Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening.

Welcome to the regular meeting of the Frisco Planning and Zoning Commission. We are gathered at 6101 Frisco Square Boulevard, and the time is 06:32PM. The planning and zoning commission consists of Frisco residents appointed by the city council. Tonight, commissioners present are Steve Cohn, John Kendall, Sean Merrill, Tiffany Wells, Michael Howard, and Warren Ruiz. My name is Britney Colberg.

I am your chair. Representing staff tonight are from the development services, we have John Letler, Jonathan Hubbard, Gilbert Irvina, Rolandria Russell, Sean O'Quinn, Ariel Winfrey, Asa Woodberry, Caitlin Venezuela, Jennifer Morgan. And from engineering, we have Joel Fitz and Toyin Fawahimi. From fire, we have John Gillette and legal Ryan Pittman. The next item on the agenda is citizen input.

If you wish to address the commission regarding any items that are on tonight's agenda, you may do so at this time. Please complete a blue speaker card and approach the podium. Prior to your comments, please state your name and address for the record. Our meetings are recorded, so please speak directly into the microphone. Please address all comments to the commission, not to members of the audience or any applicants present this evening.

To ensure there is enough time for all to speak, please limit your comments to a maximum of five minutes unless you must address the commission through a translator in which case you may have a maximum of ten minutes. Please note the commission cannot discuss or take specific action during citizen input on items not on the posted agenda except to provide a statement of specific factual information in response to an inquiry, to recite existing policy in response to an inquiry, or to indicate that the matter may be placed on a later agenda. Is there anybody here to speak during citizen input? Alright. Seeing none, we will move to the approval of the minutes. Do I have a motion?

I have a motion to approve the minutes from the March 24 meeting.

Motion by Tiffany.

Second.

Second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes six zero. Our minutes are approved. Alright. Next is the consent agenda. The consent agenda consists of routine and non controversial items. Any commission member making such request prior to a motion and vote on the consent items may consider items individually. Any member of the audience wishing to make comments on consent agenda items may do so with the majority approval of the commission. Tonight, have items three through 20 on the consent agenda. I know we need to pull several of these. So we're gonna pull five and nine, fourteen and seven 14 through seventeen and six. But for now, what I need is

I'll make I've got it down here.

Oh, I'm so proud of you.

No problem. I'll make a motion to approve items three, four, seven, eight, 10 through thirteen, and eighteen through 20 on the consent agenda.

Teacher's Pet, motion by John.

Second.

Second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion through nine.

Five and

Five

and Excuse me. Five and nine. Thank you for the correction.

I make a motion to approve items five and nine.

Motion by Tiffany.

Second.

Second by Steve. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes five zero. If someone can Sean and then Tiffany. Yep. So for the record, Tiffany is going to recuse herself as Sean returns to the dais. Alright. Now we need a vote for consent agenda item number six.

I'll make a motion to approve item six six on the consent agenda.

Motion by John.

Second.

Second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes five zero. That was so fast. I will then recuse myself while Tiffany returns to the dais.

All right, let the record show that Brittany has left and I'm back, Tiffany. So items fourteen and seventeen, I need a motion on that. Oh, 14 through 17.

Motion to approve items number 14 through 17.

I have a motion by Sean second. Any and second.

Aye.

Okay. Second by John. All those in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Motion approved. Oh, six zero.

I know I keep

saying it.

Oh, and let the record show that Britney is back. Alright.

Tonight, we will have two public hearings on the agenda and I wanna review the process. Each public hearing is preceded by a staff introduction of The applicant is then permitted ten minutes to make his or her presentation to the commission. Following questions of the staff and applicant by the commission, those wishing to speak are welcome to address the commission. All speakers including the applicant need to complete a speaker's card and provide it to the administrative assistant. If there are organized groups in attendance, we suggest that you select representatives to present your position.

Please avoid repeating what has been stated by previous speakers other than stating that you do agree with their comments. The time limit is five minutes per speaker to ensure everyone has a chance to speak. The commission members can vote to limit speaking time if a large volume of people are wishing to speak. Please note that you only have one opportunity to speak. Repeat appearances to the podium are not permitted.

After all persons have been given the opportunity to speak, the public hearing portion of the case will be closed and no further testimony will be permitted unless the case is tabled to a future date and the commission includes in their motion to continue the public hearing to a future meeting. After closing the public hearing, members of the commission may have questions for the staff or applicant. Please note the Planning and Zoning Commission only makes a recommendation regarding zoning cases. Unless the commission disapproves the case and the applicant does not appeal the disapproval, final action requires a public hearing by the city council. You are encouraged to contact the development services staff as to when the case will be considered by the city council.

The first item on our regular agenda tonight is item number 21, public hearing specific use permit Cobb Business Park S U P 25 Dash 0 005, owner John Carter Ferguson.

Good evening, commissioners. I would first ask for a motion to remove the item from

the table. Motion to move remove the item from the table.

Motion by Sean. Second. Second by Tiffany. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion pass six zero.

Thank you. The item before you all this evening is a request for a minor automobile repair facility for Building 6, all of Building 6, which is the north western most north western most building in the Cobb Business Park development. So this property is governed by a planned Development 97, which was adopted by city council in 1999 and gives the property owner or an applicant the right to go through the specific use permit process to have an automobile related use approved. So as I'm sure some of you may remember, this is the third time that a request for this property has come before you all. The first request was for major automobile repair for the whole Building 6, Then the applicant came back with a SUP for a minor automobile repair facility for the western half of Building 6, and then to again clarify that the request before you all this evening is for all of Building 6 for minor automobile repair.

And the applicant has stated that they intend to comply with the minor automobile repair definition as it exists in the zoning ordinance and was included in your staff report this evening. As we're looking at the applicant's request and its relationship to the adjacent residential, there is a provision in the zoning ordinance that requires all automobile related uses to be located a minimum of 250 feet from any residential zoning district. So as you can see here on the screen, from the residential zoning district to Building 6 is just shy of a 158 feet, but from the residential property, so that is measured from the wall to the Building 6 that is right at 200 feet and divided between a Collector Street and additional building, that being Building 7. So unlike most specific use permits that once approved, they follow with the land, the applicant is proposing, two additional conditions should this SUP be approved. The first being that the SUP be tied to the current property owner, John Carter Ferguson, and not automatically transfer to future property owners.

And the second is that it only would be valid for a three year period from the date the ordinance was adopted by city council. Therefore, if the applicant wanted to continue to pursue the use beyond the three years, they would have to come in and get a new SUP approved prior to the expiration of this SUP should this SUP get approved. At the time the packet was published, the staff has received 114 project input forms, 97 of those in opposition, 17 in support. Earlier today, I sent you all an email with 41 additional project input forms and one email, 30 of those in support and 12 opposed. The staff report goes over other compatibility considerations which this request does comply with.

You do have a recommendation for approval this evening subject to the site developing in accordance with the exhibit b site plan, the exhibit c facade plans, outdoor storage of vehicles is prohibited, that the SUV tied to John Carter Ferguson and not transferable to future property owners, and that it be valid for a period of three years unless city council approves a new SUV ordinance to allow the business to continue. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Questions for Jonathan while he's up here right now?

I do. So the only thing that this is not meeting our stipulation is the distance. That is correct. And the distance requirement is 250 feet normal?

From the residential zoning district to the boundary of the SUP.

Okay. Thank you.

And, Jonathan, just for the record, the middle of the building that was approved by PNC last time was was at the 250 feet, but that would have only allowed automotive minor automotive repairs on the western half of the building.

Correct. The the the second SUP was for minor automobile repair on the western half, and that SUP boundary went down the center of the building, which is essentially 50 feet further to the net 200 line. So that was 250 feet. So you are correct that that was recommend for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, it was denied by city council.

Thank you. Sure.

Alright. Any other questions for Jonathan while he's up here?

I do. Jonathan, the 200 feet to the masonry wall, is the masonry wall just arbitrarily used as a loose definition of the neighborhood? What is the relevance of the 200 feet?

So from an from an ordinance standpoint, the ordinance says from the residential zoning district. So if you're, you know, reading the code very black and white, that's that a 157.5 feet. However, you know, there were a lot of questions in in previous cases, and a lot of people say, well, where's the nearest lot? In that particular case, the the lot is at the edge of the screening wall, so that measurement is that. And it was also I will point out that typically zoning boundaries do go to the center line of thoroughfares.

In this case, as you can kinda see, as North County goes further, south that that, zoning boundary kind of evens out. But in this in this location, the zoning boundary is a little more to the west than the center line of North County.

Thank you. Sure. I have a

Go ahead.

So even under the most generous interpretation of that, it's still 50 feet too close?

Correct. Okay.

A lot of the input forms, people ask the question, how many times is he allowed to submit the same thing?

Mhmm.

I'll ask the same question. How many times can he do this?

There's there's not a limit on the number of times that he can submit. Okay.

Alright. Is the applicant here? Would he like to speak? I would. Yes. Okay.

Hey, everybody. My name is Carter Ferguson. I'm the applicant, and I'm the owner of the property at 10575 North County Road. Just two things real quick. And maybe there is a little bit of confusion on my part here because I'm not asking for a variance.

If I was violating a zoning ordinance, I'd be asking and requesting a variance. The PD states, black and white, it says that I have 75 feet from an adjacent building point. Now this is my understanding in reading the plan development is that if if the the zoning if ordinances were black and white, if it was straight zoning, at 250 feet where I cut the building in half last time, I wouldn't even need to be here standing here for an SUP. So the PD supersedes the zoning, which requires the SUP. And even if I was 550 feet away because there's the PD, I would still require be required by the s to get an SUP by the plan development.

