STREETLIGHTS OR NO SIDEWALKS AS WELL.

THAT'S OTHER MEETINGS IS IN TERMS OF THE SEPTIC SYSTEMS, CAN YOU REQUIRE OR ARE YOU REQUIRED IN A HOA THAT PEOPLE ARE SIGNED UP WITH A SERVICE AND ITS SERVICED ON A REGULAR BASIS? YES, MA'AM, WE ARE.

WE'RE REQUIRING AEROBICS SEPTIC SYSTEMS. WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN YOUR PACKET, I BELIEVE, A LETTER FROM TARRANT COUNTY THAT SAYS AEROBICS SYSTEMS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE HERE IN THIS LOCATION.

AND I WANT TO SAY ALSO, I KNOW THAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALLY LIKE TO GET INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF HOW THINGS WORK.

BUT LAKE GRAPEVINE ALREADY ACCEPTS A TON OF EFFLUENT WATER FROM, QUOTE UNQUOTE, A SEPTIC SYSTEM CALLED THE TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY.

WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, YES, THE HOA WOULD REQUIRE REGULAR MAINTENANCE OF THE AEROBICS SYSTEMS. BUT THIS IS NEW TECHNOLOGY.

WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, CROSS THE T'S AND DOT THE I'S AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S TAKEN CARE OF AS FAR AS SEPTIC SYSTEMS ARE CONCERNED OR AEROBIC SYSTEMS I GUESS YOU SHOULD SAY.

DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MA'AM I'M SORRY.

YES THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.

OK, WE MAY CALL YOU BACK UP LATER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

YES.

AND BEFORE I OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT, DIRECTOR BAKER, CAN WE ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS? I THINK REALLY MORE FOR CLARIFICATION THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

SO THERE IS A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT THAT ZONING IS DONE BY THE SIZE OF LOTS AROUND PAN AREA, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE.

PIECES OF PROPERTY HAVE ZONING AND, YOU KNOW, LOW DENSITY IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE IS SF1A.

THAT'S IT.

SO THAT'S, WHAT, 40000 SQUARE FEET.

SO THOSE ARE WHEN WE LOOK AT PROPERTY, THERE ISN'T A REQUIREMENT THAT IN A LOW DENSITY AREA, THAT THERE BE THREE ACRE LOTS OR FIVE ACRE LOTS OR TWO AND A HALF OR LOTS.

IT'S ONE ACRE LOT IS WHAT'S CONSIDERED LOW DENSITY IN SOUTHLAKE AND REALLY IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT'S AROUND AN AREA.

WE HAVE MANY NEIGHBORHOODS IN SOUTHLAKE.

MAYBE YOU CAN SPEAK TO THIS A LITTLE BIT WHERE WE ACTUALLY HAVE SF20 NEXT TO SF1A NEXT TO A PUD.

SO WHEN WE'RE APPROVING NEW NEIGHBORHOODS, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DENSITY AS A CATEGORY AND NOT LOOKING AT NECESSARILY LOOKING AT EXACTLY WHAT IS APPROVED, YOU KNOW, IN AND, YOU KNOW, TWO MILE RADIUS, ONE MILE RADIUS, WHATEVER, IT IS.

SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT? SURE.

WITH ONE OF THE MAJOR FACTORS THAT THE COUNCIL LOOKS AT WHEN CONSIDERING REZONING IS YOUR LAND USE PLAN.

AND ACCORDING TO THE LAND USE PLAN DEFINITION FOR LOW DENSITY, IT'S GREATER THAN ONE ACRE NET.

SO YOU TAKE OUT THE STREET IN THAT DEFINITION.

SO IT DOES MEET THE DEFINITION OF THAT PARTICULAR LAND USE CATEGORY.

AS MENTIONED, THE THE ACREAGE IN LOTS FOR THE MOST PART ARE 60000 SQUARE FEET OR IN THAT GENERAL AREA, AN ACRE IS 43, 560.

SO THESE ARE ONE POINT THREE ACRES ON AVERAGE.

AND SO THAT IS YOUR BAROMETER IN TERMS OF LOT SIZE AND PRIMARILY WHAT YOU LOOK AT DURING A REZONING CASE.

SO WHILE WE TRY TO WORK WITH EVERY DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES FORWARD, I MEAN, WE'RE KNOWN FOR IF YOU WANT 20 LOTS, WE'LL GIVE YOU A 15.

SO BUT THERE COMES A POINT WHERE THEY FIT WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY AND THEY

[01:05:02]

HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY ACCORDING TO THAT ZONING.

NOW, THEY ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME AND ASK US FOR A ZONING CHANGE AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DENY THAT.

BUT IF THEY FIT WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO ASK US ABOUT ZONING.

RIGHT.

IF THEY HAVE ZONING IN PLACE AND THEY JUST BASICALLY GO THROUGH THE PLATTING PROCESS WHEN THEY DO CHANGE FROM IN THIS CASE IS AN AG PROPERTY TO A DIFFERENT ZONE OR CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT ZONING TO DIFFERENT ZONES THEN THAT IS A LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND THAT IS THE ZONING ACT, WHICH HAS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.

AND THE OVERLAY FOR THAT AREA THEN IS WHAT WE TAKE A LOOK AT.

AND THE OVERLAY FOR THAT AREA IS LOW DENSITY HOUSING NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING.

THAT IS CORRECT.

OK.

ALSO CLARIFY.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN AN ISSUE IS THE FACT THAT A RESIDENT SOLD THEIR HOME AND THEN THAT HOUSE BECOMES ACCESS TO LAND THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY LAND LOCKED.

SO AS A COUNCIL, WE'RE NOT TAKING A LOOK AT THAT'S NOT A CONSIDERATION FOR US BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THAT LEGALLY PROHIBITS THAT RESIDENT FROM, NUMBER ONE, SELLING THEIR HOUSE.

AND NUMBER TWO, FOR A DEVELOPER USING IT AS A PRIVATE ROAD TO ACCESS ANY PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S BEHIND IT, FOR THAT MATTER.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AS LONG AS I GO THROUGH THIS APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE REZONING PROCESS, WHICH THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT DOES INCLUDE THAT HARBOR OAKS LOT AND IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THEN THAT IS PERMITTED.

OK.

ANY QUESTIONS OF KEN.

YEAH, I DO.

DIRECTOR BAKER, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY.

CAN YOU GIVE SOME CLARITY SINCE THIS IS AN EASEMENT AS TO AND YOU HAVE IT HERE ON SLIDE 20 IN THE PACKET THE GROSS VERSUS NET ACREAGE CALCULATIONS.

HOW DO WE ACTUALLY DETERMINE THE SIZE OF THE BUILDABLE LOT? WHEN WE DID THE INITIAL ANALYSIS ON YOUR LAND USE DEFINITION, YOU JUST SUBTRACT OUT THE STREET OF THE ROADWAY TO GET THE NET.

RIGHT.

BUT JUST HISTORICALLY, AS WE GO THROUGH THESE REZONING PROCESSES, PEOPLE ASK, OK, HOW DO YOU FIGURE OUT NET? SO WE ASK THE APPLICANT TO SHOW NOT ONLY THE STREET, BUT THE FLOW OF AND THE GROSS ACREAGE.

AND UNDER ANY SCENARIO, IT'S ABOVE 43, 560, WHICH EQUATES TO ONE ACRE IN SIZE.

SO THAT WAS MORE FOR DEMONSTRATION PURPOSES.

BUT THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENT THAT WE LOOK JUST AT TAKE NETTING OUT THE ROADWAY OR THE STREET.

RIGHT.

WE DID RUN ONE SCENARIO WHERE WE NETTED THAT AREA BELOW THE 572 WHICH IS IN THE FLOWAGE EASEMENT OUT OF IT.

AND EVEN WITH THAT CALCULATION, YOU CAN SEE THE COLUMNS THERE THEY'RE ABOVE THE 43 560, EXCEPT FOR MAYBE THE OPTION B, THERE'S A LOT 4.

RIGHT.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU KEN.

THANK YOU.

THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT COVENANTS LIKE NEIGHBORHOOD COVENANTS AND DEED RESTRICTIONS.

WHAT ROLE, IF ANY, DO YOU PLAY? DOES THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLAY? AND JUST MANAGING THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHEN BECAUSE THIS IS A WEIRD DEAL WHEN THEY'RE PULLING A LOT OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BASICALLY EXEMPTING IT, I GUESS, OR CHANGING THE RESTRICTIONS.

BUT WHAT'S YOUR ROLE IN THAT? RIGHT.

AND I'LL SPEAK AND THEN I'LL LET THE CITY ATTORNEY SPEAK.

BUT FROM A PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERSPECTIVE, WE WILL LOOK AT THE COVENANTS.

AND IF WE SEE SOMETHING THAT'S CLEAR MAYBE IN THE COVENANTS, WE MAY POINT THAT OUT, HEY, YOU MAY HAVE THIS PROBLEM, BUT WE DON'T ENFORCE NEIGHBORHOOD COVENANTS.

WE DON'T OTHER THAN INFORMATIONAL, WE DON'T SEE IT AS PART OF THE ZONING REQUEST NOW WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE AN ISSUE.

AND WE MAY SAY, HEY, HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THIS? AND I THINK INITIALLY WHEN THIS CAME IN, THERE WAS SIGNAGE ON THE ENTRY FEATURE.

AND THERE IS A RESTRICTED COVENANTS.

THERE'S NO SIGNAGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SAW THAT AND REMOVED IT JUST TO AVOID THAT.

BUT WE WON'T SEND A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OUT THERE TO ENFORCE DEED RESTRICTIONS OR NEIGHBORHOOD COVENANTS.

[01:10:04]

YEAH.

SO AN ATTORNEY CAN TALK TO THIS.

SO LEGALLY, IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE, THAT ISSUE WOULD BE BETWEEN THE HOA AND THE NEW LAND OWNER LOT OWNER IN THIS CASE? EXACTLY CORRECT.

DIRECTOR BAKER ANSWERED THE QUESTION PERFECTLY.

IT'S A PRIVATE PROPERTY ISSUE IT'S NOT CITY ENFORCEMENT ISSUE AT ALL.

OK.

AND THAT WOULD BE THE SAME IN EVERY EVERY COMMUNITY IN SOUTHLAKE THAT HAS AN HOA.

CORRECT.

THAT HAS.

YEAH.

OK.

AND WE'VE DONE THAT HISTORICALLY.

YES.

I REMEMBER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFICALLY ONE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT WAS KIND OF A CUL DE SAC AND THERE WAS A LARGE LOT ON THE CUL DE SAC AND THEN WENT OUT TO YES, WE SPLIT IT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OFF OF DOVE KNOWING THAT THERE WAS NO ACCESS AND THE HOMEOWNER AGREED TO JUST JOIN THE HOA IN GOOD CONSCIENCE BUT THEY WERE NOT REQUIRED TO DO SO.

YEAH, BUT WE AND SOUTHLAKE HAVE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARDS AND HOA BOARDS.

AND SO BEFORE WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CASES THAT HAVE GONE TO ZBA WHERE A NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SAID, WE DON'T WANT THIS, AND THEN ZBA HAD TO MAKE A LEGAL CALL ON WHETHER IT COULD BE APPROVED OR NOT.

SO, OK, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF CLARIFICATION FOR DIRECTOR BAKER? I JUST AND THIS IS JUST PROBABLY BECAUSE I'M NEW AND I DON'T KNOW HOW IS THE ROAD? IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD.

SO IS IT GOING TO SAY PRIVATE ROAD AT THE END OF IT? HOW IS IT GOING TO BE IDENTIFIED? HOW DOES SOMEBODY FIND IT IF THEY WANT TO GO VISIT THEIR FRIENDS? YEAH PRIVATE IS REALLY JUST PRIVATE FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES.

AND WHETHER THE CITY OWNS THAT ROAD, WE JUST HAD THE ISSUE WITH WHERE, YEAH, THEY'RE SOMETIMES THEY ARE PRIVATE ROADS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK AROUND, YEAH THE PRIVATE ROADS SHOW UP ON ANY GPS SYSTEM.

STILL, TYPICALLY, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOCATE ON THERE ANY DEVICE OR GPS DEVICE.

IT'LL JUST BE CALLED A PRIVATE ROAD.

YEAH, IT'S JUST MORE ADMINISTRATIVE.

YEAH.

OK, SO WITH THAT, IF THERE ARE NOT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO WE DO HAVE SEVERAL PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS THIS EVENING.

SO I'LL CALL FOLKS UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND HAVE YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND THERE IS A TIMER, IF YOU PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES SO THAT WE CAN HEAR EVERYONE'S COMMENTS THIS EVENING AND MAYBE LOOK FOR SOME WAYS THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER ON THIS.

THE FIRST PERSON IS, I THINK ROD.

IS IT ZILKE? I THINK I HAVE THAT RIGHT AND I APOLOGIZE AHEAD OF TIME.

AND SO IF HE CAN GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

GOOD EVENING.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS ROB ZILKE AT 1090 BURNEY LANE IN HARBOR OAKS.

I'M OPPOSED TO THE SUP AS PROPOSED FOR THE MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY ISSUES AND SOME HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE ARE CONCERNS YOU'RE ALREADY AWARE OF AND TOO INVOLVED TO GET INTO IN THREE MINUTES.

ONE COMPATABILITY COMMENT I'D LIKE TO MAKE AFTER LISTENING TO SOME RECENT POINTS JUST MADE THIS EVENING IS THAT THE PROPOSED IS COMPATIBLE WITH A LAND USE PLAN.

AND I HAVE QUITE A BIT OF EXPERIENCE IN OTHER CITIES DOING ZONING CASES.

AND IN MY EXPERIENCE, COMPATIBILITY WITH THE LAND USE PLAN IS A MINIMUM COMPATIBILITY STANDARD.

NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN YOU HAVE TWO ACRE LOTS ADJACENT TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY LIKE THIS, IN THIS CASE WITH THE LAND USE PLAN SAYS A ONE ACRE LOT TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE LAND USE PLAN SAYS A ONE ACRE LOT IS ACCEPTABLE.

THIS IS NOT TYPICAL PLANNING PRACTICE.

USUALLY THERE'S A BUFFER THERE WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED TO PUT TWO ACRE LOTS OR EQUIVALENT LOTS ADJACENT TO EQUIVALENT LOTS.

SO THIS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE LAND USE PLAN, IN MY OPINION, IS A MINIMUM STANDARD.

NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY IS THE NEXT LEVEL OF COMPATIBILITY THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS DEVELOPER ON THIS PROJECT FOR ABOUT FIVE MONTHS THAT I'M AWARE OF, AND THINGS ARE STILL SEEM TO BE IN FLUX AND CHANGING.

I'M HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING ALL THE THINGS THAT HE'S TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT HIS DEVELOPMENT.

HE HASN'T REALLY OFFERED ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES SINCE THIS DISCUSSION STARTED.

HE'S CONSISTENTLY VERBALIZED HIS ATTITUDE WHEN ASKED FOR COMPATIBILITY COMPROMISES

[01:15:02]

SUCH AS FEWER LOTS BY SAYING THINGS LIKE AND I QUOTE, I'M GOING TO LIVE OR DIE ON THIS HILL OR I'M GOING TO AGREE TO DISAGREE.

THIS PROPERTY HAS SOME VERY UNIQUE AND SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND SHOULD BE DEVELOPED INTO SOME VERY SPECIAL, UNIQUE AND EXCLUSIVE LOTS.

WE'VE SEEN IN SIMILAR NEIGHBORHOOD SITUATIONS IN THIS AREA IN THE 30 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED HERE.

AND WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES ALONG THAT UNDERSTANDS GOOD THINGS CAN HAPPEN.

AN EXAMPLE OF THIS IS THE HUGHES HOMEPLACE ADDITION, WHICH THIS PROPERTY'S ADJACENT TO TO THE SOUTH.

THIS PROPERTY NEEDS AN EXPERIENCED, KNOWLEDGEABLE, REPUTABLE AND INNOVATIVE DEVELOPER THAT KNOWS HOW TO WORK WITH SUCH THINGS AS NEGOTIATING LAND PRICE, NATURAL AND GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES, CORE AND LAKE GRAPEVINE ADJACENCY, NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY ISSUES, LARGE YIELD AND PROFITABILITY, AND ASKS US TO NAME A FEW.

INSTEAD OF A DEVELOPER INTERESTED IN RELATIVELY MAXIMIZING LOT COUNT AND PROVIDING ACCESS THROUGH THE YARD OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN A PLATTED SUBDIVISION OF 40 YEARS.

PLEASE GIVE US A CHANCE TO WORK SOMETHING ELSE OUT FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NEXT I HAVE DENNIS KING IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND IF YOU PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, MY NAME IS DENNIS KING, I LIVE AT 205 MANOR PLACE STONE LAKES SOUTHLAKE MOVED OUT HERE IN 1993.

SO I'VE BEEN HERE ALMOST 30 YEARS.

WHEN I SAY THAT TO PEOPLE, THEY LOOK AT ME LIKE I'M A DINOSAUR.

I SAY THAT NO.

I HOPE I DON'T LOOK LIKE A DINOSAUR.

I DON'T FEEL LIKE A DINOSAUR.

BUT I HAVE LIVED HERE ONLY TWO AND A HALF I WAS BORN AND RAISED AND LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE.

SO WHEN WE MOVED OUT HERE IN 1993, WE MOVED TO STONE LAKES.

IT WAS I THINK THERE WAS ONLY MAYBE TWO OR THREE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS TIMARON SOUTHRIDGE, SO WE RAISED OUR CHILDREN HERE AND WE'RE SO GLAD TO HAVE BEEN IN SOUTHLAKE.

WHEN I USED TO TELL PEOPLE I LIVED IN THE SOUTHLAKE THEY SAID, WHERE IS THAT? AND NOW I SAY, I LIVE IN SOUTHLAKE AND THEY SAY, OH MY GOSH, WHAT A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE.

AND THAT IS WHAT I THINK.

AND SO I NOT ONLY LIVED OUT HERE THAT LONG, BUT I ALSO SERVED ON PLANNING AND ZONING IN THE 90S AT THE TIME THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WE WERE DEALING WITH SPIN MEETINGS, WE WERE TRYING TO DECIDE NOT ONLY ABOUT A LOW DENSITY BUT MEDIUM DENSITY.

SOME PEOPLE WANTED HIGH DENSITY AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND SO GLAD IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

AND SO I AS I SAID, I WAS ON P&Z FOR TWO YEARS AND I WAS EVEN CHAIRMAN FOR ONE YEAR.

SO I'VE SEEN A LOT OF CHANGE OVER THE LAST MANY YEARS.

AND I THINK IT'S ALL BEEN GREAT.

I'VE SEEN ALL THE MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS FROM TOWN SQUARE TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S BEEN DONE SINCE THAT TIME.

I REMEMBER WHEN TOWN SQUARE WAS A DAIRY FARM.

NOW IT'S BEEN DEVELOPED INTO A PROTOTYPE FOR LIFESTYLE CENTERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY WITH DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS AND REAL ESTATE PEOPLE THAT I'VE TALKED TO.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.

I'VE SEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS.

I THINK THIS IS WELL PLANNED.

I THINK IT'S GOT AN EXPERIENCED DEVELOPER.

