[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
SECOND PLAN OF PLANNING AND ZONING.I'M CALLED ORDER AT 6:00 PM IF YOU'ALL, PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME.
IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE.
ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
GOT A BAD ECHO TONIGHT WORKING ON IT.
THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS TO ALLOW UP TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER WITH 30 TOTAL MINUTES ON ITEMS OF INTEREST OR CONCERN AND NOT ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY NOT DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, BUT MAY RESPOND WITH FACTUAL OR POLICY INFORMATION.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MODIFY THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY.
DO WE HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS TONIGHT? WE DO NOT.
[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.
MR. BELL AS AS DISCUSSED IN THE PRELIMINARY MEETING, I JUST WANNA MAKE NOTE OF ITEM B.
UH, CORRECTION TO THE PROJECT NUMBER SHOULD BE PSP 2025 DASH 0 2 5.
YOU MIGHT LIKE TO REMOVE AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER, I'M GONNA JUST MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE, UH, REVISED, UH, NUMBER THAT, UH, STAFF HAD JUST, UH, APPOINTED OUT.
ALRIGHT, JUST TO MAKE NOTE, WE DO HAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER TONG AND OLLIE, UM, ABSENT RIGHT NOW.
COMMISSIONER TOG MAY BE JOINING US LATER.
WE HAVE MOTION AND A SECOND, PLEASE VOTE.
I MOTION PASSES SIX TO ZERO RIGHT ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL
[Items 1A. (DW) & 1B. (DW) (Part 1 of 2)]
CONSIDERATION.ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, UNLESS INSTRUCTED OTHERWISE BY THE CHAIR, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER.
APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF 15 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL IF NEEDED.
REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY MO 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.
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 TIMES LIMITS BASED TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT.
UM, CAN YOU READ ITEMS ONE A AND ONE B TOGETHER PLEASE? AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, A REQUEST TO REZONE 14.1 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE JOB BUTLER.
SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 46, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD.
1 1 5 NORTH MERRIMAN DRIVE IN THE CITY OF PLANO, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS FROM PLAN DEVELOPMENT 1 7 3.
ESTATE DEVELOPMENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SEVEN TABLED NOVEMBER 17TH, 2025 AND FEBRUARY 2ND, 2026.
APPLICANT IS MEADOWS BAPTIST CHURCH.
THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE B MEADOWS BROOK EDITION BLOCKS A THROUGH D AND MEADOWS BAPTIST CHURCH EDITION BLOCK ONE LOT ONE R THROUGH 50, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SEVEN LOTS, TWO COMMON AREA LOTS AND A RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON ONE LOT ON 27.3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOS RIOS BOULEVARD AND MERRIMAN DRIVE ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 173 ESTATE DEVELOPMENT TABLED NOVEMBER 17TH, 2025 AND FEBRUARY 2ND, 2026.
APPLICANT AGAIN IS MEADOWS BAPTIST CHURCH.
THIS ITEM IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION.
PENDING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE A BEFORE YOU GET STARTED, JUST WANT TO MAKE NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER TONG HAS JOINED US, SO THANK YOU.
[00:05:01]
THANK YOU.DESTINY WOODS PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, SO SHOWN ON THE SCREEN IS THE REQUEST AREA FOR THIS ZONING CASE.
AND THE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE GOING TO SHOW THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN.
UM, SO THIS REQUEST WAS INITIALLY BROUGHT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2025, BUT THE REQUEST HAS CHANGED, UM, A BIT SINCE THEN.
UM, SO THE PREVIOUS ZONING REQUEST WAS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UM, TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SIX.
UM, AND THE UPDATED ZONING REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SEVEN AS SHOWN ON THE CHART ON THE SCREEN.
UM, AND THEN PREVIOUSLY THE CONCEPT PLAN, UM, PROPOSED 58 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
UM, IT PROPOSED THOSE LOTS RANGING FROM UM, SIX, AROUND 6,000 SQUARE FEET TO 13,000 SQUARE FEET.
UM, AND THEN IT ALSO HAD 15 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
NOW THAT CONCEPT PLAN IS PROPOSING 50 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THOSE LOTS RANGE FROM 7,400 SQUARE FEET TO 9,600 SQUARE FEET.
UM, AND IT'S GONNA HAVE A SCREENING WALL AND NO LOTS ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
UM, SO SINCE THE UM, NOVEMBER 17TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE THE COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT THE APPLICANT MEET WITH THE SURROUNDING, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THERE HAS BEEN A SERIES OF IN-PERSON MEETINGS, PHONE CALLS, EMAILS WITH BOTH THE RANCH ESTATES AND STONY HOLLOW HOMEOWNERS, UM, ASSOCIATIONS, AS WELL AS THE HOMEOWNERS ALONG THAT WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
SO THE EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS RESTRICT THE LOT SIZE FROM A TWO ACRE MINIMUM, OR THEY RESTRICT THE LOT SIZE TO A TWO ACRE MINIMUM AND IT ASSERTS, UM, FENCE DESIGN STANDARDS AS THEY CORRESPOND TO THE RANCH ESTATE'S DEED RESTRICTION.
SO STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST TO REZONE 14.1 ACRES OUT OF THE CURRENT, UM, 147 ACRE DISTRICT WILL HAVE NO ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT BECAUSE THE REMAINING PROPERTIES WILL REMAIN IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE EXISTING ZONING AND THE FENCE RESTRICTIONS LISTED IN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STIPULATIONS, UM, ARE INTENDED TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE RANCHES ESTATE SUBDIVISION AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT PART OF THAT SUBDIVISION.
THE SURROUNDING LAND USES INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RESIDENCE LOTS RANGING FROM TWO ACRES TO 6,000 SQUARE FOOT ACRE OR 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, EXCUSE ME.
UM, AND THEN INSTITUTIONAL LAND USES ARE, UM, TO THE IMMEDIATE NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST.
AND THOSE ARE RELIGIOUS FACILITIES AND A, UM, PUBLIC SCHOOL.
UM, AND THEN THE SURROUNDING ZONING IS A MIX OF ESTATE DEVELOPMENT SF SEVEN, NINE, AND SIX.
UM, SO THIS REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL SLY SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, LOTS BEING PROPOSED
UM, SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED IN OR NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, UM, IN MEETS ALL OF THE APPLICABLE POLICIES SET BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO STAFF DID RECEIVE ONE SIGNED LETTER IN SUPPORT FROM WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT SAME LETTER WAS COUNTED WITHIN THE 200 FOOT BUFFER, UM, AS THE ONLY SIGNED LETTER HERE, THERE AND CITYWIDE.
WE RECEIVED 72 RESPONSES AS OF FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27TH, UM, 71 IN SUPPORT AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.
WE DID RECEIVE A HANDFUL OF RESPONSES AFTER THE DEADLINE AND THOSE WERE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION.
SO TO SUMMARIZE, UM, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM PD 1 73 ESTATE DEVELOPMENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SEVEN.
AND THE CONCEPT PLAN PROPOSES 50 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
UM, ITEM ONE A IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED.
ITEM ONE B IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL APPROVAL
[00:10:01]
OF THIS ZONING CASE.AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE WITH THE PRESENTATION.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSIONER BRONSKI MS. WOODS.
GOOD JOB TODAY AGAIN, THANK YOU.
UM, A QUICK QUESTION ON THE, UH, RESPONSES.
UH, HOW DID THE, UH, DID WE SIMPLY UPDATE THE RESPONSES THAT WERE FROM LAST TIME OR DID WE HAVE RESPONSES THAT WERE IN THE NEGATIVE LAST TIME THAT ARE NO LONGER? SO, UH, WE ONLY INCLUDED RESPONSES RECEIVED AFTER THE NEW ZONING CASE WAS POSTED WITH THE NEW SF SEVEN REQUEST.
SO, UM, THAT START DATE THAT WE STARTED RECEIVING INCLUDING RESPONSES IS FEBRUARY 2ND.
SO THAT'S WHERE ALL OF THE NOW RELEVANT RESPONSES ARE COUNTED FROM.
DO YOU RECALL WHAT THE NUMBERS WERE FROM THE PREVIOUS CASE BEFORE? UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS AROUND 60 IN THE 60 RANGE AS NEGATIVE, UM, TOTAL.
AND THEN THERE WERE A FEW, ACTUALLY I HAVE IT ONE SECOND.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION THOSE NUMBERS, BECAUSE I HAVE THEM FROM OUR CLASS.
UM, WE, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITIZENS TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU'D LIKE.
IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE SCHEDULED TO SPEAK, YOU CAN BRING IT UP THEN.
I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER.
UM, BUT THERE WERE QUITE A FEW AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO A PETITION THAT WAS SIGNED AS WELL.
IF WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION FROM YOU, YOU YEAH, IF YOU GET A CHANCE BEFORE WE'RE DONE, I'D LOVE TO HEAR IT.
UM, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT IN OUR CODE FOR SCREENING BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL WHEN WE WERE GOING FROM A STATE TO SINGLE FAMILY, SEVEN OR NINE OR WHATEVER, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING THERE? THERE'S NOT NO.
OR SEPARATION SETBACKS, ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE? NO.
THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO SCREEN, UH, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS FROM OTHER RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YEAH, MR. BELL JUST HAVE THE INFORMATION.
UM, THE PRESENTATION FROM THE NOVEMBER MEETING INDICATES, UH, FIVE LETTERS IN SUPPORT, 62 IN OPPOSITION TOTAL OF 67.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? NOBODY.
I THINK WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS.
LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, I THINK WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE WITH THE PRESENTATION, IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DOUGLAS, IF YOU'D INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? GOOD EVENING.
DOUGLAS PROPERTIES ADDRESS 2309 K AVENUE HERE IN PLANO.
I, WELL FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING UP WITH US ON THE TABLINGS 'CAUSE WE REALLY HAD US A CHANCE TO, TO WORK WITH THE HOMEOWNERS.
I FEEL LIKE WE'VE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY IT'S HARD TO REACH A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREEMENT, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE, WE'VE COME A LONG WAY ON IT.
WE'VE GOT THE, THE SLIDE YOU SEE UP THERE NOW, THIS IS OUR LATEST LAYOUT WHERE IT SHOWS THE SF NINE LOTS, MINIMUM 9,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ALONG THE WEST SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE.
UH, WE HAVE THE 7,000 FOOT LOTS IN THE CENTER.
YOU, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE, THE FENCING AND THE SETBACKS.
THERE ARE NO REQUIRED SETBACKS WITH DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOMEOWNERS.
THIS IS HOW WE ARRIVED AT THIS, THIS SEPARATION.
WE'VE GOT A 20 FOOT SETBACK, EXCUSE ME, ON THE WEST SIDE, PLUS THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ROAD.
THEN YOU'VE GOT SETBACK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSES.
THE, ONE OF THE BIG REASONS, THOSE TWO BIG REASONS FOR IT IS ONE IS UNDER THEIR ORDINANCE THEY HAVE TO BE A HUNDRED FEET FROM A STRUCTURE BEFORE THEY CAN BUILD A SHED OR A BARN.
SO WE'VE GIVEN THEM 85 FEET PLUS THEY HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
SO THAT GIVES THEM 10 FEET OF WIGGLE ROOM, YOU MIGHT SAY, TO MAKE SURE.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT THROUGH THE DISCUSSIONS THEY ASK FOR A MASONRY, UH, BRICK WALL.
WE AGREED TO THAT AND THAT'S WHAT WAS IN YOUR PACKAGE.
SINCE THEN, THE DISCUSSION HAS CHANGED TO WHERE WE WOULD DO AN ORNAMENTAL METAL FENCE AND LINE THE PROPERTY LINE THE WEST WITH SOME CEDAR TREES.
THERE'S A LOT OF EXISTING TREES, SO TO FILL IN THE GAPS AND WHERE THERE AREN'T TREES WILL AGREE TO PLANT CEDAR TREES, WHICH WILL GIVE A, A SCREEN YEAR ROUND AND BE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN A BRICK WALL WILL.
PLUS THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE SUMMERTIME, THE HEAT ON THE WALL DOES GET HOT.
SO THEREFORE THAT'S HOW WE REACHED THIS.
AND IT WAS UPON, YOU KNOW, THEIR SUGGESTION.
THE HOA WILL MAINTAIN ALL OF THAT AREA.
[00:15:01]
UH, IT GIVES THEM A LITTLE MORE SECURITY, A LITTLE MORE SENSE OF SECURITY.YOU'VE GOT A DOUBLE FENCE, UH, THE TWO ENDS.
THE NORTH AND SOUTH END WILL BE FENCED AND, AND LOCKED WITH GATES.
IT'LL BE GATES SO WE CAN GET IN THERE TO MAINTAIN THE AREA.
THE UM, ALSO YOU CAN SEE FROM THE LAYOUT, THERE'S NO HOUSES THAT BACK UP TO 'EM.
AND WE ALSO HAVE MINIMUM 9,000 FOOT LOTS ALONG LOTS RIOS.
SO WHEN YOU DRIVE BY OR LOOK AT IT, IT GIVES THAT, THAT FEELING, BUT YET GIVES US CHANCE TO PICK UP A FEW MORE LOTS THERE.
UH, THIS DOES MATCH, YOU KNOW, THE AREA OR FOR SERVICES.
ALL CITY SERVICES HAVE BEEN VERIFIED.
THERE'S ADEQUATE WATER, SEWER, UH, SCHOOLS.
I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON, ON THE SCHOOLS WITH SCHOOLS CLOSINGS.
BUT UNDER THE, THE INFORMATION FROM THE SCHOOL, WHICH I BELIEVE THE LETTER FROM THE SCHOOL IS IN YOUR PACKET, THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAPACITY IN THE SCHOOLS.
THIS ONLY IS ALSO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.
AND I FEEL LIKE YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS SUFFICIENT 'CAUSE YOU'VE GOT A MIXTURE OF ZONING IN THIS AREA FROM SF SIX ALL THE WAY UP TO STATE DEVELOPMENT.
ALSO, I BELIEVE YOU GOT A LETTER FROM THE STONY HOLLOW HOA THAT TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT, THEY WANT TO STAY SF NINE, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING.
STONY HOLLOW IS NOT ALL 9,000 FOOT LOTS.
THERE'S ALMOST HALF 242 OF 'EM ARE ZONED FOR SF SEVEN.
AND THEY WERE DEVELOPED AS SF SEVEN LOTS.
THAT'S WHY THIS MAKE THIS MATCHES WITH STONY HALL.
MERRIMAN SCORED, UH, SF SIX ALSO, THIS WILL ON THE LETTERS.
UH, I'VE KNOWN SHEP STALL FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.
I'VE BEEN DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY A LONG TIME.
HE'S ALWAYS BEEN FAIR AND UPFRONT AND I APPRECIATE THE LETTER THAT HE WROTE.
IT INDICATED THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THAT SEVERAL OUR OPTIONS ARE SERVES THE, THE QUEST, THE ONE, EXCUSE ME, THE ONE REQUEST THAT HE HAD IN THERE.
AND THAT'S WHY BRIT, THE LETTER TO THE HOMEOWNERS OF MY COMMITMENT TO HONOR THIS AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, 50 LOT MAXIMUM, THE S THE 9,000 FOOT LOTS, THE SF SEVEN LOTS, THE LANDSCAPING, THE MASON, I MEAN THE UH, ORNAMENTAL METAL FENCE.
ALL OF THESE ITEMS. I'VE ALSO AGREED NOT TO COME BACK TO TOY WITH IT AT A LATER DATE.
YOU KNOW, TRY TO GET ALL SF SEVENS.
IN FACT, THE CONCEPT PLAN, THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM.
IF THAT CAN BE PART OF THE ZONING, I'LL AGREE TO THAT OR, OR WHATEVER AGREEMENT.
THAT'S WHY I'LL SAY IT IN A PUBLIC FORUM.
I'VE DONE A LOT OF BUSINESS IN PLANO.
WE'VE NEVER PLAYED GAMES WITH YOU GUYS, SO, SO THEREFORE I WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT WE'RE NOT COMING BACK TO ASKING FOR MORE.
THEY'VE WORKED WITH US AND WE APPRECIATE IT AND I SAID I DO APPRECIATE PEOPLE RECOGNIZING IT.
IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE OR IF I CAN RESERVE SOME TIME AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO.
UM, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
YOU SAID THAT THE COMMON SPACE, WHICH I PRESUME ON THIS DRAWING IS THE AREA SHOWN IN GREEN.
IS THAT CORRECT? BETWEEN THE ROADWAY AND THE WHATEVER SCREENING IS THAT YOU AGREE WITH? YES, YES SIR.
YOU SAID THAT WOULD BE MADE BY THE HOA? YES SIR.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO AN HOA SPECIFICALLY FOR MEADOWBROOK, NOT THE CURRENT HOA THAT IS CORRECT.
IT WILL HAVE ITS OWN HOA, WHICH WILL ALSO MAINTAIN THE GREEN AREA ALONG LOS RES TOO.
OKAY, SO THIS WOULD BE A SEPARATE HOA OF JUST THESE 50 LOTS? THAT IS CORRECT.
TO TAKE CARE OF THAT MAINTENANCE? YES.
UM, AND THEN GO THROUGH YOUR MATH AGAIN WITH ME ON THE A HUNDRED FOOT SETBACK.
'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME YOU'VE GOT A 20 FOOT BUFFER AND 50 FOOT RIGHT AWAY.
THAT'S 70 PLUS A 15 FOOT BILLING LINE.
WHERE'S THE OTHER 15 FEET COME FROM? THE SIDE YARD.
YOU'VE GOT THE 20 FEET OF OPEN SPACE, YOU GOT THE RIGHT OF WAY, YOU'VE GOT THE PAVEMENT, THE OTHER RIGHT OF WAY, AND THE SITE SETBACK 15 FEET FROM THE, FROM THE HOUSES.
THIS EXAMPLE SHOWS YOU 85 FEET.
YEAH, THAT'S STILL SHOWING 85.
IS THE 15 ON THE CURRENT LANDOWNER'S SIDE, IS THAT THE OTHER 15 FOOT FOR THEIR SETBACK? NO, FOR THEM TO BUILD A SHED OR BARN, THEY HAVE TO BE A HUNDRED FEET FROM ANY STRUCTURE.
SO THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE A 15 FOOT SETBACK ON THEIR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH WOULD MAKE OVER THE A HUNDRED FEET.
SO THAT HONORS THEIR SETBACK, THEY CAN BUILD RIGHT TO THEIR SETBACK LINE.
AND STILL BE A HUNDRED FEET FROM YOUR NEAREST STRUCTURE? THAT IS CORRECT.
[00:20:01]
UNDERSTAND.BECAUSE I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T WANT TO RESTRICT THEM FROM DOING SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO DO.
UH, COMMISSIONER BRUNO? UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
DO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, UH, ORNAMENTAL FENCE WITH THE CEDAR TREES REPLACES THE WALL? YES.
AND IT WILL BE PLACED, UH, AT THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE OPEN SPACE.
IT SHOWS THAT THEY'RE THE ORNAMENTAL METAL FENCE.
AND, AND THEREFORE THERE WILL NOT BE A MASONRY WALL.
WILL HAVE THE CEDAR TREES OVER THERE.
ASIDE FROM STONY HOLLOW AND WHATEVER THE OTHER, UH, DEVELOPMENT WAS, COULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THE STATUS OF AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT NOW WITH, UH, FROM THE RESIDENTS OF RANCH ESTATES TO THE WEST? THIS, THIS IS FROM RANCH ESTATES.
WE'VE, WE'VE, UH, I'VE TALKED TO THE HOA PRESIDENT, ESTONIA HOLLOW, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO MEET.
UH, HE HAS MET, HE'S PRIMARILY GONE THROUGH SOME THE, UH, RANCH ESTATES.
HE'S MET WITH THEM AND CUMULATIVE.
THEY'VE GIVEN ME LETTERS AND REQUESTS OF WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE.
UH, AND WE'VE COPIED, UH, THE CHAIR, THE PRESIDENT ON ALL THE PAPERWORK AND WE VOLUNTEERED TO MEET WITH THEM, BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
WELL, ARE ARE THEY ON BOARD WITH THIS NEW PROPOSAL OR NOT? UH, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW.
I DO KNOW FROM THEIR LETTER THAT THEY'RE SAYING, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT NOTHING LESS THAN SF NINE BECAUSE THEY WON'T PRESERVE THE SF NINE ZONING.
WELL, UNFORTUNATELY THEY HAVE SF SEVEN LOTS ALSO.
THE, UH, SCREENING WALL, UH, THAT YOU REFER TO, IS THERE ANY PLAN FOR IRRIGATION OF THAT AREA? YES, SIR.
YOU PUT THE, FOR THE GRASS AND FOR THE CEDAR RETREATS.
I, I EXPECT I, I KNOW YOU HAD ANSWERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT IN, IN YOUR ANSWERING, YOU SAID THAT THIS, THIS NOW ORNAMENTAL FENCE, UM, I ASSUME, ARE YOU STILL CONTINUING, CONTINUING TO MAKE IT AN EIGHT FOOT? IS THAT THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
THE OTHER THING IS, YOU, YOU, YOU SAID IT WAS GONNA BE ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THAT 20 FOOT.
DID, WAS THAT A MISTAKE? DID YOU NO.
DID YOU MEAN WEST? I MEANT THE EAST, EAST SIDE OF THE OPEN SPACE.
