Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:03]

WE

[CALL TO ORDER]

WILL COME TO ORDER AT 7:00 PM IN THE CHAMBERS FOR OUR JANUARY 17TH PM C MEETING.

PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF LEAD I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU.

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 THESE 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 NECESSARY.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? NO, WE DO NOT.

THANK YOU.

BEFORE YOU, UH, MOVE ON THOUGH, LET ME REMIND THE COMMISSION BASED ON THE DISCUSSION I HAD LAST TIME.

IF YOU WANNA SPEAK ON SOMETHING, UH, JUST FLAG ME WITH YOUR HAND VERSUS TURNING THE MICS ON.

CAUSE IT'S STARTING TO CREATE FEEDBACK ISSUES SOMETIMES WHEN WE DO THAT, PARTICULARLY IF WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR OF 'EM ON, CAUSE PEOPLE WANNA SPEAK.

SO YOU JUST KIND OF FLAG ME.

I'LL, I'LL GET TO EVERYBODY IN TURN.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

GO AHEAD PLEASE.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

CONSENT AGENDA.

THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO REMOVE A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE, I RETAIN A MOTION.

MAKE A MOTION.

WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM AS PRESENTED.

NO SECOND.

SO I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRUNO FOR THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RAT, OR EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF.

I SAW YOU RAISE YOUR HAND FIRST, BUT I, TOO LATE.

TOO LATE.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KERRY TO A PURSUIT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE VOTE.

AND THAT ITEM CARRIES SEVEN TO ZERO.

UH, FOR THE RECORD, WE ARE STILL SHORT ONE COMMISSION MEMBER, ALTHOUGH I THINK AN APPOINTMENT HAS BEEN MADE, AND, UH, SOMETIME IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, WE'LL HAVE THAT PERSON SEATED.

SO, ITEM

[1. (JR) Public Hearing: Zoning Case 2022-016 - Request to amend Article 10 (Nonresidential Districts), Article 14 (Allowed Uses and Use Classifications), Article 15 (Use-specific Regulations), and related sections of the Zoning Ordinance to align with specific land use policies in the Comprehensive Plan 2021. Project #ZC2022-016. Tabled November 7, 2022, and December 6, 2022. Petitioner: City of Plano (Legislative)]

ONE, ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UP IN 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 TESTIMONY TIME WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER.

PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS MUST BE APPROVED IF THEY MEET CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION ITEMS ARE MORE DISCRETIONARY EXCEPT AS CONSTRAINED BY LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS.

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING ZONING CASE.

20 22 16.

REQUEST TO AMEND ARTICLE 10 NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ARTICLE 14 ALLOWED USES AND USE CLASSIFICATIONS.

ARTICLE 15, USE SPECIFIC RES REGULATIONS AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN WITH SPECIFIC LAND USE POLICIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I'M SORRY, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021.

PETITIONER IS CITY OF PLANO.

THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSION.

UH, MY NAME IS JORDAN ROCKABEY, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

UH, SO AS DETAILED, THIS IS A ZONING REQUEST TO MAKE AMENDMENTS TO, UH, THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO, UH, REFLECT SOME OF THE CHANGES IN THE, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

A BRIEF, UH, HISTORY OF THIS CASE.

UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON IN NOVEMBER OF 2021.

IN JANUARY OF LAST YEAR, STAFF PRESENTED ON A VARIETY OF TOPICS AT A JOINT SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION.

AND IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, THE COMMISSION CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

PREVIOUSLY, FOUR ITEMS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED, THESE BEING INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES IN NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE, UH, COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE HIGHWAY 75 CORRIDOR AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE RETAIL DISTRICT.

UH, FOLLOWING THE CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, UH, STAFF BROUGHT FORWARD TWO DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEMS TO ASSIST IN PREPARING THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS.

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES WERE THE SUBJECT OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE DECEMBER 17TH, 2022 MEETING AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES WERE TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE JANUARY 3RD

[00:05:01]

MEETING.

HOWEVER, THAT ITEM WAS TABLED TO A FUTURE JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL.

FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, STAFF HAS SPOKEN WITH, UH, CHAIR DOWNS ON ADVANCING SOME OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION.

SO THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO, UM, AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WITH MULTI-FAMILY USES.

ALIGN PERMITTED LAND USES IN THE CE DISTRICT WITH THE EMPLOYMENT CENTER'S FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARD, AND TO ALLOW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE R DISTRICT WITHOUT AN S U P AS, UH, NO CHANGES RELATED TO THE HIGHWAY 75 CORRIDOR OR THE TABLED MULTI-FAMILY, UH, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ITEM ARE INCLUDED IN THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.

A SEPARATE ZONE IN CASE WOULD BE BROUGHT FORWARD, UH, FOLLOWING THE JOINT SESSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO I'LL GO THROUGH THESE, UH, THREE ITEMS IN BRIEF, INCLUDING A BROAD SUMMARY OF WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ENTAIL.

SO, AS YOU KNOW, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES ARE COUNTED AS A MULTI-FAMILY TYPE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT ARE CONSIDERED AN INSTITUTIONAL TYPE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD ADDRESS THIS INCONSISTENCY, INCONSISTENCY THROUGH FOUR BROAD ACTIONS.

FIRST, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WOULD BE RECATEGORIZED AS A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL USE.

THIS IS LARGELY ADMINISTRATIVE AND WOULD AFFECT THE LAND USE TABLES AND THE PARKING SCHEDULE.

SECOND, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WOULD BE ALIGNED WITH THOSE FOR MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS.

THE INTENT IS TO ENSURE BOTH USES ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME STANDARD TO WHERE APPROPRIATE AND ONE IS NOT FAVORED OVER THE OTHER.

THE THIRD CHANGE WOULD RESTRICT NEW INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES WHERE MULTI-FAMILY USES ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD CORNERS, COMMUNITY CORNERS AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS.

FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES DO NOT INCLUDE MULTI-FAMILY USES IN THE DESIRED LAND USE MIX.

LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE NOT ZONING DISTRICTS AND DO NOT DIRECTLY REGULATE LAND USE.

SO STAFF PROPOSE AMENDING FOUR ZONING DISTRICTS THAT GENERALLY OVERLAP WITH THESE THREE CATEGORIES.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE FOUR DISTRICTS ALSO DON'T ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY USE.

THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, GENERAL OFFICE, RETAIL, AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT ZONING DISTRICTS.

LANGUAGE WOULD BE ADDED TO EACH DISTRICT ALLOWING EXISTING AND OTHERWISE VESTED INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY USES TO REMAIN WITHOUT BEING CONSIDERED LEGAL NONCONFORMING.

THE LAST CHANGE CONCERNS CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES.

UH, STAFF HAD ASKED THE COMMISSION WHETHER STANDARDS FOR THIS USE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE SINCE A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY.

IT MAY INCLUDE INDEPENDENT LIVING U INDEPENDENT, UH, LIVING UNITS AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

IN RESPONSE, THE COMMISSION ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL INFO.

STAFF HAVE REVIEWED PEER MUNICIPALITIES AND FOUND THAT GENERALLY MOST DO NOT DEFINE A CONTINUING CARE USE.

AND THOSE THAT DO JUST USE PLANOS DEFINITION ON THE SUBJECT OF RESTRICTIVE STANDARDS.

STAFF HAVE DETERMINED THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT AND BURDENSOME TO CREATE AND ENFORCE SUCH STANDARDS, WHICH MIGHT INCLUDE CAPS ON THE PROPORTION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS OR FLOOR AREA RELATIVE TO OTHER RETIREMENT HOUSING TYPES.

SO INSTEAD OF NEW STANDARDS, STAFF PROPOSE TO MODIFY THE DEFINITION OF CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES TO MORE CLOSELY MATCH THE DEFINITION FOUND IN THE TEXAS HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE, WHICH MORE EXPLICITLY REQUIRES HEALTH RELATED SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED ON THE PREMISES.

FOR THE COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT.

STAFF PROPOSES CHANGES TO ENSURE THE LEGACY AREA CONTINUES TO BE A DESIRABLE LOCATION FOR EMPLOYERS TO LOCATE.

THE CE DISTRICT IS LARGELY LOCATED IN THE EMPLOYMENT CENTERS' FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, WHICH AS DISCUSSED WITH THE INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES ITEM, DOES NOT SUPPORT NEW RESIDENTIAL USES.

THE DISTRICT ITSELF CONTAINS A UNIT CAP, BUT ALLOWS NEW UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED BEYOND THIS CAP WITH THE APPROVAL OF AN S U P.

THE SAME LANGUAGE IS PRESENT IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ONE DISTRICT.

