Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

The Still Water Planning Commission meeting of December 2nd will now come to order. It will be the process this evening to call for items on the agenda. The commission will hear briefly from staff first, then the applicant and/or their representative. Then we will open the public hearing and hear from those in favor and in or andor in opposition to the request. When you come to the podium, please clearly state your name and address for the record. And before closing the public hearing, both staff, the applicant, and or their representative will be provided an opportunity to respond to provide additional information and answer questions. After all interested parties have spoken, the public hearing will be closed. And then we will hear closing remarks and alternatives from staff. First item on the agenda this evening are general orders, and this is to review um an alternative building material. We'll hear from staff. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Chair, commissioners. Um, good evening. My name is Henry Velheimer with development services and tonight we're looking at an alternative compliance request for 111 West Miller Avenue. This is in the formbbase code area T5 or transct 5. Um, here's the aerial view of the property outlined in pink. This is on the southeast corner of Miller and Husband um just on the west side of Brown's Bottle Shop. Here are the approved elevations. So, there is an approved building permit for the site. These are the elevations that were submitted and approved previously. These do meet the um facade requirements for the formbbased code area. Um, as you can see, there is brick veneer for um the top of the buildings and then there's a stone veneer on the bottom with this black portion in the middle sure in the middle um being dark ethus veneer. So, the applicant has proposed alternatives um that were submitted for different um exterior facades. There are

two different options that we're looking at tonight. The applicant is not requesting to use both materials. they're asking to use one or the other. So, this first material we're looking at, which is their preferred material, is LP wood lap sighting. Um, so this is what that would look like. Um, in these facads, they've taken off the um, what did I call it? The stone veneer on the bottom of the buildings and replaced it with this painted brick. Um, the front of the buildings are painted brick for the majority. And then there's that LP wood lap siding in the windows where the ephus was. And then on the sides we have this LP wood lap sighting as well. So this is alternative number one, the one the applicant would prefer. There's also the second option if we didn't like the wood siding. There's the um Hardy lap sighting. Um looks very similar to the last picture where we don't have that stone veneer, but we have that painted brick veneer um for the same portions and we have this Hardy lap siding in between. This is on the front facade and then on the sides we have that Hardy on the top there. So, as a part of this, just showing you some of the facades around the building. So, this is west of the property across Husbands. Um, there's some brick and stone veneer. Looking north across Miller, we have some siding on some residential properties. Then, directly east of the property, we have Browns Bottle Shop. This is Maine. Looking west, which we'll call it an ephus. Um, then we have the street view. We have south of the property across Virginia, we have some brick and siding as well. So these are just some context of the surrounding materials that have been used. So staff findings um section 23449 allows for the planning commission to allow alternative materials in the formbbased code area. The original formbbased codes adopted in 2015 allowed cement fiber board as facade materials. The formbbased code updated in 2019 no longer included that cement fiberboard

on the list of approved facade materials. Cement fiberboard and LP engineered wood siding are not listed in the code as prohibited materials. Um which does mean that the planning commission can approve them with this alternative compliance request. Um I'm open to answer any questions if you have any. Have a few questions um for staff. Can you tell me when you showed the context photos how many of those were constructed after the transct had been put in place with the with the requirements? Don't believe any of them were except maybe this apartment complex. I'm not sure when that was constructed.

Okay. And then uh my other question would be given the um the setbacks on the property and the fact that this was permitted with brick veneer all the way around, do the two alternative materials that we're looking at tonight, do they meet all the fire resistive requirements based on the setbacks and adjacencies to property lines?

Um that's a good question. I'm not sure if those facades were a part of that firewall that would be required. Um I can say that's something that would be reviewed by our building department and our fire department. We do have an external reviewer as well that reviews all that for fire safety. Um so I can't say for sure if this would affect that, but I can say that if it were to be approved to be installed, it would have to be reviewed to make sure it didn't negatively affect it. Okay. So regard so if there's there's an approval this evening that would go back through the process for the plan reviewers to amend or Okay update. Okay. Um and the applicant is present and might have more information on that as well.

Okay. All right. That's all I have for staff. So um I think the formbbased code is meant to create a masonry dominant urban durable street character. If we approve this, do you think that materially changes the formbbased code for this corridor? And if not, why? Why do you think that?

