[00:00:02]
>> I'M STILL LEARNING. GOOD EVENING.
[CALL TO ORDER]
WELCOME TO THE DECEMBER 16, PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M.
IF EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
>> CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS THAT ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL.
ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF.
>> COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY WANT TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION? NOBODY? COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.
>> HANG ON. LET'S TRY THAT AGAIN.
>> I MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER LINGENFELDER.
>> ANY COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? SEEING NONE, EVERYBODY, PLEASE VOTE.
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? ITEM NUMBER 1.
>> 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 A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED.
REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED SPEAKER.
THE 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.
[1. (JK) Public Hearing – Replat & Preliminary Site Plan: Park Blvd. Estates West School Site No. 2, Block A, Lots 1R-4 – Public schools and community center on four lots on 89.4 acres located at the northeast corner of Independence Parkway and Park Boulevard. Zoned Single-Family Residence-9. Projects #R2024-044 & #PSP2024-040. Applicant: Plano Independent School District. (Legislative consideration of parking reduction and pending Board of Adjustment approval of a zoning ordinance variance)]
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1, PUBLIC HEARING, RE PLAT AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN.PARK BOULEVARD ESTATES, WEST SCHOOL SITE NUMBER 2, BLOCK A, LOTS 1R THROUGH FOUR.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY CENTER ON FOUR LOTS ON 89.4 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY AND PARK BOULEVARD.
ON SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS 9, APPLICANT IS PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THIS ITEM IS FOR A LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION OF A PARKING REDUCTION AND PENDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE.
>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS JOHN KIM, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
LET ME MOVE THIS SLIDE FORWARD.
HERE'S THE LOCATOR MAP FOR THE PARK BOULEVARD ESTATES WEST SCHOOL SITE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS CURRENTLY ALL UNDER ONE LOT.
TROUGH THE REP, THEY ARE PROPOSING TO SEPARATE THE LOTS INTO FOUR DIFFERENT LOTS. CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO. I THINK MY MIC WENT OUT, BUT I'LL TRY TO SPEAK UP.
RIGHT NOW, ON THE LOT, THERE IS A HIGH SCHOOL, HAGGARD MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND THEN THE PLANO AQUATIC CENTER.
THEY ARE PROPOSING SEVERAL DIFFERENT EXPANSIONS AND RELOCATION OF THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, AS WELL AS UPDATES OF THE VARIOUS ATHLETIC FACILITIES.
THAT'S WHY THEY ARE SPLIT INTO FOUR LOTS.
HERE IS THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN.
AS PART OF THE PROPOSED EXPANSIONS FOR THE SCHOOL BUILDING FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL, THEY ARE BASING IT ON THE DESIGN CAPACITY OF 1,800 STUDENTS OR 1,800 SPACES TO FILL THE NEED FOR THAT CAPACITY.
THEY'RE REQUESTING A REDUCTION OF 236 SPACES 1800-1564 AND THEY DO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AS REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE.
THE REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED,
[00:05:03]
AND THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL WITH A 13.2% PARKING REDUCTION AS REQUESTED.I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
>> COMMISSIONERS, ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. BRONSKY.
>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. ON THE PARKING REDUCTION LETTER A, WHERE IT SAYS, THE REDUCTION IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO CREATE PARKING ISSUES.
WHAT HAPPENS IN THE PROCESS IF THEY WE DISCOVER LATER THAT THIS HAS PRODUCED PARKING ISSUES?
>> MR. BELL, COULD YOU EXPLAIN FURTHER ON THAT?
>> SURE. IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE THE REDUCTION.
IT'S VALID AS LONG AS THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THIS SIDE PLAN.
SHOULD ANY CHANGES BE MADE IN THE FUTURE, THAT PARKING REDUCTION CAN BE REVOKED.
IT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON THEM COMING IN FOR CHANGES AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
>> EVEN IF IT WERE TO START CREATING A PROBLEM, THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT IT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S NO MECHANISM IN THE ORDINANCE TO FORCE THEM TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT UNTIL THEY COME IN TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THE PROPERTY DOWN THE LINE.
>> QUICK QUESTION. THE MAIN REASON WHY THIS IS BEING TRIGGERED IS BECAUSE WE ARE SUBDIVIDING IT INTO FOUR LOTS.
IF IT WAS JUST THE ONE COHESIVE LOT, THEY'VE MET A PARKING REQUIREMENT.
IF MY MATH IS RIGHT, IF YOU TAKE ALL FOUR LOTS TOGETHER, THEY'RE ONLY REDUCE IT BY FOUR OR 5%.
>> RIGHT. IT WOULD BE LESS IF IT WAS FOR THE WHOLE LOT.
I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A LOT CLOSER TO MEETING IF IT WERE FOR THE WHOLE LOT AS ONE.
BUT AS YOU SAID, THAT IS WHY THEY'RE SEPARATING INTO FOUR.
>> ONCE THEY FINISHED WHATEVER IMPROVEMENTS THEY'RE TRYING TO DO ON THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, WHAT'S THE MECHANISM TO ENSURE THAT LOT 1R GETS BACK TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY, OR ARE WE GIVING THIS VARIANCE IN PERPETUITY?
>> IT WOULD STAY WITH THE LAND UNTIL THERE IS A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE.
IF WE FOUND THAT ADDITIONAL PARKING MAY BE REQUIRED, THEN WE CAN ADDRESS THAT IN FUTURE SUBMITTALS.
>> FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THAT, THE OTHER LOTS ARE INCREASING THEIR PARKING ABOVE THE REQUIREMENT.
WHAT MECHANISM EXISTS IF THEY DECIDE TO REDUCE THEIR PARKING BACK TO THEIR LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH WILL TAKE ANOTHER EASILY 100 PARKING SLOTS OFF OF THE WHOLE FOUR SITES, WHICH WILL CREATE THE PARKING CONSTRAINTS THAT I THINK COMMISSIONER BRONSKY WAS POKING AT.
WHAT MECHANISM DO WE HAVE AS A CITY TO ALMOST EMBED THIS INCREASES IN LOT 2, 03, AND 4 AS A CRITERIA TO GIVE THIS VARIANCE. AM I MAKING SENSE?
I'M NOT AWARE OF A CONDITION THAT COULD DO THAT BY THEY ARE MEETING THE LETTER OF THE CODE FOR THE OTHER LOTS.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS MEETING EXCEPT LOT 1R.
I WILL SHARE THAT THIS IS THE DIRECTION TO SUBDIVIDE IT IN THIS WAY WAS DONE STRICTLY FOR PHASING.
THEY'VE GOT OVERLAPPING CONSTRUCTION TIMELINES THAT DON'T WORK NEATLY WITH OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR PLANTING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
THE IDEA TO SEPARATE AND FOUR LOTS HELP THEM GET SEPARATE TIMING AND GET THE IMPROVEMENTS INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY AT DIFFERENT TIMES.
THERE WE DID DISCUSS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE POSSIBILITY OF COMBINING IT ALL BACK INTO ONE LOT ONCE THE PROJECT IS FINISHED.
NOW THAT'LL BE THEIR DECISION IN THE END, BUT THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AS A POSSIBLE OUTCOME.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE TWO DIAGRAMS HERE.
IT LOOKS LIKE ONE OF THEM IS FOR THE REPLOT, THE ONE LOT INTO FOUR LOTS.
THE SECOND ONE SEEM TO BE A SITE PLAN THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE.
I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION THEY HAVE OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S NEW AFTER THEY SUBDIVIDE THE LOT INTO FOUR LOTS, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO DESIGN.
IS THIS A NEW SITE PLAN SO WHEN WE PROVE THIS ITEM, DOES IT INCLUDE APPROVAL TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE PLAN?
[00:10:05]
>> YES. AS MR. BELL MENTIONED, THE REASON FOR THE REPLOT IS TO HELP WITH THE PHASING FOR THE SITE.
AND THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SHOWN HERE, IT IS ACCOMMODATING FOR THE NEW ATHLETIC FACILITIES, THE NEW MIDDLE SCHOOL, AS WELL AS THE EXPANSIONS FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL.
THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN THAT YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY WILL BE I GUESS THE END GOAL THEY HAVE IN MIND FOR THE WHOLE CAMPUS, INCLUDING ALL FOUR LOTS.
BUT THIS WAY THAT THEY CAN DO SITE PLANS FOR EACH LOT SEPARATELY WITHOUT HAVING TO OVERLAP WITH EACH OTHER IN I GUESS CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE.
>> WE ARE APPROVING THE ONE WHICH IS DIVIDING INTO FOUR LOTS AND SECOND PART IS THE ALL THE DETAILED PLANS ON THE SITE PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THE PARKING SPACES THAT ARE PROPOSED ON THE TABLE ON THE PREVIOUS SIDE, THAT THOSE ARE THE NUMBER OF PARKING THAT'S PROPOSED ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF ITEMS. THE MIDDLE SCHOOL LOT 2 CURRENTLY SHOWING 193 PARKING SPOTS, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> NO. IT'S SHOWING THAT THE REQUIRED IS 99 VERSUS 193.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE COMMENT THAT TYPICALLY MIDDLE SCHOOLERS DON'T EVEN DRIVE TO SCHOOL.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING SPACES THAT ARE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE APPLICABLE.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW FROM THE APPLICANT, IS THERE A CURRENT PARKING ISSUE RIGHT NOW?
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ONE, BUT I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE QUESTIONS, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> YES, THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
>> I'D JUST BE CURIOUS TO KNOW IF THERE'S CURRENTLY A PARKING ISSUE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS, BUT JUST BE CURIOUS.
>> WE'LL GET THE APPLICANT UP HERE ONCE WE OPEN PUBLIC HEARING, WE CAN ASK THEM QUESTIONS.
>> I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THOUGH TO YOUR POINT, THAT THE PARKING SPACES ARE EFFECTIVELY MANAGED BY ONE ENTITY AND THE LOT LINES ARE REALLY DRAWN FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES, BUT IN THE END, THE PARKING SPACES ARE REALLY SERVING SOME OF THE OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES THAT WILL BE USED BY BOTH SCHOOLS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE UNUTILIZED PARKING SPACES AT THE PRESENT TIME ON THE PROPERTY, AND IF SO, HOW MANY?
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT AT THIS TIME.
THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT.
>> I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU.
>> I WAS GOING TO ASK SIMILAR QUESTIONS.
BASICALLY, I WANTED TO FIND OUT IF YOU DID SOME PARKING ANALYSIS.
I ACTUALLY GRADUATED FROM PLANO SENIOR HIGH BACK BEFORE WESTON EXISTS.
BUT I DO KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE 3,000 PLUS STUDENTS ALONG WITH ALL THOSE TEACHERS, 01,500 PARKING SPOTS MAY BECOME A PREMIUM FOR MANY.
DOING THE MATH, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT 3,000 STUDENTS, JUNIORS AND SENIORS ALL DRIVING, NOT MIDDLE SCHOOLERS, ACTUALLY HIGH SCHOOLERS IN THIS CASE IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A PROBLEM.
I JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
>> MR. KIM, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE PARKING IS BASED ON CAPACITY.
>> THE ENROLLMENT MAYBE MUCH LESS.
I BELIEVE WE DID DISCUSS THAT, MAYBE THEY CAN ELABORATE ON THAT.
>> I'D LIKE TO JUST FIND THAT OUT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I KNOW IT'S BASED ON OCCUPANCY AND OR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT THIS IS WE DO KNOW THE LOGISTICS OF THE ENROLLMENT AS WELL.
IF YOU'RE GOING LESS, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT BE CAUSING MORE ISSUES.
>> ANY OTHER TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSION ALALI?
>> I WANTED TO KNOW IF THE CITY ALLOW STREET PARKING IN THAT AREA ON WEST SIDE AND IF IT HAPPENED, HOW ARE WE GOING TO CONTROL IT?
>> UNLESS IT'S RESTRICTED BY SIGNAGE THAT THERE'S NO PARKING, AND TYPICALLY THERE CAN BE ON STREET PARKING.
THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO COUNT THOSE TOWARDS THEIR PARKING COUNTS.
BUT AS LONG AS IT'S NOT SIGNED OFF FOR NO PARKING, THEY CAN PARK THERE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I CAN ANSWER COMMISSIONER ALALI'S QUESTION.
[00:15:01]
MY WIFE HAPPENS TO ATTEND DEEP-WATER AEROBICS CLASSES AT THE AQUATIC CENTER, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 3 ON THIS PLAT.I'VE DRIVEN WITH HER TO THAT FACILITY, FROM TIME TO TIME AND THERE ARE ALWAYS CARS PARKED ON WEST SIDE DRIVE, BUT THERE ARE ALSO VACANT PARKING PLACES ON THE SCHOOL PARKING LOT AT THE SAME TIME.
YES, THE CARS CAN PARK ON WEST SIDE AND THEY DO.
THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THERE'S SPILLOVER.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER TECHNICAL QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM?
>> THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, AND WE HAVE ONE REGISTERED OPINION IN SUPPORT OF.
>> IF THE APPLICANT WOULD COME FORWARD, I THINK SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
YOU WOULD JUST INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
>> YES, SIR. MY NAME IS RONNIE KLINGBILL.
I'M WITH ARIO CARE ENGINEERING.
MY ADDRESS IS 111 WEST MAIN STREET IN ALLEN, TEXAS, AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ATTEMPT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> IF YOU CAN, YOU HEARD THE QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING, CAN YOU JUST GIVE US SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THE PARKING COUNTS CAPACITY VERSUS USAGE?
>> YES, SIR. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DISTRICTS DO THE DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
THE CITY OF PLANO IS MATURING, IF YOU WILL.
I KNOW THE STUDENT POPULATION THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT IS TRENDING DOWNWARD.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING CURRENTLY, THEY HAVE ENOUGH PARKING SPACES ON CAMPUS.
THE DISTRICT FEELS LIKE IF THEY NEEDED ADDITIONAL PARKING, THEY WOULD ADD THEM, BUT DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEIR STUDENT POPULATION IS IN A DOWNWARD TREND AND THEY EXPECT THAT TO CONTINUE IN THE FUTURE.
THEY FEEL LIKE THE NUMBER OF PARKING THAT THEY HAVE IS CURRENTLY ADEQUATE.
>> QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ANYBODY? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM?
>> CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER OLLEY.
>> I MOVE WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1 REPLAT AS SUBMITTED AND TAKE THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE 13.2 PARKING REDUCTION AS REQUESTED.
>> I WAS GOING TO SECOND, SO I'M GOOD.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE? NOBODY. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.
MOTION PASSES 8-0 THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER 2.
[2. (DW) Public Hearing – Preliminary Replat & Preliminary Site Plan: Plano East Senior High School Addition, Block 1, Lot 1R – Public school on one lot on 67.1 acres located at the northeast corner of Los Rios Boulevard and Merriman Drive. Zoned Estate Development. Project #PR2024-035 & RSP2024-052. Applicant: Plano Independent School District. (Administrative consideration pending Board of Adjustment approval of a zoning ordinance variance)]
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, PUBLIC HEARING, PRELIMINARY REPLAT AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, PLANO EAST SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION, BLOCK 1, LOT 1R - PUBLIC SCHOOL ON ONE LOT ON 67.1 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD AND MERRIMAN DRIVE.
APPLICANT IS PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THIS ITEM IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION, PENDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE.
>> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS DESTINY WOODS, PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ON THE SCREEN WE HAVE THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REVISED SITE PLAN IS TO SHOW THE PROPOSED BUILDING EXPANSION OF ONE OF THE BUILDINGS, BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL DUGOUTS, TENNIS COURTS, AND ADDED PARKING.
PREVIOUSLY, A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SUBJECT TO VARIANCES FOR BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO REDUCE THE 100 FOOT BLEACHER SETBACK, ALLOW A FENCE TO BE LESS THAN 50% OPEN IN CONSTRUCTION AND REDUCE THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF PARKING BY 41%.
THESE VARIANCES WERE DENIED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE APPLICANT CAME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT REQUEST AND UPDATED DESIGN.
THE SITE WAS REDESIGNED TO MEET THE FENCE AND BLEACHER REQUIREMENTS
[00:20:02]
AT 18 PARKING SPACES AND REQUEST THE FOLLOWING PARKING REDUCTIONS.THEY HAVE INCREASED THOSE PARKING SPACES BY 18 SPACES, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A 10% STORMWATER CONSERVATION REDUCTION FROM STAFF, 20% REDUCTION FROM THIS COMMISSION.
IF THE 20% REDUCTION IS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION, THEN THEY WOULD NEED A 10.9% REDUCTION FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THE CONDITIONS FOR A 20% PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUED PARKING REDUCTION HAVE BEEN MET AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
IN APPROVAL OF THE REVISED SITE PLAN WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT A VARIANCE REQUEST TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS ALSO RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE FOR 270 PARKING SPACES.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> COMMISSION, TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? COMMISSIONER OLLEY?
>> I JUST WANT TO RECAP. IT'S STILL THE 41% REDUCTION ULTIMATELY, BUT THEY ARE UTILIZING THE STORMWATER CONSERVATION REDUCTION WHICH STAFF CAN GRANT, AND PNZ IS 20%, LEAVING THEM WITH ONLY 10.9 WITH THE BOARD.
>> THE FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD SEEMS TO SUGGEST THE DENIAL WAS ON THE SETBACK.
WAS THERE ANY SPECIFIC FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD ON PARKING REDUCTION?
>> WHEN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCES WERE DENIED, THEY WERE DENIED AS ONE, BUT MOST OF THE DISCUSSION SURROUNDED AROUND THE BLEACHERS AND THE PROXIMITY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEARBY.
>> I KNOW WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT A SEA OF PARKING AND THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE THROUGH THE CITY.
BUT I LOOK AT A 41% REDUCTION AND I'VE GOT TO ASK MYSELF, SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU, IF WE'RE REQUIRING 2,551, BUT WE'RE COMFORTABLE REDUCING IT BY 41%.
WHERE IS OUR CALCULUS WRONG IN WHAT OUR REQUIREMENTS ARE AT THE BEGINNING?
>> THAT STANDARD HAS BEEN SET BY OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT MAY BE ADDRESSED LATER WHEN WE DECIDE TO REWRITE OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
BUT AS FAR AS WHY THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT, THAT'S JUST WHAT WAS DECIDED ON A WHILE BACK WHEN IT WAS DRAFTED THAT WAY.
>> YEAH. TYPICALLY, WHAT'S USED IN THOSE ARE NATIONAL STANDARDS ON THEIR COMPANIES THAT PERFORM STUDIES ON HOW MANY PARKING SPACES OR HOW MUCH PARKING IS, DEMAND IS GENERATED FOR THESE TYPES OF USES.
MY ONLY ASSUMPTION IS THAT AT THE TIME WHEN THIS ORDINANCE WAS WRITTEN, PROBABLY DECADES AGO, THE DEMAND AT THE HIGH SCHOOLS WAS HIGHER.
WE SEE LESS DEMAND FOR STUDENTS WITH DRIVER'S LICENSES NOW, PLUS WE HAVE REDUCTION IN ENROLLMENT.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S DRIVEN THE NUMBER THAT'S IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE TODAY.
IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT WITH THE REWRITE TO SEE IF THEY ARE UPDATED NATIONAL STANDARDS ON PARKING DEMAND.
I ALSO WANT TO ADD FOR ALL THREE OF THESE HIGH SCHOOL SITES, I WAS UNABLE TO ASCERTAIN WHY.
BUT THE PREVIOUS PLANS APPROVED FOR THESE SITES DECADES AGO HAD A LOWER PARKING COUNT.
WE'VE APPLIED THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS BASED ON CAPACITY AS IT IS TODAY.
BUT THERE ACTUALLY AN INCREASE IN PARKING ON ALL THREE OF THESE HIGH SCHOOL SITES.
IT MAY NOT LOOK LIKE THAT BASED ON THE PURE TABLE, BUT ON THE GROUND THERE ARE MORE SPACES FOR EACH OF THESE SITES.
>> WHEN YOU SAY LOWER, ARE YOU SAYING LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE APPROVING OR ARE YOU SAYING LOWER THAN WHAT THE REQUIRED PARKING?
>> IT IS LOWER THAN THE REQUIRED PARKING PER THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT IS MORE PHYSICAL PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE THAN EXISTS TODAY.
>> NO. AGAIN, I CAN APPRECIATE THIS.
I WANT TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS WE GRANT THESE, THAT WE REALIZE THAT ONCE THIS IS GRANTED, THIS IS NO TAKE BACK.
SHOULD THERE BE NEIGHBORS AND OTHERS UNHAPPY BECAUSE THERE ARE PARKING RELATED ISSUES, WE'RE STUCK AND A 41% REDUCTION IS A VERY LARGE REDUCTION TO BE GRANTING.
[00:25:06]
I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CAREFUL ABOUT GRANTING SOMETHING THIS SIZE, SIMPLY FOR THE REASON THAT ONCE IT'S THERE, IF THEY HAVE PROBLEMS, WE CAN'T FIX IT. THANK YOU.I HAVE A SIMILAR CONCERN AS COMMISSIONER BRONSKY REGARDING THE WHY, AND I APPRECIATE MR. BELL EXPLAINING THAT WE WANTED TO GET A WHY, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU GOT THE WHY.
WE JUST KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
I GUESS THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION TO THE APPLICANTS.
ARE THE APPLICANTS HERE TODAY? BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW THEY ARE DOING THIS REDUCTION.
>> THEY'LL BE UP IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE CAN ASK THEM THEN.
>> YEAH. THEN THAT'LL BE FOR THE APPLICANTS. THANK YOU.
>> I HAD SIMILAR CONCERN TOO BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT ACTUALLY, IF WE GIVE THEM THE STORM CONSERVATION, WE'RE GOING TO BE GIVING THEM 30% OF PARKING REDUCTIONS.
ARE THEY ADDING TO THE SCHOOL? IF THE ENROLLMENT IS LOWER, WHY ARE THEY ADDING I ASSUME CLASSES AND LABS AND ALL OTHER FACILITIES? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S CONFLICTING. THAT'S MY CONCERN.
>> IN MY UNDERSTANDING THEY'RE ADDING TO A GYM AREA, SO TO EXPAND THE SIZE, I COULD BE MISTAKEN.
BUT ALSO FOR STORM SHELTER AS WELL IS GOING INTO WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE BUILDING EXPANSION IS, BUT THE APPLICANT MIGHT BE ABLE TO GO INTO MORE DETAIL.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. JUST ONE COMMENT.
THAT TYPICALLY AT THE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL, THE SCHOOL CONTROLS PARKING PERMITS.
THEY MANAGE THE PARKING. IT'S A PRIVILEGE.
IT'S NOT THAT JUST WE HAVE 3,000 PEOPLE SHOW UP AND THEY'RE PARKING IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND EVERYTHING.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE.
I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE PARKING PERMITS REQUIRED THAT THE SCHOOL ISSUES IN ORDER TO PARK ON CAMPUS.
I THINK THERE'S A CONTROL IN THE SITUATION THERE. JUST A COMMENT.
>> I WANT TO SEE IF MIKE CAN GO FAR ON THE NUGGET HE DROPPED.
WITH THE 15, 16 SPACES, YOU'RE SAYING IT WILL BE AN INCREASE FROM WHAT IS ON GROUND TODAY.
>> YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.
THE ORIGINAL PLANS HAD A MUCH LOWER PARKING REQUIREMENT AND I DON'T KNOW WHY THE MATH WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE CAPACITY AT THAT TIME.
WE'RE USING THE CAPACITY BASED ON WHAT THE ARCHITECT HAS GIVEN US WITH THESE UPDATED PLANS AND ARRIVED AT THIS HIGHER NUMBER.
THEREFORE, I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S REALLY DRIVING THE REDUCTION IS THEY'RE TRYING TO MEET WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE ON SITE PLUS SOME ADDITIONAL SPACES.
>> WHILE TECHNICALLY IT'S A 41% REDUCTION, IT'S ACTUALLY GETTING MORE PARKING.
>> IS IT A COINCIDENCE THAT BOTH OF THESE HIGH SCHOOL SITES HAVE ROUGHLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF PARKING, OR IS THAT?
>> I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A COINCIDENCE.
>> IT JUST SEEMED LIKE BOTH OF THEM NEEDED ABOUT 1,500 SPACES, SO IT SEEMED AWFULLY CONVENIENT THAT THEY WERE WITHIN 50 SPACES OF EACH OTHER.
