Planning & Zoning Commission Agendas & Meeting Information - Regular Meeting

this time. So, we are opening at 6:12. Does anybody have any public comment on this matter? There was one sign up. Was there one sign up? Oh, here we go. See a lot of fours. Oh, here we go. Mr. Prescott, hello. [Music] Congratulations on your running the committee. It was wonderful to serve with you in the past. I know you're going to do a great job. Thank you very much.

So, uh, I don't really have a whole lot to say. Figured I would sign up in case I wanted to say something, but congratulations on starting this. We, you know, we already always need good good places to go and I'm not really a cigar smoker. The only time I did smoke, I got really sick, so I really do anymore. Of course, I did mix it with a bunch of other stuff. So, okay. Maybe we'll try it out.

No, I mean, the thing I would like to point out is he is literally backs up to people that are not in the city. So, um not that we don't want to be good neighbors to anybody else, but uh I don't know who would complain about him having music there. And so, seems like a reasonable request for what he wanted to do. All I have to say. Thank you. All right. We are closing public comment at 6:13. Um, commissioners thoughts. What's What's the uh stop time on Saturday nights for the goat? Go on Saturday night.

We stay consistent. I think we should stay consistent. Do we want to use Um, you know, because with the with the goat and the twine, we we use kind of the same language even throughout like week nights and things. So, we want to use that as well or only limit it to the weekend. I don't see any problem with just copying what we've done the blanket statement. Just don't want to restrict them to only, you know, Saturday or Sunday and maybe there's a holiday Monday, right? Okay, Bailey, could you read that out for us what those hours were? For the goat or I think they were the same.

Um, so for the goat, for Sundays, it's 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Uh, Monday to Thursday, it's 11 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday, it's 11:00 a.m. to 10:30. And then they did call out the New Year's Eve, which is 11:00 a.m. to midnight. Okay. And then the Twine is Sunday to 1:00 p.m. or Sunday 1:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday to Thursday 400 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday 2 pm to 10 p.m. And then they called out federally recognized holidays which is 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. Okay. Will be more of a residential surrounded location. So I would think the goat would be more goat.

So one more time. So, I think you said Sunday at the goat was 2 pm to 8:00 p.m. Yes, ma'am. And then Monday to Thursday is 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. And then Friday and Saturday is 11:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Okay. Anybody like to make a motion? I can do it. All right. Go for Let's do it. Yeah. [Music]

So, I make a motion that we recommend um approval with conditions for item 2.3 of the request um on behalf of Christine. On the request of a special use permit to allow a theater, stage live performance venue outside as an accessory use in library cigar lounge located at 4400 US Highway 281 North Sweet 1 Spring Branch, Texas 78070. And the conditions are as follows. Um for the opening hour for the performance hours on Sunday from 2 pm to 8 pm, Monday through Thursday 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday 11:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. second. Have a motion and a second. All in favor?

Any oppose? No. Abain. Passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. on to the next. So 24 hold a public hearing and consider a request by Samir Cahade. Apologize if I'm pronouncing it incorrectly with one stop group LP on behalf of Dashin interest LLC for the establishment of a PDD planned development district with a base zoning of R2 and R3 residential districts for approximately 329 acres generally located one mile north of the intersection of highway 281 and FM1863.

Good evening madam chair and congratulations. Um, this request is for the establishment of a PDD plan development district to establish residential zoning on 329 acres of the 388 acre McCarti Ranch property on Highway 281. The applicant is proposing 229 single family residences um on a minimum of 1 acre lots. The applicant is requesting a list of modifications to the city's code of ordinances. The modifications are related to the setback requirements for residential lots, the lot aspect ratio and lot width requirements, parkland dedication requirements, cut, fill and disturbance within steep slope requirements, tree geometry requirements, tree survey, tree removal and tree mitigation requirements, and lastly, modifications to the riparian buffer uh requirements. Uh in the staff report there is a section on the history of this property. In summary, this property does not have an active MBP nor is it vested to older city regulations. Uh this development is required to comply with all of the current city ordinances. Uh the applicant has provided all of the submitt requirements to be considered a completed PD application. Uh this includes a conceptual site plan, a zoning statement, and a pro uh proposed utility providers um as indicated in the staff report package. And the applicant does have a presentation that I believe he would like to um take over. Samir and Miss Ham, we did have an updated US. Thank you. Good evening.

Um, it's a pleasure to be here tonight. I really appreciate your uh uh being here heard. I wish I was this gentleman here providing some cars and drinks. I know uh it's not always pleasant to be the developer. So, uh but we're here respectfully. uh we have gone through this process very carefully. We just want to give you an overview. My hope is that uh we will answer a lot of your questions in this overview. We'll go through it really quick and uh obviously all yours after that. So uh and there is a clicker up there. There is a clicker at the top one here. Yes. Thank you. Does it work? All right. So uh

there we go. All right. So the agenda is great. We'll introduce our group really quickly. uh talk about market. Let's try our behavior. Uh talk about the property. Uh we have a lot of community input. Uh we pride ourselves in this process that we went through and then we'll discuss our application very quick. In terms of who we are, you've heard developments, you've heard onetop group, you've heard SCS partners. We all operate under one umbrella which is try group of companies. Our mission is truly to just build nice communities. Now nice communities uh the concept varies from area to area from a nice community downtown San Antonio is going to be very different. A nice community here in Bver. So uh do we have multiple projects I'll go through some of them uh in terms of little about our history. I normally don't go over this but in a town hall meeting there was a lot of questions about who we were being smaller group thought we'll just put this up there uh so we've been land developer since 2007 uh we operate out of Canada Texas and North Carolina uh we launched the San Antonio operation 2014 uh we are uh basically land investors and land developers we do not go vertical we only do horizontal And uh we're very fortunate. We are debtree. Uh we're small group of owners. Uh we're very like-minded, very low-key. You won't find a lot about us. Uh it's a blessing and a curse. Uh because many people in this room wanted to learn more about us. Being on the front end of this of the uh of a project life cycle, generally you don't deal a lot with the public. So, uh, in terms of, uh, some of our projects, this project was in Raleigh, North Carolina. High-end town houses, uh, between 2,800 square ft and

4,400 square ft. Uh, sale price between 1.2 million approximately 1.9 million, very high, super close to downtown. Uh, we have a project up in Canada. We bought about,00 acres. Uh we have uh that's in Alberta just north of Montana uh for those of you who are not familiar and uh this is a lake very close to Calgary uh and we're very fortunate to have this project approved. Uh this is large lots uh most are large lots of them are mediumsiz half acre lots. In terms of San Antonio, uh, one of our first projects, uh, really came to fruition in 2022. That is on nine I 9 acre property on Evers and Senica just north of 410. Uh, initially we were approved for 94 lots. We end up going back and reducing it down to 67 after we got feedback from uh, the neighbors. uh this year we actually purchased that property by writing the apartments and we didn't because the feedback from the neighbors was as such. So uh that's the kind of flexibility we can provide as a smaller developer. This is a project uh also uh north west of 410 and Bandera route. It's 60 acres. Uh we acquired this land between 2023 2024. three pieces. We aggregated it and uh we're developing a combination of uh 60 foot plots, 40 foot lots and 30 foot plots. This is important because you don't see many 60 foot plots in our city these days. So we were able to mix it up based on neighbors input. U we saw a little bit of a comment actually a few hours

ago. My assistant uh brought this to our attention. Uh so there was a post that uh this developer basically if you want to uh see what this developer does basically that this is what we built that we erased all u all the uh the trees were bad developers. So all developers are bad hopefully we will show that we're actually not nearly as bad. So this particular property back in 1995 was farmland. There was no trees on so there's no heritage trees on three heritage trees and we push them. Uh we are however putting 800 new trees that are native. So u it's easy to just say stuff but we we understand I was one of those people didn't like developers when I wasn't a developer. So um it's only fair. We have a portfolio of uh multiple different types of projects. So we have an apartment complex. Uh we have a townhouse complex. We have single family and now we're hoping for the large lot development. So that's what our group uh in terms of market what made us come to Ver is the fact that uh obviously Kal County is one of the largest uh fastest growing counties in the US. um and this corridor has been invested heavily into by the state. So we wanted to explore more and we ended up being lucky enough to have this opportunity. U now one of the things that uh that is important to mention here is that we are going with a plan that was based on a lot of feedback from the community. So we are not waiting for state law to come in to say you know you can build small lots. We're not doing what we want to do is proceed with one echol lots with your

blessings with community's blessings and just take it from there. So in terms of uh the property itself 3 about 88 acres was annexed in 2016 uh just uh west of 281 and south of 46. Um the current zoning across the whole property is R2 R3 so one acre lot majority is.5 acre lot that is of relevance because technically we could be going with with half acre lots by right uh just wanted to keep that okay and then a portion of this property is commercial the other portion is multif family which is apartments. So um back in 2017 and again that expired but there was a master development plan that was approved by council then and it was more comprehensive than anything we are presenting. There was 205 uh single family lots. There was 300 apartment units and 224 commercial units approved for this property. In total over 500 residential blinds. So this is what the MDB looks like. Probably all familiar with it. This PDD, as Keith just mentioned, uh we didn't want to touch the commercial or the multif family. It's not within our wheelhouse. We don't feel this is the right type of development. So we stuck with the R2 R3. That's what we're moving forward with. Uh the reason why that MDP was not developed, it was approved in 2017. Uh this property poses a lot of challenges to any developer. Uh it has very difficult topography which means uh high cost development uh drainage obviously issues sewer availability,

water availability, tree protection, environmental protection and at the end can you make this work um and is it a good fit for the community? So uh what I wanted to talk about now is our effort to seek community feedback. Uh we had our first meeting with the previous mayor um as well as the city manager Mr. Bats and he's very lovely people very confident lovely lovely to work with u and I'm not saying that I really mean it was such a pleasure we worked with multiple municipalities such a pleasure to work with this team. So uh anyways we had first meeting, second meeting, third meeting by March we got a lot of feedback basically no high density no high density large lots large lots and then we came forward on March 11th in front of council just to explore more about what council wanted but what the community wanted. We heard large lots. So what we did though at that point in time, we compiled seven different uh plans that started back in 2006 and many of those were presented by other developers. We came up with our own sketches. Uh so effectively the one that made more sense most sense to us was this one here which was 538 lots but obviously all the feedback was like absolutely not. Now uh and we get it and we went back we listened very carefully said you know so so the summary wasn't just we want large laws but we also want to preserve the feel and the spirit of the hill country to mitigate flooding obviously that's even now more relevant based on the tragedy that happened a few

