[00:00:02]
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRISCO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.[CALL TO ORDER]
WE'RE GATHERED AT 6101 FRISCO SQUARE BOULEVARD AND THE TIME IS 6:31 PM.THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONSISTS OF FRISCO RESIDENTS APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL.
TONIGHT'S COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ARE; COMMISSIONER CONE, COMMISSIONER KINDLE, COMMISSIONER BOX, OUR VICE-CHAIR, COMMISSIONER KELLY, OUR SECRETARY, COMMISSIONER MORGAN.
I'M ROB COX, AM YOUR CHAIR FOR THIS EVENING.
ABSENT THIS EVENING IS COMMISSIONER COLBERG.
REPRESENTING STAFF THIS EVENING WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS JOHN LETTELLEIR, ANTHONY SATARINO, PHILIP CLIMER, AND CINDY FAREWELL.
IN ENGINEERING, WE HAVE EDUARDO TORRES AND RICARDO ORDONEZ.
ANYBODY I MISSED OR DID I BUTCHER ANY OF THOSE NAMES? EXCELLENT. FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING IS CITIZEN INPUT, IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION REGARDING ANY ITEMS THAT ARE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, YOU MAY DO SO AT THIS TIME.
PLEASE COMPLETE A BLUE SPEAKER CARD AND APPROACH THE PODIUM.
PRIOR TO YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
OUR MEETINGS ARE RECORDED SO PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE.
PLEASE ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, NOT TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE OR ANY APPLICANTS PRESENT THIS EVENING.
TO ENSURE THERE IS ENOUGH TIME FOR ALL TO SPEAK, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES UNLESS YOU MUST ADDRESS THE COMMISSION THROUGH A TRANSLATOR, IN WHICH CASE YOU HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 10 MINUTES.
PLEASE NOTE, THE COMMISSION CANNOT TAKE SPECIFIC ACTION DURING CITIZEN INPUT OR ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA, EXCEPT TO PROVIDE A STATEMENT OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY, TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY, OR TO INDICATE THAT THE MATTER MAY BE PLACED ON A LATER AGENDA.
WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS LATER AS WELL.
ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK DURING CITIZEN INPUT AT THIS TIME?
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ITEM 2, NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.CONSIDER AN ACT UPON APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON FEBRUARY 9TH, 2021.
COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THESE MINUTES? IF NOT, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 9TH, 2021?
>> MOVES TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 9TH, 2021.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KELLY.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES 50.
NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ROUTINE, NONCONTROVERSIAL ITEMS. ANY COMMISSION MEMBER MAKING SUCH REQUESTS PRIOR TO A MOTION AND VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEMS MAY CONSIDER ITEMS INDIVIDUALLY.ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO MAKE COMMENTS ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS MAY DO SO WITH THE MAJORITY APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
WE HAVE ITEMS THREE THROUGH EIGHT THIS EVENING.
I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT NEED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATIONS.
WHAT WERE THE ITEMS NUMBERS 4, 5, AND 6?
>> DO I HAVE A MOTION THAT APPROVE ITEMS 3, 7, AND 8?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 50, ITEMS 3, 7, AND 8 ARE APPROVED.
WHO IS RECUSING THEMSELVES, OR ACTUALLY YOU HAVE QUESTIONS?
[4. Open Space Plan & Preliminary Site Plan: The Arbors Frisco, Block A, Lots 1-4 (OS21-0006 & PSP21-0003)]
>> ITEM 4: OPEN SPACE PLAN, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, THE ARBOR'S FIRST GO BLOCK A LOTS 1-40-21-0006 AND PSP 21-0003.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THE ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY STAFF THIS EVENING.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
>> YEAH, I DID. THERE IS ONE REMAINING QUESTION AFTER WE [OVERLAPPING] MENTIONED THE OTHER ONES.
ON THE OPEN SPACE PLAN, THIS MORE OF A CONCERN.
I DON'T KNOW WHO IS STUCK. ANTHONY, ALREADY KNOWS WHAT THE QUESTION AND CONCERN IS, YOU WANT TO WAIT TILL WE'RE DISCUSSING IT?
>> NO, I DON'T THINK. THIS IS ALL WE HAVE RIGHT NOW TO DISCUSS.
>> YOU CAN STATE WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS.
>> ANTHONY, MY CONCERN OBVIOUSLY IS THE LOCATION OF THE OPEN SPACE AND THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THE OPEN SPACE.
WE TALKED ABOUT HOW ONE OF THE BUILDINGS HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO THE OPEN SPACE BUT THE OTHER THREE REALLY, IN MY MIND, DON'T HAVE GOOD ACCESS TO IT.
WE'RE TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT TO SEE IF THEY HAD ANY SUGGESTIONS ON THINGS THEY COULD DO THAT WOULD INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE OPEN SPACE FOR ALL THE TENANTS, NOT JUST THE ONES IN THAT BUILDING DOWN IN SOUTHWEST CORNER.
CAN YOU WRITE ON THE MAP THERE JUST TO SHOW
>> HOW PEOPLE WOULD GET FROM THE VARIOUS BUILDINGS TO THE TO THE OPEN SPACE?
