JANUARY 3, 2023. PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PE SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES O ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AN NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINEAND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Chair Downs: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO REMOVE AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE -- >> I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY. PLEASE VOTE. WE'RE MISSING SOMEBODY, AREN'T WE? >> COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S RIGHT. THERE'S ONLY SEVEN OF US. YEAH, MR. HORNE IS NO LONGER WITH US. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. I DO WANT TO MAKE A POINT OF THANKING COMMISSIONER TONG FOR BEING HERE, DESPITE BEING HOBBLED SLIGHTLY. SHE EVIDENTLY TRIED TO JUMP OFF A MOUNTAIN. I DON'T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHY. ANYWAY, I UNDERSTAND THE VIEW WAS AMAZING. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. [LAUGHTER] >> Tong: MY PLEASURE. >> Chair Downs: ITEM 1. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER REGULATIONS ARE RECEIVED. APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF 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 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: PSW HOMES ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 1-6 - SIX URBAN RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 1.3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF I AVENUE AN 17TH STREET. ZONED URBAN RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE HAGGARD PARK HERITAGE RESOURCE OVERLAY DISTRICT (HD-2 APPLICANT: SB-DOWNTOWN PLANO, L. THIS IS FO ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DONNA S DONNA SEPULVEDA, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I THOUGHT THIS HAD MORE LOTS ORIGINALLY. HAS IT ALWAYS BEEN SIX? >> THERE'S ONE NOW AND THEY'RE SUBDIVIDING INTO SIX. >> Ratliff: THE LAST GO AROUND, WAS IT NOT MORE LOTS THAN THAT ORIGINALLY, IN THE >> BELIEVE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE SAME NUMBER OF LOTS. THERE WAS A FINAL PLAT FOR ONE LOT ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. >> Ratliff: I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING OF. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. >> Tong: A QUICK QUESTION. JUST LOOKING AT THIS PLOT, THERE SEEMED TO BE A NARROW PROPERTY ON THE SIDE. IS THAT ANOTHER LOT. DOES IT COUNT TOWARDS -- IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S THE SEVENTH IN ADDITION TO THE SIX? ALLEY.Y'RE DEDICATING A >> Tg: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: A COUPLE OF THE LOTS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN THE OTHER ONES AND I ASSUME, ONE OF THEM IS LIKE 7100 SQUARE FEET. I ASSUME THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BUILD AS THEY DESIRE WHAT THEY NEED. WERE THERE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE CONSISTENCY OF THE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON ONE OF THE LOTS BEING SO MUCH SMALLER THAN THE OTHER? WILL THEY BE ABLE TO BUILD SOMETHING THERE THAT ALL LOOKS CONSISTENT? >> YES. WE DID REVIEW THIS WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT, URB RESIDENTIAL, AND IT DOES MEET THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> I WOULD ADD, COMMISSIONER, THIS IS LOCATED IN THE HAGGARD PARK HERITAGE DISTRICT AND THEY HAVE APPROVED THE PLANS FOR THESE HOMES. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I HAD THAT THOUGHT OR QUESTION . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.ON.ON.ON.ON.ON.ON.ON. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE ACCEPT THIS AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO ACCEPT ITEM 1 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. ITEM 2. >> AGENDA ITEM N0. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: TWIN RIVERS AT COLLIN CREEK, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY ON ONE LOT ON 8.3 ACRE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ALM DRIVE, 932 FEET SOUTH OF PARK B ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-60- GENERAL OFFICE. APPLICANT: TWIN RIVERS AT COLLIN CREEK, LT. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAV ANYPEAKS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO. WE HAVE TRAVIS THOMPSON. >> Chair Downs: GOOD EVENING. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS TRAVIS THOMPSON AND MY ADDRESS IS 3903 MORNING DOVE IN CAROLLTON, TEXAS. REALLY, I KNOW THIS IS AN AGENDA ITEM AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP MUCH TIME. I WANTED TO THANK EVERYONE AT PLANO, EVERYONE ON CITY STAFF, EVERYONE FOR WORKING WITH US. TWIN RIVER IS A SENIOR HOUSING COMMUNITY AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO, YOU KNOW, HOUSING THOSE PEOPLE IN PLANO THAT ARE HOPING TO STAY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. IT'S A 55 AND OVER ACTIVE ADULT COMMUNITY. WE REALLY HAVE ENJOYED OUR TIME SO FAR WORKING WITH PLANO. EVERYONE AT THE CITY FROM THE BUILDING PERMITTING PROCESS AND HOPEFULLY WE HAVE OUR CO HERE VERY SOON. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE WORKING HERE AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO EXPANDING OUR COMPANY IN PLANO AND WORKING WITH ALL OF YOU GUYS AND EVERYONE AT THE CITY HAS BEEN A PLEASURE. WE'RE HOPEFULLY, IN FEBRUARY, GIVE OR TAKE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A GRAND OPENING AND EVERYONE IS GOING TO BE INVITED SO I HOPE EVERYONE WILL COME OUT AND LOOK FORWARD TO BEING A PART OF THE COMMUNITY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING. NICE WORDS. >> AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL, FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT. I APPRECIATE IT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WANT TO VOTE NO AFTER THAT? [ LAUGHTER ] >> I MOVE WE ACCEPT THIS AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 2 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. THANKS AGAIN FOR BEING HERE. >> THANKS. >> Chair Downs: ITEM 3. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: CARTER CRAFT ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1R- INDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT, HEALTH/FITNESS CENTER, AND WAREHOUSE/DISTRIBUTION CENTER O ONE LOT ON 9.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 14TH STREET, 341 FEET WEST OF MILLARD DRIVE. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1. APPLICANT: CANTEX 1714, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS KATYA COPELAND, I'M THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I WOULD BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANY DISCUSSION? >> THERE'S NO SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: ANY DISCUSSION, ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO, THERE ARE NOT. >> Chair Downs: NOW I'LL ASK FOR ANY DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I APPROVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 3. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD SUBDIVISION, BLOCK A, LOT 1R - ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE/DISTRIBUTION CENTER O ONE LOT ON 64.4 ACRES LOCATED O THE SOUTH SIDE OF PLANO PARKWAY 454 FEET WEST OF CUSTER ROAD. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY D APPLICANT: LIBERTY VENTURE I HOLDINGS LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS PROVIDED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, THERE ARE NOT. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> Tong: I SECOND. >> Chairowns MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG TO& APPROVE ITEM 4 AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: T PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION: THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS UPDATE - DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION PERTAINING TO SECTION 13: NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JASON APRILL, I'M THE SENIOR MOBILITY PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE DEPARTMENTS ARE WORKING TO UPDATE THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS KNOWN MORE SIMPLY AS THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS . THIS DOCUMENT REGULATES THE STANDARDS FOR THE DESIGN AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND OTHER ROADWAY DESIGN ELEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY. THIS INCLUDES TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ITEMS SUCH AS STREET CURVATURE, ALIGNMENT INTERSETION DESIGN, ACCESS CONTROL, REQUIREMENTS, AND OTHER TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS. THIS WAS LAST UPDATED IN 2009 AND THE CITY HAS CONTRACTED WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES TO ACCESS THE EXISTING THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS D DEVELOP A NEW TRANSPORTATION DESIGN MANUAL. AS I PRESENTED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, WE'RE AIMING TO FINALIZE THIS IN THE SPRING OF THIS YEAR. SECTION 13, NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ADDS TO THE CURRENT THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS BY INCORPORATING DETAILS IN THE OVERALL PLANNING AND DESIGN OF TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS TO REDUCE THE SPEED AND VOLUME OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC BY RESPONDING DIRECTLY TO EXPRESS COMMUNITY NEEDS. THE UPDATES ARE GUIDED BY POLICIES AND ACTIONS WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND NEIGHBOOODS COMPONENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, INCLUDING THE ROADWAY SYSTEM POLICY AND ACTION 1 OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY. THE CITY OF PLANO PREVIOUSLY ADMINISTERED A SAFE STREETS PROGRAM THAT ADDRESSED NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONCERNS THROUGH A TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHICH ACTED AS A REVIEW AND ADVISORY BOARD FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS. THE SAFE STREETS PROGRAM WAS DISCONTINUED IN 2008 AND SINCE THAT TIME THE CITY HAS LIMITED TRAFFIC-LMING OIONS PRIMARILY TO MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING SPEED BUMPS, CURRENTLY. SECTION 13 WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATED PROCESS FOR NEIGHBORHOODS TO PETITION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC-CALMING DEVICES. A CITIZEN OR A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MAY REQUEST THAT A PARTICULAR STREET OR AREA BE CONSIDERED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS. SECTION 13 WILL OUTLINE THE REQUEST, THE DESIGN, THE OUTREACH, AND APPROVAL PROCESS AS SHOWN IN THE FLOWCHART OF THE POWERPOINT. THE APPLICANT FOR A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT REQUEST MUST COMPLETE A PROJECT REQUEST APPLICATION INCLUDING THEIR SPECIFIC LOCATION AND THE REASONING BEHIND THEIR REQUEST. THEN THE ITEM MOVES WHERE THE& CITY WILL REVIEW THE ELIGIBILITY OF EACH REQUEST BASED ON PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES. DURING THAT REVIEW PERIOD THE CITY WILL CONSIDER REQUESTS AND DETERMINE THE VIABILITY AND THE STUDY LIMITS OF THE AREA. THE STUDY AREA WILL BE BASED ON THE FACILITY BEING ANALYZED. AFTER THE CITY HAS SELECTED A PROJECT AREA, CITY STAFF WILL REVIEW TRAFFIC DATA A THE LISTED AVAILABLE TRAFFIC-CALMING TOOLS TO DEVELOP POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THE GIVEN TRAFFIC CONDITIONS. NEXT, CITY STAFF WILL NOTIFY BUSINESS AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE PROJECT AREA. OUTREACH COULD INCLUDE INTRODUCTORY MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO DISCUSS THEIR TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND AN OPEN& HOUSE TO PRESENT THE DESIGN CONCEPT TOWARD THE END. THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN WILL BE VOTED ON BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BECAUSE THE PLAN IS A SYSTEM OF INTEGRATED CALMING DEVICES, INDIVIDUAL STREETS OR DEVICES CANNOT BE TAKEN OUT OF THE PROPOSAL AS PART OF THE VOTE. THE VOTE IS EITHER A YES OR NO TO ADOPT THE PLAN AS A COMPLETE PACKAGE. IT'S A VERY HIGH-LEVEL PROCESS. THERE ARE MANY DEVICES AVAILABLE TO THE CITY TO ADDRESS NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONCERNS. SOME ARE USED TO ADDRESS VEHICULAR SPEED, OTHERS TO ADDRESS CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC ISSUES, AND OTHERS TO ENHANCE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY. THE CITY DESIRES TO IMPLEMENT DEVICES THAT ARE BOTH FUNCTIONAL AND AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. THERE ARE VARIOUS SPEED MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES THAT COUL BE APPLIED, INCLUDING VISUALLY NARROWING TECHNIQUES, HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION, AND VERTICAL DEFLECTION. VISUALLY NARROWING TECHNIQUES UTILIZE EITHER PHYSICL OBJECTS, VERTICAL STREET ELEMENTS OR PAVEMENT MARKINGS TO COMMUNICATE TO THE DRIVER A PERCEIVED NARROWING OF THEIR ANTICIPATED PATH OF TRAVEL IN HOPES OF REDUCING OPERATING SPEEDS. THESE CAN INCLUDE DESIGNATED MARKING SPACES TO NARROW THE STREET. VEHICLES TEND TO SLOW IN AREAS WITH MORE ON-STREET PARKING, ESSENTIALLY. AND STREET TREES ALSO HELP TO VISUALLY NARROW THE STREET. FOR HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION, THESE ARE TRAFFIC-CALMING TECHNIQUES THAT AIM TO FORCE THE DRIVER TO RESPOND WITH A CHANGING WIDTH OR ALIGNMENT OF THEIR ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PATH. THIS RESPONSE OF THE DRIVER TYPICALLY RESULTS IN A LOWERING OF OPERATING SPEEDS. AND THERE'S A WIDE VARIETY OF HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION POINTS AND I'LL GO THROUGH EACH ITEM QUICKLY. MEDIAN ISLANDS. THE FIRST HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION TRAFFIC-CALMING TECHNIQUES INCLUDES MEDIAN ISLANDS OR RAISED CENTRAL ISLANDS. THESE REDUCE THE LANE WIDTH AND VEHICULAR SPEED, PROVIDE AN AESTHETICALLY VISUAL BREAKUP AND PROVIDE VISUAL CUES TO THE DRIVER THAT THEY NEED TO SLOW DOWN. THEY ARE TYPICALLY NOT RECOMMENDED IN AREAS WITH A LOT OF FREIGHT TRAFFIC OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS. NEXT WE HAVE PINCH POINTS. A PINCH POINT IS A CURVE EXTENSION APPLIED MID BLOCK TO ALLOW TRAFFIC SPEEDS TO SLOW TRAFFIC SPEEDS WLE ADDING TO THE PUBLIC REALM. THEY CAN PROTECT THE BEGINNING OF AN ON-STREET PARKING LANE. NEXT A SERPENTINE CURVE IN THE ROAD. THESE CAN SLOW DRIVERS WHILE ALSO INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC SPACE AVAILABLE ALONG THE CORRIDOR . ANOTHER HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION DEVICE, STRIPING AS A TRAFC-CALMING TECHNIQUE THAT CAN HELP REDUCE THE DRIVER'S PERCEIVED WIDTH OF THE ROADWAY. STRIPING CAN BE IMPLEMENTED QUICKLY. IT CAN BE LESS COSTLY THAN OTHERS TO CONSTRUCT AND ALLOWS FOR GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN THE FUTURE IF THE CITY DECIDES TO MAKE FUTURE CHANGES TO THE AREA. NEXT, A DIVERTER IS A DEVICE THAT LIMITS THROUGH MOVEMENTS FOR TRAFFIC. IT REDUCES THE SPEED AT AN INTERSECTION APPROACH AS WELL AS POTENTIAL VEHICULAR CONFLICTS. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DIVERTERS SHOULD BE MADE FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES, SCHOOL BUSES, AND DELIVERY TRUCKS. NEXT, TRAFFIC CIRCLES. A TRAFFIC CIRCLE IS A CENTRAL ISLAND PAINTED OR RAISED AND IN THIS PHOTO IT'S RAISED. WITH A VERTICAL AMOUNTBLE CURB IN THE CENTER OF THE INTERSECTION OF TWO STREETS AND TRAFFIC CIRCLES ARE INTENDED TO BE YIELD-OPERATED INTERSECTIONS. MINI ROUNDABOUT YIELD AT ENTRY. THEY ARE USED FOR TRAFFIC WITH HIGHER VOLUME. THE MAIN USES ARE TO INCREE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING FOUR-WAY STOPS AND WHERE APPROACHING SIGHT DISTANCE IS LIMITED. THOSE SIMILAR THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM TRAFFIC CIRCLES IN THAT THEY REQUIRE DEFLECTION OF THE VEHICLE PATHS PRIOR TO ENTRY AT AN INTERSECTION. YOU CAN SEE ON THE IMAGE THE LANES TURNING INTO THE ROUNDABOUT, THEY'RE GUIDED SO THEY'RE DEFLECTED INTO THE ROUNDABOUT. THOSE ARE TYPICALLY MADE THROUGH THE USE OF CURVED O PAINTED ISLANDS. NEXT, RAISED INTERSECTIONS. THEY'RE FLAT, RAISED AREAS COVERING AN ENTIRE INTERSECTION THAT CREATE A SAFE, SLOW SPEED CROSSING IN PUBLIC SPACE. THEY'RE FLUSH WITH THE SIDEWALK AND ENSURE THAT DRIVERS TRAVEL OVER THEM MORE SLOWLY. THEY'RE TYPICALLY BEST USED IN DENSER, MORE MIXED-USE AREAS AND AREAS WITH A LOT HIGHER PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES. NEXT, PEDESTRIAN BULL BOUTS ARE USED AT THE INTERSECTION TO NARROW THE STREET AT THE LOCATION WHERE PEDESTRIANS CROSS THE STREET . WHEN COMBINED WIT ON-STREET PARKING THE CORNER EXTENSION CAN CREATE PROTECTED ON-STREET PARKING. THEY PROVIDE SHORTER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING DISTANCES AND PROTECTION AT THE BEGINNING OF A PARKING LANE. NEXT, VERTICAL DEFLECTION. THESE ARE ISOLATED INCREASE IN THE NORMAL PAVEMENT ELEVATION THAT ENCOURAGES THE DRIVER TO SLOW THEIR VEHICLE SPEED. SOME EXAMPLES ARE SPEED CUSHIONS. THESE ARE DEVICES INTENDED TO SLOW TRAFFIC SPEEDS ON LOW-SPEED ROADS. THEY ARE SEEN AS FAVORLE OVER SPEED HUMPS BECAUSE THEY ALLOW EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO PASS AT FAIRLY NORMAL SPEEDS. RAISED CROSSWALKS ARE CONSTRUCTED ALONG AN ELONGATED MOUND IN THE ROADWAY PAVEMENT SURFACE, EXTENDNG ACROSS THE TRAVELWAY AT A RIGHT ANGLE TO THE TRAFFIC FLOW. THEY ENCOURAGE MOTORISTS TO TRAVEL AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHILE INCREASING THE SIGHT DISTANCE TO THE PEDESTRIANS WHO ARE CROSSING. AND, FINALLY, SPEED HUMPS. THEY ARE TYPICALLY PLACED ON TYPE E, F, AND G ROADS. THEY ARE GENERALLY NOT APPROPRIATE FOR A PRIMARY EMERGENCY VEHICLE ROUTE. AND THEN THE FINAL ITEM, WE RECOMMEND THAT THE COMMISSION PROVIDE DIRECTION PERTAINING TO SECTION 13, THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AS PART OF THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS RULES AND REGULATIONS. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT. I REALLY THOUGHT THIS SECTION WAS GREAT THE WAY IT'S ORGANIZED AND PUT TOGETHER AND WE NEEDED A NEW PROCESS FOR CITIZENS OR ORGANIZATIONS TO APPLY FOR CHANGES TO A STREET DESIGN OR TYPICALLY SPEEDING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF, YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> Brounoff: QUESTION FOR THE STAFF. >> Chair Downs: ABSOLUTELY. >> Brounoff: THE PROCEDURE YOU HAVE OUTLINED IS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO FILE AN APPLICATION OR A REQUEST WITH THE CITY TO INSTITUTE A TRAFFIC-MODIFYING PLAN OF SOME KIND. DO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT THE APPLICATION IS MERELY A GENERAL APPCATION FOR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN BUT THE CITY STAFF WILL ACTUALLY DESIGN THE COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES, THAT IS CORRECT. >> Brounoff: I LIKE THE IDEA OF TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THEY'RE ONLY APPROPRIATE FOR LOWER-VOLUME STREETS. I THINK THERE COULD BE A PLACE FOR A TRAFFIC CIRCLE ON PRESTON ROAD AT CERTAIN INTERSECTIONS. I MEAN, THE TRAFFIC DSN'T HAVE TO STOP FOR LIGHTS. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CLOG UP THE STREET WITH THREE LANES OF TRAFFIC STOPPED FOR A RED LIGHT SO A POLICE CAR OR AMBULANCE CAN'T GET THROUGH. COMBINED WITH APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, SPEED LIMIT REDUCTIONS, WARNING SIGNS, AND SO FORTH OR MAYBE SOME SORT OF HORIZONTAL NARROWING LEADING INTO IT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> AND I DO WANT TO SAY I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT CHAD FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF THE EINEER-ECIFIC QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: JUST SO THAT EVERYONE IS CLEAR, WE'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY THIS EVENING ABOUT 13. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: SO QUESTIONS, COMMENTS REALLY FOCUS ON WHAT WAS PRESENTED TONIGHT. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: TWO QUESTIONS -- WELL, ONE QUESTION ONE COMMENT. THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, THE PETITION, DO WE HAVE SOME KIND OF STANDARDIZED TEMPLATE THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR THEM TO GUIDE THEM PERHAPS ENHANCE THEIR CHANCESD OF GETTING AN APPROVAL RATHER THTHAN, YOU KNOW, RANDOM REASONINGS FOR WHY A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN WOULD BE NEEDED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> SO YOU'RE ASKING IF THERE WAS A STANDARDIZED FORM THAT THEY COULD FILL OUT? >> Olley: TEMPLATE FORM, SOMETHING. >> MY NAME IS CHAD, TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. CURRENTLY WE USE A PETITION PROCESS WHEN A CITIZEN COMES TO US WITH A COMPLAINT, WE'RE BASING THIS OFF OUR ALLEY SPEED HUMP PROGRAM. WHEN THEY REQUEST SPEED BUMPS IN THEIR ALLEY, WE WORK WITH THEM TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH OF AN AREA THIS WOULD AFFECT. WITH AN ALLEY, IT'S EASY. YOU LOOK AT WHO ALL IS ALONG THAT ALLEY OR SIDE ALLEYS AND WE ASK THEM TO GO TO THOSE HOUSES AND WE SAY WE NEED 70% OF THE PPLE THAT' AFFTED BYHAT TO SAY, YES, WE ALSO WANT A SPEED BUMP IN THIS ALLEY. AND THEN WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM TO INSTALL. WE'RE GOING TO GO ON A SIMILAR PROCESS WITH THIS. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S A STREET SO IT AFFECTS A LOT MORE PEOPLE. ON THE CITY SIDE, WHEN THEY COME TO US WE WOULD WORK WITH THAT RESIDENT AND SAY, OKAY, WE THINK THAT THIS AREA IS GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY YOUR REQUEST. WE ARE NOT JUST LOOKING AT YOUR ONE STREET, WE'RE LOOKING AT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR EXAMPLE, LEGACY AND INDEPENDENCE. IF SOMEONE COMES AND WANTS A SPEED CUSHION OR SOMETHING, WE WOULD ALSO LOOK AT ALL THE STREETS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. AND WE WOULD REQUEST THAT THAT CITIZEN EITHER GO TO THAT HOA OR GO DOOR TO DOOR AND PUT IN A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT ON THEIR END TO PROVE TO US THAT IT IS A CERTAIN THAT IS WIDELY HELD WITHIN THAT AREA AND IT'S NOT JUST ME AND MY NEIGHBOR WANT THIS SPEED BUMP IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE. IT IS A CONCERN THAT MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN THE AREA HAVE BEFORE THE CITY COMMITS THEIR RESOURCES TO DO THE ANALYSIS AND THE DESIGN. >> Olley: AGREED. I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS THERE SOME WAY TO FILTER SO THAT WE DON'T -- BECAUSE EVERY PARENT WANTS SPEED BUMPS IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE SO THAT WE DON'T ESSENTIALLY GENERATE -- AND I CAN GET ALL MY NEIGHBORS TO SAY THE SAME THING -- THAT WE DON GENERATE MULTIPLE REQUESTS JUST BECAUSE SOME RANDOM KID IS SPEEDING 10 MILES ABOVE THE SPEED LIMIT. IS THERE SOME TEMPLATE THAT COULD ALMOST GUIDE THESE ARE MULTIPLE OCCURRENCES OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS OR YOU MUST FIRST HAVE FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE POLICE, SOMETHING THAT STREAMLINES IT. >> ANY REQUEST THAT COMES TO US, WE'RE GOING TO POINT THEM TO THE PETITION PROCESS AND HAVE THEM PUT IN THAT EFFORT TO GATHER MORE CONSENT THAN JUST THEMSELVES. >> Olley: THAT'S OUR PROCESS, THE EFFORT THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE? >> EXACTLY. WHAT WE HAVE SEEN WITH THE ALLEY SPEED BUMP PROGRAM IS WE HAVE A COMPLAINT AND IF WE ASK THAT PERSON WHO HAS PUT IN THE COMPLAINT TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT ON THEIR PART, IF IT'S GENUINE AND THEY GO THROUGH THAT EFFORT, THEN IT'S WORTH OUR TIME TO HELP THEM. BUT IF WE GIVE THEM, OKAY, YOU HAVE TO PUT IN A LITTLE EFFOR AND THEN THEY BACK OFF, MAYBE IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A CONCERN. >> Olley: SECOND QUESTION/COMMENT. THE RAISED INTERSECTION, DOES THAT HAVE MARKINGS, JUST VISUAL MARKINGS TO KIND OF WARN THE DRIVER THAT THAT'S COMING? >> YES. >> Olley: BECAUSE I HAVE BUMPED OVER ONE OR TWO IN MY DAY BECAUSE I DIDN'T QUITE EXPECT IT. >> THE WAY THAT I HAVE SEEN IT, IT COULD BE PAINTED OR THERE COULD BE SOMETHING DONE WITH THE BRICK OR THE PAVEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE TO LET THE DRIVERS KNOW THE RAISED INTERSECTIONS ARE A LITTLE DIFFEREN THAN WHAT THEY'RE DRIVING ON. VISUAL CUES. >> Chair Downs: I WANT TO ELABORATE ON SOMETHING. THERE IS A PROCESS RIGHT NOW FOR PEOPLE TO APPLY FOR A SPEED BUMP OR GET SOMETHING. IT'S NOT THAT THAT DOESN'T EXIST RIGHT NOW, THIS IS JUST GOING TO MORE CLEARLY STATE AND OUTLINE THE POLICIES AND THE TYPES OF TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS THAT CAN BE USED. THIS IS TO CLEAN UP SOMETHING WE HAVE IN PLACE TO MAKE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND HERE'S WHAT'S REQUIRED IF YOU WANT TO DO IT. INSTEAD OF IT BEING -- WILD WEST IS THE WRONG TERM FOR IT. IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN VERY CLEARLY SPELLED OUT. IT SHOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE BUT AT THE SAME TIME THE AMOUNT OF WORK IS STILL REQUIRED. I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE -- HOPEFULLY NOT INUNDATED. COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: THANK YOU. AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I WAS GOING TO ASK, BECAUSE I GOT THE IMPRESSION THERE MIGHT NOT BE A PROCESS IN PLACE. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT. I HAVE JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS, I THINK. ONE OF MY FIRST ONES IS DO YOU BELIEVE THIS WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF REQUESTS OR MIGHT IT STREAMLINE THEM? AND A PIGGYBACK ON THAT IS IF WE LOOK AND IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THEM, HOW ABOUT THE WORKLOAD. I'M CURIOUS ABOUT ALL THAT, HOW YOU THINK IT MOVES THROUGH OUR CITY. >> FOR YOUR FIRST QUESTION, WILL IT INCREASE, INCREASE THE NUMBER OF CASES, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD. I THINK IT WOULD STREAMLINE, IF SOMEONE DOES HAVE AN ISSUE, THEY WILL KNOW A LITTLE BIT EASIER WHERE TO FIND TH AND GO TO THE THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS. >> SO A LOT OF OUR JOB CURRENTLY IS RESPONDING TO CITIZEN REQUESTS. AND WE HAVE THE FIX IT PLANO SYSTEM. I'M SURE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH. WE GET PROBABLY 50% OF OUR REQUESTS THAT COME TO THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT IS PEOPLE REQUESTING SPEED BUMPS ALREADY. AND RIGHT NOW WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM, WE HAVE TO TELL THEM THAT THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY A SYSTEM IN PLACE TO PUT SPEED BUMPS ON ROADWAYS. THERE IS IN ALLEYS BUT NOT ON ROADWAYS. AND WE WORK WITH SERGEANT KEVIN LEMON FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO DO SPEED STUDIES TO SEE IF THERE IS AN ISSUE, BOTH BLIND SO THAT YOU CAN'T SEE ANY SORT OF DETECTION EQUIPMENT, AND THEN WE PUT OUT A SPEED TRAILER THAT THE DRIVERS SEE, OKAY, THEY'RE MONITORING OUR SPEED AND WE SEE IF THERE'S ANY DIFFERENCE THERE. AND IF THERE IS A CONCERN, THEN THE POLE WILL INCREASE PRESENCE IN AN AREA. THAT'S OUR CURRENT PROCESS. AND WE GET A LOT OF THOSE. WE PROBABLY GET 30 OF THOSE A MONTH. >> Cary: SO IT MAY BE THAT THIS REDUCES THE WORKLOAD SOMEWHAT -- >> THIS TRANSFERS THE WORKLOAD. IT TAKES SOME OF THE EFFORT OFF OF OUR POLICE. THEY'LL STILL BE INVOLVED. THEY HAVE ALL OF THE SPEED DETECTION EQUIPMENT IN THE CITY AND WHEN WE'RE DOING OUR ANALYSIS, FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT, WE WILL WORK WITH THEM STILL. BUT IT GIVES US A SOLUTION OTHER THAN INCREASED POLICE PRESENCE. >> Cary: GREAT. >> WE CAN PUT A DESIGN OUT THERE. >> Cary: I JUST GOT A COUPLE OF OTHER REAL QUICK THINGS. >> Chair Downs: I WANT TO, JUST BECAUSE -- YOU STATED THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS FOR GETTING SPEED BUMPS INSTALLED, YET I DO REMEMBER -- GRANTED, IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS AGO -- IT COMING TO COUNCIL AND APPROVAL OF SPEED BUMPS BEING INSTALLED BECAUSE OF A CITIZEN BROUGHT IT FORWARD AND THE POLICE DID THEIR STUDY AND THEY SAID THIS IS NOT A BAD IDEA. YOU STATED THAT THERE WASN'T A PROCESS FOR THAT T HAPPEN BUT I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN. >> THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A MORE COMPLEX PROCESS THAT INVOLVED SOME ENGINEERING DESIGN ON THE BACK END. >> Chair Downs: I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR THERE IS A PROCESS RIGHT NOW FOR CITIZENS RIGHT NOW TO DEAL WITH SPEEDING, ET CETERA, THAT GOES BEYOND JUST THE POLICE PRESENCE. IT'S JUST NOT STREAMLINED AND CLEARLY DEFINED. SO THIS MAY PRESENT GREATER OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CITIZENS TO GET