I THINK THAT IT DOES FIT WITHIN THE LAND USE PLAN, WHICH IS ALWAYS THE CASE THAT IT'S GOT TO AND NOT ONLY DOES IT FIT IT, BUT IT EXCEEDS IT.

AND THAT'S BEEN MADE VERY CLEAR.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT DEVELOPMENT IF WE HAVE SOMETHING COME ALONG LIKE THIS BACK WHEN I WAS ON P&Z, THERE WASN'T TEXTING AT THAT TIME, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TEXTED EACH OTHER SAYING, OH, GEE, OH, MY GOSH, WHAT A WONDERFUL DEVELOPMENT.

HOW FABULOUS FOR SOUTHLAKE.

NOT ONLY IS IT BIG LOTS, IT'S MULTI MILLION DOLLAR HOMES.

PROBABLY THEY'RE GOING TO BE BUILT OUT THERE.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

I WOULD ASK THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL TO RESPECTFULLY CONSIDER APPROVING IT.

AND I WOULD JUST SAY, IF NOT THIS DEVELOPMENT, THEN WHAT DEVELOPMENT, IF NOT NOW, WHEN IT .

DOESN'T GET ANY BETTER.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SIR.

AND THANKS FOR SERVING AS A VOLUNTEER IN SOUTHLAKE.

PEOPLE THINK WE GET PAID TO DO THIS.

AND AS YOU KNOW, WE DON'T.

NEXT UP, WE HAVE SEAN AND MOLLY BROWN WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WELL ONE SAYS, I WISH TO SHARE MY VIEWS.

ONE SAYS I WILL SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

IF YOU COULD COME FORWARD.

WE'RE AT TWENTY NINE EIGHTY, BURNEY.

AND FOR SOME CONTEXT, TRY NOT TO PLOW NEW GROUND HERE.

[01:20:02]

WE'VE BEEN HERE.

THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME.

OUR HOUSE IS THE HOUSE THAT YOU SEE, RIGHT ABOVE LOT, TWO.

I GUESS IT'S THE PART OF THIS LOT NORTH.

WE ALSO OWN OUR FAMILY, OWNS THE VACANT LOT NORTH OF THE HOUSEMAN LOT.

THAT PROPERTY IS SERVED BY AN EASEMENT THAT SERVES FIVE OR FOUR EXISTING SUBSERVIENT HOMES, PLUS THE VACANT LOT.

THAT'S THE DRIVEWAY YOU SEE COMING IN TO BURNEY JUST NORTH OF THE HOUSEMAN LOT.

IT'S ABOUT 115 FEET AWAY FROM THE PLAN B ROAD THAT WAS INTRODUCED AT THE NOVEMBER 17TH I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COUNCIL WAS CONCERNED WITH THE FREDERICK'S AND MS. VAN ZANDT WITH THE PLAN A ON THE ORIGINAL ROAD, BECAUSE IT WAS PUTTING A ROAD ON THE THREE SIDES OF THE FREDERICK'S AND SHINING HEADLIGHTS RIGHT INTO MS VAN ZANDT.

SO NOW WE HAVE THIS PLAN B ALL OF A SUDDEN AND IT BUTTS RIGHT UP TO OUR VACANT LOT.

IT LOOKS LIKE A 10 FOOT SETBACK TO ME.

AND SO ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW WE'RE SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY ROAD.

THIS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTS OUR ABILITY TO DEVELOP THAT LOT.

IT IMPACTS THE VALUE JUST AS IT WAS GOING TO IMPACT THE VALUE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE FREDRICK'S LOT AND IMPACT THE VALUE OF MS. VAN ZANDTS HOUSE BECAUSE SHE'S GOING TO HAVE HEADLIGHTS STRAIGHT INTO HER HOUSE.

BY THE WAY, THE NORTH ROAD IS GOING TO SHINE HEADLIGHTS YOU CAN SEE STRAIGHT DOWN TO OUR ROAD.

WHAT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS HOW THIS WORKS.

PLAN A, PLAN B, WE HAVE THE DEVELOPER EVIDENTIALLY JUST HANGING THE SWORD OF DAMOCLES OVER THE COUNCIL AND MAKING YOU CHOOSE WHETHER OR NOT YOU DAMAGE THE FREDERICK'S MS. VAN ZANDT ON PLAN A OR YOU DAMAGED THE BROWNS ON PLAN B? I NEVER HEARD PLAN C WHERE THE DEVELOPER GIVES UP A BUILDABLE LOT ON THE HOUSEMAN PROPERTY AND RUNS A ROAD THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF LOT.

NO THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING YOU TO DAMAGE THE NORTH SIDE OR THE SOUTH SIDE WHILE THE DEVELOPER RETAINS A BUILDABLE LOT.

AND I WOULD JUST ECHO COUNCILMAN SMITH'S COMMENT THAT THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY CONCESSION OF REDUCING THE LOT NUMBER ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING ME OUT.

GREAT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY.

NEXT, I HAVE MARY VAN ZANDT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION .

MARY VAN ZANDT.

I LIVE AT TWENTY NINE, SIXTY FIVE BURNEY LANE ACROSS THE THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO BRING UP.

YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'VE BROUGHT FORWARD TO YOU OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

THE FIRST THING IS THE PROPERTY OF MS. MYLES WAS LANDLOCKED WHEN SHE TOOK POSSESSION AND HARBOR OAKS, WAS PLATTED AND ESTABLISHED ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOW HUGHES HOME PLACE AND MS. MYLES PROPERTY WAS DESIGNATED AT THE END OF HARBOR Z AND THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE DEVELOPER AND MS. MYLES THAT ALLOWED A DEVELOPER TO PROCEED IN DEVELOPING HUGHES HOME PLACE WITHOUT PROVIDING ACCESS TO MISS MYLES LAND AT THAT TIME? IN HINDSIGHT, I THINK WE COULD ALL AGREE THIS WAS A MISTAKE.

THE OWNERS OF TWENTY NINE SEVENTY BURNEY LANE SIGNED THE GOVERNING HARBOR OAKS PUTTING A ROAD THROUGH THE PROPERTY IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE MOST BASIC TENETS OF BOTH AGREEMENT.

I BELIEVE YOU HAVE ALL BEEN PROVIDED WITH A COPY OF OUR DEEDS AND RESTRICTIONS.

APPROVAL OF THIS ORDINANCE WILL INCENTIVIZE AND FACILITATE VIOLATION OF HARBOR OAKS DEEDS AND RESTRICTIONS BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF TWENTY NINE SEVENTY BURNEY LANE.

THESE AGREEMENTS MEAN OUR LAST LINE OF DEFENSE IN THE PROTECTION OF OUR PROPERTY RIGHTS.

MS. MYLES WAS HARMED WHEN THE DESIGNATED ACCESS WAS CUT OFF TO HER BY THE DEVELOPMENT OF HUGHES HOME PLACE.

COMPOUNDING THE HARM DONE TO MS. MYLES BY VIOLATING THE PROTECTION OF THE HARBOR

[01:25:01]

OAKS HOMEOWNERS IS NOT THE ANSWER.

THERE IS TIME.

PLEASE DON'T ACCEPT THAT THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION.

LET'S FIND A WAY TO PROCEED WITH SOME COMPROMISE THAT THE CITY MS. MYLES AND THE HARBOR OAKS PROPERTY OWNERS CAN FIND A MUTUALLY SATISFYING OUTCOME.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT, I HAVE AMY NEWBY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

HI, AMY.

NEWBY, 2885 BURNEY LANE.

AND LIKE MS. MARY SAID, WE'VE SAID IT ALL.

WE'VE PREACHED IT ALL.

WE'VE WRITTEN IT ALL.

SO WE'RE ALL JUST HERE AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO REITERATE IT ONE MORE TIME.

AS MARY SAID.

AND THE ONLY WAY I KNOW HOW TO DESCRIBE THIS TO ME, WHAT IT JUST HIT ME OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS IS WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PUT A SQUARE PEG IN THE ROUND HOLE.

THE ISSUE IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT TO DEVELOP THE LAND.

IT'S BEAUTIFUL LAND.

YES, IT NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED.

DON'T COME THROUGH AN EXISTING LOT WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS LAND CAN BE BETTER DEVELOPED FROM ANOTHER ACCESS POINT.

THERE'S OTHER ACCESS POINTS.

IN OUR FIRST MEETING, I THINK IT WAS YOU MS. MAYOR HILL THAT SAID YOU CAN GRANT AN EASEMENT SOMEWHERE.

THIS ISN'T THE RIGHT PLACE FOR IT.

HUGES HOME PLACE WAS THE BETTER PLACE FOR THAT.

THERE'S BETTER ACCESS POINT TO THIS LAND TO DEVELOP IT IN A BETTER WAY.

JACK'S PROPERTY, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN SO UPSET ABOUT FOR ME, MY HOME IS NOT DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS, IT'S IMPACTING MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT I HAVE ZERO TIME TO GIVE TO THIS.

I'M RAISING KIDS.

MY LIFE IS BUSY, BUT I HAVE JOINED IN THE FIGHT FOR THIS BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LOVE.

AND JACK'S HOME BEING SURROUNDED BY THREE ROADS.

THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

I WOULD NEVER GO BUY THAT HOUSE WHAT I GOT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND NOW WHENEVER YOU LOOK AT THE BROWNS LOT THAT'S AN ACRE LOT.

THAT'S A PRIME REAL ESTATE.

THAT'S FOR THEM TO SELL ONE DAY, TO SURVIVE IN THEIR GOLDEN YEARS.

AND YOU'RE DEVALUING THEIR PROPERTY.

THE BEST SOLUTION IF WE ARE GOING TO SHOVE THE SQUARE PEG IN A ROUND HOLE IS FOR THE ROAD TO GO DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE HOUSEMAN'S LOT.

DOES THAT MEAN HE HAS TO GIVE UP A HOME? IT DOES.

BUT AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING FOR A COMPROMISE, AS YOU SAID, TO THAT SWEET GENTLEMAN REGARDING CROOKED LANE.

THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH US AND WE APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH US.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING ALSO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

NEXT, I HAVE KAY JOHNSON WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

MS. JOHNSON.

HELLO, I'M KAY JOHNSON.

I LIVE AT TWENTY NINE FORTY BURNEY LANE BEHIND THE PROPOSED LOT SIX DOWN AT THE SOUTH END.

AND THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO'S COME OUT TO VISIT OUR PROPERTY.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

I HAD A WHOLE SPEECH PREPARED FOR THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND I WATCHED THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT HAPPENED.

AND I CAUGHT A GLIMPSE OF DR. SHAFI'S SORT OF EXIT SPEECH, AND HE WAS TALKING ABOUT JUST THE PRIVILEGE IT IS TO BE UP HERE, TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK OUR MIND AND EXPRESS OUR OPINIONS.

AND IT GOT ME THINKING AS WHAT'S THE BALANCE OF THAT? AND I THINK THE BALANCE IS, IS THAT THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THAT WE GET EXPLANATIONS FOR THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE.

I KNOW AS A PHYSICIAN, I SPENT A LOT OF MY DAYS EXPLAINING THE RATIONALE BEHIND MY CHOICES THAT I MAKE THAT I THINK ARE RIGHT THROUGH THE PATIENTS THAT I CARE FOR.

AND I THINK AS PUBLIC SERVANTS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S OUR EXPECTATION.

AND THAT'S ALL I CAN ASK FROM YOU GUYS, IS TO KIND OF FOCUS ON THAT AND FOCUS ON THE FACTS.

AND THE FACTS ARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO COMPROMISE IN DENSITY FROM THE BEGINNING OF ALL OF THIS.

IT'S THE SAME PLAN THAT WE WERE PRESENTED BACK IN JULY, THE SAME NUMBER OF LOTS.

AND MR. SMITH TALKED LAST TIME, AS ALL I HEAR OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS DENSITY, DENSITY, DENSITY.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT, IS THE DENSITY OF THIS AND ALL, REGARDLESS OF THE LAND USE PLAN OR ANYTHING TO THAT MATTER, IT'S HOW OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS AND HOW WE LIVE AND IT AFFECTS OUR DAILY LIFE.

AND SO ALL I CAN ASK IS THAT YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION IN MAKING YOUR CHOICE AND PROVIDE EXPLANATIONS IN THE AUTHORITATIVE AND POWERFUL ROLE THAT YOU PROVIDE IN MAKING THESE DECISIONS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE THAT YOU SERVE.

AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

GREAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT.

ACCESS THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO GO THROUGH OUR PROPERTY.

[01:30:05]

FOR US, IT WAS A DIFFICULT DECISION.

I KNOW, MAYOR, YOU MENTIONED TWO MEETINGS AGO THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN AND EXPLAIN AN OPINION OF WHY THIS HAS TAKEN PLACE.

I DID NOT WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.

2006 I WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

AT THAT POINT, I HAD 10 LOTS THAT WERE NEW LOTS.

I WENT THROUGH A STRAIGHT SF1A AND EVERY TIME THAT I WOULD TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS, THEY ALWAYS WANTED ONE LOT LESS THAN WHAT I WAS WILLING TO PROVIDE.

SO IT NEVER GOT TO A POINT THAT WE EVER MADE IT AT P&Z TO GET TO A LEVEL THAT THERE WAS A NUMBER THAT WE COULD BOTH AGREE ON.

SO WHEN WE WENT THROUGH OUR OPTION AT ONE LOT HIGHER AT EIGHT FAILED.

I BELIEVE YOU WERE ON THAT COUNCIL WHEN I WENT THROUGH AND YOU WERE ONE OF TWO PEOPLE, I BELIEVE, THAT CAME AND SAID SOME VERY NICE THINGS AFTERWARD ABOUT KEEPING MY HEAD UP.

AND YOU WERE VERY GRACIOUS WHEN YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO BE.

AND I REMEMBER YOU MENTIONING THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH WHAT THE HIGHER LOTS SEVEN LOTS IS, WHAT THE P&Z SAID, AND THAT MAYBE YOU SHOULD RECONSIDER.

I HAD MY NEIGHBORS TELL ME THAT I WAS GOING TO MOVE OUT.

I DID NOT BELIEVE THAT I WAS GOING TO BUILD IT AND ACTUALLY STAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THAT WAS 14 YEARS AGO.

SO WHEN WE MOVED IN, WE MOVED IN IN 1998.

IT'S THE FIRST PROPERTY THAT MY WIFE AND I HAVE EVER OWNED, EVER.

AND WE HAVE RAISED OUR CHILDREN THERE.

WE HAVE WONDERFUL NEIGHBORS.

ALL OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SAY ARE ALL TRUE, WONDERFUL PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY THE THREE THAT ARE NEXT TO US.

MARY IS A WONDERFUL LADY WHO RAISED TWO CHILDREN.

HER DAUGHTER WAS NICE ENOUGH TO WATCH OUR SON ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS.

SO WE HAD DATE NIGHT.

I COULD SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT THE BROWNS.

ALSO WONDERFUL PEOPLE.

THEY HAD THE SAME THING, A SON AND A DAUGHTER.

THEIR DAUGHTER ALSO WATCHED OUR SON, AT TIMES AND THE PEOPLE TO OUR SOUTH ARE BRILLIANT PEOPLE ALSO, WE WENT TO GATEWAY WITH THEM AND THEY LOOKED IN ON OUR CHILDREN AS WELL.

MISS ROSE DID.

AND SO YOU DO HAVE A DIFFICULT DECISION.

BUT THE REALITY OF THIS IS THIS ISSUE, JUST LIKE MARY SAID, WAS CAUSED BY SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN 1995 AND '96.

THEY HAD NO GRANTED ACCESS, THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE VESTED ACCESS.

BUT WHAT THEY DO HAVE AND THEY HAVE AERIAL PHOTOS TO SHOW IS THEY DID HAVE LEGAL ACCESS, LEGAL ACCESS, WHETHER BY ADVERSE POSSESSION OR WHETHER BY PRESCRIPTION.

I BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY CALLED IT EASEMENT BY NECESSITY IS EXACTLY WHAT THE MAN HAD.

AND I CAN'T SAY WHAT YOU SHOULD DO, BUT I TOLD THEM NO THREE DIFFERENT TIMES BEFORE I FINALLY AGREED AFTER THE THIRD TIME THAT I WOULD DO THIS.

I DO NOT MAKE ANYWHERE NEAR WHAT I WOULD HAVE IF I BROUGHT IT THROUGH MYSELF.

I DO NOT MAKE AS MUCH IF I BUILT A HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY, IT REALLY CAME DOWN AT THE END THAT THESE PEOPLE HAD BEEN WRONGED.

EVENTUALLY THE CITY NEEDS TO DO RIGHT BY THEM.

I MEAN, THIS IS THE JONES DESCENDANTS.

WE HAVE A ROAD NAMED AFTER THEM.

WE HAVE A SOFTBALL FIELD NAMED AFTER THEM.

WE HAVE A PARK NAMED AFTER THEM.

WE HAVE A NATURE CENTER NAMED AFTER THEM.

AND YET WE WON'T LET THEM SELL THEIR OWN LAND.

IN THE P&Z MEETING THAT SCOTT DYCHE WAS THE FIRST TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY REALLY SPEAK WELL ON THIS MATTER.

HE STOOD UP AND HE SAID AFTER A VERY PASSIONATE SPEECH BY DR. ELLISON, AND I'M NOT DOING ANYWHERE NEAR AS GOOD AS WHAT HE IS.

HE SPOKE BRILLIANTLY ABOUT HOW HIS FAMILY SERVED OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

ONE OF HIS FAMILY MEMBERS DIED.

HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT HOW HE WAS ALSO A PERSON THAT SERVED IN THE MILITARY.

AND HE HAS NEVER BROUGHT THIS UP TO BE A CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE OR ANY OF THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE IT SO EASY TO BE BROUGHT UP.

HE HAS KEPT IT TO WHAT IT IS.

THIS IS A PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE, THIS FAMILY THE JONES DESCENDANTS SHOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOT JUST TO HAVE ROADS, BUT TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY AT FAIR MARKET VALUE.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY IT, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WHILE WE'VE BEEN THERE, MY SON JUST GRADUATED BORN AT GRAPEVINE HOSPITAL, NEVER

[01:35:02]

LIVED ANYPLACE OTHER THAN AT THIS HOUSE WITH THREE WONDERFUL NEIGHBORS NEXT TO US THAT HELPED IN ALL THE WAYS THAT THEY DID.

MS. MARY HAS HORSES.

MY DAUGHTER LOVES HORSES.

I COULD NOT HAVE ASKED FOR A BETTER SITUATION, BUT EVENTUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THIS CANNOT BE JUST BASED ON EMOTION.

THESE PEOPLE ARE TEXANS AND MR. DYCHE STOOD UP AND SAID, I'M GOING TO GO AGAINST THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR THIS FAMILY.

THEY ARE TEXAS PROPERTY RIGHTS OWNERS THAT HAVE A RIGHT TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE DOES.

THEY NOW HAVE A WAY TO GET THROUGH BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SELL MY PROPERTY.

YOU CAN MAKE IT.

YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE ONE OF THE TWO GROUPS OF NEIGHBORS UNHAPPY.

THAT'S YOUR DECISION BETWEEN YOU AND THE DEVELOPER.

BUT I CAN SAY THIS.

I WOULD NOT HAVE SOLD IF I DID NOT HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR THE DEVELOPER BEING A PERSON THAT'S BUILT HOMES IN THIS AREA FOR 20 YEARS.

