Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:04]

OKAY,

[Items 1 & 2]

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.

IS EVERYONE READY? ALL RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU GUYS EVENING.

GREAT.

I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY.

MAY 13TH, 2020 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON THIS EVENING.

I CAN SEE THAT WE DO HAVE A QUORUM OF COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ON TONIGHT, BUT HOWEVER WE COULD, UH, HAVE A ROLL CALL THAT WOULD TREMENDOUSLY HELP.

UH, COMMISSIONER HANEY COMMISSIONER O'MALLEY HERE.

COMMISSIONER LUCAS HERE.

MISSIONER BRIGHTWELL COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.

ROSE.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER NORCOM COMMISSIONER BAILEY HERE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HARASSMENT.

OKAY.

UM, I SEE THAT, UH, MS. JOHNSON ROSE MAY BE ON, BUT SHE MAY HAVE.

CAN WE HEAR YOU WELL NOW IS THAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ROSE? ALL RIGHT.

THEN ALL ARE ACCOUNTED FOR, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, UH, DR.

RASMUS WILL CONTINUE ON TONIGHT.

ALL BRASS.

MISS HAS MADE IT.

THANK YOU ALL IN ATTENDANCE.

WE DO HAVE A FULL BODY ON TONIGHT.

WE'LL CONTINUE OUR MEETING VIA A VIRTUAL, BE A ZONE.

IS THERE A MOTION

[Item 3]

THAT WE ACCEPT THE APRIL 8TH, 2020 MEETING MINUTES.

SO MOVE.

THIS IS THANK YOU, LUCAS.

IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND, WOULD YOU SAY TO NORCO, THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION IN REGARDS TO THE MINUTES? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY NAYS, ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU NOW TO ITEM

[Item 4]

FOUR, THE REPORTS UNDER A, THE COMMISSION REPORT CHAIRMAN, I DON'T HAVE A REPORT.

I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR BEING PATIENT AND FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS, I GUESS NEW WAY OF TECHNOLOGY.

IT'S KIND OF COOL.

WE DID GREAT LAST MONTH AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL DO GREAT AGAIN THIS MONTH.

IF ANY COMMISSIONERS COMING UP FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR SEAT, I DO ENCOURAGE YOU TO, UH, DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO REAPPLY.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS OR REPORTS? OKAY, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING.

STAFF MEMBERS.

WE'LL TAKE, UH, DIRECTOR OTIS AND IT REPORTS GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND COMMISSION AND, AND STAFF AND OTHERS.

UM, I DON'T HAVE A REPORT THIS EVENING JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT YOU JUST STATED IN TERMS OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE EXPIRING TERMS ON, UM, JUNE 30TH, UH, BY ALL MEANS SEND TO THE CITY SECRETARY, UM, A MESSAGE THAT YOU ARE DEFINITELY INTERESTED IN CONTINUING YOUR WORK ON THE COMMISSION.

I WILL SAY THAT AS A COMMISSION, YOU ARE THE MOST THOROUGH AND COMMITTEE COMMISSION THAT I HAVE WORKED WITH, AND WE ARE REALLY PLEASED WITH ALL OF YOU.

SO PLEASE BY ALL MEANS, SEND THAT MESSAGE TO THE SECRETARY THAT WILL BE FORWARDED TO COUNCIL.

UM, AND THAT NEEDS TO BE MAY 31ST AND COUNCIL WILL BE MAKING THOSE REAPPOINTMENTS, UM, BY JUNE, WE'RE HOPING JUNE, UM, OF, UM, ON THOSE APPOINTMENTS NOTABLY.

UM, I WANTED TO ALSO BRING ABOUT THE, THE, UH, THE FACT THAT CHAIR SONYA BROWN, MARSHALL IS IN HER 15 GOING ON 16 YEAR.

SO SHE TO BE COMMITTED FOR SO MANY YEARS ON THE COMMISSION.

SO WE'RE VERY HAPPY ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

IF YOU HAVE NOT MUTED YOUR DEVICE, IF YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE JUST MUTE IT SO THAT WE DON'T HEAR SO MUCH BACKGROUND NOISE, THAT SURE WOULD BE HELPFUL.

THANK YOU.

UM, CITY ENGINEER, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT ON TONIGHT?

[00:05:01]

GOOD EVENING.

ENGINEERING HAS NO REPORT TO TONIGHT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME, THIS IS A PUBLIC COMMENT.

IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION IN REGARDS TO ITEMS OR CONCERNS THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA.

UM, MS. KELLER GINA, WOULD YOU CONFIRM THAT WE DO OR THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE THAT IS CONFIRMED? WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM SIX.

[Consent Agenda]

UH, THE PLATTS UNDER A, THE CONSENT AGENDA ONE, CONSIDERING AN APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PARKS 14, TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PARKWAY CROSSING PHASE ONE, THREE, CONSIDERING APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT FOR PARKS EDGE SECTION NINE, FOUR, CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLED FOR SIANNA SECTION 33 B FIVE.

CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT FOR SIANNA SECTION 33 D SIX.

CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT FOR SIANNA SECTION 32, EIGHT AND 32 B AND SEVEN.

CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR OLYMPIA STATE'S NORTHEAST RESERVES, PARTIAL REPLAT NUMBER ONE.

IS THERE A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION.

WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

HANEY HANEY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

IS THERE A SECOND? THANK YOU, MR. BRIGHTWELL.

I ONLY HAVE JUST ONE LITTLE QUESTION AND I'LL BE BRIEF ON NUMBER TWO.

UH, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PARKWAY CROSSING PHASE ONE, UM, THE 11.54 ACRES OF THAT'S DEDICATED FOR THE PARKLAND.

I JUST DIDN'T SEE WHERE IT IS GOING TO BE PUBLIC, OR IS IT GOING TO BE PRIVATE TOM WITH JONES AND CARTER REPRESENTING THIS PLAT? THAT'LL BE PUBLIC.

OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NO PROBLEM.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSION? YEAH, I JUST DID WANT TO CONFIRM ON ITEM SEVEN.

THEY WERE, THEY JUST BASICALLY SUBDIVIDED RESERVE B INTO THREE RESERVES.

HELLO, THIS IS TOM AGAIN WITH JOHNSON CARTER.

THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY.

JUST THAT THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION ON THE, IN THE REPORT.

SO I, I JUST THAT'S THE BEST I CAN DETERMINE.

I WANTED TO CONFIRM.

THANK YOU.

YES, SIR.

COMMISSIONERS.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

SAYING NON F I, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

AND ARE THERE ANY NOS OR NAMES? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I SIGNIFY AS WELL BY SAYING, AYE, THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

[6B. PARKLAND DEDICATION]

HIDE THEM B WE'LL MOVE TO THE PARKLAND DEDICATION.

ONE, CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR PARKLAND DEDICATION FOR BERBERINE DEVON RESORT.

YES, THIS IS, THIS IS RANDY.

UH, WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.

CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME OKAY.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF I WAS ON MUTE OR NOT.

UM, YES.

SO YES, TECHNOLOGY IS KIND OF NEW FOR ME TOO, UM, THAT THE PARKS BOARD, UH, NATIONALLY, UH, VOTED TO ACCEPT THE MONEY AND LAY LOVE FOR, UH, THIS PARTICULAR PARKLAND DEDICATION ISSUE.

UM, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS PASSED FOR PLANNING THE ZONING TO A REVIEW.

RANDY, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION OF YOU.

I DID NOTICE IN THE PARKS BOARD MINUTES THAT THE APPLICANT HAD POSSIBLY, UM, MENTIONED MAYBE SUBMITTING A REDESIGN AND I APPRECIATED BOTH STAFF'S RESPONSE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF THEY HAD RESUBMITTED ANOTHER DESIGN.

UH, YEAH, I HAVEN'T SEEN ONE.

UM, I DID, UH, CATCH THAT IN THE, IN THE, THE MEETING AND, UH, I'M ASSUMING IF THEY DO, THEN WE WILL SEE WHAT THAT IS, BUT IT'S REALLY, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE ANY OF THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ISSUES AT THIS POINT.

OKAY.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.

UM, HELLO.

