[00:00:01]
>> LET'S MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR MEETING.
[CALL TO ORDER]
I NOW DECLARE THAT THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL HAS RECONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION, THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.WE'LL BEGIN TONIGHT'S REGULAR MEETING WITH THE INVOCATION LED BY PASTOR PEDRO IGUALO JR. WITH THE HOUSE OF VISION, AND THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND TEXAS PLEDGE, LED BY THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF COLLIN COUNTY. WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MAYOR, MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
IT'S A PRIVILEGE TO BE HERE WITH YOU GUYS TONIGHT.
LET'S GO TO THE LORD AND PRAYER.
HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME BEFORE YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST.
LORD, WE THANK YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE HERE IN THIS PLACE.
GOD, I ASK THAT YOU WOULD GIVE WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE, AND UNDERSTANDING TO EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER HERE, LORD, IN THE DECISIONS THAT THEY HAVE TO MAKE CONCERNING OUR CITY.
GOD, YOUR WORD SAYS THAT IF YOU ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE CALLED BY YOUR NAME, HUMBLE THEMSELVES AND PRAY AND SEEK YOUR FACE AND TURN FROM WICKED WAYS, THAT YOU WILL HEAR US FROM HEAVEN AND FORGIVE OUR SINS AND HEAL OUR LAND.
GOD TODAY, LORD, I DECLARE LIFE. I DECLARE A BLESSING.
OVER THIS COUNCIL, I DECLARE BLESSING OVER THE CITY OF PLANO, AND I THANK YOU BECAUSE THE CITY OF PLANO IS SUCH A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE.
IT'S A PLACE WHERE WE CAN CALL HOME, OR A PLACE WHERE WE CAN WORSHIP YOU, THE PLACE WHERE WE CAN HAVE COMMUNITY.
WE THANK YOU FOR THIS MEETING TODAY AND PRAY THAT YOU WOULD BE WITH EVERY SINGLE PERSON THAT IS IN THIS PLACE IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST. AMEN.
>> I'LL LET YOU GUYS TURN TO THE FLAGS.
IF YOU WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION HERE TO THE PODIUM,
[Proclamation: September is Hunger Action Month meant to mobilize the public to action on the issue of hunger.]
IT'S THAT TIME OF THE YEAR.IT'S PEANUT BUTTER TIME OF THE YEAR, AND SO SEPTEMBER IS HUNGER ACTION MONTH.
WE'LL JOIN WITH MANY OF OUR COMMUNITY, FRIENDS.
ACTUALLY, IT'S 13 COUNTIES THAT THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK COLLECTS PEANUT BUTTER IN THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER,
[00:05:06]
AND SO THIS IS OUR ANNUAL PEANUT BUTTER DRIVE, AND WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR QUITE A WHILE.UNFORTUNATELY, THE NEED IS AS GREAT AS IT'S EVER BEEN AND WE THANK ALL OF YOU THAT HAVE PARTICIPATED IN YEARS PAST, AND WE ARE GOING TO NEED SO MANY MORE TO PARTICIPATE.
I REALLY ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU TO DONATE TO THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK, IN THE PEANUT BUTTER DRIVE.
DURING THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, YOU CAN DO IT ANYTIME YOU'D LIKE.
BUT SEPTEMBER IS WHEN WE ARE FOCUSED ON IT AND SO WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION, HUNGER ACTION MONTH IN SEPTEMBER OF 2025.
WHEREAS HUNGER ACTION MONTH WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2008 BY FEEDING AMERICA AND WORKS TO PROMOTE WAYS FOR INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES EVERYWHERE TO GET INVOLVED AND HELP FIGHT THE HUNGER CRISIS.
WHEREAS THE NATIONWIDE CAMPAIGN STRIVES TO MOBILIZE THE PUBLIC INTO ACTING ON THE ISSUE OF HUNGER AND HELP THE MORE THAN 12.1% OF THE COLLIN COUNTY POPULATION WHO ARE FOOD INSECURE.
WHEREAS THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL WILL NOT RELENT IN ITS EFFORTS TO CARE FOR OUR OWN, WE CHALLENGE ALL OF COLLIN COUNTY TO GET INVOLVED, AND DURING THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, WE WILL COME TOGETHER TO HELP SOLVE THE HUNGER CRISIS IN NORTH TEXAS BY PARTNERING WITH ALL OF OUR NORTH TEXAS FRIENDS TO PROMOTE AND PARTICIPATE IN THE ANNUAL PEANUT BUTTER DRIVE.
THERE WILL BE BOTH VIRTUAL AND IN-PERSON OPTIONS FOR PARTICIPATING.
THE MORE WE COLLECT, THE MORE IMPACT WE MAKE.
NOW, THEREFORE, I JOHN MUNS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF PLANO, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 2025 IS HUNGER ACTION MONTH IN PLANO.
I DO THERE BY ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME, THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL AND THE NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK IN WORKING TOGETHER TO ERADICATE HUNGER IN OUR CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND UNION. THANK YOU.
>> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
[COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST]
>> COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA.
THE COUNCIL MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY INFORMATION.
THE COUNCIL MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA.
THE FIRST ONE IS CRYSTAL CURRY.
>> HELLO, EVERYBODY. I AM CRYSTAL CURRY.
I THINK IT WAS AROUND MEMORIAL DAY THAT MONDAY, I CAME IN, AND I HAD SOME CONCERNS.
I'M JUST REMINDED OF A QUOTE THAT I READ, AND IT SAYS THAT AN ENEMY IS A PERSON STORY THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW, AND I THINK THAT MY STORY IS UNKNOWN.
THAT MAY BE PART OF THE REASON WHY I'M HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF TROUBLE, BUT I HAD APPROACHED THE COUNCIL ABOUT ASSIGNING SOMEONE OR GETTING SOMEONE TO HELP ME THROUGH THE VARIOUS CHALLENGES I'VE HAD.
I'VE DETAILED JUST A COUPLE OF EMAILS THAT OUTLINED SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITHIN THE SPECIFIC AREAS OF PLANO, AND WITHOUT ADDRESSING EACH AREA HERE INDIVIDUALLY, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST IF SOMEONE COULD ASSIGN ME WITH OR WHAT THAT PROCESS WOULD LOOK LIKE TO GET THE HELP TO RESOLVE SOME OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING FOR ME.
LIKE I MENTIONED, I SPOKE BACK IN MAY, AND I HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING, SO I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP AND JOIN THE AGENDA TO SHOW UP AGAIN. THAT IS IT.
>> THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL LYLE.
[00:10:01]
>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MAYOR, CITY MANAGER.
MY NAME IS BILL LYLE, 1724, 15TH PLACE.
I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY, AND THEN I SAT HERE FOR YLS' PRELIMINARY OPENING MEETING, AND THAT CHANGED.
SO HERE I AM. THE PARKS PRESENTATION THAT JUST HAPPENED.
WE HAD A REALLY NICE GRAPH UP THERE WITH ALL OF THOSE AREAS ALL OVER THE CITY OF PLANO, WHERE THESE FUND BALANCES ARE TO BE SPENT.
BUT WHAT WAS MISSING? THERE WERE NO PARKS. THERE'S JUST BLANK AREAS.
YOU CAN'T SEE WHERE THE PARKS ARE.
WHAT ELSE WAS MISSING? THE ACTUAL FUND BALANCES THAT ARE SITTING IN AN ACCOUNT SOMEWHERE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SPENT IN THOSE AREAS.
I KNOW PLANO VALUES TRANSPARENCY.
YOU WOULD JUST THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO BRING A GRAPH LIKE THAT THAT YOU WOULD SHOW EVERYBODY, HEY, HERE'S THE EXISTING PARKS, AND HERE'S THE BALANCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN EACH ONE OF THESE AREAS, OR BALANCES NOT AVAILABLE, BUT THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND IN THOSE AREAS AND SO I THINK THAT'S A MESS.
YOU HEARD FROM MISS JORDAN THAT THERE'S AN APPEALS PROCESS, AND SO I HAVE REALLY ONE EXPERIENCE WITH THIS.
I HAD A VERY SMALL SOMETHING OR OTHER TO DO WITH A PROJECT THAT'S HAPPENING DOWN ON J PLACE RIGHT NOW.
JUST ON THE NORTH SIDE OF GEORGE BUSH, NORTH SIDE OF CITY LINE.
IT WAS APPROVED SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
BUT DURING THAT WHOLE ZONING PROCESS, THERE WAS A COUPLE ACRES JUST SOUTH OF THE PROJECT THAT WAS OWNED BY SOMEBODY ELSE, AND THERE WAS ENCOURAGEMENT FROM THE COUNCIL.
WE'D LOVE TO SEE YOU BUY THAT.
THERE'S A BIKE TRAIL THAT DEAD ENDS INTO THE SERVICE LANE OF GEORGE BUSH RIGHT THERE.
IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE CONNECTED VIA A SIDEWALK UP TO J PLACE.
ZERO PARTICIPATION IS WHAT THE CITY WAS WILLING TO PARTICIPATE ON THAT PURCHASE.
THEY WON'T EVEN CALL IT PARKLAND BECAUSE IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAYS.
I JUST WANT YOU ALL FROM REAL EXPERIENCE TO KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO ACTUALLY DEAL WITH PLANO WHEN YOU COME INTO ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS.
I WAS ON ANOTHER CALL WITH PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THERE'S THAT LINEAR, REALLY AWKWARD.
THEY CALL IT THE HOTEL SITE THAT WAS BEHIND FRYES.
THAT'S ALSO JUST OFF THAT SURFACE ROAD BETWEEN THE SERVICE ROAD AND EXECUTIVE, SO I WAS ON A CALL WITH PARKS AND REC THERE.
I WAS WORKING WITH ANOTHER DEVELOPER TO TRY TO PUT SOCCER IN PICKLEBALL FIELDS, BECAUSE IT'S JUST THIS LONG, SKINNY PIECE OF LAND, ZERO PARTICIPATION WILLINGNESS FROM THE CITY OF PLANO.
BUT IF YOU LOOK ON THE RICHARDSON SIDE PARKS OR PLANO, THEY ARE LIKE, OH, NO, THAT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAY.
WE WON'T EVEN DO A PARK THERE. CAN'T EVEN CONSIDER IT.
BUT RICHARDSON HAS A DOG PARK UNDER THE HIGHWAY, VOLLEYBALL ON THE NORTH SIDE, AND SO IT'S LIKE [OVERLAPPING]
>> THESE TWO CITIES ARE RIGHT HERE UNDER THE EXACT SAME HIGHWAY.
ONE HAS A HUGE DOG PARK AND VOLLEYBALL NETS, AND ON OUR SIDE, WHERE YOU NEED A LITTLE PARTICIPATION, WHERE THERE'S NOTHING DOWN THERE IN THAT SOUTHERN CORRIDOR FOR THE CITY OF PLANO.
SORRY, WE WON'T HELP. WE WON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT.
MAYBE IT WAS BECAUSE I WAS PART OF THE DEAL.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET Y'ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENS OUT THERE IN THE REAL WORLD WITH THAT APPEALS PROCESS.
MY TIME'S UP. I COULD KEEP GOING. THANK YOU.
>> MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION, AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL.
ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION BY A COUNCIL MEMBER, THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY CITIZEN.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA EXCEPT FOR PARAGRAPH P.
>> MR. MAYOR, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM P. PLEASE VOTE.
[(p)
To appoint an Associate Judge of the Municipal Court of Record of the City of Plano, setting the term of office and compensation for the Judge; and providing a publication clause, and an effective date.
]I PULLED ITEM P BECAUSE I WANTED TO RECOGNIZE OUR NEW ASSOCIATE JUDGE, MAX LYLE.MAX, WILL YOU STAND, PLEASE? EVERYBODY GIVE MAX A HAND.
[APPLAUSE] THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
I'LL BE PRESUMPTUOUS AND BELIEVE THAT YOU MAY HAVE THE VOTES TO BE APPOINTED.
I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM P. COUNCIL MEMBER HORN.
[00:15:07]
>> MR. MAYOR, GLAD TO SECOND THAT MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO APPROVE ITEM P. PLEASE VOTE.
MOTION PASSES 8-0. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
LOOK FORWARD TO WELCOMING YOU AND HAVING YOU RIGHT HERE IN THE CITY OF PLANO.
THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] NEXT ITEM.
[(1)
Public Hearing and consideration of an Ordinance as requested in Zoning Case 2025-007 to amend Article 1 (Legal Framework), Article 3 (Site Plan Review), Article 4 (Amendments), Article 5 (Variances and Appeals of Administrative Decisions), Article 8 (Definitions), Article 9 (Residential Districts), Article 10 (Nonresidential Districts), Article 11 (Overlay Districts), Article 13 (Lot and Building Standards), Article 14 (Allowed Uses and Use Classifications), Article 15 (Use-specific Regulations), Article 16 (Parking and Loading), Article 17 (Landscaping and Tree Preservation), Article 20 (Screening, Fence and Wall Regulations), Article 21 (Residential Adjacency Standards), and Article 25 (Traffic Studies) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City, Ordinance No. 2015-5-2, as heretofore amended, as a result of recent state legislative actions and to ensure compliance with state law; and providing a penalty clause, a repealer clause, a savings clause, a severability clause, a publication clause, and an effective date.
]
>> ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES PRESENTATION, TIME WITH A FIVE-MINUTE REBUTTAL, IF NEEDED.
REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME, WITH 3 MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY AMEND THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY.
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY, AND MAY INCLUDE A CUMULATIVE TIME LIMIT.
SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER OF THE REQUESTS ARE RECEIVED UNTIL THE CUMULATIVE TIME IS EXHAUSTED. ITEM NUMBER 1.
PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AS REQUESTED IN ZONING CASE 2025-7 TO AMEND ARTICLE 1 LEGAL FRAMEWORK ARTICLE 3, SITE PLAN REVIEW.
ARTICLE 4 AMENDMENTS, ARTICLE 5, VARIANCES AND APPEALS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS, ARTICLE 8 DEFINITIONS, ARTICLE 9, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, ARTICLE 10, NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, ARTICLE 11, OVERLAY DISTRICTS, ARTICLE 13, LOT AND BUILDING STANDARDS, ARTICLE 14, ALLOWED USES AND CLASSIFICATIONS, ARTICLE 15 USE-SPECIFIC REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 16, PARKING AND LOADING, ARTICLE 17, LANDSCAPE AND TREE PRESERVATION, ARTICLE 20, SCREENING, FENCE, AND WALL REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 21, RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY STANDARDS AND ARTICLE 25 TRAFFIC STUDIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2015-5-2 AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, AS A RESULT OF RECENT STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS AND TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW, PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE, A REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND A PUBLICATION DATE.
>> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR COUNCIL, AND EXECUTIVES.
I'M CHRISTINA DAY, THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
AS YOU HEARD IN THE DESCRIPTION READ BY MISS HENDERSON, WE HAVE A LOT OF GROUND TO COVER.
I'M GOING TO WORK MY HARDEST TO KEEP IT CONCISE, BUT I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF SLIDES AND QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION.
>> THERE WERE QUITE A FEW LAND USE IMPACT BILLS, THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THREE OF THOSE, THE ONES WITH STARS ARE ONES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE AT THE JOINT WORK SESSION, BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT I WILL UPDATE YOU ON BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE PREVIOUSLY, HOUSE BILL 24 AND 2464 THAT CHANGED THE NOTICE PROCEDURES FOR ZONING CASES, AND ALSO CREATE A NEW NO IMPACT HOME BASED BUSINESS REGULATION WITHIN THE STATE.
THE PROCESS TO DATE, THIS HAS BEEN A MULTI PHASE PROCESS KIND OF IN A CONDENSED TIME FRAME.
WE STARTED OFF BRIEFING P&Z IN MAY FOR THE UPCOMING BILLS, AND WHAT WE WERE HEARING OUT OF THE SESSION.
WE HAD A WORK SESSION WITH P&Z IN JULY FOLLOWED BY THAT JOINT WORK SESSION THAT YOU ALL PARTICIPATED IN.
THEN WE HAD THE P&Z PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE OR ORDINANCE CHANGES RATHER ON AUGUST 6, AND HERE WE ARE AUGUST 25 AT THE COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING.
WE ESTABLISHED SOME GOALS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPLEMENTING THESE ORDINANCES, PRESERVING OUR ABILITY TO FOSTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PRESERVING NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY, AND INTEGRITY, ENSURING ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE, PRESERVING THE DESIRABILITY AND ATTRACTIVENESS OF PLANO AS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE AND WORK BY REQUIRING WELL BUILT MULTIFAMILY AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS, AS WELL AS DIVERSIFYING THE CITY'S HOUSING STOCK.
YOU MAY NOTICE WE'VE UPDATED THESE WITH THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU GAVE US AT THE JOINT SESSION.
ONE PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION FOR STAFF IN DEVELOPING THIS AND FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS WELL WAS TO ENSURE WE MINIMIZED ANY NON CONFORMITIES.
TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, THERE ARE NO USE NON CONFORMITIES CREATED THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE.
HOUSE BILL 24 IS EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1.
THIS CHANGES THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR ZONING CASES RATHER SUBSTANTIALLY.
[00:20:04]
IT DOES REQUIRE NOW THAT SIGNS BE POSTED ON ALL SIDES PREVIOUSLY.THAT WAS NOT PART OF STATE LAW.
IT WAS PART OF THE CITY'S ORDINANCES.
IT CREATES A NEW CATEGORY OF ZONING CHANGES PROTEST THRESHOLDS, AND ALSO REMOVES THE OPTION FOR REQUIRING A CITY COUNCIL SUPERMAJORITY WHEN A ZONING CASE IS DENIED AT P&Z.
I'M JUST GOING TO FOCUS ON A FEW OF THESE THAT I THINK HAVE THE MOST IMPACT.
ONE IS REQUIRING ZONING SIGNS.
PREVIOUSLY, WE'VE BEEN ALLOWED DURING A CERTAIN CITY INITIATED CASES TO UTILIZE COMMUNICATIONS, AND EXTRA OUTREACH IN LIEU OF POSTING SIGNS BECAUSE IT IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
BUT THE STATE IS REQUIRING US TO DO THIS.
COULD BE AT THE CITY'S EXPENSE.
KNOW THAT THE CITY WILL NEED TO START POSTING SIGNS WHEN WE DO A CITY INITIATED ZONING CHANGE.
THIS IS REALLY FOCUSED ON ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING A HIGHER BAR OF PROTEST FOR NEIGHBORS WHEN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED.
I THINK THIS TABLE KIND OF SUMS IT UP.
WHAT WAS SIMPLER IS NOW MORE COMPLICATED.
LAND BASED CASES, WE STILL HAVE A 20% PROTEST WITH A SUPERMAJORITY OF COUNCIL OR SIX VOTES, WHICH IS THE WAY IT IS TODAY.
BUT THEN WE NOW HAVE THESE THREE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.
ONE, IF A CASE IS ADDING ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL, THEN IT HAS MOVED UP TO A 60% PROTEST REQUIREMENT, AND THAT'S JUST TO GET A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.
REALLY, I THINK THAT THE BIGGEST IMPACT WOULD BE IF THEY'RE NOT ALL OF COUNCIL SEATED THAT EVENING.
THEN WE HAVE OTHER PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CHANGES THAT ARE DEFINED UNDER THE LAW WHERE THERE'S NO ABILITY TO PROTEST.
THE OTHER LAND BASED ZONING CASES THAT DON'T FALL INTO ONE OF THE FIRST TWO CATEGORIES ARE GOING TO STICK WITH A 20% PROTEST REQUIRING A SUPERMAJORITY AT COUNCIL.
THE FINAL COMMENT ON HOUSE BILL 24 IS THAT THE ORDINANCES WERE UPDATED TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CITY COUNCIL MAJORITY WHEN P&Z DENIED A ZONING CASE.
THAT'S BEEN OUR PRACTICE FOR AS LONG AS I'M AWARE, BUT THE CITY'S CHARTER DOES NOT ALLOW US TO KEEP THAT IN OUR ORDINANCES WHEN THE ALLOWANCE ISN'T PROVIDED IN STATE LAW, AND THAT WAS STRUCK.
HOUSE BILL 2464 CREATES A NEW NO IMPACT HOME BASED BUSINESS, WHICH IS A REGULATION THAT'S ALREADY IN EFFECT.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES TO ENSURE THEY'RE AWARE AND WE'RE COORDINATED ON THESE EFFORTS.
BUT WE HAVE AN EXISTING HOME OCCUPATION STANDARD IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SO WE LIKE TO KIND OF KEEP THINGS SIMPLE.
IT WOULD BE IDEAL IF WE WERE JUST TO MERGE THESE TOGETHER.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE PRETTY DISTINCT IN A COUPLE OF WAYS, AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO CREATE TWO DIFFERENT USES. HERE'S WHY.
THE HOME OCCUPATION THAT'S EXISTING IN THE ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW ON STREET PARKING IN FRONT OF THE HOME.
IT ALSO ALLOWS ONE EMPLOYEE OTHER THAN THE OCCUPANTS OF THE HOME.
THE HOME BASED BUSINESS THAT'S BEEN CREATED UNDER STATE LAW SAYS YOU CAN'T USE ANY ON STREET PARKING CONNECTED WITH YOUR BUSINESS, BUT IT HAS THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ONLY LIMITED TO THE OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDING.
IT COULD BE A FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ON SITE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
BECAUSE OF THOSE DISTINCTIONS, WE WERE REALLY CONCERNED WITH CREATING NON CONFORMITIES, AND THEREFORE, RECOMMENDING THE NO IMPACT HOME BASED BUSINESS AS A SEPARATE USE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
SENATE BILLS 15,840, AND 2477, WHICH RELATE TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
YOU'VE SEEN THIS SLIDE BEFORE.
YOU CAN SEE THESE BILLS REALLY HAVE A STRONG IMPACT IN THE METROPLEX.
SENATE BILL 15 IS THE SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY BILL THAT WHERE PROPERTY IS ZONED TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES HAS NEVER BEEN PLATTED AND IS MORE THAN FIVE ACRES.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO ALLOW SMALL LOT, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S ALSO PRESCRIPTIVE AS TO THE STANDARDS AND HOW THAT CAN BE ALLOWED.
YOU'VE SEEN THIS MAP BEFORE AS WELL WITH THIS STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF LOCATIONS TO WHERE THIS APPLIES, BUT THERE ARE LOCATIONS, AND IT COULD BE MEANINGFUL TO PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE AREAS.
[00:25:01]
WE WANT TO DISCLOSE THE UNPLATTED AREAS WHERE SINGLE FAMILIES ALLOWED BY RIGHT THAT WE THINK WOULD BE PERMITTED TO DEVELOP UNDER THIS BILL.OUR IMPLEMENTATION IS TO AMEND THE SPECIFIC STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO CREATE A SMALL SINGLE FAMILY STANDARD THAT ALIGNS WITH THE BILL, AND SO PEOPLE COULD BUILD UNDER THAT STANDARD WHERE IT'S ALLOWED.
SENATE BILL 840. THIS ALLOWS MIXED USE OR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN ANY OF OUR NON RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
WE CAN'T REQUIRE ANY KIND OF DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL AS WE HAVE IN THE PAST, AND IT LIMITS WHAT THE CITY CAN REGULATE ANYWHERE MULTIFAMILY IS BUILT.
EVEN IN OUR EXISTING MULTIFAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS, IT CHANGES THE CITY'S ABILITY TO REGULATE THINGS LIKE HEIGHT, DENSITY, SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE, AND PARKING.
WE HAVE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE OUR PERMITS AND OUR PERMITTING PROCESS.
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS.
THIS IS THE MAP THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE REGARDING THE PARCELS OF LAND THAT ARE IMPACTED IN OUR ANALYSIS WITH BLUE REPRESENTING NON RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AND ORANGE REPRESENTING OUR MULTIFAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS.
I'LL JUST MAKE A QUICK MENTION OF SENATE BILL 2477.
THIS ALLOWS CONVERSION OF OFFICE SPACE INTO MULTIFAMILY OR MIXED USE BUILDINGS, AND IT DOES LARGELY PARALLEL SB 840, BUT WE DID MAKE SURE THAT ANY DIFFERENCES WERE ACCOMMODATED IN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
THESE ARE THE AREAS THAT ARE REGULATED BY SB 840, DENSITY, HEIGHT, SETBACKS, PARKING, LOT COVERAGE, OTHER NON RESIDENTIAL USES AND APPROVALS.
ONE OF THE TRICKY THINGS ABOUT THIS BILL IS THAT EACH ONE, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT INDIVIDUALLY BECAUSE DENSITY, CITY WIDE STANDARD, BUT HEIGHT AND SETBACKS ARE LOOKING AT THE SITE INDIVIDUALLY.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE GREATER CHALLENGES IN GOING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE IS LOOKING AT THINGS THROUGH A DIFFERENT LENS BASED ON THE VARIOUS STANDARDS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT BRINGING ALL THE REGULATIONS AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT DENSITY IN THE JOINT WORK SESSION.
THAT PROPOSAL IS IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING.
WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT ADOPTING NEW DESIGN STANDARDS, THINGS THAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE NEGOTIATED THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS ARE PROPOSED AS A STANDARDIZED IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATIONS HERE.
WE'VE UPDATED THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT, AS WELL AS ALLOWING SINGLE FAMILY USES IN SOME NON RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WHERE MULTI FAMILY IS ALLOWED, AND THAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE FOR MORE DENSE SINGLE FAMILY.
REMOVING MULTIFAMILY AS AN ALLOWED USE IN THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN DISTRICT AND REQUIRING SIGNAGE AND NOTICE.
QUICKLY, THIS MAP SHOWS THE HEIGHT STANDARDS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED UNDER THE BILL, BOTH MINIMUMS AND MAXIMUMS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS ARE SOMETHING THAT WHEN IT COMES TO RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY, AND ESPECIALLY NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENCY, WERE THINGS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WAS CONCERNED ABOUT.
WE LOOKED AT STANDARDS IN THE ORDINANCE, AND THERE WAS A YARD REGULATION THAT EFFECTIVELY WAS A HEIGHT REGULATION.
WE REWORKED THAT TO MAKE IT VERY EXPLICITLY A HEIGHT REGULATION.
IT IS SIMILAR TO THE EXISTING STANDARD TODAY, BUT JUST REWORKED, AND IT DOES APPLY TO ALL DEVELOPMENT, SO IS THEREFORE ALLOWED UNDER THE BILL.
PLANO HAS LONG HAD DESIGN STANDARDS.
MULTIFAMILY DESIGN GUIDELINES KIND OF SHOWS YOU WHERE WE WERE.
