Link


Social

Embed


Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

IT IS 6:39 P.M.. IF YOU WOULD STAND AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.

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 ALL FOR THAT. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A ROLL CALL HERE.

MRS. ELLIS. HERE, AND MR. AL QARAGHULI. HERE.

AND MRS. GORIA. HERE. MR. HESLEP. HERE. AND MISS GHOLSTON.

HERE. AND MYSELF. MR. SHIFLET IS HERE AS WELL.

WE DO HAVE ENOUGH FOR A QUORUM TONIGHT. MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM.

[C. APPOINTMENTS ]

HERE IS OUR APPOINTMENTS. CONSIDER APPOINTING A VICE CHAIR FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND MYSELF AS I'VE BEEN CO-CHAIR, VICE CHAIR ON OTHER BOARDS, AND CURRENTLY ON HOME RULE CHARTER AND PARKS AND RECREATION.

I SECOND THAT. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT JUST WANT TO THROW THEIR NAME IN THERE? I HAVE A QUESTION. SURE. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE FOR THAT POSITION.

BASICALLY MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD STEP IN JUST IN THE TIME THAT I WOULD BE ABSENT FROM THE MEETING.

SO THEY WOULD TAKE OVER.

CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH. WE HAD SOMEBODY WHO WAS IN THAT POSITION.

THEY STEPPED DOWN. SO. I WOULD RECOMMEND ME 3 YEARS ON P&Z, 4 YEARS ON CITY COUNCIL.

SO I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE IN THE BACKGROUND. ALL RIGHT.

AND IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T I HAVEN'T DONE THIS BEFORE. HOW IS THIS SOMETHING WE TAKE? HOW DO WE VOTE ON THAT OR WHAT DO WE DO? ELLIS, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT ONE. OKAY.

CAN WE OPEN THAT UP? OKAY. SO JUST A VERBAL OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL TAKE A VERBAL VOTE ON THAT.

MRS. ELLIS, YOU WANT YOURSELF AND MR. AL QARAGHULI SECOND IT.

MISS GORIA. SO I'M VOTING TO SAY YES. YES OR NO? YES.AND MISS GHOLSTON. YES. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WILL PASS 4 TO 1.

SO, MRS. ELLIS, CONGRATULATIONS. YOU WILL BE THE VICE CHAIR FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU.

EVEN EVEN WITH MAKING A MISTAKE, IT WAS STILL PASSED 3 TO 2, THOUGH. SHE.

CORRECT. BUT IF TAKING TAKING A VERBAL VOTE FOR FOR MRS. ELLIS TO BE THE VICE CHAIR, IF YOU EVEN IF YOU WERE TO VOTE NO ON IT, IT WAS STILL PASSED WITH THE.

WHEN SHE SAID THAT SHE VOTED YES BECAUSE SHE THOUGHT I WAS PULLING OUT.

HOW SHOULD WE WORK THIS NOW? HONESTLY, LET ME SUGGEST THIS IS THE WAY TO HANDLE.

SINCE WE HAVE FOLKS MULTIPLE PEOPLE NOMINATED.

TYPICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A VOTE LIKE THIS.

TYPICALLY YOU WOULD DO PERSON WHO'S NOMINATED, THEN SOMEBODY SECOND THAT NOMINATION.

IF SOMEBODY ELSE IS NOMINATED, YOU HAVE THAT BE NOMINATED AND SOMEBODY SECOND THAT NOMINATION, THEN YOU VOTE ON THE NAMES, NOT, YOU KNOW, LIKE HOW MANY FOR PERSON A, THEN HOW MANY FOR PERSON B AND WHOEVER GETS THE MAJORITY OF THOSE VOTES, JUST LIKE, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD ANY KIND OF AN ELECTION.

SO SHOULD WE SET THIS UP A LITTLE BIT? IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT WHEN YOU'RE DOING ELECTIONS LIKE THAT AS OPPOSED TO DOING A PASSING A NORMAL MOTION. OKAY. SO SHOULD WE DO IT WHERE WE I MEAN, IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE BOTH THE NAMES AND THEN BOTH THE NAMES ON IT FOR LIKE THE NEXT,

[00:05:06]

NEXT MEETING. I THINK IF YOU WANT TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT MEETING TO DO THAT, BUT OF COURSE YOU'VE YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU'VE GOT WHAT ARE WE MISSING 1 TONIGHT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ON. OH OKAY. SO THAT WOULD BE TYPICALLY HOW YOU WOULD DO IT.

SO I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU. YOU MR. CHAIR ON HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT.

I MEAN, IF THERE WERE, IT SOUNDS LIKE IN ANY CASE IF MR. HESLEP VOTED IN THE MAJORITY ON THIS ONE, THAT THERE'D BE A, YOU KNOW, HE'D BE ALSO OPEN TO A MOTION TO RECONSIDER SINCE HE VOTED ON THE MAJORITY SIDE IN ORDER TO CHANGE VOTES. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IN ORDER TO AVOID CONFUSION, THAT WE TRY TO YOU KNOW, RECONSIDER THIS VOTE. AND IF YOU WANT TO DO IT TONIGHT, YOU CAN DO IT TONIGHT IF YOU WANT TO WAIT TILL NEXT MEETING.

WAIT TILL NEXT MEETING. OKAY. CAN WE CAN WE SET IT UP WHERE WE WOULD HAVE THE, THE NAMES UP THERE TO, TO VOTE ON FOR NEXT TIME. IS THAT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT? OKAY, SO I'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR MRS. ELLIS. NOMINATION, A SECOND FOR HER. AND THEN A NOMINATION FOR MR. HESLEP. AND .DID ANYBODY SECOND THAT NOMINATION? I HAVE NOT HAD SOMEBODY SECOND THAT THAT NOMINATION. OKAY.

I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. SO CAN WE PUT BOTH OF THOSE NAMES ON THERE FOR THE NEXT MEETING? IS THAT IS THAT POSSIBLE TO GET CUT OFF HERE? OKAY, PERFECT. WHAT IS THAT FOR THE NEXT MEETING, THEN.

OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR PUBLIC APPEARANCE.

[D. PUBLIC APPEARANCE ]

SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED 5 MINUTES TO SPEAK. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO RESPOND OR TO DISCUSS ANY ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP DURING THAT 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.

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE FOR THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE THIS EVENING? MY NAME [INAUDIBLE] 903 EAGLE STREET. PLEASE CALL ME ELAM. I HAD.

ESPECIALLY THE MISSING COMMISSIONER. I AS I READ, I'M NOT A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL AS I READ.

THERE MAY BE A QUESTION MARK ON THE ELIGIBILITY OF THE MISSING COMMISSIONER TODAY.

SO I WAS WONDERING WHO IS VERIFYING? YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER, I KNOW THAT, THANK YOU.

SECOND IS WHITE WING TRAIL PHASE 3.C. I DO NOT KNOW IF IT APPEARED IN PLANNING AND ZONING BASED ON WHATEVER DOCUMENTS I COULD SEE SEE ONLY METES AND BOUNDS. I WAS WONDERING IF WE CAN GET MAPS ALSO AT LEAST APPROXIMATE MAP.

NOT EXACT MAP, AT LEAST ON GOOGLE. GOOGLE MAPS MARKET.

I LIVE IN WHITE WING TRAIL. I PRETTY MUCH WALK ALL THE FACES IN WHITE WING TRAIL.

I CANNOT IDENTIFY WHERE IS 3.C THERE IS 4 YEAR.

WHATEVER NUMBERS NEW NEW NUMBERS HAVE COME, I CANNOT.

I DO HAVE THE COPY OF THE METES AND BOUNDS, BUT I CANNOT LOCATE THEM BECAUSE I HAVE TO GO WHERE THE POINT MEETS AND BOUNDS IS A MILE LONG DOCUMENT, AND IT IS TOO TECHNICAL. I COULD, IF I HAVE TO, BUT I WAS WONDERING HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE IT IS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANYBODY ELSE FOR THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONER. KEVIN HISS. I WANT TO MENTION A COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT THE AGENDA.

NUMBER 1, HAS ANYBODY BEEN CURIOUS ABOUT WHY Y'ALL ARE VOTING FOR A VICE CHAIR THIS EVENING? BUT NOT A CHAIR USUALLY HAPPENS. I MEAN, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IN THE IN OUR CITY ORDINANCES AND IN THE BYLAWS, IT SHOULD OCCUR ONCE PER YEAR. YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE BYLAWS.

IT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING I WAS WORKING ON WHENEVER I WAS CHAIR. AND THAT'S NEVER GONE FORWARD.

HOWEVER IN ANY CASE, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IF YOU'RE GOING BY THE DEFAULT BYLAWS, WHICH IS THE CITY COUNCIL BYLAWS, THAT SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN DONE WHENEVER THE NEW COMMISSIONERS CAME ON BOARD,

[00:10:04]

WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN AFTER THE 1ST MEETING, AFTER THE DECEMBER MEETING.

SO IT'S SOMETHING TO MAYBE CONSIDER AND, AND DECIDE AS A COMMISSION IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO PUT ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.

BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE TO ME THAT YOU ALL HAVE NOT HAD THAT THAT VOTE.

ALSO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ITEM FOR THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, THE 1 REGULAR AGENDA ITEM FOR THE C 2 ZONING.

I FOUND THAT STRANGE. I SAW THE, IT STRUCK ME WHENEVER I SAW IT IN THE ZONING HEARING SCHEDULED FOR IT IN, THE NEWSPAPER. THOSE TYPES OF ZONING CHANGES, THEY CAN BE REQUESTED BY 3 ENTITIES.