ANY OTHER TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM?
>> THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
WE HAD ONE REGISTERED OPINION IN SUPPORT OF THE ITEM.
>> IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME DOWN AGAIN AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD AGAIN, AND THEN ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKING AGAIN, PLEASE.
>> YES, SIR. MY NAME IS RONNIE KLINGBILL.
I'M WITH ORION CO-ENGINEERING AND RESIDE AT 111 WEST MAIN STREET IN ALLEN, TEXAS.
I THINK I MIGHT BE THE ONE IN FAVOR BECAUSE I HAD TO CHECK A BOX THERE.
I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT WHY ARE THE REQUIREMENTS THE WAY THEY ARE.
I KNOW FOR INSTANCE ON THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND I KNOW MR. BELL MAY BE ABLE TO CORRECT ME, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S ONE PER 17 STUDENTS IS A REQUIREMENT FOR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
FOR INSTANCE, ON THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WITH 800 STUDENTS AT 1-17, YOU ONLY NEED 47 PARKING SPACES,
[00:30:01]
WHICH REALLY THE DISTRICT TYPICALLY LIKES TO HAVE ABOUT 110 PARKING SPACES AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS A RULE OF THUMB.YEAH, MAYBE THE ORDINANCE MIGHT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT.
ON THE FLIP SIDE FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BECAUSE THAT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE LOW.
THE HIGH SCHOOLS AND LIKE IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, FOR WHATEVER REASON THE EXISTING PARKING SPACES AT THE HIGH SCHOOL WE'RE NOT REDUCING WHAT'S THERE TODAY.
THE DIRECTIVE WE WERE GIVEN WAS TO MAINTAIN THE NUMBER THAT'S THERE AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE ALL THE LOTS RIGHT NOW FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND ARE NOT BEING 100% UTILIZED.
THE DISTRICT WANTS TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT REMAINS THE CASE.
MAJORITY OF THE ADDITIONS ARE FOR ATHLETIC PURPOSES AND JUST UPGRADE THE FACILITIES THAT IT'S NOT FOR AN INCREASE IN STUDENT POPULATION.
ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST WHAT I'D LIKE TO ADD.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. OLLEY?
DO YOU HAVE A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF WHAT IS ON GROUND IN TERMS OF PARKING RIGHT NOW?
>> I DO NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I WAS THINKING IT WAS 1,500 OR 1,600.
>> I'M GETTING 1,498. THERE WE GO.
>> THAT'S VERY PRECISE, 1,498.
WE ARE ADDING 18 PARKING SPOTS?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER ALALI?
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY REPORT OR ANALYSIS, HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS THAT ARE NOT USED RIGHT NOW ON CAMPUS?
>> DO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DO THESE ANALYSIS OR RESEARCH?
I JUST KNOW THEY'RE NOT UTILIZING ALL OF THEM. THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD.
>> I JUST FEEL LIKE IF THEY DO IT WILL HELP US MAKE THE DECISION.
IF THEY'RE NOT USING ALL THEIR EXISTING PARKING SPACES, THAT'S EASIER FOR US TO KNOW.
LIKE YOU'RE SAYING, PROBABLY THE ORDINANCE HAS SOME.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
>> I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. RESTRICT COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER, OLLEY.
>> AGAIN, THIS SEEMS TO BE JUST THE CONSEQUENCE OF THEM GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REPLATING AND WHAT HAVE YOU AND TRIGGERING.
WHILE ON THE FACE OF IT, IT LOOKS LIKE A MASSIVE REDUCTION, IN REALITY IS NOT.
WITH THAT IN MIND I MOVE WE APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS TO THE ENGINEERING PLANS AS REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND APPROVE THE REVISED SITE PLAN OR RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF A VARIANCE TO SUBSECTION 16.700 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF PARKING BY 270 SPACES.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER, MR. TONG.
>> I HAD A QUESTION, BUT NOW I THINK I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SECOND, AND THEN WE CAN PUT [OVERLAPPING].
>> YES. MY QUESTION ACTUALLY IS MORE FOR PROBABLY MIKE AND OUR STAFF MEMBERS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE ALREADY PARKINGS THERE AND THE ACTUAL PARKING THERE IS MORE THAN THE REQUIRED, I GUESS.
RIGHT NOW, IT'S PROVIDING 1516 AND THEY HAVE MORE THAN 1516.
>> NO. THEY HAVE 1498, AND THEY'RE PROVIDING 1516.
WHEN DID THEY GET THE 1498 APPROVED?
>> WHEN THEY WERE APPROVED, DID THEY HAVE A VARIANCE OR SOMETHING? IS THAT STILL AVAILABLE?
>> WE WERE LOOKING INTO THAT AND WERE UNABLE TO FIND ANY DECISIVE INFORMATION AS
[00:35:02]
TO WHETHER THEY GOT A REDUCTION OR SOME OTHER MECHANISM TO REDUCE THEIR PARKING OR IF THERE WAS SIMPLY JUST A DIFFERENCE IN CALCULATION ON CAPACITY AT THE TIME.>> MY QUESTION IS THAT, BECAUSE I'M THINKING LIKE THIS IS MAYBE A CORRECTING ERROR THAT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE INSTEAD OF APPROVING A REDUCTION OF THE PLAN BASED ON THE NEEDS OR ANALYSIS OR ANYTHING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I APPRECIATE THIS ENGINEER COMES DOWN TO BE THE APPLICANT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE WHY OR HOW AND HOW THEY GOT THE NUMBER AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW THEY HAD THE NUMBER.
THERE'S NO ANALYSIS, THERE'S NO USAGE.
THE ONLY REASON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS IS BECAUSE THERE WAS AN ERROR.
IT'S ALREADY ON THE GROUND AND WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE IT'S BETTER THAN THE ERROR ON THE GROUND.
>> I WOULDN'T CHARACTERIZE IT QUITE THAT WAY.
I BELIEVE WE DO ACTUALLY HAVE USAGE RATES THAT WAS PRESENTED TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, SO MR. ROCKERBE HAS PROVIDED ME SOME INFORMATION.
THEY HAVE ACTUALLY FOR EACH PARKING LOT.
THEY RANGE FROM ANYWHERE FROM UP TO 40% OF THE SPACE IS BEING USED UP TO 100%.
I GUESS THE PARKING LOTS CLOSEST ARE PROBABLY 100%, BUT THERE IS A RANGE THAT THEY DID PROVIDE FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO JUSTIFY THEIR VARIANCE AT THAT TIME.
WE COULD PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO YOU IF IT'S HELPFUL.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, AND JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER TONG'S QUESTION.
IF IT'S BEEN EXISTING OUT THERE AT 1498 FOR HOWEVER MANY YEARS, ARE WE AWARE OF ANY ENFORCEMENT ISSUES, ANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT ANY PARKING CHALLENGES THAT THEY HAVE HAD.
>> OUR TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DOES REVIEW THESE PLANS AND TYPICALLY, WE'LL BRING THOSE UP DURING REVIEW, AND THEY DID NOT BRING ANY TO OUR ATTENTION, SO I CAN ONLY ASSUME THE ANSWER IS NO.
>> THEY HAD NO OBJECTION, NO RECOGNITION THAT THERE WAS A PREVIOUS PROBLEM THAT NEEDED TO BE SOLVED.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ALALI, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TONG.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? EVERYBODY PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO.
[4. (DB) Discussion and Action – Conformance of Proposed 2025 Bond Referendum Items with the Comprehensive Plan: Consideration of the proposed 2025 Bond Referendum items and conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Project #DI2024-019. Applicant: City of Plano. (Legislative consideration)]
AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR, I'M GOING TO REARRANGE THE AGENDA A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF STAFF MEMBERS HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 4, AND NOT NEARLY AS MANY STAFF MEMBERS HERE FOR ITEMS NUMBER 3A AND 3B.I'M SORRY FOR THE ONES THAT ARE HERE FOR 3A AND 3B, BUT I'M GOING TO JUMP THE LINE.
IF WE CAN READ NUMBER 4, PLEASE.
>> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS LINKED UP THE AGENDA AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4, DISCUSSION AND ACTION.
CONFORMANCE OF PROPOSED 2025 BOND REFERENDUM ITEMS WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED 2025 BOND REFERENDUM ITEMS AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.
>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DREW BRAWNER, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I WILL BRIEFLY INTRODUCE THIS ITEM GIVEN THE NUMBER OF GUEST SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE.
THE 2025 BOND REFERENDUM IS INTENDED TO ADVANCE THE CITY'S MISSION OF PROVIDING OUTSTANDING SERVICES AND FACILITIES THROUGH COOPERATIVE EFFORTS THAT ENGAGE OUR CITIZENS AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S ROLE IS TO ENSURE THE PROPOSED PROJECTS ALIGN WITH THE POLICIES AND ACTION STATEMENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THIS REVIEW IS PROVIDED AS A BEST PRACTICE IN THE BOND REFERENDUM PROCESS AND DOES NOT INVOLVE EVALUATING INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
THE BOND REFERENDUM PROJECT TYPE SHOULD BROADLY REFLECT THE CITY'S LONG TERM GOALS AS OUTLINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
DECISIONS ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS ARE MADE EACH YEAR THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET AND CIP PROCESS.
THE COMMISSION HAS AN ONGOING ROLE IN REVIEWING PROPOSED CIP PROJECTS EACH YEAR TO ENSURE THEY ALIGN WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF BOTH EXISTING AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
THIS ENSURES CONSISTENCY BETWEEN LONG-TERM PLANNING GOALS AND SHORT-TERM PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION.
THERE ARE SEVERAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED BOND REFERENDUM AND ARE IDENTIFIED IN DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT.
IN SUMMARY, THE FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY AND ACTIONS PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR THE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CITY IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATES TO THE PROPOSED LIST OF BOND REFERENDUM PROJECTS AS A WHOLE.
WHEREAS THE OTHER IDENTIFIED POLICIES PROVIDE MORE SPECIFIC DIRECTION FOR THE FUNDING OF CERTAIN PROJECT CATEGORIES.
[00:40:03]
THESE INCLUDE THE POLICIES LISTED HERE ON THE SCREEN UNDER THE BUILT SOCIAL AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PILLARS.WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO KAREN RHODES-WHITLEY FOR THE BOND REFERENDUM PRESENTATION.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M KAREN RHODES-WHITLEY.
I'M THE BUDGET DIRECTOR HERE AT THE CITY OF PLANO.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING US OUT THIS EVENING.
WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS THE STAFF RECOMMENDED PROJECTS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CONSIDERING IN JANUARY TO GO ON THE ELECTION, WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 3RD, 2025.
WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES DO, THEY UTILIZE ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITHIN THE CITY, INCLUDING PLANNING AND ZONING.
WE ALSO HAVE A BOND REFERENDUM CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT HAS BEEN MEETING SINCE AUGUST.
THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO DELIBERATE WHAT THEY THINK SHOULD BE ON THE BOND PACKAGE TOMORROW.
ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, INCLUDING THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS SUPPOSED TO TURN US IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE LIST THAT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED TO YOU, AND THOSE WILL BE GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE MONTH OF JANUARY, WILL BE DECIDING THE FINAL PROJECTS THAT WILL GO BEFORE THE VOTERS.
I THINK IT'S SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 13TH, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE ELECTION WILL BE MAY 3RD.
TONIGHT, WE DO HAVE ALL THE PARTICIPANTS.
WE CALL IT THE BOND REFERENDUM ROAD SHOW, AND WE HAVE ALL THE STAFF MEMBERS WHO ARE IN CHARGE OF THESE PROJECTS TO GO INDIVIDUALLY THROUGH THE ACTUAL PROJECT.
RIGHT NOW, I WILL CALL UP RON SMITH.
HERE HE COMES. HE'S GOING TO DISCUSS THE PARKS AND REC PROJECTS.
BEFORE YOU GET UP HERE REAL QUICK, RON.
THE TOTAL RIGHT NOW ON THE BOND REFERENDUM IS $700.7 MILLION.
WE HAVE 342 MILLION IN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, WE HAVE PARKS AND REC THAT TOTALS 51.6 MILLION, PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECTS TOTAL 243.6 MILLION, MUNICIPAL FACILITIES TOTAL 58 MILLION, AND THEN LIBRARY FACILITIES TOTAL $4.6 MILLION.
WE WILL INDIVIDUALLY GO THROUGH THESE. THANK YOU, RON.
>> BEFORE WE GET STARTED WITH STAFF PRESENTATIONS.
>> THAT'S OKAY. I JUST WANT TO PREFACE FOR EVERYBODY.
OUR ROLE HERE TONIGHT IS NOT TO EVALUATE, DELIBERATE, OR OTHERWISE RANK ANY OF THE PROPOSALS BEFORE US.
OUR JOB IS TO EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE THAT ARE ON THE LIST ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHETHER THEY'RE GOOD PROJECTS OR BAD PROJECTS IS NOT UP TO US, OUR JOB IS TO DECIDE WHETHER IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CORRECT?
>> WHILE WE MAY HAVE OPINIONS ABOUT PROJECTS, THAT'S NOT OUR JOB HERE TONIGHT.
OUR JOB HERE TONIGHT IS TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WITH THAT SAID, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT AS WELL?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I'M SORRY.
>> THANK YOU, MS. RHODES-WHITLEY.
YOU MADE THE STATEMENT THAT COUNCIL RELIES ON ALL THE BOARD'S COMMISSIONS TO PROVIDE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> BUT THIS ISN'T OUR RECOMMENDATION, IS IT?
>> WHAT I AM UNDERSTANDING FROM MR. RATLIFF, YOU ALL ARE COINCIDING THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS TO THE MASTER PLAN.
IF FOR SOME REASON, YOU WANT TO WRITE IN, NORMALLY, WHAT THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DO DO IS YES, THEY FEEL LIKE, THIS SHOULD GO FORTH AND THEY APPROVE THESE PROJECTS.
IF FOR SOME REASON, YOU WANT TO ADD IN A PROJECT OR SOMETHING ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION, YOU ALL CAN DO THAT, BUT REALLY ON P AND Z, NORMALLY, WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS TO SEE IF IT GOES TO THE MASTER PLAN.
>> MY SECOND QUESTION IS, THE LIST THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED IS NOT THE FINAL LIST, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ALL THEY'RE DOING IS LOOKING AT THE LIST AND TELLING THE CITY COUNCIL IF THEY AGREE WITH THE LIST.
THE CITY COUNCIL, THEY'RE THE ONES THAT IN JANUARY ARE GOING TO DECIDE WHAT PROJECTS GO FORWARD TO THE VOTERS.
THAT IS COMPLETELY A CITY COUNCIL JOB.
>> IN OUR STATEMENT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT CONFORMS WITH THE PLAN,
[00:45:04]
THAT WOULD NOT IMPUTE THAT IF SOMETHING WERE ADDED AFTER OUR MEETING, IT WOULD BE OUR APPROVAL FOR IT, WOULD IT?>> NO. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING'S GOING TO BE ADDED, SIR.
THE CITY COUNCIL, THEY'RE JUST LOOKING TO SEE IF YOU ALL AGREE WITH THIS.
THIS IS A STAFF RECOMMENDED LIST.
THE CITY COUNCIL WILL GET ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
IT'S THE CITY COUNCIL, IT IS THEIR JOB TO DECIDE WHAT PROJECTS GO FORTH.
IF THEY ADD SOMETHING IN JANUARY, IS IT GOING TO COME BACK THROUGH YOU ALL? NO. WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH TIME TO DO THAT.
I'VE GOT SOME CONFUSION WITH SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE USING COMPARED TO THE LANGUAGE THAT THE CHAIR IS USING AS IT RELATES TO OUR RECOMMENDATION AS FAR AS THE LIST VERSUS OUR IDEA THAT IT CONFORMS WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> PETER, DO YOU WANT TO HELP ME HERE? [LAUGHTER] AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT THE LIST.
WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE WHAT'S ON THE LIST.
>> WELL, MY UNDERSTANDING OF OUR ROLE TONIGHT IS TO REVIEW THE LIST TO SEE IF WE AGREE THAT THE LIST OF PROJECTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE MASTER PLAN.
IF WE FIND SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T BELIEVE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN, THEN IT'S OUR OBLIGATION TO REMOVE IT.
>> PUT IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU THINK THIS SHOULD BE REMOVED.
>> CORRECT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE, IN MY OPINION, THAT IT'S OUR NECESSARY PREROGATIVE TO SAY, WELL, WE OUGHT TO ALSO DO X, OUR JOB IS TO EVALUATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY.
HER TERMINOLOGY OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS AS IT RELATED TO THE LIST, I DIDN'T FIND THAT LANGUAGE TO MATCH WITH WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.
THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR ROLE IS, ESPECIALLY WITH NEW COMMISSIONERS ON HERE SINCE THE LAST TIME WE'VE DONE THIS, IF THE LANGUAGE IS SUCH THAT IT'S OUR RECOMMENDATION VERSUS OUR POSITION OF THE CONFORMITY, THERE'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT ROLES.
>> WHAT I REMEMBER OF THE MEMO GOING OUT, ALL THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, YOU ALL'S MAIN JOB AT THE CITY OF PLANO IS TO MAKE SURE IT CONFORMS. IF FOR SOME REASON, THERE IS SOME PROJECT YOU WANT TO ADD, YOU CAN INCLUDE IT ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE MAIN JOB IS TO MAKE SURE IT MATCHES UP WITH THE [INAUDIBLE]
>> WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TONIGHT JUST TO BE CLEAR.
I ACTUALLY HAVE A LETTER THAT I'M BEING ASKED TO SIGN AT THE END OF THE LETTER. LET ME READ THE LETTER.
THE LETTER THAT WE WILL HOPEFULLY SEND TONIGHT TO MR. ISRAELSON IS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED THE 25 BOND REFERENDUM ITEMS AND FOUND THE PROJECTS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS FOR FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT.
>> NOT WHETHER WE APPROVE OF THEM OR NOT.
>> NOT WHETHER WE LIKE OR DON'T LIKE ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT.
>> IT'S NOT OUR RECOMMENDATION.
>> CORRECT. OUR JOB IS TO EVALUATE IT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS FOR FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT.
>> AS IT RELATES TO WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED, NOT WHAT ULTIMATELY MAY END UP HAPPENING.
>> CORRECT. THE LIST THAT'S IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT?
>> WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO EDIT THAT IS UP TO THE COUNCIL.
>> I WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT THIS IS THE FIRST STEP, THE BOND GETS APPROVED, THEY COME BACK.
THEY END UP GETTING PUTTING IN THE CIP BUDGET EVERY YEAR.
THAT CIP COMES BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EVERY SUMMER FOR RECOMMENDATION WITH MORE SPECIFIC DOLLARS AND PROJECTS.
>> THESE ARE MORE BROAD BRUSH ITEMS.
>> I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT ALL THE LANGUAGE.
CORRECT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF, DID YOU HAVE A QUICK COMMENT?
>> KAREN, COME BACK. COME ON UP HERE. THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU.
>> COME BACK. SORRY. WE'LL GET TO THE PRESENTATIONS IN A SECOND.
LET'S MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH TONIGHT.
>> WE'RE NOT THROUGH BEATING UP ON YOU, YET.
>> NEVER MIND. [LAUGHTER] NO, I JUST HAD A QUESTION.
DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS ANY REALISTIC CHANCE THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, DUE TO ACTION BY THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR ONE OF THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AT THIS LIST COULD CHANGE BEFORE IT GOES TO THE COUNCIL?
>> WILL IT CHANGE BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL? NO. THE LIST I HAVE IN MY HAND, THAT YOU ALL HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED IS THE LIST THAT WILL SHOW UP ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S DESK JANUARY 13TH, 2025.
[00:50:05]
>> ALONG WITH THAT LIST, IS YALL'S LETTER, THE CULTURAL ARTS LETTER, THE PARK PLANNING BOARD'S LETTER, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION'S LETTER.
THEY'LL REVIEW THE LETTERS THAT YOU SUBMIT THEM AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LIST THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WILL BE THE SAME LIST THAT THE COUNCIL WILL ALSO SEE.
>> COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, ONE MORE THING REAL QUICK.
>> SORRY. YES. I WANT TO GO BACK TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT IF WE DECIDED WE WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING, THEN WHAT HE JUST SAID, HIS QUESTION, THEN IS A IS THERE A POSSIBILITY FROM SOME OTHER BOARD MAKING A RECOMMENDATION THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THIS LIST, THAT THERE COULD BE SOMETHING ENDING UP ON COUNCIL DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE SEEING.
BECAUSE YOUR TERM EARLIER WAS THAT SOMEBODY [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE CITY COUNCIL IF THEY WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THE ALREADY EXISTING LIST, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT IN JANUARY.
MY QUESTION WAS, YOU SAID THAT IF WE WANTED TO ADD A RECOMMENDATION AS THE COMMISSION, WE COULD DO SO, AND ALL OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONS COULD DO THAT AS WELL.
THAT IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT WHAT ENDS UP ON THEIR DESK IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY.
>> NO. BECAUSE THE THAT SIR, THE ONCE AGAIN, THEY'RE GOING TO GET THIS LIST, IT'S 700.7 MILLION DOLLAR.
BEHIND THE LIST ARE GOING TO BE Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION LETTERS.
IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION LETTER.
DID Y'ALL GO THROUGH IT? DID COME UP AND WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? THE CITY COUNCIL WILL LOOK AT THOSE LETTERS, AT THE END OF THE DAY.
THEY'RE GOING TO DECIDE THE PROPOSITIONS.
IT'S ALL UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL, SIR.
>> MA'AM, I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> I THINK THAT'S NOT LET'S GET TO THE STAFF PRESENTATIONS AND THEN WE CAN ASK THEM QUESTIONS AT THE END. THERE YOU GO.
I THINK WE UNDERSTAND OUR CHARGE HERE TONIGHT, WHICH IS TO SEE IF IT COMPLIES WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
LET'S EVALUATE IT BASED ON THAT.
COMMISSION TONG, DO YOU HAVE A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE WE GET TO THE STAFF PRESENTATIONS?
I THINK THERE'S A MISUNDERSTANDING BETWEEN MR. BRONSKY AND MS. KAREN.
THE MISUNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE LIST IT'S A LIST.
WE CAN'T CHANGE THE LIST TONIGHT OR ANYTIME BETWEEN NOW AND JANUARY WHEN THE COUNCIL MAKES A DECISION.
HOWEVER, OUR JOB TONIGHT IS TO COME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS AND THAT'S GOING TO BE ON A SEPARATE LETTER.
WE COULD IF YOU HAVE ITEMS YOU WANT TO ADD OR WE ALL HAVE ITEMS YOU WANT TO ADD OR CHANGE, I THINK WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PUT IT IN A RECOMMENDATION LETTER AND THAT LETTER WILL GO WITH THE LIST TO THE COUNCIL.
>> I'M GOING TO CUT OFF DEBATE AT THIS POINT, AND LET'S LET THE STAFF MAKE THEIR PRESENTATIONS, AND THEN WE CAN REVISIT THIS AT THE END JUST IN THE INTEREST OF KEEPING THE MEETING MOVING.
MY NAME IS RON SMITH. I'M YOUR PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR.
I'LL STATE RIGHT OFF THE BAT THAT THIS PROGRAM, THIS PROPOSED LIST FROM PARKS AND RECREATION WAS DEVELOPED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNING BOARD.
CHAIRMAN PAGEANT HAS SUBMITTED A SIGNED LETTER THAT THIS LIST OF PARK PROJECTS HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND IS SUPPORTED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNING BOARD.
THE PROGRAM CONSISTS OF THE FIVE CATEGORIES THAT WERE ON THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE.
THIS IS THE VERSION THAT WE'VE BEEN USING INTERNALLY AND WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME LIST AS THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, BUT JUST HAS A LITTLE MORE DETAIL LIKE THE PROPOSED OR ANTICIPATED OPERATION COSTS.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS THE LIST FOR PARKS AND RECREATION, AND IT HAS THESE FIVE CATEGORIES.
I'LL GO OVER EACH CATEGORY WITH YOU DURING THIS PRESENTATION.
CATEGORY NUMBER 1, IS HALL PARK.
THIS IS LOCATED AT THE HARD CORNER OF ALMA AND PARK BOULEVARD.
