May 06, 2025 City Council

>> I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM, DID IT MAKE IT TO CITY COUNCIL? ARE WE 100% SURE THAT IT NEVER GOT HERE BEFORE IN CASE THERE'S SOME TYPE OF PRECEDENT THAT WAS DISCUSSED BACK THEN OR DID IT ONLY MAKE IT TO SPIN?

>> IT APPEARS THAT APPLICATION WAS ONLY PRESENTED TO SPIN AND THAT WE DID NOT RECEIVE OR PROCESS AN APPLICATION FOR THAT ZONING REQUEST OR THAT PROPOSAL.

IT WAS ACTUALLY JUST A PROPOSAL.

>> THANKS.

>> ANYTHING ELSE FOR DIRECTOR KILO AT THIS TIME?

>> I'M NOT SURE WHEN IS APPROPRIATE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT NOT THE APPLICANTS, BUT THE RESIDENTS EXPRESSED.

THEY GAVE US A LIST OF TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT PAGES.

I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THOSE NOW.

I ASKED THAT STAFF LOOK INTO THAT AND GIVE US AN ANSWER ON IT.

>> CERTAINLY, WE LOOKED AT THE PAGE REFERENCES THAT WERE MADE.

ONE OF THEM WAS, I BELIEVE PAGE 7 SPECIFICALLY, AND I BELIEVE THE CONTEXT OF THAT WAS LOOKING AT ORDINANCE 1191, WHICH WAS THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN STUDY.

AND THE INFORMATION ON THAT PAGE 7 SPECIFICALLY JUST TALKED ABOUT THE OVERALL CHARACTER OF WHAT WAS CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE NORTH SECTOR WHEN WE WERE DOING THE LAND USE PLAN EVALUATION IN THE 2018 TIME FRAME.

[02:35:04]

IT'S JUST A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE OVERALL CHARACTER IN THAT GENERAL AREA WAS.

AS YOU GO FURTHER INTO THE DOCUMENT, IT GOT SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT LAND USE CATEGORIES WOULD BE PLACED ON EACH OF THE PROPERTIES FOR WHICH THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WAS DESIGNATED AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH THE PRINCIPAL PURPOSE OF THAT LAND USE DESIGNATION IS TO DEVELOP SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES ON LOT SIZES OF ONE ACRE OR GREATER.

THE OTHER REFERENCES, I BELIEVE WERE PAGE 11.

ALSO IN THIS PARTICULAR PAGE REFERENCE, I BELIEVE, WAS IN CONTEXT OF OUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED CONSOLIDATED LAND USE PLAN.

THAT PAGE REFERENCED THE DESCRIPTION OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

I BELIEVE JUST CAPTURED ONE PORTION OF A SENTENCE OR PARAGRAPH THAT JUST DESCRIBED THAT LOW DENSITY IS INTENDED TO BE RURAL IN CHARACTER AND OPEN.

HOWEVER, FURTHER INTO THE DOCUMENT, IT DESCRIBES WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT LAND USE CATEGORY IS, WHICH ONCE AGAIN IS TO DEVELOP SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL ON ONE ACRE OR GREATER.

THE OTHER REFERENCE MADE, I BELIEVE WAS PAGE 20, 21, I BELIEVE, OF THE SAME DOCUMENT, AND THAT AREA TALKS ABOUT WHAT WAS ALLOCATED AS AN OPTIONAL LAND USE CATEGORY IN THE LAND USE PLAN, WHICH IS THE RULE CONSERVATION LAND USE CATEGORY.

AND IT DESCRIBES DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THAT ARE INTENDED FOR THAT CATEGORY.

IF SOMEONE DEVELOPS UNDER THAT, BUT ONCE AGAIN, THAT'S AN OPTIONAL CATEGORY.

THE PRIMARY LAND USE IN MOST OF THOSE AREAS THAT HAVE THAT RULE CONSERVATION OPTION, IF NOT ALL OF THEM IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

AND THAT PARTICULAR DISTRICT, IT PROPOSES WHAT ARE CONSIDERED CLUSTER TYPE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, WHERE I THINK THE EXHIBIT THAT WAS REFERENCED SHOWED 132 LOT DEVELOPMENT UNDER CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION DESIGN AND THEN ANOTHER 32 LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS DEVELOPED UNDER THE RURAL CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WAS AN IMPLEMENT OF THAT LAND USE CATEGORY.

IT IS ALSO A 32 LOT DEVELOPMENT BUT HAS A LARGER CONSERVATION AREAS ALLOCATED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE FOR DIRECTOR KILO AT THIS TIME? THANK YOU, SIR.

>> NEXT UP IS THE APPLICANT.

LIKE ON THE PREVIOUS CASE, THIS IS A SECOND READING, WE HAVE TWO NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE REVIEWED THE PRIOR MEETINGS OR BEEN IN ATTENDANCE, SO WE DON'T NEED TO START FROM SCRATCH.

IF YOU WANT TO UPDATE US ON ANYTHING THAT'S CHANGED SINCE FIRST READING UNTIL NOW, ANY ADJUSTMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS OR MAYBE JUST RESTATE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW WITHOUT DOING THE FULL PRESENTATION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> YES, SIR, SHORT AND SWEET. I CAN DO THAT.

>> JODIE BOYD 44 NORTH OAK STREET, RANOKE, TEXAS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A VOLUNTARY POSITION, SO I APPRECIATE THE HEADACHE THAT YOU GUYS GO THROUGH.

PART OF THE, AND WHAT DIRECTOR KILO STATED WAS WE'RE TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE FEEL OF THIS AREA IS.

AS YOU SEE HERE IN THE RED AND WHITE, THESE ARE ALL ONE ACRE LOTS.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS ONE ACRE LOTS.

OUR DEVELOPMENT COMPLIES WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SWIM AGAINST THE CURRENT.

WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN STATES FOR THIS AREA, WHICH IS ONE ACRE LOTS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SAID THE LAST MEETING WAS ALL THE LARGER LOT STUFF THAT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BOB JONES, CURRENTLY, THAT'S ALL ZONE, SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY.

SO WHILE THERE ARE BIGGER LOTS THERE, SOME FIVE ACRE AND LARGER LOTS THERE, THEY HAVE ONE ACRE LOT ZONING BY RIGHT RIGHT NOW.

WHEN THESE PROPERTIES DO TURNOVER, AND THEY WILL, I CAN PRETTY WELL GUARANTEE THEY'RE GOING TO BE MORE ONE ACRE LOTS COMING ALONG BOB JONES.

THIS, AGAIN, AND I'VE SAID TO OTHERS, WE HAVE THREE LOTS ACROSS THE FRONT OF OURS.

THERE'S THREE LOTS TO THE SOUTH OF US.

I'VE BEEN DOING THIS 25 PLUS YEARS.

I'D BE HARD PRESSED TO WALK PAST A 1.4 OR 1.35 ACRE LOT AND A 1.2 ACRE LOT AND TELL THE DIFFERENCE, AND I DO THIS FOR A LIVING.

WE TRIED TO MAKE OUR PLAN CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WAS TO THE SOUTH OF US WITH THREE LOTS IN THE SAME AND ACTUALLY A LITTLE SMALLER AREA THAN WHAT WE HAVE.

HERE'S OUR LAND PLAN.

AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT SHORT AND SWEET HERE.

NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE REALLY HEARD FROM MANY OF THE NEIGHBORS LAST TIME WE WERE HERE IS THEY REALLY LIKE THE HORSE PROPERTY ASPECT AS SOME OF THE PROPERTIES ARE ON BOB JONES.

[02:40:03]

SO AFTER THE LAST READING, WE WENT OUT AND DID A MARKETING PUSH TO TRY TO SELL LOT 1 AND 2 TOGETHER AS A JOINT PACKAGE JUST TO ADDRESS OUR NEIGHBORS CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.

I'LL SAY I'M NOT MARRIED TO ONE ACRE LOTS.

WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO GET THE DEAL DONE.

IF WE COULD SELL THIS THING AS TWO ACRE LOTS, WE WOULD.

WE WOULD BE PROPOSING ONE ACRE LOTS.

THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO GET IT DONE.

WE HAD MULTIPLE SHOWINGS OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST TWO WEEKS CONTEMPLATING DOING LOT 1 AND 2 TOGETHER AS A JOINT PACKAGE.

HAVEN'T HAD ANY OFFERS ON THAT.

HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE ALL OF THE LOTS SPOKEN FOR THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE HOUSE.

WE HAVE CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS IN THE AREA, REPUTABLE LOCAL CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS THAT WE HAVE A HANDSHAKE DEAL WITH ON ALL SIX OF THE ONE ACRE LOTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LOT 1 WITH THE HOUSE ON IT.

I THINK THAT'LL BE A LITTLE HARDER SELL ON THAT JUST BECAUSE THE EXISTING HOME IS THERE.

YOU GOT TO FIND THAT RIGHT BUYER.

BUT WE CERTAINLY WANTED TO BE SENSITIVE TO WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAD TO SAY ABOUT, PERHAPS DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

WE HAVE BEEN MARKETING AND TRYING TO GET LOT 1 AND 2 TO GO AS A COMBINED PACKAGE.

WE JUST HAVEN'T QUITE GOTTEN THERE YET.

WE WANT TO LEAVE IT AT THE WAY WE HAVE IT WITH THE SEVEN TOTAL ONE ACRE LOTS BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE THAT COMPLIES WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, BUT DEFINITELY WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE MENTIONED THAT AS WE DO OUR MARKETING TO MARKET THIS PROPERTY.

FENCES, LIKE WE SAY, ONE OF THE THINGS I DO WANT TO SAY ON STREET LIGHTS AND SIDEWALKS.

IF YOU LOOK, WE HAVE A PICTURE HERE.

IF WE WERE TO DO SIDEWALKS, THOSE TWO BIG OAKS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY.

THE SIDEWALK WOULD HAVE TO COME ALONG WITH THAT FENCES.

YOU PUT THE SIDEWALKS IN RIGHT AWAY.

WE'RE PROPOSING NOT TO DO SIDEWALKS ON THIS PROPERTY.

WE FEEL LIKE THAT'S MORE CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE SURROUNDING USES.

DIRECTOR KILO SHOWED THE SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH THAT HAS THREE STREET LIGHTS.

I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE FARTHEST STREET LIGHT TO THE EAST, THE WHOLE INSIDE OF THAT STREET LIGHT IS TAPED WITH DUCT TAPE, SO IT DOESN'T SHINE INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE THERE.

WE'D PROPOSE AND NOT DO STREET LIGHTS ON THIS AS WELL.

FRANKLY, FOR US, JUST TO PULL BACK THE CURTAIN, WE DON'T PAY FOR STREET LIGHTS.

CITY PAYS FOR STREET LIGHTS, THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE.

ENCORE PUTS THOSE IN FOR FREE.

IT REALLY FOR US IS A NON STARTER, WHETHER WE HAVE STREET LIGHTS OR NOT.

I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE DON'T TO STAY MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS, BUT DEFINITELY WANTED TO ADDRESS THE SIDEWALKS AND THE STREET LIGHTS.

WE'VE HAD A TON OF RAIN OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS.

I'M SURE, AS EVERYONE KNOWS, I'VE MADE IT MY MISSION TO DRIVE DOWN BOB JONES TO MAKE SURE THAT INDEED WE DO NOT DRAIN ANY WATER ONTO ANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS.

IF YOU GO DOWN THERE AFTER RAIN, YOU'LL GO EAST ON BOB JONES, YOU'LL SEE THE WATER CASCADING OVER BOB JONES ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND THEN OFF TO THE COP INTO PROPERTY, SO WE CERTAINLY THINK WE'LL BE COMPLIANT WITH THAT.

AGAIN, HERE'S THE DRAINAGE STUFF.

I WON'T BELABOR THAT POINT.

WATER. ALL OF THAT STUFF.

WE ADDRESS ALL THOSE THINGS.

I'M HAPPY TO STAND BY WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

AGAIN, JUST TO END ON THIS SLIDE.

WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE COMPLIANT AND WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

ALL OF THEM ARE ONE ACRE LOTS FOR THE MAJORITY OR ONE ACRE LOTS, A FEW BIGGER.

OBVIOUSLY, MR. JOHNSON TO OUR WEST HAS A BIGGER LOT THERE THAT IS IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DESIGNATION THERE.

BUT WE FEEL LIKE WE COMPLY WITH THE FUTURE LAND PLAN.

WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A GREAT PLAN HERE.

THAT'LL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.

WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL, AND I'LL STAND BY WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE THE SHORTER PRESENTATION.

WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT TREES TONIGHT IN OTHER CASES JUST TO CONFIRM ON YOUR CASE, 91% PROPOSE TO BE PRESERVED?

>> YES, SIR. I CAN HAVE THAT SLIDE, IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO PULL IT UP THERE, MR. MAYOR.

YES. WE'RE SAVING 90.

>> SEVEN, SEVEN?

>> YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S RIGHT.

>> I JUST ROUNDED UP 91 OR WE CALL IT 90.

>> WELL, NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS, TOO, WILDLIFE WAS A CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORS, ORIGINALLY, I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT WE ARE GOING TO COMMIT OUR BUILDERS AND FUTURE RESIDENTS TO PLANT SIX INCH CALIPER TREES ON EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT.

WHEN YOU DO A LOOK AT THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE SITE, I THINK WE ARE THE BENEFIT OF THEM HAVING BEEN DENUDED IN THE PAST, SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT BUT IT IS WHAT IT EXISTS TODAY.

WE'LL HAVE MORE TREES ON OUR SITE WHEN THIS IS FULL BUILDOUT THAN EXISTS TODAY.

WE'LL ALSO GO A STEP FURTHER AND REQUIRE THAT SOME OF THOSE FIVE TREES PRODUCE MAST THAT IS FRIENDLY FOR DEER AND OTHER WILDLIFE TO HELP MAINTAIN THIS RURAL CHARACTER THAT'S OUT HERE.

WE THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT, AND FRANKLY, THAT'S PART OF WHY WE LIKE THIS SITE SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

>> I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THE NEW TREES IN THE FIRST READING, AGREED TO INSTALL FIVE TREES, SIX INCH CALIBER EACH OR LARGER ON EACH LOT?

>> THAT WAS IN THE FIRST READING MOTION.

[02:45:01]

>> YES, SIR. ALSO THE STACKING ON THE DRIVEWAYS OFF BOB JONES.

ANY DRIVEWAY GATES THAT ARE ON BOB JONES WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE FAR ENOUGH INTO THE LOT, THAT YOU COULD HAVE A AMAZON TRUCK OR OTHERWISE COME AND PULL OFF THE ROAD FULLY OFF THE ROAD TO PARK THERE BEFORE THEY GOT ACCESS THROUGH THE GATE.

WE'RE HAPPY TO COMPLY WITH THAT.

LOT 7, SPECIFICALLY I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS, THE FIRST READING FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, IT'D BE BETTER TO I THINK, LEAVE THAT UP TO THE BUILDER OR THE FUTURE HOMEOWNER OF LOT 7.

IF THAT'S A HEARTBURN, WE'RE FINE TO COMMIT THAT THAT FACES TO THE SOUTH TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH AS WELL.

JUST TO ADDRESS ALL THOSE COMMENTS.

>> ON LOT 7 I THINK IN THE FIRST READING MOTION, AT LEAST, WE LEFT IT UP TO THE BUILDER TO DECIDE OR EVENTUALLY THE HOMEOWNER, WHICH WAY THEY WANTED TO ORIENT THAT BUILDING AND WHERE THEY WANTED THE BACK YARD TO BE?

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR. STICK AROUND.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> ITEM 6F IS A SECOND READING, SO IT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 6F, AND I'LL INVITE PEOPLE TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK.

FIRST, I HAVE A COUPLE OF EMAILS, WHICH I'LL READ INTO THE RECORD, AND THEN WE'LL GET INTO THE COMMENT CARDS.

FIRST EMAIL, DANA DABBS, 445 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

WRITING THIS LETTER TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 500 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

THIS ONE'S FROM TAMMY MOORE AT 325 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, STATING OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 500 EAST BOB JONES ROAD DUE TO SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.

NEXT, I'LL GET INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS.

I KNOW SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE.

IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, JUST COME ON DOWN, YOU'LL HAVE YOUR THREE MINUTES.

IF YOU INDICATED YOU WANTED TO SPEAK, BUT CHANGE YOUR MIND, THAT'S OKAY.

OR IF YOU STATED YOU DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT FEEL LIKE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU CAN ALSO CHANGE YOUR MIND IN THAT WAY.

WE'LL START OFF WITH NIKKI SINHORST, AT 225, SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD, WILL SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO 6F.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, JODY AND TROY LEWIS THE DEVELOPERS.

MY NAME IS NIKKI SINHORST, AND I LIVE AT 225, SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD.

I STAND HERE TONIGHT NOT JUST FOR MYSELF, BUT AS PART OF A UNITED COMMUNITY THAT HAS SHOWN 100% OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING CHANGE.

NOT ONE VOICE IN SUPPORT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS SURROUNDING AREA.

HERE WE ARE AGAIN, WATCHING CITY COUNCIL PROBABLY GOING TO PASS AND IGNORE THE OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION.

I MUST SAY TONIGHT IS A BREATH OF FRESH AIR.

BUT AT THIS POINT IN YOUR PROCESS, WE ARE FULLY PREPARED THAT THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL, AND THIS COUNCIL WILL PROBABLY PASS THIS ZONING CHANGE.

DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE MASTER PLAN, I KNOW WE HEARD THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS YOU CAN INTERPRET THAT.

I THINK ALL THE RESIDENTS HAVE INTERPRETED THE MASTER PLAN ONE WAY, ONE ACRE PLUS, THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS OF READING THAT MASTER PLAN AND I THINK WE'RE ALL CONFUSED.

DESPITE EVERY RESIDENT SAYING NO.

BUT YOUR VOTE IS NOT THE END, AND IN FACT, I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE THE BEGINNING.

WE'RE ORGANIZING AND WE'RE GOING TO LAUNCH AN AWARENESS CAMPAIGN, INCLUDING THE FACEBOOK PAGE, MEDIA OUTREACH.

OUR MESSAGE IS SIMPLE.

THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS FORCED INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH OVERWHELMINGLY OPPOSITION.

EVERY BUILDER, BUYER, AND REAL ESTATE AGENT, WE WANT TO LET THEM KNOW.

WE'LL MONITOR EVERY PERMIT, EVERY TREE REMOVAL, EVERY DRAINAGE PLAN, AND EVERY TRUCK THAT ROLLS DOWN BOB JONES ONTO THE SITE.

WE'LL CHALLENGE NON COMPLIANCE AND WE'LL DOCUMENT EVERY MISSTEP.

WE WILL DELAY THE PROGRESS THAT'S NOT FULLY COMPLIANT WITH EVERY LAW CODE AND REQUIREMENT.

I BELIEVE YOU'RE SETTING A PRECEDENT HERE, NOT JUST FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT FOR ALL OF SOUTHLAKE.

IF THE COUNCIL SHOWS UNANIMOUS OPPOSITION AND THE OWN PLANNING DOCUMENTS, MEAN NOTHING, I'M NOT SURE OF THE MESSAGE THAT SENDS.

WE KNOW THE SUCCESS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT HINGES ON THESE SIX ADDITIONAL HOUSES, 2-$3 MILLION EACH.

I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO BUILD MY $3 MILLION HOME IN AN AREA WHERE I WASN'T NECESSARILY WELCOME, NOT OUTSIDE OF MY CONTROL.

I DON'T THINK OTHERS WOULD, IF THEY UNDERSTOOD THE WHOLE FULL DISCLOSURE.

OUR LITTLE ARMY BACK THERE PLANS TO GIVE ALL THE BUYERS FULL DISCLOSURE.

OUR COMMUNITY MAY FEEL RURAL, BUT WE'RE ALL UNITED AND WE'LL DEFEND OUR PROPERTIES AND THE LIFE WE ENJOY EVERY DAY OUT THERE.

EVERY PERSON THAT VISITS OUR HOUSE IS AMAZED AT HOW COOL THIS AREA IS.

