[5.A. Consider approval of a Resolution of the Town of Northlake, Texas, casting vote for election of Texas Municipal League (TML) Region 8 Director]

RIGHT. WE WILL START WITH OUR ACTION ITEMS FOR TONIGHT. FIRST ITEM BE CONSIDERED IS APPROVAL RESOLUTION CASTING A VOTE FOR ELECTION OF A TML REGION EIGHT. DIRECTOR TML IS OF COURSE A GROUP THAT SUPPORTS THE COUNCIL AND NOTIFYING US WHAT'S COMING OUT OF THE LEGISLATURE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THIS COUNCIL HAVE ANY INPUT ON THIS TONIGHT. I THINK THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE THE OPTION BETWEEN THE INCUMBENT AND. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE HECK IT IS NOW. THAT I. GOING TO ASK STAFF, YOU WORK WITH THESE PEOPLE A LOT MORE THAN WE DO. DO YOU HAVE ANY. NO, NOT NOT OPINIONS, JUST REPRESENTATION OR REPRESENTATIVES DOING A GOOD JOB. DO WE NEED MORE SMALLER LOCAL REPRESENTATION? JUST AN OPINION. WE'VE NOT REALLY RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS. I, I KNOW REGION EIGHT HAS QUITE A BIT OF TURNOVER. SO YOU KNOW, IF ANYTHING, SOME HISTORY OR SOME. YOU KNOW, MEMORY, WE WHEN WE WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE INVOLVED, IT SEEMED LIKE WE WERE CHANGING EVERY YEAR. SO THE INCUMBENCY COULD BE OF VALUE. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW EITHER ONE OF THESE CANDIDATES. I THINK YOU MAY HAVE RECEIVED A EMAIL FROM MARY SARVER WITH HER BACKGROUND, BUT NO, I DON'T DON'T REALLY KNOW EITHER ONE OF THEM. GRANDVIEW, OBVIOUSLY DOWN SOUTH OF THE METROPLEX, AND AUBREY UP IN THE KIND OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE METROPLEX. ALL RIGHT. SORRY TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT THERE, BUT THAT'S HELPFUL. THANK YOU. COUNCIL, DO I HAVE ANY MOTIONS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION? MY ONLY THOUGHT WAS THAT AUBREY IS MORE SIMILARLY SIZED TO US, LIKE MAYBE THE HER AND JUST KIND OF OUR GENERAL AREA THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONSIDERATION FOR, ESPECIALLY THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY REPRESENTING US FOR IN THIS NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT I THINK THAT SOMEBODY FROM AUBREY WOULD MOST CLOSELY ALIGN WITH WHAT WE NEED IN THE TOWN. I CAN AGREE WITH THAT AS WELL. I, I KIND OF HAD GENERAL THOUGHT IN THAT DIRECTION AS WELL. SO THAT THAT'S, IT'S A THOUGHTFUL PROCESS WHERE WE NEED PEOPLE TO REPRESENT US. AND IF THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE BETTER SUITED TO THE SAME CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE, IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD DECISION. SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

[5.A. VOTE]

[00:35:02]

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SUPPORT THE GUY FROM AUBREY. ALRIGHT. MOTION FOR I SECOND THAT FOR MIKE BROWNING. MIKE BROWNING. VERY GOOD. I HAVE A MOTION BY DOCTOR SESSIONS AND A SECOND FROM MISS HOLMES. MOTION CARRIES. UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT. NEXT, I IMAGINE WE'LL BE

[5.B. Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the Town of Northlake, Texas, providing for the annexation of approximately 41.8373 acres of land generally located on the east side of Cleveland-Gibbs Road approximately 200 feet south of the intersection with Edna Lane, in the exclusive extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of the Town. Case # 26-ANX00004 i. Public Hearing ii. Consider Approval]

HEARING FROM NATHAN AGAIN HERE. BUT CONSIDER ADOPTION ORDINANCE ON NORTH LAKE PROVIDING FOR ANNEXATION. APPROXIMATELY 41 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE AIRPORT. I'LL TAKE IT OFF THE TEXT AND TELL EVERYBODY WHERE IT ACTUALLY IS. ALL RIGHT. AND HERE IS A LOOK AT WHERE IT IS ON ON THE MAP. SO THIS IS A PART OF THE BOB SMITH MANAGEMENT COMPANY TRACT.

