>> I WILL NOW CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 7:01 IT LOOKS LIKE. ALL RISE AND PLEASE JOIN ME IN THPLED OF ALLEGIANCE. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> Cary: BEFORE WE GET INTO THINGS, I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE A PRIOR PLANNING AND ZONING MEMBER WHO IS HERE WITH US TONIGHT. OUR NEWLY-ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBER. THANKS FOR COMING OUT, RICK. CONGRATULATIONS . LET'S GET TO BUSINESS HERE. >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PE SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON TH CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY. >> Cary: ARE THERE A REGISTERED SPEAKERS? >> THERE ARE NOT. >> Cary: SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THIS ITEM AND WE'LL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NONCONTROVERSIAL. ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF. >> Cary: DOES ANYONE WISH TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Cary: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO MOVE FORWARD AS PRESENTED. SO, PLEASE VOTE. WITH A VOTE OF 7-0 THE MOTION TO MOVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FORWARD PASSES. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSID PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED. REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIF THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDERAT AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN: WILLOW BEND POLO ESTATES PHASE B, BLOCK B, LOT 17R - ONE PATIO HOME LOT ON 0.3 ACRE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLD WESTBURY LANE, 85 FEET NORTH OF TURTLE CREEK DRIVE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-423-PATIO HOME. APPLICANT: NLW TRUST. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DON SEPULVEDA AND THESE ITEMS ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY TECHNICAL OR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> [OFF MIC] >> Cary: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> Brounoff: ARE THEY COMBINING TWO LOTS INTO A SINGLE LOT, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS? >> YES. >> Brounoff: I DROVE BY THERE THE OTHER DAY AND THE DEVELOPER HAS FOR SALE SNS UP PREY MUCH IN FRONT OF EVERY LOT AND A NUMBER OF THEM HAVE SOLD SIGNS, SO THESE LOTS ARE SELLING. JUST TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW. >> Cary: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> WE HAVE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. >> Cary: OKAY. SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> MR. CHAIRMAN? I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE ITEM NO. 1. >> SECOND. >> Cary: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NO. 1 BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. PLEASE VOTE. AND, AGAIN, BY A COUNT OF 7-0, THIS MOTION PASSES. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT: STARR EAST, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - ONE GENERAL RESIDENTIAL LOT ON 0.2 ACRE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 13TH STREET AND G AVE ZONED GENERAL RESIDENTIAL. APPLICANT: KENT AND CARLA STARR THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> WHAT IS THE POINT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE? WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THIS VOTE? >> TO CONSTRUCT A HOM >> Lisle: ? >> CORRECT. >> Lisle: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> Cary: OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO& ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> NO, BUT THEY ARE HERE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Cary: OKAY. THEN, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL KEEP COMMENTS TO COMMISSION. OPEN IT UP. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE ITEM 2 AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> Cary: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT MOTION PASSES 7-0. I'D LIKE TO MENTION THAT THE REASON IT'S 7-0 IS OUR CHAIRMAN DOWNS IS NOT HERE TONIGHT AND I HAVE THE FUN TIME OF SITTING IN FOR HIM. ANYWAY, THAT'S WHY IT'S 7-0. WE'LL MOVE ON. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: SPRING CENTRAL ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 2R- PROFESSIONAL/ GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE O ONE LOT ON 0.9 ACRE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 75, 600 FEET SOUTH OF SPRING CREEK PARKWAY. ZONED CORRIDOR C APPLICANT: ASKARI PROPERTIES, L THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: AND DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: JUST ONE. THERE'S A COMMENT ON A FLAWED CERTIFICATE AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE EASEMENT THAT WE'RE -- DEDICATED EASEMENT SEEMS TO SIT WITHIN A FLOODPLAIN. AM I READING THAT CORRECT? >> THERE IS A FLOODPLAIN >> Olley: OKAY. PROPERTY.