[00:00:01] WELCOME TO PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, MAY 19TH. IT'S NOW 6:32 P.M.. WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PUBLIC APPEARANCE. SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS UNABLE TO RESPOND TO OR DISCUSS ANY ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP DURING THIS SESSION 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. IS ANYBODY HERE FOR PUBLIC APPEARANCE TONIGHT? [D. CONSENT AGENDA] OKAY ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS LISTED ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS COMMISSIONERS SO REQUESTS IN WHICH EVENT THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA. THE ONLY ITEM ON HERE THIS EVENING IS THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING. WHOEVER WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA THE MINUTES AS THEY ARE. NEED A SECOND. I'LL SECOND. DO WE NEED TO DO A VERBAL VOTE? BECAUSE I'M NOT SEEING A VOTE COME UP ON THE SCREEN HERE. OKAY. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 0. ON TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. THERE ARE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING. REGULAR AGENDA. [F.1 PL20253071 Preliminary Plat - Lighthouse Village - Discussion and possible action and recommendation to City Council regarding a request from GRBK Edgewood, LLC for preliminary plat approval for a property being a 13.665 acre tract of land situated in the John Snyder Survey, Abstract No. 865, City of Princeton, Collin County, Texas.] ONE ITEM. FIRST ITEM ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. ITEM F ONE. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LIGHTHOUSE VILLAGE. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING REQUEST FOR GRBK EDGEWOOD, LLC FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A PROPERTY BEING 13.665 ACRE TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE JOHN SNYDER SURVEY. ABSTRACT NUMBER 865, CITY OF PRINCETON, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. COLE DAVENPORT. I'M THE CITY'S PLANNER. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AS WELL THAT IT'S NOT GRBK EDGEWOOD THAT'S THE APPLICANT, IT'S LIGHTHOUSE VILLAGE, LLC. THIS REQUEST IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT OF 146 UNITS ON 13 ACRES OFF OF COLE STREET AND SOUTH OF 380. THIS PROJECT WAS ZONED PD 13 ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2017, AND THE CITY THEN ENTERED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON JUNE 25TH, 2018. THE COMBINATION OF THESE TWO EXEMPT THIS DEVELOPMENT FROM THE MORATORIUM. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY, AND WAS APPROVED BY BOTH P&Z AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 24TH, 2022. THE PROJECT HAS SINCE SAT STAGNANT SINCE FEBRUARY OF 2023, THUS CAUSING THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL TO EXPIRE DUE TO THE INACTIVITY, AND IS REQUIRING THE PROJECT TO APPEAR AGAIN BOTH BEFORE THIS COMMISSION AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL , CITY STAFF AND THE CITY ENGINEER HAVE REVIEWED THIS NEW SUBMITTAL AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL. ISN'T THIS THE ONE THAT AND I APOLOGIZE IF I HAVE THE WRONG ITEM, BUT ISN'T THIS THE ONE THAT THEY REQUESTED A 30 DAY EXTENSION ON? [00:05:04] THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU SAID THAT EXPIRED. SO THAT'S THE SIX MONTH ANYTIME IT CROSSES SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF PREVIOUS APPROVAL, SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. THAT'S WHEN THEY WOULD NEED TO COME BACK. NOT NECESSARILY. THEY WERE WORKING THROUGH THEIR CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW PROCESS. AND THAT IS WHAT TRIGGERED THE SIX MONTHS, BECAUSE WE HADN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT SINCE FEBRUARY OF 2023. SO WHENEVER A PROJECT SUBMITS A NEW PLAN OR A PERMIT, THEN THAT SIX MONTHS STARTS OVER. SO IT WAS BECAUSE THE LAST SUBMITTAL THEY MADE WAS REVIEWED AND SENT BACK TO THEM FEBRUARY OF 2023, AND WE HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING UNTIL THIS NEW GROUP TOOK OVER. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THEY CAN WAIT? LET'S SAY FIVE AND A HALF MONTHS, OR JUST SHY OF SIX MONTHS AND SUBMIT JUST ABOUT ANYTHING. AS LONG AS THERE'S THAT LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION, THEN IT EXTENDS THAT SIX MONTH PERIOD, ANOTHER SIX MONTHS. THAT'S KIND OF SUBJECTIVE. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A FULL SUBMITTAL MADE FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS OR SOMETHING SIMILAR LIKE THAT. THEY CAN'T JUST I MEAN, THEY COULD REQUEST AN EXTENSION SIMILAR TO THE PLAT VIA EMAIL, BUT THEY CAN'T JUST SEND SOME RANDOM REQUEST AND THEN THAT START OVER THEIR SIX MONTHS PERIOD. SO IT'S BASICALLY LIKE AT YOUR DISCRETION. SOMEWHAT, BUT AGAIN IF THEY'RE RESUBMITTING THEN THAT STARTS OVER. BUT THEY CAN REQUEST EXTENSIONS TO THE 180 DAY TIMELINE AS WELL. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ONE ON THE, APPLICATION THAT GETS NOTARIZED. IS IT NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE A TEXAS NOTARIZATION? BECAUSE THIS WAS NOTARIZED BY SOMEBODY IN FLORIDA AND THEY'RE JUST DRAWING LINES THROUGH TEXAS? I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THIS LLC RESIDES IN FLORIDA, SO THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO GET IT NOTARIZED THERE. AND WE DON'T REQUIRE IT TO BE A STATE OF TEXAS NOTARY AS LONG AS IT'S NOTARIZED. AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING SINCE 2023, CORRECT. THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR EXTENSIONS OR ANYTHING THEN. AND I UNDERSTAND THEY CAME IN BEFORE THE MORATORIUM, BUT SINCE THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING, WHY WOULDN'T THEY NOW FALL INTO THE MORATORIUM? THEY DON'T FALL INTO THE MORATORIUM BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED AS WELL AS HAS AN EXISTING AND ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FROM 2018, WHICH EXEMPTS IT. SO THAT BEGS THE QUESTION, WHICH OF THOSE TWO ITEMS YOU MENTIONED, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE ZONING, WHICH OF THOSE IS AND I IMAGINE THAT PROBABLY IN MOST CASES, BOTH ARE ALREADY IN PLACE. BUT JUST YOU KNOW, FOR ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING, THAT'S CURIOUS ABOUT IT, WHICH OF THOSE IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR BEING EXEMPT FROM THE MORATORIUM? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON OUR END AS WELL ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY WAS ACTUALLY ZONED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SO AFTER CONSULTING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE TWO. THERE'S GOT TO BE THE ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT ALSO CONTAINS THE ZONING. SO IN THIS CASE, MERE ZONING WOULDN'T ENTITLE IT. IT'S THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN 2018. SO BEFORE THIS GOES TO CITY COUNCIL , THE STAFF REPORT WILL REFLECT THAT. ARE THERE NO REQUIREMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY BROKEN GROUND ON THE PROJECT OR COMPLETED. A, B AND C AND D, I KNOW THAT THAT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN MORE FOCUSED ON AS OF LATE. IN THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR IN A LOT OF THEM FROM THAT PERIOD OF TIME. IS THIS A CASE WHERE THERE'S NOTHING REALLY WE CAN DO AND THERE'S NO TIMELINE THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE MET? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. AGAIN, THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS IN 2018. SO I'M NOT SURE OF THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT'S USED WITHIN IT AS FAR AS TIMELINES GO. CHAIRMAN HISS, THIS IS CRAIG FISHER, THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES . THERE'S NO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, NO TIMELINE THAT THINGS HAVE TO BE BUILT AT A SPECIFIC TIME IN THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THAT YOU ALL HAVE STARTED TO WORK AWAY FROM, THOUGH CORRECTLY. IT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. ABSOLUTELY. AND IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO DO SO. THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PREDATES JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM. AND IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THOSE. BUT ABSOLUTELY IT'S A GREAT IDEA. AND I DO UNDERSTAND THIS IS JUST A PRELIMINARY PLAT . [00:10:01] BUT AGAIN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IT SEEMS IT'S GOING TO BE A MULTI FAMILY. SO BASICALLY IT'S APARTMENTS AND IT'S 146 APARTMENTS IF I'M CORRECT. AND AGAIN THIS WAS ENTITLED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2017. DOES IT MEET ALL CURRENT LIKE FIRE CODE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PLAT THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW? YES. THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. IT'S GOING TO BE BUILD FOR RENT, A COTTAGE STYLE COMMUNITY IN THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED RECENTLY DOES MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL. AND ARE WE JUST APPROVING THE MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE IT SAYS PD NUMBER 13. BUT PD NUMBER 13 ALSO SAYS FUTURE COMMERCIAL. WHAT DO THEY MEAN BY FUTURE COMMERCIAL. SO PD 13 IS A PRETTY LARGE PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT APPLIES TO MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TRACKS. THE TRACK THAT YOU'RE SEEING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS FOR MULTIFAMILY. THERE ARE VARIOUS OTHER TRACKS THAT ARE ZONED UNDER PD 13 THAT ARE FOR COMMERCIAL, BUT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE TRACKS. THIS IS EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE LIGHTHOUSE VILLAGE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. I'M GOING TO RE ASK THE QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER ELLIS JUST ASKED, SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT, BUT I'LL LET YOU EXPLAIN IT. BUT I JUST WANT TO REPHRASE IT BECAUSE SHE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE WAS WORKING TOWARDS. THE BUILDING REQUIREMENTS I THINK BASED ON THE PREFACE OF HER QUESTION, SHE'S TALKING ABOUT, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH THIS ONE CLEARLY HAS A GREATER, A MUCH GREATER NUMBER OF UNITS PER ACRE OF LAND. AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THAT IS SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE THE ZONE, THE PD 13 THAT WAS LAID OUT AND THEREFORE BASICALLY THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORK BY OUR OUR ZONING ORDINANCES. THEY ARE THEIR OWN ZONE WITH THEIR OWN RULES. AND THEY HAD THESE PROVISIONS FOR THESE SPECIFIC MULTIFAMILY UNITS, WHICH I DON'T LIKE. AND HONESTLY, ONE OF THESE CAME ACROSS ME TODAY. I