THESE FOCUS EXCLUSIVELY ON GARDEN STYLE APARTMENTS.
THIS WAS RESCINDED IN 2022 BECAUSE IT JUST REALLY DIDN'T HAVE ANY USE FOR THE STANDARDS BECAUSE SO FEW GARDEN APARTMENTS ARE BUILT TODAY.
WE HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH A PROCESS OF A COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS IMPLEMENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITYWIDE.
THAT WILL THEN BRING US TO SOME OF THE WORK THAT WAS DONE THERE.
WE ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP AS THAT KIND OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS TO IMPLEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY IN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.
WHAT'S BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS SIX PAGES OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTI FAMILY AND MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
IT IS AN ATTACHMENT TO YOUR STAFF REPORT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED AFTER DISCUSSION HERE WAS INCLUDING
[00:30:04]
LEAD CERTIFICATION AS AN INITIAL STEP WITH FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF CODE AMENDMENTS, WORKING WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THE REWRITE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.IN TONIGHT'S PACKAGE, YOU DO SEE A STANDARD LEAD CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT, BUT WE WILL BE FOLLOWING UP TO WORK ON OTHER AMENDMENTS AND BRING A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU WITH THE PROCESS.
THE BILL REQUIRES PARKING TO BE PERMITTED AT ONE SPACE PER UNIT.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT COMBINING THAT MINIMAL PARKING STANDARD WITH COMPACT PARKING.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO ELIMINATE COMPACT PARKING WHERE IT WAS ALLOWED FOR 50% OF SPACES IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS GOVERNMENT DISTRICT.
EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR DISTRICT MODIFICATIONS INCLUDE IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, PROHIBITING BALCONIES AND REQUIRING A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE, ALSO REMOVING ANY STANDARDS THAT WE CAN'T REQUIRE.
BUT THEN CITYWIDE SOME STANDARDS FOR AIR FILTRATION, INTAKE OPENINGS, AND INTERIOR NOISE.
RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN, THESE ARE OUR MORE INTENSE HOUSING STANDARDS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DESIGN DISTRICT THAT WE FELT LIKE FIT NICELY WITH CERTAIN MULTIFAMILY PRODUCTS.
IN ORDER TO PROMOTE MORE HOUSING DIVERSITY AND HOUSING OPTIONS FOR OUR COMMUNITY, IT'S RECOMMENDED TO ALLOW THESE OPTIONS ANYWHERE THAT MULTIFAMILY IS ALLOWED IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS THAT WE THINK ARE APPROPRIATE TO THE DENSITY.
HERE'S THE RECOMMENDATION OF NON RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WHERE MORE DENSE SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCTS WOULD BE ALLOWED.
THEY WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN AREAS AROUND THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED.
ONE OF THE SECONDARY IMPACTS OF THIS RECOMMENDATION IS IT DOES RESULT IN A FEW PARCELS BECAUSE SINGLE FAMILY WOULD BE ALLOWED HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDEVELOP UNDER SB 15.
THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER OPTION FOR THE BLUE PARCELS ON THE SCREEN.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S FOUR OF THEM.
WE ARE PROPOSING BOTH WRITTEN NOTICE AS WELL AS SIGNAGE.
JUST TO HELP THE COMMUNITY ADAPT TO THE CHANGES THAT WE ANTICIPATE.
IT WOULD BE SENT PRIOR TO THE ENGINEERING PROJECT RELEASE BECAUSE WE WANT IT TO HAPPEN CLOSE TO THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE JUST DOING IT BASED ON ZONING STANDARDS, PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS WITHIN 1,500 FEET.
THEN WE DID PROPOSE A FEE TO HELP THE CITY RECOUP OUR COST ON SENDING THESE NOTICES.
THE CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU'LL SEE GUIDING PRINCIPLES, LAND USE ACTIONS, COMMUNITY DESIGN POLICY, AND REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACTIONS, AS WELL AS COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE LAWS OF TEXAS.
FROM YOUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THESE ARE THE ITEMS THEY CHECKED ON THEIR FINDINGS FORMS. THIS ITEM DOES REQUIRE FINDINGS BECAUSE OF CONFLICTS WITH THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, MIX OF USES, DENSITY, AND BUILDING HEIGHTS, UNDER OUR REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACTION 1.
THERE WERE TWO ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT WE FOUND IN REVIEWING THE ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL.
ONE, WE MISSED INPUTTING SINGLE FAMILY IN A PART OF ARTICLE 13, AND THEN ADDITIONAL REFERENCE TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS IS DESIRABLE FOR JUST ENFORCEABILITY.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT AS WELL, ALTHOUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID NOT SEE THESE TWO ITEMS. PUBLIC OUTREACH, I WANTED TO JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'VE DONE TO TRY TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY KNOWS WHAT'S HAPPENING.
WE'VE UTILIZED ALL THE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT ARE GERMANE TO THIS TOPIC, PLAINTIFF CITY NEWS BEST NEIGHBORHOODS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAGE, PROMOTING WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY, MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW.
OUR PLAINTIFF CITY NEWS HAD A VIDEO.
WE HAD POSTS ON PLANO.GOV WHERE PEOPLE COULD SEE JUST IN THE NEWS FEED WHAT WAS HAPPENING.
WE USE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO PUSH THE INFORMATION OUT TO THE COMMUNITY.
THERE WAS TRADITIONAL MEDIA COVERAGE.
I HAVE A SCREENSHOT HERE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS STAR COURIER
[00:35:01]
AND FROM COMMUNITY IMPACT WHERE THEY'VE COVERED THIS ITEM.ADDITIONALLY, WE HAVE OUR STANDARD ZONING CASE RESPONSE MAP WHERE PEOPLE CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION AS WELL AS OUR ACTIVE ZONING PETITION PAGE.
THE MOST WE FELT LIKE WAS PRACTICAL IN THE SHORT TIME THAT WE HAD AND REALLY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT.
THEY WERE WONDERFUL TO WORK WITH.
WE'VE ALSO HAD A NUMBER OF PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THIS ITEM, OUR PRELIMINARY OPEN PRESENTATION, THE JOINT WORK SESSION, A P&Z WORK SESSION, AND THIS IS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING.
JUST NOTING THERE HAVE BEEN LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC NOTICE AND PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> WITH THAT, WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE ONLINE RESPONSE THAT IS IN OPPOSITION, AND THEN WE RECEIVED 13 OTHER LETTERS AND EMAILS.
THERE WERE FROM SIX TOTAL UNIQUE INDIVIDUALS, FIVE PLUS EIGHT RESPONSES FROM A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL.
THOSE WERE INCLUDED AND SENT OUT TO THE COUNCIL, I BELIEVE, EARLIER TODAY.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THESE CHANGES BY A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO AND ISSUED FINDINGS.
THERE ARE TWO SMALL AMENDMENTS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, AS NOTED IN YOUR COVER SHEET, AND WITH THAT, I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>> THANK YOU, CHRISTINA. COUNCIL MEMBER KARA.
>> THANK YOU, CHRISTINA, I APPRECIATE THAT.
I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
I MEAN, YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING ANY NON-CONFORMING USES BECAUSE OF THESE CHANGES, CORRECT?
>> HAVE THE MINIMUM UNIT SIZES CHANGED AT ALL FROM OUR PREVIOUS ZONING?
>> THEY DID. WE DID HAVE MINIMUM UNIT SIZES IN OUR MULTIFAMILY, ONE, TWO, AND THREE ZONING DISTRICTS.
WE'VE LOOKED AT CARRYING THOSE ACROSS THE BOARD SINCE NOW MULTIFAMILY HAS ALLOWED SO MANY DIFFERENT PLACES.
>> THE UNIT SIZE FOR ONE BEDROOM, FOR EXAMPLE, REALLY HASN'T CHANGED.
IT'S JUST APPLYING ACROSS THE ENTIRE [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT'S APPLYING ACROSS THE BOARD.
>> ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, THE ZONING CHANGES.
ARE THESE BEING EQUALLY APPLIED ACROSS PLANO? IN PARTICULAR, I'M THINKING ABOUT ANY OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.
>> THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS WE'RE LOOKING AT ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS BECAUSE SOMETIMES THEY MAY HAVE A SPECIFIC HEIGHT STANDARD THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S IN THE BASE ZONING.
WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFICS.
THEY MAY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S TIED TO IT.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND ASSESS THE FACTS.
>> DO YOU FEEL THAT SOME OF THE DISCRETIONARY RESTRICTIONS WE HAVE IN THERE, LIKE LEAD, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT IS IT DOING FOR PLANO, IS IT PROTECTING US FROM SOME VULNERABILITIES FROM ADDITIONAL COST, I MEAN, WHAT ARE THE REAL REASONS BEHIND THOSE?
>> I THINK THE REAL REASONS ARE THAT NOW THE CITY JUST IS LOSING A LOT OF ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT COMES TO THESE CASES.
WE WERE WORKING ON STANDARDS THROUGH THE COMMUNITY DESIGN PROCESS, BUT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT THOSE BEFORE THIS CHANGE IN STATE LAW.
IT'S SUCH A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE LAND USE PATTERN IN THE CITY.
WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO DO SOMETHING EXPEDIENT TO ENSURE A QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT.
ESPECIALLY, LEAD IS PRETTY FOCUSED ON SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS, AND IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE DENSE DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMMUNITY, I BELIEVE THOSE SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS BECOME MUCH MORE IMPORTANT.
>> DO YOU FEEL THAT PLANO IS AT A DIFFERENT POSITION IN TERMS OF DESIRE TO ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, OR WE STILL THAT'S SOMETHING WE STILL WANT TO DO?
>> I THINK WE STILL DO WANT TO ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH DEVELOPERS, AND WE WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS, WHAT RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THAT SPECIFIC PROPERTY, IS IT IN A TIF, IS THERE POTENTIALLY A PID? I MEAN, THERE ARE JUST VARIOUS FINANCIAL TOOLS WE COULD USE, AS WELL AS THE CITY'S EXISTING FUNDING.
TO ME, WE'RE GOING TO JUST NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT'S AVAILABLE, AND I THINK WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SIDE AND THE NEXT ITEM.
>> YES, THANK YOU. CHRISTINA, THANKS FOR A GREAT PRESENTATION.
WITH THESE INTRODUCTIONS OF THE SENATE BILLS AND HOW IT'S REALLY AFFECTING HOW WE HAVE DONE BUSINESS AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO BUSINESS IN THE FUTURE.
REALLY, MY CONCERN HERE IS WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF A REWRITE, IF YOU RECALL, THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT OUR ZONING SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES, AND ALSO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND TRYING TO HAVE IT TO WHERE THEY MARRY, AND WE REMOVED SOME OF THE AMBIGUITY THAT LED TO SOME OF DEVELOPERS' CONFUSION.
[00:40:05]
I'M LOOKING AT THIS REWRITE, AND YOU'RE NOW TELLING ME THAT THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK IN 2026.HOW ARE WE GOING TO HELP THE CITY WITH THE HOUSING NEED THAT WE HAVE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPERS TO AVOID THAT CONFUSION AS TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW, HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT DOING THIS, AND STILL BE COMPLIANT WITH STATE LAW? I MEAN, IS IT JUST GOING TO BE PATIENTS AND MAYBE SPAGHETTI THROW UP AGAINST THE WALL AND SEE WHAT STICKS, I MEAN, HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT?
>> THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE'VE DONE SO MUCH OUTREACH, IS WE WANTED TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT AND LET ANYONE THAT'S INTERESTED IN DEVELOPMENT KNOW CHANGES ARE COMING.
WE ALSO WE IN PARALLEL WORKING ON THE CHANGES.
IT WAS A LITTLE HARD TO COMMUNICATE EXACTLY WHAT THE CHANGES WERE UNTIL WE MADE IT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
ONCE THE PROCESS IS COMPLETE, THEN WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ACTIVELY ON IMPLEMENTATION.
WE HAVE A LONG LIST OF IMPLEMENTATION ITEMS WHERE WE'RE UPDATING THINGS WE'RE CREATING A WEBSITE, AND WE'RE WORKING ON VARIOUS OUTREACH TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT.
NOW, ON THE LEAD RIGHT SIDE, WE'LL HAVE CHANGE ON TOP OF CHANGE, ESSENTIALLY, BECAUSE HERE IN 18 MONTHS OR SO, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE CHANGE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO PREVENT THAT.
THE BEST THING I THINK WE CAN DO IS JUST GOOD QUALITY, FREQUENT COMMUNICATION.
>> THE SECOND PART QUESTION I HAVE REALLY IS SAFEGUARDING THE CITIZENS, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT CNA BILL 2477, WHICH IS THE REPURPOSING OF OFFICE TOWERS AND OFFICE BUILDINGS TO RESIDENTIAL.
IN PARTICULAR, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, WE WERE LOOKING AT OUR HEIGHTS BASICALLY BEING IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT HEIGHT OF SOME BUILDINGS THAT ARE EXISTING.
WE HAVE A FEW BUILDINGS IN TOWN THAT ARE 15 TO 20 STORIES TALL, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE GOOD CANDIDATES FOR RESIDENTIAL REUSE, IF YOU WILL.
WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE SURROUNDING THOSE AREAS FROM BASICALLY THEIR PRIVACY.
BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SETBACKS RIGHT NOW AS WE STAIR-STEP THE SETBACKS TO PROTECT THAT PRIVACY.
BUT WITH THE HIGH RISE, THAT'D BE VERY CHALLENGING TO DO.