TRAFFIC-CALMING DEVICES INSTALLED. THE QUESTION WILL STILL COME DOWN TO THE WORK THEY'VE GOT TO P IN AND AN ANALYSIS BY STAFF TO SAY IT WILL HAVE THE DESIRED RESULTS, ET CETERA. ONE THING THE CITY IS ALSO LOOKING AT IS ANY OF THESE INSTALLATIONS CREATE ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS, ET CETERA. OFF, I WAS JUST HEARING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS HERE. >> Cary: THAT'S FANTASTIC CLARIFICATION. A CHAIRMAN EARLIER TALKED ABOUT THIS PLAN AND I HAVE TO ECHO THAT, I THINK IT'S GREAT. I THINK YOU LEANED INTO SOME BEST PRACTICES . I JUST HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUICK QUESTIONS. ONE IS OUT O THESE HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION DEVICES, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE SAFETY THEY PROVIDE FROM USING THEM? IN THE BEST PRACTICES, DOES SOME PROVIDE MORE SAFETY? I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULD ALL PROVIDE SOME SPEED CALMING. >> THE DOCUMENT, AS WE'RE PUTTING IT TOGETHER, HAS A LIST OF PROS AND CONS AND BEST PRACTICES FOR EACH -- I DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN THE PRESENTATION BUT THERE ARE PROS AND CONS IN TERMS OF SAFETY FOR EACH OF THE HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION. IF IT' FOCUS ON PEDESTRIAN SAFETY OR THERE ARE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. >> Cary: I WAS JUST CURIOUS. THERE ARE PROS AND CONS IN HERE. THE REPORT IS WELL DONE. MY FINAL THING IS TO COMMENT ON THE VOTE. I READ NEIGHBORS MAY GET TO VOTE ON IT. IT CAUSED ME TO PAUSE AND GO, WOW, OBVIOUSLY OUR CITY IS STILL GOING TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT THE BEST THING IS, AND TO QUOTE THE CHAIRMAN, IT'S NOT A WILD WEST THING. I WONDER AT TIMES IF WE ALLOW EVERYBODY TO VOTE IF THAT'S THE FINAL WORD, IF THAT MIGHT BE THE BEST SOLUTION. AND IF IT'S NOT, WHAT MECHANISMS DO WE HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, THESE GUYS PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THIS AND FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY'RE NOT. ARE THERE REMEDIES WE HAVE IN THE EVENT THAT MAYBE THE CITIZENS VOTE FOR SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY NEEDED BUT THEY VOTE IT DOWN? >> SO YOU'RE SAYING IT GETS ALL THE WAY TO THE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS BUT THEN IT'S NOT APPROVED. >> Cary: RIGHT. >> I WOULD SAY IT KIND OF GOES BACK TO THE CITY TO WORK THROUGH CORRECT? >> Cary: YEAH, MAYBE THAT'S NOT DEFINED. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED TO ME AND MAYBE IT'S NOT THAT RELEVANT RIGHT NOW. >> THE CITY HAS MULTIPLE CHECKS IN THIS PROCESS DURING THE PROJECT ELIGIBILITY REVIEW. BEFORE IT GOES TO DESIGN, IF IT PASSES PETITION AND IT'S CLEAR THAT IT IS AN ISSUE THAT HAS A LOT OF CONCERN BEHIND IT, THE CITY WILL DETERMINE, OKAY, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THESE TOOLS CAN SOLVE OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT IT IS WORTH -- WE'LL LOOK AT THE SPEEDS, WE'LL LOOK AT THE POTENTIAL CRASHES THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE AREA IN THE PAST. WE'LL LOOK AT THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA AND SEE IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS WORTHY TO PUT OUR BUDGET TO. A LOT OF TIMES WE WOULD HAVE SEVERAL PROJECTS OR SEVERAL AREAS THAT WOULD BE OF CONCERN BUT OUR BUDGET IS LIMITED AND WE CAN ONLY FOCUS ON THIS ONE AREA. IT STAYS IN THE QUEUE AND WE CAN REVIEW IT AGAIN NEXT YEAR. ONCE IT GETS PAST THAT CITY CHEC, THAT LAST VOTE WE WOULD GO TO THEM WITH ONE OR MAYBE TWO DESIGN SOLUTIONS THAT OUR CONSULTANT WOULD COME UP WITH AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO GO WITH ONE OF THOSE SOLUTIONS, THE CITY WOULD COMMIT TO MAINTAIN THOSE. AND IF THEY CHOSE TO GO WITH A NO-BUILD SOLUTION, THAT WOULD BE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO -- THEY ARE FINE WITH THE STATUS QUO RATHER THAN HAVING THESE TOOLS IMPLEMENTED IN THEIR AREA. >> Cary: [OFF MIC] THAT THE CITIZENS MAY BE AGAINST. I'LL JUST LEAVE IT WITH THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GUYS. >> I'M SORRY. I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IF WE GO THROUGH A PROCESS EVERY YEAR FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT, WE ARE JUST STARTING IT NOW WHERE WE'RE ANALYZING ALL THE ACCIDENT LOCATIONS IN THE CITY. AND IF WE SEE AN ISSUE THAT STANDS OUT FROM THE DATA THAT DO ON OUR OWN, WE WOULD MOVE TO ADDRESS THAT OUTSIDE OF THIS PROCESS. YES. >> Cary: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, YOU HAD YOUR LIGHT ON TWO OR THREE TIMES HERE. >> Bronsky: GOT CUT OFF. SO HE'S PROBABLY GOING TO NEED TO COME BACK UP. SORRY CHAD. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. LET'S START WITH THE OUTREACH PROCESS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE MADE VERY CLEAR IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS ABOUT PROACTIVELY SEEKING COMMUNITY INPUT. AND SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS HOW CAREFULLY OR WHAT IS THE PROCESS WE CURRENTLY GO THROUGH AND IS IT GOING TO CHANGE AT ALL BASED ON THIS PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE COLLECTING AS MUCH INFORMATION AS WE CAN FROM AS MANY PEOPLE THAT HAPPEN TO BE IMPACTED AS POSSIBLE ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WE HAVE A LOT MORE TECHNOLOGY AT OUR HANDS RATHER THAN JUST SENDING MAIL OUT. >> OUR CURRENT PROCESS DOES INVOLVE SENDING MAIL. IT'S THE EASIEST, FROM THE CITY SIDE. WE'VE GOT ALL THEIR ADDRESSES AND WE CAN JUST -- IF SOMEONE SENDS A PETITION AND WE DETERMINE THEY ARE IN THE AREA, WE WILL SEND A MAILER TO BOTH THE TENANT, AND IF IT'S A RENTED LOCATION, TENANT AND PROPERTY OWNER. HOWEVER, JUST THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE ALLOWED A VOTE IN THAT CASE, WHICH I THINK IS DETAILED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WE SENT THEM. >> THEY DON'T HAVE THE FULL DOCUMENT. >> SOHINKHAT REPORT WILL COME LATER. WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THOSE DETAILS. THE OUTREACH PORTION IS LAID OUT. ONCE IT GETS TO OUTREACH, PAST DESIGN, WE INTEND TO HOLD A COUPLE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS. THE FIRST PUBLIC MEETING WOULD BE -- AND WE WOULD ANNOUNCE IT TO THE RESIDENTS THAT WERE AFFECTED, BOTH BY MAILER OR WE MAY WORK WITH OUR SOCIAL MEDIA TEAM TO PUT IT OUT THROUGH OTHER CHANNELS, TO DISCUSS WHAT CONCERNS THOSE RESIDENTS HAVE. AND THAT WAY WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DESIGN. THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN COLLABORATION WITH THE DESIGN STEP. THEN ONCE WE GET THROUGH DESIGN, WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC MEETING WHERE WE WOULD PRESENT OUR SOLUTIONS, GAIN COMMENT BACK, ADDRESS ANY COMMENTS, IF NDED, A THEN TO A VOTE EITHER ON THAT MEETING, IF IT IS READY, OR ON A THIRD PUBLIC MEETING IF WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND ADDRESS THINGS THAT COME FROM THE SECOND PUBLIC MEETING. >> Bronsky: [OFF MIC] DO THE SAME PROCESS -- THE SAME PROCESS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING OR ARE WE GOING TO EXPAND THE ABILITY FOR OUTREACH TO OCCUR. MY QUESTION WASN'T ARE WE GOING TO KEEP DOING MAIL -- SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK -- AND I THINK THE CITY RECEIVEDN AWARD FOR WAS THE RADAR RECOGNITION FOR ZONING CASES. PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO SAY I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THESE AREAS AND THEY'RE GETTING COMMUNICATIONS WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT ARE GOING ON. SO MY QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE I DRIVE THROUGH AND HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AT CUSTER AND PLANO PARKWAY AND I MIGHT WANT TO BE AWARE THAT SOMETHING'S CHANGING AT THAT INTERSECTION. MY QUESTION WAS HOW WE'RE ENSURING THAT WE'RE PROAIVEL CAPG EVERYBODY THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE AFFECTED OR MAYBE MIGHT WANT TO HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF IT. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. TO THE DESIGN PHASE, THAT'S KIND OF WHEN THE STUDY AREA IS ASSIGNED, BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNICATION FOR EVEN IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE THE STUDY AREA. AND I CAN SAY RIGHT NOW I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS SPELLED OUT IN THE DOCUMENT RIGHT NOW. AND I CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH KIMLEY-HORN, KIND OF GET SOME BEST PRACTICES ON THAT COMPONENT ABOUT OUTREACH TO PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE STUDY AREA ABOUT NOTIFICATION AND NOTICING. >> Chair Downs CAN I ASK A QUESTION? I MEAN, THE FOCUS HERE REALLY IS ON THESE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING. AND I THINK THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THIS SAID OUR PLAN IS TO ADD 150 OF THESE OR 25, EVEN, THROUGHOUT THE CITY, THEN IT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD HAVE MORE CONCERNS WITH INSTEAD OF SAYING HERE'S ELEMENTS WE CAN USE FOR TRAFFIC CALMING IN PLACES WHERE LOCAL CITIZENS HAVE ASKED FOR HELP. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BENEFIT IS OR THE NEED IS FOR A MUCH BROADER REQUEST FOR PUBLIC INPUT INTO AN AREA THAT'S ONLY, YOU KNOW, A SMALL AREA THAT'S BEING IMPACTED. >> Bronsky: THAT WAS SIMPLY AN EXAMPLE. I WASN'T LOOKING TO ACTUALLY HAVE THAT HAPPEN, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WERE WE GOING BEYOND SENDING LETTERS. WERE WE WORKING TO USE ALL OF OUR OPTIONS TO COMMUNICATE. >> Chair Downs: AGAIN, THE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM MIGHT HELP YOU NARROW IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT. AND IF IT'S IN THE AN HOA, THEY LIKELY HAVE AN E-MAIL ADESS ST, R EXAMPLE............. SURE HOW YOU WOULD GET THE E-MAIL ADDRESSES. OKAY. AND YOU'RE NOT DONE YET, AND I KNOW, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, YOU HAVE A QUESTION TOO. >> Bronsky: MY SECOND QUESTION WAS IN THE DOCUMENT ON PAGE 3 IT TALKS ABOUT THE VOTE IS EITHER YES OR NO TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED MANAGEMENT PLAN AS A COMPLETE PACKAGE. BUT YOU MADE A COMMENT JUST A MINUTE AGO THAT WE MIGHT PRESENT TWO OF THEM AND LET THEM CHOOSE BETWEEN THEM. >> YES. SO THE INTENT IS TO GET TO 51% ON ONE OF THE OPTIONS. SO IF THEY WERE TO -- IF WE WERE TO PRESENT THREE OPTIONS, IF OUR CONSULTANT DECIDED THAT SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX, THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO SKIN THIS CAT, WE CAN PRESENT MANY ROUNDABOUTS OR TRAFFIC CIRCLES OR WE CAN GO WITH CHICANES AND PINCH POINTS. IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD VOTED AND THEY DIDN'T QUITE REACH 51%, A RUNOFF VOTE BETWEEN THOSE TWO AND WITH THE INTENT TO GET TO 51% OF THE ACTIVE VOTERS DETERMINING WHICH OPTION THEY LIKE BEST. >> Bronsky: OKAY. >> IF WE HAVE MULTIPLE OPTIONS. A LOT OF TIMES WE'LL ONLY HAVE ONE OPTION AND IT WILL BE BETWEEN BUILD OR NO BUILD. >> AT THAT POINT IT'S EITHER YES OR NO. >> Bronsky: M LAS THINGS RE OF A COMMENT. IN LOOKING AT PAGES 7 AND 8 TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC CIRCLES AND MINI ROUNDABOUTS, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF SOME OF THE PROS AND CONS I AGREE WITH. I HAVE BEEN STUCK AT A STOPLIGHT AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES ARE UNABLE TO GET THROUGH ALTOGETHER BECAUSE OF A RED LIGHT BECAUSE HAVING TRAFFICIRCLES OR ROUNDABOUTS WOULD MAKE IT MUCH MORE EFFICIENT. WE WOULD REDUCE COSTS TO OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND SO I JUST STRUGGLE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF THE PROS AND CONS THAT YOU'VE LISTED THERE BECAUSE I THINK THEY COULD BE A LITTLE BIT -- THERE ARE CONS TO THOSE BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THOSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR EFFORT. I'M VERY EXCITED THAT WE ARE GOING TO STREAMLINE THIS PROCESS AND HELP ALL OF OUR CITIZENS BE MORE SECURE IN KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT STEPS TO TAKE TO MAKE THINGS LIKE THIS HAPPEN. SO, THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I THINK, AGAIN, THIS IS FOCUSED ON NEIGHBORHOODS, SO NOT OUR MAIN THOROUGHFARES. SO THE APPLICATION OF TRAFFIC CIRCLES MIGHT VERY WELL WORK IN SOME OF OUR MAIN THOROUGHFARES. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING MORE FOR DISCUSSION. I KNOW IT'S JUST A PHRASE BUT I'M SURE HE MEANT NO OFFENSE TO ANY CAT OWNERS OUT THERE. [ LAUGHTER ] >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, I THINK YOU WERE NEXT. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, VERY THOROUGH, VERY WELL DONE. I APPRECIATE THE EXPLANATION OF THE ISSUES. QUESTION, AS YOU ROLL THIS OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS, ONE THING THAT Y'ALL HAVE DONE EXTRAORDINARY IN THE PAST WAS PUTTING TOGETHER A FLOWCHART OF IF I'M THE RESIDENT I START HERE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS A VERY SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF THAT BUT ARE Y'ALL GOING TO PUT TOGETHER A LITTLE MORE DETAILED ONE FOR THE RESIDENTS? >> YES. WE ACTUALLY HAD A CALL WITH KIMLEY-HORN TODAY AND ONE OF THE COMMENTS WAS TO ADD A PROCESS CHART FOR THIS SECTION. SO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL THAN THE FLOWCHART ON THE POWERPOINT. IT WAS KIND OF FOR THE PRESENTATION IN THE STAFF REPORT BUT, YES, THERE WILL BE A PROCESS CHART. >> Ratliff: I FELT CERTAIN Y'ALL WERE BUT I FELT THE NEED TO ASK IT. SECOND, TO THE CHAIRMAN'S POINT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC DEVICES. AT WHAT LEVEL -- I KNOW OBVIOUSLY RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND COLLECTORS, BUT AT WHAT LEVEL DOES IT BECOME BEYOND NEIGHBORHOOD? OBVIOUSLY MAJOR ARTERIALS, MINOR ARTERIALS. WHERE DO YOU CONSIDER TO BE THE CUTOFF POINT TO WHERE THIS PETITION PROCESS WOULD APPLY? >> I THINK IT'S -- I'M NOT REALLY SURE. I VIEWED IT AS TYPE E, F, AND G AND DOWN. FOR MOST OF THESE, I DON'T KNOW. I THINK IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THE PETITION IS. >> WE WOULD NOT INTEND FOR THESE TYPE OF TOOLS TO BE USED ON THE COORDINATED TRAFFIC SYSTEM. THAT WOULD -- I THINK THAT WOULD HURT THINGS MORE THAN HELP THINGS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF POSSIBLY A LARGER ROUNDABOUT AT AN INTERSECTION, IF THAT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE NEED WAS THERE AND THAT IT WAS BENEFICIAL. SO THERE ARE SOME AREAS, ESPECIALLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PLANO, POSSIBLY NEAR OHIO AND KENISON AREA WHERE THERE ARE SOME LARGER COLLECTORS -- I THINK TEAKWOOD IS ONE OF THEM. AND WE GET A LOT OF REQUESTS IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW. THAT IS A LITTLE LARGER BUT I THINK IT'S STILL TYPE E OR F. SO WE DON'T INTEND FOR ANYTHING LARGER THAN THAT. >> Ratliff: I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, IF YOU WOULD, JUST TO CLARIFY THAT THIS WOULD NOT APPLY -- DEFINITELY NOT APPLY TO WHICH CATEGORIES. IT DEFINITELY WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN THESE CATEGORIES. AND IN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WE WOULD LOOK ATHESE CATEGORIES, OR SOMETHING JUST SO WHEN SOMEBODY COMES IN THEY SAY I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE TRAFFIC ON PRESTON ROAD AND I'VE GOT A PETITION. WELL, THAT'S PROBABLY BEYOND A PETITION. THAT'S A PRETTY MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. AND SO I THINK IT MIGHT HELP TO KNOW, IF I'M A RESIDENT COMING IN, WHERE THE BOOKENDS ON THIS PROCESS. JUST A SUGGESTION. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S A GREAT POINT. >> Ratliff: AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, IS THERE ANY PLACE IN PLANO WHERE YOU HAVE USED A CHICANE? I'M AWARE OF ANOTHER NORTH TEXAS CITY THAT PUT SOME IN A FEW YEARS AGO AND THEY LASTED TWO YEARS AND THEY TOOK THEM OUT. >> CHICANES ARE DEFINITELY ONE OF THE MORE CONTROVERSIAL OF THESE TOOLS. WHERE THEY EXCEL IS ON SMALLER NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS THAT HAVE A LOT OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC POTENTIALLY NEAR A PARK. REALLY SLOWS PEOPLE DOWN. THEY DON'T DO GREAT THINGS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. PLANO HAS NOT PUT ANY IN BUT I KNOW McKINNEY AND PROSPER AND SOME OF THE INCORPORATED NEIGHBORHOODS UP NEAR AUBREY HAVE PUT THEM IN AND THERE ARE VARYING LEVELS OF SUCCESS WITH THAT. >> Ratliff: MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THEY WORK GREAT DURING THE DAY, NOT SO WELL AT NIGHT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT BRINGS UP A GOOD QUESTION. >> Ratliff: I DIDN'T HIT IT. >> Chair Downs: WE COULD THROW EVERYTHING INCLUDING THE KITCHEN SINK IN HERE BUT IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT -- I MEAN, I GUESS YOU WANT THE TOOL IN YOUR TOOLKIT BUT I THINK IT WOU HAVE TO BE A VERY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN. AND IF YOU LOOK AT OUR OVERALL CITY LAYOUT, YEAH, I DON'T SEE ANY PLACE WHERE THAT'S GOING TO GO -- AGAIN. I GUESS IT HELPS TO HAVE EVERYTHING IN YOUR TOOLKIT. THAT WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO ASK FOR SPECIAL PERMISSION LATER ON. >> Ratliff: THAT ONE WOULD BE A VERY SPECIAL SITUATION, I WOULD HOPE. >> Chair Downs: DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. >> Ratliff: THAT'S FINE. I AGREE WITH YOU. COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF ASKED HALF OF MY QUESTIONS ALREADY. COMING INTO THIS PETITION POINT, IF SOMEONE SEES SOME TRAFFIC ISSUES AT A BIGGER INTERSECTION OTHER THAN A NEIGHBORHOOD, WOULD THEY COME TO THIS FILE PETITION TRAFFIC PLAN OR NOT? THE CITIZENS NEED TO KNOW WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES THEY HAVE BEFORE THEY COME TO HERE, RIGHT? SO THAT'S PART OF THE QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER RATLIFF HAD. AND THE OTHER HALF QUESTION I HAD REGARDING THAT IS COMING OUT OF THIS PROCESS. SO IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO IT'S VERY WELL -- LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, OHIO AND QUINCY, RIGHT? A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO YOU PUT A TRAFFIC LIGHT THERE BUT THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC LIGHT BEFORE. IT WAS CONSIDERED A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET. THERE WAS JUST A STOP SIGN FOR MANY YEARS. IF SOMEONE THINKS THIS IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I PETITION FOR THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR A CHANGE BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY ACCIDENTS, PEOPLE MISSED THE STOP SIGN, DIDN'T STOP. IN THE END, THE OUTCOME COULD BE A TRAFFIC LIGHT OR IT COULD BE A -- HAS TO BE A HARD STOP STOP SIGN IN ADDITION TO ALL THESE TRAFFIC-CALMING METHODS. SHOULD THAT ALSO BE CONSIDERED A PART OF THIS PLAN OR IS THERE ANOTHER PLAN THAT WILL COMPLEMENT THIS? >> SO TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION ABOUT -- >> Tong: COMING IN HERE. >> Chair Downs: WHAT SHOULD A CITIZEN KNOW? HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I CAN GET