>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. I WILL CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR NOVEMBER 20TH. [THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]. . >> THIS PORTION IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES TO SPEAKERS OF INTEREST AND CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY INFORMATION. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> I UNDERSTAND COMM COMMISSIONERC CARY HAS SOMETHING. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. JUST WANT TO EXPLAIN SOMETHING FROM LAST TIME AS RELATED TO THE KIRBY ICE HOUSE AND THE COMPETITION ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS KATY OUT POST. I HAD VISITED THAT PRIOR TO US MEETING LAST WEEK, MET WITH THE MANAGER AND HE pTOLD MH THE COMPETITION COMING IN. AT WAS AN ACCURATE DEPICTION OF WHAT HE SAID. BUT AFTER THAT I GOT INFORMATION FROM THE OWNERS AND THEY HAD A LIT L DIFFERENT VIEW AND I FELT THAT IMPORTANT TO BRING THAT BACK BECAUSE I HADN'T HAD A FULL EXPLANATION. THE OWNERS DO HAVE SOME CONCERN WITH THE COMPETITION COMING IN ACROSS THE STREET. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY -- BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS THAT I THINK ARE GERMANE. THE KATY OUTPOST WHICH HAS BEEN A LONG TIME PLACE OF BUSINESS IS GOING TO PUT ABT 4 MILLION DOLLARS REVENUE IN BASED ON TRENDS. THEIR CONCERN IS THE COMPETITION MIGHT CHANGE THEIR POSITION TO INVEST. IN TERMS OF FOOD TO ALCOHOL RATIO SALES AND IF KIRBY ICE HOUSE IS APPROVED ACROSS THE STREET, IF THEY WILL HAVE THE SAME FOOD RATIO AS THE KATY OUTPOST. THAT PROBABLY IS GERMANE AS WE LOOK AT IT AND PASS INFORMATION ON TO COUNCIL TO MAKE A DECISION AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I CAME BACK AND FOLLOWED THAT UP. THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. THAT'S IT. . >> LET'S MOVE ON TO CONSENT. >> CONSENT WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS TYPICALLY NOT CONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED BY INDIV INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >>> WE MOVE APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROUNSKY. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEMS (INDISCERNIBLE). ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID CONSIDERATION? >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION -- PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. SPEAKER WILLS BE CALLED IN ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE RECEIVED. APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL IF NEEDED. REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY TIMES AS NECESSARY. THEY MUST MEET DEVELOPMENT OR MORE DISCRETIONARY EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL. ZONING CASE 2023-005. THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RIONAL COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGIONAL COMMERCIAL AND RESCIND SPECIFIC USE PERMITS. FOR PRIVATE CLUB ON THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY, 305 FEET NORTH OF PARK BOULEVARD. NUMBER 56, 434, 44, 448 FOR PRIVATE CLUB AND NUMBER 570 FOR AUBLT LEASING. PETITIONERS ARE CENTENNIAL WATERFALL WILLOW BEND, NEIMAN MARCUS, MACY'S RETAIL HOLDINGS, AND DILLARD'S INCORPORATED. THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M PLANNER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A TABLING REQUEST TO DECEMBER 4TH AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE TABLING REQUEST. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? MR. OLLEY? >> Olley: IN POINTS OF REFINEMENT YOU'RE WORKING ON. >> THERE ARE SOME REFINEMENTS NEEDED ON THE PD STIPULATION AND STAFF WANTED T MAK SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL THE T'S CROSSED AND ALL I'S DOTTED. PARTICULARLY THERE WERE SOME DISCREPANCIES ON THE LOT COVERAGES AND LOT LINES, BUT WE ARE POSITIVE THAT WE CAN GET THAT FIGURED OUT. >> Holmer: THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY SPEAKERS ON THE ITEM. >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> Bronsky: I MOVE WE TABLE UNTIL THE DECEMBER 4TH, 2023 MEETING. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COMMISSION ER BROUNSKY TO TABLE THE ITEM TO DECEMBER 4TH. PLEASE VOTE. IT CARRIES 7 TO 1. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR VOTE? >> Bronsky: YES. >> WE C REVOTE. >> IF IT'S QUICK TO DO, WE'LL REVOTE. WE'LL TRY THIS AGAIN. IF YOU VOTE NO AGAIN -- OKAY. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8 TO 0. VERY GOOD. >> ITEM 2, 2023-025, REQUEST FOR SPECIFI USE PERMIT FOR TATTOOING AND PERMANENT COSMETICS ON .1 ACRE LOCATED 125 FEET EAST OF U.S. HIGHWAY 75 AND 125 FEET SOUTH OF PARKER ROAD. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. PETITIONERS ARE WEDNESDAY WOODS RETAIL CENTER INCORPORATED AND REMARKABLE INK STUDIO. >> WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JOHN KIM. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PERMANENT TATTOOING. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT PARKER ROAD AND HIGHWAY 75. ON THE SCREEN HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IS A SUITE IN THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER. ALL SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. TO THE SOUTH IS DEVELOPED RETAIL STORE. TO THE WEST IS PARKWAY AND HIGHWAY 75 AND DEVELOPED SHOPPING CENTER. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN CORRIDORS. THIS DESIGNATION SUPPORTS RETAIL AND SERVICE USES. PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR'S CATEGORY. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED AS RETAIL TYPES. REQUEST WILL RESULT IN NO CHANGES TO THE RECOMMEND ED CHANGE OF USES. STAFF FINDS REQUEST FOR TATTOOING AND PERMANENT COSMETICS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE P PLAN. SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 15 IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. IN THE ORDINANCE IT STATES A FACILITY OFFERING THESE SERVICES SHALL BE PROHIBITED WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF ANY RELIGIOUS FACILITY OR SCHOOL. THERE ARE NO USE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE 1,000 FOOT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT. IN THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER THERE ARE OTHER HIGHLY REGULATED RETAIL USES THAT INCLUDE A LIQUOR SCORE AND A SMOKING/VAPING STORE. THE CONCENTRATION OF SUCH USES MAY RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER. THERE ARE NO POLICIES OR STANDARDS DISCOURAGING CONCENTRATION OF SUCH USES. WE RECEIVED NO RESPONSES WITHIN 200 FEET FOR THIS CASE. WE RECEIVED TOTAL OF TWO RESPONSES FOR THIS CASE, BOTH IN OPPOSITION. TO SUMMARIZE THE APPLICANT ISREQ CE CENTER. SUBJECT PROPERTY MEETS SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ITEM 2 IS SUBMITTED. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO GIVE A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE REQUEST. I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUEST QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A QUESTION FROM STAFF. >> Olley: I HAVE A QUESTION. ON THE VAPING AND LIQUOR STORE -- THOSE ARE THE? >> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY'RE CONSIDERED RETAIL USE AND ARE ALLOWED. >> Olley: THE REASON THE TATTOO USE REQUIRES SUP IS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE CLASSIFIED AS RETAIL USE WITHIN? THE AREA. >> Olley: THE COMMENT ON THE AGGREGATION OF HIGHLY REGULATED -- IS THAT A LEGAL CLASSIFICATION, LEGAL THRESHOLD? I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. TWO STOPS AWAY FROM THAT IS ANOTHER VAPING STORE, CHECK CASHING, AND LIQUOR STORE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. CHECK CASHING IS HIGHLY REGULATED INDUSTRY. >> UH-HUH. >> Olley: IS THAT -- WHAT'S THE LEGAL THRESHOLD WE'RE TRYING TO USE? IS IT SOMET REGULATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? IS IT MORE INSIDIOUS, QUOTE UNQUOTE. >> COMMISSIONER, WE DIDN'T HVE ANYTHING IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE THAT SPECIFICALLY SPOKE TO THAT OR IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND -- BUT WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN INDUSTRIES THAT ARE MORE REVLY REGULATED AND CONSIDERED BY GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS. WE WANTED TO POINT IT OUT. THERE'S NO PARTICULAR MIX, THERE'S NO PERCENTAGES BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T MADE THOSE DECISIONS IN PLANO. WE COULD BUT WE HAVEN'T. >> Olley: LAST QUESTION -- WOULD THE TWO REGULATED STORES -- TWO OR THREE. HAVE WE HAD STATISTICS THAT SUGGEST INCIDENTS OF POLICE CALLS, CRIME, UNDESIRABLE THINGS? >> I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT INFORMATION, SO I THINK WE COULD DO RESEARCHND GET IT. BUT I DON'T KNOW. >> IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE AWARE OF. THESE CASES -- IF THEY HAD A CONCERN THEY COULD RAISE IT. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IT HASN'T BEEN RAISED. >> Olley: THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO --? >> QUITE CERTAIN THE QUESTION I HAVE WILL BE FOR COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPORT. WOULD I BE ILLEGAL FOR US TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE TO SAY YOU CAN'T HAVE A TATTOO PARLOR, LIQUOR STORE, AND VAP STORE -- CAN WE DO THAT LEGALLY. >> I THINK IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE YOU WOULD WANT TO COMPILE DATA FROM PD, GET REPORTS ABOUT WHETHER THERE'S HIGHER INCIDENTS OF CRIME, LOITERING -- OR WHETHER IT'S A PUBLIC PERCEPTION ISSUE AND THEN EVALUATE THE DATA YOU HAVE AND DECIDE WHAT'S APPROPRIATE. >> THE FLIP SIDE WOULD BE WOULD IT BE BETTER TO SCATTER THOSE OUT OR DO YOU COMBINE THEM. SO INTERESTING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NO MORE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. UNDERSTAND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE. >> YES. WE HAVE ALEX SMITH. >> I'M ALEX SMITH. >> ARE YOU NERVOUS. >> YES. CAN YOU TELL. >> JUST RELAX. WE DON'T BITE. >> YOU HAVE GREAT ENERGY, SO I FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE. THIS OPPORTUNITY MEANS A LOT TO ME -- JUST TO PRESENT MY VISION TO YOU GUYS. >> FOR THE RECORD COULD YOU STATE YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> I LIVE IN RICHARDSON, TEXAS, COUPLE -- 3551 WILSHIRE WAY. RICHARDSON, TEXAS. 