Thank you. Welcome to the February 3rd meeting of the Plano Plano Planning and Zoning Commission. We do have three commissioners absent tonight. Commissioner Tong, Commissioner Ali, and um Commissioner Bronky um are all out on personal for personal reasons. So, but we do still have a quorum. So, um consent agenda The consent agenda will be acted upon in one motion and contains items that are routine, typically non-controversial. Items may be removed from this agenda for individual consideration by commissioners or staff. Uh we do have a request to remove item I from the consent agenda. There any other items that the commission would like to remove? Commissioner Bruno like to move that we approve the consent agenda as recommended by staff with the exception of item I. Commissioner Lingfelter. I second that. Any comments on the motion. Please vote. passes five to zero. All right, we'll take up item I. That's a separate item. Item I, preliminary site plan, Hagert Farm, Almanac Edition, block A, lots two and four. Assembly Hall, Restaurant, Retail, Winery, and Vehicle Parking lot on two lots on 19.8 8 acres located on the north side of Pinehaven Drive, 2,220 ft west of Spring Creek Parkway. Zoned Plan Development 51 Retail General Office. Applicants are Acres of Sunshine Ltd and AOS Land LLC. This item is for administrative consideration. Good evening, commissioners. Donna Sulovo, lead planner with the planning department. The applicant is requesting to table this item due to some financing issues. I'm happy to answer any questions. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Do we have any speakers registered on this item? There are none actually sir. Um item I the applicant is online via Zoom. Maddie Pritchard. Commissioner, does anybody have a question for the applicant? No. Okay. Commissioner Bruno. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I move that item I be tabled indefinitely. And Commissioner Lingfelter, was that you? Yes, I'll second. Commissioner Li, did you have something? Okay. All right. We have a motion and a second. Please vote. That passes five to zero. All right. Items for individual consideration. Item number one. Consideration. Public hearing items. Unless instructed otherwise by the chair, speakers will be called in the order registrations are received. Applicants are limited to a total of 15 minutes of presentation time with a fivem minute rebuttal if needed. Remaining speakers are limited to 30 total minutes of testimony time with three minutes assigned per speaker. The presiding officer may modify these times as deemed necessary. Administrative consideration items must be approved if they meet city development regulations. Legislative consideration items are more discretionary except as constrained by legal considerations. Agenda item number one is a public hearing for a preliminary replat for Park Boulevard Estates West School site number two block A lot 1 R public school in one lot on 64.7 acres located at the northeast corner of Independence Parkway and Park Boulevard zone single family residence 9 applicant is Plano Independent School District this item was tabled on January 21st 2025 and is for administrative consideration. Okay. Good evening, commissioners. My name is John Kim, planner with the planning department. Um, Plano TV, can we get the slides to the right slide? Uh, in the meantime, the item is recommended for approval subject to additions and or alterations to the engineering plans as required by the engineering department. I'm available for any questions. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Not seeing any. I'll open the public hearing. Do we have any registered speakers on this item? I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Lfelter, I move that we approve this item number one as recommended by staff. Commissioner Bender. I second the motion. All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Lingfelter, seconded by Commissioner Bender. Please vote. Motion passes 5 to zero. Agenda item number two is a public hearing for a preliminary replat for Park Boulevard estates west school site number two block A lot 2 R public school in one lot on 11.9 acres located at the southeast corner of Independence Parkway and Park Haven Drive zone single family residence 9 applicant is Plano Independent School District this item was tabled on January 21st 2025 and is for administrative consideration. Mr. Kim, you probably all just stay up there for a little while. Yeah. Okay. Just to clarify, we are on item two. Um I think the slides were messed up. This item is recommended for approval subject to additions that are alterations to the engineering plans as required by the engine engineering department and approval of revised site plan RSP 2024-063 and approval of revised landscape plan RLP2024-045. I'm available for questions. Any questions for staff? Commissioners, open the public hearing. Do we have any registered speakers on this item? There are none. All right. Close the public hearing. Commissioners, Commissioner Lai, I'll move to uh you like approve uh agenda item number two as presented. Uh you like um as recommended by staff? As recommended by staff. Commissioner Bender. I second the motion. All right. Any other discussion? Please vote. Motion passes five to zero. Agenda item number three is a public hearing for a replat for Park Boulevard Estates West School site number two, block B, lot 1R, vehicle parking lot on one lot on 3.0 acres located at the southeast corner of Park Haven Drive and Wildcat Way zone single family residence 9. The applicant is Plano Independent School District. This item was tabled on January 21st, 2025 and is for administrative consideration. Thank you, Mr. Kim. The item is recommended for approval as submitted. Commissioners for questions. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Nobody. Okay. I'll open public hearing. Do we have any registered speakers on this item? There are no speakers. Okay. Thank you. I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Lingfelder, I move that we approve item number three as recommended by staff. Commissioner Bender. I second the motion. We have a motion by Commissioner Lingfelter, seconded by Commissioner [Music] Bender. All please vote. Motion passes five to zero. Christy, I've been watching auctioneers on TV, so I'm hoping you're keep up. Would you like me to read 4 A and B? Yes, read 4 A and 4B together, please. Agenda item number 4A is a zoning case 2024-020, a request to amend plan development 71 regional commercial to include development standards for single family residents and modified standards for phasing, open space, and other related standards on 89.1 acres located at on the west side of the Dallas North Tollway, 305 ft north of Park Boulevard, located within Excuse me. Yes. Located within the Dallas North Toway Overlay District with specific use permit number 570 for automobile leasing and renting. This item was tabled on November 4th, 2024, December 6, 2024, and January 6, 2025. Petitioners are Centennial Waterfall Willowbend LLC, the Neiman Marcus Group LLC, Macy's Retail Holdings LLC, and Dillards, Inc. This item is for legislative consideration. Agenda items number 4B is a revised concept plan for the shops at Willow Bin. Block one, lots R, three, 5, 6R, 1X through 3X, and 13 through 77. Regional Mall retail professional general administrative office, eight multifamily residence units, 97 midrise residential units, 50 lot, correction, 50 single family residence attached units, open space, hotel, and vehicle parking lot on 72 lots on 76.2 2 acres located on the west side of the Dallas North tollway, 305 ft north of Park Boulevard. Zone plan development 71, regional commercial with specific use permit number 570 for automobile leasing renting and located within the Dallas North Tollway Overlay District. Applicants: Centennial Waterfall Willowbend LLC, the Neiman Marcus Group LLC, Macy's Retail Holdings LLC, and Dillards Inc. This item is for administrative consideration pending item number 4A. Thank you very much. Good evening, Commission. Molly Coriel, senior planner with the planning department. And the purpose of this item is to consider an amendment to PD71 in order to modify development standards and add additional allowed uses. The subject property is the existing Willow Bin Mall, which was reszoned to a planned development, a planned development district in February 2024 to allow for a mixeduse development with 965 residential units, a hotel, additional retail, and office space. The applicant is now requesting to amend the plan development to modify standards related to phasing and open space, as well as add single family residences as part of the total number of allowed residential units. Here is the associated zoning exhibit as well as the associated revised open space plan which will be adopted as part of the plan development if approved. And here is the associated revised concept plan which is the associated item 4B to the zoning case on the agenda. The previously approved plan included preserving the southern portion of the existing mall and then adding additional uses to create a mixeduse development. So this was the previous project scope. With this proposal, um the applicant is amending uh updating the project scope to change some of these plan elements. Uh this includes uh preserving the northern portion of the mall instead of the southern portion which you can see in this graphic here. Um allowing single family attached as well as detached uses and reducing the uh largest area of contiguous open space from two acres to one and a half acres. They're also reconfiguring the open space plan in the internal street network as a result of the redesign. However, the plan has not changed to the uh the total maximum number of units which is 965. That part of the plan has not changed. Uh, additionally, the required minimum amount of open space is the same at 10 acres and the inclusion of the hotel along the Dallas North hallway is still a part of the plan and, uh, there's still a creation of new open space to be be developed with residential uses as a part of their phasing. Previously, uh, a mid-rise residential building with about 304 units was shown at the corner of Chapel Hill and Plano Parkway. The revised concept plan now shows 50 single family attached units at this location. The single family attached development will generally follow the UMU standards for single family attached development um with the modification of allowing all units to have frontage from MU streets exclusively. Typically, um standards require that single family attached developments only have a maximum 50% of units only having frontage from a muse street in order to accommodate for more on street parking. As a part of the muse street design, on street parking isn't typically an element of that. Um however, the applicant is showing um eight internal on- street parking and loading spaces in the development. I highlighted it in those green rectangles on the screen. Um and additional on street parking along the quasi public street network is available within um 600 ft of the development as well. It's not shown on the revised concept plan. However, uh the applicant is also proposing adding single family detached as an allowed use in the PD. Um, these standards were modeled after PD65, which is the villas at Legacy West. Um, and if this is included along with the SFA, as I've mentioned, these are all a part of the already approved 965 units. So, the number of units is not increasing as a result of these uses being added. For open space, the total open space acreage required has not changed, which is a minimum of 10 acres. The previously approved plan required at least one open space area B2 contiguous acres, which was the interior open space located in the southern portion of the mall. The redesign has impacted the interior open space, and so the uh largest contiguous open space area is being reduced to 1.5 acres as a result of the redesign. And as a reminder, the phasing and the open space plan will be adopted as a as a part of the plan development. For parking, um 28 uh on street parking spaces are being proposed as part of the quasi public street network, which you can see in pink. Uh, additionally, the PD includes stipulations um requiring that only on street parking, these 28 spaces, the only use that they can be dedicated to is single family uses. So that parking can't be credited to any other use to meet their parking ratios. Additionally, there is a stipulation that requires that visitor parking has to be within 600 ft of a unit. The required parking ratio for single family is 2.25 spaces per unit. So for every four units, that's one visitor parking space. This pro the subject property is within the suburban activities c center's future land use category. And additionally, um, uh, because the proposed development is getting closer to meeting the recommendations of the suburban activity centers category based on the currently adopted PD and open space plan, um, it is meeting or partially meeting um, all related comprehensive plan policies. Here is our response map. We've received two official uh responses uh in support within 200 feet of the development. Uh the two properties are just clipped by that 200 foot buffer. So you can see the um inset of those two properties and what portion of them are within that 200 foot buffer. And additionally we received