SO, UH, TWO ACTIONS ARE PROPOSED AND THEY'RE BOTH FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

THE FIRST IS TO RESTRICT NEW RESIDENTIAL LAND USES IN THE CE DISTRICT, WHICH ENTAILS REMOVING RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS FROM THE DISTRICT AND UPDATING THE LAND USE TABLE AND UPDATING THE CE AND CB ONE DISTRICTS TO REMOVE THE UNIT.

CAPITAL LANGUAGE RESIDENTIAL USES WOULD CONTINUE TO BE PERMITTED BY S U P IN THE CB ONE DISTRICT, SINCE IT IS LARGELY LOCATED IN AN AREA WHERE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUPPORTS RESIDENTIAL USE.

THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RETAIL DISTRICT ARE ALSO STRAIGHTFORWARD.

UH, CURRENTLY SOME RESIDENTIAL USES ARE PERMITTED WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

THESE BEING ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY PATIO HOMES AND DUPLEXES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CORNERS AND COMMUNITY CORNERS,

[00:10:01]

FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES SUPPORT THESE USES PROVIDED THAT THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE S U P REQUIREMENT, WHICH MAY BE A BARRIER TO NEW HOUSING.

THE RETAIL DISTRICT ALREADY CONTAINS STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SITE SIZE AND LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL USES.

SO THIS WOULD NOT CREATE A FREE FOR ALL REDEVELOPMENT SCENARIO.

FOLLOWING THIS, THE DISCUSSION ON DECEMBER 19, NEW MODIFIED STANDARDS ON SCREENING AND FENCING HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE.

THESE ARE INTENDED TO ENSURE POTENTIAL NUISANCES SUCH AS LOADING AREAS ARE APPROPRIATELY SCREENED WHILE ALLOWING FOR FLEXIBILITY IN CREATING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS AND THE SHOPPING CENTER.

SO TO SUMMARIZE, UH, STAFF PROPOSE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN STANDARDS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES, THE CE DISTRICT AND THE R DISTRICT WITH SPECIFIC POLICIES.

IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, A DETAILED LIST OF THE RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND ACTIONS IS PROVIDED IN THE PACKET, BUT THESE INCLUDE ACTIONS UNDER THE LAND USE POLICY, REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION POLICY, REVITALIZATION OF RETAIL SHOPPING CENTERS, POLICY AND SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS POLICY.

AN OVERVIEW OF HOW THESE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ALIGN WITH RELEVANT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES IS ALSO PROVIDED IN THE PACKET.

STAFF HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSES FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS NOTED IN EXHIBIT B OF THE PACKET.

I'M SURE THERE WILL BE QUESTIONS, SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UM, I THOUGHT THE, WHAT YOU HAD PUT OUT WAS VERY DETAILED.

UM, DESPITE BEING KIND OF DENSE, A LITTLE BIT JARGON, THANK GOD WE'RE ALL P AND Z MEMBERS HERE.

WE KIND OF LEARN, WE'VE BEEN EDUCATED ON THIS.

UM, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BECAUSE, UM, INDEPENDENT LIVING, WE'RE REMOVING IT AS SOMETHING YOU COULD HAVE, AND I'M GONNA USE COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT, BUT A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY IS ALLOWED THERE.

AND A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY MAY HAVE CERTAIN SECTIONS OR ELEMENTS THAT ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING.

SO IF A DEVELOPER APPROACHES US THAT SAYS, I WANNA BUILD AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY IN CE, WE'RE GONNA SAY NO.

SOMEONE SAYS, I'M GONNA BUILD A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY.

UH, AND BY THE WAY, 80% OF THE UNITS ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING.

I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE THAT SAID IT ALLOWS A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE TO BE INDEPENDENT LIVING OR SOMETHING.

AND MAYBE IT'S IN THERE, BUT AGAIN, FAIRLY DENSE.

SO HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED OR IS THERE A GUIDELINE ON THAT? SO NO, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO INTRODUCE ANY, UM, RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPORTION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS.

OKAY.

TO OTHER RETIREMENT HOUSING UNITS.

WHEN DISCUSSED AT THE STAFF LEVEL, IT WAS DEEMED THAT THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE, UM, PARTICULARLY IN THE LONG TERM.

UM, AND WOULD WE BE SENDING PROPERTY STANDARDS OUT TO YEAH.

SAY HOW MANY OF YOUR UNITS ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING? HOW MANY? NO, I COMPLETELY GET THAT.

I JUST WAS, I'M THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS THOUGH OF, I, I KNOW THAT THE DEFINITION OF CONTINUING CARE REQUIRES A CERTAIN LEVEL OF, UH, ASSISTANCE BY MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS, ET ET CETERA.

BUT, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CREATE SOMETHING WHERE, AGAIN, 5% OF THE UNITS HAVE TREATMENT AVAILABLE TO 'EM AND THE OTHER 95% ARE JUST INDEPENDENT LIVING.

AND, AND MAYBE THAT'S FINE, BUT I I THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION SINCE IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME, YOU KNOW, A DEVELOPER WILL CALL SOMETHING X AND IT, IT ISN'T REALLY X IT'S SOMETHING ELSE WITH A LITTLE SKIN OVER IT.

SO, GO AHEAD.

JUST TO ADD TO, UM, THE PRIOR COMMENTS, I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS A LOT, AT THE STAFF LEVEL, SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT GOT US COMFORTABLE WITH THIS DEFINITION WAS REALLY THE COMMENT THAT THE CONTINUUM OF PERSONAL SERVICES, NURSING SERVICES, MEDICAL SERVICES WERE PROVIDED ON THE SAME PROPERTY.

SO THAT IDEA THAT YOU HAVE TO BE PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES ON SITE, WE DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE A PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF DEVELOPMENT FOR SOMEONE TO DO 95% INDEPENDENT TO LIVING AND 5% BECAUSE THE EXPENSE OF PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES TO ALL UNITS WOULD JUST NOT BE, NOT BE PRACTICAL RE REASONABLE.

YES.

UM, OKAY.

SO ANY, WE THOUGHT IT WAS ENFORCEABLE FOR THAT REASON.

YEAH.

UNDERSTOOD.

ANYONE ELSE COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR SEGMENT? YEAH, COMMISSIONER KERRY.

YEAH, I, I ECHO, UH, WHAT CHAIRMAN SAID, I THINK THIS IS WELL DONE.

IT, THERE IS A LOT HERE, BUT I THINK THAT'S NECESSARY TO BRING THIS FORTH.

AND I

[00:15:01]

PERSONALLY AM EXCITED TO SEE, ADDRESS US ADDRESSING THE INDEPENDENT LIVING BECAUSE THE WAY IT WAS DONE BEFORE, I THINK LEFT SOME, SOME, MAYBE SOME HOLES IN THERE THAT WE NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

SO I, I APPLAUD YOU GUYS FOR TAKING THIS ON AND THE WAY YOU'RE BRINGING IT FORTH.

I THINK IT'S WELL DONE AND, AND MAKES SENSE TO ME.

SO GOOD JOB.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRUNO.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.

UM, EXCELLENT PRESENTATION AND WANNA THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK ON THIS.

UM, OBVIOUSLY IF WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WE DO, WHICH WAS DEVELOPED WITH A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT AND A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLIC INPUT AND, YOU KNOW, BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS, SO TO SPEAK, UH, IT BEHOOVES US TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR OTHER ORDINANCES, SPECIFICALLY THE ZONING ORDINANCE, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND AFTER ALL, THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO I THINK THIS IS A NECE, THIS IS A NECESSARY, UH, THING TO DO.

UM, I THINK IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IN GREAT DETAIL AND IT'S, I IT'S IN PRETTY MUCH FINISHED FORM.

SO I, I THINK WE'RE READY TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT AND SEND IT TO COUNSEL.

NOW WE GOT LOTS HANDS UP, UH, AND I DIDN'T SEE WHO WAS, WHOOPS.

ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER RATS.

UM, TO ECHO THE COMMENTS, I'M, I'M EX SO GLAD ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT LIVING, BUT I THINK IT STILL GIVES YOU THE FLEXIBILITY AND US THE FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW FOR THE SENIOR HOUSING THAT WE SO DESPERATELY NEED.

BUT PROBABLY THE ONE THAT I THINK IS GONNA MAKE THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IS THE CHANGE TO THE R DISTRICT, RIGHT? UM, TO ALLOW SOME OF THE FOUR CORNERS TO REDEVELOP.

AND SO I THINK I'M HOPEFUL THAT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE'LL LOOK BACK AND SAY THAT WAS A POSITIVE CHANGE THAT ALLOWED SOME OF THOSE THINGS TO HAPPEN.

SO WELL DONE.

IT WAS A HEAVY READ, BUT, UH, BUT, UH, I COULD TELL A LOT OF THOUGHT WAS PUT INTO IT.