A GROUP OF NEIGHBORS TOGETHER AND WE CAN CHANGE THE WAY THEY MANAGE TRAFFIC ON PRESTON ROAD. NOPE, ABSOLUTELY NOT. IT ONLY APPLIES UP TO THIS& LEVEL OF ROADWAY. >> IN THIS DOCUMENT WE WILL, AS JASON SAID, WE WILL SET LIMITS OF WHERE -- WHAT LEVEL OF THOROUGHFARE THIS APPLIES TO. HOWEVER, THERE IS STILL TOOLS WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO TO LET US KNOW ABOUTONCERNS THAT THEY HAVE. WE HAVE THE FIX IT SYSTEM AND WE GET REQUESTS ON THAT TO GO LOOK AT CERTAIN ASPECTS OF MAJOR INTERSECTIONS THAT PEOPLE DO FIND OF CONCERN OR THEY CALL IN TO THE NUMBERS LISTED ON THE WEBSITE AND WE GET THE SAME RESPONSE. WE'LL GO OUT AND WE'LL VALIDATE THE CONCERN AND WE'LL ADDRESS IT. BUTHAT DOESN'T FALL THROUGH THIS PROCESS. >> Tong: SO THERE IS ANOTHER PROCESS. WHEN YOU GET THE PETITION YOU WILL HAVE TO SORT IT OUT. >> THAT ONE -- SO THIS IS THE CITY IS GOING TO INSTALL INFRASTRUCTURE, QUITE MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE IN A LARGE-SCALE SETTING AND THE LEVEL OF EFFORT REQUIRED FOR THAT REQUIRES THE PETITION. WITH OTHER CONCERNS, THEY CAN GO THROUGH THE FIX IT SYSTEMúORE CONCERNS AND WE WILL WORK THROUGH OUR DAY-TO-DAY TASKS WITH THEM TO VALIDATE THAT CONCERN. AND IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO FIX IT, THEN WE WILL WORK WITH THEM TO FIX THAT. FAULTY PEDESTRIAN BUTTON OUT ON PRESTON ROAD THE OTHER WEEK AND SOMEONE CALLED THAT IN AND I WENT OUT AND WE CHECKED IT, VALIDATED THAT THERE WAS ISSUES WITH THE CALL, WE FIXED IT, AND NOW IT'S WORKING. SO THERE ARE PROCESSES THAT A CITIZEN CAN TAKE FOR THE LARGER INTERSECTIONS BUT IT'S MUCH SIMPLER AND IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE WITH THE FIX IT SYSTEM. >> Tong: OKAY. SO WHEN THE CONCERNS COME IN, YOU CAN TELL THEM, OKAY, THIS DOES NOT BELONG TO THE PETITION PROCESS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO FILE A PETITION. WE CAN JUST GO OUT AND FIX THAT. >> YES. SO THE INTENT IS THAT WHEN THEY COME TO THE CITY EY COULD EITHER GO THROUGH OUR -- WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE A FORM ONLINE THAT WILL FILE A PETITION AND IF WE NOTICE THAT THIS PETITION CAME IN OR THIS PETITION REQUEST CAME IN AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE HANDLED THROUGH FIX IT, WE WOULD TRANSFER IT TO THAT SYSTEM AND WE WOULD ADDRESS IT IN THAT MANNER. OR IF A PETITION REQUEST LIKE THIS CAME THROUGH FIX IT, WE WOULD GET WITH THAT CITIZEN AND POINT THEM TO THE PETITION FORM SO THAT THEY COULD PROPERLY USE THAT SYSTEM. >> Tong: OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. >> THE SECOND HALF OF YOUR QUESTION, YOU SAID COMING OUT OF THE SYSTEM. CAN YOU REMIND ME OF THAT QUESTION? I APOLOGIZE. >> Tong: SO RIGHT NOW YOUR SOLUTIONS ARE ALL THESE TRAFFIC CALMING, LIKE SPEED BUMPS ROUNDABOUTS. IT DOES NOT HAVE ANY STOP SIGNS -- >> OR TRAFFIC SIGNALS. >> Tong: WHAT IF THE PETITION CAME IN AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S A SMALL STREET, MAYBE JUST QUINCY OR PRESTON MEDAL BUT IT TURNED OUT TO BE A LARGER PROJECT AND THEN YOU HAVE TO PUT A STOP SIGN OR YOU HAVE TO PUT A TRAFFIC LIGHT THERE. WOULD THAT BE INCLUDED IN >> SO WE CURRENTLY -- WE CURRENTLY DO A LOT OF THAT ALREADY. AND IF -- IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT IT IS A SPEEDING ISSUE ON ONE PARTICULAR ROAD, AND NOT -- AND IT'S A MAJOR ROAD LIKE QUINCY, WE WOULD -- INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THIS TRAFFIC CALMING PROCESS, WE WOULD LOOK AT A STOP SIGN WARRANT OR A TRAFFIC SIGL WARRT,E SPEEDS -- IS THERE A SPEEDING ISSUE? WE DON'T TYPICALLY USE STOP SIGNS OR YIELD CONDITIONS OR TRAFFIC SIGNALS TO MANAGE SPEED THOUGH. THAT IS MORE HANDLING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT AN INTERSECTION. >> WOULD THAT RESPOND TO ACCIDENTS, TOO, AS YOU'RE ANALYZING ACCIDENTS. >> YES. >> ACCIDENTS -- . >> STOP CONTROL, YIELD CONTROL, DO HELP WITH ACCIDENT REDUCTION, BUT NOT WITH SPEEDING, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, BECAUSE PEOPL-- LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S NOT THE INTENT, BUT PEOPLE DO IGNORE STOP SIGNS AND THEY BLOW THROUGH THEM IF THEY'RE SPEEDING, OR IF THEY ARE SPEEDING, THEY MAY MISS THE SIGNS COMING UP AND THEY BLOW THROUGH THAT. IN THAT CASE, TRAFFIC CALMING WOULD HELP THAT, BUT A STOP SIGN OR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAY NOT. >> OKAY, SO THIS PROCESS IS MAINLY TO MANAGE THE SPEED? >> YES. >> Tong: OKAY. >> SO THE STOP WARRANTS IS SOMETHING WE ALREADY DO AS A CITY, AND THAT IS AGAIN HANDLEDHROUGH THE FIX IT SYSTEM. CITIZENS CAN REQUEST -- WE THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF VOLUME OR ACCIDENTS AT THIS ONE PARTICULAR INTERSECTION AND WE'LL ANALYZE THAT. WE'VE PUT IN SEVERAL ALL-WAY STOPS OVER NEAR THE SCHOOLS OVER IN THAT AREA THIS YEAR, FOR -- THROUGH THAT EXACT PROCESS. >> I JUST WANT TO ADD, YES, FOR SPEED, BUT ALSO SITUATIONS WE WANT TO ENHANCE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, HELP PEDESTRIANS FEEL SAFER AS THEY'RE TRAVELING AS WELL. >> Tong: OKAY. WELL GRT THAT'ST QUESTION. [ LAUGHTER ] I HAVE A SECOND QUESTION, SORRY. BUT THIS WILL BE QUICK, BECAUSE IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS, YOU EXPLAINED VERY WELL ALREADY EARLIER, THANKS -- THANK YOU FOR THAT. THE ONLY QUESTION I GOT THAT IS BECAUSE I ATTEND SOME HOA MEETINGS, I REALIZE SOME OF THE CITIES, THEY DON'T COME TO THE MEETINGS, SO WHAT IF LIKE THIS ISSUE INVOLVES MAYBE 60 FAMILIES ON THE STREETS, OR MAYBE -- I SAY 20, 20 MILI ON THE STREET, BUT ONLY TWO RESPONDED, DO YOU HAVE A PERCENTAGE OF THE RESPONSE RATE REGARDING TO YOUR APPROVAL PROCESS, BECAUSE THE OTHER 18, THEY MAY NOT LIKE THE IDEA, THEY JUST DIDN'T -- EITHER THEY DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO RESPOND OR THEY DIDN'T SEE THE REQUEST, OR IS THERE ANY CONTROL PROCESS IN THERE, SAY IF IT'S SLOW RESPONSE RATE, WHAT DO WE DO? >> THAT -- THAT GETS A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT MR. BRONSKY WAS BRINGING UP WITH THE OUTREAC IS -- IS WE -- WHEN WE DETERMINE AN AREA IS VIABLE TO BE ANALYZED, WE WOULD BAILOUT TO EVERYBODY WHO WAS THERE, LETTING THEM KNOW THAT WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THIS IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IT WENT THROUGH, WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO GET INVOLVED. WE WOULD HAVE THE OPEN HOUSES, WE WOULD HAVE AT LEAST TWO OPEN HOUSES, ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO ATTEND, IF IT IS AN HOA COMMITTEE, HOA REGION, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE HOA TO REACH OUT TO THEIR RESIDENTS, LETTING THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING, AND WHEN -- WHEN WE'VE DONE ALL THAT WE CAN AS FAR AS OUTREACH, IT'S UP TO THEM TO -- IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE JUST LIKE IN PUBLIC DEMOCRACY, IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE, THAT'S ON THEM, AND IF IT -- IF THEY VOTE FOR OR AGAINST, WHATEVER THE -- WHOEVER IS PARTICIPATING IN THAT VOTE WILL BE WHAT WE GO WITH. >> I THINK YOU MENTIONED THAT IT REQUIRES IN ORDER TO GET TO AN EVALUATION AND A DESIGN PHASE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE 70% OR SOMETHING OF THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA AFFECTED ON A PETITION. >> YES. >> SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 70% OF THE PEOPLE IMPACTED HAVE SIGNED THE PETITION. THEY'RE GOING TO BE ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS, I WOULD THINK. >> AND IN THAT INSTANCE, WE ENCOURAGE THE RESIDENT WHO IS REQUESTING TO GO DOOR TO DOOR. WE WILL -- WHEN THEY COME TO US FOR A REQUEST, WE ARE MOST LIKELY GOING TO BAILOUT THE PETITION PROCESS TO EVERYONE IN THAT AFFECTED AREA, LETTING THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING AND THAT THEY CAN SIGN THE PETITION THROUGH THAT WAY. WE WILL ALSO ENCOURAGE THE RESIDENT TO GO DOOR TO DOOR AND LET OTHER PEOPLE KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING AND GET PETITIONS THAT WAY. >> SORRY I MISSED A POINT EARLIER, BUT THAT'S A GOOD ANSWER. THANK YOU. >> TWO, MAYBE THREE QUESTIONS. FIRS QUESTIONS, WHO -- WHICH RESIDENT HAS STANDING TO BRING A PETITION? SO DO I HAVE TO LIVE ON THAT STREET? OR COULD I BE AFFECTED -- THE STREET THAT FEEDS INTO MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I KNOW THEY SPEED OVER THERE, AND THEY ARE COMING OFF THE BEND FAST, DO I HAVE STANDING TO GO PETITION. >> I WOULD -- IN THAT INSTANCE, I WOULD SAY YES, AND WHEN THE PETITION COMES, THE CITY WOULD LOOK AT THE STUDY AREA LOOKING AT, OKAY, IT'S AFFECTING PEOPLE ON THESE -- THIS STREET AND THEN THIS CORNER STREET AS WELL. SO THE STUDY AREA MIGHT BE KIND OF AN L SHAPE OF HOMES, YOU KNOW, OFF OF MISSION RIDGE ON TO LEATHER TOP OR SOMETHING. >> Olley: GOT YOU. THE SECOND QUESTION, THE STUDY AREA IS DETERMINED BY CONNECTIVITY, IT SOUNDS LIKE. >> WE WOULD HAVE AN ACCESS -- ACCESS STUDY TYPE THING OF WHAT IS -- WHAT IS -- WHAT IS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED? AND WE WOULD TRY AND INCORPORATE AS MUCH OF THAT AS WE COULD. >> Olley: LAST QUESTION, ON THE APPLICATION RETENTION, IT SS IT'S HELD FOR TWO YEARS, IF ELIGIBLE APPLICATION THAT IS APPROVED, IT SOUNDS LIKE, FOR BUDGETARY REASONS OR TIME, PRIORITIZATION DOESN'T MAKE IT IN FIRST, WHY ISN'T THAT AUTOMATICALLY BUMPED UP TO THE TOP OF THE PACK FOR THE NEXT YEAR VERSUS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH PRIOR TO OVER AGAIN? >> YES, SIR. THE -- WHEN IT GETS THROUGH THE PETITION PROCESS AND THE CITY IS DETERMINING IF IT'S AN ELIGIBLE TNG, IF WE -- IF WE GO THROUGH THE SPEED