ARE THOSE BUILDINGS, WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T TURN IT INTO RESIDENTIAL, OR HOW ARE WE GOING TO ADDRESS THOSE?
>> I DON'T HONESTLY KNOW THAT THERE IS A WAY THAT WE CAN ADDRESS IT BECAUSE THE STATE HAS TAKEN THOSE TOOLS AWAY FROM US.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE NEXT TO A HIGH-RISE THAT'S ALREADY THERE, THAT'S ONLY USED DURING THE COURSE OF THE DAY, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE RESIDENCY THERE.
I'M NOT SURE HOW WE GO ABOUT PROTECTING THOSE EXISTING RESIDENTS.
>> I THINK IF A DEVELOPMENT WERE TO COME IN, WE WOULD DO WHAT WE COULD UNDER THE LAW WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN, BUT THE LAW IS VERY RESTRICTIVE AND VERY PRESCRIPTIVE, AND WE MUST ALLOW OFFICE CONVERSION.
I THINK THERE'S LITTLE WE CAN DO, ESPECIALLY ON EXISTING BUILDINGS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATIONS.
>> THERE'S SO MUCH TO UNPACK IN THIS, AND I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE AND RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND MY FIRST RESPONSE IS REALLY TO WANT TO BE FAIR AND TRANSPARENT, WHICH OBVIOUSLY YOU MAY HAVE REACHED MORE PEOPLE THAN BEFORE YOU GOT TO ME BECAUSE I WAS HEARING FROM OTHER PEOPLE BEFORE I HAD READ MY PACKET TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE HAPPENING AND MY KNEE JERK REACTION WAS, WELL, IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR TO PEOPLE THAT HAVE THESE PLANS FOR THEIR PROPERTIES AND EVERYTHING AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE THE RESPONSE HAS BEEN THAT THIS HAS BEEN A KNEE JERK REACTION AND THAT MAYBE WE'RE GOING A LITTLE TOO FAR.
BUT AS I'VE TALKED IT OVER WITH STAFF AND OTHER PEOPLE, I REALLY DON'T FEEL THAT I'D BE DOING MY JOB IF I DIDN'T DO EVERYTHING AND MY CAPABILITIES TO SAFEGUARD THE GROWTH, THE LITTLE BIT THAT'S LEFT OF THE CITY.
EVEN AS PAINFUL AS IT IS TO SEE SOME THINGS THAT AND THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED TO ME, AND IT FEELS THIS WAY, THAT COMMITMENTS THAT WE MADE, THINGS THAT WE SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE ORDINANCE, AND THEN SAYING, WELL, NOW, AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT.
IT'S PAINFUL, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO AS WE NAVIGATE THIS PROCESS, SINCE IT IS NEW, AND AS WE DO INVOLVE THE REWRITE COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING.
[00:45:08]
MR. LYLE, YOU BEAT ME TO IT.THE REASON I BROUGHT UP THE APPEALS PROCESS A TALKING ABOUT PARKS WAS WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT, AND WHAT I HOPE WE CAN FIND A WAY TO ADDRESS IS BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH COMING AT US NOW A WAY FOR DEVELOPERS AND INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE IDEAS OR HAVE REQUESTS, MAYBE FOR VARIANCES AS WE'RE FIGURING OUT REALLY HOW WE'RE GOING TO NAVIGATE TO HAVE A WAY TO APPROACH CITY STAFF.
I DON'T KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE PARK SITUATION, IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IN FRONT OF THE PARKS AND REC BOARD TO FLOAT SOME IDEAS, BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO I MEAN, STAFF HAS THEIR HANDS FULL.
THEY CAN'T NECESSARILY HEAR EVERY IDEA, EVERY REQUEST, AND VET EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, BUT TO MAYBE HAVE ACCESSIBILITY TO MORE OF SOME CITIZENS' ADVISORY.
I REALLY HAVEN'T THOUGHT THIS THROUGH, DON'T HAVE SUGGESTIONS.
I'M PUTTING IT OUT THERE FOR STAFF TO CONSIDER, BUT WHETHER IT'S FOR PARK FEES, AND A DEVELOPER HAS THE INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE ABOUT WHAT THE FEES ARE THAT ARE ALREADY SET ASIDE, AND WHAT THE PARK AMENITIES ARE ALREADY IN THE AREA, AND THEY WANT TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT MAYBE A WAIVER SHOULD BE PUT OUT THERE.
I KNOW THAT UP UNTIL 2019, WE HAD IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES THE ABILITY FOR THE PARK FEE TO BE WAIVED, AND THAT WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED IN 2019.
THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPERS THAT ARE, I MEAN, SERIOUSLY IMPACTED BY THAT IN AREAS THAT OTHERWISE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DO AGREE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT EVERY SITUATION INDIVIDUALLY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A WAY FOR US TO MAKE THAT PROCESS MORE ACCESSIBLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL, WHETHER IT'S AS A REMINDER, COUNSEL IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE, PUBLIC COMMENTS, EMAIL, PHONE CALLS, IN PERSON.
WE DO TRY TO MAKE OURSELVES AVAILABLE, BUT JUST SOME OTHER WAYS TO AS WE'RE FLESHING OUT THIS PROCESS, AND AS SO MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING IMPACTED AND NEW DEVELOPERS THAT THEY HAVE THAT ABILITY.
THEN I ALSO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW THAT THERE'S A FEW DAYS LEFT STILL TO VEST IF YOU HAVE PROPERTY AND YOU WANT IT COVERED UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCES THAT YOU HAVE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1ST, IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO DO THAT.
THAT'S, I APPRECIATE THE TRANSPARENCY, TRYING TO GET OUT THERE.
THERE'S NEVER ENOUGH COMMUNICATION.
THERE'S ACTUALLY TOO MUCH A LOT OF TIMES COMING AT US FROM SO MANY DIFFERENT PLACES, YOU MISS WHAT IT IS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, THAT'S IT.
I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE TO BRING THIS UP, I STARTED TO BRING IT UP DURING THE PARK FEE COMMENTS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE MAKING THIS PROCESS BECAUSE IT IS PAINFUL FOR ALL OF US FOR THE DEVELOPERS FOR US AS A COUNCIL, FOR US AS A CITY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO LET THE CITY GROW THE WAY THAT WE WANT IT TO TO GIVE US THE RESULT THAT WE WANT OUR CITIZENS WANT.
I JUST WANT TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO MAKE IT AS UNPAINFUL AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> SURE. TWO THINGS THAT MIGHT INTEREST YOU.
ONE, IN THE REWRITE PROCESS, WE ARE LOOKING AT A SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY.
THEN, SO I THINK THAT'S FORTHCOMING WITH THE REWRITE.
THEN, IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS WE HAVE, DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, P&Z CAN WAIVE OR MODIFY THE REQUIREMENTS WITH SOME CERTAIN FINDINGS.
WE'VE TRIED TO BUILD IN SOME SAFETY VALVES, I WANT TO SAY, IN THIS PROCESS, WHERE WE CAN, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE KNOW EVERYTHING'S NEW.
>> APPRECIATE IT. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> WE DO HAVE FOUR SPEAKERS THIS EVENING.
THE FIRST ONE IS WILLIAM PIERCE CRAVENS, AND HE IS COMING IN ON ZOOM.
MR. CRAVENS, IF YOU CAN TURN ON YOUR CAMERA AND GO AHEAD.
>> MAYOR, CITY STAFF, AND COUNCIL MEMBER.
MY NAME IS WILLIAM PIERCE CRAVENS.
I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER AND BUSINESS OWNER, AND RESIDENT OF DOWNTOWN PLANO AT 1028 17TH STREET.
AS A FAMILY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, WE'VE HAD A LONG HISTORY IN DOWNTOWN PLANO, MAKING MANY LONG-TERM, SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENTS IN THE CITY.
[00:50:03]
COMMEND THE STAFF FOR THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THEY'VE PUT TOGETHER AND THE SWEEPING CHANGES OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH VARIOUS IMPACTFUL SENATE BILLS.HOWEVER, I FEEL THAT THERE ARE MANY DISCRETIONARY AMENDMENTS INCLUDED THEREIN, WHICH WILL RESULT IN AN INCREASED COST OF DEVELOPMENT, OR WILL FORCE MANY CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS TO BECOME NON-CONFORMING TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
I THINK MANY OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED IN RESPONSE TO SB840 AND SB15, ETC, WILL SUBSTANTIALLY IMPACT FUTURE DESIRE TO DEVELOP COMMERCIAL PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF PLANO, SPECIFICALLY, EAST PLANO AND DOWNTOWN, WHICH IS WHERE OUR CORE ACTIVITY LIES.
MOST NOTABLY AND SPECIFICALLY, THE PROPOSED DELETION OF SECTION 6.2.A.7 FROM THE CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IS A MAJOR REVERSAL IN THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO DOWNTOWN PROPERTY OWNERS, WHEREBY THE CITY COMMITTED TO FUND 100% OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPLEMENTING THE DOWNTOWN STREETS PLAN.
THIS PROPOSED CHANGE HAS HAD NO STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT WHATSOEVER, NO PUBLIC INPUT, AND MANY PROPERTY OWNERS ARE JUST NOW LEARNING ABOUT THIS.
THE INCLUSION OF THIS SECTION IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, WHICH ONLY APPLIES TO THE DOWNTOWN STREETS PLAN, WAS CRUCIAL TO GAINING PUBLIC SUPPORT WHEN IT WAS PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER OF 2023.
IN MY VIEW, THIS REVERSAL IN COMMITMENT IMPACTS CURRENT AND FUTURE INVESTMENTS, BOTH LARGE AND SMALL, IN DOWNTOWN.
I ALSO FEEL THAT THE DISCRETIONARY AMENDMENTS THAT WERE MENTIONED, SUCH AS LEAD CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS, MINIMUM UNIT SIZING, THE ELIMINATION OF COMPACT PARKING SPACES, INCREASED LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, INCREASED PARK FEES, HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, BOTH MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM, ETC, ALL INCREASE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT. I FEEL THEY [OVERLAPPING]
I HOPE THAT YOU RECONSIDER IN REINCORPORATING 6.2.
A.7 INTO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, AND I HOPE YOU GIVE THE PUBLIC SOME TIME TO RESPOND TO THE MANY DISCRETIONARY AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING INCLUDED WITHOUT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS. THANK YOU.
>> THE NEXT SPEAKER IS WILLIAM L. CRAVENS.
FOR MANY YEARS, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HAD QUITE AN INVESTMENT IN PLANO.
I'VE PERSONALLY BEEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS IN PLANO FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS NOW.
>> MR. CRAVENS, GET CLOSER TO THE, PUT IT A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOU.
>> I'VE BEEN THROUGH TODAY'S PLANS, TOMORROW'S PLANS, AND YESTERDAY'S PLANS.
THROUGHOUT ALL OF THAT, THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF INPUT TO MAJOR CHANGES IN THE SUBDIVISION PLAN.
>> I UNDERSTAND HOW HARD THE STAFF HAS WORKED AT THIS.
THEY'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB PIERCING THROUGH SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES THAT THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN THIS SB 840 OR ANY OF THESE NEW MATTERS.
WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS AND WE'VE DISCUSSED SEVERAL OF THEM HERE.
COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE BROUGHT UP UNKNOWNS THAT WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THESE THINGS MAY END UP LYING, BECAUSE IT'S ALSO NEW TO EVERYONE.
I WOULD HOPE THAT COUNCIL WOULD TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THIS.
GET SOME MORE INPUT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND LET THIS THING LIE FOR ABOUT 90 DAYS, SO THAT YOU CAN GET THE INPUT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY WHICH I DON'T THINK YOU REALLY GOT AT THIS POINT.
NO ONE KNEW WHAT THIS BILL WAS EVEN GOING TO PASS UNTIL THE GOVERNOR SIGNED IT.
CONSEQUENTLY, THERE WAS LITTLE FOR ANYONE TO ANTICIPATE.
THE STAFF DID AS GOOD A JOB AS POSSIBLY ANYONE COULD DO.
[00:55:04]
I JUST I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT MAY BE IN THIS DOCUMENT.I HOPE YOU WILL GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT SOMEWHERE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW IT COULD HURT WHEN ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO DO IS STIPULATE THE CITY IS GOING TO LIVE BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE UNITED STATES. THANK YOU.
>> WELL, I MET JUDGE LYLE IN THE HALL, AND I TALKED TO JUDGE MCNULTY AND HE SAID, ''WE WENT BACK 10 GENERATIONS TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL WEREN'T RELATED''.[LAUGHTER] IT WAS GOOD TO MEET HIM.
JUST TO GIVE YOU ALL SOME QUICK FACTS HERE.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SINCE IT WAS PASSED, THERE HAVE BEEN 15 CASES THAT HAVE REQUIRED FINDINGS, 11 OF THEM HAVE BEEN APPROVED ANYWAY.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN FOLLOWING THE COMP PLAN ANYWAY.
WE FIND OURSELVES AROUND THE COMP PLAN THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ZONING ACCORDING TO.
THERE'S 320 PAGES OF PD LANGUAGE IN PLANO, 320 PAGES.
THERE'S ALMOST AS MUCH PD LANGUAGE WHICH ARE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS OR EXCEPTIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS THERE IS ZONING ORDINANCE.
IF I HAD TO SUMMARIZE PLANO'S RESPONSE IT WOULD BE WITH MS. DAY, OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR'S WORDS.
