Jan 12, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2025-01-12 6:00 PM

AND WHEN WE GET TO THAT AGENDA MOMENTARILY, YOU'LL STEP AWAY FROM THE DIOCESE, PLEASE.

UM, MOVING FORWARD TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[4. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed below within the consent agenda are considered routine by the Planning and Zoning Commission and may be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items unless there is a Commission member or citizen request, in which event the item may be moved to the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence.]

ANY QUESTIONS ON CONSENT AGENDA OR A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE? YES.

AND A SECOND MOTION TO APPROVE BY BOB AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BYRD.

LET'S PROVE UNANIMOUSLY

[5.A. 2025-651 CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR BUC-EE’S #41 FINAL PLAT GENERALLY LOCATED AT 33375 INTERSTATE 10 W.]

MOVING FORWARD TO REGULAR AGENDA ITEM A FIVE A CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR BUCKY'S NUMBER 41 FINAL PLAT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 33 3 75 INTERSTATE 10 WEST.

I'LL MAKE NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER KELLER HAS STEPPED AWAY FROM THE DIOCESE.

AND MS. LINDER, THANK YOU.

10, UM, TO BUCKY'S WAY, WHICH IS A PRIMARY COLLECTOR.

UH, MY NAME IS FRANCESCA LINDER AND I'M WITH THE CITY OF BERNIE'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

HERE WE HAVE A LOCATION MAP OF THIS SITE.

IT IS FOR BUCKY'S NUMBER 41, FINAL PLAT.

IT'S LOCATED AT 3 3 3 7 5 INTERSTATE 10, WHICH IS, UH, A LONG INTERSTATE 10 AT SOUTH MAIN STREET.

THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY BUCKY'S, LTD, AND THE ENGINEER, JONATHAN, IS HERE, UM, EXCUSE ME, JONATHAN MC, UH, NARA FROM COLLIER'S ENGINEERING AND DESIGN IS THE APPLICANT, AND HE IS HERE THIS EVENING.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE SITE WAS APPROVED ON OCTOBER 5TH, 2020, AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 9TH, 2020, EXCUSE ME, 2016.

UM, THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZED CITY MANAGEMENT TO NEGOTIATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

UM, THAT WAS, THAT AUTHORITY WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2025.

UM, AND THIS WAS TO STRENGTHEN DESIGN STANDARDS, INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITMENTS, AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

HERE'S THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, AUTO ORIENTED COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT ALONG INTERSTATE 10.

HERE IS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS MAP.

THERE IS A DPZ ONE AND A DPZ TWO ON THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS A LOCAL FLOOD PLAN.

THIS IS LOCATED HERE ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND IS WITHIN AN OPEN SPACE.

HERE IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THIS WAS APPROVED, UH, UNANIMOUSLY AND WITHOUT CONDITIONS BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 5TH, 2020.

AND HERE IS THE PROPOSED FINAL PLAT.

IT CONTAINS THREE NON-RESIDENTIAL LOTS, OVER 27.55 ACRES.

UH, IT REPRESENTS AN AVERAGE DENSITY OF 9.18 ACRES.

THE LARGEST LOT, WHICH IS LOT ONE IS 17 AND A HALF ACRES.

LOT TWO OVER HERE IN THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER IS JUST OVER HALF AN ACRE.

AND LOT THREE ON THIS SIDE IS 9.14 ACRES OF DEDICATION TO THE CITY OF BURNIE, UH, FOR OPEN SPACE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IT DOES HAVE THE DPZ ONE AND TWO AND THE FLOOD PLAN.

PRIMARY ACCESS FOR THE SITE WILL BE FROM INTERSTATE

[00:05:01]

THE TIA FOR THE SITE WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF BURN EARLIER THIS MONTH.

UM, THE CITY HAS ALSO APPROVED THEIR LOCS AND WILL PROVIDE SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SERVICE TO THIS PROPERTY.

BANDERA ELECTRIC WILL PROVIDE ELECTRICITY.

THERE ARE TWO EXISTING WELLS ON THE SITE.

UM, BOTH HAVE BEEN PLUGGED, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH COW CREEK GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RULES.

UH, STAFF FINDS THAT THIS PLAT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE PRELIMINARY, PRELIMINARY PLAT, AND APPLICABLE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, AND ASK THAT IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL, UM, STAFF, UH, RECOMMENDS INCLUSION OF THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT THE RECORDED PLAT SHALL SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM TO THE FINAL PLAT DATE STAMPED JANUARY 8TH, 2026, AND THAT THE FINAL PLAT SHALL NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL ALL CLERICAL CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN REVISED AS DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.

HERE ARE SOME MOTIONS PROVIDED TO ASSIST THE COMMISSION IN THEIR DECISION.

AND TO MY FAULT, I DID NOT OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT.

MR. CRANE, I BELIEVE YOU MAY HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT SHEET.

DOES WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE'S ONE.

LOOKS LIKE, UH, JOHN MCNAMARA HAD SIGNED UP FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT IN CASE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

LETTER TO THE, UH, TO THE PNC.

AND, UH, DANA MATHIS, THANK YOU.

PLEASE COME FORWARD.

UH, DANA MATHIS, 1 6 4 CREEK SPRINGS.

GOOD EVENING AND HAPPY NEW YEAR.

THANKS FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET FOR TONIGHT.

ON PAGE 10, THE DOCUMENT SAYS THAT THE SUBMISSION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDED AGREEMENT.

IN NOVEMBER IN A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, MAYOR RICHIE, CITY MANAGER THATCHER AND COUNCILMAN MACALUSO SAID THAT THE AMENDED AGREEMENT WAS NOT YET CONCLUDED, AND THAT SOME POINTS WERE STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION.

SINCE THEN, NO FINAL, NO FINALIZED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED OR PUBLISHED.

SO HOW CAN WE TRULY KNOW IF THIS PLAT APPROVAL REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEW AGREEMENT? IN THAT SAME MEETING, CITIZENS QUESTIONED WHETHER IT WAS BEST FOR THE CITY TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE NINE ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA.

THAT'S THE LOT THREE THAT WAS JUST DESCRIBED, AND IT'S ON, THIS IS NOTED ON PAGE 10 OF THE AGENDA PACKET.

AND A KEY QUESTION IS, WHAT DOES THE WORD DEDICATE MEAN? THOSE SAME OFFICIALS SAID THAT THEY WOULD HAVE NO FURTHER, THEY WOULD HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH BUCKY'S REGARDING THIS LAND AND ITS OWNERSHIP.

TO DATE, NOTHING HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED AS TO ITS FINAL DISPOSITION.

IF THIS IS TO BE CITY PROPERTY, WOULD IT NOT HAVE TO BE REZONED? THIS ISSUE'S NOT NOTED IN THE DOCUMENT FOR REVIEW TONIGHT AND REMAINS UNRESOLVED.

THIRDLY, ON PAGE 11 OF THE PACKET, WE LEARN THAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROJECT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY.

IN A MEETING WITH CITIZENS AND TDOT ON DECEMBER 30, CITY ENGINEER, CAROL SAID THAT BUCKYS HAD JUST SUBMITTED A NEW VERSION OF THE STUDY AND THAT HE WOULD SHARE THIS INFORMATION.

TO DATE THAT TIA DOCUMENT HAS NOT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

SO AS THIS COMMISSION'S PREVIOUSLY POINTED OUT, THE EXECUTION OF THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN NON-TRANSPARENT AND SOMETIMES SLOPPY.

ARE WE HERE AGAIN? LET'S MAKE SURE EVERY I IS DOTTED AND EVERY T'S CROSSED.

PLEASE DON'T APPROVE THIS PLAT UNTIL WE HAVE THE FINALIZED AMENDMENT CLARITY REGARDING THE OWNERSHIP AND ZONING OF THE NINE ACRES AND THE FINAL VERSION OF THE TIA.

IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS PROJECT, LET'S DO IT WELL, AND LET'S DO IT RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU, MR. MATHIS.

NEXT SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IS MARK HAWKINS.

GOOD EVENING.

UH, MY NAME IS MARK HAWKINS, UH, FIVE 30 OAK PARK DRIVE, UH, COTTAGE NUMBER 100.