So maybe there's some miscommunication there. I'm not entirely sure. Like I said, the the way that I read the PD is 75 feet. So by that definition, the 200 feet, 250 feet really shouldn't matter very much. And, again, I think that's why I'm not requesting a variance.

On a side note, the city of Frisco's motto is progress in motion. Right? And for the last eighteen months, I have done everything I can to try to come to a great resolution with the residents, spoke to them, gone to HOA meetings, tried to figure out exactly how we could come to common ground. We're not gonna get there, and I understand that. So what I'm requesting from PNC and city council at this point is to give me a three year opportunity to prove that I'm not gonna be a noise problem.

I'm not gonna create excess traffic. I'm not gonna create a safety issue or trash or pollution or reduce home values. None of those things are gonna apply. And and this is kind of something from my understanding that is unique. There's really never been a time limited SUP. And currently, the city Of Frisco is about 85% built out. There's only about 15% left. So you're gonna see more of these zoning cases that come before you where you get an SUP next to residential, and there needs to be ways for the city to have triggers to try to come to resolutions between businesses and residents close to them. City of Frisco is at the forefront of a lot of things. This is another opportunity for you guys to do the same.

Give me the opportunity for three years to come in and prove that I am not gonna be the so called nuisance. If that is the case at the end of three years, I will walk away and sell the building. But I I feel like I deserve that opportunity to go in there and try to make this work and be an asset to the city. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. I have a quick question before we open public hearing.

We're actually already in the public hearing.

Oh, that's right. Thank you for that reminder. But I do have a question before we have any other public hearing comments from last time. We have a plan development in front of us that in that plan development, in order for a minor or major automotive to go in here, they must have an SUP.

Correct.

Correct. We don't have here, zoning rights. This is they have to get the SUP to start with. Correct? Correct. Then the secondary thing about the amount of feet away is based on our ordinance for major or minor automotive in which based on that definition, they have to be 250 feet away from residential district. Correct?

Correct. K. So yeah. So just just for me to say just a few things. So for example, if if this property were straight zoned and it did not have the PD on it, so they did not have the right to go through the SUP process, they don't meet the 250 feet, which is not allowed. That's the end of it. There is no avenue to do any it's just you can't do it. This is a PD. It sits on top of zoning or sorry, in the base zoning. This PD does give an applicant, a property owner, the right to pursue the SUP process and go through this.

So the Planning and Zoning Commission can ultimately recommend, and the city council can ultimately approve or deny, you know, should should they wish. The 250 foot is the zoning ordinance provision for automobile related uses. That is a distance between residential and automobile related uses. The 75 feet that is referenced is a requirement in the PD related to building height and a side yard setback. So all properties have a front yard setback, a rear yard, You know, they have they have various setbacks.

So, you know, when this development was first coming in, when these buildings were first going in, it was, okay. What's the height of these structures? What's the side yard setback? That has nothing to do with the automobile related use.

Thank you. Alright. As mister Cohen said earlier, we are already in public hearing. So because of that, I know we had some people speak, two weeks ago. If there are any other people that would like to speak, we already have blue cards here. Tiffany is gonna call you by name and also tell you who's on deck so we can try to keep this moving along. And if you do wanna speak and you haven't already filled out a blue speaker card, please do so with miss Jennifer.

How many do we have? If you want me asking.

10.

I'd like to make a recommendation that we limit the time to three minutes from five minutes.

Okay.

They're entitled to five minutes.

Is that a motion, Sean?

The ordinance that governs. Up to speak on the item, but that's an option, not a requirement.

I'd like to make a motion that we're limited to three minutes.

Second. Motion by Sean, second by Tiffany. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

You wanna raise your hands?

In favor?

Two, and then any opposed? No. All right, motion is denied then two four. Did I say that right? K. Alright. We will still have five minutes for speaking time. Okay.

So first up is John Ferguson, and then after John is Chuck Martin.

Good evening. Thanks for seeing us again. Sorry. We haven't been able to find a successful formula yet. We are a successful small business. We offer independent automotive services. We're bring some things to Frisco that are not here, exhaust repair, ADAS, your your advanced driver safety system, calibration. We do other things, front end alignment, brakes, shocks, trailer hitches. But that's some things that are not here that that we're gonna bring services to. We will be a good neighbor at these folks.

I've lived in Frisco fifty years now. I've been here a long time. We we're their neighbors, but we're not in their neighborhood. You know, when I drive down North County, I see the back of everybody's house. There's a backyard, six, eight foot wooden stockade fence, alleyway,

six to

seven foot masonry wall, sidewalk, three lanes on North County sidewalk, green space, 100 foot of another building, and then green space, and then there's us. All of our doors face north and south. Nothing faces to the Meadow Hill Estates. We'll insulate those overhead doors. We only have two. All repairs are done inside. We're a quick shop. We do not keep vehicles for days. Nothing is repaired outside. We will not have noise problems with our neighbors.

I know that because we've operated shops for fifty years in other cities. I've never had a noise complaint. I know that's not gonna happen, but I understand why the residents, they don't know me. That's why we came up with the idea of the three year SUP. We're gonna put our money where our mouth is.

We're gonna prove to them that we're a good neighbor. So and I wish we could go back to 1999 and look at the thoughts of the original PD, and I would bet you everybody put the SUP in there to protect the business park. Really weren't thinking about probably houses across the street from us. We have a 100% support from all of our partners in the business park, so they don't see us as a threat. Like I said, we would just like to have a chance to prove to him that we're a good neighbor, and I know we would be. Thank you all very much.

Thank you.

And as Chuck come, after Chuck is Douglas Edwards.

Thank you. I'm Chuck Martin. 110039 Firefly Lane, Frisco, Texas. Kim and I have lived in that house for, twenty four years, and, I should just begin by saying we're not opposed to small businesses, and mister Ferguson, his son, are fine outstanding people. And so this is not a personal issue with the Fergusons in any way.

Our concern has been stated. This will be actually the sixth time that I have personally been in this chamber addressing our concerns. And so I feel like I can resonate with the words of Jesus in Luke 18 where he tells the parable of the it's called the unjust judge. I'm not making that application to you guys. But the parable is that it's a comparison of prayer, but where this woman came asking for justice and she kept coming back time and time and time again.

And eventually, she wore the judge down to where the judge said, just get rid of her. Okay? Enough. And so the judge decided in her favor. Of course, the point was Jesus said that's not at all prayer, but that's I'll save that for a different lesson, which I often do at church.

But anyhow, the reason I bring that up is that's kinda how we feel as homeowners because we've come with concerns for property values, concerns with noise. We voice those concerns, and yet this is the sixth time we're we're doing that. And so my question is, the ordinance was written for a purpose. It doesn't fall within the boundaries of that. How many times must we appeal that we simply follow the ordinance? And that's the question I have for each of you tonight.

Okay. Does Douglas come up? After Douglas is Kim Martin.

Good evening, folks. Appreciate your time. Thanks for representing the great city of Frisco. My name is Doug Edwards. I live at 10615 Watercrest Lane.

My wife and I have been there for eighteen years, and we we, had every opportunity to live anywhere, but we chose Frisco. And in our research, when we chose Frisco, we did our homework. We knew that there was commercial property behind us. But there there was also a fact that there was a zoning ordinance put in place long before that was even in in the zoning stage of, requirements on whether there was automobile businesses allowed, and it specifically states no automotive business, not in any way shape or form. It doesn't matter how you color it, it's still a pig.

Okay? So and that's nothing personal, but let me clarify one thing. I know you folks are you you're models of our society here, and so you know you've got some soul searching to do. And of that, I I really ask you to look and ask this, does this conflict with present zoning codes? Will this negatively affect nearby residents?

Has the city already ruled on this before? And is this really the right place for this business? And I implore you all to ask yourselves this and jointly come together and side with us and deny this. I could go on, but I won't. I trust in y'all's judgment. I'd I'd prefer this not to go before the council. If it does, I'll be there again. Thank you.

Thank you.

At the Kim is Laura Atwoods.

Thank you so much for your work on this. City of Frisco is a great place to live in part because y'all are doing what you do. So, my hope is that you would not base your decision, on whether you would mind living next to an auto repair shop or on whether that would be, amenable to you, but that you would base it on what is in the zoning code from way back written by men and women who were a lot smarter than me to both promote business and to protect residents. The city zoning ordinance does say, as pointed out earlier, that any automotive business, whether it's a car wash, retail, auto parts, any type, must be at least 250 feet. We already covered that.

And here we are a 100 feet too close to our residential zoning district. City council turned down twice now. I think that should count for something. Normally, the SUP, as we know, stays stays with the property for the life of the property. But if this SUP is approved, then we will be at the same juncture in three years from now.

At that time, the SUP could change to include suspensions and lift kits or whatnot. I'm glad it doesn't include those right now, but I also wanna know how many times do we need to fight this SUP and we respectfully request that planning and zoning or someone in the city place a limit on the number of times that the same category of business can apply for an SUP for the same location. It just is so repetitive and it we feel worn down our our our neighborhood. Our objections are twofold. We have objections based on our property values.

We have two perimeter streets in Meadow Hill State. One is North County Road, one is Water Lily Lane, and a search with chat GPT brought up that a minor automotive repair shop nearby will decrease the value of those perimeter homes by three to 8%. That is anywhere from 20,000 to a $104,000. And because we do have homes that that vary in value that much in our neighborhood, Microsoft Copilot put it at five to 15%. And, in the the project input form that I submitted, I did give the links for that my second objection, which is the interpretation of the zoning code.