UM, I JUST WANT TO DO SO I'M, UH, MY NAME IS SONIA AND I'M THE ARCHITECT WITH TRIM COS WHO'S WORKING ON THIS PROJECT.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

UM, SO THE LEAD DESIGN WAS NOT FOR US TO RECONSIDER THE PARKLAND DISCUSSION, I GUESS THAT, UM, THE, ONE OF THE

[00:10:01]

OWNERS MS. MARY IS ALSO HERE WITH ME, I GUESS WE JUST WANTED TO LOG INTO THIS MEETING BECAUSE, UM, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ON WHAT BASIS IT WAS STATED THAT THAT AREA WOULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE PARKLAND, BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT WHAT WE HEARD WHEN WE FIRST SPOKE TO THE CITY ADOPTION COMMUNITY MEETING.

SO I WAS STILL A LITTLE CONFUSED AND I'M NOT RECEIVED MEET MINUTES OF THAT MEETING OF THE BOARD MEETING.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHY IT WAS REJECTED.

OKAY.

IF YOU WOULD, UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF YOU'LL HANG ON JUST ONE SECOND, BECAUSE I NEED TO HEAR FROM THE COMMISSIONERS IN REGARDS TO THE MATTER THAT'S PUT FORTH FOR US TO VOTE ON.

AND THE MATTER THAT'S PUT FORTH FOR US TO VOTE ON IS THE PARK BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION.

SO, OKAY.

WE'VE WE DO HEAR YOUR CONCERNS.

SO GO AHEAD, HANEY.

PERFECT.

TONY THOUGH, THE WAY I INTERPRETED THE, THE MEETING MINUTES WAS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WAS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO 50% AND 50% AND THE PARKS BOARD, UH, EFFECTIVELY, UH, THERE WERE RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THAT GIVEN THE SMALL AMOUNT OF LAND AND THE, THE RESOLUTION, AS FAR AS I COULD TELL WAS THAT THE APPLICANT AGREED TO DO ALL MONEY IN LIEU OF THEREFORE THEY'RE THERE.

THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PARKLAND REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THEIR FACILITY DEVELOPMENT.

I, I AGREE WITH YOU MR. HANEY, I, BUT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT, UM, THEY, THAT MAYBE THAT WAS NOT EXACTLY WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTED TO DO, BUT THAT WAS WHAT THE PARKS BOARD DECIDED TO DO.

RANDY, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR US PLEASE? YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK, UH, TYPICALLY WITH PUBLIC LAND, UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT VERY FEW CASES.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, THAT WE LOOK AT IN A SMALL, UH, SUBDIVISION THAT, THAT IS GOING TO BENEFIT A LARGER AREA THAT THE CITY HISTORICALLY HAS, HAS PREFERRED TO TAKE LARGER PARCELS OF LAND SOMETIMES IN THE, IN THE, THE MINIMUM OF LIKE FIVE ACRES, UM, YOU KNOW, SO THE MORE CAN BE A LITTLE MORE CAN BE DONE WITH THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS CAME OUT TO SOMEWHERE AROUND, UH, LESS THAN AN ACRE.

SO TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THOSE TYPES OF PARCELS OF LAND OR SET ASIDE, IF THE SUBDIVISION WOULD PREFER TO DO SOMETHING ON THE PRIVATE SIDE, SOMETHING VERY SMALL THAT SERVES JUST THAT SMALL, IMMEDIATE SUBDIVISION, UH, AREA, THEN THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THAT'S CONSIDERED ONLY ON THE PRIVATE SIDE.

SO ON THE PUBLIC SIDE OF THAT, IT WOULD, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WOULD MAKE THE, THE MONEY IN LIEU OF THAT CAN BE SPENT AT THE LARGER PARCELS OF, OF PARKLAND IN THAT PARTICULAR PARK ZONE.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT PARK ZONE, THERE'S NOT VERY FAR FROM THERE, YOU GOT PROGRAMMED WEST PARK OF, I MEAN, RIGHT ADJACENT THERE'S, THERE'S ONE WATER CANAL BOUNDARY, YOU'VE GOT STAY MOBILE PARK AND ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT, YOU'VE GOT THE 75 PLUS ACRES OF INDEPENDENCE PARK.

THAT'S A PUBLIC PARKLAND THAT CAN SERVE AS THE RESIDENCY IN THAT AREA TOO.

SO, UM, WHEN, WHEN, WHEN PARKS BOARD DID LOOK AT THAT, UH, THEY, THEY THOUGHT THAT WAS THE BEST SOLUTION THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANTED TO DO TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE THINGS, LIKE ALL OF THE DRAWING THAT THEY HAD, THERE WAS SOME NICE LITTLE AMENITIES, BUT THAT'S REALLY NOT SOMETHING THAT, THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO COME FROM FROM AROUND THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO TO, BECAUSE THERE'S BIGGER PARKS WITH WOOD THINGS IN THAT AREA.

SO IT'S NOT ONLY PRIVATE SIDE, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT PARKS BOARD CAME UP WITH.

THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION.

AND THAT'S WHAT IT WAS FORWARDED ON TO YOU GUYS WAS THE, THE MONEY IN LIEU OF THAT.

DID ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF IN REGARDS TO THIS? OKAY.

AND RANDY, I GUESS ONE MORE QUESTION.

UM, THE DECISION, THE DECISION THAT THE PARKS BOARD MADE IN REGARDS TO MONEY IN LIEU OF THAT DECISION BASICALLY FIT WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF CITY ORDINANCE, UM, YOU KNOW, LAND RESTRICTIONS AND HOW MUCH LAND OKAY.

AND WHAT SURROUNDS EXACTLY.

OKAY.

I UNDERSTAND.

UM, I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT HAD ASKED, UM, WHY IT WAS DENIED.

AND I THINK RANDY HAS, DID A GREAT JOB ON EXPLAINING WHY THEIR ORIGINAL

[00:15:01]

REQUEST WAS DENIED.

AND I WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE HER TO SPEAK MORE.

SO WITH RANDY, UH, TROXELL TO GET, UH, TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHY THE PARKS BOARD MADE THIS RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK, I THINK I HAVE A FAIR UNDERSTANDING NOW.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

WONDERFUL.

IS THERE A MOTION? UM, I'M GOING TO MOTION WE A FORWARD.

THIS WAS A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION, LUCAS.

THANK YOU, MS. LUCAS, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

OKAY.

OH, MY NAME IS JOSEPH.

CAN I HAVE A UM, SO, SO HOLD ON, HOLD ON JUST ONE SECOND.

HOLD ON JUST ONE SECOND.

UM, THIS REALLY IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER.

SO ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE IN REGARDS TO THIS, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO DEFER THEM TO STAFF RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE VOTING PROCESS.

I'M SO SORRY.

YEAH, BUT I HAD RECEIVED AN EMAIL ASKING IF I WISH TO TALK, I HAVE TO REPLY TO THE EMAIL AND THEY HEARD ALREADY A REPLY, OR THEY'RE ASKING FOR A MINUTE TO TALK OUR CASE.

OH, HOLD ON.

JUST ONE SECOND.

MS. KELLER, CAN YOU CONFIRM IF THERE IS AN EMAIL REQUEST THAT IS CONFIRMED? OKAY.

MR. HANEY, WOULD YOU PLEASE WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION AND HE NEEDS TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? YES.

OKAY.

UM, AGAIN, IT'S NOT REALLY A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT OKAY.

I WILL DROP HIM OFF.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

YES, SIR.

WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE? YES.

UH, MY NAME IS JOSEPH .

I AM THE PRESIDENT OF , UH, WHICH IS, UH, PLANNING TO BUILD A SENIOR LIVING, UH, IN THE SYDNEY AREA.

AND THIS IS A DREAM PROJECT FOR US.

UH, A LOT MORE FRIENDS JOINING TO LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY.

ACTUALLY, WE, WE WILL BE LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY AND DID THEY NEED CONCEPTUAL STAGE OF THIS PROJECT? WE HAD SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY OFFICIALS, INCLUDING MAYOR.

UH, THEY WERE ALL EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

THE PROBLEM IS THE, OUR SUPPORT, UH, THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY WILL BE RELATEDLEY OR LOT OF CITIZENS WHO WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY THE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY RATHER THAN GOING OUTSIDE.

