JANUARY 17, 2023 >> Chair Downs: WE WILL COME TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CHAMBERS FOR OUR JANUARY 17th P&Z MEETING. PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> Chair Downs: 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 AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT D 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: DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, THOUGH, LET ME REMIND THE COMMISSION, BASED ON A DISCUSSION I HAD LAST TIME, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON SOMETHING, JUST FLAG ME WITH YOUR HAND VERSUS TURNING THE MICS ON BECAUSE IT'S STARTING TO CREATE FEEDBACK ISSUES SOMETIMES WHEN WE DO THAT. PARTICULARLY WHEN WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR OF THEM ON WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO SPEAK. FLAG ME AND I'LL GET EVERYBODY IN TURN. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >> 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: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO REMOVE A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF -- I SAWOU RAISE YOUR HAND FIRST. TOOATE. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. FOR THE RECORD, WE ARE STILL SHORT ONE COMMISSION MEMBER, ALTHOUGH I THINK AN APPOINTMENT HAS BEEN MADE AND SOMETIME IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS WE'LL HAVE THAT PERSON SEATED. ITEM 1. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWSE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN 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 NE ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDE AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2022-016 - REQUEST TO AMEND ARTICLE 10 ( DISTRICTS), ARTICLE 14 (ALLOWED USES AND USE CLASSIFICATIONS), ARTICLE 15 (USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS), AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN WITH SPECIFIC LAND USE POLICIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021. PETITIONER: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JORDAN, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT . SO AS DETAILED, THIS IS A ZONING REQUEST TO MAKE AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REFLECT SOME OF THE CHANGES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THIS CASE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2021. IN JANUARY OF LAST YEA STA PRESENTED ON A VARIETY OF TOPICS AT A JOINT SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION. AND IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, THE COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. PREVIOUSLY FOUR ITEMS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED. THESE BEING INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES IN NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT. RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE HIGHWAY 75 CORRIDOR AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE RETAIL DISTRICT. FOLLOWING THE CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING, STA BROUGHT FORWARD TWO DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEMS TO ASSIST IN PREPARING THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES WERE THE SUBJECT OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE DECEMBER 17th, 2022 MEETING AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES WERE TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE JANUARY 3 MEETING. HOWEVER, THAT ITEM WAS TABLED TO A FUTURE JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL. FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, STAFF HAS SPOKEN WITH CHAIR DOWNS ON ADVANCING SOME OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION. SO THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WITH MULTIFAMILY USES. ALIGN PERMITTED LAND USES IN THE CE DISTRICT WITH THE EMPLOYMENT CENTERS FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARD AND ALLOW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE R DISTRICT WITHOUT AN SUP. NO CHANGES RELATED TO THE HIGHWAY 75 CORRIDOR OR THE TABLED MULTIFAMILY DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEM ARE INCLUDED IN THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. A SEPARATE ZONING CASE WOULD BE BROUGHT FORWARD FOLLOWING THE JOINT SESSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. SO I'LL GO THROUGH THESE THREE ITEMS IN BRIEF, INCLUDING A BROAD SUMMARY OF WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ENTAIL. SO AS YOU KNOW, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES ARE COUNTED AS A MULTIFAMILY TYPE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT ARE CONSIDERED AN INSTITUTIONAL TYPE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD ADDRESS THIS INCONSISTENCY THROUGH FOUR BROAD ACTIONS. FIRST, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WOULD BE RECATEGORIZED AS A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL USE. THIS IS LARGELY ADMINISTRATIVE AND WOULD AFFECT THE LAND USE TABLES AND THE PARKING SCHEDULE. SECOND, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WOULD BE ALIGNED WITH THOSE FOR MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS. THE INTENT IS TO ENSURE BOTH USES ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME STANDARDS WHERE APPROPRIATE AND ONE IS NOT FAVORED OVER THE OTHER. THE THIRD CHANGE WOULD RESTRICT NEW INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WHERE MULTIFAMILY USES ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY CORNERS AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS' FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES DO NOT INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY USES IN THE DESIRED LAND USE MIX. LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE NOT ZONING DISTRICTS AND DO NOT DIRECTLY REGULATE LAND USE. SO STAFF PROPOSED AMENDING FOUR ZONING DISTRICTS THAT GENERALLY OVERLAP WITH THESE THREE CATEGORIES. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE FOUR DISTRICTS ALSO DON'T ALLOW MULTIFAMILY USE. THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, GENERAL OFFICE, RETAIL, AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT ZONING DISTRICTS. LANGUAGE WOULD BE ADDED TO EACH DISTRICT ALLOWING EXISTING AND OTHERWISE VESTED INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY USES TO REMAIN WITHOUT BEING CONSIDERED LEGAL NONCONFORMING. THE LAST CHANGE CONCERNS CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES. STAFF HAD ASKED THE COMMISSION WHETHER STANDARDS FOR THIS USE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE SINCE A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY, IT MAY INCLUDE INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT. IN RESPONSE, THE COMMISSION ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL INFO. STAFF REVIEWED PEER MUNICIPALITIES AND FOUND MOST DO NOT DEFINE A CONTINUING CARE USE AND THOSE THAT DO USE PLANO'S DEFINITION. ON THE SUBJECT OF RESTRICTIVE STANDARDS IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT AND BURDENSOME TO ENFORCE SUCH STANDARDS WOULD MIGHT INCLUDE CAPS ON THE PORTION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS OR FLOOR AREA RELATIVE TO OTHER RETIREMENT HOUSING TYPES. INSTEAD OF NEW STANDARDS, STAFF PROPOSED TO MODIFY THE DEFINITION TO MORE CLOSELY MATCH THE DEFINITION FOUND IN THE TEXAS HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE, WHICH MORE EXPLICITLY REQUIRES HEALTH-RELATED SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED ON THE PREMISES. FOR THE COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT, STAFF PROPOSES CHANGES TO ENSURE THE LEGACY AREA CONTINUES TO BE A DESIRABLE LOCATN FO EMPLOYERS TO LOCATE. THE CE DISTRICT IS LARGELY LOCATED IN THE EMPLOYMENT CENTER'S FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY WHICH AS DISCUSSED WITH THE INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES ITEM DOES NOT SUPPORT NEW RESIDENTIAL USES. THE DISTRICT ITSELF CONTINUES A UNIT CAP BUT ALLOWS NEW UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED BEYOND THIS CAP WITH THE APPROVAL OF AN SUP. THE SAME LANGUAGE IS PRESENT IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS 1 DISTRICT. SO TWO ACTIONS ARE PROPOSED. THEY'RE BOTH FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. E FIRST IS TO RESTRICT NEW RESIDENTIAL LAND USES IN THE CE DISTRICT WHICH ENTAILS REMOVING RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS FROM THE DISTRICT AND UPDATING A LAND USE TABLE AND UPDATING THE CE AND CB-1 TO REMOVE THE CAP LANGUAGE. THEY WOULD CONTINUE TO BE PERMITTED BY SUP IN THE CB-1 DISTRICT . THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RETAIL DISTRICT ARE ALSO STRAIGHTFORWARD. CURRENTLY SOME RESIDENTIAL USES ARE PERMITTED WITH A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT. THESE BEING ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY PATIO HOMES AND DUPLEXES. THE NEIGHBORHOOD CORNERS SUPPORT THESE USES PROVIDED THAT THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD . STAFF PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE SUP REQUIREMENT WHICH MAY BE A BARRIER TO NEW HOUSING. THE RETAIL DISTRICT ALREADY CONTAINS STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SITE SIZE AND LOCATION OFESIDENTIAL USES, SO THIS WOULD NOT CREATE A FREE FOR ALL REDEVELOPMENT SCENARIO. FOLLOWING THE DISCUSSION ON DECEMBER 19, NEW MODIFIED STANDARDS ON SCREENING AND FENCING HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE. THESE ARE INTENDED TO ENSURE POTENTIAL NUISANCES SUCH AS LOADING AREAS ARE APPROPRIATELY SCREENED WHILE ALLOWING FOR FLEXIBILITY IN CREATING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND THE SHOPPING CENTER. SO TO SUMMARIZE, STAFF ORDINANCE TO ALIGN STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES, THE CE DISTRICT AND THE R DISTRICT WITH SPECIFIC POLICIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. A DETAILED LIST OF THE RELEVANT CRELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS IS PROVIDED IN THE ACTIONS UNDER THE LAND USE POLICY, REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY, REVITALIZATION OF RETAIL SHOPPING CENTERS POLICY, AND SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS POLICY. AN OVERVIEW OF HOW THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ALIGN WITH RELEVANT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES IS ALSO PROVIDEIN THE PACKET. STAFF RECEIVED NO RESPONSES FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE NOTED IN EXHIBIT 3 OF THE PACKET. I'M SURE THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS TO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THOUGHT WHAT YOU HAD PUT OUT WAS VERY DETAILED, DESPITE BEING KIND OF DENSE AND JARGON -- THANK GOD WE ARE P&Z MEMBERS AND HAVE BEEN EDUCATED ON THIS. I DO HAVE AOUPL OF QUESTIONS BECAUSE INDEPENDENT LIVING, WE'RE REMOVING IT AS SOMETHING YOU COULD HAVE -- I'M GOING TO USE COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT. BUT A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY IS ALLOWED THERE AND A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY MAY HAVE CERTAIN SECTIONS OR ELEMENTS THAT ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING. SO IF A DEVELOPER APPROACHES US AND SAYS I WANT TO BUILD AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY IN CE WE'RE GOING TO SAY NO. SOMEONE SAYS I'M GOING TO BUILD A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY -- BY THE W, 80%F THE UNITS ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE THAT SAYS IT ALLOWS A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE TO BE INDEPENDENT LIVING OR SOMETHING. AND MAYBE IT'S IN THERE BUT, AGAIN, FAIRLY DENSE SO HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED OR IS THERE A GUIDELINE ON THAT? >> SO, NO. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO INTRODUCE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPORTION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS TO OTHER RETIREMENT HOUSING UNITS. WHEN DISCUSSED AT THE STAFF LEVEL, IT WAS DEEMED THAT THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE, PARTICULARLY IN THE LG TM AND WOULD WE BE SENDING PROPERTY STANDARDS OUT TO, SAY, HOW MANY OF YOUR UNITS ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING. >> Chair Downs: NO, I COMPLETELY GET THAT. I JUST WAS THINKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF -- I KNOW THAT THE DEFINITION OF CONTINUING CARE REQUIRES A CERTAIN LEVEL OF ASSISTANCE BY MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS, ET CETERA. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CREATE SOMETHING WHERE, AGAIN, 5% OF THE UNITS HAVE TREATMENT AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THE OTHER 95% ARE JUST INDEPENDENT LIVING. AND MAYBE THAT'S FINE BUT I THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION SINCE IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME, YOU KNOW, A DEVELOPER WILL CALL SOMETHING X AND IT ISN'T REALLY X, IT'S SOMETHING ELSE WITH A LITTLE SKIN OVER IT. GO AHEAD. >> TO ADD TO THE PRIOR COMMENTS, I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS A LOT AT THE STAFF LEVEL SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT GOT US COMFORTABLE WITH THIS DEFINITION WAS REALLY THE COMMENT THAT THE CONTINUING OF PERSONAL SERVICES, NURSING SERVICES, MEDICAL SERVICES WERE PROVIDED ON THE SAME PROPERTY. SO THAT IDEA THAT YOU HAVE TO BE PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES ON SITE, WE DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE A PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF DEVELOPMENT FOR SOMEONE TO DO 95% INDEPENDENT LIVING AND 5% BECAUSE THE EXPENSE OF PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES TO ALL UNITS WOULD JUST NOT BE PRACTICAL. >> Chair Downs: REASONABLE. >> YES. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> WE THOUGHT IT WAS ENFORCEABLE FOR THAT REASON. >> Chair Downs: UNDERSTOOD. ANY COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR SEGMEN? YEAH, COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, I ECHO WHAT THE CHAIRMAN SAID. I THINK THIS IS WELL DONE. THERE IS A LOT HERE BUT I THINK THAT'S NECESSARY TO BRING THIS FORTH. AND I PERSONALLY AM EXCITED TO SEE US ADDRESSING THE INDEPENDENT LIVING BECAUSE THE WAY IT WAS DONE BEFORE I THINK LEFT SOME -- MAYBE SOME HOLES IN THERE THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. I APPLAUD YOU GUYS FOR TAKING THIS ON AND THE WAY YOU'RE BRINGING IT FORTH. I THINK IT'S WELL DONE AND MAKES SENSE TO ME. GOOD JOB. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. EXCELLENT PRESENTATION AND I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK ON THIS. OBVIOUSLY IF WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS WE DO, WHICH WAS DEVELOPED WITH A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT AND A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLIC INPUT AND, YOU KNOW, BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS, SO TO SPEAK, IT BEHOOVES US TO MAKE SURE OUR OTHER ORDINANCES, SPECIFICALLY THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AFTER ALL, THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO I TNK TS IS A NECESSARY THING TO DO. I THINK IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IN GREAT DETAIL AND IT'S IN PRETTY MUCH FINISHED FORM SO I THINK WE'RE READY TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT AND SEND IT TO COUNCIL. >> Chair Downs: NOW WE GOT LOTS OF HANDS UP. I DIDN'T SEE WHO WAS FIRST. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: TO ECHO THE COMMENTS, I'M ALSO GLAD ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT LIVING BUT I THINK IT STILL GIVES YOU AND US THE FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW FOR THE SENIOR HOUSING THAT W SO DESPERATELY NEED. BUT PROBABLY THE ONE I THINK IS GOING TO MAKE THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IS THE CHANGE TO THE R DISTRICT TO ALLOW SOME OF THE FOUR CORNERS TO REDEVELOP. SO I THINK -- I'M HOPEFUL THAT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE CAN SAY THAT WAS A POSITIVE CHANGE THAT ALLOWED SOME OF THOSE THINGS TO HAPPEN. WELL DONE. IT WAS A HEAVY READ BUT I COULD TELL A LOT OF THOUGHT WAS PUT INTO IT. VERY WELL DONE, VERY THOROUGH. MY COMPLIMENTS TO THE AUTHORS. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: YEAH. AIN,HANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU DID A GREAT JOB. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF, YES, WE CRIED, WE ARGUED, WE BLED FOR ALMOST MIDNIGHT A COUPLE OF TIMES. YES. I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT BRINGING THIS UP AND HAVING THIS GO FORWARD. I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB ON HONORING ALL OF THE EFFORT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. THE ABITY FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES TO BE IN THE R DISTRICT I THINK IS GOING TO BE A VERY BIG POSITIVE. SO THANK YOU FOR THE CARE AND EFFORT THAT YOU PUT FORWARD TO NOT ONLY HONOR THE CPRC AND ALL OF US BUT THE REST OF THE STAFF AND EVERYBODY IN PLANO THAT I REALLY THINK IS STRONGLY BEHIND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Olley: I'LL ECHO WHAT EVERYONE SAID. THE QUESTION I HAD WAS ON THE CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES. I'LL CONFESS I TRIED TO READ THEEXASEALTH CODE AND MY EYES GLAZED OVER. WHAT LEVEL OF MEDICAL CARE TRIGGERS THAT FACILITY GETTING THAT DESIGNATION? IS IT A FULLY-FLEDGED MEDICAL OFFICE WITH THE APPROPRIATE -- I DON'T KNOW, EQUIPMENT OR STAFF? OR DO I JUST NEED TO HAVE A NURSE THAT LIVES IN ONE OF THE UNITS AND VOILA, IT'S A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY. DO WE KNOW? >> Chair Downs: I'LL GO BACK AND READ THAT STATEMENT AGAIN. >> WHAT THE DEFINITION SAYS IS THAT IT'S A DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND STAFF TO PROVIDE HOUSING TOGETHER WITH A CONTINUUM OF PERSONAL CARE SERVICES. NURSING SERVICES, MEDICAL SERVICES, OR OTHER HEALTH-RELATED SERVICES ON THE SAME PROPERTY. SO IN ADDITION IT STATES IT INCLUDES A COMBINATION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING, ASSISTED LIVING, OR LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES. SO I THINK WE REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF A CONTINUUM OF SERVICES BECAUSE IT WASN'T JUST YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE ONE SERVICE, YOU NEEDED TO PROVIDE SETHING --HE CONTINUITY OF THE LIFE CYCLE. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF CONTINUING CARE THAT YOU'RE PROGRESSING THROUGH TIME WITH DIFFERENT NEEDS AND THAT THOSE DIFFERENT NEEDS ARE BEING MET THROUGH THIS COMBINATION OF MEDICAL NURSING HEALTH-RELATED, FOOD SERVICE, WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE CLIENTS. SO I THINK I WILL DEFER IF OTHERS REMEMBER MORE ABOUT THE TEXAS HEALTH CODE THAN I DO OR PERHAPS HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK IT UP WHILE I'VE BEEN TALKING. >> Chair Downs: THEY'RE EYES ARE ALL GLAZED. [LAUGHTER] >> TO ME WE REALLY EXPECT, I THINK BASED ON THE DEFINITION, THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE ROBUST. >> Olley: FORGIVE ME, I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THIS. CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES IN THOSE PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICTS, ARE THEY PERMITTED BY RIGHT AT THIS POINT IN TIME OR IS IT SUP? >> Chair Downs: THEY'RE PERMITTED. >> GENERALLY PERMITTED BY RIGHT. I BELIEVE THERE'S A COUPLE WHERE IT'S BY SUP. >> Chair Downs: CORRIDOR COMMERCIALS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT ARE SUP >> OKAY. JUST TO BACK UP TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION ON THE LEVEL OF MEDICAL CARE, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IN OUR DEFINITION OF CONTINUING CARE FACILITY WE DO EXPLICITLY STATE THAT IT HAS TO INCLUDE A COMBINATION OF OTHER USES WHICH ARE DEFINED IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND THOSE OTHER USES, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY, AND LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY DO HAVE MORE DETAIL ON WHAT CARE LOOKS LIKE AND THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE IN THE PACKET, EXHIBIT D IS THE ATTACHMENT WITH ALL THOSE DEFINITIONS. >> Olley: THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD -- >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE TOO THAT THIS ABILITY TO BE LOCATED IN SOME OF THESE AREAS, THE OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL AREAS, WE'RE STILL HOLDING THEM TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STANDARDS AND STUFF BECAUSE IT'S A RESIDENTIAL BUT IN A TYPICAL NONRESIDENTIAL AREA. YES SIR. >> A QUESTION FOR MS. DAY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT I'VE BEEN IN A NUMBER OF THESE FACILITIES AND THE ARCHITECTURE OF AN INDEPENDENT CARE FACILITY IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FLOOR PLAN. I PRESUME THAT SOMEBODY CAME IN FOR THAT ZONING AND THE PLANS CAME IN AND IT LOOKED LIKE AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY. AT THAT POINT YOU WOULD GO THIS DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE ZONING. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. EVEN THE SITE PLANNING IS DIFFERENT BUT WE'VE SEEN IN PLANO THAT THERE WILL ACTUALLY BE A VARIETY OF USES ON SITE. AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY EXPECTING TO SEE. WHILE IT COULD ALL BE IN A SINGLE BUILDING, THAT'S NOT THE TYPICAL FORM THAT WE HAVE SEEN THIS TAKE. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: THANK YOU. ON POINT 15.1, IT TALKS ABOUT SURVIVING MEMBERS BEING ABLE TO LIVE IN THE FACILITY IF THE 55 AND OLDER OCCUPANT PASSES ON. AND MY QUESTION IS THIS: IS A SURVIVING MEMBER, DO THEY HAVE TO BE LIVING THERE ALREADY OR COULD SOMEBODY PASS ON AND A MEMBER OF THE FAMILY THAT DOESN'T EVEN LIVE THERE MOVE IN? IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN VERY MUCH BUT AS I READ THROUGH THIS IT WAS A CURIOSITY TO ME HOW WE'D MANAGE THAT PARTICULAR THING IF AND WHEN IT HAPPENS. AND SO I JUST AM CURIOUS WHAT THE OUTLOOK OF IT IS. >> SO THAT'S AN EXISTING STANDARD IN OUR ORDINANCE. I DON'TNOW IF THAT HAS A. BASIS IN STATE LAW GOVERNING INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES. >> IT'S SURVIVING MEMBERS OF THE HOUSEHOLD AND THERE IS A DEFINITION IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE FOR HOUSEHOLD AND IT TALKS ABOUT A DOMESTIC UNIT THAT RESIDES IN AND SHARES IN COMMON A SINGLE DWELLING UNIT AND CONSISTS OF INDIVIDUALS RELATED BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE, SO ON AND SO FORTH. >> Cary: SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE LIVING THERE AT THAT TIME. >> I BELIEVE SO, YES. >> Cary: GAT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'M ASSUMING YOU NEED ACTION ON OUR PART HERE. >> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, MR. BRONSKY. >> CHAIR DOWNS, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER. >> Chair Downs: OH, WE DO? OH YEAH. WE DO. SORY. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST IN SUPPORT OF. >> I'LL WITHDRAW THAT FOR NOW. >> Chair Downs: I DIDN'T OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYWAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WAS SO EXCITED WE WERE MOVING FORWARD. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. I NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO. HODGE SHABIR. >> HEY, EVERYONE. >> Chair Downs: STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS HODGE SHABIR. I RESIDE ON 440 COIT ROAD I APARTMENT 9202 RIGHT HERE IN PLANO TEXAS. I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT ONE AND A HALF YEARS NOW AND I AM GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF MOST OF THE ITEMS OR MOST OF THE POINTS IN ITEM 1. OBVIOUSLY I'M VERY STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING AND RETAIL, PARTICULARLY FOR ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING, PLATFORM HOUSING, AND DUPLEXES. I THINK THOSE UNITS WOULD BE RETAIL EMPLOYEES IN HAVING THEM LIVE CLOSE TO THEIR WORKPLACE IS A HUGE FINANCIAL BENEFIT FOR THAT DEMOGRAPHIC. I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD TRY AND EXPLORE MAYBE EVEN POTENTIALLY MULTIFAMILY USES, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A STRETCH. AND I DO LIKE THE OPTIONS ALREADY ON THE TABLE BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE MORE COST. OPEN HOUSING OPEN TO -- RELIABLE HOUSING FORETAIL EMPLOYEE AND I THINK THE ADDED BENEFIT OF HAVING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES LIVING CLOSE, PARTICULARLY IT COULD CREATE VERY COHESIVE COMMUNITIES. I'M THINKING MAYBE THAT THE CHILDREN LIVING IN THESE HOMES COULD NOT RELY ON THEIR PARENTS AS MUCH TO MAYBE GO TO THE THEATERS OR GO, YOU KNOW, A BUNCH OF MY FRIENDS WOULD GO HIT UP THE TARGET, FOR SOME REASON. IT WOULD ALLOW A VEHICLE FOR SOME INDEPENDENCE FOR CHILDN AND IF WE BUILD COMMUNITIES AROUND THAT CONCEPT, WE CAN ARRIVE AT VERY STRONG COHESIVE COMMUNITIES WITH CHILDREN THAT HAVE HUNG OUT IN THESE RETAIL DISTRICTS GROWING UP AND CREATING A VERY STRONG COMMUNITY IN OUR CITY. THAT'S IT. ONE OF MY MAIN SKEPTICISMS -- AND I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A PART OF THE FUTURE LAND USE. HOWEVER, I AM SKEPTICAL OF REMOVING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FROM THE CURNT - I THINK IT'S THE CE CATEGORY. IT'S THE 2BM CATEGORY. PARTICULARLY IN THE LEGACY WEST AREA THERE IS A LARGE AMOUNT OF MASS TRANSIT , SEVERAL DART LINES GOING RIGHT THROUGH THAT AREA SO I THINK HAVING SOME DENSE HOUSING -- >> SIR, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS. >> SURE. HAVING SOME DENSE HOUSING IN THAT AREA WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL. LIVING CLOSE TO THE WORKPLACE IS VERY ATTRACTIVE TO YOUNG PELE, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO MIGHT BE INTERNING AT SOME OF THOSE FACILITIES OR THOSE WHO ARE VERY EARLY ON IN THEIR CAREER. SO BUT THAT'S IT. I AM STILL LARGELY IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 1. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> [OFF MIC] >> ARE YOU RIVER BLUM? OKAY. I HAVE YOU AS REGISTERED OPINION. DID YOU WANT TSPEA >> [OFF MIC] >> I DON'T HAVE YOU AS BEING REGISTERED BUT YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME UP AND SPEAK. I'LL JUST HAVE YOU FILL OUT A CARD. >> Chair Downs: I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE WE APPARENTLY HAVE MORE SPEAKERS. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'S GOING TO SPEAK? >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: OKAY. WE HAVE CARDS FOR THEM? >> WE DO NOT BUT I'LL HAVE THEM FILL ONE OUT AFTER THEY'RE DONE. >> Chair Downs: GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE. >> MY FULL NAME IS DANIEL [INDISCERNIBLE] 2200 WATERVIEW PARKWAY DOWN IN RICHARDSON. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF AN ADVOCACY GROUP AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT OVER 250 MEMBERS, MANY OF WHOM LIVE OR WORK IN PLANO, INCLUDING AREAS THAT WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL. I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS FROM MORE TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVES BUT I WANTED TO BRING UP A BIT OF AN UNORTHODOX PERSPECTIVE. MOST OF OUR MEMBERS DON'T HAVE A CAR. THEY NEED TO WALK, BIKE, OR USE PUBLIC TRANSITO GET TO THEIR DESTINATIONS. WHEN THOSE ARE NOT OPTIONS, THEY CANNOT GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO GET. TEENAGERS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS ARE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO FACE THESE PROBLEMS. I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND A PLANO CITIZENS COALITION MEETING. ONE OF THE OFFICERS TOLD ME THEY ARE SEEING A DECLINE IN ATTENDANCE BECAUSE SEVERAL MEMBERS ARE GETTING TOO OLD TO DRIVE AT NIGHT. THAT MEANS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO GET TO THEIR MEETING PLACES. IMAGINE LIVING MOST OF YOUR LIFE BEING ABLE TO GO ANYWHERE YOU WANT TO GO AT ANY TIME YOU WANT TO GO WITHOUT HAVING TO RELY ON HELP OR ASSISTANCE FROM ANYBODY ELSE AND ONE DAY LOSING THATREEDOM FOR REASONS THAT ARE ENTIRELY BEYOND YOUR CONTROL. CAN I ASK FOR A SHOW OF HANDS FOR A SECOND? RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU OWN A CAR AND YOU USED IT TO GET HERE TODAY. REALLY? >> Chair Downs: TECHNICALLY WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO RESPOND, BUT CONTINUE. >> I HOPE YOU REALIZE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENING HERE BECAUSE THE CONVERSATIONS WE TEND TO HOLD IN THESE TYPES OF PLANNING MEETINGS HAPPEN IN A BIT OF A BUBBLE. THESE MEETINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN TO THE ENTIRE PLANO PUBLIC BUT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE CAN RELIABLY SHOW UP HERE ARE PEOE WH HAV A CAR. COULD YOUR CHILD COME HERE OF THEIR OWN VOLITION? WHAT ABOUT YOUR PARENTS? AS LONG AS WE KEEP BUILDING OUR CITIES IN WAYS THAT ASSUME EVERYONE DRIVES AND PEDESTRIANS ARE SECOND-CLASS CITIZENS, WE ARE DENYING MOST OF THEM FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT. AND THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO CORRECT THIS INJUSTICE IS NOT SOME INCREASE IN DENSITY OR INVESTMENTS IN EXPENSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT SIMPLY MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE LIVE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE PLACES WHERE THEY STUDY, WORK, SHOP, OR CONGREGATE. MOST OF THIS PROPOSAL GOES INTO GREAT LOW-DE LENGTHS TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE BUT SOME PARTS DO NOT. I TAKE ISSUE WITH PARTS THAT CURTAIL FUTURE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CE DISTRICTS. I BELIEVE IN THE LONG TERM THIS WOULD PROVE TO BE A MISTAKE. I HOPE THAT AS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTINUES TO BE RECESSED BY YOU AND CITY STAFF THAT THIS PART OF THE PROPOSAL GETS RECONSIDERED. BUT OVERALL I THINK IT IS A GOOD PROPOSAL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. AND MS. RIVER, IS THAT IT? >> HELLO. I'M RIVER BLUM, 4000 HALIFAX DRIVE. I KNOW THAT THE FIRST PART OF THIS -- I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT'S THE FIRST PART BUT THE PART ABOUT RESIDENTIAL USES IN COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICTS IS PART OF THE FUTURE LAND USE BUT I DO THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED THAT MULTIFAMILY USE WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL IN THESE AREAS. NEW RESIDENTIAL USES CAN BE APPROVED ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS IN THESE AREAS IF IT IS A -- IF THERE IS NO PROHIBITION ON MULTIFAMILY USES. AND RESIDENTS MAY AT THAT TIME EXPRESS CONCERNS, OPPOSITION, OR SUPPORT AT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. MULTIFAMILY HOUSING BRINGS GREAT BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICTS AND IT CAN BE VITAL AND BENEFICIAL FOR PLANO'S ECONOMY. RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE AREA CAN ALSO ATTRACT EMPLOYERS TO THE AREA WITH PEOPLE IN THE AREA BEING POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES OR INTERNS, ESPECIALLY YOUNGER PEOPLE. THIS CAN FOSTER AND STRENGTHEN THE COMMUNITY IN PLANO, RAISING OUR RANKS BEING A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE AND RAISE A FAMILY. IN ADDITION, I WANT TO AFFIRM THAT I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE PERMISSIONF SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING IN RETAIL DISTRICTS, THOUGH I DO THINK THAT IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF PLANO'S ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY IN RETAIL DISTRICTS AS WELL. ON THE WHOLE I THINK MULTIFAMILY ZONING SHOULD BE MORE UNRESTRICTED IN PLANO STANDARDS IN FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE UPDATES OF THESE STANDARDS SHOULD HAVE THIS IN MIND. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. I' CSE THE HEARING AGAIN. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: JUST A BRIEF COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS WE'VE JUST HEARD. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY ON THIS COMMISSION WHO IS NOT STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF DART AND PUBLIC TRANSIT. I KNOW I AM. IN THE PAST, I HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO PRESERVE PUBLIC TRANSIT FOR THE PUBLIC. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CONSIDERING, ON AN ONGOING BASIS, A TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE NEW DART SILVER LINE, WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT THIS TIME, SO LIGHT RAIL LINE, STARTING FROM FAR EAST PLANO AND INTERSECTING WITH THE CURRENT RED AND ORANGE LINES AND THEN PROCEEDING OUT TO DFW AIRPORT. I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO STAY INFORMED AS TO OUR FUTURE AGENDAS AND IF YOU ARE SO MOTIVATED, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COME AND SPEAK TO US ON THE ISSUE OF TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT WHEN THAT RETURNS TO OUR AGENDAS IN THE FUTURE. I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE THIS EVENING ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS THE NEXT CASE WE'LL CONSIDER, WHICH IS ZONING CASE 2022-017 WHICH DOES CONSIDER ALL FORMS OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, INCLUDING SINGLE AND MULTIFAMILY IN ITS VARIOUS ITERATIONS NEXT TO NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL AREAS. AND THOSE TYPES OF HOUSING ARE DIVIDED INTO THREE DIFFERENT TIERS, ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF HOUSING WITH STANDARDS FOR THE PLACEMENT AND ALLOCATION OF HOUSING AMONG THOSE THREE TIERS. SO THE ISSUES YOU'VE RAISED ARE IMPORTANT AND WE ARE NOT NEGLECTING THEM. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I THINK I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT IN THE CE DISTRICT, MOST LIKELY WHAT WILL HAPPEN THERE IS THROUGH PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS IS A COMBINATION OF RESIDENTIAL, INCLUDING MULTIFAMILY, WITH RETAIL, OFFICE, ET CETERA. SO THAT CE DISTRICT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR A SINGLE MULTIFAMILY DEVEPMENT TO IN PLACE. HOWEVER, WHAT WILL LIKELY HAPPEN IS A DEVELOPER WILL PUT TOGETHER A COHESIVE UNIT, KIND OF A MIXED-USE TYPE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY. SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND SPEAKING. APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. SHALL WE CIRCLE BACK TO MR. BRONSKY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO REPEAT YOUR -- >> Bronsky: I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. WEAVE A MION AND SECOND. NOW, PLEASE VOTE. ITEM 1 CARRIES 7-0. THANK YOU, STAFF. WE DIDN'T LEAVE YOU STANDING THE WAY WE DID LAST TIME. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2022-017 - REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 9.1700 (RCD, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN DISTRICT), SECTION 10.1600 (NBD, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT), AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT OF THE DISTRICTS WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021. PETITIONER: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M CHRISTINA SEBASTIAN, LAND RECORDS PLANNING MANAGER. AS MS. BRIDGES DESCRIBED, THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMENDMENT THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN TWO ZONING DISTRICTS WITH THE CWITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021. AS A REMINDER, THESE DISTRICTS WERE FIRST APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION IN JUL O2020 COUNCIL CONSIDERED THEM THE FOLLOWING MONTH BUT TABLED THEM TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE TO WORK. IN JANUARY OF 2021, COUNCIL DID APPROVE THE DISTRICTS BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS STILL UNDER REVIEW SO THE DISTRICTS WERE LIMITED TO THE PLANO EVENT CENTER SITE ONLY, BUT COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO REVISIT THE DISTRICTS ONCE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS COMPLETE. THAT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER OF 2021 AND THEN IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR THE COMMISSION HEARD A PRESENTATIOON THE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS AND CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING. AND ON DECEMBER 19 OF THIS PAST YEAR THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS WERE PRESENTED. AS WITH THE LAST CASE, ON JANUARY 3 SOME DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON MULTIFAMILY TYPES WAS TABLED BY THE COMMISSION AND ON JANUARY 6 STAFF SPOKE WITH THE CHAIR ABOUT ADVANCING PART OF THIS CASE THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED BUT SAVING THE MULTIFAMILY DISCUSSION FOR A JOINT MEETING AND DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL AT THAT TIME. SO YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT THESE CASES A FEW TIMES SO I WILL TRY TO GO THROUGH THIS QUICK REVIEW OF THE DISTRICTS AS THEY ARE TODAY. AGAIN, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN, NBD IS FOR SMALL-SCALE COMMERCIAL USES. RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN, RCD, IS FOR SMALL-SCALE RESIDENTIAL. THEY ARE DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE BUT ALSO COMPANION DISTRICTS. THE COMPATIBILITY COULD BE WALKABLE, TREE-LINED STREETS, LOW RISE. BOTH REQUIRE OPEN SPACE BUT THEY ARE COMPANION DISTRICTS AND THEY CAN BE USED ALONE BUT NBD DISTRICTS CAN INCLUDE RCD HOUSING TYPES THAT CAN BE USED TOGETHER. THERE IS A NEED FOR THESE DISTRICTS IN THAT WHAT WE HAVE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE OTHERWISE HAS LIMITED DESIGN STANDARDS MAY ALLOW MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT OR AN INSUFFICIENT HOUSING MIX OR REQUIRE SPECIALIZED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS WHICH MAY BEPPROPRIATE IN SOME CASES BUT MAY BE INEFFICIENT TO ADMINISTER. THE NBD AND RCD ARE MARKET RESPONSIVE TO THESE NEEDS TO PROVIDE MORE VARIETY IN HOUSING TYPES AND THAT SMALL-SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD NONRESIDENTIAL USE. QUICKLY, SOME THINGS THAT ARE SIMILAR BETWEEN THE TWO DISTRICTS. THEY BOTH REQUIRE GOVERNANCE ASSOCIATIONS WALKABLE STREETS, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, AND HAVE VARIOUS BUILDING PLACEMENT STANDARDS. THEY ALSO HAVE A 2:1 HEIGHT TO SETBACK RATIO FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS TO PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM LIGHT, NOISE, AND SOME ADDITIONAL PRIVACY. FOR NBD, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR A MIX OF AT LEAST THREE USES AND, AGAIN, CAN USE -- THOSE USES CAN BE RESIDENTIAL WHEN FOLLOWING THE RCD STANDARDS. THERE IS A UNIQUE RESIDENTIAL OPTION FOR NBD CALLED THE LIVE-WORK BUSINESS LOFT. THIS ALLOWS FOR GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH A SINGLE ATTACHED DWELLING UNIT AND IT'S ONLY PMITTED I THE NBD DISTRICT. FOR RCD, THERE ARE EIGHT HOUSING TYPES DIVIDED INTO THREE TIERS. SO WE HAVE SOME SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS AND DUPLEX& UNITS FOR TIER ONE. TIER TWO IS SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, TOWNHOMES, AND AS IT IS TODAY, A MANOR HOME TYPE BUT SHOULD APPEAR AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. TIER THREE INCLUDES STACKED TOWNHOMES WHICH COULD BE SIDE BY SIDE, ONE ON TOP OF EACH OTHER OR A COMBINATION, AND STACKED FLATS WHICH ALLOW UP TO NINETIES UNITS PER BUILDING BUT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WITH ONE MAIN ENTRANCE. THERE ARE A VARIETY OF STANDARDS THAT REQUIRE A SPECIFIC HOUSING MIX BASED ON THESE TIERS BUT THE RESULTING MIX RESULTS IN THE MAJORITY OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES FOR RCD DISTRICTS. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, QUICKLY GO OVER THE ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES. SOS , THE DISTRICTS DO ALIGN QUITE WELL WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO MODIFY THEM. MOSTLY RELATE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY. SO FOR ACTION RGM-5 THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES MAKING THREE CHANGES TO LIMIT THE RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, IF IT'S AN NBD DISTRICT WITH RESIDENTIAL USES TO 50% RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO REQUIRE THAT FOR EVERY TWO SQUARE FEET OFESIDENTI USES THAT ARE DEVELOPED, AT LEAST ONE SQUARE FOOT OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES NEED TO BE DEVELOPED AND THAT USABLE OPEN SPACE AND ANY PLANNED TRAILS BE PROVIDED DURING THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. RELATED TO REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACTION 9, THIS ONE, THE PROPOSED CHANGES ESSENTIALLY SEEK TO MOVE ALL MULTIFAMILY TYPES INTO TIER THREE. SO THE CHANGES THAT YOU SEE HERE WHERE STACKED TOWNHOMES MOVE TO TIER TWO BUT MANOR HOMES MOVE DOWN TO TIER THREE. THIS PUTS L T MULTIFAMILY TYPES IN TIER THREE. TIER THREE IS LIMITED TO 25% OF THE TOTAL UNITS IN THE DISTRICT. AND THEN ALSO TIER THREE IS ONLY ALLOWED CURRENTLY WHEN THE DISTRICT HAS OVER 100 UNITS BUT TO ALIGN WITH RGM-9, PROPOSED TO ONLY BE ALLOWED WHEN THE DISTRICT HAS TEN ACRES OR MORE. THE PROPOSED HOUSING MIX IS VERY SIMILAR. IT'S REALLY JUST THE SWAP BETWEEN THE TWO PLUS THE TEN-ACRE LIMITATION BUT THAT PUTS ALL THE MULTIFAMILY USES IN THAT 100 UNITS OR MORE AND -- OR OVER 100 UNITS, RATHER. AGAIN, THEY'RE LIMITED TO 25% OF THE TOTAL UNITS IN THE DISTRICT. SO HERE WE REVIEWED THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND DASHBOARDS AS WELL AS THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS. SO THERE'S AN ATTACHMENT IN YOUR PACKET AND THIS SLIDE HAS A LOT OF INFORMATION ON IT. DON'T EXPECT TO REALLY SEE FURE LAND USE CATEGORY WITH THE NBD DISTRICT AND RCD HOUSING TYPES WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED. AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS WERE FOUND NOT TO BE IN ALIGNMENT BUT NEIGHBORHOOD CORNERS, COMMUNITY CORNERS, SUBURBAN AND URBAN ACTIVITY CENTERS, DOWNTOWN CORRIDORS, AND EXPRESSWAY CORRIDORS ALL ALIGN FAIRLY WELL WITH SOME SLIGHT VARIATIONS WHERE THE ALIGNMENT IS NOT PERFECT, HIGHLIGHTED THERE ON THE SLIDE. SO WITH THIS ININD, THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES EXPANDING THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DISTRICTS TO LOCATIONS OUTSIDE CITYWIDE WHERE THEY'RE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE PROJECTS ALIGN WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND I DO APOLOGIZE. THERE WAS A SMALL TYPO IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE RCD PURPOSE STATEMENT BUT PAGE 1 OF EXHIBIT E HAS THE CORRECT VERBIAGE. IT JUST SAYS VARIOUS USES AND SHOULD SAY THE DISTRICT. SO WE WANT TO NOTE THAT IF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DISTRICTS IS EXPANDED AS PROPOSED, WHENEVER A ZONING CHANGE COMES IN FOR AN NBD OR RCD DISTRICT, AS WITH ALL ZONING CHANGES, THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARDS WILL APPLY. EACH REQUEST WOULD BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. AND THEN P&Z MAY DETERMINE THAT THE DISTRICTS ARE NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARDS. BUT FOR NBD AND RCD DISTRICTS, P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL MAY AMEND THE BASE STANDARDS FOR EACH DISTRICT TO MEET THOSE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES. SO THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE PLACES WHERE THINGS DID NOT ALIGN NECESSARILY PERFECTLY. HOWEVER, AS THE DISTRICTS ARE WRITTEN NOW, THERE ARE A FEW STANDARDS THAT THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MAY NOT AMEND AND ONE OF THOSE IS MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DENSITIES. THE RCD DISTRICT REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 10 AND A MAXIMUM OF 20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. SO TO PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL TO UTILIZE THESE DISTRICTS AND D LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARDS, WERE PROPOSING IN THE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE EXCEPTIONS SO THAT THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL CAN AMEND THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DENSITIES WHEN THE PROPOSAL FOR THE NBD OR RCD DISTRICT IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021. ON DECEMBER 19, I THINK -- YES. THE COMMISSION ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT FREE-STANDING NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. THERE WAS AN EXISTING STANDARD IN THE NBD DISTRICT TO RESTRICT THESE BUILDINGS TO A FLOOR AREA OF AT LEAST 5,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS STANDARD MIRRORS THE STANDARD IN THE URBAN MIXED-USE DISTRICT. IT'S LARGER THERE BUT THAT WAS REALLY ADDED AT THE TIME FOR UMU TO LIMIT DEVELOPMENT OF PAD SITES. AFTER FURTHER CONSIDERATION, WE FEEL THAT THIS MAY ACTUALLY BE OVERLY RESTRICTIVE BECAUSE THE NBD DISTRICT IS DESIGNED FOR SMALL-SCALE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND IT ALREADY HAS A VARIETY OF STANDARDS TO MAKE IT -- MAKE THE DISTRICTS MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, PARKING BEHIND FRONT BUILDING FACADE, PROHIBITIONS ON DRIVE-UP WINDOWS AND SO FORTH. WE ARE PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE STANDARD TO PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR THESE DISTRICTS AS THEY COME IN. AND WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED HOW MANY THINGS IN THIS PROPOSAL ALIGN WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF OTHER POLICIES WHERE THIS AMENDMENT ALIGNS AS WELL, ESPECIALLY LAND USE, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION OF RETAIL SHOPPING CENTERS. AND, WITH THAT, THIS AMENDMENT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL PER THE AMENDMENTS NOTED IN EXHIBIT E. THERE WAS ONE RESPONSE IN SUPPORT AT THE DECEMBER 5 PUBLIC HEARING BUT NO OTHER RESPONSES OTHERWISE. AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: IS THERE A REASON, IF WE DON'T SAY 5,000 FEET, IS THERE A REASON TO SAY 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR 20,000 SQUARE FEET? IS THERE A REASON OR IS IT JUST SO UNLIKELY TO HAPPEN IN THIS TYPE OF DISTRICT THAT WE NEED TO BE CONRNED WITH SOMEBODY BUILDING A LARGE PAD SITE? MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE REASON FOR ADDING THE LIMITATION WAS TO PREVENT IT FROM TURNING INTO ONE BIG BUILDING IN AN AREA WHERE SO MANY OTHER USES COULD BE SUPPORTED. THAT'S MY QUESTION FOR YOU. WAS IT DISCUSSED HAVING ANY LIMITATION? IT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE THAT. >> SO THE LIMITATION, AS IT IS TODAY, IS THAT FREE-STANDING BUILDINGS NEED TO BE 5,000 OR GREATER AND -- >> Chair Downs: I'M SORRY. I'M GOING TO OTHER DIRECTION. IS THERE A REASON TO HAVE A CAP ON IT? IN OTHER WORDS, IF WHAT WE'RE INTENDING IN THESE TYPE OF DESIGN DISTRICTS ISN'T A LARGE SINGLE BUILDING BUT INSTEAD, YOU KNOW, I GUESS MORE MIX OF USES AND STUFF. HAVE WE EVER DONE THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER? I'M GOING TO OPPOSITE DIRECTION ON WHAT YOU WERE SUGGESTING, WHICH IS WE WANT IT TO BE AT LEAST 5,000 FEET. >> THAT MAYE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. THERE ARE A FEW STANDARDS THAT WOULD KIND OF RESTRICT OVERLY-LARGE BUILDINGS, LIKE BLOCK SIZE AND BLOCK LENGTH, BUT I DON'T KNOW RIGHT OFF WHAT THAT MIGHT CALCULATE UP TO. >> Chair Downs: NOBODY ELSE MAY HAVE THAT CONCERN AND MAYBE, YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M THINKING OF IT IN TERMS OF OPEN-ENDED BUT THE TRUTH IS THERE'S PROBABLY OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE DISTRICT THAT WOULD KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING. SO I WAS -- WHEN YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO REMOVE IT I WAS THINKING TO MYSELF WE NEED SOME LIMITATION. I WASN'THINNG ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF LIMITING, JUST SOMEBODY WANTING TO BUILD A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT PAD SITE. BY REMOVING IT, AGAIN, WE'RE GIVING THEM THE OPTION OF BUILDING SMALLER PAD SITES BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT CAPPED TO BE SOMETHING LARGER. WE'RE GOING TO RELY ON OTHER ELEMENTS WITHIN THE DESIGN DISTRICT ITSELF BECAUSE OF, AS YOU SAID, BLOCK SIZES, ET CETERA, TO PREVENT THAT. >> RIGHT. THOSE SMALLER PAD SITES WOULD BE LESS LIKE THE TRADITIONAL PAD SITES THAT WE SEE IN THE OTHER RETAIL AREAS WITH LIMITED PARKING LOTS IN FRONT OF THE PAD SITES AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO MAKE IT A MORE WALKABLE AREA. >> Chair Downs: I MEAN, THERE IS A NEW LITTLE COFFEE SHOP RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF PARKER AND CUSTER AND IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN 300 SQUARE FEET. IT'S A DRIVE-THROUGH BUT IT COULD BE WALK-UP, I GUESS, AS A COFFEE SHOP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AND JUST QUESTIONS FOR THIS POINT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL COME BACK. BUT QUESTIONS? YES SIR. >> JUST MORE OF A COMMENT. BUT THANK YOU FOR REVISITING THAT 5,000 FEET BECAUSE I THINK I MENTIONED LAST TIME I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU TAKE A LOT OF THESE PICTURES AND I THINK THE BIGGEST BUILDING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS PROBABLY 10,000 OR 12,000 SQUARE FEET AND IT'S TWO STORY. I THINK THE GOAL OF TRYING TO HAVE A WALKABLE COTTAGE KIND OF ENVIRONMENT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE PORTRAYING IN A LOT OF THE PICTURES, IS ACHIEVED BY SETTING THIS STANDARD. ALTHOUGH I DO THINK, DEPENDING ON HOW IT EVOLVES, YOU MIGHT WANT A 1,000-FOOT MINIMUM OR SOMETHING. THER ARE SOME PRETTY SMALL BUILDINGS, COFFEE SHOPS, WALK-UP KIND OF DEALS THAT HAVE POPPED UP IN THAT OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD OR EXIST IN THAT OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT THE LARGER BUILDINGS JUST, IT'S TOO DENSE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE BIG BUILDINGS BUT I THINK WE MIGHT LOOK AT 500, 1,000, SOMETHING AS A MINIMUM JUST BECAUSE I THINK YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, A TINY HOUSE POPPING IN THERE WITH A COFFEE SHOP INSIDE IT. I THINK OVERALLHE CHAES YOU MADE SINCE THE LAST MEETING ARE ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. NO MORE QUESTIONS, THEN WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. AND -- >> WE HAVE HODGE SHABIR. >> Chair Downs: WHILE HE'S COMING DOWN, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'S GOING TO SPEAK ON THIS ONE? >> WE HAVE DANIEL Y. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> HI. I DO WANT TO EXPRESS MY ENTHUSIASM AND SUPPORT FOR ITEM 2. I THINK IT'S A VERY EFFICIENT, FISCALLY-RESPONSIBLE LAND USE FOR PLANO. I THINK HAVING THAT MIXED-USE CLUSTERED LAND USE IS GOING TO BE VERY PROFITABLE. WE SEE IN OTHER AREAS WHERE THAT KIND OF THING EXISTS. THOSE LAND VALUES ARE A LOT HIGHER. I ALSO DO WANT TO ZONE OUT A LITTLE BIT AND TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE -- OVER TIME HOW OUR NEED FOR THE THIRD PLACE. SO THE PLACE THATE GO, IN ADDITION FROM HOME, IN ADDITION TO WORK BUT THAT THIRD PLACE WHERE WE CAN CONGREGATE AS A COMMUNITY HAS FADED OVER TIME. AND I AM GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE ITEMS IN THE FUTURE LAND USE AND ITEM 2 IN THIS MEETING WILL FURTHER GENERATE THOSE -- REGENERATE THOSE THIRD PLACES FROM THOSE -- LIKE MAYBE IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD CAFE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE EVERYONE GOES AND CONGREGATES TO MEET THERE. I'M SURE THAT MANY OF YOU HAVE GRADUATED COLLEGE. YOU CAN THINK OF A LOT OF COLLEGE CAMPUSES HAVE THEIR THIRD PLACE. MAYBE IT'S A STUDENT UNION OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. MAYBE IT'S EVEN A FOOTBALL FIELD. AND ONE OF MY BIGGEST FEARS GOING INTO ADULTHOOD, YOU KNOW, HAVING A JOB AND ALL THOSE THINGS IS LOSING THAT THIRD PLACE AND LOSING THAT SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND I'M IS PRIORITIZING MIXED-USE,IL- WHICH WILL HELP INCENTIVIZE THAT THIRD PLACE TO BE CONSTRUCTED. THAT'S ALL FOR ME -- OH, ANOTHER THING IS I DO THINK THAT THESE CHANGES WILL ALSO MAKE IT VERY ATTRACTIVE FOR YOUNGER PROFESSIONALS TO COME TO PLANO AND, YEAH. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR TODAY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. >> DANIEL YAHALOM. >> Chair Downs: ARE ALL OF YOU GUYS FROM UTD? >> YEAH. THEY'RE KIND OF MY GANG. SO, AGAIN, 2200 WATERVIEW PARKWAY. I ALSO WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THIS ITEM AS IS. I ACTUALLY WANTED TO BRING UP ONE ADVANTAGE OF IT THAT MAY NOT SEEM AS OBVIOUS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE FINE PRINT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS AS-IS OR AMENDED, BUT I KNOW IT'S GOING TO STAY THERE EITHER WAY. IS THAT PHASING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE BEING LARGE DEVELOPMENTS, MULTIPLE SMALL BUILDINGS IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, ARE PUT AS PART OF THE CITY ORDINANCE RATHER THAN THE INDIVIDUAL ORDINANCES THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S COMMISSION OR COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO MAKE WITH THE DEVELOPER. LAST SEMESTER WE SPENT A LOT OF ENERGY DEALING WITH THE CITY OF RICHARDSON TO GET THEM TO SUPPORT A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. AND THE GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS EVERYONE WANTED IT TO HAPPEN AND SEE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS WHERE MULTIPLE USES WOULD HAPPEN IN THE SAME PLACE. BUT THE ISSUES THEY RAN UP TO WAS THEY TRIED TO DO THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THE PD DISTRICT AND OF COURSE PD DISTRICTS DON'T HAVE ANY PHASING REQUIREMENTS BUILT IN AND SO YOU HAD A LOT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER TRYING TO SHOEHORN THE PHASING REQUIREMENT INTO A PD DISTRICT. IT PUTS AN UNDUE BURDEN ON THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE IT PUTS THEM IN CONTENTION WITH CONTRACTORS, WITH THE BANKS. IT PUTS AN UNDUE BURDEN ON THE CITY BECAUSE IT LENGTHENS NEGOTIATIONS QUITE A BIT. I THINK HAVING A REQUIREMENT BUILT IN IS A SMART MOVE AND ADDRESSES AN ISSUE YOU COULD BE HAVING WITH THESE TYPES OF DISTRICTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. SO, THAT'S IT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. MICROPHONE. THANK YOU. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU AIN TO THE SPEAKERS FOR YOUR INSIGHTFUL COMMENTS. I THINK AS WE ALL ARE AWARE, PLANO HAS PRETTY MUCH MAXED OUT ITS BOUNDARIES. THERE IS NO MORE ROOM FOR ANNEXING ADDITIONAL LAND INTO THE CITY. WE ARE LIKEWISE RUNNING OUT OF ROOM FOR ANY SORT OF SIZABLE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE FUTURE PRIMARILY IS REDEVELOPMENT. AND SPECIFICALLY I THINK TARGETING THE OLDER COMMERCIAL AREAS LOCATED ON THE CORNERS OF THE MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, SHOWING GREATER INCIDENTS OF VACANCY THESE DAYS ASA RESULT OF THE PANDEMIC AND PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, ABANDONING BRICK AND MORTAR SHOPPING AND ORGANIZED THINGS ONLINE PROVIDES AN INCENTIVE TO PROPERTY OWNERS OF THOSE DEVELOPMENTS TO TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS AND REDEVELOP THEIR PROPERTIES INTO AN ATTRACTIVE MIXED USE COMBINATION OF COMMERCIAL AND COMPATIBLE RESIDENTIAL USES THAT INTERACT WELL WITH EACH OTHER, PROVIDE AMENITIES FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION AND THE BETTERMENT AND THE DESIRABILITY OF BOTH THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. SO BECAUSE OF THE INCENTIVE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING. IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO GUIDE AND PLAN FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY, INSTEAD OF JUST LETTING IT HAPPEN AND BEING OVERWHELMED BY IT. AS AN EXAMPLE, I POINT OUT THAT COLLIN CREEK MALL IS NO LONGER WITH US WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THESE STANDARDS. IF THESE STANDARDS HAD BEEN IN PLACE, I THINK THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING ON AT COLLIN CREEK MALL WOULD PROBABLY LOOK VERY DIFFERENT. BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS, AND, OF COURSE, IT HAS THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS. I JUST MIGHT ADD PARENTHETICALLY, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT UP A STAND-ALONE STARBUCKS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, WHICH IS MUCH LESS THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET SO THE RESIDENTS CAN WALK OVER, POP OVER AND GET A GO THING. SO THANK YOU. T'S A >> Chair Downs: YOU LIKE COFFEE? (LAUGHTER) WELL, I THINK IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. I'M WONDERING, RATHER THAN JUST SIMPLY REMOVE THAT 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION, DO WE WANT TO KEEP IT BUT CHANGE THAT NUMBER? IS THERE A GENERAL SENSE ON THAT ITEM FROM ANYBODY? COMMISSIONER CARY? >> Cary: I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW? YOU KNOW, I THINK THE COFFEE SHOP YOU WERE REFERENCING BEFORE IS CALLED SCOOTER'S. AND IT'S A PRETTY COOL LITTLE PLACE. AND TO COMMISSIONER'S BROUNOFF'S POINT OF VIEW, IF THEY POP UP IN PLACES TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO LOCAL RESIDENTS, I THINK THAT'S GOOD. I UNDERSTAND THE POINT. I PERSONALLY AM NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THERE'S AN ECONOMIC DESIGN THERE >> Chair Downs: DECISION, YEAH. >> Olley: TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH. A FRIEND OF MINE JUST ENED A SCTER'S, SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE FOOTPRINT. BUT WITHIN THE CAPPED SPACE THAT IS IN PLANO, THE ECONOMICS OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL GOVERN WHAT YOU PUT IN THERE. SO UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO BE JUST BE POKING THE BOUNDARIES AND PUT A 200 SQUARE FOOT TINY HOUSE, NOT AS WORRIED. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER TONG? >> Tong: I KIND OF AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER, SHOULD WE PUT UP BOUNDARY, LIKE THE MAXIMUM? RIGHT NOW I THINK WE'RE REMOVING THE -- >> Chair Downs: MINIMUM. >> Tong: MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? SO IF WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR THIS DISTRICT TO WORK AND WE WANT TO MIX WITH SMALLER UNITS LIKE SMALLER RETAIL SPACE, OFFICE SPACE, WITH SMALLER RESIDENTIAL SPACES, IF WE PUT A BIG-BOX RETAIL THERE, WOULD IT, YOU KNOW, DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, RIGHT? SHOULD WE PUT LIKE A LIMIT ON PERCENTAGE, MAYBE, OF IF THE LAND USE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT IS THIS MUCH, THE SINGLE UNIT CANNOT BE LARGER THAN 50% OR SOMETHING. SHOULD WE CONSIDER THAT? >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS LIMITING THAT A LITTLE BIT. AND I'M JUST TAKING IT AT FACE VALUE THAT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WOULD BE THE LIMITING FACTOR. GO AHEAD. >> THAT AND THEN I WAS REMINDED, THERE IS ANOTHER STANDARD THAT N SINGLE TENANT MAY OCCUPY MORE THAN 30,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE GROUND FLOOR OF A BUILDING. SO THAT WOULD LIMIT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR BIG BOXES AT LEAST IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE. IT'S GROUND FLOOR ONLY. SO COULD GO UP. >> Chair Downs: THAT LIMITATION WOULD ALSO BE AN ECONOMIC FACTOR FOR SOMEBODY TRYING TO BUILD IT. ARE YOU GOING TO FIND THE 30,000 SQUARE FOOT TENANT? WHO KNOWS? NOT TOO MUCH. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER BRONSKY? NO? OKAY. G AHEAD. >> Bronsky: I'M VERY HAPPY THAT PEOPLE LIKE THE PHASING REQUIREMENT. THAT WAS SOMETHING I WORKED VERY HARD ON THE CPRC TO GET IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND I'M EXCITED ABOUT BRINGING ALL OF THIS TOGETHER. AND I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 2 AS RECOMMENDED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. THANKS AGAIN FOR BEING HERE AND FOR YOUR INPUT. >> 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 3, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION. THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS UPDATE - DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION PERTAINING TO SECTION 12: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JASON APRIL, THE PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS ARE WORKING TO UPDATE THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS, REGULATIONS, DOCUMENTS THE DESIGN IN CONSTRUCTION OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND OTHER ROADWAY DESIGN ELEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY. THIS WAS LAST UPDATED WITH KIMLY HORN TO ASSESS THE STANDARDS AND DEVELOP A NEW TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL. WE'RE AIMING TO FINALIZE THIS VERY SOON, THIS SPRING. THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 12 IS TO ESTABLISH THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE PROCEDURES PERTAINING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. THE UPDATES FOR THE CURRENT THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS ARE GUIDED BY THE POLICIES AND ACTIONS WITHIN THE ROADWAY SYSTEM POLICY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021, WHICH INCLUDED ACTION STEPS TOEVIE AND UPDATE TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT, THRESHOLDS, AND STANDARDS, AS SHOWN IN THE POWERPOINT. A TIA IS A SPECIALIZED STUDY THAT DETERMINES THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, IDENTIFIES ANY NECESSARY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ENSURE A SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF SERVICE ON ALL AFFECTED THOROUGHFARES AND ESTABLISHES THE TIMING AND COST SHARING AGREEMENTS FOR THE COSTS OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS. BOTH THE CITY AND LAND DEVELOPER ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSIDERING ALL REASONABLE SOLUTIONS TO MITIGATE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS CAUSED BY DEVELOPMENT, SUCH AS INCREASED ROADWAY TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND ANY SAFETY CONDITIONS. PLANO FIRST ADOPTED ITS TIA ORDINANCE IN THE LATE 1980s. THE ORDINANCE WAS DEVELOPED WHEN THE CITY'S STREET SYSTEM WAS INCOMPLETE AND MANY OPTIONS FOR MITIGATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS WERE STILL AVAILABLE, INCLUDING STREET WIDENING, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AND AMENDING THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. THE CITY WAS IN A PERIOD OF RAPID GROWTH IN THE 1980s, AND THE STREET SYSTEM WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS BUILT OUT THAN IT IS TODAY. TIAs WERE EVALUATED AS PART OF A ZONING CHANGE REQUEST OR PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT GENERATED 5,000 DAILY TRIPS OR GREATER. 