Jun 03, 2026 Frisco - Planning and Zoning Commission

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:03]

GOOD AFTERNOON. WELCOME TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRISCO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

WE ARE GATHERED AT 6101 FRISCO SQUARE BOULEVARD, AND THE TIME IS 6:31 P.M.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONSISTS OF FRISCO RESIDENTS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

TONIGHT, COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ARE WARREN RUIZ, MICHAEL HOWARD, SEAN MERRELL, JON KENDALL AND STEVE CONE.

MY NAME IS TIFFANY WELLS. REPRESENTING STAFF TONIGHT, WE HAVE JONATHAN HUBBARD, ROLANDREA RUSSELL, SEAN AUCOIN, ASA WOODBURY, KATELYN VALENZUELA, JENNIFER MORGAN.

FROM ENGINEERING, WE HAVE JASON GRIMM. RICARDO ORDOÑEZ, AND FROM FIRE, WE HAVE ALYSSA BARSTOW.

DID I FORGET ANYBODY? YES. SHE CHECKED HER [INAUDIBLE] OH WHO SHE CHECKED WRONG? WHO'S NOT HERE? OKAY, SO WATER IS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE, ENGINEERING WAS RIGHT, RIGHT? JASON.

HE GOES. YEAH, MR. GRIMM. OKAY. WE HAVE GRIMM.

SO RICARDO IS NOT HERE, RIGHT? OKAY. DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE HERE FOR? EDUARDO. EDUARDO. OKAY. GOT IT. AND THEN FIRE WAS RIGHT.

RIGHT. OKAY. GOT IT. OKAY. OKAY. 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 THE, PRIOR TO YOUR COMMENTS PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

OUR MEETINGS ARE RECORDED, SO SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE.

PLEASE ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, NOT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE OR ANY APPLICANTS PRESENT THIS EVENING TO ENSURE THERE IS ENOUGH TIME FOR ALL. FOR ENOUGH TIME FOR ALL TO SPEAK.

PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES.

UNLESS YOU'RE, UNLESS YOU MUST TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES.

UNLESS YOU MUST ADDRESS THE COMMISSION THROUGH A TRANSLATOR IN WHICH YOU MAY HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TEN MINUTES.

PLEASE NOTE THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR TAKE SPECIFIC ACTION DURING CITIZEN INPUT ON ITEMS NOT POSTED ON THE AGENDA, EXCEPT TO PROVIDE A STATEMENT OF SPECIFIC, 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 ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON CITIZEN'S INPUT.

OKAY. SEEING NONE. WE HAVE NEXT. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

MOTION TO APPROVE THE PLANNING, REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING ON MAY 12TH.

I HAVE A MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

IT'S A SPECIAL. YEAH. SO ON NUMBER THREE WE HAVE A.

I KNOW THE AGENDA SAYS REGULAR, BUT THAT'S ACTUALLY A SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

SO PLEASE WHOEVER MAKES THAT MOTION, MAKE SURE THAT YOU SAY REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING.

SPECIAL. I MEAN SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING. MOVE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES, THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON MAY 20TH. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION BY SEAN.

SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. MOTION PASSES, SIX ZERO.

NEXT, WE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE HAVE

[CONSENT AGENDA]

AND THEN WE HAVE TWO PULLED. ANY OTHER NEED TO BE PULLED? WE'LL PULL FIVE AND NINE. FIVE AND NINE. OKAY.

GOT IT. SO FOR CONSENT AGENDA.

OKAY. NEXT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT CONSISTS OF ROUTINE AND NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS. ANY COMMISSION MEMBERS MAKING SUCH REQUESTS PRIOR TO A MOTION AND VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEM MAY CONSIDER ITEMS INDIVIDUALLY AND MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO MAKE COMMENTS ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS MAY DO SO WITH THE MAJORITY APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSION.

[00:05:03]

SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION FOR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR ITEMS FOUR, SIX THROUGH EIGHT AND TEN THROUGH 12 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

OKAY. MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT SEAN IS

[Conveyance Plat: The Creek on 121, Block A, Lot 1 (CP26-0013)]

I NEED A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM FIVE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I HAVE A MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE.

MOTION PASSES, FIVE ZERO. AND THEN LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT SEAN IS BACK ON THE DAIS. NEXT WILL BE ITEM NUMBER NINE.