SO IT'S GONNA GO ALONG THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE INSTEAD OF THE PROPERTY LINE NOW? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO THE HOA WOULD BE MAINTAINING IT ON, ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE? NOT ON THE INSIDE OF THE FENCE, ESSENTIALLY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'LL HAVE A GATE AT THE SOUTH END FOR THE PLANT, FOR THE MAINTENANCE PEOPLE GET IN THERE TO MOW.
SO INSTEAD OF, INSTEAD OF RIGHT AWAY A LANDSCAPE FENCE OR WOULD, IT'S NOW A RIGHT AWAY FENCE LANDSCAPE IN OPEN SPACE.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, OPEN SPACE.
AND THEN THAT WAS A REQUEST OF THE LANDOWNER THAT'S NEXT TO IT TO MOVE THE ORNAMENTAL FENCE.
'CAUSE THERE'S EXISTING TREES THERE TOO.
AND WE DIDN'T WANNA DISTURB ANY OF THE EXISTING TREES.
WE WANTED TO LEAVE THEM ALL INTACT.
SO WHAT ARE YOU, UM, HOW, SINCE, SINCE IT'S NOT PART OF OUR PACKET, THIS, THIS ORNAMENTAL FENCE, UH, YOU, YOU SPOKE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING, UH, AND TREES.
HOW, HOW OFTEN ARE, HOW DO WE KNOW WHERE YOU'RE PUTTING THOSE TREES? EVERY 20 FEET.
EVERY, WHAT ARE YOU, WHAT ARE, WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR GENERALLY FOR THE SCREENING? IT'S GENERALLY THE CEDAR'S ABOUT 20 FEET APART BECAUSE THEY, THEY GROW OUT AND, AND THEY'RE REALLY USED FOR THE AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE ANY EXISTING TREES OR IF THERE'S GAPS BETWEEN THOSE EXISTING TREES.
'CAUSE WE WANT, WE WANT THEM TO HAVE A BE COMFORTABLE WITH A NICE, YOU KNOW, SCREEN THERE THAT STAYS GREEN YEAR ROUND AND GIVES THEM SOME BUFFERING.
AND THAT'S WHEN WE MOVED THE, THE WR IRON, I MEAN THE METAL FENCE OUT, WHICH AGAIN, IT GIVES THEM ANOTHER 20 FEET OF BUFFER, WHICH DON'T KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING OVER THERE NEXT TO THEIR FENCE OR LOOKING OVER HATE THEM IN SECURITY STANDPOINT.
SO MR. DOUGLAS, I MORE OF A COMMENT THAN A QUESTION.
I WANTED TO SAY THAT, UM, YOUR FRANKNESS AS WELL AS YOUR EARNEST DESIRE TO, UM, WORK WITH THE HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE HERE, UH, I THINK SPEAKS VOLUMES.
UH, YOUR COMMITMENT TO NOT COMING BACK FOR FUTURE, UH, SITUATIONS.
I THINK, UH, A LOT OF OUR CITIZENS FEEL THAT, UH, PEOPLE GET ZONING AND THEN THEY COME BACK WANTING CHANGES AND CHANGES.
AND SO, UM, TO HEAR THE EFFORTS THAT YOU'VE GONE THROUGH, AS WELL AS TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBERS OF, UM, I THINK SPEAK VOLUMES.
I HAVE NOT READY TO RENDER MY DECISION YET, BUT I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT, UH, THANK YOU.
I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORT AS A DEVELOPER AS WELL AS, UM, UH, A GOOD CITIZEN.
UM, TWO MORE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.
MR. DOUGLAS, UM, THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPE, AS YOU
[00:25:01]
HEARD WHEN I ASKED STAFF, WE AS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CANNOT REQUIRE THAT.HOW IS THAT BEING MEMORIALIZED? WELL, I'VE GOT A, UH, WROTE A LETTER TO THE, THE HOMEOWNERS THAT IF THAT NEEDS TO BE, I CAN ADD, YOU KNOW, SEND THAT TO YOU IF THEY WANNA ADD THAT TO THE PACKAGE.
ARE MY VERBAL COMMITMENT RIGHT HERE OF RECORD? WELL, I, I, I THINK THE POINT IS WE CAN'T REQUIRE THAT AS A CITY.
SO I JUST WANTED, I, THAT'S WHY I'M VOLUNTEERING THIS.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAD, WERE WORKING SOMETHING OUT WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO MEMORIALIZE THAT.
YES, THIS IS VOLUNTARILY AND THEY DO HAVE A LETTER ITEMIZING.
I THINK IT'S 10 POINTS THAT WE WENT THROUGH.
AND THEN LAST ON AT OUR LAST MEETING, THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE NEIGHBOR, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN TWO THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT DRAINAGE, ABOUT YOUR POTENTIAL, YOUR DEVELOPMENT, POTENTIALLY BLOCKING DRAINAGE.
HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE? WELL, THE, THE DRAINAGE THERE IS A STEADY EASEMENT FOR THE DRAINAGE THAT WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN IS EXISTING EASEMENT BECAUSE A CITY A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO WENT IN AND CLEANED THE DITCH BACK OUT TO HANDLE THAT WATER BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BARR DITCHES AND RANCH ESTATE.
SO THE WATER FLOWS IN, AND AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO TURN OUR GRADING PLANS INTO THE CITY AND THEY'RE GOING TO REVIEW IT.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA LET US DUMP WATER OVER ON THEM.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT GIVES US THAT 20 FEET PLUS A RIGHT OF WAY TO MAKE SURE IT DRAINS AWAY FROM THEM INTO OUR STORM SYSTEM.
WHICH, WHICH AGAIN, THE CHRISTIAN PROBABLY CAME UP WHEN WE HAD HOMES BACKING UP TO IT, THAT THAT WOULD'VE BEEN HARDER TO CONTROL.
BUT NOW THAT WE'VE OPENED THAT ALL UP, THAT WON'T BE AN ISSUE NOW.
UH, IN THE LETTER THAT WE GOT, UM, SOME CITIZENS HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE EMERGENCY AND PROPERTIES FOR THE STAFF.
HAVE WE CONTACTED THE POLICE IN EMERGENCY? DO THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO RESPOND? ALL THE PLANS ARE PROVIDED TO POLICE AND FIRE DURING THE PLAN REVIEW AND THEY HAD NO CONCERN.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? NOBODY.
MR. DOUGLAS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE MAY HAVE MORE FOR YOU LATER.
UM, I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS REGISTERED.
UM, IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT SEVERAL OF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO COMBINE YOUR TIME.
AND SO IF THAT'S YOUR INTENT, UM, PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND SAY THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'RE, UM, COMBINING YOUR TIME SO WE KNOW WHICH PEOPLE ON OUR LIST HAVE COMBINED THEIR TIME TOGETHER SO WE CAN BE RESPECTFUL OF, OF THE PROCESS.
UM, SO IF YOU WANT TO CALL SPEAKERS AND IF, IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE ONES THAT IS SEEDING YOUR TIME TO SOMEBODY ELSE, IF YOU'D COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND JUST TELL US THAT WE'D APPRECIATE IT.
ALRIGHT, WHO'S UP FIRST? OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS SCOTT FENTON, FOLLOWED BY RAY PARKER AND THEN FOLLOWED BY BRIAN ELEY.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
I RESIDE AT 40 17 KITE MEADOW DRIVE.
HELLO COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
UH, I WASN'T BORN IN EAST PLANO, BUT I GOT HERE JUST AS SOON AS I COULD.
I'VE BEEN AN ENTHUSIASTIC RESIDENT OF EAST PLANO FOR THE PAST 36 YEARS, SERVING AS THE PASTOR OF MEADOWS BAPTIST CHURCH.
MY THREE CHILDREN HAVE GONE TO EAST SIDE SCHOOLS FROM GRADE SCHOOL THROUGH MIDDLE SCHOOL TO HIGH SCHOOL, ALL THREE GRADUATING FROM PLANO EAST SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL, AND MY FIVE GRANDCHILDREN ARE FOLLOWING IN THEIR STEPS.
MY WIFE IS A RETIRED TEACHER FROM PLANO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND WAS A TEACHER OF THE YEAR AT ONE OF OUR EAST SIDE SCHOOLS WHERE SHE DEVELOPED OUTSTANDING AND AWARD-WINNING SPEECH AND THEATER TEAMS. I'VE SERVED AS THE CHAPLAIN OF THE PLANO EAST FOOTBALL TEAM AND FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS, I'VE SERVED AS A CHAPLAIN FOR THE PLANO POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS ASSISTING OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.
THIS SERVICE HELPS PLANO FAMILIES FROM ALL BACKGROUNDS, RELIGIONS AND ETHNICITIES TO DEAL WITH THE MOST TRAUMATIC CRISIS IMAGINABLE, THE UNEXPECTED DEATH OF A LOVED ONE.
I'VE BEEN AN EYEWITNESS AND PARTICIPANT IN THE GROWTH OF OUR EAST PLANO COMMUNITY OVER THE PAST QUARTER OF A CENTURY.
WHEN WE RELOCATED OUR CHURCH FROM EAST 14TH STREET BACK IN 2000 LOS RIOS DEAD ENDED AT THE HIGH SCHOOL.
I WAS ONE OF THE FIRST HOMEOWNERS OF THE STONY HOLLOW NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'VE LIVED THERE FOR THE PAST 27 YEARS AS A RESIDENT OF EAST PLANO.
I'M PROUD OF OUR BUSINESSES, OUR RESTAURANTS, OUR SCHOOLS, AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED OUT OF THE AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPE OF OUR PAST.
I LOVE OUR EAST SIDE PRIDE AND ESPECIALLY THE CROWN JEWEL OF THE PLANO PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM.
[00:30:01]
OUR 800 ACRE POINT, UH, OAK POINT NATURE PRESERVE.RECENT YEARS IN EAST PLANO, HOWEVER, HAVE SEEN THE CLOSING OF MAJOR CHAINS LIKE TOM THUMB AND SCHOOL CLOSURES DUE TO DECLINING ENROLLMENT.
THE REALITY IS WE NEED MORE FAMILIES, MORE HOMES, MORE CHILDREN, MORE NEIGHBORHOODS TO KEEP OUR EAST PLANO SCHOOLS AND BUSINESSES VIBRANT AND STRONG.
AS A DEVOTED EAST PLANO CITIZEN AND ORIGINAL MEMBER OF STONY HOLLOW, I URGE YOU TO VOTE YES FOR THIS REZONING, WHICH I BELIEVE WILL ATTRACT FAMILIES AND CREATE A NEW NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WILL BE OF GREAT BENEFIT 20 SECONDS TO OUR EAST PLANO COMMUNITY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS RAY PARKER, FOLLOWED BY BRIAN EPLEY, FOLLOWED BY JOHN MARLOW.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UH, I LIVE AT 2101 LOS RIOS AND HERE IN PLANO.
UM, HAD THE PLEASURE OF, UH, RESIDING IN THE SAME HOUSE FOR 31 YEARS.
MY WIFE AND I AND BOTH OF OUR BOYS WERE, UM, UH, DULEY ELEMENTARY, ARMSTRONG MIDDLE SCHOOL, WILLIAMS HIGH SCHOOL, AND PLANO EAST.
ATTENDEES VERY PROUD OF THE EAST SIDE.
WE MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF THE, THE, IT WAS A VERY LESS BUSY LOCAL, UM, COMMUNITY NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE, WE MOVED INTO AS, UM, UH, MR. FENTON SPOKE.
THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF GOOD CHANGES, BUT THERE'S BEEN SOME BAD CHANGES, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T WANT TO, UH, MAKE THE POINT AGAIN THAT HE MADE, BUT WE DO NEED MORE SCHOOLS AND WE NEED MORE PEOPLE.
UH, HERE RECENTLY, PLANO, UM, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNOUNCED THIS SUMMER HAVING TO DEAL WITH A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR SHORTFALL IN, UH, REVENUE, LOOKING AT MORE SCHOOL CLOSURES.
AND I WOULD PUT TO YOU THAT A SCHOOL CLOSURE IS A, A TERRIBLE BLOW TO A NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE SCHOOL IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S THE ENTITY THAT PEOPLE CAN CONNECT AROUND.
SO, UH, OF THE USE BEFORE YOU, I THINK THAT GOING TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME USE ON THIS PROPERTY MAKES THE MOST SENSE.
A PROPERTY THAT'S SETTING VACANT NOW.
AND, UH, LET'S TURN IT INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS A, UH, PRIDE AND CAN BECOME PART OF THE PLANO EAST NE UM, NEIGHBORHOODS AND PART OF THE PLANO EAST SENIOR HIGH, UH, SUPPORT.
NEXT WE HAVE BRIAN EPLEY, FOLLOWED BY JOHN MARLOW AND THEN JOHN JACOBSON.
UH, I LIVE AT 43 24 PEGGY LANE, UH, IN CREEKSIDE OF STATES.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I'VE ONLY LIVED HERE FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
WE, UH, MOVED MY FAMILY HERE FROM, FROM ILLINOIS.
UH, WE LOOKED FOR HOUSING FROM AS FAR SOUTH AS RICHARDSON ALL THE WAY UP TO MCKINNEY.
WE LOOKED, UH, FROM WILEY OVER TO FRISCO AND, AND WE CHOSE PLANO.
UH, WE LIKE OUR NEW COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE GOOD NEIGHBORS, OUR CHILDREN OF NEW GOOD FRIENDS.
WE LIKE THE SCHOOLS, THE PARK DISTRICT, THE CHURCHES, THE BUSINESSES.
UH, I LOVE TO BE ABLE TO GO TO THE PARADES FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL AND SEE THE TURNOUT OF THE COMMUNITY.
PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE THEIR KIDS IN SCHOOL ARE STILL THERE FOR THE PARADES SUPPORTING.
UM, IT'S BEEN HARD TO MOVE, BUT THIS COMMUNITY HAS DONE EVERYTHING IT CAN TO MAKE IT EASY FOR US TO TRANSITION.
AND WE'RE VERY, WE'RE VERY HAPPY FOR THEM, BUT WE DO HAVE ROOM TO GROW.
UH, I KNOW THAT PLANO, ISD NEEDS STUDENTS.
MY YOUNGEST SON, HIS MIDDLE SCHOOL ARMSTRONG, WAS CLOSED LAST YEAR.
HE'S CURRENTLY AT MCMILLAN HIGH SCHOOL, BUT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO WILLIAMS HIGH SCHOOL BECAUSE OF THE REDISTRICTING.
WE'VE DONE WHAT WE CAN TO KEEP 'EM THERE, BUT IT'S, IT'S HAD TO BE ON US.
WE WOULD LIKE IT SO THAT NO FAMILIES HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT UPHEAVAL.
WITH MORE SCHOOL CLOSURES, BUSINESSES ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR MORE CUSTOMERS.
THE CITY COULD BENEFIT FROM THE, UH, EXPANDED POOL OF TAXPAYERS.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE MORE FAMILIES THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPERIENCE WHAT MY FAMILY HAS EXPERIENCED HERE IN, IN EAST PLANO.
SO I URGE YOU TO APPROVE THE ZONE CHANGE.
[00:35:03]
NEXT IS JOHN MARLOWE, FOLLOWED BY JOHN JACOBSON, FOLLOWED BY PHIL LANGLEY.I LIVE AT 38 0 1 NUT WOOD LANE, PLANO, TEXAS.
I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE STONY HOLLOW HOA.
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE'VE HAD FOUR MAJOR OPEN MEETINGS.
THIS BEING ONE OF THE LARGEST TOPICS IN THERE.
WE HAVE ALSO, UM, LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF THINGS, INCLUDING THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CLOSINGS.
DUALLY, SPECIFICALLY IN, UM, 2024 PISD ANNOUNCED THAT ANYONE, UH, WITHIN TWO MILES WE NO LONGER WAS ELIGIBLE FOR BUSING.
THEREFORE, THAT GREATLY INCREASED OUR TRAFFIC FLOW NEAR HICKEY.
THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITIES, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CHILDREN ALMOST, UH, HIT WITH AUTOMOBILES.
WE'VE HAD TO GET THE POLICE INVOLVED BECAUSE AGAIN, THE TRAFFIC INCREASE.
LIKEWISE, WE'VE HAD 80 TO A HUNDRED STUDENTS FROM FOREMAN DO THAT CLOSURE GET DUMPED INTO THE HICKEY AND ELEMENTARY SYSTEM, AND THAT'S BASICALLY CLOSED DOWN OUR MAJOR COLD WATER CREEK IN DURING SCHOOL HOURS BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC JAMS. THE PISD HAS HAS FORECASTED ANOTHER 10% DECLINE IN THEIR ENROLLMENT NUMBERS OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS, AND THEREFORE, THAT FORECASTS MORE SCHOOL CLOSINGS AND WE ANTICIPATE GREATER, UH, TRAFFIC ISSUES IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMMENT MADE THAT STONY HOLLOW HAS SF SEVEN AND SF NINE.
WE ALSO HAVE SIX PROGRESSIVE PHASES THAT THE DEVELOPERS USED.
WE MOVED FROM A DENSER POPULA POPULOUS AREA TO A LITTLE BIT SPREAD OUT INTO SF NINE.
WE FOUND THAT TO BE MORE CONDUCIVE FOR BOTH, UH, INDIVIDUALS PRIVACY AS WELL AS QUALITY OF LIVING AS FAR AS SPACE, GIVING PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE HARMONIOUSLY.
THEREFORE, WE HAVE OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS FOR EACH OF THE THREE DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE TOUCHED STONY HOLLOW MAINTAIN THAT THE LOT SIZE SHOULD BE SF NINE.
AND THAT'S THE MAJOR CONTENTION OF OUR BOARD.
THE, UM, EXCUSE ME, A LITTLE, LITTLE HORSE TODAY.
THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA PUTS A TASK ON NOT ONLY OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT ALSO EMERGENCY SERVICES, PARKING AS AN EXAMPLE.
WE HAVE BOTH SIDES OF THE STREETS BEING USED IN THE EVENING AS PARKING.
WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS CASES WHERE EMTS AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET TO EMERGENCY CALLS.
THE ONLY REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE ASKING IS THAT THE LOT SIZE BE CONDUCIVE WITH WHAT WE'VE MAINTAIN 20 SECONDS MAINTAIN FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS AT SF NINE.
OKAY, NEXT IS JOHN JACOBSON, FOLLOWED BY PHIL LANGLEY, FOLLOWED BY GA GABRIELA HANNO.
I LIVE AT 39 16 RIDGETOP LANE, ABOUT 200 FEET FROM THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I'M A 40 YEAR, UH, PLATO RESIDENT AND A 34 YEAR OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY ON RIDGE TYPE OF ESTATES.
SEEN A LOT OF CHANGES I'VE SEEN WHEN NOTHING TO THE NORTH OF ME, UH, EXISTED.
THERE WAS NO HOUSES, NO HAY, JUST HAY FIELDS.
UM, I ALSO LIKE TO CORRECT MR. DOUGLAS IN SAYING THAT RANCH ESTATES ONLY HAS TWO PLUS ACRE LOTS ON IT, AND I HAVEN'T KNOWN A THREE ACRE LOT.
UM, WE CAME TO THE AREA BECAUSE WE LIKED THE OPENNESS, THE FACT THAT YOU COULD HAVE HORSES, LARGE ANIMALS, YOU COULD HAVE A WORKSHOP IN YOUR BACKYARD.
UM, THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM FOR ME IS THIS, THIS PROPOSED, UH, DEVELOPMENT'S STILL TOO DENSE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT ZONING, YOU CAN HAVE ABOUT SIX TWO ACRE LOTS ON ED 73 FOR THOSE 14 ACRES.
AND THEN YOU'D HAVE TO ALLOW SOME OF THAT SPACE FOR ROADS.
NOW ON THE OTHER HAND, WE STARTED OUT WITH 58 LOTS LAST NOVEMBER.
WE MOVED THE NEEDLE EVER SO SLIGHTLY TO 50 LOTS.
NOW YOU'RE HEARING THAT OKAY, MAYBE WE WANT A MINIMUM OF SF NINE LOTS.
[00:40:01]
NINE LOTS AND A MAXIMUM OF 30 LOTS.THAT TRANSITION, IF YOU LOOK, HAS BEEN DONE VERY WELL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIDGETOP AS WELL AS MERRIMAN TO THE SOUTH OF RANCH ESTATES.
THE OTHER THING TO CONSIDER IS THERE HAVE BEEN TWO RECENT ZONING CASES, UH, THAT THE CITY, UM, WORKED AGAINST HIGH DENSITY, UM, RESIDENTIAL.
ONE WAS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE THIS PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION, UH, WHICH IS THE MORMON CHURCH.
THEY WANTED TO BUILD SIX OR SO HOUSES ON A, ON A LOT THAT THEY WERE GOING TO SELL.
NOW IT'S A ONE ACRE TRANSITIONAL LOT, AND YOU COULDN'T TELL THAT IT WASN'T.
PART OF THAT ORIGINAL ZONING ADJACENT TO THE MORMON CHURCH IS THE MONTESSORI SCHOOL.
THEY WANTED TO PUT SMALLER LOTS ON THAT PROPERTY.
THE CITY SAID NO, AND NOW THEY ARE LARGER LOTS.
SO I THINK IT'S ONLY FAIR TO THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT THIS AREA NEEDS TO BE LARGER LOTS.
IT FITS WITH THE AREA, IT DOESN'T.
AND AS FAR AS THE SCHOOLS ARE CONCERNED, THE LEVON FARM DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA HAVE 1600 UNITS IN IT.
AND THAT SHOULD BRING IN MORE STUDENTS FOR PISD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. JACOBSON.