IT'S JUST UNDER 240 ACRES. MOST OF IT IS IN THE TOWN LIMITS, BUT THERE'S ABOUT 42 ACRES THAT'S IN THE ETJ. AND THIS ITEM IS TO ANNEX THAT SO THAT THAT ENTIRE TRACT IS IS IN THE TOWN LIMITS. AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 24TH, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED, WHICH CONSTITUTED PETITION FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION WITH THE SERVICE PLAN. AND AT THAT SAME MEETING, YOU CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD. AT THIS MEETING. ALL REQUIRED NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED, AND YOU CAN HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING NOW AND THEN AFTER THAT ACT ON THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE. OKAY, IS 6:07 P.M. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM FIVE B ANNEXATION OF THIS LAND SOUTH SOUTHWEST OF THE AIRPORT.

ANYBODY TO SPEAK ON THIS, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND WHEN YOU'RE DONE, MAKE SURE YOU FILL OUT ONE OF THE FORMS FIRST. THANK YOU. SCOTT ELLERMAN, 2021 MCKINNEY AVENUE, SUITE 300, DALLAS, TEXAS. I'M ACTUALLY PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM, AND I JUST TURNED OFF THAT. WAS THERE A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM FOR THIS PROJECT? I JUST WANT TO START OFF BY GIVING THANKS TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM FROM THE TOWN OF NORTH LAKE. DREW, NATHAN, LAURA, DENNIS, EVERYBODY'S BEEN SUCH A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH. THEY'VE BEEN AN EXTREME, EXTREMELY VALUABLE RESOURCE TO US AND A BLESSING, AND WE HOPE THE TOWN FEELS THE SAME WAY. ALSO, JUST WANTED TO GIVE THANKS TO TO YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND JUST MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM? OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC HEARING? NONE. THANK YOU SIR.

APPRECIATE YOU. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. SEEING NONE. WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 609,

[5.B. VOTE]

AND I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT, MISS MYRTLE BEACH TO IT. MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO. WELCOME. THAT LITTLE PARCEL OF THE NORTH LAKE.

[5.C. Consider adoption of an Ordinance of the Town of Northlake, Texas, approving a zoning change from AG – Agricultural to I – Industrial for an approximately 237.3179-acre tract of land generally located on the east side of Cleveland-Gibbs Road approximately 200 feet south of the intersection with Edna Lane. Case # 26-ZCA00003 i. Public Hearing ii. Consider Approval]

BUT WAIT. THERE'S MORE. ITEM FIVE C. YES, THIS IS A COMPANION ZONING CHANGE. NOW THAT THAT FULL PROPERTY IS IN THE TOWN LIMITS. AND AGAIN, HERE'S A LOOK AT WHERE THAT PROPERTY IS AT SOUTH OF THE AIRPORT. AGAIN, THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED AT THE THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. IT CALLED FOR ANNEXATION OF THAT PORTION THAT WAS OUTSIDE THE ETJ. AND THAT'S BEEN DONE. THE NEXT THING, ONE OF THE NEXT MAIN THINGS THAT COVERED WAS DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY TO FOR INDUSTRIAL USE AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST CONFORMS WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS IS ACCEPTABLE FOR CONSIDERATION AS SUBMITTED. THE PROPOSALS TO REZONE WHAT IS CURRENTLY AGRICULTURAL ZONING TO INDUSTRIAL. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARD THIS CASE AT THEIR MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 22ND. THEY HELD A PUBLIC HEARING WITH NO SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY, AND YOU'LL NEED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE CONSIDERING THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. I WILL NOTE THAT NOTICES WERE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED, AND THERE ARE TWO WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST. THANK YOU SIR. WITH THAT, IT'S 6:10 P.M. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NOBODY TO SPEAK, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:11 P.M. AND TAKE

[00:40:07]

MOTIONS. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT. BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY FOR ANYBODY THAT'S LISTENING OR CARES THAT THIS IS PART OF A PROJECT THAT NOT JUST THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT THIS PROJECT TO BRING THE ETJ INTO THE TOWN, I FEEL LIKE HAS WORKED SWIMMINGLY AND THAT THIS IS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO OFFSET THE TAX BURDEN FOR OUR RESIDENTS BY BEING CREATIVE WITH WHAT WE BRING INTO THE TOWN. SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS AND THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM FOR

