PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING >> Chair Downs: GOOD EVENING. IT'S 7:00. WE WILL KICK OFFUR OCTOBER 16th, 2023 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEASE JOIN ME. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PE SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON TH CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: VERY WELL. LET'S MOVE TO CONSENT, PLEASE. >> CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: I UNDERSTAND WE'RE MOVING -- WE'RE REMOVING K AND L. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO REMOVE ANY OTHER ITEMS FROM THE AGENDA? >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE ITEMS K AND L REMOVED. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS ITEMS K AND L AND A SECOND BY COMMISSION RATLIFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT CONSENT CARRIES 8-0. WE WILL START WITH ITEM K. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, MR. LISLE, YOU NEED TO RECUSE YOURSELF. >> CONSENT AGENDA ITEM K, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN. TRG J PLACE ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1. 325 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS ON ONE LOT ON 4.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF J PLACE, 111 FEET NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 190. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 57 CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS SMITH-LISLE HOLDINGS AND JIM LAKE JR. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A PRESENTATION. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM K? >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE ITEM K AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: MOTION BY MMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM K. PLEASE VOTE. MR. OLLEY, CAN YOU HIT -- THAT CARRIES 7-0 WITH ONE ABSTENTION BY MR. LISLE. LET'S MOVE BACK TO ITEM L. >> CONSENT AGENDA ITEM L, EXTENSION OF APPROVAL REQUEST FOR REVISED SITE PLAN. HUNTERS GLEN 5-A BLOCK 7, LOTS 2R AND 4 THROUGH 6. PARK PLAYGROUND ON FOUR LOTS ON 70.8 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY AND MAUMELLE DRIVE. EN ZONED SF- RESIDENCE 9 WITH SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT 66 FOR GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE YARD. THE APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO AND THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> I'M RAHA POULADI, THE PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS AN EXTENSION OF APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPROVAL OF THAT EXTENSION REQUEST. THIS IS A CITY PROPERTY AND COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF REQUESTED MORE INFORMATION ON THE CRITERIA THAT THE EXTENSION IS BEING CONSIDERED. ONE OF THE CRITERIA IS THAT THE REASON OF LAPSE. THE OTHER IS THE ABILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COMPLY WITH ANY CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL. AND THE EXTENT TO WHICH NEWLY-ADOPTED REGULATIONS SHALL APPLY TO THE PLAN. SO AS FOR THE REASONS FOR LAPSE, THIS PROJECT WAS UNDER REVIEW AND THE SETS WERE APPROVED. THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE REASONS FOR THE LAPSE OF CONSTRUCTION. DO YOU WANT TO ELABORATE ON THAT? >> SURE. >> Chair Downs: MR. BROUNOFF, CAN YOU BE SPECICN W YOU WANTE THIS PULLED, PLEASE? >> Brounoff: YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IN OUR PACKET, IT SAYS IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO GRANT SUCH A REQUEST TO EXTEND AN OTHERWISE LAPSED SITE PLAN. THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONSIDER THE REASONS FOR THE LAPSE -- IN OTHER WORDS, WHY THE PROJECT WASN'T UNDERTAKEN WITHIN THE TIME. THE PROPERTY OWNER'S ABILITY TO COMPLY WITH ANY CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL AND THE EXTENT TO WHICH NEWLY-ADOPTED REGULATIONS SHALL APPLY TO THE PLAN. WE WERE GIVEN NO INFORMATION RELATING TO THOSE SPECIFIC CRITERIA AND WE WERE SPECIFICALLY CHARGED TO CONSIDER THOSE CRITERIA. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S FINE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE SHE UNDERSTOOD WHAT WE WERE ASKING. >> GOOD EVENING. CHAIRMAN BROUNOFF, FIRST OF ALL, IT IS PARK'S POLICY THAT WE DO NOT HAVE MORE THAN ONE ATHLETIC SITE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT A GIVEN MOMENT. IT PUTS TOO GREAT A STRAIN ON OUR SYSTEM. OVER A YEAR'S TIME WE USUALLY ARE THERE WITH FIVE ORGANIZATIONS, WHICH EQUALS 80 TOURNAMENTS. 55,000 PATRONS, INCLUDING YOUTH LEAGUE PATRONS, AND TEN RECOGNIZED LEAGUE PARTNERS. FIELD ALLOCATION FOR THESE TOURNAMENTS TAKES PLACE FOUR TIMES A YEAR FOR LEAGUE FIELD ALLOCATIONS. AND WITH SEASONAL SUPPORT PRIORITY. TOURNAMENT ALLOCATION TAKES PLACE ONCE A YEAR, IN ADDITION TO WHICH FIELD ALLOCATION COMMITMENT NEEDS REMAIN THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT, SO THOSE NEEDS STILL HAVE TO BE FULFILLED ON OTHER FIELDS. SO WE'RE STILL BALANCING THE LOAD THERE. ALSO, WE HAVE HAD SOME STAFFING VACANCIES WITHIN OUR OWN DEPARTMENT AND WITHIN DIVISIONS ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS CITYWIDE THAT TOUCH CIP PROJECTS SO THAT HAS CREATED DELAYS IN HANDLING, BIDDING, AND ALSO AWARDING. WE CURRENTLY HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING TO PROCEED AND SO WE ARE PROCEEDING WITH THAT IN DUE HASTE. BUT AT THIS TIME IT HAS LAPSED. LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST THERE ARE ALSO STAFFING VACANCIES IN OUR CONSULTANT TEAMS AND THIS IS PRETTY MUCH THIS IS NOT AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE AND THAT HAS CREATED DELAYS IN GETTING OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED BY OTHER DEPARTMENTS. SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS. WE JUST RAN OUT THE CLOCK. >> Brounoff: IS IT PROPER TO ASK QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME OR SHOULD I WAIT? >> Chair Downs: WELL, I GUESS -- UNLESS WHAT SHE'S TOLD YOU YOU FEEL IS INSUFFICIENT TO GRANT THE EXTENSION -- >> Brounoff: SHE'S SPOKEN TO THE FIRST FACTOR, WHICH IS THE REASONS FOR THE LAPSE. I WAS GOING TO ASK HER IS THE DEPARTMENT ABLE TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL? >> YES, SIR. >>rounoff: OKAY. AND ARE THERE ANY NEWLY-ADOPTED REGULATIONS APPLYING TO THE PLAN? >> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. IT HAS BEEN REREVIEWED BY STAFF, INTERNALLY, AND SO THEY WOULD HAVE BROUGHT THOSE TO OUR ATTENTION, HAD THAT BEEN THE CASE. >> Brounoff: I'M SATISFIED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> I NEED TO ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. THE ONLY REGULATION THAT HAS CHANGED AND IS AFFECTING THIS SITE IS THE REMOVAL OF THE FACADE REQUIREMENT OR THE RESTROOM BUILDING THAT IS SHOWN ON THE PLAN, PER THE ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN ON AUGUST 28th COUNCIL MEETING. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL, I GUESS, IN THE FUTURE IF WE HAVE AN EXTENSION REQUEST, JUST GO AHEAD AND ASK WHOEVER THE APPLICANT IS TO GIVE US THAT LITTLE BACKGROUND AND THAT WAY IT AVOIDS THIS SITUATION. >> Brounoff: MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY IF THE PRESENTATION HAD BEEN IN WRITING IN OUR PACKET. >> Chair Downs: UNDERSTOOD. MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM L. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM L. THANK YOU FOR COMING TONIGHT. APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM L BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY. PLEASE VOTE. MR. LISLE, MR. RATLIFF. YEAH, THERE'S A DELAY OR SOMETHING'S GOING ON. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED REMAINING SPEARS A LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDE. CHAIR, MAY I PUT IN THAT I NEED TO RECORD INFORMATION, SO I'M NOT ABLE TO GET TO THE VOTE AS QUICKLY AS WHAT THE COMMISION WOULD LIKE TO VOTE. IT DOES TAKE A FEW SECONDS >> Chair Downs: SO EVERYBODY TAKE A DEEP BREATH BEFORE YOU VOTE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> I'M GOING TO READ AGENDA ITEM A AND B TOGETHER. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2023-018 - REQUEST TO AMEND PLANNED DEVE RETAIL/NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE ON 7.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 14TH STREET, 808 FEET EAST OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-37- RETAIL/NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE. TABLED ON AUGUST 21, 2023. PETITIONER: 4301 DEVELOPMENT, L THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDE AGENDA ITEM NO. 1B. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN & REVISED PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN: 544 PARTNERS ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 2-4 - INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, RESTAURANT, RETAIL, AND PROFESS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON 3 LOTS ON 7.0 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 14TH STREET, 808 FEET EAST OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-37- RETAIL/NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE. APPLICANT: 4301 DEVELOPMENT, LP THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DONNA SEPULVEDA. I'M A SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 37 RETAIL/NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE TO ALLOW FOR 6,000 ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES WITHIN TWO EXISTING BUILDINGS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. BUDINGAS WL AS AACANTTING LOT, WHICH WE DO HAVE PLANS FOR A FUTURE INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY. A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN AND REVISED PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND ACCOMPANIES THIS REQUEST, WHICH SHOWS THE ADDITIONAL RETAIL AS WELL AS UPDATED PARKING CALCULATIONS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THIS REQUEST WAS REVIEWED AGAINST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESCRIPTIO AND PRIORITIES, MIX OF USES, AND CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARDS. SOME HISTORY ON THIS SITE. IN 2018, THE DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED TO ALLOW FOR MEDICAL OFFERS AND RETAIL USES UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST ALLOWS THE INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY HAS A PERMITTED USE. IN 2019 PLANS WERE SUBMITTED FOR AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY WHICH REPLACED TWO FUTURE OFFICE BUILDINGS AND THE REQUEST ALSO INCREASED T MIT ON RETAIL AND RESTAURANT TO 15,300 SQUARE FEET. AND TODAY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO INCREASE THE RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES TO 21,300 SQUARE FEET. AND NO CHANGES TO THE INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY ARE PROPOSED. STAFF GENERALLY DISCOURAGES PROPOSING ADDITIONAL RESTAURANT AND RETAIL USES DUE TO CONCERNS REGARDING EXCESS RETAIL ZONING IN THE CITY. HOWEVER, THIS SITE'S NON-RESIDENTIAL PORTIONS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND MARKET TRENDS CONTINUE TO BE DIFFICULT FOR OFFICE-RELATE USES. ADDING ADDITIONAL RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL ALLOW THE SITE TO BE MORE SUCCESSFUL IN THE SHORT TERM. CAPPING THE RESTAURANT IS NECESSARY TO AVOID PARKING CONSTRAINTS ON THE SITE. AND WE RECEIVED NO RESPONDED WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER. CITYWIDE, WE RECEIVED ONE NEUTRAL RESPONSE AND ONE RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION FOR A TOTAL OF TWO RESPONSES. IN THE NEXTEW SLIS, THEY SHOW THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE CHANGE FROM 15,300 SQUARE FEET TO 21,300 SQUARE FEET. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CASE SUBJECT TO THE CHANGES SHOWN ON THE SCREEN AND IN THE STAFF REPORT. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ASSOCIATED PLAN, SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING CASE. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ISSUE? MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. I'M CURIOUS WHY THEY'RE SITTING THERE EMPTY AND I UNDERSTAND WHY. THEY'RE NICE-LOOKING BUILDINGS. A QUESTION I HAVE, I WAS LOOKING AT THE PARKING TABLE ON THE SITE PLAN AND COMPARING IT TO THE MEMO IN THE PD OR ZONING CHANGE IN THE FIRST CASE. SITE PLAN PART B VERSUS THE MEMO IN PART A. I WAS JUST HAVING TROUBLE RECONCILING THE MATH OF THE RETAIL AND RESTAURANT. BECAUSE IN THE CASE 1A YOU LOOK AT IT AS A COMBINED SQUARE FOOTAGE BUT IN THE ZONING AND PARKING TABLE IT'S SPECIFICALLY BROKEN INTO RETAIL AS A PARKING CATEGORY AND RESTAURANT AS A PARKING CATEGORY. AND THERE'S NOT ONE SINGLE EXTRA SPACE OUT THERE. I MEAN, WE'VE