Is Clicker. Clicker. Now we get to find out where the pay attention. All right, got 5:30. Go ahead and call the meeting to order. If you don't mind, would you please do the roll call? Chairman York, here. Vice Chairman Salasar Garza here. Commissioner Miller here. Commissioner Mandel here. Commissioner Munoz is going to be absent. Commissioner Hedrickk here. Uh, Commissioner Bud is going to be absent. Commissioner Kenthu here. Commissioner Titleman here. We have a quorum to conduct the meeting. Thank you very much. And if you don't mind, uh, just reading the rules for public comment. Citizens will be allowed to attend and make public comments in persons at the city planning commission meeting. The public is invited to speak on any agenda item and any other items that pertain to the planning commission. Comments are limited to three minutes if you choose to speak during this period. You will not be allowed to speak again when the specific item is considered in order of the agenda. Thank you. With that, we'll go ahead and open up public comment if anybody would like to speak. If you speak now, you cannot speak again later. Seeing none, we will close public comment. Move on. No approval of absences. So, approval of minutes for the May 28th meeting. Make a motion that we approve the minutes as presented by staff. I'll second. All right. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Motion passes. And moving on to consent agenda items two through five. Uh wait, is item six also cons? Uh item six. Sorry, that's a separate public hearing. Yeah, two through five. All righty, sir. Thank you. And for the record, Andrew Deus with Development Services reading in tonight's consent agenda. Item number two, London Village section 1, block one, lot one. Item number three, Sakura Edition lot 1B- A and 1B-B. Item four, line Weber tracks, block one, lots one and two. And item five for conditional approval, CG Glasscock Bay front edition, lot 1A and 1B. Staff has reviewed the five four plots for tonight's agenda. We have deemed them com compliant with Texas local government code as well as the unified development code and recommend approval. All right. Thank you, Andrew. Uh Commissioner, just so you know, if you we'll open up for questions, but um after questions, we're going to do items two and three and then I'll be abstaining on four and five. So, we'll do two separate public hearings and two separate votes. But, do any commissioners have questions on any of these? I have a question on number two. um this London Village uh commercial property. Uh where is the drainage going on this uh property? The drainage would be flowing to County Road 47 which is along the western property line and this doesn't require any um detention at this time or the plans that were submitted the storm water quality management plan showed a balance between the pre and post calculations. Okay. So it already shows a balance. So we already have PI plans on this. No PI plans are required. Okay. And why is that? Why? I mean I thought with all uh plats we have to submit PI plans now. Thought that's the new Well, I think it means there's no public improvements, but they'll have Right. So as I'm sure development is different. As I'm sure you reviewed the plot, you noted that uh no water construction required. It was going to operate on septic. So there would be no public improvements, therefore no PI plans. Okay. And I do have one other question. Um, it said on the note on here that there's no sidewalks required. Why is that? On County Road 43, that is a highway which is maintained. And then on County Road 47, those are ditches. So there is no sidewalk for the entire length of the road. It is a rural street design. So on FM43, as it gets developed further, nobody's going to have sidewalks in the front. At this point, that discussion has not been had on what the future will be for County Road or for FM43. Okay. It's just odd because everything that gets annexed seems to require a uh sidewalk in the front. So, this is just kind of one of the first pieces to get developed on that side. So, we're going to set a precedent. If this doesn't do it, then there's really not going to be any sidewalks probably on any of it. The same could be said for all of the plots that were approved by planning commission along Yorktown. Yeah. Which is a problem I see. Right. In which we had to come in with a bond election. So yeah. Then ultimately the city's responsible for it and the taxpayers have to foot the bill. So that's why I was just surprised that there weren't any uh side rocks required on this at least this first section to kind of set the stage. So that's all I got. Or at least a waiver to correspond with the they're not required. Man, if only somebody had been asking for a mechanism to put aside money for a sidewalk waiver like a fee in lie of construction. Yeah. Oh, you're talking about impact fees. No, I've been asking them to create something in the ordinance to have an account to set money for waivers just like that sidewalk waiver. Every time we wave