[02:50:05]

IT'S LIKE SHADY OAKS, AND IF YOU ALL DRIVE OUT THERE, YOU'LL UNDERSTAND IT.

I ALWAYS TELL PEOPLE, WE FEEL LIKE WE WON THE LOTTERY TO LIVE THERE IN SOUTHLAKE, NEAR THE TRAILS WITH OUR HORSES, AND WE'RE READY TO FIGHT TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.

MY HEART GOES OUT TO LORI CERAMI, WHO IS ALSO OUR NEIGHBOR THERE.

SHE WALKS HER DAUGHTER ONCE A WEEK OR WHATEVER, WE SEE THEM.

SHE HAS TO APPEAL HER DAUGHTER AWAY FROM THE HORSES.

I APPRECIATE WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO DO WITH ELISE PRE AEP.

AS A MOM, YOU'VE SEEN ME UP HERE THREE TIMES NOW TALKING ABOUT THE DANGERS ON BOB JONES WITH MY DAUGHTER AND HER HORSES.

AS WE KEEP CONTINUING TO DEVELOP THIS AREA, THAT CONCERN ESCALATES EVERY TIME.

WE FURTHER DEVELOP THIS AREA.

IF EQUESTRIAN IS NOT WELCOME OUT THERE AND NOT WHAT'S IN THE PLAN, THEN AND YOU DON'T SUPPORT IT, CONTRARY TO THE PLAN.

IT'D BE NICE TO KNOW THAT SO THAT WE COULD ALL PLAN.

THEN I WOULD ALSO ASK THAT YOU UPDATE YOUR PLAN ACCORDINGLY SO THAT FUTURE HORSE PEOPLE DON'T MOVE OUT HERE KNOWING THAT EVERYTHING'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED TO ONE ACRE LOTS, TRYING TO GET YOUR HORSE TO THE TRAILS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT IS JIM SCHNEIDER AT 325, EAST BOB JONES ROAD IN SOUTHLAKE.

WILL SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO ITEM 6F.

>> MY NAME IS JIM SNYDER.

I DO LIVE AT 325, EXCUSE ME, EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

JUST A QUICK COMMENT FROM 2017-2022, THIS COUNTRY'S LOST 20 MILLION ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND.

I'M SEEING THAT HAPPEN HERE TONIGHT ONE ACRE AT A TIME.

THAT MEANS SOMETHING TO ME BECAUSE I'M A FOURTH GENERATION FARMER IN THE STATE OF IOWA.

THIS ALSO MEANS SOMETHING TO MY DAUGHTER BECAUSE SHE WILL INHERIT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT I LIVE ON AND SHE WILL BE THE THIRD GENERATION ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

AS YOU ERODE THAT COMMUNITY BY ALLOWING THE CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND INTO DEVELOPED LAND, YOU WILL IN TURN CONTINUE THAT PATH.

THE ADDITIONAL PIECE TO THIS IS THEY SAID THAT THEY PRESERVED 90 PERCENT OF THE TREES, BUT THERE REALLY HASN'T BEEN ANY COMMENT WITH REGARD TO THE TREES THAT ARE ON THIS.

THE LARGE TREE THAT IS ON THIS PROPERTY WILL BE DESTROYED.

THAT'S 100 PLUS YEAR TREE THAT'S ON THIS PROPERTY.

I GUESS WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU CAN BUY OFF A COMMUNITY BY GOING, WELL, WE'LL PUT SOME OTHER TREES UP. NO BIG DEAL.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, THAT IS, I GUESS, THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.

THE ADDITIONAL PIECE THAT THIS WILL HAVE WILL BE THE ADDITION OF ADDITIONAL HOUSES AT THE END OF A DEAD ROAD, I'M SORRY, A DEAD END ROAD.

THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE ON THIS ROAD WILL MORE THAN DOUBLE WITH THE AMOUNT OF HOUSES THAT ARE BEING PLACED ON THIS.

THE ADDITIONAL CONCERN IS, I HAVE NOT HEARD OR SEEN ANY DOCUMENTATION WITH REGARD TO THE AMOUNT OF TONNAGE OF DIRT FILL SAND, AND THE CONTEMPLATION OF WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO TO THE ROADS AND IF THE CITY IS GOING TO REDO THE ROADS ONCE THEY'RE DESTROYED.

EAST BOB JONES HAS SOME POTHOLES, SOME OTHER DETERIORATIONS OF THAT ROAD TODAY, IF YOU PUT HEAVY HAUL TRUCKS IN THAT TO BRING IN THE FILL, ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF, IS THERE MONEY BEING PUT ASIDE FOR THAT PURPOSE ONCE THIS IS COMPLETED? IN FACT, IF THE DEVELOPER IS SAYING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOLD, THIS WILL BE A VERY QUICK DETERIORATION.

MY WIFE ALSO SENT THAT LETTER EARLIER THIS EVENING AND I HAVE NOT HEARD OR SEEN ANY OFFICIAL RESPONSE WITH REGARD TO THE WATER PRESSURE OTHER THAN IT'S OKAY.

I CAN GET TONS OF PEOPLE TELLING ME THINGS ARE OKAY, BUT IN REALITY, THE REAL WORK HAS NOT BEEN DONE.

THE ADDITIONAL QUESTION IS, WHAT INFRASTRUCTURE DEMANDS IS THIS GOING TO PUT ON THE NATURAL GAS OR ON THE GAS LINES, AS WELL AS THE ELECTRIC, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE PUT ACROSS OUR RIGHT OF WAYS, AND THAT'S GOING TO AGAIN CAUSE ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS. MY TIME DONE?

>> IF YOU JUST WANT TO WRAP IT UP, PLEASE.

>> THAT'S ENOUGH. I'VE SAID ENOUGH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

[02:55:03]

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT IS DAVID THOMAS 4429, SADDLERIDGE ROAD.

WILL SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO ITEM 6F.

>> GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

I'M PROBABLY MORE CONCERNED OVER THE PROCESS THAN THE PROBLEM.

THE PROBLEM IS A DEVELOPMENT THAT NO ONE WANTS, BUT THE PROCESS IS A LITTLE ALARMING.

THIS IS MAINLY DIRECTED TO THE NEW CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU FOR SERVING, BUT I ATTENDED A SPIN MEETING, FULL PACKED HOUSE IN HERE, 100 PERCENT OPPOSITION OF THIS, EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF FOLKS THAT DIDN'T LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHOWED UP IN SUPPORT OF THE BUILDER, 100 PERCENT OPPOSITION, P&Z MEETING, 100 PERCENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION, NOT 90, 100 PERCENT.

LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING, SAME THING, 100 PERCENT OPPOSITION OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE UP THERE.

SO THAT'S CONCERNING, BUT I THINK WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT, I APPRECIATE THE DIRECTOR'S RESEARCH ON THE PAGES I MENTIONED.

I'D LIKE FOR HIM TO COME UP WHEN I'M DONE AND REFERENCE PAGE 21, AGAIN, OF THE COMPREHENSIVE SOUTHLAKE PLAN, BUT I WENT BACK AND I LOOKED AND THERE'S FOUR MEMBERS THAT ARE SITTING ON THE COUNCIL TODAY THAT VOTED FOR THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ON FEBRUARY 7TH, 23, A PLAN THAT STARTED IN 2018.

FOUR OF YOU ALL, INCLUDING MAYOR RANDY ROBBINS, RANDY WILLIAMSON, KATHY TALLEY.

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YOU ALL VOTED FOR THIS PLAN THAT PROMOTES AND DIRECTOR SAID IT WELL, HE MENTIONED RURAL CHARACTERISTIC SEVERAL TIMES.

IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOKED AT THE PLAN, I SENT Y'ALL AN EMAIL LAST WEEK, JUST TO REFRESH IT.

IT IS IN DIRECT OPPOSITION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PASS THROUGH TODAY.

ALSO I SENT AN EMAIL TO YOU ALL.

I DIDN'T SEND A NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I DIDN'T HAVE YOUR EMAIL, BUT LAST WEEK ASKING IF ANY MEMBER HAS DRIVEN THIS AREA LATELY.

MAYOR, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, COUNCIL MEMBERS, HAS ANYONE DRIVEN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD LATELY?

>> I HAVE BUT GO AHEAD WITH YOUR COMMENTS.

>> I THINK IF YOU DROVE IT, YOU'D SEE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AGAIN, I WANT TO STATE YOU HAVE FIERCE OPPOSITION. IT'S NOT WANTED.

I ENCOURAGE YOU IF YOU HAVEN'T DRIVEN IT, GO UP THERE AND DRIVE IT AGAIN.

THERE'S TOO MANY QUESTIONS ON THIS TO HAMMER IT THROUGH.

ALSO SPOKE TO LAKE GRAPEVINE LAKE MANAGER TODAY.

I SAID, DO YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT THE WATER INTRUSION FROM THIS SUBDIVISION ON THE CORE PROPERTY AND HE GOES, WELL, I GOT A CALL YESTERDAY FROM THE CITY.

I TOLD HIM THERE'S SOME ISSUES.

I GO, DID YOU APPROVE IT? HE GOES, NO, THE SPOUT AND SOME OTHER THINGS ARE PROBLEMS, BUT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIX IT.

JUST YESTERDAY, THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT CAME UP.

I THINK IT'S AN ILL PREPARED PLAN.

I WOULD SUGGEST TABLE IT.

THE NEW MEMBERS CAN DO MORE RESEARCH.

MAYOR, I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU'RE DOING.

YOU'RE ON THE BOB JONES PARK OF THE NATURE CENTER BOARD A FEW YEARS AGO.

THIS IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.

THIS GOES AGAINST THE GRAIN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT, TABLE IT, DO MORE RESEARCH, AND THEN COME BACK AND VOTE ON IT.

IF YOU CAN LOOK ME IN THE EYE AND SAY, THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, I'LL BE QUIET. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT IS NANCY POLSON AT 455, EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS NANCY POLSON.

I LIVE AT 455 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.

I WATCHED THE HOUSE BE BUILT OVER THE COURSE OF TWO YEARS, AND I SAW THE CARE THAT WAS TAKEN TO PRESERVE TWO VERY OLD TREES THAT ARE ON THAT PROPERTY, WHICH ACCORDING TO THIS MAP, APPEARS TO BE RIGHT WHERE THE CUL-DE-SAC AREA IS FOR THE PROPOSED STREET THAT IS GOING IN.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM THE BUILDER OR DEVELOPER, IF THERE IS ANY POSSIBILITY OF SAVING THOSE TWO TREES, THEY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR DECADES.

IT JUST SEEMS WRONG TO DESTROY THOSE TO PUT IN A STREET AND WITH A CUL-DE-SAC RIGHT AT THAT EXACT PLACE. THANK YOU.

[03:00:06]

>> THANK YOU. NEXT IS KATHY STOKELL AT 445 EAST BOB JONES.

>> GOOD EVENING. KATHY STOKELL 445 EAST BOB JONES.

I HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO SAY, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT YOUR QUESTION RELATED TO THE LAND USE PROGRAM.

I THINK MOST OF US WILL TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THE WAY THAT THE EXPERT TALKED ABOUT THIS PLAN, AND I'M JUST GOING TO READ A SMALL PORTION OF THAT.

BECAUSE IT NAME CHECKS BOB JONES ROAD.

IT BASICALLY SAYS, ALTHOUGH EQUESTRIAN ESTATES ARE FOUND THROUGHOUT SOUTHLAKE, THERE IS A CONCENTRATION OF THESE PROPERTIES IN THE NORTH SECTOR, PARTICULARLY ALONG BOB JONES ROAD.

THESE FEATURES AND THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE NORTH AREA PROVIDES SOUTHLAKE WITH A DISTINCTIVE RURAL CHARACTER WHICH DIFFERENTIATES IT FROM CITIES IN OTHER CITIES IN THE REGION.

THERE'S MORE. THEN ACCORDINGLY, THE PRESERVATION OF THE RURAL CHARACTER OF THE NORTH SIDE OF SOUTHLAKE IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE TO ITS CITIZENS.

EQUESTRIAN ESTATES. THAT'S WHAT'S OUT THERE.

THIS IS AN EQUESTRIAN ESTATE.

THERE IS I KNOW YOU'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT, WELL, THERE'S ONE ACRE LOTS AROUND US.

THOSE WERE PUT IN 40 YEARS AGO.

NOTHING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NOT CHANGED AT ALL IN 40 YEARS, BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF THE BIG LAND OWNERS COME UP HERE AND SAY, I WANT THIS TO HAPPEN SO THAT I CAN DO THIS WHEN IT'S TIME FOR ME TO SELL MY LAND.

NOBODY HERE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SAID THAT THEY WANT THIS.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, AND THIS IS TO THE POINT OF THE DEVELOPER.

WHAT PRECEDENT ARE YOU SETTING HERE? IF YOU'RE SAYING YES TO THIS, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO SAY YES NO TO ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES UP BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE IN THE FUTURE, AND I'VE DONE THE MATH.

THERE ARE OVER 15 PROPERTIES THAT ARE OVER FIVE ACRES JUST ALONG BOB JONES IN THIS LITTLE BIT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF YOU SAY YES TO THIS, THEN YOU'RE SAYING YES TO OVER 100 POSSIBLE HOUSES AND GOING FORWARD.

HOW IS THAT MAINTAINING THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? WHAT ARE YOU SAYING TO ALL OF US WHO LIVE OUT THERE? I KNOW SHADY OAKS SAYS THEIR AREA IS REALLY PRECIOUS, AND IT IS.

THAT'S A GREAT STREET. BUT THIS AREA IS TO ME, THE CROWN JEWEL OF SOUTHLAKE.

I THINK YOU'RE DESTROYING IT BY ALLOWING MASSIVE MCMANSIONS TO GO ON ONE ACRE LOTS.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PLAN, YOU SEE THE HOUSE THAT'S THERE, THAT HOUSE IS GOING TO LOOK RIDICULOUS ON THE ONE ACRE LOT BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BE TAKE THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF THE LOT, SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE LIKE THIS MUCH ROOM ON EACH SIDE OF THE POT OF THE HOUSE, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LAND IN FRONT OF IT COMING UP TO THE STREET.

IS THIS POSSIBLE BECAUSE YOUR ORDINANCE SAYS THAT LOW DENSITY IS ONE ACRE? BUT IT SAYS ONE ACRE IS A MINIMUM.

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IT HAS TO BE ONE ACRE.

I THINK YOU REALLY NEED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF AND THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SAY, THIS DOES NOT FIT.

THIS CAN BE BUILT SOMEWHERE ELSE IN SOUTHLAKE, AND I'M SURE IT WILL BE BEAUTIFUL.

BUT THIS HAS NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I WOULD REALLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU OPPOSE IT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT TO SAMUEL JONES, 475 EAST BOB JONES ROAD HERE IN SOUTHLAKE.

>> GOOD EVENING. GOOD NIGHT, ALMOST.

I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS' SERVICE, AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS PUTTING IN THESE HOURS.

I LIVE RIGHT AT 475 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE NEW STREET ENTRANCE ONTO BOB JONES ROAD.

I CAN REITERATE EVERYTHING YOU'VE SAID OR EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID IN OPPOSITION TO THIS OVERALL DEVELOPMENT.

BUT I RECOGNIZE WE'RE PROBABLY AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SLIPPERY SLOPE AS FAR AS THAT OVERALL DECISION BEING MADE.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF TWO OR THREE PRAGMATIC, MORE PRAGMATIC TYPE REQUESTS OR QUESTIONS.

WITH RESPECT TO THE NEW STREET, I WOULD REQUEST THAT THE ENTRY ASPECT OF THAT BE PUSHED BACK AS FAR AS POSSIBLE AWAY FROM BOB JONES ROAD.

IT'S TO ALLOW FOR STACKING AND OR AND TO NOT OVERBEAR MY EXIT AND ENTRY OF MY DRIVEWAY.

SECONDLY, I WOULD ASK THAT THE ENTRY DESIGN, THE ENTRY INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT DESIGN ERR ON THE SIDE OF UNDERSTATEMENT, AS OPPOSED TO OVERSTATEMENT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE HOUSES.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED AN EGO ENTRYWAY INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

I'D RATHER JUST SEE THE STREET AND THE FENCE THAT GO DOWN IT.

[03:05:01]

THEN LASTLY, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU REVISIT THE QUESTION ON LOT 7 AND HOW THAT HOME WOULD BE CONFIGURED.

IF YOU TURN IT THE OTHER WAY AND YOU HAVE YOUR BACKYARD UP AGAINST THE CORE PROPERTY, WHICH I BELIEVE SOMEONE SAID THAT'S HOW I'D WANT MINE.

WELL, NOT IF IT'S ABOUT A THIRD OF WHAT YOUR BACKYARD DEPTH WOULD BE IF YOU TURN IT THE OTHER WAY.

I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.

I'VE GOT THAT OPEN PROPERTY DOWN THE SIDE OF MINE AS WELL.

I WOULD ASK ON THE 40-FOOT SETBACK OFF OF BOB JONES, IS THAT GOING TO CONVERT TO A 20-FOOT SIDE SETBACK IF YOU TURN THAT HOUSE? IF YOU HAVE IT LOOKED THE OTHER WAY.

THE OTHER QUESTION IS, WITH A 40-FOOT FRONT SETBACK, IT'S GOING TO BACK THAT HOUSE, AND THE FOOTPRINT OF THAT HOME IS GOING TO BACK UP AGAINST THE CORE PROPERTY.

YEAH, MAYBE YOU CAN GET A POOL IN THERE IN THAT BACKYARD.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE EIGHT OR 10 HOMES ALONG BOB JONES ROAD FACING THAT ROAD, WITH 40-FOOT SETBACKS AND DRIVEWAYS ARE FACING ON BOB JONES ROAD.

YOU'RE GOING TO COME TO THE LAST ONE.

IT'S GOING TO BE A 20-FOOT SETBACK AND A THREE-CAR GARAGE STARING AT YOU.

RIGHT ACROSS FROM MY PROPERTY.

I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO FIT.

I WANT TO TRUST THAT THE RIGHT BUYER IS GOING TO BUY IT, AND THE RIGHT BUILDER IS GOING TO BUILD IT.

BUT TRUSTING IN THAT BY ITSELF DOESN'T GIVE YOU A LOT OF CONFIDENCE OR ALLOW YOU TO SLEEP ALL THAT WELL AT NIGHT WITH RESPECT TO THAT DECISION.

I THINK THIS IS THE POINT TO ARGUE THAT.

I THINK THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO THAT IN THE PAST, AND BASICALLY, WE SAID, WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE AND KICK IT DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE THAT LOT AND THAT HOME PHASE, BOB JONES ROAD, NOT THE NEW STREET.

JUST BECAUSE OF THE LAYOUT OF THE LOT IN AND OF ITSELF.

WITH THAT, A COUPLE OF PRAGMATIC REQUESTS, AND I'LL LEAVE IT TO THAT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE THAT.

NEXT IS AMANDA HIGGINBOTHAM AT 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

>> HI, GOOD EVENING. I'M AMANDA HIGGINBOTHAM, ADDRESS 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSAL.

BOB JONES IS MORE THAN JUST A STREET.

IT'S A NATURE AND CULTURAL FABRIC OF OUR COMMUNITY.

IT BORDERS BOB JONES NATURE CENTER AND PRESERVE, WHICH IS ONE OF SOUTHLAKE'S MOST VALUABLE ENVIRONMENTAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES.

ALLOWING THIS SQUISH DEVELOPMENT, RISK DISRUPTING THE QUIET, RURAL CHARACTER THAT HAS BEEN QUOTED SEVERAL TIMES TONIGHT.

WE ALL HAVE LARGE YARDS FULL OF GREENERY, UNLIKE THOSE LISTED ABOVE THAT HAS ALSO PREVIOUSLY BEEN BROUGHT UP.

ADDITIONALLY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THIS PART OF TOWN IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE INCREASED TRAFFIC OR LARGE-SCALE DEVELOPMENT.