NEXT IS PHIL LANGLEY, FOLLOWED BY GABRIELA ANO AND CHRIS MEYER.
APPRECIATE EVERYTHING Y'ALL DO.
IT'S A CHANCE FOR ME TO WEAR A SUIT, SO I WAS KINDA EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
UM, I TOO, LIKE A PREVIOUS SPEAKER MOVED HERE FROM, UH, DOWNSTATE ILLINOIS ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR OH, I'M SO SORRY.
UM, PHIL LANGLEY 39 27 RANCHES STATE CIRCLE IN PLANO.
SO I MOVED HERE A LITTLE OVER 30 YEARS AGO.
UM, MY FATHER WAS A SMALL TOWN BANKER.
I HAVE BROTHERS THAT ARE NAMED BILL AND BOB.
SO WHEN I MOVED TO TEXAS, I FIT RIGHT IN.
UM, I'M, UH, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS THAT I HEARD HERE.
I MADE SOME NOTES, UM, THE SURROUNDING AREA.
IN FACT, AS JOHN JUST SAID, THERE'S MORE PROPERTIES THAT ARE MORE THAN TWO ACRES.
IN FACT, THE THREE ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE PROPOSED, UH, PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY ARE ALL OVER THREE ACRES.
OKAY? SO JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
AND AS FAR AS THE SETBACK, UM, THAT WASN'T A VOLUNTARY SETBACK, THAT'S A SEWER EASEMENT.
SO IT IS CONVENIENT TO SAY, HEY, WE TALKED TO THE COMMUNITY, WE DECIDED TO MOVE IT BACK 20 FEET.
COULDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THAT 20 FEET.
ANYWAY, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
AND THEN I LOOKED AT THE, UM, THE REWRITE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TODAY.
AND THERE'S A, UH, GUIDING PRINCIPLE 1.6 SAYS, PROACTIVELY SEEKING COMMUNITY INPUT.
WELL, THAT'S THE SURVEY THAT WAS ONLINE.
AND SO AS OF TODAY, THE MAJORITY OF PLANO, UH, RESPONDENTS OPPOSE IT.
AND EVEN DESPITE THE FLURRY OF RECENT, UH, IN FAVORS OF, UM, 84% OF THE RESPONDENTS THAT LIVE IN THE ZIP CODE ARE STILL AGAINST THIS PLAN.
AND THAT WAS AS OF ABOUT 1:00 PM TODAY.
SO I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ALL THOSE FACTS FOR EVERYBODY.
UH, MY OPINION, WE SHOULDN'T BE HERE FOR THREE REASONS.
NUMBER ONE, UM, THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
NUMBER TWO, THIS MASSIVE LEAPFROG OF THREE ZONING DISTRICTS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT ZONING THAT CALLS FOR SF 20 TO BE TRANSITIONED FROM STATE DEVELOPMENT THAN INTO URBAN DISTRICTS.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IN MY OPINION, THIS PUTS NEIGHBORS AT ODDS.
SEE, BECAUSE SF SEVEN AND EVEN SF NINE ARE URBAN, THE STATE DEVELOPMENT ISN'T.
SO LET ME JUST READ WHAT IT SAYS FOR URBAN RESIDENTS SHOULD BE TO QUOTE THE CITY CODE, BE PROTECTED FROM EXCESSIVE NOISE, ILLUMINATION, ODOR, AND VISUAL CLUTTER.
WELL, IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO A RANCH, UH, I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER SEEN AN ELECTRIC TRACTOR, EVER SEEN A HORSE USE A TOILET.
AND I CAN'T GET MY DOGS TO STOP BARKING UP TO 10 O'CLOCK.
RIGHT? SO IMMEDIATELY YOU HAVE NEIGHBOR AGAINST NEIGHBOR WITH COMPETING ZONING, RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S GONNA PUT US AT ODDS.
WHAT'S THE REAL REASON? I THINK WE'RE HERE.
I TALKED TO THE GOOD PASTOR, AWESOME GUY, ASKED HIM WHY HE WAS DOING THIS.
AND, UH, IT WAS TO RAISE MONEY FOR THE CHURCH.
AND BLESS THEIR HEARTS, THEY'RE GONNA MAKE A TON OF MONEY OFF OF THIS.
IT WAS GREAT INVESTMENT, GOOD FOR THEM, AND I HOPE THEY PUT IT TO GOOD USE.
BUT THEN I WENT TO THE DEVELOPER AND I SAID, WHY AREN'T YOU FOLLOWING THE CODE AS IT IS TODAY IN THE TRANSITION? HE SAID, WELL, I CAN'T MAKE ENOUGH MONEY.
HE WANTS TO GO WITH DIFFERENT ZONING 20 SECONDS, RIGHT? UH, I BELIEVE THE NEXT SPEAKER'S GONNA YIELD THEIR TIME IF I COULD ASK HER.
SO IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO MONEY IN, IN THIS EVENT.
AND, YOU KNOW, LOOK, UH, I KNOW EVERYONE WANTS
[00:45:01]
TO DO THE RIGHT THING HERE.UM, BUT JUST PUT PUTTING NEIGHBORS AT ODDS WITH EACH OTHER, BUT BEFORE YOU EVEN BREAK GROUND OR THEY MOVE IN, IS, I JUST DON'T THINK HEALTHY FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO, MR. LANGLEY, IF I CAN INTERRUPT YOU JUST ONE MINUTE.
IF YOU'LL LET, UM, MS. NARANJO COME TO THE MIC AND JUST TOE HER TIME TO YOU, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO.
UM, IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN TELL US YOUR INTENT.
I, UH, RESIDE IN 25 24 ELLIS COURT IN WEST PLANO.
AND I YIELD MY TIME TO MY HUSBAND PHILIP LANGLEY.
IF YOU NOTICE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO RESIDENCES OF PLANO, AND NEITHER OF 'EM ARE FOR RENT.
WE LIVE IN THE CENTRAL, WE LIVE IN THE EAST.
SO, UM, I I WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, COMMEND AS WELL, YOU KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER BRONSKI YOU SAID MR. DOUGLAS IS FORTHRIGHT AND, UH, WAS, SEEMED TO BE ACCOMMODATING WITH US.
AND I BELIEVE HE HAS TRIED TO BE, BUT EVERYTHING HE SAYS, UM, IS LIP SERVICE TO THIS POINT.
I'D LIKE TO TRUST HIM, BUT WHY DON'T WE JUST PUT HIM TO THE TEST? I, I ASKED THIS COMMITTEE REJECT THIS PROPOSAL.
ASK HIM TO GO BACK AND DO A PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL OF THE THINGS HE SAYS HE IS GONNA DO AND MORE IN AGREEMENT.
PUT IT IN A PLAN DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN BRING IT BACK.
'CAUSE I THINK THERE'LL BE ACCOMMODATION, BUT TODAY IT'S JUST A PROMISE.
IN FACT, HE ONE TIME TOLD ME, HEY, LET'S JUST HOPE PEOPLE DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT YOUR DOGS.
AND I SAID, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, HOPE IS NOT A PLAN.
HAVE 'EM PUT IT IN A PLAN, REJECT THIS CURRENT PROPOSAL, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AT ANOTHER TIME.
AND I'M SURE EVERYTHING WILL BE AMENABLE THEN.
AND THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CHRIS MEYER, FOLLOWED BY KYLE DE SHANE.
CHRIS MEYER, 3 8 0 5 MERRIMAN DRIVE.
I'M THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE RANCH ESTATE'S HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
UH, EVERYTHING THAT PHIL HAS SAID, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT MANY TIMES.
UH, THE LAST SPEAKER AND, UH, THE RESIDENTS OF 60 RESIDENTS OF THE RANCH ESTATES ARE IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH EVERYTHING THAT HE HAS SAID.
WE FEEL AS THOUGH THAT IF THE, IF WE GO FROM A STATE DEVELOPMENT SIZE LOTS TO SF NINE, SF SEVEN, OR ANY, ANY SMALLER, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT WHAT THE RESIDENTS OF THE EAST PLANO HAS MOVED THERE FOR.
WE MOVED THERE BECAUSE WE REALLY ENJOYED THE OPEN SPACES, THE PARKS, THE LARGER LOTS, UH, THE STANDARD OF LIVING THAT WE HAD, THAT ALL OF THAT PROVIDED.
SO I, I ASK THAT YOU VOTE NO AGAINST THIS, UH, THIS CHANGE.
AND, UH, I, I THINK THAT, UH, A STATE DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURE THERE WOULD BE, WOULD BE CONDUCIVE AND GO WORK RIGHT ALONGSIDE WITH WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE NOW AND WHAT THE, THE, THE CITY HAD ORIGINALLY PLANNED.
THE LAST SPEAKER IS KYLE DE SHANE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS KYLE DECHEN.
I LIVE AT 3 9 2 4 RIDGETOP LANE, AND I SHARE A PROPERTY LINE WITH THE LAND UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR REZONING.
AS SOMEONE WHO SPOKE A FEW MONTHS AGO, I WANTED TO START AGAIN BY SAYING THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE MY PERSPECTIVE.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE HERE AND WILLING TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS.
ALL THIS SUPPORT SHOWS WHY OUR SMALL LOS RIOS AREA COMMUNITY IS SO GREAT.
MY PROPERTY, IN PARTICULAR SHARES OVER 500 FEET OF PROPERTY LINE WITH THE AREA PROPOSED FOR REZONING.
THERE ARE A FEW POINTS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME THAT I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AS ESTATE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS ARE UNIQUE AND THEIR REMOVAL OF THAT ZONING DESIGNATION COULD HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN BOTH THEIR SIZE AND THEIR THEIR USE.
MY FIRST CONCERN RELATES TO MY PROPERTY RIGHTS REGARDING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE STATE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.
ANY ADDITIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTED ON MY PROPERTY MUST BE LOCATED, LIKE MENTIONED BEFORE, AT LEAST 100 FEET FROM ANY DWELLING ON AN ADJOINING PROPERTY.
THE DEVELOPERS HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH, WITH US TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE BUFFER.
HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ADDITIONAL ASSURANCES OR LEGALLY BINDING PROTECTIONS CAN BE PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THIS BUFFER WILL NOT BE REDUCED OR OTHERWISE COMPROMISED IN THE FUTURE.
MY SECOND CONCERN PERTAIN PERTAINS TO MY PROPERTY RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO LIVESTOCK.
BASED ON THE ACREAGE OF OUR LOTS, PROPERTY OWNERS ARE PERMITTED TO KEEP LIVESTOCK ANIMALS.
HOW CAN WE ENSURE THAT THE NEW RESIDENTS WILL ACKNOWLEDGE AND RESPECT THESE RIGHTS AS WELL? MY LAST CONCERN IS IN LINE WITH MUCH OF THE OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS AROUND DENSITY.
PLAINTIFF'S COMPREHEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LISTS AS ITS FIRST PRIORITY FOR NEIGHBORHOODS, THE GOAL TO PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER
[00:50:01]
AND QUALITY OF LIFE.AND THAT IT IS THE INTENTION TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE THESE USES AND TO REGULATE THE DESIGN OF NEW RESIDENTIAL INFILL PRODUCTS TO BE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING UH, ENVIRONMENT.
WHEN THINKING ABOUT MY ESTATE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, HOW DOES THIS INFILL DESIGN PRESERVE OR ENHANCE THEM? AND WHAT WILL THIS DO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S QUALITY OF LIFE BASED ON SOME OF THE POINTS THAT I HAVE BROUGHT UP? THANK YOU.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? OKAY, WE DID HAVE SOMEONE THAT REGISTERED, BUT AS AN ATTENDEE ONLY.
AND HE'D LIKE TO KNOW IF HE CAN SPEAK AT THIS MEETING.
IF, IF THEY'RE REGISTERED, THEN YES, WE SHOULD LET THEM SPEAK.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, COREY RAINER.
UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A FEW REMARKS ON THIS.
REQUEST YOU AN ADDRESS, PLEASE.
MR. ER COREY, ER 1814 N PLACE 7 5 0 7 4.
UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A FEW BRIEF REMARKS ON THIS REQUEST.
UM, IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT THE, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS DONE, UH, A LOT OF A OUTREACH AND BUILDING CONSENSUS, UH, AROUND SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND, AND A CHANGE, UM, IS, IS OBVIOUSLY A CHALLENGE.
UM, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I, I SUPPORT THIS REQUEST AND I HOPE THAT YOU, YOU, YOU DO TOO.
REVIEWING THE PRIOR VERSIONS OF THE PLAN, UM, I'M SOMEWHAT DISAPPOINTED THAT IT'S GONE FROM, FROM MORE UNITS DOWN TO LESS UNITS.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, WE ARE DESPERATELY IN NEED OF, OF HOUSING IN PLANO, AND WE HAVE DECLINING SCHOOL POPULATION AND SCHOOLS CLOSING.
UM, I'M A BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE AREA, UH, AND THE PROPOSED SCREENING WALL.
UM, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS IS PLACING A BURDEN ON THESE FUTURE HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE NOT EVEN IN THIS ROOM OF A COST THAT THEY WILL ULTIMATELY HAVE TO BEAR, UH, MAINTENANCE AND ALL THOSE ONGOING COSTS IN PERPETUITY THROUGH THEIR, UH, HOA.
UM, AND IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S JUST A MATTER OF, OF INEQUITY.
SO, UH, ASIDE FROM THAT, I, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL SUPPORT THE REQUEST AS PRESENTED OR MODIFIED.
I'LL, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RESTRICT COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS.
I REGISTERED TO SPEAK AND I WAS ON THE AGENDA.
THAT'S, THAT'S, HOLD JUST A SECOND.
UM, MR. TIMOTHY RICHARDS IS REGISTERED TO SPEAK FOR ITEM ONE A AS AN OPINION ONLY AS A SUPPORT ONLY, BUT NOT REGISTERED TO SPEAK.
UM, MR. RICHARDS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY, LET ME REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN AND PLEASE, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
I, I'M SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION, BUT I, I DID RECEIVE A CONFIRMATION EMAIL, UH, THAT I REGISTERED TO SPEAK.
I RESIDE AT 4,300 PEGGY LANE IN PLANO, WHICH IS PART OF THE CREEKSIDE OF STATE'S NUMBER TWO EDITION.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS, UH, JUST SOUTH OF PLANO, EAST SENIOR HIGH.
IT'S BOUNDED BY LOS RIOS BOULEVARD TO THE WEST PARK BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH.
SO WHEN, UH, MY FAMILY MOVED HERE, UM, IN FEBRUARY OF 1993, THE MERRIMAN FAMILY FARM WAS BETWEEN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND PLANO EAST SENIOR HIGH.
AND, UH, ALSO THE STONY HOLLOW EDITION DID NOT EXIST.
THERE WERE NO HOUSES NORTH OF PLANO, EAST SENIOR HIGH AND PARK BOULEVARD ENDED, UH, AT THE CREEK.
AND IT DID NOT TURN INTO BETSY ROAD GOING INTO MURPHY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO BRIDGE AT THAT TIME.
SO, TO SAY THAT I HAVE SEEN A LOT OF CHANGES IN EAST PLANO SINCE 1993, UH, IS AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.
UH, FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES, I RECENTLY RETIRED, UH, FROM THE TITLE INSURANCE BUSINESS AFTER 42 YEARS IN THAT INDUSTRY.
I ALSO HOLD A, UH, AN ACTIVE TEXAS REAL ESTATE SALES LICENSE, CONTINUAL LICENSE SINCE 1985.
JUST FOR BACKGROUND, MY WIFE CINDY AND I MOVED OUR FAMILY TO EAST PLANO IN 1993 BECAUSE WE LIKED THE SMALL TOWN FEEL OF EAST PLANO AND FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UM, BOTH OF OUR CHILDREN WENT TO DOOLEY ELEMENTARY, ARMSTRONG MIDDLE SCHOOL, WHICH AS YOU KNOW, NO LONGER EXISTS.
WILLIAMS HIGH SCHOOL AND GRADUATED FROM PLANO EAST SENIOR HIGH.
UH, SO WE'RE DEEPLY, UH, ROOTED IN LOVE EAST PLANO.
WHEN THE MERRIMAN FARM, FAMILY FARM WAS SOLD AS A HOMEOWNER IN THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD, I WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE CONS, WHAT WOULD BE DONE WITH THE LAND AND,
[00:55:01]
AND WHAT KIND OF HOUSES WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON THAT PROPERTY.UH, THE, THE ZONING PETITION AT THAT TIME WAS SF SIX, WHICH ALSO CONCERNED ME BECAUSE THOSE WERE SMALLER LOTS THAN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WELL, THE SAME DEVELOPER, UH, THAT HAS PETITIONED FOR THIS ZONING CHANGE, DOUGLAS PROPERTIES DEVELOPED THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT TURNS OUT THEY BUILT EXTREMELY NICE HOMES AND THEY HAVE, IN MY OPINION, GREATLY ENHANCED THE VALUE OF OUR ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, CONSIDERING ALL OF THE OTHER ZONING CHANGE CATEGORIES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED, RETAIL OR MULTIFAMILY, ET CETERA.
I TRULY FEEL THIS, UH, IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF, OF OUR, UH, SMALL PART SECONDS OF PLANO.
UM, AND SO, UM, I, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
I KNOW THAT, UH, SEVERAL OF OUR CONCERNED CITIZENS HAVE COME OUT THIS EVENING TO SHOW THEIR STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE REZONING EFFORT AND, UH, I WOULD JUST LIKE THEM TO STAND TO SHOW THEIR SUPPORT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
THANK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
OKAY, NOW I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RESTRICT COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION.
AND I JUST WANNA SAY THAT THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
UH, I'M REALLY IMPRESSED, UM, HAVING SO MANY PEOPLE LIVING IN PLANO FOR SO LONG, UM, AND, AND COMING HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS, TO GIVE YOUR OPINIONS AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND THE LOVE OF A CITY, AND THEN GIVE US SOME FEEDBACKS OF, AND, AND HELP, HELP US DO OUR JOBS.
UM, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION TO OUR STAFF, I GUESS, UH, REGARDING THE, UM, SETBACKS.
'CAUSE IF, IF WE WERE GOING TO PROVE THE ZONING CHANGES, IS THERE ANY, UM, LANGUAGE IN THE ZONING ITSELF TO SAY, HEY, THERE HAS TO BE THIS MUCH SETBACKS SO THAT THE NEIGHBORS WILL NOT SUFFER ANY, UM, LIKE MORE RESTRICTIONS ABOUT HOW HOW FAR THEY HAVE TO BUILD UP AWAY FROM THE BUILDING SO THAT IN THE FUTURE THEY CANNOT BUILD MORE BUILDINGS CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE? UM, ARE YOU, SORRY, ARE YOU REFERRING TO A SETBACK, UM, FROM THE RESIDENTIAL OR FROM THE RANCH ESTATES TO THE NEW PROPERTY OR JUST ANY SETBACK AT ALL? UM, THAT 85 FEET SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE NEW DEVELOPMENT BUILDING SO THAT THE NEIGHBOR WILL, DOESN'T HAVE TO, UM, BUILD A HUNDRED FEET, YOU KNOW, FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE IF THEY'RE BUILT CLOSER.
I'M NOT SURE, MIKE, CAN YOU, MR. BETE, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION? SURE.
THIS REQUEST IS FOR A STRAIGHT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SEVEN ZONING.
UM, SO THOSE RESTRICTIONS ARE NOT REQUIRED.
THEY'RE VOLUNTARY, UM, THAT THE, UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, BUT THEY'RE NOT, WILL NOT BE REQUIRED BY THE ZONING IF APPROVED.
IN ORDER TO DO THOSE KIND OF STANDARDS, YOU WOULD NEED TO HAVE IT AS PART OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
AND THIS HAS NOT BEEN NOTICED FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT CASE.
AND SO THERE'S NOT A WAY TO PUT THOSE STANDARDS ON THIS, THIS CURRENT REQUEST TONIGHT.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT AND SPEAKING TO US.
I WAS, UH, IMPRESSED WITH THE QUALITY OF THE, OF THE, OF THE PRESENTATIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE.
UM, I, I SEE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE COMMITTED TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, TO THEIR HOMES, UH, TO, UM, TO EAST PLANO AND THE CITY OF PLANO.
UM, I'M ALSO IMPRESSED WITH, UH, THE APPLICANT WHO HAS, I BELIEVE, MADE A SIGNIFICANT EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORS AND TO MODIFY HIS PROPOSAL TO ADDRESS AS MANY OF THE CONCERNS AS WAS HUMANLY POSSIBLE.
HE HAS REDUCED THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT HE WAS PROPOSING TO BUILD BY 16%, FROM 58 DOWN TO 50.
WELL, UM, WELL, AS A PERCENTAGE OF 58 IS PROBABLY A LITTLE LESS, I'M SORRY, BUT ANYWAY, UH, IT'S IN DOUBLE DIGITS.
HE'S MADE A SIGNIFICANT, UH, UH, CONCESSION THERE.
HE HAS RECONFIGURED THE DRIVE LANES IN THE DEVELOPMENTS SO THAT THERE IS NOT ONLY IS THERE NO DIRECT STREET CONNECTION BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND RANCH ESTATES, BUT THE, UH, THE, THE WESTERNMOST DRIVE LANE PROVIDES PART OF THE SETBACK FROM HOMES BUILT IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, SEPARATING THEM FROM RANCH ESTATES TO THE WEST.
