1. OATHS OF OFFICE TO BE ADMINISTERED TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AS FOLLOWS: PLACE 2 – JAKE HAYES, PLACE 4 – WILL CARPENTER, AND PLACE 6 – MELINDA REEVES.

[1. OATHS OF OFFICE TO BE ADMINISTERED TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AS FOLLOWS: PLACE 2 – JAKE HAYES, PLACE 4 – WILL CARPENTER, AND PLACE 6 – MELINDA REEVES. ]

SUSIE. WE'RE GOING TO START ON THIS END WITH MISS REEVES, IF THAT'S OKAY.

MISS REEVES, IF YOU'LL RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

YES, PLEASE. AND REPEAT AFTER ME. I MELINDA REEVES.

I MELINDA REEVES. DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR. DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES.

THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER PLACE SIX OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER PLACE SIX OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND WILL DO TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY AND WILL DO TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY.

PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND. PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS, THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE. SO HELP ME GOD.

SO HELP ME GOD. THANK YOU, MR. CARPENTER. YES, MA'AM.

READY? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. I STATE YOUR NAME.

I, WILLIAM RALPH CARPENTER, THE THIRD ESQUIRE, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR.

DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL.

MEMBER. PLACE FOUR OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL PLACE FOUR.

AND OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.

AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND, PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS, THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, AND OF THIS STATE AND THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE.

SO HELP ME GOD. SO HELP ME GOD. THANK YOU, SIR.

YES, MA'AM. LAST BUT NOT LEAST. MR. HAYES. ALL RIGHT.

WE WILL RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. I STATE YOUR NAME.

I, JAKE HAYES, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR. DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES.

THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, PLACE TWO OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBER PLACE TWO, OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.

AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY AND WILL TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND, PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS, THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE. SO HELP ME GOD. SO HELP ME GOD.

THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SUSAN. THANK YOU, MELINDA.

THESE ARE CERTIFICATES OF ELECTION FOR THOSE NEWLY ELECTED COUNCIL FOLKS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE AND CONTINUED SERVICE.

ALL RIGHT. ITEM TWO, CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM,

[2. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER TO SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.07 OF THE CITY’S CHARTER]

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.07 OF THE CITY CHARTER.

WELL, I GUESS I'LL JUST ASK THIS QUESTION. IS ANYBODY WANTING TO RELINQUISH THEIR POSITION OR POST THAT THEY CURRENTLY HOLD? HEARING NONE, I WILL MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OFFICES AS IS.

LOOK FOR A SECOND. SECOND. AND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? MAYOR, IF YOU'LL JUST ANNOUNCE WHAT THAT MEANS.

WHO ARE FOR THE EVERYONE LISTENING. ALL RIGHT.

MELINDA REEVES IS CURRENTLY THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND WILL CARPENTER IS DEPUTY PRO TEM.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

[00:10:03]

AYE. OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. ITEM THREE. SUZIE, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, SIR. WE DON'T. VERY GOOD. WELL, WE WILL BE ENTERING INTO A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS.

[4. WAV-25-0001 – A REQUEST BY KYLE GILL, AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR LIBERTAS DECATUR, LP, PROPERTY OWNER, PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF DECATUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, SECTION 702: MAJOR WAIVERS; TO MODIFY THE TREE SURVEY REQUIREMENTS TO PERMIT SURVEYING SIX (6), FOUR (4) ACRE PLOTS, FOR A TOTAL OF TWENTY-FOUR (24) ACRES, INSTEAD OF SURVEYING THE ENTIRE 200.447 ACRES, AS IS REQUIRED BY THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1800 N US HWY 81-287 BUSINESS, DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS. (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-0)]

THE FIRST ONE IS ITEM FOUR, AND WE WILL OPEN THAT UP AT 6:10.

THIS IS A WAIVER 2 25001 TO MODIFY A TREE SURVEY REQUIREMENT TO PERMIT SURVEYING 6 FOUR ACRE LOTS, FOR A TOTAL OF 24 ACRES. HAVE A REPORT FOR US.

YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING. LISA HANNAN, PLANNING DIRECTOR.

I'D LIKE TO ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS A WAIVER 25-0001 FOR NATURE CREEK RESERVE.

SO JUST TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY PURPOSE OF A TREE SURVEY IN OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IS TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF TREES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND TO GET A MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF TREES DURING DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY.

OUR GENERAL REQUIREMENTS PROHIBIT CLEAR CUTTING OF TREES UNLESS IT'S PART OF AN APPROVED DEVELOPMENT.

AS PART OF THEIR APPROVED FINAL PLAT CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND AN ENGINEERED SITE PLAN.

SO OUR GENERAL REQUIREMENTS IN OUR SUBDIVISION CODE UNDER LANDSCAPING IS TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING NATURAL LANDSCAPE, MAINTAIN AN AREA OF STREET FRONTAGE FOR GOOD LANDSCAPING.

USE TREES FROM THE APPROVED LIST AND GIVE THE DEVELOPER PROPER TREE CREDITS FOR ANY PRESERVED TREES THAT ARE ON THE SITE.

THE CODE DOES REQUIRE THAT THERE IS A TREE SURVEY FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS, FINAL PLATS, AND CLEARING AND GRADING PERMITS.

THERE ARE TREE REMOVAL FEES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION ONLY, AND THE COST TO REMOVE THE TREE PER PROTECTED TREE PER CALIPER INCH PER TREE IS LISTED.

CAN I STOP? WHAT IS A PROTECTED TREE? IT'S ON THE DEFINITION.

SO IS IT LIKE A. SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A TRASH TREE? CORRECT. CORRECT. IT'S ON THE LIST THAT'S LISTED IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.

I DON'T HAVE THEM ALL MEMORIZED YET. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT.

IT WOULDN'T BE LIKE AN INVASIVE TREE. OR LIKE YOU SAID, THE TRASH TREES THAT AREN'T PROTECTED.

YOU'RE LOOKING LIKE OAK TREES AND PECAN TREES.

MORE OF YOUR NATIVE TREES. OKAY. SO THIS COMES TO A WAIVER REQUEST.

AGAIN, THE TREE SURVEY REQUIREMENTS IN OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SECTION 107.8 REQUIRES THE TREE SURVEY SUBMITTED WITH ALL PRELIMINARY PLATS.

HOWEVER, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 702 ALLOWS FOR A WAIVER REQUEST.

SO THEY'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER FROM THE ENTIRE NOT TO HAVE TO SURVEY THE ENTIRE 200 PLUS ACRES.

WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING IS 6 FOUR ACRE PLOTS FOR 24 ACRES.

AND IF YOU'LL LOOK, THESE ARE MORE OF THE HEAVILY WOODED AREAS OF THE PROPERTY.

SO IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE UNDER THE WAIVER REQUEST THERE ARE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED.

SO I'LL TRY TO GO THROUGH THEM PRETTY QUICK FOR US. SO THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO DIFFER FROM A SPECIFIC STANDARD, WHICH ALLOWS THIS WAIVER REQUEST TO MOVE FORWARD.

THAT AS FOR THE NATURE OF THE PROPOSED LAND USE AND EXISTING LAND USE.

SO THEY'RE PROPOSING 694 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS.

GREEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACE. AND IT IS THE LAND USE IS TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE JUST WENT THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE ON THIS.

ADDITIONAL FACTORS. THEY WANT TO KNOW THE NUMBER OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

AND AGAIN, 694 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. NO COMMERCIAL IS PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

EFFECT ON PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY WELFARE. THE REQUEST IS JUST TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE TREE SURVEY AREA, THE MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING TREES, AND THIS IS FROM THE APPLICANT SHOWING THE AREAS WHERE MOST OF THE TREES WILL BE REMOVED WILL BE AFFECTED.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE AFFECTED DURING ANY OF THE CLEARING AND GRADING AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.

PROPER DRAINAGE IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED DURING AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION, SO IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THE AREA OUTLINED IN RED FOR WHERE THE MAJOR TREE REMOVAL AREA IS, IS APPROXIMATELY 35 TO 40%, BASED ON THE TOTAL LAND AREA.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES. THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THIS PROPERTY FALLS APPROXIMATELY 100FT FROM THE RAILROAD TRACKS TO BUSINESS 287, AND REQUIRING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO BE SURVEYED COULD POTENTIALLY CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE DEVELOPER.

THE WAIVER NECESSARY FOR PRESERVATION ENJOYMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

[00:15:03]

THE WAIVER WOULD ALLOW A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IN IN SIX FOUR ACRE PLOTS TO BE SURVEYED.

IT WON'T BE DETRIMENTAL TO HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND NOT INJURIOUS TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

IT WILL NOT HAVE AN EFFECT ON FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS.

ANY WAIVER REQUESTS WOULD STAND ON ITS OWN MERIT.

HARDSHIP IS NOT A MERE INCONVENIENCE. IT'S NOT.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE SIZE AND TOPOGRAPHY OF THE PROPERTY MAKE A FULL SURVEY CHALLENGING, AND THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO SURVEY SIX PLOTS THAT ARE SOME OF THE MORE HEAVILY WOODED AREAS. THE EXISTING TREES ALONG THE CREEK ARE TO BE PRESERVED.

THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, SO THEY HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS.

EACH RESIDENTIAL LOT WILL HAVE A MINIMUM OF TWO TREES INSTALLED DURING DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THEIR CO.

THIS WILL REPLACE CLOSE TO 1400 TREES ON THE PROPERTY.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE AREAS OF WHERE MOST OF THE TREES WILL BE REMOVED.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS THAT ARE NOT HEAVILY WOODED.

SO PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATIONS FOR 49 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE FORMAL RESPONSE OF AN OPPOSED STAFF HAS HAD OTHER INFORMAL INQUIRIES IN PERSON AND VIA EMAIL.

THEY JUST DID NOT SUBMIT ANY TYPE OF OPPOSITION, NEUTRAL OR IN FAVOR OF.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS A REQUEST TO WAIVE THE TREE SURVEY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY ONLY.

AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, DEVELOPMENT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THE STAFF WILL ALSO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER REGARDING ANY MITIGATION PROCESS WHEN THE CIVIL PLANS ARE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6 TO 0 AND IT IS AN ACTION ITEM.

VERY GOOD. WHAT? GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR. I THINK WILL HAD HIS HAND UP FIRST.

GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. JAKE. I DEFER TO YOU. SO HOW DO YOU KNOW? HOW WILL WE KNOW HOW MANY TREES THEY REMOVE? OR WILL WE KNOW HOW MANY TREES THEY REMOVED? BECAUSE. AM I JUST FOR ME? AM I READING IT RIGHT THAT IF THEY REMOVE A TREE 5 TO 9 INCHES, IT'S $500, 10 TO 14IN, IT'S A THOUSAND AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

THAT'S HOW WE ARE INTERPRETING IT, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S DIFFICULT TO IT'S A LITTLE AMBIGUOUS IN THE CODE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH A MITIGATION PROCESS WITH THE DEVELOPER.

WHEN THEY COME IN, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME IN WITH THE PORTION OF THE TREE SURVEY SO WE CAN GET A GOOD ESTIMATE AND BE ABLE TO EXTRAPOLATE THE NUMBERS SO WE CAN GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR THE TREES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PRESERVE, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE CREEK LINE AND IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA.

AND CREDIT FOR THE ONES THAT THEY ARE GOING TO REPLACE.

SO WE WILL BE WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH THE DEVELOPER WHEN IT COMES, WHEN THEY GET SUBMIT ALL THE SHOVEL PLANS, BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE TO HAVE LANDSCAPE PLANS TO BE SUBMITTED AT THAT TIME.

BUT MY QUESTION, IN A LOT OF THESE LOW LYING AREAS THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS TREE SURVEY, A LOT OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE TRASH TREES. THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THE TRASH TREES ARE GROWING.

SO THOSE TREES WON'T BE REPLACED. AND WE'VE GOT ANOTHER 60% THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO LOOK AT THAT THEY CAN CLEAR CUT AND WE CAN COME BACK AND PUT TWO TREES IN THE FRONT YARD. INSTEAD OF GIVING A WAIVER ON THE WHOLE THING.

FIGURE OUT HOW MANY TREES THERE TRULY ARE. UNDERSTAND THE NUMBERS AND THEN LOOK AT IT.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO CLUE WHAT'S ON THE OTHER 60%.

THOSE COULD ALL BE, YOU KNOW, BEAUTIFUL LIVE OAKS AND WE'RE GOING TO CLEAR CUT THOSE.

BUT WHAT WE HAVE IN THE DRAINAGE AREAS IS, YOU KNOW, HACKBERRIES AND THOSE ARE ALL GOING TO GET CUT DOWN AND THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANYTHING REQUIRED TO REPLACE THEM. SO WE'RE GOING TO TRASH ALL THE TRASH TREES AND ALSO GET RID OF ALL THE GOOD TREES BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOOK AT THEM.

AND IF WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MITIGATE THIS, LET'S ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT AND THEN COME TOGETHER WITH A PLAN INSTEAD OF THE PLAN IS WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO LOOK AT 60% OF IT. WE'RE JUST GOING TO LOOK AT THIS 40% THAT WE KNOW THAT ONLY 10% OF THOSE TREES ARE SAVABLE.

OR I GUESS A BETTER QUESTION IS, HOW WERE THESE SECTIONS IDENTIFIED THAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE SECTION THAT THE SURVEY IS DONE? LIKE IF YOU GO BACK TO THE SLOT, THE WHAT WAS IT RIGHT THERE? YEAH. SO HOW WERE THESE AREAS IDENTIFIED, THESE AREAS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED THROUGH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AS SOME OF THE

[00:20:05]

MORE HEAVILY WOODED AREAS. AND WE WERE THINKING WE COULD GET A BETTER GRASP OF THE TYPES OF TREES AND POTENTIAL NUMBER OF TREES.

SO YOU GUYS HELPED IDENTIFY THESE FOR. YES, SIR.

123456. SIX SECTIONS. GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR. YES.

THANK YOU. SO, WILL MR. GILL GIVE THE I'M SORRY, WILL, MR. GILL, OKAY. SO WHAT TWO TREES? SO IS IT A FRUIT TREE AND A SHADE TREE? OR I CAN HAVE TWO SHADE TREES OR TWO FRUIT TREES OR.

ONE IS AN ORNAMENTAL TREE AND ONE IS A TREE ON OUR PROTECTED TREE SPECIES.

SO IT WOULD BE MORE OF A NATIVE TREE LIKE AN OAK OR PECAN.

THANK YOU. AND THAT IS IN THEIR PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE GROUP? IT'D BE MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BASICALLY, YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THE SIX FOUR ACRE AREAS AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE OF THE ACREAGE. THAT'S WHAT WE ATTEMPTED TO DO.

AND THAT WAS A THAT WAS DONE JOINTLY. YES, SIR.

OKAY. ONE MORE QUESTION. SO THIS IS JUST APPROVING THE SURVEY AND THEN THERE WILL BE PROBABLY ANOTHER VARIANCE OR SOMETHING THAT COMES BEFORE US ON HOW MUCH THEY CAN CUT DOWN. OR WILL THAT BE SOMETHING YOU GUYS DECIDE OR? THAT IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WILL WORK WITH THEM THROUGH WHEN WE GET THE CIVIL PLANS AND SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL DRAINAGE CIVIL PLANS ARE, HOW MUCH IS BEING REMOVED AND HOW MUCH IS BEING REPLACED ON THEIR LANDSCAPE PLAN.

THEN IF THEY IF STAFF WERE WORKING THROUGH THE MITIGATION PROCESS, AS FAR AS THE FEES TO BE PAID, IT'S THAT'S POTENTIAL THAT THEY COULD ASK FOR FORGIVENESS ON THAT OR A VARIANCE ON THAT.

IF THEY DON'T AND THEY ADD MORE TREES THAN WE ARE ABLE TO SAVE MORE TREES THAN WHAT'S ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED, THEN STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH THEM.

YOU SAID OUR ORDINANCE IS KIND OF NOT WELL WRITTEN IN THIS AREA.

NO. WHAT, HOW DOES IT DIFFER FROM OTHER CITIES OR WHAT HOW SHOULD IT BE WRITTEN? WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THAT. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY TO APPLY A TREE ORDINANCE, LANDSCAPING ORDINANCE TO THIS. LOOKING AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT FEATURES ON THIS.

THE TREE SURVEYS AND THE MITIGATION PROCESS ARE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OTHER THINGS WITH ZERO SCAPING AND THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT.

THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT POSSIBILITIES OF DIRECTIONS TO GO WITH THAT.

BUT IT'S A MATTER OF REWRITING THAT ORDINANCE.

YEAH. BUT IF THIS IS APPROVED, CAN THEY STILL GO OUT THERE AND CUT THESE TREES DOWN, OR WILL IT COME BACK BEFORE US ONE MORE TIME? SO IN REALITY, THESE TREES WILL HAVE TO GO AWAY IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THERE IS NOT A WAY TO SAVE THE TREES THAT ARE IN THAT AREA.

EVEN IF YOU WERE TO SAVE SOME OF THE TREES IN THAT AREA WITH THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING IN THERE, IT'S GOING TO DISTURB THE ROOTS IN THOSE AREAS, AND EVENTUALLY THOSE TREES WILL END UP DYING.

SO THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS MITIGATION ON HOW WE GET BACK TO A GOOD SPOT WHERE WE HAVE SOME NICE TREED AREAS THAT ARE IN THERE. WE'RE ABLE TO REPLACE SOME OF THE ONES THAT, THAT DO GET TAKEN OUT AND KEEP SOME OF THESE NICER TREES THAT ARE IN THESE GREEN AREAS. BUT THERE'S NOT A WAY TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT CLEARING THAT PROPERTY AND THAT THAT IS ALLOWED FOR IN OUR ORDINANCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY TO CLEAR CUT IT FOR DEVELOPMENT.

WITH THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND APPROVED CIVIL PLANS.

OKAY. I KNOW THIS KIND OF CAME UP OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS.

THIS WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT HAD A RIDE, YOU KNOW, AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY.

IT NOW SEEMS LIKE IT'S A REALLY BIG DEAL BECAUSE IT WAS ALWAYS THERE.

I MEAN, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN LOOKED AT, IT'S NOT A SURPRISE AND LIKE I SAID, I JUST STRUGGLE WITH GETTING, YOU KNOW, JUST NOT LOOKING AT 60% OF IT. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GIVE THEM A VARIANCE OR TRY TO FIGURE THINGS OUT, LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE REALLY GIVING A VARIANCE ON, NOT 40% OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S THERE.

I MEAN, THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION IS I THINK IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE THERE HASN'T BEEN A PROPERTY WITH THIS MANY TREES DEVELOPED

[00:25:03]

HERE. RHONDA, IF I MAY JUST ONE MOMENT, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT LOOKS LIKE, YEP THAT ONE.

OH. THAT ONE? YEAH. OKAY. EDDIE TO YOUR POINT AND SOMEONE ELSE SAID IT.

I DIDN'T CATCH WHO SAID IT. THE DENSITY OF TREES ON THIS PROPERTY IS HIGH.

SO BY AGREEING WITH THE DEVELOPERS AND STAFF ON SIX AREAS, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME APPLIED LOGIC HERE.

WE'LL TAKE THE SURVEY FROM THOSE SIX AREAS AND APPLY THAT TO THE LARGER ACREAGE.

THAT WILL GIVE US A GOOD STARTING POINT SO THEY CAN MOVE ON TO THEIR CIVIL PLANNING PROCESS.

THEN THROUGH THAT PROCESS, X AMOUNT OF TREES ARE BEING TAKEN OUT, X AMOUNT OF TREES ARE BEING REPLACED.

THEY'LL WORK WITH STAFF TO FIGURE OUT THE DELTA.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANOTHER PROJECT LIKE THIS.

THAT IS TYPICALLY ALSO WHEN WE FIND THAT OUR ORDINANCES NEED SOME HELP, IS WHEN WE FIND SOME OF THESE ONE OFF PROCESSES THAT REALLY CHALLENGE OUR ORDINANCES TO FIND WHAT IS FAIR FOR ALL CONCERNED, IF YOU WILL.