[Preliminary Site Plan: Park 25, Block B, Lots 2 & 6 (PSP26-0024)]

P SP 26-0024. OWNER STAR BUSINESS PARK, LLC. IF NOTHING, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NINE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO.

PLEASE SHOW THAT TIFFANY WELLS HAS RETURNED TO THE DAIS.

[Substantially Conforming Site Plan: Dalfen Industrial, Block B, Lot 1 (SCSP25-0034)]

EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS PRECEDED 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 NEED TO COMPLETE A BLUE SPEAKER CARD AND PROVIDE IT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.

IF THERE ARE ORGANIZED GROUPS IN ATTENDANCE, WE SUGGEST THAT YOU SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE 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 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 ONLY HAVE 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 FUTURE DATE AND THE COMMISSION INCLUDES, IN THEIR MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO A FUTURE DATE.

AFTER CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT.

PLEASE NOTE THE PLANNING 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 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 FIRST ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 13, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN, DALFEN INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL BLOCK B, LOT 1, SCSP25-0034. THE OWNER IS D.G. FRISCO LOGISTICS CENTER, TEXAS, PROPERTY OWNER, L.P.. THANK YOU. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TABLED A FEW TIMES NOW, MOST RECENTLY AT THE APRIL 14TH MEETING.

THIS CASE IS REGARDING STAFF'S DENIAL OF A SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN.

IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, THE APPLICANT CHOSE TO APPEAL THAT DECISION.

SINCE THEN, THE STAFF AND APPLICANT HAVE WORKED TOGETHER TO BRING RESOLUTION TO THE OUTSTANDING ISSUES, AND THE APPLICANT HAS RECENTLY RECEIVED APPROVAL OF A NEW SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN.

THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO WITHDRAW THE PREVIOUSLY FILED APPEAL.

YOU DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING TO ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S WITHDRAWAL.

THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SO THE FACT THAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY TABLED, DOES THAT NOT MEAN THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING REMAINS OPEN?

[00:10:07]

WELL, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS TRYING TO GO. YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH.

SO LET'S GET A MOTION TO REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE ITEM 13 FROM THE TABLE.

I HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE FROM JON, SECOND. SECOND.

SECOND BY STEVE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ARE YOU STRAIGHT FORWARD MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO REMOVE THE APPEAL.

WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. YES. APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THIS ITEM.

RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO WITHDRAW BY SEAN.

SECOND. SECOND. SECOND BY JON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

ITEM NUMBER 14. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. REPLAT FOR THE FANNIN TREE FARM ADDITION BLOCK A LOTS ONE AND TWO,

[Public Hearing - Replat: Fannin Tree Farm Addition, Block A, Lots 1 & 2 (RP26-0009)]

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE ITEM THAT WAS JUST READ INTO RECORD IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT WITH A REQUEST FOR A 30 DAY EXTENSION AND TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO THE JUNE 9TH, 2020 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE 30 DAY EXTENSION REQUEST, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE THIS ITEM TO THE JUNE 9TH 2026 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS? ANYONE. ANY QUESTIONS? QUICK QUESTION, MR. LETTELLEIR. CAN I AT THE SAME TIME MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE MOTION TO CONTINUE, OR DO WE NEED TO STOP? AND THEN. SINCE IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING, YOU NEED TO OPEN IT AND THEN STOP AND DO IT AGAIN.

OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 14.

HAVE A MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

SEEING NO ONE TO SPEAK. NO, NO. WE GOT TO KEEP IT OPEN BECAUSE THEY ASKING TO.

THEY ASK FOR A 30 DAY EXTENSION. TO WHAT? THE JUNE 9TH.

YES, YES, JUNE 9TH, WHICH IS NEXT WEEK. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ACCEPT THE APPLICANTS REQUEST FOR A 30 DAY EXCEPTION TO THE JUNE 9TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

I HAVE A MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY MICHAEL.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE.

MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. ITEM NUMBER 15. PUBLIC HEARING REPLAT OF FRISCO ORIGINAL DONATION BLOCK SIX,

[Public Hearing - Replat: Frisco Original Donation, Block 6, Lots 1 & 2 (RP26-0010)]

THANK YOU, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS TO TABLE THIS ITEM AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO THE JUNE 9TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS? SAME SCENARIO. WE HAVE TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

MOVE TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND. AND NEED A SECOND.