[00:05:03]
>> SURE. THIS IS A HOA AMENITY TRAIL UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THERE IS A ACCESS POINT DOWN INTO THAT TRAIL RIGHT THERE FROM THE COMMERCIAL AREA.
THEN THIS HOA TRIAL COMES IN HERE AND BLENDS WITH THE OPEN SPACE THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
IT'S REALLY BLENDING THE RESIDENTIAL IN WITH THE COMMERCIAL AMENITY AREA, BUT THAT IS THE ACCESS POINT DOWN FROM OFF THE CUSTER FOR THOSE PROPERTIES.
>> THEN THERE'S A SECOND ACCESS POINT.
CORRECT, ANTHONY, FROM BUILDING NUMBER 1.
>> IS THAT THE ONE UNDER THE FRONT LINE KNOWN TO THE GUTTER?
>> YES, THE ONE FRONT LINE TO THE GUTTER DOWNTOWN AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.
>> THERE IS ANOTHER, IT'S HARD TO SEE IN HERE.
>> IT COMES OFF OF THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING.
WHERE [OVERLAPPING] THE THING THAT'S BLOCKING OVER.
[NOISE] THAT'S PROBABLY BETTER PLACE TO SHOW IT.
>> BUT MY CONCERN IS IF YOU'RE IN ESPECIALLY, THE BUILDING TO THE MIDDLE.
IT FEELS YOU DON'T HAVE DIRECT ACCESS OR GOOD ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE FROM UP THERE.
AS A GENERAL RULE, WE REQUIRE A LOT OF OPEN SPACE FOR OUR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
TYPICALLY THEY'RE IN THE MIDDLE OR A CENTRALIZED AS CAN BE OR SOMEWHERE REALLY ACCESSIBLE, AS A GENERAL RULE.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE WHERE WE COULD ASK THEM A QUESTION?
>> ACTUALLY, I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION BEFORE THAT, WHICH IS DO YOU HAVE A PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN ON THIS?
>> I HAVE AN ADA CONCERN ON THIS.
MY CONCERN IS THE ABILITY TO GET FROM THE BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE TO THE OPEN SPACE IS PRETTY EASY, I THINK FOR THOSE WHO ARE WALKING.
IF YOU ARE COMING OUT OF THOSE BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE AND YOU WANT TO WALK OVER TO THE OPEN SPACE, YOU CAN GET THERE FAIRLY, DIRECTLY, AND EASILY.
IT'S A BEAUTIFUL SITE, LOTS OF GREAT OPEN SPACE.
YOU CAN SEE THE OPEN SPACE FROM ALL THE BUILDINGS.
YOU CAN WALK TO THE OPEN SPACE PRETTY DIRECTLY FROM ALL THE BUILDINGS.
IF YOU WERE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING NUMBER 2, DO YOU SEE THAT ONE? IT'S THE ONE IN THE CORNER.
ONE STORY, 94"100 SQUARE FEET.
IF YOU WERE STANDING IN FRONT OF THAT AND YOU WANT TO GET TO THE OPEN SPACE, YOU CAN DO THAT FAIRLY EASILY BUT IF YOU WANTED TO GET DOWN INTO THE AMENITY LOUNGES, IT'S A VERY LONG JOURNEY.
I'D ASKED THE STAFF EARLIER IF THEY HAD ANY SUGGESTIONS ON ANYTHING THAT COULD IMPROVE THE ADA ACCESS TO THE OPEN SPACE SINCE IT'S NOT CO-LOCATED BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS OR NEXT TO THE BUILDINGS.
THE SITE THAT YOU HAVE HERE IT'S REVIVES FROM A SITE PLAN OVERALL.
THERE'S AN IMPROVED WANTS SECOND, WHAT YOU SEE OR WHAT ANTHONY POINTED OUT WITH THAT TRAIL THAT WAS OR IS A FEATURE THIS BAND PRESERVED IT'S OPEN SPACE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ANTHONY AND HIS STAFF WORK WITH THEM TO PROVIDE THAT CONNECTION DOWN TO THAT TRAIL.
BUT WITH THE SHAPE AND SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, AND GIVEN THE NATURAL FEATURES ON THE PROPERTY, THIS IS THE BEST LAYOUT TO COME UP WITH BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LOT DEPTH OF THOSE LOPS OFF OF CASTER, YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM TO PLAY WITH.
YOU GOT PROVIDE THE FLOOR COVERAGE AROUND IT.
BUT THIS IS A LAYOUT THAT DOES MEET THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
IT JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, IT ALSO MEETS THE ADA REQUIREMENTS, CORRECT?
>> OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULDN'T GO FOR IT IF IT DIDN'T MEET THAT.
SO IT'S QUESTION IS. IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS.
I JUST WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY HAD ANY IDEAS ON ANY WAY THEY COULD IMPROVE THE DIRECT ACCESS FOR ADA.
>> YEAH. CAN YOU HEAR [INAUDIBLE].
>> WOULD YOU CARE TO SPEAK ON THIS QUESTION? [OVERLAPPING] PLEASE DO SO AND THEN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND WE'LL HAVE YOU FILL OUT ONE OF THESE SPEAKER CARDS.
>> I'M JEREMY NELSON, KIRKMAN ENGINEERING AT 805 DOVE CREEK PARK IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS.
