PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT. IT'S 7:00. WE WILL START THE AUGUST 21 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PE SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON TH CURRENT AGEND. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNI AND ZONG COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: LET'S MOVE TO CONSENT. >> CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM E. >> Chair Downs: SO WE'RE GOING TO PULL ITEM E. ANY OTHER ITEMS?& OKAY. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOVE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA ITEM, NOT INCLUDING ITEM E, AS PRESENTED. >> Chair Downs: SO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM E BY MR. RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY. PLEASE VOTE. AND SO THE CONSENT AGENDA, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM E, CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 8-0. SO ITEM E. >> I NEED TO READ IT. SORRY. MY APOLOGIES. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM E IS A REVISED SITE PLAN, ENFIELD PARK ADDITION, BLACK 1, LOT 1R. HEALTH/FITNESS CENTER PARK/PLAYGROUND AND PUBLIC SERVICE YARD ON ONE LOT ON 46.3 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LEGACY DRIVE AND STADIUM DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 329-COMMUNITY CENTER. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF? >> NO PRESENTATION. I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Lisle: COMMISSIONERS, I WENT OUT TO THIS SITE AND BIG PIECE OF THE SITE PLAN IS RESTROOMS ON THE SITE BUT A PART OF IT IS BRINGING THE EXISTING PUBLIC SERVICE YARD INTO COMPLIANCE. ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE THERE'S A LARGE AREA OF OPEN STORAGE AND ON THIS PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN, THERE A LIVING SCREEN THAT'S PROPOSED. THERE'S A TOPOGRAPHY ISSUE OVER THERE THAT HAS THE PUBLIC SERVICE YARD, ABOUT FIVE FEET HIGHER ON TOP OF A WALL. AND THEN INSIDE THE CHAIN LINK FENCE AND ON TOP OF THAT WALL, IT'S ALL CONCRETE. WHICH MEANS ANY LIVING SCREEN -- THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO REMOVE CONCRETE UP HIGH OR IT WOULD BE PLANTED DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL. BUT IN ADDITION TO THIS, WE'RE ON THE BACK SIDE OF AN EXISTING BUILDING AND THEN ON THE BACK SIDE OF THAT BUILDING IS EXISTING STORAGE UNITS. THERE'S ALSO A CAR WASH THAT'S THERE AS WELL. AND SO AFTER THE FIRST 175 FEET THERE'S REALLY NO PURPOSE FOR THE LIVING SCREEN. AND SO I WAS GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE MODIFY THIS AND USE OUR AUTHORITY UNDER 19.200.7 TO BASICALLY EXEMPT THE CITY FROM PUTTING A LIVING SCREEN IN. IF SOMETHING CHANGES OVER THERE, OBVIOUSLY IT'S CITY OWNED AND THEY CAN COME BACK AND ADD THE LIVING SCREEN IF IT WAS EVER NEEDED IN THE FUTURE. 200 FEET OF LIVING SCREEN IS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY AND IT' NOT GOINGO BLOCK ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT'S EXISTING. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM E WITH A STIPULATION THAT THE LIVING SCREEN IS NOT REQUIRED AFTER THE 175-FOOT MARK GOING FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER SOUTH DOWN THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. >> Chair Downs: YOU STATED THAT VERY WELL. ALL RIGHT. ANY -- DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THIS ITEM? >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I WOULD ASK STA. DOES STAFF HAVE ANY REASON TO FEEL THAT THAT'S IMPROPER OR IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM IS DETRIMENTAL TO THIS LOCATION? >> NO. I THINK MR. LISLE'S REASONING IS SOUND. THERE IS EXISTING BUILDINGS OVER THERE, AN AREA THAT COULD CONSTITUTE AS SCREENING. IF THE COMMISSION BELIEVES IN THE FUTURE IF SCREENING IS NEEDED, WE CAN COME BACK AND ADD THAT. IT'S WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY TO MODIFY THAT SCREENING REQUIREMENT, SO W'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. >> Chair Downs: GREAT. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A COMMENT OR QUESTION. >> JUST A QUESTION. THIS IS ONLY ON THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE? >> Lisle: YEAH, THE SOUTH AND THE EAST AND THE PART THAT ALREADY WELL SCREENED.RTH IS- THERE'S NOTHING ON THE WESTERN SIDE CURRENTLY. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH 175 FEET? >> Lisle: I WENT ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND USED THE MEASUREMENT TOOL AND PULLED IT FROM THE FRONT FENCE LINE STRAIGHT DOWN THE PROPERTY. THAT'S THE FACE OF THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE IS AT THE 175-FOOT MARK. Cha Dow: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LISLE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE TO ROUGHLY 175 FEET FROM 375, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM NOW CARRIES, WITH THAT STIPULATION, BY A VOTE OF 8-0. VERY GOOD. BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA, WE'RE GOING TO SHUFFLE THINGS JUST A BIT, AS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST. SOME OF YOU MAY BE HERE FOR ITEMS 4, 5, AND 6. THOSE ARE PRETTY BASIC, STRAIGHTFORWARD ITEMS. LET'S START WITH ITEM 4. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDE AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN: HINCKLEY ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 2R AND 4 - DAY CARE CENTER ON LOT 2R AND VACANT LAND ON LOT 4 ON 3.9 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD, 224 FEET EAST OF FLINTSTONE DRI ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-320- ESTATE DEVELOPMENT WITH SPECIFI USE PERMIT NO. 598 FOR DAY CARE CENTER AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDE APPLICANT: 3411 LOS RIOS BLVD, THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JOHN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO PLANO FIRE AND RESEPPROL WITH A VARIANCE TO THE 150-FOOT HOSE REQUIREMENT ON LOT 2R. I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: MICROPHONE, PLEASE. >> Brounoff: WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE YANG GROUP, LLC, WITH REGARD TO THE LOCATION OF A FENCE AND A CANOPY, SUPPOSEDLY ON THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, COMMITTING TO HAVE THOSE REMOVED. DOES THAT SATISFY T STAFF? >> YES, IT DOES. >> YES, WE'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THAT ISSUE AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM ON THAT. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM? >> YES. WE HAVE SCOTT REMFREY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: HE'S AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN. CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. COMMENTS THOUGHTS? MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: MICROPHONE, PLEASE. >> Brounoff: I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NO. 4. >> Tong: SECOND. >> Chair Downs: AND SECOND. DO WE NEED TO DO SUBJECT TO THE -- >> SUBJECT TO REMOVING THE FENCE AND THE CANOPY FROM THE SIDE YARD SETBACK. >> Chair Downs: NO. >> SORRY. IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT. FIRE DEPARTMENT VARIANCE TO THE HOSE LAY REQUIREMENT. THE ISSUE WITH THE SIDE YARD IS SOMETHING WE ARE ADDRESSING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. >> Brounoff: SO I DON'T NEED TO INCLUDE THAT WITH THE MOTION? >> Chair Downs: NO, JUST SUBJECT TO THE -- >> Brounoff: SUBJECT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S REQUIREMENTS. LET ME AMEND MY MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS ITEM NO. 4, SUBJECT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S REQUIREMENTS. >> Chair Downs: AND YOU WANT TO SECOND THAT AGAIN, MS. TONG? >> Tong: SECOND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. NOW WE HAVE OUR MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. AND THIS SAYS AGENDA ITEM 1A ON THE BOARD, SO JUST FYI. DO WE NEED TO REVOTE? OKAY. NOW LET'S VOTE. A LITTLE ROUGH START TONIGHT. IT'S THE HEAT. I TELL YOU IT'S THE HEAT. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 5, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN: PALISADES BUSINESS PARK NO. 6, BLOCK 1, LOT 4R - CAR WASH ON ONE LOT ON 0.8 ACRE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF K AVENUE, 173 FEET NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 190. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: WOODMONT PLANO AVENU K, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRAT. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DONNA SEPULVEDA, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THESE ITEMS ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON ITEM 5? >> Olley: QUICK QUESTION ON THE BIKE TRAIL EASEMENT. WE'RE TYING THAT TO THE -- ESSENTIALLY THE BIKE PATH PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO. IS THERE A CONNECTION TO A LARGER BIKE SYSTEM WITHIN THE CITY? OR IS THIS ISOLATED IN ANY WAY? >> IT SHOULD FOLLOW THE PARKS MASTER PLAN FOR THE HIKE AND BIKE TRAILS. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs:NY OTHER QUESTION? THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 5, SUBJECT TO THE DEDICATION OF A HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL EASEMENT ON PALISADES BUSINESS PARK NO. 6, LOT 3. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPVE ITEM 5 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LISLE. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. IT'S HOT DOWN HERE. WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 6, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: ST. ELIZABETH ANN SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 1R - RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON ONE LOT ON 6.3 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SPRING CREEK INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY. ZONED SIN APPLICANT: SEASCP-RC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIO. >> WE RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE REPLAT. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> NO, WE DO NOT.KERS? >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE REPLAT AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM 6. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. OKAY. GOOD. HOPEFULLY, IF THERE WAS ANYBODY HERE FOR THOSE, THEY FEEL FREE TO MOVE ON NOW. WE DIDN'T WANT YOU TO SIT THROUGH THE REST OF THIS. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 1A. >> AS DISCUSSED, I WILL READ ALL FIVE ITEMS TOGETHER. >> Chair Downs: YES, PLEASE. >> BEFORE SHE STARTS, CAN I RECUSE MYSELF? >> Chair Downs: ABSOLUTELY. SORRY. APOLOGIES. >> JUST AS A DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNER AND AS SOMEONE THAT HAS LAND SPECIFICALLY AFFECTED BY THIS, I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF FROM THIS CONVERSATION. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: STREET DESIGN STANDARDS - DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ADOPT THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH ARE PRESENTED AS AN UPDATE TO THE CURRENT THO STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. PROJECT NO. IS DI2023-006. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1B. PUBLIC HEARING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2023-001 - REQUEST TO UPDATE THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP AND CROSS SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ALIGN WITH THE STREET DESIGN ST. THIS IS PROJECT NO. CPA2023-001. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1C. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2023-002 - REQUEST TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE AND ALIGN WITH THE STREET DESIGN ST. PROJECT NO. CC2023-002. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1D. PUBLIC HEARING: SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2023-001 - REQUEST TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ALIGN WITH THE STREET DESIGN ST. PROJECT SOA2023-001 . AGENDA ITEM NO. 1E. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: REPEAL O TRANSPORTATION-RELATED POLICY DOCUMENTS - DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO REPEAL OBSOLETE TRANSPORTATION- RELATED POLICY DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 2009-6-10, THEREB RESCINDING THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS AS AMENDED, TRAFFIC ISLAND GUIDELINES (1989), AND PRIVATE STREET SUBDIVISION GUIDELINES (. PROJECT NO. IS DI2023-013. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK THE AGENDA ON ITEM 1E DESCRIBES ORDINANCE NO. 2009-6-10. >> Chair Downs: IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE RESCINDING THE OLD ORDINANCE. >> SHE READ 2009-0-10. >> MY APOLOGIES. >> 2009-6-10. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU . >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CAL THORNHILL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING FOR THE CITY OF PLANO. I WILL TELL YOU I HAVE ALREADY ASKED IF THEY WILL TURN THE AC DOWN, SO I APOLOGIZE. LUCKILY FACILITIES IS UNDER ENGINEERING. WITH THAT, TONIGHT YOU WILL DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. THIS IS AN UPDATE TO THE CURRENT THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. AS YOU JUST HEARD, THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS WAS LAST UPDATED IN 2009. AND IN 2021 THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT INITIATED T FORT TO UPDATE THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARD RULES AND REGULATIONS AND PARTNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO HIRE A CONSULTANT FOR THIS UPDATE. AS YOU'RE AWARE, THIS IS A DOCUMENT UTILIZED BY SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS BUT SPECIFICALLY ENGINEERING AND PLANNING. BRIAN SHEWSKI WILL BE HERE TONIGHT IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC TECHNICAL OR QUESTIONS RELATED TO ENGINEERING, HE'S THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER. I WILL BE AVAILABLE AS WELL. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO JASON, OUR SENIOR PLANNER WITH MOBILITY IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I HAVE BEEN UP HERE BUT I'M EXCITED TO TALK ABOUT THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. MY NAME IS JASON APRILL, SENIOR MOBILITY PLANNER. THE CITY IS WORKING TO UPDATE THE THOROUGHFARE RULES AND REGULATIONS, SOON TO BE RENAMED THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. THIS HAS BEEN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AMONG MULTIPLE CITY DEPARTMENTS TO INCORPORATE NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES, IMPROVE USER FRIENDLINESS, AND IMPLEMENT TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF FIRST INTRODUCED THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS TO THE COMMISSION IN THE FALL OF 2022. MAJOR CHANGES, IMPROVEMENTS, AND DISCUSSION ITEMS WERE BROUGHT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. SINCE MARCH 1, STAFF INITIATED THE PUBLIC OUTREACH PHASE OF THE PROJECT. WE COLLECTED FEEDBACK FROM RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS. WE ALSO CREATED A SPECIALIZED WEBSITE FOR THE PROJECT AND POSTED UPDATED DRAFTS AND SUMMARIES ON THAT WEBSITE. STAFF HAS RELEASED UP TO THREE DRAFTS FOR MANY OF THE SECTNS, FOLLOWING FEEDBACK FROM STAFF AND FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. AND ARE PRESENTING THE FINAL DOCUMENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT. THIS EVENING'S PRESENTATION WILL BEGIN WITH AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED STREET DESIGN STANDARDS BY KIMLEY-HORN. I'LL INTRODUCE THEM IN JUST A SECOND. AS WE'VE MOVED IN PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS, THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS ARE INTERCONNECTED WITHTHER CITY POLICIES AND REGULATIONS SUCH AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. THESE DOCUMENTS WORK TOGETHER TO GUIDE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING EFFORTS AND REGULATE STREET DESIGN THROUGH THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM AND THROUGH PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT. WHEN THAT PORTION IS DONE, THEN I'LL TURN THE PRESENTATION TO DREW BRONNER, THE LEAD PLANNER, AND HE WILL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE PUBLIC OUTREACH FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED AND SOME CHANGES MADE IN RESPONSE. MOST OF THE CHANGES ARE RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN STREETS PORTION OF THE UPDATE. NOW THAT I'VE GIVEN A SUMMARY OF THE PRESENTATION OVERVIEW, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JEFF WHITAKER WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JEFF WHITAKER, VICE PRESIDENT AT KIMLEY-HORN. AND I LEAD OUR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GROUP. SINCE THE -- GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. I DID SOMETHING WRONG. IT'S AN EXCITING TIMTO BE A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER. ONE OF THE REASONS, SINCE 2009, I HAVE SEEN MORE DOCUMENTS CHANGE ACROSS THE NATION THAN I HAVE IN THE TEN YEARS PRIOR TO THAT. SO THIS UPDATE FROM THE 2009 PLANO THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS IS REALLY TO MAKE SURE IT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH SOME OF THE NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES AND STANDARDS OUT THERE. A MAJOR POINT OF RECREATING THE MANUALS -- THE VARIOUS POLICIES AND DOCUMENTS THAT WE USE IN THE INDUSTRY WANT TO BE REFLECTED IN THIS DOCUMENT . WE HAD AN OORTUNITY TO WORK ON THE STANDARDS AND MANUALS FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENTS YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS UNIQUE AND THAT'S EXCITING ABOUT THE CITY OF PLANO IS WHEN THE DOCUMENTS WERE FIRST WRITTEN, PLANO WAS GROWING, GREEN FILL DEVELOPMENT AND NOW IT'S IN AN ERA OF LOOKING AT THE EXISTING STREETS, WHAT IS THE FUTURE AND RETROFIT SO WE KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS THAT. PREVIOUS DESIGN MANUALS WAS WHAT DO NEW STREETS AND DOCUMENTS LOOK LIKE. SO SOME OF THE OVERARCHING PROJECT GOALS THAT WE HAD ON THIS WAS, AS I MENTIONED, INCORPORATE THE NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES AND REALLY TO IMPLEMENT GUIDANCE FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YOU FINISHED A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ONE OF THE ACTION ITEMS WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR VISION, YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SERVES NORTH STAR TO MAKE SURE THAT'S IN THE DOCUMENT. LOOKING AT THE MULTIMODAL STREET NETWORK QUESTION AND THINKING ABOUT DESIGN. MAKING SURE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THE STREET, THAT YOU'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, THE STREET IN A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE DIFFERENT FROM A STREET IN A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. ANOTHER THING WAS TO CONSOLIDATE DESIGN STANDARDS. THERE'S A LOT OF DOCUMENTS AND AS YOU PASS THEM OVER TIME, SOMETIMES THE ITEMS CAN BE IN MULTIPLE PLACES AND REALLY THE RIGHT STANDARDS ARE IN THE RIGHT PLACE. SO IT'S NOT IN TWO PLACES. LASTLY, TO IMPROVE USER FRIENDLINESS. I'LL SHOW YOU THE OUTLINE, A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WANT ONE ANSWER WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND THEY WANT TO FIND THAT ANSWER QUICKLY. SO HOW DO YOU GO TO THE RIGHT CHAPTER AND FIND THE ANSWER YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. I WANTED TO CONSOLIDATE THE DOCUMENT. WE LOOKED AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -- I KNOW IT WILL BE LATER IN THE PRESENTATION THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT UPDATE, BICYCLE AND ZONING ORDINANCE . WE DOVE A LITTLE DEEP INTO THE STREET TYPOLOGY. STREET TYPOLOGY IS ANOTHER WORD FOR CONTEXT. THE STREETS CHANGE AS THEY GO THROUGH DIFFERENT CONTEXT. SO THIS IS THE OVERVIEW -- I WANTED TO USE THIS SLIDE FOR A FEW REASONS. E, THERE WAS 14 SECTIONS OUTLINED IN THIS DOCUMENT AND IT'S POSTED ONLINE. IT'S BEEN POSTED ONLINE FOR QUITE A WHILE. MOST SECTIONS HAVE A FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD DRAFT. I WANT TO APPLAUD WORKING WITH THE CITY AND AS WE GO THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT, MEETING WITH THEM, AND TIME SPENT REVIEWING THEM AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC AND TRACKING THOSE CHANGES. WE'LL GO THROUGH SOME OF THOSE CHANGES WITH YOU IN A LITTLE BIT. THIS IS HOW IT'S LAID OUT SO MOST OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR CERTAIN ANSWERS CAN GO TO THAT SECTION AND GET THAT ANSWER. SO ONE OF THE MAJOR TOPICS OF ANY TRANSPORTATION MANUAL IS THE THOROUGHFARE UPDATES, THE STREET UPDATES. SO THE STREET FRAMEWORK WAS WHAT WE LOOKED AT, TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL CROSS SECTION AND SPECIAL STREETS. THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT THE CITY ENVISIONS THESE STREETS TO LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE, DEPENDING ON THAT THOROUGHFARE MAP IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ONE THING THAT WAS UNIQUE IS WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS STREET DESIGN MANUAL ADDRESSED SOME SPECIAL STREETS. WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE SPECIAL STREETS THAT WEREN'T ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY? SUCH AS A PASEO SECTION. THESE ARE NOT STREETS YOU MAY NOT HAVE SEEN 20 YEARS AGO BUT YOU'RE SEEING THEM AS YOU DEVELOP PLACES TODAY AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT GUIDANCE AND DESIGN STANDARDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO IMPLEMENT THOSE TYPES OF FACILITIES. THE LAND USE CONTEXT WAS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. DIDN'T WANT TO APPLY THE SAME RULES AND SAME TYPE OF DESIGN AND PLACES ACROSS PLANO. WE ESTABLISHED FOUR TYPES OF CONTEXT: NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL CORNER AND MIXED-USE. THE CONTEXT DIRECTLY AFFECTS THOSE LAND USE CATEGORIES. FOR EVERY CROSS SECTION THERE MIGHT BE A LITT BF DIMENSIONAL CHANGE BASED ON THE CONTEXT. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, DOWN SOME OF YOUR LARGER STREETS YOU MIGHT HAVE LARGER LANES AND IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS YOU MIGHT HAVE NARROWER STREETS TO HELP CONTROL SPEED. YOU CAN DO THAT BY DESIGN. THAT WAS SOMEWHAT OF THE IDEA BEHIND THIS. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE, JUST TO DIVE A LITTLE BIT DEEPER. THIS IS LOOKING AT A TYPE F STREET, A TYPICAL SECTION. ON THE LEFT YOU PROBABLY SEE A STREET YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT YOU SEE IN A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS IN A LOT OF AREAS. IT'S GOT THE TYPICAL TWO-LANE ROAD, THE TYPICAL SIDALK ON THE SIDE. THAT SAME TYPICAL SECTION, IF IT'S IN A DIFFERENT PART OF THE CITY, MIGHT NEED SOME ON-STREET PARKING OR TIE INTO YOUR HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL PLAN. SAME ROAD, DIFFERENT CONTEXT AND LOCATIONS AND THIS MANUAL ADDRESSES THAT FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW DIFFERENT CROSS SECTIONS TO BE USED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY AS IDENTIFIED IN THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. ANOTHER MAJOR TOPIC IS DOWNTOWN STREETS. TOOK A DEEP DIVE -- AND DREW WILL BE DISCUSSING DOWNTOWN STREETS IN A LITTLE BIT. WE TOOK A DEEPER DIVENTO DOWNTOWN STREETS TO LOOK AT WHAT THOSE FUTURE CROSS SECTIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE AS DOWNTOWN CONTINUES TO REDEVELOP, AS IT HAS BEEN. WE HAD A COMPLETE CHAPTER ADDRESSING INTERSECTION DESIGN WITH MULTIPLE TYPES OF INTERSECTIONS AND GIVE SOME GUIDANCE ON WHAT INTERSECTION THAT SHOULD BE. ANOTHER MAJOR TOPIC AREA OUTSIDE THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN WAS MULTIMODAL FACILITIES. THIS IS ONE OF THE PRACTICES THAT HAS REALLY ADVANCED IN THE LAST 15 YEARS. REALLY TO MAKE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES, BICYCLE AND TRANSIT OPERATIONS MORE COMFORTABLE FACILITIES. THAT WAS THE GOAL. HOW DOES THE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FEEL COMFORTABLE AND THAT COMFORT LEADS TO USE OF THE FACILITIES. WE WENT THROUGH MID-BLOCK CROSSINGS. THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FACILITIES FOR BICYCLES SHOWN ON HERE WITH BUFFER. AND ALSO HOW TO ACCOMMODATE TRANSIT APPROPRIATELY. WE LOOKED AT DART, WORKED WITH SOME OF THE DART STANDARDS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DIFFERENT STANDARDS ARE ALIGNED WITH THE DIFFERENT AGENCIESCROSTHAT ULD BE UTILIZING THE TRANSIT FACILITIES. ANOTHER MAJOR TOPIC AREA IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC-CALMING PROGRAM THAT WE LOOKED AT. AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC-CAMCALMING, SECTION 13. AND THEN THE OUTREACH PROGRAM. AND IT SHOWS THE SUPPORTING GROWTH THAT PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT. THERE WAS A LOT IN THAT CHAPTER ABOUT HOW TO DO THIS, HOW TO IMPLEMENT TRAFFIC CALMING. SOME EXAMPLES, ONE OF THE THGS THAT THE GUY DOES IS IT LOOKS AT DIFFERNT ELEMENTS SUCH AS A BULB-OUT BY SHORTENING THE CROSSWALKS. IT LOOKS AT RAISED INTERSECTIONS TO SLOW THE SPEED OF VEHICLES, TO INCREASE PEDESTRIAN VISIBILITY. IT ALSO LOOKS AT DIFFERENT DEVICES. AS WE WERE WORKING WITH THE CITY, REITERATE HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS FOR A CONCERNED CITIZEN TO VOICE THEIR OPINION CONCERNING NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC. AND TOGETHER WE MADE A PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS BOTH ENGINEERING AND THE CITIZENS TO WORK TOGETHER TO COME UP TO A SOLUTION. SO IT'S A PRETTY DETAILED CHAPTER USING SOME BEST PRACTICES ACROSS THE STATE. AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DREW. OH JASON. SORRY. >> OKAY. AS I MENTIONED, NOW I'LL GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF ITEMS 1B, 1C, 1D THROUGH 1E. THAT'S BASICALLY A SUMMARY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHANGES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORNANCAND NING ORDINANCE CHANGES. AS DISCUSSED AT THE OCTOBER 17 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS WILL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REGULATE THE DESIGN AND LOCATION OF STREETS FOR BOTH CITY STREET CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT. UPDATES ARE NECESSARY TO THESE DOCUMENTS TO HARMONIZE CHANGES -- WHICH JEFF WENT OVER AS A NEWLY-INCORPORATED ITEM INTO OUR STREET NETWORK AND STREET DESIGN AND ALSO THE CUOMIZATION OF DOWNTOWN STREET S. STAFF WORKED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DOCUMENTS WORKED TOGETHER, AVOIDING CONFLICTS, AND MAKING APPROPRIATE REFERENCES. THAT'S ALL PART OF SOME OF THE MAIN GOALS WE HAD IN THIS PROCESS WAS IMPROVING USER FRIENDLINESS STREAMLINING DOCUMENTS WHERE POSSIBLE, INCORPORATING NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES. AS REPORTED IN ITEM 1B, THE ASSOCIATE CHANGES TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP ARE NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT CONTEXT-SENSITIVE STREET DESIGN. THIS CHANGES INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF THE FOUR LAND USE CONTEXT ZONE THAT KIMLEY-HORN PRESENTED. NOW YOU CAN SEE THEM ON A MAP. YOU CAN SEE NEIGHBORHOOD CORNER MIXED-USE AND THE COMMERCIAL CONTEXT THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP. AND A NEW DOWNTOWN STREETS MAP INSET. THE STREET MAP WE'LL GO OVER BUT YOU CAN SEE THE INSET IN THE BOTTOM LOWER LEFT-HAND CORNER. AS ALSO REPORTED IN ITEM 1B, ALL THE CROSS SECTIONS FOR THE VL DIFFER BY THE LAND USE CONTEXT. THE DIMENSION CROSS SECTIONS WILL BE RELOCATED FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO SECTION 2 OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. IN ITS PLACE, DESCRIPTIVE TEXT AND IMAGES OF THE CONTEXT ZONES AND FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS WILL BE INSERTED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE POWERPOINT SHOWS THE DESCRIPTIONS ADDED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SO THE TWO BOXES ON THE LEFT. THE STREET TYPES WERE DISCUSSED IN DETAIL AS ARE THE FOUR NEW CONTEXT ZONES IN DETAIL. THE TABLE ON THE RIGHT PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON STREET AMENITIES BASED ON THE ROAD TYPE AND CONTEXT. A NEW DOWNTOWN STREETS INSET MAP IS NOW INCLUDED WITH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP TO ACCOUNT FOR THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA STREETS. SO THIS IS A ZOOMED IN IMAGE OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP THAT I SHOWED TWO SLIDES AGO. THIS IS ZOOMED INTO THAT AREA. AT THE OCTOBER 3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, STAFF REPORTED THAT THE CITY'S ORIGINAL 1963 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INCLUDED A SPECIALIZED THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA THAT DID NOT FOLLOW THE TYPE A THROUGH G FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. INSTEAD IT ESTABLISHED STREET RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS AND SETBACKS UNIQUE TO THE BUSINESS DISTRICT. THIS SPECIALIZED APPROACH WAS USED UNTIL THE 1986 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHIFTED THE ENTIRE CITY TO THE TYPE A THROUGH G CLASSIFICATION THAT WE KNOW TODAY. AS WITH THE CITYWIDE GOALS FOR THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS AND THE PROJECT OVERALL, THE GOAL IN THE DOWNTOWN WAS TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY FOR STREETS IN PLANO TO FIT COMMUNITY NEEDS AND DESIRES AS WELL AS TO EASILY BLEND IN WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. SPECIFICALLY IN DOWNTOWN PLANO, THIS TRANSLATES BY BRINGING BACK A SPECIALIZED STREET RIGHT OF WAY PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA, SIMILAR TO WHAT I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY. CREATING A TAILORED SET OF STREETS THAT MEET DOWNTOWN'S UNIQUE CHARACTER AND THE UNIQUE DESIGN CHALLENGES. ESTABLISHING ULTIMATE RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS TO ALLOW IMPROVEMENTS. THIS STREAMLINES REGULATORY DOCUMENTS. UTILIZE COMMONLY-AVAILABLE RIGHT OF WAY TO MINIMIZE IMPACT TO OWNERS AND ENHANCE THE STREETSCAPE. BRINGING IN STREET AMENITIES AND MAKING THINGS MORE WALKABLE TREES JUST AMENITIES THAT WILL MAKE KIND OF THE DOWNTOWN EVEN MORE UNIQUE THAN IT IS TODAY. THE TAILORED APPROACH TO THE DOWNTOWN STREETS PLAN IS REMINISCENT OF PREVIOUS PLANS FOR DOWNTOWN AND IT ALLOWS THE FLEXIBILITY THAT SUPPORTS THE DOWNTOWN CHARACTER. THE CLASSIFICATION FOR STREETS USED ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY, TYPE A, B C DON'T NECESSARILY APPLY IN THE DOWNTOWN. SO IN THE DOWNTOWN INSET, THE CUSTOMIZED STREET TYPES IN DOWNTOWN INCLUDE DOWNTOWN COUPLET, K AND MUNICIPAL AVENUE, GATEWAY CORRIDOR. IN THE PACKET YOU SAW 15th STREET, C, ET CETERA CLASSIFIED AS A GATEWAY CORRIDOR. WE HAVE MIXED-USE LOCAL AND RESIDENTIAL LOCAL STREETS. AND THEN WE BROUGHT IN SPECIAL CONDITION STREETS. STREETS LIKE MUs AND OTHER ALLEY WIDTHS AND OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS. ON THIS SLIDE ARE EXAMPLES OF STREET TYPES FOUND IN THE DOWNTOWN PLAN. THEY ARE SPECIALIZED AND FOR THE MOST PART, AS THE DOWNTOWN PLAN WENT THROUGH, IT WAS BLOCK BY BLOCK TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRAINTS AND THE SURROUNDING LAND USE CHARACTER BUT ALSO BRINGING IN LAND USE GOALS . NOW I'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 1C. AS OUTNED IN 1C, THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW CHANGES TO ALIGN WITH PROPOSED UPDATES. SOME OF THE KEY UPDATES INCLUDE MOVING REGULATIONS FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE INTO THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. MULTIPLE ZONING DISTRICTS INCLUDE STREET DESIGN LANGUAGE. THE GOAL WAS TO CONSOLIDATE ALL INTO ONE DOCUMENT. AGAIN, IMPROVING USER FRIENDLINESS. AS DISCUSSED AT THE OCTOBER 3 PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, STAFF PROPOSED THAT SETBACKS IN THE BG ZONING DISTRICT BE REPLACED WITH A SHY ZONE MEASURED FROM THE OUTSIDE EDGE. A SHY ZONE ALLOWS ENCROACHMENTS TO CREATURE VISUAL INTEREST. IT ALLOWS WIGGLE ROOM SPACE, EXTRA ROOM FOR PATIO DINING, LANDSCAPE, AWNING . IF YOU REMEMBER FROM THE PRESENTATION, IT'S THAT AREA RIGHT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE WHERE THE BUILDING IS TO KIND OF THAT SIDEWALK OCCURS. IT'S THAT MIDDLE SPACE. ADDITIONALLY, UMU SETBACKS WERE UPDATED TO MEASURE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO CORRESPOND WITH NEW STREET SECTIONS. FINALLY, FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, STAFF PRESENTED CHANGES TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS AT THE JANUARY 17th PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. ARTICLE 25 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE HAS BEEN EDITED TO LIST WHAT CONDITIONS A TRAFFIC STUDY MAY BE REQUIRED. BUT THE TECHNICAL STEPS TO COMPLETE THE TRAFFIC STUDY ARE NOW IN SECTION 12 TRAFFIC STUDIES OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. THESE IMAGES ARE FROM 1C. THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF THE INCORPORATION OF THE SHY ZONES INTO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. NOTABLY -- I THINK I'VE SAID USER FRIENDLINESS QUITE A BIT, BUT TO IMPROVE USER FRIENDLINESS, THEY'RE THE FIRST GRAPHICS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT INCORPORATE COLOR. I WANTED TO SHOW THAT. I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD ADD. ALSO, THIS SLIDE SHOWS THAT SETBACKS ARE FAIRLY COMPLICATED TO ADMINISTER AT THIS POINT. SO YOU CAN SEE -- IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT TO SEE FROM HERE BUT THE BLUE ON THE LEFT, IT SHOWS THE REQUIRED SETBACKS VERY GREATLY BASED ON THE EXISTING CURBLINE. THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT SHOWS HOW THE PROCESS CAN BE MADE CLEARER FOR STAFF AND CITIZENS. SO WHEN YOU BRING IN THAT CONSISTENT PLAN RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT CLEANER. MOVING ON TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE CHANGES. THERE WERE CHANGES MADE TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO RESPOND TO NEW COMPONENTS OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. MOST NOTABLY THE LAND USE CONTEXT ZONES. AS DISCUSSED IN ITEM 1D, HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE NEW ADD AND CREATED FORVE BN TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD, NON-RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY, AS WELL AS MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT TYPES. AN ALLOWANCE WAS ADDED FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IN DOWNTOWN STREETS. AND ALSO IT STREAMLINED PRIVATE STREET GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM 1E. THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW STREET DESIGN STANDARDS WILL REQUIRE A REPEAL OF THE CURRENT THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, IN 2022, THE MMISSION CONDUCTED A REVIEW OF LONG-STANDING POLICY DOCUMENTS. THERE WERE 32 DOCUMENTS DEEMED OBSOLETE AND ULTIMATELY WERE REPEALED. ANOTHER SET OF DOCUMENTS WERE EARMARKED FOR REPEAL AS PART OF THE ON GOING PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS. THOSE DOCUMENTS EARMARKED INCLUDE THE PRIVATE STREET SUBDIVISION GUIDELINES FROM 1994 AND THE TRAFFIC ISLAND GUIDELINES FROM 1989. THE TRAFFIC ISLAND GUIDELINES WERE DEVELOPED TO ADDRESS TRAFFIC VOLUME AND SPEED CONCERNS ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND TO REDUCE CUT-THROUG TRAFFIC. THE NEW SECTION 13 OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS PROVIDES UPDATES FOR THE PROCESS FOR REQUESTING TRAFFIC CALMING. AND NOW THEY EXPLICITLY INCLUDE TRAFFIC ISLANDS AS POSSIBLE TRAFFIC-CALMING DEVICES. IF YOU REMEMBER FROM THAT PRESENTATION, THOSE ARE NOW KIND OF PART OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT. AND ON MY LAST SLIDE, SUMMARIZING SECTION 1E, THE 1994 PRIVATE STREET GUIDELINES WERE DEVELOPED TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR THEESIG OF GATED COMMUNITIES. THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE HAS SINCE BEEN UPDATED TO REQUIRE A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS WITH PRIVATE STREET NETWORKS AND NOW THEY ARE INCORPORATING ALL THE REMAINING GUIDELINES. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC OUTREACH. YOU SAW IN MANY OF THE DOCUMENTS THERE WAS A LOT OF TECHNICAL SIDE BUT THERE WAS ALSO A LOT OF WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THE WEBSITE. AND NOW DREW BRONNER, LEAD PLANNER, WILL DISCUSS THAT PIECE. AND I'LL COME BACK AND KIND OF CLOSE US OUT. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS, DREW BRONNER, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT THE PUBLIC OUTREACH THAT WAS DONE AS PART OF THIS EFFORT, INCLUDING HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE MAJOR FEEDBACK TOPICS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STAFF PROVIDED TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS. SO STARTING WITH AN OVERVIEW OF THE OUTREACH STRATEGIES THAT WE USED, STAFF CREATED A PROJECT WEBSITE TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS PROJECT UPDATES AS THEY WERE PREPARED. THIS INCLUDED PROVIDING THE PROJECT OVERVIEW, LINKS TO DRAFT SECTIONS AS THEY WERE COMPLETED, A PAGE SPECIFIC TO THE DOWNTOWN STREETS COMPONENT, BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION RELATED TO THAT. WE PROVIDED A SECTION OF FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS, SO ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS WE RECEIVED, WE PROVIDED A DEDICATED ANSWER. AND THEN LINKS TO PAST PLANNING AND ZONING PRESENTATIONS, AS THOSE WERE COMPLETED. WE ALSO WORKED WITH OUR COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS TO STRATEGICALLY PROMOTE SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS AVAILABLE AS WELL AS DEVELOPING A PLANO CITY NEWS VIDEO. WE ALS PROVIDED INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE RELATED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING SUMMARY PRESENTATIONS ON THE SPECIFIC TOPICS THAT WE DID DISCUSSION ITEMS ON. WE ALSO ALLOWED E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE. WE ENCOURAGED THOSE WITH QUESTIONS TO E-MAIL THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON THE WEBSITE. WE ALSO DID STRATEGIC OUTREACH FOR THE DOWNTOWN STREETS COMPONENT DUE TO THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES. THAT INCLUDED A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE ON MARCH 29 AT THE COURTYARD THEATER. HERE WE INTRODUCED THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS. TO MAKE IT USER FRIENDLY FORMAT, WE PUT ALL OF THE CROSS SECTIONS INTO 3-D FORMAT SO YOU CAN SEE HOW A CROSS SECTION COULD LOOK LIKE ON A GIVEN BLOCK ON VARIOUS STREETS IN DOWNTOWN. AND IN TOTAL WE HAD 48 ATTENDEES AT THIS OPEN HOUSE. IN ADDITION TO THE OPEN HOUSE, STAFF MADE PRESENTATIONS AT THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN PLANO ASSOCIATION MEETINGS AND WE HAD CONTINUED COMMUNICATION WITH APPROXIMATELY 100 DOWNTOWN STAKEHOLDERS, WHICH TOTALED OVER 270 TOUCH POINTS THROUGH GROUP MEETINGS, INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS, OR E-MAILS AND CALLS. IN GENERAL, WITH THE CITYWIDE STANDARDS, WE RECEIVED MINIMAL FEEDBACK AND MANY COMMENTS WERE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT. FOR EXAMPLE, WE RECEIVED COMMENTS RELATED TO TRAFFIC HOT SPOT ISSUES OR CONSTRUCTION ISSUES, WHICH AREN'T DIRECTLY ADDRESSED BY THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. WE DID RECEIVE SOME COMMENTS RELATED TO BICYCLE FACILITIES AND THE STANDARDS DO ADDRESS BEST PRACTICES FOR BICYCLE FACILITY DESIGN IN THE NEW MULTIMODAL FACILITY SECTION. AND MOST OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE DID RECEIVE WAS RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN STREETS COMPONENT. MANY COMMENTS WERE POSITIVE, PARTICULARLY RELATED TO IMPROVING CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS. BUT WE ALSO HEARD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES, WHICH I'LL COVER ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDES. STARTING WITH WHY ARE CHANGES NEEDED DOWNTOWN. THE PRIMARY REASON IS THAT THE EXISTING STANDARDS DON'T FIT THE UNIQUE CHALLENGES OF DOWNTOWN. WE HAVE ADOPTED PLANS THAT OUTLINE GOALS AND STRATEGIES FOR HOW TO IMPROVE THE DOWNTOWN STREETS BUT THOSE GOALS HAVE NEVER BEEN TRANSLATED TO OUR STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. THEREFORE THE APPROACH HAS BEEN TO NEGOTIATE INDIVIDUAL IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. SOME OF THE EXAMPLES I'LL HIGHLIGHT OF HOW OUR CURRENT STANDARDS DO NOT PROVIDE APPROPRIATE DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR DOWNTOWN, INCLUDING OUR LOCAL STREET, DOWNTOWN COUPLELETS AND 15th STREET. I'LL HAVE INDIVIDUAL SLIDES ON THOSE. WE HAVE PLANNED GOALS FOR CREATING A MULTIMODAL PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT IN DOWNTOWN PLANO . THESE ARE NOT NEW. THEY DATE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN 1991 AND HAVE BEEN UPDATED IN THE 1999 VISION AND STRATEGY AND AGAIN WITH THE 2013 UPDATE OF THAT DOCUMENT. SOME OF THE GOALS THAT PROMOTE UNIQUE DOWNTOWN STREET DESIGN SOLUTIONS INCLUDE STREET AS A PLACE, MEANING THAT STREETS DOWNTOWN SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO BE A DESTINATION WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO STAY AND ENJOY THE DOWNTOWN ENVIRONMENT, NOT JUST A PASS-THROUGH OF TRIPS GOING TO OTHER DESTINATIONS. GRID STREETS, MEANING CREATING EASIER AND INCREASE THE ROUTE CHOICES BETWEEN DESTINATIONS DOWNTOWN. PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY STREETS, TO CREATE STREETS THAT INCLUDE DESIGN FEATURES THAT CALM TRAFFIC AND MAKE THE PEDESTRIAN MORE COMFORTABLE. ONE OF THE MORE SPECIFIC STRATEGIES IS TODD NEW STREET CONNECTIVITY ALONG J AVENUE. THIS RECOMMENDS ADDING NEW STREET CONNECTIONS AT 12th PLACE, 13th AND 17th STREET TO BREAK UP THE LONG BLOCKS ALONG J AVENUE AND CREATE A MORE PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED ENVIRONMENT. THEN TO HIGHLIGHT HOW OUR CURRENT STANDARDS ARE A MISMATCH FOR THE CURRENT DOWNTOWN CONDITIONS. OUR CURRENT CITYWIDE STANDARDS FOR LOCAL STREETS ARE EITHER TO USE A TWO-LANE TYPE G ON THE LEFT. THAT'S INTENDED FOR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SETTINGS. OR A WIDER TWO-LANE TYPE F, WHICH IS INTEND FOR YOUR TYPICAL COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. NEITHER OF THESE ARE APPROPRIATE FOR A MIXED-USE SETTING WHERE STREETS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE GREATER PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY AND STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS. TO TAKE A LOOK AT SOME PARTICULAR EXAMPLES DOWNTOWN, HERE'S AN EXAMPLE ON I AVENUE. THIS STREET MAINTAINS A TYPICAL LOCAL STREET DESIGN BUT SERVES A MIXED-USE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A FUNCTIONAL STREET. YOU CAN GET THROUGH IT. IT'S TWO LANES WITH SIDEWALKS. BUT SOME OF THE PREFERRED DESIGN ELEMENTS IN A MIXED-USE SS MAKING IT MORE COMFORTABLE FOR PEDESTRIANS. A TYPICAL MIXED-USE LOCAL WOULD HAVE WIDER SIDEWALKS WITH SEPARATION FROM THE TRAVEL LANES USING EITHER ON-STREET PARKING SPACES OR STREET TREES. WE DO SEE SOME OF OUR EXISTING STREETS USING SOME OF THE PREFERRED ELEMENTS OF A MIXED-USE DESIGN. AND THOSE HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. FOR EXAMPLE, HERE G AVENUE NEXT TO RICE FIELD, THE TRAVELWAY WAS MODIFIED TO PROVIDE SPACE FOR THE PARKING SPACES AND A WIDER SIDEWALK. AGAIN ON 15th PLACE, ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHERE ON-STREET PARKING WAS PROVIDED WITH CURB EXTENSION. THE PEDESTRIAN AREA FEELS A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE. ANOTHER EXAMPLE HERE IS THE FARROW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, USED TO DESIGN INTERNAL TO THE SITE, CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED MIXED-USE LOCAL. AND THEN EVEN MOVING OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, WE'RE SEEING DEVELOPMENT USING STREET DESIGN. IT INCLUDES OUR OTHER HERE'S A LOCAL STREET IN. HERITAGE CREEKSIDE THAT HAVE THE SAME DEDICATED PARKING LANES WITH THE CURB EXTENSIONS TO PROVIDE MORE SPACE FOR STREET TREES. AND THEN ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN LEGACY TOWN CENTER. YOU CAN SEE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN DRIVING MANY OF THESE WALKABLE DESIGN ALTERNATIVE APPLICATIONS. NOW WITH THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS WE'RE PROPOSING TO MAKE THIS APPROACH THE STANDARD FOR OUR DOWNTOWN AND MIXED-USE AREAS. SO MOVING BEYOND THE LOCAL STREETS, ANOTHER MISMATCH WITH OUR CITYWIDE STANDARDS IS THE DOWNTOWN COUPLET. IT'S CURRENTLY ON OUR THOROUFARELAN CLASSIFIED AS A TYPE C, MEANT FOR A MEDIAN-DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE. ADDITIONALLY PORTIONS OF K REDESIGNED WITH A LANE REDUCTION, WHICH INCORPORATES THE GOALS FOR STREET DESIGN. BUT WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR DESIGN STANDARDS FOR APPLYING THIS SAME STANDARD TO THE REST OF THE COUPLET FURTHER DOWN K AVENUE AND ALONG MUNICIPAL AVENUE. THIS RESULTS IN VERY DIFFERENT STREET ENVIRONMENTS JUST ONE BLOCK APART. 