USED EVERY SPACE OUT THERE WITH THE CALCULATIONS. AND SO HOW DO WE -- HOW DO YOU ENFORCE THAT OR IS THAT AN ISSUE MOVING FORWARD THAT THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH RESTAURANT THAT CAN BESED AS A PART OF THAT VERSUS RETAIL. HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> YES. WHEN TENANTS APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, IT'S SENT UP TO PLANNING AND WE REVIEW THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY'RE OCCUPYING AND THE EXISTING TENANTS ON SITE AND WE REVIEW A PARKING CALCULATION TO SEE HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE REMAINING. >> Ratliff: THAT WILL BE VALIDATED IN THE FUTURE? I CAN SEE A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S OVERFLOW PARKING TO THE CHURCH NEXT DOOR AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING OUT THERE. SO YOU HAVE RECONCIED ALL THAT AND THE MATH A WOR? THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I REALLY APPRECIATE -- I THINK YOU DO AN EXTREMELY THOROUGH JOB AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATIONS ALL THE TIME. I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. FROM MY TIME ON THIS BOARD AND OTHERS, ONE OF THE THINGS I KEEP HEARING ALL THE TIME IS OVER RETAILED AND YOU MADE THE COMMENT THAT IT WOULD HELP THIS BE MORE SUCCESSFUL IN THE SHORT TERM. WHAT ABOUT A LONG-TERM LOOK? IS THIS A GOOD DECISION FOR US TO BE MAKING ON A LONG-TERM BASIS? >> Chair Downs: IS THAT A TECHNICAL QUESTION FOR STAFF? >> Bronsky: SHE USED THE TERM MORE SUCCESSFUL IN THE SHORT TERM, THAT'S WHY I ASKED. >> Chair Downs: I UNDERSTOOD THAT. AGAIN, I WANT US TO FOCUS ON TECHNICAL VERSUS MAYBE AN OPINION ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN. YOU'RE FREE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> SURE. OFFICE USES COULD COME IN IN THE FUTURE BUT RIGHT NOW THIS WOULD HELP THEM GET THEIR SITE FULLY OCCUPIED WITH USES. >> Bronsky: YEAH. FRANKLY, I'M ALL FOR MORE BUSINESSES COMING TO PLANO AND IF THIS IS AN OPPORTUITY FOR US TO ATTRACT SOME MORE PEOPLE, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: SO MY TECHNICAL QUESTION IS DOES THIS PREVENT THEM, THOUGH, FROM INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF OFFICE, GENERAL OFFICE, IF THEY WANT TO? BECAUSE WE'RE CHANGING THESE -- I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE CAPPING IT VERSUS WE'RE JUST ADJUSTING, YOU KNOW, MOVING THE NUMBERS AROUND. SO WHICH APPROACH ARE WE TAKING HERE? >> THEY COULD DO OFFICE AT 100%. THIS RESTRICTION IS ONLY TO RETAIL AND RESTAURANT USES. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I TECHNICALLY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS WHAT WAS GOING ON. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OH. SORRY. I DIDN'T SEE IT. >> Olley: WHEN THEY CAME IN 2019, DID WE CLASSIFY IT AS A CAP AT THAT POINT, FOR THE 15,000 SQUARE FEET? >> YES. THERE WAS A CAP AT THAT TIME FOR RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SQUARE FOOTAGE. >> Olley: WE ARE CALLING IT A CAP. I'M BASICALLY JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS OUR GUARDRAILS FOR THEM TO COME BACK IN FOUR YEARS AND CALL IT A CAP. 26,000 AND IT'S A CAP. WHEN IS A CAP A CAP? >> I THINK THIS WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RETAIL AND RESTAURANT JUST DUE TO THE PARKING LIMITATIONS. IF THEY HAD MORE RETAIL OR RESTAURANT, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ENOUGH PARKING ON SITE. >> Olley: SO THE PARKING IS THE ENFORCING GUARDRAILS? OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT BUT THE PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS PROJECT? OKAY. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS ZONING CASE EXACTLY AS IT'S SHOWN ON PAGE 12 OF THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S PRETTY SPECIFIC. OKAY. MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: I'LL SECOND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 1A AS PRESENTED BY STAFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. AND THAT CARRIES 7-1. MAKING SURE THAT WAS A NO VOTE FOR YOU. SO THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-1. NOW ON ITEM 1B. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I MAKE A MOTION WE AROVE ITEM 1B SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ZONING CASE 2023-018. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: MOTION BY MR. RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 1B SUBJECT TO COUNCIL APPROVE OF THE ZONING CASE. PLEASE VOTE. MR. LISLE AND MR. OLLEY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: THERE YOU GO. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-1. ITEM 2. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: ST. ELIZABETH ANN SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 1R - RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON ONE LOT ON 6.3 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY, 330 FEET EAST OF INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY. ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE-9 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-105- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE. APPLICANT: SEASCP-RC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISONER MY NAME IS JOHN KIM, R WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS A REPLAT FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. KIM. ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE THE DISCUSSION. MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM 2 AS SUBMITTED. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 2S SUBMITTED. PLEASEOTE. THAT CARRIES 8-0. WE'RE GETTING OUR TIMING DOWN NOW. MOVING ON TO ITEM 3. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: LEGACY WEST ADDITION, BLOCK E, LOTS 2R, 5R, & 8R - PROFESSIONAL/GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON LOT 2R AND VACANT LAND ON LOTS 5R AND 8R ON 95.6 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HEADQUARTER DRIVE AND LEGACY DRIVE. ZONED CENTRAL BUSINESS-1. APPLICANTS: CCI-D 6501 LEGACY OWNERS, LLC AND KINTETSU ENTERPRISES COMPANY OF AMERICA. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: ANY QUESTIONS? MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: JUST ONE FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD, BECAUSE WE ARE DELETING A DRAINAGE AND FLOODWAY EASEMENT. I ASSUME THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEERING STAFF? >> YES, IT H. >> Ratff: THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS PUBLIC. THANKS. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A HAND SIGN BY MR. RATLIFF. THAT MEANS HE WILL SECOND THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 4. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: PLANO/544 BUSINESS PARK ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 5R - MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR ON ONE LOT ON 4.1 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PLANO PARKWAY AND CHARLES STREET. ZONED LIGHT COM APPLICANT: 6S T PLANO TX, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REPLAT FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO. THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM 4 AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG TO APPROVE ITEM 4 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 5. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: ASSEMBLY PARK, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - 312 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS, RETAIL, RESTAURANT, AND PROFESS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON ONE LO ON 26.3 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY, APPROXIMATELY 475 FEET EAST OF K AVENUE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-45- RETAIL. APPLICANT: PLANO MALL OWNER, L THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: MR. LISLE. >> Lisle: WHAT IS THIS REPLAT ACCOMPLISHING? >> THEY ARE CHANGING EASEMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ON SITE. >> Lisle: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: CAN WE ELABORATE ON WHAT EASEMENTS? I MEAN, JUST FOR -- >> THERE'S QUITE A FEW EASEMENTS. WATER EASEMENTS -- >> Chair Downs: UTILITIES. FIRE. IT WASN'T A SPECIFIC ISSUE, IT'S IN GENERAL IS THE SITE'S LAYOUT. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. LISLE, YOU CAN HIT YOUR BUTTON. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION AGAIN BY MR. BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY. I THINK MR. BRONSKY'S IN A HURRY. PLEASE VOTE. OKAY. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT'S MORE THAN YOUR DEAL. IT'S NOT EVEN RECORDING MY VOTES. YOU WANT TO TRY RESETTING THE BOARD AND LET'S TRY IT AGAIN? >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: HAND VOTE, PLEASE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. WE'LL GO TO ITEM 6. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT & REVISED SITE PLAN: BAYLOR MEDICAL CENTER, BLOCK A, LOT 1R- HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL OFFICE ON ONE LOT ON 34.7 ACRES LOCATED A THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PLANO PARKWAY AND ALLIED DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-138- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-402- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO.164 FOR OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT FACILITY AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT AND PRESTON ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANTS: BAYLOR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM AND BAYLOR MEDICAL CENTE AT PLANO. THIS IS FOADMINISTRAT. >> PLANO TELEVISION NETWORK, CAN YOU PLEASE ADVANCE THE SLIDES TO ITEM 6? AND WHILE THEY DO THAT, ITEM 6 IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. BOTH ITEMS, THE REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. WE'RE NOT TRUSTING THIS AT ALL ANY MORE SO MR. CARY. >> Cary: I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION AS BEFORE. WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF COMBINING THESE LOTS? >> IT WAS AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. IELIEVE THEY REGISTERED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: WHY IS A HOSPITAL INTERESTED IN BUILDING AN OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT FACILITY? >> Chair Downs: I THINK THAT WAS JUST THE UNDERLYING ZONING ALLOWED FOR THAT. IT'S NOT REALLY RELATED TO WHAT THE USE IS TODAY. >> Brounoff: I SEE. OKAY. I'LL LOOK FOR THE MERRY-GO-ROUND. [APPLAUSE] >> Chair Downs: IT'S IN THE CHILDREN'S SECTION. >> LAUGHTER HELPS HEALING. THAT'S THE REASON. >> Chair Downs: YES, THAT'S A GO. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN -- >> Chair Downs: YOU'RE ON 7. WE'RE ON 6. HE REALLY IS IN A HURRY. >> Bronsky: I MOVE THAT WE APPROV AS SUBMITTED. ITEM 6. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 6 AS SUBMITTED. HAND VOTE, PLEASE. ALL IN FAVOR. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. WE'LL GO TO ITEM 7. SOMEBODY PLEASE MAKE THIS MOTION BEFORE MR. BRONSKY. [LAUGHTER] >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: SPLIT TRAIL/SPRING CREE ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 1R & 3 - RESTAURANT WITH DRIVTHROUGH AND SUPERSTOREN TWO LOTS ON 16.4 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF K AVENUE AND SPRING CREEK PARKWAY ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANT: SAM'S REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST. THIS IS FOR ADM. >> STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUESTED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> Chair Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ONE? MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: JUST ONE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PARTICULAR CONCERNS THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MIGHT BE LOOKING AT OR WHAT CONCERNS THEY HAVE? >> THIS IS THE NORMAL PRACTICE FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS AS THEY CONTINUE REVIEWING THE CIVIL SETS, SOME OF THE EASEMENTS MIGHT SLIGHTLY CHANGE ON THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT. WE APPROVED THIS ONE AND WHEN ENGINEERING APPROVES THE CIVIL T, THE ENGINEERING SET WILL BE RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION. AND BY THE TIME THE CONSTRUCTION IS CONCLUDED, THEY WILL COME BACK WITH A REPLAT AND AT THAT POINT THE EASEMENT LINES WILL BE FINALIZED. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> SURE. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: [OFF MIC] WON'T CHANGE THE UNDERLYING ZONING, WILL IT? >> NO. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> WE DO NOT BUT THE APPLICANT AND APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. DOES ANYONE HAVE A QUESTIO FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TONG WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LISLE TO APPROVE ITEM 7. PLEASE VOTE. THAT CARRIES 8-0. NICE JOB. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTSO THZONING ORDINANCE TO MODIFY OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERA. >> THANK YOU. I'M MELISSA, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STAFF HAS ENCOUNTERED ISSUES WITH DEVELOPMENT BEING UNABLE TO MEET THE OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE ZONING ORDINANCE DUE TO A CHANGE OF USE, WHICH IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICT. THE EXISTING PARKING REGULATIONS ARE GENERALLY DESIGNED FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH LIMITED OPTIONS TO AT THE SAME TIME, THOUGH, MANY SITES APPEAR TO HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING TO MEET THE ACTUAL DEMAND WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS THROUGH THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THESE ISSUES CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL DELAYS IN PERMITTING AS STAFF WORKS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND LEASEES TO FIND SOLUTIONS. THEREFORE STAFF IS PROPOSING TO BRING FORWARD AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION TO ALLEVIATE THESE IMMIATE CHALLENGES. WHILE A FULL REWRITE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IS SLATED TO BEGIN SOON, THE PROJECT WILL TAKE SOME TIME AND STAFF'S PREFERENCE IS TO COMPLETE AN IMMEDIATE FIX FOR THE ISSUE TO RESOLVE CONCERNS WITH PERMITTING. THIS FIX SHOULD BE TEMPORARY DUE TO THE REWRITE PROJECT AND WILL BE FOLLOWED BY A THOROUGH REVIEW OF PARKING REGULATIONS DURING THAT PROCESS. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE F-STREET PKINGCE TO MODIFY QUIREMENTS AND RATED SECTIONS NECESSARY TO RESOLVE THIS CONCERN. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Tong: I HAVE A QUESTION. CAN YOU GIVE SOME EXAMPLES ABOUT OF THESE ISSUES? BECAUSE I ONLY READ THAT THESE ISSUES CAUSE DELAYS AND THE CONSEQUENCES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN THEY APPLY -- WHEN THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION OR DO THE SITE PLAN, THEY SHOULD HAVE ALREADY COUNTED THE NUMBER OF PARKING OFF STREET OR ON STREET OR WHATEVER. IT SHOULD HA BEEN SUFFICIENT BEFORE THEY EVEN GET APPROVAL, IS THAT CORRECT? BEFORE THEY GET A BUILDING PERMIT? >> SO THE ISSUES COME IN WITH REDEVELOPMENT, IN PARTICULAR, AS WELL AS LIKE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCIES. SO NEW TENANTS COMING INTO EXISTING BUILDINGS. SO IF THEY'RE REDEVELOPING AN EXISTING SITE THAT, YOU KNOW, ALREADY HAS THE CONSTRAINTS FOR LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND EXISTING UTILITIES AND OTHER SURROUNDING USES, IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO ADD IN ANY ADDITIONAL PARKING NEEDED FOR A USE THAT MIGHT REQUIRE MORE PARKING. FOR EXAMPLE, RETAIL REQUIRES MORE PARKING THAN OFFICE. SO IF IT WAS PREVIOUSLY AN OFFICE COMPLEX, THAT DIDN'T WORK OUT SO RETAIL IS COMING IN, THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THE SPACE, GIVEN CONSTRAINTS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA TO ADD THE PARKING NEEDED. IF A TENANT MOVES INTO AN EXISTING SPACE THAT WAS USED FOR AN OFFICE SUITE BUT OFFICE ISN'T VIABLE, SO RETAIL OR RESTAURANT IS COMING IN, THOSE USES REQUIRE MORE PARKING. WITH THE OTHER MIX OF USES ON SITE, THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE ENOUGH SPACES AND THAT SUITE WOUL HAVE TO REMAIN VACANT. >> Chair Downs: SO LET'S DO THIS. REALLY, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS CALL A PUBLIC HEARING AND THAT WAY SOMEBODY WILL KNOW THAT, HEY, THIS IS BEING DISCUSSED AND THEY CAN BE HERE TO HEAR ALL OF THE INFORMATION VERSUS US GETTING A LOT OF INFORMATION TONIGHT. SO REALLY WE JUST WANT TO CALL THE PUBLIC HEARING SO THEN WE CAN HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THE ISSUES. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: YEAH. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. I BELIEVE THAT PROVIDING THE FLEXIBILITY AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF TENANTS THAT ARE LOOKING TO TAKE OVER OR HAVE A CHANGE OF USE -- >> [OFF MIC] >> Bronsky: I'M WORKING ON IT. I'VE EXPERIENCED THIS BEFORE, PERSONALLY, IN ANOTHER CITY. AND SO I DO. I WANT TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMENDED THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO MODIFY OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND RELATED SECTIONS NECESSARY TO RESOLVE THIS CONCERN. >> Chair Downs: YOU WANT TO OR YOU MOVE? >> Bronsky: I MOVE THAT WE DO THAT. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BRONSKY WITH A TO CALL A PUBC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS. HAND VOTE, PLEASE. THAT CARRIES 8-0. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON. THERE'S NO ONE ELSE HERE. NEVER MIND. GO AHEAD. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 9. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO CAL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING SIMPLIFYING THE REQUIREMENTS FO PLATTED BUILDING LINES, TO ALLO FLEXIBILITY IN ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE ZONING VARIANCES FOR MINIMUM YARDS AND RELATED SECTI APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERA. >> THANK YOU. STAFF HAS RECEIVED A NUMBER OF PETITIONS TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO VARY MINIMUM YARDS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT HAVE FRONT AND SIDE BUILDING LINES ESTABLISHED BY PLAT. THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCLUDES MINIMUM REQUIRED YARDS FOR EACH ZONING DISTRICT AND PERMITS CANNOT BE ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THESE YARD STA. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE INCLUDES A REQUIREMENT THAT BUILDING LINES FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES BE SHOWN ON THE PLAT. THESE BUILDING LINES ARE TYPICALLY IDENTICAL TO THE YARD REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE BUT THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS. PERMITS CANNOT BE ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE RECORDED PLAT, WHICH INCLUDES THESE BUILDING LINES. TO VARY FROM EACH OF THESE MENTIONED REQUIREMENTS, MULTIPLE VARIANCES MAY BE NEEDED. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CONSIDERS VARIANCES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHILE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CONSIDER VARIANCES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. THE CURRENT PROCESS RESULTS IN OF STAFF REVIEW, AND A MEETING WITH BOTH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCESS, WHICH IS SHOWN BY THIS FLOWCHART HERE. DUE TO THIS COMPLEXITY FOR RESIDENTIAL LOT, WE ARE SEEKING A REVIEW OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO DETERMINE IF AN UPDATE MAY BE BENEFICIAL. THIS COULD SIMPLIFY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE GRANTED VARIANCES AND ALLOW MORE FLEXIBILI IN ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS FOR THEIR PROPERTIES. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING SIMPLIFYING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PLATTED BUILDING LINES, TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE ZONING VARIANCES FOR MINIMUM YARDS AND RELATED SECTIONS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE FLOWCHART? I KNOW THIS IS JUST FOR PUBLIC HEARING BUT WE ARE CALLING A PUBLIC HEARINGSSENTIALLY ON THE TOP RED BOXES OF THE FLOWCHART BECAUSE THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PROCESS IS WHAT WE HAVE AUTHORITY OVER. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. THERE'S NO ONE HERE TO SPEAK SO REALLY IT'S MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: MAKE A MOTION WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGARDING SIMPLIFYING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PLATTED BUILDING LINES AND ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES THAT RECEIVE ZONING VARIANCES FOR MINIMUM YARDS AND RELATED SECTIONS. >> SECOND. Chair Downs: WHAT HE SAID. AND MR. OLLEY IS SECONDING IT. PLEASE VOTE. HAND VOTE. AND THAT CARRIES 8-0 . ITEM 10, ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS. ANYTHING TONIGHT? OKAY. WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 7:41. [MEETING ADJOURNED]