BOB JONES ROAD IS A TWO-LANE ROAD ALREADY BURDENED BY DAILY SCHOOL TRAFFIC AND RECREATIONAL USERS.

REZONING WOULD LEAD TO MORE CONGESTION, MORE SAFETY ISSUES, AND MORE PRESSURE ON CITY SERVICES.

NOT TO MENTION THE POTENTIAL FINANCIAL BURDEN OF UNNECESSARY ROAD OR UTILITY UPGRADES.

MAYBE WE DO NEED A SIDEWALK, WITH HOW LARGE OF A DEVELOPMENT THIS IS.

I KNOW MY MOM HAD A REALLY FIGHT TO GET THE SCHOOL BUS JUST TO DROP ME OFF ON THE CURVE RIGHT NEXT TO THE NATURE CENTER.

WHERE'S THE SCHOOL BUS GOING TO DROP OFF ALL THOSE KIDS IF THEY'RE WAITING ON A GATE TO OPEN AND CLOSE? ALSO, IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN THERE, THERE IS NOT MUCH SPACE BEFORE IT IS CORE PROPERTY.

A SKETCHY CORE PROPERTY.

YOU GO DOWN, IT OPENS TO A BUNCH OF TRAILS, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO HEAD RIGHT OVER TO A DEAD END.

JUST SOMETHING TO BRING UP, ONCE AGAIN, WITH THE WHOLE INFRASTRUCTURE NOT REALLY THINKING THINGS THROUGH.

THIS WILL BE A CONSTRUCTION OF SIX MORE LARGE HOMES THAT WILL RESULT IN YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION, YEARS OF NOISE NEXT TO ALL OF THESE PARK AREAS, AND YEARS OF UNPROMISED AND UNACTUIZED DEVELOPMENT.

A HANDSHAKE DEAL IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

FINALLY, REZONING SETS A CONCERNING PRECEDENT.

AS THE DEVELOPER JUST SAID, THOSE BEAUTIFUL LOTS OF ACREAGE AND EQUESTRIANS WILL BE DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPED AND BUILT AND BUILT INTO ONE-ACRE LOTS.

HE JUST SAID IT HIMSELF, THAT IT CAN BE TURNED INTO ONE-ACRE LOTS.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE WILLING TO PUT YOUR NAMES BEHIND TODAY? I JUST LOST MY SPOT. IT SIGNALS THAT EVEN AREAS MEANT TO BE PRESERVED AS LOW-DENSITY, AGRICULTURE, NATURAL USE ARE OPEN FOR RECONSIDERATION.

I'M NOT DEBATING THE LEGITIMACY OF THIS PROPOSAL, BUT I AM DEBATING THE ACCURACY OF HOW THIS PROPOSAL UPHOLDS THE LAND USE PLAN.

ACCORDING TO MY HOTH LAKE NEWS, REZONING SHOULD ENSURE THE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, MINIMIZE CONFLICTS, AND PROTECT PROPERTY VALUES.

ADDITIONALLY, TEXAS CONSTITUTIONAL ARTICLE 1, SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH 1 STATES ALL GOVERNMENT OF RIGHTS ORIGINATES WITH THE PEOPLE.

IT'S FOUNDED UPON THEIR WILL ONLY,

[03:10:01]

AND IS INSTITUTED SOLELY FOR THE GOOD OF THE WHOLE.

PUBLIC OFFICERS ARE THE TRUSTEES AND SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE AND ARE AT ALL TIMES AMENABLE TO THEM.

I URGE YOU TO PRESERVE WHAT MAKES THIS PART OF SOUTHLAKE SO GREAT AND SPECIAL AND REJECT THIS REZONING PROPOSAL, AS WE ARE ALL STANDING AS A COMMUNITY, BEGGING YOU TO RECONSIDER.

THERE IS SOMETHING BETTER OUT THERE FOR SOUTHLAKE, SOMETHING BETTER OUT THERE FOR US, AND SOMETHING BETTER OUT THERE FOR FUTURE HOMEOWNERS THAT WILL COME, LEARN TO APPRECIATE WHAT WE DO OFFER, AND LEARN TO EMBRACE IT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT IS JULIE LANDESBERG AT 305 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, WHICH DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F. JULIE HERE? DO YOU WANT TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK? OKAY. CHANGE THAT ONE TO SPEAK.

>> HI. JULIE LANDESBERG, 305 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

I SERVED ON PARK BOARD, I SERVED ON THE BOARD OF THE NATURE CENTER.

WE WORKED WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEER TO MAINTAIN THE TRAILS BEFORE THE CITY TOOK THAT AREA OVER.

WE ALSO WORKED WITH OUR POLICE DEPARTMENTS FOR A GOOD NUMBER OF YEARS ON [INAUDIBLE] MOUNTED PATROL.

I AM CONCERNED HERE ABOUT THE PROCESS.

WE HAVE BEEN TO ANY NUMBER OF SPIN, PN Z, AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OVER THE COURSE OF 30 YEARS.

WHEN THIS NUMBER OF CITIZENS COME OUT OPPOSING A PLAN, WE HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE THE PEOPLE WE'RE TALKING TO JUST IGNORE THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY LIKE THIS.

WE THINK THIS PUTS TOO MANY HOMES IN AN AREA THAT IT IS JUST SQUISHING THEM INTO A SMALL PART.

IT'S GOING TO NOT BE PART OF WHAT OUR COMMUNITY LOOKS LIKE.

I REMEMBER YEARS AGO AND I THINK IT WAS WITH MAYOR STACY, HE WAS SAYING, IT'S NOT THE COUNCIL'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT A DEVELOPER GETS THE BIGGEST BANG FOR HIS BUCK, AND THEY WOULD ASK THEM TO COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT PLAN IF SO MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY OPPOSED TO WHAT WE ARE BEING SHOWN SO I JUST ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT IS LEE SYNHORST AT 225 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

IS LEE HERE AND CHANGE THEIR MIND? NO. OKAY. JADE SYNHORST AT 225 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

>> I'LL SAY SOMETHING.

>> ALL RIGHT. IF YOU COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> MY NAME IS JADE SYNHORST.

I LIVE AT 2:25 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD.

>> I APOLOGIZE ON YOUR LAST NAME. I GOT IT WRONG.

>> THAT'S FINE. I'M GLAD YOU WERE CLOSE ENOUGH, WHO CARES? I REALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT TO SAY.

EVERYTHING'S BEEN SAID AS FAR AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE, ALL THAT STUFF.

THE BIGGEST THING FOR ME IS, I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR DOING WHAT YOU DO.

ALL I CAN ASK IS LISTEN TO WHAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE ARE SAYING.

EVERY SINGLE PER 100% OPPOSITION IS SAYING.

EVERYONE'S SAYING, WE DON'T WANT IT.

ASK YOURSELF, IF YOU WERE LIVING IN OUR SITUATION, WHAT WOULD YOU THINK IF EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SAID, WE DON'T WANT IT AND PASSED SIX TO ZERO?

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT IS RICHARD ANDERSON, 4553, NORTH WHITE CHAPEL.

DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

>> I THINK THAT MIGHT BE SUSAN JOHNSON AT 400 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS.

I'M NOT SURE IF SUSAN JOHNSON HERE.

SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION? OPPOSITION TO 6F.

DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? GOT IT. THANK YOU.

IT WASN'T MARKED ON HERE, BUT WE'LL MARK IT FOR YOU.

BOTH THUMBS DOWN, GOT IT.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> [LAUGHTER] NEXT IS FRANK JOHNSON, 400 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? COME ON DOWN, SIR. WE'LL CHANGE THAT TO SHOW THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING.

>> [BACKGROUND].

>> WE'RE HERE ALL EVENING. TAKE YOUR TIME.

[03:15:03]

>> FRED JOHNSON, 400 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

MY WIFE AND I ARE THE ONES WHO ARE PROBABLY AFFECTED BY THIS MORE THAN ANYTHING, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT AN 800 FOOT SHARED PROPERTY LINE WITH THESE PEOPLE, AND I'M NOT GETTING A LOT OF ANSWERS FROM THEM.

LET ME BACK UP HERE.

I ANSWER TWO QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

ONE, YOU ASK IF HOW FAR THIS HAD GOTTEN WITH THE PREVIOUS ATTEMPT TO REZONE IT.

THAT GOT TO PLANNING AND ZONING, NEVER GOT ANY FURTHER, BECAUSE THE CURRENT OWNERS CAME IN AND ADDRESSED THOSE DEVELOPERS AT THAT TIME, WANTED TO BUY TWO BLOCKS.

IT ENDED UP THEY BOUGHT THE WHOLE THING.

THEIR MARRIAGE FELL APART UNFORTUNATELY, SO NOW WE'RE GONE.

SECONDLY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 91% TREE COVERAGE ON THIS.

UNFORTUNATELY, HYPOTHAL CANKER WHICH KILLS MOST STOKE TREES IS VERY ENDEMIC IN THAT AREA.

I HAVE LOST PERSONALLY 47 TREES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS ONE OF WHICH RING DOWN AT 233 YEARS.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT.

I'VE TALKED TO A&M, WHATEVER.

TWO OF THE BIG TREES ON THE PROPERTY NEXT TO US ARE SHOWING SIGNS OF THAT THIS SPRING.

I AIN'T GOING TO BE NO 91% TREE COVERAGE ON IT.

MY CONCERN MORE THAN ANYTHING IS THE NUMBER OF HOUSES ON ONE ACRE LOT.

IF YOU HAVE THE HOUSES THAT ARE THERE NOW, THESE ARE 3,000, 04,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSES.

YOU TAKE AND PUT A 16,000 FOOT SQUARE LOT WHICH THE DEVELOPER HAS TOLD ME HE'S LOOKING AT MULTI MILLION DOLLAR HOMES, $430 OF SQUARE FEET BUYS YOU LET'S SEE, 06,000 MAYBE 7,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME.

THE SIZE OF THE HOMES ON THIS ARE GOING TO DWARF THE ACREAGE.

A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME ON ONE ACRE IS ONE THING, 16,000 FEET IS SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.

I RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL LOOK AT BEING ABLE TO COMBINE SOME MORE OF THESE LIKE JODIE SAID, HE WAS TRYING TO COMBINE LOTS 1 AND 2.

THREE, FOUR HOUSES ON THIS MAKES A HECK OF A LOT OF DIFFERENCE OTHER THAN SEVEN.

THAT'S WHAT I THINK ALMOST EVERY ONE OF US WOULD AGREE TO.

THAT'S ABOUT ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE YOU.

TAMMY MOORE AT 325 EAST BOB JONES ROAD DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION.

GABRIELLA MILLER, 405 ORCHARD HILL DRIVE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS SUPPORT.

ALSO SEND IN AN EMAIL ON MAY 5, 2025.

YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK? WE DID.

PETE LANDESBERG AT 305 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

ANGELA HIGGINBOTHAM AT 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD HERE IN SOUTHLAKE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

BEN ALLEN AT 6:01 GARDEN COURT HERE IN SOUTHLAKE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS SUPPORT FOR 6F.

ANIVA STATON AT 445, EAST BOB JONES ROAD, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION TO 6F.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO IS HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK OR SUBMIT A COMMENT CARD? PLEASE, COME ON DOWN.

>> HI, GUYS. GOOD EVENING, OR I GUESS, GOOD NIGHT NOW.

MY NAME IS ALEXIS HAGEN BOTHAM.

I'M ACTUALLY ON 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD AS WELL, BUT I'LL BE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MRS. DABBS, WHO LIVES ON 445 EAST BOB JONES ROAD. SHE'S HERE HERSELF.

SHE JUST CAN'T SPEAK REALLY WELL RIGHT NOW.

SHE'S NOT HERE. I LIED.

KIDDING. DEAR CITY COUNCILOR MEMBERS, I AM WRITING THIS LETTER TO AGAIN, VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE I'M SORRY, I'M NOT VERY BIG PUBLIC SPEAKER, SO JUST DEAL WITH ME HERE.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 500 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

UNFORTUNATELY, I WILL BE ON A BUSINESS TRIP ON MAY 6 AND

[03:20:02]

I'M UNABLE TO ATTEND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

THE RESIDENTS OF THE NORTH SOUTHLAKE HAVE SPOKEN LOUD AND CLEAR THROUGH PETITION, LETTERS, AND ATTENDANCE OF SPIN, P&Z IN THE APRIL 15 COUNCIL MEETING THAT NO ONE SUPPORTS ITS DEVELOPMENT.

I HAVE BEEN PROUD OF THE STRONG COMMUNITY RESPONSE AND EFFORT TO BLOCK THIS BILL CONVENED PLAN, BUT NOT IMPRESSED BY THE WAY WE HAVE BEEN TREATED BY THE CITY.

I FEEL NONE OF THE CONCERNS BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE EXISTING RESIDENTS WERE GIVEN MUCH THOUGHT.

WHILE THE DEVELOPER WAS NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ANY ACTUAL STUDIES SUPPORT HIS STATEMENTS REGARDING REQUIRED DIRT WORK, DRAINAGE, IMPACT TO THE CORE ENGINEER PROPERTY, AND CONTINUED EROSION OF THE DOWNSTREAM ROADWAY, WILDLIFE CONCERNS OR FUTURE TRAFFIC FLOWS ON BOB JONES OR WHITE CHAPEL.

THERE WERE ALSO SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO SUPPORTED OR SUGGESTED CURRENT RESIDENTS WHO WERE TRYING TO PREVENT OTHERS FROM HAVING THIS GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD TO LIVE IN.

ACTUALLY, WE ARE TRYING TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE THINGS THAT MAKE THIS PART OF SOUTHLAKE SPECIAL SO THAT THE FUTURE RESIDENTS WILL THINK OF SOUTHLAKE AS A UNIQUE CITY, NOT JUST ANOTHER OVERGROWN SUBURB IN THE METROPLEX.

EVERY RESIDENT WHO BOUGHT OUT HERE HAD TO WAIT FOR AN EXISTING HOME TO BECOME AVAILABLE.

WE WERE WANTING THIS AREA BECAUSE OF THE FEEL AND BECAUSE OF EXISTING ZONINGS WOULD ALLOW FOR THE AREA TO REMAIN LARGELY UNCHANGED.

IT IS A PRESERVED AREA, AT LEAST IT SHOULD BE.

THE PROPOSED POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE DIRECTLY OPPOSED FROM 475 EAST BALL JONES ROAD.

ANY CAR LIGHTS LEAVING THE DEVELOPMENT WILL SHINE DIRECTLY INTO THEIR HOME.

DEVELOP PROPOSED SOLUTION WAS TO COVER THEIR GATE.

I THINK WE WOULD ALL AGREE THAT THIS ISN'T THE CURRENT RESIDENCE, WHY WE MOVED HERE.

I'M GOING TO SKIP DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO WE HAVE MORE TIME TO TALK.

THE P&Z COMMUNITY STATED ALL THREE LOTS ON BOB JONES SHOULD BE FACING THE EXISTING STREET IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP SOME UNION WITH THE CURRENT LOOK AND FEEL.

BUT THE CITY COUNCILOR CHANGED THAT STATING IT WASN'T FAIR TO THE NEW HOME BUYERS.

I WISH THERE HAD BEEN SOME OF THAT CONCERN EXPRESSED FOR THE EXISTING ONES.

LASTLY, I THINK THE COUNCILOR WILL BE SETTING A DAMAGING EXAMPLE.

THE LOVELY HORSE ESTATES THAT ARE SO VIVIDLY REPRESENTED IN THE PROJECT OF 2035 PLAN AND UPDATING THE CONSOLIDATED FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DATED FEBRUARY 23 WILL BE A THING OF THE PAST.

WE KNOW IT IS MEANT TO BE DEVELOPED, BUT HOW IS IT DEVELOPED MATTERS.

WITH ALL THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS AND PROGRESS, PLEASE SLOW DOWN, TAKE A HARD LOOK AT WHAT IS REALLY BEST FOR THE CITY AND KEEP WHAT MAKES SOUTHLAKE UNIQUE AND INTACT.

I BELIEVE I'M THE LAST ONE SPEAKING TONIGHT.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE WAS ONLY TWO PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DO THIS.

ALL OF US CAME OUT FROM THE WARD WORKS TO TELL YOU GUYS THAT WE REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU GUYS WOULD JUST LOOK AT THIS PLAN AGAIN AND THINK ABOUT OUR OPINIONS AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO AS PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED THERE.

MY MOM'S BEEN THERE FOR 25 YEARS.

SUSAN JOHNSON HAS BEEN THERE VERY LONG TIME, SO JUST PLEASE TAKE OUR FEELINGS INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. BEFORE I WRAP UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE ALSO HAVE THE ONLINE SUBMITTALS, AND I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THOSE QUICKLY. TO PUT THEM IN THE RECORD.

RICHARD ANDERSON, 4553 NORTH WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD IS OPPOSED.

MARK BERGE AT 405 EAST BOB JONES ROAD IS OPPOSED.

AMBER BUTCHER AT 129 WALFORD LANE IS IN FAVOR.

WENDELL CHOY AT 4515 HOMESTEAD DRIVE IS OPPOSED.

DAN COMBE AT 339 WEST HIGHLAND IS IN FAVOR.

DANA DABBS, AT 445 EAST BOB JONES ROAD IS OPPOSED.

JOHN DOTTY AT 4322 HOMESTEAD DRIVE IS OPPOSED.

PEDRAM FARNAK IS AT 816 EAST BOB JONES ROAD IS OPPOSED.

DOUG FULP, NO ADDRESS IS OPPOSED.

TODD AND DONNA HELDRIG, AT 4420 HOMESTEAD DRIVE IS OPPOSED OR ARE OPPOSED.

DAVID TAMMY CONNOR AND CAMDEN HINK AT 4300 WALNUT DRIVE, ARE OPPOSED.

RETIN ANGELA HIGGINBOTHAM, 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

AMANDA HIGGINBOTHAM, 435 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED.

MONTE AND REBECCA HOCKLE AT 4425, HOMESTEAD ROAD ARE OPPOSED.

FRED AND SUSAN JOHNSON AT 400 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

CLAIRE JOHNSON AT 323 BUCKBOARD COURT IS OPPOSED.

RICHARD AND JUDY JOHNSON AT 323 BUCKBARD COURT ARE OPPOSED.

SAMUEL AND SHERRY JONES, 475 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

D. JONES AT 475 EAST BOB JONES ROAD IS OPPOSED.

KENLEY AND ANDREW JONES, 4680, NORTH WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD, ARE OPPOSED, TOM AND NANCY COLTER, 4427 SODA RIDGE ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

JAMIE LEMAN, 4720, NORTH WHITE CHAPEL, OPPOSED.

[03:25:06]

PETER AND JULIE LANDESBERG, 305 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

MICHAEL LOVE AT 465 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED.

GLENDA LOVE, NO ADDRESS, OPPOSED, KRISTEN LACY MALONEY, 813 GLEN ABBEY, OPPOSED.

GABRIELLA MILLER AT 405 ORCHARD DRIVE, IN FAVOR.

MICHAEL MILLS, 520 WEST HIGHLAND STREET IS IN FAVOR.

TAMMY MOORE, 325 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED.

BRIAN NORTON, 198, SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD, OPPOSED, JULIE NOEL, 465 BROOKS COURT OPPOSED.

GEORGE AND NANCY POLSON AT 455 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

BRIAN AND MELISSA RAKIMA AT 808 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ARE OPPOSED.

MICHAEL SALMON AT 4506 SODA RIDGE ROAD OPPOSED.

SANFORD SAM TEXAS IS AT 500 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

THE PROPERTY OWNER IS IN FAVOR.

JIM SCHNEIDER, 325, EAST BOB JONES ROAD IS OPPOSED.

GAIL SPARKS, 4520, SODA RIDGE ROAD IS OPPOSED.

ANIVA STATON, 445 EAST BOB JONES ROAD OPPOSED.

KATHY STOKELL AT 445 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED.

NIKKI AND JADE, SEIN HORSE, 225 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD ARE OPPOSED, LEE SYNHORST AT 225 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD, OPPOSED.

