>> Downs: WE WILL BEGIN OUR SESSION TONIGHT AT 7:00. PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES 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. BILL FRANCE, IF YOU WOULD COME TO THE PODIUM. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BILL FRANCE AND I'M A 25-YEAR RESIDENT OF PLANO AND TONIGHT I'M HERE TO ASK FOR YOUR HELP. ON MARCH 19th I BECAME AWARE THAT MY NEIGHBOR WAS OPERATING A BOARDINGHOUSE OUT OF HIS HOME. RTUNELY I DISCOVERED THAT THE CITY OF PLANO HAD THE FORESIGHT TO ESTABLISH AN ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS THIS VERY ACTIVITY. I PROCEEDED TO MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE CITY AND WAS TOLD THEY WERE UNABLE TO ENFORCE THAT ORDINANCE. THE CITY HAS INSTRUCTED ME, AS MY NEXT RECOURSE, TO BRING THIS MATTER TO Y'ALL. SINCE THAT TIME, I'VE RESEARCHED THIS ISSUE AND FOUND THIS IS A PERVASIVE OBLE ACROSS TEXAS. I ALSO FOUND THAT CITIES SUCH AS ARLINGTON AND GRAPEVINE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY PASSED LAWS RESTRICTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WHICH HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED IN THE COURTS AND HAVE HELD FIRM. SINCE MAY OF 2019 THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 230 SHOOTINGS IN SHORT-TERM RENTALS NATIONWIDE. IN FACT, THERE WAS A SHOOTING THIS WEEKEND IN PITTSBURGH WITH TWO DEAD AND A MURDER JUST LAST MONTH IN FORT WORTH. I AM FEARFUL THAT THEEXT ACT OF VIOLENCE MAY HAPPEN LITERALLY IN MY OWN BACKGROUND. BUT I'M NOT HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING MY INTERESTS ALONE. I'M ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF A GROWING COALITION OF CONCERNED VOTERS WHO WANT TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. THE RESIDENTS OF PLANO DO NOT WANT SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. THE PLANO POLICE DO NOT WANT THEM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS EITHER. BUT THE SHOOTINGS AND THE PARTY HOUSES ARE JUST THE TIP OF ICEBERG. THE MORE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM IS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SENSE OF SAFETY, SECURITY, AND COMMUNITY THAT IS LOST WHEN LONG-TERM RESIDENTS THAT WE KNOW AND TRUST ARE SUPPLANTED BY A REVOLVING DOOR OF TRANSIENTS. THE GOOD NEWS IS WE ALREADY HAVE THE LAWS IN PLACE TO RESTRICT THIS ACTIVITY. ALL WE NEED NOW IS TO HAVE THESE LAWS ENFORCED. I AM URGING CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY STEPS IN ORDER TO IMMEDIATELY END THIS PROHIBITED ACTIVITY. I WOULD LIKE TO END TONIGHT BY SINCERELY THANKING YOU FOR LISTENING TO MY URGENT REQUEST AND IN THE WEEKS AHEAD YOU WILL CONTINUE TO HEAR FROM ME AND AN EVER-GROWING GROUP OF CITIZENS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND WHO HOPE FOR A QUICK AND EFFECTIVE RESOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM. THANK YOU. >> Downs: THANK YOU, MR. FRANCE. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Downs: THANK YOU. >> 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. >> Downs: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM FROM CONSENT? OKAY. SEEING NONE. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. JUST LET THE RECORD REFLECT COMMISSIONER TONG IS UNABLE TO JOIN US. SHE IS OUT OF TOWN THIS EVENING. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: APPLICANT ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED. REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMON 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 REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDE. I WILL BE READING BOTH 1A AND 1B TOGETHER. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2021-031 - REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY ON 10.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MAPLESHADE LANE, 1,450 FEET WEST OF COIT ROAD. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY D AGENDA ITEM NO. 1B. CONCEPT PLANS: DALTEX-MAPLESHADE ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOTS 1 AND 2 INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY ON TWO LOTS ON 10.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MAPLESHADE LANE, 1,450 FEET WEST OF COIT R ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY D APPLICANTS: DAL-TEX MAPLESHADE, INC. AND GHALAMBOR PROPERTIES II LLC. >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS KOTCHE COPELAND AND I'M THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT ON 10.1 ACRES OF LAND. THIS REQUEST WAS TABLED ON THE MARCH 21st PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING . AS A REMINDER, TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY, TO THE NORTH IS ZONED URBAN MIXED USE 2 AND IS UNDEVELOPED. TO THE SOUTH IS ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A HOTEL AND PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE USES. TODAY EAST IS ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND IS DEVELOPED WITH LOADING DOCKS AND A SERVICE AREA FOR A SUPERSTORE. TO THE WEST IS ZONED URBAN MID-US 2ND IS UNDEVELOPED IN ADDITION TO CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A HOSPITAL. THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT HAS TWO COMPANION CONCEPT PLANS AND THIS CONCEPT PLAN IS ON THE EAST SIDE CLOSEST TO COIT ROAD. THIS IS THE SECOND CONCEPT PLAN AND IS THE LARGER LOT OF THE TWO. USABLE OPEN SPACE SCREENING BUILDING HEIGHT, SETBACKS, NOISE MITIGATION, CONNECTIVITY, HAVE BEEN MODIFIED. THE CHANGES ARE HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SCREEN AND CONTINUE ON TO THE FOLLOWING PAGE . THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT RESIDENTIAL USES SHOULD BE INCORPORATED WITHIN COHESIVELY PLANNED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS OF MODERATE DENSITY AND INTENSITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED AS UNDEVELOPED IN THE LAND USE AND HOUSING INVENTORY. THE REQUEST DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE MIX OF USES OF THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY DASHBOARD AND DOES REQUIRE FINDINGS. IF APPROVED, THIS AREA WOULD BE RECLASSIFIED AS MULTIFAMILY TYPES. THE DIFFERENT COLORS ON THE SCREEN SHOW THE CHANGES MADE DURING STAFF'S ANALYSIS OF THIS CASE FROM MARCH 21st. THE RED COLOR SHOWS ELEMENTS THAT DO NOT MEET THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS FOR THE DASHBOARD. THE GREEN COLOR SHOWS THE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE REMAINED AS NEEDS FROM MARCH 21st AND THE BLUE COLOR SHOWS ELEMENTS THAT PREVIOUSLY DID NOT MEET AND NOW MEETS OR ARE PARTIALLY MEETING. REQUESTS THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THE MIX OF USES DESCRIBED IN THE DASHBOARD ARE DISFAVORED. APPROVAL SHOULD BE CAREFULLY DELIBERATED AND JUSTIFIED BY FINDINGS. 100% OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MET IN THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER. CURRENTLY THERE IS NO DETACHED OR ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS IN THE AREA. THIS ADDITION OF 276 MULTIFAMILY UNITS WOULD INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER TO 2,841. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 11 SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT RESTRICTIONS. THE FIRST SIX ARE ON THE SCREEN. THE BDED TEXT ARE CHANGES OR ADDITIONS MADE SINCE THE MARCH 21st MEETING. THESE RESTRICTIONS ARE ALSO HIGHLIGHTED IN YOUR PACKETS. HERE ARE THE FINAL FIVE. TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY IS THE LOADING DOCK AND SERVICE AREA FOR THE WALMART GROCERY STORE. ARTICLE 16 WITHIN THE ZONING ORDINANCE STATES SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS WHERE LOADING DOCKS ARE PERMITTED TO BE PLACED IN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES. HOWEVER, SINCE AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY IS AN INSTITUTIONAL USE WHIN THE ZNING ORDINANCE THESE STANDARDS WOULD NOT APPLY. HOWEVER, WITH THREE SUP RESTRICTIONS MENTIONING LANDSCAPE EDGES, A SCREENING WALL, AND SETBACKS, STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS LOCATION IS AN IDEAL PLACE FOR RESIDENTS TO BE ADJACENT TO. ADDITIONALLY, THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPOSAL AND SIMILARLY TO THE SUPERSTORE REQUEST ADJACENCY CONCERNS, STAFF BELIEVES THAT EVEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL SUP RESTRICTIONS, THIS LOCATION IS NOT IDEAL FOR AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY. WE RECEIVED SIX LETTERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION WITHIN 200 FEET. AND WE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF SEVEN IN SUPPORT AND NINE IN OPPOSITION WITH A TOTAL OF 16. TO CONCLUDE, STAFF RECOGNIZES SENIOR HOUSING IS NEEDED IN THE COMMUNITY. HOWEVER, THIS REQUEST IS DISFAVORED DUE TO THE LACK OF CONFORMITY WITH THE MIX OF USES WITHIN THE SURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER DASHBOARD. ADDITIONALLY, IT DOES NOT FULLY MEET OTHER DESIRABLE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. BRONSKY, GO AHEAD. MICROPHONE PLEASE. >> Bronsky: I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. UNDER THE CHART THAT YOU'VE PROVIDED THERE A COUPLE OF MINUTES AGO. YEAH, RIGHT THERE. THE THREE THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT PARTIAL OR MEETS TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE WHERE IT DOES MEET AND WHAT DOESN'T MEET IN THAT? >> SURE. UNDER PARKING ORIENTATION IT STATES STRUCTURED AND NON-STREET PARKING. AND SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SURFACE-LEVEL PARKING BUT NOT STRUCTURED PARKING. SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF PARTIALLY MEETS WITH THE STIPULATION. >> Bronsky: OKAY. AND MEETS TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. SO DOES THAT MEAN IT DOESN'T MEET IT BUT IT'S AS CLOSE AS IT CAN GET? >> I BELIEVE MR. BELL CAN ANSWER THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. >> EXCUSE ME, THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH THE ZONING. WHAT THEY PROPOSE TO DO IS BUILD A DRIVE BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY CONSTRUCTED TO THE DESIGN OF A STREET. BUT IF THEY DEDICATED IT AS A STREET THEY WOULD NOT MEET THE SETBACKS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT SO WITHOUT CHANGING THE UNDERLYING, WHICH THEY CAN'T DO THROUGH AN SUP, THEY ARE MEETING IT AS CLOSE AS THEY CAN. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY HERE. >> Bronsky: THANK YOU. >> Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: THANK YOU. NICE PRESENTATION. I'M ON. OKAY. BACK ON TO THE SAME TABLE WHEN& WE TALK ABOUT INTENSITY HERE, IT SAYS IT DOES NOT MEET BUT FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, LOOKING AT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, IT'S ACTUALLY A LOWER INTENSITY THAN WHAT IS RECOMMENDED IN THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CORRECT? AM I INTERPRETING THAT CORRECTLY? >> CORRECT. THE PLAN WOULD LIKE HIGHER INTENSITY IN THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTERS. >> Horne: CORRECT. WHAT HE IS PROPOSING IS A LOWER INTENSITY. >> CORRECT. >> Horne: THOUGH IT DOES NOT MEET THAT CRITERIA, WOULD IT BE SOMEWHAT BETTER BY DEFINITION OR IT EITHER MEETS OR NOT MEETS I GUESS IS WHAT THE ANSWER IS, CORRECT? BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOWER INTENSITY. >> THE PLAN IS RECOMMENDING A HIGHER INTENSITY IN THIS INSTANCE SO THEY'RE NOT MEETING THAT RECOMMENDATIONNNNNN >> Horne: GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Samara: YES, QUICK QUESTION. IN YOUR MATERIAL, BOTTOM OF PAGE 6 WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSING MIX, YOUR LAST SENTENCE THERE SAYS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE AREA. WHAT SORT OF AREA DID YOU USE TO DEVELOP THIS NUMBER OF 2565? >> THAT'S THE NUMBER OF UNITS WITHIN THIS SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER. SO IT BASICALLY STRETCHES FROM THE RAILROAD DOWN TO GEORGE BUSH AND EITHER SIDE OF COIT ROAD IS THE ACTIVITY CENTER. WE HAVE A MAP OF IT. >> Samara: THIS WOULD INCLUDE THE APARTMENTS ON THE EAST SIDE OF COIT STRETCHING UP FROM THE QT OR THE RACETRACK? >> CORRECT. CORRECT. >> Samara: WOULD IT GO AS IT GO AS FAR AS THE HOSPITAL? >> DO YOU HAVE A LOCATION MAP? I THINK IT DOES INCLUDE THE BOUNDARY OF THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER . ONE MORE BACK. OKAY. IT DOE'T SW THE FULL EXTENT? SO EVERYTHING FROM THAT BOUNDARY THERE ON THE WESTERN END OF THIS PROPERTY OVER TO THE RAILROAD. >> Stone: OKAY. >> EVERYTHING SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD IS IN THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER. >> Stone: THANK YOU. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER CAREY. >> Cary: THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR HIGHER INTENSITY . WOULD THAT REASONABLY BE ASSUMED TO BE MORE TRAFFIC FLOW INTO THIS AREA THEN? >> YEAH, THAT'S THE INTENT OF THE SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTER IS TO BE A HIGHER-TRAFFIC AREA OF ACTIVIT. >> Cary: SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE CALLED ME ON THIS, TRAFFIC IS ONE OF THEIR MAIN CONCERNS WITH PUTTING THIS PROJECTS IN THERE THAT IT WOULD INCREASE TRAFFIC, WHETHER THAT'S TRUE OR NOT, COMPARED TO OTHER THINGS, SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THE SECOND THING I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND IS THIS TALKS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF WALMART NEEDING TO MAKE SOME REMEDIES BASED ON POTENTIAL NOISE AND I GUESS I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT THOSE MIGHT BE AND HOY WOULD BE FORCED TO DO THAT. DO WE KNOW? >> I'M HAPPY TO RESPOND TO THAT. I THINK THE QUESTION IS FOR WALMART IT'S CLEARLY THEIR SERVICE SIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY WITH THEIR LOADING DOCKS, THEIR TRASH COLLECTION FACILITIES. TYPICALLY WHEN YOU HAVE A NEIGHBOR OR HOUSING SPECIFICALLY, SOMEONE WHO IS LIVING THERE AT ALL HOURS CAN BE DISRUPTIVE. THEY DO HAVE TRUCKS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE WALMART HAS NOT DONE A SOUND STUDY TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE MEETING THE SOUND TRANSMISSION AT THE PROPERTY LINE. THEY MAY BE REQUIRED TO CREATE SOME SCREENING, CREATE BUFFERS, MITIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SOUND IS ADEQUATELY CAPTURED ON SITE. SO THAT'S THE QUESTIO THAT I THINK WOULD NEED TO BE ANSWERED. AND I BELIEVE MS. COPELAND SPOKE WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF WALMART. THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THEM TO THATFFECT. . >> IF THAT'S TRUE YOU COULD ALMOST MAKE A CASE THAT THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE ENTIRE AREA REGARDLESS, IF THEY'RE NOT MEETING THE NOISE REQUIREMENTS, IF THIS CAUSED THEM TO REDUCE THEIR NOISE POLLUTION THAT MIGHT BE A BENEFIT OF THE WHOLE THING. >> AND IT COULD BE IF THIS CASE DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD A COMMERCIAL ENTITY COMES IN AND NOTICES. >> COULD BE THE SAME THING, RIGHT? GREAT. THANK YOU. >> Downs: I'M GOING TO GET A CLARIFICATION HERE. IF WALMART IS NOT VIOLATING THE NOISE STANDARDS CURRENTLY AND THEN A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT GETS BUILT NEXT TO THEM AND THEN UNDER THOSE TERMS THEY'RE NO LONGER MEETING IT, THEY CAN BE REQUIRED UNDER OUR ORDINANCE TO GO BACK AND MAKE CHANGES TO THEIR PROPERTY? >> I THINK -- NO. SO THE WAY THAT THE NOISE ORDINANCE IS STRUCTURED -- AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT HERE SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A COMMERCIAL STANDARD, THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL STANDARD, AND A MIXED-USE STANDARD. THIS MAY FIT INTO THE MID-USE PORTION OF THE ORDINANCE SO WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT FURTHER. BUT I THINK THE CRITICAL COMPONENT IS THERE'S NOT FOLKS LIVING THERE RIGHT NOW. AND THERE ARE DAYS THRESHOLDS AND NIGHT THRESHOLDS AND NIGHT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE SO IT MAY BE AS THEIR GOODS COME OVERNIGHT THAT DOES BECOME DISRUPTIVE FOR FOLKS WHO ARE THERE THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT. BUT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE MEETING THE NOISE THRESHOLD.