[00:10:06]
JUST REFRESHMENT.THIS WAS BASICALLY JUST UPDATED TO SHOW THE NEW SITE LAYOUT WHICH HASN'T CHANGED MUCH.
CERTAINLY FROM THE ACCESS STANDPOINT OR FROM A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS STANDPOINT TO THE OPEN SPACE PLAN.
FROM A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OPEN SPACE PLAN.
WE ARE PROVIDING ADA ACCESS AS YOU MENTIONED, AND MEETING ALL THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
SO AS FAR AS ANY ADDITIONAL SOLUTIONS TO PROVIDE ADA OR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO THE OPEN SPACE, I THINK JUST FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT, WE'LL JUST MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE PATHS ARE ADA COMPLIANT.
[NOISE] WE COULD [INAUDIBLE] AS WE GO THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS PROVIDES SOME ADDITIONAL ROUTES OR ACCESS TO THAT.
THAT MAKES SENSE, AND JUST FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT, THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO WORK.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING DRAWN ON PAPER, BUT JUST AS WE GO THROUGH THE DETAILED GRADING OF THIS SITE, JUST PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ACCESS AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS LIKE US TO LOOK INTO AS WE WORK THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
BUT I THINK FROM A PSP LEVEL, WE'VE CERTAINLY HAVE FULFILLED THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS.
IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OUTSIDE OF?
IS TO ASK YOU TO JUST LOOK AT IT AGAIN.
>> AND SEE IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH ANY CREATIVE SOLUTIONS.
I KNOW THE TOPOGRAPHY IS REALLY HARD THERE.
>> YEAH. THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME GRADING CHALLENGES, BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
>> THE ONLY SPECIFIC QUESTION THEN WOULD BE JUST THAT SOUTHWEST CORNER COMING OFF OF THAT BUILDING.
NUMBER ONE, THE TWO-STORY BUILDING.
IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS, THE TOPOGRAPHY ALLOW THAT ACCESS TO GO THE OTHER DIRECTION, ESSENTIALLY GO MORE DIRECTLY TOWARDS THE AMENITY LAWN.
>> USUALLY, IN THIS AREA HERE ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER?
>> YEAH. RIGHT NOW IT CURVES TOWARDS.
IT GOES TOWARDS [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT NOW.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A JOURNEY TO GET DOWN THERE.
IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT AREA THERE AND THEN THE AREA OVER BY THE DUMPSTERS IN THE CORNER.
IF YOU GUYS LOOK AT THAT AND YOU COME BACK AND SAY THE TOPOGRAPHY IS JUST TOO STEEP OR SOMETHING, REALLY IT WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR BETTER DIRECT ACCESS AND YOU GUYS OBVIOUSLY MEET THE CRITERIA.
>> SORRY SNS LOOK AT THAT NOW OR AS WE MOVE THROUGH SITE PLAN.
>> THAT WOULD BE I GUESS UP TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
>> IF THIS MEETS ALL OF THE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS WE CANNOT DENY TO TABLE THIS.
IT HAS TO BE APPROVED. FOR THE RULES.
>> BUT CAN WE MODIFY TO ASK THEM TO LOOK INTO THAT?
>> I THINK IF YOU WANT TO ASK FROM A SITE PLAN PERSPECTIVE TO OPTIMIZE, THAT'S A REQUEST THAT YOU CAN MAKE, BUT IT'S NOT A FORMAL REQUEST.
>> YEAH. WE'D BE HAPPY TO LOOK INTO THAT.
>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I'M LOOKING FOR.
>> IT'S VERY NICE LAYOUT BY THE WAY.
>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION ITEM FOUR?
>> WHAT IS THE MOTION ITEM FOUR?
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KINDLE.
ANY OPPOSE MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO. ITEM FOUR IS APPROVED.
[5. Open Space Plan & Preliminary Site Plan: SWC Custer/Rolater, Block A, Lots 2 & 3 (OS21-0007 & PSP21-0004)]
ITEM FIVE, OPEN SPACE PLAN, PRIMARY SITE PLANS, SOUTHWEST CLUSTER ROLE LATER BLOCK A LOTS TWO AND THREE, OS 21.0007 A PSP 21.000.4 OWNERS CUSTOMER-RELATED PARK, LLC.>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THIS ITEM WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET FOR APPROVAL AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER WHO HAS A QUESTION ON THIS PARTICULAR OPEN SPACE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY SITE, WILLIAM?
>> YES. ANTHONY, WE HAVE TWO OUTSTANDING ISSUES AFTER YOU AND I TALKED AND ONE OF THEM WAS THE CORNER OF HOLLAND DRIVE.
THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL UPON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THERE'S NO TREES THERE RIGHT NOW.
I THINK WE ANSWERED THIS ONE ABOUT THE SCREENING.
WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR I KNOW THERE'S A BUNCH OF EXISTING TREES, BUT WHAT'S THE REQUIREMENT FOR TREES?
>> IT'S STREET TREE, SO ONE TREE PER EVERY 30 FEET.
THE PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND SOME OF THESE TREES HAD BEEN REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE THAT CONSTRUCTION.
