Aug 23, 2022 Frisco - Planning and Zoning Commission

THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ROUTINE AND NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS. ANY COMMISSION MEMBER MAKING SUCH REQUEST 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 A MAJORITY APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSION OR, AS WE HEARD PREVIOUSLY, DURING CITIZEN INPUT. TONIGHT WE HAVE ITEMS THREE THROUGH 21 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

COMMISSION, ARE THERE ANY ANY THAT NEED TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? SEEING NONE, MOVED TO APPROVE ITEMS THREE THROUGH 21 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

A MOTION FROM KENDALL TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KELLY.

THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

[22. Adoption of the 2023 Development Review Schedules]

TONIGHT. WE HAVE FOR TONIGHT, WE HAVE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE AGENDA AS WELL AS ADDITION ON THE REGULAR AGENDA, AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL ITEMS. I DO WANT TO REVIEW THE OVERALL PROCESS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

EACH PUBLIC HEARING IS PRECEDED BY STAFF INTRODUCTION OF THE REQUEST.

THE APPLICANT IS PERMITTED 10 MINUTES TO MAKE HIS OR HER PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF AND APPLICANT BY THE COMMISSION.

THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK ARE WELCOME TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

ALL SPEAKERS, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT, NEED TO COMPLETE A SPEAKER'S CARD AND PROVIDE IT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

IF THERE ARE ORGANIZED GROUPS IN ATTENDANCE, WE SUGGEST THAT YOU SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO PRESENT YOUR POSITION OR POSITIONS.

PLEASE AVOID REPEATING WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS OTHER THAN STATING THAT YOU AGREE WITH THEIR COMMENTS.

THE TIME LIMIT IS 5 MINUTES PER SPEAKER TO ENSURE EVERYONE HAS A CHANCE TO SPEAK.

THE COMMISSION MEMBERS CAN VOTE TO LIMIT SPEAKING TIME IF A LARGE VOLUME OF PEOPLE ARE WISHING TO SPEAK.

PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU HAVE ONLY ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

REPEAT APPEARANCES TO THE PODIUM ARE NOT PERMITTED.

AFTER ALL, PERSONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE CASE WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER TESTIMONY WILL BE PERMITTED UNLESS THE CASE IS TABLED 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 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'S SERVICES STAFF AS TO WHEN THE CASE WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE COUNCIL.

COMMISSION, I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT PROCEDURE HERE FOR A MOMENT, AND WE I TALKED ABOUT A PROCEDURE THAT WE PUT IN TO PRACTICE DURING OUR LAST MEETING REGARDING IF WE HAVE AN ITEM THAT NEEDS TO BE TABLED.

AND IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES TO DO SO AND CHOOSES TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING, I WOULD REQUEST THAT INSTEAD OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN REOPENING IT AS

[00:10:01]

WE DID.

AND BRIAN, I THINK YOU MADE THE FIRST MOTION ON THAT LAST TIME AND IT WAS A MOUTHFUL.

I WOULD ASK IF THE COMMISSION IS WISHING TO CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE THAT WE ACTUALLY DO NOT CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WE MAKE A MOTION WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING STILL OPEN JUST FOR EFFICIENCY SAKE AS WELL AS FOR OVERALL RULES OF OPERATION. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I LOVE THE EFFICIENCY.

I'M GLAD IT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP.

SO FOR YOU TO DO IT, I KNOW I TRIED TO CHANGE AND THEN I SAID I WASN'T VERY EFFICIENT, SO I THOUGHT WE SHOULD GO AND CHANGE BACK.

SO APPRECIATE IT.

SO TONIGHT, FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, ITEM 20 ON THE REGULAR AGENDA, ITEM 22, ADOPTION OF THE 2023 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SCHEDULES.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, THERE ARE FOUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SCHEDULES THAT FALL UNDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY.

EACH OF THOSE SCHEDULES WERE PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET FOR REVIEW.

THESE SCHEDULES ARE BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR ADOPTION EACH YEAR PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND ESTABLISH THE FILING AND REVIEW DATES FOR ALL PROJECTS THAT THE PLANNING DIVISION REVIEWS.

AGAIN, THESE SCHEDULES WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AND ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL THIS EVENING AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I APPRECIATE IT. AND IN REVIEW THESE SCHEDULES AS IN EVERY YEAR DUE ACCOUNT FOR THE FACT THAT WE HAVE ONE MEETING IN JULY AND ONE MEETING IN DECEMBER, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. ANY QUESTIONS? MOTION. MOVE TO APPROVE THE ADOPTION OF THE 2023 DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW SCHEDULES AS PRESENTED.

HAVE A MOTION, ELLIE.

SECOND FOR MORGAN. ALL IN FAVOR.

