[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
WE ARE BEGINNING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR APRIL 09, 2026 AT 4 P.M. AND TODAY WE HAVE JOE, LUCY AND LYNETTE HERE AS MEMBERS SO WE HAVE A QUORUM AND WITH THAT WE WILL BEGIN OUR PLEDGES.
WE CAN GO AHEAD AND DO THAT, WE HAVE PLENTY OF FOLKS HERE BUT WE CAN HAVE SUSAN BE A VOTING MEMBER TODAY.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA HERE ARE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND WE HAVE A PRINTED PUBLIC COMMENT HERE THIS IS FROM MARCOS, I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDRESS OR ANY INFORMATION ON HERE SO, GOOD MORNING WILL THERE BE FENCE LINES CONNECTING TO EACH OTHER FOR THE NEW HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET? SPEAKING ABOUT THE DRAINAGE ISSUE, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE DRAINAGE WILL BE EFFECTIVE WHILE THE CREEK IS NOT THAT DEEP AND NOT THAT EFFICIENT TO CONTROL THE DRAINAGE? WE SHOULD LOOK INTO PROPOSITION 4 SOLUTIONS TO CONTROL ANY FLOODING THAT AFFECTS THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT APPLY NEAR ANY OF THOSE CREEKS FOR STORMWATER COLLECTION AND WATER TREATMENT.I DON'T FEEL THAT MY NEIGHBORS NEAR MAXWELL CREEK NEED TO BE SUING THE ENGINEERS AND IF A POPE WILL SUE THE CITY IF THERE IS A SIGN OF CARELESSNESS.
WITH CONCERNS ABOUT SIGNAGE, I HAVE BEEN NOTICING RECENTLY SIGNAGE ALSO FLAT ON THE GRASS OF OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES, MOST OF THEM PERTAINING TO US CANDIDATES AND THEIR SIGNS HAVE NOT BEEN PLACED UP AGAIN.
I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT SIGNS FLOATING IN WATER IN THE DITCHES CAUSING NEW PROBLEMS WITH BAD WEATHER NEXT WEEK, THOSE SMALLER SIGNS ARE NOT STRONG ENOUGH, THERE CAN BE A POSSIBILITY THAT SOMETHING STURDIER SHOULD BE PLACED AT HIGHER ELEVATIONS.
I GUESS WE WILL ENTER THIS INTO OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND TAKE NOTE WHEN WE DISCUSS ISSUES AROUND THIS.
WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO ADJUST THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA A LITTLE BIT AND MOVE NUMBER 3 TO NUMBER 1.
[3. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CITY COUNCIL’S REFERRAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 201, RELATING TO FIREWORKS AND THE PREVENTION OF FIRES, TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. [2025 0617 CC Review Referral] ]
ITEM NUMBER 3 WILL NOW BECOME NUMBER 1 AND IT IS TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CITY COUNCIL'S REFERRAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 201 RELATING TO FIREWORKS AND THE PREVENTION OF FIRES TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION.[00:05:50]
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, I'M JUSTIN FIRE CHIEF IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO I AM, THAT'S WHO I AM.A COUPLE OF ITEMS, WE HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO WHERE WE WANT TO BE WITH THIS ORDINANCE.
TO GET YOU UPDATED ON WHAT TOOK PLACE TODAY, I TOOK SOME NOTES OVER SOME DISCUSSION WITH ANOTHER COUNCIL PERSON WHO WANTED TO GO OVER THIS.
WE HAVE ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 201, THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR ORIGINAL ORDINANCE FROM 1974.
WHAT I DID HERE WAS GO IN AND BREAK IT UP TO WHERE IT MADE MORE SENSE.
THERE ARE STILL SOME CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE ON THERE AS FAR AS WHERE IT SAYS LIKE APPROVED BY THE FIRE MARSHAL, SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THOSE BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE A FIRE MARSHAL.
I WOULD SERVE IN THAT CAPACITY AND APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE ANYTHING THAT TOOK PLACE.
THE BIG QUESTION IS SOUTH FORK.
THAT SEEMS TO BE OUR DRIVING FACTOR WHEN IT COMES TO FIREWORKS.
WHERE DO WE WANT TO BE WITH THAT? I MET WITH SOUTH FORK TODAY AND SOUTH FORK, I ASKED THEM WHAT THEIR PLAN WAS FOR LAUNCH SITE SINCE THERE'S A BUNCH OF NEW HOMES GOING BASICALLY FROM PARKER ROAD ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S OFF OF MCCRARY OVER THERE.
THAT IS ACTUALLY PARTLY WHERE THEIR LAUNCH SITE IS OVER THERE.
WITH THAT SAID, THEY WANT TO CONTINUE TO LAUNCH THERE.
IF WE STICK WITH OUR OLD ORDINANCE, IT'S NOT TO THE DISTANCE AWAY FOR FIREWORKS.
THEY'RE WITHIN DISTANCE, SO THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO IGNITE THEM AND GO FROM THERE, WHICH AT THAT POINT WE HAVE NO SAY WHAT THEY DO WITH IT BECAUSE THEY MEET ALL THE QUALIFICATIONS.
MY RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT WAS GO A LITTLE FURTHER BACK TO 300 FOOT ON THAT.
CURRENTLY IT'S 250, SO IF WE GO 300 FROM ANY STRUCTURE OR PUBLIC ROAD, THAT STILL DOESN'T PREVENT THEM FROM IGNITING FIREWORKS OR HAVING A SHOW.
WHAT THIS DOES, IT JUST GIVES US MORE DISTANCE FOR SAFETY, IF YOU WILL.
WE'VE NEVER REALLY HAD ANY ISSUES WITH SOUTH FORK.
THEY DO COME IN AND GET A PERMIT.
THERE'S A WHOLE PERMIT PROCESS THAT GETS APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY.
THEY SEND A MAP OUT AS WELL OF WHERE THEY'RE LAUNCHING, WHAT THEY'RE LAUNCHING, WHAT TIME THEY'RE LAUNCHING.
IS IT A LOW PROFILE OR A HIGH PROFILE FIREWORKS SHOW? IT'S CUT CLEAR WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
THE MAIN QUESTION FOR PMZ IS WITH THE NEW HOMES GOING IN AND THEN KNOWING WHAT ELSE IS GOING IN OVER THERE, DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW TO HAVE FIREWORKS IN THE CITY LIMITS OF PARKER AT ALL, BEING POPPED, LAUNCHED, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DESCRIBE THAT? THAT'S A QUESTION THAT I HAVE FOR PMZ.
DID YOU HAVE ANY FIRES THIS LAST WEEK, 4TH OF JULY, LABOR DAY, ANY OF THAT? NO, MA'AM.
IN THE MAP THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE PACKET, WHICH AREA ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? A, B, A2, A1, A3.
A1 AND A3 ARE RIGHT ALONG 2551.
THERE'S A MAP OF SOUTH FORK IN OUR PACKET.
YOU WERE DESCRIBING WHERE THEY NORMALLY SET OFF THOSE FIREWORKS.
I CAN DESCRIBE, TELL YOU WHERE IT IS, BUT I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS MAP, SO THIS IS NOT FROM ME.
WHEN YOU GO INTO THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF SOUTH FORK, GATE 3, WHERE THEY DO CATTLE BARON'S BALL IN THAT FIELD, ARE YOU ALL FAMILIAR WITH THAT? IT'S THE MAIN FIELD
[00:10:01]
TO THE RIGHT OF GATE 3.THAT'S WHERE THEY LAUNCH THE FIREWORKS.
IT'S GOING TO BE NORTH OF THE MANSION, BUT SOUTH OF GATE 3.
IT WILL BE CLOSER TO PARKER ROAD? IT WILL BE CLOSER TO PARKER ROAD, WHICH STILL MEETS THE DISTANCE OF OUR ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS GO THROUGH PIECE BY PIECE, IF WE CAN, AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ON EACH ONE.
AS MENTIONED, WE CAN START WITH ORDINANCE 201 AND JUST GO DOWN FROM THERE AND LET YOU TAKE THE LEAD ON IT AND GUIDE US.
WE DO HAVE SOME FEEDBACK ON THE OLD ORDINANCE VERSUS THE UPDATED ONE, WHICH IS THE SECOND PACKET THAT YOU HAVE.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THAT, AND SORRY YOU DID NOT HAVE THIS PACKET BEFOREHAND TO REVIEW.
TIMING DIDN'T WORK OUT TO GET IT TO WHERE IT NEEDED TO BE.
CAN I JUST ASK AN OVERVIEW QUESTION? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ORDINANCE 201, AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO ORDINANCE 244, AND THE SOUTH FORK ORDINANCE IS 413.
ARE WE GOING TO BE ELIMINATING THESE AND STARTING WITH WHAT THE DRAFT IS AT THE END OF THIS? THAT'S UP TO P&Z WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH THAT.
I'M ALL FOR HELPING DRAFT A NEW ORDINANCE TO WHERE IT'S CLEANER THAN WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE, BECAUSE YOU CURRENTLY HAVE THREE OF THEM AND THEY CONTRADICT EACH OTHER IN WAYS.