three responses uh online um one response online along with that uh those two official responses. So, three responses in favor and we also received um 10 other letters and emails which are unofficial responses. Staff is recommending approval for item 4 A and for the revised concept plan item 4B, we're recommending approval subject to city council approval of the zoning case 2024-020. Thank you so much for your time, Commission, and I'm available to answer any questions. Can you pull back up the parking deal where you have the two green squares and walk us through the parking calculations for the residential attached please? Of course. So for residential attached or detached, the parking ratio required is the same and that is 2.25 spaces per unit. So that's two garage spaces, which is typical uh and then one visitor space per four units. So in order to uh be able to meet that, all of the parking spaces that can be dedicated to that use on a via a site plan submitt um they have to be within at least 600 ft of that unit. So, um that means that if there's on street parking in the quasi public street network that's outside that 600 foot boundary of a proposed development, uh if they were to include any sort of single family detached, single family attached developments in the future through a revised concept plan and a site plan submitt. Um we would have to find that those uh on street parking spaces were available within that distance. And so is the 600 ft distance. Is that in our zoning ordinance today or is that just proposed in this PD? I believe Mike, it's not in the ordinance, but I think it's um consistent in other planned developments for mixed use. Yeah, it's in PD6500T. Yes. Okay. So, can you show me where those visitor parking spaces are? You had that site that had the two green squares on it. Yes. So that was the specific to the single family that is correct development. Those are eight spaces right there internal to the site. And then just south of that development in front of the parking garage there is additional on street parking as proposed in that quasi public street network. Um and um because that parking can't be counted towards meeting the parking requirement for any other use besides single family, that parking could be used to meet any uh parking requirement for that single family attached development. Okay. And what do you know about the parking garage there with the big zone B in the middle of it? Is that available as well? That would have to be answered by the applicant. I'm not sure how they're going to handle the parking garage. All right, those are my questions for I'm sure I'll have more. Um, um, that single family attached the standard SFA district also has a 600 foot requirement. It SSA does. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, commissioners, questions for staff. Commissioner Lingfelter. Yes. Uh uh I we've got a letter from from PISD, but I just it didn't really say yay nay or anything like that. It just kind of gave us numbers and uh it does look like uh Brinker and Rener might be pushing the limits with 900 something residents being added to the to the area. Did they when during your conversations with PISD did they show any concern with their elementary school and middle school? No, they did not. Okay. Commissioner Brennoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, when I drove by the property over the weekend, uh, there was a big crowd outside of Macy's and lots of signs on the entrance way indicating that everything in the store was for sale. Um, is is Macy's closing? I believe that is correct. The applicant can answer that question as well. So, in this plan, what would happen to the Macy's building? So, um, as a part of the revised concept plan, the southern portion of the mall, including the Macy's, is going to be demolished. Um, the northern portion, basically from Neman's um up towards Dillards, that portion of the mall is is remaining, but I believe the applicant can get in some more specifics if you would like that. Okay. Also, what would happen to Kraton Barrel under this proposal? Um, no change. No change. No change according to the applicant. Thank you. Okay. Um, and this is a question possibly for Mr. Bell. Um, I'm thinking back to when we considered the Colin Creek Mall specifically. They came to us with proposals for different design features for the different areas of the residential portion of that development and they were very creative and different and attractive. Um, can we expect to have something presented to us with respect to the single family attached here? No. So, Colin Creek has what we call a pattern book. I think that's the document you're referencing. Um, that is part of their urban mixeduse um design requirements. So, that's not required here. Okay. No, the reason I say that is I mean I recognize that this is a more abundant property and you know something needs to be done to it and um the staff has assessed that this plan is even comes closer to meeting the requirements of the suburban activity center future land use map than the than the existing plan does. But with respect to the single family attached, I'm looking at it and I see a bunch of parallel buildings with narrow muse between them. we you know and I've I've seen a similar arrangement in another project that created something of a canyon effect and I was I was hoping for something that might spruce it up a bit, you know. No. Um, a few years back the legislature passed some laws about what cities can regulate in terms of architectural materials. And so the city has taken the approach um that those architectural regulations are beyond the perview of the city unless they're voluntarily voluntarily requested by the property owner. Okay. I may speak to the applicant about that. Okay. Thank you. Right. Commissioner Lai. Um, I have a couple questions. So, do we have um an idea where's the closest school to this uh you know like development elementary school? Is there like a distance that you know like the I do not have a distance top of mind? Um but is there like a regulated like distance from you like any residential uh development uh you like to elementary school or middle school at least? That question is better suited for PIST I believe but no there's there's no um standard distance. Okay. And you like and my other question is um was there any uh traffic study for that corner uh being done because you like to me it's very close you know like um those streets it is in the corner with those there was a traffic impact analysis prepared um with the original submitt as well as this one that provided a a number of mitigations that were required but those were internally mostly about internal or connectivity from the from the perimeter street system into this property. There was not a study done specifically for the workings of the single family Muse Street system. Uh are you going to require this kind of study? It's typically not required for for this small scale development. The tip the traffic impact is more so about how does this development impact the city's street system around it, not the internal street system. Not the entrance. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? None. Okay. I'll open public hearing. I believe the applicant is here if they have a presentation. Mr. Chair, Commission, my name is Bill Dalstrom, 2323 Ross Avenue. Thank you for allowing us to come back. Uh, a lot of work's been put into this project since our approval, which was 965 units for the mid-rise residential. So, if you recall, we came back, we wanted to do attached single family. So, we took that pod over in that uh I'll call the southwest corner and we were proposing 50 town home uses as opposed to 300 mid-rise residential. So after we did that, then we decided, well, might make sense to come back with a detached development or detach a potential to do detached residential. So we did that and that's why we had to postpone it a couple times and appreciate your your patience with us on that. Um, so we are here tonight requesting approval uh with the ability to do those town homes where we had 300 units and the the ability to do the detached single family as well. But a couple things I I would like to point out on the internal parking on the town homes. We actually have 11 spaces shown on that plan that was on the screen. We had six spaces along the uh the street. We're we're agreeable to put in three more parking spaces. We could add additional parking spaces there. I know that was a concern raised. Um and uh again, as as far as the 600 ft, I believe that's a that's a standard, Mike, uh in the city. So, uh at this point, you know, uh we feel good about the development. We feel good about where it's headed. Uh appreciate your your your patience and your your consideration. Uh with me tonight, Michael Platt and Steve Leven. Steve is the CEO of Centennial. Uh I'm going to turn the podium over to Mike, Michael Platt, to make a presentation as to what we see, what our vision is. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for uh taking some time to hear our zoning case this evening. We are uh very excited about this property. We've owned it now for almost a couple of years. uh we have been hard at work on it every moment in that window of time. Uh yes, we've actually were very success very excited at our success achieving a zoning uh change uh almost a year ago to this day. Uh of course uh Commissioner Brownov to your to your question uh very shortly on the heels of that uh successful zoning change, we received a call from Macy's to say they were in fact going to close their store. Uh, and we had, if you can picture that prior scheme, we were saving the or preserving the southern portion of the shopping center between Macy's and Nean Marcus. And uh, ultimately once we learned news of Macy's closing their store really caused us to pause. Candily, I would have liked to have that information six months prior, we would have changed our plan and been able to do this one time. Uh, but by the same token, better to have it then than six months later when we were actually well underway with implementing that that plan. Uh so it did give us reason to sort of pause uh and and kind of re rethink our strategy. And I think you'll see an updated plan here that I hope makes a lot of sense in that context. And then through the series of a number of conversations that uh both our CEO Stephen and myself have had uh really learning about the market and I think what we said last time here and is still true today. We are very market driven. Uh we are really trying to not force something through here that Stephen wants or that I want, but what is right for this community, what is right for this market, what is right for this time in this place. Uh and so, you know, for us, while I love pretty pictures like the one you see on the screen today, they're really worth just about the paper they're printed on. Uh we want to see something really happen here at this asset. The asset deserves it. uh the community deserves it and we need to be able to put something on that page and and come through this commission and ultimately through city council that we believe in and that we can execute upon and I think that's what we're here trying to do tonight. So if I could just for a minute uh you can see I go through this very quickly uh and I apologize for those of you who have heard a little bit of the spiel the last time around. And I know there are a couple of new members, so I'll go quickly. Uh, but we've got a really best-in-class team. Uh, really a great platform that we're very proud of within Centennial. Just lost my screen, but okay. Um, this is really while it's probably the least dynamic slide, it it actually has a lot of meat to it. So, if you would indulge me for just 90 seconds, I'll walk through this slide. It really speaks to yesterday's suburban mall, which candidly is what the shops at willowbend is and really what we think of as a dynamic mixeduse destination of the future and really what's what's caused that to really change. Um, as you can see there on the upper left, project anchors. That's a big part of the reason why we're here tonight, right? We had three uh originally the site had five. If you recall a day back to when Saks Fifth Avenue and Lorden Taylor were on site as well, um those two anchors have long since closed and with the uh pending closure of Macy's here uh in just a little a short little while, uh you know, we really need to kind of re you know, reimagine what this asset needs to be and it's not as anchor centric and anchor reliant. Um the only thing on this slide that doesn't change is the size of the parcel, right? we're we're not we're not needing to annex more real estate or giving any back. Uh we just need to redeploy that real estate in a way that is more relevant and and more appropriate for today's consumer, today's retailer, and honestly for the Plano community at large. Uh again, I won't read through all this, but consumer shopping, sorry, spending preferences changed very much. Obviously, malls of yesterday year were built to to really uh house soft goods, accessories uh with a little bit of food. today that that ratio has flipped dramatically and it's much more about food and beverage uh experiential entertainment uh some retail accessories but really the the split has changed dramatically uh and also the most successful shopping centers around the