>> Chair Downs: WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] THANK YOU. >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PE SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON TH CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MOVE ON TO CONSENT. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACT UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO PULL A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. PLEA VOT THAT ITEM -- WELL, WE'RE MISSING SOMEBODY. >> I VOTED. >> Chair Downs: NO WORRIES. WE'LL GET IT STRAIGHT. IT'S ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE OUR MOTION. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. SO YOUR VOTE DOES COUNT. [LAUGHTER] EXCELLENT. ALL RIGHT. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS, PLEASE. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID 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 MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. PUBLIC HEAR ZONING CASE 2022-005. REQUEST TO AMEND ARTICLE 4 (AMENDMENTS) AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANC PERTAINING TO THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY-INITIATED ZONING CASES ON PRIVATE PROPERT APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS A LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I AM ROBIN KIRK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT CASE PERTAINING TO NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY-INITIATED ZONING CASES FOR ZONING CHANGES ON PRIVATE REAL PROPERTY. THIS ISSUE WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION AT THE MARCH 1 MEETING. WE HAD A DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEM AT THAT TIME FOLLOWED UP ON SOME RESEARCH AND LEGAL QUESTIONS AT THE MARCH 21st P&Z MEETING. THE COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING AT THAT TIME. THE CASE WAS TABLED AT THETO PRD OBTAINING CAN BE DIFFICULT AND TIME CONSUMING. HERE'S A TABLE OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS. STAFF RESEARCH FOUND 49 CASES IN WHICH THE CITY OF PLANO WAS THE PETITIONER FOR A ZONING CHANGE AFFECTING REAL PRIVATE PROPERTY. OF THESE 49 CASES, 40 OF THEM WERE UNNEEDED SPECIFIC-USE PERMITS MOST LIKELY FOR PRIVATE CLUB FOLLOWING CHANGES IN STATE ALCOHOL REGULATIONS. THE NINE OTHER CASES INVOLVE ZONING CHANGES AND PD DISTRICT UPDATES AND FOUR SUP REQUESTS FOR TRANSIT CENTERS TO BRING THE EXISTING TRANSIT CENTERS IN CONFORMANCE WITH LAW. THE SCOPE OF THIS AMENDMENT, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD ONLY AFFECT CASES THAT MEET ALL THREE OF THE CRITERIA SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE. CITY-INITIATED ZONING CASES THAT ONLY AFFECT PROPERTY OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO REQUIRE THE POSTING OF SIGNS PER THE ORDINANCE. THAT THIRD POINT ADDRESSES POTENTIAL CORRIDOR REZONINGS IN WHICH THE CITY COULD POSSIBLY OWN SMALL SLIVERS OF RIGHT OF WAY BEING RECOMMENDED IN THE REZONING CASE . FOR THE CASES THAT DO MEETLL THR, AN ADDITIONAL FORM OF PUBLIC NOTICE WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE IN THIS PROPOSAL. THIS DOES ENSURE THAT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF REQUIRED FORMS AND NOTICE DOESN'T CHANGE FROM CASE TO CASE AND MAINTAINS TRANSPARENCY THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS COMMITTED TO. THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE PERMITS THE CITY MANAGER AND THE COMMUNICATIONS TEAM STAFF TO DESIGNATE THE MOST USEFUL PLATFORM FOR THIS NOTICE SINCE THESE CASES COME UP RARELY AND TRENDS SHIFT IN THE INTERVENING MONTHS AND YEARS BETWEEN THEM. THIS REQUEST IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S LAND USE POLICY. CITY-INITIATED ZONING IS INTENDED TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT GOALS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE REQUEST INCREASES EFFICIENCY AND REMOVES A UNIQUE BARRIER TO ZONING