>> Chair Downs: OKAY. IT IS 7:05. WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY. WE HAD A LENGTHY EXECUTIVE SESSION . AS IT SAID O THE AGENDA, DISCUSSING STRs TO SOME DEGREE. ALWAYS A FUN TOPIC. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST 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 INFORMAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE TO CONSENT. >> CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTRO ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO REMOVE AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES -- WE'RE MISSING SOMEBODY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: YEAH, HE DID. >> MISS A MEETING, WE TAKE YOU OFF. [LAUGHTER] >> Chair Downs: I'VE BEEN INSTRUCTED BY STAFF THAT -- WELL, I THINK IT'S BETTER IF WE RESET AND DO IT ELECTRONIC. ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU SAID? >> WE CAN GO AHEAD AND REVOTE. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IT DIDN'T GO THROUGH, FOR WHATEVER REASON. CONSENT AGENDA CARRIES 8-0. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. ITEM 1. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NE ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. PUBLIC HEARING ━ REPLAT, SITE PLAN, & REVISED SITE PLAN: RENT-A-CENTER ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 1R AND 2 ━ PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON LOT 1R AND VEHICLE PARKING LOT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TED AT - HEADQUARTERS DRIVE AND DOMINION PARKWAY. ZONED COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT. APPLICANT: 5501 HEADQUARTERS OFFICE PARTNERS, LP. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIO. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. I AM PARKER McDOWELL, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REPLAT FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO PUBLIC WORKS' ACCEPTANCE OF DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE SITE PLAN AND REVISED SITE PLAN ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, MR. McDOWELL. ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. CARY. MICROPHONE. >> Cary: I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY THIS LOT'S BEING DIVIDED. >> I BELIEVE IT'S BEING -- I'M ACTUALLY NOT TOO SURE BECAUSE DONNA SEPULVEDA WAS THE MAIN CASE PLANNER BUT I DID LOOK THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT AND IT IS MEETING ALL THE STAFF REQUIREMENTS TO DIVIDE IT. I'M NOT SURE WHY. RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST PARKING LOT. >> THE APPLICANT DESIRES TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO CONVEY A PIECE OF PROPERTY? >> Cary: CONVEY? >> LOT 2 TO ANOTHER OWNER. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I THINK WE HAVE SOMEBODY AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT ONLINE. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN AND CONFINE THE DISCUSSION. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS ITEM 1 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> Chair Downs: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 1 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. MR. BRONSKY. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. AS WE GO TO ITEM 2, A QUESTION FOR STAFF. BASED ON OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS AROUND STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE ITEMS WE HAVE OF THE 5 THAT WOULD ACTUALLY COME TO US? DON'T KNOW? OKAY. I JUST WANTED CONFIRMATION. >> I THINK FOUR OF THESE ITEMS. THEY'RE ALL REPLATS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF KINGS GATE BECAUSE THAT'S RESIDENTIAL. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE WOULD HAVE ONE INSTEAD OF FIVE. VERY GOOD. ITEM 2. THANK YOU. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING ━ REPLAT: MEMORY TECH, INC. PHASE 1 ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1R ━ DATA CENTER ON ONE LOT ON 19.0 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SUMMIT AVENUE, 1,315 FEET EAST OF JUPITER ROAD. ZONED RESEARCH/TE CENTER AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: ALIGNED DATA CENTERS (DFW) PRPCO, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINIS. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JOHN KIM. I AM A PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO SPEAKERS? >> NO SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 2 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING ━ REPLAT: KINGS GATE, BLOCK B, LOT 13R ━ ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 20 LOT ON 1.5 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RUFFORD COURT, 225 FEET WEST OF OLD GATE ROAD. ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE- 20 WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 281 FOR PRIVATE STREET DEVE APPLICANT: ASHLEIGH CHRISTINE, THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON ITEM 3? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 3 AS RECOMMENDED -- I AM JUST NOT GETTING THIS RIGHT TONIGHT. AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, I THINK, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 3. PLEASE VOTE. YOU CAN TAKE THE REST OF THE EVENING OFF, MR. BRONSKY. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 4. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: I NEED A RELIEF PITCHER HERE. MR. RATLIFF OR MR. OLLEY, ARE YOU UP FOR IT? >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING ━ PRELIMINARY REPLAT: GRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH, BLOCK A, LOT 1R ━ PUBLIC SCHOOL ON ONE LOT ON 10.8 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HEDG ROAD AND PRESTON MEADOW DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-439- SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE-7 WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 193 FOR DAY CARE CENTER. APPLICANT: GRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH, INC. THIS IS FOR ADMINI. >> THE ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEER PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND PLANO FIRE RESCUE 150-FOOT HOSE REQUIREMENT AND 1200-FOOT MAXIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR FIRE ACCESS ROAD . I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OH, I THINK WE HAVE TWO. MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: IS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVING THIS APPLICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE 150-FOOT HOSE LAY REQUIREMENT AND THE 1200-FOOT MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH? >> YES. WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER A WEEK OR SO AGO APPROVING THE REQUEST. >> Brounoff: I'M GOING TO CURIOUS. THE APPLICANT IS A CHURCH BUT YOUR NOTES SAY THIS IS TO CONVERT THE FORMER RELIGIOUS FACILITY TO A PUBLIC SCHOOL. >> YES. THAT'S CORRECT. IT WILL BE A CHARTER SCHOOL GOING IN. AND IN OUR ORDINANCE THE CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE REFERRED TO AS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. >> Brounoff: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY IS NEXT. OH, MR. LISLE. SORRY. >> Lisle: IS THAT A FIRE LANE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING? >> YES, IT IS. >> Lisle: WHY IS THERE A HOSE LAY REQUIREMENT IF THERE'S A FIRE LANE? >> THERE IS AN ADDITION IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THEY'RE ADDING A STORM SHELTER BUILDING. SO THERE IS A POINT, INTERNAL POINT THAT THERE ISN'T A 150-FOOT DOESN'T REACH IT, SO THEY JUST NEED AN EXTENSION. >> Lisle: THE WATER WILL GET THERE THOUGH? I GOT YOU. I WAS JUST CURIOUS THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL WOULD ACTUALLY DO THIS ON A SCHOOL AND SO I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SITUATION WAS. AND THEN WHEN I SAW THE FIRE LANE IT REALLY DIDN'T MAKE SENSE. THANKS FOR THE EXPLANATION. >> Chair Downs: THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION? >> Bronsky: YEAH. THE STORM SHELTER WAS MY QUESTION. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. NO OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> NO SPEAKERS REGISTERED. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I'M GOING TO TRY IT ONE MORE TIME. >> Chair Downs: ARE YOU SURE? >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 4 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A VERY CLEAR MOTION BY MR. BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 4. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING ━ EXTENSION OF APPROVAL REQUEST ━ PRELIMINARY REPLAT: PRESTON PARK VILLAGE ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1R ━ REQUEST TO EXTEND APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY REPLAT FOR A SHOPPING CENTER ON ONE LOT ON 26.3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRESTON ROAD AND PARK BOULEVARD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-189- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMITS NO. 229 AND 649 FOR PRIVATE CLUB AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PRESTON ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: BRE THRONE PRESTON PARK, LLC. THIS IS FOR LEGISLAT. >> THIS APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN EXTENSION TO THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT, WHICH WAS APPROVED FEBRUARY 2022 AND EXPIRED IN FEBRUARY OF 2024, EARLIER THIS MONTH. ON THE SCREEN IS THE EXTENSION CRITERIA, WHICH I WILL NOW GO THROUGH. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING AN EXTENSION TO COMPLETE THE SITE REQUIREMENTS AS REQUIRED BY ENGINEERING. THE PROPERTY OWNER'S CONDITIONS TO COMPLY WITH APPROVAL. AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL NO CONDITIONS WERE PLACED ON THE PLAT WITH THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL. EXTENT TO WHICH NEWLY-ADOPTED REGULATIONS SHALL APPLY. NO REGULATION CHANGES ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS EXTENSION REQUEST FOR APPROVAL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MR. CARY. >> Cary: [OFF MIC] IS THAT THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN DELAYED? DO YOU KNOW? >> IT IS THE PRESTON PARK VILLAGE A BLOCK 1R. >> IT IS PART OF THAT. >> Cary: YEAH, WHAT I HAPPENED TO KNOW WAS THERE WAS A TRANSFORMER THAT NEEDED TO GET MOVED. I THINK THAT'S FINALLY BEEN APPROVED RECENTLY. I JUST WANTED TO VALIDATE WHAT I THOUGHT WAS TRUE WAS TRUE. >> SURE. THAT LOT HAS MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON IT AND IT'S ONE OF THEM. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> SURE. >> Chair Downs: OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU. I WILL CLOSE THE -- EXCUSE ME, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 5 AS PLEASE VOTE.BY STAFF.- THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. DISCUSSION: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE ━ PRESENTATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE STREET DESIGN S APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JASON APRILL, SENIOR MOBILITY PLANNER. LAST SEPTEMBER YOU REMEMBER THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS. THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS PROVIDE THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF PLANO INCLUDING TRAFFIC-CALMING ELEMENTS THAT COULD BE USED TO REDUCE TRAFFIC SPEED OR VOLUME, INCREASE SAFETY, AND BEAUTIFY CITY STREETS. ON JANUARY 3, 2023, STAFF PRESENTED AN OVERVIEW OF SECTION 13 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THIS SECTION IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS BECAUSE IT OUTLINES THE PLANNING AND DESIGN OF THE TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS THAT REDUCE THE SPEED AND VOLUME OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY NEEDS. THE SECTION LAYS OUT THE MECHANISMS FOR CITIZENS IN PLANO TO PETITION TRAFFIC CALMING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. AT THAT JANUARY 3, 2023 MEETING, THE COMMISSION PROVIDED DIRECTION THAT TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS IN PLANO SHOULD CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON USER FRIENDLINESS AND THE PROCESS SHOULD BE STREAMLINED TO EXPEDITE EVALUATION. TONIGHT STAFF WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS THIS LAST FALL. LET'S GO OVER SOME HISTORY. AS A REMINDER, THE CITY PREVIOUSLY ADMINISTERED A SAFE STREETS PROGRAM THAT ADDRESSED NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONCERNS THROUGH A TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHICH ACTED AS THE REVIEW AND ADVISORY BOARD FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS. SOLUTIONS UNDER THE PROGRAM INCLUDED TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND SPEED BUMPS ON NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR STREETS. ON THE POWERPOINT IS A TRAFFIC CIRCLE THAT'S CURRENTLY ON COLUMBIA PLACE. THE SAFE STREETS PROGRAM WAS DISCONTINUED IN 2008. SO BETWEEN 2008 AND THE ADOPTION OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS THE CITY HAD LIMITED TRAFFIC-CALMING OPTIONS. IMPROVEMENTS WERE PRIMARY LIMITED TO THE EXISTING SPEED BUMPS. IN PARTICULAR, THESE POLICIES AND ACTIONS INCLUDED THE ROADWAY SYSTEM POLICY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY ACTION ONE WHICH SAYS TO ESTABLISH PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES TO ENABLE HOMEOWNERS TO MAINTAIN AND ENHANCE THEIR PROPERTIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS. AS OUTLINED IN THE UPDATED STANDARDS, TRAFFIC CALMING INCLUDES METHODS THAT REDUCE THE SPEED AND VOLUME OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC TO ADDRESS NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONCERNS. TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS MAY CONSIST OF HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL AND OTHER FEATURES SUCH AS CURB EXTENSIONS OR MEDIAN ISLANDS OR VISUAL. PHYSICALLY STRIPING THE ROADWAY. THESE TECHNIQUES CAN ENCOURAGE SLOWER VEHICULAR SPEEDS. SO SPEED BUMPS, RAISED CROSSWALKS, THESE ARE ALL EXAMPLES OF TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS THAT COULD BE USED TO MEET THE DESIRED RESULTS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD. SECTION 13, AS YOU RECALL, LISTS OUT THE VARIETY OF METHODS THAT PLANO CAN UTILIZE. IF A CITIZEN OR A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DESIRES THAT TRAFFIC BE ADJUSTED IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY CAN REQUEST THAT A PARTICULAR STREET OR AN AREA BE