sidewalk for stuff in Flower Bluff, on the island, wherever, where they make sense, they could still be putting money in the pot. But because they didn't have a pot to put money in, we can't require it. Impact fees take care of all that. That's a different story. All right. Any other questions? Okay. Um, we are going to open the public comment for items two and three. Seeing no takers, we will close public comment. Uh, entertain entertain further discussion or a motion on just items two and three. Please make a motion that we approve items two and three as presented by staff. I'll second. Okay, we got a motion and a second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? All right, motion passes. Uh, moving on to items four and five. Public hearing and vote. and I will be abstaining. Okay. So, moving on to items four and five. Um, we already had questions for the commission, right? For So, now I'll go ahead and open up the public comment on items number four and five. Anybody like to come and speak on behalf of items four or five? If not, then I'll close the public comment and u entertain a motion or further questions for staff. I move that we approve items four and five as presented by uh staff. I'll second. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I I. All those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, vice chair. Moving on to item six. Good afternoon. Karen Castanzo with planning and community development. Just waiting on the slideshow to be pulled up. There we go. Thank you. So, the item before you is the Padre Mustang Island Mobility Plan. This item actually initiated from the island area development plan. uh mobility plan was a high priority identified uh within that ADP and uh the community had requested uh for that plan to get funded. So this is a TUR funded project. It launched in 2023 with the economic development department and then last uh early summer we uh over at planning and community development received this project as we had some uh staff transitions. uh looking at the plan at that point, uh determined that we wanted to speak to Texot specifically and identify some recommendations for Park Road 22 as well as uh 361 over on the island uh which we certainly did and also worked uh closely with the ISAC, the island strategic action committee to finalize recommendations for the various facilities within the island that are part of this plan. Um we have taken the this uh draft document over to the ISAC for their recommending action. Um they have recommended uh and we'll talk a little bit with some modifications and those are in front of you as well. So we'll go over those uh at the end of the presentation to just give you broad overview. The intention of the mobility plan is to focus on connectivity for pedestrians, people's riding riding bikes, people using uh their golf carts to grid around as well as vehicles and also watercraft. Uh ways to connect the community with attractions, whether it be the beach or area parks, as well as local businesses, whether they live on the island or visiting. So, the mobility plan does have several sections. uh but the core recommendations follow uh geographic uh groupings. So we have a set of recommendations for texttop facilities that I'm going to focus on in today's presentation. But there's also specific recommendations for the area that you see on this map in orange, which we're calling the north loop streets, city beach connectors, which are cityowned streets uh that are over uh near the the beach side, as well as county beach connectors, which are within the county park area. And then on the west side of park red 102, uh we're calling that the west island connectors which are mainly residential connectors and also where we have the uh white cap preserve development coming on board. So again, focusing on the text dot facilities, the recommendation for Highway 361 between Park Road 22 over to the entrance of the Lake Padre development uh that will be coming online is to have on the south side of the street a shared use path that is a 15 mph path for both bicycles and golf carts, taking them out of the vehicle. vehicle travel lanes. There would also be a separate sidewalk facility for pedestrians that would obviously be moving at a much slower pace than 15 mph. And uh landscaping for Park Road 22, we have a significant amount of rideway to work with. Uh so that gives us an opportunity to keep the uh travel lanes, the vehicle travel lanes and the existing median as is and then look at adding both um additional opportunities for storm water collection uh and then storm water underground uh gray infrastructure as well as on both sides having two-way uh golf cart and bicycle paths. So you could see that that is 14 feet on each side or 7 foot lane in each direction and then an additional 8ft sidewalk on each side of Park Road 22 with landscape buffer uh next to the businesses. There's some elevation there as well. So that will help uh with some of that. Again, it's 15 mile per hour for those shared use paths for bicycles and golf