VERY WELL DONE, VERY THOROUGH.

UM, MY COMPLIMENTS TO THE AUTHORS.

THANK YOU, MR. BRACO.

UH, YEAH, UH, AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

UM, YOU DID A GREAT JOB.

UM, COMMISSIONER BRUNO? YES, WE CRIED.

WE, UH, BLED, ARGUED WE BLED, UH, FOR ALMOST MIDNIGHT A COUPLE TIMES.

SO, YES, UH, I, I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT, UM, BRINGING THIS UP AND HAVING THIS GO FORWARD.

I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB ON HONORING ALL OF THE EFFORT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

UM, AND, UH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER RATLIFF.

THE ABILITY FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO BE IN THE, OUR DISTRICT, I THINK IS GONNA BE A VERY BIG POSITIVE.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE CARE AND EFFORT THAT YOU PUT FORWARD TO NOT ONLY HONOR THE C PRC AND ALL OF US, BUT THE REST OF THE STAFF AND EVERYBODY IN PLANO THAT I REALLY THINK IS STRONGLY BEHIND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

SO THE ECHO, WHAT EVERYONE SAID, UM, THE QUESTION I HAD WAS ON THE CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES, AND I'LL CONFESS, I TRIED TO READ THE TEXAS HEALTH CODE AND MY EYES GLAZED OVER.

UM, WHAT LEVEL OF MEDICAL CARE TRIGGERS THAT FACILITY GETTING THAT DESIGNATION? IS IT A FULLY FLEDGED MEDICAL OFFICE WITH THE APPROPRIATE, I DUNNO, UH, EQUIPMENT ON STAFF? OR DO I JUST NEED TO HAVE A NURSE THAT LIVES IN ONE OF THE UNITS AND I IT'S A CONTINUED CARE FACILITY? , DO WE KNOW, I'D GO BACK AND READ THAT STATEMENT AGAIN CUZ I THOUGHT THAT WAS GO AHEAD.

OH, THE STATEMENT MM-HMM.

, THE, WHAT THE DEFINITION SAYS, UH, IS THAT IT'S A DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND STAFF TO PROVIDE HOUSING TOGETHER WITH A CONTINUUM OF PERSONAL CARE SERVICES, NURSING SERVICES, MEDICAL SERVICES, AND OR OTHER HEALTH RELATED SERVICES ON THE SAME PROPERTY.

SO IN ADDITION, IT STATES THAT IT INCLUDES A COMBINATION OF INDEPENDENT LIVING, ASSISTED LIVING, OR LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES.

SO I THINK WE REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF A CONTINUUM OF SERVICES BECAUSE IT WASN'T JUST YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE ONE SERVICE, YOU NEEDED TO PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE CONTINUITY OF THE LIFE CYCLE.

THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF CONTINUING CARE, THAT YOU'RE PROGRESSING, UM, THROUGH TIME, UH, WITH DIFFERENT NEEDS AND THAT THOSE DIFFERENT NEEDS ARE BEING MET THROUGH THIS COMBINATION OF MEDICAL, NURSING, HEALTH RELATED, UM, FOOD SERVICE, WHATEVER IT IS THAT THAT'S NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE CLIENTS.

SO I THINK I WILL, UM, DEFER IF OTHERS REMEMBER MORE ABOUT THE TEXAS HEALTH CODE THAN I DO OR HAVE PERHAPS HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK IT UP WHILE I'VE BEEN TALKING .

BUT, UH, THEIR EYES ARE ALL UGLY TO ME.

IT, WE, WE REALLY EXPECT, I THINK BASED ON THE DEFINITION THAT IT'S GONNA BE MORE ROBUST.

AND FORGIVE ME, I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THIS.

CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES IN THOSE PARTICULAR ZONE DISTRICTS,

[00:20:01]

ARE THEY PERMITTED BY RIGHT AT THIS POINT IN TIME OR IS IT SAP? THEY'RE, THEY'RE PERMITTED, THEY'RE GENERALLY PERMITTED BY, RIGHT.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A COUPLE WHERE IT'S BY U CORRIDOR CORRIDOR COMMERCIALS, UH, REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT ARE U P.

YEAH.

OKAY.

AND THEN JUST TO, UH, TO BACK UP TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION ON THE LEVEL OF, UM, MEDICAL CARE, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IN OUR DEFINITION OF CONTINUING CARE FACILITY, WE DO EXPLICITLY STATE THAT IT HAS TO INCLUDE, UM, A COMBINATION OF OTHER USES WHICH ARE DEFINED IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE AND THOSE OTHER USES, UM, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY AND LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY FACILITY DO HAVE MORE DETAIL ON WHAT CARE LOOKS LIKE.

UH, AND THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE IN THE PACKET.

UM, EXHIBIT D IS THE ATTACHMENT WITH ALL THOSE DEFINITIONS.

THANK YOU.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR TO ENSURE THAT WE HAD A HIGHER OF FAR THAT THEY DO BE COST PROHIBITIVE TO SOMEBODY TO JUST GO TIME.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE TOO THAT THIS ABILITY TO BE LOCATED IN SOME OF THESE AREAS, THE OFFICE IN COMMERCIAL AREAS, UH, WE'RE STILL HOLDING THEM TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STANDARDS AND STUFF BECAUSE IT'S A RESIDENTIAL, BUT IN A NON-TYPICAL NON-RESIDENTIAL AREA.

YES, SIR.

MR. , JUST A QUESTION FOR MS. DAY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I'VE BEEN IN A NUMBER OF THESE FACILITIES AND THE ARCHITECTURE OF AN INDEPENDENT CARE FACILITY IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT MM-HMM.

THAN A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FLOOR PLANS, SO I PRESUME THAT SOMEBODY CAME IN FOR THAT ZONING AND THEN THE PLANS CAME IN AND IT LOOKED LIKE AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY THAT'S AT THAT POINT HE WOULD GO, UH, NOW THIS DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE ZONING.

IS THAT CORRECT? UH, YES.

EVEN THE SITE PLANNING IS, IS DIFFERENT.

BUT WE'VE SEEN IN PLANO IS THAT THERE'LL BE ACTUALLY A VARIETY OF USES ON SITE.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY EXPECTING TO SEE.

WHILE IT COULD ALL BE IN A SINGLE BUILDING, THAT'S NOT THE TYPICAL FORM THAT WE'VE SEEN THIS TAKE.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KERRY.

THANK YOU.

UM, ON, UH, POINT 15.1, UM, IT TALKS ABOUT SURVIVING MEMBERS BEING ABLE TO, UM, IN LIVE IN THE FACILITY IF THE 55 AND OLDER, UM, OCCUPANT PASSES ON.

AND, AND MY QUESTION IS, IS THIS, UM, IS A SURVIVING MEMBER, DO THEY HAVE TO BE LIVING THERE ALREADY OR COULD SOMEBODY PASS ON AND A MEMBER OF THE FAMILY THAT DOESN'T EVEN LIVE THERE MOVE IN? AND IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN VERY MUCH, BUT AS I READ THROUGH THIS, IT, IT WAS A CURIOSITY TO AMY TO ME HOW WE'D MANAGE THAT PARTICULAR THING IF AND WHEN IT HAPPENS.

UM, AND SO I JUST, I'M CURIOUS WHAT, WHAT, UH, WHAT THE OUTLOOK OF THAT IS FOR SURE.

UM, SO THAT'S AN EXISTING STANDARD IN OUR ORDINANCE.

IT'S ALREADY THERE TODAY.

UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HAS A BASIS IN, UM, STATE LAW GOVERNING INDEPENDENCE, LIVING FACILITIES, OR PERHAPS I'LL JUST NOTE, UM, IT'S SURVIVING MEMBERS OF THE HOUSEHOLD AND THERE IS A DEFINITION IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE FOR HOUSEHOLD.

UM, AND IT, IT TALKS ABOUT A DOMESTIC UNIT THAT RESIDES IN AND SHARES IN COMMON A SINGLE DWELLING UNIT AND CONSISTS OF INDIVIDUALS RELATED BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE LIVING THERE AT THAT TIME FROM THAT DEFINITION.

I WOULD BELIEVE SO, YES.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, I'M ASSUMING YOU NEED ACTION ON OUR PART HERE.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS SUBMITTED.

THANK YOU, MR. BROWN.

CHAIR DOWNS.

WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER.

OH, WE DO? OKAY.

OH YEAH, WE DO.

SORRY, I WITHDRAW.

I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST IN SPORT OF, UM, I'LL WITHDRAW THAT FOR NOW.

YEAH, WITHDRAW THAT FOR NOW.

CAUSE I DIDN'T OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYWAY, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

I WAS SO EXCITED WE WERE MOVING FORWARD.

.

THANK YOU EVERYBODY.