WE PROPOSE THE $10 MILLION TO DEVELOP THE FIRST PHASE OF THIS PARK LAND, WHICH WILL INCLUDE IMPROVEMENTS PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT,
[00:55:04]
PICNIC AREAS, AN IMPROVED HIKE AND BIKE CEMENT OR CONCRETE TRAIL AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PARK.THE MAJORITY WILL BE DEVELOPED AS A PARK, BUT I WANTED TO SHOW THIS SLIDE THAT WE HAVE ALSO BEEN UTILIZING BECAUSE IT SHOWS A PORTION OF THE PARK THAT WILL BE USED FOR MUCH NEEDED PUBLIC SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES FOR POLICE AND FIRE.
BUT AGAIN, THE MAJORITY OF THE PARK OR THE PROPERTY WILL BE DEVELOPED AS INTENDED.
THAT FIRST 10 MILLION THAT IS PART OF OUR PARK DEVELOPMENT OR 25 BOND PROGRAM WOULD BE FOR THE FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT OF HALL PARK.
LAND ACQUISITION IS THE NEXT CATEGORY, $20 MILLION IDENTIFIED FOR LAND ACQUISITION, 15 OF THE 20 IS IDENTIFIED FOR THE PARK LAND IN THE LAVON FARM DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS IDENTIFIED HERE JUST EAST OF HIGHWAY 75.
THIS IS THE WAY IT IS DISPLAYED ON OUR PARK MASTER PLAN.
IT CLEARLY SHOWS IN THE LIGHT GREEN OF SHAWNEE PARK AN ADDITIONAL CAP, IF YOU WILL, OF PARK LAND.
THAT IS MORE OR LESS 24 ACRES, AS SHOWN ON THE PARK MASTER PLAN.
BUT AS WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE LAVON FARM IN CONJUNCTION AND IN SUPPORT OF THE ENVISION OAK POINT PLAN.
WHAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING IS THAT THE PROPOSED 24 ACRES, THEY'RE SHOWN IN GREEN, THE BRIGHTER GREEN IS ACTUALLY BEING DISSEMINATED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT TO BETTER MEET THE NEEDS OF THE FUTURE 4,000 PLUS RESIDENTS THAT WILL SOMEDAY CALL LAVON FARM HOME.
WE'RE STILL MEETING THAT THE SPIRIT OF THE PARK MASTER PLAN WITH THE 25 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES, BUT WE'RE DISPERSING THEM IN A WAY THAT WILL BETTER BENEFIT THE PUBLIC WHEN THEY EVENTUALLY LIVE IN THOSE HOMES.
LET ME GO BACK ONE MORE THING.
WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE COST OR THE ESTIMATES THROUGH APPRAISALS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE FOR THESE PARCELS AS IDENTIFIED ON THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE, AND IT'S MORE OR LESS ROUGHLY 15 MILLION.
WE FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE THAT THAT 15 MILLION FOR LAVON FARM IS RIGHT ON THE MONEY.
AGAIN, THIS CONFORMS WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THE ENVISION OAK POINT PLAN.
THE REMAINING 5 MILLION FOR PARK ACQUISITION IS FOR OTHER PARCELS THAT WILL BECOME AVAILABLE BETWEEN 2025 AND 2029 THAT HELP BUILD OUT THE PARKS MASTER PLAN AS IT IS CURRENTLY CONSTITUTED.
THE NEXT CATEGORY IS COMMUNITY PARK RENOVATIONS, 11,595,000.
WE ARE PUSHING ALL OF OUR CHIPS INTO THE CENTER OF THE TABLE FOR COMMUNITY PARK RENOVATION FOR SCHELL PARK.
IT'S THE LARGEST PROGRAMMABLE SPORT SPECIFIC PARK EAST OF HIGHWAY 75.
IT'S IN NEED OF A WHOLESALE RENOVATION.
HERE ARE SOME OF THE EXISTING AMENITIES ARE IMPROVEMENTS ON SITE RIGHT NOW, INCLUDING THE FLYING V, PICNIC PAVILION AND THE VERY ROBUST YET INSUFFICIENT RESTROOMS THERE AT SCHELL PARK.
THOSE TWO AMENITIES OR IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE REPLACED AS WELL AS THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AS PART OF THIS WHOLESALE RENOVATION OF SCHELL PARK.
THE NEXT CATEGORY IS PARK IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS IS A $5 MILLION THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED FOR THIS PURPOSE.
THIS ALLOWS THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO MAKE ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CITIZENS OF PLANO, OR PARK STAFF DURING THAT FOUR YEAR WINDOW FROM 2025-2029.
THE LAST CATEGORY FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION PROPOSED BOND PROGRAM IS RECREATIONAL TRAILS, 5 MILLION.
THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO BUILD OUT THE PARKS AND RECREATION TRAIL SYSTEM, WHICH CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF OVER 100 MILES OF TRAIL.
IT IS ONE OF THE AMENITIES THAT WE CONSISTENTLY GET VERY POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AS IT IS WIDELY USED AND PROVIDES A VERY BROAD BENEFIT.
[01:00:02]
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN WORKED ON WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNING BOARD.THEY'VE SIGNED THEIR LETTER, SUGGESTING THAT THEY SUPPORT THIS PROPOSED PROGRAM, AND THIS ALLOWS THE CITY'S DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION TO FUND CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR THAT FOUR YEAR WINDOW FROM 2025-2029.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKS PLAN. COMMISSIONER ALI.
O&M IS OPERATING IN MANAGEMENT.
SECONDLY, I'M GOING TO GUESS A LOT OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AROUND THE PARK LAND, WE'RE TIE INTO MAYBE I'M FORECASTING THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND CONNECTING PARKWAYS AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
WALKABILITY IS ALL A PART OF THIS.
>> AS FAR AS THE LAVON FARM, IF THAT'S YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION, THAT DEVELOPMENT CERTAINLY HAS THE VISION POINT STAMP, WHICH IS A WALKABLE DEVELOPMENT.
IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY WIDE PROGRAM, SO OUR HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL IS PART OF THE CITY'S TRAIL SYSTEM AND BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
ANY TRAIL DEVELOPMENT OR NEW TRAIL CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE CONFORMING WITH THAT EXISTING PLAN.
>> SPECIFICALLY, WHEN IT CAME TO THE LAVON FARMS PIECE COMPONENT.
YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT A LARGE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
I WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING IN THERE? IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT?
>> WELL, I'M SURE THAT OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION, BUT THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE LAND OWNER AND THE DEVELOPER ON THAT.
IT'S A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PARK LAND AND TRAILS IS A BIG COMPONENT OF THAT.
>> AS A FORM AS A DEVELOPER, CIVIL ENGINEER.
I ALSO FOUND THAT MANY TIMES THE CITIES WOULD REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP THIS LAND AND TO PROVIDE THAT LAND AT NO COST TO THE CITY, MANY TIMES.
I'M JUST TRYING TO WRAP MY MIND AROUND THE 01,520 MILLION FOR LAND THAT A DEVELOPER MAY BE PUTTING TOGETHER.
>> WELL, IT'S OUR HISTORY THAT WE PAY MARKET VALUE FOR PARK LAND.
>> BECAUSE I KNOW THAT DEVELOPMENTS I'VE DONE IN THE PAST, IT WAS NOT THAT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE.
THAT THERE WE HAD TO PUT A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE AS AS PARK LAND AND SOMETIMES GOT A CREDIT, LIKE A TREE MITIGATION CREDIT OR DIFFERENT THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN THAT IT WAS STILL DONATED, SO I WAS JUST CHECKING IN ON THAT.
>> FOR, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THERE IS A PARK FEE THAT'S STILL CHARGED, THAT FEE IS USED TO PURCHASE PARK LAND FOR THAT PURPOSE.
>> THERE IS AN ASSESSMENT MADE BASED ON MULTI FAMILY OR SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THERE IS A PARK FEE ASSESSMENT THAT'S MADE, AND THAT CAN BE USED IN VERY SPECIFIC WAYS.
BUT STILL THE CITY WOULD PAY BASED ON THOSE APPRAISALS, THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THAT PARK LAND.
>> ONE QUICK QUESTION. YOU HAVE THE JC PENNEY ACQUISITION CROSSED OFF.
I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S WORKED OUT.
MY QUESTION IS, AS THAT PROJECT IS BEING DEVELOPED, ARE WE NOT CONSIDERING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARK AS WELL?
>> NOT AT THIS TIME. I'M NOT GOING TO BE PART OF THIS 2025 PROGRAM, PROBABLY 2029.
THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION, AND THAT'S THE EXACT ANSWER IS NOT IN THIS ROUND FOR THE 2025 PROGRAM.
>> THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL WILL SIT UNCHANGED BASICALLY UNTIL 2029?
>> IT WOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED UNTIL THERE IS FUNDING AVAILABLE.
IN THE DEFERENCE TO A BIG PUBLIC SAFETY NEED, PARKS AND RECREATION HISTORICALLY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE BOND PROGRAMS FROM PARKS AND RECREATION, THEY'RE 70, 80, $90 MILLION EACH EVERY FOUR YEARS.
THIS YEAR, BECAUSE OF SOME OTHER BIGGER NEEDS THAT THE CITY HAS, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO OUR PART AND THAT 51.5 MILLION WE THINK IS AN ADEQUATE NUMBER.
>> I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU DO AS WELL AS THE STAFF AND THE CITIZENS SERVING ON THAT COMMITTEE AND I FEEL GOOD ABOUT ALL OF THE THINGS.
I JUST I SAW THE JC PENNY CROSSED OFF AND IT JUST BROUGHT TO MY MIND.
WE DID GET THAT, BUT JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
>> WE LEFT IT ON THERE INTENTIONALLY SO THAT WE WOULD KEEP THAT AS A PLACEHOLDER,
[01:05:01]
REMEMBER WHAT HAD HAPPENED BECAUSE THAT WAS A BIG DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PUT IN THERE FOR ACQUISITION, SO WE'RE REALLY FORTUNATE THAT THINGS PLAYED OUT THE WAY THEY DID.>> A VERY GENEROUS DONATION TO MUCH. THANK YOU.
EARLIER, THE NEXT DOOR COMMISSIONER, REMINDED ME A QUESTION THAT I'M JUST CURIOUS REALLY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY DECISIONS MAKING HERE.
I JUST WONDER WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE HOMES DEVELOPED IN THE PARK LAND OWNED BY THE CITY IN THE LAVON FARM COMMUNITY.
IF WE OWN THE PARK, THE CITY OWNS THE LAND, THE PARK, AND THERE'S A SMALL PORTION OF IT WILL BE DEVELOPING TO SINGLE FAMILIES OR HOUSES, WHATEVER, THEN YOU SELL THEM TO INDIVIDUAL OWNERS AND THEY WILL BE LIVING ON CITY'S PARK PROPERTY?
ON THE SCREEN, THE PARK LAND IS THE YELLOW HATCHED.
I'LL EXPLAIN THIS SLIDE ONE MORE TIME.
THE LIGHT PALE GREEN IS THE EXISTING SHAWNEE PARK AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
THE BRIGHT GREEN THAT SAYS 24.75 WAS WHAT WE PROPOSED ORIGINALLY, AND IT SHOWS IN THE PARK MASTER PLAN AS AN ADDITIONAL ACREAGE ON TOP.
THE YELLOW HASH SHOWS HOW THE PARK LAND DISBURSEMENT WILL HAPPEN.
THERE WILL BE NO HOMES BUILT ON ANY OF THOSE AREAS THAT ARE MARKED IN YELLOW.
THAT WILL BE PARK PROPERTY, THE HOMES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT WILL GO OUTSIDE OF THE YELLOW.
>> THIS WHOLE PROJECT IS JUST FOCUSING ON THOSE YELLOWS.
>> THE PARK LAND ACQUISITIONS WILL ONLY BE THE YELLOW AS SHOWN ON THAT SLIDE.
>> THANK YOU. FOR GIVING ME THE CHANCE TO CLARIFY THAT FOR YOU.
WE JUST WENT THROUGH A VISIONING EXERCISE ON HAGGARD PARK.
I KNOW IT'S NOT A VERY BIG PROJECT, BUT IS THAT IN HERE SOMEWHERE OR IS THAT BEING POSTPONED FOR ANOTHER.
>> THAT'S GOING TO PROBABLY BE A 2029 FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, THAT ANSWER THAT I GAVE HIM IN DEFERENCE TO OTHER MAJOR EXPENDITURES.
>> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE CLARIFYING THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKS?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. WHO'S UP NEXT?
>> GOOD EVENING, FOLKS, POKINS A FACILITIES DIVISION MANAGER.
I'LL BE INTRODUCING CHIEF DRAIN, WHO WILL INTRODUCE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS CARR, WHO WILL REINTRODUCE CHIEF DRAIN, THEN CHIEF BAKER STAFF, THEN ABO AND FROM PUBLIC WORKS BACK TO ME FOR FACILITIES, AND THEN I'LL FILE A HANDOFF TO LIBBY FROM LIBRARIES.
SLOW REACTING. THE FACILITIES PACKAGE IS 306 MILLION.
THAT'S WHY MY POOR FRIEND RON SEEMS TO HE GAVE A LOT, SO WE COULD DO THAT.
PUBLIC WORKS, PUBLIC SAFETY IS A BIG PORTION OF IT, 243 MILLION OF THAT, 155 IS A NEW POLICE HQ IN 911 CENTER.
A NEW FIRE STATION 14 IS 21, ALMOST 22 MILLION.
WE ARE GOING TO GET MORE FUNDS TO COMPILE WITH ORIGINAL FUNDS FOR STATION 8 TO GIVE IT A FULL REMODEL, IF NOT A REBUILD.
WE'RE GOING TO BUY LAND FOR STATION 3 AND PAY FOR THE DESIGN, AND WE ARE GOING TO BUILD A NEW POLICE TRAINING CENTER IN REPLACING THE OLD TRAINING CENTER AND WE'LL EXPLAIN MORE AND WE'LL GET TO THAT.
THEN PHASE 1 FOR REDOING OUR PUBLIC WORKS CAMPUS OVER AT PARKWAY OPERATIONS ON THE WEST SIDE.
WILL BE TO BUILD A NEW FLEET BUILDING.
THEN A PROJECT NEAR TO MY HEART IS A NEW FACILITIES MAINTENANCE BUILDING, WHICH WE WILL BUY THE LAND AND PAY FOR THE DESIGN WITH THIS BOND.
THEN FINALLY, WE HAVE RENOVATIONS AND STUDY POD FURNITURE PURCHASES FOR SCHIMEPLFENIG PARK AND HAGGARD LIBRARY.
WITH THAT, I WILL HAND OFF TO CHIEF DRAIN.
>> HELLO, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS.
I WILL FIRST TALK ABOUT THE NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS.
OUR CURRENT PD BUILDING WAS FIRST BUILT IN 1973.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 50-YEARS-OLD.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME RENOVATIONS THAT ADDED ADDITIONAL SPACE OVER THE YEARS TO THAT FACILITY.
BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY AND THE MOST RECENT ADDITION TO IT WAS IN 2014 WHICH PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE EXPANSION, BUT THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE.
[01:10:04]
WHERE THE NEW PROPOSED LOCATION, THE LOCATION FOR THE NEW POLICE STATION IS IN THAT HALL TRACK THAT DR. SMITH JUST TALKED ABOUT ABOUT 9.1 OR 9.2 ACRES OF THAT HALL TRACK IS GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO THE POLICE FACILITY.THE PART IN RED IS FOR THE NEW FIRE STATION, AND THE FIRE CHIEF WILL BE UP IN A FEW MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THAT PORTION OF IT.
WE HAVE POLICE FACILITIES THAT ARE SCATTERED ACROSS THE CITY IN VARIOUS PLACES.
BY BUILDING THIS NEW FACILITY, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WILL NOT BE REPLACED WILL BE THE JAIL, WHICH IS CURRENTLY CO-LOCATED WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE MUNICIPAL COURT.
THOSE WILL REMAIN WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT THERE AT 15TH AND H. THE JOINT E FACILITY, WHICH IS CO-LOCATED WITH DAVIS LIBRARY ON INDEPENDENCE WILL ALSO CONTINUE TO BE USED.
WE HAVE TWO STOREFRONT LOCATIONS FOR WHAT WE CALL NPOS ARE NEIGHBORHOOD POLICE OFFICERS THAT ARE IN WEST PLANO.
THE OTHER ONE IS IN LEGACY WEST.
78 OFFICERS WORK OUT OF THOSE FACILITIES.
WE WANT TO KEEP THOSE FACILITIES THERE.
PEOPLE CAN WALK UP AND DO REPORTS.
WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THOSE IN PLACE.
THE RUSSIAN POLICE SUBSTATION, WHICH JUST OPENED IN 2020, IT SAID ROBINSON AND MCDERMOTT, IT ALSO WILL CONTINUE TO BE IN OPERATION, AND THE EMERGENCY OPERATION CENTER, OF COURSE, IS GOING TO STAY IN PLACE.
WHAT WE WILL REPLACE IS OUR CURRENT HEADQUARTERS BUILDING, AS I SAID, ALTHOUGH THE JAIL AND THE MUNICIPAL COURT WILL REMAIN IN PLACE.
WE HAVE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD POLICE OFFICER FACILITY AT AVENUE K AND PARKER.
IT'S UP ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THAT STRIP MALL THERE.
THERE'S REALLY NO OPERATIONAL REASON FOR THAT FACILITY TO BE THERE.
FOLKS DON'T GO UP THERE, WE DON'T TAKE REPORTS THERE OR ANYTHING.
THOSE OFFICERS ARE THERE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPACE FOR THEM IN THE CURRENT POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT SOME LEASE SPACE ALSO ACROSS THE CITY THAT WE'LL BE GIVING UP AS WELL, AND WE'VE GOT SOME SPACE AT THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER AT PARK IN LOS RIOS.
WE'VE GOT TWO OF OUR INVESTIGATIVE UNITS THERE, OUR SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT AND OUR FAMILY VIOLENCE UNIT WORK OUT OF THAT FACILITY, AND THEY WILL ALSO BE COMING BACK TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
NOT SHOWN UP THERE IS ALSO OUR NARCOTICS UNIT IS ALSO IN AN OFFSITE FACILITY, AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BRING THEM BACK TO THE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.
IN 1973, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL STAFF WITH 49 EMPLOYEES, 81, 141, 2003, 475, AND WE'RE CURRENTLY AT 618 TODAY, THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE 50 OR SO SEASONAL CROSSING GUARDS THAT WE ALSO HAVE OUT WORKING FOR THE PD.
YOU CAN SEE THE VARIOUS SPACE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAD OVER THE YEARS, AND WE JUST OUT OF SPACE, AND SO WE NEED ADDITIONAL SPACE.
OUR BUILDING CANNOT BE ADDED TO ANYMORE.
IT'S BEEN ADDED TO SEVERAL TIMES.
WE CAN'T GO UP, WE CAN'T GO OUT.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A NEW FACILITY WITH THE VOTERS APPROVAL, OF COURSE, AND THE COUNCILS.
ONCE WE RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY AT OUR NEW HEADQUARTERS, WE'VE GOT ABOUT 343 FOLKS WORKING OUT OF THERE.
I MENTIONED THE PLACES WHERE WE'VE GOT DIFFERENT UNITS SCATTERED THAT WOULD BRING IN ABOUT ANOTHER 40 OR 45 BACK TO THE HEADQUARTERS.
WE WOULD ALSO BE ADDING 95 FOLKS FROM PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION.
MS. CARR WILL BE UP TO TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE.
ONCE IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE, WE'D HAVE ABOUT A TOTAL OF 474 WARM BODIES IN THE NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS.
AS I SAID, WE'VE GOT TOO MANY LOCATIONS SPREAD ACROSS THE CITY.
EVEN WITHIN OUR BUILDING, WE HAVE SOME SUPERVISORS WHO WORK ON ONE END OF THE BUILDING, BUT THE UNITS, THE SUPERVISOR ON OTHER ENDS OF THE BUILDING.
WE WANT TO BRING THEM TOGETHER, SO JUST FOR EFFICIENCY REASONS.
WE'VE GOT EMERGENCY FLEET VEHICLES THAT ARE ALSO IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS ACROSS THE CITY.
SOME OF THEM ARE LOCATED OUT AT OUR TRAINING FACILITY.
OVER ON 14TH ON THE EAST END OF 14TH STREET.
SOME ARE AT THE EOC, SOME ARE ARE AT THE POLICE HEADQUARTERS.
WE ALSO WANT TO BRING ALL THOSE UNDER ONE ROOF AND WE WANT TO PUT THEM INSIDE.
THOSE ARE VERY EXPENSIVE VEHICLES.
WE JUST PURCHASED A 2.1 OR JUST RECEIVED A 2.1 MILLION DOLLAR MOBILE COMMAND POST THAT IS OUTSIDE.
IT IS COVERED, BUT IT IS OUTSIDE, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THAT INSIDE.
WE ARE PAYING ABOUT $85,000 IN LEASE SPACE EVERY YEAR.
THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO CONSOLIDATE BOTH OUR PEOPLE AND OUR EQUIPMENT BY BUILDING THIS NEW HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.
AGAIN, SOME OF THE BENEFITS BRING PERSONNEL TO THE SAME BUILDING, AS I SAID,
[01:15:03]
ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF PERSONNEL BEING SEPARATED FROM THEIR WORK GROUPS, INCREASE OUR EFFICIENCY, AND NEW BUILD IS MORE ECONOMICAL THAN TRYING TO WORK ON OUR CURRENT LOCATION, WHICH WE REALLY CAN'T DO.WE CAN REALLY CAN'T ADD MUCH MORE TO IT.
WE JUST FINISHED A RENOVATION ON IT TO BETTER UTILIZE THE SPACE WE HAD, BUT IT DID NOT ADD ANY ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.
MS. CARR WILL BE UP TO TALK ABOUT THE 911 AND DISPATCH OPERATION.
>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS SUSAN CARR, THE DIRECTOR OF 911 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS.
WE'RE A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE CITY, BUT WE PROVIDE 911 SERVICES AND POLICE AND FIRE DISPATCH SERVICES FOR THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS PLAINTIFF FIRE RESCUE EMS. TODAY, WE'RE CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THE BASEMENT HERE OF CITY HALL.
JUST DOWN THE RAMP, YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH OUR LOCATION DOWN HERE.
WE'RE LOOKING TO MOVE INTO THE NEW POLICE HEADQUARTER BUILDING.
SEVERAL REASONS FOR THAT IS ADDITIONAL SECURE FACILITY.
MY FOLKS TAKE A LOT OF POLICE HIGH PRIORITY CALLS AND THEN THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN RECEIVING SOME THREATS WHEN CALLERS DON'T LIKE THE WAY THE CALL WAS HANDLED OR THE WAY THINGS WENT.
THEY WEAR A UNIFORM WHEN THEY'RE LEAVING, AND SO IT MAKES THEM A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS IN A NON SECURE FACILITY.
ADDITIONALLY, I HAVE SHIFT WORKERS.
THEY WORK 12 HOUR SHIFTS, 78 TO 7P AND 7P TO 7A, AS WELL AS I HAVE A CALL TAKER SHIFT FROM 11 A TO 11:00 PM.
THEIR OVERTIME HOURS ARE IN FOUR HOUR BLOCKS.
I HAVE SOME PEOPLE COMING IN GOING AT INDIVIDUALS COMING IN AT 11:00 PM.
AT 3:00 AM WALKING IN BY THEMSELVES IN AN UNSECURED PARKING LOT.
THERE'S BEEN HOMELESS FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT MAKES MY TEAM A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE WEARING A UNIFORM AND THEY'RE WALKING IN.
OUTSIDE OF THAT, LAST YEAR, THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL HAD TO EVACUATE FROM THIS BUILDING DUE TO A SITUATION IN ONE OF THEIR MEETINGS, AND MY FOLKS HAD TO EVACUATE AS WELL.
WE HAVE A LOT OF BACKUPS AND REDUNDANCIES IN PLACE, BUT WHEN WE'RE LEAVING OUR PRIMARY FACILITY AND MOVING TO OUR ALTERNATE SITE, RICHARDSON POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS TO ANSWER THE PHONE CALLS FOR US, AND THEN THEY RELAY THOSE TO US ON A PORTABLE RADIO, WHICH CREATES A LITTLE BIT OF A DELAY IN GETTING THAT OUT.
THAT'S ONLY HAPPENED ONCE, BUT AGAIN, IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE LIKE TO PLAN AND NOT PREPARE FOR NOT HAVE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.