weeks ago we need to consider the environment slopes trees wildlife uh we do not want a solar treatment plant Uh supposedly there's another project uh in the city where issues with orders and uh in terms of uh water well we need to consider that carefully and we have been you'll see our plan I believe is a good plan for that uh and obviously maintaining some of the neighbors had issues of privacy and how do we do that uh now one acre lots pose a lot of problems for developer uh one we're going to have way less loss. We're going to have more grading. Believe it or not, when you have more loss, net cost of development is higher overall than if you had higher density. Uh not per lot, talking overall because in this particular case, we're going to have to do more grading in order for us to to do one because otherwise before we could cluster and avoid a lot of space. So that being said, uh we basically went ahead and said we're going to forge ahead with a plan that is low density, that is preserving a lot of green space. We are leaving a big buffer, green buffer with the neighbors, but also not just with neighbors around us, but within the community. I will talk about this here in a second. Uh there will be no water towers. Uh we are not linking to the communities next to us in terms of traffic with one exception. I will talk about in a second maybe uh and uh talk about water tank. Uh we will talk about the water strategy here in a second. So this is what we came up with. You all saw this plan. Uh

we then took all of this and called for a town hall meeting. Uh we sent 320 personally addressed meetups and we had about 100 people at them. Uh we thought it was great because we got a lot of feedback, a lot of questions and we actually had a chance, we were allowed by the team to just go back and refine our application a little bit to reflect some of these comments and we're very grateful for that. We uh we gave a brochure uh with a gesture of leaving people with something to go home with and the value instead of just leaving them. We screwed up and we put the city's logo on it. Was a bad move. Was I take full responsibility for it. We should have checked before our graphic artist sent it to print. So our sincere apologies. We did not in any way. So anyways, uh again uh we did following that we got some very very good comments. Uh there there were actually about four or five really good emails uh complimentary emails appreciative of our efforts to listen to the community uh to uh to what we ended up with in terms of uh this development hopefully compared to other developments. Uh so we'll let you look look at this later. Um, so now our application caused us a lot. This is this was probably honestly probably the most difficult equation for us to balance, but we got it. So we needed to balance the project viability on one hand with all the different cost that come with this project. We talked about all these different challenges. So I believe it was successful. We ended up in our application. This is a checklist

of all the things that were requested. We end up adding four things. Uh a drainage analysis, a slope area analysis, a water supply analysis, and a an on-site sewer facility suitability analysis. We thought if we're going down the path of one acre law, we needed to make sure that one we're actually able to do it. So if we're coming here and saying we're going to go and do one acre lot, but we can't put uh septic because of the to well how is that going to work? So or if we come in with confidence and say that's what we want, but we know ultimately it's going to cause drainage issues. Well, that's not going to work very well. So we had to frontload a lot of the work that normally would happen at flatting time to do it in advance to ensure everybody's comfortable with the setup. All right. So, you've all seen this plan uh large lots. I wanted to touch on the on the second point which is the minimum rear setback of 150 ft that is very important because that's going to allow us not only on the edges of the development. So basically hills you see that green belt and on the south end another green belt that's 150 ft that we had reserved as as a green belt but we thought why don't we do this inside the development between the lots. So now people can only build our typical lot size is 135 by 325. So we will only allow by ordinance people to build only on the front 175. That will give us 300 ft guaranteed

between structures on the on the backto back lots. So now that applies for regular shape loss which is most of the development as you see now we do have lots that are corner lots called the sap. Obviously that won't apply for so uh we did do some calculations in terms of uh density. I'm not going to go into it but ultimately the buildable area the actual density is 38% of the whole property. We believe this is a very very good principle. We can revisit it with any questions. Happy to go over it in more details. Uh strong conservation plan. and we have bought 42 acres of green space. We're planting over $450 new trees. Uh we're paying $200,000 up to it, depending on how much we will owe uh in tree preservation. Uh we're quite familiar with some of the decisions that were made around some developers coming in and requesting uh a uh variance on that. We don't uh the variance here is to just allow us to not exceed 200,000. Um then obviously the 150 foot uh setback would also allow for uh this is key for wildlife because we believe that by allowing this big corridors allows a nice flow for the wildlife. So we're not and and there would be no fences. Uh rainwater collection, tricaping, natural escaping as a standard. Uh and we believe we have an excellent flood mitigation plan. We'll talk about it here in a second. And uh we only have one bridge crossing that environmental reserve. You'll see in previous plans uh there were two, three, four bridges. Uh we brought it down to one at a lot of cost, but we did not want to disturb

that. All right. So uh so that being said on the wastewater sewer we ended up doing uh a suitability study uh was done by Mr. Craig Johnson. He works with Kar County. He's actually the one uh to my understanding that he that assesses uh the uh suitability of existing developments and certifies them. Uh on the water supply we have two options to put water pumps. Uh one is on the top of our property at the highest point. The other one is uh north of us. Maybe I should just leave this two seconds. This is relevant. All right. So if you look Can I point this?

I think so. I think I just ear. Yeah, there you go. Okay. So, so the water tank here, this is the top of the property or this is the St. Paul's Church property right here. Uh, and they have a pretty high point as well. So, this point here is about 13 uh sorry 31 1309 and sorry, I'm the other one is 1319. So the church's highest point is actually higher than ours. Now why is this a potential? Because we we had conversations. We don't have an agreement but uh the church is very open to uh having a potential agreement with us. uh in fact church back in 2013 the congregation met and they voted in favor uh this kind of setup in conjunction with the Martis the Marti property to be able to supply both properties for any future developments we believe that this approach will also pressurize communities around us i.e able for the hills because we understand what's been going on on that side. We know there are water pressure issues. We believe working with Texas Water Company, we're a we'll be able to trust that. U so in terms of uh that strategy, we're putting out three stouts. Uh so I'm going to just show you here what that looks like. So basically, this is one stout here. to uh the holy hills, another stubble. These are easements already in place. There's a stubble that will go up to the church and that is something that

obviously uh would be part of the deal if we end up uh in an agreement with them on this side uh to put the the storage tank uh on top of their property. And uh basically that's all I wanted to highlight here. Oh, now uh we read the staff analysis uh as part of the packet. We just wanted to key on a few things. Uh there were two elements and again staff extremely poor very very strong. U so concerns around the riperian buffers uh storm water requirements and the other concern is around basic. What I would like to do is I would like to invite uh our engineer Alan Stanton to talk about the issue of drainage. Uh I invited Alan to to join me tonight because he's way more qualified to do it as well as uh ultimately once we're done. If people wanted to ask me questions, welcome. So thank you.

Thank you. Uh my name is Alan Stanton. I am president of Streamline Engineering. We are a civil engineering firm focused on complex water resources civil engineering projects. Uh I started my career with a few larger firms. One was half associates and I was uh I was working probably 60% of the time for a year and a half two years. Uh so I was one of the main engineers doing the Lewis Creek drainage study, Indian Creek drainage study. uh I was there when we were delineating the riparian buffer zones. I delineated all the drainage areas in the city to develop the maps uh that were produced during that time. Um I also developed the Bernie master drainage plan uh where we devel developed all the local flood plans for the city developed all the drainageway protection zones um and then also relevant to Bverie um during construction of Johnson Ranch, Forest Ranch, Sing Hills, we were do I was doing the inspections. I was helping out with development reviews. So I know the city. I'm I live at 281 Bulver, so not quite in the city limits. Uh so I'm familiar with the area. Done a lot of work in central Texas. Most of our work is actually public work. Um just got back from city Bernett doing substantial dam damage evaluations. They had about 130 structures flood uh last month. So we were pulling 60-hour weeks doing that. Uh I do grant program development for the city of San Antonio, master drainage plan work for Medina County, big flood control projects for them. So this uh I don't specialize exactly in development type work um but we do a lot of drainage work and I was happy that Samir called us and asked us to assist in um the development of this project and I was a little surprised because it's on the front end of a project. Usually this doesn't happen till we're

developing detailed construction plans. So with that u we were asked to look at TCEQ compliance. Uh so we identified this project is in the contributing zone of the Edwards aquifer. Uh which means it is required the project site is required to do a contributing zone plan. Uh what that means is for every uh square foot or acre of impervious cover that uh is to be constructed that there has to be a best management practice put in place. The BMP that is a water quality feature to manage the storm water for the more frequent flows. So uh think of like your 1 inch or 2 inch or 3 inch type rains. all of that water will be captured and treated before being released over 48 hours. Uh so we did that for the sites. Um and what we came up with is uh three batch detention facilities uh with vegetated filter strips. Uh this is just an image of what a typical batch facility is. So imagine it, it's like your detention pond, but the outfall uh is set a little bit higher and it's going to be control controlled by um a mechanical opening that that releases uh releases the water slowly over 48 hours. So that was the first thing that he asked us to evaluate when developing the site plan. We set the riparian buffers uh for the site. As you can see, that's the the darker blue there. And you can see that they're generally uh about 90% on the back side of the lot. The lots do not touch them. There's a couple uh a couple crossings. And then there is one area on the north where uh there's a a landscaping feature

uh adjacent to a road where we uh recommended to put something in like at Harper Park. They have this nice natural low impact development channel with some uh drought tolerant plants. A it always looks pretty good when I go out there. And so that is something that we're thinking of implementing in the area where we would be intruding on the riparian buffer zone. Another thing uh that we were asked to look at is preliminary no adverse impact drainage analysis. Uh so we delineated all the drainage areas, all the off-site areas, all the off-site from the church, from Bulveri Hills, all the on-site, the existing land use, and we compared what would happen if we were to develop the site. And when we developed this analysis, we assumed that there would be an average of halfacre properties. We didn't know what the land use was going to be at the end. Uh so it actually ended up being less impervious cover for the final plan. Uh so we designed this uh more conservatively and so this is just some images here depicting the extent of the analysis that was done put together a hydraology model that is typical to be submitted for uh the city of Bverting through their storm water criteria and these detention facilities are going to be built in conjunction with the water quality facilities. So the water quality facilities will accept that first few inches and drain that out slowly. And then the bigger storms, there's going to have an outlet that allows the water to be released at the pre-existing conditions, the the pre-RO conditions. It's just a image of the hydrographs just showing the extent of the analysis. This is the basin that we developed on the southeast of the property. Uh that's going to be done in conjunction with that batch facility.