country are what we call mixed use right they really layer in uses that aren't just a pure play retail like Willowband has been for its 20 plus years of existence and really layering in uh a resident who's who's there uh to really bring uh life to to the to the center uh in sort of those non-shopping hours. Uh an office environment that brings a worker there three, four, hopefully five times a week. Uh really, you know, feeding the gyms that we have on site, the restaurants, the the retailers, etc. Uh and then bringing in obviously hotels and other uses that really complement one another. It's not about uses that compete with one another, but really things that are synergistic and complimentary. Uh I mentioned the the change in the split in terms of uh accessories versus dining entertainment. You can see on that slide under merchandising and it has truly flipped and quite frankly we're even seeing some that are even higher than that in terms of dining entertainment. And lastly, uh you see a dramatic change in the amount of square footage. That's a product of a number of things. Uh consolidations, retailers realizing that they don't need 17 outlets in a market, they can get away with four or six. uh and really just a refocusing of those efforts in terms of their real estate. So the need for in this case a million and a half square feet is uh is really difficult and for those of you Commissioner Brown who was there earlier this over the weekend you can see this mall is uh obviously is is a challenge to tenant. Uh we have no shortage of leasing meetings around our company and really speak to uh you know what we see as the right vision, the right traction for the leasing and really if there's any one consistent theme it's less, right? We just need less small shop real estate. So, taking that real estate and redeploying it in a way that is more relevant to today's consumer, to today's retailer, to today's Plano community. That's really the task that we're that we have at hand. Um, you know, I I won't go through this. You know, we've got the great thing we do have about Willowband is it is a beautiful asset. I think I think Mr. Elean and I would both agree it's it's one of, if not the nicest asset we have in our portfolio today. Just from a pure aesthetic standpoint, it is a beautiful, pretty mall. If it were a matter of just spending a few dollars and uh changing the floor and improving the lighting and enhancing the landscaping, we would have done that long ago. But really, that's not the path forward to to success here at this asset and to vibrance. It's really about redeploying that real estate. Even that said, we've got great retailers there. We're happy to have Neiman Marcus and Crate and Equinox and Dillards and some great restaurant tours and uh NTPA. great great retailers and great tenants on which we can build a new found or build a new project. They form a great foundation, but unfortunately as they stand today, not not enough in their own right. So, here's a shopping mall today. Uh the three department stores that are currently trading. Uh as we mentioned earlier, Macy's will soon be closing their doors. I'm happy to report that we are now the owners of that of that parcel. We were able to acquire that. Uh that is part and parcel to our redevelopment efforts. Uh we have seen around the country in these redevelopments where uh a third-party entity has come in and acquired a box like that. It becomes very challenging to deal with a new owner who quite frankly you know my terms no one else's but ends up kind of being there for holdup value. Uh they tend to sort of extort you know would be developer and really try to make difficult uh a redevelopment. So, we're happy to have have gotten control of that real estate and have uh really folded it into our vision. And I think you'll see it's a been a great uh a great addition. So, this is the plan that we uh actually entitled about one year ago. And again, uh to the to the point I made earlier, you know, we were really looking at rightsizing the real estate. Uh if you can picture that slide, I mentioned about really dropping from a million and a half square feet to between six and 800,000. we were taking the the northern half of the shopping center between Nean Marcus and Dillards and uh redeploying that real estate and maintaining the southern portion of it. Fortunately or unfortunately, we didn't start with that before we got the phone call from Macy's and again had to sort of pivot and ultimately what you see now is a new plan that really starts to say, okay, um let's take that information and understand what the market has to offer. Where is the market today, you know, 12 months later, and where do we see it headed? And this is the plan that I think we've really come up with that speaks I think to what we believe is highest and best use for this real estate. Uh so maintaining a smaller footprint of the enclosed shopping center really uh giving our existing restaurant district the chance to be successful in the near term so we really kind of create a little bit of a buffer there. So there there's less disruption in that area while we're going through and redeveloping the kind of more southern or western portions of the site and then really stitching this asset into its community. today, a regional shopping center, and this one, no different, is really a sort of a an insular uh construct, right? It's a it's an enclosed shopping center. It's surrounded by a sea of parking. There's a ring road that effectively functions as a moat around the parcel. Uh and it really doesn't it doesn't really engage and and encourage uh exploration and discovery. I think what you're seeing on the page today is something that is stitched into its community. It does create great people spaces, great walkability, great synergy. Uh it right sizes that retail component, takes that prior uh retail space and redeploys it in a way that is more relevant. We are adding some high street outdoor retail that we don't have today. uh the affforementioned uh residential components in various capacities whether they be mid-rise residential, single family attached or single family detached in various um you know various configurations and then really supporting uh a great vibrant workspace and office space and opportunity the opportunity for hospitality and layering it and connecting all that together with great people spaces. Placemaking is at the heart of everything Centennial does. Uh we believe it is a differencemaker. Uh we really want to create vibrant places where people can explore and feel at home and create memories and want to come back time and time again. And I think that's what I hope you see on the page here today. Here is a little rendering that I think uh maybe uh shows the dream a little bit more clearly. Uh that multifamily phase on the left is where there's a Macy's box that sits today. Uh the commissioner asked a question about Kraton Barrel. You can see Kraton Barrel there front and center. uh along with great retailer in Equinox and the ability to add kind of one more kind of like-minded space as we you know align road work or roads with the existing road network and bring in that new central green space that becomes really the heart of the 50ard line of this of this property. Um this is a new green space. You see clearly there Neiman Marcus a really key anchor for us. The uh a new front door on the shopping center the the you know reduced footprint shopping center. A great opportunity for the kind of high street retail and those kind of outdoor cafes and people spaces. Uh places for people to congregate to shop to exercise to just relax uh and and hopefully enjoy themselves here in what we think is really great property. Um, and then lastly, I think the last image I have in here, and um, and then I'll kind of stop, but uh, you see, uh, this is a sort of a again a very quick take, a little excerpt there on on what a single family attached, uh, product might look like in this context. Uh, we envision great new branding, great streetscapes. You see great sidewalks and walkability. On the left there is a community dog park. A dog park not intended just for users of, you know, on this site, but really for the community at large. So, a great place to kind of meet and greet and uh and really kind of come and enjoy and experience what the new Willow Band has to offer. So, quick walk through. I think that is my last slide. Oh, no, I'm sorry about I have one more. Just a little bit of branding. Um one rendering of this is the existing restaurant district. Uh this is something we have our leasing team focused on um every day candidly. We actually reviewing deals uh just last week. uh you know we we've had a great uh infrastructure here for quite some time. It's not been given the attention and the success that it deserves. Uh so this has really become a renewed effort. And with this new plan, we feel like we've armed our leasing team with the ability to bring in some vibrance here and really help support those restaurant tours who are on site and really thrive in the critical mass and the environment that I think you see on the page there. The last slide is just a look at some branding. Uh again this is just here more to really talk about or just sort of illustrate the uh the depths to which we really look at as we as we talk about redevelopments uh and really talk about branding here. You know Willow Bend is a is a brand that is not just the shops but it's you know kind of the the the entire kind of sub area and uh we feel like we want to kind of pivot from that a little bit but but respect the history. Uh so you see we've kind of come up with this uh this new logo this new mark called the bend. Uh we're playing with a very fashionforward color palette and looking at things like advertising, leasing brochures, and even there on the bottom right, you know, what what kind of uh barricade graphics can we put on during construction. So everything no no detail is too small. Uh everything is important. Thank you very much. That is I hope yes my last slide. Thank you very much. That was timing was very good. Thank you. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Um I I'll start the uh first of all still very impressed with the project. It's equally as impressive as the first time we saw it. So excited about the opportunity. Um excited to have y'all redevelop this asset and and bring it back to life. So thank you. Um uh but do have a couple of questions for you um that I I'd like to kind of walk through just um and then I'll turn it over to the rest of the commission. the single family attached um concerned about parking. Yeah. So, in looking at it, I understand the 2.25 spots per unit of in this particular case, the two are all in enclosed garages. Um but the visitor parking and overflow parking has been a problem in these neighborhoods um that has been a concern um by multiple commissioners and and the staff as well. So, I know we have 10 site 10 spots on site. We have an additional six on the adjacent street. Um, but talk to me about the parking garage adjacent, which I know is right across the street. The restrictions on that with the would somebody having a Super Bowl party, could ne friends and neighbors park there? Um, what what is the opportunity? What is the access to that garage look like long term? Yeah, perfect. So, just a just a minor clarification, we do have 11 on site within that parcel and six across the street. So there are actually 17 that parks at a 2.34 today. So we were careful to be in excess of the 2.25 that was required or was recommended. Uh but yes, there is you can see a a north of a thousand space parking garage immediately adjacent to this site. Um you know there's the way that these shopping centers work, we we actually can't earmark any parking for any single use. uh whether that be a residential use, a retail use, uh you know, just that it's not the way things work now. When we build something new, we can we can do that. So, that's why you see parking decks in the uh in the in the in the mid-rise residential and obviously garages in the uh in the single family product are obviously not up for debate. Um but absolutely anyone who if there's a this would be the best place to host a Super Bowl party if you had 20 guests coming over. I mean that can be tough to find in a residential parking street but here we do have a thousand space parking garage that would be open to that for that user. Uh it's not something that we dedicate uh but it is available parking on site and is allowable. Uh but for for any user here again the only example I would give you is you know we have plenty of retailers who ask for dedicated parking. Can I put up some signs and say you know Equinox parking only or Neman's parking only and we the REA doesn't even allow us to do that. those parking stalls. The stall right in front of Neman's front door is available to Kraton Barrel and the stall right in front of Equinox is available to uh you know to Whistle Bridges. It just there's there's it's it's a cross easement agreement and and uh you know any user on this site has the ability to park in any site any any available parking space. Okay. So just to make sure I'm clear so that parking garage is part of a cross parking agreement that applies to the entire property. It it does apply to the car property. There there is a there is an REA reciprocal easement agreement that covers