WHAT I DID IS I WENT IN, GOT ALL THREE OF THEM AND PUT THEM IN ONE TO WHERE IT TOOK THE RIFFRAFF OUT OF IT, IF YOU WILL, AND MADE IT JUST SIMPLE.
I LIKE TO KEEP IT SIMPLE BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE BEST THING WITH IT.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO SOUTH FORK HAVING THEIR FIREWORKS SHOW.
I AM OPPOSED TO THE SAFETY OF THE HOMES THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN THERE AND WHERE THE DEBRIS IS GOING TO FALL, JUST THINGS LIKE THAT.
TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE WHERE WE'RE AT.
WE CAN ALSO GO IN AT SOME POINT, IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE WITH SOUTH FORK, WE CAN ASK THEM TO MOVE THEIR LAUNCH PAD IF NEED BE.
BUT WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY ISSUES WITH SOUTH FORK AT ALL.
I DON'T WANT TO RUIN THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH SOUTH FORK.
WHAT ARE THE SITUATIONS THAT OCCUR WITH WIND CONDITIONS? DO THEY CANCEL A SHOW IF IT'S TOO WINDY? DO THEY HAVE ANY PARAMETERS AROUND WIND CONDITIONS? WE DON'T HAVE ANY SET, NO SIR.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS IF IT'S 30 MILES AN HOUR, YOU CAN'T LAUNCH YOUR FIREWORKS.
THAT WOULD BE UP TO WHOEVER THE VENDOR IS TO GO IN AND SAY, YEAH, WE'RE NOT DOING IT.
I KNOW RAIN IS NOT A FACTOR, I'LL TELL YOU THAT.
RAIN IS EASY, RIGHT? IT HELPS PUT OUT THE FIRE.
BUT WIND IS THE THING I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT, IF THEY FLOAT WAY FAR IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.
THAT'S JUST MY CONCERN WITH WIND.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT P&Z WOULD HAVE TO COME UP WITH IF YOU WANT TO PUT A WIND SPEED IN THE ORDINANCE.
I REALLY WANT P&Z TO HAVE A SAY IN THIS, SINCE IT'S GOING THROUGH P&Z, AND WE CAN ADAPT AND ADJUST WHAT WE NEED TO.
WE HAVE A WORKING GROUP ESTABLISHED TO DISCUSS WHAT SOUTH FORK WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE YOU ARE A REPRESENTATIVE ON THAT, FOR THE SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT, AND THAT'S WHERE THE ORDINANCE REGARDING FIREWORKS I THINK IS EMBEDDED INTO IT, IS THAT RIGHT? DO WE NEED, ARE WE GOING TO GET, NO? IT'S NOT? OKAY, THEN IT DOESN'T MATTER.
BUT I WASN'T SURE, BECAUSE WE ARE WORKING ON THAT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF WHAT THEY WANT, AND THEREFORE ALLOW IT IN THE ORDINANCE.
WE ALL HAVE MET WITH SOUTH FORK.
SO WHAT WE ARE REFERRING TO HERE IS A NEGOTIATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, SO TO TRANSITION THE SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT INTO THIS NEW ZONING CLASSIFICATION.
I WOULD SAY THAT THOSE NEED TO BE SEPARATE, I.E. THE FIREWORKS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED IN THEIR OWN ORDINANCE AND GOVERNED THERE, AND THE ZONING REALLY SHOULD PERTAIN TO LAND USE ITEMS AND NOT SO MUCH WHAT ACTIVITIES
[00:15:01]
THEY MAY BE DOING FOR SPECIAL EVENTS.SO HERE'S WHAT WE'VE COME UP WITH.
SO WE MET WITH CHIEF PRICE YESTERDAY, AND PD, IF WE KEEP THE ORDINANCE OUT HOW IT IS, PD CAN SIT AT THE FIREWORKS STAND, PULL PEOPLE OVER AS SOON AS THEY PURCHASE AND PULL OUT.
WELL, WE FOUND OUT THAT IS NOT TRUE.
AS LONG AS THEY CAN PURCHASE IT, THEY CAN BRING IT IN THE CITY, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT OPENED, IT'S NOT A VIOLATION AS LONG AS THEY'RE JUST TRAVELING THROUGH.
NOW IF THEIR DESTINATION IS TO GO TO YOUR HOME AND LAUNCH THEM, BLOW THEM UP, WHATEVER IT IS, YES, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE.
SO PURCHASING THEM, TRAVELING THROUGH, WE'RE GOOD.
AND THAT'S IN THE PACKET AS WELL, IN ONE OF THE SECTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHERE THE DEBRIS FIELD IS FOR THE FIREWORKS THAT HAVE BEEN SET OFF THERE FOR DECADES? SO IT USED TO BE EAST OF THE MANSION IN THE FIELD.
THERE'S A POND, A RETENTION POND THAT SITS BACK THERE.
IT USED TO BE THERE, BUT AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THEY MOVED IT TO THE FRONT OF SOUTH FORK, TO THE RIGHT OF GATE 3 ON THERE.
HAVE THEY LAUNCHED FROM A NEW PLACE? OH YEAH, PLENTY OF TIMES.
AND WE DON'T KNOW OFFHAND WHERE THAT DEBRIS FIELD IS? I'M CONFUSED BY THAT.
THEY'VE BEEN LAUNCHING FROM A NEW LOCATION FOR A WHILE.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHERE THE DEBRIS FIELD FOR THOSE FIREWORKS HAS BEEN OCCURRING? I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE LANDING.
ALL OVER SOUTH FORK? THEY CAN'T CONTROL THEM WHERE THEY LAND AT THAT POINT.
RIGHT, AND THERE'S NOT MUCH REMNANTS LEFT.
IT'S USUALLY JUST ASH IS WHERE IT IS.
I GET QUITE A FEW HOMESTYLE FIREWORKS DEBRIS AT MY HOUSE.
AND I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.
AS IT TURNS OUT, I'M A HALF A MILE FROM SOUTH FORK.
AND LIKE I SAY, IT'S OBVIOUSLY HOMESTYLE FIREWORKS DEBRIS.
AND IT DOES SOUND LIKE ARMAGEDDON AROUND MY HOUSE ON THE HOLIDAYS, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE NO POLICE ACTIVITY THAT'S OCCURRING YET.
SO I'M GUESSING IT'S HAPPENING ON LITTLE POCKETS OF ETJ OR PERHAPS IT'S HAPPENING IN THE PARKING LOT OF THAT FIREWORKS STAND, WHICH IS ALSO...
SO I WILL TELL YOU THIS, SPEAKING WITH CHIEF PRICE, THEY'RE RUNNING ABOUT 75 CALLS A NIGHT ON 4TH OF JULY.
AND THEN UP TO THAT POINT, AS LONG AS THEY'RE SELLING, THEY'RE STILL RUNNING CALLS.
FIRE DEPARTMENT SIDE, WE VERY RARELY GET ANY CALLS FOR FIREWORKS, WHICH ALSO KIND OF BRINGS US INTO SEIZING OF FIREWORKS AND STORAGE OF FIREWORKS AS WELL.
IF WE WANT TO TOUCH ON THAT SINCE YOU BROUGHT THE WHOLE PD PORTION INTO IT.
WELL, I NEVER CALLED THE PD ABOUT IT BECAUSE I JUST ASSUME IT'S JUST A FACT OF THE CALENDAR.
AND TO DATE, NO FIRES HAVE BEEN STARTED BY THOSE FIREWORKS.
FIREWORKS HAVE BEEN STARTED BY THE ELECTRICAL LINES AND SQUIRRELS, BUT NOT BY THE FIREWORKS.
SO I JUST DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.
I'M LOOKING AT WHAT YOUR DRAFT IS HERE, AND I APPRECIATE YOU DOING IT.
I GUESS RIGHT AWAY I'M SEEING ITEM NUMBER FOUR SAYS THAT IT'S UNLAWFUL TO EXPLODE FIREWORKS WITHIN 250 FEET OF ANY STRUCTURE.
THAT READS TO ME THAT I CAN EXPLODE THEM IF I'M 251 FEET AWAY FROM A STRUCTURE.
[00:20:01]
THEY CANNOT.SO THAT GOES INTO THE OTHER PART OF THE ORDINANCE WHERE IT SAYS THEY'RE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CITY.
AND I THINK THAT'S A LOT OF THE CONFUSION.
IT IS CLEARLY STATED THAT YOU CANNOT LET FIREWORKS EXPLODE WITHIN 250 FEET OF ANY STRUCTURE.
AND I WANT TO MOVE THAT TO 300 FEET.
IT IS CLEARLY STATED THAT YOU CANNOT POP FIREWORKS IN THE CITY LIMITS OF PARKER.
SPECIAL EVENTS PORTION, YOU CAN.
AND IF YOU NEED TO POP FIREWORKS, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO COME GET A PERMIT TO DO THAT.
BUT I HAVE NEVER ISSUED A PERMIT FOR A RESIDENT.