SECOND. SECOND BY. I HAVE A MOTION BY WARREN.

SECOND BY STEVE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO. MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL THE JUNE 9TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR A 30 DAY GRANT. A 30 DAY EXTENSION. I HAVE A MOTION BY SEAN.

SECOND. SECOND BY JON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. THAT MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

ITEM NUMBER 16. WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, PANTHER CREEK WWTP DIAMOND TOWERS.

[Public Hearing - Specific Use Permit: Panther Creek WWTP – Diamond Towers (SUP26-0001)]

SO JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY. CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SITE MARKET AGREEMENT WITH DIAMOND TOWERS IN JANUARY OF LAST YEAR TO MARKET SELECT CITY SITES FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE.

THIS PROPERTY, THE PANTHER CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, BEING ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES.

THEREFORE, BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 145 FOOT TALL NON-STEALTH TOWER.

[00:15:04]

THIS IS 594FT SOUTH OF FIELDS PARKWAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND WILL BE LOCATED BEHIND THE ORNAMENTAL METAL FENCE THAT SURROUNDS THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITY.

THE GROUND MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WILL BE SCREENED WITH AN EIGHT FOOT MASONRY SCREENING WALL AND SHRUB SIX FEET IN HEIGHT AT THE TIME OF PLANTING.

THE PROPOSED TOWER AT 145FT MEETS THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT FOR SETBACKS.

THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT THESE TOWERS BE SET BACK FROM ALL PROPERTY LINES, A DISTANCE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THE SUPPORT STRUCTURE OR TOWERS HEIGHT MEASURED FROM THE GROUND LEVEL TO THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE SUPPORT STRUCTURE.

594FT FROM THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE, 276FT FROM THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, 909FT FROM THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE, AND JUST OVER 1100FT FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.

THEREFORE, ALL OF THOSE SETBACKS ARE BEING MET.

LASTLY, THE NEAREST PROPERTY DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY IS JUST OVER 1200FT TO THE WEST AND 1200FT TO THE SOUTH.

ON THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST, YOU ALSO HAVE A 100 FOOT HOA LOT THAT HOUSES POWER LINES THAT ARE ABOUT 100FT IN HEIGHT.

AND THEN ON THE SOUTH SIDE, YOU ALSO HAVE THE MONARCH VIEW PARK.

AND THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL THIS EVENING.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. I HAVE A QUESTION.

SURE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PIQUED MY INTEREST WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS IN THE AGENDA SAID ADJACENCY TO A MAJOR CREEK.

WHY WOULD THAT BE AN ISSUE? IT'S NOT AN ISSUE.

SO THERE ARE STANDARD ITEMS THAT WE REVIEW SUP REQUESTS AGAINST.

AND THAT IS ONE OF THE. ANY SUP. ANY SUP. AND THAT IS ONE OF THOSE STANDARD ITEMS. SO THAT'S WHERE WE SAY THE PROPOSED TOWER IS NOT ADJACENT TO MAJOR CREEK.

OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 16.

MOTION BY JON. SECOND. SECOND BY SHAUN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. WE'RE IN PUBLIC HEARING.

MOTION PASSES, SIX ZERO. WE'RE IN PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 16.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 16? SEEING NONE. SEEING NONE MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

HAVE A MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY STEVE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE.

PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED AND MOTION PASSES SIX ZERO.

IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS TO STAFF ON NUMBER 16? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE COMMERCIAL ANTENNA AND THE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE.

I HAVE A MOTION BY SEAN. SECOND. SECOND BY STEVE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. SEE ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE.

MOTION PASSES, SIX ZERO. LAST ITEM FOR PUBLIC HEARING IS A ZONING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 280 Z26-0001.

[Public Hearing - Zoning: Planned Development-280 (Z26-0001)]

SO TO ACCOMMODATE CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ADJUST FOR MARKET CHANGES, THE APPLICANT IS BEFORE YOU ALL THIS EVENING REQUESTING TO AMEND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

SO BEGINNING WITH TABLE FOUR TWO. SO TABLE FOUR-TWO IS THE TABLE THAT LISTS THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE VARIOUS SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCT TYPES.

SO CURRENTLY FIELDS RESIDENTIAL 3A, 3B AND THE FIELDS RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES REQUIRE A MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE HOME AT THREE FEET OR A MINIMUM OF 20FT.