A COUPLE OF THINGS, I'M SORRY, SLIDE GOT A LITTLE BIT CONVOLUTED.
WE HAD TO MOVE EVERYTHING UP TO CAPTURE THE CAPTIONING.
BUT IF WE MOVE INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING THAT ALLOWS US FOR SOME BETTER OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND COLLABORATION WITH THEM DURING HIGH RISK EVENTS, AND WITH THE REAL TIME CRIME CENTER, WE'RE ANSWERING THE LIVE CALLS, THE REAL TIME CRIME CENTERS, PROVIDING THE INTELLIGENCE.
WE HAVE CLOSE WORKING RELATIONSHIPS WITH THEM AS WELL.
THEN FINALLY ENOUGH CAN'T BE SAID ABOUT NATURAL LIGHT.
WE'RE IN THE BASEMENT AND THERE'S NO WINDOWS.
WE HAVE A LOT OF CALLERS THAT ACTUALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE WEATHER AND WHAT'S COMING IN.
WE CAN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT THAT WITH THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WE HAVE NO WINDOWS, AND MY FOLKS CAN'T RUN UP THE STAIRS AND CHECK OUT WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE WEATHER OUTSIDE.
BUT IT'S HARD TO SEE ON THIS SLIDE, BUT THERE ARE EIGHT MONITORS PER WORKSTATION, WERE HEAVY INDIVIDUAL USER PC AND EQUIPMENT.
HAVE A LOT OF MIGRAINE SUFFERERS AND THAT FLUORESCENT LIGHT ALL OF THOSE MONITORS CAN CREATE LEAVE AND ISSUES WITH MY FOLKS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOME NATURAL LIGHT, TO MAKE SURE WE CAN GET OUR PEOPLE TO WORK AND THEN INCREASE THAT SERATONA, SO THAT WHEN THEY'RE TAKING ALL THOSE STRESSFUL CALLS THAT THEY'RE DOING THEY'RE ALWAYS WANTED TO GIVE 100%.
OUR END GOAL IS TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY, EXCELLENT PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES.
>> NO. I HAD A QUESTION FOR CHIEF J. I'LL WAIT.
>> HE'LL BE BACK UP TO TALK ABOUT THE TRAINING CENTER.
>> I'LL HAND IT BACK TO CHIEF FREE.
OBVIOUSLY, IF THE 911 OPERATION IS WORKING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT WILL BE MUCH SAFER FOR HER EMPLOYEES VERSUS GOING OUT OF THIS BUILDING.
THERE IS A LOT OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN HER TEAM AND SOMETHING THAT WE CALL OUR REAL TIME INFORMATION CENTER AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
HAVING THEM CO-LOCATED WOULD BE GOOD FOR US AS WELL.
NOW I WILL TALK ABOUT THE POLICE TRAINING CENTER.
THE THING TO KNOW ABOUT OUR TRAINING CENTER IS WE SHARE OWNERSHIP,
[01:20:05]
RESPONSIBILITY WITH THE TRAINING CENTER WITH THE CITY OF RICHARDSON, IT'S A TWO THIRD, ONE THIRD RELATIONSHIP.THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ONE THIRD OF THE O&M COST, THE OPERATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS RIGHT NOW, AND THAT THEY WOULD ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ONE THIRD OF BUILDING THE NEW ACADEMY.
WE HAVE WORKED OUT AN ARRANGEMENT WHERE THEY WOULD PAY THAT OUT OVER 20 YEARS, KAREN.
THE LAST MAJOR RENOVATION THAT WE DID OUT AT THE IT DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ACADEMY, THE FACILITY ITSELF.
BUILT A NEW RANGE OUT THERE, AND THAT WAS A BOND PACKAGE, AND THAT'S HOW THAT WAS HANDLED WITH RICHARDSON WAS TO PAY IT OUT OVER 20 YEARS.
I WANTED TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY.
THIS FACILITY WAS BUILT IN 1990, SO OVER 30-YEARS-OLD.
THE BUILDING ITSELF HAS NEVER HAD A MAJOR RENOVATION DURING THAT TIME.
OUR STAFFING HAS INCREASED QUITE A BIT AS YOU SAW FROM THE PREVIOUS SLIDE WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING.
IN 2017, WE DID ADD A BASIC PEACE OFFICER COURSE, WHICH HAS PUT A BIG STRAIN ON OUR FACILITIES.
WHAT THAT IS, IT'S IN IT'S ABOUT A 30 WEEK LONG COURSE THAT OFFICERS HAVE TO GO TO BECOME POLICE OFFICERS.
PRIOR TO 2017, WHAT WE DID WAS WE WOULD SEND OUR NEW HIRES OUT TO BE TRAINED AT ONE OF THE COLLEGES OR THE COG.
THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT ALSO HAS A TRAINING ACADEMY IS THE ONE THAT WE PRIMARILY USE.
BUT WE'VE GOTTEN MUCH BETTER RESULTS, WE BELIEVE BY TRAINING OUR OFFICERS IN HOUSE.
OF COURSE, WE ALSO TRAINED RICHARDSON'S OFFICERS, AND WE TRAIN ALAN FRISCO AND MCKINNEY'S OFFICERS AS WELL.
BUT IN THE BPOC, WHETHER WE'RE TRAINING FIVE OFFICERS OR 25 OFFICERS, THERE'S JUST A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SPACE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE.
THE NEW BUILDING WILL ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF TRAINING IN THE FACILITY.
THE DRIVING PATH WILL BE RESURFACED FOR BOTH SAFETY AND ADVANCE TRAINING, AND A NEW BUILD IS MORE ECONOMICAL THAN TRYING TO RENOVATE THE EXISTING FACILITY.
WE THINK THAT WE WILL GET MORE FOR EVERY DOLLAR THAT WE HAVE IF WE JUST BUILD NEW VERSUS TRYING TO GO IN AND RENOVATE THE CURRENT FACILITY AND THEN WORK AROUND SOME OF THE EXISTING PROBLEMS THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR 30 YEARS.
BEFORE WE BRING UP THE FIRE CHIEF, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF ME OR MS. CARR?
>> I DO. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT YOU MENTIONED ABOUT WHAT YOU WERE KEEPING AND WHAT YOU WERE REPLACING OR REMOVING?
>> THERE WE GO. I LOVE THE IDEA OF INCREASED EFFICIENCY.
I'VE JUST GOT ONE SMALL CONCERN AND IT WAS ABOUT ITEM SEVEN AND THE OFFICERS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE WORKING AT THE ADVOCACY CENTER.
>> I WAS A CHAIRMAN OF THE COLLIN COUNTY CPS BOARD FOR A WHILE AND I KNOW THAT HAVING THOSE OFFICERS THERE, WORKING WITH THE PEOPLE IN CPS WERE VERY CRITICAL IN MAKING A LOT OF CHILD SAFETY ISSUES BE ADDRESSED.
WHAT WAS THE PROCESS TO DECIDE THAT WE WERE NO LONGER GOING TO HAVE THOSE OFFICERS THERE AND RELOCATE THEM, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO INEFFICIENCY OR INEFFECTIVENESS ON THAT?
>> WHEN YOU WERE ON THE CPS BOARD AT THE TIME, THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER PROBABLY RAN THEIR OPERATION OUT OF THAT LOCATION AT PARK IN LOS RIOS.
THAT'S NO LONGER THE CASE NOW.
THEY'VE ACTUALLY BUILT A NEW FACILITY UP IN MCKINNEY, AND THEY'RE GOING WHERE THE KIDS ARE, QUITE FRANKLY.
THE KIDS IN OUR SCHOOLS HAVE DROPPED OFF, AND THEY WANTED TO BE FURTHER NORTH.
THEY EXPLAINED THAT TO US AS SOON AS I GOT HERE AS CHIEF IN 2020, I WAS AWARE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
THEY STILL DO SOME THINGS THERE, BUT THE DIRECTOR AND MOST OF THAT STAFF HAS ACTUALLY MOVED UP TO MCKINNEY.
THE OPERATIONAL NEED FOR US TO HAVE THEM THERE IS NOT THE SAME AS IT WAS BEFORE.
WE CAN STILL DO FORENSIC INTERVIEWS THERE.
IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE KIDS, YEAH, THEY'VE GOT TO GO THERE TO DO THE FORENSIC INTERVIEWS, BUT WE CAN'T TAKE A SUSPECT THERE, SO THEY STILL GOT TO DRIVE BACK TO THE STATION.
IF THEY'RE AT THE STATION HAVING TO GO OVER THERE TO GO DO A FORENSIC INTERVIEW, IT'S GOING TO BE A WASH.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THERE'S REALLY NO OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY FOR US HAVING THEM THERE NOW, WHICH WAS THE CASE WHEN YOU PROBABLY WERE ON THE CPS BOARD.
>> YEAH, THAT WAS AND I KNOW THAT THERE WERE SOME TIMES WHERE HAVING THOSE OFFICERS THERE, WHENEVER THERE WAS VISITATION ISSUES OR OTHER THINGS,
[01:25:01]
THEY WERE ABLE TO INTERVENE AND INTERACT AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE STILL PROTECTING OUR CPS EMPLOYEES THAT ARE IN PLANO.>> THOSE INTERACTIONS DON'T HAPPEN AS MUCH OUT THERE NOW AS THEY DID PROBABLY WHEN YOU WERE ON THE BOARD.
>> YES, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> WELL, COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, ASKED ONE.
I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, THE CURRENT HEADQUARTERS THAT WE HAVE ONCE THE NEW ONE IS BUILT AND VACATED, WHAT IS THE USE GOING TO BE FOR THE CURRENT HEADQUARTERS? ARE WE LEASING THAT? DO WE OWN THAT?
>> THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR MY FACILITY DIRECTOR.
>> AGAIN, [INAUDIBLE] FACILITY'S DIRECTOR OR DIVISION MANAGER.
WE DO OWN THE BUILDING IF THAT WAS YOUR QUESTION.
WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT, THERE'S A TWO-PART MASTER PLAN THAT'S HAPPENED.
WE'VE ALREADY STUDIED POLICE IN 911.
WE ARE CURRENTLY STUDYING COURTS IN JAIL FOR THE 2029 BOND.
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE POLICE SIDE OF THAT BUILDING RIGHT NOW IS UNKNOWN.
PART OF THE DELIVERABLES OF THAT MASTER PLAN WILL BE SUGGESTIONS BY OUR CONSULTANTS ON WHAT VERSION DO WE DO FOR THE NEW JAIL AND THE NEW COURTS.
WHETHER WE USE THAT LAND, USE THAT BUILDING, IT'S UNKNOWN, BUT THAT WILL REMAIN IN THE CITY INVENTORY UNTIL WE DETERMINE THAT.
>> THE SECOND QUESTION IS SIMILAR.
THE TRAINING CENTER THAT WE'RE SHARING WITH RICHARDSON WHEN WE GET OUR OWN SPACE, AND I LIKE MY OWN ROOM DEAL.
DO WE VACATE THE JOINT AGREEMENT WITH RICHARDSON, OR DO WE STILL MAINTAIN THAT COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY OF RICHARDSON, WHICH I CAN SEE WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A BENEFIT TO IT?
>> YES, WHEN WE BUILD A NEW FACILITY, WE WILL STILL HAVE THAT PARTNERSHIP WITH RICHARDSON.
RICHARDSON HAS BOUGHT IN ON, AND THEY AGREE THAT WE DO NEED A NEW FACILITY.
HOW WE WOULD WORK IS WE WOULD BUILD THE NEW FACILITY ON THE SAME SITE, BASICALLY, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE OTHER END OF THE DRIVING PATH.
ON THE WEST END OF THAT FACILITY, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO TRAIN IN THE OLD FACILITY UNTIL THE NEW FACILITY IS BUILT, AND THEN WE WOULD MOVE INTO THE NEW FACILITY.
THAT'S ONE OF THE ADVANTAGES OF GOING WITH THE COMPLETELY NEW BUILD.
IT WOULD PROBABLY BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO CONTINUE TO TRAIN IN THE BUILDING WHEN THEY'RE ADDING SO MUCH MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO IT AND NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER PLACE TO GO TO TRAIN.
BY DOING A NEW BUILDING, THAT TAKES THAT PROBLEM OFF THE TABLE, AND WE CAN JUST STAY IN THE OLD FACILITY, PLANO AND RICHARDSON UNTIL THE NEW FACILITY IS BUILT.
>> MAKE SENSE CONSIDERING THE POPULATION GROWTH WE'VE SEEN IN PLANO. THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NEXT UP.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M CHRIS BIGGERSTAFF.
I'M THE FIRE CHIEF HERE IN PLANO.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE THREE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE ON THE BOND REFERENDUM.
THE FIRST ONE THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT IS STATION 14.
RIGHT NOW WE CURRENTLY HAVE 13 STATIONS, AND SO THIS WOULD BE A NEW STATION.
AS YOU SAW THE LOCATION EARLIER, AND YOU'LL SEE IT AGAIN IN THE SLIDES HERE, THERE AT PARK AND ALMA.
OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS, WE'VE SEEN OVER A 50% INCREASE IN EMERGENCY CALLS.
YOU CAN SEE THAT PATTERN ON THIS SLIDE.
AS YOU DIG DOWN A LITTLE DEEPER AS TO WHERE THOSE CALLS TAKE PLACE AND WHY WE WOULD PUT STATION 14 WHERE IT IS.
IF YOU LOOK AT STATIONS 1 AND 2, THEY'RE BY FAR OUR BUSIEST STATIONS.
STATION 1 IS ON AVENUE K AND THEN STATION 2 IS THERE NEXT DOOR TO BYRNES HIGH SCHOOL ON 15TH STREET.
ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WOULD WANT TO PUT A STATION 14 IN BETWEEN STATIONS 1 AND 2 IS TO HELP WITH THE RESPONSES THAT ARE GOING IN TWO STATIONS, DISTRICTS 1 AND 2.
WHEN YOU ARE AS BUSY AS THEY ARE, A LOT OF TIMES YOU'LL HAVE OTHER STATIONS THAT HAVE TO RESPOND INTO THEIR DISTRICT.
YOU CAN SEE THE EXAMPLE THERE ON DISTRICT 1, THE VERY FIRST ONE, WHICH IS MED3, THAT'S OUR STATION 3 AMBULANCE.
THERE AT SHERRYE SHALLOW, 612 TIMES IN 2023, THEY CAME INTO STATION 1'S DISTRICT.
WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT LEAVES AN OPENING IN STATION 3'S DISTRICT, THEN YOU FIND YOURSELF TRYING TO FILL THOSE OPENINGS ALL THE TIME.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME OF THAT, BUT IF YOU HAVE IT FREQUENTLY ENOUGH, THEN YOU'VE GOT A LONGER RESPONSE TIME BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT GAPS BECAUSE THEY'RE FILLING IN AT THESE TWO BUSIER STATIONS.
ANOTHER REASON THAT WE LOOKED AT THIS AREA WAS IN 2020, THERE WAS ROUGHLY 17,000 PEOPLE THERE AND THEN IN 2034,
[01:30:03]
WE'RE LOOKING AT OVER 24,000 PEOPLE THERE WITH THE INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE COLLIN CREEK AND HERITAGE CREEKSIDE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING ON THERE.YOU ADD MORE PEOPLE, YOU ADD MORE EMERGENCY CALLS.
AGAIN, THAT'S THE SAME MAP THAT YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE HERE OF OUR CURRENT DISTRICTS.
RIGHT NOW, YOU SEE THE BLACK LINES, THEY OUTLINE THE DISTRICTS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
THE PURPLE ONE WITH THE ONE ON AT THERE STATION 1, THE GREEN THERE STATION 2.
IN THIS MAP, YOU'LL SEE THE 14 IS RIGHT IN BETWEEN THOSE.
THAT WOULD BE THE DISTRICT THAT WOULD BE OUTLINED THERE.
ALL THOSE DOTS IN THERE REPRESENT EMERGENCY CALLS.
THEY DON'T REPRESENT ALL OF THEM BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE IN THE SAME LOCATION, SO THERE'S ONLY ONE DOT REPRESENTING THAT, BUT IF YOU GET A BUSY LOCATION, THERE COULD BE MORE CALLS THAN JUST WHAT WE ARE SHOWING THERE.
IN 2022, WHEN WE FIRST DID THIS STUDY, THEY MADE 2,472 CALLS TOOK PLACE IN WHAT WOULD BE STATION 14'S DISTRICT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE 13 STATIONS WE HAVE NOW, THAT WOULD BE THE SIXTH BUSIEST STATION.
IT WOULD BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE RIGHT NOW ALREADY, AND SO IT'S A RELATIVELY BUSY AREA.
THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS ONE, IT REALLY HELPS TO SEE WHAT THE BENEFIT WOULD BE OF HAVING STATION 14 THERE.
IF YOU PULL 1,458 CALLS OFF OF STATION 1, 769 CALLS OFF OF STATION 2, AND THEN YOU'LL SEE ADDITIONAL CALLS COMING OFF OF STATIONS 4 AND 6.
AGAIN, THAT GOES BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER WITH SOMEBODY HAVING TO COME INTO THAT DISTRICT AND FILL IN.
FOR ALL THOSE CALLS YOU'RE REMOVING FROM THERE, THAT HELPS.
THIS IS MY FAVORITE ONE OF ALL THE SLIDES IN HERE BECAUSE IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE FOCUS ON REALLY ON THREE THINGS WHEN A 911 CALL COMES IN, WE TRY TO GET THERE QUICK, DO GOOD WORK, AND SHOW COMPASSION.
THE GETTING THEIR QUICK PART, THIS IS A HUGE BENEFIT FOR US.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PURPLE HEXAGONS, THEY'RE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 3 AND 4 MINUTES OF A DECREASE IN RESPONSE TIME.
THAT'S HUGE CONSIDERING THAT OUR AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME RIGHT NOW IS 5 MINUTES AND 40 SECONDS.
IT MAKES SENSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHERE THE NUMBER 14 IS, OF COURSE, THE ONES CLOSE BY, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A DECREASE IN RESPONSE TIME TO THOSE.
BUT THEN WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THERE AT THE ONES THAT WOULD BE AROUND THAT PARK AND ALMA AREA, PART OF THE REASON YOU SEE SUCH IMPROVEMENT THERE IS BECAUSE IT'S A NO MAN'S LAND COMING FROM STATION 1 OR STATION 2.
IT'S NOT EASY TO GET TO AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET THERE QUICKLY, SO YOU SEE A PRETTY DRASTIC IMPROVEMENT IN THAT AREA.
REALLY, THE BENEFITS FOR US, YOU WOULD SEE DECREASED RESPONSE TIMES THAT WE JUST SHOWED.
YOU'D ALSO SEE THE CALL REDUCTION IN OUR TWO BUSIEST DISTRICTS, WHICH HELP WITH THE COVERAGE OF THOSE TWO DISTRICTS.
IN THAT NEW STATION, YOU'D HAVE AN ENGINE COMPANY AND A MED UNIT IN THAT NEW STATION.
SECOND PROJECT, STATION 8 REMODEL.
THAT'S AT HEDGE COCKS AND ROBINSON ROAD.
THERE HASN'T HAD A SIGNIFICANT REMODEL IN THAT TIME AND THERE'S REALLY A LIST ON THE NEXT TWO SLIDES OF THINGS THAT WAITED ON DOING, PUT THEM OFF FOR THIS POTENTIAL REMODEL.
BUT FOR US, OPERATIONALLY, THE BIGGEST THING IS THE ADDITION OF BAYS.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S TWO BAYS AT THIS STATION, YOU CAN SEE THE PICTURE THERE.
WE HAVE AN ENGINE AND A TRUCK THAT RESPOND FROM THERE.
AS THE CITY GETS BUSIER, WE'LL PROBABLY NEED AN AMBULANCE IN THAT AREA, AND SO THAT WOULD HELP US WITH ADDING AN AMBULANCE ALSO PROVIDES ADDITIONAL STORAGE AREA FOR OUR RESERVE APPARATUS.
BY DOING THAT, YOU WOULD ALSO HAVE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF BEDS AND THE SIZE OF THE STATION SO IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT REMODEL.
THEN OUR LAST ONE IS LAND ACQUISITION AND DESIGN, STATION 3, THAT'S AT SHERRYE DRIVE PLANO IT'S 48 YEARS OLD.
DON'T NEED A NEW STATION BECAUSE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND IT IS OLDER, BUT ALSO BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT THERE, IT'S OUR SMALLEST STATION BY FAR.
IN THE BAYS, PART OF THE PROBLEM WAS 48 YEARS AGO, OUR FIRE ENGINE TRUCK WERE A LOT SMALLER THAN THEY ARE NOW.
WE HAVE UNITS THAT YOU CAN'T PARK IN THERE, YOU CAN'T CLOSE THE DOORS FOR THEM.
IT'S A SMALLER STATION, AND SO OUR GOAL IN THIS BOND WOULD BE TO PURCHASE THE LAND AND THEN HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT BOND TO GET THE MONEY TO
[01:35:01]
BUILD A NEW STATION 3. ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?>> COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
>> I JUST HAVE ONE TINY QUESTION AND THIS IS MORE OPERATIONAL.
DO YOU STILL ROLL AN ENGINE EVERY TIME WE ROLL FOR A MEDICAL CALL?
>> WE DO NOT. WE HAVE TWO LEVELS.
ALL LEVEL ONE CALLS WE DO ARE LEVEL TWO CALLS.
WE JUST SEND AN AMBULANCE ON THOSE, AND WE DON'T EVEN RUN CODE THREE ON THOSE CALLS.
NO LIGHTS, NO SIREN, WE JUST SEND THEM TO THAT LOCATION.
IT'S BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT SUZY AND HER GROUP GET IN THE 911 CALL.
>> SIR, I WANT TO SAY AS A CITIZEN, I APPRECIATE THE EFFICIENCIES THAT YOU'RE DOING THERE.
I REMEMBER A WHILE BACK WE WERE DOING THAT AND THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW MUCH THAT WAS COSTING US.
I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS BEING DILIGENT WITH EVERY DOLLAR THAT YOU SPEND.
>> YES, SIR. IT HELPS US BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'VE GOTTEN BUSIER AND BUSIER, SO THAT DOES HELP US IN THAT AREA.
>> EVENING, CHIEF. IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWED HOW MUCH CALL VOLUME THE NEW STATION 14 WAS GOING TO PULL FROM THE EXISTING.
>> BY THE NEW STATION PULLING THE 14, 50, 87, 69, WHAT HAVE YOU, WOULD THAT BRING THOSE STATIONS CALL VOLUME DOWN TO RIGHT AROUND THE 2,400 THAT STATION 14 WILL BE ASSUMING OR.
>> IT DOESN'T GET THEM QUITE THAT FAR, BUT IT DOES GET THEM IN A LOT BETTER RANGE.
>> STATION 1, WE'LL GO BACK AND LOOK, BUT I THINK IT'S ABOUT 5,000 CALLS.
THAT WAS IT RIGHT THERE. IT'S FIVE.
IT WON'T GET THEM ALL THE WAY DOWN THERE IN LINE, BUT IT'LL HELP FROM WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS THINKING OF UPGRADING ADA DEFICIENCIES.
>> THAT'S STRAIGHT FROM MY HEART. THANK YOU.
I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, ALSO OUT OF CURIOSITY.
I ALREADY FORGOT THE NUMBER THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ALLOCATED TO THIS PROJECT.
THERE ARE A LOT OF NUMBERS IN THE BEGINNING. I ALREADY FORGOT.
BUT ON THE LAST SLIDE, THE ONE YOU SAY, THIS ITEM INCLUDES THE PROCUREMENT OF THE LAND AND THE DESIGN.
WHAT'S THE NUMBER, DO YOU REMEMBER?
>> THE LAST SLIDE, THE STATION NUMBER 3.
>> YEAH. YOU SAID IF APPROVED THIS ITEM WOULD INCLUDE SO WHICH ITEM, LIKE, WHAT'S THE NUMBER HERE? I FORGOT WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE.
>> IT WAS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION BUT IT'S ABOUT FOUR MILLION, AND ANY CHANCE 4.7.
>> YOU HAVE 4.7 FOR LAND ACQUISITION AND DESIGN.
>> THEN JUST ONE QUESTION FROM ME.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING CARE OF STATION 1.
I LIVE NOT TOO FAR FROM THERE, AND I KNOW THEY'RE INCREDIBLY BUSY HERE.