carts. There's also a recommendation to reduce Park Road 22 from its current 55 mph uh speed to 45 mile per hours. That's something that had come up during the area development plan discussions and the community really wants to see that um move forward. So again, bring that to fruition uh through this planning process. And then in addition beyond Aquarius Street uh towards those businesses that are located underneath the JFK causeway like Snoopies or uh docks uh being able to have a side path. We we have a photo here of another side path that's connected to a bridge. It may not be attached necessarily, but having a separate side path at least 20 ft wide to accommodate all those modes of transportation to get to those businesses. And a lot of engineering still would need to be done there. It could be on the north or south side of the JFK uh depending on you know wetland impacts and and what would make the most sense from an engineering standpoint. Um we do have an implementation portion uh of recommendations within this document and the the park road 22 and the side path are broken up into pieces again with understanding that some items will take 10 15 years or more to come online. I'll go through these slides a little bit more quicker quickly, but I just wanted to highlight that we do have an appendix that looks very specifically at the water exchange bridge on Park Road 22. Um, we have a lot of rightway on this new bridge. And one of the questions is how do people get over, under, across, and around be able to get between the White Cap Preserve and the um Lake Padre development? And so we did um include within uh the appendix some preliminary engineering analysis on feasibility as well as load analysis just to get us going um in that process. But as always um we'll continue to to take a look at this as it's done uh to uh bring those side paths on online for park road 22. Uh so again this is all in the document. you each have a copy in front of you as well as it's uh a digital copy is available within your agenda packet. Again, just some renderings of what those uh paths might look like underneath the water exchange bridge. Um just kind of showing some of the height um availability in addition to the text dot facilities. We looked again at at the city beach, the county beach, the north loop, and the the west connectors for ways that we can amend what is existing without having to invest a full amount of money for reconstruction. Right? So, where it was feasible, there are interim recommendations for each of these facilities that use the existing pavement width. Um, a lot of them are wide enough to be able to accommodate either some sidewalk could be painted. We could use ballards or armadillos to help delineate where people will walk or ride their bikes. Um, here's an example just from Leeward Drive closer to uh the Whitecat Beach. And you can see um that there's a lot of rightway and pavement to work with. So, in the interim, being able to have, you know, the same two-way vehicle traffic, add parking and add a bicycle uh and pedestrian shared use path in the long term where reconstruction would take place, extending the amount of pavement. And again, this could be 10, 15, maybe even 20 years out depending on, you know, funds available for these types of projects. Um again having those you know traffic being able to go two ways and having parking on both sides but then converting to bike a golf cart shared use path and having the pedestrians in a separate facility from from those vehicles. Um one thing to note is transportation um technology is changing rapidly. So we completely understand that this is you know based on current conditions by the time it's time to reconstruct some of these streets it the world may look different right not all of us saw scooters coming is one of my examples right so those electric scooters and electric bikes personal mobility devices are kind of taking over in other cities uh quite rapidly and we may be seeing some of that here soon as well so all of these plans are living documents again I mentioned that we do have an implementation uh portion within the document short, mid and long term with the short term being the next one to five years. Just a couple highlights uh both Sand Dollar and Crow's Nest are paper streets currently on the island and the tours number two has already uh set aside $7.2 million over the next several years for construction of those two or portions of those two streets. Um so those are um in highlighted in the short term as well as park road 22 from Aquarius to WhiteCap. There's already a uh programmed project in the uh metropolitan planning organizations transportation projects. Um it's early in their 10-year plan currently but we may have an opportunity here to work with Tex and the NO um to bring that uh into an earlier implement implementation. That's the intention. Um, Winward, uh, as well as connecting, uh, that south part of Winward to Ellif, which is essentially would connect the city beach collectors connectors to the, um, county beach