STARWOOD CUSTOM HOMES IS OUR NAME.

WE HAVE SEEN PLENTY OF BOTH SIDES OF THIS.

AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT JODIE BOYD WAS MY THIRD MEETING.

WE MET WITH HIM.

I KNEW HIM FROM ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT HE'S DONE IN SOUTHLAKE AT COLLEYVILLE IN FACT WHEN I WENT THROUGH TWO THIRDS OF MY PICTURES THAT I SHOWED ABOUT WHAT I WANTED TO DO WITH THE DEVELOPMENT WERE ACTUALLY PICTURES I HAD TAKEN OF HIS SUBDIVISIONS.

I DIDN'T KNOW THAT UNTIL I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT MY NOTES.

BUT THIS GUY WILL DO A GREAT JOB.

THE CITY WILL BE PROUD OF WHAT THEY'VE DONE.

YES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO LOSE OUT ON WHAT MANY ARE USING AS FREE ACCESS TO A RECREATION AREA.

BUT THEY GOT AN EXTRA 14 YEARS AFTER I LOST.

IT'S TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING BY THE JONES DESCENDANTS AND LET THEM HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND DEVELOP THIS SUBDIVISION EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS.

IT'S A SCARY DEAL.

I DIDN'T ACCEPT IT AT THAT NUMBER IT'S TOO LOW UNLESS YOU'RE A GREAT DEVELOPER LIKE JODIE .

AND I THINK HE'LL DO A GREAT JOB FOR THE CITY.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.

YEAH, THANK YOU.

AND THANKS FOR AT LEAST I WAS INTERESTED IN THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION, SO I APPRECIATE YOU GETTING INVOLVED.

I KNOW YOU DIDN'T WANT TO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I HAVE A NEXT CARD.

ROSE FREDRICKS WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

MRS. FREDRICK'S.

AND IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M ROSE FREDERICKS.

I LIVE AT TWO NINE SIX ZERO BURNEY LANE.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE WITH YOU.

WE BOUGHT OUR HOME IN 2002 AND I HAVE ALWAYS CALLED THAT DRIVE NORTH ON CARROLL THE ROAD TO TRANQUILITY BECAUSE JUST DRIVING TOWARDS HOME, MY BREATHING WOULD SLOW, MY SHOULDERS WOULD DROP AND I KNEW I WAS HEADED TO THAT PEACEFUL PLACE CALLED HOME.

YOUR DECISION TONIGHT HAS THE ABILITY TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CURRENT STATUS OF OUR HOMESTEAD AND FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE IT FOREVER BY NOT ONLY HOW IT MAY LOOK WITH A ROAD SURROUNDING IT, POTENTIAL DECREASE OF VALUES AND INHERENT NOISE AND LIGHTS.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY TO ME, IS THE TOLL.

SORRY, THE TOLL THAT IT WOULD BE ON THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF MY FAMILY, WHICH INCLUDES THREE DISABLED PEOPLE, TWO ELDERLY AND ONE SEVERELY AUTISTIC.

SO PLEASE IMAGINE WITH ME.

CONSIDER THE SPOT.

WHAT IF THIS WAS YOUR HOME? HOW WOULD YOU VOTE THEN? SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER, AS SOMEONE HAS PREVIOUSLY OPTION OFFERED OPTION C.

WHAT OTHER CHOICE DO WE HAVE TO FIND A COMPROMISE THAT WILL WORK FOR EVERYONE? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM.

NEXT I HAVE JACK FREDRICKS WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

I BROUGHT PICTURES AS NORMAL.

OH GOOD AS THEY'RE LOADING THAT, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

AND IT'S BEEN AN ARDUOUS PROCESS, I'M SURE.

OK, PERFECT.

[01:40:02]

THANK YOU SO THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THIS.

THESE WERE THE PICTURES THAT I HAD SHOWN IN THE LAST MEETING.

I DIDN'T HAVE THE PLEASURE OF GETTING TO SEE ALL OF YOU ON THE PROPERTY.

SO, AGAIN, I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THIS AREA AND THE UNIQUENESS OF IT.

I THINK THE IMPORTANT POINT THAT I WANT TO RAISE IS THIS PRESSURE POINT THAT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT, WHERE EVERYTHING COMES TOGETHER AT THE CORNER, ALMOST AT THE CORNER OF MY LOT.

AND AS IT GOES INTO THE CORE AND I'VE BROUGHT ON A COUPLE OF MORE PICTURES.

THIS IS FROM OUR BACK DECK BEHIND OUR POOL SO YOU CAN HOPEFULLY THE YELLOW LINE REPRESENTS THE TOP CORNER NEXT TO MR. HOUSEMAN'S LOT AND MY LOT.

SO YOU CAN SEE HOW DEEP THIS BASIN IS.

AND I LISTENED TO THE ENGINEER AND I CERTAINLY CAN'T DISPUTE HIS CALCULATIONS, BUT I LIVE HERE AND WE MAY NOT HAVE HAD 100 YEAR FLOOD, BUT THE WATER DOES GET OVER A FOOT DEEP GOING DOWN HERE, AT LEAST ON MY PROPERTY.

NOW AS IT SPREADS OUT I COULD UNDERSTAND HOW THAT COULD BE DIFFERENT.

BUT I WANTED TO JUST, AGAIN, GIVE YOU SOME MORE VISUALS.

THE OTHER THING IS I'VE HEARD THAT NOBODY WILL REALLY NOTICE THE DEVELOPMENT BACK THERE.

SO WHAT I DID IS I DROVE OUR MIDSIZE SUV UP TO THE TOP CORNER OF THE WHITE CAR THERE.

SO YOU GET A SENSE OF WHERE IT'S GOING TO IMPACT.

AND OF COURSE, THAT'S ON MY PROPERTY AND THAT WOULD BE 20 FEET FURTHER.

BUT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT I SAW NOTHING IN THE DEVELOPER'S PLAN AROUND WHAT WE CAN DO AROUND PRESERVATION OF THAT AREA.

AND THAT PINCH POINT IS GOING TO BE DEVASTATED.

WE'RE GOING TO LOSE ALL THE TREE COVER.

AND OUR FOCUS HAS BEEN TRYING TO KEEP THIS AREA AS NATURAL AS POSSIBLE AND USE IT AS A NATURAL RIGHT OF WAY.

SO I THOUGHT THIS PICTURE WOULD GIVE YOU A FAIRLY GOOD SENSE.

AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE ROADS GOING TO GO.

I HAVE ASKED MR. BOYD, FOR DETAILS WHICH I'VE NOT RECEIVED.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN LOW OR STRAIGHT.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY KNOWS YET.

BUT AT LEAST AT THE CORNER BETWEEN MR. HOUSEMAN AND OUR PROPERTY, YOU CAN GET A SENSE OF WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO.

AND THEN ALL THAT TREE COVER AGAIN BEHIND IT IS OBVIOUSLY A BIG CONCERN.

SO I THINK EVERYTHING'S BEEN SAID.

WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO COMPROMISE AS MUCH AS WE CAN.

I CONTINUE TO SEE OBVIOUSLY TWO ISSUES, A ROAD ON ALL THREE SIDES OF OUR HOME, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE ASKED OF US.

AND EVEN IF THE ROAD IS MOVED, WE STILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WITH CONSOLIDATION, LOSS OF TREE COVER AND JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST GENERAL DEVASTATION OF THIS AREA.

SO IF THAT IS SOMETHING IT CAN BE CONSIDERED, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT, BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN SHOWN AND PRESENTED, I STILL SEE THIS AS A HUGE GAP IN THE PROBLEM.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

GREAT THANK YOU, SIR.

AND NEXT.

MR. DAN COMB WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT.

THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY.

MY NAME IS DAN COMB.

I LIVE AT 339 WEST HIGHLAND STREET HERE IN SOUTHLAKE, IN BETWEEN WHITE CHAPEL AND SHADY OAKS I KNOW EVERYBODY IN THIS TOWN, AND THIS HEARING HAS DRIVEN UP AND DOWN PAST MY HOUSE PROBABLY 5000 TIMES IF THEY'VE DONE I KEEP HEARING PEOPLE REFER TO THIS PROPERTY.

I KEEP HEARING PEOPLE REFER TO THERE'S A BETTER PLAN.

THESE PEOPLE RIGHT HERE HAVE BEEN WAITING HALF THEIR LIVES TO BE FREED OF THIS LAND.

THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PAYING TAXES FOR HALF OF THEIR LIVES AND BEING BOUND TO PAYING CITY TAXES AND COUNTY TAXES FOR THIS LAND F OR HALF OF THEIR LIVES.

HOW LONG WILL YOU BIND THEM TO THEIR LAND? I'M A REAL ESTATE BROKER, BUT NOT THE BROKER OF A RECORD FOR EBBY HALLIDAY.

I AM THE BROKER THAT BROUGHT THIS TOGETHER BECAUSE I SOLD A PROPERTY ADJACENT TO IT.

AND BELIEVE ME, MY PROPERTY OWNERS KNEW THAT THEY DID NOT BACKED CORPS OF ENGINEER

[01:45:02]

PROPERTY AND THAT SOMEDAY THEIR LAND BEHIND THEM COULD BE DEVELOPED.

AND I TRIED TO WORK SOMETHING OUT FOR THEM THAT WAS EQUITABLE.

THERE WAS NOTHING EQUITABLE.

I'M VERY SORRY THAT THINGS ARE NOT WORKING OUT PERFECT FOR EVERYBODY.

NEEDLESS TO SAY, THIS FAMILY COULD HAVE USED THEIR MONEY 30 YEARS AGO, BUT THEY DID GET LAND LOCKED OUT OF THEIR PROPERTY.

THIS IS A BEST CASE SCENARIO FOR NOW, BECAUSE IF WE KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD ONE MORE TIME, NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WILL BE FREED OF THEIR LAND BEFORE THEY GO UP, FREE THEM OF THEIR LAND BEFORE THEY DIE, ALLOW THEM TO HAVE A LEGACY FOR THEIR FAMILY, A SIMILAR LEGACY THAT THEY ISSUED TO YOU THROUGH THE LAND THAT YOU NOW USE FOR BOB JONES PARK.

THESE ARE THE HEIRS OF BOB AND ALMEADY CHISUM JONES WHO HAVE OCCUPIED THIS LAND ON AND OFF SINCE THE YEAR SINCE PRIOR TO DECEMBER OF THE YEAR 1900.

THEY'VE BEEN DENIED THEIR ACCESS TO THIS LAND BY THE NEIGHBORS, BY PEOPLE SURROUNDING THEM, BY THE CITY, BY EVERYONE IMAGINABLE.

FREE MY FRIENDS OF THIS LAND.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NEXT, I HAVE GRAHAM JOHNSON WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

GRAHAM JOHNSON, 2940 BURNEY.

I, TOO, AM A TEXAN.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT HAS TO DO WITH IT.

AFTER SEEING MINIMAL CHANGES MADE TO THE MASTER PLAN, I'VE REQUESTED FROM THE DEVELOPER A 20 FOOT BRIDLE PATH FROM MY PROPERTY TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROPERTY.

THERE IS AN EXISTING 20 FOOT JOGGING BRIDLE UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF BURNEY LANE THAT CONNECTS APPROXIMATELY 20 HOUSES TO THE CORPS PROPERTY ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF HARBOR OAKS.

THIS EASEMENT WOULD NOT ONLY ALLOW SAFE EQUESTRIAN TRAVEL TO THE CORP LAND, IT WOULD HELP WITH TREE PRESERVATION AND IN TURN CREATE A NATURAL BUFFER IN HARBOR OAKS IN THE CONSERVATION.

THE DEVELOPER SAID HE WOULD INCLUDE THIS EASEMENT IN HIS PLAN IF ME AND ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS AGREED TO REMOVE OUR OBJECTIONS IN WRITING.

THIS PROVED ONCE AGAIN THIS IS JUST A GAME OF CHESS IN THE DEVELOPER'S MIND, HE'S WILLING TO USE ANY ANGLE FROM THREATENING LAWSUITS TO TEXTING NEIGHBORS THAT HE'S DRIVING BY THEIR HOUSE DURING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS TO THREATENING ME WITH MORE LOTS ON THE MYLES PROPERTY IF THIS ZONING CHANGE GETS DENIED.

IN MY OPINION, THAT IN ITSELF IS THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS OF HARBOR OAKS AND THE DEVELOPER AND HIS ASSOCIATES.

ONCE THEY GET THEIR MONEY, WE WILL NEVER SEE THEM AGAIN.

THAT INCLUDES THE MYLES FAMILY AND THE HOUSEMAN'S WHO ARE ALLOWING A STREET TO BE PUT THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY AND THEN SELLING IT.

I'M CONTINUING TO REACH OUT TO ENVIRONMENTALIST GROUPS TO ASSESS INTEREST IN PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY.

THERE ARE ALSO THREE EXISTING NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE INTEREST IN PURCHASING PARTS OF THE MYLES PROPERTY.

I CONCLUDE WITH THIS I WOULD MUCH APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO REVISIT THE 2008 DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT 2008 DEVELOPMENT PLAN ONLY HAD FIVE LOTS PROPOSED.

IN THE FIRST READING YOU ASKED THE DEVELOPER TO GO BACK TO THE MYLES FAMILY TO RENEGOTIATE IPF EIGHT LOTS WASN'T FEASIBLE.

YOU THEN STATED THE ONE THING THAT YOU CAN CONTROL IS DENSITY.

I'M RESPECTFULLY ASKING YOU TO PROVE THAT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NEXT, WE HAVE KATHLEEN CARABINE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

HI, MY NAME IS KATHLEEN CARABINE MY HUSBAND, DAN MCDOWELL AND I, WE LIVE AT NINE SIX ONE THOUSAND OAKS COURT.

WE'VE BEEN THERE OVER 12 YEARS.

OUR GIRLS THEY'RE K THROUGH 12 DRAGONS.

AND WE LOVE BEING HERE.

UP FRONT I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TO LISTEN TO YOUR RESIDENTS.

AND I HAVE A POINT.

BUT, IT'S GOING TO TAKE ME A MINUTE TO GET THERE, SO I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.

SOUTHLAKE HAS BEEN THROUGH GROWING PAINS TO HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT IS PROFITABLE AND RESPONSIBLE GROWTH.

AND IT MAY SOUND LIKE I'M LAYING IT ON A BIT THICK, BUT IT'S TRUE THAT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS HAVE EXCHANGED HANDS ALL ALONG SOUTHLAKES CORRIDOR 114.

EVERY GROWTH INDUSTRY IS CAPITALIZING ON THE FOUNDATION THAT SOUTHLAKE HAS DESIGNED.

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESSES ARE TAKING FOOT HERE BECAUSE OF YOUR HARD WORK.

ALL ARE SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTING TO THE REVENUE STREAMS AND TAX BASE FOR THIS CITY.

THIS GROWTH CLEARLY ILLUSTRATES SOUTHLAKE'S 2035 PLAN THAT THESE PROJECTS WERE LAUNCHED BECAUSE OF THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT WAS PUT FORTH IN THE PLANNING,

[01:50:01]

THE CONTINGENCY PLANNING BY ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED.

AND YOU KNOW BETTER THAN I DO ABOUT THE ENDLESS COMPLEX LAYERS AND VARIABLES THAT AFFECT THE SUCCESS OF A PROJECT SAFETY, SEWAGE SYSTEMS, POLITICS, WATER LINES, ET CETERA, I KNOW DAMAGING EXISTING ROADS, PROPERTIES OR SABOTAGING FUTURE GROWTH, YOU HAVE DEMANDED THESE DETAILS.

AND THAT IS WHY SOUTHLAKE IS SUCH A COMMERCIAL SUCCESS, BECAUSE YOU ACCEPTED SMART PROPOSALS THAT SERVE SOUTHLAKE FOR OUR CURRENT AND LONG TERM OBJECTIVES.

NOW, SOUTHLAKE WANTS TO OPTIMIZE THIS PROPERTY.

AND WHY NOT? BUT WHY THIS PROPOSAL? AND I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT ALL THE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU TONIGHT FOR YOUR REVIEW IN REGARDS TO HOW THIS PROPOSAL CONTRADICTS THE 2035 PLAN ON MULTIPLE LEVELS AND HOW THE PROPOSAL DOESN'T HAVE THE REQUIRED PLANNING, RESEARCH OR FLEXIBILITY TO BE A SOUTHLAKE SUCCESS.

YES, ADDING EIGHT MEGA HOMES WILL ADD STRESS TO OUR CITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES IN THIS CORRIDOR.

SO, YES, WE HAVE TO BE SMART ABOUT WHAT WE GREENLIGHT IN THIS PROPOSAL.

BUT IT'S NOT JUST THESE 13 ACRES.

WE CAN'T IGNORE THAT THERE ARE ALMOST 20 ADDITIONAL ACRES SCATTERED THROUGHOUT HARBOR OAKS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE DEVELOPED.

AND THE PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE WILL GREATLY INFLUENCE HOW THAT ACREAGE WILL BE TREATED, THE ISSUES OF ONE POINT OF ACCESS, ONE WATER LINE PRESERVING THE ECOSYSTEM, ZONING CHANGES, ETC. WE'LL ALL STILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY AFTER THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THE SAME STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE THAT SOUTHLAKE HAS PUT INTO ITS COMMERCE CORRIDOR NEED TO BE APPLIED TO HARBOR OAKS RESIDENTIAL GROWTH AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ITS SACRED WILDLIFE CORRIDOR.

SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR SERVING OUR COMMUNITY IN YOUR VOLUNTEER ELECTED POSITIONS.

GREAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT, I HAVE MR. JAMES COOK.

I'M NOT SURE IT SAYS I DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK.

IT SAYS I WISH TO SHARE MY VIEWS, SIR.

MR. COOK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HASN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD.

SEEING NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COUNCIL QUESTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER, ANYTHING YOU WANT CLARIFIED OR QUESTIONS OF KEN ANYTHING YOU WANT CLARIFIED? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. BOYD.

SURE.

MR. BOYD, IF YOU'D COME FORWARD, MR. BROWN SPOKE TO THE PLAN B, THE PROXIMITY OF THE ROAD TO THAT PROPERTY AND THE EASEMENT.

IS THERE ANY WIGGLE ROOM UP THERE TO MOVE THAT ON PLAN B TO PULL THAT ROAD JUST A LITTLE FARTHER SOUTH I BELIEVE.

THIS ROAD HERE TO MOVE IT A LITTLE FURTHER SOUTH? YES, SIR.

YES, MA'AM.

I THINK WE'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WHEN WE MADE THIS PLAN B WAS WE DIDN'T PUT IT RIGHT AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO I DO WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE THAT WE COULD MOVE THAT A LITTLE FURTHER SOUTH, MAYBE 10 OR 15 FEET FURTHER TO THE SOUTH.

IF IT'S A COMPROMISE, WE COULD DO THAT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE, FROM WHAT I'M THE HOME SALES.

SO BUT IF THERE IS ROOM TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT IS A FAIRLY LARGE LOT, OK.

SO WE WOULD BE PREPARED TO DO THAT.

YES, MA'AM.

OK.

WHAT'S THE SIZE OF THAT LOT FROM NORTH TO SOUTH.

1.8 ACRES.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE DISTANCE IS MEASUREMENT WISE.

I'M NOT SURE.

BUT IT IS A LARGE LOT.