OPPOSED MOTION PASSES FOUR ZERO.

CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU.

[23. Modifications to Planned Development-280: N/A]

REALLY? ITEM 23.

MODIFICATIONS TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO 80.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO MODIFY TABLE 4-1, AS PERMITTED BY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO 80.

TABLE FOR DASH ONE IS THE TABLE WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO AID MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE FIELDS PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT IDENTIFIES THERE ARE MINIMUM AND OR MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SPECIFIED LOT TYPES BY SUB DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING MODIFICATIONS TO THE TABLE THIS EVENING, PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE EAST VILLAGE SUBDISTRICT, TO ALLOW FOR MINOR FLEXIBILITY AS THEY WORK THROUGH THE PROPOSED LAND PLAN FOR THAT SUBDISTRICT.

STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AS THERE ARE CORRESPONDING REDUCTIONS AND INCREASES.

SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO IF YOU LOOK UP THE MARKUP THAT'S ON THE SCREEN HERE, YOU WILL SEE IN THE EAST VILLAGE BETWEEN THE FIELDS, RESIDENTIAL, THREE A AND THREE B, THERE'S AN INCREASE OF 295 LOTS.

LOOKING ACROSS THE TABLE THROUGH THE VARIOUS SUBDISTRICTS AND PRODUCT TYPES, YOU WILL SEE A REDUCTION IN 295 PRODUCT TYPES.

SO THERE'S AN EQUAL GIVE AND TAKE.

SAME THING FOR THE MULTIPLEX.

THE TABLE FOR DASH ONE TODAY ALLOWS A MAXIMUM OF 250.

THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REDUCE THAT DOWN TO ZERO.

AND THEN THOSE 250 MULTIPLEX UNITS HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED AMONGST SOME OF THE OTHER SUBDISTRICTS, AS SHOWN HERE ON THE TABLE.

SO IN ADDITION TO IT BEING AN EQUAL INCREASE TO DECREASE, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO NOT PROPOSING TO MODIFY THE PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CAP, WHICH IN THIS CASE HAPPENS TO BE 14.9 FOR THE EAST VILLAGE PER THE ORIGINALLY ADOPTED PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO 80.

PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO 80 DOES PROVIDE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORITY TO MODIFY A TABLE FOR DASH ONE AFTER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION ON THE REQUEST.

THIS REQUEST IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL THIS EVENING AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THEN I HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT ASK THE REST.

THE COMMISSION JUST YOU MADE A POINT THAT THE DENSITY CAP DOES NOT CHANGE FOR THE EAST VILLAGE.

THAT'S CORRECT. IS IT CORRECT THAT THE DENSITY CAP DOES NOT CHANGE FOR ANY OF THE VILLAGES? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY, GREAT COMMISSION.

ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? JOHN, I'VE JUST A BASIC QUESTION.

NON PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPEAK OR WITHOUT TAKE A VOTE OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK IF THEY WISH? YOU WOULD HAVE TO OPEN IT UP SINCE IT'S NOT ADVERTISED.

YEAH. MY COMMENT IS THAT I THINK WE'VE HAD ONE OF THESE NOT TOO LONG AGO.

THAT'S CORRECT. THIS IS SUCH A COMPLEX PROJECT THAT WE WOULD EXPECT SOME TWOS AND FROS HERE AS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

SO NO SURPRISE BUT GLAD WE'RE KEEPING IT AT AT THE AUTHORIZED LEVEL SO.

[00:15:12]

QUESTIONS. THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? ITEM 23 IS SUBMITTED BY STAFF.

I HAVE A MOTION FOR MORGAN FOR APPROVAL.

SECOND. SECOND FROM COLON.

THANK YOU. ITEM 24, OPEN SPACE

[24. Open Space Plan & Preliminary Site Plan: Preston Lebanon Crossing Addition, Block A, Lot 11 (OS22-0056 & PSP22-0036)]

PLAN AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN.

PRESTON, LEBANON CROSSING ADDITION BLOCK A, LOT 11 OS 20 20056 AND PSP 22-0036 OWNERS KIMCO FRISCO LP.

THANK YOU, SHERIFF COMMISSIONERS.

THESE PROJECTS WERE SUBMITTED ON JUNE 27, 2022, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED A 30 DAY EXTENSION AT THE JULY 26, 2022 MEETING BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED THESE PROJECTS AND FOUND THAT THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND OR OTHER APPLICABLE CITY CODES, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS, AS NOTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST PER THE REASONS IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THANK YOU. AND JUST TO REITERATE, I TRY TO SAY THIS EVERY TIME IS THIS IS A DISAPPROVAL.

THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS WHAT WE CONVENIENTLY CALL A SHOT CLOCK, THAT WE HAVE TO DECISION THINGS WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

AND SO THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT THIS MAY NOT MOVE FORWARD, BUT IT DOESN'T MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS INSIDE THE TIMELINE.

THAT'S CORRECT. GREAT.

THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.

I MOTION TO DISAPPROVE.

I'M 24 FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND DELEGATE THE STAFF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE REASONS FOR THEIR DISAPPROVAL.

I HAVE A MOTION FROM KENDALL.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KELLY.

ALL IN FAVOR.

ITEM 25, OPEN SPACE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FIREFLY PARK BLOCKED A BLOCK A LOTS ONE THROUGH FOUR BLOCKS B THROUGH G LOT ONE BLOCK H LOTS ONE AND TWO S 20 20062 AND PSP 20 20040 OWNERS FRISCO NORTH DEVELOPMENT LLC AND FRISCO EDC.

ITEM 24 IS DISAPPROVED.

[25. Open Space Plan & Preliminary Site Plan: Firefly Park, Block A, Lots 1-4, Blocks B-G, Lot 1, Block H, Lots 1 and 2 (OS22-0062 & PSP22-0040)]

THANK YOU AGAIN AND COMMISSIONERS.

THESE PROJECTS WERE SUBMITTED ON JUNE 27TH AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED A 30 DAY EXTENSION AT THE JULY 26, 2022 MEETING.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED THESE PROJECTS AND HAS FOUND THAT THEY FAIL TO COMPLY WITH CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND OR OTHER APPLICABLE CODES, AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

FOR THIS REASON, STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

NUMBER 25. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I HAVE A MOTION I MOVE TO DISAPPROVE ITEM NUMBER 25 FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF'S REPORT AND DELEGATE TO STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL OF A MOTION FROM COHEN ON 25 SECOND SECOND FOR MORGAN ALL IN FAVOR I OPPOSED.

ITEM 26, OPEN SPACE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN THE HEIGHTS AT FRISCO BLOCK A, LOTS THREE, FOUR AND FIVE OS 22-0063 AND PSP 22-004 FOR OWNERS FRISCO SKY LLC.

ITEM 25 IS DISAPPROVED.

[26. Open Space Plan & Preliminary Site Plan: The Heights at Frisco, Block A, Lots 3, 4 and 5 (OS22-0063 & PSP22-0044]

THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

THESE PROJECTS WERE SUBMITTED ON JULY 11, 2022 THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED A 30 DAY EXTENSION AT THE AUGUST 9TH MEETING BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 0.

STAFF IS REVIEWED THESE PROJECTS AND FOUND THAT DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCES, ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND OTHER APPLICABLE CITY CODES, AS NOTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. FOR THIS REASON, STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVAL ON ITEM 26 FROM STAFF.

ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, COULD I HAVE A MOTION? MOVED TO DISAPPROVE ITEM 26 FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

DELEGATE TO STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THIS APPLICANT FOR THE REASONS OF APPROVAL OF DISAPPROVAL.

MOTION FROM MORGAN.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KENDALL.

OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES FOR ZERO.

ITEM 26 IS DISAPPROVED.

[27. Site Plan: LDC Clearview Addition, Block A, Lots 3R & 5 (SP22-0105)]

[00:20:01]

ITEM 27, SITE PLAN LDC CLEAR VIEW ADDITION BLOCK A, LOTS THREE R AND FIVE SP 22-0105 OWNERS RSSCSAIL 2016-C5-TX TQFLLC . COMMISSIONERS, THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR THIS PROJECT TO BE WITHDRAWN. THAT WAS RECEIVED THIS AFTERNOON.

OUR RECOMMENDATION HAD BEEN DISAPPROVAL BASED ON THE ITEMS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

WITHDRAWAL OF THIS APPLICATION WOULD HAVE NO BEARING, PARTICULARLY ON THE REQUEST ON THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE NEXT ITEM.

SO WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THE WITHDRAWAL.

HOWEVER, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WOULD LIKE TO DO THE DISAPPROVAL INSTEAD, THAT IS UP TO YOUR DISCRETION.

WHAT BOTH READ. I GUESS SINCE THEY'RE ASKING WITHDRAWAL, WE SHOULDN'T READ THEM IN TOGETHER.

WELL, SINCE YOU ALREADY OPENED THIS ONE, JUST TAKE ACTION AND THEN OPEN THE NEXT ONE.

THANK YOU. SO ITEM 27 IS REQUESTED FOR WITHDRAWAL.

THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION WAS DISAPPROVAL.

THAT'S CORRECT. COMMISSION.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOR THOUGHTS ON WHICH MOTION SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOVE TO ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL FOR ITEM 27? I HAVE A MOTION FROM KELLY TO ACCEPT THE WITHDRAWAL.