streets. And of on West Island, there's a few of those more local uh, collector streets. Um, Death Marinus, for example, is included in the recently adopted rapid pavement program. That's one thing to note is that those in interim recommendations allow uh these street uh plans to be uh included in that rapid pavement program during the restriping. So we can implement some of this pretty easily as the street comes onto the rapid pavement program. we can get the restriping uh to to meet the the design and the interimm recommendation so that we are not spending millions of dollars or tens of millions of dollars on reconstructing each one of these facilities. So in terms of next step, the reason this item is here in front of the planning commission is because this document is essentially amending plan CC, the city's comprehensive plan by attaching it to it as an element of the comprehensive plan. So it comes before planning commission as a public hearing um and a recommending action for council. We'll then uh after today's meeting go to the TUR number two and brief them on the project and that's tentatively scheduled for July pending their agenda. It's budget season so that can be complicated and then after that we'll be taking it to city council again public hearing and having two readings of the adopting ordinance. Everything will be updated on the website on creating CC. So, we have a project website that gives um interested parties updates on when items are going either to planning commission, it's up there, or city council. And we also have uh a constant contact email that we send out with those updates as well. With that, um I stand for any questions. Uh we have, uh Craig Thompson here from the Island Strategic Action Committee. Um, and also with me is Dan McGin from the planning and community development department. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate the presentation. Um, I had a couple quick comments. Um, and then I'll see if commissioners have any others. One is I I really appreciate seeing u golf cart paths along Park Road 22 and 361 because the two roads where golf carts aren't allowed, but they still end up all the time. Um, so that's that's a great thing. Um, comment on the other streets. I know like Leeward, this is just my opinion and maybe this was already discussed, but I think you don't really need the extra room for golf cart paths on minor streets cuz like you said there's other things that are, you know, the golf carts have no problem being with the cars on the minor roads. So, they're probably better there and they make everybody slow down anyway, but then they get them off of the other path because then you'll have bikes and we already see scooters and that'll probably keep coming and then like you said, there's other things that are coming. So, uh, but that's pretty minor and I think, uh, I I I really like this vision. The only other comment I want to make as we were discussing before the meeting is would love to see, you know, if you can put trees in here in the mobility plan, but if we could somehow implement that the island is oak trees instead of palm trees, it would be great because they're actually native and they provide shade. That would be awesome. I I I will add um you have uh in addition a printout of the Isac recommended amendments. And I did say I was going to review those. Apologies. Totally uh at the end slipped my mind. Um but the island uh strategic action committee did have three changes to the document in front of you. So you can see the print out for page 28 uh which is park road 22 highlighted is an addition bullet of emphasized greenscape and adequate drainage solutions. I'm not if it's this body's will, we can add emphasize greenscape trees inadequate. Up to you if you wanted to make an amending motion. That's always interesting on emphasizing on the green, you know, plants and so forth because it does make the area look a lot nicer and more inviting. But as far as the adequate drainage of these, you know, so like if you're going to go ahead and plant all these things, how are we going to continue watering them so they can continue not to die being the fact that we have a shortage of water right now? It's almost stage four. I'm trying to think of the short way to answer it besides saying it is feasible. Um, we have technology such as bags for new planting that we could use the recycled water in and those release water. you use native plants, but there's there's ways to make it work. If it's an if it's a priority, it can happen. I will also say that even before today's storms, there was water in the ditches. Yeah. Drainage. Do we need to recommend that? I think that's just a no-brainer. They have standing water for weeks after a rain. Yeah. So, and and I I think that that's just a concern of residents who have seen, you know, spillage over onto Park Road 22 from, you know, those those ditches on the side of the road. And that well we've just I've just seen that happen in other districts where we do try to build a corridor real nice, beautiful. We