THEY CAN BE REQUESTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THEY CAN BE REQUESTED BY COUNCIL AND THEY CAN BE REQUESTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS.

WELL IT'S JUST A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. AND FOR, FOR ANYBODY IN C-2 ZONING, WHICH YOU ALL HAVE ANOTHER ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, WHICH IS C-2 ZONING FOR THE LONG, WHICH IS THE ZONING FOR LONG NECK ROAD.

BUT THE C-2 ZONING WENT ON SCHEDULED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE ANY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR COUNCIL MEMBER BROUGHT IT BROUGHT IT FORWARD. SO I FIND THAT A LITTLE BIT CURIOUS, ESPECIALLY SINCE Y'ALL ARE VOTING ON Y'ALL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ITEM TONIGHT THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD, A DECISION YOU MAKE WILL IMMEDIATELY CHANGE IN IMPACT, THAT DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS EVERY OTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT'S WITHIN C-2 ZONING.

SO THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I THAT I THINK YOU GUYS SHOULD KEEP IN MIND AS YOU'RE, AS YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS THIS EVENING. ALSO JUST A GENERAL COMMENT WHILE I HAVE TIME IS THE MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN.

1ST OFF, YOU GUYS ARE ABLE TO ASK THEM. SO WE USED TO HAVE COMPUTERS IN FRONT OF US.

YOU ALL JUST HAVE SCREENS. NOW WE HAVE COMPUTERS.

AND IF WE WANTED TO LOOK UP AN ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING, WE COULD DO IT.

YOU ALL ARE KIND OF FORCED TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY FORCED YOU TO LOOK AT. SO Y'ALL CAN ALWAYS ASK THEM TO PUT SOMETHING A DOCUMENT OR WHATEVER ON THE SCREEN.

YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO REALLY Y'ALL SHOULDN'T.

Y'ALL SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO EVERYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO, TO MAKE A DECISION.

AND, AND I RECOMMEND THAT, THAT YOU, YOU KNOW, EXERCISE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR.

THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL PUT YOU HERE FOR. ALSO THAT YOU GUYS DO NOT WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL.

YOU DON'T WORK AT THE PLEASURE OF THE MAYOR. Y'ALL ARE AN INDEPENDENT BOARD. IT SAYS THAT IN OUR BYLAWS AND IT SAYS THAT IN OUR CITY CHARTER, YOU GUYS MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION, AND YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THE IMPACTS FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD, FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. THERE ARE MANY COURT OR MANY SUPREME COURT CASES THAT HAVE DECIDED THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON, YOU KNOW, SAY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

NOW THERE IS ZONING DECISIONS MADE FOR THAT REASON.

BUT THINGS LIKE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LATER TONIGHT, EVERY ARGUMENT I'VE HEARD FOR IT, EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT I'VE HEARD FOR IT, HAS BEEN THE CITY NEEDS TAX DOLLARS, THAT'S CALLED SPOT ZONING.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T WE CANNOT PASS YOU GUYS IF YOU GUYS VOTE ON THAT LATER.

AGAIN, THIS IS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT IT'S JUST A GENERAL COMMENT BECAUSE I'VE BEEN IN YOUR CHAIRS.

I'VE BEEN IN YOUR SEATS. AND I KNOW THAT Y'ALL ARE THROWING UP THERE BLINDLY WITHOUT ANY TRAINING OR ANYTHING.

AND I KNOW THAT IT'S IT'S SOMETIMES CAN BE DIFFICULT TO GET THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED.

I APPRECIATE THE WORK. I KNOW THAT WE PROBABLY HAVE A LOT MORE PEOPLE PUTTING IN THE WORK NOW THAN AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION WAS ON THE BOARD. AND I REALLY LIKE SEEING THE QUESTIONS AND STUFF THAT I'VE SEEN, AND I HOPE YOU GUYS KEEP AT THAT AND JUST REALIZE THAT THERE ARE THERE IS AUTHORITY THAT Y'ALL HAVE AS A BOARD, AS A COMMISSION GRANTED TO YOU BY THE CITY CHARTER, BY STATE LAW.

AND Y'ALL ARE NOT. I DIDN'T TURN IT OFF, BUT YOU ARE AT THE 5 MINUTES.

SO IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND WRAP IT UP. WELL, IF I HIT THE 5 MINUTES, I WAS DESIGNATED MORE TIME, BUT THE REST OF IT IS MORE APPLICABLE TO THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

AND IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE HERE FOR THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS.

[E. CONSENT AGENDA ]

ALL CONSENT AGENDA DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS THE COMMISSIONER. SO REQUESTS IN WHICH THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. THIS EVENING WE HAVE OUR MINUTES FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING ON MARCH 16TH.

[00:15:05]

THE FINAL PLAT FROM MS FINAL PLAT FOR JOYCE.

JOYCE CAROL. THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE CROSS MILL PHASE.

FINAL PLAT FOR WHITE WING TRAILS. PHASE 4.A-1, FINAL PLAT FOR THE WHITE WING TRAILS.

PHASE 3.E AND THE FINAL PLAT, EASTRIDGE PHASE 8.

MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS IS.

I'VE GOT A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND GOT A MOTION.

A SECOND OPEN UP FOR A VOTE, PLEASE.

AND THAT WILL PASS 5 TO 1. MOVING ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

[F. PUBLIC HEARINGS ]

PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT IS A REZONING REQUEST.

CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING FROM MARCH 16TH, 2026, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AND CONSIDER SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY AT 1503 LONG NECK ROAD FROM A SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE, SF-E TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 46 PD 46 AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.

GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

CYRUS, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I'M PRESENTING THIS CASE TO YOU GUYS.

THIS YEAH. OKAY. SO THIS IS A CASE THAT YOU ALL HAD HEARD ON MARCH 16TH AND TABLED IT, CONTINUED IT AT YOUR DESKS ARE, IS A LETTER THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED AS A RESPONSE TO YOUR REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL STUDIES.

AGAIN, IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO, OR FOR PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME, THAT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THAT'S ASKING FOR PD 46. THERE IS A 5.5 ACRES UP HERE.

THAT'S ALSO PD 46. IN OUR WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES TO 200FT AROUND THERE. SO IN OUR CURRENT ZONING AS I SAID, THIS IS SF-E THAT'S A STATE THAT'S LARGE HOMES ON THIS SIDE.

THIS IS AGRICULTURE AND THEN SF-E THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE, THE T IS APARTMENTS MULTI-FAMILY PD DOWN HERE. THIS THAT YOU SEE IS ALSO A MULTIFAMILY PD.

THIS AREA HERE, THIS PROPERTY IS HAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH 408, I BELIEVE MULTIFAMILY UNITS. SO THOSE ARE THE MULTIFAMILY AROUND HERE UP NORTH IS PD 18, WHICH IS ALSO COMMERCIAL BASED ZONING, C2 ZONING AND PD 10 UP ON THE OTHER CORNER NOW.

IT SHOWS THE OTHER CORNER COMPLETELY IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

AND I THINK THERE'S A MAP IF I GO FORWARD. YES, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT CORNER IS ALL IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

HOWEVER THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY HAS FILED A LOMR AND THAT'S WHAT THEY FILED WITH FEMA TO DO ADJUSTMENTS SO THAT IT'S NO LONGER IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

I AM GOING TO TAKE LESSONS TO LEARN MORE ABOUT IT FROM OUR ENGINEER.

HOWEVER DO KNOW THAT THEY CAN BUILD THERE IF THAT LOMR IS, COMES OUT TO BE TRUE.

WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR GIS TO PUT ALL THE LOMRS AND THE BOUNDARIES THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED PROPERLY.

BUT JUST IN CASE IT ENDS UP BEING THE CASE THAT THE LOMR HAS BEEN APPROVED BY FEMA, THEN THAT CORNER ALSO FREES UP AND BECOMES COMMERCIAL FOR THAT REASON. AND I WILL SAY THAT ALL OF THESE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE APPROACHED A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR A CHANGE TO THEIR PROPERTY TO COMMERCIAL.

SO GOING BACK, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT OUR FUTURE COMP PLAN CALLS THIS THE COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD,

[00:20:05]

WHICH MEANS A SMALLER, HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OR NEIGHBORHOOD TYPE RETAIL.

SO PD 46, THEY HAVE TAKEN OUT THE REALLY BAD USES, I GUESS, OR HIGH INTENSITY USES FROM C-2 AND ARE TRYING TO GET TO A NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL.

SO THAT'S THE EXISTING 1. WE DO HAVE A NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMING OUT.

I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TEASING ABOUT THAT DRAFT COMING OUT, BUT YOU WILL SEE IT SOMEWHERE IN, IN MAY PRETTY SOON.

SO THIS PROPOSAL IS, AS WE'VE TALKED BEFORE, KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD TYPE COMMERCIAL RETAIL USES THAT THEY WANT.

A CONCEPT PLAN WAS PROVIDED 5000FT². MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY WANT TO DO A STATE FARM OFFICE THERE, A COUPLE OTHER OFFICE SUITES AND I THINK A BAKERY OR LIKE JUST COMMERCIAL KITCHEN TO BAKE IN AND NOT HAVE PEOPLE COME IN AND SIT DOWN LIKE A RESTAURANT, BUT MORE LIKE A BATCH PRODUCTION, SMALL BATCH PRODUCTION. SO THAT'S, BUT AS I SAID LAST TIME, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT WHILE THESE USES ARE EXCLUDED, THE OTHER LIST OF C-2 WILL BE ALLOWED IN THIS AREA.