BEATRIX TERRAZAS, 4322 HOMESTEAD DRIVE, OPPOSED.

DAVID THOMAS, 4429 SADDLERIDGE OPPOSED.

DONNA WALKER, 400 BROOKS COURT, OPPOSED, AMY WATTS, 800 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED, ANNA JENSEN WEBBER, 4323 HOMESTEAD DRIVE, OPPOSED, KARA WHITE, 4475 HOMESTEAD DRIVE, OPPOSED, GLENDA WILLIAMS, 465 EAST BOB JONES ROAD, OPPOSED, BUTCH AND SALLY WILLINS, 4721, NORTH WHITE CHAPEL OPPOSED.

DREW AND SANDRA WILSON, 120 SAM BASS RIDGE ROAD ARE OPPOSED.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK OR SUBMIT ANY KIND OF COMMENT? COME ON DOWN.

WE'LL GO OVER HERE FIRST, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK OVER HERE.

IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> NIKKI SEIN HORSE 225 SAM BASS.

I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT YOU GUYS ALL LOOK UP THE ADDRESSES FOR THE ONES THAT ARE FOR IT, DO NOT LIVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S THE REALTOR DEVELOPER'S FRIEND.

THERE'S LIKE THREE. THEY DON'T LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THAT.

>> NANCY POLSON, 455 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

I DECIDED I'D SHARE MY PREPARED REMARKS AFTER ALL.

THIS POTENTIAL SUBDIVISION IS NOT CONDONED BY ANY PERSON LIVING IN PROXIMITY TO EAST BOB JONES ROAD OR ON IT.

THERE WILL BE NO HOMEMADE COOKIES, HOMEMADE BREAD OR CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIES TO WELCOME NEW AND UNSUSPECTING RESIDENTS TO THIS UNWANTED BLIGHT ON OUR LANDSCAPE.

APPROVAL BY CITY COUNCIL OF THIS APPLICATION BY THIS DEVELOPER DISHONORS THE WORK PUT INTO THE CREATION OF THE 2035 LAND USE PLAN BY ITS FOUNDERS AND SUBSEQUENT CITY COUNCILS WHO CHOSE TO RESPECT ITS GUIDELINES FOR PRESERVING THE RURAL NATURE OF OUR AREA.

THE CITIZENS OF NORTHERN SOUTHLAKE ARE NOT PLEASED TO HAVE A CURRENT CITY COUNCIL THAT IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF OUR CONCERNS.

FINALLY, THIS SITUATION SHOULD NOT BE A RESOLUTION TO SOMEONE'S PERSONAL AND PRIVATE ISSUES AT THE EXPENSE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE WERE ALL ONE AT ONE TIME.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO SPEAK BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES, SIR.

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS PETE LANDESBERG.

I LIVE AT 305 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

THE ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS I THINK THE ENTITY THAT INVESTED THE MOST IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.

WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT BOB JONES PARK,

[03:30:02]

THE BOB JONES NATURE CENTER, THE WALNUT GROVE PARK, ALONG LAKE GRAPEVINE, WHICH THE CITY HAS ACQUIRED THE LEASE FOR.

YOU ADD IT ALL UP, AND IT'S CLOSE TO 1,000 ACRES THAT THE CITY HAS DEDICATED TOWARDS GREEN SPACE, WHICH WAS SHOWN IN THE PUBLIC SURVEYS THAT WERE TAKEN, THAT THIS IS OVERWHELMINGLY WHAT THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE WANT.

YOU'VE INVESTED SO MUCH IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU'RE WILLING TO APPROVE THIS PROPOSAL. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS TONIGHT BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE.

I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 6F.

CAN THE APPLICANT COME ON BACKUP? I THINK I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

STARTING WITH THIS VISUAL, COULD YOU MAYBE CLARIFY LIKE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE OR FOOTPRINT, AS FAR AS THERE'S THE DOTTED LINE OR BROKEN LINE, AS FAR AS THE SETBACKS AND ALL THAT, HOW BIG ARE THE FOOTPRINT IS GOING TO BE FOR THESE HOMES ROUGHLY? IT'S NOT GOING TO REALLY TAKE UP ALL THE YELLOW AS MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT'S JUST THE ENVELOPE, BUT THAT INCLUDES THE YARD, AS WELL, NOT JUST HOUSE.

>> YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT.

WHAT'S DESIGNATED HERE WHAT THE DOTTED LINES ARE THE SETBACKS THAT'S PRESCRIBED BY ORDINANCE.

WE'RE JUST SIMPLY DEMONSTRATING WHAT THE SETBACKS YOU COULDN'T PUT A HOME OR A BUILDING OVER THOSE DOTTED LINES.

THAT'S JUST SETBACKS FOR THE ORDINANCE.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY, IF YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THIS, AND I MISSED IT, I'M SORRY, BUT ANY ROUGH ESTIMATES ON HOUSE SIZES THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING, I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE OTHER BUILDERS INVOLVED, BUT WHAT DO YOU EXPECT?

>> I'D ANTICIPATE THAT THESE HOUSES WILL ALL BE IN THAT 4,500-6,500 SQUARE FEET.

WE ROUGHLY TAKE UP A QUARTER OF THE LOT FOR A 43,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT.

>> ON THIS DIAGRAM, WHERE IS THE HUNDRED YEAR OLD TREE ROUGHLY? IF YOU NEED TO USE THE CURSE OR GO AHEAD.

>> I THINK THE TREE IN QUESTION, I'M NOT CERTAIN, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.

THAT TREE WILL BE COMING DOWN.

THE BALANCE OF THE TREES ON THE SIDE ARE UP HERE ON THE TOP.

AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND I GREW UP IN THE NURSERY BUSINESS.

MY GRANDPARENTS MOVED TO SOUTHLAKE IN 1960.

I GREW UP PLANTING TREES AND LANDSCAPING ALL OVER THE CITY, SO I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO KEEP TREES.

FRANKLY, THAT'S AN ADDED VALUE AD FOR US.

WE'LL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP THE TREES, BUT WE CERTAINLY ARE COMPLYING WITH THE ORDINANCES AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE CITY WITH REGARDS TO TREE PRESERVATION.

>> JUST A THOUGHT. IF THERE'S ANY WAY, I KNOW IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT STREET.

IF THERE'S ANY WAY YOU COULD WORK AROUND IT, IF YOU HAVE TO TWEAK THE LAYOUT OF THESE LOTS.

I THINK THAT'D BE SOMETHING WE'D BE INTERESTED IN AND MAYBE WE CAN EVEN BUILD THAT IN THE MOTION, BUT THAT'S WHAT I HAD FOR NOW, GO AROUND DIAS AND SEE WHAT OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE, BUT JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN MR. JONES SPOKE, HE MENTIONED A GATE.

I DON'T RECALL THERE BEING A GATE AT THE ENTRANCE.

>> NO, MA'AM. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY GATE HERE.

>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.

>> I WANT TO CLARIFY, I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN ROBBINS' COMMENTS ON THE FIRST READING.

WE'RE PREPARED TO DICTATE THAT LOT 7 FACES BOB JONES.

I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

I KNOW THAT MAY BE NOT THE FREEDOM THAT WE MIGHT ALL DESIRE, BUT I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND MIRRORING OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH, SO WE'RE WILLING TO ADD THAT TO THE KITTY.

>> THEN I THINK ALSO, MR. JONES COMMENTED, WE'VE ALL GIVEN THIS A LOT OF CAREFUL THOUGHT.

I WOULD BE INTERESTED GIVEN WHERE THIS IS GOING TO GO IF IT PASSES, NOT HAVING SOME GRAND ENTRANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT BLENDS IN MORE.

DO YOU HAVE PLANS IN THAT AREA?

>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. NO. I THINK WE'RE COMPLETELY COMFORTABLE COMPLYING WITH A DIMINISHED ENTRANCE HERE.

AS YOU GO UP AND DOWN, BOB JONES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE, I FORGET THE NAME OF IT. I APOLOGIZE.

BUT THE TWO NEIGHBORS THAT ARE THERE DEFINITELY HAVE UNDERSTATED ENTRANCES, AND WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.

WE'VE TRIED TO BE SENSITIVE TO MR. JONES PLACE THERE.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT STREETS COMING OUT THERE.

THAT'S REALLY THE BEST PLACE FOR THAT TO GO.

WE HAVE OFFERED TO PLANT BUSHES ALONG THE FRONT OF HIS PROPERTY AND EXTEND IRRIGATION IF HE PREFERRED TO DO THAT, BUT TO DATE, HE'S NOT TAKEN US UP ON THAT, BUT THAT'S STILL ON THE TABLE IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REQUESTED.

>> I HAD THE SAME COMMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE ENTRANCE, BUT MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE LIKE, NO ENTRANCE.

JUST FROM A RURAL AESTHETIC FEEL.

I THINK THAT THAT FEELS BETTER.

TO PIGGYBACK ON LOT 7 DESIRE TO FACE BOB JONES, BUT ALSO THE GARAGE FACE INTERIOR TO THIS.

THE GARAGE IS BEHIND IT FACING THAT WAY,

[03:35:02]

NOT FACING BOB JONES?

>> THANK YOU FOR FLESHING THAT OUT. I BELIEVE I SAID THAT AT THE FIRST READING.

WE'D BE PREPARED TO MAKE SURE THE HOUSE ON LOT 7 FACES BOB JONES, BUT HAVE THE DRIVEWAY OFF OF THE NEW STREET.

WE'RE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT A CONDITION ZONE.

>> ON THAT TREE CONSERVATION PLAN, SO THE OLD OAK TREE, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THE PLAN GOES, THE CENTER OF IT IS LIKE RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE PROPOSED ROAD IN THERE.

IT WOULD SEEM LIKE THAT ROAD COULD TILT A LITTLE BIT TO THE RIGHT TO TRY TO PRESERVE THAT.

FRANKLY, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR YOU.

BUT AGAIN, THINKING ON THE AS YOU WOULD KNOW, AS A DEVELOPER, THE AESTHETIC APPEAL OF PULLING DOWN THAT DRIVEWAY AND SEEING THIS GIGANTIC TREE THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR 150 YEARS OR WHATEVER IT WAS, WOULD ADD VALUE TO ANY OF THOSE LOTS.

EVEN IF IT COMES OVER, LIKE 10 FEET, YOU'RE NOT EVEN REALLY EVEN CUTTING INTO LOT 7, YOU'RE CUTTING INTO LOT 6 JUST A TOUCH.

AT LEAST AS FAR AS WHAT YOU'VE GOT DOWN HERE.

THAT WAS ONE QUESTION I HAD FOR YOU.

>> I WOULD SAY THAT CERTAINLY IF WE CAN SAVE THOSE TREES, WE WILL, THEY ARE POST OAK TREES, SO THEY'RE PRETTY CHINTZY WHEN YOU START GETTING AROUND THEM.

THEY DON'T REALLY RESPOND WELL.

IF WE CAN SAVE THAT TREE, WE WILL AS PART OF THE PLATTING PROCESS.

I'LL COMMIT TO THAT. THEY ARE BEAUTIFUL TREES. WE'D LIKE TO KEEP THEM.

>> AS FAR AS POST OAK TREES, I UNDERSTAND WHAT I'VE HEARD BEFORE FROM PEOPLE SAYING ABOUT POST OAK TREES, BUT IF THAT ONE HAS BEEN THERE FOR THAT LONG, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A PRETTY HARDY TREE AND HAS SURVIVED A GRAVEL PIT AND WHATEVER HAPPENED ON THE PROPERTY BACK AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

A SECOND QUESTION WAS, AND THIS MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE GEARED TOWARDS DENNIS.

ON MY PROPERTY, WE HAVE RECENTLY, AND I KNOW MR. MAYOR, I HAD SHOWN YOU A VIDEO OF THIS RECENTLY MYSELF, BUT ON OUR PROPERTY, OUR NEIGHBOR PUT IN ONE STONE WALL FENCE, ONE WALL, AND THAT WALL CURRENTLY CAPTURES WATER FROM THIS ONE PROPERTY AND DIRECTS IT 900 FEET ACROSS MY FRONT YARD INTO THE CREEK AND DUMPS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF SEDIMENT RIGHT INTO THAT CREEK.

AND IT IS JUST AMAZING TO ME TO SEE FIRSTHAND THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT CAN BE GENERATED BY ONE MINOR WALL NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE LARGE HOUSES, AND I CONSIDER 6,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE TO BE LARGE, AND WE ALSO HAVE THEIR SWIMMING POOLS.

BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE SWIMMING POOLS AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE DRIVEWAYS, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE ROAD ITSELF.

AGAIN, JUST PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.

I'VE BEEN IN THAT PROPERTY FIVE TIMES.

I'VE ACTUALLY WALKED THE PROPERTY.

I WALKED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY, AND I CAN PROVE IT.

I MET A CAT THAT LIVES ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S THE COOLEST.

I WAS GOING TO STEAL THE CAT.

IT WAS THE COOLEST CAT EVER.

I'VE BEEN OVER THERE, AND I WAS THERE THIS MORNING.

I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR A BIG RAIN TO SEE HOW MUCH WATER FLOW THERE WAS.

THERE WAS SHEET WATER FLOW GOING ACROSS.

NOT TERRIBLE, BUT IT WAS THERE.

BUT I'M JUST REALLY CURIOUS WHEN WE START PUTTING ON THESE IMPERVIOUS STRUCTURES, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO REALLY DAMPER DOWN ON THAT? I KNOW DENNIS HAD MENTIONED TO ME EARLIER SOMETHING ABOUT THERE IS A LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF SHEET FLOW THAT CAN BE DIRECTED OFF THE PROPERTY.

I JUST WANT TO HAVE THAT ADDRESSED IF I CAN.

>> WELL, I WILL SAY WE'LL COMPLY WITH ALL THE ORDINANCES FOR DRAINAGE WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE.

I THINK WE NEED TO ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS PROPERTY BORDERS CORPS OF ENGINEER PROPERTY.

LAKE GRAPEVINE IS A FLOOD CONTROL LAKE, SO ESSENTIALLY, LAKE GRAPEVINE IS THE LARGEST DETENTION POND IN THE CITY.

CERTAINLY WE'RE GOING TO WE'LL SHEET FLOW AND COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCES FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT.

WE'LL VERSED AT THAT.

WE'LL HAVE THE LOTS THAT COMES OFF LOTS 1, 2, AND 7.

WE'LL CONTINUE TO GO, LIKE IT DOES NOW UP THE BOB JONES RIGHT AWAY OFF TO THE CORP PROPERTY.

I THINK TO ADDRESS THE DRAINAGE CONCERNS, WE'RE NEXT TO THE LARGEST DETENTION POND IN THE CITY, AND WE'LL ALSO COMPLY WITH EVERY ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY HAS FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT FOR DRAINAGE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR DISCUSSION? GO AHEAD.

>> AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR YOU OR IF IT'S FOR DENNIS OR ANYBODY ELSE THAT CAN RESPOND TO IT.

IS THE WEAR AND TEAR ON THE ROAD BECAUSE I WOULD ASSUME THERE IS GOING TO BE WEAR AND TEAR, AND MAYBE, WHEN IS BOB JONES ON OUR LIST TO BE RESURFACED OR HAS ANY OF THAT BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT?

>> LAURI, FROM OUR WORKS.

>> PROBABLY HAS AN ANSWER FOR US AND WHERE THAT IS ON THE STREET REHABILITATION PROGRAM. GO AHEAD, LAURI.

>> THANK YOU. WHILE IT'S NOT CURRENTLY ON OUR REPLACEMENT PLAN, IT DOES HAVE A PQI SCORE, WHICH IS OUR PAVEMENT QUALITY INDEX OF 63,

[03:40:03]

WHICH PUTS IT IN THE THRESHOLD OF NEEDING TO BE RESURFACED.

WE ARE AWARE THAT OF THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD.

WHENEVER WE LOOK AT RANKING ALL OF THOSE, WE LOOK AT USE, AND TYPICALLY, THIS ONE HAS RANKED SLIGHTLY LOWER, BUT GIVEN THE CONSTRUCTION, WE WOULD WANT TO WORK WITH IF APPROVED THE DEVELOPER TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE NOT DESTROYING A ROAD THAT WE JUST REPAVED.

CURRENTLY, IT'S SLATED FOR A FUTURE PROJECT.

IT'S NOT ON THE FY '25 OR '26 PLAN.

>> DID WE JUST REPAVE IT?

>> NO, MA'AM. I'M SORRY.

I WENT PRETTY FAST.

WE DO AN ANNUAL SCAN OF THE ROADS TO ASSESS CONDITION.

IT'S CURRENTLY AT A 63 OF OUT OF 100.

>> THE THRESHOLD THAT WE WOULD START REPAVING IS 78.

IT IS WITHIN THAT THRESHOLD TO BE REPAVED.

>> WE CAN MAKE A NOTE PERHAPS.

I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD WANT TO REPAVE IT BEFORE THEY START DOING CONSTRUCTION, AND YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO START BUILDING FOR A YEAR OR WHATEVER, BUT LET'S MAKE A NOTE ON THAT TO LOOK AT REDOING THAT, ONCE THE CONSTRUCTION IS DONE, AND ALL THE BIG TRUCKS ARE DONE, IT DOESN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE TO DO IT UNTIL THEY'RE DONE WITH THAT PART.

>> LET'S DO THAT. THANK YOU, LAURI.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> WHERE IS THAT SECOND TREE? THE OLDER TREE?

>> THE ONLY ONE TREE THAT IS GOING TO BE IMPACTED, I BELIEVE WITH OUR CONSTRUCTION IS THE ONE HERE.

WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO SKIRT THAT WITH THE PLATTING PROVIDED WE GET APPROVED HERE.

>> THE SPEAKERS MENTIONED TWO TREES, SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

>> WELL, THERE'S TWO HERE ALONG BOB JONES THAT I THINK I MENTIONED WITH THE SIDEWALKS.

I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE.

LET ME LOOK AND SEE IF WE HAVE THAT IN AS PART OF THE SLIDES HERE.

I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO. LET ME GO BACK HERE.

SORRY. BEAR WITH ME HERE AS I SEARCHED THE SLIDES.

>> THE ONES THAT YOU SHOWED US ON THERE.

>> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. WE DON'T HAVE THE OVERHEAD AND OVERHEAD.

I BELIEVE THE TREE THAT THEY'RE REFERENCING IS A DOUBLE TRUNKED OAK THAT I SPOKE ABOUT WITH COMMISSIONER TAGGART A SECOND AGO.

I BELIEVE THE LOCATION OF THAT TREE IS RIGHT HERE IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.

IT'S RIGHT HERE ON THIS EDGE OF THE CONCRETE THERE. I BELIEVE THAT'S IT.

>> IF WE CAN SAVE THAT, WE CERTAINLY WILL.

WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO GO KNOCK DOWN TREES BECAUSE WE LIKE KNOCKING DOWN TREES.

AS I SAID BEFORE, I'VE PROBABLY PERSONALLY PLANTED WITH MY TWO HANDS MORE TREES THAN THE ROOM COMBINED, CERTAINLY IN THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE WITH MY GRANDPARENTS PLANT FARM.

I SAID LAST TIME, I'M A TREE HUGGER, I'LL CERTAINLY GO OUTSIDE AND HUG A TREE RIGHT NOW.

I'M NOT AFRAID TO DO THAT, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY SENSITIVE TO THE TREES AND THE AESTHETICS THAT THEY BRING TO JUST A SUBDIVISION.

>> JUST AS A PREVIEW, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO PUT THAT IN THE MOTION THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IT.

[LAUGHTER] BEST INTENTIONS I GET ALL THAT, BUT, [OVERLAPPING] WE'VE HEARD THAT BEFORE, SO WE'LL PUT IT IN THE MOTION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK AROUND ONE OR TWO TREES.

I THINK ADMINISTRATIVELY, THAT CAN BE APPROVED AS FAR AS WHATEVER THESE PROPERTY LINES ARE, THESE ENVELOPES, AND THAT SORT OF THING, THE LOT BORDERS.