UH, NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM BY? WE DO, UH, ETTE .

AHA.

SHE KNOWS WHAT SHAIR.

YES.

UH, ONE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

SURE.

UH, MY NAME IS AHHA SHAIR.

I RESIDE ON FOUR 40 COIT ROAD IN APARTMENT 92 0 2, RIGHT HERE IN PLANO, TEXAS.

I AM A, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT, UH, ONE AND A HALF YEARS NOW, AND I AM GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF MOST OF THE ITEMS IN, ARE

[00:25:01]

MOST OF THE POINTS IN ITEM ONE.

UH, OBVIOUSLY I'M VERY STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF, UM, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING AND RETAIL, PARTICULARLY FOR, UM, ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, UH, PLATFORM HOUSING AND, UH, TWO FAMILY UNITS OR DUPLEXES.

I THINK THOSE TWO UNITS WOULD BE VERY APPROPRIATE FOR THE RETAIL EMPLOYEES IN THOSE SECTION.

UM, AND HAVING THEM LIVE VERY CLOSE TO THEIR WORKPLACE IS DEFINITELY, UM, A HUGE FINANCIAL BENEFIT FOR THAT DEMOGRAPHIC.

UM, UH, I I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD TRY AND EXPLORE MAYBE EVEN POTENTIALLY MULTIFAMILY USES, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A STRETCH.

AND I DO LIKE THE, UM, OPTIONS ALREADY ON THE TABLE.

UM, BECAUSE AGAIN, UM, THAT WOULD BE, UH, MORE COST OPEN HOUSING OPEN TO, UM, RELIABLE HOUSING FOR, UH, RETAIL EMPLOYEES.

AND I THINK THE ADDED BENEFIT OF HAVING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES LIVING CLOSE, UM, PARTICULARLY, UM, IT COULD CREATE VERY COHESIVE COMMUNITIES.

UM, I'M THINKING MAYBE THAT THE CHILDREN LIVING IN THESE HOMES COULD, UH, NOT RELY ON THEIR PARENTS AS MUCH TO MAYBE GO TO THE THEATERS OR, OR GO, YOU KNOW, MUCH OF MY FRIENDS WOULD ALWAYS GO HIT UP THE TARGET FOR SOME REASON.

SO , UM, IT WOULD ALLOW A VEHICLE FOR SOME INDEPENDENCE FOR CHILDREN.

AND, UM, IF WE BUILD C COMMUNITIES AROUND THAT CONCEPT, UH, AROUND THAT CONCEPT, WE CAN ARRIVE AT, UM, VERY STRONG, COHESIVE COMMUNITIES WITH CHILDREN THAT HAVE HUNG OUT IN THESE RETAIL DISTRICTS GROWING UP AND STR AND CREATING A VERY STRONG COMMUNITY IN OUR CITY.

UM, THAT'S IT.

UH, ONE OF MY ONE MAIN SKEPTICISMS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A PART OF THE FUTURE LAND USE.

HOWEVER, UM, I AM SKEPTICAL OF REMOVING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FROM THE, UH, CURRENT.

I THINK IT'S THE CE UH, THE CE CATEGORY.

IT'S THE TWO B EM CATEGORY.

UM, THAT'S BECAUSE PARTICULARLY IN THE LEGACY WEST AREA, THERE IS, UM, A LARGE AMOUNT OF MASS TRANSIT.

UH, WE HAVE SEVERAL DART LINES GOING RIGHT THROUGH THAT AREA.

SO I THINK HAVING SOME DENSE HOUSING, UM, SIR, YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS.

SURE.

HAVING SOME DENSE HOU HOUSING IN THAT AREA WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL.

UM, LIVING CLOSE TO THE WORKPLACE IS VERY ATTRACTIVE TO YOUNGER PEOPLE, UM, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO MIGHT BE INTERNING AT SOME OF THOSE FACILITIES OR, UM, THOSE WHO ARE VERY EARLY ON IN THEIR CAREER.

SO, BUT THAT SAID, I AM STILL LARGELY IN SUPPORT OF ITEM ONE.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, WE DO NOT.

OKAY.

NO, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC AREA.

I'M SORRY, ARE YOU RIVER BLUM? OKAY.

I HAVE YOU AS REGISTERED OPINION.

DID YOU WANNA SPEAK? OH, SHE'S .

I'M DANIELLE REGISTERED.

I DON'T HAVE YOU AS BEING REGISTERED, BUT YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME UP AND SPEAK.

WE'LL JUST HAVE YOU FILL OUT A CARD AFTER YOU'VE DONE SO.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

YES.

WE APPARENTLY HAVE MORE SPEAKERS.

CAN WE, BEFORE YOU ARE, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'S GONNA SPEAK? JUST THE TWO THERE.

OKAY.

AND WE HAVE CARDS FOR THEM? WE DO, WE DO NOT, BUT I'LL HAVE THEM FILL ONE OUT AFTER THEY'RE DONE.

OKAY.

PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

YEAH, OF COURSE.

UM, MY FULL NAME IS DANIEL YALOM, 2200 WATERVIEW PARKWAY, DOWN IN RICHARDSON.

UH, SO I'M THE PRESIDENT OF UTD ADVOCACY GROUP CALLED COMMENTS FOR BETTER TRANSIT.

I'M HERE TO REPRESENT OVER 250 MEMBERS, MANY OF WHOM LIVE OR WORK IN PLANO, INCLUDING AREAS THAT WILL BE DIRECTLY BE AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS FOR MORE TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVES, JUST LIKE YOU SAW FROM A HEART, BUT I WANNA BRING UP A BIT OF AN UNORTHODOX PERSPECTIVE.

RIGHT NOW.

MOST OF OUR MEMBERS DON'T HAVE A CAR.

THEY NEED TO WALK, BIKE, OR USE PUBLIC TRANSIT TO GET TO THEIR DESTINATIONS.

WHEN THOSE ARE NOT OPTIONS, THEY JUST CANNOT GET WHERE THEY NEED TO GET YET.

TEENAGERS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS ARE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO FACE THESE TYPES OF PROBLEMS. RECENTLY, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND THE PLAINTIFF CITIZENS COALITION MEETING.

ONE OF THE OFFICERS TOLD ME THEY'RE SEEING A DECLINE IN ATTENDANCE BECAUSE SOME OF THE MEMBERS ARE GETTING TOO OLD TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE AT NIGHT IF THAT MEANS THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO GET TO THEIR MEETING PLACES.

IMAGINE LIVING MOST OF YOUR LIFE, BEING ABLE TO GO ANYWHERE YOU WANT TO GO AT ANY TIME YOU WANT TO GO WITHOUT HAVING TO RELY ON THE HELP OR ASSISTANCE FROM ANYONE ELSE, EVEN ONE DAY LOSING THAT FREEDOM FOR REASONS THAT ARE ENTIRELY BEYOND YOUR CONTROL.

CAN I ASK FOR A SHOW OF HANDS FOR A SECOND? RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU OWN THE CAR AND YOU USE IT TO GET HERE TODAY.

[00:30:01]

REALLY TECHNICALLY WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO RESPOND, BUT CONTINUE.

OKAY.

UM, I HOPE YOU REALIZE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENING HERE BECAUSE THE CONVERSATIONS WE TEND TO HOLD IN THESE TYPES OF PLANNING MEETINGS HAPPEN IN A BIT OF A BUBBLE.

THESE MEETINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN TO THE ENTIRE PLANO PUBLIC, BUT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO CAN RELIABLY SHOW UP HERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE A CAR.

COULD YOUR CHILD COME AROUND WORLD OF VOLITION? WHAT ABOUT YOUR PARENTS? AS LONG AS WE KEEP BUILDING OUR CITIES IN WAYS THAT ASSUME EVERYONE DRIVES AND PEDESTRIANS A SECOND CLASS CITIZENS WHERE THEY FACTOR DENYING MOST OF THEM FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT.

AND THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO CORRECT THIS INJUSTICE IS NOT SOME INCREASE IN DENSITY OR INVESTMENTS IN EXPENSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT SIMPLY MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE LIVE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE PLACES WHERE THEY STUDY, WORK, SHOP, OR CONGREGATE.

MOST OF THIS PROPOSAL GOES INTO GREAT LENGTH STORE JUSTICE ISSUE, AND I GENUINELY APPLAUD THEM, BUT SOME PARTS DO NOT.

SPECIFICALLY, I TAKE ISSUE WITH PARTS THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY CURTAIL FUTURE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CE DISTRICTS.

UM, I BELIEVE IN THE LONG TERM, THESE WILL PROVE TO BE A MISTAKE.

I SINCERELY HOPE THAT AS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTINUES TO BE REASSESSED BY PEOPLE LIKE UN CITY STAFF, THAT THIS PART OF THE PROPOSAL GETS RECONSIDERED.