SECOND. SECOND FOR MORGAN.

ITEM 28 IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

ITEM 27 IS WITHDRAWN.

[28. Public Hearing - Replat: LDC Clearview Addition, Block A, Lots 3R & 5 (RP22-0021)]

REPLAT LDC CLEARVIEW EDITION BLOCK A LOTS 3 R AND 5 RP22-0021 OWNERS RSSCSAIL 2016-C5-TXTQFLLC.

COMMISSIONERS, THIS ITEM RECEIVED A 30 DAY EXTENSION AND A PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED AND IT WAS TABLED ON JULY 26, THEREFORE THIS MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE TABLE.

HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE THIS FROM THE TABLE.

SO MOVED.

A MOTION FROM CONE.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KENDALL.

OPPOSED. THE MOTION PASSES FOUR ZERO.

THE ITEM IS REMOVED FROM THE TABLE.

THANK YOU. AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION AS IT DID NOT HAVE A SITE PLAN TO SUBSTANTIATE THE LOT OF SUBDIVISION OF THIS LOT.

SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE A MOTION FROM KENDALL.

SECOND. SECOND FROM MORGAN.

OPPOSED. MOTION PICTURES FOUR ZERO.

THIS IS PUBLIC HEARING.

I DO HAVE A SPEAKER CARD FROM MICHAEL DAVIS.

HE'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

MR. DAVIS, IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU.

MICHAEL DAVIS, 3613 SPRING VALLEY DRIVE, BEDFORD, TEXAS.

I GUESS I WANT TO START OFF BY APOLOGIZING TO MR. LETTELLEIR HOW THIS PROJECT GOT OFF.

GOT STARTED. WE BEGAN THE PROCESS IN MARCH.

AND I READ THE ORDINANCE AND IT'S BEING A REPLAT, IT'S MOST OF THE ORDINANCE IN THE SUBDIVISION IS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AND SO NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND.

I STARTED BEGINNING I BEGAN REACHING OUT TO THE CITY BECAUSE IT SAYS, PLEASE REACH OUT TO THE CITY.

SO WE REACHED OUT VIA EMAIL AND SOME AND ASK A VERY, VERY, VERY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

YOU KNOW, PARKING, INFRASTRUCTURE, THESE TYPE QUESTIONS.

AND ALL I RECEIVED WAS A CHECKLIST.

AND SO I WAS FRUSTRATED.

SO I SENT A LETTER TO MR. LETTELLEIR AND PROBABLY REGRET THAT DEEPLY.

BUT I APOLOGIZE FOR DOING SO.

BUT ANYWAY.. IT'S FORGOTTEN ABOUT.

I THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.

BUT AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE SIDE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS CAN SEE THE PICTURE, BUT I CAN SEE IT HERE.

AND IT'S IT WAS IT WAS APPROVED IN 2004.

IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION, IT WAS THE OWNER OF THE LAND DEFAULTED THIS LAST YEAR AND MY CLIENT THE ONE THAT YOU SO ELOQUENTLY READ. SORRY, I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT AGAIN.

YEAH, OKAY. THEY TOOK IT OVER AND THEY'VE HAD IT ON THE MARKET.

AND HONESTLY, IT'S INCREDIBLY TOUGH TO SELL IT IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION, WHICH I KNOW HARDSHIP IS REALLY NOT A THING.

[00:25:08]

BUT THEY CALLED ME AND ASK AND FOR LIKE THREE MONTHS I TRIED TO ASK STAFF FOUR QUESTIONS AND SAY, HEY, HOW DO I NEED TO DO THIS? HOW DO I NEED TO DO THIS? SO WE SUBMITTED THE PLAT AND THEY IMMEDIATELY SAID, WELL, THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THE APPLICATION, WE NEED PROOF THAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. SO WE WAIT 30 MORE DAYS AND WE RESUBMIT AND THEN THEY'RE LIKE, OKAY, WE'VE GOT TO DO A SITE PLAN.

SO, SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE THAT WE ASKED FOR THE DELAY TO TRY TO LET US PLAY AND CATCH UP WITH IT.

AND THEN AN ELEPHANT KIND OF JUMPED IN THE ROOM ON US.

AND IT'S OUR IT'S OUR HOPE THAT THROUGH DISAPPROVAL, WE CAN MOVE INTO THAT FORMAT AND SIT DOWN WITH CITY AND TRY TO COME WITH CITY STAFF AND COME UP WITH A WAY FORWARD.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, THE WAY FORWARD IS IS NOT WHAT ALL OF THOSE ALPHABET LETTERS ARE HOPING FOR.

TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I DO.

SINCE I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF MINUTES, I WANT TO I WANT TO BLOW YOU GUYS HORN.