try to put a little bit of landscaping on it and it just doesn't get maintained. Yeah. And I want to see it maintained because I live in district 1 and I like to see the plants and when they start to build the corridor down 624 to continue to do that as well. And of course, we're going to go about how the what type of plants they are, you know, and I think now the plants we're going to have to use is something more like what they use in Arizona, you know, almost because the the good news is native plants are acclimated to our temperatures and our climate and our ecosystem. So, uh, if we stick to natives, we're probably in in good shape. Um, I personally have not had to water my trees yet. And the way it's going, yeah, my rain barrels will take care of it. I don't think I'll have to water them till July or August. So, no. In all, I think it's an excellent plan. I I love it. I can't wait till it does start to get into action, you know. Yeah. Uh, the second change from the Isac, just so I make sure to highlight it, both Se Pines and uh, White Cap Boulevard. So, this is west of Park Road 22, not the east side. The there initially was a recommendation in the interim and future to take one of the travel lanes in each of those two uh street segments and convert it to just for uh bikes and golf carts. There's additional desire uh to take a look at the at some data and and what whether or not that would be an appropriate recommendation. So we'll take another bite of the apple with ISAC. We can always come back and amend the plan after it's adopted. So that's not at all um an issue. So both staff and the ISAC are recommend adoption with the amendments from the island strategic action committee. And did it look on the white cap? It brings it down to one lane, right? One lane each way. That was the original recommendation, but if you look at uh the print out of the recommendation from Isac, it's the back page of that stapled uh set of pages. So, page 64. Okay. It would now be um to come back revisit that with recommendation. Okay. Thank you. Any other uh commissioners have Does the city already own all the rightway? Because all these say 100 foot rightways. So, it's already there's no more acquisition. It's all within the right ofways. Uh that Yes. From the plats. They have large rightways on the Makes it a lot easier. Yeah. No. And and 200 feet of rideway for Park Road 22 is that's exceptional. That's we should be able to do something exceptional with it. Is there any plans for striping or signage or you know showing people that this is golf carts, this is bikes, this is I feel like it'll be a cluster. Yeah. Everything will have to be worked out in the engineering phase to make sure that we're following um all the transportation guidelines. Obviously uh our traffic engineering folks are going to be sticklers. Uh but the intention is is to have the the sherros as well as 15 mile per hours um on the golf cart bike paths because obviously golf carts can go much more than 15 miles per hour. If you want to drive like a car, you have to go in the vehicle travel lanes. If you if you want to take it nice and leisurely, you can go in the 15 m per hour lane, right? That's that's the intention there. Um and so yes, the answer is yes. what that looks like will be during the engineering design uh determined and then ultimately the order of what uh projects get done at what point that's just ultimately up to the TUR board. So they'll there'll be a like anything we have a process right whether it gets on a bond or it's the it's tourist funded um the the stuff that's west of park road 22 is not within the tourist boundary so the tourist funds wouldn't necessarily be used that I shouldn't say that that's not wholesale just realized why cap preserve is part of the tur they amended the tourist boundary so um items that are outside of the tur boundary would be unlikely to be funded with the tur funds but we have other sources of funds with in the city. Beyond just the bond, um we have access to the type B funds. If it's an economic development facility, that might be an appropriate uh fund. So, we'll be looking at that. Also, grant funding. So, those will come with their own requirements. If it's a grant-f funded uh project, uh this just helps direct staff on where to focus first. And so, the short-term projects will be prioritized over things identified in the mid and long term. And as always, if something is identified as more important and it's in the midterm, we just amend the plan. Um, these things are living documents and the Isac will continue to be engaged, I'm sure, just as they have been with the area development plan implementation. Great. I appreciate the presentation. Two questions. Is 14t wide enough for bikes and golf carts and pedestrians? Not all three. Oh, can we bring the presentation back up? I to go back to one of the earlier slides. Thank you. Oh, just went back. There you go. So, the preferred operating uh uh width for a golf cart is seven feet. Um the preferred for parks is five. So, where golf carts and