>> Downs: WELCOME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSIO MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> WE HAVE DAVID BARTRIDGE. AND THIS IS THE ITEM YOU'RE WANTING TO DISCUSS IS NOT AN ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA. >> IT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA, NO, MA'AM. >> JUST MAKING SURE. THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS DAVE BARCH AND I LIVED 30 YEARS IN PLANO. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. IT'S BEEN TABLED A WEEK AGO, ABOUT THE CUSTER AND LEGACY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ABOUT A QUARTER MILE FROM MY HOUSE AND IT'S GOING TO CHANGE THE COMPLEXION OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PRETTY DRAMATICALLY. TWO WEEKS AGO I WAS HERE WHEN THE PROPERTY AT CUSTER AND LEGACY WAS BROUGHT TO A VOTE TO APPROVE A PRELIMINARY PATCH. THAT'S THIS THERE. IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN ON THIS AREA. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S A SCHEMATIC FOR A INTEGRATED CIRCUIT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT SURE DOESN'T LOOK LIKE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. MY UNDERSTANDING IS WITHOUT FURTHER ACTION IT COULD BE APPROVED SOMETIME NEXT WEEK. WHILE YOU WERE DISCUSSING THE MERIT OF THE PROJECT, OR LACK THEREOF, I HEARD FIVE OF YOU SAY THAT YOU WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT. IT'S TOO BIG. IT DOESN'T FIT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S NOT WHAT PLANO NEEDS NOW. BUT IT WAS ZONED 27 YEARS AGO AND YOUR HANDS ARE TIED, YOU SAID. WELL, A LOT'S HAPPENED IN 27 YEARS. TODAY THE SURROUNDINGS ARE FULL OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. 27 YEARS AGO LEGACY AND CUSTER WERE ONLY FOUR-LANE ROADS. THE APARTMENTS BEING BUILT IN PLANO WERE TWO-STORY GARDEN-STYLE BUILDINGS WITH GREEN SPACES THAT SET THEM BACK FROM THE ROAD. 27 YEARS AGO PLANO HAD PLENTY OF WATER, POWER, SEWER AND ROOM TO GROW. THAT'S NOT THE CASE TODAY. MUCH OF THE LAND IN PLANO WAS FILLED IN, AND THIS IS A UNIQUE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT ANY DEVELOPER WOULD LOVE TO GET THEIR HANDS ON. IT SHOULD CONTINUE AS A PLACE FOR CHILDREN TO PLAY BUT IT COULD BE BEAUTIFUL HOMES. YOU O IT TO THE CITY TO STOP THIS SHOEBOX APARTMENT COMPLEX AND FIND A MORE SUITABLE PLAN FOR THIS LAND. READING THE TEXAS STATUTE A2 12.002.AA IT STATES THAT, QUOTE, AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER, THE GOVERNING BODY OF A MUNICIPALITY MAY ADOPT RULES GOVERNING PLATS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF LAND WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY'S JURISDICTION TO PROMOTE THE HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE MUNICIPALITY AND THE SAFE, ORDERLY, AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT OF THAT MUNICIPALITY. PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW ADDING 636 APARTMENTS CRAMMED TOGETHER ON THIS LITTLE PIECE OF PROPERTY WILL HELP THE GENERAL WELFARE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. BY MY CALCULATION, IF THIS IS ALLOWED TO PROCEED, THE 16 ACRES WILL SOON ONLY HAVE ABOUT 2,000 SQUARE FEET OF GRASS -- 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF GRASS. WHERE DOES THE RAIN GO WHEN IT FALLS ON PLASTIC ROOFS AND CONCRETE PARKING LOTS? OH, AND I DON'T SEE A SINGLE TREE ANYWHERE IN THIS PLAN, NOT ONE. THE CITY OF PLANO'S ZONING REGULATIONS, APPLICABLE TO ALL MF-3 THAT INCLUDE REQUIREMENTS FOR USABLE OPEN SPACE FOR THE RESIDENTS. FOR A COMPLEX THAT INCLUDES 644 BEDROOMS, PLANO REQUIRES 229,500 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE. LET'S COUNT THE CENTRAL COURTYARD WITH THE POOL AND KITCHEN AS 3,516 FEET. THIS AREA OVER HERE FOR DRAINAGE CONTROL IS 1,800 SQUARE FEET. I'M GOING TO ASSUME THE DEVELOPER IS COUNTING THE 20-FEET OF SETBACK THAT SURROUNDS THE PARAMEER AS USEFUL OPEN SPACE BUT IT INCLUDES THE CITY'S EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALKS, AND I DON'T THINK IT CAN BE COUNTED. BUT IT MIGHT ADD AS ADDITIONAL 65,600 SQUARE FEET. THAT STILL LEAVES THE DEVELOPMENT 110,000 SQUARE FEET SHORT OF THE REQUIRED USABLE OPEN SPACE. THIS ALONE REQUIRES YOU TO REJECT THIS PLAT. ANOTHER ISSUE IS THE THREE-STORY BUILDING, WHICH, BY THE WAY, WILL BE THE ONLY THREE-STORY BUILDING WITHIN MILES OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT IN PLANO OF 100 FEET FOR ANY THREE-STORY BUILDING. NOTHING COMES CLOSE TO THIS ON THIS PLAT AND IT SHOULD NOT INCLUDE THE TWO-STORY AND SINGLE-STORY BUILDINGS BETWEEN IT AND THE STREET. ALSO, SINGLE AND TWO-STORY BUILDINGS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A 25-FOOT YARD. DON' SEE O THERE. ANOTHER REASON TO REJECT THIS DESIGN. WE ARE WELL PAST THE DESIGN POPULATION OF PLANO'S INFRASTRUCTURE WITH ADDED MULTIFAMILY HOUSING WE HAVE MORE CONGESTION, AND THAT BRINGS TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. THIS IS ALREADY ONE OF THE BUSIEST INTERSECTIONS IN OUR CITY. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEY WILL HAVE 761 PLACES FOR CARS TO PARK. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN THEY ALL DECIDE TO LEAVE AT RUSH HOUR? TWO WEEKS AGO WE WERE TOLD BY CITY STAFF -- >> SIR, SIR. YOU'VE REACHED YOUR FIVE-MINUTE LIMIT. >> IF I MAY HAVE ONE MORE MOMENT. WE WERE TOLD BY STAFF THAT THIS PLAT MET THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT DOES. PLEASE LOOK IT OVER AND REJECT THE PLAN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Downs: THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. [APPLAUSE] >> Downs: BEFORE WE -- [APPLAUSE] >> Downs: BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, I THINK OUR ATTORNEY HAS SOME COMMENTS ON STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE. >> THANKS. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A FEW FACTS. SO AT THE LAST MEETING THERE WAS A VOTE 3-3 AND THAT MEANT THE MOTION FAILED. THE MOTION WAS TO -- IT WAS EITHER TO APPROVE OR DENY. WHICH WAS IT? TO APPROVE. OKAY. SO THE MOTION FAILED SO NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. IT WASN'T TABLED SO IT'S NOT COMING BACK TO THIS BODY. IT'S ALSO NOT GOING TO CITY COUNCIL. INSTEAD, IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVED BY OPERATION OF LAW ON OCTOBER 29th. THAT'S BECAUSE THERE IS A SHOT CLOCK STATUTE THAT THE LEGISLATURE APPROVED THAT SAYS ONCE THEY FILE AN APPLICATION, IF WE DO NOT TAKE ACTION WITHIN 30 DAYS, IT IS APPROVED BY OPERATION OF LAW. SO THAT IS WHAT'S SCHEDULED TO HAPPEN. NOW THAT PLAT WILL BE APPROVED ON OCTOBER 29th. AND THE STATUTES THAT I WAS RELYING ON LAST TIME WHEN I GAVE LEGAL ADVICE SAYING THAT THEY NEEDED TO APPROVE AS LONG AS IT COMPLIES WITH THE SUBDIVISN ORDINANCE AND OTHER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS, THAT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 212.005 AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 212.010. AND SO IF ANY OF Y'ALL ARE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT IT AND VERIFYING THAT LEGAL ADVICE, PLEASE DO. THANKS. >> Downs: NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >> THE GENTLEMAN ACTUALLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT IS ON THE CURRENT AGENDA, SO I PLACED HIM THERE. >> Downs: BEFORE WEOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, JUST SO EVERYONE'S AWARE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON 1A, 1B AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ITEM 2 AS WELL BUT THOSE HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO BE TABLED SO THERE WON'T BE ANY ACTION TO BE TAKEN TONIGHT ON THOSE ITEMS. IN ADDITION, IF YOU'RE SPEAKING TO SPECIFIC PARTS OF THOSE PLAN THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, IT COULD BE THAT THAT WILL CHANGE BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME THAT IT'S GOING TO BE BROUGHT BACK. I THINK THE REQUEST IS TO TABLEG ALONG THOSE LINES. SO JUST A HEADS UP SO THAT YOU'RE NOT SURPRISED WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT. OKAY. LET'S MOVE TO CONSENT, PLEASE. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACT UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS, STAFF, OR ANY CITIZEN. CITIZENS ARE LIMITED TO TWO ITEMS AND DISCUSSION TIME OF THREE MINUTE THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Dns: ULD ANYBODYIKE TO PULL ANYTHING FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> I MOVE APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> SIR, I'M SORRY. WE DO HAVE REGISTERED OPINIONS. WE HAVE ONE IN SUPPORT OF ITEM B, ONE IN OPPOSITION, AND TWO RESPONDED THAT THEY WERE NEUTRAL. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF THEIR OPINIONS. >> Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU. I DIDN'T SEE THAT HERE. MAYBE I DO NEED GLASSES NOW. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. PLEASE VOTE. WE SEEM TO BE HAVING TROUBLE WITH COMMISSIONER CARY'S BUTTON.3 THERE WE GO. IT WASN'T REASSIGNED PROPERLY. HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE LONG ARMS. ALL RIGHT. THAT CARRIE. IT SHOULD BE A VOTE OF 7-0 SINCE WE ARE ONLY SEVEN OF US HERE INSTEAD OF EIGHT. EVERY TIME I SIT AT THIS DAIS THIS THING DOESN'T WORK. IS THERE A PROBLEM? I'M TECHNOLOGY-CHALLENGED, I GUESS. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND, MAY I CORRECT IT VERY QUICKLY? >> Downs: THAT WILL SPEED THINGS UP LATER. >> THANK YOU. >> Downs: THANK YOU. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: APPLICAN ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMON TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. WE HAVE AN ITEM THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TOGETHER, AGENDA ITEM NO. 1A, PUBLIC HEARING ZONING CASE 2020-032. REQUEST TO REZONE 142.5 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY AND PARKWOOD BOULEVARD FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-242-MU RESIDENCE2, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPME OFFICE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPME RESIDENCE-2 AND PLANNED DEVELOP OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMEN AGENDA ITEM NO. 1B. CONCEPT PLAN: HAGGARD FARM ADDITION, BLOCKS A-C - MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE, HOTEL, RETAIL, PROFE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, HEALTH/FITNESS CENTER, RESTAURANT, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, PARK AND OPEN SPACE O SIX LOTS ON 142.5 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY AND PARKWOOD BOULEVARD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-242- MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE-2 AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-243- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE. APPLICANT: HAGGARD ENTERPRISE LIMITED, LTD. AND ACRES OF SUNSHINE LTD. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. ERIC HILL, SENIOR PLANNER. THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I'M ALSO AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE . >> Downs: THANK YOU, MR. HILL. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS FOR A MONTH NOW AND IT'S A VERY INTERESTING PROJECT. I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, SUNS THEY'RE ASKING TO TABLE IT AND, YOU KNOW, CANDIDLY AT THE LAST MOMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON WITH THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT THEIR REQUEST WAS FOR. I WOULD LIKE A LITTLE TEXTURE ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHAT THEY HOPE TO BE DIFFERENT AT THE END SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE AT AS WE LOOK AT WHETHER WE TABLE THIS OR NOT. >> SURE. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER. Downs: COMMISSIER SAMARA? >> Samara: YES. ERIC, I NOTICE IN THE AGENDA ITEM NO. 1A IN YOUR SUMMARY YOU'VE WRITTEN WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THERE IS NOT FULL ALIGNMENT WITH THE 2011 FUTURE LAND USE MAP OR HOUSING DENSITY POLICY STATEMENTS. BUT THERE IS SUPPORT FOR THE LAND USE POLICY HOUSING, THOROUGHFARE, AND PARKS PLAN. WOULD YOU CARE TO EXPLAIN EACH OF THOSE FOR US SINCE IT ISN'T INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE, VERY EXTENSIVE PACKAGE. WHIC BY THE WE LARGEST PACKAGE WE RECEIVED IN THE TWO YEARS I HAVE BEEN SITTING ON PLANNING AND ZONING. IT WAS THAT THICK. BUT NO MENTION OF ANY OF THESE AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHICH ONES ARE ORDINANCES AND WHICH ONES ARE ADVISORY. >> SURE. LET ME MAKE SURE I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY BUT WE DO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE CITY'S CONSULTANT IN THE STAFF REPORT. THAT'S POSTED ONLINE. THE COMMISSION ALSO RECEIVED A COPY OF THAT AT THEIR RESIDENCES. SO IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT THE ANALYSIS DISCUSSES THAT THIS IS IN THE LOW-DENSITY OFFICE CATEGORY. THE CATEGORY DOES NOT INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL USES. IT DOES TALK ABOUT OTHER ITEMS AS WELL SUCH AS FLOOR TO AREA RATIOS. ADDITIONALLY, IT TALKS ABOUT ALLOWANCES FOR OTHER USES IN THAT LAND USE ELEMENT ANALYSIS. THERE'S ALSO, IF YOU CONTINUE THROUGHOUT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS, DISCUSSION OF STRATEGIES, INTERIM AMENDMENT REDEVELOPMENT UNDEVELOPED LAND POLICIES. AND I BELIEVE YOU ALSO ASKED ABOUT THE HOUSING DENSITY POLICY STATEMENTS. IT TALKED ABOUT THE DISTRIBUTION OF HIGH-DENSITY HOUSING. THAT'S IN POLICY THREE. WHAT THIS PROPOSES IS 700 UNITS AND TWO 350-UNIT STRUCTURES. THIS IS ON PAGE 10 OF 24 OF THE STAFF REPORT, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. BEING THAT THE POLICY RECOMMENDS A DISTRIBUTION SO THAT THERE'S NO MORE THAN 500 UNITS WITHIN ANY COMPLEX AND A RECOMMENDED SEPARATION OF 1500-FOOT