SO IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THEM TO HAVE PRIVATE PARKLAND INSIDE THE COMMUNITY.

THAT IS WHY WE PREFER TO HAVE PRIVATE PARKLAND WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

WE ARE READY TO PAY 50% OF THE PAYMENT THAT WAY BOTH THE SENIOR CITIZEN RESIDENTS AND THE CITY WILL BE IN A WIN-WIN SITUATION.

IF A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE MONEY GOES TO THE CITY FOR THE PUBLIC PARK, THE SENIOR CITIZENS WILL BE THE LOSERS BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE USE OF THE PUBLIC FACILITY BECAUSE OF THE AGE FACTOR.

SO WE HUMBLY REQUEST TO GO BY THE ORIGINAL REQUEST OF 50% PAYMENTS AND A 50% PRIVATE PARKLAND.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION? WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS HAS TO GO BACK TO THE PARKS BOARD THAT WE DON'T AGREE.

WE, WE CAN'T, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, CAUSE IT, IT, IT, IT, FROM THE MINUTES, AT LEAST IT APPEARED THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY, UM, AGREE TO THE, UM, THE OUTCOME OF THE MEETING.

SO, UM, THIS IS, UH, KIND OF A SURPRISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS JENNIFER GOMEZ.

CAN I INTERJECT JUST FOR A SECOND, PLEASE? OKAY.

SO, UM, REMEMBER THAT THE PARKLAND DEDICATION IS SUBJECT TO THE NEW PROCESS.

SO, UM, PARKS BOARD HAD TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS ARE DISAPPROVED.

[00:20:01]

AND SO THE COMMISSION ALSO HAS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IN THAT SAME MANNER AND FORWARD IT TO CITY COUNCIL.

UM, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE FINAL DETERMINATION IF THEY'RE STILL, YOU KNOW, FURTHER DISCUSSION AS TO THE NATURE OF THE DEDICATION, BECAUSE IF A PRIVATE PARKLAND IS ULTIMATELY APPROVED ON SITE, THAT WOULD NEED TO BE REFLECTED ON A FINAL PLAT APPLICATION.

SO IT AFFECTS THE TIMING OF WHEN THEY CAN SUBMIT A FINAL PLAT APPLICATION.

UM, BUT IF IT GETS TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL DECIDES THAT PARKS BOARD NEEDS TO RECONSIDER IT, THEN IT WOULD RESTART THAT WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN.

SO THIS, THIS APPLICATION WOULD NEED TO GO FORWARD TO COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION.

UM, BUT THE TIMING ON WHEN THEY CAN FINALIZE THE PLAT OR IS GOING TO BE AFFECTED.

OKAY.

WE UNDERSTAND.

WELL, MAYBE, UM, SO, YOU KNOW, MY ORIGINAL MOTION WAS TO SAM WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION.

SO BECAUSE THERE'S A QUESTION HERE, IF WE APPROVE WITH CONDITION, WOULD THAT BE A MORE APPROPRIATE CHOICE? CORRECT? YEAH, BECAUSE YOU CAN, YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT OR MAKE, YOU KNOW, CONDITIONS TO THE PARKS BOARD RECOMMENDATION AND THEN RECOMMEND THAT FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.

YEAH.

BUT I MEAN, FOR ME, IT HAS TO GO BACK TO THE PARKS BOARD.

I'M NOT GOING TO CONTRADICT THE PORT POWER SPORT, BUT THERE'S STILL AN OUTSTANDING ISSUE.

IT HAS TO GO BACK TO THEM.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THE COUNCIL HAS TO DO THAT.

SO I WILL AMEND MY MOTION TO SAY, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS AND WE'LL LET COUNCIL, UH, ADDRESS THAT MOTION THAT WE HAVE TO CITE TO THE RULE THAT WE'RE CONDITIONING.

AND WHAT ARE YOU CONDITIONING? UM, UM, UM, I'M TRYING TO, UH, BASICALLY PUSH US BACK TO THE PARKS BOARD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OUR, OUR PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE PARKS BOARD RECOMMENDATION.

AND IF, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO, I, I JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, BASED ON WHAT JENNIFER SAID, IT SOUNDED LIKE WE HAD THE OPTION.

UM, AND, AND I, I GUESS I'M NOT SURE HOW TO DESCRIBE THE CONDITION.

UM, YOU KNOW, IN, I GUESS IN THE OLD DAYS, UM, IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE NEVER GOTTEN TO US AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IT HOPEFULLY WOULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED PRIOR TO GETTING TO US, UH, WOULD IT, UM, WHAT WOULD, HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS FAN? SO TECHNICALLY WE ONLY REALLY HAVE TWO CHOICES.

WE COULD EITHER, UM, SEND IT APPROVED WHAT THE PARKS BOARD HAS STATED, OR WE CAN DISAPPROVE WHAT THE PARK BOARD HAS STATED.

IT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BE ONE OR THE OTHER.

CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? UM, PLEASE, MS. ROMERO, THE PARKS BOARD HAD A DECISION TO MAKE EITHER YOU, UM, TO LAND WASN'T ENOUGH TO HAVE IT A PUBLIC PARK, THE PRIVATE PARK TO AN AMENITY THAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO BUILD, UH, IS NICE AND PERFECT FOR, UH, A PRIVATE PARK.

IS HE JUST IS APPLICANT SAYING, SO WE DON'T WANT TO PAY THE A HUNDRED PERCENT AND THEY'RE COMING TO US ASKING US NOT TO APPROVE WHAT THE PARK BOARD APPROVED, BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY THE, THE A HUNDRED PERCENT CASH BECAUSE THE PARKS THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BUILD A PARK FOR THEIR RESIDENTS.

AND SO THE, WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS THE 50% IN LIEU, IS THAT RIGHT? AND I'M PRETTY SURE IT WAS DEBATED IN THE PARK BOARD.

THIS IS FOR CITY COUNCIL.

IT'S NOT TO SEND BACK TO THE POOR PARK BOARD.

I MEAN, THAT'S I OPINION, I MEAN, IT'S, IT WAS DISCUSSED AND VOTED ON, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE A SOLID RECOMMENDATION.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYTHING OUT OF THE PARKS BOARD COMES TO US AND THEN DEVELOPERS WANT US TO DECIDE ABOUT CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF THAT'S NOT OUR ROLE.

I, I AGREE WITH JOHN, IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCES WITH REGARDS TO, TO CASH IN LIEU OF

[00:25:01]

PARKLAND.

AND THIS IS TO DO WITH PUBLIC PARKLAND.

AND IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A DOLLAR, IT'S A DOLLAR SWAP THAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE.

SO MY OPINION IS WE NEED TO MOVE ON WITH THE MOTION TO EITHER PASS IT POSITIVE, OR AGAIN, TO ME MOVING ON FORWARD, BECAUSE IT'S NOT OUR, IT'S NOT IN OUR PREROGATIVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING.

HE CAN MAKE HIS CASE TO COUNSEL.

THIS IS JIM NORCO.

I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT ALSO.

I MEAN, THE STATEMENT WAS MADE TONIGHT FINE, BUT, UM, IF THAT ENTITY OR THAT PERSON NEEDS TO REVISIT THAT WITH CITY COUNCIL, AT THIS POINT, WE WOULD BE OUT OF, OUT OF OUR JEWISH JURISDICTION, FICTIONAL, UH, UH, RIGHTS RIGHT NOW, RIGHT.

SOMEBODY TELLING ME IF WE'RE WRONG.

I THINK WE'RE REALLY RIGHT BACK AT THE POINT WHERE STAFF IS REALLY ASKING US TO FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION.

AND AT THIS POINT, THE ONLY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CAN DO IS AN APPROVAL OF PARKS, BOARD RECOMMENDATION, OR A DISAPPROVAL.

BUT EVEN IF YOU GIVE A DISAPPROVAL, YOU WOULD HAVE THE STATEWIDE WIDE OPEN FOR EMOTION.

SO I'LL REMAKE MY FIRST MOTION, WHICH IS TO APPROVE IT, SEND IT WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU, MR. HANEY, IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND THAT MOTION O'MALLEY.