THE MMUNY B SUPPORTING PLANO'S LAND U PLANS. R REQUIRED FOR ZONING CASES WITHOUT INFRINGING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR OWNERS. IT INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY THAT ALLOWS COMMUNICATION STAFF TO RECOMMEND THE MOST EFFECTIVE METHOD OF NOTIFYING THE PUBLIC OF THESE REQUESTS IN CONFORMANCE WITH CIP ACTION 5. TO SUMMARIZE THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REMOVE A LEGAL HINDRANCE NOT ANTICIPATED WHEN THE SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENT W ADDED IN 2015. THE PROPOSAL REMOVES UNIQUE BARRIERS WHILE MAINTAINING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. IT ALSO PERMITS INNOVATION AND CITIZEN OUTREACH THAT COULD POTENTIAL IMPROVE NOTIFICATION FOR THESE CASE TYPES. FOR THESE REASONS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS AS SHOWN. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HIS LIGHT CAME ON FIRST. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> RatliffTHAN Y, MR. CHAIRMAN. I READ THE AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE AND I APPRECIATE THE THREE BULLETS ABOUT WHEN THIS WOULD BE USED. HOW IS THAT -- IS THAT JUST GOING TO BE IN PROCEDURE OR SINCE THAT'S NOT IN THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IS THAT JUST HOW THE STAFF INTENDS TO UTILIZE IT OR HOW IS THAT PERMANENTLY RECORDED? >> ARE YOU ASKING HOW IS THAT INCORPORATED? >> Ratliff: YOU HAD THE -- IT HAS TO MEET ALL THREE CRITERIA TO BE ABLE TO BE USED FOR THE ALTERNATE NOTIFICATION BUT THAT'SOT I THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. IS THAT JUST IN THE PROCEDURE MANUAL? HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE DOCUMENTED? >> Chair Downs: SO LET'S GO BACK TWO OR THREE SLIDES TO THE POINT WHERE IT LISTED THE THREE. THERE. >> Ratliff: HOW IS THAT INCORPORATED IF IT'S NOT IN THE ORDINANCE? >> SO WE FEEL LIKE THE LANGUAGE BASICALLY COVERS THOSE POINTS. SO IN A MORE TECHNICAL SENSE, PERHAPS. BUT FOR OUR RECORDS THIS STAFF PORT IN YOUR PACKET WILL BE -- WE DO THIS FREQUENTLY. WE'LL REFERENCE PREVIOUS STAFF REPORTS TO UNDERSTAND A REASONING OR INTERPRETATION SO IT WILL BASICALLY WILL BE IN OUR PROCEDURES AND ALSO IT WILL BE PART OF THE FORMAL IT'S APPROPRIATELY RECORDED SO THAT WE HAVE THAT FOR POSTERITY. THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: THANK YOU, MS. KIRK FOR THE PRESENTATION. AGAIN, SPRINGBOARDING OFF WHAT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF SAID WERE THE THREE ITEMS. TALKING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY TO THE PUBLIC AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONLY REASON WE'RE CHANGING OR AMENDING OUR CODES HERE, IF YOU WILL, IS BECAUSE THREE ACTION ITEMS AND THE DIFFICULTY THE CITY HAS HAD ABOUT GETTING POTENTIAL ZONING CASES TO THE PUBLIC. BUT WE ARE NOW WITH OUR WEB BASE APPLICATIONS WITH THE MASS NOTIFICATIONS THAT WE VE, IANT TO MAKE SE THAT THE PUBLIC FULLY UNDERSTANDS AND IS AWARE THAT UNLESS THESE THREE CASES ARE INVOLVED THAT WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY OTHER CHANGES TO NOTIFICATIONS. BUT WHEN THESE THREE CHANGES DO EVOLVE OR COME TO CASE, THAT THE CITY WILL BE WELL AWARE, CITIZENS WILL BE WELL AWARE OF THE ACTIONS THAT THE CITY'S GOING TO BE TAKING. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT. AND, AGAIN, SPRINGBOARDING OFF COMMISSIONER RATLIFF'S CASE HERE THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY KNOW THAT'S THE CASE. >> ALSO IN ADDITION TO WHAT THESE TWO GENTLEMEN MENTIONED, THAT THE SIGN REMOVING -- WELL REMOVE SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENTS HERE ARE ONLY APPLYING TO THE PHYSICAL SIGN ON THE REAL PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT? WE ARE STILL MAINTAINING ALL THE REST OF THESE POSTING NOTIFICATIONS AND THIS IS SPECIFICALLY APPLYING TO THE PHYSICAL SN THAT'S BEING PLACED IN THE GROUND, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. THIS