And let's see here. Yeah, this is just an if I can see this. I don't know how to do this little laser, but that southeast portion you see a lot of blue there. It kind of blends in the flood plane, the riparian buffer zone, but that is the uh Thanks. So, this is the area of large regional detention facility. Basically, all of this area here, it's kind of hard to tell, but this drainage area is going to drain to here and captured in this batch detention bin detention facility. And then we also have a couple batch facilities up on this uh this area. So, we assess all site outfalls everywhere that water's going to drain either to the north and south. We assess that slope analysis when developing the plan uh we understand the importance of maintaining the slopes and we tried to hold as best as we could to that uh so in the red here it are your steep slopes greater than 25% and there's some areas where so we we try to uh put these on the back of these properties and also um in areas where there's not adjacent to the streets where we could. Um so we try to follow the contours, follow the topography and limit the extent of the uh um grading into the steep slopes. Uh this is a general cross-section. It's kind of hard to see, but the cross-section starts here at the top of the hill, and we just cut all the way through to Birdie Hills. And it's it's backwards here. So, this is the top of

the hill all the way to Bulbert Hills. Uh this the the light blue gray, that's your existing grade. There's basically a few locations where there's going to be grading. There's this first spot here where we have this first road. It's kind of hard to see here. Uh but basically the idea is the first 150 foot of the lot that that fronts the the roadways that's going to be graded at a we're going to make sure that we maintain a maximum of 10% slope on those grades and we're going to have walls on the back ends of those locations. So, in general, we're going to have uh about five wall sections um over across 3500 ft, 2,00 to 3500 ft. And the typical wall height is going to be 4 to 6 foot. And the maximum wall height is going to be about 12 to 15 ft. And with that, I'm going to pass it back to Mr. I don't be available for questions. Uh we're wrapping up. We thought I'm not big on the presentations long presentations. We thought this is u there was a lot of questions and we really out of respect want to spend the time to build comprehensive overview so that we hopefully can answer any questions from the commission as well as uh from the audience. So uh in terms of uh base zoning uh what we're requesting is an R2 R3 mix which is what we currently have. Uh it is consistent with the current distribution R2 R3. Uh so the main issue here the reason why it's funky because initially it was uh okay let me just skip through this really quick. Uh so this is what it was

before was a straight line coming down beautiful straight line. Problem is with our uh conceptual plan with the NDP uh we have many lots crossing between two zones and uh rightfully so uh staff was like what do we do with this? This is not acceptable. So uh initially they wanted us to come in and say you know what we'll do it all by two instead of keeping it as a mix. Uh now obviously the current mix is something uh that we wanted to maintain because the code allows us to do so. So basically this is in the code it says the standards may be based on existing zoning requirements and uh and the standards may be approved if one wanted to change modified but we don't see anywhere where they can be requested or if they uh so I just there may be misunderstanding we're happy to talk more about it but in terms of uh being able to operate within the existing zoning requirements we believe we can do that now there may be a question mark. Well, what if these guys get this all these modifications and then they go back and they just go back to the original zoning. Well, what we are happy to do is to tie the modifications to the MDP to say you can only get these modifications if you are implementing the MDP. Otherwise, the answer is no. So we can put it in the ordinance. Just want to thinking we can get to a medium where we're not losing the original zoning, but we're also not getting compromises that we can potentially misuse.

Uh anyways, we'll just put this out there. Uh but we did maintain the uh pretty much the same average is a 1% difference. We couldn't gain it anywhere else. So uh now in terms of so okay the reason again we just needed to follow the lot lines that's why you see this so we needed to follow the lot lines so that we don't have any lots that were overlapping yet keep the percentage was an interesting exercise for engineer all right uh so in terms of request modifications again you've you've all seen those uh they're any application uh the ones I wanted to uh highlight is the fact that we're actually certain modifications we're increasing the setback from 33 ft to 150. Uh and everything else is to to be able to allow us to do the one month. And that's basically uh Oh, okay. So, if you'd like me to go over it expansion, the Texas Water Company, the ISD I'm happy to go over that if you would like me. This is additional content if you prefer that. I don't

I'm interested in the Texas water. Okay, why don't you just do this? So, uh first, how does this project link to the overpass expansion that is planned? Uh this is what we have. This is draft. We could not get the final copy yet. So but we believe this draft to be very very accurate.

Uh so this is basically the property line between the mccardi property and the church and this is where the commercial starts and ends there. Sorry ends where the R3 goes. So now let me just look at it a little bit properly here. So this is what it looks like. All right. So now what we are planning to do with your permission is to have account for potential linkage potential revenue on our land between this entrance and this overpass. This will also serve the commercial whoever is going to do this in the future. But this here will allow for people heading north not to have to go all the way south and around and people coming from San Antonio not to have to go all the way up to 46.

Uh this will be very good also for the neighbors. I think I think it will be be a good thing for us to do. Uh so this is what we will be looking at. By doing so we'll be taking six feet but we will still maintain one acre lot size on the site. In terms of Texas Water Company uh we we believe we designed our water plan with the intention of partnering with Texas Water. uh our approach is for small development. We're not 1,600 unit development or 229. We can provide we have the too but provide pressure to the whole neighborh. So our our value proposition to them is that you know we are not going to consume nearly as much as these developments are. We are going to place storage tank at our cost. They've been trying to do something like this understanding for a long time. They don't have a budget for it. So allow us to do it. Provide us water for 329 minutes. And this is the approach we're taking. We have not yet gotten anything firm with the Texas water. So uh I just wanted to leave it at that. U happy to entertain any questions on this. In terms of the ISD, we reached out to them. This was a suggestion from the town hall. We shame on us. We didn't think about it. The reason why we didn't think about it because in the back of our minds, this is going to be a high-end development. Uh we expect homes over a million dollars in in in sale price. So we thought tax revenues that will come to

the ISD 1.7 million versus the number of people that will have children in that development is less likely to cause an issue for the ISD but we end up reaching out to them. We haven't heard back from them yet. So and we did that immediately after the 17th. So I believe we did it on the 18th. All right. So, uh, in terms of impact on on city's budget, uh, we believe this development will add about $500,000 plus to the city's annual, uh, revenue tax. So, that's it. Uh, happy to answer any questions. I'm sorry, we thought we'd frontload it. Uh, make sure everybody has a chance to understand uh, the extent to which we gone through to seek feedback. uh and to be able to balance this equation also to come back to you with a whole bunch of answers hopefully to many questions and uh I will just leave it right now for you to ask all your questions.

Thank you so much. Um thank you so much for for taking the time to put the presentation together as well. You did cover a lot of imagine our questions. I imagine we're probably going to ask you some of the same things again just to make sure we're super clear. Um, I also want to thank you for engaging the community and taking the time to understand where we come from as a community and wanting to preserve our whole country views. And um, I believe I saw in some of your your presentation as well the analysis of like our our 2025, you know, sun sunrise plan and where we want to see the city to to go forward. So, thank you so much. The next the next slides, but I said, you know what, by now it's death by by PowerPoint. No more.

So, we appreciate it. Thank you. there's a lot of film when it comes to you across our desk where they don't take the time to do that. So, thank you very much.

Um, so probably a few questions. I know you're you're requesting PD PDD in order to kind of realign the zoning line. Um, but there's a lot of modifications to ordinances and things that we have in place with that. Um, walk me through again the reasoning as to not why not to do all part two if you are already doing a minimum of of one acre. Um, because it when I was reading through the different setback adjustments, it seemed like you were wanting to keep R2 and R3 but almost adopting the a lot of the development rules of R3 on top of R2. So can you walk us through that a little bit?

Yeah, of course. Honestly, it's a it's a risk mitigation strategy uh for us. It's important that we do not uh lose the density in case this project for some reason does not does not become valuable. Uh and anything can happen. We all know anything can happen. So uh in that unlikely event we just thought it'd be prudent for us to keep the density percentage like we're not claiming more or less it's like within 1% but honestly that's the best we can do. Uh so the idea is PDDDs everything we do is through PDDs. We have not done one project without PD. We believe PDD gives certainty for the city for us for the community as to what's coming and there's an agreement there's negotiations pass it's not being left the last minute upon platting plan for people to know what's going on. So we are absolutely willing to give all the compromises on density which is what we've done. Our hope is that we you allow us to mitigate our risks if something was to happen. MDPs expire right if we were to lose our base zoning we would lose our base zoning. So uh and we are we are I know it's not your problem. We are paying a lot of money for this property. If we were to lose our baseline, we're buying it with that baseline. To lose it, to lose the baseline, it our risk goes to lower in case we're not able to proceed with this. And natural disasters happen, wars happen, economies fail. It's not within our control. Our plan, obviously, you've seen the effort we've been putting into this. Our plan is to forge ahead in this project. We believe we will do it quick. Like we we have budget allocated. We're ready to go. So, uh, I hope that answers your question.

Thank you. And, um, are is your development company the owner of the property or when when did you connect with the the owner if you were not the owner?

Yes. So, uh, we actually have, uh, have this property under contract u with very with hard money as we call it, non-refundable money. Uh so we've uh initiated this process with uh with the current owners uh in December and uh basically we've been carrying through. They've been good to work with. Honestly, they want this project to happen. Uh we even uh reached out to Marti family and uh we intend to keep the name Marti Ranch to honor the family to honor the heritage of and we wanted to reach out and see and we actually were able to establish contact. I'm having lunch with them at the petroleum club on Friday. So, uh the gentleman, his name is Joseph, uh who built the house on top of the hill in 95. Uh his his father purchased it in 1972. And this all used to be part of the Johnson uh ranch all. So then uh that basically uh stayed they and then when uh the father passed away in 1992 he ended up starting the living process 95 that house was up. So uh we thought you know it's only appropriate to preserve the name of the martis and and honor them. So uh I think we're doing everything we can to make sure that we're fitting with you. I hope you see that. Okay, we're not the big builders. We're not, you know, we're small. We're we do only small number of projects. Now we have like three projects. That's it. This is our biggest most important priority.