It's a good question. I do think the front facade being primarily brick does lend itself to that masonry facade that we're going for for that formbbased coat area. Um I don't know a lot of details about that woodlap sighting and whether that would fit the vibe that they're going for. Um, but I do know that it it would help that at least on that street facing side, it would still be primarily brick. Okay.

Um, I did say on the street facing side that would be the north side. The south side there's a parking lot and then another street along the south. So you could argue the south side of the building would also be rather visible from that southern street. So just for transparency that's also there. The height of the building would be fairly trans be fairly visible from main street as well on the east side. Yes, that's a good point. And then it's on the corner so the west side is also fairly visible. Sure is. Yeah, it's a good point as well. So staff didn't have a recommendation for approval or denial. I'm kind of curious about that.

Yes, sir. Um without much knowledge of the different materials, um we thought that planning commission was best equipped to decide whether this was appropriate for the formbbased code area. Um we didn't think it was very clear one way or the other. So we went ahead and just didn't make that recommendation so you guys could determine. Fair enough. Thanks. I'm not entirely sure about this, but it I think the formbbased code only allows wood as trim accent and not as a primary wall material, and that would be a direct code conflict if we approved that, right?

Yes, sir. I was told before we moved forward that this was not actually a wood sighting. It's um I don't know the best words to describe this, but it's it's a what do you call not real material? Synthetic. There you go. It's a synthetic material that I believe is made to look like a wood. There we go. Sorry. Um I mean David Bar with development services. Um, and if Gary might be able to elaborate more, it's been a while since I've looked at this, but um, LP is Louisiana Pacific is just a brand name, but it's basically oriental oriented strand board. Um, you know, smartlap sighting, so

I think is what they used to call it, but basically it's an engineered wood. Um, so it's not solid wood, um, like you might see of older wood sighting materials. It's an engineered product that's pre- primed. Um, and then they paint it. And um, yeah, I I I just thought I would add that. Um, I also thought I would add one other thing because you asked about the pictures and I think I brought this up when we had another um, a similar situation where uh, a developer had asked for alternative materials in the formbbased code. Um, when you see uh projects or when you see sorry uh houses or apartments that have siding um for someone who wants to reside their house, they don't have to get a permit for that. So, there's nothing that prevents somebody from taking a house with vinyl siding or wood siding and replacing that vinyl siding or wood siding in the form based coat area um because they're just performing maintenance. Um so, I know this is different. they're building something new. But so I think there's all that to say I think that you're can you would continue to see different materials than what were prescribed or are prescribed in the formbbased code um in that area just because people will be doing maintenance instead of building something new and they can use whatever materials they had on their house to begin with. Um there's because there's nothing that forces you to change their materials just to do maintenance.

So if I might have a follow-up question to your statement. Sure. So you're talking about replacement of same for an existing structure that predates the um formbbased code. Correct. Yes. So, if um a building that's constructed after the formbbased code needs to have maintenance, then are you saying that there's now, my words, a loophole? The material could be changed to something that no longer complies?

I I think so. I mean, um, you know, if you if you had a, um, for example, a brick structure and let's say that, um, a portion of it burned or something like that and have a tornado and take whatever and they decided to replace some of the area with sighting. Um, I mean, we'd have to look at that, but um, because that's that's getting outside of maintenance and it's it would be considered new construction. And I believe our code talks about um when something's more than 50% damaged um then you have to comply with the the current codes at the time.

So if it were, you know, less than 50% damaged, maybe they could um it would be considered maintenance. I'm just saying, you know, there's if you have sighting, whether it's wood or or vinyl, doesn't really matter. um on an existing structure and somebody wanted to replace that sighting, there's nothing that they would have to do with us at the city to um to to put new materials and you wouldn't have the foundational support either. You know, those houses that have siding don't have a footing for brick or stone. So, um, you'd be creating a real hardship on somebody for their home to have to ask them to put up stone or brick for a, you know, 100-year-old house that has wood siding on it just because they were replacing the siding. So, I'm I'm not trying to throw a wrench in anything just to, you know, when you when you look at the pictures of surrounding areas and yeah, I believe every single one of those structures that Henry showed were built before the performance code, including that apartment complex. Okay.

