>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, [CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:03] CITY OF PRINCETON, REGULAR MEETING, DECEMBER THE 18TH, 2023. COMMISSIONER ROLL-CALL. KYLE SUTTON IS HERE. SHERRY CAMPBELL. >> HERE. >> RYAN SHIFLET. >> HERE. >> CHRIS COOPER IS ABSENT AND ROBIN FORSYTH. >> HERE. >> PLEASE SILENCE ALL CELL PHONES AND STAND AND JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> PUBLIC APPEARANCE SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO RESPOND OR TO DISCUSS ANY ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP DURING THIS SECTION THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA, OTHER THAN TO MAKE STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO A SPEAKER'S INQUIRY OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO ANY INQUIRY. WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE PORTION. THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. [CONSENT AGENDA] ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS LISTED ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS THE COMMISSIONER SO REQUESTS IN WHICH EVENT THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA. TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023 MEETING AND FINAL PLAT FP 20233011384 SCROLL ADDITION. IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION OF EITHER ONE OF THESE BY ANY COMMISSIONER, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> ACTUALLY, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT FINAL PLAT. I'M JUST CURIOUS. I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THIS. LOOKING AT THE FINAL PLAT. THIS IS THE ONE OVER THERE. >> WE WANT TO PULL THAT AND ADD IT TO THE AGENDA. >> IF YOU WANT TO JUST PULL IT DOWN I MAY BE THINKING OF SOMETHING DIFFERENT THOUGH I UNDERSTAND. RIGHT NOW I'M FINE. >> GOOD. >> DISREGARD. >> THE PURPOSE OF THIS PLAT YOU CAN SEE IT NOW ON THE SCREEN IT'S TO DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FORCE GROVE, SOUTH STREET HAS BEEN AN EASEMENT. IT WAS NEVER FORMALLY DEDICATED AS RIGHT-OF-WAY SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS PLAT. THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PLAT. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE AN OPEN MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> I WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION OF SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. MOTION CARRIES 4-0 ONTO THE REGULAR AGENDA, FIRST ITEM, [REGULAR AGENDA] PUBLIC HEARING SUP20233002, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST FROM INDOFUNSO TORRES, FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE ON A 0.447 ACRE TRACT OF LAND AND THE HEART AND RIGHT SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 957, CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. CRAIG FISCHER, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AT THE CITY SO THIS REQUEST IS FOR AN SUP FOR A GUESTHOUSE ON A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT AT WOODY DRIVE IN SEVENTH STREET. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS ONE OR SF1 DISTRICT REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE. THE ZONING ORDINANCE DEFINES A GUEST HOUSE. IT MEANS LIVING QUARTERS WITHIN A DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING LOCATED ON THE SAME PREMISE WITH THE MAIN BUILDING FOR USE BY TEMPORARY GUESTS OF THE OCCUPANTS OF THE PREMISE AND NOT RENTED OR OTHERWISE USED AS A SEPARATE DWELLING. STAFF FINDS THIS REQUEST IS REASONABLE. THERE'S ADEQUATE PARKING ON-SITE, BOTH FOR THE EXISTING HOUSE AND INTERMITTENT GUESTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE. HERE'S A LOOK AT THE PROPERTY, A SKETCH OF THE EXISTING HOUSE, AND THE PROPOSED GUEST HOME TO THE REAR. >> DOES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GUEST HOUSE FOLLOW SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION ORDINANCES AS [00:05:02] THE CONSTRUCTION OF A REGULAR HOUSE AS FAR AS MASONRY AND THINGS LIKE THAT? >> YES. THE GUEST HOUSE WILL HAVE TO BE BUILT PER CITY'S BUILDING CODE. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING, ANYONE? >> IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING. >> LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:05. IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> PLEASE TURN ON YOUR MIC. >> YEAH [INAUDIBLE] >> IS THIS REGARDING THIS SUP REQUEST FOR THE GUESTHOUSE? THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS SPECIFIC TO THIS AGENDA ITEM. YES, SIR. NO PROBLEM. ANY ANYONE ELSE? THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:06. ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SUP APPLICATION? THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SUP20233002. >> I WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> MOTION CARRIES 4, 0. NEXT ITEM, PL20220779, PRELIMINARY PLAT GARDEN HOMES OF PRINCETON, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST FROM TEXTILE HOLDINGS LLC FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A PROPERTY BEING A 12.14 ACRE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE DAVID CHERRY SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 166, CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS. >> THIS REQUEST WAS BROUGHT BEFORE YOU LAST MONTH AND TABLED TO HEAR ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION. I DO BELIEVE THE DESIGN ENGINEERS IS HERE TO EXPLAIN THEIR DRAINAGE DESIGN AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE SO I INVITE THEM TO THE PODIUM TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. TURN THAT MICROPHONE ON. THERE'S A BUTTON THERE. >> TO THE RIGHT THE BUTTON. >> TO THE RIGHT. >> THERE YOU GO. >> GOT IT. MY NAME IS MARK HICKMAN. I'M WITH HRV CONSULTANTS OUR OFFICES ARE LOCATED IN NEVADA AT 18332 FM1778. WE'RE THE ENGINEER OF RECORD ON THIS PROJECT AND I APOLOGIZE FIRST OF ALL FOR NOT BEING AT THE LAST MEETING TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS, BUT I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TONIGHT. SPECIFICALLY, I THINK THE ISSUE WAS THE DRAINAGE ON THE PROPERTY AND LET ME JUST START BY MAKING A GENERAL COMMENT AND THAT IS, THAT WE'VE ADDED A DETENTION POND IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT ADDED IT, IT'S BEEN THERE FROM DAY ONE, BUT THIS POND IS SIZED TO CONTROL THE ADDITIONAL FLOW FROM THIS PROPERTY AND THEN SOME WERE ACTUALLY OVER-DESIGNING THE POND TO CAPTURE MORE WATER THAN THE MINIMUM THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO CAPTURE IN ORDER TO RELEASE OR IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FLOW THAT WE'RE RELEASING INTO THE PIPE THAT TRAVELS ACROSS THE ROAD SO THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT ON ANY ADJACENT PROPERTY FROM THIS TRACT OF LAND. OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE CITY'S APPROVAL PROCESS, THE THIRD-PARTY REVIEWER, OR REVIEW OUR PLANS AND DESIGNS AND THEY THEMSELVES WILL VERIFY AND GUARANTEE THAT WE MEET ALL CITY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS CASE WE'LL ACTUALLY EXCEED ALL CITY REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT COMES TO DRAINAGE DETENTION POND DESIGN. I CAN LAUNCH INTO THE SPECIFICS ABOUT THE DESIGN IF YOU GUYS REALLY WANT TO KNOW THE NUMBERS BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE ARE MEETING AND OR EXCEEDING THE CITY'S MINIMUM DESIGN CRITERIA FOR RETENTION AND THE MITIGATION OF INCREASED FLOWS. >> OKAY. >> ANY QUESTIONS? SPECIFICALLY? >> I DON'T THINK HAVE ANY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR. [00:10:26] CRAIG, I THINK THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE LAST MONTH WANTED TO HAND US SOMETHING. IS HE ALLOWED TO DO THAT? >> YEAH. IT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU'D LIKE TO INVITE HIM FORWARD HE COULD SPEAK. >> SURE. >> DO YOU MIND IF I SPEAK? >> NO, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. >> APPEARS TO BE ON, CAN YOU HEAR ME? AGAIN, I WAS HERE A FEW WEEKS AGO CONTESTING THE APPROVAL OR THE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE GARDEN HOMES OF PRINCETON TO THE CITY COUNCIL. BASICALLY, I'M HERE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> EXCUSE ME. SIR, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> OH, I'M SORRY, KEVIN HISS, 1314 LONGNECK ROAD PRINCETON, TEXAS. ESSENTIALLY, I'M HERE REQUESTING THAT EITHER THE MEETING BE POSTPONED AGAIN OR THAT IT'S RECOMMENDED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL NOT TO APPROVE IT. REASON BEING IS BASICALLY THE DATA IT'S MORE SO LIKE COMMUNICATION THAN ANYTHING. I DID CONTACT CRAIG FISCHER AND I DID GET A RESPONSE, HE DID SPEAK WITH ME. BUT BASICALLY I WAS DIRECTED TO THE DEVELOPERS ENGINEER. I WAS FIRST TOLD TO JUST WAIT FOR THIS MEETING AND THEN I SAID, HEY, LOOK, I THINK IT'S ONLY RIGHT THAT I'M ABLE TO SEE WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE COME UP WITH. CAN YOU PROVIDE ANY DATA? EVENTUALLY IT WAS GIVEN ACCESS TO THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, BUT THERE WERE STILL SOME INFORMATION MISSING ON THERE AND THEN BASICALLY ACCESS TO THAT WAS REVOKED. UNFORTUNATELY, I DIDN'T DOWNLOAD IT FIRST. DID YOU GET MY EMAIL REQUESTING IT AGAIN? OKAY. ESSENTIALLY, I WAS JUST ASKING FOR COMMUNICATION SO I CAN'T ARGUE ABOUT THE DATE OR ANYTHING BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO ARGUE WITH. IT'S REALLY LACK COMMUNICATION. OBVIOUSLY, I'M THE ONE THAT REALLY HAS ALL THE RISKIER, THE POTENTIAL FOR MY PROPERTY FLOODING AND OBVIOUSLY, I HAD A WHOLE LIST OF SUPREME COURT CASES AND THINGS THAT THAT BASICALLY SHOWED THE NECESSITY FOR THAT PROCESS