SO ONCE AGAIN WE'VE LOOKED AT THE SURROUNDING ZONING.

WE'VE LOOKED AT THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY. CURRENTLY THERE ISN'T ENOUGH TO TURN THIS WHOLE THING INTO COMMERCIAL HOWEVER, HAVING JUST ONE SMALL 1 ACRE LOT DEVELOPED 500 0 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE THEM BUILD A 4 LANE DIVIDED. WE WILL ASK THEM TO ESCROW THEIR PORTION OF THE MONEY, HOLD IT TILL THE TIME DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS IN THIS AREA TO NEED A 4 LANE DIVIDED RIGHT NOW NOBODY NEEDS IT, SO WE'LL KEEP THE MONEY.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO WITH EVERYONE ELSE, EVERYONE.

ONCE THE ZONING IS APPROVED, WE REQUIRE THEM TO COME BACK WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND ALL THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TIA DOWNSTREAM ASSESSMENT, DRAINAGE STUDIES, ALL OF IT IS CONSIDERED AT THAT TIME.

SO WHENEVER THIS AREA DEVELOPS TO A POINT WHERE THE NEXT TIA SAYS THAT, HEY, WE'RE 100 CARS LESS THAN NEEDING ENLARGEMENT IN THE ROAD. WE'LL START THE PROCESS TO BUILD IT.

AND I'M JUST USING 100 CARS. IF THERE'S AN ENGINEER HERE, THEY'RE PROBABLY SQUIRMING, BUT THEY WILL LET US KNOW WHEN THAT TIME COMES.

AND HOWEVER, RIGHT NOW THE MARKET'S NOWHERE NEAR THAT COMING IN HERE.

PLEASE REMEMBER WE HAVE US 380 THAT WILL REDEVELOP 1ST WE HAVE THE BYPASS THAT'S GOING TO GO.

SO EVERYONE WHO WANTS COMMERCIALS CAN RUN THERE.

SO WE WILL, FOR A WHILE, KEEP THIS AS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TYPE USES.

THAT HAVING SAID, LOOKING AT ALL OF THAT, WE DO WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION.

YOU ALL APPROVED THIS CASE. BACK IN DECEMBER, DECEMBER 15TH, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING REQUEST. AND THEN THERE WAS SOME OPPOSITION AT THAT MEETING FOR THE JANUARY 12TH MEETING WITH COUNCIL. THERE WAS 1 MORE OPPOSITION LAST TIME WHEN THE CASE CAME TO YOU.

SO WE'VE HAD FORMAL OPPOSITION LETTERS THAT WERE GIVEN TO YOU ALL BEFORE.

AND HOWEVER THIS TIME WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYONE COME TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FORMALLY TO OPPOSE.

HAVING SAID THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, BASED ON THE FACT THAT EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS COMMERCIAL. MAKES MORE SENSE FOR THIS TO BE COMMERCIAL AT THAT CORNER.

WITH, WITH 6000 HOMES NORTH OF MONTE CARLO COMING DOWN 75, WE DO NEED A LITTLE BIT OF RELIEF AROUND THIS AREA. AND THAT'S THE WHOLE DEAL.

IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THAT'S THE BEST USE, HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THAT PROPERTY AT THIS POINT.

[00:25:04]

PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FROM MARCH 16TH, WHICH YOU ALL HAVE STARTED, AND THEN EITHER RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST AS PRESENTED, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST.

THOSE ARE YOUR 4-3 OPTIONS ON THE ACTION. SO CAN I ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS? IT'S FROM THE APPLICANT.

YOU WOULD LIKE. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID WHAT WAS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPERTY AGAIN, THE AGE OF THAT PROPERTY. THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY IS ONE ACRE.

AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE BUILDING IS 5000.

5000. THANK YOU.

IT'S TERRIBLE. OKAY. MY QUESTION IS, IS LAST P&Z, WE REQUESTED A TOPO DRAINAGE SURVEY, TRAFFIC SURVEY? WHY IS THAT NOT HERE? BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RESPONSE OF THE APPLICANT ON WHY IT'S NOT HERE.

BUT BY LAW, WE CAN ASK WHATEVER WE NEED TO ASK AND WHAT WE WANT TO ASK.

KEVIN. AM I WRONG? I WAS REVIEWING THAT EARLIER. THE LET ME GET HANG ON A SECOND.

I HAD THAT I HAD THAT EARLIER GIVE ME JUST A SECOND, PLEASE.

YEAH, I HAD A YEAH THERE IS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION, THERE IS THE RIGHT FOR THE COMMISSION TO REQUEST CERTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OF WHICH IMPACTS RELATING TO TRAFFIC DRAINAGE WHATNOT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REQUESTED.

NO. I'M JUST ASKING THE LAST MEETING. YES IT WAS.

YEAH. WE ASKED TO SEE A TRAFFIC STUDY, A TOPO AND A DRAINAGE ANALYSIS.

OKAY. AND BECAUSE THAT AREA IS VERY PRONE TO DRAINAGE AND I MEAN, THERE'S FLOODPLAIN RIGHT NEXT TO THIS PROPERTY, A PIECE OF IT IS ON IT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE.

I LOVE THIS LETTER, THIS IS GREAT. IT'S VERY ARTICULATED, BUT I DON'T KNOW, I, I JUST WANT TO SEE THE DRAINAGE STUDY, THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND THE TOPO. THE 2ND THING THAT I'LL SAY IS READING THE PACKAGE TODAY, WHICH BY THE WAY, I HAVE I KNOW YOU HAVE OUR EMAILS AND I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS AND YOUR JOB AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT I HAD TO GO ON THE WEBSITE TODAY TO SEE THE AGENDA.

SO HOPEFULLY YOU AND I GET TOGETHER AFTER TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT EMAIL, BUT THE ZONING APPLICATION IS STILL INCORRECT.

IT IS INCORRECT. AND HERE'S WHY. YOU HAVE YOU HAVE 2 PLACES WHERE A NOTARY SHOULD SIGN.

NOW 1 PLACE, 1 GUY DOES SIGN AND HE GIVES HIS STAMP.

THE OTHER PLACE THERE IS NOT. THERE'S A STAMP, BUT THERE'S NO SIGNATURE.

NOW, AS A BANKER, I KNOW THIS FOR A FACT. IF YOU'RE A NOTARY, YOU HAVE TO ATTEST TO MY SIGNATURE AND SIGN IT.

KEVIN, AM I WRONG? I'M SORRY. I WAS JUST CHECKING.

ANOTHER QUESTION. I MEAN, IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE, YOU KNOW, THE DISCRETION TO MAKE THAT REQUEST.

WELL, SEE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. SO. OKAY, SO HERE'S MY POINT IS, ALL THE ROTARY STAMPS I'VE SEEN IN MY CAREER ARE STAMPED IN BLACK, STAMPED IN BLACK. IT COMES IN A BLACK STAMP. NOBODY HAS A BLUE OR RED OR YELLOW STAMP.

IT'S STAMPED IN BLACK. SO AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING APP, YOU CAN SEE UP TOP WE HAVE A SIGNATURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

WE HAVE A STAMP. BUT ARE YOU TELLING ME SHE'S NOW SIGNED IT?

[00:30:11]

MY FAULT, THE WAY IT WORKED OUT WAS THE APPLICANT HAD SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION ON FEBRUARY 3RD.

WE SAW THAT THERE WAS NO SIGNATURE. WE RETURNED IT TO THEM AND SAID, WE NEED A SIGNATURE.

THEY SENT US BACK A SIGNED APPLICATION WITH SIGNATURE, AND IT WAS MY FAULT THAT I ATTACHED THE WRONG ONE AND NOT THE LATEST ONE. SO WE DID MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE WE STARTED PROCESSING THE APPLICATION, WE MADE SURE YOU'LL NOTICE ANOTHER MISTAKE ON THAT APPLICATION, WHICH IS SUP-N325. AGAIN, BECAUSE PEOPLE SUBMIT THESE APPLICATIONS ELECTRONICALLY BY EMAIL.

AND THE ONLY REASON FOR THOSE, MAINLY FOR THOSE APPLICATION, IS FOR STAFF TO UNDERSTAND WHAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER KNOWS WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THEIR PROPERTY, THAT SOME RANDOM PERSON IS NOT CHANGING THINGS ON THEIR PROPERTY.

AND 3RD IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CORRECT FEES HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN FOR THAT APPLICATION.

SO WE DID CATCH ALL OF IT WHEN WE MADE THE THING.

THE ONLY REASON IS WE I HAVE A ATTACHMENT THAT SHOWS THAT WE TOOK IN $1,200.

WE MADE SURE THAT WE NOTICED THE CASE CORRECTLY.

SO THAT MEANS WE KNOW WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR.

WE MADE SURE AND WE DID CHECK THAT THE OWNER KNOWS THIS IS HAPPENING AND THE OWNER IS THE OWNER.

SO MORE THAN THE NOTARY IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE OWNER'S SIGNATURE, THE OWNER HIMSELF DID THAT.

WE DID CHECK WITH WE HAVE THE DEED, WE COLLECT THE DEED TO MAKE SURE THE OWNER IS THE OWNER, AND WE ALSO CHECK THE CAD WEBSITE. SO WE DID MAKE SURE ALL THE THINGS WERE RIGHT BEFORE WE STARTED THE PROCESS.

I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW IT WAS AT THE END.

I WAS HURRYING AND PUT THE WRONG ATTACHMENT. I APOLOGIZE, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES I'VE DONE THAT.