WHAT COULD BE PRESERVED WAS AND THEN WE'LL BE SUPPLEMENTED WITH A ANOTHER TREES TO MEET THAT STREET TO YOUR REQUIREMENT ALONG HOLLAND, DRIVE.
>> OKAY. CAN YOU PULL UP A MAP THAT SHOWS THE BUILDING LAYOUTS? YEAH. THAT ONE'S PERFECT.
>> MY QUESTION CONCERN WAS JUST ABOUT THE BUILDINGS DOWN ON THE I GUESS YOU'D CALL IT THE SOUTH PART OF THE PROPERTY,
[00:15:02]
BUILDINGS FIVE, SIX, EIGHT, NINE, TEN, ELEVEN AND THE OPEN SPACE.SO EVERYTHING DOWN AT THE BOTTOM PART THERE.
>>WHAT YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT WAS ASKING IF THERE WAS A WAY TO ADD A DIRECT CONNECTION FROM HOLLAND DRIVE IN THAT GAP WHERE THERE'S NO EXISTING TREES? WE WANT TO ASK THE [INAUDIBLE] SAME QUESTION.
>> OKAY. YOU'RE JUST TO CONFIRM YOU WOULD YOU THE SIDE WALK FROM THAT'S REQUIRED ALONG HOLLAND AND BRING IT INTO THIS OPEN SPACE AREA HERE?
>> NO JUST A SMALL BASICALLY CROSSING THE GRASS NEXT TO THE DUMPSTERS.
WHERE BUILDING FIVE, YOU SEE THE CORNER OF BUILDING FIVE.
>> [NOISE] LET ME PUT SO THAT I CAN SEE.
>> I CALL THE FRONT OF BUILDING FIVE.
>> ZOOM. [NOISE] THAT'S THE NEXT BUILDING OVER NEXT TO IT.
[NOISE] THE ONE I CIRCLED THERE'S BUILDING SIX.
IF YOU GO TO THE WEST OF THAT.
>> OKAY. BUILDING FIVE BEING IN THE VERY CORNER THERE? YEAH. IN THE CORNER ONE THERE.
>> THE PAVEMENT OBVIOUSLY ENDS AT THE FRONT OF BUILDING FIVE?
>> THE QUESTION WAS, IF WE CAN TALK TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT CONNECTING DIRECTLY FROM THE HOLLAND STREET SIDEWALK TO WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT BASICALLY CONNECTING TWO PIECES OF EXISTING PAVEMENT.
>> PRETTY SHORT STRETCH THERE.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT HERE TO ASK A QUESTION.
>> I UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU RECOMMENDING CONNECTING THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE COMMERCIAL?
>> WELL IT IS CONNECTED UP BECAUSE HOLLAND DRIVES JUST A SINGLE LOADED STREET.
IT'S ALL COMMERCIAL ON THE ONE SIDE.
IT'S NOT EXACTLY CONNECTING THE RESONANCE, ALTHOUGH [INAUDIBLE] THERE IS THAT ONE HOUSE THAT'S FACING THE CORNER? YEAH. THERE'S THAT ONE LOT THAT FACES.
>> IT'S NOT DRAWN VERY WELL, BUT, ARIEL MIGHT BE BETTER THAN THAT.
>> WHAT I MENTIONED TO ANTHONY WAS THAT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE HAVE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL, THEY WORKED OUT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY PUT IT IN A NICE ENTRANCE WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD JUST EASILY WALK STRAIGHT TO THE BUILDINGS WITHOUT HAVING TO GO OUT AND AROUND.
THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING THAT IS IF YOU GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE ENTRANCE OFF OF HOLLAND, IT'S QUITE A JOURNEY BACK DOWN TO THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S PRETTY LONG TRIP BACK DOWN TO BUILDING FIVE, SIX ETC.
>> I THINK, HAVE ANY OF THE RESIDENTS REQUESTED THIS? I'M JUST WONDERING IF IS OUR REQUEST OR IS THERE ACTUALLY A RESIDENT WANTING THIS?
>> I HAD NOT HEARD FROM ANY RESIDENT.
>> NOW IT'S TIME FOR THEM TO COMPLAIN.
>> I'M NOT GOING TO COMPLAIN TOO EITHER, BUT IT'S NOT THAT KIND OF A THING THAT NORMALLY CATCHES PEOPLE'S ATTENTION.
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WOULD PUT THERE.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE A ROAD DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE A WALKWAY.
>> [NOISE] THERE IS OTHER SIDEWALK ON HOLLAND.
>> BOTH SIDE. YEAH. ANTHONY CONFIRMED THAT THERE IS A SIDEWALK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOLLAND.
>> YOU'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING US LITTLE SIDEWALK THERE TO GO AROUND THAT CURVE OVER HERE DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK BY BUILDING FIVE?
>> YEAH. FROM THE CURVE DIRECTLY TO BUILDING FIVE.
>> GO AHEAD AND DO THAT, NO BIG DEAL.
>> NOW WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT CONNECTION.
>> BUT I THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO DO THAT.
>> MY QUESTION IS, DOES THE RESIDENT WANTED I AM CURIOUS, HOW DID THEY GET ZONING NOTICES AND THEY HAVE BEEN REQUESTED IT?
>> THEY WOULDN'T JUST BE CLEAR THAT WHEN THEY GET ZONING NOTICES FOR THIS.