THANK YOU, MR. O'MALLEY.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

ARE THERE ANY NAYS? ARE THERE ANY THAT MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM TWO, CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR A PARKLAND DEDICATION FOR PARKWAY CROSSING PHASE ONE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UH, RANDY, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.

OKAY.

I GOT DISCONNECTED A MINUTE AGO.

I HAD TO CALL BACK IN, SO WE'LL MAKE SURE WE'RE STILL HERE.

UM, IN THE, IN THE MINUTES FOR THE, UH, ON THE PARKS BOARD, UH, THEY'RE A LITTLE LENGTHY, UM, I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE, BUT I'LL HOPE YOU GOT A CHANCE TO READ THROUGH THAT.

THERE WERE QUITE A FEW DISCUSSIONS AND STUFF ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.

UM, BOTTOM LINE IS, UH, THE, THE MOTION WAS MADE FOR STAFF TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER ON THE LOCATION AND POTENTIAL OF DEVELOPMENT OF SOME LAND TOGETHER.

ONE OF THE REASONS BEHIND THAT IS IMPART ZONE.

UH, WE HAVE NO PARKLAND WHATSOEVER.

UH, THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, PARKS BOARD LOOKED AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, POSSIBLY, UH, ATTAIN OF FIVE PLUS ACRES OF PARKLAND, UH, IN THE PUBLIC, UH, SETTING.

SO, UH, THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION WAS, WAS, WAS MADE, UH, WITH THE CONDITION THAT DOES STAFF WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO TRY AND WORK OUT SOME DETAILS OF HOW THAT PARK IN THE PARKLAND COULD BE USED.

THERE WAS A, LET'S SAY, UH, I GUESS IT'S PART OF THEIR LAND PLAN, UM, FOR THE SUBDIVISION THAT SHOWS, UH, FOUR AREAS IN GREEN OF THE PARKLAND COMES UP TO, I THINK IT WAS AROUND 21 ACRES, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.

AND, UH, SO, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE AREA THAT, UH, THIS IS REFERRING TO.

SO THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT PARKS BOARD WANTED TO PASS ON FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING TO REVIEW.

AND, UH, UM, I SOLD TO COUNCIL.

IF YOU SEE IT TO BE, THANK YOU SO MUCH, RANDY, FOR THAT EXPLANATION COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THIS APPLICATION? I'M SORRY, PARKLAND DEDICATION.

IS THERE A MOTION TO FORWARD THIS TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THIS, WITH THE PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION? THANK YOU, MR. HANEY, IS THERE A SECOND, A SECOND, LUCAS.

THANK YOU, MS. LOCOS, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

ARE THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY NAYS, ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU.

MOVING NOW TO ITEM THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS, THERE ARE NONE ITEM EIGHT

[Item 8A]

ZONING, TEXT AMENDMENTS, AA ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS.

WE'LL DISCUSS POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY ZONING ORDINANCE TO COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 3000 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

[00:30:01]

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME? THANK YOU.

THIS IS JENNIFER GOMEZ, A PLANNING MANAGER, AND SOME OF THE, UH, BOXERS, UH, PORTIONS OF THIS PRESENTATION.

AND THEN, UH, TO MILA WAY, UM, FIRST ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY IS ON THE LINE AS HIM FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR PROVIDE INPUT AS WELL.

UH, NEXT SLIDE.

SO YOU ALL, WE PRESENTED THIS TO YOU, UM, MID TO LATE LAST YEAR.

UH, THESE REGULATIONS WERE, UM, VOTING WELL BECOMING EFFECTIVE.

UH, THEY FORMALLY BECAME EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1ST AND, UH, WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSION SINCE THAT TIME.

AND, UH, JUST PRIOR TO THAT, UH, TO TRY TO LOOK AT WHAT THE IMPACT OF THIS NEW LAW WOULD BE ON THE CITY'S DESIGN STANDARDS.

UM, SO JUST TO RECAP THIS, THESE ARE THE SUMMARY OF THE, UM, CODE ITEMS THAT IMPACT OUR DESIGN STANDARDS.

UM, ESSENTIALLY, UH, ANY REGULATION, ANY CODE THAT WE HAVE THAT PROHIBITED, UM, OR LIMITS OF BUILDING PRODUCT OR MATERIAL, UM, WE CAN NO LONGER ENFORCE IF THAT PRODUCT MATERIAL IS APPROVED BY, UM, A NATIONAL CODE.

ALSO ANY OF OUR REGULATIONS THAT ESTABLISH A STANDARD THAT'S MORE STRINGENT, UH, THAN THE NATIONAL MATH MODEL CODES, WE CAN NO LONGER ENFORCE AS WELL.

AND THEN FINALLY, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO, UM, REALLY, UH, DWELL ON THIS PART TONIGHT.

UM, BUT ANY PROVISION, UM, AS YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE AWARE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS ADOPTED THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING AND FIRE CODES, UH, THIS NEW LAW IMPACTS, UH, ANY OF THE CITY'S AMENDMENTS, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED TO THOSE TONES.

UH, THOSE ARE NOT FOUND IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THOSE ARE FOUND IN DIFFERENT CHAPTERS OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES.

UH, BUT ANY OF THOSE AMENDMENTS THAT, UM, ARE APPROVED BY A NATIONAL MODEL OR, UM, ARE AMENDMENTS THAT MIGHT BE MORE STRINGENT THAN THE NATIONAL MODEL MODEL CODES.

THOSE ARE NO LONGER ENFORCEABLE AS WELL.

UM, SO AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'LL POINT OUT, UM, UH, SOME OF THOSE, UH, CODES THAT ARE IMPACTED JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE.

UM, AND THEN, UH, THE FOCUS, UH, FOR US FOR TONIGHT IS TO START OUR PROCESS TO REALLY LOOK AT, UM, THE EFFECT OF THIS LAW ON OUR DESIGN STANDARDS AND START TO LOOK AT WAYS MOVING FORWARD.

UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A VISUAL, UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN STANDARDS WE KNOW, UM, HAVE BEEN PREEMPTED, UM, SOME OF OUR MORE COMMON STANDARDS, UH, SO CERTAIN STANDARDS LIKE OUR REQUIREMENT FOR 100% MASONRY, UM, ON EXTERIOR WALLS, THAT'S BEEN A STAPLE OF OUR DESIGN STANDARDS.

UH, THIS IS, UH, THE PICTURE IS OUT OF A COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON HIGHWAY SIX.

UM, THAT THE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE EXTERIOR MATERIAL IS PRIMARILY A COMBINATION OF BRICK AND STONE.

UM, AND SO THIS STANDARD IS ONE OF THE REGULATIONS THAT, UM, WAS THAT'S BEEN USED IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THESE KINDS OF DESIGN AFFECTS.

SO WE KNOW THAT, UH, THAT STANDARD, UH, IT PROHIBITS AND LIMITS DIRECTLY, UM, A MATERIAL, IF AN, IF THE DEVELOPER WANTED TO USE AN ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL, UM, THAT'S NOT MASONRY AS WE DEFINE A MASONRY, UH, THEN IF IT'S PERMITTED BY A NATIONAL CODE, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT CHAPTER, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT AND THE CITY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ENFORCE, UH, THIS PARTICULAR, UH, REGULATION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND THEN IN COMBINATION WITH THAT REGULATION, UH, THE CITY HAD A PRESENT USE.

SO, UM, WHERE A BUILDING MAY NOT BE 100% A BRICK OR 100% STONE, UM, IT'S STILL A MASON REEF FIVE, BUT THERE'S A PERCENT USE THAT PRIMARY MATERIALS HAD TO BE USED.

SO THIS IS, UH, THE SHOPPING CENTER RIGHT IN FRONT OF LOWE'S ONE OF THE SHOPPING CENTERS IN FRONT OF THOSE, UM, ON HIGHWAY SIX.

SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT REGULATION IN PLAY, WHERE YOU SEE KIND OF THE COLUMN SUPPORTERS ARE A LIGHT BRICK MATERIAL.

UM, AND THEN, UH, WHERE THE FINES ARE PLACED IS EITHER AN ETHOS OR A STUCCO THAT WE DEFINE AS MASONRY.