[5.C. VOTE]

WORKING ON THIS STUFF. THANK YOU. HAVE A MOTION FOR MISS HOLMES. I'LL SECOND. SECOND FOR MR. FOWLER. WE'LL TAKE VOTES. MOTION CARRIES. UNANIMOUS. VERY GOOD. NEXT, WE HAVE TWO MORE

[5.D. Consider approval of an Ordinance of the Town of Northlake, Texas, amending Chapter 9A, "Unified Development Code," of the Code of Ordinances of the Town of Northlake, Texas, as amended, by granting a Specific Use Permit ("SUP") authorizing a third accessory structure on certain property located at 3111 Apple Creek Lane, Northlake, Texas - Case # 26-SUP00001 i. Public Hearing ii. Consider Approval]

PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT. JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS. NEXT IS CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE FOR AN SUP REGARDING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON 3111 APPLE CREEK LANE. ALL RIGHT. SO HERE'S THE THE LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE CREEK MEADOWS WEST SUBDIVISION. AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S JUST A HOME ON THIS SITE. BUT THERE HAVE BEEN TWO PERMITTED CONSTRUCT STRUCTURES.

ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IS TWO CABANAS AROUND A PLANNED POOL. AND THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A THIRD STRUCTURE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY. PROPOSED POOL HOUSE ARE THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. LIMITS THE NUMBER OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON PROPERTIES LESS THAN FIVE ACRES TO TWO. HOWEVER, YOU CAN REQUEST MORE. YOU JUST HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT PROCESS, WHICH IS WHY THIS IS BEFORE YOU. SO IT GIVES IT GIVES MORE PUBLIC INPUT IN IN THE PROCESS, THERE'S NOTICE REQUIREMENTS, GOES BEFORE THE PNC AND THEN COMES BEFORE YOU. AND IT'S KIND OF A WAY TO HAVE EXTRA VETTING FOR, FOR SITUATIONS LIKE THIS. SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS JUST FOR THE THIRD STRUCTURE. EVEN WITH ALL OF THESE COMBINED, IT'S WELL BELOW THE 50% THRESHOLD AS COMPARED TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE.

IT'S AT 34%. HERE'S A LOOK AT WHAT THE POOL HOUSE IS WILL LOOK LIKE. THIS WILL BE AN EXHIBIT TO THE ORDINANCE IF YOU CHOOSE TO APPROVE THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. SO THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD HAVE TO LOOK LIKE IF APPROVED. AND HERE'S SOME 3D RENDERINGS OF WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE. AND WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE WAS WE HAD MOUNTAINS IN NORTH LAKE, LIKE I DID PICK UP ON THAT IN THE PACKET. I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING BACKGROUND LANDSCAPE. WE WERE REQUIRING THEM IN MOUNTAINS. I WISH WE COULD. SO PNC HEARD THIS CASE AT THEIR MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 22ND. THEY HELD A PUBLIC HEARING WITH NO SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST, AND THEY UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST. SO YOU'LL NEED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. AND THEN AFTER THAT, YOU CAN CONSIDER THIS AS U. P COUNCIL AND THE SUPS WE HAVE THIS PROCESS IN PLACE. SO IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTARY BEFORE OR AFTER PUBLIC HEARING, FEEL FREE. ANYBODY WANT TO GO BEFOREHAND? I WILL POINT OUT THE OH, SURE, THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM. VERY GOOD, MR. FOWLER. THE LIMIT IS 50% AND THIS IS WHAT, 35, 34%. OKAY. IT GIVEN THAT IF IT'S BELOW THE 50, IS IT BECAUSE THERE'S A THIRD STRUCTURE? YES. THAT'S WHY IT'S HERE. OKAY. I THINK WHAT THEY'RE PUTTING TOGETHER IS BEAUTIFUL AND THAT I'M GOING TO TRY AND FINAGLE MY WAY INTO AN INVITE TO COME WORK OUT.

IT'S ON. YEAH. THAT'S ALL THAT'S MY COMMENTARY. I THINK IT'S BEAUTIFUL. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. 6:15 P.M. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? OKAY. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S STILL 6:15 P.M. JUST A LITTLE LONGER,

[5.D. VOTE]

AND WE'LL HAVE DISCUSSIONS OR MOTIONS. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND. MOTION TO APPROVE FROM MAYOR PRO TEM LORENZ. SECOND FROM MR. GANS. MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO. VERY

[00:45:07]

GOOD. YOU'RE ALL SET. WHEN'S THE POOL PARTY? VERY GOOD. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. ALL RIGHT. NEXT.

