>> PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST. THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF SUPER OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY INFORMATION. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> CONSENT AGENDA, THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS ANDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO PULL THE ONLY ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. PLEAST VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. PLEASE NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER TONG WAS UNABLE TO JOIN US THIS EVENING. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE RECEIVED. APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO 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 MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MT REGULATIONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS. AGENDA ITEM 1A AND 1B WILL BE READ TOGETHER. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> AGENDA ITEM 1A, PUBLIC HEARING. ZONING CASE 2022-015 - REQUEST TO REZONE 36.5 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LEGACY DRIVE, 1,168 FEET EAST OF ALMA DRIVE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 489-MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE-1 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-489-MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE-2. THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1B IS A PUBLIC HEARING, REVISED CONCEPT PLAN: CHASE OAKS APARTMENTS, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - 470 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS ON ONE LOT ON 34.7 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LEGACY DRIVE, 1,168 FEET EAST OF ALMA DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-489-MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE-1. APPLICANT IS 701 LEGACY DRIVE LLC, 701 LEGACY DRIVE IV LLC. THAT IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING. I AM THE SENIOR PLANNING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE PRER FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 489 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE 1 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 489 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE 2 WITH EIGHT PLAN DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS. THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 9, WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMITS NUMBER 62 FOR A GOLF COURSE AND NUMBER 107 FOR A PRIVATE CLUB. ACROSS LEGACY DRIVE TO THE SOUTH IS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR RESIDENCE 3 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 329 R A COMMUNITY CENTER. SHOWN ON THE SCREEN IS THE COMPANION REVISED CONCEPT PLAN SHOWING A BLEND OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. THE REVISED CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS PROPOSED 124 UNITS IN 20 NEW BUILDINGS. THIS IS SHOWN WITH FOUR DIFFERENT BUILDING TYPES AND LAYOUTS, ADDING THAT THERE WILL BE 10 TWO-STORY BUILDINGS AND 10 THREE-STORY BUILDINGS. THERE WILL ALSO BE ONE, ONE-STORY COMMUNITY BUILDING THAT IS EXPANDING, TWO PROPOSED DOG PARKS WITH A COMBINATION OF SURFACE PARKING AND CLOSED GARAGE SPACES TUCKED UNDER PARKING AND TAN DOM SPACES THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY. SHOWN ON THE SCREEN IS AN ILLUSTRATED CONCEPT PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. THE YELLOW AND ORANGE BUILDINGS ARE THE NEW PROPOSED BUILDINGS. THE BUILDINGS IN YELLOW ARE PROPOSED TO BE TWO STORIES AND THE BUILDINGS IN ORANGE ARE PROPOSED TO BE THREE STORIES. THE BUILDINGS WITH THE TAN COLOR ARE THE EXISTING BUILNGS. THE BUILDING WITH THE PURPLE COLOR IS COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION. THIS CASE MAY START TO SOUND FAMILIAR TO SOME OF YOU, AND THAT IS CORRECT. BACK IN 2020 THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A SIMILAR ZONING REQUEST TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE, HOWEVER THE CITY COUNCIL DENIED THE REQUEST. AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO NOTE TWO MISCALCULATIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT VERSUS WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THIS ZONING CASE. ITS REPORT NOTES THAT 70 NEW UNITS WERE PROPOSED COMPARED TO THE 124 UNITS AND THAT UNIVERSAL DESIGN STANDARDS WERE TO BE IMPLEMENTED. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO APPROVE THE ZONING CASE FOR THE 124 UNITS AND NOT INCLUDE COMMUNITY DESIGN -- UNIVERSAL, EXCUSE ME, DESIGN STANDARDS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. D THE PRORTY IS CLASSIFIED AS MULTI-FAMILY TYPES IN THE LAND USE AND HOUSING INVENTORY MAP. THIS REQUEST DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE MIX OF USES OF THE N-BOARDS AND WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN MULTI-FAMILY TYPES. THE RECOMMENDED 20% FOR MULTI-FAMILY TYPES HAS ALREADY BEEN ACHIEVED. THE ADDITIONAL 124 UNITS WILL INCREASE THE CURRENT PERCENTAGE FROM 24.7 TO 24.8%. STAFF ANALYZED THE PROPOSAL WITH THE COMPANION REVISED CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THE N-BOARD. THE PROPOSAL MEETS ALL BUT BUILDING HEIGHTS. THIS REQUESTED IS DISFAVORED DUE TO A LACK OF CONFORMITY IN THE N-BOARD WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PLAN. APPROVAL SHOULD BE DELIBERATED AND JUSTIFIED BY FINDINGS. SHOWN ON THE SCREEN ARE SEVEN POLICIES AND STUDIES THAT WE REVIEWED FOR THIS ZONING CE. THE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS THAT WERE STATED AS MOSTLY IN CONFORMANCE WERE SHOWN ON A PREVIOUS SLIDE. THE MAXIMUM DENSITY IN F1 IS 12 UNIT PER ACRE WITH A HEIGHT MAXIMUM OF THREE STORIES AND 40 FEET. THE MAXIMUM DENSITY IN MF2 IS 18 UNITS PER ACRE WITH A HEIGHT MAXIMUM OF TWO STORIES AND 35 FEET. PER THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 13.6 UNITS PER ACRE WITH A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF THREE STORIES AND 45 FEET EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 15.000 AND OTHERS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THE APPLICANT'S PARKING PLAN DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS ARE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. BELOW IS A MAKE BROWN OF THE PARKING AS EXISTING AND PROPOSED. THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN BOTH MF1 AND MF2 IS TWO PER DWELLINNITITH ONE OR MORE BEDROOMS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE SPACE PER BEDROOM IN THE PLAPLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS. THIS WOULDING 1.2 SPACES AS SHOWN ON THE TABLE. SHOWN ON THE SCREEN IS THE PARKING PLAN PROVIDED BY APPLICANT. THE EXISTING PARKING TOTALS 692 SPACES. WITH 124 UNITS AND 20 NEW BUILDINGS, THERE'S ALSO NEW PARKING BEING PROPOSED. ACCORDING TO THE PLAN, THE 20 NEW BUILDINGS ON THE PROPERTY WILL HAVE TUFTED PARKING, ADDITIONALLY 58 SPACES ARE PROPOSED AND 96 SURFACE LEVEL SPACES. IF ALL THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PARKING THAT IS BEING PROPOSED ARE COUNTED FOR, THE PROPERTY WILL HAVE 1,065 SPACES TOTAL, MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT. HOWEVER, IT IS STAFF'S OPINION THAT THE PROPOSED TANDEM PARKING CREATES AN UNNECESSARY INCONVENIENCE FOR RESIDENTS TO FREQUENTLY HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH RESIDENTS, FAMILY MEMBERS, GUESTS AND NEIGHBORS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS AREA AVAILABLE TO ADD SURFACE PARKING TO AVOID THIS INCONVENIENCE. EXCLUDING THE TANDEM SPACES NOTED IN THE TABLE ABOVE, THE APPLICANT PROVIDES 757 SPACES ON-SITE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO STIPULATIONS TO REQUEST CONSTRUCTION OF THREE ADDITIONAL AMENITIES FOR THE FUTURE RESIDENTS. THESE AMENITIES ARE INTENDED TO ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE TENANTS AND BALANCE OUT THE ADDITIONAL NSIT AFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THOSE. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN TOPOGRAPHY AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTO ON THE SCREEN. THERE ARE FOUR TWO-STORY BUILDINGS BEING PROPOSED IN THE AREA OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. THERE ARE OTHER AREAS ON THE PROPERTY WITH SIGNIFICANT GRADE CHANGES WITH BUILDINGS ARE ALSO BEING PROPOSED. STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE GRADE CHANGES IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION AND THE LOSS OF GREEN SPACE THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING EIGHT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS WITH THIS REQUEST AND SIX ARE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. ON THIS SLIDE THERE ARE THE FINAL TWO STIPULATIONS. STAFF RECEIVED ZERO LETTERS ON THIS REQUEST AS OF NOVEMBER 18th, WHICH WAS FRIDAY. AND OVERALL RESPONSES WE RECEIVED ONE IN SUPPORT AND THREE IN OPPOSITION. TO CONCLUDE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 489 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE 1 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 489 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE 2 TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THIS REQUEST IS DISFAVORED BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL LACKS CONFORMITY WITH THE MIX OF USES SECTION AND DO NOT FULLY CONFORM TO THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DEFINION IN THE COREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS PROPERTY IS UNIQUE AND PROVIDES LOW DENSITY HOUSING IN A PARKLIKE SETTING. THE INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL USES, REDUCTION OF OPEN SPACE AND CHANGING IN THE PARKING STANDARDS, INCLUDING BOTH TANDEM AND REDUCTION IN OVERALL PARKING, IMPACTS THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT. DUE TO THE REQUEST'S GENERAL MISALIGNMENT WITH THE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE REQUEST. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUC OKAY. I KNOW WE'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. YOU TURNED YOURS ON BEFORE SHE EVEN STARTED SPEAKING, SO COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF? >> Brounoff: I TURNED MY OFF IN RESPONSE TO THE READING OF THE AGENDA BY MS. BR. SHE QUOTED A NUMBER OF ACRES ON THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM MY AGENDA. I HAVE 37 ACRES. >> Chair Downs: ON THE CONCEPT PLAN VERSUS THE ZONING. SO ITEM 1A IS 36.5 ACRES, WHICH IS THE TOTAL ZONING EAND THE CONCEPT PLAN COVERS 34.7 ACRES. >> Brounoff: WHY WOULD THEY HAVE DIFFERENT ACHE ACKNOWLEDGES. >> THE BOUNDARIES GO TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE AREA. >> Chair Downs: VERY GOOD, COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: GREAT PRESENTATION. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WITH THE ZONING ACREAGE, THE --R WANTED TO CONTINUE WITH AN MF1 DESIGNATION, THEY COULD EXPAND WITH 70 ADDITIONAL UNIT IS THAT CORRECT? AND STILL STAY WITHIN THE M MF1 BOUNDARIES. >> SO WITHIN THE MF1 BECAUSE WE HAVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF UNITS TO 346, IF THEY WANTED TO ADD ONE MORE UNIT, THEY WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. >> Horne: BUT IT WOULD STILL BE COMPLIANT WITH THE MF1 DESIGNATION, CORRECT? >> IT WOULD, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT EVEN ONE ADDITIONAL UNIT WOULD EXCEED THE THRESHOLD OF 20% MULTI-FAMILIES THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> Horne: AND HOW FAR IS -- WHAT'S THE EXTENT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD? ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT THAT SUBDIVISION OR ARE WE INCLUDING ALL THE OTHER APARTMENTS THAT ARE ON LEGACY. >> THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS CALCULATED WITH THE ENTIRE CITY OF PLANO IN MIND, AND WE'VE REACHED THAT THRESHOLD OF 20% AND ACTUALLY ACTUALLY OVER THAT AT 20.7%. >> CLARIFY, IT'S DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> Horne: GOT IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANKS. RLLY, IF THEY ADD EVEN JUST WANTED TO ADD ONE BUILDING, THOUGH IT WOULD STILL BE MF1, IT WOULD BE EXCEEDING THE THRESHOLD, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT, BECAUSE THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PLANO LAYINGS HAVE A LIMITATION OF 346 UNITS. >> OKAY. AND HOW EASY IS IT TO CHANGE THAT STIPULATION? >> WELL, HERE WE ARE TONIGHT ASKING FOR MORE. >> Horne: THERE YOU GO. THANKS. REALLY, IF WE WERE -- BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES HERE WAS WE HAVE MULTI-FAMILY 1 VERSUS MULTI-FAMILY 2, RIGHT? AND IF HE WAS JUST TO CONTINUE WITH 70 ADDITIONAL UNITS PER THE CALCULATION FOR THE ACREAGE, IT COULD STILL STAY AS A MULTI-FAMILY 1. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Horne: AND WITHIN THAT MULTI-FAMILY 1 THEY COULD BUILD A THREE-STORY BUILDING. >> TECHNICALLY. >> Horne: OKAY, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: ALONG THE SAME LINES, SO WITHIN MF1 THEY CAN GO UP TO THREE STORIES. FOR THE STIPULATION TO BE REMOVED AND [INDISCERNIBLE] WOULD THAT HAVE TO BE A ZONING CASE OR THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING -- THAT'S A ZONING CASE. OKAY. >> YES. >> Olley: BUT WHAT IS THIS FAVORING THIS PROPOSAL SEEMS TO BE MORE THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATION THAT IS TRUMPING THE PARTICULARLY ZONING ATTACHED TO THIS PROPERTY. >> IT'S MULTIPLE FACTORS IN WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENYING OF THE ZONING. ONE IS THAT WE'VE REACHED OUR THRESHOLD OF MULTI-FAMILY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT ALSO IT DOESN'T MEET THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS IN THE PLAN AS FAR AS BUILDING HEIGHTS GO AS STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THREE STORY IN THIS AREA. >> Olley: RIGHT, BUT CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS ARE PERTAINING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATION. >> CORRECT. >> Olley: RIGHT, BUT WITHIN MF1 AS COMMISSIONER HORNE WAS SPEAKING, THEY COULD GO UP TO THREE STORIES IF THEY WERE NOT DESIGNATED AS NEIGHBORHOODS. >> THEY COULD, AND IN ADDITION IF THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DID NOT EXIST FOR BUILDING HEIGHT IN THIS CURRENT ZONING, SPD489MF1 NUMBER 4 STATES TWO STORIES, 35 FEET. >> Olley: ONE OTHER QUESTION JUST FOR -- I WASN'T HERE IN 2020. WHY DID THE COUNCIL VOTE THIS DOWN IN 2020? IF YOU COULD PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND. >> IN NOVEMBER OF 2020? >> Olley: YEAH, WHY WAS IT VOTED DOWN. P&Z APPROVED IT, WHY WAS IT VOTED DOWN AT THAT TIME. >> I WAS NOT HERE IN PLANO IN 2020, WITH YOU I DID WATCH THE VIDEO, BOTH PLANNING AND ZONIN AND CITY UNCIL, AND TO BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND PLEASE ANY STAFF MEMBERS THAT WERE HERE CAN CHIME IN, THEY DID NOT SEE THE IDEA OF REINVESTMENT NEEDING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH ADDING ADDITIONAL UNITS. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YOU TALKED ABOUT THE 200-FOOT RESPONSES AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, HOW MANY ACTUAL RESIDENTS LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS OUTSIDE OF THIS COMMUNITY? IS IT ANY? >> SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES,? THE CLOSEST SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME IS 530 FEET AWAY. >> Cary: OKAY, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IF THEY WERE TO TRY TO REMAIN WITHIN THE MF1 BASE ZONING DISTRICT, AND BUILDING ADDITIONAL UNITS MAYBE UP TO THREE STORIES, THEY WOULD STILL BE LIMITED BY THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DENSITY OF 12 UNITS PER ACRE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED IN MF1. > CARRY. >> Brounoff: AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WOULD STILL TAKE THEM OVER THE 20% COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHAT IS THE PLAN ON TUCKED UNDER PARKING? >> WE DO NOT SEE TUCKED UNDER PARKING FREQUENTLY WITHIN THE CITY. AND I'D LIKE TO NOTE ABOUT TANDEM SPACES AS WELL. TANDEM SPACES ARE NOT COMMONLY SEEN IN THE CITY AS WELL. WE PERMIT THEM IN URBAN MIXED USE, AND THEY ARE NOT COUNTED FOR IN THE TOTAL PARKING REQUIREMENT. AND THE TUCKED UNDER SPACES ARE ALMOST ACTING LIKE A CARPORT WITH A BUILDING ON TOP OF IT. SO IT'S OPEN ON THE THREE SIDES, BUT ON THE NORTHSIDE WHERE YOU WOULD TYPICALLY SEE A ROOF FOR A CARPORT IS GOING TO BE A BUILDING. >> Brounoff: WOULD THAT CREATE ANY STRUCTURAL ISSUES FOR THE BUILDING ITSELF? >> I WOULDN'T KNOW THAT ANSWER. BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT. >> THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY STRUCTURAL IUES. THE APPLICANT WOULD DESIGN IT TO MEET BUILDING CODE, ENSURE THEY WERE SAFE AND ENSURE OUR INSPECTORS LOOK AT THAT AS WELL. WE DO HAVE SOME OTHER PODIUM TYPE PARKING IN THE ESTIMATE THERE IS A PROPERTY IN CONSTRUCTION UNDER THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF K AND PARK BOULEVARD, A MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE THAT WOULD HAVE A FULLY FIRST FLOOR PARKING. WE DO SEE IT IN SOME INSTANCES, BUT NOT TYPICALLY DUE TO THE COST. >> Olley: FORGIVE ME IF I MISSED THIS, THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ZONING, THIS IS HYPOTHETICALLY THAT THIS GOES THROUGH, THE CONCEPT PLAN, DOES IT VIOLATE ANY OF OUR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ZONING? >> IT DOES NOT. >> Olley: IT DOES NOT. SECOND QUESTION, I DROVE AROUND THE PREMISES, THE TOPOGRAPHY IS WEIRD, TO PUT IT MILDLY. THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING ENGINEERING WOULD HAVE TO CHIME IN, NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING WE CAN LEGISLATE FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE. I'M FINDING IT HARD TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU COULD FIT A BUILDING WITHOUT TRAVELING A TON OF STUFF. >> AND THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THIS. WE ADDED THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT JUST FOR INFORMATION. PART OF THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY I THINK IS IT'S TOPOGRAPHY SO WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION. THEY WILL HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THE SITE IS ENGINEERED PROPERLY. THE CITY WILL REVIEW THOSE PLANS. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS AT THIS POINT THAT THEY CAN ACHIEVE THE CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED, MEETING THE DRAINAGE AND OTHER CODES. WE JUST WANTED TO POINT IT OUT BECAUSE IT'S A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU. ONE QUESTION. YOU SAID SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T SEE IN YOUR REPORT WHICH IS THAT IN A NORMAL PARKING REQUIREMENT IS A MINIMUM OF TWO SPACES FOR THE PERCENT BEDROOM AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS ONE SPACE PER BEDROOM. IS THAT WHAT I HEARD CORRECTLY. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: SO WHAT THAT TELLS ME IS RIGHT NOW IF THEHAVE A ONE BEDROOM UNIT IT WOULD REQUIRE TWO PARKING SPACES, BUT UNDER THE REQUESTED ZONING IF THEY HAD A ONE BEDROOM UNIT IT WOULD REQUIRE ONE SPACE. >> YES. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE NUMBER OF ONE BEDROOM UNITS IS IN THIS COMPLEX? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE. >> YES. LET ME LOOK TO SEE IF I CAN READ THE CONCEPT PLAN. >> WHILE SHE'S LOOKING THAT UP, I WOULD SIMILARLY KIND OF COUNTING SPACES, AND IF WE IGNORE THE TUCKE UNDER -- THE TANDEM PARKING, THEY'VE GOT 1.63 SPACES PER UNIT. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT THE NUMBER OF UNITS ARE. >> THANK YOU. I COULDN'T READ IT ON THIS. 64 ONE BEDROOM SPACES, ONE BEDROOM UNITS. >> OKAY. SO FOR THOSE 64 UNITS WE'RE CUTTING THEIR PARKING IN HALF. >> CORRECT. >> GOING FROM TWO SPACES TO ONE SPACE. >> THE TOTAL IS 470 UNITS, SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR ONE SPACE PER BEDROOM, TECHNICALLY 470 SPACES COULD BE ON THE PROPERTY AND THAT WOULD BE MEETING. >> Chair Downs: AND DO Y'ALL NORMALLY -- DOES THE STAFF NORMALLY GIVE FULL CREDIT FOR THE GARAGES IN CASES LIKE THIS? AND THE REASON I ASK THAT QUESTION IS MY RECENT EXPERIENCE IS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE THOSE GARAGES USE THEM AS MINI-WAREHOUSE UNITS AND THERE'S NEVER A CAR IN THEM. SO THEY DON'T REALLY FUNCTION AS PARKING SPACES. AND AT LEAST, I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB IN AT LEAST 50% OF THE CASES. DO YOU DISCOUNT THOSE AT ALL FOR THAT ACTUAL USAGE TENDENCY? >>E DO NOT COUNT THEM TYPICALLY. >> Chair Downs: YOU DON'T COUNT GARAGE UNITS AT ALL TYPICALLY? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: BUT THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF US DOES COUNT THE GARAGES? >> YES. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> AND I'D LIKE TO ADD THE APPLICANT CAN COMMENT ON THIS AS WELL, BUT WHEN I STATE THAT IF ALL PARKING WAS COUNTED, 1,065 SPACES ARE AVAILABLE, THAT IS CONSIDERING THAT NO ONE IS USING THEIR GARAGE FOR STORAGE. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM UNDERSTANDING THIS. SO IF A BUILDER IS BUILDING AN APARTMENT BUILDING AND EVERY UNIT HAS A GARAGE, THE CITY'S POSITION IS WE DON'T COUNT ANY OF THAT AS PARKING, WE JUST ASSUME IT'S GOING TO BE USED AS STORAGE? IS THAT OUR POLICY? >> WE TYPICALLY WILL IF IT'S AN ATTACHED GARAGE, IF IT'S -- THEY PULL INTO THEIR UNIT, THEY DON'T HAVE A PARKING PAD, WE'LL COUNT THE ATTACHED GARAGE AS THEIR PARKING SPACE. DETACHED GARAGES ARE TYPICALLY STORAGE UNITS SO I THINK THAT'S THE DISTINCTION. IN THIS INSTANCE THERE IS ATTACHED AND -- >> AND DETACHED. >> AND A PARKING PAD BEHIND IT. HOWEVER WE LOOKED AT OUR PAST SITE PLANS AND THE ATTACHED GARAGES WERE JUST COUNTED AS PARKING SPACES FOR THIS PROPERTY SO WE'RE JUST CONTINUING THAT FOR THIS PROPERTY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO YOUR ATTACHED GARAGES FOR ARE COUNTED AS PARKING? >> CORRECT. DETACHED WOULD NOT BE COUNTED. >> Chair Downs: SO THE 769 NUMBER YOU GAVE US THAT ELIMINATED THE TANDEM DOES INCLUDE ATTACHED GARAGES? >> YES. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> EXCUSE ME, I NEED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. THE EXISTING ONE BEDROOM UNITS WE HAVE 1076 ONE BEDROOM UNITS CURRENTLY AND THE PROPOSED NUMBER WOULD BE 64. SO TOTAL OF 240 ONE BEDROOM UNITS WILL BE AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. D YO GET YOUR QUESTIONED? YOU HAD YOUR LIGHT ON FOR A MINUTE AND THEN TURNED IT OFF. SOMEBODY. THANK YOU. WHOEVER IS CONTROLLING MR. BRONSKY'S MICROPHONE, I APPRECIATE IT. I APPRECIATE IT. ASK YOUR QUESTION.KY, PLEASE- >> Bronsky: THANK YOU. ASIDE FROM BUILDING HEIGHT AND THE PERCENTAGE OF MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IN THE DASHBOARD, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT THE STAFF REPORT POINTS OUT WHERE THIS IS NOT IN CONFORMITY CORRECT? COULD YOU GO INTO A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL ABOUT LU4, THE LAND USE POLICY, AND WHERE YOU STATE -- WHERE YOU GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT THE GRADING OF THE PROPERTY? >> SURE. I'D LIKE TO GET SOME ASSISTANCE FROM MR. HILL ON THAT ONE IF THAT'S ALL RI RIGHT. >> SURE, SO LU4, NO ONE IS READING THE STAFF REPORT CREATING REGULATIONS THAT AND REVITALIZATION UNDER PERFORMING MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. SO WE LOOKED AT THIS POLICY IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WE NOTED THAT ONE OF THE PURPOSES IS REALLY TO CONSIDER OUR REGULATIONS FOR TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE UNDERPERFORMING. THERE'S NOT A CLEAR DEFINITION OR EVEN A DEFINITION OF UNDERPERFORMING IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS THE AGE OF THIS PROPERTY. IT WAS DEVELOPED IN 1997. AND THE INSPECTION GRADE. SO TYPICALLY GOOD INSPECTIONS GRADES ARE A-B AND D AND F ARE LOW. THIS RECEIVED A B INSPECTION GRADE. SO IN OUR OPINION THIS IS NOT UNDERPERFORMING BECAUSE IT'S A MORE RECENT DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE LOTS OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE OLDER THAN 1997. AND IT HAS A HIGHER INSPECTION GRADE SO WE DIDN'T FIND THIS TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THAT LAND USE PATROL. >> THANK YOU. MY SECOND QUESTION IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY. AND YOU MAKE THE STATEMENT THAT THE REDUCTION IN THE OPEN SPACE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AS IT RELATES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY AND ITS APPLICATION. >> YES. >> CAN YOU GO OVER THAT? >> THIS PROPERTY IS -- HAS A PARKLIKE SETTING TO IT WITH ALL OF THE OPEN SPACE AND THE GRADING CHANGES. SO TAKING AWAY THAT, STILL MEETING OUR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, COULD JUST DECREASE THE RESIDENTS' QUALITY OF LIFE. >> Bro >> Bronsky: SO FROM THE BEST OF MY REVIEW OR TWO, FOUR FIVE SIX NON-CONFORMING PORTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THEN NOT FULLY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AS WELL, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, I BELIEVE SO. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: HAVE WE GOT ALL THE QUESTIONS DONE? WHOEG OFF MY MIC TOO, YOU AND I ARE IN GOOD COMPANY. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE THE APPLICANT -- >> YES. WE HAVE FRANK TURNER AND MICHAEL FARINEK THAT ARE SPEAKING AND MARK WOLFE WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> YES. GOOD EVENING. >> WE'LL HAVE YR PRESENTATION. IF WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO ADDRESS US AS WELL. YOU MAY GET SOME QUESTIONS AFTER AND THEN AFTER. >> NO PROBLEM, I LOVE IT ALL. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER. I WANT TO CLARIFY MY NAME IS MICHAEL FROM STAR POINT PROPERTIES. MY ADDRESS IS 4433 NORTH CAMDEN DRIVE, BEVERLY HILLS. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY A QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED FROM CATTIA EARLIER. P&Z DID APPROVE A 6-2 WE WENT TO CITY COUNCIL. THE REASON CITY COUNCIL DID NOT APPROVE US IS BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WT A UNITS IN FRONT AS FAR AS LEGACY WAS CONCERNED. THEY WANTED LEGACY TO BE CLEAR. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE AT THIS POINT WHICH YOU WILL SEE IN THE PRESENTATION IS WE'VE TAKEN ALL THE UNITS BACK. SO YOU CAN LOOK AT THE VIDEO, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE TAPE AT THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WAS THE ONLY CONCERN THAT THEY HAD WAS AS FAR AS THE FACT THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY UNITS FACING LEGACY, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE FACED. IT WAS NOT ANYTHING ELSE AS FAR AS WAS STATED EARLIER. THANK YOU, CHAIR. IF YOU CAN PUT THE PRESENTATION UP FOR US, PLEASE. THANK YOU. SO MY NAME IS MICHAEL FROM STAR POINT PROPERTIES. WE OWN AND MANAGE A LOT OF PROPERTIES, ABOUT 3,000 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS. AND ABOUT EIGHT TO NINE MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND RETAIL. WE'RE OUT OF BEVERLY HILLS. WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME. THIS IS NOT YOUR PART-TIME JOB, IT IS OUR FULL-TIME JOB, IT IS OUR LIVING AND WE DO A VERY GOOD JOB AT IT. WE'RE A FULLY INTEGRATED COMPANY. WE DO EVERYTHING AS FAR AS OUR ACQUISITION IS CONCERNED, AS FAR AS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT IS CONCERNED, AS RS GROUND-UP CONSTRUCTION IS CONCERNED. WE ARE AN A TO Z FIRM AS FAR AS OUR FIRM IS CONCERNED. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, PLEASE. PERFECT. I LIKE IT. BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY ABOUT- FIVE YEARS AGO. WE LIKE THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S IN TEXAS. IT'S A GREAT PROPERTY. AS WAS INDICATED EARLIER, AND I WANT TO REITERATE, 65% OF OUR UNITS HAVE PARKING THAT COME STRAIGHT FROM THE DOWNSTAIRS. YOU PARK YOUR AUTOMOBILE, YOU CO UPSTAIRS. SO 65% OF THE UNITS HAVE GARAGES THAT ARE WITHIN THE UNIT. WE DO ALL OF OUR OWN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SO BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE HAVE BECAUSE THIS QUESTION WAS ASKED BEFORE, ABOUT FIVE TO SIX PERCENT OF THE GARAGES ARE NOT BEING USED AS GARAGES, THEY'RE BEING USED AS STORAGE OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BECAUSE THIS QUESTION WAS ASKED BEFORE. SO IN ANSWER TO A PRIOR QUESTION, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I GET THAT ANSWERED FOR YOU AS WELL. OBVIOUSLY WE'VE GOT A VERY UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY IN THIS PROPERTY. IT'S GOT A LOT OF GREENER THERE WAS ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WAS POSED EARLIER AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION IS CONCERNED. MARK IS GOING TO ADDRESS THAT AS FAR AS CASE SONS ARE THERE AND ARE GOING TO BE THERE AND NO ISSUE AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION IS CONCERNED AS FAR AS THAT TOPOGRAPHY IS CONCERNED. WE'VE HAD -- SO AS WAS STATED EARLIER, RIGHT NEXT TO US IS A GOLF COURSE, WHICH IS A CITY OF ALLEN. WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE CITY OF ALLEN AND THEY'RE IN FULL AGREEMENT AS FAR AS OUR CONSTRUCTION IS CONCERNED. I MYSELF HAVE TALKED TO ERIC CHAMBERLAIN, THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOA OF CHASE OAKS MANY TIMES. THE CLOSEST UNIT CLOSEST TO US IS 600 FEET. WE'VE -- ERIC HAS WRITTEN A LETTER THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET IN FULL AGREEMENT AS FAR AS WHAT -- BECAUSE INITIALLY THERE WAS A LOT THAT WE WANTED TO DO AS FAR AS PARKING WAS CONCERNED, AS FAR AS PUTTING UNIT, AND HE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH IT. SO BASED ON WORKING WITH HIM AND US WORKING HAND IN HAND WE'VE CHANGED EVERYTHING AROUND AND HE AT THIS POINT IS VERY MUCH IN AGREEMENT AND HE OBVIOUSLY IN THE LETTER STAS THAT ALL THE HOA IS IN FULL AGREEMENT AS FAR AS OUR WORK IS CONCERNED. ANOTHER QUESTION CAME UP AS FAR AS PARKING WAS CONCERNED. WHEN I SAT -- IT WAS A ZOOM MEETING FOR P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL A FEW YEARS AGO. SO EVERYBODY ON P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL, THEY TOLD US, PLEASE, WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO IS DON'T GET RID OF THE GREENERY AS FAR AS CHASE OAKS IS CONCERNED. DO TANDEM PARKING, DO LESS PARKING BECAUSE OF UBER AND WHAT HAVE YOU COMING UP, BUT DON'T GET RID OF THE GREENERY. SO RIGHT NOW BASED ON OUR PARKING BEING 1.63 IS EXACTLY THE INPUT THAT WEWEWEWEE COUNCIL AS FAR AS NOT KIDDING RID OF GREENERY AND MAKING SURE THAT -- AS FAR AS PARKING IS CONCERNED. OUR PARKING IS 163 AND SOME OF IT IS TANDEM, BUT TANDEM PARKING IS VERY PREVALENT AS FAR AS OUR PROPERTY AND AS FAR AS OTHER PROPERTIES ARE CONCERNED AS WELL. SO THAT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO 124 UNITS. RIGHT NOW WE ARE -- OUR PROPERTY IS THE ONLY PROPERTY, AND IT'S IN YOUR PACKET, THAT HAS 10 UNITS PER ACRE. EVERY PROPERTY AROUND US IS 14, 16, EVEN 18 UNITS PER ACRE. AND ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GO FROM 10 UNITS PER ACRE TO 14. WE'RE NOT -- AND STILL EVEN AT 14 WE'RE GOING TO BE THE LOWEST DENSITY IN THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AS FAR AS OUR PROPERTY IS CONCERNED. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO 18, WE'RE NOT GOING TO 20. WE'RE GOING TO 13.5, WHICH IS STILL THE LOWEST DENSITY. WE'VE GOT GREAT UNIT MIX. AGAIN, WHEN WE CAME TO P&Z LAST TIME AND TO CITY COUNCIL THEY SAID WE WANT TO SEE MORE THREE BEDROOMS. WE WANT YOU TO PUT ALL THE THREE STORIES IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND WE WANT YOU TO DO SOME THREE BEDROOMS TO CATER TO THE FAMILIES THAT WILL BE IN PLANO. SO WE LISTENED TO THAT AND NOW WE HAVE A GOOD MIX AS FAR AS ONE BEDROOMS, TWO BEDROOMS AND EVEN ADDING THREE TO THE MIX SO EVERYBODY IS HAPPY NORTHWARD TO ALL THE INPUT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US. WE'RE INCREASING THE AMENITIES AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY IS CONCERNED. WE'RE DOING MORE DOG PARKS AND DOING MORE COMMUNITY CENTS. LAST TIME WE WERE AT P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL WE WERE GOING TO DO A JOG AROUND THE PROPERTY AND WE WERE TOLD NOT TO DO THAT, SO WE TOOK THAT OFF THE BOOKS AND SAID YOU GUYS DON'T WANT IT, NO PROBLEM WEEK NOT GOING TO DO IT, SO THAT'S OFF THE MIX AS FAR AS THAT PROPERTY IS CONCERNED. AGAIN, WE'VE GOT THE SUPPORT OF CITY OF ALLEN, WE'VE GOT THE SUPPORT OF CHASE OAKS HOA. EVERYBODY AROUND US HAS TOLD US THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A WIN-WIN FOR US AND THE CITY AND THE PROPERTY. FRANK, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE AND THEN MARK YOU CAN COME UP, PLEASE. ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE FROM ME BEFORE FRANK GETS STARTED. >> Chair Downs: WE'LL WAIT UNTIL THE END. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MARK. WHILE WE'RE ON THIS SLIDE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE EIGHT APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN THE CHASE OAKS AREA THAT ARE IDENTIFIED ON THE SLIDE. THERE ARE ACTUALLY 10. THERE ARE TWO MORE SENIOR HOUSING COMPLEXES THAT ARE ON THE EASTSIDE OF CHASE OAKS THE DRIVE OVER BY THE CIMEMARK THEATER. THOSE COLLECTIVELY, FIVE OF THE 10 APARTMENTS ARE THREE STORIES AND ONE IS FOUR STORIES. THE REMAINDER OF COURSE ARE TWO. STORIES IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE, CERTAINLY IN THE MINORITY OF THE APARTMENTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. IN TERMS OF DENSITY, MICHAEL ALREADY COVERED THIS, BUTLY BUT LEGENDS IS THE LOWEST DENSITY IN THE AREA, AT 10 UNITS TO THE ACRE. SOME RANGE AS HIGH AS AFTER ONUP THERE AT 20 UNITS TO THE ACRE. AGAIN, VERY MUCH AN EXCEPTION. THERE ARE SEVEN APARTMENT COMPLEXES, NOT NECESSARILY APARTMENTS. MOST ARE CONDOS, THAT ARE ZONED MF1 IN THE CITY. THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT. AS I SAY, THEY ARE CONSIDERABLY DIFFERENT IN CHARACTER AS THEY ARE GENERALLY CONDOMINIUMS AND TOWN HOME COMMUNITIES. I THINK ONE OR TWO OF THEM ARE ACTUALLY APARTMENT COMPLEXES. ON THE GARAGE COMMENT, AS STAFF POINTED OUT, IN REALITY WE HAVE OVER A THOUSAND, 1,065 PARKING SPACES. IT GETS TO BE A QUESTION OF HOW YOU COUNT THE PARKING SPACES. THEY DO INCLUDE GARAGES, WHICH ARE DIRECTLY UNDER THE UNITS. THEY'RE NOT FREESTANDING GARAGES. AND THERE ARE -- LET ME FIND MY NUMBER HERE, 258 OF THOSE. THOSE ARE EXISTING ENCLOSED GARAGES. IT JUST MEANS THAT THEY HAVE A DOOR, SO YOU CAN'T SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING BEHIND THE DOOR. AND YES, PROBABLY SOME OF THEM ARE USED FOR STORAGE. BUT CERTAINLY NOT ALL OF THEM. THE OTHER SPACES, THE ONES THAT WE WILL CREATE AS TUCKED SPACES, WOULD BE OPEN TO FEW, SO THEY WON'T BE USED AS STORAGE. THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS WE WORKED OUT. THERE ARE TANDEM SPACES BUT THERE ARE TANDEM SPACES THROUGHOT IN FACT, THERE ARE TANDEM SPACES IN THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE PARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF NEARLY ALMOST EVERY GARAGE AT LEGENDS CURRENTLY. RETAINING WALLS WAS MENTIONED. THERE ARE RETAINING WALLS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, NOT ONLY MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS HAVE RETAINING WALLS. THERE'S NOTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THEM. YOU HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY CREATE A FLAT AREA FOR A BUILDING PAD AND IF YOU CUT INTO A SLOPE AND IF IT'S SIGNIFICT ENOUL HAVE A RETAINING WALL. AND THEY'RE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. PREDOMINANTLY IN THE MORE HILLY ROLLING AREAS OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT ANYTHING UNIQUE ABOUT IT HERE. THIS AREA HAS THE GREATEST SETBACKS PROBABLY IN THE CITY. AS YOU CAN SEE THE SAME EIGHT APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE IDENTIFIED ABOVE, ALMOST ALL OF THEM HAVE THE STANDARD SETBACKS OF 25 FEET IN THE FNT AND 15 FOR SIDE AND REAR. THIS PROPERTY HAS A 70-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK. SO MY KNOWLEDGE IT'S THE ONLY PROPERTY IN PLANO THAT HAS A 70-FOOT SETBACK IN THE FRONT AND 50 ALONG THE GOLF COURSE PERIMETER. THAT OF COURSE CONTRIBUTES TO THE OPEN ATMOSPHERE AND WE HAVE NOT DISTURBED THAT IN ANY WAY. WE'RE KEEPING THOSE SAME STIPULATIONS THAT EXIST IN TODAY'S ZONING CARRIED INTO OUR FUTURE REQUEST. SO THE BUIINGS ARE COMPRESSED TO THE CENTER PART OF THE CITY IN ORDER IN ORDER TO HAVE THE 124 UNITS. WE'RE TRYING OUR BEST TO PRESERVE THE OPEN SPACE, AND THAT ABOUT HALF OF THE BUILDING AREAS ARE ACTUALLY LOCATED IN WIDE ISLANDS IN THE PARKING AREAS. THEY'RE NOT IN THE GENERAL OPEN SPACE AREA OF THE PROPOSAL. WHAT ELSE AM I MISSING HERE? OH. ON OPEN SPACE, THIS SITE IS ABOUT 35 ACRES IN SIZE. 10 ACRES ARE DEVOTED TO OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. AND YOU CAN SEE IT LITERALLY ON THE EXHIBIT UP HERE HOW EXPANSIVE THE OPEN SPACE AREA IS. AGAIN, A TOTAL OF 470 UNITS. REMEMBER, THIS IS A VERY LARGE PROPERTY, IT'S OVER 35 AC. VERY GENEROUS SETBACKSE'RE MAINTAINING. WE'RE PROVIDING FOR THREE STORIES, WHICH IS CERTAINLY NOT UNUSUAL IN PLANO, AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS AREA. PROVIDING FOR TWO DOG PARKS AND A CLUBHOUSE EXPANSION OF ABOUT 2,000 FEET. >> SIR, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. >> WE'RE COUNTING PARKING AT ONE PER BEDROOM, WHICH IS MORE A PERFORMANCE BASED STANDARD THAN THE TWO PER UNIT. IF WE WERE TO DO TWO PER UNIT, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED 940 SPACES. AS I SAID, WE HAVE A THOUSAND AND 65 SPACES IN THE PLAN. SO EVEN BY THE TWO PER UNIT WE HAVE MORE PARKING IN REALITY THAN IS REQUIRED UNDER THE TWO PER UNIT. >> LET ME JUST REITERATE ONE MORE THING. SO IF YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE THERE'S NOTHING AS FAR AS IN FRONT OF LEGACY IS CONCERNED, AS I SAID EARLIER, EVERYTHING IS IN THE BACK AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE HAD TO RESORT TO THREE STORIES SO WE CAN MAINTAIN THE 124 UNITS. BUT AS FAR AS LEGACY IS CONCERNED, EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF LEGACY FAR AS THE 70 FEET BASED ON WHAT CITY COUNCIL TOLD US, HAS BEEN LEFT OPEN. >> SO BACK TO PARKING AT ONE PER BEDROOM, THAT'S BASICALLY THE STANDARD THAT IS USED IN DOWNTOWN PLANO, MOST OF LEGACY IN THE CENTER PART OF THE DOWN CENTER PORTION IN LEGACY WEST, THEY ARE BEDROOM-BASED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR PARKING. WE'RE JUST APPLYING THE SAME HERE. IF WE WERE TO USE THE STANDARDS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY ULI AND THE INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS, WE WOULD HAVE EVEN LESS. ULI PROPOSES 1.5 SPACES PER UNIT AND ITE RECOMMENDS DOWN TO 1.3 SPACES PER UNIT. SO WE'RE -- PLANO IN GENERAL IS OVERPARKED, AND WE'RE SIMPLY TRYING TO PRESERVE OPEN SPACE BY COMING DOWN TO ONE PER BEDROOM. >> I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. >> ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING AS FAR AS WHEN THIS WORK IS CONCERNED IS AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER WE HAVE A 1970s STOCK. THESE UNITS HAVE A LOT -- WE NEED TO DO A LOT AS FAR AS THE AGE OF THESE UNITS IS CONCERNED. WE HAVE VERY OLD UNITS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WHEN WE BUILT THIS PROPERTY, THE 124, IS THAT QUEER GOING TO GO AHEAD AND UPDATE ALL THE EXISTING UNITS AS FAR AS COUNTER TOPS IS CONCERNED, AS FAR AS FLOORING, SO ON AND SO FORTH, IN ORDER TO BRING THIS PROPERTY BACK TO THE 2022, WHICH IS THE NEW STOCK THAT WE BRING AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY IS CONCERNED. AGAIN, WE ONLY HAVE 20 SECONDS. DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE? >> ONE LAST COMMENT AND THAT'S ABOUT UNDERPERFORMANCE. I REALLY WOULDN'T JUDGE UNDERPERFORMANCE BY THE APPEARANCE OF APARTMENTS. THAT'S KIND OF LIKE CHASING YOUR TAIL OR SOMETHING. IT'S AFTER THE FACT IN TERMS OF UNDERPERFORMANCE. WHEN PROPERTIES UNDERPERFORM ECONOMICALLY THEY THEY BEGIN TO DID HE TERRY RATE. IN THE TIME SINCE 1998, LAND VALUES IN THIS AREA HAVE GONE UP 10 TIMES AS TO WHAT THE APPRAISAL TRICKED SHOWED FOR THIS SAME PROPERTY IN 1998. THE IMPROVEMENT VALUE, HOWEVER, HAS ONLY GONE UP BY A LITTLE OVER 30%. SO THE LAND TO IMPROVE RATIO IS GETTING OUT OF WHACK, IF YOU WILL. THE ONLY WAY YOU IMPROVE THAT IS BY MAKING ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE LAND TO GET A BETTER RETURN. >> REINVESTING. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, I KNOW MR. BRONSKY I THINK YOU WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION. >> Bronsky: I HAD A COUPLE. MY FIRST QUESTION WAS: YO GUYS HAVE REFERENCED SEVERAL TIMES THE TRIPS YOU MADE PREVIOUSLY WITH P&Z AND COUNCIL. WHICH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS THAT UNDER? >> IT WAS UNDER THE PREVIOUS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> Bronsky: OKAY. MY SECOND QUESTION: WE TALKED ABOUT UNIVERSAL DESIGN. AND I'M -- >> I TAKE THAT BACK. THAT WAS UNDER THE INTERIM PLAN. SO THE PLAN HAD BEEN PULLED BACK, AS YOU RECALL, AND WE WERE USING KIND OF A HYBRID MODEL AT THAT POINT. >> Bronsky: SO EVERYTHING YOU WERE PROPOSING, WAS THAT OR WE TRE THINGS NOT INTE INTERIM PLAN?HEN WITH THE- >> WELL, THERE WERE CERTAINLY NO 20% CAP ON MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE OLD PLAN. >> Bronsky: BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE CURRENT PLAN THERE'S MORE THAN ONE AREA THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE. SO MY QUESTION WAS WERE THERE OTHER AREAS THAT IT WASN'T IN CONFORMANCE AT THAT TIME? >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S OUT OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TODAY. REMEMBER, YOU'RE ASKED TO MAKE FINDINGS, WHEN YOU FIND IT SUBSTANTIALLY IN T COMMUNITY'S REQUEST SUPER TO CHANGE ZONING, IT'S WITHIN YOUR POWER TO DO SO. >> Bronsky: ABSOLUTELY. I COMPLETELY AGREE. AS THE VICE-CHAIR FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT WORKED ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO AT TIMES HAVE THAT PURVIEW. MY NEXT QUESTION WAS UNIVERSAL DESIGN. MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT SHE MENTIONED. ARE YOU LOOKING FOR AN EXEMPTION FROM UNIVERSAL DESIGN? >> NO, IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT FROM THE CITY. STAFF HAD MENTIONED IT AS SOMETHING THEY THOUGHT WOULD BE DESIRABLE, BUT IT'S MY KNOWLEDGE THAT IT WOULD BE THE ONLY APARTMENT COMMUNITY THAT HAD THAT REGULATION ON IT. >> Bronsky: SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH UNIVERSAL 99. >> WE HAVE TO MEET ADA REQUIREMENTS, BUT UNIVERSAL DESIGN IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THAT. >> Bronsky: SURE. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, AGAIN, THAT REQUIREMENT DOESN'T APPLY TO ANY OTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX. >> Bronsky: ON NO, I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY WHAT SHE SAID, THAT WAS ALL. I WASN'T -- ERIC HAD MENTIONED THAT IT WAS 1997, AND YO GUYS MENTIONED 1970. I'M CONFUSED. >> ABOUT WHAT? >> Bronsky: ABOUT THE -- WHEN IT WAS BUILT. >> WHAT WAS THE CONSTRUCTION DATE? >> IT WAS IN THE MID TO LATE 70s -- '90S, EXCUSE ME. >> I APOLOGIZE, YES. >> Bronsky: I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. >> MAY I ADD ONE MORE THING. WE ALSO HAD AN EXTENSIVE STUDY DONE AS FAR AS THE ABSORPTION IS CONCERNED FOR THESE 124 UNITS AND I THINK THAT'S IN THE PACKET AS WELL, THE FACT THAT .3001 OF THE STOCKN PLANOND THEY THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE NO ISSUE AT THIS POINT WHATSOEVER, MULTI-FAMILY IS VERY MUCH IN DEMAND, SO THERE WOULD BE NO ISSUE AS FAR AS ABSORPTION FOR THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERN AS WELL. >> MAY I MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT ABOUT THE 20%? BECAUSE THAT'S BEING APPLIED BLANKET-WIDE ON THE CITY, BUT YET THERE ARE AREAS LIKE CHASE OAKS THAT HAVE VERY ISOLATED POCKETS OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, NO ADJACENCY TO SINGLE-FAMILY. WE ARE ADDING UNITSO CREASE THE ECOMIC VIABILITY. >> AND IN OUR OWN 35 ACRES. >> YEP. >> Bronsky: SO MY NEXT QUESTION WAS ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE. WHAT PERCENTAGE -- SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S CURRENTLY A THIRD? >> IT'S PROBABLY EVEN A LITTLE BIT GREATER TODAY. THE ADDITIONAL UNITS WILL EAT INTO SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE AREAS. ABOUT HALF OF THAT WERE ISLANDS, WIDE ISLANDS PICTURED ON THE SLIDE EARLIER, IN BETWEEN PARKING BAYS. >> AND LARGE SLOPES THAT ARE NOT REALLY USABLE FOR ANYTHING. >> Bronsky: AND MY LAST QUESTION. I WAS REALLY CURIOUS ABOUT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE LAND TO IMPROVEMENT RATIOS AND YOU WENT BACK TO 1998. IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT THE FIVE YEARS THAT YOUR ORGANIZATION HAS OPERATED THIS, WHAT ARE THOSE RATIOS AT THAT POINT? >> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT VALUES. BUT LAND VALUE IN GENERAL HAS BEEN RAPIDLY CLIMBING THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY? >> Bronsky: THAT'S ALL HAD, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. HORNE. >> Horne: YES, MR. TURNER AND MR. FARINEK, THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. I WAS ON THAT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHEN YOU FIRST PRESENTED TO US, AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE NOT MESSING WITH THE STRIP ALONG LEGACY. IF I RECALL DURING THAT LAST PRESENTATION, YOU ACTUALLY HAD APARTMENTS COMING UP TO LEGACY. >> WE'VE DROPPED IT FROM 70 PETE TO 50 FEET. >> SO YOU KEPT THAT AND ALSO KEPT THE 50-FOOT PERIMETER AROUND THE GOLF COURSE. >> WE'RE KEEPING IT A IS. >> WHICH SHOULD BE A SAFETY FACTOR FOR THE RESIDENTS. AND IF YOU FIND ANY OF MY GOLF BALLS I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU RETURNING THEM. >> WE WERE ALSO ASKED TO PUT IN GREENERY, WHICH YOU AGREED, BUT SINCE CITY COUNCIL ASKED TO TAKE EVERYTHING OFF LEGACY, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE. >> Horne: AND I APPRECIATE YOU DOING THAT. AND YOU BASICALLY TOOK OUR COMMENTS, WHICH WE VOTED 6-2 UNDER THE INTERIM PLAN IS WHEN IT HAPPENED. SO IT PASSED 6-2 AND YOU WENT IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY VOTED FOR IT RIGHT? >> THE CITY COUNCIL DENIED BY ONE VOTE. >> Horne: BY ONE VOTE, OKAY. >> THE CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT ANYTHING AS FAR AS LEGACY WAS CONCERNED. THEY TOLD US TO GO BACK TO LEGACY OPEN AS WE DID ANDEP- THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THE BACK SIDE NOW. >> THE VOTE WAS 6-2MENT. >> WHEN IT PASSED. >> WHEN IT FAILED. >> Horne: SO I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT HERE IS -- AND IT'S GET BACK TO WHAT MS. COUPLAND WAS TALKING ABOUT. YOU COULDN'T LIVE WITH THE 70 ADDITIONAL UNITS, YOU HAD TO GO WITH THE ADDITIONAL 126 THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? I MEAN, IT WOULD SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE A MUCH EASIER ROW TO HOE IF YOU WENT IN THE PDA1 BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE% AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DENSITY AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT. >> AND THAT QUESTION WAS ASKED TO US BY SEVERAL PEOPLE. SO WE WENT TO SEVERAL CONTRACTORS. THEY LOOKED AT THE PLAN AND THEY SAID BASED ON 72, THEY WOULD DO THE JOB, BUT THE COST WOULD JUST BE TREMENDOUS. IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR US TO DO ONLY 72 UNITS AS FAR AS ECONOMIES OF SCALE ARE CONCERNED, MR. COMMISSIONER. SO WE LOOKED AT IT, ESPECIALLY OBVIOUSLY AT THIS POINT WITH CONSTRUCTION BEING WHERE IT IS AND CONTRACTORS BEING WHERE THEY ARE, IT JUST DID NOT MAKE SENSE. AND IT WASN'T CREATIVE AT ALL FOR US, MR MR. COMMISSIONER. >> Horne: SO IF WE WERE TO GRANT THIS, WHAT TYPE OF PHASING WOULD YOU BE GOING THROUGH OR WHAT YOUR INITIAL IDEA OF PHASING WITH REGARDS TO YOU OFFERED TO DO RENOVATION OF CLUBHOUSE, EXPANSION OF CLUBHOUSE, EXPANSION OF THE POOL, THE BUSINESS CENTER. WHEN WOULD YOU START THAT WORK? WOULD IT BE AFTER -- >> NO, WE WOULD DO THAT FIRST, MR. COMMISSIONER. WE DO ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS AS FAR AS THE DOG PARK AND AS FAR AS THE EXTRA AMENITIES, WE WOULD DO THAT FIRST. AND THEN AT THAT POINT WE WOULD GO THROUGH AND START BUILDING THE EXTRA UNITS IN THE COMMUNITY. >> Horne: OKAY. AND WOULD YOU BE PHASING THAT ALSO OR JUST -- >> IT WOULD BE SOME SORT OF PHASE, BUT OBVIOUSLY WITH THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE IT WOULD E CONTRACTOR TO JUST COME AT ONE TIME AND DO EVERYTHING. SO IT WOULD PROBABLY BE DONE AT THE SAME TIME. THAT'S WHAT WOULD MAKE SENSE AS FAR AS THE NUMBERS ARE CONCERNED, MR. COMMISSIONER. >> Horne: OKAY, THANK YOU, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT I HAD. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: A QUESTION AND A COMMENT. WHERE WOULD YOU HAVE VISITOR PARKING? >> I'M SORRY? >> Brounoff: VISITOR PARKING? >> IT'S RANDOMLY PLACED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE SURFACE SPACES. >> Brounoff: I WAS THINKING IF YOU ONLY HAD ONE PARKING SPACE PER BEDROOM, IF YOU HAVE LET'S SAY TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS OCCUPIED BY FAMILIES WITH TWO CARS, WHICH IS VERY COMMON IN THESE DAYS, IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE PEOPLE OVER FOR DINNER, IF THEY WANTED TO HOLD A SOCIAL EVENT IN THEIR APARTMENT IS THERE ADEQUATE PARKING FOR THE VISITORS TO COME IN? SUPPOSE A NUMBER OF UNITS ON A GIVEN WEEKEND ARE HAVING PEOPLE OVER. >> YES, SIR. >> Brounoff: CAN THE PARKING ACCOMMODATE THE >>ES.ORS? >> CURRENTLY I'VE BEEN TO THE PROPERTY AT LEAST 120 TIMES, PARKING AT NIGHT. I'LL BE THERE IN THE NEXT HOUR TO MAKE SURE THINGS ARE OKAY. THE PARKING IS NEVER FULL. THERE'S ALWAYS PLENTY OF PARKING. AND EVEN RIGHT BEHIND THE PARKING SPOTS THAT WE'VE GOT AS FAR AS PEOPLE GOING THROUGH UNITS ARE CONCERNED, SOME PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO PARK BEHIND THAT AREA AS WELL. SO THE -- IF YOU DRIVE THERE ANY TIME DURING THE DAY, PEOPLE ARE WORKING DURING THE DAY. DURING THE NIGHT, IT'S PROBABLY 70 TO 75% OCCUPIED. THERE'S A LOT OF ROOM AS FAR AS PARKING IS CONCERNED, MR. COMMISSIONER. >> THERE WAS ALSO A STATEMENT IN THE REPORT ABOUT NOT HAVING TRANSIT SERVICE. THIS AREA DOES HAVE TRANSIT SERVICE. IT'S UNDER THE GOLD LINK ZONED FOR THIS AREA SO YOU CAN CATCH RIDES TO THE DART STATION OR DESTINATIONS FOR THIS AREA OF PLANO. >> AND JUST TO COMMENT WHEN I INITIALLY READ THROUGH THIS MATERIAL BEFORE THE MEETING I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOSS OF THE PARKLIKE SETTING BY BUILDINGS OCCUPYING A PORTION OF WHAT IS NOW A PARKLIKE SETTING. LOOKING AT THE MAP NOW, IT JUST STRUCK ME THIS PLACE IS SURROUNDED BY GOLF COURSES. THAT'S PRETTY PARKLIKE TO ME. [LAUGHTER]. >> AND AGAIN, AS I STATED EARLIER, MR. COMMISSIONER, THE CLOSEST SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, CLOSEST ONE TO US IS 600 FEET. >> AND THAT'S FROM BUILDING TO BUILDING. NOT TO CONFUSE THAT WITH PROPERTY LINE. THE 530 IS PROBABLY ACCURATE FOR PROPERTY LINE. >> AND THE THING THAT IS MOST IMPORTANT TO ME IS PRESERVING AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE AND A PARKLIKE SETTING, BUT MUST SURVIVE ALL THIS CONSTRUCTION. >> THIS IS PROBABLY THE GREENEST APARTMENT COMPLEX IN THE CITY. >> AND IT'S GOING TO BE THE GREENEST AFTER WE GET OUR 13 AND A HALF BECAUSE -- ALL THE COMMUNITIES RIGHT NEXT TO US ARE 20 UNITS PER ACRE. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE REINVESTMENT REASON FOR THIS. YES, LAND VALUES HAVE GONE UP. WE ARE ALL WITNESSES WHEN WE SEE OUR TAX BILLS. TWO QUEIONS. I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE CHARGING MARKET RENT. >> WE ARE. >> Olley: I'M ASSUMING YOUR OCCUPANCY IS NEAR 100. >> IT'S NEVER 100. OCCUPANCY NORMALLY IS 93-94%. >> Olley: SO WHY ISN'T THAT ENOUGH TO GENERATE THE CASH FLOW YOU NEED TO INVEST INTO THE PROPERTY? >> OBVIOUSLY THE RENTS HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, SO YOU CAN'T REALLY ACHIEVE GREATER ECONOMIC POSITION BY MERELY RAISING RENT. YOU HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE. SO, AGAIN, THE COST OF OER PROPTG SUCH A GENEROUS AMOUNT OF GENE N SPACE, THEY WEIGH AGAINST THE ECONOMIC RETURN TO THE APARTMENTS. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS IS TO INCREASE THE OPERATING INCOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO RETURN MORE VALUE TO THE OWNERS AS WELL AS TO PROVIDE CASH FLOW FOR MAINTENANCE. >> MR. COMMISSIONER, ONE MORE THING. RIGHT NOW, OUR UNITS ARE PRETTY OLD. WE'VE GOT UNITS THAT ARE 30 YEARS OLD. THEY LOOK TIRED. WE HAVE TO MAKE A HUGE INVESTMENT IN BRINGING THOSE UNITS BACK SO WE'RE COMPETITIVE WITH THE REST OF THE AREA. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COMPETITIVE. RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT THE BOTTOM END OF THE MARKET BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE UNITS LOOK. AND WE'VE GOT A LONG WAY TO GO AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO SPEND MONEY TO BRING UNITS BACK TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE. >> THERE WERE TWO STATEMENTS MADE IN THE STAFF WRITE-UP THAT NEED ATTENTION. ONE WAS, JUDGING PERFORMANCE BASED ON APPEARANCE. AND CERTAINLY, YOU DON'T WANT TO WAIT UNTIL AN APARTMENT COMPLEX IS RATED A C OR A D OR LOWER IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY SOME TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT TO THE PROPERTY. I THINK THAT'S -- >> Olley: THAT'S FAIR. >> NOT A VERY GOOD STRATEGY. THE OTHER STATEMENT MADE IN THE WRITE-UP WAS THE CITY HAS A LOAN PROGRAM. >> Olley: THAT FAST THE -- THAT WAS THE SECOND QUESTION. >> ASSISTANCE IT CAN PROVIDE FOR OLDER APARTMENTS. WE'RE PROPOSING DOING IT WITH PRIVATE FUNDS. ISN'T THAT BETTER? MAET RATE.PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, IT WILL SEEM THAT WOULD BE PREFERRED. >> THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO COST US 25 TO $30 MILLION TO DO ALL THE THINGS WE WANT TO DO, BRING THESE UNITS BACK UP, AND ALSO RENOVATE ALL THE OLD STOCK THAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS OUR UNITS ARE CONCERNED AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO SPENDING THAT KIND OF MONEY AS FAR AS THE CITY IS CONCERNED. >> Olley: WHAT'S THE SPLIT? $30 MILLION FOR EVERYTHING. IF WE ARE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING NEW, YOU'RE JUST REVAMPING THE EXISTING STOCK OF APARTMENTS? >> IT DEPENDS. IT WILL PROBABLY COST US $15,000 A DOOR IN ORDER TO RENOVATE AND TO BRING BACK AS FAR AS COUNTERTOPS FLOORING LIGHT FIXTURES ETC. THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD ESTIMATE. >> Olley: OKAY. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION, BUT IT'S MORE FOR STAFF. THE CAP STIPULATION, IS THAT ATTACHED TO THE PE FOR THE MAX AMOUNT OF UNITS THAT EXIST? >> YES. >> Olley: OKAY. DID WE D ANY REASON WHY WE CAPPED THE PD? >> THIS PROPERTY WAS INITIALLY ZONED FOR TOWNHOMES. AND THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME COMMITTED TO A DENSITY THAT MATCHED THE TOWNHOME DENSITY, A MAXIMUM OF TEN UNITS PER ACRE. >> CAMBRIDGE COMPANIES WAS THE DEVELOPER OF CHASE OAKS. THEY DID A COMBINATION OF MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL GOLF COURSE, ALL OF THAT WAS PART OF THE PLAN. THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WHEN IT WAS ZONED AS A PART OF THE OVERALL TRACE OAKS AREA, WAS ZONED FOR TOWNHOMES. THE DEVELOPER WAS FINISHING UP THE PROJECT AND WAS WISHING TO, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY GET RID OF THE PROPERTY. THE TOWNHOME PORTION WAS NOT MARKETABLE. PEOPLE AT THAT TIME WERE NOT INTERESTED IN BUILDING OR OCCUPYING TOWNHOMES. IT WAS A VERY SOFT MARKET FOR THAT PARTICULAR PRODUCT TYPE. SO, BY SFA STANDARDS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT ON INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED LOTS. YOU CAN RENT, BUT IT'S AGAIN GOING THROUGH THE PLATTING PROCESS. HE ASKED IF HE -- HE HAD A BUYER FOR THE PROPERTY. BILL PARSONS. HE ASKED IF HE COULD JUST SIMPLY CONVERT IT OVER TO MULTIFAMILY SO THAT HE COULD SELL THE REMAINING TRACT. AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS NEGOTIATED AT THE TIME. THAT WAS FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS AGO. >> Olley: CAN I ASK ONE MORE JUST TO CLARIFY MY MEMORY? YOUR BREAK EVEN POINT I72 UNITS, YOU MENTIONED DURING YOUR PRESENTATION. >> NO. IF WE WERE TO DO 72 UNITS, STAFF WOULD BE IN SUPPORT, BUT WE CANNOT DO 72 THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO 124 AS FAR AS OUR DENSITY IS CONCERNED, THAT WOULD TAKE US TO 13.5 UNITS PER ACRE. >> Olley: OKAY. >> AGAIN, THE LOWEST DENSITY OF A APARTMENT COMPLEX IN THE CITY. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. JUST FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION, HOW MANY TOTALBEDROOMS ONCE YOU'RE DONE? >> GIVE ME A SECOND. >> Cary: SURE. >> WE'LL GET YOU THE MIX. >> Cary: I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. YOU KNOW, I HAVE SOME EMPATHY FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING BECAUSE I'VE BEEN INVOLVED ON THESE EXACT KIND OF PROJECTS. I'VE BEEN A PARTNER IN SOME AND WE'VE HAD TO REINVEST, MUCH LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. YOUR 15K IS PROBABLY A PRETTY GOOD NUMBER. WITH THAT SAID, IT WAS TO OUR ADVANTAGE TO SPEND THAT MONEY BECAUSE OUR OCCUPANCY RATES AND OUR ABILITY TO LEASE APARTMENTS AND ALL THOSE THINGS WENT UP AND IT WAS A GOOD INVESTMENT. VIEW OTH TNAND VALUE, ISF THIS PROJECT UNDERPERFORMING IN YOUR PORTFOLIO? >> NO. >> Cary: IT'S NOT. OKAY. >> WE DON'T WANT IT TO. >> Cary: BECAUSE FRANKLY, PART OF WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING IS THAT IT IS, BUT -- AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. >> COMMISSIONER, IT'S GOING TO BE. AS I SAID, IT'S OLD STOCK. >> Cary: YEAH. >> WE'RE COMPETING WITH THE NEWER ONES. WE'RE HOLDING ON A LITTLE BIT HERE AND THERE, BUT WE HAVE TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE TO IMPROVE THE UNITS, COMMISSIONER. >> Cary: ABSOLUTELY. I GET IT. THAT'S PART OF OWNING PROPERTIES. I'VE BEEN IN YOUR SHOES. I COMPLETELY GET THAT. AS LOO AT THIS AND WE TALK ABOUT THE GREEN SPACE AROUND HERE, I AM STRUGGLING WITH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO EVEN THOUGH I HAVE EMPATHY WITH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT A GOLF COURSE AROUND HERE PROVIDING A PARK-LIKE SETTING, BUT WHEN YOU GO TO THIS, I THINK IT IS A UNIQUE PROPERTY. AND I THINK PROBABLY THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE REALLY LIKE THE OPENNESS AND THE GREEN SPACE THAT'S THERE. AND AS YOU CHANGE THIS -- I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING BUILDINGS IN ISLANDS -- THEY'RE GOING TO BE BIG BUILDINGS THAT WILL CHANGE THE COMPLETE FEEL FOR THIS WHOLE PLACE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS BEING OKAY WITH THIS, WHICH THERE REALLY AREN'T ANY, BUT I WONDER ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN THIS AS YOU'RE DOING THIS CONSTRUCTION OVER SEVERAL HUNDRED -- 124 UNITS AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THAT DOES TO YOUR PRO FORMA. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WEIGHING IN ON ANYWAY IN TERMS OF THE FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF THE PROJECT. LET ME FINISH, PLEASE. >> SORRY. >> Cary: SO, WHAT THAT DOES TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING HERE WHO ARE PLANO CITIZENS RIGHT NOW, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, THE CONSTRUCTION NOISE, THE DISRUPTION, AND THE CHANGE IN THAT. AND SO I REALLY DO HAVE EMPATHY FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THIS THING FOREVER. AND I'M NOT CONVINCED IT'S GOING TO BE BETTER FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING THERE. AND I THINK IF YOU UPGRADE YOUR APARTMENTS YOU VERY WELL MAY ACHIEVE A LOT OF WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITHOUT SPENDING $30 MILLION. SO, I GUESS THAT'S REALLY A POINT, NOT A QUESTION. [ CHUCKLING ] ANYWAY. >> Chair Downs: DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> Cary: I DON'T. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, 732 BEDROOMS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. SERIOUSLY, UNLESS IT'S SPECIFICALLY A QUESTION ABOUT TA, LET'S MOVE ON. LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER SPEAKERS AND THEN WE CAN -- SPECIFIC DATA QUESTION, OR NO? YOU HAVE YOUR HAND HOVERING OVER THE BUTTON. >> I DID HAVE A QUESTION. I WAS TRYING TO THINK THROUGH. TWICE NOW YOU'VE MENTIONED OLD STOCK AND BOTTOM END. BUT YOUR LATEST INSPECTION OF A GRADE B -- >> Chair Downs: IS THIS A QUESTION? >> YEAH. >> Chair Downs: WHAT'S THE QUESTION? >> HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THAT? IS IT GRA B DO YOU AGREE, OR IS IT NOT A GRADE B AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS AT THE BO BOTTOM? >> WE'VE DONE LITTLE THINGS TO MAKE IT GRADE B. WE WANT TO MAKE IT A GRADE A. WE'VE DONE A BUNCH OF UNITS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE IT STAYS GRADE B BUT THERE'S A LOT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT A GOOD B+ TO A PROPERTY. THAT'S OUR GOAL AT THIS POINT, COMMISSIONER. >> YEAH, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I WIL CLO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I THINK I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT DIDN'T SPEAK, BUT EVIDENTLY MR. HILL WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING. >> THIS WAS IN THE PLANO TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> Chair Downs: YES. >> IT WAS UNDER THE PLANO TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, NOT THE INTERIM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> Chair Downs: WHEN IT WAS FIRST PROPOSED. YEAH. OKAY. SO, I MADE SEVERAL NOTES. AND I THINK THERE ARE -- IN MY OPINION -- SEVERA ELEMENTS THAT WERE INTERJECTED INTO ALL OF THIS WHICH REALLY MAYBE ARE BEYOND OUR PURVIEW IN TERMS OF HOW WE SHOULD BE MAKING OUR DECISIONS. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY MAY HAVE AN INSPECTION GRADE FOR UNITS TRYING TO DETERMINE WHICH ONES MAY BE -- I'M ASSUMING THIS FALLS UNDER BUILDING STANDARDS OR SOME KIND OF ANALYSIS IN TERMS OF HOW WELL AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR SOMETHING IS PERFORMING. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S HOW WE SHOULD BE EVALUATING THINGS, BUT IT'S OUT THERE. DOG SOMETNG TO PREVENT THISOF FROM FALLING TO A GRADE C, OR GRADE D. AND, YOU KNOW, SO THAT MEANS INVESTMENT. AND WHETHER THAT'S COMING IN THE FORM OF JUST SIMPLE $15,000 A DOOR TO TRY TO GET IT REFURBISHED, OR A MUCH BIGGER INFLUX OF CAPITAL TO CHANGE THE SITE. SO, I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE. SO, BUILDING HEIGHTS, THEY'RE GOING TO THREE STORIES, THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING. THEY'RE PUTTING IN THE BACK OF THE PLACE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN THE UNITS. MY SON LIVED THERE FOR THREE YEARS, PRIOR TO THAT A GOOD FRIEND LIVED THERE FOR FOUR. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY. I'VE VISITED IT AT VIRTUALLY EVERY HOUR OF THE DAY AND NEVER HAD A PROBLEM FINDING A PARKING SPOT, USUALLY CLOSE TO THE UNIT I WANTED TO GO TO. I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE PARKING. THE TANDEM PARKING USED ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY IS USED IN A LOT OF OTHER CITIES. AND THE PEOPLE WHO RENT THE UNITS KNOW THAT IT'S TANDEM PARKING WHEN THEY RENT THE UNIT AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO JUGGLE THAT IF THEY WANT TO HAVE TWO VEHICLES. SO I AM NOT GOING -- PERSONALLY -- WILLING TO DISCOUNT TANDEM PARKING SPACES EVEN THOUGH I KNOW IN THE STAFF REPORT WE'RE SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO COUNT THOSE. I THINK IT'S VALID TO COUNT THEM, SO I'M IN FAVOR THERE OF SAYING I THINK THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING. I THINK THERE'S ALSO A LITTLE BIT PERSONALLY OF THE IDEA THAT, OKAY, CITYWIDE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WE'RE OVER OUR LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT THAT DOE'T ALLOW YOU TO LOOK IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION AND SAY IS IT OKAY TO ADD MORE UNITS IN THIS AREA. I THINK A QUESTION I WOULD THROW OUT IS DO WE WANT A BRAND NEW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH 124 UNITS OR DO WE WANT TO GO INTO AN EXISTING ONE AND ADD 124 UNITS, GET AN UPDATE ACROSS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, STILL HAVE ONE OF THE LOWEST DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ENTIRE CITY, AND THE PARK-LIKE SETTING WILL BE THERE WITH THE GOLF COURSE. I CAN SEE HOW THE ENVIRONMENT WILL CHANGE, BUT IT'S GOING TO CHANGE REGARDLESS, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IT'S GOING TO CHANGE. AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING THERE ARE EITHER GOING TO ENJOY THE ENVIRONMENT OR THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY FIND ANOTHER LOCATION. ANDAND THERE WILL BE SOMEBODY EE THAT LIVES THERE AND WITH THE CITY NEEDS THE HOUSING. THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH. I THINK THE APPLICANT WAS CORRECT. THE COUNCIL REJECTION -- AND THIS IS BASED UPON THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD AT P&Z. I WAS ON P&Z WHEN THIS CAME THROUGH AND WATCHED CAREFULLY THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION, AND THE NUMBER 1 ISSUE BY FAR WAS THIS MOVING FROM 70 FEET TO 50 FEET ON LEGACY. THEY WANTED THAT DISTANCE. THEY ABSOLUTELY WANTED THAT DISTANCE. AND SEVERAL OTHER ITEMS THAT THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT THAT WAS ASKED FOR BY COUNCIL, THEY'VE DONE. SO, IT FEELS A LITTLE DISJENUOUS DISINGENUOUS TO ME -- DIFFERENT TIME, DIFFERENT PLAN, TWO YEARS LATER, EVERYTHING ELSE -- BUT P&Z SAID, THUMBS-UP. COUNCIL SAID, CHANGE THESE THINGS. SO THEY COME BACK WITH THAT, AND T HAPPY WITH THIS. THERE'S SEVERAL PARTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHERE THE STAFF REPORT CLEARLY SAYS WELL, HERE'S THIS ISSUE, OR HERE'S THIS ISSUE. AND ALL OF THEM SEEM TO TIE BACK TO EITHER THE DENSITY PROBLEM, BEING OVER 20%, OR THE BUILDING HEIGHT. THERE'S A COMMENT ABOUT THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE PROJECT. I THINK HAVING ANOTHER 124 PEOPLE IN A SINGLE SPOT LIKE THIS THAT WILL PROVIDE REVUE IN THE FORM OF SALES TAX AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO OUR CITY IS VALUABLE. THERE IS AN INCREASE IN THE LAND VALUE. CERTAINLY EVERYBODY HAS SEEN IT IN THEIR OWN APPRAISALS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH. SO, I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS. I WAS IN FAVOR OF IT LAST TIME. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING STRONGLY ABOUT OUR OTHER UNITS, OUR OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE STRUGGLING. AND I THINK IN TODAY'S WORLD, ASKING A DEVELOPER TO COME IN AND INVEST MONEY ON A PER-DOOR BASIS AND NOT GIVING THEM THE ABILITY TO ECONOMICALLY DESIGN A STRUCTURE OR A PROPERTY, OR A DEVELOPMENT THAT ADDS VALUE IN OTHER WAYS IS SHORT-SIGHTED ON OUR PART. SO I'M GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF IT. I REALIZE I MAY BE IN THE MINORITY, BUT I SEE TOO MANY GOOD THINGS COMING OUT OF THIS. IT REMAINS A UNIQUE PROPERTY. IT ADDS VALUE TO THE CITY. SO I'M GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF IT. AND I'LL START ON THE END WITH MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: A COUPLE OF THINGS NESSARY WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, RIGHT. YOU KNOW, MAYBE REMOVE THE FINANCE HAT FOR A SECOND. THE MAIN MOTIVE OF THIS BEING REINVESTMENT AND WHAT HAVE YOU, I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH A BIT WITH THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW. I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE CAP THAT WE PLACED ON THEM INITIALLY. AND IT SEEMS LIKE OUTSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATION, THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL GOES THROUGH RELATIVELY EASILY. I MIGHT BE WRONG IN LOOKING AT IT THAT WAY. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WILL FIGURE OUT THE TOPOGRAPHY. AND I'M CONFIDENT IN THAT. AND IF YOU LOSE YOUR PARK-LIKE SETTING, THE MARKET WILL JUDGE IF THAT IS APPROPRIATE. I'M PROBABLY IN FAVOR OF IT, ST BECAUSE AGAIN, TO ME IT FEELS LIKE THE -- COMPARED TO WHAT IS AROUND, IF YOU COULD PLACE A MULTIFAMILY UNIT ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, THIS IS PROBABLY THE PLACE. IT'S AWAY FROM OTHER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. BASED ON WHAT'S AROUND IT, THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALMOST BARRING THEM FROM BEING COMPETITIVE TO THE OTHER COMPLEXES OR WHAT HAVE YOU AROUND THEM DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT. AND I CAN'T PUT MY FINGER ON A GOOD REASON TO CAP THAT. SO, COMMENTS FOR NOW. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I WANTED TO ASK STAFF A QUESTION. BEING IN EXCESS OF THE 20%, THAT IS NOT CITYWIDE. THAT IS RELATIVE TO THE AREA IN WHICH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> 20% MEASURES EVERY PROPERTY DESIGNATED AS NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE FUTURE MAP. IT DOES -- CITYWIDE. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYTHING IN Y CENTERS, EXPRESSWAY CORRIDORS. >> Bronsky: SO WHEN WE DO THE CALCULATION OF THE CHANGE IN THE MULTIFAMILY DENSITY IN THIS AREA, THE NUMBER IS ACTUALLY FROM 24.7 TO 24.8 ACROSS THE CITY? >> THAT'S ALL THE UNITS THAT ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATIONS YES. THAT'S THE INCREASE. >> Bronsky: SO IT'S NOT JUDGED BASED ON THE INDIVIDUAL AREAS. >> NO. NOT IN THIS CASE. >> Bronsky: OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF? >> Ratliff: I'LL BE HONEST, I WALKED IN HERE THINKING I KNEW WHAT I WANTED TO DO. AND I'M STRUGGLING WITH HOW I FEEL NOW, BECAUSE MY INITIAL THOUGHT WAS WHY WOULD WE APPROVE A NEW 124-UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN THIS LOCATION? BUT THE MORE I SIT HERE AND LISTEN, AND TALK ABOUT THE PROS AND CONS I'M PUTTING ASIDE THE ECONOMIC ISSUE, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY IN OUR PURVIEW. I UNDERSTAND IT. I RECOGNIZE THE VALUE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THAT'S PART OF THE WHOLE CALCULUS. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ARE HERE TO EVALUATE. WE'RE HERE TO EVALUATE THE LAND USE. AND IF I HAD AN EMPTY TEN-ACRE TRACT AND SOMEBODY WANTED TO PUT 125 ACHERS ON IT, WE'D BE HAVING A DIFFERENT DISCUSION. BUT THE ARGUMENT THAT'S HOLDING WITH ME RIGHT NOW IS THAT IT'S ALREADY A LAND USE THAT'S THERE. AND IF THEY CAME IN WITH A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS ALREADY ZONED THERE, THAT ALREADY HAD THAT DESIGNATION, AT W ALREADYHE DENSITY WOULD BE HIGHER. I MEAN, IF IT CAME IN AS A GREEN FIELD DEVELOPMENT WITH THAT ZONING THERE WOULD BE MORE DENSITY THAN THERE IS TODAY, WITHOUT A DOUBT. THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT THERE TODAY IS JUST BECAUSE OF THE GENESIS OF THAT PROPERTY, NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT DEMAND FOR IT, NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE, AND NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING OF THE ADJACENT PARCELS. SO, I'LL BE HONEST, I'VE KIND OF COME FULL CIRCLE ON THIS. I'M NOW PROBABLY IN THE FOR CATEGORY, WHERE THAT IS NOT WHERE I STARTED THE EVENING. SO, I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION, BECAUSE IT'S ALLOWED ME TO UNDERSTAND, KIND OF, HOW WE GOT HERE. I THINK IT'S A TOUGH CALL, BECAUSE WE'VE NOT HAD A CASE WITH FINDINGS BEFORE. AND SO THIS -- WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST WHERE WHICH CASE IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST ONE THAT GENERATES A SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH ISSUE TO HAVE A FINDINGS CASE, BUT I THINK THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION THAT PROBABLY WARRANTS IT. SO, I'M LEANI IN FAVOR. >> Chair Downs: COISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, I'M PROBABLY GOING TO BE IN THE MINORITY. I MIGHT BE THE MINORITY. [ CHUCKLING ] YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT STAFF HAD THIS RIGHT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, THEIR PRESENTATION WAS RIGHT ON. I THINK IT WAS TONE-APPROPRIATE. I THINK THEY IDENTIFIED THE RIGHT THINGS. AND, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE MAKING AN ECONOMIC DECISION HERE WHEN THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR ROLE. AND I THINK WE'RE LEANING INTO THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THE BENEFIT TO THIS PROJECT BEYOND THAT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, SO THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS ORIGINALLY CONE CONE -- DONE IN LIEU OF TOWNHOMES WITH A TARGET OF TEN UNITS PER ACRE. AND IT'S ALREADY BIGGER -- IT'S GOING TO BE MORE THAN THAT. SO THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE RIGHT THING TO ME. AND SO I'M GOING TO BE AGAINST THIS PROJECT. AGAIN, I THINK STAFF HAD IT RIGHT TO BEGIN WITH. AND I DO UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMIC NEED FROM THE DEVELOPERS AND IF I HAD THE PROPERTY I'D PROBABLY BE WANTING TO MAXIMIZE MY INVESTMENT HERE, TOO. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO. AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING A LITTLE BIT. AND SO I'M A LTLE BOTHED BY THAT. BUT BE THAT AS IT MAY, I'M PROBABLY AGAINST THIS. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I WENT THROUGH THIS. I WAS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHEN THIS WAS FIRST PRESENTED. AND I WAS ONE OF THE DISSENTERS BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ALONG LEGACY. AND FRANK, YOU AND I HAVE HAD LONG DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT. AND I'VE WALKED THAT SITE. AND I STILL GO AROUND THAT SITE ALL THE TIME. AND THE FACT THAT YOU LISTENED TO CITY COUNCIL ON THEIR CONCERNS ON LEGACY, AND MAINTAINING THE PERIMETER, I THINK YOU DID WHAT THE COUNCIL SAID. THE ONLY ISSUE WE HAVE NOW IS, WE'RE EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL AGAINST A DIFFERENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAN WAS APPROVED OKAY? THAT'S THE 20% THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT WAS -- IF THIS WAS BACK THEN, IT DIDN'T HAVE LEGACY, IT WOULD HAVE PASSED, I THINK. THAT'S MY OPINION HERE. THIS LITTLE SECTION HERE, IT'S AN ISLAND SURROUNDED BY A LOVELY GOLF COURSE. AND, IT'S JUST A GORGEOUS AREA THERE. AND I THINK YOU DO IT INJUSTICE TO INCLUDE THAT 20% AS A NEIGHBORHOOD SETTING WHEN THE NEAREST HOUSE IS 600 FEET AWAY, YOU KNOW. I THINK WHEN WE PUT THIS 20% CAP BECAUSE OF OUR NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I THINK IT'S ALMOST ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS. SO I THINK IT'S UNFAIR TO SOMETHING THAT WE NEED. WE NEED THE HOUSING. AND IF THIS WAS A SNDALE ZONING CASE WHERE IT WAS AGRICULTURAL OR IT WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY AND WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO MAKE IT MULTIFAMILY, I COULD SEE THE CASE OF DENYING IT, BUT IT'S ALREADY MULTIFAMILY. AND WE'RE JUST ADDING IT BY JUSM SEEING, BEING AN MF1 WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE 12 UNITS PER ACRE TO 13.5 OR WHATEVER IT IS. IT'S NOT THAT MUCH OF AN EXPANSION THERE. I'VE BEEN TO THE SITE. I'VE BEEN THERE SEVERAL TIMES. PARKING'S NOT AN ISSUE. I MEAN, THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING SPACE THERE. OR THERE'S TANDEM STUFF. IF THERE'S PARTIES, THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING IN FRONT WHERE PEOPLE GO TO A PRIVATE GATE. MOST OF THE PARTIES WILL BE AROUND THE POOL AREA -- WHICH, BY THE WAY, I KNOW IT'S NOT PART OF THE ZONING DECISION. ONE CASE WE HAVE HEARD RECENTLY WAS FROM A WOMAN PLEADING FOR HIGHER-QUALITY APARTMENTS. SHE FELT LIKE SHE NEEDED TO FIND THOSE OUTSIDE OF -- SHE LOOKED AT THE APARTMENT INVENTORY OUT THERE, AND THERE WAS NO GRADE A-QUALITY APARTMENTS. THIS IS A BND YOUANT TO TAKE IT TO AN A. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. THERE IS A NEED FOR THAT GRADE A. YOU KNOW, ONCE WE WANT TO COME OUT OF OUR OWN HOMES, I LIKE TO THINK I COULD TAKE MY WIFE TO A GRADE A APARTMENT BEFORE I GO ON TO THE SENIOR LIVING CENTER. [ LAUGHING ] >> Horne: I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO LIVE IN THE VILLAGE ANYMORE. THOSE DAYS ARE GONE. BUT THAT BEING SAID, THERE'S AN ELEMENT HERE THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE ECONOMICS, BECAUSE AT $1,500 A DOOR TO DO IMPROVEMENTS, YOU KNOW, $15,000 A DOOR TO DO IMPROVEMENTS IS NOT A WHOLE LOT. YOU CHANGE OUT THE CARPET EVERY TIME YOU CHANGE A RESIDENT. YOU TALK ABOUT NEW FIXTURES, NEW COUNTERTOPS. THOSE COST -- I THINK YOU'RE GETTING CLOSER TO TICKLING 20,000 TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, WITH TODAY'S MARKET. SO, BECAUSE OF THAT -- AND I THINK -- AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT A LITTLE ISLAND HERE. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE APPROVAL, BECAUSE OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AND PASSING THIS EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE TO DO A FINDINGS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IF WE WERE GOING TO PUT 124 NEW APARTMENTS SOMEWHERE ELSE IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE CHALLENGING AND IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE PUBLIC PUSHBACK FROM IT. >> Chair Downs: RIGHT. >> Horne: SO I DON'T SEE ANY PUSHBACK AT THIS POINT, BUT THAT'S MY OPINION. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I CAME IN HERE TONIGHT WITH SERIOUS RESERVATIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I HAD READ THE MATERIALS AND THE PACKET, AND I THOUGHT THE STAFF HAD RAISED SOME VERY GOOD POINTS. I THINK THEIR POINTS WERE MADE VERY GOOD. BUT AFTER HEARING THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT, AND CONSIDERING ALL THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF AND FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE POSITIVES OUTWEIGH THE NEGATIVES. NOT THAT THERE ARE NO NEGATIVES. I THINK THERE ARE SOME. I THATIT TO SEE SOME -- HATE SO SEE SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE SACRIFICED TO BUILD BUILDINGS, BUT I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH LEFT. I'M LOOKING AT THE DRAWING AND THERE IS AMPLE GREEN SPACE. IT IS SURROUNDED BY GOLF COURSES, WHICH ADDS TO THE PARK-LIKE SETTING. MORE HSING IN PLANO. NEED FOR THEY ARE PRESERVING THE SETBACKS, THE 70 FEET FRONTING LEGACY, THE 50 FEET ON THE SIDES. THE THREE-STORY CONSTRUCTION HASN'T BEEN TYPICAL OF THIS PROJECT, BUT IT'S VERY TYPICAL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS WOULD NOT BE A DEPARTURE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. I REQ NOISE THAT DURING THE -- RECOGNIZE THAT DURING THE PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION THERE WILL PROBABLY BE A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF DISRUPTION TO THE PRESENT TENANTS AND THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE PERD THAT THE CONSTRUCTION LASTS. AND THAT MAY BE SEVERAL YEARS, AND THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, BUT IT IS TEMPORARY. AND LOOKING LONG-TERM, TAKING A LONGER VIEW, I THINK THIS WILL REMAIN A VERY ATTRACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. SO I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. OKAY. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: MR. CHAIRMAN, ONE QUICK COMMENT. IF YOU GUYS COULD LOOK AT THE UNVERSAL DESIGN, ADA ACCESSIBILITY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SEEMS TO BE SCARCE IN APARTMENTS IN PLA A A PT OF THE LANDSCAPE, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. BUT THAT BEING SAID, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1A AND B IN TANDEM. >> Chair Downs: LET'S DO A FIRST. >> Olley: OKAY. WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1A TO REZONE 36.5 ACRES NORTH SIDE OF LEGACY FROM PD489, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE ONE TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE TWO. >> SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 1A. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES. WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR FINDINGS. THAT'S GOING TO TAKE US A FEW MINUTES. WE'VE GOT TO HAND-WRITE THEM THIS TIME, DUE TO SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES, BUT -- >> [ OFF MIC ] >> Chair Downs: THERE SHOULD BE TWO FORMS OVER THERE. ONE QUESTION THAT WASN'T ASKED, DO WE HAVE TO SIGN THESE IN BLOOD? [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: ONLY THE GUYS THAT VOTE FOR IT? [ LAUGHING ] WELL-SAID, COMMISSIONER CARY. I NEED TO FIND A PEN THAT WORKS. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I THINK KIM'S GOING TO NEED TO COLLECT THEM, RIGHT? OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: IN THE IF THE COMMISSION'S OKAY WITH IT, WE'RE GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. WE'LL TAKE A SHORT FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. THEN WE HAVE THREE REPORTS AFTER THAT AND IT MIGHT TAKE A LITTLE WHILE SO. OKAY. ARE WE GOOD? FINDINGS ARE IN? NOPE, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY IS STILL WRITING HIS. >> Chair Downs: ALWAYS THOROUGH. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: HE'S DONE. OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR PROFESSIONALISM AND YOUR ATTENTION TO DETAIL, MR. BRONSKY. >> [ OFF MIC ] [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: I SEE. OKAY. VERY GOOD. COMMISSIONER OLLEY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STATE YOUR MOTION FOR 1B >> Olley: SURE. I MOVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1P AS SUBMITTED. >> MR. CHAIR. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 1B. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 5-2. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. GOOD LUCK. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ITEM 2. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, Resed te Plan: Robinson Addition, Block 1, Lot 3R - Public school and commercial antenna support structure on one lot on 49.4 acres located on the east side of Archgate Drive, 817 feet south of Legacy Drive. Zoned Single-Family Residence-7. APPLICANT IS PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS, I'M PARKER, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND STAFF RES FOR APPROVAL AS COMMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE ACCEPT THIS AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED, FOR THE REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN. THAT WOULD BE A SECOND. >> Chair Downs: THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 2 WHICH INCLUDES A REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. THANK YOU. ITEM 3. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3, Public Hearing - Replat: Kings Gate, Block B, Lot 3R - One Single-Family Residence- 20 lot on 1.0 acre located on the east side of High Gate Road, 165 feet north of Sudbury Road. Zoned Single-Family Residence-20 with Specific Use Permit No. 281 for Private Street Development. APPLICANT IS HIGH GATE SUDBURY, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. YOU GET ALL THE EASY ONES. >> TODAY I DO. >> Chair Downs: E THE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: DOES THE FACT THAT THIS IS A PRIVATE STREET WEIGH AT ALL UPON THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? >> NOT FOR THIS PLAT, NO. >> Brounoff: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> YES, WE HAVE APPLICANT JOHN WITH TOWER GROUP, LLC. >> Chair Downs: CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? >> MY NAME IS JOHN ZUZELKA, I LIVE IN UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS. AND I JUST WANTED TO SHOW UP TONIGHT BECAUSE I HADN'T BEEN TO ONE OF THESE MEETINGS FOR 26 YEARS AND I WAS CURIOUS. AND I THANK YOU ALL. I'VE LEARNED SOMETHING TONIGHT AND I WANT TO PARTICULARLY THANK THE STAFF FOR THEIR HARD WORK, GREAT JOB. AND I BROUGHT MY DAUGHTER BECAUSE SHE WAS IN NEW YORK FOR 13 YEARS. I WANTED HER TO SEE FIRST HAND HOW THINGS REALLY WORK IN THE CITY. [ LAUGHING ] >> I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 54 YEARS. AND THAT'S WHY I AVOIDED BEING HERE FOR THE LAST 26. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT WAS VERY EDUCATIONAL AND I APPRECIATE -- I WAS THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER WITH KING'S GATE 26 YEARS AGO. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME. AND I'VE DONE KING'S GATE, KING'S LAKE, NOW DOING KING'S WOOD IN FRISCO. MY THREE KINGS ARE NOW OVER. >> Chair Downs: YOUR THREE KINGS ARE OVER. IT'S THE SEASON. >> IT IS INDEED. THANK YOU ALL OF YOU, AND I APPRECIATE THE STAFF. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NO, WE DO NOT.OTHER SPEAKERS? >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF? >> Ratliff: MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 3. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. ITEM 4. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4 IS Public Hearing - Replat: Village at 121 Addition, Block 1, Lot 15R - Restaurant on one lot on 3.8 acres located on the south side of State Highway 121, 419 feet west of Preston Road. Zoned Commercial Employment and located within the State Highway 121 Overlay District. AAPPLICANT IS VILLAGE 121 CORNER DEVELOPMENT LTD. ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING AGAIN. THIS REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> IS THIS THE EXISTING SEAFOOD RESTAURANT, OR IS IT A VACANT TRACT OF LAND NEXT TO THE SEAFOOD RESTAURANT? >> THE SECOND ONE, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? >> JUST A QUICK QUESTION. THE EASEMENT BEING ABANDONED IS THE SEWER EASEMENT. HAS THAT BEEN MOVED SOMEWHERE ELSE? >> YES, THEY ARE ABANDONING THE SSEWER EASEMENT AND PROPOSING A NEW EASEMENT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY JUST BELOW STATE HIGHWAY 121. >> OH, SORRY. I NEED GLASSES. THANK YOU. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4 AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 4. THAT ITE CARRIES 7-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5, PUBLIC HEARING, Preliminary Replat: Ruisseau Village II, Block 1, Lot 2R - Major vehicle repair on one lot on 4.2 acres located at the southwest corner of Premier Drive and Ruisseau Drive. Zoned Corridor Commercial. APPLICANT IS 3401 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY LLC. CONSIDERATION.MINISTRATIVE >> STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE ADDITION TO ALTERATION TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 5 SUBJECT TO THE ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. OKAY. BEFORE WE MOVE INTO OUR NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEMS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A SHORT RECESS, BUT JUST -- FOR NONPUBLIC HEARING WE'VE GOT A SHORT-TERM RENTALs update, silver line station areas plan phase one report and another report. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF REPORTING. FOR THOSE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION. WE'RE NOT ASKING QUESTIONS. WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING BUT GETTING INSTRUCTION ON HOW THE PROCESS IS GOING TO WORK MOVING FORWARD. SO, I KNOW THERE'S SEVERA OF YOU THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT YOU'RE FREE TO SPEAK. I DO HAVE THE POWER TO RESTRICT THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION TONIGHT, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE IF YOU REALLY HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY LATER. THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE WATCHED THESE MEETINGS KNOW I GIVE LOTS OF TIME FOR PEOPLE TO SPEAK. I WANT EVERYONE'S VOICE TO BE HEARD, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DECISION. SO, IF YOU GOT TOGETHER AND SAID WE'VE GOT ONE PERSON WE WANT TO GIVE US THREE MINUTES OR FOUR MINUTES FINE. THAT'S FINE. BUT OTHERWISE, IT'S NOT GOING TO BENEFIT ANYBODY. SO, JUST KNOW THAT'S COMING. I WILL LET YOU SPEAK. WE'RE GOING TO GET OUR STAFF REPORT AND THEN AFTER THAT IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. SO, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS FOR THOSE THAT NEED TO TAKE A LITTLE BIO BREAK. SO, IT'S 8:45. WE'LL RECONVENE AT 8:50. ♪ >> Chair Downs: OKAY. IT IS 8:51 AND WE ARE RECONVENED INTO OUR REGULAR MEETING. AND I HEARD STAFF EATING CANDY OVER THERE. THIS IS LIKEHE CSSROOM. IF YOU EAT THAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MEETING, YOU COULD GET IN TROUBLE. I'M KIDDING. WITHOUT SHARING. EVERYBODY UP HERE IS GOING, WHAT'S HE . . . VERY GOOD. LET'S GO TO OUR NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. >> NONPUBLIC 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 upon the number of speaker requests, length of the agenda, and to ensure meeting efficiency, and may include a total time limit. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6 IS A DISCUSSION. Short-term Rentals Update - Presentation and discussion introducing the topic of and basic process for zoning ordinance amendments pertainin TO A SHORT-TERM RE RENTAL. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. >> THANK YOU. I'M THE LEAD PLANNER. THE PURPOSE OF THIS AGENDA ITEM IS TO PRESENT AN INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND BEGIN THE DISCUSSION REGARDING ORDINANCE AMEMENT SHORT-TERM RENTA ARE THE RENTING OF A ROOM OR A WHOLE DWELLING UNIT FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, USUALLY LESS THAN 30 CONSECUTIVE DAYS. THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT CURRENTLY PROVIDE ANY LIMITATION ON THE LENGTH OF THE TERM OF THE LEASE OR RENTAL OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. ON OCTOBER 10TH, 2022, COUNCIL HEARD A PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY'S CONSULTING ATTORNEY REGARDING RECENT COURT DECISIONS ON THE LEGALITY OF CERTAIN SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS AND HEARD PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING EXISTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS WITHIN THE CIT COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO DEVELOP SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS, INCLUDING A REGISTRATION PROGRAM. COUNCIL ALSO INDICATED THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER USING ZONING TO DESIGNATE WHERE SHORT-TERM RENTALS MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN THE CITY AND TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION AND REGULATION FOR USE. IT SHOULD BE NOTED A REGISTRATION PROGRAM WAS TABLED AT THE NOVEMBER 14TH, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THIS PROJECT TO CONSIDER CHANGES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE MAY INVOLVE COLLECTING AND ANALYZING INFORMATION FROM VARIOUS SOURCE INCDING PROPERT STANDARDS CASES, LEASE REPORTS, AND HOSTING PLATFORMS. THE PLANO POLICE DEPARTMENT IS CURRENTLY PROVIDING INFORMATION ON SERVICE CALLS, INCLUDING NOISE AND TRASH COMPLAINTS AND TRAFFIC ISSUES. STAFF IS RESEARCHING SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY OTHER CITIES AND WILL BE PROVIDING INFORMATION ON RELEVANT LEGAL CASES. SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THIS PROJECT INCLUDE DEFINITIONS FOR WHICH ALL RESIDENTIAL USES WILL BE EVALUATED FOR NEEDED UPDATES AND CLARITY. APPROPRIATE LOCIONS AONING DISTRICTS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS WILL BE CONSIDERED. NEW STANDARDS MAY ALSO BE PROPOSED TO PROVIDE PARAMETERS SPECIFIC TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. IN NUISANCE REGULATIONS, POTENTIAL CHANGES MAY BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE PROJECT AS WELL. SO, FOR NEXT STEPS, THE GOAL IS TO PROVIDE A MEANS OF REGULATING SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND TO ENSURE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND QUALITY OF LIFE STANDARDS ARE PRESERVED IN CITY NEIGHBORHOODS. STAFF WILL CONTINUE RESEARCH AS NOTED PREVIOUSLY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS INCLUDING STAKEHOLDERS IS BEING DEVELOPED AND WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. STAFF IS LOOKING INTO CONTRACTING WITH A CONSULTANT TO ASSIST WITH THIS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. ADDITIONALLY, AS DEVELOPMENT OF THE DRAFT SHORT-TERM RENTAL STANDARDS PROGRESSES, DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED UPDATES WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION OVER A SERIES OF MEETINGS IN THE COMING MONTHS, CULMINATING IN THE MANDATORY CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING, THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THEMSELVES AND THE FINAL ADOPTION. SO, NO ACTIO IS REQUIRED AS THIS IS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM ONLY. PLEASE NOTE STAFF DID RECEIVE EIGHT EMAIL RESPONSES TO THIS ITEM WHICH WERE DISTRIBUTED TO THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE MEETING. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOT REALLY A QUESTION, I GUESS, BUT JUST KIND OF A REITERATION OF THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH. I WATCHED THE COUNCIL MEETING AND SAW THE INSTRUCTION, BASICALLY TO REFER THIS BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. I THINK THERE'S STILL SEVERAL QUESTIONS. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING STAFF IS DOING MORE RESEARCH. AND SO FOR US TO BE ABLE TO, I GUESS, HAVE AN EDUCATED DIALOGUE ON THIS, YOU'RE PROVIDING MORE INFORMATION? >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. DO WE HAVE SOME IDEA OF TIME? I KNOW COUNCIL SAID SOMETHING ABOUT SIX MONTHS. SO ARE WE -- SOMETIME IN THE SPRING IS WHEN THIS WILL PROBABLY COME FORWARD? >> THE EARLIEST THAT WE COULD HAVE THIS PROJECT FINISHED WOULD BE LATE SPRING. HOWEVER, IT CONTINUES TO EVOLVE, SO WE ARE NOT SURE HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE EXACTLY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I SEE IN HERE WE'VE GOT -- THERE'S PUBLIC OUTREACH. SO, THAT'S THE CONSULTANT WHO IS GOING TO PROBABLY HOST -- I'M ASSUMING THEY'RE GOING TO HOST SOME TYPE OF A TOWN HALL OR SPECIFIC AREAS, LOCATE -- HAVE A HEARING OR JUST A PLACE TO GATHER INPUT? >> WE'RE STILL LOOKING INTO THE CONSULTANT ASPECT, SO I D'T HAVE A VERY CLEAR ANSWER AS TO WHAT THE CONSULTANT WOULD DO AT THIS POINT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> BUT THAT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THE OUTREACH NOW. AGAIN, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A GROUP HERE. THEY'VE BEEN VERY PASSIONATE AND PUBLIC AND PRESENT AT THE COUNCIL MEETINGS ON THIS, SO I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO GET YOUR OUTREACH. WE WANT TO TRY TO GET AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE OBVIOUSLY. THE MORE OUTREACH, THE MORE INPUT WE GET AS A COMMISSION FROM ALL CITIZENS, THE BETTER THE END RESULTS WILL BE. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. I THINK IN THE PAST THERE'S BEEN TIMES WHEN WE'VE HAD MORE THAN ONE PUBLIC HEARING, SO THAT COULD ALSO BE THE CASE HERE, OBVIOUSLY. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION THAT ARE REALLY JUST BASED AROUND THE PROCESS? YES, SIR, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. I'M NOT EXPECTING ANSWERS TO THESE TONIGHT, BUT THIS IS SUCH AN EMERGING TOPIC AND I THINK IT'S GOING ON ALL AROUND THE STATE. I PRESUME THERE'S STUDY GROUPS GOING ON AT MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, MUNICIPAL PLANNERS ASSOCIATION. ARE Y'ALL INVOLVED OR TRACKING, OR AWARE OF ANY OF THOSE? I PRESUME THERE'S STUFF GOING ON AT THE STATE LEVEL? >> WE ARE KEEPING UP TO DATE WITH ANY PUBLICATIONS COMING OUT FROM DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ON STAFF IS SPECIFICALLY INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM, BUT WE ARE TRACKING ANYTHING THAT THEY RELEASE. >> Ratliff: OKAY. >> OKAY. I THINK PART OF OUR PROCESS AND I THINK THERE'S SOMEBODY DOING THIS. I FEEL THERE'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING GOING ON IN AUSTIN IN THE SPRING THAT MAY OR MAY NOT AFFECT THI ISSUES WELL. SO I'M SURE THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE WILL GET INVOLVED WHICH MAY HELP OR MAY NOT. DID I SAY THAT TONG IN CHEEK? -- TONGUE IN CHEEK? [LAUGHTER]. >> THEY TALK A LOT BUT DO NOTHING WELL. WE'LL SEE IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO THAT THIS SESSION. WE MAY NEED TO MONITOR OTHER PERFORMANCE AS WELL. >> Chair Downs: I THINK THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION. ECHOING COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: ECHOING WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAID, THIS IS MORE A QUESTION FOR THE RESEARCH. HOW HAVE WE BEEN -- THIS MIGHT NOT -- YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE AN ANSWER. HOW DO YOU BENCHMARK IN THE STATE OF TEXAS? ARE WE FOCUSED, ARE WE SPREADING BEYOND TEXAS IN OUR RESEARCH? ARE WE JUST LOOKING AT THE LARGE METROPLEXES WITHIN TEXAS? >> FROM WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR WE HAVE LOOKED WITHIN TEXAS AND OUTSIDE OF TEXAS. WE'VE DONE COMMUNITIES VERY SIMILAR TO PLANO, OTHERWISE THAT ARE WELL-KNOWN FOR COMMUNITIES AS WELL JUST TO SEE THE DIFFERENCES. SO WE ARE COLLECTING A VARIETY OF INFORMATION FROM DIFFERENT CITIES. >> Olley: AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THREE OF THE FOUR BULLET POINTS HAVE TO DO WITH OUTREACH AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT AS USUAL THE STAFF WILL KEEP THE CITY AND CITIZENS INVOLVED AND INFORMED. >> Chair Downs: MR. HORNE. >> Horne: THANK YOU. HAS ANYBODY TALKED OR HAVE THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE CAN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS? BECAUSE I THINK THIS WILL ALMOST BE A COUNTY-WIDE ISSUE WHERE YOU WILL SEE OUR COUSINS IN FRISCO AND ALLEN AND McKINNEY WILL BE FACED WITH THE SAME TYPE OF PROBLEMS AND/OR OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE FACING US, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE MAY BE SOME COUNTY COORNATI. I MEAN, WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN ARLINGTON AND WE ALSO UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN AUSTIN, BUT IT'S HARD TO TIE THAT RELATIONSHIP TO PLANO. SO THAT'S WHY I WAS KIND OF WONDERING IF YOU HEARD ANY -- IF THERE'S COMMISSIONERS EVEN HAVE IT ON THEIR DOCKET FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS OR NOT. >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. I'M NOT SURE IF -- >> Chair Downs: I GUESS I WOULD ASK THE ATTORNEY IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY COURT WOULD EVEN HAVE THE COUNTY TO DO? WOULDN'T THAT OVERRE LIKE A HOME RULE? >> YOU KNOW, WITH THE CITY'S BEING CHARGED WITH ZONING AND ZONING OFTEN BEING WHERE THESE REST, I THINK CITIES IS LIKELY WHERE IT'S GOING TO STAY. >> OKAY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: SO ON COMMISSIONER HORNE'S POINT, HAVE WE HEARD ANYTHING FROM COG? ARE WE STAYING IN CONNECTION WITH COG AND SEEING IF COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE NORTH TEXAS AREA WOULD BE ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER ON THIS ISSUE? >> I HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING PUBLISHED FROM THEM OR ANY COMMUNICATIONS. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF OTHER STAFF MEMBERS HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THAT AGAIN WOULD PROBABLY BE STEPPING BEYOND THEIR BOUNDS BECAUSE AS THE ATTORNEY POINTED OUT, IT'S ZONING. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO WE KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK AHEAD OF US, A LOT OF INFORMATION. THE MORE FACTUAL INFORMATION WE HAVE THE BETTER, I THINK, BUT STAFF ALREADY KNOWS THAT. YOU'RE REALLY GOOD AT PROVIDING FACTUAL INFORMATION ALREADY. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. AS I SAID EARLIER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS. THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT YOUR INFORMATION AT PROBABLY MULTIPLE SITUATIONS. SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE HAVE THAT WANT TO SPEAK? > WE HAVE EIGHT THAT HAVE SIGNED UP, AND I DID ASK THEM AND THEY WOULD LIKEN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. SO IF IT'S OKAY, I WILL CALL THEM IN SMALL GROUPS SO THAT -- >> Chair Downs: CALL THEM DOWN IN SMALL GROUPS. I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE. STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND JUST A BULLET POINT FACT. THAT WOULD HELP US MORE THAN ANYTHING RIGHT NOW, A BULLET POINT FACT. >> I'LL CALL THEM IN THE ORDER THAT THEY'VE REGISTERED. UP FIRST WILL BE BILL FRA FRANCE. AND THEN IF I COULD HAVE KATHERINE PARKER, SUSANA PAPPAS AND GLENN SMITH HAVE A SEAT AT THE FRONTOW. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS BILL FRANCE. I LIVE AT 2712 BARRING TON DRIVE IN PLANO, TEXAS. I MOVED HERE AS FAST AS I COULD. AND WHEN I MOVED HERE I DIDN'T EXPECT A HOTEL TO POP UP IN MY BACKYARD BUT THAT'S WHAT I FOUND IN APRIL. AND I LOOKED UP THE ORDINANCE AND YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE HOTELS, MOTELS, BOARDING HOUSES, ROOMING HOUSES. AND YOUR CO-MISSIONERS, NOT OMISSIONERS, SO YOU'RE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING SAFETY AND SECURITY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT IS AN ABOMINATION THAT THIS IS OCCURRING. THERE ARE MORE THAN 900 IN OUR CITY TODAY. AND THE REASON YOU HAVE BEEN HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR POSITION IS TO PROVIDE FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR FAMILIES. AND WE SAT HERE FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF WHILE WE TALKED ABOUT ONE APARTMENT BLDING -- >> SIR, YOU'VE REACHED YOUR ONE MINUTE. >> AND WE'RE NOW BEING CUT DOWN TO ONE MINUTE, AND I THINK THAT IS -- >> Chair Downs: SIR, THE REASON YOU'RE BEING CUT TO ONE MINUTE IS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS TONIGHT AND WE WILL HEAR ALL OF THAT FROM YOU IN THE FUTURE. IT'S GOING TO COME, YOU WILL HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY. >> WELL, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE IS FOR THE CITY TO ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAW, WHICH IS APPARENTLY NOT BEING DONE. SO WHAT WE ARE ASKING THE CITY TO DO AT THIS POINT IS REAL ORDINANCE IN A BANS SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS CENTER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD -- SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH IS WHAT WE BELIEVE THE LAW SAID, BUT HAS BEEN OMITTED. YOU WILL HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT TONIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR PERFORMING THE IMPORTANT FUNCTION THAT ZONING IS HERE TO DO. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT. >> KATHERINE PARKER. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I AM KATHERINE PARKER. I LIVE AT 2112 WILLOWBROOK WAY. I'M A MEMBER OF THE TEXAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, THE PLANO CHAPTER. MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE BEEN HOMEOWNERS IN PLANO FOR EIGHT YEARS AND I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO ME, I WOULD SAY THEY ARE MY NEIGHBORS BUT THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO ME ARE NOT MY NEIGHBORS. IN FACT, I HAVE YET TO MEET THEM. I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE. I DO KNOW THEY ARE HO HOSTS ON AIRBNB. THEIR GUESTS PAY MORE THAN FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS A NIGHT TO PARTY, AND THEY LIST IT AS BEING A SWEET NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS COOL, A POOL AND IS PET FROM FRIENDLY. JUST LIKE THE PROPERTY LISTED ON THE MARRIOTT WEBSITE, THAT'S RIGHT, GUESTS CAN GUEST THIS PLANO HOME -- >> MA'AM, YOU'VE REACHED YOUR TIME MINUTE. >> LEGACY AND CUSTER AND IT'S CALL THE OAK. AND YOU CAN GET HOTEL REWARD POINTS. THESE ARE HOTELS. THEY NEED TO BE OUT OF OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING IT BRIEF. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU AGAIN. I'M SURE WE WILL. AND YOU WILL HAVE PLENTY OF TIME, I PROMISE YOU. >> NEXT IS SUSAN PAPPAS. >> HI. MY NAME IS SUZANNE. I SENT YOU A LETTER SO I WON'T REPEAT ALL OF THOSE POINTS. I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 23 YEARS. I HONE OWN A HOME. WE HAVE AN AB AND B ACROSS THE STREET, IT'S A HOTEL. IT'S BAFFLING TO ME BAUSE THE CITY COLLECTS HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES ON THESE BUT SAY THEY'RE NOT HOTELS SO WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO DIG INTO THE CURRENT ZONING THEY EXIST AND WE THINK THEY SHOULD BE PROHIBITED IN OUR SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE'S ZONING THAT CLEARLY SAYS THAT LODGING IS NOT ALLOWED AND WE REALLY THINK THAT THEY ARE LODGINGS, THEY ARE HOTELS. WE ASK THAT YOU TAKE ACTIONS, ZONE THEM OUT AND PROTECT OUR CITY. >> WOW, LOOK AT YOU GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER]. >> Chair Downs: NOW SHE SET THE BAR. EVERYBODY ELSE, YOU REALIZE THIS. [LAUGHTER] >> AS GLENN SMITH MAKES HIS WAY TO THE PODIUM, IF I CAN HAVE CINDY PATILLO, KATHERINE BURNS, BARBARA FRANCE TO COME MAKE THEIR WAY DOWN. >> I CAN PROMISE ALL OF YOU, YOU WILL HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO SPEAK. ACTUALLY, I LIKE THIS, IT'S AN INTRODUCTION. I WILL SEE YOU, KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND I WILL SAY DON'T HIDE. >> I'M JOKING. >> DID, GOOD. >> GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M GLENN SMITH, A VETERAN OF THE UNITED STATE AIR FORCE AND A PLANO RESIDENT FOR OVER 25 YEARS. >> ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> 3301 SAN SIMILARRIAN WAY, I'M THE OTHER HALF. I'M HERE TONIGHT TO IMPLORE THE PLANO ZONING COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF PLANO'S HOMEOWNERS IN THE TEXAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION TO WORK TOGETHER WITH US INCLUDE COULD BE ACTIVE EFFORTS AND DEFINE EXACTLY WHAT A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS AND ZONE THEM OUT OF PLANO'S WELL PLANNED AND DEVELOPED LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. PLEASE HELP REMOVE THESE LODGING BUSINESSES FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND ZONE THEM INTO AREAS WHERE THE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY, NEIGHBORLINESS AND PEACEFULNESS IS FAR LESS THAN IN OUR RESIDENTIAL PLANO AND OUR FAMILY FRIENDLY RESIDENTIAL PLANO NEIGHBORHOODS. PLANO HAS CLOSE TO 3800 OF THESE ACTIVE STR'S AND OVER A THOUSAND THAT ARE RENTED AT TIMES THAT WE KNOW OF. STRs HAVE INCREASED OVER 40% IN THE PAST YEAR THAT WE KNOW OF. AND THERE'S ABOUT 20 TO 30 ONLINE MARKETPLACES. SO BY REGISTRATION OF ONE OR TWO BUSINESSES, YOURE FAILING THE REST WHO MAY NOT REGISTER. PLEASE TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION AND DEFINE AN STR AS A LODGING BUSINESS -- >> SIR, YOU'VE REACHED YOUR TIME LIMIT. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR THE FACTS. THAT WAS GREAT. APPRECIATE THAT. >> CINDY PATILLO. >> Chair Downs: I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS CUTTING THIS SHORT, I REALLY DO. >> HI THERE. I WROTE A ONE AND A HALF MINUTE VERSION SO I HAD TO CATCH ALL OVER IT. MY NAME IS CINDY AND I'VE LIVED IN PLANO FOR 29 YEARS AT 4229 WEST CSTER LINE. HOTELS AND MOTELS PROVIDE SLEEPING ACCOMMODATIONS TO THE PUBLIC IN EXCHANGE FOR MONEY AND THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES. FOR TAX PURPOSES AS PER THE CITY, THESE HOUSES ARE BUSINESSES. THEY ARE HOTELS. I'M ASKING PLANNING AND ZONING TO CLEARLY ADDRESS SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THE SHOWN ORDINANCE TO DEFINE THEM THERE AS HOTELS AND THEREFORE TO EXPRESSLY PROHIBIT THEM IN SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THEY DO NOT BELONG. >> DO YOU HAVE ONE LIVING NEXT TO YOU. >> I HAVE ONE DIRECTLY BEHIND MINE. >> Chair Downs: I'M SENSING A PATTERN HERE. THIS IS GOO >> JUST WAIT. [LAUGHTER]. >> SHE'S THE WINNER OF THAT. OR THE LOSER. >> Chair Downs: WHO IS NEXT? >> KATHERINE BURNS. >> HERE SHE COMES. >> IF YOU WOULD PLEASE SHOW THAT. MY NAME IS KATHERINE BURNS, I'M A RETIRED CPA AND A PROUD PLANO RESIDENT OF 30 YEARS AT 2500 REGAL ROAD. THE ITEM IN BLUE, THE THREE IN RED ARE THE THREE SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO MY HOME. THEY ADVERTISE WITH 13 BEDROOMS AND A MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY OF 32 INDIVIDUALS. PLEASE GET THEM OUT OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD. WITHIN A MILE AND A HALF WE HAVE THREE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, TWO MIDDLE SCHOOLS, A HIGH SCHOOL AND A SENIOR HIGH. AND I HAVE HAD A DRUG PURCHASER COME TO MY FRONT DOOR AND TRY TO ENTER MY HOME. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT? >> NEXT WE HAVE BARBARA FRANCE. AND WHILE SHE COMES TO THE PODIUM IF I COULD HAVE GREG PATILLO NEXT. >> HI, MY NAME IS BARBARA, I LIVE AT 2712 BARRING TON DRIVE. IN PLANO RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, NOT COMMERCIAL USES. THIS IS WHY OUR ZONING CODE MAKES THIS DISTINCTION. SHORT-TERM RESIDENTIAL RENTALS ARE NOT RESIDENTIAL USE, THEY ARE CLEARLY COMMERCIAL AND DO NOT BELONG IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PEOPLE THAT STAY AT STRs ARE NOT RESIDENTS. RESIDENTS RECEIVE MAIL AND PAY TAXES. OCCUPANTS OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE GUESTS, VAXERS, CUSTOMERS TRANSIENTS BUT THEY ARE NOT RESIDENTS. THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL CODE RECENTLY PROPOSED BY CITY COUNCIL IS TRYING TO DEFINE STRs AND RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY. HOWEVER, IN THE INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT THEY SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT STRs HAVE RESULTED IN AN INCREASE IN TRANSIENT AND VACATION RENTAL UNITS WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS A MAP OF WHERE THESE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING. THEY'RE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE REINFORCE OUR CURRENT ZONING INTENTIONS TO KEEP RESIDENTIAL AREAS -- >> MA'AM, YOU'VE REACHED YOUR TIME LIMIT. >> AND PROTECT OUR FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. >> Chair Downs: CAN YOU LEAVE THAT FOR JUST A SECOND? I'M SURE WE'LL GET A CHANCE TO SEE IT LATER. >> IT WAS UPSIDE DOWN. >> IF YOU WANT MINE, I'VE GOT SEVERAL COPIES. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'M SURE WE WILL SEE ALL OF THIS AGAIN LATER. THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I HAD EVER SEEN IT SO I WAS -- >> YOU CAN LEAVE IT UP THERE. YOU DON'T NEED TO SEE MY FACE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS GREG, I'VE LIVED IN THE GLENN MEADOWS NEIGHBORHOOD IN PLANO FOR 29 YEARS DESPITE EFFORTS OF THE STR INDUSTRY TO DEFINE THE LAND USE OF PROPERTIES OF HOTELS AS RESIDENTIAL. IT IS CURRENTLY A DEFINED LAND USE THAT WOULD BE LODGING, TO BEST ENSURE THE SAFETY OF PLANO NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY OF PLANO, PLANNING AND ZONING SHED INCLUDE THEM AS STRs AND INCLUDE THEM IN SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AS THEY ARE IN THE PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING. IN ADDITION, 80% OF THE STRs ARE NOT OWNER OCCUPIED AND I HAVE SEEN NOTHING IN THE PLANO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 TO ACCOUNT FOR THE HOUSING UNITS LOST TO NOT OWNER-OCCUPIED STR OPERATORS, WHICH HAVE INCREASED 50% IN THE LAST YEAR. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT? >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> Chair Downs: WOW. YOU GUYS ARE GREAT. SERIOUSLY, THANK YOU FOR KEEPING IT SHORT AND SWEET. WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING EVERYTHING YOU'VE GOT TO SAY AND WE WILL. WE'LL HEAR IT. SO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COME. SITTING FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF, TWO HOURS, THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]. YOU CAN TAKE THAT WITH YOU IF YOU WANT. I'M SURE WE WILL GET A COPY EVENTUALLY. OKAY. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7,. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION: THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS UPDATE - DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION PERTAINING TO SECTION 2 ━ STREET FRAMEWORK AND RELATED CHAGES TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. I'M DREW BRAUNER, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS AN INTRODUCTION TO SECTION 2 OF THE DRAFT UPDATE TO THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS. WE INTRODUCED THE THOROUGHFARE UPDATE AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND WE INTEND TO BRING THE DRAFT UPDATED SECTIONS TO YOU OVER A SERIES OF MEETINGS TO YOU TO ORIENT YOU TO THE OVERALL DOCUMENTS. I WANT LIKE TO SAY OUR SENIOR MOBILITY PLANNER IS SEEING THE EVERYDAY JOB OF THIS TOPIC, BUT I AM TAKING THIS TOPIC AND HE WILL TAKE THE NEXT TOPIC. THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS ORIENTED SECTION, SO WE'RE NOT PRYING YOU SECTION ONE, WHICH IS JUST AN INTRODUCTORY ADMINISTRATIVE LANGUAGE TYPE LANGUAGE. SECTION 2 IS THE BASIS FOR MUCH OF THE DESIGN LANGUAGE AND DIRECTION OF THE DOCUMENT. IT ESTABLISHES THE THOROUGHFARE CROSS-SECTIONS WITH PREFERRED WIDTHS AND STREET ELEMENTS BASED ON LAND YUKON TEXT. SO FOR BACKGROUND THE THOROUGHFARE BACKGROUND AND REGULATIONS IS THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER ROADWAY DESIGN ELEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY. IT WAS LAST UPDATED IN 2009 AND THE CITY IS NOW UPDATING IT TO INCORPORATE NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES. WE'RE AIMING TO FINALIZE THE OVERALL UPDATE PROCESS IN SPRING OF 2023. SO DESIGN STANDARDS FOR CITY STREETS ARE DEFINED THROUGH TWO DOCUMENTS. THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARD RULES AND REGULATIONS WHICH COVER THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF STREET DESIGN AND JUST TO HIGHLIGHT WE ARE PROPOSING TO UPDATE THE DOCUMENT NAME MANUAL TO BE ME INCLUSIVEIGN OF THE VARIETY OF TOPICS COVERED WITHIN THE MANUAL. AND THEN THE OTHER CORE DOCUMENT THAT GUIDE STREET DESIGN THROUGHOUT THE CITY IS THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN WHICH IS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO TO START WITH SOME BACKGROUND OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO DOCUMENTS, IN SHOWS THE LOCATIONS AND ALIGNMENTS OF EXISTING AND FUTURE ROADWAYS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. IT HAS ACCOMPANYING CROSS-SECTIONS THAT HAVE GUIDELINES TO SIZE, NUMBER OF TRAVEL LINES, MEDIAN AND PARKWAY MYTHS AND ASSOCIATED DIMENSIONS. THIS SLIDE CRATES THE CURRENT CROSS-SECTIONS IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT APPLY TO ALL STREETS REGARDLESS OF THE LAND YUKON TEXT. IT'S ESSENTIALLY A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH TO THE SIZE AND BASIC ELEMENTS OF OUR STREET TYPES. WE DO HAVE UNIQUE STREET DESIGNS THROUGHOUT THE CITY BUT THOSE ARE THROUGH UNIQUE ZONING APPLICATIONS AND THE PROCESS. THE DESIGN IT TO BRING ALL OF THEM INTO ONE DOCUMENT, BEING THE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL. SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 DOES PROVIDE A STREET DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR DIFFERENT LAND USES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THAT'S WITHIN THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARDS AND CHARACTER DESIGNING ELEMENTS. WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED SOME EXAMPLES HERE WHERE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED AREAS ARE INTENDED TO HAVE TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS, OUR COMMUNITY CORRIDORS MAY HAVE RESIDENTIAL OR URBAN STREETS. OUR ACTIVITY CENTERS MAY HAVE URBAN DESIGN STREETS AND THEN OUR EMPLOYMENT CENTERS MAY HAVE CORPORATE CORRIDOR DESIGN STREETS. SO THERE COULD BE VARIAON IN STREET DESIGN BASED ON THE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT IT THROUGHOUT THE CITY. SO THE FIRST STEP OF THIS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SIDE IS A PROPOSED UPDATE TO OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP, WHICH WOULD DEFINE THE TRADITIONAL THOROUGHFARE TYPE SYSTEM WE HAVE IN OUR CURRENT THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND CAN THE GUIDANCE OF OUR FUTURE CATEGORIES INTO MORE OF A LAND USE BASED THOROUGHFARE PLAN BASED CLASSIFICATION MAP. ON SO THE DRAFT MAP ON THE RIGHT HAS THE SAME CLASSIFICATION THROUGHOUT THE CITY INDICATING THE COINES IT WITH LAND YUKON IT TEXT TO GIVE MORE GUIDANCE ON THE INTENDED DESIGN OF THOSE STREETS. THIS WOULD ILLUSTRATE THE TYPICAL DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE DESIRABLE FOR EACH CATEGORY OF STREET. SO THE FIRST ELEMENT OF THE DASHBOARD IS FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION. THIS IS THE CURRENT BASIS FOR THE STREET TYPES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. IT DEFINES THE HIERARCHY OF STREETS AND DEFINES THE DINSIO SUC AS RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE NUMBER OF LANES. THEN TO ADD TO THAT WOULD BE DESCRIPTIONS BASED ON LAND USE CONTEXT SO THIS SECTION WOULD ESTABLISH THE GENERAL DESIGN EXPECTATIONS OF FOUR CONTEXT TYPES, NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL, CORNER AND MIXED USE. AND THESE CONTEXTS ARE BASED DIRECTLY ON THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES. SO YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SLIDE IS THE PROPOSED CONNECTION BETWEEN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE FOUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN LAND USE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES THAT SHARE STREET DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS INTO DESIGNED THOROUGHFARE PLAN LAND USE CONTEXT. >> Chair Downs: VERY EFFICIENT. I LIKE IT T. >> AND FINALLY A PROPOSED ELEMENT OF THE DASHBOARD WOULD BE A VERY DESCRIPTIVE TABLE THAT ILLUSTRATES WHICH DESIGN ELEMENTS -- >> Chair Downs: YOUR TIME IS UP. [LAUGHTER]. >> SORRY. >> SO THIS TABLE ON YOUR SCREEN INDICATES THE TYPICAL OR APPROPRIATE STREET DESIGN ELEMENTS BASED ON THE COMBINATION OF FUNCTIONAL CLASS AND CONTEXT. SO FOR EXAMPLE, A LOCAL IN A MIXED USE AREA WOULD B PROPRIATE TO HAVE ONSTREET PARKING WHERE AN ARTERIAL STREET IN A COMMERCIAL AREA LIKELY WOULD NOT. SO MOVING ON TO THE CONTENT THAT WOULD BE FOUND WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL IN SECTION 2, TO START THIS IS THE BASIS OF THE INFORMATION FOR THE STREET TYPES AND FUNCTIONAL CLASSES SO IT OUTLINES THE STREET TYPES FROM A THROUGH G AS WELL AS A SET OF SPECIAL STREETS. THE TABLE INDICATES THE TYPICAL MINIMUM RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR EACH OF THE TYPES. THE MEDIAN WIDTH IF THERE IS ONE PRESENT AND THE TYPICAL NUMBER OF LANES. SO TO PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND ON THE DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF FUNCTIONAL CLASSES -- >> Chair Downs: I'M SORRY, CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE? ALLEYS MEWS? MAYBE I'M IGNORANT HERE. WHAT IS A MEW. >> THE SPECIAL STREETS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE EXPANDING IN THE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL, SO THESE ARE SPECIAL LOCAL ACCESS TYPE STREETS. SO ALLEYS ARE GOING TO BE YOUR TYPICAL REAR ACCESS STREETS. MEWSS A VARIATION OF THAT. TYPICALLY IT SERVES OUR RESIDENTIAL TYPE PRODUCTS. IT'S A BIT MORE NARROW THAN AN ALLEY. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT, THERE YOU GO. I KNOW WHAT IT IS. VERY GOOD, THANK YOU. >> SO THEN THE BREAKDOWN OF OUR FUNCTIONAL CLASSES START WITH THE ARTERIAL STREETS. THESE ARE THE HIGH CAPACITY ROADWAYS THAT SUPPORT CROSS TOWN TRAFFIC. THEY ARE TRIPS TO AND FROM EXPRESSWAYS. FOR EXAMPLES INCLUDE COIT ROAD, PARKER ROAD, PRESTON ROAD ETCETERA. THIS MAP HIGHLIGHTS JUST THE ARTERIAL NETWORK IN THE CITY SO YOU CANEE IT'S FAIRLY EVENLY SPACED FROM EAST TO WEST. GENERALLY ON A ONE MILE GRID IN MOST CITIES. WE DO HAVE SOME SUPPORT WILLING MINOR ARTERIALS, MORE SO ON THE WESTSIDE OF THE CITY. MOVING ON TO COLLECTOR STREETS AS THEIR NAME INDICATES THEY COLLECT TRAFFIC FROM LOCAL STREETS AND DISTRIBUTE THEM ON TO OTHER COLLECTORS OR ARTERIALS. EXAMPLES INCLUDE TULANE DRIVE AND PREMIER DRIVE ARE TYPICALLY IN THE FOUR LANE WIDTH. AND THEN HERE'S A MAP HIGHLIGHTING JUST THE COLLECTOR STREETS. AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S NOT A CONTINUOUS NETWORK THROUGH THE CITY AND IT'S INTENDED NOT TO BE. IT'S MEANT TO CARRY SHORTER TRIPS, CARRY THEM BETWEEN LOCAL STREETS AND ARTERIALS. AND THEN WE GET TO LOCAL STREETS WHICH PROVIDE ACCESS TO ABUTTING PROPERTIES. THEY'RE INTENDED TO BE LOW TRAFFIC VOLUME, LOWER SPEEDS AND THEY'RE NARROW. WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT FREEWAYS AND HIGHWAYS. THEY'RE NOT MAINTAINED BY THE CITY. BUT THE PLANO DOES MANAGE DRIVEWAY ACCESS AND THE DESIGN OF SOME SERVICE ROADS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. SO THEN AS WE MENTIONED, THE SPECIAL STREETS CROSS-SECTIONS, THIS WILL BE IN ADDITION TO OUR TYPICAL SET OF CROSS-SECTIONS. THEY INCLUDE THE APPROPRIATE WIDTHS FOR THE LOCAL ACCESS, UNIQUE STREET TYPES THAT INCLUDE MEWS, PASEOS AND ALLEYS. >> SO THEN WHEN IT COMES TO THE UNIQUE LAND USE BASE DESIGN ALTERNATIVES FOR THE STREET WE'RE REALLY BASING THIS OFF OF THE DIRECTION FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS. THESE INCLUDE GUIDANCE ON BLOCK PATTERN AND STREETSCAPE AS WELL AS VARIOUS MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES PER LAND USE TYPE. AND THIS CAN INDICATE OR GIVE US GUIDANCE ON VARIATION FOR VARIOUS ZONES WITHIN THE CROSS-SECTION SO THE TRAVEL WAY, WHICH IS THE TRAVEL LANES AND THE MEDIAN WILL HAVE THE LEAST VARIATION FROM ONE CONTEXT TO THE NEXT. THAT WILL BE GUIDED BY THE TRAFFIC NEEDS IN THE CITY. SO IF WE NEED A SIX LANE ROAD THAT WILL PROBABLY BE THE ND REGARDLESS OF CONTEXT. IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE THOSE OUTER ZONES CLOSEST TO DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO VARY BASED ON DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES. WE FIND THAT MANOR ARTERIALS, COLLECTORS AND LOCALS HAVE THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY FOR CONTEXT SENSITIVE DESIGN. THEY DON'T HAVE QUITE THE SAME TRAFFIC NEEDS AND WE CAN VARY DESIGN TO INCLUDE MAYBE MULTI-MODAL DESIGN OR GREATER STREETSCAPE TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT TYPES. WE ALSO WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT OPTIONS FOR ON STREET BICYCLE FACILITIES AND OTHER MULTI-MODAL INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE PROVIDED IN THE MANUAL, THEY JUST WON'T BE THE TYPICAL OR STARTING POINT FOR SECTIONS, IT WILL BE BASED ON THE NEED IN A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. SO STARTING WITH THE VARIOUS CONTEXT THAT WE'LL BE INCLUDING IN THE DESIGN MANUAL, THE FIRST IS NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT. THESE ROADWAYS SHOULD BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE FOR PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL AND OPEN SPACE LAND USES. AND THESE STREETS ARE GOING TO BE TRADITIONAL SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY DESIGN VERY TYPICAL OF THE STREET DESIGN THAT WE HAVE TODAY. THIS MAP HIGHLHTS THE AREA THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT. IT'S THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE CITY IN THAT LIGHT GRAY COLOR WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY AS WELL AS OUR OPEN SPACE AND SOCIAL NETWORK. AND JUST TO HIGHLIGHT AN EXAMPLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED DESIGN STREET, YOU'LL SEE STANDARD TRAVEL LANE WIDTHS FOR A LOCAL STREET HERE, UNDEFINED BUT PERMITTED PARKING AGAINST THE CURB, SIDEWALKS ARE TYPICALLY BUFFERED A LITTLE BIT FROM THE CURB WITH A LANDSCE STRIP, AND THERE'S NO LANE DEMARCATIONS ON THIS LOCAL STREET. >> Chair Downs: HERE'S A QUESTION FOR YOU LOOKING AT THAT. HOW WIDE IS THIS STREET? >> SO OUR LOCAL STREETS' PAVEMENT WIDTH IS TYPICALLY 26 FEET AND THEN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY 50 FEET. >> SO IT'S 26 FEET AND IF YOU GET A VEHICLE ON EACH SIDE THEY TAKE UP SIX FEET, LEAVES YOU 14. AND HOW MUCH SPACE DOES A FIRE ENGINE NEED? >> THAT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY. >> Chair Downs: THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE I SEE -- IN VARIOUS TIMES I'VE DRIVEN THROUGH IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR EXAMPLE, ON A CURVE, A PRETTY TIGHT CURVE AND THERE'S TWO TRUCKS THAT ALWAYS PARK OUT THERE, I HAVE TO BRING MY MIRRORS IN ON MY F250 TO GET IN THERE BECAUSE OF THEIR MIRRORS AND STUFF. SO I'M WONDERING JUST HOW THIS IS MONITORED. IS IT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CHECKING THESE THINGS? HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET ACCESS WHEN THERE'S SO MUCH -- AND THIS IS IN NEIGHBORHOODS ALL OVER THE CITY. SO MUCH CURB PARKING? I'M THE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING MANAGER. AND YOUR QUESTION IS SOMETHING WE DEAL WITH LITERALLY WEEKLY, ALMOST DAILY. AND 26 FEET YOU CAN HAVE A CAR ON BOTH SIDES AND HAVE A FIRE TRUCK BECAUSE WE'VE ACTUALLY DONE THE STUDY WITHIN THE LAST MONTH, WE'VE ACTUALLY DONE THIS STUDY ON. HAVE A FIRE TRUCK MAKE IT THROUGH THERE. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A STRETCH OF ROADWAY THAT IS 1,000 FEET LONG NEXT TO A PARK AND YOU HAVE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES, THE FIRE TRUCK HAS A VERY HARD TIME GETTING THROUGH THERE, ESPECIALLY IF THE'S Y KIND OF A CURVE, WHICH IS NOW WE'RE STARTING TO ADDRESS THOSE SPECIFIC SITUATIONS BY WIDENING THE ROADWAY AS WE'RE DOING IN ONE PARTICULAR LOCATION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT BECAUSE -- >> THE NEXT ROADWAY SIZE UP ON OUR STANDARD IS A 36 OR 37-FOOT WIDE ROADWAY WHICH ALLOWS FOR PARKING ON BOTH SIDES AND TWO THROUGH LANES. AND THAT'S USUALLY WHAT WE CALL A COLLECTOR WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS. >> Chair Downs: THK YOU. DIDN'T MEAN TO GET YOU OFF COURSE. JUST SOMETHING THAT STRUCK ME. >> SO HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT STREET, THIS BEING MORE OF AN ARTERIAL DESIGN. SO AGAIN STANDARD TRAVEL LANE WIDTH, BUFFERED SIDEWALKS, IN THIS CASE A MEDIAN. AND THEN IN CONTRAST TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT WOULD BE OUR MIXED USE CONTEXT. SO THIS IS MORE OF OUR HUMAN SCALE PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED STREET AND BUILDING DESIGN. YOU HAVE A M OF USES. IN THIS CASE THE TRAVEL WAY DESIGNED FOR SLOWER TRAVEL AND IN SOME WAY IT MAY REQUIRE TRAFFIC-CALMING TECHNIQUES TO ENCOURAGE THAT SLOWER TRAVEL SPEED. ONSTREET PARKING IS ALSO RECOMMENDED IN MOST CASES WHERE FEASIBLE. OUR DOWNTOWN AREA IS INCLUDED IN THE MIXED USE CONTEXT BUT SOME STREETS IN DOWNTOWN WILL NOT FIT NEATLY INTO OUR CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE AND HOW THEY'RE DESIGNED. SO WE WILL INCLUDE THAT SUBSET OF DOWNTOWN STREETS IN A SEPARATE SECTION, SECTION 6, WHICH IS ALL SO WE'LL BRING THAT AT A FUTURE DATE. BUT TO KNOW THAT SUBSET OF MIXED STREETS WILL BE IN ITS OWN SECTION. HERE WE HIGHLIGHT THE AREAS IN THE CITY THAT WOULD BE IDENTIFIED AS A MIXED USE CONTEXT FOR THOROUGHFARE DESIGN. AND TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE HERE OF A MIXED USE ORIENTED LOCAL STREET, SO WE HAVE STREET TREES ALONGSIDE THE CURB EDGE, A NARROWER TRAVEL WAY TO ENCOURAGE THE SLOWER SPEEDS, A DEFINED PARKING LANE VERSUS JUST KIND OF A CURB ADJACENT PARKING, AND WIDER SIDEWALKS, AND USUALLY THAT INCLUDES SOME STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS TO GO ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. SO CORNER CONTEXT, THIS IS A UNIQUE IN THAT THE STREET DESIGN REALLY VARIES ON HOW DEVELOPMENT OCCURS WITHIN THE CORNERS. SO IN LIMITED SITUATIONS, THERE MAY BE RESIDENTIAL USES THAT REALLY STEER THE STREET DESIGN MORE TOWARDS A NEIGHBORHOOD TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL TYPE STREET DESIGN. HOWEVER, IF REDEVELMENT WERE TO OCCUR IN MORE OF A MIXED USE FASHION WHICH WOULD HAPPEN LIKELY IN OUR COMMUNITY CORNERS, IN THAT CASE WE WOULD USE MORE OF THE MIXED USE TYPE STREET DESIGN. AND HERE WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE VARIOUS AREAS THAT WOULD BE COVERED BY THE CORNER CONTEXT AND THESE TWO EXAMPLES PROVIDE THAT COMPARISON BETWEEN HOW A CORNER STREET MIGHT BE DESIGNED BASED ON THE APPROPRIATE LAND USE THAT OCCURS NEXT TO THE STREET. SO ON THE LEFT THE STREET DESIGN IS SIMILAR TO THE NEIGHBORHO CONXTHICH HAS A TRADITIONAL COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS AN EXAMPLE OF A CORNER THAT MAY BE REDEVELOPED TOWARDS MORE OF A MIXED USE WALKABLE PATTERN. AND IN THIS CASE WE WOULD SUGGEST WIDE SIDEWALKS, SIDEWALK AMENITIES AND A GREATER FOCUS ON AESTHETICS. AND LAST WE HAVE THE COMMERCIAL CONTEXT. THESE ARE COMMUTER ORIENTED STREETS THAT SERVE LARGER SCALE BUSINESS CENTERS AND OFFICE CAMPUSES. THE TRAVEL LANES ARE TYPICALLY WIDER THAN YOU WOULD FIND IN A MIXED USE CONTEXT. IT INCLUDES TURN LANESND AUTOMOBILE ACCES IS PRIORITIZED. AND THIS MAP HIGHLIGHTS THAT CONTEXT AREA THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND THEN WE HAVE AN EXAMPLE HERE OF A COMMERCIAL ORIENTED ARTERIAL WITH A TYPICAL TRAVEL LANE WIDTH AND THEN A WIDER BUFFER BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THE CURB AND THE SIDEWALK BECAUSE TRAFFIC TENDS TO MOVE FASTER ON THESE STREETS. SO IN THE NEXT SET OF SLIDES I'LL GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE CROSS-SECTIONS VARIATINS FOR EACH OF THE TYPES JUST TO INDICATE HOW EACH OF THE LAND USE CONTEXT MIGHT STEER THE DESIGN OF THE STREETS. SO WE'LL START WITH TYPE B WHICH ARE REGIONAL ARTERIALS. HERE THESE STREETS HAVE TRAFFIC AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT AS PRIORITIES. I THINK THESE INCLUDE SIGNAL TIMING COORDINATION, DECELERATION LANES, SHARING OF DRIVEWAYS AND MEDIAN OPENINGS. AND FOR THIS EXAMPLE THERE'S ACTUALLY VERY LITTLE DESIGN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTEXT JUST BECAUSE THE PRIORITY HERE IS REALLY MOVING TRAFFIC THROUGH THE CITY. OUR TYPICAL TYPE B IS A SIX LANE ROADWAY WITH ERA RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THOSE DECELERATION LANES FOR ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE IS GOING TO BE IN THE PARKWAY AREA FOR PEDESTRIANS WHERE WE RECOMMEND WIDER SIDEWALKS FOR OUR MIXED USE CONTEXT BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATE HIGHER PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY IN THOSE AREAS SO OUR TYPICAL SIDEWALK STARTS AT FIVE FEET FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT AND WOULD BE A SEVEN FOOT SIDEWALK FOR OUR MIXED USE CONTEXT. AND THE CROSS-SECTIONS ON THE BOTTOM WILL BE OUR TYPE B MINIMUM CROSS-SECTION BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE ON MANY CORRIDORS PARTICULARLY COIT, WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THESE DECELERATION LANES SO WE SHOW THE MINIMUM SIX LANE CROSS-SECTIONS WITHOUT THOSE TURN LANES.ANES.ANES.ANES.ANES.. THE TRAFFIC SHOWS TREES EVERYWHERE BUT I ALSO KNOW WE'VE BEEN REMOVING TREES FROM OUR MEDIAN. SO ARE WE GOING TO PUT TREES BACK? NOPE? >> OUR INTENT IS TO PROVIDE AT LEAST THE WIDTH THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE STREET TREES. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> SO MOVING DOWN TO TYPE C, THESE ARE THE MAJOR MATERIALS. THEY'RE ALSO CROSS DOWN ROADWAYS, NOT TO THE LEVEL OF TH. THEY SERVE SLIGHTLY LOWER TRAVEL VOLUMES, BUT THEY ARE SIX LANES SEPARATED BY A MEDIAN AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTEXT BECAUSE THEY'RE AUTO ORIENTED WITH JUST A SUBTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK WIDTHS BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOOD AND MU. MIXED USE. AND TYPE D IS OUR SECONDARY OR SUPPORTING ARTERIALS. THEY SUPPORT AND FEED THE REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM. THEY'RE A MORE MODERATE VOLUME, MODERATE SPEED AND THEY SERVE SHORTER TRIPS THAN THE MAJOR ARTERIALS. A GREATER VARIATION OF THEEE CONTEXT. SO THE CROSS-SECTION ON THE TOP WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, CORNER OR COMMERCIAL CONTEXT. A TYPICAL FOUR-LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY WITH THE FIVE OR SIX-FOOT SIDEWALKS ON THE CURBSIDE. AND THEN THE CROSS-SECTION ON THE BOTTOM WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE IN THE MIXED USE ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT WITH A MUCH GREATER 12-FOOT SIDEWALK, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE DESIGN THAT WE'VE BEEN USING FOR UMU MAJOR STREETS. TYPE E ARE THE MAJOR COLLECTORS. THEY ARE INTENDED TO COLLECT AND DISTRIBUTE TRAFFIC BETWEEN THE ARTERIALS AND THE MINOR COLLECTORS AND LOCAL STREETS. THEY TYPICALLY SERVE SHORT LENGTH TRIPS AND THEY ALSO PROVIDE ACCESS TO ABUTTING PROPERTIES. AGAIN, WE SEE GREATER DESIGN OPTIONS HERE BASED ON CONTEXT SO OUR TYPICAL TYPE E MAJOR COLLECTOR DESIGN IS A FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED ROADWAY WHICH IS STILL THE APPROPRIATE TYPICAL DESIGN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD CORNER OR COMMERCIAL CONTEXT, BUT WHEN WE GET TO A MORE MIXED USE ORIENTED CONTEXT, A TWO-LANE DIVIDED MAJOR COLLECTOR WOULD ONSTREET PARKING, GREATER SIDEWALK OR SHARED USE PATH ALONG THE SIDE OF THE ROADWAY WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THERE. TYPE F ARE OUR MINOR COLLECTORS. SO THEY ACCUMULATE TRAFFIC FROM LOCAL STREETS AND DISTRIBUTE THEM ON TO OUR ARTERIAL STREET NETWORKMENT THEY TEND TO BE LOW SPEED AND LOW VOLUME. AND HERE ARE TYPICAL DESIGN IS A TWO-LANE SECTION. IT'S WE'DER THAN OUR LOC STREET SO IT WIL HAVE A 36-FOOT PAVEMENT WIDTH AND IS APPROPRIATE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CORNER AND COMMERCIAL CONTEXT. AND THEN A VARIATION THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN MORE OF A MIXED USE SETTING WOULD BE AGAIN A TWO-LANE PAVEMENT WIDTH BUT WITH THE ADDITION OF DESIGNATED ONSTREET PARKING AND THEN GREATER ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY. AND THEN FINALLY OUR TYPE G OR LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS, THESE ARE OUR MOST COMMON TYPE OF STREET THROUGHOUT PLANO. THEY PROVIDE ACCESS TO ABUTTING PROPERTIE AND RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ARE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE TWO-WAY TRAFFIC AT LOW SPEED AND LOW VOLUME. AND SO AGAIN, THIS IS A TWO LANE ROADWAY BUT WITH A MORE NARROW PAVEMENT WIDTH, TYPICAL IN A NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT AND CORNER CONTEXT WITH BASIC PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS AND THEN IN A MORE MIXED USE SETTING IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TWO LANE ROADWAY, BUT WITH DESIGN ELEMENTS I I GUESSNATED ONSTREET PARKING AND THEN A WIDER SIDEWALK. SO THAT WRAPS UP THE OVERVIEW OF WHAT WOULD BE COVERED WITHIN SECTION 2. IT IT WILL ESTABLISHES THE BASIC MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS FOR EACH OF THE DIFFERENT STREET TYPES IN THE CITY BASED ON ADJACENT LAND USE AND SO WE RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION PROVIDE DIRECTION PERTAINING TO SECTION 2 STREET FRAMEWORK AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE PLAN STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO EVERYBODY STILL AWAKE? >> THANKS, VERY THOROUGH. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ON COMMERCIAL CONTEXT, YOU TALKED ABOUT PRIMARILY AUTOMOBILE TRAFF, BUT A LOT OF THOSE STREETS ARE GOING THROUGH AREAS WITH LOTS OF TRUCK TRAFFIC AS WELL. ARE WE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT INCREASED TURNING RADIUSES, LONGER DIESEL LANES THAT KIND OF -- STUFF IN THE COMMERCIAL CONTEXT? >> THIS WOULD BE THE MINIMUM IN OUR COMMERCIAL AREAS, BUT WE HAVE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS DESIGNATED AS TRUCK ROUTES A. AND WE DO HAVE SPECIAL DESIGN ACCOMMODATIONS FOR OUR TRUCK ROUTES. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> I KNOW WITH DELIVERY TRKS AND EVERYTHING ELSE SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE A LOT OF CURBS OUT THERE THAT GET RUN OVER. SO MAKE SURE WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT. AND SECOND MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TABLE THAT YOU SHOWED EARLIER, ARE WE MAKING ANY CHANGES TO OUR STANDARD RIGHT-OF-WAY DESIGNATIONS OR IS THIS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST? JUST AS WE MOVE FORWARD ARE WE, AS ROADS GET REDONE ARE WE GOING TO BE WIDENING ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THE FLEX LANES OR IS IT PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS DONE AS FAR AS THE WIDTH IS CONCERNED? >> THE MINIMUM TYPICAL FOR OUR NGHBORHOOD CORNER AND COMMERCIAL CONTEXT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS WE'VE DONE. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING WIDENING ANY OF THESE ESTABLISHED CORRIDORS. IT'S REALLY OUR MIXED USE SETTING WHERE WE MIGHT SEE NEW DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT WHERE WE'LL HAVE MORE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A NEW STREET. IN THAT CASE THE MINIMUM WOULD BE A LITTLE WIDER TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THESE STREETSCAPE FEATURES ON STREET PARKING, THAT KIND OF THING. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> I'M WONDERING ABOUT J PODS. WILL THEY HAVE ANY IMPACT ON HOW WE ORGANIZE OR DESIGN THE STREET? BRIAN WAS THE ONE THEY TALKED TO. >> BRIAN, ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION MANAGER. I TAKE IT YOU SAW THE COUNCIL MEETING THE OTHER NIGHT WITH THE J PODS PRESENTATION. WE DID SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR AN EIGHT-MILE CORRIDOR BASED IN THE NORTHWEST PART OF PLANO, LEGACY WEST TOWN CENTER. THERE WOULDE A DARK PARK IN RIDE LOT WITH SPECIAL CONNECTIONS OVER TO GRANDSCAPE, STONE BRIAR, EAST PLANO DOWN TO [INDISCERNIBLE]. SO YES, THAT IS A DESIGN ELEMENT THAT HAS TO BE YET RESOLVED. THIS IS AT THE VERY, VERY BEGINNING. THEY HAVEN'T DESIGNED THEIR COLUMNS YET FOR THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE, SO THEY HAVE TO WORK WITHIN OUR EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY AND OUR STREET SCAPES AND UTILITIES AND LOTS OF HURDLES WE HAVE TO GET OVER BOREE EN GET CLOSE TO THAT. >> I JUST SAW SOME PICTURES IN THE COMMUNITY IMPACT AS WELL AND I WAS WONDERING HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK OUT. ARE YOU FAMILIAR AS WELL -- THEY MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE AS WELL TRANS PODS OR AS I HAD CONVERSATION A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT TIMES, THE UNMANNED ARIEL TAXIS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE SEE -- >> TRANS PODS ACTUALLY IS ANOTHER ONE OF THE TWO PEOPLE MOVER SYSTEMS THAT WERE APPROVED. TRANS PODS ARE REALLY FOR LONG HAUL, GOING DOWNN ENTIRE CORRIDOR. VERY FEW STOPS IN BETWEEN. THE J PODS ARE REALLY MEANT FOR LIKE THE CITY STREET SYSTEM, STREET NETWORK SYSTEM, JUST MIMICKING THAT EXCEPT IN AN AERIAL. YOU GET IN ONE OF THE J PODS, YOU PLUG IN AN ADDRESS YOU WANT TO GO AND IT TAKES YOU DIRECTLY THERE USUALLY WITHOUT STOPPING. UNLIKE THE CITY STREET SYSTEM YOU DON'T HAVE TO REALLY STOP. BUT TWO DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES. ONE IS MORE LONG HAUL, ONE IS MORE POINT TO MULTI-POINT, WHICH IS WHAT E J PODS IS. >> I JUST LOOKED AT THE DESIGN IN THE COMMUNITY IMPACT AND I COULD SEE THE TABS PODS RUNNING OVER TOP OF THE J PODS RUNNING UNDERNEATH THE BOTTOM OF THE TRANSPORTATION. BUT WITH THE WALKWAYS AND EVERYTHING, IT'S A NICE RENDERING FOR AN IDEA, IMU I WAS CURIOUS HOW THAT WAS GOING TO PLAY INTO THE -- HOW WE WOULD DESIGN STREETS. >> UNLESS THERE WAS A REGIONAL NEED TO HAVE TRANS PODS GO THROUGH PLANO, I DON'T SEE TRANS PODS BEING IN PLANO AT ALL. SO RIGHT NOW A J POD IS THE ONE THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY COG AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH. BUT THERE ARE OTHER TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE MIGHT CONSIDER ALSO. >> WELL, FROM COG THEY HAD CERTIFIED BOTH, I THOUGHT. >> THEY DID, THEY DID. >> OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU. THESE RENDERINGS OF A DIFFERENT DESIGN FOR STREETS OF VARIOUS TYPES SORT OF IMPRESSED ME AS AN IDEALIZED VERSION OF WHAT WE WOULD HAVE IN A PERFECT WORLD, IN OTHER WORDS, A WISH LIST. BUT OBVIOUSLY PLANO HAS EXPANDED OUT TO ITS MAXIMUM BOUNDARIES AND THE STREETS WE HAVE ARE IN PLACE THE WAY THEY ARE, WHICH DO NOT ALWAYS COMPLY WITH YOUR IDEALIZED SET OF STANDARDS. SO I WONDER WHAT HAPPENS GOING FORWARD WITH THE IDEALIZED SET OF STANDARDS. >> ONE PART OF THAT IS THIS IS THE IDEALED PART OF THE STREETS. THIS WILL INCLUDE ALEXIE MINIMUME ELEMENTS. IN OUR CONSTRAINED AREAS, ESPECIALLY WHERE IT COMES TO UTILITIES WHERE YOU MAY HAVE TO RUN A SIDEWALK THROUGHOUT A CONSTRAINED AREA, SCREENING WALL, WE'LL HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO INSERT LIMITED SECTIONS TO REDUCE THE WIDTH OF MAYBE THE GRASS PARKWAY OR THE SIDEWALK TO ACCOMMODATE A CONSTRAINT. SO IT WON'T BE NECESSARILY THE PERFECT SECTION ALL THE WAY THROUGH. WE'LL HAVE SOME OF THOSE CONSTRAINED AREAS. >> WHAT I MEAN IS HOW DO YOU GET FROM WHAT WE HAVE NOW TO WHAT IS DEPICTED ON THE RENDERING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE? >> SO IT WILL HAPPEOVER TIME. LARGELY THROUGH CIP PROJECTS AND WIDTH REDEVELOPMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS NOT TO GO THROUGH AND START DESIGNATING WHAT ROADS NEED TO BE WIDENED. THAT'S NOT THE PROCESS. WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS STETTING THE STANDARD. AND WHEN, SAY, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT COMES THROUGH OR ENGINEERING COMES THROUGH TO REDESIGN THE ROAD, CURRENTLY DOESN'T MEET THE SIDEWALK STANDARDS, THEY MIGHT NEED TO ADD WIDER SIDEWALKS WHEN THEY COME THROUGH OR REDEFINE THE STREET TREES OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE TO ALIGN WITH THE STANDARDS IN THE TDM, TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL. BUT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OVER TIME. AS HE MENTIONED BEFORE IT'S REALLY THE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING NEW STREETS WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE GREATEST IMPACT RIGHT AWAY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I DON'T MEAN TO BE AN ECHO CHAMBER HERE, BUT THIS REWORK HERE ISN'T TO SAY WE NEED TO TEAR UP ALL OUR STREETS AND REBUILD THEM. IT'S TO SAY AS WE GO THROUGH AND WE REFRESH OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, THESE ARE THE GUIDELINES WE'RE GOING TO USE. IS THAT CORRECT? COMMISSIONER HORNE? >> THANKS, DREW, GREAT PRESENTATION AND THE STAFF REPORT WAS FANTASTIC. BUT I GUESS IT'S A TWO-PART QUESTION. WE'VE GOT 15TH STREET THAT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO FIT THAT TO THIS. AND THE SECOND PART IS IS THERE ANY OTHER STREETS LIKE 15TH STREET THAT WE ARE FACING THE CHALLENGES WHERE WE HAVE VARIOUS WIDTH ATTEND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT NARROWS DOWN TO YOUR HISTORIC BUSINESS DISTRICT? ARE WE JUST GOING TO MAKE THAT THE EEPTI AND ME THE IMPROVEMENTS AS BEST WE CAN WITHOUT INFRINGING ON PROPERTY RIGHTS? AND THEN LIKE I SAID, THE SECOND QUESTION, IS THERE ANY OTHER STREETS BESIDES 15TH THAT WE'RE HAVING THESE TYPE OF CHALLENGES? >> 15TH STREET EAST OF 75 IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THOSE DOWNTOWN STREETS THAT WE'RE GOING TO SET ASIDE IN A SUBSET OF UNIQUE SPECIAL STREETS THAT IT DOESN'T FIT INTO OUR TYPES. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY VARIES JUST BASED ON THE AGE OF THE STREET. SO WE'RE TREATING THOSE ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. SO THAT AS WE DO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE DOWNTOWN STREE WE'TS TO OUR WORKING WITHIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY AS MUCH AS WE CAN. 15TH IS ONE THAT IT DOES HAVE SOME VARIATION THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR SO THERE MAY BE SOME AREAS THAT WILL -- EITHER HAVE TO WAIT ON REDEVELOPMENT OR A SPECIAL PROJECT TO ACQUIRE AN EASEMENT HERE AND THERE, MAYBE TO EVEN OUT THE DESIGN OF THE STREET. IT'S NOT QUITE TO THAT DEGREE ON SOME OF OUR OTHER DOWNTOWN STREETS BUT WE DO HAVE SOME KIND OF UNIQUE CONSTRAINTS IN DOWNTOWN THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING. >> IS THAT MOSTLY THROUGH LIKE THE OLD TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD? I'M REALLY MORE CONCERNED ABOUT ACCESS TO FIRE TRUCKS. IF WE GOT BOTH VEHICLES PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD, I MEAN, THOSE STREETS ARE -- I THOUGHT MY STREET WAS NARROW. THEIR STREET APPEARS TO BE NARROW FROM MY A EYE, BUT I'M THINKING THIS STRICTLY AS A SAFETY ISSUE AT THAT POINT. I'M NOT TRYING TO PRIORITIZE, AS THE CHAIRMAN WAS SAYING, BUT I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE WERE -- FROM THE CIP PERSPECTVE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN WHERE IS THE NEXT IMMEDIATE AREA THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, I GUESS? >> SO YOU MUST HAVE READ MY MIND AS I WAS STANDING UP, YOUR COMMENT. SO CIP WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN EXISTING CIP PROJECT WAY IN ADVANCE OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN STANDARDS BEING UPDATED. ON 15TH STREET EAST OF MUNICIPAL TO P OR N -- TO P AVENUE, WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKING AN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY, RIGHT, CURB TO CURB, WHICH IS A FOUR-LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHICH ALLOWS PARKING. IT ALLOWS PKING. AND WE'RE REDUCING THAT TO TWO LANES EACH DIRECTION BECAUSE THE VOLUMES WARRANT TWO LANES. AND WE'RE CHANGING UP THE PARKING IN THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND THE BICYCLE ACCESS ALONG THAT 15TH STREET. AND IT'S GOING TO BE THE -- I WANT TO SAY THE STANDARD MOVING FORWARD, BUT IT TAKES AN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY AND IT MAKES IT MUCH BETTER, MUCH SAFER, THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY. SO WHAT IS IMPLIED AND I'LL TRY TO PRONOUNCE YR NAME, BROUNOFF. SO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS EXACTLY ADDRESSED, BUT WE HAVE SEVERAL STREETS, ARTERIALS, SIX-LANE ARTERIALS, FOUR-LANE ROADWAYS WITH AND WITHOUT MEDIANS THAT DO NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO HITTING CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS. SO SETTING THESE STANDARDS ALLOWS US TO COME BACK INTO THESE ALREADY ESTABLISHED ROADWAYS AND MAYBE REDUCE A LANE IN EACH DIRECTION AND PUT IN PARKWAYS, PUT IN SAFER AREAS THAT ARE -- >> Chair Downs: FOR BICYCLISTS OR WIDE SIDEWALKS. >> SO TO MAKE IT SAFER. SO IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A STANDARD TO TURN TO AND SAY IF WE HAVE A 90-FOOT CURB TO CURB ROADWAY AND WE WANT TO GO DOWN TO FOUR LANES, TWO IN EACH DIRECTION WITH TURN LANES, WHAT IS THAT STANDARD GOING TO LOOK LIKE? AND THIS IS GOING TO ABSOLUTELY HELP US DO THAT. I HOPE THAT HELPS. >> Chair Downs: I THINK WE'RE GETTING SLIGHTLY INTO THE WEEDS BASED ON WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR HER, BUT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: ONE MORE COMMENT. I DON'T WANT TO OPEN AUTOPSY WHOLE OTHER THING BECAUSE IN YOUR REPORT IT WILL BE COVERED IN SECTION 6. I THINK BRIAN KNOWS THAT MEWS STREETS ARE A PARTICULAR PET PEEVE OF MINE, SO I'LL BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW -- THE DETAILS ON THAT AS WE GET INTO THAT SECTION. >> THE COMPLAINTS I GET ARE THE NARROW STREETS -- USUALLY THESE ARE 22 FEET O LESSS IS PARKING A AND FIRE ABSOLUTELY CAN'T GET DOWN WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES SO WE HAVE TO GO IN AND RETROFIT THESE WITH NO PARKING ZONES OR THE OWNER ASSOCIATION HAS TO PROHIBIT PARKING AND ITSELF-POLICED. SO IT BECOMES AN ISSUE. >> Chair Downs: SO I LIKE THE WAY THE MAPS ARE SET UP AND THE WAY YOU'RE IDENTIFYING THE ZONES AND THE TYPES OF THOROUGHFARE PLANS YOU WILL FIND IN EACH ONE OF THEM. THAT'S I THINK GOING TO BE HUGELY BENEFICIAL TO US MOVING FORWARD. IT WAS MENTIONED THE PARKING AND STUFF. PARKING REGULATIONS, REQUIREMENTS, ALL OF THAT, DON'T BELONG IN HERE. SO THE DEFINITION OF THIS LANE THAT'S DESIGNED FOR PARKING OR NOT, THE DESIGN PART IS, BUT WHETHER SOMEONE DOES OR CAN OR CAN'T PARK THERE ISN'T PART OF THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. A. >> Chair Downs: A PLAN OF GOING FORWARD ON HOW WE NEED TO UPDATE OUR STREET SYSTEM, ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK? YES SIR. >> I SEE THE DIRECTION YOU'RE GOING. I THINK IT'S WELL DONE. I'M SURE AS YOU MOVE FORWARD THERE WILL BE THINGS THAT YOU ADJUST AND TWEAK. TO ME IT'S A GREAT STEP FORWARD AND BASED ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS YOU'RE MAKING HERE ABOUT WHAT THE PLAN IS INTENDED TO DO I THINK YOU'VE CAPTURED IT WELL. I APPLAUD WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE AND I THINK DIRECTIONALLY IT'S REALLY GOOD. >> Chair Downs: DEFINITELY HEADED IN THE RIGHT RECTION. >> THANK Y. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. IT'S 9:52. MOVING ON, ITEM -- >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION. SILVER DESIGN STATION AREAS PLAN. PHASE 1 REPORT SECTIONS ONE THROUGH THREE, REVIEW, DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON SECTIONS 1 THROUGH 3 OF THE SILVER LINE STATION AREAS PLAN PHASE 1 REPORT. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JASON APRIL, I'M THE SENIOR MOBILITY PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF PLANO AND BEING THAT IT IS 9:53 I'M GOING TO TAKE MY 15 TO 17 MINUTE PRESENTATION DOWN TO FIVE MINUTES. OR EVEN FASTER, OKAY. >> MR. BRONSKY WILL HAVE 12 MINUTES OF QUESTIONS. [LAUGHTER]. >> SO WE STARTED THE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND IN FEBRUARY OF 2022 THE COMMISSION DIRECTED STAFF TO START AN AREA PLAN WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THE FUTURE SILVER LINE STATIONS AND THAT I WHAT I'M BRINGING TO YOU TODAY. WE'RE STARTING THAT PROCESS AND SO THE REPORT THAT YOU HAVE IS SECTIONS 1 THROUGH THREE AND WE'LL BE LOOKING AT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. YOU WILL SEE ME AGAIN NEXT WEEK AS I WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE ZONING ALIGNMENT. WE'VE DUG INTO THAT A LOT MORE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'VE LOOKED AT THE SILVER LINE STUDY FROM FEBRUARY. >> YOU MEAN IN TWO WEEKS, RIGHT? WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK. E IT'S ALL A BLUR. >> I'M STILL IN SHOCK THAT THANKSGIVING IS ON THURSDAY. Chair Downs: YES. >> SO WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE FIRST DATA-GATHERING PHASE. WE'LL BE -- THE DATA FROM THIS PHASE WILL BE USED IN LATER PHASES AS WE GO TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH STAKEHOLDERS FOR FUTURE PLANNING ENGAGEMENT AND TO PLAN. IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR, THE SILVER LINE IS A 26-MILE LONG COMMUTER RAIL EXTENDING BETWEEN DALLAS-FORT WORTH AIRPORT AND SHILOH ROAD IN PLANO. SO SHILOH RIVERSIDE IS GOING TO BE THE END OF THE LINE STATION FO SILVER LINE. DART IS GOING TO BE THE OPERATOR. THEY'RE EXPECTING IT TO BEGIN SERVICE IN 2024 AND THERE WILL BE TWO STATIONS LOCATED IN PLANO TO SUPPORT THE COMMUTER RAIL. THE 12TH STREET STATION AND THE SHILOH ROAD STATION, BUT THERE WILL ALSO BE A NEW DART RED AND ORANGE LINE LIGHT RAIL STATION CONSTRUCTED JUST NORTHEAST OF THE SILVER LINE STATION. THIS CORRIDOR HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT SINCE AT LEAST 1983. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY TALKED ABOUT ASHE COTTON BELT BUT IT WAS REBRANDED IN 2019. THE CITY OF PLANO HAS A STRONG CONNECTION TO THE REGION'S PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM, RECOGNIZING THE ELECTRONIC ECONOMIC BENEFIT THAT TRANSIT HAS TO THE CITY AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR PRIVATE INVESTMENT. AND SHOWCASED IN THE REPORT PLANO HAS A VERY LONG HISTORY OF PROACTIVELY PLANNING FOR TRANSIT IN THE CITY AND WE'RE TAKING THIS STUDY AND WE'RE WANTING TO FOLLOW IN THOSE FOOTSTEPS WITH THE PLANNING EFFORTS THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY DONEITH THE SILVER LIN STUDY. BEST PRACTICES FOR TOD, WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT IN THE ANALYSIS AS WE WERE LOOKING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS A TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT MEAN? WHAT ARE THE NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES AND WHAT ARE THE BEST PRACTICES WITHIN THE CITY -- WITHIN THE REGION, SPECIFICALLY COLLIN COUNTY. WE FOUND TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS, THEY SHOULD BE WALKABLE AND CONNECTED. THEY SHOULD BE DENSE AND DIVERSE AND OFFER A MIX OF COMPLEMENTARY LAND USES AND THEY SHOULD BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE. SO TOD SHOULD CONNECT TO THAT SURROUNDING COMMUNITY SO THAT IT'S A PART OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE FOUND TIME AND TIME AGAIN, NOT JUST ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION CONNECTIONS INTO THE TOD, BUT SHOULD BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL, THE MOST SUCCESSFUL TODs. DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR TOD, TODs HAVE A UNIQUE DESIGN, CHARACTER, FORM AND QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMPARED TO OTHER DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT. THE PATTE ST ACCOMMODATE A MIX OF BUILDING TYPES. STREETS SHOULD BE DESIGNED AS MORE THAN JUST A MEANS FOR TRAVEL, BUT AS A SHARED SPACE, SO CREATING A SENSE OF PLACE EVEN THROUGH THE STREETS THEMSELVES. AND TODs SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO INCLUDE THE PRIMARY TRIP GENERATOR. SO A TOD MAY BE WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIVING AND THEN THEY'RE TAKING THE TRAIN AND THEY'RE GOING INTO WORK OR AT SOME EXAMPLES THAT WE'VE SEEN WHERE IT'S KIND OF THE OPPOSITE WHERE IT COULD BE AN EMPLOYMENT DESTINATION AS WELL WITH RESIDENTIAL. THE DALLAS-FORT WORTH REGION HAS MANY EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL TODs IN THE REAM. I THINK PART OF THAT IS DART ACTIVELY ENCOURAGES DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN THE SURFACE AREA CITIES AND PARTNERS SO THEY WORK ON THAT COLLABORATION. EACH NEW TOD ALONG THE DART RAIL LINES RESPONDS TO THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS THAT ARE IN THAT UNIQUE COMMUNITY SO THAT'S PART OF THAT CONTEXT SENSITIVE APPROACH AS WELL, MAKING SURE THAT THE TOD RESPONDS TO THE COMMUNITY. SOME EXAMPLES HIGHLIGHTED IN THE REPORT, CITY LINED BUSH STATION. THIS IS A REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CENTER, HUB, RETAIL, JUST DOWN THE STREET. DEFINITELY A DRIVER FOR RIDERSHIP, BUT ALSO THE COMPACT WALKABLE FORM OF DEVELOPMENT KIND OF HELPS THE WHOLE SITE HAVE A MORE HUMAN CENTERED APPROACH. DOWNTOWN CARROLLTON I THOUGHT THIS WAS AN CAOLLTON BECAUSE THEY FOCUSED ON KIND OF REVITALIZING THEIR DOWNTOWN AND MAKING IT -- FOCUSING ON COMMUNITY EVENTS AND PUBLIC EVENT. AND I'M NOT REALLY DOING THE FIVE MINUTES, I JUST REALIZED. I'LL START GOING. DOWNTOWN GRAPEVINE, THIS WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE TEX RAIL IS PRETTY MUCH THE MIRROR IMAGE OF THE SILVER LINE SO IT'S OPERATED BY TRINITY METRO, BUT IT CONNECTS DFW TO DOWNTOWN FORT WORTH. THE STUDY AREAS, THEY ARE -- LET ME GO BACK. THEY ARE A HALF MILE BUFFER AROUND. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND DART GUIDANCE AS WELL. AND SECTION 3 OF THE REPORT, TAKING THAT HALF MILE ANALYSIS WE LOOKED AT FUTURE LAND USE, EXISTING LAND USE, AGE OF STRUCTURES, PARCEL SIZE, TO TRY TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN -- HOW THE 12TH STATION AND SHILOH ROAD SIMILAR AND HOW ARE THEY DIFFERENT? HIGH LEVEL, THEY WERE VERY -- THERE WERE SOME SIMILARITIES BETWEEN 12TH AND SHILOH, FOR INSTANCE, BOTH TENDED TO HAVE INDUSTRIAL USES SOUTH OF THE RAIL LINE, BUT 12TH STREET DEFINITELY BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE SELLS AND THE HISTORY IN THE AREA -- PARCELS AND THE HISTORY IN THE AREA HAD A LOT MORE EXISTING LAND USES. HISTORIC RESOURCES, 12TH STREET TENDED TO HAVE MORE THAN SHILOH. AGE OF STRUCTURES, I THINK THAT GOES INTO THE DNTOWN ISOME OF THE OLDER PLACES IN THE CITY OF PLANO. WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK SO IT WAS COMMON WHEN WE WERE LOOK AT WHAT MAKES A SUCCESSFUL TOD, WHAT CONNECTIONS ARE IN AND OUT OF THE AREA. WE LOOKED AT PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS AND ALSO TRANSIT ACCESS. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WE REANALYZED THE MARKET ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE IN THE AECOM STUDY. WE LOOKED AT NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES, TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ZONES, DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS AND WE LOOKED AT A LIST OF PUBLIC CIP PROJECTS TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT WAS A DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING WITHIN 12TH AND SHILOH. AND THEN DEMOGRAPHICS, 12TH STREET HAD A POPULATION OF ABOUT 5,000. SHILOH ROAD HAD A POPULATION OF ABOUT 1,303,530. IN SUMMARY, SUCCESSFUL TODs SHOULD HAVE DENSE, COMPACT, HHLY WAL ABLED AND CONTEXT SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. THE CITY OF PLANO HAS A SUCCESSFUL TRACK RECORD FOR PLANNING FOR TOD IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. WE FOUND THAT THE 12TH STREET STATION HAS A SLIGHTLY HIGHER POTENTIAL FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT THAN THE SHILOH STATION. THIS IS EVIDENT THROUGH MARKET DATA, THE EXISTING BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND THE LAND USE PATTERN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN 12TH STREET AND SHILOH. AND THE CURRENT MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION NETWORK. IF IT CHANGED TO TOD IT'S ULTIMATELY THE COMMUNITY'S VISION FOR THESE AREAS, UPDATEFOR ZONING WILL BE NEEDED, BUT I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU ON DECEMBER 5TG ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON TO WHAT IS THE EXISTING ZONING ALLOW BASED OFF OF THE SUBDISTRICTS LAID OUT IN THE AECOM STUDY FOR FEBRUARY. SO NEXT STEPS... FIVE PHASES. WE'RE HOPING TO START STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH THIS SPRING, SO SPRING OF 2023. AND WE'VE REQUESTED THE COMMISSION PROVI INP ON NEEDED DATA BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD. SO THE DATA THAT WAS PRESENTED IN THIS VERY FAST PRESENTATION, BUT ALSO IN THE ATTACHED REPORT, IF THERE ARE ITEMS THAT YOU THINK WE SHOULD EXPAND ON, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DISCUSS. >> Chair Downs: SO I WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION IF YOU HAVEN'T THOROUGHLY REVIEWED THAT REPORT, DO SO. AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WANT TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK RIGHT NOW, PLEASE DO SO AND COMMUNICATE YOUR THOUGHTS TO THEM. I'M SURE THEY WOULD APPRECIATE IT. FROM MY VIEWPOINT I HOPE WE DO A REALLY GOOD JOB AT 12TH STREET. I THINK THERE'S A HUGE OPPORTUNITY THERE. EVEN POTENTIALLY SOMEWHAT MORE UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY THAN WE HAVE IN DOWNTOWN PLANO. AND WE CERTAINLY NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB THAN WE DID IN PARKER ROAD BECAUSE IT ORIGINALLY WAS -- THEY DIDN'T CALL IT TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AT THAT TIME BUT I THINK WE MISSED THE MARK THERE SOMEHOW. SO WHATEVER WE CAN DO AT 112TH STREET TO REALLY LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES WILL REQUIRE A ZONING CHANGE. IT MIGHT REQUIRE A NEW DISTRICT. IT MIGHT FIT INTO SOME THINGS WE'VE GOT, BUT I DON'T THINK SO. YOU WILL HAVE CHALLENGES THERE TOO WITH SOME OF THE HISTORIC AREAS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, THE ABILITY TO COLLECT SIZEABLE ENOUGH PAPARCELS WILL BE A CHALLENGE. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SHILOH STATION ISN'T THAT WITHIN THE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT? HAS RESISTED ANY ZONING CHANGE FOR 50 YEARS OR SOMETHING. SO IT'S JUST MY OPINION, BUT I ALMOST FEEL LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING MORE THAN LIKE CITY LINE IS, I DON'T KNOW, CALL IT WHITE-COLLAR, YOU KNOW EMPLOYMENT CENTER. I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY THERE ISN'T MORE OF A DOWNTOWN PLANO OR 12TH STREET, BUT MOR OF A HOW DO YOU TURN THAT INTO A HUB THAT REALLY SUPPORTS MUCH MORE EMPLOYMENT AND GREATER EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES. THAT'S MY FEEDBACK ON IT. 12TH STREET PROBABLY -- SHILOH WOULD REQUIRE LESS ZONING CHANGE PERHAPS OTHER THAN TWEAKING OUR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY. BUT WHO'S TO SAY YOU CAN'T PUT A COMPANY OUT THERE THAT EMPLOYS 1,000 PEOPLE OR SOMETHIN. SO MY THOUGHTS. ANYBODY ELSE? COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: JUST TO REEMPHASIZE SOME OF THE THINGS YOU SAID ABOUT 12TH. I THINK THERE'S A HUGE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO CARROLLTON. I'VE WATCHED THAT CARROLLTON DEAL FOR 20 YEARS, AND IT WAS NOT THAT DISSIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BETWEEN 15TH AND 12TH WHEN DART RAIL FIRST CAME THROUGH THERE. AND IT TOOK A LONG TIME. IT'S STILL EVOLVING OVER THERE. THERE'S STILL BODY SHOPS AND SOME RANDOM BUSINESSES THAT WILL EVENTUALLY BE GONE, I'M SURE. IT TOOK A LONG TIME BUT IT'S REALLY TURNED OUT, REALLY STARTING TO COME TOGETHER. I THINK THE LONG-TERM VISION IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO STUDY THAT ONE AND TALK TO THE CITY OF CARROLLTON A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THAT IS A GOOD ROADMAP TO LOOK AT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN KIND OF A CONNECTION DOWN J. THAT CONNECTION IS ALREADY FORMING DOWN J BETWEEN THE TWO AREAS. BUT I'D AO, A WORD OF CAUTION. THE DOUGLAS COMMUNITY IS A SPECIAL PLACE. >> YES, IT IS. >> AND WE NEED TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THAT SPECIAL PLACE AS WE PUT THIS PLAN TOGETHER BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE PATH GOES OVER THERE. IT'S -- WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO FULLY INTEGRATE WHATEVER WE DO WITHOUT ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE DOUGLAS COMMUNITY. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> THANK YOU. I WANT TO COMPLIMEN THE STAFF ON THEIR THOROUGH AND INFORMATIVE REPORT. I LEARNED A LOT JUST BY READING IT. I'D LIKE TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THAT THE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY DISTRICT, WHICH IT SEEMS TO ME IS PRETTY MUCH DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW. SO I'M THINKING THAT THE EFFORT GOING FORWARD WITH RESPECT TO THE LOS RIOS STATION AND SPECIFICALLY IN THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AREA THAT IS TO THE SOUTH OF THAT SHOULD PERHAPS FOCUS ON DEVELOPING CONTRAFLOW RIDERSHIP OKAY? AND THAT WOULD INVOLVE WORKING WITH THE EMPLOYERS IN THE AREA TO DEVELOP THINGS THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE THEIR EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THE SILVER LINE TO WORK, OKAY? WITHOUT TRYING TO PROPOSE A SPECIFIC LIST OF THINGS TO DO RIGHT NOW, JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT COME TO MY HEAD AT THE MOMENT ARE WORKING WITH WHOEVER YOU NEED TO WORK WITH TO ESTABLISH A SHUTTLE SERVICE BETWEEN THE LOS RIOS STATION AND THE VARIOUS ELOYMENT AREAS. MAYBE RUN A ROUTE THROUGH THE AREA -- >> LAST MILE. LAST MILE SERVICE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY. >> Brounoff: SOMETHING LIKE THAT. HAVE THE EMPLOYERS INSTITUTE PROGRAMS WITHIN THEIR COMPANIES TO ENCOURAGE RIDERSHIP PERHAPS SUBSIDIZED RIDERSHIP, SUBSIDIZE THE TRAIN FARES AND OTHER THINGS ALONG THAT LINE. AND I THINK IF YOU ENCOURAGE THE RIDERSHIP GOING THE OTHER WAY, YOU KNOW, COMING TO WORK IN THE MORNING AND LEAVING, THAT WOULD PROBABL HAVE A BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON STIMULATING TRANSIT TRANSIT ON THE NORTHSIDE OF THE RAIL --D DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTHSIDE OF THE RAIL. >> Chair Downs: I THINK YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE A SIMILAR ISSUE AT SHILOH THAT WE HAD AT PARKER ROAD WITH PEOPLE DRIVING DOWN FROM ALLEN McKINNEY PARKING. >> I SHOULD HAVE SAID [INDISCERNIBLE]. >> Chair Downs: DRIVING DOWN, PARKING AND TAKING IN -- I DON'T RECALL WHAT THE SOLUTION WAS. AT ONE POINT YOU HAD TO HAVE A PERMIT TO PARK THERE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT ALL SHOOK OUT, BUT WE SHOULD ANTIPATE SOMETHING SIMILAR. IT MAY JUST SIMPLY BE DFW TRAFFIC TRYING TO GET TO THE AIRPORT, BUT EITHER WAY FROM A PARKING STANDPOINT I WOULD ANTICIPATE THERE BEING SOME KIND OF NEED FOR THAT. COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: I THINK ONE THING WE HAVE TO EMPHASIZE TOO IS THE EASE TO GET TO DFW AIRPORT. PARTICULARLY WITH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AREA, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THERE'S FIVE FLIGHTS A DAY NONSTOP FROM D TO SAN JOSÉ AND THEY'RE BOOKED. THEY'RE PACKED. SO THAT TELLS YOU THERE'S A LOT OF TECH MAKING THAT DRIVE. AND IF WE CAN EMPHASIZE THAT PARTICULARLY OVER IN THE SHILOH AREA, IT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO SELL THAT AND DEVELOP THAT WHOLE AREA AROUND SHILOH. I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT PEOPLE COMING IN FROM WHEREVER, ACROSS THE WORLD GENERALLY WILL TAKE A TRAIN AND AT THE END OF THE LINE THEY'RE AT THEIR STOP. AND AS COMMISSIONE WAS SAYING, HAD THAT LAST MILE BEING ABLE TO DROP THEM OFF AT THE HOTEL OR THE BUSINESS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO, I THINK THAT'S THE BIG BONUS ABOUT THIS WHOLE THING. I THINK MY DAYS OF DRIVING TO DFW AND PAYING $24 TO PARK A CAR, IT MAY COME TO THE END WHEN THIS LINE OPENS. BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO EMPHASIZE. AND THE CONNECTIVITY ALSO THAT WE HAVE WITH THE ORANGE AND RED LINE. THOSE ARE BIG SELLING POINTS. I THINK THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO KIND OF EMPHASIZE ON THIS. THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COME. IT WILL COME. AND WE HAVE TO BE KEENLY AWARE THAT THERE ARE ZONING CHANGES WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT. SO I THINK THIS IS JUST A THE ENTIRE CITY. BUT ANYWAY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY MORE RED LIGHTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THIS HAS BEEN AWHILE COMING AS YOU SAID. LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING IT DEVELOP. AND AS COMMISSIONER RATLIFF KIND OF REFERENCED, IT'S GOING TO TAKE AWHILE. THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. IT WILL TAKE AWHILE. OKAY. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING? MR. BRONSKY. MIKE'S OVER THERE JUST TWITCHING TWITCHING TWITCHING. [LAUGHTER]. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 10:11 P.M.