THE REAL REASON IS LOSING DISCRETION AND I WOULD CHANGE THE WORD DISCRETION TO CONTROL.
I THINK THERE'S SOME VALIDITY TO IT.
I THINK THE STATES COME IN AND SAID, WE'RE GOING TO PLAY ON YOUR FIELD AND THE PLANO RESPONSE IS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR BALL AND GO HOME.
MR. KEHR, YOU MADE A CARE. I'M SORRY.
YOU MADE A COMMENT IN THE JOINT MEETING ABOUT OPPORTUNITY.
I JUST SEE US TAKING OUR BALL AND GOING HOME.
THE LANGUAGE THAT MR. CRAVENS JUST SPOKE OF, I BELIEVE WAS GIVEN TO YOU ALL.
ESSENTIALLY SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW STATE LAW.
THE EHA THAT THEN BECAME THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR, THAT THING SHOULD HAVE BEEN THROWN OUT A VERY LONG TIME AGO.
IT'S JUST A HINDRANCE THAT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO PROTECT ANYONE.
I CHECKED THE MERV RATINGS ON FILTERS.
MERV 10 IS THE MOST YOU CAN FIND AT A HOME DEPOT AND THEY'RE VERY EXPENSIVE RELATIVE TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BUY, 40, $50 FOR THAT FILTER.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HIGHER RATINGS THAN THAT.
IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
YOUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER RECENTLY SAID TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ''I THINK I KNOW THE DIRECTION COUNCIL WANTS TO GO ON THIS''.
DOES HE NOT KNOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE AN INDEPENDENT BODY MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU GUYS? HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE GUIDING THEM TO WHAT HE THINKS Y'ALL ALREADY WANT.
THE ZONING IS BROKEN IN PLANO.
MINIMUM UNIT SIZES SHOULD FOLLOW THE BUILDING CODE THAT WOULD BE THAT SIMPLE.
[OVERLAPPING] I'LL JUST CLOSE WITH THIS.
THE 90TH LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS JUST A FEW MONTHS AWAY.
THEY HAVE THE BIGGER STICK. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I RESIDE AT 1814N PLACE, PLANO, TEXAS 75074.
I WANT TO START BY THANKING ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT, SPENT EVALUATING TONIGHT'S PROPOSALS.
THIS PAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION I HAD THE HONOR OF JOINING MY PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION, THE TEXAS SOCIETY OF ARCHITECTS IN AUSTIN.
WE MET WITH LAWMAKERS AND ADVOCATED FOR ISSUES IMPORTANT TO OUR PROFESSION.
WE SUPPORTED MANY OF THE ADOPTED PRO-HOUSING BILLS.
TEXAS ARCHITECTS POSITION STATEMENT ON HOUSING ATTAINABILITY READS, ''WE ARE COMMITTED TO SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO IMPROVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, AND AVAILABILITY AND TO INCREASE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR ALL TEXANS.
ARCHITECTS ARE UNIQUELY QUALIFIED TO ADVISE ON LAND DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND ADDRESS HOUSING ATTAINABILITY THROUGH INTENTIONAL DESIGN''.
BILLS LIKE SB 840 ARE A RECOGNITION BY OUR STATE LEADERS THAT HOUSING IS A SERIOUS CONCERN ACROSS TEXAS.
FURTHER, THESE BILLS ARE A CALL TO ACTION FOR US TO ADDRESS THIS CHALLENGE HEAD ON.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE PROPOSALS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING DID NOT MEET THE CHALLENGE.
THEY GO BEYOND MERE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW,
[01:00:02]
ADDING ADDITIONAL BARRIERS AND COSTS TO NEW HOUSING CONSTRUCTION SUCH AS LEAD, HEIGHT MINIMUMS, NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.THERE'S NO URGENCY TO UPDATE OUR REGULATIONS BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE STATE LAWS.
IN FACT, THE RIGOROUS ANALYSIS BY STAFF DEMONSTRATES THAT THEY ARE WELL EQUIPPED TO EVALUATE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS UNDER THE NEW REGULATIONS AND WITH RESPECT TO THE CURRENT ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES.
IF SOMETHING MUST BE PASSED THIS EVENING, IT SHOULD BE STRICTLY LIMITED TO ALIGNING OUR ORDINANCES WITH STATE LAW.
THE BULK OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD BE MORE PROPERLY CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE ZONING REWRITE PROCESS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE COMMENTS TO THE COUNCIL.
LET ME JUST SAY, YOU-ALL ARE LOOKING TO PUNCH YOUR BUTTON.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION.
SINCE I'VE BEEN A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY, SINCE I'VE BEEN ON P&Z, SINCE I'VE BEEN THE MAYOR OF THE CITY, I HAVE BEEN PRO HOUSING WHETHER IT BE DENTS OR WHETHER IT BE SINGLE FAMILY.
I HAVE ALWAYS SUPPORTED MORE HOUSING IN THIS CITY.
WHAT SENATE BILL 84015 HAVE DONE IS THEY'VE TAKEN COMPLETE AUTHORITY AWAY FROM WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
I THINK ONE THING I WILL ALWAYS SAY ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY IS THEY GIVE US FEEDBACK ON WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE IN THIS COMMUNITY.
THIS COUNCIL IS RECEPTIVE TO LISTENING TO WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS.
THE ONE THING THAT HAPPENS ON SEPTEMBER,1 IS WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY ABILITY TO WHAT WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE IN CERTAIN AREAS.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PLANO HAS BEEN WELL KNOWN FOR ALL OVER THE COUNTRY IS OUR CORPORATE COMMUNITY AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH NOW CAN BE TAKEN AWAY BY A DEVELOPER THAT JUST SAYS, I'D JUST RATHER BUILD MULTIFAMILY.
WHAT WE DO HAVE CONTROL OVER IS THE QUALITY OF THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT GETS BUILT.
I CAN'T ARGUE WITH YOU THAT SOME OF THOSE THINGS MIGHT COST MORE MONEY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE HAVING OUR DOORS KNOCKED DOWN BY PEOPLE THAT ARE WANTING TO BUILD TAX CREDIT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IF THAT IS THE SOLUTION THAT THE STATE HOUSE CAME UP WITH, I'D BE VERY SURPRISED IF THAT TURNED OUT TO BE THAT WAY.
WHAT WE JUST LIKE TO DO IS SET THE BAR ON SET.
BEFORE SEPTEMBER, 1 WE ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE REASONABLE AND LOWER THOSE AREAS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE WORKING.
BUT TO JUST IGNORE IT AND JUST ALLOW WHATEVER SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT IN ALL OF THOSE AREAS THAT MS. DAY SHOWED US, I THINK IS IRRESPONSIBLE ON OUR PART.
ALL WE'RE SAYING IS, WE WANT TO SET A STANDARD OF A QUALITY OF BUILDING THAT'S BEING BUILT AND MAKE THEM STAND BY THAT QUALITY.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE NOT TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM THE DEVELOPERS OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD.
IN FACT, THEY HAVE A MUCH BROADER ABILITY TO BUILD WHEREVER THEY WANT IN ALL THOSE AREAS THAT WE NOTED EARLIER.
THE THING OF IT IS, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO BE SELF ASSURED THAT THOSE DEVELOPMENTS ARE AT THE HIGHEST QUALITY THAT BELONG IN THE CITY OF PLANO.
WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT. WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO BE ABLE TO STOP THOSE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE DEVELOPMENTS AT A HIGH QUALITY LEVEL.
I WILL PASS THIS ON TO COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.
IS IT NOT ON? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.
I HAD THE PLEASURE AND HONOR TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THREE YEARS PRIOR TO BEING ELECTED TO THE COUNCIL.
[01:05:04]
DURING THAT THREE YEARS, WE WENT IN BASICALLY THROUGH COVID AND CAME UP WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH OF COURSE, SOME OF YOU REMEMBER AS MR. CRAVENS BROUGHT UP REPLACED A TOMORROW PLAN, AND PROBABLY A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL BE CALLED A FUTURE PLAN IN THE FUTURE.I'M NOT SURE. BUT THAT BEING SAID, MIRRORING WHAT THE MAYOR SAID HERE.
THAT COM PLAN WAS CONSTRUCTED TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS.
WE LISTENED TO THE CITIZENS ABOUT THE APARTMENT ISSUE.
WE LISTENED TO THE CITIZENS THEY'RE SAYING, ''WE DON'T WANT APARTMENTS IN CERTAIN AREAS''.
THEY WANTED TO HAVE US BACK TO WHERE WE WERE JUST THE OLD FARMING COMMUNITY.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT WHERE WE ARE.
THAT IS NOT WHERE NORTH TEXAS IS.
RIGHT NOW IN COLLIN COUNTY, I THINK I HEARD THAT WE'RE GROWING ABOUT 1,800 PEOPLE PER DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR.
THEY LIVE SOMEWHERE AND THEY WANT TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF EXCELLENCE.
OUR EMPLOYERS WOULD LIKE THEIR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN PLANO, THE SHORTER COMMUTE.
WE WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY IN PLANO.
THE STATE BASICALLY MANDATED THESE SENATE BILLS AND TOOK AWAY LOCAL CONTROL. THEY DID.
WE'LL BEGONE THAT THE STATE HAS ANY TYPE OF FEDERAL INTERFERENCE, BUT THEY IN TURN WANT TO HAVE INTERFERENCE ON LOCAL CONTROL.
YOU CAN SEE THE LANGUAGE ON HOW THEY DID IT.
I WOULD RECOMMEND ANYTIME YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE WAY THE STATE WENT, LOOK AT WHO YOU VOTED FOR AND MAYBE LOOK FOR ANOTHER CANDIDATE.
BUT RIGHT NOW THE CITY'S TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SYSTEM, A SET OF ORDINANCES THAT'LL BE COMPLIANT WITH THE STATE LAW COME SEPTEMBER,1.
WILL THERE BE ROOM FOR NEGOTIATIONS IN THE FUTURE? ABSOLUTELY. BUT THE POINTS ABOUT LEAD HAVE TO BE DRIVEN BY THE FACT IS WE NEED TO HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE SUSTAINABLE, CONSERVE ENERGY BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING RESTRICTIONS NOW, OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES ON ELECTRICITY AND WATER.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE LEAD REQUIREMENTS RIGHT NOW.
YES, THE COST OF CONSTRUCT IS GOING TO BE GOING UP.
BUT THE COST OF EVERYTHING ELSE IS GOING UP, TOO.
WE HAVE TO KEEP THOSE THINGS IN MIND.
I THINK ECONOMICS WILL BE DRIVING THE CONVERSION OF OFFICE BUILDINGS TO RESIDENTIAL.
THEY'LL BE THE DRIVER BEHIND ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR, BECAUSE THE PRICE OF LAND IS SO EXPENSIVE THERE.
I THINK WE ARE IN A POSITION HERE WHERE IF WE FACE FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT THE DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF PLANO CAN BE HAPPY WITH.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S SOMEWHAT OUT OF OUR CONTROL BECAUSE THE STATE IS DRIVING THIS.
MR. MAYOR, THAT'S WHERE MY POSITION IS.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE I'M ON. GREAT. AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I'M TRYING TO MARRY A COUPLE OF THINGS TOGETHER.
FIRST OF ALL, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A HUGE NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING.
THERE WAS A STUDY THAT THE CITY OF PLANO DID AND WE SHOWED THERE'S A BIG NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE'S A BIG NEED FOR HOUSING DIVERSITY.
WE NEED DIFFERENT HOUSING, NOT JUST APARTMENTS AND NOT JUST BIG HOMES IN ORDER TO REALLY SATISFY THE NEEDS FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK HERE TO LIVE HERE.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME I ALSO KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS HERE, WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR TAX BASE, THAT THESE NEW BILLS HAVE INTRODUCED OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE EXPOSED TO A LOT OF COSTS THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN EXPOSED TO BECAUSE WE WERE ABLE TO GET INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
I WOULD SAY THAT EVEN THESE THINGS THAT ARE PROPOSED IN THE ZONING TODAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THIS DOESN'T PRECLUDE ANY OF THAT.
DEVELOPERS CAN COME TALK TO US.
WE'RE READY FOR BUSINESS, WE'RE READY TO NEGOTIATE, WE'RE READY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING TO WORK.
BUT I TELL YOU IT HAS TO WORK FOR EVERYBODY.
IT HAS TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF PLANO AND OUR CITIZENS.
IT HAS TO WORK FOR THE DEVELOPER AND ALSO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO LIVE THERE.
[01:10:03]
THERE'S A LOT TO BALANCE.I'M NOT TRYING TO OVERSIMPLIFY ANYTHING HERE, BUT I THINK THAT AS WE LOOK AT THIS, AS WE PROTECT THE CITY SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, KNOWING THAT THERE'S POTENTIAL CHANGES COMING DOWN THE PIKE THAT WE'LL BE IN A BETTER PLACE ONCE WE LEARN MORE ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH STATE LAW, POTENTIAL LAWSUITS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I THINK THAT WHAT I'M HEARING TODAY IN MY MIND MAKES SENSE THAT IT'S A GOOD MEASURE FOR NOW.
SEPTEMBER, 1 IS COMING AND THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE HAD INITIATED.
BUT I THINK IT DOES A GOOD BALANCE OF PROTECTING THE CITIZENS, AS WELL AS GIVING THE DEVELOPERS REALLY SOME CONSISTENCY HERE.