>> SO WHY DON'T WE BRING THE APPLICANT UP HERE AND JUST ASK THE QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT IF YOU DON'T MIND, SIR.
>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS BASICALLY JUST A SIDEWALK AND.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YEAH. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> I WILL ABSOLUTELY. JEREMY NELSON, 805 DOVE CREEK PARK, MIDLOTHIAN IN TEXAS.
[00:20:04]
BASICALLY JUST A SIDEWALK CONNECTION FROM THE WESTERN MOST BUILDING TO THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK, THAT'S A LONG HAUL AND DRIVE.>> I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT.
[OVERLAPPING] LD5 AROUND THE TRASH CAN INTO THE [NOISE] JUST REFRESH MY MEMORY HERE.
>> I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THIS SITE.
I DON'T SEE ANY COLLIDING ISSUES AND WE HAVE ENOUGH ROOM THERE.
WE NEEDED TO PUT A RAMP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION.
BUT AGAIN, I GUESS I WOULD ASK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD DO TO THE SITE PLAN PROCESS AND NOT HOLD THIS [INAUDIBLE].WELL CONSIDERING THIS MEETS ALL PUBLIC SAFETY RULES AS IMPLEMENT RECYCLING OPEN SPACE.
>> THAT REQUIRE YOU TO DO THAT AT THIS POINT.
IF YOU THINK THERE'S A SUGGESTION.
WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU DO THAT FOR ANY SITE PLAN PHASE. [NOISE]
>> YEAH. I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT
>> AND I GOT ANOTHER QUESTION THAN THAT FOR [OVERLAPPING] ANTHONY.
IF YOU WANT TO STAY TIGHT FOR JUST A SECOND.
ANTHONY WE TALKED ABOUT THE RETAINING WALL OVER ON THE NOW SWITCHING OVER TO THE CUSTER ROAD SIDE.
>> MY QUESTION WAS WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE PUTTING A SCREENING WALL UP AGAINST A GROVE OF TREES WHERE THERE'S NO ANY RESIDENTIAL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT SCREENING WALL.
AND YOU SAID THAT THE SCREENING WALL WOULD END 30 FEET BEFORE WE GET TO PRESTON OR CUSTER. [OVERLAPPING] SORRY.
>> IN THIS AREA, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE TREES THAT ARE THERE TO ALLOW FOR A DETENTION AREA.
THE TREE PRESERVATION AREA THAT'S DISCUSSED IN THE STAFF REPORT, MAINLY REFERS TO ALL OF THIS AREA OVER HERE TO THE NORTH OF THAT ENTRANCE DRIVES.
YOU'VE GOT YOUR MEDIAN HERE ON CUSTER AND THEN THIS ACCESS DRIVE THEN TO THE SOUTH OF THAT IS A PROPOSED DETENTION POND.
>> OKAY. MY QUESTION TO YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT WAS THE, ON THE HOA SIDE OF IT OBVIOUSLY, THE TREES ARE ALL STAYING THERE.
>> I UNDERSTAND HAVING AN EIGHT-FOOT MASONRY WALL BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES IN THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
BUT AS YOU GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO CUSTER FEELS LIKE WE HAVE JUST A OR ALMOST MAKING THE APPLICANT BUILD AN EIGHT-FOOT MASONRY WALL TO BLOCK THE TREES FROM THE DETENTION POND.
NOW, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE.
YOU SAID 30 FEET IN, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO EARLIER, YESTERDAY OR TODAY TO MEASURE THAT.
>> THE SET BACK LINE IS DRAWN ON HERE.
SO IT SHOULD BE ABOUT RIGHT THERE.
PLANTS, NOT VERY GOOD. LET'S TRY THIS.
>> LET ME ASK A QUESTION. IS THE RETAINING WALL TO OUR.
>> SCREENING WALL [OVERLAPPING].
>> RETAINING WALL TO OUR STANDARDS.
>> THE SCREENING WALL IS EIGHT FEET IN [OVERLAPPING].
>> IN BETWEEN A COMMERCIAL AND A RESIDENTIAL.
>> SO THIS MEETS THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY AND OUR ORDINANCES?
>> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT A QUESTION THEN ABOUT WHAT YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT WITH THAT WALL. [NOISE].
>> YOU'VE ALREADY STATED [OVERLAPPING].
>> I GUESS MORE PARTICULARLY A SPECIFIC QUESTION THEN.
DID YOU ALL CONSIDER REQUESTING FROM US THAT YOU'D BE ALLOWED TO DO A LIVING SCREEN FOR THE PORTION THAT'S THROUGH THE FLOODPLAIN AND THROUGH THE GREEN OPEN SPACE VERSUS PUTTING A WALL THROUGH THAT OPEN SPACE.
>> WELL, I THINK THERE MAY JUST BE A LITTLE CONFUSION.
THE SCREENING WALL WOULD, TO EXTEND IT THROUGH THIS BASICALLY CHANNEL WOULD NOT BE A GOOD IDEA.
I THINK WE'RE ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT OUR SCREENING WALL WOULD IN SOMEWHERE PASS THIS PROPERTY LINE, THIS EASTERN MOST PROPERTY, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE, SOME FEET THAT MAKES SENSE.
