[CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:02] GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRISCO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. WE ARE GATHERED AT 6101 FRISCO SQUARE BOULEVARD AND THE TIME IS 6:30 P.M. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONSISTS OF FRISCO RESIDENTS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. TONIGHT COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ARE STEVE CONE, JON KENDALL, SEAN MERRELL, TIFFANY WELLS, MICHAEL HOWARD AND WARREN RUIZ. MY NAME IS BRITTANY COLBERG AND I'M YOUR CHAIR. REPRESENTING STAFF TONIGHT ARE JOHN LETTELLEIR FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ROLANDREA RUSSELL, SEAN AUCOIN, IRIEL WINFREY, ASA WOODBURY, CAITLIN VENEZUELA, AND HOLLY MARTIN. FROM ENGINEERING WE HAVE JASON GRIMM AND JOEL FITTS. AND FROM FIRE WE HAVE JOHN GILLETTE AND WE HAVE FROM LEGAL, RYAN PITTMAN TONIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA 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 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 TEN MINUTES. PLEASE NOTE THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR TAKE SPECIFIC ACTION DURING CITIZEN INPUT 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. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK DURING CITIZEN INPUT? SEEING NONE, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 24TH, 2026 MEETING. MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. NEXT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA. [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. WE HAVE ITEMS 3 THROUGH 10 THIS EVENING AND I UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO PULL NUMBER 4 AND NUMBER 6. DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THE OTHER ITEMS TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS 3, 5 AND 7 THROUGH 10 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. EXCELLENT. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. SO WELL. THAT'S FINE. IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND WE'LL RECUSE YOURSELF, WE'LL DO 6 FIRST. OH, NO. ARE YOU RECUSING YOURSELF FOR 4? THANK YOU. [Conveyance Plat: Railhead, Phase 1, Block A, Lots 9, 10, & 14 (CP26-0004)] DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 4 NOW THAT SEAN HAS RECUSED HIMSELF. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 4. MOTION BY TIFFANY. SECOND. SECOND BY JOHN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 5-0. WE CAN GRAB SEAN BACK. [Open Space Plan & Site Plan: Hillcrest 380 Addition, Block A, Lot 6 (OS25-0105 & SP25-0152)] AND FOR THE RECORD, SEAN IS BACK TO THE DAIS. NOW WE WILL READ IN CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6, OPEN SPACE PLAN AND SITE PLAN. HILLCREST 380 EDITION BLOCK A LOT 6 OS25-0105 AND SP 25-0152. OWNERS EAST GROUP PROPERTIES L.P.. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE ITEM JUST READ INTO THE RECORD IS BEFORE YOU ALL FOR APPROVAL. THIS EVENING, AFTER THE AGENDA WAS FINALIZED AND PUBLISHED, THERE NEEDED TO BE AN UPDATE TO THE BUILDING HEIGHT, REDUCING IT BY 2 FEET. AND SO THAT IS REFLECTED IN THE PRINT OUTS. THAT IS BEFORE YOU ALL THIS EVENING. STAFF STILL RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE ITEM. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THAT ITEM OR DO I HAVE A MOTION? ANDRE, CAN YOU TELL US 2 FEET FROM WHAT TO WHAT. IT WENT BUILDING 1 WENT FROM 44FT TO 42. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 6? MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 6 WITH THOSE CHANGES NOTED. MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. CONGRATULATIONS. ALL RIGHT MOVING ALONG. TONIGHT, WE HAVE 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE AGENDA. [Substantially Conforming Site Plan: Dalfen Industrial, Block B, Lot 1 (SCSP25-0034)] [00:05:02] AND I WANT TO REVIEW THE PROCESS. EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS PRECEDED BY A STAFF INTRODUCTION OF THE REQUEST. THE APPLICANT IS THEN PERMITTED TEN 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 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. PLEASE AVOID REPEATING WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS OTHER THAN STATING THAT YOU AGREE WITH THEIR COMMENTS. THE TIME LIMIT IS FIVE MINUTES PER SPEAKER TO ENSURE THAT 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 1 OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. REPEAT APPEARANCES TO THE PODIUM ARE NOT PERMITTED. AFTER ALL, PERSONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AT 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 THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ONLY MAKES A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ZONING CASES UNLESS THE COMMISSION DISAPPROVES THE CASE AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT APPEAL THE DISAPPROVAL. FINAL ACTION REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF AS TO WHEN THE CASE WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. SO THE 1ST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT IS NUMBER 11 SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN DALFEN INDUSTRIAL BLOCK B, LOT 1 SCSP 25-0034 OWNERS DG FRISCO LOGISTICS CENTER, TEXAS PROPERTY OWNER LP. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE ITEM THAT WAS JUST READ INTO THE RECORD WAS TABLED AT THE DECEMBER 9TH MEETING LAST YEAR AND HAS SINCE BEEN TABLED AT THE JANUARY 13TH FEB AND FEBRUARY 10TH MEETING AND THIS EVENING THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO TABLE THE ITEM AGAIN TO THE APRIL 14TH MEETING SO THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS AS THEY GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO THE APRIL 14TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. EXCELLENT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MOVE TO APPROVE THIS ITEM TO THE TABLE THIS ITEM TO THE HAVE A QUESTION. I'M SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. NO. YOU'RE GOOD. YOU HAVE TO HOLD IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT. OH, ONE MORE TIME. THERE YOU GO. SO IT'S AN EASY ONE. ARE THERE ANY LIMITATIONS TO THE NUMBER OF TIMES THE REQUESTS CAN BE TABLED? NOT AT THIS TIME, NO. MOVE TO TAKE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO THE APRIL 14TH MEETING. MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY STEVE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. SO WE'LL SEE THIS AGAIN APRIL 14TH. CONGRATULATIONS. ITEM NUMBER 12. CONVEYANCE PLAT FIREFLY PARK BLOCK G LOTS 5 THROUGH 6. [Conveyance Plat: Firefly Park, Block G, Lots 5-6, Block H, Lot 1, Block I, Lot 1, & Block J, Lots 1-2 (CP26-0002)] BLOCK H LOT 1BLOCK I LOT 1 IN BLOCK J LOTS 1 THROUGH 2 CP26-0002. OWNERS FRISCO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE ITEM THAT WAS JUST READ INTO THE RECORD TONIGHT IS BEFORE YOU FOR DISAPPROVAL. THE PROJECT WAS SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 26TH, 2026. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED A 30 DAY EXTENSION ON FEBRUARY 24TH, 2026. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND FOUND THAT IT FAILS TO MEET THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND OR OTHER APPLICABLE CITY CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS, RULES, POLICIES OR STANDARDS. AND IT'S THEREFORE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR DISAPPROVAL. AND WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THEN I MOVE TO DISAPPROVE. ITEM NUMBER 12, FOR THE REASONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF'S REPORT AND DELEGATE TO STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE REASONS OF THE REASONS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL. MOTION BY STEVE. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. ALL RIGHT. MOVING INTO OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. [Public Hearing - Replat: Lamar Norma Hunt Middle School at Frisco Corners, Block 1, Lot 1R (RP26-0005)] ITEM NUMBER 13, PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT LAMAR HUNT MIDDLE SCHOOL AT FRISCO CORNERS BLOCK 1, LOT 1R RP26-0005. OWNER'S FRISCO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS ITEM MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE TABLE. MOVE TO REMOVE THE ITEM FROM THE TABLE. MOTION BY STEVE. SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. SO THIS ITEM THAT WAS JUST REMOVED ON THE TABLE CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 24TH WITH THE REQUESTED TABLE. THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT IS TO DEDICATE EASEMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FRISCO ISD FINE ARTS FACILITY. [00:10:04] THE PLOT DOES CONFORM TO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN OCTOBER OF 2023. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANDREA? MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 13. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. WE ARE NOW IN PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NO ONE HERE TO SPEAK, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY STEVE. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE. ITEM NUMBER. 13. 13. MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. CONGRATULATIONS, FRISC ISD. WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THE FINE ARTS FACILITY. ALL RIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 14. [Public Hearing - Zoning: First Texas Homestead at Collinsbrook (Z25-0014)] PUBLIC HEARING ZONING FIRST TEXAS HOMESTEAD AT COLLINS BROOK, Z25-0014 OWNERS FIRST TEXAS HOMES, INC.. THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. SO THE PROJECT THIS PROJECT IS BEFORE YOU ALL THIS EVENING WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. AND SO JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND, SO STAFF WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THIS PROPERTY OWNER TO GO THROUGH THE ANNEXATION PROCESS AND ALSO NEGOTIATED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WENT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 2ND, 2025. SO THIS AGREEMENT THAT WAS HEAVILY NEGOTIATED WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES PIN DOWN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE REFLECTED IN OUR STAFF REPORT TODAY, AND THAT WILL GO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL IN THAT ORDINANCE. AS I STATED, THE ANNEXATION REQUEST CAME IN, WHICH WAS APPROVED AND WENT JANUARY 26TH, 20TH OF 2026 THIS YEAR. SO THIS REQUEST BEFORE YOU ALL IS TO DEVELOP AS SINGLE FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY 7 LOTS, WHICH IS COMPLIANT WITH THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO THERE ARE PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN THAT THE PROPERTY PROPERTY OWNER IS LOOKING TO MONETIZE WHICH ARE REFLECTED IN THE EXHIBITS THAT ARE PROVIDED TO YOU ALL THIS EVENING. STAFF DOES, DID REVIEW THIS DEVELOPMENT AS A PRELIMINARY PLOT THAT DID COME BEFORE YOU ALL LAST YEAR. I'M NOT. I WISH YOU ALL DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR. AND SO THIS EVENING, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING REQUEST PER THE EXHIBIT B, WHICH DETAILS THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS WELL AS THE ACCOMPANYING EXHIBITS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANDREA, THE APPLICANT HERE? WOULD THEY LIKE TO SPEAK? I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. WE ARE NOW IN PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NO ONE, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE. PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY TIFFANY. SECOND. SECOND BY JOHN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR DO I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 14? I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS BEFORE. WE DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS ANY COMMENTS OR ANYTHING. PROBABLY NOT. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS WHERE WE ANNEX LAND IN KIND OF GOES TO STAFF, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL GETS ALL THE DETAILS, GET WORKED OUT. AND THEN KIND OF AFTER ALL OF THAT HAPPENS, THEN IT COMES TO P&Z. I DO WISH THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER SYSTEM IN PLACE TO WHERE P&Z HAD A CHANCE IN A WORK SESSION, OR SOME FORMAT, TO AT LEAST LOOK AT DEVELOPMENTS BEFORE THEY WENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO FINAL APPROVAL FROM CITY COUNCIL. AND ON THIS SPECIFIC ONE HERE, MY CONCERN FOR FUTURE ANNEXATIONS FROM ETJ LAND IS THAT REDUCING THE REAR YARD SETBACK BY 50% FEELS A LITTLE BIT MUCH TO ME. I KNOW THAT FRISCO. I'VE HEARD A LOT OF CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF MICRO YARDS THAT WE HAVE IN FRISCO. I DON'T THINK ANYONE THINKS THAT WE HAVE TOO MANY LARGE BACKYARDS IN FRISCO, OR THAT WE HAVE HOUSES THAT ARE SET TOO FAR BACK, AWAY FROM THE ROAD. I THINK IT'S MORE LIKELY THE OPPOSITE THAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FRISCO BUILDS OUT THAT WE TRY TO AVOID THE MICROWAVE BACKYARDS, AND WE TRY TO KEEP THE BACKYARDS A LITTLE BIT BIGGER FOR THE FUTURE RESIDENTS AND TRY TO KEEP THE HOUSES SET BACK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER FROM THE STREET. SO I KNOW THAT THE REGULAR STANDARD FOR SINGLE FAMILY SEVEN IS 30 FOOT SETBACK. IN THIS CASE, WE LOWERED IT BY 50% DOWN TO 15FT. I COULD I WOULD PREFER SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE THAT WE LOOK AT SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE 15 AND 30FT AS MAYBE A BETTER COMPROMISE THAN LOWERING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 15FT. [00:15:08] THAT'S ALL I HAD. THANK YOU. IF YOU DON'T