THEY KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT FROM US AND WE HAVE SOME GOOD CHANGES COMING DOWN THE WAY.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK IT'S BEEN SAID THAT APARTMENTS CONSTRUCTION IN PLANO IS THE SINGLE MOST CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC WE HAVE.
I'VE BEEN ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ARGUMENT AND IN SEEKING THE VERY BEST DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, WE'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER TO ALLOW APARTMENTS, NOT TO ALLOW APARTMENTS, TO ALLOW MANY APARTMENTS, TO ALLOW SOME APARTMENTS, ET CETERA.
>> NOW THAT CONSIDERATION AND CHOICE IS REALLY NOT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO WORK WITH.
MANY FOLKS HERE HAVE ASKED THAT WE SHOULD TAKE TIME TO PROVIDE TIME FOR INPUT, REFLECTION, CONSIDERATION BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD ON CHANGES.
WELL, I THINK WE DO NEED TO PAUSE FOR REFLECTION ON THESE CHANGES THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS IMPOSED ON US.
BUT I HAVE TO AGREE WITH SOME OF THE OTHERS WHO SAY THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE SOME PRELIMINARY CHANGES IN PLACE TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROLIFERATION OF MULTIFAMILY IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I WOULD ENCOURAGE OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO SEEK INPUT NOW AND TO WRAP AS MUCH OF THAT INPUT INTO THE CHANGES THAT THEY WILL BE PRESENTING TO US IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE CAN TRULY EXPLORE HOW BEST TO PROVIDE ANY CONTROLS THAT WE CAN DEVELOP FOR OUR USE AND CONSIDERATION IN THE FUTURE.
BUT IT IS NECESSARY FOR US TO HAVE SOMETHING NOW IN EFFECT BEFORE ANY OPPORTUNITY IS PRESENTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER DOWNS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THROUGHOUT THE CONVERSATION OF ALL OF THESE CHANGES IN BILLS.
I'VE LISTENED TO THE INPUT OF EVERY CITIZEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW CHALLENGING THIS REALLY IS, AND WE'RE IN AN UNTENABLE SITUATION THAT IS DRIVEN BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE.
EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID HERE FROM THE MAYOR, TO COUNCILMAN KEHR, TO COUNCILMAN HORNE AND COUNCILMAN LAVINE, I AGREE WITH, AND I SIMPLY JUST WANT TO SAY ONE THING FROM MY POSITION.
ARTICLE 11, SECTION 5 OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION TELLS US THAT A CITY CANNOT HAVE ORDINANCES THAT ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW, AND AS A LAWYER, I SIT HERE AND I SAY THAT WE MUST COMPLY WITH THE STATE LAW, AND WE MUST ALSO BALANCE THAT WITH THE NEEDS OF ALL OF OUR CITIZENS, AND WHAT WE'RE SEEKING TO DO HERE TONIGHT STRIKES THAT BALANCE, KNOWING THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO ANALYZE THIS OVER TIME AND RE-ADDRESS THE CONCERNS AS THEY APPROACH TO US.
>> WELL, I FIGURE EVERYBODY SAYS SOMETHING, SO I PROBABLY SHOULD, TOO.
MY TWO SENSES, I MOVED TO TO APPROVE THE AGENDA ITEM 1, PUBLIC HEARING.
AGENDA ITEM 1. THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
[01:15:03]
>> THANK YOU, MARIA. DO I HAVE A SECOND? DO YOU SAY THAT? THANK YOU.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DID YOU GET THAT, LISA? PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO.
>> MAYOR, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, WE NEED TO DO FINDINGS FORMS.
>> DO WE HAVE TO DO FOR ALL THREE ITEMS OR JUST THIS NUMBER 1? WE'LL TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS.
[01:25:23]
PLANO CITY COUNCIL IS RECONVENED INTO OPEN SESSION.[01:25:27]
ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.[(2)
Public Hearing and consideration of an Ordinance as requested in Subdivision Ordinance Amendment 2025-001 to amend the Introduction and Procedural Overview, Article I (General Provisions), Article II (Definitions), Article III (Platting Procedures), Article IV (Assurance for Completion and Maintenance of Improvements), Article V (Requirements for Public Improvements, Reservation and Design), Article VI (Participation and Escrow Policies), and Article VII (Replatting Procedures) of the Subdivision Ordinance of the City, Ordinance No. 2017-11-4, as heretofore amended, as a result of recent state legislative actions and to ensure compliance with state law; and providing a penalty clause, a repealer clause, a savings clause, a severability clause, a publication clause, and an effective date.
]>> ITEM NUMBER 2, PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AS REQUESTED IN SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2025-001, TO AMEND THE INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW, ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE 2, DEFINITIONS, ARTICLE 3, PLATTING PROCEDURES, ARTICLE 4, ASSURANCE FOR COMPLETION AND MAINTENANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, ARTICLE 5, REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATION, AND DESIGN, ARTICLE 6, PARTICIPATION AND ESCROW POLICIES, ARTICLE 7, RE-PLATTING PROCEDURES OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2017-11-4, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED AS A RESULT OF RECENT STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS AND TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW, PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE, A REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND A PUBLICATION CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THE NEXT ITEM WE HAVE ARE CHANGES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
FIRST, THE CHANGES TO SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
WE'VE CREATED THIS DEFINITION OF NARROW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH THE DEFINITION OF THOSE LOTS BEING LESS THAN 50 FEET AND UNIQUE STANDARDS RELATING TO THAT STYLE OF DEVELOPMENT.
REAR ACCESS FROM AN ALLEY WOULD BE REQUIRED, A WIDER ALLEY IN SUPPORT OF OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR THESE TIGHTER SUBDIVISIONS, UTILIZING MIXED USE STREET DESIGN.
THERE'S ON STREET PARKING, TREES TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS AND WIDER SIDEWALKS, AND THEN A SMALLER BLOCK LENGTH BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY.
ADDITIONALLY, WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT PLAT VACATIONS STILL COUNT AS HAVING A PLAT ON RECORD SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T UTILIZE PLAT VACATION AS A MEANS OF ACCESSING THE BENEFITS OF SB15 WHEN THAT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE INTENT.
MULTIFAMILY AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, SIMILAR STANDARDS WITH THE BLOCK LENGTH AND THE STREET DESIGN, BUT THE ONE CHANGE HERE REALLY BEING THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN INTERNAL STREET NETWORK FOR LARGER PROJECTS TO ENSURE THERE'S ADEQUATE CIRCULATION THROUGH THE SITE.
ONE OF THE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES THAT I THINK WE'VE ALL HEARD A LOT OF FEEDBACK ON ARE THE INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSES.
THESE CHANGES WOULD IMPLEMENT NEW SYSTEMS WHERE WE WOULD REQUIRE EARLY ENGINEERING PLANS WITH OUR CONCEPTUAL AND PRELIMINARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO START LOOKING AT UTILITIES, DRAINAGE, AND OTHER RELATED ITEMS EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS.
WE WOULD REQUIRE A WATER AND SEWER STUDY, AND THIS WATER AND SEWER STUDY WOULD ALLOW US TO START ANALYZING THE CAPACITY.
I THINK THIS IS A BENEFIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, AND THAT IT ALLOWS THEM TO VEST CAPACITY IN THE PROJECT.
ONCE THEY DO THIS STUDY, THEY KNOW THEY NEED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF GALLONS.
WE SET IT ASIDE, AND THEY CAN VOLUNTARILY FOUR-FOOT IT.
BUT OTHERWISE, IT IS THEIRS TO UTILIZE, AND THAT PROCESS DOESN'T EXIST TODAY.
THERE IS A NEW FEE RELATED TO THIS IN ITEM 4 THAT I WILL DISCUSS LATER.
THIS DOES REMOVE REFERENCES TO CITY FACILITY PARTICIPATION THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
WE DON'T WANT THERE TO BE A PERCEPTION OF FINANCIAL OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF THE CITY BECAUSE WE'RE JUST NOT SURE OF THE IMPACTS, BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES TO THE PLANNING LANDSCAPE THAT COME ALONG WITH THE LAND USE CHANGES FROM THE BILLS.
CITY PARTICIPATION IS STILL POSSIBLE.
>> IT JUST WE'LL LOOK AT IT THROUGH THE LENS OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW BASED ON AVAILABLE FUNDING AND OUR ENGINEERING ANALYSIS.
WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CLARIFICATIONS ON HOW WE DEAL WITH PARK IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS THAT WERE NEEDED IN THE ORDINANCE.
A FEW OTHER CHANGES ABOUT NOTICE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON WITH
[01:30:02]
THESE PROJECTS AND TYING IT TO THE PLATTING PROCESS.WE'VE PROVIDED DEFINITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CLARITY.
WE'RE MAKING SOME ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES TO OUR NOTES, AND ONE THING WE DID NOT FIT INTO THIS UPDATE WAS STORMWATER MITIGATION CHANGES.
THE WILL NEED TO BE INCLUDED WITH THE REWRITE BECAUSE I WAS JUST TOO MUCH TO MANAGE IN THE TIME FRAME.
SO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND THIS BY A VOTE OF 7-0, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> WE DO HAVE A FEW SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
THE FIRST ONE IS WILLIAM L. CRAVENS.
>> MY NAME IS WILLIAM L. CRAVENS.
I LIVE AT 4241 BORDEAUX, DALLAS, TEXAS.
THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE HERE IS THE PRESERVATION OF SECTION 6.2, POINT A 0.7 OF THE PLANO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN WHICH THE CITY HAS RESPONSIBILITY IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MANY OF US HAVE DEPENDED ON SINCE IT WAS PASSED IN 2023, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IT PRESERVED IN THE NEW SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, IF THAT IS AT ALL POSSIBLE.
IT'S A MAJOR COMPONENT OF OUR COST, WHICH TO THIS POINT, HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED AS TO BE SHARED BY THE CITY.
I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER LEAVING THOSE PROVISIONS IN THE ORDINANCE AS IT GOES FORTH. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COUNSEL.
JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS TOPIC.
THIS JUST A LITTLE HISTORY HERE.
THIS DOWNTOWN STREET GRID GOT PUT BACK TOGETHER ON A MAP.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHERE ROADS NOW NO LONGER EXIST, THEY'RE ON A MAP TO EXIST AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
DOWNTOWN PLANO CONSISTS OF A LOT OF SMALL PARCELS OF LAND.
SOME OF THESE ROADS RUN THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF EXISTING BUSINESSES THAT ARE OPERATING TODAY.
IT'S SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE FOR A DEVELOPER TO BUY THAT LAND AND THE BUILDING AND RELOCATE THE BUSINESS AND THEN DONATE OR BUILD THE ROAD.
IT'S AN OBSTACLE THAT WON'T BE OVERCOME.
ALL IT DOES BY TAKING THIS OUT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS INHIBIT THE REDEVELOPMENT OF DOWNTOWN PLANO, WHICH IS WHAT HAS BEEN SAID WAS A PRIORITY, WHICH IS WHY THIS GOT PUT INTO THE MAP TO BEGIN WITH.
THE PROVISION THAT HE JUST REFERENCED, AND I WON'T GO THROUGH THE LOCATION OF IT IS ONLY FOR DOWNTOWN PLANO.
IT WAS SPECIFICALLY PUT IN FOR THIS.
THE LAST COUNSEL BEFORE THE ELECTION IN MAY, GAVE DIRECTION TO FUND THIS.
I'M LOOKING AT AN E MAIL FROM YOU MARK ON JANUARY 28.
HI, BILL, COUNSEL GAVE DIRECTION FOR THE DOWNTOWN RIGHT AWAY TO BE FUNDED FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN BONDS.
THEY WANTED STAFF TO LOOK AT TIF FUNDS AND CAPITAL MAINTENANCE, WHICH WILL BE DONE AS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS.
THAT BUDGET PROCESS IS NOW. IT'S NOT HAPPENING.
I'M GUESSING THAT'S BECAUSE THE STATE DID THIS, AND Y'ALL, WE'RE LOOKING AT TAKING IT OUT.
BUT BECAUSE THIS IS SPECIFIC TO DOWNTOWN, IT SHOULDN'T COME OUT.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPS WITHOUT IT.
THE OTHER THING IS, NO ONE IS GOING TO COME IN AND FORCE THE CITY OF PLANO TO DO SOMETHING THEY DON'T WANT TO DO ANYWAY.
YOU COULD LEAVE IT IN AS JUST A GESTURE OF GOODWILL TOWARDS THE DOWNTOWN COMMUNITY THAT YOU PROMISED THIS TO LESS THAN TWO YEARS AGO.
THERE'S NO HARM IN IT AT ALL. I'LL LEAVE IT WITH THAT. THANK YOU.
>> WE DID HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL SPEAKER, WILLIAM PIERCE CRAVENS, WHO WAS ON ZOOM, BUT IS NO LONGER THERE, AND I DON'T SEE HIM IN THE AUDIENCE. LAST CALL THERE.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CONFIRM THE COMMENTS TO THE COUNSEL.
[01:35:08]
COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.MR. CRAVENS, WE HEAR YOU, BILL, WE HEAR YOU ON THIS.
AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER AN ORDINANCE, THAT STILL WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH STATE LAW, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, ADDRESS THE FINANCES FOR THE STATE, I MEAN, FOR THE CITY.
WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUDGET PROCESS, AND WE ARE STRUGGLING COLLECTIVELY AS TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO FUND OTHER SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF EXCELLENCE.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I STILL THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE ROOM FOR NEGOTIATIONS WHEN WE HAVE DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN AND THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THAT IS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT SAY WE WILL NOT FUND STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT IT SAYS THAT WE WILL USE THAT BASICALLY AS AN OPTION, IF YOU WILL, WHEN WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, AND THEY WILL BE SERVED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
I KNOW THAT INTRODUCES UNCERTAINTY TO DEVELOPERS.