ON BOTH THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY SIDE TO BE ADEQUATE, PROTECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. I CAN'T SAY WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THAT'S BEEN UPHELD BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY DATA. I DID SPEAK WITH THE ENGINEER THAT'S HERE AND ESSENTIALLY GOT THE ANSWER THAT TRUST ME, I'M AN ENGINEER, TO SUMMARIZE OUR CONVERSATION. REALLY, ALL I'M ASKING FOR IS OPEN COMMUNICATION IF THERE'S NO COMMUNICATION BY BOTH THE CITY AND THE CITY'S ENGINEERS, WHICH I WAS NEVER DIRECTED TO, I WAS DIRECTED DIRECTLY TO THE DEVELOPERS ENGINEERS OR GIVE ME THE DATA. JUST SHOW ME THE SAME THING THAT THEY WOULD SHOW YOU THAT THEY'RE SHOWING TO THE CITY THAT'S SHOWING THAT THIS IS ADEQUATE OTHER THAN JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. UNFORTUNATELY AGAIN, WHEN I'M THE ONE WHO IS GOING TO LOSE, THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GO FORWARD. I'M REASONABLE, I'M NOT JUST TRYING TO HOLD THINGS UP, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE THAT IS A MINIMUM STANDARD. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME. >> OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR YOU, IF YOU DON'T MIND. IS THAT A REASONABLE REQUEST FROM AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER? I DON'T KNOW HOW THINGS WORK IN THAT WORLD. TURN ON YOUR MIKE. DO YOU EVER HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS? >> ABSOLUTELY. YOU BET. >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'S REASONABLE, I DID SPEAK WITH MR. HISS FOR ALMOST AN HOUR ON THE PHONE AND WHEN I SPOKE WITH HIM, HE TOLD ME HE HAD RECEIVED THE INFORMATION AND I GOT THE IMPRESSION AFTER CHATTING WITH HIM THAT BECAUSE HE'S NOT AN ENGINEER, [00:15:04] HE WOULDN'T SURE HOW TO INTERPRET THE INFORMATION. I SUGGESTED THAT HE EITHER SPEAK WITH THE CITY'S ENGINEER, OF COURSE, HE NEEDS TO TALK TO THE CITY FIRST AND GET PERMISSION TO DO THAT, OR TO ENGAGE AN ENGINEER ON HIS OWN BEHALF TO PROTECT HIS INTERESTS IF HE WAS TRULY CONCERNED. AFTER CHATTING FOR ABOUT AN HOUR, WHAT I WAS ABLE TO SURMISE IS MR. HISS, WHEN WE STARTED THE CONVERSATION, HE SAID THAT WHEN HE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY, I BELIEVE IT WAS HANDED DOWN, I COULD BE WRONG, BUT THAT HE HAD EXPERIENCED SOME FLOODING CONDITIONS OUT THERE ALREADY SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST AND WAS CONCERNED ABOUT US PERPETUATING THAT PROBLEM AND I ASSURED HIM THAT WHAT WE WERE DOING WOULD NOT PERPETUATE THE PROBLEM. BUT I GOT THE IMPRESSION AT THE END OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WHAT HE WAS REALLY WANTING US TO DO IS FOR OUR DEVELOPER TO PAY TO HAVE THE STORMWATER THAT'S EXITING OUR PROPERTY, PIPED DOWN THE ROAD TO THE CITY PARK AND OUTFALL ON THE CITY PARK PROPERTY INSTEAD OF HIS PROPERTY AND HE WANTED OUR CLIENT TO PAY FOR THAT IMPROVEMENT. I TOLD HIM THAT'S GENERALLY NOT THE WAY THAT IT'S DONE, THAT WE DID WHAT WAS REQUIRED, WHICH WAS DESIGNING AND OVERSIZING THE DETENTION POND TO CONTROL THE WATER. THAT I COULDN'T GUARANTEE THAT IS PROPERTY WOULDN'T FLOOD PARTICULARLY SINCE HE STARTED THE CONVERSATION BY TELLING ME THAT IT HAD FLOODED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST ALREADY. BUT WHAT I DID TELL HIM IS THAT BASED ON THE DESIGN CRITERIA AND THE CITY'S CRITERIA REQUIRED, THAT HIS PROPERTY WOULD NOT FLOOD BECAUSE OF THE UPSTREAM IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE WERE DOING FOR MR. TROLIO, WHO IS HERE AS WELL AND HE'S HAPPY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION IF YOU GUYS HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR HIM. THAT WAS HOW THE CONVERSATION WENT. I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH MR. HISS AND TRY TO MAKE HIM MORE COMFORTABLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN DO OTHER THAN OVERSIZE THE POND. THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A REQUIREMENT, AND FRANKLY, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S LEGAL TO REDIRECT STORMWATER THAT'S DRAINING IN ONE DIRECTION OVER TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AREA. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE WATER ACTUALLY EVENTUALLY ENDS UP IN THAT PLACE. BUT FOR OUR CLIENT TO PUT THAT VOLUME OF OFFSITE UNDERGROUND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S A VERY COSTLY SITE RIGHT NOW WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING. TO ADD THAT TO THE COST OF THE PROJECT, IT'S NOT EVEN A REQUIREMENT OF THE CITY'S. LOOK, WE'RE HAPPY TO HELP. WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO GUARANTEE THAT WE DON'T PERPETUATE A PROBLEM THAT ALREADY EXISTS. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO MR. HISS AND HE KEPT QUESTIONING HOW LONG I'VE BEEN DOING THIS AND MY EXPERIENCE LEVEL, AND HE WANTED ME TO GUARANTEE HIM THIS PROPERTY WOULDN'T GO TO FLOOD, I CAN'T DO THAT. WHAT I DID GUARANTEE HIM IS THAT WE HAD MET PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING STANDARDS, THE CITY'S SPECIFIC GUIDELINES, AND THAT THERE WOULD BE TWO OR THREE SETS OF EYES LOOKING AT THESE PLANS. NOT ONLY DO WE DESIGN THEM INTERNALLY, WE GO THROUGH A QA, QC CHECK, AND THEN THE CITY'S ENGINEERS THEMSELVES WILL LOOK THROUGH THE PLANS, REVIEW, ADD SUGGESTIONS. WE WILL CONTINUE MODIFYING UNTIL WE GET EVERYTHING APPROVED BY THE CITY AS WELL AS US. I HOPED THAT HE WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE THAT WE HAD DOTTED ALL THE I'S AND CROSSED THE T'S AND NOW WE FIND OURSELVES HERE TODAY. I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. >> YEAH, IT DOES. >> ANYTHING ELSE? >> COULD YOU EXPLAIN JUST IN LAYMAN'S TERMS EXACTLY HOW THIS DETENTION POND WORKS? WE HAVE DURING THE FLOODING SEASON, I KNOW EVERYTHING'S SUPPOSED TO DRAIN INTO THE POND. WHAT HAPPENS THERE? HOW MANY GALLONS ARE PUMPED OUT OR WHERE DOES IT GO? [NOISE] >> THERE'S TWO CRITERIA WHEN IT COMES TO A DETENTION POND. IT'S SIZING THE HOLE, SO TO SPEAK. THIS IS NOT A RETENTION FACILITY, IT'S A DETENTION FACILITY. IT HOLDS ALL THE WATER AND IT RELEASES IT AT A VERY SLOW RATE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, GENERALLY 24-48 HOURS. THE FIRST CONCEPT THAT WE HAVE TO DESIGN, TWO, IS WHAT SIZE HOLE DO WE NEED? WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SERIES OF CALCULATIONS THAT TELLS US WHAT THE STORM EVENT IS. [00:20:02] IS IT A 20-MINUTE STORM, A 30, A 40, A 50-MINUTE STORM. ONCE WE ASCERTAIN WHAT STORM EVENT WE'RE WORKING WITH OUT THERE, IT'S BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY AND HOW MUCH FLOW IS COMING ON TO US FROM OTHER ADJACENT PROPERTIES. WE'RE NOT JUST DESIGNING THIS THING FOR OUR TRACT. IT'S EVERYTHING THAT COMES IN THROUGH THE PROPERTY AS WELL. THAT'S STEP 1, DESIGN THE HOLE, SO TO SPEAK. STEP 2 THEN IS THE OUTLET CONTROL DEVICE. THAT'S SPECIFICALLY THE DEVICE THAT RELEASES THE WATER. WE HAVE DESIGNED THE OUTLET-CONTROLLED DEVICE TO BE SO SMALL THAT THE POND NOW HAS GROWN IN SIZE SO WE CAN CAPTURE MORE WATER THAN WE'RE REQUIRED TO CAPTURE. THAT WAY WE'VE ACTUALLY IMPROVED THE SITUATION DOWNSTREAM. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE RUN A SERIES OF UNDERGROUND CONVEYANCE PIPES ALL THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND WE'VE HAVE PICKED UP STORMWATER ALL OVER THE PROPERTY. WE'RE NOT DIRECTING IT THROUGH SHEET FLOWS. WE'RE DIRECTING IT THROUGH AN UNDERGROUND STORM SYSTEM. IT'S THE MOST EXPENSIVE WAY TO DO IT. BUT WHAT IT DOES IS WE'RE ABLE TO PICK UP ALL THE ROOF DRAINS. IT TAKES ALL THAT WATER UNDERGROUND INSTEAD OF RUNNING AT SHEET FLOWING ACROSS THE PROPERTY FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO WALK, PARK THEIR VEHICLES. INSTEAD, WE'VE TAKEN ALL THAT UNDERGROUND INTO THE STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM THAT GOES DIRECTLY INTO THE DETENTION POND. THE POND THEN IS OVERSIZED TO CAPTURE MORE WATER THAN IT'S SUPPOSED TO AND THE OUTLET CONTROL DEVICE IS UNDERSIZED TO RELEASE LESS WATER THAN IT'S REQUIRED. DOES THAT EXPLAIN? >> THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. >> SURE. ANYTHING ELSE? >> I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR YOU. ANYONE? THANK YOU. >> I ABLE TO RESPOND TO SOME OF [INAUDIBLE]? >> SURE. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> FIRST OFF, I THINK THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT WERE FLAGRANTLY FALSE. WHEN I SPOKE WITH MR. HICKMAN, I CODDLED HIM TO MAKE SURE THAT HE WAS NOT OFFENDED. IT SEEMED LIKE EVERY TIME I BROUGHT UP ANYTHING RELATED TO, CAN YOU PROVE IT TO ME? CAN YOU PROVIDE THIS DATA? IS THERE A POTENTIAL THAT THIS VARIABLE WASN'T TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION? I THINK VERY SENSIBLE QUESTIONS, THEN I GOT DEFENSIVENESS. I CONTINUED TO TRY TO PUSH THAT DOWN LIKE, I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE A BAD ENGINEER, HUMANS MAKE MISTAKES. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS DONE RIGHT. AS FAR AS SAYING THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR MY PROPERTY TO NEVER BE FLOODED, I'M IN A FLOOD ZONE, PART OF MY PROPERTY'S IN A FLOOD ZONE. I'M A GEOLOGIST. I CAN TELL YOU, THAT MEANS THERE'S A RISK OF FLOOD. I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT. WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS ACCORDING TO CRAIG FISCHER. WHAT HE MENTIONED THE LAST TIME IS THAT THE DEVELOPMENTS DON'T ACTUALLY MAKE THE ISSUE WORSE. THAT'S A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER. HE MENTIONED A DETENTION POND. WHAT DOES DETENTION POND DO? IT HOLDS WATER. HOW MUCH WATER DOES IT HOLD? THERE'S A PAGE UP