I'M COMING AND GOING ALL THE TIME. WILL THIS HELP? I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE HAD AND I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN IT HAPPENS, I KNOW YOU HAVE ISSUES OCCASIONALLY WITH GETTING ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
THIS PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL RELIEF FOR THOSE TIMES AS WELL?
>> YES, IT DOES BECAUSE EVERYTHING WE DO IS BASED ON RESPONSE TIME.
WE GO BACK AND WE'LL TRACK THAT AND THAT'S HOW THEY OUTLINE WHERE THE DISTRICT IS.
BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT MAKES SENSE.
WHEN YOU SEE THE DISTRICT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S REAL CROOKED, IT'S NOT STRAIGHT IN THERE.
IT'S ALL BASED ON WHO CAN GET THERE THE FASTEST.
IT WILL HELP THE AREAS THAT ARE SLOWED DOWN BY THE TRAIN BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON THAT PLUS GO BACK AND YOU LOOK AT THE PAST YEAR AND HOW LONG IT TOOK US TO GET TO THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT FIRE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIEF. APPRECIATE YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M ABBY OWENS.
I'M THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
I'M PRESENTING ON OUR REQUEST.
OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS HOUSED OVER HERE OFF OF WEST PLANO PARKWAY, WE'RE IN THE SOUTHERN CENTRAL SECTION OF THE CITY.
PUBLIC WORKS PROVIDES ALL OF THE FLEET MAINTENANCE FOR ALL THE CITY'S FLEET.
IN ADDITION, WE DO ALL OF THE WATER SEWER, STREETS, TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, SOLID WASTE, AND ALSO A COMPOST OPERATION.
WE HAVE FIVE TOTAL LOCATIONS RIGHT NOW, BUT THIS IS THE HUB OF ALL OF OUR OPERATIONS.
THIS IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE VEHICLES ARE, AND THEN LIKE I MENTIONED, ALL OF THE REPAIRS OCCUR TOO.
[01:40:01]
CURRENT FLEET SERVICES BUILDING WAS BUILT IN 1979, AND AS CHIEF MENTIONED, FIRE APPARATUSES WERE SMALLER, HEAVY EQUIPMENT TRUCKS WERE SMALLER.OVER TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ADDITIONS TO ADD MORE BAYS AND INCREASE CEILING HEIGHTS WHEN THAT'S HAPPENED.
BUT SINCE 2004, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE BUILDING.
WE ENGAGE THE SERVICES OF A CONSULTANT TO HELP US EVALUATE THE ENTIRE CAMPUS AND IDENTIFY WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE, WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
PARKING IS ONE OF OUR BIGGEST STRUGGLES, AND THEN IDENTIFY, COULD WE AS A PUBLIC WORKS OPERATION, STAY ON SITE, OR DO WE NEED TO CONSIDER SPLITTING PUBLIC WORKS INTO TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS? AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT STUDY, WHAT WE DETERMINED IS, WE CURRENTLY HAVE ABOUT 40,000 SQUARE FEET FOR PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS.
WE HAVE ABOUT 51,000 SQUARE FEET FOR OUR FLEET, AND THEN OUR PARKS OPERATION, I'LL SHOW YOU OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS A SMALL MAINTENANCE FACILITY ON THE CAMPUS AS WELL, IS JUST UNDER 8,000.
FROM A PARKING PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE JUST UNDER 700 PARKING SPACES.
KEEP IN MIND FOR PUBLIC WORKS FOR EVERY EMPLOYEE THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE THE PERSONAL VEHICLE THAT SHOWS UP, BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE A CREW CAB OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BACKO OR A HEAVY EQUIPMENT OF SOME KIND.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A ONE TO ONE.
IT'S USUALLY LIKE FOR EVERY TWO EMPLOYEES, WE'RE GOING TO NEED ANOTHER PARKING SPACE FOR WHATEVER THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT IS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN.
OUR CURRENT NEEDS RIGHT NOW IS WE CURRENTLY IN OUR OPERATIONS BUILDING, DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE.
WE'RE SQUEEZED IN THERE AND WE'VE GOT ABOUT 42,000 SQUARE FEET.
BASED UPON THE MASTER PLAN AND LOOKING AT WHAT WE THINK IS REALISTIC FROM A CONSERVATIVE GROWTH PERSPECTIVE FOR PUBLIC WORK STAFF, WE THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE AT ABOUT 45,000 SQUARE FEET.
MOST STAFF THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADD, IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE MORE ADDITION OF PARKING SPACE, MORE SO THAN THE ADDITION OF SQUARE FOOTAGE SPACE INSIDE.
FOR FLEET OPERATIONS, WE CURRENTLY HAVE 17 BAYS TO DO ALL OF THE MAINTENANCE ON THE FLEET VEHICLES.
IT'S DETERMINED THAT WE PROBABLY NEED CLOSER TO 24 AND THAT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A NIGHT SHIFT THAT WORKS ON ALL OF OUR SOLID WASTE TRUCKS.
BY MOVING TO 24 BAYS, WE COULD GET THEM OFF OF NIGHT SHIFT, WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO STAFF, AND ALSO DELAYS SOLID WASTE TRUCK REPAIRS.
WE TYPICALLY USE OUR RESERVE FLEET DURING THE DAYS SO THEY CAN KEEP RUNNING, AND THEN THE REPAIRS GET DONE AT NIGHT.
THAT WOULD HELP MAKE OUR OPERATIONS A LITTLE BIT MORE EFFICIENT.
THE PARKS OPERATION HAS ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE AS IS, BUT WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO RELOCATE THEM TO ANOTHER LOCATION BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THEIR SPOT THAT THEY'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
THEN CAMPUS PARKING, AS I MENTIONED, THAT'S OUR CHALLENGE, OUR 20 YEAR NEED NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OVER 1,000 PARKING SPACES FOR BOTH CITY VEHICLES AND PERSONAL VEHICLES.
THESE ARE SOME PICTURES OF THE LOCATION, JUST SO YOU COULD SEE.
AS I MENTIONED, THE BAY HEIGHTS AREN'T QUITE TALL ENOUGH, PLUS YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE HVAC DUCT WORK AND THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE AS WELL.
PAUL'S TEAM HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO REMOVE AND CONSOLIDATE WHERE POSSIBLE TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF SPACE ABOVE THE VEHICLES, BUT IT'S REALLY JUST NOT ENOUGH AT THIS POINT.
WE REALLY NEED SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER CEILINGS.
THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF SOME OF OUR LARGER FLEET VEHICLES, INCLUDING A FIRE APPARATUS.
SIMILARLY, OPENING UP A FIRE TRUCK AND TRYING TO WORK ON IT, YOU REALLY DO NEED THE LADDER ALL THE WAY UP AND EXTENDED.
OUR STAFF DO THE BEST THEY CAN AND MAKING SURE IT'S SAFE FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO WORK ON THOSE VEHICLES.
THEN ALSO PARKING, AS I MENTIONED.
IN THE TOP LEFT AND TOP RIGHT, ACTUALLY WE HAVE TO DOUBLE PARK A LOT OF OUR VEHICLES AT THE END OF THE WORKSHIFT DAY, AND SO THAT REQUIRES STRATEGICALLY BRINGING IN THE CREW AT THE SAME TIME SO THE NEXT ONE CAN COME PARK BEHIND IT AND THEN ROLLING THEM OUT THE NEXT MORNING AT THE SAME WAY.
WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT ALL OF OUR VEHICLES PARKED IN THE PARKING.
ON TOP OF THAT, I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE THESE VEHICLES AT THE BOTTOM ARE LOCATED, BUT IN THE TOP OF OUR LOCATION, WHERE PARKS CURRENTLY IS, WE HAVE AN OVERFLOW STORAGE AREA, AND THAT OVERFLOW STORAGE AREAS ALSO WE'RE HAVING TO PARK SOME OF OUR DUMP TRUCKS AND SOME OF BARKOS AND OTHER STORAGE ITEMS AS WELL.
WE'RE GROWING OUT OF OUR CURRENTLY DEVELOPED SPACE AREA.
THIS IS A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.
AT THE VERY TOP IS THAT LOCATION, I JUST SHOWED YOU WHERE WE HAVE OUR OVERFLOW PARKING AND OUTDOOR STORAGE.
JUST BELOW THAT IS THE PARKS MAINTENANCE BUILDING, WHERE THEY ALSO HAVE SOME OUTDOOR STORAGE AND VEHICLES AS WELL.
THE PINK HIGHLIGHTED AREA IS AN ENCORE EASEMENT.
THERE'S ACTUALLY TRANSMISSION LINES THAT RUN THROUGH THAT AREA, AND WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD ANY BUILDING STRUCTURES ON THAT LOCATION, BUT WE CAN USE IT FOR PARKING.
THAT'S WHERE MOST OF OUR PARKING IS FOR PERSONAL VEHICLES, AND SOME OF OUR FLEET VEHICLES ARE THERE AS WELL.
THEN JUST SOUTH OF THERE, THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS MAIN BUILDING AND THEN THE FLEET OPERATIONS BUILDING ARE THE TWO OTHER ONES.
WE LOOKED AT INSTEAD OF DOING ANY ADDITIONAL BUILDING TO ACTUALLY ADD ON TO WHERE THOSE CURRENT FACILITIES ARE.
THE CHALLENGE IS IT FURTHER TAKES AWAY OUR PARKING AND IT DOESN'T INCREASE ANY OUR PARKING COUNTS.
AFTER EVALUATING, WE WERE DETERMINED WE COULD STAY ON SITE.
IN ORDER TO STAY ON SITE THOUGH, WE WILL HAVE TO FIND A NEW LOCATION FOR PARKS MAINTENANCE, AND WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE TIME, AND WE HAVE SET ASIDE EXISTING FUNDING THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO BE ABLE TO RELOCATE THEM.
THEN AFTER THAT, WE BUILD THE FLEET BUILDING IN THE TOP CORNER, AND THEN WE WOULD TEAR DOWN THE EXISTING FLEET BUILDING.
THAT'S WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THIS BOND PACKAGE.
WE DIDN'T THINK REALISTICALLY IN ORDER TO KEEP OPERATIONS GOING,
[01:45:01]
WE COULD TEAR EVERYTHING DOWN OR BUILD ANYTHING ALL AT ONCE.IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A TWO PHASE APPROACH ACROSS TWO DIFFERENT BOND PROGRAMS. BUT BUILDING THE NEW FLEET BUILDING IN THE TOP LEFT WOULD ADD THE 24 BAYS THAT WE NEED.
WE MIGHT HAVE TO SEQUENCE THEM DEPENDING UPON HOW MUCH FUNDING IS ALLOCATED IN THIS BOND PACKAGE.
THEN AFTER THAT, THE CURRENT FLEET BUILDING THAT'S THERE NOW WOULD EVENTUALLY BE DEMOLISHIONED, ASSUMING THE 2029 BOND PACKAGE PASSES.
THEN IF THAT OCCURS, THEN WE WOULD BUILD THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING ON THAT LOCATION AND TEAR DOWN THE OLD ONE AND COULD START RE UTILIZING THE SITE AS NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT PARKING AND EFFICIENCIES THAT WE NEED.
>>YOU MENTIONED THIS IS GOING TO BE IN TWO PHASES.
IN OUR PACKET, THERE IS A NOTE THAT THIS IS ADDITIONAL TO 2017 AND 2019.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT A REFERENDUM WAS PASSED IN 2017 AND 2019 FOR THIS PARTICULAR?
>> ORIGINALLY, IN 2017 AND 919, THERE WAS A PACKAGE TO RENOVATE THE TWO BUILDINGS, AND IT WAS NOT NEARLY ENOUGH FUNDING THAT WAS GOING TO BE NEEDED.
THAT'S WHEN WE DECIDED THAT THE CONSULTANT WOULD COME IN AND HELP US EVALUATE THE LOCATIONS.
WHEN WE TRIED TO ADD SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE HERE AND SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE HERE, THE PARKING WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE OUR CHALLENGE, AND THAT WASN'T REALLY DISCOVERED, I THINK DURING THOSE ORIGINALS.
ALSO, PAUL CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THERE WAS FUNDING SET ASIDE TO DO SOME UPDATES FOR FUELING FACILITY AS WELL, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO IN THE FUTURE HERE AS WELL.
>> THIS 54 MILLION ASK IS GOING TO BE IN ADDITION TO 2017 AND 2019, AND THAT'S PHASE 1, MEANING THERE'S ANOTHER ADDITION COMING IN 2029, POTENTIALLY?
>> CORRECT. BETWEEN THE 2017 AND THE 2019 AND THEN THIS FUNDING, THERE WOULD BE ABOUT 59 MILLION, AND SOME OF THE FUNDING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE USING TO RELOCATE THE PARKS OPERATION SO THAT THEY CAN MOVE OFF OF THAT CURRENT SITE THAT'S THERE BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET THEM RELOCATED AND IN THEIR NEW SPACE BEFORE WE COULD START ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THAT LOCATION IN THE TOP CORNER.
>> WE DON'T HAVE IT'S OUT OF A PURVIEW ON COST AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
IT'S MORE CONFORMANCE TO THE PLAN.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> I'M GOING TO BE HERE FROM MY SLIDE.
SIMILAR TO STATION 3, WE ARE LOOKING TO GET LAND TO BUY MONEY TO BUY THE LAND AND PAY FOR THE DESIGN OF FACILITIES MAINTENANCE.
CURRENTLY, WE ARE HOUSED NEXT TO THE POLICE TRAINING ACADEMY IN THE OLD ANIMAL SHELTER.
WE HAVE STORAGE UNITS, WE RENT ALL OVER THE CITY FOR ALL THE EXTRA CEILING TILES AND FAN BELTS AND EVERY OTHER THING WE STORE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY LOCKER ROOM SPACES FOR OUR FOLKS.
WE'D LIKE TO CONSOLIDATE TO ONE LOCATION, WHAT THE PROPER STORAGE FACILITIES AND THE PROPER LOCKER ROOM FACILITIES FOR OUR FOLKS. ANY QUESTIONS?
>> TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU RIGHT.
YOU'RE IN THE OLD ANIMAL SHELTER?
>> YES, SIR. WE EVEN HAVE THE OLD CREMATORIUM STILL THERE AS THE BACKUP CREMATORIUM.
>> THAT'S AN INTERESTING OFFICE FEATURE.
>> THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW.
>> ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PART OF IT?
>> SEEING NONE. WHO'S NEXT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SHUT OFF THE MONITOR.
>> LIBBY HOLT. FOLKS DIRECTOR OF LIBRARIES.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M LIBBY HOLTMANN.
I'M DELIGHTED TO SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR FIVE LIBRARIES IN PLANO.
BACK IN 2017, WE WERE ABLE TO RENOVATE TWO OF OUR LOCATIONS, HARRINGTON LIBRARY, AND DAVIS LIBRARY, WITH THE BOND, AND THEY'RE GORGEOUS.
WE ARE ASKING TO IMPROVE THREE OTHER LOCATIONS, OUR FINAL THREE.
SCHIMELPFENIG LIBRARY HAS A 43-YEAR OLD BUILDING.
WE'RE LOOKING TO RENOVATE THE REST ROOM SO THAT THEY COMPLY WITH ACCESSIBILITY CODES.
WE'D LIKE TO REPLACE THE CARPET, PAINT, JUST SOME GENERAL TOUCH UP, AND THEN ADD STUDY PODS.
IF YOU'VE BEEN TO A CORPORATE CAMPUS, YOU'VE SEEN GLASS STUDY PODS.
WHAT WE'VE SEEN WHEN WE RENOVATED THE OTHER TWO LOCATIONS IS HIGH DEMAND AND USED BY THE PUBLIC OF STUDY ROOMS. THEY'RE AT NO CHARGE.
THEY JUST USE THEIR LIBRARY CARD AND RESERVE THEM.
[01:50:03]
THEY ALSO NEED TO REPLACE THE ELEVATOR AT SCHIMELPFENIG LIBRARY.IT'S THE SAME THING, RENOVATING RESTROOMS TO COMPLY WITH THE ACCESSIBILITY CODES.
REFRESH FINISHES, REMOVE THE WALL COVERINGS THAT ARE PEELING AND ADD PAINT.
WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD STUDY PODS AS WELL TO THAT LOCATION.
THEN PARR LIBRARY, WHICH I ALWAYS THINK OF AS BEING BRAND NEW, BUT IT'S 24-YEARS-OLD. TIME GOES QUICK.
THE SAME THING, RENOVATING THE RESTROOMS, REFRESHING THE FINISHES, ADDING STUDY PODS, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR LIBRARIES.
>> THANK YOU. LET ME SEE IF I GET THIS.
YOU HAVE THREE BUILDINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT REMODELING, ONE'S 43-YEARS-OLD, ONE'S 35, AND ONE'S 24.
>> I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO EVERYBODY TALK ABOUT ALL THESE NEW FACILITIES THEY'RE GETTING AND IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE LIBRARIES CONTINUE TO DO MORE WITH LESS.
I'M CONTINUALLY ASTONISHED AT HOW WE CONTINUE TO HAVE FIVE LIBRARIES, BUT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THE USAGE OF THEM CONTINUE TO GROW.
BUT WE DON'T FIND THAT WE CAN EQUIP YOU A LITTLE BIT BETTER WITH UPDATED OR NEW FACILITIES AS A LOT OF THESE OTHERS ARE GETTING.
WOULD IT BE A DREAM OF THE LIBRARY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A NEW FACILITY RATHER THAN HAVING TO UPDATE A 43-YEAR-OLD?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
THIS IS ASKED ALSO BY THE COMMITTEE AS WELL, AND I CALLED MARK ISRAEL SENT UP.
WHAT'S DECIDED FOR 2025 IS WHAT FACILITIES IS ABLE TO WORK THROUGH AND DELIVER UPON, AND THAT IS WHAT WE'VE ASKED FOR AS PART OF THE PROJECT, AS YOU'VE SEEN, WE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS ACROSS THE CITY AND SO THIS IS WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
>> I TOTALLY GET IT AND I DIDN'T MEAN TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.
YOU KNOW VERY WELL. I'M A HUGE FAN OF THE LIBRARY.
I WANT TO JUST MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I'M IMPRESSED THAT YOUR STAFF AND EVERYBODY THAT'S IN THE LIBRARIES ALWAYS SEEMS TO DO MORE WITH LESS AND HITS THE BALL OUT OF THE BALLPARK, TRYING TO ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE CURRENT ON WHAT'S GOING ON, THAT YOU'RE MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS OF PLANO WHILE ALSO DOING IT CLOSER TO A SACRIFICIAL PLACE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'VE DONE AND WHAT YOU'VE BROUGHT PERSONALLY TO THE LIBRARIES IN YOUR YEARS ALREADY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, AND ON BEHALF OF TEAM PPL, IT'S OUR DELIGHT.
WE SAW 300,000 MORE PEOPLE LAST YEAR THAN WE'VE SEEN, AND IT'S JUST A JOY FOR THE PEOPLE COMING THROUGH.
WE JUST WANT TO CREATE A GREAT EXPERIENCE.
WE WOULD LOVE TO UPDATE WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED IF POSSIBLE.
>> THE INCREASES ARE WHAT I'M HIGHLIGHTING THAT YOU'RE DOING WITH THE SAME SPACE THAT YOU'VE HAD BASICALLY FOR A LONG TIME, 24 YEARS. THANK YOU.
>> I THINK YOU HEAR THAT WE HAVE A SOFT SPOT FOR LIBRARIES, GIVEN THAT DAVIS HAS HOSTED US SO GRACIOUSLY FOR QUITE A WHILE PLEASURE.
LIKE PIN IT ON MIKE'S POINT, 43 YEARS, 24 YEARS.
WHAT'S THE USE LIFE? FOR A LIBRARY.
SHOULD WE EXPECT TO REFRESH DAVIS AND WHAT HAVE YOU?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. TO ME, THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE REALLY DONE SOMETHING BIG.
MY GUESS WOULD BE I'M GOING TO DEFER TO PAUL A LITTLE BIT.
MY GUESS IS WHEN THE USE SHOWS AND WHEN IT'S NEEDED, AND WE LOOK AT HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE COMING TO USE THE FACILITY, WE LOOK AT HOW IT WEARS.
WE SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE EACH AND EVERY DAY, SO WE JUST WANT IT TO LOOK THE BEST IT CAN POSSIBLY LOOK FOR THE COMMUNITY.
>> THESE LIBRARIES HAVE HAD SOME COSMETIC RENOVATIONS IN THEIR HISTORY.
THE RESTROOMS ARE PROBABLY WHAT NEEDS THE MOST HELP OTHER THAN MEETING HER NEEDS NOW WITH THE STUDY PODS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THAT.
WE TEND TO WANT TO ABOUT A 15 YEAR CYCLE ON MOST FINISHES, ESPECIALLY RESTROOMS.
WE JUST WENT THROUGH PARKING VARIANCES, GALORE.
THAT SEEMS TO SUGGEST THAT OUR SCHOOL POPULATION IS DECLINING.
ARE YOU NOT SEEING THAT TRANSLATING INTO THE LIBRARY USE?
>> NO, WE'RE NOT. WE'RE WELL UTILIZED, STILL A LOT OF FAMILIES.
BUT REALLY WHERE OUR GROWING POPULATION IS WHAT YOU'LL SEE
[01:55:02]
ALSO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE CITY ITSELF IS OUR SENIOR POPULATION.WHEN YOU ASK ABOUT EXPANSION JUST TO BE FRANK, WHERE WE'RE EXPANDING IS OUTREACH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AWARE, BUT WE HAVE TWO VEHICLES NOW THAT OUR FRIENDS FUNDED FOR US, AND WE GO OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY TO DELIVER CLASSES AND PROGRAMS, AND WE NOW HAVE ROUTES WHERE WE GO OUT TO SENIOR RETIREMENT HOMES AND WE DELIVER SERVICES ONCE A MONTH, AND WE HELP THEM WITH DIGITAL LITERACY AND CLASSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'RE MORE FOCUSED ON GETTING OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY AND WITH OUR FIVE LOCATIONS, HOW OUR ORIGINATOR, MS. DAVIS PLAN THEM.
THEY'RE VERY WELL SITUATED ACROSS THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK THEY'RE VERY ACCESSIBLE THANKS TO OUR FRIENDS IN PARKS ON THE TRAILS.
IT'S A REALLY NICE MATCHUP, BUT YOU'LL SEE US ON THE STREET IN OUR BLUE VANS OR WHEREVER THERE'S BUBBLES, THAT'S WHERE WE'LL BE. IT'S OUR SIGNATURE.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT LIBRARIES?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHO'S NEXT?
>> GOOD EVENING, ABBY OWENS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AGAIN.
I'LL KICK OFF OUR REFERENDUM ON STREET PROJECTS.
SOME OF THESE SLIDES YOU ALL HAVE SEEN THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE TALKED TO YOU ALL ABOUT DURING THE CIP PROGRAM.
OVERALL, THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY BOND REQUEST FOR STREETS RELATED PROJECTS.
PUBLIC WORKS FUNDING IS ONLY REQUESTED FOR THE TOP 2 ITEMS, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE THE ARTERIAL STREET REPAIRS AND RESIDENTIAL STREET AND ALLEY REPAIRS.
THE REST OF THEM, CALEB THORNHILL OUR DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, HE'LL TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LATER.
JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THE CITIZEN SURVEY IN 2022, MAINTENANCE OF CITY STREETS WAS STILL THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY OVERWHELMINGLY.
THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT SPECIFICALLY THE QUESTION RELATED TO PERCEPTIONS OF THE CURRENT SERVICE LEVEL.
THE QUESTION WAS, HOW DO YOU THINK WE'RE DOING ON THOROUGHFARES, ON RESIDENTIALS, ALLEYS, AND SIDEWALKS? IT FEELS LIKE MOST PEOPLE THINK IT'S ABOUT RIGHT.
WITH THAT IN MIND, OUR BOND REQUEST FOR THIS GO AROUND IS VERY MUCH IN LINE WHAT WE ASKED FOR LAST TIME WITH THE INCREASED ESCALATION COST ESTIMATES.
IT'S NOT THE SAME DOLLAR FIGURE, IT'S HIGHER, BUT WE'RE THINKING WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO ABOUT THE SAME AND A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN ONE PLACE.
>> THIS IS A MAP OF OUR STREET NETWORK AGE JUST TO SHOW YOU, IT'S BASED UPON HOW THE CITY DEVELOPED, AND YOU CAN SEE THE RED AREAS ARE OUR OLDER STREET NETWORKS, AND WHEN THEY WERE INSTALLED IN THE GREEN AREAS ARE THE NEWER ITEMS. 95% OF OUR STREETS ARE CONCRETE WITH MOST OF THEM BEING ABOUT 30-YEARS-OLD OR MORE.