CONSIDERED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS. THE DIAGRAM ON THE SCREEN IS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN SECTION 13. IT PROVIDES THE PROCESS FOR HOW A PLAN CAN BE USED TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS AND HOW THE PLAN COULD BE DEVELOPED. A REQUEST DESIGN, OUTREACH AND APPROVAL PROCESS ARE OUTLINED TO MAKE THE PROCESS CLEAR AND CONCISE TO BOTH THE PUBLIC AND THE STAFF. ADDITIONALLY, SECTION 13 SPECIFIES MANY POLICIES AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ON NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, INCLUDING THAT PROJECTS SHOULD ENCOURAGE SLOWER SPEED TO ENHANCE SAFETY FOR ALL RECOGNIZE USERS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE CONTEXT. THAT PROJECTS SHOULD BE LIMITED TO STREETS WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE DESIGNATION. THIS TYPE INCLUDES E, F, AND G STREETS. AND THAT THEY MAY BE UTILIZED IN HEAVY PEDESTRIAN CONTEXT. SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IN JANUARY 2023, THE COMMISSION PROVIDED DIRECTION THAT THE UPDATES TO THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS SHOULD FOCUS ON USER FRIENDLINESS AND A STREAMLINED PROCESS. SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE STANDARDS STAFF HAS INITIATED CHANGES RELATED TO THE REQUEST, THE EVALUATION, AND THE SELECTION PROCESSES FOR TRAFFIC-CALMING IMPROVEMENTS. SO I'VE INVITED CHAD, SENIOR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, TO DISCUSS THE WORK THAT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS DONE TO IMPLEMENT THE IMPROVEMENTS AND I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BRIAN, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MANAGER IS ALSO AT THE DAIS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS WHEN WE CONCLUDE THE PRESENTATION. I'LL TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO CHAD. >> MY NAME IS CHAD. SENIOR TRAFFIC ENGINEER WITH THE CITY OF PLANO. I'M ONE OF THE STAFF MANAGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC-CALMING PROGRAM. WE HAVE ROLLED THIS OUT IN JANUARY AND WE STARTED LOOKING BACK THROUGH SEVERAL OF THE FIX ITS THAT WE HAD RECEIVED IN THE PRIOR YEAR AND THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS GOOD CANDIDATES FOR THIS PROGRAM. WE NOTIFIED THOSE RESIDENTS THROUGH THE FIX IT PROGRAM THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC-CALMING PROGRAM WAS LIVE. WE GAVE THEM LINKS TO THE WEBSITE AND THE APPLICATION AND WE DISCUSSED REALLY BRIEFLY HOW THE PROCESS WAS STARTED AND WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO. AND WE WERE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE. WE POINT THEM FIRST TO THE WEBSITE WHERE WE'VE GOT AN OVERVIEW OF OUR PROCESS. AND THEN LINKS TO THE TRAFFIC-CALMING REQUEST FORMS. AND THEN WE GO OVER HOW THIS IS A COMPETITIVE PROCESS. WE DO HAVE LIMITED FUNDS EACH YEAR. SO JUST BECAUSE THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE GOING TO NECESSARILY RECEIVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING. NEXT WE GUIDE THEM TO THE TRAFFIC-CALMING REQUEST FORM THROUGH THE WEBSITE AND WE TRY AND SIMPLIFY THIS FOR THE APPLICANT. WE'RE JUST ASKING WHO THEY ARE AND HOW WE CAN CONTACT THEM. WHERE THEY ARE SEEING THE ISSUE AND WHEN THEY ARE SEEING THE ISSUE. SO THAT WHEN WE ARE GOING BACK AND DOING OUR DATA COLLECTION, WE CAN SEE WHAT THEY'RE SEEING. IF THEY'RE SEEING THAT WHEN SCHOOL LETS OUT IS WHEN THEY ARE SEEING THE SPEEDING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, WE CAN GO AND COLLECT DATA FOR THAT TIME-FRAME. AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO GET TOO TECHNICAL FOR THOSE REQUEST FORMS SO WE LIMITED IT TO JUST WHO THEY ARE AND WHEN AND WHERE THEY'RE SEEING THE ISSUE. ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT APPLICATION, WE DO A LITTLE BIT OF WORK ON OUR END. W LOOK AT THE AREA THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING AND WE DRAW UP A MAP OF WHAT RESIDENTS WOULD BE IMPACTED DIRECTLY BY THESE IMPROVEMENTS. AND WE HAVE THEM GO THROUGH A PETITION PROCESS. WE PARTIALLY FILL OUT THE PETITION PROCESS FOR THEM WITH WHERE THEY'RE AT AND WE FILL IN ALL THE ADDRESSES OF WHO THEY NEED TO CONTACT. IT IS THEN ON THE RESIDENT TO GO DOOR TO DOOR AND REQUEST THE SIGNATURES AND EXPLAIN WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. THIS STEP IS JUST A VALIDATION THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM ON THEIR STREET. THEY'RE ASKING THEIR NEIGHBORS DO YOU AGREE THAT THERE IS A SPEEDING PROBLEM IN THIS AREA. AND THEN WE ARE LOOKING FOR TWO-THIRDS OF THE NEIGHBORS IN THAT AREA TO SAY EITHER YES OR NO. AND IF TWO-THIRDS SAY YES, THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS. SO THE CURRENT STATUS OF OUR PROGRAM, WE HAVE FIVE PROJECT LOCATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE WORKS. TWO OF THOSE