SO YES, NOW I HAVE A FULL STAFF AND SO WE WILL NOT BE MAKING THESE MISTAKES.

AND AT THE END OF THE MEETING, I'LL INTRODUCE YOU TO OUR FULL STAFF.

I'LL GO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL COMMENT UNTIL I SEE THE TRAFFIC STUDY, THE TOPO, THE DRAINAGE STUDY.

I WANT TO SEE IT. AND I THINK THAT'S WITHIN OUR RIGHT AND OBLIGATION TO DO.

EVEN THOUGH I'M AN APPOINTED OFFICIAL, I'M NOT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

THESE GUYS CAN OUTVOTE ME. IT CAN GO TO COUNCIL AND GET APPROVED.

BUT I WANT TO SEE IT DONE CORRECTLY BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT OUR CITY, I CARE ABOUT OUR CITIZENS.

AND THAT'S KIND OF MY MY POSTURE. THAT IS YOUR PREROGATIVE.

YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. BUT GREAT PRESENTATION.

SHAI, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THOSE 3 ITEMS FOR THE REQUEST AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

I DID DO A LITTLE SOME RESEARCH AND SAW THAT THESE 3 ITEMS HAVE TO BE PART OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. SO EVEN IF WE DO APPROVE THIS CHANGE, WHEN THEY COME TO US WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE CAN STILL AT THAT POINT, IF WE DON'T AGREE OR THAT DENY IT.

SO I WILL BE LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, IF ALL THEIR STUDIES MEET OUR CODE. YES. WE CANNOT DENY IT. RIGHT, RIGHT.

WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT. SO BUT IF THEY DON'T MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS, THEN YES, OF COURSE, WE WON'T EVEN BRING IT TO YOU.

WE WILL KEEP DENYING IT OR BRING IT TO YOU FOR DENIAL.

SO USUALLY IF THEY DON'T MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE, WE GIVE THEM 3 OPTIONS.

YOU WITHDRAW THE CASE, YOU EXTEND THE CASE TILL SO WE CAN WORK TOGETHER.

OR WE TAKE THE CASE TO P&Z AND COUNCIL FOR DISAPPROVAL, BECAUSE IN 30 DAYS YOU HAVE TO EITHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE.

SO WE'LL DO 1 OF THOSE 3 AND YOU WILL OKAY. SEE IT.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT KEVIN. OH TO THAT.

YEAH. LET ME ADD SOMETHING TO THAT. 1 OF THE THINGS, OF COURSE, IS AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE WHEN THOSE STUDIES ARE PROVIDED, IF IT TURNS OUT THOSE STUDIES, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE PROPERTY ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT TO DEVELOP BECAUSE OF ANY MODIFICATIONS RELATING TO THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC FROM THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT,

[00:35:04]

WHATEVER. I MEAN, THERE MAY BE SOME ISSUES THERE THAT MAY PREVENT THE APPLICANT FROM GOING FORWARD WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THAT.

SO SO UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN THOUGH THAT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MAKE IT A DONE DEAL, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAPPEN.

IF ALL OF A SUDDEN THE DATA SHOWS IT'S REAL BAD, RIGHT? OKAY, SO AT THIS STAGE, I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW THE REQUEST I MADE AT THE LAST MEETING BECAUSE OF A THE PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS WILL HAVE THAT INFO. AND ALSO AS WELL AS WHAT OUR ATTORNEY HAS, THE POINT HE HAS JUST MADE AS WELL, THAT THEY MIGHT DETERMINE MORE AT THAT TIME AND THEY HAVE TO DO IT AT THAT TIME.

THANK YOU. MY THOUGHT IS WHY WASTE OUR TIME IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION UP FRONT TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.

THEN WHY KEEP BRINGING THIS THROUGH? AND WHY TAKE IT FURTHER BEFORE WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEED TO SEE? SO JUST MY EXPERIENCE. USUALLY IF THERE IS ENOUGH INFORMATION LAND USE WISE TO MAKE THE DECISION, WE, THE APPLICANT, SPEND MONEY ON ALL THESE STUDIES.

IF THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE THE GUARANTEE THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

SO THAT'S WHY IT COMES AT PRELIMINARY PLAT AND IT APPLICANTS ALWAYS KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO DO ALL OF IT, BUT AT LEAST THEY HAVE THE. AND ONE NUMBER 1 ENTITLEMENT, WHICH IS, YES, I HAVE THE ZONING BECAUSE NOW IF WE MAKE THEM DO THE STUDIES AT THIS POINT AND YOU ALL STILL SAY NO, BECAUSE FOR ZONING, YOU CAN SAY, NO, IT'S NOT MINISTERIAL PLATTING IS MINISTERIAL PLANNING. IF THEY MEET EVERYTHING, YOU HAVE TO SAY YES.

ZONING. YOU DON'T. AND SO ALL THOSE STUDIES COULD YOU COULD STILL SAY NO IF THE STUDIES MEET OUR.

SO THAT'S WHY MOST APPLICANTS DON'T. THAT'S. SO FROM MY POSITION, RISK ANALYSIS IS WASTE ANYBODY ELSE'S TIME UNTIL THE STUDIES ARE DONE.

IT'S TIME AND MONEY. AND IT'S NOT JUST TIME AND MONEY, BUT IT'S TIME THE CITY HAS TO SPEND DOING ALL THIS.

AND ARE WE NOT? WE'RE PLANNING AND ZONING. PLANNING AND ZONING.

SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I MEAN, THESE GUYS CAN OUTVOTE ME.

I'M JUST 1 VOTE. BUT I IF BEFORE I VOTE, YAY.

AND I DO THINK THAT THIS PROJECT COULD BE A GOOD PROJECT.

SMALL WON'T GENERATE A LOT OF SALES TAX. NO, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND WALK THE RIGHT STEPS AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS DOTTED AND T'S ARE CROSSED.

THAT'S MY THOUGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION. THIS MAY HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ON THE RIGHT PAGE.

SO HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, WE APPROVE THIS TODAY IN THE STUDIES COME BACK THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE MOVING FORWARD.

BUT NOW THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PIECE OF LAND. WHAT DOES THE FUTURE LOOK LIKE? LIKE WHAT HAPPENS? SO BASICALLY, EITHER THEY WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE HOW BIG THE PROJECT IS IN CASE THOSE STUDIES WILL SHOW THAT PEOPLE CANNOT DEVELOP THIS LAND UNLESS IT IS ABLE TO MOVE.

SO IT COULD SIT OPEN OR THEY COULD ASK FOR A DIFFERENT USE ON THEIR.

THEY COULD DO A SMALLER USE ON THEIR. IT'S ON THEM HOW THEY DO IT.

OR THEY CAN COME BACK AND ASK FOR A REZONING BACK TO WHAT IT WAS BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T DEVELOP IT AS COMMERCIAL.

SO IT'S, IT'S EVERY PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHT TO TRY AND DO THE BEST THEY CAN WITH THEIR PROPERTY.

AND SO ONCE THEY FILE AN APPLICATION, WE HAVE TO BRING IT TO YOU.

SO, SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S, IT'S A THE TRANSITION FROM GOING FROM COMMERCIAL BACK TO RESIDENTIAL IS A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX. YES. OKAY. AND THEN IF WE ALL WERE TO AGREE TODAY.

YES. LET'S GO AHEAD. LET'S MOVE ON WITH THE COMMERCIAL ZONING.

IF THEY CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR INITIATIVE AND THEY WANT TO SALE, WHAT HOW DOES HOW DOES THAT PUT THE RESIDENTS IN THE CITY IN JEOPARDY WHEN WE HAVE NEW INVESTORS AND NEW DEVELOPERS COMING IN WANTING TO MOVE FORWARD? SO WE WOULD STILL REQUIRE THE NEW PERSON TO DO ALL THE STUDIES FOR WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DEVELOP AND MATCH THE STUDIES

[00:40:07]

TO WHATEVER IT IS THEY'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP TO MAKE SURE IT MEETS THE CODE.

SO WHOSOEVER COMES AND WANTS TO DEVELOP HERE HAS TO DO ALL THOSE STUDIES AND HAS TO DEVELOP ACCORDING TO OUR REGULATIONS.

AND SO THAT IT DOESN'T IMPACT. AND AND ALSO OUR REGULATIONS ARE NOT STATIC.

WE ARE WE THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE REGULATIONS ON THE DAY THAT THEY MAKE THE APPLICATION.

SO BY THEN EITHER COUNCIL YOU ALL AND COUNCIL WILL HAVE MADE IT EASIER OR MORE DIFFICULT OR WHATEVER IT IS, THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET IT WHAT IT FOR THAT DAY.

AND JUST TO CONFIRM 1 OTHER PIECE, EVEN IF THIS GROUP DOES ALL THESE STUDIES AND THEY GET TOLD, NO, YOU CAN'T BUILD THIS, AND THEY DECIDE THEY DON'T WANT TO GO FORWARD, THE NEXT GROUP THAT COMES IN HAS TO REDO ALL THE STUDIES AND EVERYTHING.

YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. MY LAST THOUGHT IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THE STUDIES ANYWAY.

WHY NOT DO IT UP FRONT? LET'S NOT WASTE CAPITAL.

LET'S NOT WASTE CITY COUNCIL TIME. LET'S GET THE STUDIES AND LET'S COLLECTIVELY REVIEW AND ANALYZE AND MAKE THE PROPER DECISION.

IT'S MY THOUGHT. I'M SORRY. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT.