SO IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SOUTHPORT.
OR IT'S BEEN CROSS CREEK WHERE THEY'RE DOING SPARKLERS.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR IT.
IT'S DEFINED IN THE CODE, THE ORDINANCE, THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR IT.
WELL, HAVING LIVED HERE FOR DECADES AND ENJOYED THE SOUTHPORT FIREWORKS, I'M NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD OPPOSED TO IT.
AND PEOPLE WHO MOVE INTO THOSE SUBDIVISIONS, IT'S SORT OF LIKE IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUY PROPERTY NEXT TO AN AIRPORT, EXCEPT THAT IT ONLY HAPPENS A COUPLE TIMES A YEAR INSTEAD OF MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES A DAY.
I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO DISCUSSION, BUT I'M NOT OPPOSED TO ALLOWING THEM TO CONTINUE.
I THINK THEY HAVE. I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK.
SOUTHPORT CAN HAVE 12 FIREWORKS SHOWS A YEAR.
AND WE DO REACH THAT IN THE SUMMERTIME DURING THE WEDDING SEASON.
AND THAT INCLUDES EVEN THE SPARKLERS AS A FIREWORKS SHOW.
SO THIS ORDINANCE, 201, ISN'T SPECIFIC TO SOUTHPORT? NO, MA'AM.
BUT THAT'S WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT 250 FEET.
SO, YES, IT TALKS ABOUT 250 FEET THERE.
AND THEN IT ALSO, SECTION 03, THAT'S WHERE WE ADDED THE 300-FOOT DISTANCE IN THERE.
AND THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE ADOPTED INTO THE ORDINANCE.
I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE 300, INCLUDING BURN PITS AS WELL.
SO I THINK IF YOU KEEP IT 300 FOR BURN PITS, 300 FOR FIREWORKS, WE'RE CONSISTENT.
THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT WHICH ORDINANCE IS WHAT.
WOULD YOU PREFER FOR THEM TO REPLACE 201, 214, 215 WITH A NEW DRAFT? NOT NECESSARILY MY NEW DRAFT.
JUST SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH.
I WANT ONE ORDINANCE THAT HAS IT.
SECTION BY SECTION, SO WHERE IT'S NOT CONFUSING AS IT IS.
BECAUSE WE COULD GO, WHAT IF THIS ALL DAY? AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S SOUTHPORT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT IS REALLY ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREWORKS.
THE RESIDENTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREWORKS.
I MEAN, IT'S BLACK AND WHITE THERE.
I FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT BLACK AND WHITE.
I MEAN, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK WE AGREE, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO REWORD IT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE ORDINANCES ARE SEPARATE.
AND IN ORDER TO COMBINE THEM, THERE'S GOT TO BE, IN MY MIND, BECAUSE IF I'M TRYING TO LOOK IT UP AS A CITIZEN TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT I CAN DO IT, YEAH, IT NEEDS TO SAY THAT ONLY SOUTHPORT RANCH IS ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREWORKS.
NO PRIVATE CITIZENS ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREWORKS.
WELL, I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TOO.
YOU CAN'T START MAKING CERTAIN GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT CAN AND CAN'T.
SO THIS HAS TO BE JUST AN OVERALL ORDINANCE THAT HANDLES FIREWORKS.
YOU CAN'T START CALLING OUT CERTAIN GROUPS AND CLASSES OF PEOPLE.
THAT WOULD BECOME A LEGAL CHALLENGE AT SOME POINT, I'M PRETTY SURE.
SO I KNOW IN ONE SECTION OF THE CODE, IT'S ACTUALLY ON THE OTHER ORDINANCE, IT SAYS, IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY TO MANUFACTURE, ASSEMBLE, STORE, SELL, OFFER FOR SALE, KEEP, POSSESS, WITH INTENT TO SELL, USE, DISCHARGE, IGNITE, DETONATE, FIRE, OR OTHERWISE SET IN ACTION ANY FIREWORKS OF ANY DESCRIPTION.
IF I READ THAT, I DO NOT HAVE FIREWORKS.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF SHORTENING THAT ORDINANCE AND MAKING IT CLEAR.
DOES IT ACTUALLY SAY IN HERE? BECAUSE I'M...
THE NEW DRAFT, DOES IT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WITHOUT A PERMIT? THAT WAS JUST THE GENERAL
[00:25:05]
PROHIBITION PORTION OF IT.BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT FIREWORKS ARE GENERALLY BANNED.
USUALLY IT'S GOING TO BE FOR SOME WELL-ORCHESTRATED COMMERCIAL EVENT OF SOME KIND.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AWARENESS OF.
SO IF YOU NEED TO RESPOND TO A FIRE, EVERYONE'S NOT OFF IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRY OR SOMETHING.
WHETHER IT'S THE SMITH'S 49TH REUNION, WHERE THEY'RE HAVING FIREWORKS THAT CAN MEET THE STANDARDS, OR WHETHER IT'S SOUTH FORK RANCH, IT OUGHT TO BE TREATED ESSENTIALLY THE SAME.
I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THAT.
AND I SAY THAT IN THE SENSE OF THE DISTANCE AROUND SOMEBODY'S HOME COULD POTENTIALLY...
IF YOU MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THE REQUIREMENTS IN HERE, MAKE IT SO PEOPLE HAVE TO MEET THEM.
WHETHER IT'S SOUTH FORK OR THE SMITH'S 49TH REUNION OR SOMETHING, YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN READ THEM, PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND THEM, PEOPLE CAN MEET THEM IF THEY CAN.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION COMES UP, WHERE DO WE WANT TO GO FROM HERE? WHAT IS PNZ'S PLAN? HAVE YOU ALL DISCUSSED THIS FURTHER THAN WHAT WE HAVE SINCE LAST TIME WE MET THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS AGO ON THIS? NO, I DON'T THINK WE REALLY HAVE.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE TOPICS THAT WE CAN SIT UP HERE FOR HOURS, BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY BETTER WHEN WE HANDLE ONE OF THESE TOPICS WITH EITHER JUST A SMALLER GROUP OR LET'S KIND OF GET SOMETHING HERE.
YOU'VE GOT A GOOD DRAFT HERE, THAT'S GREAT, AND WE NEED TO COMBINE THESE ITEMS TOGETHER, MAKE IT SIMPLE, BUT WE'VE ALSO GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE KIND OF PUTTING IT TOGETHER IN WHAT I WOULD CALL A LEGAL FRAMEWORK.
SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T SCREW UP THERE.
SO THIS IS WHERE I'D RATHER GET TWO OR THREE FOLKS TO GET TOGETHER AND HAMMER THROUGH WHAT YOU'VE GOT HERE AND COME BACK WITH THINKING THROUGH ALL THAT, NOT JUST A SINGLE PERSON, OR GET SEVERAL OF THE PEOPLE UP HERE WHO WANT TO VOLUNTEER TO DO THAT.
I UNDERSTAND, AND I'D BE WILLING TO SIT IN ON THAT AND KIND OF GIVE FEEDBACK.
THIS IS NEW TO ME AS WELL, JUST LEARNING THE WHOLE PROCESS, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ON THAT, BUT DEFINITELY WOULD CONSIDER THAT.
SO TODAY WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT DEALS DIRECTLY WITH THE SPECIAL, I'M NOT GOING TO CALL IT THE RIGHT THING, SPECIAL USE, SPECIAL ACTIVITIES.
I TOLD YOU I WOULDN'T SAY IT RIGHT.
BUT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE FIREWORKS TODAY IN THAT ORDINANCE, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
OKAY, SO TO ME, I AGREE WITH YOU.
UNTIL WE CHANGE THEIR SPECIAL ACTIVITIES PERMIT ABILITY, I THINK YOU ALMOST HAVE TO HAVE TWO SECTIONS TO THE ORDINANCE.
ONE THAT IS, HERE'S THE ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY, AND HERE'S THE SPECIAL USE, BECAUSE IT EXISTS TODAY.
AND THEN IF WE CHANGE IT, THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK? NOT NECESSARILY.
IF THIS IS WRITTEN SO THAT IT'S A REPEAL AND REPLACE, WHICH IS WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, THEN THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY COVER UP ANYTHING.
AND NEGATE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT PROVIDES COVER FOR FIREWORKS.
SO ONE THING THAT GOT BROUGHT UP TODAY IN OUR MEETING WAS, IF YOU WANT TO KEEP IT THE SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT PARK REQUEST, AT SOME POINT THAT MAY GET ASKED TO HAVE FIREWORKS ADDED.
SO WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT WE DO HAVE THE SPACE FOR THAT BACK HERE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE MAY NOT WANT TO SHUT IT DOWN COMPLETELY.
IF WE'RE LIKE, LET'S HAVE A FIREWORKS SHOW, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDO THIS WHOLE THING.
HERE'S A GENERAL QUESTION THAT I HAVE, AND THAT IS, WHAT IS THIS REALLY LIKE IN OTHER CITIES? BECAUSE I DON'T GO TO THESE BIG SHOWS.