BUT OVERALL, I THINK IT IS A GOOD PROPOSAL.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

AND MS. RIVER, IS THAT HELLO? UH, I'M RIVER BLOOM.

I'M A, I LIVE AT 4,000 HALIFAX DRIVE.

UH, I KNOW THAT THE FIRST PART OF THIS, UH, OR I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT'S THE FIRST PART, BUT THE PART ABOUT, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES IN COMMERCIAL, UH, EMPLOYMENT DISTRICTS, UH, IS PART OF THE FUTURE LAND USE.

BUT I DO THINK THAT, UH, IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED THAT MULTI-FAMILY USE, UH, WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL IN THESE AREAS.

UH, NEW RESIDENT NEW RESIDENTIAL USES CAN BE APPROVED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, UH, IN THESE AREAS.

UH, IF IT IS A PART, UH, IF THERE IS NO PROHIBITION ON MULTI-FAMILY USES, UH, AND RESIDENTS MAY AT THAT TIME EXPRESS CONCERNS, OPPOSITION, OR SUPPORT AT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES.

UH, MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, UH, BRINGS GREAT BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DISTRICTS.

AND, UH, IT CAN BE VITAL AND BENEFICIAL FOR PLANOS ECONOMY.

UH, RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE AREA, UH, CAN ALSO ATTRACT EMPLOYERS TO THE AREA, UH, WITH PEOPLE IN THE AREA.

BUT BEING POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES OR INTERNS, UH, ESPECIALLY YOUNGER PEOPLE, UH, THIS CAN FOSTER STRENGTHENED COMMUNITY IN PLANO RAISING OUR RANKS AND BEING A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE AND TO RAISE A FAMILY.

IN ADDITION, I WANT TO AFFIRM THAT I, UH, STRONGLY SUPPORT THE, UH, PERMISSION OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING AND RETAIL DISTRICTS.

UH, THOUGH I DO THINK THAT IT IS IN THE INTEREST OF PLANOS, UH, ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY AND RETAIL DISTRICTS AS WELL.

UH, ON THE WHOLE, I THINK MULTI-FAMILY ZONING SHOULD BE, UH, MORE UNRESTRICTED IN PLANOS STANDARDS AND FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE UPDATES TO THESE STANDARDS SHOULD HAVE THIS IN MIND.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE? NO.

NO.

WE DO NOT.

ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL CLOSE THE HEARING AGAIN.

UH, COMMISSIONER BRUNO, UH, JUST A BRIEF COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE, TO THE COMMENTS WE'VE JUST HEARD.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY ON THIS COMMISSION WHO'S NOT STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF DART AND PUBLIC TRANSIT.

I KNOW I AM.

UH, IN THE PAST, I HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO PRESERVE PUBLIC TRANSIT FOR THE PUBLIC.

UM, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CONSIDERING, UH, ON AN ONGOING BASIS, UH, TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE NEW DART SILVER LINE, WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT THIS TIME.

SO THE LIGHT RAIL LINE STARTING, UH, FROM, UH, UM, FAR EAST PLANO AND, UM, INTERSECTING WITH THE, UH, CURRENT, UH, RED AND ORANGE LINES, AND THEN PROCEEDING OUT TO DFW AIRPORT.

UM, I THINK, UH, YOU MIGHT WANT TO, UH, UH, STAY INFORMED AS TO OUR FUTURE AGENDAS.

AND IF YOU ARE SO MOTIVATED, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COME AND SPEAK TO US ON THE ISSUE OF TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT WHEN, WHEN THAT, UH, RETURNS TO OUR AGENDAS IN THE FUTURE.

UM, I'D ALSO POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE THIS EVENING ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS THE NEXT CASE WE'LL CONSIDER, WHICH IS ZONING CASE 2022

[00:35:01]

DASH 17, WHICH DOES SPECIFICALLY CONSIDER ALL FORMS OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, INCLUDING SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY IN VERY, IN ITS VARIOUS ITERATIONS.

UH, NEXT TO, UH, WHAT WE CALL NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT, WHICH IS, UH, A, UM, THE COMMERCIAL AND AND RETAIL AREAS.

UH, AND, UH, THOSE TYPES OF HOUSING ARE DIVIDED INTO THREE DIFFERENT TIERS ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF HOUSING WITH STANDARDS FOR, UH, THE, UH, PLACEMENT AND ALLOCATION OF HOUSING AMONG THOSE THREE TIERS.

SO THE ISSUES YOU'VE RAISED ARE IMPORTANT AND WE ARE NOT NEGLECTING THEM.

THANK YOU.

I THINK I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT, UM, IN THE CE DISTRICT, MOST LIKELY WHAT WILL HAPPEN THERE IS THROUGH PLAN DEVELOPMENTS IS A COMBINATION OF RESIDENTIAL, INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY WITH RETAIL OFFICE, ET CETERA.

SO THAT CE DISTRICT, IT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR A SINGLE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO BE, UH, IN PLACE.

HOWEVER, WHAT WILL LIKELY HAPPEN IS A DEVELOPER WILL PUT TOGETHER A COHESIVE UNIT, KIND OF A MIXED USE TYPE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL INCLUDE MULTI-FAMILY.

SO, UH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND SPEAKING.

APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY.

SHALL WE CIRCLE BACK TO MR. BROSKY? WOULD YOU LIKE TO REPEAT YOUR YEAH, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT, UH, ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE AS SUBMITTED.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BROSKI.

AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BRUNO.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION.

AND SECOND, NOW PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM ONE, CARRIE SEVEN TO ZERO.

THANK YOU.

STAFF.

WE DIDN'T LEAVE YOU STANDING THE WAY WE DID LAST TIME.

AGENDA

[2. (CS) Public Hearing: Zoning Case 2022-017 - Request to amend Section 9.1700 (RCD, Residential Community Design District), Section 10.1600 (NBD, Neighborhood Business Design District), and related sections of the Zoning Ordinance to improve alignment of the districts with Comprehensive Plan 2021. Project #ZC2022-017. Tabled November 7, 2022, and December 6, 2022. Petitioner: City of Plano (Legislative)]

ITEM NUMBER TWO, PUBLIC HEARING ZONING CASE 2022 DASH 17.

REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 9.1700 R C D, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN DISTRICT, SECTION 10.160 N B D NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT, AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT OF THE DISTRICTS WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021, PETITIONER AS CITY OF PLANO, THIS IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

I'M CHRISTINA SEBASTIAN, LAND RECORDS PLANNING MANAGER.

UM, AS MS. BRIDGES DESCRIBED, THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALIGN TWO ZONING DISTRICTS AND BD AND R C B WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021.

AS A REMINDER, THESE DISTRICTS WERE FIRST APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION IN JULY OF 2020.

UH, COUNSEL CONSIDERED THEM THE FOLLOWING MONTH, BUT TABLED THEM TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE TO WORK IN JANUARY OF 2021.

COUNCIL DID APPROVE THE DISTRICT'S, BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS STILL UNDER REVIEW.

SO THE DISTRICTS WERE LIMITED TO THE A PLANO EVENT CENTER SITE ONLY, UM, BUT COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO REVISIT THE DISTRICT'S WANTS.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS COMPLETE.

THAT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER OF 2021.

AND THEN IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, THE COMMISSION HEARD A PRESENTATION ON THE, THE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS AND CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, AND ON DECEMBER 19TH OF THIS PAST YEAR, UH, THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS REPRESENTED AS WITH THE LAST CASE, UH, THE, ON JANUARY 3RD, SOME DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON MULTI-FAMILY TAPES TYPES WAS, UH, TABLED BY THE COMMISSION.

UM, AND ON THE JANUARY 6TH, STAFF SPOKE WITH THE CHAIR ABOUT ADVANCING PART OF THIS CASE THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, UM, BUT SAVING THE MULTI-FAMILY DISCUSSION FOR, UM, A JOINT MEETING AND, UH, DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL AT THAT TIME.

SO YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT THESE CASES A FEW TIMES, SO I WILL TRY TO GO THROUGH THIS QUICK REVIEW OF THE, THE DISTRICTS AS THEY ARE TODAY.

UM, AGAIN, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN.

N B D IS FOR SMALL SCALE COMMERCIAL USES.

RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN IS RCD IS FOR SMALL SCALE RESIDENTIAL.

THEY ARE DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE, UM, BUT ALSO COMPANION DISTRICTS.

UH, THE COMPA COMPATIBILITY OF THE CAN BE WALKABLE, TREELINE STREETS, LOW RISE.

UH, BOTH HAVE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE, BUT THEY'RE COMPANION DISTRICTS AND THAT EITHER CAN BE USED ALONE, BUT N B D DISTRICTS C CAN INCLUDE R C D HOUSING TYPES SO THAT THEY COULD BE USED TOGETHER.