UM, BUT THEY HAVE TO UTILIZE A PERCENTAGE OF BRICKS, UM, ON THAT BUILDING, IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THIS REGULATION.

SO THIS, UH, REGULATION AS WELL, UM, IT PROHIBITED SOME LIMITS, UH, ANY OTHER, UH, MATERIAL THAT MIGHT, UH, BE APPROVED, UM, BY A NATIONAL

[00:35:01]

MODEL CODE.

UH, SO THIS REGULATION IS ANOTHER REGULATION THAT WE ARE NO LONGER ABLE TO ENFORCE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO THE OTHER STANDARD THAT THE LAW CREATES IS THE CREATING A STANDARD FOR BUILDING PRODUCT MATERIAL OR AESTHETIC METHOD.

THAT'S MORE STRINGENT.

AND SO AGAIN, ONE OF THE STAPLES OF OUR DESIGN STANDARDS IS REQUIREMENTS FOR PITCH SCREWS OR ARCHITECTURALLY PITCHED ELEMENTS OF THIS PITCHER EXAMPLE IS THE WALGREENS AT LEXINGTON, UH, INDEPENDENT.

AND I'VE BEEN IN FMC IN 92.

UM, AND SO YOU COULD SEE THE ELEMENT, RIGHT, UM, IN THAT CENTER COLUMN OF THE BUILDING WHERE YOU SEE THE PITCH ON TOP OF THE COLUMN, UM, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT YOU SEE AROUND THE CITY.

UM, THOSE ARE REQUIREMENTS, UH, OR THEY'LL GET DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WERE PUT INTO PLACE TO MEET THIS, UH, REGULATION.

AND A PART OF THIS REGULATION WAS PUT INTO THE DESIGN STANDARDS, UH, TO MAKE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS MORE HARMONIOUS WITH, UH, THE BEDROOM COMMUNITY, UH, THAT MISSOURI CITY WAS GROWING TO BE.

UM, SO THIS STANDARD, UH, WE BELIEVE, UH, IS NO LONGER ENFORCEABLE, UH, BASED ON THIS PARTICULAR ELEMENT OF THE NEW LAW.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THEN THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE FEEL, UM, SURVIVE.

THE REGULATION ARE THE NEW LAW.

UM, THOSE REGULATIONS INCLUDE, UH, OUR ABILITY TO REQUIRE SCREENING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.

SO TAKING A LOOK AT THAT SAME WALGREENS, UM, IT'S MORE THAN LIKELY THAT THEY HAVE ROOF-MOUNTED, UM, AC UNIT, UM, OR OTHER OR EQUIPMENT, UH, ON THEIR ROOFTOP, BUT YOU DON'T SEE IT BECAUSE THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE, UM, A PARAPET WALL.

SO THE WALL WHERE THEIR SIGNS ARE LOCATED, UM, ARE MORE THAN LIKELY EXTENDED PAST THE ACTUAL ROOF LINE.

UM, BUT THAT DESIGN ELEMENTS, UH, WAS A PART OF THIS REGULATION THAT THEY HAVE TO SCREEN IT.

SO THERE'S THE DESIGN OF THAT BUILDING, UM, WAS DESIGNED SO THAT, UH, THOSE RE UM, MOUNTED EQUIPMENT OR EVEN WALL MOUNTED BOXES, UM, ARE SCREEN PAINTED, UM, ESSENTIALLY, UH, THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC WON'T SEE THOSE KINDS OF ELEMENTS OF THE BUILDING.

ALSO, WE BELIEVE THE SCREEN WALL, UH, REGULATIONS, SCREEN WALLS TO SCREEN OUTSIDE STORAGE AREAS, UM, WEANED WALLS OFF OF BUILDINGS.

UH, WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE ARE STILL ENFORCEABLE, UH, REGULATIONS, UH, FENCE REQUIREMENTS.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, UH, COMMUNITY DENSITY REQUIREMENTS THAT ESTABLISHED, UH, MATERIALS, UH, FOR, UH, COMMUNITY FENCING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF SUBDIVISIONS ALONG MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.

UM, WE BELIEVE THOSE STANDARDS ARE STILL ENFORCEABLE, UM, AS WELL AS FINES.

AND SO YOU SEE THE WALGREENS SIGN, UH, IN THAT PICTURE WHERE THE WALGREEN'S SIGN IS YOU SEE THE WALGREENS, UH, SIGN FACE, AND THEN IT'S BEEN CASED AND A BRICK OR MASONRY PRODUCTS.

UM, SO WE BELIEVE THAT ELEMENTS OF THAT ARE STILL ENFORCEABLE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THEN THERE'S STANDARDS THAT WE ARE STILL DISCUSSING.

UM, AND SO THAT THIS WILL COME UP AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, UM, STANDARDS REGARDING CANOPIES AND AWNING.

UM, THIS IS THE CENTER OVER NEAR COLONIAL LAKE AND HIGHWAY SIX.

UM, THE WALGREENS OR WALGREENS, UH, WHEEL, UH, IS LOCATED NEAR THE SHOPPING CENTER.

AND THIS IS IN FRONT OF, UM, HOLIDAY NOON, THE HOLIDAY IN BOOKOUT.

UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE BLACK AWNINGS THAT ARE JUST ABOVE THE STOREFRONT UP, OR THE CANOPIES THAT ARE JUST ABOVE THE STOREFRONT ON THIS BUILDING.

WE HAVE REGULATIONS IN TERMS OF THE LOCATION, UM, OF CANOPIES, AWNING, UM, RESTRICTIONS THAT, UM, WHERE YOU SEE THE NAIL SALON THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T HAVE A SINGLE AWNING THAT EXTENDS, YOU KNOW, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THAT, UM, PORTION OF THE BUILDING.

UM, SO THERE ARE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS THAT, UM, THE DESIGN STANDARDS INCLUDE, UM, IN ORDER TO MAKE AWNINGS AND CANOPIES AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, BUT THAT THEY DON'T OVERWHELM, UH, THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING.

AND SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THESE ASPECTS WITH THE LEGAL DIVISION, UM, IN DISCUSSION TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT, UM, EITHER ONE OF THOSE REGULATIONS OR THE NEW BALL, UM, UH, PREMIUM THOSE STANDARDS WINDOW COVERINGS, UM, ARE ALSO CONTAINED IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THAT DETERMINATION, UH, STILL NEEDS TO BE MADE AS WELL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE ARTICULATION AND LIMITATION ON OUR DOORS ON EXTERIOR BUILDING OR SOME OTHER ISSUES, UH,

[00:40:01]

THAT WE NEED TO, UH, MAKE A DETERMINATION ON AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE PREEMPTED.

UH, THIS PARTICULAR FEATURE IS THE HUNTINGTON, A SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY OVER ON 10 92.

AND, UH, BOTH OF THESE STANDARDS ARE A STANDARD SET OF REQUIREMENTS OF MULTIFAMILY, UH, DEVELOPMENT.

SO, UH, WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS YOU SEE THE BUILDING WALL, IT'S NOT JUST A SOLID SURFACE.

UM, YOU SEE THE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT, UM, ARTICULATION IN THE WALL WHERE YOU SEE PORTIONS, UM, RECESS, MORE SO THAN OTHERS.

UM, YOU ALSO SEE THAT ALL OF THE ENTRYWAYS TO THE UNIT AND ITS FACILITY ARE INTERNAL AND ALONG THE INTERNAL HALLWAY.

UM, SO THERE'S A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF DOORS THAT YOU ACTUALLY SEE, UM, FROM THE PUBLIC VIEW.

UM, THOSE DESIGN ASPECTS ARE ALL REGULATED UNDER THESE STANDARDS.

UM, AND SO WE HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, THOSE STANDARDS ME, PARTICULARLY THE SECOND, UM, ELEMENT OF THE NEW LAW, UM, IS THAT A STANDARD THAT'S MORE STRINGENT THAN A NATIONAL CODE, UM, UH, WOULD REQUIRE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND SO, UM, FINALLY, AS WE LOOK AT THE IMPACT OF THE NEW LAW ON OUR NEW, UH, OR ON OUR DESIGN STANDARDS, ONE THING THAT WE ALSO NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF OUR REDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT, UH, THESE TWO BUILDINGS ARE ALL TEXAS PARKWAY.

YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT, UH, REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES, UM, ALONG WITH PARKWAY AND SOME OF OUR OLDER CORRIDORS, UM, AND PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY WERE DEVELOPED PRIOR TO, UM, THE ADOPTION OF THESE DESIGN STANDARDS.

AND NOW, NOW THAT THEY'RE, UM, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDEVELOP ROOM.

UM, OUR ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS HAVE BEEN IMPACTED.

UM, SO AS WE LOOK AT THE TOTALITY OF THE IMPACT OF THESE STANDARDS, UM, THE DISCUSSION SHOULD ALSO BE MINDFUL OF, UM, OPPORTUNITIES, UH, THAT WE MIGHT HAVE, UH, FOR THESE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS, OTHER, YOU KNOW, OTHER OPTIONS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO EMPHASIZE, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, DIFFERENT STANDARDS THAT CAN PROMOTE, UM, BETTER PRODUCT FOR BETTER OUTCOMES, UM, FOR SOME OF THOSE AREAS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO OUR RECOMMENDATION OKAY FOR YOU, THIS IS, UH, TO START OUR FORMAL PROCESS TO, UH, RE-LOOK AT OUR DESIGN STANDARDS.

UH, IT'S OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE GET TO START, THE PROCESS STARTED, UM, IF, UM, YOU ALL WOULD CALL, UH, CALL A PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, AND WHAT WE WANT TO BRING BACK TO YOU WITH A PRELIMINARY REPORT IS A FINALIZATION OF THAT CHART THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, UM, SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE TOTAL IMPACT OF THE NEW LAW ON, UM, OUR DESIGN STANDARDS.

AND THEN BASED ON THAT IMPACT, WE CAN PROVIDE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD, WHETHER, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE JUST TAKING OUT, YOU KNOW, ALL THE SECTION SEVEN, EIGHT, UM, OR JUST REMOVING THOSE ITEMS, YOU KNOW, THAT, UM, ARE IMPACTED OR, YOU KNOW, NOT EVEN REMOVING THE ITEMS WITHIN THE DISCLAIMER, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THAT SECTION, BUT ONCE WE HAVE THE FULL PICTURE OF THE IMPACT OF THE LAW, UM, ON THOSE REGULATIONS, UH, THEN WE CAN BRING THAT FORWARD TO YOU WITH OUR RECOMMENDED A SUGGESTION.

AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF IT IS TO, UH, WE WANT, UM, TO GET FEEDBACK FROM YOU ALL ON STARTING A PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS.

UM, POSSIBLY THIS GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECONSIDER, UH, THE CITY'S GOALS AND PRIORITIES AS IT COMES TO THE WAY, UM, OUR, OUR COMMUNITY LOOKS, UM, AS IT CONTINUES TO DEVELOP, UM, AND LOOKING AT WHAT OUR OPPORTUNITIES ARE MOVING FORWARD.

AND SO, UH, SOME OF THAT PUBLIC INPUT COULD, UH, COME IN THE FORM OF A JOINT, UH, COUNCIL, UH, COMMISSION MEETING, UH, TO START THE PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, FOR YOU ALL TO KIND OF THROW OUT IDEAS AND START TO PUT THINGS ON THE TABLE.

AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A GAME PLAN, THEN INVITING THE PUBLIC IN A, FOR WORKSHOP FOR WHATEVER THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE POST THE PANDEMIC.

UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN LOOK AT SOME CREATIVE WAYS, UM, AND OPPORTUNITIES TO INVOLVE THE PUBLIC IN THE PROCESS.

UM, SO THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE, UM, UH, JAMEELA.

DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING OR SHARE ANYTHING AND THEN WE'RE FOR QUESTIONS AS WELL? NOPE.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSIONERS FOR JENNIFER JAMEELA, JENNIFER, JENNIFER, UM, HOW HAS, HOW DOES THIS, OR DOES THIS AFFECT PDS AND OR DEED RESTRICTIONS? ARE THERE, ARE THEY ABLE TO DICTATE MORE STRINGENT STANDARDS THROUGH THAT MECHANISM OR ARE THEY SUBJECT TO THE SAME LIMITATIONS? SO THE,

[00:45:01]

THE RESTRICTIONS ARE UNINFECTED BECAUSE IT JUST, UH, LIMIT MUNICIPALITIES.

UH, SO PLACES LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE CNA AREA WHERE YOU HAVE A SIENNA PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, UM, RIVERSTONE FIRST COLONY, THEY'RE STILL ABLE TO ENFORCE THEIR DESIGN STANDARDS.

AND A LOT OF THEM STILL HAVE THE SAME RESTRICTIONS.

UM, BUT WE PROBABLY WON'T SEE MUCH OF A CHANGE IN DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THOSE AREAS.

IT'S JUST THOSE AREAS THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THOSE.

THESE RESTRICTIONS ARE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, UM, IN TERMS OF PDS, THAT WOULD BE THE CITY, UM, IN FORCING IT.

SO THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO JUST LIKE OUR, OUR, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, UH, WHERE WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THOSE ELEMENTS, THAT A COMPLAINT WITH THE NEW LAW.

OKAY.

BUT YOU DID SAY THAT ONE, ONE APPROACH THAT WE COULD TAKE IS TO KIND OF LEAVE THE STANDARDS THERE AND, AND TELL PEOPLE, WELL, THESE ARE OUR STANDARDS, BUT IN REALITY, WE CAN'T ENFORCE THEM, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF A GOOD NEIGHBOR, GOOD NEIGHBOR APPROACH, RIGHT? YEAH.

AND THAT'S, WE'LL, WE'LL TALK THROUGH THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF THAT, BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, PART OF IT IS, IS WE WANT TO BE CLEAR, UM, PROVIDE CLEAR GUIDANCE TO DEVELOPERS OR TO, UM, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE BUILDING IN THE CITY OF WHAT THE CITY'S REGULATIONS ARE.

AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN TALK THROUGH LIKE SOME CREATIVE WAYS IF WE CAN'T KEEP IT IN THE ORDINANCE, UM, OF CONVEYING, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE EXPECTATION FOR QUALITY DEVELOPMENT IS WITHOUT OBLIGATING, UM, YOU KNOW, A DEVELOPER TO, TO DESIGN TO THAT STANDARD.

YEAH.

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO, UM, TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HAVE PUT IN PLACE? WELL, YES, MA'AM AND I THINK, AND THAT'S PART OF, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU ALL REMEMBER THE EARLY CONVERSATIONS WE WERE HAVING WITH THIS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME MUNICIPALITIES, UH, AN ILLEGAL PULL DOWN, UM, AND EXAMPLE ORDINANCE FROM FATE, UH, TEXAS, THAT, UH, THEY PASSED RIGHT BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1ST.

AND, UH, SO THEY HAD THE QUALIFIER THAT, UH, THEY JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE, TO GO THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS IMPACTED AND WHAT WAS NOT.

UH, SO THEY PUT CERTAIN CONDITIONS.

AND SO THEY DIDN'T REMOVE THE LANGUAGE AS I JUST PUT SOME QUALIFIERS IN THERE, INCLUDING, UH, PUTTING THE BURDEN ON AN APPLICANT TO STATE OR FINE, YOU KNOW, THE NATIONAL CODE SECTION, UH, THAT ALLOWS FOR WHATEVER MATERIAL WITH STANDARDS THEY WERE PROPOSING.

UM, SO WE WILL DEFINITELY INCLUDE THAT, UH, WITH, UH, THE PRELIMINARY REPORT IS A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.

UM, I THINK, UH, IN OUR EARLY DISCUSSION WITH LIKE THE CITY OF STAFFORD, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE NEW TO DESIGN STANDARDS WHEN ALL OF THIS STARTED, UM, I THINK THEIR ORIGINAL CONVERSATION, THEY WERE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO KEEP THE LANGUAGE IN THEIR CODE AND PUT SOME DISCLAIMERS IN THERE.

UM, SO WE'LL, WE'LL DEFINITELY POOL.

UM, SOME OF THE ACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY COMMUNITIES IN OUR AREA OR THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND PROVIDE THAT AS, AS SOME GUIDANCE AS WELL.