I MEAN, EVERY BIG CITY HAS ONE, RIGHT? PLANO, EDISON, GARLAND, EVERYBODY HAS ONE.
AND SO I JUST DON'T, I PREFER NOT TO GO TO WHERE ALL THOSE PEOPLE ARE.
BUT IT'S JUST, WHERE DO THEY, ARE THEY IN BIG PARKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? GREAT BIG AREAS WHERE THERE'S NO HOUSES AROUND, NO APARTMENTS, NO OTHER BUILDINGS? I DON'T KNOW.
[00:30:01]
PARKER ACTUALLY HELPS WITH THE PLANO FIREWORKS SHOW.THEY'RE LEANING MORE TOWARDS THE DRONE SHOWS.
COMBINATION FIREWORKS DRONE SHOWS NOW IS WHAT WE'VE SEEN ON THERE.
I WILL SAY AS FAR AS ORDINANCES GO, I DID RESEARCH WITH LUCAS, MURPHY, AND WILEY.
WE HAVE PROBABLY THE MOST IN-DEPTH ORDINANCE OUT OF EVERYBODY.
I THINK LUCAS' IS ABOUT A PARAGRAPH ON THERE.
BREAKS IT DOWN ALL THE WAY TO THE COUNTY BURN BAN TO FIRE PIT SIZE, ALL THAT.
SO IN REALITY, I'LL SAY WE DO NOT, AS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, HAVE ANY ISSUES FOR THE MOST PART WITH FIREWORKS, BURN PITS.
WE'LL GET A FEW CALLS HERE AND THERE.
GARY WILL ACTUALLY GET ALL OF OUR CALLS ABOUT BURN PITS, AND HE'LL RELAY THAT INFORMATION TO US IF SOMEBODY'S BURNING IF NECESSARY.
SO IT'S NOT OUT OF HAND FOR US.
WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM TODAY, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE'VE GOT TO GET JUSTIN OUT OF HERE AT SOME POINT IN TIME.
I'M OKAY WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR A COUPLE OF PEOPLE TO WORK ON IT, IF EVERYBODY ELSE IS.
THESE ARE THE ONE-WAY EXPLODING DRONES YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? SORRY, A LITTLE BIT OF HUMOR.
SO THOSE ARE THE BASIC THINGS THAT WE HAD ON THERE.
AS FAR AS GOING TO STORAGE, AS OF RIGHT NOW, AS THE ORDNANCE SITS, IT TALKS ABOUT SEIZING THE FIREWORKS.
IF YOU GET CAUGHT, WE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO PUT THEM.
SO THERE'S NO POINT IN US EVEN TAKING THEM.
THERE'S NOT A PLACE THAT'S SAFE TO DO SO.
SO WE DID COME UP WITH A SOLUTION FOR THAT THAT ACTUALLY CAN TAKE PLACE TODAY IF WE NEEDED TO, AS FAR AS PURCHASING.
IT'S TO GET A FIREPROOF CONTAINER.
WE'LL KEEP IT OUTSIDE BY OUR FIRE STATION.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO KEEP FIREWORKS 90 DAYS PAST THE COURT DATE DUE TO IF THEY APPEAL IT OR NOT.
IF WE EXPLODE THEM, WE WILL HAVE TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT.
THE OTHER THING THAT I FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT, MOST CITIES HAVE THIS, IS FIREWORK SIGNS AT EVERY ENTRANCE TO THE CITY.
IT'S ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS YOU SEE.
IF YOU PAY ATTENTION, IT SHOWS YOU THE ORDNANCE AND BREAKS IT DOWN.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TO WORK WITH GARY AND PUBLIC WORKS ON TO GET SOMETHING ROLLING ON THAT.
ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP THE ORDNANCE OUT AND MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE I THINK IS APPROPRIATE.
OKAY, WELL, I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE SOME KIND OF A SUBCOMMITTEE AT SOME POINT HERE, LOOK AT ALL THIS AND TRY AND HAMMER OUT SOMETHING THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF OUR MULTIPLE INSTANCES OF FIREWORKS.
AND YOU HAVE MY EMAIL, I BELIEVE, ONE OF THE MEMBERS DOES.
FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME A DATE ON THERE AND I'LL SEE IF I CAN LINE IT UP WITH MINE.
I'M SURE WE CAN FIND YOUR EMAIL.
IT'S ON THE WEBSITE, SO YOU CAN GO FROM THERE.
YEAH, I'D BE HAPPY TO GET THIS KNOCKED OUT PRETTY QUICK.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE IT DONE BEFORE FIREWORKS SEASON.
THEY OPEN UP FAIRLY QUICKLY IN THE JUNE.
OKAY, WHO WOULD LIKE TO, I MEAN, I'M KIND OF INTERESTED IN WORKING ON THIS WITH FOLKS.
OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF VOLUNTEERS HERE, SO WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN SET SOMETHING UP HERE.
LET'S SEE, OKAY, LET ME MAKE A COUPLE OF QUICK NOTES HERE.
I NEVER USE THIS KEYBOARD AND IT'S GOING BAD ON ME, SO I'M SITTING HERE TRYING TO TYPE AND IT WON'T TYPE.
OKAY, SO WE'LL PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER HERE, AT LEAST WITH SUSAN, RUSS, JOE, AND LYNETTE, AND WE'LL SEE HOW THAT WORKS OUT HERE.
[00:35:01]
RECOMMEND THAT YOU APPOINT MAYBE ONE PERSON TO THIS? I KNOW SUSAN'S ALREADY SERVING ON THE PDD SUBCOMMITTEE.WE'VE GOT QUORUM ISSUES IF YOU PUT TOO MANY MEMBERS TOGETHER IN ONE SPOT.
I'LL BACK OUT THEN SINCE I'M DOING THE OTHER THING.
THREE? IS THAT A QUORUM? YES, THAT'S A QUORUM.
WHAT'S THAT? IF YOU GUYS WANT TO DO IT, THAT'S FINE.
SO, I GUESS WE'LL DO THE NON-QUORUM.
WE NEED A BIGGER P&Z SO WE HAVE FEWER QUORUM PROBLEMS. OKAY.
[1. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FOR MARCH 12, 2026. ]
OUT HERE.WE'VE GOT CONSIDERATION UNDER ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING THE APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 12, 2026.
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN AND WE HAVE A SECOND.
[2. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON PARTNERS IN BUILDING KINGS CROSSING PHASE 6 SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBMISSION. ]
OKAY.CONSIDERATION UNDER APPROPRIATE ACTION ON PARTNERS IN BUILDINGS, KINS, CROSSING, PHASE SIX, SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBMISSION.
I MAY NEED A LITTLE CATCH UP ON THIS ONE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A OFFICE SLASH CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN KINGS LANDING PHASE SIX.
THIS IS A KINGS CROSSING PHASE SIX.
THE LANNISTERS OR WHO WE GOING WITH? I'LL LET YOU PICK ON THAT ONE.
SO, YES, CONDITIONAL USE HERE.
THIS IS FOR A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION THAT'S A TEMPORARY SOLUTION TO ALLOW FOR FOLKS TO SHOWCASE THE COMMUNITY BEFORE A MODEL HOME IS BUILT.
AND WE DO HAVE THE DEVELOPER OF THE SUBDIVISION AS WELL AS THE BUILDER HERE TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO WHAT THEY ARE PLANNING.
IN YOUR PACKET YOU WILL SEE SOME PICTURES FROM ANOTHER SUBDIVISION WHERE THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED ONE OF THESE.
AGAIN, THIS IS TEMPORARY IN NATURE AND WE'RE JUST FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH OUR ORDINANCES TO MAKE SURE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS BEFORE YOU AND THEN EVENTUALLY TO CITY COUNCIL SHOULD YOU APPROVE.
SO, I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BUILDING ITSELF.
I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE IT IS HOUSING.
I'M CURRENTLY USING, LIKE RIGHT NOW, THAT IS A MAJOR INGRESS AND EGRESS INTO KINGS CROSSING WHERE THE OTHER HOMES ARE.
AND THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE LEASE LENGTH CONSTRUCTION, IT HAS BEEN A NIGHTMARE BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER HAS HAD ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE DOING FENCES, BLOCKING THE ROADWAY, AND IT'S BEEN A TOTAL, THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT THERE AS A RESULT OF SOME PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE.
AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE A MAJOR INGRESS AND EGRESS ON THAT ROAD.
AND SO, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT A TEMPORARY BUILDING OR A MODEL BEING BUILT.
I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE ARE PARKING THEIR CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS AND ALL OF THAT TO GET TO YOUR CONSTRUCTION SITE AND BLOCKING THE ROAD.
I MEAN, I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S THE DEVELOPER'S PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN BLOCKING THE ROAD TO DATE.
[00:40:01]
BECAUSE THAT ROAD IS WIDE ENOUGH FOR TWO-WAY TRAFFIC, BUT IT BECOMES A MAJOR ISSUE WHEN THERE'S A TRUCK WITH A TRAILER AND ALL THIS STUFF BLOCKING IT AND PEOPLE CAN'T GET OUT.SURE, SO PRESTON, 4040 NORTH CENTRAL, DALLAS, TEXAS 75204.
