[Call to Order]
[00:00:15]
YOU FOR YOU, LORD. WE THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO IN OUR LIVES. LORD, WE ASK THAT YOU COME INTO OUR CHAMBER TODAY AND JUST TOUCH EACH AND EVERY PERSON IN HERE AND GIVE US THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE DECISIONS THAT ARE GOOD FOR ALL OF US. LORD. LORD, WE THANK YOU FOR OUR MILITARY, OUR POLICE AND OUR FIRE. ALL THIS WE ASK IN YOUR NAME. AMEN. AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY. THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UP TO SIX MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL DATA OR POLICY INFORMATION, OR PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHOULD SUBMIT A PUBLIC COMMENT FORM TO THE CHAIR OR BOARD LIAISON PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. OKAY, I KNOW SOME OF YOU. IF IF YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT BESIDES OUR AGENDA ITEM, WE'D LIKE FOR YOU TO COME UP. IF NOT, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEM WHEN IT COMES UP. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
[Agenda Items]
WELL, WE'LL CALL YOU WHEN THOSE ITEMS COME UP. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE BACK INTO THE REGULAR SESSION AT 7:06 P.M. ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE AGENDA. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER THE 12TH, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. I RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR NOVEMBER 12TH, 2025. PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. I GOT A MOTION. NEED A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ITEM NUMBER TWO. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE JOINT MEETING MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR NOVEMBER 3RD, 2025. I RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE NOVEMBER 3RD, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING AND AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEETING. GOT A MOTION? NEED A SECOND. SECOND.WE GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY. ITEM NUMBER THREE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 707. REZONE CASE NUMBER 2020 5-015 PD. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A ZONING CHANGE FROM THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING DISTRICT TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR AN EVENT CENTER AND RETAIL SITE AT 600 WATER STREET, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. BILL. THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIRMAN, AND GOOD EVENING. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE. IF YOU CAN SEE ON YOUR SCREEN CASE NUMBER 2020 5-015 PD. THIS REQUEST IS FOR A PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD CREATE A BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF LOCAL RETAIL AND ALLOW FOR AN EVENT CENTER TO BE LOCATED ON SITE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. MISTER COLLIN CLICKER'S NOT WORKING TONIGHT. HERE'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OUTLINED IN RED. IT'S JUST EAST OF WATER STREET, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE AND SOUTH OF US 175 FOR REFERENCE, THAT'S THE TRAILER RETAIL SITE JUST ACROSS THE STREET THERE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE'S A ZONING OF THE SUBJECT. PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED LIGHT MANUFACTURING. AND WHILE IT'S NOT SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE HERE, THERE IS AN APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON THE SITE TO ALLOW FOR AN AUTO BODY REPAIR SITE OR AUTO BODY REPAIR AND BODY SHOP. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE IS AN
[00:05:06]
ELEVATION OF THE PROPOSED EVENT CENTER THAT WOULD BE LOCATED ON SITE. AND ONE MORE SLIDE. OH, I THOUGHT WE HAD ONE MORE CALLER. OKAY. YEAH. SO THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. AT THIS TIME, WE WE WOULDN'T HAVE A FULL SITE PLAN OR ENGINEERING DRAWINGS.JUST REMEMBER THIS IS STRICTLY JUST FOR ZONING APPROVALS. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. SO IN SHORT WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THIS PROPERTY HERE IS A TWO STORY, 14,000 SQUARE FOOT EVENT CENTER WITH FUTURE RETAIL UNITS ALONG WATER STREET. THE DEVELOPERS PROPOSING TO INCLUDE 166 SPACES. I'M SORRY, THAT'S A TYPO ON SCREEN. IT'S CORRECT. IN YOUR PACKET, THEY'RE PROPOSING 166 SPACES. SORRY. WHAT'S REQUIRED IN OUR ORDINANCE IS 166 PARKING SPACES, AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY PROVIDING 175 PARKING SPACES. THE REQUESTED HOURS OF OPERATION IS GOING TO BE MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY, 9 A.M. TO 1 A.M. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE'S JUST A LAYOUT OF THE SITE TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A REFERENCE FOR HOW THE SITE WOULD FUNCTION. WE'VE MET WITH THE APPLICANT SEVERAL TIMES, JUST KIND OF GIVING THEM FEEDBACK ON CONFIGURING THE SITE. HE'S ALSO PROPOSING AN EIGHT FOOT BRICK WALL ALONG THE EAST AND SOUTHERN BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY TO HELP SCREEN FROM RESIDENTIAL LAND USES.