But it seems like the formbbased code though would be to to trend in a certain direction over time that you'd want it to look like this as things got torn down and rebuilt. Yeah. So I I get it that the maintenance of something that exists wouldn't really be impacted, but anything that comes up as [clears throat] new, you'd want to align with that. Anything that's new and there's maintenance, they'd have to still be in compliance with the form based code. Okay. So they wouldn't I think that's where we might disagree. Okay,

David, is that anything that comes that's built after this forbased code was adopted and there's maintenance on that building, they would have to still be in compliance. However, if it was existing building before the form based code was adopted and there was maintenance and that's what David is saying that they would not have to now become in compliance.

So yeah. Okay. So, so for instance, um as as we're talking kind of through what is and isn't allowed on something that's approved under the form based code. So, um looking at the the memorandum um where we're referencing chapter 23 [clears throat] there, that first item lists the approved materials. So, say um someone had some ephus or some stucco and they wanted to do maintenance and replace it with sighting that was wood or vinyl or something, then what we're saying is because that doesn't comply with form based code, they'd have to go back within a material that did comply.

No, what I'm saying is any new structures that were that are erected after this form case was adopted, they'd have to be in compliance with the materials or get exemption. However, if there's maintenance, they would have to still comply with these materials. Okay? But if the building was already existing prior to this form based code, they would not have to come in compliance. They could if they had sighting before, they wouldn't they could keep having residing if there was maintenance needed. Okay. And I would I would only add that unless they got an exception on those materials

originally and then their maintenance could continue that same exact. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. Yeah. Do you know if we've approved LP or Hardy as an alternative um compliance in the formbbased code district before?

To my knowledge, there's been one um that Hardy cement fiber board that's been used on one other project that was approved as an alternative compliance. Um I I don't believe I have not seen any applications for uh the wood lapsiding similar to this. Um so I don't have any context for that one. I don't believe it's been brought before you, but there are probably a lot of cases I don't know about.

Yeah. Gotcha. [clears throat] We have any other questions for staff? Give the applicant an opportunity to come forward and maybe provide a little bit more information.

Thank you all. Um we are asking for u yes alternative materials um one or the other uh part partly uh due to just the uh the look that we're that we want to go for. There is some cost involved in brick and stone especially um and there is uh some concerns about um the availability of subcontractors to do those products in large amounts. Um we did want to stay consistent as much as possible with the formbbased code. So, we did take Miller Street, which is probably 85 90% brick. Uh, along with again the LP sighting is the preferred choice of the two products, both of them being out of the compliance. Um, but it is I would emphasize this is an engineered wood product. Uh, there's lots of resins and different things that makes it uh helps prevent termites, helps prevent rotting. Um it is got a very lengthy um very lengthy warranty uh equal or better than the cement uh Hardy sighting. It um we have chose even on the sides to go up about 50% with brick than the siding on the back the bottom two feet would be brick instead of siding. And that is a construction that we prefer um due to potential moisture. Um also maintenance from either one of those products I would say is more susceptible to um especially the hardy board. If a lawn mower or a weed eater hits it, it's a

very brittle product.

It can break. Uh it's it's even shown some uh issues with um earthquakes uh cracking it and needing it replaced. It's more difficult to work with. Uh the fiber in it is uh we have to take some extra precautions in the fiber cement product uh as far as uh the workers because of the dust that's created from that product. Uh so our LP is our our preferred choice. Uh we feel like we're taking measures to protect by keeping everything on the lower level uh brick um on all four sides that would be adjacent to the ground or or concrete. Um I would say that uh one of the pictures that that was shown um was a little two-story building. I don't know if you can pull that one back up. Um, but it was right across the street that and I don't know um I don't know um yes um the one that's kind of got a yellow creamy tone. I don't know all the particulars about the permitting of that, but that was just completed

within the last month or two. Wow.