And you're planning to sell lots and the homeowners are bringing their own builder to the property. Are you working with preferred builders? Are you offering, you know, buy lot to then build homes? What's the

There are there are many uh options ahead of us. And honestly at this point in time saying let's we're we're very realistic people you know one step at a time. We're not going to go start talking to people when we don't even have project yet. So uh we do not do vertical. We do not do vertical. So not not everything. So how the vertical gets done we've done it in so many different ways. We had we sold lots finished where people came in. They built their own homes. They bought their own builders. We had builders come in and buy a whole bunch of lots at the same time. We had one project, one builder came in and bought everything. They like the idea. So, uh how this will turn out, it's all pie in the sky. Uh but we are very lucky. We have we have time. We have the cash to do it and we'll wait. you you mentioned in your presentation um you know no fences and um I think I saw the previous presentation maybe the the talk of the rainwater catchment and some of these things that would be dictated by HOA or some sort of architectural restrictions on the neighborhood. Um, so what is your, let's say, for example, since this is so early, a builder does come in and buys the entire property and they can put their own architectural controls in that are different from the ones you're presenting to us today. What are you going to be using in order to maintain the controls that you're telling us today for the future?

Uh, we have very successfully in the past uh contracted. We we contract very very well. We put agreements in place that honor every single promise we make and uh every single promise we make here will be carried through. I'm not saying it lightly. We have presidents in this city. So uh we will whatever we're saying here we will end up at the end of the day our hope is that a lot of the stuff we can put in ordinances right. So that's the best enforcement possible. So when we say set back 150 ft set back is you know in the rear that's what it is right when we say the standard is tricaping or natural escaping that is the standard right it's in the ordinance they can't mess with that doesn't matter who's coming later to build it they have to comply that's why we like to do everything up front in the ordinance as much as possible certain things we don't have control because it's state law that overrides all of Right. So, but everything that we can control is in an ordinance. We put it down. Does that answer your question?

So, you don't have a contract with Texas Water Supply yet? Water company. We do not. Nobody has nobody. So what we do have is uh is a strategy that we believe will work very well. That's all I can give you. Honestly, so much is out of our control and honestly that adds tremendous risk to us

way more than any of you guys. Out of curiosity, if we realign the zoning but none of the current requested modifications to our current ordinances happen, is your project still moving forward? If we align, could you repeat that? So, if we if we realign that the R2 and R3, we accept your design. Yeah. But none of the modifications to the ordinances. Does that design still work or no?

No. Uh the the variances we're requesting the nature of this property uh it requires doesn't matter which way you go. You're going to need variances. I hope this is with us. It doesn't matter. Uh that equation is so difficult to balance. And honestly, we went through I mean, if you look at all the studies that we did to be able to be educated on exactly what we're asking for in our uh uh modifications, those modifications are custom made for this plan. Okay? If we don't build this plan, those modifications don't mean anything. I mean, and again, we can attach those modifications to the MD. we do not have to say blanket modifications approval right uh we can even if you like there's a mechanism and maybe Mr. Bats and the team can can help us out with this. There's a mechanism to say look if we don't build this we'll revert back to original like uh we're we're good with that. If you have

I'm sure something like that could be a and we're happy with that. If if 100% say you know what you don't build this you're not getting anything from us. Take it. So I think the the hard part for me is the amount of variance requests that are within this. It's it's hard to go through and do a blanket approval or blanket denial or blanket with conditions because there is so much here. I wish that we could go through variance by variance and and vote. Let's do it. It would take

Well, no, sorry. Sorry. Okay. No, let me just rephrase. These variances must be considered as one, right? Because we cannot live with three and not the fourth. We can't build, right? And maybe and then so that's just your position that every modification listed in here is required and that if you get nine but not 10, it's not a value too. Go ahead. Yes. Yeah. Um we ask question. Yeah, of course. Yeah. Um is this going to be a gated community or is it is it going to be private private property that drives?

We are open. We have not made a decision. Uh the community is kind of a split on it. So if the recommendation, we're not married to the concept. If you want it gated, we can make it. One one thing that jumped out at me was the u the rightway. Yes. The uh asking for the right ride rightway decrease and the what's the ordinance on the preservation that too and then the uh the street width what's the so historically uh developments that have gotten reduced um street widths were required to make those private streets. The city would not accept them. Uh that ties in my question

cuz he's requesting a 20 foot 20 foot street 50 or 60 I'm sorry I don't remember off top of my head the minimum no I thought that was the from the asphalt you talking the actual asphalt the 12in ribbon curts of course that's a decision council would end up making but generally speaking city and not accepted streets uh with less lower standards uh for publicly owned to maintain. Be interesting to see what fire and police thought of that. We're we're actually 100% open to private streets. We have zero issue.

I had a question for the city in regard to placement of the water tank on neighboring church properties. Mhm. Um while I don't have a problem with them having a tank in their own community, that review should not be burdened on that already exists. This document, this PDD process could not authorize that on a different part. Uh that would have to be you could authorize it. The one that's proposed internally, but the one that's offsite would be a different standalone SUV. Okay. Special use.

Yes. And u this is all like for us presenting you both. We're very transparent. We don't want to come in and say, "Well, we're going to put it here and later on like change our mind." So, it's best to just let you know that these two options are now understanding that you can only approve the location of our property. That's the only thing that's at Understood. Yeah. I think it's just important at least from my perspective that if you're developing this land that you kind of shoulder the burden of the infrastructure. Oh, okay. Sorry. Let me just explain. we would be buying that piece and and they actually want it. I'm sure they want us they want us to do that and pay for it

so that they are able to also benefit from it if they decide to develop. So it's not I mean it's mutually beneficial. It's not like more perspective. I'm just from the citizens of perspective. I would say that this kind of thing creates a nuisance visually and that should be shouldered by the community that's making it necessary. Well, I mean, if that's your preference, that's just my preference. I don't speak the whole I mean, look, we providing options. We're very open to

open, professional, very Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh I I I'll tell you something. We have not gone out and designed anything and uh in an ivory dog with another hopefully you see this and we still pulling we're still pulling you know you tell us look you know what we don't want to stay on the other property want it here if that's the consensus that's what people want we put it in our property we actually reserve the spot for and it will cost us less because we won't have to it's just that the other property is higher. So that's the reason and in the other presentation you gave it was going to be ground below. Uh and now I'm raised or elevated.

It's ground level. Still ground. Oh yeah. But it's on a hill. It's almost neither one would get either one. That that's the nice thing about honestly what we're very lucky that we have the too we're able to do that and that is something that um water providers have been struggling with because people don't want a tower

and uh they don't have a budget for it. So if you have a developer coming in and saying look we're going to pressurize the neighborhood around us and you know we're going to cost at least the close properties everybody you know we will we will account for that I I think they probably be very Mr. back. Um, so I understood that park was supposed to be five continuous acres and designated um along a primary and I don't see that on this plan. Well, this plan uh doesn't with that. That's one of the modifications you're requesting.

And then you're wanting the riperian to be part of that. Yes. Yes. because because we're trading there's a lot of trade-off happening to be able to make the span one acre lots uh I mean honestly if we were to go with a much higher density we'll be able to cluster and not needing need as many but then we'll be putting water treatment plant we putting sorry we putting a sewer treatment plant uh so a lot of stuff it's it's you know when I put that equation

honestly it was very interesting get this team together and sit down and say, "Okay, how do I do it?" It was like many many interesting conversations, I'll tell you that as you can imagine.

Can uh can you speak to the the require or the request for the front and side setbacks, the changes in those I see that they've gone. You're requesting a minimum of 40 feet on the front for all units and modified a minimum of 50 feet on the side of all all units. Can you speak to that? Yeah. Yeah. So because we're putting such a big uh we are set back. We expect that a lot of it is going to go sideways, right? So you know what I'm talking about. So we we have a our standard lot size is 135 width going deep 325. We're chopping off 150 and the back can't do anything. Right? So the front part is 175. So if you want to pull like you know things like this, you may have to push sideways instead of going deep. Does that make sense?

Can you talk us through the the benefit again of the 150 foot rear setback? And I understand the the beauty of kind of the green belt, but what is the positive benefit to you as the developer for requesting that?

Uh as a developer We don't what we do I'll tell you I'll tell you something what we do have is we are able to live with the promises and what people are asking us which is to keep as much undisturbed as possible although the benefit to us would be the preservation uh the more we preserve the more and that would be a natural thing uh the more we can keep wildlife more we can it's a to get approved is really what would be the best for us if that makes sense to you.

Where would this harder um looking thing go? Um you go and this goes back to that uh riparian you know the variance for riparian buffer disturbance. One sec here. So this area here is generally your parenting buffer

but we have this landscape feature right in the middle so that we can uh have this access point here. And so the idea this landscape feature right now as it currently stands is on average about 90 to 100 feet. And so this is the idea of where you'd have a some sort of covert system from this riparian buffer that ties into a natural channel feature here that's like that harder part. So it could be you know that's that's the location. Okay.

Yes. And that's that's really the sole location we're looking at that and we'd have the channel there and then another cover pulling water back to the repar buffer here. Okay. And then the the thing with a pipe underneath would be down here. The So there there there will be a pipe here, a pipe here, a box cover. It'll probably be a box cover, box cover, uh a pipe here or a box cover there. And then the pond is here where we'll have the batch detention and then the uh outfall for the detention facility which will have pipes. Okay. Thank you.

I would like to make a comment on what Allan and his engagement when we uh looked at this property. We knew what we were getting into and uh we knew it was going to be very challenging and we wanted to assess first is this something we can absorb. We're small small group, you know, we're not the big the big guys, but when we're taking a risk, we have to be careful. So, uh, so we thought the best thing to do is to go out and hire the best and the best is generally the people that help. So, so that's what we saw and who Allan is was one of and he goes, I don't work with developers.