WERE IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY AS KNOWN ISSUES. AND SO WE ARE PROCEEDING AS THE APPLICANT, AS THE CITY, AND WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH THE SAME PETITION PROCESS THAT A RESIDENT WOULD. BUT WE WILL BE DOING IT THROUGH MAILERS AND POTENTIALLY USING SOME OF OUR STAFF TO GO DOOR TO DOOR, IF NEEDED. THE THREE APPLICATIONS THAT CAME IN, WE RECEIVED THEIR APPLICATION AND WE HAVE RESPONDED WITH THE PETITION PROCESS AND THE MAP. AND WE HAVE ANSWERED A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAVE. WE ARE ALSO, AS AN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, WE ARE WORKING WITH PURCHASING TO GAIN A COUPLE NEW PIECES OF EQUIPMENT TO FACILITATE EFFICIENCY IN OUR DATA COLLECTION. AND WE ARE ALSO WORKING ON SCOPING THE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PORTIONS OF THIS PROGRAM WITH THIRD-PARTY CONSULTANTS. THE NEXT STEPS, AS WE GET RESIDENTS WHO ARE REQUESTING THIS THROUGH APPLICATIONS, WE ARE ALSO REACHING BACK OUT -- PLANNING ON REACHING BACK OUT AFTER THEY SUBMIT THE PETITION. WHETHER IT'S FOR OR AGAINST. AND ASKING FOR FEEDBACK. HOW WAS THE APPLICATION PROCESS? WHAT DID THEY THINK OF OUR WEBSITE? HOW WAS THE PETITION PROCESS? HOW CAN WE STREAMLINE THOSE? MAKE IT MORE USER-FRIENDLY FOR THEM. DID THEY HAVE ANY ISSUES GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS? THAT'S THE TYPE OF FEEDBACK THAT WE'LL BE SEEKING FROM THE RESIDENTS AS THEY COMPLETE THE APPLICATION, NOT JUST WITH THESE FIRST THREE BUT ANY TIME THAT WE GET AN APPLICATION FOR THIS FIRST YEAR. THAT WAY WE CAN REEVALUATE LATER THIS YEAR AND SEE IF WE NEED TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROGRAM. SO THAT IS MY UPDATE. I WILL TAKE QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: YEAH, COULD YOU GO BACK TO WHERE YOU LISTED THERE WERE FIVE LOCATIONS -- FIVE POTENTIAL PROJECTS? THREE CAME THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS ONLINE. IT SAYS TWO WERE KNOWN ISSUES ALREADY AND THE CITY'S WORKING THROUGH. WERE THEY KNOWN ISSUES BECAUSE A RESIDENT HAD BROUGHT THEM UP PREVIOUSLY OR IS IT SOMETHING THE CITY'S JUST -- IT'S PART OF THE OVERALL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT THAT SAID THIS IS A LOCATION WE SHOULD LOOK AT? >> SO ONE OF THOSE -- AM I ALLOWED TO -- SO ONE OF THOSE IS WESTWOOD DRIVE BETWEE 15th AND PLANO PARKWAY. THIS IS ONE WE ARE AWARE OF THROUGH BOTH CRASH HISTORY FROM OUR ANNUAL HIGH-ACCIDENT LOCATION, HIGH-ACCIDENT -- I FORGET WHAT THE R STANDS FOR THAT WE DO EVERY YEAR. THAT CORRIDOR GETS A LOT OF CRASHES AND SOME OF THEM ARE CRAZY. AND A LOT OF THEM ARE DUE TO SPEEDING. >> Chair Downs: SO THE ONES THE CITY IS WORKING THROUGH, BASICALLY IS THROUGH TRAFFIC? >> THAT ONE IS OUR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS. WE HAVE HAD ANOTHER ONE EAST OF DOWNTOWN HERE IN THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA WHERE WE'VE HAD SEVERAL RESIDENTS, OVER THE LAST YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF, MAKE THIS REQUEST. AND RATHER THAN GOING TO ONE PERSON, WE'RE JUST PURSUING IT AS A CITY. >> Chair Downs: VERY GOOD. I LIKE HEARING THAT. COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO HOW DO WE DEFINE AN AREA? WE SAY WE NEED TWO-THIRDS OF THE CITIZENS BUT HOW DOES THAT AREA GET DEFINED? >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS WE ASK WHERE THEY ARE SEEING THE ISSUE. WE THEN LOOK AT THAT AREA AND SEE WHY WOULD A PERSON BE SPEEDING THROUGH THIS AREA. THEY MAY LIMIT THEIR SCOPE TO A FEW BLOCKS. BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE AREA, WE MAY SEE, OKAY, THIS IS BEING USED OR COULD BE USED AS A CUT-THROUGH TO GET FROM ONE ARTERIAL TO ANOTHER OR MAYBE THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO A SCHOOL. AND SO WE MIGHT EXPAND THAT AREA BASED ON WHAT WE THINK MIGHT BE HAPPENING OUT THERE. AND THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT, IF WE WERE TO PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE, WHETHER IT BE SPEED BUMPS OR SHECANES OR RAISED CROSSWALKS, OUR DESIGN CONSULTANT DETERMINES THE BEST SOLUTION. WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT TO HOUSES BE. SO IF THERE IS A LOCATION WHERE A HOMEOWNER COULD AVOID THESE -- THIS INFRASTRUCTURE BY EITHER TAKING A SIDE STREET OR GOING THROUGH THEIR ALLEY TO GET TO THEIR HOUSE, WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY ASK THEM IF THEY WERE -- SINCE THEY WOULDN'T BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED EVERY DAY -- BY THIS INFRASTRUCTURE. >> Cary: SO AS I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, WE NEED TWO-THIRDS AND THAT WILL THEN TRIGGER THE PROCESS AND THEN I GUESS WE IN THE CITY, THE CITY WILL DETERMINE IF IT'S REALLY VALID WITH LIMITED RESOURCES TO DETERMINE IF THE PROJECT GOES FORWARD. IS THAT LARGELY CORRECT? >> CORRECT. WE