bikes so that 14t one in each direction that would be fine. Pedestrians would be have a separate facility to either. So there the only shared use paths are either bikes and golf carts with pedestrians separated not sharing or there are recommendations in a few instances where bicycles and pedestrians are sharing and I think those are 12 foot wide. So we did take a look and make sure that we were um following all the transportation guidelines, design guidelines uh that most current ones. Okay, that was my concern. The other concern is I think it's great that you're reducing the speed limit from 55, but is 45 slow enough? Did you look at that the possibility of reducing it to 35? I mean, road um Rodfield the speed limit in some sections is 30 miles an hour and there's a portion that's 25 miles on Park Road 22 during school hours, right? So, so we do even have a a school uh uh limit speed limit there as well uh during operating hours. I would I would say the answer for now given that the design for Park Road 22 um is not changing for vehicles, right? We're keeping the lane configuration with a median. Uh it it will be incremental, right? So that's not something we are recommending at this point, but it's certainly something that can be revisited. Ed, I know you've been down in his jaws recently. It got reduced, but the speed limit is still very much 50 even though it was 45. Exactly. That that's what my concern is. You reduce it by 10 miles an hour, but people are still going to be going 55 miles an hour. And you know, my concern is injuries, right? you know and again in the design process maybe we'll we'll work on you know the configuration of the pavement for vehicles I want to leave that to the engineering design process and make sure that we're following those procedures uh so that the engineering team can help us identify again if community said 45 this body is certainly welcome to make an amending recommendation for what it's worth there's calculations for that gets It's real nerdy. But with the amount of driveways and everything onto Park Road 22 that have grown since, you know, original, it you run that calculation, it's probably 45 or less. And I'm sure Textile will run that. But that did make me think of another comment. If you can add a note on there, I'd like to see it in here to have them consider the two schools that are out there because when when they're doing pickup and drop off, those cars are all stacking. So if there's any changes to the configuration, make sure they keep Right now they kind of use the shoulder, but if there's going to be any changes to that part where you're doing changing any configuration, want to make sure we at least have some kind of shoulder or some stacking space so that they get out of the the traffic way. And that's specifically for Park Road 22 as opposed to Palmyra. Yeah, because the two schools, there's a elementary school and a middle school that are right on Park Road 22. And that's where those two school zones are that you were talking about. I wonder if uh that would be something to be put into a recommendation if you wanted us to make a change to the draft plan as presented. So you you need that in the motion. You mean if if you want us to make a change to what we present to council and again it would be a recommendation. So we'd present Isac's recommendation planning commission's recommendation. Okay. That am I following? Make to do that. Thank you, sir. I always look to my lawyer. I had a couple comments, too. I guess your biggest challenge is going to be dealing with the bridges. Um, I would imagine, right? When you say which bridges? Let's be specific. Well, if we're going to have these paths uh be continuous, you know, and and have the full island mobility plan. Obviously, the Datricio Bridge does not have these lanes on it today. And so it would have to be some sort of addition to that. And I don't know whether you can I don't think you can can lever anything off of those no need structures. That was part of the what you'll see in the appendix. There's enough pavement that we can we can fit. You can fit we can fit. They they they built those quite wide on the Don Patricio. So we we have that and that's also why we did the load analysis init as a initial step just to say you know initial feasibility shows that we we can do that for the Don Patricio B. Yeah, one of the things with Gypsy Bridge is a different story. Gypsy, we took a look at that and that's why there's a limitation um in that recommendation in terms that you're not going to have um lanes or sidewalks on both sides. So, you can take a look uh and that interim, right? If if we wanted to spend all the money we in the world, we can make anything work. Um and then one of the reasons for the White Cap West initial recommendation that is now, you know, to be revisited was because of those bridges there, leaving very little room for anything else, even pedestrian uh sidewalk space. So, and then Text would have to be a willing participant in the bridge to Snoopies. Yes, that's that's their