IT'S IT'S THE APPLICANT'S MONEY. THE APPLICANT'S HERE.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO ASK HIM. BUT HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE MONEY ANYWAY, 1 WAY OR ANOTHER.

SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS INSTEAD OF COMING BACK, COMING BACK, COMING BACK, LET'S GET THE STUDIES UP FRONT.

LET'S NOT WASTE THE POLITICAL CAPITAL THAT WE HAVE OVER HERE THAT ARE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THIS CALL, MAKE THIS DECISION BASED ON THE ANALYTICS.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND THE MONEY ANYWAY.

AND YOU GUYS MAY SAY NO. BUT REALLY, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, OUR CHARGE AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO MAKE THE DECISION BASED ON THE FACTS, THE ANALYTICS AND THE METRICS.

THAT'S IT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:22.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. A FEW THINGS ABOUT SOME ITEMS THAT WERE MENTIONED.

YOU KNOW, I'VE OBVIOUSLY WATCHED THIS WHOLE PROCESS VERY, VERY CLOSELY FROM BEGINNING TO END IS I'M A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

SO MUCH OF WHAT Y'ALL HAVE BEEN TOLD IS A MISREPRESENTATION OF THE ACTUAL SITUATION.

THEY DON'T WANT ME TO SPEAK TO YOU. OF COURSE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE BEHIND ME. THERE ARE PEOPLE, CITY OFFICIALS THAT DON'T WANT ME TO SPEAK ON THIS.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THINGS THAT THAT TELL ME THAT THERE IS A LOT MORE GOING ON HERE THAN SIMPLY MAKING A ZONING DECISION. IN ANY CASE I DID SPEAK WITH SHAI DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES A COUPLE MONTHS AGO ABOUT THIS.

OBVIOUSLY, THIS PROCESS STARTED IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR.

AND I ONLY I DIDN'T HEAR A LOT THAT MADE ME FEEL REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE DECISIONS THAT WERE BEING MADE.

THE ONLY THING THAT I HEARD THAT MADE ME FEEL COMFORTABLE.

AND SHE SAID, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, LIKE, FOLLOW.

SHE MADE ME FEEL LIKE SHE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCES, FOLLOW THE PROPER PROCEDURES.

AND SHE COMMENTED THAT IF ANYTHING CAME UP THAT SHE DIDN'T AGREE WITH THAT THAT WASN'T RIGHT.

[00:45:01]

AND SHE SAYS IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE IN HER CAREER. SHE SAID, I WON'T SIGN IT MYSELF.

SHE SAID, I'LL SLIDE IT ACROSS THE TABLE. AND YOU KNOW, WHOEVER IT IS ELSE THAT HAS A DECISION, THEY CAN SIGN IT. WELL, EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED SO FAR THROUGH THIS PROCESS REALLY MAKES ME QUESTION WHAT I WAS TOLD THERE.

SO 1 OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO NOTE IS HOW IT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL.

DID YOU GUYS WATCH THAT? DID Y'ALL SEE HOW IT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL? IT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AS THOUGH THEY HAD THE ABILITY TO APPROVE OR DENY.

THEY DIDN'T. AND THE THINGS THAT THEY WERE, THEY, THEY ALSO MENTIONED, INSTEAD OF MENTIONING Y'ALLS HEARING THAT WAS FOR THIS ZONING DECISION, THEY MENTIONED THE DECEMBER HEARING, WHICH, BY THE WAY, HAS ANYBODY CONSIDERED WHAT HAPPENED TO PLACE 2 COMMISSIONER HERE? SHE HADN'T BEEN HERE FOR A WHILE. FIRST OFF, SHE SHOULD BE KICKED OFF BY NOW AFTER 3 MEETINGS.

SECONDLY I WENT AND LOOKED UP AND I SEE THAT AT LEAST SINCE 2023, SHE'S NOT BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON.

I WOULD LOOK INTO THAT BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE CASE, Y'ALL HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS FROM THE TIME SHE CAME ON WHERE THERE WAS 4 COMMISSIONERS HERE AND WITHOUT. AND IF SHE WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THEN YOU ONLY HAD 3 MEMBERS. AND THIS VOTE, THEY KEEP REFERRING TO THE ALL APPROVED THIS DEVELOPMENT AT ONE POINT.

THAT WASN'T EVEN A REAL LEGAL MEETING. ALSO, THEY PRESENTED IT, THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THERE WAS, THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THE THEY TALKED ABOUT THAT MEETING SAYING THAT IT WAS PASSED 3 TO 1 VOTE.

1 OF THOSE VOTES, 3 VOTES BEING PLACED 2 COMMISSIONER HERE.

THEY SPOKE ABOUT ALL THE FAVORABLE THINGS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT, BUT THEY DIDN'T MENTION THE THINGS ABOUT THAT THERE WERE APPLICANTS OR PEOPLE WHO OPPOSED IT. THEY DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT.

THEY PRESENTED THIS IN A VERY NON-NEUTRAL FASHION.

AND THAT IS THE EXACT REASON THAT THERE WAS HEAD BUTTING BETWEEN ME AND ANYBODY ELSE, BECAUSE WHENEVER I WAS ON P&Z, BECAUSE I FELT LIKE WE ALL NEEDED TO BE NEUTRAL, WE ALL NEEDED TO BE NEUTRAL.

CITY STAFF NEEDS TO BE NEUTRAL. CITY OFFICIALS NEED TO BE NEUTRAL.

THERE NEEDS TO BE NEUTRALITY. YOU ALL DON'T BENEFIT THE PUBLIC.

Y'ALL DON'T BENEFIT COUNCIL. Y'ALL DON'T BENEFIT THE CITY, THE RESIDENTS, UNLESS YOU'RE NEUTRAL.

AND THIS PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN NEUTRAL AT ALL.

ALSO WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE WITH THE THE, OR THE APPLICATION.

WHY DID THEY HIDE IT FROM Y'ALL THE 1ST TIME AROUND? YOU KNOW, THEY PUT IT IN HERE, BUT WHY DID THEY HIDE IT THE LAST TIME THIS CAME THROUGH? THEY IT WAS THE 1ST TIME I HAVE EVER SEEN IT OMITTED FROM THE AGENDA.

IT USED TO BE THE ONLY. ACTUALLY, I HAD 15 MINUTES.

NO, IT'S MY DISCRETION. YOU'VE GOT 5 MINUTES TO SPEAK AND YOU GOT 20S.

OH, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW ME TO USE. SO YOU'RE GOING TO INTERRUPT ME WHILE I'M SPEAKING AND THEN TELL ME I CAN'T USE THE COUNCIL BYLAWS AND THE DEDICATED TIME TO ME ON THIS. YES. YEAH. I'M SAYING THAT YOU HAVE 5 MINUTES TO SPEAK.

Y'ALL CAN TAKE A VOTE ON THAT. CAN SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION THAT I'M ALLOWED TO SPEAK? BECAUSE IT IS MY IT'S MY RIGHT BASED ON THE BYLAWS.

AND YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE A MOTION FOR TO ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL 10 MINUTES THAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO ME BY ANOTHER, BY 2 OTHER MULTIPLE, I DON'T KNOW, 10 OTHER RESIDENTS.

THAT SAID, I SPOKE ON BEHALF OF THEM AS WELL.

SO THE CHAIRMAN HERE IS NOT ONLY DENYING ME, BUT MULTIPLE OTHER RESIDENTS THE ABILITY TO BE HEARD.

WELL, AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, 1ST OF ALL, THE BYLAWS TO WHICH YOU REFER APPLY ONLY TO CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURES.

THEY DON'T APPLY TO BOARD AND COMMISSION PROCEDURES. AND THESE ARE THE I'M SPEAKING OF THE NEWLY ADOPTED BYLAWS.

SECONDLY, WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT ANY IN WRITING THAT YOU'VE BEEN EVEN YIELDED YOUR THESE ADDITIONAL TIMES FOR FROM OTHER RESIDENTS THAT YOU'RE, IN FACT, SPEAKING FOR A GROUP OF PEOPLE.

YOU HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED THEM. SO AT THIS POINT, THE CHAIR HAS THE DISCRETION AND, OR THE COMMISSION HAS THE DISCRETION.

YES, TO ALLOW YOU ADDITIONAL TIME, BUT AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD TAKE A MOTION AND A VOTE OF THE OF THE ENTIRE COMMISSION TO ALLOW THAT AT THIS POINT. AND SO. THAT'S WHERE A COUPLE THINGS THE BYLAWS ACTUALLY DO SAY IT APPLIES TO THE BOARDS.

IT WAS LITERALLY TALKED ABOUT. WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

IT SPECIFICALLY TALKS ABOUT ONLY SPEAKS TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

RIGHT. BUT, BUT THERE IS WORDING VERBIAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS THAT THROUGHOUT THIS DOCUMENT WE'RE REFERRED TO COUNCIL OR THE MAYOR,

[00:50:01]

THAT THOSE ARE ALL THOSE VERBIAGE THAT WERE THOSE WORDS ARE ALSO APPLICABLE TO BOARDS LIKE CHAIR AND COMMISSION.

THE VERBIAGE IS THERE. IT IS APPLICABLE. THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE BYLAW, THE BYLAW REVIEW, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED, AD NAUSEAM. ALSO THERE ARE THE CITY SECRETARY RECEIVED THOSE MESSAGES FROM MULTIPLE PEOPLE. SO YOU SAY WHO IS WE DID I NEED TO LIKE THERE'S NO THERE'S NOTHING SPELLED OUT IN THERE.

WHO IS SUPPOSED TO RECEIVE THAT? SO SENDING IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY AND THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

AND SOMEBODY ELSE WAS COPIED ON THERE AS WELL.