SO IT'S KIND OF A UNIQUE SITUATION, BUT I THINK STAFF AND THE DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB AT FINDING A MIDDLE GROUND BASED ON SOME ASSUMED LOGIC HERE IN THE SIX SPOTS. THANK YOU, SIR. AND THE ORIGINAL ASK ON THIS WAS TO WAIVE THE TREE SURVEY ALTOGETHER, AND WE CAME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF MIDDLE GROUND WITH THE DEVELOPER TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO EXTRAPOLATE THE AMOUNT OF TREES THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH ON THIS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? SUZIE, DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN PUBLIC WHO HAS SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM? NO, SIR, BUT MR. GILL IS HERE AND HE IS AVAILABLE IF ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.

YES. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL OR ADD SOME INFORMATION FOR US OR A REPRESENTATIVE? SO YES, THIS HAS BEEN A MAJOR ISSUE FOR GOSH WELL, ON ALMOST TWO YEARS NOW WHEN WE FIRST STARTED LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY.

SO THERE MAY BE A LITTLE MISUNDERSTANDING. I THINK, WAYNE, MAYBE OUR ORIGINAL, ACTUALLY, OUR REQUEST WAS TO WAIVE THE TREE SURVEY IN ITS ENTIRETY. I THINK THIS IS WHAT STAFF WANTED TO SEE, THE SIX AREAS.

BUT WE HAVE NOT NECESSARILY AGREED TO THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE EXORBITANT COST AND EFFORT THAT HAS TO GO INTO THOSE TREE SURVEYS. BUT PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY ON THIS PROPERTY, WHEN WE GO TO GRADE IT, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAVE ANY OF THESE TREES.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WHAT WE HAVE IN ALL OF OUR OPEN SPACE AREAS, WE DO PLAN TO SAVE ALL THOSE TREES.

WE'D LIKE TO SAVE SOME OF THE TREES AT THE ENTRANCE OF BOTH ROADWAYS.

TREES SELL HOUSES, AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO US.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO GET THE HOUSE ON THE GROUND AS WELL.

AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THE GRADING PLAN JUST REQUIRES THAT WE'VE GOT TO LEVEL THE SITE, AND WE JUST CAN'T SAVE THE TREES. DO YOU HAVE THAT SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS OUR COLORED SITE PLAN? AND SOMEBODY PULLED THAT UP, AND I CAN LET TIM TALK MORE ABOUT THE GRADES.

BUT YOU KNOW, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, ALONG THE RAILROAD TRACK, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A 25 FOOT BUFFER AREA WHERE WE PLAN TO TRY TO PRESERVE AS MANY OF THOSE TREES ALONG THE RAILROAD AS POSSIBLE.

BUT ONCE YOU GET OFF OF THAT 25 FOOT AREA, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PROBABLY 10 TO 12FT OF RETAINING WALLS THAT GO DOWN.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT OUT THAT MUCH DIRT JUST TO BALANCE THE SIDE OUT, AND THAT WILL TEAR ALL THE WAY DOWN TO BUSINESS TO 87.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE 100 FOOT HIGHER AT THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAN YOU ARE AT BUSINESS 287.

ANY QUESTIONS? SO YOU'RE NOT IN AGREEMENT TO THE SIX SECTIONS FOR A SURVEY? I THINK WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO GET THIS DONE.

THE I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT IS THE END GAME? BECAUSE WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAVE THE TREES, WHICH IS WHY WE TRIED TO BUILD THE PD WITH EXTRA TREES

[00:30:04]

BUILT INTO IT. TO DO THE TWO TREES INSTEAD OF ONE, FOR INSTANCE, SO WE COULD GET CLOSER TO THAT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S 1388 TREES THAT WILL BE PLANTED.

SO AT THE END OF THIS, IF YOU TAKE OUT, LET'S SAY YOU TAKE OUT 3000 TREES, THEN YOUR VISION IS THAT THE REPLACEMENT OF THE 1300 AND SOME ODD TREES FOR THE SUBDIVISION IS ADEQUATE.

I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER WAY AROUND IT, GIVEN THE GRADES THAT ARE OUT THERE.

RIGHT. RIGHT. YEAH. PLUS, THE FEES WOULD MAKE IT JUST NOT FEASIBLE.

AND I GUESS THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME SORT OF SURVEY, AND I GET NATE, WHAT YOU'RE KIND OF SAYING IS WE'LL KIND OF EXTRAPOLATE THE DATA FROM THESE SIX SECTIONS AND SAY IF THERE'S 30 OAK TREES PER SECTION PER SIX SECTIONS WILL APPLY THAT TO THE WHOLE BALANCE OF THE 600 ACRES.

YES, SIR. OKAY, I GET IT, I GET THAT. THAT'S GOOD.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TIM WELCH, WELCH ENGINEERING, 6253 MEADOW LAKES DRIVE, NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS. GOING BACK TO THE EXTRAPOLATION, YOU TALK ABOUT THOSE 30 TREES FOR THE ENTIRE SITE.

A LOT OF THE SITE IS VACANT. OKAY. SO HOW IS THAT JUSTIFIED THAT YOU COULD JUST TAKE ONE GENERAL AREA AND APPLY IT ACROSS THE ENTIRE BOARD, WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE APPROXIMATELY 35 TO 40% OF TREE COVERAGE? I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH YOU. SO MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST DO THE SURVEY FOR THE WHOLE THING.

AND MOST OF THE TREES ARE ALL TRASH TREES OUT THERE.

I MEAN, A LOT OF THE TREES THAT WE WANT TO TRY TO PRESERVE IS COMING OFF A BUSINESS 287 81 RIGHT THERE.

THAT'S A VERY FLAT AREA RIGHT THERE. THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR YOU GUYS, BECAUSE IT WOULD SAVE YOU A LOT OF MONEY IF YOU DID THE WHOLE SURVEY, AND THEN WE WOULD KNOW HOW MANY TRASH TREES THERE ARE.

NO, WE WOULDN'T TIE DOWN TRASH TREES. WE WOULD TIE DOWN THE NECESSARY TREES.

DUDE WHAT? SAY THAT AGAIN. TIE DOWN THE TREES REQUIRED FOR THE ORDINANCE.

WE WOULDN'T TIE DOWN A LOT OF TRASH TREES OUT THERE.

RIGHT, BUT THE SURVEY WOULD DETERMINE HOW MANY TRASH TREES THERE ARE.

SO IF 90% OF THE TRASH OF THE TREES ARE TRASH, THEN YOU WOULDN'T OWE THE MONEY OR HAVE TO REPLACE ANY OF THE 90% OF TRASH TREES. THE THING IS, 95% OF THE SITE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE REGRADED IF YOU CAN'T REGRADE IT.

I MEAN, THIS SITE IS [INAUDIBLE] TO A TEN FOOT RETAINING WALLS AROUND THE SIDES.

IT'S GOING TO BE STAIR STEPPED ALL THE WAY DOWN. I MEAN, IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH YOUR GRADING CRITERIA, WE WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE ALL THE TREES AND MAKE THE GRADING.

SO YOU'RE [INAUDIBLE] FROM BEGINNING WITH YOUR GRADING CONTROL ALREADY.

RIGHT. BUT THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME WE HAVE TO KNOW SOME WAY ON HOW MANY TREES? HOW MANY OF THE PROTECTED TREES ARE BEING REMOVED? WELL, THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE WAIVER THAT ALLOW US TO JUST REMOVE ALL THE TREES THAT WE FEEL.

AND THEN NOT KNOW HOW MANY TREES YOU REMOVED.

WELL, THAT'S WHY THE PD IS PUT IN PLACE FOR THOSE 1400 TREES.

SO YEAH. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THERE'S ONLY 1400 TREES.

YOUR ESTIMATION IS THERE'S ONLY 1400 TREES THAT WILL BE REMOVED.

I'VE BEEN WALKING ACROSS THIS SITE. THERE'S LIKE I SAID, THERE'S PROBABLY NOT THAT MANY 1400 TREES OUT THERE. GOOD TREES TO KEEP, BE HONEST WITH YOU. AND RIGHT NOW, IT'S A JUNGLE OUT THERE.

RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE ANYTHING IN THERE. WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO THAT WOULD BE GREAT FOR Y'ALL BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD KEEP IT AS YOU HAVE IT IN HERE OF 1300 OR 1300 TREES. AND SO THEN YOU WOULDN'T OWE ANY MONEY FOR THE PENALTIES FOR TAKING OUT GOOD TREES. YEAH. THAT WAS THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.

SO YEAH. SO MAYBE THE WHOLE SURVEY IS THE WAY TO GO SO WE'D KNOW.

WELL, THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE WAIVER REQUESTED IN LIEU OF THAT. YES.

SO YEAH. RIGHT. SO IN LIEU OF THAT, WE DO THE SURVEY LIKE STAFF HAS REQUESTED.

AND THEN WE EXTRAPOLATE THAT DATA. I DON'T IT'S I THINK I MEAN I'M NOT REALLY A FAN OF THIS WAIVER.

I'LL VOTE FOR IT. I THINK IT'S THE STAFF HAS DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF COMING UP WITH IT.

BUT IT'S DEFINITELY EITHER THIS WAIVER OR DO THE SURVEY.

I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY TWO OPTIONS. AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT THOSE SIX AREAS THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL DO BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF.

OKAY, GOOD. HEY, JAKE, IF I MAY, JUST A POINT OF CLARITY.

YOU ASKED THE QUESTION, WOULD WE TAKE THE SIX AREAS THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING AND APPLY IT TO THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY? NO. TO WELCH'S, MR. WELCH'S POINT. WE WOULD NOT APPLY IT TO AREAS OF OPEN SPACE.

WE WOULD APPLY IT TO THE ACREAGE THAT'S REPRESENTED HERE, WHERE THERE ARE TREES.

[00:35:02]

WE WOULDN'T. IF YOU DID IT TO THE ENTIRE 200 ACRES, THAT WOULD BE PUNISHING THE DEVELOPERS.

THAT'S THE INTENT, IS TO COVER THE DENSITY OF THE EXISTING TREES.

I ASSUMED LOGIC ON THESE SIX SPACES, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED ME.

JAKE. WE WOULD NOT APPLY IT TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.

RATHER, WE WOULD APPLY IT TO THE TREED AREA OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD BE SOME VERSION OF THIS IMAGE RIGHT HERE BEFORE YOU.

BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER'S TEAM HAS SAID FROM THE BEGINNING THEY HOPE TO KEEP TREES NEAR THE ENTRANCE NEAR THE EDGE WHERE THE GREEN SPACE IS AT.