YOU CAN TWEAK THOSE ADMINISTRATIVELY, I BET WITH DIRECTOR KILO, IF NEED BE, TO ADDRESS THE TREES.

>> OKAY, SIR.

>> ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR.

COUNCIL ANY DISCUSSION.

BEFORE WE REALLY GET INTO THAT.

I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN TO MULTIPLE MEETINGS.

SOMEONE USED THE WORD TO IGNORE.

WE REALLY DON'T IGNORE YOU.

IT MIGHT SEEM THAT WAY BASED ON HOW THE FIRST VOTE WENT AND HOW IT MIGHT GO TONIGHT.

BUT IF THIS PROPERTY WAS BEING PROPOSED TO HAVE 0.9 ACRE LOTS, WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE TONIGHT.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED AT P&Z, AND PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED THREE WEEKS AGO.

BUT IT'S COMPLIANT WITH OUR OWN RULES AS FAR AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE ONE ACRE LOTS AND WHAT'S AROUND IT.

I CAN APPRECIATE THAT HAVING THE ONE HOME WITH THE HORSE BARN ON THE EIGHT ACRES IS NICER TO LOOK AT.

BUT OUR HANDS TO A CERTAIN EXTENT ARE TIED ON THIS ONE, AS FAR AS THE OWNER'S RIGHTS TO DEVELOP IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR OWN PLANS.

AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND A DIFFERENT VIEW ON THAT, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE AND VOICING THOSE CONCERNS.

IT'S NOT IGNORED.

REALLY IT DOES HIT HOME.

IF THE ROLES WERE REVERSED, I'D PROBABLY BE RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST IT, BUT IT IS COMPLIANT WITHOUT VARIANCES.

TO A CERTAIN EXTENT WE DON'T HAVE MANY OPTIONS OR CHOICES ON THAT.

WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN AS FAR AS PRESERVING THESE TREES AND GETTING THE DEVELOPER, AND WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE MOTION, I PRESUME WHEN WE GET READY TO VOTE.

[03:45:01]

BUT YOUR VOICES ARE HEARD.

IT IS A BEAUTIFUL AREA. I'VE BEEN UP THERE.

AGAIN, ALSO BEING ON THE BOB JONES NATURE CENTER BOARD.

I RESPECT WHAT YOU HAVE UP THERE.

>> BUT THIS IS COMPLIANCE.

PROBABLY JUST RAMBLED ON A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT'S GETTING LATE.

BUT COUNCIL, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL FOR A MOTION?

>> I THINK THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME CONFUSION BETWEEN WHAT THE PAPERWORK SAYS OR WHAT THE PLAN SAYS FROM THE RESIDENTS' STANDPOINT AND FROM DENNIS'S STANDPOINT, BUT I THINK WE ALSO HAD THE ATTORNEY LOOK AT THIS AFTER THE LAST ONE.

I'D LIKE FOR HER TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT, OR WHETHER THERE IS ANY CONFUSION FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT ABOUT WHAT THIS PROPERTY IS SUPPOSED TO BE AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW.

>> YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESCRIBES THIS AREA AS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, SF1A, WHICH WOULD BE ONE-ACRE LOTS OR LARGER.

>> THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY IS EXCLUDED FROM THE OTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE LARGE EQUESTRIAN FARMS, THE MULTI-ACRE STUFF, AND EVERYTHING ELSE, CORRECT?

>> PARDON.

>> THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY IS EXCLUDED FROM THE DISCUSSION THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP ABOUT MULTIPLE LEAVING THESE LARGE MULTI ACRE PIECES TOGETHER, CORRECT?

>> RIGHT. THE PLAN DISCUSSES AN OPTIONAL CATEGORY THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY.

>> EXACTLY. I APPRECIATE ALL THE NEIGHBORS INPUT HERE, TOO, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO EVEN WHAT COUNCILMAN WILLIAMSON SAID LAST TIME.

WHENEVER YOU GUYS WERE BUYING YOUR LOTS OR BUILDING YOUR HOUSES OR WHEN YOUR HOUSES WERE BUILT, THEY MIRROR EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE ACROSS THE STREET.

YOU LIVE ON 1.5 ACRE OR ONE ACRE LOTS.

WE CAN SHOW IT ALL ACROSS THE STREET.

I JUST HAVE A HARD TIME TELLING A LANDOWNER THEY CAN'T DO EXACTLY WHAT'S MIRRORED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM, THAT'S JUST A BIG STRUGGLE FOR ME.

OTHERWISE, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULDN'T EXIST. IT'S JUST A STRUGGLE.

>> I WANT TO ASK OUR ATTORNEY, ALSO.

ON OUR DEFINITION OF 1A, DOES THAT LIMIT CITY COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY IN A CASE LIKE THIS OF IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH 1.00, THEN IT HAS TO BE ALLOWED.

OR DOES CITY COUNCIL HAVE THE DISCRETION OF SAYING, WELL, WE LIKE 1.2 FOR THIS AREA OR 1.32, ACTUALLY MIRROR THE ONES ACROSS THE STREET.

THE ONES ACROSS THE STREET OR NOT 1.00, THEY'RE 1.3 1.4.

THERE'S A NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THE CORNER, WHICH IS THE ONE THING THAT HURTS THIS BECAUSE THAT IS A POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY'RE SMALLER.

BUT ANYWAY, SPECIFICALLY, OUR HANDS TIED TO CITY COUNCIL AT ONE.

>> ZONING IN GENERAL SHOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IN THIS CASE, YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS OF ONE ACRE OR LARGER.

WITH ZONING, COUNCIL ALWAYS HAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DISCRETION, BUT THAT DISCRETION SHOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY OR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? WE'VE ALREADY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I'M JUST GOING AHEAD MAKE A COMMENT IF I CAN.

>> YEAH, GO AHEAD.

>> LIKE I SAID, I'VE BEEN THERE. I FEEL WHAT YOU GUYS FEEL. HERE'S THE THING.

THIS PROPERTY IN 2017 WAS PROPOSED TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT OF SEVEN, ONE ACRE PLUS LOTS ON IT.

IN FACT, I'VE SEEN THAT DIAGRAM, AND IT IS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL THAT IS HERE NOW.

NOW, THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT TO CITY COUNCIL, IT SOUNDS LIKE.

BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND IS THE PEOPLE WHO THIS LAND USE PLAN WAS APPROVED BY PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL, AND THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN R POD, THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR 0.9 ACRES.

WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THIS TO THIS PROPERTY.

THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY KNEW THIS WHEN THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.

MAYBE IT'S COINCIDENTAL THAT THE HOUSE THAT THEY PUT ON THERE IS PRETTY MUCH AT THE CORNER OF WHERE THAT STREET WAS OR NOT.

BUT THEY HAD THIS, AND THEY HAD THIS PROPERTY FOR EIGHT YEARS, SEVEN OR SIX YEAR, WHATEVER PERIOD OF TIME THEY HAD IT.

THAT ENTIRE TIME, THEY, AS THE PROPERTY OWNER, HAD THE RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, POTENTIALLY.

BUT THEY ALSO HAD THE RIGHT TO COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL AND SAY, I WANT TO PROTECT THIS LAND.

[03:50:02]

I WANT TO REQUIRE THAT THIS IS 5A OR 7A AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

THE SAME THING HAPPENS ALONG EAST BOB JONES.

THE NUMBER OF EQUESTRIAN LOTS THAT ARE ALONG THERE THAT HAVE THE SAME RIGHT AS THIS PROPERTY OWNER HAS, THEY CAN ACTUALLY ALSO PROPOSE TO CHANGE THEIR LOTS TO NOT BE ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED DOWN TO 1A.

THEN THOSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO COME INTO CITY COUNCIL, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND TRY TO GET SOME CHANGE BACK.

WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO SAY IS, IT'S NOT CITY COUNCIL THAT HAS THE POWER HERE, IT IS THAT LAND OWNER RIGHT NOW WHO HAS THAT POWER AND HAS HAD THAT POWER FOR THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS.

IF YOU GUYS DO WANT TO FORM A GROUP, PLEASE DO AND LOOK AT THOSE PROPERTIES AND IDENTIFY THOSE OWNERS ALONG BOB JONES, AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, LET'S FIND A WAY TO PROTECT THOSE REMAINING LOTS ALONG BOB JONES.

I'LL CERTAINLY HELP EVERY WAY THAT I CAN ON THAT.

IF I SAID ANYTHING INCORRECT, PLEASE CORRECT ME ON THAT.

IF THE OWNERS DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT DOWN BOB JONES AS WELL.

ANYWAY, THAT WAS IT. THANKS.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO TO A MOTION?

>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT I THINK WE ALL AGREED TO RELATIVE TO LOT 7 THAT IT FACES BOB JONES.

>> YEAH. LET'S ALSO ADD IN ABOUT THE TREE PRESERVATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO ADJUST THE LOT CONFIGURATIONS TO ACCOUNT FOR MOVING THAT STREET AROUND SO THAT HE CAN SAVE THOSE TREES.

ALSO MAKING A NOTE ABOUT THE PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT PROGRAM AND LOOKING AT THAT WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS DONE.

IF THERE'S A MORE TECHNICAL TERM THAN THAT, DIRECTOR KILO, YOU CAN GIVE IT TO US.

COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOMES.

>>YES, SIR.

>> THE GARAGE ON LOT 7 DOES NOT FACE BOB JONES.

>> YEAH.

>> I MEAN, ISN'T SAYING THE HOME FRONT ON LOT 7 FACES BOB JONES, THE SAME THING?

>> YOU WOULD THINK THAT THAT'S BEING SPECIFIC.

>> THAT THE GARAGE DOES NOT FACE BOB JONES?

>> YES. THEN THE NON DESCRIPT OR NO ENTRY. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU [OVERLAPPING]

>> MINIMALIST ENTRANCE.

>> LET ME READ IT ALL AND THEN YOU GUYS CAN CORRECT ME.

>> THEN WE'LL TAKE A PRACTICE AROUND.

>> YES. GIVE ME JUST A SECOND.

IN TERMS OF THE APPLICANTS AGREEMENT, WE HAVE SEVERAL, AND THEN WE HAVE ONE CITY.

APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT. I HAVE PROVIDE EITHER AN UNDERSTATED ENTRANCE OR NO IDENTIFIABLE ENTRANCE.

DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT? IS THAT GOOD?

>> I'M FINE WITH THAT.

>> WE'LL PRESERVE THE LARGE TREE AS IDENTIFIED IN THE DISCUSSION.

BUT YOU WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING ABOUT THE ROAD OR DOES THAT COVER IT, DENNIS?

>> ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO ADJUST THE ROAD AND THE LOTS TO COVER [OVERLAPPING]

>> THAT COULD BE DONE AS PART OF CONSIDERATION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLOT AS WELL, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO PUT THAT IN THE MOTION TO ALLOW ADJUSTMENT OF STREET ALIGNMENT AND LOTS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE TWO OAK TREES IDENTIFIED CURRENTLY TO BE REMOVED.

>> SAY THE LAST PART. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO ALLOW ADJUSTMENT AND REALIGNMENT OF THE ROAD AND LOTS TO [OVERLAPPING].

>> TO SAVE THE TWO OAKS SHOWN TO BE REMOVED.

>> I THOUGHT IT WAS ONE [BACKGROUND]

>> IT'S A 27 AND A 24 INCH OAK IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN.

>> ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO ALLOW ADJUSTMENT AND REALIGNMENT OF THE ROAD AND LOTS TO SAVE HOPEFULLY, I'LL JUST SAY, TO SAVE TWO OAKS IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN.

>> THEN MAKE SURE THE HOME ON LOT 7 FACES BOB JONES, AND THE GARAGE OF HOME 7 DOES NOT FACE BOB JONES. THAT COVERS BOTH.

[03:55:01]

>> YEAH.

>> THEN SEPARATELY, ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE, THE CITY WILL LOOK INTO THE PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT PROGRAM AND THE POTENTIAL OF REPAVING BOB JONES. I ALREADY SAID THAT.

>> YEAH. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS ON THAT?

>> LIGHTS WAS ALREADY HANDLED.

DO I NEED TO SAY LIGHTS AGAIN? I THINK THAT WAS ALREADY HANDLED.

IT'S ON HERE. IT'S PART OF WHAT'S WRITTEN IN THE MOTION.

>> PROBABLY FROM THE FIRST READING MOTION.

IT'S PROBABLY BUILT IN AGAIN.

>> YES, IT IS.

>> WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A CRACK AT A FIRST MOTION ON 6F.

>> FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME, IF NEEDED.

COUNCIL, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6F, ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-81 ZA25-0014, SECOND READING ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR 500 EAST BOB JONES ROAD.

ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, WILLIAM PHILLIPS NUMBER 1017 EDITION, IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED APRIL 29, 2025, AND THE CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW AND SUMMARY NUMBER 1 DATED MARCH 7, 2025.

NOTING THE VOTE IS TO APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE IN CONCEPT PLAN FOR SEVEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 8.38 ACRES, CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AG AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO SF1A, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS PRESENTED, NOTING THE APPLICANT'S AGREEMENT TO THE FOLLOWING.

MAINTAIN THE SAME FENCING AROUND THE PERIMETER THAT IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, INSTALL A QUANTITY OF FIVE, SIX INCH CALIPER OR LARGER TREES ON EACH LOT.

THE CONSTRUCTION HOURS WILL BE LIMITED TO 7:00 AM TO 5:00 PM AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE.

NO STREET LIGHTING OR STREET LIGHTING PERMITTED CONSISTENT WITH THE OAKWOOD ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD AGREES TO ADDRESS A MINIMUM DRIVEWAY STACKING DEPTH DEPTH ON EAST BOB JONES ROAD, ADEQUATE TO ACCOMMODATE DELIVERY VEHICLES OFF STREET.

NO SIDEWALKS SHALL BE REQUIRED GIVEN THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS WITHIN THIS AREA, PROVIDE EITHER AN UNDERSTATED ENTRANCE OR NO IDENTIFIABLE ENTRANCE.

MAKE SURE THE HOME ON LOT 7 FACES BOB JONES AND THAT THE GARAGE ON LOT 7 DOES NOT FACE BOB JONES.

LET ME FIND MY TREE.

ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL WILL BE GIVEN TO ALLOW ADJUSTMENT AND REALIGNMENT OF THE ROAD AND LOTS TO SAVE THE TWO OAK TREES IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN.

THEN I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE NOTES FOR THE APPLICANT. DID I COVER THEM ALL? THEN ALSO NOTING THE CITY WILL LOOK INTO THE PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT PROGRAM RELATIVE TO REPAVING BOB JONES ONCE HOME CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> CAST YOUR VOTES. THAT MOTION CARRY 6-0.

ITEM 6F IS APPROVED.

AGAIN, THANK YOU TO ALL THE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR MULTIPLE MEETINGS LATE INTO THE NIGHT.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK FIVE MINUTE BREAK, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND PICK UP WITH ITEM 7A.

WE'LL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY GO WITH 6A,

[6.A. Ordinance No. 1293, authorizing the issuance of Tax and Water and Sewer System Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2025. PUBLIC HEARING]

AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, SHARON JACKSON.

>> HELLO, WE HAVE JIM SABONUS WITH HILLTOP SECURITIES THAT'S GOING TO GO OVER THE DETAILS OF THE BONSELL WE HAD EARLIER TODAY.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AS SHARON INDICATED, JIM SABONUS WITH HILLTOP.

I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE TO BE THE CITY'S FINANCIAL ADVISOR FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

TODAY, ON THE CITY'S BEHALF, WE RECEIVED BIDS FOR THE CITY'S ANNUAL DEBT ISSUANCE.

WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH RESULTS FOR THOSE THAT ARE NEW.

THESE ARE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION THAT ARE A COMBINATION PLEDGE OF [INAUDIBLE] TAX AND NET REVENUES OF UTILITY SYSTEM.

THESE FUND BOTH PROJECTS IN THE UTILITY SYSTEM AND SEPARATELY FUND PROJECTS THAT ARE FOR THE GENERAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.

THEY'RE AMORTIZED DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THE DEBT SERVICE FOR EACH FUND.

THE INEST, THE GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS ARE AMORTIZED ONLY A FIVE YEAR PERIOD.

THE WATER AND SEWER DEBT ALLOCATION IS DONE FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD.

WE AMORTIZE THEM DIFFERENT AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT SOURCE OF USES FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES.

WE CAN BIND THEM FOR EFFICIENCIES TO GO FORWARD.

THESE ARE TAXES AND BONDS.

WE WENT THROUGH A RATING PROCESS, WHICH WAS VERY IMPORTANT.

AS YOU KNOW, YOUR CITY HAS THREE AAAS.

I'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS VERY BRIEFLY OF THE RATING REPORT.

[04:00:02]

I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN ALMOST 3,000 ISSUES, AND I WAS TELLING SHARON AND OUR CITY MANAGER THAT THIS WAS THE BEST RATING REPORT EVER READ, VERY SOLID RATING.

TODAY, WE RECEIVED SEVEN BIDS.

THE LOW BID WAS A 3.25% BY JEFFERIES LLC.

THE LOW BID PRICING RESULTED IN A PAR AMOUNT OF 14,720,000, A PROJECT FUND OF 15,650,000.

THERE'S A PREMIUM IN THESE BONDS.

I'LL EXPLAIN THAT IN A MINUTE.

ALL INTEREST COSTS ARE 3.47 BELOW WHAT WE INDICATED FOR A TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST OF $18,098,878.

>> THE RATING REPORT IS REALLY INTERESTING.

CITY MANAGER AND THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE PREPARED A PACKAGE OF INFORMATION THAT WE SENT TO THE RATING AGENCIES.

THEY SUBMITTED QUESTIONS AND WE HAD A TEAMS VIDEO CALL GOING OVER THE QUESTIONS.

AS I INDICATED, IT WAS A VERY POSITIVE REPORT.

IN FACT, EVERY CRITERIA THAT THE CITY IS EVALUATED YOU HAVE CONTROL OF, YOU GOT A ONE SCORE.

WE HAD A 1.25 SCORE, AND THE OVERALL ONE WAS EVERYTHING THAT YOU CAN CONTROL.

SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS ARE, YOUR ROBUST ECONOMY SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE COUNTY, TEXAS, AND NATIONAL METRICS, TO GIVE YOU A FEEL YOUR EARNINGS PER HOUSEHOLDER, ABOUT THREE TIMES WHAT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS.

YOU WELL MANAGED POLICY PRACTICES.

YOUR BUDGET'S OUTSTANDING.

THE CITY SPENDS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CASH ON AN ONGOING BASIS TO FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.

WE'VE REDUCED DEBT ISSUANCE AND DELEVERAGED OVER THE YEARS, AT THE SAME TIME, YOU MAINTAIN VERY SIGNIFICANT FUND BALANCES ABOVE YOUR FUND BALANCE REQUIREMENTS.

YOU HAVE A VERY MODERATE DEBT AMORTIZATION, DEBT PROFILE, RAPID AMORIZATION, AND MINIMUM DEBT PLANS GOING FORWARD.

AGAIN, THE EXPECTATION IS THAT YOU WILL ACTUALLY GET STRONGER IN THE FUTURE AND THAT AAA WILL BE SOLID.

IT WAS A WELL-WRITTEN REPORT.

THEY INDICATE DOWNSIDE SCENARIOS, AND THEY'RE JUST REALLY THE DOWNSIDE SCENARIOS THAT ANY ENTITY WOULD HAVE JUST FOR FORMALITY, BUT WE HAD DISCUSSED AFTER THE RATING RESULT IN DETAIL WITH THE RATING ANNALS, THEY WERE VERY POSITIVE AND VERY COMPLIMENTARY OF THE STAFF'S PRESENTATION.

RECEIVED SEVEN BIDS, AND THESE ARE THE WHOS WHO THAT BIDS.

IF WE TOOK THESE SEVEN AND WE LOOKED AT THE 10 LEADING BIDDERS OF THESE TYPE BONDS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THESE SEVEN WOULD BE IN THE LIST.