Said, well, you know what, not your typical developers. We actually want to understand if this is if this is going to be done right. Can we do it right? Can we stand up and make a promise and fulfill it? Uh are we going to go out of business because of this project? So we wanted to mitigate RS, but we also wanted to make sure that we're fully compliant. We're bringing the best team. Mr. Greg Johnson, I'm not sure if you guys know who he is. Uh you know, we sought him out to come in and do the assessment. uh we work with uh city planners that have experience in different municipalities just to bring in a code perspective to bring in I mean and honestly like you know for for us we want to talk to anybody just we're reaching out to everybody we talked to uh to to the previous mayor we talked to we attempted to talk to many people we did the townhouse uh we sat down with staff three times so we we just really wanted to reach out and get as much information as possible and I believe we have a good good formula. I think we at the end what we have give us the best we could do honestly uh we came to you like crawl but here we are so we're hoping hoping you see that we're hoping that you give us the approval allow us to build nice community and you know I think you will find in us somebody who's willing to take make less because we don't have the overhead right and we can make compromises you can ask me something and I'll respond boom

mh on the spot and my partners would agree. Yes. Yes. So, I personally um don't agree with the $200,000 cap on the tree. I was just going to ask how much was that prospective tree mitigation going to cost on that small lot right here up the road? We just talked about it last month. It was uh I mean at full uh full mitigation it would have been somewhere on the order of 260,000 by itself. That the acreage there was minimum it was 15 something like that. So 11 acres and his tree mitigation cost was well over $200,000. I find

how much is he gonna pay? A bridge too far. How much is he gonna be? Well, that's a what are we in 70 something? I know council ended up approving 135,000 135 11 acres roughly. Yeah. So, while that that development, my opinions about that are different, uh, I do have a problem capping at 200,000 because if you just multiply that major by 24, I mean, we're talking major dollars that the city's just going in the air. That's a difficult one for me.

Well, I'll tell you, uh, fair enough. We're small town, right? That we don't have endless money. We we work that budget so tight. There's a reason why we came in at 200 not not at 170 very burdensome development which is why the KBS of the world come in bulldoz check. Yeah. Which is difficult from the city's perspective to see the residents but smaller developers like yourself these things can be quite expensive. they will they will fit the equation for us honestly.

We just have to maintain some consistency here when we're dealing with any development that we're not just giving everybody. Yeah. And I appreciate that. But there's give and take, right? Like you know where we are we are we have entitlement 4.5 we go to one, right? So there's it's that equation I was talking about. It's very difficult equation and as we work our math it's important it's vital

because otherwise if we can't if we can't build it and we're not saying hey you know we need to make money and this is your problem we're not saying that we're not throwing the problem on you I hope you see that but it's a when when we had that logo and we said we build it together uh although like you know and I am so sorry this happened we typically don't do that uh but you know the idea was that We're doing it in collaboration with the city, the community that, you know, we listen to you, listen to us, we work together, we'll come up with with a plan that the other guys can't implement. I can assure you the big boys will not touch that. Not with not

I assure you of that. So if we're working together and we're all like saying, "Hey, we're gonna get here. We're going to take here." Our sincere hope is that you give us that consideration because it will give us like you know trust me it will because we're operating and I know it's not your problem. I get it for operating super super slim on this. Understood. I'm just being transparent. Sure. No, I get it. It's there's a lot of things that we're really reaching on. If we were to reach for one of these items, but more than five whether they're eight or nine requests, that's very difficult for us to say at all. You understand?

Well, what you're getting is you're getting one acre lot development that hopefully will fit. It's a challenging property, but somebody will wait and develop 30 foot lots on it and it'll be very worth it for them. Trust me. you know, like for and and one day like know we know we know a few things that we know is that Bill 15 that just came out is strict to like the big municipalities, you know, over 150,000 uh you know, counties that are over 300. But the people who lobbyed for that, they started lobbying about this eight years ago

and they got it. And now what they're saying is too late because a lot of these properties inside submits are now gone and they're pushing out and now they're lobbying for the five miles out right. So and that's going to happen you know ultimately because there's no room inside inside cities. There really isn't. I mean when we find 10 an acre property like inside the 1604 loop we're like on it. Everybody's competing right? So it's pushing out and the state is promoting promote promote promote.

They invested in 281. Why didn't it put a lot of money into it for a reason? Why would they do it? Right? I mean they did it because they had planned and unfortunately you know people get caught up in that plan. Right? So, but ultimately certain corridors heading west deep Medina all of that you're going to see a lot of it's I35 it's highly likely I'm not I'm just speculating but you know it's a small community even though we're small we got invited to a lot of stuff and we we know a lot of the big boys so at the end of the day I can assure you changes will come if it's not tomorrow it's going to come five years from now And we understand that well aware of that growth.

Yeah. So my hope my hope is that we we can work together. It sounds like a lot of compromises but so are we. We're getting a lot of compromises too. It's I mean that's when I say like you know it's a partnership. We mean it because we cannot get it done without you guys. And ultimately you know we don't know where this is going when it comes to you know the big boys being able to do the 1600 units. It's happening. Yeah.

All right. Uh, so the the easement in the back 150, can that be just a conservation easement back there? Because I know that people would go back to that back thing and start cutting back there even though it's supposed to be a dedicated. Are you talking about Are you talking about the just the edge here? Yes. And up and around. And it would be nice if the people that are going to be backed up against maybe a apartment complex and also the commercial if they had some wild space too and that would look better in 281. You're talking about potentially a conservation is

just that somewhere they touch so that they can't touch it inside the private property lot. Yes, that makes sense. Yeah. So how do you deal with state law that says that a respon cannot restrict somebody from cutting trees on their propert? So such an easement have to be given to the HOA and enforced by them. We wouldn't be able to enforce it. Correct. But even the HOA cannot in that case

that that's that's state law. State law says not the HOA, not the municipality, not a builder, not anybody. Once you own your property, you can do whatever you want with those. And I cannot revert that, right? This is not within none of us here can change that. It's state law. And when you say no fences, that only along between Bulbert Hills and or is it between the lots? Between the lots. Okay. between the lots fully permitted backyard so to speak just not fully fenced is what you're saying

uh yeah no fencing we don't want yeah want to allow the wildlife to move right so otherwise yeah no maybe it's the Canadian it is a unusual based on what you just said about property ownership uh what do they want to put a fence after they own the property let's keep Oh, that is something, right? He saw specifically the tree law they passed a few years ago um removing cities and apparently HOA is for regulate trees after a owner occupied single family home is on a lot.

Yeah, I was surprised that the HOA because we were thinking push it down the HOA battle. We were totally thinking and then uh one of our attorneys is like no. So you're going to do your roads and then the front of each lot you're going to like cut down everything and like the first 135 ft. Is that what I'm understanding? All right. Where the house is going to be? Yes. Yeah. That's where So going back to this real quick.

So you wouldn't just do that per lot. No, it's So it's a section. So So basically I'm going to just follow here. This area, this is the top of the hill. So approximately just also going back to that water tank,

that's going to be about right. Sorry. Right here about 1309. The top of the hill is about 1350. It's going to be about right here about this 1309. All of this untouched. Then the wall and then our 10% slope road 10% slope for that first um 135 150 I'm forgetting the number in the application. Hit another wall. All of this untouched. That's this is trees that buffer area. See on the land plan. another wall 10% street 10% that's the the front side of the lots every time you see that 10% drop riparian buffer is like right here we're exceeding all of that all of this is untouched untouched untouched and then here so so basically whenever you see in the front of the lot you see a road that's going to be those are your grading areas and so

so some will be four feet and some will be 12 feet uh correct there will in this cross-section in this cross-section here that's from the top of the hill just going southwest towards Bulbury Hills that crosses all of these every section of lots and roads. Uh we have two 12 foot walls and the rest are four to six feet. So there's five walls uh and uh two are 12 foot and this was in the steeper section. Oh

okay. So that was that was the uh it's going to be typically about that four to six foot range and then there's going to be a couple sections where it's it's rather steep. And um you know as for um you know the view again we're top of that hill is 1350 and you know our this is our our location our sets of our sets of walls. Our first wall is set at that about 13 15 13 to 20. Um, that's that's the deal there. But I mean, as you can see in this section here, you know, the riparian buffer, we're the we we have that riparian buffer that's shown on the uh, you know, to the the lots to the edge of the riparian buffer. Generally the 150 feet outside of the riparian buffer isn't going to be graded with this plant. So the riparian buffer whenever you're you're hearing eight different variances and we show that 90% of the riparian buffers aren't going to be touched. We're actually there's going to be riparian buffers plus 300 feet on either side. And so as for you know going talking about the parkland it's going to be more like a natural setting with you know a potential for trails option along the riparian buffer zone. That's that's the idea. Um yeah

so that 300 foot will be in somebody's backyard basically. Yes. Mow up to the riparian buffer. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. And in those areas as for mowing there's there's a there's a lot of trees. So all those trees are going to be preserved. So that that riparian buffer. Yeah.

You know there's tons of trees and you can see kind of we took the aerial. See here go back all the way back to the original plant right here. I mean you can see we we tried to highlight the areas where uh just looking at the aerial where you see the tree canopy. So all of these sections on the back of the lots. So that line that we were showing you that's basically this line right here. That's this line right here.

That's our 1350. This is approximately the water storage tank. We're going to have that that wall here. Wall here. And then no grading all the way through until we get to the front of these lots right here. We're going to grade no grading right here all the way through and then grade here. Grade grade and then no grading. So even this buffer here. Oh, actually I'm sorry. We have this road here. We're gonna have we're going to maintain that buffer, but there is going to be some slight grading right here. Um that's the deal. And then how many majestic trees do you think are in the roadways?

I don't have that answer. There's no tree survey. So super expensive at this point where he's at. It doesn't pencil out. It doesn't make sense. It would be astronomical money to not have an approved plan and then invest in a tree survey. Typically we won't see that until till it's individual that that plotting time. Yeah. Uh and that is why actually we're we're addressing variance on the extent of the survey. Thank you for that. So basically we will only survey the areas that we would qu but it's interesting because there's an assumption that people are going to buy a property like this and just mow all the trees. It happens a lot.