[01:00:01]
HAS PROPOSED AN ATTRACTIVE, UH, ORNAMENTAL FENCE WITH, UH, UH, CEDAR TREES TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL VISUAL, AN ATTRACTIVE VISUAL SCREENING BARRIER, SEPARATING THE NEIGHBORHOODS.BUT I THINK THIS APPLICATION CREATES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO BUY HOMES.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES.
IT PROVIDES APPLICATION FOR, UH, OR OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW HOME OWNERSHIP SO THAT PEOPLE CAN, UH, DEVELOP PRIDE IN, IN PRIDE IN, IN, IN OWNING A HOME, WHICH IS PART OF THE AMERICAN DREAM PRIDE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, IN A BRAND NEW NEIGHBORHOOD OF WHICH THEY CAN BE A PART, UM, PRIDE IN EAST PLANO.
UM, AND THESE ARE GOOD THINGS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY, ANY WAY IN WHICH A HOME ON A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IS INHERENTLY DAMAGING, POISONOUS OR CONTAMINATING TO LARGER LOTS THAT MAY BE IN, IN THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT.
PROVIDED THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS SUFFICIENT SIZE.
AND THIS ONE IS, THIS IS NOT A SPOT ZONING SITUATION.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ONE OR TWO LOTS, WE'RE TALKING A WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, I KNOW MY OWN HOME IS ON AN SF SEVEN LOT.
IT'S ABOUT A 7,800 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
I THINK MY HOME IS ATTRACTIVE.
I THINK MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS ATTRACTIVE.
UH, I THINK THE HOMES ARE DESIRABLE.
UM, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT IN A PAST LIFE, UH, MY FAMILY AND I USED TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF IRVING AND I SERVED ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN IRVING WHEN I WAS THERE.
UH, AND I REMEMBER WELL THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT THAT TIME, A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF JACK SPURLOCK, WHO WAS A REAL ESTATE BROKER, REMARKING THAT EVEN A HOME IN A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT ZONED LOT CAN BE A DESIRABLE HOME.
UM, 6,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME CAN BE DESIRABLE.
CERTAINLY A HOME ON A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, A BIGGER HOME CAN BE DESIRABLE AND HOMES TODAY, THE MARKET BEING WHAT IT IS, UM, ON A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT CAN ALSO BE VERY DESIRABLE, VERY ATTRACTIVE, UH, AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY AND AN ASSET TO THE CITY.
UM, SO, UM, CONSIDERING CAREFULLY THE ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES, UH, I'M INCLINED TO BELIEVE THAT THIS APPLICATION IS ON BALANCE A GOOD THING, AND I'M PREPARED TO VOTE TO APPROVE IT.
COMMISSIONER BRONSKI, MS. WOOD.
UH, A COUPLE, COUPLE QUESTIONS.
UM, BASED ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE BEEN GETTING, UM, FIRST, UM, THE HOA BEARING, THE COST FOR THE, UM, SCREENING WALL, UH, THAT'S FAIRLY STANDARD FOR THE WAY THAT, UH, WE GO ABOUT THESE THINGS.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, UH, CITIZENS KNOW WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND PURCHASING THESE HOMES THAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE BUILT IN, RIGHT? THAT THE HOA HAS FEES, THEY'RE TOLD ABOUT THAT BEFORE THEY PURCHASE.
AM I RIGHT? THEY MAY BE TOLD, UM, PERHAPS.
SO THE SECOND QUESTION I HAD, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KEPT TRACK, MR. UH, DISDAIN BROUGHT UP A COUPLE PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUES THAT I JUST WANT TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT FOR A SECOND, UH, AS IT RELATES TO, UM, UH, LIVESTOCK, WOULD THERE BE ANY, COULD THERE BE ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THIS PARTICULAR ZONING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND HIS PROPERTY AS FAR AS, UM, HIS ABILITY TO MAINTAIN WHATEVER LIVESTOCK HE HAS ON THAT PROPERTY? I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UM, ADDRESSED WITH THE, UM, PROPERTY STANDARDS AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENTS, IF THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME, OR WITH THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, IF THERE IS AN ORDINANCE REGARDING SMELL AND HOW FAR AWAY IT NEEDS TO BE.
UM, SO I WOULD DEFER TO THOSE DOCUMENTS.
SO ARE YOU THEN SAYING THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THERE COULD BE A PROBLEM FOR SOMEONE LIVING IN THESE, UH, AND MIS UH, MR. DISDAINS LIVESTOCK ABILITY? I HAVEN'T REVIEWED THE IMPACT OF, I DON'T BELIEVE SMELL OF, YOU KNOW, ANY LIVESTOCK.
SO I CAN'T ANSWER VERY DIRECTLY ON THAT QUESTION.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE COURT, THE CODE OF ORDINANCES DOES HAVE REQUIREMENTS AND, UH, REGARDING SMELL OR ANY OF THOSE EXTENUATING THINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED, UM, MR. BELL, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? NO, UM, THOSE
[01:05:01]
THAT ARE ADMINISTERED AS MS. WOODS SUGGEST NOT THROUGH THE ZONING ORDINANCE.THEY'RE ADMINISTERED THROUGH OTHER ORDINANCES OF THE CITY AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS ON NECESSARILY OUR EXPERTISE TO ANSWER DIRECTLY.
UM, BUT I CAN ONLY SURMISE BY THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ABUTTING TO THE NORTH THAT, UM, IF, IF, IF THOSE ARE NOT CREATING THE SAME ISSUES, THEN THERE WOULD NOT BE THE SAME ISSUES FOR THESE LOTS AS WELL.
UM, LEGAL, LEGAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
DO WE NEED AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR IS IT SOMETHING YOU CAN ASK IN OPEN SESSION? I PREFER TO ASK IT IN SESSION.
WELL THEN LET'S, UM, LET'S FINISH QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES UP.
AND WE MAY NEED TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK.
UM, I'M GONNA HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO IF THE APPLICANT WOULDN'T MIND COMING UP.
UH, FIRST QUESTION IS, UH, JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY FOR, FOR EVERYBODY HERE AS WELL AS US, UM, THIS IS, THIS IS A STRAIGHT ZONING REQUEST.
SO, UM, THEY, THEY'VE PROVIDED A SITE PLAN, THEY PROVIDED ALL THIS.
UM, IS THAT, ARE THEY STUCK TO THAT SITE PLAN OR CAN THEY ADJUST IT BASED ON THE STREET ZONING? THEY CAN ADJUST THEIR CONCEPT PLAN IF THEY'D LIKE TO.
THE ZONING DOES NOT REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD WHAT'S PRESENTED ON THE CONCEPT PLAN.
SO ULTIMATELY WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THEY, THEY PRESENTED A NICE PLAN FOR US ALL, BUT ULTIMATELY THE REQUEST IS STRAIGHT ZONING.
WHICH MEANS THE WHOLE BUFFER THING THAT WE'VE GONE ALL THIS TIME FOR, TALKING ABOUT THE, THE FENCE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, ALL THIS STUFF, TECHNICALLY THEY CAN GET OUT OF IT AND IT BASED ON AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE STRAIGHT ZONING.
SO NOW THE APPLICANT, YES, SIR.
SO YOU GET WHAT I'M GETTING AT? YES, SIR.
UH, WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO HOLD YOU TO THAT, BUT A PD WOULD, DID YOU DISCUSS THIS, UH, A PD OPTION WHERE IT WOULD HOLD YOU TO A SITE PLAN LIKE THIS AND HOLDS YOU TO THE, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND HOLD YOU TO ALL THOSE THINGS? SO IT'D BE ACTUALLY WRITTEN INTO THE ZONING.
UH, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH STAFF, BUT THEY DETERMINED THE SITE WAS SO SMALL THAT IT REALLY WASN'T, OF COURSE IT WAS BEFORE WE KNEW WE WAS GONNA RUN INTO ALL THESE ISSUES ALSO.
SO THEY SUGGESTED NOT TO DO, YOU KNOW, A PD JUST BECAUSE IT WAS, IT WAS SMALL.
AND I, I KNOW, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT THE LETTER, WE'VE GOT ALL THE THING, ANYTHING THAT YOU, THAT YOU WANT FROM US TO PRO TO ASSURE YOU THAT WE'LL DEVELOP PER THE CONCEPT PLAN.
THE OTHER ITEM THAT, UH, WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE OLDER, THE NOISE, WE'VE ALSO COMMITTED IN THE LETTER TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE HOA DOCUMENTS THAT PROHIBIT THE HOMEOWNERS FROM COMPLAINING ABOUT NOISE ODORS.
AND ALSO IT CAN BE IN THE BYLAWS.
SO I MEAN, WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS EVERYTHING THAT THEY, THAT WE CAN, UH, WITH THEM.
SO, I MEAN, AS FAR AS EVEN THAT, SO, UH, AGAIN, UH, IT ENCOMPASS SOME IDEAS OF MAYBE ATTORNEY OR SOMETHING OF WHAT IS, CAN WE INCLUDE A DOCUMENT OR WHATEVER.
I MEAN, WE WILL DO IT BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S NOT A LARGE SUBDIVISION.
I MEAN, IT'S GONNA BE DONE IN OBVIOUSLY ONE PHASE.
IT'LL BUILD OUT IN PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, FOUR YEARS AT TODAY'S RATES, YOU KNOW, 10, 12 PLOTS A YEAR.
IT'S TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES US, UH, UH, RIGHT NOW, STARTING TODAY, WE'RE PROBABLY, UH, 20, 22 MONTHS FOR THE FIRST HOU LOT WOULD BE READY FOR A HOUSE AND THEN THE GUY BUILD A HOUSE.
SO WE'RE TWO YEARS AWAY RIGHT NOW, AND IT'LL PROBABLY TAKE, YOU KNOW, 30 MONTHS OR SO TO, TO SELL OUT.
AND SO IT'S JUST A VERY SHORT PROCESS.
BUT AGAIN, I MEAN, WE ARE, WE ARE GOING TO DEVELOP, I MEAN, PER THE CONCEPT PLAN, I MEAN, WE'LL BE COMING RIGHT BACK IN FOR, WITH A PLAT AND WHATEVER, WHATEVER COMMITMENT WE HAVE TO DO WILL DO.
BECAUSE BELIEVE ME, I'VE DONE TOO MUCH BUSINESS IN PLAYING ALL OFFICE RIGHT DOWN THE STREET.
THESE 50 LOTS AREN'T WORTH MESSING WITH MY REPUTATION.
I MEAN, I WOULD NEVER DO, I, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS, DOING THIS BUSINESS FOR 44 YEARS AND THEN YOU SEE, I GO INTO, THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY GOAL IS TO DO WHAT I SAY I'LL DO.
I WAS JUST, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF, WELL, I, I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE THAT DON'T KNOW YOU OR DON'T KNOW, HAVEN'T HAD THAT EXPERIENCE IN, IN THE RESIDENCE IN YOUR NEIGHBORS.
SO, UM, I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION, IT MAY HAVE TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION, IS, IS WHAT, WHAT CAN WE DO, UH, ON OUR END SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER? YEAH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE.
[01:10:01]
BENDER.JUST A BRIEF QUESTION TO STAFF.
UM, A SCREENING WALL, WHETHER IT'S CONCRETE OR UH, IRON OR STEEL, WHATEVER, AFTER CONSTRUCTED THE CITY MAINTAINS THAT, CORRECT? NO, THE SCREENING WALL THAT'S BEING PROPOSED WOULD NOT BE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY.
IT WOULD BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOA? THAT'S CORRECT.
I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UM, BACK TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE ADJACENT LANDOWNER'S RIGHTS WITH, WITH THIS A HUNDRED FOOT SEPARATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITIONAL, UH, STRUCTURE ON THE, ON THE NEIGHBORS, THE EXISTING NEIGHBORS PROPERTY WITH THAT DEALT WITH, HOPEFULLY AS FAR AS LIVESTOCK, UM, OTHER USES OF THAT PROPERTY.
IS ANYTHING GONNA CHANGE FOR THE CURRENT ESTATE OWNERS AS FAR AS THEIR, THEIR, UM, PROPERTY RIGHTS, WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO USE THEIR PROPERTY FOR, HOW THEY'RE ALLOWED TO USE IT, ET CETERA? NO.
UM, FROM OUR ANALYSIS OF REVIEWING THE, UM, EXISTING, UM, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AS WELL AS JUST ESTATE DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL, WE DO NOT FIND THAT ANY OF THEIR CURRENT ALLOWANCES THROUGH THEIR ZONING WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL.
THERE'S NO ADJACENCY QUESTIONS ABOUT ADJACENT LAND USES, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT WOULD END UP RICOCHETING BACK.
THAT, THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION FOR STAFF.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE, WE MAY NEED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE, HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR LEGAL COUNSEL.
I'LL RESERVE MY COMMENTS TILL AFTER WE DO THAT.
I JUST, ANOTHER QUESTION, UH, UH, POP IN MY HEAD ABOUT THE ANIMALS.
IF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE LIVESTOCK HORSES, UM, CATTLE CROSSED THE PROPERTY LINE, 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO FENCE, RIGHT? THEY'RE ALL LIVE SCREEN LIKE TREES AND THE TREES ARE 20 FEET APART.
IF THE LIVESTOCK CROSSED THE PROPERTY LINE, PROPERTY LINE AND GOING INTO THE OPEN SPACE WHERE THEY'RE ASSUMING THERE'LL BE GRASS GROWING AND GRAYS ON THOSE AND THE HOMEOWNERS ON THE OTHER SIDE WILL HAVE TO BURY THE BURDEN TO MAINTAIN THAT GRASS, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT CITY CAN STEP IN AND, UM, MITIGATE THAT? UM, SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY IF ANIMALS CROSSING ONTO A DIFFERENT LOT IS, UM, A VIOLATION OF OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.
IT, I IMAGINE THAT IT WOULD BE, BUT, UM, I CAN PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION, IF NOT, UM, BUT IN THAT EVENT, IT WOULD BE A CIVIL DISPUTE AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER AFFECTED WOULD NEED TO REPORT THAT TO OUR PROPERTY STANDARDS DEPARTMENT AND, UM, MAKE US AWARE OF THAT ISSUE.
[Additional Item]
HAD A REQUEST BY COMMISSION TO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR LEGAL COUNSEL AND EXECUTIVE SESSION.SO, UM, I WILL, UM, ADJOURN US INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER CHAPTER 5 51 0.071, AND, UM, WE'LL BE BACK WITH Y'ALL IN A FEW MINUTES.
RECONVENE US BACK INTO OPEN SESSION AT 7:24 PM UM, UH, MR. BELL, WE HAD
[Items 1A. (DW) & 1B. (DW) (Part 2 of 2)]
A QUESTION COME UP EARLIER ABOUT THE FENCING ALONG THE COMMON PROPERTY LINE.CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR US? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING FENCE ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE, SO THAT WOULD CONTROL THE LIVESTOCK QUESTION.
UM, I HAD PRESERVED MY COMMENTS TO LEFT OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION.
UM, I WANNA APPLAUD MR. DOUGLAS AND WHERE'D YOU GO? HE WAS SITTING ON THE FRONT ROW.
I JUST WANTED TO, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE YOU WERE.
I WANTED TO, TO LOOK AT YOU WHEN I SAID THIS.
I, I APPLAUD YOU FOR REACHING OUT TO THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK YOU FOUND SOME CREATIVE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT SETBACKS, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TURNING THE SIDES OF THE HOUSES TO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS SO YOU'RE NOT LOOKING DIRECTLY INTO THEIR YARDS.
SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD AT THE FIRST MEETING, UM, YOU FOUND A BLEND OF SF SEVEN AND SF NINE.
UM, AND, AND IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, I I BELIEVE THAT ALL OF THAT EFFORT HAS GONE A LONG WAY TOWARDS PRESERVING THE ESTATE FEEL THAT YOUR NEIGHBORS HAVE TODAY, UM, WITH THE SCREENING AND THE SETBACKS AND, AND, AND ALL OF THAT.
UM, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU
[01:15:01]
FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS ON THEIR BEHALF.I THINK YOU LISTENED AND IT, IT SHOWS YOUR COMMITMENT TO TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION.
UM, I ALSO RESPECT THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE THERE.
I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE GOT SOME BEAUTIFUL PLACES OUT THERE.
UM, LARGE TRACKS, YOU KNOW, RURAL FEEL, WHICH IS FANTASTIC.
UM, WITH, AND, AND I, I, I BELIEVE THAT MR HAS TRIED TO WORK TO FIND A COMPROMISE, RECOGNIZING THAT YOU'RE ALREADY SURROUNDED ON TWO SIDES BY HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SF NINES AND SS SEVENS.
UM, AND THERE ARE SF SEVENS AND EVEN SIXES ACROSS THE STREET AND ALONG WITH THE, ALONG WITH THE SCHOOL.
AND SO I, I DON'T FIND THE REQUEST INCONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE CHANGES.
I, I'LL BE HONEST, I DID NOT FEEL THAT WAY AT THE LAST MEETING.
UH, AND I, AND I FEEL LIKE HE'S GONE A LONG WAY TOWARDS, UM, ACCOMPLISHING THAT GOAL TO PRESERVE WHAT YOU HAVE AND, AND YET BE ABLE TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH HOUSING STOCK THAT, THAT WE DO NEED IN THE CITY OF PLANO.
UM, WITH THAT SAID, I, I DO AGREE WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
I KNOW WE HAVE SOME OTHER CONCERNS UP HERE, AND SO I'LL SEE IF ANY OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON ANY OF THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT, THAT, UM, HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED.
COMMISSIONER BRONSKI? I'LL START OFF.
UH, MR. DOUGLAS, AS I SAID, UH, WHEN I FIRST STARTED TALKING, THAT, UH, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE WORKING HARD, UH, TO MAKE AN EFFORT, UM, THAT YOU HAVE, UM, SHOWN YOURSELF TO BE, UH, A PERSON OF GREAT INTEGRITY THAT HAS BEEN IN OUR CITY FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, I HAVE FELT A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE ABOUT, UM, THE DESIGN, UM, AS TO HOW IT SITS TODAY.
UH, I DO HEAR THE CONCERNS OF THE CITIZENS, UH, THAT ARE YOUR NEIGHBORS.
AND, UM, I DO BELIEVE, UH, AS, UH, ONE OF YOUR NEIGHBORS MENTIONED THAT, UM, SHOULD THIS COMMITTEE SUGGEST THAT THE BEST OPTION IS TO COME BACK WITH A PD, UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD COME BACK, UH, WITH THE PD THAT LOOKS, UM, JUST LIKE WHAT YOU'RE OFFERING AND YOU WOULD BE A PERSON TO KEEP YOUR WORD AT THAT.
UM, WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY COMMENT UNTIL EVERYBODY ELSE SPEAKS.
MR. TONG, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
UM, AGAIN, I AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER THAT, THAT WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORT, MR. DOUGLAS AND DEVELOPER AND ALL THE NEIGHBORS WHO CAME IN TO SUPPORT THIS DESIGN.
AND WE ALL, UH, FEEL LIKE, OR SORRY, ME, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GREAT DESIGN AND THAT YOU HAVE LISTENED, YOU HAVE CHANGED, THAT YOU HAVE MADE ALL THE CHANGES THAT, UH, ACCORDING TO LAST MEETING, THAT ALL THE REQUESTS THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED.
AND, UH, UM, THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAD WAS THAT BECAUSE THE CASE RIGHT NOW IS A STRAIGHT ZONING CASE.
ONCE WE CHANGE THE ZONING, THERE'S NO WAY THAT WE CAN HOLD EITHER YOU OR THE NEXT DEVELOPER OR THE DEVELOPER AFTER THAT, DO ANY CHANGES TO THE PLAN.
BECAUSE ONCE THE ZONING CHANGES, THERE'S NO WAY THE CITY CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE, THE, THE, THE PLAN ITSELF.
SO I THINK I, UM, UH, UH, I A SOLUTION, UH, SEEKER.
I LIKE TO SEEK A SOLUTION, AND I, UH, KIND OF LEARNED THAT THE SOLUTION COULD BE A PD.
SO, UM, I GUESS, UH, I AGREE WITH, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER BRONSKI, IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN TURN INTO A PD, I WOULD ERR ON THAT SIDE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BENDER.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TABLED THIS, UM, CASE, UM, RECENTLY, UH, I THINK WHAT WE WANTED TO SEE WAS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED HERE, IS THAT THE COMMUNITY WAS WORKING TOGETHER, UH, WITH THE DEVELOPER TO FIND BETTER SOLUTION.
UH, BECAUSE THERE ARE LIMITS TO WHAT WE, WHAT WE CAN DO.
UM, AND OUR PRIMARY, UH, CASE, UH, REASON FOR BUSINESS HERE IS TO LOOK AT LAND USE.
AND, UM, I ALSO BELIEVE THAT ALL LANDOWNERS HAVE RIGHTS, RIGHT? THEY ALL HAVE RIGHTS.
[01:20:02]
YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU'VE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS.AND WE ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ALL LANDOWNERS RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED.
SO I THINK SOME OF THE COMMENTS, UH, COMMISSIONER BRONSKI, UH, THOSE KIND OF COMMENTS WERE LEANING THAT DIRECTION TO MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN PROTECT EVERYONE'S RIGHTS AND INCLUDE THOSE THINGS THAT ARE BEEN DISCUSSED AND SO FORTH.
SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ENFORCEABLE.
UM, MR. DOUGLAS, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU IF YOU WOULD COME FORWARD.