Section one point o five point o two is about restrictiveness, and it talks about how where the regulations vary from place to place, that the regulations which are more restrictive and impose higher standards are the requirements that shall govern. And the second part is about abrogation. So the provision of these regulations are not intended to abrogate or do away with any easement covenant or other private agreement provided that where the requirements of these regulations are more restrictive or impose higher standards or regulations than such easement covenant or private private agreement. The requirements of these regulations, meaning this zoning code shall govern. So I think that's two places, restrictiveness and abrogation where it says where there's more restrictiveness go with the more restrictiveness.

And then the section on, standards for planned developments, zoning code 6.14 o two, it talks about exhibit c. Exhibit c is a part of this planned development and it says the exhibit c shall in no way vest rights for the property that are outside the regulations of the zoning ordinance and other applicable city ordinances as they currently exist or shall be amended. So, and it says One minute. Anyway,

that's just

what it says.

Have a minute.

So that is my plea to you. Thank you.

Thank you. Bye. Oh, I have one still have one minute.

Yes. I thought you were

telling me

to try try

to turn this up. Sorry. But, yeah, that is basically all I had to say, and I appreciate your consideration of that.

Thank you. Thank you.

As Laura come up, next is Cynthia Thomas.

Evening, chairwoman and commissioners. My name is Laura Edwards. I'm at 10615 Watercrest Lane. We've been here for eighteen years as my husband stated. You know, this is more of an emotional plea. I'm I y'all know the codes. Y'all know the laws. This is our sanctuary, our house. My house is the one with the red dot. I'm lucky I have a few more feet versus my neighbor who's literally on the line. His backyard is the red line there. You know, we've opposed this for a long time. We're exhausted. This shouldn't be we shouldn't be having to come up here again and again and again. I was also told for this particular SUP that it was gonna be just possible inspections and tint window tinting.

They were no longer gonna do mufflers, Now I'm hearing we're back to mufflers again. So my letter is not even it was more on automotive. I was gonna lean a little bit lighter, but, you know, where are we going? 250 feet, 200 feet, only working the west half of the building. You know, we need to stop, and I and I'm all for Miller Muffler somewhere else, which is exactly what city council said, somewhere else. It's just it's not the right place. I wanna sit on my back porch and enjoy my backyard. I it's my home. It's my investment. You know, maybe they won't make a lot of noise.

Maybe they won't. But I was a young ster with a muffler, and let me tell you what I did. I drove him down the first road I came to, and that he can't control that. And that's just gonna be something that happens with mufflers. That's something people do. That's what they why they like them loud. So I really just thank you for listening, and I really appreciate your time tonight, and I I really hope that you'll be in opposition. Thank you.

Thank you.

And Cynthia come after her as Sherry Anderson.

Hello. I'm Cynthia Thomas. I live at 10687 Watercrest Lane. So I live about, five or six doors down from Laura. So my backyard backs up to North County also.

And as we know, noise and traffic doesn't travel down that red line for 200 feet or a 157 feet. Right? We're we're gonna hear the same noise down the street in the neighborhood and not in that straight line. There are also houses from our neighborhood that are to the north of this center. It it's not only to the east, but there is also Meadow Hill on on the north side of this also.

So like the others, I've been here before last fall. I I'm not sure I've been here six, but maybe I've been here four times. And I just ask that you all respect the regulations that, have been in in place, for the zoning, just as I've requested before. Thank you.

Hey. Sherry come. Greg, I just can't read the last name so

I could see it. Yeah. Okay.

In with Sherry.

Hi. Good evening. I'm Sherry Anderson. I live at 10627 Watercress Lane, and I live next door to the red dot just to the north of it. So I can see this whole business from my backyard.

I can see the whole front of it, all the cars parking in the front, and the things that'll be happening, at this business. Mister Ferguson, made a comment that it's a need that he would be bringing to our neighborhood, and I have to disagree with that as I disagree with this SUP. From my house, again, I'm right next to the red dot, four tenths of a mile is, automotive ER. A mile and a half is solutions automotive and a mile and a or sorry, 1.4 miles is solution automotive and 1.5 miles is Frisco Automotive. So within a mile and a half, there are three other automotive businesses that service our neighborhood very well.

It was also brought up to maybe for three years, you know, let him have an SCP for three years, and then we would revisit, whether or not that got extended. But in that three years, who's responsible for policing what is happening at his business? That was a question that was brought up to the city council, and that answer was on the residents. So I don't think it's fair that we should also have to be policing what is happening in his business and that he's abiding by his SUP. So, I strongly ask that we oppose this SUP. I would be directly affected financially if we decide to, sell our home is what was brought up by, Kim. So I ask you to please deny this SUP. Thank you.

As Greg come up, Joe Thomas is next.

Good evening. Thank you. I think our codes are to promote I'm against I'm against Miller Automotive, the business, not the people. Codes are put in place in our city to promote harmony harmony of neighborhoods, businesses. You know, we have codes for traffic, codes for, you know, houses where they can be built and things like that, so it it promotes harmony. Good neighbors of all kinds, they wanna be a good neighbor. We wanna have a good neighborhood. I just I I think everyone needs to live by the same coach. I think, Warren, you even brought up. So this is 50 feet from short of the code, and, yes, it is.

I don't even know why we're having an SUP. It's it's short of the code. It seems like even when you submit a building permit, it should have it should meet certain one or two or three or four codes. Is it in the right area? Is it away from this and that and this and that?

It seems like that would just be and if it doesn't, you can't even submit it. However, it is, and that's where we are. So in in limiting number of times, already talked about that. One of the arguments is insulating the shop for noise, but you can't control customers that wanna test their new product. I heard about the green belts and the brick walls and the alleys and etcetera, but that can't insulate us against the excited customer revving up and showing his new exhaust product.

There's nothing he can do about that, and I I just think that's that's that's hard on us. If you grant the three years that puts us as monitors and documentarians, it's like dealing with rabbits eating all my plants. There's not really much I can do about it. I have to be on it and on it, and I have to and it gets frustrating, and it's like, okay. Now I gotta go and see. And when I'm not gonna walk over there every day, and I can't but I hear this, and I got okay. I'll have to document this because when it comes up in three years, the argument will be, well, we didn't do any of that. Where is all of this stuff? And then I'm gonna have to pull out my sheets and documents, and I don't wanna do that. That's that's not right to us because it's just one more notch towards and then the next time it will be, hey.

It's worked for three years. Let it work for three years again. It's it's it's it's a low grade frustration and irritant that it will be on all of us neighbors to have to keep up with, and I I just don't think that's right. That's not promoting harmony. So I am against it. Thank you.

Thank you. You mind saying your name and address for the record?

I'm so sorry. Greg Luttrell. 7400 Veronica Lane, Frisco, Texas. I'm around the corner from the dot.

We got it on the blue card. Thank you. Thank you.

And as Joe come, the last blue card I have is Evelyn Valero, I think, or Farrell.

Good eve hi. Good evening. My name is Joe Thomas, not Jill as it said up there, and I live at 10687 Watercrest Lane, so my house backs up to North County. And, yes, we already have a whole lot of noise that goes on in our neighborhood from the businesses that are across the street from us, including that whatever they're called. They they plug their their bass guitars into the amp and and rattle my windows and make all kinds of noise.

And then we also still have a whole lot of traffic on a a small two lane road, North County Road. It's already there. My concerns are okay. First of all, if if you were to grant a three year, SUP for them, then in three years, what happens? And if you should then say, okay.

We'll just go ahead and grant you the complete SUP. That that SUP has always been tied to the land and not to the business, and my fear is when the the business ends or when they move, who's going in there and what what will happen then. Second of all, just establishing a precedent of allowing an SUP for a a business like this will allow businesses throughout the city then to to come before you asking for the same SUP, the same consideration. And, you know, I I fear that you will be inundated with those kinds of requests. So, I strongly ask you to please again, deny this issue p.

Thank you.

And last is Evelyn.

Hello. My name is Evelyn Villarreal, and I'm at 7419 China Berry Lane, Frisco, Texas. Okay. So I moved here. First of all, just a little bit about us. My husband's ex military, navy, traveled all over the world. We end up here in o eight, and we didn't know if we'd stay. Little by little, presidencies change. We're still here. We're still making it. We're loving it. Our kids are

in great

schools. Everything is good, community, friends, children. It's all about children. So as we're going into still providing stuff for families here, Now we got universal and this and that. Okay. My husband and I talk about stuff all the time. He's been all over the world to where he knows how people live, where people live, how they I mean, like, how do they make it? When he's sitting here, he's like, I like it because it's clean, and I like it how there's no, like, say, riffraff. There's no this, and there's no where we came from. Or and so as we come here, we're realizing, okay.

So let's do our research. We're gonna stay here. We're gonna buy here. And just like some of my other neighbors that have bought here who have done their research as to, you know, what zoning, who's gonna go across the street, who's you know, who like, is there a potential for some sort of noise or, you know, auto mechanics? We did our research.

I'm sorry that when mister Ferguson purchased this, you know, building or put in the lifts and all that, like, he didn't do his research. So you can't now put the burden on the citizens, the the residents for us to pick up the pieces and say we're okay with it because we're not. We've done our research. Some people have lived here longer than me and my husband, and they did their research. You know, I didn't even hear about the property value dropping, so that kind of puts another spin on as to what wife is even gonna say today.

But then we also have where he's asking for a three year term or what I wanna know is, like, how much or he's he's doing mufflers or he's not doing mufflers or he is. From the very beginning, this is my sixth time talking up here. It was Monday through Friday, and you can go back and look at all the videos and, you know, recordings. Monday through Friday, nine to five. Got denied, went up to city council, then it was Monday through Friday, and Saturday, nine to six. Don't worry. We will not be here past 6PM. Like, you will not catch us here at 06:05PM. Okay? Then it goes to minor.