right of way as well. and that I mean anything that would affect the JFK causeway. Uh they they would be particularly interested in having a say in but we hope to partner with them on both on the entirety of Park Road 22. Okay. Well, I like it. I I think y'all did a great job. Um and I'm looking forward to it. You know, it's going to be a process and some time to get everything into become reality. Um, and you know, as far as the landscaping goes, there is purple pipe, um, you know, in the in some of those areas for irrigation. And I'm with Commissioner York, uh, or Chairman York with regards to, you know, oaks because I mean, there's plenty of scrub oaks on the east side of Park Road 22 um, that never get watered at all. They're very healthy and um so I I like it. Any other to add that to an amendment if you want the oaks in there? Yeah, I'll make a note of that. Say just native native flora and shave trees. Well, it's just palm trees aren't native and um they're very freeze susceptible and they're once they're established, they typically do pretty well over here, but there's always difficulty getting them to establish um on the front end. And um so you know whatever we can do to minimize water usage and um introduce you reintroduce native flora I think it's a good idea. With that I guess we can open up public hearing if there's anybody would like to speak on item number six. Howdy. Craig Thompson, um, vice chairman of the ISAC committee, chairman York, and commissioners. Appreciate you all hearing us today. Um, we've been working uh as vice chair, but also as chairman or uh as uh chair of the uh ADP uh subcommittee. We've been working with Karen and uh Dan now for a couple months or so. Uh maybe more than that. really appreciate their efforts uh picking this up and and and running with it to uh get it over the uh over the gold line. As y'all can see, they've done an outstanding job with it. Um and um I did have just a couple comments that that I wanted to mention about um about the width of the rideway. And one of the benefits of the width of that rideway and one of the benefits of this plan is that interim design that they've that they've put in there to be able to come in and utilize some of those really ride wide roadways and the wide rideways that they have like Winward, Leeward, some of these others. A lot of those roads have some really wide pavement sections right now that really aren't necessarily used for traffic um or or uh vehicular traffic. But to be able to come in and be able to stripe those, to be able to extend, you know, mobility within that pavement out to the golf carts and and and uh bicycles, I think uh was a real benefit and one of the things they should be complimented on on including that. Um you mentioned drainage, Michael. Um it it shouldn't uh necessarily need to be mentioned, but um we felt like it did need to be mentioned, especially on Park Road 22. um you know some of those lowlying areas we definitely need to make sure I mean you know that high ground water out there it doesn't take much of a rain when you get some high ground water uh to push it out onto the roadways uh which it does out on Park Road 22. We felt like that was important to mention that the green space goes without saying that's not a hard sale to anybody. And so just a couple things that we added. Um I think that was it. Um, again, appreciate you all hearing it and um, really look forward to getting this thing moving to the next stage. Thank you all. Thank you. Anybody else? Seeing none, we'll close public hearing. Um, if I may help with this motion. So we'll entertain a motion to recommend approval of the Padre Island Padre Mustang Island mobility plan with ISAG. Do we need to recommend with ISAG recommended changes? Okay. So to recommend approval uh with the recommended ISAG changes and the planning commission additions to consider uh Park Road 22 road configuration to accommodate the existing schools that have stackings uh on the road during pickup and drop off and to give preference to native plants and oak trees for use in the landscape areas. Anybody would like to make that motion? I make the motion that he just said right now. Perfect. Yeah, we do that. Just so moved. And I'll second it. Second. All right, we got a motion and second that was written out hopefully already. All those in favor? I I. Any opposed? All right, motion. That's what the recorder is for. Thank you. I'm like writing it all. Thank you. Uh, moving on to director's report. No report for tonight. All right. Any future agenda items? I just have one quick item. Um, whenever we get packets like this for this or for budget or whatever it may be, is there any way to get these before the actual meeting? Because we seem to get them and then on legisar. I didn't certainly the presentation was I saw the presentation. I just didn't see like the the ISAG thing. Yeah. Well, I don't know if that was on legisar or not. C CIP. You'll definitely get at least two weeks in advance. Okay, great. That's always fun. Thank you. All right, we are journ