With complete cement sighting. I walked across the street and checked it. Uh, so that was a complete remodel, interior and exterior remodel that was done with cement sighting. To my knowledge, they did not ask for alternative materials. Um, and again, you had spoke of some things. I don't know if that falls inside or outside. I wasn't able to follow exactly, but that was just completed one block north of here. Uh, a large project. I believe it's 16 twostory town homes was just completed for August movein. It's 99% and that's not inaccurate. It's 99% cement sighting. There is a small portion of brick on the front. Um it's uh I don't know if if any of you all were were here but that was submitted in the uh to a alternative uh product setting and it was approved and I I wasn't present at that bill that meeting so I don't know exactly why that was approved but it has been done to my knowledge on a remodel on a new construction project in the last year twice. Um so we feel like um because of of cost constraints, availability of of product and and particularly not product but employee brickmasons and so forth. Um we're trying to hold as true to the formbase as we can by keeping the the front primarily. We're still using and either the reason I submitted both is I I believe that both of them are very good products. Don't get me wrong, we like the LP product better. Um, we we feel

like it's every bit as good of a product and and for longevity. Um, it's easier to work with. It's more available. It's something that our local lumber yards stock at a high volume. The cement sighting is a a special order product that we'll have to bring in. Um but both of them um well-maintained are exceptional options. Go ahead. Thank you.

Okay. So I I have a few questions. Um so um thank you for providing the the technical information that we had requested. Um one of the questions I had that I I didn't see it it it was rather lengthy um submission. Yes. And and what I was trying to find is what is the moisture barrier for the LP product. It it it lists and I I I went to YouTube before we got the technical bulletin and watched the YouTube on the manufacturing process. So it's so it's OSB.

It's got the resins. It's got wax. I think there's a zinc borate or something in it. And it has some type it looks like some type of of paper material or or what is that moisture layer? Um, again, my my knowledge of the technical data is probably much like yours. It has a uh the zinc borate uh includes binders, waxes. There's a a resin saturated overlay to protect against moisture, fungus, uh decay, and termites. It has a 30 to 50 year warranty, you know, uh depending on, you know, different variables obviously. Um the substructure is we're using the zip wall system which is the green um basically a a um treated u subwall material that you use and it's approved by

moisture barriers moisture barriers moisture yes with the zip zip tape and it is approved by both of these products as a sub substance. Um, and then there's other things for that you have to do between the seams to to [clears throat] allow, you know, for extra protection. So, okay. So I think that's still the question I have is in in looking at the at the material there's there's a little diagram that says that there's some kind of moisture layer moisture barrier layer that goes on top of this item on top of the LP product as well as the zip barrier that the zip product that's the moisture barrier behind it and then this goes on top of it but it's got another layer

on it and and that that's on the that would be the finished layer. There's not anything on the exterior like that's not the way that's not the way the product material reads and that's not the way that I was watching the I was watching the YouTube product uh manufacturing process. It it has another material that's laid on top of it once the OSB in the uh in the manufacturing manufacturing process. I was I was speaking out on the field, right? Yeah. You know, manufacturing process. And then I I think then [snorts] there was kind of another another question I had on the on the product itself. So

there's LP sighting, the LP product, the engineered wood. It has several different um finishes on it. What was the finish? Yeah. So you can get the LP sighting along with the Hardy sighting. You can get that in just a pre- primed where you paint it the color of choice or you can get that in a preainted option. Uh we we have chosen the the primed and we would paint on site and then the texture [clears throat] would what would the texture be? It has a wood grain texture as far as the visual okay component of it. Yes. Because I think I think for me that has some impact on how this look is.

Yeah. Both of those products would be that way. they would have they do offer uh more of a smooth u option. Now I I know LP has just came out with that. That's not the the product of of choice. Okay. I'm going I'm going to look through here and and allow Commissioner Prather to Okay. ask some questions and I may have a couple more. Sure. I would like to mention also um something was brought up about the fire and I don't know all the code but we are excuse me we are um a sprinkled facility. We will have a fire suppression system. So that's big.

Yeah. And it's a woodframed um building. So I feel like the the siding side of it um or the brick side either way is not a big issue there. So I I I mean based on the somewhat limited research I did that that the Hardy was in the original 2015 formbbased code and wood is restricted to trim only. So there is a distinction there.