- AND THIS WOULD -- DOES THIS IMPACT THE ABILITY FOR THAT AREA TO FLOOD IN ANY WAY OR THIS HELPS IN ANY WAY OR IS THIS JUST MORE FOR GENERAL POLICE/FIRE TO GET TO THE PROPERTY? >> THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THIS PLAN AND THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENT. >> Olley: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Cary: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. SEEING NONE, I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS COMMISSION? >> THE APPLICANT IS IN ATTENDANCE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Cary: DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> I SECOND. >> Cary: OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONERRONS. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG. PLEASE VOTE. AND, AGAIN, BY 7-0 THIS PASSES. IT'S PRETTY EASY. THERE'S NOTHING TO THIS. [LAUGHTER] >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT, SITE PLAN, AND REVISED SITE PLAN: NORTHGLEN 2 ADDITION, BLOCK B, LOTS 3R AND 6R - MEDICAL OFFICE ON TWO LOTS ON 5.5 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NATIONAL DRIVE, 285 FEET WEST OF GILLESPIE DRIVE. ZONED REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT AND LOCATED WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY 121 OVERLAY D APPLICANT: TSC INTERESTS, LLC. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AND THE SITE PLAN AND REVISED SITE PLAN ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ONE? OKAY. WELL, SEEING NONE, I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS. >> Cary: OKAY. WELL, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL HAVE COMMENTS BETWEEN COMMISSION AND STAFF HERE. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE T ELIMARY REPLAT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS BY THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND APPROVE THE SITE PLAN/REVISED SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED. >> I SECOND THAT. >> Cary: WELL DONE. A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY. PLEASE VOTE. AND, ONCE AGAIN, BY 7-0 THIS PASSES. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: PARKER ROAD MARKETPLACE ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 1R AND 2R - INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY ON LOT 1R AND VACANT LOT ON LOT 2R ON 8.7 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF JUPITER ROAD, 227 FEET SOUTH OF PARKER ROAD. ZONED RETAIL. APPLICANT: SWC PARKER JUPITER, THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. >> Cary: OKAY. I WILL -- SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. WE APPROVE ITEM 5 SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> Cary: OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TONG. PLEASE VOTE. AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS ITEM PASSES BY 7-0. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: THE PARK ON 14TH ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - 62 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS ON ONE LOT ON 1.5 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 14TH STREET AND G AVENUE. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-123-DOWNTOW APPLICANT: TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? >> YES. WE HAVE DAVID WITH TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION. >> GOOD EVENING, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF FINANCE FOR THE TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK I CHECKED THE WRONG BOX. I WAS JUST GOING TO BE HERE FOR ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS, BUT I WANT TO THANK THE CHAIR AND ALL THE MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. LET'S KEEP THE MOMENTUM GOING ON THOSE VOTES. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU. >> Cary: DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. SEEING NONE, THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF . >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 PRELIMINARY REPLAT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> Cary: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. PLEASE VOTE. AND THIS ITEM PASSES 7-0. >> NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7. DISCUSSION: PRESENTATION ON THE 2023 DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK, WITH INFORMATION FROM PLANNING, ENGINEERING, AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENTS. APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. >> GOOD EVENING. ROBIN KIRK, SENIOR PLANNER IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I'M JOINED TONIGHT BY SEVERAL COLLEAGUES FROM PLANNING. MELISSA, LEAD PLANNER FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SERVICES AND CHRISTINA SEBASTIAN, RECORDS MANAGER. I'M ALSO JOINED BY GINA SCOTT AND MIKE MARTIN . WE ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK TEXT AND ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND RECORD DIUSSION.NS THROUGHOUTHIS >> Cary: GREAT. THANK YOU. SO DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OH, EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU. >> BOTH THE CONTENTS AND STRUCTURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK WERE GUIDED BY STAFF EXPERIENCE WITH THE INTERCONNECTEDNESS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. WE HAVE BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE OVERLAPPING NATURE AND TIMELINES OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PROCESSES. FOR