SOUNDS GOOD.

COMMISSIONERS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I BELIEVE THAT ON TONIGHT, THEY'RE, UM, ASKING FOR US TO, UH, CALL, CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO MAKE OUR WAY FORWARD ON THIS ITEM.

OKAY.

AND TO CONSIDER A PRELIMINARY REPORT, IS THERE A SECOND? THANK YOU.

THE MOTION WAS MADE BY HANEY AND IT WAS SECONDED BY NORCO.

ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY NAYS? OKAY.

THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING THE FULL REPORT.

JENNIFER.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE NOW TO ITEM B

[Item 8B]

MURALS AND WALL ART.

WE'LL DISCUSS POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF MURALS AND WALL ART.

OKAY.

UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND REALLY, UH, JAMEELA, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THESE THE FIRST THREE, FIVE? UH, SURE.

UM, I GUESS YOU ALL, NOW

[00:50:01]

YOU CAN SEE THE BIG PICTURE OF WHERE WE LEFT OFF WITH OUR LAST MEETING.

AND WE TALKED ABOUT PUBLIC, UH, REGULATING ART ON PUBLIC PROPERTY VERSUS PRIVATE PROPERTY.

SO WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS NOW IMPLEMENTING A NEW POLICY THAT WILL ADDRESS PROCUREMENT AND SELECTION OF A PROCUREMENT AND SELECTION PROCESS ESTABLISHED AN ART FUND, LOCAL ART COMMITTEE, AND A PERCENTAGE FOR ART ORDINANCE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND SO SPECIFICALLY WITH OUR CITY, UM, THE LAW THAT GOVERNS NOT OUR CITY, I APOLOGIZE WITH THE LAW THAT GOVERNS PUBLIC, UH, ART IS THAT IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION.

SO THE CITY CAN SAY WHAT IT WANTS TO SAY, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HELD TO A FIRST AMENDMENT, UH, TEST.

AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE THE PERSON GIVING THE SPEECH OR WE'RE GIVING THE SPEECH.

SO THAT'S THE THEORY OF IT.

AND THEN IN OUR CITY, WE HAVE ARTS AND PUBLIC PLACES THAT WE'RE TAKING A COUNCIL NEXT WEEK THAT WILL OFFICIALLY ESTABLISH A PROGRAM.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A NAMING OF PUBLIC PROPERTY ORDINANCE, UH, CHAPTER 16.

AND YOU'LL HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT LATER, NEXT SLIDE.

UM, AND THEN, SO MOVING ON TO PRIVATE ART, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT ALSO TODAY, WE HAVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND BASICALLY ANY TYPE OF EXPRESSION IS, IS GOVERNED BY THAT.

AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, UH, SO IT GO UNDER THAT TEST.

THEN WE HAVE DUE PROCESS EQUAL PROTECTION.

THAT'S WHAT ZONING, UM, THE TEXAS ENABLING ACT, WHICH IS OUR 2000, UH, SORRY, CHAPTER 211, TWO 11, OR THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE THAT GOVERNS, UH, ZONING.

AND THEN YOU HAVE THE LUMBARDO VERSUS THE CITY OF DALLAS.

IT TALKS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ZONING.

THAT'S GOING TO AGAIN, GET YOU TO THE LOCATION OF YOUR ART AND AESTHETICS SUPREME COURT MENTIONED THAT YOU CAN NEVER REGULATE SPECIFICALLY ON AESTHETICS.

YOU CAN COUPLE IT WITH, UM, A POLICE POWER, BUT YOU CAN'T JUST REGULATE AESTHETICS.

UM, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE CITY APART VERSUS TIPPETT, WHICH ADDRESSES AGAIN, HOW YOU CAN LOCATE IN THIS TELLING YOU YOU CAN'T SPOT ZONE.

SO YOU HAVE TO DO THAT IN ACCORDANCE TO, UM, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

AND THEN OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, UH, WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, WHICH IS OUR MATERIALS BILL, WHICH IS CODIFIED IN CHAPTER 3000 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

I'M SORRY, THE GOVERNMENT CODE, NOT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

AND THEN OF COURSE OUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND TEXAS AND FIRE BUILDING CODES.

NEXT SLIDE.

ALL RIGHT, JENNIFER.

THANK YOU.

MA'AM SO, UH, JENNIFER GOMEZ AGAIN, UH, SO WHAT WE WANT TO LOOK AT IS WE ARE BROAD, I THINK LAST YEAR, MAYBE THE YEAR BEFORE, UH, STARTED THIS CONVERSATION ON, UH, PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DISPLAY MURALS OR A WALL ART.

AND SO PART OF WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT WAS, UM, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, UH, ANYTHING APPLIED TO THE EXTERIOR OF A BUILDING, WE HAD THE PRESET TIMBER FIRST ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, UM, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE TIME REGULATIONS.

UM, AND SO THOSE ARE THE PRIMARY REGULATIONS THAT, UH, KIND OF IMPACTED AND, UH, LIMITED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, UH, THE ABILITY TO PLACE MURALS AND WALL ART.

UM, SO AS WE JUST DISCUSSED WITH ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, UM, SOME OF THOSE ISSUES MAY BE GOING AWAY.

UH, SO IN OUR STAFF DISCUSSION, WE'VE LOOKED AT, UH, VIEWING, UH, MURALS AND WALL ARE PRIMARILY THROUGH US AS A SIGN.

UM, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO KIND OF EXPLORE, UH, ONE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE COMMISSION'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THOUGHTS ARE IN TERMS OF, UH, DISPLAYING MURALS AND WALL ART.

UM, BUT ALSO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SIGNAGE, UM, UNDERSTANDING, SO THIS PICTURE, UH, THAT THESE TWO PICTURES THAT ARE ON THE SCREEN OR RAISING CANE'S, IT'S NOT OUR RAISING THINGS LOCATION.

UH, THESE TWO, I THINK, ARE BOTH LOCATED IN LOUISIANA, UM, BUT IT KIND OF DESCRIBES WHAT ARE RAISING CANES WHEN THEY WANTED TO LOCATE HERE.

UH, THEY WANTED TO PUT SOMETHING SIMILAR ON THE EXTERIOR OF THEIR BUILDING.

UH, SO THAT, THAT RED CANE'S KIND OF OBTAINING THAT'S ON OF THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT.

UM, AND THEN, UH, THE PICTURE OF THE DOG, UM, THE RAISING CANE'S LOCATION, WANTING TO INCORPORATE THAT INTO THEIR DESIGN.

UH, BUT WE WERE UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, UM, BASED ON THE CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, UM, AND THEN ALSO, UH, SIGNAGE STANDARDS.

SO

[00:55:01]

THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO TRY TO BALANCE IN, UH, LETTING, UM, BECAUSE IT, IT, IT, UM, FROM OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, I BELIEVE, AND WE CAN IN THE COMMISSION CAN CORRECTLY, UM, THAT THERE WAS SUPPORT FOR ALLOWING THESE OPPORTUNITIES, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

UM, BUT LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OR, UM, YOU KNOW, ISSUES OF CONCERN, UH, THAT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, CREATING, UH, REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR THIS.

UH, SO NEXT TIME, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THAT'S, UH, WHERE WE'RE AT IS WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE COMMISSION, UH, CALL A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM, UM, AND ALLOW FOR US TO BRING, UH, POSSIBLE, UH, REGULATIONS.

UH, THOSE REGULATIONS MAY COINCIDE WITH, UH, SOME OF THE REGULATIONS, UH, DESIGNED FOR THE PUBLIC SIDE, UM, BUT MODIFIED, UM, FOR, UH, WHAT WE CAN DO ON THE PRIVATE SIDE.

UM, BUT AS WE WORK THROUGH THOSE REGULATIONS, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR, YOU KNOW, FROM THE COMMISSION ON ANY COMMENTS, THOUGHTS, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE IN REGARDS TO A TWO YEAR OLD OR WALMART, THAT'S ALL WE HAVE WITH US.

THANK YOU.

UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF JENNIFER OR JAMILA? IS THERE A MOTION THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE HAIL? SO MOVE.

THANK YOU, MS. LUCAS, THERE A SECOND.

THANK YOU, MR. HANEY, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

ANY NAYS? GREAT.