And then we're not gonna do these items. We're only doing six items. List the six, got denied, went up to city council, lists them lists them off, 10 items now. Okay. And then here we are again. Then we hear, oh, okay. I think you might do window tinting and stuff. And I'm like, okay. So I can't keep up. I didn't have my notes, so I'm just coming in here now, and I had something else to say.

But like I'm saying now is that he comes up here, then papa Ferguson comes up here, and he states, we're bringing something that you don't have here, that you need. We're gonna do, you know, mufflers and this and, you know, transmissions and stuff like that. Okay. I'm sorry, but maybe you shouldn't have said maybe you shouldn't have stated that because that is what we have already voted against five other times, you know, or four other times. So now I'm we're basically pleading with you as to, like, how many times?

Like, please even after this is over, can you please put a limit? Or even just googling, it'll stay on there where other cities have, like, a fee, a fine like, you know, if you know, that you're gonna, like, put in place, like, something that you can't keep applying or a term limit, like, a year a full year. But I'm just sitting here wondering, like, why like, if you just sit there and ask yourselves for the next, say, thirty seconds, why do you think that we need muffler enhanced vehicles running up and down North County when it's a direct path to, like, the cricket, to the volleyball, to Staley, to Rogers, to the bus barn, to the community swimming pool for the children, for FISD, and then and then our neighborhood. Like, just just to think about why you would say we need that here in Frisco.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anybody else that would like to speak

that has not filled out a blue speaker card? Do you have some that

Yes. We have some others that, do not wish to speak. We have, one in support, and we have three in opposition. And then we have one that does not wanna speak, but they didn't say whether they supported it or opposed it, and that would be Karen Langley. Opposed? Okay. So it's four opposed, one four.

Is there anybody else that would like to speak?

I like to make a motion and close public hearing. Motion by Tiffany.

Second.

Second by Steve. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes six zero. Public hearing is now closed. Thank you all so much for being here. Know I said this last time. There are times that we are here at City Hall and it's just us and city staff. So we do appreciate, your time.

We appreciate everyone being here and your input. I know for me personally, I read through every project input form, and understand, what you all are saying and understood last time as well. I do wanna make sure that if there are any other questions or comments that said, as the chairwoman, I do not vote unless there is a tie. I will tell you being that this is the third time, that we have seen this before us. I have a few thoughts, that I just wanted to say.

One of the things we are doing is making sure that we are making a recommendation to city council. We take that recommendation seriously and consider a lot of different things. You know, I know it said earlier that, you all have another business or two businesses, I believe, and that those don't have noise complaints. I know I looked those up previously, and they were both located, correct me if I'm wrong, near a highway, and I don't know if any of those are less than 200 feet from residential. So I appreciate that there aren't noise complaints that you're hearing from residential, but I don't know if we're comparing apples to apples here with with that statement.

For me, I understand that this is an SUP to begin with, so there aren't property rights. There aren't zoning rights here. So even to start the process, we are looking at a special use permit to determine if this is the right business for this place. On top of that special use permit, then we're looking at a second thing, which is within the boundaries of a major minor automotive repair, does it meet the ordinance requirements, which would be 250 feet from residential. The last time that this case before this case came before us, because it was going to be that the building was occupied just the western side, then we had different information where it's gonna be 250 feet.

So things are changing each understand every time it comes before us and we need to reevaluate. I did have a quick question for Jonathan. I know this was mentioned. If I remember correctly, and I watched both cases today from November '24 and then April '25, but I don't remember where we all started. If correct me if I'm wrong. The equipment and the lifts were put in the building before, and then they realized when they were trying to get the CO of the situation that they needed to get an SUP. Is that am I remembering correctly?

I don't I I do I do recall that the equipment was installed. Whether or not they had submitted for for a CO, I I do not know. I do know that, mister Ferguson had had reached out to me, you know, saying, hey. This is what we're trying to do here. You know, what what does that look like?

Mhmm.

And I know that's where my involvement started, you know, regarding whether they had applied for a CO or not, I'm unsure.

Okay. I'll ask the applicant. Sure. Do you mind popping up here? You remind me how we all started here. There were equipment put in first?

Correct. Yes, ma'am. So the the equipment that I use can be anywhere from a four to a six month special order. So miscommunication on the front load told me that this was gonna be an okay thing to do here. So I ordered the equipment, and it got to be one of those things like, hey. You gotta take possession of it. Do something with it. So it just got put into the building. I've just got a big empty building with lifts in it right now.

Gotcha. Okay.

So it was just it was just a special order kind of endeavor that was something I had to find a place for.

Sure. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Mhmm. So, yeah, for I just wanna go back to history since I was brought up. So for me, again, I know we've seen this fleshed out differently, different times. And if I had to vote tonight based on the distance, based on, again, our residents, knowing this is a special use permit and knowing that our city council has denied this twice, I cannot in good faith decide to recommend this to them again. So that's where I land on it, I'd like to open it up for more comments, more questions to staff or the applicant.

That's how you wanna start.

Just let him think. Who else can start?

I have a few questions and I don't know, Jonathan, you wanna answer it. What was the rationale behind staff recommending approval even though it didn't meet the 250 feet? Was it because the restrictions y'all put in place and that it would only be a three year, I guess, condition on it?

So, you know, it's also fair to say that, staff's recommendation has been approval for the last two as well. So if you look at the compatibility considerations, that are listed within the staff report, which is essentially, you know, criteria that staff uses in evaluating an SUP request. All of those compatibility considerations were met until you come to the intensity of use. The intensity of use is the category where we referenced the the the the the distance between the two and the distance was that there was a between the residential and the use, there was a collector size street and an additional building, Building 7, between that and the the use itself.

And then my, final question is, I know we, been talking about different restrictions, and so I know some people mentioned the noise. Some people mentioned, I guess, the particular use if he's gonna be doing mufflers or tint, all that type of stuff. How would that be enforced? Right? I know some of that noise, of course, is police, but how would that be enforced and especially with these restrictions? Would that be something that would be notified to code enforcement? Or

So the the noise ordinance, particularly, that is enforced by the police department. Other zoning related issues, yes, could be, reported to code enforcement, and code enforcement could, investigate and work with the property owner to either, you know, bring the site into compliance or, you know, that's that's the city's motto to eventually or to to attempt to work with people and and bring sites into compliance instead of just automatically issuing citations. But, eventually, it could certainly come to that point.

I don't know if this would be a question for you or legal, but let's just say hypothetically. Right? We get several complaints within that three year time frame. Is there a mechanism, I guess, for that business to be temporarily or shut down or go before somebody, whether that's city council or we would have to wait that three years.

In the

ordinance that grants the SUP, which city council would approve if it gets it gets that far, there are conditions specified in that ordinance that would allow the city council to rescind the SUP. There are certain conditions that would allow for that opportunity to happen, one of which is violation of any codes of the city. And so, that's in any SUP ordinance that gets adopted. And and I would anticipate the ordinance, for this case, if it is adopted, would include the same type of conditions that we've seen before. And so, yes, if there are multiple violations of other codes, which would include the noise ordinance that have occurred, then the council would have the opportunity to to call a hearing and and consider a rescension of that SUP before the three year period expires.

That's it for me.

Can you elaborate on that process? Where would that burden fall? Who who who has to complain? What what initiates that process?

Yeah. I think it would be initiated by the city council. If if majority of the members of the city council wish to open up that process, then I would expect that a case would be brought forward to the city council. There'd be a public hearing, and the city council would then consider the facts of the violations, the circumstances of the violations, and then we'll ultimately decide whether whether the state council believes that a rescension of the SUP was warranted in that case.

I'm sorry. We can't ask any other comments afterwards. Thank you.

Can I ask a question with that, Just immediately following on to that? Staff would keep track of any, code enforcement issues, anything that reported. Police department would would keep track of all of that. Is it possible that through the staff that those issues could be raised up to city council to then do what Ryan just said? Because they it's right. City council may not be fully aware of everything that staff is aware of.

Yes, that can happen. Okay.

There's somebody else, let me collect my thoughts.

Would anybody else like to comment or ask any questions?

I do have something real quick. Looking at the recommendations, the five recommendations, one of them does refer back to one of the the issues one of the the speakers brought up that this is tied to John Carter Ferguson, and it's not transferrable to any future property owners. So if if this owner was to leave, sell a business, it doesn't transfer. So just to to make that not not an issue. That's all I got.

Sure. Some of you may know I'm a little long winded. I mean mean, these neighbors, you know, if it when you've lived here five, it doesn't matter if you lived here a year or twenty years, you you love your home. It's your it's your home. It's your backyard. I mean, you care. And I I I can sense it, and I I for sure, as anyone, I don't want anyone to feel pressure on their peace of mind and anything like that. I I'm I'm I'll I'll tell you why I'm torn is the things that I would say I agree with is, no. It's not great that, you know, someone can come here ten, fifty, 30 times. I don't know.

I do I guess, one quick question for Jonathan. When someone comes again, they have to pay a permit fee or a fee again each time they apply.

That's correct. Yeah. Okay. That all of our this is this is a new case, and the submittal fees apply each time.

Okay. I I mean, but for the record is that they do have to pay, you know, how substantial it is. So I just want you to know it's not it's it's a wear on either. It doesn't make it right or wrong, but, yes, currently, the system is they could come a 100 times, but they would have to pay a 100 times, and people have to decide. I don't want the residents to feel that they're being worn down. I don't want businesses to feel that we're not business friendly. You know, and the concerns I would start with, it's safety first. If I and this is how I look at it. If if I feel there's a safety issue, it's just it's dead in the water. It goes, hey.