EASE OF USE THE BOOK IS DIVIDED BY DEVELOPMENT TYP A SHOWN IN THE LOWER HALF OF THIS SLIDE. AND INFORMATION IS PROVIDED AND REPEATED AS NEEDED SO THAT EACH SECTION IS SELF-CONTAINED. A LITTLE HANDBOOK HISTORY. THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK WAS PUBLISHED IN 1994 BY WHAT WAS THEN CALLED THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. THE HANDBOOK WAS INITIALLY DIVIDED INTO SECTIONS BY CITY DEPARTMENT WITH SUBSECTIONS FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE FOUND OLDER RECORDS THAT THE HANDBOOK WAS WELLECEIVED BY LAND DEVELOPERS BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR WHY THIS HANDBOOK STOPPED BEING UPDATED AND OFFERED. THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION WILL BE A GUIDE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE TYPE OF INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR EACH DESIRED DEVELOPMENT GOAL. THE STEPS ARE GENERALLY DESCRIBED HERE. WE START WITH THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING THAT BRINGS TOGETHER STAFF FROM ALL POTENTIAL REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS. STAFF CAN ADVISERIOR TO DEVELOPERS INVESTING. THE SUBMITTAL OF REQUIRED PLANS WITH ENGINEERING AND BUILDING PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS REQUIRED THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS . THIS SLIDE IS AN ABRIDGED VERSION OF THE FLOWCHART FOUND IN THE HANDBOOK NEAR THE BEGINNING BY SHOWING DEVELOPMENT STEPS BASED ON PROJECT TYPE. THE DARK BLUE INDICATES STEPS REQUIRED REGARDLESS OF DEVELOPMENT TYPE. THE ORANGE INDICATES STEPS IN THE PRIMARILY NON-RESIDENTIAL SECTION AND THE LIGHT PURPLE INDICATES STEPS IN THE PRIMARILY SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SECTION OF THE BOOK. SHOWN HERE ARE THE STEPS IN THE ZONING PROCESS WHICH ARE DESCRIBED IN GREATER DETAIL WITHIN THE HANDBOOK. PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS RECEIVED FREQUENT QUESTIONS FROM BOTH DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTS SO THE ZONING PROCESS INCLUDES SUBMITTAL MATERIALS FOR STAFF REVIEW CYCLES AS WELL AS PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND PLANO PROVIDES FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND RECEIVING PUBLIC INPUT. TYPES ARE BASED ON PROXIMITY TO THE SUBJECT AREA WHILE OTHERS ARE BROADLY AVAILABLE. THIS PROVIDES NOTICE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ZONING CASES THAT AREN'T LAND BASED, SUCH AS TEXT AMENDMENTS . THIS IS A LIST OF THE CURRENT NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES AVAILABLE FOR ZONING CASES. IT INCLUDES MULTIPLE INFORMATION POSTING ITEMS TO EXPAND OUTREACH AND IT ALSO INCLUDES TOOLS DESIGNED TO RECEIVE RESPONSES. ALL OF THESE ARE DESCRIBED WITHIN THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK. THESE IMAGES SHOW THE STANDARD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE FOR PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES. THIS NOTICE INCLUDES INFORMATION AND MAPS SHOWING THE PROPOSED REZONING AREA AND A SPACE FOR RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENT FROM PROXIMATE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. IT CULMINATES IN PUBLIC HEARING AND VOTES BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. THIS NEXT STION APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL AND SOME FORMS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. MULTIFAMILY FOLLOWS THESE STEPS. PATIO HOMES AND ATTACHED DEVELOPMENTS FOLLOW THE NON-RESIDENTIAL PLAN AND PLAT REVIEW PROCESS, FOR THE MOST PART. PLANNING STAFF FREQUENTLY RECEIVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APPLICABILITY OF PLAN REQUIREMENTS TO SPECIFIC PROJECT TYPES SO THIS IS AN AREA OF FOCUS FOR THE HANDBOOK. THE NEXT THREE SLIDES COVER THE SEVEN STEPS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR THESE PROJECT TYPES. THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL INCLUDES A CONCEPT PLAN OR PRELIMINARY SE PL AND A CONVEYANCE PLAT WHEN NECESSARY. THE SECOND STEP IS THE SITE PLAN PACKAGE AS DESCRIBED ON THIS SLIDE WHICH INCLUDES FULL ENGINEERING PLANS AS WELL AS THE OTHER ITEMS SHOWN HERE. AFTER ENGINEERING PLANS ARE RECEIVED AND UNDER REVIEW, CONSTRUCTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL AND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT. TESTING AND INSPECTIONS WILL OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS ARE SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED. CONSTRUCTION COMMENCES WITH REQUIRED INSPECTIONS THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. THE FINAL PLAT IS SUBMITTED AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. AFTER THE FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED AND FILED OF RECORD AND ALL INSPECTIONS ARE COMPLETED, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CAN BE ISSUED. SOME ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION IS ALSO PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION OF THE HANDBOOK. THAT INCLUDES INFORMATION ON STREET RESERVATION, NAMING, ADDRESSING, THE APPEALS PROCESS IN THE EVENT OF A DENIAL. PROCEDURES FOR WHEN A PLANNER PLAT