AND THEN THE SAME THING FOR THE FOR THE GARAGE SETBACK.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MODIFY THIS TO THREE FEET FOR THE HOME, AND THEN 3 TO 10 OR A MINIMUM OF 20FT FOR THE GARAGE.

SO WHAT EXACTLY DOES THAT MEAN? SO THIS IS GOING TO ACCOMMODATE A VERY TYPE OF PRODUCTS VERSUS KIND OF WHAT THEY'RE LIMITED TO NOW.

SO IN THIS CASE THE HOME ITSELF, THE NON GARAGE PORTION OF THE HOME WILL BE ABLE TO GO TO THE THREE FOOT LINE, WHILE THE GARAGE PORTION WILL HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO BE BETWEEN 3 TO 10FT OR A MINIMUM OF 20FT.

[00:20:09]

SO IN THE CASE OF THE 3 TO 10, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET A CAR IN THERE WITHOUT OVERHANGING.

SO JUST VISUALLY, PEOPLE SHOULD BE DETERRED FROM FROM PARKING THERE BECAUSE THE THE APPRENTICE SHOW SHORT VERSUS A MINIMUM OF 20FT.

A CAR WILL FIT IN THERE AND NOT OVERHANG THE ALLEY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE ANYWHERE 16FT, 17FT, PEOPLE WOULD SAY, HEY, I THINK I CAN PARK THERE, BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO OVERHANG INTO THE ALLEY.

NEXT, LOOKING AT THE PARKS AND TRAILS, SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL WHEN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WAS AMENDED IN JULY OF 2025, WE REMOVED THE PARK REQUIREMENT IN THE MIDTOWN WEST SUBDISTRICT.

THIS IS THE SUBDISTRICT WHERE FIELDS WEST IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

THERE WAS A PUBLIC HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL THAT RAN EAST WEST.

THROUGH THAT, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMOVE THAT CONNECTION.

SO THIS IS NOT STATING THAT THERE WILL NO LONGER BE SIDEWALKS OR GREEN SPACE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THE SUBDISTRICT.

THERE CERTAINLY WILL BE. HOWEVER, THAT WILL ALL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED VERSUS BEING A CITY TRAIL SHOWN HERE ON THIS REVISED EXHIBIT. THERE WILL STILL BE PUBLIC HIKE AND BIKE TRAILS AROUND THE MIDTOWN WEST SUBDISTRICT.

SECOND, LOOKING AT THE POINT EAST SUBDISTRICT, THE POINT EAST SUBDISTRICT, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MOVE THE LOCATION OF THE PARK. THEY ARE STILL MEETING ALL OF THE PARK'S REQUIREMENTS.

THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKS. THE MINIMUM ACREAGE.

MINIMUM. THE MINIMUM. AGGREGATE. SOME. IT IS JUST RELOCATING THE POSITION WITHIN THE SUBDISTRICT BASED ON HOW DEVELOPMENT IS OCCURRING WITHIN THAT SUBDISTRICT. AND THEN LASTLY, IT IS JUST CLARIFYING CITY AND DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITY OF THE REGIONAL TRAIL WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY VILLAGE SUBDISTRICT.

AND AGAIN, MY APOLOGIES FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO TO DRAW ON THIS EXHIBIT THIS EVENING IN POINT THESE THINGS OUT.

BUT THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT HAS SIGNED OFF ON ALL OF THESE AND HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO ANY OF THESE.

LASTLY, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MODIFY THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO INCORPORATE SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING AND ASSISTED LIVING INTO THE NORTHFIELDS AND UNIVERSITY SUB DISTRICTS BY RIGHT.

SO UNDER THE CURRENT PD, SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING WOULD BE LOOKED AT AS MULTI-FAMILY AND ASSISTED LIVING WOULD REQUIRE APPROVAL OF AN SUP. SO THIS IS JUST ALLOWING THOSE USES BY RIGHT.

IN THOSE TWO SUBDISTRICTS, THEY STILL WOULD COME ALONG WITH THE STANDARDS THAT THE SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING, ANY UNITS WILL COUNT TOWARDS THE OVERALL MULTIFAMILY UNIT COUNT IN THE FIELDS PD, ASSISTED LIVING, ON THE OTHER HAND, WILL NOT. YOU DO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL ON THIS ITEM THIS EVENING, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. A COUPLE OF TECHNICAL QUESTIONS ON THE MAP THAT YOU HAVE UP THERE.