I hope to go you know if somebody's buying a one acre lot one would think that you know and they're buying it in place. One would think I I'm speculating cross two in one.

Yeah. Yeah. Fair enough. But uh like our hope is that you know as as we built uh certain uh encouragements in the ordinance uh that people would it be discouraging for people to do that. I I find it quite disturbing people would actually lie when the law must know it. I don't know. All right. So, we're go ahead and start public comment. Yes, please.

So, before we do that, I just want to remind everyone again that you are limited to three minutes. Um, and also unfortunately we cannot uh converse back with you. We can only speak to matters of fact. So, more than likely they're going to hear a thank you from us and we'll we're listening and taking it all in. So, we have our list here. We're opening public comment at 7:38. Um, first on the list, oh, and then also I want to say as well, when you come to speak, please state um your address as well as your name so we understand where you're from. Um, David Renquillo. I'm saying that's right.

Good evening. My name is David Rono. I live at 3777 Lariat Drive in Bulverie. That's Johnson Ranch. As you saw in that email, it's the lowcale Johnson Ranch. The uh foundational principle of any government is the protection of the people's rights and safety. The city of Bverie enacted various ordinances to govern the development of land primarily for the protection of its residents, not for the profit of developers. The one-stop group is asking for a significant number of variances. I wish to address tree preservation and I will tell you I am not a tree hugger. The property to be to be developed is covered with trees. Ordinance 10A-4.07 07 establishes several regulations for the protection of trees within the city and the ETJ. Specifically, 4.07A [Music] 6 is to prevent the clear cutting of land under tree removal and mitigation requirements on the application. The developer is asking to modify to allow the removal of majestic trees within areas to be graded. Current ordinances require a tree removal permit and authorization for each majestic tree to be removed for any reason. Majestic tree is 3 feet in diameter. An oak tree 3 ft in diameter is approximately 144 years old. Why was this specific aspect of the tree preservation ordinance put in place? One can assume to prevent unbridled clear cutting of old oak trees. Why does a developer want a modification? One can assume to clearcut any old oak trees that stand in the way of his profit margin. 4.07FI5 requires a tree survey to locate protected specimens, majestic and historic trees. Subsection I2 requires a

separate permit for each majestic tree to be removed. It appears that the developer does not want to do this. Additionally, developer is requesting the city to limit any payment to the city of $200,000 regardless of the total replacement caliber per inches required to be mitigated. How the developer arrive at this number? And is $200,000 adequate to complete a tree survey to identify which trees will be removed? I have addressed only one small aspect of the developer's application. The developer has requested numerous modifications to the city's ordinance, yet has provided no surveys or studies other than a soil evaluation report. I would urge the commission to request more detailed studies with respect to the trees on the property as well as water drainage. We and Johnson Ranch do not do not want to be inundated with runoff from this development. As we're seeing in Johnson Ranch, the potential remains that when a developer walks away, any problems they did not adequately address would be left to the city and the residents to deal with. Respect the request that this application not be forwarded to city council until forward further studies and surveys are completed to your satisfaction. Thank you.

Mr. again. Is it possible that you could pull up page five from the agenda? There's a diagram on there if I wish to refer to that's the one that's got all of that on it. It's page five of the of uh actually it's page 22 or something of the Yes, exactly. Um,

one thing that I did not understand from the presenters was this continued reference to R2 and R3. The county's OSSF ordinance only allows on-site septic systems on properties that are one acre in size or more. In addition, section 2.07 of the city's ordinance uh states that on-site septic systems must comply with both the city's ordinance and the county's ordinance. Mr. Ron Po has already dealt with the tree issue, but I object to the tree provisions as well. The developer states an intent to plant two trees per lot. I infer from that desire that he intends to grade the entire lot and then plant two trees. One thing we do not need here is another development that has both the appearance characteristics and the drainage characteristics of Edgebrook and all of you have seen that the developer pro proposes modifications to the cut and fill requirements as well as restrictions on disturbances of steep steep slopes according to the city ordinances. The purpose of this article is to limit disturbance in areas with steeply sloping terrain to protect watersheds, prevent flooding and limit soil loss and erosion, degradation of surface water and the destruction of natural resources and topography of the city and ETJ. Exhibit K from the agenda states that no area of the properties included in FEMA flood zone A. What that exhibit does not show you if you refer to the big screen is this is tributary number 20 of Similo

Creek. This is tributary number 23. This hatched area that you see right here is in fact the start of a 100year FEMA flood plane. In addition, the only reason that that flood plane does not start up higher here is that there is no imperous cover up there. That flood plane flows south under 281 as shown in this diagram. What's not shown in that diagram is that that flood plane continues to the east between Johnson Ranch Elementary and the fire station and then south across uh 1863 during the July flooding and in several other instances before that. The fire station number three up there has found it necessary to move all of their equipment uh up higher in that vision. What's the name of that street?

Yeah, Mustang Vista because they can't get their equipment out of the fire station when there's impressed as I am by Mr. Stat's drainage analysis, I don't believe it. Brian Willie Weller sorry.

So honestly I'm just gonna I'm just speaking from the heart. I'm not going to quote a bunch of things throughout the ordinances. I lived in Wbury since 2003. Been there quite a while. Been taken up as long as others. Um, my property does back up to the ranch. My fence is back up to the ranch. Um, I'm just kind of wondering why I was never notified in any other meetings. I don't know how. I read the front porch every month. I drive by this place daily. I live in Bullbury. I'm sorry. I live on 31821 Lake, by the way. Um, I've uh I'm just kind of shocked. I'm a little upset with myself right now, but I wasn't invited to the town hall meeting because I really would have liked to been in that. I have a lot of questions for that developer, but I mean being back up to that ridge, I'm not I'm gonna, you know, um I mean there's a lot of things that he went through that I mean I can tell you right away it's like no, nobody wants it, right? But there is a point where yeah, there is growth gonna happen, right? The growth is gonna happen. I've seen it. It's already it's already happened. I mean, you know, I mean, there's a lot of things I can stand up here and tell you all the negative things about everything that's going to happen. I'll show you my picture. I'm probably that water sitting at 1300 ft. My property is about 1,250 ft. When I look in the back porch every night, that's what I see. I see the whole property back there. So, um, you know, I mean, I've got all kind of questions. I mean, you know, there's I mean I I'm not going to have enough time, but all the surveying that need to be done to make sure all them offsets are withheld, that buffer that he talks about, I I don't really believe that that would back up to me. I'm not too sure how once once they own it, how are they going to hold the buffer? Um, I'm still a little irritated about not being I did get this notice.

I don't know how many people back up. They got this notice. I got this notice. I wish maybe moving forward if maybe the residents could have a different kind of notice of the town hall meetings or something. I don't know how that was. I don't know how people were notified. Well, and I'll just point out that that was done by the developer. It wasn't a city process.

Okay. Well, so then right away like I didn't get that. I don't know why I got this. You see, I mean I am I did get this um So other than that, I mean, without going through it, I mean, you know, without getting into all the all the preerments and all that stuff. Obviously, you know, I live here. I'm a property owner. I mean, I'm not I I do like that you're not dumping I'll I'll tell you one good thing. You're not dumping any traffic into the rest of the board. Okay? That's some things I like. They're it's staying out on 281. It's going to happen. Somebody's gonna bought develop that land anyway. So I mean I got three seconds. I mean just a little tricky. I'm sorry but it's just a little you know but I hear about all these other things. Just a little irritating but

I'm not opposed to it. Thank you, Cheryl Short. My name is Cheryl Short. I live at 30860 Schwar Lane in Johnson Ranch. That whatever he called it. And Lindy stole half of my thunder as he went through his presentation. So things have somewhat changed, but I am the president of the Johnson Ranch Mud. I have spent the last three weeks with the mud engineer and our maintenance crew going through and looking at all of the issues we're going to have to address because of the January of the July 5th rain. I am very concerned because as Lindy pointed out, we do have those tributaries that come across. They go right next to the fire station and between the elementary school. It was so high it almost crested that tributary and fire station wall was right there. There's a bridge that goes across Johnson Way. It was barely underneath the bridge. So, if we have additional water coming that direction, we are going to have some problems. And as we've already said, that's the EMS station. They are able to get out if the bridge washes out or has an issue with it. What's how long is it going to take to repair that? Um, look, I'm skipping through some of this since it's already been addressed. I do have a video. I've been collecting videos from the entire neighborhood, but one of them is of that tributary. So, if you want to see it, I can send it to somebody and you can get a picture of it. The other issue is Mustang Vista. Water from that side comes under 281, goes into the Mustang Vista, goes across that street, and there's a detention pond at the end. So, we're concerned about the amount of water that is going to be put into our neighborhood from this. And when they talk about building the detention, it sounded really nice that they can control the flow, but they build for a 100year flood. We have had

how many floods that have been over a 100-year flood in the last 10 years. So, I'm not sure that that's really going to protect us by by much. And that is all I have and thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Prescott.

My name is Seth Prescott. I live at 291 Windmill Ranch Road in Windmill Ranch here in Bulbury. Um, having sat up there for three years, I can appreciate the struggle that you guys have having to think through all of the different variances requested. But as I reflect on my time on the committee, uh I recall that that's our job is to actually look at these things and to weigh them. And as developer put it, uh it is almost impossible to build with the variances that we have. And he's also right and several other people have said it that someone is going to buy that property and build on it and they may not care how they do it as long as they can make the most money possible. It doesn't seem like this guy I I don't know him. First time I've uh seen or heard him is tonight and I certainly have no financial interest in this development. Um, and so, uh, my only thought is that the enemy of the good is the best. And so, I understand you guys are faced with giving a lot of different variances, but that pop that property would almost be impossible to build without the variances that he's requested, it seems to me. I do have a question for the developer. Um, so I've had experience with Texas Waterl Company personally and so I'm just wondering what happens if they won't give you. So uh right now they have a moratorum on even talking to anyone until the end of 2026

which I personally think is just a money grab because they are they their water availability report said that they had 25 years of water in 2022 and now they're saying that they have none. Um, so I think it's a bunch of BS honestly. And they have raised their LUE rates from 2,100 to 18,025 um for people now applying. So I think it's a complete money graph. Not saying that there's not uh low water or less water than there was in the lake. Thank god it's come back up. But, uh, at the end of the day, um, I think a California company that purchased Cany Lake Water Supply and is now purchasing a Houston company is out for the money. And that's all I have to say.