LET'S SEE THE HIS APPLICATION IS IN THE PACKET, AS WELL AS SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING HIS SURVEY AND A BROCHURE, OR KIND OF A PROPOSED LAND USES AND HOW THE SITE WOULD OPERATE, WHICH IS ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET HERE INCLUDES THE UNITS THAT WOULD BE BUILT FOR RETAIL, AS WELL AS WHAT USES WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THOSE RETAIL UNITS. THIS INCLUDES LIKE A BAKERY, A RESTAURANT, SEAMSTRESS, A CANDY STORE BOOKSTORE. HE PUT FILM DEVELOPING AND PRINTING, OFFICE BUILDING, PHOTOGRAPHER, STUDIO, AS WELL AS RESTAURANT. OKAY. WE DID RECEIVE SEVERAL LETTERS OF OPPOSITION ON THE SITE FROM VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE THAT DID RECEIVE A LETTER, DID RESPOND WITH LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. SO THAT BEING SAID, BASED ON MY CALCULATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST, IT WOULD REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE IT. SO JUST KIND OF KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND MOVE FORWARD. SO I'M PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
AND HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION. THE HOURS OF OPERATION AREN'T THE OTHER ONE. I SAY THE OTHER ONES. THE OTHER ONE IN SEAGOVILLE BY HOME BANK.
DON'T THEY CLOSE AT LIKE 1011? YES, MA'AM. I DO BELIEVE THEY CLOSE SIGNIFICANTLY EARLIER THAN THIS ONE HERE, BECAUSE I MEAN, THIS ONE RIGHT HERE IS 1 A.M. AND YOU'RE REALLY CLOSE TO HOMES THERE. YES, MA'AM. AND I ASSUME THEY WILL BE SERVING ALCOHOL IN HERE ALSO. YES. THE APPLICANT DOES PROPOSE TO SERVE ALCOHOL AT THE EVENT CENTER. THAT'S CORRECT. I WOULD JUST SAY LET'S LOOK AT THE TIMES ON THAT. AND THIS IS THE. IS THIS THE ONLY ONE IN SEAGOVILLE RIGHT NOW? I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE BY THE NEW BANK THAT JUST OPENED UP ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY HERE. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE THE ONLY ONE WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS, BECAUSE THE OTHER ONES ARE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, PAST WOODY, DOWN THE HIGHWAY. I LOVE THE IDEA OF THE SHOPPING CENTERS. I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF AN EVENT CENTER BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE TO HOMES THERE, AND I KNOW I WOULDN'T WANT TO HEAR MUSIC BUMPING ALL NIGHT LONG WHILE I'M TRYING TO SLEEP. AND YOU SAID THE HOURS WERE MONDAY THROUGH. MONDAY. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY, 9 A.M. TO 1 A.M. YEAH, THAT'S JUST WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. AND I DON'T SEE THE APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT. MR. MONDRAGON, I DON'T THINK HE'S HERE TONIGHT. OKAY. I NEED TO
[00:10:11]
CLOSE. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 714. I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. DOES SHE LEAVE? SHE FILLED OUT THE FORM. YEAH. YOU CAN SEND ME AN ORDINANCE. SHE CAN SEND THE ORDINANCE. DO WHAT? OKAY, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. WE'VE GOT A MOTION. SHE WANTS ANOTHER QUESTION. DO WE JUST.YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH. COULD YOU PULL THE MAP BACK UP WITH THE ZONING? SURE. YES.
OKAY, SO THE PROPERTY HERE. SO ALL THIS YELLOW IS ALL THIS YELLOW SINGLE FAMILY. YES.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. YES. THE PURPLE THAT YOU SEE IS LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND THAT YELLOW IS R5 OR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S THE CORNER. IT LITERALLY HAS EVERYTHING SURROUNDING IT. SINGLE FAMILY. YES. ON TWO SIDES. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU COLIN. OKAY. I'M ENTERTAINING A MOTION. NO MOTIONS. WE HAVE NO MOTION. I VOTE AGAINST THIS. ONLY BECAUSE I THINK HAVING AN EVENT CENTER THERE IS TOO CLOSE TO TO RESIDENTS, AND I. YEAH, I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE REZONING CASE OF 2025015 PD. I GOT A MOTION TO. DENY. GOT IT. I GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AND THIS WILL BE ON THE JANUARY 26TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR ACTION BY THE COUNCIL. ITEM NUMBER. ITEM NUMBER FIVE. CASE NUMBER 2025043Z. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REPEAL OF ORDINANCE 11 DASH 2022 AND 30 3-203. BILL. THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN. SO THIS ITEM HERE IS AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL OR A REQUEST TO REPEAL ORDINANCES 11, 20, 22 AND 33 2023. BOTH OF THESE ORDINANCES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 1803 SEAVILLE ROAD, 1815 SEAGOVILLE ROAD, 620 NO NAME STREET AND 1908 KANE STREET. THANK YOU. LAURA, GOTTA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 718. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS ED RASMUSSEN. I LIVE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD. I COME TO YOU TONIGHT AS A RESIDENT AND SOMEONE WHO CARES ABOUT THE LONG TERM SAFETY AND STABILITY OF THIS COMMUNITY. LEADERSHIP IS STEWARDSHIP, AND STEWARDSHIP REQUIRES FORESIGHT, NOT JUST LOOKING AT WHAT BENEFITS A SINGLE PROJECT TODAY, BUT WILL PROTECT AN ENTIRE CITY TOMORROW, ESPECIALLY ITS CHILDREN. ZONING EXISTS TO PROTECT PEOPLE, NOT JUST PROPERTY VALUES AND NOT JUST TAX REVENUE. UNDER THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 211, ZONING IS MEANT TO
[00:15:03]
PROMOTE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND GENERAL WELFARE. THAT PURPOSE IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT WHEN THE DECISIONS INVOLVE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS, EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS, AND THE CAPACITY OF POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES. WHEN THESE FACTORS ARE NOT CAREFULLY EVALUATED TOGETHER, COMMUNITIES SUFFER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT. WHEN PLACED WITHOUT ADEQUATE PLANNING, HAS PREDICTABLE IMPACTS. INCREASED POPULATION DENSITY BRINGS INCREASED DEMAND FOR POLICE SERVICE, EMERGENCY RESPONSE, TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT, AND FIRE PROTECTION. IF OUTGROW. IF GROWTH OUTPACES INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SAFETY CAPACITY, RESPONSE TIMES INCREASE, WORKLOADS INTENSIFY, AND RISK RISES NOT ONLY FOR RESIDENTS BUT FOR THE OFFICERS AND FIRST RESPONDERS WHO SERVE US. LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ALREADY CARRY TREMENDOUS RESPONSIBILITY.