77052. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. >> THERE WE GO. WE'LL GET HER STARTED. WE REALIZE THIS IS A BIG DEAL FOR YOU. WE REALIZE THIS IS A BIG DEAL FOR YOU. >> IT IS, IT IS. >> IT'S OKAY. >> I'M GOING TO TAKE MY TIME BUT NOT TAKE UP T MUCH OF YOUR TIME. MY MISSION STATEMENT FOR REMARKABLE INK WOULD BE TO PROVIDE AN ABOVE-AVERAGE TATTOO EXPERIENCE WHILE PRIORITIZING SANITATION, SIMPLICITY, CUSTOMER SERVICE, AND QUALITY. JUST TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON EACH ITEM -- SO I HAVE WHAT IS CALLED THE FOUR PILLARS OF OPERATION. THAT WILL ARE BE IMPLEMENTED WITHIN THE STOP OR STUDIO, RATHER. SANITATION WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE, AS IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF ANY TATTOO -- SO, YES, SANITATION WOULD BE HEAVILY ENFORCED, DISINFECTING OF ALL KINDS WITH GERM SIGH DAL SOAPS AND SHOP CLEANING WOULD BE A MANDATORY ROUTINE FOR US. ALSO SIMPLICITY -- WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THE DESIGN OF THE STUDIO IS GOING TO BE VERY MO NO CHNOCHROMATIC, NO TOO MUCH GOING ON BUT HOPING TO ENCOURAGE COMFORT BLT FOR MY CLIENTS. CUSTOMER SERVICE IS VERY IMPORTANT AND QUALITY IS ALSO VERY IMPORTANT. WE WANT TO UPHOLD A STANDARD AT THIS TATTOO STUDIO AND THAT'S ANOTHER PRIORITY FOR US. SO.... MY INSPIRATION -- THIS IS MY GRAND MOTHER. SHE -- VERY BEAUTIFUL. SHE WAS AN ENTREPRENEUR HERSELF. SHE WAS A FASHION DESIGNER. THERE'S A PICTURE OF HER AT HER FIRST SHOW. SHE PUT IT ON I BELIEVE IN THE '80S, LATE '80S. SHE'S A VERY DRIVEN PERSON. I GET MY DRIVE AND CONFIDENCE LEVEL, I WOULD SAY, TO GO OUT AND PURSUE SOMETHING LIKE THIS FROM HER. THAT'S ANOTHER COUPLE OF IMAGES OF HER IN FRONT OF HER BOUTIQUE SHE OWNED AT ONE POINT. LADY KATHERINE. COUPLE MORE PICTURES OF HER DOING WHAT SHE DID. SHE WAS A SPEAKER, PUBLIC SPEAKER. SHE HAD A BOOK SHE RELEASED CALLED "STOP THE INSANITY IN CHRISTIANITY." SO HUGE INSPIRATION FROM ME RIGHT HERE. THIS IS HER MAKING A COUPLE OF TV APPEARANCES PROMOTING HER BOOK. THIS SHOP IS CALLED "REMARKABLE INK." MY GRAND MOTHER WAS REMARKABLE IN EVERY WAY. I GOT MY ENTREPRENEURSHIP GENES FROM HER. SHE INFLUENCED ME TO FOLLOW MY DREAMS AND BE A DOER. THAT'S WHY I'VE INCLUDED HER IN THE SHOP AND THE SLIDES. SOME DIFFERENTIATING FACTORS -- WE HAVE AN EARLIER AND CLOSING TIME WHICH MEANS WE WON'T BE OPEN UNTIL THE WEE HOURS OF THE NIGHT. I THINK THAT COULD SPEAK TO THE QUESTION YOU HAD ABOUT CRIMES OR ANYTHING GOING ON. I WANT TO CLOSE AT AN EARLY TIME TO PREVENT SOME OF THAT STUFF THAT COULD HAPPEN AT A LATER HOUR. ALSO, MY CLIENTS THEY APPRECIATE COMING IN EARLIER FOR MY SERVICES AS OPPOSED TO COMING IN LATE AT NIGHT. IF YOU HAVE -- THEY HAVE THINGS TO DO, JOBS, CHILDREN. THAT'S MORE CONVENIENT FOR THEM AND MYSELF ALSO. SO THAT -- LET'S SEE. CUSTOMER SERVICE -- I TOUCHED ON A LITTLE EARLIER. I WANT TO MAKE MY CLIENTS FEEL THIS IS MORE THAN A TRANSACTION. I SPEND FOUR TO EIGHT HOURS, MAYBE TEN HOURS WITH MY CLIENTS. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE LETTING THEM KNOW IT'S NOT JUST A TRANSACTION AT REMARKABLE INK. IT WILL BE MUCH MORE THAN THAT. SHOP DESIGN, ATMOSPHERE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT -- MY GOAL IS FOR THIS NOT TO BE TYPICAL TATTOO SHOP. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE OF A PERSONALIZED STUDIO THAT I THINK MY CLIENTS CAN APPRECIATE WITH A GOOD ATMOSPHERE AND LASTLY, APPOINTMENT BASED. MY STUDIO WOULD BE APPOINTMENT BASED WHICH MEANS THAT YOU COULD COME IN AND BOOK AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK OR THE NEXT DAY. I WON'T BE DOING TOO MANY, LIKE, RANDOM WALK-INS THROUGHOUT THE DAY. THE WAY I LIKE TO WORK IS THROUGH APPOINTMENTS ONLY. THAT'S HOW I'VE ALWAYS WORKED. I THINK THAT WILL ARE BE A DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR FOR US AS WELL. SO COUPLE OF FACTS ABOUT THE TATTOO INDUSTRY. THE GLOBAL TATTOO MARKET SIZE WAS VALUED AT 1.89 BILLION DOLLARS IN 2022. IT'S PROJECTED TO GROW TO 3.93 BILLION DOLLARS BY THE YEAR 2030. TATTOO INDUSTRY HAS BEEN INCREASING BY NEARLY 10 PER CENT EVERY YEAR FOR MORE THAN A DECADE NOW. I PUT THIS IN THE POWERPOINT JUST TO KIND OF SHOW THAT THE INDUSTRY IS GROWING. IT'S A GROWING MARKET. I BELIEVE THAT TATTOO STUDIOS SHOULD AND WILL BE AS COMMON AS YOUR LOCAL BARBARA SHOP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO YE, THE MARKET IS GROWING. THAT'S A GOOD THING FOR ANY TATTOO ARTIST IN THE INDUSTRY NOW AND ALSO FOR THE CITY, IN WHICH WE WOULD RESIDE. A LOT OF PEOPLE GET TATTOOS TO COMMEMORATE THE MEMORY OF LOVED ONES, STRESS RELIEVER. COULD BE COMPARED TO WORKING OUT, SOMETHING ABOUT GETTING SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL FROM THAT PAIN -- PEOPLE LOVE TO CELEBRATE A MILESTONE AND TO ULTIMATELY EXPRESS ONE'S INDIVIDUITY,ELL THEIR STORY THROUGH ARTWORK AND TATTOOS. COMMUNITY BENEFIT -- INCLUSION WOULD BE ONE. KIND OF LIKE EMBRACING THE NEW GENERATION AND JUST ANYONE WHO WANTS TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES THROUGH TATTOOS. I BELIEVE THAT -- LIKE I SAID EARLIER, THE MARKET IS THRIVING. I THINK THAT COULD BE GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY AS WELL. AND GIVING BACK -- I PLAN TO GIVE BACK IN MY STUDIO. SO DURING CHRISTMAS TIME WE WOULD HAVE THINGS LIKE TOY DRIVES WHERE YOU COULD BRING A TOY AND POSSIBLY GET A PERCENTAGE OFF YOUR NEXT TATTOO. A SPACE WITH A NAME. HERE IS SOME IMAGES OF THE STUDIO, A SMALL, QUAINT SPOT -- NOT TOO BIG, WHICH I FELT WAS PERFECT FOR ME AND IF I -- WHOEVER WANTS TO JOIN -- I MIGHT HAVE ONE OR TWO OTHER ARTISTS BUT WORKING WITH MY CLIENTELE. I THOUGHT THIS SPACE WAS PERFECT. IT'S NOT TOO BIG. YEAH. SO HERE'S A COUPLE OF IM IMAGES OF THE ARTWORK THAT I DO. GOING KIND OF FAST. I'M VERY PARTICULAR ON THE TYPE OF WORK I DO. I DON'T JUST DO ANYTHING. IT HAS TO ALIGN WITH ME THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO MENTION. YEAH. SO THAT IS IT FOR ME. THANK YOU, GUYS, SO MUCH. I FEEL LIKE I RAMBLED THROUGH THAT WHOLE THING, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS. >> WE HAVE GEORGE -- IS IT HOLMES. >> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LET MR. HOLMES SPEAK AND WE MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. >> OKAY. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR TAKING A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO TALK. I'M GEORGE HOLMES. I LIVE AT 700900 -- I WOULD BE ALEX'S GRANDFATHER. THAT FABULOUSLY LOOKING GRAND MOTHER YOU SAW WAS MY WIFE FOR 40 YEARS. SHE WAS ALWAYS AN INSPIRATION TO ALEX. MY WIFE WAS VER ENTREPRENEURIAL AND AS ALEX -- I'VE KNOWN HER OBVIOUSLY SINCE THE DAY SHE WAS BORN. SHE'S ALWAYS HAD AN ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT. I RECALL -- SHE'S BEEN COUPLE YEARS NOW IN HER TATTOOING. SHE SAID I'M LOOKING FOR A SPOT. SHE NEVER COULD COME UP WITH ONE UNTIL A FEW MONTHS AGO. SHE SAID, GRANDPA, I FOUND MY SPOT. I SAID LET'S CHECK IT OUT. INTERESTING -- WHEN I WAS EXACTLY HER AGE, 27, I GOT INTO THEALON BUSINESS. I -- TEN YEARS I HAD THREE DIFFERENT -- OPENED THREE DIFFERENT HAIR SALONS, WHICH IS A RELATED BUSINESS, AND SO I SAID, WELL, YEAH, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE YOUR SPOT. SO I WENT UP THERE AND CHECKED IT OUT. IT -- I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY IDEAL FOR WHAT SHE WANTED. WASN'T TOO BIG. THOUGHT SHE COULD MANAGE IT. THOUGHT THE TRAFFIC THAT WOULD COME BY WOULD REALLY HELP HER SUCCEED IN HER BUSINESS. SO I WAS PRETTY MUCH ON BOARD RIGHT AWAY. OF COURSE I WAS WAITING FOR THE NEXT QUESTION AFTER SHE SAID -- THERE'S ENOUGH GRAY HAIR IN THIS ROOM YOU'LL UNDERSTAND. THE NEXT QUESTION IS, GRAMPS -- COULD YOU HELP ME FINANCE IT? I SAID, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT -- THE QUESTION NEVER CAME. ONE DAY I SAID, ALEX, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO THIS? SHE SAID I'VE BEEN SAVING MY MONEY FIVE YEARS AND I'M SET TO GO. I'VE JUST BEEN WAITING FOR THE SPOT, SO I WAS SO PROUD OF HER TO SAY THAT. SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED. WHEN SHE WAS A TEENAGER SHE HAD REGULAR BS. ONE IN PARTICULAR -- SHE WAS WORKING AT FOOT LOCKER AND WOULD COME HOME WITH SHOE AFTER SHOE AND BOXES -- I WAS LIKE WHAT DO YOU WANT ALL THESE SHOES FOR? SHE SAID DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. I KNOW WHAT I'M DOING. SIX MONTHS LATER WHENEVER SOMETHING WOULD COME UP -- SHE MIGHT PAY HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR AIR JORDANS OR WHATEVER IT WAS. I'D COME UP AND I'D SAY WHAT'S GOING ON. SHE SAID DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT, GRANDPA. I'M GETTING DEALS. SHE WOULD STA HERLOSET FULL? >> SIR, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS. >> SHE WOULD GO AND SAY SHE WOULD SELL THE SHOES AND SELL THEM FOR 250. IMMEDIATELY SHE HAD THIS ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT THAT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WILL DO HER WELL. I'M PROUD OF HER. SHE WANTS TO TRY THIS. I THINK THE CITY OF PLANO IS A GREAT PLACE FOR HER TO DO IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. YOU OBVIOUSLY WEREN'T NERVOUS. [LAUGHTER]. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE.... YEAH? COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: GREAT JOB ON THE PRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU. >> Holmer: THIS IS YOUR FIRST SHOP. >> YES. >> Olley: HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN TATTOOING. >> ABOUT FIVE YEARS. >> Olley THE REASON FOR THE? >> IT'S A SMALL PLACE, WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO. I HAD A VISION IN MY HEAD. THE WAY IT'S SHAPED IT'S PERFECT FOR ME. IT'S ALL PART OF IT AND THE LOCATION IS GREAT, I THINK, FOR SURE. >>> ANYONE ELSE? THANKS FOR BEING HERE. YOU DID A GOOD JOB. D D GOOD LUCK. YOU'RE VERY TALENTED. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> Brounhoff: THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. WHILE I'M IMPRESSED WITH THE APPLICANT I WILL POINT OUT THAT ZONING INVOLVES ZONING LAND, NOT PEOPLE. EVEN LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS PROPERTY I DON'T FIND IT OBJECTIONNAL AT ALL. FIRST OF ALL, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GET A TATTOO, I DON'T THINK IT HARMS ANYBODY. I THINK IT'S A PERSONAL DECISION THAT SOMEONE CAN MAKE DON' SEE THAT THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT IS GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT OTHER PROPERTIES IN ANY WAY. IT'S NOT GOING TO PRODUCE NOISE OR FUMES OR HAVE BRIGHT LOUDZ OR SPEAKERS OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT MIGHT DISTURB OR ANNOY OTHER PROPERTIES. IT'S BOUNDED BY TWO HIGHWAYS ON TWO SIDES. ON THE SOUTH IS THE BEST BUY ELECTRONICS STORE. AND IT IS LOCATED NOWHERE NEAR HOMES, SCHOOLS, RELIGIOUS FACILITIES OR ANY OTHER SENSITIVE USE. AND FINALLY, I THINK IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO BURDEN THIS PROPERTY WITH WHAT WE MIGHT CONCEIVE AS NEGATIVE IMPACTS FROM OTHER PROPERTIES BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT PRODUCING NEGATIVE IMPACTS. SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS APPLICATION. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARY? >> Cary: WELL SAID. I SEE THIS AS A GOOD USE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY WITH AN ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT THIS YOUNG LADY WOULD BRING. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT THING FOR PLANO. AS THE COMMISSIONER SAID, WE'RE K LOOKING AT LAND USE, NOT NECESSARILY PEOPLE. IN THIS CASE I THINK THERE IS A BENEFIT TO THE PEOPLE. SEEMS SHE HAS A GOOD PLAN. I THINK THIS FITS IN GOOD WELL. I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT. >> COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: HE SAID EVERYTHING I WAS GOING TO SAY. WITH THAT I WANT TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2 AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 2 AS SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKI. IT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. GOOD LUCK. ANOTHER STEP TO GO. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> I'LL HAVE TO STOP BY AND SEE YOU. >> PLEASE DO. >> I ONLY HAVE ONE. >> IT'S ON MY LEG. IT'S A MILESTONE. I DID AN IRONMAN TRIATHLON. >> SEE? THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. THANK YOU. >> IF IT PLEASES, THE COMMISSION I'LL READ 3A AND B TOGETHER. PUB RICK HEARING ZONING CASE 2023-015, REQUEST TO AMEND URBAN MIXED USE 3 ON 103.6 ACRES LOCATED IN ON THE EAST SIDE OF ALMA DRIVE. 3B IS REVISED SITE PLAN -- LLIN CREEK SINGLE FAMILY -- 104 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE DETACHED LOTS, 298 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ATTACHED LOTS AND 25 COMMON AREA LOTS ON 35.1 ACRES LOCATED ON EAST SIDE OF ALMA DRIVE, 550 FEET NORTH OF PLANO PARKWAY, ZONED MIXED US 3. APPLICANTS ARE MM CCM 48M,LLC, VM FUND, MATTAMY HOMES, ASHTON DAMNS RESIDENTIAL AND BRIGHT LAND HOMES. FIRST ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATION AND SECOND IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DONNA. SENIOR PLANNER WITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS IS REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR PROJECTIONS OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND TO MAKE OTHER CLARIFICATION OF IT. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED ON THE SCREEN IN YELLOW. A REVISED SITE PLAN HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WITH THIS REQUEST TO SHOW THE TWO-FOOT PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT TO ALLOW THE PROJECTIONS OF BUILDINGS INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY. THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN REVIEWED WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER AND OPEN SPACE CENTER ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. REQUEST MEETS DESCRIPTIONS AND PRIORITIES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARD. THIS DOES NOT IMPACT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LAND USE TYPES, MIX OF USES OR ANY OTHER POLICIES. STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THIS SITE -- THE DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2018. THE FIRST PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES MANY OF THE SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX HOMES. APPLICANT IS READY TO GO VERTICAL ON THE HOMES. HOWEVER, UPON REVIEW OF THE BUILDING PERMIT, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE PROPOSED 3WI8DING PLANS INCLUDED ROOF PROJECTIONS INTO THE CITY'S RIGHT OF W WAY. CURRENTLY ONLY AWNINGS, CANOPIES AND OTHER FIXTURES MAY EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE EXCEPTIONS TO ALLOW OTHER NONDETACHABLE FEATURES, TO EXTEND UP TO TWO FEET IN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY WITH APPROVAL OF A LICENSE AGREEMENT FROM THE CITY OF PLANO. THE IMAGE SHOWS A PROOF PROJECTION SHOWN IN RED INTO THE SIDEWALK SHOWN IN BLUE, WHICH IS CITY RIGHT OF WAY. THESE TYPES OF ENCROACHMENT ALLOWANCES ARE NOT UNCOMMON. OTHER AREAS INCLUDE DOWNTOWN PLANO, THE LEGACY AREA, PLANO GATEWAY AND THE 190 APARTMENTS. NEXT WITH THE AGREEMENT FROM THE APPLICANT STAFF REQUESTS TWO ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION EDITS. FIRST IS TO AMEND THE TABLE OF PERMITTED USES TO CLARIFY INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED ON BLOCK THIS HAS BEEN IN PLACE FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE DISTRICT AND WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT. NEXT WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT NO MINIMUM RATIO IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRIVATE STREET LOT IN BLOCKAA ALTHOUGH THERE WILL BE A BUILDING OVERHANG IT WAS NEVER INTENDED THIS BLOCK BE DEVELOPED WITH BUILDINGS. AS FAR AS RESPONSES WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER. WE DID RECEIVE ONE RESPONSE CITY WIDE AND IT WAS IN OPPO OPPOSITION. STAFF RECOMMENDS AWE PROOUFL OF THE ZONING CASE SUBJECT TO THE STIPULATION SHOWN ON THE SCREEN AND IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING CASE. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> CAE OR TWO? THERE YOU GO. I AM JUST -- I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT WHERE THERE'S A COMMA AFTER "BOXES" AND IT SAYS "AND OTHER BUILDING PROJECTIONS." WHAT WOULD KEEP SOMEONE FROM TAKING THE SECOND FLOOR AND CANTILEVERING OR MOVING IT OUT TWO FEET SO IT'S NOT JUST A BUILDING PROJECTION. I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE BAY WINDOWS. I WAS LOOKING AT PERHAPS ADDING LANGUAGE THAT WOULD SAY WHATEVER THE PROJECTION IS IT CAN'T ADD SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE FOOTPRINT OR THE FLOOR PLAN BECAUSE I THINK ALL OF THESE PROJECTIONS ARE FINE. I JUST DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO TAKE THAT LANGUAGE AND RUIN THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING BY TRYING TO GET A FEW MORE SQUARE FOOT -- SQUARE FEET. >> WE WILL REVIEW THEIR BUILDING PLANS AND THEY HAVE TO ENTER INTO A LICENSE AGREEMENT, AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S THE APPLICANT'S INTENT TO CANTILER TIR BUILNGS OVER. IT'S STRICTLY FOR ROOFS AND BAY WINDOWS AND SUCH FEATURES LIKE THAT. BUT I DID HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK WITH THE APPLICANT AND IF WE DID LOOK AT THAT LANGUAGE THAT YOU PROPOSED AND THEY WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO THAT. >> OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO READ IT IN OR SHOULD I. >> I CAN ALSO? >> I WENT TO BUILDING INSPECTION OFFICE AS WELL BECAUSE I WANTED TO SEE WHAT THEY WERE DOING AND I TALKED TO THE PLANS EXAMINER, AND SHE WAS SUPPORTIVE OF THE LANAGE I PROPOSED AS WELL JUST SO THAT IT WAS CLEAR IT WAS FOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES? >> NONOCCUPIED SPACE. >> RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO READ IT IN. >> I THINK WHAT YOU WROTE WAS NOT THE TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATION. IT WAS THE SUMMARY. IF I COULD SUMMARY, IT WOULD BE ADDING TO ROMAN NUMERAL TWO THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN -- ADDING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES ARE INTENDED TO BE DECORATIVE IN NATURE AND WILL NOT INCREASE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. >> THAT'S REASONABLE. >> ANY APPROVAL WILL INCLUDE THIS SENTENCE. >> OKAY. >> CAN WE TIE BACK ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES TO BUILDING PROJECTIONS SO WE SAY OTHER ARCHITECTURAL -- WHAT WAS THE -- JUST TIE IT SO BUILDING PROJECTIONS AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES ARE NOT DIFFERENT THINGS. >> CORRECT. THE BUILDING PROJECTIONS AREN'T INTENDINED TO BE DECORATIVE IN NATURE. >> I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. JUST LOOKING AT ONE OF THE EXHIBITS WHERE YOU DREW A RED BOX AROUND THE LOTS THIS WOULD APPLY TO I WANT A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WHICH I PRESUME WOULD BE THE STREET IN FRONT AND/OR THE ALLEY IN THE REAR BUT NOT THE SIDE LOT LINES. IS THAT CORRECT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND SO TO FURTHER CLARIFY ON THE ALLEYS IN THE REAR WHERE THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS, WOULD WE ALLOW THE PROJECTIONS THERE AS WELL OR ONLY ON THE SIDEWALK WHERE IT'S ENCROACHING OVER. >> THE ALLEYS ARE STILL PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. IF THERE WAS A BAY WINDOW OVER AN ALLEY THAT'S STILL PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THAT WOULD NEED A LICENSE AGREEMENT. >> IS THAT THE CONDITION WHERE THE 14-FOOT WOULD NEED TO APPLY? IS THAT WHY THAT'S IN THERE, FOR FIRE TRUCKS, ET CETERA. THAT OY OCCURS IF A UTILITY IS LOCATED WITHIN 8 FEET. SHOULD THEY BE LOCATED IN THE ALLEY THAT WOULD APPLY THERE BUT I DON'T IT'S INTENDED FOR THAT PURPOSE. >> THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE ALSO FIRE LANES. WOULD IT BE EXCLUDED IN A STREET WHERE IT'S A FIRE PLANE? I'M CONCERNED THAT? >> THEY'RE NOT WIDE ENOUGH. A FIRE LANE IS 24 FEET. >> MOST OF THE ALLEYS ARE 24 FEET. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. >> OH. THAT'S MY QUESTION. IF IT SAYS JUST PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND THAT'S THE RIGHT OF WAY, I'M CONCERNED WE HAVE PROJECTIONS STICKING OUT IN AN AREA WHERE TYPICALLY FIRE TRUCKS (INDISCERNIBLE). >> YEAH. THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS, PERHAPS GET THE APPLICANT'S THOUGHTS ON THAT. BUT WE HAVE THIS SUBJECT TO A CITY LICENSE AGREEMENT. SO IF THERE'S A FIRE CONCERN, WE HAVE THE RIGHT NOT TO ISSUE THE LICENSE AGREEMENT. >> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING. WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT WOULD ALLOW ENGINEERING, FIRE DEPARTMENT, ET CETERA TO REVIEW ANY REQUESTS FOR THIS. I DON'T KNOW HOW SPECIFIC WE HAVE TO GET. I LIKE THE CHANGE YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT TALKS ABOUT THE LIVING AREA, OCCUPIED SPACE. BUT ANY CHANGE IS GOING TO -- ANY ATTEMPT FOR THIS IS GOING TO REQUIRE THE LICENSING AGREEMENT WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE IN-DEPTH REVIEW THAN WE CAN DO HERE. >> I JUST WANTED TO RAISE THE CONCERN? >> YEAH. I UNDERSTAND. >>> DON'T RESTRICT FIRE ACCESS WITH ANY OF THE PROJECTIONS. >> I GUESS THE VALID QUESTION AT THAT POINT WOULD BE DOES THE LICENSE AGREEMENT CONTAIN A PROCESS THAT INCLUDES A FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW OF THIS CHANGE. IF THAT PROCESS DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT, THEN WE HAVE AN ISSUE. SO DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THAT LICENSING AGREEMENT REVIEW LOOKS LIKE. >> YEAH. LEGAL LOOKS AT IT WITH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, TYPICALLY IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY -- IF IT'S JUST A FIRE AND ACCESS EASEMENT, IT WON'T BE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, AN EASEMENT OR A FEE INTEREST, IT WILL BE. I DON'T WANT TO SOUND TOO TECHNICAL. I'LL LOOK AT IT AND THE ENGINEERS WILL LOOK AT IT. >> OKAY. >> IS THAT ENOUGH OR? >> YEAH. I THINK -- I JUST WANTED TO GET MY CONCERN ON THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT WE DON'T CREATE A FIRE ISSUE IN SOME OF THE ALLEYS, HAVING LIVED IN A COMMUNITY LIKE THIS. THE ALLEYS ARE AWTIGHT AND THEY COUNT ON THEM -- AT LEAST IN MY EXPERIENCE THEY DO. >> WHETHER IT'S OCCUPIED OR NOT, A PROJECTION IN THAT SPACE COULD CREATE A DANGER TO THEM. >> CORRECT. >> OR DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY. >> IF IT RESTRICTS THEIR ABILITY TO GET THEIR LADDER TRUCK IN AND DO THE JOB THEY'RE TRAINED TO, I'M CONC CONCERNED. EVEN IF IT'S PRIVATE. JUST HAVE THAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS TO MAKE SURE THE STAFF IS AWARE OF IT. THAT WOULD SATISFY MY CONCER >> OKAY. VERY VALID. SO I WOULD TAKE IT BACK TO THE PROCESS, AND IF IT'S LEGAL AND ENGINEERING REVIEWING IT, SHOULD THAT PROCESS INCLUDE FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW, OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINES. MAYBE ENGINEERING DOES COVER FIRE. I DON'T KNOW. COMMISSIONER TONG? >> Tong: THANKS. I CONCUR. I HAD A SIMILAR CONCERN AS COMM COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. WHEN YOU MENTION IN TYPE OF ENCROACHMENT IS NOT AS USUAL THROHOUTHE CITY -- DO YOU HAVE ACTUAL EXAMPLES OR CASES THAT WE HAVE WORKED ON THAT HAD THIS TYPE OF ENCROACHMENT? I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE PEDESTRIANS, IF IT'S ENCROACHING INTO THE SIDEWALK. WILL THERE WILL BE ANY SAFETY CONCERNS -- THINGS FALLING OFF THE PROJECTIONS OR MAYBE THERE'S A BALCONY OR SOMETHING OFF THE ROOF -- ANY SAFETY CONCERNS -- OR ANY SAFETY ISSUES THAT HAVE -- WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED FROM OTHER CASES. >> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY SAFETY ISSUES FROM OTHER AREAS IN TOWN WHERE THIS IS PRESENT. >> Tong: DO YOU HAVE SPECIFIC CASE IN MIND WHERE WE HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE? I JUST CANNOT RECALL. >> THE LEGACY AREA, THE AURA, 90 APARTMENTS BY THE GATEWAY, DOWNTOWN PLANO. IT'S IN A FEW AREAS OF THE CITY. >> Tong: WE'VE NEVER HAD TY ISSUES WITH THAT? S . >> WE'VE ADDED THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ENCROACHMENTS ARE LIMITED TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT AND ABOVE. THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE LANGUAGE. >> Tong: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER BROUNHOHH. >> Brounhoff: THANK YOU. I WAS WONDERING WHETHER A BALCONY INCREASES THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A SECOND OR THIRD FLOOR, IF SO, LANGUAGE MIGHT HAVE THE UNINTENDED EFFECT OF PROHIBITING BALCONIBALCONIES. >> I THINK A LOT OF THESE ARE JULIET BALCONIES, THEY HAVE A RAILING COMING OUT FROM THE SLIDING DOOR -- FROM THE PLANS I LOOKED AT TODAY. >> FROM STAFF'S STANDPOINT THAT DOESN'T PREVENT THE INCLUSION OF A BALCONY IN SOME FORM. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN EIGHT-FOOT PATIO. IT'S ONLY TWO FEET. >> I THINK BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. >> COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: JUST A QUESTION -- PAGE 9. DETACHABLE FEATURES PERMITTED TO THE RIGHT OF WAY ON EXISTING STANDARDS. DETACHABLE -- GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IS PERMITTED AS A DETACHABLE FEATURE AND DO THOSE ALREADY HAVE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS OR THRESHOLDS ATTACHED TO THEM. >> AWNINGS AND CANOPIES ARE ALLOWED ALREADY. STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS. >> OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION OR JUST ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> WE DO NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MMR. RATLIFF HAS A QUESTION. >> MICHAEL ZUZIK. I THINK I HAVE AN ANSWER TO ALL FIVE OF THE QUESTIONS I JOTTED DOWN. >> THERE MAY ONLY BE ONE QUESTION. MR. RATLIFF IS THE ONLY ONE WHO SAID HE HAS A QUESTION. >> OKAY. LET ME RUN THROUGH THIS QUICK, AND IF THERE'S MORE, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS AS A FORMALITY. THIS WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION WHEN THE FIRST BUILDING PERMITS WERE SUBMITTED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS IS A NECESSARY STEP TO GET THE LICENSE PROCESSES. >> BUILD SOMETHING, RIGHT. >> I WANTED TO START BY SAYING THE SIDEWALKS ARE 7 FOOT OR 12 FOOT WALK. THE 2 FOOT WILL NEVER BRING IT DOWN BELOW A 5-FOOT SIDEWALK, WHICH IS GREATER THAN MOST OF THE SIDEWALKS THAT SURROUND MY NEIGHBORHOOD IN PLANO. THE 8-FOOT MINIMUM HEIGHT IS ABOVE THETANDARDS. WE FELT THAT WAS ADEQUATE FOR SOMEONE RIDING A BIKE OR STATE BOARD. QUICK COMMENT -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY THE TYPE OF SQUARE FOOTAGE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. ANY TYPE OF PROJECTION WOULD EXTEND OUR ROOF AREA OR BUILDING FOOTPRINT, EVEN IF IT'S A BALCONY OR EXTERIOR SPACE. SOMETHING LIKE WILL NOT INCREASENTERIOR OR CONDITION SQUARE FOOT WOULD CLARIFY A BALCONY COULD PROJECT A LITTLE BIT OR THE RAIL OF THE BALCONY. IF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE GROWS BECAUSE OF THE ROOF OVERHANG, THAT CAN BE CLARIFIED AND ACCEPTED. IN RESPONSE TO FIRE LANES, OUR MINIMUM FIRE LANES OR ALLEYS HAVE A TWO-FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT. AT THE REAR WE WILL NOT GO BELOW 14 FOOT. TH'S BEEN TAKEN CARE OF WITH DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS. WE'LL MAINTAIN THE CLEERPS ON THE BACK AND MAINTAIN 24-FOOT WIDE FIRE ACCESS THROUGH EVERY ALLEY, WHETHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. I COVERED NUMBER FOUR ON MY LIST HERE, THE SAFETY -- 8 OR 14 FEET. WE'RE WELL ABOVE THE MINIMUM. LANGUAGE ON WHAT IS DETACHABLE. OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE DETACHABLE WOULD BE LIGHT FIXTURES GUTTERS DOWN-SPOUTS, ITEMS OF THAT NATURE. AGAIN, WE FEEL THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE INTENT OF ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN APPROVED PREVIOUSLY. WE WERE, YOU KNOW -- THERE WAS NEVER DISCUSSION ON GROWING THE OCCUPIABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE. HOPEFULLY THAT ADDRESSES ALL OF YOUR CONCERNS. IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I'M HERE TO ANSWER THEM. >> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I WAS NOT SEEING THAT DIMENSION. IPPRECIATE THE MY CONCERN. CLARIFICATION. >> WELCOME. >> SOUNDS LIKE THE ONLY REAL CLARIFICATION HAS DO WITH THE DEFINITION OF "LIVABLE SPACE." I LIKE YOUR TERMINOLOGY. YOU WANT TO READ THAT BACK AGAIN. >> YEAH. I DON'T REMEMBER THE WHOLE SENTENCE BUT DOT DOT DOT WILL NOT INCREASE INTERIOR OR CONDITIONED SQUARE FOOTAGE. CONDITIONED SQUARE FOOTAGE IS COMMON TERMINOLOGY. >> SOMEHOW YOU'RE MODIFYING THE ENVIRONMENT. >> BAY WINDOWS EXTEND SOME OF THE AIR CONDITIONED SPACE. BETWEEN BALCONIES AND BAY WINDOWS WE'RE GOING BACK AND FORTH. DEPENDING ON HOW YOU DESIGN IT. >> EVEN A SEATED AREA. >> I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THE INTENT. >> AS LONG AS WE HAVE LANGUAGE THAT'S CLEAR TO US AND THE NEXT COMMISSION THAT'S SITTING HERE. SO COMMISSIONER TONG? >> Tong: QUICK QUESTION REGARDING THE 8-FOOT CLEARANCE. THIS IS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY BUILDING. WHAT'S THE INTERIOR CEILING HEIGHT YOU'RE PLANNING TO BUILD SO THAT THE SECOND FLOOR IS ONLY HAS 8-FOOT CLEARANCE OUTSIDE. >> WELL, THE TYPICAL FLOOR-TO-FLOOR HEIGHT WOULD RESULT IN 9-FOOT SITTING. MORE COMMONLY WE GO -- IT REDUCES THE STRESS OF 8-FOOT HIGH WOULD BE DECORATIVE FIXTURE FOR THE GUTTER DOWNSPOUT I MENTIONED BEFORE. YOU'RE UP AT THE SECOND FLOOR BEFORE YOU HAVE AN AWNING OR BALCONY PROJECTION. IT WOULDN'T BE PART OF THE CEILING PROJECTION. IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PATTERN BOOK THAT'S ALLOWS TO MAINTAIN THE INTENT OF THE DESIGN THAT'S BEEN APP APPROVED. >> OKAY. I THINK WE'RE CLEAR. WE'RE JUST -- WE GOT TO GET THIS DONE SO THEY CAN START BILLING. >> YEAH. THEY'RE READY. >>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS. >> NO, WE DON'T. >> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. RATLIFF, YOU HAVE YOUR FINGERS OVER THE BUTTON. >> Ratliff: I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 3A WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED BY CITY STAFF. AND INCLUDING THE CLARIFICATION ON THE LANGUAGE IN ITEM ROMAN NUMERAL II. >> I THINK THAT'S CLEAR, CERTAINLY TO ANYONE WATCHING THIS LATER. THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND IT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE ITEM 3A. SUBJECT TO STAFF'S MODIFICATION OF THE LANGUAGE ON ROMAN NUMERAL II. THANK YOU. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8 TO 0. ITEM 3B. >> MOVE WE APPROVE 3B SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CASE. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNHOFF. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM CARRIES 8 TO 0. ITEM 4. >> PUBLIC HEARING PRELIMINARY REPLAT. LLIN CREEK, BLOCK M, LOT 1, BLOCK N, LOT 1, BLOCK 0, LOT 1. BLOCK P, LOT 1; BLOCKS R, LOT 2. BLOCK S, LOTS 1 THROUGH 4 AND BLOCK W. VEHICLE PARKING GARAGE, COMMON AREA LOT 472 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS AND -- SORRY. RETAIL AND RESTAURANT AND VACANT LAND ON 13 LOTS ON 64.9 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PASEO LANE, 150 FEET SOUTH OF JANWOOD DRIVE. ZONED MIXED USE 3. APPLICANTS ARE MM CCM 48M AND VM FUND FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON TH ITEM? THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS. >> APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> THANK YOU. MR. BRONSKY. >> FIRST I WANT TO SAY, M MRZ MS. BRIDGES, THAT YOU DO SUCH A FINE READING THESE TO US. I WANT TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 4, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THENGINEERI DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE ITEM 4. PLEASE VOTE. >> ITEM 5 CARRIES 8-0. THANK YOU, SIR, FOR BEING HERE. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5, PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: BRAUM'S ADDITION NO. 2, BLOCK A, LOT 1R - BANK ON ONE LOT ON 1.5 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 15TH STREET AND E AVENUE. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANT IS FROST BANK. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> Chair Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: FIRST OF ALL, I WENT BY THERE TODAY. IT'S AN UNBELIEVABLY BEAUTIFUL FACILITY. I MOVE A WE APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED. >> SOND. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 5 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 6. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6, REVISED SITE PLAN: SPRING CREEK FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOTS 1R & 2 - RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON LOT 1R AND VACANT LAND ON LOT 2 ON 27.2 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARKER ROAD AND SPRING . ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE-9 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M PARKER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THESE ITEMS FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. WELL, COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: JUST A QUICK QUESTION. WHY DO THEY WANT TO DIVIDE THIS INTO TWOOTS? >> TO PREPARE FOR LOT 2, AS SHOWN, TO BE RESIDENTIAL. THAT SHOULD BE COMING TO YOU AT THE NEXT AGENDA. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I GUESS THAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 6. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7, PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: MCDERMOTT SQUARE, BLOCK A, LOT 8R - ASSEMBLY HALL ON ONE LOT ON 2.0 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY, 480 FEET NORTH OF MCDERMOTT ROAD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-400-RETAIL. APPLICANT: ATHITI VENTURES, LLC THIS IS FOR ADMINISATIV CONSIDERATION. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: YEAH. IN TRYING TO VIEW THIS PROPERTY, I MEAN, THERE WAS NO SIGN OR ANYTHING. THIS IS NOT A ZONING CASE. IS THIS AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEVOTING TO KN THESE USES? >> I BELIEVE IT'S A NEW BUILDING. >> Brounoff: BUT EXISTING? IT'S N A VACANT PIECE OF LAND AT THIS POINT. THERE IS A BUILDING. >> CORRECT. >> Brounoff: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IN SPEAKERS? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 7 AS SUBMITTED. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG TO APPROVE ITEM 7 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. THAT A ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 8. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8, PUBLIC HEARING, PRELIMINARY REPLAT, A REVISED SITE PLAN, MILLER & HOOD HIGHWAY ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 4R & 5R - PROFESSIONAL/GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ON TWO LOTS ON 0.5 ACRE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 20TH STREET, 220 FEET WEST OF K AVENUE. ZONED RETAIL. APPLICANTS ARE PCTA VENTURES, LLC, AND CHRIS POLITO (ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION). >> RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: THE PURPOSE FOR THE REPLAT IS TO -- THE EASEMENTS NECESSARY TO REFLE T EXISTING CONDITIONS. WHAT EXISTING CONDITIONS? >> THERE HAS BEEN PAVEMENT THAT HAS BEEN ADDED. SO THEY UPDATED A ACCESS EASEMENT TO ALIGN WITH THE DRIVEWAYS THAT WERE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS. WHICH IS THAT NEW U SHAPE GOING THROUGH. YOU CAN SEE THE OLD ONE IS CROSSED THROUGH AND THAT'S NOT WHERE THE DRIVEWAYS WERE CONSTRUCTED. >> Olley: GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: YOUR QUESTION? NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> YES. THE APPLICANTS, MR. POLITO AND TED ANDERSON WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORY. >> SIR. >> Chair Downs: GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> CHRISOLIT 1901 RICK'S COURT PARKER. I WAS -- I LIVED IN PLANO FOR 25 YEARS. I LIVED 12 MINUTES WEST OF OUR OFFICE NOW. NOW I LIVE 12 MINUTES EAST. I'VE SERVED ON THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION IN PLANO FOR YEARS. I WAS THE -- A BOARD PERSON AND THE CHAIR OFHEOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. AND I ENJOYED THAT TIME. BUT WHEN I MOVED OUT OF PLANO I HAD TO RELINQUISH MY AUTHORITY. WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 12 YEARS. AND THIS ALL STARTED WHEN WE TRIED TO REPLACE SOME FENCING ON THE SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY. WE WERE TOLD WE NEED TO GET A PERMIT. SO WE APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT. WE WERE TOLD THE SITE PLAN, OR THE CONFIGURATION OF OUR PARKING LOT NOW DOES NOT MEET THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT WE ENTERED YEARS AGO. THE REASON BEING WE HAD GRAVEL ON THE -- WE HAD THREE SEPARATE LOTS. WE GRAVELED THE THIRD LOT TO PROVIDE PARKING. IT WAS DECIDED BY THE CITY WE HAD TO PAY A FINE BECAUSE WE WERE PARKING ON A NON-APPROVED SURFACE. SO WE ASPHALTED THAT SURFACE. AND NOW WE'RE TOLD WE DON'T MEET THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN. SO WE NEED TO SUBMIT FOR NEW ONE. THIS IS OUR FOURTH REVISION. IT'S BEEN A CONSIDERABLE TIME AND EFFORT AND MONEY TO GET TO THIS POINT. AND I'M SAYING THAT BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THESE COUNCILS WORK, THIS LOT IS THE DEFINITION OF A NON-CONFORMING LOT. IT WAS A HOME BUILT 65 YEARS AGO THAT WAS TURNED INTO -- WE'RE ZONED RETAIL. AND SO WAS THE FIRE STATION BEHIND US. YOU KNOW. NOBODY SELLS RETAIL IN THIS AREA. WE HAVE A USED CAR LOT ACROSS THE STREET. WE HAVE A DOCTOR'S OFFICE ACROSS THE STREET. A RETAIL OFFICE -- I'M SORRY, A REALITY OFFICE ACROSS THE STREET. AND WE ARE TRYING TO BE GOOD PATRONS OF THE CITY, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE BEING HELD TO STANDARDS LIKE WE WERE A BRAND NEW PROPERTY. WE'RE TOLD WE HAVE TO BUILD A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ON THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THE TWO LOTS TO USE EVEN THOUGH WE'VE BEEN APPROVED TO USE ROLLOFF TRASH CANS. WE WERE TOLD WELL, YOU CAN BUILD THE ENCLOSURE, BUT YOU DON'T NEED TO USE IT. TO ME, THAT'S JUST A WASTE OF MONEY. I DON'T HAVE IT. THIS IS A POOL BUSINESS. AND IF YOU NOTICED HOW POOL BUSINESS HAS BEEN DOING, THEY ARE STRUGGLING NOW WITH THE INTEREST RATES. IT'S EEN A CHALLENGING YEAR. AND JUST SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO -- IF WE HAD A BRAND NEW PIECE OF PROPERTY IT WOULD BE ONE THING, BUT WE'RE TRYING WORK WITHIN THE CONFINES OF A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT 65 YEARS AGO. AND THE LAWS HAVE CHANGED. SO, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR A LITTLE CONSIDERATION. WE WANT TO BE GOOD PATRONS. WE WANT TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. AND WE HAVE 26 EMPLOYEES THAT WE PAY TAXES. AND WE PAY THE TAXES EVERY YEAR ON PERSONAL PROPERTY. AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP OUR HEADS DOWN AND DO A GOOD JOB AND GO HOME AT THE END OF THE NIGHT KNOWING WE'VE DONE WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO. I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. SOMEBODY ELSE TO SPEAK? >> MR. ANDERSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK NEXT? YOU HAVE 11 MINUTES REMAINING. >> TED ANDERSON, CHRIS POLITO'S BUSINESS PARTNER, 805 CLOISTER WAY McKINNEY 75069. CHRIS ELOQUENTLY STATED MOST OF THIS. EVERY TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED IN TRYING TO UPDATE THE PROPERTY, WE'VE TRIED THE VERY BEST WE CAN TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO DO. AND WE EVEN TRIED TO DO A VERY LARGE REMODEL ON ONE OF THE BUILDINGS AND ONE OF THE PIECES OF PROPERTY AND WE SUBMITTED PLAN AFTER PLAN AND SPENT THSAND OF DOLLARS. FINALLY THREW UP MY HANDS AND SAID THIS PROCESS, TOO EXPENSIVE. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE THE ONE PROPERTY AS IT IS, PAINT IT, TRY TO MOVE IN. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET AN OCCUPANCY ABILITY IN THE NEW BUILDING FOR TWO MONTHS. AND WE'VE BEEN HELD UP BECAUSE OF A DUMPSTER GARAGE, OR A PLOT PLAN ISSUE, OR AS CHRIS DESCRIBED, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH A 65-YEAR-OLD AREA. WE WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK NICE. WE WANT TO TO MAKE I PLEASANT FOR EVERYBODY AND OUR NEIGHBORS, BUT ALSO, WE'RE THE ONLY ONE ON THAT STREET THAT'S BEING HELD TO ANY OF THESE STANDARDS. AND SO WE ARE FEELING VERY HARASSED. I WANTED TO SAY THAT. MAKE THAT POINT. WE'D LIKE TO GET THIS DONE. BUT ASKING US TO REVISE SOMETHING THAT'S 65 YEARS OLD OR SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN THERE TEN YEARS -- AND I'M KIND OF GETTING THE DRIFT OF THIS. WE REPLATTED FROM 3 TO 2 SO THAT WE COULD GET A SOLID SURFACE PARKING AREA FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS THAT WOULD COMPLY. SO WHEN WE DID THAT, WE STIRRED UP THIS HORNET'S NEST ABOUT HAVING TO MAKE ALL THESE OTHER THINGS IN COMPLIANCE. NOW I'M WONDERING WHY DID WE REPLAT IT AT ALL? I CAN -- WE COULD HAVE DONE THE CENTER PLOT PARKING LOT AND LEFT IT AS IT WAS AND LEFT THEM THREE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES AND DONE SOME SORT OF LEGAL AGREEMENT THAT THERE WERE EASEMENTS BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS. WEE N TT SRT. WE'RE REALLY, REALLY QUALITY POOL BUILDERS, BUT WE DON'T DO THIS FOR A LIVING. SO, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THIS, OUR IGNORANCE HAS COMPLICATED THE MATTER. I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT DIFFICULT. BUT I'VE BEEN WAITING TWO MONTHS, HAD SOMEBODY TO POSSIBLY MOVE IN AND RENT THE OTHER FACILITY TO GET SOME CASH FLOW, AND THEY COULDN'T WAIT. SO THAT'S GONE. HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE MY FRUSTRATION. AND AS I'M VIEWING THIS PROCESS FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER, IT'S RATHER INTERESTING. SO, THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. >> Chair Downs: SO I HAVE A QUICK QUESTN F YOU. >> YES, SIR. >> Chair Downs: BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU, ALL YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO TONIGHT IS APPROVE THIS, RIGHT? NEITHER OF YOU REALLY TALKED TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS. I'VE HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT THE DUMPSTER AND OTHER STUFF BUT THIS ITEM IS ABOUT THIS REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN AND YOU WOULD LIKE FOR US TO APPROVE IT? >> WITH MIXED FEELINGS. THE SITE PLAN SPECIFIES THAT WE HAVE TO BUILD A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND SOME OTHER THINGS. WE HAVE TO MOVE THE STORAGE BUILDING THAT'S BEEN ON ONE PROPERTY FOR ABOUT TEN YEARS TWO FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S ONE FOOT NOW. AND IT NEEDS TO BE THREE FEET. SO THEY'RE SAYING WE HAVE TO MOVE IT TWO FEET. IT CAN BE DONE. IT'S BEEN THERE TEN YEARS. I'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR 12. I JUST LOOK AROUND. I SEE EXPOSED DUMPSTERS ACROSS THE STREET FROM US. NOW WE'RE ASKED TO BUILD AN EXPENSIVE UNIT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE. I'M JUST ASKING FOR A LITTLE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON THAT. BUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS HAS HELD THAT OTHER BUILDING HOSTAGE BECAE CAN'T TURN THE POWER ON. SO WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT HAS NO POWER. CAN'T GET THE C.O. UNTIL WE GET THE SITE PLAN APPROVED. >> Chair Downs: OUR OPTIONS TONIGHT ARE TO APPROVE IT OR NOT. IF WE DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT HELPS YOUR CASE ANY. [ CHUCKLING ] >> NO. I'M HERE WITH MIXED BLESSINGS. YES, I'D LIKE YOU TO APPROVE IT. I JUST WANT TO GET IT ON THE RECORD THAT I DON'T APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T LIKE IT. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I SEE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. ARE THEY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO SPEAK? DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SO, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL START WITH MR. BRONSKY, YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. YOU DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, RIGHT? OKAY. SO LET'S LET THE QUESTION GET ASKED. >> SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- >> Chair Downs: UNDERSTOOD. >> FOR STAFF, I'M CURIOUS IF YOU CAN GIVE ME SOME INFORMATION AS IT RELATES TO THIS DPSTER ENCLOSURE REQUIREMENT THAT HE'S NOT EVEN GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO USE? >> THERE'S A REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ON-SITE. THAT IS IS RULE STAFF CANNOT WAIVE. IT'S A REQUIREMENT. EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS AN EXCEPTION MADE TO ALLOW THEM TO USE CARTS, THE REQUIREMENT IS TO PROVIDE THE ENCLOSURE. IF THEY WANT TO USE IT IN THE FUTURE, THAT'S UP TO THEM. THAT'S HOW THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT. THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND REQUEST A VARIANCE. THEY CHOSE THIS ROUTE. >> Bronsky: BUT THEY HAVE AN EXCEPTION SAYING THEY DO NOT NEED TO USE IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY HAVE CART SERVICE. >> Bronsky: OKAY. SO -- >> THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE AN ENCLOSURE. THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE IS STILL REQUIRED. >> Bronsky: TO ME, IT SEEMS PROBLEMATIC THAT WE WOULD PUT A REQUIREMENT ON A BUSINESS OWNER, OR A PROPERTY OWNER THAT THEN WE TELL THEM WELL, YOU HAVE TO PAY ALL THIS MONEY TO HAVE THIS DONE, BUT YOU'VE ALREADY GOTTEN AN EXCEPTION TO NOT USE IT. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE NOT -- >> Chair Downs: THE QUESTION THAT COMES ALONG WITH THAT IS, DOES THE CART SERVICE ALLOWANCE -- IT ONLY APPLIES FOR THIS BUSINESS, THIS USE. IT'S NOT BASED ON LAND. IT'S BASED ON USE. THEY HAD TO APPLY FOR THIS, RIGHT? >> I BELIEVE THERE WAS -- YOU KNOW, THE CART SERVICE IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE SERVICE THAT PROVIDES IT, IN THIS CASE, THE CITY. THEY WERE ACCEPTABLE WITH THE CART SERVICE DUE TO CONDITIONS ON THE SITE. THAT IS NOT A COMMON CONDITION. IN MOST COMMON CONDITIONS THIS IS APPLIED ACROSS THE CITY, THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE IS PROVIDED INSTEAD. THIS IS NOT ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER BUSINESS. >> Chair Downs: THERE COULD BE A DIFFERENT USE IN THESE BUILDINGS IN THE FUTURE THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE DUMPSTER AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO PUT IT IN ANYWAY. >> THAT'S RIGHT. EACH LOT IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE ITS OWN ENCLOSURE. WE ALLOWED THEM TO COMBINED THEM. STAFF HAS USED OUR FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THE ORDINANCE TO THE GREATEST EXTENT WE CAN, UNDERSTANDING THIS IS A CHALLENGE. >> Bronsky: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. LISLE. >> Lisle: SHARED DUMPSTER IS PROVIDED? >> THAT WAS ONE OF OUR SOLUTIONS WE CAME UP WITH. >> Lisle: I BELIEVE IT IS. I HAVE A SITE THAT HAS SHARED DUMPSTER ACCESS THAT WAS ALLOWED BY ORDINANCE. >> I DON'T KNOW. IT MAY BE. >> Lisle: OKAY. >> THEY WERE SAYING THIS WAS THREE LOTS, BUT IT WAS PLATTED IT FROM 3 TO 2? >> THERE WAS A PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT, THEY DID NOT MOVE FORWARD, BUT THAT WAS WHAT FACILITATED IT. >> IT'S ALREADY BEEN REPLATTED AND IT'S TWO TODAY. AND WHERE IS THE DUMPSTER ON THIS PLAT? >> I BELIEVE IT'S RIGHT ON THE LOT LINE. >> IT'S ON THEITE PLAN IN THE MIDDLE LOT LINE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. >> CAN WE SEE THE SITE PLAN? >> WHERE THE LOT LINE RUNS DOWN THE MIDDLE. >> Chair Downs: AT THE BOTTOM. >> I WOULD TELL YOU I'M AN EAST PLANO BUSINESS OWNER AND I'VE RUN INTO THIS ISSUE BEFORE. AND NOW SITTING HERE, THE QUESTION IS WHEN DO WE REQUIRE SOMEONE TO COME UP TO A STANDARD? AND AS FRUSTRATING AS IT CAN BE, I'VE BEEN IN YOUR SHOES. THERE HAS TO BE -- AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO BRING IT UP TO THE NEW STANDARD. SO IF YOU DON'T LIKE -- I DON'T LIKE THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ANY MORE THAN YOU DO, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE TRASH CART ACCESS. IT DOESN'T -- I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE THEM HAVE THAT AREA SO THAT IT COULD BE BUILT IN THE FUTURE, BUT ACTUALLY BUILDING THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE -- IT MIGHT BE A $5,000 DEAL AND THEN ALL YOU HAVE IS A HOLE WITH TWO DOORS THAT IS NOT USED FOR ANYTHING. I COULD SEE PROVIDING -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. I KNOW WE CAN'T TONIGHT. I'M JUST TALKING -- THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE THE LAST TIME THAT ISSUE COMES. AND SO -- >> Chair Downs: I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST. THEY BRING UP A COUPLE POINTS. MAYBE WE PUT THIS ON OUR AGENDA FOR DISCUSSIONS IN THE FUTURE. >> Lisle: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHEN DID THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE REQUIREMENT HAPPEN OR BECOME A REQUIREMENT WHEN TRASH CARTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR USE? YOUR TRASH ERVICE IS NOT A DUMPSTER. IT'S THE CART. THAT'S THE TRUCK THAT'S GOING TO COME BY. WHEN DID THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE BECOME A REQUIREMENT? >> I'D HAVE TO LOOK AND GET BACK TO YOU. >> Lisle: ARE WE SURE IT IS A REQUIREMENT? >> YES. >> Lisle: I CAN THINK OF SITES THAT DON'T HAVE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES. >> IT'S A REQUIREMENT. DO YOU HAVE INFORMATION? >> SURE. SO PER SECTION 220.400 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ITEM 2, A MINIMUM OF TWO CONTAINERS PER LOT TO ACCOMMODATE BOTH REFUSE AND RECYCLING ARE REQUIRED PER LOT. ADDITIONAL CONTAINERS MAY BE REQUIRED FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES FOR THIS SITE DESIGN STANDARDS AND TO YOUR POINT REGARDING SHARED CONTAINERS, IT'S NOT SHARED CONTAINERS, BUT ONE OR MORE LOCATNS MAY BE OFF-SITE, WITHIN 150 FEET OF THE BUILDING AS DETERMINED SUFFICIENT. SO IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT SHARED DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES, BUT RATHER, HAVING AN OFF-SITE ENCLOSURE. >> Lisle: THE LANGUAGE I WAS HEARING WAS TWO CONTAINERS. I DON'T HEAR TWO DUMPSTERS. WHY ARE THE ROLLING TRASH CARTS NOT CONTAINERS IF THAT'S THE SERVICE? >> WHEN WE CONSIDER THE CONTEXT OF THE ENTIRE REQUIREMENTS, THIS SECTION IS ABOUT DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE. >> Lisle: I WOULD THINK WE WOULD USE THE TERM DUMPSTER. I'M HEARING CONTAINERS. WE CALL THOSE TRASH CARTS TRASH CONTAINERS. IF YOU WEREN'T SURE WHEN YOU WALKED IN HERE THAT WE SHARE SOME OF YOUR FRUSTRATIONS, AND WE DO TRY TO MAKE IT ALL MAKE SENSE, JUST KNOW THAT WE HEAR YOU. THAT'S ABOUT THE BEST I CAN DO TONIGHT. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: JUST A QUICK CLARIFICATION ON A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE. IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A WAIVER PROCESS WITH THE BOARD OF JUSTMENTS IFHEY SO CHOSE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. UNLESS DELEGATED SPECIFICALLY TO P&Z, ANY OTHER VARIANCE GOES TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. >> Olley: CAN THEY -- WHETHER THIS IS APPROVED OR NOT, CAN THEY ADD AN ADDITIONAL STEP TO NOW GO ASK FOR A WAIVER FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ENCLOSER? WE APPROVE THE SITE PLAN, WHICH REQUIRES IT. IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE AN EXTRA STEP? >> THERE ARE -- I'M GOING TO SAY THERE'S COMPLICATIONS IN WHAT HAS TO GO FIRST, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. THEORETICALLY THAT COULD BE DONE. I'M NOT SURE THAT WOULD CROSS ALL THE Ts, BUT THERE IS AN AVENUE TO GET THIS, YES. >> Olley: ALL RIGHT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK THAT WOULD BE A TIME CONSIDERATION. THEY'RE ALREADY FRUSTRATED BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME. AT THIS POINT IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'VE THROWN UP THEIR HANDS AND SAID, HERE'S HOW WE'VE GOT TO DO THIS. COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. I THINK -- FIRST OF ALL, I THINK WE SHOULD -- I WANT TO APPROVE -- THE BEST WAY TO DO IT TODAY IS TO APPROVE SO THEY CAN GET GOING ON THE BUILDING. BUT I DO WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE, BECAUSE I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER LISLE, THIS MAY NOT BE THE LAST TIME WE HEAR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO JUST TO EDUCATE US, IF A BUILDING HAS BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME, AT WHAT POINT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BUILD THIS DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE THING? WHAT KIND OF BUILDING? BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE BUILDINGS THAT DO NOT HAVE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES, BUT THERE ARE BUILDINGS THEY HAVE TO HAVE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENTIATOR THAT REQUIRES THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE? >> AT A HIGH LEVEL, THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN PRIMARILY FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT. IT'S WRITTEN IN THAT CONTEXT. WITH THE UPCOMING REWRITE WE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE PROVISION FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT DON'T CURRENTLY EXIST THAT MIGHT ADDRESS SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE YOU HAVE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS BUILT UNDER PREVIOUS STANDARDS AND THRESHOLDS OF WHEN THOSE NEWER REQUIREMENTS KICK IN. WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THOSE. >> Tong: WHAT'S THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT? >> ALL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN. >> Tong: ALL RETAIL? WHAT KIND OF USE? >> WHATEVER IS APPLICABLE TO THE SITE. WE HAVE NO THRESHOLD AT THIS MOMENT. EVERYTHING THAT APPLIES. >> Tong: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. WE CAN KEEP GOING, BUT LET'S KEEP IN MIND THAT IF WE'RE THINKING ABOUT IF WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS IN THE FUTURE, THAT OPPORDOESN'T HELP US MAKE OUR DECISION TONIGHT. >> Lisle: WHILE I WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR FRUSTRATION, I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE STAFF'S ABILITY -- OR EFFORTS TO DO THE BEST THEY CAN. AND THEY'RE TRYING TO WRITE RULES FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. AND JUST LIKE HE SAID, IT'S PRIMARILY WRITTEN FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT. AND SO IT'S DIFFICULT. BUT WE HEAR YOUR CONCERNS AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE AN AVENUE FORTHCOMING THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CLARIFY SOME OF THESE THINGS. THE ISSUE IF I HAD TO PUT AN UMBRELLA OVER THE WHOLE THING IS THE SAME STANDARD IF YOU'RE BUILDING THE TOYOTA CAMPUS IN WEST PLANO APPLIES IF YOU'RE REMODELING A 65-YEAR-OLD, THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN EAST PLANO. THERE'S NO DIFFERENT STANDARD. IS THAT RIGHT, MIKE? >> WHATEVER IS APPLICABLE TO THE SITE YES. >> Lisle: RIGHT. AND SO YOU HAVE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS. YOU'VE GOT TWO OLD HOUSES ON 50CRE CAMPUS IN WEST PLANO AND THE STANDARDS ARE LARGELY THE SAME. THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES WRITTEN INTO IT, BUT NONETHELESS, I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE ON. I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE STAFF'S DOING THE BEST THEY CAN AS WELL. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: JUST A QUESTION OF PROCESS FOR THE STAFF MAYBE, FOR MY EDUCATION AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT. I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE ONE OF THEIR MAIN CONCERNS IS GETTING THEIR C.O. SO THEY CAN GET POWER TURNED ON SO THEY CAN RENT, LEASE, OR OPEN THIS BUILDING. IS THERE A C.O. PROCESS THEY CAN THROUGH -- OBVIOUSLY SOME OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS ARE GOING TO TAKE TIME TO GET BUILT, INCLUDING THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE. IS THERE A PROCESS THEY CAN PURSUE -- THEY NEED TO COME MEET WITH Y'ALL AND GO THROUGH IT TO HELP THEM GET THAT BUILDING WHERE THEY CAN START UTILIZING IT QUICKLY. OR IS THAT A BUILDING PERMITTING QUESTION? >> THAT'S HANDLED COMPLETELY BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. THERE IS A PROCESS. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE INTRICACIES OF THE CRITERIA. >> Ratliff: I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN HELP YOU ACHIEVE YOUR GOALS AND GET IN THAT BUILDING MAYBE SOONER THAN LATER. THAT WAS MY ONLY COMMENT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: THANK YOU. REAL QUICK, JUST A COUPLE THINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THESE GUYS ARE WILLING TO CHANGE DIRECTION, BUT I HEARD THEM WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE STRUGGLE OF THE BUSINESS, THE CAPITAL OUTLAYS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH. I HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. ONE IS, IF WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT, DOES THAT FORESTALL THEM FROM GOING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IF THEY DECIDE TO DO THAT? DO WE KNOW THAT? WOULD IT PRE-INCLUDE THEM FROM DOING THAT? >> I DON'T THINK IT DOES. THEY MAY NEED TO HAVE OTHER REVISIONS TO THEIR PLANS, BUT IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THEM FROM GOING BACK. >> Chair Downs: THEY WOULD NOT GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PRIOR TO THIS. >> THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS COMES AFTER PLANNING AND ZONING. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY NEED ANOTHER CHANGE HERE IF THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THERE. THAT'S OUR HESITANCY. >> Cary: I WAS RESPONDING TO SOMETHING WHH SEEMED LIKE THAT WASN'T CLEAR. EVERYBODY HERE WANTS TO HELP THESE GUYS. THAT'S CLEAR. EVERYBODY. AND SO, OKAY. AND I GUESS IF THEY DECIDED THEY WANTED TO PULL THIS RIGHT NOW AND GO DOWN A DIFFERENT PATH, IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO TRY TO HELP THEM WITH THEIR SITUATION FROM A P&Z POINT OF VIEW? IF THEY SAY DON'T APPROVE THIS? I WANT TO TRY TO HELP THESE GUYS. I THINK EVERYBODY DOES. THEY MAY NOT WANT TO DO THAT. YOU GUYS PROBABLY JUST WANT TO MOVE AHEAD WITHHIS. I DON'T KNOW. I RETRACT THE QUESTION. >> Chair Downs: ANYTHING THAT WE DO HERE OTHER THAN APPROVING THIS IS GOING TO JUST DELAY THEM FURTHER, WHETHER THEY BUILD THE DUMPSTER OR GO TO BOARD -- IF WE TABLE IT THEY'VE STILL GOT TO COME BACK TO US. SO -- >> WE HAVE NO CHANGE-MAKING AUTHORITY. >> Chair Downs: THAT'S WHERE WE SIT. IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: BECAUSE THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO APPROVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION, I MOVE THAT THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THAT AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO APPROVE ITEM 8 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. GOOD LUCK, GUYS. SORR FOR THE ST. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 9, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT & REVISED SITE PLAN: NORTH CENTRAL ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 3BR - RESTAURANT AND RETAIL ON ONE LOT ON 1.7 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 75, 608 FEET NORTH OF 16TH STREET. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANT IS 1700N CENTRAL REALITY LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO REPLAT ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS. AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> Lisle: ISN'T THERE A SITE PLAN ON THIS? >> MHMM. YES. IT'S RIGHT HERE. >> Lisle: I WAS LOOKING AT -- I THINK THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. TAE?E'S THE TABLE, THE SUMMARY >> THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET. >> Lisle: THERE WAS JUST A DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THAT THE PARKING WAS CALCULATED. SOME OF IT WAS RETAIL, SOME WAS RESTAURANT, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANY DELINEATION IN THE BUILDING. WHAT DID YOU APPLY THE PARKING RATIO FOR RETAIL, VERSUS -- WHAT SECTION OF THE BUILDING DID YOU APPLY THE PARKING RATIO FOR RETAIL VERSUS THE RESTAURANT SINCE I DIDN'T SEE A DELINEATION? >> I BELIEVE THIS IS GOING TO BE THE MULTIPLE SUITES. WE DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO DIFFERENTIATE WHERE. THEYE DELEGATING FOR FEATUREAL IN THE BUILDING. THERE'S NOT DESIGNATED SPOTS. THEY HAVE CAPS ON BOTH. >> Lisle: I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST ONE BIG RESTAURANT. I DON'T SEE SUITES BROKEN UP ON THE FLOOR PLAN. >> WE DON'T LOOK AT THE FLOOR PLAN. WE JUST LOOK AT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINTS. >> THEY PROVIDE A SITE SUMMARY TABLE WHICH DESCRIBING THE USES ON THE SITE AND THE PARKING BREAKDOWN. WE GET THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THROUGH THAT SITE. >> Lisle: BUT THEY DON'T GIVE YOU THE BUILDING FLOOR PRINT AND SAY THIS IS THE RETAIL AND THIS IS THE RESTAURANT? >> NOT AT THIS STAGE. >> Lisle: BUT THEN IT WILL MATCH LATER. OKAY. >> Chair Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> BnskyI MO WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 9, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 9 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. ITEM 10. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT & REVISED SITE PLAN: CREST CADILLAC ADDITION, BLOCK B, LOT 1R - VEHICLE STORAGE ON 2.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PREMIER DRIVE, 1,660 FEET NORTH OF ENTERPRISE DRIVE. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 35 FOR VEHICLE STORAGE. APPLICANT: VTC PLANO RENTAL PROPERTIES LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> THE REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPAMENT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MR. LISLE. >> Lisle: I WENT BACK AND WATCHED WHEN THEY PRESENTED THIS BACK ON JULY 17TH. AND THEY TOLD US ABOUT ALL THESE TREES THEY WERE GOING TO ADD. THEY WERE GOING TO ADD A SCREEN ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE PARKING LOT BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND THE HOUSES. IS THERE A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED? I THOUGHT LIVING SCREENS OR TREES -- >> THERE IS A LANDSCAPE PLAN, BUT THAT'S ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THIS BOD >> Lisle: WERE THE COMMENTS THAT THEY MADE AT THE MEETING FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH ON THEIR LANDSCAPE PLAN? >> YEAH. >> Lisle: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: NO MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THANK YOU. I CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY SPEAKERS? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, PRELIMINARY REPLAT, SUBJECT TO ADE TO ADDITIONS, AE REVISED SITE PLAN. >> Chair Downs: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 10 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU LONG-SUFFERING INDIVIDUALS STILL SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11, PUBLIC HEARING, PRELIMINARY REPLAT: VAN TUYL ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 2R & 3 - NEW VEHICLE DEALER AND MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR ON TWO LOTS ON 11.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 75, 1,345 FEET NORTH OF ENTERPRISE DRIVE. ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANTS: VTC PLANO RENTAL PROPERTIES, LLC, AND DELYNN A. DAVIDSON. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE ADEC ADDITIONS/AND OR ALTERATIONS FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> Chair Downs: I THINK YOU HAVE THAT MEMORIZED. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11, PRELIMINARY REPLAT, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN. AND I HAVEN'T MEMORIZED THAT. >> Chair Downs: A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 11 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: LOS RIOS PLAZA, BLOCK 1, LOT 2R - VEHICLE PARTS SALES (INSIDE) ON ONE LOT ON 0.6 ACRE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PARK BOULEVARD, 210 FEET WEST OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD. ZONEETAIL. APPLICANT IS FERGUSON GLEN, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> A PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SEEING NONE, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? >> THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT O THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12, SUBJECT TO ADECISIONE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> Chair Downs: A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO APPROVE ITEM 12 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. I THINK -- THAT ITEM CARRIES 8-0. WE'LL LET MR. BRONSKY MOVE THE NEXT ONE AND MOVE INTO THE MOTION. [ LAUGHING ] >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: WALTON PARK SQUARE ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 2R - RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THROUGH ON ONE LOT ON 2.6 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARK BOULEVARD AND VENTURA DRIVE. ZONED RETAIL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PRESTON ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: 5040 REUNION, LLC (ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION). >> A PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONSND/OR ALTERATIO TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: IF YOU WANT, NEXT TIME WE CAN HAVE MR. BRONSKY READ THAT LAST LINE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? MR. BROUNOFF. >> THIS IS A L LUBY'S CAFETERIA. WHAT ARE THEY PLANNING TO DO? >> THEY ARE ABANDONING SOME EASEMENTS LIKE A FIRE LANE AND THEY'RE PROPOSING NEW FIRE LANES AND UTILITIES ON THE LOT. >> Brounoff: IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY OR THE CAFETERIA OPERATIONS? >> THERE WILL BE A NEW BUILDING ON THE SITE. IT WILL BE A NEW AAA RESTAURANT. >> Brounoff: OH. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE LUBY'S ANYMORE? >> Chair Downs: I HEARD DISAPPOINTMENT IN THAT. >> Bron >> MY LOU ANN PLATE IS GONE FOREVER. >> IT'S HARD TO FIND A PLACE IN THIS TOWN YOU CAN GET LIVER, YOU KNOW. >> THANKOODNESS. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEYOND THE LIVER SPECIAL? I GUESS NOT. THANK YOU, MR. KIM. GUYS, IT'S NOT EVEN 9:00 AND YOU'RE ALREADY LOSING IT. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? I'M SURPRISED WE DON'T HAVE AN ARMY OF LUBY'S FANS SITTING HERE GOING, THAT ARE YOU DOING. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I THINK MR. BROUNOFF SHOULD MAKE THAT MOTION. >> APPROVE WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 13,UBCT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS. SORRY, I DIDN'T MEMORIZE IT. I NEED A SCRIPT. >> Chair Downs: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BROUNOFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 13 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM -- IT CARRIES 8-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 14, PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT & REVISED SITE PLAN: CLASSIC BMW ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 1R - NEW VEHICLE DEALER ON ONE LOT ON 23.6 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY AND SPRING CREEK PARKWAY. ZONED COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NO. 539 FOR NEW CAR DEALER AND LOCATED WITHIN THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: VHC, LLC (ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION). >> THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEENG PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: BARELY EVEN GLANCED AT IT. SHE'S GOT IT MEMORIZED FOR SURE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T SEE ANY. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY DISCUSSION OR ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> APPROVE REAPPROVE AGENDA ITET SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND A REVISED SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED. >> AS MUCH AS I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO ASK THE AUDIENCE A QUESTION, I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Chair Downs: IS THIS YOUR ITEM? OKAY. SOMEBODY GET THAT MAN A BEER. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 14 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. CONGRATULATIONS SIR. THAT IS APPROVED 8-0. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. ITEM 15. >> ITEM 15 ARE ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS. >> I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. MR. RATLIFF, YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON. THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT ALL OF OUR DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE DUMPSTER ISSUE AND THOSE REQUIREMENTS -- >> Olley: I THINK I JUST WANTED TO ASK IF -- THE DUMPSTER ISSUE, NATURALLY A PART OF THE REWRITE. >> Chair Downs: IT IS. AND AS MR. BELL'S FRUSTRATION SHOWED, THAT'S WORK THAT WE NEED TO GET DONE. BUT IT JUST TAKES A WHILE TO PULL IT ALL TOGETHER. AND WE HAVE PRIORITIES THAT WE SET AS A BODY AND THEY'RE MOVING ALONG WITH THOSE. THEY ALSO RECEIVE INSTRUCTION, ENOUGH FROM COUNCIL. SO THESE TYPES OF ISSUES WILL DEFINITELY BE ADDRESSED. MR. BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: ON THAT SUBJECT OF THE DUMPSTER ENCSURE, I SORT OF SEEME TO ME THE PRESENT REQUIREMENT PUTS THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. IT REQUIRES AN ENCLOSURE -- >> I'M SORRY, BUT WE CAN'T DISCUSS -- >> Chair Downs: WE CAN'T GET INTO THE DETAILS. >> AS HOW WE WANT TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE. WE COULD PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE OR WE COULD WAIT FOR THE ORDINANCE REWRITE BUT WE CAN'T DISCUSS IT NOW. >> Chair Downs: WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO BRING OUT. WE DIDN'T NEED TO ADD IT TO A FUTURE AGENDA BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE. OKAY? ARE WE GOOD? TO THE EXTENT, MR. BROUNOFF YOU HAVE A POINT YOU WANT TO BRING UP TO STAFF, FEEL FREE TO EMAIL THEM. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? OKAY. 8:44, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. >> GOOD-BYE.