I, UH, AM HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT SIENNA COURT.

UH, IN, IN THE, UH,

[00:10:01]

THE, THEY SAID THAT WE HAVE KEPT THE, THAT THEY HAVE KEPT THE, THE COTTAGES NOTIFIED.

I DON'T, OR INFORMED, I DON'T FEEL THAT WE ARE, HAVE BEEN FULLY INFORMED.

MY, MY, UH, MY WIFE IS, IS, UH, PRESIDENT OF THE HOA AND NOBODY HAS SPOKEN TO US.

WE DO KNOW THAT, UH, THEY, THEY HAVE SPOKEN TO A, A FEW OF OUR, UH, OWNERS, BUT BEING FULLY INFORMED IS NOT HOW I FEEL.

THE, UH, THE SECOND THING THAT I, THAT I FEEL THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT IS, UH, THE QUESTION THAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY DENIED BY THE PNC BECAUSE OF, UH, THE, WELL, I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT WORDING, BUT, UH, IT WAS DENIED.

AND, AND WE JUST, UH, I FEEL BEFORE I CAN SUPPORT IT, THAT THEY, THEY NEED TO, UH, LET ME KNOW HOW MR. LUCIANI IS INVOLVED AS INVESTOR OR, UH, OR ANY WAY INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.

IF, IF HE IS, UH, IS INVOLVED EITHER AS A, A INDIVIDUAL, HIS WIFE, PAM AS AN INDIVIDUAL OR THEIR, THEIR SON WHO, WHO IS AN ATTORNEY, NOT THEIR SON, BUT I THINK IT'S, HE IS HER, HER SON, UH, THAT HE IS, IS NOT AN INVESTOR IN THIS OR ANY WAY, UH, IN, IN THE, HAS INPUT IN THE, UH, IN THE PROJECT.

UH, AND I JUST APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO, UH, TO LET ME SPEAK AND, AND HAVE CONSIDER THESE THINGS.

THANK YOU, MR. HAWKINS.

AND AS SOON AS WE WORK THROUGH THIS INITIAL AGENDA ITEM WITH BUCKY'S, WE'LL BE GETTING TO SEE IN A COURT AS WELL.

THOSE ARE ALL OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP, BUT I DO WANT TO GIVE ANYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY THAT DID NOT SIGN UP OR THAT MAY HAVE COME IN LATE, UH, TO, TO SPEAK AS WELL.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON EITHER AGENDA ITEM OR, OR ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY, THANK YOU.

MOVING BACK TO AGENDA ITEM FIVE A, UM, I WILL OPEN IT UP TO COMMISSION DISCUSSION.

COMMISSIONER FRYER, I HAVE, I GUESS AN ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTION AND I DON'T WANNA JUMP THE GUN.

UM, BUT I NOTICED IN THE SIENNA COURT PLAT THAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT NEXT THAT THERE WERE STAMPS OF APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL, ENGINEERING, MOBILITY DEVELOPMENT, ENGINEERING PLANNING UTILITIES, BUT THOSE SAME STAMPS ARE NOT ON THE BUCKY'S PLAT.

CAN, IS, IS THERE A PROCEDURAL DIFFERENCE? UH, GREAT QUESTION.

UH, SO THROUGH OUR REVIEW REVIEW PROCESS, UM, WHENEVER WE GET A PLAT IN, WE SEND IT OUT TO ALL THE REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS AND THEY STAMP IT WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE REVISED AND RESUBMIT OR IF IT'S APPROVED OR NO OBJECTION.

UM, ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, UM, FOR, UM, THE BUCKYS PLAT, THEY, UM, RESUBMITTED A CLEAN COPY BASICALLY ON THURSDAY, WHICH WAS THE DAY IT WAS POSTED.

SO THERE WERE VERY MINIMAL COMMENTS BEFORE THAT I WOULD QUALIFY THEM AS CLERICAL.

UM, AND THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THE STIPULATION HERE.

THAT BEING SAID, I DID REVIEW IT TO ENSURE THAT ALL OF THE COMMENTS WERE ADDRESSED.

SO WAS, SO THERE, IT RECEIVED FULL REVIEW FROM ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS MULTIPLE TIMES.

IT WAS JUST THE MOST RECENT SUBMITTAL WE WANTED TO PRESENT YOU WITH AN UPDATED CLEAN COPY.

SO THOSE STAMPS WOULD'VE BEEN ON THE PRIOR COPIES.

[00:15:06]

CAN I, UM, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, CAN WE GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED TONIGHT ABOUT THE NINE ACRES? UM, AND THEN ALSO ON THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS, UH, DECEMBER 30TH, OR IT WAS APPROVED IN JANUARY, SO IT WAS NOT APPROVED AS OF DECEMBER 30TH.

IT, IT WAS VERY RECENTLY APPROVED.

UM, OUR, UH, ENGINEERING DIRECTOR IS HERE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TIA, HE'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THEM.

UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR PREVIOUS QUESTION? UM, I THINK THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT THE NINE A NINE ACRES THAT'S GONNA BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY.

AND, UM, I THINK THE QUESTION WAS WILL THAT NINE ACRES BEZO, REZONED, OR, UH, SO HERE IS THE, THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.

UM, IT IS, LIKE I MENTIONED IN THE DPC ONE AND DPC TWO AND THE FLOODPLAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, UM, APPROVED BY COUNCIL DOES REQUIRE, UH, A MINIMUM OF A FIVE ACRE, UH, DEDICATION FOR OPEN SPACE.

UH, SO THIS GOES, UH, A LITTLE BEYOND THAT.

UM, IT WILL NOT NEED TO BE REZONED.

UM, ALL PROPERTY, ALL CITY OWNED PROPERTY, UM, IS ALLOWED TO BE CITY OWNED.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICT.

THAT'S WHAT I HAD THOUGHT.

OF COURSE.

WE'LL ALSO ADD THAT PARKS AND OPEN SPACES PERMITTED USE IN THE C3 DISTRICT.

AND THEN REGARDING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, IS THERE ANY INFORMATION DIRECTOR, CAROL OR ABIGAIL THAT YOU ALL WOULD WANNA PROVIDE TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT AROSE? SURE.

EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

UH, YES.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE BUCKY'S DESIGN TEAM AND THEIR TRAFFIC ENGINEER.

AND ON LAST WEDNESDAY, END OF THE DAY, WEDNESDAY, WE APPROVED THE TRAFFIC STUDY.

UM, SO WE HAD SEVERAL BACK AND FORTHS, UH, IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

UM, BUT THEY FINALLY PROVIDED A PRODUCT THAT MET ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS AND WE, WE APPROVED IT.

CAN YOU, I'M SORRY.

CAN YOU SUMMARIZE A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS WERE AND WHAT Y'ALL APPROVED? SO THE BIGGEST THING, THE LAST COUPLE ROUNDS OF COMMENTS HAD TO DO WITH THE, THERE'S A COMPUTER MODEL THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS BASED ON THAT COMPARES THE EXISTING CONDITION TRAFFIC TO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS TRAFFIC.

AND WE SAW SOME IRREGULARITIES BETWEEN THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE WAY THEY WERE SHOWING THE DRIVEWAYS AND TURN LANES ON THE SITE PLANS THAT WE WERE RECEIVING, AND THE WAY THEY WERE SHOWN IN THE COMPUTER MODEL ITSELF AS WELL WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS.

SO THE EXISTING TURN LANES ARE THERE TODAY, YOU DRIVE THROUGH, BUT THERE'S ALSO, UH, IF YOU'RE SOUTHBOUND MAIN STREET, THERE'S A MARKED OUT AREA TODAY THAT THEY'RE WITH.

THIS BUCKYS PROJECT WILL BE ADDING A NEW LEFT TURN LANE.

THEY'LL BE ADDING A LANE THAT GOES ACROSS THE BRIDGE TODAY.

IT'S KIND OF A MARKED OUT AREA.