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.
PUBLIC WORKS GOAL IS TO STAY ON TOP OF STREET MAINTENANCE TO WHERE WE STAY UP IN THAT GREEN AREA, WHICH AVERAGE AGE OF A STREET IS MEANT TO BE SHOWN ON THIS USING THE BLACK LINE.
BY DOING PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE TYPE TREATMENTS, REALLY, WATER IS THE ENEMY OF STREETS.
REALLY WHAT WE FOCUS ON IS KEEPING WATER OUT OF THE JOINTS AND OUT OF ANY CRACKS.
AS LONG AS WE CAN DO PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE, WE STAY UP IN THE GREEN AREA.
THEN YOU'LL SEE THE POTHOLES DEVELOP AND YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE DETERIORATION IN INDIVIDUAL PANELS.
THAT'S WHEN WE GO IN AND WE DO WHAT WE CALL REHAB.
THAT'S GOING TO BE THE ORANGE LINE MEANT TO BE DEPICTED THERE.
ALL THAT MEANS IS WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND DO PANEL REPLACEMENTS OF THOSE STREETS.
NOT THE WHOLE THING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TEAR OUT ALL THE CONCRETE AND REPAIR IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SUBGRADE.
THIS IS GOING TO BE THOSE PANEL SECTIONS.
THEN IF WE FALL BEHIND ON THAT, THEN THAT'S WHEN IT GOES INTO RECONSTRUCTION.
RECONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO BE COMPLETE LANE CLOSURES, WHERE YOU'LL HAVE TO SHIFT TO ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD OR THE OTHER, AND IT WOULD BE A FULL REBUILD.
ENGINEERING DOES THAT IN NEIGHBORHOODS VERY FREQUENTLY, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL SEE WHERE THEY HAVE AN ENTIRE ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD CLOSED AND THEN THEY HAVE THE OTHER SIDE CLOSED.
OUR GOAL IS TO STAY IN THAT GREEN AND ORANGE AREA, AND ONCE IT GETS TO A POINT WHERE PUBLIC WORKS CAN'T MAINTAIN IT, THAT'S WHEN WE'LL HAND THOSE OVER TO ENGINEERING, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY WOULD DO THE DESIGN AND TAKE ON THE PROJECT FROM THERE.
THIS IS A HIGHLIGHT OF WHAT PUBLIC WORKS HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN SQUARE FOOT REPLACEMENT.
YOU'LL NOTICE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN 22/23 AND 23/24.
A LOT OF THAT IS DUE TO THE BOND REFERENDUM THAT WAS PASSED IN '21.
TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE SAY ARTERIAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION, WE'RE ASKING FOR ABOUT 130 MILLION HERE.
ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE ON THIS MAP, WHAT THIS IS SHOWING IS WE DO STREET INSPECTION SCORES, AND WE HAVE THEM FOR OUR STREETS, INCLUDING ARTERIALS AND RESIDENTIALS.
OUR NEXT ONE WE'LL ACTUALLY DO LATER IN 2025.
BUT WHAT THIS SHOWED IS WHEN THE STREETS WERE DRIVEN AND RATED USING A METHODOLOGY WITH AN ENGINEERING FIRM, THESE ARE THE AVERAGE APPEARANCES OF WHAT THEY DETERMINE THE CONDITION OF THE STREETS WERE.
ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU'VE SEEN THIS ANIMATION BEFORE, SO BE KIND, IT'S MEANT TO BE ANIMATION SAID LOOSELY, BUT THIS IS AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT WE DO FROM A REPAIR ON AN ARTERIAL.
WE'LL GO IN, WE IDENTIFY CERTAIN PANELS THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED.
THE CONCRETE IS REPLACED, IT DOES NOT MATCH, AND THEN WE PUT DOWN AN ULTRA THIN OVERLAY ON TOP.
THIS $130 MILLION IS AIMING AT DOING THE CONCRETE REPAIRS
[02:00:04]
ON OUR MAJOR ARTERIALS AND THEN FOLLOWING UP WITH THIS ULTRA OVERLAY.AS I MENTIONED, WITH WATER BEING THE ENEMY OF STREETS, YOU WANT TO GO IN, WE PUT THIS OVERLAY ON TOP OF IT, AND THAT'S MEANT TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE CONCRETE, PROVIDE THAT EMULSION LAYER, WHICH IS WHAT PROTECTS WATER FROM GETTING INTO IT.
THEN THE ULTRATHIN ASPHALT OVERLAY IS LIKE THE FROSTING, BUT IT PROVIDES A MUCH BETTER RIDE.
AFTER WE'VE DONE THAT, YOU CAN SEE WE USE CARTOGRAPH AS OUR ASSET MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE.
WHAT CARTOGRAPH DOES IS IT TAKES THE SCORE THAT WAS PROVIDED FROM THESE STREET INSPECTIONS IN '20 AND '21, AND BASED UPON WHAT WE CALL TREATMENTS ARE DONE TO THE ROADS, WHETHER IT'S JUST CONCRETE REPAIRED OR CONCRETE REPAIRED AND OVERLAID, IT DOES AUTOMATIC CALCULATIONS OF WHAT THE STREET SCORE SHOULD BE.
LIKE I MENTIONED, WE WILL RE DRIVE OUR STREETS AT THE END OF NEXT YEAR, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, OUR BEST CASE ESTIMATES HERE, YOU CAN SEE A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN WHAT WE INSPECTED IN 2020.
AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN INVESTING A LOT IN "ROAD REPLACEMENT".
THEN NOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BASED UPON OUR ESTIMATES FROM REPAIRING THE CONCRETE AND THEN INSTALLING THE ULTRATHIN OVERLAY.
I WILL JUST ALSO MENTION WITH THE RECONSTRUCTION, THIS INCLUDES AN 8% ESTIMATED COST FOR INCREASE FOR REPAIRS.
THEN BECAUSE ARTERIAL OVERLAYS WE'VE ONLY BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, WE ADDED ABOUT A 10% CONTINGENCY FOR WHAT WE THINK THOSE COSTS WILL BE YEAR OVER YEAR AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROGRAM.
THIS IS OUR OVERLAY PROGRESS TO DATE.
WE PILOTED INDEPENDENCE ROAD FROM 15TH TO PARK AND THAT'S WHAT WAS DONE IN '17 AND '18, AND THEN THE BOND REFERENDUM IS WHERE WE ADDED THE ADDITIONAL ROADS.
IF YOU ADD UP WHAT WE'VE COMPLETED SO FAR, IT'S AROUND 45.6 MILES. OUR GOAL WAS 50.
PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE WE HAD TO DELAY SOME OF THE OVERLAY DUE TO SOME WEATHER SHIFT CHANGES THAT HAPPENED THIS PAST YEAR AND SOME CHALLENGES WE HAD WITH RAIN.
WE'LL COMPLETE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT OVER THIS NEXT YEAR.
THAT'S WHY 24/25 LOOKS SO BIG BECAUSE WE HAD TO MOVE SOME OF THEM AROUND.
OUR 2025 BOND ESTIMATES IS WE THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO COST US ON AVERAGE ACROSS ALL FOUR OF THE YEARS, ABOUT $3.45 MILLION TO DO THE REPAIR AND THE OVERLAY.
THEN WE THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET TO ABOUT 38 MILES.
THAT WE'LL NOT HAVE EVERYTHING OVERLAY THAT WE WOULD LIKE, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE QUITE A FEW MILES THAT WILL BE REMAINING.
OUR PLAN RIGHT NOW IS ABOUT OR ABOUT A 15 YEAR PLAN FROM THE TIME WE STARTED IN '21 TO THE TIME WE'LL BE ABLE TO FINISH.
ALL OF THAT, THOUGH, AS I WILL SHOW YOU HERE, IS VERY DEPENDENT UPON OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING ON.
THE GREEN SHOWS EVERYTHING WE'VE COMPLETED SO FAR.
THE BLUE IS WHAT WE HAVE PLANNED FOR 24/25 THAT WE HAD TO CARRY OVER.
THEN ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE IN GRAY ARE EITHER GOING TO BE UNDER REPAIR SOON OR CURRENTLY UNDER REPAIR, AND THEN WE'LL BE OVERLAID HERE IN THE NEXT 4-5 YEARS.
THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF PRIVATE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING ON.
LIKE PLANO PARKWAY, THE AREA THAT'S IN GRAY.
WE DON'T KNOW WHEN EXACTLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO OVERLAY THAT.
THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT HAS SOME WORK BEING DONE THERE.
IN ADDITION, LEGACY DRIVE ENGINEERING HAS BEEN DOING SOME SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, SO THAT DELAYS OUR ABILITY TO GET THERE AND REPAIR AND DO OVERLAYS AS WELL.
THIS IS A BALLPARK OF WHERE WE'LL BE HEADING.
BUT ON TOP OF THAT, AS WE HAVE OTHER ROADS THAT ARE REPAIRED AND READY TO HAVE BE OVERLAY, WE CAN SHIFT THOSE AROUND.
IT'S OUR GUIDELINE WE'RE WORKING OFF OF.
ANY SECTIONS THAT YOU SEE THAT HAVE A GAP.
FOR INSTANCE, PLANO PARKWAY FROM ABOUT PRESTON ROAD OVER TO 75, THERE IS A MAJOR SEWER LINE PROJECT THAT ENGINEERING IS DOING AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT'S GOING TO DIRECTLY IMPACT THE PAVEMENT, SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT PLAN FOR REPAIRS OR OVERLAY IN THIS PACKAGE FOR NOW.
BUT AGAIN, AS THINGS SHIFT AROUND, WE MOVE IT.
THE BOND REFERENDUM IS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO THE MOST NEEDED AREAS AT THE TIME BASED UPON OUR EVALUATIONS.
THE OTHER PART OF OUR REPAIR IS FOR RESIDENTIAL STREET AND ALLEYS.
WE'RE ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN $92 MILLION.
WHAT WE DO THESE IS WE CALL THEM NEIGHBORHOOD SWEEPS AND THEY'RE BASED UPON NEIGHBORHOOD ZONES, AND IT'S BASED ON THE AVERAGE AGE OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STREETS IN THE AREA AND WHAT THE DETERIORATION OF THE STREETS, ALLEYS, AND SIDEWALKS ARE.
A LOT OF TIMES WE SPEND A SIGNIFICANT PORTION WORKING ON ALLEYS AND ALSO MEETING ADA REQUIREMENTS.
WHEN WE GO IN AND DO A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, IT REQUIRES US TO BRING THAT AREAS UP TO ADA COMPLIANCE, AND SO WE END UP PUTTING IN A LOT OF RAMP MODIFICATIONS AT THAT MOMENT.
TYPICALLY, WE SPEND ABOUT $5.3 MILLION PER PROJECT, AND EACH ZONE IS TYPICALLY TWO MAYBE THREE PROJECTS.
IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT HAS TO BE DONE.
THE CURRENT PACKAGE THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR WOULD COVER ABOUT EIGHT DIFFERENT ZONES OVER THOSE TOTAL OF FOUR YEARS.
THAT MEANS WE'D BE DOING 16 PROJECTS TOTAL, AND THAT'S HOW WE WOULD GET THROUGH THOSE EIGHT ZONES IN THAT TIME FRAME.
THIS IS A PICTURE OF THESE ZONES.
IF YOU EVER LOOK AT OUR COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS,
[02:05:01]
IT'LL SAY WE'RE GOING TO Q4 OR WE'RE GOING TO P3.THESE ARE WHAT THESE ITEMS ARE REFERRING TO.
ANYTHING THAT HAS A BLACK DATE ON IT, THOSE ARE PLACES THAT WE'VE ALREADY BEEN AND THAT'S WHEN THE RECENT PROJECT WAS EITHER COMPLETED OR IT'S CURRENTLY IN CONSTRUCTION.
YOU'LL SEE '24 AND '25 ON THERE.
ANYTHING IN RED ARE LOCATIONS THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN YET, WHICH ARE ALSO HIGHLIGHTED IN THAT BLUE TEAL COLOR, AND THAT'S THE AVERAGE AGE OF WHEN THE STREETS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WERE INSTALLED.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'VE GOT THOSE REMAINING BLUE AREAS LEFT.
IT ENDS UP BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN EIGHT, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE REALLY NEW AREAS.
FOR INSTANCE, J11 IS ONE THAT WE ORIGINALLY WERE PLANNING ON GETTING TO OVER THE NEXT YEAR, BUT WHEN WE GO OUT AND DRIVE THAT LOCATION, THE STREETS ARE IN REALLY GREAT CONDITION.
WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF SIDEWALK NEEDS.
THOSE ARE ONES THAT WE MIGHT NOT SPEND BOND FUNDING ON.
WE WOULD SEND A DIFFERENT CONTRACTOR OUT THERE TO JUST HIT THOSE AREAS THAT ARE NEEDED.
BUT THIS IS OUR MAP OF WHERE WE WOULD BE SPENDING THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING MOVING FORWARD.
>> COMMISSION, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER LINGENFELDER.
>> FOR THE ASPHALT OVERLAYS, YOU SAID ULTRATHIN, BUT IS THAT INCH AND A HALF, TWO INCHES? WHAT ARE YOU GUYS ACTUALLY DOING OUT THERE?
>> ULTRATHIN. IT'S THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH ACTUALLY.
SOME SPOTS IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT THICKER.
>> IT IS VERY ULTRATHIN, AND THAT'S WHY WE STILL HAVE THE CONCRETE UNDERNEATH.
THAT'S WHY I SAY, THE EMULSION LAYER THAT GOES DOWN FIRST IS WHAT'S GOING TO PROTECT IT FROM ANY OF THE WATER GETTING INTO THE JOINTS OR ANY OF THE CRACKS.
THEN ON TOP OF THAT WE PUT THAT.
THAT'S REALLY JUST FOR RIDE QUALITY AND THEN PROTECTING IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
OUR GOAL IS TO COMPLETE THE ARTERIALS THAT WE HAVE ON OUR MAP IN 15 YEARS.
BY DOING THAT, WE'LL THEN GO BACK AND WE'LL MILL IT, WE'LL MAKE ANY REPAIRS THAT ARE NEEDED THERE AND THEN DO ANOTHER OVERLAY ON TOP.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF THOSE STREETS AS LONG AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.
>> I TRAVEL PARKER ROAD QUITE A LOT, AND IT'S UNBELIEVABLE.
I GO OUT OF MY WAY TO DRIVE IT NOW. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
>> WELL, I STILL AVOID CERTAIN PARTS OF PARKER.
>> YOU CAN DRIVE IN THE LEFT LANE.
>> MY QUESTION, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE LONG TERM FINANCIAL IMPACT AND THE REDUCTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING.
WHAT ARE YOUR ESTIMATES FOR THE LONG TERM FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE OVERLAYS FOR ALL OF OUR CONSTRUCTION COSTS AS IT RELATES TO OUR ROADS?
>> WELL, I LEFT MY CRYSTAL BALL AT HOME, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE'VE BEEN RUNNING THE NUMBERS TO TRY TO COMPARE, WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS TO TRYING TO DO THIS? AND I WAS TRYING TO FIND MY SLIDE THAT I HAVE IN OUR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION.
BUT ESSENTIALLY, BY ADDING THE OVERLAY ON TOP OF IT, MAKING THOSE REPAIRS, WE THINK THAT WE CAN PROLONG THOSE LIFE OF THE STREETS TO THEN DO ANOTHER MILL AND THEN REOVERLAY AGAIN BEFORE WE HAVE TO GO BACK IN AND HOPEFULLY DO ANY MAJORS.
IT'S A PILOT. WE'RE WATCHING THE ONE ON INDEPENDENCE REALLY CLOSELY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'VE NOTICED.
ORIGINALLY, OUR PLAN WAS THAT WAS PUT DOWN IN 2017.
WE THOUGHT IN 10 YEARS, WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND MILL IT AND THEN OVERLAY IT AGAIN, AND THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD REALLY BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT THAT CONCRETE UNDERNEATH IS LIKE.
WE'RE NOTICING IT'S DOING REALLY WELL.
WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE OUR JOINT SEAL CONTRACTOR GO OUT THERE PROBABLY NEXT YEAR AND GO AND SEAL, THERE'S LONGITUDINAL CRACKING, THERE'S REFLECTIVE CRACKING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT TAKEN CARE OF, AND THEN SEE HOW MUCH LONGER WE CAN GET.
FARMERS BRANCH HAS BEEN DOING THIS LONGER THAN WE HAVE, AND THEY'VE SEEN REALLY GOOD SUCCESS ON IT.
EVEN WHEN WE'VE HAD TO CUT INTO THE OVERLAY TO DO A WATERLINE REPAIR.
WE POUR BACK THE CONCRETE LEVEL WITH IT AND IT CONTINUES AND MOVES ON.
WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE GOOD SUCCESS WITH IT, BUT WE'RE ONE OF THE PEOPLE LEADING THAT CHARGE.
BUT OVERALL, WHEN WE HAD RUN OUR NUMBERS FOR COMPARISON, WE HAD FOUND THAT IF WE WERE GOING TO DO IT, I THINK IT WAS EVERY 10 YEARS, IT WAS GOING TO COST US, I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT AGAIN, PER MILE, IT WAS GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS WHEN WE EXTENDED IT OUT TO 15.
BUT I CAN HAVE SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS SHARED IN.
>> NO. MY POINT WAS IS THAT YOU GUYS ARE REALLY NOT ONLY ON THE LEADING EDGE OF THIS STUFF, BUT YOU'RE TAKING VERY SERIOUSLY EVERY TAX DOLLAR THAT WE'RE SPENDING ON THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FULLY DRAW OUT AS MUCH TIME OUT OF THESE ROADS BEFORE WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK AND REDO THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
AS I'VE WATCHED THIS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN CURIOUS ABOUT IS THE LONG-TERM FINANCIAL IMPACTS THAT IT'S GOING TO BRING TO ALL OF PLANO IN BEING ON THE FRONT EDGE OF THIS.
>> I WILL SAY WHEN YOU LOOK BACK AT OUR ORIGINAL ESTIMATES, IF WE ARE TO HAVE TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE ROAD NETWORK, MORE.
THE COST TO REPLACE THE STREET IN 2020.
THE COST TO REPLACE OUR STREET NETWORK FOR ARTERIALS WOULD HAVE BEEN 1.8 BILLION DOLLAR.
IF WE HAD TO GO IN AND REPLACE ALL OF OUR ARTERIALS NOW, JUST FOUR YEARS LATER, IT'D BE 2.3 BILLION.
THOSE REPLACEMENT COSTS ESCALATE CONSISTENTLY AND SO TO REPAIR COSTS, BUT IT'S MUCH MORE FEASIBLE TO BE ABLE TO DO SMALL REPAIRS AND MAKE THOSE REPLACEMENTS AS POSSIBLE.
>> THAT WAS MY POINT IS THAT LONG-TERM COMMITMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING TO MAKING THE ROADS NICE AND
[02:10:02]
SMOOTH AS WELL AS EXTENDING THE CITIZENS DOLLAR THAT'S BEING SPENT THERE.I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING VERY HARD AT THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE KNOW THE ROADS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S A GOOD RIDE QUALITY AS WELL.
>> I HAVEN'T HAD TO REPLACE TWO TIRES IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS.
[LAUGHTER] IT'S IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER SLIDE THAT THE SLIDE YOU JUST CAME FROM, SHOW THE 50% CONSTRUCTED IN THE 1900S OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
>> ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF IT?
>> YEAH. THE 50% WAS CONSTRUCTED LIKE 30 YEARS AGO.
IF THIS IS PASSED, IT TAKES A YEAR, 02, 3, 4, 5 YEARS TO COMPLETELY UTILIZE THIS CAPACITY.
DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THAT NUMBER BECOMES IN FIVE YEARS? DO WE EAT INTO 10% OF WHAT IS LEFT FOR THE 30 YEAR STREET NETWORK?
>> THE 50% OF STREETS CONSTRUCTED OVER 30 YEARS AGO.
UNLESS WE WERE TO COMPLETELY REPLACE A STREET, WE DON'T COUNT THAT.
WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE JUST DOING REPAIRS TO IT.
THE STREETS THAT WERE IN RED, THEY'RE STILL RED IF IT HASN'T BEEN COMPLETELY REPLACED BY ENGINEERING.
CALEB, WHEN HE COMES AND TALKS ABOUT STREET REPLACEMENTS, IT'S A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF STREETS THAT ARE REPLACED IN MILES EVERY YEAR IN THE CITY.
THIS NUMBER STILL HOLDS PRETTY CONSISTENTLY BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO REPLACE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF STREETS.
WE'RE JUST DOING REPAIR AND TRYING TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF THAT STREET.
>> GOT YOU. DO WE, I'M SURE YOU DO, HAVE A SENSE OF THE PERCENTAGE OF STREETS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN TOUCHED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS?
>> I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE RECENTLY PULLED SOME NUMBERS TO FIGURE OUT ABOUT HOW MUCH PAVEMENT HAVE WE REPLACED SINCE THE LAST BOND, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THE ROADWAY SEGMENTS, WE HAVE REPAIRED 20% OF THE ROADWAY NETWORK IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
I KNOW I THINK EVERYONE THAT LIVES IN THE COMMUNITY HAS FELT THAT WAY.
WE FEEL THAT THIS BOND PACKAGE IS THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN KEEPING UP WITH THE MAINTENANCE THAT WE NEED TO DO, BUT WITHOUT STRESSING TOO MUCH ON TAKING ON TOO MUCH.
WE TRY NOT TO HAVE TWO PARALLEL ROADS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT THE SAME TIME, AND WE TRY NOT TO TWO MAJOR ARTERIALS CONSTRUCT AT THE SAME TIME.
WE DO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT, BUT SOMETIMES ACQUISITION.
SOME OF THE EASEMENT CHALLENGES HAPPEN, INTERSECTIONS, THINGS DELAYS, IT HAPPENS, BUT THAT'S OUR GOAL OVERALL.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS? NOBODY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> SO YOU GUYS REALIZE WE ARE AT THE FINISH LINE.
I'M THE LAST ONE. CALEB THORNHILL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, I APPRECIATE THE TIME TONIGHT.
BUT OBVIOUSLY, $700 MILLION IS A VERY IMPORTANT BOND PACKAGE, AND SO WE HAVE A LOT TO COVER.
A LOT OF MINE ARE GOING TO BE VERY STANDARD FROM THE 21 BOND, AND I'LL WALK THROUGH THOSE.
I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE SPECIFICS ON THAT.
THE FIRST ONE IS ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS ABOUT 6 MILES OF ALLEY REPLACEMENT.
AS ABBY MENTIONED, ENGINEERING WILL BE INVOLVED WHEN WE'RE COMPLETELY REPLACING THE ASSET.
WHETHER IT'S AN ALLEY, A SCREENING WALL, A RESIDENTIAL STREET, A WATER LINE, ABBY'S TEAM WILL DO THE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR ON THOSE IF WE DO HAVE A BUST IN THE LINE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
EVEN SCREENING WALLS, THEY'LL DO REPAIRS ON THE BRICKS.
BUT IF IT GETS TO A POSITION, WHERE IT'S CREATING A SAFETY CHALLENGE, ENGINEERING WILL COME IN AND REPLACE IT.
THE NUMBERS YOU'RE SEEING UP HERE ARE THE FULL REPLACEMENT OF AN ALLEY.
THIS IS ONE OF THE NEW ITEMS. WE DID NOT HAVE THIS IN THE 21 BOND PACKAGE.
IN OUR 2023 DESIGN STANDARDS OR STREET DESIGN STANDARDS, WE ADDED SOME STREET DOWNTOWN FOR FUTURE CONNECTIVITY TO IMPROVE THE FLOW DOWNTOWN.
AS A PART OF THAT, WE HAVE ADDED FUNDING TO RESERVE IN CASE THOSE AREAS SHOULD REDEVELOP.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF REASONS FOR THAT.
ONE, IF WE DO NOT HAVE THAT FUNDING AND SET ASIDE, STATE LEGISLATURE RECENTLY CHANGED THAT WE CANNOT REQUIRE THE DEDICATION OF THOSE, AND WE FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THESE LOCATIONS ARE VERY CRITICAL WITH THE WALKABILITY, THE REDEVELOPMENT, THE DIVISION OF DOWNTOWN.