WOULD -- IT WOULD TRIGGER US TO DO DATA ANALYSIS, DATA COLLECTION. WE WOULD LOOK AT THE SPEEDS OF THE VEHICLES AND WE WOULD LOOK AT HOW MANY VEHICLES IN THAT CORRIDOR MAKE A TRIP EVERY DAY. AND THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH OUR ANALYSIS CONSULTANT TO DETERMINE IF IT WAS ONE OF MANY PROJECTS THAT WAS SUITABLE FOR FUNDING THAT YEAR. >> Cary: SO IF SOMEBODY PUTS IN AN APPLICATION AND THEN THEY DON'T GET ENOUGH SUPPORT, THEN WOULD THE CITY NOT LOOK AT THAT AT THAT POINT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TWO-THIRDS IN THE AREA THAT WE'RE DEFINING? OR WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN THERE? >> CORRECT. SO IF THEY DO NOT RECEIVE ENOUGH PETITION SUPPORT, THE CITY COULD DO DATA COLLECTION AND STILL DETERMINE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH CRASH ANALYSIS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT WOULDN'T SCORE AS HIGH ON OUR FUNDING OR APPLICABLE FUNDING RUBRIC BECAUSE THE PETITION PROCESS IS PART OF THAT SCORING. IF THEY DON'T REACH THAT, THEN THEY'RE LOSING OUT ON POINTS. >> Cary: YOU'RE RESERVING THE OPTION OF GOING, WAIT A MINUTE, WE KNOW ABOUT THIS AND EVEN IF IT DOESN'T GET SUPPORT IT MAKES SENSE. HOW SIGNIFICANT WILL BE CRASH DATA IN DETERMINING THIS? WILL THAT BE A MAJOR SCORING FACTOR? >> YES. CRASH HISTORY IS ONE OF OUR BIGGEST POINT VALUES IN OUR GRADING RUBRIC. >> Cary: IN SOME AREAS I KNOW THERE ARE SOME STREETS THAT ARE LEADING UP TO SCHOOLS AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S MANY CRASHES. BUT SOMETIMES I SEE CARS GOING DOWN THESE AREAS. THEY ARE DRIVING A LOT FASTER THAN THEY SHOULD BUT I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE CRASHING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: JUST TO BUILD OFF OF COMMISSIONER CARY'S POINT. IS THERE ANY MEANS TO ARGUE SCOPE OF THE AREA THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GO GET PETITIONS FROM? BECAUSE I'M THINKING OF MY OWN STREET NOW. ON-STREET PARKING ACTS AS A NATURAL CHICANE TO SOME EXTENT AND SLOWS PEOPLE DOWN. IF I HAD TO COME UP WITH A TRAFFIC PETITION ON MY OWN STREET, THAT IS SIX BLOCKS THAT I COULD THINK OF POTENTIALLY COULD BE -- SO IF YOU GIVE ME ONE -- IF YOU GIVE ME AN AREA THAT WIDE TO GO COLLECT PETITIONS FROM, DO I HAVE THE MEANS TO ARGUE LIKE, YOU KNOW -- >> ONE OF OUR FIVE PROJECTS IS SIMILAR TO THIS AND WE BROKE IT UP INTO TWO PROJECTS. TECHNICALLY WE HAVE SIX PROJECTS ON THE BOOKS BUT IT WAS ONE REQUEST, TWO LOCATIONS. IN THAT INSTANCE WE WOULD APPLY INFRASTRUCTURE TO THIS SECTION BETWEEN TWO SETS OF ALLEYS AND THEN THERE WAS A CROSS STREET. AND WE BROKE IT UP AT THAT CROSS STREET AND WE DID ANOTHER SECTION DOWN THE STREET. SO IF ONE SET OF BLOCKS OF RESIDENTS WANTS IT, AND THEY WOULD BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED, THEN WE COULD PUT IT ON THAT SEGMENT. BUT DOWN THE STREET THEY MAY NOT WANT IT SO WE WOULDN'T LOOK AT THAT. IF WE HAVE A LONG STRETCH, WE WOULD LOOK AT BREAKING IT UP SO THAT IT IS BOTH EASIER ON THE RESIDENT TO REACH THE PETITION SUCCESS, BUT IT ALSO HELPS US BECAUSE IT'S MORE NARROWLY DEFINING THAT AREA. >> Olley: OKAY. >> Lisle: LET ME ADD A COUPLE OF MORE THINGS. YOUR ISSUE OF DATA COLLECTING, GOING DOOR TO DOOR SIX BLOCKS AWAY, EITHER DIRECTION, IF WE'RE CONCENTRATING ONLY ON THAT CENTER PART WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT COLLECTING INFORMATION FROM RESIDENTS OR VALIDATION THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN DOING CLOSE TO THAT LOCATION. I CAN GUARANTEE YOU FROM EXPERIENCE THAT SIX BLOCKS AWAY THEY ARE GOING TO SAY NO BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE BENEFIT OF THE SLOWING THE TRAFFIC DOWN BUT THEY ARE DISBENEFITED BY HAVING TO SLOW DOWN. WE'RE GOING TO BE CLOSE. WE WON'T HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO A LONG DIRECTION. CHAD DIDN'T SAY THIS BUT LET ME POINT OUT WHY WE'RE HAVING THE RESIDENT COLLECT INFORMATION. WHEN WE DO MAILERS, WE GET A VERY LOW TURNOUT OR RESPONSE RATE ON THE MAILERS. AND SO WE'LL DO A MAILER IF THE RESIDENT WANTS US TO DO THAT BUT WE ONLY HAVE -- IS IT SIX WEEKS OR EIGHT WEEKS, CHAD? >> SIX WEEKS. >> SIX WEEKS TO GET RESPONSES BACK. IF WE DON'T GET RESPONSES BACK THEN THE MATTER IS DEAD ON ARRIVAL, AS YOU MIGHT SAY. >> Olley: UNDERSTOOD, UNDERSTOOD. I ACTUALLY THINK THE RESIDENT GOING TO COLLECT INFORMATION ENABLES THIS TO BE HEARD AS A COMMUNITY PROBLEM. LET'S FIGURE THIS OUT TOGETHER. I APPRECIATE THAT. SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE IN ZONING, IT'S 200 MILES OR 200 SQUARE FEET? >> Chair Downs: 200 FEET. >> Olley: I APPRECIATE THE FLEXIBILITY ON DETERMINING WHAT MATTERS MORE, WHICH CONCENTRATION MATTERS MORE. >> ONE OTHER THING. FROM A HISTORCAL STANDPOINT, IF YOU'RE AROUND PRE-2009, WE USED TO HAVE A PROGRAM IN PLACE THAT ALLOWED US TO PUT SPEED