THE REASON I'M ASKING IS, IS IF HYPOTHETICALLY, IF THAT ROAD WHERE TO MOVE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHERE HARBOR OAKS IS RIGHT NOW STRAIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT, HOW MANY FEET SOUTH WOULD THAT BE MOVING IT FROM WHERE IT'S PROPOSED ON THIS? YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT WOULD LEAVE AS FAR AS MORE MEAT ON THE BONE AS YOU GO FARTHER TO THE SOUTH, I WILL SAY AT SOME POINT MOVING THAT ROAD FURTHER SOUTH MAKES THAT LOT UNTENABLE.

YEAH.

YOU KNOW, WE'D BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE AND MOVE IT YOU KNOW 10 OR 15 FEET TO THE SOUTH, BUT I'M NOT PREPARED TO GO TO THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT.

DIRECTOR BAKER DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW CAN YOU FIGURE IT OUT? YEAH, BECAUSE I WANTED TO ASK THAT ALSO BECAUSE THE LOT TO THE NORTH IS OBVIOUSLY THE OWNER OF THAT WILL WANT TO SELL THAT LOT AND DEVELOP THAT LOT THEMSELVES AT SOME POINT.

SO THAT'S ONLY AN ACRE.

RIGHT.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT A COMMUNITY WHERE AN ACRE DOESN'T WORK, BUT THAT'S HOW BIG IS THAT LOT TO THE NORTH OF LOT TEN.

IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN AN ACRE I'M CURIOUS AS TO HOW MANY FEET IT IS FROM NORTH TO SOUTH.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE LOT HERE? YEAH, I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.

AND MAYBE KEN WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING IF YOU CAN GET AN ESTIMATE AS TO, I GUESS FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD AS PROPOSED.

[01:55:02]

IF THAT CENTER LINE WENT STRAIGHT THROUGH THE WHAT'S YOUR BEST ESTIMATE OF HOW MANY FEET SOUTH THAT MOVES THAT ROAD.

THE GRAY AREA IS 25, ROUGHLY 25 FEET.

SO YOU COULD PROBABLY ESTIMATE THAT PRETTY.

75 FEET.

JUST ESTIMATE.

BUT I CAN LOOK AT THE PLANS AND GET YOU A LITTLE BETTER NUMBER.

OK, OTHER QUESTIONS, CONVERSATION.

I MEAN, IT'S OBVIOUS WHAT YOU WERE THINKING OR WHAT JUMPS OUT AT YOU JUST AS PART OF DISCUSSION, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, IT'S LOGICAL TO THINK, OK, YOU KNOW, THIS LOT GIVES US ACCESS, THAT ROAD WENT RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF IT.

THIS PROBLEMS SOLVED IN A PERFECT WORLD, RIGHT? YEAH.

I MEAN, I THINK THE ISSUE FOR EVERYONE IS TO BALANCE THE PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHTS WITH THE ACCESS ISSUE, BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY PECULIAR ACCESS ISSUE.

NOW, HAVING LOOKED AT THIS PROPERTY THREE TIMES OVER THE YEARS.

YES, THIS IS THE LOWEST DENSITY.

THIS IS THE BEST DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE BEEN BROUGHT.

AND WE'VE ALWAYS HAD THE DISCUSSION SO KEN AM I CORRECT.

I MEAN, IF ANYONE ALONG BURNEY LANE BACKING UP TO THE MYLES PROPERTY SOLD THEIR PROPERTY, WE COULD BE HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION.

IT MIGHT NOT BE THE CURRENT HOMEOWNER.

THE CURRENT HOMEOWNER MIGHT SELL THEIR HOME AND THE NEXT PERSON.

EVERY LOT THERE HAS THE RIGHT TO SELL THEIR HOME.

AND THAT WOULD GRANT ACCESS TO THAT PROPERTY.

YEAH, RIGHT.

THAT'S RIGHT.

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME FORWARD AND ASK.

YEAH, SO THIS SITUATION ISN'T GOING TO GO AWAY.

AND WITH THE PRICE OF HOMES IT'S MORE AND MORE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S GOING TO MAKE SENSE FOR PEOPLE.

AND ALSO AS PEOPLE AGE UP AND THEIR CHILDREN GRADUATE AND THEY DO WHAT PEOPLE DO, THEY LOOK TO TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY AND TO MOVE ON.

SO ANYONE COULD COME TO US.

SO WHILE THE HOMEOWNER RIGHT NOW MIGHT SAY THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN, HAVING HAD IT HAPPEN IN MY BACKYARD, AND IT DOES ABSOLUTELY HAPPEN.

ABSOLUTELY HAPPENS.

SO THEN WE HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT ACCESS TO THE SEVEN LOTS IN THE BACK.

WELL, ACTUALLY, THE EIGHT COUNTING LOT ONE AND SAY, HOW DO WE GET THE NEW HOMEOWNERS BACK TO THEIR PROPERTY WITH HAVING THE LEAST AMOUNT OF IMPACT ON THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE? MAYOR ONE OF THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE I THINK IT WAS MR. BROWN, WAS THAT MR. BROWN, WHOSE PROPERTY IS JUST DIRECTLY NORTH.

YEAH, RIGHT.

THE LOT THAT'S LESS THAN AN ACRE.

AND THEN DID MR. BROWN ALSO SAY HE OWNS THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF SPEAKERS] YES.

I'M CURIOUS MAYBE MR. BROWN CAN TELL US WHAT IS THAT STRUCTURE ON THAT PROPERTY RIGHT THERE.

IS THAT I CAN'T TELL IS IT A HOME.

YEAH.

THAT'S THEIR HOME.

THAT'S THE HOME OKAY.

YES SIR.

THAT'S YOUR HOME.

HAS THERE EVER BEEN ANY CONVERSATION OR INTEREST IN ACCESS TO THIS COMING THROUGH YOUR LOT.

ABSOLUTELY THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATIONS WITH MS. MYLES TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO, 20, 25 YEARS AGO, BETWEEN MY LATE FATHER IN LAW WHO DEVELOPED, DESIGNED AND BUILT OUR HOUSE.

AND HE WAS ACTUALLY INVOLVED IN SOME PROPOSALS BEFORE COUNCIL I THINK BACK MIC] BUT I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT ISSUES.

HE WAS INVOLVED IN EFFORTS ACTUALLY SWAP THAT FRONT LOT WITH LOT HE'S EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN COMING THROUGH AND WE'RE JUST NOT WILLING TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT HE'S PROPOSING.

SO, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT WAS.

SO LET ME ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

YEAH, I WANT TO MAKE SURE.

CAN THIS STILL BE ACCESSED AND STILL MAINTAIN LOT ONE AND LOT 10 MR. BOYD.

IF FOR ACCESS

[02:00:06]

PROPOSAL RIGHT? YES.

IT COULD COME OFF OF THAT ACCESS EASEMENT.

AND I'M NOT SURE WITH THE DETAILS OF THAT ACCESS EASEMENT ARE.

YOU KNOW, I REACHED OUT TO MR. BROWN MULTIPLE TIMES THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, ASKED IF THAT LOT WAS FOR SALE WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4TH, I ASKED IF THAT LOT WAS FOR SALE.

I CALLED UP AGAIN LATER ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4TH.

TO DATE, THE LOTS NOT FOR SALE.

SO WE CAN'T DO ON HYPOTHETICALS.

WE'LL DO ON WHAT WE'VE GOT.

FAIR ENOUGH.

WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US.

YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A PERFECT, PERFECT WORLD.

YEAH.

WELL, I YOU KNOW, SO I THINK WHAT WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT, WE JUST HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THE LEGAL ISSUES HERE.

SO I MEAN, THIS IS REALLY WHAT IT'S COME DOWN TO IS WE HAVE CERTAIN RIGHTS AS A COUNCIL TO AND WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE RIGHTS.

SOMEBODY I KNOW ASKED FOR AN EXPLANATION OF HOW WE MAKE THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE.

AND WE DO.

WE FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE NO ROLE IN THIS WE'RE HEARING A DEVELOPERS SIDE OF AN ISSUE AND WE'RE HEARING THE RESIDENTS SIDE OF AN ISSUE.

AND THEN OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING TELLS US WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO.

AND OUR LAWYER TELLS US WHAT WE LEGALLY CAN AND CAN'T DO.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, IT DOESN'T ALWAYS GO TOGETHER.

WE HAVE TO PUT ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS IN SOUTHLAKE FORWARD BECAUSE WE CAN'T SPEND OUR LIVES IN COURT.

AND AT SOME POINT WE'RE GUILTY OF TAKING PEOPLE'S PROPERTY.

WHEN WE BECAUSE I GO BACK TO THE POINT I MADE, WHICH IS THAT ANYBODY ON THAT STREET THAT BACKS UP TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY CAN SELL THEIR PROPERTY TODAY AND A YEAR AND FIVE YEARS AND TEN YEARS.

AND WE COULD HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME AND THE CITY CAN GET IN A WHOLE LOT OF TROUBLE BECAUSE YES WOULD I LIKE ONE LESS LOT.

ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

I'VE ASKED FOR IT.

I'VE ASKED FOR IT.

I'VE ASKED FOR IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE A LEGAL POSITION TO GET IT IF IT'S NOT BEING GIVEN TO ME.

SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? SURE.

SO AS DIRECTOR BAKER INDICATED EARLIER, THIS PROPOSAL THAT YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR ONE ACRE LOTS IN THIS AREA.

AND SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DENSITY AND THAT IS ALWAYS A CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT ZONING, THIS PROPOSAL IS ALREADY LESS DENSE THAN WHAT WAS CONTEMPLATED IN YOUR PLAN.

THAT BEING THE CASE, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER HOW THIS PROPERTY IS LOOKED AT WHEN YOU CONSIDER SIMILARLY SITUATED PROPERTIES ON YOUR PLAN AND IT'S LESS DENSE IN THOSE PROPERTIES.

SO IT'S DIFFICULT TO ARGUE THAT DENSITY IS A PROBLEM HERE WHEN IT'S LESS THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED WITH YOUR PLAN.

CAN I CONFIRM THAT IF THIS APPLICATION WERE TO BE DENIED, APPLICANT CAN COME BACK THROUGH WITH A SF 1A AND HAVE TEN LOTS AND WE COULD BE DEALING WITH THE SAME SITUATION WITH TEN LOTS INSTEAD OF EIGHT.

YES, HE COULD.

YOU STILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE ACCESS ISSUE.

RIGHT.

BUT YOU'D YOU'D BE DEALING WITH THE SAME ACCESS ISSUE WITH MORE LOTS.

WITH TEN LOTS INSTEAD OF EIGHT.

CORRECT.

BUT AGAIN, THE ACCESS ISN'T AN ISSUE, IT ISN'T A CITY ISSUE.

YEAH, IT'S AN HOA ISSUE.

I DID NOT READ WHEN I READ THE HOA I DID NOT READ.

KEN DID I MISS SOMETHING WHERE IT SAYS EXPRESSLY THAT PROPERTIES CAN'T BE USED FOR ACCESS.

BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAD THE SAME CASE WITH THAT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, I WAS ON COUNCIL MEMBER WHEN THAT CAME FORWARD AND ACCESS WAS A BIG DISCUSSION AND WE HAD OF RESIDENTS THAT WERE VERY UNHAPPY ABOUT IT.

ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? YEAH, YEAH.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE READ THEM, BUT I DO NOT RECALL.

I KNOW IT SAID IT COULD NOT BE SUBDIVIDED.

RIGHT.

BUT AN ACCESS THERE'S NO ACTIVE SUBDIVISION OCCURRING ON THE HARBOR OAKS LOT.

AND SO UNFORTUNATELY, IF THE LAWYER WILL TELL ME IF I'M CORRECT OR NOT.

SO UNFORTUNATELY FOR US THAT'S A BIG DEAL.

I MEAN.

ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN, THAT'S A BIG DEAL.

WE NEED IT TO SAY THAT TO GIVE US SOMETHING TO AT LEAST SAY, YOU KNOW, HEY, WAIT A MINUTE, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S UP TO THE CITIZENS.

IRREGARDLESS, WE HAVE NO STANDING.

IT'S UP TO THE HOA TO GO AFTER THE DEVELOPER.

WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER THAT'S COMPLIANT WITH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.

WELL, IT WOULDN'T MATTER.

I MEAN, TO KEN'S POINT EARLIER, IF THERE WAS A LINE IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS

[02:05:01]

THAT SAID NO ONE CAN GRANT ACCESS ON THEIR PROPERTY FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE COULD AT LEAST TELL THE DEVELOPER, HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

BUT THAT IS NOT A CITY ISSUE AND IT'S NOT A CITY AND THAT'S MY POINT.

MY POINT ISN'T WHAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS SAY.

MY POINT IS THAT WE HAVE NO STANDING.

IT'S HARD TO EXPLAIN TO CITIZENS OUR LIMITED RIGHTS AS A GOVERNING SPEAKERS].

OUR ONLY ISSUE IS, THE LAND USE AND THE ZONING AND THE DENSITY OF THESE LOTS.

IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS REGARDING WHETHER OR NOT THAT LOT TEN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT PROPERTY, PRIVATE PROPERTY DEED RESTRICTIONS, THAT'S A PRIVATE PROPERTY MATTER.

BETWEEN THE CURRENT HOMEOWNERS.

EVEN IF WE WANTED TO, WE HAD NO LEGAL STANDING.

EXACTLY.

AND THAT'S A PROBLEM.

RIGHT.

AND FOR THE FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE, BECAUSE IT'S A PUD, WE DO HAVE SOME OF THE ABILITY TO DIRECT WHAT THE ENTRANCE LOOKS LIKE, THE OPEN SPACE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

BUT KEEPING CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU WOULD CERTAINLY BE RESPECTIVE OF WHAT THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS AS WE THINK THROUGH HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.

RIGHT.

THOSE ARE THE OTHER DECISIONS THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL.

RIGHT.

BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS REQUEST, YOU DO HAVE SOME OPTIONS THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE FOR JUST STRAIGHT ZONING THAT ALLOW YOU TO CONTROL SOME OF HOW THIS LOOKS THAT MIGHT BENEFIT THE NEIGHBORS.

SO FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE AS WELL, IT'S THEIR LATITUDE FOR A COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ADVERSE IMPACT ON BECAUSE YOU'VE MADE THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS ADVERSELY IMPACTS THE LANDOWNER MIC] THEIR ABILITY TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY.

IS THERE CONSIDERATION, THOUGH, FOR ADVERSE IMPACT? I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT IT'S ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I BOUGHT A BEAUTIFUL HOME AND WE HAVE THIS GREAT VIEW AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN'T CONTROL, THAT PEOPLE DON'T VIEWS.

RIGHT.

BUT CONCRETE ROADWAYS ON THREE SIDES.

THAT KIND OF THING AS MR. BROWN RAISED IS THAT DO WE HAVE LATITUDE TO CONSIDER THAT.

YOU DO.

YEAH, IT'S ALL PART OF THE PICTURE THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT AS A WHOLE.

SO THERE'S MULTIPLE PIECES TO THIS PUZZLE AND YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL OF IT.

PROHIBITING DEVELOPMENT IN A MEANS THAT ESSENTIALLY ACTS AS A TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.

IS APPROVING A SEVEN LOT DEVELOPMENT TAKING.

THE ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE TO THAT EFFECT.

MIC] RIGHT.

YEAH.

I MEAN, FOR ME, IT KEEPS COMING BACK.

AND I'VE SAID THIS REPEATEDLY.

IT KEEPS COMING BACK TO LOT TWO.

AND WHAT DOES LIKE TWO BECOME.

I HONESTLY DON'T I'M GOING TO BE HONEST.

I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH LOT TWO SELLING AND THE HOUSE GETTING KNOCKED DOWN AND IT BECOMING AN ACCESS TO THE OTHER PROPERTY.

I BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU STOP ANY PROPERTY OWNER.

I GO BACK TO THAT ANY PROPERTY OWNER THAT SIDES OR FRONTS ON THIS PROPERTY COULD COME TO COUNCIL AND ASK FOR EXACTLY THE SAME THING WITH TEN HOMES.

MY ISSUE CONTINUES TO BE WHAT DOES LOT TEN LOOK LIKE? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT HAS A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES TO A HOUSE AND AND THAT'S GOING TO BECOME A ROAD.

AND SO, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE COUNCIL FEELS ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT'S SO FOR ME, IT WASN'T SO MUCH ABOUT LOSING ANOTHER LOT, BECAUSE I'VE LOOKED AT THIS OVER THE YEARS.

IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT.

I THINK THE LOT COUNT IS FINE.

IT'S JUST WHAT'S THE USE OF LOT 10? DOES LOT 10 BECOME AN ACCESS TO A PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DOES LOT 10 BECOME AN ACCESS TO A PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOOD AND GET REDEVELOPED? YES, I'M SPOT ON WITH YOU.

LOTS, ONE THROUGH SEVEN.

THEY MIC] WHATEVER THEY DO, THAT'S THEIR PROPERTY.

GET THE MYLES ARE NOT LAND LOCKED ANYMORE.

AND SO I APPRECIATE ALL THE EMOTIONAL STUFF ABOUT THE MYLES FAMILY.

GOD BLESS.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE HERE.

WE'RE NOT LAND LOCKING ANYBODY.

WE'RE GRANTING ACCESS.

THE QUESTION IS, WHAT DOES THAT ACCESS LOOK LIKE? WELL, LOOK, CAN I ADDRESS THAT THERE MAYOR.

CURTIS YOUNG JUST CAME UP TO ME.

THE BROWNS LOT THERE THAT LOT THAT'S NORTH OF THE HOUSEMAN'S LOT IS ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FEET WIDE ALONG BURNEY LANE.

HOUSEMAN'S LOT IS TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY FEET WIDE ACROSS THERE.

[02:10:03]

SO THAT'S A TOTAL OF FOUR FEET BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS AS YOU GO FROM NORTH TO SOUTH ON THERE.

WHAT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PROPOSE IS IF YOU JUST DIVIDED THAT BY TWO THAT'S TWO HUNDRED FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG BURNEY LANE, WE'D BE WILLING TO MOVE THAT ROAD FORTY FEET SOUTH SO THAT IT COMES ACROSS RIGHT WHERE THAT WRITING IS IT DIDN'T QUITE GET TO THE HARBOR OAKS LINE, BUT IT GETS TO THE LOT 10 NUMBER THERE.

I CAN'T QUITE READ IT FROM HERE.

SORRY.

BUT WE'D BE PREPARED TO MOVE THAT ROAD ON PLAN B FORTY FEET FURTHER TO THE SOUTH SO THAT IMPACTS THE LOT THE BROWNS LOT TO THE NORTH MUCH LESS GIVES THEM A HUGE BUFFER THERE.

WHILE THAT WOULD NEVER BE THEIR PROPERTY IN EFFECT, IT WOULD BE USABLE BY THEM IN THAT THERE'S NOT A ROAD RIGHT UP AGAINST THEIR PROPERTY LINE.

SO IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPROMISE, WE'D BE WILLING TO GO MOVE THAT ROAD FORTY FEET FURTHER TO THE SOUTH.

WOULD THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE MOVE SOUTH ALSO.

OR WOULD YOU JUST HAVE A UNIQUE LOOK WHERE THE ROAD WOULD GO? WELL, THE HOUSE IS GOING TO BE DESTROYED AND WE'LL BUILD A NEW HOUSE THERE.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE'LL JUST MAKE THAT HOUSE DO YOU THINK YOU WOULD MOVE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE NEW HOUSE? YES, FOR SURE.