BUT WE CERTAINLY WOULD NOT WANT TO EXTEND A MASONRY SCREENING WALL DOWN THE CHANNEL THROUGH THE FLOW LINE AND THEN BACKUP 30 FEET FROM THE ROAD.
WE WOULD HAVE TO I GUESS MAYBE IT'S JUST WE HAVE TO PUT SO MUCH INFORMATION ON THIS SITE PLAN OR ON THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO SEE WHERE THAT DELINEATION IS SOMETIMES, BUT IT IS CERTAINLY NOT OUR INTENTION TO EXTEND THE MASONRY SCREEN WALL ACROSS THE WEST RELATIVE CREEK TRIBUTARY TO THAT WOULD BE A
[00:25:03]
[NOISE] ACTUALLY WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA FROM HYDRAULIC SAME POINT.>> YEAH. YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION PERFECTLY, THEN I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT REQUIRING YOU TO TRY TO BUILD A WALL THROUGH THAT SPACE, THEN THAT IT'LL END SOMEWHERE THAT MAKES SENSE.
CLOSER TO THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
>> YEAH. WE'LL DEFINITELY HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE SCREEN THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, BUT SOMEWHERE PAST THAT POINT, WE'LL HAVE TO END IT JUST SO WE DON'T REALLY KNOW IF WE THROW A BALL IN THERE, IT'S GOING TO CAUSE A HUGE ISSUE HYDRAULICALLY.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS PICTURING WAS THE WALL BEING THE CAUSING BIG PROBLEM IN THEIR.
>> YES, STEVE, THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS DONE FOR THE CUSTER BRIDGES PROPERTY ZONE RETELL, THAT'S AT THE SOUTH, THEN FURTHER ON DOWN, THERE WAS NO WALL THAT WAS BUILT THERE.
JUST A LIVING SCREEN [OVERLAPPING] WEATHER, TOPOGRAPHY.
>> SOME ADDITIONAL SCREENING WE COULD DO, LIVING SCREEN OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE FROM JUST A DRAINING STANDPOINT.
>> THAT'S ALL I HAVE COMMISSIONER COX ON THIS ONE.
>> DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 5?
>> WE HAVE TO APPROVE ITEM 5 IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOX.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
>> MOTION CARRIES 501. ITEM 5 IS APPROVED.
[6. Open Space Plan & Site Plan: Gateway Church Addition, Block A, Lot 1 (OS21-0008 & SP21-0007)]
ITEM 6 7 SPACE PLAN AND SITE PLAN, GATEWAY CHURCH TRADITION, BLOCK A LOT ONE, WEST 21-0008 AND SP 21-0007 OWNERS GATEWAY CHURCH.>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THIS ITEM WAS IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY STAFF.
BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT [INAUDIBLE] COMMISSIONER HAS QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?
>> YEAH. FOLLOWING ON THE ANTHONY WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, MY CONCERN WAS THAT WE HAVE A SIDEWALK IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE CONTINUED ONTO THE PROPERTY IS JUST GOING I GUESS, REMAIN A DEAD END.
ONE OF THE PLANTS, I GUESS WE CAN GET A RE-ORIENTED TO IT.
THE BEST WAY TO LOOK AT IS DOWN KIND OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY.
>> YEAH, RIGHT THERE. IT SHOWS THE SIDEWALK THAT'S GOING NORTH ALONG LEGACY THAT WILL BE CONNECTED TO OBVIOUSLY.
THEN IT SHOWS A LITTLE STUB OUT OF A SIDEWALK GOING TO THE WEST.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THAT'S JUST GOING TO REMAIN UNCOMPLETED STUB OUT.
>> YES, I DID HAVE A CHANCE OF FOLLOW-UP WITH TRAFFIC ENGINEERING.
SO WE WOULD TAKE THAT STUB OUT AND TAKE IT ALL THE WAY DOWN AND THEN CONNECT IT INTO THE SIDEWALK IN EDGE TO THEM.
SO I DID TO EITHER HAVEN'T HAD CHANCE TO TALK TRAFFIC UNTIL RECENTLY, BUT
>> THAT'S PERFECT, THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION.
>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM 6?
>> APPROVE ITEM 6 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINDLE.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
EXCELLENT. [OVERLAPPING] [NOISE]
[9. Public Hearing - Replat: Hills of Kingswood, Phase 1, Block A, Lots 128 & 129 (RP21-0003)]
TONIGHT WE HAVE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE AGENDA.EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS PRECEDED BY A STAFF AND INTRODUCTION OF THE REQUEST.
THE APP PINS AND PER MINUTE, TEN MINUTES TO MAKE HIS OR HER PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION.
FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF AND APPLICANT BY THE COMMISSION, THOSE WISHING SPEAKER, WELCOME TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
ALL SPEAKERS, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT, NEED TO COMPLETE A SPEAKER'S CARD AND PROVIDE IT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.
THEY'RE ORGANIZED GROUPS AND TENANTS.
WE SUGGEST THAT YOU SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO PRESENT YOUR POSITIONS.
PLEASE AVOID REPEATING WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS HAVE IN STATING THAT YOU AGREE WITH THEIR COMMENTS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU ONLY HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
REPEAT APPEARANCES TO THE PODIUM ARE NOT PERMITTED.