LOW BID BY JEFFRIES WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN WHAT WE HAD INITIALLY INDICATED, AND THE SPREAD BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND WERE PRETTY LOW.

I'LL ALSO SAY THAT WE'RE IN A VERY TERRIBLE MARKET.

A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY.

AS I WAS TELLING SHARON EARLIER, WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE INITIAL THINGS ABOUT TARIFFS, INTEREST RATES WERE BOUNCING AROUND ABOUT 50 BASIS POINTS A DAY FOR A WEEK.

IT WAS REALLY UNIQUE, AND SO WE HAVEN'T SEEN THIS MANY BIDS IN A WHILE.

IN FACT, TONIGHT, BOTH MY PARTNERS ARE AT TWO OTHER COMMUNITIES, AND EACH OF THEM HAD COMPETITIVE BIDS, AND BOTH OF THEM THEN RECEIVED ONLY THREE BIDS, AND THEY WERE VERY STRONG CREDITS, THE AA-PLUS TYPE CREDITS.

SHOWS AND IT'S BEEN THE EXPERIENCE, SOUTHLAKE BOUNDS SELL WELL AND OUR STRUCTURE OF A FIVE AND 10-YEAR SETUP WELL TO BE SOLD TO GO FORWARD.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE VARIANCE OF THE INITIAL PLANNED FINANCE.

IN MARCH, WE CAME FORWARD WITH A PLANNED FINANCE TO FUND 14,885,000 BONDS.

WE DID SLIGHTLY LESS BONDS MOSTLY DUE TO REDUCED COST OF ISSUANCE.

THIS IS A COUPLE OF HIGH POINTS I WANT TO POINT OUT.

ONE IS THAT IT'S AN UNUSUAL STRUCTURE, BUT IT'S COMMON IN OUR BOND INDUSTRY.

AS YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE WERE SOLD WITH A PREMIUM AND WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT THE AVERAGE COUPON WAS 5%, BUT OUR TRUE INTEREST COST, WHICH IS REALLY THE YIELD TO THE INVESTOR WAS 3.47% FOR FIVE-YEAR AVERAGE LIFE MATURITY.

WHAT TAKES PLACE IS THAT IN OUR FIXED INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT, WHEN PEOPLE THINK INTEREST RATES ARE GOING UP, YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY'LL ACTUALLY SELL BOND, BUY BONDS, AND THEY WANT THEM TO HAVE HIGHER COUPON RATES IN THEIR PORTFOLIO.

THE REASON BEING IS THAT WHEN INTEREST RATES GO UP, THE MOVEMENT IN INTEREST RATE IS LESS ON A HIGHER COUPON BOND THAN A LOWER COUPON, AND IT'S A LESS IMPACT ON MARK TO MARKET.

IF WE WERE IN A FLAT TO A REDUCING INTEREST RATE MARKET,

[04:05:04]

BOND BUYERS WOULD LOOK AT DISCOUNTS TO CONCEPT THAT THEY'D LIKE TO PAY $4,950 FOR A $5,000 BOND AND NOT HAVE TO PAY A FULL PAR AMOUNT.

IT REALLY GIVES YOU INSIGHT INTO WHAT BOND INVESTORS ARE THINKING RATES ARE GOING UP.

THE SECOND THING I WANT TO POINT OUT WAS IN THAT WHEN WE BOOKED THIS, WE ALLOWED UP TO 1% BUYERS DISCOUNT.

THE UNDERWRITER WHEN THEY BUY THE BONDS, THE MAIN WAY THEY MAKE MONEY IS BUYING THEM AT A DISCOUNT SO THEY CAN RESELL THEM AT THE MARKET PRICE, AND I WAS TELLING SHARON THAT JEFFRIES WHEN THEY BOUGHT THESE BONDS, ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THEY WON THE BID WAS THAT THEY ONLY HAVE AN UNDERWRITER'S DISCOUNT OF $12,000.

THEY TAKE INTO INVENTORY 14,720,000 BONDS.

THEY'RE MAKING ABOUT $12,000 ON THIS.

IT'S TO BE EXPECTED, THERE'S READY BUYERS, SHORT AMORTIZATION, THEY HAD THE BUYER SET UP.

ON THE ALL INTEREST COSTS, WE ACTUALLY USED 3.74% WHEN WE SIZE THE ISSUE.

AS WE DO WITH MOST OF OUR ISSUES, WE TRY TO BE A LITTLE BIT CONSERVATIVE.

WE HAD A 25 BASIS POINT BUFFER PUT IN AT THE TIME WE DID THE TRANSACTION, THINKING THAT RATES WERE GOING TO GO UP.

BUT I WAS CHECKING JUST TODAY, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BOND BUYER INDEX FOR THE FRIDAY BEFORE WE DID THE PRESENTATION TO YOU ON THE TUESDAY, WHEN YOU DIDN'T KNOW SOME INTENT UNTIL THIS FRIDAY, ACTUALLY THE BOND BUYER INDEX HAS GONE UP 101 BASIS POINTS.

ONE THING THAT WAS REALLY ADVANTAGEOUS FOR YOU IS THAT THE BOND BUYER INDEX OF GEO BONDS TARGETS A 20-YEAR MATURITY, AND SO TO GIVE A FEEL WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE MARKETPLACE IS THAT IT'S GONE UP 100 IN JUST THIS EIGHT-WEEK TIME FRAME, WHEN AS YOU MOVE DOWN THE MATURITY TIME-FRAME, IT'S ACTUALLY ONLY ABOUT 61 BASIS POINTS, AT A FIVE-YEAR MATURITY, IT'S 31, AND OUR AVERAGE LIFE OF OUR TRANSACTION WAS ABOUT FIVE YEARS.

THE REALLY GOOD NEWS HERE IS THAT EVEN WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AT ABOUT 349 AT THE MARKET THE DAY WE WE DID OUR INITIAL PRESENTATION, WE BEAT THAT, EVEN THOUGH RATES HAVE GONE UP ON OUR AVERAGE LIFE ABOUT 31 BASIS POINTS, AND IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME.

I'VE SAID THIS TO COUNCIL BEFORE AND SHARON, I'VE DISCUSSED THIS MANY TIMES FOR THAT, IN DIFFICULT MARKET TIMES, WHEN I STARTED MY CAREER 30 YEARS AGO, I REMEMBER ONE OF THE FIRST WEEKS, MY MENTOR TELLING ME THAT WHEN INTEREST RATES ARE GOING UP, PEOPLE DON'T WANT CREDIT RISK.

YOU GOING TO HAVE TO PUT THEIR MONEY AT WORK SO THEY WANT TO REDUCE THEIR RISK OPTIONS.

SECONDLY, TEXAS HAS A STRONG ECONOMY, AND SOUTHLAKE HAS GOT THE STRONGEST BOND RATINGS OF ANY CITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

WE JUST HAVE A READY INVESTMENT AND THOSE PEOPLE COMPETED FOR THIS AND BOUGHT IT SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW THE MARKETPLACE.

BELOW THIS, I'VE GOT, AND I WON'T GO THROUGH THE DETAIL, BUT YOU'LL SEE THAT THE I&S AND THE WATER, WE DID THE SOURCE AND USE ALLOCATION, THEY BOTH SHARED IN THE SAVINGS, RATIONALLY BASED ON HOW THEIR AMORTIZATION WAS.

AGAIN, THIS IS ACTUALLY AMORTIZATION OF YOUR EXISTING I&S DEBT, AND IT'S AMAZING.

THIS IS A FIVE-YEAR AMORTIZATION.

YOU ONLY HAVE FIVE YEARS OF DEBT OUTSTANDING AT THE MOMENT.

THIS WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON YOUR CURRENT I&S TAX RATE.

IN FACT, IF YOU LOOK AT OUR 25 FISCAL YEAR END, WE ACTUALLY DON'T SHOW THE INCREASE, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE ON YOUR PRELIMINARY VALUES FOR 26, SO THERE WON'T BE AN INCREASE GOING FORWARD AND WE JUST HAVE FIVE YEARS.

WE DIDN'T EXTEND THE MATURITIES BEYOND WHERE YOU ARE RIGHT NOW.

YOUR WATER AND SEWER DEBT GOES OUT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AT THE MOMENT.

IT GOES OUT TO 2039.

WE DID A 10-YEAR AMORTIZATION HERE, AND WE TRIED TO LEVEL OUT OUR DEBT SERVICE IN WHAT WE WENT FORWARD.

TONIGHT, THIS IS ON AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.

IF APPROVED BY YOUR COUNCIL AND EXECUTED, IT'LL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS WHO REVIEWS ALL DEBT ISSUANCE BY TEXAS MUNICIPALITIES TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL PROPER LEGAL PROCEDURES WERE FOLLOWED, AND WE EXPECT AFTER THAT'S DONE, WE'LL CLOSE ON MAY 29TH.

THE SUMMARY, AS WE EXPECT, SOUTHLAKE HAS THE HIGHEST CREDIT QUALITY, AND THERE WAS EXCEPTIONAL EXECUTION OF THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THE RATING BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THE FINANCE DIRECTOR.

RESULTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.

THE RATE REPORT, AGAIN, AS I'VE INDICATED, IT WAS THE MOST POSITIVE RATE REPORT I CAN EVER REMEMBER BEING INVOLVED IN.

THE MARKET HAS MOVED AGAINST US, BUT THE CREDIT AND THE NAME OF SOUTHLAKE HELPED YOU EXCEED MARKET DYNAMICS.

WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH SEVEN BIDS, COMPETITIVE, SUCCESSFUL SALE, AND WE'D RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT I CAN.

[04:10:03]

>> WELL, THANK YOU, MR. SABONIS.

THAT SOUNDS LIKE A VERY A-PLUS REPORT CARD FOR ALLISON AND SHARON, AS WE ALWAYS EXPECT, I'M NOT IN THIS BUSINESS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND FAVORS US THAT WE'VE DRIVEN DOWN OUR DEBT OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS, SO THERE'S LESS DEBT OUT THERE, SO WHEN WE BRING SOMETHING TO MARKET FOR AN IMPORTANT PROJECT LIKE WATER AND SEWER LINES, IT GETS GOBBLED UP AND DRIVES DOWN THE INTEREST RATES.

WE'VE MADE IT A POINT OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS TO PAY DOWN DEBT AND BE REAL AGGRESSIVE IN REFINANCING DEBT TO LOWER INTEREST RATES AND PAINT IT OFF EARLY AS WE CAN.

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE THE FRINGE BENEFITS OF IT, IF YOU WILL, OF GETTING, THIS DEMAND AND THIS GREAT RATE.

WE'RE STILL IN A GOOD POSITION WHERE WITH THE PROPERTY TAX PART OF IT, FIVE YEARS, SO WE'RE STILL IN LINE WITH WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT, HEY, A SEVEN YEARS, WHERE ARE WE GOING TO BE? ARE WE GOING TO BE REAL CLOSE? YOU'LL NEVER BE DEBT FREE BECAUSE JUST LIKE EVERYONE WHIPS OUT THE CREDIT CARD AS SOON AS YOU PAY IT OFF, BUT WE WANT TO KEEP THAT AS A GOAL.

EVEN FOR 10 YEARS ON THE UTILITY FUND BONDS, THAT SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY SHORT TIME-FRAME ON STUFF THAT IT'S GOING TO HOPEFULLY BE IN THE GROUND FOR 30 YEARS, BUT AT SOUTHLAKE IS GETTING CLOSER TO OUR 70TH BIRTHDAY NEXT YEAR, NOT ALL THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IS 70-YEARS-OLD, BUT THERE'S SOME IT'S OLD, AND THERE'S CAPACITY AND WEAR AND TEAR ISSUES, SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF IT WITH THIS STUFF AND GET THINGS REPAIRED BEFORE IT ACTUALLY BREAKS.

BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THAT.

SORRY, WE KEPT YOU HERE LATE TONIGHT.

YOU GOT TO HEAR SOME INTERESTING CASES TONIGHT, OR HOPEFULLY ENJOYED DINNER BEFORE THAT.

>> I DID.

>> BUT THANK YOU TO ALLISON AND SHARON FOR THE GREAT WORK, AND THANK YOU TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM AT HILLTOP.

>> ANY QUESTIONS, COUNCIL, OR DISCUSSION? GO AHEAD.

>> I KNOW EVERYBODY'S TIRED, BUT JUST HAVE A REAL QUICK QUESTION.

JUST FOR COMPARISON SAKE, IF IT WAS LIKE A AA CREDIT RATING, BUT WHERE WOULD THAT RATING RATE BE? MAYBE AN UNFAIR QUESTION.

THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS, IF YOU BACK UP 30 DAYS, WHERE WOULD THAT COST IT AT? I'M JUST CURIOUS.

>> LET ME SAY THAT WE STARTED THE PROCESS, AND I'VE GOT DATA FROM AT THE END OF MARCH TO TODAY,31 BASIS POINTS.

MOST OF THAT WAS ACTUALLY WITHIN THE FIRST FEW WEEKS.

BUT I THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE BEEN SOMEWHERE, 31 BASIS POINT CHEAPER WHEN WE STARTED THE PROCESS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

AGAIN, MARKETS ARE JUMPING, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE TOMORROW, SO IT WOULD TAKE PLACE.

BUT FROM A AA CREDIT, IT'S HARD TO SPOT IT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT VERY LIVE DATA FROM NATIONAL TRADES OF AA, AAAS, AND EVERY SEGMENT IN BETWEEN NEGATIVE POSITIVE OUTLOOKS.

BUT SOUTHLAKE IS UNIQUE AND AS I INDICATED, IF I WOULD EXPECTED YOUR SALE TODAY I WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY SAID THAT THE MARKET WAS AT 349, THE DATE WE ACTUALLY RAN THE ANALYSIS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

IT'S MOVED 31 BASIS POINT, SO YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT 380 TODAY, THAT'S WHERE I THINK THE MARKET SHOULD HAVE BEEN FOR YOU, BUT WE PRICED IT 347.

WHAT I WANT TO TELL YOU IS THAT IT IS BEYOND WHAT JUST A DOUBLE AA TO AAA, YOU HAVE THREE AAAS AND A STERLING CREDIT, LIMITED AMOUNT OF DEBT, A HIGH INVESTOR INTEREST.

IN A NORMAL CASE, WE MIGHT SAY SOMEWHERE MAYBE SEVEN BASIS POINTS BETWEEN A AA TO A AAA.

BUT IN YOUR CASE, IT'S FAR GREATER THAN THAT BECAUSE YOU DON'T TRADE LIKE A AAA, YOU TRADE IN GENERAL TEXAS [INAUDIBLE] INDICATION AND YOU TRADE BETTER THAN OTHERS.

>> TEXAS IS NOT A HIGH ENOUGH CLASSIFICATION FOR IT.

>> JUST AS THE MAYOR INDICATED, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DEBT.

SOUTHLAKE DEBT IS GOOD TO HEAR.

I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF THERE'S SOUTHLAKE RESIDENTS THAT ACTUALLY HAVE APPLIED TO TRY TO PURCHASE DEBT FROM THEIR UNDERWRITERS.

>> WELL, BRAVO, ALLISON AND SHARON. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. THIS ITEM REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING, SO I'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 6A.

ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON 6A? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COUNCIL, UNLESS THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION, LET'S MOVE INTO A MOTION ON 6A.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 6A, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1293, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TAX AND WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 2025, NOTING WE ARE APPROVING THE AUTHORIZATION OF ISSUANCE OF TAX AND WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 2025.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> LET'S CAST YOUR VOTES ON 6A.

THAT MOTION CARRIES SIX, ZERO.

THANK YOU, SIR FOR YOUR HELP.

WE'LL SEE YOU MAYBE NEXT YEAR, MAYBE NOT.

NEXT UP IS 6B, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1290.

[Items 6.B. & 6.C.]

SECOND READING, APPOINTING CARA CARRERAS AS ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD, AND WE'LL ALSO TAKE UP ITEM 6C, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1291, SECOND READING,

[04:15:01]

APPOINTING LINDSAY KINSEY AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD.

STACY, I THINK WE PROBABLY WOULD LIKE THE ABBREVIATED VERSION.

>> FIGURED THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE.

AS MAYOR SAID, PURPOSE THIS ITEM IS JUST REAPPOINT YOUR TWO ASSOCIATE JUDGES, LINDSAY KINSEY AND CARA CARRERAS, ARE BOTH YOUR CURRENT ASSOCIATE JUDGES, AND AS A REMINDER, THE PURPOSE OF THE ASSOCIATE JUDGE IS TO SIMPLY FILL IN FOR THE PRESIDING MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, CAROL MONTGOMERY IN HER ABSENCE.

THAT IS COUNCIL APPOINTED.

THEY DO SERVE TWO YEAR TERMS PER THE CHARTER.

YOU CAN SEE THE TWO JUDGES HERE ON THE SCREEN WITH THEIR QUALIFICATIONS.

THEY BOTH MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY THE CHARTER.

WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPROVE BOTH ORDINANCES.

THEY BOTH ALSO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE EMPLOYMENT GRIEVANCE WITH THE TWO INDIVIDUALS.

THERE'S NO NEGATIVE BUDGETARY IMPACT FOR THIS REQUEST.

I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY FOR OUR NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEY ARE THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

THEY ONLY WORK WHEN JUDGE MONTGOMERY'S NOT AVAILABLE, SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE PAYING THREE JUDGES TO DO ONE JOB, SO THEY JUST FILL IN AS NEEDED, AND I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT NUMBERS, BUT IT WAS DE MINIMIS FOR THE LAST YEAR OR SO AS FAR AS THEIR COSTS.

>> MAYBE 200 HOURS EACH OVER THE YEAR OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR, SO VERY LIMITED HOURS.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. BOTH OF THESE ITEMS REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO I'LL OPEN PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEM 6B AND 6C.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON 6B AND 6C AND THE ASSOCIATE JUDGES OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT? SEEING NONE.

I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ASK DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM KATHY TALLEY FOR A MOTION.

LET'S START WITH 6B AND THEN 6C.

>> YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 6B, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1290, SECOND READING, APPOINTING CARA CARRERAS AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGE.

NOTING WE ARE APPROVING APPOINTING CARA CARRERAS AS THE ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON 6B, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> THAT MOTION CARRIES 6, 0. 6B IS APPROVED.

>> CAST YOUR VOTES.

CARA CARRERAS IS REAPPOINTED AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE.

LET'S DO 6C.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 6C, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1291, SECOND READING, APPOINTING LINDSAY KINSEY AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGE.

NOTING WE ARE APPROVING APPOINTING LINDSAY KINSEY AS THE ASSOCIATE JUDGE OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON 6C, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND, COUNCIL VOTES.

>> THAT MOTION CARRIES 6-0, 6C IS APPROVED, AND WE HAVE REAPPOINTED LINDSAY KINSEY AS AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE. THANK YOU.

LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 7A,

[7.A. Ordinance Nos. 480- 832 and 480- 833, ZA25- 0018, 1st Reading, Zoning Change, Development Plan and Site Plan for Liberty Commons, on property described as Tracts 3D and 3CO2, W R Eaves Survey Abstract No. 500, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 1963 W. Southlake Blvd., and 200 S. Peytonville Ave. Current Zoning: " S- P- 1" Detailed Site Plan District and " 0- 1" Office District. Requested Zoning: " RPUD" Residential Planned Unit Development and " S- P- 1" Detailed Site Plan District. SPIN Neighborhood # 10.]

ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-832 AND 480-833.

CASE NUMBER Z825-0018, FIRST READING ZONING CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND SITE PLAN FOR LIBERTY COMMONS. DIRECTOR KILLOUGH.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR CITY COUNCIL.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1963, WEST SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD AND 200 SOUTH PEYTONVILLE AVENUE.

AS YOU MENTIONED, ZONING CHANGE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND SITE PLAN, CHANGING ONE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, THE SOUTHERN PORTION IN PARTICULAR AND THE FRONTAGE ALONG WEST SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD TO S-P-1, DETAILED SITE PLAN DISTRICT, INCLUDING BOTH 0-1 AND C1 DISTRICT USES.