WOULD DO EVERYTHING I COULD TO SHUT IT DOWN. BUT WE ARE WE'RE BOUND TO THIS PARTICULAR ZONING BECAUSE OF WHAT WAS DECIDED ON BACK IN, WHATEVER IT WAS 2018. IS THAT CORRECT OR CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG OR ADD TO THAT IF I NEED TO BE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE, YOU KNOW. NO, YOU ARE CORRECT. THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 13, ALLOWS FOR 312 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY UNITS WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ON THESE TRACKS. THE SOUTHGATE APARTMENTS CURRENTLY HAVE 156. SO THAT LEAVES ANOTHER 156 THAT ARE ABLE TO BE BUILT. THIS PROPERTY HAS 146 UNITS WITHIN IT, SO THERE ARE TEN LEFTOVER. SPECIFICALLY BASED ON PD 13 AS IN, IT WOULD NOT MEET OUR OTHER ZONING ORDINANCES. CORRECT? PD 13 AS WELL AS THE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE PD. YOU SAID THE DEVELOPER IS HERE THIS EVENING, THE DEVELOPER'S ENGINEERS HERE THIS EVENING. WHO CAN WOULD YOU LIKE TO STEP UP? AND SINCE YOU'RE THE ENGINEER, MAYBE THERE MIGHT BE SOME QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER, BUT. TURN ON YOUR MIC, PLEASE. THERE WE GO. SORRY. YEAH. DAVID GREER WITH PAPE-DAWSON ENGINEERS. I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER. SO THE OWNER DEVELOPERS. THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT HERE THIS EVENING. NO, HE LIVES IN FLORIDA. SO HAS THE CITY CONTACTED YOU YET AT ALL, TODAY OR RECENTLY ABOUT SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT WERE FOUND AT THIS DEVELOPMENT, SPECIFICALLY DUE TO DRAINAGE, THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS? IT'S CURRENTLY. NOT WITH ANY SPECIFIC ISSUES, I WAS TOLD. YEAH, THERE MIGHT BE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT DRAINAGE. YOU HAVEN'T CONTACTED THEM BACK TO. NOT SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. NO. I JUST WAS TOLD TO BE HERE AND HOPEFULLY ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. SO WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU? DO YOU VISIT? I KNOW YOU'RE AN ENGINEER. SO DO YOU VISIT THE THE SITE? AND WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU DID? I HAVE VISITED THE SITE. IT'S BEEN SINCE WE PREPARED THE DESIGN, SO IT'S PROBABLY BEEN A COUPLE YEARS SINCE WE VISITED THE SITE. AND YOU. SO YOU'RE AWARE THAT THERE'S A TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG WHAT IS TO BE THE REMAINDER OF COLE [00:15:05] STREET? CORRECT? YES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT YOU GUYS ARE DOING SOME WORK ON, I BELIEVE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND I BELIEVE IT'S THE COLE STREET. ALSO, HAZELWOOD ALSO COUNTY ROAD 456, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. WE'RE EXTENDING COLE STREET DOWN TO THE INTERSECTION, AND THEN ALL OF HAZELWOOD AND A PORTION OF COUNTY ROAD 456. IT'S HAZELWOOD ALL THE WAY UP TILL IT VEERS TO THE WEST. YES. I BELIEVE THE ONE OF THE APARTMENTS PUT IN THEIR FULL SECTION, AND THEN WE'RE EXTENDING IT DOWN TO THE SOUTH. MISS COURSON, CAN YOU SCROLL TO THE AERIAL IMAGE OR. SCROLL TO THE SITE PLAN A COUPLE MORE PAGES, PLEASE. RIGHT THERE. THANK YOU. YES, MR. HISS, THE DEVELOPER WILL FULLY CONSTRUCT COLE STREET, WHERE IT CURRENTLY DEAD ENDS AT A CUL DE SAC. THEY'LL CONTINUE IT SOUTH TO COUNTY ROAD 456 OR. YEAH, 456. THEY WILL ALSO OBLIGATED TO REBUILD HAZELWOOD STREET ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO CITY STANDARDS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO THERE'S A CUL DE SAC. I GUESS IT'D BE. IT'S EASIER. IT DOESN'T SHOW ON THIS PAGE, BUT IT'S ROUGHLY UP THERE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHERE THAT THAT'S WHERE THAT STREET TYPICALLY OR CURRENTLY ENDS. THERE'S A TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM THERE ALL THE WAY TO COUNTY ROAD 456. AND SO WHEN WAS THAT TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT? WHEN WAS IT GOTTEN AND WHEN WHEN DID THEY ACTUALLY PUT IN THE DRAINAGE? I THINK THAT TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT WAS BUILT WHEN THE APARTMENTS JUST TO THE NORTH OF US WENT IN AND THEY PUT IN THEIR PORTION OF COLE STREET AND THEN GRADED THAT SYSTEM OUT IN THAT DITCH ALL THE WAY TO THE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. THAT'S CORRECT. WERE YOU, THE ENGINEER THAT WORKED ON THAT PROJECT? NO. WAS THE DEVELOPER THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH? IS IS HE DIFFERENT? DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT, DIFFERENT TEAM. BUT THE DEVELOPMENT IN FRONT OF US HERE, THEY ARE THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE EASEMENT, CORRECT? CORRECT. I KNOW THAT IT'LL BE HANDED OVER TO THE CITY. HALF OF THE EASEMENT? YEAH. I THINK THAT EASEMENT, IS STRADDLES TWO DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS, SO HE'S GOT ONE HALF OF IT. IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN SHOW ME THAT? DOES IT SHOW INDICATE THAT ON HERE THAT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT PROPERTY? THE EASEMENT IS SPLIT. MR. GREG, COULD YOU. OH, NOW I CAN SPEAK. YES. MISS COURSON, IF YOU COULD ZOOM INTO COLE STREET, RIGHT WHERE YOUR MOUSE IS, YOU COULD SEE THE TEMPORARY PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT. MAYBE ZOOM IN A LITTLE FURTHER BY THAT DETENTION POND. YEAH. KEEP GOING. YOU CAN SEE THE LIMITS OF THE PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT. HALF OF THAT EASEMENT IS ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE OTHER HALF IS ON THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST. IT'S IN. IT'S IN GRAY. THAT PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS A DIFFERENT DEVELOPER, CORRECT? OKAY. SO TO ME, THIS THIS SEEMS LIKE IT. THE ISSUE THAT I NOTICED TO KNOW ABOUT IS I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW IT'S HANDLED IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE IF THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU. HOWEVER, WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT THERE'S SOME MAJOR WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME ANYBODY LOOKED AT IT WAS. BUT THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT IT WAS ON SUNDAY, AND THERE WAS IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY MAYBE DUG OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENT OVER BY WHERE THE CUL DE SAC IS. THERE ARE THERE'S RIPRAP WHERE THE ROCKS ARE CAGED UP. JUST SLOW DOWN THAT'S OUT THERE. THAT'S ACTUALLY BEEN BLOWN THROUGH SOME OF THE WATER VELOCITY AND VOLUME THAT'S COMING THROUGH THERE. IT SEEMS TO BE A LOT MORE JUST BASED ON WHAT'S LEFT. SEEMS TO BE A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WAS INITIALLY INTENDED. WHEN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE WAS PUT INTO PLACE. THERE'S IT ALSO LOOKS LIKE OTHER ON YOUR SIDE SAY YOU'RE UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT. [00:20:03] THERE'S BEEN DIGGING IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE SOME, SOME TRENCHES TO HELP ALLOW FURTHER DRAINAGE OFF THE LAND. IT'S POSSIBLE IT COULD BE EROSION, BUT IT LOOKED MORE LIKE DIGGING TO ME. SO SOMEBODY WORKING OUTSIDE THE EASEMENT. ALSO, THERE'S A LOT OF TRASH IN THERE AT THE BLOCKING IT. BUT I THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM AT ALL, OR THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT I NOTICED IS, THAT I MENTIONED THAT IT LOOKS LIKE A MUCH, MUCH HIGHER VELOCITY OF WATER'S COMING OUT THAN WHAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, AGAIN, THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE THIS RIPRAP THAT HAS BEEN DESTROYED BY THE WATER THAT'S COMING THROUGH THERE. AND A LOT OF EROSION. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY I DON'T HAVE A BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURES MY FIRST TIME COMING OUT THERE, BUT MY GUESS IS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF EROSION AND THERE'S PROBABLY A WIDER CHANNEL THAN IT ONCE WAS. AND SO THAT LEADS ME, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S SOME ISSUES. I KNOW, SINCE YOU GUYS ARE IN CONTROL OF THE EASEMENT, YOU AND WHOEVER ELSE CO-OWNS THE EASEMENT WITH YOU SOUNDS LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME WORK THERE ALL THE WAY UP TO COLE STREET. BUT ALSO, IT MAKES ME CURIOUS ABOUT THE THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT THE ENGINEERING FIRM HAS COME UP WITH AS FAR AS WHAT'S CALCULATED TO GO THROUGH. I FORGET WHAT THE SIZE OF THE PIPE IS, BUT I WAS ENVISIONING THE SIZE OF THE PIPE THAT THAT THE DRAINAGE PIPE THAT'S SHOWN ON HERE. AND IN THINKING ABOUT THE VOLUME OF WATER THAT WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME THROUGH TO DO THE DAMAGE THAT I SAW, BECAUSE IT'S LITERALLY TORN NEW DRAINAGE CHANNELS AROUND WHAT YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY BUILT. AND SO MY CONCERN WAS LIKE, WHATEVER YOU GUYS HAVE, AND AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THAT WILL BE FURTHER CALCULATED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S DONE RIGHT. IT SEEMS LIKE THESE THE CURRENT DRAINAGE IS POTENTIALLY WAY UNDER WAY UNDER DESIGNED TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT'S COMING THERE, BOTH THE VELOCITY AND THE FLOW AND VOLUME. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW YOU GUYS WHEN YOU HAVE A PRELIMINARY PLAT LIKE THIS AND YOU NEED TO DO THOSE, CALCULATIONS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THEY MAY CHANGE AS, AS YOU GO BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CITY'S ENGINEERS, CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH THAT PROCESS? HOW YOU WOULD DO THAT? WHERE'S YOUR INITIAL DATA COME FROM FOR LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THE 100 YEAR FLOOD WATERS? IS THAT GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, BASED ON OUR MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN? OR CAN YOU JUST WALK ME THROUGH STEP BY STEP HOW THAT HAPPENS? SURE. YEAH. EVERY PROJECT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. BUT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH INFRASTRUCTURE ALREADY INSTALLED BEFORE WE GOT THERE, THEN WE COLLECT THOSE AS BUILT DRAWINGS. YOU KNOW, WE WE CONFIRM THAT THOSE WERE DESIGNED CORRECTLY, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, THAT THEY'RE USING THE CITY'S CRITERIA. AND THEN WE INTEGRATE THOSE INTO OUR PLANS AND WE DESIGN OUR PIPES TO PICK UP WHAT DRAINAGE THEY ARE OUT FALLING ON TO US. SO WHICH IN THIS EXAMPLE WOULD BE THAT THAT HEADWALL RIGHT OUT OF COLE STREET. SO I'M SORRY. CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT LOUDER. SORRY. SO WE WE DO CONFIRM THAT THOSE PRIOR PLANS THAT WERE BUILT BEFORE WE GOT HERE ARE, OUR, YOU KNOW, COMPLIANT WITH DRAINAGE CRITERIA. AND AND YOU KNOW, THEY WERE THEY WERE OBVIOUSLY REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY. SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, ONE LEVEL OF OF REVIEW RIGHT THERE. AND THEN WE TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT ONCE WE GET THOSE PLANS AND THEN WE, WE DESIGN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE TO MATCH THOSE DRAWINGS. SO IN THIS CASE, THERE WAS A, I BELIEVE, AN OVERALL DRAINAGE PLAN THAT ACCOUNTED FOR OUR SITE AND FOR FUTURE COLE STREET AND FOR ALL THE DRAINAGE THAT IS COMING INTO THIS BASIN. AND WE'RE JUST KIND OF PLUGGING INTO WHAT WAS, YOU KNOW, SLATED FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT, WHICH INCLUDED ONSITE DETENTION. SO WE ARE DETAINING OUR INCREASED RUNOFF ON OUR SITE. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO WHEN WE EXTEND COLE STREET WILL BE, YOU KNOW, FILLING IN THAT DITCH AND EXTENDING THAT CULVERT ALONG COLE STREET AND UPSIZING THAT UPSIZING THAT LINE. SO WE DO A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE IN THAT REGARD, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT NOT CREATING ANY ISSUE. I CAN'T SPEAK TO HOW THAT RIPRAP WAS PLACED OR, YOU KNOW, WHAT MEASURES THEY TOOK TO MAKE SURE IT DIDN'T ERODE. IT COULD BE THAT IT WAS SINCE IT WAS A TEMPORARY DRAINAGE CHANNEL, THEY DIDN'T THINK IT WAS GOING TO SIT THERE THAT LONG. AND IT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, 4 OR 5 YEARS, YOU KNOW, WITH A LOT OF RAIN. AND IT'S JUST SLOWLY ERODED OVER TIME. BUT BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT WE STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH FINAL PLATTING AND DETAILED ENGINEERING AND ALL THAT DOES GET LOOKED AT AGAIN BY US AND BY THE CITY'S ENGINEER. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT THE DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS WERE UPDATED? [00:25:06] IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAD TO BE DONE AGAIN FOR THIS SUBMITTAL, OR IS THAT IS THAT SOMETHING POTENTIALLY OLD DATA? AND I ASK BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THE INFLUX OF WATER, THE INFLOW IS COULD CHANGE BASED ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. FOR INSTANCE, IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENTS BUILT NEARBY AND IT'S CHANGED THE INFLOW. THEN THEN MAYBE THERE MIGHT NEED TO BE SOME RECALCULATIONS THIS BEING A, A DIFFERENT DEVELOPER, DID THESE CALCULATIONS HANDED OFF TO YOU AND THEN BE WHENEVER YOU ALL DID YOUR SUBMITTAL AND DID REDID THESE CALCULATIONS? THAT WAS YEARS AGO. HAS THIS PROCESS BEEN GONE THROUGH AGAIN, OR IS THERE POTENTIALLY OLD DATA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? IT'S BEEN GONE THROUGH AGAIN. I THINK WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, IT PROBABLY WASN'T EXTREMELY DETAILED REVIEW, BUT THEY DID LOOK AT IT. WE DID GO THROUGH DETAILED REVIEW IN 2023. SO JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, AND I WILL SAY IT IS ALL WHEN THE DRAINAGE DESIGN WAS DONE, IT WAS ALL CONTEMPLATED THAT THIS WAS A FULLY DEVELOPED AREA. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE WOULD BE SURPRISED IF ONE TRACT BUILT OUT AND WE WERE THINKING IT WAS A GREENFIELD AND DIDN'T HAVE INCREASED FLOWS. I THINK THAT WAS ACCOUNTED FOR BECAUSE IT ALL HAS TO BE KIND OF SIZED FOR FULLY DEVELOPED CONDITIONS. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. THE CITY'S ORDINANCE REQUIRES THEM TO LOOK AT THE FULLY DEVELOPED CONDITION FOR THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE BASIN. MR. FISHER. I DO KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT THE CITY ORDINANCES REQUIRE. HAVE YOU AS DAVE, MR. GREER? AS AN ENGINEER, EVER RUN INTO A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR FOR THESE FOR THE REQUIREMENT TO BE THE THE DRAINAGE IS SIZED FOR FULLY DEVELOPED AREA. HAVE YOU EVER RUN INTO AN INSTANCE WHERE YOU GET INTO A DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S LIKE, HEY, I DON'T THINK THEY CALCULATED CORRECTLY BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS, IS POTENTIALLY HIGHER AND MAYBE PUT IN A POSITION WHERE YOU HAVE TO BEEF THINGS UP BECAUSE OF WHATEVER MAY HAVE HAPPENED PREVIOUSLY. YEAH, THAT DOES HAPPEN. AND SOMETIMES DRAINAGE CRITERIA CHANGES FROM FROM TIME TO TIME. AND THEY, YOU KNOW, INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL THAT YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR IN 100 YEAR STORM. SO THAT THAT DOES HAPPEN. IT'S USUALLY IN BIGGER GAPS OF TIME WHEN THAT HAPPENS. I THINK WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF US WENT IN, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS 2018, 2019. I MEAN, IT'S BEEN 4 OR 5 YEARS OR SIX YEARS. SO IT HADN'T BEEN THAT LONG OF A GAP. BUT BUT LIKE I SAID, WE STILL DO CHECK THAT OUT AND LOOK AT THEIR CALCS, MAKE SURE THERE WERE NO MAJOR ERRORS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LIABLE TO IF THERE'S SOME KIND OF ISSUE IN THOSE PLANS. SO WE CHECK IT INTERNALLY AS WELL AS THE CITY'S ENGINEER. THEY'RE, ON TOP OF IT AS WELL. CAN YOU EXPLAIN? YOU SAID YOU'RE LIABLE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT THAT HOW YOU WERE LIABLE AND IN WHAT CIRCUMSTANCE. SO, FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU SELL THE DEVELOPMENT OR DOES THE LIABILITY PASS ON OR IS IT YOU AS THE ENGINEERING FIRM THAT'S LIABLE FROM THE DEVELOPER? THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT. AND WHEN IT COMES TO DRAINAGE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY YEARS LATER THAT SOMEBODY SEES, LIKE, HEY, THERE'S AN ISSUE HERE THAT WASN'T CAUGHT. AND EVEN IF LAWYERS DO GET INVOLVED, WHICH USUALLY THAT TAKES SOME TIME. LIKE WHO REALLY WHERE DOES IT COME DOWN TO AS FAR AS LIABILITY GOES? YEAH. AND OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY AND CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. BUT I DO KNOW THAT WE'RE TASKED AS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS FOR, YOU KNOW MAKING SURE THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS ACCOUNTED FOR AND OUR LICENSES ARE TIED TO THAT. SO THERE'S A THERE'S A WHOLE ENGINEERING COMPLAINT PATH THAT SOMEONE COULD GO DOWN. IT'S NOT REALLY A LEGAL ROUTE, BUT BUT EVEN ON THE LEGAL SIDE, I'M SURE BECAUSE WE SIGN AND SEAL THESE PLANS, THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF LIABILITY IN THERE THAT SOMEONE COULD, YOU KNOW, COME AND SUE US AS ENGINEER OF RECORD. SO THERE'S. AND IT STICKS WITH THE LAND. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS OR SOMETHING, BUT WE AS ENGINEERS HAVE A DUTY TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR CALCULATIONS ARE CORRECT AND WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, SO IT DOESN'T GO TO, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THE CITY ENGINEERS BECAUSE THEY BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY APPROVE IT TOO. RIGHT. BUT THE CITY ENGINEERS USUALLY HAVE SOME KIND OF CLAUSE OR SOMETHING THAT SAYS IT RELEASES THEM OF ANY LIABILITY. JUST BECAUSE THEY REVIEWED IT AND APPROVED IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE LIABLE FOR IT. SO AGAIN, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING HOW THAT WORKS. YEAH. I GUESS IT GETS DOWN TO, AGAIN, THE FACT THAT IT'S DRAINAGE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WATER. AND LIKE A BRIDGE FAILS, LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY DID SOMETHING WRONG WHEN IT COMES TO WATER. EVERYBODY'S LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T MODEL EVERYTHING PERFECTLY. SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE DISCUSSION COMES FROM. YEAH. AND YES, AND AND WE KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A FINGER POINTED AT US. [00:30:04] AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MOTIVATION BEYOND THAT. WE ALSO HAVE, YOU KNOW, BUT WE HAVE MOTIVATION TO TO DO THINGS CORRECTLY AND, AND YOU KNOW, EVERY ENGINEERING FIRM CARRIES LIABILITY INSURANCE AND BUT WE DO A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO OUR BEST TO NOT MAKE A MISTAKE. AND, IN THIS CASE, I CAN'T SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE DITCH AND THE EROSION ISSUES THAT YOU'RE SEEING OUT THERE, BUT I CAN PASS ALONG THAT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND LET THEM KNOW THERE'S ISSUES OUT THERE AND THAT MAYBE HE NEEDS TO GET SOMEBODY ON BOARD TO FIX THAT ONE AREA. BUT ULTIMATELY WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD THE ROAD AND DO THIS DEVELOPMENT WHICH WILL, YOU KNOW, FILL IN THAT THAT DITCH. AND THERE'S ALSO A, I THINK, ANOTHER TEMPORARY DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT CUTS THROUGH ON THE THE WEST SIDE OF THE TRACK TOO THAT, THAT WOULD ALSO CLEAN THAT UP AS WELL. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THERE'S AN ENTRANCE OFF OF HAZELWOOD STREET AND ENTRANCE OFF OF COLE. CORRECT. OKAY. NO ENTRANCE OFF OF COUNTY ROAD 456. CORRECT. CORRECT. AND IF I'M LOOKING AT THIS CORRECTLY, THERE'S ONLY TWO PROPERTY FIRE HYDRANTS, AND THEY ARE BOTH LOCATED ON THE SIDE CLOSEST TO HAZELWOOD. ON SITE HYDRANTS. NO PROPERTY. FIRE HYDRANT. AND THERE'S ONLY TWO INDICATED. SO THOSE MAY BE TWO PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANTS INTERIOR TO THE SITE THERE'S MUCH MORE THAN THAT. OKAY. I GUESS BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT A CONCERN IF FIRES GOT TO COME TO SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, OVER CLOSE TO COLE, AND THERE'S A FIRE IN THE BACK FAR CORNER IN COTTAGE D. THAT'S AN AWFUL LONG FIRE HOSE. WE DID HAVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW AND WORKED WITH THEM TO TO GAIN THEIR APPROVAL. OKAY. THANK YOU. MISS ELLIS. THE FIRE MARSHAL, I CAN CONFIRM, DID REVIEW THESE PLANS. THE FIRE MARSHAL, MR. JERRY MILLER, IS HERE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK HIM ANY QUESTIONS. HE'S. HE MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER HOW MANY FIRE HYDRANTS THERE ARE ON SITE. MARSHAL, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT. I KNOW THAT THESE PLANS WERE APPROVED. THE FIRST THING I SAID WHENEVER I SPOKE TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ABOUT THIS, I WAS LIKE, HOW DID YOU GUYS GET THIS APPROVED FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL? IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS PROBABLY AT LEAST AT THE VERY LEAST, THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH ABOUT THAT. I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW WHAT MAYBE WERE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU RAN INTO, FOR SOME OF US THAT AREN'T EXPERTS, BUT LOOKED AT THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THOUGHT THEY PROBABLY WERE NOT TOO HAPPY WHEN THEY SAW IT AT FIRST. GOOD EVENING DEPUTY CHIEF FIRE MARSHAL JERRY MILLER. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MISS ELLIS, THERE IS SIX HYDRANTS IN THAT IN THAT AREA, ONE ON EACH CORNER OF THE ROADWAY AND ONE GOING IN AND ONE GOING OUT. THIS WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED BEFORE I GOT HERE. I GOT HERE IN 22. AS COLE STATED, IT WAS APPROVED IN 17 AND THEN AGAIN IN 18 EVERYTHING WAS DONE AND EVERYTHING WAS PRE-APPROVED BEFORE I GOT HERE. I DID MAKE AN EXCEPTION FOR THEM. IF YOU'LL LOOK IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THE DRAWING. IT MAY NOT HAVE IT ON THIS ONE. IT MAY BE. IS IT THE FOUR FOOT GATE WITH YES BOX FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE USING COLE STREET AS A FIRE ACCESS ROAD. QUESTION. WHY WOULDN'T WE DO SOMETHING SIMILAR ON HAZELWOOD? BECAUSE THE DISTANCE FROM THE FIRE LANE TO THE HOUSE, THE COTTAGE IN THE BOTTOM CORNER IS 292FT. THE ONE ON THE OPPOSITE END IS ONLY. I BELIEVE IT'S RIGHT AT 205FT IF I REMEMBER MY MEASUREMENTS CORRECTLY. THANK YOU. SO FIRE CODE STATES IF IT'S SPRINKLED, WHICH ALL OF THESE ARE SPRINKLED WITH A RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLER SYSTEM, WE CAN ALLOW UP TO 200 FOOT OR MORE. SO I GAVE AN EXCEPTION WITH THE GATE FOR THAT CORNER, [00:35:01] BECAUSE IT ONLY REALLY AFFECTS ABOUT FOUR BUILDINGS FOR APARTMENTS THERE. NOW WE KEEP SAYING APARTMENTS, YOU UNDERSTAND? THESE ARE JUST LIKE THESE HOUSES RIGHT HERE BESIDE CITY HALL. THEY'RE NOT TWO STORY, THREE STORY, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S ONE STORY DUPLEX. FOURPLEXES. DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS REGARDING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS GATE? YOU KNOW, OF. THE ONE THEY'RE PUTTING IN FOR US, LIKE CONCERNS OF IT? THE DRAINAGE, OPERATING DRAINAGE, THE DRAINAGE, GOING OVER THAT SIDEWALK THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S UP ABOVE THE DRAINAGE. THERE'LL BE A KNOX LOCK ON THERE THAT WE CARRY THE KEY FOR. IT'S A FOUR FOOT GATE. I'VE SEEN THE EXCEPTION HAPPEN BEFORE, AND I CONSULTED WITH OTHER FIRE MARSHALS ABOUT IT BEFORE I GAVE IT. BUT AGAIN, I'M ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS, APPROVING THIS, TRYING TO GET SOMETHING THAT'S BETTER THAN NOTHING. RIGHT? IS FOUR FOOT. HONESTLY, IS THAT HIGH ENOUGH OR? IT'S WIDE FOUR FOOT WIDE, FOUR FOOT WIDE? HOW TALL IS IT GOING TO BE? DO YOU KNOW? SIX FEET. SIX FOOT TALL? OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. AND ONE MORE QUESTION. SORRY. WOULD YOU OR YOUR DEPARTMENT BE GOING OUT THERE TO ENSURE, YOU KNOW, VANDALISM PER SE? YES, MA'AM. SO THERE'LL BE A I'M SURE YOU'VE SEEN THEM ON A BUSINESS CALLED THE KNOX BOX. IT WILL BE STRAPPED TO THE GATE THAT IT CAN'T COME OFF. AND OUR KEY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN OPEN IT TO GET TO EITHER THEIR KEY THAT'LL BE IN THERE, OR A PASS A KEY CARD SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. DEPUTY MILLER, ONE QUESTION. YOU SAID THAT YOU MADE AN EXCEPTION AFTER YOU HAD CONSULTED WITH OTHER CHIEFS. SO WOULD YOU HAVE THEN HAD THE AUTHORITY TO DENY THIS PLAN AND MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO UPDATE IT TO A HIGHER STANDARD? THE PROBLEM IS, AGAIN, I'M APPROVING THIS. I CAUGHT THIS WHEN I DID THE MOST RECENT REVIEW. AGAIN, THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED PRIOR TO ME BEING HERE. SO I'M TRYING TO GET THE BEST OUT OF WHAT SITUATION I WAS GIVEN. SO YOU DID NOT. I WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED IT ORIGINALLY NO. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED IT ORIGINALLY. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS HERE. SO SO IN ORDER FOR YOU TO HAVE MADE AN EXCEPTION, IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME ACROSS YOUR DESK. SO WHAT IF YOU WOULD HAVE SAID, I'M TOO UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS. I DO NOT EVEN WANT TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION. THEN WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED? IT'S ALREADY PRE-APPROVED. SO HERE. SO YOU REALLY. OKAY. ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CHIEF? THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHIEF? YES, SIR. MR. GREER. SO SORRY. I'M HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES. MY COMPUTER'S WANTING TO REBOOT ITSELF EVERY 30 SECONDS. SO THERE'S A AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE JUST THE ENGINEER, NOT THE DEVELOPER. BUT THE DEVELOPER IS NOT HERE, SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU INSTEAD. I THINK SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST KIND OF MADE CLEAR WITH THE FIRE ISSUES WE'RE LOOKING AT AND THE FACT THAT OUR CURRENT FIRE MARSHAL DID NOT LIKE WHAT HE WAS SEEING. THERE ARE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS. WE HAVE 35,000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT ARE PRE-APPROVED AND BY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE NO LONGER HERE ANYMORE. AND THERE'S A LOT OF US ARE LOOKING AT THAT COMES ACROSS OUR DESK AND WE'RE LIKE, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SAYING, I DON'T LIKE IT EITHER, BUT WE'RE STUCK CONTRACTUALLY, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT NOT ONLY ARE WE DEALING WITH. I MEAN, THESE ARE RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THEY'RE BASICALLY LIKE SIZES THEY'RE LIKE TINY HOME SIZE AND THEY'RE SO DENSELY PACKED. AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THAT AND WE ARE IN A, I'M SURE YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN A RESIDENTIAL MORATORIUM HERE, WHICH IS, IS FAIRLY UNCOMMON AND WE'RE DEALING WITH KIND OF UNPRECEDENTED GROWTH HERE. AND OUR, FIRE DEPARTMENT IS STRAINED IT'S STRESSED. OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS STRAINED AND STRESSED. OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT WE ARE I BELIEVE THE GOAL IS TO BE AT A ONE AND A HALF OFFICERS PER 1000 RESIDENTS. WE'RE LIKE ONE RIGHT NOW. AND A MATTER OF FACT, OUR LIAISON IS NOT WHERE I EXPECTED HER TO BE. BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT BE BROUGHT UP TO COUNCIL. [00:40:05] WHAT ARE WE DOING TO MANAGE GROWTH WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES? TO MAKE SURE. BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE CITY MANAGER , THE LAST TIME I SPOKE WITH HIM, HE SAID HE ACQUIESCED AND SAID WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON SLOWING DOWN ON THESE DEVELOPMENTS BECAUSE THINGS WERE COMING THROUGH FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND THE CITY HAD NOT CAUGHT THEM. AND SO HERE'S SOMETHING ELSE. YOU KNOW, THE THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT CATCHING, BUT BUT BUT ALSO THE THING THAT WE KNOW, WHICH IS WE HAVE FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT IS EXTREMELY STRESSED. WHAT ARE WE DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WORKING, THAT ALL DEPARTMENTS ARE WORKING TOGETHER? WE HAVE DRAINAGE ISSUES. WE HAVE FIRE ISSUES. WE HAVE POLICE ISSUES. AND THIS ONE UNIT. AND HERE WE ARE IN THIS ONE DEVELOPMENT. HERE WE ARE WITH THIS EXTREMELY DENSE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S EXCEPTIONAL IN THE ASPECT THAT IT IS AN EXCEPTION LAID OUT IN THE PD 13 ZONE. AND AGAIN, WE ALL KNOW WE'RE CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED AT THIS POINT. BUT MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS COUNCIL DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ADDRESSING THIS. BECAUSE WE HAVE 35,000 UNITS THAT A LOT OF US UP HERE CAN SIT HERE AND SAY, OKAY, HERE'S ALL THE ISSUES, BUT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM COUNCIL WHAT WHAT ARE THE PLANS TO HELP MANAGE THE GROWTH AND TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES, TO MAKE SURE THAT PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS HOW TO MOVE TOGETHER SO THAT AS WE HAVE THESE 35,000 NEW RESIDENTS MOVED TO PRINCETON AS THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE FINALLY COMPLETED. WHAT ARE YOU ALL DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING BETWEEN EVERYONE SO THAT PEOPLE AREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER FIRE SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE THERE, POLICE SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE THERE, OR WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE FLOODING OR DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT ARE OVERLOOKED BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GOT TOO MUCH ON THEIR PLATES FROM PEOPLE WHO SAT IN THESE CHAIRS, YOU KNOW, SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS AGO WHEN APPROVED DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE JUST SEEING NOW. AND I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. SO HEARING FROM DEPUTY MILLER I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR SAFETY, OUR FIRST RESPONDER SAFETY, THE RESIDENT SAFETY. RIGHT. AND TO HEAR HIM SAY THAT IF THIS WOULD HAVE COME ACROSS HIS DESK FOR APPROVAL, I WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED THIS. I'M WONDERING, DOES THAT DOES THAT GIVE YOU SOME SORT OF PAUSE THAT YOU WILL TAKE BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND RECOMMEND MAYBE MAKING SOME CHANGES AT THIS POINT? JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU SPOKE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF YOUR CREDENTIALS, RIGHT, AS AN ENGINEER AND HOW THOSE THINGS CAN COME INTO PLAY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE COST OF HUMAN LIFE HERE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT GIVES YOU PAUSE, THAT MAKES YOU SAY, MAYBE WE CAN DO SOMETHING HERE, AND MAYBE WORK WITH THE FIRE CHIEF AND THE OTHER CITY OFFICIALS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE BEST THING FOR THE RESIDENTS. SURE. YEAH, I THAT'S IMPACTFUL. YOU KNOW, OUR AS AN ENGINEER, I'M FOCUSED ON SITE DEVELOPMENT, PAVING, GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITIES. BUT PERSONALLY, YEAH, IT YOU KNOW, I HEAR WHAT HE SAYS, AND I WILL TAKE THAT BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND, YOU KNOW, CONVEY THAT CONCERN. ULTIMATELY, IT'S UP TO HIM TO MAKE THAT DECISION. I WILL SAY WE'VE, RUN ACROSS THESE DEVELOPMENTS BEFORE, AND THEY ARE YOU KNOW, THEY ARE THEY ARE DENSE. THEY CERTAINLY LOOK DENSE ON THIS ON THIS PAPER, BUT I THINK ONCE IT DOES GET CONSTRUCTED YOU KNOW, I THINK WHEN YOU WALK THROUGH THE SITE, IT DOESN'T LOOK AS BAD AS WHAT THIS YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE ON PAPER. SO BUT I'LL CERTAINLY CONVEY THAT BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND, SEE WHAT HE SAYS. SO I HAVE A QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU JUST SAID YOU WERE THE PART OF THE SITE DESIGN, RIGHT? AS THE ENGINEER. AS THE ENGINEER. SO WE GET A LAYOUT FROM AN ARCHITECT, AND THEN WE DO ALL THE GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING, WATER AND SEWER. THANK YOU. THEN I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AS WELL THIS IS BROUGHT FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL OF APPROVAL, BUT TECHNICALLY, YOU COULD DENY THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT BASED OFF THE FIRE CODES BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, AS HE STATED, IT DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. THIS WAS BROUGHT TO YOU FROM AS A RECOMMENDATION. SO THIS COULD BE DENIED THEORETICALLY. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY ARE NOT GRANDFATHERED INTO ANY FIRE CODE OR OR PREVIOUS FIRE MARSHAL'S OPINION OR APPROVAL, AS LONG AS OUR CURRENT FIRE MARSHAL AND CURRENT FIRE CODE [00:45:11] SAYS THAT THIS DOES NOT MEET APPROVAL. CORRECT. THEY HAVE TO MEET THE CITY'S CURRENT SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND GET APPROVAL FROM CURRENT OFFICIALS. THE FACT THAT OUR CURRENT FIRE MARSHAL MADE AN EXCEPTION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES. OBVIOUSLY, THAT WAS INTENDED TO SAY, OKAY, I BELIEVE YOU'VE MET BARE, BARE MINIMUM THAT I'M OKAY WITH THIS, BUT IS THERE ANY WEIGHT BEHIND THAT THAT LEGALLY SAYS WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT. AND FURTHER. DID AND A QUESTION FOR YOU, DEPUTY MILLER. DID YOU KNOW THAT WE OR THAT YOU ACTUALLY RIGHT, HAD THE POWER TO SAY, NO, I DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THIS. I DON'T WANT TO RECOMMEND IT. WELL, AGAIN, THIS WAS APPROVED IN 17 AND 18. AND THEN WHEN IT COME BEFORE ME IN 22. 23. YEAH. HOLD ON. NO, I THINK WE LOOKED AT IT IN 22. JUST AS I GOT HERE. AND THE PERSON THAT WAS ACTING FIRE MARSHAL APPROVED IT. OKAY. AND THEN WHEN IT COME BACK BEFORE US THIS TIME AGAIN I FINALLY HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT. AND I LOOKED AT THIS AND I MADE COMMENTS FROM THE BEGINNING WITH THEM THAT THAT IS TOO FAR FROM THE FIRE LANE. OKAY. AND THEN BEING PRE-APPROVED, I'M LOOKING AT IT THE THIRD TIME THAT IT'S COME BEFORE US. AND YES, I FELT LIKE, WELL, IT'S ALREADY APPROVED BY THE CITY, READY TO GO. SO MY OPTION IS TO FIND THE BEST OPTION FOR THE CITIZENS AND MY GUYS TO BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE AND FIGHT FIRE. THANK YOU. ONE QUESTION FOR COLE AND I MAY COME BACK TO YOU. OKAY. SO DON'T GO TOO FAR. SO, COLE, IF WE VOTE THIS DOWN HERE AND GOES BACK TO CITY, WHAT WHAT HAPPENS THEN? WE THEY'RE REQUIRED THEN TO BRING IT UP TO CURRENT CODE. OR DO I MEAN, DOES CITY COUNCIL HAVE TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IF CITY COUNCIL SAYS NO, YOU NEED TO BRING THIS UP TO CURRENT CODE, THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDESIGN IT AND BRING IT UP TO CURRENT CODE. YEAH, I WANTED TO PUSH MY BUTTON THERE A MINUTE AGO. MR. MILLER, THE PREVIOUS APPROVALS ALL EXPIRED WHEN THIS PROJECT SAT DORMANT FOR SOME TIME. SO ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY REALLY DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S UP TO YOU AN THE COMMISSION. Y'ALL CAN RECOMMEND DENIAL AND HAVE THEM REDESIGN AND BRING A PLAN THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL IS MORE COMFORTABLE WITH, THAT IS AN OPTION. THANK YOU. AND IF THAT ENDS UP BEING THE ULTIMATE DECISION BY COUNCIL, THEN WOULD IT BE UP TO THE DEVELOPER TO CONSULT WITH DEPUTY MILLER? I'M SORRY IF I'M GETTING YOUR TITLE WRONG. IT WAS LIKE ALPHABET SOUP. I'M SORRY. I DON'T MEAN ANY DISRESPECT. YES, MA'AM. I'M THE DEPUTY CHIEF . DEPUTY CHIEF ? OKAY. YES. THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME TO CURRENT CODE. WHAT? THEY. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER AND I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT. RIGHT? I KNOW HOW TO READ THE FIRE CODE AND INTERPRET IT. OKAY. BUT I'VE ALREADY. WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATION S TO THEM. HEY, YOU COULD DO THIS, AND I WOULD BE HAPPIER. OKAY. GOT IT. THERE'S THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN THAT THAT COULD. AGAIN, YOU BROUGHT UP THE DENSITY PER ACRE. THAT'S WHERE MY CONCERN COMES IN. THAT'S WHERE WE'VE GOT TOO FAR FROM THE FIRE LANE. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH I APPRECIATE THAT. YES MA'AM. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. MAXINE. NO, THAT WAS ME. SORRY, SORRY. I DO WANT TO MENTION THAT YOU HAVE A NEW DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES . SINCE THAT TIME YOU HAVE A NEW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SINCE THAT TIME, YOU HAVE IN LARGE PART, A NEW COUNCIL OR A SMALL PART, AND YOU HAVE A NEW MAYOR. AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, BUT I BELIEVE THERE IS MORE OF A SWAY NOW TO MAKE SURE TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND BEING RESPONSIBLE IN THE WAY WE GROW. SO I CAN TELL YOU PERSONALLY, I WOULD VALUE YOUR EXPERTISE OVER CUSTOMER SERVICE TO DEVELOPERS, AND ANYTIME YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS, BRING THEM FORWARD TO US AND WE WILL LISTEN. [00:50:01] I HAVE A QUESTION FOR DEPUTY CHIEF . SORRY. IT'S OKAY MA'AM. I'M NOT TRYING TO IGNORE Y'ALL. I'M TRYING TO LOOK UP THE CODE SO I CAN QUOTE IT TO YOU. SO AGAIN, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THESE QUESTIONS, BUT I'M LOOKING OUT FOR THE CITIZENS OF PRINCETON. AND I DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WHEN WE'RE NOT HERE OR TEN YEARS FROM NOW, WHEN WE'RE NOT HERE, THE THESE BUILDINGS GOING UP IN FLAMES AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING A HUGE TRAGEDY. KNOWING NOW THAT EVERYTHING THAT OCCURRED PREVIOUSLY HAS EXPIRED. IF YOU HAD KNOWN THAT, OR DID YOU KNOW THAT IT ALL EXPIRED PREVIOUSLY? [INAUDIBLE]. OKAY. IF YOU HAD KNOWN THAT, THEN WOULD YOU OF POSSIBLY NOT GONE WITH THIS EXCEPTION, WORK AROUND FOR THEM. SO I DENIED IT THE FIRST TIME IT CAME THROUGH. I DENIED IT THE SECOND TIME IT CAME THROUGH. AND THEN WE HAD A MEETING. AND THIS IS THE OKAY THAT WE COME TO. OKAY. SO. WOULD YOU. I'M ASSUMING THEN THERE WOULD BE A MORE EFFICIENT AND BETTER WAY TO PROTECT THESE RESIDENTS. THAT AND I'M SORRY, THE ENGINEER, THE DEVELOPER AREN'T GOING TO BE THERE AGAIN IN FIVE, TEN, 15 YEARS. YOU KNOW THAT YOU WOULD HAVE, AGAIN, ACCORDING TO ORDINANCES AND ALL THAT THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. YES, MA'AM. YOU HEAR ME? YES, MA'AM. LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. SO I WOULD I WOULD TELL THEM, BRING ME SOMETHING NEW THAT COMES INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE. AND IF I AGREE THAT IT COMES INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE, EVEN IF THEY WANT TO SEND IT TO A THIRD PARTY. I HAVE A LIST OF THIRD PARTY REVIEWERS THAT ARE ENGINEERS, FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERS. THEY COULD SEND IT TO AND GET THEIR STAMP OF APPROVAL ON IT ALSO. TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO DISCLOSE. WHAT IS THIS MEETING THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF? WHO WAS IN THIS MEETING? WAS THIS WITH THE DEVELOPER OR CITY SERVICES? WE HAD A WAS IT ME AND COLE AND. YOU AND COLE? WAS ANYBODY ELSE IN THERE, OR WAS IT JUST ME AND YOU? WERE YOU THERE, CRAIG? I THINK IT WAS ME AND MYSELF AND COLE AND MAYBE TYLER FROM GIS. TYLER. OKAY. BUT IT WAS THE DEVELOPER. I BELIEVE THE ENGINEER WAS INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION. AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT MEETING TO SWAY YOU OFF OF YOUR PROFESSIONAL, EXPERT OPINION THAT THIS SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD AFTER YOU DECLINED IT TWICE. THIS IS NOT, YOU KNOW, MEANT TO QUESTION YOUR INTEGRITY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. BUT I JUST WONDER ABOUT IF YOU'VE GOT THE HIGHEST EXPERT IN FIRE SAFETY HERE DENYING THAT WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT MEETING. WHY DIDN'T Y'ALL LISTEN TO HIM? WHY DID HOW DID YOU GET CONVINCED TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION? AGAIN FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, IT WAS ALREADY APPROVED. I'M TRYING TO FIND THE BEST OPTION TO GET OUT OF WHAT I'M HANDED. GOT IT CLEAR NOW THAT CRAIG IS. I DIDN'T KNOW, BUT NOW CRAIG HAS CONFIRMED IT IS GONE. IT IS DEAD. THEY'RE COMING BACK FOR COMPLETE THEN YES, I WOULD NOT APPROVE THIS. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO PUSH THEM. I'M GOING TO. I'M GOING TO PERSONALLY TRY TO VOTE THAT DOWN SO WE CAN GO BACK. AND I'LL JUST PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION AS WELL, THAT I WAS UNAWARE THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL DID NOT KNOW THAT THIS HAD PREVIOUSLY EXPIRED AND WAS NO LONGER NEEDED TO BE APPROVED. AND HE REVIEWED MULTIPLE SUBMITTALS OF THIS, AND I WAS UNAWARE THAT HE WAS ILL INFORMED THAT THIS WAS NOT APPROVED. I FOUND THAT OUT DURING THIS MEETING. SO WITH HIS EXPERTISE AND KNOWLEDGE NOW BEING TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, I THINK STAFF WOULD CHANGE THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO DENIAL OF THIS PENDING MEETING THE FIRE CODES. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. SO CAN WE, SINCE WE ALL KIND OF HAVE THE SAME THOUGHT ON THIS, RIGHT? IT'S A SAFETY HAZARD. AS A FIRST RESPONDER MYSELF, I WOULD WANT US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SAFE AND WE'RE PROTECTING NOT ONLY OUR FIREFIGHTERS BUT ALSO THE CITIZENS AS WELL. MY RECOMMENDATION ON THIS WOULD BE THAT WE TABLE THIS UNTIL THEY CAN COME BACK WITH A BETTER SOLUTION THAT'S GOING TO MEET THE FIRE [00:55:05] CODE FOR WHAT THE DEPUTY CHIEF IS WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT HIS PEOPLE ARE SAFE AND THEY CAN ADEQUATELY TAKE CARE OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY. DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT'S THAT WAS MY QUESTION. OKAY. NO. WELL, FIRST OFF, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DID I DID WANT TO NOTE BECAUSE I COULDN'T HELP BUT NOTICE THAT THERE'S A PID ON HERE. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE I HEAR FROM THAT THAT ARE ACTUALLY THIS WOULD BE PROBABLY MORE OF A QUESTION FOR THE ENGINEER. I APOLOGIZE AGAIN, IT'D PROBABLY BE BETTER FOR THE DEVELOPER, A QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER, BUT HE'S NOT HERE. THERE'S A PID ATTACHED TO THIS. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF. THANK YOU COLE. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH IN THE CITY FROM COUNCIL AND FROM CITIZENS ABOUT A LOT OF A LOT OF THESE PIDS THAT HAVE BEEN ATTACHED TO A LOT OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE APPROVED MANY YEARS AGO. AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT VERY PRO MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FOR VARIOUS REASONS. I'M NOT TOTALLY AGAINST IT. THE WAY I LOOK AT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IS THERE'S A RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. THERE'S A WRONG WAY TO DO IT. THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT, IN MY OPINION, IS WE HAVE ESPECIALLY IN OUR TOWN, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HIGH INCOME JOBS. I THINK WE WILL GET THERE, BUT RIGHT NOW WE JUST DON'T HAVE A LOT OF BUSINESS CENTER TYPE OF STRUCTURES TO SUPPORT THOSE TYPES OF JOBS. AND THEREFORE I DON'T MIND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IF IT'S DONE IN THE RIGHT PLACE, IN THE RIGHT WAY AND AT THE RIGHT PRICE, MEANING THAT RENTALS ARE ACTUALLY EASIER TO GET, CHEAPER TO GET FOR, FOR LOWER INCOME INDIVIDUALS BECAUSE WE NEED THOSE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO WORK IN OUR, IN OUR TOWN. BUT WHENEVER I SAW THAT THERE WAS A PID ATTACHED TO THIS, I THOUGHT TO MYSELF, YOU KNOW WHO'S PAYING FOR THE PID? BECAUSE USUALLY, LIKE WHEN THAT'S ATTACHED TO RESIDENTIAL UNITS, RESIDENTIAL UNITS, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY'S GOT TO PAY THEIR SHARE. WHEREAS THIS IS BASICALLY AS FAR AS THE PID IS CONCERNED. AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT WOULD JUST BE ONE LUMP SUM PAYMENT THAT'S PAID BY THE OWNER OF THE FACILITY WHO'S COLLECTING RENT FROM THE TENANTS. AND THAT MEANS THAT OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A COST THAT'S GOING TO BE PASSED DOWN TO THE RENTERS AND IT'S GOING TO MAKE RENT HIGHER, WHICH DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF WHAT I LIKE TO SEE IN THESE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, WHICH IS AFFORDABLE LIVING FOR LOWER INCOME INDIVIDUALS, TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY LIVE IN OUR TOWN AND WORK THE LOWER INCOME JOBS THAT WE RELY ON. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE THE ENGINEER, BUT WHAT IS THE INTENDED? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THESE ARE LIKE 700 TO 1000FT². THESE ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO, LIKE, TINY HOME SIZE. IS THERE AN INTENDED RENT THAT, THAT YOU KNOW OF THAT'S GOING TO BE ATTACHED TO THESE? ARE THEY PLANNING ON RENTING THESE FOR 1000 OR 1500 FOR THE GENERAL UNIT, OR DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA? I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFICS. I JUST BASED ON PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS. I THINK HIS MARKET IS FOR LIKE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS OR, YOU KNOW, RETIREES THAT WANT TO HAVE LOWER MAINTENANCE LIFESTYLE. SO IT ISN'T A IT ISN'T AN AFFORDABLE PRODUCT. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT THE RENTS ARE. BASED ON. OH, I'M SORRY CHAIRMAN. OH. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT. OKAY. SO I DO APOLOGIZE. HOWEVER, THERE ARE ORDINANCES. OH. SORRY, CRAIG. DUE TO THE SHOT CLOCK REQUIREMENTS FROM THE STATE LAW, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL EITHER APPROVE OR DENY THIS REQUEST. WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN ONE EXTENSION, AND SO IF WE WE DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO TABLE IT BECAUSE OUR NEXT MEETING ISN'T UNTIL THE THIRD WEEK IN JUNE. SO I'D RECOMMEND YOU EITHER CONDITIONALLY APPROVE IT AND HAVE THE DRAWINGS CORRECTED BEFORE THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, OR DENY AND HAVE THEM RESUBMIT WITH A PLAN THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL IS HAPPY WITH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT. BUT WE ARE LOOKING CLOSELY AT ORDINANCES, AND WE WANT TO ENSURE IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE SAFE. SO I MOTION THAT WE DO DENY PL20253071 AND REQUEST THAT IT IS BROUGHT UP TO FIRE CODE CURRENT FIRE CODE. AND I WOULD ASK, MISS ELLIS, COULD YOU SPECIFY YOUR REASON FOR DENIAL IN YOUR MOTION? [01:00:02] MY REASON FOR DENIAL IS CURRENTLY IT DOES NOT MEET THE CURRENT FIRE CODE AND ORDINANCES REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF PRINCETON. SO AGAIN, I DO MOTION THAT AT THIS TIME WE DENY AND REQUEST FOR IT TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CURRENT FIRE ORDINANCE CODE. I WOULD ADD TO THAT. I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT THE DRAINAGE ISSUES, WHICH I BELIEVE THE CITY IS GOING TO CONTACT YOU ABOUT, THOSE BE RESOLVED. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MAY NEED TO BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CO-OWNER OF THAT EASEMENT. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. I CAN PROVIDE PHOTOS. AND THERE'S A LOT OF ORDINANCES, BUT THE FACT THAT THE DRAINAGE THE CODE FOR OUR FOR THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT RELATIVE TO THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT, INCLUDING, I DON'T KNOW OFFHAND THE EXACT ORDINANCES, BUT THERE'S TRASH IN THE CREEK. THERE IS THE CHANNELS HAVE BEEN DUG OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENT AND THE CURRENT BARRIERS THAT ARE IN PLACE. THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE. THAT IS IN PLACE IS NO LONGER IN PLACE. SO IN ADDITION TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM NOT ONLY TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES AND BRING IT UP TO CODE, BUT TAKE A LOOK AT THE CALCULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO DECIDE WHAT THE VOLUME AND FLOW OF WATER COMING THROUGH THERE IS, AND MAKE SURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU HAVE IN PLACE UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS AND IS COMPLETED, THAT IT WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT WITHOUT CAUSING ISSUES WITH, ADDITIONAL EROSION AND BRINGING SILT OFF OF THE PROPERTY AND AND A MUCH HIGHER FLOW VELOCITY TO ANY NEIGHBORS. THERE'S DEFINITELY A SILT ISSUE BECAUSE I SAW CLOGGED, WHICH YOU'LL GET A PHOTO OF THAT AS WELL THAT I SENT TO THE CITY, BUT A CLOGGED STORM DRAIN FROM THE SILT. IN ANY CASE, WE HAVE ONE MOTION. I WOULD ADD THAT TO IT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. IT IS FOR MEANS TO DENY WE ARE VOTING FOR TO DENY THE. IT WAS CONFUSING A LITTLE BIT TO ME TOO. DOUBLE NEGATIVE. OKAY, THE MOTION TO DENY THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR, FOR PATIENTLY ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS, AND WE DO LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND SEEING THIS COME ACROSS IN A WAY THAT WE CAN ALL SMILE ABOUT. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA [F.2 Meeting Date/Time Discussion regarding meeting dates and times, as requested by Discussion Chairperson Hiss.] F2 OR I'M SORRY. YEAH. F2 MEETING DATE AND TIME DISCUSSION REGARDING MEETING DATES AND TIMES AS REQUIRED, AS REQUESTED BY CHAIRPERSON HISS. ARE Y'ALL GOING TO DO AN INTRODUCTION ON THIS OR IS THAT IS UP TO ME? I'D BE HAPPY TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM. SO WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH THE CHAIRMAN ABOUT DOING A SECOND MEETING EACH MONTH. TWO MEETINGS A MONTH WOULD MAKE MEETING THE SHOT CLOCK REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE MUCH EASIER. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO MEET ON THE CONTINUE TO MEET ON THE THIRD MONDAY OF EACH MONTH, BUT ALSO MEET ON THE FIRST MONDAY OF THE MONTH. MANY CITIES IN TEXAS MEET TWO TIMES. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, IT WOULD MAKE THINGS A LOT SIMPLER FOR MEETING SHOT CLOCK REQUIREMENTS IN PARTICULAR. SO THAT'D BE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO MEET ON THE FIRST AND THIRD MONDAY OF EACH MONTH. WE'RE OPEN TO HEAR Y'ALL'S IDEAS. AND I KNOW THAT FRED GIBBS, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER , ALSO HAD SOME INPUT HE WANTED TO PROVIDE, I BELIEVE. COLE, REAL QUICK BEFORE HE TALKS. DOES THE FIRST MONDAY CONFLICT. I THOUGHT IT WAS EITHER THE EDC OR CDC. I BELIEVE IT WAS THE EDC THAT MET ON THE FIRST MONDAY. YEAH. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH JIM WEHMEIER, THE CEO OF THE EDC AND CDC, AND HE'S MOVING HIS MEETINGS TO TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. FRED GIBBS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER . I JUST WANT TO KIND OF PREFACE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON INTERNALLY TO HELP KIND OF SET THE STAGE OF THE CONVERSATION TONIGHT. I CAN TELL YOU A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT INTERNALLY IS WORKING THROUGH SOME OF OUR PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES. ONE OF THOSE IS LOOKING AT A SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE THAT WILL INCLUDE A SERIES OF SUBMITTAL DATES AND MEETING SCHEDULES THAT WILL BE ABLE TO BASICALLY WORK THROUGH [01:05:02] THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS A LOT MORE EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY FOR THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL. YOU KNOW, WITH WHETHER IT'S A YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT MANUAL, SOME PROJECT MANAGEMENT AS WELL AS PART OF THAT. BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA THAT WE LOOK INTO THAT. I JUST ASK THAT SOME PATIENTS ON THE TEAM SIDE. SO AS WE START TO ROLL IN SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT IS ONE THING WE'RE LOOKING AT INTERNALLY AND HOW IT WORKS, HOW IT'S EFFECTIVE AND WORKS EVERYBODY'S SCHEDULE APPROPRIATELY. SO I JUST WANTED TO PREFACE THAT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE WORKING ON INTERNALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME PAGE AND WE'RE MEETING THE DEADLINES AND WE HAVE A PREDICTABLE PROCESS BOTH FOR THE COMMISSION AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, BECAUSE THAT DOES WORK BOTH WAYS. SO JUST WANTED TO PREFACE THAT BEFORE WE GET TOO DEEP IN CONVERSATION AND ANY WAY THAT I'M KIND OF SHEDDING A LITTLE LIGHT IN MY CRYSTAL BALL A LITTLE BIT WITH YOU GUYS TONIGHT. SO I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION, BUT I DO WANT TO PREFACE THAT FOR YOU GUYS TONIGHT. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY WELCOME AND THANK YOU. SURE. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. YES. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE SETTING UP A SCHEDULE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL. INSTEAD OF JUST. EVERYBODY CAN JUST SUBMIT WHENEVER THEY WANT. SO APPRECIATE YOU WORKING ON THAT FOR US. ABSOLUTELY. DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO BE ARBITRARY WHEN WE'RE WORKING ON THINGS TOGETHER. I THINK IT'S THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DOES APPRECIATE PREDICTABILITY AND SO DOES COMMISSIONS AND STAFF AND EVERYBODY. SO THAT IS OUR GOAL AS A TEAM. I WANT TO ECHO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID. AND WHAT I MENTIONED AT THE RETREAT IS VERY GLAD THAT THAT YOU'VE STEPPED INTO YOUR ROLE. AND SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE A LOT OF YOU'RE VERY OPEN TO WELL, YOU DIDN'T SHOW THIS, BUT YOU'RE PROBABLY VERY OVERWHELMED JUST FIGURING OUT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE ALL THE BATHROOMS ARE AND WHERE ALL THE ISSUES ARE THAT WE POINTED OUT TO YOU. AND I THINK WE'RE ALL VERY REALISTIC ABOUT THAT. AND LIKE YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME PATIENCE WITH BOTH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT MAYBE A NEW DIRECTION THAT THEY'RE HEADING WITH YOUR EXPERTISE. SO REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE IT. AND I HOPE YOU'RE GETTING ENOUGH SLEEP. IN ADDITION TO THAT, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THAT I, THAT I BROUGHT UP AS, AS A POTENTIAL IDEA BECAUSE WE ARE ALL KIND OF IN, IN FLUX HERE, RIGHT? WE'RE ALL KIND OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE CITY IN GENERAL, WE'RE NOW NUMBER ONE, YOU KNOW, FOR GROWTH IN THE UNITED STATES. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY'S GOING TO FEEL ANY DIFFERENCE. IT'S JUST GOING TO FEEL LIKE JUST TOO MANY PEOPLE COMING IN AT ONCE. WE HAVE A LOT OF CHANGES THAT ARE OCCURRING, ESPECIALLY WITH YOU COMING IN AND, AND PUTTING IN ALLOWING HOPEFULLY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND PUBLIC WORKS AND EVERYBODY GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE RESOURCES VERY SOON IS MY HOPE. SO THAT SO THESE PROCESSES CAN BE PUT INTO PLACE. AS WE'RE KIND OF GOING THROUGH THIS PERIOD OF TRANSITION, SOMETHING THAT I SUGGESTED IS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT MR. FISHER HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU KNOW, FOR LIKE THE CUSTOMER SERVICE ASPECT AND THE EASE ON DEVELOPMENT SERVICE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE TWO SET MEETING DATES PER MONTH SOMETHING THAT I SUGGESTED ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH SOME TRANSITION ON THE P AND Z AS WELL, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE NEW PLANNING AND ZONING AT LEAST ONE NEW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WHAT WE DO CURRENTLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, TONIGHT WE'RE DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER, BUT WE HAVE SOME ATTENDANCE ISSUES SOMETIMES. SOMETHING THAT I THOUGHT IS, HEY, YOU KNOW, CAN WE DO? AND I MENTIONED THE RETREAT. CAN WE DO MAYBE ONE SET MEETING AND THEN A SECOND MEETING THAT IS BASICALLY EARMARKED FOR A QUOTE UNQUOTE BACKUP MEETING THAT COULD BE A SPECIAL MEETING OR WHATEVER ELSE. AND IN THAT WAY, WE DO HAVE THE TWO POSITIONS. SO LET'S SAY, FOR INSTANCE, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GETS OVERWHELMED AND THEY HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE MEETING, THEN THAT'S FINE. WE STILL WE UNDERSTAND REMAIN FLEXIBLE. AND WE UNDERSTAND WE'LL HAVE TWO MEETINGS THAT MONTH. BUT IF THE GENERAL IDEA IS LET'S TARGET THIS ONE SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE EVERY MONTH TO WHERE WE HAVE ONE MEETING PER MONTH, AND THEN WE HAVE THE SECOND MEETING AS A BACKUP IN CASE WE NEED TO TABLE SOMETHING LIKE WE JUST HAD A AN ITEM COME BEFORE US TO WHERE IT WAS RECOMMENDED. HEY, LET'S NOT TABLE THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE WE HAVE THIS ISSUE OF THE SHOT CLOCK. SO THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL, AS YOU KNOW, THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENTION OF SUGGESTING TWO MEETINGS PER MONTH. SO AGAIN WHAT MY SUGGESTION IS ONE MEETING PER MONTH AND AN EARMARK FOR A SECOND MEETING PER MONTH. [01:10:03] NOW, AS FAR AS THE SOMETHING THAT IS THAT WAS PUSHED ON BY AT LEAST ONE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK AT LEAST TWO IS IS HAVING A, A LARGER PERIOD OF TIME BETWEEN WHEN THE AGENDAS ARE RELEASED AND WHEN THE MEETINGS ARE. AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S TOUCHED ON ME. I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY COMMISSIONER UP HERE, BUT I DO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME ON THESE. AND SOMETHING YOU MENTIONED THAT I AGREE WITH. I HOPE TO GET VERY QUICKLY TO THE POINT TO WHERE I DON'T FEEL LIKE I NEED TO AND, AND THAT'S NOT A MISTRUST OR ANYTHING. I JUST KNOW IT'S THE THINGS I'VE BROUGHT UP BEFORE, WHICH IS WE'VE GROWN SO FAST, WE'VE GROWN, WE OUR OUR NEED FOR STAFF, OUR NEED FOR EVERYTHING HAS, HAS OUTPACED THINKING AHEAD AND MAKING SURE ALL THE RESOURCES ARE ALL THE STAFF IS HERE. AND AND IT HAS BEEN KIND OF INDICATED BY MY LEGWORK THAT THERE IS THAT THERE IS, SOME NEED TO DO THAT EXTRA LEGWORK. AND SO, SO THE TWO THINGS THAT TOUCHES ON THE TWO REASONS THAT I WANTED TO DO TWO DIFFERENT CHANGES. ONE, AGAIN, LEAVE IT AT ONE MEETING PER MONTH WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT A SECOND MEETING MAY BE NECESSARY, EITHER BECAUSE SOMETHING IS TABLED OR BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS OVERWHELMED OR WHATEVER. THE SECOND THING BEING THAT THAT AGENDAS ARE STILL RELEASED ON THURSDAYS AND POTENTIALLY MOVING OUR MEETINGS TO THE FOLLOWING THURSDAY. SO IF WE DO THAT, WE HAVE A FULL WEEK IN BETWEEN. THEN WE HAVE A WE ALL HAVE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THESE SCHEDULES. SOMEBODY ELSE BROUGHT UP SOME OTHER THINGS, LIKE LEADERSHIP IS OUT OF THE OFFICE ON FRIDAYS. MAYBE IT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER IF YOU'RE STAYING FOR LATE MEETING. BUT SPECIFICALLY IN MY CIRCUMSTANCE, I'M THINKING ABOUT LIKE IF I HAVE A QUESTION. LEADERSHIP'S OUT ON FRIDAYS, SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS. NOBODY'S IN THE OFFICE. AND THAT LEAVES MONDAYS WHEN WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MOST OF US, WE'RE ALL VOLUNTEERS, SO WE'RE ALL WORKING. THAT LEAVES MONDAYS TO GO BACK AND FORTH WITH WITH LEADERSHIP AND WHATNOT. SO MY THOUGHTS ARE A FULL WEEK. EVERYBODY'S GOT THE WEEKEND. IF THEY GOT TIME FOR IT, IF THEY DON'T HAVE TIME FOR IT DURING THE WEEKEND, THEY CAN SPEND THEIR TIME LOOKING AT THESE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE DURING THE WEEK AND WHATNOT. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE OPINIONS OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS. AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE OR, PROCESSES WITHIN THE CITY BECAUSE IT'S A FEW LESS DAYS THAT Y'ALL HAVE IN ORDER TO PREPARE SOMETHING VERSUS WHAT THE LAW SAYS IS YOU HAVE 72 HOURS TO REPORT IT VERSUS A WEEK. BUT THIS IS WHAT I'M HOPING ON. SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I DO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS DO AS WELL. LOOKING AT THESE ITEMS WITH THE HOPES THAT SOMEDAY SOON I WON'T FEEL THE NEED TO. ME PERSONALLY, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THAT CHANGING THE DAY WOULD NOT WORK FOR ME. I'VE GOT TWO COMMUNICATION CENTERS THAT I'M OVER AND MY SHIFT CHANGES WEDNESDAYS AND THURSDAYS. I HAVE TO STAY LATE BOTH OF THOSE DAYS TO MEET WITH MY SUPERVISORS THAT ARE WORKING. SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK FOR ME. I'D HAVE TO KEEP IT AT A MONDAY. I'M FINE WITH GETTING THE INFORMATION EARLIER THAN THAT, BUT AS FAR AS MOVING THE DAY, THAT WOULD NOT WORK FOR ME PERSONALLY. I'M ALSO FINE WITH HAVING THE ONE SET MEETING. AND THEN ALSO IF THE SECOND MEETING IS NEEDED, THEN WE CAN HAVE THE SECOND MEETING AS WELL. THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE. BUT MOVING THE DAYS IS NOT GOING TO WORK FOR WHAT I DO PERSONALLY OUTSIDE OF HERE. I WOULD AGREE MONDAYS WORK BEST FOR ME AS WELL. SORRY. I SAID I WOULD AGREE MONDAYS WORK BEST FOR MY SCHEDULE AS WELL. SAME MONDAYS WORK BEST FOR ME AS WELL. I WORK FROM HOME ON MONDAYS AND FRIDAYS WHEN I HAVE TO GO INTO THE OFFICE IT TAKES ME CLOSE TO TWO HOURS TO TO GET HOME, AND I JUST WOULD HAVE A SERIOUS ATTENDANCE ISSUE IF I HAD TO DO THAT. I HONESTLY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO CONSIDER RESIGNING. BUT ALSO TO THAT POINT, IF WE HAVE A SECOND STANDING MEETING FOR ME PERSONALLY, I TRAVEL A LOT FOR WORK. I DO MY BEST TO RESERVE THIS MONDAY FOR THIS MEETING, BUT IF WE WENT TO TWO A MONTH, I COULD HAVE SOME POTENTIAL CONFLICTS. BUT I THINK IF THERE WAS YOU KNOW, JUST AN AS NEEDED MEETING AND WE GOT SOME CONFIRMATION, YOU KNOW, AS FAR IN ADVANCE AS WE COULD TO TO UNDERSTAND IF THAT WE REALLY NEEDED THAT MEETING THAT MONTH OR NOT. I COULD I COULD DEFINITELY WORK WITH THAT. I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON AN IMPORTANT POINT HERE THAT, FOR INSTANCE, IF THERE'S MAYBE OTHER IF THERE'S MAYBE MORE TIME FOR US TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, [01:15:10] THEN MAYBE SOME THINGS WILL SURFACE THAT THAT WOULD NOT SURFACE UNTIL WE'RE ACTUALLY AT A MEETING AND THE DEVELOPER IS ABLE TO COME A LITTLE BIT MORE PREPARED TO ANSWER PARTICULAR QUESTIONS AND MIGHT HELP INHIBIT THE POTENTIAL FOR ADDITIONAL MEETINGS, JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS THAT, THAT OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE IN BETWEEN SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT THREE. I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM COMMISSIONER ELLIS YET, BUT THREE OUT OF FOUR AREN'T BIG FANS OF MONDAY OR AREN'T BIG FANS OF SWITCHING IT OUTSIDE OF MONDAY OR THURSDAY? SWITCHING IT TO THURSDAY. I STILL LIKE THE THURSDAY IDEA. OBVIOUSLY I CAN REMAIN FLEXIBLE, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY ARGUMENTS SO FAR AGAINST THE POTENTIAL FOR MOVING TO HAVING A WEEK BETWEEN THE TIME THAT THE AGENDAS ARE PUBLISHED AND THE TIME THAT THAT WE'RE MEETING ABOUT IT. AND I THINK THAT A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TOUCHED ON BY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO THAT. THAT'S A GREAT POINT. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HAVE THE I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO THIS. I TRUST ME, I REALLY DO. I REALLY GET IT GUYS. LIKE ONE MORE DAY THOUGH. ANY 12 HOURS ANY LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA TIME BECAUSE TO KEVIN'S POINT, THERE'S NOBODY TO REACH OUT TO TALK TO ON FRIDAYS IF WE NEED TO. IT MAKES IT KIND OF HARD. SO WE'RE THEN MONDAY DURING THE DAY I'VE GOT MY FULL TIME JOB. IT'S REALLY HARD TO DIG INTO THIS THING WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, THAT EXTRA TIME. SO ANY ANY EXTRA TIME. BUT WE KNOW HOW HARD YOU GUYS WORK ON THIS AND APPRECIATE IT A LOT. KNOW THAT THAT IS SOMETHING I CAN WE CAN GET TOGETHER WITH THE TEAM AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE. SO I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN PATIENT FOR A LONG TIME. I KNOW I ASK FOR YOUR GRACE AND YOUR PATIENCE. Y'ALL BEEN PLUS THAT AND PLUS SOME. BUT WE ARE GOING TO REVAMP THAT. AND I THINK LOOKING AT LOOKING AT THE TWO MEETINGS A MONTH IS, IS PRETTY STANDARD. HONESTLY, NOT TO SAY WE'RE BEHIND THE STANDARD, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. AND AS YOU NOW THAT WE'RE THE FASTEST GROWING AND ONCE WE OPEN THOSE DOORS, IT'S NOW'S THE TIME TO BE PREPARED WITH OUR PROCESSES AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. SO WHEN IT DOES START COMING IN THESE APPLICATIONS, WE'VE KIND OF FIGURED THAT PART OF IT OUT, RIGHT. SO WE CAN DEFINITELY WORK AS A TEAM WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE AND SEE WHAT HOW SOON THAT LOOKS TO YOU GUYS. WE WANT YOU TO HAVE AMPLE TIME TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION ON ITEMS. HOPEFULLY WE WANT TO HAVE A LOT OF THE OTHER STUFF IN THE FUTURE THAT MAYBE CUT DOWN ON THAT AS MUCH, BUT DEFINITELY WANT YOU GUYS TO HAVE AN AMPLE AMOUNT OF TIME. SO YOU'RE MAKING A GOOD, INFORMED DECISION UP HERE AS VOLUNTEERS. SO WE'LL DEFINITELY PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, SHOW TO THE COMMISSION. HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET SOME COMMISSIONERS WITH SOME ALTERNATES TOO. SO IF WE DO RUN INTO THESE MEETINGS WHERE YOU FOLKS CAN'T BE HERE, THE ALTERNATES CAN COME IN AND FILL THAT VOID TO HELP ALLEVIATE, BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE HERE 100%. RIGHT? SO IF WE GET SOME GOOD ALTERNATES TO HELP ALLEVIATE WHEN YOU GUYS HAVE PERSONAL THINGS YOU'D LIKE TO DO ON YOUR TIME AS WELL. SO THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE CAN EXPLORE AS WELL. SO I DON'T KNOW THE LAWS AROUND THIS OR ANYTHING, BUT JUST IS THERE ANY POTENTIAL OR TALKS OR ANYTHING ABOUT UTILIZING TECHNOLOGY FOR THESE MEETINGS SO THAT COMMISSIONERS WHO MAY HAVE A CONFLICT BUT MAY BE ABLE TO JOIN [INAUDIBLE] TEAMS HERE? THERE IS SOME STATE LAW THAT TALKS ABOUT HAVING MEETINGS. I MEAN, IT WAS NOT A BIG DEAL DURING COVID AND THEY WERE REALLY KIND OF OPEN WITH IT, BUT THEY HAVE SCALED THAT BACK QUITE A BIT. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY, BUT THERE IS SOME, STATUTE THAT DOES PUT LIMITS ON THAT. I'M NOT 100% UP TO DATE BECAUSE EVERYBODY KIND OF WENT BACK TO NORMAL, YOU KNOW. SO I JUST KIND OF PUT THAT TO THE SIDE AND DIDN'T WORRY ABOUT IT ANYMORE. BUT THERE IS I DO KNOW AT SOME POINT IN TIME YOU WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE A HYBRID APPROACH WHERE A MEMBER THAT COULDN'T COME TO THE COMMISSION OR COUNCIL MEETING COULD PARTICIPATE VIA VIDEO. I'M NOT 100% SURE. SO THAT'S SOMETHING I'D HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON FOR THE COMMISSION. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN. I'D JUST LIKE TO HEAR. YEAH. WHAT THE POTENTIAL IS. VERY GOOD. SURE. YEAH. THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LOOKING INTO ALL THIS. I THINK, HONESTLY, OUT OF EVERYBODY, I'M PROBABLY OUR MOST FLEXIBLE BECAUSE I'M 100% WORK AT HOME. BUT MONDAYS ARE LIKE, FAMILY KNOWS I'M GOING TO BE HERE ON MONDAYS. [01:20:05] SO I WOULD LIKE TO SAY MONDAYS WOULD WORK BEST, BUT I AM THE MOST FLEXIBLE OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE AROUND. ALSO, YOU KNOW, LIKE TONIGHT I STARTED LOOKING AT THE PLAT A LITTLE BIT MORE, NOTICE THE FIRE HYDRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE SEE COLLABORATION BETWEEN P&Z AND YOUR SIDE OF ITEMS THAT WE WANT TO ENSURE ARE BEING DONE CORRECTLY BEFORE THESE PLATS. SO MAYBE THE COMMISSION HERE AND YOUR TEAM, WE CAN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING OR SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL SIT DOWN AND COLLABORATE TOGETHER. YEAH. YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT'S NICE IS WE KIND OF HAVE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY HERE. I THINK WITH WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS WE GET SEASONED AS A GROUP TOGETHER WE CERTAINLY I THINK HAVING A WORKSHOP BEFORE THE MEETING WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AS WELL, TO SOME DEGREE. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS OBVIOUSLY NEED TO BE OPEN TO. I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TELLING YOU THINGS THAT HAVE WORKED IN THE PAST FOR MYSELF THROUGHOUT MY CAREER. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK SOMETHING, EVEN IF YOU JUST STARTED IT 30 MINUTES BEFOREHAND AND HAD A WORKSHOP AND KIND OF GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE THINGS. SO WHEN YOU GET TO THE DAIS, WE'RE NOT FIRST TIME TALKING ABOUT. WE'VE KIND OF GOT A LITTLE PRELUDE TO WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT IN THE REGULAR MEETING. MAYBE SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY HAVE IN YOUR MIND TO CONSIDER. MAYBE EVEN IF WE START AT SIX, IF EVERYBODY SCHEDULES CAN WORK THAT WAY. THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF THINGS THAT KIND OF RUN THROUGH MY MIND TO HELP. I KNOW IT'S AN ADDITIONAL ASK FOR YOU TO BE HERE EARLIER. BUT IT MAY SAVE ON THE END TIME WHEN WE END. SO SO, YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK STUFF LIKE THAT. I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE OPEN TO HAVE THAT COLLABORATION BEFORE THE REGULAR MEETING. ONE THING WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT DOING WITH THE TEAM IS HAVE A MORE ROUTINE DRC AND KIND OF LETTING THEM KNOW BEFORE I TELL THEM. BUT I THINK, I THINK HAVING, YOU KNOW, MORE OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE THAT'S STANDARD THAT WILL HAVE ALL YOUR DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, THEY ALREADY DO A FORM OF THAT RIGHT NOW. I THINK WE CAN, YOU KNOW, EXPAND ON THAT EVEN MORE AND INCLUDE MORE PEOPLE TO THE TABLE AND HAVE A MORE COLLABORATIVE EFFORT ON SOME OF THESE PLANS AND PROCEDURES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I'M WORKING ON BEHIND THE SCENES. BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WITH YOUR GRACE AND YOUR PATIENCE TO ALLOW US TO GET TO THERE. AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE TOGETHER. SO THANK YOU. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. AND AS I STATED AT THE STRATEGIC RETREAT THIS IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT BOARD THAN WHAT IT WAS MANY MOONS AGO. AND THIS COMMISSION, OR AT LEAST ME, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY, BUT AT LEAST ME, I'M NOT GOING TO CLOSE MY EYES AND JUST SAY YES, I'M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTIONS. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, YOU'RE YOU YOURSELF AND CRAIG AND COLE AND ALL THE OTHER MEMBERS NEED TO BE LOOKING FOR THESE ITEMS THAT POTENTIALLY WE COULD BE QUESTIONING AND SAYING NO BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE QUESTIONS AND PUSH BACK. THANK YOU. I'LL ADD TO THAT, I THINK I WAS SOMEBODY INFORMED ME THAT THAT AN ITEM WAS BEING WORKED ON TO THAT WAS LIKE AN EXPLANATION OF, LIKE HOW A DEVELOPMENT OCCURS. I THINK THEY MENTIONED THAT THAT YOU WERE A PART OF IT. I'M NOT TOTALLY CERTAIN I DIDN'T GET ALL WELL, IN A NUTSHELL, I DIDN'T GET ALL THE INFORMATION HERE, BUT THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND THAT SOMEBODY WAS HERE. THE CITY WAS PUTTING TOGETHER SOME SOMETHING ABOUT HOW A DEVELOPMENT IS PUT TOGETHER FROM BEGINNING TO END AND WHAT PART, WHAT PARTS OF THE CITY PLAYS. AND I THINK THAT WHAT COMMISSIONER ELLIS JUST MENTIONED KIND OF GOES HAND IN HAND WITH THAT. IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW. SO, FOR INSTANCE, TIDBITS LIKE WHAT WE LEARNED TONIGHT THAT THAT IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THE PREVIOUS LINE ITEM AGENDA ITEM WAS THE SPECIFIC ASPECT THAT THEIR APPROVALS WERE NO LONGER VALID. SO IT'S THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT, THAT A LOT OF US, YOU KNOW, DON'T KNOW UNTIL WE ACTUALLY RUN ACROSS. SO I THINK ITEMS LIKE THAT, LIKE IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN PUT TOGETHER SO THAT WE HAVE A BETTER IDEA WITHOUT THE DECADES OF EXPERIENCE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE [01:25:04] WORKING HERE THAT WILL REALLY HELP US BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, LIKE SOME OF US CAN SIT HERE AND GO THROUGH THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR HOURS AND HOURS ON END, BUT ULTIMATELY, WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPERIENCE THAT YOU ALL DO. AND ANYTHING THAT YOU ALL CAN HELP TO PUT TOGETHER LIKE THAT, EVEN UNDERSTANDING WITH UNDERSTANDING AND PATIENCE THAT YOU GUYS NEED SLEEP. BUT ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT WE CAN THAT WE CAN BUILD ON, THAT WE CAN ADD TO. IF WE NOTICE SOME ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT ON OUR OWN THAT WE CAN ADD TO THAT AND THEY JUST CAN BE BUILT ON THROUGH THE YEARS AND IN AS FUTURE, PEOPLE SIT IN THESE CHAIRS AND ARE MAKING THE DECISIONS THEY CAN LEARN FROM, THE INFORMATION THAT WE PUT TOGETHER. ANYWAY, IT'S JUST A GENERAL SUGGESTION. SURE. YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK ONE THING THAT ONE OF OUR CHALLENGES THAT WE WILL MANAGE IS INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE SOMETIMES PLAYS A ROLE IN A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE COMING BEFORE P&Z AND COUNCIL. AND A LOT OF THE FOLKS YOU KNOW, THAT WERE ON THE STAFF ARE NOT HERE. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING TO DO A LOT MORE DIGGING ON SOME OF THE INSTITUTIONAL THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO GET ACCLIMATED TO MORE ABOUT. HEY, YOU KNOW, GO BACK TO THIS DATE AND LOOK AND LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, SEE WHERE IT IS TODAY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL WORK TOGETHER ON AS A TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER IS STILL HERE IN THE STAFF TO SAY, HEY, WHAT HAPPENED HERE? WHAT HAPPENED HERE? YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CAPTURING A LOT OF THAT INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, WHICH IS PEOPLE DOWNPLAY THAT. BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT IN A COMMUNITY THAT'S GROWING LIKE WE ARE. AND IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AS WELL. SO I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WE'RE, WORKING ON SOME THINGS AND WE'RE GOING TO GET BETTER AT THOSE TYPE OF THINGS TO ALLOW THIS COMMISSION TO OPERATE AT THE LEVEL THAT YOU GUYS HAVE THE CONFIDENCE IN, THAT WE'VE CROSSED THE T'S, SIGNED OFF EVERYTHING. AND THEN WHAT YOU GUYS TAKING ACTION ON WE'VE GIVEN YOU ALL THE FACTS AND ALL THE THINGS PER OUR ORDINANCES, SO YOU GUYS CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION SO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. GIBBS. SURE. THANK YOU ALL. DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE THE? NO, NOT AT THIS TIME. SO WE'LL PUT TOGETHER SOME [INAUDIBLE] CALENDAR AND A PROPOSAL MEETING TIME AND SCHEDULE THAT YOU ALL WILL THEN CAN ACT ON AT A FUTURE MEETING. SO WE'LL TAKE THE THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE INTO CONSIDERATION AND BRING BACK A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CALENDAR FOR YOU ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. FISHER. OKAY. THE NEXT MEETING. [G. INFORMATION] THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE MONDAY, JUNE 16TH, 2025. AT THIS POINT, ARE THERE ANY REQUESTS FOR FUTURE ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA? OKAY. IN THAT CASE, I'LL SEEK A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. OKAY. CAN WE VOTE FOR ADJOURNMENT? MOTION PASSES 5 TO 0. THANK YOU. WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MEETING. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.