Sure. So, I'm I guess I'm curious, Gary, if if we said on the front facing we would allow Hardy or we would allow Hardy everywhere, but but the LP we wouldn't allow on the front. Would that be helpful or or would you use Hardy everywhere because you did it on the front or

Well, like I said, I I submitted it both ways because I'm comfortable with both products. Um we prefer the LP product just because of availability of um the easy to work with um from you know there's just extra measures that we need to take with employees with the the

the Hardy um but um but yeah I I don't know that like doing the LP on the front and Hardy everywhere where or vice versa necessarily. I mean, I guess it would there's very little sighting on the front. Um, whether it's I mean, it's just really used as an accent where on the back it is more um of, you know, a visual from from Virginia. Um,

it just it does seem like it's a bigger ask for the LP code. I I understand the the term wood uh being written out and this is an engineered wood product is I think the discrepancy or the difference. Uh it's an engineered product that has that does have a wood fiber core u but has you know additives to make it longer lasting and and better for conditions. So makes sense. [snorts]

I did find the the diagram this diagram that has this overlay layer. That's the thing. I can't seem to find any data as to what it is. [snorts] Yeah. Yeah. It's it's hard it's hard to know what it is. In the YouTube um video that's referenced on the same page, they call it a moisture overlay barrier. Okay. Yeah. I'm not what sure what that technical data of that means. So um

so since the code has a requirement for high quality longlasting do you think one of these two products is fits that better? No equal

in my opinion they're an equal product. um both having you know pluses and and minuses probably in in certain certain areas. Uh like I said I I think the major difference we have worked with both I would tell you that I would say easily 90% of the homes that we we do in uh the custom home world which is my primary job um is the LP product and 90% is not a stretch in this town. Um the cement board is just it's more difficult to work with. I don't like the brittleleness of it because it's a cement fiber.

Yeah. It's it it cracks. It breaks easier. That's the the part of it that I'm not as crazy about. Um is that typically during installation or is that is that after it's installed it's more likely to I've I've seen it both. Um, if you get high winds, you can, you know, if you get any movement in that, the fasteners at the overlay point. Okay. It can loosen at that at that point a little bit. Um, so the the wood is a little more forgiving. Uh, the wood engineered wood product is a little more forgiving in that way.

Um, so it's uh they both paint and hold paint very well. I don't see any difference in in the two holding paint. and the longevity there. Thanks. Okay, I have a couple more questions here. So, um for the so the plans have the plans have been approved with the brick. Mhm. And um I believe it's already under construction. Correct. It is. It is. Um, does the foundation that you're building will will it support the weight of the brick if you go the three stories and then that accounts for all the relief angles that go in for the brick?

Yes. Okay. Yeah. And I I I I can appreciate the difficulty in trying to find masons in the market. It seems to be something I've struggled [snorts] with for 25 years in the market. So it Yeah. We feel confident with the amount that we have proposed that we can complete that successfully. uh it would be double that amount if we go all brick or or stone in this case. So I I I think for the for the LP um product I'm I'm not as familiar with it. Mhm.

Um the Hardy Plank I'm very familiar with. It's on my house so I'm very familiar with it and it's getting ready to go on 11 years so no problems with it. I really like it. Um, for the hearty plank, it it's it's a cementitious fiber. So, to me, it's more in keeping with kind of the spirit of where we where we're going. Um, how how the

form-based code has been written and I I am curious why it was taken out at one point. And I don't, you know, I don't know the history of of the buildings around, but I do know that the apartment complex that was shown right across Husband, the front, which faces Husband and Miller, is kind of a almost a decorative cinder block bottom with brick above, but if you walk into that complex, it's cement sighting on the back. I think those are all the questions that I have. Any other questions for the applicant?

Right. Thank you. Yeah. Staff present our alternatives and findings. Yes, ma'am. So, the alternatives tonight are to approve the LP engineer wood sighting, to approve the James Hardy CMF fiber, to deny the request, or to table request for a future meeting.

Thank you. Well, I don't I don't have a problem at all with the Hardy, but I think the question is the LP to me. It uh seems to weaken the uh form base code's purpose. It would be tough to deny one in the future. Agreed.

Um, so those I mean possibly you could allow it on on non public facing some of the you know the sides or the back. That's a question. But, um, anyway, that's kind of where where I land is. I mean, there's good arguments for the LP. It's just so it seems to be specifically not part of the FBC.

Right. I I think there's been a you know a lot of um thought that's gone into the formbbased code and I think some of the acknowledgments that have come out of this recent planning effort is that there are some parts of that formbbased code that need some massaging and I know that that's underway. Um but I my I don't think that that those comments would apply to this material section. I think the material section um needs to be adhered to as as closely as we can. Um and and I think it's it's there for a specific reason to give a specific kind of substance to this this transct T5 area. Um those are my thoughts. I just think because the cement fiber board was included in 2015 and for some reason omitted in 2019 and I think that gives it the edge um in in our decision. So

would would you would anyone thinking of a motion or some more comment?