[5.E. Consider approval of an Ordinance of the Town of Northlake, Texas, amending Chapter 9A, "Unified Development Code," of the Code of Ordinances of the Town of Northlake, Texas, as amended, by granting a Specific Use Permit ("SUP") authorizing an accessory structure on certain property located at 7710 Willow Ridge Drive, Northlake, Texas - Case # 26-SUP00002 i. Public Hearing ii. Consider Approval]

ANOTHER SUP FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. YES. THIS ONE IS AT 7710 WILLOW RIDGE. AND THE NORTH RIDGE ESTATES SUBDIVISION PROPERTY JUST OVER ONE ACRE. AGAIN, IT FALLS UNDER THE SAME REQUIREMENTS OF THE FIVE ACRE OR LESS LOT. IT MUST BE LESS THAN 50% OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE.

AND THIS PROPERTY, YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE AERIAL THERE'S JUST ONE SMALL SHED STRUCTURE IS ALL THAT'S THERE. NOW THEY'RE REQUESTING A SECOND STRUCTURE, AND DUE TO THE SIZE IT'S REQUESTED, IT'S ABOUT 1980FT■!S OVERALL, INCLUDING A 2 BY 40 AWNING ADJACENT TO THE POOL. SO THAT, ALONG WITH THE EXISTING SHED, PUTS IT AT ABOUT 56.5% OF OF THE HOME. AND THAT IS WHY THIS SUP IS COMING BEFORE YOU. THIS ITEM WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT THEIR SEPTEMBER 22ND MEETING. THEY HELD A PUBLIC HEARING WITH NO SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST AND UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE SUP AS REQUESTED. TONIGHT, YOU'LL NEED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE YOU CAN TAKE ACTION, AND WE'LL NOTE THAT THERE WERE 13 WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THIS. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST, AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL. SO VERY GOOD. IT'S 6:18 P.M. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? ALL RIGHT. AND WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 6:18 P.M. ONCE AGAIN, NORTHRIDGE ESTATES IS DEFINITELY BANDED TOGETHER AND GOT THEIR NEIGHBORS OPINIONS.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND. CAN I MAKE A COMMENT WITH OR I GET NOT RELATED TO TAKING THE VOTE OR NOT. I WOULD REQUEST THAT STAFF REVIEW OUR ORDINANCE AND MAYBE CONSIDER WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE SIZE FROM 50 TO MAYBE 60% FOR THE ACRE, ACRE LOTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THIS IS, I THINK, THE THIRD ONE, AND IT'S MOSTLY NORTHRIDGE ESTATES THAT THIS AFFECTS AND THAT THEY HAVE SAID OVERWHELMINGLY THAT THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THEIR SHEDS WITHOUT US MESSING WITH THEM.