I, WHILE YOU'RE COMING FORWARD, I, I, I DO CONCUR WITH THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO'VE SAID THAT, THAT, UM, I, I DO BELIEVE THAT REGARD, UH, IF, IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME SORT OF A PD OR SOMETHING, THAT THE PLAN AS PRESENTED, I BELIEVE IS A SOLUTION THAT, UM, HAS FOUND THE COMPROMISE THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION.
AND SO, THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU, AND IT'S KIND OF A YES OR NO, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO WORK ON THIS AND TURN THIS INTO A PD SO WE CAN MEMORIALIZE THE COMMITMENTS THAT YOU'VE MADE TO THE NEIGHBORS SO THAT THEY CAN BE ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY? IF, IF THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES, YES, SIR.
IN FACT, THOSE, LIKE I SAID, THAT WAS ONE OF OUR FIRST THOUGHTS, BUT IT WAS JUST SO SMALL.
BUT, BUT NO, IF THAT'S WHERE HE WANT US TO GO, WE'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRONSKI.
SO, MR. DOUGLAS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMITMENT HERE.
SO ON THAT, I WOULD MOVE THAT IN ORDER TO ALLOW THIS TO CONTINUE THE PROCESS OF MR. DOUGLAS AND THE COMMUNITY WORKING TOGETHER, THAT WE TABLE THIS, UH, ITEM, UH, ONE A TO AN INDEFINITE TIME PERIOD.
NO, UM, YEAH, WE NEED TO PICK A DATE.
WELL, WE HAVE TO RE-NOTICE ANYWAY SO THAT A DATE CERTAIN ISN'T NECESSARY IN THIS CASE BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA SEND OUT NEW NOTICES.
SO, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO, UH, COMMISSIONER BRUNHOFF.
YOU HAVE A SECOND? UM, I'LL SECOND IT WITH A COMMENT THAT, UM, UH, I WISH THAT THIS REQUEST HAD BEEN A PART OF OUR FIRST TABLING OF THE CASE.
WE'RE NOW PUTTING HIM TO A SECOND TABLING OF THE CASE.
IT'S INCONVENIENT AND UNFAIR, I THINK ULTIMATELY TO THE APPLICANT TO KEEP POSTPONING THE CASE AS WE THINK OF NEW THINGS TIME AFTER TIME, UH, SINCE HE IS AGREEABLE TO IT.
UM, I SEE NO PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, WITH GOING WITH, WITH THE PD FORMAT.
SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THE MOTION.
UM, I CONCUR WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
I WOULD ADD TO THAT, UM, RESPECT FOR THE PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP TONIGHT, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS THE SECOND TIME Y'ALL BEEN HERE.
FIRST, MANY OF YOU AND SOME OF YOU THE THIRD, AND SOME OF YOU MAYBE EVEN A FOURTH.
'CAUSE I THINK WE'VE TABLED TWICE.
SO, UM, THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR COMMITMENT.
I KNOW THAT THESE ARE YOUR HOMES AND WE ASK YOU TO COME OUT AT NIGHT AND MEET WITH US.
UM, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT DOING IT INTENTIONALLY.
WE DO WANT TO GET TO A GOOD ANSWER THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.
SO, UM, WITH THAT SAID, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION? NO, PLEASE VOTE.
UM, MR. DOUGLAS AND YOUR NEIGHBORS, WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING Y'ALL AGAIN.
THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH FOR COMING OUT THIS EVENING.
UM, YEAH, SO WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO READ ONE B SO THAT WE CAN TABLE THAT AS WELL, PLEASE.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS FOR ONE A, I'M SORRY, THAT WAS, THAT MOTION WAS FOR ONE A.
SO, UM, MR. COMMISSIONER BRONSKI, I MOVE WE TABLE AGENDA ITEM ONE B TO THE INDEFINITE TIME PERIOD AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER, I'LL SECOND.
ALRIGHT, A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ALSO TABLE ITEM ONE B CONSISTENT WITH ONE A.
ITEM ONE B PASSES SEVEN ZERO TO TABLE AS WELL.
[2. (MC) Public Hearing – Zoning Case 2025-003: Request to expand and amend Urban Mixed Use-1 on 160.4 acres of land out of the William Beverly Survey, Abstract No. 75, and the Samuel Klepper Survey, Abstract No. 216, located at the southeast corner of Plano Parkway and Custer Road in the City of Plano, Collin County, Texas, for the following changes: to expand the district by rezoning 4.1 acres from Light Industrial-1 to Urban Mixed-Use-1; to modify the required mix of uses; to allow outdoor commercial amusement, additional multifamily residence units, and single-family attached units on certain blocks of the development plan; and to modify other development standards for the district; presently zoned Urban Mixed-Use-1 and Light Industrial-1 and located within the 190 Tollway/Plano Parkway and Expressway Corridor Overlay Districts. Tabled January 20, 2026. Projects #ZC2025-003 and #DP2025-001. Applicant: Rosewood Property Company. (Legislative consideration)]
TWO, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, REQUEST TO EXPAND AND AMEND URBAN MIXED USE ONE ON 160.4 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF THE WILLIAM BEVERLY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 75 AND THE SAMUEL K CLIPPER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER TWO 16, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PLANO PARKWAY AND CUSTER ROAD IN THE CITY OF PLANO, COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS.FOR THE FOLLOWING, CHANGES TO EXPAND THE DISTRICT BY REZONING.
4.1 ACRES FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE TO URBAN MIXED USE.
ONE TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED MIXED USES TO
[01:25:01]
ALLOW OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT, ADDITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE UNITS AND SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS ON CERTAIN BLOCKS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.AND TO MODIFY OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE DISTRICT.
PRESENTLY ZONE URBAN MIXED USE ONE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE AND LOCATED WITHIN THE ONE 90 TOLLWAY PLANO PARKWAY AND EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS TABLE.
APPLICANT ROSEWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY.
THIS ITEM IS FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION.
MY NAME IS MOLLY COEL, LEAD PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE SAME AS THE JANUARY 20TH MEETING.
THIS IS THE, UM, SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARIES SHOWN HERE ON THE SCREEN.
AND ADDITIONALLY HERE IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWING THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
I WANTED TO INCLUDE THIS SLIDE TO BRIEF EVERYONE ON THE PREVIOUS TABLING OF THIS ITEM AND TO DISCUSS THE CHANGES, UH, THAT WILL BE SHARED IN THIS PRESENTATION SINCE THAT LAST MEETING.
SO, UM, AS A REMINDER, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TABLED THIS ITEM AT THE JANUARY 20TH, 2026 MEETING, UM, TO THE MARCH 2ND MEETING.
THIS MEETING TODAY, UM, ASKING THE APPLICANT TO INCORPORATE PHASING OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, WITH THE ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY BEING REQUESTED.
THE PHASING REQUIREMENTS, UH, HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT.
AND ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR AREA REQUIREMENTS HAVE ALSO BEEN ADDED FOR BLOCKS A TWO LOT ONE F AND Z, UH, STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HAD IDENTIFIED SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES NEEDED FOR, FOR THAT, UH, EHA REQUIREMENTS, UM, SINCE THAT MEETING, WHICH ARE INCORPORATED.
AND THEN, UM, TO MAKE IT CLEAR, UH, I'VE UP, UH, UPDATES THE PRESENTATION RELATED TO THESE CHANGES, UH, RELATED TO THESE CHANGES WILL BE CALLED OUT USING YELLOW HIGHLIGHTS WHERE THERE'S NEW SLIDES.
I'VE JUST HIGHLIGHTED THE TITLE BLOCK IN YELLOW.
SO, UM, WITH THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START.
SO TO GO OVER THE REQUEST AGAIN IN FULL, THE REQUEST HAS, UH, FIVE ELEMENTS EXPANDING THE DISTRICT BY REZONING 4.1 ACRES FROM LI ONE TO UMU ONE FOR THE ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS BEING REQUESTED.
THAT'S THE 51 TOWN HOMES ON BLOCK Z.
UH, MODIFYING THE REQUIRED MIX OF USES TO EXCEED THE STANDARD MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE OF ANY ONE PRIMARY USE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, WHICH IS GOING FROM 53%, 88% OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, OR A MAXIMUM OF, UH, OVER THE MAXIMUM REQUIRED 70% FOR ANY ONE PRIMARY USE.
I'LL GO OVER IN MORE DETAIL AGAIN ON THAT LATER.
UH, REDUCING THE REQUIREMENT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
UM, SO HAVING A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, RELATED COMPLIMENTARY TO THE INCREASE IN RESIDE, UM, RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF THIS REQUEST.
UM, MODIFYING OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE DISTRICT, WHICH HAS BEEN UPDATED FOR PHASING, WHICH WE'LL GO OVER, AS WELL AS ALTERNATIVE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT MITIGATION STANDARDS.
THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2014.
IT WAS AMENDED, UH, TWICE IN ORDER TO REFINE, USE ALLOCATIONS, SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS, THE STREET LAYOUT AND BLOCK CONFIGURATIONS.
AND THEN IN 2021, UH, THE REQUEST SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFIED THE UMU ONE A DISTRICT, UH, THE UMU ONE DISTRICT, UM, TO DEMOTE OFFICE AS A SUPPORTIVE USE.
UM, HAVE A 50% REDUCTION IN OFFICE BUILDING HEIGHTS.
UM, THERE WAS A CONNECTION TO CUSTER ROAD ESTABLISHED AND, UH, THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL 31 NEW SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED LOTS.
THE DISTRICT EXPANSION IS, UH, 4.1 ACRES THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED LI IT'S THE CREATION OF BLOCK Z FOR THE 51 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS.
UH, STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE UMU ONE DISTRICT.
AND, UM, FURTHERMORE, THE REDUCTION IN THE LI ONE ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY.
TODAY I TALKED ABOUT THE MODIFYING MIX OF USES IN MY PREVIOUS PRESENTATION.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING REQUIRED FOR ALL UMU DISTRICTS.
IT ESTABLISHES A RANGE OF PERCENTAGE BASED ON THE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A WHAT USE.
UM, CURRENTLY, UH, THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE FOR ANY ONE PRIMARY USE IS 70%.
UH, TODAY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 88%.
UH, IN A, IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE AMOUNT OF RETAIL AND SERVICE USES, AS WELL AS OFFICE AND PROFESSIONAL USES WILL
[01:30:01]
HAVE A, UM, MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF THREE AND 5%.RESPECTFULLY, THIS IS THE INFORMATION SHOWN AS ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, THEY'RE SHOWING A MAXIMUM 88% OF RESIDENTIAL, 3% RETAIL, 9% OFFICE, AND THERE'S NO COMMITMENT TO A HOTEL.
THE REQUEST FOR RESIDENTIAL HAS NOT CHANGED.
THEY'RE ADDING 700 MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND 51 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS ATTACHED UNITS.
ADDITIONALLY, FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL, THIS IS NOT CHANGING.
IT'LL ONLY ACCOUNT FOR 12% OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA.
THE PHASING BEING PROPOSED TONIGHT IS AS FOLLOWS.
SO, UM, THE PROVIDED UMU ONE EXCEPTIONS WOULD ALLOW SUCH THAT BLOCK F THE MULTIFAMILY, UH, BUILDING CLOSER TO THE PGBT, UM, COULD BE, UH, BEGIN CONSTRUCTION OR HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED.
UM, AS LONG AS BUILDING PERMITS FOR AT LEAST 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, UM, IS DEVELOPED WITHIN BLOCKS A TWO LOT, TWO BLOCK, A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE C, L, OR M.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY FOR BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE THE MULTIFAMILY CLOSER TO THE CORNER OF WEST PLANO PARKWAY AND CUSTER ROAD, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MUST BE READY FOR OCCUPANCY.
UH, THE CITY OF PLANO DOESN'T DO SHELL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCIES.
HOWEVER, WE CAN FINAL OUT CONSTRUCTION OF A NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING BASICALLY SAYING IT'S READY FOR OCCUPANCY.
UM, SO THAT IS THE LANGUAGE AVAILABLE IN THE PROPOSED UMU ONE EXCEPTIONS.
UM, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE 700 ADDITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY UNITS IS A MINIMUM OF 12,000 SQUARE FEET.
THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED FOR 12,000 SQUARE FEET CAN BE THE SAME 12,000 SQUARE FEET THAT IS FINALED OUT FOR OCCUPANCY.
THIS ANALYSIS WAS PROVIDED IN MY PREVIOUS, UH, PRESENTATION, BUT JUST TO SHOW, UM, THERE HAS BEEN AN INCREASE IN SINGLE FAMILY OR RESIDENTIAL USES THROUGHOUT THE REQUESTS MADE FROM 2014 TO TODAY, AS WELL AS A REDUCTION IN OVERALL AMOUNT A OF OFFICE RETAIL AND HOTEL USE.
UM, THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF THE ZONING CASES FOR THIS PROPERTY, THERE ARE SOME OTHER MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WHICH ARE NOT CHANGING AS PART OF THIS REQUEST.
SINCE IT'S BEEN TABLED, THEY'RE STILL DECREASING THE LOT COVERAGES FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL LOTS AS WELL AS DECREASING BUILDING HEIGHTS.
THERE ARE REDUCTIONS IN FREESTANDING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SIZES, AND THE REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS ARE NOT CONDUCIVE TO A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, AS WE DISCUSSED IN THE PREVIOUS UM, MEETING, THERE IS A REQUEST FOR AN OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT USE, BOTH FOR BLOCKS A FIVE AND C.
THE PROPOSED EXCEPTIONS FOR THIS OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT WILL LIMIT OPERATION TYPES TO INCLUDE GAME COURTS, TABLE GAMES, MINI GOLF, OTHER SIMILAR LEISURE ACTIVITIES.
IT WON'T ALLOW THINGS LIKE GO-KARTS, CIRCUSES, MORE NOISE PRODUCING ITEM OF OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT THAT'S NOT CONDUCIVE TO THE UMU ONE DISTRICT.
UM, AND ADDITIONALLY, ANY PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW ANY SORT OF NOISE OR LIGHTING ORDINANCES.
SO THESE PROPERTIES WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THOSE SAME ISSUES OR CODE REQUIREMENTS GOING INTO THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY FOR BLOCK C.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CONDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, CORRIDOR AREA REQUIRES SFA UNITS BE BUFFERED FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE BY EITHER A 100 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS OF SIMILAR OR GREATER HEIGHTENED LENGTH TO THE HOMES.
UM, BLOCK M IS NOT MEETING THIS REQUIREMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING BLOCK, UM, TOWN HOMES ON BLOCK Z, AND THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING ALTERNATIVE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THESE HAVE BEEN CHANGED SINCE THE LAST MEETING.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, UNDER VENTILATION, UM, SPECIALIZED VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS TO MITIGATE OUTDOOR AIR FOR SFA UNITS WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.
I WILL GET INTO MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF THAT, UM, IN A MOMENT.
BUT, UM, THE PROPOSED STANDARD DOES NOT PROVIDE EQUAL MITIGATION TO THE TYPICAL STANDARD.
UM, SAME FOR THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TABLE, THE APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING NON-CONTINUOUS NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS OF SHORTER HEIGHT, 22
[01:35:01]
FEET AND LENGTH OF THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES, OR A TEMPORARY 100 FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE EDGE.HOWEVER, THEY HAVE REMOVED THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE TREES IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, A ORNAMENTAL AND A SHADE TREE BETWEEN THOSE BUILDINGS.
SO THAT IS NO LONGER A PART OF THEIR REQUEST.
BLOCK F IS THE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE.
AS A PART OF TONIGHT'S REQUEST, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT TYPICALLY IN THE CECA, THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE BUFFERED FROM THAT TURNPIKE BY EITHER A 100 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR A NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING OF SIMILAR OR GREATER HEIGHT AND LENGTH TO THE HOMES.
UH, OR IN THIS CASE, THE MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE STIPULATIONS FOR BLOCK F HAVE BEEN MODIFIED, UH, TO CONSIDER THE EXISTING OPEN SPACE AND MINOR STREET AS ALTERNATIVE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS.
THERE IS A, UM, REALLY GREAT, UM, THRIVING, UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH THAT OPEN SPACE LOCATED ON LOT 13 X AND 15, WHICH PROVIDES A LOT OF NOISE MITIGATION, UM, AND SEPARATION FROM THOSE STRUCTURES AS WELL AS THE MINOR STREET ADDS AN ADDITIONAL SETBACK.
AND THEN THERE ARE STREET TREE AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL, UM, THAT WILL NEED TO BE FOLLOWED.
SO THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT BUFFER BETWEEN, UM, THAT, UH, BLOCK 15 MULTIFAMILY BUILDING AND THE TURNPIKE.
SO STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE MODIFIED SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN BLOCK F AND THE TURNPIKE FOR BLOCKS, UH, BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE.
THE CECA REQUIRES THAT MULTI-FAMILY UNITS NOT WITHIN 500 FEET OF THAT TURNPIKE, BUT STILL WITHIN THE CECA TO SIMPLY PROVIDE A, UH, 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE FROM TYPE A THOROUGHFARES FOR THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT SPECIFICALLY, UM, STIPULATIONS FOR BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE HAVE BEEN MODIFIED TO REMOVE THIS SPECIFIC SEPARATION REQUIREMENT AS IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE UMU FORM.
WE HAVE A MAXIMUM SETBACK FOR, UM, STRUCTURES WITHIN, UH, THE UMU DISTRICT.
SO IN A, IN A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE, UH, IS REALLY NOT CONDUCIVE TO BRINGING THAT BUILDING CLOSER TO THE STREET, UM, ALLOWING, UH, MORE OF AN URBAN FORM AS THAT STRUCTURE IS PUSHED UP AGAINST THE STREET.
SO STAFF IS ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THIS MODIFIED SEPARATION REQUIREMENT BETWEEN BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE AND THE TURNPIKE GOING BACK TO THE MODIFIED VENTILATION STANDARDS.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAD PROVIDED THIS PROPOSED MODIFICATION, UM, TO THE UMU ONE REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF DID NOT CATCH IT WHEN MODIFYING THE FORMATTING PRIOR TO PUBLISHING THIS PACKET.
UM, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT INCLUDED A STIPULATION OR A MODIFICATION TO THE VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS STATING THAT, UM, INTAKE OPENINGS FOR OUTDOOR AIR AS IDENTIFIED IN THE ADOPTED INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE AS AMENDED MUST BE LOCATED ON SIDES OF THE BUILDING OTHER THAN THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FACING A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE WHERE LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE RIGHT OF WAY, TYPICALLY WE REQUIRE THOSE, UM, OUTDOOR AIR VENTILATION, UH, ON THE OPPOSITE, ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT'S OPPOSITE TO THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.
AND, UM, CURRENTLY AS CURRENTLY ADOPTED, OUR ORDINANCE REQUIRES IT WITHIN 1200 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.
UM, PREVIOUSLY, UH, OUR ORDINANCE WAS SILENT UNDER FOR DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, HOWEVER, THIS REQUEST, UH, IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH EITHER OUR PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE OR OUR CURRENT ONE.
AND ADDITIONALLY BLOCK A TWO LOT.
ONE IS NOT WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, UM, FROM STAFF'S ANALYSIS.
SO THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY MAKE THAT REQUIREMENT NULL AND VOID FOR THAT PARTICULAR MULTIFAMILY LOT.
THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, BUT THERE ARE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF RECENT CHANGES IN STATE LAW AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST.
UM, STATE LAW HAS MANDATED THE CITY TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND PORTIONS, UM, OF THE CITY, UM, FOR ANY NEW PROJECTS INITIATED AFTER THE DATE OF THE LEGISLATION.
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ACTIVE SINCE BEFORE THAT DATE, AND THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN TO, UH, BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE PREVIOUS REQUIREMENTS.
UH, HOWEVER, A NEW APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT COULD AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SITE WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A ZONING CHANGE AND WOULD BE REVIEWED UNDER CURRENT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE URBAN ACTIVITY CENTERS, UH, FUTURELY END USE CATEGORY AS SHOWN HERE.
UM, IT DOES, UH, CREATE INCREASES IN THE OVERALL HOUSING ACREAGE ABOVE THE RECOMMENDED RANGE, AS WELL AS MULTIFAMILY TYPES ABOVE THE RECOMMENDED RANGE.
HOWEVER, UM, THE INCREASED ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY
[01:40:01]
TYPES WITHIN IS WITHIN THE RECOMMENDED RANGE, WHICH IS A POSITIVE.UM, HOWEVER, THERE ARE, UM, INCREASES IN RETAIL TYPES ABOVE THE RECOMMENDED RANGE, AS WELL AS DECREASES IN OFFICE, UH, OFFICE TYPES.
LOOKING HERE AT THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS, THIS PROPERTY, THIS PROJECT IS STILL MEETING A LOT OF THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS REQUIRED OR, UM, NOT REQUIRED, BUT UH, PROVIDED UNDERNEATH THE URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER'S FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, INCLUDING BEING WITHIN THE RECOMMENDED RANGE FOR BUILDING HEIGHTS DENSITY, UH, AS WELL AS PARKING ORIENTATION AND THE BLOCK PATTERN IN STREETSCAPE.
SO, UM, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, MEETING THOSE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS FOR THE URBAN ACTIVITIES CENTER WITH THIS CURRENT PROPOSAL.
HOWEVER, UH, IT IS NOT MEETING THE INTENSITY REQUIREMENTS.
WE WOULD LIKE A HIGH INTENSITY TYPICALLY IN THIS FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, AND THEY'RE ONLY PROVIDING A MODERATE INTENSITY.