SO WHO IS WE THAT DIDN'T RECEIVE THOSE WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO.

REMEMBER WHAT I MENTIONED ABOUT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT ME TO SPEAK HERE BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT GOING ON HERE THAT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE.

I'M A PROPERTY OWNER, THIS IS THIS I'M, I'M NOT TRYING TO FIGHT DEVELOPMENT.

I'VE NEVER SPOKEN AGAINST DEVELOPMENT. I'VE ONLY SPOKEN FOR PROPERTY OWNERS NOT HAVING THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS VIOLATED.

AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THAT FOR SOME REASON.

THAT'S ALL I CARE ABOUT. OKAY. I WILL, I WILL STAND CORRECTED, MR CHAIR, AND I, I WILL BEG FORGIVENESS.

I DID MAKE A NOTE EARLIER. THESE WILL APPLY TO THE.

BUT IT'S STILL UP TO THE CHAIR TO ALLOW AND THE.

AND OR THE COMMISSION TO ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL TIME FOR THE SPEAKER TO SPEAK.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I JUST CAME ON LAST MONDAY, SO I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO MEMORIZE THESE THESE BYLAWS. NO. YOU'RE FINE.

I BEG YOUR FORGIVENESS. AND AND SO I HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND FOR HIM TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'D BE CORRECT.OKAY. I MEAN, I WAS NOT AWARE NOT MADE AWARE OF ANY PART OF YOU SPEAKING ON ANYBODY'S BEHALF PRIOR TO THIS.

SO I UNDERSTAND THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE 10 PEOPLE SENDING MESSAGES.

OKAY. I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, UNTIL, YOU KNOW, IF I WOULD HAVE HAD SOMETHING PRIOR TO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL.

I DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING PRIOR TO. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US DID. WOULD YOU BELIEVE THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IF SHE TOLD YOU THAT SHE WAS COPIED ON ALL THOSE EMAILS? I MEAN, THAT'S FINE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A HEADS UP ON IT SO.

I DON'T CONTROL WHAT THE CITY DOES, I APOLOGIZE.

NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. AT THIS POINT I WOULD LIKE TO STICK WITH THE 5 MINUTES.

AND THEN IF WE, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, IN A FUTURE TYPE OF TYPE OF MEETING, IF IT'S SOMETHING WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK ON HIS BEHALF, I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING IN WRITING FOR THAT BECAUSE I CAN'T, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO GO BY RIGHT NOW. OH, I NEED SOMETHING IN WRITING. I CAN FORWARD YOU ALL THE EMAILS. NO, I'M AT THIS POINT, IT'S I MEAN, I DON'T WANT I'M NOT GOING TO DO THIS NOW.

OKAY. RIGHT. I'M TALKING PRIOR TO THE MEETING. OKAY.

SO IN THIS CASE, I'LL STICK WITH THE 5 MINUTES.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO AGREE WITH THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC HEARING? ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:32.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THE REZONING REQUEST IN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE REZONING.

I'VE GOT A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND. I SECOND.

MOTION A SECOND OPEN FOR A VOTE, PLEASE.

AND WITH IT BEING 3 TO 3, HOW DO WE GO ABOUT DOING THIS ONE? WE DON'T HAVE A TIEBREAKER. OH, THIS IS MY WORST FEAR FOR MY 1ST MEETING HERE.

SORRY. I WOULD I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT MOTION THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH RESPECT TO BECAUSE AT SOME POINT A RECOMMENDATION NEEDS TO GO FORWARD TO THE, TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

YOU KNOW, AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THE 3-3 VOTE, IT'S, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY IT'S BECAUSE IT DIDN'T RECEIVE A MAJORITY OF THOSE VOTING.

IT'S, IT'S TECHNICALLY A WELL, THE VOTE FOR APPROVAL, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FAILS.

OKAY. SO THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A SEPARATE VOTE RECOMMEND, YOU KNOW, TO DENIAL, WHICH I'M GOING TO ASSUME.

[00:55:03]

AND IF YOU TAKE THAT VOTE, IT WOULD, YOU KNOW, BE THE SAME.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS, INSOFAR AS WE'RE PROBABLY NOT LIKELY TO HAVE MORE THAN 6 PEOPLE HERE FOR A WHILE UNTIL THE COUNCIL APPOINTS SOMEBODY, DEPENDING ON MR. SHAVERS 'S STATUS, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO YOU KNOW, EITHER COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT MOTION THAT COULD BE APPROVED. THE RECOMMENDATION GOING FORWARD WOULD BE THE OTHER OPTION.

AND, MR. CHAIR, I'M FRANKLY I'M AT A LOSS WHAT THAT WOULD BE. YEAH, I AM AS WELL.

OKAY.

SO IF SOMEBODY HAS A SECOND MOTION THAT THEY WISH TO MAKE THAT MIGHT GARNER 4 VOTES.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD I WOULD REQUEST THAT. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DECLINE.

I SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DECLINING.

WE CAN OPEN THAT ONE UP FOR A VOTE.

FOR DECLINING. OKAY. AND SO WE'RE BACK AT THE SAME SPOT. WELL, GIVEN THAT. WE HAVE A MINUTE WITH THE MAYOR.

AND AGAIN, THE OPTION WOULD BE TO SET A MOTION FOR YOU TO TALK. YEAH. YEAH. WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE IT REALLY NEED TO HEAR THIS DISCUSSION.

I THINK THERE'S DISCUSSION ON FROM WHAT I'M GATHERING IS THAT IT'S THE MONEY'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SPENT TO GET THE, THE REQUESTED INFORMATION THAT WE REQUESTED THE LAST MEETING.

RIGHT. AND WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN IS THAT MONEY IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE SPENT ONCE THEY GO TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

IF THIS ZONING CHANGE IS DONE, BUT WITH THEM, WITH IT BEING A ZONING CHANGE, THEY DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE MONEY UP FRONT ON THE CHANCE OF US, US NOT APPROVING THE ZONING CHANGE AND THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO NOT APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE, NOW THEY'RE OUT THE WHAT WAS IT, $37,000 THAT THEY MENTIONED IN THE LETTER? RIGHT NOW THEY'RE OUT THAT MONEY. SO WHY SPEND THE MONEY IF WE'RE NOT EVEN IF WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO MAKE THAT ZONING CHANGE? THAT'S WHAT IS WHAT THE DISCUSSION THAT WE WERE HAVING WAS TRYING TO TELL THEM IS THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE MONEY'S GONNA HAVE TO BE SPENT ONCE WE GO TO PRELIMINARY PLAT, BUT THERE'S NO SENSE IN SPENDING THE MONEY NOW WHEN WE MAY OR MAY NOT EVEN MAKE THE ZONING CHANGE. AND I THINK THAT THERE, I THINK THAT THERE'S DISCUSSION OF WANTING THAT INFORMATION UP FRONT AND JUST TRYING TO MAKE THAT UNDERSTANDING OF THAT MONEY IS COMING, THAT THE INFORMATION IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE THERE AT SOME POINT. IT'S JUST NOT SPENDING 37,000 ON A CHANCE OR A HOPE THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT ZONING CHANGE.

AND, AND AS IT STANDS TONIGHT, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T THERE HASN'T BEEN A MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT, A REQUEST FOR THAT INFORMATION AS PART OF THE APPLICATION OR REQUIREMENT GOING FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.

BUT THE YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ADDING THAT TO THE MOTION CHANGES ANYTHING, OR IF THOSE WHO ARE VOTING IN FAVOR WITHOUT THAT REQUIREMENT WOULD CHANGE THEIR VOTES, YOU KNOW, NEGATIVELY.

I MEAN, ANOTHER OPTION IS SIMPLY TO, YOU KNOW, EITHER APPROVE, APPROVE IT OR, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CHANGE THEIR VOTE AND APPROVE IT.

SOMEBODY CHANGE A VOTE TO GET A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN LET THE COUNCIL MOVE IT FORWARD.

[01:00:02]

AND THEN JUST MOVE IT FORWARD TO COUNCIL AND LET THE COUNCIL MAKE A DECISION.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE.

WE DO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO BRING THE DOCUMENTATION TO US WITH THE PRELIMINARY, AND WE PROVE IT AND SEND IT TO COUNCIL AND LET COUNCIL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION IS MY MOTION.

AND PLEASE BE ADVISED THE CITY COUNCIL CAN ALSO ADD THAT REQUIREMENT AT THEIR OWN AT COUNCIL LEVEL IF COUNCIL WISHES.

CORRECT? YES. IT'S TO APPROVE.

SORRY. I'LL MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR WHEN THEY'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO DO THIS ONCE IT GOES.

ONCE WE APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE AND THEY GO TO A PRELIMINARY PLAT, THIS.

THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE DONE NO MATTER WHAT.

NO MATTER WHAT. IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE DONE. EVERYONE HAS TO DO THAT.

WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS THAT THE THAT THEY WOULD SPEND $37,000 ON THE HOPE THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT ZONING CHANGE.

SO THEY'D RATHER WAIT UNTIL AFTER WE MAKE THAT ZONING CHANGE AND THEN SPEND THAT MONEY BEFORE IT COMES IN AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT. OKAY. AND THEN WE WOULD LEAVE THAT PART UP.

LEAVE THAT PART UP TO THE COUNCIL TO HANDLE. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE PRELIMINARY WOULD COME BACK TO US AS LONG AS THEY THEY MET ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS.