this 89.1 acres and uh you know that's that's what we are are bound to for any use we bring to the site. It controls parking, it controls maintenance, security, upkeep, you know, all landscaping. There's a whole whole swath of issues that that covers. Uh and that's how we you know we will maintain the green spaces for instance. So there there's no uh you know all those all those common area uses and spaces are are clarified in terms of you know their usability and and who's there to maintain them within that document. Okay. So I'm going to give you a hypothetical that's really not a hypothetical because I used to live in a neighborhood like this. Um some of the residents are going to have three cars. They just are. or they're going to have half a garage full of stuff and two cars and not be able to get their cars in their garage or get all their cars in their garage and they need overflow parking. Is there a scenario by which they couldn't use on a day in and dayout basis that parking garage for that overflow parking? You know, we we have we are doing this around the country and I know we are trying to control where people speak, you know, park. Um, but I mean I don't I know we we've had some issues in Chicago where we've had to sort of get people to move their cars periodically just like you would if you parked your car on a street and leave it there forever and it's or it's it's got a flat tire that's sitting there for a couple weeks or our security team is going to kind of flag that and you know kind of ask you to move along or do something about it. But uh in general no the spaces are available for parking. Overnight parking is allowed especially if we now have you know residents on site or hotel guests on site. we fully expect, in fact, encourage and want overnight parking. So, it's not a matter of u you know, you're going to have to move your car along. Like I said, if if you're there for some extended period of time and it looks like the car is not being well cared for or you know, you may get a little note on there, but uh you know, that's really just to make it a safe and comfortable space for for all. Sure. If I've got an inoperable car on the street, that's an issue, too. So, okay. All right. Um let me turn it over to the rest of the commission. See if they have questions for you. Commissioner Lanfelter, that was uh Thank you, Commissioner Ratliff. That was actually one of my big questions was the parking and you've you answered that well and uh relieved some of my concerns. Uh another thing I had was so is this self-managed? Is this you guys it sounds you keep talking about leasing team and stuff. Are you self-managing this? What are your what are your plans as far as do you have like event center type things? How do you draw how are you drawing in the community into this? I know that you're populating it. Sure. But you're going to need to really bring in the community. What are some of the plans and thoughts that you have? It looks like you have an event center kind of thing in that food area, but I was curious. We do. Yes. So, we are, you know, very proud of our our platform. It's a very vertically integrated platform. We have really all disciplines inhouse. Uh we actually don't third-party anything. So, we have our leasing team, our events team, property management teams, leasing teams. Uh I'm on the development team. Uh so that is all under our shingle and uh we we will absolutely um you know leverage that platform to drive events in that green space. It's a it's a big source of of activity for us and what we do for our retailers. So even today the shopping center you know there are events I'm sure you've been to gymnastics events or bands and you know there are local community events that they host in the Nean Marcus Court and down to Macy's and Dillards. uh you know the the actually the center team is clamoring for a great outdoor space and actually a space of great of greater scale where they can do things like movies in the park and concerts in the park and farmers markets and festivals and you know all those things will be handled by our internal and our our mall property teams uh both at the corporate and at the property level and again a great source of uh of pride for us and really putting on great great events. Great. Great. Yeah, because uh company I work for, we have we have a mall in Fort Worth called Lra Plaza and you might be familiar with some of that. We're really successful mall, one of the most successful in the country right now because and uh but they cater to the demographics and they and they do events every every weekend and you know concerts and and meet the p public whoever you know a celebrity or whatever. Sure. And um I was just curious if you were going to kind of take that approach and and bring the the Plano community in and try to pull them into this this space that has been somewhat dead. Um 100% we're going to do it as often as we possibly can. That's that's really the intent in that green space that was uh this space this space will be a great uh a great venue for that. You see we even showed a kind of a reader board there on Ne Marcus that will be offering you opportunities for movies in the park and um there'll be no shortage of events in this space. I think we can't build this fast enough for our property and our events teams. That's good to hear. Commissioner Bruno, hang on. Did I? There you go. Okay. Thanks. Gee, um used to be so simple. Uh um when this case came to us a year ago, at that time there was a request by a local children's theater group not to be moved out of the mall or not to have their space demolished around them and you worked out an agreement with them which we were happy to see. Is that agreement still in place with this new proposal? It is indeed in fact their space in this they that that large space uh near the near Dillards and near the uh the parking deck kind of on the north part of site is that space and that space in this plan I'm happy to report remains intact. So we actually don't even have to disrupt their operations at all. They are business as usual and can enjoy seeing all the activity around them and hopefully the the increased traffic and vibrancy that comes along with it. they are unimpeded from from their course of business um for as long as they're willing to stay and be a part of our family. Okay, good. Um I mean I recognize that this property, the original mall, is in need of of major re redevelopment which your company is providing and that's a good thing. Um, the only comment I would make and please take this only as a comment. Okay. This is not something that I would think of putting in in a motion because I'm advised that we can't. Not yet. Okay. So, I won't uh and it's not something I'm that I'm I'm raising to the level of a requirement, but it is perhaps a suggestion and a personal hope. Okay. that uh with respect to the single family attached portion of this uh of this project uh it would be in the interest of your company, the interest of the residents who live in those units and in the interest of the property as a whole uh that you put your designers to work making this as aesthetically as attractive as possible. and I will leave it there as a hope um and leave it to you to do what you think is best. But um I I hear you loud and clear. We we share the same hope. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bender. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Um, first of all, thank you so much for all the hard work that you have put in because our community needs this redevelopment and and we're excited about this redevelopment. And you know, when you think about redevelopment in Plano, for some that have been around for a while, they're they're like really redevelopment, but that's that's the future. And when I when I think about redevelopment, especially with, you know, uh the bend, right, that you're calling it, it's I think about thoughtful redevelopment. And those of us here, you know, live in Plano and we live here, we've lived here for a long time. So, having lived in a in the villas at Legacy West for six and a half years, I was the first to sign a contract there. So, I have some experience living in a dense urban environment like that. And as the commissioner alluded to, there is what's on paper and then there's reality. And reality is being able to get a fire truck down a street, an EMS unit down the street close. What you find is the regulations have changed where there's going to be a fire line that's that's stri which is great for enforcement. Uh but what you find is residents park in the back of their garage parallel to the to the house, things like that. So as as you talked, it's going to require quite a bit of policing. Um because when those things occur, when you think about construction that's occurring and subcontractors parking large trucks and making large deliveries, it's impossible to get around a development like that. And so I would uh suggest as Commissioner Bruno has said that it is very difficult when you live in an in an environment like that where there could be need for and there has been right EMS fire trucks things like that to get through and many people have you know multiple vehicles right not just two that fit in a garage or 2.25 25 right so it doesn't work exactly like that so um I think if there's something that you can do to allow I understand the economics fully understand that but uh I would tell you that um in other developments I've seen people have left because of those environments so when you think about the branding and you think about the value that's something from a development standpoint you should think about so um with that I appreciate your your hard work, but I would ask you to look at anything that you can do to add more parking and certainly police that um as it's being developed. It'll make everybody's life nicer. Great. Thank you for your comments. Thank you. Commissioners, other questions for the applicant? Nobody. All right. Do we have any other speakers on this time? Thank you very much for your time. Well, we we stay stay close. We may have more for you. Sounds good. Thank you. There were three registered speakers. Um all three are applicants. Okay. We also have three registered opinions for both items and support. Okay. All right. So, nobody else from your team. All right. Well, then I'll close the public hearing. Restrict comments to the commission. Um, I I'll lead off by saying that I I am probably one of the biggest doubters about parking because I like Commissioner Bender uh lived in a community that was very dense like this and we had a lot of parking challenges and and emergency access challenges. We've addressed the emergency access challenges with striped fire lanes, which is a huge improvement. Um, and I I know they have met the requirements of the 2.25 25 on site. Um, and while I normally wouldn't be comfortable with that, I'll be honest with you, the fact that there's a parking garage adjacent that is in an REA gives me some comfort to that. And so, um, the the challenge there is that that's not part of the zoning ordinance, but it is part of the site plan. So, if in the future the plan ever changed to eliminate that parking deck and build another building of some sort, we would still have, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Bell, we would still have an opportunity to review how if if that garage went away, what was going to go in its place and have a chance to readress this parking issue if that were to happen at some point in the future. Is that correct? That's correct. It would require a s I plan to demolish that structure and replace it with other parking and you'd get a chance to evaluate the parking at that time. Okay. And the fact that it is open and available and frankly it it actually helps my comfort level knowing that somebody will be policing it so there aren't a bunch of cars parked there long term or somebody leaves a boat there for 6 months or something. That actually gives me more comfort, not less. Um, so thank you for addressing my concerns because that that is a major issue for those very dense residential areas. With that said, a A+ first class excited about the project overall. I thought I liked the first one. I think I like this one better actually. So I think the extra time uh has actually produced a better product. So I do want to compliment you on that. Um, and with that said, I'm going to open it up to other commissioners. Commissioner Lanfelter, I'd just like to basically just agree with everything you said there. It It looks It looks great. It's in line with what city council's vision is with the Big 10 being one of the items in the Big 10. And uh and it and I think I'm going to go ahead and make make a motion to approve this as recommended by staff. Uh 4A, correct? For 4 A. Yes. Okay. Um Okay. Let Or can I do I do it? Why don't you hang on just a second? I think we may have some other commissioners that want to um make a comment. I'll come back to you to allow you to make the motion. Commissioner Ali. Uh well, I agree. You like the project looks very beautiful, the renderings and the vision for the space and and I think it's it was needed for this mall specifically, but I still, you know, like have a reservation on the residential on that corner. I think it's you like the muse ideas and you like the narrow streets and the density there. Um I you like I don't think it's very appropriate for uh this kind of site. So I just wanted to put my opinion on there. Thank you. Commissioners other comments? Nobody. Okay. Commissioner Benner. Yeah, I just had a comment. You know, the [Music] um developments like this today are really uh where things are going and I think it's the you know, we like to refer to as live, work, and play close. And so I think that's very important. And um I can tell you despite the parking issues, living in a dense urban environment like that where you can walk to a Starbucks or walk to a restaurant, things like that are pretty convenient. um you know this development um even though it's being converted um you know the schools are very close the feeder pattern is very good so very very strong so um you know it's an incredible development it's a lot of work it takes years to get to get this done so I can appreciate all the work and effort and you know as you know we have seen these before with this site so over a period of time so Um, you know, I I as a as a resident, I would love to see this happen and and move along. So, thank you very much for your hard work. And I think it uh the mixture of housing types is really important. Um, and uh, unfortunately, it's expensive land, right? So, that's just the way it is. But, thank thank you. All right, Commissioner Lingfelder, back to you. All right. I make that same motion that we uh recommend approval for 4A as recommended by staff. Unless I can do both. I I we're not doing them together. We need to do one at a time. That's what I thought. Yeah. Commissioner Bender, I would second the motion. Right. Any other discussion? Commission. All right. Please vote. That motion passes four to one. All right. Item [Music] 4B. Commission. What's your pleasure? Commissioner Bruno. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that we approve item 4B as recommended by staff subject to the city council approving item 4 A. Commissioner Lingfelter. I'll second. Commissioner Bender, did you have a comment? I will second. Yep. Another second. Okay. All right. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Anybody? Okay, please vote. Motion passes 4 to one. Thank you, gentlemen. We appreciate all your work on this. We're looking forward to the grand opening. Oh, it's okay. All right. Item 5 A. Would you like read five 5 A and B together, please? Yes, sir. Agenda item number 5A is a request to reszone from commercial employment to planned development commercial employment on 10.9 acres located at the northeast corner of Spring Creek Parkway and Communications Parkway zoned commercial appointment and within the Dallas North Toway Overlay District. Petitioners are BC Family Partners LP and Bacas Family Partnership LP. This item is for legislative consideration. Agenda item number B 5B is a concept plan for Arabella edition block A lots 1- 16 and 1X through 3X, blocks B, lots 1 through 11 and 1X and blocks C lots 1 through six and 1X. This is for 33 single family residents detached lots and five common area lots on 8.6 6 acres located at the northeast corner of Spring Creek Parkway and Communications Parkway zone commercial employment and located within the Dallas North to Overlay District. Applicants Bacus Family Partnership LP and BC Family Partnership LP. This item is for administrative consideration pending agenda item number 5A. Right. Thank Thank you. Thank you. Right. So the this subject the subject property is located at the northeast corner of Spring Creek Parkway and commun communications Parkway. It is currently undeveloped. Here is the associated concept plan item 5B and you'll see that there are 33 uh single family lots proposed. So the item is a reszone uh from commercial employment which is the current zoning today to plan development commercial employment. So the purpose of the PD would be to allow either um the property to to be developed in accordance with commercial employment or in accordance with SF6 standards single family 6. So the property is located in the legacy business area and is adjacent to the Dallas north tollway corridor. The legac legacy business area includes all CE and central business one zoning south of the Sam Ravern to Tollway in the Dallas North Tollway intersection. Commercial employment zoning is specifically designed for the legacy business area and focuses on corporate headquarters research facilities in a campus-like setting. Both sides of the DNT corridor south of Spring Creek Parkway are primarily zone regional employment and regional commercial which do not permit single family uses. Communications Parkway and Parkwood Boulevard have historically provided a consistent dividing line between the commercial corridor and adjacent neighborhoods. The request is inconsistent with the wellestablished zoning patterns and zoning districts in this area. The subject property is located within the employment centers category of the future land use map. The employee the employment centers category primary uses include corporate offices, medical centers, educational facilities, techn technology centers, and research facilities. Residential uses are not appropriate within these centers in order to ensure the city's ability to attract and maintain employment generating uses. The priority is to maintain land for employment generating uses. The request is also not consistent with the goals of the undeveloped land policy. The undeveloped land policy prioritizes business offering businesses offering skilled employment. New housing in the the area will only be considered appropriate where where it is consistent with a future land use map and other related comprehensive plan uh priorities. The proposed request for single family does not reserve undeveloped land for high quality employment and is therefore inconsistent with this policy. Uh to the north of the subject property is a fourstory independent living facility that is nearing completion. And to the east there is an approved concept plan for two 22story independent living facilities with a fourstory and fivetory parking garage. U a part of one of the 22 story towers uh the northern one is proposed within 100 ft while the whole site is within 400 ft of the residential or the subject property district. As a result, future residents may suffer from negative effects of lighting, noise, and shadows from the adjacent buildings. The plans for adjacent properties were originated prior to a recent ordinance amendment that no longer permits new independent living facilities within the CE district. Within the zoning ordinance, there are several sections that provide separation, screening, and other protections for neighborhoods adjacent to commercial developments. In the CE district, when a non-residential use is adjacent to a residential district, buildings must meet setbacks with different proposed building heights. With the proposed 22tory buildings, the CE district would typically require these buildings to be located more than 800 ft away from the district boundary. Because this will remain as a C district, these pro protections will not be applicable and they will not protect the uses. In article 13, it provides additional protections for residential districts adjacent to non-residential buildings. Based on this setback requirement, the proposed towers would need to be located a minimum of 475 ft away from the residential district. And on the screen is the formula that is uh in the zoning ordinance. So, the applicant is requesting a PD stipulation stating this zoning will not be considered a residential district or zoning district, thereby exempting the adjacent sites from the setbacks requirements. As a result of these exemptions, the single family homes will not be provided the same protections typically afforded to other standard neighborhoods. Two access points are proposed. Um, one is along Spring Creek Parkway and one is along Communications Parkway. So, the figure on the left shows the proposed access to the site. Um, you can see there is the a full median opening proposed along Communications Parkway on the west side and then there is a access point from Spring Creek. It there is a hooded med hooded left median directly in front of them. So, they can only turn right outside right out of the neighborhood. And so that will only be the two access points. Um there will be no cross access with this development with this proposed use. If on the figure to the right, if the commercial if the property is developed as a commercial use, um there will expand opportunities for more cross access. Um, as shown here, this is just a potential mockup that shows, you know, that a potential cross-axis is possible with commercial uses. And you can see it connects both properties to the north and to the east. And it provides greater median access for the subject property. and so therefore there's more connectivity and less access challenges. There are other elements to consider with this request. The driveway spacing along Spring Creek Road is proposed to be reduced from 235 ft to 145 ft. Also, typically non-residential districts must build screening walls when adjacent to residential zones or residential districts. The applicant is proposing to build 8 foot masonry walls along the northern and eastern boundaries and these will be the ones adjacent to the independent living facilities and screening is also required along the third affairs and is proposed on the concept plan. There is also a request to not require primary entrance in the subdivision as required by the subdivision ordinance. So here are the proposed plan development stipulations so we can refer them with questions. In essence, the purpose of the resoning is to allow the building of residential lots in accordance with single family 6 standards without changing the base zoning. This will not provide the protections typically seen for residential uses and the purpose does not appear to be consistent with the purposes of plan developments. The request is inconsistent with the priorities of the comprehensive plan. We received one official letter uh that is shown neutral and as of Friday at noon we received a total of three responses. Uh but since then we have updated um with 11 total responses received including the official letter. uh 10 of them are in support and they are they were included in the packet you receive at the POM meeting. And so in summary, the request is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Um it goes against the wellestablished land use u patterns within the legacy business area and the Dallas North toway corridor and it does not support the single family resident 6 development. Excuse me. Um because of the PD stipulations, the typical residential protections will not be provided for this subject property. Um there are some access and design issues, just less connectivity um to the site compared to commercial uses. And then the proposal is not consistent with purposes of a plan development. So the recommendation for item 5A is recommended for denial for the findings policy. This request must be found consistent with the guiding principles of the comprehensive plan and substantially beneficial to the immediate neighbors surrounding community and general public interest if the commission wishes to recommend approval to the city council. Item 5B for the concept plan is recommended the commission take action consistent with agenda item number 5A. If approved by the commission, staff recommends the approval be subject to city council approval of zoning case 2024-027. and I'm available for any questions. And the applicant is also here with the presentation as well. Um, one question real quick. Can you go back to the plan that shows the adjacent developments, please? Didn't write down your slide number. I apologize. There it is right there. Do do we know or do we have any knowledge about what's happening west of communications? Has there been anything approved on the west side of communications? Not at this time. And then south, is that all the Lexus property now? Have they finished building that out? So there there's portions of undeveloped property down there. There is a um I think a school, there is an office, but there is also um undeveloped portions. So, it still um kind of makes that that at that point and and anything pending there at this time or anything that's in process? No, it's just undeveloped pads that have not yet come in for development. I think the Lexus is a little bit further to the east, closer to the tollway. Okay. I couldn't remember how far back it went and I didn't get a chance to drive up there. So, um Okay. Um commission questions for the staff. Commissioner Lfelter. So, that that school's that challenge school or isn't that what that one's called? I think yeah I I don't remember the exact name but I believe it was but um I I I've been going back and forth after going through this per over the weekend and um I I know you mentioned connectivity but it does look like they're they could potentially connect up north right where I got that plane right there. It doesn't necessarily have to go through the site. They could actually connect that that northwest and then the east could connect where they do a joint where they do a butt at the top right. Is that because it looks like it's just parking lot. So there could be a potential connection but it may be hard to transition from because we need a a street like a street layout um for this subject