PATTY, YOU HAVE ALL MY INFORMATION, DON'T YOU? OKAY.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING, HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
SO, THAT'S THE FIRST WE'VE HEARD OF THERE BEING AN OBSTRUCTION ON THE ROADWAY.
THE TOWN'S ALWAYS WELCOME TO CALL US AND WE CAN COMMUNICATE TO THE CONTRACTORS.
THEY HAVE BEEN INSTALLING LANDSCAPING AND FENCING ALONG LUCAS ROAD.
AND I BELIEVE, I WAS JUST OUT THERE, ALL OF THE TREES ARE IN AND ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MONUMENT IS COMPLETE AS WELL AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE COLUMNS.
SO, THE FINAL PIECE TO GO IN IS REALLY THE SOD.
SO, I BELIEVE THAT THE LANDSCAPING IS 90% COMPLETE AT THIS POINT.
THEY SHOULD NOT BE BLOCKING THAT ROAD.
THEY DID A HUGE DUMP OF ROCKS BLOCKING ONE SIDE AT ONE POINT WHILE LEWIS WAS CLOSED.
SO, THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO KNOW ABOUT.
THEY INTENTIONALLY LEFT IN THE OLD HOUSE SITE ACCESS POINT FROM LUCAS ROAD TO SERVE AS A CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.
IT WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT THERE TO SERVE AS THE LOCATION FOR MATERIAL TO BE DELIVERED TO AND FROM THE SITE.
SO, IF THEY'RE NOT DOING THAT, WE'D BE HAPPY TO CORRECT IT.
WE JUST NEED TO KNOW THAT IT'S HAPPENING.
WAS IT GPEC THAT DID THAT? NO, IT WAS THE LANDSCAPERS, THE IRRIGATORS.
I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT ONGOING.
IF YOU LOOK AND FACE THAT WHOLE AREA, IT'S ONE OF THE ONLY WAYS WITH THE NUMBER OF HOMES THERE THAT YOU CAN GET OUT OF KINGS CROSSING.
IF THERE'S A FIRE OR SOMETHING, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GO THAT WAY.
SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PARK AS THAT WHOLE THING TAKES PLACE.
GLAD TO KNOW THAT IT WAS HANDLED.
WE HANDLE THOSE THINGS AS WE SEE THEM.
IF YOU SEE THOSE THINGS, IF YOU'LL CALL US, WE CAN HANDLE THOSE PRETTY QUICKLY.
I JUST NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND WE CAN ADDRESS IT.
WE WERE JUST REALLY GRATEFUL TO GET KINGS CROSSING 6 IN BEFORE LEWIS LANE STARTED SO THAT IT COULD BE UTILIZED AS AN ACCESS POINT.
I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE TO BE IN KINGS CROSSING RIGHT NOW WITH THE LEWIS LANE CONSTRUCTION IF THAT ACCESS POINT WAS NOT THERE.
SO, WE'RE GRATEFUL THAT KINGS 6 WAS DONE EARLY AND ABLE TO TIME WITH THE LEWIS LANE CONSTRUCTION AND PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE ACCESS POINT.
AS FAR AS PARKING AT THE CONSTRUCTION TRAILER, PARTNERS IN BUILDING JUST REMOVED, THE TIMING IS ODD, BUT THEY JUST REMOVED THE CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN ANOTHER PROJECT WE HAVE CALLED DEAN FARMS IN LUCAS.
AND I THINK THERE ARE PICTURES IN YOUR PACKET, BUT IN ADDITION TO THE TRAILER, THEY ACTUALLY CREATE A PARKING LOT THAT IS OFF STREET.
SO, THEY INSTALL A CULVERT THAT'S COORDINATED WITH THE FLOW LINE OF THE DITCH.
SO, THEY'RE FOLLOWING PROTOCOL TO PUT IN A ROADSIDE CULVERT AND THEN PUT IN A TEMPORARY DRIVE WITH THE REQUISITE MATERIAL AND THEN CREATING OFF STREET PARKING AND THEN THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IS SET BACK ON THE HOUSE PAD.
SO, YOU'RE 75 FEET FROM THE STREET, WHICH GIVES YOU AMPLE SPACE TO CREATE A TURN RADIUS AND COME IN AND PARK.
AND THEY DO A GREAT JOB OF THE WAY THESE THINGS ARE FINISHED OUT, BECAUSE THEY ARE TALKING TO PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BUILD A CUSTOM HOME AND THAT'S A LONG TIME FRAME AND THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE MODEL HOME IS DONE TO START THE DESIGN PROCESS OF A CUSTOM HOME AND THEY DON'T WANT THEM TO PULL UP ON A ROCK DRIVEWAY.
SO, IT LOOKS VERY NICE. THE ONE IN DEAN FARMS WAS LANDSCAPED AND HAD IRRIGATION AND NICE FLAG POLES.
AND THE BIG PIECE IS THAT THEY CREATE OFF STREET PARKING TO ACCOMMODATE NOT ONLY THEIR SALES STAFF AND CONSTRUCTION STAFF, BUT THEN ANYONE THAT'S VISITING THAT FACILITY AS WELL.
AND THEN ONCE THE MODEL HOME IS DONE, THEY TRANSITION THAT ENTIRE UNIT OVER ACROSS THE STREET TO THE MODEL HOME.
AND TO ADDRESS THAT POINT AS WELL, WE'VE ALREADY REVIEWED THE MODEL HOME PLANS AND THE MODEL HOME INCLUDES A CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY WITH SOME ADDITIONAL WIDTH TO ACCOMMODATE GUEST PARKING.
AND THEN THE CONSTRUCTION STAFF WILL BE LOCATED INSIDE THE GARAGE AND SO THEY FINISH OUT THE GARAGE AS A CONSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SO THAT YOU CAN UTILIZE THE HOME AS A SALES POINT.
BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO A CONSTRUCTION AREA THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE HOME AND THERE'S OFF STREET PARKING FOR THAT AS WELL.
[00:45:03]
IN THE PICTURE THEY HAD FENCING AROUND THAT WHERE THE PARKING AREA WAS.IS IT GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO THAT WITH SOLID FENCING, SIX FOOT TILE ON THE CEILING? I THINK THAT FENCING WAS UNIQUE FOR ANOTHER PROJECT IN FLOWER MOUND THAT REQUIRED FENCING BECAUSE IT WAS BACKING TO EXISTING HOMES.
THIS IS BACKING TO OPEN LOTS AND WE STILL OWN ALL THE OPEN LOTS ADJACENT TO IT.
WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO INSTALL SOLID FENCING BECAUSE THEN THE NEIGHBORS WANT TO INSTALL SOLID FENCING AND THE CITY PROHIBITS IT AND THE HOA PROHIBITS IT.
SO OUR GOAL IS TO JUST LANDSCAPE IT.
I'M COMMITTING THE BUILDER TO THINGS SO I'M TURNING AROUND TO MAKE SURE THAT HE'S OKAY WITH WHAT I'M SAYING.
OFF STREET PARKING AND NO SOLID FENCING.
WHEN THE MODEL HOME IS DONE AND THEY'RE HOPING TO HAVE IT DONE IN OCTOBER, IS IT THAT THE PORTABLE WILL BE REMOVED AT THAT POINT OR WILL IT BE STAYING UNTIL DECEMBER 31ST? I BELIEVE DECEMBER 31ST WAS AN OUTSIDE DATE ONCE THEY WERE RENTING IT AND THEY DO NOT WANT TO CONTINUE TO PAY FOR IT.
SO ONCE THEY'RE ABLE TO MOVE INTO THE MODEL HOME, THE PORTABLE WILL GO AND THEY WILL RESTORE THE SITE.
I BELIEVE DECEMBER 31ST WAS PUT IN AT THE CITY'S REQUEST TO HAVE AN OUTSIDE DATE OF WHEN DO WE GET RID OF THIS THING.
HAVE WE EVER DONE THIS BEFORE? IS THIS OUR FIRST? THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE DONE THIS.
WE DID THEM IN KING'S CROSSING PHASE 1, WHICH WAS A FEW YEARS AGO.
BUT WHEN GRANT AND SHATTUCK WERE BUILDING THEIR ORIGINAL MODEL HOMES, THE SAME THING WAS DONE.
AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRES THE CITY TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE HOA DOCUMENTS.
SO WE ACTUALLY ADDED A STIPULATION ABOUT CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS IN THE HOA DOCUMENTS.
SO THAT IS CONTROLLED NOT ONLY BY THE CITY SIDE, BUT THE HOA TELLING THEM THIS CAN ONLY BE HERE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MODEL HOME AND THEN IT MUST BE REMOVED.
I TERRIFY THE TEAM FARMS. BUT WE'RE EXCITED.
PARTNERS IN BUILDING IS A GREAT BUILDER.
THEY DO REALLY NICE CUSTOM HOMES.