& WE DON'T KNOW. WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN AND PERFORMED ANY NOISE READINGS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE OUT THERE. >> Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. Olley: THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY MY LINE OF QUESTIONING IS IF WE BRING IN ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENTIAL NEXT TO WALMART, IT DOESN'T SOUND RIGHT THAT THE BURDEN NOW FALLS ON WALMART TO FALL BACK INTO COMPLIANCE FROM A NOISE ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT? IF THEIR OPERATIONS IS BASED ON WHAT THEY KNEW THE ZONING WAS FOR, THE THRESHOLD NOW -- IT DOESN'T SOUND RIGHT THAT THAT BURDEN FALLS ON THEM FOR SOMETHING THEY DID NOT DO TO PUT THEMSELVES OUT OF COMPLIANCE. AND ITOESN'T SOUND LE ANY OF THE SETBACKS -- OR MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION. ANY OF THE SETBACKS OR THE INCREASED MASONRY WALL. HAVE WE DONE ANY TESTING TO SHOW THAT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, ANY EXCESS SOUND GENERATED FROM WALMART'S OPERATIONS? >> NOT AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE BUT THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO ENSURE LANDSCAPE EDGE, SCREENING WALL, AND ADDITIONAL SETBACKS ON THAT EAST SIDE. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES, ON THIS SAM ITEM ON PAGE 14 OF YOUR PRESENTATION YOU NOTE THAT REQUIRING ALL BUILDINGS TO USE MATERIALS ENSURING INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS WILL NOT EXCEED 45 DBA. IS THIS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD WALMART NOT BEEN THERE, IF THAT WAS AN EMPTY FIELD. WOULD THE BUILDER BE ABLE TO UP THAT NUMBER? >> THIS MAY BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, IF THEY'RE REQUIRED TO MEET A CERTAIN THRESHOLD INTERNAL TO THEIR UNITS. THE ZONING ORDINAN DOES NT PROVIDE A REQUIREMENT TO MEET THAT THRESHOLD SO AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE BUILDING CODE THEN IT WOULD MEET THE CITY'S REGULATIONS. SO THIS IS -- WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE APPLICANT TO PROPOSE THIS JUST TO ENSURE THAT IT MEETS THOSE SOUND TRANSMISSION THRESHOLDS BASED UPON THE ADJACENT USE BUT IT'S NOT REQUIRED PER THE ZONING, CURRENTLY. >> Stone: THAT WOULD BE MY INTERPRETATION THAT THEY WERE OFFERING THIS OVER AND ABOVE WHAT THEY MIGHT NORMALLY BE REQUIRED TO DO. >> WE TYPICALLY -- WE DO NOT INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY REGULATIONS IN OUR STIPULATIONS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT. SO FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. TYPICALLY WE GO OVER THE BUILDING INSPECTIONS AS WELL SO THEY'RE FAMILIAR. THIS MAY BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT SO WE CAN ASK THEM THAT QUESTION. BUT FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS NOT REQUIRED. >> Stone: THANK YOU. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER CAREY. >> Cary: WOULD WALMART BE GRANDFATHERED IN BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY OPERATING? I THINK WHAT I UNDERSTOOD HERE IS REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S HAPPENED PREVIOUSLY THE FACT THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN COMPLYING WITH THE NOISE LEVELS THERE DOESN'T EXONERATE THEM GOING FORWARD. THEY SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN DOING IT BY CODE, ALTHOUGH IT HASN'T BEEN CHECKED. IS THAT ACCURATE? >> THAT'S CORRECT. I'M NOT SAYING WHETHER THEY ARE COMPLIANT OR NOT. >> Cary: I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> WE'RE SAYING THIS USE YOU MAY BUILD IN RESIDENTS WHO WERE THERE OVERNIGHT ANDHEY MAY EXPERNCE THOSE DISRUPTIONS. WE DON'T KNOW FOR CERTAIN WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE RIGHT NOW BUT ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES IN THERE, THE OPERATOR IS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S NOISE REQUIREMENTS. SO WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW. BUT, YES, WHETHER OR NOT THIS DEVELOPMENT COMES IN OR IT'S A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THEY STILL HAVE TO COMPLY. >> Cary: MAY BE A MOOT POINT THAT THEY'RE COMPLYING OR THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT TODAY NOW THAT THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT COMING IN DOESN'T GIVE THEM A PASS ON AT THE ORDINANCE ALREADY REQUIRES. >> THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK OUR QUESTION IS AS WE'RE REVIEWING THIS PROPOSED ADDITIONAL USE IS THIS THE CORRECT LOCATION TO PLACE úRESIDS OPERATION. WHETHER THEY GET THERE OR NOT, THE CITY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY AS WELL AS THE OPERATOR OF THE SITE TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE CODES. >> Cary: GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Downs: I THINK THAT'S THE KEY POINT HERE IS THAT THIS IS ZONED ONE AREA AND WE'RE CHANGING THE ZONING AND WHEN WALMART PUT IN THEIR VELOPMENT, WHAT THIS PROPERTY WAS ZONED FOR, THEY MAY BE MEETING THOSE NOISE REQUIREMENTS. BUT WE PUT IN RESIDENTIAL, WE CHANGE THE ZONING TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL. NOW THEY MAY BE HELD TO A STRICTER NOISE LEVEL THAN IF THIS WAS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT WAS GOING IN, RIGHT? >> I DON'T KNOW. >> Downs: OKAY. > WE COULD EXPLOH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. I'M NOT SURE IF MS. D'ANDREA IS FAMILIAR WITH THAT ORDINANCE OR NOT. THERE MAY BE SOME GRANDFATHERING OR PREEXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE ORDINANCE >> WA DEFINITION OF RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AS OUTLINED IN THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE. SO WHATEVER'S LISTED AS RESIDENTIAL, THOSE ARE THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT HAVE TO MEET THE RESIDENTIAL STANDARD. IF YOU'RE MIXED-USE OR COMMERCIAL THEN YOU MEET A DIFFERENT STANDARD. >> YES. THIS WOULD NOT BE THE RESIDENTIAL STANDARD. IT MAY BE THE MIXED-USE STANDARD PER THE ORDINANCE. >> Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: QUICK QUESTION ON THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT. IF I'M READING THIS RIGHT ON PAGE 15, THE CHANGE THE APPLICANT PROPOSES WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE TO INTEGRATE THIS INTO THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT NEXT DOOR. >> THEY ARE PROVIDING A STIPULATION FOR AN ADDITIONAL SETBACK ON THE WEST SIDE OF 250 FEET IN ADDITION TO A PRIVATE DRIVE RUNNG NORTH/UTH, CONNECTING TO THE STREET CALLED BON STREET THAT IS BEING PROPOSED WITHIN THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT. SO THEY'RE WORKING TOWARDS MORE OF A CONNECTIVITY -- MORE CONNECTIVITY WITH BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT. >> Olley: I'M GUESSING WE WILL HEAR THIS FROM THE APPLICANT BUT IS BEACON SQUARE IN AGREEMENT TO THAT OR DOES THAT MATTER? >> Downs: WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT SHORTLY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? WE'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO OBVIOUSLY SPE WITH THEM AFTER THE PRESENTATION. OKAY. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. >> BILL DAHLSTROM. >> Downs: YOU DON'T LOOK LIKE BILL. >> NO, SIR. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JASON. IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I REPRESENT McDOWELL HOUSING AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO TALKING TO YOU ABOUT THIS MAPLESHADE SENIOR DEVELOPMEN McDOWELL HOUSING WAS FOUNDED IN 2004. WE HAVE $4 BILLION IN MULTIFAMILY ASSETS AND SENIOR ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT. I WON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME REVIEWING WHAT WE COVERED ALREADY BUT I'LL GO THROUGH THE IMPORTANT SLIDES SO I CAN GIVE THIS SOME MORE ATTENTION WHERE THE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED. THIS CAME UP DURING OUR LAST PRESENTATION AND I STILL WANT TO DRIVE IT HOME. IF YOU HAD TO TAKE CARE OF A SENIOR OR SOMEBODY WHO LIVES IN AGE-RESTRICTED, YOU KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF TIME SPENT IN MEDICAL APPOINTMENTS AND I FELT THIS WAS A VERY COMPELLING SLIDE BECAUSE THE LOCATION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT PUTS YOU RIGHT IN THE HEART OF ALMOST OF WHAT I WOULD CALL A MEDICAL DISTRICT. I KNOW IT'S NOT A MEDICAL DISTRICT BUT THE SLIDE YOU CAN SEE YOU'VE GOT BAYLOR, ONCOLOGY, THE VA CLINIC AND YOU'VE GOT PLANO MEDICAL CENTER. THIS IS BEING CALLED THE VETERANS HOUSING BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO STEER OUR MARKETING TOWARDS SENIOR VETERANS BECAUSE I'M A VETERAN AND IT'S A KIND OF A HEART PROJECT FOR ME. I HAVE DEALT WITH A LOT OF SENIOR VETERANSEALING WITH A LO OF MEDICAL ISSUES. I GO TO THIS MEDICAL FACILITY FOR MY VETERAN'S BENEFITS AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEAR IS WE'VE GOT TO DRIVE 20 MINUTES. MY SON HAS TO TAKE OFF FROM WORK TO DROP ME OFF AT MY ONCOLOGY APPOINTMENT AND HE'S DRIVING ALL OVER DFW. YOU THINK HOW CAN WE MAKE THEIR LIVES BETTER AND THIS IS THE CRUX OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, I POINTED OUT THE VA OUTPATIENT CLINIC IS HERE, TEXAS ONCOLOGY, MEDICAL CENTER PLANO, AND QUEST CARE. I MED THIS SLIDE UP BECAUSE WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS. IT IS A SMALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE KIND OF COMPLEMENTS -- ALTHOUGH SOME MAY DISAGREE, I BELIEVE IT COMPLEMENTS THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT. YOU HAVE A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY, OFFICE RETAIL. THERE IS NO SENIOR AGE-RESTRICTED SO WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD COMPLEMENT THAT DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THE UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS BOTH SIDES, EAST AND WEST. ON THE EAST SIDE WE'VE HEARD A NOE MITIGATION.ON ABOUT THE WE HAVE AN EIGHT-FOOT MAC MASONRY WALL THAT FRONTS WALMART. WALMART ISN'T GOING TO BE ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE COST OF THAT MASONRY WALL. WE ALSO INCREASED OUR SETBACKS AND WE HAVE AGREED TO OUR NOISE DECIBEL AT 45, WHICH IS THE HUD STANDARD AND MOST OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS AREN'T REQUIRED TO DO THAT. AGAIN, THIS IS A REVIEW OF LAST -- OUR LAST TIME. DAL-TEX ONE IS THE TRIANGULAR SITE. IT'S GOT 35 MILLION WITH NOI OF 1.8 ANNUAL TAXES ABOUT 700K. WE'RE LOOKING AT 120 TO 126 UNITS ON THIS SITE. DAL-TEX 2 IS ON THE EAST SIDE AND THIS IS ONE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S A FRONT TO OR ADJACENT TO OUR WALMART SITE. $38.5MILLION DEVELOPMENT. $2.5MILLION NOI WITH ESTIMATED TAX VALUE OF $850,000 ANNUALLY. THIS IS GOING TO BE ABOUT 150 UNITS OF SENIOR AGE RESTRICTED. HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT FOR OUR ELEVATIONS. AGAIN, IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED WE WOULD SPEND TIME WITH BILLINGSLEY AND TALK ABOUT BEACON SQUARE TO MAKE SURE OUR FACADES ROLL IN LINE WITH WHAT MATERIALS THEY ARE USING AS PART OF A BIGGER DEVELOPMENT. KEEP SOME CONSISTENCY. THESE ARE OUR MARKET-RATE COMPARABLES. AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE TWO VERY CLOSE TO THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. THE ORCHARDS AND MARKETPLACE AND OVERTURE AT PLANO. I LISTED THESE SIMPLY FOR INFORMATION. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE, THESE ARE FAIRLY CLOSE AND THESE ARE THE MARKET COMPS. ALL BUT ORCHARDS ARE ABOUT 90-PLUS OCCUPANCY. ORCHARDS WAS COMPLETED IN 2020 AND OBVIOUSLY THEY HAD A SLOW IN THEIR LEASE UP DURING THE PANDEMIC. THE LEFT SIDE IS FOR EDGESTONE. THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT I WAS IN CHARGE OF FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS AND THE PICTURES THAT I'LL SHOW YOU, THE EXAMPLES OF WHAT OUR FINISH OUT WILL LOOK LIKE IS THAT DEVELOPMENT. THESE ARE THE COMMON AREAS. THERE'S A LOT MORE LAND IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S ABOUT 17 ACRES SO HALF OF THE SITE -- I WOULD SAY ABOUT SIX ACRES OF THE SITE WAS ABOUT 153 UNITS AND FURTHER DOWN SOUTH ON THAT SITE HAD ONE-STORY COTTAGES SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BUT WE HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE LAND TO PLAY WITH. MORE EXAMPLES OF AMENITIES. THESE ARE ACTUAL PICTURES, NOT RENDERINGS. THESE ARE THE UNITS. AND THIS CAPTURES AND ENCAPSULATES WHAT YOUR SENIOR PLANNER OUTLINED. WE HAVE INCREASED THE USABLE EN SPACE. WE'RE DOING AN EIGHT-FOOT MASONRY WALL AND WE HAVE AGREED TO MAXIMIZE THE STORIES AT FIVE STORIES, 65 FEET. THE EAST SETBACK IS 85 FEET, AGAIN, SO YOU HAVE 85-FOOT SETBACK WITH EIGHT-FOOT MASONRY WALL AND THEN WE'RE ALSO INCREASING OUR BUILDING MATERIALS FOR MORE SOUNDPROOFING TO MEET THE 45 DBA. THAT'S A HUD STANDARD AGAIN. WE'RE NOT USING HUD FINANCING BUT THEY HAVE PRETTY STRICT STANDARDS. WEST SIDE AT 250 FEET OF SETBACK. NO BALCONIES ALONG THE EAST SIDE. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE BALCONIES FACING THE WALMART. THERE MAY BE SOME ARCHITECTURAL JULIETTES BUT THEY WON'T BE OPEN OR OPERABLE. THE NORTH/SOUTH, THE VEHICLE DROPOFF ZONE AND THEN THE SITE MODIFICATIONS. AT THIS TIME I'LL BRING UP BILL DAHLSTROM TO SPEAK ON THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANKS, JASON. MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, MY NAME IS BILL DAHTROM2323 RASA AVENUE. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE STAFF FOR HELPING US WORK THROUGH A LOT OF ISSUES. WE HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS, A LOT OF CHANGES IN OUR PLANS AND REALLY THOSE ARE THE MAJOR ONES. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE ALSO DID ACCOMPLISH. WE DID ALIGN IT TO THE BEACON SQUARE MAIN DRIVE BECAUSE IN TERMS OF THE FORM BASE, THE FORM-BASE APPROACH, YOU WANT THOSE STREETS TO LINE UP. THINGS SUCH AS ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DUMPSTER LOCATIONS. WE ADDED THE SHADE STRUCTURES TO THE PEDESTRIAN LOADING ZONES. ADDED ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE AREA TO THE EAST SIDE FOR THE 15-FOOT. SO WE MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT, MAJOR CHANGES IN THIS PLAN AND, AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE STAFF FOR HELPING US GO THROUGH THIS. LIKE JASON, I'M NOT GOING TO COVER ALL THE SLIDES WE DID LAST TIME BECAUSE WE COVERED QUITE A BIT AND I WANTED TO FOCUS ON A COUPLE OTHER THINGS. WE TALKED ABOUT THE MIX OF USES DILEMMA WHERE FOR PURPOSES OF THE COMP PLAN, INDEPENDENT LIVING IS MULTIFAMILY BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE ZONING IT'S AN INSTITUTIONALSE. WE SHOWED THAT THE PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE THE EHA CONTOURS. THIS AGAIN IS CONNECTIVITY TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. AND THEN AS FAR AS -- WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE UNIT MIX, THE NUMBERS, THE RAW NUMBERS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DON'T SUPPORT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR BECAUSE THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS THERE TAKE UP 100% OF THE RESIDENTIAL MIX IN TERMS OF THE RAW NUMBERS. IN MY OPINION PLANNING'S MORE THAN JUST LOOKING AT THE RAW NUMBERS. I DO APPRECIATE LOOKING ATHE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND THESE ARE JUST EXCERPTS THAT WE TOOK FROM THE DOCUMENT WE SUBMITTED TO Y'ALL. AGAIN, HOPEFULLY WE PROVIDED THE FINDINGS Y'ALL NEED IN ORDER TO SUPPORT OUR CASE. AGAIN, I WENT OVER THESE LAST TIME. I CAN DO IT AGAIN BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I ALSO WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE CHART. WELL, CONSISTENCY WITH POLICIES. I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. THIS IS A RECURRING THEME THAT WH WE'ROPONG MEETS THE SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING POLICY BY PROVIDING SENIOR HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES. MEETS THE HOUSING TRENDS ANALYSIS AND STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY. A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO CLARIFY ALSO IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING PARTIALLY MEETING THE STANDARDS. WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING, WE ARE PROVIDING ON-STREET PARKING AND THAT'S HOW WE ARE PARTIALLY SATISFYING THAT NEED OR THAT REQUIREMENT. I THINK MIKE DID A GREAT JOB OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION ON THE STREET, THE PRIVATE DRIVE. WE ARE WANTING TO COMPLY WITH THE MIXED-USE, THE FORM BASE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE SO WE ARE PROVIDING THAT PRIVATE DRIVE AND WE HAVE ALIGNED IT WITH THE STREET TO THE NORTH SO WE THINK WE'RE PROVIDING THE FORM BASE OBJECTIVE AS WELL AS THE CONNECTIVITY OBJECTIVE UNDER THE URBAN MIXED-USE BY DOING WHAT WE DID BUT, AGAIN, WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND REZONE -- CHANGE THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY. AND, AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE I THINK KOTCHE'S EXHIBIT WAS A LOT BETTER THAN THIS ONE SHOWING WHAT WE HAVE CHANGED AS FAR AS THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS. AT THAT, I'M GOING TO BASICALLY LEAVE IT BECAUSE I THINK YOU'VE HEARD EVERYTHING AS FAR AS WHAT WE HAVE DONE TO THE PLAN, WORKING WITH STAFF, WHAT WE HAVE CHANGED AND TRIED TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AGAIN, UNDERSTANDING THAT IT DOESN'T PERFECTLY SATISFY THE ARE POLICIES AND OTHERTHERE CHARACTER-DEFINING AND OTHER ISSUES THAT WE DO SATISFY THAT DO SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION. WE DO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. JASON AND I ARE HERE. OUR ENGINEER IS HERE AS WELL TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. I WANTED TO BE AS EFFICIENT WITH MY TIME AS POSSIBLE. >> Downs: THANK YOU VERY& MUCH. I SEE ONE LIGHT ON. COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. DO YOU ENVISION HAVING COVERS OVERNYF THESE PARKING SPACES OR WILL THEY BE WALKING IN THE RAIN? >> I'M GOING TO DEFER TO JASON SIR. >> Stone: YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. >> AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE HAVEN'T PLANNED FOR ANY CARPORTS BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. WE USUALLY WORK WITH OUR CIVIL ENGINEER TO LOOK AT THE BEST LOCATION BECAUSE THIS IS NORTH TEXAS. >> Stone: DO YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OR A SAMPLE OF YOUR TERAN-DIRECTED MARKETING PLAN THAT WE COULD LOOK AT OR SOMETHING WE COULD SEE ON THE SCREEN? HOW ARE YOU ACTUALLY GOING TO DO THAT? >> SO I DON'T HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. YOU KNOW, NOT WITH ME TODAY BUT WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO IS REACH OUT TO THE VFWs, ALL THE AMERICAN LEGIONS. WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THE VA AND MARKET TO THEM TO LET THEM KNOW. ALSO WE WORK WITH THE VETERAN SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE REGION AND PUT ALL OF OUR MARKETING MATERIALS OUT THERE SAYING WE'RE GIVING PREFERENCE TO VETERANS. OUR MARKETING MATERIALS WILL BE JUST LIKE WHAT WE PROVI TO ALL SENIORS BUT IT WILL SHOW THAT THERE'S A VETERANS' PREFERENCE SO FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE. >> Stone: GREAT. GOOD. THANK YOU. >> Downs: I WOULD STAY CLOSE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I HAVE TWO. IF YOU COULD GO BACK, THE SLIDES THAT YOU HAD UP WITH YOUR RESPONSES TO THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES. >> YES, SIR. >> Bronsky: UNDER GUIDING PRINCIPLES 2.2, WHICH WAS THE PLANO 2050. MY QUESTION IS YOUR RESPONSE WAS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPNT WILL PROVIDE A UNIQUE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY FOR SENIOR VETERANS. WHAT ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY IS UNIQUE, SPECIFICALLY FOR VETERANS? >> I THINK ONE THING THE PROXIMITY OF THIS SITE TO THE VA HOSPITAL FACILITY IS VERY KEY. >> Bronsky: BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE PROVIDING. THAT'S WHAT THE CITY ALREADY HAS. SO MY QUESTION IS WHAT UNIQUELY IS YOUR DEVELOPMENT PROVIDING? THAT'S WHA IT SAYS. UNIQUE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY FOR VETERANS. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S THIS KIND OF -- I'M NOT AWARE OF THIS KIND OF FACILITY THAT PROVIDES THESE KIND OF AMENITIES, THIS KIND OF LOCATION OR THIS KIND OF A FACILITY FOR VETERANS IN THIS LOCATION, IN THE NEAR VICINITY. >> Bronsky: A POOL, A CLUBHOUSE, AN OUTDOOR ACTIVITY CENTER AND A DOG PARK? >> RIGHT. THERE'S GOING TO BE A LIST OF AMENITIES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY MANAGEMENT. MOST OF THEM WILL BE GEARED TOWARDS SENIORS AND ALSO VETERANS. A LOT O OUR DEVELOPMENTS FOR SENIORS HAVE A VETERANS' LIBRARY, VETERANS' WALL. IF THERE'S A GOOD AMOUNT OF VETERANS HERE THERE WILL BE VETERAN ACTIVITIES. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH VSOs WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO COME OUT ONCE A WEEK AND HELP VETERANS ACQUIRE OR RESEARCH THEIR BENEFITS SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY CAN GET, CAN'T GET, AND WHAT THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR. A LOT OF TIMES VETERANS DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO AND THEY HAVE NO IDEA THEY CAN GET CERTAIN MEDICAL BENEFITS. I MET WITH THE ONE -- THE VSO OUT IN ROCK WALL AND THEY WERE TELLING ME THE AMOUNT OF SENIOR VETERANS THEY HAVE COME THROUGH THAT DON'T EVEN REALIZE THAT THEY CAN GET A VA CHECK TO HELP THEM GET BY EVERY DAY. I THINK OFFERING THAT UP WITH THE OPERATIONS -- IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING PHYSICAL. IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THROUGH MANAGEMENT AND PARTNERSHIP WITH LOCAL VSOs THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THIS UNIQUE AND THE FACT THAT IT'S LESS THAN A MILE AWAY FROM THE VA CLINIC -- WE CAN GET WITH THE DIFFERENT TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATIONS THAT HELP VETERANS GET TO THOSE MEDICAL FACILITIES AND THEY OFFER THAT FREE OF CHARGE. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF BUILDING THAT COALITION, WHICH I HAVE ALREADY BEGUN TO DO, AND LETTING THEM KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE LOCATED THIS CLOSE TO THE VA HOSPITAL. >> Bronsky: THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. IN YOUR LIST OF AMENITIES AND THINGS, NONE OF THAT WAS MENTIONED AND SO THAT'S WHY I WAS CURIOUS. THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS ON THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES 3.4. YOU MADE THE RESPONSE, THE DEMAND FOR SENIOR VETERAN LIVING IS SUBSTANTIAL. WHAT STUDY DO YOU HAVE THAT SHOWS THAT OUT? I ASKED STAFFND THE WEREN'T ABLE. >> I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO SENIOR HOUSING AND THEN JUST ANECDOTALLY FROM WHAT I HAVE TALKED TO OTHER VSOs. RIGHT NOW IF YOU LOOKED AT THE COMPARABLE PROPERTIES, ALL BUT ONE WERE 90% OCCUPIED AND THAT ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN 90% OCCUPIED JUST FINISHED CONSTRUCTION NOT TOO LONG AGO. THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS, THEY USUALLY ABSORB. THAT MEANS THEY'RE GOING TO BE OCCUPYING AS THEY RELEASE UNITS, ABOUT 10 TO 12 A MONTH IN A GOOD MARKET. THIS ONE THAT I SPOKE OF EARLIER THAT'S AT 40% TO 50%, IT WAS OPEN DURING THE PANDEMIC SO IT HAD A SLOWER START. SO, ONE, THE MARKET STUDY SHOWS THAT OCCUPANCY IS VERY HIGH AND UNITS ARE VERY LIMITED FOR SENIOR HOUSING. AND YOU GUYS STATE THAT IT'S A SOUGHT-AFTER ASSET CLASS. JUST KNOWING THE SENIOR COMMUNITY ANECDOTALLY SPEAKING TO ALL THE VSOs, THERE'S A DIRE NEED FOR HOUSING, NOT JUST FOR HOMELESS VETERANS BUT SENIOR VETERANS AND ALL VETERANS. IT'S USUALLY THAT MIDDLE GROUND WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE MY AGE THAT AREN'T LOOKING FOR HOUSING ARE USUALLY WELL ADJUSTED AND WE FOUND A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME BUT WITH HOUSING BECOMING MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN, THE SENIORS -- I SPOKE ABOUT THIS IN OUR LAST MEETING BUT YOU'RE CREATING THIS COMMUNITY WHERE YOU HAVE BEACON SQUARE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 1200 UNITS OF MULTIFAMILY, OFFICE SPACE, AND RETAIL. I HAVE DEALT WITH TAKING CARE OF A PATIENT BEFORE, NOT JUST A VETERAN BUT A SENIOR PATIENT TO WHERE I WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE WORK, TAKE THAT PERSON TO THEIR CARE AND IF I AM ENVISIONING THAT I WAS ABLE TO WORK AT BEACON SQUARE AND LIVE THERE AND TAKE MY MOM OR MY FATHER OVER TO MEDICAL FACILITIES THAT I SHOWED YOU UP NORTH, LIFE WOULD BE VERY SIMPLE FOR EVERYBODY. I THINK THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT IS TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE'S LIVES BETTER. >> Bronsky: SO IT WAS MORE OF THE DEMAND FOR SENIOR LIVING IS SUBSTANTIAL. >> CORRECT. >> Bronsky: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: FIRST I WANT TO SAY I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING WITH THE CITY AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU WORKED PRETTY EFFECTIVELY TOGETHER TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAD. TWO QUESTIONS. ONE IS ON THE VETERAN STILL BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A HOT BUTTON SINCE YOU GUYS ARE PROMOTING THIS AS VETERANS' FACILITY. I THINK YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD OTHER FACILITIES WHERE YOU DO THIS SAME TYPE OF MARKETING, IS THAT ACCURATE? >> CORRECT. >> Cary: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THOSE OR WHAT PERCENTAGE OCCUPANCY OF VETERANS DO YOU HAVE IN THOSE NORMALLY? CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? >> I CAN'T TELL YOU RIGHT NOW IN AN ACCURATE WAY BUT I CAN TELL YOU WHEN WE WERE LEASING UP EDGESTONE, THE CITY OF EDGESTONE, OPERATIONAL STAFF WERE TELLING ME THEY WERE AT 5% TO 10% AT THATIME. I HAVEN'T CHECKED WITH THEM RECENTLY BUT I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A LOT OF VETERANS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THAT COMMUNITY WHERE THEY BUILT A VETERANS' WALL IN THEIR LIBRARY. I COULD GET BACK TO YOU WITH THAT INFORMATION BUT I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT NOW. >> Cary: OKAY. DID YOU MENTION THAT -- I GUESS I REALLY HAVE THREE QUESTIONS. DID YOU MENTION THAT YOU ARE DOING SPECIAL THINGS FOR VETERANS THERE? DID THAT HAVE TO DO WITH PRICING OR IS THAT SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS YOU WERE MENTIONING TO COMMISSIONER BRONSKY? >> NO, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PRICING. WHEN YOU CREATE A FACILITY FOR SENIOR LIVING FOR VETERANS, MOST OF -- THEY'RE NOT JUST VETERANS, THEY'RE SENIORS. MOST OF WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO IS YOU'RE GOING TO BRING OPERATIONAL THINGS TO THEM. AMENITIES. FORGET ABOUT THE VETERAN THING FOR ONE SECOND. IF YOU'RE DOING JUST SENIOR HOUSING, THERE ARE GOING TO BE GRAPHICS. THERE'S GOING TO BE THINGS -- THEY'RE ALL ACTIVITIES GEARED TOWARDS SENIORS. IF WE'RE MARKETING TOWARDS VETERANS WE'RE GOING TO DO THINGS MARKETED TOWARDS VETERANS. WE'RE GOING TO BRING IN THE THERE'S GOING TO BE A FRIDAY WHERE WE RAISE THE FLAG TOGETHER OR BRING IT DOWN BUT IT BRINGS A SENSE OF NORMALCY TO VETERANS. IT WILL BE PROGRAMMATIC THROUGH THE OPERATIONS. >> Cary: I'VE GOT SOME EXPERIENCE WITH WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING IN THIS AREA BECAUSE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WE BROUGHT MY 89-YEAR-OLD MOTHER-IN-LAW OVER TO PLANO TO PUT IN A FACILITY THAT'S JUST NORTH OF YOURS. AND I CAN TELL YOU THE PROXIMITY TO HOSPITALS AND OUR PROXIMITY TO MY MOTHER-IN-LAW, ESPECIALLY MY WIFE, HAS BEEN IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS SHE'S HAD SOME HEALTH ISSUES. I THINK YOUR PROXIMITY TO THE HOSPITALS IS COMPELLING. FINAL, SIMPLE QUESTION. I THINK YOU DO HAVE FOOD SERVICE IN HERE. YOU HAVE A CAFETERIA. AM I CORRECT? >> THERE'S NO CAFETERIA. WE WOULD WORK WITH THE VSOs AND CATERING TO PROVIDE -- IF PEOPLE WANTED TO PURCHASE MEALS PREPARED. >> Cary: THERE'S NO FOOD SERVICE. >> THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL KITCHEN OR FOOD SERVICE. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: THIS IS A SENIOR LIVING FACILITY WITH A PREFERENCE FROM A MARKETING PERSPECTIVE FOR VETERANS. BUT WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS, WE ARE LOOKING AT IT MAINLY IN TERMS OF 55 AND OLDER SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. PERIOD. >> CORRECT. >> Olley: OKAY. >> Downs: ANYONE ELSE? >> IF I COULD, I WOULD RESTRICT IT TO VETERANS ONLY BUT BECAUSE OF FAIR HOUSING LAWS, I BELIEVE YOUR CITY ATTORNEY SPOKE ABOUT THIS, YOU CAN'T RESTRICT IT. IT'S NOT A PROTECTED CLASS. YOU CAN AGE RESTRICT BUT YOU CANNOT SAY ONLY VETERANS, NOT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, NOT RIGHT NOW. >> Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. NEXT SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM. >> NEXT WE HAVE LISTED ROB LEWIS. >> I THE CIVIL ENGINEER HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: THANK YOU. >> NEXT IS HENRY BILLINGSLEY. >> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS HENRY BILLINGSLEY. I'M WITH BILLINGSLEY COMPANY. WE'RE THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER OF BEACON SQUARE, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY THAT GOES FROM COIT ROAD, WRAPS AROUND THE WALMART AND THEN DOWN TO MAPLESHADE. WE SPENT ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF WORKING WITH THE CITY ON OUR PROPERTY A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. IT TOOK A LONG TIME. IT WAS A LOT OF WORK AND WE WORKED OUT SOMETHING AND I MEAN I DON'T THINK WE COULD CHANGE A TREE ON THAT DEVELOPMENT AND GET IT THROUGH THE CITY NOW. I MEAN, IT WAS IN CONCRETE. WE ENDED UP WITH 1200 UNITS OF APARTMENTS, 117,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL, AND 800,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND IT WAS ALL LAID OUT. THE APARTMENTS WERE UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW WITH THE RETAIL AND THE FIRST PHASE OF APARTMENTS. AND THAT FACES ON COIT ROAD. THE OFFICES ARE PRIRILY IN THE BACK PART FACING MAPLESHADE. AND SO MAPLESHADE IS THE FRONT DOOR TO THE OFFICE PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND WE LOOKED AT THE ZONING AND WE'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR 50 YEARS. WE LOOKED AT THE ZONING. IT WAS CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE DEVELOPMENT FROM COIT ROAD OVER TO OHIO ON MAPLESHADE, IT IS ALL BASICALLY COMMERCIAL OFFICE. WE SOLD A SITE AT THE OTHER END OF MAPLESHADE, ABOUT 400 YARDS FROM HERE, FOR A MEDICAL BUILDING. IT WAS BUILT TWO YEARS AGO. WE'RE DEALING RIGHT NOW WITH ANOTHER TWO-STORY, 50,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL BUILDING FOR A GROUP OF BRAIN SURGEONS. THAT'S THE TYPE OF THING WE EXPECTED TO BE ALONG THAT CORRIDOR. AND FOR 800,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE YOU NEED TO HAVE OFFICES IN THE FRONT SO IT'S A CONTINUITY OF DEVELOPMENT AND ALL AND I THINK THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING THAT WAS THERE, YOU LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT ALL ALONG MAPLESHADE, IT WOULD BE VERY, VERYIFFICULT TO HAVE NICE FIRST-QUALITY OFFICE BUILDINGS BEHIND MULTIFAMILY AS THE FRONT DOOR INTO THAT. AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT I THINK THE CITY IS BETTER OFF. I KNOW OUR OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF THERE WAS AN OFFICE-TYPE USE IN THE FRONT RATHER THAN MULTIFAMILY. IT WOULD JUST MAKE DEVELOPING OFFICE BUILDINGS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT. AND YOU CAN'T DO THEM IF THEY DON'T MAKE MONEY AND SO I JUST THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING THAT'S ALONG THAT CORRIDOR AND THE OTHER BUILDINGS ALONG THAT CORRIDOR THAT OFFICE-TYPE DEVELOPME WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE BOTH FOR THAT PROPERTY AND FOR THE PROPERTY BEHIND. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: THANK YOU, MR. BILLINGSLEY. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, THERE ARE NOT. >> I HAD A QUESTION FOR HIM. NO? >> Downs: OKAY. HE'S NOT A DEVELOPER. >> IF HE WANTS TO ANSWER IT. HE'S NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION. >> Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. HE NO MORE SPEAKERS. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> Downs: ALL RIGHT. SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AND WE WILL NOW CONFINE DISCUSSION TO STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL START. WHAT IN THE UNDERLYING ZONING RIGHT NOW, THE WAY IT SITS, HOW TALL COULD SOMETHING BE BUILT ON THOSE TWO LOTS? HOW MANY FLOORS? >> SO THE CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL ZONING HAS A 20-STORY HEIGHT LIMIT. DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE RESTRICTED BASED UPON PROXIMITY TO PROPERTY LINES AS WELL AS PARKING LOT COVERAGE, THINGS LIKE THAT. THE MAX AMOUNT IS 20 STORIES BUT PROBABLY WOULD NOT GET THAT HEIGHT ON THE PROPERTY. >> Downs: PHYSICALLY YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BECAUSE OF SETBACKS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. OKAY. IN TERMS OF -- AND I HAD ASKED MR. HILL ABOUT THIS -- I HAVE A CONCERN, ACTUALLY, ABOUT LINING UP THE ENTRANCE WITH THE MAIN ROAD INSIDE BEACON SQUARE BECAUSE THAT WILL SIMPLY BECOME A SHORTCUT OUT TO MAPLESHADE FROM BEACON SQUARE RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF SENIOR HOUSING AREA WITH PARKING RIGHT ON THE STREET. IT COULD GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A TRAFFIC LIGHT AT THAT POINT. THERE'S ANOTHER LOCATION JUST DOWN AND AROUND THE CORNER BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A GUARANTEE THAT THAT WOULD BE THE BUSY VERSUS THE OTHER ONE. AND SO I THINK I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT ALIGNMENT. I'M JUST GOING TO EXPRESS KIND OF WHERE I'M COMING FROM ON THIS. AT OUR LAST MEETING I MADE IT CLEAR, THIS IS LAND USE. WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT'S BEEN RECENTLY VETTED AND GONE THROUGH BY 20 COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO SPENT A YEAR AND A HALF ON IT. THEY WENT BACK AND FORTH WITH THIS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OVER AND OVER TO DEVELOP SOMETHING THAT WE ALL AGREED KIND OF FIT WHAT OUR GOALS WERE AS A CITY. AND IN THE PAST, SITTING ON P&Z AND COUNCIL, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE I RECOMMENDED SOMETHING THAT WENT AGAINST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PRIMARILY THAT WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT OUR PLAN WAS SEVERAL YEARS OLD AND THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE. AND SO SIMPLY FOR ME CHANGING THE SETBACK, BUILDING AN EIGHT-FOOT WALL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT MIGHT WORK IF THERE WAS ALREADY ROOM FOR RESIDENTIAL IN THIS SPACE. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO PUSH SOMETHING IN HERE. THIS IS WHAT IT FEELS LIKE TO ME. DO WE NEED MORE SENIOR HOUSING? ABSOLUTELY. WHY DO I NOT SAY DO WE NEED VETERAN HOUSING? BECAUSE THEY CAN'T MAKE IT VETERAN HOUSING. AND IF IT'S 5% TO 10% THAT ARE VETERANS, THAT'S GREAT BUT THAT BY ITSELF ISN'T ENOUGH FOR ME TO SAY THIS IS SO NECESSARY TO OUR CITY, TO OUR COMMUNITY THAT THIS IS THE BEST PLACE FOR SOME KIND OF PROJECT LIKE THAT. I'VE ALSO SAID MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE THAT PEOPLE WILL LIVE ANYWHERE. YOU MAY NOT WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO A RAIL STATION OR A TRAIN TRACK OR AN AIRPORT OR ANYTHING ELSE BUT YOU CAN GO AROUND THIS ENTIRE COUNTRY AND FIND PEOPLE THAT LIVE THAT WAY EVERY SINGLE DAY AND THEY'RE HAPPY BECAUSE THEY GOT A PLACE TO LIVE. SO IF THEY BUILT THIS, I HAVE NO DOUBT IT WOULD FILL UP. HOW MANY WOULD BE VETERANS? I HAVE NO IDEA. WITH THE DEMAND FOR RESIDENCE IN THIS CITY RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT VETERANS WOULD HAVE A CHANCE. I THINK IT WOULD BE RENTED VERY QUICKLY BUT OVERALL FOR ME, PERSONALLY, I HAVE DIFFICULTY SUPPORTING THE PROJECT AND I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER BUT EVEN AT THE LAST MEETING, AS I SAID, I WAS CONCERNED THAT WE WERE MAKING COSMETIC CHANGES AND SOME THINGS LIKE THAT WHEN ULTIMATELY REALLY IS THIS THE RIGHT ZONING, RIGHT LAND USE IN THIS LOCATION? THAT'S MY OPION. COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. BEING A SON OF A VETERAN WHO BASICALLY HELPED HIS FATHER DURING THE LATTER PART OF HIS LIFE, GOING THROUGH INDEPENDENT LIVING, THROUGH ASSISTED LIVING TO FINALLY HOSPICE, I CAN EMPATHIZE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM TRYING TO SUPPORT THE VETS. WE ALL WANT TO SUPPORT THE VETS OKAY? BUT REBOUNDING, AS I LOOK AT YOUR PETITION HERE, YOUR APPLICATION, I WAS TORN. I'VE BEEN FLIP FLOPPING OVER THIS THINGS SINCE FRIDAY AND I'VE REVIEWED IT AND GONE BACK AND FORTH AND TO BACKSTOP WHAT CHAIRMAN DOWNS WAS SAYING, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE SPENT 16-PLUS MONTHS COMING UP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT THE CITIZENS ARE EXPECTING US TO ADHERE TO. IT WAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE CRP. IT WAS VOTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THIS BOARD AND ALSO BY THE CITY COUNCIL. SO THOUGH I CAN EMPATHIZE WANTING TO PUT SOMETHING TO SUPPORT THE VETERANS, I FEEL THAT COMBINED WITH THAT THERE'S ALREADY, WITHIN THE AREA, INDEPENDENT LIVING AND ALSO ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES AND JUST TO THE NORTH, AS MR. BILLINGSLEY WAS MENTIONING, THERE'S GOING TO BE UNITS FOR RENT IN THE URBAN MIXED-USE AREA. I THINK THERE'S A BETTER USE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SPOT HERE THAT CAN, WE HOPE IN THE FUTURE, HELP SUPPORT THE VETERANS, WHETHER IT'S NEW CLINIC OR ONCOLOGY UNIT OR WHATEVER THE CASE. BUT I DON'T THINK THE CITIZENS WISH FOR US TO PUT A MULTIFAMILY UNIT WITHIN THIS AREA HERE. AND THAT'S WHERE IT COMES DOWN TO, I GUESS. AND WE'RE HERE TO SPEAK AS THE VOICE OF THE CITIZENS. THANK YOU. >> Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Horne: I CONCUR. IS THERE A NEED FOR SENIOR HOUSING I PLANO? ABSOLUTELY. IT'S A NEED ACROSS THE COUNTRY, ESPECIALLY FOR VETERANS. BUT LIKE YOU SAID, THIS IS NOT A PROTECTED CLASS ON THAT LAW. BUT AS WE CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE AND THE NEED FOR PLANO AS WE GO INTO THE FUTURE, THAT DIVERSIFIED HOUSING PORTFOLIO IS GOING TO BE CRITICAL, MULTIFAMILY INCLUDED AND WHAT HAVE YOU. BUT I KEEP BUTTING AGAINST THE UNDEVELOPED LAND USE POLICY WHERE TO ME, THAT ALMOST RAISES THE BAR. WE HAVE SO LITTLE LEFT, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PRETZEL INTO A BOX THAT IT'S NOT MADE FOR. AND FROM THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES WHERE THERE'S A LINE THAT SAYS IT HAS TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO ITS NEIGHBORS. AND WE'VE HEARD FROM THE ONE PERSPECTIVE THAT THIS COMES IN AS POTENTIALLY A BURDEN THAT IS PUT ON THAT PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHTS. AND TO T MIXED USE, THE BEACON SQUARE DEVELOPMENT, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT THIS DOESN'T FIT THAT SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL. I WISH I COULD LIFT IT AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE CAN'T. BUT SIMILAR TO EVERYONE HERE, I WENT BACK AND FORTH. I CHATTED WITH COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, LIKE, I WOULD SAY RIGHT UP UNTIL THE DRIVE HERE I WAS ON THE FENCE, BUT I CAN'T FIND A WAY TO CONFORM IT TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH ALL THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE MANNER THAT DOES NOT -- ALMOST INVALIDATE ALL OF THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO THE DEFINE THE DASHBOARD AND THAT AREA. SO I'M LEANING IN OPPOSITION TO THIS. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I'M KIND OF IN THE SAME PLACE. WE WERE HERE HOWEVER MANY WEEKS AGO, AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS ANY SECRET, I WASN'T A FAN A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. BUT I WAS HOPEFUL THAT WE WOULD SEE SOME DRAMATIC CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM. I WAS DISAPPOINTING THAT WE DIDN'T SEE VERY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. BUT I STILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS ABOUT THE ADJACENCY TO WALMART. AFTER TONIGHT, HEARING THAT WE MAY CREATE A NONCONFORMING USE HERE THERE IS NOT O, THAT'S A PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE THAT IS NOT FAIR TO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, THAT WE MAY PUT THEM IN VIOLATION OF AN ORDINANCE THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE IN VIOLATION OF TODAY BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE USE NEXT TO THEM. I DON'T THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. SO I'M STILL WHERE I W A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. I'M WITH EVERYBODY THAT'S SPOKEN SO FAR. WE'RE TRYING TO FORCE SOMETHING IN A PLACE THAT'S JUST NOT APPROPRIATE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER? >> I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PUT IN. AS SOMEBODY WHO SERVED AS THE VICE CHAIR FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I THINK IT'VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE RESPECT THE DESIRES OF ALL OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT PROVIDED FEEDBACK. I DO THINK THERE ARE TIMES THAT WE WILL NEED TO GO AGAINST WHAT THE PLAN SAYS, HOW THE PLAN IS WRITTEN. WE WERE VERY CLEAR THAT EXCEPTIONS ARE EXPECTED, BUT IT GOES BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF SAID, AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER TOSON, THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT F TO THE COMMUNITY FOR E TO VOTE AGAINST THE PLAN THAT WE JUST ACCEPTED. I SEE A SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. I DON'T PERSONALLY -- I'VE STRUGGLED WITH THIS. I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THAT THEY'VE MADE SOME CHANGES, BUT TO ME THERE ARE STILL SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT STAND IN THE WAY OF ME BEING ABLE TO SAY THE TWO YEARS' WORK BY THE COMMUNITY THAT THIS IS THE PROJECT THAT WE NEED TO VOTE FOR THAT IS SUBSTANTIVE ENOUGH TO REQUIRE ME TO VOTE FOR IT. I AM -- I DO BELIEVE THERE ARE TIMES THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT FOR ME RIGHT NOW THIS IS NOT THAT DEVELOPMENT. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: ACTUALLY, IN SOME REGARDS, I THINK A BIT DIFFERENT THAN PROBABLY EVERYBODY ELSE ON THIS COMMISSION, MAYBE, AND IN MANY REGARDS, SIMILAR. WE'VE ALL EXPRESSED A NEED FOR SENIOR OUSING. SO IF NOT HERE, WHERE? I GUESS WE PUMP THAT ON DOWN THE ROAD AND THE 276 RESIDENTS WILL HAVE TO FIND A DIFFERENT PLACE TO LIVE. I THINK THAT YOU GUYS WORKED HARD TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS AND I FEEL YOU DID MAKE PROGRESS. THERE'S BEEN SOME COMMENTS THAT THERE WASN'T SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS. I DON'T SEE THAT THE SAME WAY. I THINK THE PROJECT IS WELL-DESIGNED. I THINK THE PROJECT BEING ADJACENT TO HEALTHCARE IS IMPORTANT. AND I THINK IT ACTUALLY COULD COMPLEMENT BEACON SQUARE. I'M NOT SWAYED BY THE ARGUMENT THAT IT DOESN'T. I'M LOST ON THAT. WITH THAT SAID, WE ALL HAVE SAT HERE OVER THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF AND WORKED ON A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO, AND A LOT OF SUPPORT. AND THAT CARRIES A LOT OF WEIGHT. AND TO ME, THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO, WHAT'S THE BEST USE OF THIS LAND FOR THE CITY? AND I'M NOT SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT TODAY, BUT I DO FIND IT HARD TO VOTE FOR THIS, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALL OF THE WORK THAT WENT INTO IT. AND I THINK WE HAVE HOPEFULLY AN OBLIGATION HERE TO TRY TO FOLLOW THAT PLAN AS MUCH AS WE CAN. ALL OF US GOING FORWARD, AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT MOSTLY, AS WELL AS FUTURE LAND USES, IT'S REGRETFULLY HARD FOR ME TO VOTE FOR THIS, AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO. I THINK THAT ALL THE WORK THAT WENT IN, AND ALL THE THOUSANDS OF HOURS I THINK DESERVES SOME RESPECT. AND I KNOW IN TALKING TO EVEN IN THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS, PEOPLE THAT WERE ON THIS COMMITTEE AND TALKING ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC SITE AND WHY THEY LAID IT IN THE WAY THEY DID TO LEARN MORE, BECAUSE I KNOW THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON EACH OF THESE PIECES OF PROPERTY. A LOT OF THE DECISIONS WERE SOUND THERE. I FEEL THE NEED TO GIVE RESPECT TO ALL THOSE CITIZENS THAT WORKED ON THAT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES. I, TOO, FEEL LIKE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EFFORT AND THE BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS THAT PELE SPENT ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF -- THEIR PURPOSE AND THEIR EFFORTS NEED TO BE HONORED AND RESPECTED AS WE GO FORWARD, UNLESS THERE IS AN OVERWHELMING AND REALLY UNIQUE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. PERSONALLY, AS A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A WONDERFUL LAYOUT FOR THE SITE. I WISH THERE WERE PARKING GARAGES FOR BOTH OF THESE BUILDINGS SO THAT THE FOLKS WOULDN'T END UP WALKING THREE OR 400 FEET JUST TO GET TO THE DOOR OF THEIR BUILDING. I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, BUT I THINK THE EFFORT THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH WILL HELP US IN FUTURE DISCUSSIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. OKAY. WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION. COMMISSIONER? >> I MOVE THAT WE DECLINE THIS PROPOSAL. >> Chair Downs: DENY, YOU MOVE WE DENY ITEM 1A. >> 1A AND 1B TOGETHER? >> Chair Downs: SEPARATE. >> OKAY, 1A. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO DENY ITEM 1A. SO, YOU WOULD VOTE YES IS A NO. [ LAUGHING ] OKAY. BY A VOTE OF 7-0, ITEM 1A IS DENIED. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY AS WELL. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO DENY ITEM 1B. SO, AGAIN, A VOTE YES IS TO DENY. AND THAT ITEM ALSO CARRIES 7-0. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ENERGY GUYS. ITEM 2. >> AGENDA ITEM 2, PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT& REVISED SITE PLAN: LEGACY CORPORATE CENTER, BLOCK A, LOT1R &R - HEALTH/FITNESS CENTER ON TWO LOTS ON 15.5 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LEGACY DRIVE, 392 FEET WEST OF OHIO DRIVE. ZONED GENERAL OFFICE WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 468 FOR HEALTH/FITNESS CENTER AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PRESTON ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: LTF REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC (ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION). >> GOOD EVENING, I'M PARKER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OH, HE'S JUMPING THE GUN. DID YOU SAID NO, WE DO NOT? >> WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND NOW DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? >> NO. MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSION HORNS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEMNUMBER 3, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: NORTH CENTRAL ADDITION, BLOCK 2, LOT 2R - RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON ONE LOT ON 1.2 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 18TH STREET, 510 FEET EAST OF U.S. HIGHWAY 75. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANT: PUERTA DEL CIELO IGLESIA CHRISTIANA (ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION). >> PARKER, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS ITEM FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER OLL?IONS. >> Olley: I RECOMMEND ITEM NUMBER 3 FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY? THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. NEXT ITEM. BLESS YOU. >> NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRECEDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER CARDS ARE RECEIVED UNTIL THE TOTAL TIME IS EXHAUSTED. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4, DISCUSSION & DIRECTION: TATTOOING AND PERMANENT (OR INTRADERMAL) COSMETICS AND RELATED LAND USES IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS/GOVERNMENT (BG) ZONING DISTRICT - REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION PERTAINING TO LAND USE CLASSIFICATION AND RESTRICTIONS FOR TATTOOING AND PERMANENT (OR INTRADERMAL) COSMETICS AND RELATED LAND USES IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS/GOVERNMENT ZONING DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS THE CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION PERTAINING TO TATTOOING AND PERMANENT COSMETICS AND RELATED LAND USE IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GOVERNMENT ZONING DISTRICT, THE BG DISTRICT. THE COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AMENDING THE ORDINANCE TO ALLOW TATTOOING AS A PERMANENT USE AT THE MARCH 21ST P&Z MEETING, AND THE COMMISSIONER CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR MAY 2ND, 2022. SO, THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION IS TO PRESENT DRAFT STANDARDS, DISCUSS THE INCLUSION OF BODY PIERCING AS A RELATED LAND USE, AND SOLICIT ADDITIONAL DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION. SO, IN CONSIDERING THIS ISSUE FURTHER, STAFF RECOMMENDS INCLUDING BODY PIERCING AS PART OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR THE BG DISTRICT. SO, ALTHOUGH TATTOOING AND PERMANENT COSMETICS AND BODY PIERCINGS ARE TWO DISTINCT USES, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH USES ARE THE SAME. BOTH USES ARE ALSO REGULATED BY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES WITH THE SAME GENERAL RESTRICTIONS, HEALTH REQUIREMENTS, AND INSPECTION SERVICES. AND ADDITIONALLY, CHANGING ONE LAND USE WITHOUT ADJUSTING THE OTHER MAY RESULT IN UNINTENTIONAL NONCONFORMITIES. SO, CURRENTLY WHEN PERMITTED AS A PRIMARY USE BY SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, THE USE IS PROHIBITED WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF ANY RELIGIOUS FACILITY, RESIDENTIALLY ZONED DISTRICT, OR PUBLIC OR PAROCHIAL SCHOOL. AND THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REDUCE THAT DISTANCE TO 300 FEET. AND SO TO ASSIST THE COMMISSION IN THEIR CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DRAFT PROPOSAL, STAFF PREPARED AN ANALYSIS OF THE BG DISTRICT IN RELATION TO THESE USES WITH BOTH 1,000 FEET AND 300 FEET BUFFERS. AND SO AS YOU CAN SEE, ON THE MAP ON THE SCREEN, USING THE 1,000-FOOT DISTANCING REQUIREMENT WOULD PROHIBIT THE USE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DISTRICT. A 300-FOOT BUFFER, HOWEVER, WOULD CONCENTRATE THE USE TO AN OPERABLE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 15TH PLACE, MUNICIPAL AVENUE, 14TH STREET AND THE D.A.R.T. RED LINE. SO THIS AREA INCLUDES THE DOWNTOWN HERITAGE DISTRICT, HD26, HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE. AND SO THE EXHIBIT ON THE SCREEN GIVES YOU A CLOSER LOOK AT THE BOUNDARY AND ILLUSTRATES THE AREA ENCOMPASSED BY HD26. AND STAFF FOUND THAT REQUIRING DISTANCE SEPARATIONS CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLICATED TO TRACK FOR MULTIPLE REASONS. OUR CURRENT PERMANENT SOFTWARE CANNOT BE FILTERED BY LAND USE, SO EACH FACILITY WOULD HAVE TO BE VERIFIED BY PHYSICAL INSPECTION. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORIC NATURE TOF THE DISTRICT, THERE IS MUCH OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE RIGHTS TO PREDATE ZONING REGULATIONS OR RELATE TO OUTDATED ORDINANCES. THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL PARTIALS THAT EXIST WITHIN THE BG ZONING DISTRICT. HOWEVER, THEIR USE IS RESIDENTIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL, MAY TAKE CONSIDERABLE STAFF TIME TO CONFIRM BECAUSE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. AND DUE TO SOME OF THE AGE OF THE PROPERTIES, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE. SO THESE WOULD ALSO REQUIRE PHYSICAL INSPECTIONS. AND FOR THESE REASONS, AND BECAUSE HD26 IS A DEFINED BOUNDARY, STAFF PROPOSES USING HD26 TO ALLOW TATTOOING, PERMANENT COSMETICS AND BODY PIERCINGS AS PRI PRIMARY LAND US IN THAT PART OF THE BG DISTRICT. SO, TO PERMIT TATTOOING, PERMANENT COSMETICS AND BODY PIERCING, STAFF PROPOSES THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS. WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF HD26, A MAXIMUM OF REE TTOOG AND PERMANENT COSMETICS OR BODY PIERCING USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT. ANY TOOT TOGETHER AND PERMANENT COSMETICS AND/OR BODY PIERCING USES IN HD26 IN EXCESS OF THOSE PERMITTED BY RIGHT MAY ONLY BE PERMITTED BY S.U.P. THEY MAY BE PERMITTED BY S.U.P. THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT. WE PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT REGARDING TATTING,ERMANENT COSMETICS, AND RELATED USES IN THE BG DISTRICT. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. SORRY. THANK YOU. SO, TO BE CLEAR TONIGHT, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK FROM US, TO REALLY TWEAK WHAT THEY HAVE PRESENTED AS A DRAFT PROPOSAL. SO WE PROBABLY WANT TO FOCUS ON WHAT WE'VE GOT ON THE SCREEN RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF US. SO, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: JUST ONE QUESTION. WHY THREE? >> WE WITH WEREN'T SET ON A SPC NUER, BUT WE WERE BASING IT OFF OF HD26. THE THOUGHT WAS WE WERE FOCUSING, IF WE WERE SAYING ONE FOR EACH MAIN STREET. >> Ratliff: YOU'RE RIGHT ON THE MONEY. I THINK YOU HIT EVERY POINT. MY ONLY -- THE ONLY THING THAT GAVE ME TROUBLE WAS THREE INSTEAD OF MAYBE TWO. I DON'T THINK ONE IS ENOUGH. I THINK THERE OUGHT TO BE ALLOWANCE FOR COMPETITION. IT'S JUST SUCH A CONCENTRATED AREA, I PERSONALLY THI TWO IS A MORE APPROPRIATE NUMBER, BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK YOU DID A GREAT JOB DOING THE ANALYSIS AND I AGREE WITH YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: TWO QUESTIONS. THIS MIGHT BE MORE LEGAL. I THOUGHT INTRADERMAL WOULD HAVE COVERED PIERCING. WHY DO WE NEED TO CALL THAT OUT? FOR MY THOUGHT, INTRADERMAL IS GOING INTO THE SKIN. >> WE DO HAVE TWO SEPARATE LAND USES IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE ALREADY, SO I THINK WE WERE OKING TO NOT HAVE TO REDEFINE OR REWRITE AND JUST STICK WITH THE WAY WE HAVE IT CURRENTLY. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT WE'VE ALWAYS HAD THEM SEPARATE IN THE PAST, AND SO . . . >> Olley: OKAY. HELP ME OUT. I MISSED THIS. HD26, CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE OVERALL DOWNTOWN BUSINESS -- WHAT? THINK OF TWO OR THREE THINGS, WHY HD26 IS MORE PARTICULAR IN THIS CASE. >> SO, HD26 IS A SPECIFIC HERITAGE DISTRICT DESIGNATED THROUGH OUR HERITAGE PRESERVATION. SO THAT DISTRICT IS JUST -- THOSE CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN THE BG DISTRICT. SO IT HAS ITS OWN SET OF STANDARDS THAT IT CALLS OUT ON TOP OF THE BG DISTRICT STANDARDS. >> Olley: STANDARDS MEANT TO PRESERVE A CERTAIN CHARACTER SPECIFIC TO THE HISTORY AND HERITAGE OF PLANO? JUSTOR MY EDUCATION. >> THAT'S RIGHT. MIKE BELL, PLANNING MANAGER, LIAISON TO THE HERITAGE COMMISSION. THE DOWNTOWN HERITAGE DISTRICT IS ITS OWN ZONING OVERLAY AND AS PART OF THAT ANY CHANGES TO THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN DESIGN CRITERIA AND BE APPROVED BY THE HERITAGE COMMISSION. >> Olley: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I'LL GET TO COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. WE'RE CHOOSING HD26 BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO NARROW THE LOCATIONS RIGHT? AND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE DRAFT IS BY RIGHT IN HD26. BY S.U.P. IN THE BG, WHICH IS THE ORANGE AREAS THERE. BUT ALSO WITHIN THE ORANGE AREAS WE STILL HAVE SOME LIMITATION ON LOCATIONS DUE TO THE 300-FOOT DISTANCE CORRECT? I'M LOOKING AT THE MAPS THAT ARE UP THERE NOW. >> DO YOU MEAN WITHIN THE HD26 STILL HAVING ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS? >> Chair Downs: NO. THE HD26 APPEARS TO MEET ALL THE DISTANCE SEPARATIONS. >> SO, THE 300-FOOT AND 1,000-FOOT CURRENTLY DOES NOT APPLY TO BG BUT DOES WHERE THOSE USES ARE ALLOWED IN THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS. SO THIS PROPOSAL WOULD BE TO NOT HAVE THOSE DISTANCE SEPARATIONS WHEN IT'S ALLOWED BY SPECIFIC USE PERMIT -- >> Chair Downs: TO ELIMINATE THE DISTANCE -- >> JUST FOR BG. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. SORRY, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, GO AHEAD. >> Bronsky: SO, I GUESS I WAS STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE 300-FOOT BUFFER PIECE. AND I GUESS MY BIGGER QUESTION IS STILL BACK TO THE FACT TT ITAYS PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS AREN'T MENTIONED IN IT. SO, THERE IS NO 300-FOOT BUFFER, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING? >> CORRECT. CURRENTLY, BG, THE USE IS JUST NOT PERMITTED AS A PRIMARY USE. >> Bronsky: AND MY SECOND QUESTION WAS THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS SOMEBODY HAD SOME SLIDES THAT WERE SHOWING HOW OTHER COMMUNITIES HANDLE THIS. AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIOR RATLIFF. MY ONLY STRUGGLE, REALLY, IS THE NUMBER 3. IT SEEMED TO ME THAT SEVERAL OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT DID PERMIT IT CAPPED IT AT TWO. AND SO I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT CHANGED TO TWO RATHER THAN THREE. I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE IN CONFORMITY WITH SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARY, DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING? >> Cary: I DID. SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. SO, IT'S PERMITTED BY S.U.P. ANYWHERE INSIDE BG, BUT BY RIGHT WITHIN HD26, CORRECT? AND SO I GUESS SOMEWHAT ALIGNING HERE WITH COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, THREE SEEMS LIKE A BIG NUMBER TO ME WITHIN HD26. BUT I WONDER, DID WE DISCUSS AND WHY WOULD WE NOT LIMIT IT TO THREE WITHIN ALL OF BG BY RIGHT AS OPPOSED TO THIS VERY SMALL AREA? I'M CURIOUS WHY WE DID THAT. >> I BIEVE AT THE LAST MEETING N DIRECTED STAFF TO ALLOW THE USE BY RIGHT. THERE WAS KIND OF AN ASTERISK TO THAT WITH SOME RESTRICTIONS. SO THIS WAS AN ATTEMPT TO POTENTIALLY PUT IN SOME RESTRICTIONS, BUT, OF COURSE, IF YOU WOULD PREFER TO ALLOW IT THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT, THAT'S YOUR PLEASURE. >> Cary: OBVIOUSLY YOU FOLKS HAVE PUT MORE SCRUTINY ON THIS THAN I, BUT IF THE NUMBER IS THREE, I WOULD SUGGEST POSSIBLY WE ALLOW IT BY RIGHT THROUGHOUT BG UNLESS THERE SOMETHING I'M MISSING. THAT'S VERY LIKELY THE CASE. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO, AGAIN, WE CAN COME UP WITH WHATEVER WE WANT HERE. SO, WE HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I NEED TO ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION FROM YOUR QUESTION EARLIER. THE WAY I'M READING THE MEMO, THE USE BY RIGHT WOULD BE LIMITED ONLY TO HD26, AND THE CURRENT ORDINANCE WOULD STILL APPLY IN THE REST OF BG WITH THE THOUSAND-FOOT BUFFER UNLESS GRANTED A VARIANCE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> SO, FOR THIS DRAFT PROPOSAL, WE WEREN'T INCLUDING ANY DISTANCING REQUIREMENTS AT ALL FOR THIS ONE. >> Ratliff: IN HD26, OR ARE YOU ELIMINATING THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS IN ALL OF BG? >> FOR THE ENTIRE BG. >> Ratliff: SO BY THAT, IF WE LOOK AT YOUR RADIUS MAP, IF YOU'LL PUT THAT BACK UP, THE EXHIBIT 2. IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY RIGHT THERE, THERE IT IS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY THEN THAT WOULD MAKE IT A USE BY S.U.P. ANYWHERE THAT'S NOT BOUNDED BY THE YELLOW LINE, IS THAT CORRECT? BASICALLY ALL THE WAY DOWN K OVER BY THE NEW SILVER D.A.R.T. LINE WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT? >> THE ONLY AREAS WHERE IT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT, IF WE GO WITH THESE STANDARDS, WOULD BE WITHIN HD26. SO IN THIS HIGHLIGHTED BLUE AREA. SO WE HAD JUST SET IT AT THAT NUMBER 3 SO THERE WOULD BE THREE ALLOWED BY RIGHT WITHIN THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. >> Ratliff: WHICH IS THE CURRENT STANDARD? >> NO, CURRENTLY IT'S NOT ALLOWED AS A PRIMARY USE IN BG AT ALL. >> Ratliff: SO WE WOULD BE BROADENING THE RULE A LITTLE BIT IN BG TO ALLOW AT LEAST AN S.U.P. REQUEST, BUT IT WOULD BE A USE BY RIGHT, WHICH WOULDN'T REQURE A ZONING CASE IN HD26. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IF IT DIDN'T GO ABOVE THIS MAXIMUM NUMBER OF THREE. >> Ratliff: THE REASON I NEEDED TO ASK THAT QUESTION IS I WA AGRING WITH COMMISSIONER CARY, BECAUSE I DON'T DISAGREE THAT IF WE HAVE IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, I THINK TWO IS PLENTY, PERSONALLY. BUT IF THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE UP K AVENUE AND 18TH BY S.U.P., I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, AS LONG AS WE GET TO TALK ABOUT IT. BUT I DO THINK WE OUGHT TO STILL HAVE SOME LIMITS ON HOW MANY TOTAL. I THINK TWO IN HD26 IS PLENTY BUE IN BG, BUT I'D PREFER TO HAVE JUST TWO IN HD26. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S WHAT WE GET TO PULL TOGETHER. >> I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CURRENT RULES REMAIN AS THEY ARE FOR EVERYWHERE EXCEPT HD26 AND THEN ALLOW TWO BY RIGHT IN HD26. >> Chair Downs: WE'RE GOING TO S THREE BY RIGHT IN HD26 AND THEN BY S.U.P. IN THE BG DISTRICT. WE COULD APPROVE SIX OR NONE, IT'S S.U.P. THERE'S NO DEFINING. I THINK YOU WERE GOING TO -- >> THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS THAT STAFF WAS TALKING ABOUT. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THIS DISTRICT IT'S NOT APPLIED TO JUST DOWNTOWN. THE SEVERAL LINE STATION ACROSS -- SILVER LINE STATION ACROSS FROM 12TH STREET THERE'S A PORTION ZONED BG. WE HAVE HAD OTHER REQUESTS FOR BG-ZONED PROPERTIES. THIS AREA WAS FOR US TO BEOKED ABLE TO TRACK IT EASILY. THERE'S LIMITATIONS ON WHAT WE CAN TRACK WITH OUR SOFTWARE. BUT ALSO, THIS IS THE MAIN COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY NODE IN DOWNTOWN. THERE'S FINGERS THAT GO OUT IN DIRECTIONS, BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE MAIN ENTERTAINMENT/ACTIVITY AREA. SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE FOCUSED ON AS ALLOWING IT THERE. BUT IF THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT, THEN IT COULD BE BY S.U.P. IN THOSE AREAS. BUT ALLOWING IT BY RIGHT AND US Y IS DIFFICULT EVERYWHERE. >> Chair Downs: SO, ASSUME WE EXPAND THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT. THAT WOULD THEN EXPAND THAT BY RIGHT OR BY S.U.P. PROCESS. SO IN THE FUTURE WE SHOULD KEEP IN MIND WHEN WE DESIGN THIS THAT IF THAT DISTRICT, BECAUSE WE'RE BEING SPECIFIC, HD26 PROBABLY ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE MUCH, BUT THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GOVERNMENT CORRIDORS COULD CHANGE. AND AS LONG AS WE HAVE IT ROUGH AN S.U.P. PROCESS, WE HAVE THE CONTROL TO MAKE THAT. SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE COGNIZANT OF THAT PIECE. I TEND TO BE IN FAVOR OF COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. I THINK TWO DOWNTOWN IS GREAT. COMPETITION IS A GOOD THING. IF YOU SAID IT'S ALLOWED UNDER S.U.P. IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GOVERNMENT DISTRICT, HOWEVER THAT WINDS UP BEING, UNDER AN S.U.P. PROCESS, WE HAVE SOME ABILITY TO HELP SHAPE WHAT THIS ENVIRONMENT LOOKS LIKE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: YES, WE'VE GOT TO REMEMBER, THERE WAS A TATTOO FACILITY DOWNTOWN THAT GOT BUSTED BECAUSE THEY WERE SELLING STUFF THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SELLING. SO, FROM A POLITICAL TASTE, I THINK TWO FOR US TO BE SOMEWHAT CONSERVATIVE HERE OF THE RECENT HISTORY OF WHAT'S HAPPENING. AND IF WE KEEP IT SIMPLE RIGHT NOW -- BECAUSE ONCE WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IT GOES TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND IT DOES HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE THE CITY COUNCIL. AL. THEY HAVE A LONG MEMY, SO, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT TRYING TO EXPAND COMPETITION THROUGH THE BG AREA, BUT, AGAIN, I'M JUST KIND OF GENTLY REMIND YOU OF WHAT HAS OCCURRED OVER THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF OF THAT FACILITY. AND MAYBE WE NEED TO TAKE BABY STEPS. AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PETITION DOWN THE LINE, WE CAN MAYBE MAKE THAT PETITION DOWN THE LINE IF SOMEONE WANTS TO OPEN UP A NEW TATTOO PARLOR ON THE NORTHERN BORDER ON 18TH STREET. I'M JUST BRINGING THAT BACK TO YOUR ATTENTION. SO RIGHT NOW STAFF IS ASKING US TO SIMPLY COME UP WITH A DRAFT PROPOSAL. AND WHAT THEY HAVE IS CLEAR AND CONCISE. AND IT'S EASY TO MONITOR AND EASY TO POLICE. AND IT'S A SIMPLE MATTER TO PASS THROUGH, GET THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON JUST THAT AREA AND THEN I THINK IT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT -- STAY WITH THE K.I.S.S. METHOD AND KEEP IT CONFINED TO THE HD26 AREA AND KEEP IT TO TWO,Y OPINION. >> Chair Downs: SO, THAT'S REASONABLE. I THINK IT CERTAINLY IS REASONABLE IF YOUR OPINION IS, EVEN BY S.U.P. YOU REALLY DON'T PEOPLE LIKE WE SHOULD -- FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE MORE THAN TWO IN THE ENTIRE AREA, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE AN S.U.P. PROCESS IN BG WHERE THEY GET DENIED EVERY TIME THEY COME FORWARD. THAT'S SENDING THE WRONG MESSAGE OUT. WE SHOULD BE UP FRONT ABOUT THAT. AS A BODY HERE, LET'S TAKE IT THIS DIRECTION. ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH TWO IN HD26? >> YES. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH TWO IN HD26. NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT BG. DO WE WANT TO PUT THAT S.U.P. PROCESS IN PLACE FOR BG? I DON'T THINK YOU PUT A NUMBER ON IT. IF YOU SAY WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW ONE MORE IN THE BG AREA SOMEBODY'S GOING TO APPLY FOR THAT AS SOON AS THIS IS DONE SO THEY HAVE THAT POSSIBILITY. TIF WE DON'T PUT A NUMBER ON IT BUT WE'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT ANOTHER ONE, IT'S NOT THAT SOMEBD TRY TO DO THAT, BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY ELSE GETS IN THERE AND THEY DECIDE THEY WANT TO THEY STILL HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE NOT RESTRICTED IT TO ONE IN BG. SO, IN GENERAL, ARE WE IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING AN ADDITIONAL ONE, TWO THREE FOUR WHATEVER IN THE BG AREA? YES NO? NO NO. YES. >> HAVE A MAXIMUM S.U.P. WEB THE BG AREA. IF WE HAVE TWO BY RIGHT IN HD26, ARE WE ALLOWED TO CAP -- >> Chair Downs: THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS? >> Olley: THERE CAN BE NO MORE THAN FOUR IN OPERATION, PERMITS WITHIN THE BG. >> YES. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING YOU COULD BUILD INTO THE DISTRICT. AGAIN, YOU'RE CREATING A COMPLEX SYSTEM FOR THE CITY TO ADMINISTER AND REVW. IF THAT GOES AWAY, AS YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE, WE'LL HAVE TO RESCIND THAT S.U.P. TO USE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. I THINK IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE USES AND S.U.P.s IN THE DISTRICT IT MAY BE BEST TO KEEP IT AS IT IS NOW WHERE IT'S ALLOWED BUT AS AN ACCESSORY USE ONLY TO THE PERSONAL SERVICE SHOPS. THAT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT WHERE IT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ADMINISTERED SUCCESSFULLY LONG-TERM. AND I THINK AS CHAIR DNS MENTIONED, NOT HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THESE RIGHTS WITH INDIVIDUALS, BUT WHERE IS THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION, WHERE IS THE EXTENT IT COULD BE ALLOWED. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED BEFORE YOU. BUT IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE BROADER USE THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT, THEN MAYBE YOU WANT TO JUST KEEP IT RESTRICTED FOR NOW. YOU COULD LOOK AT EXPANDING IT LATER. WE DO HAVE -- THE DISTRICT IS LARGE. IT DOES HAVE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY, PROXIMITY TO OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. SO YOU COULD START SMALLER AND WE COULD REVISIT IT IN THE FUTURE IF YOU'D LIKE. >> Chair Downs: I THINK COMMISSIONER HORNE BROUGHT UP A GREAT POINT. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME BACK LATER AND PETITION US TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO ALLOW IT UNDER S.U.P., WE CAN ADDRESS IT AT KEEPING IT SIMPLE, MEETING A CURRENT NEED AND HD26 SEEMS TO BE AN IDEAL LOCATION. I AGREE WITH YOU. SOME OF US HAVE VERY LONG MEMORIES OF THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. SO, COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, I THINK THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING IS SENSIBLE IN MY OPINION, BUT I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MR. BELL. AND THAT IS, AS THIS IS A HERITAGE AREA, DO WE THINK THAT TATTOO PARLORS ARE A GOOD MATCH FOR A HERITAGE AREA? MAYBE IT'S JUST ME, BUT THAT SEEMS A BIT INCONGRUOUS TO ME IN SOME REGARDS, THAT WE'RE TAKING TATTOO PARLORS AND PUTTING THEM IN THE HERITAGE AREA. I'M SURE YOU GUYS HAVE CONSIDERED THIS. I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT THE THOUGHTS WERE. >> GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE HERITAGE COMMISSION IS NOT CONCERNED WITH THE USE OF THE BUILDING, BUT WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE DESIGN. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU >> Cir Downs: COMMISSIONER TLIFF. >> Ratliff: I MAY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WITH A DIFFERENT ANGLE, IS THAT I THINK AT LEAST THE PEOPLE THAT I KNOW, MY NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE IN THE ARTS DISTRICT AS WE CALL IT, RECOGNIZE THE DOWNTOWN AREA AS THE HEART OF THE ARTS DISTRICT. SO REGARDLESS OF THE ARCHITECTURE, IT'S THE USES ARE THE ARTS DISTRICT. AND THE TATTOO PARLOR DOES FIT IN AN ARTS DISTRICT USE. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: SO, CAN WE GIVE STAFF DIRECTION THAT WE ARE GOOD WITH ALLOWING TWO BY RIGHT IN HD26? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK WHAT STAFF HAS PRODUCED IS EXCELLENT, CLEAR CONCISE. THE ONLY MODIFICATION IS WE CHANGE IT FROM A MAXIMUM OF THREE TO A MAX HUMAN RESOURCES . >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THAT ALSO IS ALLOWING S.U.P. THROUGH THE BUSINESS DISTRICT. DO WE WANT TO -- LOOKING AT WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, DO WE WANT TO ALLOW ITEM 1, WHICH IS ANYBODY CAN COME AND APPLY FOR AN S.U.P., UNLIMITED NUMBER OF LOCATIONS, MEANING THAT IF WE DO THAT, WE'RE GOING WIINGO APPROVE THEM, YES, WE'RE OTHERWISE WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THAT IN THERE. >> NOT BEING ONE TO DENY AN INDIVIDUAL THE OPPORTUNITY TO EARN A LIVING, OKAY. AND IT IS AN ECONOMIC DRIVER. I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE ANY TATTOOS. I'M A BLANK. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: A BLANK CANVAS? >> I UNDERSTAND THAT'S THE TERM. MY SON HAS THEM AND I KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE AND THERE'S GREAT ART ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. I WOULD HATE TO DENY SOMEONE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO EARN A LIVING SO I STILL THINK WE NEED TO KEEP ITEM 1 IN THERE FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. >> Olley: I AGREE. I THINK THE MARKET WILL CONSTRAIN TO SOME EXTENT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH DEMAND IS IN PLANO FOR MULTIPLE TATTOO PARLORS. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. LET ME BACK UP AGAIN. ITEM 2, WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT OTHER THAN CHANGING IT TO TWO. OKAY. DO WE WANT ITEM 1? YES NO? >> I DON'T, BUT I RECOGNIZE THE ARGUMENT. BUT I WOULD BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH JUST ITEM 2. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF 1, YES. >> I WOULD LIKE NUMBER 1 REMOVED. >> I'M IN FAVOR OF 1. [ OFF MIC ] [ LAUGHING ] >> BEING A BLANK MYSELF, I'M NOT SURE I'M QUALIFIED TO TALK ABOUT THIS. >> Chair Downs: WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD INCLUDING ITEM 1. PARDON? IT'S A NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEM. IS THERE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. OKAY. ARE WE AS CLEAR AS MUD? >> YES, SIR. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. BASICALLY, YOUR DRAFT PROPOSAL IS GREAT, JUST CHANGE IT FROM THREE TO TWO AND THEN THAT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO US FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. ARE WE GOOD? YES, THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5 IS DISCUSSION & DIRECTION: PLANNING POLICY DOCUMENTS - CONSIDER A PROCESS TO REVIEW LONG-STANDING -- I'M SORRY -- PLANNING POLICY DOCUMENTS WITH THE PURPOSE OF RECOMMENDING THE CONTINUED USE, UPDATE, OR RETIREMENT OF THESE DOCUMENTS. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M DREW, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, A CONTINUATION OF AN ITEM THAT WE FIRST BROUGHT TO YOU IN JANUARY SEEKING DIRECTION ON A PROCESS TO REVIEW SOME OF OUR LONG-STANDING PLANNING POLICY DOCUMENTS. TO RECAP, THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS ITEM, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING PLANS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS TO GUIDE PHYSICAL DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE HAVE COMPLETED NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS, MANY OF WHICH REMAIN ADOPTED, SOME DATING BACK TO 1981, WHICH MAY NO LONGER SUPPORT THE CURRENT GOALS AND RESULT IN CONFUSION AND UNCERTAINTY FOR STAFF WHEN PROVIDING GUIDANCE OR RECOMMENDATIONS. SO AT THE JANUARY 4TH, 2022 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, WE RECEIVED DIRECTION FOR THE CHAIR AND FIRST VICE CHAIR TO MEET WITH STFF TO REVIEW THE FULL LIST OF DOCUMENTS TO SORT AND PRIORITIZE THE DOCUMENTS AND DETERMINE WHICH WOULD BE BEST REVIEWED BY THE FULL COMMISSION OR BY A P&Z SUBCOMMITTEE. AND WE MET WITH THE CHAIR AND FIRST VICE CHAIR ON FEBRUARY 8TH, 2022. SO FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, STAFF TOOK BACK THAT FULL SET OF DOCUMENTS, DID A REVIEW AND GROUPED THEM INTO ONE OF FOUR CATEGORIES BASED ON THEIR NEED FOR REVW AN SE OF THE OTHER FACTORS DISCUSSED WITH THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. SO, GROUP NUMBER 1 ARE POLICY DOCUMENTS RECOMMENDED FOR RETIREMENT OR REPEAL. THESE ARE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE MOST EASILY RECOMMENDED FOR RETIREMENT DUE TO ONE OF THE FEW REASONS HERE ON THE SCREEN. THEY'RE PRIMARILY OUTDATED AND NO LONGER USEFUL FOR STAFF. IN THE CASE WHRE -- CASES WHEREY PROVIDE VALUE, THEY'RE EXPECTED TO BE REFERENCED AS PART OF A FUTURE DOCUMENT, OR THE OBJECTIVES ARE LARGELY COMPLETE. THE EXAMPLE ON THE SCREEN IS THE S HISTORIC AREAS FROM 1993. THIS DOCUMENT IS NOW OBSOLETE DUE TO THE CREATION OF CUSTOMIZED DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DOWNTOWN AND HAGGARD PARK HERITAGE DISTRICTS. GROUP 2 ARE DOCUMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED DURING FUTURE POLICY OR PLAN UPDATES. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONSIDERED OUTDATED BUT MAY BE RELEVANT FOR FUTURE PRIORITY PLANNING ACTIVITIES THAT MEET THE OBJECTIVES. THESE WOULD INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN, AS ADDRESSED BY THE POLICY AND AN UPDATED DOWNTOWN PLAN AS ADDRESSED BY OUR LAND USE POLICY. HANY DOCUMENTS WOULD BE REVIEWED AT THAT TIME. AN EXAMPLE BEING THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY DESIGN GUIDELINES. ANY RELEVANT ASPECTS OF THESE GUIDELINES WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR INCORPORATION IN THE FUTURE COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN AND THE DOCUMENT WOULD BE REPEALED UPON COMPLETION OF THE DESIGN PLAN. GROUP THREE ARE POLICIES DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEES, DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD NEED A DEEPER DIVE THAN OTHERS, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT FOR DECISION-MAKING AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEEDS ADDITIONAL DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION, INCLUDING WHETHER TO RETAIN, RETIRE, OR INCORPORATE THEM INTO OTHER DOCUMENTS. AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE PLANO'S LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION STUDY FOR THE STATION FROM 1998. THE PLANS FOR THIS AREA HAVE NOT BEEN REALIZED AND CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED. THE DOCUMENT MAY BE SUITABLE FOR RETIREMENT OR REVISITED AS PART OF ANOTHER PLANNING EFFORT. AND FINALLY GROUP FR ARE OTHER POLICY OR REFERENCE DOCUMETS THAT ARE NOT RECOMMENDED FOR A REVIEW OR DO NOT NEED A REVIEW. THEY INCLUDE OUR CURRENT OR RECENT DOCUMENTS, THOSE BEING UPDATED OR THOSE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED AND ARE A REFERENCE DOCUMENT WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A FORMAL REPEAL. AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE ENVISION OAK POINT, FROM 2018, A CURRENT AND RELEVANT DOCUMENT. THE TABLE HERE SUMMARIZES OUR RECOMMENDED REVIEW PROCESS OF THESE FO GROUP THE GROUP ONE POLICY DOCUMENTS RECOMMENDED FOR RETIREMENT OR REPEAL WE WOULD BRING TO THE COMMISSION AS ONE GROUP OF DOCUMENTS FOR REVIEW. THEY TOTAL SEVEN PLANNING POLICY DOCUMENTS PLUS VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLANS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES DEPARTMENT HAS -- IS IN AGREEMENT THAT THAT WOULD BE A SET THAT THEY WOULD AGREE WOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR REPEAL. GROUP TWO ARE THE PRIORITY POLICY DOCUMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED DURING FUTURE PLAN UPDATES. WE WOULD SCHEDULE THOSE AS AGENDA ITEMS DURING THOSE FUTURE PLANNING ACTIVITIES. SO THE EXAMPLES ON THE RIGHT OF THAT TABLE INCLUDE THE DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN AND THE DOWNTOWN VISION AND STRATEGY UPDATE, AS WELL AS FUTURE UPDATES TO THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STUDY, THE HOUSING VALUE RETENTION ANALYSIS AND THE RETAIL CORNER AND THE TRAFFIC ISLAND GUIDELINES ARE UNDER REVIEW AS AN UPDATE TO OUR THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS. GROUP THREE ARE THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE RECOMMEND REVIEW BY A COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE. SO THERE ARE 12 DOCUMENTS FOR REVIEW THERE. WE RECOMMEND REVIEWING THOSE IN GROUPS OF FOUR. WI T SUBCOMMITTEE.HREE MEETINGS AND THAT WOULD BE FOLLOWED BY A FULL P&Z COMMISSION CONSIDERATION. AND THEN FINALLY 23 DOCUMENTS WERE IDENTIFIED AS OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT DO NOT NEED REVIEW AT THIS TIME. SO, FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW PROCESS, WE RECOMMEND APPOINTMENT OF A SUBCOMMITTEE OF APPROXIMATELY 3-4 P&Z MEMBERS. THE TIMEFRAME OF THOSE MEETINGS COULD VARY DEPENDING ON THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT WITH THE DOCUMENTS OR THE LENGTH AND COMPLEXITY OF THE ONES WE BRING FORWARD, BUT WE ANTICIPATE TWO HOURS PER MEETING. STF WLD PROVIDE BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THE REVIEW PROCESS AND THEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD APPEAR ON AGENDAS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE FULL COMMISSION. AND SO IN CLOSING, WE ARE SEEKING DIRECTION ON THESE TWO ITEMS, AFFIRMATION OF THIS REVIEW APPROACH WITH THESE FOUR DOCUMENT GROUPS, AND THEN THE FORMATION OF A P&Z SUBCOMMITTEE TO REVIEW SPECIFICALLY THE GROUP THREE DOCUMENTS NEEDING DEEPER REVIEW. AND WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: AY. THAN YOU. SO, COMMISSION, IF YOU RECALL, THEY BROUGHT US A LIST. WE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT GO THROUGH THIS. AND THE VICE CHAIR AND I HAD A GREAT MEETING WITH STAFF AND THEY TOOK OUR GUIDANCE EXACTLY. THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE SAID. LET'S BREAK IT DOWN INTO CHUNKS THAT WE CAN EASILY GET THROUGH. ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, THE SUBCOMMITTEES ARE AD HOC COMMITTEES. THE CHAIR IS ABLE TO CREATE THOSE TO HELP ADDRESS SPECIFIC WORK AGENDA ITEMS, WORK PROAMS THAT THE FULL COMMISSION DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON. I BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE, THE HOPE AND INTENTION HERE IS THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL DO THE WORK. THEY'LL BRING IT TO THE FULL COMMISSION. THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ASKING QUESTIONS, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO REDO THE WORK THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE HAS ALREADY DONE, OKAY? SO, AT THIS POINT I LIKE THIS APPROACH. I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TAKE THESE 12 DOCUMENTS AND LOOK AT HOW BEST TO DIVVY THOSE UP. AND THEN THAT MIGHT HELP ME DETERMINE HOW BEST TO BUILD MY SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THOSE. THE PROCESS FOR THE REVIEW BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE A MEETING WITH STAFF, RIGHT. IT WON'T BE ONE OF THESE MEETINGS. IT WILL BE A SEPARATE MEETING THAT YOU'LL NEED TO TAKE WITH STAFF. AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT TWO HOUR, OR PER SET OF FOUR DOCUMENTS, FOR EXAMPLE? >> WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT WOULD BE FOR THE FOUR DOCUMENTS. >> Chair Downs: FOR THE FOUR DOCUMENTS. SO ONE ADDITIONAL TWO-HOUR MEETING WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AND I THINK EVERYBODY WAS PRETTY MUCH ON BOARD WITH THAT APPROACH. SO, WHERE I'D LIKE TO GO FROM HERE, ASK AND TELL ME IF THIS WORKS FOR YOU GUYS, MR. HILL, STAFF. I HAVE TIME THIS WEEK, I CAN LOOK AT THESE 12 DOCUMENTS. MR. HORNE CAN JOIN ME IF NEED BE AND WE WILL TRY TO BUILD THESE COMMITTEES AND TRY TO GET THOSE OUT TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT THEY CAN WORK TO SET DATES WITH STAFF TO MOVE THESE FORWARD. I WOULD ASK YOU, FOR EXAMPLE, GROUP ONE, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE ALREADY PULLED TOGETHER AND THAT MIGHT SHOW UP ON OUR MAY 2ND MEETING AS A REQUEST TO RETIRE THESE DOCUMENTS, OR WHAT'S YOUR TIMETABLE LIKE? >> FOR THAT FIRST SET OF DOCUMENTS WE WOULD PREPARE A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION THAN WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING IN THE SUMMARY TABLE. >> Chair Downs: SURE. >> SO WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT MAYBE MORE THAN JUST ONE MEETING SPAN OF TIME TO PREPARE THAT INFORMATION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. DO YOU HAVE A TARGET GOAL TIME-WISE FOR GROUP THREE? >> FOR GROUP THREE . . . >> Chair Downs: YOU'RE SAYING FOUR PER MEETING, BUT IN MAY WE WILL COVER FOUR, BETWEEN NOW AND THE SECOND MEETING, THE SUBCOMMITTEE NEEDS TO GET WITH IN JUNE, ANOTHER FOUR IN JUNE. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A SENSE OF WHEN I COMMUNICATE TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE THEY UNDERSTAND AT THE URGENCY IS. IS THAT REASONABLE OVER THE NEXT QUARTER TO TRY TO GET THROUGH THESE 12 DOCUMENTS? >> YEAH, I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. WE COULD GO QUICKER IF THE SUBCOMMITTEE WANTS TO. I THINK ONE MEETING PER MONTH WOULD BE GREAT. >> Chair Downs: I'M TRYING TO BE COGNIZANT OF STAFF'S TIME. COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: THANKS. GREAT JOB, DREW. I MEAN, AGAIN, YOU EXPOUNDED ON WHAT THE CHAIRMAN SAID, YOU TOOK OUR SUGGESTIONS AND WENT FORWARD. GREAT JOB, I APPLAUD STAFF. BUT LIKE THE CHAIRMAN IS ASKING, THIS GROUP ONE, THE SOONER WE GET THIS THIS CLEANED UP AND OFF THE TABLE THAT WOULD BE GREAT, JUST GET IT DONE. BECAUSE NOT TO SAY THAT YOU GUYS LIED TO US, BUT I HEARD A NUMBER LIKE 23 OR 24 DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAD TO REVIEW. [ LAUGHING ] >> Horne: OKAY. IT WAS ONLY THIS BIG. BUT THAT BEING SAID, IF WE CAN GET RID OF THESE AS QUICK AS WE CAN THAT WOULD BE TERRIFIC. THEN WE CAN WORK ON SUBSET AND GET GROUP THREE DONE AND START CLEAN UP THESE POLICIES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. I CAN MEET ANYTIME YOU'RE READY TO MEET WITH STAFF. BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IF WE CAN GET RID OF THE FIRST ONES AND GET IT OFF THE TABLE, IT MAKES IT EASIER TO ADDRESS THE THIRD GROUP. >> Chair Downs: THIS IS AN OPERATIONAL ITEM. OUR JOB IS TO SUPPORT YOU. IF YOU SAID WE NEED THIS DONE BY JULY WE'LL MAKE THAT HAPPEN. IF YOU SAID WE CAN'T GET IT DONE BY JULY -- IF WE CAN GET THROUGH EVERYTHING BY DECEMBER,OU WOUL B ECSTATIC. WE JUST NEED THAT INFORMATION SO THAT WE CAN A BE HELPFUL. >> GETTING THROUGH THIS BY THE END OF THE SUMMERTIME WOULD BE REASONABLE. >> Chair Downs: PERFECT. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH COMMISSIONER HORNE. GROUP ONE, GIVE US THE BACKGROUND. WE'RE RETIRING THESE FOR A REASON. WE HAVE THE BENEFIT OF -- ABOVE SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS IN THAT WE SAT IN THAT MEETING AND KNOW WHAT THESE ARE. THEY'RE USELESS. BUT IT REQUIRES AN ACTION BY THIS BODY TO REMOVE THOSE FROM O. THAT'S AN EASY ONE. ANYONE WANT TO M MAKE A MOTION? WE CAN MOVE THINGS THROUGH REAL QUICK IF WE NEED TO. SO ANYWAY. SO, WE WANT TO GET DONE BY THE END OF SUMMER. I'LL GET WITH COMMISSIONER HORNE. WE'LL TRY TO PUT TOGETHER THE SUBCOMMITTEES FOR THIS GROUP THREE THIS WEEK, PERHAPS. AND THEN GO FROM THERE. DOES THAT WORK FOR EVERYBODY? EVERYBODY STILL WILLING TO SERVE? ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS TOPIC? >> NO, THERE ARE NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. [ LAUGHING ] ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ALONG. WE HAVE A PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT, I THINK. PRESENTATION: ANNUAL REPORT - RECEIVE PRESENTATION ON THE 2022 CITY OF PLANO PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT >> Chair Downs: CAN I ASK IF THERE ARE SPEAKERS BEFORE THEY SPEAK? GO AHEAD. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONER. MY NAME IS STEVE SIMMS, LEAD PLANNER. AND WITH ME THIS EVENING IS MY COEAGUELANNICK COLEMAN. TOGETHER WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT THE 2022 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS DIVIDE INTO HALF. I'M GOING TO START OFF WITH A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF OUR DIVISIONS AND WHAT THEY ACCOMPLISHED THIS YEAR, AND THEN NICK WILL COME AND SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT HERITAGE PRESERVATION AS WELL AS DEMOGRAPHIC AND DEVELOPMENT DATA. SO, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW, THIS IS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2021. ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THIS YEAR IS THAT WE BEGAN THE TIME WORKING FROM HOLE. HOME. IN JUNE, WE MADE THE TRANSITION BACK TO THE CITY HALL. AND ALSO DURING THAT TIME, OUR OFFICE WAS REMODELED. BUT ONE OF THE GOOD THINGS THAT REMAINED CONSISTENT THROUGH ALL THAT CHANGE IS WE WERE ABLE TO MAINTAIN OUR QUALITY CUSTOMER& SERVICE DURING THAT TIME PERIOD. HERE IS AN OVERVIEW OF AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF OUR PLANNINGEPARTMENT AND THE VARIOUS DIVISIONS THAT WE HAVE. I'D ALSO LIKE TO MENTION THAT 67% OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS HAVE SOME TYPE OF PROFESSIONAL ACCREDITATION. THE FIRST DIVISION WE'RE GOING TO START WITH IS ONE THAT YOU'RE MOST FAMILIAR WITH. THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION. HTHEY COME TO YOU TO PREPARE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS AND PROVIDE FOR YOU DIRECTION REGARDING ZONING CASES, PLANS, AND LANDSCAPE ISSUES. NEXT DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, HERITAGE AND INFORMATION, THE GROUP THAT NICK AND I ARE BOTH AFFILIATED WITH. AND WHAT WE DO IS WE LOOK AFTER THE CITY'S HERITAGE RESOURCES AS WELL PROVIDE DEVELOPMENT AND DEMOGRAPHIC DATA. OUR SECOND GROUP IS LONG-RANGE PLANNING. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS SMALL AREA STUDIES. NEXT, WE HAVE OUR LAND RECORDS PLANNING DIVISION. AND THIS GROUP IS ALSO DIVIDED INTO TWO. WE HAVE OUR LAND RECORDS DIVISION AND WHAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IS MAKING SURE THAT THE INFORMATION IS ASSIGNED TO OUR AUTOMATED MAPS ARE CORRECT AND UP TO DATE FOR ANALYSIS. THEN WE HAVE OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION. AND WHAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IS TAKING CARE OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAKING SURE THAT ALL OF OUR NEW DEVELOPMENT AS WEL EXISTING DEVELOPMENT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT AND OUR REGULATIONS. THEN WE HAVE OUR ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT. AND THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HOLDING US ALL TOGETHER, HELPING US PREPARE OUR PACKETS FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS, THE HERITAGE COMMISSION MEETINGS, GETTING READY FOR CITY COUNCIL, PREPARING PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SERVES THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE HERITAGE COMMISSION PRIMARILY, AND TOGETHER, YOU AS COMMISSION MEMBERS AS WELL AS STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO COMPLETE MANY AWARD-WINNING PROJECTS FOR THE CITY OF PLANO'S PLANNING INITIATIVES. NEXT, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAD A HEIGHT AROUND 2016-17, 2017-18, DIFFERENT SUBMITTALS AND THEN WE COME BACK UP AGAIN AS INTEREST IN DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING HAS RETURNED. HERE WE SHOW YOU A MAP OF OUR VARIOUS ZONING PETITIONS THAT WE HAD DURING THE YEAR OF 2021 BY TYPE, AS WELL AS THE STATUS OF WHAT WAS OCCURRING WITH EACH ONE OF THOSE PETITIONS. ANOTHER IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE'D LIKE TO BRING UP HERE AS WE TALK ABOUT THE AVERAGE NUMBER 60 DAYS IT TAKES FROM THE TIME THE CASE IS SUBMITTED TO THE TIME THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THEIR DECISION. AND AS YOU CAN SEE THAT NUMBER HAS BEEN GOING UP. AND ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT IS THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE MAYBE AS MANY CASES THAT COME TO US AS WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST, THESE HAVE BECOME MORE COMPLEX. AND DUE TO THEIR COMPLEXITY, IT REQUIRES MORE WORK, MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND RESEARCH FOR BOT STAFF BOARDS AND COMMIIONSAS WELL AS FOR THE COUNCIL TO GO FROM A RECOMMENDATION TO DIRECTION, TO MAKING A FINAL DECISION. AS AN EXAMPLE OF CASES FOR THE 2022 ANNUAL REPORT THAT DID REQUIRE SOME EXTRA TIME, THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS AND THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN DISTRICTS AND ALSO THE PLANO EVENT CENTER REQUEST. ALONG WITH THAT, THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, HAGGARD FARMS AND THE THREE D.A.R.T. STATIONS WERE EXAMPLES OF CASES THAT WENT ANYWHERE FROM 275 TO UPWARDS OF 410 DAYS. NEXT, WE HAVE A MAP OF DISTRIBUTION OF OUR MAJOR PROJECTS THAT ARE FOUND THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF PLANO. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY'RE GENERALLY CLUSTERED ALONG THE GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE AND ALSO UP AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY AND THE SAM TOLLWAY, AND MORE DETAILS ARE FOUND WITHIN THE REPORT. AND AGAIN, ALL OF YOU HAVE THAT WITHIN YOUR PACKET. AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING OR LISTENING TONIGHT, YOU CAN ACCESS THE REPORT AT WWW.plano.gov AND THE PLANNING WEB PAGE. WHEN IT COMES TO UNDEVELOPED LAND IN THE CITY, YOU CAN SEE IT'S SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY. BUT THE CONCENTRATION ALONG THE TOLLWAY AND THE GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE, 4.6% OF OUR CITY IS UNDEVELOPED, LAND NOT WITHIN THE HUNDRED-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. WE COME TO OUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND AMENDMENTS, AND THE TWO BIG ONES THAT I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT WERE THE CREATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT, THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PLANO EVENTS CENTER, AND NOW THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS BEEN ADOPTED, WE'LL BE LOOKING AT PROBABLY CONSIDERATION OF WHERE IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THESE DISTRICTS TO AND WITH THAT, I TURN OVER THE PRESENTATION TO NICK. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M NICK COLEMAN, PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF PLANO. SO ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL DUTIE OF THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION TEAM IS REVIEW OF CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS WHICH ARE NEEDED FOR ANY MODIFICATION OR ADDITION TO A HERITAGE RESOURCE IN THE CITY. LAST YEAR 42 CAs WERE ISSUED AND OF NOTE THERE IS 60% WERE REVIEWED AT THE STAFF LEVEL, WHICH IS A BENEFIT TO HISTORIC PROPERTY OWNERS. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE NEXT HERITAGE COMMISSION MEETING. OF THAT 60% THAT WERE REVIEWED BY STAFF, 72% WERE REVIEWED WITHIN A SINGLE DAY. A BIG ACCOMPLISHMENT FOR THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION TEAM IN 2021 WAS THE APPROVAL OF THE HAGGARD PARK HERITAGE DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH WAS AS ALLUDED TO EARLIER, WAS A MUCH-NEEDED UPDATE. THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION TEAM ALSO ADMINISTERS TWO PROGRAMS. THE FIRST IS THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION GRANT PROGRAM WHERE HERITAGE-ORIENTED ORGANIZATIONS ARE AWARDED GRANT FUNDING WITH THE GOAL OF UPPING VISITORSHIP. THE THREE ORGANIZATIONS AWARDED PRESERVATION GRANTS LAST YEAR HAD A COMBINED VISITOR TOTAL OF OVER 25,000. HERITAGE TAX EXEMPTIONS ARE ALSO GRANTED. 88 PROPERTIES RECEIVED THOSE EXEMPTIONS LAST YEAR WHICH ARE INTENDED TO HELP AID WITH PRESERVATION ACTIVITIES. TRANSITIONING FROM HERITAGE PRESERVATION INTO 2021 PROJECTS THAT WERE COMPLETED. THE FIRST AND PERHAPS MOST SIGNIFICANT WAS THE PASSAGE OF THE 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH YOU ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH. THE SINGLE UNIFIED POLICY DOCUMENT IS INCREDIBLY HELPFUL MOVING FORWARD AND IN NO SMALL PART IT'S DUE TO THE HARD WORK OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF COORDINATION WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE. SO THANKS TO THE COMMISSIONERS FOR ALL YOUR HELP. FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS IN 2021 ARE ZONING PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS TO HELP NOTIFY RESIDENTS OF ZONING CHANGES WITHIN THEIR AREA. OF PARTICULAR NOTE WITH THESE IMPROVEMENTS IS THE ZONING ALERT TOOL. THE RECENT CITIZE SURVEY INDICATED THAT 79% OF RESPONDENTS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LEARNING ABOUT THE ZONING UPDATES AND SO THE DEMAND IS DEFINITELY THERE FOR THIS TOOL AND AS OF THIS MORNING SINCE THE TOOL WAS MADE PUBLIC FEBRUARY 1, 839 RESIDENTS HAVE ACCESSED IT AND USED IT. ANOTHER 2021 ACCOMPLISHMENT WAS THE SILVER LINE MARKET STUDY WHICH EXAMINED THE POTENTIAL FOR TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AROUND THE TWO NEW DART STATIONS ON SILVER LINE. AND SORT OF INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT HAVE -- CONSIST OF TECHNOLOGY UPDATES AND IMPROVEMENTS, PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF PROJECT TRACKING, ADMINISTRATION, AND SORT OF ROBUST ANALYSIS OF DATA, WHICH HELPS TO MAKE THE DEPARTMENT MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE EFFECTIVE. AND FINALLY IN 2021 WE HAD OUR FIRST INITIAL ANALYSIS OF 2020 CENSUS RESULTS. RELEASE OF DATA.ISTRICTING- SO WE GOT -- WHICH WAS NOT A COMPLETE DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE BUT IT GAVE US UPDATED INFORMATION PARTICULARLY AS THE CHART ON YOUR SCREEN INDICATES THE INCREASING DIVERSITY OF OUR COMMUNITY. SO THE CENSUS WILL BE A GOOD PLACE TO PIVOT TOWARDS DEMOGRAPHIC AND HOUSING AND TO START WITH WE HAVE SCHOOL DISTRICT DATA. EVERY DECEMBER WE HAVE AN ANNUAL EDUCATION MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY. AND WE DISCUSS HOUSING, THE TRENDS IN EDUCATION, AND ONE OF THE LARGER TRENDS THAT WE'VE OBSERVED OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS IS THE DECLINE OF THE CHILD-AGE POPULATION WHICH, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE CHART ON THE LOWER LEFT IS A TREND WHICH IS AT WORK IN THE NATION AND THE STATE AND LARGER COMMUNITIES BUT IS MORE PRONOUNCED WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO. AND THE RESULT FOR THE ISDs IS A DECLINING ENROLLMENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE CHART ON THE LOWER RIGHT WE HAVE FEWER CHILDREN ENTERING KINDERGARTEN THAN ARE GRADUATING FROM HIGH SCHOOL. MORE GRANULAR DATA, WE REVIEW SCHOOLS CONCERNED. WE LOOK AT HOUSING PERMITS ISSUED WITHIN INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND THEN WE TRY TO ESTIMATE HOW MANY CHILDREN WILL BE ADMITTED INTO THE DISTRICT AS A RESULT OF THAT HOUSING. AND THEN FROM THAT WE CAN EXTRAPOLATE HOW MANY CHILDREN ARE PRESENT PER UNI AND PER ACRE IN DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WE SORT OF TRACK OF IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT ON SCHOOL DISTRICTS. AND, OF COURSE, UNDERSTANDING THIS IMPACT IS ONLY POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF PERMIT TRACKING. THERE WERE 761 PERMITS -- RESIDENTIAL PERMITS ISSUED LAST YEAR AND WE KNOW OF THOUSANDS OF PENDING PERMITS THAT ARE FORTHCOMING BASED ON APPROVED PLANS. WE HAVE TRACKED THIS DATA OVER THE PAST TWO AND A HALF DECADES AS INDICATED ON THE CHART BELOW. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TRACK SORT OF THE RISE AND FALL OF PERMITTING TRENDS THROUGHOUT TIME. BUT OF COURSE WE DON'T JUST TRACK THE NUMBER OF PERMITS, WE TRACK THE LOCATION SO THE ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL AREAS MAP, WHICH IS IN THE REPORT, TRACKS WHERE ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WAS TAKING PLACE THROUGHOUT 2021 AND THEN TABLES THAT LIST THE TYPE AND NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENT IS INCLUDED IN THAT REPORT AS WELL. AND SO TRACKING PERMITS OVER TI GIVES US A SENSE AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT OF HOW MANY HOUSING UNITS THERE ARE IN THE CITY. AS OF JANUARY 1st OF THIS YEAR WE HAD 117,020 HOUSING UNITS. OF THOSE 63% WERE SINGLE-FAMILY AND 37% WERE MULTIFAMILY. AND BECAUSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE HAVE A SINGLE AGREED-UPON TARGET OR A FORECAST OF THE HOUSING THAT WE EXPECT IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS. AND WE'RE ABLE TO BALANCE APPROVED AND PENDING UNITS OFF OF THAT NUMBER. AND THE 20-YEAR FORECAST IS 144,000 HOUSING UNITS. THE PERCENTAGE WILL CHANGE SOMEWHAT WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD TO 60% SINGLE-FAMILY AND 40% MULTIFAMILY. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU AND WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT WORK. IT ILLUSTRATES AGAIN WHY THE CITY OF PLANO, CITY OF EXCELLENCE. I MEAN, IT'S THAT KIND OF DATA AND EFFORT YOU'VE PUT INTO EXPLAINING WHO WE ARE. HOW WE'RE MADE UP, ALL OF THAT STUFF. EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT WORK. ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO COMMENT OR QUESTION ON THIS. COMMISSIONER OLLEY WAS DIVING FOR HIS BUTTON. >> Olley: COMMENT. I CONCUR. I LOOK AT POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS ALL DAY LONG AND ONE OF MY PET PEEVES IS WASTED SPACE AND EVERY PAGE HAD SOMETHING I COULD GET INFORMATION FROM. WHOEVER PUT THIS TOGETHER [INAUDIBLE] >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: FANTASTIC INFORMATION. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. WHEN I LOOK AT PAGE 28 WE'RE LOOKING AT BUILDING PERMITS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN FRISCO AND LEWISVILLE. DID YOU LOOK AT GOING NORTH TO PROSPER AND SELENA TO TRACK THOSE BECAUSE THOSE ARE GOING TO BE COMPETITION, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THAT OR IF POSSIBLY YOU WOU INCLUDE THAT IN THE FUTURE. >> WHAT WE'RE TRACKING IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF PLANO WE HAVE MULTIPLE ISDS SO WE'RE LIMITED TO TRACKING THOSE WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO. THOSE PERMITS ARE WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO OR WITHIN LEWISVILLE ISD WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK YOU HAVE PUT INTO THIS AND I'M VERY PROUD THAT WE'VE GOT SO MANY INCREDIBLE PEOPLE WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF PLANO IN OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GENTLEMEN. APPRECIATE YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ALL THE STAFF. OKAY. ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, THERE ARE NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'M GETTING BROWNIE POINTS OVER HERE. GREAT. IT'S NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA BUT ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS. MR. STONE, I BELIEVE YOU HAD SOMETHING. >> Stone: JUST REAL BRIEFLY. RECENTLY WE REVIEWED A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT WITH FRONT OPENING GARAGES THAT WERE RIGHT AT THE SIDEWALK LINE WITH NO LANDING PAD BETWEEN THE STREET AND THE DWELLING. AND I'M WONDERING IF WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT IN SOME OF THE ZONING OR BUILDING REGS TO REQUIRE AT LEAST A 20-FOOT LANDING PAD IN FRONT OF THE GARAGES IN A LOCATION LIKE THAT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO... >> Stone: IS THERE ANY TRACTION FOR THAT AMONG THE GROUP? >> Chair Downs: LET ME -- THE REASON THEY'RE ABLE TO DO THAT -- AND MR. HILL IS KIND OF PUSHING HIS HAND OVER HERE. THEY'RE MEETING OUR ZONING, OUR ORDINANCE. >> Stone: I UNDERSTAND. >> Chair Downs: AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST WE DECIDED THAT WAS OKAY. YOUR QUESTION IS SHOULD WE >> Stone: IS IT STILL OKAY. >> Chair Downs: IS IT STILL OKAY. >> Stone: YEAH. AND IS THERE ANY SUPPORT FOR THAT. >> Chair Downs: I WOULD ASK IF ANYONE ELSE WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE IT JUST MEETS THAT DIVERSITY OF HOUSING AND THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS WHERE THIS FUNCTIONS WELL IN CERTAIN GROUPS. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: YEAH, IT FITS INTO A BROADER QUESTION I HAVE HAD AND MR. HILL AND I HAVE HAD THIS DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD A COUPLE OF TIMES ABOUT PARKING IN GENERAL IN SOME OF THE MORE DENSE, IN MY CASE MU STREETS, SOME OF THE MORE DENSE DEVELOPMENTS WE HAVE GOT AND I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF A BRIEFING. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ACTION ITEM AT THIS POINT BUT I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF AT LEAST A BRIEFING. >> Chair Downs: I THINK THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT TO PUT AN ITEM ON THE FUTURE AGENDA. MR. HILL, IS THIS A GOOD USE IS THIS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE WORKING ON ANYWAY? >> SURE. I WILL SAY I THINK COMMISSIONER STONE TALKED ABOUT OUR URBAN PRODUCTS IN OUR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS, OUR URBAN MIXED-USE DISTRICT WE HAVE THE REAR GARAGE CAN REALLY ABUT THE TRAVEL LANE SO THAT THERE'S NOT TYPICAL PARKING PAD LIKE YOU WOULD BEHIND A NORMAL SINGLE-FAMILY GARAGE LIKE YOU WOULD SEE IN THE MORE SUBURBAN AREAS OF THE CITY. WE HAVE ALLOWED THAT BECAUSE TYPICALLY IN THOSE DISTRICTS YOU HAVE ON-STREET PARKING SO U WILL SEE THOSE TYPICALLY COUPLED TOGETHER. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME INSTANCES WHERE THE PUBLIC PARKING, THE COMMISSION HAD A CONCERN. WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT THOSE. WE ARE WORKING ON AN UPDATE TO OUR THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS. WE'VE HAD SOME CHALLENGES WITH, IN SOME DISTRICTS, PUBLIC PARKING. PEOPLE PARKING IN THE ALLEYS AND BASICALLY BLOCKING TRAFFIC AND HAVING DIFFICULTIES GETTING PUBLIC PARKING. COUPLED WITH OUR THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS WE ARE LOOKING AT& POSSIBLY AN AMENDMENT TO THOSE SETBACKS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR PARKING BACK THERE SO IF YOU WOULD ALLOW US SOME TIME TO KIND OF BUILD THA INT A DISCUSSION WE'LL BE HAPPY TO BRING THAT BACK TO YOU. >> Stone: I JUST THINK AS A HOMEOWNER I'D LIKE TO HAVE A PLACE TO BACK MY CAR OUT AND WASH IT BUT I CAN'T DO IT IF MY GARAGE DOOR IS RIGHT ON THE SIDEWALK. THANK YOU FOR -- >> Chair Downs: IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DON'T NEED IT AS A SEPARATE ITEM BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSING THIS ANYWAY. COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: I'M NOT SURE THIS IS FOR A FUTURE AGENDA BUT I WANTED TO BRING THIS UP. THIS MEETING STARTED WITH A GENTLEMAN THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT RENTAL HOUSES AND HE SAID HE WENT TO THE CITY AND THEY SUGGESTED THAT THIS COMMISSION SHOULD TAKE THAT ON. SO I GUESS IS THAT ACCURATE AND SHOULD WE DO THAT? >> Chair Downs: I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION OF LEGAL HERE AND MAYBE AS -- BECAUSE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IS IT WORTH A BRIEF UPDATE, EITHER IN PRELIMINARY OR IN REGULAR SESSION JUST ON OUR ORDINANCE AROUND THAT? >> JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE INFORMATION, THE COUNCIL DOES PERIODICALLY CONSIDER THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGULATION. THERE'S A WORKING GROUP IN STAFF AND WE REPORT ABOUT EVERY SIX MONTHS TO COUNCIL IN A WORK SESSION. SO I'M NOT SAYING YOU CAN'T DECIDE THAT YOU WANT TO EXAMINE SHORT-TERM RENTAL HERE BUT YOUR COUNCIL IS ALREADY CONSIDERING IT IN A WORK SESSION AS WELL. >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT'S -- COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: IF IT'S OKAY, I WOULD AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CARY THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN UPDATE ON THAT AS WELL. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE'LL ASK STAFF JUST TO GIVE US WHAT OUR CURRENT LANGUAGE IS AROUND SHORT-TERM RENTALS, JUST SO WE HAVE AN AWARENESS. THIS IS SOMETHING, PERSONALLY I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE ON. YEAH. SO, ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE? DO I HAVE TO ASK IF WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITE ALL GHT. ARE ADJOURNED AT 9:12 P.M. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, EVERYBODY. [MEETING ADJOURNED]