THEY RESPOND TO VOLATILE SITUATIONS SO KNOW SO OTHERS DO NOT HAVE TO. CITY PLANNING DECISIONS SHOULD SUPPORT THEIR MISSION AND NOT ADD ADDITIONAL STRAIN. THIS CURRENT ZONING CHANGE IN THE FOUR ORDINANCES BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS THIS EVENING AND AGENDA NUMBERS FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN ALLOW HIGH DENSITY APARTMENTS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WITHOUT A DEDICATED SAFETY OR RISK MITIGATION ANALYSIS. CHILDREN ARE NOT SIMPLY ANOTHER PLANNING VARIABLE. THEY REQUIRE HEIGHTENED CONSIDERATION. MANY TEXAS CITIES REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER DISTANCES BETWEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES. BECAUSE CHILDREN DESERVE ENVIRONMENTS DESIGNED WITH CAUTION AND CARE. WHEN INCREASED TRAFFIC, POPULATION DENSITY, AND TRANSIENT RESIDENCY ARE INTRODUCED NEAR A SCHOOL, THOSE IMPACTS SHOULD BE STUDIED, NOT AVOIDED. GOOD PLANNING ANTICIPATES RISK. IT DOES NOT WAIT FOR HARM TO REVEAL IT. HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ALSO PLACES PRESSURE ON INFRASTRUCTURE, TRAFFIC FLOW, WATER, SEWER, UTILITIES AND EMERGENCY ACCESS ROUTES. WHEN THESE SYSTEMS ARE STRAINED, EVERYONE FEELS IT.
PARENTS DURING SCHOOL DROP OFF AND PICK UP RESIDENTS NAVIGATING DAILY COMMUTES, FIRST RESPONDERS TRYING TO REACH EMERGENCIES QUICKLY. INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING IS NOT ANTI-DEVELOPMENT. IT IS RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT. I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE NOT PRESENT DURING THE EARLIER STAGES OF THIS PROCESS. MANY NEARBY RESIDENTS ARE WORKING FAMILIES WHO CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT MAY FEEL HESITANT TO SPEAK PUBLICLY WHEN PLANNING DECISIONS MOVE FORWARD. WITHOUT ROBUST COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION, THE PEOPLE MOST AFFECTED CAN BE UNINTENTIONALLY LEFT OUT. ZONING DECISION DECISIONS SHOULD REFLECT THE LIVED REALITY OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT JUST WHAT LOOKS FEASIBLE ON PAPER. COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS NOT ABOUT STOPPING GROWTH. IT'S ABOUT CHOOSING WISE GROWTH. WISE GROWTH WILL PROTECT CHILDREN, RESPECT NEIGHBORHOODS, SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FIRST RESPONDERS. YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TONIGHT TO RECOMMEND A COURSE THAT PLACES SAFETY AND STEWARDSHIP. FIRST, I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER WHAT IS PRUDENT. PLEASE WEIGH THE LONG TERM EFFECTS IMPACTS ON CHILDREN, FAMILIES, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THE PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO PROTECT US EVERY DAY AND REPEAL THE FOUR ORDINANCES ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COMMITMENT TO THE FUTURE OF SEAGOVILLE. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE. MY NAME IS. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN. I LIVE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD, SEAGOVILLE, TEXAS. I'M HERE AS A CONCERNED
[00:20:01]
RESIDENT AND AS AN OFFICER SECRETARY FOR THE CITY OF RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, LOCATED AT THE SAME ADDRESS. TONIGHT, I ASK THE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER TO REPEAL THE FOUR CITY OF SEAGOVILLE ZONING ORDINANCES THAT WERE PASSED ORDINANCES 11 DASH 20 2233 DASH 20, 23, 26, 2023 AND 27 DASH 2023. THESE ORDINANCES ARE PART OF TONIGHT'S MEETING, LOCATED IN THE AGENDA NUMBERS FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN. THE ROLE OF ZONING COMMISSION EXISTS FOR A REASON TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ENSURE ZONING ACTIONS COMPLY WITH TEXAS LAW, CITY ORDINANCE, AND BASIC STANDARDS OF SAFETY AND FAIRNESS. ENSURING PROPER