SO IT WILL BE A GREAT STEP FOR KING'S CROSSING.
AND THEN SHATTUCK HOMES IS GOING TO ALSO BUILD A NEW MODEL IN PHASE 6.
CURRENTLY THEY HAVE A MODEL HOME ON MIDDLETON IN PHASE 1 THAT WILL HAVE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS INTO PHASE 6 AND 7, BUT DOESN'T HAVE VEHICULAR ACCESS.
AND SO THEY WILL BUILD A NEW MODEL HOME AND SELL THE HOME THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY IN.
WELL WITH THAT, UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A PROPOSAL FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.
IF THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO ON THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBMISSION.
I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT.
TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
DO YOU WANT TO ADD THAT THEY'VE COMPLETELY REMOVED IT BY DECEMBER 21ST? DO YOU WANT ME TO ADD? ADD WRITTEN, WHICH INCLUDES IT HAS TO BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE, IT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IN THE DOCUMENT.
THAT'S WHY IT WILL BE REMOVED BY DECEMBER 21ST.
I THINK THEY'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO THAT.
I THINK THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT'S PROPOSED AS THE PERMIT.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE AS IT IS WRITTEN, AND JUST IDENTIFYING THAT IT WILL BE REMOVED BY DECEMBER 31ST.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND SUPPORT GETTING THIS GOING.
WE'RE EXCITED TO SEE THIS COME ONLINE.
[4. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CITY COUNCIL’S REFERRAL OF CHAPTER 153 REGARDING SIGNS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. [2025 0401 CC Review Referral, 2025 0724 P&Z 1st Review, 2025 0807 P&Z 2nd Review, 2025 0904 P&Z 3rd Review, 2026 0108 P&Z 4th Review and 2026 0312 P&Z 5th Review.] ]
OKAY.DISCUSS AND CONSIDER CITY COUNCIL'S REFERRAL OF CHAPTER 153 REGARDING SCIENCE TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION.
[00:50:03]
I'VE ACTUALLY DONE A LOT OF CALLING AND TOLLING PLACES AND LOOKING AT THIS SINCE WE LAST MET.AND I WANT TO OFFER, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE COMMISSION HAS DONE JUST A TON OF WORK TRYING TO COME UP WITH WHAT'S THE RIGHT SOLUTION.
BUT I DO WANT TO ADD A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT LENS, WHICH IS WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FOR CANDIDATES.
AND I THINK THE ACTUAL WAY WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS IS TO THE CITY OF PARKER AND THE IMPACT OF THE EMPLOYEES AND OUR RESIDENTS WHO ARE COMING TO A POLLING PLACE TO VOTE.
THERE'S LIKE SEVEN CANDIDATES, BUT THERE'S 02,000 PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF PARKER, ROUGHLY, A LITTLE LESS THAN THAT, THAT ARE REGISTERED TO VOTE.
AND SO THEY GET IMPACTED WAY MORE THAN WHATEVER NUMBER OF SIGNS WE COME UP WITH FOR CANDIDATES.
AND AS I'VE TALKED TO ELECTION OFFICIALS AND EVERYBODY ELSE, THE WHOLE INTENT OF CREATING BARRIERS AROUND THE POLLING PLACE AND RULES FOR SIGNAGE OR WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO AT A POLLING PLACE IS TO PROTECT THE VOTER THAT'S COMING TO THE POLLING PLACE TO HAVE A FREE, THE ABILITY TO VOTE IN AN UNINFLUENCING WAY.
AND SO I WOULD ACTUALLY THINK WE SHOULD KIND OF MAYBE PIVOT A LITTLE BIT IN HOW WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS RULE AND THINKING OF IT MORE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING TO VOTE AND WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITY OF PARKER VERSUS SOLELY THINKING ABOUT IT FROM THE CANDIDATE'S LENS.
I KNOW YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT MORE THAN THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THOUGHT.
AND I JUST DID A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH HERE, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COMES UP EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE IS POST-2015 U.S. SUPREME COURT RULINGS ABOUT CONTROLLING POLITICAL VERSUS OTHER TEMPORARY OR IDEOLOGICAL SIGNS.
SO I DON'T WANT US TO GET INTO THE SITUATION THAT SOME CITIES HAVE BEEN IN WHERE SOMEBODY COMES AND CHALLENGES THE WAY WE DO THIS BECAUSE WE'RE IDENTIFYING SOMETHING AS A POLITICAL SIGN OR SOMETHING.
SO WE JUST PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOCUS ON THE SIZES, THE NUMBER, AND SQUARE FOOTAGE.
BECAUSE I THINK WE HAD IT BEFORE THE RECOMMENDATION WAS 16 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING.
SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT? YEAH, I MEAN WE HAVE THIS 36 SQUARE FOOT MAX, YOU KNOW, FOR 8 FEET HIGH KIND OF THING THAT'S IN THERE.
IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, I GUESS, IS THERE ANYTHING BAD ABOUT IT? IS THERE ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT IT? I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, WHAT ABOUT SOMETHING SUPER SIMPLE LIKE YOU CAN HAVE TWO 48 BY 48 SIGNS OR YOU CAN HAVE EIGHT 18 BY 24 SIGNS, WHICH ARE THOSE SMALL YARD SIGNS, OR ANY COMBINATION.
TWO 48 BY 48 SIGNS ARE PRETTY LARGE.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH SPACE OUT THERE.
OR EIGHT SMALL 18 BY 24 INCH SIGNS OR SOMETHING.
JUST TRY TO MAKE IT SUPER SIMPLE.
AND THAT WAY, BECAUSE MOST OF THE SIGNS THE CANDIDATES ARE DOING I THINK ARE EITHER 48 BY 48 OR THE SMALL 18 BY 24 YARD SIGNS.
WAS THAT WHAT WE RECOMMENDED? WAS IT SIMILAR? IT WAS A BIG ONE OR LITTLE ONES? I FEEL LIKE THAT'S WHAT WE...
YEAH, I MEAN I THINK WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET TO IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN TALK ABOUT DIMENSIONS, RIGHT? BUT REALLY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I MEAN, IS THE SIGN SKINNY? IS IT FAT? OR WHATEVER.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING DOWN TO.
AND SO, AND THEN OF COURSE IF YOU WANT TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE ABOUT MAXIMUM HEIGHT SO YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE THAT'S EIGHT FEET TALL OR SOMETHING.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.
AND SO I DON'T, I MEAN, I STILL FEEL OKAY WITH LIMITING, I MEAN, PERSONALLY I BELIEVE IN SAYING THAT YOU CAN HAVE A MAXIMUM OF THIS MANY SQUARE FEET AND YOU CAN DO IT IN THREE SIGNS LIKE THIS OR ONE SIGN LIKE THAT AND, YOU KNOW, TAKE YOUR PICK.
I JUST WONDER IF THAT MEANS THAT THE CITY EMPLOYEES THEN NEED TO GO OUT THERE WITH A TAPE MEASURE TO SAY...
AND THEY ALL HAVE TAPE MEASURES.
[00:55:01]
I'VE SEEN THEM.I, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE ANYTHING ELSE.
IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE, THEN YOU HAVE TO WORK ON IT.
BUT NO, I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND MEASURE SIGNS, YOU KNOW.
WHAT'S THAT? TODAY THE POLITICAL SIGNS AT THE CITY HALL IS AN ISSUE.
THAT'S WHY THEY PRESENT IT TODAY.
WELL, YEAH, BUT I MEAN, IF WE CLEARLY STATE WHAT THE RULES ARE, THEN, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU CAN POST THE RULES.
IF YOU'RE COMING HERE, HERE ARE THE RULES FOR ALL YOUR SIGNS.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY THAT WOULD WORK, BUT...
ALLEN HAS A LIMIT OF 16 SQUARE FEET, WHICH WOULD BE, WHAT, FOUR BY FOUR FEET, AND LIMITED TO FOUR SIGNS PER CANDIDATE OR POSITION ON A MEASURE.
SO, AND THEN THEY HAVE A 100-FOOT RESTRICTION AROUND THE PLACE, THE VOTING PLACE.
I THINK OURS IS, WHAT, 75 FEET? JUST WHATEVER THE STATE LAW SAYS.
SO, AND THEN WE'RE ALSO HERE, WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE RESTRICTIONS IN THERE SO THEY CAN SEE GOING OUT OF THE AREA AS WELL.
SO WE NEED TO DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
WE'RE 25 BY 25 OVER THERE AT THE ENTRANCE TO CITY HALL.
AND DID THEY PUT THEM IN THE, I THINK THEY WERE IN THAT LITTLE ROUND PLACE WHERE THE SIGN WAS LAST TIME.
SO WOULD IT BE DIFFICULT ON THESE ELECTION DAYS TO COME OUT THERE WITH YOUR LIME GREEN PAINT AND BASICALLY JUST SAY, HERE'S THE LINE? WE DID THAT LAST TIME.
SEE? THAT'S NOT TERRIBLY DIFFICULT.