property for homes to be developed on. But then and the other side is just a fire lane. So, I think there may be some challenges um connecting those two together, but Okay. And it and it sounds like the developer is is or the the the um applicant is ask is asking and taking on a lot of the costs of like the the screening walls and a lot of the typical things that many times get thrown onto the adjoining properties. Um so that that's a good thing. But um one of the things I was trying to figure out is I was trying to follow the the the thought pattern what they're doing. Um how do we keep it sounds like they're keeping it from being a restriction on the adjoining properties you know where you know where the what would carry a typical residential use. Um h how are how is that totally being maintained and keeping making it so that those tall buildings can be built and different things without any restrictions on them right so there are two sets of setbacks the base C has based on residential zoning those would not apply here because the request is to maintain CE so it would become a non-resident it would maintain its non-residential zoning the second set of setbacks is based on residential district which is use or zoning Um, in this case, those properties to the north is already being built, so they have rights. The property to the east has a concept plan, which they're vested in that plan. And but if that expires or should something else happen and that not get built, then these setbacks would typically have applied in that case. Yeah, that's what I was worried about that right with this zoning, they're saying, okay, we're just we're going to wave those requirements and say this will not be considered resident residential district. Therefore, it doesn't affect the property to the east should those plans expire. So, they're just taking on the risks of the residents that they're they're building for that they're going to have those those uh problematic situations as neighbors that you wouldn't typically want next to a res basically, right? They're they're the the standards that we would typically afford to a residential neighborhood would not be applied in this case. Yeah. Commissioner Bender. Thank you, Comm uh Chairman. Um Mr. Kim, uh, the best that I can remember, you have, uh, Parkwood that runs parallel to the tollway uh, on the east side and then you have communications that runs parallel to the tollway on the west side of the tollway. And that's what I can remember. all the way from Willow Bin Mall all the way to 121 on the east side of communications, there is no single family housing. And same as on Parkwood, if you if you look at Parkwood, the best that I can recall, um on the west side of Parkwood, there was no single family housing. And you know, that's really meant from my question and my perspective is is really about land use. Is this the right way land use? So when you think about that, those buffers along the tollway, there is currently and hasn't historically been any development. Is that is that correct as far as you're concerned or your Yes, that is correct. But I would like to add that there are some single family units within mixeduse areas such as Legacy West that have different standards that they're built with in accordance with mixeduse standards. And so there's different development standards than a traditional single family six. Exactly. Very different environment. Right. Thank thank you commissioners. Any other questions for the staff? Nobody. All right. I'll open the public hearing and we have a a presentation from the applicant. You could introduce yourself. Good evening. My name is Jerry Silo with JBI Partners, 2121 Midway Road in Carolton. Uh we do represent the applicant this evening. We appreciate everybody's time obviously. Uh and thank you for letting us be here tonight. Uh what we are proposing is a three a 33 lot neighborhood of single family detached homes on about 8 and a half acres uh at the northeast corner of Spring Creek Parkway and Communications Parkway. Uh we are proposing the single family six development standards. So that would be a 6,000 foot lot minimum and a 55 foot wide lot minimum. Uh these are all proposed for for sale homes. They will all be front entry with a twocar garage and a twocar driveway. Uh the houses will be set back per typical standard uh SF6 development standards. What I do want to make clear right up at the front end is this. This is not a speculative neighborhood. Uh there is a builder that intends to build these 33 homes. Uh they are very aware of the situation. They are very aware of the location. uh they are very aware of their customer base and do not have a problem with being uh a neighborhood this close to uh the Dallas North Toway. And in fact, you know, uh the home builder is uh Starside Custom Builders. Uh they build in the preserve up in Fris, which is the PGA complex. Uh and they've also built homes in Normandy Estates, which is just to the west of here. They are proposing uh homes priced in the in in the letter we provided to you. ballpark two and a half million to$2.8 million uh for these homes. These are representative examples of what those homes would look like. Uh they they are since they are on the SF6 lots, they would be considered the villa homes that they have. They have a much larger home product that they're building up in Frisco right now with the PGA facility. Just a few more examples of the homes that are being built. Uh some some questions that always come up with this and it was sort of interesting in in the previous case that a lot of very similar items with respect to location uh transition things of that nature really what's happening across the market and I think Plano has experienced a a fair amount of it Richardson's experienced it there is not the fear from a lot of people to be closer to higher intensity development uh with all the growth in the Dallas Fort Worth market people coming in from other parts of the country uh be it the east coast, Boston, New York, be it the west coast, Los Angeles, wherever. Uh, and the uh the the typical uh north Dallas pattern of suburbia segregated by office, which is then segregated by industrial and all using six-lane divider roads to separate us all and highways. Uh, a lot of these folks uh they don't need that. They don't want that. They want to be close proximity to the activity. They want to be close proximity to their office or to retail. Uh I think as was mentioned in the previous case, being able to walk to the coffee shop uh in the morning versus having to get in your car and drive there. Uh that's what that's that's what uh this market is. That's what these the people that would be interested in buying these homes, that's that's that demographic. They're not they're not afraid of the height. They're not afraid of the retail. Uh they're not afraid of uh the multif family. Um and and that and that shows up in a number of places uh throughout the metroplex. You know, the villas at Legacy West is is a very obvious one. Um, town homes at on the shops legacy on the east side of the tollway, exact same thing. The town homes are fully integrated into the development. Uh, down in Richardson, I don't know if you know the the Palisades office development, which is basically Gallatin Parkway and 75. Immediately across the street from that, uh, is, um, the Palisades, um, residential district, uh, which is across the street. The Palisades is a 16story office building. uh and they had no problem selling those holes. Once again, it's a certain demographic. City line, which is the State Farm facility down in Richardson, same thing. They have threetory single family detach across the street from that development. And that that that is just who they are. and they don't they are not uh as focused on the non-residential and I think a big part of that whether it's Richardson, Frisco, Plano I think a big part of that is a testament to the city itself to the staff to the commission to the council because those the people that are living in those neighborhoods they obviously have to have a certain comfort level that they are not going to get the back end of the stick when it comes to anything for the being that close to this type of development. And you can see you can see whether it's through legacy whether it's through palisades or city line uh that that quality exists. And so there there is what potentially would have been fear there is a lot less of that in the world today because of the quality that's being built in these cities. A lot of the staff's report has to do with commercial employment. Uh this is the uh purpose of the commercial employment district that's in the city zoning ordinance. provide integrated development, major focus, corporate offices, rearch research facilities in a campus like set that is textbook for the old legacy business park. EDS, JC Penney, the large office complexes with a lot of green space. Uh that was very prominent in the 80s and the early 90s. uh development has transitioned from that both from a commercial standpoint as well as a residential standpoint to a much more of a as we talked earlier today much more of a mixeduse development pattern and uh the tollway in Plano is a prime example of that uh where it's much more consolidated uh there's not as much open space uh but there is some uh but it's much more integrated in uses and so to um to focus on the commercial employment district and the commercial employment ment policy and the commercial employment land use and the comprehensive plan I think turns your back on the way development is going uh the development is evolving to something different than what it was when the when the original vision of comp of commercial employment was created. Um the area uh is is becoming much more in this area to to the questions that were raised by the commissioners with regards to building in this corridor. If if you recall from It's on It's page 16 of the staff's report, but it was one of the slides that John had up that showed the Legacy Business District and showed where this property was. We were at the far south end of that district. Across the Caddy Quarter, across the intersection from on uh Spring Creek Parkway and Communications is the Wolf Creek neighborhood. Uh it's the property zone apartments, but it's developed as single family. Uh the property immediately to the south of us is zoned um for um regional employment. It's it's not commercial. It's primarily developed as officer or we heard as a school. Much lower impact type uses. So the the higher intensity uses are closer to the tollway and then and the lower transition uses are going towards the west. U the um the plaza at Spring Creek as was mentioned has a multif family component. Uh the independent facil independent living facility north of us fourstory mid-rise apartments because that's really what it is. It's a mid-rise apartment development is immediately to the north of us. So those uses are transitioning intensity as you go further to the west which is old school planning 101 where you have the intense uses along the highway corridor and you transition to lower intensity uses uh by the single family development uh which is in essence what we are proposing. This is the the concept plan that was approved uh the revised one for the plaza spring creek uh back in November of last year. Uh they're proposing 520 senior apartments, 191,000 square feet of retail and restaurant, and 90,000 square feet of office. And I don't know anybody that would be opposed to this development. Everybody hopes this development is extremely successful. uh and at the location that it is, you look at how it was proposed and it is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of how development has evolved in the Plano area where you have a mix of retail and residential and what is going on when you have this type of development because obviously it's a huge financial commitment. They have to really consolidate that activity. They have to really consolidate that energy interior to the site. So what they've done by doing that is they've turned their backs to their neighbors. So the property to the north uh which is vacant has uh multi-story parking structures next to them. Arabella which is what we are proposing which is to the west has uh multi-story parking structures next to that. So they really turned their back to our neighbor their neighbors. Uh and so the two asterisks at the top are the are the connections to the north property uh which are main boulevards, main driveways that go north south through the the the plaza property and the Arabella driveway which is behind the parking garage and not a direct link at all to anything that's being proposed in uh in the plaza at Spring Creek. This is a a little closer uh shot of that whole area with Arabella in there. As you can see, the driveway to uh the plaza. Uh it's at the back end behind the parking garage. It's not even lined up with the parking garage driveway. It's not lined up with the driveway that runs east west just to the south. My opinion, that is a driveway that was required by the ordinance that the applicant put in because he was required to put it in. Uh I I do not believe the driveway was intended to be used as uh interconnectivity with vehicles. That is not saying that that is bad. That is saying that the developer had a reason to do it. It met that he there was a there was a mechanism