SURE. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IN NEXT DOOR TO THE POINT EAST IN EAST VILLAGE, IT SHOWS TWO DIFFERENT PARK LOCATIONS.

DOES THAT MEAN. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO PARKS LOCATED IN EAST VILLAGE.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND THOSE ARE STAYING THE SAME APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS.

CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE OR ANYBODY REPRESENTING WANTS TO SPEAK? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FROM ITEM 17.

I HAVE A MOTION BY JON. I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE, WE ARE IN PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 17? SEEING NONE.

SEEING NO ONE HERE TO SPEAK. I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. HAVE A MOTION BY STEVE.

SECOND. SECOND BY JON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE WE HAVE CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM NUMBER 17.

ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? I HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION FOR JONATHAN.

ON THE THREE FOOT SETBACK IN THE REAR YARD. YES.

JUST CONFIRM WITH ME. WHAT WHAT IS IT CURRENTLY FOR? FOR THE HOUSE. NOT THE GARAGE FEET

[00:25:04]

MINIMUM OF 20. IT CAN'T BE FOUR OR 5 OR 8. CORRECT.

OKAY. WAS THERE A REASON WHY WE SET THAT UP LIKE THAT FOR THE HOUSE? SO VERY OFTEN WE YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE IT TO WHERE THE, THE HOUSE PORTION CAN BE PULLED CLOSER, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THE GARAGE CAN BE PULLED FURTHER BACK TO ACCOMMODATE THE CAR AS I WAS REFERENCING.

SO REGARDING THE, THE THREE FOOT, THE THREE A, THE THREE B, THE TOWNHOMES, THESE ARE THE SMALLER SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCTS THAT ARE, WERE ORIGINALLY ADOPTED WHEN PART OF THE PD.

AND IT WAS JUST INTENDED TO, YOU KNOW, APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD.

YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T HAVE DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN FRONT OF US.

IN SPEAKING WITH HOME BUILDERS AS THEY HAVE STARTED TO DEVELOP PRODUCT OUT THERE, IT DOES NOT ALWAYS ACCOMMODATE THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS AND LOCATIONS FOR EVERYTHING.

SO THIS CLEANS ALL THAT UP. OKAY, SO JUST JUST TO CLARIFY AGAIN, SINCE WE'RE CHANGING IT TO JUST THREE FEET MINIMUM. SO NOW THEY CAN DO FIVE. CORRECT.

SEVEN. EIGHT. CORRECT. OKAY. FOR THE HOUSE. FOR THE HOUSE.

JUST THE HOUSE. JUST THE HOUSE. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE GARAGE OR THE GARAGE.

THAT'S WHY IT'S SPLIT UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT ONES. THANK YOU. THAT CLARIFIES IT, I APPRECIATE THAT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE THE ITEM THAT WAS PRESENTED IN THE AGENDA BACKING DOCUMENTS TABLE 4.2. THAT'S ON PAGE 22. OKAY.

OR PACKET PAGE 95. IF YOU HAVE THAT. DO YOU HAVE THAT UP? I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TABLE 4.2. NO, IT'S NOT ON HERE.

OKAY. ANYWAYS, ONE OF THE THINGS I SAW ON HERE, IT SAID ON THE LAST ROW MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, 22FT, MINIMUM GARAGE SETBACK TO RIGHT OF WAY.

IT SAYS 3FT TO 10FT OR A MINIMUM. AND THEN IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ELSE.

I THINK IT'S MISSING SOMETHING. IT GOT CUT OFF. THANK YOU. WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CLEANED UP. NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT SHOULD IT SAY THERE? 20FT. 20FT LIKE THE OTHER ONES BEFORE. JUST GOT CUT OFF.

IT JUST GOT CUT OFF ON THE TABLE. OKAY. I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS NOT CUT OFF.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 17 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

HAVE A MOTION BY JON. I'LL SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE.

ITEM 17 IS APPROVED SIX ZERO. NUMBER 18, SCHEDULE OF FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEMS.

[Schedule of future discussion items.]

BUT THAT'S A. YOU WANT TO MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? JASON. JASON GRIMM ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT MANAGER. SO ON JULY 28TH YOU WILL HAVE YOUR NORMAL P AND Z MEETING.