UM, SO WHEN THEY'RE PUTTING FROM THE EXISTING CONDITION MODEL TO THE PROPOSED CONDITION MODEL WHERE THAT TURN LANE STARTS ON THE CITY SIDE, CITY OF BERNIE SIDE OF THE INTERCHANGE, THE WAY THE DISTANCE AND THE WAY THAT THE INTERSECTION EXISTS WAS DIFFERENT IN THE MODEL AND IT WAS FAVORING, UM, THE BUCKYS AS OPPOSED TO IT WAS KIND OF DECREASING.

SO WE JUST REALLY WANTED THE MODEL TO REALLY MATCH WHAT WAS ACTUALLY GONNA GET BUILT OUT THERE IN THE FIELD.

AND SO WE WORKED BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CONSULTANT AND GOT THAT TO MATCH.

UM, BUT THROUGHOUT THE DESIGN PROCESS, ONE OF THE LAST TIMES WE TALKED ABOUT THE TIA WITH YOU AS WELL, UM, THE ORIGINAL PROJECT, IF YOU MIGHT RECALL, HAD ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AREAS IN THERE.

AND SO MANY OF THE VERSIONS OF THE TIA WE REVIEWED HAD ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC.

UM, BUT WHEN, THAT WAS WHEN BUCKY'S DECIDED THAT THOSE ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL LOTS WERE NO LONGER IN THERE, THOSE HAD TO GET REMOVED OUT OF THE TRAFFIC MODEL.

AND SO THAT AFFECTED MANY OF THE REVIEWS THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY DONE LOOKING AT A MODEL THAT HAD A LESS TRAFFIC.

AND, UH, IT WAS JUST GETTING THAT OUT TO EVERYONE.

MR. CARLL, QUICK QUESTION.

IS IT STANDARD PRACTICE TO RELEASE THE TRAFFIC STUDY TO THE PUBLIC FOR THEIR REVIEW AT ANY POINT IN THIS PROCESS, PARTICULARLY BEFORE FINAL PLAT APPROVAL? HAVE WE DONE THAT IN OTHER PROJECTS? SO I KNOW WE'VE RECEIVED MANY PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS AND WE'VE SENT IT OUT MANY TIMES.

UH, I KNOW IN TIMES PAST WE'VE ONLY SENT OUT APPROVED DOCUMENTS.

UH, THIS ONE WE ACTUALLY SENT OUT THE UNAPPROVED DOCUMENTS AS WELL.

UM, IT JUST DEPENDS ON, UH, HOW IT GOT SENT OUT IN THE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST.

BUT YEAH, WE'VE SENT IT OUT MANY TIMES, BUT AGAIN, IT JUST GOT APPROVED AT THE END OF LAST WEEK

[00:20:01]

THAT JUST HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

SO IT, UM, IT'S DISSEMINATED BY, UM, BY REQUEST, CORRECT? NOT, IT'S NOT STANDARD PRACTICE TO POST IT AND CORRECT.

I DON'T, I DON'T SEND INFORMATION OUT.

WE RECEIVE, WE HAVE A PUBLIC INFORMATION PORTAL THAT PEOPLE SUBMIT THEIR STUFF IN, AND THEN WE SEND IT OUT TO MEET STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS.

HAS THERE BEEN ONE FOR THIS FINAL TRAFFIC STUDY, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR CARROLL? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MR. KATES? NOTHING.

IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR.

YOU'VE MADE A MOTION.

BOB GATES HAS MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND OR ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION? I WAS, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK IF WE THINK IT, UM, MIGHT BE PRUDENT TO ALLOW FOR SOME TIME FOR, UM, THE PUBLIC TO REQUEST THAT TRAFFIC STUDY.

WELL, I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT AS, AS WE THOUGHT, AS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST.

YEAH, I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE 30 DAYS, THE BENEFICIAL CONSIDERATION TO THE PUBLIC TO ALLOW FOR THERE TO EITHER BE A MORE IN-DEPTH PRESENTATION AROUND THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND STUDY SO THAT THERE IS TRANSPARENCY AND, AND, UH, ALLOW US ALL TO DIGEST IT, PARTICULARLY SINCE THERE HASN'T BEEN A REQUEST, UH, FOR ANYBODY TO SEE WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED.

UM, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.

MR. KATES, UH, FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOTTEN OUT OF OUR LANE SEVERAL TIMES ON BUCKY'S AND I UNDERSTAND WHY, BUT I THINK WE'RE DOING IT AGAIN.

UH, CITY COUNCIL WOULD DEAL WITH THE, WITH THE TIA, UH, WE DON'T APPROVE IT.

WE DON'T AMEND IT.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH APPROVING THE FINAL PLAN.

AND I THINK THE APPEALS FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, THE APPEALS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NEED TO GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL NOT TO PLAN AND HIS ZONING BECAUSE OF CITY COUNCIL AS THE AUTHORITY OVER THOSE ITEMS. AND WE DO NOT, I JUST DON'T WANT SEE US GETTING OUT OF OUR LANE AGAIN.

THAT'S FAIR.

COULD I MAKE A COMMENT? YES, SIR.

MR. MCCAMEY, UH, STATE LAW REQUIRES AFTER THE COMPLETED APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT IS PRESENTED FOR YOUR REVIEW, YOU HAVE A 30 DAY STATE LAW LIMITATION ON WHEN YOU HAVE TO ACT.

AND UNDER THE LAW ACTION MEANS APPROVING, DENYING, OR APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS.

SO IF YOU WANT TO DELAY CONSIDERATION FOR THAT FINAL APPROVAL, YOU STILL HAVE TO DO IT WITHIN THAT 30 DAY PERIOD.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS COMPLETE, BUT IT WOULD DEFINITELY REQUIRE SPECIAL MEETING.

THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS RECEIVED JANUARY 8TH BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THIS, THIS BODY TO GO AHEAD AND DO THEIR JOB TONIGHT AND, AND, UH, FINISH THIS.

SO THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT WE HAVE UNTIL IT'S 30 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THEN, AND OUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED, YOU MAY HAVE FOR MONDAY THE 2ND OF FEBRUARY.

SO THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TIME TO ALLOW FOR FURTHER REVIEW IF THAT'S THE DECISION THE COMMISSION MAKES.

YOU JUST HAVE TO ACT BY THAT 30 DAY DEADLINE.

BLESS YOU.

I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE THAT WE DO WHAT OUR TASK ARE AND, AND, UH, LET CITY COUNCIL DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR FUNCTION.

UM, I, I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE TIRED OF ME SAYING KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA SPEND 30 MINUTES OR AN HOUR ON THIS TONIGHT JUST TO SPEND 30 MINUTES OR AN HOUR ON IT AGAIN NEXT WEEK OR NEXT MONTH, AND STILL NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORITY OVER THE TIA AND THE WHATEVER THE TIA IS WON'T HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHAT OUR VOTE IS.

AND, UM, SO I JUST, UH, I I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THE PUBLIC AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT JUST TO KEEP KICKING THIS DOWN THE ROAD JUST SO WE FEEL BETTER ABOUT IT.

SO I, I WOULD ENCOURAGE, UH,

[00:25:01]

I, I, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF IT.

COMMISSIONER KATES CITY COUNCIL WILL NOT SEE THIS, UH, OR APPROVE THIS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAT.

SO WHEN IT IS APPROVED, OR IF IT IS APPROVED, THIS DOESN'T GO BEFORE, UH, CITY COUNCIL.

UM, I AGREE, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF THE TIA IS RELEASED AND, AND, UH, WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE SAYING, I DON'T LIKE THE TIA, THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT.

WELL, HOW'S THAT GONNA AFFECT OUR NEXT VOTE ? AND, AND THAT I THINK THAT'S A FAIR, THAT'S A FAIR POINT AS WELL.

DIRECTOR CRANE, DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY ADVICE ON THE TIA HOW IT IS AFFILIATED OR ASSOCIATED? SO, TIA, ALONG WITH ALL OUR PUBLIC INFRAS, UH, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS OR INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY.

UH, THEY'RE NOT REVIEWED, UH, BY CITY COUNCIL, BY THIS BODY OR ANY OTHER BODY THAT WE HAVE.

IT'S A, UH, IT'S A, UH, PURELY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION.

I WILL NOTE THAT WE DO HAVE OUR OWN 15 DAY TIMELINE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, UH, REESE MIDDLES, WHICH THIS ONE IS CLASSIFIED, UH, IN OUR UDC, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE 30 BISHOP.