THIS IS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY.

THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE PROPERTY IS RETAIL COMMERCIAL ALONG THE FRONT EDGE OF WEST SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

ONE PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY, THE AREA THAT'S IN THIS PLAN DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE AND STREET IS OFFICE COMMERCIAL.

THESE ARE SOME SITE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITE.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS S-P-1, DETAILED SITE PLAN DISTRICT ON THE LARGER PORTION OF THE PIECE, AND THEN 0-1 OFFICE DISTRICT ON THE SMALL FINGER EXTENDING TO SOUTH PEYTONVILLE.

THIS IS A VIEW OF THE FRONT AGE OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE PEYTONVILLE FRONTAGE.

THIS IS THE COMPOSITE PLAN INCLUDING BOTH THE RESIDENTIAL PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT THAT IS 480-832,

[04:20:03]

AND THEN THE SP1 DETAILED SITE PLAN DISTRICT WHICH IS PROPOSED UNDER ORDINANCE 480-833.

MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, GENERALLY, IT FOLLOWS THE SF20 REGULATIONS.

THE MINIMUM LOT SIDE IS 20,000 SQUARE FEET.

THIS IS A DETAIL OF THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION AND A DETAIL OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTION.

THIS IS A SITE DATA SUMMARY AND THIS IS A TREE CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT.

THIS IS UNDER STANDARD ZONING, WOULD REQUIRE 70% PRESERVATION IN THIS AREA AND THEY ARE PROPOSING ROUGHLY FIVE PERCENT.

THIS IS THEIR LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THIS IS THE TREE PRESERVATION FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.

THIS IS THE DRAINAGE AREA PLAN AND THESE ARE RENDERINGS OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

THE OFFICE PORTION OF THIS HAS COMPLETED ELEVATIONS SPECIFIC TO WHAT WOULD BE BUILT.

HOWEVER, THE RETAIL COMPONENT IS JUST RENDERED AND THE APPLICANT WOULD BRING BACK A SITE PLAN FOR FINAL BUILDING ELEVATIONS ON THE RETAIL PORTION IF APPROVED UNDER THIS SP1.

WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA, WE'VE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES OUTSIDE OF THE NOTIFICATION AREA WITHIN THE SOUTHLAKE WOODS, STONEBERY, ADDITION TO THE SOUTH, WE'VE RECEIVED TWO OPPOSITIONS, WHICH YOU RECEIVED IN YOUR PACKET.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-0 AS IT WAS PRESENTED SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT AND REVIEW SUMMARY.

I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> THANK YOU, DIRECTOR KILLOUGH. ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? GO AHEAD.

>> YES. WHAT LOOKS LIKE THE TREE PRESERVATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL SIDE IS LESS THAN 5%?

>> YEAH, IS WHAT WAS BEING SHOWN FOR PRESERVATION. THAT'S CORRECT.

>> THEN THE RESIDENTIAL SECTION, WHAT'S THE REQUIRED PERCENTAGE OF THAT AND WHERE ARE WE AT AGAIN?

>> I BELIEVE THAT IS ALSO 70%, I BELIEVE.

I'LL DOUBLE CHECK AND THEY'RE PRESERVING JUST BARELY OVER 38% OF THAT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR KILLOUGH AT THIS TIME BEFORE WE INVITE THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, DIRECTOR KILLOUGH.

>> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS CURTIS SEAN WITH THE SAGE OF 1130 CARROLL.

I APPRECIATE YOU STAYING LATE FOR THIS.

THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE BEEN HERE A WHILE, WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE AND A VERY BRIEF HISTORY IN FACT, COUNCILMAN REYNOLDS SAW THIS AT P&Z, I THINK.

THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED AT P&Z WITH 30 LOTS.

WE TOOK IT TO COUNCIL.

THIS IS AN ALTERNATE CONCEPT AFTER SPEAKING TO SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE PRESENTED THIS.

WHEN WE WENT TO SECOND READING,

[04:25:01]

THERE WAS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE DIRECTION WE WERE GIVEN.

MY FAULT ON THAT.

SOME MEMBERS LIKED THE GREEN BELT IN THE MIDDLE AND WE TOOK THIS OUT IN RESPONSE TO TRYING TO MAKE THE LOTS AS LARGE AS POSSIBLE, THIS IS 25 LOTS.

WE STARTED WITH 30. WE WERE ASKED TO BRING BACK ANOTHER PLAN IN THE JANUARY 7TH MEETING THAT HAD FEWER LOTS AND ALL THE LOTS ABOVE 10,000 SQUARE FEET.

WE DID THIS. THIS PLAN ENDED UP WITH A 3-3 VOTE.

I THINK MANY OF THE OUTSIDE ISSUES WE HAD ADDRESSED AS FAR AS ACCESS AND THOSE THINGS.

WHAT I HEARD AT THIS MEETING WAS THAT IT WAS BASICALLY A MATTER OF LOT SIZE ON THE RESIDENTIAL.

WHAT WE WERE TOLD IS THAT, I BELIEVE, AT LEAST BY THE MAYOR AND PERHAPS OTHERS WAS THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO MATCH THE LOTS, RESIDENTIAL LOTS NEXT TO US TO OUR SOUTH, WHICH ARE SF20 LOTS.

OTHER THINGS WE HEARD, WE DIDN'T GET ENOUGH VOTE, SO WE'VE ESSENTIALLY SAID, WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT AND HAVE THE GET UP TO THE HALF ACRE LOTS.

BUT AGAIN, ON THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, THIS MEETS THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE AREA COMMERCIAL STRIP ALONG SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD, WITH MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE REAR.

OUR ACCESS POINTS, WE HAVE SEVERAL ACCESS POINTS, A COUPLE FROM PLAYERS CIRCLE TO THE WEST.

ONE OF THEM WHICH WOULD BE USED AS ANOTHER ACCESS POINT TO THE COMMERCIAL AREA ALONG SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD.

THE OTHER ONE WOULD BE A SECONDARY ACCESS TO THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION, AND OF COURSE, THE ACCESS OFF OF PEYTONVILLE WHICH WOULD BE A ROAD THROUGH THE RATHER THIN STRIP OF PROPERTY THERE, OPEN SPACE ON EITHER SIDE.

THERE IS A APPROVED A COMMERCIAL OFFICE SITE PLAN TO OUR SOUTH.

WE WOULD ALLOW A CONNECTION TO THAT BEFORE WE HAVE OUR GATE.

WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS TO BE A GATED DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS THE PLAN THAT IS RESULTING ON THAT.

WE'RE NOW DOWN TO 14 LOTS.

ALL OF THESE LOTS ARE 20,000 SQUARE FEET AND UP AND THEY BASICALLY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SF20 ORDINANCE.

ALONG THE SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD, PLAN SHOWS FOUR OFFICE BUILDINGS AND A DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT.

HERE'S THE DETAILED STATISTICS ON THAT.

I WON'T BELABOR THE POINT, BUT THERE'S A CLOSE UP DETAIL OF THIS AND LANDSCAPE DETAIL FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION.

AS DENNIS SHOWED YOU, HERE'S THE ELEVATIONS, THE RENDERINGS OF THE OFFICE BUILDINGS AND OF COURSE, THE ACTUAL ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS.

HERE'S OUR PROPOSAL.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OR TALK ABOUT THE DETAILS.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. YOUNG? WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY. GO AHEAD, FRANCIS.

>> I DO HAVE SOME. WHY DID YOU CHOOSE NOT TO GO TO SPIN ON THIS?

>> WELL, BASICALLY, WE'D BEEN TO SPEND.

IF WE'D HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO TABLE IN JANUARY, THEN WE'D BE BACK IN HERE.

I HAVE TALKED PERSONALLY WITH TWO OF THE ADJACENT FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEY WERE HAPPY WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN.

>> ON THE LAST PLAN YOU BROUGHT FORWARD ON THE RESIDENTIAL, THE GARAGES WERE IN THE FRONT.

WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THIS RESIDENTIAL? WHERE ARE THE GARAGES ON THESE?

>> WELL, I DON'T THINK THEY'LL ALL HAVE TO BE FRONT LOADED.

THAT'S FOR SURE. THESE LOTS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER.

>> THEY SHOULDN'T BE, ARE THEY? I WON'T BE. THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT.

[04:30:02]

>> I THINK WE COULD COMMIT TO THERE BEING NO FRONT LOADING GARAGES ON THIS.

>> LET ME ASK YOU YOUR QUESTION. ONE OF THE VARIANCES THAT'S BEING ASKED IS FOR 45% VERSUS 30% ON THE BUILDINGS ON THE LOTS, IN OTHER WORDS, HOW MUCH ROOM THEY CAN TAKE UP.

IS THAT A LEFTOVER PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS NOW.

WHY WOULD WE NEED A VARIANCE FROM A 30%?

>> I'M SORRY. WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO EXACTLY, A 30% OF WHAT?

>> ONE OF THE ITEMS ON HERE WE TALKED ABOUT A LAND THE COVERAGE OF THE HOUSES ON THE LOT ITSELF.

AM I INCORRECT ON THAT? IT'S ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO 45% FROM 30%?

>> WELL, IT'S A PUD, SO WE'RE BASICALLY SETTING OUT THE REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S A COVERAGE OF THE STRUCTURE ON THE HOUSE ON THE LOT.

>> SECOND QUESTION IS, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE EXIT ON THE PEYTONVILLE.

I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS TONIGHT, BUT IT'S BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST MIDNIGHT.

I FOLLOWED THIS PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY, OBVIOUSLY BACK IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER AND JANUARY, AND I SAW ALL THOSE MEETINGS, AND THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WERE PASSIONATE ABOUT THE EXIT ONTO PEYTONVILLE WITH THE SCHOOL.

REVISITING THAT AT THIS POINT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. KILLOUGH, IF NEEDED, BUT WE'RE TALKING 14 LOTS.

BY THE WAY, MUCH BETTER.

I MEAN, I HAVE TO SAY, IT'S GREAT TO SEE THAT THESE ARE OF THE 20,000 SQUARE FEET, SO TOTALLY APPRECIATE IT.

BUT WHY IS THAT EXIT EVEN NEEDED NOW? CAN'T WE JUST HAVE ONE ENTRANCE AND EXIT OUT OF PLAYERS CIRCLE?

>> WELL, THIS IS THE MAIN ENTRY.

THE PEYTONVILLE ENTRY IS THE MAIN ENTRY, THAT'S AN ACTUAL STREET.

YOU'RE GOING BETWEEN COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON THE PLAYERS CIRCLE THING.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE ALWAYS TRY TO DO IS TO MAKE THESE DEVELOPMENTS HIGH QUALITY.

IN KEEPING WITH THE QUANT OF QUALITY THAT PEOPLE EXPECT IN SOUTHLAKE, AND WE NEED A MAIN ENTRY OFF OF PEYTONVILLE.

THERE'S ONLY A VERY SMALL PERIOD OF THE TIME AND I DON'T REALLY EVEN THINK 14 LOTS WOULD EVER CONSTITUTE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM THERE.

PEOPLE TEND TO BLOW THINGS OUT OF PROPORTION A LITTLE BIT.

BUT CERTAINLY 14 LOTS COMPARED TO THE 30 THAT WE ORIGINALLY ASKED FOR IS VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE LEAVING IN THE MORNING, REALLY THE POINT OF THE PLAYERS CIRCLE EXIT IS TO GIVE PEOPLE A CHANCE THE RESIDENTS THAT WILL BE LIVING IN HERE A CHANCE TO GO OUT AND GET ON SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD WITHOUT THEMSELVES GETTING IN THE MESS BY THE HIGH SCHOOL THERE.

BUT UNDER NORMAL TIMES, PEYTONVILLE IS A NICE RESIDENT THAT SHOULD BE THE ENTRY TO THIS.

IT'S A BETTER RESIDENTIAL ENTRY THAN CERTAINLY PLAYERS CIRCLE.

>> NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. IT GOES BACK AGAIN TO THE DISCUSSIONS THAT THERE HAD BEEN ABOUT PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO DO U-TURNS, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING DOWN TO SOUTHLAKE WOODS AND TURNING AROUND AND THERE.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IT'S NOT REALLY NEEDED, IS WHAT I'M SAYING AT THIS POINT.

YOU COULD ACTUALLY UTILIZE THE PLAYER CIRCLE.

>> IT'S NEEDED. YOU'RE COMING BACK FROM SOUTHLAKE TOWN SQUARE AND YOU'RE COMING BACK TO HOME.

YOU WOULD TURN ON PEYTONVILLE AND COME STRAIGHT IN.

IF YOU HAD TO GO TO PLAYER CIRCLE, YOU NOW HAVE AN UNPROTECTED LEFT.

>> WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS ALONG SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD THAT HAVE THAT NOW.

AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR OF THEM CAN PROBABLY NAME RIGHT OFF THE BAT.

>> SURE, I KNOW.

>> BUT SOME POINT A TRAFFIC LIGHT COULD GO THERE IF NEEDED IF IT WAS REALLY THAT BAD.

BEFORE WE GET INTO DISCUSSIONS ON DISTANCE OF IT, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TRAFFIC LIGHT AT CARROLL AND I THINK IT'S TOWER OVER BEHIND OREO CLOSER THAN IT IS FROM PEYTONVILLE OVER TO PLAYER CIRCLE.

I'M JUST SAYING, AS FAR AS MOST OF US HAVE UNPROTECTED TURNS.

>> IS IT TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE? ABSOLUTELY, YOU ARE CORRECT.

BUT I DON'T SEE WHY YOU WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.

>> THEN THE LAST QUESTION I HAD WAS, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE COUNTING OPEN SPACE FOR THAT ENTRANCE AND EXIT AS PART OF OUR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPERTY, NOBODY'S GOING TO BE PLAYING BASEBALL ACROSS THAT THING, AM I CORRECT ON THAT?

[04:35:01]

>> SURE. WE'RE NOT COUNTING THE OPEN SPACE THAT'S IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT THERE'S OPEN SPACE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ENTRY, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY.

>> I'M GETTING A NOD. I JUST WANT TO CHECK THAT THAT CAN COUNT, IS THAT WHAT I'M ASKING?

>> [INAUDIBLE] F THE OPEN SPACE IN THEIR PLAN OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE PRIVATE STREET?

>> I'LL BE BRIEF, CURTIS, BUT COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER COLORED SITE PLAN WITHOUT THE OFFICE UP RIGHT THERE? THAT WAS GOOD.

I AGREE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A PEYTONVILLE ENTRANCE, AND I THINK IT JUST FLOWS BETTER.

IT FEELS LIKE A MORE ELEGANT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT YOU'RE ENTERING INTO.

THE ONLY HEARTBURN I HAVE IS FROM 7:00 AM UNTIL 8:30 AM WHEN PEOPLE ARE LEAVING FOR WORK AND THEY WANT TO GO WESTBOUND ON 1709.

THEY EITHER COME OUT TO PLAYERS CIRCLE, AND YOU HAVE GOT THAT UNPROTECTED LEFT, YOU CAN DO THAT, OR YOU'RE GOING DOWN PEYTONVILLE.

YOU'RE DOING A U-TURN WHILE THERE'S AN INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THAT ROAD GOING INTO THE PARKING LOT AT CARROLL SENIOR HIGH.

YOU CAN SEE WHERE THEY'RE U-TURNING AND THEY'RE TURNING AT THE SAME TIME, OR JUST THE COLLECTION OF CARS TRYING TO GET OUT.

I GET THAT THERE'S ONLY 14 HOMES, SO IT'S PROBABLY NOT AN ACUTE SITUATION.

BUT ONLY TWO QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT.

ONE IS, HAD YOU ALL EVER TALKED WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER SOUTH OF THIS, THAT WOULD MAKE THAT LINE UP TO THAT DRIVE?

>> GO AHEAD, RESPOND TO THAT FIRST.

>> WE TRIED TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE PROJECT EARLY ON.

THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN SELLING.

YOU CAN SEE THE TWO HOUSES THERE.

THOSE ARE RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED AT ALL, BUT THERE'S ALSO THE OFFICE WITH AN APPROVED SITE PLAN ABOVE THAT.

THEY WERE CONTACTED EARLY ON BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A NATURAL FIT FOR THIS.

IT WOULD GENERATE A LOT LESS TRAFFIC AS RESIDENTIAL THAN IT WOULD IN ITS APPROVED OFFICE PLAN THERE NOW.

BUT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED IN SELLING.

>> YOU CAN'T FORCE SOMEBODY TO SELL.

>> CAN'T FORCE THAT.

>> THEN THE SECOND PIGGYBACK ON THAT IS, CAN WE ADD A SIGN ON THAT MEDIAN THAT SAYS, NO U-TURNS BETWEEN 7 AND 8, OR WHATEVER?

>> THAT WAS PART OF COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMSON'S MOTION EARLIER ON, THAT HE WOULD BE HAPPY WITH INSTALLATION OF A DURING SCHOOL HOURS, NO U-TURN AT THAT THING.

I MIGHT POINT OUT THERE ARE TWO OTHER OPTIONS TO GO WEST, TOO.

ONE IS TO TAKE PLAYERS CIRCLE OUT TO 1709, DO RIGHT, AND MAKE A U-TURN AT PEYTONVILLE LIKE WE DO JUST ABOUT EVERYWHERE ELSE ALONG 1709 WHEN WE HAVE TO GO THE OTHER DIRECTION.

OR YOU CAN GO THROUGH THE SHOPPING CENTER TO OUR WEST TO DAVIS AND TURN LEFT, GET OUT ON DAVIS, TURN LEFT FROM THERE. IT'S NOT HOPELESS.

>> MOST OF THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE GOING OUT TO PLAYERS CIRCLE AND GOING EAST.

>> EXACTLY.

>> NINETY PERCENT OF IT'S GOING TO BE DOING THAT.

THEN THE EGRESS OR THE INGRESS COMING HOME IS GOING TO COME DOWN PEYTONVILLE, BOOM, THEY'RE IN.

NO BIG DEAL. MY CHILDREN GO TO ROCKENBAUGH ELEMENTARY.

WHEN I DROP THEM OFF, I GO NORTH COMING OUT, YOU CAN'T DO A U-TURN BETWEEN CERTAIN HOURS, SO YOU JUST GO LEFT.

THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCES IF RANDY WILLIAMSON SAID THAT AS WELL TO ADD A SIGN THERE.

>> WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE MOTION, CHAIRMAN.

>> THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THE NO U-TURN AND IT'S THE CONCERN THAT THE SOUTHWOOD PEOPLE HAD, IS THAT IF YOU WANT TO DO A U-TURN, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GO DOWN TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND DO IT.

IT'S A PERFECT PLACE TO DO A U-TURN.

YOU'RE FORCING THEM IF THEY DON'T WANT TO MESS WITH GETTING ONTO SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD AND THEY DON'T WANT TO BREAK THE LAW, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO DO A U-TURN IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR MAJOR CONCERNS.

>> IT'S A VALID POINT.

I'M THINKING PRACTICALLY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? WOULD I DRIVE ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE TO THEN TURN AROUND AND THEN COME ALL THE WAY BACK UP AND THEN SIT AT A LIGHT TO THEN GO LEFT? HOW MANY WOULD DO THAT? MAYBE A COUPLE OUT OF THE 14.

WHEREAS, I THINK MOST DURING THAT PROTECTED TIME PERIOD, WOULD GO OUT PLAYERS CIRCLE AND WAIT HERE TO GO LEFT.

I THINK THE MAJORITY WOULD BEHAVE THAT WAY.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT WON'T HAPPEN.

[04:40:02]

I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T THINK IT'LL BE PREVALENT.

>> I AGREE.

>> BUT THEN THAT BACKS UP WHAT I'M SAYING, IS DO YOU EVEN NEED THE PEYTONVILLE ACCESS? AGAIN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. DON'T GET ME WRONG.

I THINK THE ENTRANCE THERE WOULD BE BEAUTIFUL, OBVIOUSLY.