NOTICE TO AFFECTED RESIDENTS. ENSURING A REQUIRED STUDIES ARE COMPLETED. SAFETY. TRAFFIC, SEWER, WATER AND UTILITIES. IDENTIFYING RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY, ESPECIALLY WHEN CHILDREN ARE INVOLVED AND CAUTIONING CITY COUNCIL WHEN ZONING ACTIONS ARE UNLAWFUL OR INCOMPLETE. WHEN THOSE DUTIES ARE IGNORED, THE PROCESS FAILS WITH RESPECT, THE RECORD SHOWS SERIOUS FAILURES. I HAVE FACTUAL EVIDENCE PROVING MANY THINGS WENT WRONG WITH THE PROCESS OF THE FOUR ORDINANCES.THE SEAGOVILLE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION WAS FORCED TO FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE FOR SUCH FAILURES. THESE RECORDS CAN BE FOUND IN THE DALLAS COUNTY COURT OF JUDGE DALE TILLERY, CAUSE NUMBER DC 2320349. IN SUPPORT OF THESE ASSERTIONS, I SUBMIT FIVE AFFIDAVITS TONIGHT. MY DECLARATION FOR PHOTOS I TOOK IN OCTOBER OF 2023, A COPY OF THE LAWSUIT WITH MY TESTIMONY TONIGHT, AND THE URL ADDRESS TO VIEW THE ALTERED SEAGOVILLE GOVERNMENT VIDEO THAT WAS OFFERED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE. NOT ALL OF THE FAILURES ARE MENTIONED IN THIS SHORT SIX MINUTES. I INSIST MY VERBAL AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BE SUBMITTED AS A PERMANENT RECORD OF THIS MEETING REGARDING THESE FOUR ORDINANCES.
FIRST, PROPER NOTICE WAS NOT GIVEN DESPITE THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE CLAIMS. TEXAS LAW AND CITY ORDINANCE REQUIRE WRITTEN NOTICE TO RESIDENTS WITHIN 200FT THAT DID NOT OCCUR.
BASED UPON PERSONAL TESTIMONY. I HEARD FROM OVER SEVEN RESIDENTS WITHIN THE 200FT REQUIREMENT. SECOND, PUBLIC SIGNAGE WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE. A SIGN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY FRONTING SEAGOVILLE ROAD WAS PLACED BEHIND TALL WEEDS AND DOES NOT QUALIFY AS MEANINGFUL NOTICE OR SIGNAGE. THE PHOTOS I SUBMIT TONIGHT EVIDENCE THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE WAS IN VIOLATION OF ITS OWN ORDINANCE OF GRASS HEIGHT LIMITATIONS OF EIGHT INCHES. THE ONE SIGN WAS PLACED BY A CITY EMPLOYEE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEHIND ABOUT TWO AND A HALF TO THREE FEET OF GRASS, CLEARLY HIDING THE SIGN FROM BEING SEEN BY THE RESIDENTS OF SEAGOVILLE VIOLATING TEXAS ZONING LAWS, THE CITY FELL TO PLACE ANY SIGN ON KANE STREET, WHICH AGAIN VIOLATED TEXAS ZONING LAWS. THIRD, REQUIRED REPORTS WERE MISSING OR IGNORED. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THERE WAS ANY ADEQUATE AND SPECIFIC STUDIES FOR THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS TRAFFIC STUDIES, SEWER WATER CAPACITY ANALYSIS, AND NO INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACT REVIEW FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THESE ARE SAFEGUARDS MEANT TO PROTECT RESIDENTS AND CITY SERVICES. THE STUDY THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE DID OFFER ARE NOT BELIEVED TO BE SPECIFIC NOR ADEQUATE FOR THESE TRACTS OF LAND. FOURTH, THIS REZONING CONSTITUTES SPOT ZONING. APARTMENTS DO NOT EXIST WITHIN THAT IMMEDIATE BLOCK. TEXAS LAW DOES NOT FAVOR SPOT ZONING BECAUSE IT PRIORITIZES A SINGLE PRIVATE INTEREST OVER THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. MOST TROUBLING OF ALL, THIS HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT ZONING WAS APPROVED DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WITHOUT A SAFETY OR ENDANGERMENT STUDY. MANY CITIES REQUIRE THOUSAND FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND APARTMENTS BECAUSE CHILD SAFETY MUST COME FIRST. NOT ONE MEETING WAS CONDUCTED WITH THE PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATION AT SEAGOVILLE NORTH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OUT OF SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE CHILDREN OR THE FAMILY COMMISSIONERS.