to meet the code. The code was met uh and the development plans were approved and as as we said we hope that's successful. Arabella to the north uh is somewhat similar. It's a four-story apartment building. They are required to they were provide required to provide the interconnectivity. But what ends up happening with this corner and that's what we're focused on now is this corner. The development that's taking place around this piece of property for all intents and purposes uh for lack of a better beats up the ability to have integrated development with its neighbors which is the purpose of the district which is the comp plan purpose which is everything regarding corporate uh employment. Arabell is a gated neighborhood. It's a gated apartment complex. That driveway connects to communications parkway and we are already proposing a street to communications ballpark 250 ft south of that. That's not providing us any additional access. This property cannot be accessed to through the apartments to the vacant property that will ultimately develop to the northeast. this property if it was developed as commercial that driveway would be at the back end of a commercial development that most most users would not use. Uh it would it would go into the parking structure and even though there were opportunities the the pl the plaza concept plan has a driver running along its entire west property line ample opportunity to provide locations for these cross access points in different locations. Yet that's where it was proposed. This property for all intents and purposes doesn't really have good vehicular access to the east. It technically it does have it. It meets the code. Uh but from a practical standpoint, in our opinion, it really does not. So we we believe that these two developments and this is in our cover letter that we provided, we talked about outside influences. We believe these influences have impacted the ability to actually develop this property per what the zoning is or per what the comprehensive plan proposes for it. Uh so we have the plaza which has 190 plus or minus thousand square feet of retail restaurants planned for 90,000 square feet of office s residential. In our opinion this the property that Arabell is on is not competitive from a retail perspective. If you were going to have retail retail development in this area and you were a tenant, you were a user, you were a restaurant trying to find a location to go, 99% of the populations is going to go to the plaza that which isolates this. And you you may get a pad site out here for fast food. You may get a pad site for a gas station. What that's going to do is that's going to eat up about an acre and a half along the frontage and it's going to leave that back property vacant. It's not going to develop into a cohesive fast food courtyard um food hall over like like in um in Legacy West. From a retail standpoint, we don't think this property is vi marketable and viable for retail development based on other zoning that is in place. From an office development standpoint, 8 and a half acres in my opinion is too small to be a corporate campus, is too small to be research facilities. Uh what ends up happening is you end up Huffman Office Park, which is just immediately north of Arabella. Uh and uh Plano, you see this all along uh Parkway and Communications. They're basically office condos. Uh little uh little shops. People need an office. Very viable, very good, very usable. Uh and and we would believe that if this property develops at office, it would develop in a very similar manner. Huffman Park, little over five acres. The valuation per Ken County Appraisal District is 26.8 million. So basically a buck 15 a buck 16 a square foot which is nothing to complain about. Our proposal with homes starting at 2.5 million on eight and a half acres is estimated value of $82.5 million which is approximately $220 a square foot. From a highest and best use viability standpoint, we truly believe our proposed neighborhood with our builder that is locked into wanting to build here fully aware of what the plans are. Uh they intend to uh I know there was a concern from staff. They intend to have the documentations in their model so that everybody knows what is being proposed at that price point. You're not going to hide it. You're in trouble if you do. So, we believe the value of our property as an $82 million single family neighborhood with only 33 lots is better suited for this location. It serves as a transition uh for the neighborhood to the west. Uh it serves as a more viable not another office uh condo park uh to fill up spaces as you go along. I'll put this slide up real quick towards the end for a specific reason. If you wrap it up a little bit, just wrap it up for us. Yes, sir. Yeah. Little little a little background. Uh lived in Carolton 30 years. Over that time, I've been on the Finland zoning commission a little over nine years. Uh back in 2020 2002, Plano versus Carolton developed this uh retail study uh the um the Tri City retail study for un underdeveloped or unused hard corners. There was there were a lot of hard corners all throughout all three cities trying to figure out what to do with them. Basically what the study came out with and said a number of reasons caused this speculation. Somebody buy it for retail and never develop. uh people who own larger single family areas. We're trying to allow for retails at at the corner to provide service uses for them or as we're saying with our proposal is unintended consequences of these adjacent developments sort of blocked out these sites to be able to develop as as commercial and retail. Uh we believe if I I believe if a 2032 plan is done, if a 2032 study is done and this property is still zone commercial employment without any other things going on to it, it will be one of these corners that's in that intersection. Uh that wraps up my presentation for the zoning. If I may talk about the concept plan because that was sort of folded in or if you want me to wait for that, I'm more than happy to. Yeah, why don't we? Um yeah, I'll give you a couple more minutes. Yes, sir. Yeah, it's all it has to do with the waiverss that we're asking for. Okay. Running a running kind of long. So, let's I'm sorry. I apologize. Thank you. Okay. Regard regarding the waivers, uh we're asking for a few things because they're very sight specific to what has impacted us on the on the perimeters. Uh we are asking for the street design waiverss in terms of uh not having a primary entrance to the neighborhood. Uh the image the aerial to the east of our concept plan uh is Kingsgate which is at the far west end of town. When the subdivision ordinances are written they're written generally speaking and so larger developments is it's to handle the volume of traffic that these that these single family neighborhoods create. You need to have some larger areas some larger intersections to handle that volume of traffic. And that's what this divided entry does. And this is as you can see down at the far south end they have a large divided entry. that entry takes up an 80 foot rideway versus the 50- foot rideway that's normally involved with the local street. Uh we don't think that volume is of traffic is going to uh take place in our neighborhood. Uh so we are asking for that waiver. We are also asking for the waiver going uh only having 30 feet of paving for that first leg of the intersection of at those entrances till we hit that first street. The city requires the city would require every every street out there to have 31 feet of paving versus 26 which is the uh city standard of the of the six. And then once again that that extra paving allows for it to handle that traffic volume. We think if the streets are 30 feet wide versus 26 feet wide that's going to encourage people to bypass the intersection at Spring Creek and Communications if there's red lights to cut through the neighborhood which we don't think is a benefit to our residents. Uh the last thing has to do with the driveway spacing to the for the driveway to the uh east of us from the plaza's uh development. Um if we met the spacing requirement that the city has for driveway spacing, uh our drive our driveway would be located basically at the the west end of lot one uh just to the west of the the entry street. That west property line would be the west property line of our street. What that does is that does not give me 125 foot intersection offset from the continuation of that street to the north. So I come in and then I per the city's code I have to have 125 ft before I can hit another north south street. Setting that to meet the driveway spacing standards. I can't do that. If I offset that, keep going farther to the west and offset that street 125 ft. What I end up doing is that entry street ends up being in lot two and three which starts going into the right turn lane of communications Parkway. So now that's even that that that impact that's that in my opinion that's a global impact versus an internal impact. So we have proposed to leave the street where it is. Our traffic volumes are so small uh we have 14 lots on one street 19 lots on the other street. Uh our traffic consultant has feels that that is not going to have a negative impact on the traffic system in Plano. And with that, I will stop talking soon. All right. Thank you. Um, commissioners, questions for the applicant. Commissioner Bruno, thank you. Um, if as you say a commercial employment type of development would not be appropriate or viable in this space, why are you retaining commercial employment as the base zoning of your plan development? Thank you. uh because while all intentions are good, everything is a risk and our client has committed to the property owner uh to not to negatively impact the property. If for some reason the deal busts, if the builder walks and we can't find another builder, if for whatever reason uh something happens with the developer and it doesn't the deal doesn't go through, we don't want to zone the property for SF6 and then give the property owner 8 and a half acres zone SF6 that he that he may not be able to market to somebody. So, we felt this was the best way to minimize his exposure and still provide us the opportunity to do the neighborhood as we're proposing. Okay. You're you understand we're asked to evaluate a proposal for homes, not a proposal for a commercial employment use. Yes, sir. We don't have a concept plan for any sort of commercial employment use in front of us. Correct, sir. Because we we believe that the the the single family neighborhood is is the best use for the property. And if what you're saying is true that it's not viable, what would be the point of maintaining the commercial employment based zoning if you can't do it? I mean because because that's what the property owner has on his property today. That is that is not our decision. The property the the property owner currently owns the property eight and a half acres because of Miraosa because of the plaza. Those developments in our opinion have impacted this property. The property owner still owns it. He's it's still zoned for CE. He at this stage of the game he he does not have an opport he does not have an option to develop it commercially but nobody wants to give away their commercial zoning. Well I mean on the one hand you're keeping your options open for a commercial employment development. On the other hand you're saying can't do it. The other properties have impacted this property to the point that that's not really feasible. I don't I can't resolve the conflict in my own mind. I'm sorry. You have a you have a colleague there who wants to speak. Introdu in introduce yourself if you would please. Yeah, I signed up to speak. Brian Robertson. I'm the developer purchaser for the property u with Robertson Companies 5700 Granite Parkway here in Plano. Um just to elaborate a couple things on uh what Mr. Silo said. So we do have the property owner here today. He owns uh a little over 60 acres around us. He has sold off some to uh the current owner of the plaza that uh currently has CE zoning. Um we worked with the surrounding property owners including Mariposa which we got support uh for our use uh given their uh 55 and older active adult community. Um, we also have support from the seller because he intends to develop not only to the west on the west side, uh, but northeast of our site, which is due north of the plaza. Um, we have an agreement that because our current property cannot be more than two stories because we have existing zoning on the southwest corner, which is Wolf Creek Estates. That is one of the main reasons why he wants to sell this property off, but he wants to be intimately involved because it's a legacy. It's a family legacy. with him owning all the properties to back his family, which you all know here in Plano, he wants to see this project come to fruition by adding future homeowners to the neighborhood because he feels like the commercial employment district at this corner without going higher than two stories doesn't have the value. So, we're paying for that value. Hence, the 2 and a half to$2.8 million homes. And these are luxury homes. One other point I want to just correct since we're on the record. Um, Starside had interest. Starside is a neighborhood next to here. We are mirroring their luxury villa, but partners in building is is our builder and he's actually here today to answer any