UH, THERE IS A NEED FOR THESE DISTRICTS IN THAT WHAT WE HAVE ON THE, IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, OTHERWISE HAS LIMITED DESIGN STANDARDS, MAY ALLOW MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT OR AN INSUFFICIENT HOUSING MIX, OR REQUIRE SPECIALIZED PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, WHICH MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN SOME CASES, BUT CAN BE INEFFICIENT TO ADMINISTER THE, THE NB N B D AND RCD DISTRICTS ARE MARKET RESPONSIVE TO THESE NEEDS TO PROVIDE MORE VARIETY AND HOUSING TYPES AND

[00:40:01]

THAT SMALL SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.

UH, SO QUICKLY, JUST SOME THINGS THAT ARE SIMILAR BETWEEN THE TWO DISTRICTS.

UH, THEY BOTH REQUIRE GOVERNANCE ASSOCIATION, WALKABLE STREETS, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, UM, AND HAVE VARIOUS BUILDING PLACEMENT STANDARDS.

UH, THEY ALSO HAVE A TWO TO ONE HEIGHT TO SETBACK RATIO FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, TO PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM LIGHT AND NOISE AND SOME ADDITIONAL PRIVACY.

FOR M V D, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR A MIX OF AT LEAST THREE USES, AND AGAIN, CAN USE, UH, THOSE USES CAN BE RESIDENTIAL.

UM, WHEN FOLLOWING THE RCD STANDARDS, THERE IS AN, A UNIQUE RESIDENTIAL OPTION FOR N B D CALLED THE LIVE WORK BUSINESS LOFT.

THIS ALLOWS FOR GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH A SINGLE ATTACHED DWELLING UNIT.

UM, AND IT'S, AGAIN, IT'S ONLY PERMITTED IN THE N B D DISTRICT.

FOR R C D, UH, THERE ARE EIGHT HOUSING TYPES, UH, DIVIDED INTO THREE TIERS.

SO WE HAVE SOME SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNITS AND DUPLEX UNITS FOR TIER ONE.

TIER TWO IS SINGLE FAMILY LOTS TOWNHOMES, AND AS, AS IT IS TODAY, UM, THE, A MANOR HOME TYPE, WHICH ALLOWS UP TO SIX UNITS IN A BUILDING, BUT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

AND TIER THREE INCLUDES STACKED TOWN HOMES, WHICH COULD BE SIDE BY SIDE OR ONE ON TOP OF EACH OTHER, OR A COMBINATION.

AND STACKED FLATS, WHICH ALLOW UP TO NINE UNITS PER BUILDING.

BUT SIMILAR TO THE MANOR HOME, SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH ONE MAIN ENTRANCE.

THERE ARE A, A VARIETY OF STANDARDS THAT REQUIRE A SPECIFIC HOUSING MIX BASED ON THESE TIERS.

UH, BUT THE RESULTING MIX RESULTS IN A MAJORITY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FOR RCD DISTRICTS.

SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, QUICKLY GO OVER THE, THE ALIGNMENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES.

SO, AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, THEY, THE DISTRICTS DO ALIGN QUITE WELL WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO MODIFY THEM THAT MOSTLY RE RE RELATE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY.

SO, FOR ACTION RGM FIVE, THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES MAKING THREE CHANGES TO LIMIT THE RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.

IF, IF IT'S A N B D DISTRICT WITH RESIDENTIAL USES TO 50% RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO REQUIRE THAT FOR EVERY TWO SQUARE FEET OF RESIDENTIAL USES THAT ARE DEVELOPED, AT LEAST ONE SQUARE FOOT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES NEED TO BE DEVELOPED.

AND THAT USABLE OPEN SPACE AND ANY PLANNED TRAILS BE PROVIDED DURING THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

ACTION NINE.

THIS ONE.

THE PROPOSED CHANGES ESSENTIALLY SEEK TO MOVE ALL MULTI-FAMILY TYPES INTO TIER THREE.

UH, SO THE CHANGES AT ZU SEE HERE WHERE STACK TOWN HOMES MOVE TO TIER TWO, BUT MANOR HOMES MOVE DOWN TO TIER THREE.

SO THIS PUTS ALL THE MULTI-FAMILY TYPES IN TIER THREE.

TIER THREE IS ALREADY LIMITED TO 25% OF THE TOTAL UNITS IN THE DISTRICT.

AND THEN ALSO TIER THREE IS ONLY ALLOWED CURRENTLY WHEN THE DISTRICT HAS OVER 100 UNITS.

BUT TO ALIGN WITH RGM NINE, THAT PROPOSED TO ONLY BE ALLOWED WHEN THE DISTRICT HAS 10 ACRES OR MORE.

UH, THE PROPOSED HOUSING MIX IS VERY SIMILAR.

IT'S REALLY JUST THE, THE SWAP BETWEEN THE, THE TWO PLUS THE 10 ACRE LIMITATION.

UM, BUT THAT PUTS ALL OF THE MULTI-FAMILY USES IN THAT, UH, 100 UNITS OR MORE, OR, AND, OR OVER 100 UNITS RATHER.

UM, AND AGAIN, THEY'RE LIMITED TO 25% OF THE TOTAL UNITS IN THE DISTRICT.

SO HERE WE REVIEWED THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND DASHBOARDS AS, AS WELL AS THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS.

UM, SO THERE'S A SLIDE IN, OR THERE'S A ATTACHMENT IN YOUR PACKET, AND THIS SLIDE HAS A LOT OF INFORMATION ON IT.

DON'T EXPECT YOU TO BE ABLE TO REALLY SEE THIS.

UM, BUT WE DID COMPARE EACH FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY WITH THE M BD DISTRICT AND R C D HOUSING TYPES, UH, AND THE CHANGE WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED.

AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS WERE FOUND NOT TO BE IN ALIGNMENT, BUT NEIGHBORHOOD CORNERS, COMMUNITY CORNERS, SUBURBAN ACTIVITY CENTERS, URBAN ACTIVITY CENTERS, DOWNTOWN CORRIDORS AND EXPRESSWAY CORRIDORS ALL ALIGN FAIRLY WELL WITH SOME SLIGHT VARIATIONS WHERE THEY, THE ALIGNMENT IS NOT PERFECT.

UM, HIGHLIGHTED THERE ON THE SLIDE.

SO WITH THIS IN MIND, UM, THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES EXPANDING THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DISTRICTS TO LOCATIONS, UH, OUTSIDE BASICALLY CITYWIDE, UM,

[00:45:01]

WHERE THEY'RE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THE, THE PROJECTS ALIGN WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

UM, AND I DO APOLOGIZE THERE WAS A SMALL TYPO IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE RCD PURPOSE STATEMENT.

UH, BUT PAGE ONE OF EXHIBIT E HAS THE CORRECT VERBIAGE, UM, JUST SAYS VARIOUS USES AND SHOULD SAY, UM, THE DISTRICT.

UM, SO WE WANT TO NOTE THAT IF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DISTRICTS IS EXPANDED AS PROPOSED WHENEVER A ZONING CHANGE COMES IN FOR AN M B D OR RCD DISTRICT, AS WITH ALL ZONING CHANGES, THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARDS WILL APPLY.

EACH REQUEST WOULD BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY.

UM, AND THEN PNC MAY DETERMINE THAT THE DISTRICTS ARE NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DASHBOARDS.

UM, BUT FOR M BD AND RCD DISTRICTS, P N Z AND, AND CITY COUNCIL MAY AMEND THE BASE STANDARDS FOR EACH DISTRICT TO MEET THOSE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES.

SO THAT, THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UM, FOR THOSE IS THOSE PLACES WHERE THINGS DID NOT ALIGN NECESSARILY PERFECTLY.

HOWEVER, THERE, AS THE DISTRICTS ARE WRITTEN NOW, THERE ARE A FEW STANDARDS THAT THE P THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MAY NOT AMEND.

AND ONE OF THOSE IS MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DENSITIES.

THE, THE, THE RCD DISTRICT REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 10 AND A MAXIMUM OF 20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

SO TO PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL TO UTILIZE THESE DISTRICTS AND BETTER ALIGN WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARDS, UH, WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE EXCEPTIONS SO THAT, UM, YOU CANNOT, THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL CAN AMEND THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DENSITIES WHEN THEY'RE, THE, THE PROPOSAL FOR THE M BD OR R C D DISTRICT IS IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 ON, UH, DECEMBER 19TH, I THINK.

UM, YES, THE COMMISSION, UH, ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT FREESTANDING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

THERE WAS AN EXISTING STANDARD IN THE M BD DISTRICT TO RESTRICT THESE BUILDINGS TO A FLOOR AREA OF AT LEAST 5,000 SQUARE FEET.