AFTERWARDS YOU WILL ADJOURN AND RECONVENE AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

WHAT YOU'LL BE DOING IS HEARING FROM OUR CONSULTANT AS WE'RE UPDATING OUR IMPACT FEES.

JOINING YOU FOR THAT MEETING IS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM ETJ, SAM RATCLIFF.

BECAUSE BY STATE LAW, IF WE HAVE ETJ AREA, WE HAVE TO HAVE A ETJ REPRESENTATIVE.

DURING THAT MEETING, OUR CONSULTANT WILL KIND OF GO OVER AN IMPACT FEE, ONE ON ONE FOR EVERYONE AND ANSWER QUESTIONS RELATED TO IT.

AND THEN THEY'LL PRESENT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE LAND USE PLAN.

AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT GOING FORWARD WITH IMPACT FEE RATES.

YOUR DUTIES WILL BE TO THEN MAKE COMMENTS ON THAT, THAT WE THEN TAKE TO COUNCIL FOR OFFICIAL ADOPTION.

AND IN THE FUTURE, LIKE TWICE A YEAR, WE'LL RECONVENE AND ENGINEERING WILL PRESENT THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AS IT GETS MODIFIED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. AND THAT'LL BE YOUR ROLE. ANY QUESTIONS? GREAT. ALL RIGHT. SO EVERYONE MARK THEIR CALENDAR JULY 28TH.

I HAVE ONE THING. HAPPY BIRTHDAY SEAN. OH. THANK YOU.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY. HAPPY BIRTHDAY. YES, CHAIRMAN.

YES, HE HAD A BIRTHDAY YESTERDAY. BIG FIVE. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. YEAH. SO WE'RE STILL DISCUSSING FUTURE BUSINESS.

YEP. I JUST WANT TO THROW SOMETHING OUT THERE.

[00:30:03]

SO THEY. THAT IS DROPPED FOR THE TIME BEING. AND SO AFTER THE MAYORAL ELECTION, SOMETIME AFTER THAT, THEY'LL, YOU KNOW, PUT IT BACK ON. THAT'LL BE A MAYOR AND COUNCIL'S DECISION.

WILL IT BE RETROACTIVE WHEN THEY DO THAT TO ALL COMMITTEES OR JUST THE CITY COUNCIL? NO, THIS IS JUST FOR CITY COUNCIL. SO WHAT WARREN IS ASKING, I MEAN, I'LL VISIT WITH RYAN AND WE CAN HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THAT, BUT I DON'T SEE THE SAME QUORUM CHALLENGES THAT HAPPEN AT P&Z THAT'S HAPPENING AT CITY COUNCIL.

YEAH, OUR PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETINGS ARE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER CLASS THAN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS SO. WE'LL REFLECT BACK ON THE MEETING THAT WE HAD NOT SO LONG AGO THAT INVOLVED THE PROPERTY. WELL, [INAUDIBLE] ONE OF THE HOT BUTTON ITEMS THAT CAME UP DURING COUNCIL WHERE THERE WAS EXTENDED CITIZEN INPUT HERE. RIGHT. BUT THAT WAS OVER A CITIZEN THAT WAS OVER AN AGENDA ITEM.

THAT'S RIGHT. SO THAT'S FAIR. BUT SO I'M JUST I'M TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE BECAUSE I'M, I'M SEEING THE WRITING ON THE WALL THAT WE WON'T BE IMMUNE FROM THE SAME. PEOPLE LOOK FOR A WAY TO STEAL OPPORTUNITIES.

SO, JENNIFER, JUST MAKE A NOTE. I'LL VISIT WITH RYAN IN THE MORNING ABOUT I WOULD SAY THIS AS AN EXECUTIVE ITEM ON IT.

SO ANYTHING ELSE? AT FIRST I DIDN'T I DIDN'T AGREE WITH THAT.

BUT NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT, I THINK IT IS A GOOD PREEMPTIVE MOVE IN CASE BECAUSE IF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO VENT ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, THEY COULD COME HERE TO DO THE SAME THING.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. DEFINITELY WORTH TALKING ABOUT.

YEAH, YEAH. GOOD. GOOD CALL. WARREN. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WARREN, THAT'S YOUR THING. MOVE TO ADJOURN, HAVE A MOTION BY WARREN.

SECOND. SECOND BY SEAN. MEETING ADJOURNED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:04.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.