Thank you. Ryan Tucker.

Good evening. Uh Ryan Tucker. My wife and I live at 2936 Barton Hill. On the map, we're the property probably most impacted by the superior water tower that the developer intends to put on the map. I'm the pie shape, if you will. Uh gentlemen for mentioned notice. I sent an email uh to the commission and I I believe that pursuant to the Texas Local Government Code, I don't think you can make a decision tonight. I think you have to punt on this because um several of my neighbors on Barton Hill and Lakeland have no idea that we're even here today and they are neighbors that are going to be directly impacted. We all know what's going to happen with that St. Paul property if the developer gets hold of it. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out and I think they should have a savior. They're not here and pursuant to local government code I object to um anything other than punting this to next month. Uh I recognize that uh it's not 200 feet. There's the St. Paul property in the middle, but again we've talked about through several exhibits that particular water tower. So I wanted to raise that objection. I'm not not waving it. The second thing is the developer brought up that picture and for those that were wondering about that picture of Cynical Trails, I'm the one that took that picture. I drove over there and if you'll pull out your phones right now and look at Google Maps, type in 6518 Samaritan Drive and look at the satellite image and you tell me whether there are trees on that property that were wiped out. If they're not trees, then I'm full of crap. If they are trees and someone else in this room is full of crap and I think truth I think veracity matters. the comment was made. Every single promise we make will be followed

through. We're very transparent. If you do a simple Google search about them, there's other things you will find. I'm happy to provide them to this committee. In addition to the tree concerns, uh there's just a litany of variances here. I don't have the time obviously to go through it, but we object to the cutting and filling beyond four feet, the nonsense with the adjusted trees and cap mitigation cost of 200,000. Leon Valley, you know, fell for that crap. But we're different. Do we want our hill to look like that? I've got the picture my wife to. If you want a bald hill, if that's the you want to live at, then go ahead and go up and prove this. I moved out here for a reason. I got away from the city for a reason. And I sure as heck didn't come over to see a bunch of trap homes in my backyard or a water tower. I ask that you delay it and then deny it. Thank you. Shut up.

Thank you so much. Sure. You want us to take a look at what it is?

That's fine. Ivon Chapman 30809 Sunlight Drive here in Bardi. Um, thank you all for your thoughtful consideration of this and um, backful positive plan development. I might say that the extent of the number the extent of variances requested makes me wonder if this is the property that maybe shouldn't be developed. I appreciate Alen. I don't know the work you did um 10 years ago. Have any of our drainage maps been updated in the last nine or 10 years? The maps themselves have not been although the rainfall

some of the rainfall have been addressed. Okay. Um I want to hone in and support what um Mr. Cis was speaking about regarding the tributaries on this ranch and you will see that they come into the beginning of 100year flood plane and as he said it crosses under 281. If you will flip the page, first page, the second picture is from the July 5th form. That is the screenshot from that video that's behind our fire station. That's where these tributaries, these two combine and go under Highway 281. At some point, we're going to have to consider the regional effects of uh drainage mitigation u variances. I mean being granted to our drainage ordinance, we have to consider the regional effects. There are people who are being affected that weren't even discussed in this presentation east of 281 and then as everything is draining into the civil creek and Lewis Creek does the same. What about the backwash and concerns there? So this is not this is not an isolated one little piece of property here. There are a lot of people who have behun. The third page that you see that photo is lar and that is the road on which Mr. Rono, Mr. and Mrs. Rono live. That was July 5th. That was about three and a half inches of rain on July the 5th. So, and this is before any development. So, y'all don't get any of this. And that wasn't referenced by um the engineer. And truly these got they have an exceptional reputation. Um so I'm not challenging that. I'm saying the way our ordinances are drafted in state law is I suppose they don't have to consider but you have the ability to say no to the variances. Thank you

Mason Brand. Okay. Um Melissa Koski um my husband and myself with 315 drive. Um, I want to thank the rest of you for kind of uh going over more technical issues that I really don't understand, but I am very concerned about the drainage and what's going on. And I did not know about this problem at the fire department that if you know it starts to flood, they've got to move the equipment. This is insane. I mean, why do we put up with that? I mean, how many more issues are we going to have? But I'm going to tell you from the first when I got this letter to invite us to the town hall meeting, which I thought was very nice for the developer to do that. It wasn't a city, you know, sponsored thing. It was a okay, meet us and we're going to tell you what's going on. But anybody that got it, there's no return address. There's no location of their business. There's no phone number to contact them. There was an email address and it said, "Use this email address if you want to RSVP to get a chair for the town hall meeting." That was it. Try to figure out who they are. When the meeting started that night, Samir, very nice gentleman, but he introduces himself and he introduces his company and he says, "You can't really find us. go out on the internet, look for Trimark, look for One Stop, look for You can't really find us. And that's by design. And I I thought, what are we doing here? Who do we trust? I I don't care what's on that paper. I don't care what's on

the drawings. I don't care what you say every day. You're You're not being forthright. Put it out there honestly and tell us who you are, what you're doing. Somebody asked, "Where can I go see your developments?" Oh, you got to go to Canada. You didn't want to tell anybody you could go over to Leon's Valley. Okay. So, plenty of develops here. Developments here. Anyways, my point is I'm I'm worried about the water. We live towards the top of Hills Drive. And what happens every summer, we have owned this house for 10 years. Every summer, August and September, the water drops, the water level drops. I can't take a shower. Once school starts, all the kids, people are taking showers in the morning. If we don't take a shower at six o'clock in the morning, I'm done till about 10 11 o'clock. He talked about the water towers going in. And the plan is the water towels will water towers will recharge during the night and then they'll have enough water for the new development. I'm sorry. That's my water. Because I know in August and September, other than luckily this year, I have to get up at 5:30, 6 o'clock to take a shower because our water trickles out of the shower. We have a two-story house and it's it's an event. You know, there's there's so many issues here. You know, the the you want to do Oh, thank you for listening. Mark go.

I'm the proud husband of that previous lady. Uh, you know, we came out here in 2007 and uh, I came here by pure accident. I missed a flight going home. I came out for a convention at Lock and Terra and with all construction going on the 410 around the airport stuff, we missed our flight going home and my wife at the time was in the real estate mortgage part of the business and said, "Well, let's go buy the store, pick up the thing and drive around." The very first place we went around here, we drive up 281. We come out to Bori Hills Drive hangar and I'm emotional about this because I love this town. We're driving up the hill. Everybody's waving waving. Look like they're waving to us. Maybe they think there's somebody in the neighborhood. No, it's the neighborhood. Get to the top of the hill. We see the home we live in now called the barn house. the red brick house to drive. Check it out. It's actually for sale. We look at it. That's kind of cool. Go back home in California. Come back. We end up renting a place in Stone Oaks. And uh three other times the house will go up for sale. The third time we go to that house that's for sale again. She goes, I don't want to go see the house. I don't want to see it. No, I want to see it's for sale again. She walks in the door, looked around just for a second. It hasn't changed in 10 freaking years. Hits me on the shoulder and says, "We're going to buy this damn house." That's why you come over. And just like she said, there are so many things here that are being hidden from all us residents that we don't know. And I appreciate the fact that you guys are asking questions that are important because I come from California. I know what it's like to get screwed in the city. Okay? I know what it's like. This

this doesn't happen here. I belong to a real good church. I love my community. I love my neighbors. You know, and that's what we have here in neighborhood. And when someone comes in and says, "Well, we can't do this or take it or leave." You don't give me these 10 things. You don't get You know what? Pack your stuff, walk out the door, and go away. I don't want you here. This is called negotiations. Negotiation is strong army. Negotiation is talking, having a communication, negotiation back and forth, and saying, "Hey, this is what I believe in." They tell me, "Oh, I can't do this or I can't do that because I we're a small company." No, you're not a small company. You got lots of money. You got people have 52 subway franchises. And you got money behind you. Don't tell me you don't have money. But don't think we're stupid here. We're not stupid farm folks. We're smart people. Okay? And if you're think you're going to tell somebody they're going to make these million-dollar lots get million dollar homes. That's fantastic. Maybe you can put an Iowa Springs up there. I don't think you can. So that's not what BUR is about. BUR is about the community. And I love this town. I love this community. And I thank you all for these having this hearing.

Mike Romans.

Mike Roman 3148 Reills Drive. I've got one of the the largest slots combinations you're going to find on that west side west of this property. Uh we built in 2000 and I joined planning and zoning at a very early age. At eight actually I I wrote all the incorporation meets and bounds on the land survey of very all over the state. I joined planning and zoning because of this tract and there was an MDP. It was actually outside the city limits at that time. There was an MDP that had been submitted and approved uh back when we had bought the property. you submitted to the county and uh I figured development was going to take place within months after I moved in. Well, fast forward to 25 years later. Um this uh MDP plan uh is frankly as good as we're going to get. We are losing our rights to the state. state has taken the city's rights to to uh regulate properties especially in ETJ. Luckily, this is at the city lem uh the MDP in 2017 I was the chairman of planning and zoning at the time and uh it was a good plan. This plan is slightly better than that plan u has some concerns. I believe a conservation easement can work for the trees along there. The state is saying that you can't as a city come in on property that's not already restricted and put new restrictions on it, but you can't take trees down. But if a person buys a lot with a 150 foot conservation in the back of it, that's common law. Anybody can enforce that. Anybody can come out come and sue them if they go in