We've gotta protect the safety of our our community. That's that's goes right in time with our our property value and why people wanna be here. I I personally don't see this as a safety issue. Then after safety, it's, you know, it's your property value. A lot for most people, it's your biggest asset or investment, you know, in in your career.

I know some of you may not like what I hear is, you know, I see both sides as property values Frisco's a special place, and property values have continued to go up to the point where people are complaining that property values are going up too much. And one of the reasons I'm not saying I'm I'm supportive of property values going up, but the reason why people complain about it, because if if you look at Frisco, Frisco compared to our surrounding cities, we are drastically above them. And to you know, you wonder why is Frisco not just, like, a little above the surrounding cities, but drastically above them? It's really comes down. Its school district plays a component, but it is our planning department.

It's what our city officials done for the last twenty years is why your home values are so high. And something you know, those city staff have been here for fifteen, twenty plus years, and so that will come kind of full circle. So I personally, again, don't see property values going down because of this. I look at this as a automotive building, doesn't look like an automotive building. You know, the structure's already there there.

I I I feel one of your disadvantage, you can't change it, the name muffler hurts you because if this had just been, you know, Christian automotive, you know, just all of a sudden it's like, oh, it doesn't do mufflers, or that's not his main thing. Unfortunately, that's working against you. That's that's the name, it's the family name, whatever it is. Forgive me, I'm gonna keep going just going over these. So property values, I personally feel they're not gonna go down.

And we what we talked to the city staff and something they brought up, this has been recommended by staff not just tonight, but the last two times it's been in front of us. And it's one of those where it's it's tough. No one's perfect, but we love our city staff because of all these things they've done. But if if we don't like this thing, now we kind of question, do they know what they're doing? I feel, in my opinion, the city staff have looked at this over a year, and if they feel good about this, I kind of lean towards it.

They know I've disagreed with them before, but we've got amazing staff. I'm telling you, these are like nationally renowned staff we have here. And so when they say, hey, this is something we support, and they feel it's not a big concern, it does carry weight. We don't have staff that have only been here, you know, five years. We're talking twenty plus years. So that means something to me. It's difficult. When you're building a city and when we're small and you just throw a neighborhood off and it's easy to come up with distances of 250 feet, and then we go over and someone does another 100 acre development, we have these parameters. This is a difficult time in Frisco. We're now when I first got on here, think we're only like 60% built out.

Now we're to 85. And now those in in spots are starting to fill in, these are where we have to make very difficult, difficult decisions. I hope you know I don't take this lightly. You know, I'm earning my pay tonight because I just, like Brittany, I read all those comments. So, you know, it's I I felt that they were real, I know they're real comments, but I lean on the staff.

So when we talk of, you know, hey, it's the code says 250, There's a time as when things get tight, you have to look at it, and they've put parameters in my opinion that will protect you. Again, I'm only one vote up here. I'm shocked that he agreed to a three year thing. As if I were advising him as a business council, I think that's a terrible idea on his part. Because he's gonna now, if if he was approved, he's gonna open up a business, he's gonna create a brand there, he's gonna have an address and do all these things.

And if he doesn't do it smart, he's gonna have any one of you calling the police on him, getting complaints, complaining to city staff, city council, and he's gonna get uprooted from an emergency meeting or the three years. We better believe all it's gonna you know, police police chief of town say we've had 20 complaints, probably even two complaints. If there's probably been two complaints, there's a really good chance they're gonna say you're out of here. That's a really bad business model. So the fact that I in my opinion that he's willing to do that, and that was city staff was supportive even before he made that, I think he's putting his neck out there personally.

I think he's gonna have the staff meeting and say, guys, we can't do this. Again, I'm one opinion. I see, you know, feelings out there. And then what I look at is what else could go here? I have learned, you know, I work now in this city, Nethers, you don't know what else could be here. This could be a CrossFit gym, and they can open up those doors, and they can blare music. I know someone mentioned guitars, you know, you don't want to hear that. It could be that. And guess what? If if it becomes a music school of rock type of business, that we won't have an SUP.

This will get you'll just find out how you'll hear about it is when the music just starts blaring. The other options aren't always what you think they might be, and I caution against that is there are things that could go here that you may not be as excited about. But there's passion, you've got amazing neighborhood. Your gate your neighborhood's not gated, but I can assure you people think that Meadow Neighborhood is probably one of the best in Frisco. You've got the larger lots, you've got the mature trees, It is so desirable to be there. There are people wanting to tear down the some of the older homes and wanna be there. You have a great neighborhood, and I believe it can still be that. But for me personally, I would be in support of this because I trust our staff.

Sean, you can go over. I'm good.

Go. This

is this is not an easy one. You would think that smaller. The smaller, the easier. We've had some really large several thousand acre cases that might have come across as easier in the end, but there's a lot more work that goes into those. This is hard because we've said before this is North County Road. We would not build a road like that today. We would not build we would not arrange the city like this today, but here we are. These houses were built here. These commercial areas were built here. A lot of things I'm leaning on.

The 250 feet ordinance is a very heavy, heavy weight on this. Those of you that said you did your research, that weighs very heavily. If I was a homeowner doing my research and I saw that in black and white, I shouldn't expect an automotive business within 250 feet of my house, I would take that at its word. I would read that ordinance, and I would say, okay. I've done my homework.

I know that I live, you know, now 251 feet away, I may get an automotive building, but I I shouldn't expect to get an automotive, a use within 250 feet. We have to make a lot of tough decisions up here, as John said. We're we're earning our keep, in a good way because we have to act as kind of the judges between the business owners and the homeowners, and someone's going to be disappointed in the outcome no matter what. I agree with mister Kendall that, home values, I I wouldn't see this being a concern. I live next to some things that were supposedly going to ruin my home value, like an eight story hospital.

They've heard it before. A theme park, a Costco, a high school, the lights of a ball field. I have all four of those surrounding my my neighborhood and my house, and Frisco's unique enough that that I would not be worried about home values. So I'm just saying this partly because if if this were to get passed, recommended on, a lot of the concerns are are usually do not turn out as bad as you think. The noise is not as bad as as we assume it's gonna be.

Home values are not hurt like we think they're gonna be, just in case this does get passed. I agree with what, commissioner Kendall said about staff, and I think that staff makes a judgment call. And I think there are some cases, I think most of the cases, they do so much homework that staff is very comfortable that the judgment call that they're making recommending to us is is very solid, and they themselves feel very comfortable with it. However, I do think there are cases where staff probably has a little bit of internal turmoil where they're like, you know, we're gonna recommend yes, but I don't feel like this is a solid, easy yes. And I think sometimes staff probably recommends denial on some things that they're like, you know, I'm making a judgment call.

This could be approved and not be bad for Frisco, but it's kind of right here on the fence, And so I think staff does the best job they can making that judgment call, and then they throw it to us to make another judgment call on top of their judgment call. Don't completely agree with John on the thing about if there's complaints. That's one of my biggest concerns, is if there's two complaints to the police department or five or 25 or 30, I really don't know what the threshold would be in three years, and so you're then requiring staff, the police department, to make a judgment call as to how many noise complaints was too many. Development department, planning services, code enforcement, they have to make a judgment call as to well, there was eight violations during this three year period. Is that not not that bad, or is that terrible?

I don't know. So we would be back here in three years making tough judgment calls again. I do think that once the SUP gets approved, it's harder I'm just speculating that it would be harder to dislodge a business that's been operating for three years with I can see people making the comment of, well, there's been a few things, but they've addressed them, and it's not been that bad, and that would lead to a lot of very frustrated neighbors. Bottom line, if we say that the noise is not gonna be that bad, I'm making a subjective judgment call, and what if it is? What if the noise is worse than I think it's going to be?

I told you earlier, live next to a hospital. I was sitting where you're sitting today out there in the seat before I was on PNZ. It's one of the things that brought me out to PNZ was they were approving an eight story hospital in my backyard, and one of the stipulations was that the hospital would not be that loud, and the ambulances would be required to turn off their sirens before they got close to the neighborhood, and that's my understanding is that's still the rule. Do the ambulances always turn off their siren the sirens before they get to our neighborhood? No. They don't. Do I call the police department and report a noise complaint every time an ambulance comes loudly into the hospital? I don't. But I still hear them. We still hear them.

They're still there. So that's the kind of thing that I doubt there's gonna be zero noise. I don't think it's gonna be as bad as you think, but it's not gonna be zero because, like someone said, the business owner can't control what their customers do, and that's that's not really fair to the business owner to expect them to control what their customers do outside their property. So to wrap it up, for me, the 250 foot rule, we have to have some way to judge these judgment calls, and it was said earlier that if this was a straight zone if this was straight commercial zoning, an applicant came in and said, I wanna do automotive inside of 250 feet from residential, I believe staff would have said don't we're we're not gonna move this even forward. Straight zoning.

It's inside the 250 feet. There's not a way to request a variance. It's not gonna move forward at all. So the only reason we're here tonight is because this PD allows an opportunity for an SUP, but I don't think that that means that we have to then, ignore the 250 foot, rule from residential. I voted in favor of this last time because the applicant decided to cut the building in half, and I thought that meets the letter of the law. That meets the black and white expectation that you would not have automotive repairs within 250 feet of of a residential area. Because they're doing the whole building tonight, I can no longer support this.

You wanna go?