AND THEN WE WOULD VOTE ON THAT AND THEN SEND IT TO TO COUNCIL FROM THERE. AND WHEN WE GET THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, IT WOULD HAVE ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IN IT, AND THEY WOULD BE SPENDING THAT 37,000 AT THAT TIME.

SO EITHER WAY, IT'S JUST AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THEIR POINT.

WHY AM I GOING TO SPEND $37,000 IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE ZONING? SO THAT'S MY MOTION. WELL, HERE'S MY THOUGHTS.

WHY DON'T WE JUST AGREE TO DISAGREE? STAY WITH THE VOTE AND AGREE TO PASS IT ALONG TO COUNCIL AND LET THEM MAKE THE DECISION.

WE HAVE A MOTION RIGHT NOW THOUGH THAT YEAH. RIGHT NOW I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND ON THAT.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. I'VE GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND.

OPEN BACK UP. AND WE'RE STILL AT OUR SAME SPOT.

WELL MY QUESTION IS CAN WE JUST AGREE THAT WE'RE 3 TO 3.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO FORWARD. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO BACK AND REALLY JUST GO AHEAD AND PASS IT ALONG TO COUNCIL.

I MEAN, I HATE TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE SPENDING THEIR TIME AND THEIR EFFORT, AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS FROM A PLANNING AND ZONING STANDPOINT, UNLESS I'M WRONG, TO KIND OF MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO SPEND THE TIME IF I'M WRONG, PLEASE TELL ME. BUT AT THIS POINT, I THINK WE'RE AT AN IMPASSE.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE TO A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE VOTE.

SO CAN WE JUST MAKE A MOTION THAT SAYS, HEY, WE'RE 3 TO 3.

WE'RE GOING TO SEND IT TO COUNCIL. LET THEM, LET THEM DECIDE.

GIVE ME JUST A MOMENT.

THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 8233 A1 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SAYS AS FOLLOWS CITY COUNCIL MAY FROM TIME TO TIME, AFTER RECEIVING A FINAL REPORT THEREON BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AFTER PUBLIC HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW, AMEND, SUPPLEMENT OR CHANGE THE REGULATIONS HEREIN PROVIDED OR THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFIED ON THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP.

THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TALKS ABOUT.

WELL. BUT THE PROBLEM IS HERE'S THE HERE'S THE PROBLEM.

A.3 OF THAT SAME SECTION SAYS, IN NO CASE SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL ACT UPON ANY ZONING REQUEST PRIOR TO RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

CONSEQUENTLY, THERE HAS TO BE A RECOMMENDATION OF EITHER APPROVAL OR DENIAL FROM THE COMMISSION BEFORE IT CAN GO FORWARD.

NOW WHICH IS A BIT OF A YOU KNOW, STATE LAW ONLY REQUIRES A REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION.

OUR ORDINANCE REQUIRES AN ACTUAL RECOMMENDATION.

SO THEREFORE WE'RE KIND OF IN A BIT OF A PROCEDURAL DILEMMA IN GETTING THIS THING PASSED ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

IF WE CAN'T GET THIS TIE BROKEN OR A MOTION THAT CAN BE APPROVED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL OF THE COMMISSION SITTING HERE.

[01:05:02]

I'M SORRY IF WE'RE HAVING. I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT HE WAS SAYING.

I'M SORRY. OKAY, SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THIS TO COUNCIL.

WE'RE WE'RE DEADLOCKED, AND WE CAN SIT HERE AND TALK AND TALK TILL 1:00 IN THE MORNING.

WE WON'T GET PAST IT. IT'S. I SEE MERITS OF THE PROJECT.

I JUST WANT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SO I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO COME DOWN AND SAY, HEY, LET'S MOVE IT TO COUNCIL.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN I APPROVE IT. FOR THE RECORD, WHOEVER'S TAKING NOTES.

BUT I'M MAKING THE MOTION THAT WE MOVE IT TO THE BIG BOYS AND LET THEM MAKE THE CALL.

AND MR. HESLEP, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I JUST.

WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU HERE IN OUR OWN ZONING ORDINANCE, IT SAYS THERE HAS TO BE A RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. I MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MOVE IT FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

NO, THERE HAS TO BE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE CASE FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL.

I RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE AND MOVE IT ON TO THE BIG BOYS.

AM I SAYING THAT RIGHT? IS THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION THAT YOU'RE SWITCHING YOUR VOTE? YES, I'M SWITCHING MY VOTE. OKAY. I JUST THIS IS SO IF WE WANT TO IF WE WANT TO PARLIAMENTARY CORRECTLY TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT, YOU WOULD YOU'RE GOING TO ASK FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PRIOR MOTION HAVING VOTED, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST MAYBE NOT IN THE MAJORITY, BUT IN THE NEGATIVE, BECAUSE IN THIS CASE, BOTH PARTIES VOTED IN THE NEGATIVE.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO ASK FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PRIOR VOTE. THEN WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A SECOND. WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THAT. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE PRIOR MOTION. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS PROCEDURALLY CORRECT ON THE RECORD.

WE WERE ON COUNCIL TOGETHER. I KIND OF MOVED ALL OVER THE PLACE.

I UNDERSTAND YES, YOU AND I ARE WE'RE ON WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE THE MOTION. YES, MA'AM.

QUESTION TYPICALLY WHEN THIS COMES BEFORE P&Z WHEN, YES, I GUESS IT'S FOR YOU.

I'M SORRY. THIS IS MY SECOND MEETING, SO GIVE ME.

SO. SO WHEN DO THOSE SURVEYS OR THE TIA'S AND ALL THAT.

TYPICALLY WHEN ARE THEY DONE AT THIS POINT OR ARE THEY DONE AFTER THE REZONE.

AFTER THE REZONE. SO FIRST WE REZONE. SECOND STEP IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

AND I DO WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT WE NOW HAVE A 11 PAGE REQUIREMENT FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT. WE USED TO HAVE 6 WE HAVE 11 PAGES. SO PLEASE KNOW THAT WE WILL GO THROUGH EVERYTHING.

SO WHEN THEY COME TO SUBMIT IT, WE GIVE PEOPLE NOW THAT LIST AND SAY YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT ALL THESE DOCUMENTS, ALL THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING. AND THEN OUR ENTIRE, WE NOW HAVE A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PARKS DEPARTMENT, FIRE MARSHALL, ENGINEER, 3RD PARTY ENGINEER PLANNING.

WE ALL WILL REVIEW THE PLANS AND GIVE OUR COMMENTS IF THEY MEET, WHICH NEVER.

IN THE FIRST SUBMITTAL HAS ANYONE MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

BUT WE'RE HOPING THAT WITH THAT DETAIL THE LIST PEOPLE WILL START MEETING IT, BUT WE WILL BRING THAT TO YOU AFTER WE REVIEW IT.

SO THAT'S HOW DEVELOPMENT USUALLY WORKS BECAUSE WHETHER IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT THAT'S JUST HOW THE DEVELOPMENT I HAVE SEEN WORKING.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S YOU THAT'S GOING TO ANSWER OR THE KEVIN, THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE REQUEST THAT WE MADE OUR REQUEST FOR THE CHANGE.

THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED AT THIS TIME. THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED UNTIL WE DO A PRELIMINARY PLAN.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO IT'S A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER BECAUSE IN OUR PD ORDINANCE IT SAYS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL MAY ASK FOR THESE. IF IF YOU NEED IT TO MAKE A DECISION, YOU MAY ASK FOR IT.

SO WE CAN YOU CAN, BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRED THAT WE ASK FOR IT OR IT'S WE CAN IT'S A REQUEST.

YOU MAY NOT. YOU SHALL. OKAY. THANK YOU. BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO.

YES, YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO. SO CAN SOMEBODY FRAME THE NEW MOTION? NO. MY MOTION WAS THAT WE APPROVE IT AND. MOVE IT.

WE APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGE, MOVING IT TO COUNCIL, AND ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT

[01:10:10]

WERE REQUESTED WILL BE PART OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS REQUIRED.

YES, THAT AND THAT IS MY MOTION. I SECOND THAT MOTION. OKAY.

AND WE'LL OPEN THIS UP FOR ANOTHER VOTE.

I DID, I VOTED OKAY.

THERE WE GO. OKAY. AND THAT WILL PASS 4 TO 1.

THERE WE GO. MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM HERE, OUR REGULAR AGENDA ZONING AMENDMENT TO CONSIDER INITIATING A CITY ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO

[G. REGULAR AGENDA ]

THE DISTRICT REGULATIONS. HEIGHT FOR C-2. GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

SO 1 OF THE REASONS THIS CASE, THIS ITEM IS IN FRONT OF YOU IS OUR ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL MAY ASK FOR TEXT AMENDMENT.

IT DOESN'T SAY THAT STAFF CANNOT. SO BASED ON THAT, WE WENT AHEAD AND PUT IT OUT THERE WHEN WE HAD A BASICALLY YOUR C-2 HAS LOWER HEIGHT. C-2 IS A MORE INTENSIVE.

COMMERCIAL DISTRICT HAS A LOWER HEIGHT THAN C-1 AND MOST OF OUR C1 AND C2 ARE ALONG THE MAIN CORRIDOR. THERE CAN NEVER BE. WELL, THERE CAN BE, BUT ONLY THOSE WALK UP GARDEN STYLE HOTELS OR MOTELS IN 35FT. SO IF YOU WANTED A HOLIDAY INN OR SOMETHING ELSE OR A NICER HOSPITAL TO COME IN ALONG YOUR US 380 YOU WILL NEED FOR 4 TO 5 STORY HEIGHT.