HUMPS IN THROUGH A PETITION PROCESS. AND WE'RE KIND OF FOLLOWING THAT SAME PROCESS FROM A PETITION STANDPOINT, ALTHOUGH WE DISBANDED OR ELIMINATED THE SPEED HUMP PROGRAM IN 2009, ALTHOUGH WE STILL MAINTAIN THE ONES INSTALLED PRIOR TO THAT. IT'S NOT SOMETHING NEW THAT THE LONGTIME RESIDENTS HAVE NEVER SEEN. WE USED TO HAVE THIS VERY SIMILAR PROCESS IN PLACE. >> Chair Downs: MR. LISLE. >> Lisle: SO ON THE SPEED BUMPS, WE NOW HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THEM BACK. THROUGH THIS PROCESS YOU CAN GET A SPEED BUMP ON YOUR STREET, IF YOU GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING BACK THAT WE GOT RID OF IN 2009? >> WE ACTUALLY HAVE AN ENTIRE TOOLBOX IN CHAPTER 13 OF DIFFERENT ITEMS. ONE OF THE THINGS CHAD TOUCHED ON IS WHEN WE DO OUR EVALUATION, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT WHAT'S THE BEST SOLUTION. IT MIGHT BE THAT SPEED HUMPS IS THE BEST SOLUTION. IT MIGHT BE THAT A CHICANE IS THE BEST SOLUTION. >> Lisle: THAT'S MY NEXT QUESTION. WHAT IS A CHICANE? DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF IT? >> Chair Downs: A LITTLE BUMP OUT. >> IF YOU LOOK IN THE TOP RIGHT OF THIS -- >> Lisle: THAT CREATES A PARKING SPOT THOUGH, RIGHT? >> SO THIS IS CALLED A BULB OUT WHERE YOU HAVE THEM DIRECTLY OPPOSITE OF EACH OTHER. A CHICANE WOULD BE HAVING ONE AND ANOTHER ONE OFFSET SO YOU KIND OF HAVE TO DO A WEAVING MANEUVER THROUGH THE STREET. >> [OFF MIC] >> Lisle: IT'S ONLY HAPPENED ONCE AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY A MEDIAN. [LAUGHTER] BUT I GOT THE FRONT AND THE BACK TIRE. >> SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IS TO ACT LIKE ON-STREET PARKING. IF YOU'RE DRIVING THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU HAVE ON-STREET PARKING ON BOTH SIDES, YOU'RE GOING TO SLOW DOWN. IF THERE'S AREAS WHERE THERE'S HIGH SPEEDS, TYPICALLY BECAUSE THERE IS NOT THAT ON-STREET PARKING AND YOU DON'T FEEL THAT FRICTION GOING THROUGH. THIS CREATES THAT. AND THAT FRICTION IS A LOT EASIER ON VEHICLE SUSPENSIONS THAN SPEED BUMPS. AND SO THE DESIGN CONSULTANT WOULD LOOK AT WHAT IS THE MOST APPLICABLE METHOD FOR THIS. IF SPEED BUMPS ARE THE WAY THEY GO, I MEAN, YOU ARE GOING TO SLOW DOWN BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO FEEL IT IF YOU DON'T. THERE ARE OTHER -- >> Lisle: CURIOSITY QUESTION. WHAT MONEY HAS BEEN SET ASIDE FOR THIS PROGRAM? >> 2021 BOND PROGRAM SET ASIDE $400,000 FOR THIS PROGRAM. >> Lisle: IS THAT $400,000 PERIOD OR A YEAR? >> THAT WAS FOR THIS PARTICULAR BOND PROGRAM, WHICH WAS A FOUR-YEAR PERIOD. WE'RE JUST NOW DIPPING INTO IT. AND SO WE'RE ASSUMING, TO KEEP THE PROGRAM MOVING FORWARD, THE 2025 BOND PROGRAM WOULD HAVE SOMETHING SIMILAR. >> Chair Downs: ANYTHING ELSE, MR. LISLE? >> Lisle: I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. OVERALL, I LOVE THE NEW PROCESS BUT LOOKING AT YOUR RUBRIC, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. ON MULTIMODAL ACTIVITY, YOU HAVE ACTIVITY GENERATORS WHERE YOU CAN GET POINTS FOR SCHOOLS PARKS NEIGHBORHOODS WITHIN ONE BLOCK. AS WE GROW OUR TODs, AND I'M SPECIFICALLY THINKING OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA, PEOPLE ARE WALKING FOR MORE THAN ONE BLOCK. ON MY PARTICULAR STREET WE'VE GOT A SCHOOL THAT HAS FACILITIES THAT ARE TWO BLOCKS APART. THEY WALK BACK AND FORTH ALL DAY EVERY DAY. WE'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING TO THE DART STATION THREE AND FOUR BLOCKS AWAY. I WALKED HERE FOR THIS MEETING AND IT'S MORE THAN ONE BLOCK. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO LOOK AT THAT ONE BLOCK QUESTION BECAUSE ESPECIALLY IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND IN THE TODs, LIMITING THE PEDESTRIAN GENERATORS TO ONE BLOCK I THINK IS NOT RECOGNIZING HOW PEOPLE ARE FUNCTIONING, ESPECIALLY IN THIS PART OF TOWN. >> THAT'S A VERY GOOD COMMENT. I SEE BRIAN WRITING THAT DOWN. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. >> I THINK WHEN WE WERE DEVELOPING THESE STANDARDS, WE WERE FOCUSING ON THE CITY AS A WHOLE AND THE DOWNTOWN AREA IS DEFINITELY MORE PEDESTRIAN FOCUSED. SO I CAN SEE THAT BEING SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I THINK THE OVERALL PLAN IS GOOD AND I ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO BE RESPONSIVE TO A REQUEST FROM THE CITIZENS FOR INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC-CALMING DEVICES IN APPROPRIATE SITUATIONS. I WOULD URGE YOU NOT TO BE TOTALLY IN A RESPONSIVE MODE, HOWEVER, BUT TO ALSO BE IN A PROACTIVE MODE THAT WOULD IDENTIFY AREAS THAT MIGHT NEED ATTENTION AND TO TAKE ACTION WHERE NEEDED, TO COMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM OF RESPONDING TO THE CITIZEN REQUESTS. ONE AREA IN WHICH I THINK YOU MIGHT CONSIDER BEING PROACTIVE -- I REMEMBER WE HAD DISCUSSION BEFORE WHEN THE TRAFFIC-CALMING PLAN WAS BEFORE US LAST YEAR SOMETIME, I