WHAT, WHAT HAVE WE, NATHAN, WHAT HAVE WE PROMISED THE CITIZENS OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS THAT HAVE IN THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS WHERE WE'VE MADE PROMISES THAT WE WOULD PROVIDE SOME, SOME INFORMATION? SO WE KNOW THE TRAFFIC STUDY HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S MISSING? NOT THAT I'M, NOT, THAT I'M AWARE OF, BUT I'M NOT PRIVY TO ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS EITHER.

SO, BUT I'LL, I'LL LET JEFF JUMP IN.

HE KNOWS MORE.

SO A COUPLE THINGS TOO.

SO FIRST OFF, WE, THE CITY STAFF REVIEWS THE TIA, WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH CITY'S TRAFFIC ORDINANCE SINCE WE WROTE 'EM BACK IN 2007.

THEY REVIEW THE TIA AND THEY APPROVE THE TIA AS WELL AS TDOT HAS APPROVED THE TIA.

UM, WE'VE, I THINK WE'RE ON ROUND SIX OR SEVEN OF THIS TIA AND WE'VE GIVEN MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF THE PREVIOUS VERSIONS OUT, UM, TO ANYONE THAT EVER ASKED FOR IT.

UM, THIS LAST ROUND WAS REALLY JUST SOME MINOR CLARIFICATIONS TO THE MODEL AS WELL AS A COUPLE OF THE TABLES IN THERE.

UM, SO IT'S NOTHING MAJOR, SO IT DIDN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE OUTCOMES.

IT, IT REALLY DIDN'T CHANGE MANY OF THE OUTCOMES.

UM, SO I'M JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION ON THE TIA ITSELF.

I THINK IF I, IF I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE MAIN CONCERN IS, THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ON THE SIXTH WITH BUCKY'S ON THE AGENDA THAT WAS LAST TUESDAY.

THE TIA WAS APPROVED BY CITY STAFF ON THE SEVENTH, AND THEN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAT WAS RECEIVED FROM BUCKY'S ON THE EIGHTH, WHICH IS WHEN THE ADDITIONAL DETAILS, UM, OF THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAT WERE, WERE POSTED AS WELL.

SO IT WAS, IT WAS PRESUMPTIVELY PRES, LIKE BUCKY'S WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE SIXTH BEFORE THE TIA AND BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAT WERE APPROVED OR EVEN DELIVERED AT, AT THAT TIME.

WE KNEW THE, WE KNEW THE STATUS OF THE TIA AND WE KNEW THE STATUS OF THE PLAT ITSELF.

SO, YEAH.

THE CITY COUNCIL HAD ANNOUNCED THE NEW REVISED AGREEMENT.

UM, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THERE'S MAYBE A SENSE OF, HEY, ALL OF THIS CAME TOGETHER JUST IN TIME FOR THIS MEETING TODAY.

UM, AND THERE'S A SENSE FOR SOME ADDITIONAL TIME TO LOOK AT THE DETAILS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED AS RECENT AS THIS WEEK.

UM, AND THAT'S WHERE THE SENTIMENT'S COMING FROM OF, HEY, IS THERE MORE TIME TO REQUEST A TIA AND LOOK AT THIS INFORMATION LONGER FROM THE PUBLIC? IS THAT FAIR? I, I'LL STAY WITH MY STATEMENT THAT WHAT DIFFERENCE WILL IT MAKE IN 30 DAYS WHEN WE MEET ON THIS? AGAIN, WE CAN'T CONSIDER EITHER OF THOSE IN OUR DECISION.

MR. MATHIS AND MS. MS. PATTON, THE PUBLIC COMMENT HAS, HAS BEEN CLOSED OR MADE.

IS IT, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW FOR THERE TO BE SOME MORE PUBLIC COMMENT, MR. MCCAMEY? WELL, THAT'S UP TO YOU, MR. OKAY.

THAT'S UP TO YOU.

MR. MR. MATHIS, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD? YES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR MAKING THIS SPECIAL PROVISION.

I, I WANTED TO CLARIFY MAYBE WHAT THE QUESTIONS WERE.

I WAS TRYING TO RAISE WHEN OUR COMMUNITY GROUP SAT WITH THE MAYOR, UM, THE CITY MANAGER AND OUR COUNCILMAN, AND THEY TOLD US THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS AFTER

[00:30:01]

THEY TOLD US THAT THIS WASN'T A DONE DEAL, AND THEY WERE STILL WORKING ON SOME OF THE DETAILS, AND THIS NINE ACRE PLOT ISSUE CAME UP.

AND WE SAID, WHO'S GONNA OWN THAT? AND THEY SAID, WELL, THE CITY'S GONNA OWN THAT.

AND SO THE DISCUSSION WAS, WELL, WHAT'S THE BENEFITS AND DOWNSIDE OF THAT? AND THEY SAID, WELL, WE'LL GO BACK TO BUCKY'S AND TALK ABOUT WHAT, WHO'S GONNA OWN THAT? BUT THAT'S NOT RESOLVED AT THIS POINT, IS WHAT THEY TOLD US.

AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NOTHING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED OR DECIDED SINCE THEN.

AND IN THE, IN THE DOCUMENT, IT TALK, IT USES THE WORD DEDICATE FOR THAT LOT THREE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

AND SO, I MAY BE IGNORANT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT DEDICATE MEANS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS IN TERMS OF OWNERSHIP AND ZONING.

THAT WAS THE, THAT WAS KIND OF THE ISSUE I WAS RAISING.

IS IT RESOLVED THAT WE KNOW WHO'S GONNA OWN THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY AND, AND HOW IS IT TO BE ZONED? THEREFORE, UH, I, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY INFORMATION THAT SAYS THAT'S DETERMINED.

THAT WAS THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO RAISE.

AND AS FAR AS THE TAIA, I UNDERSTAND IT SETTLED, THE CITY'S APPROVED IT, I JUST, YOU KNOW, I TALKED TO JEFF AND WE HADN'T, HE SAID HE WAS GONNA PROVIDE A COPY, AND WE HADN'T GOTTEN THAT YET.

AND I JUST THOUGHT FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSPARENCY, THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY TO HAVE A COPY.

MR. MCNAMARA, UM, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE DIDN'T, THE FINAL PLAT, WE RESUBMITTED THAT IN NOVEMBER.

WE'VE JUST BEEN WAITING FOR THE OTHER ITEMS TO GET APPROVED TO COME TOGETHER, AS YOU NOTED.

SO IT'S, IT WASN'T AS JUST, WE WE'RE LIKE, LET'S RUSH AND GET IT IN.

WE'VE BEEN WAITING ON THE OTHER THINGS TO COME INTO LINE AS WELL, SO THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

FRANK, CAN WE CLARIFY WHO'S, UH, WELL, I'LL JUST DO IT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE EXHIBIT FOUR, YOU ON THE SCREEN ON THAT, UH, LOT THREE BLOCK ONE, THAT'S THE NINE ACRES.

IT SAYS, OPEN SPACE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF BURN, 9.14 ACRES.

SO THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION ON OWNERSHIP AND WHO IT'S DEDICATED TO.

AS I MENTIONED IN THE C3 DISTRICT, UH, PARKS ARE PERMITTED USE, SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A ZONING CHANGE FOR THAT USE.

SO FOR CLARIFICATION, DEDICATED MEANS OWNERSHIP.

YEP.

AND MAINTENANCE.

SO THE CITY'S RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING IT AS WELL, THE TERM DEDICATED MEANS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC.

SO THE CITY ALSO CANNOT SELL THE LAND WITHOUT PUBLIC APPROVAL.

SO IT IS A TERM OF ART IN MUNICIPAL PRACTICE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SO JUST, JUST ONE THING I WANTED TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO IN OUR UDC, IT ACTUALLY HAS THE CRITERIA FOR WHICH A FINAL PLOT IS REVIEWED AND APPROVED.

UH, AND I'LL JUST GO OVER THOSE QUICKLY WITH YOU.

UH, ONE IS, DOES IT COMPLY WITH APPROVED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN? IN THIS CASE, WHAT THAT MEANS IS A LOT OF PROJECTS DO HAVE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVES PRIOR TO.

