[A. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:03] GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CALL TO ORDER AT 6:31 P.M. IF YOU WILL JOIN ME IN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL HERE, MR. AL QARAGHULI? HERE. AND MYSELF. MR. SHIFLET IS HERE. MR. HESLEP? HERE. OH, HERE. AND MISS RILES-SHAVERS? PRESENT. PERFECT. WE HAVE FOUR OF US HERE, AS WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. [C. PUBLIC APPEARANCE] WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH HERE WITH THE PUBLIC ATTEND, PUBLIC APPEARANCE. SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO RESPOND OR TO DISCUSS ANY ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP DURING THIS SECTION THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA, OTHER THAN TO MAKE STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO A SPEAKER'S INQUIRY, OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO ANY INQUIRY. ANYBODY HERE FOR PUBLIC APPEARANCE THIS EVENING? YOU CAN COME UP. HOW Y'ALL DOING TODAY? YEAH, THERE'S A BUTTON ON THERE IF YOU'LL PUSH IT THAT WAY. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU. I REALLY DIDN'T GET TO HEAR MUCH WHAT YOU SAID. I'M STILL READING WHAT'S HAPPENING ON LONGNECK ROAD. IT'S UNDER MY IMPRESSION YOU GUYS PLAN ON DOING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA. SO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC APPEARANCE? YOU WANT TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE FOR THAT AGENDA ITEM. I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE DIFFERENCE FROM ONE TO THE OTHER. WE WILL BRING THAT UP HERE IN JUST A LITTLE BIT. IF YOU WANT TO TALK AT THAT POINT, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. ON THAT TOPIC. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NO PROBLEM. ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC APPEARANCE? OKAY. WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. [D. CONSENT AGENDA] ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS LISTED ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS A COMMISSIONER. SO REQUESTS IN WHICH THE EVENT WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA. THE ONLY THING THAT'S ON HERE IS THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3RD, 2025. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. I'VE GOT A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND MOTION A SECOND. OPEN UP FOR A VOTE. AND THE CONSENT AGENDA PASSES 4-0. MOVING ON TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. [E. PUBLIC HEARINGS ] PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER ONE, ITEM E.1, ZA20253148. ZONING AMENDMENT FOR 1503 LONGNECK. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST FROM KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY ALLEN IN A ZONING AMENDMENT TO PD 46 ON A ONE-ACRE TRACT SITUATED NEAR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MONTE CARLO BLVD AND LONGNECK ROAD IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS CRAIG FISHER. I'M THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. MISS COURSON, IF YOU COULD PULL UP THE SLIDES, PLEASE. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A ONE-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LONGNECK ROAD, JUST TO THE SOUTH OF MONTE CARLO BLVD. YOU CAN SEE THAT HERE ON THE SCREEN. THERE'S AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY. THIS MAP SHOWS THE SURROUNDING ZONING IS COMMERCIAL ZONING DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH, PD 46. AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY FROM SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL OR SF-E TO PD 46. FURTHER NORTH, NORTH OF MONTE CARLO BLVD, THERE'S ADDITIONAL RETAIL ZONING AS PART OF PD TEN, AND THEN AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONTE CARLO AND LONGNECK OR FM 75, THERE'S COMMERCIAL ZONING. AND THEN DIRECTLY TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ACROSS LONGNECK ROAD. THERE ARE SOME LOTS ZONED SF-E OR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENT ESTATE. THIS MAP SHOWS THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION BOUNDARIES AS REQUIRED. NOTIFICATION LETTERS WERE SENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND NEWSPAPER NOTICES WILL ALSO BE, ARE BEING PUBLISHED PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AS NOTED, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE TO PD 46. PD 46 EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY JUST NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE PURPOSE OF PD 46 IS TO CREATE A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH RESTRICTED USES TO MAKE THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD [00:05:04] WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. SO HIGH INTENSITY USES LIKE RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE THRUS AUTO REPAIR SHOPS AND THE LIKE ARE NOT PERMITTED. THE FULL LIST OF PROHIBITED USES IN PD 46 IS SHOWN HERE ON THE SCREEN. AND TO SUMMARIZE, THE INTENT OF PD 46 IS, IS TO CREATE A LOW IMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBLE COMMERCIAL AREA. THIS CONCEPT PLAN WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AND SHOWS POTENTIALLY HOW THE SITE COULD DEVELOP IF THE ZONING WERE APPROVED. THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. IF THE ZONING IS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO SUBMIT A PRELIMINARY PLAT. GO THROUGH THAT REVIEW PROCESS. PRELIMINARY PLAT WILL COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ALL CITY REGULATIONS REGARDING DRAINAGE AND GRADING, ZONING, SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITATIONS ALL NEED TO BE ADHERED TO. AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, IMPROVEMENTS TO LONGNECK ROAD ARE REQUIRED. DETAILED DRAINAGE PLANS AND GRADING PLANS WILL HAVE TO BE PROVIDED, SO THOSE STEPS WILL ALL BE FORTHCOMING AS THIS. IF APPROVED, THIS ZONING REQUEST DOES NOT GRANT THE DEVELOPER THE PERMISSION TO BUILD. SO THIS IS JUST A CONCEPTUAL IDEA OF HOW IT MAY LOOK IF APPROVED. IN MY STAFF REPORT, I DID NOTE THAT A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN, SO A FLOOD STUDY WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY PERMIT APPROVAL. TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S STORMWATER REGULATIONS AND THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN. IN SUMMARY, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM AS IT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEGINNING TO OCCUR NEAR THIS, NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF MONTE CARLO AND LONGNECK FM 75. WE DID RECEIVE THREE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST SINCE THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA. THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, MISS ROOS, WILL READ THOSE IN DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE FOR STAFF. ALL RIGHT. THEY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. AND SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT 6:39. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. WE HAVE RECEIVED, AS CRAIG SAID, THREE LETTERS IN OPPOSITION OF THIS REQUEST. AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENTERING THESE IN THE RECORD, I WILL READ THEM OUT. THE FIRST LETTER IS FROM JULIAN COLVIN, OWNER OF 1424 LONGNECK ROAD, PRINCETON. THIS IS A FORMAL PROTEST AGAINST ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION ZA20253148 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1503 LONGNECK ROAD. MR. COHEN SAYS PLEASE ACCEPT THIS PETITION LETTER AS A FORMAL, WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST THE ABOVE REFERENCED ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION PURSUANT TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 2.11.006D. I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1424 LONGNECK ROAD, PRINCETON, TEXAS, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 12.819 ACRES. MY PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN 200FT OF THE SITE PROPOSED FOR REZONING. I ASSERT THAT THE LAND I OWN WITHIN THE STATUTORY 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION BUFFER CONSTITUTES MORE THAN 20% OF THE TOTAL LAND AREA WITHIN THAT BUFFER. THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS STATE LAW, THIS PETITION REQUIRES THAT THE ZONING CHANGE CANNOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF THREE FOURTHS OF ALL VOTING MEMBERS. I AM PROTESTING THIS CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SF-E TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 46, PD 46 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. INCOMPATIBILITY. THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL USE IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING AND ACTIVE AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS ON MY PROPERTY. THE INTRODUCTION OF COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION, TRAFFIC NOISE AND ACTIVITY WILL IMPACT ACTIVE AND ONGOING AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED USE IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF MY PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, [00:10:05] WHICH IS LARGELY FEMA FLOOD HAZARD AREAS, INCLUDING THE TICKEY CREEK TRIBUTARY. MY PROPERTY IS DOWNSLOPE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LIES BETWEEN THE PROPOSED PD 46 AND THAT TRIBUTARY. SECOND POINT IS DIMINUTION OF VALUE. SORRY, THE INTRODUCTION OF COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC, NOISE AND ACTIVITY WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE QUIET ENJOYMENT AND MARKET VALUE OF MY 12-ACRE RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL ESTATE. FURTHERMORE, THE IMPACT OF ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WILL AFFECT SURFACE WATER, WHICH CURRENTLY FLOWS ONTO MY PROPERTY FROM THE PROPERTY AT 1503 LONGNECK ROAD. ANY ADDITIONAL SHEET FLOW WILL IMPACT NOT ONLY THE VALUE OF MY PROPERTY, BUT THE VALUE AND OPERATIONS OF MY ACTIVE AND FUTURE AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. NOTE THAT THERE IS NO DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON MY PROPERTY THAT IS APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PD 46. THIRD POINT IS SAFETY. TRAFFIC ON THIS ROAD IS ALREADY UNSAFE. THE NEAREST INTERSECTION AT LONGNECK ROAD AND MONTE CARLO, HAS THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES OF ANY LOCATION IN PRINCETON. WIDENING OF LONGNECK ROAD IS ON THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE PLAN, BUT THAT PROJECT IS NOT FUNDED YET. FURTHERMORE, THAT PROJECT WILL ALSO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CURRENT LAND USE AND DRAINAGE AND WILL NECESSARILY REQUIRE EASEMENTS AND PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ALONG THE ENTIRE ROADWAY. I REQUEST THAT THIS PROTEST BE LEGALLY FILED AND PRESENTED TO BOTH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO ANY DELIBERATION OR VOTE ON THIS MATTER. I FURTHER REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER. RESPECTFULLY, JULIEN COLVIN, OWNER. THAT WAS THE FIRST LETTER. THE SECOND LETTER IS FROM KENZY MILLER, OWNER OF A PROPERTY ON LONGNECK ROAD. THIS IS NOT WITHIN THE 200FT NOTIFICATION, BUT IT IS IN THE AREA ON LONGNECK ROAD. SO, MISS MILLER SAYS, TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. I LIVE ON LONGNECK ROAD AND I OPPOSE CASE ZA20253148. DUE TO TRAFFIC SAFETY AND FLOODING CONCERNS. ALL ACTIONS SHOULD CEASE UNTIL THE CITY ADDRESSES THE FLOODING ISSUES FOR ALL RESIDENTS. LONGNECK ROAD WAS NOT MEANT TO BE MORE THAN THE CURRENT TWO LANES THAT IT IS. WIDENING THIS ROAD WILL TAKE LAND FROM THE CITY PARK, AS WELL AS SEVERAL HOMEOWNERS THAT MOVED TO PRINCETON BEFORE THE POPULATION BOOM. THE DECAYING AND CURRENT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT, I'M SORRY, I ACTUALLY I MISSED A SENTENCE. SO AFTER BEFORE THE POPULATION BOOM, THERE IS A SENTENCE. THE SECRETIVE PUSH THROUGH OF THIS CASE IS FRIVOLOUS AT BEST. ATTENTION SHOULD BE TURNED TOWARD THE DECAYING AND CURRENT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES THAT LINE THE 380. COMMERCIAL LAND HAS NO PURPOSE ON A SMALL TOWN ROAD, WITH NO DRAINAGE IN PLACE FOR THE CURRENT RUNOFF, AND OVER FULL CULVERT DRAINS WHERE IT WOULD CAUSE UNDUE STRESS AND IMMINENT DANGER DURING FLOODING. BEST REGARDS. KENZY MILLER. I HAVE A THIRD LETTER HERE BY JONATHAN MILLER, ALSO OWNER OF PROPERTY ON LONGNECK ROAD. MR. MILLER SAYS, TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I LIVE ON LONGNECK ROAD AND I OPPOSE CASE ZA20253148, DUE TO TRAFFIC SAFETY AND FLOODING CONCERNS. BEST REGARDS, JONATHAN MILLER. THESE ARE THE THREE OPPOSITION LETTERS THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN REGARD TO THIS MATTER? GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONER KEVIN HISS. HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TONIGHT ABOUT THIS ZONING HEARING ON LONGNECK ROAD. THE, THERE'S A FEW THINGS NOTED IN THE AGENDA ITEM IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR THIS THAT ARE QUESTIONABLE. SO, NUMBER ONE, IT TALKS ABOUT TRANSPORTATION, UNDER THE TRANSPORTATION SECTION IT MENTIONS THAT, [00:15:01] AND IT WAS ALSO MENTIONED BY CRAIG FISHER THAT WIDENING LONGNECK ROAD IS PART OF THE ZONING REQUEST. SO WHENEVER BASICALLY YOU GUYS REZONE IT, WHEN THE DEVELOPER COMES IN AND WANTS TO BUILD SOMETHING, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO WIDEN LONGNECK ROAD. THERE'S MULTIPLE ISSUES THERE. NUMBER ONE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WERE NOTIFIED OF THIS ZONING CHANGE ARE THOSE WITHIN 200FT OF THE PROPERTY. NOW, THAT'S THE MINIMUM REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. BUT SINCE THEY HAVE ALSO TIED THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENT OF LONGNECK ROAD, THE WIDENING OF LONGNECK ROAD TO IT, REALLY ANYBODY ALONG LONGNECK ROAD SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THAT BECAUSE IT AFFECTS EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR PROPERTIES. AND I DO LIVE ON THAT ROAD AT 1314. AND NOBODY'S CONTACTED ME ABOUT PURCHASING ANY EASEMENT. THERE'S NO THERE'S NO POTENTIAL RIGHT NOW FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY WIDEN THIS ROAD WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY BEING PURCHASED. I HAVE MAPS HERE AND STUFF. UNFORTUNATELY, I WAS HAVING PRINTER ISSUES TO BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU SOME OF THIS STUFF. HOPEFULLY MAYBE YOU CAN SEE FROM MY IPAD, BUT THIS IS THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE PLAN. IF YOU GUYS LOOK AT THAT, AND THAT LITTLE, THE PURPLE CIRCLE THERE IS LONGNECK ROAD. I'M SORRY, THIS, I APOLOGIZE. THIS IS THE PLAT FOR THAT AREA. SO THE PLAT FOR THAT AREA SHOWS THAT SOME OF THE PROPERTIES ACTUALLY ENCROACH ONTO WHAT THE CITY'S CALLING ITS RIGHT OF WAY, SO THAT I THINK THAT THEY NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK WHETHER THEY HAVE THIS FULL RIGHT OF WAY AS THEY'RE NOTIFYING IN THE REPORT THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE. THAT'S AGAIN, SOMETHING THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PURCHASE FROM HOMEOWNERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CONTACTED ABOUT THIS YET, AND ALSO HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF ZONING NOTICE, THOUGH THEIR PROPERTIES DIRECTLY ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THE WIDENING OF THE ROAD THAT'S TIED TO THIS. ALSO A, I HOPE THIS DOESN'T DIE ON ME. SECOND. THIS IS A FLOOD MAP OF THE AREA. Y'ALL PROBABLY HAVE DIFFICULTY SEEING IT FROM THERE, BUT BASICALLY LONGNECK ROAD IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT AREA. IF YOU IF YOU DRIVE DOWN LONGNECK ROAD, YOU CAN SEE ALL THE AREA BELOW IT WHERE, WHERE THE PARK IS COLWELL PARK AND ALL THE HOMES. IT'S ALL LOWER LONGNECK ROAD'S BUILT UP MUCH HIGHER. LONGNECK ROAD ESSENTIALLY HOLDS BACK THE FLOODPLAIN. THE FLOODPLAIN GOES ALL THE WAY UP. THAT'S THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO LONGNECK. IT HOLDS IT BACK. ANY WAY, ANY WIDENING OF THAT IS EITHER GOING TO ENCROACH ONTO THE FLOODPLAIN, WHICH THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT LEGALLY, OR IT'S GOING TO WORSEN IT. IT'S GOING TO WORSEN THE FLOODPLAIN. IF THEY BUILT ON THE BUILDING SIDE WHERE THERE STILL IS FLOODPLAIN BUT LESS OF IT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BUY HOMES. AGAIN, THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS ZONING CHANGE AND HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE ZONING CHANGE. ALSO, I WANT TO NOTE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE YOU TEND TO KIND OF LOOK AT, LIKE, THE CITY AND THE ENGINEERS AND TRUST, LIKE, HEY, THEY PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO THIS TYPE OF STUFF. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF POTENTIAL FOR FLOODING ISSUES, DRAINAGE ISSUES, THEY'VE GOT THIS COVERED. AN EXAMPLE IS A, OF HOW THAT CAN VERY EASILY BE OVERLOOKED. IS THE MCDONALD'S AT MONTE CARLO AND LONGNECK ROAD THAT, THE PLAT FOR THAT THEY CAME THEY WERE APPROVED ORIGINALLY BACK IN 2024. THEY CAME BACK TOWARDS THE END OF 2025. SORRY. EARLY 2025. LATE 2025. THEY THEY CAME BACK. THEY HAD OTHER DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT THEY NEEDED TO RESOLVE. SO THEIR PLAT CHANGED. ABOUT HALF OF THE LAND THAT MCDONALD'S IS ON BECAME A, ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEERS, NEEDED TO BE A RETAINING, A RETENTION POND. AND I'VE GOT A EXAMPLE OF THAT RIGHT HERE. SO, THIS IS THE PLAT WITH THE MCDONALD'S, AND THE BLUE IS WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE RETENTION POND NOW. SO. SO IF YOU GO BY THERE, THEY'VE ACTUALLY STARTED CONSTRUCTING IT. THE BUILDING FOR MCDONALD'S IS WHERE THE RETENTION POND IS. THAT'S BECAUSE WHEN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED. CRAIG FISHER WAS ALSO, THIS WAS BEFORE DIRECTOR SHAILAJA ROOS STEPPED IN TO HER POSITION, AND SHE'S CHANGED THIS NOW, BUT THEY WERE BASICALLY GIVING PERMITS BEFORE THE BEFORE ANY OF THE ENGINEERING WAS DONE. SO DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEIR PLAT SHOWED THAT THEY NEEDED IN, THE ENGINEERS SHOWED THAT THEY NEEDED TO GET TO DO ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE AND TAKE ABOUT A HALF OF THEIR PROPERTY AND MAKE IT A RETENTION POND. THAT WAS NOT DONE. AND RIGHT NOW, IF YOU DRIVE BY THERE, RIGHT WHERE THE RETENTION POND IS SUPPOSED TO BE IS THE MCDONALD'S ITSELF. AND IT'S WHY IT'S IT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE, NUMBER ONE, OF WHY WE SHOULDN'T JUST FLAT OUT TRUST THE CITY OR THE ENGINEERS. [00:20:08] WE DO HAVE SOME IMPROVEMENTS HAPPENING, BUT WE NEED TO. DRAINAGE IS SOMETHING THAT'S UNDER YOUR PURVIEW BASED ON STATE LAW AND BASED ON CITY ORDINANCE. IF YOU EVER GO READ THROUGH THOSE ORDINANCES, IT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT AS A COMMISSION. AND THAT DRAINAGE AT MCDONALD'S NOT ONLY IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY WE SHOULDN'T JUST FLAT OUT TRUST THAT THINGS ARE GOING SMOOTHLY. IT DIRECTLY AFFECTS LONGNECK ROAD, BECAUSE THE DRAINAGE FROM THAT AREA COMES DOWN BOTH DIRECTIONS OVER MONTE CARLO AND OVER HIGHWAY 70, OR FARM TO MARKET 75 INTO THE TICKEY CREEK AREA, WHICH DIRECTLY DRAINS THROUGH THIS ENTIRE AREA. SORRY, MY IPAD KEEPS LOCKING ON ME. YOU GUYS ALSO KNOW. I KNOW THERE'S NO. WE GOT SOME NEW MEMBERS UP HERE. AND THERE'S NO FORMAL TRAINING FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU'RE KIND OF LEARNING AS YOU GO, BUT, YOU KNOW THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS YOUR GUIDEBOOK OF KIND OF HOW YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO VOTE. AND THIS DOES NOT MEET THE CITY'S CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH WAS PASSED IN 2019. WE SAW THAT, OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF BEING UPDATED, BUT IT'S NOT UPDATED YET. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR LAND USE IS SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, BUT THE LAND USE FOR THIS AREA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS CRAIG FISHER NOTED, IS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD IS SAYS THIS PLACE TYPE CAN SUPPORT A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES, INCLUDING SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES, PATIO HOMES, TOWNHOMES AND DUPLEXES IN A COMPACT NETWORK, A COMPLETE, WALKABLE STREETS THAT ARE NAVIGABLE BY CAR, BICYCLE, OR FOOT, AND MAY CONTAIN A SMALL NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES TO SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD LOT SIZES RANGE IN SIZE, BUT ARE TYPICALLY LESS THAN HALF AN ACRE. SO, THAT'S FOR THE PRIMARY LAND USE. THE SECONDARY LAND USE IS, CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE. SMALL AMOUNTS OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL SPACE AND SPECIFIC LOCATIONS. SO THE SECONDARY USE DOES ALSO COVER SOMETHING THAT THEY CALL NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SAYS IS BASICALLY TO SUPPORT THOSE TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH DON'T EXIST HERE RIGHT NOW. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS A CATEGORY OF USES INTENDED TO AUGMENT OR SUPPORT, SUBURBAN LIVING, COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD, AND URBAN LIVING SPACE TYPES. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES PRIMARILY SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THEM. THE SCALE AND ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. THESE DEVELOPMENTS COMPLETE THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO ALTHOUGH THERE IS SOME ROOM FOR COMMERCIAL IN THE ZONING, AGAIN, THAT'S A SECONDARY TYPE OF ZONING IN AN AREA WHERE WE DON'T HAVE THE PRIMARY TYPE OF ZONING IN THIS AREA. SO AGAIN, THIS DOES NOT MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON ORDINANCES SAYS YOU GUYS ARE SUPPOSED TO VOTE ON THESE ZONING CASES BASED ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH AGAIN, THIS LAND USE DOES NOT MEET. SO AGAIN, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE, MAJOR OR MINOR ARTERIAL TYPE D ROADWAY FROM THE CITY OF PRINCETON'S, WHATEVER THEY CALL ROADWAY. I FORGET WHAT THE BOOK IS THAT THEY HAVE ALL THESE IN. IT'S A 70-FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. I MAPPED IT OUT AGAIN. I DON'T SEE HOW THIS 70-FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IS GOING TO FIT THERE. THEY DO. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY MAY HAVE IT IN SOME AREAS, BUT YOU IF YOU DRIVEN DOWN LONGNECK ROAD, IT'S ABOUT 11-FOOT LANES ON EITHER SIDE. THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE THE CITY CAN UTILIZE WHAT AN AREA THAT'S NOT DENOTED AS RIGHT OF WAY, BUT THEY HAVE TO STOP THE DRAINAGE DITCHES, WHICH THE DRAINAGE DITCHES ON THAT ROAD ARE EITHER NONEXISTENT OR, AT, IS RIGHT AT THE ROADWAY. SO I'M NOT I HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME SEEING HOW THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. AGAIN, THAT'S MORE REASON TO QUESTION, STOP AND SAY, HEY, ARE WE ACTUALLY PLANNING THIS, RIGHT? AGAIN, WE HAVE MULTIPLE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE I WENT AROUND AND KNOCKED ON DOORS AND LET THEM KNOW KIND OF WHAT'S GOING ON, BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS. NOBODY. MOST PEOPLE DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT WHAT'S COMING OFF THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION. I SAW A FEW PEOPLE, OLD PEOPLE CRY BECAUSE THEY REALIZE THAT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEIR HOMES, WHICH ALREADY DEAL WITH FLOODING ISSUES ALWAYS ALREADY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE FOR A LOT LONGER THAN ANY OF US AND LIKELY GOING TO END UP PUSHING THEM TO EITHER HAVE TO BE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOME. [00:25:05] AND, AND THAT IS, IT'S VERY LIKELY IF THEY HAVE TO PURCHASE THOSE PROPERTIES, PURCHASE AN EASEMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAVE EVER GONE THROUGH THE CITY OF PRINCETON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR THEM TO PUT IN INTO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS A CLAUSE WHERE IF THEY NEED A CERTAIN EASEMENT OR SOMETHING, THEN THE CITY WILL HELP TO DO EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACTUALLY TAKE THE PROPERTY. SO OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THIS YET. THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE ZONING FIRST, BUT IT'S LIKELY BASED ON PAST HISTORY. THE MOST RECENT ONE THAT I KNOW OF IS TOWN CENTER, WHERE THERE'S A CLAUSE IN THERE, AND THEY BASICALLY GIVE THE CITY THE RIGHT TO WHERE IF THEY CANNOT GET WHAT THEY NEED TO IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION, FOR INSTANCE, AN EASEMENT. THEN THE CITY WILL STEP IN AN EMINENT DOMAIN. IT SO AGAIN, HINTING THAT KIND OF POWER TO THE CITY WHEN WE AND THE DEVELOPER, WHEN WHEN WE AS A CITY HAVE NOT REALLY GONE THROUGH AND FIGURED OUT WHAT IS THE BEST USE OF THIS AREA, MAYBE IT'S NOT COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THEY'VE DENOTED IT ON HERE. I FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT. I FEEL LIKE THERE ARE OTHER USES FOR IT, BUT WHAT THEY'RE TURNING IN ALL COMMERCIAL, IT'S REALLY, REALLY SHORTSIGHTED. NOW, YOU MIGHT THINK BASED ON WHAT YOU SEE IN THE AGENDA PACKET, OH, THE AREA IS ALTERNATIVE COMMERCIAL. WELL, WE DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, NOBODY REALLY LOOKED AT IT. EVERYBODY VOTED YES ON GETTING WHERE THE WHERE THE MCDONALD'S IS AT THE CORNER TURNING THAT COMMERCIAL. IT'S ALSO NOTED THAT ON THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT THAT THAT'S COMMERCIAL AS WELL. IT MAY BE ZONED BASED ON WHAT, THE PD THAT'S THERE. I FORGET WHAT IT'S CALLED. THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT COMMERCIAL IN THERE. HOWEVER 100% OF THAT IS FEMALE FLOODPLAIN. IT'LL NEVER BE COMMERCIAL EVEN THOUGH PD ALLOWS IT. IT IS 100% FEMA FLOODPLAIN. NOBODY'S BUILDING ANYTHING THERE. CAN'T BUILD ON THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN. SO THE ONLY PART THAT IS ACTUALLY COMMERCIAL THAT ACTUALLY HAS AN APPROVED COMMERCIAL USE RIGHT NOW IS BUILDING IS WHERE THE MCDONALD'S IS, WHICH HAS ITS OWN PROBLEMS. THE OTHER PART IS JUST NORTH OF THERE, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL PD 46, WHICH WAS APPROVED IN JANUARY 2024. AND THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THAT IS IT'S A BAIT AND SWITCH. THEY CAME IN AND THEY ZONED PD 46. I VOTED ON IT AND I WENT AND TALKED TO ALL THE NEIGHBORS. IT'S NOT I MEAN, IT'S AT THE CORNER OF THE LONGNECK ROAD. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLANS FOR THAT, IT WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH LONGNECK ROAD. WE WERE TOLD IT WAS GOING TO BE A LITTLE STRIP CENTER. IT I DIDN'T SEE HOW ANYBODY WAS EVER GOING TO BUILD A HOME RIGHT THERE. CATTY CORNER FROM A MCDONALD'S. BUT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A LITTLE STRIP CENTER, AND WE DENOTED WHAT THEY SHOULDN'T BUILD THERE, WHAT THEY SHOULDN'T WHAT SHOPS THEY SHOULDN'T PUT IN THERE. WELL, NOW THEY'RE MERGING THIS INTO MAKE PD 46 LARGER AND TAKING UP LONGNECK ROAD. THAT'S A BAIT AND SWITCH. THIS IS NOT THE COMMERCIAL THAT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US. AND AS FAR AS THE, I APOLOGIZE, I'M KIND OF GETTING DRY MOUTH HERE AS FAR AS THE FLOODING ISSUE GOES, WHICH IS A MAJOR ISSUE. I WOULD SAY NUMBER ONE THE CITY OR CITY COUNCIL JUST APPROVED FOR US TO DO A DRAINAGE PLAN OR FOR US TO REDO OUR DRAINAGE PLAN, A DRAINAGE STUDY. IT'S GOING TO BE 1 TO 2 YEAR PROCESS. I SAY VOTE THIS DOWN. LET THAT DRAINAGE STUDY HAPPEN. LET THEM DECIDE, OKAY, WHAT'S A BETTER LAND USE FOR THIS BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THAT STUDY? BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE CRITICAL AREAS IN THE ENTIRETY OF PRINCETON. IT AFFECTS THE SCHOOL THERE, THE MIDDLE SCHOOL THERE, IT AFFECTS THE PARK, IT AFFECTS EVERY SINGLE HOME THERE, AND IT'S ALREADY AFFECTING THEM. SO I SAY UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT ACTUALLY WHAT'S THE BEST LAND USE HERE, LET'S PUT A HOLD ON THIS. LET'S NOT ZONE THIS STUFF, AND YOU GUYS NEED TO HAVE THE INFORMATION AND MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS. BUT THE CITY BRINGING THIS TO YOU, BRING THIS PAST RESIDENTS WITHOUT ACTUALLY LETTING US KNOW THIS IS HAPPENING. I JUST HAPPEN TO OBVIOUSLY I PAY ATTENTION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WHAT COMES ON YOUR AGENDA? MOST PEOPLE DON'T. FOR THEM TO KIND OF, I FEEL LIKE THEY SNUCK IT PAST US. THEY WERE TRYING TO SNEAK IT PAST US. THEY DID NOT. THEY KNOW THAT THIS CHANGE IN THE ROADWAY IS GOING TO AFFECT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US, AND I DON'T THINK THEY REALLY HAVE ANY PLANS. WE HAVE A REALLY, REALLY GOOD DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES NOW, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT SHE'S BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH. SHE'S JUST WRAPPING HER HEAD AROUND ALL THE ISSUES. AND A LOT OF THIS WAS DONE BY THE PREVIOUS STAFF. I'M SURE THAT IN THE FUTURE WE'LL SEE BETTER PLANNING GOING ON. I DO, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I FEEL LIKE IT NEEDS ANOTHER SET OF EYES, A MORE EXPERIENCED SET OF EYES. [00:30:16] I DON'T KNOW IF IT REALLY REGISTERED FOR YOU GUYS WHENEVER DIRECTOR ROOS MENTIONED IT, THAT THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY COUNCIL. SO YOU ALL COULD VOTE. Y'ALL COULD ALL VOTE YES ON THIS, AND Y'ALL COULD ALL VOTE NO ON IT. THE RESULT IS THE SAME, BECAUSE IF YOU VOTE YES, IT'S SAYING TO COUNCIL YOU. HEY, PASS IT TO THEM. YOU GUYS APPROVE OR DENY? IF YOU VOTE NO ON IT, IT STILL PASSES IT TO THEM, OF COURSE, BUT IT REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE OF THEM. SO EITHER WAY, THE RESULT, NO MATTER HOW YOU VOTE ON THIS, IS THE SAME. HOWEVER, THE IDEA IS, YOU GUYS, YOU DON'T WORK FOR THE CITY, YOU WORK FOR THE PEOPLE. YOU'RE APPOINTED BY COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL IS APPOINTED BY THE PEOPLE. YOU WORK FOR THE PEOPLE. AND I'M TELLING YOU, THE PEOPLE. I TALKED TO ALMOST EVERY RESIDENT ON LONGNECK ROAD, AND EVEN THOUGH NOT ALL OF THEM SENT AN EMAIL YET, I IMAGINE BUT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THERE WILL BE A LOT MORE EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVEN'T ALL SPOKEN, I GUARANTEE YOU, I DIDN'T TALK TO ONE SINGLE PERSON WHO WASN'T VEHEMENTLY AGAINST THIS IN TEARS BECAUSE THEY REALIZED WHAT THE CITY DOES NOT. SO I REALLY HOPE THAT YOU GUYS YOU KNOW, TAKE ALL THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AT A BARE MINIMUM ASK MORE QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S HERE TO SPEAK ON? ZA20253148. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. JUST STATE YOUR STATE YOUR NAME FOR US. JONATHAN MILLER AS YOU HEARD EARLIER, I'M TECHNICALLY NOT IN THAT 200FT AREA OF THE. WHAT'S GOING ON? BUT I DO LIVE OFF LONGNECK. I DON'T HAVE A PRAYER OF SPEECH LIKE THIS GENTLEMAN JUST HAD, BUT SIMPLY I'M A BLUE COLLAR MAN THAT WORKS HARD EVERY DAY. I COME HOME TO A WIFE AND TWO KIDS, AND ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVE IS THAT THERE'S NOTHING AROUND US. I COME HOME, AND I GET TO LOVE MY KIDS. THEY GET TO GO OUT AND PLAY IN OUR YARD. I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANYTHING. COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT JUST DOESN'T. I MEAN, I ONLY TALKED TO TWO OF MY NEIGHBORS BECAUSE WE ALL LIVE ON AN ACRE, AN ACRE AND A HALF LOT. BUT THEY'RE PRETTY OLD, AND THEY WANT EITHER. YOU KNOW, WE ENJOY OUR PEACE AND QUIET. SINCE WE MOVED HERE, IT'S GOTTEN QUITE A BIT BUSIER. NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. PRINCETON GROAN, THAT'S GREAT, BUT I DON'T WANT MCDONALD'S. I DON'T KNOW WHO THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT'S RIDICULOUS. WE ALREADY GOT MCDONALDS. WHAT ABOUT A WALGREENS OR CVS? I WOULD TAKE THAT GLADLY. BUT THEN AGAIN, I DON'T WANT ANYTHING. I DON'T WANT ANY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON OUR STREET. I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT SIDEWALKS PUT ON MY PROPERTY SO PEOPLE CAN WALK UP AND DOWN MY PROPERTY, SEE WHAT'S IN MY YARD, POSSIBLY TAKE IT. I MEAN, I LOVE PEACE AND QUIET. I THINK EVERY MAN WANTS PEACE AND QUIET. IF YOU COULD GLADLY JUST. I DON'T KNOW. WHEN'S THE LAST TIME YOU GUYS DROVE DOWN LONGNECK? BUT JUST DRIVE DOWN LONGNECK, YOU'LL SEE, THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THAN WE ALREADY HAVE. IT'S BEAUTIFUL JUST THE WAY IT IS. SO PLEASE, I GUESS IF THERE. IF YOU GUYS ARE VOTING FOR THIS, PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR IT OF ANY KIND. THANK YOU, MR. MILLER. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE THIS ONE AT 7:06. FIRST OFF, I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR COMMENTS. YOU HAVE A LOT OF PASSION. PEOPLE IN AMERICA NEED MORE PEOPLE LIKE YOU. HOWEVER, WE ARE APPOINTED OFFICIALS. WE'RE NOT ELECTED. AND SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BLACK AND WHITE FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE. SO, CRAIG, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. DOES. [00:35:07] SIMPLY, YOU ALREADY SAID THAT THERE'S GOING TO, THAT THIS IS ALL SUBJECT TO A DRAINAGE STUDY, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. IF THE ZONING WAS APPROVED, THERE WILL BE DRAINAGE STUDIES REQUIRED IN SUBSEQUENT STEPS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. ALL DRAINAGE CRITERIA OF THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO BE ADHERED TO. SO YOU'RE GOING TO ADDRESS HIS COMMENTS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CORRECT? YES, SIR. TRAFFIC STUDIES, HAVE THERE BEEN ANY? NOT AT THIS STAGE WITH ZONING, BUT THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY BE REQUIRED DURING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. OKAY, SO LET ME TELL YOU, I CAN'T ANSWER FOR MY OTHER COLLEAGUES, BUT I HAVE BEEN P&Z THREE YEARS IN A CITY COUNCIL FOR FOUR. SO I UNDERSTAND THE WAY THE GAME IS PLAYED. BUT I AM APPOINTED, NOT