5,000 DAILY TRIPS OR GREATER. THE RESULTS OF THE TIA INCLUDED WHERE IMPROVEMENTS WERE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A TARGETED LEVEL OF SERVICE AT NEARBY INTERSECTIONS. IN 2010 THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE SYSTEM WAS LARGELY COMPLETE. HOWEVER, TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WERE WORSENING DUE TO REGIONAL GROWTH AND OPTIONS FOR MITIGATION BECAME MORE LIMITED. MANY INTERSECTIONS IN PLANO WERE HEAVILY CONGESTED DURING PEAK COMMUTING HOURS AND EVEN WITH DUAL LEFT TURN LANES AND FREE RIGHT TURN LANES, THEY WOULD NOT GO TO THE MINIMUM STANDARD. AS A RESULT, THE CITY'S TIA REGULATIONS WERE REVISED TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR TIA AT T TIME OF ZONING AND INCREASE THE THRESHOLD TO REQUIRE A TIA AT SITE PLANS TO 8,000 DAILY TRIPS OR GREATER. THIS WAS INTENDED TO TAILOR THE TIA PROCESS TO LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS AND FOCUS MITIGATION OPTIONS TO ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS THAT CAN BE MADE, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT. THESE CONTINUE AS THE CURRENT TIA REQUIREMENTS IN ARTICLE 25 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. TODAY THERE'S AN INCREASING NEED TO EVALUATE THE IMPACTS O NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT AT THE TIME OF ZONING CHANGES, INCLUDING SMALL TO MEDIUM-SCALE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. THE CURRENT TRIP GENERATION THRESHOLD OF 8,000 DAILY TRIPS IS CONSIDERED HIGH. UPDATES TO THIS PROCESS INCLUDED IN SECTION 12 AIM TO MAKE THE PROCESS CLEARER FOR BOTH OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS. EXPECTATIONS ARE SOMEWHAT UNCLEAR ON WHEN -- EXCUSE ME. EXPECTATIONS ARE SOMEWHAT UNCLEAR ON WHEN A TIA IS APPROPRIATE AND WHEN THESE PROPOSED UPDATES AIM TO MAKE THE TIA EASIER TO REGULATE AS A WHOLE. FOR EXAMPLE, IN RECENT YEARS, DEVELOPERS HAVE VOLUNTARILY SUBMITTED TIAs AS PART OF THE ZONING CASE UPON STAFF RECOMMENDATION. HOWEVER, THIS HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE PROCESS ADOPTED IN THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A REQUIREMENT. THE UPDATES IN SECTION 12 AND TO MAKE THE PROCESS EASIER TO REGULATE AS WELL. TO BETTER MEET CURRENT NEEDS, SECTION 12 PROPOSES A TIERED APPROACH TO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PEAK HOURS OR TOTAL DAILY TRIPS GENERATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT. A TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT WILL GENERALLY BE REQUIRED FOR ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS, PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS, SPECIFIC USE PERMITS, DEVELOPMENT PLANS, PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS, AND SITE PLANS. A TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT WILL CONTAIN THE PROJECT LOCATION, LAND USE, AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT'S INTENSITY BASED ON FULL BILLED OUT FOR THE SITE PLAN. BY REQUIRING A TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT, THE PROCESS WILL BE MORE UNIFORM AND CLEARER TO ALL INVOLVED. THE FLOWCHART IN THE POWERPOINT ILLUSTRATES THE PROCESS FOR DETERMINING IF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC STUDIES ARE REQUIRED AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT. THE TRIP GENERATION NUMBERS FROM THE TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL -- IF AN ADDITIONAL STUDY IS NEEDED IN THE FORM OF A TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, OR REGIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. SO YOU CAN SEE IN THE FLOWCHART WHAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMT REQUESTS REQUIRE A TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT, THE TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT SHOWS TRIPS GENERATED, PEAK HOUR TRIPS OR TOTAL DAILY TRIPS, AND YOU CAN FOLLOW THAT DOWN WITH THE TRIPS GENERATED, FOR EXAMPLE, ARE UNDER 50, NO FURTHER STUDY REQUIRED. ON THE OTHER END, OVER 500, PEAK HOUR TRIPS, OR OVER 3,000 TOTAL DAILY TRIPS, A REGIONAL TIA WOULD BE REQUIRED. THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES DETAILS OUTLINED IN SECTION 12 FOR EACH OF THE TFFIC STUDIES THAT MAY BE REQUIRED. A TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT WOULD INCLUDE TRIP GENERATION DISTRIBUTION AT PROPOSED ACCESS POINTS. A TIA WOULD INCLUDE ALL INTERSECTIONS AT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH ADJACENT ROADWAY SYSTEM. AND A REGIONAL TIA WOULD HAVE THE LARGEST FOOTPRINT, AND IT'S THE LARGE PURPLE CIRCLE IN MY FIGURE WHERE IT'S TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT TIA, REGIONAL TIA. THAT WOULD HAVE THE LARGEST FOOTPRINT AND WOULD INCLUDE ALL INTERSECTIONS AT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENAND ADJACENT MAJOR INTERSECTIONS WITHIN A ONE-MILE RADIUS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SECTION 12 ALSO OUTLINES THE INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR TIAs AND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS, R TIAs. AT A HIGH LEVEL, THE MEMO WOULD INCLUDE AT LEAST THE PROJECT INFORMATION, EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE USES THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE SITE. SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE LOCATION AND STUDY AREA, EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, THE EXISTING ZONING, AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT WOULD ALSO REPORT ON THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, SITE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS, ANALYSIS SCENARIOS, AND TRAFFIC VOLUMES SUCH AS PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR BUILDOUT. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND FINALLY MITIGATION MEASURES THAT WOULD AIM TO KEEP THE LEVEL OF SERVICE AT TARGETED LEVELS. SECTION 12 ALSO OUTLINES THE ROLE OF ENGINEERING STAFF, WHO WILL EVALUATE THE COMPONENTS OF THE METHODOLOGY MEMO. THIS SECTION PROVIDES CONSISTENCY FOR STAFF REVIEW AS WELL. MITIGION SOLUTIONS WILL BE COORDINATED BETWEEN ENGINEERING AND THE DEVELOPER OR PROPERTY OWNER. THE TIA MUST PROVIDE DETAILS FOR MITIGATIONS REQUIRED WITHIN STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAY LINKS TO OPERATE AT AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE. THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY FOR MITIGATION IMPLEMENTATION, AND OPTIONS FOR MITIGATION INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT PEDESTRI FACILITIES, CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS, DEDICATING RIGHT-OF-WAY, FOR EXAMPLE. TIAs, WHEN REQUIRED, WILL BE PROVIDED AS SUPPORTING INFORMATION TO CONCEPT PLANS, PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS, DEVELOPMENT PLANS, AND VARIOUS ZONING CHANGE APPLICATIONS. BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, THE P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL WHERE APPLICABLE WILL HAVE THE FOLLOWING AUTHORITY. SO FOR ZONING CHANGES, PROPOSED MITIGATION IN THE TIA SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AS PART OF THE ASSOCIATED PROJECT. FORSYTHE PLANS, WHEN SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, THE PROPOSED MITIGATION SHOULD INCLUDE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. SO THE UPDATE TO THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS AND FOR THIS TOPIC IN PARTICULAR, WILL LIKELY REQUIRE HOUSEKEEPING AND UPDATES THROUGH VARIOUS RELATED ORDINANCES. AS I'VE MENTIONED, I BELIEVE, IN PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS. FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, CHANGES TO ARTICLE 3, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND ARTICLE 25, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WOULD BE LIKELY AS WELL AS POSSIBLE CHANGES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION PROVIDE DIRECTION ON SECTION 12 AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS, RULES, AND REGULATIONS. I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT BRIAN SHOOSKI IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS RELATE TO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. WE'VE BEEN WORKING IN TANDEM WITH THEM FOR THE UPDATE ON SECTION 12. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: SO I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE QUITE A FEW. OUT OF MY PERIPHERAL VISION, I >> I ASSUMED THERE WOULD BE QUESTIONS TONIGHT. >> Chair Downs: LET'S START WITH THIS. PEAK HOUR TRIPS. HOW DO YOU DETERMINE HOW MANY PEAK HOUR TRIPS THERE WILL BE? IS THERE A STANDARD GUIDE BOOK OUT THERE THAT SAYS YOU HAVE A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE X. OR YOU'VE GOT A 300-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX. YOU'LL HAVE Y. IS IT THAT SIMPLE? >> IT IS THAT SIMPLE SINCE THE LATE 1970s AND UPDATED EVERY YEAR SINCE THEN. THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS HAS PUBLISHED A MANUAL THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT EVERY KIND OF LAND USE KNOWN TO MAN IN EVERY KIND OF BUILDING AND HAS STUDIES, ACTUAL PHYSICAL STUDIES WHERE THEY'VE COUNTED IN SOME CASES HUNDREDS OF STUDIES. SO ONCE WE KNOW WHAT'S BEING BUILT, HOW MANY SQUARE FEET, HOW MANY RESIDENTIAL -- OR HOW MANY APARTMENTS ARE GOING TO BE IN IT OR WHATEVER THE LAND USE IS, THEN WE CAN CALCULATE WHAT THE TRIP GENERATION IS. >> Chair Downs: DOES IT BREAK DOWN AS LITERALLY 300-UNIT APARTMENT, 150 ARE ONE BEDROOM, 100 ARE TWO BEDROOM, 50 ARE THREE BEDROOM, AND IT BREAKS IT DOWN BASED ON THAT RATIO? >> IT ABSOLUTELY DOES. AND IT GIVES YOU THE A.M. PEAK PERIOD, P.M. PEAK PERIOD, TRIP GENERATIONS AND WEEKEND. ┗> ChaE PEAK HOURS? 7:00 TO 9:00? >> IT ACTUALLY HAS TWO DIFFERENT PEAK HOURS. IT HAS A PEAK HOUR OF THE STREET, RIGHT? >> Chair Downs: OH, OKAY. >> SO YOU CALCULATE THE STREET VOLUMES. THE PEAK HOUR VOLUME, YOU CAN DO THAT. OR YOU CAN HAVE THE PEAK OF THE ACTUAL UNIT ITSELF. SO SOMETIMES APARTMENT COMPLEXES, THEY MIGHT DISPERSE THEIR FOLKS FROM 6:30 TO 7:30, JUST PICKING A NUMBER. BUT THE PEAK HOUR OF THE STREET MIGHT BE 7:45 TO 8:45. SO IT DEPENDS ON -- AND WE ACTUALLY LIKE TO USE THE PEAK HOUR OF THE STREET AS OUR STANDARD. BUT OTHER AGENCIES USE PEAK HOUR OF THE ACTUAL UNITS. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. AND THEN THIS RANGE THAT YOU'VE KIND OF COME UP WITH HERE UNDER 50 TO 200, 201 TO 500 AND OVER 500, IS THAT RANDOM? OR NO, THERE'S A SCIENCE TO THOSE NUMBER RANGES? >> I ACTUALLY AM NOT QUITE SURE. I CAN GET BAC TO YOU ON THAT QUESTION. >> (OFF MIC). >> YES, WHY DON'T YOU COME UP HERE? CHAD IS ONE OF OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEERS >> TRAFFIC ENGINEER FOR THE CITY OF PLANO. I HELPED DEVELOP THIS BREAKDOWN. AND THE THRESHOLDS WERE DETERMINED BASED ON WHAT OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA ARE DOING, AS WELL AS WHAT WE ARE REQUIRING FOR OTHER PARTS OF OUR MANUAL. FOR EXAMPLE, IN SECTION 2 OR 3 WHERE WE BREAK DOWN WHEN RIGHT TURN LANES ARE REQUIRED, WE REQUIRE 75 VEHICLES TURNING RIGHT INTO THE DEVELOPMENT WILL TRIGGER A NEED FOR THAT RIGHT TURN LANE. SO THAT 50 TO 200 LETS US ANALYZE THAT RANGE. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR IS RIGHT AND LEFT TURN AND MEDIAN OPENINGS. AND THE 200 TO 500 AND OVER 500, OVER 5,000 A DAY, THAT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT FRCO,cKINN, ALLEN, AND OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA ARE PERFORMING. >> Chair Downs: OKAY, VERY GOOD. I THINK THE FIRSTHAND I SAW WAS OVER HERE. COMMISSIONER OLLEY, WE'LL LET YOU START. >> Olley: I THINK MY QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED. I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A STANDARD METHODOLOGY, SOMEBODY PICKS UP A METHODOLOGY FROM THE INTERNET AND SUBMITS IT AS THEIR TIA, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A STANDARD. DO WE GIVE THE DEVELOPER THE STANDARD TO FOLLOW FOR WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE FOR THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT OR THE TRAFFIC STUDY? OR DO WE LET THEM COME TO US WITH THE RESULTS OF SOME KIND OF ASSESSMENT AND WE MEASURE IT AGAINST WHAT OUR STANDARDS ARE OR WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE? >> I WOULD SAY, SO DURING THE PROCESS OF THE TIA AND THE RTIA, THE DEVELOPER AND PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH ENGINEERING STAFF. SO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THE PRCESS WOULD BE VETTED WHAT'S APPROPRIATE AND WHAT'S NOT. >> Olley: OKAY. I DON'T THINK THIS WAS ANSWERED. IT WAS A QUESTION GENERATED BY THE REPORT. THE 1500 TO 3,000, FOR INSTANCE, WAS THAT GROSS OR IS THAT A NET CHANGE IN TERMS OF A THRESHOLD? LIKE IF THE PUBLIC LOOKED AT IT FROM THE CHANGE PERSPECTIVE -- I MAY BE MIXING THIS UP. THE DEVELOPER STANDS TO LOOK AT IT FROM A GROSS PERSPECTIVE. WHAT'S OUR STAND? >> SO YOU'R ASKING ARE THE PEAK HOUR TRIPS OR TOTAL DAILY TRIPS, IS THAT GROSS? >> Olley: IS THAT GROSS OR IS THAT A CHANGE FROM THE STATUS QUO FOR THAT AREA WOULD BE? >> IT'S ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE THE ADDITIONAL TRIPS GENERATED BY A SITE IN A REDEVELOPMENT. SO IF YOU HAVE A REDEVELOPMENT AND IT'S GENERATING -- THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IS GENERATING 2,000 REDEVELOPMENT GENERATES 6,000, THEN THAT WOULD TRIGGER A REGIONAL. AND I THINK THIS HAS BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE HERE. SO IF YOU GO BACK TO COIN CRE MALL, THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS THERE, THE REDEVELOPMENT, DID NOT REQUIRE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BECAUSE THE EXISTING -- IF IT WAS ACTUALLY BEING USED AND THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY HAD ALMOST IDENTICAL DAILY TRIPS PER DAY, WHICH IS AROUND 55,000, SO IT DID NOT TRIGGER THE NEED FOR ONE. BUT THEY DID ONE ANYWAY, FORTUNATELY. >> Olley: OKAY. SO LET ME PHRASE IT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING. IF THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT ALREADY GENERATES 3,000 TOTAL DAILY TRIPS AND THE REDEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO ADD ANOTHER 1,500 TO IT, THAT WOULD TRIGGER A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, NOT A REGIONAL TIA, WHICH MAKES IT 4,500. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Olley: OKAY. LAST QUESTION. I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS. THIS IS AN EITHER/OR. SO EITHER ONE OF THESE TRIP WIRES NEED TO BE TRIGGERED TO GENERATE ASSESSMENT VERSUS REGIONAL VERSUS TIA. EITHER IT'S A PEAK OR TOTAL, ONE OF THE TWO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE TWO, BOTH? >> EITHER/OR. >> Olley: EITHER/OR. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER RATLIFF? >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. YOU'RE MAKING ME PUT ON MY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING HAT. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I'VE WORN IT, SO APOLOGIZE. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE A FEW LE, DYOU BASE THE TIA ON CURRENT ZONING OR CURRENT LAND USE THAT YOU USE WHEN YOU DESIGN THE STREETS? OR IT'S GOING FROM PASTURE TO 150 UNITS AND THEY'VE GOT TO DO A TIA BASED ON THAT INCREASE? OR IS IT BASED ON WHAT IT COULD BE UNDER ITS CURRENT ZONING EVEN THOUGH IT'S A GREENFIELD? >> I'M ACTUALLY NOT QUITE SURE. >> IT FACTORS AN EXISTED ZONING. THE METHODOLOGY MEMO INCLUDES A CERTAIN SET OF PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE CAN CONSIDER WHEN ENGINEERING IS HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT. SO THE IDEA OF THE MALL AS A GOOD EXAMPLE, WE CAN NOW CONSIDER VACANCY RATE AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO GET A MORE REALISTIC PICTURE. >> I WAS THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THE VACANT LAND THAT STILL EXISTS UP AROUND THE LEGACY AREA. OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE FOR THAT VACANT LAND. SO AS THAT VACANT LAND COMES THROUGH ZONING, IF IT'S A TRACK THAT GENERATES 210 PEAK TRIPS BUT IT WAS ANTICIPATED IT WOULD GENERATE 300, WILL VERY HAVE TO GO BACK AND DO THE TIA? >> IT'S BASED ON EXISTING ZONING. IF WE'RE SAYING AG ZONING, IT WOULDN'T HAVE THOSE TRIPS. IF IT HAD COMMERCIAL ZONING, IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE COMMERCIAL ZONING WOULD ALLOW AS A STARTING PLACE. >> OKAY. ON THE REGIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, HOW DID WE COME UP WITH T E-MILE RADIUS? THE REASON I ASK THE QUESTION IS, COLLIN CREEK IS A GOOD EXAMPLE. IT'S GOT MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE ON ALL FOUR SIDES. BUT IF YOU'RE UPIN AN AREA OF TOWN THAT ONLY HAS MINOR OR ARTERIALS AROUND IT, HOW FAR OUT? THE MILE MAY NOT BE ENOUGH IF IT'S A VERY DENSE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE A LOT OF TRIPS. SO HOW DID THE ONE MILE COME IN, AND IS THAT A JUDGMENT CALL BY STAFF TO SAY, I THINK YOU NEED TO GO TWO MORE INTERSECTIONS DOWN? DO YOU HAVE THE DISCRETION TO EXPAND THAT BOUNDARY IF IT'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE? >> THE ANSWER IS YES, AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE DISCRETION TO REDUCE THE BOUNDARY ALSO. SO THE ANSWER IS YES, WE HAVE DISCRETION TO CHANGE THAT. AND ON THE REDUCTION SIDE, WE HAVE SEVERAL LOCATIONS WHERE WE HAVE LITERALLY MAXED OUT AN INTERSECTION, DUAL LEFT TURNS ON EVERY POINT, RIGHT TURNS ON EVERY APPROACH. SO REANALYZING AN INTERSECTION THAT CAN'T POSSIBLY HAVE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. SO WE'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. >> OKAY, SO THE ONE MILE IS NOT A HARD-AND-FAST RULE. IT'S WHERE YOU START. >> IT'S A NEGOTIATION. >> OKAY, THAT WA MY QUESTION. >> AND IT WAS KIND OF STATED BUT IN THE BEGINNING WHENEVER THIS DOES HAPPEN, WE SIT DOWN WITH THE APPLICANT AND GO THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED BASED ON WHAT THEIR DEVELOPMENT IS. AND SO DURING THAT TIME, WE'LL DISCUSS WHAT THE LIMITS ARE GOING TO BE. >> Ratliff: AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BRIAN, BUT AT LEAST IN MY PROJECTS, THERE'S ONLY A HANDFUL OF REALLY GOOD TRAFFIC ENGINEERS IN TOWN. SO MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THEY ALL PRETTY MUCH USE THE SAME METHODOLOGY. >> THE METHODOLOGY IS STANDARDIZED. THE PROBLEM IS, BE THERE ARE A HANDFUL, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF INDIVIDUAL -- LIKE NUMBER OF PASS-BY TRIPS, THE NUMBER OF INTERNAL CAPTURE TRIPS. THE PERCENTAGES ON COMING FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. AND SO SOMETIMES SOME CONSULTANTS -- I'M NOT SAYING ALL. AND I SPENT 33 YEARS IN CONSULTING, SO I OW THIS FOR A FACT. SOME CONSULTANTS WILL SAY, MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF TRIPS GENERATED TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE SITE. THERE'S A LOT OF CONSULTANTS THAT WILL DO IT THE CORRECT WAY TO SHOW WHAT THE TOTAL IMPACT IS. >> Ratliff: THAT'S WHY WE COUNT ON YOU TO REVIEW IT. >> YES. >> Ratliff: OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: IF WE'RE GOING AROUND THE DAIS, I'M GOING TO ASK ANOTHER ONE. YOU SAID WE'RE USING OUR TRIP COUNTS BASED ON A SYSTEM DEVELOPED IN1970? FOR THE NUMBER? >> THAT'S WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED. IT'S BEEN LITERALLY UPDATED WITH STUDIES EVER SINCE. IS IT 11? VERSION 11 NOW? >> YES. >> WE'RE ON VERSION 11. >> Chair Downs: WHEN WAS VERSION 11? WHEN DID THAT COME OUT? >> 2020. >> WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. >> THEY JUST ADDED MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. (LAUGHTER) THERE'S ENOUGH OF THOSE AROUND TO REQUIRE. I GUESS THE REASON I -- I WAS JUST LOOKING TO SEE BECAUSE CERTAINLY THE PANDEMIC AND THE CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY AND HOW WE OPERATE AND WORK REMOTELY AND EVERYTHING ELSE SHOULD BE HAVING SOME IMPACT ON OUR TRAFFIC, PARTICULARLY PEAK HOUR WHERE PEOPLE HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY AND WHEN THEY MIGHT BE LEAVING. I WAS WONDERING HOW CURRENT THAT WAS AND IF IT REFLECTED TRENDS OVER THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. COMMISSIONER CARY, WE'RE GOING AROUND THE HORN HERE >> Cary: PERFECT. SIMPLE QUESTION, A COUPLE THINGS. IF THIS IS IMPLEMENTED, WHAT EFFECTS DO YOU THINK IT WILL HAVE ON STAFF IN TERMS OF WORKFLOW, AS WELL AS COSTS, IF ANY? HOW DOES THIS BENEFIT US, IF IMPLEMENTED? >> WELL, ACTUALLY, WE'RE ELIMINATING SOME UNCLEAR AREAS IN HERE, SO IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO HELP US IN OUR -- THE NUMBER OF TIAs THAT WE'LL HAVE TO REVIEW WILL INCREASE SOMEWHAT. BUT I'D RATHER TAKE THAT AND IMPROVE EAFETY AND CAPACITY OF OUR SYSTEM, WHICH IS THE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO PRIORITY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION. SO THE STAFF TIME IS GOING TO INCREASE SOMEWHAT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S VERY WELL NEEDED TO IMPROVE, AGAIN, SAFETY AND CAPACITY. >> Cary: IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO PROVIDE TRANSPARENCY TO OUTSIDE PEOPLE. I THINK IT PROBABLY WILL IMPROVE WORKFLOW. IT MIGHT INCREASE IT SOME BUT MIGHT IMPROVE IT AS WELL. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Cir Downs:OMMIIONE TO. >> Tong: FIRST OF ALL, I LOVED THE PRESENTATION. I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR DOING A GREAT JOB OF PUTTING ALL THESE COMPLICATED CONCEPTS INTO VERY CLEAR BLOCKS AND FLOWCHARTS. AND I LOVE FLOWCHARTS, PERSONALLY. AND I LOVE THE COLORS, SO GREAT JOB. (LAUGHTER) >> Chair Downs: THERE'S NOTHING SHE DISLIKES ABOUT IT. IT'S ALL GOOD. >> Tong: EXACTLY. THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, I LOVE HOW YOU REQUIRED THEM TO GENERATE THE TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORTS SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE WHETHER A TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT IS REQUIRED OR WHAT KIND OF IMPACT REPORT IS REQUIRED. MY QUESTION IS, INSTEAD OF HAVING AN ABSOLUTE NUMBER TO MEASURE THE TRAFFIC GENERATED, IS THERE ANOTHER APPROACH? MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING RELATED TO THE METHODOLOGY THAT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF MENTIONED. COULD IT BE RELATIVE? BECAUSE I'M THINKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF TRAFFIC GENERATED COULD RELATE -- THE IMPACT OF THE TFFIC COULD RELATE TO THE SURROUNDINGS. SO IF YOU'RE JUST MAYBE A CORNER SHOPPING CENTER RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE DOING A REDEVELOPMENT. BUT NEXT DOOR IS A SCHOOL AND DURING TRAFFIC HOURS, THAT SCHOOL CAN GENERATE LOTS AND LOTS OF TRAFFIC, VERSUS ANOTHER, LIKE A SMALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT HAS NO SCHOOL AROUND IT. AND THAT SAME NUMBER OF TRAFFIC GENERATED COULD HAVE TOTALLY DIFFERENT IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE STEAOF TT ABSOLUTE NUMBER WE'RE LOOKING AT. SO IS THERE ANOTHER APPROACH OR MAYBE IN ADDITION TO THE NUMBERS WE HAVE? IS THERE A RELATIVE METER OR RATE, RATIO, THAT WE CAN CONSIDER TO DETERMINE WHAT TYPE OF IMPACT ANALYSIS WE SHOULD DO? >> WELL, I'LL ADD, FIRST, AND THEN BRIAN, MAYBE YOU CAN ADD ON TO IT. I THINK IN SOME OF THOSE SITUATIONS, OTHER SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL, THERE O- WOULD BE OTHER PARAMETERS WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AND JUST FOCUSING NOTUST ON TRAFFIC NUMBERS BUT ALSO ON SAFETY AS WELL. SO IN THAT SITUATION, I THINK THE NUMBERS ARE A GOOD GUIDE, BUT THERE COULD BE INSTANCES WHERE THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE WORKING WITH STAFF FOR SOME OF THOSE ONE-OFF SITUATIONS THAT ARE MORE QUALITATIVE. >> I'LL ADD TO THAT, THE DRAFT DOES INCLUDE A TIA IS ALWAYS REQUIRED FOR A SCHOOL, A DAYCARE, I THINK A CAR WASH. I MAY BE WRONG ON THE CAR WASH ONE, BUT THOSE USES THAT GENERATE A LOT OF TRAFFIC IN AND OUT. >> Tong: GOT YOU. GOOD, GOOD, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE ELSE RESPONDING? I PROMISE I'LL GET TO YOU. NEXT TIME WE'LL START ON THIS END AND GO AROUND. >> (OFF MIC). >> Chair Downs: YOU COULD HAVE HAD A CUP OF COFFEE. GO AHEAD, MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. EVERYBODY HAS BEEN NIBBLING AROUND THE EDGES OF MY FIRST QUESTION. I WANT A DIRECT ANSWER AND THEN I'LL HAVE A SECOND QUESTION. MY QUESTION IS, WITH REGARD TO THE TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT, THE TIA, THE RTIA, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO PREPARE IT? IS IT THE DEVELOPER OR IS IT THE STAFF? >> THE DEVELOPER IS WORKING ON IT, BUT STAFF WOULD BE EVALUATING IT THROUGH THE PROCESS. BUT IT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPER. >> Brounoff: ALL RIGHT. AS A COROLLARY TO THAT, WHAT IS THE MAGNITUDE OF THE BURDEN ON THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE THESE VARIOUS ASSESSMENTS? IN OTHER WORDS, IS IT SO GREAT THAT IT MIGHT ENDANGER THE DEVELOPERS' CAPACITY FROM THE ECONOMIC STANDPOINT TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AND THUT KILL WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE A GOOD PROJECT? >> SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE WORKING THROUGH DOING KIND OF WHAT'S ALREADY IN A TRAFFIC GENERATION REPORT AT THIS POINT. AND SO IT'S REALLY JUST STANDARDIZING THAT AS PART OF THE PROCESS. AND SO LOOKING AT THE PROJECT LOCATION, THE LAND USE, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY, BASED ON FULL BUILDOUT WITH THE SITE PLAN, LOOKING AT TRAFFIC THAT WAY. >> Brounoff: I'M NOT A DEVELOPER AND I DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPER'S HAT TO WEAR. I DON'T HAVE A TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S HAT TO WEAR. WOULD A DEVELOPER TYPICALLY HAVE STAFF ON BOARD TO DO THIS STUFF OR HAVE TO HIRE A THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT TO DO IT FOR THEM AND THEN PAY THEM, INCUR THE COST OF HAVING THAT ASSESSMENT DONE? >> I'M NOT IN THE WEEDS ENOUGH WITH STAFF TO KNOW THAT. >> I KNOW OF NO DEVELOPERS EXCEPT WITH A VERY BIG STAFF, SO THEY WOULD HIRE A CONSULTANT. THIS FIRST REPORT IS CALLED A REPORT BUT IT'S LITERALLY A ONE-PAGE TABLE THAT TAKES CARE OF THE TRIP GENERATION. >> THE RTIA SOUNDS LIKE A BEAR OF A PROJECT. >> YES. THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT GO INTO THAT. THAT COSTS ANYWHERE FROM $20,000 TO $50,000. IT'S QUITE SUBSTANTIAL. BUT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT FAIRLY LARGE DEVELOPMENTS. AND I'LL JUST SAY H-E-B GENERATED 20,000 TRIPS PER DAY. AND THEN BEYOND THAT. >> Brounoff: DID H-E-B PROVIDE AN RTIA? >> YES, THEY DID. >> Brounoff: OKAY. SECOND QUESTION. I THINK IT'S WELL AND GOOD TO GET THIS INFORMATION IN HAND AT THE TIME OF THESE APPLICATIONS ARE FILED, ZONING CHANGE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USES, AND SO FORTH. BUT CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE. SO WHAT MECHANISM IS THERE FOR THE CITY TO COME IN AND ON ITS OWN INITIATIVE, YOU KNOW, CONDUCT AN ONGOING STUDY IN THE FUTURE TO REFLECT PERHAPS AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AFFECTING THE DEVELOPMENT AS A RESULT OF FUTURE EVENTS SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, POPULATION GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT OF OTHER PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, OR DOWN THE SAME STREET OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MIGHT JUST CHANGE THINGS OR REPLACEMENT OF A SMALLER IMPACT TENANT IN A PROJECT TO A LARGER IMPACT TENANT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. I MEAN, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THIS THAT WOULD PRECLUDE THE CITY FROM ON ITS OWN AUTHORITY INITIATING ITS OWN TRAFFIC IMPACT WITH A VIEW TO INS INSTALLING, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT DEVICES, SIGNALIZING INTERSECTIONS, WIDENING STREETS, OR WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE? >> THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE TO PRECLUDE THAT, BUT THIS IS DIRECTED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE APPLICANT-DRIVEN PROJECTS. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THERE'S NOTHING TO PREVENT US FROM DOING THAT. >> Brounoff: WHAT IS THERE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO IT DOWN THE ROAD? >> I'M NOT SURE THERE'S ANYTHING TO ENCOURAGE, BUT WE SOMEWHAT HANDLE THIS DURING THIS NEGOTIATION, SO SOME OF THE ZONING ALLOWS FOR MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF INFRASUCTURE. A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AND A SIT-DOWN RESTAURANT MIGHT BE ALLOWED IN A PARTICULAR ZONING. SO WHEN THEY COME TO US IN A ZONING AND THEY SAY WE'RE GOING TO PUT ALL -- EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE SIT-DOWN RESTAURANTS IN THIS ZONING. WE WILL NEGOTIATE DURING THAT TIME WHEN WE SIT DOWN WITH THEM, WE'LL NEGOTIATE SOMETHING THAT IS MORE REALISTIC FOR THE ZONING, WITH A CAVEAT THAT IF THEY DO COME IN, RIGHT, THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY COME IN AND DO A SITE PLAN THAT HAS ALL SIT-DOWN RESTAURANTS, AND WE'RE TALKING NOT JUST ONE TO TWO RATIO. WE'RE TALKING A 1 TO 10 RATIO AS FAR AS TRAFFIC GENERATION. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THE FUTURE AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF WHAT'S REALISTIC FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING CASE. >> AS AN EXAMPLE, CITY RECENTLY COMPLETED A WIDENING PROJECT ON COIT ROAD BETWEEN THE BUSH TURNPIKE AND MAPLE SHADE IN THE VICINITY OTHEIMPL MARKET SUPERMARKET. SIMPLE MARKET HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS. THIS IS NOT AN APPLICATION THAT TRIGGERED THIS THAT I KNOW OF. I THINK THE CITY SAW A NEED AND TOOK CARE OF IT. WHAT IS IT THAT THE CITY DID THAT TRIGGERED THE INCEPTION OF THAT PROJECT? AND OTHERS LIKE IT? >> WELL, THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT WAS BASED ON THE CAPACITY OF THE INTERSECTIONS THAT WERE THERE AND THE SAFETY. THAT WAS ONE OF OUR HIGHEST -- THAT CORRIDOR BETWEEN PBGT AND MAPLE SHADE WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER CORRIDORS WE HAD FOR ACCIDENTS. >> Brounoff: OKAY, BUT WHAT WAS THE FORMAL PROCESS THAT LED THE CITY TO INITIATE THAT PROJECT? IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THE CITY WILL EVALUATE TRAFFIC IMPACTS PERIO PERIODICALLY, EVERY FIVE YEARS? >> IT IS NOT ORDINANCE DRIVEN. I'LL TELL YOU WITH THAT PARTICULAR ONE, EVERY YEAR THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION GOES THROUGH A CRASH ANALYSIS OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR, PREVIOUS THREE YEARS' CRASHES. AND BASED ON THAT ANALYSIS, WE LOOK AT THE HIGHEST CRASH LOCATIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS, UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS, AND CORRIDORS. THE TOP 20 OF EACH OF THOSE THREE SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED AND CORRIDORS, WE START DOING AN ASSESS AM. WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO IMPROVE AND REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF CRASHES THAT ARE OCCURRING AT THAT LOCATION? AND WE COME UP WITH A LIST. A LOT OF THOSE TURN INTO CIP PROJECTS. THAT WAS ONE OF THE ONES THAT TURNED INTO A CIP PROJECT. WE DID OUR ANALYSIS. WE DETERMINED THAT WAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST LOCATIONS, AND WE DEVELOPED WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE THOSE CRASHES. SO THAT PROJECTITERALLY GOT SIGNED OFF ON I THINK THIS WEEK OR MAYBE NEXT WEEK. BUT OVER THE NEXT YEAR WE'LL LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CRASHES IN THAT LOCATION. I'LL BE VERY SURPRISED IF IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING BUT GO DOWN >> Brounoff: I'M JUST SAYING AS A COMPANION TO THIS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TONIGHT, THERE SHOULD BE A COMPANION PROCEDURE FOR ONGOING TRAFFIC NEEDS AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK THAT EXISTS. THE CITY HAS A POLICY. IT HAS AN ENTIRE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT EVALUATES TRAFF INTERSECTIONS, ACCIDENTS, ALL OF THAT. SO THAT'S HAPPENING SEPARATE AND APART FROM THIS. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT IS REALLY LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT OR A REDEVELOPMENT. WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT OF THAT ON OUR EXISTING SYSTEM? >> Brounoff: I UNDERSTAND THAT. I DON'T HAVE LARGE ISSUES WITH THAT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY, ALL RIGHT. I'M BRINGING US AROUND BASICALLY SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. I REALLY WANT TO FIND OUT, BASED ON WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE, ARE ERE CHANGESR ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS? COMMISSIONER OLLEY, YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP >> Olley: QUESTION. WHEN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, NEW ZONING, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, COMES IN, DO WE AS PART OF THE EVALUATION TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY FUTURE PROJECT THE CITY IS GOING TO DO? FOR INSTANCE, IF WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME ALEVATION BASED ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION THAT'S GOING TO FLOW THROUGH THAT AREA AT WILLMPAC THE TRAFFIC THAT'S BEEN GENERATED BY THIS TWO YEARS FROM NOW, DOES THAT COME INTO PLAY IN ANY WAY? >> FUTURE LAND USES ARE PART OF THAT PROCESS, YES. SO IN CASES WHERE THERE'S A PLANNED AREA THAT YOU'RE SAYING WOULD SPILL OVER TRAFFIC, YES, THAT WOULD BE PART OF THAT. >> Olley: OKAY. SO IT'S NOT JUST A SNAPSHOT IN TIME, FROZEN. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: IT INCLUDED PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT AND POPULATION GROWTH. >> YES. >> AND FUTURE CIP PROJECTS WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS. NEW ROADWAYS OR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE INCLUDED IN ANYTHING WE DO WITH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. >> Olley: SO IF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY SHOWS 2,000 DAILY RIDES OR DAILY VISITS, AND WE KNOW SOMETHING IS COMING DOWN THE PIKE IN NINE MONTHS THAT WOULD TAKE THAT DOWN TO 1,000, WHICH CHANGES THE THRESHOLD OF WHAT SHOULD BE GENERATED B WHAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD, DO WE MAKE THEM -- INSTEAD OF GOING REGIONAL, DO WE MAKE THEM JUST DO A SIMPLE TIA? OR DO WE STILL ASK THEM TO DO THE REGIONAL, YOU KNOW, THAT THE SNAPSHOT IN TIME REQUIRES? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> YEAH, I THINK THE PROCESS IS MEANT TO BE -- THIS IS THE STARTING PLACE AND EVERYTHING BEYOND THAT IS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN ENGINEERING AND PLANNING. I'M SORRY, ENGINEERING AND THE DEVELOPER BASED ON THOSE TYPES OF CONDITIONS. SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF UNFORESEEABLE CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE THAT WHERE THE PROSS IS BUILT TO ALLOW US TO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY IN THE NEGOTIATIONS. >> Chair Downs: SO WE CONTINUE, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS. I'M GOING TO ASK IT ANYWAY, IF YOU DON'T MIND. I PRESUME YOU ALL CONTAIN THE BASE TRAFFIC MOLGSDZ OF THE ENTIRE CITY SO IF THE CONSULTANTS ARE STARTING FROM WHAT YOU KNOW AS CURRENT CONDITIONS TO OVERLAY THEIR NEW DEVELOPMENT ON, IS THAT -- >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE HAVE AN INTERSECTION LEVEL MODEL FOR A.M., THE P.M. PEAK, THE MID-DAY PEAK, AND THEN A NIGHTTIME PEAK. SO WE HAVE THOSE FOUR MODELS THAT CONSULTANTS CAN USE. THEN THERE'S ALSO THE REGIONAL PLANNING MODEL WE HAVE FOR THE CITY. BUT GENERALLY, WE DON'T TOUCH THAT. WE'RE USUALLY WORKING WITH OUR PEAK PERIOD MODELS. >> Ratliff: SO THEY DIDN'T JUST OVERLAY THEIR NEW DEVELOPMENT ON TOP OF THE MODEL. AS NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME IN, YOU INCORPORATE THAT INTO YOUR MODEL AS NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME ON? >> THE MODEL IS REALLY SIGNAL TIMING, DISTANCES BETWEEN SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS. >> Ratliff: I THINK SOME OF THE ANSWERS TO A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS IS YOU MAINTAIN THE BASE MODEL SO YOU KNOW THE STARTING POINT FOR EVERY DEVELOPER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> Ratliff: WE'RE NOT STARTING WITH A BLANK SHEET OF PAPER. >> NO, SIR. >> Ratliff: GREAT, THANK YOU. >> I WANTED TO MENTION TOO THAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, WE CAN ONLY REQUIRE DEVELOPERS TO MITIGATE THE NEW TRAFFIC THAT THEY'RE BRINGING IN. WE CAN'T ASK THEM TO FIX THE AND THERE'S ACTUALLY AN APPEAL PROCESS IF THE DEVELOPERS FEEL LIKE WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE THAN WHAT THEY'RE BRINGING THAT WOULD COME TO YOU ALL, JUST SO YOU KNOW. >> THANKS. >> MM-HMM. >> Chair Downs: SO HAVING SAT HERE IN DIFFERENT POSITIONS FOR MANY -- LONG TIME, I'VE OVER AND OVERHEARD PEOPLE SAY HOW COME THERE WASN'T A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DONE? IT WAS BECAUSE IT REQUIRED 8,000 TRIPS OR MORE TO TAKE PLACE. AND A LOT OF THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS ARE NEVER TRIGGERING 8,000 TRIPS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A COMMERCIAL ENTERPRIS WITH A WHOLEOTF PEOE COMING IN OR OUT. I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE HAVE A PROCESS NOW AND SOMETHING THAT CLEARLY DELINEATES, AND WE'LL GET THAT INFORMATION. IT MAY NOT BE A TIA, BECAUSE IT MAY NOT GENERATE ENOUGH TRIPS, BUT THERE WILL BE SOME KIND OF ASSESSMENT DONE AND AT LEAST WE'LL HAVE THOSE NUMBERS. ULTIMATELY, IT COMES DOWN TO US AND WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO WITH THAT INFORMATION? HOW HEAVILY DO WE WEIGHT THAT IN OUR DECISIONS AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT? AND YOU KNOW, TO OUR VERY SHARP TRAFFIC ENGINEER OVER THERE, THE DEVELOPMENT MAY BERINGG IN MORE TRAFFIC, BUT THERE'S NO MITIGATION THAT CAN BE DONE. THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE WHAT THE TRAFFIC'S GOING TO BE, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADJUST TO IT BECAUSE THE VALUE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS WORTH IT TO THE CITY. SO ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? I THINK IT'S WELL DONE AND IT TAKES US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION IN TERMS OF GATHERING INFORMATION. COMMISSIONER? >> I COMPLETELY AGREE AND HAVE ONE REQUEST. WHERE THE DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS ARE SO I CAN AVOID THEM. (LAUGHTER) BUT I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE CHAIRMAN. I THINK IT'S WELL DONE. > WEO GENERATE A REPO EVERY YEAR WHICH IS GENERALLY FINISHED AROUND APRIL 1st. (LAUGHTER) >> PERFECT. >> IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, BUT WE'LL GLADLY SHARE THAT WITH YOU. >> I WAS JOKING. >> I FIGURED YOU WERE. >> BUT I THINK IT'S WELL DONE, AND I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. I APPLAUD YOU GUYS FOR THE WAY YOU APPROACHED THIS. >> Chair Downs: THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, THERE WERE NOT. >> Chair Downs: SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE GOOD TO GO, N DIRECTION, OTHER THAN TO -- WE DON'T HAVE MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN THIS CITY RIGHT? SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT >> NONE LEGAL. >> Chair Downs: NONE LEGAL? ARE YOU GIVING -- NEVER MIND. >> THAT GIVES NEW MEANING TO THE WORD "TRIPS". >> Chair Downs: YES, IT DOES. OKAY. LAST ITEM. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA. ANY ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE. AGAIN, THANK YOU GUYS FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT. WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 8:47. . .