15th STREET IS ANOTHER MISMATCH IN OUR CURRENT STANDARDS. IT'S CLASSIFIED AS A TYPE F ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN, WHICH MEANS IF WE WERE TO FOLLOW THAT PLAN, IT SHOULD BE A TWO-LANE ROAD. OF COURSE THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S CURRENTLY DESIGNED. IT'S CURRENTLY DESIGNED AS A FOUR-LANE UNDIVIDED STREET WITH VARYING RIGHT OF WAY AND SIDEWALK CONDITIONS. THIS IMAGE ILLUSTRATES HOW THE RIGHT OF WAY VARIES FROM BLOCK TO BLOCK. WE KNOW THE INTENT IS NOT TO PROVIDE THE STANDARD TYPE F DESIGN HERE BUT WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC GOAL OF WHAT WE'RE WORKING TOWAR. SO WITHOUT A PLANNED RIGHT OF WAY GOAL IT BECOMES DIFFICULT TO ACQUIRE APPROPRIATE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS IN THIS AREA. AND THEN AS MENTIONED BEFORE, IMPROVING THE CONSISTENCY OF SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IS AN IMPORTANT SHORT-TERM NEED OF THIS UPDATE. BASING IT OFF OF CONSISTENT PLANNED RIGHT OF WAY WOULD PROVIDE SIMPLICITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. SO THEN MOVING INTO TRAFFIC CONCERNS. WE HEARD CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS WOULD BE WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN DOWNTOWN. SOME STREETS, SUCH AS 15th A LE REDUCTION, WHICH WOULD FREE UP SPACE FOR AN ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED STREET DESIGN AND ADDITIONAL ON-STREET PARKING. IN WORKING WITH ENGINEERING, WE DETERMINED IT IS MORE OF THE INTERSECTIONS RATHER THAN THE NUMBER OF LANES. THE REDUCTION OF LANES PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO OPTIMIZE THE INTERSECTIONS WHERE WE SEE SOME DELAYS TODAY. CURRENTLY THE TURNING MOVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTIONS ARE MIXED IN WITH THE THROUGH LANES. WE'LL LOOK AT 15th STREET AS AN EXAMPLE TO START. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, STARTING AT THE G AVENUE INTERSECTION, WE CURRENTLY HE TWO EASTBOUND LANES BUT THE LEFT LANE AT THE INTERSECTION ALSO FUNCTIONS AS A LEFT TURN LANE. THOSE TWO LANES CONTINUE EAST UNTIL THE DART TRACKS. BUT IN THAT LAST BLOCK, TRAFFIC IS FORCED TO EITHER TURN RIGHT INTO McCALL PLAZA OR MERGE INTO THE LEFT LANE TO CONTINUE THROUGH DOWNTOWN. MANY VEHICLES KNOW THIS AND PERSONAL TO THE LEFT MUCH EARLIER, WHICH MEANS THAT THE RIGHT LANE IS ESSENTIALLY JUST FUNCTIONING AS A LONG RIGHT-TURN LANE. HOWEVER, THERE ARE ISSUES WITH TRACKS WHICH CAN CREATE SOME DELAYS AND SAFETY CONCERNS. SO THE PROPOSED LANE MODIFICATION FOR 15th STREET MOVES THE MERGE POINT BACK FROM THE DART TRACKS TO THE G AVENUE INTERSECTION. SO THIS SLIDE HERE IS LOOKING AT THE G AVENUE INTERSECTION BUT WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES. THROUGH TRIPS WOULD CONTINUE IN A SINGLE LANE FROM THIS POINT AND LEFT TURNING VEHICLES WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN DEDICATED TURN LANE WHICH ALLOWS THE SIGNAL TIMING TO BE IMPROVED. RIGHT-TURN LANES WOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE A DEDICATED LANE AS CURRENTLY EXISTS. AND THEN MOVING EAST FROM G AVENUE, THROUGH TRIPS CONTINUE ON. AT THIS POINT THEY'RE ALREADY IN THEIR SINGLE LANE APPROACHING THE DART TRACKS. A CENTER TURN LANE WOULD ALLOW SPACE FOR LEFT TURNING VEHICLES WITHOUT HOLDING UP THROUGH-TRAFFIC. APPROACHING THE DART TRACKS, A SHORTER RIGHT-TURN LANE WOULD BE MAINTAINED TO SEPARATE THE TURNING VEHICLES INTO THE McCALL PLAZA PARKING AREA. LOOKING AT SOME OF THE ANALYSIS AND BENEFITS, IT WAS DETERMINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES DO NOT WARRANT TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION. THE EXISTING CAPACITY OF THE ROAD IS MORE THAN THE DEMAND WE SEE DURING THE PEAKS. THE RECAPTURED STREET SPACE WOULD ALLOW FOR ENHANCEMENTS. SAFETY IS IMPROVED AT THE DART RAIL. SIGNALIZATION IMPROVEMENT AT G AVENUE IS FORECASTED TO REDUCE WAIT TIMES UP TO 30%. NEXT WE'LL TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT 14th STREET. HERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO THROUGH-LANES IN EACH DIRECTION AND THIS SLIDE IS SHOWING THE CURVE ACROSS THE DART TRACKS GOING TOWARDS K AVENUE. AGAIN AT THE INTERSECTION, TURNING VEHICLES ARE MIXEDN WITH. AS VEHICLES TURN, ANY VEHICLES NEEDING TO GO THROUGH MUST WAIT. YOU SEE THAT WITH RIGHT TURNS AT K AVENUE AND LEFT TURNS AT MUNICIPAL AVENUE. IN THIS SLIDE HERE ILLUSTRATES THE ISSUE THIS CREATES. IF YOU'RE TRAVELING EAST ON 14th STREET IN THE LEFT LANE, IF THERE IS A LEFT URNING VEHICLE, THAT REDUCES THE THROUGH LANES TO ONE LANE. CARS BEHIND THE TURNING VEHICLE MUST WAIT OR MERGE TO THE RIGHT. AND THE SAME THING HAPPENS WESTBOUND AT K AVENUE. THE RIGHT LANE CAN CONTINUE THROUGH BUT THE LEFT LANE IS SHARED WITH LEFT-TUING VECLES. ANY TURNING VEHICLES CAN CREATE DELAYS FOR VEHICLES STACKED BEHIND THAT VEHICLE. DESPITE THERE BEING FOUR LANES IN THIS SECTION, IT'S ESSENTIALLY FUNCTIONING AS JUST TWO THROUGH LANES IN THE OUTER LANES AND TWO INNER TURN LANES. AND SO THIS SLIDE ILLUSTRATES THE PROPOSED STREET DESIGN CHANGE FOR 14th IN THIS AREA STARTING FROM THE CURVE AT THE DART TRACKS. THE EASTBOUND THROUGH LANE WOULD BECOME A RIGHT-TURN LANE FOR J AVENUE. AND THROUGH TRIPS WILL CONTINUE IN T SINGLE THROUGH LANE. THIS TRAFFIC PATTERN WOULD CAN'T EASTBOUND WITH DEDICATED TURN LANES AT K AVENUE AND MUNICIPAL TO SEPARATE OUT THE TURNING VEHICLES. AND THEN THE SAME TRAVEL PATTERN WOULD OCCUR WITH WESTBOUND TRIPS. DEDICATED TURN LANES AT THE INTERSECTIONS WITH A SINGLE CONTINUOUS THROUGH TRAVEL LANE. AND THEN THIS SLIDE ILLUSTRATES A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE EXISTING FOUR-LANE SECTION AND THE PROPOSED THREE-LANE SECTION AND HOW THIS ACCOMMODATES THE SAME INTENDED TRAFF PATTERN BUT FREES UP STREET SPACE. AND THEN SOME OF THE ANALYSIS SUMMARY FOR 14th STREET. TRAFFIC VOLUMES DO NOT WARRANT TWO LANES IN EACH DIRECTION. THE EXISTING CAPACITY OF THE ROAD IS MORE THAN THE DEMAND WE SEE DURING THE PEAKS. THE PROPOSED DESIGN CHANGE OPERATES FUNCTIONALLY THE SAME AS EXISTING CONDITIONS. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND COMFORT IS IMPROVED BY NARROWING THE INTERSECTIONS. AND MORE SPACE IS PROVIDED FOR STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS. SPECIFICALLY FOR 14th STREET EAST OF MUNICIPAL, THREE CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN RESPONSE TO CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC FLOW IN THIS PORTION OF 14th STREET. ALL CROSS SECTION OPTIONS ARE DESIGNED TO WORK IN THE SAME RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH SO THE BEST OPTION CAN BE SELECTED LATER FOLLOWING AN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC STUDY. NOW I'LL TOUCH ON THE FUTURE STREET CONNECTIONS IDENTIFIED ON THE DOWNTOWN PLAN INSET. THE PROPOSED DOWNTOWN STREETS PLAN INCLUDES FUTURE EXTENSIONS OF F AVENUE, 12th PLACE, 13th STREET, O AVENUE AND P AVENUE. THESE ARE INTENDED TO REINFORCE THE STRT GRID BY INCREASING WALKABILITY AND CREATING NEW STREET FRONTAGE OPPORTUNITIES TO DOWNTOWN'S GROWTH AND REDEVELOPMENT. THEY ARE GENERALLY ALIGNED WITH EXISTING STREETS WHERE POSSIBLE AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH SHORTER BLOCK LENGTH REQUIREMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED AREAS IN THE ORDINANCE. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH PAST PLANNING PROCESSES. SOME PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF SHOWING THESE FUTURE CONNECTIONS ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP. THE NEED AND BENEFIT OF THE CONNECTIONS ARE NOT WIDELY DISPUTED BUT IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED ABT IMCTS ON LONG-TERM LEASING AND FINANCING OF AFFECTED PROPERTIES. THE TIMING OF THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUNDING AND CONSTRUCTING THE ROADWAYS. IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED THAT THE CITY SHOULD COMMIT TO ACQUIRING THE NECESSARY RIGHT OF WAY AND FUNDING THE STREETS. WITHOUT SUCH COMMITMENT THE FUTURE STREETS SHOULD BE REMOVED AS THEY WOULD RAISE TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE IMPACTED. WHILE VALID QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THE FUTURE STREETS MAY POSE, THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO PLAN FOR THE OVERALL COMMUNITY'S LONG-TERM REVING THE STREETS WOULD NOT NECESSARILY REMOVE [INDISCERNIBLE] IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WOULD STILL NEED TO BE MET FOR LARGE-SCALE REDEVELOPMENT. IF THE GREATER PUBLIC INTEREST IS SERVED BY INCREASING CONNECTIVITY DOWNTOWN, THE CITY SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT ITS FUTURE PLANS FOR INCLUDING THESE NEW STREET CONNECTIONS ON THE MAP AND EQUITABLE AND RELYING UPON ESTABLISHED CITY PROCEDURES AND PROTECTIONS UNDER THE LAW TO PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY INTERESTS. MOVING ON TO QUESTIONS ABOUT CITY VERSUS PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBILITIES. THIS HAS ALSOEEN RSED. IN RESPONSE, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE CHANGES INCLUDE COMMITMENT OF CITY TO REIMBURSE FOR RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS AND FUND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS TO COUPLET AND GATEWAY CORRIDOR WOULD BE DEFERRED TO FUTURE CIP PROJECTS AND SMALL-SCALE REDEVELOPMENTS SHOULD NOT TRIGGER STREET IMPROVEMENTS. THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OVERALL NOT SPECIFIC TO DOWNTOWN STREETS. THIS IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT AND COULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF UPCOMING ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATES. I'LL END WITH THE TIMING. IN THE SHORT-TERM, THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD RESULT IN RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION ON ALL STREETS AS REDEVELOPMENT OCCURS TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE C IP-DRIVEN IMPROVEMENT. WE'RE NOT LIMITING OURSELVES DOWN THE LINE BY NOT PLANNING FOR FUTURE CONDITIONS. RECONSTRUCTION WOULD OCCUR AT THE TIME OF REDEVELOPMENT. SIDEWALK AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE REQUIRED ON MAJOR STREETS. IN THE LONG TERM, MAJOR STREET REDESIGNED WOULD OCCUR AND NEED TO BE PROGRAMMED THROUGH THE CIP. THERE ARE NO IMMEDIATE OR SHORT-TERM PLANS TO RECONSTRUCT MAJOR ROADWAYS, AND ADDITIONAL STUDIES MAY BE NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE FINAL DESIGN. NOW I'LL TURN IT BACK TO JASON FOR THE CLOSING SUMMARY. >> THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS RESPOND DIRECTLY TO MULTIPLE COMPONENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MOVE FORWARD WITH ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY GOALS RELATED TO THE ROADWAY SYSTEM IN PLANO. YOU CAN SEE ON THE SLIDE, CORE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN THE STAFF REPORTS. AND ARE SUPPORTED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS ACTIONS IN THE GRAY BUBBLES BELOW. THE COMPREHENSIVE OVERALL OF THE CITY STREET DESIGN STANDARDS WAS A TWO-YEAR PROCESS THAT REQUIRED COLLABORATION ACROSS MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS. AS A BEST PRACTICE, STAFF PLANS TO MONITOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STANDARDS AND TO RETURN TO THE COMMISSION NEXT YEAR IN ORDER TO ASSESS POTENTIAL UPDATES AND CHANGES AS NECESSARY. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE AS SUBMITTED ITEMS 1A THROUGH 1D AND APPROVE ITEM 1E SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. A LOT OF MATERIAL. THANKFULLY, WE'VE SEEN THIS IN SECTIONS THROUGHOUT THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF. AND I THINK SOME OF IT WAS EVEN DISCUSSED WHEN WE BROKE INTO SUBCOMMITTEES AND EVALUATED WHICH WERE THE PRIORITIES, AND THIS WAS ONE OF THEM. SO, I APPRECIATE STAFF'S VERY THOROUGH WORK ON THIS AND THE OUTSIDE CONSULTANT. I APPRECIATE YOU HELPING US WITH YOUR INPUT ON ALL THESE ITEMS. SO DO WE HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS? MR. RATLIFF, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU CHAIRMAN. FIRST OF ALL, IMPRESSIVE BODY OF WORK. I'VE TRAVELED THE COUNTRY BUILDING THINGS AND I HOPE MORE CITIES WOULD HAVE A DOCUMENT LIKE THIS, BECAUSE IT LAYS OUT THE RULEBOOK. A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I JUST HAD QUICK FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS ON. FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S AN EXHIBIT IN THERE ABOUT CURB ACTIVATION. I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT BEFORE. IS THAT PART OF THIS NEW -- SOME OF THE NEW STANDARDS WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT ZONES OF CURB ACTIVATION? IT WAS VERY ENLIGHTENING TO ME. >> ANSWER THAT? >> I THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO SECTION 9 WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE MULTIMODAL? >> Ratliff: IT HAD ZONES FOR TRANSIT, ZONES FOR UBER, FOR PARKING, ZONES -- IT WAS COLOR CODED. IT WAS VERY EDUCATIONAL FOR ME. >> SECTION 14 I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE BEST PRACTICES ACROSS THE NATION, AS YOU TRAVEL AROUND. WHEN YOU HAVE CURBSIDE SPACE, SOME OF THE MOST VALUABLE SPACE IN SOME PLACES. IF YOU THINK OF LOADING, INTERFERES WITH UBER, WITH PARKING FOR THE RESIDENTS. IN SOME PLACES YOU MIGHT WANT TREES LIKE WHAT YOU SEE IN THE IMAGES. IT'S DEVELOPING A PLAN TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS OF WHATEVER THAT DEVELOPMENT IS. IT'S PROBABLY A RECENT BEST PRACTICE OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS. RELATIVELY NEW. >> Ratlff: THE REASON I ASK IS, COMING UP AND DOWN 15TH MULTIPLE TIMES DAILY, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT, ESPECIALLY THE AREBETWEEN A.R.T. AND H, I GUESS IT IS. A LOT OF DELIVERIES HAPPENING IN THAT CORRIDOR. A LOT OF TENANTS MOVING IN AND OUT. A LOT OF LOADING AND UNLOADING GOING ON THROUGH THERE. AND AS WE TALK ABOUT THAT STREET CROSS SECTION, I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO STUDY THAT ACTIVATION COMPONENT. SPECIFICALLY LOADING AND UNLOADING, FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, IN ADDITION TO THE PARKING PERSPECTIVE. BECAUSE I THINK THAT AND ALSO 14TH, PARTS OF 14TH HAVE THE SAME CHALLENGE. AND PARTS OF 16TH HAVE THE SAME CHALLENGE AS WELL, LOADING AND UNLOADING ARE A CONSTANT ISSUE ON THOSE CORRIDORS. SO -- BUT IT CERTAINLY OPENS UP THAT OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. THE GEOMETRIC STANDARDS -- I KNOW LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE, THEY HAVE EVOLVED SLIGHTLY FROM KIND OF WHAT'S BEEN TRADITIONAL, AT LEAST IN MY EXPERIENCE. WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU SAY -- WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS THAT MIGHT HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEY DIDN'T SEEM LIKE MAJOR DEVIATIONS FROM WHAT'S BEEN BUILTOR THE LAS HOWEVER MANY YEARS. ARE THERE SPECIFIC DEVIATIONS IN GEOMETRIC STANDARDS, INTERSECTION SIZES, ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD SINGLE OUT AS A MAJOR CHANGE IN GEOMETRIC? >> HOLISTICALLY, THEY'RE NOT MAJOR CHANGES. IT'S MORE ABOUT LOOKING AT THE CONTEXT, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE CONTEXT, YOU WANT DIFFERENT SPEEDS. MOST OF THE CHANGES, LOOKING AT THE SPEED AND DESIGN. THERE'S SOME MINOR CHANGES S THE NATIONAL GUIDE HAS EVOLVED, BUT HOLISTICALLY, IT KIND OF GOES DOWN TO WHAT SPEED AND WHAT CONTEXT THE LAND USE IS AROUND THERE. SO, JUST THE LITTLE TWEAKS CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. >> Ratliff: I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING MAJOR. THAT'S PROBABLY WHY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. FINALLY, A QUESTION ABOUT THE SHY ZONES, WHICH IS A TERM I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN SOME PREVIOUS MEETINGS. JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING, SO THE SHY ZONES ARE AREAS YOU CAN PROTRUDE INTO THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE SETBACK FOR PATIOS AND STOOPS AND ALL THAT. IS THERE ANY GUIDELINES ON THAT Y ZONE CAN BE USED? IS IT A 50% KIND OF BALLPARK IDEA OF HOW MUCH OF THAT SHY DZONE CAN BE USED? YOU DON'T WANT SOMEBODY BUILDING TO THE LINE AND THROUGH THE SHY ZONE. IS THERE ANY BEST PRACTICES ON SHY ZONE UTILIZATION AT THE GROUND LEVEL? >> I'M NOT AWARE. YOU'RE ASKING -- WITHIN THAT SHY ZONE DEDICATED SPACE, HOW MUCH OF THAT SPACE COULD BE FOR DOORS OPENING, AWNINGS, PATIO SEATING? >> Ratliff: AS OPPOSED TO LANDSCAPING, SOMETHING SOFTER. OBVIOUSLY AT THE HIGHER LEVELS YOU'RE HANGING OVER, BUT AS A PEDESTRIAN, THAT'S INTENDED TO PROVIDE SOME ARTICULATION AND SOME CHARACTER AT THE GROUND LEVEL. ARE THERE ANY GUIDELINES? IS THAT A 25, 50, 75% UTILIZATION? >> 50%. >> Ratliff: 50 IS A STANDARD PRACTICE, OR IS THAT IN THE ORDINANCE? >> IN THE ORDINANCE, 50%. >> Ratliff: OKAY. I DID NOT READ EVERY WORD. I MUST HAVE MISSED THAT ONE. I WILL BE THE FIRST TO CONFESS. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE FIRST QUESTION - -- I HAVE TWO. FIRST -- BEFORE THAT, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION, EVERYBODY. I THINK THAT WAS WONDERFUL AND LIKE I SAID MANY TIMES BEFORE, THAT I LOVE THE COLORS AND THE FRIENDLINESS OF THE PRESENTATION AND THE DIFFERENT COLORS ARE EASY FOR PEOPLE TO READ. THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, I THINK TO A LOT OF OUR CITIZENS. SO, THANK YOU FOR THAT. MY FIRST QUESTION IS REGARDING MAYBE FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, BECAUSE THINK ABOUT NOW. WE'RE REWRITING OR AMENDING OUR ORDINANCE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED MAYBE 15 YEARS AGO. SO MAYBE THE NEXT TIME WE DO THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE ANOTHER DOZEN YEARS LATER. BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, THERE COULD BE NO-MAN CARS, OR DRONES ALL OVER THE PLACE. IS THERE ANY THOUGHTS OR DESN REIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE CONSIDERED INTO OUR STREETS OR OUR ORDINANCE NOW TO ACCOMMODATE LIKE A CAR THAT NOBODY IS DRIVING, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >> THE STANDARDS DON'T SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS FUTURE TRANSPORTATION MODES. IT DOES INCORPORATE KIND OF STANDARD PRACTICES FOR TRANSIT THAT'S EXISTING NOW. AND WITH THE CURBSIDE FLEX ZONE, IT DOES HAVE SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY. BUT I THINK AS A TECHNOLOGY ARRIVES, WE'LL COME BACK AND DISCUSS IF WE NEED TO CHANGE ANYTHING, OR UPDATE. >> TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING MANAGER BRIAN. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT REALLY THE PLACE TO DISCUSS AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES. WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT, WHERE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES ARE PREVALENT, WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE ONE MAJOR CHANGE. WE'RE GOING T HAVE TO GO FROM BUTTONS TO STRIPES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES TRIGGER ON. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE ALL THE SIGNING IS UPDATED APPROPRIATELY. THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DOCUMENT OUTSIDE OF THIS DOCUMENT. >> Tong: THANK YOU. GREAT. MY SECOND QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY VERY RELATED OR SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF SAID REGARDING DOWNTOWN STREETS AND PARKING. I WAS HAPPY TO HEAR ANOTHER PERSON WHO WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAME THING THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, IS THE INTERSECTION OF THAT D.A.R.T. LINE AND 15TH STREET. YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE CHANGED THE TURN LANE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN TURN INTO THE MCCALL PLAZA, OR DOWN THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN AREA. MY CONCERN -- I THINK I RAISED THIS QUESTION A COUPLE MEETINS BEFORE REGARDING THE PARKING AREAS AND COMMISSIONER RATLIFF ALSO MENTIONED THE UNLOADING AREAS. THAT WHEN A PARKING SPOT OPENED UP, PEOPLE WILL STOP SUDDENLY THROUGH TRAFFIC. BUT THE PEOPLE BEHIND IT USUALLY WITH DRIVING, YOU EXPECT TRAFFIC TO FLOW WHEN YOU DON'T SEE TRAFFIC LIGHT, RIGHT. BUT WHEN PEOPLE STOP SUDDENLY, LIKE THREE CARS IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHY. HOWEVER, YOU'RE STUCK ON THAT LINE. SO, I WONDER IF THERE'S ANY ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE PUT INTO THE NEW DOCUMENT THAT WILL HAVE SOME KIND OF LANGUAGE TO PROTECT THE RAILWAY AREA, YOU KNOW. IF THERE'S A RAILWAY AND THERE'S AN INTERSECTION, THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY PARKING ALLOWED OR ANY STOPPING ALLOWED IN CERTAIN FEET WITHIN THAT RAIL LINE, BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE NO OTHER -- THEY CAN'T HELP IT. THEY'RE STUCK THERE. SO THAT'S A VERY -- VERY CONCERNING TO ME. >> THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS SET OUT REQUIREMENTS TO PREVENT A SITUATION LIKE A CAR STOPPING ON THEDO THE D.A.R.T. LINE, BUTT WOULD BE A CITATION FOR THAT INSTANCE TO NOT PARK OR STOP ON THE D.A.R.T. LINE. >> Tong: WILL THERE BE ELEMENTS THAT AVOID THAT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE? >> WELL, FOR A D.A.R.T. -- SO A CAR STOPPING ON D.A.R.T. -- THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED ANYWAY. IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. I'M SURE THERE'S THINGS THAT WE COULD DO TO HELP PREVENT THAT, SIGNAGE, SOUNDS, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT I WOULD THINK WOULD BE PART OF THE PROCESS. THAT'S IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE D.A.R.T. RAIL AND QUEUING THAT CAN HAPPEN AROUND ANY D.A.R.T. LINE. >> Chair Downs: WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO ASK THAT SOMETHING BE PUT THERE THAT SAID BE PREPARED TO STOP, TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF YOU MAY STOP SUDDENLY, ANYTHING THAT GIVES PEOPLE AN ALERT? BECAUS I'M COMETEL FAMILIAR WITH WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT. I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN NUMEROUS TIMES. YOU'RE ANXIOUS FOR A DOWNTOWN SPOT TO PARK AND YOU SEE SOMEBODY GET IN THEIR CAR SO YOU STOP. AND THE TRAFFIC BUILDS UP BEHIND YOU AND SOMEBODY WASN'T EXPECTING THE CAR IN FRONT OF THEM TO STOP BECAUSE THERE'S NO LIGHT, THEY CAN SEE. SO YOU'RE RIGHT ON THE CAR BEHIND YOU. YOU DON'T EVEN THING, GOING OVER A D.A.R.T. RAIL. SO, I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE TO FIGURE THAT OUT. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WOULD ADDRESS IN THIS ORDINANCE, BUT IT IS MAYBE A TRAFFIC ISSUE. >> ONE THING THAT I THOUGHT OF THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL -- SO THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT -- FOR CITYWIDE, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE CLEARER GUIDELINES IN WHEN A SITUATION ARISES WHERE CITIZENS ARE NOTICING UNSAFE VEHICLE -- THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO NOTIFY THE CITY. THE CITY WOULD BE, YOU KNOW -- KNOW ABOUT IT AND BE ABLE TO INVESTIGATE AND FIND A SOLUTION. SO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROCESS, THERE WOULD BE A SOLUTION IN THAT CASE. >> Tong: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, THANK YOU. I HAVE TO ECHO, IT'S AN IMPRESSIVE DOCUMENT. A LOT OF IT IS LAYERED IN TOGETHER, WHICH MAKES IT COMPLEX. KUDOS TO YOU GUYS FOR PUTTING IT TOGETHER. I'VE GOT A FEW QUESTIONS. ONE OF THEM I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT ANTICIPATE FUTURE NEEDS. BUT THIS DOES TALK ABOUT PARKING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I'M NOT SURE I AGREE, BECAUSE I THINK PARKING NEEDS COULD CHANGE TREMENDOUSLY AS OWNED VEHICLES CHANGE AND AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES BECOME MORE IMPORTANT. FLYING VEHICLES AND CERTAINLY THAT'S BEYOND WHERE WE ARE NOW. BUT I DO THINK THE PARKING ISSUE COULD BE PART OF IT. I SEE IT DIFFERENTLY. I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. TO THAT END, ONE OF THE THINGS THIS TALKS A LOT ABOUT IS IMPROVING FLOW AND REDUCING GRIDLOCK. OKING AT INCREASED DENSITY INENT DOWNTOWN PLANO AND THE AREAS AROUND IT AND WHAT THAT DOES? AS WE START TO GO DOWN THIS PATH, LET'S ASSUME WE ADOPT ALL THIS AND REDUCE THE LANES THAT WE HAVE. AS WE INCREASINGLY SEE MORE REQUESTS FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AROUND DOWNTOWN PLANO, THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD REASONS FOR THAT. SO, HOW MUCH DID YOU, IF AT ALL, BAKE THAT INTO WHAT YOU DID, THE POTENTIAL FOR FAIRLY SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED HOUSING AROUND THIS AREA IN DOWNTOWN PLANO? >> SO MY ANSWE FOR THIS QUESTION -- SO SECTION 2 REALLY INCORPORATES A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY. THERE'S FLEXIBILITY IN THE STREET DESIGNS NOW FOR AREAS WHERE WE MIGHT WANT TO UTILIZE SPACE DIFFERENTLY WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO, AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS, I'M THINKING OF THE CORNER AND SOME OF THE MIXED USE, ALLOWING ON-STREET PARKING IN AREAS OR ANOTHER LANE. SO THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE. AND THEY ALSO LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING LAND USES IN SOME OF THE ARE WE WOULD EXPECT INCREASED DENSITY. BUT I WILL SAY THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS FOCUSED ON THE ROADWAY NETWORK ITSELF, BUT ALSO THE LAND USE THAT COULD COME IN THE FUTURE. >> Cary: I KNOW THAT'S HARD TO TTRIANGULATE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. THERE'S A LOT OF WONDERFUL THINGS IN HERE. I LIKE THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. I'M A BIG FAN OF BIKES. WHEREVER WE CAN INCREASE BIKING SAFELY I THINK IS A GAT THING. BUT I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HOW RAPIDLY WE WOULD IMPLEMENT A LOT OF THIS. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT -- ESPECIALLY DOWNTOWN PLANO AND WHAT SOME OF THESE CHANGES MIGHT DO TO THE CHARACTER OF DOWNTOWN PLANO AND HOW FAST SOME OF THOSE THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT SPECIFICALLY MAYBE 13TH STREET AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. AND A LOT OF IT MAKES SENSE. I WONDER IF SOME OF THE COSTS THAT WE MIGHT ULTIMATELY INCUR MAY BE WORTH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. AND FINALLY, I WONDER AS WE LOOK AT THIS -- IT'S A FAIRLY AMBITIOUS PROJECT, I THINK. AS WE LOOK AT THAT, WHAT THE COSTS MIGHT BE AND WHAT IN A MIGHT STALL US OUT IN TERMS OF AVAILABLE REVENUES OR TAX BASE TO DO OTHER THINGS. WITH THAT SAID, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT STUFF IN HERE. SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: I ECHO SOME OF THE THINGS COMMISSIONER CARY -- THINKING ON T RETURON INVESTMENT, HOW DOES THIS HELP ENHANCE DOWNTOWN. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY AND WITH THE CAVEAT THAT -- TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IN MY LIFE, HOW DID WE MODEL THAT THE CHANGES WE ARE PROPOSING WITH THE RIGHT TURN LANES AND WHAT HAVE YOU -- DID WE RUN THROUGH SCENARIO MODELING OR THOUGHTS THAT PROVED THAT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY -- INTUITIVELY, GNG FROM TWO TO ONE LANE MAKES IT SEEM LIKE THAT INCREASES TRAFFIC. CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH THE PROCESS HOW WE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THOSE CHANGES WOULD HAVE MINIMAL IMPACT, OR ACTUALLY WOULD IMPROVE TRAFFIC IN THOSE AREAS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT? >> DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC LOCATION YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT, OR JUST A GENERAL QUESTION? >> Olley: GENERAL QUESTION. THE -- DEDICATING THE RIGHT TURN LANE A LITTLE BIT EARLIER, I BELIEVE IT WAS THROUGH K OR 15TH. GENERALLY, HOW DO WE APPROACH MAKING THAT DEDUCTION THAT WE ARE REDUCING LANES? I UNDERSTAND THE TURN LANE BEING MUCH LONGER, IT CREATES A LITTLE BIT OF A ONE-WAY WHILE EVERYBODY ELSE IS STOPPING BEHIND THE PERSON TURNING. BUT WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR MODELING THAT OUT, WHAT'S THE PROOF, SO TO SPEAK? >> SO WE DO HAVE MODELS FOR PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE CITY AT THIS POINT, ANY ROADWAY WITH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS, WE HAVE A DETAILED MODEL WITH TRAFFIC VOLUMES, THE LANE ASSIGNMENTS AND WHATNOT. SO I ASKED THE QUESTION IS IT A SPECIFIC LOCATION OR WAS IT A GENERAL LOCATION. ANYTIME THAT YOU ADD IN A RIGHT TURN LANE OR A LEFT TURN LANE INTO AN INTERSECTION YOU'RE INCREASING THE CAPACITY OF THE INTERSECTION. AND YOU ARE REDUCING THE CONFLICTS THAT POTENTIALLY OCCUR BETWEEN A THROUGH VEHICLE AND A RIGHT TURN VEHICLE. SO YOU'RE INCREASING THE SAFETY. THE SAME THING IF YOU'RE ADDING IN A LEFT TURN LANE. THERE ARE MANY LOCATIO RIG NOW WHERE WE HAVE LEFT TURN LANES THAT SPILL BACK INTO THE THROUGH LANES. AND AT THOSE LOCATIONS IT'S BLOCKING YOUR THROUGH LANE. INSTEAD OF THREE THROUGH LANES, WE HAVE TWO. WHEN YOU INCREASE THE LEFT TURN LANE OR YOU ADD IN A RIGHT TURN LANE, IT'S INCREASING THE CAPACITY. AND IT'S IMPROVING THE SAFETY. >> Olley: SO THE MODELING FOR THE CITY -- IS IT A COMPUTER PROGRAM? >> IT IS A COMPUTER PROGRAM CALLED SYNCRO THAT WE CAN SHOW SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS IN FUEL CONSUMPTION, EMISSIONS, WHEN WE ADD THESE EXTRA LANES. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. RATLIFF? >> Ratliff: JUST A FOLLOWUP QUESTION. BACK TO WHAT I SAID ON 15TH. I FORGOT TO MENTION THE AREA ON 14TH SPECIFICALLY BETWEEN J AND K. AGAIN, I THINK IT'S -- I JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO STUDY THAT. IT'S A RARE DAY THERE'S NOT A TRUCK UNLOADING, EITHER SOMEBODY MOVING IN AN APARTMENT OR SOMEBODY SERVING ONE OF THOSE BUSINESSES. JUST FEELS A LITTLE SHORT TO ME. I KNOW YOU'LL DO A DETAILED DESIGN BEFORE YOU STRIPE ANYTHING, SO I TRUST THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL DRAWING. BUT I THINK ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS ALL THE NEEDS OF THAT CORRIDOR, NOT JUST PARKING, BUT LOADING AND UNLOADING ETC. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND. ONE OF THE CHANGES IN HERE, I THINK IT SUGGESTS THAT ANYTIME THERE'S A ZONING CHANGE WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. DID I READ THAT CORRECTLY, OR AM I IN ERROR WITH THAT? >> SO THE ONE REQUIREMENT FOR PRETTY MUCH ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT -- IT'S CALLED A TRAFFIC TRIP GENERATION REPORT. AND IT IS LITERALLY A 15-MINUTE EXERCISE. AND IT IS A ONE TABLE, IT TAKES 15 MINUTES TO GENERATE. IT'S NOT A REPORT. IT'S DONE VERY QUICKLY. FOR SOME OF THE SMALLER DEVELOPMENTS, WE WILL ACTUALLY -- STAFF WILL BE DOING THOSE. AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE IN THE PREDEVELOPMENT PROCESS WHEN THE APPLICANT COMES IN, THEY'RE GOING TO LET US KNOW AHEAD OF TIME W WHAT THE LAND USE IS AND THE SIZE OF LAND USE. AND ON THE SMALLER ONES WE'LL JUST GENERATE THIS REPORT OR THE TABLE. IT DOESN'T TAKE US VERY LONG TO DO THAT. WE HAVE THE TOOLS TO DO THAT, THE SOFTWARE TO DO THAT. AND THAT PREDEVELOPMENT MEETING WILL DETERMINE WHETHER A MORE DETAILED TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY IS REQUIRED. >> Cary: OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT, BECAUSE THE CONCERN WAS OBVIOUS. ON SOMETHING THAT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF IMPACT, WHAT KIND OF COST WOULD THAT INCUR. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE WAY IN FRONT OF THAT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANYMORE LIGHTS ON -- MR. BELL. >> I WANT TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION. I DID MISSPEAK. THE 50% LIMITATION IS TO BUILDING ARTICULATION COMING INTO THAT SHY ZONE. PAO DINING OR PORCHES ORBER OF THINGS LIKE THAT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK ONE POINT THAT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT I HAD ALSO CONSIDERED WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE IS NEW DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN. WE ARE EXPECTING MORE. WHEN I SAY DOWNTOWN, SOMETIMES WE GET CAUGHT UP IN THINKING 15TH STREET AND MUNICIPAL AND K, BUT REALLY IT EXTENDS QUITE A BIT SOUTH OF THERE. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE HOPING TO ACHIEVE HERE WITH THIS IS NOT TO TURN 15TH AND 14TH INTO A THOROUGHFARE AND WEE WANTING TO MAKE IT MORE OF A WALKABLE COMMUNITY BUT IMPROVE THE FLOW-THROUGH OF VEHICLES THAT ARE GOING THERE. AM I CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: SO WEAR GOING WG FROM -- THE CAPACITY IS A THOUSAND CARS AND THE PEAK DEMAND ON 15TH WAS 375 AND ON 14TH WAS 600. THAT WAS PEAK DEMAND, RIGHT? AND BY REDUCING THIS TO ONE LANE FLOW-THROUGH, WHAT DOES THAT DO? DOES IT TAKE US FROM A THOUSAND TO 600? NO, IT STAYS AT A THOUSAND, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE AN EASIER FLOW-THROUGH. >> WELL, SOMETHING THAT HASN'T REALLY BEEN DISCUSSED YET, BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT 15TH. SO, 15TH AND G IS THE ONLY SIGNAL BETWEEN 75 AND THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS, RIGHT. SO EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT. VISUALIZE THAT PARTICULAR INTERSECTION IN THE EASTBOUND YOU HAVE A SHARED LEFT THROUGH, A THROUGH, AND A RIGHT. ALL THE OTHER APPROACHES TO THAT INTERSECTION ARE TWO LANES. IT IS LITERALLY OUR MOST INEFFICIENT OPERATED INTERSECTION IN THE ENTIRE CITY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO SEQUENTIALLY TIME THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. AND IF YOU RECALL, IT'S IN A COUNTER-CLOCKWISE MOVEMENT -- EASTBOUND, THEN NORTHBOUND, THEN WESTBOUND, THEN SOUTHBOUND. IT ACTUALLY SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES THE SAFETY OF THE INTERSECTION AND OUR THROUGHPUT FOR THE INTERSECTION IF WE WERE TO GO TO ONE LANE WHERE WE COULD HAVE EAST AND WESTBOUND LEFT TURN LANES THAT CAN OPERATE SIMULTANEOUSLY, OR THE EAST-WEST OPERATE SIMULTANEOUSLY. SO, ANY EXTRA TIME THAT I MIGHT HAVE I CAN GIVE TO [ INDISCERNIBLE ]. WHEN YOU HEAR YOU'RE REMOVING A LANE, IT'S GOING TO BLOW UP THE INTERSECTION, IT'S THE OPPOSITE. IT'S THE ONLY INTERSECTION IN THE CITY WHERE REMOVING A LANE WOULD CREATE AN IMPROVEMENT AT THE LOCATION. >> Chair Downs: AND YOU'RE GETTING THERE KIND OF, BUT YOU'RE SAYING CURRENTLY WITH TWO LANES, IT HAS A THOUSAND PER HOUR, WHA YOUR MEASUREMENT. WE'RE TAKING IT TO ONE LANE. ARE YOU TELLING ME EVEN THOUGH DEMAND IS 375, BECAUSE WE'VE 15TH THAT NOW THE THROUGHPUT IS 2,000 AN HOUR? ARE WE INCREASING THE FLOW? >> NO. WE'RE NOT INCREASING THE FLOW. IT'S STILL A THOUSAND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> BUT -- YES, THE SIGNAL TIMING WOULD ALLOW ME TO HAVE MORE TIME FOR THE EAST-WEST. SO THE THROUGHPUT WOULD CHANGE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER, BUT IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY CHANGE. >> Chair Downs: SO IT DOES ALLOW MORE TRAFFIC THROUGH EVEN IF WE'RE NOT TRYING TO, BUT IT SHOULD BE A SAFER F FLOW. >> THAT SIGNAL IS NOT COORDINATED WITH ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. I CAN COORDINATE THAT WITH U.S. 75 IF I CAN TAKE THOSE LEFT TURNS AND HAVE SEPARATE LANES FOR THOSE. >> Chair Downs: IF WE CAN COORDINATE D.A.R.T. TRAINS WITH THE SIGNAL WITH 75, THEN WE'RE ALL OKAY. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, GUYS. GREAT PRESENTATION. A TON OF INFORMATION. AND WELL-PRESENTED. LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAVE TWO OR TH THREE SPEAKER. >> JAMES RUSSELL, AND IF KENNETH WYATT COULD TAKE A SEAT, AND PHYLLIS JERRA. >> Chair Downs: HELLO. >> HOW ARE YOU DOING? COME TO SPEAK TO YOU GUYS TONIGHT ABOUT THE DOWNTOWN PART OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, SECTION 1A AND 1E, SPECIFICALLY THE SECTION EAST OF G AND WEST OF THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS. THE PROPOSAL WAS TO PRODUCE THE LANE -- REDUCE THE LANE FROM THE FOUR TO THREE. ONE LANE GOING EAST, ONE LANE GOING WEST, WITH A TURN LANE CALLED A SUICIDE LANE IN THE MID. ABOUT 20-25 YEARS AGO WE HAD THE SAME CONFIGURATION DOWN THERE. WE HAD NUMEROUS ACCIDENTS, HEAD HEAD-ON COLLISIONS. THE TRAFFIC AT THE LIGHT AT 15TH STREET AND AVENUE K BACKED UP ALMOST ALL THE WAY TO AVENUE G. WE ALSO HAD 12-15 VACANT BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN, BECAUSE WHEN THE TRAFFIC BACKS UP, PEOPLE AVOID THE AREA. WHAT THOSE OUTSIDE LANES DO IS FUNNEL THAT TRAFFIC AND THIN IT WNO WHERE WHEN IT GETS TO DOWNTOWN YOU HAVE A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF WAIT TIME. I WORKED WITH MR. BEAUTIFULLEN E TRAFFIC ENGINEER, AND THE HEAD ENGINEER, AND FRANK TURNER, THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. AND WE WORKED TOGETHER TO WIDEN THAT AREA DOWN THERE BELOW THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS. AND WE INCREASED THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC. WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE TRAFFIC THROUGH. IT'S SAFER. AND I'VE NEVER SEEN A PLACE IN ANY TOWN WHERE YOU REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC GOING BY A BUSINESS AND INCREASE THE BUSINESS. NOW, GUYS, I HEAR PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN. YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT 15TH STREET. WE HAVE AN 18-FOOT GRADE FROM AVENUE K DOWN TO THE POLICE STATION. THAT'S WHY WE NEVER GOT A PARKING GARAGE DOWN THERE. PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO WALK UP A LONG TIME, ESPECIALLY IN 106° WEATHER, OR 35° WEATHER. BEEN DOWN THERE SINCE I WAS SEVEN YEARS OLD LOOKING OUT THAT FRONT WINDOW. SO I KIND OF KNOW WHAT WILL AND WILL NOT WORK. AND I DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO GO BACK TO A PLAN THAT'S ALREADY FAILED ONCE, AS THIS ONE DID 25 YEARS AGO. THAT'S MY INPUT. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, SIR. >> KENNETH -- I'M SORRY, KENNETH HYATT. >> HI. MY NAME IS KEN HYATT. FORGIVE ME, I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER. I'M ALSO NOT A PUBLIC SPEAKER, SO I'LL DO THE BEST I CAN. MY FAMILY AND I HAVE OWNED VILLAGE GREEN LANDSCAPE FOR 43 YEARS. AND WE MOVED TO DOWNTOWN PLANO 23 YEARS AGO. WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY ON 1316J AVENUE. THAT IS OUR ONE AND ONLY INVESTMENT PROPERTY. WE ARE NOT DEVELOPERS. THE PLANS FOR 14TH STREET, 13TH STREET, 12TH STREET, J PLACE -- THESE AREN'T THEORIES FOR US. AND FOR ME AND MY FAMILY. THESE PLANS ARE LIKELY TO PREVENT US FROM BEING ABLE TO OPERATE OUR BUSINESS THERE. THEY'RE GOING TO REDUCE THE VALUE OF OUR FAMILY'S ONLY INVESTMENT PROPERTY. AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE, IN MY OPINION, NOT AN ENGINEER, MAKE TRAVELING THE AREA EVEN MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT IS NOW. THE ISSUES I SEE WITH 14TH STREET IS THAT TRAVELING EAST-WEST IS ALREADY DIFFICULT. IT SEEMS LIKE REDUCING THE LANES WOULD MAKE IT EVEN MORE DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY FOR US TO GET IN AND OUT OF OUR BUSINESS. IT'S A MAJOR EXIT FOR OUR COMPANY'S VEHICLES. J PLACE, WHICH IS THE ALLEY OF J AVENUE, THAT'S OUR ONLY EXIT OUT OF OUR PROPERTY. AND AT THIS POINT, THE CONSIDERATIONS CONVERT THAT TO A STREET AND A WALKWAY. THE CONSTRUCTION ALONE WILL PROBABLY SHUTUR BUSINESOWN. AND THEN ONCE IT'S OPENED UP IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR US TO OPERATE OUR BUSINESS, I BELIEVE. THEN THE 12TH STREET AND 13TH STREET EXTENSIONS -- OUR PROPERTY IS ATTRACTIVE BECAUSE IT CAN BE COMBINED WITH OTHER PROPERTIES. THIS IS THE VALUE THAT AT SOME POINT WE WILL REAP OUT OF BEING THERE FOR 20 PLUS YEARS IS TO BE ABLE TO SELL IT. AND THE BEST VALUE IS TO COMBINE IT WITH OTHER LOTS. 13TH STREET ESPECIALLY WILL RUN WITHIN ABOUT 20 FEET OF OUR FENCE LINE AND ESSTIALLY IMINATEUR ABILITY TO COMBINE WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY. AS I SAID, I'M A LONGTIME PLANO BUSINESS OWNER, MY FAMILY AND I ARE. AND I ALSO AM A HOMEOWNER JUST WEST OF THE AREA. I DO WANT TO SEE A THRIVING DOWNTOWN PLANO. IT'S A BENEFIT TO ME AS A HOMEOWNER AND A BUSINESS BOTH. I DON'T SEE HOW THIS PLAN ACCOMPLISHES THAT. IT PROBABLY BENEFITS SOME PEOPLE, I GUESS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT FOR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS LIKE ME, THAT THE PLAN LOOKS TO ME LIKET'S GOING TO MAKE TRAVELING DOWNTOWN EVEN HARDER. IT'S GOING TO MAKE MY BUSINESS MUCH HARDER TO OPERATE IN THIS AREA, POSSIBLY IMPOSSIBLE. AND IT WILL ABSOLUTELY REDUCE THE VALUE OF OUR ONLY INVESTMENT PROPERTY. SO I'D JUST LIKE FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE ON ALL OF THESE SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS THAT ARE LIKE ME THAT ONLY HAVE THE ONE PROPERTY DOWN THERE. SO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> NEXT, WE HAVE PHYLLIS GERALD. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M PHYLLIS WITH CITY CENTRIC PLANNING, I REPRESENT GRECO PROPERTIES. THESE COMPANIES HAVE CONSTRUCTION UNDER WAY IN DOWNTOWN PLANO FOR TOWNHOUSES AND APARTMENTS. AND I HAVE FOLLOWED THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FROM THE START WHEN THEY REALLY STARTED OUT AS HOW ARE WE GOING TO MEASURE SETBACKS IN DOWNTOWN. AND THAT WAS MY INITIAL CONCERN AND REMAINS MY CONCERN IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT THAT CHANGING -- CHANGE THAT MEASUREMENT HAS IN MAKING EXISTING BUILDINGS NONCONFORMING IN TERMS OF SETBACKS. I HAVE HAD AN EMAIL IN YOUR PACKET THAT OUTLINED A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF HOW CHANGING THE MEASUREMENT WOULD IMPACT MY CLIENTS' PROPERTIES. ONE IS THE CHURCH CHAPEL AT THE FORMER FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH PROPERTY. CHANGING THE MEASUREMENTS WOULD MAKE ONE WING OF THAT BUILDING TOO CLOSE, ONE WING OF IT TOO FAR AWAY FROM THETREETS. AND, OF COURSE, NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS CREATE PROBLEMS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS IN TERMS OF DUE DILIGENCE AND INSURANCE AND LENDING AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS THAT MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO MANAGE AND TRANSFER PROPERTIES. I WANTED TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR PATIENCE AND ASSISTANCE. I'VE PEPPERED THEM WITH QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS, AND EVEN AS LATE AS FRIDAY WE WERE STILL HAVING SOME CORRESPONDENCE ON SOME PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE NONCONFORMING ISSUES THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT. AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND CONFIRM WITH STAFF THAT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FRIDAY AFTERNOON WILL BE PART OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE RECOMMENDING TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PART OF ANY EMOTIONN THAT YOU MAKE TONIGHT. THEY DO ADDRESS MY CONCERNS, BUT I THINK GIVEN THAT THIS IS EVOLVING LANGUAGE UP UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE, ESSENTIALLY, THAT IT REALLY -- I WOULD HOPE THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD TAKE YOUR TIME TO STUDY THESE CHANGES, THE IMPACT THAT THEY DO HAVE ON PROPERTIES, AND NOT RUSH THESE CHANGES THROUGH. I KNOW EVERYONE'S PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO IT, BUT IT COULD PROBABLY USE A LITTLE MORE TIME. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND I THINK I HAD A QUESTION THAT CAME UP EARLIER AND I THINK MR. BELL, YOU AND I HAD A DISCUSSION AROUND MAKING SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND TEAR UP THE STREETS AND THE CITY'S NOT GOING TO GO THIS AND DRIVE THIS. IT'S NOT -- THERE'S NO TIMETABLE. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THIS DONE NEXT YEAR OR TWO YEARS FROM NOW OR FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. BUT IT DOES GIVE US A BASELINE TO WORK FOR SO THAT AS WE'RE MAKING CHANGES, AS CHANGES ARE BEING PROPOSED BY ANYONE THAT'S WANTING TO DO A DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE A BASIS TO WORK FROM. IS THAT ACCURATE? >> THAT'S ACCURATE. >> Chair Downs: I CAN UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN ABOUT 13TH STREET. I APPRECIATE YOU COMING DOWN AND SHARING YOUR CONCERNS. I MEAN, I GET THAT. I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE CITY, THOUGH, TO BE TRANSPARENT IN THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE THAT AS A THROUGH STREET SO THAT ANYONE LOOKING TO CONSOLIDATE KNOWS WHAT'S BEING CONSIDERED BY THE CITY. IT'S POSSIBLE THAT IN THE FUTURE, IT WON'T GO THROUGH. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THERE TO BE KNOWLEDGE OF THAT IN ADVANCE VERSUS SOMEONE BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THEN FINDING OUT THE CITY HAD A GOAL OR AN OBJECTIVE OF EXTENDING THE STREET THROUGH THERE. SO, I THINK YOU EARLIER, MR. CARY, SAID AT SOME POINT WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS, IT PRESENTS A CONUNDRUM OF WHAT YOU DO. I THINK I WOULD BE FAR LESS ENAMORED WITH THE DOWNTOWN AREA IF I FELT LIKE WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED WAS A MDATE AND EVERYBO. EVEN IF WE WERE GOING TO PAY FOR IT, WE WERE TELLING THEM YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE THESE CHANGES AS AN EXISTING BUSINESS OWNER. THAT WOULD CONCERN ME. I UNDERSTAND, MR. RUSSELL, YOU'VE BEEN STARING OUT THAT STREET FOR -- I WON'T SAY HOW OLD YOU ARE -- A LONG TIME. [ LAUGHING ] SINCE YOU WERE SEVEN. SO YOU'RE 20 NOW? SO 13 YEARS? BUT BOTTOM LINE IS, ALL I THINK WE CAN DO IS RELY ON EXPERTS THAT SAY THIS IS HOW IT WORKS. AND WE S IT ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY. THIS IS HOW IT WORKS WHEN YOU REDUCE LANES. I'VE NEVER HEARD A CENTER TURN LANE REFERRED TO AS A SUICIDE LANE. THAT WAS NEW TO ME. I'VE DRIVEN ON MANY STREETS WITH THOSE AND I'VE FOUND THEM TO BE PRETTY HELPFUL IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE. AND PERSONALLY FOR ME, THAT INTERSECTION AT G AND 15TH IS A NIGHTMARE, AS WELL AS THE INEVITABLE RACE THAT OCCURS BETWEEN G AND THE D.A.R.T. TRACK TO GET IN FRONT OF SOMEBODY TO GET OVER. SO I APPRECIATE THE CHANGES THAT E SHO THERE AS WELL. THIS IS SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT, I THINK IT'S BEEN ALMOST TWO YEARS IN AND THIS HAS BEEN IN THE PROCESS FOR THAT LONG. I LOOK AT ALL OF THE OUTREACH THAT'S GONE ON, ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS, SOME ADJUSTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BASED ON OUR INPUT BEFORE AND BASED ON INPUT FROM THE BUSINESS OWNERS AND THE RESIDENTS. I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB, AS THE COMMISSION, GIVING FEEDBACK, WORKING WITH STAFF. AND IT'S TIME FOR US TO REALLY MOVE THIS FORWARD. I THINK IT CHECKS OFF A BIG BOX. I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'VE RUSHED IT. I THINK WE'VE TAKEN OUR TIME. I THINK THERE'S STILL ROOM FOR DISCUSSIONS ON CERTAIN ISSUES. AND LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S AT THE CITY, ANY ONE OF THESE ITEMS CULD BE ADJUSTED OR AMENDED IN SIX MONTHS, YOU KNOW. SO I DON'T SEE A REASON FOR US TO REALLY HOLD THIS UP AFTER THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE. SO COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. MY -- HERE -- REFERENCED SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH YOU AND THE EXISTING SETBACKS AND SOME CHANGES. CAN YOU SHED SOME LIGHT ON WHAT THOSE CHANGES MIGHT BE FOR ALL OF US? THAT'S ONE QUESTION I HAVE, AND I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION AFTER THAT. >> SURE. THERE WERE TWO CHANGES MADE. ONE IS IN THE EXISTING LANGUAGE, BUILDINGS MAY BE RECONSTRUCTED TO THE ORIGINAL LOCATION SO LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH THE MAXIMUM SETBACK. WE AGREED THAT LANGUAGE WAS USING. WE STRUCK THE PART ABOUT THE MAXIMUM SETBACK, IT SAYS YOU CAN RECONSTRUCT YOUR ORIGINAL LINE WITHIN FIVE YEARS. SIMPLE AS THAT. THE SECOND CHANGE WAS OUR CROSS SECTION THIS HAD A STANDARD, BUT GIVES FLEXIBILITY FOR ANGLE PARKING SPACES. IT WAS BROUGHT UP HOW DOES THE SETBACK CHANGE IF YOU PROVIDE ANGLE PARKING, YOUR SHY ZONE NEEDS TO MOVE BACK. WE'VE ADDED LANGUAGE THAT SHOULD A VARIATION BE PROVIDED IN A STREET SECTION THE SHY ZONE WOULD MOVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT VARIATION ESSENTIALLY. >> Cary: GREAT. MY OTHER QUESTION IS THIS. OUT OF THESE DIFFERENT 1A, 1B, 1C, WHICH ONE CAPTURES THIS 13TH STREET IMPROVEMENT CHANGE? WHICH ONE OF THE -- WHERE IS THAT IN HERE? >> 1B IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE THE DOWNTOWN STREETS. >> Cary: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY? >> Bronsky: YEAH. SO I HAVE -- I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. AND IT WAS FOR MR. SUSKY IN RELATION TO MR. RUSSELL'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC TTERN, 20-25 YEARS AGO IN THAT AREA AS IT RELATES TO HOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, LOOKING IN THE FUTURE. COULD YOU TALK TO THAT FOR A MINUTE PLEASE? >> ALTHOUGH I'VE BEEN LIVING IN PLANO FOR 33 YEARS, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE TRAFFIC PATTERN WAS PRIOR TO THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION THAT IT IS RIGHT NOW. BUT I'LL STAND BY MY COMMENTS EARLIER THAT WHEN WE CHANGE THE INTERSECTION -- WE'RE PROBABLY MOVING FORWARD, BECAUSE THEECT IMPROVEMENTS ARE SO SIGNIFICANT IN CAPACITY AND IN SAFETY. BUT THE NEW CONFIGURATION -- WE'RE BASICALLY LINING UP EVERYBODY WEST OF G AND MOVING THEM -- EXCUSE ME, IN ONE LANE BETWEEN G -- OR 2H AND SHOWN IN THE GRAPHIC, WE'LL GO BACK TO TWO LANES ONCE YOU APPROACH THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS, WHICH IS HOW IT OPERATES RIGHT NOW. SO, I'M NOT SURE HOW TWO LANES IS GOING TO CHANGE THE PERCEPTION OF A DRIVER WHEN THEY HAVE TO MERGE -- WHEN YOU GET BACK DOWN TO THE D.A.R.T. TRACS ANYWAYS. JUST AN OBSERVATION HAVING DRIVEN MANY YEARS NOW, IN THE MORNING ESPECIALLY, WITH THE PATTERN, IF YOU LOOK, MOST OF THE DRIVERS ARE ALREADY IN THAT LEFT LANE. AND SO YOU MIGHT HAVER EIGHT VEHICLES QUEUED UP IN THAT LEFT LANE, WHICH IS WHERE WE WOULD PUT THEM. THEN YOU ONLY HAVE TWO OR THREE VEHICLES IN THE MIDDLE LANE BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE IN THE LEFT LANE WHEN THEY GET TO THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS. I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT IT WAS 25 YEARS, WHAT THAT CONFIGURATION WAS. I GUESS I COULD DO SOME RESEARCH. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT THAT IS GOING TO MAKE ANYTHING SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN MY RECOMMENDATION AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. >> Bronsky: WHAT I'M REALLY ASKING ISN'T NECESSARILY THROUGHPUT, B IS THE OVERALL SAFETY OF BOTH THE DRIVERS AND ANYONE THAT WOULD BE IN THAT AREA. DO YOU FEEL LIKE WE ARE INCREASING THE SAFETY -- >> OH, ABSOLUTELY. YEAH, WHEN WE CAN GET LEFT TURNS OUT OF THE THROUGH TRAFFIC, WHEN WE CAN QUEUE EVERYBODY UP SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT BIG WEAVE, AS THE CHAIRMAN POINTED OUT, BETWEEN G AND THE D.A.R.T. TRACK, THAT DEFINITELY INCREASES THE SAFETY. WE DO HAVE A ACCIDEN PROBLEM BETWEEN G AND THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS. NOTHING SIGNIFICANT, BUT AN ACCIDENT ISSUE OCCURS BECAUSE OF THIS WE'VE. YOU HAVE A LOT OF NEW DRIVERS THAT COME IN AND THAT GET SURPRISED. AND I WILL TELL YOU THIS. ALMOST EVERY TIME I DRIVE THROUGH YOU HAVE A DRIVER IN THAT RIGHT LANE AND IT GETS TO THE D.A.R.T. TRACK AND REALIZES, I HAVE TO TURN RIGHT. AND IT CUTS IN. WHICH ALSO CREATES OUR ISSUE WITH ACCIDENTS. SO WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID THAT. >> Bronsky: I WOULD SAY MY DAUGHTER IS 20 AND SHE AVOIDS DOWNTOWNOMPLETELY BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE CONCERNS OF A HUNDRED THINGS SEEMING LIKE IT'S ALL GOING ON AT ONCE. AND I REALLY WANT TO JUST BE SURE THAT MR. RUSSELL'S CONCERNS ARE BEING HEARD AND ADDRESSED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT AREA IS AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE, AND THAT BY ADDING MIDDLE TURN LANES OR WHATEVER WE'RE NOT MAKING THINGS WORSE. BUT I TRUST YOUR WORD AND I'M SURE THAT MR. RUSSELL HAS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE CONVERSATION WITH YOU, OR YOU'LL BE OPEN TO DOING THAT. >> IF I CAN ADD ONE MORE THING, N LANE. IN ORDER OF SAFETY, THE BEST CONFIGURATION THAT WE CAN HAVE IS A RAISED MEDIAN WITH LEFT TURN LANES, RIGHT. RIGHT BELOW THAT IS NO RAISED MEDIAN, BUT YOU HAVE A CENTER -- YOU HAVE A CENTER -- I'M SORRY, YOU HAVE -- NO MEDIAN, BUT THEN YOU HAVE TURN LANES DEDICATED FOR CERTAIN LOCATIONS. BUT WITH THE CONFIGURATION THAT WE HAVE BETWEEN G AND DOWNTOWN WE HAVE A LOT OF DRIVEWAYS. SO THE NEXT-BEST CONFIGURATION FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT IS THE SUICIDE LANE, AS HE CALLED IT. AND YES, I HAVE HEARD THAT NAME USED IN THE PAST. BUT IT IS ACTUALLY MUCH SAFER THAN THE CONFIGURATION THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS NO TURN LANES AND PEOPLE ARE STOPPING AND TURNING ACROSS TRAFFIC. THAT'S ACTUALLY MUCH LESS SAFE THAN HAVING THE SUICIDE LANE, OR THE -- I'M SORRY, NOW I'M SAYING IT. >> Chair Downs: YEAH. [ LAUGHING ] >> BUT IT'S A SAFER SITUATION. >> Chair Downs: FOR ANYONE LISTENING AT HOME, THAT'S NOT A . >> NO. [ LAUGHING ] >> Bronsky: THANK YOU, BRIAN. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: MORE OF A COMMENT THAN A QUESTION, I HAVE NOT RUN A TRAFFIC FLOW THROUGH ANALYSIS, BUT I HAVE DONE SUPPLY CHAIN FLOW-THROUGH ANALYSIS IN MY PAST. WHEN THE MODEL MEETS REALITY, IT'S DIFFERENT. SO, JUST MORE OF A COMMENT. IF THERE'S A WAY WE CAN -- WITHOUT -- BEFORE WE DIG UP AND PLANT STUFF, TEST SOME OF THIS. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ACTUALLY COULD PUT SOME KIND OF PHYSICAL BARRIER TO SHORTEN THE TURN LANE OR SOMETHING BEFORE WE PUT JACKHAMMERS INTO THE GROUND, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. >> I'M SMILING BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAVE HAD A TEST FOR FOUR MONTHS IN EASTBOUND -- WESTBOUND 14TH STREET BETWEEN O AND M WHERE IT'S BEEN LITERALLY CLOSED FOR FOUR MONTHS BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION THERE. SO, WE ACTUALLY HAVE -- NOT INTENTIONALLY, BUT IT HAS BEEN NARROWED DOWN. AND REGARDING THE MODEL, IT WAS ACTUALLY LAST WEEK WE WERE REQUESTED BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO ACTUALLY EVALUATE THE ADDITION OF SOME LEFT TURNS OR RIGHT TURNS AT SOME OF OUR MAJOR INTERSECTIONS. SO WE'RE DOING A STUDY. WE JUST STARTED A STUDY. WE'LL PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THIS COMMISSION IF YOU'RE INTERESTED ON WHAT THOSE RESULTS ARE SHOWING WHAT THE REDUCTIONS IN DELAY, CAPACITY, FUEL CONSUMPTION, EMISSIONS ARE WHEN YOU ADD A RIGHT TURN LANE OR YOU ADD A LEFT TURN LANE AT AN INTERSECTION. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. BRIAN, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO FOLLOW UP. YOU ALSO HAD A STUDY YOU MAY REMEMBER, Y'ALL SHUT DOWN A LANE ON 15TH TO DO SOME UTILITY WORK FOR SEVERAL MONTHS DOWN TO ONE LANE AND IT SEEMED TO WORK OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE INTERSECTION. I'M THROUGH THERE MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY AND ANY IMPROVEMENT IN EFFICIENCY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED, BECAUSE I SIT AT THAT LIGHT A LOT. (CHUCKLING.) ONE QUESTION FOR YOU THOUGH. ON -- I'M GOING TO CALL IT A CHICKEN LANE. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TAUGHT IT WAS. SO IT W ALWAYS REFERRED TO AS A CHICKEN LANE. >> Chair Downs: ALSO NOT A TECHNICAL TERM. >> Ratliff: WOULD THAT ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES -- IS THAT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO BE USED FOR SOME OF THIS LOADING AND UNLOADING THAT WE'VE GOT GOING ON IN THE CURB LANE TODAY? I SEE IT HAPPENING, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S -- THAT MAY BE A PD QUESTION. BUT I SEE IT HAPPENING. AND SO IT'S A QUESTION. DOES THAT ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, OR IS THAT WAY OUT OF BOUNDS ON A -- >> IT'S A FAIR QUESTION BUT IT DOES NOT ADDRESS -- IT WOULD BE AN ILLEGAL MANEUVER. AS A GENERAL COMMENT FROM EDITORIAL COMMENT FROM MYSELF, THE UPS TRUCKS OF THE WORLD, NOT TO PICK ON UPS OR THOSE KINDS OF TRUCKS ARE THE BANE OF MY TRAFFIC WORLD BECAUSE THEY SHUT DOWN LANE WHEN IS THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO. IT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WE DID THE CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT SECTION, BECAUSE WE HAVE VEHICLES ON MAJOR ROADWAYS STOPPING A LANE OF TRAFFIC, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ILLEGAL IN PLANO TO STOP AND LOAD OR UNLOAD ON PRETTY MUCH EVERY MAJOR ARTERIAL THAT WE HAVE IN PLANO. SO . . . WE HAVE A DOCUMENT HERE THAT ALLOWS US TO DESIGN -- AND ACTUALLY, A LOT OF SOME OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE COMING IN, WE'RE ASKING -- NOTHING OFFICIAL YET, BUT WE'RE ASKING THESE DEVELOPMENTS TO PROVIDE FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING ZONES TO GET THE VEHICLES OFF THE STREETS. >> Ratliff: LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I HAVEN'T BEEN HERE AS LONG AS ANYBODY THAT SPOKE, BUT I DO LIVE IN THE AREA AND I DO WALK DOWN 15TH FAIRLY REGULARLY. IF THE NROWING OTHE ROAD AND THE CHANGES TO THE CURBSIDE ENGAGEMENT ZONES -- IS THAT GOING TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AS WELL? BECAUSE ON A FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHT, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS DOWN THERE WALKING UP AND DOWN 15TH AND THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS. HOW DOES THE CHANGES TO 15TH AND 14TH, FOR THAT MATTER -- I KNOW IT'S A BALANCING ACT BETWEEN TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIANS, BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF PEDESTRIANS DOWN THERE. IS THIS GOING TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY? F >> ABSOLUTELY, YES. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS THAT WE HAVE IN SOME OF THESE CROSS STREETS, OR THESE ROADWAYS, WE ARE NARROWING THE TIME THAT THE PEDESTRIAN IS ACTUALLY IN THE ROADWAY WITH THESE BULB-OUTS. SO, THE ANSWER IS YES, PEDESTRIANS WOULD BE IN A SAFER SITUATION SINCE THEY WON'T HAVE TO BE IN THE ROADWAY AS LONG AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW. >> Ratliff: GREAT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: OOPS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THERE'S A LITTLE PARK NEXT-DOOR TO THE -- ACROSS THE D.A.R.T. TRACKS FROM THE 15TH STREET STATION. THERE IS ON DISPLAY AN OLD STREET CAR THAT USED TO RUN BETWEEN DALLAS AND OUTLYING AREAS AS LONG AGO AS THE 1940s WHEN MY MOM USED TO TAKE THE INTERURBAN CAR FROM DALLAS TO DENTON TO GO TO COLLEGE. RIGHT NEXT TO THAT CAR IS THE 15TH STREET D.A.R.T. STATION. AND I THINK COMPARING THAT LITTLE STREETCAR TO WHAT IS NEXT TO ITS A PERFECT ILLUSTRATION OF HOW FAR PLANO HAS COME IN THE LAST, SHALL WE SAY 60 YEARS. PLANO HAS DEVELOPED FROM, IN ITS INFANCY, AN AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY TO A BEDROOM COMMUNITY TO A SUBURBAN COMMUNITY AND IT IS NOW BECOMING OR HAS BECOME A MAJOR EMPLOYMENT CENTER, ALL OF WHICH HAS BEEN POSSIBLE THROUGH CONTINUING ONGOING FORWARD-LOOKING LONG-TERM CONTINUOUS PLANNING THROUGH THE YEARS. THE CONDITION OF THE CITY AND THE NEED TO ENGAGE IN ONGOING PLANNING TO ME IS ALWAYS EVOLVING AND NEVER STATIC. WE SHOULD NEVER REST ON OUR LAURELS. WE SHOULD NEVER SAY THAT THE WAY WE ARE NOW IS PERFECT AND WE CAN'T CHANGE ANYMORE. THE POPULATION IS GROWING. JOBS PRESENT IN THE CITY HAVE INEASE TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED. THE SILVER LINE IS COMING. THE SILVER LINE IS CREATING OPPORTUNITIES FOR TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH THIS COMMISSON IS ALSO LOOKING AT. ADDING ADDITIONAL STREETS IN THE 12TH AND 13TH STREET AREA WILL IMPROVE CIRCULATION AND ACCESS IN THAT AREA BY CREATING A NAVIGABLE GRID PATTERN WHICH WILL ALLOW BETTER TRANSPORTATION MOVEMENT THROUGH THE AREA, WHICH WILL MAKE THE AREA MORE DESIRABLE FOR TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ARRIVAL OF THE D.A.R.T. LINE. NONE OF THESE STANDARDS ARE DESIGNED TO HURT PEOPLE. THEY'RE DESIGNED TO MAKE MANAGED, PLANNED GROWTH POSSIBLE. THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE HISTORICALLY DONE. IT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO DO. AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I F AGREE WITH ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, MR. . >> ONE QUICK QUESTION. AT A VERY HIGH LEV, AS WE LOOK AT THESE IMPROVEMENTS, HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK THEY MIGHT REDUCE ACCIDENTS IN TOWN? DO YOU GUYS HAVE A PROJECTION ON THAT AT ALL, ANY KIND OF SPIT WAD? >> I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER, BECAUSE TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARE CONTINUALLY CHANGING UP AND DOWN. ONE WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT WHEN COVID HIT AND OUR VOLUMES WENT DOWN, 90% THE FIRST COUPLE OF WEEKS AND FOR A YEAR OR SO THEY WERE DOWN 50-60% THAT OUR ACCIDENTS ACTUALLY STAYED ABOUT THE SAMEECAU NOW VEHICLES ARE GOING A LOT FASTER BECAUSE THERE'S NO TRAFFIC ON THE ROADWAY. AND SO THAT REALLY SURPRISED ME. >> Cary: THAT'S ALL YOUR FAULT. YOU REPAVED THESE ROADS AND NOW THEY'RE FASTER. >> I WILL SAY THE GENERAL COMMENT THAT WE HAVE, IN ENGINEERING, ESPECIALLY ON THE TRANSPORTATION SIDE, WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR GOALS THAT WE ACCOMMODATE -- SAFETY IS NUMBER 1. IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE ROADWAYS. ALL DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE, WE FIRST LOOK AT, IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE THE SAFETY. NEXT, IS IT GOING TO MOVE TRAFFIC. NEXT IS THE DECISION THAT WE'RE MAKING GOING TO IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCIES THAT WE HAVE. AND THE LAST ONE, WHICH IS WHERE I THINK MOST POLITICIANS START WITH IS, ARE WE GOING GOOD STEWARDS OF OUR PUBLIC FUNDS. BUT WE LOOK AT SAFETY AS NUMBER 1 AND I THINK THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE MAKING HERE ARE GOING TO IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE PEDESTRIANS AND THE SAFETY OF THE MOTORING PUBLIC. >> Cary: JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THAT MAKES SENSE. MY FINAL THING IS, ONE OF THE THINGS I'M STRUGGLING WITH ALL OF THIS IS 13TH. AND I'LL KEEP MY COMMENTS SHORT HERE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WE WANT TO IDENTIFY THIS AS A POTENTIAL AREA WHERE WE MIGHT PUT A STREET ROUG BUT WE MIGHT NEVER PUT IT THROUGH. AND SO AGAIN, IT'S A CHALLENGE FOR ME, BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT WHO ARE WE BENEFITING, THE CURRENT LANDOWNER, OR MAYBE A POTENTIAL LANDOWNER. WE MIGHT NEVER DO 13TH STREET. AND SO FOR THAT REASON ON 1B I'M CHALLENGED. I WISH WE WOULD PULL 13TH STREET OUT, JUST ONE GUY'S OPINION. OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE IS REALLY GOOD AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR IT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. SO, A LOT OF CONVERSATION. WE APPROVE ITEM 1A AS STAFF'SVE RECOMMENDED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY MYSLF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIO COMMISSIONER BROUNO APPROVE ITEM 1A. PLEASE VOTE. THANK YOU. SO THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE ABSTENTION. MR. LISLE HAD RECUSED HIMSELF. I WILL CONTINUE WITH A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 1B AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: GOT YOU OVER HERE. A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN DOWNS WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 1B. PLEASE VOTE. THAT CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 6-1 WITH ONE CONFLICT. SORRY. SHALL I CONTINUE, OR DOES >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE EM 1 AS PRESENTED. >> I'LL SECOND. >> Chair Downs: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO APPROVE ITEM 1C. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 7-0 WITH -- CONFLICTED OUT. >> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 1D. >> I SECOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CARY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG TO APPROVE ITEM 1B AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE CONFLICT. >> 1E. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE REPEAL THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS ORDINANCE 2009-6-10 AS AMENDED, TRAFFIC GUIDELINES, 1989 AND PRIVATE STREET SUBDIVISIONS 1994, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN03, AMENDMENT 2023-001. GLAD THAT'S PRE- >> Chair Downs: THAT'S PRECISELY WHY I STOPPED MAKING THE MOTIONS. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY ON ITEM E. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE CONFLICT. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH, STAFF. A LOT OF A LOT OF HOURS ON THIS. VERY COMPLEX. GOOD WORK. GOOD WORK. OKAY. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM 2. MR. LISLE IS RETURNING, IT LOOKS LIKE. MR. BRONSKY -- OH, YOU'RE ON 3? OKAY. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2023-014 - REQUEST TO AMEND ARTICLE 8 (D ARTICLE 14 (ALLOWED USES AND US CLASSIFICATIONS)ARTIE 15 (USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS), AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL DRONE DELIVERY HUBS AND TO INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY AIRCRAFT. PETITIONER: CITY OF PLANO. >> THANK YOU. I'M JORDAN ROCKERBIE, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >> Chair Downs: EXCUSE ME, CAN WE MOVE THE CONVERSATIONS OUT OF THE CHAMBER? THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO AS A QUICK RECAP OF THIS DISCUSSION ON DRONES IN THE CITY STARTED IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR. OUR FIRST MEETING WITH THE COMMISSION WAS IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, FOLLOWED BY A SECOND MEETING IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CALLED. THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WILL RECAP SOME OF THAT BACKGROUND INFO THAT WAS PRESENTED AT THE JUNE MEETING. SO DRONES ARE KNOWN BY MANY NAMES. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IS THE PREFERRED INDUSTRY TERM IN THE UNITED STATES. SO THE ORDINANCE WILL REFER TO UNMANNED AIRCRAFT BUT THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION I'LL PROBABLY JUST SAY DRONES, BECAUSE IT'S A BIT EASIER. DELIVERY DRONES PROVIDE A LAST-MILE DELIVERY FUNCTION. THEY TYPICALLY REPLACE TRIPS THAT WOULD BE MADE BY A LOCAL DELIVERY VEHICLE OR BY A PERSONAL VEHICLE. THE MOST COMMON DRONES IN USE TODAY ARE UNDER 55 POUNDS, DUE TO FEDERAL REGULATIONS. BUT LARGER ONES DO EXIST AND ARE IN OPERATION IN TEXAS. MOST OPERATORS CURRENTLY LIMIT THEIR DELIVERY RANGE TO ABOUT FOUR MILES, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE CAPABLE OF LONGER FLIGHT TIMES. ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY REFERS TO A NEW CLASS OF AIRCRAFT THAT ARE SIMILAR TO HELICOPTERS. THEY ARE SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS AIR TAXIS THESE DAYS. THESE AIRCRAFT ARE UNDER ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND AROUND THE WORLD AND THE FIRST COMMERCIAL SERVICE IS EXPECTED IN THE UNITED STATES IN 2025. FEDERAL REGULATION OF AIRCRAFT IS BY THE FAA IN TERMS OF DRONES, THIS IS THROUGH PART 107 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. PART 135 IS ALSO USED TO REGULATE ADVANCED OPERATIONS OF DRONE AIRCRAFT, ALTHOUGH THAT PART WAS INTENDED FOR CONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT. AN UPCOMING FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT THIS YEAR, IF PASSED IN ITS CURRENT FORM, WILL RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FOR BOTH DRONE OPERATORS AND ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY. THIS ACT WOULD REQUIRE THE FAA TO ISSUE RULES AND UPDATE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE OPERATION OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT IN ORDER TO MAKE IT EASIER TO ADD THEM INTO THE AIR SPACE. TO ISSUE RULES FOR ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY AIRCRAFT AS WELL AS PILOT CERTIFICATION. THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS LIMITED REGULATORY POWERS DUE TO FAA PREEMPTION OVER THE FEDERAL AIR SPACE. CHAPTER 423 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE ESTABLISHES SOME RULES FOR THE USE OF DRONES. ONE NOTABLE SECTION IN THERE RESTRICTS MUNICIPALITIES FROM ADOPTING OR ENFORCING ORDINANCES THAT REGULATE THE OPERATION OF DRONES. IN THE MOST RECENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION AN ACT RELATED TO AIR MOBILITY WAS PASSED, THIS REACTIVATES A WORKING GROUP OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY. THEY'RE GOING TO REVIEW CURRENT LAWS IN TEXAS A REPORT BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2024 ON WHAT LEGISLATION NEEDS TO BE CHANGED OR INTRODUCED IN ORDER TO ALLOW THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY TO OPERATE IN TEXAS. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES HAVE VARIED REGULATORY POWER OVER AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS. THE FAA PREEMPTS FLIGHT PATHS, ALTITUDE, AND FREQUENCY. PACKAGE CONTENT AND THE SAFETY AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH AIRCRAFT AND PILOTS. THE STAT HAS THEIR RESTRICTION ON MUNICIPALITIES PASSING ORDINANCES THAT AFFECT THE OPERATION OF DRONES, WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL BARRIER TO LOCAL REGULATIONS. HOWEVER, THE CITY IS ABLE TO REGULATE GROUND SITE FACILITIES SUCH AS HUBS. I WILL NOTE THAT THE FAA WAS PROVIDED WITH A DRAFT COPY OF OUR ORDINANCE, THE FIRST VERSION. THEY REVIEWED IT AND THEY SAW NO ISSUES WITH A PREEMPTION IN THAT FIRST DRAFT. IN TERMS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THEY CONSIST OF THREE NEW DEFINITIONS, TWO AMENDED DEFINITIONS, TWO NEW LAND USES, AND ONE NEW SECTION THAT WOULD CONTAIN THE USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR THOSE NEW LAND USES. TWO AMENDED DEFINITIONS FOR HELIPORT AND HELISTOP. MOSTLY THE SAME AS EXISTING. HOWEVER, THE WORD HELICOPTER IS SWAPPED OUT FOR ROTARY RING AND TILT PASSENGER AIRCRAFT. THIR THOSE ADVANCED MOBILITY AIRCRAFT IN ADDITION TO HELICOPTERS TO USE THESE SITES . AND THIS LANGUAGE IS THE SAME AS WAS PRESENTED IN THAT JUNE MEETING. TWO DEFINITIONS FOR COMMERCIAL DRONE DELIVERY HUBS ARE PROPOSED. THE FIRST IS FOR A LARGE HUB, SO COMMERCIAL DELIVERY DRONE HUB BRACKET LARGE. THIS WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS FOR DRONES OF ANY SIZE. WITHIN THE SECOND DEFINITION BEING FOR SMALL DELIVERY HUBS. ESE ARE LARGELY THE SAME AS THE LARGE HUBS EXCEPT THEY WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS FOR SMALL DRONES, WHICH ARE 55 POUNDS OR LESS. THE PURPOSE OF HAVING THESE TWO DEFINITIONS IS TO ALLOW THE CITY TO SET MORE STRICT STANDARDS AND OVERSIGHT FOR THOSE LARGER HUBS WHILE ALLOWING THESE SMALLER ONES TO OPERATE BY RIGHT AND AVOIDING SOME OF THAT REGULATORY PROCESS. THE FINAL DEFINITION THAT WOULD BE ADDED IS FOR THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. THIS IS NOT A LAND USE. E TAKFF AND LANDING AREA IS ONE PIECE OF A DRONE HUB. IN TERMS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT USE TABLES, AS MENTIONED, THOSE TWO USES WOULD BE ADDED, SO THE SMALL HUBS AND THE LARGE HUBS. BOTH WOULD BE PERMITTED AS PRIMARY USES IN THE CE -- SO COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1 AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 2 DISTRICTS. HOWEVER, THE LARGE DRONE HUB WOULD REQUIRE AN SUP. THE LARGE DRONE HUB WOULD ALSO WILL BE ALLOWED BY SUP AS AN ACCESSORY USE IN THOSE THREE DISTRICTS. THE SMALL DRONE HUBS WOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT ACCESSORY TO CERTAIN IDENTIFIED RETAIL AND WAREHOUSE USES IN ANY NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE CITY. NEITHER OF THE HUBS WOULD BE PERMITTED IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. AND THIS IS A MAP SHOWING WHERE IN THE CITY THEY MAY BE PERMITTED. PERMTED A A PRIMARY ORWOULD BE ACCESSORY USE. THAT'S OUR CE LI-1 AND 2 DISTRICTS. RED ARE ALL THOSE OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WHERE SMALL DRONE HUBS WOULD BE ALLOWED AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO THOSE CERTAIN WAREHOUSE AND RETAIL USES. THE BULK OF THE NEW REGULATIONS ARE IN SECTION 15, WHICH IS THE USE-SPECIFIC STANDARDS. THESE WOULD APPLY TO BOTH THE SMALL AND LARGE DRONE HUBS EXCEPT THERE'S A FEW INSTANCES WHERE THEY ARE CALLED OUT INDIVIDUALLY. SO AS AN ACCESSORY USE, DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS WOULD BE LIMITED TO 10% OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE PRIMARY BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY. THE INTENT OF THAT IS TO LIMIT THE SIZE OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS THAT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO REPURPOSE IF THE DRONE HUB WOULD LEAVE THE SITE AND ALSO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF EXISTING OR VACANT SUITES WITHIN THE PRIMARY BUILDING. NEXT UP WE HAVE STANDARDS FOR THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS. THROUGHOUT THESE SLIDES THAT WILL BE ABBREVIATED AS TOLA. SO FIRST OFF, THE PLACEMENT OF THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE PLACED WITHIN ANY REQUIRED BUILDING SETBACKS, AS SHOWN IN RED ON THE SCREEN. WITHIN ANY REQUIRED LANDSCAPE WITHIN ANY FIRE LANES, EASEMENTS, MANEUVERING AISLES, LOADING SPACES OR REQUIRED PARKING SPACES OR SO AS TO OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY OR INTERFERE WITH PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICLE CIRCULATION. ALL OF THESE ARE MORE OR LESS IDENTICAL TO THE STANDARDS FOR OPEN STORAGE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND TO SHOW IT ALL TOGETHER, IT COVERS A FAIR BIT OF THIS SITE. OUR SAMPLE SITE IS A SMALL, PROBABLY PAD SITE. THERE WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY ON OUR LARGER PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THE SIZE OF THE TAKFF AND LANDING AREA WOULD BE LIMITED TO 5% OF THE LOT AREA WHEN THE DRONE HUB IS AN ACCESSORY USE. THERE WOULD BE NO LIMIT WHEN IT IS A PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING THERE WOULD BE NO LIMIT TO A TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA THAT IS LOCATED ON THE ROOF OF THE PRIMARY BUILDING. THE INTENT HERE IS TO MANAGE THE SIZE OF THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS AND TO INCENTIVIZE USE OF THE ROOF. AT GRADE, SCREENING IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THEAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA UNLESS IT INCLUDES ITEMS THAT WOULD TYPICALLY FALL UNDER OUR DEFINITION OF OPEN STORAGE. SO THINGS LIKE TRAILERS OR SHIPPING CONTAINERS OR ANY OTHER STRUCTURE OR MOVABLE MATERIAL THAT WOULD NORMALLY FALL INTO OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN STORAGE. THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE SCREENED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN STORAGE. AND THE INTENT HERE IS TO TREAT THESE USES FAIRLY AND TO FIND A BALANCE BETWEEN AESTHETIC CONCERNS AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. ON ROOFTOPS, SCREENING WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR MECHANICAL UNITS ON TOP OF ROOFTOPS. THERE WOULD BE SOME EXCEPTIONS FOR HEIGHT. GENERALLY, THE SCREENING AND ANY STRUCTURES WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IN THE DISTRICT. HOWEVER, WE ARE SUGGESTING ONE EXCEPTION FOR A MAST WITH A WIND SOCK AND ANY COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD FALL INTO OUR REQUIREMENTS AND EXCEPTIONS FOR COMMERCIAL ANTENNAS, WHICH IS IN A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE. NOISE-SENSITIVE BUFFERS ARE PROPOSED. THIS IS WHERE WE GET INTO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SMALL AND THE LARGE HUBS. SO FOR A SMALL DRONE HUB, AGAIN, THOSE THAT ARE PROVIDING TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS FOR AIRCRAFT 55 POUNDS OR LESS. WE ARE PROPOSING A 150-FOOT BUFFER FROM THE EDGE OF THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AA TO THOSE IDENTIFIED SENSITIVE USES. FOR THE LARGE HUBS, THIS INCREASES TO A 300-FOOT BUFFER. WE ARE ALSO INCLUDING A PROVISION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REDUCE THAT 300-FOOT BUFFER TO 150 FEET WHEN CONSIDERING THE SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT. THE INTENT HERE IS TO MITIGATE NOISE-RELATED NUISANCE AND APPLY NOISE SEPARATION STANDARDS FAIRLY. I'LL NOTE THAT 150-FOOT BUFFER IS EQUIVALENT TO OUR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR OTHER NOISE-GENERATING USES IN THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY STANDARDS SECTION OF OUR ORDINANCE. FINALLY, WE HAVE A PARKING RATE. THIS WOULD APPLY ONLY TO A DRONE HUB THAT IS A PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY. ACCESSORY USES DO NOT REQUIRE THEIR OWN PARKING. AS A PRIMARY USE, WE ARE SUGGESTING A PARKING RATE OF ONE SPACE PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSING SPACE AND ONE SPACE PER 300 SQUARE FEET OF ANY OTHER BUILDING SPACE. WHEN WE HAVE A DRONE HUB THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY BUILDINGS, WE'RE SUGGESTING A PARKING RATE OF ONE SPACE PER 300 SQUARE FEET OF THAT DESIGNATED TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. SO, AS A SUMMARY, WE ARE PROPOSING AMENDED DEFINITIONS TO ALLOW FOR ADVANCED MOBILITY AIRCRAFT. WE'RE PROPOSING NEW DEFINITIONS TO ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL DRONE DELIVERY HUBS AS WELL AS USE-SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR THESE HUBS. THE INTENT IS TO SUPPORT THE MEASURED IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN THE COMMUNITY. ADDRESS NOISE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY AMONG SIMILAR USES AND STANDARDS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE'S TWO POLICIES WHICH SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS AND TWO LAND USE ACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. WE HAVE RECEIVED THREE WRITTEN RESPONSES, ALL OF THOSE ARE INCLUDED IN THE PACKET. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS PER THE AMENDMENTS LOCATED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THAT, M HAPPY T ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. READING THROUGH THE LETTERS THAT CAME -- UNLIKE OUR TYPICAL LETTERS FROM HOMEOWNERS, THIS IS FROM ACTUAL OPERATORS OF THESE BUSINESSES. OF COURSE, IF I WAS IN THEIR SHOES, PROBABLY THE SAME WAY. I DON'T WANT ANY RESTRICTIONS. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT I WANT TO DO. BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT POPPED UP. THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT -- THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY IN THERE, NOT WORDED THE WAY I'M GOING TO WORD IT. 150-FOOT BUFFER FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OR WHATEVER. BUT IT DOESN'T SAY FROM RESIDENTIAL OR FROM ANOTHER BUSINESS OR FROM WHAT -- OR AT LEAST HERE IN THE SUMMARY I DIDN'T SEE THAT CALLED OUT. I ASSUMED YOU MEANT FROM A RESIDENTIAL, BUT MAYBE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. THE OTHER WAS SCREENING WAS TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL TIMES AND THEY CALLED THAT OUT IN HERE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE MADE IT CLEAR BUT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE IF WE'RE REQUIRING A SOLID FENCING, LIKE A MASONRY WALL OR SOMETHING NEXT TO THESE PADS. THEY HAD A CONCERN ABOUT IT AND THAT MADE SENSE TO ME THAT IF WE'RE DICTATING SCREENING THAT ISN'T PERMEABLE ENOUGH FOR THE AIR FLOW FROM THESE UNITS, WE CREATE CHALLENGES. SO IS THAT -- CAN YOU ADDRESS THOSE TWO ISSUES? >> YES. IN ORDER. FIRST YOU TALKED ABOUT -- >> Chair Downs: THE BUFFER. >> THE BUFFERS. DENDING ON T USE. DIFFERENT THEY ARE ALWAYS MEASURED FROM THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. THAT POINT ALWAYS STAYS. AND THEN I'LL JUST READ IT OFF HERE, BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE EASIEST, IF IT'S F-2. SO -- SORRY, F-3. THE MEASUREMENT OF THE REQUIRED BUFFER IS TO BE MADE IN A STRAIGHT HORIZONTAL LINE FROM THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. AND, ONE, TO THE CLOSEST PROPERTY LINE OF A PROPERTY CONTAINING A DWELLING, RETIREMENT AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FACILITY, OR PUBLIC PARK. SO IT'S THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THOSE THR TYPES. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> OR TO THE BUILDING FACE OF A DAY CARE CENTER, RELIGIOUS FACILITY, SCHOOL, OR PRIVATE SCHOOL. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO TO THE PROPERTY LINE OF A SCHOOL, IT WOULD BE TO THE BUILDING FACE. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. AND THEN THE SCREENING? >> SCREENING, SO WE'RE NOT REQUIRING SCREENING FOR THE PADS THEMSELVES. BUT SHOULD THERE BE ANYTHING THAT -- IF THERE WAS NO LANDING PAD THERE, WE WOULD CALL IT OPEN STORAGE. IN THOSE CASES, WE ARE ASKING FOR THE TYPICAL SIX TO EIGHTFOOT MASONRY FENCE SCREENING, JUST TO BE FAIR. >> Chair Downs: IF THERE IS A TAKEOFF AND LANDING PAD, IT'S AN OPERATION, AND THEY USE A CONTAINER OR SMALL PORTABLE UNIT, A POD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT'S WHERE THEY STORE THEIR TAKEOFF AND LANDING PAD, THEIR ELECTRONIC GEAR, THEIR MOVABLE WIND SOCK, WHATEVR ELSE. IS THAT GOING TO THROW THEM INTO, WELL, NOW YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A MASONRY WALL? I THINK WE HAVE TO FIGURE THAT PIECE OUT. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: ESSENTIALLY WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN'T ORATE UNLESS YOU TAKE ALL YOUR GEAR AND LEAVE EVERY DAY. OR YOU GET A BIG ENOUGH SPACE THAT YOU CAN GET FAR AWAY. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. THERE'S SOME OTHER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS, SO LET'S KEEP GOING AND WE'LL CIRCLE BACK, PERHAPS. COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, WHAT IS ON THE DEFINITION OF HELISTOP? WILL THAT ALLOW HELICOPTERS IN, BASED ON THE WAY I READ IT? >> THE HELISTOP? YEAH, SO THE DEFINITION OF A HELISTOP IS THE SAME AS A HELIPORT. >> Cary: THEY ARE NOW THE >> THEY ARE TIED TOGETHER. >> Cary: OKAY. DID WE CONSIDER TRYING TO LEGISLATE OPERATING HOURS AT ALL? >> WE DID NOT. >> Cary: AND WHY NOT? >> IT WAS ONE OF THOSE GRAY AREAS LEGALLY WHERE THE ADVICE THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE FAA WAS THAT A OWNER OF A -- THEY JUST SAID AIRPORT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WORD THEY USE FOR ANY FACILITY THAT HANDLES AIRCRAFT. THE OWNER OF AN AIRPORT THAT IS NOT PUBLICLY FUNDED, CAN SET OPERATING HOURS. AND SO THAT MIGHT BE A WAY FOR US TO -- THROUGH A NEGOTIATION WITH A DRONE HUB OPERATOR, BE LIKE THE SUP IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE OPERATION BETWEEN THIS HOUR AND THIS HOUR. BUT IT WAS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE JUST THOUGHT IT WAS TOO MUCH OF A LEGAL QUAGMIRE, POSSIBLY, THAT WE LEFT IT OUT. >> Cary: YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU TALKED ABOUT WAS A 150-FOOT SETBACK AND THE NOISE WAS THE SAME AS OTHER NOISE ORDINANCES. DO WE KNOW, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NOISE ON THE GROUND AND NOISE IN THE AIR FROM THE SAME THING? I WONDER IF IT'S EQUIVALENT, REALLY. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NOISE THAT WOULD BE GENERATED LARGELY ON THE GROUND. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO 150 FEET BUT IT'S GOING TO BE IN THE AIR. DO WE KNOW IF THAT'S MOREF A DISTURBANCE? >> THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I CAN SPEAK TO. IT'S OUTSIDE MY AREA OF EXPERTISE. >> Cary: AND TO THAT END, AS WE LOOK AT OPERATING HOURS AND 150 FEET AND HOW MANY OF THESE THEY MIGHT BE OPERATING AND HOW MUCH NOISE THEY PUT IN THE AIR. AS WE SORT THROUGH THIS, I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT THERE. ONE FINAL THING -- AND THE CHAIRMAN WAS TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE NOTES THAT WERE PUT IN THERE AND ONE OF THE THINGS I DID SEE THAT SEEMED TO MAKE SOME SENSE IS THE SETBACKS AND THE PERCENTAGE OF AVAILABLE LAND THAT COULD BE USED FOR THIS -- I THINK IT'S , 10% -- MIGHT BE SOMEWHAT AN UNLEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR REALLY SMALL BUSINESSES. AND SO HOW ARE WE THINKING ABOUT THAT? DO YOU SEE THAT AS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE AND DO WE HAVE ANY MITIGATION STRATEGY IF IN FACT THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR SOMEBODY THAT MIGHT WANT TO RUN ONE DRONE OUT OF A SMALL SITE. NOW THEY'RE UPSIDE DOWN COMPETITIVELY VERSUS SOMEONE ELSE. >> FOR SURE. WE DID LOOK INTO THAT, RUNNING SOME ANALYSIS ON HOW BIG IS A WHEN SHE SHALL PROPERTY IN OUR& CITY. AND THEN WHAT IS 5% OF THAT . FOR THE MOST PART, IN TERMS OF OUR SMALLEST PROPERTIES -- OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, BECAUSE DOWNTOWN IS ITS WHOLE DIFFERENT BEAST WITH VERY SMALL PROPERTIES. OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, YOUR SMALLEST PAD SITES WOULD STILL ALLOW A TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA OF AT LEAST 1,000 SQUARE FEET. WHERE THINGS START TO GET COMPLICATED ON THE SMALL PROPERTIES IS THEY ALSO HAVE TO PROVIDE PARKING. AND A LOT OF THE TIME THEY ARE JUST BARELY MEETING THEIR REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANES AND PARKING, PLUS THEIR BUILDING AND THEIREQUID LANDSCAPING. AS YOU SAW ON THAT KIND OF SAMPLE SITE PLAN, YOU DON'T END UP WITH MUCH PROPERTY LEFT TO EVEN GET TO THAT 5% ANYWAYS ON THE SMALLER PROPERTIES. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: YES, GO AHEAD. >> COULD I JUST ADD A REMINDER TOO THAT WE ARE PREEMPTED ON REGULATING OPERATIONS OF THE DRONES. AS SOON AS THEY GET IN THE AIR, WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT KIND OF NOISE THEY MAKE. SO -- BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THEIR OPERATION. >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: YEAH, I KNOW I SAID I WAS ONLY GOING TO ASK TWO QUESTIONS AND SO ON. DOING THE BEST I CAN. SO I HAVE TWO CONCERNS WITH THIS. ONE IS THE ADDITION OF THE PHRASE "TILT ROTOR PASSENGER AIRCRAFT." WHEN I READ IN A FORBES MAGAZINE ARTICLE IN 2020, THEY WERE CREATING A -- OR VERY NEAR COMPLETION OF A V-22 OSPREY TILT ROTOR FOR CIVILIAN USE. ARE WE WIDENING OURSELVES TOO WIDE BY USING JUST A GENERAL PHRASE, TILT ROTOR PASSENGER AIRCRAFT? >> SO THAT BECOMES A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT THING WITH DEFINING AIRCRAFT. BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NO GOOD WAY TO CATEGORIZE AIRCRAFT TO ONLY INCLUDE CONVENTIONAL HELICOPTERS AND THEN THESE NEW ADVANCED AIR MOBILITY TYPE OF AIRCRAFT. IN FACT, WITH THE WAY THAT SOME OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING, A COUPLE OF THEM WOULDN'T EVEN BE INCLUDED IN THE ROTARY TYPE BECAUSE THEY'RE USING MICRO JETS EV TECHNOLOGY. BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH CHANGE IN THAT SECTOR AND THERE'S SO MUCH DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION, IT IS VERY HARD TO NAIL DOWN PARTICULAR TYPES THAT WE WANT TO INCLUDE AND EXCLUDE. >> Bronsky: GOOD. AND I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP DEFINITIONS BECAUSE YOU MADE A STATEMENT THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. YOU SAID THAT THE FAA DEFINES ANY PLACE WHERE SOMETHING IS LANDING OR TAKING OFF AS AN AIRPORT. ARE WE GOING TO BE CREATING MANY AIRPORTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY MAKING THIS A LAND USE FOR THESE PLACES TO LAND AND TAKE OFF FROM? >> THAT WOULDN'T BE MY UNDERSTANDING. MY REFERENCE TO THE FAA AND AIRPR CATCH-ALL FOR ANYWHERE THAT AN AIRCRAFT TAKES OFF AND LANDS FROM. IT WOULD INCLUDE OUR CONVENTIONAL AIRPORTS. IT WOULD INCLUDE HELIPORTS AND HE WILL PADS. VERTI PORTS. >> Bronsky: WE ARE CREATING MANY AIRPORTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD CALL IT. >> ANYWHERE THAT ACCEPTS AIRCRAFT LANDINGS AND TAKING OFF, THAT'S CONSIDERED A TYPE OF APORT >> Bronsky: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT WE'RE -- WHEN WE START ADDING LANGUAGE LIKE THAT, JUST LIKE THE ROTARY, THE TILT ROTOR PASSENGER THINGS, WE NEED TO BE VERY CLEAR WITH THE CITIZENS AS WELL AS EACH OF US ON THE COMMISSION THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE PUTTING OURSELVES UP FOR. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: TWO COMMENTS AND A QUESTION. I THINK I REMEMBER A CASE -- WAS IT MEDICAL CITY PLANO? WHERE THE STUDY ON NOISE SHOWED THAT MOST OF THE IMPACT WAS ON THE TAKEOFF AND ON THE LANDING, DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF POWER ESSENTIALLY USED TO EXECUTE THOSE ACTIONS. TO CHAIRMAN DOWN'S POINT, A SOLID MASONRY WALL WHICH RESTRICTS AIR FLOW INTO THE AREA WOULD REQUIRE MORE POWER AN. I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT IF THERE'S A WAY TO ALMOST GIVE AN EXCEPTION BECAUSE THE BENEFITS TO ME IN THE LONG RUN MAKE MORE SENSE. THIS IS GOING TO BE BY RIGHT IN THOSE THREE DISTRICTS FOR THE SMALL DRONES, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD. AN SUP FOR LARGE DRONES. WHY ARE WE RESTRICTING IT BY RIGHT FROM MY NON-RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION. I KNOW WE HAVE A REASON, I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER IT FOR THE SMALL DRONES. >> SO FOR ALL OF THE LAND USE PERMISSIONS, IN TERMS OF AS A PRIMARY USE WE LOOKED AT THOSE DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW THE WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION CENTER USE. AND SO THOSE DISTRICTS ARE WHERE WE'VE IDENTIFIED IT WOULD BEST FIT AS A PRIMARY USE. AS AN ACCESSORY USE, WE'VE IDENTIFIED CERTAIN RETAIL-TYPE USES AS WELL AS WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION CENTER WHERE BASED ON WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE INDUSTRY, THESE ARE BUSINESSES THEY TEND TO CO-LOCATE WITH AND THESE BUSINESSES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN EVERY SINGLE NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE CITY WIH THE EXCEPTION OF 01 . >> Olley: THE ACCESSORY USE WILL BE BY RIGHT, NOT NECESSARILY -- SO RETAIL STORE WOULD NOT NEED TO APPLY FOR AN SUP FOR A SMALL DRONE. >> SMALL WOULD ALWAYS BE BY RIGHT AND LARGE WOULD ALWAYS BE BY SUP. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. DOES THIS PROPOSAL REQUIRE ROOFTOP SCREENING OF THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS? >> YES. IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THAT ROOFTOP AREA BE SCREENED CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR MECHANICAL UNITS. >> Brounoff: I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT STORAGE, I'M TALKING ABOUT JUST THE TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREAS THEMSELVES. BECAUSE THE OPERATORS HAVE SENT US LETTERS WORRYING ABOUT CREATING VARYING WIND CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT BE HARMFUL TO THE DRONE AIRCRAFT AS A RESULT OF THE SCREENING WALLS. WHAT'S THE PURPOSE BEHIND REQUIRING SCREENING? >> THAT WAS IN THERE MOSTLY TO CREATE THAT CONSISTENCY AMONG SIMILAR USES AND EXISTING STANDARDS IN THE ORDINANCE. >> Brounoff: SIMILAR USES? >> USE OF THE ROOFTOP. >> Brounoff: WHAT SIMILAR USES DO WE HAVE TO DRONE DELIVERY SERVICES? >> THAT WOULD JUST BE OUR HELIPORTS. >> Brounoff: IT SEEMS TO ME THE BUFFERING DISTANCE PROVIDES ADEQUATE PROTECTION FROM NOISE SO WHY DO WE NEED SCREENING FOR? >> THE SCREENING IS MORE FOR AESTHETIC IS WHAT THE PURPOSE IS FOR THE MECHANICAL UNITS. >> Brounoff: I CAN SEE IT FOR STORAGE BUT I'M NOT SURE I SEE THAT. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S GOING NUTS ON ITS OWN. SORRY. MY iPAD SUDDENLY JUST SAID, HEY, I'M GOING TO PLAY MUSIC. [LAUGHTER] >> Brounoff: OKAY. >> Chair Downs: IT WAS A GOOD SONG. >> Brounoff: I'M A LITTLE WORRIED THAT WE HAVE BUSINESSES LOCATED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD CORNER LOCATIONS CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS. AND I'M WONDERING IF THEY MIGHT NOT BE COMPETITIVELY INHIBITED FROM INITIATING A DRONE DELIVERY SERVICE BECAUSE OF THEIR LOCATION. >> YES. THAT WOULD ALWAYS BE THE CASE IF WE WANT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF NOISE SEPARATION. IF WE REMOVED THE NOISE SEPARATION AND THEY HAVE THE SAME ADVANTAGES -- >> Brounoff: I'M THINKING, FOR EXAMPLE, OF A CVS STORE THAT WE USE. IT'S ON THE CORNER OF JUPITER AND PARK. IT'S GOT RESIDENCES ON TWO OF THE FOUR SIDES. I HAVEN'T MEASURED IT BUT PROBABLY WITHIN 300 FEET OR 150 FEET. AND THEY MIGHT BE PRECLUDED FROM HAVING A DRONE DELIVERY SERVICE WHEREAS OTHER CVS LOCATIONS IN LARGER SHOPPING CENTERS MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE IT OR THEIR COMPETITION MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE IT IN OTHER LOCATIONS. >> YES. >> Brounoff: IS THERE A FAIRNESS ISSUE HERE ABOUT SOME BUSINESSES BEING PRECLUDED BECAUSE OF THEIR LOCATION? >> YES, THERE WOULD A FAIRNESS ISSUE BUT THEN I GUESS THE REVERSE OF THAT IS WOULD THERE BE A FAIRNESS ISSUE IF WE RELAX THAT SETBACK FROM CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL USES. SO WOULD THOSE RESIDENTS NOT BE AFFORDED THE SAME COMFORT AND USE OF THEIR PROPERTY IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT SAME 150-FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> Brounoff: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. LISLE. >> Lisle: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: WHAT SONG WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO PLAY? >> Lisle: LET'S LET YOUR IPAD DECIDE. [LAUGHTER] I JUST WANT TO SAY HERE, I WANT PLANO TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF WHATEVER THE BEST IS. AND I CONTINUE TO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS ITEM, REALLY. I'LL KEEP GOING THERE. IF I CAN GO TO SPRING CREEK AND AVENUE K AND GET ON A LITTLE HELICOPTER AND END UP AT THE OTHER SIDE OF LAKE TEXOMA IN 25 MINUTES, WE'VE MADE PROGRESS. I'M ALL FOR IT. PUT A HELICOPTER IN -- PUT AN AIRPORT IN SIX DIFFERENT LOCATIONS WHERE WE CAN ALL GET THERE AND WE'LL UBER THERE AND WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY PARKING THERE. BUT WE'RE NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THAT. MY UNDERSTANDING TODAY, FROM THE PRESENTATION WE HAD, IS WE'RE DELIVING CHEETOS, PEPTO-BISMOL, ICE CREAM -- >> CHICKEN. >> Lisle: WE DID TALK ABOUT A ROTISSERIE CHICKEN. AND I'M NOT -- AND IT'S FREE, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT. THERE'S NO CHARGE. I DON'T SEE THE POINT AT ALL IN PUTTING A 55-POUND DRONE ABOVE OUR CITY, MAKING THE NOISE OF A LEAF BLOWER, THAT WE CAN'T REGULATE, TO DROP A CHICKEN IN SOMEONE'S BACKYARD. I'M SORRY. I DON'T SEE IT. I DON'T SEE THE POINT AT ALL. AND SO I THINK THIS IS THE WAY OF THE FUTURE. MAYBE IT'S GOING TO GET SOMEWHERE PRODUCTIVE BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S PRODUCTIVE TODAY. IF OPEN STORAGE IS REALLY THE ISSUE -- I KNOW IN THE PAST WE'VE MADE EXCEPTIONS FOR CLOTHING DONATION NTERS, STACKS OFOOD THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE OPEN STORAGE. AND SO IF Y'ALL REALLY THINK THAT THIS MOVES PLANO FORWARD, I DON'T. I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO GET AROUND THE OPEN STORAGE ISSUE, AS WE'VE SEEN DONE IN THE PAST. YOU MENTIONED RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY STANDARDS AND THE BUFFERS WERE MODELED ON THAT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S 1,000-FOOT BUFFER . AM I WRONG ON THAT? >> YES. THERE'S VARIABLE DISTANCES. SOME ARE 150, 300. BUT TYPICALLY IT'S IN THAT RANGE. >> Lisle: I WAS REMEMBERING THE ONE THAT HAD NOISE BEING MUCH GREATER. >> I THINK THERE IS ONE 1,000 FOOT. MANY OF THEM ARE 150, 300 FEET, SO THAT'S OUR TYPICAL. >> IT IS ONLY 1,000 FOR THE PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM. THE REST ARE 150. >> Lisle: RIGHT. SO MY POINT IS THAT THE NOISE FROM A DRONE IS GOING TO BE MORE SIMILAR TO A PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM THAN SOMETHING ELSE. >> Chair Downs: DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION FOR STAFF SO WE CAN KIND OF MOVE THROUGH? WE'VE GOT TO GET TO THE OPEN HEARING AND THEN WE CAN HAVE OUR DISCUSSION. >> Lisle: RIGHT. I'M SORRY. MAYBE IT WAS THE TIME OF THE PARKING LOT. I'LL REST FOR NOW AND COME BACK. >> Chair Downs: DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER TONG, WHO COULDN'T GET HER BUTTON TO WORK. >> Tong: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MY QUESTION IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE -- ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF REMINDED ME THAT WHEN WE HAVE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DRONE AREAS, HAVE WE CONSIDERED THAT THAT AREA COULD BE ALREADY BEHIND A SCREENING WALL SOMEWHERE ELSE WITHIN A LARGER PIECE OF THE PROPERTY? SO SHOULD WE -- DO WE HAVE ANY LANGUAGE TO SAY IF THIS AREA IS ALREADY BEHIND ANOTHER WALL OF THE LARGER SHOPPING CENTER, THEN THAT REQUIREMENT IS ALEADY MET. >> YES. SO THE LANGUAGE IN THIS ORDINANCE IS THAT THE SCREENING STANDARDS MUST BE AS PER THE OPEN STORAGE SECTION. AND THE OPEN STORAGE SECTION SIMPLY SAYS THAT THEY MUST BE SCREENED FROM VIEW, STREETS, AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IF THERE'S AN EXISTING SCREENING WALL THERE IT'S ALREADY SCREENED AND THEY WOULDN'T NEED TO ADD ANYTHING. >> Tong: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I JUST WANT TO KIND OF RESPOND TO THE QUESTION THAT MR. -- COMMISSIONER LISLE SAID ABOUT OUR FUTURE OF THE CITY. JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. THERE ARE KIDS RIGHT NOW ORDERING A CUP OF BOBA TEA TO THEIR RESIDENCE BY GRUB HUB, BY GOOGLE EATS, BY WHATEVER YOU CAN THINK OF DELIVERY SYSTEM. SO THE CITIZENS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD IS ORDERING STUFF ONLINE AND HAVING THEM DELIVERE TO THEIR HOUSEHOLD. SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING -- THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO OR WE DON'T WANT TO DO AS A CITY. I THINK THIS IS THE FUTURE O THE CONSUMERS. THEY WILL REQUIRE -- THEY WILL DEMAND TO DO THAT. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: BACK TO THE QUESTION ON THE SCREENING ON THE ROOF. AND I JUST WONDER IS POTENTIALLY PART OF THAT JUST SAFETY FOR THE PEOPLE UP THERE OPERATING, THAT THERE'S SOME KIND OF PARAPET UP THERE TO PROVIDE SAFETY? I WONDER IF THAT MIGHT BE PART OF THE INTENT. >> SO THE SCREENING DOESN'T COME INTO SAFETY. THEY WOULD NATURALLY HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF SAFETY RAILS, AS PER BUILDING CODE. BUT A SAFETY RAIL DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A SCREEN. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THAT DOES BRING UP A GOOD QUESTION, THOUGH. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT WOULD FALL. SAY WE CREATE AN ORDINANCE YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE SCREENING ON A ROOF. AND AN OPERATOR GETS UP THERE. WHAT FUNCTION, ORGANIZATION, DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE CITY IS GOING TO SAY YOU CAN OPERATE UP THERE BUT ONLY IF YOU PUT UP A SAFETY RAIL? DO WE HAVE TO DO THAT OR IS THAT GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE? >> IT WOULD LIKELY BE ANY -- SAY A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR COMMERCIAL PERMIT WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT. THAT WOULD BE MY BEST GUESS FOR WHERE THAT MIGHT BE. >> Chair Downs: WE KNOW THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED UNDER ANYTHING WE'RE PRESENTING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO GET A C.O. TO SET A PAD OUT ON A ROOFTOP? >> CORRECT. I WOULD ALSO ADD, EVEN BEFORE WE GET TO THAT STAGE, OUR BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT DOES REVIEW OUR SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS. SO IF THEY'RE SHOWING A TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA LOCATED ON A ROOF, I WOULD HOPE THAT OUR BUILDING INSPECTIONS CREW WOULD BE CATCHING THAT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO LET'S, RATHER THAN RESPOND TO ME, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION SPECIFICALLY FOR STAFF, EITHER OF YOU? >> YES. >> Chair Downs: GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: ACTUALLY, THAT'S REGARDING THE SCREENING ON ROOFTOP. WE KNOW THAT CURRENTLY IN OUR BUILDING ORDINANCE IF WE HAVE, ON THE ROOFTOP, AIR-CONDITIONING UNITS, WE REQUIRE SOME KIND O SCREENING. IF IT'S ON THE ROOFTOP, I STILL THINK WE NEED SCREENING FOR THE HELICOPTER -- SORRY. >> Chair Downs: THE DRONE. >> Tong: YEAH, THE DRONE. >> Chair Downs: IS THAT A QUESTION OR NO? >> Tong: THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH QUESTIONS. I AM GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE I SHOW THERE'S AT LEAST MAYBE ONE SPEAKER. >> YES. WE HAVE ERIC BREMMER. >> Chair Downs: ARE YOU STILL HERE, MR. BREMMER? >> I AM. JUST AVAILABLE FOR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WITH THAT, THEN, HE'S AVAILABLE. DOES ANYONE HAVE A QUESTION FOR AN OPERATOR, BASED ON WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED? WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NOW, LET ME JUST SET THE STAGE HERE. THIS IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE NOT READY TO APPROVE IT YET. WE WANT TO MAKE THESE OTHER CHANGES TO IT. I ENCOURAGE US TO NOT GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS. IT'S DEVELOPING. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT IT COMES TO THE OPERATION OF THESE THINGS AND IF THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN PLACE AREN'T TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE OPERATION, THE WAY THESE THINGS MOVE, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED OR I THINK WE RUN THE RISK OF THEM SAYING WE CAN'T DO THIS. AND THEY ABSOLUTELY NEED THE ABILITY TO STORE THEIR EQUIPMENT ON SITE AND I THINK WE HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION, SIMILAR TO MR. LISLE'S COMMEN ABOUT WEAKE EXCEPTIONS. I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT MODIFY THIS. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: SURE. WHICH ONE? >> THAT ONE. NO, THAT ONE. I APPRECIATE THE DRIVE TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY. BUT LIKE WE HAVE VOICED IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, THIS IS UNIQUE. THERE'S NO SIMILAR USE, SO TO SPEAK. WE ARE ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO LOOK BEHIND THE CURVE, SO TO SPEAK, AND SEE WHAT'S COMING AND TRY AND ADDRESS THINGS IN A MANNER. SO I -- THE AMENDED DEFINITIONS I AGREE WITH. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE DEFINITIONS. I THINK THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEIGHT UNMANNED LANGUAGE, WHAT HAVE YOU, BOXES THAT LANGUAGE LEGALLY IN A MANNER THAT ALLOWS US TO GIVE OPERATORS A DECENT GUIDELINE TO JUMP OFF FROM. I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE AREAS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY AND JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS DIFFERENT. THIS IS UNIQUE AND REQUI T SCREENING STANDARDS AND -- OR THE BUFFER SEEMS FINE, TREATED AS DIFFERENT AS UNIQUE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. LET ME ASK A QUESTION, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME AND DISCUSSION. FROM STAFF'S STANDPOINT, YOU'VE MADE A PROPOSAL, RECOMMENDATION. I THINK -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS -- I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN MAYBE TRYING TO GET SOME MORE FEEDBACK, BUT SPECIFICALLY WE KNOW WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH SCREENING. I'VE HEARD IT MENTIONED. AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO RETHINK THAT PIECE OF IT. IS THERE ANY OTHER PIECE THAT WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IN THE PROPOSAL? IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK STAFF TO GO RELOOK AT THIS, I WANT THEM TO RELOOK AT IT ONCE AND DEAL WITH IT. I DON'T WANT THEM TO COME BACK AND US SAYING, WELL, WE DON'T REALLY LIKE THE SETBACK ISSUES TOO. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: YEAH, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE SMALLER SITES. I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO RECOGNIZE THAT IF THE CVS AT THE CORNER WANTS TO TAKE TWO PARKIN SPACES AND THEY'RE LANDLOCKED AND OTHERWISE THEY COMPLY, I THINK WE'VE GOT TO ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY. RECOGNIZING THAT FOR EVERY DRONE DELIVERY THAT'S ONE LESS CAR THAT'S COMING THERE. AND SO WHAT IS THE TRADE-OFF FOR SOME OF OUR SMALLER PAD USERS? IS THERE A MAXIMUM X SQUARE FEET AND YOU CAN LOSE X PARKING SPACES. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING I'M WORRIED ABOUT, PRIMARILY FOR THE SMALLER BUSINESSES. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, JUST REAL QUICK. COMMISSIONER LISLE'S COMMENT ABOUT DO WE NEED THIS AND COMMISSIONER TONG'S COMMENT ABOUT THAT'S ALREADY HAPPENING WITH GRUB HUB. THAT LEANS INTO COMMISSIONER LISLE'S POINT THAT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY DELIVERING THIS WAY AND MAYBE WE DON'T NEED IT. THEN I THINK ABOUT IT THIS WAY. THIS IS HAPPENING AND IF WE DON'T DO IT, MY CONCERN IS DO WE PUT BUSINESSES IN PLANO AT A DISADVANTAGE? AND THAT CREATES A DIFFERENT PROBLEM FOR US THAT MAYBE WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE. AND SO I THINK -- I STARTED THINKING THROUGH YOUROINT AND THINKING THERE'S MERIT TO IT BUT THEN I STARTED THINKING ABOUT THE BUSINESSES OVER IN FRISCO ARE TAKING OUR BUSINESS. IT'S A COMPLEX ISSUE. I THINK WE HAVE TO GET IT RIGHT. I SUPPORT WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT AND I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT PATH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER LISLE. >> Lisle: I'LL FINISH UP MY THOUGHTS FROM EARLIER. THIS IS A SOLUTION LOOKIN FOR A PROBLEM. YOU'RE RIGHT, GRUB HUB IS DOING THIS BUT WE'RE DOING IT ON THE GROUND. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AUTONOMOUS CARS LONG BEFORE WE NEED TO FLYHEM THROUGH THE AIR WITH A LEAF BLOWER. I WOULD TELL STAFF TO JUST REST ON THIS UNTIL WE ACTUALLY KNOW A POINT OF IT BECAUSE THERE'S PLENTY OF WAYS THAT MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE TO DELIVER SOMETHING. I DON'T THINK WE'RE PUTTING ANY PLANO BUSINESSES AT A DISADVANTAGE. THERE'S NOT EVEN A PRICE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. IT'S FREE. THERE'S NO REVENUE LOST BY -- THERE'S ACTUALLY MONEY GENERATED IF SOMEONE BRINGS IT TO YOU. I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO GET THERE, NO MATTER WHAT THE POINT IS. I JUST THINK ABO 15th STREET AND 75. WE HAVE STARBUCKS AND BED BATH AND BEYOND IS STILL THERE AND LET'S SAY THERE'S A BOOKSTORE STILL THERE AND BOSTON MARKET AND HALLMARK. ARE WE IMAGINING ALL THESE PLACES HAVE A PARKING SPOT AND THEY'RE ALL FLYING STUFF? >> Chair Downs: I THINK THE MARKET AND THE OPERATORS WILL DICTATE WHAT HAPPENS THERE. >> Olley: JUST GIVE THEM THE GUIDELINES. >> Chair Downs: I WOULD RATHER HAVE THE GUIDELINES IN PLACE RATHER THAN WAKE UP AND FIND 50 PART-TIME OPERATORS DECIDING THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO THIS. I THINK ONCE THEY LEAVE THE GROUND, WE HAVE NO CONTROL. THE ONLY THING WE CAN CONTROL IS WHERE THIS MIGHT HAPPEN AND WHAT THAT SPACE MIGHT LOOK LIKE. IF WE DON'T NEED IT IN TEN YEARS, WE TAKE IT OFF THE BOOKS. >> Lisle: I THINK THIS IS OUR NEXT COTTAGE ORDINANCE THAT ENDS UP WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF TIME AND EFFORT AND NETS US TWO COTTAGES THAT WE END UP REPEALING LATER. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S NOT INSTRUCTIONS TO STAFF. >> Lisle: MY INSTRUCTION WOULD BE LET IT GO. >> Chair Downs: I UNDERSTAND. MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAI. I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS HAPPEN IN SOME FORM. I'D LIKE TO SEE US TAKE SOME TIME AND GET INTO A LITTLE BETTER FORM TO GO FORWARD. IF A BUSINESS WANTS TO PUT IN AN OPERATION TO DELIVER CHICKENS, ICE CREAM, OR WHATEVER ELSE, THAT'S A BUSINESS DECISION. THAT'S NOT A REASON NOT TO DO IT. IT ALSO, INCIDENTALLY, TAKES A CAR OFF THE ROAD. THAT'S ONE LESS VEHICULAR TRIP. THAT'S LESS POLLUTION. LESS TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK HAS TENTIAL. TH OY PROEM I HAD WAS IS SCREENING ON THE ROOFTOP REALLY NECESSARY? I WOULDN'T VOTE AGAINST IT JUST BECAUSE THERE'S SCREENING ON THE ROOFTOP UNLESS IT CREATED A HAZARDOUS CONDITION. THEN I WOULD HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH IT. I WAS JUST QUESTIONING WHETHER IT WAS REALLY NECESSARY TO HAVE IT BUT IT WASN'T -- >> Chair Downs: RELOOK AT SCREENING, IN PARTICULAR, AND IS THERE A WAY TO TWEAK THE LOCATION SO SMALLER LOCATIONS CAN DO IT? I THINK EVERYBODY IS OKAY WITH THE AREAS THAT ARE BY RIGHT AND THEN T SUP REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT. COMMISSIONER LISLE. >> Lisle: HELLO? I'M JUST NOT CLOSE ENOUGH. WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN HERE, A DRONE OPERATOR WITH QUESTIONS. CAN I ASK HIM A QUESTION? OH, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. I LOST THAT OPPORTUNITY. >> Chair Downs: SINCE WE'RE GOING TO PUSH THIS, THEY'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: [OFF MIC] >> CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT REAL QUICKLY, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT SCREENING. THE CITY HAS ALWAYS HAD STANDARDS REGARDING AESTHETICS AND SCREENING HAS BEEN A VALUABLE PART OF THAT. YOU LOOK AT OUR DUMPSTERS. WE HAVE MASONRY ENCLOSURES FOR DUMPSTERS. A LOT OF CITIES HAVE WOODEN ENCLOSURES. WE HAVE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS FOR ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. THIS IS AT A POINT WHERE YOU'RE STANDING 5.5 FEET AT THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT SITE DISTANCES, BUILDING SIZES, THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES WHERE SCREENING MAY NOT BE NEEDED. HOWEVER, THE GOAL IS TO SCREEN SOME OF THOSE MORE UNSIGHTLY EQUIPMENT ITEMS. SAME WITH OPEN STORAGE. WE LOOK AT GROUND STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS THINGS LIKE THAT. JUST THE VISUAL ASPECTS GET A LITTLE CLUTTERED. THE CITY HAS GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TO RESPECT THE VIEWS AND AESTHETICS OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THOSE THINGS IN PLACE. I WANT TO PROVIDE THAT CONFECTION FOR YOU. WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT THOSE ISSUES AGAIN, BRING YOU BACK SOME INFORMATION, SOME OPTIONS REGARDING THAT. REGAING TABLING, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT A MOTION FOR TABLING, JUST TO A DATE CERTAIN. MS. SEBASTIAN, HAVE Y'ALL THOUGHT ABOUT A DATE WHERE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TORING THINGS BACK? >> I DON'T KNOW. I THINK TWO WEEKS IS PROBABLY TOO SHORT. A MONTH OR SIX WEEKS WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE PRACTICAL. >> Chair Downs: SIX WEEKS WOULD BE BETTER. >> THAT IS OCTOBER 2 WOULD BE THAT DATE. >> Chair Downs: MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I MAKE A MOTION WE TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE OCTOBER 2 MEETING. >> I'LL SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE OCTOBER 2 MEETING. WITH THE INSTRUCTION TO BE RELOOKING THE SCREENING AND LOCATION BASED ON OFFSETS OR SETBACKS TO BENEFIT POTENTIALLY SMALLER BUSINESS OPERATIONS. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE ABSTENTION BY COMMISSIONER LISLE. OKAY. ITEM 3. MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: IN AN EFFORT TO BE FULLY TRANSPARENT AND TO KEEP, ALTHOUGH I'M NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO, I WOULD LIKE TO RECUSE MYSELF AS I SERVE AS AN ELDER FOR RECLAMATION CHURCH WHICH IS CROSS BEND CHRISTIAN CHURCH, WHICH IS THE APPLICANT FOR THIS. I'LL BE RECUSING MYSELF. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2023-016 - REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR DAY CARE CENTER ON 5.2 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CROSS BEND ROAD AND BRANCH HOLLOW DRIVE. ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE-7 PETITIONER: CROSS BEND CHRISTIA THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDE. >> GOOD EVENING. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT FOR A DAY CARE CENTER. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARD. FUTURE LAND USE MAP, EXCUSE ME. THE REQUEST IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESCRIPTIONS AND PRIORITIES AND MIX OF USES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARDS. THE DAY CARE CURRENTLY OPERATES AS AN IN-HOME DAY CARE IN A NEARBY RESIDENTIAL HOME. THE SUP IS BEING REQUESTED TO EXPAND THE CAPACITY OF THE IN-HOME DAY CARE. THERE ARE TWO SPECIFIC-USE PERMITS FOR DAY CARE CENTER WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND BOTH DAY CARE CENTERS ARE CURRENTLY IN OPERATION. THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THIS ADDITIONAL SUP IS NECESSARY AS THEIR BUSINESS IS CURRENTLY OPERATING IN PROXIMITY AND THEY ARE LOOKING TO EXPAND. WE RECEIVED TWO RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER. AND CITYWIDE WE RECEIVED ONE SUPPORT AND TWO IN OPPOSITION. AND WE DID RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION OVER THE WEEKEND. THAT'S NOT REFLECTED ON THIS MAP. FOR A TOTAL OF THREE RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS OR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE MAP THAT SHOWED THE -- THOSE OTHER TWO SUPs. NOW GO BACK TO THE OPPOSITION. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ONE OF THE SUP DAY CARES. >> Chair Dns: IT'S NEXT TO IT RIGHT? >> I BELIEVE IT'S THE DAY CARE. IT'S IN THE PACKET. [LAUGHTER] >> Chair Downs: YEAH. THAT'S PRETTY FUNNY. I WAS THINKING IT WAS ONE NEXT TO IT. >> Olley: ANY CONCERNS, GIVEN THAT THERE'S SUP, SUP. I BELIEVE THERE'S A MONTESSORI NOT FAR FROM THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. ANY CONCERNS BY STAFF AS TO WHY AN SUP SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED? >> NO CONCERNS FROM STAFF. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: MY QUESTION IS WITH THIS SUP ISSUED, WOULD IT KIND OF ENLARGE THE BOUNDARY OF THE EXISTING FACILITY OR MAKE IT CLOSER TO ANY SURROUNDING RETAILS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT INCUR SOME CONFORMANCE OF OTHER BUSINESSES? SOME BUSINESSES CANNOT BE WITHIN CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, DISTANCE TO THE DAY CARE CENTER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BY ENLARGING THE AREA OR ISSUING THIS SUP, COULD IT CAUSE ANY TROUBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING BUSINESSES? >> NO, THERE ARE NO PROXIMITY CONCERNS. >> Tong: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONERROOFF. >> Brounoff: IS THIS ITEM 3? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 3. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 3 AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE ABSTENTION, MR. BRONSKY. NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 7 BECAUSE WE COVERED 4, 5, AND 6 EARLIER. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: DISCUSSION AND ACTION WITH OPPORTUNITY TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND CONSIDER THE ADDITION OF A LAND USE CLASSIFICATION AND ASS RESTRICTIONS FOR PET FUNERAL HOME AND CREMATORY. APPLICANT: ALAN AND RENE BLAKEMORE. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M MELISSA KLEIN, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 19, STAFF PRESENTED INFORMATION WHETHER A NEW LAND USE SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REGULATE PET FUNERAL HOME AND CREMATORY SERVICES . THE PURPOSE OF THIS ITEM IS TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS FROM THAT JUNE 19th MEETING AND SOLICIT ADDITIONAL DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION. COMMISSION ASKED STAFF TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ON HUMAN AND ANIMAL CREMATIONS. CREMATION IS THE INCINERATION OF HUMAN OR ANIMAL REMAINS TO PRODUCE ASHES. WHILE HUMAN AND ANIMAL CREMATORIES ARE LICENSED AND DEFINED DIFFERENTLY BY THE STATE, THE PROCESS AND EQUIPMENT ARE LARGELY THE SAME EXCEPT FOR AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF CREMATION, WHICH IS ALLOWED FOR ANIMAL REMAINS ONLY. THIS METHOD IS ALKALINE HYDROLYSIS IN WHICH ANIMAL REMAINS ARE RAPIDLY DECAYED IN AN ALKALINE WATER SOLUTION UNDER PRESSURE, LEAVING ONLY THE BONES WHICH ARE THEN TURNED INTO ASHES. STAFF ALSO RESEARCHED THE HISTORY OF THE CREMATORY USE IN PLANO. THE ZONING ORDINANCE HAS HISTORICALLY NOT REFERENCED CREMATORY AS A PERMITTED USE. A MORTUARY OR FUNERAL HOME HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE SINCE THE FIRST ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE WITH AD IN 1986 AND REMAINING UNCHANGED TODAY. THE CREMATORIES OPERATED BY ANIMAL CARE SERVICES ARE PERMITTED UNDER THE GOVERNMENT FACILITY LAND USE. STAFF REACHED OUT TO THE COMMUNITIES LISTED ON THE SCREEN ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF CREMATORIES SPECIFICALLY ANIMAL CREMATORIES IN THEIR JURISDICTIONS. OF THE THREE WHO RESPONDED, TWO HAVE NOT RECEIVD COMPLAINTS BUT ONE HAS REGARDING SMOKE, ODOR, AND HEALTH CONCERNS. ANIMAL SERVICES STAFF HAS AT THE ANIMAL SHELTER IS USED TWICE WEEKLY, ON AVERAGE, AND THEY ARE UNAWARE OF ANY PUBLIC COMPLAINTS REGARDING THE OPERATION OF THE CREMATORY. IF AN ANIMAL CREMATORY IS TO RECEIVE A PERMIT FROM TCEQ, IT MUST MEET SPECIFIC CRITERIA. ONLY CARCASSES OR ANIMAL PARTS WITH ANY ASSOCIATED PACKAGING SHALL BE PROCESSED. STATE REGULATIONSO NOT DIFFERENTIATE AMONG TYPES OR CATEGORIES OF ANIMALS SUCH AS PETS, LIVESTOCKS, OR ROAD KILL. HOWEVER, FACILITIES MAY NOT ACCEPT ANIMAL CARCASSES THAT EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF THEIR LARGEST INCINERATOR AND MAY NOT DISMEMBER ANY CARCASSES DURING THE PROCESSING. THE STATE ALSO HAS A VARIETY OF REGULATIONS REGARDING THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF INCINERATORS. FACILITIES HAVE TO MAINTAIN RECORDS OF ALL MONITORING AND TESTING RESULTS, HOURS OF OPERATION, AND QUANTY O WASTE BURNED. AND ALL INCINERATORS MUST BE OPERATED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER OPERATING PROCEDURES. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AS PART OF THE TCEQ PERMIT REGARDING AIR POLLUTION AND ASH CONTROL. AND THEN THE ZONING ORDINANCE ALSO INCLUDES PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IN ARTICLE 24 WHICH INCLUDE REGULATIONS REGARDING SMOKE AND PARTICULATE MATTER AS WELL AS ODOR. SO PER PREVIOUS DIRECTION AT THE JUNE 19 MEETING, THE COMMISSIONIRECD SFF TO INCLUDE PET FUNERALS IN THE MORTUARY FUNERAL HOME USE TO BE TREATED AS THE SAME AS HUMAN FUNERALS. IF THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT CREMATORY IS APPROPRIATE FOR PLANO AND DIRECT STAFF TO ADD A NEW USE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE DRAFT DEFINITION WOULD BE CREATED FOR THE COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION. A POTENTIAL DEFINITION IS SHOWN HERE. A BUILDING STRUCTURE OR PART THEREOF USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE CREMATION OF HUMAN OR ANIMAL REMAINS. A CREMATORY SHALL HAVE APPROPRIATE PERMITS, LICENSING, AND REGULATION BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. AT THIS TIME STAFF IS REQUESTING THE COMMISSION PROVIDE DIRECTION ON THE QUESTION SHOWN HERE. ONE, SHOULD CREMATORY BE ADDED AS A USE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE? AND, IF SO, SHOULD IT INCLUDE HUMAN AND ANIMAL REMAINS OR ONLY ONE OR THE OTHER? AND, TWO, SHOULD NO CHANGES BE MADE AT THIS TIME SO IT WOULD REMAIN AN UNLISTED AND DISALLOWED USE. OUR RECOMMENDATION. STAFF RECOMNDS THA THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING THE CREMATORY LAND USE AND CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO MAKE ANY DIRECTED CHANGES REGARDING THE USE, IF APPROPRIATE. I WILL GO BACK TO THE DIRECTIONS SLIDE HERE AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. JUST FOR THE COMMISSION'S PURPOSE, WE'RE NOT GETTING INTO THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF ANY OF THIS. IT'S ALL REGULATED BY STATE. SO REALLY, FOR US, IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE DECISION. DO WE WANT TO ALLOW CREMATORY? PET, HUMAN, BOTH OR EITHER, I GUESS, IN THE CITY OF PLANO. IT'S PRETTY BASIC. THAT'S ALL THAT'S BEING ASKED. ULTIMATELY I THINK IT WOULD COME DOWN TO WHERE DO WE WANT TO ALLOW IT. BUT RIGHT NOW SHOULD IT BE ADDED AS A USE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. ANYONE OPPOSED TO THAT? COMMISSIONER TONG, YOU'RE OPPOSED TO IT? COMMENT? >> Tong: I'M OPPOSED TO IT. FROM A REAL ESTATE POINT OF VIEW, IF WE ALLOW THE USE OF CREMATORY, THERE WILL BE PEOPLE GETTING INTO THE BUSINESS OF DOING THAT AND I THINK MOST OF THE HOMEOWNERS, WHEN THEY BUY A HOME, THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED OR CLOSE TO -- THAT WILL DECREASE THE VALUES. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S WHY I SAID ALLOWING IT IS ONE THING. WHERE WE ALLOW IT IS DIFFERENT. >> Tong: IF YOU ALLOW IT, SOME WILL DO IT. >> Chair Downs: WE MIGHT SAY THAT'S ONLY ALLOWED IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE NEXT TO MEBODY'S HSE. >> Tong: THERE WILL BE RESIDENTIAL AREAS AROUND THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREAS. >> Chair Downs: SO IN GENERAL, THOUGH, THE QUESTION: SHOULD CREMATORY BE ADDED AS A USE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE? I THINK THE GENERAL WAS YES? YES, WE WANT TO INCLUDE THAT. FROM THERE WE CAN GO HOW DO WE -- WHERE DO WE DO IT. NUMBER TWO IS -- WE'RE GIVING YOU DIRECTION ONE. IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. THEN WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? I DON'T KNOW. DO WE WANT TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING OR DO WE WANT TO HAVE A DRAFT? YEAH, I'M SEEING THAT. WE'LL GET THERE IN JUST A SECOND. >> I THINK IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION. IF YOU CALL A PUBLIC HEARING, WE CAN BRING THAT BACK TO YOU IN THE FUTURE. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IMMEDIATE. WE CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ADOPTION. PRIOR TO OUR HEARING, IF YOU PREFER. >> Chair Downs: VERY GOOD. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO GET INTO THE TECHNICAL, MY QUESTION IS JUST A REALLY SIMPLE ONE FOR STAFF. MY UNDERSTANDING FROM YOUR REPORT IS THAT CREMATORIES REQUIRE A TCEQ PERMIT FOR PERMISSIONS? >> YES. >> Ratliff: IF AND WHEN WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS, I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT OTHER USES REQUIRE A TCEQ PERMIT AND WHAT ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS ARE THEY CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN? >> YES. WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT FOR THE FUTURE. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MY ASSUMPTION IS NOW THAT WE HAVE SAID YES, THE STAFF WILL DO ITS USUAL SIX-FOOT DEEP -- PARDON THE PUN -- DIVE, DIG TO A OF THE TNGS ASSOCIED WITH THAT. SO MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WHAT IS THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE CITY'S CURRENT ANIMAL CREMATORY IS LOCATED? >> WE'LL NEED A MOMENT TO LOOK THAT UP. >> I BELIEVE INDUSTRIAL. >> Brounoff: I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE ALLOW IT IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS AND IS.TEVER THAT ZONINDISTCT >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YES. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO DETERMNE HOW MUCH WE CONTROL IT IS WHAT KIND OF -- FROM HOW FAR AWAY WILL WE ALLOW BODIES TO BE BROUGHT TO BE CREMATED AND WHAT EFFECT THAT MIGHT HAVE ON OUR CITY. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE CAN CONTROL THAT OR HOW MUCH WE WANT TO, BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN DISCUSSING IT, AT LEAST. >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT'S ILLEGAL TO CARRY THEM ACROSS STATE LINES, SO WE'LL GO FROM THERE. ALL RIGHT. FROM STAFF'S STANDPOINT, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WANT TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING ANDET AATEL ALLOW YOU TO BRING BACK -- I'M ASSUMING, LIKE WE SAID, YOU'LL DO YOUR RESEARCH. BUT THE MAIN QUESTION THAT YOU NEEDED WAS ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW IT. AND IT LOOKS LIKE, IN GENERAL, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THAT. YES MA'AM. >> IT'S AN LI-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1. AND IF I MAY ASK, DO YOU HAVE DIRECTION ON THE ANIMAL OR HUMAN PART? I DON'T RECALL IF THAT WAS CLEAR. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I DON'T WANT TO DIFFERENTIATE, PERSONALLY. NO. SO IF IT'S A CREMATORY, IT'S A CREMATORY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: WELL, THEY'LL MAKE THAT PROPOSAL WITH RESEARCH PROBABLY AND WHERE IT'S ALLOWED IN OTHER CITIES AND ALL THAT STUFF. WE'LL LEAN ON THEM FOR THAT. >> MR. CHAIRMAN? >> Chair Downs: YES. >> WHEN IT COMES BACK, I WAS HOPING IT WOULD COME BACK IN THE FORM OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE THAT WE CAN APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE, VOTE ON, AS SOMETHING TO SEND TO THE COUNCIL. >> IT'S UP TO THE COMMISSION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE HEARING, THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK AS AN ORDINANCE FOR CONSERI. OTHERWISE, WE'LL BRING IT BACK AS AN ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ITEM. WE CAN PUT IT IN THE FORM OF THE ORDINANCE SO YOU CAN SEE ALL THE CHANGES BEFORE YOU CALL THE HEARING. IT'S YOUR PREFERENCE. >> I WOULD SAY LET'S BRING IT BACK ONCE. THERE'S NO NEED TO BRING IT BACK TWICE. LET'S HAVE A HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE. >> Chair Downs: GO AHEAD. >> Lisle: IS THIS AT 4840 14th STREET? >> NO. I THINK THIS IS OFF PLANO PARKWAY. IT'S THE CITY'S SERVICE CENTER. >> Lisle: WHERE 14th STREET AND PLANO PARKWAY JOIN? >> 15th STREET. >> THAT IS THE -- 4840 14th STREET IS A PREVIOUS LOCATION OF THE ANIMAL SERVICES. SO THERE IS AN OLD CREMATORY THAT IS THERE. BUT THE ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER IS ON PLANO PARKWAY MORE IN THE CENTER OF TOWN. >> Lisle: I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT WAS. I GUESS THE OLD ONE WAS LI-1 AS WELL WITH RESIDTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NEXT DOOR, WHICH MAY BE WHY WE MOVED IT. >> RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY CENTER, ACTUALLY. >> Lisle: I SAW THAT TOO BUT IT'S ALL PURPLE. I DIDN'T KNOW WHICH ONE IT WAS. LI-1 IS PURPLE AND RT IS PURPLE. BUT OKAY. SO IT'S MOVED AND I KNOW WHERE IT IS NOW. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: HOW MUCH TIME DOES STAFF WANT TO BRING SOMETHING BACK? >> IF YOU JUST DIRECT US EITHER TO CALL THE HEARING OR BRING BACK A DISCUSSION, WE'LL DO THE RESEARCH AND THEN SET A DATE, AS NEEDED. >> Chair Downs: YOU NEED SIX WEEKS? DO WE WANT TO DO OCTOBER AGAIN? >> YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SET A DATE. WE'LL BRING IT BACK WHEN WE'RE READY. >> Chair Downs: IN THAT CASE, WE WANT TO TAKE A MOTION TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING. >> Chair Downs: TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE. >> TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND OUR ZONING ORDINANCE TO MAKE CHANGES REGARDING CREMATORIES AND PET FUNERAL FACILITIES. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. AND LAST ITEM I BELIEVE, ITEM 8. WE HAVE AN UPDATE ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? >> YES. [OFF MIC] I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK YOU -- THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS BUT MY WIFE AND I, OUR RETORT IS ON ORDER. I WAS HOPING IT WOULD BE HERE JANUARY 1. WE ARE CURRENTLY LIMITED TO LOOKING IN McKINNEY, TEXAS. McKINNEY IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THAT'S HOW THEY HAVE THE ZONING FOR THE CREMATORY. SO I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY WAY IT COULD BE EXPEDITED SO WE HAVE SOME TIME TO MAYBE CONSIDER SOME PROPERTIES IN THE PLANO AREA AS WELL TOO BEFORE WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ON A PROPERTY. THAT WAS MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. >>hair Downs: THANK YOU. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 8. DISCUSSION: SHORT-TERM RENTAL STUDY UPDATE - PRESENTATION OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL STUDY PROGRES TO DATE. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLA. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. TRY TO MAKE THIS QUICK. CHRISTINA SEBASTIAN, LAND RECORDS PLANNING MANAGER. QUICK UPDATE ON THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL STUDY. AS YOU KNOW, THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED MANYIMES AT COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. LAST FALL COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE A REGISTRATION ORDINANCE AND TO UTILIZE A SIMILAR PROCESS TO THE ONE ARLINGTON, TEXAS USED TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE CHANGES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP. COUNCIL, AT A JOINT MEETING WITH THIS COMMISSION, ADOPTED AN INTERIM BAN ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN MAY AND LATER THAT MONTH COUNCIL APPOINTED 22 PLANO RESIDENTS TO A SHORT-TERM RENTAL TASK FORCE. CURRENTLY THE REGISTATION ORDINANCE IS TABLED TO A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING. SO PHASE 1 IS OUTREACH AND DATA COLLECTION. WE ARE WORKING TO IDENTIFY LISTINGS. MOST OF THOSE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY ARE IDENTIFIED. THE MULTIFAMILY STILL IS CHALLENGING BUT STAFF CONTINUES TO WORK WITH THEM. THOSE IDENTIFIED LISTINGS ARE ADDED TO THE COMPUTER-AIDED DISPATCH SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION 9-1-1 SO THAT THERE'S MORE ACCURATE INFORMATION FOR OFFICERS AND FOR ANALYSIS AFTERWARDS. ALSO,E AR WORKING WITH GAFFE STRATEGIES FOR PUBLIC OUTREACH SUPPORT. THERE WAS A COMMUNITY SURVEY LAST SPRING, OVER 6,000 RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED AND SINCE THEN THE TASK FORCE HAS BEGUN MEETING. THEY HAVE HAD TWO MEETINGS TO FURTHER STUDY THE ISSUE AND ARE REPORTING BACK FINDINGS. SO THE MAIN THING I WANTED TO SHARE TONIGHT IS THAT WE HAVE OUR SHORT-TERM RENTAL OPEN HOUSE THIS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23 FROM 6:00 TO 8:00 P.M. AT EVENT 13 HERE IN DOWNTOWN PLANO. THE SAME INFORMATION AND FEEDBACK OPPORTUNITIES ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE AT PLANOSTR.COM. THAT OPEN HOUSE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR A WEEK FROM WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23 TO WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30. AFTER THE OPEN HOUSE, THE TASK FORCE WILL RECONVENE AND THEIR FINDINGS WILL BE REPORTED BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL. PHASE 2 IS GOING TO FOCUS ON POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS AND THE PLAN IS FOR THE STUDY TO CONCLUDE IN TIME FOR ANY NEEDED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS BEFORE THE BAN EXPIRES IN MAY OF NEXT YEAR. THERE'S NO ACTION REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS ITEM. JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO ATTEND THE OPEN HOUSE IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. HYBRID -- I'M ASSUMING THEN IT'S STREAMED AND THEN THERE'S QUESTIONS AVAILABLE THROUGH CHAT OR SOMETHING? >> THERE WILL BE BOARDS AT THE OPEN HOUSE. STATIONS FOR PEOPLE TO WALK THROUGH. FOR THE ONLINE ONE, IT'S BASICALLY PAGES TO TAB THROUGH TO LOOK AT THE SAME INFORMATION. AND THEN THERE'S, AT THE OPEN HOUSE THERE'S PAPER OPTIONS. BUT GENERALLY VIRTUAL CELL PHONE-BASED POLLING AND THAT SAME POLLING SYSTEM WILL BE USED ON THEEBSI. THERE IS A VIDEO AT BOTH SITES BUT IT WILL BE -- IT'S A SHORT VIDEO. >> Chair Downs: SO THIS IS NOT REALLY A PRESENTATION. >> IT IS A COME AND GO EVENT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. LAST ITEM WOULD BE ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA. ANYBODY? >> CHAIR, WE DO HAVE SOMEONE THAT REGISTERED TO SPEAK. ERIC BREMMER. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: I WAS WONDERING. YOU WERE STILL HERE BUT, OKAY. I THOUGHT HE'S -- OH, NEVER MIND. IT'S LATE. AND IT'S HOT. OKAY. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. IT'S 10:13. WE ARE ADJOURNED. [MEETING ADJOURNED]