questions. So, I hope that answered some of the questions on why we're maintaining the CE zoning. If we reszone it or we call it a residential district, we're affecting the heights that are the height restrictions that are in place based on that residential district or zoning. So, we tried to come up with a solution with the surrounding property owners and we feel like we've done that from a PD standpoint. Aren't those height restrictions for the purpose of protecting the residential properties? That is correct. And we're well and we're well a aware of the of the potential surroundings and the site plans. Our builders are actually uh willing and we've had very very intense conversations on this because of the location of what you have around here with the the demand for high-end luxury real estate or call it a lock and leave buyer in this commercial employment district or uh the headquarters that are all up there at Legacy West. We really feel like there's a demand at this price point for a lock and leave buyer that wants a really nice home but doesn't want the halfacre lot uh and have to keep up with. Um and so we are putting a disclosure in our sales contracts. We've talked that very very deeply with the builder. U we're going to obviously to promote the neighborhood we're going to have site plans everywhere. Um, so even though the plaza is approved to the east, doesn't mean the plaza is going to be the plaza in three to five years, but we're going to promote it because we think it's a great use and we'd love to see it come to fruition just like you all. Thank you. Any other questions, commissioners? Any other questions for the applicant? Nobody lights. Okay, I think we're good. Thank you very much. Do we have any other registered speakers on this item? The only other registered speakers are also applicants. Okay, any other comments, applicants, since all y'all are registered, just want to before I close the public hearing, if you have anything to say. All right. My name is Mark Hessie and I'm the uh attorney for the applicant and I'm also a resident that lives right around the corner from this house in Normandy Estates. And the only thing I really want to say and the one the one thing I'd like to stress is I moved to Plano in 1984. I've been here over 40 years. I've watched this city grow. I've watched it develop and I've watched how the housing has changed over the years. And I remember the first time I saw a housing development that developed in a neighborhood where there was a large water tower, I thought to myself, who in the world is going to buy homes that are that close to a water tower? And the reality of the situation is people find ways to adapt to what the surroundings are. And that's why I think something like this would be very successful even though there's a it strikes everybody as unusual that you would be right next to a 22tory office building or assisted living. But the reality of the situation and people don't really care that much about that as much as they want to be close and they're they want to be around urban development and that's really kind of what Plano has hit in some of these areas around the tollway. So that was the only thing that I wanted to say and I wanted to make sure that I was on the record of being in support of this development. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. All right. With that, I'll close the public hearing. Reserve comments to the commission. Commissioner Bruno. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I suppose you could say that any proposed land use is potentially good if it's in the right place. Not if it's not in the right place. I think this is a proposal for beautiful homes in the wrong place. The reason it is in the wrong place is that we have a comprehensive plan that was developed at great public effort uh overcoming great public controversy over a long period of time by many people who combined their efforts to produce something that the public could agree on that designated this part of the city basically north of Spring Creek Parkway and between Communications Parkway to the west and Parkwood Boulevard on the east uh with the future land use category of employment center. Okay. With the zoning to reflect that being um um commercial employment. Okay. The comprehensive plan specifically provides that residential uses are not appropriate in this area. This area is designed to promote and support the economic life and future of the city by providing a place where employers can come in and establish buildings, headquarters or at least places of business that employ people, skilled people um that can maintain Plano as an economically vibrant city. Um, Commissioner Bronky, who uh, unfortunately is not with us this evening, I think, spoke very eloquently to that point a few weeks ago when we were considering the the proposed parks at Legacy development, which is the old JC Penney campus. Um, in my view, it is necessary for us to respect the comprehensive plan. What is proposed here is a major departure from the assumptions of the plan. This is not just a single, you know, apartment complex that may increase the percentage of multifamily housing in the city from 21.2% to 21.4%. This is a major departure from the future land use map which impacts directly on the potential for economic development by uh basically um destroying the habitat which has been reserved for economic development. Um, the buildings, the 22story buildings which have been approved to the east, as the staff has pointed out, negatively impact these homes from the standpoint of noise, light, shadow, and what the staff didn't mention is privacy. You've got people as high as 22 stories up looking down on a residential area and people in their private homes. Um, these are beautiful homes. You know, I can't viewed in isolation. And these are beautiful homes, you know, $2 and half million dollar homes located somewhere else. They would be an asset to the city. Not here. Not in my opinion. Not here. It has been pointed out not only tonight but in other cases before us about, you know, there's a need for an increased, you know, housing development. I agree with that. Let me just respectfully submit that two$ two and half million dollar homes probably do not address the bulk of that need. So with that, um, I'm going to be against. Thank you, Commissioner Bender. Thank you. Thank Thank you, Chairman. Um, one with Commissioner Bruno's comments. Um, my my thought is really about land use. And when I when I think when I look at this development and I think about land use and I look at what's again you look at the comprehensive plan and you look at what's been developed and so forth. Um I just don't see this as the right land use. So that's that's my comment. Thank you Commissioner Lai. I I agree with whatever was uh um the applicant was saying about the you like the uh potential for you know like um mixed use and proximity to you know like shopping the living with shopping but with this development uh you see that it's secluded it is you like it's fenced out there's only two way to go out you like in and out from this development I don't I think it has the um the same you like vision that they're envisioning. It's not going to be uh integrated in the surrounding areas to me. Uh so for that reason, I don't think that it's the right uh use for this uh piece of land. Thank you. Um I think our one of our primary charges as a planning and zoning commission is to follow where possible unless we see significant deviations the comp guiding principles of the comprehensive plan and we all know the findings policy which is in order for us to deviate from the plan and and sign findings we have to find one of several things. um one that whatever's presented in front of us fits the guiding principles of the comprehensive plan. It's substantially beneficial to the immediate neighbors, the surrounding community, and the general public interest. Um and in in order to override the comprehensive plan, we need to as a commission find those things. Um I believe this product is desperately needed in in Plano. I do believe there's a market for it. I do believe you have you would sell every one of them. Unfortunately, I do agree unfortunately for you. I I do agree with the other commissioners that have spoken and I do not find that this project rises to the level that we can disregard the comprehensive plan that it is our duty to implement as best as we can. And um I just I don't as much as I do think you've got a great idea here, I I do have to agree with Commissioner Bruno, I think it's a great project in the wrong location. So, um that's my position. Mr. Lingfelder, any comments? you're the only one haven't spoken. So, since we're kind of short-handed tonight, I I think I'm I'm very prodevelopment and want to see the residential as as we've talked and and I' I've looked at this and gone back and forth for it for days now since since it was uh sent to us. So, we're able to look at it. But ultimately, I I I have have to agree. I mean, I it it takes a lot to have to deviate from the comprehensive plan um for because we we do have to sign our lives away. It feels like um when when we do deviate and we must justify that and and I just don't think this this will allow me to is enough for me to justify that deviation. So, commission, anybody prepared to make a motion? Commissioner Brinoff? Mr. Mr. Chairman, I move that uh item 5A be denied. I have a second. Anybody? Commissioner Bender? Yes. Uh I second the motion. Right. Any other discussion? Everybody, please. And just to be clear, a yay vote is to deny. A nay vote is to pursue another motion. So, all in all all in favor of the motion to deny. The motion passes five to zero. So, thank you gentlemen for being with us tonight. Um, we take up item [Music] 5B. Commissioner Bender. Oh, did your I'm sorry. I thought your light was probably still left on from last time. I apologize. Commissioner Bruno. Okay. I move that um we deny item 5B. Commissioner Bender. Yes. I would second the motion. Any other discussion from the commission? All right. So, just to be clear again, this is a motion to deny. So, a yay vote is to deny. A nay vote is to consider a separate motion. All please vote. Motion passes five to zero. Item number six, non-public hearing items. The presiding officer will permit limited public comment for items on the agenda not posted for 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 may include a total time limit. Agenda item number six is a request to call a public hearing to amend urban mixed juice 1 on 156.3 acres located at the southeast corner of Plano Parkway and Kuster Road. Applicant is Jackson Walker LLP. This item is for legislative consideration. Thank you commission. This call for public hearing is to request the uh the applicant would like to amend uh the UMU1 Heritage Creekide District. Um we require these calls for public hearing whenever a district in this case UMU1 has multiple property owners. Uh however, the applicant has stated in the letter provided that they intend to uh this UMU1 uh amendment proposed will only impact the tracks owned by RPC. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Staff is recommending that the uh commission call a public hearing on this item. Commissioners, any questions for staff? Just to refresh our memories, if we don't do this, they have to get what percentage of the owners to all agree. 100%. 100%. Okay. So, looking at the map, there's a lot of property owners out there. That's correct. Okay. Great. Thank you very much for the clarification. All right. No questions from commission. All right. Do we have any registered speakers on this item? I know it's not a public hearing, but there are two registered speakers. Both are applicants, Bill Dstrom and K. At Adkin, do you all have a presentation tonight? Are you here to answer questions? Okay. Any questions for the applicant? No. Seeing none, Commissioner, what's your pleasure? Commissioner Lingfelder, I'd like to move that we approve uh and grant the public hearing uh as recommended by staff. Commissioner Brenoff. I second the motion. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Nobody. Please vote. Passes five to zero. Thank you, Mr. Der, for hanging out with us tonight. Right. Comments of public interest. There are no registered speakers for comments of public interest. All right. Um, with that we that's the end of the agenda. I will adjourn the meeting at 8:01 p.m. [Music] to make sure you change that air filter um at the very least twice a year. Some people like to do it once a month. You know, if you've got three dogs and or three cats or something like that, you got a little bit more stuff going on. Maybe two dogs, three cats. There you go. Maybe you need to change yours like Yeah, once a month is probably better. The type of filter you can buy, there's a lot of uh there from it's like everything else. There's really cheap ones and there's really expensive ones. Typically myself, I like to go for the medium. Um because every now and then you can get one that's just too good of a filter and it everything's about air flow. And so if it's too good of a filter, the air is not flowing through well enough and it's going to uh you know, your AC is not going to work as efficiently. This is your the condensation drain line. Um, this is as the AC's working over the summer, it gets hot. It produces a lot of condensation.