THERE THAT HAS A TOPO MAP ON IT, AND YOU SEE THERE'S A BUNCH OF BIG PONDS, SEVERAL BIG PONDS UP THERE IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW THAT ACT AS DETENTION PONDS NATURALLY. ALSO, AS WE ALL KNOW, SOIL ABSORBS WATER. SO AS IT RAINS, YOU GOT ABSORPTION OF THAT SOIL. NOBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT FLOODING WHEN WATER GOES INTO THE SOIL, IT'S WHEN THE SOIL GETS INUNDATED AND IT DOESN'T GO INTO THE SOIL ANYMORE, AND IT'S THEN GROUNDWATER, IT'S ABOVE GROUND, AND THAT'S WHAT FLOODS. WHEN YOU HAVE AN IMPENETRABLE SURFACE SUCH AS CONCRETE, YOU ARE COVERING UP ALL THAT PENETRABLE SURFACE, SO IT'S CATCHING ALL THE WATER THAT'S RUNNING FROM OUTSIDE THEIR PROPERTY AND WHAT WOULD LAND ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND PUSHING IT INTO THAT TANK. NOW HE'S SAYING IT'S LARGE ENOUGH. MAYBE IT IS, MAYBE IT ISN'T. AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING FOR THE DATA. I WASN'T REQUESTING THAT HE MAKES SURE MY PROPERTY NEVER FLOOD. I DID MENTION THE POTENTIAL FOR STORM WATER DRAINS, AND THAT IS ACTUALLY A REASONABLE REQUEST. HE SAID, THAT'S POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL STORM WATER DRAINS. WE REGULARLY CARRY WATER FROM PLACES TO OTHER PLACES. IT'S A VERY NORMAL THING. [00:25:01] I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD NOT WANT TO VOLUNTEER FOR THAT. IT'S AN ADDED EXPENSE, BUT ULTIMATELY THAT IS THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO SAY, THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE ENGINEERING PLANS CALL FOR MAYBE SOME EXTRA MITIGATION. THIS IS VERY COMMON FOR THAT TYPE OF MITIGATION. WE GOT TOO MUCH WATER GOING WHERE IT SHOULDN'T, INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT'S A POTENTIAL FLOOD HAZARD FOR ME AND MY NEIGHBOR WHO WASN'T ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY, AND STORM WATER DRAINS. I DIDN'T SAY YOU HAD TO DO IT. I DIDN'T MAKE ANY THREATS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I SIMPLY ASKED, WOULD YOU AGREE AS AN ENGINEER THAT THAT WOULD HELP TO MITIGATE THE ISSUE? ULTIMATELY, THAT'S WHAT I GOT HUNG UP ON. IT WAS CLEAR THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO PUSH THAT. I UNDERSTAND. HE'S NOT WORKING FOR ME. HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE NICE TO ME. HE DOESN'T NEED TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. ULTIMATELY, THE CITY DOES. MY TAXES PAY THE CITY, AND AGAIN, FROM THE CITY, I WAS DIRECTED TOWARDS THE DEVELOPER. SO HE IS RIGHT IN THAT HE SAID, MAYBE YOU NEED TO SPEAK WITH THE CITY, OR HE SAID, HE NEEDS TO HIRE HIS OWN ON ENGINEER. HOW AM I GOING TO HIRE AN ENGINEER TO DO ANYTHING WHEN THEY HAD THE DATA? YOU ALL HAVE SOIL SAMPLES, AND THE SOIL SAMPLES, WHAT'S THE VOLUME ON THE GROUND OF THE SOIL THAT'S GOING TO HOLD WATER UP UNTIL IT'S INUNDATED? HOW MUCH IS THAT? THESE ARE SIMPLE QUESTIONS. THESE ARE THINGS THAT THE CITY'S ENGINEER SHOULD HAVE ASKED. DID THEY? MAYBE THEY DID. I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING IS JUST, CAN YOU SHOW ME WHICH OF THE ENGINEER. IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU DON'T WORK FOR ME. BUT THE CITY'S ENGINEER CAN. ALL I'M SAYING IS JUST COMMUNICATE. I DON'T THINK IT'S TOO MUCH TO ASK. I HAVE A LOT TO LOSE. THEIR DEVELOPMENT WILL GET BUILT, EVENTUALLY. I'M NOT TRYING TO HOLD THAT UP. IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. THEY GET A LOT OF MONEY IN THAT. I'M SURE THEY'RE GOING TO PUSH THROUGH ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I'M JUST TRYING TO KEEP MY PROPERTY FROM HAVING A GREATER CHANCE OF BEING FLOODED BY THAT HAPPENING. THERE ARE TWO DEVELOPMENTS THERE. HONESTLY, I THINK A STORM WATER DRAIN WOULD MAKE SENSE, 300 FEET OF STORM WATER DRAIN. THERE'S TWO DEVELOPMENTS THERE, THEM AND THE ONE SOUTH OF THEM, PRINCETON LANDING, I THINK, TO PAY FOR 300 FEET OF STORM WATER DRAIN SO THAT IT CAN GO SAFELY DOWN TO WHERE THERE'S ALREADY WATER DRAINING THROUGH WHERE THE PARK IS DOWN INTO THE CREEK. THAT'S ALL SAFE. NOBODY'S HOME IS IN DANGER OF THAT. I JUST MENTIONED IT AS A POSSIBILITY AND WAS TOLD, HEY, YOU KNOW THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO. IN 2020, A DEVELOPMENT PAID FOR A SEWAGE PIPE TO GO IN THROUGH MY HOUSE. THEY BOUGHT A EASEMENT, PUT A SEWAGE PIPE IN. IT DOESN'T EVEN CONNECT TO MY HOUSE. I'M STILL ON SEPTIC. I'VE GOT A SEWAGE PIPE RIGHT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE. THEY PAID FOR IT, HANDED OFF TO THE CITY BECAUSE THE CITY IS SAID YOU NEED THIS. NOW, THAT'S OBVIOUS. THERE'S NO WISHY-WASHY OF DO YOU NEED A SEWAGE PIPE OR NOT. THAT NEEDS TO GO. THINGS THAT TRAVEL IN A SEWAGE PIPE NEED TO GO. BUT DO YOU NEED STORM DRAINS? DO YOU NEED TO DIRECT MORE WATER AWAY FROM HERE? THAT'S A MORE DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER. WHILE