OH, YEAH.

YEAH.

WE KEEP WITHIN THE SETBACK THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED HERE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A SETBACK LINES THERE.

BUT THE HOUSE SQUARE WHERE IT IS NOW, WILL PROBABLY MOVE MY GUESS IS PROBABLY MOVE TO THE SOUTH, TO THE NORTH A LITTLE BIT THERE.

AND THAT'S JUST SHOWING A SQUARE HOUSE NOW.

YOU KNOW UNIQUE LOTS REQUIRE UNIQUE SOLUTIONS SO WE CAN MAKE THAT LOT AN L SHAPED LOT OR A HOUSE OR OTHERWISE.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, MOVING THAT DOWN WOULD ACTUALLY GIVE US AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF ROAD SO, MR. BOYD, IF THAT'S WHAT YOUR COMPROMISE IS, WOULD YOU CONSIDER MAKING EVERYTHING NORTH OF THAT LOT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPEN SPACE.

CAN'T SUBDIVIDE A LOT IN HARBOR OAKS.

EFFECTIVELY.

YES, IT COULD BE IT WOULD BE OPEN SPACE, BUT FROM A TECHNICAL STANDPOINT, WE COULDN'T REMOVE IT FROM THAT LOT AND MAKE IT BUT EFFECTIVELY IT WOULD BE OPEN SPACE IN THAT IT'D BE USABLE, YOU WOULDN'T FENCE IT.

WE WOULDN'T ALLOW ANY STRUCTURES TO BE BUILT ON IT, YOU KNOW, SO WHILE IT'S TECHNICALLY NOT OPEN SPACE, EFFECTIVELY IT WOULD BE.

BUT IT WOULD BE LOT 10 BLOCK TWO'S OWNERSHIP.

THEY WOULD STILL OWN.

YES.

WELL, THEY STILL TECHNICALLY ON THE YEAH.

WHAT IS THAT? I KNOW YOU JUST CAME UP WITH THIS ON THE FLY, BUT WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE I GUESS THE SOUTHERN PIECE OF THAT LOT TO THE SIDE OF THAT PIECE? WELL, CERTAINLY IF YOU MOVE IT TO THE SIDE, IT'S GOING TO SQUEEZE THE BUILDABLE AREA OF THAT LOT FOR SURE.

RIGHT.

DID YOU FIGURE OUT AN AMOUNT LIKE HOW BIG THAT EFFECTIVELY SPEAKERS] I THINK IT'S STILL I MEAN, THE FACT THAT IT'S A, YOU KNOW, ONE POINT EIGHT ACRE LOT, IT'S STILL A VERY LARGE LOT.

SO SURE.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING A ONE ACRE LOT.

IT'D STILL BE A BIGGER LOT THAN WHAT THE BROWNS LOT IS TO THE NORTH.

SO YOU MIGHT HAVE AN ACRE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OR.

AT LEAST.

YEAH, I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT A 40 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY THAT WE CONTINUED TO HAVE A LOT FACE TO THE NORTH, WHICH WE COULD STILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT WITH THE ROAD MOVING TO THE SOUTH 40 FEET.

SO EFFECTIVELY WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN BURNEY LANE.

THIS HOUSE IS GOING TO FACE VERY MUCH AS THE EXISTING HOUSE KEN, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD? YES.

MAYOR TO ADDRESS COUNCIL MEMBER PATTON'S QUESTION.

THE CORRECT YOU CAN'T SUBDIVIDE AND CREATE A TRUE OPEN SPACE LOT, BUT YOU COULD CREATE AN EASEMENT OR A WILDLIFE EASEMENT SIMILAR LIKE THE EASEMENTS ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, SUCH THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE FUTURE STRUCTURES ON THAT SIDE YARD.

YOU CAN KEEP IT UNDER BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE THE ROAD, YOU DON'T WANT ANYTHING BUILT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, BARN OR, YOU KNOW, A CHICKEN COOP OR WHATEVER.

WELL, I DON'T THINK CHICKEN COOPS CAN HELP, BUT YEAH, I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT YOU KEEP THAT NATURAL AND WE DON'T ALLOW ANY STRUCTURES ON THAT PROPERTY.

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO COMMIT TO AN EASEMENT ON THAT? OH, YES, WE WOULD COMMIT TO AN EASEMENT THERE AND AS I SAID BEFORE, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S DEDICATED, THAT NO STRUCTURE TO BE CONSTRUCTED THERE, NO ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN THE, YOU KNOW, ENJOYMENT OF OPEN SPACE THERE.

WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT I GET THE DEAL WITH THE CHOKE DOWN.

IT'S ON THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTIES.

BUT THERE'S JUST I MEAN, AGAIN, IT'S NOT TAKING THAT AWAY AND SAYING THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THAT PROPERTY IS NOTHING THAT'S GOING TO STAND UP IN COURT.

[02:15:01]

AND THAT PUTS ALL THE TAXPAYERS AT HUGE RISK.

SO I CAN'T THAT'S THAT'S NOTHING WE CAN.

YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'VE MOVED IT OVER AS MUCH AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN.

AND THIS IS JUST IT'S A BAD SITUATION FOR EVERYONE.

BUT IT'S.

DISCUSSION NOW.

COUNCIL ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR.

NO, NO, NO.

GO AHEAD.

YOU KNOW, AS I WAS SITTING HERE, TWO THINGS KEPT COMING TO MIND.

A.

I WANT TO COMMEND THE AUDIENCE.

THIS ENTIRE PROCESS FROM READING ALL THE EMAILS, THIS IS, WHILE, TOUGH.

I REALLY LOVE THAT IT WAS MORE AMICABLE, AMIABLE THAN ACRIMONIOUS.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT OFTEN HOW THESE THINGS GO.

I ALSO REALIZE THE ERROR OF MY WAYS.

YOU KNOW, AS I SAID HERE, MY BIGGEST STICKING POINT HAS BEEN SELFISHLY TO DO AWAY WITH THAT BIG LOT.

LIKE WE COULD JUST GO RIGHT THROUGH THERE AND YEAH, YEAH, YOU COULD HAVE THE OPEN SPACE.

I THINK CHAD AND COUNCILMAN HUFFMAN BROUGHT UP.

I ALMOST FEEL LIKE THAT CONCESSION GETS ME TO A BETTER SPOT.

RIGHT, IF WE'RE GOING TO BRING IT DOWN.

IT'S NOT CUTTING A LOT IN HALF, IT'S NOT MAKING IT UNUSABLE, BUT IT JUST FEELS A LOT BETTER BECAUSE ULTIMATELY NOT THAT IT HAS TO BE PAINFUL.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A GIVE AND TAKE, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY SO FAR WE CAN GO IN.

IT'S ONLY SO FAR YOU'RE GOING TO FEEL LIKE YOU NEED TO GO OR HAVE TO GO.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M, YOU KNOW, BEING AN COUNCIL MEMBER AND HAVING SERVED ON ON ZBA FOR FOUR YEARS, PREVIOUS TO THAT, I ALWAYS SAY I WANT TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE DECISIONS WE MAKE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO LOOK OUR FELLOW RESIDENTS IN THE FACE WHEN WE SEE THEM IN CENTRAL MARKET OR SHAKE SHACK.

I'M JUST TALKING OUT LOUD.

BUT I KIND OF LIKE THAT.

OK, QUESTION NOT ABOUT THE ROAD, BUT THAT CLUSTER BOX IS THAT A POSTAL SERVICE DIRECTED LOCATION.

THE LOCATION IS NOT DIRECTED BY THE POSTAL SERVICE, BUT CERTAINLY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A CLUSTER BOX IS.

UNDERSTOOD THAT.

BUT I MEAN, I'LL PUT THAT ANYWHERE YOU WANT TO.

WELL, I'M THINKING NOW THAT WE HAVE THE OPEN SPACE.

IT KIND OF BACK.

MOVE IT UP THERE A LITTLE BIT.

SOMEWHERE UP THERE THAT I DON'T KNOW WHERE, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT MIGHT BE A BETTER LOCATION.

I'M FINE WITH THAT.

BUT WOULDN'T YOU HAVE TO HAVE PARKING AROUND IT? NO.

YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S NOT PARKING AROUND RIGHT NOW, THIS WOULD JUST BE A CURB STOP WHERE THEY GET OUT.

THE KIND OF COMPROMISE WE'RE NOT GOING TO EVERY HOUSE IS THEY JUST PULL OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND THEY GET OUT.

AND GO.

YEAH, YEAH.

WE'VE APPROVED A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE THAT.

YEAH.

I JUST COULDN'T RECALL IF IT WAS POSTAL SERVICE DIRECTED.

NO IT'S NOT JUST THE THAT'S WHY WE GET PAID THE BIG BUCKS.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S THE ONE THING YOU DON'T I GET IT.

YOU BUY A HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU DON'T IT WOULD NEVER DAWN ON YOU THAT A HOUSE.

YEAH, THE HOUSES ARE GETTING KNOCKED DOWN.

I KNOW PEOPLE UP THERE WHO KNOCKED DOWN THEIR PARENTS HOMES AND BUILT BIG HOUSES AND THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN KNOCKING DOWN A HOUSE AND CHANGING THE LOT FROM A HOMESTEAD TO ACCESS TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO, I MEAN, THAT'S EMOTIONAL.

THAT'S NOT YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY I KEEP ASKING YOU IF LOT TEN CAN'T I MEAN, CAN'T GO AWAY OR YOU CAN'T ROLL SOME OF THE LAND INTO ONE AND BUILD A REALLY NICE HOUSE ON ONE AND MAKE UP THE MONEY.

AND SOMEONE SAID IT RIGHT.

THIS IS A SQUARE PEG ROUND HOLE.

I MEAN THIS IS JUST A WEIRD DEAL, BUT I DON'T LIKE WEIRD DEALS, BUT, YOU KNOW, WITH HOW BUILT UP WE ARE AS A CITY, A LOT OF THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WE'VE DEALT WITH OVER THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS IS INFILL STUFF.

AND IT'S WEIRD.

A SQUARE PEG, ROUND HOLE STUFF.

IT IS.

AND IT'S TOUGH.

IT'S NOT FUN.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYBODY ON COUNCIL KNOWS AND I'VE SHARED WITH SOME PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.

I'VE BEEN IN THIS EXACT SITUATION, YOU KNOW, MY HOUSE ON HIGHLAND A ACRE AND A HALF AND BACK TO TWENTY FIVE BEAUTIFUL ACRES WITH SPRING FED PONDS AND, YOU KNOW, BEAVER, WHICH I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW, LIVED IN TEXAS.

BUT THEY DO IT TURNS OUT.

A COYOTE AND DEER AND ALL THAT STUFF AND GOT BOUGHT AND DEVELOPED AND FLIP TO TOLL BROTHERS.

AND YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT FUN.

I KNOW IT'S NOT FUN.

SO I'VE BEEN THROUGH IT PERSONALLY.

AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY ABSENT THE LEGAL ISSUES, THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TOLD US MULTIPLE TIMES WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY ABSENT THOSE ISSUES, I'D BE PERFECTLY COMFORTABLE ASKING THE

[02:20:04]

DEVELOPER TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

BUT I JUST DON'T SEE THAT AS AN OPTION AT THIS POINT.

AND AT SOME LEVEL, WE HAVE TO BE FIDUCIARIES.

I MEAN, THAT'S OUR JOB FIDUCIARIES OF THE TAXPAYERS MONEY.

AND THEN WE HEAR FROM THE CITY ATTORNEYS THAT WE'VE GOT A TANKING CASE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO WIN.

IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE ANY SENSE TO GAMBLE WITH THE TAXPAYERS MONEY AS MUCH AS YOU KNOW, AS MUCH AS THIS IS A SQUARE PEG ROUND HOLE SO JUST A TOUGH DEAL.

YEAH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? I MOSTLY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL JUST TO FORMULATE THE MOTION, BUT WE'LL DO THAT LAST.

WELL, I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER QUESTIONS SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE THINGS OTHER THAN THE ROAD NOW.

THE FENCE DIAGRAM.

CAN WE SPEAK TO THE FENCING A LITTLE BIT? KEN DO YOU HAVE THE DIAGRAM FOR THAT? TOP LEFT CORNER.

WE DON'T HAVE A FULL SCREEN IMAGE OF THAT.

EVEN WITH MY GLASSES, I STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT.

I TRY TO BLOW IT UP FOR YOU.

THE ADJOINING PROPERTY LINES ARE WROUGHT IRON WITH CONCRETE PILLARS AND AT LEAST SOME OF IT THAT'S FACING BURNEY.

AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY WROUGHT IRON WITH CONCRETE PILLARS FACING BURNEY ANYWHERE IN HARBOR OAKS THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER DOING THAT ON A GO FORWARD BASIS.

IF THIS GOES IN THE DIRECTION SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE, I DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN PUTTING WROUGHT IRON ON THIS ON BURNEY.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS A POSITION ON THAT.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT WE'VE GOTTEN THAT WE'VE SHOWN HERE ALONG, BURNEY? YES, SIR.

YES, SIR.

THERE IS AN EXISTING IRON FENCE THERE NOW.

THAT'S ABOUT FOUR FOOT.

ESSENTIALLY, WHAT OUR PROPOSAL WAS JUST CONTEMPLATING IS JUST PUTTING A NEW FENCE THERE JUST TO REPLACE THE OLD FENCES THERE.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT MARRIED TO PUT THE FENCE THERE.

IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK TO TAKE THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE ALONG, BURNEY, OFF OF OUR PLAN.

THAT SETS BACK QUITE A BIT, THOUGH, DOESN'T IT? WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY RIGHT THERE ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.

A YOU GO FURTHER SOUTH ON BURNEY THERE'S ACTUALLY A CONCRETE PILLAR WITH A FENCE.

A WHITE ONE, MAYBE THE WHITE ONE.

THERE'S WELL, THERE'S A WHITE ONE AND THERE'S ALSO A BLACK WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT'S GOT BRICK COLUMNS ON IT, THERE'S SEVERAL THAT DO AND SEVERAL THAT DON'T AS YOU GO DOWN BURNEY LANE.

SO, OK, I'M JUST SENSITIVE TO WANT TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD THE BEST THAT WE CAN.

YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO MR. PATTON.

WHEN WE PROPOSED, THAT WAS JUST IF YOU'LL SEE, THAT'S ONLY A FOUR FOOT.

I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE ONE THAT REPRESENTS THIS FENCE HERE IF IT GOES ACROSS THE FRONT.

I'M SORRY.

I DON'T KNOW THAT.

BUT WE WERE GOING TO DO A FOUR FOOT FENCE ACROSS THERE, ALONG BURNEY LANE.

BUT AS I SAID, WE'D BE HAPPY TO REMOVE THAT IF THAT'S AN ISSUE.

OK, I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS A POSITION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

I JUST WANT TO BRING IT UP FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.

I MEAN, I'VE SEEN IT.

I THINK A NEW FENCE WOULD LOOK BETTER THAN THE ONE THAT'S THERE.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

DOES THE ONE THAT'S THERE NOW HAVE THE COLUMNS, THE NO MA'AM.

NO IT DOESN'T.

IT'S JUST A METAL FENCE.

SO MAYBE JUST REPLACE IT WITH WHAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW.

I'D BE FINE WITH THAT.

NO COLUMNS.

THAT'S FINE.

YEAH.

OK.

AND THEN SHOULD THIS THING GET APPROVED, WE NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.

YEAH.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT AND WHERE THEY SHOULD BE STAGED.

THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

YEAH.

I MEAN I'LL JUST ADDRESS THAT DIRECTLY.

I MEAN, I'VE DONE OVER A THOUSAND CUSTOM HOME LOTS IN NORTHEAST TARRANT COUNTY IN MY CAREER.

I'VE DEALT WITH THIS ISSUE AT LENGTH IN THE PAST.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO WITH THE CONTRACTORS AND YOU'VE GOT TO CRACK THE WHIP EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE BECAUSE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, TEND TO DO THE LAZIEST THING.

BUT WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL AS PART OF THE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR OUR SUBCONTRACTORS THAT ARE THERE, WE'LL MAKE THEM STAGE THEIR VEHICLES OFF OF BURNEY LANE ONTO THE BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSEMAN'S LOT.

I'M NOT GOING TO COMMIT TO WHEN THAT HOUSE IS GOING TO BE TORN DOWN, BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY MAKE OUR SUBCONTRACTORS STAY OFF OF BURNEY LANE.

SO ANY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC WILL JUST BE TRUCKS COMING AND PARKING THERE ON THE

[02:25:02]

HOUSEMAN LOT AS THEY BUILD AND DO THEIR WORK AROUND THE SUBDIVISION.

OK, PERFECT.

WHAT ABOUT LIKE, SAY, ONE HUNDRED FEET FROM BURNEY LANE? JUST SO WE HAVE SOMETHING MEASURABLE RATHER THAN JUST LAYING ON THE HOUSEMAN'S PROPERTY WOULD ONE HUNDRED FEET FROM BURNEY LANE WORK.

SURE.

YOU BET.

CAN WE GET SOME CLARITY AROUND THE CONVERSATION AROUND THE BRIDLE PATH MIC] KEN WELL I GUESS YOU CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

WHERE IS THE ACCESS EASEMENT RIGHT NOW? SO PEOPLE CAN CONTINUE TO USE PLANS.

YEAH, WE'VE PROVIDED BOTH PLANS, WILDLIFE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT ACROSS HERE FOR TWO REASONS.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE GOT WE GATHERED FROM THE NEIGHBORS AS WE WENT THROUGH OUR PROCESS.

THEY WANTED TO BE SURE THAT WE DIDN'T BLOCK ANY WILDLIF TRANSITING FROM THROUGH THIS PROPERTY INTO THE HARBOR OAKS.

IS THAT ME DOING THAT.

KEN SORRY I'LL LET YOU OUT TO FIX IT, I WENT TOO FAR.

I'M NOT SURE OK, SO HERE IT IS.

THIS IS OUR PLAN A.

IT SHOWS A PEDESTRIAN AND WILDLIFE ACCESS EASEMENT THAT GOES ACROSS HERE.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS FOR MR. FREDERICKS AND HIS FAMILY.

THEY DIDN'T WANT US TO BLOCKADE, SO TO SPEAK, ANY WILDLIFE, DEER OR OTHERWISE COMING FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEER PROPERTY AND OUR PROPERTY TO THE HARBOR OAKS SUBDIVISION.

SO THIS IS PLAN B, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY THE ACCESS WOULD BE ANYONE'S WELCOME TO COME RIDE THEIR HORSE OR WALK THEIR DOG OR GO OUT FOR AN EVENING STROLL AND JUST COME DOWN THE STREET AND ACCESS THE CORP EASEMENT HERE.

WE'VE PROVIDED A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK ACROSS THIS EASEMENT HERE TO THE LIMITS OF OUR PROPERTY.

THIS RED LINE HERE DEPICTS A TRAIL BY OTHERS.

WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY, STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO BUILD ANYTHING IN THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROPERTY.

SO IF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE WANTED TO PROVIDE TRAIL ALONG THE CORPS PROPERTY, I BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.

TO TIE INTO THE EXISTING HORSE TRAILS THAT GO AROUND THE LAKE WE WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT.

BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'VE GIVEN THE ACCESS EASEMENT ONE FOR WILDLIFE GOING TO THE EAST AND WEST, I GUESS, BACK AND FORTH, AS WELL AS OUR NEIGHBORS GOING BACK AND FORTH.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT EASEMENT? IS THERE AN EASEMENT TO THE SOUTH AT ALL? NO, THERE'S NOT.

THERE'S A UTILITY EASEMENT HERE THAT EXISTS WITH THE POWER THROUGH THERE.

I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING IS MR. JOHNSON'S DESIRE FOR A HORSE EASEMENT HORSE BRIDLE EASEMENT.

I SPOKE TO HIM ABOUT IT.

AND, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY THERE'S NO REASON WHY HIS NEIGHBORS COULDN'T GIVE HIM THAT SAME EASEMENT.

YOU KNOW, AS PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS AS PART OF THIS PROCESS.

HE'S ASKING FOR SPECIAL DISPENSATION FOR A 20 FOOT HORSE AND BRIDLE TRAIL TO GO THROUGH THERE.

AND I SAID, SURE, SUPPORT ME.

AND THIS IS A GIVE AND TAKE.

RIGHT.

AND, YOU KNOW, I HEAR SEVERAL COMMENTS THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING DIFFERENT.

WE HAVEN'T CHANGED.

I FRANKLY DISAGREE WITH THAT WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

AND THERE'S NO REASON WHY HE COULD COME OUT ON TO BURNEY LANE AND TRANSIT THROUGH, AS ALL THE NEIGHBORS WOULD DO.

THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY ADDITIONAL EASEMENT ON HIS PROPERTY FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST TO TRANSIT THAT.

SO I FELT LIKE WE'RE PROVIDING ACCESS EAST AND WEST AS PART OF OUR DEVELOPMENT PLANNING, AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE.

LET ME ASK YOU THIS, THOUGH.

I MEAN, IF YOU WERE GETTING AN AFFIRMATIVE MOTION BEING MADE THAT INCLUDED THAT EASEMENT, I MEAN, RATHER THAN GETTING INTO IT, WRESTLING MATCH SURE.

YOU KNOW.

YOU KNOW.

YEAH, NO, I GET IT AT SOME POINT YOU CAN'T MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY.

I WILL SAY THIS.

WHEN I WENT TO OUR CUSTOMERS THE CUSTOM BUILDERS THAT WE'RE MARKETING THIS PROJECT TO THAT WAS A REAL ISSUE FOR THEM.

SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO SAY, OK, ON THE BACK OF YOUR LOT, THAT YOU ARE GOING TO PAY 2 MILLION DOLLARS FOR THIS HOME WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW SOME OF YOUR NEIGHBORS JUST TO COME TO TRANSIT THROUGH THERE WITH A HORSE OR OTHERWISE AND ACCESS THE CORP PROPERTY WITH SOME SPECIAL DISPENSATION WHEN THEY COULD HAVE EASILY ACCESSED THE CORP AS EVERYONE ELSE DOES TO THE NORTH SO.

WOULD THERE NOT BE ANY GREEN THOUGH, IT WOULDN'T BE BEHIND A TREE LINE.

WELL, IT'S COVERED WITH TREES, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

YEAH, IT'S PRETTY COVERED WITH TREES IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT WORK.

SO, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S JUST UNTENABLE FOR OUR BUILDER OUR FUTURE CUSTOMERS.

AND, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE ANYTHING.

AM I GOING TO STAND HERE AND SAY, YOU KNOW, AND I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THE LOTS TOO.

IF I COULD GO TO 7 LOTS AND GET THIS THING DONE THEN I WOULD.

I MEAN, I'M NOT HERE TO ARGUE, JUST FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE.

I GOT TO MAKE IT WORK FOR MY TEAM OR TO MAKE IT WITH MY FAMILY AS WELL, YOU KNOW, TO GIVE THAT EASEMENT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU APPROVAL IF YOU GIVE US THAT, GIVE HIM THAT EASEMENT.

[02:30:02]

I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT EASEMENT.

CLARIFY FOR ME WHERE DOES IT GO FROM BURNEY LANE ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

WHAT MR. JOHNSON.

OR FROM SOMEONE'S PROPERTY.

HE LIVES HERE.

I'M SORRY.

HE LIVES HERE.

HAS HORSES.

YEAH YEAH YEAH.

WHAT HE WANTED WAS JUST FOR US EXACTLY RIGHT.

OK.

YEAH.

OK, WELL YEAH.

I MEAN.

BUT EVERYONE HAS ACCESS, THEY JUST HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTRANCE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CUT THROUGH.

YES MA'AM.

OK, SO NO ONE'S BEING BLOCKED OUT OF ACCESSING ALL.

OK.

OK, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO.

THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU.

OK.

ANY OTHER CONVERSATION COUNCIL OR ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION AND SEE WHERE IT FALLS? WELL, I WOULD ASK THE MAYOR PRO TEM IF HE'S GOT ALL THAT.

I HOPE SO.

MAYBE WE CAN GO AROUND THE HORN AND I CAN TRY TO MAKE SURE I CAPTURED ALL THE COMMENTS.

IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE ALL.

WHAT ABOUT THE CURBS AND GUTTER OR BAR DITCH.

WHERE DO WE END UP ON THAT? I THINK IN MY OPINION, I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF BAR DITCHES BECAUSE THAT'S THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY.

BUT I THINK FOR TREE PRESERVATION PERSPECTIVE IT MAYBE MAKES MORE SENSE TO CONSIDER THE CURB YEAH.

I MEAN, THAT'S A MEANINGFUL.

RIGHT.

OK, SO ARE WE IN FAVOR OR PREFER OPTION B TO OPTION A.

SOUNDS LIKE WE WERE.

OPTION B BUT MOVE SOUTH BY WHAT DID HE SAY.

40 FEET.

IT'S EITHER OPTION A MOVING IT UP ONE HUNDRED FEET OR OPTION B MOVING IT DOWN 40 FEET.

PRETTY CLOSE BURNEY LANE, LOT TEN BLOCK TWO WILL BE REPLACED WITH A WROUGHT IRON FENCE, BUT NO MASONRY COLUMNS.

TO THE POINT MADE ABOUT CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.

THERE'LL BE NO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, PARKING OR STORAGE WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET OF BURNEY LANE DURING CONSTRUCTION.

TO RANDY'S POINT ABOUT FINAL APPROVAL FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED THAT NO WORK WILL BE PERMITTED OR UNDERTAKEN ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL SUCH APPROVAL IS OBTAINED AND THEN PROVIDED TO OUR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

KEN IS THERE A MORE FORMAL WORD WE NEED TO USE RATHER THAN WORK BEING DONE ON THE PROPERTY OR.

I THINK THAT'S THE WORD WE USED, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF WORK IS TECHNICAL.

NO DISTURBANCE ON THE PROPERTY.

NO DISTURBANCE.

AND OF COURSE, YOU'LL HAVE TO HAVE THEIR OTHER CONSTRUCTION PLANS APPROVED.

RIGHT.

THEN THE ISSUE OR THE APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT TO MOVE THE NEW ROAD THROUGH THE HOUSEMAN PROPERTY ON LOT 10 IN BLOCK TWO WILL BE MOVED TO THE SOUTH BY FORTY FEET AND ALSO PROVIDING WITH AN EASEMENT FOR NO CONSTRUCTION OR STRUCTURES BETWEEN THE BROWN PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AND THE NEW ROAD.

ALSO, THE CURB STOP FOR THE KIOSK AND MAILBOXES WILL BE MOVED FROM THE INDICATED LOCATION IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE NEW ACCESS ROAD FROM BURNEY LANE ON LOT TEN BLOCK TWO.

I'M NOT SURE IF WE REALLY SPECIFIED WHERE THAT WOULD GO, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE IN ITS PRESENT LOCATION IT WILL BE MOVED TO LOT TEN BLOCK TWO.

KEN DO YOU HAVE SOME MORE SPECIFICITY.

IF YOU PUT THE NO DISTURBANCE EASEMENT IN THERE I WOULD JUST MAKE AN EXCEPTION, FOR THAT MAIL KIOSK TO BE LOCATED NORTH OF THE ROAD.

SO THERE MAY EVEN WANT TO BE A PULL OFF IN AN AREA, TURN AROUND FOR THE MILITARY OR SO.

THAT WOULD BE SOME SO THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THE EASEMENT.

OK.

CAN YOU TAKE A BREAK FOR A SECOND SHAWN I HAVE QUESTIONS? I HAVE HAD TWO PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS THAT WERE MARKED FOR ITEM THE PERSON PUT DOWN THAT THEY WANTED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO ITEM E 6.

AND I WAS SITTING HERE JUST LOOKING AT THIS, AND THAT'S OUR BUDGET.

AND WE WERE HAVING A BIG TAX RATE CUT.

SO I DOUBT THAT THEY MEANT THAT.

SO IS THERE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT ACCIDENTALLY PUT E 6 APOLOGIZE.

I KNOW THAT'S OUT OF BUT ARE YOU HERE AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK.

OK, I MIGHT HAVE THE RIGHT ITEM SO I WILL CALL YOU ON SIX E BUT I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

I JUST WOULDN'T WANT TO MISS ANYBODY.

THANK YOU.

[02:35:03]

MOVING THE ROAD 40 FEET SOUTH THAT DOES RAISE THE ISSUE A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR MS VANZANDT.

SO WE DO NEED SOME LANGUAGE AROUND THE APPLICANT WORKING WITH MS. VANZANDT ON SEEMS THERE WAS SOME AGREEMENT ON SOME BUFFERING ASK HER.

YEAH, MAYBE OR ASK THE APPLICANT WHAT WERE THE CONVERSATIONS.

SURE.

RIGHT.

BECAUSE THE ROAD GOT MOVED AND THEY GOT IT TO WHERE IT WAS THEY PUT IT RIGHT IN, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH IN THE FRONT YARD.

RIGHT.

WELL, OUT OF THE WAY, MAYBE YOU PUT A LITTLE SOMETHING IN THERE.OPTION MOVES IT BACK IN THAT DIRECTION 40 FEET MS. VAN ZANDT, DID YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD PLEASE? COUNCIL HAS A QUESTION FOR YOU.

OK, MR. REALLY DIDN'T WANT A PHYSICAL BERM.

YOU WANTED JUST MORE OF A SIGHTLINE LANDSCAPE, I THINK.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY BUT IF IT'S AN ISSUE UNTIL WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT.

AS LONG AS YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE ONCE IT'S IN THE MOTION AND I'D LIKE TO BELIEVE MR. BOYD WILL, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOUR RIGHTS ARE BEING MAKE SPEAK TO.

I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY ONE THING ABOUT THE DEEDS AND THAT SAYS NO LOT SHALL BE USED FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN A SINGLE FAMILY.

AND SO, YEAH, AND SO OUR POINT IS THAT UNFORTUNATELY THAT WE CAN'T.

RIGHT.

ABSOLUTELY.

I TOLD MANY NEIGHBORS TOO.

ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

NO QUESTION.

ACCOUNT FOR HEADLIGHTS IN THE DIRECTION OF MS. VAN ZANDTS HOME.

SO I'VE GOT ONE MORE QUESTION FOR YOU, KEN, ABOUT THE ROAD.

SO IF WE APPROVED OPTION A, WE DIDN'T NEED ANYTHING.

NOTING A PD REGULATION ALLOWING CUL DE SACS LONGER THAN A THOUSAND FEET.

OPTION B REQUIRES THAT NOW THAT WE'VE SORT OF MESSED AROUND WITH IT AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE, HOW DO WE WORD THAT IN THE MOTION TO MAKE SURE THAT REGULATION GETS IN IF WE NEED IT? AND I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT REGULATION, IT MAY OR MAY NOT.

WE JUST HAVE TO MEASURE IT.

BUT I WOULD JUST PUT IT IN IF IT'S NOT APPLICABLE IT'S FINE.

DID YOU GET THAT.

NOPE.

YOU CAN DO IT AGAIN.

SO WE NEED A PD REGULATION ADDED TO ALLOW THE LENGTH OF THE CUL DE SAC TO EXCEED A THOUSAND FEET SIMILAR TO OPTION B, SO JUST ADD THE REG AND THAT'LL COVER IT.

IF THIS OPTION TRIGGERS THAT OR WE JUST ADD IT.

IT IS IN THE REGULATIONS CURRENTLY.

SO IT IS OK SPEAKERS] WE GOT THAT.

I'M GOOD.

OK.

IF THERE ARE NO OTHER INPUT FROM COUNCIL DO WE HAVE A MOTION.

WHAT ABOUT THE DEDICATION OF THE EASEMENT FOR THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S NORTH OF THAT ROAD? I'VE GOT THAT IN HERE.

PER THE APPLICANTS AGREEMENT WE ARE MOVING THE NEW ROAD THROUGH THE HOUSEMAN PROPERTY AND LOT 10 BLOCK TWO WILL BE MOVED TO THE SOUTH BY 40 FEET WITH AN EASEMENT WITH NO CONSTRUCTION OR STRUCTURES BETWEEN THE BROWN PROPERTY AND THAT NEW ROAD.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE MAILBOX.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE NEW MAILBOX LOCATION.

PERFECT.

NO MORE FOR ME, DIRECTOR BAKER IS THAT OKAY.

YES SIR.

ONE MORE QUESTION, JOHN.

NO MORE.

SORRY.

YEAH I WAS GOING TO SAY YOU REMIND ME OF SOMEONE BUT I WON'T SAY.

MAYOR.

WOW.

CALLING IT LIKE I SEE IT.

I'M NOT TALKING THE REST OF THE MEETING.

NO PLEASE ASK AS MANY QUESTIONS.

OK, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SIX D, THE ORDINANCE NUMBER FOUR EIGHTY DASH SEVEN SEVEN THREE.

CASE NUMBER ZA TWENTY, DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR NINE.

SECOND READING, ZONING, CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CONSERVATION LOCATED AT TWENTY NINE SEVENTY BURNEY LANE AND THIRTY ONE EIGHTY FIVE SOUTHLAKE PARK DRIVE IN SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 23RD 2020 AND SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER FIVE DATED NOVEMBER TWENTY THIRD TWENTY TWENTY.

NOTING THAT THIS APPROVAL IS FOR EIGHT RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY THIRTEEN POINT ONE ACRES, NOTING ALSO THE ACCESS EASEMENT STREET IS TO BE NON GATED

[02:40:05]

OPEN TO PUBLIC TRAFFIC, BUT PRIVATELY MAINTAINED BY THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION KNOWING THAT WE'RE APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN OPTION B, WHICH SHOWS THE ACCESS EASEMENT STREET ACROSS ACCESS FROM BURNEY LANE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LOT TEN BLOCK TWO OF HARBOR OAKS AND NOTING A PUD REGULATION IS ADDED TO ALLOW THE LENGTH OF THE CUL DE SAC TO EXCEED ONE THOUSAND FEET.

ALSO NOTING THAT AT A MINIMUM, THE CROSS SECTION OF THE FIRST FIFTY FEET OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS EASEMENT STREET FROM THE BURNEY LANE INTERSECTION WILL BE DESIGNED AS A TYPICAL RURAL ROAD CROSS SECTION WITH A BAR DITCH MEANING NO STREET CURBS OR GUTTERS, AS REFERENCED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

AS THE ROAD PROCEEDS WEST, THE ROAD CROSS SECTION WILL TRANSITION BACK INTO A TYPICAL URBAN STREET CROSS SECTION, WITH CURB AND GUTTER ALSO NOTING THAT NO STREET LIGHTS WILL BE INSTALLED AS PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, ALSO NOTING THAT ALL HOMES WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A FIRE SUPPRESSION SPRINKLER SYSTEM.

ALSO NOTING THE APPROVED PLAT WILL INDICATE A PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EQUESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT ALONG THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREET, AS WELL AS ALONG THE SIX FOOT TRAIL LOCATED ON LOT 2 THAT LEADS INTO THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROPERTY.

NOTING THAT THERE WILL BE NO LIVING TREE REMOVAL, CONSTRUCTION OR FENCING ALLOWED IN THE IDENTIFIED OPEN SPACE AND WILDLIFE EASEMENT.

STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER TWENTY THIRD TWENTY TWENTY.

NOTING THAT IF IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD, GRADING OR DRAINAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCESS EASEMENT, ANY DAMAGE OCCURS TO TREES ON THE ADJACENT LOT NINE BLOCK TWO OF HARBOR OAKS LEADING TO THE DEATH OF THOSE TREES.

SUCH TREES WILL BE REPLACED INCH FOR INCH WITH RED TREES.

ALSO NOTING THAT THE FENCING ALONG BURNEY LANE ON LOT TEN BLOCK TWO WILL BE REPLACED WITH WROUGHT IRON, BUT NO MASONRY COLUMNS.

ALSO NOTING THAT FENCING SHALL BE PROVIDED AS SHOWN ON THE SUBMITTED WALL AND FENCE DIAGRAM FOR LOTS ONE THROUGH SEVEN.

AND THAT ADDITIONAL SIDE, REAR AND FRONT YARD FENCING IS PERMITTED, BUT LIMITING THAT FENCING TO WROUGHT IRON OR PIPE RAIL ALSO NOTING THAT THERE WILL BE NO STORAGE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT OR PARKING OF VEHICLES DURING CONSTRUCTION WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET OF BURNEY LANE.

ALSO NOTING THAT OUR APPROVAL IS CONDITIONED ON FINAL APPROVAL, FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGARDING THE ROADWAY CROSSING OVER THE FLOWAGE EASEMENT WHICH THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE TO OUR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, AND ALSO NOTING THAT NO DISTURBANCE ON THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PERMITTED OR UNDERTAKEN ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL SUCH APPROVAL IS PROVIDED TO OUR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND NOTING THE APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT TO THAT CONDITION.

ALSO NOTING FOR THE APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT THAT WE WILL BE MOVING THE NEW ROAD THROUGH THE HOUSEMAN PROPERTY LOT TEN BLOCK TWO TO THE SOUTH BY 40 FEET FROM, AS INDICATED IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH AN EASEMENT PROVIDED WITH NO CONSTRUCTION OR STRUCTURES BETWEEN THE BROWN PROPERTY AND THE NEW ROAD.

ALSO NOTING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL WORK WITH CITY STAFF ON AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF SCREENING TO ACCOUNT FOR HEADLIGHTS IN THE DIRECTION OF MS. VAN ZANDT'S PROPERTY.

ALSO NOTING THE RELOCATION OF THE CURB STOP FOR THE KIOSK AND MAILBOXES, WHICH WILL BE MOVED TO THE NEW ACCESS ROAD FROM BURNEY LANE ON LOT TEN BLOCK TWO.

AND THIS WILL BE AN EXCEPTION TO THE EASEMENT PROVIDED ABOVE.

DIRECTOR BAKER.

IS THERE A SECOND.

SECOND.

AMY, IF YOU WILL CALL THE VOTE? MAYOR PRO TEM MCCASKILL.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER PATTON.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

YES.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM HUFFMAN.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER MAYOR HILL.

YES, OK, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR PARTICIPATING.

NEXT ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL GO BACK TO ITEM 6 A THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON

[6.A. Ordinance No. 1237, 2nd reading, abandoning a portion of a drainage easement on Lot 4, Block 1, Kirkwood Hollow Phase II, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being located at 512 Round Hollow Lane. PUBLIC HEARING]

KIRKWOOD.