AND IF WE COULD GO SO THAT THE BIGGER SIGNS WOULDN'T BE UP THERE BY THE ENTRANCE AS WELL.
THE BIGGER SIGNS COULD BE FURTHER DOWN.
THE LITTLE SIGNS PROBABLY DON'T AFFECT THE VISUAL.
JUST GOING OUT INTO THE STREET.
WE'D LIKE TO KEEP ANY SIGNS FROM BLOCKING THE MONUMENT TO CITY HALL.
SMALLER SIGNS IN THAT AREA IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM THERE.
AND THEN KEEP THEM OFF THE ROAD BY A REASONABLE DISTANCE.
AND I WOULDN'T SAY 10 BY 10 OR 25 BY 25.
I WOULD SAY 10 OR 20 FEET OFF THE ROAD EDGE OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
I THINK THE STATE LAW READS AT LEAST 10 FOOT OFF THE ROAD EDGE.
SO DID YOU SAY, I READ ALLEN'S BUT I FORGOT WHAT IT SAID.
IT'S 16 FEET OR FOUR SIGNS? YEAH.
16 SQUARE FEET AND FOUR SIGNS PER CANDIDATE.
THAT TO ME LIMITS THE NUMBER OF SIGNS.
I MEAN THAT TAKES CARE OF WHAT WE HAD THE LAST ELECTION WHERE YOU HAD JUST AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF SIGNS OUT THERE.
RIGHT? THAT SEEMS VERY REASONABLE.
16 SQUARE FEET BUT A MAXIMUM OF FOUR SIGNS PER CANDIDATE.
AND OF COURSE NO HIGHER THAN 8 FEET.
AND ARE WE DIRECTED TO JUST VOTE ON THAT PIECE OF THIS ORDINANCE? OR ARE WE DOING THE WHOLE ENCHILADA? BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT DISCUSSING ILLUMINATED SIGNS IN THE SIGN ORDINANCE IN GENERAL.
CAN WE DO IT IN GENERAL? SIGN ORDINANCE IN GENERAL.
CAN WE DO IT IN TWO PARTS? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING I GUESS.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT DO WE KIM? I CERTAINLY HAVE SOME OPINIONS BUT MAYOR PETAL HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS THE LIAISON TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO HOW YOU ENVISION THIS A LITTLE BIT? I WAS WAITING FOR A RECOMMENDATION FROM KIM.
I WAS WONDERING HOW OTHER CITIES HAVE ADOPTED TO THIS.
I THINK THERE WAS A BILL FROM THE CITY OF LOCUST THAT LIMITS THEIR SIGNS AND THE CITY OF ALLEN WHICH IS QUITE RESTRICTIVE IN SOME WAYS.
WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE.
THERE WERE AN AWFUL LOT OF COMPLAINTS AFTER THE LAST ELECTION THAT YOU COULDN'T SEE TO GET ON PARKER ROAD.
THE SIGNS WERE BLOCKING PEOPLE'S VISION.
EVERYBODY COMPLAINED THAT IT WAS JUST ONE HECK OF A MESS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR GUIDANCE ON.
WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE IT BETTER? COMMISSIONER
[01:00:02]
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES YOU COULD DO THIS IN TWO PARTS.YOU COULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION JUST ON THE POLITICAL SIGNAGE AND THEN YOU COULD MOVE ON TO ELECTRONIC SIGNS.
OR ALTERNATIVELY YOU COULD REALLY STUDY AND DIG INTO THIS ORDINANCE AND MAKE SOME SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE SIGN ORDINANCES FROM NEVADA AND JOSEPHINE ARE VERY COMPREHENSIVE.
THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT AWNINGS AND ALL THAT.
I'M NOT PREPARED TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT THE ILLUMINATED SIGNS UNTIL WE DISCUSS HOW BRIGHT IS BRIGHT.
I'M NOT GOING TO SUBMIT IT OR TELL YOU.
WHEN YOU GET TO ILLUMINATED SIGNS THE ISSUE IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ALL OF THE MODERN STANDARDS APPLIED TO THEM.
AND THAT WOULD BE THE BRIGHTNESS AND YOU'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO MEASURE THE BRIGHTNESS.
MESSAGE DURATION IF YOU'RE CHANGING MESSAGES.
TO ME THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ELECTRONIC SIGNS.
BUT THEY CAN'T BE LIKE POLICE LIGHTS THAT ARE REVOLVING AND FLASHING AND CAUSING A BRIGHTNESS PROBLEM.
WE SHOULD ALLOW ELECTRONIC SIGNS OR NOT.
AND THEN IF YOU DECIDE THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED, UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS, UNDER WHAT RULES, DO YOU WANT THEM TO HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE? SOME OF THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RUSS.
IN THIS DAY AND AGE I THINK IT'S RIDICULOUS TO NOT ALLOW ELECTRONIC SIGNS.
MY FEELING ABOUT IT IS IT'S MORE THE ILLUMINATION PART AND THE FACT THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE ELECTRONIC SIGNS.
MY FEELING ABOUT IT IS IT'S MORE THE ILLUMINATION PART AND THE FLICKERING OR DISTRACTION PART OR SOMETHING.
BECAUSE IF YOU HAD A SIGN THAT SAYS WELCOME TO PARKER AND IT'S DONE WITH LEDS OR IF YOU HAVE ONE THAT SAYS WELCOME TO PARKER AND IT'S DONE WITH AN OLD-FASHIONED MONUMENT SIGN, THEY'RE KIND OF THE SAME THING.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF IF YOU LIGHT THE ONE AT NIGHT OR IF THE ONE'S LIT AT NIGHT FROM BACKLIGHTING, YOU CAN SEE BOTH OF THEM.
THE QUESTION BECOMES REALLY IS HOW DO YOU MAKE THEM SO THAT THEY ARE NOT DISTRACTING, THEY DON'T CAUSE PROBLEMS WITH PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO SEE AT NIGHT, JUST THINGS LIKE THAT.
REMEMBER WHEN THEY HAD THE BIG SIGN AT DFW THAT HAD ALL OF THE DEPARTURE INFORMATION ON IT AND THEY MADE THEM TAKE ALL THAT DOWN? DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER THAT? YOU'D GO INTO DFW AND THEY HAD THE GIANT SIGN THAT SHOWED DEPARTURE INFORMATION AND EVERYTHING AND IT WAS CHANGING AND THEY MADE THEM TAKE THAT DOWN.
BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE LOOKING UP THERE.
NOW THEY LOOK DOWN HERE AND LOOK AT THEIR PHONE.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? I THINK WE NEED TO HANDLE ELECTRONIC SLASH DIGITAL SLASH LIGHTED SIGNS.
I THINK WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION ON SOME OF THE MODERN STANDARDS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
WHAT MAKES SENSE FROM A BRIGHTNESS PERSPECTIVE? I THINK WE JUST NEED TO KIND OF REDO THAT AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WILL WORK UNLESS THERE'S SOMEBODY THAT JUST THINKS THAT WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE A LIGHTED SIGN.
WE THOUGHT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT NO LIGHTED SIGNS OTHER THAN IF IT WENT TO ZONING AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
AN EXAMPLE BEING THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SIGN, THEY'D LIKE TO CHANGE TO THAT.
AT ONE TIME WE THOUGHT WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING SOUNDED REASONABLE BUT IT NEEDED TO GO BEFORE ZONING AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND NOT BE CODIFIED HERE.
AS FOR THE POLITICAL SIGNS, I'M CONFUSED WHERE THE PROBLEM WAS SINCE WE KNOW HOW MANY FEET BACK FROM THE ROAD THEY NEED TO BE.
WHAT ELSE NEEDS TO BE DONE? WHERE IS THE PROBLEM THAT THEY COULDN'T SEE OUT? I'D CERTAINLY LIKE TO FIX THAT PROBLEM BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO NOT BE ABLE TO SEE OUT.
ARE WE SAYING WE NEED TO MAKE IT 25 FEET IF IT'S
[01:05:01]
10 FEET NOW? I'M FORGETTING NOW.I'VE READ TOO MANY OF THESE NOW.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE FEET BUT I'M HAPPY TO EXTEND IT, MAKE IT FURTHER BACK.
JUST MAKE IT SOMETHING REASONABLE THAT YOU CAN SEE.
WHEN YOU GET TO THE PART OF THE ROAD HERE, IF YOU LET THEM PUT SIGNS WHEREVER THEY WANT TO, THEY'LL PUT THEM ALONG THAT AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE EVEN OUT OF A PICKUP AND ESPECIALLY A LOWER CAR.
SO YEAH, SOMETHING, THE STATE SAYS 10 FEET.
I DON'T KNOW IF 10 FEET COVERS IT, MAYBE 15, MAYBE 20.
I'D HAVE TO GO LOOK AND SEE WHAT THE NUMBER WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE REASONABLE.
I THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IT TO SOMETHING REASONABLE.
I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS EITHER.
BUT THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC AND IF YOU'RE TRYING TO TURN LEFT OUT OF HERE, YOU'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO SEE.