I would move to approve the James Hardy fiber cement lab sighting as an alternative compliance material for the upper story and rear elevations and to deny the request to use LP Smart Site engineered wood sighting. Second motion. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 5-0. We'll now move into the public hearing section. And the first item on our agenda is um a small lot single family residential RSS zoning preliminary plat. And we shall staff.

Yes ma'am. We have a preliminary plat for Mroy Park which is addressed as 2002 East Mroy Road. Here's an aerial view of the property outlined in pink. This is just west of the northwest corner of Jardo and Mroy. Here's the street view of the property. This is Mroy looking northwest. Um you can see the existing single family house on the property that would be torn down to build this proposed subdivision. Here's the zoning of the property where you can see the zoning on the parcel we're discussing is RSS or small lot single family residential. To the north and northwest you have RSL which is large lot single family residential and to the east you have CS or commercial shopping. Here's the proposed preliminary plat that we're discussing tonight. This is a 14 lot um single family residential subdivision with one out lot to the north which also has the proposed detention facility. Um we did see a [snorts] um a different residential project proposed on this property earlier this year. Um it was called Cowboy Landing. There was a proposed PED or plan unit development. Um that property did include 1924 East Maroy which is to the west of this property. um this proposed preliminary plat has excluded that. So that would stay a single family residence as it currently is. And then this is just for that eastern property or the 2002 East Maroy. The proposed subdivision does meet all the standards of the of the RSS or small out single family residential um zoning district. I'm open to answer any questions if you have any.

I'll I'll I'll test your memory and see. And I don't know if you had a chance to look through that or not. Um, when it included the other parcel of land, do you remember how many units were on there? And if you don't, then maybe the applicant can answer that later. It changed a few times with different layouts. Um, I don't remember what the final answer is, but my guess is going to be 42 because I know that was one of the numbers, but I don't know if that was the final number. So, the density has changed dramatically from

Yes, ma'am. Density now aligns with code. Okay. That was all I have for staff. Any other questions for staff? [snorts] I don't see any. Okay. Thank you. At this time, we'd allow the applicant to come forward and provide any other information.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Safe Lucy, 20002 East Mccelroy Road. Uh first I want to say thank you very much because when we reached this stage last time you guys believed in what we were trying to create here and creating homes and so you approved the 42 units that we had proposed. Now going [snorts] through all this process we've worked tirelessly with the community and we we're actually very appreciative of how much effort was put in by the the neighbors and to be honest with you actually the staff here too put a lot of work into this. So we're grateful for where we were with that project and what happened. Um, we we tried working it to make it 32 units. Unfortunately, that didn't work, which is fine. We uh thanked our neighbors, which we hope you all saw that in the notice in the the newspapers and so forth. We've come back. We got to do something with this property. And so, we feel that the 14 units fits within what the scope was of, you know, the ruling and the the code and all this. We've had the engineers involved. I think this piece of property has a lot of knowledge and a lot of eyes on it. Um, and I think Still Water needs homes. I mean, this is critical that's happening right now and we we see it. So, I'm here to h answer any other additional questions that my neighbors might have. Again, we appreciate the time that they've come out here to do this. Um, and again, you know, I think the the number of people have drastically changed, so we do appreciate everyone's time. Do you guys have any questions or

any questions? No. All right. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, with that, we'll open the public hearing and ask if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this project to come forward. Sure.

Good evening, uh, members of the planning commission. Um, I don't see a timer. Are we still doing Sorry. Please state your name and address for the record. I'm about to. I will. Okay. My name is Simon Ringsmith. Uh 1705 East Linda Avenue. And I don't see a timer. Do we have a timer tonight? She's working on it. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. All right. It just won't show. Sorry.