SO THEY WANNA MAKE SURE IT COMPLIES WITH THAT.

UH, DOES IT CONFORM TO ALL RELEVANT REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, WHICH WE BELIEVE THIS REQUEST DOES, UH, DOES, DOES THE PLAQUE CREATE A VIOLATION OF ANY APPLICABLE REGULATIONS? WE DON'T BELIEVE IT DOES.

UH, THE VEHICLE, VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM IS CONSISTENT WITH ADOPTED TRANSPORTATION PLANS AND THOROUGHFARE PLANS AND STREET LAYOUTS.

AND IT IS, UM, UH, THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WILL NOT HAVE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS ON SAFETY OR EXERCISE OF PERMITTED USES ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

UH, WE BELIEVE IT COMPLIES WITH THAT JUST THE WAY ZONING WORKS.

UH, AND THE SUBDIVISION NAME, UH, IS CONSISTENT ALONG WITH THE BLOCK NUMBERS, UH, AND ANY MITIGATION AS IT RELATES TO FLOODPLAIN.

THAT'S, THAT'S THE CRITERIA THAT IS, THAT THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT IN APPROVING AND STAFF LOOKS AT IN APPROVING A PLAT.

SO I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO TRAFFIC, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY CONCERN, IT SOUNDS LIKE HERE, THAT WOULD FALL UNDER NUMBER FIVE OF SAFETY OF USES.

MM-HMM.

WE'LL GET THE APPROVED TRAFFIC STUDIES.

YEAH.

ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION?

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY I COMMISSIONER GATES.

YEAH, I ASKED AND ANSWERED I SECOND COMMISSIONER BY SECONDS.

[00:35:01]

I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.

WE'RE MOVING FORWARD TO AGENDA BOTTOM FIVE B.

DID I MISS IN ALL OF THIS SOMEWHERE? IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT SIGNED? HAVE WE CROSSED THAT? SO, AS MENTIONED, UH, EVEN ON OUR WEBSITE, YOU LOOK AT THE COUNCIL DID APPROVE, UH, THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY STAFF TO FINALIZE THE, UH, AGREEMENT, WHICH WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING.

NOW, WE HAVE A COUPLE EXHIBITS, UH, JUST TO BE REVISED FOR SOME TECHNICAL INFORMATION, UH, UH, AND SO FORTH.

UH, BUT THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR LATER THIS MONTH, UH, FOR, FOR CITY COUNCIL.

BUT NONE OF THE MEAT AND POTATOES HAS CHANGED.

NOTHING'S CHANGED.

THERE'S NO NEW ITEMS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

WHEN I CONSIDER THIS ITEM, I CERTAINLY HAVE A SENTIMENT OF FEELING THE NEED FOR PAUSE TO ALLOW FOR THERE TO BE REVIEW OF INFORMATION THAT CUTTING BACK TRAFFIC WHENEVER I THINK ABOUT DEVELOPMENT PLAT, SHOULD WE TABLE THIS ITEM FOR 30 DAYS? OR IF THERE WAS A MOTION TO TABLE IT THIS ITEM FOR 30 DAYS, AND THE PUBLIC DIDN'T LIKE WHAT WAS IN THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, I DON'T SEE A WAY FOR THERE TO BE THE INFLUENCE TO, TO CHANGE THAT AS WELL.

UM, IT DOESN'T, THESE TWO ITEMS AREN'T DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER.

THIS IS DEVELOP THE, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAT OF WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT WILL EXIST AND THE LOT LINES, ET CETERA.

AND SO WHILE I HAVE A, A SENSE OF CALL FOR THAT MOMENT OF PAUSE, I DON'T KNOW IF THE OUTCOME IS ANY DIFFERENT, EVEN IF THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT IN SOMETHING LIKE TRAFFIC.

UM, AND SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND TODAY.

I CERTAINLY HAVE A, A, A FEEL OF CALLING FOR A PAUSE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT GETS US ANY DIFFERENT OF AN OUTCOME.

UM, SO IF EVERYBODY WILL CAST YOUR VOTE AND THE MOTION IS PASSED, I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR TAKING THE TIME REPETITIVELY TO COME DOWN AND SHARE YOUR CONCERNS, YOUR THOUGHTS.

UM, UNDOUBTEDLY THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT FROM WHAT WE SAW INITIALLY WITH BUCKY'S FROM SIGNS TO DARK SKIES TO A LIMITATION OF THE, THE FOOTPRINT THAT THEY WILL BE, WILL, WILL BE, UH, CONSUMING IN THIS AREA, SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT.

UM, AND SO IT'S SINCERELY APPRECIATED THAT ALL THAT HAVE COME THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT AND HAVE BEEN HERE IN PREVIOUS NIGHTS.

THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND RESEARCH THAT'S BEEN PUT FORWARD HERE, WE WILL NOW RELY ON OUR, OUR COUNSEL TO TAKE THE NEXT STEPS.

I DO WANT CLARIFICATION, PLEASE, BECAUSE THE MOTION WAS MADE SECOND, DIDN'T VOTED ON, BUT WE NEVER SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT IT IS, UH, SUBJECT TO THE, THE, UH, RECOMMENDED THE, THE RECORDED FLASH OF SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM AND THE FINAL PLA SHALL NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL ALL THE CLERICAL.

SO I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

[5.B. 2025-653 CONSIDER APPROVAL FOR SIENA COURT GARDEN HOMES FINAL PLAT APPROVAL GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHEAST OF DAILEY STREET AND FREY STREET.]

GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

GOOD EVENING.

EXCUSE ME, HERE IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

HERE WE HAVE THE LOCATION MAP FOR SIENNA COURT GARDEN HOMES FINAL PLAT.

UM, IT IS LOCATED NEAR FRY STREET IN DALEY STREET.

THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY JL NORTHERN VENTURES, LLC, AND IS REPRESENTED BY TYLER MEAL OF, UH, MEALS, EXCUSE ME, OF MEALS AND MEYER ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING LLC.

UM, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THIS PROPERTY WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2018.

AND THE, THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY, EXCUSE ME, THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD SUBMITTED A FINAL PLAT, AND THAT DID EXPIRE WITHOUT BEING APPROVED BACK IN APRIL OF 21.

HERE IS OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PROPERTY, UH, IS WITHIN THE TRANSIT TRANSITIONAL RESIDENTIAL, UH, FUTURE LAND USE MAP DISTRICT.

UM, AND THIS DOES SUPPORT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

HERE WE HAVE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS MAP.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE LOWERED GLENROSE BOUNDARY AND BUFFER AREAS.

HERE IS,

[00:40:01]

UH, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED THIS BACK ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2018.

AND HERE IS THE PROPOSED FINAL PLAT, UH, FOR SIENNA COURT.

IT DOES CONTAIN 25 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND FOUR OPEN SPACE LOTS, UM, ACROSS THE 5.468 ACRES.

UH, IT HAS A GROSS DENSITY OF ABOUT 4.56 RESIDENTIAL LOTS PER ACRE.

AND THE SUBDIVISION ACCESS WILL COME FROM SIENNA COURT, WHICH IS A PRIVATE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL STREET, UM, FROM FRY, WHICH IS A PUBLIC COLLECTOR.

SO THIS WAS REVIEWED RECENTLY BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

IT WAS DENIED BACK ON NOVEMBER 3RD, 2025 PER UDC TWO DASH SIX A EIGHT G.

UM, ESSENTIALLY NON-CONFORMITY TO THE CITY OF BERNIE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FAIL TO ACHIEVE ENVISION CHARACTER OF THE AREA.

THE OWNER HAS SUBMITTED A LETTER TO P AND Z FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THIS LETTER WAS ATTACHED TO YOUR PACKET, UM, AND IT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING HERE.

UH, HIGHLIGHTS, UH, THE OWNERSHIP HAS CHANGED TO JESSE MURANO.

HE IS THE SOLE OWNER OF THE DEVELOPMENT JL NORTHERN VENTURES, LLC, AND HIS REPRESENTATIVES ARE HERE TONIGHT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

UH, THE NEW OWNER HAS COMMITTED TO REPAIRS TO SIENNA COURT PAVEMENT AS NECESSARY AND DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER, IMPROVING THE INLET, INTERCEPTING THE STORMWATER RUNOFF, LEAVING THE COTTAGE ON OAK PARK DETENTION FACILITY TESTING OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS REQUIRED BY THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT.