SO THOSE AREAS WEREN'T ORIGINALLY A CONCERN. AND THIS PARTICULAR MAP WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER OF THIS. SO THOSE TREES WILL BE TAKEN OUT LIKE THAT THAT'S WHAT THIS MAP IS SHOWING.

THOSE TREES WILL BE IN THE RED AREAS WILL BE GONE.

AND WE'LL USE THAT DATA FOR THOSE AREAS. YES.

WELL, THE DATA IS FROM THE 6 FOUR ACRE LOTS. THOSE ARE.

YES. THE MATH IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ACREAGE THAT WAS ON THE PRIOR PAGE.

AND ANY OF THE FEES WOULD COME FROM THOSE SIX AREAS.

THE AVERAGE EXTRAPOLATE ACROSS THOSE AREAS THAT ARE THERE WOULD TAKE THAT DATA THAT WE GAIN FROM THOSE SURVEYED AREAS AND APPLY IT TO ALL OF THOSE. WHERE THERE ARE TREES. I'M RIGHT THERE WITH JAKE.

I UNDERSTAND WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT. AND YOU EITHER DO THE WHOLE THING OR THIS.

NOT REAL EXCITED ABOUT IT AND I KNOW THE TREES HAVE TO COME OUT.

BUT THE 1388 FIVE GALLON LIVE OAKS AND BRADFORD PEARS, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, IN 30 YEARS, THEY'LL HAVE A TREE. BUT, I MEAN, AND I THINK WHERE JAKE'S SAYING IT'S LIKE IF YOU DID THE WHOLE THING AND THERE'S NO TREES OUT THERE, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE, I THINK IS WHAT HE'S TRYING TO SAY IS BECAUSE IF THERE'S A 20 ACRE PLOT AND THERE'S NO TREES IN IT, WHAT'S WRONG WITH DOING THE TREE SURVEY AND THAT? AND IF WE LOOK AT THE WHOLE THING AND THERE'S NOT 1388 TREES THAT IN AND YOU'RE NOT GETTING, I DON'T WANT TO SAY FINE BUT HAVE A FEE FOR TAKING OUT SUCH A LARGE TREE.

WHY AREN'T WE JUST LOOKING AT THE SMALL ONES? BECAUSE THERE'S ALL THESE BIG AREAS. WHY ARE WE NOT LOOKING AT THOSE ALSO? AND I KNOW YOU DIDN'T WANT TO A TREE SURVEY AT ALL.

AND I THINK THAT WAS PART OF IT FROM KIND OF GROUND ZERO.

BUT THAT ALSO WASN'T ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS KIND OF NEGOTIATED OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS OF US TO GET TO WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.

I DON'T KNOW. IT IS WHAT IT IS, I'M AFRAID. BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A LOT OF GOOD TREES, AND WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THEM EITHER WAY. AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO REPLACE A THREE FOOT DIAMETER TREE.

I MEAN, IT CAN'T BE DONE. SO IT'S NOT OUR PREFERENCE EITHER.

IF WE CAN KEEP EVERY TREE OUT THERE, WE WOULD.

THAT WOULD BE ONLY TO OUR BENEFIT. BUT YOU CAN SEE THE OPEN SPACE AREAS THAT WE'VE GOT AND SOME OF THE AMENITIES THAT WE HAVE PLANNED. AND I CAN PROMISE YOU, WE WANT EVERY TREE IN THERE THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY KEEP UP BECAUSE THAT THAT WILL BE A HUGE SELLING FEATURE OF THIS DEAL. SO.

IS THE OBVIOUSLY THE OPEN SPACE IS GREEN. THERE WAS A YELLOW.

I CAN'T READ THE LEGEND ON THAT. WHAT IS THE YELLOW? THAT'S THE DRILL SITE THAT'S. YEAH, BUT. THE DRILL SITE AND THE GAS LINES THAT ARE THERE.

OKAY. WHICH THOSE HAVE ALREADY BEEN CLEARED, ESSENTIALLY.

UNDERSTAND. WELL, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND THE CARE OF COUNCIL.

I ALSO WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT. I APPRECIATE CITY STAFF COMING UP WITH A WAY OF REVIEWING THE POSSIBILITY WITHOUT DOING 100%. I MEAN, THE SAMPLING, I MEAN, THERE'S SOME REAL LOGIC TO THAT PROCESS THAT IT WOULD BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE ENTIRETY OF THOSE TWO ZONED AREAS. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR COMING UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN.

MAYOR, THERE IS ONE PERSON THAT'S IN OPPOSITION AND HE IS ONLINE.

OKAY. VERY GOOD. AND ALSO THE OPPOSITION IS ON YOUR ON THE DAIS, IT HAS TO HAVE A LETTER ON THE BACK THAT HE HAS PROVIDED TO COUNCIL AND STAFF. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY HARONDAY.

[00:40:07]

ARE WE DO WE GIVE ME THE THUMBS UP OR. I ASKED HIM TO.

OKAY. VERY GOOD. IF YOU WOULD JUST STATE YOUR STATE, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

MR. IRWIN, IF YOU'RE ONLINE AND CAN HEAR US THE MAYOR'S CALLING FOR YOU TO SPEAK.

WELL, HEARING NOTHING, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION THAT EVERYBODY ON COUNCIL HAS RECEIVED.

DO WE? WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WAS ONLINE TO ATTEMPT TO COMMUNICATE TO US? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT. SO DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM CITY STAFF? NO, SIR. JUST ONE MORE QUICK, NATE. OR STAFF, WHATEVER.

WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, IF WE PUT, LIKE, TWO OF THOSE BOXES OR ONE OF THE TWO OF THE BOXES IN THE OPEN AREA AND THEN EXTRAPOLATE IT TO THE WHOLE. WHAT TO THE WOODED AREAS, 220, 220 ACRES OR, YOU KNOW, WOULDN'T THAT BE A WAY? AM I OFF BASE? I DON'T KNOW.

JAKE AM I HEARING YOU SAY TO REDUCE THE DENSITY OF TREES IN THE SIX.

BUT JUST TO APPLY IT TO THE WHOLE 220 ACRES, I MEAN.

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BECAUSE I SEE WHAT THE BOXES THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SELECTED ARE THE MOST DENSELY POPULATED AREAS OF THE LAND.

WITH TREES, YES. SO TO DECREASE THE SURVEY COST ON THEIR PART AND MAKE IT MORE REAL DATA.

IF YOU PUT ONE OR THERE'S GOT TO BE A, YOU KNOW, A MATHEMATICAL WAY TO DO IT TO PUT 1 OR 2 OF THOSE BOXES IN THE LESS DENSE AREAS.

AND THEN APPLY IT TO THE WHOLE 220 ACRES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I THINK IT MAKES SENSE. I CAN UNDERSTAND THE LOGIC BEHIND THAT ALSO.

BUT AND I'M GOOD WITH EITHER DIRECTION. WE'VE LOOKED AT IT FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT.

I'M SURE YOU HAVE. VIEWPOINTS . THIS IS WHAT WE'D COME UP WITH.

BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR LOGIC BEHIND THAT TO YOU KNOW, THAT BRINGS IT MORE TO THE OPEN SPACE BEING FIGURED INTO THAT.

AND THEN YOU DO THE WHOLE 200 ACRES, RATHER THAN JUST THE DENSELY TREED AREAS YEAH.

YEAH. AND I GET WHAT Y'ALL DID. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HIGHLIGHTED THE AREAS OF THE DENSE TREES THAT ARE GOING AWAY.

AND WE'RE GOING TO APPLY THIS TO THOSE AREAS.

IT MAKES, I MEAN IT MAKES SENSE I GUESS. HEY WAYNE, QUESTION.

SO IN TEXAS WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A GOOD TREE.

SO PECAN, OAK, CEDAR WE HAVE A WHOLE LIST ONLINE.

I CAN GET YOU THAT LIST. OKAY. OF THE TREES THAT ARE ON THERE, THAT'S FINE.

I DON'T NEED TO BREAK DOWN, BUT THAT'S OKAY. SO SAY WE EXTRAPOLATE THAT ALL SIX OF THOSE SURVEYED ZONES ARE ALL FULL OF GOOD TREES.

SO. OKAY. CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF A JUNK TREE? HACKBERRY. OKAY. CEDAR ELMS, I BELIEVE CEDAR ELMS ON THAT OR OFF THAT LIST? OKAY. THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF CEDAR TREES ON THAT PROPERTY, WHICH ARE PROBABLY NOT ON THE LIST OR NOT ON THE PROTECTED TREES, THEY WOULD BE CONSIDERED JUNK, RIGHT. SO THEY SAID AN ORNAMENTAL TREE.

WHAT DOES THE ORDINANCE SAY YOU HAVE TO REPLACE TREES WITH WHAT TYPE OF TREES.

[00:45:07]

SO IT TALKS ABOUT MITIGATION. AND YOU GET DIFFERENT CREDITS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF TREES.

GOTCHA. AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO IDENTIFY TYPES OF TREES, BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO DETERMINE THE DIAMETERS OF THOSE TREES.

YEAH. I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO PUT IN TWO TREES PER LOT AND THERE WOULD BE AN ORNAMENTAL AND A PROTECTED.

WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT AS FAR AS FOR YOUR ORNAMENTAL.

WE'VE GOT A LIST, TOO. AND RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT IS EITHER, BUT IT'S PART OF OUR PD. THERE'S NOT A TREE LIST IN THERE.

NO, IT'S JUST A DEFINITION.

I GUESS FOR MY OPINION FOR IF WAYNE, IF YOU ALL ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS, I'M ALL WE'RE DOING IS SURVEY AT THIS POINT ANYWAYS.

BUT TYPICALLY WE USE RED OAKS AND LIVE OAKS. THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT WE USE.

BUT THOSE ARE THOSE CONSIDERED ORNAMENTAL OR ONE OF THOSE CONSIDERED.

THOSE ARE HARDWOOD TREES. OKAY, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

I THINK THE QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE ORNAMENTAL? BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO LOOK UP. AND TYPICALLY AN ORNAMENTAL TREE IS A CEDAR ELM WHICH ARE NATIVE TO TEXAS ALL OVER THE PLACE.

THAT'S WHAT WE CALL ORNAMENTAL TREE. IT'S CLOSE TO A HARDWOOD, BUT IT'S NOT A HARDWOOD.

I JUST WAS HOPING YOU WEREN'T GOING TO PUT UP A LOT OF BRADFORD PEARS.

NO, WE DON'T EVER USE BRADFORD PEARS. OKAY, GOOD.

BECAUSE IT IS CONSIDERED AN ORNAMENTAL. THAT IS A TRASH TREE. IT'S, YOU KNOW, DESCRIBED AS AN ORNAMENTAL TREE.

BUT 40 YEARS, I'VE NEVER PLANTED IT A BRADFORD PEAR.

THANK YOU. AND DON'T EVER WANT TO. THIS, YOU KNOW, JUST TO CORRECT ONE THING.

WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW, NATE A LONG TIME AGO.

YES, SIR. IN OUR INITIAL MEETING, WE TALKED ABOUT THE SLOPE OF THIS PROPERTY AND THE TREE ISSUE.

WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE BECAUSE WITH ALL THE DRAINAGE ROADS AND THE TOPO THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH AND ALL THE RETAINING WALLS WE'RE GOING TO BUILD.

THERE'S NO WAY TO SAVE ANY TREES ON THIS PROPERTY EXCEPT IN THE GREEN SPACE AREAS.

AND IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. TO LOSE A LOT OF TREES UP THERE BEHIND THE WALMART IN THAT DEVELOPMENT.

AND A LOT OF THESE HARDWOODS, IN MY EXPERIENCE, I'M NOT AN ARBORIST, BUT I'VE SURE KILLED A LOT OF TREES.

IF YOU GET WITHIN TEN FEET WITH ONE OF THESE MACHINES TO ONE OF THESE TREES, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SURVIVE THREE YEARS.

THEY JUST DON'T. IT'S UNFORTUNATE, BUT IT'S JUST A FACT.

THEY LOOK GOOD FOR A WHILE, BUT THEY JUST DON'T SURVIVE IT.

SO RATHER THAN BEAT AROUND THE BUSH, WHEN WE MET WITH YOUR CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR AND JAKE, I THINK YOU WERE THERE. I KNOW WILL WAS THERE. WE DID TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE WITH WITH THE TREES AND THE SLOPE OF THIS PROPERTY.

IT'S JUST IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT IT'S GOT A LOT OF CHALLENGES.

SO THE SURVEY THAT WE CAME UP WITH, OBVIOUSLY WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT.

IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE. AND NOW THAT IT'S SUMMERTIME, IT'S GOING TO BE EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE.

AND IT TAKES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME. BUT AS A COMPROMISE, WE'LL DO THE AREAS THAT WE'VE COME UP WITH STAFF AND TRY TO COME UP WITH THE BEST COMPROMISE THAT WE CAN.

BUT IT'S JUST A VERY EXPENSIVE PROCESS. AND TREE ORDINANCES VARY FROM CITY TO CITY.

YOURS COULD PROBABLY BE TWEAKED A LITTLE BIT AND MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE USER FRIENDLY, BUT IT'S JUST A FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT, IT'S ALWAYS AN ISSUE. IT JUST ALWAYS IS BECAUSE YOU GOT A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY AND YOU WANT TO DEVELOP IT.

IT'S TREES ARE IN THE WAY. SO VERY GOOD. WELL I APPRECIATE YOUR WORDS.

WELL WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US AGAIN ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.

IT IS WAIVER 25-0001. IT IS THE WAIVER FOR SURVEYING 6 FOUR ACRE LOTS FOR THE TREE SURVEY. WE'VE HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC.

WE'VE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO US.

SO WHAT SAY YOU, COUNCIL? WELL, MR. MAYOR I WILL GO OUT ON A LIMB AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE, TO APPROVE WAIVER 25- 0001. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US.

[00:50:09]

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MOTION BEFORE US? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. SO WE HAVE TWO ABSTENTIONS OR TWO NAYS.

BUT THAT WAIVER, 25-0001 PASSES. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S COMMUNICATION AND DELIVERANCE ON THAT.

ALL RIGHT. AND WE WILL CLOSE ITEM FOUR AT 6:50.

[5. RP-25-0005 – 1200 N MILLER STREET. PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION, AND TAKE ACTION REGARDING A REQUEST TO REPLAT APPROXIMATELY 0.847 ACRES, LOT 5R, BLOCK 3, RANGE “K”, DEVEREAUX ADDITION, BEING A REPLAT OF LOTS 5 – 6, BLOCK 3, RANGE “K”, LOTS 1 AND 4, BLOCK NO. 4, RANGE “L” AND PART OF TILDEN STREET (NOT OPEN) IN THE DEVEREUX ADDITION, TO THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS. (WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING (WCCA)) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 4-0, COMMISSIONERS KLOSE AND HICKS RECUSED)]

ITEM FIVE WILL OPEN UP AT 6:51. THIS IS RP 2505.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO REPLAT APPROXIMATELY 0.847 ACRES.

YES, SIR. LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR. I'D LIKE TO ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS A REPLAT OF 1200 NORTH MILLER STREET, WHICH IS WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING.

A LITTLE LESS THAN AN ACRE ON LOT FIVE R, BLOCK THREE.

THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH THE OLD BUILDING AND REBUILD A NEW BUILDING.

WE DON'T HAVE PLANS YET. IT IS ZONED SINGLE FAMILY SF TWO, WHICH WILL REQUIRE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE PHILANTHROPIC USE.

THAT SUP APPLICATION IS RUNNING CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS REPLAT.

IT IS LEGALLY ABLE TO BE REPLATED. IT MEETS THE MINIMUM STANDARDS AND IT INCLUDES THE DEDICATION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR NORTH MILLER STREET.

AND AN APPROVAL, A DECISION CANNOT BE ARBITRARY ON A REPLAT.

PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATIONS. 14 OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED.

WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES AS OF FRIDAY OR TODAY, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REPLAT REQUEST.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 4 TO 0 WITH COMMISSIONERS MR. KLOSE AND HICKS RECUSED. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL, OR COMMENTS? DO YOU HAVE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION MAYOR.

MOVED TO APPROVE SUP 25-0002. [INAUDIBLE] RP 25-0005.

SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES AND WE WILL CLOSE ITEM FIVE AT 6:53.

AND WE'LL OPEN UP ITEM SIX AT 6:53. THIS IS SUP 25-0002.

[6. SUP-25-0002 – 1200 N MILLER STREET. A PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW PHILANTHROPIC USE IN AN SF-2, SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT, ON APPROXIMATELY 0.847 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1200 N MILLER STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. (WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING (WCCA) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 4-0, COMMISSIONERS KLOSE AND HICKS RECUSED)]

THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT OF APPROXIMATELY 0.847 ACRES.

YES, SIR. AGAIN, LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR.

I'D LIKE TO ENTER OUR STAFF, REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE, WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING, A PHILANTHROPIC USE AND A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

ACCORDING TO APPENDIX B, WHICH IS OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, IT ALLOWS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL OR DENIAL FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

AND UNDER OUR SECTION 6.1.2, TABLE SEVEN ALLOWS THAT PHILANTHROPIC USE WITH THE SUP.

WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING HAS BEEN IN OPERATION SINCE APPROXIMATELY 1984.

IT PROVIDES FREE MEALS, SOCIAL AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES FOR OUR UNDERSERVED LOCAL SENIORS.

AGAIN, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE AND REPLACE THE BUILDING.

WE'VE NOTIFIED 14 PROPERTY OWNERS. NO RESPONSES RECEIVED AS OF FRIDAY AND TODAY.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE SUP 25-0002 AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOUR TO NOTHING WITH COMMISSIONERS KLOSE AND HICKS RECUSED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? AND THIS IS THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT LITTLE REMINDER. BEFORE WE ASK FOR A MOTION.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC ON THAT? SUSIE.

ALL RIGHT, WE WILL CLOSE THAT ITEM AT 6:54. AND OPEN ITEM SEVEN AT 6:54.

[7. CP-25-0002 – PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, BY AMENDING APPENDIX D, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) LAND USE ON APPROXIMATELY 5.114 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1901 S TRINITY STREET, DECATUR, TEXAS. (RIVER OF LIFE CHURCH (ROLC)) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-0]

THIS IS CP-25-0002. AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR BY AMENDING APPENDIX D.

YES, SIR. THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

LISA HAMMOND, PLANNING DIRECTOR. I'LL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS RIVER OF LIFE CHURCH AT 1901 SOUTH TRINITY.

[00:55:01]

5.114 ACRES. THEY HAVE TWO PROPERTIES AND THEY ARE CHANGING THE LAND USE.

THE CURRENT EXISTING LAND USE IS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT SHOWS THE SURROUNDING ZONING AS THOROUGHFARE BUSINESS AND MULTIPLE FAMILY SURROUNDING THIS.

THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS GOING TO COMMUNITY. COMMERCIAL.

THE CHURCH IS PROPOSING AN EXPANSION FOR A MAIN SANCTUARY, MULTI-PURPOSE ROOMS FOR COMMUNITY PROGRAMS AND EVENTS, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES, PARKING AND LANDSCAPE AREAS.

THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2050 FOR THE SECONDARY LAND USE OF CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES.

SO THE ZONING AGAIN IS THOROUGHFARE BUSINESS C-2 AND MULTIPLE FAMILY, WHICH PERMITS THE PROPOSED USES OF THE CHURCH AND ACCESSORY USES.

13 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED AND NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED AS OF FRIDAY AND TODAY, DEVELOPMENT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF CP 25 0002, AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL SIX TO NOTHING.

THIS IS THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE FOR CP 25 0002.

ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.

ALL RIGHT. HEARING. HEARING NONE. OH. DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP IN PUBLIC FOR THIS? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THIS IS THE FIRST READING, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE ITEMS. THANK YOU. AT 6:56. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL OPEN UP ITEM EIGHT AT 6:56.

[8. ZC-25-0001. PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.0355-ACRE TRACT OF LAND IN THE A.J. WALKER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 860, IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING PART OF A CERTAIN CALLED 2.59-ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN CLERK'S FILE NUMBER 202406609, OFFICIAL RECORDS, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM MULTIPLE-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT TO THOROUGHFARE BUSINESS DISTRICT (C-2) ZONING DISTRICT. (RIVER OF LIFE CHURCH (ROLC)) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-0)]

THIS IS 25-0001. THIS IS A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.0355 ACRES.

YES, SIR. LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR, WILL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO, AGAIN, RIVER OF LIFE CHURCH, 1901 SOUTH TRINITY STREET.

A PORTION OF THEIR PROPERTY IS ZONED MULTIPLE FAMILY 2.59 ACRES.

SO THEY ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE THIS TO THOROUGHFARE REPAIR BUSINESS.

C2 A LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORY OF WHY THAT LITTLE SECTION WAS MULTIPLE FAMILY.

BACK IN 1985, IT WAS REZONED TO MULTIPLE FAMILY AND IT WAS PROPOSED FOR MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT IS ADJACENT TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY.

BUT THAT NEVER, I GUESS, CAME TO FRUITION. SO THEY ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AND ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE IT TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT.

SO IT IS WE'VE GOT APPLICATIONS, OF COURSE, IN PROCESS, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, THE REZONING APPLICATION, AND WE ARE WE'LL HAVE THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT AS WELL TONIGHT RUNNING CONCURRENTLY.

IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR SECONDARY LAND USE OF CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES.

11 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED AND WE RECEIVED NO RESPONSES AS OF FRIDAY AND TODAY.

DEVELOPMENT STAFF. EXCUSE ME RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REZONING REQUEST ZC 25-0001, AS DID THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? SUZIE, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC INPUT? NO SIR. WE DON'T. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE WILL CLOSE THAT ITEM EIGHT AT 6:58.

AND WE WILL OPEN ITEM NINE AT 6:59. THIS IS PD 25-0001.

[9. PD-25-0001 – PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2025-03-13, AND APPENDIX B, “ZONING,” OF THE CITY’S CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THE CITY’S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO PROVIDE FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS ON A TRACT OF APPROXIMATELY 200.4471 ACRES, THE NATURE CREEK RESERVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, TO UPDATE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE CONCEPT PLAN. (NATURE CREEK RESERVE – KYLE GILL) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-0)]

FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-0313 AND APPENDIX B.

YES, SIR. LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR, WILL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR LIBERTAS OR ALSO NATURE CREEK RESERVED.

ITS AMENDING THE APPROVED ORDINANCE 2025-03-13 FOR THE 200 PLUS ACRES AT 1800 NORTH US HIGHWAY 81-287. IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL MARCH 24TH OF THIS YEAR.

THE AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

THEY ARE CHANGING THE LOCK COUNT FROM 693 TO 694, AND THE MINIMUM CURRENTLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

THE MINIMUM AREA IS FOR 50 FOOT LOTS, 2000FT² AND 40 FOOT LOTS, 1800 SQUARE FEET, AND AT THE TIME DID NOT INCLUDE THE GARAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY WERE REQUESTING FOR GARAGES TO BE A MINIMUM OF 400FT².

[01:00:01]

THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE PD WILL NOW INCLUDE THE GARAGE IN THAT 2018 HUNDRED SQUARE FOOT OF LIVING AREA. THE UNDERLYING ZONING IS SINGLE FAMILY TWO SF TWO, AND THE REQUIRED MINIMUM BUILDING OR LIVING AREA IS 1000FT². SO IF EVEN IF YOU TAKE 400 FROM 2,018 HUNDRED, YOU'RE STILL ABOVE WHAT THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE IS FOR THE UNDERLYING ZONING. SO IT DOES EXCEED THAT.

THIS SHOWS THE TYPES OF LOTS AND HOW MANY THEY ARE PROPOSING IN EACH AREA.

IT IS THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGAIN IS STILL CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING HOUSING FOR ALL DIFFERENT TYPES, MEETING ALL THE NEEDS FOR ALL AGES, ABILITIES AND INCOME LEVELS.

49 PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY FORMAL RESPONSES FOR THIS.

HOWEVER, WE DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL WHICH HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE COUNCIL.

WE HAD IN-PERSON AND EMAIL INQUIRIES. DEVELOPMENT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO BE UPDATED BY THE SECOND READING TO READ.

UNDER THEIR PLAN DEVELOPMENT NOW H. THE BUILDING AREA THE MINIMUM DWELLING AREA FOR LOTS 40FT SHALL BE 1800 SQUARE FEET AND FOR 50 FOOT LOTS BE 2000FT². DWELLING AREA DOES INCLUDE THE GARAGES.

HOWEVER, THE LIVING AREA FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 1000FT² IN AREA.

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH THAT STIPULATION THAT ALL RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 1000FT² OF LIVING AREA. THE UNDERLINED IS WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING BEING ADDED INTO THE ORDINANCE BEFORE THE SECOND READING.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? MR. GILL IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NONE. AND THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS ITEM AT 7:02. AND THAT ENDS OUR PORTION OF PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. WE WILL NOW GO TO OUR NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEMS.

[10. HEAR PRESENTATION REGARDING WISE COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING (WCCA)]

ITEM TEN TO YOUR PRESENTATION REGARDING WISE COUNTY COMMISSION ON AGING.

AMY. YOU'RE UP. OH, IT'S MY BOARD MEMBER. ALL RIGHT.

SHELBY. IT'S AN HONOR. WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO I NEED TO SAY MY NAME AND ADDRESS? PLEASE DO.

SHELBY HICKS, 200 WILLIAM ALLEN LANE IN DECATUR, TEXAS.

TODAY I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD FOR WISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING.

ALSO PROBABLY BETTER KNOWN AS MEALS ON WHEELS AND FOR NEARLY 50 YEARS, WHICH THE DATE WAS A LITTLE OFF.

THAT WAS WHEN THE BUILDING WAS DONE, NOT WHEN THE ORGANIZATION STARTED. WE STARTED IN 79.

SO FOR NEARLY 50 YEARS WE HAVE HAD A PASSION FOR INCREASING AND FOCUSING ON THE HEALTH AND THE LIVES OF OUR SENIORS IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND WITH THAT, WE'VE HAD SO MANY WONDERFUL PEOPLE COME AND SERVE AND BE A PART OF OUR ORGANIZATION, AND IT'S REALLY BEEN A BLESSING TO SEE THAT COME.

BUT WITH THAT DILIGENT ATTENTION TO OUR SENIORS NEEDS AND GOOD STEWARDSHIP.

IT'S ALLOWED US TO ACHIEVE A PLATINUM RANKING WITH GUIDESTAR, WHICH IS A THIRD PARTY NONPROFIT RATING SYSTEM, AND WE'VE RECEIVED THE HIGHEST RATING AVAILABLE.

WE SERVE APPROXIMATELY 68,000 MEALS EACH YEAR TO OVER 450 LOCAL SENIORS AND PROVIDE THOSE BOTH DELIVERED TO HOMEBOUND SENIORS AND ALSO CONGREGATE MEALS OVER AT THE SENIOR CENTER.

SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF THOSE, AND THOSE MEALS ARE SO IMPORTANT, NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE NOURISHMENT THAT IT PROVIDES, BUT ALSO THE MENTAL HEALTH. WHAT A LOT OF FOLKS HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT IS THE PEOPLE THAT WE SERVE ARE HOMEBOUND SENIORS, MEANING THAT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO HOP IN A CAR AND DRIVE TO A GROCERY STORE OR DRIVE TO A FAST FOOD PLACE TO FEED THEMSELVES.

AND MOST OFTEN THEY DON'T HAVE THE STRENGTH OR THE CAPABILITIES OF GOING TO THE KITCHEN AND MAKING THEMSELVES THEIR OWN MEAL.

AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE RECEIVING THESE SERVICES.

AND SO IT IS VERY CRUCIAL THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO DELIVER THOSE MEALS TO THOSE SENIORS, BECAUSE OUR DRIVERS ARE OFTEN THE ONLY SOCIAL INTERACTION THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE SEEING ON A WEEKLY BASIS.

[01:05:02]

AND SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONTINUE TO TACKLE SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE COMING UP, WHICH I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY SURPRISE TO ANY OF YOU THAT FOOD COSTS HAVE GONE UP RECENTLY.

AND SO RIGHT NOW IT COST US ABOUT $8.85 PER MEAL TO FEED OUR SENIORS.

AND WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT INCREASING IN THE FUTURE.

ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, CONCERN OF OURS IS THAT THE POPULATION HAS INCREASED, AS I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE VERY AWARE.

AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE. AND WE HAVE A WONDERFUL PLACE TO RETIRE.

SO A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE OVER THE AGE OF 65.

AND WE'RE KIND OF FEELING IT. WE'RE SEEING HOW MANY VULNERABLE SENIORS ARE MOVING INTO OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE'RE STRIVING TO FIND WAYS TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES TO THEM.

NOW, THAT IS ALL OF OUR CHALLENGES. BUT THE BIGGEST THING THAT WE FACE TODAY IS FEDERAL CUTS.

WE'VE LOST APPROXIMATELY $200,000 IN FEDERAL FUNDING THAT WE'VE RELIED ON IN RECENT YEARS, AND THAT IS GOING TO DIRECTLY IMPACT THE QUALITY OF CARE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE.

WE'VE ALREADY HAD TO MAKE CUTBACKS TO NOT ONLY THE AMOUNT OF MEALS, BUT THE PORTION OF MEALS.

AND IT'S JUST REALLY CHALLENGING HAVING TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SENIORS WHEN THEY REALIZE THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING AS MUCH AS THEY WERE THE WEEK BEFORE OR THE MONTH BEFORE. AND SO IT'S WE NEED SOME HELP, AND WE'RE HERE TODAY TO JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY HELP US WITH, WHETHER THAT BE SUPPORT, WHETHER IT BE IMMEDIATE FUNDING OR MORE OF A LONG TERM VISION TO HELP US AS WE CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON BUILDING A FACILITY WHERE YOU'LL JUST KIND OF RULED ON THAT.

BUT WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A CENTRALIZED LOCATION FOR OUR SENIORS TO GATHER AND THE SENIOR CENTER.

IT'S JUST NOT MEETING OUR NEEDS TODAY AND WILL DEFINITELY NOT MEET OUR NEEDS TOMORROW.

AND SO WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT IN A CENTRALIZED LOCATION BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE OPERATING OUT OF THREE DIFFERENT PLACES AND OUR KITCHENS ALL THE WAY IN CHICO.

SO IT'S HAVING TO BOUNCE AROUND QUITE A BIT. I AM JUST GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF AND WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE.

AND I HAVE THE MORE IMPORTANT PEOPLE BACK HERE WHO ARE USUALLY RUNNING THE SHOW.

I JUST HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF SPEAKING BEFORE YOU TODAY.

WILL THE NEW FACILITY, WILL IT HAVE A KITCHEN IN IT? WILL Y'ALL BE ABLE TO MOVE THE KITCHEN HERE? THAT'S THE GOAL.

THAT'S THE GOAL. WE HAVE A LITTLE LESS THAN AN ACRE OVER THERE.

SO WE'RE WORKING WITH STAFF TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS CAPABLE, FOOTPRINT WISE AT THAT LOCATION.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY, WILL PELOSI AND MYSELF HAD TO RECUSE OURSELVES, BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE PROJECTS WE'RE WORKING ON TO SEE WHAT WE'RE CAPABLE OF DOING. THAT'S REALLY JUST THE FIRST STEP IS TO UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE PROPERTY IS CAPABLE OF HOLDING.

AND THEN THE NEXT THING IS MORE OF A BUILDING CAMPAIGN AND A FUNDRAISER TO BETTER, YOU KNOW, RAISE THE FUNDS AND FIGURE OUT A TIMELINE ON WHEN WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.

WELL, HOW MANY SENIORS DID YOU SAY YOU GUYS FEED? AND IS IT WEEKLY OR MONTHLY? YEAH. IT'S WEEKLY.

SOMETIMES DAILY. IN A LOT OF CASES WE HAVE A REVOLVING DOOR OF SENIORS THAT FALL OFF BASED ON NEED.

SOME COME BACK ON SOME, SOME GET WELL AND DON'T NEED THE SERVICES AS MUCH.

I THINK IN DECATUR THERE WAS A LITTLE OVER, I THINK, 195 INDIVIDUALS HERE IN DECATUR, BUT IT'S A LITTLE OVER 450 IN THE COUNTY ALONE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? ONE MORE. SORRY, MIKE. WITH THE 200,000 LOSS, HOW MUCH UNDERFUNDED DO YOU THINK YOU'LL BE THIS YEAR? OR DO YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER? WERE Y'ALL AT A SURPLUS BEFORE OR NO, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF OPERATING.

SO YOU'LL BE UNDER 200,000. YEAH. THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED MAKING THE CUTS A COUPLE MONTHS BACK, ANTICIPATING THIS HAPPENING AND NOT REALLY HAVING A SOLUTION FOR IT FINANCIALLY.

WE STARTED HAVING TO CUT BACK TO FIVE DAYS A WEEK INSTEAD OF SEVEN DAYS A WEEK OF MEALS.

ALSO, THE PORTION SIZES HAVE BEEN CUT DOWN. AND SO WE'RE TRYING WHAT WE CAN TO, TO MAKE THOSE DIFFERENCES AND THEN TRY TO CREATE A MORE EFFICIENT ROUTE FOR US TO, TO SERVE SENIORS AND STUFF. MR. HICKS, DID YOU SAY THAT WAS FEDERAL FUNDING OR STATE FUNDING THAT GOT FEDERAL FROM MY UNDERSTANDING.

IN WHICH ARM OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS THAT MONEY COMING FROM? NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. OKAY.

[01:10:07]

OKAY. WELL, WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND COMMUNICATING TO US YOUR NEEDS.

IT'S DEFINITELY A BIG PART OF OUR POPULATION, A POPULATION THAT WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT AS A COMMUNITY.

AND I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS.

AND, AMY, YOU AND YOUR WORK AND YOUR STAFF HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU ALL DO AND THE BOARD AS WELL.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. APPRECIATE. THANK YOU, MR. HICKS. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

ITEM 11 IS THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE LOCATED IN APPENDIX A,

[11. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE LOCATED IN APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ADD PROVISIONS RELATED TO TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE IMPACTS CREATED BY SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT. ORDINANCE 2025-05-17]

THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ADD PROVISIONS RELATED TO TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE IMPACTS.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL ANDREW SIMONSEN, 7016 CULVER AVENUE, FORT WORTH.

THIS ITEM IS MORE ADMINISTRATIVE. IT'S AMENDING APPENDIX A, WHICH IS THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.

WE'RE NOT ADDING ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL TO IT. IT'S MORE CLARIFYING SOME CLERICAL ERRORS AND THEN ADDING A SECTION OF LANGUAGE THAT WAS LEFT OFF THE PREVIOUS REVISION. THAT'S RELATED TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

SO REALLY AT THIS POINT IT'S REALLY ADMINISTRATIVE, LIKE I SAID, NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? LONG TIME NO SEE. ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS A THIS IS A FIRST READING. SO UNLESS THERE IS OTHER COMMENTS FROM YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ITEM 12 CONSIDER FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING AMUSEMENT,

[12. CONSIDER FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING AMUSEMENT REDEMPTION MACHINES AND GAME ROOMS. ORDINANCE 2025-05-18]

REDEMPTION MACHINES AND GAME ROOMS. YES. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS TYPE OF, SUBJECT MATTER AT TWO PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND THEN YOU ALL RECEIVED SOME LEGAL ADVICE AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. AND I HAVE BROUGHT BACK TO YOU AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING AMUSEMENT, REDEMPTION MACHINES AND GAME ROOMS WITHIN THE CITY OF DECATUR.

FORT WORTH, THE CITY OF FORT WORTH FOUGHT A LONG, THE PAPER CALLS IT A NINE YEAR BATTLE, BUT THE ATTORNEY IN CHARGE OF IT TELLS ME IT WAS A TEN YEAR BATTLE AGAINST THESE AMUSEMENT REDEMPTION MACHINES, AND THEY WERE VICTORIOUS EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT HEARD THE MATTER, REMANDED IT THEN FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS.

IT WAS ATTEMPTED TO GO BACK UP TO THE SUPREME COURT, AND THE SUPREME COURT DIDN'T HEAR IT AGAIN. SO THAT SECOND COURT OF APPEALS OPINION STANDS AND IT RULED THE AMUSEMENT REDEMPTION MACHINES ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SO YOU ARE WITHIN YOUR GOOD STANDING TO BAN THEM, AS YOU HAVE VERBALIZED THAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO.

VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? THANK YOU. YEAH, APPRECIATE OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S WORK ON THAT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. ITEM 13, CONSIDER, TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON A SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO RECONSTITUTE THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD.

[13. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO RECONSTITUTE THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. ORDINANCE 2025-05-16]

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. NO CHANGES SINCE YOU SAW THIS ORDINANCE AT YOUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING.

AND JUST A SIDE NOTE, WE ARE SET TO CLOSE THE APPLICATION PERIOD FOR REPLACING THOSE MEMBERS AT THE END OF THE MONTH.

SO IF YOU'RE HEARING US TALK ABOUT THIS, MAKE SURE YOU GET YOUR APPLICATION IN.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.

AGAIN APPRECIATE EVERYBODY ON CITY STAFFS WORK ON THAT.

ITEM 14 DISCUSS. YOU DO NEED AN ACTION. THIS IS AN ACTION.

I AM SO SORRY, MR. MAYOR. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2025-05-16.

SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES. THANK YOU. ITEM 14. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A PROCEDURE FOR THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY,

[14. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A PROCEDURE FOR THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTIONS.]

INCLUDING AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. ITEM 14 IS JUST SHORING UP WITH A PROCEDURE, SOMETHING THAT ALREADY EXISTS IN STATE LAW.

SENATE BILL 985, PASSED IN 2013, THAT GAVE THE MUNICIPALITIES THE OPPORTUNITY TO SELL REAL PROPERTY.

SOMETIMES WE FIND OURSELVES WITH A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE NO LONGER NEED.

THIS PROCEDURE WOULD ALLOW US TO ENGAGE IN A BROKER AND GET THE PROPERTY LISTED FOR A SET OF A SET PERIOD OF TIME, AND THEN EVENTUALLY BRING BACK TO YOU THE MOST APPROPRIATE BIDDER OR HIGHEST BIDDER, IF YOU WILL, ON THAT PROPERTY, THEN ENTER INTO A CONTRACT TO SELL.

I CALLED IT INITIALLY INTERNALLY, CALL IT SURPLUS PROPERTY, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY REAL PROPERTY.

THE BEST EXAMPLE I CAN GIVE YOU OF, OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS, SAY, WHERE AN OLD WATER TOWER MAY HAVE BEEN,

[01:15:01]

OR AN OLD BUILDING THAT WE OWNED AT ONE POINT IN TIME MAY HAVE BEEN.

IT'S TIME TO START MOVING THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY OFF OF OUR CARE AND MAINTENANCE AND INVENTORY LIST.

SO THIS IS JUST A PROCEDURE, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR FIRST READING.

AND I APOLOGIZE. THIS IS A YOU CAN APPROVE THIS TONIGHT IF YOU SO CHOOSE.

YES. THIS WOULD BE THE ADOPTION OF A PROCEDURE IF YOU FIND IT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY, BASICALLY IT WILL LET THE CITY MANAGER DO ALL THE LEGWORK, ENGAGE THE BROKER.

THE FINAL SAY ON ANY REAL PROPERTY WOULD ALWAYS BE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.

VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL OR COMMENTS? LOOK FOR A MOTION. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE PROCEDURE FOR THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTIONS.

SECOND. SO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND IN THE DISCUSSION ON THAT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAME SIGN.

ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES. ITEM 15 SI 25-001, CONSIDER FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE STAFF INITIATED AMENDMENT TO

[15. SI-25-0001 – CONSIDER FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE STAFF-INITIATED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 2-126 “MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS,” OF DIVISION 6 “PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION,” OF ARTICLE III “BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS,” OF CHAPTER 2 “ADMINISTRATION,” OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DECATUR, TEXAS TO INCLUDE A PROVISION FOR CHAIRPERSON VOTING.]

SECTION 2126, MEMBERSHIP OF TERMS. HELLO. GOOD EVENING AGAIN, LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR.

THIS IS A HOUSEKEEPING ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW.

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS A NON-VOTING MEMBER, EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF A TIE.

WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS IF THE CHAIRPERSON IS COUNTED AS THE FOURTH PERSON NECESSARY FOR ESTABLISHING A QUORUM.

THE CHAIRMAN SHALL BE A VOTING MEMBER. ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? VERY GOOD. YES GO AHEAD.

OH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 16, THIS IS PP21E50002,

[16. PP-25-0002 – CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROXIMATELY 200.447-ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NELSON H. MUNGER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 581, THE DANIEL WAGGONER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 884, THE JAMES TARLETON SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 805, AND THE GEORGE M. VIGEL SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 857, CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID 200.447-ACRE TRACT BEING ALL OF A CALLED 100.64-ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO SHERI FRANCES HULING, BY DEED THEREOF FILED FOR RECORD IN VOLUME 750, PAGE 813, O.P.R.W.C.T., SAID 200.447-ACRE TRACT ALSO BEING ALL OF A CALLED 100.64 ACRE TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO SUE NELL REID, BY DEED THEREOF FILED, IN THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS. (NATURE CREEK RESERVE — KYLE GILL). (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL APPROVAL BASED ON THE CONDITIONS 1 – 15, OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT, 6-0)]

CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR 200 AND 0.447 ACRES.

YES, SIR. LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR, WILL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR NATURE CREEK RESERVE.

694 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ALONG WITH OPEN SPACE AND PARK SPACE, PER OUR TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 212 . IT CAN BE LEGALLY PLATTED. SO THIS IS COMING TO YOU WITH A REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.

I'LL DO A LITTLE MORE EXPLAINING AT THE END. SO THESE WE'VE GOT 15 CONDITIONS.

THEY ARE TO IDENTIFY ALL RETAINING WALL LOCATIONS AND PROPOSED HEIGHTS INCLUDE THE DETENTION POND LOCATIONS.

LABEL ALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER DRAINAGE AND ACCESS EASEMENTS INCLUDE THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION LOCATION.

PROVIDE EXECUTIVE WRITTEN AGREEMENTS INCLUDING EXHIBITS OF ALL NATURAL GAS EASEMENTS.

PROVIDE UTILITY STUB OUTS ON THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS.

OPEN LOT 13X WATER AND SANITARY ON LOT 20X AND LEASE SUFFICIENT ROOM FOR BORE PITS UNDER THE RAILROAD.

EXTEND WATER SANITARY SEWER ON LOT 22Z SHOW PARALLEL SIX INCH WATER LINES FOR THE CUL DE SACS ON THE FOLLOWING STREETS DIXIE LANE, TALIA CIRCLE, DAISY LANE, HAVENS NEST AND AZALEA CIRCLE TO SUBMIT A DRAINAGE ANALYSIS FOR REVIEW, INCLUDING LOT LAYOUTS, DETENTION, CULVERTS, ROAD CROSSINGS, GRADING AND RETAINING WALLS, AND DEMONSTRATE THE LOT LOCATIONS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARY, AS DETERMINED BY THE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS.

THERE TO SUBMIT EXISTING AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA MAPS.

SUBMIT WATER AND SANITARY STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS TO INCLUDE THE SIZE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, PROPOSED POSTED SPEED LIMITS. SUBMIT THE TXDOT ACCELERATION DECELERATION PLANS FOR BOTH 287 AND 380, AND THE CITY WILL REQUIRE COPIES OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENTS AND APPROVALS FROM TXDOT.

SUBMIT THE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION FOR THE 21 INCH SANITARY SEWER LINES INSIDE THE ROADWAY LIMITS, AND ALL THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED IN THE FINAL PLAT IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW.

THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE COMMENTS AS NECESSARY BASED ON ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED AND CHANGES MADE.

SO WE ARE REQUESTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH 15, AS OUTLINED IN OUR STAFF REPORT AND PRESENTATION.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH 15 6 TO 0.

SO PRELIMINARY PLAT IS THE FIRST STAGE OF THE PLANNING PROCESS FOR PROJECTS.

[01:20:05]

ALL OF THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT MUST BE ADDRESSED AND RECTIFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL PLAT, AND CIVIL PLANS REVIEW APPROVAL. STAFF WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF THESE DEFICIENCIES EARLY IN THE PROCESS, SO THE PROJECT CAN CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. WE CAN CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

THE APPLICANT AND OUR ENGINEER, KIMLEY-HORN, HAS PROVIDED A LOT OF THESE COMMENTS AS THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS.

BUT THESE ORDINANCES, THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT, THESE CAN ALL BE RECTIFIED BY THE FINAL PLAT BEFORE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS ARE APPROVED.

VERY GOOD. YES. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? LISA, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE REPORT IT HAS 694.

WAS THE ORIGINAL 693 OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED.

AND THEN WE HAVE IT IN HERE THAT WE ARE ON THE FIRST READING, THAT WE'RE MOVING IT TO 694.

CORRECT. BUT WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE THIS WITH 694.

WE HAVEN'T APPROVED IT YET ON A SECOND READING.

WE HAVE THEM RUNNING ALL CONCURRENTLY. SO. OKAY.

AND THAT'S WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS THE 694 LOTS.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. SO THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM FOR COUNCIL.

MR. YES, SIR. GO RIGHT AHEAD. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PP25- 0002 WITH THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED BY STAFF, WITH CONDITIONS OUTLINED BY OUR LOVING STAFF.

THANK YOU. SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES.

ITEM 17 IS PP 25-0003. CONSIDER, TAKE ACTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO PRELIMINARY PLAT ON APPROXIMATELY

[17. PP-25-0003 – CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST TO PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROXIMATELY 5.831 ACRES OF LAND BEING A REPLAT OF LOT 1R, BLOCK 1, SOUTH DECATUR BUSINESS PARK, CAB. D, SLIDE 509, O.P.R.W.C.T., DOC. NO. 201408820, TO THE CITY OF DECATUR, WISE COUNTY, TEXAS, ALSO KNOWN AS 1801 S TRINITY STREET. (DECATUR OFFICE VILLAGE) (THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL APPROVAL BASED ON THE CONDITIONS 1 – 10, OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT, 6-0)]

5.831 ACRES OF LAND. AGAIN, I KNOW YOU'RE TIRED OF ME ALREADY.

SO, LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR AND WE'LL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO AGAIN, WE HAVE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 1801 SOUTH TRINITY STREET, DECATUR OFFICE VILLAGE. AND IT'S A LITTLE OVER FIVE, LITTLE LESS THAN SIX ACRES.

IT'S GOING TO BE A MEDICAL OFFICE PLAZA. PER TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, IT CAN BE REPLANTED.

AND WE'VE GOT TEN CONDITIONS. SO ADDING A SIDEWALK PER THE CITY STANDARD ALONG EAST THOMPSON, SOUTH TRINITY PROVIDE A FIRE LANE AND HIGH PAVEMENT TRAFFIC AROUND BUILDING ONE AND TWO RETAINING WALL PLANS NOT TO DISTURB THE EXISTING WATERLINE. FUTURE WATERLINE MAINTENANCE, WALL LOADING AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR WALL AND BUILDING PROTECTION PROVIDE THE RETAINING WALL DETAILS.

UPSIZE THE HDPE LINE AND DRAINS BEHIND BUILDING TEN, PROVIDING THE PLAN AND PROFILE VIEW.

PROVIDE STEEL CASING PER CITY STANDARD. DETAILS AROUND WATER AND SEWER LINES UNDERNEATH THE AREA INLET REGARDING THE DETENTION POND DRAINAGE.

A NEW WATER LINE ALONG SOUTH TRINITY STREET TO MEET TCEQ 217-29 SEPARATION OR ENCASEMENT REQUIREMENTS FROM THE EXISTING SEWER. THE WATER AND SEWER LINES ARE ALSO TO MEET THE TCEQ 217/290 SEPARATION CONFIRMED THE BUILDING SIZE AND SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL NEEDS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND PROVIDE A REVISED DRAINAGE AREA MAPS AND DRAINAGE STUDY AGAIN TO CONTINUE TO MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD.

THIS IS PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE MET AND RECTIFIED BEFORE FINAL PLAT AND CIVIL PLANS.

THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR CIVIL PLANS IN FOR REVIEW.

SO A LOT OF THESE COMMENTS CAME FROM OUR ENGINEERING STAFF FOR THE PRELIMINARY OR FOR THE CIVIL PLANS REVIEW.

WE ROLLED IT OVER INTO THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE WAS AWARE OF THIS.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH TEN AS WELL.

PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL APPROVAL SIX TO NOTHING.

VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? LOOK FOR A MOTION. MR. MAYOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE PP 25 0003.

A SECOND. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE US.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. ALL RIGHT. THAT ITEM PASSES.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 18 IS V 250002, CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON A VARIANCE REQUEST ON A

[18. V-25-0002 - CONSIDER TAKING ACTION ON A VARIANCE REQUEST BY COURTNEY HERNANDEZ, ON BEHALF OF PPL MOTORHOMES, REQUESTING TO INSTALL A ROOF SIGN ON A BUILDING LOCATED AT 402 N US HWY 81-287. PER THE CITY OF DECATUR SIGN CODE, CHAPTER 15, DIVISION 3. – SPECIAL SIGNS, SECTION 15-56, ROOF SIGNS, ROOF SIGNS ARE ONLY PERMITTED IN THE HISTORIC (H) ZONING DISTRICT. (PPL MOTORHOMES)]

[01:25:02]

BUILDING LOCATED AT 402 NORTH US HIGHWAY 81-287.

YES. LISA HANNON, PLANNING DIRECTOR. WE'LL ENTER OUR STAFF REPORT INTO THE RECORD IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE.

SO THIS IS PPL MOTORHOMES. YOU MAY REMEMBER ABOUT A MONTH AGO, WE HAD ONE ASSIGNED VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 500 NORTH US HIGHWAY 81-287. THIS IS A PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET.

REQUESTING A ROOF SIGN ON AN EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE.

ROOF SIGNS ARE NOT PERMITTED IN THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION ANY LONGER.

THE ROOF SIGN IS NONCONFORMING, ABANDONED BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN USED FOR OVER 180 DAYS.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE GOING INSIDE THE EXISTING SIGN STRUCTURE.

THE WAY THE BUILDING IS, IS BUILT. THERE'S THAT'S ABOUT THE ONLY LOCATION FOR A SIGN.

AND THAT SIGN STRUCTURE STILL EXISTS. AND CHAPTER 15, SECTION 1567 PERMITS CITY COUNCIL TO GRANT A VARIANCE.

AND THE BUILDING, LIKE I SAID, DOES NOT LEND ITSELF TO ANY OTHER TYPE OF SIGNAGE OTHER THAN THE ROOF.

AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THEIR VARIANCE REQUEST.