SO THAT THAT WOULD BE MY ASK, IS THAT WE KIND OF REVIEW THAT ORDINANCE AND SEE IF THERE'S ROOM TO ADJUST IT TO WHERE WE STILL HAVE TO VIEW THE THINGS THAT ARE REALLY OUT OF THE ORDINARY, BUT THAT IF WE HAVE THIS IS OUR THIRD ONE JUST TO CONSIDER. SO THAT'S THE WE'D LIKE INPUT FROM THE COUNCIL FROM SOME DIRECTION. THIS HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS SINCE 2012, THREE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS. SO MAYBE SOME OF THE SAME COUNCIL, BUT QUITE A BIT OF CHANGE. THE. THE BAR IS WHEREVER YOU WANT IT, WHEREVER YOU WANT TO SET IT. IT WAS IT WAS THOUGHT BACK IN 2012 THAT 50% OF THE SIZE OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE WAS APPROPRIATE. SO THERE'S WE HAVE OTHER RULES ABOUT HAVING SPACE FOR YOUR SEPTIC SYSTEMS, BUT. AND WE COULD LOOK AT WHAT THE MAXIMUM WOULD BE. BUT IF YOU WANT IT TO BE 100% THE SIZE, IF YOU WANT IT TO BE 75%, THERE'S REALLY NO, THERE'S REALLY NO NUMBER. YOU TELL US THE NUMBER. THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO KIND OF SCIENTIFIC NUMBER. SO JUST LET US KNOW WHAT YOUR DIRECTION IS. AND I WILL POINT OUT ONE THING THAT COUNCIL IN THE PAST HAS DONE TO MAKE THESE A LITTLE BIT LESS OF A BURDEN IS LOWER. THE FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC USE PERMITS. SO IT USED TO BE $500 AN OUNCE, $100 FOR THESE. AND AND OUR DEFAULT IS TO ASK YOU IF IT'S A SPECIAL CASE. SO IF YOU IF IF YOU DON'T WANT THESE COMING BEFORE YOU, THEN JUST TELL US WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE THE NUMBER TO BE. RIGHT. MR. FOWLER QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS ON THE STRUCTURES ARE WE COUNT. WE ARE COUNTING THE OVERHANG LIKE THE SHADED AREA, RIGHT? NOT JUST THE ENCLOSED EVERYTHING COVERED BY ROOF, BECAUSE I THINK MOST OF THESE THAT WE'VE HAD, THE THREE OF THESE, IT'S A SHADED ADDS TO IT. AND THAT'S WHAT CAUSES THESE TO GO OVER. SO PART OF LIKE PART OF THE RATIONALE BACK WHEN WE DID THE UDC UPDATE IN 2012 WAS HOW MUCH IS COVERED WITH IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. SO THE GOAL WAS TO KEEP IT OPEN. SO IT'S A IT'S KIND OF A FOUNDATION AND A, AND

[00:50:03]

A ROOF. IT IS OPEN. IT'S NOT AIR CONDITIONED, BUT IT'S STILL AND IT'S RAIN. IT'S HOW WE MEASURE THE HOUSE TOO. THEY'VE GOT A COVERED PATIO THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE AREA OF THE HOME. SO I GUESS MY, MY PERSONAL GUIDANCE WOULD BE THAT WE ADJUST IT FROM 50% TO 60 OR 65 BASED ON WHATEVER THE THE COUNCIL THINKS. IF IF YOU DIDN'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED SO THAT WE CAN STILL SEE THEM, IF IT'S SOME KIND OF LIKE HUGE MONSTROSITY, BUT THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE PENALIZED BY HAVING A LITTLE BIT SMALLER HOUSE, THAT THEY CAN STILL BUILD A PRETTY COOL STRUCTURE. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A BIG PART OF THE HISTORY AND THE EFFORT TO KEEP THE OPEN SPACES OPEN. COUNCIL IN THE PAST DECIDED THAT THERE WAS A IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD A MINIMUM SIZE HOUSE AND THEN BUILD A MASTER SIZE BARN OR SHED OR WHATEVER, THAT. TO KEEP THE BALANCE IN THOSE THINGS, BUT I, I, I THINK WITH ALL THE CASES WE'VE SEEN SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL AS WELL, THEY HAVE GENERALLY FALLEN BELOW THAT 60% THRESHOLD. THE QUESTION IS, IF WE RAISE THE 60, THEY ALL START COMING IN AT 65 AND 68. BUT YEAH, WHERE WHERE DOES THAT END? BUT IN EVERY CASE THAT I'VE SEEN, THINGS HAVE BEEN REASONABLE. SO I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT BRINGING AN ITEM TO LOOK AT 60% AS WELL. DO WE HAVE COUNCIL DIRECTION TO BRING THAT FORWARD AT A LATER DATE? YEAH I AGREE, I AGREE WITH THAT AS WELL. SO SOMETHING ELSE I'D LIKE TO ADD FOR THE DISCUSSION IS IF IT'S A CONCERN ABOUT A SMALLER PRIMARY RESIDENCE, MAYBE WE CAN SET A LIKE A MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE. YOU'RE ALLOWED. THAT'S NOT RELATED TO THE. SO IF YOU HAVE A 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE AND YOU WANT TO BUILD A 1500, YOU'RE NOT REALLY PUTTING A LOT OF STRUCTURES THERE. SO WE COULD. WE'LL LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS. YEAH. BECAUSE A VERY COMMON BUILDING SIZE IS 30 BY 40. THAT'S 1200FT■!S, RIGHT. THAT'S VERY COMMON SIZE THAT'S OUT THERE. SO YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN BRING OTHER OPTIONS WITH IT EITHER TYPE SITUATION. YEAH, I KIND OF WOULD LIKE TO, I MEAN, I DON'T MIND THE 50%. I THINK WHAT IT, THE REASON, THE RATIONALE BEHIND THAT, AT LEAST WHAT I THINK IS ALLOWS US TO MAKE REASONABLE DECISIONS IF WE KEEP RAISING IT LIKE I'M, I'M WORRIED THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET 65, 70% HAVE TO MAKE REASONABLE DECISIONS AT 65, 70%.