YES.THERE'S A LOT OF UNCERTAINTIES DEVELOPERS FACE EVERY DAY.
BUT I THINK THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR PLANNING AND WITH THE HELP OF OUR CITY MANAGER, THAT WE CAN COME TO SOME RESOLUTION OF HOW WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.
I DO THINK THERE'S HARM DONE TO LEAVE IT THERE.
I THINK THAT ONCE WE HAD THE NEW STATE LAW PASSED, WE REALIZED WE HAD TO MAKE A CHANGE.
WE GAVE NOTICE AS MUCH NOTICE AS WE COULD, BUT I WOULD FEEL WORSE ABOUT LEAVING AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE AND THEN COMING BACK AND SAYING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO STICK TO WHAT IT SAYS IN WRITING.
I THINK THAT OPENS US UP FOR LIABILITY.
I DON'T THINK THIS CONVERSATIONS OVER YET.
I THINK AS COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE SAID, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND LOOK AT.
>> I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 2.
PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 8-0. NEXT ITEM.
[(3)
Consideration of an Ordinance to amend Section 3 (Special Streets and Accessways) and Section 5 (Street Design) of the Street Design Standards, Ordinance No. 2023-9-11, as heretofore amended, pertaining to recent state legislative actions; and providing a penalty clause, a repealer clause, a savings clause, a severability clause, a publication clause, and an effective date.
]>> ITEM NUMBER 3. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 3 SPECIAL STREETS AND ACCESS WAYS, AND SECTION 5 STREET DESIGN OF THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-9-11 AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, PERTAINING TO RECENT STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS, PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE, A REPEAL CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, A PUBLICATION CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> THIS ITEM ADDS STANDARDS TO THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS THAT RELATE SPECIFICALLY TO THE CHANGES THAT YOU JUST APPROVED IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
IT GIVES THE STANDARD FOR THAT WIDER ALLEY GIVES SAME DIRECTION WITH REGARD TO BLOCK LENGTH AND MIXED USE STREET DESIGN.
IT JUST ALIGNS THIS DOCUMENT WITH THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS BY A VOTE OF 7-0.
>> COUNSEL MEMBER, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.
>> YES. IN PARTICULAR, WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE NEW STREET DESIGNS REALLY FOR DECTER TO THOSE AREAS WHERE WE MAY HAVE SMALLER LOT SIZES.
THE SMALLER LOT SIZES WOULD HELP US WITH SUPPLYING HOUSING TO SAFE FOR THE WORKFORCE, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THE BLOCKS WE'RE LOOKING AT ARE GOING TO BE NO LONGER THAN 600 FEET.
WE'RE LOOKING AT ON I GUESS IT WAS F-SIZE STREETS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WIDE ENOUGH WALKS FOR BIKES AND PEDESTRIANS, AND THEN THE SMALLER STREETS, THE G, WERE JUST BASICALLY PEDESTRIAN AND STILL JUST A STANDARD TWO CARS PASSING, CORRECT?
>> NOW, WHAT ABOUT THE ALLEY SIZE? WHAT WERE YOU LOOKING AT ON THAT?
>> THE ALLEY SIZE, THE IDEA HERE IS TO PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE WIDTH IN THE ALLEY
[01:40:03]
BECAUSE IT'S SO TIGHT WITH THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS THAT WOULD BE ACCESSED, I'LL PROVIDE SPACE FOR CARTS, WHERE SOMETIMES THAT'S DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE, ESPECIALLY THE NORMAL NOTCH OUTS THAT YOU SEE IN SUBDIVISIONS IN PLANO, WHERE PEOPLE PUT THEIR CARTS IN THE ALLEY, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT, IN A TIGHTER DEVELOPMENT, IT'S HARDER TO FIT IN A DRIVEWAY AND THE TRASH CARTS.JUST ALLOWING US TO DO ADEQUATE SERVICE IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
I KNOW YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO HAVE IMPROVE THE THROUGH FARE, IF YOU WILL, OF TRAFFIC.
THAT'S WHY WE WENT TO THE 600 FOOT LENGTH BLOCKS.
WAS THAT REALLY GOING TO ENHANCE THAT PASSAGE BY REDUCING IT FROM THE 1,200 FOOT LENGTH? BECAUSE I MEAN, IF WE'RE SITTING THERE LOOKING AT THAT, THAT SECTION THAT WE'RE HAVING THERE COULD HAVE TWO MORE HOUSING.
IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE LENGTH OF THE STREET.
>> IT COULD, THE 1,200 FOOT BLOCK LENGTH MAX IS REALLY DESIGNED FOR WIDER LOTS THAT ARE MORE TRADITIONAL 7,000, 09,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS THAT DEVELOPED IN PLANO THROUGH THE 70S, 80S AND INTO THE 90S.
BUT AS YOU GET THESE TIGHTER DEVELOPMENTS, IT'S WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND CONNECTIVITY AND HAVING THOSE SMALLER LOTS REALLY FITS WITH THE HOUSING SIZE.
THE MORE DENSE YOU HAVE, THINGS, THE SMALLER THE BLOCK IN A MORE FINE FABRIC THAT YOU WANT OF THE CITY TO WHERE THERE'S MORE CONNECTIVITY AND MORE ACCESS.
>> I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
THE FIRST IS WILLIAM PIERCE CRAVENS.
WE'LL CALL THAT ONE OUT AGAIN.
>> WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE COMMENTS TO THE COUNSEL.
>> MR. MUNS MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3.
>> SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 3.
PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 8-0, ITEM 4.
[(4)
Consideration of an Ordinance to amend Section 16-19 – Fees for zoning, rezoning and other miscellaneous fees, of Article II – Fees Generally, of Chapter 16, Planning and Development, of the Code of Ordinance of the City of Plano; establishing new fees for Notices and Water & Sewer Studies; providing a repealer clause, a severability clause, a publication clause, and an effective date.
]>> ITEM NUMBER 4, CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 16-19 FEES FOR ZONING, REZONING, AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS FEES OF ARTICLE 2 FEES GENERALLY OF CHAPTER 6, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF PLANO, ESTABLISHING NEW FEES FOR NOTICES AND WATER AND SEWER STUDIES, PROVIDING A REPEAL CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, A PUBLICATION CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHANGES WE'VE JUST CONSIDERED IN ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE.
FIRST, OUR NOTICES, BECAUSE OF THE NEW NOTIFICATIONS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING, WE'VE JUST MIMICKED THE EXISTING ZONING APPEAL FEE AT $5 PER NOTICE.
WE THINK THAT COVERS OUR COSTS, ESSENTIALLY TO ALLOW THE CITY TO RECOUP THE COST FOR MAILING THOSE NOTICES.
THEN A WATER AND SEWER STUDY FEE, AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON COST RECOVERY, WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT PROVIDING FUNDS TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT TO SUPPORT THEIR OUTSIDE CONSULTANT THAT THEY WILL BE UTILIZING TO ASSESS THE WATER AND SEWER STUDY THAT'S PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER.
THAT IS THE END OF THE FEE PROPOSAL, AND THAT DID NOT GO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR CHRISTINA? COUNCIL MEMBER KEHR.
>> JUST ONE QUESTION. IS THE $10,000, IS THAT 100% FEE COST RECOVERY OR WHAT PERCENTAGE?
>> I HAD A QUESTION ON $10,000.
HOW DID WE GET TO THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT?
>> IT WAS BASED ON ENGINEERING'S EXPERIENCE IN ORDERING THESE TYPE OF DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY.
[01:45:03]
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.>> WE HAVE THE SAME THREE SPEAKERS, MR. LYLE.
>> WATER AND SEWER STUDY FEES.
I'M GUESSING THIS IS TIED TO A ZONING CASE, MS. DOWNS?
>> CHANGES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
>> NEVER MIND. I WASN'T SURE WHAT IT WAS TIED TO. THANK YOU.
>> WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE COMMENTS OF THE COUNSEL. SORRY, BOB.
>> I MOVE WE ACCEPT ITEM 4 AS PRESENTED.
>> MR. MAYOR, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT TO ITEM NUMBER 4.
PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 8-0.
THANK YOU. NUMBER FIVE. ITEM 5.
[(5) Public Hearing on the FY 2025-26 Recommended Budget, Proposed Community Investment Program (CIP), and Proposed Ad Valorem Tax Rate.]
>> ITEM NUMBER 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2025/26.
RECOMMENDED BUDGET, PROPOSED COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM, AND PROPOSED AD VALOREM TAX RATE.
>> GOOD EVENING. THIS IS I'M KAREN RHODES WHITLEY, BUDGET DIRECTOR.
THIS IS YOUR SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET, WHICH TOTALS 788 MILLION IN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM, TOTALS 319 MILLION.
WE'RE ABOUT TO HAVE DISCUSSION ON THE TAX RATE.
YOU DO HAVE A POSTED TAX RATE RIGHT NOW, WHICH SERVES AS A TAX CEILING $44.06.
>> I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
>> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[(6)
Discussion and Direction regarding the Proposed Ad Valorem Tax Rate.
]>> ITEM NUMBER SIX, DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED AD VALOREM TAX RATE.
>> WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON SEPTEMBER EIGHTH.
WE WILL BE BRINGING BACK THE OPERATING BUDGET ADOPTION, THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM ADOPTION.
YOU WILL ALSO DECIDE THE TAX RATE ON THAT NIGHT, AND WE WILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN ON THE TAX RATE AND RATIFICATION OF THE TAX RATE.
INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS 41.76.
WE CAME BEFORE YOU ALL A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
WE HAD TO POST A NOTICE IN THE PAPER WITH YOUR TAX CEILING, MEANING YOU CANNOT GO OVER THAT RATE, HOWEVER, YOU CAN GO DOWN.
WE WANTED TO START THE DISCUSSION FOR US TO BRING BACK ALL THOSE ORDINANCES ON SEPTEMBER EIGHTH.
>> MAYOR AND COUNSEL, I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD IN A FEW QUICK THINGS.
THERE IS ONE MATTER THAT'S STILL OUTSTANDING THAT WE HAVE WITH REGARD TO THE DOWNTOWN MAMMOTH JACK FESTIVAL, WHICH WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN DIRECTION FROM COUNSEL YET ON.
ADDITIONALLY, THE LEGISLATURE IS STILL HARD AT WORK.
AND PART OF THAT WORK IS LOOKING TO POTENTIALLY LOWER THE A VOTER APPROVED RATE FROM 3.5% DOWN TO ONE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WILL BE SOME CARVE OUTS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN THAT.
BUT WE'RE STILL WAITING TO SEE HOW THAT WORKS THROUGH CONFERENCE COMMITTEE.
AS PART OF THAT, I'VE TALKED WITH SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FELT LIKE IT WAS IMPORTANT TO SHOW THE IMPACT OF SEVERAL ELEMENTS.
YOU HAVE A CHART IN FRONT OF YOU THAT REALLY STARTS AT THE VOTER APPROVED RATE, AND THAT'S NOT WHERE YOU HAVE TO START, YOU CAN START WHEREVER YOU WANT, BUT REALLY WENT UP BY THREE TENTHS PERCENT EACH STEP IN THERE SHOWING THE IMPACT AND SHOWING THE REVENUE TO THE CITY.
BUT WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO TRY TO FINALIZE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PUBLISH FOR THE BUDGET FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SEE AND PUT THOSE THINGS IN THERE.
AS I MENTIONED, THE MAMMOTH JACK WAS ONE OF THOSE ELEMENTS THAT WAS STILL OUTSTANDING.
IF THERE'S ANY OUTSTANDING ITEMS, WE ARE HAPPY TO TAKE THAT FEEDBACK.
YOU CAN TELL US WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO FEEL MOST COMFORTABLE WITH THE TAX RATE, WE CAN PUBLISH THAT SO THE COMMUNITY KNOWS WHERE THE BUDGET IS GOING TO LAND.
>> THANKS, MARK. COUNCIL MEMBER LAVINE.
[01:50:02]
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. OUR RESIDENTS HERE IN PLANO HAVE VERY HIGH EXPECTATIONS.
THEY HAVE INDICATED TO US THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE CITY SERVICES THAT THEY HAVE, AND THEY ENJOY WHEN WE'RE ABLE TO DO A LITTLE SOMETHING MORE FOR THEM.
WE ARE ALSO AT THE POINT OF HAVING MANY ONE TIME EXPENSES WHICH OUR CITY MANAGER AND STAFF HAVE POINTED OUT TO US REALLY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE NEAR TERM.
SOME OF THOSE ARE STREAM BANK EROSION, THE CRITICAL ELEMENTS, AS WELL AS PROVIDING SOME FUNDING FOR MITIGATING SOME AREAS FROM BECOMING CRITICAL.
WE HAVE PUBLIC SAFETY WITH OUR FIRE AND RESCUE STAFFING CHANGES, WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
WE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY NOW TO OFFSET SOME OF THE BOND INTEREST EXPENSE BASED ON THE BONDS THAT WERE APPROVED THIS LAST ROUND, AND WE CAN HEAD OFF SOME POTENTIAL TAX INCREASES THERE.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPLENISH OUR LAND ACQUISITION FUNDS.