UH, THE STANDARD MIRRORS THE STANDARD IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT, UH, WHICH LARGER THERE.

UM, BUT THAT WAS REALLY ADDED AT THE TIME FOR UMU TO LIMIT DEVELOPMENT OF PAD SITES.

UM, AFTER FURTHER CONSIDERATION, UM, WE FEEL THAT THIS MAY ACTUALLY BE OVERLY RESTRICTIVE BECAUSE THE M VD DISTRICT IS DESIGNED FOR SMALL SCALE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, UH, AND IT ALREADY HAS A, A VARIETY OF STANDARDS TO MAKE IT, UH, THE DISTRICT'S MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, UH, PARKING BEHIND FRONT BUILDING FACADES, PROHIBITIONS ON DRIVE UP WINDOWS, AND SO FORTH.

UH, SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO SIMPLY REMOVE THE STANDARD TO PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR THESE DISTRICTS AS THEY COME IN.

AND WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, UM, HOW MANY THINGS IN THIS PROPOSAL ALIGN WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF OTHER POLICIES, UH, WHERE THIS AMENDMENT ALIGNS AS WELL.

UH, ESPECIALLY LAND USE, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION OF RETAIL SHOPPING CENTERS.

AND WITH THAT, THIS AMENDMENT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL PER THE AMENDMENTS NOTED IN EXHIBIT E.

UH, THERE WAS ONE RESPONSE IN SUPPORT AT THE DECEMBER 5TH PUBLIC HEARING, BUT NO OTHER CO RESPONSES OTHERWISE.

AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

IS THERE A REASON, IF WE DON'T SAY 5,000 FEET, IS THERE A REASON TO SAY 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR 20,000 SQUARE FEET? IS THERE A REASON OR IS IT JUST SO UNLIKELY TO HAPPEN IN THIS TYPE OF DISTRICT THAT WE SHOULD NEED TO BE CONCERNED WITH SOMEBODY BUILDING A LARGE PAD SITE? MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE REASON FOR ADDING THE LIMITATION WAS TO PREVENT IT FROM TURNING INTO ONE BIG BUILDING IN A AREA WHERE SO MANY OTHER USES COULD BE SUPPORTED.

SO THAT'S, I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS WAS IT DISCUSSED HAVING ANY LIMITATION OR IT SAYS WE'RE GONNA REMOVE THAT.

SO THE THE LIMITATION IS AS, AS IT IS TODAY, IS THAT FREE STANDING BUILDINGS NEED TO BE 5,000 OR, OR GREATER AND OH, I'M SORRY, THEN I'M GOING THE OTHER DIRECTION.

IS THERE A REASON TO HAVE A CAP ON IT? IN OTHER WORDS, IF, IF WHAT WE'RE INTENDING IN THESE TYPE OF DESIGN DISTRICTS ISN'T A LARGE SINGLE BUILDING, BUT INSTEAD, YOU KNOW, UH, I, I GUESS MORE MUL MIXED OF USES AND STUFF, HAVE WE EVER DONE THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER IN THIS KIND? I'M GOING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF WHAT YOU WERE SUGGESTING, WHICH WAS WE WANT IT TO BE AT LEAST 5,000 FEET.

THAT MAY BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

THERE ARE A FEW STANDARDS THAT WOULD KIND OF RESTRICT OVERLY LARGE BUILDINGS

[00:50:01]

LIKE BLOCK SIZE AND BLOCK LENGTH.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW RIGHT OFF KIND OF WHAT THAT MIGHT CALCULATE UP TO.

SO, AND, UH, NOBODY ELSE MAY HAVE THAT CONCERN.

AND MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT.

I, I'M THINKING OF IT IN TERMS OF KIND OF OPEN-ENDED, BUT THE TRUTH IS THERE'S PROBABLY OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE DIS DISTRICT THAT WOULD KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING.

SO I WAS, WHEN YOU SAW, WHEN YOU SAID YOU WERE GONNA REMOVE IT, I WAS THINKING TO MYSELF, WE NEED SOME LIMITATION.

I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS, WASN'T THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF IT LIMITING TO SOMEBODY WANTING TO BUILD A 1000 SQUARE FOOT, YOU KNOW, PAD SITE.

SO BY REMOVING IT, AGAIN, WE WE'RE GIVING THEM THE OPTION OF BUILDING SMALLER PAD SITES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT CAPPED TO BE SOMETHING LARGER.

WE'RE GONNA RELY ON OTHER ELEMENTS WITHIN THE DESIGN DISTRICT ITSELF BECAUSE OF, AS YOU SAID, BLOCK SIZES, ET CETERA, TO PREVENT THAT.

RIGHT.

AND, AND THOSE, THOSE SMALLER PAD SITES WOULD BE LESS LIKE THE TRADITIONAL PAD SITES THAT WE SEE, UH, IN OTHER RETAIL AREAS WITH LIMITED PARKING LOTS IN FRONT OF THE PAD SITES AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO MAKE IT A MORE WALKABLE AREA, I GUESS.

I MEAN, THERE WAS A NEW LITTLE COFFEE SHOP PUT UP RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF PARKER AND CUSTER, AND IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN ABOUT 300 SQUARE FEET, YOU KNOW, NOW IT'S A DRIVE THROUGH, BUT IT COULD BE WALKUP, I GUESS AS A COFFEE SHOP.

MM-HMM.

.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AND, AND JUST QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT, CUZ WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER ON THIS, SO WE'RE GONNA GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK.

BUT QUESTIONS? YES, SIR.

JUST MORE OF A COMMENT.

BUT, UM, THANK YOU FOR REVISITING THAT 5,000 FEET BECAUSE I THINK I MENTIONED LAST TIME, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU TAKE A LOT OF THESE PICTURES MM-HMM.

AND I THINK THE BIGGEST BUILDING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD'S PROBABLY 10 OR 12,000 FEET AND, AND IT'S TWO STORY.

SO, UM, I THINK THE GOAL OF TRYING TO HAVE A WALKABLE COTTAGE KIND OF ENVIRONMENT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE PORTRAYING IN A LOT OF THE PICTURES, IS ACHIEVED BY SETTING THAT STANDARD.

ALTHOUGH I DO THINK WE PROBABLY, DEPENDING ON HOW IT EVOLVES THERE, YOU MIGHT WANT A THOUSAND FOOT MINIMUM OR SOMETHING BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME PRETTY SMALL BUILDINGS, COFFEE SHOPS WALK UP KIND OF DEALS THAT, THAT HAVE POPPED UP IN THAT OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD OR EXIST IN THAT OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, BUT THE LARGER BUILDINGS JUST, IT'S, IT'S TOO DENSE, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

SO, AND I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE BIG BUILDINGS, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT LOOK AT 500, A THOUSAND SOMETHING AS A MINIMUM JUST BECAUSE I THINK YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, A TINY HOUSE POPPING IN THERE WITH A COFFEE SHOP INSIDE IT.

UM, BUT, UH, BUT OVERALL, I THINK THE, THE CHANGES YOU MADE SINCE THE LAST MEETING ARE ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

OKAY.

NO MORE QUESTIONS AND WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU.

AND WE HAVE AHHA SHAIR WHILE HE'S COMING DOWN.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'S GONNA SPEAK ON THIS ONE? YES, AND WE HAVE DAN DANIEL YALO.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

HI, UH, I DO WANT TO EXPRESS MY, UH, EN ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT FOR ITEM TWO.

I THINK IT'S A VERY EFFICIENT, UH, FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE LAND USE FOR PLANO.

I THINK HAVING THAT SORT OF MIXED USE, CLUSTERED, UM, LAND USE IS GOING TO BE VERY PROFITABLE.

THE FUTURE.

WE SEE THAT, LIKE IN OTHER AREAS WHERE THAT KIND OF THING EXISTS, UM, THOSE LAND VALUES ARE A LOT HIGHER.

UM, I ALSO DO WANNA ZONE, UH, ZONE OUT A LITTLE BIT AND, UM, TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OVER TIME HOW OUR NEED FOR THE THIRD PLACE.

SO THE PLACE THAT WE GO, THAT IS IN ADDITION FROM HOME IN ADDITION TO WORK, BUT THAT THIRD PLACE WHERE WE CAN CONGREGATE AS A COMMUNITY HAS LIKE FADED OVER TIME.

AND I AM GLAD TO HEAR THAT, UM, THE ITEMS IN THE FUTURE LAND USE AND ITEM TWO, UH, IN THIS MEETING WILL FURTHER GENERATE THOSE, UH, REGENERATE THOSE THIRD PLACES, UM, FROM, UH, THOSE LIKE MAYBE IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD CAFE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE EVERYONE GOES AND CONGREGATES TO MEET THERE.

UM, I'M SURE THAT, UH, MANY OF YOU, UH, HAVE GRADUATED COLLEGE.