Sure. I agree with most of what John Kendall said tonight. I don't think the property values will be affected by this. I also think that it pretty much doesn't matter where you live in Frisco. You're gonna hear noises. I just looked it up right now. I live almost 3,000 feet from 121, Sam Rayburn Tollway, and I can hear people racing up and down there all night long. So I don't think this is gonna be really a big issue as far as noise. You've got another building separating this building and the subdivision. You've got a retaining wall or a a screening wall.

I think that the owner will probably be talking to all his his folks that come to get their business done there and, you know, tell them, look. Don't be peeling out of here making a bunch of noise. I don't need noise complaints. My my livelihood's gonna rest on this. So I got a feeling he he's gonna it would behoove him to really talk to the folks. And as they go pulling out of there, not not to be, know, showing off

their

speed. That that just makes sense to me. I think he's putting a lot on the line, like John Kendall said, with, tying this SUP to potential noise complaints and having it only valid for three years. So like John, I think I'm going to be in favor of this tonight.

Yeah.

I'll share my thoughts. I'm really sympathetic to both sides of this. I can appreciate the concerns of the residents and appreciate you speaking up tonight. And to Mr. Ferguson, trust me when I say I want your business to be successful somewhere in Frisco.

You know, I think we're moving in the right direction from the first request to the second request, you know, moving from major modified to minor and the whole building to the half. To meet met that middle ground of where we needed to be between the resident concerns and your needs, which is why I voted to support that. You know, really, to me, the only circumstances that have changed since that last vote is these additional conditions that staff has recommended, but that alone to me doesn't supersede kind of the letter in the spirit of the PD and the zoning ordinance and the 250 foot rule. I I wish we we were moving back toward that use of only using half the building, so I can't support this.

I a question for the applicant. Yes, sir. What does the space look like right now? You stated that you had long lead equipment that you ordered and then installed inside the space. Is that correct? Yes, sir. So the the lifts are in place, installed, and would be otherwise functional, is that correct?

Some of them are, yes, sir.

Okay.

Was my question. My comment to his responses is that, I'm a general contractor, I order long lead material and equipment on a regular basis. We never bring them into the building until we have a certificate of occupancy, we know better. So I struggle with the assertion that this was unintentional. Yeah, I'm a no.

I'm so sorry to interrupt. Did I get everybody? Any follow-up questions or comments?

I do want to make one more comment because I didn't make enough earlier apparently. I meant to say, you know, we said if this was straight zoning and it was within two fifty feet, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The other thing that the neighborhood needs to be aware of is that this did pass p and z last time when it was outside the 250 feet, and that's the subjective call about how loud, how negative would this be for the neighborhood. And if I thought or I think if the rest of us thought that it would be very negative for anyone, whether it's us personally or anyone else, it would not have passed last time. So I think a lot of us are leaning on the black and white letter of the law, and noise does not stop at 251 feet.

I get that. But I'm just leaning on the fact that if this was over 250 feet, I do believe the applicant that the noises are contained inside the building, and this is not a huge negative use for this building.

Since we're adding comments because we didn't say enough. Yeah. I wanted to make sure that staff hears me say that I always respect your work, and I know that commissioner Kendall had commented that, you know, we're using and relying on their good advice and and wisdom in that. And just a reminder that even the first time this came before us, staff recommended us to approve it, but then we disapproved it based on the information that was before us. So we make these decisions.

I I can speak for myself, but also know my commissioners here are in good faith operating in a respect for our city staff at all times. In the same time, that's why we're appointed so that we can make individual decisions given the information that we have, and so I just wanted to comment and add that. Alright. Well, if we have nothing else, I'd like to see if we have a motion on item number 21.

I'd like to make a motion, please. Move to deny agenda item 21.

Motion by Warren. Second. Second by Tiffany. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Motion passes four two.

Motion for To deny. To deny.

So sorry. Motion passes by Warren to deny by four two.

Did we

close the public hearing? Did we need to?

No. We already closed public Yes. And

then you need to go ahead and state your raisins. So we'll put it in a memo.

Mine is supporting staff's recommendation.

Mine's the same.

Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here tonight. Appreciate everybody.

You for sitting through the cold.

Now, hold on. Hey, Chuck.

Hold on. Wants another He

wants a bible story.

No. We're all doing those from time to time. So so since this was denied, the applicant has fourteen calendar days to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial to city council. So he has that right. That debt or that letter has to be on my desk by 5PM, two weeks from today, if you wish to appeal.

Well, that means at council, it will be a supermajority vote at council. It's not simple majority, but it has to be a supermajority vote. So as you leave here, they do have that opportunity, and if should that happen, we will be advertising the case for a future council meeting. Okay? K.

Thank you everyone for Thanks being

for saying, Chuck.

Alright. Moving along.

Let me take my shirt off.

Item number 22, public hearing, sign variants, p one one seven edition, block a Lot one, V 26 Dash 0002, Owners FTNV LLC.

Good evening, madam chair, commissioners. The item read in the record is a variance to the sign ordinance. The applicant who is representing the owners is seeking two separate variances with this. One is to increase or to allow an increase in allowable height of a monument sign from eight feet to 15 feet nine nine inches and nine and one eighth inch. This includes architectural borders and to also increase or allow the increase of the actual sign area, square foot area from 92 I'm sorry.

From the allowable, 60 square feet to 92 square feet. This is a the sign itself, is 92 square feet, but the total square footage of the entire monument is 204 square feet. Second request is to allow for four, monument signs on three frontage roads. Currently, the sign ordinance allows one monument, sign per frontage road. This property is sits along three frontage roads, Dallas Parkway, Panther Creek Parkway, and Universal Parkway.

Signed ordinance states that the planning and zoning commission shall determine that request meets three of the following criteria in order to approve variance request. The criteria are as follows with staff's comments on each criteria. The proposed sign should not adversely impact the adjacent property. Staff comment, two of the signs will be located adjacent Dallas Parkway. The other two signs are proposed to be in an area that would not adversely impact the adjacent property as they are separated by medium and a total six lanes of roadway.

Two, both the sign will be of unique design or configuration. The signs are designed to complement the primary architecture, architectural elements of development. The overall design scale and branding are consistent with companies established monument signage at theme park properties worldwide. Combination with integrated base design and branded architectural style creates monument sign with unique design and configure configuration distinguished that distinguishes it from typical monument signage. Three, special exception is needed due to restricted area, shape, topography, or physical features that are unique to the property on which the prop proposed sign would be erected.

That comment is none. Four, special exceptions substantially improves the public convenience and welfare and does not violate the intent of the ordinance. The proposed increase in sign height and area enhances the site visibility and wayfinding, which improves access to development, particularly, given the scale of the property and its multiple frontage roads. The addition of Monument sign will assist visitors in safely identifying access points. Given that this development serves as an entertainment destination, featuring regional, national, and international draw, enhanced signage is both appropriate and necessary to support visitor navigation and overall site functionality.

Staff recommends approval of this variance request, recommends approval of four monument size and three fringe roads and the increase of total height in area as from the zoning, I'm sorry, the sign ordinance.

Excellent. Any questions for staff?

Have there been any forms submitted for I have not received either either side, okay.

I have a question for staff just on lighting. Can you kind of describe the nature of what these will look like during the day and at night?

I can only show you what was submitted. The applicant did submit a presentation as well. I did not see that they had any configuration or examples of what it would look like at night.

Okay.

Is the applicant here?

Yes. Can we please a

question? Yeah, let's wait. Yeah, go ahead and ask

the Did

I miss the part in the description of the signs lit or unlit? The signs would be Are they lit?

They're not lit.

They're not Can

you clarify? So there's four total signs, correct? Four signs. And is the proposal that they're all equal in size? Because I see in the drawings, there's two options per proposed. Are you is the request for all four to be equal size, or they're proposing some to be at the different options?

All four equal in size. One of them, the one that for the hotel entrance is side double sided.

That's the only difference that's double sided, but they're all gonna be the 16 foot approximate height?

That is my understanding. Yes.

For the one that is not double sided up at I understand the two corner ones on the tollway, but the one that's at the park entrance that's not double sided, what will the back of that sign look like? Because it seems to me like it'll be very visible to people entering the park.

It would not be based on the landscape that's back there. It would be concealed by bushes and trees.

Oh, is it I'm sorry. Did I miss Reed, is it turning the entrance one, the main entrance, is that facing out to the as people drive in? Correct. And so only ones that would see the backside would be if they're leaving the park or there's some bushes and trees.

Where there's an entrance? Correct. The rest aren't the entrance?

Only one of them.

There's only front door in order to see it.

Well, there's an exit over there to the to the right of it, I believe. Okay.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, I have one. How many other signs would they be allowed to put in meaning like directional signs outside of these?

Wayfinding.

Directional wayfinding other.

Well, are already some additional way of finding signs out there. This is just a variance for the monument signs themselves.

Do you know the total right now?

I don't know the total of how many are out there currently.

Any other questions for staff? Would the applicant like to do a presentation? Okay.

Evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission. My name is Michael Denny. I reside at 2016 Westover Reserve Boulevard in Windermere, Florida. And we're here before you tonight humbly requesting a variance to the city Of Frisco sign ordinance. As staff mentioned, our our project is a universal kids resort. We're located in North Frisco. We are adjacent to the Dallas North Tollway, the Panther Creek Corridor in in the fields development area. And I'd like to first thank staff for taking the time to review our project. I appreciate it. And for your recommendation of approval, that is also very much appreciated.

Universal doesn't find itself typically asking for variances, and when we do, it's it's most typically our monument signs for the reasons that were mentioned by staff. And to not belabor your time anymore this evening, I'd like to, with your permission, introduce my colleague who will walk you through the details of that justification.