STUDY, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WE'RE NOT SEEING ANY SORT OF SPEEDING IN THAT AREA, WE PUT OUT MULTIPLE SPEED TRAILERS OR SPEED RADARS WHERE IT'S -- YOU CAN'T SEE IT, AND IT'S JUST PASSIVE COLLECTION OF DATA, AND WE'RE NOT SEEING ANY SORT OF SPEEDING ISSUE. IF -- IF THAT YEAR IT ISN'T WITHIN THE BUDGET, THE NEXT YEAR SOMETHING ELSE COMES UP THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAT ISN THE BUDGET, AND WE DO SEE SPEEDING ISSUE, AND IT JUST KEEPS GETTING BUMPED, THAT'S WHEN IT WOULD -- IT WOULD FALL OFF POTENTIALLY AFTER THE -- >> AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO REPETITION AFTER THE -- >> YES, WE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO REPETITION. >> Olley: OKAY. >> IF -- IF FOR SOME REASON WE HAD A YEAR WHERE THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THAT REALLY CAME UP AND WE HAD THE BUDGET, AND THIS WAS STILL ON OUR LIST, EVEN THOUGH THERE WASN'T A SPEEDING ISSUE THAT WE COULD SEE OR AN ACCIDENT ISSUE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT TOLD USD TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, THEN WE WOULD -- WE WOULD USE THE BUDGET, THE FREE BUDGET TO PERFORM THE ANALYSIS OR THE DESIGN ON THAT. >> Chair Downs: SO I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING -- FIRST, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, BECAUSE YOU ANSWERED A TON OF QUESTIONS. WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS THE PRESENTATION OF -- WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN PLACE THIS PROCESS RIGHT? IT'S -- PROBABLY DON'T HAVE THE FINAL DETAILED DOCUMENT YET THAT LAYS THIS SPECIFICALLY OUT WITH EVERY DOCUMENT FUL FORMED, BUT THAT PROCESS WOULD HAVE TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THIS, SO WE WILL GET TO SEE WHAT THAT -- A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE'VE ASKED THE QUESTIONS WE DID, BECAUSE THAT WILL BRING -- THEY WILL BE ABLE TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND THOUGHTS AS THEY'RE DESIGNING THIS, SO GREAT QUESTION, EVERYBODY. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING WHATEVER THE FINAL IS. COMMISSIONER -- COMMISSIONER? GOLLY. I WANTED TO PROMOTE YOU TO COMMISSIONER. >> THANK YOU FOR THE PROMOTION. >> Chair Downs: WE ARE AT THE DAIS, COMMISSIONER BRIDGES -- NO. [ LAUGHTER ] >>> THE STANDARDS DO CURRENTLY LIMIT THEM TO TYPE E. F AND G STREETS WHICH ARE THREE LOWEST CLASSIFICATIONS, SO TYPE E, YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR, 18th STREET OR G AVENUE, THOSE ARE THE EXAMPLE OF THE LARGEST TYPES OF STREETS THAT MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR SOME TYPE OF TRAFFIC CALMING. >> I SAW THAT UNDER PROBABILITY ELIGIBILITY REVIEW. FOR INSTANCE A COLLECTOR TYPE E AND S STREET WOULD HAVE A LARGER AREA, BUT IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY IN HERE, WHERE YOU'RE FINDING THAT UNDER THE TITLE OF NEIGHBOROD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD REFERENCES THE THOROUGHFARE TYPES? >> IT DOES. IT ALSO REFERENCES CERTAIN -- A FEW MEETINGS AGO WE PRESENTED THESE CONTEXT MEETINGS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT, THE MIXED USE CONTEXT, THE CORNER ACTIVITY CONTEXT. >> THAT IS REALLY WHAT IS THE BOUNDARY, IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR HERE IS TO OUR POINT WOULD BE HOW WOULD A CITIZEN KNOW THAT. >> I THINK I'M HEARING A LOT OF QUESTION, WITH EVERY ORDINANCE, WE HAVE TO DO SORT OF OUTREACH, ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS OUTLINED SPECIFIC COMPLY IN THE REGULATION, I'M HEARING LOUD AND CLEAR WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING PREPARED FOR THAT WHEN WE ROLE THIS OUT, THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR WHAT THE PROCESS IS AND THEY CAN FIND THE ANSWERS THEY NEED. >> I THINK THAT IS KEY ALWAYS. I MEAN, WE SIT HERE, YOU GUYS EDUCATE US TWICE A MONTH, AND WE HAVE MATERIAL TO READ, AND -- I THINK YOUR GENERAL CITIZEN IT'S REALLY GOT TO BE SO CLEAR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T ANSWER EVERY QUESTION, BUT MOST OF THE ONES WE'RE ASKING, EVEN WITH OUR EXPERIENCE, ARE GOING TO BE ONES THAT YOU KNOW THE PUBLICOULD ASK. SO THANKS FOR PICKING UP ON THAT PIECE. ANY OTHER FEEDBACK FOR THEM? THEY'VE PROBABLY GOT A VOLUME AT THIS POINT. APPRECIATE IT SO MUCH. AS I STARTED OFF BY SAYING, I LIKE THAT WE'VE GOT THIS -- WE'RE PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. THIS IS NEEDED AND NECESSARY SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYTHING ELSE? NOPE? OKAY. WE'RE GOOD. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS. >> THANK GOD, NO. OKAY. NEXT ITEM, 6. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMR 6, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION, ALIGNMENT OF MULTI-FAMILY USES IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 2021, BE IT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN ZONING CASE #Z2013S 2022-016, AND 2022-017. THIS IS DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE ALIGNMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 2021, DIRECTION WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO ZONING CASES 202-016, AND 2022-017, WITH PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 17, 2023. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. >> Chair Downs: BEFORE YOU GET STARTED, FIRST OFF, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. WE CAN -- ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO GO REALLY QUICK ANYWAY, BUT -- I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE QUICK. ALL RIGHT. SO IF YOU'LL DO THAT THATILL HELP ME. THE LAST TIME WE WENT THROUGH THESE, WE HAD A TON OF QUESTIONS, AND IT WAS -- THERE WAS A LOT OF MIS -- NOT MISUNDERSTANDINGS, BUT LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF EVERYTHING THAT WAS BEING PUT FORWARD AND HOW THIS TIED BACK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND WE HAVE ON HERE A DEADLINE OR A PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE FOR JANUARY 17th, WHICH IS TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY, AND I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS ISSUE WAS THE HOTTESBUTTON OF ALL IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWORK IN THE COMMISSION THAT SPENT HOWEVER LONG, AND I'M THINKING WE NEED TO MAYBE TAKE A STEP BACK HERE. I WOULD LIKE TO I THINK AT THIS TIMETA TIME TABLE THIS AND DIRECT STAFF TO CANCEL OUR CURRENTLY-SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE ITEMS AND PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO I THINK IT'S WORTH THE TIME AND EFFORT TO POSSIBLY GET A JOINT COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MEETING DISCUSSION ON THIS, PAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPTANT THAT WE DON'T HEAD ONE DIRECTION OFF P&Z, AND COUNCIL PERHAPS HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT ON SOME OF THE ITEMS. STAFF HAS PUT A TON OF EFFORT INTO IT AND I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS EFFORT -- GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS ONLY FOR COUNCIL THEN TO HAVE US STEP BACK AND GO THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY REALLY AN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WE WANTED. THIS ISN'T -- IT'S JUST TOO BIG AN ISSUE AND TOO SENSITIVE A TOPIC I THINK FOR US TO DO THAT. SO I'M GOING TO OPEN THAT UP ROME DISCUSSION BEFORE WE GET A PRESENTATION, BUT I DON'T WANT THEM TO GO THROUGH IT ONCE AND HAVE TO GO THROUGH IT AGAIN OR MAYBE TWICE MORE, AND I JUST DON'T -- PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE READY FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 17th FOR THIS STUFF. SO COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: IS THAT A MOTION TO TABLE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A SECOND OR IS THIS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. >> Chair Downs: I TELL YOU WHAT, I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM, BUT I DO WANT COMMISSIONER'S INPUT, AND MAYBE AN INPUT FR STAFF IN TERMS OF HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT TABLING IT, BECAUSE THEY PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO IT. MAYBE WE SHOULD HEAR FROM YOU FIRST, YOUR THOUGHTS JUST IN GENERAL AROUND TABLING, IS THAT SOMETHING -- I KNOW YOU'RE PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT CAN YOU SEE RATIONALE AND LOGIC AND PERHAPS HAVING A BROADER DISCUSSION AROUND THIS TOPIC? >> SURE. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO GET A SECOND BEFORE WE DISCUSS -- >> I DIDN'T MAKE IT AS A MOTION. >> OH, OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DISCUSSION BEFORE THERE'S A MOTION. >> Chair Downs: I'M THROWING THE IDEA OUT THERE. IF THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE INTERESTED IN DOING THAT, WHAT TG THROUGH THAT EXERCISE. I SAID I WAS WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION. BUT I WANT TO GET FEEDBACK BEFORE WE GO DOWN THAT DIRECTION. YES, WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSION IF WE WANT IT AFTER THE MOTION AND SECOND, BUT JUST IN GENERAL UP FRONT, AGAIN, I'M GOING TO ASK MR. HILL IF HE HAS ANY THOUGHTS? >> HILL: WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO TABLING THIS DISCUSSION TO SCHEDULE SOMETHING WITH COUNCIL AT THEIR DIRECTION AND HAVE A BROADER CONVERSATION ON THIS. AS THE CHAIR MENTIONED, IT IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE, IT'S A SENSITIVE ISSUE TO THE COMMUNITY, SO WE WANT TO GIVE IT ITS DUE. SEBASTIAN, HER TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING ON IT, WE DO HAVE A HEARING SCHEDULE ON THE 17th, WE WILL HAVE A TABLE, WE CAN TABLE OR WITHDRAW IT AT THAT TIME. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANY MORE CONTEXT? >> I THINK THAT GENERALLY, THAT SOUNDS FINE. WE WERE ANTICIPATING TRYING TO GET THE DRAFT TEXT OUT AS POSSIBLE.ECTION AS SOON BUT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME DRAFTING STANDARDS THAT WE DON'T REALLY HAVE SUPPORT FOR, SO WE MAY BALANCE THAT IN THE INTERVENING TIME UNTIL WE HAVE THAT JOINT MEETING. >> WELL, I MEAN WE -- I CAN'T TELL ME HOW MANY HOURS HAVE BEEN SAT AT THIS DAIS, BETWEEN P&Z, COUNCIL, AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I FEEL LIKE WE NEED MORE INFORMATION ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC. THAT IS MY GENAL THOUGHTS. IS THERE ANYBODY HARD LINE NO, THAT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA. >> NO, IN FACT I THINK IT'S A WISE IDEA, AND I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF IT. >> Tong: I AGREE. >> Chair Downs: I MOVE WE TABLE ITEM 6 TO ALLOW STAFF AND COMMISSION TO WORK POTENTIALLY WITH COUNCIL TO CREATE A BETTER FORMAT FOR HEARING THE SUGGESTIONS AND IDEAS BY STAFF. >> AS THE ONE PERSON FROM THE CPRC, I WOULD HAPPILY SECOND IT. I THINK STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB ON A LOT OFHIS, AND FOR ME THE KEY SENTENCE WAS THIS REPORT AIMS TO OUTLINE THE GAPS AND PROPOSED POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ADDRESS ALL OF THE GAPS, AND I THINK AS YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, ABOUT COMMUNICATION AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS, I THINK IT'S A VERY WISE THING TO TABLE, SO I'M GLAD TO SECOND. >> NOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO YOUR PRESENTATION. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE HAPPY OR SAD ABOUT THAT. >> SPEECHLESS. >> THERE'S A TEAR. HE'S HAPPY, OKAY. WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. SO A VOTE YES IS TO TABLE ITEM 6. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. OKAY. ARE YOU GOOD FOR ANOTHER COUPLE OF MINUTES? HE'S GOOD. OKAY. ITEM 7. >> ITEM 7, DISCUSSION AND ACTION, ELECTION OF FIRST AND SECOND VICE CHAIRS, NOMINATION AND ELECTION OF THE FIRST AND SECOND VICE CHAIRS FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: SO I APPRECIATED THE SERVICE OF MR. HORNE OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND RIGHT BEHIND HIM THE ENTIRE TIME WAS COMMISSIONER CARY. I FOUND HIM TO BE THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATE OF ALL POSITIONS, ELOQUENT, AND ASKED EXTREMELY THOUGHTFUL QUESTIONS, SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ELECT MR. CARY AS OUR VICE CHAIR. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO MR. CARY AS OUR VICE CHAIR WITH A SECOND BY MR. BRUNHOFF. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. THAT IS SIX, WITH ONE ABSTENTION. MR. CARY WILL NOT VOTE FOR HIMSELF. >> Cary: I WOULD NEVER DO THAT. [ LAUGHTER ] (INDISCERNIBLE). >> Chair Downs: MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: MR. CHAIRMAN, ALONG THE SAME LINES, I THINK THE CITY HAS BEEN BLESSED BY HAVING, YOU KNOW, NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STAFF FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, BUT ALSO WHAT LOOKS LIKE A DEEP BENCH OF PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO BRING A UNIQUE MIXTURE OF PUBLIC SERVICE AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IN CONSTRUCTION AND BUSINESS. I THINK IT'S WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE ONE OF THOSE PUBLIC SERVANTS SO THAT WE COULD LEVERAGE HIS LEGISLATIVE EXPERIENCE, LEVERAGE HIS PERSONAL BUSINESS EXPERIENCE, SERVING AT A STATE LEVEL ALSO WITHIN THE CITY, WOULD LOVE TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER RATLIFF FOR THE POSITION OF VICE CHA 2, WHICH I THINK CONTINUES THE STRONG TRADITION WE'VE HAD OF VICE CHAIRS SO FAR. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. COMMENTS SECOND? >> >> Tong: I SECOND. >> THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. SO NOW WE'LL HAVE DISCUSSION ON THAT. AND THEN GO FROM THERE. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE TO VOTE ONE AT A TIME. MY QUESTION THEN WOULD BE IF THIS PASSES, ARE WE -- >> WE'RE DONE. >> Chair Downs: IF IT ILED, THEN WE WLD CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: SO -- I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING OTHER THOUGHTS. BUT IF WE'VE GOT A MOTION. >> UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO WITHDRAW THEIR MOTION. >> Chair Downs: WELL, I JUST DON'T WANT ANYONE TO FEEL LIKE THIS WASN'T -- THERE WASN'T AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. LET'S HAVE THE VOTE. LET'S HAVE THE VOT >> Oey: I COU, FROM A DISCUSSION AND TRANSPARENCY PERSPECTIVE, I'M FINE WITH WITHDRAWING TO ALLOW FURTHER DISCUSSION, AND POST THAT DISCUSSION, WE'LL COME UP AGAIN WITH THE SAME MOTION. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION. >> Olley: I WITHDRAW -- TEMPORARILY WITHDRAW MY MOTION. >> Tong: I WITHDRAW. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS. >> I WOULD. I THINK EVERYTHING COMMISSIONER OLLIE SAID IS ACCURATE, BUT WE HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC SERVANT WHO IN SERVI TO THE COMMUNITY, I WOULD GIVE CONSIDERATION TO ANOTHER CANDIDATE, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY AS WELL, HE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HAS BEEN A GREAT SERVANT OF THE CITY IN THAT REGARD, OVER SEVERAL YEARS, SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST WE CONSIDER HIM AS WELL. SO MAYBE THAT MUDDIES EVERYTHING UP. >> Chair Downs: WELL, IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME IT'S BEEN MUDDY. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE'S TWO VERY STRONG CANDIDATES HERE, AND WE CAN ALL EXPRESS I GUESS OUR OPINIONS OF IT. MR. BRONSKY IS A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE. WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. AND SO I -- I APPRECIATE THAT. I APPRECIATE THE EXPERIENCE THAT HE'S BROUGHT AS WELL TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE DAIS. AND AGAIN, HE SERVED IN A LOT OF OTHER WAYS. I TEND TO LEAN TOWARD MR. RATLIFF BECAUSE OF HIS BACKGROUND IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, WHICH THE PLAN AND THE ORDINANCES DON'T ALWS ADDRESS EVERYTHING WE NEED, THAT'S WHY I HAVE I THINK IN THIS CASE NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH HIS LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND IS UNDERSTANDING OF THE POLITICAL PROCESS. SO THAT'S WHERE I LEAN, BUT -- >> IF I MAY, SIMILAR, I'VE GROWN PROBABLY DUE TO PROXIMITY CLOSE AND HE'S SHOWN ME ONE OF THE BETTER ICE CREAM SPOTS IN THE CITY, SO DO I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT REGARDING THE KNOWLEDGE AND BACKGROUND, MAIN REASON FOR LIMIT TOWARD COMMISSIONER RATLIFF IS I HAVE LEARNED A LOT TO LOOK FOR THINGS THAT I DIDN'T QUITE KNOW TO LOOK FOR LISTENING TO HIM, MANY TIMES I WILL COME IN HERE HAVING A SENSE OF WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE THE ANSWER AND HE BRINGS UP A DIFFERENT ASPECT TO IT BASED ON HIS PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND HIS LEGISLATIVE EXPERIENCE THAT FORCES ME TO RECONSIDER WHICH IS WHY I TILT THAT HIS WAY. >> Chair Downs: I THINK IT'S CLEAR -- SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR TO ANYONE WATCHING IN PARTICULAR THAT THE ROLE OF THE SECOND VICE CHAIR IS TO FILL IN IF I WAS NOT HERE AND COMMISSIONER CARY WAS NOT GOING TO BE HERE. IT DOESN'T HOLD A DIFFERENT WEIGHT IN TERMS OF A VOTE. IT DOESN'T HOLD ANYTHING DIFFERENT IN THAT REGARD. THE PRIMARY ROLE OF A CHAIR IS TO MAINTAIN THE AGENDA, CONTROL THE MEETING, AND, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS POTENTIAL SPEAKERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO AGAIN, I THINK I WOULD -- I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY, OR WE CAN DROP BACK TO -- COMMISSIONER CARY, YOUR MIC IS STILL ON? NO, THAT'S FINE. COMMISSIONER BROUNSKI. >> THE ROLE SINCE WE'RE NOW DOING FINDINGS, THE REPORT THAT THE SECOND VICE CHAIR FILES WITH THE CITY COUNCIL IS NO LONGER APPLICABLE. >> Olley: SO I WL RESTATE MY MOTION TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER RATLIFF FOR VICE CHAIR 2 AND -- >> Chair Downs: DO YOU WANT TO SECOND AGAIN? >> Tong: I SECOND. BUT THERE'S A DISCUSSION. I THOUGHT IF WE HAD TWO NOMINATIONS, ARE WE JUST GOING TO MOVE AND PICK ONE AND GO ONE, OR ARE WE SUPPOSED TO VOTE BETWEEN THE TWO NOMINATIONS. >> Chair Downs: WE NOW HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER RATLIFF AND WE WILL VOTE ON THAT. >> Tong: OKAY. >> Chair owns: OKAY? >> Tong: OKAY. >> IF IT FAILS THERE CAN BE ANOTHER MOTION. >> Tong: OKAY. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE'VE GOT -- WE CAN ALL STILL GO HAVE A DRINK AFTER THIS GUYS. THIS IS -- OKAY. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 6 TO 0 WITH ONE ABSTENTION, MR. RATLIFF. MR. BRONSKY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR PUSHING OUT -- >> COMMISSIONER BRONSKY HAS DONE A LOT FOR THE SKI. ABSOLUTELY.wns: >> I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF BENNET FOR ALL OF THE REASONS, I THOUGHT IT WAS WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. I APOLOGIZE IF I GOT US INTO AN AUGUST TOWARD SITUATION THERE. THAT WAS NOT MY ATTENTION. ITEM 8, ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS. SEEING NONE, WE'RE ADJOURNED AT 8:24 P.M. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR YOUR TIME. NOW YOU HAVE A LONGER BREAK. [ ♪ MUSIC PLAYING ♪ ]