YOU CAN THINK OF LIKE, UH, A LOT OF COLLEGE CAMPUSES HAVE THEIR THIRD PLACE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S A STUDENT UNION OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, MAYBE IT'S EVEN A FOOTBALL FIELD.

AND AS WE, AND ONE OF MY BIGGEST FEARS, YOU KNOW, GOING INTO ADULTHOOD, YOU KNOW, HAVING A JOB AND ALL THOSE THINGS, WHERE IS THAT? IS LOSING THAT THIRD PLACE AND LOSING THAT SENSE OF COMMUNITY.

AND I'M REALLY GLAD THAT THE COUNCIL IS PRIORITIZING, UM, MIXED USE, WHICH WILL HELP INCENTIVIZE THAT THIRD PLACE TO, UH, BE CONSTRUCTED.

UH, THAT'S ALL FOR ME.

OH, ANOTHER THING IS THAT I

[00:55:01]

DO THINK THAT THESE CHANGES WILL ALSO MAKE IT VERY ATTRACTIVE FOR YOUNGER, UH, PROFESSIONALS TO COME TO PLANO.

AND YEAH, THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR TODAY.

THANK YOU.

SPEAKER DANIEL YALO, ARE ALL OF YOU GUYS FROM U T D? YEAH.

YEAH.

THEY'RE KIND OF MY YANG.

I'M YOUR ISSUE, NOT THEM.

UM, SO AGAIN, DANIEL YALOM 2200 WATERVIEW PARKWAY.

I ALSO WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THIS ITEM AS IS ACTUALLY WANTED TO BRING UP ONE ADVANTAGE OF IT THAT MAY NOT SEEM AS OBVIOUS BECAUSE IT'S A BIT IN THE FINE PRINT.

SOME OF THE FINE PRINT OF THE SPECIFIC DISTRICTS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AS IS OR AS AMENDMENT, BUT I KNOW IT'S GONNA STAY THERE.

EITHER WAY IS THAT PHASING REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPERS ARE BUILDING LARGE DEVELOPMENTS.

IN THIS CASE, NOT ONE BIG BUILDING, BUT MULTIPLE SMALL BUILDINGS IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD ARE PUT AS PART OF THE CITY ORDINANCE RATHER THAN THE INDIVIDUAL ORDINANCES THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS COMMISSION OR COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO MAKE WITH A DEVELOPER.

UM, LAST SEMESTER WE SPENT A LOT OF ENERGY DEALING WITH THE CITY OF RICHARDSON TO GET THEM TO SUPPORT A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS EVERYONE WANTED IT TO HAPPEN.

EVERYONE WANTED TO SEE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT, SO WHERE MULTIPLE USES WOULD HAPPEN IN THE SAME PLACE.

BUT THE ISSUE THEY RAN UP TO IS THEY TRIED TO DO THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THE PD DISTRICT, AND OF COURSE PD DISTRICTS BY DEFAULT DON'T HAVE ANY, ANY SORT OF PHASER REQUIREMENT BUILT IN.

AND SO YOU HAD A LOT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER TRYING TO SHOEHORN A PHASER REQUIREMENT INTO A PD DISTRICT.

THAT JUST TENDS TO NOT WORK.

IT PUTS AN UNDUE BURDEN IN THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE IT PUTS THEM INTENTION WITH CONTRACTORS, WITH THE BANKS.

IT PUTS AN UND BURDEN IN THE CITY BECAUSE IT'S SOUNDING LENGTHENS NEGOTIATIONS QUITE A BIT.

I THINK HAVING THAT REQUIREMENT BUILT IN IS A VERY, VERY SMART MOVE AND ADDRESSES AN ISSUE THAT YOU MIGHT NOT EVEN KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE HAVING WITH THESE TYPES OF DISTRICTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

SO THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, WE DO NOT.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONFINED DISCUSSION OF THE COMMISSION.

COMMISSIONER BRUNO MICROPHONE, PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

YEAH, THANK YOU AGAIN TO THE SPEAKERS, UH, FOR YOUR INSIGHTFUL COMMENTS.

UM, I THINK AS WE ALL ARE AWARE, UH, PLANO HAS PRETTY MUCH MAXED OUT ITS BOUNDARIES.

THERE IS NO MORE ROOM FOR ANNEXING ADDITIONAL LAND INTO THE CITY.

UH, WE ARE LIKEWISE RUNNING OUT OF ROOM FOR ANY SORT OF SIZABLE NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE FUTURE PRIMARILY IS REDEVELOPMENT.

AND, UH, SPECIFICALLY I THINK TARGETING THE OLDER, UM, OLDER COMMERCIAL AREAS LOCATED ON THE CORNERS OF THE MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, UH, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, SHOWING, UM, GREATER, UH, INCIDENTS OF VACANCY THESE DAYS AS A RESULT OF THE PANDEMIC AND PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, ABANDONING BRICK AND MORTAR SHOPPING AND GOING, YOU KNOW, ORDERING THINGS ONLINE FROM AMAZON AND SO FORTH.

UM, AND SO I THINK THIS, THIS ITEM PROVIDES AN INCENTIVE TO PROPERTY OWNERS OF THOSE DEVELOPMENTS TO, UH, TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS AND REDEVELOP THEIR PROPERTIES INTO AN ATTRACTIVE MIXED USE COMBINATION OF COMMERCIAL AND COMPATIBLE RESIDENTIAL USES THAT INTERACT WELL WITH EACH OTHER, PROVIDE AMENITIES FOR THE, UH, THE BEAUTIFICATION AND THE, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, THE BETTERMENT AND THE DESIRABILITY OF BOTH THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

UM, UH, SO BECAUSE OF THE INCENTIVE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING.

IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO GUIDE AND PLAN FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY INSTEAD OF JUST LETTING IT HAPPEN AND BEING OVERWHELMED BY IT.

UH, AS AN EXAMPLE, I POINT OUT THAT, UM, COLLIN CREEK MALL IS NO LONGER WITH US AND IT IS BEING REDEVELOPED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THESE STANDARDS.

IF THESE STANDARDS HAD BEEN IN PLACE, I THINK THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING ON AT COLLIN CREEK MALL WOULD PROBABLY LOOK VERY DIFFERENT, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.

AND OF COURSE, IT, IT HAS THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS.

I JUST MIGHT ADD, PARENTHETICALLY, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT UP A STANDALONE, YOU KNOW, STARBUCKS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, MUCH LESS THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET SO THE RESIDENTS CAN JUST, YOU KNOW, WALK OVER, POP OVER AND GET A CUP OF COFFEE, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING.

SO , THANK YOU.

YOU LIKE COFFEE ? UM, WELL, I, I THINK IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED BY COMMISSIONER RATLIFF.

I'M, I'M WONDERING, WE'RE SINCE, RATHER THAN JUST SIMPLY REMOVE THAT 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION, DO WE WANT TO KEEP IT BUT CHANGE THAT NUMBER? IS THERE A GENERAL SENSE ON THAT ITEM FROM ANYBODY? COMMISSIONER KERRY? YEAH, I, I UNDERSTAND THE POINT, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

YOU KNOW, UM, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, I THINK THE COFFEE SHOP YOU WERE REFERENCING BEFORE UP, BUT PARKER'S CALLED SCOOTERS.

YEAH.

AND, UM, IT'S A PRETTY COOL

[01:00:01]

LITTLE PLACE.

YEAH.

AND, UH, COMMISSIONER BRON'S POINT OF VIEW, IF THEY POP UP IN SOME PLACES TO PROVIDE, UH, SERVICE TO, TO, UH, LOCAL RESIDENTS, I THINK THAT'S GOOD.

SO, OKAY.

I, I UNDERSTAND THE POINT.

I PERSONALLY AM NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THERE, THERE'S AN ECONOMIC, UH, DESIGN THERE.

SO DECISION, YEAH.

SO TOOK THE WORDS RIGHT OUTTA MY MOUTH.

UH, A FRIEND OF MINE ACTUALLY JUST OPENED THE SCOOTERS IN WATAUGA, SORRY.

OKAY.

I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE FOOTPRINT.

UM, BUT WITHIN THE CAPPED SPACE THAT IS IN PLAIN THE ECONOMY, UH, THE ECONOMICS OF THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD GOVERN YEAH.

YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT YOU PUT IN THERE.

SO, UM, UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO BE REALLY SILLY TO JUST POKE THE BOUNDARIES AND PUT, YOU KNOW, A 200 SQUARE FOOT TINY HOUSE, NOT AS WORRIED.

OKAY.

COMMISS, UM, I KIND OF AGREE THAT YOUR CONCERN EARLIER, THE PRESS, UH, OUR, UM, CHAIR CONCERNED EARLIER, SHOULD