ULTIMATELY, THE PROJECT, UM, DOES NOT MEET, UM, MANY ASPECTS OF, UH, THE MIX OF USES NOR THE, UH, UNDEVELOPED, UNDEVELOPED LAND POLICY AND MANY OF THE ACTIONS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE REGROWTH AND MAN, UH, REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY.
SO FINDINGS IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS REQUEST, AND FINDING STORMS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION AS OF NOON.
UM, LAST, UM, THURSDAY, UH, THE, UH, STAFF HAS RECEIVED, UM, 25 LETTERS IN SUPPORT WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THREE NEUTRAL RESPONSES AND TWO RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION.
AND THEN, UM, OUTSIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT WITHIN 200 FEET, WE HAVE RECEIVED, UH, THREE SIGNED LETTERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM, AND THAT NUMBER HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE LAST MEETING.
AND THEN OVERALL, WE'VE RECEIVED 47 RESPONSES, UM, WHICH YOU CAN SEE THE TABLE HERE TO REITERATE, THIS REQUEST, UM, IS STILL TO INCORPORATE AN AREA OF LAND ZONED LI ONE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING TOWN HOMES, UM, AND ALLOWING FOR ALTERNATIVE EHA, UM, OVERLAY MITIGATION STANDARDS FOR BOTH THE TOWN HOMES AND NOW THE MULTIFAMILY AS WELL.
UM, MODIFYING THE MIX OF USE REQUIREMENTS TO EXTE EXCEED, EXCEED THE STANDARD ALLOWANCE FOR RESIDENTIAL AS A PRIMARY USE AND BOTH THE UMU DISTRICT AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UH, REDUCING THE REQUIREMENT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES TO 12% OF THE DISTRICT, AS WELL AS INCORPORATING PHASING OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES FOR A MINIMUM OF 12,000 SQUARE FEET ON BLOCK A TWO LOT TWO OR BLOCKS A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE C, L, OR M.
THOSE ARE THE REMAINING NON-RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS THAT ARE UNDEVELOPED.
AND, UM, THE REQUEST TO AMEND VARIOUS SITE DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH SUPPORT WALKABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT FORMS, CONSISTENT WITH THE INTEGRITY OF THE DISTRICT STAFF, SUPPORTS THE GEOGRAPHIC EXPANSION OF THE UMU ONE DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE PROVISION OF A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THE EHA STANDARDS FOR BLOCK Z.
UM, AND THEN PER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FINDINGS POLICY, THE OTHER REQUESTED CHANGES TO THE EXISTING UU ONE ARE RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL AND MUST BE FOUND CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST IF P AND Z WISHES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
OH, AND THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION AS WELL.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
MR. BRONSKI? MS. ELLE, GREAT JOB.
UH, SO JUST A COUPLE GENERAL QUESTIONS.
WHY DO WE HAVE UMU DISTRICTS? THE PURPOSE OF UMU DISTRICT IS TO ESTABLISH A SORT OF MASTER PLAN DISTRICT THAT HAS, UH, AN URBAN FORM INVITES A MIX OF USES, UH, AND CAN CREATE A STREET NETWORK THAT IS, UM, MAINTAINED, UM, AS PART OF THE UMU DISTRICT.
MR. BELL, DID I MISS ANYTHING? TERRIFIC JOB.
MY SECOND QUESTION IS, UM, WHY DO WE HAVE THE FUNCTIONAL ROLES AND WHY DO WE RANK THEM? THE FUNCTIONAL ROLES ARE BROKEN OUT INTO PRIMARY, SECONDARY, AND TERTIARY.
AND THEIR PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE A, UH, RANGE OF PERCENTAGES THAT ARE DETERMINED BY THE AMOUNT OF GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, A SINGLE USE TYPE HAS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE UMU ONE DISTRICT.
THE PURPOSE OF HAVING THOSE BANDS OF RANGES
[01:45:01]
BETWEEN THOSE THREE DIFFERENT TIERS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT NOT ONE SINGLE USE OCCUPIES TOO MUCH OF THE GROUND, UH, GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THOSE USES SO THAT IT CAN BE A MIXED USE DISTRICT.SO THE, THE INTENTION IS TO KEEP THEM BALANCED, RIGHT? YES.
SO WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY, UH, CREATED, I THINK YOU'RE SAID 2014 YES.
IS THE DATE, UM, WHAT WERE THE, UH, WHAT WERE THE FUNCTIONAL ROLE, UH, THE RATINGS FOR THE FUNCTIONAL ROLES, UH, FOR THE USE CATEGORIES? GREAT QUESTION.
LET ME, I'M GONNA CHEAT AND I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE WHERE I TALKED ABOUT THAT.
SORRY, BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE THE ORIGINAL ONES, BUT IF I CAN JUST SPEAK FROM THE TOP OF MY HEAD AND WE CAN GET THOSE, THOSE NUMBERS MORE CONCRETELY TO YOU.
UH, IF YOU GIMME SOME MOMENT TO RESEARCH, I BELIEVE IT WAS, UH, PRIMARILY OFFICE AND HOTEL WITH SOME SUPPORTIVE RETAIL.
AND I BELIEVE RESIDENTIAL WAS ALSO A SECONDARY USE, BUT THAT'S THE PART I'M NERVOUS ABOUT YOU QUOTING ME ON.
I MIGHT HAVE BEEN PRIMARY AS WELL.
SO, UM, I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION IS, UM, WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE SEEN TO THIS DISTRICT, UH, AND THE CHANGES IN THE FUNCTIONAL ROLES, UH, TO MAKING, UH, EVERYTHING EXCEPT THE RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, AS PRIMARY AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO TERTIARY, UM, WHAT KIND OF AN IMPACT DOES THAT HAVE ON A UMU DISTRICT AND ITS GENERAL PURPOSE FOR EXISTING STAFF PROVIDED IN OUR REPORT THAT WE BELIEVE THE CHANGES BEING RECOMMENDED BY THE APPLICANT, UM, DO NOT MEET THE PURPOSE OF THE UMU DISTRICT AND, UM, POINT TO, UH, THE ORIGINAL, UH, DISTRICT LANGUAGE, UM, AS, AND I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER BROSKY, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION?
I WAS WHAT? THE IMPACT OF SHIFTING EVERYTHING AROUND TO ONE PRIMARY AND EVERYTHING ELSE TERTIARY MM-HMM
UH, THEY HAVE, UH, IT HAS A SIGNIFICANT, UH, NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED.
IS THAT FAIR IN SAYING YES? I THINK STAFF'S REPORT POINTED TO THAT.
MR. BELL, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANNA SAY? YEAH, JUST IN SUMMARY, WE THINK IT BECOMES MOSTLY A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND NOT A MIXED USE DISTRICT.
MS. COEL, UM, BECAUSE THE STAFF HAS, UH, TOLD US IN THEIR, UH, PACKET MATERIALS, UH, THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THAT IF WE APPROVE THIS APPLICATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE FINDINGS MM-HMM
IN ORDER TO BRING IT WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND IN MAKING FINDINGS, UH, WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND THAT THE APPLICATION, UM, PROMOTED OR SERVED SOME GUIDING PRINCIPLE WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
COULD YOU IDENTIFY FOR US ANY ONE OR MORE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WOULD BE SERVED BY APPROVING THIS APPLICATION? THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.
UM, MS. DEANDRA, CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THIS QUESTION? UH, UH, UH, LET ME CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT APART FROM THE POSSIBLE EFFECT OF THE RECENT CHANGE IN STATE LAW.
UM, IT'S THEIR POSITION TO MAKE A CASE AS TO WHY THEY THINK THAT THEIR REQUEST IS BEYOND IS MEETING THE GOALS OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? NOBODY.
SO, UH, MS. CORELLE, UM, I JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE CHANGES.
UH, PAGE 44 ON YOUR REPORT, I THINK IN THE SCREEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE, UM, UM, WHAT USED TO BE THE EHA AND THE LETTER THAT WE, THE NOTE THAT WE RECEIVED PRIOR TO OUR, UH, PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING WAS A, UM, WAS NOT PART OF WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED HERE.
IS THAT CORRECT? VICE CHAIR BROSKY?
[01:50:01]
I'M SORRY.I FEEL LIKE I ASK YOU TO REPEAT YOUR QUESTION EVERY SINGLE TIME.
I SWEAR I I'M LISTENING, BUT, UM, CAN YOU, UH, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ONE MORE TIME FOR ME? YOU PASSED OUT DURING, PRIOR TO THE, YES.
SO WHAT I'M SEEING ON THE SCREEN, IS THAT WHAT THIS IS OR IS THIS SOMETHING IN ADDITION TO THOSE CHANGES? NO, SO THIS TABLE IS, IS KIND OF MEANT TO PROVIDE A, A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A GENERAL EXPLANATION OF THE CHANGES.
UH, THIS TABLE HERE ON SLIDE NUMBER 47, UH, MUCH, UH, STATES MUCH MORE EXPLICITLY THE CHANGES, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TYPICAL STANDARD, UM, AS IDENTIFIED IN THE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED, UH, ZONING ORDINANCE THAT THIS CASE IS BEING REVIEWED UNDER, UH, REQUIRES INTAKE OPENINGS FOR OUTDOOR, UH, FOR OUTDOOR AIR TO BE LOCATED ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FROM THE EXPRESSWAY.
UH, AND THE PROPOSED REQUIREMENT, UH, WOULD ALLOW THAT INTAKE OPENING FOR OUTDOOR AIR TO BE LOCATED ON A SIDE OF THE BUILDING OTHER THAN THE SIDE THAT'S PARALLEL TO THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, UH, WHERE LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THIS SLIDE MUCH MORE EXPLICITLY STATES THE MODIFICATIONS, SO CAN NOW, UM, THE, UM, THE ECA STANDARDS AS WE, UM, ADOPTED THEM MM-HMM
UH, PRIOR, PRIOR THE EHA STANDARDS, UH, WHY DO WE HAVE THEM IN PLACE? WHAT ARE THEY, WHAT ARE SOME OF THEIR INTENTIONS TO HELP MITIGATE THE, UH, NOISE AND POLLUTION EFFECTS OF LIVING ADJACENT TO A RAILROAD OR TYPE A THOROUGHFARE? OKAY.
AND SO THEY'RE DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE TENANTS THAT ARE LIVING, UH, LIVING IN THEM? YES.
IT'S FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
UM, WOULD, SO PART, UH, HAVING THE ERROR INTAKES OPPOSITE THE THOROUGHFARE, THE DESIGN, THE PURPOSE FOR THAT IS SO THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING AIR SUCKED IN TO THE VENTS OR, OR AT LEAST ALLEVIATING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THAT AIR INTAKE FROM YOU WOULD, THAT YOU WOULD GET FROM THE ROAD.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IN NOT DOING THAT, WE ARE THEN CREATING A, THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING THAT ERROR INTAKE COME IN AS, UM, HAVE THEY SUGGESTED ANY MITIGATION SUCH AS HIGHER FILT, UH, FILTRATION, UH, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO GUARD THE, THE PURPOSE OF THE RE SORRY, TO GUARD THE PURPOSE FOR WHY WE HAVE THESE STANDARDS IN PLACE THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED, UH, BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT.
HOWEVER, I, I WILL SAY AGAIN, IN THE APPLICANT'S DEFENSE, I AS STAFF DID NOT NOTICE THAT THESE WERE MODIFIED STIPULATIONS WHENEVER WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THEM.
SO I DID NOT GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK THIS OUT AND TALK ABOUT ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS THAT COULD HELP, UH, SUPPLEMENT THE MODIFIED REQUEST.
SO, SO THEN IF WE APPROVE THE MOD, THE MODIFIED REQUEST, WE ARE THEN ALLOWING AIR FILTRATION TO COME IN, UH, A WAY DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY WE ORIGINALLY INTENDED.
THE STIPULATION THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WOULD HELP MITIGATE THAT CHANCE.
AND ALTHOUGH I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE LOOKING AT THESE SITES, THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE.
UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING TO MODIFY THE ZONING, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, THE ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, SO MR. BELL, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD TO THAT? I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT THEY ARE MAINTAINING THE STANDARD OF A MERV THIRD TRA, MERV 13 FILTRATION SYSTEM, WHICH IS STANDARD, UH, FOR THE EHA AREAS.
AND I, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, I BELIEVE THERE BEING SOME DISCUSSION OF THIS ON PREVIOUS CASES THAT GOING ABOVE 13 HAS KINDA MINIMAL IMPROVEMENT.
LIKE 13 IS IS ABOUT WHERE YOU GET THE MOST, UH, EFFICIENCY, UM, INFILTRATION.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE 13 WAS DESIGNED FOR THE AIR INTAKES COMING OPPOSITE THE EXPRESSWAYS, CORRECT? THAT'S HOW IT WAS WRITTEN, YES.
UH, I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE WITH ME.
VICE CHAIR BRONSKI, COMMISSIONER BENDER.
UM, YOU HAD MENTIONED EARLIER THE DEVELOPMENT ORIGINALLY STARTED BACK IN 2014, RIGHT? THE UMUI, I REMEMBER I WAS ON THE, ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME.
DO WE HAVE OTHER, UM, U ACROSS THE CITY THAT HAVE BEEN,
[01:55:01]
THAT ARE SIMILAR, THAT HAVE TAKEN 12 YEARS? SO THE UMU ONE DISTRICT IS THE OLDEST DISTRICT.IT'S THE FIRST, IT'S THE UU ONE, UH, BEACON SQUARE UM U2 WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019.
AND THEN COLIN CREEK WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019? CORRECT.
SO, UM, BEACON SQUARE IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT.
THEY STILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR UMU DISTRICT UNDEVELOPED.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S PROBABLY ALSO 12 YEARS FROM NOW.
SO THE ECONOMIC CHANGES THAT CAN OCCUR OVER 12 YEARS IS, ARE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL.
WOULD YOU AGREE? AND THAT COULD, THAT CAN IMPACT THE, THE WEIGHTING OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENT PRODUCTS THAT ARE USED THAT ARE PRE, THAT ARE INITIALLY SET UP FOR THAT UMU.
COULD THAT BE A FAIR STATEMENT? OKAY.
NO OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALRIGHT, WE DO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
I KNOW THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION, SO I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD.
I KNOW YOU KNOW THE DRILL, UH, MR. CHAIR COMMISSION.
MY NAME'S BILL DAHLSTROM, UH, 2323 ROSS AVENUE HERE ON BEHALF OF, UH, THE, THE ROSEWOOD COMPANY.
AND, UH, YEAH, WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT I THINK WE'RE GONNA, UH, NOT GO INTO IT.
UH, WE, WE, A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED, WE, WE WENT INTO IN PRETTY MUCH DETAIL AT THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING WITH REGARD TO CONFORMANCE WITH THE, THE COMP PLAN.
AND THAT'S ALWAYS GONNA BE DEBATABLE.
UH, A LOT OF THE THINGS WE ARE PROPOSING ARE A BETTER DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UH, THERE'S JUST NOT A MARKET FOR THAT MUCH OFFICE.
UH, THE, THE MARKET DOES CHANGE, THE ECONOMY DOES CHANGE.
AND THAT, THAT, THAT IN FACT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED.
WE ARE PROPOSING A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS AN EXTENSION OF A VERY HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT HERITAGE CREEK SIDE.
AND I'LL TELL YOU OUT THERE IN THE MARKET, PEOPLE KNOW HERITAGE CREEK SIDE THAT YOU SAY HERITAGE CREEK SIDE, IT'S LIKE THAT IS A, THERE, THERE, I HATE TO USE THAT PHRASE, BUT THAT IS A, THAT IS A, A PLACE.
SO WE HAVE CREATED A PLACE AND WE ARE LOOKING AT EXPANDING IT.
UH, AND YES, IT, IT IS RESIDENTIAL, BUT YOU KNOW, I I I, I, I FREQUENT NEW YORK CITY, THEY'VE GOT A SON THERE AND I'VE GOT A BROTHER THERE.
THEY ARE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE HIGHLY RESIDENTIAL LIKE THIS, THAT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MULTIFAMILY AND HAVE, UH, UH, RESIDENTIAL IN IT, I MEAN, RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS IN IT AS WELL.
SO, UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK MOLLY.
SHE'S DONE A GREAT JOB WORKING WITH US.
I MEAN, OUR TASK AT THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING WAS TO WORK WITH STAFF AND COME UP WITH A, A, A PHASING PLAN.
AND WE, WE HIT THE GROUND RUNNING LIKE A DAY LATER.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GONE, WE TOOK, UH, STAFF'S LEAD, UH, CAME UP WITH THIS, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH WITH, WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT STANDARDS, BUT, UM, UH, SHE WORKED VERY HARD.
UM, BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS, IS AN EXTENSION OF, OF THAT, UH, HERITAGE CREEK SITE.
AND I, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE ARE PLENTY OF BENEFITS WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UH, WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT WE THINK WE CAN ACTUALLY GET OUT THERE AND BUILD WITH ALL THAT OFFICE OUT THERE THAT'S NOT GONNA BE BUILT FOR WHO KNOWS HOW LONG.
WE DO HAVE AN OFFICE COMPONENT THAT WE ARE, ARE MAINTAINING, UH, WE ARE PROPOSING UNIQUE, UH, RETAIL RESTAURANTS THAT HAVE AN ORIENTATION TO THE CREEK.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION MORE OF THE, THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT THERE AND ORIENTING OUR RETAIL RESTAURANTS AND ENTERTAINMENT USES TO THAT.
AND WE, WE, WE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF, OF, OF MIXED USE, ONE OF THE, THE MAGNETS FOR THOSE WHO WHO WORK IN THAT AREA IS AN ENTERTAINMENT COMPONENT.
AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, IN 2014, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE DID.
I WASN'T EVEN THOUGHT OF BACK THEN.
BUT NOWADAYS IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A MAJOR COMPONENT.
YOU THINK ABOUT THE, UH, MORE MODERN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS, UM, YOU KNOW, A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPE TWO, WE'RE BRINGING IN MORE FOR SALE TALENT HOMES.
THAT IS, I THINK, VERY IMPORTANT.
AND I, I, I THINK STAFF STAFF, UH, SUPPORTS THAT AS WELL.
SO WE, WE ARE COMPLYING WITH VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GONNA BE A HIGH QUALITY DEVELOPMENT.
ROSEWOOD STARTED THIS IN 2014.
THEY'VE OWNED THIS LAND FOR 40, 50 YEARS.
TIM HARRIS FROM ROSEWOOD IS HERE.
THEY'VE OWNED IT FOR 40, 50 YEARS, MAYBE EVEN LONGER THAN THAT.
AND THEY OWN CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP OF A LOT OF THE EXISTING HERITAGE CREEKSIDE OVER ON THE EAST SIDE.
AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO OWN MUCH OF THE, UH, HERITAGE CREEKS OUT ON THE WEST SIDE AS WELL.
THEY AREN'T HERE TO DEVELOP IT AND LEAVE.
[02:00:01]
UH, THEY HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY.THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT, NOT, I, NOW I REMEMBER I WORKED ON THE FIRST HERITAGE CREEK SIDE, THE FIRST UMU WHEN WE CAME IN.
WE HAD AN EXHIBIT THAT I HAD PREPARED FOR TO SHOW YOU LAST TIME, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS, UH, WE, WE HAD AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM DO A, A, A MASSING STUDY OF WHAT WE COULD DO ON THAT PROPERTY AT THAT POINT.
AND IT WAS FULL OF OFFICE AND, UH, WAREHOUSING AND, AND DIFFERENT KINDS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND ROSEWOOD DECIDED THEY DIDN'T WANNA DO THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY OF PLANO.
THEY WANTED TO COME IN AND DO A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
ONE THAT WOULD, THAT QUITE FRANKLY WAS GONNA BE A LEGACY DEVELOPMENT FOR THEM.
AND IT HAS BEEN, AND A LEGACY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO CONTINUE.
THEY COULD HAVE DONE, I I, THE NUMBERS THAT STICK IN MY MIND, MIKE MIGHT KNOW, EIGHT, NINE, 10 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE OFFICE USES THAT THEY DECIDED NOT TO PURSUE.
THEY DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND COME IN WITH THIS, THE FIRST UMU.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AN EXTREMELY GOOD QUALITY, COMPETENT CORPORATE PARTNER IN THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR AN INDEFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME.
UM, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MORE RETAIL, UH, AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE, UH, TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, OF THE, UH, ENVIR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
ALSO, AND THIS IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALSO.
THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN GET OUT THERE AND WE CAN BUILD RIGHT AWAY.
SO I, I, I WOULD SUBMIT THAT YES, WE DO FURTHER A LOT OF THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE DO FURTHER THE MIXED, MIXED, UH, UNITS, ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS, THE MIXED USES AS WELL.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE EXTREMELY WELL ABOUT THE PERCENTAGES OF THE, THE USES, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IN TODAY'S WORLD, THOSE JUST DON'T WORK AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO WORK.
OTHERWISE, THE LAND'S GONNA STAY VACANT INDEFINITELY.
GETTING BACK TO OUR, OUR CHARGE AGAIN, WE, WE, WE THINK WE CAME UP WITH A, A, UH, PHASING PLAN THAT THAT WORKS FOR US ALL.
AND, UH, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT MOLLY READ INTO THE RECORD.
UH, AGAIN, TIM AND I ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT THIS IS A VERY EXCITING TIME FOR ALL OF US AND WE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I GOT A COUPLE OF CONCERNS, I GUESS IS THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES.
I, I, I LIKE THE NEW SITE PLAN, I'LL BE HONEST.