THERE'S ANOTHER MATTER THAT DIRECTLY AFFECTS THE INTEGRITY OF THE PUBLIC RECORD AND PUBLIC TRUST OF THE CITY OF RELATED TO THESE ORDINANCES, SOMEONE HAVING ACCESS TO THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE GOVERNMENT RECORDINGS ALTERED AN OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT RECORDING OF THE NOVEMBER 6TH, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. I WAS A SPEAKER AT THE NOVEMBER 6TH, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AND I'M A WITNESS TO WHAT ACCURATELY OCCURRED THAT EVENING DURING MY SIX MINUTE PRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL, I WAS INTERRUPTED BY THE MAYOR, SEBASTIAN. ABOUT HALFWAY
[00:25:04]
THROUGH MY PRESENTATION, HIS INTERRUPTION WAS UNLAWFULLY REMOVED FROM MY PRESENTATION, THE VIDEO AND PLACED AT THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. IT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE LOGICAL SENSE AT THE END. JUST LISTEN TO IT. I SERVE AS SECRETARY AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS OF THE SEAGOVILLE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, AND I ATTEST THAT THE VIDEO I AM OFFERING TO YOU TONIGHT THROUGH A VIMEO URL ADDRESS, REFLECTS THE ALTERED VERSION SUBMITTED FROM THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE DURING A LEGAL PRODUCTION REQUEST. YOU MAY VIEW THAT ALTERED CITY OF SEAGOVILLE GOVERNMENT VIDEO VERSION BY GOING TO VIMEO.COM 41103243528. TEXAS LAW IS CLEAR THAT GOVERNMENT RECORDS MUST BE PRESERVED ACCURATELY, AND THAT ALTERATION SUCH RECORDS CARRY SERIOUS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES. TONIGHT, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD WITH INTEGRITY BY CORRECTING AND REPEALING THE FOUR ORDINANCES, RESTORING LAWFUL PROCESS AND PUBLIC TRUST. YOU CAN DO WHAT IS RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND MAY WISDOM GUIDE YOUR DECISION. AND I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER ALL THE DOCUMENTS TO YOU TO ADD TO THE RECORD AT THE.YOU CAN JUST SIGN IT RIGHT HERE. THANK YOU. WE'LL LOOK THROUGH IT, MA'AM. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT SEVEN. AND I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. I RECOMMEND TO REPEAL THE ORDINANCE. CASE NUMBER. CASE NUMBER 2025043Z. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE ORDINANCE 11 DASH 2022 AND 30 3-2023. YEAH. OKAY. GOT A MOTION TO REPEAL. NEED A SECOND, GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? CASE NUMBER 2025044Z. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.
DISCUSS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REPEAL OF ORDINANCE 20 6-2023. BILL. THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER SIX ON YOUR AGENDA. THIS IS TO REPEAL ORDINANCE NUMBER 26 2023. AND WHAT THIS ORDINANCE DID THE THE PREVIOUS RED LINE IS IN YOUR PACKET. IS IT INCREASED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF APARTMENT COMPLEX FROM THREE STORIES TO FOUR STORIES OR 45FT IN HEIGHT. OPENED A PUBLIC HEARING AT 732.
ANY DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS? ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE? I JUST SAID I WOULD LIKE IT. EVERYTHING THAT I JUST SAID. MY NAME IS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN. I LIVE AT 1919. I WOULD LIKE IT TO APPLY FOR NUMBERS FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN OF THE AGENDA. OKAY. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE? I DO HAVE A QUESTION, BILL. YES, MA'AM, ON THIS ONE. AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT, WASN'T THIS THREE STORY ANYWAY, OR WAS WAS THIS HIGHER? NO. SO LET'S SEE IF WE GO TO YOUR PACKET HERE. YOU'LL SEE PIECE OF TEXT. IT'LL SAY DIVISION 12 AT THE AT THE TOP IT'LL SAY A APARTMENT DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS KIND OF LOOKS LIKE THIS. OKAY. AND IF YOU GO DOWN, YOU'LL SEE A RED LINE IN THERE IF IT WAS PRINTED IN COLOR. OKAY, I SEE IT. AND YOU'LL SEE HOW IT WAS AMENDED FROM 2 TO 3. JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM. YES, MA'AM. SO JUST TO CONFIRM, BILL,
[00:30:02]
THIS WAS THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS MADE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RESCINDING. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT, CORRECT. I INCLUDED THE HOW THE ORDINANCE WAS ORIGINALLY AMENDED. AND SO THAT WAY YOU CAN SEE HOW IT WAS CHANGED AND WHAT IT APPEARS LIKE TODAY. OKAY. THANK YOU.OKAY. WHAT YOU'LL. I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT ORDINANCE WAS ORIGINALLY TWO STORY CHANGED OVER TO THREE STORY IN VIOLATION OF THE PROCESS THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN NOT FOR STORY. IT WAS ORIGINALLY TWO STORY. AND THEN LATER I BELIEVE THE CITY AMENDED IT. SO IT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE REPEAL IS FOR THE ORDINANCE AT AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY WHEN IT WAS TWO STORIES WITHOUT THE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS, WHEN THE WHEN IT WENT FROM TWO STORY TO INCREASE IT TO THREE STORIES. AND SO THAT'S WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE REPEAL IS FOR TO TAKE IT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL TWO STORY HEIGHT. RIGHT. SO I MIGHT HAVE MISSPOKEN ON THAT. I'M GOING TO READ EXACTLY WHAT ORDINANCE 2623 READS AND HOW IT WAS AMENDED. SECTION ONE. THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED, IS AMENDED BY AMENDING TITLE TWO BUILDING DEVELOPMENT ZONING. CHAPTER 25 ZONING. ARTICLE 25.02 ZONING ORDINANCE DIVISION 12A APARTMENT DWELLING DISTRICT REGULATIONS BY REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 2502 .252 TO READ IN ITS ENTIRETY AS FOLLOWS. NO BUILDING SHALL EXCEED THREE STANDARD STORIES FOR A LIVING PURPOSES, WHERE BASEMENT AREAS ARE USED FOR OFF STREET PARKING OR OTHER SERVICE FACILITIES, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING ABOVE GRADE SHALL NOT EXCEED 45FT. THIS IS THE ORDINANCE IN QUESTION ON THE TABLE TO BE REPEALED TONIGHT.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS? IT'S IN OUR PACKET ONLINE AS WELL, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 736. ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I RECOMMEND TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 2623. CASE NUMBER 2025044Z. A MOTION TO. I'VE GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 737. CASE NUMBER 2025045Z. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REPEAL OF ORDINANCE 27-2023. MR. MEDINA.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, CASE NUMBER 20 2545 Z. THIS IS AN ITEM TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 27 2023. AND WITH THIS ORDINANCE DID IS IT REDUCED THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT 2720, 23, IN OUR PACKETS, YOU'LL SEE UNDER SECTION KIND OF UNDER SECTION ONE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE THERE. PAGE ONE, IT WILL SHOW THE MINIMUM ACREAGE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWNHOME DISTRICT. AND DUPLEX DISTRICT NEEDED A MINIMUM OR WAS CHANGED TO A MINIMUM OF ONE ACRE. SAME FOR MULTIFAMILY, SAME FOR NONRESIDENTIAL, AND SAME FOR MIXED USE. IF YOU KEEP GOING. YOU'LL SEE DIVISION 22 PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REGULATIONS UNDER SECTION. WHERE AM I? 2502 .533 PLAN DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
YOU'LL SEE A RED LINE OF HOW THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE EXISTED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF TONIGHT'S ITEM, WHICH IS. 27 ZERO. SORRY. 27 DASH 2023. YOU CAN SEE PREVIOUSLY FOR RESIDENTIAL PD, MINIMUM OF 20 ACRES WAS REQUIRED FOR MULTIFAMILY. TEN ACRES WAS REQUIRED FOR NONRESIDENTIAL PD, TEN ACRES WAS REQUIRED AND FOR MIXED USE 30 ACRES WAS REQUIRED.
THOSE WERE ALL REDUCED DOWN TO ONE ACRE IN SIZE. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS?
[00:35:09]
OPEN UP TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WHAT YOU'LL NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, MR. CHAIRMAN. OH YOU DID? YEAH. MY NAME IS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN. I LIVE IN 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD, AND I WOULD LIKE EVERYTHING THAT I STATED BEFORE TO APPLY FOR THIS ALSO. AND I'M ASKING THIS COMMISSION TO REPEAL THIS ORDINANCE. THANK YOU. ANY DISCUSSION? I GO STATE YOUR NAME. HELLO. MY NAME IS JEFF BERTRAM. ONE, TWO, THREE KENNETH DRIVE. I'M QUITE CONFUSED WITH WITH ALL THIS. SO IS THIS FOR FOR ME? YES. SO. RIGHT. SO YOU YOU REZONED YOUR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY JUST DOWN THE HIGHWAY OVER HERE TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT THE. AT THAT TIME, THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT SIZE FOR PD WAS ONE ACRE. AND WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT IS TO REPEAL THE ORDINANCE ALLOWING FOR PD BEING ONE ACRE IN SIZE. OKAY. I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE GRAPHIC DETAILS OF YOUR SPECIFIC PROJECT. HAVE YOU SUBMITTED ANY APPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT? YES, I THOUGHT THAT THING WAS DONE WAS GETTING A PERMIT. I'M JUST TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE. I'M NOT TRYING TO DO AN APARTMENT, BUT WHATEVER.WHATEVER YOU'VE GOT ON THE GROUND RIGHT NOW, IT GETS TO STAY THERE. OKAY? EVEN IF WE CHANGE THE ZONING, IT BECOMES LAWFUL, NON-CONFORMING. IT'S STILL A LAWFUL, NON-CONFORMING USE. OKAY. YEAH. THE LETTER THAT YOU RECEIVED, MR. BURKHAM, IS MANDATED THAT WE SEND THOSE OUT BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. OKAY, I KNOW THERE'S SOME SCARY LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR SURE, BUT YOUR PD IS ALREADY APPROVED. YOU'VE SUBMITTED PERMITS FOR THAT. YOU'RE VESTED ON THAT.
OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. OH. CAN WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 741? I RECOMMEND TO REPEAL THE ORDINANCE 27203, CASE NUMBER 2025045Z. MOTION TO REPEAL. I NEED A GOT A SECOND? ALL IN
[Discuss future agenda items.]
FAVOR? MR. MEDINA, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I HOPE EVERYBODY HAD A GOOD CHRISTMAS AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEW YEAR. YOU'LL SEE ON YOUR IN YOUR PACKET. YOU'LL SEE QUITE A BIT OF UPDATES THAT I HAVE HERE FOR YOU. WE'VE BEEN WORKING INTERNALLY WITH OUR NEW CITY MANAGER AND OUR BUILDING OFFICIALS, AS WELL AS OTHER DEPARTMENTS ON SEVERAL COMPREHENSIVE TEXT AMENDMENTS. WE HAVE A LOT OF OUTDATED LANGUAGE IN OUR ORDINANCE, A LOT OF THINGS THAT JUST HAVEN'T BEEN LOOKED AT OR WORKED ON IN QUITE SOME TIME. AND SO WE'RE WE'RE NEEDING TO UPDATE THIS OR UPDATE OUR ORDINANCES. WE DON'T EXPECT IT TO HAPPEN ALL AT ONCE. WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET ALL THE NAILS AT ONE TIME. IT'S KIND OF GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROCESS. AND SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET ARE THE ITEMS THAT PERTAIN TO THIS COMMISSION, THE ZONING AMENDMENTS TO OUR TO OUR ZONING CODE, TO THE TEXT OF ORDINANCE. SO I WANTED TO GIVE THIS GET THIS OVER TO YOU ALL SO YOU CAN START LOOKING IT OVER. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THE PLAN RIGHT NOW IS TO TAKE THE MAJORITY OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE JANUARY 26TH COUNCIL MEETING. WE PLAN ON HAVING A JOINT PNC AND COUNCIL MEETING HERE ON THE 26TH, SO WE CAN GET IT ALL DONE IN ONE MEETING. BUT IN SHORT, YOU'LL SEE THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT. THERE ARE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE ABOUT A SERVANT'S QUARTERS. VERY OUTDATED. WE TOOK THAT OUT.WE'RE JUST CLEANING THAT UP. WE'RE ALSO SHOWING THAT THERE. IF YOU LOOK AT CARGO CONTAINERS IN THE CITY, YOU. WE HAVE VERY LARGE PLACES LIKE WALMART, FOR EXAMPLE. THEY WILL HAVE CARGO CONTAINERS COME IN TEMPORARILY DURING THE HOLIDAYS TO KEEP STOCK AND MAKE SURE THAT THEIR SHELVES DON'T RUN EMPTY. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN SO MUCH THIS YEAR, BUT IN THE PAST IT'S VERY COMMON. THOSE REALLY AREN'T ALLOWED IN OUR CODE. IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR. SO WHAT WE DID WAS FIND A WAY FOR THAT TO ACTUALLY WORK, HAVE THEM COME IN AND GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY CARGO CONTAINERS DURING THE HOLIDAYS. THAT WAY WE WE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT DOESN'T INTERRUPT THEIR NORMAL BUSINESS, AND WE KIND OF FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT WORK. THAT'S THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC OR FIRE LANES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AGAIN, OUR CODE WAS JUST SILENT ON THE MATTER, AND WE NEEDED A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE A PATHWAY TO OUR BUSINESS PARTNERS TO TO NAVIGATE SOME ISSUES. HERE. YOU'LL ALSO SEE
[00:40:01]
NEW DEFINITIONS BEING ADDED. SPEAKING WITH POTENTIAL DEVELOPER IN TOWN, THERE'S A PROSPECT FOR A SPORTS COMPLEX CENTER THAT WANTS TO COME HERE. SOMETHING SMALL SCALE, BUT OUR CODE DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT YET EITHER. AND SO WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT ON WHAT DEFINITION MIGHT WORK, WE'RE PROPOSING TO AMEND OUR CODE TO ALLOW FOR THAT USE WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SO THAT WAY THIS BODY AND THE CITY COUNCIL CAN REVIEW THAT AND KIND OF APPROVE OR DENY THAT AS THEY DEEM FIT. A LOT OF CLEANUPS ON LANGUAGE REGARDING ATMS AND KIOSKS, RIGHT. ALLOWING THOSE WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF LIKE THAT WHERE IT'S JUST KIND OF BEEN UNADDRESSED OVER THE YEARS AS TECHNOLOGY AND THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND WE'VE KIND OF OUR IDENTITY IS KIND OF EVOLVING AS WE'RE GROWING A LITTLE BIT. ONE FINAL THING YOU'LL SEE IN HERE IS AN AMENDMENT FOR THE CREATION OF A DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT. WHILE SEAGOVILLE DOESN'T HAVE A TRADITIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE DO HAVE WHAT I THINK IS A IS COULD BE A VERY NICE DOWNTOWN WITH A LOT OF POTENTIAL. AND SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN HERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT ANY, ANY BUSINESS OR LAND USE WITHIN THAT DISTRICT THAT DEALS WITH AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR OR OUTSIDE STORAGE, ANYTHING LIKE THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED WITH A, WITH A WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. AND SOME OF THESE HEAVIER MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS USES JUST WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED ANYMORE. AGAIN, IF THEY'RE PREEXISTING, THEY COULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE. THEY WOULD BE YOU KNOW, EVERYONE LIKES THE TERM GRANDFATHERED IN OR LEGAL NONCONFORMING THEY CAN MAINTAIN OPERATE. BUT AS WE START TO REDEVELOP OUR CITY AND KIND OF REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN AND PULL IT UP, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE NEWER BUSINESSES THAT ARE COMING IN ARE GOING TO BE HIGH QUALITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT IN HERE AS WELL. AND REALLY, THE PURPOSE OF GETTING ALL THIS IN FRONT OF YOU IS TO JUST RECEIVE FEEDBACK, GET YOU THINKING ABOUT IT. AND THAT WAY, COME JANUARY, WE CAN HOPEFULLY COME OUT ON THE OTHER END WITH SOME SOME GOOD POLICIES HERE. I SAID ONE FINAL NOTE, BUT I SKIPPED ONE. THERE'S YOU'LL SEE TWO DOCUMENTS, NUMBER TWO AND THREE IN YOUR ATTACHMENTS THAT LOOK VERY, VERY SIMILAR. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THEM YOU'LL SEE THAT WE ADD DEFINITIONS FOR SOME OF THESE LAND USES THAT I WAS REFERRING TO. ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY REQUIRES A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR ANY NEW MOBILE FOOD UNIT OR FOOD TRUCK. WE ACTUALLY DIDN'T HAVE A DEFINITION IN OUR ZONING CODE FOR MOBILE FOOD UNITS. SO WE WANT TO CREATE THAT DEFINITION AS WELL AS OPTION ONE, REQUIRE MOBILE FOOD UNITS TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT BEFORE THEY CAN OPERATE. OR OPTION TWO ALLOW THEM BY RIGHT, BUT LIMIT THEM TO ONLY ONE MOBILE FOOD UNIT PER ACRE OF LAND OR LESS. SO IF YOU OWN A CONVENIENCE STORE THAT'S SITTING ON A QUARTER ACRE, YOU COULD HAVE A FOOD TRUCK, BUT NO MORE THAN ONE ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. SO WE'RE KIND OF JUST LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK TO SEE THE DIRECTION OF HOW YOU WANT SEAGOVILLE TO LOOK. DO WE WANT TO REQUIRE IT TO HAVE A HAVE THESE MOBILE FOOD UNITS TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, OR DO WE WANT TO ALLOW THEM BY RIGHT AND ANY NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, THAT ITEM IS A LITTLE BIT STICKIER THAN SOME OF THESE OTHER ONES. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ONE WILL NECESSARILY MAKE THE JANUARY 22ND DOCKET, BUT IT'S AN ONGOING ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING THROUGH. AND AGAIN, LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES, SEE HOW OTHER CITIES ARE DOING IT, HOW OTHER, YOU KNOW, FORNEY, CRANDALL, MESQUITE AND EVERYONE ELSE ENFORCE THAT AND KIND OF GET A FEEL FOR WHAT OUR NEIGHBORS ARE DOING AS WELL. BUT BUT AGAIN, ONE SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL. WE NEED TO DO WHAT'S GOOD FOR FOR OUR COMMUNITY HERE. SO QUESTION I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. BUT AGAIN THIS IS I KNOW THIS IS YOUR FIRST TIME SEEING IT, SO FEEL FREE TO DIGEST IT OVER THE HOLIDAYS AS YOU SEE FIT. WE STILL ON JANUARY THE 8TH. IS THAT OUR JOINT MEETING CALLING FOR JANUARY 8TH? YES, YES JANUARY 20TH. YES, YES. THAT'S GOING TO BE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. YES, MA'AM. IT SHOULD START AT SIX WILL, WE'LL CHECK MONDAY WHEN WE'RE BACK AND WE'LL GIVE EVERYBODY A CALL. SHOULD BE 630 IS OUR REGULAR MEETING TIME. TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THE PNC WOULD MEET FIRST. WE WOULD HAVE OUR NORMAL MEETING LIKE WE LIKE WE WOULD. AND THEN DIRECTLY AFTER THAT, WE'LL GO RIGHT INTO CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND I'LL MAKE A REPORT AND PROVIDE THAT TO THE COUNCIL ON WHAT YOU WHAT YOU DID. OKAY. I HOPE SO. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS MEETING AT* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.