ESSENTIALLY IT'S A SET ASIDE FUNDING IN CASE SOME OF THESE AREAS DEVELOP.
WE CAN REQUEST THAT THE RIGHT AWAY BE DEDICATED, BUT WE WILL ALSO BE PAYING FOR THAT RIGHT AWAY RESERVATION AND THE NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT PROJECT.
[02:15:04]
>> A BRIDGE REPAIR REPLACEMENT.
THIS IS AN ITEM THAT WE USE EVERY YEAR.
A LOT OF OUR BRIDGE REPAIRS ARE SOMETIMES SEEN UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE.
IF WE HAVE IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO OCCUR TO GUARD RAILS, THAT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SLABS.
IT CAN BE THE REPLACEMENT OF A BRIDGE.
THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE SHILOH BRIDGE THAT WE DID A FULL REPLACEMENT OF THAT.
IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR ON THE EAST SIDE, WE ADDED THE ADDITIONAL LANES, BUT WE HAD TO COMPLETELY REPLACE THE BRIDGE.
IT WAS NOT ADEQUATE DUE TO OUR DRAINAGE STANDARDS THAT HAD CHANGED OVER TIME AND THE BRIDGE WAS VERY OLD, SO WE DID A FULL REPLACEMENT OF THAT LOCATION.
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, ALWAYS OUR FAVORITE.
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROBABLY ONE OF OUR MOST CHALLENGING.
WE'RE ADDING CAPACITY OR CONGESTION RELIEF, OR THERE'S A SAFETY CONCERN AT THOSE LOCATIONS.
SO A LOT OF THE TIMES WE'LL SEE ADDITION OF DUAL LEFT TURNS, RIGHT TURN LANES FOR THOSE TWO PRIMARY REASONS.
THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES WITH THESE IS THEY'RE AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF ARTERIAL STREETS, AND THERE'S A LOT OF UTILITIES AT EVERY ONE OF THOSE CORNERS.
WHEN WE'RE ADDING RIGHT AWAY IN CAPACITY, EXPANDING THE ROADWAY TO GET THOSE UTILITIES RELOCATED AND AVOID HITTING THEM, THEY TAKE TIME, AND AS ABBY MENTIONED EARLIER, A LOT OF COORDINATION WITH HER TEAM ON THE OVERLAYS.
LEGACY IS ONE, WE'VE HAD ACTIVE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY OUT THERE CONSTRUCTING IT.
THIS IS THE PICTURE OF LEGACY IN INDEPENDENCE.
WE'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE WITH THAT PROJECT, BUT THIS IS FOR $8 MILLION, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE EIGHT LOCATIONS, ABOUT $1 MILLION LOCATION OVER THE NEXT BOND PACKAGE.
RESIDENTIAL AND COLLECTOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS A FULL REPLACEMENT OF THE STREET.
IT WILL GO FROM RIGHT AWAY TO RIGHT AWAY, SO WE'LL ALSO INCLUDE SIDEWALK.
A LOT OF OUR OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, THE ADA STANDARDS ARE OUTDATED, THE RAMPS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT.
THE STREET HAS DETERIORATED, SO WE ARE GOING IN AND DOING FULL REPLACEMENTS OF THOSE.
LIKE I MENTIONED, ABBY'S TEAM WILL DO REPAIRS ON SCREENING WALLS IF THE BRICKS ARE FALLING.
ENGINEERING WILL COME IN IF THERE IS A SAFETY CONCERN IF THE FOUNDATIONS NOT APPROPRIATE.
A LOT OF THESE WALLS WERE BUILT BY DEVELOPERS YEARS AND YEARS AGO AND THEY DIDN'T USE THE RIGHT PIERS, WE'RE PUTTING IN NEW PIERS AT THESE LOCATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT HOPEFULLY THEY DON'T EVER FALL.
SIDEWALKS. IT'S A GREAT PICTURE.
WE'RE ADDING A NEW SIDEWALK ALONG PLANO PARKWAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF ALMA.
BUT THIS IS FOR EITHER THE RECONSTRUCTION OF A SIDEWALK OR FILLING IN VOIDS OR GAPS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE SIDEWALK BUT NEEDED TODAY.
WE'VE HAD A HUGE INITIATIVE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
WE HAD FUNDING IN THE 21 BOND, AND WE'VE STARTED BIDDING THOSE PROJECTS OUT.
THIS IS FOR ESSENTIALLY A FULL REPLACEMENT OF OUR TRAFFIC SIGNAL NETWORK.
THE CABINET HERE YOU SEE IN THE PICTURE, THERE'S ALSO COMPONENTS OF THAT CALLED A CONTROLLER THAT WE'RE REPLACING.
WE'VE INVESTED IN THE PAST IN OUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CENTER, WHICH IS UPSTAIRS HERE AT CITY HALL.
WE'RE INVESTING IN FIBER, WHICH WILL PROVIDE BETTER CONNECTIONS TO THE SIGNALS AND GIVE US MORE EYES ON THE FIELD, BUT BETTER COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE LOCATIONS.
ALSO, CCTV CAMERAS, VEHICLE DETECTION UPGRADES, JUST A MASSIVE UPGRADE THAT'S BEEN LONG OVERDUE FOR OUR SIGNAL NETWORK SYSTEM.
LAST ONE. THIS IS ANOTHER NEW ITEM, AND THIS IS ONE THAT WE'VE COORDINATED WITH ABBY OWENS, THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
I HEARD THE PARKER ROAD TERM USED EARLIER, THAT WAS AN ENGINEERING PROJECT, AND IT MAY NOT BE COMPLETELY EVIDENT, BUT THAT WAS A WATER REHAB PROJECT.
ABBY'S TEAM BEFORE THEY DO A SIGNIFICANT OVERLAY, WILL DO A REPLACEMENT OF THE UTILITIES IF THEY'RE OUTDATED.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE.
WE HAD TO REPLACE THAT WATER LINE.
WE'RE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING RIGHT NOW IN PARK BOULEVARD.
WHAT WE'VE REALIZED WITH A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS IS THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF STREET WORK THAT GOES ALONG WITH A WATER REHAB.
THE ABILITY TO FUND THAT STREET REPAIR FROM THE STREET FUND, INSTEAD OF USING WATER, IT ALLOWS US TO STRETCH THAT WATER FUND EVEN FURTHER.
[02:20:01]
WATERLINE REPLACEMENTS THAT WE DO IN NEIGHBORHOODS OR ALONG ARTERIALS, BUT WE CAN FUND THE STREET REPLACEMENT WITH THIS.I GOT SOME ANIMATION. THERE WE GO.
UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION REAL QUICK.
YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE DOWNTOWN RIGHT AWAY SLIDE?
>> IT WAS REALLY EARLY IN YOUR PRESENTATION, BUT YOU WERE ON A ROLL SO I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU. THERE YOU GO.
WE HAVE JUST GONE THROUGH THE SILVER LINE DOWNTOWN VISIONING PROCESS.
I WANT TO ASSUME JUST BY LOOKING AT THE MAP AND MY KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PLAN THAT THIS HAS BEEN COORDINATED WITH SOME OF THE MASTER PLAN GOALS FOR THAT REDEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY SOUTH OF 14TH.
FROM WHAT I CAN TELL FROM HERE, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT YOU'VE ACCOMMODATED SOME OF THAT, BUT I GUESS IT'S MORE OF A QUESTION.
HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE SILVER LINE PLAN AND COORDINATED YOUR DOWNTOWN RIGHT AWAY RESERVATION WITH THAT GUIDING DOCUMENT?
>> YEAH. THIS IS AN EXCERPT FROM OUR 2023 STREET DESIGN MENU.
OBVIOUSLY, IT ENCOMPASS THE SILVER LINE PLAN, THE 12TH STREET, THE AERIAL LOCATED AT STATION.
IT DID INCLUDE THE SILVER LINE PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN. IF THAT'S THE QUESTION.
>> THAT'S THE QUESTION. JUST MAKE SURE THAT THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED BECAUSE WE JUST ADOPTED THAT PLAN FAIRLY RECENTLY, THAT THAT YOU ALL HAD UPDATED IT WITH THE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THAT REPORT.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
>> I DON'T KNOW. MIKE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT?
>> I SAY IT'S SOMEWHAT THE OPPOSITE THE SILVER LINE PLAN INCORPORATES THESE IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE THEY WERE DONE RECENTLY IN THE STUDY OF DOWNTOWN.
SO SILVER LINE WHICH WILL COME BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING HAS KEPT THIS PLAN IN MIND.
>> SO BOTTOM LINE IS THEY'RE COORDINATED? CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR.
GOOD. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
>> A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS ON BRIDGES.
WE HEARD A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON ABOUT BRIDGES AND THE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES IN 2022 REPORTED THAT TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE BRIDGES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES IS IN POOR CONDITION.
WHAT WOULD YOU SAY ARE THE CONDITIONS OF OUR BRIDGES?
>> SO LIKE I SAID, WE DO A BRIDGE REPAIR PROJECT EVERY YEAR.
NOW, WHAT WE WILL DO IS WE'LL DO A DESIGN PORTION ONE YEAR AND THEN NEXT YEAR WE'LL DO A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
BUT WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT CONSTRUCTION, WE'RE STARTING DESIGN ON THE NEXT ONE.
IT'S CALLED A BRINSAP REPORT, AND DON'T GET ME LINE WHAT THE BRINSAP ACRONYM STANDS FOR, BUT THEY ESSENTIALLY DO A INVENTORY AND EXAMINATION OR INSPECTION OF ALL OF OUR BRIDGES THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF PLANO.
SO WE TAKE THAT AND THEN WE WILL PULL FROM IT WHAT THE MOST CRITICAL LOCATIONS THAT NEED REPAIRS AND PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF THESE PROJECTS, WILL GO OUT AND DO DESIGN.
SOME OF THEM ARE, I WOULD SAY, SOMEWHAT MINOR.
THEY WILL RATE THAT IF A GUARD RAIL IS MISSING ON A BRIDGE, IT IS A HUGE SAFETY CONCERN.
SO THE BRIDGE IS NOT IN DANGER OF FALLING, BUT IF A GUARD RAIL IS MISSING, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE.
AS FAR AS THE ANSWER TO OUR CONDITION OF OUR BRIDGES, I WOULD SAY PLANO IS STILL A RELATIVELY YOUNG CITY.
SO THE MAJORITY OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS SOMEWHERE IN THAT 30, 40, INSTANCES, 50 YEARS.
I WOULDN'T SAY OUR BRIDGES ARE IN POOR CONDITION.
I WOULD SAY THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE IS THE BRIDGES DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION, IS THE STORM DRAINAGE.
AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S SCOUR EROSION BELOW THE BRIDGE, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IS THE BRIDGE DESIGNED AT ADEQUATE HEIGHT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WENT INTO SHILOH.
SHILOH, WE HAD TO RAISE THAT BRIDGE.
THE BRIDGE ITSELF WAS ADEQUATE, OBVIOUSLY, IT NEEDED TO BE WIDEN, BUT WE HAD TO RAISE THAT BRIDGE BECAUSE OF THE CREEK AND THE STORM DRAINAGE.
AND SO USING OUR NEW STANDARDS AND THE NEW DATA TODAY, WE'VE GOT SOME ADJUSTMENTS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OTHER LOCATIONS AS WELL.
>> SECOND QUESTION IS, IN ADDITION TO ALL THAT CONVERSATION, I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT A LOT OF DIFFERENT DOLLARS, AND ALL OF OUR BRIDGES IN PLANO FUNDED THROUGH THINGS LIKE THIS, OR DO WE SEE ANY STATE OR FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT COME IN TO HELP THAT AS WELL?
>> SO SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, WHICH HAS JUST BEEN OVER 10 YEARS, THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE FUNDED THROUGH OUR BOND PACKAGE.
WE DO HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S ACTIVE THAT TXDOT IS FUNDING IT'S A BRIDGE ALONG PARKER, AND IT'S ACTUALLY A BOX CULVERT, BUT THEY TREAT DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF A BOX CULVERT, THEY'LL TREAT IT AS A BRIDGE CLASS CULVERT.
THAT IS THE FIRST ONE THAT I'VE HAD FUNDED OUTSIDE OF OUR BOND.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONER OLLEY?
>> NOT A QUESTION. JUST MY INNER PERSONA FLARING UP ON THE WATER MAIN SLIDE.
[02:25:07]
I THINK YOU HAVE THE SAME WORDING PHOTO DESCRIPTION AS THE BRIDGE SLIDE.SOMEBODY PAGES A COPY IT AND PASTE IT WRONG.
>> SHOW ME WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SO I CAN GET IT FIXED.
THE COMMENTARY REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? NOBODY? YOU HAVE ANY OTHER BODY ELSE TO PRESENT?
WITH THAT PRESENTATION, STAFF RECOMMENDS FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED 2025 BOND REFERENDUM ITEMS ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE POLICIES AND ACTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? I AM GOING TO TAKE THE LIBERTY TO MAKE THE MOTION MYSELF.
THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED 2025 BOND REFERENDUM ITEMS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT. MR. BRONSKY?
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSION? NOBODY? WE CAN VOTE, PLEASE.
THANK YOU, STAFF. APPRECIATE YOU ALL HANGING OUT WITH US.
AND COMMISSION, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK? WE'LL COME BACK AND HANDLE THE LAST TWO ITEMS. FIVE MINUTES, PLEASE.
[MUSIC] STAFF, SORRY, I PUT ALL OFF TILL THE END.
PROBABLY I'M SORRY, I HAD INCONVENIENCE TO THE THREE OF YOU ALL FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, BUT I'M SURE THEY'LL APPRECIATE YOU TOMORROW.
WE GOT SUGAR COOKIES LEFT OVER.
[Items 3A & 3B]
>> LET'S KRISTI, LET'S DROP BACK TO ITEM 3A, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
PUBLIC HEARING ZONING CASE 2024-025, REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF ARTICLE 11 OVERLAY DISTRICTS, ARTICLE 15, USE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS, AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD A NEW EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT, WHICH WILL APPLY THE SAME BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS FROM THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO DESCRIBE THE NEW BOUNDARY DELINEATIONS FOR THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT ON THE ZONING MAP.
PETITIONER CITY OF PLANO, THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO?
>> YEAH, GO AND READ 3B AS WELL, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3B.
PUBLIC HEARING, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2024-0011, REQUEST TO AMEND THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT REGIONALISM PILLAR AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTIONS, AND TO REMOVE THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP AND GUIDELINES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
APPLICANT CITY OF PLANO, THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING COMMISSION.
SO I'M JORDAN ROCKERBIE, SENIOR PLANNER IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I'LL BE PRESENTING ON THE ZONING CASE, WHICH IS ITEM 3A.
AFTER MY PRESENTATION, MARIAM HERE WILL BE PRESENTING ITEM 3B, WHICH IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CASE.
THE REQUEST TONIGHT IS TO UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN EXPRESSWAY CORRIDORS, AND THERE ARE CORRESPONDING UPDATES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING THE CURRENT EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AREA GUIDELINES AND MAP.
I WAS HERE ABOUT A MONTH AGO FOR THE CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE EHA.
IN THAT, I DETAILED SOME OF THE HISTORY AND THE CURRENT REGULATIONS.
I'M GOING TO GO OVER THOSE VERY BRIEFLY TONIGHT SINCE IT WAS IN RECENT MEMORY THAT I WAS HERE.
PLANO DOES HAVE A LONGSTANDING POLICY FOCUSED ON LIMITING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR AREAS.
INITIALLY, THAT WAS JUST A SETBACK ALONG HIGHWAY 121, AND THAT WAS LATER EXPANDED TO THE OTHER EXPRESSWAYS IN THE CITY.
THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF THAT WAS TO PRESERVE VACANT LAND FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS PROTECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR RESIDENTS.
[02:30:04]
THE CURRENT POLICY IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED BASED ON A 2019 STUDY.AS A RESULT OF THAT, A MAP GUIDELINES AND GOAL WERE PLACED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THERE WERE SOME REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PLACED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GUIDELINES APPLY TO THE REVIEW OF ZONING CASES AND THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPLY FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW.
SO THERE ARE SIX MITIGATION STRATEGIES OUTLINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THESE ARE ALL SUGGESTED AND THE COMP PLAN DOES SUGGEST A COMBINATION OF MITIGATION STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL OF NOISE MITIGATION.
IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THREE OF THESE ARE REQUIRED MITIGATION STRATEGIES AND THESE ONLY APPLY TO CERTAIN LAND USES AS LISTED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE APPLICANT WAS OR IS ABLE TO SUGGEST OTHER MITIGATION STRATEGIES THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF AN EHA SITE ANALYSIS.
THAT SIDE ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED FOR ALL ZONING APPLICATIONS INVOLVING A SENSITIVE LAND USE WITHIN THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDORS.
THE PURPOSE OF THAT ANALYSIS IS TO CONFIRM THE EXISTING NOISE EXPOSURE, PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE THE TARGET OF 65 DECIBELS LDN AT EXTERIOR OF SENSITIVE LAND USES, AND TO PROJECT THE ANTICIPATED FUTURE NOISE EXPOSURE BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT THE PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGIES.
SO FAR, THERE HAVE BEEN NINE ZONING CASES PRESENTED TO THIS COMMISSION THAT HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO THE EHA GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS.
MOST OF THOSE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO MEET THE POLICY GOAL, BUT HAVE SUGGESTED OTHER MITIGATION STRATEGIES TO COMPLY WITH THE INTENT OF THE GOAL.
A LOT OF THESE HAVE BEEN SIMILAR BUT NOT IDENTICAL MITIGATION STRATEGIES, AND SO THROUGH THIS REQUESTED AMENDMENT, WE DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO STANDARDIZE THE MITIGATION STRATEGIES ACROSS PROJECTS.
>> THESE UPDATES ARE PROPOSED TO RE-CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AS A GOAL OF THE POLICY.
IT HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT LOST AND OVERSHADOWED BY THE FOCUS ON QUALITY OF LIFE, WHICH REMAINS AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
THE UPDATES ALSO PROPOSED TO SIMPLIFY THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT, STRENGTHEN, AND STANDARDIZE THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENT, AND IMPROVE THE TRANSPARENCY OF THIS REVIEW PROCESS.
FOR COMP PLAN CHANGES, THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP, AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, WOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THE COMP PLAN, AND ON THE GUIDELINES WOULD ALSO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE COMP PLAN.
THERE WOULD BE CORRESPONDING CHANGES THROUGHOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SWITCHING CURRENT REFERENCES TO THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP TO INSTEAD REFER TO THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR HEALTH STUDY THAT WAS DONE IN 2019.
THAT MAP WOULD BE REPLACED WITH AN OVERLAY DISTRICT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE TWO AREAS WOULD BE RENAMED.
EHA-1, WHICH IS THE LESS RESTRICTIVE WOULD BECOME THE CONDITIONAL EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY AREA, AND THE MORE RESTRICTIVE WOULD BE THE RESTRICTED EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR AREA.
THERE ARE NO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE BOUNDARIES AT THIS TIME.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE A NEW STUDY AND THAT WOULD BE A FURTHER BUDGET ASK, SO IT'S NOT PART OF THIS AMENDMENT TONIGHT.
THIS WOULD BE THE RESULTING MAP.
IT'S THE SAME AS THE CURRENT MAP IN THE COMP PLAN, BUT AGAIN, WITH JUST RENAMED AREAS AND WOULD BE A ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT.
THERE WOULD BE SLIGHT CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED LISTED SENSITIVE LAND USES IN ORDER TO TARGET THE REGULATIONS TO THE USES THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED BY NOISE, THESE ARE RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE ZONING ORDINANCE CURRENTLY HAS REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS AND LARGE INSTITUTIONAL DWELLINGS, SO CONTINUING CARE FACILITIES, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES, THOSE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS.
THOSE ARE CURRENTLY PROTECTED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS ARE SUBJECT TO THE CURRENT COMP PLAN REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY WOULD BE ADDED AS LISTED USES IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
WITHIN THAT RESTRICTED ECA, NONE OF THESE LISTED USES WOULD BE PERMITTED, IT WOULD BE SOLELY ON NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD BE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, I'VE GROUPED THEM INTO THREE CATEGORIES ON AIR QUALITY, NOISE, AND SEPARATION.
FOR AIR QUALITY MITIGATION, THERE WOULD BE A NEW REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE AIR FILTRATION OF MERV 13 OR HIGHER,
[02:35:01]
AND WE WOULD MAINTAIN THE EXISTING REQUIREMENT THAT THOSE BE DUCTED TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE EXPRESSWAY FROM THE BUILDING.I'LL NOTE THAT THIS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE MULTI FAMILY AND INSTITUTIONAL DWELLINGS.
IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX USES JUST BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE FLEXIBILITY FOR THEIR LOT LAYOUT OF WHERE THEY'RE LOCATING ANY AIR FILTRATION SYSTEMS. FOR NOISE MITIGATION, THIS IS A BRAND NEW REQUIREMENT TO HAVE IMPROVED CONSTRUCTION TO ACHIEVE A MAXIMUM INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL OF 45.
ALMOST ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT CAME BEFORE US HAD THIS AS A PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGY SO THIS IS ENSHRINING THAT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
FOR SEPARATION OF LAND USES, THIS IS BROKEN OUT INTO TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
ONE, FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE WITHIN 500 FEET OF AN EXPRESSWAY AND ONE FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE MORE THAN 500 FEET OF AN EXPRESSWAY.
FIVE HUNDRED WAS CHOSEN AS THIS WAS A FIGURE FROM THAT STUDY, WHERE AFTER 500 FEET, THAT'S WHERE THERE WAS A NOTICEABLE DECLINE IN MOST AIRBORNE PARTICULATE MATTER.
WITHIN 500 FEET, IT'S A MODIFIED REQUIREMENT.
CURRENTLY, THERE IS A HARD REQUIREMENT THAT A NON RESIDENTIAL BUILDING OR STRUCTURE BE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN THE LISTED USE AND EXPRESSWAY.
WE WOULD HAVE THAT AS ONE OPTION.
ALTERNATIVELY, THEY COULD PROVIDE A 100 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE WITH A LANDSCAPED BERM.
FOR DEVELOPMENT MORE THAN 500 FEET FROM THE EXPRESSWAY, THIS IS ADDED FROM WHAT WE PRESENTED AT THE LAST MEETING TO RECOGNIZE THAT OUR CURRENT ECA BOUNDARIES DO INCLUDE OUR DART LINES AND OUR RAIL LINES, WHICH ARE NOT NEAR EXPRESSWAYS, AND SO MAY NOT NEED THE SAME LEVEL OF PROTECTION FROM AIRBORNE PARTICULATES.
IN THIS CASE, THEY WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUILDING BETWEEN THE SENSITIVE LAND USE AND THE NOISE SOURCE, THEY WOULD JUST BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE.
THAT LANDSCAPE EDGE IS A CURRENT REQUIREMENT THAT APPLIES ACROSS ALL LAND USES.
ONE THING THAT HAS BEEN ADDED BACK IN SINCE I WAS LAST HERE WAS THE ABILITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO WAIVE REQUIREMENTS.
THERE IS A STIPULATION THAT THE WAIVER MUST BE BASED ON A FINDING THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT NOISE AND AIR FILTRATION MITIGATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
WE'VE ALSO ADDED THE CLARIFICATION THAT NONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION CAN BE VARIED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, SO EITHER THE APPLICANT IS FOLLOWING THE REQUIREMENTS OR THEY ARE RECEIVING A WAIVER FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
WE HAD ALSO CHATTED ABOUT PARKING GARAGES AT THE LAST MEETING AND THE CONCERN WITH ENCOURAGING THE USE OF PARKING GARAGES TO SCREEN BUILDINGS AND HAVING THEM PLACED CLOSE TO ROADWAYS, SINCE THE HIGH VISIBILITY OF THE STRUCTURES CAN IMPACT THE STREETSCAPE AND THE QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S FIVE SUGGESTED REQUIREMENTS.
THESE WOULD APPLY TO ALL PARKING GARAGES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
SOME OF THESE ARE PULLED FROM EXISTING REQUIREMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DESIGN DISTRICT, NBD.
SOME OF THEM ARE NEW REQUIREMENTS.
WE HAVE MODIFIED THESE BASED ON THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WITH THE COMMISSION AT THE LAST MEETING, AND THAT IS ALL NOTED IN THE PACKET.