A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS BEEN HIRED TO ASSESS THE EXISTING PERIMETER STONE WALLS ON, UH, AND ONSITE RETAINING WALLS.

REPAIRS TO THESE WALLS WILL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATION.

SO WITH THAT, HERE ARE THE STIPULATIONS THAT STAFF WOULD ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WITH THE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

THE BULK OF THESE ARE THE SAME AS WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN NOVEMBER.

HOWEVER, WHAT'S UNDERLINED HAS CHANGED.

I'LL GO THROUGH AND READ 'EM.

UH, ONE, THE RECORDED PLAT SHALL SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM TO THE FINAL PLAT DATE STAMPED OCTOBER 20TH, 2025.

PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE.

ALL EXISTING OR PROPOSED FENCES SLASH RETAINING WALLS NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WILL NEED TO HAVE PERMIT SUBMITTED, REVIEWED, AND APPROVED.

THIS INCLUDES PROVIDING GATE CROSSINGS, UH, UTILITY EASEMENTS AND REPAIRING SLASH IMPROVING THE FENCE, ABUTTING THE COTTAGE ON OAK PARK BASED ON A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S ANALYSIS.

PRIOR TO THE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEVELOPER MUST CONDUCT ALL REQUIRED TESTING OF THE WATER, SEWER, AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE, AND MAKE, UH, ANY REPAIRS NECESSARY TO MEET CITY SPECIFICATIONS AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS.

UH, THIS INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO REPAVING THE ENTIRE CUL-DE-SAC REPAIRING SLASH IMPROVING DRAINAGE FOR THE INLET INTERCEPTING THE STORM WATER RUNOFF, LEAVING THE COTTAGES ON OAK PARK DETENTION FACILITY.

A TWO YEAR 20% WARRANTY BOND SHALL BE PROVIDED AT FINAL ACCEPTANCE PRIOR TO RECORDATION.

FINANCIAL GUARANTEE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THE COST OF THE CURRENT STREETS, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS IF THESE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY.

AND THE FINAL PLAT SHALL NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL ALL CLERICAL CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN REVISED AS DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.

AND THESE MOTIONS ARE PROVIDED TO ASSIST THE COM COMMISSION'S DECISION.

UM, AND AS I STATED, THE, UH, THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THEIR ENGINEER AS WELL AS AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE HERE TONIGHT.

WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND PRESENT ANYTHING IF THEY'RE HERE? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING.

AND I'D LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR HAVING ME HERE.

UM, ALSO HAPPY NEW YEAR AND, UH, WE'RE READY TO GET STARTED.

I'M THE NEW, UH, REPRESENTATIVE FOR SIENNA COURT.

UH, IT'S BEEN PURCHASED BY A NEW OWNER THAT OWNS A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY NOW.

AND, UH, I'M A DEVELOPER FROM SAN ANTONIO.

SORRY, I SKIPPED MITCHELL STERNS, THREE 10 WEST SUNSET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.

TO GET THIS PROJECT ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

MR. STERNS.

I'M A DEVELOPER AND A BUILDER.

UM, WE ARE HERE

[00:45:01]

IT IS UNDER NEW OWNERSHIP NOW, AND, UH, 100% OWNED BY MR. JESSE MORENO.

AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY HAS AND WOULD LIKE THE HELP OF THE CITY IN PLANNING AND ZONING TO GET THIS ACROSS THE LINE.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE DEVELOPER OR ANY COMMISSION DISCUSSION? MR. COMMISSIONER, VICE? YOU KNOW, I WAS GONNA ASK THE OBVIOUS QUESTION.

UH, THE, THE CONCERN WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER THIS EVENING, WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS ANY, UM, LINKAGE BETWEEN THE NEW OWNERSHIP IN THE PRIOR OWNERSHIP TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, UM, IS THERE, IS THAT BEING COMPLETELY SEVERED? YES, SIR.

SO NO, NO, NO.

UM, RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE OLD OWNER, WHETHER IT'S THE, THE OWNER, THE SPOUSE, OR THE SON? NO, SIR.

I KNOW THIS, I KNOW THESE QUESTIONS ARE SOMEWHAT IRRELEVANT TO THE PLAT THAT WE'RE, THEY'RE HERE, WE'RE HERE TO LOOK AT TONIGHT, BUT I THINK IT'S CRITICAL THAT THE COMMUNITY AND, AND STAFF AND, AND THIS COMMISSION UNDERSTANDS, UM, THE HISTORY.

I'M SURE, I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD AN EARFUL.

UM, IF YOU'VE DONE ANY DUE DILIGENCE AT ALL, WHICH I'M SURE THAT YOU HAVE, UM, I, I THINK THERE'S STILL SOME CONFUSION OR, OR MAYBE IT'S CHATTER ON THE STREETS.

UM, YOU SAID YOU JUST STATED THAT THERE'S NO RELATIONSHIP WITH A PRIOR OWNER AND, AND THE CURRENT OWNER AND YOURSELF.

WAS THERE A PRIOR RELATIONSHIP WHERE ANY OF YOU INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT IN THE PAST? THE, THE OWNER? A HUNDRED PERCENT.

NOW, MR. MORENO WAS A PRIOR PARTNER IN THE, IN THE, UH, EX PARTNERSHIP.

AND WHAT WAS HIS ROLE IN, UM, THE OAK PARK COTTAGES FINANCIAL.

SO HE WAS, HE WAS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT? YES, MA'AM.

WELL THAT TAKES MY QUESTION A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEN.

MM-HMM .

UM, PART OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THE OAK PARK COTTAGES HAVE HAD CONTINUOUSLY FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS, AND I THINK STILL HAVE, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, IS THAT THERE WASN'T ENOUGH MONEY TO FINISH THE PROJECTS AND THE, THE GUARANTEES THAT WERE MADE TO THEM.

SO IF MR. MORENO WAS A FINANCIAL GUARANTOR OF THAT PROJECT, WHAT IS THE CURRENT FINANCIAL STRENGTH OF HIS PROJECT? NOW, THE, THE PROJECT, MR. MORENO HAS, UH, PAID OFF THE PROJECT 100%.

AND ANY AND ALL DRAWS THAT WERE, UM, ASKED FOR BY THE DEVELOPER OR PAID.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW DEEP I CAN GET INTO THAT DETAIL, BUT, UH, THERE WAS SOME MISCOMMUNICATION, OR NOT MISCOMMUNICATION, MIS UM, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT ONE, BUT THERE WAS A TOTALLY SEPARATE DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT WAS DRAWN AND WHAT WAS PAID.

SO MR. MORENO HAS PAID THE BANK OFF 100% AND OWNS ALL THE LAND FREE AND CLEAR NOW.

UH, SO WE ARE PREPARED TO PUT UP ANY MONEY, ANY NEED THAT NEEDS TO GET DONE TO FINISH THIS PROJECT.

HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY CURRENT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COTTAGES AT OAK PARK? NO, MA'AM.

FOR REVIEW BEFORE IT IS APPROVED BY P AND Z.

COMPLETELY SEPARATE.

YES, MA'AM.

AND I'VE, I'VE BEEN MEETING WITH THE COTTAGE, UH, AND SINCE I BELIEVE NOVEMBER, AND UPDATING THEM ON OUR, UH, YOU KNOW, PROGRESS AND WHERE WE'RE GOING, WHERE WE'RE HEADED, AND WHEN WE WERE GONNA GET THERE.

AND WE'RE THERE NOW.

UM, SO, UH, IT'S 100% CLEAN AND READY TO ROLL.

EXCELLENT.

THANK YOU FOR BEING TRANSPARENT.

YES, MA'AM.

UM, I DO WANNA MAKE A COMMENT THAT I HAD A CONVERSATION EARLIER WITH FRANKIE ON THE PHONE, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHE EXPLAINED IS THAT THESE, I HAD ASKED THE QUESTION THAT IN THE PAST WE HAVE DENIED OR TABLED PLATS BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY STIPULATIONS.