I AGREE THAT HE HAS YEARS OF EXPERTISE, ALSO, HE HAS AN INCENTIVE TO GET IT DONE QUICKLY AND TO GET IT DONE CHEAPLY. PRINCETON'S GROWING CITY. WE HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS GOING IN. IF PEOPLE CAN'T TRUST THE PROCESS, CAN'T TRUST THAT THE CITY IS DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T AT RISK BECAUSE DEVELOPERS ARE BRINGING LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY. I'M NOT SAYING DON'T BUILD THE PLACE. I'M JUST SAYING JUST MAKE SURE I'M PROTECTED IN THE MEANTIME, SO I'M JUST HOPING THAT YOU GUYS IS THAT AS THE INDEPENDENT LINE OF DEFENSE, CAN JUST PLAY A LITTLE BIT EVENS HERE AND MAKE SURE THAT I GET SOME SORT OF COMMUNICATION SO I CAN MAKE THAT DECISION. I HOPE THAT IT CONTINUES FURTHER THAN JUST ME BECAUSE, IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, I'VE SPOKEN TO SOME PEOPLE AND GOTTEN SOME STORIES, SOME UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAST 15, 20 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENTS OCCURRING AND PUTTING A LOT OF PEOPLE AT RISK, AND BEING OPEN AND HAVING AN OPEN PROCESS TO WHERE CITIZENS DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING PUSHED ASIDE FOR DEVELOPERS WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT FOR US GOING FORWARD. >> RIGHT. UNDERSTOOD. [00:30:01] I THINK MAYBE THE CORRECT WAY TO PROCEED FROM HERE ON THIS ONE IS FIRST OF ALL, I'M SATISFIED WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE ENGINEER REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF THE DETENTION POND AND ALL OF THAT. BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT YOU TO BE LEFT OUT ON THE DARK OR ANYTHING. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO MANDATE OR FORCE THE DEVELOPER. GO AHEAD. I WOULD LIKE FOR THERE TO REMAIN AN OPEN LINE OF COMMUNICATION JUST SO HE FEELS HE'S GETTING THE INFORMATION HE NEEDS. HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT HE HAD THE INFORMATION THERE BEFORE HE HAD A CHANCE TO DOWNLOAD IT, HE DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO IT ANYMORE SO THAT COULD BE POSSIBLY WHY STILL A LITTLE BIT IN THE DARK BECAUSE THAT ACCESS THAT HE HAD WENT AWAY BEFORE HE. >> I'M HAPPY TO GIVE HIM THAT INFORMATION. >> I CAN RE-SHARE IT I JUST HAVE LIMITED SPACE ON MY CLOUD STORAGE, SO I SHARED IT WITH HIM AND THEN I HAD TO REMOVE IT SO I COULD SHARE OTHER INFORMATION WITH OTHER INDIVIDUALS. BUT I WOULD BE HAPPY TO REUPLOAD THAT INFORMATION AND SHARE NEW LINK WITH MR. HISS, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. >> IN THE INTEREST OF MOVING THE PROJECT ALONG, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT. >> RIGHT. >> YOU GUYS WILL HAVE ANOTHER SHOT AT THIS. [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY POINT. I THINK I HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION THAT I'M SATISFIED THAT WE CAN APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT MOVE FORWARD. THIS IS NOT THE LAST TIME THESE DRAINAGE ISSUES ARE GOING TO BE LOOKED AT IN THAT PROCESS ANYWAY. SO. >> PERFECT. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING TO POINT OUT TO YOU IN THIS KIMBERLY HORN LETTER IN OCTOBER, IT STATES THAT A DETAILED REVIEW OF THE ROADWAY, WATER, WASTEWATER, AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES WILL BE COMPLETED AS THE DRAWING SUBMITTALS WERE COMING THROUGH SO WE DO HAVE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES. >> YEAH, THIS IS GOING TO BE THREE OR FOUR PART PROCESS. >> JUST ASK THAT THE KEY STAYS ON THE CITY'S RADAR AS WELL, THANKS. >> OKAY. >> IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR NULLIFICATION OF >> YOU NEED TO, PEOPLE AT HOME CAN'T HEAR YOU IN THE BACK. >> IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR NOTIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES THAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE AT RISK OF FLOOD OR OTHER TYPES OF DANGER LIKE THIS. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S AN AGREED RISK OF FLOOD OR THEY WOULDN'T HAVE PUT MONEY INTO THIS INTO THIS DETENTION POND SO THAT'S ACKNOWLEDGED. IS THERE ANY TYPE OF LAW REGULATION OR JUST USUAL WAY OF DOING BUSINESS IN WHICH THERE'S SOME SORT OF NOTIFICATION BECAUSE HONESTLY, I'M ONLY HERE BECAUSE OF PURE LUCK. I CAME ONTO THE CITY LOOKING FOR DIFFERENT INFORMATION. I HAPPENED TO STUMBLE ACROSS THE FACT THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS BEING PROPOSED. >> YOU TALKING ABOUT ANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY TO NOTIFY. >> NOTIFICATION OF NEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE IS A POTENTIAL RISK OF FLUTTER HAZARD. >> NOT FOR THIS PROCESS, FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THERE WAS PUBLIC HEARINGS WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS ZONED FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT. BUT FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT, THERE'S NO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT. >> YOU MEAN A PUBLIC NOTIFICATION NOT AS IN CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTIES THAT MIGHT BE AFFECTED, BUT JUST RELEASED IT ON THE WEBSITE. >> NO DON'T YOU HAVE TO PUT UP ACTUAL SIGNAGE. >> FOR THE ZONING, YES. BUT NOT FOR THIS STAGE. >> RIGHT YEAH. >> ALL THE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE I CAN SHARE THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED. >> IS THERE A LIMIT ON THAT FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY HAVE SOLE ANALYSIS SHOWING WHAT THE ACTUAL I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE ACTUALLY DONE THAT YET. HAVE YOU ALL DONE SOIL SAMPLES YET? SO YOU KNOW WHAT ACTUAL DATA THAT'S. >> I DON'T THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE, NOTIFICATIONS TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS FOR EVERY SINGLE. >> OH, NO I MEAN, IT'S FAR SHARING INFORMATION. >> EVERYTHING SUBMITTED TO THE CITY IS SUBJECT TO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST, YOU CAN REQUEST IT FOR ME, I'D BE HAPPY TO SHARE ANYTHING THAT'S SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR THIS PROJECT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? ANYBODY READY TO MAKE A MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT PL20220779 GARDEN HOMES OF PRINCETON. [00:35:07] >> I WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE >> MOTION CARRIES 4, 0. MOVE ON TO PRELIMINARY PLAT PL20221230, BEAUCHAMP PLAZA PHASE 2 OR BEECHAM IF YOU CHOOSE TO PRONOUNCE IT THAT WAY. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST FROM RETAIL PARTNERS LLC FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A PROPERTY BEING A 24.95 ACRE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE HEART AND RIGHT SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 957, CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS. >> THIS REQUEST IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST PRINCETON DRIVE IN NORTH BEACH IN BOULEVARD. THE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTS OF A GROCERY STORE, RETAIL, RESTAURANT SITES, AND THREE MULTIFAMILY LOTS. CITIES ENGINEERS HAVE REVIEWED THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PLANS AND HAVE FOUND THEM TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY'S REGULATIONS. FOR THAT REASON, THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL IF NEEDED. >> DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> NO. >> I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE, ROBIN OR RYAN. >> NO. >> NO. >> I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ITEM. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT PL20221230, BEECHAM OR BEAUCHAMP PLAZA PHASE 2. >> I WILL SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> MOTION CARRIES 4, 0. INFORMATION. [INFORMATION] >> NEXT MEETING TUESDAY JANUARY 16TH, 2024. NUMBER 2, DISCUSSION REGARDING OFF-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. I'LL GIVE CRAIG A MINUTE TO FINISH UP THAT CONVERSATION. >> SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. THAT'S FINE. ITEM NUMBER 2 ON THE INFORMATION SECTION DISCUSSION REGARDING OFF-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. >> YES. LAST MEETING, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT WE BRING THIS ITEM UP FOR DISCUSSION. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS AGENDA ITEM IS TO DISCUSS OFF-SITE PARKING. CURRENTLY, CITY DOES NOT PERMIT OFF-SITE PARKING, ALL PARKING SPACES MUST BE LOCATED ON THE SUBJECT LOT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT OFF-SITE PARKING, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE. WE'D HAVE TO PUT OUT PUBLIC NOTIFICATION THAT A CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PROPOSED, WE CAN THEN ADVERTISE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S AGENDA ITEM IS TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S A DIRECTION YOU'D LIKE TO GO. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH CREATING A DRAFT ORDINANCE AND NOTIFYING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. >> CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IT IS? I WASN'T HERE LAST TIME. >> BASICALLY, IF I MAY. IT'S THE OLD SKATING RINK RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE STADIUM AND THE NEW OWNERS ARE RIGHT HERE. IT IS THEIR PLAN TO NOT HAVE IT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT, EVERY SATURDAY NIGHT, WHOEVER WANTS TO SHOW UP, SHOWS UP. IT IS GOING TO BE A RESERVATION-ONLY, PRIVATE PARTY-TYPE SITUATION. THE CURRENT SITUATION, THEY HAVE 33 PARKING SPOTS IN THAT LOT, THE CITY WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE 77. THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE ABILITY TO USE THE STADIUM PARKING LOT, OFF-SITE PARKING. WELL, THAT'S WHAT WOULD BE THE REQUIREMENT. >> SHE WANTS YOU TO COME UP AND TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> GO AHEAD. CAN WE DO THAT, CRAIG? >> YEAH. >> OKAY. JUST TURN YOUR MIC ON, SORRY. [00:40:03] >> THAT'S IT. ACTUALLY, I OMITTED SOME THINGS BECAUSE THIS CONCEPT HASN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE SO I CAN'T TELL YOU, IT'S LIKE THIS THUNDERBIRD WROTE, I CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEEN DONE. >> THANK YOU. >> KEEPING IN MIND, THIS IS NOT REALLY AN AGENDA ITEM, SO WHAT I'M PROBABLY GOING TO SUGGEST IS THAT WE ALL TAKE THIS HOME. >> YES. >> YES. THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS YES. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM TO WHERE WE CAN DISCUSS A CHANGE IN THAT ZONING ORDINANCE. >> OKAY. THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT BUT THE REQUEST IS TO MAKE A GENERAL AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR OFF-SITE PARKING. SOME OTHER CITIES THAT I RESEARCHED DO PERMIT OFF-SITE PARKING PROVIDED THAT IT'D BE WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. THE CITY OF PLANO, FOR EXAMPLE, IT MUST BE WITHIN 300 FEET AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE A LEGAL CONTRACT WITH THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD CONSIDER FOR THE NEXT MEETING FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. I COULD DRAFT AN ORDINANCE WITH SOME SUGGESTED LANGUAGE, PROVIDE YOU WITH RESEARCH OF WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES DO, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU CHOOSE TO GO. I JUST NEED THAT GREEN LIGHT FROM YOU ALL THAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO MOVE FORWARD IN THAT DIRECTION TO MAKING A CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. >> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. >> YEAH. I WILL TOO. >> WE'LL GET THAT GOING FOR THE JANUARY MEETING. >> GOOD. I THINK WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU. >> NUMBER 3, CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA AND NOT FOR DISCUSSION OF THESE REQUESTS AT THIS TIME. ANYTHING IN ADDITION TO THAT NUMBER 2 DISCUSSION. >> I DO. I JUST BEEN FORMALLY HAD MENTIONED THAT AT SOME POINT I WOULD BE STEPPING DOWN FROM PLANNING AND ZONING, SO THAT WILL BE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. I KNOW THAT SOMEONE IS SECURED TO TAKE THE SEAT, I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE IT VACANT WITH THE FORUM ISSUES THAT WE MAY HAVE, BUT JUST TO PUT THAT ON YOU ALL'S RADAR, THAT WILL ALSO OPEN UP THE VICE-CHAIR SEAT HERE, AND MY POSITION ON THE EDC IS BASED ON MY PLANNING AND ZONING SEAT SO THAT'LL ALL BE COMING UP FOR GRABS AT SOME POINT. I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO MY COUNCIL MEMBERS, SO IT MAY BE IN JANUARY, BUT WE'LL SEE. >> OKAY. >> I'LL DO FORMAL WRITTEN NOTICE WHEN THAT HAPPENS. >> SOUNDS GOOD. >> OKAY. >> I WAS PREOCCUPIED DURING INFORMATION ITEM NUMBER 1, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT THAT'S GOING BE ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 16TH. THE CITY WILL BE CLOSED ON MONDAY. >> GOT YOU. >> MARTIN LUTHER KING HOLIDAY. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR CRAIG ON UPDATE OF ONGOING PROJECTS? >> DO YOU HAVE ANY UPDATE FOR ME ON MY REQUESTS FOR WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE WERE BEFORE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO WHERE WE ARE NOW? >> THAT IS GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA FOR JANUARY. THE UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE UPDATE TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN WITH THE 380 BYPASS. IT DOES INCLUDE THAT INFORMATION, THEY'LL HAVE THAT FOR YOU NEXT MONTH. >> AWESOME. THANK YOU. >> I'VE HEARD CHATTER ABOUT A 381 LANE ON EACH SIDE EXPANSION. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT FROM TEXT DOT TIMING OR? >> IT'S LATE NEXT YEAR THAT THE CONTRACT SHOULD LET, ABOUT THIS TIME NEXT YEAR. THAT IS TO ADD ONE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION, SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES. THAT SHOULD BE STARTING IN ABOUT A YEAR'S TIME. >> HOW FAR DOES THAT GO? >> THAT PROJECT IS IN MCKINNEY FROM AIRPORT ROAD TO BOORMAN LANE HERE IN PRINCETON. [OVERLAPPING] >> TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL LANE IN EACH DIRECTION. >> IF THERE'S NOTHING, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> WE MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION, SECOND ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE >> MOTION CARRIES 4-0. WE'RE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.