THIS WILL HELP US TO MAINTAIN OUR CONTINUED EFFORTS TO GROW AND IMPROVE THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND OUR MUNICIPAL FACILITIES.
WE ARE FACING INCREASED PRESSURE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE CAP THAT WE PLACED ON THAT FUND PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE INCREASED.
LIKE WHAT THE CITY MANAGER JUST MENTIONED, THE MAMMOTH JACK FESTIVAL.
WE CAN'T FORGET THE FACT THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF FUN AND A LITTLE BIT OF EXCITEMENT IN DOWNTOWN AND FOR OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL.
THAT AND OTHER UNFUNDED EFFORTS, WE MAY NOT HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY AGAIN.
THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS PUTTING TREMENDOUS PRESSURE ON US AND OUR ABILITY TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THESE ONE TIME ELEMENTS.
WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE ADOPT THE 44.06 TAX RATE SO THAT WE CAN ADDRESS MANY OF THESE NEEDS AND MAINTAIN OUR CITY OUR SERVICES AND SUCH AS THE MAYOR HAS DIRECTED IN HIS PROPOSED BUDGET.
>> I AM GOING TO START WITH THE PUNCH LINE.
I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN LAVINE, THAT I THINK WE'RE AT THIS POINT, WE SHOULD BE A 44.06.
I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR SIX YEARS, AND I'M GOING TO SAY ONE MORE TIME.
CITY OF PLANO SHOULD BE RUN LIKE A BUSINESS, NOT LIKE A HOUSEHOLD.
WE HAVE TO HAVE MONEY FOR RAINY DAYS.
WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THE CITY'S WORKING WITHOUT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IF WE'RE THAT CLOSE TO NOT BEING ABLE TO BALANCE OUR BUDGET.
FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS, I'VE SEEN FREEZES, HIRING FREEZES, BUDGET FREEZES, SALARY FREEZES BECAUSE OUR POOR CITY MANAGER REALLY IS TRYING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET BASED ON THAT NARROW MARGIN OF WHAT WE HAVE WHEN WE PASS.
THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE WANT THE CITY OF EXCELLENCE.
NOW, I HAD BEEN STRUGGLING BETWEEN 43.46 76 BEFORE I CAME TO COUNCIL'S MEETING TODAY.
THE REASON IS BECAUSE I FOUND OUT THAT IF WE DON'T MAX IT THIS TIME, WE ARE NEVER GOING TO HAVE THIS BUFFER OF MONEY EVER AGAIN, BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE BASICALLY HAVE CUT OFF OUR ARMS AND OUR LEGS.
AND AT THIS POINT, IF WE WANT ANY TYPE OF INCREASE IN OUR TAX BASE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT,
[01:55:01]
AND THAT IS REALLY SCARY.IF WE HAVE THE CHANCE OF HAVING SOME TYPE OF SAVING FOR THE RAINY DAY OR THE EMERGENCIES OR TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE CONTINGENCIES ARE PAID FOR.
ALL THE EMERGENCIES ARE SAVED UP FOR, THEN THAT'S WHAT I WANT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
>> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER KEHR. SORRY.
>> THE ORIGINAL BUDGET, WHICH HAD 41.76 DIDN'T INCLUDE A NUMBER OF THINGS WHICH I THINK ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.
COUNCIL MEMBER TOO MENTIONED THE RAINY DAY FUND.
I THINK THAT WE'RE A STORM A WILDFIRE, AWAY FROM BEING IN REAL BIG TROUBLE.
COUNCIL MEMBER LAVINE MENTIONED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO INVEST IN THAT IN ORDER TO GROW OUR TAX BASE SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT OUR RESIDENTS HAVE COME TO EXPECT.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS SUCH AS TRANSIT.
WE NEED SOME ALTERNATIVES THERE, I THINK.
WE HAVEN'T MADE ANY DECISIONS AROUND WHAT'S HAPPENING AROUND DART.
IF WE HAD SOME BUDGET FOR ALTERNATIVES HERE, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR RESIDENTS THAT THEY WANT TRANSIT.
THEY NEED TRANSIT, PARATRANSIT, FOR EXAMPLE.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR OUR RESIDENTS, AND SO WE NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR THAT THING, TOO.
I ALSO HAVE HEARD OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS, MANY PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE DEBT THAT WE'VE ENCOUNTERED WITH THE BONDS, AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO PAY FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS.
MAYBE SOME MORE SHORT TERM THINGS LIKE TECHNOLOGY.
THE LAST THING I WANT TO MENTION IS, I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE EQUIPMENT THAT OUR POLICE HAVE.
MANY OF THESE THINGS ARE IN DIRE NEED OF REPLACEMENT, AND I THINK THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO SUPPORT THAT AND HELP THAT.
>> WITH THAT, I WOULD SAY THE NUMBER OF THE 44.06 IS REALLY WHAT I'M AIMING FOR.
CAN I MENTION ONE MORE THING ABOUT?
>> MAMMOTH JACK. SINCE YOU ASK.
I THINK THIS COULD BE A VERY FUN FESTIVAL.
HOWEVER, I REALLY LIKE TO LIMIT ANY FUNDS FROM THE CITY TO COME FROM THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES, NOT COMING OUT OF GENERAL FUND. THANK YOU.
>> GOT YOU. COUNCILMAN HORNE? YOU'RE ON.
>> I APPRECIATE IT. FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS, IF I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, WE'VE KEPT THE TAX RATE THE SAME AT 41.76.
I DON'T THINK ANY OTHER CITY AROUND US HAS DONE THAT.
I'VE KEPT THE RATE THE SAME FOR THE THREE YEARS.
OF COURSE, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT COSTS HAVE GONE UP.
WE'VE SEEN IT ACROSS THE BOARD WITH REGARDS TO SERVICES, FUEL, FOOD, AND GROCERIES, BUILDING MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, EVERYTHING'S GOING UP IN PRICE.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I'M NERVOUS.
I SEE THAT TREND GOING UP EVEN FURTHER BECAUSE OF THE INTERNATIONAL TARIFFS THAT WE'RE SEEING.
I THINK THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT US AS A CITY AS WELL AS AFFECT US PERSONALLY.
AS COUNCILMAN KEHR MENTIONED, WE ARE ONE TORNADO AWAY FROM HAVING A CATASTROPHIC EVENT AND REALLY HURTING US CRITICALLY FROM A BUDGET PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT WE LOOK AT THAT AND TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN HAVE THOSE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO COVER THOSE COSTS.
WE SAW IT IN HIS LAST WIND DAMAGE.
THEY CAME TO US TWICE TO REQUEST FUNDS JUST TO REMOVE DEBRIS FROM STRAIGHT LINE WINDS.
OUR CITY DID A FANTASTIC JOB ON GETTING THE PLACE CLEARED, GETTING STREETS PASSABLE, AND WE WERE VERY LUCKY THAT NO ONE WAS KILLED DURING THOSE EVENTS.
WE HAVE SOME ITEMS IN FRONT OF US THAT CITIZENS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, STREAM BANK MITIGATION.
WE ARE RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF OUR MANAGEMENT OF STORM WATER.
IT'S PART OF OUR CONVEYANCE SYSTEM.
THERE'S COSTS THAT WERE UNEXPECTED.
AS COUNCILMAN KEHR, ALSO MENTIONED, OUR POLICE FORCE, SOME OF THE BEST IN THE STATE.
THEY ARE THE BEST IN THE STATE, AND WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE EQUIPMENT TO KEEP US THE SAFEST CITY.
[02:00:03]
OUR PARKS AND REC ARE, TOP FIVE IN THE STATE.THIS IS THE TOP 10 PUBLIC GOLF COURSE IN THE STATE.
THAT YES, IT GENERATES ITS OWN FEES, BUT THAT'S THE TYPE OF SERVICE THAT OUR CITIZENS ARE EXPECTING.
THEN AGAIN, WITH THE STATE LEGISLATOR, WHAT THEY'RE DOING TODAY BY TOMORROW MORNING LUNCH, WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING TO COME OUT WITH REGARDS TO VOTER APPROVED RATES IN THE FUTURE.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M IN FAVOR WITH THIS ONE TIME BOOST OF, NOT ONE TIME, BUT THIS BOOST TO THE AD VALOREM TAX WITH THE INCREMENT OF $44.06.
I'M HOPING WE'RE ABLE TO SUSTAIN THAT FOR ANOTHER THREE OR FOUR MORE YEARS AND KEEP IT AT THAT RATE.
>> LIKE MAYOR PRO TEM TOO, WHEN I CAME TONIGHT, IT WAS WITH THE HOPE OF NOT GOING TO THE LARGEST NUMBER OPTION AVAILABLE TO US, AND THEN FOUND OUT ABOUT SB10, WHICH WILL LOWER THE EXISTING VOTER APPROVAL RATE FROM 3.5% DOWN TO 2.5%.
IN PLANO, THIS WILL ONLY RESULT IN AVERAGE SAVINGS OF ABOUT 12.82 PER YEAR FOR OUR RESIDENTS, BUT THAT ADDS UP FOR US, AND NOT TO MENTION, IF WE HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THERE'S THE ADDITIONAL COST THAT COMES WITH THAT AS WELL.
IT MAKES SENSE TO ME BEING A MATURE CITY.
NORMALLY, YOU THINK ABOUT YOUNGER CITIES.
THEY DON'T NEED TO RAISE THEIR TAX RATE BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT ALL THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT, NEW PROPERTY TAXES COMING ONLINE.
HERE, WE'RE THE ENVY OF COLLIN COUNTY BEING ONE WITH THE LOWEST TAX RATE, PLUS ALL OF THE TAX SAVINGS WITH FREEZES AND SUCH, ALL THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS YOU CAN HAVE, AND WE'RE THE OLDEST, WE'RE MOST MATURE CITY, IF YOU WILL, IN COLLIN COUNTY.
I THINK WE'VE DONE AN AMAZING JOB OF BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND KEEPING THAT TAX RATE DOWN.
BUT I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IS TO COME AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PREPARED FOR THAT.
I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID, AND COUNCIL MEMBER KEHR, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT ABOUT MAMMOTH JACK AND LOOKING TO OUR HOT TAXES.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DEFINITELY LOOK INTO, AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR SOMEONE ELSE ON COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE ADDITIONAL EVENT IN DOWNTOWN PLANO, WITH THAT, I'LL AGREE WITH WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M GOING TO SAY DITTO TO EVERYTHING THAT WAS SAID BEFORE BY THE OTHER COUNSEL, BUT I ALSO TOOK AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHANNEL MY FORMER COUNCILMAN ANTHONY RICADELLI, AND DID SOME BACK OF THE NAPKIN MATH AS IT RELATES TO MY OWN HOUSE AND HOW ALL OF THESE RATES IMPACT ME AS A HOMEOWNER ON MY OWN TAXABLE VALUE.
IF WE GO UP TO 44.06 THAT RATE, FOR ME, IT WILL COST ME AN ADDITIONAL $257.30 A YEAR.
LET ME REPEAT THAT. $257.30 A YEAR.
I HAVE THE ABILITY OF BEING ABLE TO EASILY ABSORB THAT, AND THAT IS NOT AN IMPACT ON ME.
WHEN WE DO THAT, AND WE THINK ABOUT THAT OVERALL AS IT APPLIES TO US, I THINK WE HAVE TO ANALYZE, IS IT WORTH $257.30 A YEAR TO MAINTAIN THE EXCELLENCE OF OUR POLICE, OUR FIRE, OUR PARKS, OUR WRECKS, STREAM BANK STABILIZATION, A FUN FESTIVAL IN DOWNTOWN PLANO, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, LAND BANK, RAINY DAY, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SAID HERE, AND I WANT TO SAY THAT I BELIEVE UNEQUIVOCALLY THE ANSWER IS YES.
>> I'LL HIT THE REQUEST TO SPEAK BUTTON.
I MIGHT BE THE ONLY ONE ON THE OPPOSITE END OF THIS.
I HAVE A LITTLE HESITATION GOING STRAIGHT TO THE 44.06.
I WAS LENDING AT THE 43.46 OR THE 43.76.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED TO FUND AND WE HAVE THE NEED DAY FUNDS, AND WE HAVE IMPACTS AND WE CAN'T PREDICT THE WEATHER AS WELL, TOO, AND WHEN IT COMES TO BUDGETS, AS WELL.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE EVERYBODY'S COMING FROM.
IT'S JUST A LITTLE HIGHER THAN WHAT I'M USUALLY USED TO AND WOULD LIKE TO DO VEHEMENTLY IN OUR FIRST TERM.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND $250 IN REGARDS TO THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS WITH RESIDENTS.
BUT I ALSO HAVE IN THE BACK OF MY MIND, COST OF LIVING IS GOING UP, FOODS GOING UP, GROCERIES GOING UP FOR EVERYDAY CITIZENS.
I'M THINKING IN MIND OF EVERY RESIDENT ACROSS PLANO, NOT NECESSARILY THE ONES THAT CAN OR CAN'T AFFORD THE PROPERTY TAXES.
IT'S JUST A BIGGER PILL FOR ME TO SWALLOW AT THIS TIME.
BUT I WAS LEANING AT THE 43.46.
>> ALL RIGHT, KAREN. I THINK YOU HAVE SOME DIRECTION.
I TOO AGREE WITH THE 44.06, AND WE STILL,
[02:05:03]
EVEN AT THAT NUMBER, ARE IF NOT THE LOWEST RIGHT AT THE LOWEST TAX RATE IN COLLIN COUNTY.THANK YOU. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS. WE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.