BETWEEN THOSE DEVELOPMENTS. THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT ALIGN, IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THAT HOUSING POLICY STATEMENT. I BELIEVE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. >> Samara: I WOULD HOPE THAT IF THIS COMES BACK TO US, IF IT IS TABLED, WE WOULD SEE A MORE FLUSHED OUT VERSION WHERE IT IS AND ISN'T IN COMPLIANCE. >> I BELIEVE WE HAVE DONE THAT VERY CLEARLY IN THE REPORT BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT AGAIN SO WE CAN PROVIDE MORE CLARITY. >> Downs: ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR MR. HILL? I JUST PROMOTED YOU? OR MAYBE THAT'S A DEMOTION, ACTUALLY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WOULD THE APPLICANT PLEASE COME FORWARD? I THINK COMMISSIONER CARY'S QUESTION IS PROBABLY MORE RELEVANT TO YOUR RESPONSE. >> GOOD EVENING, CLAY ROBE WITH THE APPLICANT. SO HAPPY TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION. AS YOU MIGHT BE AWARE AFTER OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS E TENSIVE AND WE COVERED QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT, I REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL FOLKS I KNEW WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT. ONE OF THOSE WAS MR. JIM DELLVIEW WHO HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH OUR ZONING CASE SINCE THE BEGINNING . WE HAVE SPENT A BETTER PART OF A YEAR WORKING THROUGH ISSUES WITH STAFF, WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CONSTITUENTS TO TRY TO CREATE CONSENSUS AROUND THE PLAN AND I HEARD THERE WAS STILL RESISTANCE. I FOLLOWED UP WITH THOSE GROUPS TO MEET ONE-ON-ONE TO GO THROUGH ESSENTIALLY THE POINTS OF OUR COMP PLAN, OF OUR ZONING DOCUMENT, OF OUR PD LANGUAGE TO UNDERSTAND SPECIFICS ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE UPON OUR PLAN, CHANGE IT, ADAPT IT, MAKE IT BETTER, GIVEN THAT PERSPECTIVE. AND SO WE MET A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. HE GRANTED ME A BIT OF HIS TIME, WHICH I'M GRATEFUL FOR, TO GO THROUGH THOSE IN DETAIL. AT THE END OF THAT MEETING, JUST SPEAKING CANDIDLY, I FELT LIKE WE HAD REACHED CONSENSUS ON A RGE MBERF ITEMS RELATED TO OUR PD. I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THERE WAS ANYTHING OF MAJOR CONSEQUENCE AS IT RELATES TO OUR SPECIFIC PLAN THAT IN THAT DISCUSSION I FELT COULD BE IMPROVED UPON. I CONSIDERED THAT TO BE A GOOD MEETING AND WORTH THE DISCUSSION TO THEN MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO OUR PLAN, WHICH WE HAVE SINCE DONE. I WAS MADE AWARE OVER THE WEEKEND, WHICH I DID NOT KNOW UNTIL THAT TIME, THAT THERE WAS STILL SIGNIFICANT CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING THAT I WAS NOT AWARE OF WITH NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS THAT WERE FRANKLY STILL IN RESISTANCE TO VARIOUS ASPTS OF OUR PLAN. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS HAPPENING. SO FROM THE VERY BEGINNING WE'VE BEEN OPEN DOMETIAN AND DISCUSSIONS TO TRY TO FIND WAYS TO IMPROVE OUR PLAN AND INCORPORATE THAT INTO OUR ZONING DOCUMENT . AS I SAID A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO I THOUGHT WE HAD MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS IN THAT REGARD. AS OF THIS WEEKEND I FIND OUT THERE WERE STILL SOME CONCERNS. I WANTED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES BEFORE PRESENTING FORMALLY BACK IN FRONT OF THE BODY HERE. >> CyM THE CITIZENS, MR. ROBE, TWO OF THE CRITICAL CONCERNS ARE THE OVERALL DENSITY. SPECIFICALLY, THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND WHAT IT DOES TO DENSITY AND HOW THAT WILL ROLL OUT THROUGH THAT COMMUNITY. AND ALSO SOME BUILDING HEIGHTS. AND SO SHOULD THIS BE TABLED, DO YOU ANTICIPATE WHEN YOU COME BACK IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO BE ADDRESSING THOSE TWO THINGS? >> YOU KNOW, CANDIDLY I'M KIND OF HEARING THAT FROM YOU FOR THE FIRST TIME, FRANKLY. WHAT I OFFERED TO MR. DELLVIEW AT THE TIME D WH I'M OFFERING TONIGHT IS TO SIT DOWN AND GO THROUGH OUR PLAN AND UNDERSTAND WHAT CHANGES CAN BE MADE THAT WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE THAT CURRENTLY DON'T SUPPORT THE PLAN TO SUPPORT IT. SO IF THERE ARE THINGS IN THAT NATURE THAT WOULD KIND OF BRING CONSENSUS THEN THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE OPEN TO DISCUSS. FRANKLY, AS I STAND HERE TODAY, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THOSE THINGS ARE AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO TAKE SOME OF THE ANIMOSITY AGAINST OUR PLAN AND TRY TO BRING SOME BALANCE AND SO I NEED TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH WHOEVER I NEED TO HAVE THEM WITH TO GET TO THAT ANSWER. LET ME SAY, IF I MAY, WE HAVE CHANGED OUR PLAN SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS TO ACCOMMODATE FEEDBACK. FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF OUR DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE BEEN OPEN TO MODIFICATIONS. AT THE END OF THE DAY WE STILL NEED A PROJECT THAT'S FINANCEABLE, THAT'S MARKET DRIVEN, THAT SATISFIES THE DEMANDS THAT WE CAN DO AS A DEVELOPER THAT THE HAGGARD FAMILY WILL SUPPORT. THERE ARE COMPETING INTERESTS INVOLVED AND WE NEED TO BALANCE ALL THOSE INTERESTS AND THAT'S WHAT WE DO. I'M CONTINUING TO BE OPEN TO THAT. >> Cary: I APPRECIATE THAT. MY GUESS IS THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HERE, NO DIFFERENT FROM ME, HAVE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE CITIZENS. AS YOU SAID THERE ARE CONCERNS. AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THEM IS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD THINGS WITH YOUR PLAN BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSITION TO THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND I THINK THE CONCERN AND THE THING THAT PEOPLE ARE CURIOUS AND MAYBE A LITTLE BAFFLED BY, AS I HEAR FROM CITIZENS. I'M NOT SPECIFICALLY TRYING TO SPEAK FOR THEM BUT A LOT OF THEM HAVE CALLED ME IS THIS LAND WAS ZONED NON-RESIDENTIAL AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE RUB IS COMING IN AND WHERE THE CITIZENS OF PLANO ARE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE GOT FROM A PLAN THAT WAS IN 2014 I THINK REZONED TO SPECIFICALLY NOT HAVE RESIDENTIAL TO A POINT NOW WHERE WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT. SO I THINK AS YOU DIG IN I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT THE LIO OR THE LOI? THANK YOU. THAT THERE'S RESTRICTIONS ON BUILDING HEIGHTS. AND IF YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH YOU'LL FIND ALL THIS OUT. BUT ALSO THE HOTEL WAS SPECIFICALLY -- I HEARD CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE -- SITED AS TWO-STY BUT COULD BE FIVE-STORY BUT LOI PRECLUDES THAT HIGH. I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANKS FOR THE NOTICE. >> Downs: THANK YOU. OKAY. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS REQUESTED TO BE TABLED. OF COURSE THAT HASN'T BEEN DETERMINED YET BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT WILL LIKELY BE MADE. SO IF YOU'RE SPEAKING TO SPECIFIC ITEMS, UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE MAY CHANGE. WITHHATAID, W E PUBLIC HEARING AND LISTEN TO ANY SPEAKERS THAT STILL WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. >> I HAVE ELLEN LEER. WHILE MS. LEER COMES TO THE PODIUM, CAN I PLEASE HAVE STEVEN LEVINE AND RICHARD WEIRA HAVE A SEAT AND WAIT THEIR TURN? >> GOOD EVENING. >> MY NAME IS ELLEN LEER AND I LIVE IN THE MIDDLE OF PLANO AT PARKER AND INDEPENDENCE. MY HUSBAND HAS OWNED THAT HOUSE FOR ABOUT 23 YEARS AND WE'VE BEEN MARRIED 10 YEARS. I USED TO LIVE IN PLANO A LONG TIME AGO BUT I HAVE VERY BIG CONCERNS AND I AM VERY PROUD OF PLANO. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO OPERATE THIS THING. DOES SOMEBODY ZOOM IN ON IT? OKAY. FOR JUST A MOMENT -- LET ME SEE. OKAY. OF THESE AREAS, THIS ONE RIGHT HERE IS ALREADY APPROVED FOR MULTIFAMILY UNITS SO THEY HAVE NOT YET BEEN BUILT. THE CONCEPT SAID 150 -- >> Downs: CAN WE TURN HER MIC? GO AHEAD. >> AND IT IS ACTUALLY APPROVED FOR UP TO 1300 MULTIFAMILY UNITS. AND THESE THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT -- SORRY. I FORGOT THAT PART. MORE IN THIS AREA ARE UP TO 924. AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IT KIND OF SEEMS TO BE DOWNPLAYED A LITTLE BIT BUT HAGGARD OWNS ALL OF THAT AREA. THIS WHOLE BIT, SOME OF IT HAS ALREADY BEEN REZONED, ZONED, APPROVED, AND THEN THIS PART THAT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION. BUT HE ALSO OWNS THIS PART OVER HERE. SO THIS WHOLE AREA IS WHAT I WOULLIKEOOINT OUT IS SUBJECT TO POSSIBLE ONGOING CONCERNS ABOUT THE MULTIFAMILY. THE CONCEPT THAT THEY PRESENTED IS NOT REALITY AND I FEEL IT'S MISLEADING. I THINK THE OFFICE AND LIGHT RETAIL IS MORE APPROPRIATE. IN ADDITION, WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING GOES AGAINST ALL PLANO CITY PLANS. THE 1963 PLAN IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 1986 AND THE COMING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES OF COURSE THE INTERIM PLAN. IT HAS NEVER FIT INTO PLANO'S GOALS IN ANY WAY. YOU ARE CONSIDERING GOING AGAINST EVERY CITY PLAN, INCLUDING THE NEW ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN FULLY ADOPTED YET. AND FOR NO GOOD REASON -- >> YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS. >> THANK YOU. ALREADY 28,000 MULTIFAMILY UNITS. I WAS ON THE ZOOM CALL LAST WEDNESDAY AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS COMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO PASS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MIKE BELL SAID ERYOTIN DECISION MUST BE BASED ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND MIKE BRONSKI MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THERE'S A VERY HIGH BAR FOR ANY CHANGES. IN REVIEWING THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I HAVE MULTIPLE AREAS THAT GO ALONG WITH WHAT THOSE GUYS SAID AND ARE COMPLETELY AGAINST THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >> NEXT IS STEVEN LEVINE. NEXT IS RICHARD WEIRA. >> Downs: WHO IS AFTER MR. WEIRA? GO AHEAD, SIR. >> THANK YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS. I'VE SPOKEN BEFORE REGARDING THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE THING THAT STICKS OUT IN MY MIND, YOU KNOW, AS WE LOOK AT THESE PLANS, AND SOME OF THEM ARE QUITE BEAUTIFUL AND SO FORTH, IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO TRAFFIC, SPECIFICALLY, ON SPRING CREEK, ON PARKWOOD, A THOSE ASSOCIATED STREETS. I MEAN, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OTHER ONES IS GOING TO GENERATE IS PRETTY ENORMOUS AND I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW A PLAN OF THIS SIZE COULD BE CONSIDERED WITHOUT ANY EXTENSIVE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THAT TRAFFIC IS GOING TO IMPACT THAT MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AT SPRING CREEK AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. THOSE ARE THE ONLY COMMENTS I HAD THIS EVENING. >>owns: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT SPEAKER. >> NEXT WE HAVE COLLEEN AGUILAR EPSTEIN. WHILE MS. EPSTEIN COMES TO THE PODIUM, CAN I HAVE DAVID BARCH AND JOHN O'LEARY. >> Downs: I DON'T SEE MS. EPSTEIN. >> OKAY. MR. BARCH, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE PODIUM. CAN I HAVE MATT DIXON AND BILL DREXLER COME AND WAIT THEIR TURN AT THE PODIUM, PLEASE? >> GOOD EVENING, THANKS AGAIN FOR LISTENING TO ME. I'M A 30-YEAR RESIDENT AND LIKE EVERYONE WHO LIVES IN PLANO I BOUGHT MY HOME HERE TO LIVE IN A CITY OF EXCELLENCE THAT WE'RE PROUD TO ADVERTISE. I MOVED HERE FOR THE GREAT SCHOOLS, THE SAFETY, AND THE KNOWLEDGE THAT OUR CITY PLANNERS WANTED TO CONTINUE THAT LIFESTYLE. SOMETHING HAS CHANGED AND WE DON'T LIKE IT. YOU MEMBERS OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEEM TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE MORE IS BETTER PHILOSOPHY. QUITE OFTEN MORE IS NOT BETTER. IT'S JUST MORE. LAST WEEK I WAS HERE AS WE WERE INTRODUCED TO THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR PLANO. 18 MONTHS, HUNDREDS OF HOURS TO PLOT THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS. EXISTING ZONING IS SUPPOSED TO TAKE PRECEDENCE IN THAT PLAN. WE HAVE ZONING IN PLACE FOR THIS PROPERTY AND THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE. A MONTH AGO, AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE MAJORITY OF CITIZENS THAT SPOKE OUT, WE WERE TOLD THAT YOU WOULD LOOK INTO PLANTING A FEW TREES TO HIDE A THREE-STORY PARKING GARAGE. THOSE WILL BE SOME BIG TREES BUT THEY WILL NEVER BE BIG ENOUGH, EVEN IN 30 YEARS. THERE WAS TALK ABOUT A PARK AND ACCESS. WASN'T THAT PARK SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT YEARS AGO AND WHERE IS IT? THE CITY OF PLANO HAS RECEIVED 321 COMMENTS VIA E-MAIL REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL. 320 ARE AGAINST IT. YOU CAN'T GET 320 OUT OF 321 TO AGREE THE SUN WILL COME UP TOMORROW. NOBODY LIKES THIS PROPOSAL. MY QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE POINT OF THE CITIZENS PASSING ZONING AND LONG-TERM PLANS FOR OUR CITY HERE AND VOICE OUR OBJECTIONS TO YOU? WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES. DEVELOPERS DO TOO. AND YOU NEED TO BE THE GATEKEEPERS. SINCE THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT COME CLOSE TO EXISTING ZONING, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE EVEN HERE. PLEASE, DO YOUR JOB. REJECT IT. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> MY NAME IS JOHN O'LEARY AND MY HOME FACES THIS DEVELOPMENT. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN TWO CONFERENCE CALLS, TWO ZOOM CALLS WITH STILLWATER. IN BOTH OF THOSE CONFERENCE CALLS I HAVE RAISED ISSUES ABOUT THE PARKING GARAGES FACING US. AND I BELIEVE I'VE E-MAILED MR. HILL AND I BELIEVE I'VE E-MAILED MS. DAY AND EXPRESSED MY CONCERNS REGARDING THOSE SO I FIND IT RATHER QUESTIONABLE WHEN THE STATEMENT IS MADE THAT SOMEONE IS NOT AWARE OF THAT. THE SECD IUES THAT IN READING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS MOST RECENTLY I NOTICED THAT WHAT IS PRESENTED ON THE PLANS IS A THREE-STORY PARKING GARAGE IS IN THE STIPULATIONS REQUESTED, THE ABILITY TO BUILD THEM AS THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE BUILDINGS IN FRONT OF THEM. WHICH MEANS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 55, 60, AND 70-FOOT PARKING GARAGES. ABOUT FIVE TO SEVEN-STORY PARKING GARAGES. BEING PROPOSED AS A LIVINGEES- SCREEN CERTAINLY DON'T COVER MUCH OF THOSE PARKING GARAGES. I DON'T NEED TO COMMENTN THE MULTIFAMILY. I THINK YOU'VE HEARD ENOUGH OF IT BUT I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MISREPRESENTATIONS IN THIS PLAN AND, BELIEVE ME, I DISLIKE THE FACT I'M COMING UP HERE AND CONTRADICTING MR. ROBE. IN FACT, MR. ROBE KNOWS I COMMENTED. MR. ROBE PROMISED ME WHEN I RAISED QUESTIONS ABOUT VALUATIONS THAT HE WOULD PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION SUPPORTING THE FACT THAT OUR HOMES WOULD NOT BE DEVALUED BECAUSE OF THIS. I PUT THE QUESTION TO YOU, GENTLEMEN, THERE'S A LOT OF MISREPRESENTATIONS HERE AND I CERTAINLY HOPE YOU STICK TO THE GUIDELINES AND NOT BUY INTO THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> MR. DIXON. >> MATT DIXON, 30-YEAR RESIDENT OF THE CITY. IN THE RECENT COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IT READS HOW WILL THE PLAN BE USED? THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL BE USED EVERY DAY BY A VARIETY OF STAKEHOLDERS TO MAKE IMPORTANT DECISIONS HOW TO INVEST IN THE COMMUNITY AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN PLANO. RESIDENTS CAN USE THE PLAN TO SEE HOW THE CITY INTENDS TO GUIDGROW ANDEVELMENTN WAYS THAT D ASPIRATIONS. HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT A CITIZEN CAN USE THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR ANY OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEN THIS PROJECT DOESN'T MEET THE EXISTING LAND USE FOR THE 2011 PLAN OR EVEN THE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? SO HOW ARE PEOPLE SUPPOSED TO USE THIS PLAN TO KNOW HOW TO INVEST, HOW TO BUY WHEN WE HAVE AN ARBITRARY APPROACH TO CHANGING ZONING WHENEVER IT MEETS THE CITY STAFF OR SOME DEVELOPER? IN THE CASE OF CITY OF PHARR V. TIBON. IT SAYS THE CITY HAS THE POWER TO AMEND IF A PUBLIC NECESSITY DEMANDS IT. WHILE THE PRESUMPTION WOULD BE THAT THE ENACTMENT OF THE AMENDED ORDINANCE WAS VALID, THE PRESUMPTION DISAPPEARS WHEN IT SHOWS THAT THE CITY HAS ACTED ARBITRARILY AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION. IF IT VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF HOMEOWNERS UNDER THE BASIC ORDINANCE [INDISCERNIBLE] SAFETY, MORALS, OR GENERAL WELFARE THAT IT CONSTITUTES UNJUSTIFIABLE SPOT ZONING. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. I VEEARD LOT OF DISCUSSION FROM THE DEVELOPER ABOUT HOW THE HAGGARD FAMILY LIKES THIS BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD ONE SCINTILLA OF INFORMATION ABOUT WHY THIS IS GOOD FOR THE CITIZENS OF PLANO. IT SHOULDN'T BE VERY DIFFICULT IF IT'S SUCH A GREAT PROJECT TO SAY WHY THE CITIZENS OF PLANO SHOULD SUPPORT THIS. DOES IT LOWER THEIR TAXES? DOES IT HELP THEM WITH PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY MORALS OR GENERAL WELFARE, AS INDICATED BY LAW? IT INDICATES IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF STANDARDS OF REZONING DECISIONS, THE EXERCISE OF PRESSURE BY DEVELOPERS, THE LIKELIHOOD THAT ZONING BODIES WILL BE INFLUENCED BY THESE SPECIAL INTERESTS RATHER THAN THE MERITS OF THE CASE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE PEOPLE ARE BEING SHORTCHANGED BECAUSE CITY STAFF AND OTHERS ARE BASICALLY BEING PRESSURED BY DEVELOPERS TO GET THESE THINGS THROUGH. AND THERE IS NOT ONE SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED. WE WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT, IF THERE IS, AS TO WHY THE CITIZENS SHOULD BE BEHIND THIS. THE GOOD NEWS IS THERE IS RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY STANDARDS AND THE CITY OF PLANO HAS THESE IN -- >> SIR, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT. >> PURPOSE AND INTENT, THE GENERAL OBJECTIVES ARE TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE INTEGRITY ENJOYMENT AND PROPERTY VALUES OF RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO. THAT'S WHAT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT REVIEW TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF A PROJECT LIKE THIS. I ASK YOU THAT YOU GO FORWARD AND YOU DO NOT TABLE THIS. THAT YOU VOTE ON IT TONIGHT. AS I SAID BEFORE, DEVELOPERS ARE LIKE CITY BUSES. DON'T PICK ONE OUT, THERE WILL BE ANOTHER ONE ALONG IN A LITTLE WHILE AND THERE MAY BE ANOTHER PROJECT THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS OF PLANO AND THE CURRENT LAND USE. >> Downs: NEXT SPEAKER. >> OUR FINAL SPEAKER IS BILL DREXEL. >> Downs: MR. DREXEL. >> HELLO. PLEASED TO BE HERE. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF PLANO -- >> Downs: STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> BILL DREXEL, 6108 -- IN AVIGNON. TH 25EARSGO A I'VE BEEN ME A LOT OF STUFF ABOUTES AND HEAR- DEVELOPMENTS. IN FACT, THAT CORNER, THE FIRST SPEAKER TALKED ABOUT 1.3 MILLION SQUARE FOOT THAT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED, YET IT WAS REZONED FOUR YEARS AGO. THAT WAS BASED ON THIS BOGUS NOTION THAT PEOPLE MY AGE WERE GOING TO WANT TO HAVE LOCK AND LEAVE. THEY WOULD SELL THEIR HOUSE AND GO TO SOME APARTMENT WHERE THEY COULD LOCK IT UP AND LEAVE. IT HASN'T BEEN BUILT. IF THERE'S A NEED FOR A HIGH-RISE RESIDENTIAL, HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, WHY DON'T THEY DEVELOP THAT FIRST AND THEN WE'LL SEE IF WE NEED MORE. I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY MORE IN PLANO. I THINK WHAT WE NEED IS MORE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING. I'VE GOT FOUR KIDS. THREE OF THEM LIVE IN THIS AREA. TWO OF THEM BOUGHT HOUSES IN PLANO FIVE TO TEN YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE. IT'S GOTTEN MUCH MORE DIFFICULT. MY YOUNGEST DAUGHTER MOVED BACK TWO YEARS AGO FROM NASHVILLE AND SHE COULDN'T FIND A HOUSE THAT WAS AFFORDABLE IN PLANO. SHE HAD TO GO TO McKINNEY AND I DON'T LIKE THAT. I WISH SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING IN PLANO. WHY DON'T YOU LOOK INTO SUGGESTING -- IF THEY WANT TO ILD RESIDENTIAL ON WHAT'S ZONED COMMERCIAL, BUILD SOME SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. UNTIL THERE'S MORE SPECIFICITY PROVIDED ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THEY'RE GOING TO DO HERE. THEY SAY IN A CONCEPT PLAN THEY'RE GOING TO DO ONE THING BUT YOU LOOK AT THE DETAILS AND THE DETAILS SAY, NO, WE'RE GOING TO POTENTIALLY BUILD BUILDINGS THAT ARE HIGHER WITH POTENTIALLY 25% MORE SQUARE FEET. DON'T ACCEPT THAT KIND OF BAIT AND SWITCH. HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE. IF THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE A COMMITMENT, THEY BETTER HONOR IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL COME BACK IN NOVEMBER AND SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. >> Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKERS? >> WE DO NOT. I WANTED TO NOTE TO THE COMMISSION THAT WE HAVE FOUR REGISTERED AS IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT AND ONE IN SUPPORT. >> Downs: THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION. MR. SAMARA. >> Samara: COMMISSON WILL NOTE THAT I'M HOLDING UP THE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT THAT CAME IN OUR PACKET. VERY HEAVY. BUT THIS, THE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION THAT CAME PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 20th. AND THIS ARE LETTERS THAT WERE IN OUR PACKET THAT CAME PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. WHEN I VOTED TO CREATE THIS TABLING, I HADN'T SEEN THESE AND I'M WONDERING WHY. NOW WE HEAR THERE'S 320 LETTERS OF OPPOSITION AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHY WE DON'T HAVE THOSE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. BECAUSE OF THE OPPOSITION TO THIS PLAN, NOT ONLY FROM THE PUBLIC BUT THE LACK OF CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED BETWEEN THE FIRST TIME WE LOOKED AT THIS ON SEPTEMBER 20th AND LOOKING AT IT AGAIN TODAY, IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE IS VERY LIMITED INTEREST ON THE PART OF THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE CHANGES OR TO REACH OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S STILL A FOOD TRUCK PARK LOCATED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND IT'S LOCATED RIGHT NEAR AVIGNON, WHICH WAS SOLD TO THE PEOPLE OF AVIGNON AS A LUXURY DEVELOPMENT. SO I'M TROUBLED BY THE ENTIRE WAY THIS ENTIRE PROCESS HAS UNFOLDED AND NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO WAIT ANOTHER FOUR WEEKS. I AM GOING TO MOTION THAT WE DENY THE REQUEST TO TABLE THIS AND WE TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT ARE INVOLVED HERE THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE SHOWN UP WITH PREPARED STATEMENTS TO MAKE, MANY OF THEM WELL-THOUGHT-OUT. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS MYSELF AND TO GET AN E-MAIL AT 1:55 THIS AFTERNOON THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS IS PRETTY DARN LATE. SO I'M GOING TO MOTION THAT WE DENY THE TABLING AND THAT WE GET INTO THE MEAT OF WHAT'S BEEN CHANGED AND WHAT IS LIKELY TO CHANGE WITH THIS PLAN. >> Downs: ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS SUCH A BIG DEAL, IT HAS SUCH A HUGE IMPACT ON THE CITY AND I DON'T THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE FOR US TO TAKE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO DISCUSS IT AND GIVE THE DEVELOPER AND CITIZENS TIME TO WORK IT OUT. I THINK WE'RE NOT GAINING ANYTHING, WE'RE NOT DOING ANYBODY ANY FAVORS BY RUSHING THIS THROUGH WHEN WE DON'T HAVE TO. SO I WON'T SUPPORT THAT MOTION TO TABLE . [APPLAUSE] [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'S A BRAVE MAN RIGHT THERE. I'LL WALK OUT WITH YOU. >> I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION EITHER. I WOULD LIKE TO GRANT THE PETITIONER'S MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO THE NOVEMBER 15th, 2021 MEETING. MR. ROBE, I'M GOING TO ALSO ASK YOU, PLEAD WITH YOU TO COLLABORATE COLLABORATE COLLABORATE WITH THE CITIZENS THAT ARE HERE AND THE NEIGHBORS OF AVIGNON TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT WILL MAKE A MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS HAPPY. I KNOW THERE WILL BE SOME THAT WON'T BE HAPPY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO AND MOVE FORWARD, BUT I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING TO BE SAID ABOUT HONEST TWO-WAY TRANSPARENT DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING O MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS FANTASTIC PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HAS SUCH A RICH HERITAGE FOR THE CITY OF PLANO AND THAT WILL REALLY BRING FRUITION AND MAKE IT AN AREA THEY'RE ALL PROUD OF. >> Downs: BEFORE WE MOVE ON, LET ME JUST -- WE HAVE A MOTION. CAN WE GET A SECOND TO THAT? >> POINT OF ORDER. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK BEFORE WE HAVE THE SECOND BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND I CAN'T SPEAK AFTER THAT. >> Downs: NO, THAT'S NOT ACCURATE ACTUALLY. WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION. >> MAY I MAKE A POINT BEFORE THAT? >> Downs: GO AHEAD. >> I MADE A FEW NOTES BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO EVERYBODY. IT'S CERTAINLY IMPORTANT TO STILLWATER, THE HAGGARD FAMILY, THE CITIZENS OF PLANO. STILLWATER PROPOSED A DEVELOPMENT WITH MANY TRACT DEVELOPMENTS AND THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY UNDER THE ZONING THAT'S IN PLACE. A LOT OF PLANO CITIZENS, INCLUDING ESPECIALLY THOSE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS SITE HAVE EXPRESSED LEGITIMATE CONCERNS OF THIS PROJECT AS PROPOSED AND HOW IT WILL AFFECT THE COMMUNITY. AND IF YOU READ THE LETTERS FROM THE CITIZENS -- AND I READ EVERY SINGLE ONE AND SOME OF THEM WERE A FORM LETTER BUT A LOT OF THEM HAD COMMENTS IN IT, REGARDLESS. AND I DID THAT THIS WEEKEND. MANY TALK ABOUT NEIGHBORS MOVING DUE TO INCREASED CROWDING IN PLANO AND MAN MORE ARE TALKING ABOUT MOVING THEMSELVES. THAT'S NOT IDEAL FOR PLANO. WHEN THE CITY'S CHANGING TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE FEEL THEY HAVE TO MOVE. THEIR CONCERNS INCLUDE DENSITY, THE EFFECT ON THEIR SCHOOLS, STRAINS ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND WHAT THE PROJECT WILL LOOK LIKE ULTIMATELY IN THE END. MANY CITIZENS EXPRESS CONCERN THAT THE CITY GOVERNMENT IS MORE FAVORABLE TO DEVELOPERS THAN ITS CITIZENS AND THEIR CONCERNS. AND -- [APPLAUSE] I PERSONALLY DON'T BELIEVE THAT BUT THE CITIZENS EXPRESSED THAT. AND IF THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED AS SUBMITTED, I FEAR MANY PLANO CITIZENS WILL SEE THIS AS FURTHER PROOF OF THEIR CONCERNS AND WE'VE ALL HEARD THE SAYING PERCEPTION'S REALITY. TO ME, THAT'S AN ISSUE. MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE THIS PROPERTY WILL BE BEST DEVELOPED SIMILAR TO AVIGNON. THERE'S DEMAND FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN PLANO AND THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS WHO HAVE COMMENTED AND THEIR CONCERNS DEMAND I THINK WE GIVE THIS SERIOUS THOUGHT TO THEIR PERSPECTIVE WHILE BEING GUIDED BY THE ZONING. ON P&Z WE'RE TO FOLLOW THE ZONING IN PLACE TO EVALUATE PROJECTS. THAT IS EVEN CLEARER AFTER TODAY, YOU KNOW, IN EARLIER SESSION. SO THE 1986 PLAN ON THIS PROJECT WAS FILED -- THAT THIS WAS FILED UNDER IN THE 2011 LAND USE DON'T ALLOW RESIDENTIAL ON THIS LAND. AND IT PRESCRIBES LOW-DENSITY OFFICES, WHICH LIMIT THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDING AS WELL. AND SO I THINK COMMISSIONER HORNE MAKES SOME VERY GOOD POINTS AND I'M TROUBLED BY THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE IN-PLACE ZONING ON THIS AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION TO THAT. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. >> Downs: THANK YOU. MR. STONE. >> Stone: I CAN'T SUPPORT HEARING THIS ISSUE TONIGHT. I HAVE A REAL PROBLEM WITH THE GREAT WALL OF PARKING GARAGES, THE GREAT WALL OF CHINA. I BELIEVE THE WEST END OF THIS TRACT NEEDS TO BE REDESIGNED AND FIND A WAY TO MAKE THOSE GIANT PARKING GARAGES EITHER HIDDEN OR GO AWAY. I'M TROUBLED WITH THE PARK THAT IS IN AN AREA THAT'S NOT CONVENIENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR WHICH IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED. I SUPPORT ALL OF COMMISSIONER HORNE'S COMMENTS. I'D LIKE TO GIVE THE DEVELOPER ANOTHER 30 DAYS TO REALLY WORK ON THIS, NOT JUST IN LITTLE PIECES LIKE WE'VE DONE WITH SOME OF THE CHANGES BUT I THINK SOME MAJOR CHANGES ARE NEEDED HERE. I BELIEVE 700 UNITS ARE TOO MANY FOTHIS TCT. I WOULD CONSIDER IT IF THERE WERE LESS. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY LESS BUT SOME LESS. SO THAT'S WHERE I AM TONIGHT. >> Downs: THANK YOU. SO I WOULD ASK AGAIN -- >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION SO WE CAN VOTE ON THE TABLING. SO I'LL SECOND COMMISSIONER SAMARA'S MOTION, WHICH WE CAN THEN VOTE ON, WHICH HE'S DENIED TO TABLE IT. >> Downs: OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DENY THE REQUEST TO TABLE. PLEASE VOTE. KEEP IN MIND, A VOTE YES MEANS YOU'RE DENYING THE TABLING. A VOTE NO MEANS THE MOTION DOES NOT PASS. AND THAT VOTE FAILS 5-2. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO TABLE TO NOVEMBER 15th. >> I SECOND THAT MOTION. >> Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS TO TABLE ITEM 1A TO NOVEMBER 15th AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT VOTE CARRIES 6-1. WE NOW NEED A MOTION ON ITEM 1B. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE TABLE ITEM 1B TO THE NOVEMBER 15, 2021 MEETING. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO TABLE 1B TO NOVEMBER 15 AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT VOTE CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 6 WITH ONE ABSTENTION. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2021-023. REQUEST TO REZONE 8.2 ACRES LOCATED 605 FEET NORTH OF WINDHAVEN PARKWAY AND 820 FEET WEST OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-243-RE OFFICE TO GENERAL OFFICE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-243- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE. PROJECT APPLICANT: FOREFRONT LIVING PLANO INC. >> THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM IS REQUESTING IT TO BE TABLED TO THE NOVEMBER 15 MEETING . >> Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. HILL? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLICUBLICUBLI DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON ITEM 2? >> TWO OF THE SPEAKERS, MR. STEVE LEVINE AND COLLEEN AGUILAR EPSTEIN WERE REGISTERED BUT NOT IN ATTENDANCE. WE DID HAVE ONE, RUSSELL JONES. >> Downs: MR. JONES, ARE YOU HERE? >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS RUSSELL JONES AND I OFFICE AT 225 EAST JOHN CARPENTER FREEWAY IN IRVING, TEXAS. AND I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF GRAYSTONE, WHO IS THE DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT FOR THE APPLICANT FOREFRONT LIVING. THE FOREFRONT REQUEST IS CONTINGENT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE PREVIOUS ZONING REQUEST. SINCE THAT REQUEST HAS BEEN TABLED TO NOVEMBER 15th -- TO THE NOVEMBER 15th HEARING, FOREFRONT WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REQUEST BEING TABLED TO THAT SAME P&Z MEETING. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. >> Downs: DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. SAMARA? >> Samara: YES, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT RELATIONSHIP FOREFRONT HAS TO STILLWATER? >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP. WE'RE SEPARATE -- IT'S A SEPARATE OWNERSHIP AND A SEPARATE APPLICANT. WE'RE ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY BUT WE'RE NOT A PART OF THEIR ZONING REQUEST. >> Samara: CAN YOU TELL US WHAT RELATIONSHIP YOU HAVE TO HAGGARD PROPERTIES? >> WE'RE NOT -- FOREFRONT PURCHASED LAND FROM HAGGARD PROPERTIES BUT THEY ARE A SEPARATE ENTITY. >> Samara: THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> Downs: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO MORE SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE HAVE THREE THAT WERE -- THEIR REGISTERED OPINION IS IN OPPOSITION AND WE HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS IN SUPPORT. >> Downs: CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COISSI. DISCUSSIONS TOHE >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE AGENDA ITEM NO. 2, CASE NO. 2021-023 TO THE NOVEMBER 15 MEETING. >> SECOND. >> Downs: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NOVEMBER 15th MEETING WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STONE. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> THIS IS A TWO-PIECE PROJECT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3A PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2021-019. REQUEST TO REZONE 21.9 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PREMIER DRIVE, 1,627 FEET NORTH OF RUISSEAU DRIVE FROM PLANNED RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE AND CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED RESIDENC ATTACHED. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-446- RETAIL/GENERAL OFFICE AND CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3B. CONCEPT PLAN: THUNDERBIRD PARK ADDITION, BLOCK A-E - 146 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDEN ATTACHED LOTS AND 11 COMMON ARE LOTS ON 21.9 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PREMIER DRIVE, 1,627 FEET NORTH OF RUISSEAU DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMEN OFFICE AND CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. APPLICANT: RMP PARKER/CENTRAL, . >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DONNA FALLETTA. I'M A PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A REQUEST TO REZONING 21.9 ACRES FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 446 RETAIL GENERAL OFFICE IN CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL 2 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ATTACHED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON THE NORTH. COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND VACANT LAND ON THE EAST. HOTELS, INDEPENDENT LIVING, MULTIFAMILY, AND PATIO HOMES ON THE SOUTH. AND RESIDENTIAL, A DAY CARE, AND OFFICE ON THE WEST. A CONCEPT PLAN SHOWING THE PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ATTACHED DEVELOPMENT ACCOMPANIES THE ZONING CASE. IT IS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. THE CURRENT COMMERCIAL ZONING DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THIS AREA. THE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS RESIDENTIAL. THE DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE INTERIM AMENDMENT LAND USE POLICIES IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT POLICIES. LASTLY, DEVELOPMENT OF SFA LOTS MAY FIT THE HOUSING PRIORITIES OF THE CITY BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE HOUSING TRENDS IN STRATEGIC PLANS REPORT. THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS GENERALLY NOT RECOMMENDED WITHIN 1200 FEET OF AN EXPRESSWAY. FACTORS INCLUDING TOPOGRAPHY, CREEKS VEGETATION AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN APPLYING THIS STANDARD. THERE ARE5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS PROPOSED WITHIN THE 1200-FOOT SETBACK AREA. THERE ARE EXISTING RESIDENTS TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED WITHIN THE 1200-FOOT SETBACK. RESIDENTS WILL PARTIALLY BE BUFFERED FROM THE EXPRESS WAY BY HOTELS VEGETATION AND DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF PREMIER. TO PROVIDE FURTHER PROTECTION FROM 75, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MINIMUM 100-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE EDGE ALONG PREMIER ALONG THE EASEMENT. E INTUITION DEVELOPMENT ARE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A BUFFER FROM THE RESIDENTS FROM U.S. HIGHWAY 75. THERE ARE A FEW ISSUES THAT SURROUND THIS ZONING CASE, INCLUDING THE FLOODPLAIN AND BLOCK LINKS. FIRST A LARGE PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN. A FLOOD STUDY IS NOT REQUIRED WITH IN ZONING REQUEST HOWEVER THE APPLICANT HAS DISCUSSED THE FLOODPLAIN CONDITIONS WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A NEW FLOOD STUDY TO VERIFY THE IMPACTS OF THE FLOODPLAIN. NEXT, THERE ARE TWO EXISTING FOUR-STORY HOTELS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES HEIGHT SETBACKS FOR BUILDINGS IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WHEN CONSTRUCTED IN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. THE PROPOSED SFA ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARY WOULD MAKE THE HOTEL LOTS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE HEIGHT SETBACK REQUIREMENT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PD STIPULATION TO ENSURE THE HOTEL LOTS REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE. RUING ALONG THE SUBJECTOCK A PROPERTY'S SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE IS APPROXIMATELY 1900 FEET LONG. HOWEVER, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE STATES THAT BLOCK LINKS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS MUST NOT EXCEED 1200 FEET. THE DEVELOPMENT MEETS THIS REQUIREMENT IN ALL OTHER AREAS ON THE PLAN EXCEPT THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT TO A STREET TO THE SOUTH DUE TO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS . THE APPLICANT IS ADDING A PD STIPULATION TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AND STAFF IS IN ISSUE. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THAT. RECEIVED SEVEN RESPONSES WITHIN THUFFE THREE ARE IN SUPPORT AND FOUR ARE IN OPPOSITION. WE RECEIVED 70 UNIQUE RESPONSES OVERALL, 8 IN SUPPORT, 2 NEUTRAL, 60 IN OPPOSITION. WE RECEIVED 11 DUPLICATE RESPONSES FOR A TOTAL OF 81 RESPONSES. THIS IS A MAP OF ALL RESPONSES CITYWIDE. THE ZONING CASE IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE PD STIPULATIONS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN AND IN YOUR PACKET. AND THE CONCEPT PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE 2021-019, AND APPROVAL OF A FLOOD STUDY. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER HORNE FIRST, THEN COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Horne: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THIS. I LOOK AT THIS DRAWING OF THIS AND I SEE IT'S RIGHT -- WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BOWMAN BRANCH FLOOD WAY AND THEY WANT TO PUT HOUSING ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT FLOODWAY? HAVE WE -- HAS THE DEVELOPER OR THE CITY WORKED WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR A 404 PERMIT? AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THIS TRYING TO PUT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIDDLE OF A FLOODPLAIN? >> THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THEY FEEL CONFIDENT A FLOOD STUDY WILL ALLOW HOMESERE. D THE ALICANT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK FURTHER TO THEIR FLOOD STUDY RESEARCH. >> Horne: DID THEY HAVE TO GET, LIKE, A CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT ON THIS? BECAUSE AGAIN, I'M SEEING TYPICALLY WITH FLOODPLAINS, BECAUSE OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT, YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH SOMETHING TO GET THAT MITIGATED SOMEHOW. >> I KNOW A FLOOD STUDY WILL HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED TO ENGINEERING. OTHER REQUIREMENTS? >> THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY PROVIDE DETAILS. THEY HAVE REVIEWED IT EXTENSIVELY WITH OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THEY'RE AWARE THEY HAVE TO DO A FLOOD STUDY. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT CORPS PERMITS OR OTHER PERMITS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PLAN IF THEY WEREN'T FAIRLY CONFIDENT THEY COULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S STORM WATER REGULATIONS, SO I'M SURE THEY CAN PROVIDE MORE DETAILS, BUT AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT THEY CAN MEET IT. ENGINEERING WAS HOPING THEY'D SUBMIT A FLOOD STUDY PRIOR TO THIS SO WE'D HAVE ADDITIONAL DETAILS. I THINK THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON THAT. WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED IT YET. THAT'S WHY WE MADE THE CONCEPT PLAN CONDITIONAL TO THE FLOOD STUDY. >> Horne: THIS IS A CONDITIONAL SITE PLAN? >> CORRECT. >> Horne: CONCEPTUAL, MAYBE. ALL RIGHT. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: MY MAGNIFYING CLASSES FAIL ME -- GLASSES FAIL ME. CAN YOU TELL US THE TYPICAL LOT DE-MENTIONS? I JUST CAN'T MAKE THEM OUT HERE. >> YES. LET ME PULL THAT UP. >> Stone: IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE ALL PRETTY STANDARD. >> THEY DO MEET OUR SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED STANDARD REQUIREMENTS IN THE CITY, SO THEY'RE NOT VARYING THE LOT WITH THEIR DEPTH OR ANY OTHER -- >> Stone: I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS. >> YES, SIR. >> THERE IS A STANDARD DRAWING, IF YOU LOOK IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER OF THE CONCEPT PLAN, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO SEE LARGER DIMENSIONS THERE. >> MOST LOTS ARE ABOUT 25 FEET L- >> Stone: 25 x 90. I DO SEE THAT UP THERE, YES. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. JUST CONTINUING ON THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE FLOOD STUDY, THIS AREA IS HEAVILY WOODED. WE'RE GOING TO BE CHOPPING DOWN LOTS OF TREES TO PUT THESE HOUSES IN HERE. THAT'S JUST AN OBSERVATION. THANK YOU. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER WALTERS. >> Walters: DID YOU CONFIRM THE NUMBER OF UNITS BEING PLANNED? VEEEN FERENCE TO A COUPLE DIFFERENT NUMBERS. >> 146 LOTS WITH 11 COMMON AREA LOTS. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: ARE YOU DONE? COMMISSIONER WALTERS IS DONE? >> Chair Barbera: SHE'S DONE. >> Cary: ON PAGE 5, SOMETHING THAT IS CAUSING ME A LITTLE CONFUSION, PS45 TALKS ABOUT RESIDENTIAL SHOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED UNLESS IT'S VERY UNLIKELY THAT COMMERCIAL WOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED. AND IT SUGGESTS THAT THE NONRESIDENTIAL IS UNLIKELY TO OCCUR AND IT CITES FARTHER DOWN DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. I'M BACK TO WHERE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE. WE'LL WAIT FOR THIS FLOOD PLAN STUDY. BUT MY FIRST QUESTION IS, I GUESS YOU HAVE ASCERTAINED THAT IT'S UNLIKELY THAT COMMERCIAL GOES HERE. AND IS IT BECAUSE OF THE DRAINAGE? WOULDN'T THAT EXACERBATE THE PROBLEM WITH THE HOMES? I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED, HONESTLY. >> YEAH, I THINK WE WERE TRYING TO POINT OUT A COUPLE THINGS HERE. FIRST OF ALL, THE POLICY THAT YOU REFER TO REALLY PROVIDES YOU SOME GUIDANCE ON -- WE'RE NOT LOOKING SOLELY TO A DEVELOPER'S WISHES AS FAR AS ZONING, BUT THERE SHOULD BE EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION THAT PROVIDES YOU THAT NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MAY NOT OCCUR ON THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHAT THE POLICY IS SAYING. WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT POLICY, AS YOU CAN TELL, THIS IS A UNIQUE PROPERTY. THE GEOGRAPHY IS STRANGE. THE TOPOGRAPHY IS CHALLENGING. IT HAS MULTIPLE FRONTAGES ON DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE STREET. IT IS SITUATED BETWEEN A VARIETY OF USES. IT HAS A CONNECTION TO RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTH, ADJACENT TO AGRICULTURAL LAND AND RETIREMENT HOUSING AND SO, I THINK YOU CAN ALMOST THROW A DART AND HIT A TON OF CONDITIONS ON THIS PROPERTY. SO I THINK WE THOUGHT THAT IT WAS MORE LIKELY THAT RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE APPROPRIATE HERE THAN COMMERCIAL, BECAUSE OF THESE CONDITIONS. I THINK WE WOULD NOT SAY THAT COMMERCIAL IS NOT NABLE HERE. IT COULD DEVELOP, BUT IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY CHALLENGING. >> Cary: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY TWO CENTS, WE'RE TALKING HERE FREQUENTLY ABOUT HOUSING AND THE NEED FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND SO THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT COIN IS THIS VERY WELL MAY PROVIDE SOME OF THAT IF WE CAN RESOLVE SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES. SO THANKS. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. SEEING NONE, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> HELLO, I'M PHILIP, 8200 DOUGLAS AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS. THIS IS MY NEPHEW, COLIN. THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME. WE'RE THE APPLICANTS. AND IN GENERAL, I'VE GOT SOME SLIDES, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE. WE'VE BEEN IN THE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS FOR THE LAST 35 YEARS. WE MAINLY BUILD MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES AND THOSE USUALLY HAVE ANYWHERE FROM 1500 TO 2500 HOMESITES IN THEM. SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I KNOW THE BROKER AND HE SHOWED US THIS SITE BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF FAMILIARITY WITH FLOODPLAIN RECLAMATION, WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS. WE USUALLY DON'T DEAL WITH SMALL SITES AND REZONING. I SAID WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT. WE DID, DROVE OUT THERE, COLIN AND I LOOKED AT IT ON THE MAP AND SAID THIS IS A COMMERCIAL TRACT SANDWICHED BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL. AND IT'S GOT THIS GIANT CREEK IN IT. NOT GIANT, BUT A NICE-SIZED CREEK. THE OWNER.YEARS WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEER AND GOT A PERMIT TO CHANNEL OUT THE CREEK. WHEN COLIN AND I LOOKED AT IT WE SAID THAT'S NOT THE BEST USE FOR THIS PROPERTY, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A COMMERCIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA. WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT CREEK CONCRETE. I SAID COLIN, YOUR JOB IS TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE THIS RESIDENTIAL AND MAKE IT WORK FINANCIALLY. AND HE HAS. HE CAME UP WITH THIS TOWN HOME CONCEPT WHICH IS EXCELLENT. SO THERE'S A FLOOD STUDY ALREADY DONE MANY YEARS AGO, AND SOMETHING HAS ALREADY BEEN ISSUED, BUT THAT WAS WITH THE 404 PERMIT TO MAKE IT ALL CONCRETE-LINED. WE HAVE A FEW SLIDES HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THEM, BUT I THINK EVERYBODY IS FAMILIAR WITH THE CONCRETE-LINED CHANNEL AND HOW THAT CUTS DOWN ALL THE TREES. THERE COULD BE EROSION, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, START SLIDESHOW. THOSE ARE PRETTY GOOD. HANG ON. THIS IS SOME OF OUR ENTRY FEATURES IN OUR COMMUNITIES. THEY'RE IN THE SUBURBS. SO WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME, AND A LOT OF THE DETAILS FROM THE SIDEWALKS, THAT'S A PEDESTRIAN THERE. THESE ARE 50-FOOT TALL, BACK LIT AT NIGHT, WE CUSTOM DESIGNED. THIS IS IN ARLINGTON. THESE ARE IN WYLIE. THAT'S AN ART FEATURE THAT WE PUT IN THE COMMUNITIES. THIS IS AN AGE-RESTRICTED AREA. THE HOMEOWNERS CHOSE THE FROG WITH THE COCKTAILS. THESE ARE THE AMENITY CENTERS, SWIMMING POOLS, WATER SLIDES. WE FOCUS ON HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH THIS COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE. THAT'S A SOCIAL FABRIC. THAT'S WHAT WE FOCUS ON, TO PROMOTE THE WEAVING OF FAMILY AND NEIGHBORHOODS TOGETHER TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT RICH IN CULTURE AND A LIFESTYLE FULL OF FUN AND MEMORIES. WE CALL IT VALUE ENHANCEMENT, OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, CITIES CALL IT CODE ENFORCEMENT. WE LIKE TO CONSIDER IT ENHANCING THE VALUE OF THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE SOCIAL PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES, FOURTH OF JULY, EASTER, CHRISTMAS FUNCTIONS, FISHING. AND WHAT DO WE DO BETTER? EVERYTHING. [ LAUGHING ] NO ONE IS LAUGHING TONIGHT. ITEM 1 AND 2 GOT EVERYBODY DOWN. WE'LL HAVE -- THESE ARE NEIGHBORHOOD -- IN THE COMMUNITY OF INSPIRATION, NEIGHBORHOOD SOONAGE, ALL BACK -- SIGNAGE, ALL BACK LIT. WE GO ON A THEME, HARMONY, HOPE, SUCCESS. WE EVEN HAVE CUSTOM MANHOLES. WE BUILT ELEVATED STORAGE, LAKES, UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE. THIS IS A TYPICAL -- NOT IN PLANO, BUT IN SOME CITIES, TYPICAL FENCING. WE HAVE SPECIAL FENCING, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, WE PUT SHRUBS ON ALL THE FENCES, BOARD ON BOARD, STONE COLUMNS. WE ALSO HAVE MAILBOXES AND STONE, CAST STONE ADDRESS BOXES. NOW I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO COLIN TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE ARCHITECTURE THAT WOULD OCCUR HERE ON THESE TOWN HOMES. >> GOOD EVENING. AS YOU SEE, WE ARE OFFERING A FRFRONTFRFRONTENTRY. WE HAVE SEVERAL BUILDERS VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN THE SITE. THE THREE OR FOUR PICTURES FORTHCOMING ARE SUBMITTED BY POTENTIAL BUILDERS. AT THE PRESENT WE DO NOT HAVE ONE SELECTED OR CONTRACTED WITH. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE INTERESTED IN APPLYING -- CONFORMING TO THE DESIGN CRITERIA THE CITY OF PLANO MAY HAVE. WE HAVE A MASONRY PROGRAM AND A STONE ONE AT THE TOP. IT'S BASICALLY THE UNIT ORIENTATION WILL BE FOUR AND SIX-UNIT ORIENTATIONS PER BLOCK. I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD TO EXAMPLES OF AMENDING THE ORIGINAL CREEKWAY. THIS IS OUR SITE GREEN SPACE PROGRAM. WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE 10% GREEN SPACE OR OPEN SPACE NOT INCLUDING THE FLOODWAY. WE'VE BROKEN UP THE BLOCKS IN POCKET PARKS. WE OVER- AMENITIZE EVERYTHING. WE WILL PROGRAM EACH ONE OF THESE PARKS FOR DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE ON 75, ON THE SAME BRANCH OF THE CREEK THAT'S FURTHER UPSTREAM THAT IS CHANNEZED,ND YOU C S THE VEGETATION IS DECIMATED. WE ARE NOT MOVING TOWARDS THIS PROGRAM, THIS CONCRETE WASHOUT PROGRAM IS NOT IN OUR PLAN AT ALL. >> IT'S ALREADY APPROVED. >> BUT AS THE 404 PERMIT ON-SITE, IT DOES PERMIT FOR THIS CHANNELIZATION AND CULVERTIZATION. HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM K AVENUE AND THE BROWN BRANCH CREEK. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF COMMERCIAL APPLICATION RIGHT ON TOP OF THE CREEK. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS WORK AROUND THE CREEK, WITH THE CREEK, TO POSSIBLY ADD GREEN SPACE EVEN THOUGH IT WON'T BE AMENITIZED. HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DRIVE. HERE'S ANOTHER AERIAL VIEW OF COUNTRY PLACE DRIVE AT WINTERTIME. AGAIN, THIS IS RIDGE DRIVE, SPRING CREEK CROSSING, AND DEERFIELD, SIDEWALKS ON THE SIDE, KIND OF ENHANCED VIEW OF PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. AND THEN THIS IS KIND OF WHAT THE ANGLE WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM THE CREEK LOOKING UP. YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS HERE IN PLANO. WE'D BE BASICALLY HAVING TWO CROSSINGS, ACCORDING TO OUR SITE PLAN. WE TRY TO MINIMIZE THOSE BUT FOR FIRE AND ACCESS, AFTER A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF, WE DETERMINED IT WAS NECESSARY TO HAVE TWO CROSSINGS OVER THE CREEK. WE ARE LOOKING INTO THE FLOOD STUDY. IT DOES TAKE TIME TO GET THAT DONE. THIS SITE MAY MOVE AROUND HERE AND THERE TO MEET AND FIT WITHIN THE FLOODWAY. >> THE REASON ANOTHER FLOOD STUDY IS NECESSARY IS BECAUSE THE CHANNELIZATION WILL NOT OCCUR IF WE DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, SO IT HAS TO BE RESTUDIED. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER HORNE, AND THEN COMMISSIONER SAMARA. >> Horne: THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE 404 PERMIT AND THE CHANNELIZATION. I'M GLAD YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GO WITH THE CONCRETE CULVERT. WE HAVE TOO MANY OF THOSE. BUT I'M STILL CONCERNED WITH BUILDING THESE QUAD PLACES. I LIKED THE LAYOUT IN THE EARLIER PICTURE. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO MITIGATE POTENTIAL FLOODS THAT OCCUR DURING THE HUNDRED-YEAR FLOODS. WE'VE SEEP SOME HEAVY RAINS OVER THE PAST COUPLE YEARS. THAT PROBABLY COULD BE CASE IN POINT IN FUTURE YEARS. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED PUTTING SSINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENCES TO A CREEK THAT COULD BECOME A CLASS FOUR RIVER. HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO TO MITIGATE TOES TYPE OF CONDITIONS? >> YES, SIR. THAT'S AN ENGINEERING QUESTION AND WE WOULD ADHERE TO ALL OF THE CITY OF PLANO ENGINRING STANDARDS, FEMA STANDARDS. THE ENGINEER IS HE. IHERE.I DON'T KNOW IF SHE WANTSO ADDRESS THAT. WE WILL MAKE SURE WE ADHERE TO ALL THE STANDARDS. PLANO IS PROBABLY TWO FEET ABOVE ELEVATION, MOST CITIES ARE THE SAME, TWO FEET ABOVE THE HUNDRED-YEAR FOR ALL FINISHED FLOORS. ALL OF THAT WOULD BE STUDIED AND ADDRESSED. >> AS WELL, THE APPROVAL IS CONDITIONAL ON THE FLOOD STUDY, SO WE WON'T BE MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY PROPOSAL WITHOUT THE FLOOD STUDYEING CONRMED AND OUTLINED, COMPLETELY DELINEATED. >> Horne: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER SAMARA. >> Samara: YEAH. MY THOUGHT IS IF YOU WERE TO HAVE AN ADVERSE FINDING FROM YOUR ENGINEERS, COULD YOU NOT TAKE JUST A FEW UNITS OFF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND STILL GO FORWARD WITH IT IF IT IN FACT PROVES TO BE TOO CLOSE OR THE GROUND IS NOT STABLE ENOUGH? WOULD THOSE BE ISSUES THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED THAT YOU ARE STILL NOT KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT AT THIS POINT? >> I THINK WE'RE PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH THE UNIT COUNT BEING THE WA WAY IT IS, BUT WE WOULD AMEND THE LOCATION OF THE UNITS WITHIN THE FLOODWAY AS IT BECOMES DELINEATED. >> Stone: IT LOOKS LIKE AN úEASYS THE ISSUES WERE RAISED, IF YOU GOT SOME PROBLEM WITH VIABILITY. >> Samara: WE HAVE A SIMILAR CREEK NEAR WHERE I LIVE, AND THE CITY HAS COME IN AND MADE IT VERY, VERY DEEP, CHANNELIZATION OF IT. SO OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S ABOUT IT. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES, YOU HAVE A VERY INTERESTING PROJECT HERE. A COUPLE OF QUICK COMMENTS. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEARLY 2,000-FOOT LONG STRAIGHT STREET RUNNING EAST AND WEST. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME VARIATION IN SETBACKS ON SOME OF A THIRD DIMENSION GOING RATHER THAN THIS LONG STREET. I'D EVEN LIKE TO SEE THE STREET MAYBE BE A MEANDERING STREET. PERHAPS THE LOTS ARE NOT ALL THE SAME SIZE. PERHAPS THERE ARE SOME LARGER UNITS HERE AND THERE. I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER A CONNECTOR BETWEEN THE TWO EAST-WEST STREETS, A NORTH-SOUTH CONNECTOR RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN THERE TO GIVE THE RESIDENCE ON THE NORTH SIDE A LITTLE BETTER TO GET OUT IN THE MORNING AND COME IN IN THE EVENING. OBVIOUSLY IT'S GOING TO MEAN GIVING UP A FEW UNITS. I'D LIKE TO SEE A FEW LESS UNITS AND HAVE A BETTER VARIETY IN FACADE AND STREET PATTERN, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN MAKE THAT WORK. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON ANY OF THAT? >> YES. WE DO HAVE A DENSITY TO HIT, A DENSITY THRESHOLD AND THAT'S TEN UNITS PER THE SFA REQUIREMENTS PER ACRE. SO, IF WE DID TAKE AWAY UNITS THAT WOULD IACTHAT. SO WE HAVE TO BE CONSCIENTIOUS OF THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS THROUGH OUR PETITION, BUT REALIGNING THE ROAD, THAT'S A AA STUDY MOSTLY. >> Stone: I FEEL LIKE A THOUSAND-FOOT-LONG TUNNEL WITH HOMES ON BOTH SIDES ALSO UNIFORM SETBACK IS VISUALLY -- I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE PLEASANT. >> YES, SIR. WELL, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE THAT. MOST OF OUR COMMUNITIES WE DO MEANDER AND WE HAVE STANDARDS THAT REQUIRE THAT. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR SITE, AS HU. CAN SEE, THE CONSTRAINTS ARE >> Sne: S, TY ARE. >> AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THESE LOTS ARE ONLY ABOUT 90 TO 100 FEET DEEP AS IT IS. AND SO TO MEANDER THE STREET OR SETBACK, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THERE AT ALL. WE DID OFFSET IT. THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY HAS TWO CROSSINGS SO IT CAN GET TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND WHEN WE CAME IN FROM THE EAST, WE ALSO JOGGED THE ROAD TO THE SOUTH, DUE TO FLOODPLAIN, AND TO OTHER ISSUES SO THAT THE SIGHT LINE, WHEN YOU COME IN THE ROAD FROM THE EAST, IT IS NOT LOOKING AT HOUSES. IT'S LOOKING AT THE GREEN BELT. SO WE DID TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BUT THE SITE IS SO CONSTRAINED WITH KEEPING THE CREEK. IF WE CHANNELED OUT THE CREEK WE COULD DO MORE OF THAT. >> Stone: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Chair Barbera: ANYONE ELSE FROM THE COMMISSION? I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, PERHAPS UNRELATED TO ANY KIND OF ZONING DECISION, BUT BASED ON SOMETHING COMMISSIONER CARY BROUGHT UP AND SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED EARLIER AS WELL. WHAT IS YOUR PRICE POINT ON THESE ITEMS? >> PRICE POINT? >> Chair Barbera: YEAH. >> YES, SIR. THEY'LL BE PROBABLY IN THE 375 TO 475 RANGE, MAYBE HIGHER. >> Chair Barbera: OKAY. SO THEY'RE NOT REALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THEY'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO MEET THE NEEDS TO THE CITY HAS FOR ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS ANYMORE. I MEAN, THE AVERAGE SALES PRICE OF A NEW HOME ANYWHERE IS OVER $300,000. >> Chair Barbera: UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. BUT YOUR TARGET FOR THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE YOUNG FAMILIES, I THINK. SQUAREOOTA O A PROPERTY? >> THESE ARE PROBABLY 1500 TO 2100 2,000. >> Chair Barbera: OKAY. SO, SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER STONE,, I HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN ABOUT THIS BEING A FRONT ENDRY FOR YOUNG FAMILIES WITH YOUNG KIDS PLAYING ON A STRAIGHT STREET WHERE SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BE IN A HURRY TRYING TO GET TO OR FROM WORK. SO I HAVE SOME CONCERNS THERE, BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THE SHAPE OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT, CHALLENGING ITEM. SO, WITH THAT SAID, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, OR FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS? >> WE DO. MR. DALLAS HAYDEN. WHILE HE COMES DOWN, CAN I HAVE SEAN HAYDEN, JOHN STAFFORD, RAVI BENSON, AND MARY FRANCIS POSTON. >> Chair Barbera: IF YOU COULD COME TO THE FRONT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US MOVING THIS ALONG. THANK YOU. MR. HAYDEN, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS DALLAS HAYDEN, FROM HAYDE REALITY, 5509 PLEASANT VALLEY DRIVE SUITE 700. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. SO, OUR COMPANY WOULD LOVE TO SUPPORT THIS AS LONG AS THE APPLICANT'S ROAD IS PLACED FAR ENOUGH SOUTH TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH OUR PLANNED SECOND ROAD ACCESS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALMA DRIVE. WE OWN 3920 ALMA DRIVE. IT'S THE TRY ANGULAR OFFICE BUILDING, JUST NORTH. YOU CAN SEE IT RIGHT HERE. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY SINCE AROUND 2017 TO ADD A SECO ACCESS. THIS SITE IS PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT. IT PROBABLY HAS THE WORST ROAD ACCESS OF ANY OFFICE IN THE CITY. IT'S ONLY FROM THE NORTHBOUND LANE OF ELMA DRIVE. THAT WAS RECOGNIZED BY THE CITY AS EARLY AS 1981 AND MULTIPLE TIMES THEREAFTER. SO WE BEGAN WORKING ON THAT IN 2017. WE'VE SUBMITTED A SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMING SITE PLAN LAST WEEK. SO WE'RE ON THE SHOT CLOCK FOR A SECOND ENTRANCE ON THAT SOUTHEAST CORNER. THAT'S CRITICAL FOR THE VIABILITY OF OUR OFFICE AND FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PATIENTS. AND RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE THE CURRENT PROPOSAL, WHICH IS IN ORANGE HERE, IN THE CONCEPT, IS ONLY 45 FEET AWAY FROM WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING THE SECOND ENTRANCE AND REALLY THE ONLY VIABLE PLACE TO HAVE A SECOND ENTRANCE ON OUR PROPERTY. SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND, AS SOME OTHER PEOPLE HAVE DISCUSSED, HAVING PERHAPS A MEANDER NORTH. PERHAPS THE ROAD CAN MEANDER DOWN HERE. WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE SITE FOR A LONG TIME. THE PROBLEM WITH THEIR SITE IS IT'S ISOLATED, 2500 FEET FROM THE NEAREST COMMERCIAL CENTER, SO WE'RE HEAVILY RELIANT ON CAR TRAFFIC AND WE NEED ALL THE PARKING SPACE POSSIBLE TO STAY VIABLE AND ECONOMICALLY COMPETITIVE IN THIS TOUGH MARKETPLACE ESPECIALLY YOU KNOW, WITH COVID CHANGES, WITH OFFICES. SO AGAIN, IF THAT ACCESS IS PLACED TOO FAR NORTH, IT MAY CAUSE A HAZARD FOR PATIENTS TRYING TO GET IN AND GET OUT OF OUR OFFICE. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, AGAIN, THERE'S ONLY ONE CUT HERE. THERE ARE MAJOR SIGHT LINE PROBLEMS, GRADING ISSUES. WE HAVE A CANAL HERE. YOU KNOW. SO YOU CAN ONLY GET IN GOING NORTHBOUND ON ALMA DRIVE. ALL THE PEOPLE RUNNING SOUTH HAVE TO MAKE A U-TURN ACROSS BEND. THERE'S CURRENTLY NO WAY TO GET IN. IF THIS CONCEPT GOES THROUG- >> MR. HAYDEN, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS. >> AS PROPOSED, IT MAY CAUSE SERIOUS ISSUES FOR OUR OFFICE. SO, AGAIN, WE'RE OPPOSED TO THE CONCEPT AS IT SITS. WE WOULD LOVE TO BE IN SUPPORT IF THERE WAS A WAY TO MOVE IT DOWN SO WE COULD FIT OUR CRITICAL VIABLE ACCESS POINT IN HERE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. HANG ON ONE SECOND, PLEASE. >> WE'D LOVE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT. SPECIFICALLY, ANTWON DRIVE TO THE SOUTH, THE CITY ASKED THEM TO LOCATE THEIR DRIVE THAT WAY, THE CITY'S TRAFFIC ENGINEERS, BECAUSE OF THE BLIND CURVE THAT'S COMING FROM THE SOUTH FROM ANTON DRIVE. SO, THERE ARE GOING TO BE CONCERNS ABOUT MOVING THE DRIVE SOUTH. SO, WE'D BE GLAD TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. >> NEXT IS SEAN. >> YEAH, THANK YOU, SEAN HAYDEN, 5124 MARBLE FALLS LANE, PLANO, A MEMBER OF HAYDEN REALTY, OWNING THE PROPERTY. I'M A SURGEON, SOMETIMES MY NIGHT JOB IS ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON, AS WELL. JUST TO FOLLOW DALLAS' COMMENTS, OUR CONCERN WITH THE PROPERTY -- I'LL JUST PUT THE SAME DOCUMENT UP HERE AGAIN -- IS THE SAFETY FOR THE PATIENTS. ACCESS -- THIS IS REALLY THE BEST LOCATION FOR THE CUT INTO THE PROPERTY. THIS IS WHAT THE CITY HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR MANY YEARS. MOVING IT FURTHER NORTH WOULD ACTUALLY ENTER INTO THE PARKING AREA AND THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS IS ALREADY SOMEWHAT LIMITED WHEN THE BUILDING BECOMES ACTIVE. AND FOLKS COMING IN, IT WOULD BE PLACING SOME OF THE OTHER PATIENT CARS, ETC., AT RISK IN OUR OPINION. SO, I THINK DALLAS H MENTIONED THAT. AS A PATIENT SAFETY THING, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT. LET ME JUST SHOW YOU BRIEFLY. AND SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS ALREADY. BUT THE LOT GETS VERY FULL. THIS IS A PICTURE . . . MOVE THAT UP A LITTLE BIT. SO THAT'S A PICTURE OF THE PARKING. I THINK THIS WAS IN 2015 WHEN IT WAS OWNED BY THE MENTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE. SO -- AND THIS RIGHT HERE IS AN AREA, IF WE MOVE THE CUT FURTHER NORTH, WE LOSE A NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND IT'S ALREADY VERY CONGESTED THERE. AND THE FOLKS ENTERING WOULD BE ENTERING INTO THE PARKING LOT FACING OTHER PARKING SPACES, WHICH WE THINK IS A CONCERN FOR PATIENT SAFETY, SO. AGAIN, WE THINK THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE WAY IS A GOOD IDEA FOR RESIDENTIAL HOUSING. WE'D LIKE TO BE FOR IT. WE'RE NEUTRAL ON THE ZONING CHANGE AND AGAINST THE CONCEPT PLAN AS IT STANDS. >> Chair Barbera:THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >> NEXT IS JOHN STAFFORD. >> CAN YOU PUT THE SLIDE BACK UP THAT PHIL HAD FROM THE PRESENTATION? >> TELEVISION, PLEASE PUT THE SLIDES BACK UP. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. JOHN STAFFORD, 1401 HARVEST GLEN DRIVE, I LIVE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF ALMA FROM THIS PROPERTY AND WALK THROUGH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD A LOT. I HAVE FRIENDS THAT LIVE ON CAMBRIDGE DRIVE AND OTHER FRIENDS THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH OF THIS, AND THEIR BIG CONCERN IS WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO CAUSE FLOODING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND APPROVING THIS WITHOUT HAVING THE RESULTS OF THE FLOOD STUDY IS OF CONCERN TO MY FRIENDS THAT LIVE IN THE HOUSES ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THIS, BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE THEIR HOMES FLOODED BY ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING ON HERE. I HAVE A CONCERN JUST FROM -- AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS MAP, IEE 42 LOTS ON THIS. AS I WAS LOOKING AT THE PACKET THAT WAS ON THERE, I SAW DIFFERENT DESIGNS THAT WERE 140 TO 164 LOTS ON THIS SITE. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT THE DEVELOPER IS ACTUALLY PLANNING TO BUILD HERE, BECAUSE WHEN I SEE 42 HERE AND I SEE 164 IN THE PLOT, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON? WHAT'S REALLY GOING TO BE BUILT HERE? THAT'S CONFUSING AS FAR AS THE VOLUME IS GOING IN THIS AREA. SO. BUT I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO JUST TABLE TAKING ANY ACTION ON THIS UNTIL WE ACTUALLY KNOW THE RESULTS FROM THE FLOOD STUDY SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GET THAT BACK AND TAKE ACTION WITH ALL THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE NEED TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS. THANK YOU. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >> NEXT IS RAVI BENSON. >> HELLO, EVERYONE I LIVE AT 712 CAMBRIDGE DRIVE AT THE TOP SIDE OF THAT 1900-FOOT-LONG WALL OF 28-FOOT-TA HOUSES. THE HOUSES AS THEY'RE GOING TO STAND IF THEY DO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS BE SITUATED HIGH ENOUGH THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SEE DOWN INTO MY BACKYARD. I BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 2019 AND DIDN'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM AT THAT TIME. WE'RE PROPOSING NOW TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO ALLOW A DEVELOPER TO PUT THESE HOUSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PROBLEMATIC FOR ME IN A PLACE THAT THEY CAN GO FORWARD. I VERY MUCH MORE WOULD RATHER HAVE A BOUTIQUE SOFTWARE SHOP BACK THERE, OR MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER SINGLE-STORY COMMERCIAL THAT'S PROPOSED FOR THE ZONE AS IT STANDS TODAY, CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL, TO BE THE THING THAT WE GO FORWARD WITH. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT SAYS THE UNDEVELOPED LAND IN PLANO ISN'T NECESSARILY FOCUSED ON ADDING MORE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY NOT $400,000 PER UNIT, THREE-BEDROOM, TINY HOUSES FOR STARTER FOLKS MAKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR. THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT I THINK LINES UP WELL WITH THE COMMUNIT AROD IT. IT'S 1.5 TIMES MORE DENSE THAN THE COMMUNITY TO THE NORTH AND ABOUT 1.25 TIMES AS DENSE AS THE COMMUNITY TO THE SOUTH. WE'RE ADDING SIGNIFICANT DENSITY, WE'VE GOT A TRAFFIC PROBLEM FROM THE COMMERCIAL FOLKS AROUND HERE ALREADY. THE OUTPUT TO THUNDER BIRD COMES OUT ON TO CAMBRIDGE ON MY SIDE. IF I COME TO MY HOUSE FROM ALMA I HAVE 400 MORE CARS TAKING THAT SAME TURN AS ME. ON PREMIER, THE CURVE THAT WE'RE ON, ALREADY THERE WITH THE HOTEL HAS MULTIPLE COMPLICATIONS WITH LIGHTING AND ACCESS. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET INTO A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM WITH THAT ACCESS POINT AS WELL. I'VE TRIED TO TALK TO THE DEVELOPERS AROUND THIS. IT TOOK MONTHS TO HEAR BACK FROM ANYBODY. I THINK THE OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW ARE ON THE 404 THAT THE CITY DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT AND THE UNCOMMUNICATED COMPLEXITY OF THIS SITE. WE'VE ALL LOOKED AT THIS AND SEEN IT. WE INSTANTLY SAY THIS ISN'T RIGHT FOR WHAT IT'S BEING PROPOSED FOR. YOU NEED TO CHANGE SOMETHING. THEY'RE PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE ZONING. THE ZONING FOLKS SAY MAYBE FEMA TH FLOODPLAIN FOLKS ARE THE RIGHT ONES. THEY'RE ALREADY INVOLVED. NOW THE ARGUMENT THAT THIS CAN'T BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL IS KIND OF MOOT. I UNDERSTAND I HAVE 30 SECONDS. THANKS. THE THING I'M ASKING YOU TO DO TODAY IS DON'T MAKE ANY CHANGES. THERE'S NO REASON FOR US TO ADD ANY COMPLEXITY TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD, NO REASON FOR THESE FOLKS TO GET WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WITH REGARD TO A CLEAR PATH TO DESTROYING A GREENSPACE, CREATING FLOOD HAZARD AND CREATING MORE NOISE AND COMPLEXITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Chair Barber: THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. >> THANK YOU. NOW WE HAVE MARY. >> GOOD EVENING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM AN 11-YEAR RES RESIDENT ON CAMBRIDGE DRIVE, MY PARTNER OWNED OUR HOME THERE SINCE 2002. OUR PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. MY CONCERN IS FOR THE DISPLACEMENT OF THE WILDLIFE ALONG THEREEK AND CAREER LINE THAT WILL OCCUR DURING THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WOODS. THE LAND TO BE DEVELOPED -- EXCUSE ME -- LIES IN A FEMA FLOODPLAIN. THIS IS OF GREAT CONCERN WHEN OUR STREETS EXPERIENCE FLOODING AFTER THE ICE STORM LAST WINTER AND THE VERY RAINY SPRING WE HAD. ANOTHER ITEM OF CONCERN IS PRIVACY. THESE MULTILEVEL TOWN HOMES WILL HAVE DIRECT VIEWS INTO THE SOUTH-FACING WINDOWS AND BACKYARDS OF RESIDENTS ON CAMBRIDGE DRIVE. LASTLY, THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BRING WILL SURELY CLOG THE ALREADY-CONGESTED STREETS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED. I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE NO ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND FELLOW WESTGATE RESID RESIDENTS SO THAE MAY CONTINUE TO LOVE WHERE WE LIVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY MORE SPEAKERS? >> THERE ARE NOT. [ OFF MIC ] >> Chair Barbera: HAVE YOU FILLED OUT A CARD, SIR? >> I'VE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE. I THOUGHT YOU JUST SHOWED UP AND TALKED. I DIDN'T KNOW HOW THIS WORKED. >> Chair Bbera: GO AHEAD BUT MAKD BEFORE YOU LEAVE. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL VARGAS. I LIVE AT 820 CAMBRIDGE DRIVE. SO, MY HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE IN THIS AREA. THE GREEN BELT IS RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE. I MOVED HERE TO PLANO IN 1998 AND WAS LIVING IN APARTMENTS. AND THEN I DECIDED IN 2004 TO BUY A HOUSE. AND I WENT AROUND PLO WHY REA LOOKING AT PROPERTIES. AND WE LOOKED AT MANY BEFORE I CAME ACROSS THIS ONE THAT WAS FOR SALE. AND GOT OUT OF MY CAR AND WALKED AROUND THE BACK WITH THE REA. THE FIRST THING I SAW WAS THE GREEN BGREEN BELT. FANTASTIC, I KNEW THAT WAS THE ONE I WAS BUYING. MY WIFE SAYS WE HAVEN'T LOOKED INSIDE. I DON'T CARE WHAT IT LOOKS INSIDE. LOOK AT THIS. I SAID, THIS IS PRICELESS RIGHT HERE. I CAN'T BEGIN TO TELL YOU HOW MUCH, THAT'S PRICELESS TO ME THAT THERE'S NOBODY BACK THERE AND THERE'S ALREADY BEEN MANY CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THE FLOODS AND THE PRIVACY. LIKE, EVERY CONCERN I HAVE HAS BEEN ECHOED ALREADY. SO I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING MORE TO SAY ABOUT THAT. I AGREE WITH EVERYBODY THAT HAS THE SAME CONCERNS. ANYBODY THAT'S EVER COME OVER TO MY HOUSE, AS SOON AS THEY WALK IN THE BACKYARD THEY'RE LIKE, THIS IS FREAKING GREAT! YOU GOT LUCKY TO FIND THIS. I SAID YEAH, I DID. IT'S THE FACT THAT THIS COULD BE TAKEN AWAY FROM ME FRUSTRATES ME BEYOND BELIEF. I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT HAPPEN. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT CAN'T BE LEFT ALONE. I -- MY PROPERTY TAXES ARE ALREADY TOO HIGH. THIS IS GOING TO DO NOTHING TO HELP THAT. I DON'T SEE THEM GOING DOWN IF THIS GETS PUT IN. TO ME, THERE'S NO UPSIDE FOR ME AS A RESIDENT AND I HOPE THAT IT DOESN'T GET DONE. THANK YOU. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] >> Chair Barbera: MAKE SURE YOU GET WITH HER TO FILL OUT A CARD. >> WE HAVE NO OTHER ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS. WE DO HAVE ONE PERSON THAT REGISTERED IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT AND ONE THAT IS IN OPPOSITION -- ONE PERSON. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE DISCUSSION TO COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF? ARE WE MAKING A ZONING DECISION HERE, OR A FLOODPLAIN DECISION HERE? >> IT'S A ZONING DECISION IS ITEM 3A. THE CONCEPT PLAN IS ITEM 3. THERE WILL BE A FLOOD STUDY THAT WILL BE REQUIRED WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. AND WE'LL BE SUB SUBMITTING THAT BEFORE THEY CAN GET APPROVAL. THERE'S NO FLOOD STUDY REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED TO CONSIDER THE ZONING CASE OR CONCEPT PLAN. >> SO IF WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THE ZONING IS APPROPRIATE AS REQUESTED, THEN THAT DECISION CAN BE MADE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUE AND THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUE IS A FUNCTION OF WHAT CAN BE BUILT THERE OR NOT. THAT'S MORE OF AN ENGINEERING QUESTION. >> CORRECT. THE POLICY AND THE PLAN, REGARDING LAND USE, THAT IS THE FOCUS OF THE ZONING CASE. THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUES WILL BE DISCUSSED IN THE FUTURE. THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WILL REVIEW THOSE CLOSELY WITH THE APPLICANT. THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET ALL CITY REQUIREMENTS REGARDING MITIGATION FOR THE PROPERTY. THAT'S TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE FUTURE. >> THE THING I FIND INTERESTING IS THAT WE HAVE SUCH AN AMAZING CONTRAST TONIGHT BETWEEN A FIELD BECAUSE IT'S GOING -- THEY THINK IT'S GOING TO LOWER VALUES, AND ANOTHER TRACT OF LAND THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT BUILT ON BECAUSE THEY THINK IT'S GOING TO RAISE THEIR PROPERTY VALUES. WE CAN'T WIN. THE REALITY IS IF YOU EVER BUY A PIECE OF PROPERTY NEXT TO A VACANT FIELD, DO YOUR RESEARCH. IS IT OWNED BY THE CITY? IS IT EVE GNG TO BE POSSIBLY DEVELOPED? YOU CAN'T DENY PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO USE THEIR LAND JUST LIKE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE YOUR LAND. I JUST -- YOU -- THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE NOT READY TO WRITE A CHECK FOR THAT LAND. SO, I'M SYMPATHETIC. I WOULD LOVE IT IF I HAD BOUGHT MY HOUSE AND NOBODY EVER BUILT ANYTHING NEXT TO IT. THAT'S JUST NOT REALITY. AND I DON'T KNOW, I THINK TONIGHT IS SUCH AN INTERESTING DICHOTOMY. AND IN THE END, IT JUST MEANS THAT PEOPLE NER WANT ANY LAND THAT'S NOT ALREADY DEVELOPED TO BE DEVELOPED AS LONG AS IT'S NEXT TO THEIR HOUSE. BUT GUESS WHAT? YOUR HOUSE HAD TO BE DEVELOPED. YOUR OFFICE HAD TO BE DEVELOPED. SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE HAD THE SAME OPINION ABOUT WHERE YOU LIVE NOW. I DON'T KNOW. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER STONE. >> Stone: YES, I'D JUST LIKE TO OBSERVE THAT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING ON THIS PIECE OF DIRT SOMEDAY. IT MAY BE THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT MAY BE ANOTHER. BUT SOONER OR LATER SOMEONE WILL BUILD ON THIS. MR. HILL, I'M LOOKING AT YOUR MATERIAL HERE. AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 7, YOU RESTATE THAT A FLOOD STUDY IS NOT REQUIRED WITH THIS ZONING REQUEST. HOWEVER, IT IS POSSIBLE THE LAYOUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL NEED TO BE ADJUSTED DEPENDING ON I'M CONCERNED THAT THE FLOOD STUDY MIGHT BE PRETTY SEVERE AND THAT THIS SITE PLAN MAY CHANGE DRAMATICALLY. AND FRANKLY, IT MAY GET LESS DESIRABLE TO ME THAIT IS TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE TABLE THIS UNTIL THE FLOOD STUDY IS DONE. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> Chair Barbera: HANG ON A SECOND. SO THAT WASN'T REALLY DONE AS A MOTION. >> Stone: I KNOW. >> Chair Barbera: WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET. I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING. I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS, AND THEN WE CAN GO THAT DIRECTION. MR. SAMARA, PLEASE TURN YOUR MIC ON. >> Samara: CLOSE TO THE EXPRESSWAY. IT'S AN INFILL LOCATION. IT'S ONE THAT IS VERY REPLYNISTN'T OF A LOT OF OTHER PROJECTS WE'VE HAD TO LOOK AT. THOSE OF US THAT LIVE NEAR HERITAGE CREEKSIDE ALL FELT LIKE WE LIKED THE FIELD BETTER THAN WE LIKED WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD THERE EVENTUALLY, BUT EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE BUILT IN PLANO TO SOME EXTENT. AND THERE COULD BE OFFICE BUILT HERE, THREE-STORY OFFICE, COULDN'T THERE? I THINK THE RESIDENTS ARE CERTAINLY -- SHOULD BE SYMPATHETIC TO THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE A GREEN BELT, BUT PROBABLY THE HIGHEST USE AND THE BEST USE FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT WILL BE MOST COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH OUR CURRENT PROPERTY RATES, ARE GOING TO BE TOWN HOMES. WE'VE HAD SUCCESSES WITH RICE FIELDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY. WE'VE HAD SUCCESSES GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH HERITAGE CREEKSIDE WITH ATTACHED TOWN HOMES WHERE THEY BUILT MORE THAN THEY HAD PLANNED FOR. SO, I'M GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF THIS AND ALTHOUGH I WOULD ALWAYS DEFER TO COMMISSIONER STONE'S FORMER PROFOUND KNOWLEDGE OF FLOODPLAIN WORK, I THINK THE ENGINEERS WILL WORK OUT THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUE ADEQUATELY, OR THEY WON'T BE ALLOWED TO BUILD. SO, I'M GENERALLY IN FAVORAV OF THIS AS AN INFILL PROJECT. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER WALTERS. >> Walters: YEP. I THINK THIS IS -- THIS ZONING CASE REPRESENTS A FAR BETTER FIT FOR THIS USE OF LAND THAN THE COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT IS THERE TODAY. SO I SUPPORT THIS CHANGE. I'M CONCERNED -- I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE RESULTS OF THE FLOODPLAIN STUDY. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THE STREET ACCESS ISSUE FOR THE MEDICAL BUILDING THAT'S CLOSE-BY. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARY. YOUR MIC IS ON. >> Cary: I JUST WANT TO ECHO, I'M IN CONCERT WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER WALTERS AND COMMISSIONER STONE SAID, AS WELL AS WHAT COMMISSIONER SAMARA SAID. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF TAKING A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE THE PROJECT MAY CHANGE. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ACCURATE. >> Chair Barbera: COMMISSIONER STONE. COMMISSIONER HORNE. >> Horne: MY MAIN CONCERN IS WE DON'T HAVE THE FLOODPLAIN STUDY AND WE'RE ASKING TO CHANGE A ZONING REQUIREMENT FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED WITHOUT HAVING THAT FLOODPLAIN DATA HERE. SO I'M ALMOST INCLINED NOT TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE AT THIS TIME UNTIL WE GET THAT FLOODPLAIN, BECAUSE WHAT IF THEY COME BACK AND SAY NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICUT FOR YOU TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY AND STILL BE ABOVE THE HUNDRED-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, WHETHER YOU ELEVATE THE BUILDINGS, I DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW THAT YET UNTIL WE GET THAT ENGINEERING STUDY SO I'M SOMEWHAT RELUCTANT OF THAT. BUT AS A SECOND OPINION I THINK THE BEST THING FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE THE CITY OF PLANO BUY IT AND MAKE IT A PARK. THIS -- YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE WITHIN 15 MINUTES WALK OF PARK. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THERE'S A 15-MINUTE PARK HERE. I SEE THIS AS A GREAT PARK, AS A PASSIVE PARK. BUT IF WE'RE ABLE TO GET THE FLOODPLAIN AND WE'RE ABLE TO BUILD THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THERE, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BETTER THAN HAVING A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. BUT I HATE TO MAKE THAT CHANGE NOW WITHOUT HAVING THAT FLOODPLAIN STUDY IN HAND. >> IT SEEMS LIKE BASED ON EVERYTHING EVERYBODY HAS SAID, I WOULD RECOMMEND -- I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION, I'M TALKING OUT LOUD. IT SEEMS LIKE WE OUGHT TO APPROVE THE ZONING BUT TABLE THE CONCEPT PLAN, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S GOING -- THAT GIVES US THE CHANGE IN ZONING WHICH IS BETTER FOR THE RESIDENTS IN GENERAL, AND REDUCES WHAT COULD BE BUILT THERE, AS COMMISSIONER SAMARA POINTED OUT. BUT THEN WE WITHHOLD THE APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPT PLAN UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THE FLOOD. >> I CAN SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION. >> Chair Barbera: HANG ON. >> I JUS WAN TO COMMENT THAT THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHICH REQUIRES A PLAN TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ZONING. >> OH. OKAY. >> SO WE'LL NEED TO COME UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE. >> Chair Barbera: SO, THANK YOU. MY THOUGHTS -- TO THE APPLICANT, YOU OWN THE PROPERTY ALREADY? NO. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. SO REALLY, THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY IS DEPENDENT UPON THE ZONING CHANGING AND A LOT OF VARIABLES. AND I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL OVER COMMERCIAL IN THIS LOCATION. SO THE ZONING REQUEST IS TO REZONE THIS AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. IF WE REZONE IT, AND THE FLOOD STUDY COMES BACK AND THEY WOULD BE LUCKY TO SHOEHORN 25 UNITS INTO THIS, THEY PROBABLY WON'T DEVELOP IT AND IT WILL STAY A PASSIVE GREEN BELT FOR WHO KNOWS HOW LONG AND MR. VARGAS AND THE OTHERS WL BE EXTRAORDINARILY HAPPY. IF THE FLOOD STUDY COMES BACK AND IT ALLOWS THEM TO CREATE THIS ENVIRONMENT, I THINK IT'S A POSITIVE. NOW, IT'S NOT THE KIND OF RESIDENTIAL LOCATION THAT I WOULD PURCHASE IN, BUT I'VE LIVED NEXT TO AIRPORTS AND RAILROAD TRACKS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND GUESS WHAT, I HAD A HOME OF MY OWN. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERED. SO, I INITIALLY THOUGHT I WOULD RATHER WITHHOLD THE ZONING UNTIL WE HAD A FLOOD STUDY, BUT ULTIMATELY OUR CONCERN IS, IS RESIDENTIAL A BETTER USE OF THIS PROPERTY THAN COMMERCIAL. AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GIBBONS, COMMISSIONER STONE, 100%, THIS IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED SOMEDAY AND WHAT'S GOING TO BE THERE MAY NOT BE AS NICE AS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, SO I AM IN FAVOR OF -- WE HAVE A SIDEBAR HERE. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE APPROVAL OF THE ZONING AND WE CAN EVEN APPROVE THE ASSOCIATED 3B ITEM, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET ALL THE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS, THE FLOOD STUDY REQUIREMENTS. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET ALL THOSE AND THEN EVENTUALLY COME BACK TO US WITH A CHANGED PRODUCT THAT WILL LIKELY BE RESIDENTIAL AND WE'LL BE GLAD THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE RESIDENCES AROUND THEM AND NOT SOME KIND OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THAT'S MY TWO CENTS. SO WITH THAT SAID, I'M OPEN TO -- >> GIVEN THAT, UNLESS THERE'S ANY FURTHER WISDOM TO BE GIVEN US BY OUR STAFF MEMBERS, I AGREE. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 3A AS SUBMITTED BY THE CITY STAFF. >> Chair Barbera: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS TO APPROVE ITEM 3A AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WALTERS. PLEASE VOTE. >> IT WAS JUST A LITTLE CONFUSING, BECAUSE IT SAID AS SUBMITTED BY STAFF OR SOMETHING. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, NOT AS SUBMITTED. WE'LL RESTATE THE MOTION, BUT I THINK THE VOTE WILL STILL CARRY. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS ITEM AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND PACKAGED TONIGHT. >> Chair Barbera: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE THE SAME SECOND. ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT? SO WE'LL GO WITH OUR VOTE OF 7-0 ON ITEM 3A. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 3B. THAT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLEX OH, OKAY. WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER STEPPING ASIDE FOR A MOMENT. >> WELL -- >> Chair Barbera: HANG ON ONE SECOND. WHAT TIME IS IT? 8:49. IT'S WEIRD TAKING IT RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE, BUT LET'S TAKE FIVE MINUTES. ♪ >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I THINK EVERYBODY UP HERE FEELS BETTER NOW. [ CHUCKLING ] A LITTLE RELIEVED. OKAY. I CAN'T BELIEVE I REPEATED THAT. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Barbera: SO, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM 3B, BUT ACTUALLY THE WREA BREAK GAVE USA MOMENT TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION. CHRISTINA, DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHAT APPROVING 3B MEANS AND WHAT THEUTCO OF THAT WILL BE BASED ON A FLOOD STUDY? >> CERTAINLY. 3B, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REQUIRES, UNDER A ZONING ORDINANCE, THAT SOME SORT OF PLAN, EITHER A CONCEPT PLAN OR A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ZONING. SO THESE ITEMS NEED TO MARCH FORWARD TOGETHER. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO BRING IN A FLOOD STUDY. AND THAT WILL NEED TO PROVE UP THEIR ABILITY TO BUILD BASED ON THE CITY'S ENGINEERING STANDARDS. SO THEY'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FULL CIVIL ENGINEERING PROCESS, MEET THE CITY'S ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND MAKE SURE THAT ANY LOTS THAT ARE DEVELOPED ARE FULLY OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN AND EXCEED THE STANDARDS THAT OUR ENGINEER DEPARTMENT REQUIRES. SO THAT WILL BE THE NEXT STEP OF THE PROCESS. IT WILL COME BACK BEFORE THIS COMMISSION AS A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN AND AT THAT POINT WE'LL HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. >> Chair Barbera: AND ALL OF THAT IS CONTINGENT UPON COUNCIL APPROVING THIS, SO WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE STEPS BEFORE WE GET COMPLETELY DONE WITH IT. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THOSE THAT ARE WATCHING OR HERE, IF YOU GO INTO THE PACKET AND LOOK AT PAGS FROM STAFF, WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION BECAUSE IT'S QUITE EXTENSIVE, REALLY LAYS OUT THE RESTRICTIONS ON THIS IN THE ZONING CASE. SO, SOMETHING FOR YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT. OKAY. ALL THAT SAID, CAN I GET A MOTION ON ITEM 3B? >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 3B AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY. >> Chair Barbera: SUBJECT TO THE FLOOD? >> SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE FLOOD STUDY. >> Chair Barbera: THANK YOU. >> SECOND. >> Chair Barbera: AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SAMARA, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE SUBJECT TO FLOOD STUDY ON 3B, AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SAMARA. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE FOR OUR LITTLE BREAK AND TIME. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4 IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ZONING CASE 2021-022, Request to rescind Specific Use Permit No. 58 for Country Club and Private Club on 3.1 acres located at the northwest corner of Turtle Creek Drive and Old Westbury Lane. Zoned Planned Development-423-Patio Home with Specific Use Permit No. 58 for Country Club and Private Club. APPLICANT IS THE CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING. MELISSA, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY USED AS A TENNIS CENTER, POOL, AND PRIVATE CLUB ANNEX OWNED AND OPERATED BY A PRIVATE COUNTRY CLUB, BUT HAS CEASED OPERATIONS AND WAS SOLD. TY COUNCIL APPROVED A REZONING REQUEST FOR A PATIO HOME DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY ON JUNE 28TH OF THIS YEAR AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED THE ASSOCIATED PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ON AUGUST 16TH OF THIS YEAR. GIVEN THE RECENT CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY'S ZONING, AND THAT THE EXISTING AMENITY CENTER IS NO LONGER IN USE AT THIS LOCATION, THE PROPERTY NO LONGER NEEDS THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE CCOUNTRY CLUB AND THE PRIVATE CLUB. THEREFORE, STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT THE SUP BE RESCINDED. STAFF DID RECEIVE FOUR RESPONSES FOR THIS PROJECT ALL WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER, THREE IN SUPPORT AND ONE IN OPPOSITION. >> Downs: ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT. WE HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT REGISTERED IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT. >> Downs: CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> I RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STONE TO APPROVE ITEM 4 AS SUBMITTED WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - REVISED PRELIMINARY REPLAT & REVISED SITE PLAN: CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER LEGACY CAMPUS, BLOCK A, LOT 1R - HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL OFFICE ON ONE LOT ON 56.0 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PRESTON ROAD AND HEDGCOXE ROAD. ZONED COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PRESTON ROAD OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: CHILDREN'S HEALTH. >> PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND OUR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEENG PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON ITEM 5? THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT. >> Downs: THANK YOU. WITH THAT I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> I MAKE A [OFF MIC]. >> Downs: OKAY. >> SECOND. >> Downs: DO WE WANT TO READ THAT OUT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS. >> Walters: I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN AS RECOMMENDED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS. >> Downs: CLOSE ENOUGH? ALL RIGHT. >> SECOND. >> Downs: THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WALTERS TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 5 GIBBONS.COND COMSSIONER PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: T PRESIDING OFFICER MAY 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. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER CARDS ARE RECEIVED UNTIL THE TOTAL TIME I AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. REQUEST TO WITHDRAW A CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2019-007 RELATED TO SIGNAGE STANDARDS - REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING RESULTING IN AN UNNOTICED ZONING CASE 2019-007 TO AMEND ARTICLE 8 (DEFINITIONS), ARTICLE 22 (SIGNS), AND RELATED SECTIONS O THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO SIGNAGE STANDARDS. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. I'M CHRISTINA SEBASTIAN LAND RECORDS MANAGER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. IN MAY 2019 THE COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW THE SIGNAGE STANDARDS. SINCE THAT TIME STAFF HAS COMMENCED WORK AND RETAINED AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT. HOWEVER, THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DELAYED DUE TO CONTINUED LITIGATION CURRENTLY PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. THE ZONING CASE WAS NEVER NOTICED AND AS SUCH STAFF RECOMMENDS WITHDRAWING THIS CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING. WE DO EXPECT TO BRING A FUTURE CASE FORWARD WHEN APPROPRIATE AND WE'LL PRESERVE THE WORK COMPLETED TO DATE. WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? NONE? THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYBODY REGISTERED TO SPEAK? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS. >> Downs: THANK YOU. COMMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS? >> I RECOMMEND WE MOVE FOR WITHDRAWAL. >> SECOND. >> Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSION GIBBONS TO WITHDRAW THE PUBLIC HEARING AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HORNE. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0 NEXT ITEM. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 7. REQUEST TO WITHDRAW - REVISED SITE PLAN: TRADITION TRAIL INDUSTRIAL PARK ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 2 - WAREHOUSE, MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR, AND USED VHICLE DEALER ON ONE LOT ON 3.9 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRADITION TRAIL AND FULGHAM ROAD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-131- LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT: ANG PRIMO FAMILY TRUST. >> THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO WITHDRAW THIS REVISED SITE PLAN SINCE THE PLAN STILL REQUIRES SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES THAT CANNOT BE ADDRESSED WITHIN THE ALLOWED TIME-FRAME. A WITHDRAW IS NECESSARY TO MEET CHAPTER 212 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE WHICH REQUIRES ACTION BE MADE WITHIN A SPECIFIC TIME-FRAME WITHOUT EXCEPTION. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW REVISED SITE PLAN 2021-043. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN WE MAY BE REVISITING THIS PLAN? >> NO, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT GIVEN A TIME-FRAME AS TO WHEN THEY WILL RESUBMIT A PLAN. >> Downs: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND -- ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW REVISED SITE PLAN 2021-043. >> Downs: THANK YOU. >> SECOND. >> Downs: SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE TO ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW WITH A SECOND BY COMMISIONER STONE. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 7-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 8. REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL VEHICLE PARKING AMENDMENTS - REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 16 (PARKIN AND LOADING) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO SPECIAL VEHICLE PARKING, AND RELATED AMENDMENTS IF FOUND NECESSARY. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> A POTENTIAL CONFLICT CURRENTLY EXISTS BETWEEN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE PARKING OF OVERSIZED MOTOR VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. THEREFORE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDR AMENDMENTS FOR THIS PURPOSE. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS ON THIS ITEM? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS. WE HAD ONE INDIVIDUAL REGISTER IN OPPOSITION. >> Downs: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMENTS. DIRECTION? EVERYBODY STILL AWAKE? >> I MAKE A MOTION WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM NO. 8. >> SECOND. >> Downs: ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HORNE AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STONE, I THINK IT WAS. TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 8. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES 7-0. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY FOR BEING HERE. WE WILL ADJOURN AT 9:07. [MEETING ADJOURNED]