AND I DOUBT WE WILL NEED ANYTHING MORE THAN TWO SENTENCES .

YES MA'AM.

GOOD NIGHT MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL I'LL BE PRESENTING ITEM 6A AND 6B THIS EVENING SO THE REQUESTED ACTION IS TO CONSIDER ABANDONING A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED AT 512 ROUND HOLLOW LOCATED AT KIRKWOOD BOULEVARD.

LOOK, I'M SORRY, THE KIRKWOOD HOLLOW SUBDIVISION.

THIS IS A SITE, AS YOU CAN SEE, LOCATED JUST EAST OF KIRKWOOD BOULEVARD.

AND THE ISSUE IS PRETTY MUCH THAT WHEN THE SUBDIVISION CAME IN, A DRAINAGE EASEMENT WAS ESTABLISHED.

FOR SOME REASON, A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS MUCH WIDER THAN THE FLOODWAY.

AND SO THE RESIDENTS DECIDED TO UTILIZE SOME OF THE PROPERTY AND THEY REALIZED THAT THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS WIDER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE.

[02:45:03]

SO THEY HIRED A THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM THAT THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT CAN BE MADE A LITTLE SHORTER OR A LITTLE SMALLER, BUT WOULD STILL INCLUDE THE FLOODWAY.

AND SO THEY WOULD GAIN BACK ABOUT 0.2 ACRES TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT FOR THEIR PRIVATE USE.

SO THESE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY USED.

AGAIN, THE THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT WENT AHEAD AND ALSO UTILIZED THE FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE FIRM MAP, AS WELL AS MET OUR ORDINANCE REGULATIONS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ONE FOR THE FREEBOARD.

AND THEN THE APPLICANT HAS PAID THE FEES.

AND THEN THIS ACTION MEETS THE SOUTHLAKE STRATEGY NOW.

SO THAT CONCLUDES.

IF IT'S THAT'S GOOD WITH YOU.

IT'S GOOD WITH ME.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ABOUT THIS ITEM, SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6A ORDINANCE NUMBER 1237 SECOND READING, ABANDONING A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT UNLOT FOUR BLOCK ONE, KIRKWOOD HOLLOW, PHASE TWO, IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, LOCATED AT 512 ROUND HOLLOW LANE, SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT.

AND NOTING THAT ON AUGUST 9TH, 2000, A DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE REAR YARD OF THE LOTS ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH FORK OF THE KIRKWOOD BRANCH WAS GRANTED TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.

THE HOMEOWNERS ARE REQUESTING THAT THE CITY ABANDONED A PORTION OF THE EASEMENT AND REQUESTED THE CUMULOUS DESIGN LLC, A CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRM, TO PROVIDE A DRAINAGE STUDY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT WAS LARGER THAN NECESSARY.

IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT WERE GREATER THAN REQUIRED.

THE EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS WIDER THAN THE EXISTING FLOODPLAIN AND BASED ON THE RESULTS OF A DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT PERFORMED BY THE RESIDENTS, CONSULTANT WILL REMAIN WIDER THAN THE FLOODPLAIN.

ONCE THE SUBJECT PORTION OF THE EASEMENT IS ABANDONED.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

YOU THROW YOUR PAPER.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE CARE OF 6B.

YES, MA'AM.

SO THIS IS ALSO CONCERNING THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF THE WATER EASEMENT.

[6.B. Ordinance No.1238, 2nd reading, abandoning a portion of a water easement on Lot 20R, Block 1, H. Granberry No 581 Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, being located at 191 W. Southlake Blvd. PUBLIC HEARING]

LOCATED AT 191 WEST SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD.

THE SLIDE BEFORE YOU AS THE BACKGROUND ON IT PRETTY MUCH SHOWS YOU THE AREA OF THE EASEMENT IN QUESTION, WHICH IS IN ESSENCE RIGHT HERE.

FOR SOME REASON, IT WAS DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES.

HOWEVER, WE DO NOT NEED THAT THAT EASEMENT AT ALL.

IT'S FIVE SQUARE FEET OF A ROUGHLY A THREE ACRE LOT.

AND SO WE'RE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THAT EASEMENT BE ABANDONED.

OK, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE IN COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SIX B, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1238 SECOND READING, ABANDONING A PORTION OF A WATER EASEMENT ON LOT, TWENTY R BLOCK ONE H SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED DECEMBER 1ST 2020 AND NOTING THAT ON AUGUST 23RD 2019, A 15 FOOT WATER LINE EASEMENT ON A 3.4175 ACRE TRACT OF LAND WAS GRANTED TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE AND WAS DESIGNATED FOR A FIRE LINE AND DOMESTIC AND IRRIGATION WATER METERS.

THE DEVELOPER IS REQUESTING THAT A FIVE SQUARE FOOT AREA OF THE WATER LINE EASEMENT BE ABANDONED SO THAT THE ADJACENT BUILDING FOUNDATION NO LONGER ENCROACHES ON THE EASEMENT, THE EASEMENT AREA TO BE ABANDONED DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND WILL NOT AFFECT ACCESS TO CITY INFRASTRUCTURE.

IS THERE A SECOND.

SECOND.

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

GREAT.

THANKS.

DOES ANYONE NEED, LIKE, A TWO MINUTE BREAK? I JUST LIKE WE'LL DO IT REALLY FAST.

THANK YOU.

I THINK I FORGOT TO CALL THE MEETING OUT OF ORDER, SO YO CAN'T TAKE ME OUT OF TOWN HALL OR I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO DO.

[6.C. Ordinance No. 480-774, (ZA20-0045), 2nd Reading, Zoning Change and Concept Plan for Lots 25 and 26, O.W. Knight No. 899 Addition on property described as Tract 6C, Obediah W. Knight Survey, Abstract No. 899, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and Tract 1A5B, J.W. Hale Survey, Abstract No. 803, Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas, and located at 1000 Breeze Way, Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Proposed Zoning: "SF-20A" Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood #9. PUBLIC HEARING]

OK, AND WE'RE ON ITEM 6C.

MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.

THE CONCEPT PLAN PER YOUR MOTION.

THE APPLICANT DID QUANTIFY THE TYPE OF TREE PLANTINGS ON THE WEST BOUNDARY, WHICH ARE THIRTEEN EASTERN RED CEDARS AT 15 GALLONS.

AND YOU MAY RECALL AT YOUR FIRST READING, YOU REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE EIGHT FOOT SIDEWALK.

[02:50:02]

SO I'D ASK THAT ANY MOTION INCLUDE A VARIANCE NOT REQUIRING THAT EIGHT FOOT MULTIUSE TRAIL.

OK, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SEEING NO ONE IS THERE A MOTION? YES MAYOR AND COUNCIL I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6C ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-774 CASE.

NO, I'M SORRY.

DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK.

SORRY WHEN I ASK.

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GO.

YES, GO AHEAD.

MY BAD NAME IS PAUL CUTLER.

I LIVE AT 1200 OK.

PROPERTY JUST TO THE WEST.

I HAD SOME COMMENTS DURING PLANNING ZONING DISCUSSION IN OPPOSITION TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AS I UNDERSTAND, I'M TOLD THAT SUBDIVISION WOULD COMPLY WITH THE MEDIUM DENSITY REQUIREMENTS SF20 BARELY.

MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN CARVED OUT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT SURROUNDS IT SINCE ABOUT 1996 WHEN IT WAS BOUGHT FROM THE LEGACY LAND OWNER.

IT'S REMAINED OUTSIDE OUR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, BUT HAS ENJOYED SOME OF THE SOME OF THE BENEFITS THAT OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAVE PROVIDED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE BASIS FOR MY OPPOSITION IS SIMPLY DENSITY.

IT COMPLIES WITH THE LAND USE PLAN.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER THE INFRINGEMENT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES IN TERMS OF PRIVACY AND POTENTIAL PROPERTY VALUE LOSS ARE OUTWEIGHED BY THIS PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHT TO DEVELOP IT.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

I THINK IT'S TO DENSE.

IT'S A BUSY CORNER DROP OFF TRAFFIC FOR THE OLD UNION ELEMENTARY ACROSS THE STREET.

IT IS EXTREMELY BUSY YOU JUST MOVE THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT AT THE FIRST MEETING.

I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT.

I'VE WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPER TO ADDRESS AS BEST WE CAN, BUT BACK TO MAIN PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AS FAR AS IT WILL BE SUBDIVIDED IS GOING TO OVERLOOK DIRECTLY INTO OUR BACKYARD FENSE AT US.

SO I'M LIKE, MY CONCERN IS THAT TO THE EXTENT YOU HAVE THE LEEWAY, THIS COMPLIES, BUT BARELY WITH THE 20A REQUIREMENTS.

YEAH.

AND UNDERSTAND THAT IS WHAT THE ISSUE IS IF IT COMPLIES.

AND THAT'S WHY WE WANTED THE DEVELOPER TO.

OK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE IT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK.

SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CALL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE A MOTION? YES MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6C ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-774.

CASE NUMBER Z 20-0045.

SECOND READING ZONING CHANGE IN CONCEPT PLAN FOR LOT'S TWENTY FIVE AND TWENTY SIX O.W.

KNIGHT NUMBER 899 ADDITION LOCATED AT 1000 BREEZEWAY SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 23 2020 AND REVISE CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER THREE DATED NOVEMBER 20TH 2020.

GRANTING THE FOLLOWING VARIANCE REQUEST VARIANCE TO SIDEWALK TRAIL REQUIREMENT UNDER ZONING ORDINANCE 480 SECTION THIRTY THREE POINT ONE NINE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NUMBER 483, SECTION FIVE POINT ZERO SIX AND REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN EIGHT FOOT MULTIUSE TRAIL TO BE INSTALLED.

ALSO NOTING THE REVISED CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTED THIS EVENING INCLUDES THIRTEEN RED CEDAR TREES, FIFTEEN GALLONS EACH TO BE PLANTED ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, AND ALSO NOTING THAT THE EXISTING WROUGHT IRON FENCE WILL REMAIN ALONG THE SAME WEST PROPERTY LINE.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

AMY, IF YOU CALL THE VOTE PLEASE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT ON THE AGENDA, WE'RE GOING TO GO AND ORDER A LITTLE BIT.

[7.A. Ordinance No. 480-740, (ZA18-006), 1st Reading, Zoning Change and Concept/Site Plan for Creekside Point (formerly known as Southwest Meadows) on property described As Lot 1R1R2, Block 1, Sabre Group Campus Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1901 W. Kirkwood Blvd., Southlake, Texas. Current Zoning: "NR -PUD" Non-Residential Planned Unit Development District. Proposed Zoning: "S-P-2" Generalized Site Plan District. Spin Neighborhood #1.]

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE ITEM SEVEN A AND RATHER THAN HAVING A PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO COME FORWARD AND JUST ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE ON THIS ITEM.

AND THEN WE'LL TAKE THIS UP AS A FIRST READING AT OUR NEXT MEETING SINCE WE ARE RUNNING LATE TONIGHT.

[02:55:02]

AND MR. KARR, THE APPLICANT, HAS KINDLY AGREED TO DO THAT FOR US.

SO, MR. KARR, ARE YOU HERE? THANK YOU, SIR.

IF YOU WANT TO JUST COME FORWARD AND YOU CAN HAVE THE DRAWING ON THAT OR THE THE COLOR AND.

OH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.

SO, NUMBER ONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR DOING THAT FOR US.

WE APPRECIATE IT.

THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME ANYWAY.

SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS LET THE COUNCIL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS.

I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN BEFORE THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE.

I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH P&Z AND I THINK YOU'RE THE ITEM WAS DENIED AT PLANNING AND ZONING.

AND SO I WOULD GUARANTEE YOU THAT COUNCIL IS GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF THE SAME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY HAD AT P&Z.

SO CAN YOU.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WHY DON'T YOU KIND OF EXPLAIN TO US WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND THEN WE'LL WE'LL GIVE YOU A HARD TIME.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANKS, COUNCILPERSONS.

SO I'M DAVID KARR.

405 SOUTH KIMBALL AVENUE, SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS.

WE HAD A READING AT P&Z, WAS DENIED.

WE CAME.

THIS THING STARTED OUT AS A LIMITED SERVICE HOTEL WITH THREE RESTAURANT PATHS WITH A DIFFERENT DEVELOPER.

WE TOOK IT OVER ABOUT EIGHT OR NINE MONTHS AGO.

WE STARTED THE CLOCK, RAN THROUGH A CORRIDOR, RAN THROUGH P&Z.

WE BROUGHT IT UP TO A FULL SERVICE HOTEL, A VERY SMALL HOTEL.

ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE KEYS, WHICH WE THINK SOUTHLAKE WANTED WAS THE FULL SERVICE VERSUS THE LIMITED SERVICE.

AND THEN THERE WERE TWO RESTAURANT PADS ON THE SITE.

YOU DON'T SEE THOSE HERE BECAUSE THIS SITE PLAN AND RENDERING IS A REACTION TO WHAT WE HEARD AT P&Z.

SO WHAT WE HEARD AT P&Z WAS THAT THE BUILDING NEEDED MORE ARTICULATION, HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION, WHICH WE RESPONDED TO, ESPECIALLY ON THE FLAT, KIND OF WHAT I CALL A FLAT FACE, WHICH IS THE SIDE UNDER THE EMBASSY SUITES SIGN.

WE'VE BROUGHT IN MORE HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION THERE.

WE CHANGED THE PORTA CACHé UP A BIT.

WE DELETED A RESTAURANT PAD TO THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OF THE SITE.

THAT'S ABSOLUTELY COMPLETELY GONE.

NOW, THAT WAS A FIVE THOUSAND, I THINK MAYBE SIX THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT SITE.

SO THAT'S GONE BECAUSE WE HEARD THAT WE WANT TO SAVE TREES, BRING IN MORE GREEN SPACE.

SO WE TOOK A BIG GULP AND DELETED THAT LOT, THE ONE THE RESTAURANT PAD ON THE LEFT.

THE SMALLER KIND OF CUTE LOOKING BUILDING OUT FRONT IS ANOTHER RESTAURANT PAD.

INITIALLY THAT WAS AN 11000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT PAD THAT'S BEEN SINCE REDUCED TO EITHER A NINE OR AN EIGHT THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT SITE.

I DON'T KNOW WE ADDED ENTRIES.

WE GOT RID OF A RESTAURANT PAD WHERE WE ONLY HAVE ONE NOW.

AND WE REALLY KIND OF JUICED UP, I THINK, THE FIVE STOREY HOTEL.

SO IT'S MORE LIKE A ALMOST LIKE A BOUTIQUE.

IT WOULD BE THE SMALLEST EMBASSY SUITES IN THE ENTIRE MARKET.

IT'S 145 KEYS.

THE ONLY ONE, THE NEXT BIGGEST SIZE EMBASSY SUITES IS ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY SIX KEY HOTEL IN FORT WORTH AS AS OPPOSED TO THE DELTA IS TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY KEYS.

SO IT WAS THE WEST END, THE KEYS.

SO HILTON WANTS TO BE IN THE MARKET WITH A SUITE PRODUCT BECAUSE OF THE CORPORATE RELOADS.

EVERYBODY MOVING HERE, THEY SEE A NEED FOR A SUITE PRODUCT IN SOUTHLAKE OR ACTUALLY THIS REALLY ISN'T THE SOUTHLAKE MARKET.

THIS IS TECHNICALLY THE DFW AIRPORT MARKET.

BUT THEY LIKE THIS SITE FOR THEIR SWEET PRODUCT, THEY WANTED A LARGER HOTEL, BUT WE KEPT IT A LOT SMALLER.

IN FACT, THIS IS THE SMALLEST ONE THEY HAVE IN THE IN THE DFW MARKET.

SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS SORT OF A REACTION TO THE BAD NEWS WE HEARD AT PNC.

AND WITH THAT, I'LL PLEASE CALL ON ME AND ASK ME A MILLION QUESTIONS.

PLEASE.

DID YOU BRING THIS PLAN TO CORRIDOR? WE BROUGHT A SIMILAR PLAN TO CORRIDOR.

SO WALK ME THROUGH THE TIMELINE.

YOU SAID YOU PICKED THIS UP NINE MONTHS AGO.

THE LAST TIME WE SAW YOU AT CORRIDOR, YOU WERE PROPOSING SOMETHING ON THE GATEWAY

[03:00:04]

PROPERTY ON OFF A BLESSED WAY, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.

OK, SO DID YOU SEND THIS PLAN THROUGH CORRIDOR? AND I JUST MISSED IT.

I THINK I MISSPOKE.

I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

I THINK I TOOK GATEWAY THROUGH CORRIDOR AND NOT THIS.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

I'M WRONG.

BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT THIS BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLANNING PROCESS.

SO WE SUBMITTED AN ORIGINAL PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION FOR THIS SITE.

SO THAT'S NOT I'M NOT SURE THIS IS RELEVANT TO THIS.

BUT WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GATEWAY PROJECT? WE DROPPED THE GATEWAY SITE BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THE HOTEL ON THAT SITE WAS TOO MUCH HOTEL FOR THAT SITE.

THE FEEDBACK WE GOT FROM A LOT OF FOLKS, I'LL PUT IT THAT WAY, WAS THAT A HOTEL WOULD NOT BE SUITABLE FOR THAT SITE.

AND JUST TO ADD MORE OFFICE SPACE, BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAD THREE 80000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDINGS WHICH WE THINK IS THE RIGHT OFFICE BUILDING SIZE BUT ADDING A FOURTH INTO THAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN DID NOT WORK.

SO WE DROPPED THE SITE.

OK.

OH, WE MUST BE MISREMEMBERING OR REMEMBERING THAT DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER GIVING YOU THAT FEEDBACK AT CORRIDOR.

NOT AGAIN, THAT'S GERMANE TO THIS DISCUSSION.

THAT'S JUST A LITTLE WEIRD.

SO, NO, I DON'T THINK I DON'T THINK THE FEEDBACK I GOT FROM CORRIDOR WAS THAT WE HAD TO THE WRONG PRODUCT TYPE.

YEAH, I DIDN'T GET THAT AT ALL.

YEAH.

ANYWAY, YEAH, I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO DIG INTO THIS AT CORRIDOR.

I MEAN BECAUSE THIS IS MATERIALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE LAST ONE WE SAW WHEN WE SAW TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO WAS I MEAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK WE SAW SOMETHING TIERED WITH BIG RETAINING WALL USING THE TOPOGRAPHY, USING THE INTERESTING SITE EFFECT.

WE GOT WALKED AROUND THREE OR FOUR OF US WALKED AROUND THE SITE BY THE ARCHITECT GE WAS TELLING US ABOUT SOMETHING HE DID IN THE HILL COUNTRY.

AND HOW DID THIS HAPPEN, KEN? HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? THIS IS DIFFERENT.

THIS IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

WHEN I SAY, HOW DID THIS HAPPEN YOU'RE NOT TO BLAME .

HASN'T GONE THROUGH CORRIDOR.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF BATTLE THIS OUT.

I THINK, THE FACT THAT THIS LOOKS LIKE WHAT WE SAID NO TO BEFORE.

AND THEN WE WENT THROUGH THE SUBSEQUENT SITE VISIT, YOU TALKED ABOUT USING TERRACES AND RETAINING WALLS TO RETAIN THE TOPOGRAPHY AND SAVE A LOT MORE TREES.