TO SUMMARIZE THE CHANGES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE EHA PORTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THERE'S UPDATES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE PROPOSED TO CREATE A NEW OVERLAY DISTRICT, CHANGE THE LISTED USES AND ADD SOME REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THOSE AREAS, AND ALSO TO INTRODUCE CITYWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING GARAGES.
FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT WOULD BE TO REMOVE THE EHA MAP AND GUIDELINES FROM THE COMP PLAN AND TO UPDATE THE REFERENCES THROUGHOUT THE PLAN TO REFER INSTEAD TO THE STUDY.
I'LL NOW PASS OFF TO YOU MARIAM.
>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS MARIAM [INAUDIBLE], PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
MY PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION WILL COVER THE OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE EHA ITEMS. BEFORE I JUMP INTO THE SPECIFICS,
[02:40:02]
I JUST WANTED TO COVER THE ITEMS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION EARLIER THIS YEAR.ON MAY 20TH, WE PRESENTED THE CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND ALSO IDENTIFIED THE SCOPE OF THIS YEAR'S REVIEW.
ON JUNE 17TH, WE PRESENTED THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT PILLAR UPDATES.
DOUG MCDONALD, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WAS ALSO PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION HAD, BUT ALSO WAS THERE IN SUPPORT OF THE RECOMMENDED UPDATES.
ON JULY 15TH, WE PRESENTED THE REGIONALISM PILLAR AND SOME OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ACTION UPDATES, AND I'LL GO MORE IN DEPTH WITH THAT.
THIS EVENING, WE'RE HERE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.
RGM7 OR REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY, ACTION 7 PROVIDES GUIDANCE TO REVIEW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVERY TWO YEARS TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH CITYWIDE GOALS AND RESPOND TO DEVELOPMENT TRENDS AND CHANGING CONDITIONS.
ALTHOUGH RGM7 PROVIDES DIRECTION TO REVIEW THE COMP PLAN EVERY TWO YEARS, STAFF HAS DEVELOPED A TENURE REVIEW SCHEDULE TO ANNUALLY REVIEW VARIOUS MAPS AND PILLARS AND MORE MANAGEABLE SECTIONS.
THE 2024 REVIEW IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE, AND THEN THOSE ITEMS INCLUDE THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT PILLAR, REGIONALISM PILLAR, EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MAP AND GUIDELINES, AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTIONS.
THOSE OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTION UPDATES ARE A RESULT OF END OF YEAR FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVE FROM DEPARTMENTS WHO HAVE A LEAD ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING THESE ACTIONS.
THEN ALSO, WE ARE INCORPORATING PLANO AT MATURITY RETAINED ACTION, SO THAT WAS RETIRED IN 2022.
JUST WANT TO ALSO COVER THAT THE UPDATES BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING ARE TWO SEPARATE UPDATES.
SOME ARE ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES AND THAT'S JUST UPDATES TO FACTS AND FIGURES, OR MINOR STATISTICAL UPDATES.
THEN THE SECOND SET ARE UPDATES THAT REQUIRE A PLAN AMENDMENT AND INCLUDE CHANGES TO POLICIES, ACTION, VISION STATEMENTS, GUIDING PRINCIPLES, MAPS, DASHBOARDS.
I DO JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THE UPDATES THAT WE ARE PRESENTING THIS EVENING ARE MINOR UPDATES, AND THESE ARE NOT MAJOR UPDATES.
MAJOR UPDATES WOULD BE MORE POLICY DIRECTION CHANGES, BUT THESE ARE MORE UPDATES RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION.
THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT PILLAR IS COMPRISED OF TWO COMPONENTS, WHICH INCLUDE TWO POLICIES AND A TOTAL OF 11 ACTIONS AS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN.
STAFF WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IN REVIEWING THIS PILLAR, AND AS I MENTIONED, WE PRESENTED THESE WITH DOUG MCDONALD ON JUNE 17TH.
NOTE THAT THERE ARE UPDATES PROPOSED TO THE COMPONENT BACKGROUND, BOTH POLICY BACKGROUNDS AND STATEMENTS, AND FIVE EXISTING ACTIONS, AND ONE NEW ACTION IS PROPOSED.
I'LL COVER THIS FURTHER ON IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT THE ONE NEW PROPOSED NEW ACTION INCORPORATES TWO PLANO AT MATURITY ACTIONS THAT WERE RETAINED.
THE REGIONALISM PILLAR IS COMPRISED OF ONE COMPONENT, SIX POLICIES, AND A TOTAL OF 31 ACTIONS.
STAFF WORKED CLOSELY TO REVIEW THIS PILLAR WITH VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WHO HAD A LEAD ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING IT.
WE PRESENTED THIS ON JULY 15TH AND SOUGHT THE COMMISSION'S DIRECTION.
THERE ARE UPDATES PROPOSED TO THE COMPONENT BACKGROUND, POLICY BACKGROUND, AND STATEMENTS OF SOME, BUT NOT ALL OF THE POLICIES, AND 16 ACTIONS.
THE OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATES ARE OUTLINED ON THE SCREEN, AND THOSE WITHIN ASTER RELATE TO THE PLANO AT MATURITY RETAINED ACTIONS.
THE END OF YEAR STATUS FEEDBACK, WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY ACTIONS THAT WERE EITHER COMPLETE OR OBSOLETE AND PROPOSE UPDATES ACCORDINGLY.
THEN THE OTHER IS ACTIONS RETAINED FROM THE PLANO AT MATURITY 2003 REPORT.
ON OCTOBER 3RD, 2022, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED RETIRING THE STUDY, BUT RETAINING SEVEN OF THE ACTIONS THAT WERE NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN SOME WAY.
YOU'LL SEE WE ARE PROPOSING FIVE NEW ACTIONS AND ONE REVISED ACTION.
ONCE AGAIN, ON THE LEFT, YOU SEE THAT IT NOTES SIX ACTIONS, BUT JUST PLEASE NOTE THAT DRE7, DIVERSE AND RESILIENT ECONOMY ACTION 7 INCORPORATES TWO OF THE PLANO AT MATURITY ACTIONS.
AT THIS TIME, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF BOTH THE ZONING CASE 2024-025 ITEM, AS WELL AS THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2024-001.
JORDAN AND I ARE BOTH AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
[02:45:01]
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSION, AS WE DISCUSSED IN OUR PRE-MEETING, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS LET'S FOCUS OUR INITIAL COMMENTS ON THE ZONING CASE, WHICH IS ABOUT THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AND THE EHA INCORPORATION AS AN OVERLAY.
LET'S HANDLE THAT, HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON IT, HAVE ACTION ON THAT ITEM, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS WITH ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AFTER THAT.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ZONING CASE REGARDING TAKING THE EHAS AND TURNING THEM INTO CODIFIED ZONING CODE VERSUS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> JUST ONE QUESTION ON THE CONDITIONAL ECA, AND THE 100 FOOT BERM.
THE 100 FOOT, I BELIEVE APPLIES TO THE DISTANCE FROM THE EXPRESSWAY.
IS THERE A HEIGHT TO THE REQUIREMENT TO THE BERM?
THE LANDSCAPE BERM MUST HAVE A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, AND THERE IS A MINIMUM SLOPE, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS, AND THAT'S ALL WRITTEN INTO THAT STIPULATION.
>> SECOND QUESTION. THE PARKING STRUCTURE REQUIREMENT, DID I READ IT RIGHT THAT THE REQUIREMENT IN THE NBD IS GOING TO BE APPLIED POOL CITYWIDE WHERE THE PARKING STRUCTURES NEED TO TIE INTO THE FACADE OF THE STRUCTURES THEY SERVE OR?
>> YES. CURRENTLY THERE'S, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING GARAGES IN NBD.
TWO OR THREE OF THEM WOULD BE TAKEN OUT TO APPLY CITYWIDE, ONE OF THOSE IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT ARCHITECTURAL HARMONY WITH THE BUILDING THAT IT SERVES.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR SURROUNDING CITIES, DO THEY CURRENTLY HAVE OR ARE THEY IMPLEMENTING SIMILAR POLICIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE?
>> ON ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE OR ON PARKING STRUCTURES?
>> WELL, ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND MAYBE THE SAME THING WITH STRUCTURES.
FRISCO, ALLEN, MCKINNEY, ARE THEY DOING SIMILAR TYPES OF THINGS THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WITH THE ORIGINAL POLICY, WHICH WAS THAT 1,200 FOOT SETBACK ALONG 121, THAT WAS SHARED WITH I BELIEVE MCKINNEY AND ALLEN, WE'RE ALSO APPLYING THE SAME.
IN TERMS OF THE MITIGATION AGAINST NOISE AND MITIGATION AGAINST AIRBORNE PARTICULATES, THAT ONE, I THINK WE'RE LEADING THE PACK.
THE ONLY OTHER ONE THAT I COULD FIND WHEN WE WERE DOING SOME PEER RESEARCH IS, I BELIEVE THE SAN ANTONIO HAD SOME NOISE REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT NEAR THEIR MILITARY BASES.
>> I THINK THIS IS ALL VERY POSITIVE CHANGES.
I THINK THE REQUIREMENT OF HAVING THE ENGINEERING REPORT BEFORE THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REALLY PUTTING TEETH INTO IT.
THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS THOUGHTS ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT ABOUT APPLYING SOME OF THESE THINGS TO POTENTIALLY REDEVELOPMENTS IN THE FUTURE. THOUGHTS ON THAT?
>> YEAH. WE WROTE IN THE APPLICABILITY STATEMENT, SO THAT'S 0.3, WHERE ANYTHING THAT'S ON THE GROUND TODAY, THEY GET TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER IT WAS WHEN THEY WERE CONSTRUCTED, A REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THESE NEW REQUIREMENTS.
>> GREAT. BECAUSE I THINK AS WE LOOK MOVING FORWARD, THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIG PIECE IS ENSURING THAT WE CONTINUE TO UPGRADE.
I ASKED FROM A COMPETITIVE STANDPOINT, ECONOMICALLY, WE'RE COMPETING SOMETIMES WITH OTHER CITIES, BUT I THINK WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A HIGH QUALITY PRODUCT, AND SO I THINK THESE ARE GREAT STANDARDS.
WHEN I WAS ON PLANNING AND ZONING BEFORE, THIS CAME UP OFTEN.
HAVING SOME OF THESE THINGS LOCK DOWN I THINK IS MUCH BETTER.
WE'RE GOING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE INTERPRET POLICY MOVING FORWARD. GOOD WORK. THANK YOU.
[02:50:01]
>> THIS IS, AS I THINK I'VE TOLD MICHAEL AND CHRISTINA, THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN HOPING TO SEE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW AND GETTING TO A PLACE WHERE WE'RE STARTING TO RE-LOOK AT SOME OF THIS.
YOU TALKED ABOUT STANDARDIZING THE MITIGATION.
DO WE HAVE OR ARE WE CONSIDERING ANYTHING AS IT RELATES TO FLEXIBILITY FOR THE POTENTIALITY, AS WE EXPERIENCED EVEN SINCE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF NEW MITIGATION OPPORTUNITIES THAT DEVELOPERS OR PEOPLE THAT THEY BRING IN, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS AGAIN, OR ARE WE A LITTLE MORE FORWARD THINKING IN THE POTENTIALITY OF FUTURE MITIGATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES THERE?
>> WITH WHAT WE'VE PUT IN TO THIS, IT'S LARGELY BASED ON WHAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING TO DATE.
AS I MENTIONED, ALMOST ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENTS HAVE COME IN WITH THAT 45 INTERIOR NOISE STANDARD.
IF EVERYONE IS GOING TO DO IT, WE MIGHT AS WELL JUST PUT IT INTO THE ORDINANCE.
WHETHER OR NOT WE'LL SEE ALTERNATIVES TO THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S THE ONE WHERE I CAN SEE THERE MIGHT BE SOME CHANGES.
>> I THINK MINE WAS MORGAN LINES WITH THE PARTICULATE MATTERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND HOW THEY'RE MITIGATING FOR PARTICULATE.
>> AN ALTERNATIVE TO BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE PROPOSALS FOR LIKE A MRV 13.
I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN THAT FIELD, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER KINDS OF MITIGATION THERE WOULD BE.
WITH THE WAIVER THAT WE HAVE IN THERE, IT IS CONTINGENT ON THE COMMISSION FINDING THAT THERE IS A SUFFICIENT SOMETHING TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE POLICY.
WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION WILL REQUEST AN ENGINEER'S REPORT TO SUPPORT THEIR FINDINGS WOULD BE UP TO THE COMMISSION AT THAT TIME.
BUT THAT'S WHAT THE WAIVER IS IN THERE TO PROVIDE THAT FLEXIBILITY.
>> MY LAST THING I WANT TO IS MORE OF A COMMENT.
THE INTENTIONALITY OF THE EHA STUDY AND THE REASON THAT WE PUT THOSE IN THERE WAS TO PROTECT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALONG THOSE FOUR MAJOR HIGHWAYS.
I HAVE TO SAY THAT WHENEVER WE LOOK AT THE RESTRICTED AREA AND THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE USING THERE AS IT RELATES TO RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, MOVING FROM DISCOURAGED TO PROHIBITED, I THINK THAT'S A HOME RUN.
WE NO LONGER HAVE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THE BIG PROBLEM IS A GUIDELINE IS NOT EFFECTIVE IF WE DON'T FOLLOW IT.
TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT OUR INTENTION IS TO HAVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON HERE AND NOT ANY KIND OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS OCCURRING IN THE RESTRICTED AREAS, AND BEING CAREFUL IS EVEN HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CONDITIONAL AREAS.
I THINK YOU GUYS HIT A HOME RUN ON EXACTLY THE INTENT OF WHY WE DEVELOPED THIS EHA AND WHY WE'VE I THINK BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH IT. THANK YOU.
I WANT TO CONCUR WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER THAT YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.
THANK YOU SO MUCH ON THIS REPORT AND UPDATES TO OUR ORDINANCE.
I ALSO HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DISTANCE, AND I AGREE WITH ALSO OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT THAT'S GREAT.
BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE DISTANCE LIKE THE 100 FEET OR THERE'S ONE SLIDE ABOUT SOMETHING ABOUT 15 FEET.
I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT.
HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THOSE DISTANCE? DID YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO OUT TO DO A ANALYSIS, ENGINEER, OR NOISE OR AIR POLLUTION TEST FOR THAT DISTANCE OR IT'S JUST LIKE A GENERAL BEST PRACTICE WE GOT FROM OTHER CITIES? HOW DID YOU CONCLUDE WITH THAT NUMBER?
FIRST THE 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE.
THAT'S AN EXISTING REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S ALREADY IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SO THAT'S CARRIED FORWARD.
WE DIDN'T RE-EXAMINE THE 15 FOOT.
I BELIEVE TYPICALLY IT'S A 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE IS WHAT'S REQUIRED, EXCEPT WHEN YOU'RE IN AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, SUCH AS THE DALLAS NORTH TOLLWAY OVERLAY.
THEN IT'S A 30 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE.
IT'S THE MORE RESTRICTIVE OF THE TWO, IT WOULD BE EITHER 30 FOOT OR 15 FOOT, DEPENDING WHERE YOU ARE EXACTLY.
THAT'S WHERE THE 15 CAME FROM.
IT'S EXISTING, SO WE DIDN'T REEXAMINE IT.
[02:55:01]
THE 100 FOOT FOR THE LANDSCAPE EDGE WITH LANDSCAPING, THE BERM, THE TREES.I BELIEVE THAT'S FROM A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN TO DEVELOPMENT THAT WE SAW THAT WE HAD APPROVED A PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
WE JUST TOOK THOSE, MOVED THEM INTO THE ORDINANCE.
THEN THE 500 FEET FOR THAT DISTANCE WHERE YOU GET A LITTLE BIT LESS OF A SEPARATION REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S AS I MENTIONED, IT'S FROM THAT 2019 STUDY.
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT WE APPROVED THAT CASE.
IT'S CASE BY CASE, WHICH IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM WE'RE MAKING IT INTO AN ORDINANCE.
PROBABLY I WOULD BE HAPPIER IF WE HEARD SOME REALLY ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS TO MAKE SURE THAT NUMBER IS THE NUMBER THAT WE WANT.
BUT IT'S OKAY. I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
ANOTHER SUGGESTION OR MY OBSERVATION IS ABOUT THE NOISE AND AIR POLLUTION MAY RELATE TO THE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHWAY AND THE TRAFFIC.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY ANALYSIS THAT'S DONE BETWEEN THE CORRELATION OF THE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHWAY RELATIVE TO THE WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS AND TO THE DISTANCE.
I'M NOT SURE IF I EXPLAINED IT WELL, LIKE HOW FAR AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAY COULD BE RELATED TO THE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHWAY, WHERE THE HIGHWAY IS.
>> WE DIDN'T GET INTO THAT ANALYSIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CASE, BUT WHAT I HAVE ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS THE MAP BASED ON THAT 2019 STUDY, AND YOU CAN SEE AT THE AREAS WHERE THE EXPRESSWAYS MEET WHERE YOU HAVE THOSE LARGE ELEVATED PORTIONS OF THE EXPRESSWAY.
BOTH THE CONDITIONAL AND THE RESTRICTED AREAS FLARE OUT CONSIDERABLY.
YOU ESPECIALLY SEE IT DOWN AT 75 IN THE PGPT.
THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY GOES ALL THE WAY TO COLLIN CREEK.
JUST FROM THAT ANALYSIS, YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH THE SOUND TRAVELS BECAUSE THESE MEASUREMENTS WERE BASED ON SOUND MEASUREMENTS ON THE GROUND.
THAT WAS DONE IN THE PAST. WE DIDN'T REDO ANY OF THAT STUDY FOR THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IF WE ADOPT THIS, WOULD PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXISTING OR ARE CURRENTLY APPROVED, WOULD THEY BE ENTITLED TO CONTINUE TO EXIST AND GO FORWARD?
>> YES, THEY WOULD HAVE THEIR BE VESTED DEVELOPMENT TRAIN.
>> YES. EVEN IF THEY WERE IN A, FOR EXAMPLE, AN EHA WHAT IS PRESENTLY AN EHA 2 PROHIBITED ZONE?
>> BECAUSE I REMEMBER, FOR EXAMPLE, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE DEALT WITH THE J PLACE APARTMENTS THAT HAD SOME EHA 2 ISSUES.
IN CASES OF THAT CASE AND OTHERS LIKE IT, WE SAT HERE SPINNING OUR WHEELS, WONDERING, FIRST OF ALL, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHETHER IT REALLY PROHIBITED SENSITIVE LAND USES IN AN EHA 2 AREA OR NOT.
I THINK THE LANGUAGE WAS THEY WERE DISFAVORED, BUT IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY COME OUT AND SAY THEY WERE PROHIBITED.
WE WERE HERE TRYING TO DISCERN WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS OKAY WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IF THEY MITIGATED OR WHETHER OR NOT OPEN SPACE WAS USABLE OR NOT.
WHETHER OR NOT THE RELEVANT NOISE MEASUREMENT WAS TO BE AN OUTDOOR MEASUREMENT OR AN INDOOR MEASUREMENT.
WE HAD TO LOOK AT PAGES AND PAGES OF THE APPLICANT'S NOISE STUDIES GIVING US A DECIBEL LEVEL AT MULTIPLE PLACES ON EVERY STORY OF EVERY BUILDING THAT WAS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT.
WE SPUN A LOT OF WHEELS GOING OVER THIS STUFF, AND I THINK IT MAKES ALL KIND OF SENSES TO CODIFY SOME STANDARDS, TELL THE DEVELOPERS WHAT THEY'RE EXPECTED, WHAT WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO.
IN SOME RARE CASES AND I HOPE THAT THEY ARE RARE.
THEY CAN COME TO US FOR A WAIVER WITH THE CAUTION THAT YOU START WAIVING EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME AND YOU LOSE THE ORDINANCE.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE JUDICIOUS IN OUR GRANTING OF WAIVERS.
IF IN ANSWER TO MR. BRONSKY'S POINT, THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT, NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS MAY COME ALONG SUCH THAT NEW MITIGATION STRATEGIES MIGHT BE ON THE TABLE.
WE CAN ALWAYS RE-EXAMINE THE ORDINANCE DOWN THE ROAD IF IT COMES TO THAT.
BUT OUR EMPHASIS SHOULD BE ON HAVING AN ORDINANCE THAT IS FIRM, THAT IS ENFORCEABLE, AND THAT IS ENFORCED, AND THAT WE DON'T THROW AWAY BY ABUSING THE WAIVER POWER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER OLLEY.
[03:00:03]
>> JUST A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION.
FOR THE RECA THERE IS NO WAIVER.
>> NO WAIVER. THAT'S STRICTLY PROHIBITED. THAT'S OUT OF OUR HANDS.
>> FOR THE CECA HE HAS A POSSIBILITY OF A WAIVER IF THE COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT THE MITIGATION STRATEGIES ARE APPROPRIATE FOR ALL THE LISTED USES, NOT JUST THE MULTIFAMILY USE.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM?
>> NONE. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
STRICT COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER BRONSKY.
>> I AM THRILLED TO SAY THAT I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 3A AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> GIVEN THE LONG JOURNEY WE'VE HAD ON EHA, I WILL SECOND THAT.
>> COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF, YOU HAD YOUR LIGHT ON? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
WE'VE GOT A TECHNOLOGICAL DEAL THERE BECAUSE WE ALREADY CLOSED THAT ITEM.
I'LL GIVE OUR TECHNICAL TEAM A SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRONSKY, AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OLLEY.
COMMISSION, WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF ON ITEM 3B, WHICH IS THE AMENDMENTS TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PILLAR, REGIONALISM PILLAR, AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTIONS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE ECAS.
COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF. DOES A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3B HAVE TO BE CONDITIONED ON THE COUNCIL APPROVAL OF 3A?
>> I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST THE OPPOSITE, ACTUALLY IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE'RE ACTUALLY CONDITIONING UPON EACH OTHER BECAUSE ONE IS THE ZONING AMENDMENT, ONE IS THE COMPLAINT AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE MAP ON THE COMPLAINTS, THEY NEED TO BE BOTH APPROVED OR BOTH DENIED.
>> PROBABLY THE EASY THING IS TO PER THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF, THAT WAY IT'S COVERED IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION, THE WAY IT NEEDS TO BE COVERED.
I WILL HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M NOT READY FOR A MOTION JUST YET.
LET'S HANDLE QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY'S GOT.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? YOU'RE GETTING OFF LIGHT. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM?
>> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NOW, COMMISSIONER LINGENFELDER.
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 3B AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF SECOND.
HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LINGENFELDER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BROUNOFF.
EVERYBODY VOTE. MOTION PASSES 8-0.
>> THERE ARE NO COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
>> NOBODY SIGNED UP FOR COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
[Additional Item]
I BELIEVE MR. BELL HAD WANTED THE FLOOR.>> BEFORE WE ADJOURN, I JUST WANT TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT TO RECOGNIZE MR. ERIC HILL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS WILL BE HIS LAST MEETING AFTER OVER A 20-YEAR CAREER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ATTENDING MANY MEETINGS IN THIS VERY ROOM OVER THE YEARS.
HE'S VERY HIGHLY RESPECTED IN THE DEPARTMENT.
HE'S BEEN A MENTOR TO MANY PLANNERS AND A FRIEND TO MYSELF.
WE'RE VERY MUCH GOING TO MISS HIM IN THE DEPARTMENT AND WISH HIM WELL, AND WE WANT TO ASK THE COMMISSION TO JOIN US IN WISHING HIM WELL IN HIS FUTURE ENDEAVORS.
>> THANK YOU. MR. BELL THANK YOU COMMISSION IT'S BEEN WONDERFUL TO WORK WITH YOU AND WE HAD SUCH A TREMENDOUS STAFF HERE.
IT'S JUST BEEN AN HONOR TO BE HERE. THANK YOU.
>> WE TRIED TO KEEP YOU HERE LATE JUST FOR OLD-TIME SAFE.
>> MR. HILL, DON'T BE A STRANGER.
[03:05:01]
I KNOW YOU'VE GOT GREAT THINGS AHEAD OF YOU STILL TO DO.IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS OF PLANO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT SAID, WE STAND ADJOURNED AT 9:11 P.M. WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY NEXT YEAR AND HAVE A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS, AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT YEAR.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.