FOR ALL PERSONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER TESTIMONY WILL BE PERMITTED UNLESS THE CASES TABLE TO A FUTURE DATE AND THE COMMISSION INCLUDES IN THEIR MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO A FUTURE MEETING.
AFTER CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF OR THE APPLICANT.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ONLY MAKES A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ZONING CASES UNLESS THE COMMISSION DENIES THE CASE AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT APPEAL THE DENIAL.
FINAL ACTION REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF ASKED TO WHEN THE CASE WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
ALL RIGHT, FIRST ITEM UP, PUBLIC HEARING, RE-PLAN, HILLS OF KINGWOOD, PHASE ONE BLOCK A, LOTS 128 AND 129, RP21- 0003, OWNERS, THE STAGGER NOBLE, AND SILTANA C. NOBLE.
I'M SORRY IF I BUTCHERED THAT FIRST NAME AND [LAUGHTER] I HOPE I DID OKAY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE PURPOSE OF THIS RE-PLAN, IT'S TO COMBINE TWO LOTS INTO ONE, AND TO ABANDON THE EASEMENTS NECESSARY TO COMBINE THE LOTS.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED THIS EVENING.
>> ALL RIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? WOULD THEY CARE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME?
>> OKAY. DO I HAVE A MOTION OPEN TO PUBLIC HEARING?
>> MOSTLY MY GESTURE BOX SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ACCOUNT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
[00:30:04]
>> ANY OPPOSE MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME?
>> WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC CARE.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MR. MORGAN.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
>> ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES 5-0.
MY QUESTION, THIS DOESN'T CREATE ANY IRREGULAR LOT CHALLENGES WITH.
>> NO SO THIS MEAN SINGLE-FAMILY 8.5, IT WELL EXCEEDS THOSE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEPTH AND THE WIDTH OF THE LOT. IT DOESN'T MEAN.
>> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY IS THE INTENTION TO BUILD ONE RESIDENT SO ON. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU ASK THEM WAS FOR SALE.
>> YEAH. MAYBE A NICE LITTLE LINE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM NINE.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NINE AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINDLE.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
ITEM TEN, PUBLIC HEARING RE-PLAN.
>>TERMS OF TALKS REAL QUICK. DID WE OPEN AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> ALL RIGHT. ITEM TEN PUBLIC HEARING, RE-PLAN.
[10. Public Hearing - Replat: Frisco Multi-Use Event Center, Block C, Lot 5 (RP21-0004)]
BRISCOE MULTI-USE EVENTS CENTER BLOCK C, LOT FIVE RP21 [INAUDIBLE] 0000.FOUR OWNERS BLUE STAR LAND PHASE 3, LLC.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THE THREE PLAQUE CONFORMS TO THE SITE PLAN AS P 1800 098, THAT STAFF APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 26, 2019.
THE REQUIRED INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN INSTALLED PER THE APPROVED CONSTRUCTION SET AND THE PROJECT IS NEARING COMPLETION.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED.
>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE. WOULD THEY CARE TO SPEAK? [INAUDIBLE] MOTION OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I GOT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
>> ANY OPPOSE MOTION CARRIES 500.
IS THERE ANYONE IN HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> WE'VE CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
>> SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE]. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM OR DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM TEN?
>> APPROVE ITEM TEN AND AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BOX.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
[11. Public Hearing - Zoning Amendment: Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - Food Truck Uses (ZA20-0010)]
PUBLIC HEARING ZONING AMENDMENT.AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINATES FOOD TRUCK USES ZA20.00101.
OWNERS, [INAUDIBLE] FRISCO. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TABLE [INAUDIBLE] AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE JANUARY 26TH, 2021 MEETING TO ALLOW STAFF TO RECONSIDER LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWED EXPANDED OPERATION TIMES A FOOD TRUCK, TEMPORARY SITES FOR LARGE SPECTATOR EVENTS.
SPECIFICALLY EXPANDED TIMES FOR BUSINESSES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> LET ME TAKE THIS OFF THE TABLE.
I GRAB A MOTION THAT TAKE THIS OFF THE TABLE.
CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KELLY.
>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
THIS HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE TABLE.
>> THOSE SPECIFIC EXPANDED OPERATIONAL TIMES ARE BEYOND WHENEVER THE HOST BUSINESS HAS OPERATIONAL HOURS.
THE HOST BUSINESS WOULD BE CLOSED AND THEY WILL BE ALLOWED OPERATIONAL HOURS FOR THE TEMPORARY SITE BEYOND THAT.
THAT'S WHEN A TIME THAT POSSIBLY THE HOST BUSINESS DOESN'T HAVE A DIRECT OBSERVATIONS OF THEIR PROPERTY OR MAY NOT HAVE BATHROOM FACILITIES FOR THE PUBLIC.
THE REVISED LANGUAGE THAT IS PROPOSED TONIGHT WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO THE ATTENDEES.
THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE WAS VERY NARROW, GEARED TOWARDS SPECTATOR SPORTS AND CONCERT EVENTS.
IT'S BEEN BROADENED A LITTLE BIT AND DIRECTED TOWARDS ATTENDEES.