THINK. WAS THE POTENTIAL SAFETY BENEFITS OF TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND RUNABOUTS. AND I WAS THINKING THAT PERHAPS IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE STAFF TO IDENTIFY A SMALL NUMBER OF SUITABLE INTERSECTIONS TO INSTALL A TRAFFIC CIRCLE HERE AND A ROUNDABOUT THERE ON A TRIAL BASIS SO YOU CAN EVALUATE HOW THEY OPERATE, HOW THE TRAFFIC FLOWS, WHETHER OR NOT YOU NEED TRAFFIC SIGNAGE TO COMPLEMENT IT SUCH AS STOP SIGNS OR YIELD SIGNS OR PAVEMENT MARKINGS, THAT SORT OF THING. AND IF THE TRIAL INSTALLATIONS PROVE PROMISING, YOU CAN TURN THAT INTO A LARGER PROGRAM TO HAVE TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND RUNABOUTS INSTEAD OF THE TRADITIONAL INTERSECTION WITH STOP SIGNS OR TRAFFIC LIGHTS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MR. CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, PRETTY QUICKLY. FIRST OF ALL, I AGREE WITH HIM. I HAVE BEEN IN SOME CITIES RECENTLY WHERE THEY ARE USING THE RUNABOUTS REALLY EFFECTIVELY AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US LOOK AT THAT. I THINK THEY CAN BE GREAT ONCE THE CITIZENS FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WORK . THERE'S A SIX-WEEK TIMING FROM WHEN AN APPLICATION COMES TO WHEN THEY HAVE TO GET SIGNATURES. >> IT'S 60 DAYS AND THE APPLICATIONS THAT WE SENT OUT -- SO IF YOU REFERENCED YOUR STAFF REPORT, WE INCLUDED THE EVALUATION EXAMPLE HERE. AND IT'S HARD TO SEE BUT WE PROVIDED, AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THAT LEFT SIDE, WE PROVIDE THE DATES AS THE DATE THAT WE SEND IT OUT AND THE DATE THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT BACK. I GAVE A ROUND NUMBER. I SAID WE'RE GOING TO START THIS ON A MONDAY. I SENT IT OUT THE THURSDAY BEFORE. I SAID WE'RE STARTING IT NEXT MONDAY. YOU HAVE THIS EXTRA TIME WINDOW. I GAVE THEM A LITTLE TIME WINDOW THERE. AND THEN I WENT 60 DAYS OUT AND PUT A ROUND NUMBER, GET IT TO ME BY FRIDAY END OF THE MONTH. ROUGHLY 60 DAYS, GIVE OR TAKE. . >> Cary: SO MY FINAL QUESTION IS IF THEY DON'T GET THE SIGNATURES THEY NEED AND/OR WE DECIDE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THIS PROJECT IN PLAY RIGHT NOW, IS THERE A TIMELINE UNTIL THEY CAN REAPPLY? >> SO IF THEY APPLY -- >> ONE YEAR. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. WE HAVE A SIMILAR SIMILAR FOR THE SPEED BUMP PROGRAM OR REQUESTING FOR REMOVALS. ONCE THIS PROGRAM IS IN PLACE -- SORRY, ONCE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE, THERE IS ALSO A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR BEFORE THEY CAN REQUEST IT TO BE REMOVED. SO IF IT GOES IN AND THEY DETERMINE, OH, WE REALLY DON'T LIKE THIS AFTER ALL, THEN THEY HAVE TO WAIT AND LIVE WITH IT FOR A LITTLE BIT. >> I'M GOING TO EXPAND ON CHAD'S COMMENT. FROM A HISTORICAL STANDPOINT, WE HAD A LOT OF SPEED HUMPS GET PUT IN PRIOR TO 2009. AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS THEY GOT REMOVED IS BECAUSE AFTER A MONTH THE CITIZENS SAID OH I DON'T LIKE THE NOISE OR I DON'T LIKE THE BOUNCE SO TAKE THEM BACK OUT, AFTER WE'VE ALREADY PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN. WE INTENTIONALLY PUT IN A ONE-YEAR LAG TO -- BEFORE THE CITIZEN CAN SAY WE NEED TO HAVE THIS REMOVED. UNLESS OF COURSE IT'S SOME SAFETY ISSUE THAT'S CAUSING ACCIDENTS OR CRASHES. BUT THERE IS A ONE-YEAR LAG, AS CHAD MENTIONED. >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: JUST TWO COMMENTS. NUMBER ONE, I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE EFFORT THAT YOU PUT IN TO KEEP OUR STREETS SAFE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND FOR US. AND, TWO, I'VE ALSO BEEN IN LOTS OF CITIES WHERE I'VE SEEN ROUNDABOUTS BE VERY EFFECTIVE AND I THINK THEY WOULD BE A BIG BENEFIT FOR US TO LOOK AND CONSIDER ADVANCING IN THE FUTURE. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANKS SO MUCH, GUYS. APPRECIATE IT. EVERY DAY YOU GUYS ARE POUNDING THE PAVEMENT TRYING TO FIX IT FOR US. MAKE IT SAFE. WE APPRECIATE IT. THANKS SO MUCH. DO YOU HAVE A WRAP-UP OR NO? YOU GOT BACK TO THE MICROPHONE. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY, YOUR LIGHT CAME ON. OH. OKAY. AGENDA ITEM 7 IS ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS, WHICH WE HAVE A PROCESS I GUESS FOR THAT. >> Bronsky: I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THANKS TO MRS. BRIDGES FOR HER DEVOTED SERVICE TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND FOR SERVING THIS COMMISSION. WE'RE REALLY GOING TO MISS YOU. >> YOU WILL BE MISSED. [APPLAUSE] >> Cary: [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MY JOB TO DO THAT BUT HE'S ACTING CHAIRMAN TONIGHT. WHEN HE CAN SPEAK. YES. YOU WILL BE MISSED. IT'S ALL RIGHT, MR. BRONSKY. THANK YOU. YOU STEPPED IN REALLY WELL. ALL RIGHT. IT IS 7:52 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. [MEETING ADJOURNED]