AND WE ASKED THAT THEY GO CLEAN THOSE THINGS UP FIRST AND COME BACK TO US.

AND WHAT SHE EXPLAINED TO ME EARLIER WITH THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT IS THAT THOSE STIPULATIONS CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO BE COMPLETED UNTIL THE FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED.

SO JUST FOR OUR OWN, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THEY CAN'T BE PERMITTED, THEY CANNOT BE PERMITTED UNTIL THE PLATT'S APPROVED.

CORRECT.

SO, SO WE COULDN'T TAKE THAT STAND TO SAY, GO CLEAN THAT UP BEFORE WE APPROVE IT, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT PERMITTING AND THEY CAN'T GET THE PERMITS WITHOUT PLAT APPROVAL.

BUT THEY COULD PROVIDE A COMPLETED, DID I SAY THAT RIGHT? THEY COULD PROVIDE A COM, A COMPLETED AND ACCURATE DEVELOPMENT PLAT

[00:50:01]

SO THE ITEMS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE STIPULATIONS ON HERE ARE ATYPICAL.

THEY'RE NOT THE NORMAL TYPE OF STIPULATIONS THAT YOU WOULD SEE.

WE HAVE OUR NORMAL ONES, WHICH IS, IT NEEDS TO SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORM TO THE FINAL PLATS, DATE STAMPED AND, UM, THE CLERICAL CORRECTIONS ONE.

BUT THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE IN HERE ARE MORE SPECIFIC HAVING TO DO WITH THE LIFESPAN OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE, UM, SO MUCH WORK WAS PUT INTO, UH, GROUND ESSENTIALLY AFTER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, BUT BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT.

SO THE NEXT STEPS AFTER THIS IS TO GET ALL OF THOSE PERMITS.

EXACTLY WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER FRY WAS SAYING.

AFTER FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, THEY CAN FINISH UP THEIR PERMITS TO GET ALL THIS STUFF VERIFIED.

AND BY HAVING IT AS A STIPULATION HERE, UM, WE'RE CREATING REALLY CLEAR, TRANSPARENT COMMUNICATION FOR FUTURE STAFF TO LOOK AT AND SAY, HEY, WE CANNOT RECORD THIS PLAT UNTIL ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE MET.

SO THIS IS A WAY TO, ALL OF THESE STIPULATIONS ARE A WAY TO ENSURE THAT EVERYTHING ON HERE IS ADDRESSED BEFORE RECORDATION.

ONCE IT'S RECORDED, THEN THEY CAN START APPLYING FOR BUILDING PERMITS AND START BUILDING HOMES.

SO THIS IS OUR WAY OF MAKING SURE THIS IS ALL TAKEN CARE OF BEFORE, UH, ANY RESIDENCE IS CONSTRUCTED OR ANYBODY MOVES INTO A HOME.

COMMISSIONER KELLER.

I THINK THAT BASICALLY ADDRESS THE QUESTION THAT I HAD, WHICH MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO HAVE ALL THESE THINGS ADDRESSED IN COMPLETE PRIOR TO APPROVING THE PLAT, WHICH DOESN'T SEEM TO BE AN OPTION.

UM, MR. STARNES, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID YOUR LAST NAME IS? YES, SIR.

YOU, ARE YOU GOING TO BE THE BUILDER ON THESE HOMES? YES, SIR.

I'M GONNA FINISH THE DEVELOPMENT AND BE THE BUILDER.

AND YOU HAD NO TIE TO THE COTTAGES OR YOU DID NOT BUILD ANY OF THOSE HOMES IN THERE? ONLY THE RELATIONSHIP THAT I'VE HAD, WHICH THEY'VE BEEN WONDERFUL, UH, JUST EXPLAINING OUR PROCESS.

HAVE WE BEEN GOING? OKAY, THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER KATES? YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT THE FINAL PLA IN THE PACKET, AND IT'S STILL FILED UNDER THE NAME OF, UH, DAVE LUCIANI SANTA COURT DEVELOPMENT.

LLC? YES.

UM, THAT IS, THAT WAS AN ERROR.

THEY DID SUBMIT AN UPDATED PLAT.

UM, I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE COVERED UNDER STIPULATION SIX, THAT A NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL ALL CLERICAL CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN, UM, REVISED AS DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.

HOWEVER, YOU CAN, UM, ADD ANOTHER STIPULATION IN HERE IF YOU WANT, SPECIFICALLY SAYING THAT THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED, THAT WOULD BE FINE.

BUT THEY DID SUBMIT AN UPDATED, UM, COPY OF THE PLAT THAT SHOWS THAT, UH, WE JUST ATTACHED THE WRONG ONE TO THE PACKET.

SO WE'VE NOT SEEN THE CURRENT.

CORRECT.

THERE IS ZERO CHANGES TO IT BESIDES THE OWNER CERTIFICATE, ZERO CHANGES BESIDES THE OWNER CERTIFICATE.

COMMISSIONER KELLER, ONE MORE QUESTION THAT I, I BELIEVE SHOULD BE FOR DIRECTOR CRANE.

UM, IS, IS THIS THE SAME SITUATION AS YOU MENTIONED WHEN I WAS SITTING OUT IN THE AUDIENCE WITH, UH, WITH BUCKY'S FINAL PLAT, THE SAME TYPE OF CRITERIA? YES, SIR.

THERE'S NO, I MEAN THERE'S NO OTHER DIFFERENCE.

IT'S THE SAME.

I MEAN, THERE HAVE BEEN SITUATIONS OR SCENARIOS IN THE PAST WHERE WE REVIEWED A FINAL PLAT THAT DID HAVE RED LINES ON IT, AND DEPENDING ON WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT WAS, THE COMMISSION HAS MADE THE DECISION TO ALLOW FOR A CORRECTED VERSION TO BE PRESENTED, UM, UNTIL A DECISION HAS BEEN MADE.

SO IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE A TABLING, UM, IF THERE'S A LEVEL OF UNCOMFORT COMFORTABILITY WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER'S NAME BEING ON IT, OR THERE COULD ALSO BE A STIPULATION CLEARLY DEFINING THAT THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CHANGED.

WHICH SOUNDS LIKE IT ALREADY HAS BEEN.

WE WERE GIVEN THE WRONG, INCORRECT VERSION.

CORRECT.

I WAS JUST, I GUESS JUST FOR CLARITY'S SAKE, UM, DID IT'S, UH, DID MR. MORENO, DID THE OTHER PARTNER WITHDRAW FROM THE PARTNERSHIP, OR DID, OR DID MR. MORENO ACTUALLY TRANSFER THE DEED INTO JAIL? NORTHERN VENTURES, THE OTHER PERSON IS DISSOLVED, SO IT JUST LEAVES WITH, EXCUSE ME, I'M A LITTLE BIT UNDER THE WEATHER, BUT THE OTHER PERSON, I'M NOT CONTAGIOUS.

UH, THE OTHER PERSON, UH, WAS DISSOLVED AND, UH, MR. MORENO IS 100% OWNER, UH, AND IT'S BEEN FILED AND RECORDED

[00:55:01]

OF A DEED OF TRUST.

THE OTHER GENTLEMAN HAS ZERO INTEREST AND ZERO ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PROJECT.

AND WHAT WAS MR. MORENO'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE NEIGHBORING PROJECT THAT'S HAVING ALL THE ISSUES? UH, ZERO.

ZERO.

SO HE WASN'T A, A FINANCIAL SUPPORTER IN THAT OR NO, SIR.

I THOUGHT HE WAS, WAS BROUGHT IN THREE YEARS AGO WHEN THIS PROBLEM STARTED, MORE OR LESS.

I THOUGHT HE WAS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORTER OF THE OAK PARK COTTAGES.

NO, MA'AM.

ONLY SIENNA COURT.

HE WAS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORTER ON THIS PROJECT.

ON THIS PROJECT.

ON THIS PROJECT, NOT ON THE OAKS.

I THOUGHT I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID ORIGINALLY, BUT TO MY QUESTION, I THOUGHT HE WAS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORTER OF THE OAK PARK COTTAGE.

NO, MA'AM.

JUST CNA COURT WAS NOT.