Okay, that's fine. Um I speak only on behalf of myself. I don't represent my organiza any organization. I don't represent my neighbors. My opinions are my own. Um last time I was here, uh emotions are running pretty high in the room and there was a lot of anxiety, uncertainty, and fear in the room. Tonight things are a lot different. Um, and [clears throat] I wanted to be present at this meeting to publicly express my gratitude uh to Steven Ghost, to Safe Alooi, to uh the staff here at city hall, uh the property owners, all the parties involved to get us to where we are today. Um, back in June, there was a huge amount of opposition to Cowboy Landing because it was a proposed pud. Um, and it didn't fit with zoning. And one repeated theme theme throughout much of what was said in opposition was that we the neighbors were not opposed to development. It's not that we don't want this land to be developed. We just want it to be responsibly developed in a manner that is consistent with existing neighborhoods and Maroy Park does that. And I'm so thankful to what got us here today. Um it fits RSS zoning. There's no reasonzoning requested, no exceptions. The one road is wide. It's got a culde-sac for turning around and it's got the detention pond in the north. Three of the lots are actually larger than what RSS requires, which helps with that transition to the surrounding areas. Um, this neighborhood will hopefully attract permanent residents and not short-term renters and can hopefully serve as a model for development going forward. Um, people in my neighborhood have lived here for a long, long time. Um, many of us go back decades over multiple generations. Um, and we're passionate. We've packed this room because we're so passionate about protecting our neighborhood because it's who we are. And development, when development is done right, it benefits everybody, not just the people who will live there, but the people who already

live there. So, when I got the notice about this preliminary plat come before the planning commission, I was a little hesitant as I loaded that PDF on the computer. I thought, here we go again. Time to start the group text, the phone calls, the neighbors, and everything else. And guess what? It was great. I was pleasantly surprised to see this Maroy Park development. Um, I have no objections and so thank you to the developers for coming up with not just a workable plan, but a good plan. I appreciate everyone's work to get us here and I look forward to welcoming our new neighbors. Uh, hopefully they will come to realize what makes this part of town so special. I often like to tell people it's the the best kept secret in town. Everyone likes to move out to the west by country club, but guess what? The northeast part's pretty great, too. Hopefully, they will put down roots that will last for generations. So, thank you to everyone involved.

Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to speak in favor of this item? Seeing none, I'll ask if there's anyone in the room that would like to speak in opposition to this item. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and ask for staff to return to present um findings and alternatives.

Yes, ma'am. The proposed preliminary plat meets the subdivision and zoning requirements. The C3 plan uh recommends commercial uses at this location. The proposed density is in alignment with the RSS zoning requirements. The alternatives tonight are to um uh approve, conditionally approve, to deny or to table this request. Staff recommends alternative number one, which is to accept findings and approve the proposed preliminary plat as presented.

Thank you. I was also very pleased when I saw this. Uh my my issue earlier on was the density. This resolves all of that. I think it's uh critical to that neighborhood. And so I really appreciate the developer and his efforts to do that. Uh and so um I was just excited when I saw it. Any other comments or perhaps a motion?

I make a motion to accept the findings and approve the Mroy Park preliminary plat as presented. Second. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 5-0. And that concludes the public hearing section of the agenda. The next item is meeting summary for review and possible action. We have a meeting summary for November 4th. And I had um two corrections for names that I sent in, but I don't know if you had time to get those, Ally. Yes. Perfect. I think you still need to make the motion with those corrections.

With the corrections. Okay. Did anybody else have anything for [snorts] November 4th? Okay. So, it was on page six. On page six, sorry, I had it tabbed and then my tab fell off. Okay. on page six, um the names of the people that came to speak. Um the third one down should be Steve Trumper and the fourth one down should be Bob Hollra. So um I would move to accept the minutes as um with the corrections noted. Do I have a second?

Second. A motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes. Uh, four yes and one abstain. The next item is the regular meeting summary of November 18th. Are there any corrections on that one? No, my mic's dead. You might want to hit the He did [laughter] my technical advisor. I just learned about that earlier today.

I wonder why earlier we couldn't hear. uh want to thank the staff for making the amendment to the uh notes about my comments regarding the flood plane and risk mitigation on the uh urban wildland uh fire issue. So appreciate that. So I move that we accept the minutes of the november 18th meeting. Second. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes. Uh, four yes, one abstain. Sorry.

Oh. Oh, there we go. I'm sorry. Correction. Motion passes with five yes. Um, the next item on the agenda is miscellaneous items from staff, planning commissioners, or city attorney for discussion and possible action. Not the meeting. All right. All right. The next regular meeting listed is in two gigs on December 16th. And the last item on the agenda is adjournment. Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? Move to adjurnn. Second. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote.

It doesn't like me today. Motion passes 5. We're now adjourned.