EXPIRES OR IS NEARING EXPIRATION. ADDITIONAL STEPS APPLICABLE TO REDEVELOPMENT ON BOTH SMALL AND LARGER SCALES AND OTHER TOPICS ARE COVERED AS WELL. THE HANDBOOK ALSO CONTAINS INFORMATION ON CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY PROCEDURES, WHICH STAFF IS FREQUENTLY ASKED ABOUT. A CO IS REQUIRED FOR OCCUPANCY OF ANY NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING OR SUITE AND FOR MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS, THOUGH NOT THE INDIVIDUAL DWELLING UNITS. A CO IS REQUIRED TO CHANGE OWNERSHIP OR BUSINESS NAME EVEN IF NO INTERIOR WORK IS PLANNED. WE DO ENCOURAGE APPLICANTS TO CONTACT US PRIOR TO SIGNING ANY CONTRACTS OR LEASES FOR SPACES WHERE A CHANGE OF USE IS REQUIRED. IN ADDITION TO THE BUILDING PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS ALREADY MENTIONED, BUILDING INSPECTIONS ISSUES BUILDING PERMITS FOR SOME NON-RESIDENTIAL AND SELECT RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING THOSE LISTED HERE AND WITHIN THE HANDBOOK. SO THE NEXT SECTION OF THE FOR DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY AND DUPLEX SUPERVISION DEVELOPMENT. PATIO HOME AND DETACHED DEVELOPMENTS FOLLOW THE NON-RESIDENTIAL PLAN AND PLAT REVIEW PROCESSES AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED. THE NEXT TWO SLIDES COVER THE SEVEN STEPS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR THESE PROJECT TYPES, WHICH ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. THE FIRST SUBMITTAL INCLUDES A CONCEPT PLAN OR A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN. AFTER THIS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STEP INCLUDES THE FULL ENGINEERING SUBMITTAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BEGINS AND THE FINAL PLAT IS RECORDED IF APPROVED. THE FIFTH STEP IS THE ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AFTER WHICH BUILDING PERMITS ARE SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED ALONG WITH THE REQUIRED INSPECTIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION. OCCUPANCY OF THE UNIT IS THE FINAL STEP, ALTHOUGH NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUIRED TO OCCUPY A RESIDENCE. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION IS ALSO PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION OF THE NDBOOK. THIS SECTION INCLUDES INFORMATION ON SUPERVISION AMENITIES, WHICH CAN INCLUDE HOA REQUIREMENTS, STREET RESERVATION AND NAMING, ADDRESSING, THE APPEALS PROCESS IN THE EVENT OF DENIAL, PROCEDURES FOR WHEN A PLAN OR PLAT EXPIRES OR IS NEARING EXPIRATION AND SOME OTHER TOPICS . IN ADDITION TO THE BUILDING PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS ALREADY MENTIONED, BUILDING INSPECTIONS DOES ISSUE SOME BUILDING PERMITS FOR RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING THOSE SHOWN HERE. THE DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK PROVIDES TWO IMPORTANT APPENDICES AS WELL. THE FIRST IS A SET OF FLOWCHARTS SHOWING THE STEPS FOR THE ZONING PROCESS FOR EACH PLAN AND PLAT SUBMITTAL TYPE INDIVIDUALLY INCLUDING SHOT CLOCK AND PRE-SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES AND FOR BUILDING PERMITS. THE COLOR CODING IS SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE. SHOWS WHICH STEPS ARE REQUIRED OF APPLICANTS AND WHICH ARE DONE BY STAFF, WHICH AIDS IN UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS. THE SECOND APPENDIX PROVIDES A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ONLINE RESOURCES, MANY OF WHICH STAFF END OUT ON A DAILY BASIS IN RESPONSE TO APPLICANT INQUIRIES. WE PROVIDED LINKS HERE TO APPLICATION MATERIALS, TO DEPARTMENT WEBSITES WITH CONTACTS, TO SOME PUBLIC-FACING MAPS THAT ARE USEFUL, TO RELEVANT CITY CODES AND ORDINANCES, TO THE CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICTS WITHIN PLANO, AND POPULAR REQUEST FORMS. WE CAN EASILY UPDATE THIS LIST AS NEW RESOURCES ARE CREATED. THANK YOU AND STAFF MEMBERS ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK AT THIS TIME. >> Cary: THANK YOU FOR THAT MYSELF AS I LOOK THROUGH THIS, IT'S IMPRESSIVE TO ME AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS MAKE IT EFFICIENT AND EASY FOR FOLKS TO DO BUSINESS WITH US. ANYWAY, I WAS IMPRESSED. DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? >> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. FIRST OF ALL, THANKS. PROFESSIONALLY I WORK ALL OVER THE COUNTRY DOING THIS AND VERY WELL DONE. I WISH -- Y'ALL WILL BE SETTING A MODEL FOR THE COUNTRY WITH THIS DOCUMENT. I REALLY AM IMPRESSED. I DO HAVE ONE FAIRLY MINOR COMMENT ON -- W HAVE A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN YOUR FLOWCHART ON PAGE 71 AND THE VERBIAGE ON PAGE 26. AND IT'S A MINOR ISSUE BUT THE FLOWCHART IS THE WAY Y'ALL HAVE ALWAYS DONE THINGS BUT THE VERBIAGE CHANGES THINGS A LITTLE BIT. THE VERBIAGE ON PAGE 26 SAYS BUILDING PERMITS CAN ONLY BE APPROVED AND ISSUED ONCE THE CITY ACCEPTS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. TRADITIONALLY THE CO CAN ONLY BE ISSUED ONCE THE CITY ACCEPTS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BUT THIS SAYS YOU WON'T ISSUE THE BUILDING PERMIT UNTIL YOU HAVE ACCEPTED THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. BUT THE FLOWCHART HAS IT THE WAY Y'ALL HAVE TRADITIONALLY DONE IT, WHICH IS ENGINEERING IS DONE SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE CONSTRUCTION SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT MAKING A CHANGE IN THAT PROCESS . AND IF WE'RE NOT MAKING A CHANGE, RECOMMEND THAT THE LANGUAGE ON PAGE 26 GET CLEANED UP A LTLE T. >> OKAY. YEAH, NO CHANGES ARE PROPOSED. THIS IS PURELY INFORMATIVE SO WE'LL MAKE SURE TO UPDATE WITH THE CORRECT INFORMATION. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. OTHER THAN THAT, INCREDIBLE. I HOPE MORE PEOPLE FOLLOW YOUR EXAMPLE. THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR WORK. >> Cary: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. YEAH, LET ME ALSO ADD MY COMMENT THAT IT WAS ILLUMINATING TO ME TO SEE THE WHOLE PROCESS LAID OUT IN SORT OF A TIME SEQUENCE MANNER SO WE CAN GET AN OVERVIEW OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS RATHER THAN JUST LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL ITEMS ON OUR AGENDAS WITHOUT REALLY UNDERSTANDING WHERE THEY FIT INTO THE BROADER PROCESS. FROM MY INSPECTION OF YOUR FLOWCHARTS, AM I CORRECT IN CONCLUDING THAT WITH RESPECT TO PLATS AND SITE PLANS, APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DOES NOT REQUIRE A SUBSEQUENT APPROVAL BY THE COUNCIL, IS THAT CORRECT? IT GOES STRAIGHT INTO ENGINEERING OR BUILDING PERMIT. >> RIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT, EXCEPT IN RARE CASES OF APPEAL, I THINK. >> Brounoff: WEL THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS IN THE EVENT THE COMMISSION DENIES SOMEBODY, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT IF THE COMMISSION APPROVES IT IS WHAT I'M SAYING. THAT'S FINAL. YES? >> YES. THAT'S CORRECT. >> Brounoff: OKAY. YOU DESCRIBED THE PUBLIC NOTICE PROCEDURE FOR ZONING CASES, WHICH IS MANDATORY NOTICE WITHIN 200 FEET AND A COURTESY NOTICE WITHIN 500 FEET. IS THERE A PUBLIC NOTICE PROCEDURE FOR PLATS AND SITE PLANS COMING BEFORE THE COMMISSION? >> SO THERE IS NOTICE REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL REPLATS, I BELIEVE. BUT NO SITE PLANS. >> Brounoff: GREAT WORK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> Cary: THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: ECHO EVERYTHING EVERYONE HAS SAID. SUCKER FOR FLOWCHARTS SO IT'S KIND OF NICE TO SEE HOW THE FLOW GOES AND ALSO AS A DEVELOPER THE CLEANLINESS OF I'M SURE THEY GREATLYTAKE. APPRECIATE. THIS IS MORE FOR MY EDUCATION AND A BIT OF A CURIOSITY TO A COMMENT YOU MADE. WHY IS THE PATIO HOME AND ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY FLOW THAT DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE-FAMILY FLOW? >> LET ME BACK UP AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO HERE. >> Olley: THE NON-RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THE FLOW, THERERE A LOT MORE ADDITIONAL STEPS AND WHAT HAVE YOU. I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY THE PATIO HOME AND ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY HAS LIKE THREE OR FOUR MORE STEPS THAN THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE-FAMILY FLOWCHART. >> YEAH, I CAN DISCUSS THAT. SO THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED AND PATIO HOME COMMUNITIES. THERE'S REQUIRED OPEN SPACE. THERE ARE REQUIRED PUBLIC PARKING SPACES, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IT'S HARD TO CAPTURE THOSE ITEMS ON A PLAT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY MEET THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS. THEY INCLUDE THINGS SUCH AS DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS AND DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, WE HAVE INCLUDED A SITE PLAN REQUIREMENT. >> Olley: SO WOULD THAT BE BECAUSE THEY WOULD MOST LIKELY BE PART OF A PLANNE DEVELOPMENT OR JUST IN GENERAL? >> NO. JUST BECAUSE OF THE FORM OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AMENITIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE SPECIFIC DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THOSE AMENITIES AND WE JUST NEEDED A WAY TO CAPTURE THOSE REQUIREMENTS WERE MET, AND THAT'S DONE THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS. >> Olley: GOT IT. SO THAT'S WHERE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND ALL THAT COMES IN TO CAPTURE THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Cary: OKAY. COMMISSIONER LISLE. >> Lisle: [OFF MIC] I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE SECOND TO LAST BULLET POINT. CHANGES IN LAND USE MAY REQUIRE UPDATES. WOULDN'T THAT BE AN OCCUPANCY USE IF IT'S A CHANGE FOR THE BUILDING AND WHAT DO WE DO IF IT'S JUST A LAND OCCUPANCY SITUATION WITHOUT A BUILDING? I KNOW THERE'S OCCUPANCY OR LAND USE PERMITS. WHERE IS THAT CAPTURED IN THE PROCESS? I KNOW IT'S ONE IN A MILLION HERE IN PLANO. MOST LAND HAS BUILDINGS. >> RIGHT. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU STATE YOUR QUESTION AGAIN? I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW YOU. >> Lisle: HOW DOES THE -- CHANGES IN LAND USE. WHAT IF THERE ISN'T A BUILDING ON THE LAND? >> RIGHT. SO DEPENDING UPON THE USE OF THE PROPERTY -- SO WE DO HAVE CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR LAND AS WELL AS FOR BUILDINGS. AND IF IT'S A LAND-BASED C.O., THE USE MAY REQUIRE THINGS TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE MAY REQUIRE A FIRE LANE , IT MAY REQUIRE PARKING CHANGES. IT MAY REQUIRE IF IT'S OPEN STORAGE, SOM PAVG, THINGS KE THAT. >> Lisle: AND ONE MORE CLARIFICATION ITEM. IN THE FLOWCHART -- AND I DIDN'T CATCH THE SLIDE NUMBER. BUT THE FLOWCHART, YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE A SITE PLAN AND PAPERWORK BEFORE YOU GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS, OTHER THAN THE APPLICATION TO DO THE ZONING, IS THAT CORRECT? >> NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE -- THE ONLY PLAN THAT'S REQUIRED IN ZONING -- THERE'S A CONCEPT PLAN REQUIREMENT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REQUEST OR THERE'S A DEVELMENT PLAN REQUIREMENT FOR AN URBAN MIXED-USE OR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT. THE OTHER TYPES OF ZONING, IF IT'S A STRAIGHT ZONING THAT'S NOT A REQUIRED PLAN, STAFF USUALLY RECOMMENDS IT AND IT'S USUALLY PROVIDED. IT HELPS THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REQUEST IS AND REALLY PUTS PEN TO PAPER. SO AS THEY BRING THE REQUEST FORWARD, IT'S REALLY EVIDENT THAT THE REQUEST FITS WELL ON THE PROPERTY. SO IT'S NOT REQUIRED EXCEPT FOR CERTAIN INSTANCES, BUT IT'S OFTEN PROVIDED AND WE USUALLY RECOMMEND IT. >> LisleAN THEN LASTLY, JUST PIGGYBACKING ON VICE CHAIR CARY'S COMMENTS ABOUT IT BEING A BEAUTIFUL DOCUMENT AND WE WANT IT TO BE EFFICIENT TO DO BUSINESS HERE IN PLANO. HERE'S YOUR 85 PAGES. AND I'VE LOOKED THROUGH A LOT OF IT AND I SAY THAT JOKINGLY BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY I DON'T THINK ANYTHING WE COULD TAKE OUT OF IT. IT'S JUST A LOT OF INFORMATION. AND I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAVE IT SO THAT WE CAN HAND IT TO SOMEBODY AND SAY HERE'S THE PROCESS. >> Cary: COMMISSIONER TONG, YOUR LIGHT WAS ON EARLIER. OH WAIT. WE'RE BACK. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: ONE, I WANT TO SAY GREAT JOB. I'M ALWAYS EXCITED WHENEVER I HEAR THE PROCESS BEING TALKED ABOUT, HOW WE INTENTIONALLY COLLECT INFORMATION AND SHARE IT. I JUST HAD TWO REAL SMALL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APPENDIX AND MAYBE THINGS THAT COULD BE ADDED. THE ZONING ALERT AND RESPOE TOOL AND THE DENSITY GUIDANCE MAPS. DO WE -- WOULD THAT MAKE SENSE TO PROVIDE EITHER OF THOSE TWO? THE DENSITY GUIDANCE, CERTAINLY FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE LOOKING TO -- GO AHEAD. >> I THINK THE DENSITY GUIDANCE, THAT'S REALLY A COMP PLAN SITUATION, SO IT LIVES THERE. IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO BE PLACED IN THE HANDBOOK, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A CONNECTION TO THE HANDBOOK. GO AHEAD. >> WE COULD POTENTIALLY PUT IT DERHE LINK FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO HAVE A SPECIFIC PAGE, SINCE DEVELOPERS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE LAND USE AND HOUSING INVENTORY, RIGHT, IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> Bronsky: YES. >> SAME WITH THE ZONING ALERT TOOL. WE CAN DO THAT AS WELL. >> Cary: WE HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. COMMISSIONER TONG. >> Tong: THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. I DID HAVE MY LIGHT ON EARLIER. MY QUESTION KIND OF GOT ANSWERED BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF'S QUESTION. AND NOW I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION REGARDING SOME OTHER COMMISSIONER REMINDED ME THAT IN THE FUTURE -- BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF LAND TO DO NEW DEVELOPMENT. AND I REALIZE A LOT OF OUR EXISTING HOMES MAY BE UNDERGOING REMODELING OR MAYBE BUILDING COTTAGES IN THE BACKYARD OR HAVING HOME ADDITIONS BUILT OUT. WHICH PART OF THE PROCESS WOULD THAT FIT INTO IF THEY WANT TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING? I SEE ONE OF THE SLIDES HAS THE ACCESSORY BUILDING BUT THAT SEEMS TO BE A PART OF A NORMAL TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL PROCESS BUT WHAT IF THE RESIDENCE IS ALREADY THERE BUT YOU'RE ADDING SOMETHING TO IT? >> SURE. FOR TRADITIONAL SINGLE-FAMILY BUILDING INSPECTIONS INVOLVE THE PERMITTING AND THE REVIEW OF THOSE PLANS SO THAT DOES NOT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. >> Tong: GOTCHA. THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THIS PROCESS. >> RIGHT. IT'S PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS BUT IT WOULD BE HANDLED BY BUILDING INSPECTIONS THROUGH THEIR PERMITTING. >> Tong: EVEN IF THEY'RE BUILDING A BRAND-NEW BUILDING IN THEIR BACKYARD? >> IF IT'S A BACKYARD COTTAGE, THAT'S CORRECT. IT ALSO GOES THROUGH BUILDING INSPECTIONS FOR PERMITTING. IT DOES NOT COME TO PLANNING FOR REVIEW. >> Tong: GOTCHA. THANK YOU. >> AND THE OTHER BUILDING PERMIT SECTION OF THE TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL SECTION, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY BUILDINGS ARE BRIEFLY COVERED FOR ANY ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, INCLUDING BACKYARD COTTAGES. WE COULD POTENTIALLY ADD MORE INFORMATION ABOUT BACKYARD COTTAGES. >> Tong: THANK YOU. >> Cary: THAT WRAPS UP THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE THERE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Cary: COMMENTS ARE CONFINED TO THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. ANY MORE COMMENTS? OKAY. WELL, IN CONCLUDING THIS, I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SAY, AGAIN, I'M IMPRESSED WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. I THINK YOU GUYS DID GREAT WORK. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ERIC. I HAVE TO BELIEVE THIS ALLOWS YOU AND YOUR STAFF TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE ONCE THIS IS DONE AND PUBLISHED. THERE HAS TO BE A BENEFIT TO YOUR TEAM IN THAT REGARD. >> IT'S VERY HELPFUL. AS COMMISSIONER LISLE MENTIONED, THE BUILDING PROCESS IS VERY SOPHISTICATED IN PLANO AND WE ROUTINELY HAVE CONVERSATIONS -- TYPICALLY WE HAVE FOUR PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS EVERY WEEK WHERE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND TALKING TO THE DEVELOPER ABOUT A NEW PROPERTY SITUATION. THIS IS GOING TO BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR US TO PROVIDE THEM SOMETHING THEY CAN ACTUALLY REVIEW. YES, IT IS LENGTHY AND IT MAY NOT BE HELPFUL TO ALL BUT WE THINK IT WILL BE VERY HELPFUL TO SOME. >> Cary: I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT'S THE CASE. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. A FINAL THING I WOULD SAY IS AS I SAT HERE ON COMMISSION FOR A FEW YEARS, ONE OF THE THINGS I SEE IS THESE TYPES OF THINGS, THIS TEAM CONTINUES TO PUSH FORWARD AND I'M REALLY EXCITED TO WATCH THE WORK AND TO HAVE A SMALL PART AS WE EVOLVE. YOUR TEAM, YOU GUYS ARE DOING REALLY GOOD STUFF AND I THINK THIS IS A FANTASTIC EXAMPLE. WELL DONE. THANKS A LOT. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 8. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO CAL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING REQUIRING A PROPERTY WITH A BACKYARD COTTAGE TO BE OWNER-OCCUPIED AFTER HIGNELL-STARK V. CITY OF NEW OR APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERA. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. DANIEL WYATT, PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF PLANO. AGAIN, THIS IS A REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING REQUIRING A PROPERTY WITH A BACKYARD COTTAGE TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED BY THE HIGNELL-STARK V. THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS CASE. THEY FOUND THAT THE REGULATION REQUIRING A PROPERTY TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED VIOLATED THE DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE. THIS RULING WOULD IMPACT OUR CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE WHICH CURRENTLY REQUIRES EITHER THE MAIN OR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, DWELLING, TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CALL THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ENSURE THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE COURT RULING. >> Cary: OKAY. THANK YOU. DO COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> JUST MORE OF A PROCESS QUESTION. THIS IS GOING TO BE NOTICED CITYWIDE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE COTTAGE ALREADY BUILT OUT TO GET NOTICE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING? >> IT WILL JUST BE THE STANDARD NEWSPAPER NOTICE FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS. SO IT WON'T SPECIFICALLY GO TO ANYBODY WHO HAS A BACKYARD COTTAGE. IT'S THE CITYWIDE NOTICE. >> Olley: THANKS. >> Cary: MR. RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. JUST FOR THE RECORD, I OWN A BACKYARD COTTAGE SO I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN FROM THIS VOTE. >> Cary: FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU. OKAY. GREAT. >> I MOVE WE -- OH. >> Cary: YEAH, FIRST, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Cary: OKAY. SO SINCE WE DON'T, I'LL CLOSE THIS HEARING AND CONFINE COMMENTS TO COMMISSION AND STAFF. >> I MOVE WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING. >> SECOND. >> Cary: OKAY. WE HAVE A CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY. AND WE HAVE A RECUSAL BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> THAT'S AN ABSTENTION, NOT A RECUSAL RIGHT? >> Cary: ABSTENTION. THANK YOU. AND THE VOTE FOR CALLING THE PUBLIC HEARING PASSES 6-0. GREAT. THANK YOU. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 9. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO CAL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PERTAININ TO STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS AN TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE APPLICANT: CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERA. >> THANK YOU. MELISSA, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT . SO THIS IS A REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS. THE 88th TEXAS LEGISLATURE CONCLUDED ON MAY 29th OF YEAR. STAFF IS ANALYZING 17 BILLS THAT HAVE PASSED BOTH CHAMBERS. THE DEADLINE FOR ACTION BY THE GOVERNOR ISUNE 18 AND UNLESS VETOED MOST BILLS BECOME EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1st. ALTHOUGH SEVERAL BILLS BECOME EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY IF THEY RECEIVED A TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF ALL MEMBERS ELECTED TO EACH HOUSE. THIS REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING IS INTENDED TO COVER ANY ORDINANCE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AS A RESULT OF THE BILLS PASSED THIS SESSION. ANY CHANGES TO REGULATION SHOULD BE FINALIZED BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1st, SO THE PROCESS FOR THESE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS NEEDS TO BEGIN IMMEDIATELY. IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT STAFF MAY ALSO INCLUDE UPDATES FROM PRIOR LEGISLATIVE LEGAL STANDARDS AND GENERALNT- PRACTICE WITHIN THE STATE. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS AND ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW . I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Cary: DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> Olley: ANOTHER PROCESS QUESTION. WOULD WE -- I GUESS THIS MIGHT BE MORE OF A QUESTION TO MICHELLE. ARE WE GOING TO BE GIVEN A RUNDOWN SUMMARY OF ALL 17 OR JUST THE ONES YOU THINK PERTINENT TO PLANO? HOW DOES THIS PLAY OUT? >> SO USUALLY WHAT WE DO IS JUST BRING ORDINANCE CHANGES TO YOU ALL, SINCE THEY'RE REQUIRED. SO WE GIVE YOU RED LINES SHOWING YOU THE OLD ORDINANCE AND THE NEW AND BRING THEM FOR ADOPTION. IS THERE GOING TO BE ANYTHING DIFFERENT THIS YEAR, CHRISTINA? >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE'LL JUST HIGHLIGHT THE BILLS THAT ARE IMPACTING THE CHANGES WE'RE PROPOSING. >> Cary: GREAT. OTHER QUESTIONS? NO OTHER QUESTIONS? THEN -- YES. COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: I CAN SEE THAT BOTH OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH ON THIS AGENDA MIGHT BE LENGTHY AND I'M WONDERING WITHIN THE TIME-FRAME THAT THE CITY HAS TO FOLLOW IF THERE'S ROOM TO SPACE THEM OUT SO THEY'RE NOT STACKED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER IN A SINGLE MEETING. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. TYPICALLY WE HANDLE THESE ITEMS AS WE'RE ABLE TO. I THINK BOTH OF THEM ARE PRESSING, DUE TO LEGISLATIVE CONCERNS. SO I THINK WE'LL TRY TO GET THEM TO YOU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. WE DO HAVE QUITE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ON OUR AGENDAS WITH SOME ZONING CASES IN THE WINGS AS WELL AS CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE'LL DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND TRY TO BALANCE OUT THE MEETING WORKLOADS. WE APPRECIATE THAT. >> Cary: SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE BUSY. >> YOU WILL BE BUSY. >> Cary: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE,O WE HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS? >> WE DO. SARAH STETLER. >> GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK HERE TONIGHT. >> Cary: GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> SARAH STUTLER. I'M HERE TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING AT CUSTER AND PARK. I SAW THE PROPOSAL -- >> I DON'T THINK THAT'S ON THE AGENDA. >> Cary: YEAH, SO THIS WASN'T ON THE AGENDA -- >> IT WAS FROM EARLIER. THIS PARTICULAR TIME IS FOR ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE CHANGES DUE TO THE LEGISLATURE. >> OH. >> THE GENERAL CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT WAS AT THE VERY, VERY BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. >> OH. DID I SIGN UP FOR THE WRONG TIME? >> [OFF MIC] >> IF WE CAN GET YOUR INFORMATION, WE CAN GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT. IT IS GOING TO BE SCHEDULED FOR A FUTURE AGENDA AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT WHEN IT'S GOING TO COME FORWARD. >> I SAW THERE WAS GOING TO BE A CALL FOR PUBLIC -- >> IT WILL BE ON AN AGENDA IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND WE CAN GIVE YOU INFORMATION ABOUT WHEN IT'S GOING TO BE. >> Cary: THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO ADDRES IT. THANK YOU FOR COMING. SORRY FOR THAT. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? OKAY. WELL, WE WILL CONFINE COMMENTS TO COMMISSION. >> I MOVE WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ISSUE. >> SECOND. >> Cary: WE HAVE A MOTION TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT MOTION PASSES 7-0. AND THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF OUR MEETING, ESSENTIALLY. COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY ITEMS WE WOULD LIKE TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA? >> [OFF MIC >> I THINK OUR FUTURE AGENDAS ARE PRETTY FULL AS IT IS. >> Cary: THEY SEEM TO BE BUILDING THEMSELVES. >> Bronsky: I WOULD LIKE TO SAY YOU HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB TONIGHT. >> Cary: YOU WOULD LIKE TO BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. THANK YOU FOR MAKING IT EASY, ESPECIALLY TO ERIC AND HIS STAFF. AS ALWAYS, YOU GUYS DO A GREAT JOB AND IT'S FUN BEING HERE. SO I WILL CONCLUDE THE MEETING AND CALL THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:48. EVERYONE HAVE A WONDERFUL NIGHT. [MEETING ADJOURNED]