I COULD SEE THE LONG DRIVE IN AND WHATEVER, BUT THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION OF DO YOU EVEN NEED IT BECAUSE MOST OF THE PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO DO THAT, SO THEY ARE GOING TO GO OUT PLAYERS CIRCLE.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. AS ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS UP HERE TOLD US IS THAT MOST PEOPLE GO FROM THIS LOCATION GO EAST BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY OF SOUTHLAKE IS.

THERE'S SOUTHLAKE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO GO TO THE SOUTHLAKE THINGS.

WHEN THEY COME BACK, THIS GIVES THEM A CHANCE TO TURN SOUTH ON PEYTONVILLE AND GO STRAIGHT IN.

IT'S REALLY THE MUCH BETTER ENTRY.

>> TAKES THE QUEUING OFF OF 1709, AND I THINK IT BRINGS DOWN THE QUALITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THAT'S NOT THERE.

>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT. TREE CONSERVATION, AGAIN, AND I KNOW I BROUGHT THIS UP EARLIER, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS LIKE 5% RETENTION AND 38% RETENTION.

THE TREE CONSERVATION IS A REQUIRED THING.

>> WELL, THIS IS A DIFFERENT SITE THAN MOST.

NONE OF THE TREE COVER OUT THERE IS NATURAL POST-OAK FOREST LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ON SHADY OAKS OR EVEN THE BIG OAKS THAT ARE ON THE BOB JONES SITE.

THIS WAS A TREE FARM, AND BECAUSE OF IT, THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS THAT HAVE STANDING WATER IN IT OR WHATEVER.

I THINK THEY CAME AND THEY DUG TREES OUT AND WHATEVER ELSE.

TO BE SHORT, THERE'S A BUNCH OF TRASH TREES OUT THERE THAT HAVE GROWN UP WILLOWS AND OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE GROWN UP JUST BECAUSE THIS WAS A BASIC AND AGRICULTURAL USE, IF YOU WILL, GROWING TREES AND WHATEVER OUT THERE.

THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES ARE ALONG SOME OF THE PERIMETER FENCES.

WE'RE TRYING TO SAVE AS MANY OF THOSE AS WE CAN.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO COME IN AND PUT A MASONRY WALL IN BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL.

IT'S TOUGH TO SAVE TREES THAT ARE GROWING UPRIGHT ON A FENCE LINE WHEN YOU'RE DOING THAT.

IT'S JUST A REAL WEIRD PIECE OF PROPERTY. I'VE BEEN OUT THERE.

I COULD SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF IT OR TAKE YOU OUT THERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE.

MOST OF THESE TREES ARE JUST POOR TRASHY TREES.

>> BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE TREE CONSERVATION PLAN, MOST OF THE TREES AREN'T ALONG THE FENCE LINE.

MOST OF THEM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S MY SCREEN OR MY EYES AT THIS POINT, BUT THEY'RE ALL ALONG LOT 7, 08, 9, THE VAST MAJORITY.

>> WELL, THERE'S BIG PONDS, SWAMP AREAS BACK THERE.

THEY'RE NOT HIGH-QUALITY TREES, IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> BUT I THINK THE TREE ORDINANCE DOESN'T DESIGNATE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HIGH QUALITY AND LOW QUALITY, JUST LOOKING FOR THE RETENTION OF THE TREES.

IT'S TWO-INCH TREES AT 4.5 FEET THAT MIGHT ATTAIN A HEIGHT OF 15 FEET TALL. I GET IT.

WE DON'T WANT COTTONWOOD, THERE'S HACKBERRY OR WHATEVER.

GREAT. I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, AND I THINK THERE COULD BE SOME VARIANCES FOR THOSE.

BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT'S DONE IN THIS SURVEY WHICH A LOT OF THEM ARE LIVE OAKS WHEN I LOOK AT IT.

>> I JUST BELIEVE THE BEST RESULT OF THIS WILL BE IF IF WE PRETTY MUCH START OVER AND PLANT BEAUTIFUL TREES AND LANDSCAPING ON THESE LOTS AND HAVE HIGH-QUALITY TREES INSTEAD OF THE MORE TRASH TREES THERE, TRYING TO WORK AROUND THINGS THAT REALLY AREN'T.

>> DENNIS, YOU CAN CHIME IN IF YOU FEEL LIKE, BUT I BELIEVE THE TREE ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR THAT.

IF HE WERE TO PROPOSE WHERE THESE TREES WERE TO HELP MAKE UP FOR, SO WE CAN MEET THE NUMBERS FOR THE CONSERVATION, AM I CORRECT?

>> YES. AS PART OF CONSIDERATION OF A TREE CONSERVATION PLAN OR ANALYSIS, WHERE THERE'S A DEFICIENCY, YOU CAN PROPOSE OR PUT FORTH MITIGATION TO OFFSET SOME OF THAT LOSS, IF NOT ALL OF IT.

>> AGAIN, IF I'M ASKING THE QUESTION,

[04:45:02]

SO IF YOU WANT TO VERIFY WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT'S GREAT, TOO.

THE OTHER OPTION IS PAYMENTS INTO THE REFORESTATION FUND TO ALLOW TREES TO BE BUILT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, THAT IS AN OPTION.

HOWEVER, IT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPER, OR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THAT DECISION OR CHOICE, WHETHER THEY'RE ON-SITE OR THROUGH THE MITIGATION FUND OR THROUGH REPLACEMENT, SOMEWHERE ELSE AGREED UPON WITH OUR LANDSCAPE ADMINISTRATOR ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY.

>> GREAT. THANKS.

>> I THINK WE'RE GOOD FOR NOW.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THIS IS A FIRST READING ON 7A, SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING, AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S HERE TO TALK ABOUT IT, SO WE'LL JUST SKIP PAST THAT.

COUNCIL, ANY DISCUSSION ON 7A.

I KNOW WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE.

>> I THINK THIS IS MUCH IMPROVED FROM WHAT WE SAW BEFORE.

I LIKE THE TWO ENTRANCES AND EXITS.

AS I SAID WHEN THIS CAME UP BEFORE, I'VE GIVEN A LOT OF THOUGHT OF NOT BEING THERE AND COMING HOME VERSUS JUST LEAVING.

I REALLY DO LIKE THE PEYTONVILLE ENTRANCE IN TERMS OF THAT.

ONCE THESE FOLKS LIVE HERE AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE DEAL IN TERMS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL AND THE HOURS WHERE IT'S MORE TRAFFIC, THEY'LL FIGURE IT OUT, THEY'LL MAKE THEIR DECISIONS.

I'M NOT TERRIBLY WORRIED ABOUT THAT SINCE THIS BEEN OVER THERE MULTIPLE TIMES ON PURPOSE AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF DAY.

PEYTONVILLE IS JUST LARGELY NOT TRAFFICKED.

IT JUST ISN'T, EXCEPT FOR THE MORNING HIGH SCHOOL ARRIVAL, AND THEN THE AFTERNOON EXIT.

I'M NOT THAT CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC ON PEYTONVILLE, BUT I DO REALLY LIKE THE TWO OPTIONS, SO YOU CAN MAKE YOUR CHOICE AS YOU LIVE HERE, GET USED TO WHERE YOU'RE GOING, WHAT YOU'RE DOING, DROPPING THE KIDS OFF, GOING TO WORK, YOU HAVE THOSE OPTIONS.

I'VE ALSO BEEN OUT THERE.

THE TREES ARE NOT GREAT.

I'M NOT A TREE EXPERT, BUT YOU CAN TELL IT WAS A TREE FARM, AND IT'S PRETTY UNATTRACTIVE IF I'M BEING HONEST.

I DO LIKE THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE A HUGE IMPROVEMENT ON THE SPACE AND HOW IT LOOKS.

I'M NOT ATTACHED TO THE TREE ISSUE, BUT HAPPY TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT IF OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WORK IT OUT.

>> I'LL JUMP IN HERE.

I FORGOT TO NOTE WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT FROM HILARY RABLER, 602 STONEBURY DRIVE, DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT RECORDS OPPOSITION.

NO DRIVE-THROUGH, NO PEYTONVILLE.

THEN WE ALSO HAD SOME ONLINE SUBMITTALS, MELISSA PARROTT, 1901 WHITE OAK CLEARING IS OPPOSED.

HILARY RABLER, 602 STONEBURY DRIVE IS OPPOSED.

THAT'S FROM 34 PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATIONS THAT WE SENT OUT.

I THINK THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO RESPONSES.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. I FORGOT TO DO THAT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE?

>> I JUST WANT TO CHIME IN ONE MORE TIME, SIR.

OBVIOUSLY, SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN HERE, AND I DO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER TALLEY JUST SAID.

I TOTALLY THINK THAT THIS IS WAY BETTER.

TO ME, THIS LAYOUT VERSUS WHAT CAME BACK THROUGH HERE PREVIOUSLY IN DECEMBER AND THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY IS PROOF THAT THE SYSTEM CAN ACTUALLY WORK BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE LOTS THAT ARE ABOVE 20,000 SQUARE FEET.

IT DOES MATCH THE AREAS AROUND THERE.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I ALSO DO AGREE THAT I THINK THAT THAT ENTRANCE OFF PEYTONVILLE WOULD BE A REALLY NICE ASSET TO IT.

BUT I DO THINK THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE A SOLUTION TO THE TREE THING.

AGAIN, IT'S A PASSIONATE SUBJECT, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.

IT IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE IN SOUTHLAKE, AND IT'S NOT ASKING A HECK OF A LOT TO SATISFY THAT ORDINANCE SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN.

WE'RE A TREE CITY, USA TOWN, AND WE HAVE BEEN FOR 28 YEARS, AND IT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS ORDINANCE. YOU GUYS CAN LOOK IT UP.

IT LITERALLY IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS ORDINANCE AND OUR TREE DAY AND A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE THAT DESIGNATION, AND THERE IS A LOT OF PUBLIC INTEREST IN MAINTAINING WHAT GREEN SPACE WE CAN IN TREE.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT TIME THIS COMES THROUGH HERE.

SOME WAY THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THAT.

WHETHER IT'S PLANTING MORE TREES AROUND THERE TO MAKE IT LOOK NICER, OR IF IT IS AN ABSOLUTE HAS TO, THEN THE REFORESTATION FUND, WHICH IS LITERALLY WHAT THE CITY SET UP IN CASES WHERE IT JUST SIMPLY CAN'T BE DONE.

[04:50:02]

>> GOOD POINTS. ANYTHING ELSE?

>> I GUESS I UNDERSTAND THE PEYTONVILLE ENTRANCE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT BE AN ENTRANCE ONLY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS THAT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS ARE HAVING ABOUT THE U-TURNS.

ALSO, I'M BOTHERED AND WAS ORIGINALLY.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED ON THE COMMERCIAL.

I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF A DRIVE-THROUGH ON THAT LOCATION.

I DO LIKE THE HOUSING, AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN REDUCED DRAMATICALLY, BUT I STILL HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE ENTRANCE AND THE DRIVE-THROUGH.

>> SPEAKING OF THAT DRIVE-THROUGH, AND AGAIN, MAYBE IT'S JUST THE WAY IT WORKS, BUT IS THERE A REASON WHY THAT DRIVE-THROUGH CAN'T BE A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN OR ON THE WEST END, AND JUST FLIP THAT OUT WITH ONE OF THE OFFICES, OR DOES IT JUST SIMPLY NOT FIT? IT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT ACTUALLY FIT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE THERE. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

THE PICTURE THAT YOU SHOW LOOKS LIKE AN HTO OR WHATEVER, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT ANYBODY'S PLANNING ON PUTTING IN A CHICK-FIL-A, BUT I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF A CHICK-FIL-A WENT IN RIGHT THERE.

>> CURTIS, YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE POSSIBLE FLIPPING IT TO THE I GUESS THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY?

>> ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S AT THE EAST END IS BECAUSE IT'S NEXT TO WALGREENS, AND IT'S REMOTE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THE BOUNDARY GOES UP THERE A LITTLE BIT SO IT ACTUALLY FITS PRETTY WELL RIGHT THERE.

I REALIZE THERE'S THAT COFFEE SHOP OVER THERE, BUT WE'VE GOT THE ROAD THAT GOES THROUGH THE PLAYERS CIRCLE THERE TOO THAT ACCESSES ALL THE COMMERCIAL.

IT JUST, I THINK, SEEMS TO WORK BETTER AT THE EAST END.

>> YOU HAD ME AT AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORS GO WITH THE DRIVE-THROUGH. THANK YOU.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME HOMEWORK IF YOU GET PAST FIRST READING TO ADDRESS THE TREE PRESERVATION OR TREE MITIGATION.

MAYBE LOOK AT RELOCATING THE DRIVE-THROUGH ON THE RESTAURANT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE YOU CAN ALWAYS USE YOUR COMPUTERS AND FLIP THAT AROUND, AND LET US LOOK AT IT, AT LEAST, MAYBE A VERSION OF THIS JUST SO WE CAN SEE IT, BUT I CONCUR WITH WHAT WE JUST SAID.

YOU HAVE SOME HOMEWORK IF WE GET THROUGH FIRST READING, BUT WHY DON'T WE START WITH A MOTION AND SEE WHERE WE ARE.

THIS IS FIRST READING.

>> MAYOR, LET ME CLARIFY.

DO WE WANT SOMETHING IN HERE ABOUT THE NO U-TURN SIGN?

>> YEAH. I THINK THAT WAS IN LAST TIME.

I KNOW IT DIDN'T PASS.

>> WHICH I DON'T HAVE. THAT'S CITY INSTALLED?

>> IT'S ON A PUBLIC ROAD.

>> YES. NOBODY ELSE GETS INSTALL SIGNS ON CITY ROADS.

>> IT'S TRUE. THE HOURS, IS IT THE SAME AS WHATEVER THE SCHOOL HOURS ARE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE.

>> DR. KILLOUGH, DO YOU REMEMBER IF WE TIMED IT AS FAR AS THE SCHOOL MORNING RUSH HOUR OR FROM 7:00 WHATEVER UNTIL 3:00 WHATEVER OR WAS IT JUST TWO BRACKETS.

>> I THINK WE LOOKED AT THE SCHOOL'S TIMING.

>> ARRIVAL AND DISMISSALS?

>> YEAH.

>> WE CAN DO THAT. WHATEVER WE DID LAST TIME, MADE SENSE. I KNOW IT GOT DENIED.

>> I' M NOT INTERESTED IN THAT.

>> I THINK WE'RE OKAY ON THAT.

>> I THINK LAST TIME THEY DID A NO EXIT DURING CERTAIN SCHOOL HOURS, BUT THIS IS 14 HOUSES.

>> I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE U-TURN, NOT EXITS.

>> I MISSED THE HOURS.

>> CONFIRMED WILL BE SCHOOL ZONE HOURS.

>> [OVERLAPPING] THERE WAS MORNING HOURS DUE TO A LOT OF STUDENTS LEAVE AFTERNOON, SOMETIME EARLY AFTERNOON.

NOT ALL OF THEM LEAVE AT THE END OF THE DAY, SO IT'S MORE SPREAD OUT IN THE AFTERNOON, I BELIEVE, BUT WE CAN DOUBLE-CHECK.

>> I THINK, FRANCIS, THE SPEED LIMIT IS DIFFERENT DURING THOSE CERTAIN HOURS.

THERE'S A BLOCK OF TIME IN THE MORNING WHERE THE SPEED LIMIT GOES DOWN AND THEN ALSO IN THE AFTERNOON.

I THINK YOUR TIME, BUT NO U-TURNS.

>> GOING TO BE EXTENDED. WE VOTED TO EXTEND THAT SOME TIME AGO, WHERE IT'S GOING TO GO FARTHER DOWN PEYTONVILLE.

>> DID YOU MAKE THAT MOTION?

>> NO. I AGREED TO IT.

>> IT WAS STRICTLY DURING THE SCHOOL ZONE HOURS.

>> WELL, LET'S MAYBE COME UP WITH SOME OPTIONS.

WE CAN EITHER TIE IT TO THE SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMIT CHANGES OR WHATEVER ELSE WE COME UP WITH IF WE HAVE A DIFFERENT IDEA.

>> THE SPEED LIMIT CHANGES ARE CONCURRENT WITH THE SCHOOL ZONE HOURS.

>> IS THERE ANY OTHER OPTION YOU WANT US TO LOOK AT? NO. LET'S JUST TIE THE NO U-TURN TO THAT. KEEP IT SIMPLE.

[04:55:03]

>> I'LL GIVE IT A GO. YOU GUYS CORRECT ME IF I NEED TO BE CORRECTED.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 7A, ORDINANCE NUMBERS 480-832 AND 480-833 ZA 25-0018.

FIRST READING ZONING CHANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SITE PLAN FOR LIBERTY COMMONS ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 3D AND 3C02, WR EVES SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 500, CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS, AND LOCATED AT 1963 WEST SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD AND 200 SOUTH PEYTONVILLE AVENUE SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED APRIL 29TH, 2025 DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER 4, DATED APRIL 29TH, 2025.

NOTING WE ARE APPROVING ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-832, A ZONING CHANGE IN DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR RPUD, RESIDENTIAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING FOR 14 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 10.72 ACRES, AS PRESENTED, NOTING THE FOLLOWING.

NOTING THAT THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO NO FRONT LOADING GARAGES, AND THE APPLICANT WILL, BETWEEN NOW AND SECOND READING, ADDRESS THE TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AND COME UP WITH SOME OPTIONS.

NOTING THAT THE CITY WILL, IF APPROVED, INSTALL A NO U-TURN SIGN LOCATED ON SOUTH PEYTONVILLE AVENUE, AND THE HOURS OF THE SIGN WILL BE CONCURRENT WITH SCHOOL ZONE HOURS.

WE ARE APPROVING ORDINANCE NUMBER 480-833, A ZONING CHANGE IN SITE PLAN FOR SP1 DETAILED SITE PLAN DISTRICT ZONING FOR OFFICE RETAIL AS PRESENTED FOR FOUR OFFICE BUILDINGS AND ONE RETAIL RESTAURANT BUILDING ON APPROXIMATELY 4 BY 4 ACRES AS PRESENTED.

I DON'T HAVE ANY CONDITIONS ON THAT ONE.

>> I THINK THAT'S IT.

>> DENNIS, DO YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT? WE HAVE A MOTION ON FIRST READING. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> THAT MOTION CARRIES 5-1.

>> CAST YOUR VOTES.

WE'LL SEE YOU AT SECOND READING IN TWO WEEKS.

YOU HAVE SOME HOMEWORK TO DO. THANK YOU, SIR.

NEXT UP IS ITEM 8A,

[8.A. Resolution No. 25- 009, appointing a Mayor Pro Tem and Deputy Mayor Pro Tem. ]

RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-009, APPOINTING A MAYOR PRO TEM AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

I'M GOING TO NOMINATE OR SUGGEST WE DO THE SAME THING AS WE'VE DONE THE PAST YEAR WITH RANDY WILLIAMSON AS MAYOR PRO TEM, AND KATHY TALLEY AS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

KATHY, YOU GET TO MAKE A MOTION ON YOURSELF.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 8A, RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-009, APPOINTING A MAYOR PRO TEM AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.

NOTING, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THE MAYOR HAS APPOINTED WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL, RANDY WILLIAMSON, TO SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM, AND KATHY TALLEY TO SERVE AS DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, AND BOTH SHALL HOLD OFFICE FOR ONE YEAR.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> 8A PASSES. 8B, RESOLUTION NUMBER 25-010,

[8.B. Resolution No. 25- 010, appointing representatives to the Audit Committee, Southlake Parks Development Corporation, Corridor Planning Committee, and Metroport Teen Court as a result of the May 3, 2025, uncontested General Election. ]

APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. THAT'S THE FUN ONE.

SOUTHLAKE PARKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, QUARTER PLANNING COMMITTEE, AND METRO PORT TEEN COURT, AS A RESULT OF THE MAY 3RD, 2025, UNCONTESTED ELECTION.

LET'S JUST TAKE THEM IN ORDER.

THE AUDIT COMMITTEE IS THE MAYOR, THE MAYOR PRO TEM, AND THE DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM.