I will now call the July 15th planning commission meeting to order. If we could proceed with the roll call. Ingresol here. Shonac here. Beam Seagull
here. Casper here. McDougall here. Krabanhoff here. Are there any amendments to the agenda as distributed? No amendments. Chair,
is there a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Agenda is approved. Is there a motion to amend or approve
the minutes for the May 5th meeting? Motion to approve. Second. Second. All in favor of approving the minutes say I. I. I. Against. Minutes stand approved.
This time is an opportunity for citizens to be heard on items that are not on the agenda. Is there anyone here wishing to be heard on non-aggenda items? If not, we will proceed to the public hearings that are scheduled for this afternoon.
The first request of Lowry Engineering on behalf of Prairie Parkway 2 LLC for vacation of a 30foot Red River Valley Cooperative easement at 405123rd Street South. Is there a motion to open the public
hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. The public hearing is now open. City planner Houston, please provide the commission with an overview of this
particular item. Thank you, Chair Seagull. Uh we'll have Assistant City Planner Forest Steinhoff present this item. Thank you, Vice Chair Seagull and Commissioners. Uh, Lowry Engineering on behalf of Prairie Parkway 2 LLC is
requesting a vacation of a Red River Valley Cooperative Utility Easement within lot 5, block 1 of Prairie Parkway, Second Edition. The request is to vacate an existing 30-foot Red River Valley Cooperative Utility Easement for electric lines that serve the two township parcels to the west of this
parcel. The easement is no longer needed as these electrical lines are being relocated so they may continue to serve these homes and so that the developer may better utilize this parcel. No additional easements are needed. Uh we reached out to public and private utilities um and notices were sent out
to affected property owners. To date, we have not received any comments. Staff is recommending that the planning commission recommend approval of the vacation and related findings of fact to the city council subject to the four conditions listed in the report. And please let me know if you have any questions.
Are there any commission comments or questions regarding this particular item? Are there any public comments regarding this particular item? Yes, please stand at the podium, please. And would you identify yourself, please?
Uh, my name is Amber D. I'm an LICSSW, licensed independent clinical social worker. So, my understanding of community development is pretty strong. And I just want to verify, are we talking strictly about the Prairie P Parkway? Is there more content about
that or is you guys divide this into like electrical lines and then meridian and then I just want to make sure I'm speaking at the correct time. Uh chair, I think she's referring to this the subdivision that's on the third
item for tonight. This is just a vacation of an easement. Okay, that's all. Thank you. Any further public discussion regarding this item? hearing none. Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Is there any more discussion uh on this item or we move along? Make a motion to approve the vacation of a 30foot Red River Valley Cooperative
easement at 4051 23rd Street South. Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Those in favor say I. I. Same sign. Our second item is a request of Quick
Trip Incorporated for conditional use permits for dynamic display signs at 1409 Main Avenue Southeast and 1100 30th Avenue South. Is there a motion to open the public hearing?
So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Those against. City Planner Houston, please provide the commission with an overview of this item. Thank you again, Chair Seagull. Uh we'll
have Assistant City Planner Ethan Yonk uh present this item. Uh thank you, Vice Chair Seagull and Commissioners. Uh so QuickRip is requesting conditional use permits for the installation of onremise dynamic display signs in both the MU4 gateway
mixed use and CC community commercial zoning districts. Uh the request is to modify previously permitted freestanding signs by adding a 32.9 ft dynamic display element to each sign. Under recent text amendments, uh dynamic
display signs now require a conditional use permit just to protect uh adjacent residential properties and such. Um the proposed modification uh to the permitted freestanding sign falls within allowable the allowable square footage
for freestanding sign area at both sites. Um notices were sent to um affected properties and no public comments have been received to date. Um staff is suggesting that the planning commission recommend approval to the city council the conditional use permits
um to allow the installation of onremise dynamic display signs and both the MU4 gateway mixeduse and CC community commercial zoning districts on related findings of facts for both sites contingent on the 13 conditions listed in your packet. So please let me know if
you do have any questions. Are there questions or comments from members of the commission? Are there any public comments made at this time? Uh my name is Ray Qualvog. I own the property just to the north of where the
Quick Trip uh convenience store supposed to go. And so I just got a couple questions and I I didn't really get the uh the dimensions I guess of, you know, or I don't really know what a DDS sign looks like. So maybe you can explain
that to me because I guess I'm concerned about visibility and all that sort of stuff. And then on the the information I got from the brochure, is that where the I don't know where the the arrow is, is that where the sign is
going to be? Is it going to be just one DDS sign just to the north of where the building's going to be? Uh what site are you referring to? Is it the 1409 or 1100? Uh this is the 1130 the 30th Avenue South uh parcel.
Uh so that that sign is going to be located on the southwest corner of the property. Um the arrow is likely just referring to the whole property as a whole. Okay. So, it's going to be southwest corner. Okay. So, it's going to be right
along right along 30th then. Yep. And how big is that sign going to be? What are the dimensions and how tall and all that good stuff? Um, so that one I I believe that one is the whole freestanding sign which was already
permitted is 35 ft. Um, so they're just proposing to add a dynamic display sign at the bottom and that itself is going to be approximately 32 square ft. Okay. Have you got a picture or do they have it of of what this dynamic display sign is?
Yep. We can pull it up on the screen here. So, it's just that small portion on the bottom of the sign that'll have some electrical elements. Okay. Chair, I would mention to um these types of signs go by different
names. electronic motion signs, uh, dynamic display signs. This is not a typical, um, electronic motion sign where you see it looks like a TV screen and they've got, you know, different pictures flashing. This one's kind of more of an electronic reader board. So,
they do have messages, but it's still it meets the definition of a dynamic display sign. So, it's it's for more advertising their products at the new convenience store. Okay. Could you go back to and put the picture up that I've got here and then
just point exactly where that's going to be on there if you can do that if you've got the capability to do that. So would it be right? Yeah, right there. Mhm. Okay. Okay, that's all I got. Thank you. Any further public comment
hearing? None. Uh is there a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Those opposed, same sign. All right. Then we have a motion to recommend approval to the city council
the conditional use permits to allow the installation of onremise dynamic display signs at 1100 30th Avenue South and 1409 Main Avenue Southeast and related findings of fact contingent on the conditions that were listed in your packet. There are 13 of them which I
will not read at this time. I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit including those 13 items in the packet. Is there a second? Second.
Is been moved and seconded? All in favor say I. I. Against. Same sign. Brings us to our third item. the request of Meridian Mortgage LLC for the following related to Partridge Creek
edition to reszone from TZ transitional to RLD3 residential low density 3 and a preliminary and final plat. Is there a motion to open the public hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I.
Against. Same sign again. City Planner Houston, please provide the commission with an overview of this particular item. Thank you again, Chair. Uh, Assistant City Planner Britney Cameron will present this item. Thank you, Vice Chair Seagull and
Commissioners. The applicant is requesting approval recommendations for these items related to the proposed Partridge Creek edition to facilitate single family residential development in close proximity to plan neighborhood friendly commercial uses and Prairie Parkway second edition located just
north across 40th Avenue ditched approved in 2024. The first item is a reszone from transitional to residential low density 3. The transitional zoning district is a placeholder for these 2004 annex
properties which are vacant and have historically been used for agriculture. These properties have been guided for residential development since annexation. The RLD3 district aligns with existing and planned future developments of the area. The second and
third items are the preliminary and final plat for an 85 lot Partridge Creek edition neighborhood contingent upon the four conditions in your report plus one additional condition. Additional easements as required specifically where
the plan shows rear yards with 5-ft easements. These need to be 10-ft easements. One comment was received from A. Bradold um who lives on 19th Street South to the west of the proposed project um stated
he opposes the project due to the size of the proposed lots and homes and was concerned about the quality of the development and its impact on area property values. Staff suggests the planning commission recommend approval for the following to
the city council for Partridge Creek Edition. Reszone from trans transitional to residential low density 3 preliminary and final plat of Partridge Creek edition contingent on the conditions listed in your packet and the one additional condition regarding
additional easements. Please let me know if you have any questions. Are there any questions or comments from members of the commission? I I do have a question um related to the comment that was received from the constituent. Uh is
the the plots are they are they standard for what's in the area? Do we know that they are very similar to what is um nearby?
Okay. Smaller, larger. Um I can take that. So, the the lots that are proposed, they meet the minimum requirements of the zoning that's proposed, the RLD3. They average about 4,000 square ft and they have about 40
ft of frontage. That is the that is the minimum you can go in that zoning district. Um, Prairie Parkway first edition, those lots were similarly planned except those were planned for twin homes and single family detached.
The developer is proposing all detached homes on these lots um for this development. Thank you. If I may, um the developer then has met the required standards that are expected. Is that
true? Yes. Okay. And um the final decision regardless of what this group does will be made by the city. Correct. The planning commission is a recommending body to the city council and they will make the final
determination on the actions. Uh did I hear you say as uh uh in the beginning that the uh um side uh the side lots were increased to 10 ft from 5 to 10. Oh, you're talking about the easement.
Yeah. So, um, we just missed a comment on because we've had multiple versions of the plat. Um, we needed some additional easements in the backyards for drainage. So, right now, part of the plan shows five foot easements and we would just be increasing those to 10 ft
and the backyard. Sideyards still five. The sideyards are showing what they are. Some of the sideyards are 20 because we have bigger easements. Some of them are 10. Oh, okay. Yeah. Thank you. Other comments from members of the commission.
Are there any p public comments regarding this particular development? Good evening, commissioners. Uh Brian Patingale with Houston Engineering. We're the engineers and planers working on the plat with the developer. Um, just to answer a few questions and clarify a few things. Um, yes, we are meeting the
minimum lot dimensions for that. Uh, they're not all 40 foot lots. On average, they're roughly 40 by 100 foot lots. Um, there are a portion of them, about a fifth of them are are mixed in as 45 foot lots. So, there is some variation in the lot widths and things
like that. Um, in regards that we were contacted by the engineering staffer earlier today about the regard to issues. We don't really see an issue with that. so we can address the additional easement space. It doesn't affect the buildability of the lots overall um in that regard. So um like I
said, just asking some clarification on that and we'll work with the city on them to get that adjusted. So happy to answer any other questions you may have regarding the lots and layouts and things of that nature. I do have a question might not be for you, might be for Robin. Um thinking
ahead is are there going to be any more uh entrances or exits to this addition? Because right now you come in on 28th Street only. Is there going to be any access to say 20th on the other side? Correct. So um this this area was originally master planned with the
Prairie Parkway development, but that developer sold to this developer. So they're starting over with a master plan and there there will be an additional access south on 28th Street um because our subdivision requirements require
more than one way to get in and out. Correct. We have, just to clarify, we do have a master plan for the larger area as a whole, for the whole property it's owned. Um, if Robin, could you bring up an aerial for me, please, on the It's up. Oh, is it up? It's not.
They can see it. It's just not on Okay. So, if you notice, there's that water tower lot uh to the south kind of that uh the developer owns all the land down minus that farmstead kind of south. The intent is to currently add another access on the master plan south of the
water tower. So you'd have two entrances into the development. Those are kind of all master plan to loop around on themselves. So that that is the current master plan and future development that's sort of phased in with the current land ownership. So if I could ask both entrances will come off 28th Street,
correct? In the future? Yes. Okay. And currently, at least for the current development, any dead ends have got to be a culde-sac of some sort. Correct. We temporarily temporarily. Correct. We've addressed most of that with the current version of the plat where we've got we've gotten
rid of some of the dead ends at the request of the city. So, most of the stuff loops in on itself on the first phase. Other questions from the commission? Thank you. Thank you. Is there other public comment regarding this particular item and now I'm here at the correct time.
Amber do again. Um so my question is how many of these homes are going to be slaughtered for build to rent? Do we know? We do not know that at this time. Does the city I could not find any information about the city having any
policy or law about quantity of build to rent um in new developments. Am I missing anything? We do not. Okay. Um, so as far as Meridian goes, that I have spoke to um a number of my
neighbors last night went knocking door to door seeing opinions and thoughts and I did not have one single person say I'm okay with Meridian being there. And in fact, everyone said, "I am upset Meridian is there." Um, we ourselves
have issues with Meridian in our own neighborhood. I'm on 19th Street. Um, even the property next door to me, um, Meridian does not upkeep anything that they are renting. Um, to the point where my neighbor has a ridge cap that's been
open, no, um, uh, no shingles on the ridge cap at all. And I've called multiple times in the last probably five years. So, you know, snow and rain are getting down in there. And these poor renters, they don't know any better. And I asked them, "Do you
have mold going on?" And they're that's kind of funky in there. Also, people further down complain about Meridian. I have strong issue with Meridian being the one
um building here. Um I'm already losing property value because I do face that field. We are next to a railroad track there. Part of what kept our property value at least somewhat up is that we were at least facing open land. And I know it's
already been plotted. This has already been taken care of. However, if it's not just that, but now we're also talking about half build to rent or whatever by meridian. Okay, here's my property value is can you imagine how many tens of
thousands of dollars I will be losing just because these are going to be planted or built there anyway. Um, so me and a number and I don't know if you guys got phone calls or emails from them. Sounds like one person. Um,
I would be very cautious about allowing Meridian. They are a business. I know they need to make money. Do they need to make money right there when our properties are already being lowered? Let some other developer,
somebody who has some um confidence in the public, uh somebody who's not so obviously disliked in the community when I go to sell my house when or I mean I will now because of the moving
in. Um but part of the issue is people know who Meridian is and they know that and realers know that. Um, so already I'm losing a lot of property value. So is everybody on our neighborhood. I also have issue with
rent or build to rent because now we have bigger population, bigger transient population, which I'm all about community building, but when you have rentals and you have half your half your buildings are rentals, now we have a lot of movement.
Okay, we've worked really hard to build our little community. So to add this now and have it be Meridian and have it be all this built rent, which we know nationwide is an issue, it's very concerning for us. So we are hoping that perhaps there is
consideration that Meridian is not who we should be um catering to. Thank you. Thank you. Further public comments, any additional comments from the
commission or questions? If not, is there a motion to close the public hearing? Uh, Mr. Chair, I have a comment, question, whatever. Now, you said that um, uh, your property
values will be lowered. Where did that information come from? Obviously, I don't have research on that. I looked I could not find anything that would be specific enough to give that specific information. However, what we know and
there is research and I don't have that I don't have that particular reference. I think my reference is just on population density. Um, but what we do know is that property values are higher when there's greater green space. Well,
yes, that's a field, but that is green space. We know. Okay. I understand that, but what you said m just a few moments ago was that your property value would go down tens of thousands of dollars.
That that was you you made that comment. That's my estimate. Okay. It's an estimate. Um, and that's coming from you. Yes. Um, um, is there anything from any local real estate uh,
companies who might back that up or No, that's an unfounded um, that's an completely no evidence behind that at all. That's completely my estimate. Yep. To clarify. Thank you. Yeah. I have a question for Robin and maybe
the team. Have we um we must have relationships with developers in the community and have we had uh community members contact related to properties um built specifically by
Meridian? I'm not, that's not my department, but if we do have renters that have issues with property owners, we do have an outlet for those people to make complaints. All of our rental properties are register they're required to be
registered in the city. They get inspected every year for safety. So, if somebody has I'll just use her as a example. if there's black mold, that would be a mark against that inspection and that inspection would not pass until the property owner would address that issue. Um, so I don't have a, you know,
a record or knowledge of any of those particular complaints. Um, but we do have an outlet for people that have problems with property owners. So, we are approving um the development or for single use or for single
dwelling, I should say. um single dwelling and it can be rented or it can be rented or the property owner. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thanks. When uh to the young lady who just spoke to us a
little while ago, your comments regarding Meridian, um do you have any you can back that up? Thank you. I'm not going to c curtail discussion, but for the sake of moving along, uh, is
there a motion to close the public hearing portion of this conversation? So moved. Second. Those in favor say I. I. I. Those against. Are there more items of discussion
pertaining to this particular item before we move on? comment right ahead. Having uh 37 years of real estate
experience in town, um the codes are being followed. Um we need housing in all our communities. We need affordable housing. Um, I can't speak to Meridian, but they
are a licensed contractor in the state of Minnesota able to build build homes. And we, as stated by Robin, we have protections. We have in inspectors as the properties are being built, they're inspected.
I I don't um uh there is nothing in the record to hold ever for us to hold a builder back that in my opinion as long as they always meet their lensure and whatever you know
meet the requirements and I we need these type of lots throughout town and they have mixed uses mixed sizes it makes it better more uh diverse community, if you will, and uh we're all
better for that uh type of building occurring all over um our area. So, I'd like to make a motion and then we have more discussion if you
want. So I'd like to make a motion to uh related to partage creek reszone from transitional uh to RLD3 load city three and then are you wanting a separate motion for the
preliminary and final plan. Is that something later? Yes, we should have two at least two separate motions. One for the reszone and one for the the platty. Okay. Well, I'll just take care. So I move for that approval. There a second to that motion. Second.
Further discussion. Yes. Um those in the audience understand again that whatever this group does is the recommendation to the city council which has the final approval. We simply
recommend to them. And um I would suggest if you can document some of the issues that you have that might change how they reflect upon what we have done here today, I would suggest you do that. But uh our role is from the
information we have um we don't see a lot of negatives. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Further discussion hearing? None. We have a motion on the first portion of this item for the resoning from
transitional to residential low density 3. All in favor say I. I. I. Oppose. Same sign. That now brings us to the second part of this particular item, the preliminary and final plat of Partridge Creek
edition. and it's contingent on what was four but now five items that are listed in your packet regarding uh the structure of this particular addition. Is there a motion to approve
this item? Move to approve. There a second. Second. All those is there any further discussion on this particular part of
hearing? None. Those in favor may signify by saying I I I against same sign. We are recommendation to the uh the council as we have voted. Is there any other business to come before us?
We have no other business. Chair Seeing that there is no further business to come before the uh commission, is there a motion to adjurnn? So moved. Is there second? All in favor signify by saying I. I.
Motion is adjourned. Thank you. And meeting is adjourned as well.