UH, IIII THINK YOU'VE ADAPTED TO THE MARKET, I THINK, UM, AND I DON'T HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH, WITH, UM, LOTS A TWO Z AND F AS THE WAY YOU'VE PRESENTED THEM.
MY CONCERN IS WITH THE REST OF IT, AND, AND PHASING WAS ONE OF OUR CONCERNS AT THE LAST MEETING, I BELIEVE WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT.
MY CONCERN IS, AND ROSEWOODS DONE A GREAT JOB, BEEN A LONG TERM PLAYER, BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LAND USE, NOT NECESSARILY THE CURRENT OWNER, THE CURRENT TENANT, THE CURRENT USE, UH, BUT TO LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF WHAT COULD BE DONE AS FAR AS THE LAND USE IS CONCERNED.
HAVE Y'ALL CONSIDERED ANY KIND OF PERMANENT RESTRICTION ON THAT LAND OTHER THAN THE ZONING? UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T, MY MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'VE HAD MISSION CREEP WITH MORE AND MORE RESIDENTIAL IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, WHICH, UNLESS, IN MY OPINION, I THINK WE'RE KIND OF BUMPING OUR HEADS NOW AS TO HOW MUCH RESIDENTIAL WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
UM, AND, AND I DON'T WANNA PUT WORDS IN ANYBODY'S MOUTH, BUT I DON'T THINK I'M ALONE IN THAT ASSESSMENT.
UM, AND, AND SO ARE THERE ANY ASSURANCES THAT YOU COULD PROVIDE TO THE CITY OF PLANO? NOT JUST VERBAL, BUT HOW COULD WE MEMORIALIZE THE COMMITMENT THAT, THAT NONE OF THE REST OF THAT PROPERTY WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL IN THE FUTURE? WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK WITH A SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 DEVELOPMENT.
WE WANTED TO CON CONTINUE WITH WHAT WE SET OUT TO DO IN 2014, AN EXTENSION OF THAT, UH, MIXED USE HERITAGE CREEK SIDE.
UM, YEAH, STAFF, WE MET WITH STAFF SEVERAL TIMES AND WE HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND JUST DO ALL RESIDENTIAL IF WE WANTED TO.
THE COMMITMENT IS TO CONTINUE WITH THE, UH, PLAN THAT WE STARTED IN 2014 AND ACTUALLY CAME BACK IN THE SPRING, IT SEEMS LIKE A LONG TIME AGO.
BUT YEAH, I MEAN, OUR, OUR, OUR, OUR PROPOSAL IS TO CONTINUE WITH THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE THAT'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IN THE ZONING.
AND I, YEAH, WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT RIGHT NOW.
ONE OF THE TOOLS WE HAVE IN OUR TOOLBOX, AND I KNOW YOU HAVE IN YOUR TOOLBOX TOO, IS TO DE RESTRICT THE PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO THE ZONING.
IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL WOULD CONSIDER ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL LOTS AS
[02:05:01]
CURRENTLY PROPOSED DE RESTRICTED? WHO WOULD BE THE BENEFICIARY? I'D BE DE RESTRICTED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE THE, WELL IT START RAISING.I MEAN, THAT STARTS RAISING SOME QUESTIONS.
I MEAN, I, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT FROM, AS A, AS A BUSINESS QUESTION.
I COULD RAISE SOME LEGAL ISSUES WITH THAT KIND OF APPROACH, BUT I HAVE TO DEFER TO, I'M LOOKING FOR, I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR, MAYBE THAT'S, MAYBE I'M ASKING THE QUESTION WRONG.
IS THERE SOME BINDING, OTHER THAN THE ZONING CASE, SOME PERMANENT BINDING PLACE, SOMETHING WE COULD PUT IN PLACE JUST ON THE OUTSIDE CHANCE THAT ROSEWOOD SELLS IT, SOMEBODY ELSE DOESN'T COME IN AND, AND WANT TO PUT MORE RESIDENTIAL ON THOSE OTHER PARCELS.
HOW CAN WE, HOW CAN WE MEMORIALIZE THAT? I MEAN, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE OWNED THE LAND, UM, SINCE BEFORE THE 1970S.
I'M SORRY, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE? OH, I'M TIM HARRIS.
I'M WITH ROSEWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE OWNED THE LAND SINCE BEFORE THE 1970S.
IF WE'VE EVER CHANGED OUR PLAN, WE'VE ALWAYS COME BACK HERE IN THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET YOUR APPROVAL.
UH, EVEN TODAY, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE WANT DO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO ASK FOR APPROVAL.
WE'VE, WE'VE ALWAYS INDICATED THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT THING TO DO, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.
UH, I WOULD SAY AS A RULE PRACTICE, WE'VE RARELY EVER HAVE EVER DONE DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, BECAUSE UNWINDING IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROCESS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO DO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE.
UM, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES SINCE 2014, YOU KNOW, IT'S 12 YEARS LATER.
UM, A LOT IN THE WORLD HAS CHANGED.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT LAST TIME.
UM, BUT ALSO WE, WE, WE DOUBLED SINCE THAT TIME, THE AMOUNT OF SINGLE FAMILY FOR OWNERSHIP AS WELL.
SO I KNOW SOME OF THAT APPEARS LIKE MORE APARTMENTS.
UM, WE'VE ONLY ASKED FOR MAYBE SINCE THE BEGINNING OF 40 SOMETHING PERCENT INCREASE.
UH, DON'T COUNT, IT'S 48, MAYBE 51, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WE'VE MORE THAN DOUBLED THE SINGLE FAMILY TOO.
SO WE'VE ALWAYS BROUGHT THAT INTO THE CASE.
SO, UM, I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN, WE'VE BEEN GRINDING AWAY AT HERITAGE CREEKSIDE FOR YEARS, UM, TO CREATE SOMETHING REALLY SPECIAL.
WE ALWAYS CALL IT THE DONUT HOLE, THAT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA THAT WE'VE ACQUIRED.
UM, WE WENT AND BOUGHT THAT, JUST HOPING THAT YOU GUYS WOULD GIVE US, YOU KNOW, THIS APPROVAL TO GO DO TOWN HOMES ON IT, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
WE WANNA PREVENT SOMETHING LIKE MORE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BEING DONE THERE.
UM, AND, AND TO GO BACK TO WHAT BILL SAID EARLIER, UM, YOU KNOW, ABOUT WHAT WE COULD HAVE DONE YEARS AGO, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY ACTUALLY TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT.
AND, UM, I KNOW WE HAD A, YOU KNOW, A BUNCH OF VOTES FROM IN SUPPORT AND AGAINST, AND IF YOU JUST LOOK ON THE MAP OF WHO'S AGAINST, THEY'RE NOT NEARBY.
IF YOU LOOK AT EVERYONE NEARBY, THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
AND WE HELD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH, UM, BOTH FOLKS INSIDE OF HERITAGE CREEKSIDE AND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT, AND THOSE ARE THE ONES YOU SEE APPROVAL FOR.
IS THERE A COMPLETELY CHANGING TOPICS, THE AIR QUALITY QUESTION? UM, WHY THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE AND, AND I'M GONNA PREFACE THAT WITH, UM, THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION ABOUT, UM, PROTECTING RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ZONE AND, AND HAVE BEEN, I I BELIEVE OUR COMMISSION HAS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT ABOUT NOT DEVIATING FROM THOSE STANDARDS.
IS, IS THERE A PARTICULAR HARDSHIP, AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT WORD, 'CAUSE THAT WOULD BE A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS QUESTION, BUT IS THERE A PARTICULAR, UM, DRIVING FORCE THAT'S ASKING WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT EXCEPTION THAT OTHER THAN IT'S JUST EASIER
WE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE HIRED A REALLY GREAT MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL, UH, PLUMBING ENGINEER.
WE RAN THE REQUIREMENTS BY THEM.
THEY DO, UM, AN, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PERCENTAGES, BUT THEY DO A TON OF WORK WITHIN THE CITY OF PLANO.
UM, THEY HAVE RUN ACROSS THIS REQUIREMENT BEFORE, AND, YOU KNOW, THE BEST WAY I CAN DESCRIBE IT IS WE HAVE THE HIGHWAY HERE, OUR BUILDING'S HERE, AND THE CORRIDOR, THE CORRIDOR GOES BEYOND OUR BUILDING.
SO NO MATTER WHERE WE'RE PULLING AIR FROM, WE'RE PULLING AIR FROM WITHIN THIS CORRIDOR.
AND REALLY, OUR, OUR GOAL IS TO TAKE THE UNITS THAT FACE THE HIGHWAY, LIKE IT SAID, AND, AND TO GO OUT INTO OUR INTERIOR COURTYARDS, BUT ALSO IN THE ONES THAT ARE HARD TO REACH, TO GO THROUGH THE CORRIDORS.
THERE'S JUST SO MUCH TRAFFIC UP IN THE CEILING.
HE IS LIKE, IT'S ALMOST INFEASIBLE TO DO THIS.
AND SO IT'S JUST FOR THOSE UNITS TO GO OUT TO THE SIDES.
AND THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S REALLY THE REASON WHY.
SO LEMME MAKE SURE, BUT WE, WE STILL DO HAVE THESE, UM, ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO SATISFY.
SO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
[02:10:01]
THE SIDES OF THE, UH, YOU WOULD BE DRAWING AIR OUT OF THE COURTYARD OR YEAH, THE INTERIOR COURTYARD, UH, A HUNDRED AND A HUNDRED, ROUGHLY A HUNDRED FEET AWAY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.OKAY, SO NOT, NOT NECESSARILY ON THE OUTSIDE FACE, YOU'D BE IN THE, IN INTERIOR COURTYARD? YES.
THIS'S JUST THE SHORTEST PATH TO GET ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO IT'S REALLY THESE CORNER UNITS THAT WE'RE REALLY STRUGGLING WITH TO GO OUT TO THE SIDE.
THAT, THAT CLARIFIES THE REQUEST A LITTLE BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE REQUEST ALLOWS AND THAT'S WHY, UH, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE CRYSTAL CLEAR ON WHAT YOUR CONCERN WAS.
SO IF THAT, IF THAT REQUEST TO BE, WAS TO BE CLARIFIED THAT IT WOULD BE ON THE FACE OPPOSITE THE, THE THOROUGHFARE OR AN INTERIOR COURTYARD, WOULD THAT STILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH AS OPPOSED TO JUST ALLOWING IT ON A FACE ON ANY FACE THAT IT'S NOT FACING THE FREEWAY? YES.
YOU SEE MY QUESTION? YES, SIR.
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN MY MIND ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE DRAWING THE AIR FROM.
UM, THAT'S WHAT I'VE GOT FOR NOW.
UM, COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER.
SO, UM, UH, OUR CHAIR, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER RATLIFF HAD KIND OF ALREADY, UH, HAS, UH, ALLUDED TO THIS ALREADY, BUT, UM, I THINK THE THING IT'S REALLY I'M STRUGGLING WITH IS KIND OF SIMILAR TO WHAT WE JUST, THE PREVIOUS CASE JUST, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, HOW DO WE HOLD SOMEBODY ACCOUNTABLE AND, AND, AND ENFORCEABLE? LIKE HOW DO, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE GONNA DO, THEY DO.
AND, AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE STRUGGLING HERE AS WELL.
AND I, AND YOU BROUGHT IT UP, THEY, AT THE, UH, STATE, THE STATE LAW THAT'S BEEN PASSED, UM, HOW, HOW DO WE KEEP YOU YOUR INTENT? YOU PROMISE THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT, WHAT YOU'VE SAID.
HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THAT THAT IS DOCUMENTED IN A WAY THAT IT'S ENFORCEABLE AND IT'S, IT'S MAINTAINED.
YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
NO, I MEAN, THE, THE INTENT OF GOING BACK AND WORKING WITH THE STAFF ON THE PHASING WAS, WAS TO PREVENT YOUR CONCERN.
THAT WAS THE REQUEST LAST TIME WE CAME.
AND, AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I THINK LIKE, UH, BILL SAID, WE MET WITH MOLLY AND CHRISTINA, I THINK THE NEXT DAY.
UM, ACTUALLY IT'S, YOU KNOW, CHRISTINA PROPOSED THIS LANGUAGE AND WE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S A LITTLE BIT A HARD PATH.
DOES EVERYONE FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT? AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE ENDED UP.
THAT'S WHAT WE WERE COMING BACK TO BE WILLING TO DO.
YEAH, I MEAN, I I I GET THE QUESTION.
BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING WITH ZONING AND WE'RE WORKING WITH A DEVELOPER WHO'S, WHO'S ACTUALLY DELIVERED EXTREMELY HIGH QUALITY DEVELOPMENT.
UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE PRETTY HARSH.
AND IT'S, I THINK IT'S HIGHLY IRREGULAR IN THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR THAT TO COME UP IN A ZONING HEARING.
BUT IT'S, IT'S JUST A TOUGH, TOUGH QUESTION TO ANSWER.
SO AGAIN, LIKE THE LAST ONE IN THIS ONE, I, YOU KNOW, I, I'LL BE OUT FRONT.
I, I THINK BOTH DEVELOPMENTS CERTAIN EYESIGHT, I LIKE WHAT YOU YOU'RE DOING HERE.
UM, JUST LIKE THE LAST ONE, I, I LIKE WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
I LIKE WHAT THEY, THEY ACCOMPLISHED, BUT AGAIN, I GET STUCK ON, YOU KNOW, THINGS HAPPEN, THINGS GET SOLD, LAND GETS SOLD, THE EQUATION CHANGES AT A POINT, YOU KNOW, 12 YEARS DOWN THE LINE, SOMETHING CHANGES AGAIN.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A, A SOLUTION THERE TO HOLD THAT IN.
AND I THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE PHASING WHEN WE SUGGESTED THE PHASING WAS, WAS I THINK WE THOUGHT WE'D COME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT, THAT WOULD CON WOULD KEEP YOU INTO THAT AREA.
AND WOULD YOU BE COMMITTED TO THAT? LIKE THAT 12,000, THAT 12,000 BUILDING THAT 12,000 SQUARE FOOT, UH, SHELL ESSENTIALLY, I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT REALLY A SHELL, BUT I'M GONNA USE IT THAT WAY RIGHT NOW.
UM, COULD YOU RESTRICT, SAY, LIKE, SAY WE'RE GONNA MOVE IT TO, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA COMMIT TO BLOCK A FIVE FOR SAY, OR BLOCK C OR SOMETHING WHERE YOU SAY, I'M GONNA, WE'RE GONNA COMMIT TO, TO AT LEAST THOSE AREAS WHERE THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT IS THOSE THAT'S GONNA REALLY COMMIT AND REALLY ADD VALUE TO THIS PRO THIS THIS PROJECT OVERALL.
[02:15:01]
SO IS THE QUESTION THAT'S MAYBE THAT'S AN ALTERNATIVE TO A DEED RESTRICTION.MAYBE IT'S LIKE, OKAY, INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, SAYING, WELL, WELL THEY'RE GONNA DO BLOCK M FOR SAY AND MEET THAT SAME RESTRICTION, LET'S SAY, WELL, WE'D RATHER HAVE A MORE DESIRABLE SECTION AND, AND MOVE IT TO BLOCK A FIVE OR C.
SO, SO THE IS THE QUESTION THEN DOING THE, THE 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE INTERNAL PARK INTO INTERNAL PARK? YEAH.
WHERE IT'S SO 12,000 BEING HERE, JUST TRYING, TRYING TO HELP FIND AN ALTERNATIVE
I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S OUR, THAT'S OUR INTENT.
THAT'S WHY WE WANNA KEEP IT THERE.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY IS EXCEPT FOR LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TO ASK, UM, THIS SPECIFIC PLAN BECAUSE OF CANVASSING THE MARKET, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LAST YEAR SPINNING, UH, OR LAST 18 MONTHS.
AND IT'S BEEN THE LAST YEAR WITH STAFF.
AND I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
I KNOW THAT YOU PROBABLY SEE A LOT OF OTHER DEVELOPERS SAY ONE THING AND DO ANOTHER TO DATE, WE HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING WE HAVEN'T SAID WE WEREN'T GONNA DO.
AND THAT, THAT RETAIL ON THE CORNER OF PLANO AND ALMA IS THERE BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED IT.
AND WE SAID WE'D BUILD IT FIRST, AND WE DID.
AND, UM, SO YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S REALLY OUR COMMITMENT.
I MEAN, WE'RE SO COMMITTED TO PLANO.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE TRUTH.
WE'RE NOT HERE TO BAIT AND SWITCH.
I THINK IF FOR SOME REASON, IF WE JUST COULD NOT GET THIS RETAIL UP OFF THE GROUND, WE COME ASK YOU GUYS ABOUT DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT,
UM, LET ME ASK YOU THE QUESTION I FIRST ASKED MS. COYE, AND, UH, THEY SUGGESTED I ASK YOU, UM, IF WE APPROVE THIS, WE HAVE TO MAKE FINDINGS UNDER OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THOSE FINDINGS HAVE TO IDENTIFY ONE OR MORE, UH, GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT ARE SERVED BY, BY YOUR APPLICATION.
CAN YOU IDENTIFY ONE OR MORE OF THOSE GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR US? I, I THINK FOR THE, UM, WELL, THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES TALK ABOUT A LOT OF, OF, UH, ITEMS SUCH AS THE MIXED USE, SUCH AS THE BETTERMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE, THE, THE CURRENT POPULATION AND THE FUTURE PROP POPULATION.
THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT, THIS ZONING WOULD, WOULD ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE, THE CITY DOING A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING COMMUNITY ROUTE OVER THERE, AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY.
UH, AND IT'S ALSO AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENGINE THAT WOULD, UH, PROVIDE ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO THE CITY AS WELL.
UH, THE BIG, I MENTIONED THE MIXED USE.
UH, I MENTIONED THE, UM, MIXED RESIDENTIAL WE'RE, WE'RE, UH, BRINGING IN MIXED RESIDENTIAL ALSO, WHICH, WHICH IS A, YOU KNOW, A, A, A PRINCIPLE IN THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL, UH, AS YOU PROPOSE IT.
WOULD THIS, UH, ADDITIONAL, THESE ADDITIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, PROVIDE HIGH INTENSITY ACTIVITY CENTERS? YES.
IF SO, HOW? UH, WE'RE PROPOSING A HIGH INTENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, BRINGING IN MORE RESIDENTIAL, BRINGING IN, UM, UH, MORE OF AN ACTIVE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT CORRIDOR WHERE WE HAVE RETAIL ALONG THE CREEK.
SO IT IS, I MEAN, IT, IT IS MORE INTENSIVE THAN WHAT COULD BE DONE THERE.
DOES, DOES YOUR PROPOSAL ATTRACT LARGE CORPORATIONS? I'M READING FROM THE DESCRIPTION OF THE, UM, URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
IT'S ON PAGE 67 OF OUR PACKET.
I, I, I THINK A HUNDRED PERCENT THE, IF, IF WE CREATE A REALLY GREAT RETAIL RESTAURANT, ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT, THIS IS WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO COME AFTER WORK, BEFORE WORK, GET THEIR BREAKFAST, GET THEIR COFFEE.
I THINK THIS REALLY DOES SUPPORT IT.
I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'VE, WE'VE LEFT OFFICE ON OUR PLAN, UM, ON THE CORNER.
'CAUSE I THINK IF WE CAN GET THIS GOING, WE CAN GET MORE OFFICE DONE.
UM, I THINK IT SUPPORTS SOME OF THE GREAT EMPLOYMENT THAT'S IN THE AREA, UM, BOTH IN EVERY DIRECTION.
UM, WE'RE, WE'RE TIED RIGHT INTO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
AND SO I THINK GETTING TO OUR OUR MASTER PLAN, UM, IS GONNA BE EASY.
I THINK WE'VE DONE A REALLY, UM, THOROUGH JOB ON THE PARKING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S EFFICIENT,
[02:20:01]
THAT PEOPLE CAN COME HERE, SPEND TIME, GET OUT, BE SAFE.WE'RE ACTUALLY REDUCING TRAFFIC COUNT.
UM, AND THE TRAFFIC IMPACT IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, UM, FROM THE PRIOR PLAN.
UM, SO I, I THINK WE ARE, WE ARE CREATING SOME VIBRANCY HERE FOR EMPLOYMENT NODES TO CONTINUE UP AND DOWN OUR, OUR CORRIDOR HERE IN PLANO.
I THINK THE RESIDENTIAL'S IMPORTANT ALSO FOR ATTRACTING LARGE CORPORATIONS.
AND I THINK THIS CENTER ALSO PROVIDES, CAN PROVIDE SPECIALTY, UH, SHOPPING AS WE, I DON'T KNOW IF, AND I, I WILL SUBMIT TO ASK THE STAFF, UH, THE URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER IF EACH ONE OF THOSE POINTS NEEDS TO BE HIT.
BUT I DO BELIEVE WE HIT MANY OF THOSE, IF NOT ALL OF THE PRINCIPLES.
WE DO PROVIDE, UH, A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES, WHICH IS GONNA BE ATTRACTIVE TO, UH, MANY FOLKS, ESPECIALLY SPECIALTY SHOPPING, DINING AND ENTERTAINMENT.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY.
AND A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK ALL THOSE PRINCIPLES WE HIT WITH THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
DOES YOUR PROPOSAL INCLUDE MID TO HIGH RISE BUILDINGS? AND I THINK WE DEFINE MID-RISE AS LIKE FIVE TO NINE STORIES AND HIGH-RISE WOULD BE 10 STORIES AND UP THERE'S, WE'VE, WE'VE RETAINED THE BLOCK A THREE AS FOR, FOR AN OFFICE MID-RISE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT OF, OF, OF HOW MANY STORIES? WELL, I, I BELIEVE WE'RE, SORRY.