THIS IS SIMILAR LANGUAGE THAT'S ALSO IN THE SPECIAL EVENTS ORDINATES THAT KIND OF GETS SCOPING OF WHAT THEIR ORDINANCE APPLIES TO.
I TRIED TO USE THE SAME LANGUAGE TO BE CONSISTENT.
I WOULD ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
ADDITIONAL TO PROPOSE LANGUAGE OR ANY OTHER IN THE ORDINATES.
ARE ASKING THE ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU.
>> WE ARE THE AFRICANS. IF WE WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME WHERE WE OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A MOTION TO OPEN TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[OVERLAPPING] MOTION BY MR. KELLY.
>> SECOND. BY MR. MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
I LIKE TO TAKE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS TIME FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM 11.
ANYONE CARE TO SPEAK TO SEE ME?
[00:35:03]
I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
ALL RIGHT COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS? THIS WAS REVISED AFTER A LENGTHY CONVERSATION ON THIS ITEM THREE TO FOUR WEEKS AGO.
APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE ON IT AND CENTS.
I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE LOOKED LIKE YOU GUYS HAD ADDRESSED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD AT THE LAST TIME.
ANY QUESTIONS, MR. [INAUDIBLE]?
>> THEY DID A GOOD JOB OF ANSWERING ALL THE QUESTIONS AND I THINK WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD PLAN HERE.
>> YES, I BET PHILIP, IS SO GLAD TO BE WORKING ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN [INAUDIBLE].
[LAUGHTER] AND WE APPRECIATE IT. GREAT WORK.
>> ABSOLUTELY. THANKS FOR THAT THOROUGHNESS AND THE ADJUSTMENTS.
I THINK IT'S A MUCH BETTER FIT AT THIS TIME.
DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM 11?
>> MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 11 AND SUBMITTED BY STAFF
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MORGAN.
>> SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER COHEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
CONGRATULATIONS. THANKS FOR ALL THE HARD WORK.
[12. Results of the February 16, 2021 City Council meeting.]
>> ITEM 12 RESULTS OF THE FEBRUARY 16TH, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THERE WAS NOT A MEETING, SO THERE'S NO RESULTS TO PRESENT TO YOU THIS EVENING.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> I BELIEVE THAT WAS PROBABLY EMERGENCY CANCEL.
>> DUE TO THE INCLEMENT WEATHER. THAT IS CORRECT.
>> WAS IT 80 DEGREES THAT DAY?
>> IT WAS SOMEWHERE. [INAUDIBLE]. ALL RIGHT.
[13. Schedule of future discussion items.]
ITEM 13. SCHEDULE A FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS.>> HAVE GUESSED THE ITEM, SO I DON'T CARE HERE FOR A MERIT BADGE OR FOR OUR SCHOOL ASSIGNMENT.
>> YES. [OVERLAPPING] WE ARE HERE TO LEARN
>> ASK ANY OF THEM EXCEPT ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> [LAUGHTER] WHAT ITEM IN THE LAST MEETING, WE TALKED ABOUT THE MEETING IN TWO WEEKS OVER SPRING BREAK.
WHO WOULD BE HERE FOR THE RECORD, I JUST WANT TO SAY I WILL NOT BE HERE ANY LONGER.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU NEED TO REINSTATE THAT, ON THAT DAY, YOU WILL NOT BE HERE.
>> I WILL NOT BE HERE ON THAT DAY.
>> OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WEREN'T RESIGNING.
LET THE RECORD REPRESENT THAT HE WOULD JUST BE MISSING ONE DAY.
>> AS FAR AS I KNOW, I'LL BE HERE.
>> OKAY. THAT LEAVES US WITH FIVE.
WE JUST HAVE TO HAVE FOUR VOTING MEMBERS.
MORE THAN LIKELY WE WILL HAVE THE LINKS ZONING THE CASE THAT NIGHT.
>> I WAS THINKING OF GOING, BUT I'M GOING TO PUT THE CITY AHEAD OF MY FAMILY. I'LL BE HERE.
>> ARE YOU GOING TO PUT THE CITY AHEAD OF YOUR FAMILY AND THEN [INAUDIBLE].
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO BRING UP THE STAFF'S ATTENTION TO THIS POINT.
JOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR US?
>> NO. HOPE. WELL, JUST ONE TIME DOES HELP TO HAVE TALKING ABOUT RETAIL PARKING MAYBE NEXT MONTH.
BEEN DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH AND SO WE'LL TRY TO SHAPE FOR THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE AGENDA IS, FLIGHT.
>> WE MAY NEED TO HAVE A ANOTHER TOUR OF THE PGA FACILITY.
NOW THAT [INAUDIBLE] ARE DONE IN MOST OF THE GREENS [LAUGHTER] , YOU'RE DONE.
>> LAST WEEK WOULD HAVE BEEN A TIME.
WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT RUNNING INTO IN ANY BODY?
>> I TRIED TO TAKE SNOWSHOES OUT THERE, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO VIOLATE ANY RULES [INAUDIBLE].
ANYTHING ELSE, FOLKS JUST LEAVES US WITH ONE THING THAT I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
>> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KELLY.
>> SECOND. BY COMMISSIONER BOX, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES FIVE ZERO.
[NOISE]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.