MIND, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS. I SENT AN EMAIL OUT TO THE COMMISSION LAYING OUT THE GROUNDWORK, HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT. THIS HAS BEEN ABOUT 3 YEARS IN THE MAKING TO GET THIS INCORPORATED INTO THE CITY. THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS DILUTED THE ANNEXATION LAWS FOR CITIES. THIS PROPERTY OWNER, ANYBODY IN THE ETJ COULD REQUEST TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CITY'S ETJ. WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THAT WHATSOEVER. NUMBER 2, THE COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE MUCH LAND USE CONTROLS. AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS, LOOK WHAT WE ANNEX ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WEST RIDGE, WEST OF CUSTER ROAD, THERE'S A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT THAT WAS BUILT. NOW, THE COUNTY AND THE CITY HAVE THE SAME BUILDING STANDARDS. HOWEVER, WE DO FAR MORE INSPECTIONS OF THE PROPERTIES TO ENSURE THAT IT STILL MEETS CODE. THE COUNTY DOES NOT DO IT. WE GOT 2 SELF STORAGE FACILITIES THAT WERE BUILT. WE HAD NO CONTROL OVER THAT SINCE THAT PROPERTY WAS IN THE ETJ AND THE ONE ON WEST RIDGE. WHEN I DISCOVERED THAT I THINK ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS IS GOING TO BE IN THE FUTURE TRAVEL LANE. WHEN WEST RIDGE IS IMPROVED. THERE'S NO CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY AS REQUIRED BY OUR AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY. SO WHAT THE CITY WAS DOING HERE IS TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THIS CAME INTO THE CITY, AND WE GOT SOMETHING THAT WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. SO WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME CRITICISM OVER THE PROCESS, WE WERE TRYING TO AVOID APARTMENTS ON THE PROPERTY. ALL THESE OTHER TYPE OF USES THAT WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE CITY. SO STAND BY THE PROCESS THAT WE HAD AND WE WERE UNDER, YOU KNOW, NOT THE BEST CIRCUMSTANCES TO NEGOTIATE. SO. THANK YOU FOR THAT. OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR SO. I LIVE RIGHT, RIGHT NEAR THIS, AND I'M SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR WITH WHAT JOHN WAS ALLUDING TO. I DON'T NECESSARILY DISAGREE WITH YOU ABOUT THE SHORT SETBACKS? THE 5 FOOT SIDE YARDS. IT'S A LITTLE TIGHT, BUT I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE RIGHT WAY TO SAY IT. THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS. AND IT IT COULD HAVE GONE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WAY. SO I'M GLAD THAT IT DIDN'T GO THE OTHER WAY THAT JOHN WAS DESCRIBING. WE COULD HAVE THOUSANDS OF APARTMENTS RIGHT THERE AND THERE'S NOTHING WE COULD HAVE DONE ABOUT IT. SO I'M HAPPY. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH THE PREMISE. I UNDERSTAND THE DILEMMA WITH ETJ AND THAT THE THE STATE HAS MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR CITIES, EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR CITIES. I'M TALKING MORE JUST ABOUT TINKERING AROUND THE EDGES. I'M TALKING ABOUT LET'S STILL MAKE SURE THAT THIS COMES IN AS SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT WE JUST GET ANOTHER LOOK AT IT EARLY ON, MAYBE IN THE THREE YEAR PROCESS, MAYBE HALFWAY THROUGH. SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, JUST TINKERING AROUND THE EDGES, I WILL SAY WITH ETJ LAND FOR ANOTHER TIME, WE COULD TALK ABOUT. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS THE ABILITY. THE LEGAL ABILITY TO DE ANNEX FROM A CITY DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY HAVE THE PRACTICAL ABILITY OR THE MARKETABILITY TO PULL A PIECE OF LAND OUT AND SUDDENLY FIND A RESOURCE FOR THEIR OWN WATER, THEIR OWN SEWER, THEIR OWN POLICE, THEIR OWN FIRE, THEIR OWN EMT, THEIR OWN PARKS, THEIR OWN LIBRARIES, ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE VIABLE OUTSIDE OF A CITY. YOU KNOW, YOU LIVE OUT IN A RURAL AREA, VERY LIKELY THAT PEOPLE WILL PULL THEIR LAND OUT OF ETJ. IT SEEMS HIGHLY UNLIKELY IN A DONUT HOLE INSIDE A CITY LIKE FRISCO THAT THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN. BUT JOHN'S CORRECT THAT THAT IS STILL A POSSIBILITY. AND SO WE DO NEED TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH AS WAS DONE HERE. SO IT'S NOT AN EITHER OR THING. I'M TALKING MORE ABOUT JUST TINKERING AROUND THE EDGES TO MAKE IT SLIGHTLY BETTER FOR RESIDENTS. BUT THAT SAID, THIS IS LOCKED IN THIS KIND OF SET IN STONE. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 14. MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 14 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED. AYE. MOTION? MOTION PASSES 6-0 THIS ITEM IS APPROVED. NO. OH, I'M SORRY, YOU SAID NAY. I SAID YEAH. I HEARD AYE. [00:20:01] SO WE HAVE ONE NAY AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE WAS AN AYE. CORRECT. THANK YOU. SO WHAT WAS THE OPPOSITION? I STILL DON'T LIKE THE SMALL SETBACKS. I UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE SITUATION. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS. I JUST I STILL DON'T LIKE IT. MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO CHANGE MY VOTE TO AYE NAY. SOUNDS GOOD FOR THE RECORD, THEN. FOR THE RECORD, I WAS ASSUMING THAT WE ALL NEEDED TO VOTE YES, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE BY COUNCIL. BUT I THINK TO I THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE SLIGHTLY BETTER IF IT'S IF IT'S 95% GOOD, THAT'S GREAT, BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY BETTER WITH BETTER SETBACKS. SO FOR THE RECORD, THEN NOW WE HAVE A 4-2. YES. WELL, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REVOTE ON IT JUST TO MAKE SURE. NO PROBLEM. SO DO I HAVE A NEW MOTION? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE ALL JUST TO SAY TO WHAT WOULD BE THE WORD REMAKE OR. THE PRIOR MOTION. YEAH. THE PERSON WHO MADE THE PRIOR MOTION COULD RESCIND THAT MOTION AND THEN VOTE ON IT. VOTE ON THAT. AND THEN THAT WOULD OPEN THE ABILITY FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION OR THE SAME MOTION. AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A SUBSEQUENT VOTE ON THAT. OH, I'LL RESEND MY MOTION ON ITEM 14. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY TIFFANY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED MOTION [INAUDIBLE] PASSED 6-0. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 14, AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. MOTION BY JOHN. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. 2. SO MOTION PASSES 4-2. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 15. RESULTS OF THE MARCH 3RD, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. [Results of the March 3, 2026, City Council meeting.] 3 ITEMS. 1ST ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE FIREFLY DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS WHERE THEY'RE AMENDING THE URN UPS ON THE COMMERCIAL AND NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS, AND THEY'RE ALSO DECREASING THE NUMBER OF TOTAL MULTIFAMILY UNITS ON THAT BY 100 UNITS. SO THE COMMISSION HAD APPROVED THAT 5-0 AND COUNCIL APPROVED THAT. SO 6-0 ON THAT. WE'RE COMING BACK WITH AN ORDINANCE AND GO TO THE THE SELF STORAGE THAT'S AT PARKWOOD. AND SO THAT WAS APPROVED 6-0 THAT THE COMMISSION HAD APPROVED. THE ONE THAT GOT A LOT OF ATTENTION WAS THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION CENTER. COUNCIL DID APPROVE THAT. DIRECTED STAFF TO GO AHEAD AND PREPARE THE ORDINANCE. THAT WAS A VOTE OF 4 TO 2. AND WHAT COUNCIL HAS ASKED OF THE APPLICANT IS TO MEET WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ONE MORE TIME. AND SO THEY'LL BE DOING THAT PROBABLY BY THE END OF THIS MONTH. SO AND THEN STAFF WILL REPORT BACK ON WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT MEETING. SO BUT THEY DIRECTED US TO GO AHEAD AND PREPARE THE ORDINANCE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR JOHN ON ANY OF THAT? ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 16. SCHEDULE A FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS. [Schedule of future discussion items.] SO I PLAN TO DISCUSS PARKING AT THE NEXT MEETING. SO WE MAY JUST DO THAT UPSTAIRS. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL BE HERE. JOHN'S EXCITED ABOUT THAT. OH, YEAH. I WAS THINKING ABOUT MAYBE HAVING YOU ALL WALK HERE FROM YOUR HOME TO GET YOU ALL SET UP. I MIGHT BE OUT THAT NIGHT. AND THEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT TAKING YOU ALL ON A TOUR OR A WALKING TOUR. BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT LIABILITY. I DON'T WANT TO LOSE ANY COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU. JOHN. CARING FOR OUR SAFETY. ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE HAVE 1 FINAL MOTION. MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION BY TIFFANY, SECOND BY SEAN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES 6-0. WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED AT 6:54 P.M. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GOOD EVENING. 24 MINUTES. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.