REALLY IT'S OUR FLOOR PLATE THAT WE'RE MOST CONCERNED WITH.
IT'S SIX STORIES LABELED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
YEAH, MINE'S ILLEGIBLE AND WE ARE CREATING A HIGHLY WALKABLE URBAN FORM WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRONSKI.
SO, UM, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS COMING BACK AGAIN.
UM, SO I HAVE TWO THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT.
UM, I'M GONNA COME BACK TO THE, UM, ECAS SECOND.
SO AS I LOOK AT THE MAP AND I CONSIDER THE PHASING, UH, AND THE RETAIL THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE PHASING OF THE 12,000 SQUARE FEET, AS YOU TALKED ABOUT IN THE LAST MEETING.
AND, UH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I'VE ACTUALLY, UM, I'VE TALKED TO THREE RESIDENTS THAT ARE IN ROSEWOOD, UH, IN THAT COMPLEX COMPLETELY BY ACCIDENT, UH, IN MY DAILY LIFE.
UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THEY MENTIONED WAS THE RETAIL.
UM, SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS IT, IS IT WITHIN HOW THE LANGUAGE CURRENTLY IS STRUCTURED? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE PHASING BEING THE, THE RETAIL IN A FOUR, A FIVE? OR IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THAT 12,000 SQUARE FEET COULD BE IN L AND M? IT COULD BE AN EITHER.
I MEAN, WE TOOK THE, THE PRIORITY BEING THAT WE GET EITHER MORE OFFICE THERE OR MORE RETAIL.
THERE IS OUR UNDERSTANDING AT HARRIS CREEKSIDE.
SO TO DO, WE GOTTA GO DO THAT BEFORE.
SO YOU COULD BUILD, AND IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, L AND M, WHAT ARE THOSE UNITS? THOSE THAT'S OFFICE, UH, OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL.
SO THEY'RE STRAIGHT OFFICE NOW, OUR PROPOSAL'S OFFICE, CORRECT? MM-HMM.
YEAH, THEY'RE THE TWO SKINNY LOTS ALONG THE PD TEAM.
WE HAVE TO DO OFFICE OR RETAIL BEFORE, I THOUGHT THEY WERE GONNA BE CONDOS OR SOMETHING THAT WERE LIVE WORK OFFICE CONDOS.
THE, THE, FOR THE, FOR THE MOST PART, THE, UM, THE TENANT WILL BE THE OWNER OF THE BUILDING AS WELL.
IT'S LIKE ENGINEERING FIRMS, UH, DENTIST OFFICES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND THERE'LL BE TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT, WHICH IS THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE TOWN HOMES BEHIND THEM, PLUS OR MINUS.
TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S A OFFICE USE ONLY, NOT AN OFFICE OFFICE USE, NOT A LIVE WORK.
PURE OFFICE JUST SOLD AS A CONDO FOR OWNERS.
JUST MAKE SURE IT'S NOT A LIVE WORK SITUATION.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
UM, UH, SO I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A COMMITMENT TO THE A FOUR A FIVE RETAIL.
'CAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT YOU ALL TALKED ABOUT BEING, UH, ONE OF THE DRIVING FACTORS THAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT, THAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH AS I CONSIDER MY VOTE ON THIS.
AND THE SECOND THING, UM, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR THIS UNLESS WE ARE VERY CLEAR IN THE DELINEATION OF THIS, UM, THESE INTAKES.
AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THE WAY THAT THE LANGUAGE IS
[02:25:01]
CURRENTLY WRITTEN TODAY, THAT IT PREVENTS ONLY WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING HAPPENING.AND SO I HAVE SERIOUS RESERVATIONS, NOT ABOUT YOU, BUT ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE LANGUAGE ISN'T CRYSTAL CLEAR AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING OUT OF THIS AS IT RELATES TO THESE INTAKES.
AND I BELIEVE THAT IT IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE TO EVERY RESIDENT THAT IS GOING TO LIVE IN ANY OF THESE, THAT WE AS A COMMISSION HOLD STRONG TO THE LINE THAT WE WANNA PROTECT THEIR SAFETY IN THE AIR THAT THEY'RE BREATHING.
AND SO I BELIEVE VERY STRONGLY THAT THIS LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE CHANGED AND NOT BE SO WIDE OPEN AS IT RELATES TO THIS LANGUAGE ON THE ECAS.
IT CAN BE FROM THE COURTYARD AS CHAIR SAID.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OFFER THAT? OKAY.
YEAH, I MEAN, I, YEAH, WE THAT RIGHT MR. BROSKI? WE WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO THE LANGUAGE THAT YEAH.
THE CHAIR HAD SUGGESTED AS FAR AS THAT GOES, WHICH CLARIFIES IT OR SO IS THAT CLARIFY? OOPS, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
IS THAT CLARIFYING THAT IT'S ONLY AS YOU MENTIONED, THE CORNER UNITS? YEP.
IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES, SIR.
I THINK THE REDUCTION IS, IS TWO THINGS.
IT'S THE LOCATION OF THE VENTS, BUT IT'S ALSO A REDUCTION IN THE SEPARATION FROM 1200 TO 500.
SO THE EXCEPTION REMOVES THE REQUIREMENT FOR, FOR THE LOCATION OF THE AIR FILTRATION FROM THE BUILD FROM THE MULTIFAMILY UP CLOSER TO PLANO PARKWAY.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR.
THAT BUILDING BEING MORE THAN 500 FEET AWAY FROM THE EXPRESSWAY.
IT'S 500 FEET AWAY FROM I, WHAT DID WE SAY? I NEED MORE CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
HE JUST, I'LL COME BACK TO THAT.
THE CLARIFICATION ON THIS CALL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? NO, IT'S CLARIFICATION.
HAVE A FEELING YOU'LL BE BACK.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER REGISTERED SPEAKERS? YES, WE DO.
MR. REKER, YOU KNOW THE DRILL.
COREY REKER 1814 IN PLACE, UH, PLANO.
REPEAT OFFENDER? UH, SORRY I DIDN'T SIGN UP CORRECTLY.
UH, I SUPPORT THIS ZONING REQUEST.
UM, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, PLANO NEEDS HOUSING.
ACCORDING TO THE RECENTLY COMPLETED HOUSING STUDY, THE CITY IS THOUSANDS OF HOUSING UNITS SHORT OF EXPECTED DEMAND.
SOME OF THE PROJECTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE CITED IN THE STUDY SUCH AS THE FRY SITE, ARE NO LONGER EVEN IN THE WORKS.
SO WE ARE FALLING EVEN FURTHER BEHIND.
IF WE WISH TO REMAIN A CITY OF EXCELLENCE, WE MUST ADD SUFFICIENT HOUSING TO COMPLEMENT THE SUBSTANTIAL GROWTH IN EXPECTED EMPLOYMENT.
IT'S CLEAR FROM THE PRESENTATIONS I'VE SEEN THAT THIS PROPOSAL MEETS THE MARKET DEMAND FOR BOTH HOUSING AND NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT AREA USES AND COPIOUS OUTDOOR, UH, OPEN SPACE AND PLAZAS PRESENT AN ATTRACTIVE DEVELOPMENT AS A RESIDENT.
I'M CONCERNED BY THE INSISTENCE ON PHASING REQUIREMENTS.
FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD, THESE REQUIREMENTS PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.
THIS SORT OF FORCED BACKWARDS DEVELOPMENT PATTERN HAS A POTENTIAL TO DOOM THE PROJECT BEFORE IT EVEN BEGINS AS APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN THE CASE ON SEVERAL OTHER RECENT PROJECTS.
IN MY EXPERIENCE, HERITAGE CREEKSIDE HAS BEEN A SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT.
THE DESIGN IS FIRST RATE, THE RESTAURANT TENANTS ARE EXCELLENT AND THE HOUSING COMPONENT APPEARS TO OFFER A REASONABLE DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT LET THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD AND ALLOW THIS APPLICANT TO SEE THIS QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH TO COMPLETION.
MR. REKER, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.
ALRIGHT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, RESTRICT COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION.
I'M GONNA TAKE A, UH, WELL I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, CAN YOU, UH, MS. CORELLE, CAN YOU PUT BACK UP YOUR SLIDE THAT SAID REQUEST ON IT? IT WAS THEIR REQUEST.
IT WAS BEFORE RECOMMENDATIONS.
YEAH, LET ME JUST TAP THE SCREEN LIKE 20 TIMES OR SO.
OH, AM I AT THE START OF THE PRESENTATION? I SURE AM.
OH, YOU'RE AT THE START OF OUR MEETING.
CAN SOMEONE, CAN, CAN SOMEONE HELP ME LIKE GET TO LIKE I DON'T,
[02:30:01]
I THINK IT'S LIKE ABOUT, THERE YOU GO.THERE'S, IT WAS PROBABLY 20 SLIDES IN.
THAT'S THE ONE I'M LOOKING FOR.
UM, I NEED TO UNDERSTAND BETTER THE EAC REQUEST, NOT ONLY THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FOR THE INTAKE.
I, I'M, I'M NOT SURE I'M COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDING THAT REQUEST.
LET ME, SO I THINK ACTUALLY LEMME JUST TALK, I'LL START, I'LL GO TO THE, THE CULPRIT BLOCK.
A TWO LOT ONE, UH, RAL, IF IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S A, UM, QUESTION ABOUT THE, UH, DISTANCE FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE WITHIN THE CECA.
NOW THE CECA IS A, UH, CONDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDOR OR CORRIDOR AREA.
I'M NOT SO GOOD WITH THE, UM, ABBREVIATIONS OF THINGS, BUT, UM, THE CECA UH, RANGES QUITE A DISTANCE, UM, FROM THE RESTRICTED AREA OUT TO, UM, THAT DISTANCE.
AND IT'S GENERALLY ABOUT 1200 FEET, UM, GIVE OR TAKE.
UM, NOW BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE IS MORE THAN 500 FEET AWAY FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, BUT IT'S STILL WITHIN THE CECA BOUNDARIES.
SO, UM, OUR ZONING ORDINANCE IN, UH, THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED MAKES A DISTINCTION IN THIS REGARD FOR CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS, NAMELY, UM, THE OPTION TO, UH, PROVIDE A 100 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR A BUILDING, A NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING OF EQUAL HEIGHT, UH, AND LENGTH.
UM, THE AREA THAT'S MORE THAN 500 FEET AWAY.
IN THE CASE, THIS BUILDING, THEY'RE TYPICALLY ONLY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT RUNS PARALLEL WITH THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.
SO BASED ON THAT, THE BUILDING IS MORE THAN 500 FEET FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE AND THEIR REQUEST IS MODIFIED TO REMOVE THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT.
I BELIEVE HE'S SPEAKING ABOUT THE FILTRATION, THE NEW REQUEST THAT WE GOT, THAT WE MISSED.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
I WAS, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
SO THE LANDSCAPING IS IMPORTANT, BUT THE, BUT THAT'S, I WAS MORE TALKING ABOUT THE FILTRATION REQUEST.
THE FILTRATION REQUIREMENTS ARE REQUIRED REGARDLESS OF THE DISTANCE, UH, THAT THE BUILDING HAS, UM, WITHIN THE CECA.
NOW OUR UPDATED REQUIREMENTS CLARIFIES THAT IT'S MEASURED 1200 FEET.
UM, HOWEVER, UM, WHETHER THE BUILDING IS WITHIN 500 FEET OR 1200 FEET OF THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, OUR CURRENT STANDARDS REQUIRE THIS AIR FILTRATION TO BE REQUIRED.
UM, WITH THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL TO ONLY BE WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, THIS IS EFFECTIVELY GETTING RID OF THAT FILTRATION REQUIREMENT FOR THIS SPECIFIC MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE BECAUSE IT IS FURTHER THAN 500 FEET FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.
SO THE, THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENT WOULD STILL APPLY ON BLOCK F AND BLOCK Z AS WELL AND, AND BLOCK Z THE TOWN HOMES.
SO THIS, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A TWO THEN LOT ONE.
AND SO ON A TWO UNDER THAT FILTRATION REQUIREMENT, ALL OF THE INTAKES WOULD HAVE TO BE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING, CORRECT? THAT AS UNDER OUR CURRENT STANDARD AS ADOPTED IN THIS ORDINANCE, YES.
AND THAT, AND SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR IT TO BE ON ANY SIDE AS LONG AS IT'S NOT ON THE SOUTH SIDE? THAT IS CORRECT.
ALTHOUGH OUR DISCUSSION A MINUTE AGO WOULD BE ANY SIDE THIS INTERIOR COURTYARD OR THE NORTH SIDE.
I'VE, I ACTUALLY KIND OF, I'M JUST TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO CRAFT A MOTION IN MY HEAD.
YEAH, I ACTUALLY, I THINK I KIND OF STARTED THE WORK FOR YOU.
BUT, SO, UM, LOOKING AT THE SHEET I PROVIDED FOR YOU CHAIR RATLIFF, I BELIEVE THE MOTION COULD READ MOTION TO APPROVE ZC 2025 DASH 0 0 3 WITH AN ADDITIONAL EXCEPTION UNDER SECTION 20 OF THE UMU ONE EXCEPTIONS, INCLUDING THAT INTAKE OPENINGS FOR OUTDOOR AIR AS DEFINED IN THE ADOPTED INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL
[02:35:01]
CODE AS AMENDED MUST BE LOCATED ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING OPPOSITE OF THE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE OR ON A SIDE OF THE BUILDING WITHIN AN INTERIOR COURTYARD WHERE LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE RIGHT OF WAY.OR YOU COULD SAY 1200 FEET OR WHATEVER DISTANCE YOU WANT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO HAVE THOSE VENTILATIONS PROVIDED IN INTERIOR COURTYARDS AS WELL AS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS, I WAS JUST MULLING AROUND IN MY BRAIN, BUT I WASN'T GETTING QUITE THE WORD YOU GOT.
UM, COMMISSION WITH YOUR INDULGENCE.
I'M, I'M GONNA TAKE A SHOT AT EMOTION 'CAUSE THIS IS A COMPLICATED CASE.
UM, AND COMMISSIONER BRUNO, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT REAL QUICK? YES, SIR.
UM, BETWEEN THIS APPLICATION AND THE APPLICANT PROCEEDING UNDER SB EIGHT 40, I HAVE THE FEELING THAT WE'RE SORT OF FINDING OURSELF BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY PROCEEDING UNDER EIGHT 40 IS, YOU KNOW, UNFAVORABLE TO THE EXTENT THAT ALL WE GET ARE APARTMENTS AND THAT DESTROYS THE MIXED USE, UH, DILU DILUTES, I SHOULD SAY THE MIXED USE CHARACTER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
BUT PROCEEDING UNDER THE APPLICATION AS WE SEE IT NOW, I THINK CONTINUES, ALSO CONTINUES A PROCESS OF DILUTING THE URBAN MIXED USE CHARACTER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT BY DEGREES, WHICH HAS HAPPENED OVER THE PAST 12 YEARS.
UM, THIS APPLICATION WOULD DUTE IT TO THE POINT WHERE I DON'T THINK IT EVEN QUALIFIES AS AN URBAN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ANYMORE.
THERE ARE, THERE'S A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES, THERE IS SOME RETAIL ON THE EASTERN EDGE, SOME, SOME RESTAURANTS ON THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT I THINK THE CONCEPT OF AN URBAN MIXED USE OF DEVELOPMENT PRESUPPOSES OR DESCRIBES A COMPACT WALKABLE AREA WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE AND WORK AND BE ENTERTAINED AND RECREATE AND EAT AND SHOP, UM, ALL WITHIN A SORT OF A SELF-CONTAINED COMMUNITY.
THAT TO ME IS WHAT MAKES IT AN URBAN MIXED USE, UM, AREA.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO BUILD MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS OF VARIOUS TYPES, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE NON-RESIDENTIAL, UH, USES, THEY'RE ONLY PROPOSING TO BUILD UNOCCUPIED SHELL BUILDINGS.
PEOPLE CANNOT WORK IN A SHELL BUILDING.
THEY CAN'T EAT OR ENTERTAIN OR SHOP IN A SHELL BUILDING.
UM, I, UM, THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN DEFINING THE, UH, URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER OF FUTURE LAND USE TALKS ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ATTRACTING LARGE CORPORATIONS.
UM, WE'VE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT HOW MANY RESIDENTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ARE ACTUALLY WORKING OR WOULD BE PROJECTED TO WORK WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE RETAIL THAT EXISTS IS VERY SMALL.
IT CANNOT SUPPORT ANY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THE EMPLOYEES THEY HAVE COME FROM THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OR NOT.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, FROM MY STANDPOINT, A BETTER EXAMPLE OF AN URBAN MIXED USE AREA IS LIKE THE COLLIN CREEK DEVELOPMENT, FOR EXAMPLE.
WHICH HAS, UM, YOU KNOW, ROBUST ELEMENTS OF BOTH RESIDENTIAL OF VARIOUS TYPES AND NON-RESIDENTIAL BUSINESS COMMERCIAL, UM, UM, I UNDERSTAND THE MARKET FOR, UH, OFFICE BUILDINGS HAS BEEN DEPRESSED LATELY.
UH, WE FOUND THAT OUT WITH THE, UH, THOSE OF US WHO WERE ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME AND REMEMBER THE FRY ELECTRONICS CASE IN WHICH, YOU KNOW, WE WERE PROMISED OFFICE BUILDINGS IN A HOTEL AND THAT DISAPPEARED, UM, BECAUSE OF THE POOR MARKET.
BUT MARKETS HAVE A WAY OF REBOUNDING OVER TIME AND I WOULD HOPE THAT BY WAITING THE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE LONGER THE MARKET WOULD RECOVER AS PEOPLE GO BACK TO WORKING IN THE OFFICE PLACE AND LESS WORKING AT HOME AS WE RECOVER FROM THE PANDEMIC.
UM, SO IN ORDER FOR ME TO BE SATISFIED THAT WE STILL HAVE AN URBAN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IN MORE THAN NAME ONLY, I WOULD WANT TO SEE SOME KIND OF COMMITMENT TO THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES SOMETHING MORE THAN A SHELL BUILDING.
AND OTHERWISE, AS A PLANNING AND
[02:40:01]
ZONING COMMISSIONER, I FEEL THAT MY DUTY IS TO UPHOLD OUR ORDINANCES AND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BERNOFF.
UM,
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES THEY'VE ALREADY OVERCOME ON THIS PROPERTY AND HAVE BEEN GOOD CORPORATE PARTNERS WITH US.
AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THE PLAN THEY HAVE IS THE PLAN THAT THEY INTEND TO BUILD.
UM, HOWEVER, I THINK THAT THE PLAN THAT Y'ALL ORIGINALLY HAD WAS THE PLAN YOU INTENDED TO BUILD AS WELL.
AND, AND I AND I RESPECT THAT THE MARKET CHANGED AND THAT Y'ALL BEEN SLOGGING AWAY AT THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA STAY WITH IT, UM, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S HOW Y'ALL ARE.
SO WITH THAT SAID, I'M GONNA TAKE A SHOT AT A MOTION AND TRY TO PLAY A LITTLE SOLOMON HERE AND FIGURE, SEE IF WE CAN FIND A MIDDLE GROUND THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE TO.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING CASE 20 25 0 0 3 WITH AN ADDITIONAL EXCEPTION UNDER SECTION 20 OF THE UMU ONE EXCEPTIONS FOR LOT A TWO ONLY INCLUDING INTAKE OPENINGS FOR OUTDOOR AIRS DEFINED IN THE ADOPTED INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE AS AMENDED MUST BE LOCATED ON SIDES OF THE BUILDING.
OPPOSITE TYPE A THOROUGHFARE OR AN INTERIOR COURTYARD WHERE LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE RIGHT AWAY.
AND THAT THE 12,000 FOOT COMMERCIAL PHASING REQUIREMENT REQUIRE THAT, THAT 12,000 FOOT COM 12,000 SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL SHELL BE CONSTRUCTED ON LOTS, A FOUR, A FIVE, AND OR LOT C.
SO YOU CAN PICK PART OF ONE ALL ON ONE HALF ON EACH TO ALLOW FOR YOU TO ADJUST TO MARKET, BUT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE BUILT IN THAT CENTER CORE OF THE PROJECT.
UM, I HOPE THAT ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMISSION WHILE TRYING TO GIVE THE APPLICANT FLEXIBILITY TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND COMMISSIONER'S CONVERSATION.
I HOPE WE'VE FOUND A REASONABLE SOLUTION THAT WE CAN ALL MOVE FORWARD WITH.
COMMISSION WE NEED TO FILL OUT OUR FINDINGS FORMS. YES.
WE NEED TO FILL OUT OUR FINDINGS FORMS. CAN WE, CAN WE ADJOURN BEFORE WE DO THAT? OR WE HAVE TO DO IT BEFORE WE ADJOURN? CAN YOU STAY IN OPEN SESSION AND FILL OUT AN OPEN SESSION? OKAY.
THEN UM, WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY TURN THE MICROPHONES OFF.
WE CAN'T ADJOURN UNTIL WE, LET'S FILL OUT, FILL OUT FINDINGS FORMS AND THEN WE CAN ADJOURN.
AND WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE, STRETCH YOUR LEGS IF YOU NEED TO CHAIR.
MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 9 0 6.