I'VE BEEN OUTTA COURTESY, UM, UPDATING THE VILLAGE OUT OF COURTESY BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTA TAKE CARE OF A DRAINAGE ISSUE THERE.

UH, SO, UH, AND I JUST WANT TO UPDATE ALL THE NEIGHBORS, WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THERE, WHAT'S HAPPENING WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.

I CAN SPEAK OPENLY ABOUT IT, MORE OPENLY ABOUT IT, AND WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.

PERFECT.

YES, MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER KATES? YEAH, JUST, JUST, UH, JUST A A A COMFORT LEVEL.

I KNOW A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN THAT, UH, RE THAT WALL ROCK WALL LEANING AND ABOUT TO FALL OVER.

YOU GUYS ARE COMMITTING TO, TO DO AN ENGINEERED STUDY, AND THE CITY STAFF WILL NOT ACCEPT IT UNTIL IT PASSES INSPECTION FOR, UH, APPROVAL AND OR, OR REPAIR OF THE ROCK WALL.

THE FENCE PERMIT COULD BE PULLED SEPARATELY, BUT BY INCLUDING IT IN THE STIPULATIONS, WE'RE ENSURING, UM, THAT IT IS DONE BEFORE THIS PLAQUE CAN BE RECORDED AND THE LOTS SOLD.

SO IT'S, BUT, BUT IT WILL BE DONE RIGHT THIS TIME BECAUSE YOU GUYS WILL HAVE, UH, OVERVIEW OF IT ALSO.

UH, CITY WILL, WE WILL BE REVIEWING IT.

OKAY? YES, SIR.

I'VE ALREADY HAD A, UH, STRUCTURAL ENGINEER OUT THERE LAST WEEK AND, UH, THERE IS ISSUES WITH IT AND IT'S PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TO COME DOWN.

SO WE'RE GONNA WORK ON ALL OF THOSE SO WE CAN JUST GET IN THERE.

HOPEFULLY WE GET APPROVED TONIGHT AND GET IN THERE AND KNOCK OUT EVERYTHING WE NEED TO GET DONE.

ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MA'AM.

PLEASE COME FORWARD.

I'M SORRY.

MY NAME IS JAN RYDER AND I LIVE AT FIVE 30 OAK PARK IN ONE OF THE COTTAGES.

UM, I BELIEVE EVERYTHING HAS BEEN PAID OFF, BUT WE HAVE NEVER GOTTEN WHAT WE WERE PROMISED.

SO, UH, I HOPE THAT THE CITY WILL NEVER WORK WITH THE LUCIANI AGAIN.

WE HAVE NO RECOURSE FOR WHAT'S HAPPENED TO US.

WE'RE ALL RETIRED, WE'RE ALL OLDER.

WE'VE ALL BEEN LEFT HOLDING THE BALL.

THANK YOU, SIR.

THAT WOULD JUST ONE LAST FINAL TIME TO ASK THAT.

MR. LUCIANI HAS NO TIE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT ANYMORE, WHATSOEVER AT SIENNA COURT? NO, SIR.

SIERRA, MR. FIRE, I DON'T RECALL IF YOU WERE AT THE MEETING WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST MONTH, UM, BUT WE DID HAVE A CONVERSA.

WERE YOU HERE LAST? CAN I ASK FOR THAT? WAS SHE IF SHE WAS HERE? SURE.

, WERE YOU HERE FOR THAT DISCUSSION LAST MONTH? HE WAS.

HE WAS.

I WAS.

JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, FOR THOSE WHO MAYBE DIDN'T GET TO HEAR IT, IS WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH CITY STAFF ABOUT THE DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT CITY CAN ENFORCE AND WHAT THEY CAN'T.

AND WE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT THAT TOO, IS THAT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU WERE PROMISED THAT I THINK YOU DIDN'T GET WERE HOA CORRECT, DRIVEN, AND UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T NO, NONE OF US HAVE CONTROL OVER THOSE ITEMS. WE FEEL FOR YOU, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE ASKING SO MANY QUESTIONS SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WE DID HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH STAFF TO SEE WHERE, WHERE THOSE LINES ARE OF, OF WHAT'S ENFORCEABLE AND WHAT'S NOT.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND I KNOW YOU CAN'T HELP US WITH THAT.

UM, BUT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT.

I KNOW WE HAVE PUT THIS PROJECT INTO THEM PROPERLY AND BEAUTIFULLY.

UM, BUT I BELIEVE MR. ANO HAS BEEN PAID OFF.

WOULD THAT BE THE CORRECT, HE'S NOT PAID OFF

[01:00:01]

TO THE BALANCE.

, I DUNNO IF HE GOT ANY.

UM, BUT HE CERTAINLY WILL NOT BE USING ANY MONEY TO PERHAPS GOT TO LEAVE TO DO ANYTHING FOR US.

SURE.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO ASK ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN UPFRONT TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE PROTECTING THE COMMUNITY THE BEST WAY THAT WE CAN.

I THINK, UM, FOR THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING AND, AND THOSE THAT ARE PRESENT, I WANT YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT WE HAVE, I'VE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION SINCE 2021, I BELIEVE, AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY A MEETINGS WHERE, UH, THE COTTAGES HAVE BEEN A TOPIC AND IT'S NOT BEEN A POSITIVE TOPIC.

AND SO THE SPIRIT OF THIS COMMISSION HERE TONIGHT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NOT ANY FUTURE RESIDENTS THAT ARE PUT INTO A SIMILAR SITUATION, UM, EITHER BY WAY OF THE DEVELOPER OF THE COTTAGES, UM, BEING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, UM, OR ANY SIMILAR SITUATION THAT COMES UP.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE THOROUGHNESS AND MAYBE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS ARE, ARE COMING ALONG THE LINES OF, UH, MAYBE, UM, NOT IN CHARACTER FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAT, BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T, UH, REPLICATE A SITUATION, UM, THAT WE CAN'T SUPPORT THE CITIZENS WITH, UM, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE HAD TO, UM, UH, WITNESS IN THE PAST.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING, MR. STERNS.

UM, AND, AND, UH, COOPERATING WITH SOME OF THE UNUSUAL QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH A, WITH A DEVELOPMENT, UH, PLA A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER BYRD? YEAH, I MEAN, IS THERE ANY WAY TO, I MEAN, TO ENSURE THAT MR. WAS IT LUCIANO CAN'T GET, CAN'T WORK HIS WAY BACK INTO THIS DEAL? NO, WE CAN'T CONTROL OWNERSHIP.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH OWNERSHIP OF ANY PROPERTY.

OR WHO BUILDS I'M OR WHO BUILDS WE CAN'T YEAH.

COMMISSIONER FRYER, LAST THING, NOW THAT WE'VE PUT YOU THROUGH THE RINGER.

WELCOME.

WE'RE SO THANKFUL THAT THERE'S NO, NO, NO PROBLEM AT ALL.

UM, NEW BLOOD IN THE PROJECT.

I, I HOPE I ANSWERED EVERYBODY'S QUESTIONS, UH, AS WELL AS I COULD WITHOUT GETTING OFF TRACK.

UM, AND I'M HERE AVAILABLE ANYTIME FOR ANY OF YOU ALL.

ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS? ANYTIME.

PLANNING AND ZONING HAS BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH.

HOA HAS BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH AN UPDATE, AND I THINK EVERYBODY'S RELIEVED AND WANTS TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE AND BUILT OUT, AND WE APPRECIATE ALL OF Y'ALL'S HELP.

SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VINO.

IS THERE A MOTION COMMISSIONER FRIAR'S MOVE TO APPROVE.

ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION WITH THIS? WE NEED TO ADD THE ONE STIPULATION THAT THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE BE CHANGED ON THE FINAL PLAT.

WAS THAT THE ONLY STIPULATION WE NEEDED TO ADD? THAT'S CORRECT.

ALONG WITH ITEMS ONE THROUGH SIX, CORRECT.

ON THE SCREEN.

AND ITEM FIVE B IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. STERN.

[6. COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION/LEGAL COUNSEL/STAFF - No discussion or action may take place]

UH, DIRECTOR CRANE.

I KNOW WE WANTED TO MAKE SOME INTRODUCTIONS.

SURE.