Good evening, madam chair, members of the commission. My name is Angela Hunt. I'm with the law firm of Munch Hart, 500 North Ackard Street in Dallas. I just wanna take you through and give you a little more context for this. This theme park is the first of its kind in the world, the first of its kind for Universal.

It is focused on families with young children. So it's very exciting that this is coming to North Texas and especially that it's coming to Frisco. The theme park is 97 acres, so this is a large campus. Just to to orient us, as has been pointed out, the theme park is surrounded by very large, wide major thoroughfares. You've got the Dallas North Tollway to the West, including its access road.

To the North and to the South, we've got six lane divided roadways, and that makes it a little more challenging to ensure that we have visible and safe signage for drivers. We anticipate that we will have a lot of regional visitors coming to the theme park who may not be familiar with the area to make sure that they have safe access and that we reduce traffic. It's important that we have very visible signage. And I know one of the commissioners mentioned had a question about the two sizes of understand where that question comes from. In your packet, you saw this.

And so I just want to explain exactly what we're looking at. I thought it would be helpful for us to get some perspective on what the signs would look like from a driver's standpoint if the signs were the required standard height for monument signs. That's eight feet tall. So on the right side, you will see what the sign would look like at eight feet tall. And then on the left side of the page, you'll see what the proposed sign would look like at almost 16 feet tall.

I hope you'll agree. The sign on the left looks appropriate for the scale of the project and for the distance that drivers will be going as they approach the project. This particular sign is the double face sign, and it is the entrance to the hotel that's in the theme park from Panther Creek Parkway. And so that's what this perspective shows. And we can see another sign.

This is a little bit closer. You can again see it here. And while the eight feet standard size is certainly appropriate for a typical office park or a retail center. Eight feet tall sign here would look diminutive and it would not serve the function of really showing here is the entrance to our hotel area. Two of our signs are at the corners of the Dallas North Tollway Access Road and Universal Parkway at the North and Panther Creek Parkway to the South.

As you all know and as you've heard in other cases, cases, you have to maintain a visibility triangle to make sure that drivers can safely see around corners when they're at an intersection. Here, what that means is that you have some of the signage pushed back. On the right, you can see when the signs push back, it looks really tiny. And on the left hand side, this is what it would look like at the height that we're proposing. And there it is again.

And then here is really the very similar situation on the northern corner right there. And this, I think we were talking about earlier. This is the entrance on the south excuse me, on the north side on Universal Parkway. This is the entry to one of our major parking lots on the site. And it faces the west side because people are gonna be coming in from the West, and that's how they'll be turning in.

There there is not a face on the backside. It will either be landscaping or it'll just have a solid, but it won't have signage. It won't have words on the other side of it because the entry doesn't doesn't work. You can't access it from the other direction. It only works when you're coming from the West.

So there's the there's the sign, and I just wanna kind of underscore that it's our position that we have met all the standards for the variance, and I just wanna run through those very quickly. Because we have these really wide roadways around the site, we believe that just the topography of the site really creates a situation where it would be unsafe not to have signage that creates this visibility. Secondly, the signs are far enough away from all the surrounding properties. They're not going to create an adverse impact. We also believe that the signs will improve the public welfare by creating safer streets around the site.

And lastly, just wanna show you a little bit of a close-up of the sign. These are really pretty signs. They're particular and unique to Universal's branding and trademark, but they're also unique in that there is a lot of air and light around them. You can see that they're not just a blocky, you know, monolith standing there. They they have color, they're playful, they I think they play on the idea of children's blocks for the age of the children and families that'll be coming here.

So they really are attractive in different signage. Lastly, I thought it would be helpful to show you some other monument signs from a couple of other parks from around the world. Here we've got Epic Universe in Orlando, Florida. These are monument signs. They're larger than what we're proposing, and they're they're different.

But you can see this is really standard with these types of large scale, significant theme parks. On the bottom, we've got Beijing, China, and I like these images because people use these monument signs as backdrops for souvenirs for photography because they really are pretty and they show exactly where they were, what they were visiting. So we are here to answer any questions for you. We wanna share our appreciation for your staff in working with us through this, and we're here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you. Thanks.

All right. It is time for public hearing.

Move to open the public hearing.

Motion by Steve. Second. Second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes six zero. Do

we have anyone here to speak?

Seeing none, move to close public hearing.

Motion by Sean. Second. Second by Tiffany. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes six zero. Public hearing is now closed. Any other comments or any other questions?

Yep. I've got questions for the, applicant. Can you just clarify when we said that these these signs are not going to be lit, so they won't be backlit? Will they be front lit? Can you can you describe what they'll look like at night?

Yeah. There's no proposal right now to light the signs. They're not built to be illuminated. However, there's discussion within the executive team that there may be a need for a spotlight at night at some time if if we're operating after dusk where it may be helpful to have it more visible. But there is no current infrastructure infrastructure out there in the right of way right now to support a light. We'd have to come back in and ask for the staff to review that from an engineering perspective.

Seems like it would need to be uplit at least.

I will say they will have to comply with the light ordinance, and it's gonna have to be pointed on the sun itself and not just be spotlighted.

Yes, sir. And

to kinda just answer that question, one of the biggest concerns that the neighborhood that I live in next door had is when the park is closed. Worried that if these are not lit in any way, like like Warren said, that they're gonna need some kind of lighting because if the park feels dark at night so we don't wanna go too far. We don't want a giant spotlight. We don't want to be too bright, and we don't it to be too dark. So take that under advisement as to something.

Understand. Yeah. Okay. We're very familiar with noise and light ordinances and pollution that have happened to neighbors, so we're we're sensitive to it.

Okay. No. We appreciate that. And then I have a technical question. Can you go back to that entrance, the main entrance? Are you able to go back to that slide?

I think the the one that goes into the parking lot?

Yes. In the parking lot. I'm sorry. The main entrance to the the parking lot. Sure thing.

Here we go. That one right there. Am I misremembering this, or can you also there is obviously the right turn that this shows this car going into the park where they make that really quick u-turn. Can't you also enter from Everwell or can make a left turn into the the parking lot?

My understanding of the way this

There's a meeting opening there. There's a meeting because if you look at the design that's in the lower right hand corner, so you see Everwell coming into the entrance, so the entrance that I believe you're referencing, Steve, where they're coming into the park off of of Universal Parkway, that meeting opening lines with Everwell as well as the entrance into the park. Is that answering your question?

Or I think I think it does. So then that means that some people will be driving straight across Universal Parkway and then merging with this car. So this car we're looking at there, he's gonna make a sharp u-turn, and other traffic will be driving on the backside of that sign and then merging with that car.

Can I recommend There's a red light

right here?

Let's ask Joel. Can you clarify, Joel, the roads?

Okay. So this intersection has a traffic signal. Uh-huh. And yes, it is possible to enter it from three directions. It's just that the primary route that all the way finding and everything in is the going to send people up the tollway, turn right onto Universal, and then turn right into the theme park at this entrance. However, yes, it is possible. If somebody's local, knows their way around, they could come straight in Everwell or come in on the other side on Universal, but it's a traffic signal. So it'll operate like a normal intersection anywhere in the city with a traffic signal that controls when people go from one direction or another and turn onto that road. So it's not gonna be an unusual merge or anything like It's just a normal traffic signal intersection.

So Okay. Thank you for clarifying. No. I'm I'm fine with the traffic pattern there because we approved it way back when. I'm just concerned about clarifying that if if 70% of the people come in the way we want them to, that'll be great. It'll it'll flow like we want. The other 20 or 30%, though, that are coming in from other directions, it it just feels odd to me that that's not a two sided sign like the one at the hotel entrance. And, John, is that something that if they decided they wanted to revise later, they could to make that two sided? If if that's the right call, don't know.

If you I would recommend that you make that part of the motion so it's very clear and not left to staff interpretation leading to confusion.

Okay. So

Any other commissioners, am I am I seeing are you visualizing what I'm seeing as people crossing the intersection and they they don't see the front of the sign?

I'm personally not concerned. I I think they're gonna angle it if need be. I'm pretty sure they're gonna, when they go lay it out there, they're gonna line it to for the most optimum way, personally. I'm I'm guessing that they're gonna be looking into that. It's I think it's gonna be closer to ninety ten. I mean but

I just

I would respectfully request the the option to make it two sided, and we'll go back and look at it from an engineering and safety perspective and make that determination of whether it would be safer to have it double sided or not. But having that option would be helpful.

Is that okay? I've had the option. The option.

Yeah. I just don't wanna pigeonhole that.

Oh, no. I wasn't gonna force him. I just wanted to see if if there's a possibility. And just one more thing. I mean, I know we're focused on the visitors driving into the park, but all the other times where the park's not open or residents just driving by, we we do care about the visual on the road Mhmm. Driving past it too. That's right. Yeah. Okay. My bigger question than that is at the hotel entrance.

I I I agree with what you're saying on the frontage road. Major frontage road, high speed traffic, toll road. It makes perfectly great sense to have a 16 foot really large sign on the frontage road. Same thing at the Frontage Road and Universal Parkway. Those two corner ones there make make great sense to me.

The main entrance, the main entrance to the main parking lot, where 90% of people hopefully are coming through, Makes great sense to me to have really large sign there. In my mind, the hotel is a little bit different than the park, and so my question to the commissioners and to the staff would be, do we have other hotels in Frisco that are on a six lane divided thoroughfare that have signs that are over eight feet tall? And maybe we do.

I just I don't think that's an apples to apples comparison. Saying a standard four story hotel, comparing to this being a it's a package, where now we're extracting the hotel when this is universal. They're they're they're in one, how I look at this.