THAT MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL MOVE NOW TO

[Items 9 & 12]

ITEM NINE.

SO THIS'LL BE OUR FINAL ITEM ON TONIGHT.

OTHER MATTERS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSION OR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUBDIVISION AND STREET NAMES TONIGHT, WE'LL DISCUSS A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING NAMING OF SUBDIVISIONS AND STREETS.

WOW.

OKAY.

THIS CAN BE A BACKSEAT DICEY TOPIC.

UM, SO, UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE THINK, I THINK EVERY, EVERYONE ON THIS CALL IS PROBABLY AWARE OF, UM, THE NATIONAL CONVERSATION THAT'S GONE ON, UM, IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS CONCERNING, UH, VARIOUS NAMES OF, UH, DIFFERENT COMMEMORATIONS OR, UM, PLACES, UH, THROUGHOUT, UM, THE COUNTRY.

AND, UH, IT, IT HIT THE VERY CITY WHEN ATTENTION WAS GIVEN, UH, TO THE VICKSBURG, UH, SUBDIVISION AND, UH, COUNCIL DISCUSSED THIS, UM, MID TO LATE LAST YEAR AND, UH, REQUESTED THAT, UH, CITY FAB BRING BACK TO THEM, UH, PROPOSED REGULATIONS, UH, TO, UH, GUIDE THE NAMING OF SUPPOSITIONS AND STREET MANES, UH, TO AVOID, UH, NAMES, UH, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE HISTORICALLY OFFENSIVE, UM, TO, UH, VARIOUS GROUPS.

UH, SO AS YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, FULLY, OR, YOU KNOW, MAY FULL, FULLY BE AWARE, THE VICKSBURG SUBDIVISION, UM, WAS REFERENCED AT THE NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.

I HAD A MENTION OF THE SUBDIVISION AND SOME OF THE STREET NAMES, UM, IN THE SUBDIVISION.

UH, THE FOCUS OF THAT ARTICLE WAS ON A STREET NAMES RELATING TO THE CONFEDERATE ARMY, UM, AND SOME OF THOSE, UM, AND, UH, SOME OF THE OPPOSITION, UH, TO THOSE NAMES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THEN THE QUESTION CAME UP, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THE CITY, UH, REGULATE, UH, SUBDIVISIONS WITH STREET NAMES AND, UH, PRIMARILY THEY COME THROUGH YOU ALL, UM, DURING, AT THE TIME OF PLANNING.

SO, UH, THE CITY HAS NO, UH, REGULATIONS ON HOW A SUBDIVISION IS NAMED, UM, ON STREET NAMES.

WHAT YOU FIND IS THE REQUIREMENT THAT AT THE TIME OF SIDING, IF A DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING NEW PUBLIC AND EVEN, UH, PRIVATE STREETS, UM, THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE, UM, A LIST OF THOSE STREET NAMES.

UM, AND SO THOSE ARE PRETTY MUCH THE ONLY STANDARD, UH, THAT'S ESTABLISHED ON THE CLADDING SIDE OR ON THE, UH, FIGHTING MANUAL SIDE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND THEN ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN SIDE, IT'S MORE OPERATIONAL, UM, IN TERMS OF HOW MANY CHARACTERS THE STREET MAN CAN CONTAIN.

UM, SO THAT'S THE STREET SIGN WHEN IT'S CREATED AND POSTED, UM, CAN MOUNT, UM, ON A, UM, UM, ON A POLE, UM, AND NOT, YOU KNOW, UH, FALL OVER OR, UM, YOU KNOW, BE

[01:00:01]

UNBALANCED.

UM, SO YOU HAVE THOSE CONDITIONS.

UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UH, STREET NAMES, BOTH THROUGH A REVIEW TO AVOID CONFLICT, UM, MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SIMILAR TO ANOTHER EXISTING STREET NAME, UM, THOSE ISSUES ARE AVOIDED, SO YOU DON'T HAVE, UM, EMERGENCY SERVICE, UH, CHALLENGES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO WHAT WE TYPICALLY FIND IS WHILE WE HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE A REGULATION OF, IN TERMS OF HOW A SUBDIVISION IS NAMED OR SPECIFICS ON HOW STREETS ARE NAMED, UM, WHAT WE'RE SEEING AND WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE IS THERE'S THEMES THAT ARE CREATED.

UM, SO YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT ARE CREATED TO SELL SUBDIVISIONS, UM, THINGS, THINGS THAT ARE CREATED TO PROMOTE, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN ASPECTS, WHETHER THEY'RE NATURAL FEATURES OR, UM, AREA FEATURES, OR, YOU KNOW, UM, JUST ALL SORTS OF THEMES.

UH, SO GOING BACK TO VICKSBURG, UM, WHAT YOU SEE IN VICKSBURG, THE MAP THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, AND THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, UM, IS THAT THE VICKSBURG SUBDIVISION ITSELF WAS PLANTED IN THREE SECTIONS.

SO WE HAVE THIS PART, THE SUBDIVISION, AND THEN ALSO, UM, VICKSBURG BOULEVARD, WHICH IS THE STREET NAME FOR THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE, UH, THAT PROVIDES ACCESS TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THEN CONTINUES THROUGH THE CITY.

UM, SO CLEARLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EXPERTS, UH, THE BATTLE OF EXPOSURE, THE SIEGE OF VICKSBURG, UM, THAT TOOK PLACE IN VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE NAMES OF THE STREETS AND THE SUBDIVISION, IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, VERY CLEAR THAT, UH, THE THEME, UM, WAS, UH, SITUATED AROUND THAT BATTLE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO AS THE THREE SECTIONS, UH, THE VILLAGES OF SHILOH, WHICH IS TO THE WEST OF VICKSBURG BOULEVARD, THE VILLAGE OF CUMBERLAND, UH, TO THE RIGHT, UH, VICKSBURG BOULEVARD, UM, THOSE TWO SECTIONS DIRECTLY, UM, APPEAR TO HAVE LINKAGES TO, UH, THE BATTLE OF VICKSBURG.

UM, AND SO THE THEME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OVERALL SUBDIVISION, UH, THE NAME KERRY FLOWED THROUGH IN THE STREET NAMES THAT WE SEE WITHIN THOSE SECTIONS, THE LAST SECTION THAT WAS PLANTED, UM, IN VICKSBURG.

SO DON'T IMPRE, UH, TOOK A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, UH, THEME.

SO WHILE IT'S, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH VICKSBURG, UH, THE LAST SECTION SEEMS TO BE ASSOCIATED MORE WITH THE STATE OF ARIZONA AND PLACES, LOCATIONS, UM, UM, THINGS IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NEXT SLIDE.

OKAY.

I LIKE, CAN WE GO BACK ONE SLIDE? I'M SORRY, THAT WAS ME.

I'M SORRY.

UM, SO ACTUALLY THESE, THE LAST THREE SLIDES I WAS SAYING NEXT SLIDE, AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THE PICTURE WAS THE SAME.

I APOLOGIZE.

UM, BUT THE, THE SECTION, IT JUST SHOWS THE STREETS WITHIN THOSE SECTIONS.

SO AS I WAS SAYING WITH, UH, SEDONA FREE, UM, A LOT OF THOSE STREET MAINS, UH, REFERENCE PLACES, UM, IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA.

UM, AND THEN THE SAME FOR A VILLAGE OF CUMBERLAND, UH, SEEMS TO REFERENCE A LOT OF CONFEDERATE ARMY, UM, REFERENCES, CONFEDERATE ARMY BATTLES, GENERALS, UM, AND THEN THE VILLAGE OF SILO, UH, SEEMS TO REFERENCE, UM, NAMES, UM, GENERALS, UH, THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNION ARMY, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BATTLE OF THE VICKSBURG.

UM, SO TAKING IT AS A WHOLE, UM, IT APPEARS IS THAT THERE, WASN'T JUST A REFERENCE TO THE CONFEDERACY, ALTHOUGH YOU DO HAVE, UH, THOSE STREETS THAT ARE WITHIN THAT SECTION THAT ARE NAMED FOR, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, MEMBERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONFEDERATE ARMY.

UM, BUT YOU HAVE, UM, WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE THEME OF THE ENTIRE