I STARTED SURVEYING HERE IN FRISCO IN 2003.

I WAS MAPPING EL DORADO PARKWAY FROM 423 OVER TO THE DNT AND I WAS STANDING AT THE INTERSECTION OF DNT AND EL DORADO PARKWAY, AND I WAS IN A CORNFIELD, AND THAT WAS ONLY 18, 19 YEARS AGO.

SO YOU GUYS HAVE DONE AN AMAZING JOB.

AND I'M GOING TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

THIS CITY SHOULD BE A MODEL FOR ANY GROWING CITY ON THIS PLANET.

FOR GOODNESS SAKES, YOU GOT THREE PRO TEAMS AND AND JUST AND IT DOES ALL START HERE.

I WAS ON P&Z IN BEDFORD FOR SEVEN YEARS AND I, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT ALL BEGINS HERE.

AND YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A FANTASTIC JOB.

SO IF IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M PUFFING YOU UP, I AM.

BECAUSE YOU DESERVE IT, YOU TRULY DO, AND YOU'RE YOUR PREDECESSORS AS WELL.

BUT WITH THIS PLANT, WE JUST BELIEVE THAT THE ROAD BETWEEN WAS A NATURAL DIVIDING LINE.

IT WAS IT'S A ROAD BETWEEN THE TWO PARKING LOTS.

WE RECEIVED THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVAL.

AND THERE ARE TWO ITEMS LIST.

ONE IS WE HAD A TYPO IN OUR NOTARY STATEMENT AND THE OTHER ONE WAS A SUBDIVISION OR ORDINANCE.

1.0D3, SITE PLAN SP 22-0105 IS REQUIRED TO BE APPROVED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PLAT, AND I DON'T WANT TO BE CONDESCENDING IN ANY WAY, BUT WHEN I READ SECTION 4.01D3, IT SAYS SITE PLAN APPROVAL WHERE SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS REQUIRED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

AND THESE ARE JUST WORDS.

BUT THEY SAY PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT, THIS SITE HAS BEEN HERE FOR 15 YEARS OR ALMOST 20.

NO APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAT, MINOR PLAT, REPLAT APPROVAL SHALL BE ACCEPTED UNTIL THE SITE PLAN IS DONE AND WE WORK DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO GET A SITE PLAN.

BUT. MY CLIENT HAS HIRED SOMEBODY ELSE.

THAT'S MORE OF A PLANNER. I'M JUST A LAND SURVEYOR.

AND WHAT WE ARE REALLY WANTING TO DO IS TO GET THROUGH THIS SHOT CLOCK AND MEET WITH WITH STAFF AND PEOPLE AND TRY TO COME UP WITH A WAY FORWARD. BECAUSE THEN WE DO UNDERSTAND THE DISAPPROVAL AND LIKE I SAY, YOU GUYS, I'LL JUST.

I'M IMPRESSED WITH FRISCO AND I DON'T WANT TO.

I'M OUT OF TIME, SO IF YOU GOT ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THEM THE BEST I CAN.

OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, WE'LL ASK AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? PROBABLY NOT.

THERE ARE NOT MANY PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE FOR THOSE WATCHING.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED. I HAVE A MOTION FROM KENDALL.

SECOND.

SECOND FROM CONE. ALL IN FAVOR.

PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WILL MAKE SOME COMMENTS.

PLEASE. SO EVERY ONE OF YOU ARE AWARE OF THE HOUSE BILL? SO WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION ON PLATS WITHIN A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME.

SITE PLANS, OPEN SPACE PLANS.

SO THAT'S OUT THERE.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PLACED ON CITIES BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

NUMBER TWO, THE REASON FOR THE SITE PLAN, IF SOMEBODY'S SUBDIVIDING PROPERTY, WE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LOTS CAN STAND ALONE.

SO WE'RE NOT CREATING NONCONFORMING LOTS, NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, NONCONFORMING AND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.

SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A SITE PLAN TO EVALUATE.

AND THIRD, THE LAND AUTHORIZATION FORM.

THE REASON WE REQUIRE THAT IS MAKE SURE THE OWNER HAS GIVEN THEIR APPROVAL FOR THAT APPLICATION TO BE SUBMITTED BECAUSE WITHOUT

[00:30:08]

THAT ANOTHER CITY I WORKED IN, THERE WAS A ZONING CASE WHERE THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED AND THE PROPERTY OWNER DID NOT KNOW IT UNTIL HE ACTUALLY CAME IN FOR DEVELOPMENT.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WE GO THROUGH THAT, IS TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE I'S ARE DOTTED AND T'S ARE CROSSED.

OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND MR. DAVIS, AS YOU SAID, THE CITY OF FRISCO HAS DONE PHENOMENAL THINGS.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE IS WE PUT IN PROCESS AND PROCESSES THERE FOR A NUMBER OF THOSE REASONS THAT MR. LETTELLEIR JUST RESTATED TO PROTECT US AS A CITY.

I'M A RESIDENT OF THE CITY, WHICH MEANS I WANT TO PROTECT, I WANT ME PROTECTED AS A TAXPAYER.

AND YOU AS REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER SHOULD BE PROTECTED AS WELL.

SO SOMETHING THAT, LIKE HE JUST SAID, DOESN'T HAPPEN AND THERE ARE NO SURPRISES.

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT CORNER TO THE CITY.

IT'S THE FIRST THING. IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT CORNER.

OBVIOUSLY, THE MALL WAS IT WAS JUST SITS TO THE OTHER SIDE IS WAS WAS A STARTER FOR A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY.

SO I WOULD SAY PLEASE WORK WITH CITY STAFF.

I THINK MR. LETTELLLEIR SAID THE LETTERS IN THE PAST SO ACCEPT THAT AND BUT WE AS CHAIR I ASK THAT YOU WORK WITH CITY STAFF AND BRING THIS BACK IF THAT'S WHAT YOUR CLIENT CHOOSES AND MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS .

THEY'RE THERE FOR A REASON.

AND WE AND MY ROLE IN SERVING ON THIS COMMISSION FOR SIX YEARS HAS BEEN WE STAND BEHIND THAT AND I CONTINUE TO STAND BEHIND THE PROCEDURES THAT THE CITY HAS. SO I APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND SPEAKING.

SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION HAS? ONE THING I'D ADD IS THE SITE PLAN IS CRUCIAL AS IF IT GETS TIED, THAT RESUBMITTAL IS WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW PARKING WILL LAY OUT, HOW EASEMENTS MIGHT COME INTO PLAY OPEN SPACE.

SO AND I REALIZE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE SEE HOW THOSE WORK TOGETHER AND THAT SITE PLAN WILL ANSWER A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

IT MIGHT MAKE IT GO EXTREMELY SMOOTHLY, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.

YEAH. THERE'S NOT A TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK UNLESS YOU'RE ASKED A QUESTION.

I'M SORRY. OH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THIS IS RECOMMENDED FOR DISAPPROVAL FROM STAFF.

I MOVED TO DISAPPROVE ITEM 27.

28. I APOLOGIZE.

I MOVED TO DISAPPROVE ITEM 28 FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND DELEGATE THE STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE REASONS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL.

HAVE A MOTION FROM KENDALL.

SECOND, FROM MORGAN.

AND SIR, WORK WITH STAFF AND THEY'LL MAKE SURE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THE EXPECTATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.

I'LL JUST, MR. DAVIS, I'D JUST RECOMMEND YOU JUST WORK WITH SUZANNE AND STEPHANIE.

SHE'S A MANAGER, SO WORK WITH THOSE TWO.

[29. Public Hearing - Replat: T&M Frisco Addition, Block A, Lot 7 (RP22-0025)]

ITEM 29, PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT T&M FRISCO EDITION BLOCK A, LOT SEVEN RP 20-0025.

OWNERS KROGER, TEXAS LP.

COMMISSIONERS ON AUGUST 9TH, THIS APPLICATION WAS GRANTED A 30 DAY EXTENSION.

THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED AND IT WAS TABLED.

SO WE REQUEST THAT YOU REMOVE THIS ITEM FROM THE TABLE.

HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE THIS ITEM FROM THE TABLE.

SO MOVE. MOTION FROM KELLY.

SECOND FOR MORGAN. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE.

OPPOSED.

ITEM IS REMOVED FROM THE TABLE.

THIS REPLAT IS TO DEDICATE EASEMENTS NECESSARY FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ON THIS PROPERTY.

THAT DEVELOPMENT IS COMING TO COMPLETION AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REPLAT.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THOSE.

BUT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

COULD I HAVE A MOTION? [INAUDIBLE] THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MOTION FROM KELLY? SECOND.

SECOND FROM MORGAN. ALL IN FAVOR.

MOTION PASSES. WE ARE IN PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE APPLICANT.

SEEING NONE. I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE A MOTION FROM KENDALL.

SECOND. SECOND FROM CONE.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

COMMISSION ANY QUESTIONS OR CAN I HAVE A MOTION.

MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 29 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

HAVE A MOTION FROM KELLY.

SECOND FROM MORGAN. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. OPPOSED MOTION.

ITEM 29 IS APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED.

[30. Public Hearing - Replat: Prestmont Center, Block B, Lot 5 (RP22-0030)]

[00:35:03]

ITEM 30, PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT CENTER BLOCK B, LOT FIVE RP 22-0030.