YOU MIGHT ALSO WANT TO LOOK AT OTHER AREAS, COMMERCIAL AREAS.
BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, HEY, I MAY PUT A FLASHING SIGN IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE AND MY NEIGHBORS MAY NOT LIKE THAT A WHOLE LOT.
UNLESS IT SAYS VOTE FOR LEE, RIGHT? YEAH, I THINK WE'RE HEADED TO A LONGER DISCUSSION ON THAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T READ IT WORD FOR WORD, BUT THOSE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES HAVE PAGES AND PAGES AND PAGES ON SIGNS AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT AND IF WE NEED TO DRAFT THAT, WE NEED TO GET TO WORK.
I DID LOOK AT, THERE ARE OTHER AGENCIES THAT TALK ABOUT LIGHTS.
THERE'S A U.S. SIGN COUNCIL FOUNDATION, DARK SKY TEXAS INTERNATIONAL SIGN ASSOCIATION.
I THINK THERE ARE LARGER ENTITIES THAT CAN HOPEFULLY HELP US WITH LIGHTS BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SAY IS WE SHOULDN'T HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS CONSIDERED A NUISANCE BECAUSE HOW DO YOU DEFINE A NUISANCE WHEN IT COMES TO LIGHTS? RIGHT, AND SO BASICALLY THEY DO DIGITAL BRIGHTNESS LIKE 05,000 NITS DURING THE DAY, 250 NITS DURING THE NIGHT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR HERE I HEARD .3 FOOT CANDLES OVER AMBIENT.
WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF THINGS, WE'VE GOT LOTS OF ENGINEERS AROUND HERE THAT CAN FIGURE THAT STUFF OUT SO WE JUST NEED TO GET GARY A LITTLE LIGHT MEASURING DEVICE.
SO I THINK THE LAST MEETING WE SAID WE WANTED TO ADDRESS THE POLITICAL SIGNS AT CITY HALL SPECIFICALLY BEFORE THE ELECTION IN ORDER TO HELP CITY STAFF WITH THE CHALLENGES THEY HAD LAST TIME.
SO I'M WONDERING IF WE NEED TO BREAK THIS UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT THINGS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THE LIGHTED SIGN NEEDS A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN AGREE ON SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO POLITICAL SIGNS SPECIFICALLY AT CITY HALL.
YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. I THINK WE CAN RECOMMEND SOMETHING LIKE YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT HERE THAT'S SIMILAR TO ALAN BECAUSE THAT PART OF IT IS NOT REALLY THAT TECHNICAL.
IT'S JUST KIND OF TRYING TO MAKE IT MAKE SENSE IN TERMS OF NOT CREATING A CLUTTER AND EYESORE AND PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE.
I THINK THAT'S EASY BUT TO YOUR POINT ON THE ELECTRONIC SIGNS, YEAH I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT OFFLINE AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT COVERS ELECTRONIC SIGNS TAKING PROBABLY FROM SOME OF THE MODELS THAT ARE OUT HERE THAT YOU CAN STEAL FROM I GUESS.
GARY, DID WE DRAW A LINE AT THE 10 FOOT MARK LAST YEAR AT THE LAST ELECTION TO SAY YOUR SIGNS CAN'T BE IN FRONT OF THIS? I DIDN'T MEASURE THE FOOTAGE.
I JUST STEPPED OFF WHAT LOOKED REASONABLE TO ALLOW PARENTS TO SEE.
AND WE STILL GOT COMPLAINTS? NO, WE DIDN'T GET COMPLAINTS ON THAT. THAT WAS BETTER.
WHEN WE PAINTED THE AREA AND MARKED IT AS NO SIGNS IN THAT AREA, NOBODY PUT SIGNS THERE.
SO FROM THE ROAD? FROM THE ROAD EDGE.
OKAY, SO MAYBE WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE THAT IF HE ACTUALLY MARKS IT AGAIN THIS YEAR.
YEAH, I THINK IT HAS TO BE MARKED OR IT WON'T.
YEAH, WE'LL HAVE TO DO IT OR THEY'LL PUT THEM THERE AND IT'LL BE A PROBLEM.
YEAH, WE JUST NEED TO MAKE THAT PART OF THE PROCESS.
LET'S MARK THE GROUND SO THERE'S NO...
EVEN IF YOU PUT IT IN THE ORDINANCE, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO MARK IT BECAUSE...
AND IF YOU MARK IT, NOBODY WILL READ THE ORDINANCE.
SO HOW DO YOU GUYS FEEL ABOUT 16 SQUARE FEET, NO TALLER THAN 8 FEET, NO MORE THAN 4 SIGNS PER CANDIDATE? ALL OF THAT? IS IT ALL OF THAT? I DON'T REMEMBER HOW ALLEN'S IS WRITTEN.
16 SQUARE FEET AND? OR IS IT AND OR? MAXIMUM NUMBER OF 4 SIGNS.
AND NO SIGN OVER 8 FEET FROM THE GROUND.
[01:10:05]
LIKE RESTRICTING THE SIGNS SO I VOTED AGAINST IT LAST TIME.I DON'T WANT... SAFETY HAS TO BE ADDRESSED AND SO IF WE NEED TO KEEP THE ROAD, YOU KNOW...
I'M DEFINITELY CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY AND THE ROAD.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS ELECTION WE ONLY HAVE OUR MUNICIPAL CANDIDATES ON THE BALLOT.
SOME YEARS WE HAVE COLLIN COLLEGE TRUSTEES ON OUR BALLOT AND PLANO ISD AND, YOU KNOW, THE SCHOOL BOARD CANDIDATES.
I THINK IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO GET THEM TO KNOW THAT THERE'S DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES.
BUT YOU CAN'T FIX THAT, I DON'T SUPPOSE.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AND THEN I GUESS IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEONE'S RESPONSIBILITY TO GO OUT AND PULL THEM OUT.
BECAUSE I THINK IF THEY'RE JUST DRIVING THROUGH COLLIN COUNTY TO GET THEIR SIGNS OUT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY IT'S REASONABLE TO HAVE.
BUT IT'S CUMBERSOME IF YOU HAVE DIFFERENT RESTRICTIONS AT THE DIFFERENT...
I MEAN, IF ALLEN HAS SOMETHING LIKE THIS, ALLEN'S KIND OF A BIG CITY NOWADAYS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY SHOULD CONSIDER THAT UNUSUAL.
SO, YOU KNOW, AND IF WE'RE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS ALLEN, YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
FOUR SIGNS IN THE FRONT OF OUR BUILDING IS PRETTY REASONABLE.
I MEAN, I THINK WE OUGHT TO JUST GO WITH THAT AND GET SOME SPRAY PAINT AND, YOU KNOW, AND MARK THE GROUND AND LET'S MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE DON'T PUT SIGNS WHERE IT CREATES A VISION PROBLEM.
AND, YOU KNOW, JUST LET'S MAKE A DECISION AND MOVE ON.
DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THIS TO MAKE IT A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL? WE DO.
WOULD YOU LIKE A MOTION? WELL, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE IT.
OR JOE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION SINCE YOU'VE GOT THE VERBIAGE? I'D LIKE THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE LIMIT THE CLINICAL SIGNS TO 16 SQUARE FEET AND FOUR SIGNS PER CANDIDATE.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND.
AND THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND.
OPPOSED? YEAH, I'M JUST NOT GOING TO VOTE.
WELL, LET'S GO WITH THAT THEN AND SEE IF THE CITY COUNCIL LIKES THAT.
WE RECOMMENDED THAT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS ONE? I THINK THE LAST ONE DIDN'T GO BACK TO COUNCIL, BUT IT MAYBE DIDN'T LIMIT THE NUMBER OF SIGNS, SO THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS, I THOUGHT. IT DID LIMIT. IT DID LIMIT. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE KIND OF REPEATING THIS TOO, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO. OKAY.
MY MEMORY CELLS ARE NOT AS GOOD AS THEY USED TO BE. I WASN'T HERE WHEN IT WENT LAST TIME, SO. THERE WE GO. I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL PUSHED IT BACK TO US. OKAY, I SAY PONG. OKAY, SO LET'S SEE.
[ROUTINE ITEMS]
FROM THE CITY STAFF, ANY OTHER ROUTINE ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT? GOT ANYTHING HOT COMING UP? CONTINGENT ITEMS, WE SHOULD BE GETTING ANOTHER PLOT FROM GREEN MEADOWS. GREEN MEADOWS. THEY'LL PROBABLY SUBMIT THAT NEXT WEEK, CLOSE TO THE MIDDLE DATE, AND THAT WILL PROBABLY BE COMING TO P&Z. OKAY. WHERE'S THAT ONE? PARKVILLE ROAD, RIGHT ACROSS FROM LEWIS LANE. I BELIEVE IT'S 28 ACRES OR SO, AND THERE'S A GROUP THAT'S WANTING TO BUILD, I THINK, 10 HOUSES THERE. OKAY.OKAY, SO IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE, I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING AT 5.15 P.M. 1715.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.