AND THEN THIS KIND OF GOES BACK TO SQUARE ONE THAT WE SAID HARD NO TO THREE YEARS AGO.

SO I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME.

THERE WERE MORE RESTAURANT PAD SITES.

YEAH, RIGHT.

THAT KIND OF ALL TIED INTO THIS.

YEAH.

IT'S LIKE WE REPLACED THE RESTAURANT PAD SITES WITH CONCRETE.

CATWALK FROM THE.

YEAH.

LIKE THE RESTAURANTS TO THE SECOND TO THE SECOND FLOOR.

YEAH.

BRING US THAT ONE BACK.

THE ONE I SAW WHEN I TOOK IT OVER WAS I CALLED IT THE SAFEWAY PLAN WHERE IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS LIMITED SERVICE HOTEL IN THE BACK AND THEN IT WAS A LOT OF PAVING AND THEN MAYBE THREE OR FOUR SMALLER RESTAURANT PADS ALONG THE PERIPHERY OF THE PARKING LOT.

I THINK THAT WAS VERSION ONE.

I SAW ONE OF THESE WHEN I WHEN I FIRST GOT ON.

DID YOU? AFTER WE SAID NO TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, HE CAME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT HAD MORE TERRACES AND RETAINING WALLS TO HAVE LIKE HE DESCRIBED IT AS SOMETHING HE HAD DONE IN AUSTIN OR SAN ANTONIO.

YEAH.

WITH RETAINING WALLS TO KEEP MORE TREES AND BROKE IT UP A LITTLE BIT BETTER AND HAD ALL THESE NEAT FEATURES.

AND I REMEMBER GOING AROUND WITH THEM ON THE POOL IN BACK BECAUSE OF THE TOPO.

AND YEAH, WE WANT TO HAVE A POOL.

YEAH.

I MEAN WE WENT AND WALKED IT WITH THEM AND HODGES WAS THE ARCHITECT AND THE WILKS BROTHERS WAS STILL REPRESENTING.

YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.

YOU SAW IT AT YOUR JUNE MEETING AND YOU TABLED IT IN JUNE 2018.

IT WENT TO THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE.

AND THAT'S WHEN HE PRESENTED SOME CONCEPTUAL CONCEPTS WHERE THE HIGH POINT OF THE PROPERTY WOULD WOULD BE RETAINED IN THE THE RESTAURANT SITES WOULD BE

[03:05:03]

NESTLED IN THAT HIGH POINT.

THERE'D BE SOME RETAINING WALLS.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT, COUNCIL MEMBER HE MENTIONED TWO PROJECTS HE DID DOWN IN AUSTIN AT THAT CORRIDOR MEETING.

THIS PARTICULAR ITEM WAS BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL.

IT WAS IN JANUARY OF 2020.

SO IT WAS PRE COVID.

THE REPORT IS IN YOUR PACKET BUT THE THERE WAS SOME COMMENTS IN THERE ABOUT MANDATORY PRESERVATION LIKE TO INCORPORATE BRIDGE OVER THE CREEK TRAIL THAT CONNECTS TO THE LITTLE PARKING ON 114.

SO THIS CONCEPT WITH THE TWO RESTAURANTS WAS TAKEN AS REVIEWED BY THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.

AND THEN YOU'RE SAYING COUNCIL LOOKED AT IT IN JANUARY.

NO MA'AM NO CORRIDOR COMMITTEE.

THE ONLY TIME YOU AND THEN THIS IS A RESPONSE TO THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED, WHICH WAS WE STILL DON'T WANT T HAT MANY RESTAURANT PADS.

I THINK THERE WAS MORE FEEDBACK THAN THAT.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST ME, BUT I MEAN, I REALLY DON'T MIND HAVING ANOTHER RESTAURANT IF I HAVE SOME TOPOGRAPHY.

I MEAN, IF THE LOT IS INTERESTING, I THINK IT'S MORE PALATABLE.

I DON'T.

WHAT'S THE PARKING SITUATION FOR THE HOTEL? ARE YOU ARE WE USING CURRENT PARKING GUIDELINES? ARE WE ALLOWING LESS SPOTS BECAUSE OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE BEEN GETTING ON THIS PART? YES, MA'AM.

AS PART OF THE APPLICATION THAT WE HAVE HAD COMMISSIONED A STUDY WITH THE SO THE PARKING'S COMING IN QUITE A BIT LESS THAN OUR ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT.

AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT SOME OFF SITE PARKING FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES.

BUT WHEN WE GET INTO THIS IN JANUARY, I'LL GO THROUGH THOSE NUMBERS.

BUT IT'S ABOUT IT'S ABOUT ROUGHLY 30 PERCENT REDUCTION FROM OUR ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY JUSTIFY IT THROUGH THE PARK AND STAY.

TOTALLY AGREE.

SO COUNCIL, I GUESS, SINCE WE HAVE MR. KARR HERE, WHAT IF HE BRINGS US BACK TO US IN JANUARY WHAT CHANGES WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE AND THEN LET HIM WORK ON THOSE AND HE CAN EXPLAIN TO US IN JANUARY WHAT WHAT HE WAS ABLE TO DO AND WHAT HE WASN'T ABLE TO DO.

I WOULD TRY TO FIND THAT HODGE'S PLAN THAT HAD THE TOPOGRAPHY RETAINED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT LIKE KEN SAID WITH THE HIGH POINT OF THE LOT MAINTAINED, I THINK THERE WAS LIKE A COMMON SHARED PATIO OR ALMOST SORT OF OPEN SPACE FOR ALL THE RESTAURANTS.

AND THEN YOU GO ACROSS THAT TO THE HOTEL WITH THE RETAINING WALLS, A LOT MORE TREE PRESERVATION.

THE PARKING WASN'T SO FLAT, WASN'T TAKING.

I KNOW THIS WAS BUILT UP WHEN THE HIGHWAY WAS BUILT.

THIS IS NOT NATURAL, RIGHT HILL.

BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS NOW.

SO IF YOU COULD FIND THAT PLAN OR SOMETHING AND SO I THINK THE OTHER ISSUE I HAVE WITH THIS RENDERING IS THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY USING A LOT OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE BECAUSE YOU JUST CAN'T KNOCK THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN OFF RIGHT AND PLOP SOMETHING ON IT.

SO WE JUST NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF GRAPHICALLY REPRESENTING WHAT'S HAPPENING TOPOGRAPHICALLY AND WHAT YOU SEE HERE.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

GOOD POINT TAKEN.

DAVID.

WHERE'S THE WHERE'S THE CREEK RELATIVE TO WHERE THIS IS? IT'S IN THE TREES.

BEHIND THE HOTEL.

HOW FAR BACK? HAVE TO LOOK AT A SITE PLAN.

IS IT INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT, OUTSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK IT'S ON THE PROPERTY, BUT IT'S OUTSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S PART OF THE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT TIES INTO THE TD AMERITRADE TRAIL BEHIND US.

THAT'S PART OF THE VIEW THAT THE NORTH SIDE HOTEL ROOMS GET A LOOK ON TO THE.

ONTO THE CREEK.

IT'S DOWN THE HILL FROM.

AND THIS IS THE DESIGN THAT'S CURRENTLY IN VOGUE, I MEAN, YOU SAID MORE LIKE A BOUTIQUE HOTEL.

THIS TO ME DOESN'T REALLY LOOK LIKE A BOUTIQUE HOTEL.

REMINDS ME OF SOME OF THE APARTMENTS THEY'RE PUTTING UP AT COLLEGES IN TERMS OF A LOOK.

BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE WAY IT'S GOING, I GUESS, FROM A DESIGN PERSPECTIVE OF THE BUILDING.

WELL, I THINK YOU CAN DESIGN A BUILDING HOWEVER YOU WANT, REALLY.

[03:10:03]

I THINK THIS IS REALLY A RESPONSE TO KIND OF WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE ENVIRONMENT REALLY IS, WHICH IS A CERTAIN STONE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE LIKE TO BUILD TO, YOU KNOW, IN STEEL AND STUCCO SORT OF AESTHETIC WE LIKE TO TIE TO.

BUT I HEAR IT DOES A LOT OF THE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS THAT YOU DO SEE LOOK SIMILAR TO THE STYLE WITH THE FLAT KIND OF HAT ROOF.

YOU THINK BOXES IN THE FRONT.

KIND OF UGLY.

MAYBE WE DO SOME WORK ON THAT.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S THIS DISTINCT.

YOU KNOW, I JUST HAVE TO WONDER WHAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO FEEL ABOUT IT IN FIVE YEARS.

IT'S AN IMPORTANT CORNER.

YEAH, IT IS AN IMPORTANT CORNER.

AND THEN KEN.

YEAH.

I WOULD TRADE ANOTHER PAD SITE FOR A RESTAURANT OR A NICER LOOKING BUILDING.

AND BETTER TOPOGRAPHY.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S THE OVERALL MESSAGE HERE IS YES, WE'LL GIVE YOU SOMETHING.

BUT GIVE US SOMETHING.

BEING CREATIVE AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE TOPO AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT HERE, WE'RE JUST NOT SEEING IT.

BUT OVERALL, THE OVERALL CHARACTER ITSELF NEEDS TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE WOW FACTOR TO IT BASED ON WHERE IT'S LOCATED.

I MEAN, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THIS KIND OF LOOKS LIKE A ME TOO USA KIND OF CONCEPT, LIKE I WANT A ME TOO USA DROP.

YOU DROP IT IN ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES.

BOOM, THERE IT IS.

ANY SUBURB IN THE U.S.

AND I THINK WE'RE HOLDING OURSELVES AND DEVELOPERS TO A HIGHER STANDARD, ESPECIALLY ON THIS MAIN CORRIDOR HERE.

AND THIS CORNER IN PARTICULAR, WE DON'T HAVE TOO MANY HOT CORNERS LEFT AND THIS NEEDS TO HAVE SOME POP.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, REALLY KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT AND POINTS OUT TO TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS, MAKING THEM FEATURES VERSUS CONSTRAINTS.

RIGHT.

TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT CREEK, IF YOU CAN, THE OVERALL CHARACTER MINIMIZING THE IMPACT ON THE SURFACE.

SO CONSIDER A PARKING GARAGE AND WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE A LOT OF SURFACE LEVEL PARKING, IDEALLY UP AND DOWN THE CORRIDOR.

OBVIOUSLY, PRESERVATION OF THE TREES, INCORPORATING THE TREES, IF YOU CAN, IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE, AND THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE TOO FAR BACK.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT SOMETHING TO US THAT'S HOSPITALITY, NATURE, INCORPORATING THAT CREEK ON THE BACKSIDE, SEEING THE RENDERINGS, UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, I THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT AND PROBABLY GIVE YOU A SHOT FROM THE NORTH SIDE LOOKING SOUTH.

TOTALLY.

YEAH.

AND HOW YOU'RE INCORPORATING IT INTO THE PROJECT.

YEAH, I THINK WE'VE DONE A THIS, BUT I THINK IN A THREE DIMENSIONAL WAY.

THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT SEEM TO COME OUT OF P&Z WAS NOT COMPLYING WITH THE I THINK THOSE ARE CRITICAL TO LOOK REALLY GOOD, I THINK, TO ALONG THE LINES OF JUST THAT PIZAZZ AS YOU KNOW, AS I THINK ABOUT THAT CORNER AMERITRADE, YOU'RE GOING TO GET HIGH LEVEL EXECUTIVES COMING IN FREQUENTLY AND BY NO MEANS AM I A HIGH LEVEL EXECUTIVE.

BUT WHEN I TRAVEL, I REMEMBER SPECIAL PLACES AND I REMEMBER IT VERY FONDLY.

LIKE, WELL, I LOVE GOING HERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THIS GREAT HOTEL SPEAKERS] OR IT'S LIKE, OH YEAH, THIS IS IT'S A SPECIAL CORNER.

I THINK IT NEEDS A REALLY SPECIAL PROJECT.

THOSE ARE OUR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS.

THESE ARE HIGH PROFILE CUSTOMERS.

YEAH.

WHOEVER GOES THERE IS GOING TO DO REALLY WELL.

THEY CAN.

OUR FRIENDS IN WESTLAKE ARE RIGHT ACROSS THE HIGHWAY.

SO WE WANT TO IMPRESS THEM RIGHT.

WE'RE WILLING TO GIVE YOU ANOTHER PAD SITE .

I MEAN, JUST KIND OF LIKE A LITTLE MAGIC ON THAT BUILDING, MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE BIT NICER.

AND THAT I THINK YOU CAN MAKE UP FOR THAT WITH HAVING ANOTHER RESTAURANT.

YEAH, THAT RESTAURANT SIZE IS ACTUALLY A REACTION TO A TENET THAT WE HAD THAT WANTED TO THE LARGER RESTAURANT.

POST COVID PROBABLY NOT THERE ANYMORE, BUT WE'LL PROBABLY JUST DROP BACK AND DO WHAT WE THINK IS MORE NATURAL.

YEAH, THERE'S MORE OF A SMALLER I THINK EVERYONE'S GOING TO MOVE TO A SMALLER FOOTPRINT.

BUT I THINK IF YOU EVEN IF YOU DON'T BUILD IT, IF YOU KIND OF SCOPE OUT A SPOT THAT WOULD WORK AS A PAD SITE, BRING IT BACK, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT IF YOU HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY, THAT MIGHT WORK POSITIVELY FOR YOU.

DEFINITELY HELPS WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY.

YEAH.

THE MORE OUTDOOR PATIO SPACE TOO.

[03:15:01]

OR, YOU KNOW, GREEN SPACE WHERE YOU COULD GO FROM THE RESTAURANT PAST THEIR PATIO.

AND EAT IN THAT GREEN SPACE.

DAVID.

THIS ACTUALLY DOES HAVE THAT.

WE'RE JUST NOT SEEING IT IN THIS ONE SLIDE.

BUT I HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR.

WE WERE WE THOUGHT THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO MAKE IT REAL FLUID BETWEEN THE HOTEL RESTAURANT AND THEN THE OTHER RESTAURANT PADS THAT HAVE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO HANG OUT OUTSIDE.

KIDS CAN PLAY, YOU CAN WATCH AND THAT KIND OF THING.

YEAH, IT SEEMED LIKE THE LAST CONCEPT HAD SOME TREE CANOPY AND THERE WAS A LOT OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES GOING ON IN BETWEEN THE RESTAURANTS, ALMOST LIKE SHARED SPACE COMMON SPACE.

I'LL DIG THAT UP AND SEE IF I CAN GET A HOLD OF IT, FIGURE IT OUT.

THAT SEEMED TO HAVE SOME INTEREST BY ALL OF US.

IT SEEMED TO HAVE THE CHARACTER TO IT THAT WAS ATTRACTIVE.

YEAH, I LIKE THAT IDEA A LOT BECAUSE I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THE DEVELOPMENT KIND OF WORK ITSELF INTO THE SITE.

YEAH.

VERSUS HAVING THE DEVELOPMENT POUND ON TOP OF THE SITE.

YEP.

YEAH.

YEP.

THAT'S WHAT AMERITRADE DID SO WELL.

YEAH THAT'S RIGHT.

COUNCIL ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, OTHERWISE WE'LL SEE HIM IN JANUARY.

AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO REACH OUT TO STAFF OR ANYBODY HERE THAT HAD COMMENTS IN PARTICULAR, FEEL FREE TO DO THAT.

WILL DO.

THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE FEEDBACK.

THANK YOU FOR WORKING ON IT.

WE APPRECIATE IT.

WE'LL SEE YOU IN JANUARY.

A MOTION, JUST REQUEST.

YOUR TABLING IT.

BUT WE'RE NOT IT'S NOT AFFECTING ANYTHING.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, MAYOR COUNCIL, I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 7A, WHICH IS ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-740 CASE NUMBER Z18-006.

FIRST READING, ZONING, CHANGE AND CONCEPTS SITE PLAN FOR CREEKSIDE POINT PER THE APPLICANTS REQUEST TABLING TO OUR JANUARY 5TH 2021 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

AMY IF YOU WILL CALL THE VOTE.

YES.

OK, NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 6E, WHICH IS GOING TO GO REALLY FAST.

SHARON'S BEEN WAITING ALL NIGHT FOR THIS.

ABOUT FIVE SECONDS.

THIS IS THE FORMAL ACTION REQUIRED TO FUND THE BUSINESS RELIEF GRANT

[6.E. Approve Ordinance No. 1235A, 2nd Reading, Approving and adopting the revised Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2021. PUBLIC HEARING]

PROGRAM.

YOU APPROVED THE FIRST READING AT THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

AND THIS IS JUST THE SECOND READING TO ESTABLISH THE FUNDING OF THE MILLIONS IN THE ECONOMIC INVESTMENT FUND.

ANY QUESTIONS OF SHARON? THANK YOU FOR MANAGING OUR CITY TO THE POINT WHERE WE CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING IS THERE A MOTION? YES.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6 E ORDINANCE NUMBER 1235A.

SECOND READING, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REVISED ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021, SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 20TH, 2020 AND NOTING THAT ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020 CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RESOLUTION NUMBER 20-051 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF THE SOUTHLAKE BUSINESS RELIEF GRANT PROGRAM.

YOU MAY RECALL FROM THIS PRESENTATION, THE CITIES ADOPTED BUDGET MUST BE REVISED TO INCORPORATE THE BUSINESS RELIEF GRANT PROGRAM.

THE PROGRAM WILL BE FUNDED THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUND.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

AWESOME.

[8.A. Consider the use of eminent domain to condemn property and consider Resolution No. 20-054 authorizing the filing of eminent domain proceedings for the purpose of acquiring fee simple title in and to an approximate 1,414 square foot right-of-way from the FM 1938 corridor for the construction of roadway improvements to provide public access to Davis Boulevard (FM 1938) and for other public purposes permitted by law.]

THANK YOU.

LAST ON THE AGENDA.

ITEM 8A.

WHO IS PRESENTING THAT? WE DON'T NEED A PRESENTATION.

WE DON'T.

JUST CONSIDERATION SAY? SURE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OK, THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE A MOTION.

YES.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 8A TO CONSIDER THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO CONDEMN PROPERTY AND CONSIDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 20-054 AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING FEE SIMPLE TITLE IN AND TO AN APPROXIMATE ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN SQUARE FOOT RIGHT AWAY FROM THE FM 1938 CORRIDOR FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAY

[03:20:01]

IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO DAVIS BOULEVARD FM 1938 AND FOR OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW.

SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED DECEMBER 1ST 2020 AND NOTING THAT I MOVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE AUTHORIZE THE USE OF THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE AN APPROXIMATE ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN SQUARE FOOT PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE WILLIAM H.

MARTIN SURVEY.

ABSTRACT NUMBER TEN SIXTY EIGHT TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NUMBER 20-054 AS PRESENTED FOR PUBLIC USE AS RIGHT AWAY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO DAVIS BOULEVARD FM 1938 AND FOR OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSES PERMITTED BY LAW.

AND I FURTHER MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 20-054 AS PRESENTED ALSO NOTING THE REVISED STAFF REPORT AND RESOLUTION DATED DECEMBER 1ST 2020 PROVIDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL THIS EVENING, WHICH WILL REPLACE THE STAFF REPORT RESOLUTION PROVIDED IN THE CITY COUNCIL PACKET.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

WITH THAT MEETING ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.