PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. MARCH 20, 2023 >> Chair Downs: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR COMING THIS EVENING, JOINING US FOR THIS EVENING, THE MARCH 20 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THES ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY INFORMATION. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NE. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANYPE? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE TO CONSENT. >> 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. >> Chair Downs: WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, I'LL -- >> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 6-0 FOR THE RECORD, NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER TONG WAS UNABLE TO JOIN US THIS EVENING. WE HOPE SHE'S RECOVERING WELL FROM HER HEALTH ISSUE AND THEN WE ARE STILL SHORT ONE COMMISSIONER BUT WE EXPECT TO HAVE THAT REMEDIED BY APRIL 3. ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 1A. >> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER REGISTRATIONS ARE RECEIVED. APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL IF NEEDED. REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMON TIME, WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIO LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY, EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDE. IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, I WILL READ BOTH 1A AND 1B TOGETHER. >> Chair Downs: PLEASE DO. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2022-018 - REQUEST TO REZONE 5.2 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF J PLACE, 111 FEET NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 190 FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND TO RESCIND SPECIFIC USE PERMITS NO. 525 AND 529 FOR CORACTONSTCTION; NO. 526 AND 528 FOR AUTO STORAGE; AND NO. 527 AND 530 FOR USED CAR DEALER. PETITIONER: JAN MARTIN, GRAPELAND PROPERTIES, LLC, S.H. LUCAS INVESTMENTS, LLC, NUMERO UNO LTD., AND SMITH-LISL HOLDINGS LTD. THIS IS FOR LEGLATIVE CONSIDERATION. AGENDA ITEM NO. 1B. CONCEPT PLAN: TRG J PLACE ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1 - 307 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS ON ONE LOT ON 4.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF J PLACE, 11 FEET NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 190 ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMITS NO. 525 AN 529 FOR CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION; NO. 526 AND 528 FOR AUTO STORAGE; AND NO. 527 AND 530 FO USED CAR DEALER AND LOCATED WITHIN THE 190 TOLLWAY/PLANO PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. PROJE. APPLICANTS ARE THE SAME INDIVIDUALS AS NAMED PREVIOUSLY. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M RAHA POULADI. AS MENTIONED, THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL TO CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL . PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL BASE ZONING. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES IN THIS AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS AERIAL MAP, THE PROPERTY HAS -- IS ADJACENT TO THE MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR TO THE NORTH AND THE NORTHERN PROPERTY IS ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL AS WELL. AND ALSO TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY USED AS HOTEL AND IT'S ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL AS WELL. VACANT LAND TO THE SOUTH IS ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL AS WELL. AND TO THE WEST, THE PROPERTY IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL, THE SAME AS THE REQUEST. THIS IS THE ZONING EXHIBIT SHOWING THE BOUNDARY OF THE PETITION. TO GIVE YOU A HISTORY ON THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY, ORIGINALLY A ZONING CASE WAS COMM SUBMITTED UNDER THE INTERIM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN 2021 AND THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THE ZONING CASE. THE COMP PLAN ANALYSIS, ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARD, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR AND THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY ENVISIONS REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AA TO PROVIDE A WELCOMING AND ATTRACTIVE GATEWAY TO DOWNTOWN. THAT'S OF COURSE THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE LARGER AREA INTO THE CIVIC AND CULTURAL HEART OF THE CITY. THE COMP PLAN LISTS SEVERAL POLICIES AS IT IS LISTED ON THE SCREEN. IN GENERAL, THE DESCRIPTION AND PRIORITIES REGARDING THE DESCRIPTION AND PRIORITIES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHE PLAN, THIS PROPOSAL MEETS -- THIS PROPOSAL DOESN'T MEET THE MIX OF USES AND THIS PROPOSAL PARTIALLY MEETS THE CHARACTER-DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DASHBOARD. WHEN IT COMES TO THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP, THIS PROPOSAL MEETS THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAP. IT MEETS THE PARKS MASTER PLAN MAP BUT IT DOES NOT MT THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP. AS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR POLICY, THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT. THIS REQUEST ALSO DOES NOT MEET -- DEPENDING ON THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION, TRANT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT POLICY. AS FOR RGM ACTION 1 AND RGM ACTION 8, THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT MEET. AND ALSO RGM ACTION 1 TRIGGERS FINDING POLICY. AS FOR THE DOWNTOWN VISION AND STRATEGY UPDATE, THIS ALSO REQUIRES THE DIRECTION FROM COMMISSION. AS FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE PROPOSES 325 UNITS AND THE REQUEST IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE SURROUNDING ZONING ON THE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL LIVING. APPROXIMATELY 3,000 TOTAL UNITS HAVE BEEN BUILT OR ARE PENDING CONSTRUCTION IN THE DART CORRIDOR. AS FOR THE ACCESS TO DART, THE WALKING DISTANCE TO THE CLOSEST DART STATION, WHICH IS GOING TO BE IN THE CITY LINE, IS APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET. FUTURE RESIDENTS WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION CROSSWALK FROM THE WESTERN-MOST POINT OF THE PROPERTY AND THROUGH A PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTION. THAT IS PART OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ALSO LOCATED IN EHA-2. THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STUDY NOTES THAT THE PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATION IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER WITHIN 330 FEET OF MAJOR HIGHWAYS AND CONCENTRATION OF SOME AIR POLLUTANT DECREASES BY OVER 50% WITHIN THE FIRST 100 TO 150 METERS FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROADWAY E SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS WITHIN 140 AND 210 FEET OF THE EDGE OF STATE HIGHWAY 190, WHICH IS LESS THAN 330 TO 490 FEET. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THAT AREA AND THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS A PARKING STRUCTURE BETWEEN THE EXPRESSWAY AND THE TWO RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO ACT AS A NOISE BARRIER RESULTING IN AN OUTDOOR NOISE LEVEL OF UP TO 74 DBA FOR THE SOUTH BUILDING AND UP TO 65 DBA ON THE NORTHERN BUILDING. THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATION REQUIRES THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE NOISE READING FOR ALL THE UNITS TO SHOW NOISE LEVEL OF LESS THAN 45 DBA. THIS INDOOR TARGET IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GUIDELINES BUT THE MITIGATION DOES NOT ACHIEVE THE TARGET FOR OUTDOOR NOISE LEVEL. THE EHA SITE ANALYSIS CONFIRMS THAT THERE IS NO REASONABLY-FEASIBLE MITIGATION THAT COULD ACHIEVE TO TARGET MAXIMUM OUTDOOR NOISE LEVEL OF 65 DBA FOR THE SOUTH BUILDING. ACCORDING TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATION, 10 TO 20% REQUIRED OPEN SPACE IS EXPECTED FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT. ALSO, THE APPLICANT REQUIRES TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 50-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS CURRENTLY A MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR. AND ALSO THE APPLICANT AGREED TO PROVIDE A SEVEN-FOOT PEDESTRIAN WALK ALONG J PLACE ALONG WITH STREET TREES AND ON-STREET PARKING TO GIVE AN URBAN LOOK. PRIDING TRAIL CONNECTION TO THE CURRENT TRAIL AND ALSO THEY ARE GOING TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ON ALL THREE SIDES: NORTHERN, SOUTHERN, AND WESTERN. THERE ARE ALSO FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS, UNIT SIZE RESTRICTIONS, AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. AS FOR THE RESPONSES, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE A SIGNED LETTER WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER OF THE ZONING PETITION BUT WE RECEIVED ONE UNIQUE RESPONSE AND ONE DUPLICATE RESPONSE WITHIN THE AREA OF REQUEST, AS IT IS SHOWN IN THE EXHIBIT. IN TOTAL, WE RECEIVED FOUR UNIQUE RESPONSES WITH TWO DUPLICATE RESPONSES AND TWO RESPONSES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. AS FOR THE SUMMARY, OVERALL THE PD DISTRICT IS DESIGNATED TO INCLUDE STANDARDS WHICH WILL ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPANION CONCEPT PLAN, NUMEROUS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVES, APPLYING THE PROPOSED STREET SECTION ALONG J PLACE, AND PROVIDING TRAIL CONNECTION AS NOTED IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STIPULATION. AS FOR THE ZONING CASE RECOMMENDATION, DUE TO THE LACK OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE RGM1, THIS REQUEST IS DISFAVORED UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WILL REQUIRE A JUSTIFICATION OF FINDINGS BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING AND ZONING MMISSION MAY OCCASIONALLY ALLOW PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT STRICTLY CONFORM TO THE STANDARD ABOVE, AS NOTED IN THE FINDING FORM. AS FOR THE CONCEPT PLAN, DUE TO THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF THE ZONING CASE, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE CONCEPT PLAN. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THEY HAVE A PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> Chair Downs: QUESTIONS HERE WE GO. MR. BRONSKY, I'M GOING TO TRY TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE SPEAKER. >> Bronsky: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE THOROUGH PRESENTATION. MY FIRST QUESTION ACTUALLY IS FOR MR. BELL. MICHAEL, COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHY, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DOWNTOWN AREA, THERE ARE CERTAIN SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AREAS THAT ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE CALCULATION? >> SURE. THERE ARE ACTUALLY FOUR NEIGHBORHOODS: HAGGARD, DOUGLAS, VENDOME, AND THE HAGGARD ADDITION IS ON THE EDGE, SO IT'S NOT EASY TO SEE. THOSE ARE GENERALLY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE IDEA BEHIND TAKING THEM OUT OF THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR AND PUTTING THEM INTO NEIGHBORHOODS IS THESE ARE HISTORIC. THERE WAS PRESERVATION IN THE CURRENT FORM AND NOT ALLOWED IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR DASHBOARD. >> Bronsky: ONE FOLLOW UP. THE NINE HOMES THAT WE RECENTLY APPROVED ARE IN THAT GENERAL AREA. WERE THOSE INCLUDED IN THAT AS WELL ON 11th STREET OR SOMEWHERE? >> I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK BUT I BELIEVE THOSE ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS ASSOCIATED WITH VENDOME, BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK. >> Bronsky: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. MY SECOND QUESTION IS YOU MENTIONED ON ONE OF THE SLIDES WHEN YOU COVERED THE FOUR AREAS AROUND THIS PROPERTY THAT THE SOUTH PROPERTY DIRECTLY BELOW THIS WAS INCOMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL LIVING BECAUSE IT'S DESIGNED&-ú. CAN WE REALISTICALLY EXPECT TO SEE LIGHT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPED ON THAT PROPERTY THE WAY THAT IT'S STRUCTURED WITH THE DRAINAGE RUNNING THROUGH IT? >> RIGHT. AS YOU MENTIONED THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY AND STAFF HAS CONTEMPLATED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE. WE ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO REACH OUT TO THE PPERTY OWNER T INCORPORATE THAT SECTION WITHIN THIS REQUEST. BUT I BELIEVE THEY CAN FURTHER EXPLAIN THAT. BUT I BELIEVE THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO SECURE THAT PROPERTY. HOWEVER, DEPENDING ON THE USE IN THE FUTURE, IT MAY BE DEVELOPABLE DEPENDING. >> Bronsky: SO THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD SOMETHING ON THERE? >> STAFF THINKS THAT BASED ON THE REQUIRED SETBACK, IT IS POSSIBLE. >> Bronsky: OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR RIGHT NOW. >> MR. BRONSKY, I HAVE AN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION. I ACTUALLY MISSPOKE. IT IS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. THAT ACTUALLY FOLLOWS THE BOUNDARY, IT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE, AND THAT IS IN THE CALCULATIONS FOR THE MIX OF USES. >> Bronsky: THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING, SO THANK YOU FORNFOR FOLLOWING UP WITH THAT. >> Chair Downs: I BELIEVE NEXT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: QUICK QUESTION. THE -- I BELIEVE IT'S THE BUILDING OR THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST IS ALREADY PD CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL. DOES THAT FALL WITHIN THE EHA, ANY OF THE EHA ZONE DESIGNATION? >> THAT PROPERTY WAS APPROVED PRIOR TO THE EHA DESIGNATION. >> Olley: OKAY. REGARDING THE EHA DESIGNATION, I KNOW WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT NOISE AND NOISE MITIGATION, BUT THERE'S A PARTICULATE MATTER TO THAT. THE RULES CONCERNING THAT JUST ON INDOOR PARTICULATE MATTER OR DOES THAT COVER THE OUTDOOR SPACES, THE POOL, OR THE OPEN GROUND? DOES THE PARTICULATE MATTER MITIGATION -- ARE THERE RULES THAT GOVERN THE OUTDOOR SPACES OR IF YOU SOLVED FOR THE INDOOR YOU SOLVED FOR ANY EHA CONSIDERATIONS? >> AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, THE AIR POLLUTION AND NOISE POLLUTION BOTH, THERE ARE CONSIDERATIONS FOR BOTH INDOOR AND OUTDOOR. HOWEVER, I WOULD ASK HIM TO EXPLAIN ON THE CERTAIN REQUIRED THRESHOLD FOR AIR POLLUTION. >> HELLO. JORDAN ROCKERBY, SENIOR PLANNER IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE PARTICULATE MATTER, THE COMP PLAN DOESN'T HAVE A PAICULATE MATTER BUT WHAT IT DOES DIRECT IS FOR INTAKE VENTS TO BE LOCATED AS FAR AWAY FROM THE SOURCE OF POLLUTION. SO IN THIS CASE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDINGS AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAY, AS WELL AS THE ZONING TYPICALLY REQUIRES A LARGER LANDSCAPE EDGE ALONG THE SIDE OF THE SITE CLOSEST TO THE HIGHWAY TO HELP MITIGATE BOTH INDOOR AND OUTDOOR PARTICULATES. >> Olley: OKAY. SO THE ONLY MITIGATION WE HAVE FOR OUTDOOR PARTICULATES SOUNDS LIKE IT'S DISTANCE. THE FURTHER YOU CAN GET AWAY FROM THE SOURCE -- >> CORRECT. IT WOULD BE THE NUMBER ONE DISTANCE FOR THE INTAKE VENTS TO HELP MITIGATE THE INDOOR PARTICULATE LEVELS, AND THEN HAVING THAT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING REQUIRED AS THAT KIND OF NATURAL FILTER. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT RGM1. LOOKING AT THE REASONS WHY WE'RE NOT COMPLYING WITH RGM1, JUST TO CLARIFY, ONE, IS THE MIX OF USES AND, SECOND, IS THE DENSITY. >> CORRECT. >> Ratliff: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S WOVEN THROUGH YOUR ENTIRE STAFF REPORT IS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A TOD OR NOT A TOD. SO IF WE INDEED FIND THAT THIS IS A TOD, DOES THE DENSITY QUESTION GO AWAY? >> CORRECT. >> Ratliff: SO THEN WE WOULD BE DOWN TO A MIX OF USES QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. >> Ratliff: SOAST MEETING WE HAD A CASE WHERE WE ACTUALLY LOOKED BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY TO CONSIDER MIX OF USES. HAVE WE CONSIDERED THAT AS A WAY TO LOOK AT THIS CASE AS WELL? >> NO, IT'S CLEARLY DEFINED IN THE HOUSING INVENTORY. IT'S LIMITED TO THE MIX OF USES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR AREA BOUNDARY. >> Ratliff: THIS IS REQUIRED TO THE MIX OF USES QUESTION? IT WAS COUNTING THE ENTIRE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR. IT WAS THE APPLICANT THAT SUGGESTED USING THE ENTIRE AREA AROUND . IT WAS NOT A STAFF CALCULATION. IT IS ALL THE PROPERTIES WITHIN DOWNTOWN CALCULATED TOGETHER TO CALCULATE THAT MIX OF USES. >> Ratliff: IT'S NOT ABOUT THE MIX OF USES ON THAT PARCEL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OVERALL MIX OF USES IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. OKAY. THAT'S WHY I NEEDED CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. I DON'T KNOW, COMMISSIONER OLLEY, IS YOUR SPEAKER BUTTON STILL ON? >> Cary: FIRST OF ALL, THANKSOR THE RIGOR ON THIS. STAFF IS REALLY SORTING THROUGH THIS TO TRY TO GET THE RIGHT ANSWERS, ESPECIALLY AS IT LAYERS INTO THE COMP PLAN. YOU KNOW, I APPLAUD YOU FOR THAT. MY QUESTION IS SIMPLE AND IT'S PIGGYBACKING ON COMMISSIONER RATLIFF'S AND IT HAS TO DO WITH RGM ONE. ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF RGM1 IS SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC INTEREST. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE SAID IS THAT THIS WOULD BE IN CONFLICT DUE TO RGM1. BUT AS I READ THIS, I THINK MAYBE THERE COULD BE A CASE THAT THERE MIGHT BE BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC. MY QUESTION IS HOW DID YOU GUYS LOOK AT THAT WHEN YOU SAID THAT IT WAS DISFAVORED DUE TO THAT? >> RIGHT. SO WHAT WE SIMPLY LOOK AT IS THE MIX OF USES, THE BUILDING HEIGHT, AND THE DENSITY. THAT'S IT. IF IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH ONE OF THOSE THREE, IT'S DISFAVORED. THE DECISION TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE NEIGHBORS FALLS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL. WE AS STAFF DON'T MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. >> Cary: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'M LOOKING AT THE LETTER, WHICH APPEARS ON PAGE 148 OF OUR PACKET. IT'S A LETTER FROM ADAM BROWN ADDRESSED TO CHRISTINA DAY, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. AND IT STARTS OUT BY SAYING I FIRST WANT TO THANK YOU AND THE PLANNING STAFF FOR YOUR TIME, EFFORT, AND VISION IN ASSISTING US WITH THIS APPLICATION OVER THE PAST YEAR. IN PARTICULAR, MR. ERIC HILL AND MS. RAHA POULADI HAVE CRAFTED A DOCUMENT THAT THE CITY OF PLANO CAN BE PROUD OF. DID YOUR DEPARTMENT CRAFT THIS PROPOSAL? . >> I BELIEVE THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION. THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS TO REZONE FROM LIGHT COMMERCIAL TO BG DISTRICT. HOWEVER, WE TALKED TO THE APPLICANT AND THEY AGREED TO DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL, SIMILAR TO THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST. AND THEY AGREED TO ALMOST ALL OF THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND THE OTHER DESIGN ELEMENTS IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE REQUEST. I THINK WHAT THEY MEANT WAS WE HELPED THEM WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND STIPULATIONS. >> Brounoff: OKAY. BUT YOUR DEPARTMENT STILL DISFAVORS THE APPLICATION? >> ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, RGM1, AND RGM8. THEY DON'T MEET A CERTAIN PORTION OF THOSE , THAT'S WHY WE ARE NOT ABLE TO FAVOR THIS PETITION. >> Brounoff: NOW, AT OUR LAST MEETING WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE FRY PROPERTY, CHRISTINA DAY WAS SITTING IN OUR MEETING, THAT PARTICULAR MEETING, AND I ASKED HER SPECIICALLY ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST, AURA 190, I THINK IT'S CALLED, AND HOW THAT GOT TO BE APPROVED GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND THE MIX OFSES AND DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR FACTORS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE. AND I BELIEVE THE ANSWER I RECEIVED WAS THAT THE AURA 190 PROJECT WAS APPROVED UNDER A PREVIOUS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT UNDER LOOSER LESS RIGIDLY-DEFINED STANDARDS THAT WERE IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME BUT ARE NO LONGER IN EFFECT, WITH THE CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD NOT PROVIDE A PRECEDENCE SUPPORTING A SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T BUT WE CAN'T LOOK TOHATOPMENT- PROJECT AS PRECEDENT TO SUPPORT IT. IS THAT ALSO YOUR UNDERSTANDING? >> NOT SURE IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION CORRECTLY. >> SO COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF, YOU'RE CORRECT. MS. DAY WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN PLACE AT THE TIME THAT THAT PREVIOUS CASE WENT FORWARD AND WAS APPROVED. WE JUDGE EACH CASE UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UNDER WHICH IT'S BEEN FILED UNDER. SO WE DID NOT LOOK AT THAT PREVIOUS PLAN, BASED UPON THIS REQUEST. WE VIEWED IT UNDER THE CURRENT LENS. >> Brounoff: WE VIEWED THIS PLAN UNDER ITS OWN SET OF MERITS AND NOT BASED ON WHAT HAPPENED TO THE WEST. >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE DO NOTE THERE IS RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST. WE NOTED THAT IN OUR STAFF REPORT. AS MS. POULADI MENTIONED, ALL THE PLANS AND ZONING CASES BEFORE US, STAFF HAS HAD A HAND IN THOSE, ESPECIALLY COMPLEX CASES LIKE THIS WE HELP THE APPLICANT CRAFT THE LANGUAGE AND PROPOSE DESIGN CHANGES, THINGS LIKE THAT, REALLY TO HELP THEM DO BUSINESS THE WAY PLANO DOES AND GIVE THEM THE BEST OPPORTUNITFOR SUCCESS. >> Brounoff: DO I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH OF THIS PARCEL IS AN ACTIVE AUTO REPAIR FACILITY? >> CORRECT. IT'S A MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR. AND ACCORDING TO CURRENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY, THERE SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 150 SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BAY DOORS AND THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS. BUT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WITH THE 50-FOOT SETBACK THERE WOULD BE CLOSE T 85 FEET FROM E BAY DOORS OF THOSE MAJOR VEHICLE REPAIR. HOWEVER, WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALLOWING FOR THESE RESIDENTIAL USES, THAT WILL REMEDY THAT 150 FEET RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY. >> Brounoff: WOULD THE UNITS IN THE NORTHERN-MOST BUILDING HAVE WINDOWS AND BALCONIES OVERLOOKING THE AUTO REPAIR FACILITY? >> I THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD BE A BETTER RESOURCE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AN OPAQUE EVERGREEN LIVING SCREENING ON THE NORTHERN SIDE, IN ADDITION TO A WROUGHT IRON FENCE. >> Brounoff: YEAH, WOULD THE FENCE AND THE VEGETATION BE FIVE STORIES TALL? >> NO, IT WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT-FOOT TALL. >> THERE IS NO PROHIBITION FOR WINDOWS OR BALCONIES ON THAT FACADE, I BELIEVE, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'S NO PROHIBITION TO WINDOWS OR BALCONIES? >> NO. >> THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD DEVELOP IT. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIF >> Ratliff: THA YOU. JUST A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ON RGM-8. WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE MIX OF USES, SO I PRESUME HAT STANDARD IS THE SAM. BUT RGM-8 IS ABOUT EHA 2. IS THAT THE PRIMARY REASON THAT RGM-8 IS COMING INTO PLAY BECAUSE OF THE EHA? >> I WOULD LET MR. BELL. >> RGM-8 SAYS RESIDENTIAL [INDISCERNIBLE] WHICH IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF MIX OF USES. AND SECONDLY THAT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHOULD MEET THE HOUSING DIVERSIFICATION OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STREGY THE CITY SUCH AS TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. THOSE TWO THINGS TOGETHER MUST BE MET TO COMPLY WITH RGM-8. >> Ratliff: IF WE SAY THAT -- I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE COMMISSION, BUT IF WE GO ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT IT IS A TOD, DOES THAT MIX OF USES ANSWER CHANGE? >> NO BECAUSE THEY WOULD STILL NOT BE COMPLIANT WITH MIX OF USES. THEY WOULD CHECK THE BOX FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY BUT THE OTHER HALF OF THAT WOULD STILL NOT BE MET. >> Ratliff: OKAY. THEN WE'RE STILL BACK TO THE MIX OF USES AND THE EHA QUESTION. >> IF I COULD OFFER A CLARIFICATION TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT RGM-1. YOU ASKED ABOUT THE SPECIFICS ON THE FRY CASE, THERE'S AN RGM-5 THAT APPLIES TO MIX OF USE SITES. THAT DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT'S A STRICT MULTIFAMILY REQUEST, IT'S NOT A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. >> Ratliff: GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: MR. BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE EHA INTAKE. ARE THERE ANY INTAKE MITIGATIONS THAT COULD BE USED TO MITIGATE THE PARTICULATE INTAKE TO MEET THE EHA GUIDELINES? >> SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WE DON'T HAVE A SET STANDARD FOR LIKE PARTICULATE PARTS PER MILLION. WE SIMPLY REQUIRE THAT INTAKE BE LOCATED AS FAR AWAY FROM THE SOURCE OF POLLUTION AS POSSIBLE. WHETHER OR NOT CERTAIN SCREENING COULD BE ADDED TO THAT FILTER, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DON'T HAVE EXPERTISE IN. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY. >> IT'S JUST A MATTER OF DISTANCE. THERE COULD BE MITIGATIONS THAT WOULD BE BETTER THAN DISTANCE BUT WE JUST HAVEN'T -- WE'RE JUST SAYING DISTANCE IS DISTANCE. >> THAT'S CORRECT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT TARGET PARTS PER MILLION TO MEASURE -- WE DON'T HAVE A TARGET TO REDUCE PARTICULATES TO X PERCENT. WE REQUIRE THOSE INTAKES BE LOCATED AS FAR AWAY FRO POLLUTION AS POSSIBLE, WHETHER AN ADDITIONAL FILTER IS ADDED ON BY THE DEVELOPER IS AT THEIR DISCRETION . >> Bronsky: I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION RELATED TO THE SOUND AS WELL. SO THERE'S A SNORING PROBLEM IN MY FAMILY'S HOME AND ONE OF THE THINGS I NEVER THOUGHT WE WOULD DO -- I'M NOT SAYING WHICH SIDE THAT FALLS ON -- ONE OF THE THINGS I NEVER THOUGHT WE WOULD DO IS WE ACTUALLY PURCHASED A BOSE SLEEP BUDS TO GO IN OUR EARS. AND I WAS REALLY SURPRISED THAT RATHER THAN BEING ABLE TO SIMPLY DEADEN THE SOUND, IT ACTUALLY USES SOUND TO DEADEN ALL OF THE NOISE. SO THE IDEA THAT THE EHA IS 74 OR SOME NUMBER ABOVE 45, HAVE WE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE IMPACTS THAT SOUND, ESPECIALLY SIMILAR SOUNDS TO WHAT ROADWAYS WOULD PRE INTO DEADENING SOUND RATHER THAN JUST SAYING ALL SOUND IS BAD? >> ASSUMING I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION, NO. WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT. WHAT THE EHA GUIDELINES STATE IS THAT THE OUTDOOR NOISE BE NO GREATER THAN 65 DBA LDN. SO IT DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR NOISE LEVELS ON THE INTERIOR OF THE UNIT, JUST ON THE OUTSIDE. >> Bronsky: NO, NO. MY QUESTION WAS -- LET ME SEE IF I CAN PHRASE THIS DIFFERENTLY. ON MY STREET, IF SOMEBODY COMES DOWN MY STREET BLOWING A HORN REALLY LOUDLY, HAVING A SOUND LEVEL THAT WOULD BE A NEUTRAL KIND OF SOUND MAY ACTUALLY BE A NET POSITIVE TO MY HOME BECAUSE OF THE EXTERIOR NOISE GOING ON. WE HAVE NEVER LOOKED AT WHAT THE IMPACT ACTUALLY COULD BE ON A POSITIVE SIDE FOR A HOMEOWNER LIVING IN A RESIDENCE WITH A DBA ABOVE 45, IS I GUESS MY QUESTION. >> OKAY. DON'T HAVE THA AMOUNT OF NUANCE WRITTEN INTO THEM. I WOULD NEED TO LOOK BACK AT THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT FROM -- IS IT 2021 -- THAT WAS USED IN PREPARING THOSE GUIDELINES TO SEE IF THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY CONSIDERED IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. >> Bronsky: I WAS JUST CURIOUS. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THAT SOUNDS TO ME MORE LIKE A MITIGATION ISSUE, WHICH I WOULD LEAVE TO THE DEVELOPERS TO DO THE RESEARCH AND GO, BY THE WAY, WE DISCOVERED... TO YOUR POINT, A 90-DEGREE FREQUENCY SEPARATION FROM THE AMBIENT NOISE WILL ELIMINATE OR REDUCE THE OVERALL NOISE. ANYTHING ELSE? MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: QUICK FOLLOW UP BACK TO THE EHA TO THE PARTICULATE MATTER. THE ADJACENCY STANDARD TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE REPAIR YOU MENTIONED, JUST FOR MY EDIFICATION, WHY THAT 150 DOES PARTICULATE OR EXHAUST FROM THAT BUSINESS COMING TO THE REASON WHY WE REQUIRE THAT SETBACK? OR IS IT MORE OF A VISUAL, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT OUR CHILDREN SEEING EXHAUST FROM RANDOM CARS. >> THAT 50-FOOT SETBACK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO PROVIDE ON THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, SO THE SETBACK BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THAT MAJOR AUTO REPAIR, THAT DOESN'T COME FROM OUR EHA STANDARDS, THAT COMES FROM OUR RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY STANDARDS. AS MS. POULADI MENTIONED, IF IT WAS THE REVERSE HAPPENING AND AN AUTO REPAIR PLACE WAS CHOOSING TO LOCATE NEAR RESIDENCES, WE WOULD REQUIRE A 150-FOOT SETBACK, SO THE 50-FOOT IS JUST SOMETHING EXTRAHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO SQUEEZE IN TO MITIGATE THEIR PROXIMITY TO THE EXISTING BUSINESS. AND IT'S MORE SO A NOISE AND NUISANCE, NOT SPECIFIC TO PARTICULATES. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: I DON'T SEE ANY MORE SPEAKER BUTTONS ON. I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BUT I THINK THEY'VE BEEN PRETTY WELL COVERED. WE MIGHT CIRCLE BACK TO THEM BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE ALSO SOMEWHAT RELATED TO WHAT WE MIGHT HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. NOTHING ELSE FOR STAFF, APPARENTLY? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M ASSUMING THE APPLICANT WANTS TO ADDRESS US. >> YES. WE HAVE THREE REPRESENTATIVES: ADAM BROWN, JIM LAKE, AND CONNOR OSBOURNE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. WHOEVER WANTS TO GO FIRST. >> HIT THE SLIDE TO GO TO MINE. GOOD EVENING, ADAM BROWN WITH TRINSIC RESIDENTIAL GROUP. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER. THE SITE IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF PLANO AND IT'S A SEMIBLAGE SO IT'S THREE DIFFERENT USES. WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE OWNERS OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR PLUS TO ASSEMBLE THE SITE, GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE. AS RAHA MENTIONED, WE FIRST CAME IN AS BG, AS A PROJECT, THE TOLL BROTHERS PROJECT. AFTER SPEAKING WITH THEM WE FELT THE RHT THING TOO WAS STEP BACK AND TRY TO COMPLY WITH AS MANY THINGS AS WE COULD. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S ISSUES THAT WE CAN'T. THERE'S SOME DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'LL HAVE LATER ABOUT TODs AND DENSITIES, BUT SIDEWALKS, SETBACKS, RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION, ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE REALLY WORKED WITH THE PLANNING STAFF TO CHECK THOSE BOXES AS MUCH AS WE COULD. JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SET THAT BACKGROUND BEFORE WE GOT INTO THE PRESENTATION. SO THE NEXT SLIDE IS JUST TO TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHO TRINSIC IS. WE STARTED T COMPA ABOUT 12 YEARS AGO. WE'RE BASED HERE IN DALLAS. I HANDLE TEXAS. WE HAVE DONE ABOUT 7,000 UNITS IN THE METROPLEX, SO VERY ACTIVE. YOU KNOW, THIS IS OUR BACKYARD. WE'LL TALK ABOUT LATER WE ACTUALLY DID THE PROJECT NEXT DOOR, 190 THAT EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH. SO WE HAVE HISTORY IN THE AREA AND KNOW THE SITE VERY WELL. NEXT SLIDE IS JUST A FEW OF OUR PROJECTS. THIS ONE IS IN GRAPEVINE. WE WORKED WITH THEM. IT WAS ALSO A REZONE. IT'S IN THEIR DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR OFF MAIN STREET. VERY SA SIMILAR SITUATION. THE NEXT SLIDE HERE ON THE LEFT IS IN DOWNTOWN LOUISVILLE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. WE PURCHASED THE SITE FROM THE CITY. IT'S NEXT TO A MASS TRANSIT STOP AS WELL. AND THEN THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS A PROJECT ON MAIN STREET JUST NORTH OF DOWNTOWN MANSFIELD. AGAIN, A REZONE THAT WE WORKED WITH THE CITY ON THAT ONE. THE NEXT PROJECT IS THE ONE THAT WE'VE BEEN SPEAKING OF, OR 190, THE ONE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DART TRACK. THIS IS A SIMILAR SITUATION AS THE ONE WE ARE ON. THERE'S MULTIPLE EASEMENTS, HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, THE GEOMETRY OF THE SITE REALLY AFFORDED ITSELF TO A MULTIFAMILY SITE. WE'LL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON OUR PARTICULAR SITE. SO AS WE LOOK AT THE SITE, KIND OF WE STEP BACK HOW TO ADDRESS THE SITE. YOU CAN SEE JUST NORTH OF CITYLINE, YOU CAN SEE THE YELLOW BOX THERE. WEE .MIS FRO A STOP, WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED TOD THERE AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A NEW STOP NORTH ON TWELFTH STREET AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE 190 KIND OF FLANKING THE SITE ON THE WEST, THE NEW HOTEL ON THE EAST. REALLY, THE WAY WE SEE THIS FROM AN AERIAL PERSPECTIVE IS THE HIGH DENSITY USES IN OUR OPINION, BELONG TO PLANO PARKWAY, AVENUE K, 75, REALLY WHERE THE HIGH-DENSITY OFFICE. WE SEE THIS AREA SIMILAR TO 190. IT'S RLLYN INTERIOR SITE. THERE'S NOT GREAT ACCESS FOR RETAIL. IT'S HIDDEN. YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID WE KNOW THE AREA. WE'RE STILL OWNERSHIP OF 190 HAD NO ISSUES WITH IT SO WE FELT IT WAS THE RIGHT PLACE TO DO A PHASE 2. WE REZONED THAT BACK IN 2014, BEEN SUCCESSFUL. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE EHA WEREN'T ISSUES THEN. WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY ISSUES. WE DIDN'T DO ANY MITIGATION AT THE TIME BECAUSE WE WEREN'T REQUIRED, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO ISSUES SINCE WE BUILT THAT IN 2016. NEXT SITE IS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER IN. YOU CAN SEE IT AERIALLY. TO THE SOUTH OF US THERE'S A DRAINAGE DITCH THROUGH THERE SO IT'S REALLY PRETTY HARD TO DEVELOP, NOT THAT IT COULDN'T ONE DAY. THE HOTEL OWNS THAT SITE SO THERE IS POTENTIAL THAT WE COULD WORK WITH THEM BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S REALLY PROBABLY GOING TO BE A GREEN SPACE, AT LEAST FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. AS YOU CAN SEE TO THE NORTH THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT TRACTS, ALL OPEN STORES TODAY. THEN THERE'S A BIG EASEMENT RIGHT TO THE MDLE. SO THAT'S REALLY A CHALLENGE OF THE SITE TO DEVELOP. THERE'S NO DIRECT ACCESS EXCEPT FOR OFF THE SIDE STREET. SO, AGAIN, WE FEEL IT'S BETTER SUITED FOR RESIDENTIAL. WE CAN ADDRESS THE EASEMENT WITH MULTIPLE BUILDINGS. AND IT REALLY JUST CLEANS UP THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY TO PLANO. YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS OUR SITE PLAN OVERLAID ON THAT EARLI. A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT RAHA ADDRESSED, WE HAVE THE TEN-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO THE SOUTH. TO THE NORTH WE HAVE A TRAIL EXTENSION THERE THAT MEETS THE EXISTING HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. OUR GARAGE IS ON THE SOUTH. WE HAVE NO BALCONIES ON THE SOUTH BUILDING, SOUTH OF THE EASEMENT, EXCEPT FOR THE UNITS THAT FACE THE NORTH COURTYARD. REALLY, AS FAR AS THE MITIGATION FACTORS THAT ARE STIPULATED IN THE PD. WE'RE DEDICATING A RIGHT OF WAY FOR FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE ADJACENT ROAD WITH PARALLEL PARKING, SEVEN-FOOT SIDEWALK, AND REALLY CREATING A WALKABILITY FACTOR FROM THE DART STATION TO THE SOUTH. I MEAN, WE BELIEVE PEOPLE WILL WALK TO THE SOUTH WILL ALWAYS WALK TO THE NORTH TO THOSE TRAIN STOPS THAT ARE REALLY ABOUT A 10 OR A 15-MINUTE WALK. WE FEEL LIKE BOTH ACCESS POINTS ARE CRITICAL AND REALLY A GREAT RESIDENTIAL FEEL. THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE DESIGN FEATURES OF THE ACTUAL APARTMENT COMPLEX AND WE BUILD PRODUCT., TOP OF THE MARKET ONE OR TWO BEDROOM. IT'S SIMILAR TO THE 190, SIMILAR FINISH LEVEL. AND, AGAIN, JUST SOME OF THE EXCERPTS OF THE PD WE HAVE BOTH MENTIONED IN OUR PRESENTATIONS. REALLY OUR LAST SLIDE HERE BEFORE CONNOR SPEAKS MORE IN DEPTH ABOUT THE COMP PLAN AND DENSITY. WHILE WE FEEL THAT REDEVELOPMENT IS SUPPORTED HERE, IN OUR OPINION, NO ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, TRANSIT ORIENTED, CLOSE TO MULTIPLE STOPS. YOU KNOW, THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY REALLY CLEANS UP REALLY THAT ENTRY POINT. AND THE SITE CONSTRAINTS, EASEMENTS. IT'S A HARD SITE AND THOSE ARE USUALLY A BEST FIT FOR MULTIFAMILY. ASSEMBLAGE AND WE'RE LOCAL. WE BUILT NEXT DOOR SO WE HAVE ALL THE FACTS THERE. CONNOR, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE US TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE. >> CONNOR OSBOURNE WITH JU WANTED TO SPEND SOME TIME WITH THE COMP ITEMS. THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. JUST WANTED TO SAY WE WORK IN A LOT OF CITIES ACROSS THE METROPLEX AND AS I'VE GOTTEN REALLY FAMILIAR WITH THE COMP PLAN OVER THE PAST YEAR, I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE EFFORT YOU GUYS PUT INTO -- WELL, THE DETAIL AND THE CARE IS REALLY EVIDENT FROM THE COMMITTEES, WHAT THEY DID LESS THAN TWO YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE. THAT BEING SAID, THE PLAN ITSELF STATES MANY TIMES IT IS TO BE A BROAD GUIDING TOOL, NOT A PRESCRIPTION FOR INDIVIDUAL UNIQUE SITES. I LISTENED TO A DECEMBER 2022 P&Z MEETING WHERE CHAIRMAN DOWNS SAID AT THE END THAT THE COMP PLAN IS A GUIDE FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY AND JUST LIKE MANY COMP PLANS BEFORE, IT WILL CONTINUOUSLY BE UNDER REVISION. YOU ALL HAVE BEEN PLACED ON P&Z BECAUSE OF YOUR WISDOM AND GUIDELINES IN THESE MATTERS. THE PLAN EMPOWERS YOU ALL TO ADAPT ITS HIGH-LEVEL GUIDANCE TO UNIQUE SCENARIOS FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES. AT THAT SAME DECEMBER MEETING, CHAIRMAN DOWNS CLOSED BY REMINDING THE COMMISSION THAT YOU ALL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE AND INHESE TOD AREAS THAT WILL LIKELY MEAN MORE MULTIFAMILY, EVEN IF IT SOMETIMES FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE DASHBOARDS. SO REALLY WE'VE GOT FOUR ISSUES THAT RAHA HIGHLIGHTED FOR US. RGM-1, THE MIX OF USES, THE MULTIFAMILY DASHBOARDS ARE ALREADY AT 90%. IT'S NOT ALLOWING MORE MULTIFAMILY. TWO, THE DENSITY IS ABOVE THE 50 UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH CAN BE CLEANED UP IF IT'S DETERMINED TOD. THREE, THE DOWNTOWN VISION AND STRATEGY UPDATE ALREADY HAS 2,000 UNITS, EVEN THOUGH -- IT SUGGESTS 2,000 UNITS,VEN THOUGH E GROUND SINCE 1999 START DATE. AND THEN THE FOURTH ISSUE IS REALLY THE EHA AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED IN DETAIL. ADDRESSING THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS THE MIX OF USES ALREADY BEING AT 90%. WE WOULD ASK YOU GUYS TO -- THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR IS THE AREA IN THE COMP PLAN THAT CONTEMPLATES THE MOST MULTIFAMILY INTENSITY. NOWHERE ELSE CONTEMPLATES 90%. THIS IS A PLACE THAT'S GOING TO GET MOSTLY MULTIFAMI. FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AS DEVELOPERS, IT'S VERY HARD TO BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY IN AN ALREADY-DEVELOPED PLACE. SINGLE-FAMILY NEEDS IS LOW DENSITY SO IT NEEDS LOW LAND PRICES AND LOW LAND PRICES ARE HARD TO COME BY WHEN YOU HAVE CASH-FLOWING INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS LIKE OUR EXISTING OWNERS. SO, REALLY, MULTIFAMILY IS WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SEE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR BECAUSE IT ADDS DENSITY AND WE CAN AFFORD TO TEAR DOWN THOSE OLDER USES AND ADD DENSITY. THE SECOND ITEM, AS YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, THE COMP PLAN IS NOT CLEAR ABOUT WHAT TOD IS AS IT RELATES TO THE RICHARDSON STOP, EVEN THOUGH IT IS WITHIN A QUARTER MILE. I WOULD SK THE COMMISSION TO CLARIFY FOR STAFF THAT THIS IS A TOD SITE BECAUSE IT'S .2 MILES WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE CITYLINE STATION. PEOPLE ARE ALREADY WALKING FROM OUR PROJECT NEXT DOOR TO THE BUSH CITYLINE STATION EVERY DAY TO GO TO WORK. I THINK CLEARLY INTERPRETING HELPFUL FROM YOU GUYS.E THE THIRD ISSUE REALLY COMES FROM THE DOWNTOWN VISION AND STRATEGY UPDATE, WHICH IS A SEPARATE DOCUMENT. FIRST STARTED IN 1999, IT IDENTIFIED 1,000 UNITS TO BE DESIRED AROUND THE DOWNTOWN PLANO STATION. IN 2013 IT WAS UPDATED TO EXPAND THAT VISION TO THE FOUR STATIONS, STARTING AT CITYLINE UP TO PARKER ROAD, AND EXPANDED THE GOAL TO 2,000 UNITS. THE QUESTION FOR COMMISSION TO STAFF AND US IS IS THAT 2,000 UNITS, IS THAT A HARD CAP OR IS IT A GOAL FOR REVITALIZATION OF DOWNTOWN? I READ IT AS A GOAL AS A WAY OF ADDING RESIDENTS AND DENSITY TO DOWNTOWN TO MAKE IT A FLOURISHING PLACE, BUT THAT'S FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE. AND THEN LASTLY ON THAT, IN THE DECEMBER MEETING I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE STARTED TO STUDY REZONINGS AROUND SOME OF THESE STATIONS DRIVEN BY THE SILVER LINE. I THINK THERE COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE RENDER THIS 1999 TARGET PERHAPS OBSOLETE GOING FORWARD, BUT THAT'S OBVIOUSLY IN THE WORKS. AND THEN THE FOURTH ONE IS EHA. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ITS LOCATION IN EHA 2, WHICH IS NOT RECOMMENDED BUT WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH STAFF TO POSITION OUR GARAGE ALONG THE HIGHWAY. YOU KNOW, ADD HEAVY-DUTY AIR FILTRATION, WHICH HELPS WITH THE PARTICULATES. WE'RE ADDING A HIGHER-GRADE FILTER THAN YOU NORMALLY SEE IN AN APARTMENT BUILDING. AND THEN WE REPLACED ALL OF OUR DUCTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE FREEWAY. THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING AWAY FROM THE FREEWAY, SORRY, WHICH IS A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE LEARNED FROM LEASING UP OUR PROJECT AT AURA 190 THAT SOME OF THOSE UNITS THAT ARE CLOSEST TO THE FREEWAY BUT ARE ALSO CLOSEST TO DART, ACTUALLY LEASED UP VERY QUICKLY AND WERE DESIRABLE FOR RESIDENTS BECAUSE OF THE CLOSER WALKING ACCESS TO DART. SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE FOUND THAT THE MARKET NECESSARILY CARED ABOUT, BEING CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAY AND HAVING HIGHER LEVELS OF NOISE. >> SIR, YOU HAVE ABOUT TWO MINUTES LEFT. >> THANK YOU. THIS SLIDE ADDRESSES RGM-1, WHICH IS WHY MAKE FINDINGS TO SUPPORT US. THE FIRST RGM-1 REQUIRES YOU TO LOOK THROUGH TWO LENSES, THE FIRST BEING IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS PLANO TODAY, PLANO 2050, AND PLANO TOGETHER, WHICH WE FEEL OUR PROPOSAL MEETS ALL OF THOSE. TWO, WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD, SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, A GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST. WE HAVE SUPPORT LETTERS FROM OUR TWO IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, THE HOTEL AND AURA 190. AS FAR AS THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND GENERAL PUBLIC, THIS IS GOING TO ADD A LOT MORE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO LIVE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR, AND IT BRINGS MORE VIBRANCY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC THIS UNDOUBTEDLY CLEANS UP A LOT OF THE MORE UNDESIRABLE USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY AT PLANO SOUTHERN GATEWAY BY RESCINDING SIX INDIVIDUAL SPECIAL-USE PERMITS THAT DO NOT ALIGN WITH THE CITY'S GOAL FOR THE CORRIDOR. HERE'S THE TWO SUPPORT LETTERS FROM THE HOTEL OWNER AND THE CURRENT OWNER OF AURA 190. THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. WE THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND ASK YOU GUYS TO PARTNER WITH US TO EXECUTE THE COMP PLAN'S VISION FOR A MORE ACCESSIBLE, CORRIDOR. WE FEEL THE CHANGE HAS TO CITY'S SOUTHERN GATEWAY? THE WE'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I THINK BEFORE WE GO TO QUESTIONS, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE ON THIS, ADDITIONAL? >> WE ONLY HAVE ONE. WE HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND BUT HE WANTED TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT. >> Chair Downs: WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND HAVE THAT PERSON -- AND THEY'RE IN SUPPORT. WE PROBABLY DON'T NEED A REBUTTAL. THEN WE'LL GO TO QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. >> I NEED TO CALL AMANDA LAKE. >> [OFF MIC] >> ARE YOU AN APPLICANT OR A RESIDENT? >> Chair Downs: IF YOU'RE PART OF THE APPLICANT, THEN I WOULD SAY WE'RE GOOD AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO QUESTIONS, THEN. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH I DON'T SEE ANYBODY WITH A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT UP HERE. OKAY. BOOM BOOM BOOM. HERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. SO, YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. >> Ratliff: FIRST OF ALL, THANKS. VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION. APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE DONE WITH THE STAFF TO HAVE SOMETHING TO BRING FORWARD TO US. I THINK IT'S VERY WELL-THOUGHT-OUT. ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS, BECAUSE YOU WERE PART OF THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, YOU MENTIONED THAT SOME OF THOSE UNITS LEASED FASTER. WHAT'S YOUR EXPERIENCE ON THOSE? ARE THOSE LOWER-PRICED UNITS? MARKET PRICE? WHAT ARE YOU SEEING AS FAR AS SUPPLY ANDEMAN OF THE UNITS THAT POTENTIALLY HAVE THE HIGHER NOISE VERSUS THE ONES ON THE OTHER SIDE? >> YEAH, I MEAN, JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE HISTORY, I WAS ACTUALLY THE ONE WHO WENT THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS IN 2014, SO I PRESENTED TO P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL AT THAT TIME. I WAS ACTUALLY THE PHYSICAL GUY THAT DEVELOPED IT. NOT SOMEBODY JUST TALKING ABOUT IT. YEAH, THOSE UNITS THAT ARE CLOSER TO THE FREEWAY ARE NOT DISCOUNTED. I MEAN, IF THAT ONE BEDROOM IS THERE VERSUS THE OTHER ONE, WE PUT PREMIUMS ON UNITS. WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE LEASING PROCESS, YOU KNOW, IF UNITS ARE MORE DESIRABLE, THEN WE ADD PREMIUMS. AS CONNOR MENTIONED, AS WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE SAW THAT THE UNITS, FOR PROXIMITY FOR RESIDENTS GOING TO CITYLINE WERE WILLING TO PAY. FOR THAT PREMIUM WAS 60 ON THE NORTH SIDE, MAYBE IT'S 75 ON THAT DAY. THAT'S REALLY JUST A FUNCTION OF THE LEASING, BUT THERE IS NO, FOR SPEED OF LEASING WE DIDN'T DISCOUNT THOSE UNITS. YOU KNOW, WE GOT MORE RENT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, EXACTLY. >> Ratliff: Y'RE SAYING THE PRIUMS ON THE SOUTH SIDE ARE ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN THE NORTH SIDE? >> THERE'S BEEN NO DISCOUNT. THERE'S NO DISCOUNT IN OUR EYES. AGAIN, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOISE, WE HAVE TO ESTABLISH A 45 DB INSIDE THE UNIT. SO IF YOU'RE LIVING IN THIS ENVIRONMENT, YOU'RE LIVING IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT, YOU'RE USED TO MORE NOISE OUTSIDE. SO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR UNIT, YOU'RE AT 45 DB, NO MATTER IF YOU'RE AN EHA OR IF YOU'RE OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF A FIELD. THERE'S NO NEGATIVE IMPACT FROM THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE YOU'RE LIVING IN AN URBAN SETTING, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> Ratliff: YEAH. SO THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY LEASING ISSUES? >> NO ISSUES. >> Ratliff: AND OCCUPANCY IS WHAT WOULD BE EXPECTED. >> YEAH, 95%, WHICH IS THE STANDARD FOR OCCUPANCY. I MEAN, NOBODY GETS UP TO 100%, SO THAT'S WHERE YOU MAINTAIN IS AT 95%. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY SINCE WE STARTED LEASE UP, FINISHED LEASE UP BACK IN 2017. >> Ratliff: DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY CIRCUMSTANTI EVIDENCE ABOUTHE THERE THAT ARE GOING TO THE TRAIN? ARE THEY WORKING IN CITYLINE? ARE THEY TRAVELING NORTH INTO DOWNTOWN PLANO? >> I ACTUALLY LOOKED BACK AT THE KIND OF THE DEMOGRAPHICS REPORT THAT WAS PART OF THE STANDARD. IT WAS ACTUALLY SURPRISINGLY DIVERSE, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE EITHER WORKING IN CITYLINE, NOT ALL AT STATE FARM, BUT UP AND DOWN THAT 75 CORRIDOR, DRIVING THEIR CAR OR TAKING THE TRAIN, A COUPLE STOPS EITHER WAY. LIKE ALL OF OUR PROPERTIES, A DIVERSE ARRAY OF EMPLOYMENT. >> Ratliff: SOHE TNSIT IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF IT. >> CERTAINLY. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH, THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. MY FIRST QUESTION HAS ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED. >> Chair Downs: MICROPHONE, PLEASE. >> Cary: MY FIRST QUESTION HAS ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED AND THAT WAS AROUND OCCUPANCY AT 95%. PRETTY SOLID. GIVE US AT A HIGH LEVEL WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO ON LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AROUND THIS. >> I THINK IT WAS STIPULATED IN THE PD BUT I BELIEVE WE ESTABLISHED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH END WE'VE GOT A TEN-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH A GREEN SC. BELIEVE IS IT 6 OR 8 -- 8-FOOT MINIMUM GREEN SCREEN SO THAT WOULD BE HIGHLY -- I DON'T KNOW IF WE MENTIONED ACTUAL SPECIES, BUT THERE WOULD BE A SOLID BE A SOLID GREEN BARRIER ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH END TO MITIGATE THE POLLUTION FROM THOSE TWO LOCATIONS. >> Cary: AND I THINK CONNOR MENTIONED YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE DUCKS ON THE NORTH END. I THOUGHT IT WOULD WONDERFUL YOU'D HAVE WATER FOWL AND THEN I REALIZED HE WAS TALKING ABOUT OTHER THINGS. I'JUST KIDDING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ LAUGHING ] >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARRY. .COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: THE NINE UNITS THAT I MENTIONED A MINUTE AGO, WHEN DID WE PASS THAT? DO YOU REMEMBER? >> I WANT TO SAY 2021. >> Bronsky: I WAS ON THE COMMISSION, BECAUSE I VOTED FOR IT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. THOSE WERE NINEINGLE-FAMILY HOMES CORRECT? >> ERIC, DO YOU REMEMBER? THAT WAS PRE-COMP PLAN 2021. >> NINE, TEN. >> Bronsky: BUT THOSE WERE IN THIS GENERAL AREA, CORRECT? >> YES, THEY WERE ON K AVENUE JUST BEFORE THE -- >> Bronsky: SO, CONNOR, YOU MENTIONED THAT WE DON'T BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN THIS KIND OF AN AREA. IN FACT, WE JUST RECENTLY BUILT NINE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. MY QUESTION EARLIER AUT INCLUDING THOSE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES INTO YOUR CALCULATION IS NOT TO SAY IT'S NOT DO-ABLE OR WOULD WORK ON THIS SITE, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT DOES HAPPEN. AND WHEN WE GET PEOPLE THAT ARE VERY CREATIVE, THAT CAN SOMETIMES BE THE CASE. TO MY OTHER COMMENT, I REALLY APPRECIATED ONE OF THE THINGS YOU SAID ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BEING A BROAD TOOL, BECAUSE AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, I SAT ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMISSION AND ONE OF THE THINGS EVALUATING YOUR CASE IS I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY THAT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT ARRIVES THAT MEETS THE THRESHOLD. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO ZONING NECESSARILY OFF THE TABLE IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS SPECIAL. AND ALTHOUGH IT MIGHT NOT MEET THE EXACT NUMBERS THAT WE SET AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHETHER IT'S THE MIX OF USE, WHETHER IT'S THE DENSITY, WHETHER IT'S THEEIGH-- I MISSING ONE. BUT NEEDLESS TO SAY, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE FINDINGS TOOL WAS A WAY FOR US TO SAY YES, WE REALLY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS CREATIVITY OUT THERE THAT DOES MEET ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE KNEW OR UNDERSTOOD. AND WE SUPPORT AND ENDORSE IT. SO, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: DID YOU TURN YOUR SPEAKER BUTTON OFF? LET'S SEE WHO'SEXT. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: I'M GOING TO SOUND LIKE I'M BEATING A DEAD HORSE. I'M GOING BACK TO THE PARTICULATE MATTER, AND THE POLLUTION, AND WHAT HAVE YOU. AND I UNDERSTAND WE DON'T HAVE A CAP THAT NEEDS TO BE MET AND WHAT HAVE YOU. I USE MR15 IN MY HOME, BUT MY DAUGHTER HAS BREATHING ISSUES. YOU MADE A COMMENT THAT ON THE SITE THAT WAS BUILT IN 2016 THERE WERE NO ISSUES YET, BUT THERUTH I IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL WHAT ISSUES COULD POSSIBLY HAVE COME FROM BEING IN THAT CLOSE TO A FREEWAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS PARTICULARLY FOR THE OUTDOOR POLLUTION THAT YOU HAVE CONSIDERED TO MITIGATE THIS SOMEWHAT? I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BUILDING TALLER TREES, MORE TREES. I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT I THERE ATHIN ELSE YOU CONSIDERED THAT COULD POSSIBLY ADDRESS THE FACT THAT THIS WILL BE BUILT SO CLOSE TO A MASSIVE SOURCE OF POLLUTION? >> YEAH. ON THIS WE'VE KIND OF BEEN FOLLOWING STAFF'S LEAD. IT'S RELATIVELY NEW POLICY, SO WE'VE TRIED TO STUDY AS HARD AS WE CAN AND DESIGN THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WAY EHA IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. THERE WASN'T ANYTHING TO TALK ABOUT OUTDOOR POLLUTION, SO WE DIDN'TDDRE THAT SPECIFICALLY UNFORTUNATELY. >> I JUST WANT TO ADD SOMETHING, THAT THAT SECTION OF HIGHWAY IS ELEVATED. SO THERE'S BASICALLY VERY LIMITED POSSIBILITY OF BEING ABLE TO MITIGATE POLLUTION AND NOISE EFFECTIVELY. AND THAT WAS THE REASON THAT STAFF DETERMINED THAT EHA2 MITIGATION MIGHT NOT BE ACHIEVED. >> Olley: IF IT'S ELEVATED -- I'M THINKING OUT LOUD. SOME OF THAT POUTION COULD POSSIBLY BE CARRIED AWAY BY THE WIND, BUT YOU STILL HAVE SOME DENSER MATERIAL SETTLING INTO THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDINGS, NO? >> BUT THAT COMMENT IS THAT NO AMOUNT OF TREES OR -- OF COURSE TREES CAN HELP, BUT THE TREES COULDN'T BE THAT TALL. >> Olley: SO THERE'S REALLY NOTHING -- NO MITIGATION. >> THAT'S WHY STAFF THINKS THAT THIS PROPERTY IS NOT -- THE DEVELOPMENT OF COURSE IS VERY ENCOURAGED, BUT RESIDENTIAL MIGHT NOT BE THE BEST USE. >> Olley: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: NEXT IS COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU. A QUESTION. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT RUNS ACROSS THE PROPERTY, IS THAT AN OPEN DITCH OR IS IT BURIED? >> IT'S BURIED. >> Brounoff: OKAY. DOES IT CARRY RAW SEWAGE? >> YEAH. >> Brounoff: HAS THERE BEEN AN ODOR PROBLEM? >> YOU'D PROBABLY KNOW MORE ABOUT THIS. >> SO THAT EASEMENT IS MAINTAINED BY THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM THE WHOLE TIME. WE'VE GOT A LONG LIST OF -- TO CONSTRUCT OUR PROPERTY, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO KEEP THAT MAIN SAFE AND STABLE. SO WE'VE GOT A LONG LIST OF CONSTRUCTABILITY TECHNIQUES WE'RE GOING TO USE FOR THAT. BUT THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF INSTALLING AN ODOR CONTROL UNIT. I'M NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER, BUT THEY'RE EXPANDING THE FORCE MAIN TO THE SOUTH A LITTLE BIT ALONG E D.R.T., SO THEY'RE IMPROVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE AREA AND THEY'RE GOING TO ADD AN ODOR CONTROL UNIT. >> Brounoff: HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THAT PROCESS WILL TAKE? >> ADDING THE ODOR CONTROL UNIT? >> Brounoff: YEAH. >> PROBABLY 45-60 DAYS ONCE THEY PUT A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND. >> Brounoff: OKAY. ARE YOU PROPOSING TO HAVE WINDOWS THAT OPEN AND/OR BALCONIES ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE TWO BUILDINGS? >> EAST AND WEST? >> Brounoff: YES. >> ON THE NORTH BUILDING. SO, NORTH OF THAT EASEMENT. >> Brounoff: BUT NOT ON THE SOUTH BUILDING? >> CORRECT. >> SO THAT'S PART OF OUR MITIGATION, IS WE'VE STRIPPED THE BALCONIES PER STAFF'S DIRECTION OFF OF THE SOUTH BUILDING, THOSE EAST AND WEST. THE ONLY PLACE WE HAVE BALCONIES ON THE SOUTH BUILDING IS ON THE NORTH FACE WHICH FACES AWAY FROM THE FREEWAY OVER THAT PLAZA, OUR CENTRAL PLAZA. THE NORTH BUILDING ALL HAS BALCONIES. >> Brounoff: OKAY. WHAT IF ANY -- WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO WITH THE OPEN SPACE ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE? I UNDERSTAND THE EAST SIDE IS GOING TO BE LIKE A SIDEWALK WITH ON-STREET PARKING, BUT IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY AMENITIES ON THE OUTDOOR AREAS OF THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE BUILDING -- WALKING TRAILS? >> PUT THE BLIND BACK UP ON Y'ALL'S SCREEN. SO ON THE WEST SIDE, THE EXISTING HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL IS THAT T SIDALK THERE ON THE WEST. >> Brounoff: AND THAT'S THERE ALREADY. >> THAT'S EXISTING. SO WE'RE TYING INTO THAT TRAIL ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER DUE TO SOME GRADE. SO OUR RESIDENTS WOULD COME ACROSS AND TIE INTO THE HIKING BIKE TRAIL TO GO SOUTH TO THE CityLine OR NORTH TO DOWNTOWN PLANO. >> Brounoff: IS IT SHOWING ANY SORT OF AMENITY AROUND WHICH PEOPLE WOULD GATHER AND REMAIN, LIKE A TABLE OF SOME KIND? >> THE ONLY ELEMENT IS IN THAT SOUTHWEST CORNER FOR A POTENTIAL DOG PARK THAT WE'VE LABEL ON THAT PLAN. IT'S JUST NORTH OF THAT TRAIL CONNECTION. SO AS PEOPLE TRAVERSE ON AND OFF THE HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL THERE'S A DOG PARK ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. >> Brounoff: OKAY. >> BUT NO OTHER OUTDOOR AMENITIES OR MEETING SPACES. >> I JUST WANT TO ADD SOMETHING, THAT THAT SECTION IS PART OF EHA2. AND OPEN SPACE IS DISCOURAGED IN THAT SECTION. >> Brounoff: I KNOW. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. I RECOGNIZE IT'S PART OF EHATWO AND I'M LOOKING AT PAGES 88 AND 89 SHOWING THE MITIGATED DECIBEL LEVELS ON THE OUTSIDES OF THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THE SOUTH BUILDING IS PRETTY MUCH TOTALLY ABOVE 65 DECIBELS, OR 65 OR ABOVE, BUT BELOW 75. IT GOES UP TO 74. BUT I'M WONDERING HOW SIGNIFICANT WOULD THAT BE IF THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING IS NOT A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO CONGREGATE AND REMAIN, LIKE TO SIT AND ENJOY THE OUTDOORS, FOR EXAMPLE. SO I'M WONDERING WHETHER IT IS, YOU KNOW, FEASIBLE OR POSSIBLE TO DISCOUNT THOSE NOISE LEVELS ON THE GROUNDS THAT NO ONE'S GOING TO REALLY HANG AROUND THERE ANYWAY. THAT'S ALL I'M THINKING. >> YEAH. IT'S SIDEWALKS, STRICTLY CIRCULATION, JUST LIKE AROUND THE HOTEL. >> Brounoff: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: YEAH. SO WE TALKED EARLIER ABOUT YOU CITED A GOAL OF 2,000 UNITS AND 2900 HAVE BEEN BUILT. THERE ARE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF UNITS IN THE GENERAL AREA THAT ARE YET TO BE BUILT. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, HAVE YOU FACTORED THAT IN AS YOU LOOK AT THE FEASIBILITY OF YOUR SITE HERE? I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE IF THIS IS APPROVED, IT WILL ADD YET MORE UNITS AND WE'RE GETTING READY TO BUILD SOME IN THE GENERAL AREA, QUITE A FEW OF THEM. >> SO WE DO MONITOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. AND WE'RE BLESSED TO LIV IN DFW, WHICH IS A GROWING METRO AREA. SO THERE'S -- WE'VE BEEN BUILDING A LOT OF APARTMENTS AND THEY ALL FILL UP. SO WE STUDY EXPERTS IN THE FIELD. MOST RECENTLY, REAL PAGE, THERE'S AN ECONOMIST, JAY PARSONS. HE POSTS REGULARLY ABOUT STUDIES SAYING DFW CONTINUES TO BE UNDERSUPPLIED FOR APARTMENT UNITS. SO WE FEEL THERE'S NOT TOO MANY APARTMENTS FROM A MARKET DEMAND PERSPECTIVE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. SOUESS TT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. >> Cary: SURE. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. MY TURN, I GUESS. SO YOU BUILT ORA 190, BUT YOU'RE NOT MANAGING IT. SO YOU DEVELOP AND THEN SELL THE PROPERTIES TO OTHER MANAGEMENT. >> YEAH, SO THAT PARTICULAR DEAL, OUR PARTNER ON THAT DEAL BOUGHT US OUT, SO WE ARE NOT THE WHOLE OWNER, BUT WE STILL HAVE A PARTNERSHIP INTEREST IN THAT DEAL. JUST LIKE ALL OUR DEALS, WE'RE THE DEVELOPER, BUT WE'RE ALSO THE BUILDER. AND THEN WE HAVE A THIRD-PARTY MANAGEMENT CAN COMPANY THAT MANS IT. WE HAVE IN-HOUSE ASSET MANAGEMENT THAT OVERSEE THE LEASE-UP. AND IT'S THE SAME GROUP THAT WE STILL USE TO LEASE THAT UP. ACTUALLY, THE MANAGER ON THAT PROJECT IS NOW HEAD OF ASSET MANAGEMENT FOR TEXAS. SO, VERY INTIMATE WITH THAT PROJECT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. ON THE NORTH BUILDING, IS THE PARKING FOR THAT BUILDING THAT PARKING GARAGE THAT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE -- >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: SO IF I'M LOOKING AT IT, SOMEBODY WHO'S RENTING IN THAT NORTH BUILDING HAS TO PARK IN THE PARKING GARAGE AND THEN WALK TO THE NORTH BUILDING. THERE'S NO WAY TO DO THAT COMPLETELY COVERED, SECURE, ETC. THTHEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET T AND WALK OUTSIDE TO GET TO THEIR BUILDING. >> NO. THIS WORKS -- SO IT'S A FIVE-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE, SO YOU'LL PARK -- MOST PEOPLE WILL PARK -- IF YOU LIVE ON THE THIRD LEVEL, PARK ON THE THIRDEVEL YO WALK TOUGH AIR CONDITIONED CORRIDORS, OPEN THE DOOR, A CONDITIONED CORRIDOR. IF YOU LIVE IN THE NORTH BUILDING THIRD FLOOR, YOU'D PARK, GO INTO THE CORRIDOR. THE CORRIDORS ARE THE DARK GRAY THAT YOU SEE. YOU'D WALK DOWN THE CORRIDOR AND WE'LL I HAVE A SKY BRIDGE. >> Chair Downs: THERE'S A SKY BRIDGE. >> CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: THAT WASN'T CLEAR ON HERE. >> THERE'S A STIPULATION OF HEIGHTS WITH THE EASEMENT THAT WE FOLLOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THAT GROUP TO ESTABSH THAT. >> Chair Downs: GREAT. THAT'S HELPFUL. YOU MAY HAVE TO DISCOUNT THOSE NORTHERN UNITS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PARK 300 FEET AWAY, JUST SAYING. I DID NOTICE BY ADDING UP THE LINEAR -- THE FOOTAGE FROM -- IT LOOKS LIKE IF YOU TAKE THE EASEMENT, THEN YOUR FIRE LANE AND THEN THE SIDEWALK, AND THEN THE PARKING GARAGE, BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE GARDEN COURT AREA, WHICH IS WHERE SOMEONE MIGHT HANG OUT, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ABOUT 158 FEET AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAY, AT LEAST 158 FEET AWAY. SO I KNOW IT WAS SAID THAT WE'RE NOT 150 FEET AND THAT'S TRUE ON THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE ON THE SOUTH END OF THE BUILDING, BUT BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THAT GARDEN COURTYARD YOU'RE OVER 15R GUIDELINE FOR BEING AWAY FROM THE PARTICULATE MATTER IN AN OPEN SPACE. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE WE'RE AT LEAST 150 FEET AWAY. SO THAT'S GOOD, AND GIVES ME LITTLE MORE COMFORT. THE DOG PARK ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER TO COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF'S POINT, I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S GOING TO HG OUT THERE. I THINK THERE'S A DOG PARK RIGHT UNDER 190, RIGHT UP THE ROAD. >> TO THE WEST. THERE'S A PUBLIC DOG PARK. >> Chair Downs: ALSO, THE SIZE OF THE UNITS -- BECAUSE IT LISTS EFFICIENCIES, ONE-BEDROOMS AND TWO-BEDROOMS AND THEN THE PD, IT LISTS MINIMUM SIZES, BUT IT SAYS THAT THE AVERAGE UNIT FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT MUST BE 700 FEET. AND IT SAYS A TWO-BEDROOM MINIMUM IS 625. SO CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME IDEA THEN OF WHAT YOUR REAL ACTUAL SIZES ARE GOING TO BE? AND IT'S NOT A LAND USE DECISION AS MUCH AS IT IS WE'RE APPROVING A PD THAT SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE UNITS THAT ARE 625 FEET WERE A TWO BEDROOM BUT THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT YOU MEET 700 SQUARE FOOT AVERAGE FOR ALL UNITS. >> THOSE ARE MINIMUMS. >> Chair Downs: THEY ARE MINIMUMS. SO I'M WONDERING WHY WE WENT THAT DIRECTIN IF THE AVERAGE HAS TO BE 700. SO WHAT'S YOUR AVERAGE TWO-BEDROOM? >> IS 700 THE MINIMUM AVERAGE OR THE AVERAGE? >> Chair Downs: THAT'S THE AVERA. >> SHOULD BE THE MINIMUM AVERAGE. >> IT SHOULD BE MINIMUM, NOT AVERAGE. >> THE LANGUAGE SAYS THE AVERAGE UNIT SIZE WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 700 SQUARE FEET. >> YEAH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD BE UNDERWRITING MOST LIKELY 850 AVERAGE. SO THOSE ARE MINIMUMS. A LOT OF CITIES LIKE TO PUT MINIMUMS JUST TO PUT A BRACKET AROUND WHAT IT IS, BUT AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE UNDERWRITING, WE'D BE AN AVERAGE OF 850 FOR THE PROJECT. 13 AND SOME THAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM EFFICIENCY. IT WOULD BE AVERAGE 850. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? OKAY. AND WE HAVE NO MORE SPEAKERS ON THIS ISSUE. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND AS WE START OUR DISCUSSION, LET ME JUST -- PERSONALLY, I SEE THIS AS A TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. IT'S DESIGNED WITH A WALKWAY THAT'S HEADED STRAIGHT SOUTH TO THAT LESS THAN 2/10 OF A MILE AWAY TRAIN STATION. AND THAT TO ME RESOLVES A LOT OF THE ISSUES. I STRUGGLED A LITTLE BIT WITH THE HEALTH STUFF, BUT AGAIN, MITIGATION EFFORTS CAN HANDLE MOST OF THE NOISE. THIS IS ALSO NOT DESIGNED AS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SPEND ALL DAY OUTSIDE. IT'S MEANT TO BE CONVENIENT AND TO THE EXTENT IT CAN BE, INEXPENSIVE, I GUESS. BUT CONVENIENT TO TRANSIT F WORK. YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IF I GET BEYOND THAT, IF I GET BEYOND THE -- I DON'T KNOW, LET'S CALL IT THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES -- I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER PROBLEM WITH THIS. I DON'T LIKE THAT THERE'S AN AUTO REPAIR PLACE RIGHT NEXT TO THE NORTHERN BUILDING, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THAT AUTO REPAIR PLACE IS NOT GOING TO STAY THERE. IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THAT NORTHERN SECTION IS PROBABLY CONSOLIDATED BY SOME DEVELOPER AND TURNED INTO SO, I LIKE THERE'S A HOTEL THERE RIGHT NEXT TO IT. THERE'S A LOT I LIKE ABOUT IT. AND I DO THINK THAT IT REPLACES KIND OF A SORE SPOT THERE COMING INTO THE CITY WITH SOMETHING THAT WILL LOOK NICE AND MEET A NEED. IN TERMS OF DEMAND FOR UNITS, WHETHER WE TALK ABOUT DOWNTOWN BUSINESS OR THE 2000-UNIT CAP WHICH I DON'T THINK IS REASONABLE IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON THE TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR, PARTICULARLY BEING SANDWICHED HERE BETWEEN CityLine OR BUSH AND 12TH STREET, WHERE THAT'S COMING. SO I THINK WE HAVE TO REALIZE THAT THE 2,000 CAP IS NOT REASONABLE. THE DEMAND IS THERE. I JUST GOT BACK FROM AUSTIN RECENTLY AND THEY SAID THERE'S A THOUSAND PEOPLE A DAY MOVING TO TEXAS AND A BIG CHUNK OF THOSE ARE MOVING TO NORTH TEXAS BECAUSE WE KEEP DRAWING IN LARGE CORPORATE COMPANIES, WHICH, OF COURSE, BRING NICE HIGH-PAYING JOBS WITH THEM, THE MAJORY OF THEM. SO I AM NOT WORRIED ABOUT THERE BEING A DEMAND FOR IT. AND SO IN GENERAL I'M GOING TO SAY THAT I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. I REALIZE WE'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A FINDINGS DEAL, BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE OPTIONS WHEN I GO, WHAT ELSE COULD GO HERE? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE SOMEONE IS GOING TO COME IN HERE. IF THEY'RE ABLE TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE A SECTION THAT'S GOING TO WIND UP BEING MULTIFAMILY HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. SO IN GENERAL I WOULD SAY I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. AND THEN COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: THANK YOU. I THINK THE CHAIRMAN MAKES SOME GOOD POINTS. I THINK IT'S VERY REASONABLE TO INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF TOD. AND I CAN'T SEE HOW WE WOULD EXCLUDE IT THOUGHTFULLY. YOU KNOW, TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT, THERE ARE A LOT OF BENEFITS. AND AS I SORTED THROUGH THIS, ONE OF THE THINGS I LOOKED AT WAS THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THIS. AND I LOOK AT THAT FOR A LOT OF THE PROJECTS WE'RE DOING AROUND PLANO, ESPECIALLY IN THIS AREA. SO THE QUESTION -- ONE OF THE QUE THE BEST LAND USE FOR PLANO IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. AND WHILE I SEE BENEFIT OF BRINGING SOME MORE RESIDENTS TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA, I DO THINK IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE HOTEL NEXT DOOR. AND I THINK IN TERMS OF BEING A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY, THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, POSSIBLY IT DOES SERVE AS A BIT OF AN IGNITION TO A LITTLE BIT MORE DEVELOPMENT AROUND HERE. I THINK PROBABLY SOME OF THE BUSINESSES WOULD SAY WE COULD USE SOME MORE CITIZENS AROUND HERE. WHAT I DON'T KNOW IS IF WE DENY THIS, COULD THERE BE A BETTER USE OR ANOTHER USE. AND POSSIBLY SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WOULDN'T BE WHAT WOULD GO IN HERE, BUT I THINK PROBABLY ULTIMATELY WITH ALL THE DEMAND GOING ON FOR THINGS IN PLANO THAT THERE MAY BE BUSINESSES THAT GO, GOSH, THIS IS A PERFECT SITE FOR US. AND SO I DO THINK THAT'S POSSIBLE. AND I WEIGHED THAT A LOT. I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS AS WE TALK ABOUT THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING IN PLANO AROUND DENSITY. AND WHILE THERE'S DEMAND, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN WE SHOULD COMPLEELY SUCCUMB TO THE DEMAND AND PUT AS MANY APARTMENTS OR HOUSES AS POSSIBLE. AND I THINK THE CITIZENS OF PLANO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. AS I LOOK AT THESE THINGS, I HAVE THAT CONCERN ABOUT DENSITY. WHAT IS IT GOING TO DO TO OUR TRAFFIC. I DON'T THINK IN AFFECTS THE TRAFFIC VERY NEGATIVELY IN PLANO. AS I LOOK AT THIS, MY BEST GUESS IS THAT PROBABLY FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE THERE'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO POP UP HERE THAT WE WOULD USE THAT MIGHT BETTER SERVE PLANO, WHICH IS MY NUMBER 1 THING, WHAT'S GOING TO SERVE PLANO BETTER. THERE MAYBE SO PIECES OF PROPERTY AROUND HERE THAT PEOPLE COME IN AND SAY WE WANT TO PUT MORE MULTIFAMILY. AND I MIGHT NOT THINK THAT'S AS APPROPRIATE. BUT FOR THIS ONE I THINK I DO, SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARY. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. I ECHO WHAT THE PREVIOUS OPINIONS HAVE BEEN TO A LARGE DEGREE, BUT I WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE THINGS. I AGREE WITH THE TOD. IF WE MAKE THIS PART OF THE TOD, WHICH WE SHOULD, BECAUSE IT'S WELL WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF CLOSER THAN MOST PROPERTIES, CLOSER THAN A LOT OF PROPERTIE THAT ARE IN DOWNTOWN PLANO TODAY TO A D.A.R.T. STATION. AND SO TO ME, THAT ELIMINATES REALLY ALL BUT TWO ISSUES. AND ONE IS THE MIX OF USES AND THE SECOND IS THE EHA AREA. WHEN WE LOOK AT BOTH OF THOSE TOGETHER IN MY MIND, THIS SITE WOULD BE HORRIBLY SUITED FOR SINGLE-FAMILY. >> Chair Downs: YES. >> Ratliff: FOR THE EHA, I WOULD NOT EVEN CONSIDER SINGLE-FAMILY ON THIS TRACT BECAUSE OF THE OUTDOOR COMPONENT THAT NORMALLY GOES WITH A SINGLE-FAMILY OR EVEN A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT. SO, THAT FROM A MIX OF USES STANDPOINT DOESN'T MAKE ANY LOGICAL SENSE TO ME AT ALL. AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT AS A HOUSING AREA THAT REALLY NEEDS THAT DENSITY FOR THE TOD, THEN THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION IS A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT OF SOME KIND. TRANSIT IS THERE. THE ROADWAY NETWORK IS THERE. ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT IN A TOD ARE AT THAT PARCEL. AND SO I THINK THE DEVELOPER HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF MITIGATING BY DESIGN A LOT OF THE EHA CONCERNS. I DO FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THE PREMIUMS ARE FOR THE ONES CLOSER TO THE STATION, ALSO CLOSER TO THE FREEWAY. I FIND THAT COUNTERINTUITIVE, BUT IF THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE WALKING TO WORK OR THE TRAIN STATION, I GET IT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO WALK HOME YOU DON'T WANT TO WALK THAT EXTRA 500 FEET, I GUESS. SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, I DO BELIEVE THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE FOR A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS. THE TOD IS THE OVERRIDING CONCERN IN MY MIND THAT'S THE REASON I CAN LOOK PAST THOSE OTHER CONCERNS, BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE IT'S THE RIGHT KIND OF PLACE FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER OLLEY. I THINK I GOT OVER THE TOD PRETTY QUICKLY. IT WAS FAIRLY OBVIOUS THAT THIS WAS SUITED FOR TOD. I CAN'T GET OVER THE EHA2. IN MY MIND -- AND I MAY BE WRONE APPROVED ANY RESIDENTIAL USE YET IN MY TIME HERE IN EHA2. I COULD BE WRONG. I WOULD ACTUALLY LOVE TO KNOW THAT ANSWER. AND IF IT'S NOT SUITED FOR SINGLE-FAMILY OR TOWNHOME FROM A RESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE, THEN WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER. IT'S NOT SUITED FOR FAMILIES IN A MULTIFAMILY LIVING SITUATION. THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD FIT IN THERE WITHOUT HAVING SOME RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. BUT I CAN'T GETVER THE EHA2. EHA1 I MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER, BUT EHA2 TO ME HAS A HIGHER BURDEN TO OVERCOME. SO I PROBABLY WILL NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. >> Brounoff: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. SITTING HERE AND EVALUATING THESE CASES OFTEN COMES DOWN TO WEIGHING TRADEOFFS. THIS PROJECT IS A CASE IN POINT. IT HAS POSITIVES AND IT HAS NEGATIVES. THE POSITIVES ARE OBVIOUS. FIRST OF ALL, IT CLEANS UP THE PARCEL. AND THE PROPOSAL IS MUCH MORE VISUALLY APPEALING THAN WHAT IS THERE NOW. AND IT WOULD MAKE A MORE ATTRACTIVE GATEWAY, SOUTHERN GATEWAY INTO THE CITY. IT MEETS A NEED FOR HOUSING, WHICH IS ONGOING AND INCREASING. AND IT IS CONVENIENT TO THE CityLine BUSH LIGHT RAIL TRAIN STATION WHICH CONNECTS THE RED LINE, THEILVE LINE, AND DURING RUSH HOUR, THE ORANGE LINE AS WELL. AND I WOULD CONSIDER THIS PART OF A TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AREA. I DON'T THINK THE CITY LIMIT IS GOING TO STOP THE PRACTICAL CONSIDERATION OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GO GET TRANSIT WHERE IT'S CONVENIENT TO GO TO AND CityLine BUSH IS CONVENIENT, LET'S FACE IT. THE NEGATIVES CENTER LARGELY AROUND THE EHA2 AREA. AND I THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ABOUT THAT. AND THE DRAINAGE DITCH. SUPPOSEDLY THAT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT'S GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT PROBLEM, WHICH COULD BE SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THERE COULD BE A HEALTH RISK IF YOU'VE GOT RAW SEWAGE FLOWING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY. >> Chair Downs: I THINK WE SHOULD CLARIFY THERE. THIS LINE IS BURIED. IT'S A BURIED LINE. >> Brounoff: I THOUGHT IT WAS OPEN. >> Chair Downs: PROBABLY EIGHT ? AT LEAST. TEN FEET DOWN. >> Brounoff: ALL RIGHT. BUT I THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ABOUT THE EHA2. OUR STANDARD SAYS THAT RESIDENTIAL USES ARE GENERALLY -- AND I BECAME AWARE OF THE WORD GENERALLY WITH THIS CASE. I WASN'T AWARE OF IT 2 1/2 WEEKS AGO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE OTHER CASE -- GENERALLY INAPPROPRIATE, BUT MAY BE MADE APPROPRIATE WITH MITIGATION AS OPPOSED TO THE EHA1 DISTRICT WHICH SAYS THAT RESIDENTIAL HOUSING MAY BE INAPPROPRIATE BUT CAN BE APPROPRIATE WITH MITIGATION. SO, AS UNDERSTAND IT IN AN EHA1 SONE DISTRICT MITIGATION MS RESIDENTIAL USES OVERCOME THE ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTION, WHEREAS IN AN EHA2 DISTRICT IT MAY OVERCOME THE ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTION. IN THIS CASE I FIND THAT THERE HAS BEEN -- THERE IS PROPOSED MITIGATION IN ALL THE AREAS THAT NEED TO BE MITIGATED IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE LIVABILITY. THE AREAS THAT THERE -- THAT ARE NOT MITIGATED, THE EXTERIOR AREAS AROUND THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE SOUTH BUILDING. THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SOUTH BUILDING IS A PARKING GRADUAL GARAGEWALL AND RESIDENTIAL WALLT THOSE ARE NOT AREAS WHERE PEOPLE WILL BE HANGING OUT. THEY HAVE NOT PLANNED AMENITIES THERE SUCH AS BENCHES, PLAYGROUNDS, PICNIC TABLES, AREAS WHERE PEOPLE WOULD REMAIN IN ORDER TO ENJOY BEING OUTDOORS. THOSE AREAS ARE IN THE COURTYARDS WHICH ARE SUICIENTLY MITIGATED. SO, FOR THAT REASON I'M WILLING TO CONCLUDE THAT THE POSITIVES OUTWEIGH THE NEGATIVES AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE FOR IT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NO COMMENTS FROM YOU? THAT'S FINE. COMMISSIONER OLLEY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING. NO ISSUES. I DID WANT TO THOUGH -- I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT -- AND I'M NOT TRYING TO CHANGE YOUR VOTE AT ALL, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE EHA2. AND YOU MENTIONED YOUAUGHTER, BREATHING ISSUES AND STUFF. AND I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE IT'S WORTH -- WOULD IT BE BETTER -- I WANT YOU TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS EITHER WAY, BUT IF YOUR CONCERN IS EXTERIOR AND IT WILL BE THAT REGARDLESS OF IF THEY COULD MAKE THE AIR INSIDE AS CLEAN AS POSSIBLE, AS CLEAN AS THAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LIVE IN, BUT THEY STILL HAD THE PARTICULATE ISSUES OUTSIDE, THAT WOULD STILL CAUSE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST IT? >> [ OFF MIC ] >> Chair Downs: THERE'S NOTHING THEY CAN DO ABOUT THE INSIDE. IT'S REALLY THE EXTERIOR. ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE. AND TO YOUR POINT, TOO, WHAT ELSE COULD BE BUILT THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO FACE THE SAME ISSUES. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, DID YOU . . .? >> SO, YEAH. I REALLY STRUGGLED WITH THIS AND I BET YOU I'VE CHANGED MY THOUGHT THREE DIFFERENT TIMES OR MORE. SO LET ME EXPLAIN MY THINKING. MBER 1, I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF ABOUT THE TOD. I DO BELIEVE THAT HAD WE ADDRESSED THE TOD AT THIS LOCATION ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE WE WOULD HAVE LABELED THIS A TOD STOP. SO I COMPLETELY CONCUR WITH LABELING THIS AND ANYTHING WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF THAT RICHARDSON STOP AS A TOD, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. NUMBER 2, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT BEST USE. AND I WALKED THIS SITE YESTERDAY, PROBABLY FOR AN HOUR OR TWO. I COVERED EVERY BIT OF IT, ALL THE WAY AROUND, WALKED THROUGH IT SOME, WALKED THROUGH THE DRAINAGE DITCH IN THE FRONT AND THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ABOUT WHAT COULD GO HERE, BOTH IN THE SHORT TERM AND IN THE LONG TERM. I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT A BETTER USE COULD BE FOUND FOR THIS SPOT. WILL IT OVER ANY SHORT TO MEDIUM PERIOD OF TIME? I REALLY DOUBT. THEN WE GET TO MY BABIES, THE RGM POLICIES. [ LAUGHING ] >> Bronsky: BOY. LOOK, I MEAN, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND THE COUNCIL VOTED PROBABLY 10 OR 12 TIMES ALL UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF THE MIX OF USE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE PUT HERE. AND SO IN MY JUDGMENT AND TRYING TO DECIDE AS I SAID, I REALLY DO LOOK FORWARD TO VOTING FOR SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE MEETS TE ALWAYS FELT THE COMMITTEE AND THOSE PUTTING FORWARD FINDINGS WAS ABOUT. I'M GOING TO PAUSE AND GO TO THE LAST THING. AND THAT WAS COMMISSIONER OLLEY'S EHA CONCERNS. I HAVE -- I UNDERSTAND THIS. AND AS I THOUGHT ABOUT THE EHA CONCERNS, I GET IT. AND I DO WONDER IF IT MAKES ANYTHING VIABLE IN THIS SPOT. ALL THAT SAID, I AM NOT GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I WAS SETTING HERE WATCHING HIS MIND CHANGE ONE MORE TIME. THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE. FOR THOSE OF YOU GOING WHY DON'T THEY VOTE ALREADY, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROCESS. IS IMPORTANT.VING THE DIALOGUE COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: CAN I ASK -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN AS PART OF THE PD STIPULATION, IF THE MRV8 IS THE NORM THAT YOU PUT INTO A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING, CAN WE UP THAT STIPULATION TO WHAT'S NEXT, A MRV10? 15 IS PROBABLY NOT COMMERCIALLY VIABLE, BUT -- >> Chair Downs: PLEASE, YES. >> SO THE MRV8 IS ALREADY SEVERAL STEPS UP FROM WHAT WE NORMALLY PUT IN AN APARTMENT BUILDING. WE'VE BEEN STUDYING THIS WITH OUR ENGINEERS WHO KNOW THE FILTERS BETTER THAN I DO. WE FELT THAT MERV8 WAS SOMETHING WE COULD REALISTICALLY EXECUTE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T -- IT STILL ALLOWS AIR TO FLOW DECENTLY WELL WITHOUT PUTTING A HUGE SYSTEM ON TOP OF THE BUILDING THAT COSTS LIKE A SURGERY CENTER WOULD HAVE, THAT IS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT KIND OF CIRCULATION SYSTEM. SO WE FELT MERV8 WAS HIGHER THAN OUR TYPICAL EXECUTION. >> Olley: WHAT'S THE TYPICAL? >> I'M SORRY, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT FILTRATION STANDARDS. >> Chair Downs: I BET HE GOES AND LEARNS IT. >> I WILL HAVE THAT FOR YOU NEXT TIME. >> THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY HAD IT AS MERV6, BUT STAFF REQUESTED IT TO BE MERV8. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. ANYONE? COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: QUESTION FOR STAFF. IF THE COMMISSION AGREES THAT THIS IS A TOD, DOES THAT STILL NECESSITATE FINDINGS? >> Chair Downs: YES, BECAUSE OF OUR GM, WHICH IS UNRELATED TO THE TOD ISSUE. >> Ratliff: JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. >> Chair Downs: YUP. >> Ratliff: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. NOW, IN OUR MOTION WE NEED TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REGARDING THE STRUCTURED PARKING, CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> Chair Downs: IS THERE A SPECIFIC LANGUAGE YOU WOULD LIKE US TO USE WITH THE MOTION? >> WE HAVE LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE CRAFTED FOR OTHER PROPERTIES IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPERTY AT LEGACY HAS A PARKING GARAGE. AS PROPOSED IN THE CONCEPT PLAN, THERE ARE SOME UNITS WHICH WILL NOT BE BUFFERED BY THE GARAGE, SO WE WOULD INCLUDE IT WHERE THE OUTER UNITS -- IT WOULD BE BUFFERED EXCEPT FOR THE OUTER UNITS. >> Chair Downs: THE APPLICANT IS FAMILIAR WITH THE LANGUAGE AND THEY'VE ALREADY AGREED TO THAT? >> THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE STANDARD AND WE'LL CONFIRM THE LANGUAGE WITH THEM. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. EVERYBODY'S LOOKING AT ME. I MOVE REAPPROVE ITEM 1A WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE REQUIRED STRUCTURED PARKING ADDED TO THE PD. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY CHAIR DOWNS WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 1A WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE STRUCTURED PARKING REQUIREMENT ADDED TO THE PD. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM GOES WITH A 4-1 NO AN. OKAY. SO THAT ITEM CARRIES. AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT UP, I WOULD MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM 1B. >> SECOND. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, IT'S APPROVED SUBJECT TO COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CASE. >> Chair Downs: CORRECT. SO, LET ME MODIFY THAT. I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM 1B SUBJECT TO COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CASE 1A. >> SECONDED AGAIN. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MIONND A SECOND TO APPROVE ITEM 1B. PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT ITEM CARRIES BY A VOTE OF FOUR YEAS, ONE NAY AND ONE ABSTENTION. THANK YOU, GUYS. SO, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME FINDINGS FORMS NOW AND THAT COULD TAKE US A FEW MINUTES. SO IF ANYONE NEEDED A LITTLE POTTY BREAK, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME. ARE THESE AVAILABLE . . .? OH, SHE'S BRINGING THEM. >> YOU CAN DO IT EITHER WAY. >> Chair Downs: WHERE'S THE ONLINE VERSION? HOW DO WE GET TO IT ONLINE? WE HAVEN'T DONE THESE. >> HAS A LINK ON THEIR THING, BUT YOURS DOES NOT. >> Chair Downs: OH. >> FINDINGS FORM. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. TECHNICALLY WE ARE NOT RECESSED, ALTHOUGH IT MAY HAVE FELT LIKE ONE. THAT'S A POLICY DECISION. WE'RE DOING FINDINGS. THAT'S A PART OF THE PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO AND ON-CAMERA. SO, I'M GOING TO MOVE UP -- ONE OF THE PLEASURES OF BEING THE CHAIR IS I GET TO KIND OF CHANGE THE ORDER A LITTLE BIT. WE HAVE ONE NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEM, THE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. NOW, JUST TO BE CLEAR, ALL WE'RE DOING IS CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING. THERE IS NO DISCUSSION GOING ON OR ANYTHING ELSE. I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE HERE AND I THINK TWO OR THREE OF YOU -- HOW MANY HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? >> WE HAVE THREE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'M DOING THIS TO HELP YOU GUYS OUT SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO SET THROUGH THE REST OF OUR MEETING. IF YOU'D JUST BE SHORT AND SWEET SO WE CAN MOVE THROUGH HERE, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DISCUSS ANYTHING TONIGHT. ITEM 8 AND THEN WE'LL CIRCLEH BACK TO THE REST OF THE STUFF. SHOULDN'T TAKE US LONG, GUYS. >> SINCE THIS IS A NONPUBLIC HEARING ITEM, 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 UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8 IS DISCUSSION AND ACTION, CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING. CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO AME THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. APPLICNT IS THE CITY OF PLANO. >> THANK YOU. I AM MELISSA, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS PRESENTATION WILL PARTIALLY BE BY ME AND PARTIALLY BY OUR DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, MICHELLE, WHO WILL GO OVER SOME OF THE LEGAL INFORMATION. SO THIS IS A REQUEST TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. FOR SOME BACKGROUND, SHORT-TERM RENTAL PRESENTATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL HAVE BEEN ONGOING SINCE 2020. THE CURRENT PROCESS STARTED IN OCTOBER OF 2022 WHEN COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO LOOK AT A REGISTRATION PROGRAM, IMPLEMENT A PROCESS TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE CHANGES, AND TO FOLLOW THE MODEL OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS. A REGISTRATION ORDINANCE WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2022, BUT THAT WAS TABLED TO A FUTURE MEETING. THERE WAS AN UPDATE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION AT YOUR NOVEMBER 21ST, 2022 MEETING AND AN ADDITIONAL UPDAT WAS GIVEN TO CITY COUNCIL IN JANUARY OF 2023. THEN AT THE FEBRUARY 27TH, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, A COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTED AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS BE BROUGHT TO THE APRIL 10TH, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THE CITY MANAGER SUGGESTED THAT FURTHER DIRECTION ON THAT ORDINANCE BE DISCUSSED AT THE MARCH 13TH, 2023 COUNCIL MEETING. JUST AN UPDATE ON WHAT STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING ON SINCE OUR LATH T UPDATE IN NOVEMBER, WE SIGNED A CONTRACT WITH DECKER TECHNOLOGIES TO PROVIDE DATA WHICH STAFF HAS BEEN LOOKING THROUGH. WE HAVE OVER 3600 INDIVIDUAL LISTINGS TO REVIEW. AND AS OF MARCH 6TH, THIS REVIEW IS ABOUT 50% COMPLETE. MUCH OF WHAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED HAS ALSO BEEN INCORPORATED INTO PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS, COMPUTER-AIDED DISPATCH. SO POLICE ARE ABLE TO OBTAIN A MORE ACCURATE ANALYSIS OF THE CALL FOR SERVICE DATA. STAFF HAS A CONTRACT WITH GAP STRATEGIES FOR PUBLIC OUTREACH SUPPORT. WE HELD AN INTERNAL MEETING ON MARCH 2ND TO INITIATE THE PROCESS AND WE HAVE REVIEWING A TIMELINE AND SURVEY QUESTIONS AS OUR FIRST STEPS IN THIS PROCESS. AN ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION IS PONDING LEGISLATION. THERE IS A HOUSE BILL THAT IS PENDING RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. IT WOULD PREEMPT LOCAL ZONING ACTION AS IT WOULD ALLOW SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND WOULD LIMIT WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO REGULATE. AND AT THAT MARCH 13TH CITY COUNCIL MEANING, COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR A TEMPORARY BAN ON NEW SHORT-TERM RENTALS, BRING BACK THE REGISTRATION ORDINANCE AND CONSIDER A NUISANCE PARTY HOUSE ORDINANCE. THROUGHOUT THE ORDINANCE PREPARATION AND APPROVAL PROCESS, AS WELL AS TR THROUGHOT THE TIMEFRAME OF THE TEMPORARY BAN, STAFF WILL CONTINUE THE PROCESS TO DEVELOP A PERMANENT ORDINANCE INFORMED BY FURTHER PUBLIC OUTREACH AND DATA ANALYSIS. AND I WILL HAND IT OVER TO MICHELLE >> MISSA WOULD YOU MIND MOVING SLIDES FOR ME? >> YES. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. SO, WE DIVIDE OUR LEGAL ADVICE TYPICALLY INTO GREEN, YELLOW, AND RED. THE GREEN IS LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. COULD BE LITIGATION, BUT WE THINK WE HAVE A DECENT CHANCE OF BEING ABLE TO WIN. I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH WHAT WE CAN DO THAT'S GOT A GREEN DESIGNATION. WE CAN DO REGISTRATION AND LICENSING. THAT CAN REQUIRE SAFETY GUIDELINES, ESTABLISH A LOCAL POINT OF CONTACT. WE CANNOT CREATE SPECIAL RULES THAT APPLY ONLY TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. BUT WE COULD ENFORCE ACROSS THE BOARD NUISANCE ORDINANCES AND REVOKE PERMITS IF PEOPLE ARE NOT COMPLYING WITH THOSE. WE DID LEARN THAT THERE'S NOT A PROPERTY RIGHT IN LICENSE RENEWALS FROM A RECENT CASE OUT OF THE 5TH CIRCUIT. THAT MAKES IT EASIER TO REVOKE WITHOUT HAVING TO GET CLAIMS THAT YOU'RE TAKING PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS. ANY F FEE OR FINE HAS TO BE REASONABLE AND NOT EXCESSIVE. SO, THOSE ARE GREEN. MOVING TO YELLOW, THESE ARE REGULATIONS THAT ARE DEFENSIBLE IF THEY'RE SUPPORTED BY GOOD DATA. AT LEAST THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED LIKE IN THE ARLINGTON CASE. SO, ZONING, WHICH WOULD MEAN BANNING -- MOVING FORWARD, ANY KIND OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN CERTAIN AREAS AS DESIGNATED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. WE'D GO THROUGH THE STANDARD ZONING PROCESS, WHICH WOULD BE REVIEWED BY THISOMMISSION, GIVING NOTICE AND HAVING PUBLIC HEARINGS. IF AN STR USE EXISTS IN AN AREA THAT LATER BECOMES RESTRICTED THROUGH ZONING, THE PREEXISTING USE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE. SO IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED. WHY DO WE HAVE TO GRANDFATHER? BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT COULD BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING OF PROPERTY WITHOUT COMPENSATION. THERE'S ALSO A CASE OUT THERE OUT OF AUSTIN THAT TALKS ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL RETROACTIVITY CLAIMS. SO IFOMEBODY'S ALRDY GOT THAT USE IN PLACE AND THEN WANTS TO CONTINUE TO USE IT, THE CONSTITUTIONAL RETROACTIVITY CLAUSE MAY PREVENT US FROM STOPPING THAT USE AND DUE PROCESS CLAIMS. SO, SOME PEOPLE MAY KNOW THAT ARLINGTON DID NOT HAVE TO GRANDFATHER OR DECIDED NOT TO GRANDFATHER WHEN THEY ADOPTED THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE ON ZONING. ARLINGTON HAD A SPECIFIC DEFINITION IN THEIR ZONING ORDINANCE THAT LIMITED HOUSEHOLD LIVING TO PERIODS THAT ARE LONGER THAN A MONTH. WE DO NOT HAVE THAT IN PLANO, SO WE ARE NOT SIMILARLY SITUATED. ARLINGTON IN EFFECT HAD ALREADY PROHIBITED SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN SOME DISTRICTS. SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN DO -- THIS IS ALSO IN THE YELLOW CATEGORY -- WOULD BE A NUISANCE ORDINANCE WHERE WE PUT IN LIMITATIONS. NOW, I THINK IT WOUL BE GREEN TO SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NUISANCE ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO CONSIDER NOISE, TRASH, PARKING. BUT IF WE TRIED TO DO OCCUPANCY LIMITATIONS THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN LONG-TERM RENTALS OR OWNED PROPERTY, OR IF WE TRIED TO DO ASSEMBLY LIMITATIONS, THEN THOSE ARE GOING TO MOVE IT INTO RED. WHY? BECAUSE THE AUSTIN CASE HAS FOUNT FOUND THAT WE CAN'T RTRICT ASSEMBLY RIGHTS WITH OUR SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCES. THAT VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT. AND SO THAT'S WHY. BUT IF WE DO THE NUISANCE ORDINANCES AND PEOPLE HAVE VIOLATIONS, AND THEN WE COULD REVOKE THEIR PERMITS. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A REAL USEFULNESS IN HAVING SOME STRICT NUISANCE ORDINANCES IF YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO STOP WHO ARE HAVING PARTIES AND STURNG OTHER PEOPLE. WHAT REGULATIONS ARE NOT DEFENSIBLE: RESTRICTING ASSEMBLY AT SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES, CITYWIDE BANS OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS WITHOUT GOOD PROCESS AND GOOD REASONS TO BACK THOSE UP. SUNSETTING OR JUST PHASING SHORT-TERM RENTALS OUT OVER TIME. THAT DID NOT WORK FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN. ALSO, WHAT REGULATIONS ARE NOT DEFENSIBLE: THAT WOULD BE OWNER OCCUPANCY RESICTIS. THERE'S A CASE IN THE FIFTH CIRCUIT WHICH APPLIES TO TEXAS THAT SAYS IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO BE SOMEBODY WHO LIVES HERE IN ORDER TO HAVE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL OR LIVES IN THE HOME. AND ALSO WE DON'T THINK IT'S DEFENSIBLE TO RELY UPON OUR CURRENT ZONING DEFINITIONS TO PROHIBIT SHORT-TERM RENTALS BECAUSE THERE IS NO CLEAR LANGUAGE IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW THAT TALKS ABOUT HOW LONG PEOPLE HAVE TO LIVE SOMEWHERE IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE A DWELLING OR A RESIDENCE. AND THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE CASE THAT MAKES IT PRETTY CLEAR THAT COURTS WANT US TO HAVE CLEAR LANGUAGE THAT PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND WHEN THEY'RE BUYING PROPERTY TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY CAN'T USE THEM AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS, IF WE'RE GOING TO PROHIBIT THEM. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO WE GOT MORE EDUCATION THAN I ANTICIPATED THERE AND I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD BE A LAWYER. MY WIFE'S ONE BUT, I DON'T KNOW, READING THROUGH SOME OF THAT. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. FIRST OFF, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WE'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO GET INTO THIS TONIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I THINK YOU'RE GOOD. SO IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING BUT I DID -- WHO'S FIRST TO SPEAK? AS SHE CALLS YOUR NAME, COME ON DOWN, GET CLO. >> FIRST UP IS ELENA BURKE. >> Chair Downs: FOLLOWED BY? >> MARK POLEUM. >> Chair Downs: AND THE NEXT ONE? >> GREG POTILLO. >> MY NAME IS ELENA BURKE AND I HAVE LIVED IN MY PLANO HOME FOR 29 YEARS. I WANTED TO ECHO TWO OF THE SIGNIFICANT POINTS MADE BY SHELBY WILLIAMS AT LAST WEEK'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING. ONE, SHORT-TERM RENTALS MOST CLOSELY MATCH THE DEFINITION OF BOARDING/ROOMING HOUSES WHICH ARE PROHIBITED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE CY OF PLANO. THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE, AS EVIDENCED BY THE VERY DETAILED DESCRIPTION, CLEARLY WAS INTENDED TO PREVENT THIS TYPE OF LODGING IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THE CONCEPT OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS WAS NOT KNOWN WHEN OUR ZONING ORDINANCES WERE WRITTEN. MR. WILLIAMS STATED THAT THERE'S NO CURRENT ORDINANCE PROHIBITING VERTICAL TAKEOFF AND LIFT AIRCRAFT EITHER. IT IS REASONABLE TO SEE WHAT EVOLVES BEFORE WE DECIDE WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT. STATISTICALLY IN OUR CITY, SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THREE TIMES AS TH OTHER RESIDENCES.E SERVICE THE TAG LINE CITY OF EXCELLENCE WAS ADOPTED TO REFLECT THE COMMITMENT TO QUALITY OF LIFE AND DELIVERY OF SERVICES BY THE CITY OF PLANO TO ITS STAKEHOLDERS. AS STAKEHOLDERS, THE MAJORITY OF CITIZENS YOU SERVE DO NOT WANT SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THEIR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND ONE FINAL POINT, OUR COALITION, PLANO CHAPTER OF THE TEXAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, IS NOT OPPOSED TO LONG-TERM RENTALS. WE LIVE VERY PEACEFULLY WITH A LOT OF LONG-TERMENTERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS BUT WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT RESIDENTIAL ARE THE PLACE FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND ALL THAT ENSUES FROM THEM. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. NEXT. >> MR. POLEUM. >> Chair Downs: LET'S MOVE ON. >> GOOD EVENING, PLANNING AND ZONING. MY NAME IS GREG POTILLO, 6229 WEST CHESTER LANE IN THE GLEN MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT, AND I HAVE FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS. I JUST WANTED TO COVER SOME HISTORY. ON MAY 1, 2019, THE AGREEMENT THAT THE CITY OF PLANO SIGNED WITH AIRBNB TO COLLECT HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX WENT INTO EFFECT. AT THAT POINT IN 2019 THERE WERE 231 HOME LISTING AND THAT DATA IS FROM AIR DNA. THERE'S A SECTION OF THEIR DATA THAT ACTUALLY EXTENDS NORTH OF OR SOUTH OF THE BUSH AND EAST OF CENTRAL. THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY PLANO TERRITORY. DID A LITTLE MATH TO CORRECT THAT DOWN TO WHAT IS MORE REALISTIC. I DIDN'T COUNT DOTS BUT USED A BASIC PERCENTAGE. AND IN MAY 2020, A YEAR LATER, WE WENT FROM 231 TO 306. MAY 2021, 457 ENTIRE HOME LISTING. AS OF MAY 2022, THERE WERE 581. IN THE MEANTIME, EVERYONE WAS WORKINGN THCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021, WHICH DID NOT ADDRESS SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND THEIR IMPACT ON HOUSING WHATSOEVER. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT ESTIMATE, AIR DNA PROJECTS A 2% GROWTH QUARTERLY, IT'S KIND OF LEVELED OFF. OBVIOUSLY, MAY, WHEN THE FEDS STARTED INCREASING RATES BY 50 AND 75 BASIS POINTS, THAT KIND OF HIT THE ECONOMICS OF THE MARKET AT THE SAME TIME AND THE CITY OF PLANO WAS GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION AS TO WHAT IT WAS GOING TO DO AND A LOT WAS UP IN THE AIR. THINGS HAVE LEVELED OFF IN THE MOMENT BUT WITH THE PLANS FRISCO HAS, THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK INTO PLAY IF WE ALLOW THESE THINGS TO EXIST IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE AVERAGE OF ABOUT 557 ENTIRE HOME LISTING, THAT EQUALS TWO TRADITIONAL APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS OR ONE MID-RISE DEVELOPMENT. AND SO WE WOULD HOPE TO BE BUILDING THOSE TO CREATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING, NOT TO MAKE UP FOR THE HOUSING THAT WE'RE LOSING TO THE SHORT-TERM INDUSTRY. AND SO AS WE PLAN WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AND WHAT THAT DOES IN INFLATING RENT PRICES. THAT HURTS OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES BECAUSE IT LOWERS DISCRETIONARY INCOME AND FORCES OUR SMALL BUSINESSES TO OFFER HIGHER WAGES IN ORDER TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN STAFF. THERE'S AN ECONOMIC MODEL THAT PLANO HAS. IT'S NOT BUILT FOR TOURISM. SHORT-TERM RENTALS DO NOT SOLVE ANY PROBLEM FOR PLANO. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY CREATE MORE PROBLEMS THAN THEY DO SOLVE. EVENING FOLKS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S IT, RIGHT? >> NO OTHER SPEAKERS. >> Chair Downs: AS I SAID, THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING SO, WITH THAT, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY. >> Bronsky: I WOULD MOVE THAT -- FIRST I WANT TO SAY I'M VERY HAPPY THAT WE'RE TAKING A VERY THOUGHTFUL APPROACH TO THIS AND I DO BELIEVE LISTENING TO OUR PUBLIC HAS TO SAY IS VERY IMPORTANT. SO THE PUBLIC OUTREACH PIECE IS VERY IMPORTANT AS WELL. I MOVE WE CALL A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 6-0. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. OKAY. LET'S CIRCLE BACK TO OUR ITEM NO. 2 ON PUBLIC HEARINGS, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CASE 2023-001 - REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR DANCE, GYMNASTICS, AND/OR MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO ON ONE LOT ON 0.1 ACRE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CAPITAL AVENUE, 684 FEET EAST OF N AVEN ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1. PETITIONER: JOE L. GRIFFITH. THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CO. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONER. I'M PARKER McDOWELL, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS SUBJECT REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIFIC-USE PERMIT FOR DANCE, GYMNASTICS, AND A MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO. IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL-1 ZONING DISTRICT . ON THE SCREEN IS THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. ON THE SCREEN IS THE ASSOCIATED ZONING EXHIBIT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE EMPLOYMENT CENTER CATEGORY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. ALTHOUGH THE CATEGORY IS PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR CORPORATE OFFICES, MEDICAL CENTERS EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES TECHNOLOGY CENTERS, AND RESEARCH FACILITIES, SERVICE USES LIKE THIS CAN BEUPPORTING USES. BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS MOSTLY SERVICE USES AND INCLUDES RETAIL STOREFRONTS, THE PROPOSED USE WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS RETAIL. THIS SITE IS CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED AS RETAIL TYPE RESULTING IN NO CHANGE TO THE MIX OF USES. ON THE SCREEN IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY SUMMARY. THIS SITE IS LOCATED WITH THE THE EM AREA. USE OF THE EXISTING SITE, THE MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO, IS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE EM TO KEEP THE AREA LIMITED TO EMPLOYMENT-GENERATED USES. STAFF HAS RECEIVED ONE NEUTRAL RESPONSE WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER WITH A SIGNED LETTER. AND STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY ADDITIONAL ONLINE RESPONSES RESULTING IN JUST ONE NEUTRAL RESPONSE IN TOTAL. SO WITH THIS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE ITEM FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION AND IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, IF NEEDED. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE APPLICANT WISHES TO ADDRESS -- >> YES. TRACY DICKEY. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M TRACY DICKEY AND I AM THE OWNER. I HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS SUBLEASING FOR OVER 15 YEARS IN THIS AREA . AS I AM SUBLEASING RIGHT NOW IN OTHER AREAS FOR THIS. THE SERVICES I PROVIDE IN MY STUDIO IS I TEACH AGES 4 AND UP AND ADULTS. I HAVE MANY FAMILY MEMBERS THAT I TEACH. I ALSO DO SELF-DEFENSE CLASSES. THESE CLASSES, I DON'T TAKE PROFIT FROM THEM. I DO DONATIONS TO HELP STORES, NEW BEGINNINGS, AND EMILY'S PLACE, AND TREASURED VESSELS FOUNDATION . I HAVE ALSO TAUGHT SELF-DEFENSE AHOSE CHARITIES IN PLANO AND I ALSO GO WEEKLY TO TREASURED VESSELS FOUNDATION, WHICH IS A SEX TRAFFICKING SAFE SHELTER THAT I GO TO WEEKLY AND WORK WITH THE LADIES WITH KARATE. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> YOU'RE VERY WELCOME. I ENJOY IT A BUNCH. I HAVE ALSO TAUGHT SELF-DEFENSE CLASSES AT PLANO EAST. I DONATE SELF-DEFENSE CLASSES AND KARATE CLASSES TO ALL THE LOCAL PISD ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS FOR THEIR SILENT AUCTIONS THEY DO EVERY YEAR. FOUR OUT OF FIVE OF MY STUDENTS, THEY'RE ALL FAMILY MEMBERS. 20% OF MY STUDENTS ARE ON SCHOLARSHIP. SO I'M HOPING TO HAVE -- BECAUSE I'VE BEEN SUBLEASING, I FEEL LIKE I'VE BEEN LIMITED ON WHO I CAN BRING THERE AND A SAFE PLACE FOR LADIES FROM THE DOMESTIC ABUSE SHELTERS AND SEX TRAFFICKING SHELTERS, SO I'M HOPING TO HAVE MY OWN PLACE AND A SAFER PLACE FOR ALL OF THEM AND MY FAMILIES. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OH YES. >> NO. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. NO QUESTIONS FOR YOU. I'M JUST MAKING SURE. I DON'T SEE ANY ON THE BOARD BUT I'M DOUBLE CHECKING. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION AND THANK YOU FOR THOSE CLASSES FOR THE STUDENTS. THAT'S AMAZING. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. EVERYBODY WANTED TO MAKE THAT MOTION AND A SECOND. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WITH A SECOND BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. [ LAUGHTER ] >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CARY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 2 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. UNANIMOUS SUPPORT. GOOD LUCK. THANK YOU. OKAY. ITEM 3. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT, REVISED SITE PLAN, AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN: JUPITER SPRING CREEK ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOT 1, BLOCK B,OT 1BLOCC1, LOT 1, AND BLOCK C2, LOT 1 - COMMUNITY CENTER, VACANT LAND, HOTEL, RETAIL, RESTAURANT, AND VEHICLE PARKING GARAGE ON FOUR LOTS ON 42.1 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SPRING CREE PARKWAY AND JUPITER ROAD. ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN-1 AND LOCATED WITHIN THE PARKWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. APPLICANT IS CITY OF PLANO. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOO EVENING, EVERYONE. KATYA COPELAND, I'M THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS REPLAT REVISED, SITE PLAN, AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ARE ALL RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE -- OH, WE DO HAVE ONE. THERE IT IS. SORRY. THERE, HERE, AND IN BETWEEN. YOU PUSHED YOUR BUTTON. GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. THE EVENT CENTER IS IN PLACE AND FUNCTIONING, RIGHT? >> YES. >> Brounoff: YOU WILL BE ADDING A HOTEL, RESTAURANT, AND RETAIL NECESSARILY ASSOCIATED WITH THE EVENT CENTER AS A PACKAGE, SO TO SPEAK RIGHT? >> YES. AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS TO SHOW THE ROADWAYS FOR THE PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS DISTRICT. >> Brounoff: TO ME, THE COMBINATION OF AN EVENT CENTER WITH A HOTEL AND RESTAURANT -- AND YOU CAN THROW IN RETAIL, IF YOU WANT, SPELLS CONVENTION CENTER. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE? >> YES. >> Chair Downs: THIS IS AT THE CONVENTION CENTER, RIGHT, BASICALLY? >> Brounoff: YEAH, IT WILL ATTRACT GROUPS AND EXHIBITORS AND EVENTS FROM OUTSIDE THE CITY TO COME IN, ESPECIALLY FOR EVENTS NOW REQUIRING AN OVERNIGHT STAY. THEY CAN DO IT THERE BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE A PLACE TO STAY IN THE HOTEL. >> EXACTLY. >> Brounoff: AND THE CITY COLLECTS ROOM TAX ON THE HOTEL AND SALES TAX ON THE RESTAURANT. >> Chair Downs: YES. >> Brounoff: AND THE EVENT CENTER HAS CATERING FILITIE AND AUDIO-VISUAL FACILITIES FOR MEETINGS AND THAT SORT OF THING. >> YES. >> Brounoff: AND FLEXIBLE SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE GROUPS OF VARIOUS SIZES. CONVENTION CENTER >> Chair Downs: YES, IT IS. >> Brounoff: SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. >> Chair Downs: THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING BECAUSE THE PLANO CENTER -- >> Brounoff: I WOULD ADD, WITH A CONVENTION CENTER, I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY HAS ONE ALREADY, BUT IT WOULD BEHOOVE THE CITY TO HAVE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF A CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU. >> Chair Downs: WE DO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YOU'RE DONE. THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING. ANY SPEAKERS? >> WE HAVE THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE RON NINTENSKI. >> [OFF MIC] >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 AS SUBMITTED. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY TO APPROVE ITEM 3 AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE VOTE. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK OUR HEAD OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT FOR BEING HERE. APPRECIATE YOU, SIR. THAT ITEM CARRIES 6-0. ITEM 4. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN FOR YOUR PATIENCE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN: WILLOW BEND POLO ESTATES PHASE B, BLOCK B, LOTS 1R-19 AND BLOCK X, LOTS 1-4 - 19 PATIO HOME LOTS AND FOUR COMMON AREA LOTS ON 3.1 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NTHWE CORN OF TURTLE CREEK DRIVE AND OLD WESTBURY LANE. ZONED PL DEVELOPMENT-423-PATIO HOME. APPLICANT: SHADDOCK WBP PLANO, THIS ITEM IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE. >> THANK YOU, MS. BRIDGES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REPLAT AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> Chair Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM COMMISSIONER CARY. >> Cary: I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. I JUST BRING THIS UP EVERY TIME THIS COMES UP. I JUST URGE US TO BE CAREFUL HERE AND THOUGHTFUL IN TERMS OF THE DRAINAGE. BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT THIS SITE, I CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS WITH WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE PEOPLE ON THE SOUTH END OF THIS. FOR ALL OF OUR GOOD PEOPLE WORKING ON CITY STAFF, I KNOW YOU'RE DOING IT BUT PLEASE, FOR THE CITIZENS THAT ARE ON THE SOUTH END, LET'S MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT DRAINAGE IN PLACE FOR THEM. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ALL RIGHT. YES, COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. I SAW YOU SEARCHING FOR YOUR BUTTON OVER THERE. >> Brounoff: I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE WERE SOME NEGATIVE COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS URGING DISAPPROVAL ON THE BASIS OF THEY DIDN'T WANT PATIO HOMES IN THEIR SF-9 NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS A REPLAT AND SITE PLAN UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION, WHICH MEANS IT COMPLIES WITH THE APPLICABLE AND CITY ORDINANCES, WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT. WE HAVE NO DISCRETION NOT TO. AND THATITIZSHO THINK THEY MAY BE OPPOSED OR HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, SHOULD BRING THEIR CONCERNS FORWARD AT THE ZONING CASE, NOT AT THE SUBDIVISION PLAT CASE. BECAUSE THE SUBDIVISION PLAT CASE, OUR HANDS ARE TIED. IF YOU OPPOSE SOMETHING, COME DOWN AND TALK TO US WHEN THE CASE IS UP FOR ZONING. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. I'D LIKE TO -- TO YOUROINT ABOUTD CITIZENS TALK TO US ABOUT IT AND WE HAD A BIG CONCERN ABOUT THAT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OUR CITY ENGINEER IS HERE. IF POSSIBLE, I'D LIKE TO HAVE HIM COME MAYBE SPEAK TO THAT SITUATION, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'RE HEARING ONE THING FROM THE -- AND I REALIZE THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION, ALL OF THAT, BUT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY, HOPEFULLY FOR SOMEONE AT THE CITY TO ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS, WHICH WERE SIGNIFICANT. >> ENGINEERING MANAGER. WE UNDERSTAND DRAINAGE HAS BEEN A CONCERN BUT WE LOOKED AT THE PLANS, REVIEWED THEM, AND APPROVED THEM. IT DID MEET OUR POLICIES AND THE ORDINANCES. THE IMPERVIOUS AREA DID DECREASE SO THAT SHOULD NOT INCREASE RUNOFF AT ALL. >> Chair Downs: THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANYBODY AT THE CITY GETTING PICTURES OF WATER RUNNING THROUGH SOMEONE'S YARD OR ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE OF DRAINAGE FROM THIS PROPERTY. >> WATER WILL RUN THROUGH THE LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED BUT ALL THAT WATER WILL R THROUGH T RIG OF WAY AND STREETS ARE PART OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. >> Chair Downs: ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS? I MEAN, I THINK IT WAS JUST GOOD TO GET THIS ON THE RECORD HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD SO MANY DISCUSSIONS AROUND IT. >> Cary: I'M SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE THINGS WE NEED TO BUT BECAUSE I'VE HAD SO MANY -- SEVERAL CITIZENS THAT LIVE HERE APPROACH ME. ARE THERE ANY SPECIAL THINGS BEING DONE IN TERMS TO MITIGATE SOME OF THAT WATER? BECAUSE HISTORICALLY THERE'S ALREADY SOME CHALLENGES WITH WATER COMG DOWN THOSE STREETS AND THERE'S FEAR THAT THAT WILL INCREASE NOW WITH WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE. SO WAS THERE ANYTHING EXTRA DONE TO TRY TO MITIGATE THAT? I GUESS I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. >> I WOULDN'T SAY ANYTHING EXTRA IS DONE BUT THE DECREASE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IS AN IMPROVEMENT. DECREASE OF IMPERVIOUS AREA. >> Cary: THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: ANYONE ELSE? NO? COMMISSIONER OLLEY. >> Olley: ONE QUESTION. I SEEM TO REMEMBER ONE OF THE APOVALS ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY HAD THE LANGUAGE SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS AND OUR USUAL LANGUAGE. THAT CARRIES THROUGH THROUGH THE LIFE OF THIS PROPERTY FROM ZONING ALL THE WAY THROUGH BUILD, IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT VERBIAGE IS REALLY INTENDED TO CAPTURE ANY CHANGES IN THE FIELD THAT HAPPENED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. ONCE THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS GETS FINALIZED WITH THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REPLAT. WE DON'T BRING THAT LANGUAGE FORWARD ANYMORE. IT SHOULD BE FIXED AT THIS POINT IN TIME. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER RATLIFF . >> Ratliff: I WANT TO REPEAT BACK SOMETHING YOU JUST SAID AND MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD IT LIKE I DID. BASED ON WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE, WE HAVE ACTUALLY DECREASED THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE, WHICH SHOULD CORRESPONDINGLY DECREASE THE RUNOFF COMPARED TO WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE THIS DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. >> Ratliff: WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE LESS WATER THAN WAS THERE FOR YEARS, ONCE THIS IS COMPLETED. >> IT'S LESS ROFF. IS IT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE SEEN? IT'S HARD TO TELL BECAUSE A LITTLE BIT OF WATER BUT, YES, IT SHOULD BE A DECREASE. >> Ratliff: FROM A CALCULATION STANDPOINT IT'S LESS WATER THAN WAS THERE TWO, THREE YEARS AGO BEFORE THAT WAS DEMOLISHED. >> YES, SIR. >> Ratliff: JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT AS WELL. I UNDERSTOOD IT BUT PEOPLE LISTENING MAY NOT HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I THINK WE ALL FEEL A LITTLE BIT BETTER NOW. APPRECIATE IT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? 'RE GD.OU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. >> Chair Downs: ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER RATLIFF. >> Ratliff: I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE REPLAT SUBJECT TO THE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY AND APPROVE THE REVISED SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTD. >> Chair Downs: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 6-0. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: LLAMA HAVEN ADDITION, BLOCKS A-D, - 49 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE-9 LOTS AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT ON 16.1 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PARKER ROAD, 180 FEET WEST OF VIRGO DRIVE. ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE-9. APPLICANT: CHEN YOU-HONG AND HONG ZHUANG. THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN. THIS PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING PLANS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? KIND OF COOL TO SEE AS SF-9 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TAKING PLACE. I LIKE THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> YES, IGREEITH YOU, MR. SPEAKER -- CHAIRMAN. [LAUGHTER] >> Chair Downs: JUST YOU. I AGREE WITH YOU. >> Bronsky: YES, YES. I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE 49 MORE SF-9 HOMES GOING IN PLANO AND SO I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> Chair Downs: SPEAKER BUTTON. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? >> QUESTION FOR STAFF. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> Chair Downs: WE HAVE A SECOND. NOW WE HAVE DISCUSSION. >> I LOOKED AT THE LOTS ON THE PLAT AND IT LOOKED LIKE MOST OF THEM WERE A LITTLE BIT UNDER 9,000 SQUARE FEET, LIKE 8500 8800. DOES THAT TAKE THIS OUT OF THE SF- 9 CATEGORY OR DO WE LEAVE IT IN SF- 9? >> WE HAVE TWO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DIVISIONS, ONE AND TWO, WHICH CAN DECREASE THE SI OF THE LOTS BUT STILL FITTING IN THE SF- 9 DISTRICT. >> THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF TO APPROVE ITEM 5 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, SO PLEASE VOTE. THAT ITEM CARRIES 6-0. ITEM 6, PLEASE. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT AND REVISED SITE PLAN: WEST PLANO RETAIL CENTER, BLOCK 1, LOT 1R- SUPERSTORE WITH VEHICLE FUELING STATION ON ONE LOT ON 15.7 ACRES LOCATED ON TH WEST SIDE OF THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY, 865 FEET SOUTH OF PARK ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-220- REGIONAL COMMERCIAL AND REGIONA COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED WITHIN THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY OVERLA APPLICANT: COSTCO WHOLESALE COR THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONS. >> STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REVISED SITE PLAN FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, IF THERE ARE ANY . >> Chair Downs: QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? I HAVE COMMISSIONER CARY FIRST. >> Cary: CAN YOU HELP ME BECAUSE IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME, MAYBE I'M A LITTLE OBTUSE. WHAT ARE THEY PLANNING TO DO HERE WITH THE FUELING? IT'S REALLY PERSONAL TO ME BECAUSE I'M OVER THERE AND IT'S CRAZY. I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS BUT JUSTT A VERY EYE LEVEL. >> THEY ARE PROPOSING TO EXPAND THE FUELING. NOW THEY'RE COMING IN WITH THE REVISED SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY REPLAT TO EXPAND THE FUELING AND THE QUEUING FOR THE FUELING TO MAKE IT EASIER TO NAVIGATE THE SITE. >> Cary: THAT'S A GOOD THING. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> YES, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ONLINE, CHARLES MOSELEY. >> Chair Downs: VERY GOOD. MR. MOSELEY, CAN YOU HEAR US? I DON'T SEE HIM YET. >> PROBABLY WAITING IN THAT LINE OVER THERE. >> Chair Downs: THERE HE IS. CAN YOU HEAR US? >> YES. I CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> Chair Downs: VERY WELL. >> I'M CHARLES MOSELEY AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF COSTCO WHOLESALE FOR THE COSTCO FUEL EXPANSION PROJECT. I HAVE THE TEAM HERE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. I HAVE TERESA GARCIA WITH COSTCO, OWNER REP. HALEY DAWSON, WHO IS OUR CIVIL ENGINEER, AND CHRISTINE CONNOLLY WITH KITTLESON AND ASSOCIATES, WHO IS OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER. WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH MR. McDOWELL TO DEVELOP AND COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE COSTCO FUEL FACILITY. WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF REPORT AND THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU, MR. MOSELEY. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MOSELEY ON THIS ITEM? WE DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU. THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING, FOR BEING HERE. >> THANK YOU, ALL. >> Chair Downs: DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: VERY WELL. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MR. OLLEY. >> Olley: I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 6, PRELIMINARY REPLAT, SUBJECT TO ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AND ALSO TO APPROVE THE REVISED SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED. >> I WILL GLADLY SECOND THAT. >> Chair Downs: NO PERSONAL INTEREST THERE. >> COMPLETELY PERSONAL. >> Chair Downs: OKAY. NO FINANCIAL INTEREST. >> Cary: NO FINANCIAL INTEREST. >> Chair Downs: THERE YOU GO. JUST BEING CLEAR THERE. I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARY TO APPROVE ITEM 6 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. THAT ITEM CARRIES 6-0. SO VERY GOOD. SHORTER LINES AND CHEAPER GAS. >> Cary: IT'S GOING TO GET BETTER QUICKLY. >> Chair Downs: EXCELLENT. >> AGENDA ITEM NO. 7. PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY REPLAT: THE CANAL ON PRESTON, BLOCK A, LOTS 11R AND 12R - RETAIL, PROF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, RESTAURANT, AND VETERINARY CLINIC ON LOT 11R AND RETAIL ON LOT 12R ON 2.3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ANGELS DRIVE AND MCDERMOTT ROAD. ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-20- MIXED-U APPLICANT: AKSHAYA REALTY, LLC AND MANTRA REALTY, LLC. THIS THIS IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION. >> Chair Downs: EASY FOR YOU TO SAY. >> NOT REALLY. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DONNA SEPULVEDA, SENIOR PLANNING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THIS ITEM IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Chair Downs: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIO FORTAFF ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T SEE ANY. YOU'RE OFF THE HOOK. YOU'RE GOOD. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> Chair Downs: I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO THE ADDITIONS AND OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND. >> Chair Downs: I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF TO APPROVE ITEM 7 AS SUBMITTED BY STAFF. PLEASE VOTE. COMMISSIONER CARY. HE'S ALREADY GETTING GAS. [LAUGHTER] >> Chairowns: THAT ITM CARRIES 6-0. I THINK THE ONLY OTHER OUTSTANDING ITEM WAS ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY RECOMMENDED ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS? OKAY. SEEING NONE, WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 9:33. [MEETING ADJOURNED]