OWNERS C H.

RETAIL FUND TWO.

DALLAS PRESTON STONE BAR, L.P..

COMMISSIONERS. THIS PROJECT WAS SUBMITTED ON JULY 25TH AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 30 DAY EXTENSION.

TO STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVE THE 30 DAY EXTENSION, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE THE ITEM TO SEPTEMBER 13, 2022.

QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

IF NOT, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO MOVE. MOTION FROM KELLY.

SECOND FROM KENDALL.

YOU GOT IT IN MAN. ALL IN FAVOR.

WE ARE IN PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF NOT CLOSE IN PUBLIC.

MOTION PASSES FOR ZERO.

CORRECT.

CORRECT. SO IF THE COMMISSION WOULD SO DEEM.

I'LL DO IT.

MOVE TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND APPROVE THE 30 DAY EXTENSION UNTIL THE SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 MEETING.

AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE A MOTION FROM KELLY.

SECOND. SECOND FROM MORGAN.

ITEM 30 IS TABLED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CONTINUED.

[31. Public Hearing - Replat: Frisco Square, Block A, Lot 1 (RP22-0032)]

ITEM 31, PUBLIC HEARING REPLY FRISCO SQUARE BLOCK A, LOT ONE.

RP 22- 0032, OWNERS COLUMBIA MEDICAL CENTER OF PLANO SUBSIDIARY L.P.

AND HTA FOREST PARK FRISCO, LLC.

COMMISSIONERS. THIS ITEM ALSO WAS SUBMITTED ON JULY 25 AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 30 DAY EXTENSION AND WE REQUEST THAT YOU GRANT THAT EXTENSION, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE THE ITEM TO SEPTEMBER 13, 2022.

QUESTIONS OF STAFF? CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED. HAVE A MOTION FROM CONE.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KENDALL.

OPPOSED MOTION PASSES FOUR ZERO.

WE ARE IN PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? COMMISSION, THIS IS ONCE AGAIN ONE THAT'S REQUESTED AS THE PRIOR CASE WAS.

IF SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

SO I MOVE TO APPROVE THE 30 DAY EXTENSION, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE THE ITEM TO SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

I HAVE A MOTION FOR MORGAN.

SECOND. SECOND FROM KELLY ALL IN FAVOR.

ITEM 31 IS TABLED AND WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED AS STATED.

[32. Results of the August 16, 2022, City Council meeting.]

NEXT ON THE AGENDA? ITEM 32 IS RESULTS OF THE AUGUST 16, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

COMMISSION, ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? JON ONE OF THE ITEMS WAS TABLED.

WAS THERE ANYTHING THAT WAS SAID PUBLICLY THAT YOU CAN SHARE WITH WHEN IT WAS TABLED? NO. ANSWERS THAT.

[INAUDIBLE] HEAR MORE OF THAT.

YOU CAN WATCH THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT IT WAS TABLED TO THE SEPTEMBER SIX MEETING.

[33. Schedule of future discussion items.]

COMMISSION SCHEDULE ANY SCHEDULE OF FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS. ONE THAT COMES TO MIND. I KNOW WHEN COVID HIT, A LOT OF PEOPLE START WORK FROM HOME OR DRESSING DOWN, WEARING BASKETBALL SHORTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND WHERE ARE YOU GOING? AND I JUST NOTICED THAT REALLY ONLY ONE PERSON KIND OF ALREADY BROUGHT THEIR GAME BACK.

JOHN LETTELLEIR IS WEARING A TIE.

I THINK HE'S THE ONLY ONE IN THE BUILDING.

GILLETTE. GILLETTE.

YEAH THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IF YOU START AT THE TOP.

START AT THE TOP. I JUST.

I JUST THOUGHT HE'S. HE'S SETTING THE BAR PRETTY HIGH FOR EVERYONE WEARING IT'S SUIT AND TIE.

SO MAYBE THAT WILL PERCOLATE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE STAFF.

MAYBE IT STARTS UP HERE WITH YOU.

I HAVE A REAL COMMENT. SO THE AP MAGAZINE HAD A REALLY GOOD ARTICLE ABOUT PARKING MINIMUMS THIS PAST MONTH, WHEREAS I THINK IT'D BE BENEFICIAL TO BRING PARKING BACK UP.

WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT UP IN THE NEXT YEAR.

THAT'S ONE OF THE PROJECTS, BUT PARKING IS A VERY COMPLICATED PROJECT.

AND SO I'LL JUST SAY THIS THERE'S PLACES THAT HAVE GOT RID OF THEIR PARKING MINIMUMS AND IT'S LIKE, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PARKING, THE PROJECT SUFFERS.

SO YOU KNOW.