Yep. I don't see people going just to the hotel. If they're going to the hotel, they're going to the

park. No. I I'm I'm talking about the size of the sign. I'm saying I get the the concept. That doesn't mean that if this if this sign at the hotel was 10 feet tall or 12 feet tall or 14 feet tall and was not quite as tall as the other ones, that's not gonna decrease from the appeal of universal. It's not gonna make people go, oh, you know, I don't feel like this is universal I agree with the the look of the sign, the bigger sign. Eight feet does look small, but 16 feet feels kinda large for that section there. It is also the section closest to existing residents. It Keep that in mind.

It's a valid opinion. For me, you know, it's well, I take my kids to the amusement parks throughout the country, and I wanna if I had to say which one's gonna be the most accessible to take a picture with my family, it's gonna be the hotel entrance. It's cool. And I wanna be by you know, it's kind of cool. The bigger it's the big Buckeys. You know, you wanna be I wanna be by a big sign. I I personally I like the size of it. I

like that point, but physically, I'd I'd this is a two way this is in the median of a two way in and out ingress, egress. And I I like what you're if you're staying at a hotel, you're right. But physically, I don't know if people are gonna go to this one that's in the drive aisles versus I would go to the one that's one-sided that's backing up against the bushes. So that's my my concern is that of the criteria that staff recommended, yes, I agree with almost all of it, except where it says that it doesn't it may not impact adjacent properties. It just so happens that the hotel sign is the one that's closest to adjacent residents, and 16 feet feels too tall for that area.

And that is the feedback I have gotten from other people I've talked to about this. Did you all consider other sizes at all when you guys were first doing your initial planning?

We did. Okay. And the traffic perspective drove us to the the height of the sign just to have that on the right away, just to have that visual acuity spot the sign quickly, just helps people make decisions early.

Okay. And I I hear what you're saying about that, but I I don't know that that's been the case at all the other major hotels, not the four story hotels that John's talking about, but if you were in a major hotel, an eight story, six story hotel somewhere else in Frisco, I don't know that a six lane thoroughfare has necessitated taller signs before. Maybe I'm wrong.

I I think that one of the things that would distinguish us from a typical hotel is the trip generation. You know, peep there's gonna be a lot of people coming to this theme park, not just to visit a hotel. So it's gonna be significantly more traffic.

On the on the hotel side of it? We're hoping not. Be careful what we say there because we're hoping that 90 percent of the traffic is away from the the residents.

I'm just saying in general, servicing the park is not just a hotel. It's gonna have other people.

No. I I agree with that. I'm talking specifically only the the six lane thoroughfare in front of the hotel. I totally agree with what you're saying on the frontage road and at the main entrance.

And I appreciate your comment.

Okay.

Hey, Steve, just to add, and this is something we have in the staff report. So this development is unique into itself, that it's gonna be a regional, national, and probably somewhat of a international draw.

Mhmm.

So that was a factor in our recommendation to y'all to approve this request tonight. I was just checking some other sites like the embassy and whatnot that have your typical monument signed. But as he mentions, this is gonna be generating traffic above your typical hotel, the Omni or Omni Resort, anything like that. But this is a use unique into itself in which people will be traveling, not on an everyday basis, granted the people that are residents, they're gonna be familiar getting in and out, but we will have a lot of people coming from other parts of the country that's not familiar.

I agree. So my question is, if this sign was 12 feet tall, would that somehow make it difficult for for tourists to find the hotel? And based on the the the design of the hotel, the answer is everyone's gonna be able to find the hotel from much further away before they're gonna see the hotel before they see the sign. So I guess I'm still wondering what's the reason for having the 16 feet at the hotel entrance. Let me put it let me put it that way. If they had come in here and said, we're gonna do a 12 foot, 14 foot, or whatever at the hotel, and we're gonna do 16 feet on the main roads, would you guys have a problem? And you would you say, no. No. No. 10 feet's not gonna be enough.

12 feet's not gonna be enough. People aren't gonna be able to find it unless you add a few more feet to it if you if you were to flip it around.

I totally respect your opinion. And and just looking at these two images, you know, the perspective that you get from the eight feet, it it almost disappears into the landscaping. If it was just a few feet higher, 12 feet, I'm not sure if it makes a big difference. However, the 16 feet sign that's being proposed, it doesn't feel uncomfortable. And I know that we have many professionals that work for Universal that are in the art business, and they've chosen this size for particular reason, not to diminish your point about can they see it if it's 12 feet, maybe they could. We feel that the 16 feet is appropriate.

Do you have any other comments? Oh, go ahead.

Yeah. So historically, when businesses open in Frisco, when they're putting the signs up, they're usually four or five days from opening. Do you are you four or five days away from opening?

Sir, we're very close to opening. I know we have a set of drawings that are in for review from engineering department, and we would love nothing more than to build these signs quickly.

So no comment on it opening in the next week?

That was the sneakiest way

I I've ever been questionalized.

Let's try that. Let's try

I that. If

I stepped on the toes of my chairman, I probably wouldn't have a job, and I don't have any biblical references references for for that that right now.

Wouldn't

Can I ask one

one final question since we're gonna give them the option for the double sided sign at the main entrance? Not saying to put this in there, but, John, if they came back in a few weeks and said, you know what? We don't need 16 feet. We're going to do 15 feet, or it's 14 feet, in their actual design and building, we're just saying that we're setting the maximum. They could always come in lower than that.

But

you do have the option to go lower at the hotel if you choose to.

Thank you, sir.

Yeah. Okay.

Go ahead. Okay?

So Alright. An observation. If you look behind you

There you go.

If you look behind you, that wall directly facing us, in general terms is approximately 16 feet tall. This wall would be about the same. That's about 16 feet tall and maybe less than 20 feet wide. That's not that big. That wall, that sign is not that big. So a a different perspective, I drive past this every morning. Panther Creek is my way my way to work, and Universal's my way home. I drive past it every day. I think it's fantastic. Thank you, sir. I don't see a problem with the signage. If not, I'll make a

motion if there's not a I'll make a motion to approve item 23 as recommended by staff with the option to make the other signs double sided if needed or desired.

Motion One on the north side.

The one on the north side. I'll second.

Motion by John, second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 60.

Give yourself four signs.

Congratulations. Thank

you very

much. What was that date again you said that y'all were opening? It's imminent. Alright.

Dang. Good try.

I wasn't as smooth as John was. Item number 23, substantially conforming site plan, Dauphin Industrial Block B Lot 1 S C S P 25 Dash 0034. Owners, DG Frisco Logistics Center, Texas property owner, l p.

Thank you. This item has recently been tabled. Most recently at the March 10 meeting, the applicant is continuing to work with staff and did resubmit plans today. However, they are requesting that this be tabled once again. Therefore, you do have a recommendation this evening to table this item to the 05/26/2026 planning and zoning commission meeting. Happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Jonathan?

Motion to table this until the We have to remove it from the table before we can

No. Put it on the

We do not. Right? Oh. Oh. So sorry. I didn't see it on the agenda. So

Motion to remove from the table.

We have it. Second.

I'm sorry. Motion by Sean, second by Tiffany. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes six zero. Now, do we have another motion?

I have 01/23. May 26.

Excellent. You wanna say that one more time Warren, do we need

move to table item 23 until the May 26 PNZ meeting.

Excellent. Motion by Warren. Second. Second by Tiffany. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 60. This item is tabled to May 26. Item number 24, results of the 04/07/2026 city council meeting.

Okay. So council approved the ordinance for the self store storage facility there at Lebanon and Parkwood. Planning and zoning commission unanimously recommended approval of that. Then we had the firefly ordinance. Council approved that, and that was approved five to zero by PNC. And then the other one dealing with the rezoning up at PGA Parkway and Court Road, that item was approved for two by PNC. Council unanimously approved that request. And that was a piece of property when which there was an annexation agreement on. So

Love that one.

I imagine you do.

Right by the house. Alright. Item number 25, schedule future discussion items. I know we have the work session, but what else?

Besides the work session, the city's gonna be updating their impact fees, and so I think it'd be at the first meeting in May. It'd be a impact fee one zero one class on it. And so the state does require the cities to, if they have impact fees, to routinely review those and update those. And so, PNC will be used for that. Engineering has selected a property owner from the ETJ as required since we do apply our impact fees to the ETJ. So

Alright. Well

And then I wanna mention, I don't know how this schedule worked out, but it did. So at the next meeting, several of us, so we have John, Sean, and Steve, will be joining several of staff going to Detroit for the National APA Conference. We get back on the twenty eighth. I thought the flight was coming in earlier. It's not.

So we're gonna have a driver staff member pick us up right now. So we're gonna start the PNC meeting next time at 07:30. So I apologize for that. We're trying to work out ways, and there was no way to move that meeting because I would have had to do it two weeks ago, asked you all to do that.

So how do we get our vehicles back from the airport then?

Well, I'm gonna recommend that you Uber there to the airport.

You can come to my house and Uber with me.

Okay. For those of us who are here, do y'all come back with gifts?

Us. At APA Only for a long Yeah.

We'll pick up some APA swag there for you.

That's exciting.

Junker job

a r p.

Our drive our driver will get a gift.

I mean,

you ask

him for a favor, so you

She doesn't wanna drive. Yeah. So we got somebody else.

Oh, she

said she was driving.

Gilbert's wait raising his hand.

Well, we'll talk about that.

Alright. Okay. Well to adjourn. We have, yeah, one favorite motion of Warren's. Motion by Warren, second by Sean. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 08:30. We are adjourned.

Oh, okay.

So up to