I LIKE THE WAY I LOOK AT THESE IS, YOU KNOW, THE SHADED PARTS, THE PARTS THAT ARE NOT ENCLOSED.

I IN MY MIND, I DON'T REALLY COUNT THAT AS MUCH. YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THE STRUCTURES, MAKE SURE THEY'RE NICE. AND I THINK IT'S PART OF OUR JOB AS COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING THESE MASSIVE BUILDINGS OVERTAKING THE HOMES. I'M KIND OF FINE WITH THE 50%. LIKE I SAID, THIS IS THE THIRD CASE, FOURTH CASE, AND I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL FOR FIVE YEARS. THAT'S JUST MY INPUT. BUT I THINK IF WE RAISE IT, WE'RE GOING TO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A 65 AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A 70 AND SO FORTH. SO YEAH, I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE DID THERE WAS THE RESIDENTIAL SUP FEE THAT THAT MAKES THINGS MUCH MORE ATTAINABLE FOR PEOPLE AS WELL.

MR. GANZ, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? WELL, I MEAN, 50% TO ME IS FINE, BUT IF YOU RAISE IT TO 60 THEN WE CAN JUST ELIMINATE THE SUP THEN. DON'T ALLOW IT BEYOND 60%. I MEAN, WE STILL HAVE TO GIVE THEM DUE DUE PROCESS. THEY STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. BUT YEAH, I GUESS WE COULD MAKE IT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. IF IT'S 60 AND YOU DON'T WANT TO LOOK AT IT ABOVE THAT ANYTHING, COULD WE TAKE THAT OFF THE AS A SUP? YEAH, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT.

YOU'D ALMOST HAVE TO HAVE THAT MINIMUM STRUCTURE SIZE AS WELL THOUGH TO COMPLEMENT THAT.

WE'LL, WE'LL DO, WE'LL LOOK AT 60%. WE'LL LOOK AT A MINIMUM STRUCTURE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE. AND WE'LL LOOK AT REMOVING THE SUP AS AS OPTIONS AND LET YOU ALL HASH IT OUT. SO WHEN YOU GO TO THE FIRST YEAH WE'LL GET THEIR INPUT AS WELL. THE PNC. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE POINTED THEM FOR TO KIND OF WORK THROUGH THIS. SO WE'LL BRING SOME OPTIONS TO YOU AS A AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PNC. ALL RIGHT. NOT THE APPLICANT KIND OF DISTRACT US FROM OUR VOTE NOT THE APPLICANTS ARE SAYING THEY'RE HOLDING THEIR BREATH

[5.E. VOTE]

GOING, OH MY GOD. I DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. SO WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THAT. MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 1 AND YOU GOT YOUR SUP. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN FINALLY TONIGHT WE HAVE A

[5.F. Consider approval of a Resolution of the Town of Northlake, Texas, ratifying the actions taken by the Northlake Municipal Development District Board of Directors, approving a Pioneer Grant in the amount of $35,000 for Chef Lin's Asian Kitchen and authorizing the Town Manager to enter into a performance agreement]

PIONEER GRANT TO CONSIDER. IT'S A BUSY NIGHT FOR YOU NATHAN. YEAH. I FEEL LIKE JOHN THOMPSON DURING BUDGET SEASON. YEAH. GIVING HIM THE NIGHT OFF. NO. ALL RIGHT. SO I THINK YOU'RE ALL PRETTY WELL AWARE OF OUR PIONEER GRANT PROGRAM. THIS WAS STARTED BY THE EDC AND CDC AND IS NOW TRANSITIONING WITH THE TO THE MDD. THIS APPLICATION BEFORE YOU IS FOR SHEFFLIN'S ASIAN KITCHEN. THEY ARE GOING INTO A SPACE IN NORTH LAKE CROSSING AT 1800 ROBSON RANCH

[00:55:06]