ELECTED. PEOPLE THAT ARE ELECTED, THEY GET TO HAVE AN OPINION. I HAVE TO LOOK AT IT BLACK AND WHITE. SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THIS MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR ZONING VARIANCE? IS THAT CORRECT? THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING A VARIANCE. REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING. I UNDERSTAND. I CALL IT A VARIANCE. DIFFERENT LINGO FROM WHERE I CAME FROM. BUT THEY'RE REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING, RIGHT? CORRECT. DOES IT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY? YES OR NO? THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATED DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH THAT DESIGNATION DOES ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND SOME NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL. STAFF LOOKED AT THIS AND FEELS THAT THIS IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THAT PORTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BECAUSE IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A MIXTURE OF SMALL-SCALE COMMERCIAL TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEN, SIR, I'M NOT HERE TO TELL YOU HOW TO DO YOUR JOB. I'M AN APPOINTED OFFICIAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I HAVE TO LOOK AT IT BLACK AND WHITE. SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY HAS MADE, UNLESS YOU GUYS DIFFER. THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY. NOW, WAIT. IF I'M ON COUNCIL, I MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION, BUT I'M NOT SITTING HERE TONIGHT TO GIVE AN OPINION. I'M SITTING HERE TONIGHT TO SERVE IN THE ROLE THAT I'VE BEEN APPOINTED TO. IT'S A YES OR NO QUESTION. DOES IT MEET OR DOES IT NOT? IF IT DOESN'T, BOOM, WE VOTE IT DOWN. IF IT DOES, THEN WE'RE REQUIRED TO SAY YAY! SO THAT'S MY STANCE. IN MY EXPERIENCE, IN MY OPINION, MATTERS SUCH AS ZONING COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BECAUSE THERE'S A DEGREE OF SUBJECTIVITY. AND FOR THAT PURPOSE, YOU ALL ARE APPOINTED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. I WOULD AGREE WITHIN RATIONAL SENSE. YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THIS DOES NOT, AND IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT THE CITY IS RECOMMENDED, CORRECT? STAFF FINDS IT TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH ADOPTED PLANS AND POLICY. THEN THAT'S WHERE I AM NOTED. CAN YOU JUST PULL UP THE MAP OF THE ITEM E.1, THAT SHOWED THE FEMA FLOOD ZONE? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE. THE FACT THAT IT'S IN THE FLOOD ZONE, I DON'T. I MEAN, I ACCEPT THE FACT THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, BUT I THINK WE NEED A LOT MORE BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THAT DECISION. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DENY OR APPROVE. I THINK WE SHOULD STALL TILL THE NEXT MEETING. GIVE STAFF TIME AND THE APPLICANT TIME TO ADDRESS ALL THE DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAIN AND TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS, BUT FOR ME, IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD RIGHT NOW. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING RELIABLE ON THIS. IF I MAY, RIGHT NOW, THE APPLICANT. I'M SORRY. I'M LIKE, TOO SHORT, BUT APPLICANT WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC OR DRAINAGE OR ANYTHING AT THIS POINT. THEY WOULD LOOK AT IT DURING PLANNING. SO IF YOU PUT IT ON HOLD, IT WON'T MATTER BECAUSE THE QUESTION IS JUST THE ZONING AT THIS POINT. AND IF WE'D PREFER FOR YOU ALL TO TAKE AN ACTION OR RATHER, GIVE COUNCIL A RECOMMENDATION TODAY. HOLDING IT ON THAT PURPOSE IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT FOR. [00:40:05] I PUT MY CONFIDENCE IN COUNCIL. COUNCIL WILL DOES HAVE AN OPINION. PERIOD. WE'RE BLACK AND WHITE, SO IT'S THE WAY I FEEL. I MIGHT JUST WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT YOUR BLACK AND WHITE FOR PLANNING AND SITE PLAN. IF THOSE TWO THINGS COME IN FRONT OF YOU AND THEY MEET ALL THE REGULATIONS. BUT FOR ZONING, YOU ARE A LEGISLATIVE BODY. SO YOU CAN HAVE YOUR OPINIONS, YOUR COLORS, YOU CAN TAKE OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINIONS IN CONSIDERATION. SO I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT I LOVE THAT YOU WILL PUT YOUR CONFIDENCE IN STAFF. YES. BUT IN ADDITION, I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT OTHER THINGS. CAN YOU GO TO A SLIDE 6? I MEAN, BASED ON THIS PICTURE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE. AND THAT'S JUST ONE CONCERN. AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH PARKING FOR THAT BUILDING. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH MASONRY SCREENING WALL IN THE FEMA. I JUST, I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT WE SHOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I MOVED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF ZONING CASE ZA20253148 AS PRESENTED. I'VE GOT A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? IF THERE'S NO SECOND, THEN THE MOTION FAILS TO ENTERTAIN ANOTHER MOTION. OKAY, SO SINCE NOBODY WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION OR A SECOND FOR DENIAL, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ZONING AMENDMENT. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ZA20253148A SECOND. I SECOND. I'VE GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND. CAN I OPEN IT UP FOR A VOTE? AND IT PASSES 3 TO 1. MOVING ON TO OUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING. E.2. ZA20253149, ZONING AMENDMENT PARK PROFESSIONAL PARK CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER SENDING RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR PRINCETON EDC FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT TO PD WITH C-1 BASED ZONING ON A 53.3865 ACRE SITUATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH BEACH AND BLVD AND MYRICK LANE IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. AND I WILL OPEN UP THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:15. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION. MY NAME IS CRAIG FISHER PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REQUEST IS PRINCETON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OR THE CITY'S EDC. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE APPROXIMATELY 53-ACRE PARCELS FROM M-1, WHICH IS OUR MANUFACTURING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT 47. MISS COURSON, IF YOU PULL UP THE SLIDES, PLEASE. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF MYRICK LANE NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH BEACH AND BLVD. CORPORATE DRIVE BISECTS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE OUTLINED IN YELLOW. SO THEY'RE THE EDC PREVIOUSLY OWNED OTHER PARCELS IN THE AREA, BUT THOSE HAVE BEEN SOLD AND ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS ZONING REQUEST. IF APPROVED, THE PD WOULD JUST APPLY TO THE PARCELS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. THIS MAP HERE SHOWS THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. THE PURPLE IS THE EXISTING M-1 ZONING THAT WOULD REMAIN ON THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT NO LONGER CONTROLLED BY THE EDC. [00:45:08] TO THE NORTH IS THE BROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A RESIDENTIAL ZONING. TO THE NORTHWEST IS THE CITY'S J J BOOK MEMORIAL PARK AND PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS. THE CROSS MILL NEIGHBORHOOD IS BEING DEVELOPED THERE, A SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS TO THE SOUTH, SOUTH OF MYRICK LANE IS THE WINCHESTER CROSSING NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING. AND THEN TO THE EAST IS CITY OWNED PROPERTY, HOME TO THE FUTURE MULTI GEN REC CENTER AND PARK. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION WAS SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY AS REQUIRED AND AS CAN BE SEEN HERE ON THIS EXHIBIT. SO THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF PD 47 IS TO, IS TO CREATE TO TRANSITION THE PROPERTY FROM AN INDUSTRIAL PARK TO A BUSINESS PARK. AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO CREATE A MORE COMPATIBLE COMMERCIAL AREA COMPATIBLE WITH A PROPERTY THAT IS NOW COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL USES. AND ALSO TO LIMIT THE TYPES OF USES THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE RESIDENTS. IF APPROVED, THE C-1 BASED ZONING WOULD ALLOW FOR SUCH THINGS AS MEDICAL OFFICE, SOME GENERAL OFFICE, AND SOME RETAIL, AMONG OTHER COMMERCIAL USES. PD 47 ALSO PROPOSES MANY DESIGN STANDARDS WHICH WERE AVAILABLE IN YOUR PACKET IN THE DRAFT PD. SOME OF THOSE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS WILL REQUIRE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS THAT 100% OF THE BUILDING'S EXTERIOR CONSIST OF MASONRY OR STONE PRODUCT THAT THERE BE NO BLANK FACADES, JUST THE BUILDING ARTICULATIONS REQUIRED THAT BUILDINGS HAVE A. PERCENTAGE OF OPENINGS OF WINDOWS. THEY BE TRANSPARENT. HAVE OPENINGS THAT ARE ORIENTED TO THE STREET. THE INTENT OF THESE STANDARDS IS TO CREATE A HIGH-QUALITY BUSINESS PARK THAT WILL ATTRACT COMPANIES TO THE CITY AND WILL BE A DESTINATION FOR COMMERCIAL USES IN THE CITY. THERE'S ALSO PARKING REGULATIONS THAT ARE OUTLINED AND LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ENHANCED ABOVE AND BEYOND THE THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY SIGN REGULATIONS AND ALSO SCREENING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ALL AVAILABLE IN YOUR PACKET. STAFF HAD A CONCEPT PLAN PUT TOGETHER THAT SHOWS HOW THE PROPERTY COULD DEVELOP. AGAIN, THE ZONING, IF APPROVED, WOULD NOT THIS CONCEPT WOULD NOT BE PART OF THAT ZONING. IT'S JUST IT'S AN IDEA OF HOW IT MAY LOOK AS PROPERTIES MOVE DOWN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, YOU'LL GET OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON PRELIMINARY PLOTS, SITE PLANS, INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. AT THIS POINT, JUST LOOKING AT ZONING, CHANGING FROM A MANUFACTURED ZONING TO MORE OF A, THE C-1 BASED ZONING FOR A LIGHTER COMMERCIAL OR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING TYPE USES. THIS MAP LOOKS AT THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. THERE'S ADEQUATE WATER AND SEWER LINES IN CORPORATE BEECHAM AND MINOR CLAIMS THE CITY HAS ALSO CONSTRUCTED RETENTION PONDS, THREE OF THEM THROUGHOUT THE PARK, TO HANDLE ALL STORMWATER AT THE ULTIMATE DEVELOPED CONDITION OF THE PARK. SO THAT'D BE A BENEFIT TO ANY DEVELOPER COMING IN TO DEVELOP A PARCEL IN THIS PARK. STORMWATER IS HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR. THERE'S NO FEMA FLOODPLAIN LOCATED IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES. SO IN SUMMARY, STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE CHANGE AS THIS IS A MORE. THIS CHANGE IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT NOW SURROUNDS THE PROPERTY. SO WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE. THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CEO, JIM WAYMIRE IS ALSO HERE AND AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CRAIG. DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THEY GOT ANY QUESTIONS. IS ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE ZA20253149? NOPE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:21. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE ZA20253149 AS PRESENTED. SECOND. I'VE GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND. CAN WE GET IT OPEN FOR A VOTE? [00:50:12] AND THAT PASSES 4-0. MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ONE. E.3, ZA20253150, ZONING AMENDMENT TO PD 12. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST FROM IRONWOOD AT PRINCETON 599 WEST PRINCETON LP FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT TO PD 12 ON A 15.157 ACRE SITUATED AT 599 WEST PRINCETON DRIVE IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:22. GOOD EVENING, CRAIG FISHER PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. THIS REQUEST IS TO MODIFY THE EXISTING ZONING PD 12 ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS RICHARD NEUHARTH WITH BLOOM CAPITAL. THE PROPERTY HAS. OH, THERE WE GO. I THINK IT'S WORKING NOW. MISS COURSON, CAN YOU PULL UP THE SLIDES, PLEASE? SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF US 380 JUST TO THE TO THE WEST OF TICKEY DRIVE AND EAST OF THE WALMART RETAIL STORE. YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS SHOWN HERE ON THIS EXHIBIT. RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH ALONG TICKEY DRIVE. FURTHER SOUTH ACROSS THE CREEK IN THE BROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMERCIAL ZONING TO THE WEST WHERE WALMART IS. THE NORTH IS ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONING. AND THEN TO THE EAST THERE'S RESIDENTIAL ZONING. THIS EXHIBIT SHOWS THE NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY. ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200FT WERE NOTIFIED. SO JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND TO THE PROPERTY. THE EXISTING ZONING WAS APPROVED IN 2015. THE BUILDING PERMITS WERE ISSUED IN 2021. CONSTRUCTION THEN SLOWED AS THERE WERE DISPUTES WITH PREVIOUS CONTRACTORS AND DEVELOPERS, AND THE PROPERTY SAT IN SOME LIMBO. BLUM CAPITAL PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. WORKED THROUGH SOME CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES. THERE WAS SOME DEFICIENCIES IN THE MATERIALS ON SITE. THOSE HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. FULL BUILDING PERMIT WAS THEN ISSUED IN OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR. AND AT THIS TIME NOW THE DEVELOPER IS REQUESTING THESE CHANGES TO MODIFY PD 12 TO CHANGE SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS. SO THOSE CHANGES ARE OUTLINED HERE ON THIS SLIDE TO INCREASE THE UNIT COUNT FROM 300 TO 306, TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT FOR GARAGES, AND TO ALSO CHANGE SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUIREMENTS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S STANDARD REQUIREMENTS. IF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CHOOSES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THESE CHANGES. STAFF RECOMMENDS DOING SO WITH SOME WITH SOME ENHANCED STANDARDS, SOME WITH SOME CHANGES AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS BE ENHANCED AND THAT THERE BE TWO DIFFERENT MATERIALS, TWO DIFFERENT COLORS USED ON EACH FACADE. AND THAT CEMENTITIOUS HARDIE BOARD CAN BE USED, BUT ONLY IF IT DOES NOT RESEMBLE TRADITIONAL HORIZONTAL SIDING. ENHANCED LANDSCAPING REQUIRING LANDSCAPES, SWELLS, LANDSCAPE, ISLANDS, ONE ISLAND FOR EVERY 15 PARKING SPACES, INCLUDING CANOPY TREES AND ENHANCING THE PARKING STANDARDS TO HAVE ONE CANOPY TREE PER 10 PARKING SPACES. STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS ENHANCING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BALCONIES TO BE AN ORNAMENTAL METAL, AND ALSO TO IN LIEU OF THE GARAGES TO PROVIDE COVERED PARKING SPACES WITH A DECORATIVE PARKING, AS SHOWN IN SOME OF THESE SLIDES. HERE YOU CAN SEE SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE, JUST TO ENHANCE THE VISUAL APPEAL OF THIS PROPERTY ALONG A VERY VISUAL CORRIDOR IN THE CITY. SO WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE DEVELOPERS IS PRESENT AS WELL. I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ZA20253150? ALL RIGHT. AND WANTING TO WAIT FOR HIM TO GET BACK BEFORE WE DO A VOTE. SO, COMMISSIONERS, I DO WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE HAD SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. [00:55:09] SO YOUR PANEL WILL ASK YOU TO HIT THE SIGN IN BUTTON AGAIN BEFORE YOU'RE ABLE TO VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT. AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:27. AND THEN WE'LL GIVE IT JUST A MINUTE FOR MR. HASLAM TO GET BACK WITH US. I MAKE A MOTION TO SIDE WITH THE CITY AND DENY THIS REQUEST. MR. HESLEP, OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT IF YOU ALL CHOOSE TO APPROVE IT, TO APPROVE IT WITH CHANGES AS OUTLINED IN STAFF'S REPORT AND THE PRESENTATION. THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAW TODAY. IT SAID THAT YOU GUYS RECOMMENDED THIS THE PULTE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? NO, SIR. WE'RE DISCUSSING PD 12. SORRY. THE ITEM JUST BEFORE THAT. SORRY. I THOUGHT THIS WAS A PULTE NEIGHBORHOOD. MY APOLOGIES. YES, THAT'S. WE'RE STILL OPEN FOR A MOTION. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE ZA20253150 AS PRESENTED AND SUBJECT TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. I SECOND. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. CAN I OPEN UP FOR A VOTE? AND THAT PASSES 4 TO 0. MOVING ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 1F1 THE CLEAR HAVEN PRELIMINARY PLAT EXTENSION REQUEST. [F. REGULAR AGENDA ] CONSIDER APPROVING A REQUEST FROM PULTE HOMES OF TEXAS, LP TO EXTEND THE APPROVAL OF THE CLEAR HAVEN PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 180 DAYS. TAKE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS CRAIG FISHER PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. SO THIS REQUEST IS FROM PULTE HOMES OF TEXAS, LP TO EXTEND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR 180 ADDITIONAL DAYS. MISS COURSON, IF YOU PLEASE, PULL UP THOSE SLIDES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 452. TO THE EAST AND NORTH OF FM 982, A PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL MAY 28TH OF 2024. THE DEVELOPER THEN MOVED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR PHASE 1. PHASE 1 WAS CONSTRUCTED AND THEN A FINAL PLAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, [01:00:04] 2025. EXCUSE ME. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS STILL VALID AT THIS TIME. WITH THE WITH THE SUBMITTAL OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR PHASE ONE THAT EXTENDED THAT APPROVAL PERIOD. SO AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO EXTEND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ON TRACK TO DELIVER PHASE 2 UNTIL 27, AS OUTLINED IN THEIR LETTER THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET. SO IF APPROVED THIS REQUEST WOULD EXTEND THE THEIR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO JULY 10TH, 2026. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST. THE CITY IS RAPIDLY GROWING. WE FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT TO TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT EACH AND EVERY DEVELOPMENT AS IT COMES THROUGH WHEN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. THERE'S SO MANY THINGS ARE CHANGING IN THE CITY. A NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ON ITS WAY, AMONGST OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS. JUST WITH THE RAPID PACE OF DEVELOPMENT, IT'S VITAL THAT THE CITY LOOK AT, AT THIS DEVELOPMENT CAREFULLY PRIOR TO THEM PROCEEDING WITH PHASE 2. SO WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. FISHER? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CAN I MAKE THIS MOTION? SURE. TO MAKE. OH, SORRY. ALL RIGHT, SO, GUYS, WHAT YOU HAVE TO KNOW IS THAT WHEN I WAS ON P&Z AND ON CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FIRST 3 OR 4 YEARS, I HAD A PROBLEM FINDING MY SWITCH OR SWITCHES ON THE DICE WERE UNDERNEATH. SO THANK YOU, SIR, FOR HELPING ME FIND MY SWITCH. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SIDE AND AGREE WITH CITY THAT WE DECLINE THIS PROPOSAL. I'VE GOT A MOTION A SECOND. I SECOND. MOTION AND SECOND. OPEN UP FOR A VOTE, PLEASE. OH! DANG IT. OKAY. I'M SORRY. AM I READING THIS CORRECTLY? THAT 3 OR 4 DENYING THIS, IS THAT CORRECT? SO I HEARD I HEARD HESLEP SAY WHOOPS. DO WE NEED TO CLOSE THIS, REJECT THIS VOTE AND HAVE ANOTHER VOTE. YES. YES, THAT'S FINE, WE CAN DO THAT. I'M A PUTZ. IT IS OPEN. OKAY, SO I GO FOR AND DENYING THE TWO ZERO. I'M SORRY. DENYING THE CLEAR HAVEN. PRELIMINARY PLOT EXTENSION REQUEST PASSES 4 TO 0. MOVING ON TO INFORMATION. OUR NEXT MEETING IS GOING TO BE MONDAY, JANUARY 5TH, 2026. [G. INFORMATION] WOW. ANY REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? ALL RIGHT. AND AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. I MOVE TO ADJOURN. SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND. I GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND. AND WE ARE GOOD FOR NOTHING. Y'ALL HAVE A WONDERFUL NIGHT. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.