SO THAT WAS 1 OF THE REASONS THAT PEOPLE WERE COMING IN.

THERE ARE HIGHER INTENSITY USES THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED IN C1, BUT C1 HAS A HIGHER HEIGHT C2.

THOSE USES ARE ALLOWED, BUT THEY CAN'T BUILD BECAUSE IT HAS A LOWER HEIGHT.

SO THAT WAS THE REASON WE WERE BRINGING THIS QUICKLY IN FRONT OF YOU, BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF INQUIRIES ABOUT IT.

BUT IT IS GOOD PRACTICE AND GOING FORWARD, STAFF WILL KEEP IT IN MIND THAT WE WILL BRING IT TO BRING YOU A WHOLE LIST OF THESE ISSUES THAT ARE, AND SEE WHAT YOU ALL WILL AGREE TO AND PRIORITIZE IT SO THAT STAFF CAN DECIDE THEIR WORK PLAN FOR THE NEXT YEAR BASED ON WHAT P&Z AND OR COUNCIL WANTS TO GUIDE US IN.

BUT THIS TIME AROUND, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SAY THAT WE CAN'T.

AND IN MY CAREER, I'M USED TO JUST, YOU KNOW, INTERPRETING THAT UNLESS IT SAYS ONLY THE P&Z AND COUNCIL CAN DO IT.

WE'VE USUALLY HAD STAFF USE THEIR JUDGMENT AND BRING IT IN FRONT OF YOU ALL BECAUSE ANYWAYS, IT'S COMING TO YOU ALL. SO QUESTION YOU'RE GOING FROM 35FT TO WHAT.

WE'RE AT 60. IS THAT THE RECOMMENDATION? OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE 60.

SO WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP COMING FOR VARIANCES TO YOU.

BUT THE OTHER THING WE'LL BRING RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE.

WE WILL BRING YOU 2 OR 3 SUGGESTIONS OPTIONS.

SO SO THAT'S WHAT WE USUALLY DO WHEN WE BRING A NEW ORDINANCE.

FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION. WE WE JUST GIVE YOU STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS.

BUT HERE ARE YOUR OTHER OPTIONS. SO YOU COULD DO YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO ALLOW THAT HEIGHT BY CHANCE, LIKE THIS PD 46, IT HAS C-2 BASE. SO WE DON'T WANT 60FT STORY THERE.

SO YOU CAN ALSO DO THE ORDINANCE JUST C-2 ALONG 380 CORRIDOR.

THAT COULD BE THE CHANGE IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WRITE THAT AND BRING IT TO YOU.

BUT BEFORE WE BRING IT TO YOU NEXT WEEK, WE JUST WANTED TO PROCEDURALLY MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL KNEW ABOUT IT, THAT YOU ALL AGREED TO US DOING THIS. AND THEN GOING FORWARD, RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO BRING IT TO YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE ADVERTISED IT,

[01:15:09]

NOTICED IT. BUT BY SECOND MEETING IN MAY, WE'LL BRING YOU A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF EMERGENCY ORDINANCES THAT WE SHOULD FIX RIGHT NOW. AND THEN ONCE THE COMP PLAN IS DONE, WE'LL DO A FULL UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SO HOW MANY STORIES ARE IN THE 35FT OR 60FT. SO WE'RE TRYING TO EITHER ALLOW 4 OR 5.

35 IS FOR COMMERCIAL 2 STORIES. NICE COMMERCIAL WILL HAVE THOSE HIGHER CEILINGS.

SO IT'LL BE 2 STORIES YOU COULD FIT IN 3. THIS IS PLANNED FOR 380 TO BE ON 380. IS THAT OR JUST IN THE CITY? SO THE WHOLE CODE AMENDMENT IS CITY WIDE, WHICH IS WHY WE'LL HAVE TO, WHEN WE WRITE THE CODE OR BRING YOU THE OPTION, WE'LL HAVE TO THINK THROUGH IT A LITTLE BIT MORE BECAUSE WE ONLY WANT THIS 60 ALONG 380.

SO DO WE DO THE WHOLE C-2 OR DO WE SAY C-2 30 60 WITH SUP EVERYWHERE ELSE EXCEPT US 380. SO THEN BECAUSE WE WILL LATER ON HAVE THE BYPASS THIS AND THAT.

SO WE WANT TO LEAVE IT OPEN IN CASE PEOPLE WANT AND WILL BRING IT TO YOU WITH A SUP SO YOU'LL HEAR IT, BUT ALONG 380 WE DON'T WANT TO. I MEAN IT'S OBVIOUS IT'S 380.

SO WE'RE HOPING THAT WE CAN OPEN THAT UP FOR DEVELOPMENT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

IS THIS TYPICALLY HOTEL OR IS IT JUST ANY COMMERCIAL BUSINESS? ONCE YOU INCREASE THE HEIGHT, IT WILL BE ANY COMMERCIAL WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THAT.

ANYTHING IN C-2 WILL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE 60FT HEIGHT.

SO MY QUESTION IS IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, WE COULD LIMIT IT TO PER SE ONLY 380. CORRECT. YOU COULD. YES. OKAY. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE STATE FARM BUILDING AS EXAMPLE THAT WERE JUST HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WE COULD SAY THAT C-2, YOU KNOW, THAT AREA WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE OR WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU EXEMPT FROM THIS.

THIS IS ONLY FOR 380 OR 380. AND MEYRICK, FOR EXAMPLE.

YES, YOU CAN CHOOSE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. SO YOU CAN SAY C-2 IN THESE LOCATIONS IS ALLOWED 60FT IN.

YOU CANNOT YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO 60FT. YOU CAN DO 50FT, 55FT.

WE'RE JUST SAYING 60 TO BE SAFE. OKAY. AND WHEN YOU BRING US THE ORDINANCE, THEN WE CAN REVIEW IT, OF COURSE, AND GO BACK TO YOU WITH, WELL, WE THINK THIS, WE THINK THAT, AND THEN YOU REVISE IT AND GO, OKAY, WE WORK BACK AND FORTH LIKE THAT. OR YOU CAN JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN WE'LL REWRITE THE ORDINANCE AND TAKE IT.

PERFECT. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CONFIRM. THANK YOU.

SO WITH THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT YOU BEGIN SETTING UP THE ORDINANCE, DRAFTING THE ORDINANCES FOR OUR REVIEW.

IF I MIGHT, ON THE RECORD, SUGGEST A LITTLE MORE DETAILED MOTION.

SO STAFF HAS A CLEAR DIRECTION UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST AND LET ME SAY WHEN I DO THIS, TYPICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE A WHAT HE SAID KIND OF RESPONSE.

AS FAR AS YOUR MOTION THAT YOU, THE STAFF, BE AUTHORIZED TO PREPARE AN AMENDMENT TO THE C-2 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS ALLOWED IN C-2.

SO MY MOTION IS WHAT KEVIN JUST SAID, THAT YOUZONING IS AUTHORIZING YOU TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO THE C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL HEIGHT. SECOND.

OKAY, WE CAN DO THAT. NO PROBLEM. ALL RIGHT, MISS ELLIS.

[01:20:02]

YES. ALL RIGHT. AND, MR. AL QARAGHULI. YES. ALL RIGHT, MISS GORIA.

YES. ALL RIGHT, MR. HESLEP. YES. AND MISS GHOLSTON.

YES. AND I VOTE YES MYSELF. THAT WILL PASS 6 TO NOTHING.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I ALSO WANTED, IF YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO TAKE THE CHANCE TO INTRODUCE OUR NEW STAFF TO YOU, EVERYONE. OUR PLANNING MANAGER, PARKER MCDOWELL.

AND OUR PLANNING TECHNICIAN. LASHAWNA RICH. AND OUR PLANNER, HANNAH IS.

OH, THERE SHE IS. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS, I'M PARKER MCDOWELL, THE NEW PLANNING MANAGER.

I WANT TO SAY I'M VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE WITH THE CITY OF PRINCETON. I'M EXCITED TO BE PART OF THE GROWTH AND ALL THE DEVELOPMENT. HELLO.

I'M SORRY I WENT TO THE BATHROOM WHILE YOU GUYS WERE.

HI, I'M LASHAWNA RICH. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME HERE AND WORK AND IT'S A NICE PLACE TO BE.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE A PART OF THE TEAM.

THANK YOU ALL AND WELCOME. WELCOME TO THE CITY.

TODAY'S PARKER'S 1ST DAY. AND TODAY HANNAH AND LASHAWNA HAVE COMPLETED 1 MONTH.

I WILL SAY PARKER HAS EXPERIENCED FROM CITY OF BOULEVARD, CITY OF PLANO AS A CONSULTANT TO TAYLOR ROBINSON. CITY OF MCHENRY UP IN ILLINOIS AND A FEW CITIES IN TENNESSEE.

AND HE'S WORKED WITH STANTEC AND HDR TO INTERNATIONAL FIRMS AS A CONSULTANT TO CITIES.

WE'VE GOT HANNAH. SHE'S GOT EXPERIENCE WITH CITY OF DALLAS AND AND MESQUITE.

AND THEN WE HAVE LASHAWNA. SHE MOST RECENTLY HAS EXPERIENCED DOING THE EXACT SAME THING FOR CITY OF MCKINNEY.

SO I AM REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE A FULL HOUSE. WELCOME ABOARD.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO OUR INFORMATION, I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION LISTED HERE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY INFORMATION OR ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE UPCOMING ON THE NEXT AGENDA? NOTHING. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT I HAVE NOTHING ELSE.

WE WILL GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN. Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD EVENING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.