AND WHERE ARE YOU LOCATED WITHIN? YOU'RE AN ISLAND TO UNTO YOURSELF AND YOU HAVE A LITTLE MORE CONTROL.

BUT WHEN YOU'RE PART OF SOMETHING LARGER AND YOU'RE IN COMPETITION ALMOST, I LIKE EMPLOYERS WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IT.

HEY, DO WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING? ALSO, THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, THEY'RE DOING PARKING STUDIES FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS,

[00:40:08]

AND I PROVIDED THEM A LIST OF INFORMATION THINGS TO CONSIDER.

THEY'RE NOT DOING ALL THE PARKING, BUT SEGMENTS WHAT'S DEEMED TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT, LIKE MIXED USE OFFICE AND MAYBE RETAIL.

BUT IT'S A VERY COMPLEX SUBJECT.

BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE PARKING SECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR NEXT YEAR.

OKAY, GREAT. YEAH. AND THE OTHER SIDE IS, I CAN'T THINK OF THE PLACE MAKING INDIVIDUAL WHO DOES A LOT OF PLACE MAKING AROUND AND AND HE'S VERY PRO A CERTAIN LEVEL OF PARKING. HE HE'S NOT SAYING REMOVE ALL PARKING BUT DO PARKING IN A STRATEGIC FASHION.

SO WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.

OKAY. IT IS VERY COMPLICATED.

IMPORTANT. YEAH. ANY OTHER ITEMS? I GOT TO COMMENT. YEAH.

YES, MR. LETTELLEIR.

SO. [INAUDIBLE] LORI AND JENNIFER.

THEY'RE ALL ONE OF THEM WILL BE SENDING OUT EMAILS ON WEDNESDAY PRIOR TO THE P AND Z MEETING.

THAT'S SIX DAYS BEFORE AROUND NOONTIME.

WE NEED TO KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE HERE AT THE MEETING.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE HERE AND WE DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD A QUORUM UNTIL LIKE TODAY.

AND SO I HAD ANOTHER COMMISSIONER THAT WAS LOOKING TO CHANGE.

THEY HAD A THEIR COMPANY HAD A DINNER TONIGHT.

AND SO HE'S ATTENDING THAT.

BUT ON WEDNESDAY, THE WEEK BEFORE THE P AND Z MEETING, CHECK YOUR EMAILS AND RESPOND TO LORI OR JENNIFER.

SO WE KNOW BEFOREHAND IF WE GOT QUORUM, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE QUORUM, ALL THESE ITEMS ARE WELL GET APPROVED BECAUSE WE GOT 30 DAYS TO ACT ON IT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE STATE REQUIREMENT.

AND I WOULD JUST ADD IS IF ANYONE KNOWS THEY'RE GOING TO BE OUT, DON'T WAIT FOR THAT WEDNESDAY.

LET'S LET STAFF KNOW BEFORE THAT.

AND 100% ON BOARD.

I'M JUST AND I REALIZE TWO COMMISSIONERS AREN'T HERE TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK AND I DON'T WANT TO ADD MORE WORK TO LORI AND JENNIFER, BUT WITH IT BEING A CITY EMAIL, DOES IT ADD A LAYER? IF I LIKE I TEXT, I WOULD TELL YOU IN HALF A SECOND.

IF YOU TEXT ME ON WEDNESDAY, YOU'LL KNOW WITHIN 5 SECONDS.

BUT MY EMAIL I MAY ONLY CHECK.

I DON'T WANT TO ADD THAT LAYER.

IF YOU SAY NO, YOU JUST NEED TO CHECK IT ON WEDNESDAY.

WE GOT IT. WE GOT ALL CITY EMAIL ACCOUNTS AND AS I'VE STATED BEFORE, I WANT YOU DO ALL YOUR CITY BUSINESS COMMISSIONERS ON THAT EMAIL. SO IF FOR ANY REASON SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO A SEARCH, IT'S LIMITED TO THAT.

BUT ONCE YOU DO IT ON YOUR PERSONAL DEVICES, YOU OPEN THAT UP.

SO THAT'S BEEN PART OF THE TRAINING THAT RYAN PITTMAN HAS PROVIDED IN THE PAST IS USE THAT CITY EMAIL.

SO I RECOMMEND I WOULD MAKE TO MYSELF AND EVERYONE ELSE IS I'M GOING TO PUT A REMINDER ON WEDNESDAYS TO CHECK MY CITY EMAIL..

AND THEN TEND TO SEND IT AROUND NOON TIME SO.

OKAY. GREAT. THAT LEAVES US WITH ONE ITEM.

MOVE TO ADJOURN. HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN FROM KELLY.

SECOND. SECOND FROM CONE.

ALL IN FAVOR.