PERTAINS TO ONLY PHYSICALLY PLACING THE SIGN ON PROPERTY THAT THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO BECAUSE IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. ALL OTHER NOTIFICATION ACTIONS WILL BE MAINTAINED AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION ACTION WILL BE USED IN THESE CASES. >> Tong: WHAT OF ADDITIONAL? NOW, THE STAFF WOULD BE THE COMMUNICATIONS STAFF. >> AND WE DID SPEAK WITH THE COMMUNICATIONS STAFF AND THEY SAID AT THIS TIME THEY WOULD CHOOSE NEXTDOOR AS AN ALTERNATIVE THAT IS FREQUENTLY USED BUT IN THE FUTURE THEY MIGHT CHOOSE TO USE SOMETHING ELSE IF THINGS CHANGE FOR THAT PLATFORM. >> Tong: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: PERHAPS TO HIGHLIGHT THE CHALLENGES THE CITY HAS FACED IN THE PAST, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT A SITUATION WHERE WE COULDN'T -- DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS T THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHAT AVENUES WERE AVAILABLE AT THAT POINT TO THE CITY? JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THE REASON WHY WE ARE PUSHING IN THIS DIRECTION. >> A SITUATION WHERE WE ACTUALLY WEREN'T ABLE TO ACCESS? I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ONE. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS TABLE, THERE'S ONLY BEEN TWO CASES SINCE THAT WAS INSTITUTED. >> Olley: PERHAPS HYPOTHETICALLY AS FAR AS A DEVELOPMENT DENIED US ACCESS& WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE RECOURSE? >> RECENTLY FOR ZONING CASE 2022-008 WE HAD TO POST PHYSICAL SIGNS ON OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES AND WE FACED SOME CHALLENGES BECAUSE SOME OF THE PROPERTIES, THEY WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THE SIGN BEING ON THEIR PROPERTY AND WE HAD TO SEND THE SIGN CONTRACTOR MULTIPLE TIMES TO THE AREA TO RELOCATE THOSE SIGNS. >> Olley: SO THERE IS A FINANCIAL BURDEN ATTACHED? >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, YOU ORIGINALLY HAD YOUR LIGHT ON. >> Bronsky: I DO. I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE FLEXIBILITY AND BEING INNOVATIVE AND I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE RARITY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. WHAT HAPPENS TO SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT USING THE INTERNET? HOW AWAY SOMETHING THAT A PERCENTAGE OF OUR CITIZENRY MAY VALUE A GREAT DEAL IN BEING ABLE TO BE INFORMED. SO ARE THERE OTHER ALTERNATIVES -- ALTERNATE NOTIFICATION METHODS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THOSE OF US THAT MAY NOT BE AS INTERNET SAVVY? >> WELL, WE DO HAVE THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE, WHICH IS NOT AN INTERNET NOTICE, THAT APPEARS IN THE PRINT EDITION. OTHERWISE I DON'T KNOW OF OTHER NON-INTERNET-BASED TOOLS. >> Bronsky: SO IF I'M AN OLDER PERSON THAT DOESN'T USE THE INTERNET, I'VE GOT TO GET A NEWSPAPER SUBSCRIPTION? >> OR USE PRESS READERS, I SUPPOSE. >> Bronsky: THANK YOU. >> JUST TO NOTE THAT THESE CASES WOULD CONTINUE TO GET THE 200 AND 500OOT OPER OWNER NOO IF THEY'RE CLOSE BY THEY'LL GET THOSE LETTERS. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER. >> Cary: I THINK YOU CAN SENSE EVERYBODY HERE WANTS TO BE SURE THAT THE CITIZENS GET THE COMMUNICATION THAT THEY'RE GETTING TODAY AND SO BUT I THINK AS WE STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THIS, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OF THAT, FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A FAIRLY RARE THING TO BEGIN WITH SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF IT. SECOND, I THINK SOME OF THE VEHICLES WE HAVE RECENTLY PUT IN PLACE WOULD GIVE US A GOOD CHANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT MOST IF NOT ALL PEOPLE ARE COMMUNICATED WITH. I THINK WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING HERE. I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT IT THE RIGHT WAY. I THINK WE'RE IMPROVING THINGS FOR THE CITY IN THOSE RARE INSTANCES WHERE IT HAPPENS. WHILE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE WITH THE NEED FOR THE SIGNS -- AND I PERSONALLY LIKE THE SIGNS -- I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WELL DONE AND I THINK THE COMMUNICATION'S GOING TO BE ADEQUATE AND I'M NOT TOO CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE NOT BEING AWARE OF THIS, ESPECIALLY WITH SOME OF THE NEW VEHICLES WE'VE PUT IN PLACE TO COMMUNICATE. I THINK THIS HAS BEEN WELL THOUGHT THROUGH. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE FOR STAFF? QUESTIONS? WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THE ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. INTERESTED IN IT, I GUESS. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. JUST USE. CASES ARE SO TINY AND WE HAVE DONE SO MANY OTHER THINGS TO REACH OUT THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR ANYONE TO FIND FAULT WITH US SAYING WE DON'T WANT TO FORCE OURSELVES ON SOMEONE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY TO NOTIFY ONE OR TWO PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF 300,000 THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A CHANGE THERE. HEARING'S CLOSED. I'M OPEN TO -- >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 1, RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS FOLLOWS WITH THE ADDITIONS, AMENDMENT TO SECTION 4.300 PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARING OF ARTICLE 4 WITH AMENDMENTS AS SUCH PORTION OF SECTION GRANTS THE FOLLOWS AND YOU SEE THIS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE DOCUMENTATION. >> I WILL SECOND THAT WELL-CRAFTED MOTION . >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. BEFORE WE PLACE A VOTE ON THIS, THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE AND COMMISSIONER CARY. SHOULD THERE BE A COMMA AFTER "HEARING"? SHOULD IT BE PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMA, PAUSE FOR ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FOR REAL PROPERT OR SHOULD IT JUST READ AS A SENTENCE? DOESN'T MATTER TO ME BUT DO WE NEED TO GIVE THEM THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THAT CHANGE IF IT NEEDS TO BE DONE? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE VOTE. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. ALL RIGHT. THIS CARRIES 8-0. THANK YOU, STAFF FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT. ITEM 2. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC H ZONING CASE 2022-006. REQUEST TO AMEND ARTICLE 8 (DEFINITIONS), ARTICLE 14 (ALLOWED USES AND USE CLASSIFICATIONS), ARTICLE 15 (USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS), AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO ARCADE REGULATIONS, AND TO SECTE ALLOWED USE TABLE, AND THE USE-SPECIFIC REGULATION SECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. INCLUDED IN THE CASE IS A REQUEST TO RESCIND SPECIFIC-USE PERMITS FOR ARCADE THAT ARE NO LONGER NEEDED TO PERMIT THE LAND USE. THIS ISSUE WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION AT THE MARCH 1 MEETING. WE HAD DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEM AND FOLLOWED UP ON ADDITIONAL RESEARCH ITEMS AS REQUESTED AT THE MARCH 21 MEETING. THE COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING AT THAT TIME. THE CASE WAS TABLED AT THE MAY 16 MEETING SO THAT STAFF REQUEST.NTINUE TO REFINE THE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO REFLECT CHANGES IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY IN THE PAST 40 YEARS. STAFF PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE SEPARATE ARCADE LAND USE AND CONSIDER THESE VENUES UNDER THE INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT VENUES. PLANO'S ARCADE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 1996 AND HAVE CHANGED VERY LITTLE SINCE THE LAND USE BECAME RESTRICTED IN 1982 AFTER THE DEFINITION WAS ADDED IN 1981. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS NOT HAD A REQUEST FOR A PIN BALL OR VIDEO ARCAD I OVER 20 YEARS . THE REQUESTS WE PROCESS NOW ARE FOR SMALL CHILDREN'S ENTERTAINMENT USES, ACCESSORY USES, BOWLING ALLEYS, AND E-SPORTS VENUES. THE SLIDE INCLUDES THE CURRENT DEFINITIONS FOR THE ORDINANCE FOR BOTH ARCADE AND INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT. THE DEFINITION OF INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT FIRST ADDED ARCADES AS AN EXAMPLE OF AN AMUSEMENT IN 1996. SINCE THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE TWO LAND USES ARE VERY DIFFERENT WITH ARCADES BEING MUCH MORE RESTRICTED, THE OVERLAP IN LANGUAGE BETWEEN THE TWO DEFINITIONS PRESENTS POTENTIAL ISSUES FOR STAFF. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS ALSO INTENDED TO ADDRESS THIS CONFLICT IN THE ORDINANCE. THE RESCISSION OF THE 30 ARCADE SUPs WOULD ACCESSORY USE WITHIN A BOWLING ALLEY. THE DECISION WOULD RESCIND ANY STIPULATIONS. THIS WOULD AFFECT TWO ARCADES WHOSE BUSINESS PLANS WERE ADDED AS STIPULATIONS TO THE SUP TABLE. BASED ON THESE VENUES' ON GOING COMPLIANCE, STAFF FOUND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WARRANTED THE DECISION. YOU CAN SEE A FULL TABLE OF THE SUPS, STIPULATIONS, AND BUSINESS STATUS IN EXHIBIT 1 OF THE STAFF REPORT . THIS REQUEST IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S GUIDING PRINCIPLE 2.2 AND ITS LAND USE POLICY. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUPPORTS LANGUAGE AND POLICY THAT ACCOMMODATE TRENDS IN ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY THAT HAVE BEEN EMERGING FOR THE PAST FEW DECADES. THESE CHANGES MAKE THE CITY MORE ATTRACTIVE FOR NEW ENTERTAINMENT DEVELOPMENT AND REMOVE A SOURCE OF CONFUSION IN THE ORDINANCE FOR POTENTIAL DEVELOPERS AND STAFF. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT INCLUDES FOUR CHANGES AS SHOWN IN THE STAFF REPOR ONE, REMOVE THE ARCADE DEFINITION. TWO, REMOVE THE ARCADE USE FROM THE ALLOWED USE TABLES. THREE, REMOVE THE USE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR ARCADES. FOUR, RESCIND ALL CURRENT SUPs FOR ARCADE SINCE THE LAND USE WILL NO LONGER EXIST AS A SEPARATE USE. STAFF RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION. THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AND HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. COMMISSIONERATLIFF. >> Ratliff: FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE ALL THE BACKGROUND. IT WAS VERY WELL DONE. MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE TWO THAT HAVE THE RESTRICTION. SO IS THIS BASICALLY LIFTING ALL THOSE RESTRICTIONS? I WASN'T QUITE FOLLOWING THAT PART OF YOUR PRESENTATION. THE TWO EXISTING OPERATIONS THAT HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON THEM. DO THOSE JUST GO AWAY OR ARE THEY EXISTING NOT CONFORMING USE OR WHAT HAPPENS? >> PER OUR RESEARCH AND ADVICE, WE AREN'T ABL TO ENFORCE STIPULATIONS ON SUPs THAT DON'T EXIST. >> Ratliff: SO THEY GET WIPEDHE ANY COMMERCIAL BUSINESS. >> Chair Downs: YES. >> Ratliff: I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR FOR THOSE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT HAVE BEEN OPERATING UNDER RESTRICTIONS THAT THIS MAY ALLOW THEM SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITIES . THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: YES, WITH THE CHANGE TO THE INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT LAND USE AND REMOVAL OF THE SUPs, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK THAT THE CITY HAS TO DO IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THESE OPERATORS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD? I'M JUST WONDERING. IS THERE ANYTHING WE HAVE TO DO LEGALLY OR THAT THE CITY HAS TO DO? WE GAVE THEM A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO DO AWAY WITH THEM, BY RIGHT, BY INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT. DOES THE CITY HAVE TO DO ANYTHING ADDITIONALLY TO THIS? >> SO THE -- THE ONLY PAPERWORK -- THERE'S JUST A COUPLE OF THESE VENUES WHERE THE PRIMARY USE WAS ARCADE. THEY ARE ALMOST ALL ACCESSORY USES THAT ARE NOT REFLECTED ON THIS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. FOR THE ONES THAT HAVE THE PRIMARY USE OF ARCADE, WHICH I THINK IS TWO NOW, WE WOULD NEED THE C.O. TO BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THE NEW PRIMARY LAND USE. >> Horne: THAT'S A SIMPLE MATTER OF GETTING THE C.O. REVISED, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES, THANK YOU FOR TWO GOOD PRESENTATIONS. CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN US ON THE LETTER FROM MR. SMITH. DID HE EXPAND HIS OBJECTION YWHERE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF AS TO WHAT HIS OBJECTION WAS? >> NO, THE E-MAIL IN YOUR PACKET IS THE ONLY COMMUNICATION I GOT. >> Stone: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: SO IN THE FUTURE IF ANYONE WANTS TO OPEN AN ARCADE OR INDOOR E-SPORT, THEY WOULD JUST APPLY FOR THE INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT. WOULD THAT BE AN SUP OR THAT'S ZONING THAT'S A BROADER -- >> IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE ZONING DISTRICT. APPLY FOR AN INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT SUP IN THIS CASE? >> ONLY IF THAT USE WAS ONLY PERMITTED BY SUP IN THE DISTRICT. >> Chair Downs: IS THAT CLEAR OR NOT CLEAR? >> Tong: I THINK, YEAH, PROBABLY. COMMISSIONER HILL, WELCOME. [LAUGHTER] >> SO I THINK YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE ASKING THE USE VERSUS THE ZONING DISTRICT. WHAT MS. KIRK WAS TALKING ABOUT IS THE ZONING DISTRICT WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN, THAT WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS ALLOWED OR WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT OR NOT ALLOWED. SO ONCE WE WERE APPROACHED BY THAT PROPERTY OWNER, WE WOULD DETERMINE THEIR ZONING AND THEN LET THEM KNOW WHAT THE DIRECTION WOULD BE BASED OFF OF THAT. CORNER, MOST OF THOSE AREIL ZONED RETAIL AND IF THERE'S NO SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS YOU CAN JUST LOOK AT THE CHART HERE ON PAGE 3. THAT'S A PERMITTED USE FOR INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT IN THE RETAIL ZONING. >> Tong: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> UH-HUH. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: ONE MORE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. ON THE TWO SUPs THAT ARE ARCADE THAT ARE GOING TO BE LEFT, DID I HEAR THAT RIGHT? THERE WILL BE TWO THAT ARE THE PRIMARY USE OF ARCADE AFTER WE PA THIS? AND THEY'LL UPDATE THEIR C.O.s. IS THAT SOMETHING THEY NEED TO DO IMMEDIATELY OR Y'ALL WILL REACH OUT AND WORK WITH THEM. I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE A BUSINESS OWNER HANGING, NOT UNDERSTANDING THEY NEED TO COME DOWN TO CITY HALL. I WANT THEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS IN THEIR PARTICULAR CASES. >> SO, YES, WE WOULD -- WE HAVE ACTUALLY ALREADY SENT A LETTER OUT TO ALL THE OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS -- PROPERTY OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS AS WELL ASECEN APPLICANTS IN CASE THERE'S NOT AN OVERLAP THERE TO LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THIS AND WE WILL SEND ANOTHER LETTER TO EVERYONE IF IT IS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL TO LET THEM KNOW THAT IT'S HAPPENED AND AT THE SAME TIME FOR THOSE COUPLE THAT ARE PRIMARY USESF ARCADES WE'LL BE WORKING WITH OUR BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT TO UPDATE THEIR CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY AND MAOU CREATE AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON THEM. WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR LIFE EASIER. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. ACTION? >> I MOVE THAT WE, ONE, RESCIND E PERMITS FOR ARCADES AS LISTED IN EXHIBIT 1. TWO, AMEND THE SECTION 8.200, TERMS DEFINED OF ARTICLE 8, DEFINITIONS. SUCH PORTION OF THE SECTION THAT READS AS LISTED WITH THE STRIKE-THROUGH. THREE, AMEND SECTION 14.100, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS USE TABLE OF ARTICLE 14, ALLOWED USES AND USE OF CLASSIFICATIONS. SUCH PORTIONS OF THE SECTION THAT IS LISTED THERE BELOW. FOUR, AMEND SECTION 14.200, NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS USE TABLE FOR ARTICLE 14, ALLOWED YOU'LL SEE AND USE OF CLASSIFICATIONS SUCH AS THE PORTION LISTED BELOW IN OUR PACKET. FIVE, AMEND SECTION 14.300 USE TABLE NOTES FOR ARTICLE 14, ALLOWED USE AND USE CLASSIFICATIONS SUCH AS LISTED BELOW IN OUR PACKET WITH THE STRIKE-THROUGH AND, SIX, AMEND SECTION 15.100 ARCADES OF ARTICLE 15, USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS SECTION AS IS READ BELOW IN OUR PACKET. >> Chair Downs: YOU'RE NOT GOING TO READ 8 THROUGH 12? I'M KIDDING. THERE'S NOT. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 2. PLEASE VOTE. THAT CARRIES 8-0. MAYBEMER HERE ON WHEN WE NEED TO READ ALL THAT AND WHEN WE DON'T.AU >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR THE EFFORT. AND THE PRESERVATION OF OXYGEN, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T BREATHE DURING THAT ENTIRE THING. LET'S ADD AN AGENDA ITEM, JUST TRAINING A LITTLE BIT ON THAT OF WHEN IT'S REALLY NECESSARY UNDER LEGAL AND WHEN IT'S NOT. FUTURE -- YEAH. SO WE'LL ADD THAT TO A FUTURE AGENDA. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY FOR YOUR EFFORT. THERE'S A LITTLE SWEAT RIGHT HERE. [LAUGHTER] >> Chair Downs: THAT ITEM IT 3.ED SO LET'S MOVE ON TO >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC H PRELIMINARY REPLAT, REVISED SIT PLAN, AND REPLAT: PRESTON MEADO LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 2R AND PRESTON MEADOW OFFICE PARK ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 3R - PROFESSIONAL/GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AND ASSEMBLY HALL ON LOT 2R AND PRO ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON LOT 3R ON 5.5 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WES SIDE OF COIT ROAD, 920 FEET SOUTH OF LEGACY DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-429- NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE. APPLICANT: COLLIN COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS AND REDDING-MCHARGUE PARTNERSHIP. RF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE WE APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN AND REPLAT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY HAS MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 4. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING ━ PRELIMINARY REPLAT: PALISADES BUSINESS PARK NO. 6, BLOCK 1, LOT 4R - CAR WASH ON ONE LOT ON 0.8 ACRE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF K AVENUE, 173 FEET NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 190 ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY D APPLICANT: WOODMONT PLANO AVENUE K, LLC. ADMINISTRATIVE C. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS DONNA FALLETTA. I'M A SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STONE TO APPROVE ITEM 4 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. SO OTHER THAN THE ITEMS F FUTURE AGENDA, WHICH WAS JUST SOME INSTRUCTION ON MOTION LANGUAGE, ANYTHING ELSE FOR FUTURE AGENDAS? >> [OFF MIC] >> FROM A PROCEDURAL PERSPECTIVE, DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT FUTURE CONSIDERATION ITEM? >> WE JUST NEED ONE OTHER TO BE INTERESTED IN HEARING ABOUT IT. >> Chair Downs: THERE WERE A LOT OF HEAD NODS BUT DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO VERBALLY -- >> I'LL SECOND. >> Chair Downs: VERY GOOD. OKAY. NO OTHER BUSINESS, WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 7:38. [MEETING ADJOURNED]