some trees down. You can't you can't get something that you didn't buy. So if the the property is restricted that 150 ft in the back if it's restricted by plat and it's clearly restricted but they can't take trees down. They can't take the trees down. The state can't tell them that they can because that's common law. Okay. U you can't get something that you didn't buy. You didn't buy the right to do that. You don't suddenly get it. The state telling them that you can. Um, on a personal note, there is a game fence along the back of the property between McCarti Ranch and the lots in Bulbury Hills. It's a beautiful fence. They spent a fortune on it. I would like them to keep that fence. I haven't talked to anybody that's in favor of taking that fence down. I'd like them to please conserve that fence. It is on the ranch property. It' be their right to do it, but it'd be a stupid stupid waste of money. Um, we need to have underground power in the subdivision. We don't want to look at power lines and a 40 foot rideway with a 20 foot pavement section. You don't have room for ditches. They're going to have to be an eman outside that rideway for ditches. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hey, that is it for public comment. It is closing at 8:10 for us to discuss amongst ourselves. Um, for me, my position, I felt there was too many variances that were left open-ended. There wasn't enough detail on exactly they were asking for, which makes me extremely nervous. Um, I would much rather see later on an NDP with some of those variance requests with more detailed information of what they're actually asking for. That's just my personal opinion. So, what I'll say to that in speaking to his position, um, in order to come up with all those answers and in a scenario like this, it's extremely expensive. He doesn't own the property. He's looking at the viability of this project. The people who can afford to do that, it's going to be KB. It's going to be these types of builders on the postage stamp lots. And we're going to get all the money for our trees. We're going to get everything we don't want vertical. However, it's also very difficult to give so much as much as they've requested and as he said before, you know, if we could only get three of these things done and the rest we can't, well, his project doesn't move forward. I'm sensitive to both sides of this. However, I do have a hard time getting past the the abundance of requests these uh rules here. So,

all or nothing. It's difficult. Yes. Yes. And and I feel that the R2 is I don't want three for me. It needs to be all or two and then um but I don't I don't think we have those. Yeah, we don't have the ability to restrict that. Sorry. So No, no, no. We we absolutely can. We can. Oh, we have that's if they would if they would requesting it, right?

They don't have to request it. No, the city can zone the property however we see fit. Uh there's no vesting on this property, so you could zone it all R2. Um the city could initiate a zoning regardless of outside this process and zone it R2. Um so no you're not restricted in that regard. This isn't set in stone when we presented these are the no like as divided on the map. No I mean that's the current zoning. City can change the zoning at any time. We have to respect any vested rights that may exist but I'm not aware of any at this time.

Okay. I also have a trouble with the trees that that majestic trees and trees in general and the $200,000 and uh the cut and fill and the flooding for all problems.

So approval or denial.

Yeah. I mean, I I believe when he mentioned, you know, it was kind of an all or nothing thing. Um, it only really gives us the option for approval or denial. I think at this point in time, I'm seeing it only going forward as as denial. And I agree with you being sensitive to both sides. I I really am also, but I think there is a lot of the requests that are on here that are too open-ended and it feels too much of a just trust just trust us and this is what we're going to do and move forward. And but I also understand it also is very extensive. if there was a way that we could break these out a little bit more and or if there's more that you could look at to see if there is some other viability or more conversation we can have rather than an all or nothing when it comes to these variances. I think we'd all really want to have that conversation.

Um I feel like all the city's getting is the lower density and then everything else is favors the development development. That's the only the only thing the city's and he's running his numbers. That's what he's got to get to, right? To make the whole thing work. So, my understanding that Texas Water Supply is not giving anybody a new contract until the end of 2026. So, can you hang on for that long and then maybe you're not going to get it? You know what I'm saying? Um, is he able at this point to have more? It's up to the chairman

or the board if they want to appeal the chairman's decision? I'm willing to do that. Yeah. All right. So, uh, would you like me to address any of the comments that were made? I think just just the one just the one comment.

Yeah. Uh so in terms of uh what you're asking for, you're saying it's too extensive and and we get it, you know, and are we able to sit down and talk about it if there's a form for us to be able to do that? Uh but you know, we have in previous municipalities that we dealt with, there was informal meetings. There were informal. We're honestly flying blind, just so you know. uh like you know we had we had a few meetings that were very constructive but uh we are flying blind. We were just here like you know listening for the first time with some of these concerns. Uh as far as we're concerned we're we're happy to sit down and talk uh and if you believe this item can be tabled to the next uh planning and zoning allowing us chance to have a conversation uh we we're happy to do that as long as you're able to provide a mechanism for that. Right. So if you if you all are willing to say hey you know what we will provide you the mechanism for feedback maybe a meeting it happens it happens all the time when people actually sit down and meet and talk. No, but it's true that you know it's true. I mean that's that's how things get done and if there's Chinese wall between developers and city officials uh honestly it's going to be like public forum where people trying to like doing this and and people getting personal about stuff and and yeah you know what uh we are a bit careful honestly for those reasons why our names and and home addresses and and all of that are published. uh because there are people we have received cuts in the past.

So, so anyway, so as far as as far as it was question we're happy, we're happy to well no the 26 uh we believe well we will not be paying if we're waiting until 26. Yeah, I mean if you tell us now look you what you guys good try see you later we will we will indulge honestly like you know we have uh we're happy to move on there are lots of other projects that we will do we believe in this project we honestly do like you know I'm not playing games with uh you know what you tell us we're not interested get out of here we will uh if you want to talk we're happy to talk

so yeah absolutely Um, I would like to have that conversation more. So, I mean, to the point of um, Mr. Roman's point of, you know, this might be as good as it gets. I mean, I I do think there's some validity in that that I would like to further that conversation. Um, and again, for me, it's just so much of the open-endedness. So, if there was a way we could create some sort of boundary on some of these items you're requesting that are open-ended without having to go through maybe a full expense to you, just more of that negotiation that we can have. Um, I think that the drain is just going to be something that is be very very difficult. Um, at least within our ordinances, it does say that by, you know, our ordinances, you have to um not negative ne negatively impact drainage any more than what you currently have. So, we have to make sure that's extremely buttoned up. Um, but Mr. Bats, there is a way that we can have some sort of and whether that that's joint with council. I know there was a special council meeting as well, but I'm sure a lot of our same questions and concerns council are going to have as well.

So, um the process that's available to us is meetings of the planning and zoning commission, public meetings with input. So, um uh you guys can table this and give direction on things you'd like to bring brought back for further discussion. Uh, I don't believe there's any opportunity for off- channel discussions between staff or members of the commission. Um, our the council directed us to tighten up the PDD process considerably, which is why we have all the information we have tonight. Traditionally, we wouldn't have had all this. Um, so uh and and whether council's open to a a joint meeting or not, that's not something I could speak to tonight.

Okay. So I say moving forward what we can do is um I'm happy to suggest certain I'm happy to maybe suggest something. Um, we are happy to invest in going over all every single uh uh modification that we're asking for and submit to explain the rational behind each one of those.

Okay, we're happy to do that. And then if there's feedback, so we will do this by today's Tuesday. We'll do it by Friday. We'll submit that to you. If you believe if you have any questions, uh then maybe we'll do correspondence back and forth. That is okay. Don't know if we are allowed to do that. Staff can. Uh the commission cannot. Yes. Okay. So, uh if you you'd have to give us clear direction on what you'd like to see, then we'd work with the applicant to try and bring it back at the next P&Z meeting in September. So, those letters could go into the next meeting in September for us to review. and then we could give you your your our feedback at that time during the meeting.

Okay. So why don't we do this? Why don't we table it? We will take it upon ourselves uh to submit few options and then for us to have this conversation again in uh in early September I'll tell you exactly when the next meeting is second September the second.

Yeah. Absolutely. and we'll we'll we'll give as much detail as possible all the rationale behind them. We'll give more feedback. Uh for instance like we believe Allan and I were talking we believe we can the concerns around drainage what's happening now we believe our development will mitigate some of that like we really believe that and we will show you numbers as to how it's being done. I know there's skepticism in your room. It's normal. Uh there's emotion. We don't act emotionally. We have the science behind us. We have the engineers working. If somebody has an issue with the science, then they're welcome to bring their own experts and submit contrary arguments, scientific arguments. Uh I mean, that's just the way it works, right? So, so I know Allan for instance uh is is brought by the courts to come in as an expert witness on uh on those kind of matters. So, uh it's simple. If somebody has an issue scientifically, happy to challenge our assessments, our studies that we invested in. We're happy to uh to entertain that. In the meanwhile, we will send you an exact stat exact rationale for every single one of those and maybe some more detail on big picture and we'll just hope that we'll have better conversation next time.

Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. Thanks. Additional Yes. Any additional comments for him before we make a motion? Anybody like would like to take it table? But are we going to save for tableling with just the whole thing? Right. Each everything. We'll do it. Yeah. Okay. All right. I make a motion to recommend Make a motion to recommend the city council. No, this is not a recommendation. I'm sorry. This is a motion to table.

Okay. I make a motion to table a request by smear shouting with one stop group LP on behalf of Dash interest LLC for the establishment of the PDD plan development district with a base zoning of R2 and R3 districts for approximately 329 acres generally located one mile north of the intersection of highway 281 and FM 1863. I'll second. So, we have a first and a second. All in favor? Oppos? None. And none of

So, I'll just mention that the anticipated consideration at council on August 19th will no longer take place. Instead, we'll be looking forward to the September 2nd uh PNZ meeting and possibly the uh September 9th council meeting if it moves forward. After that,

public hearing and consider the establishment of R1 residential district zoning on approximately.201 square miles of land generally located south and east of the Bell Oaks Ranch subdivision, north of the Montla subdivision, and west of Centennial Ridge subdivision adjacent to the city of Aber, Texas. Yes. So the law was actually at the last council meeting in early July. Um when the property when a property is the establish zone name this was established through the development agreement already as a R1 residential with a minimum of five law they are surrounded by which is R1 is but closely related [Applause]

is the applicant here um no there wasn't applicant process. I have no issues. I make a motion that we uh Is it recommending approval or is it flat approval?

I think I think it's still a recommendation. It's still going to get I make a motion that we recommend approval of item 2.5 for the establishment of R1 of residential district zoning on approximately.201 201 miles of land generally located south and east of the Bell Oaks Rain subdivision north of the Monola subdivision and west Cential Ridge subdivision adjacent to the city of Wbert, Texas. I'll second a motion and a second. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay.

Table. Okay. So number three on the agenda, any public comment not related to posted agenda items? None. And we are adjourned at 8:26. Thank you so much everybody.

You're not what? [Music] out the door.