Mar 23, 2026 City Council

UH, LIKE TO, UH, PRESENT A PROCLAMATION.

ALRIGHT.

WHAT YOU WANT, RED OR BLUE IS OKAY.

NO, SHE WANTS ABOVE.

YEAH.

WOULD YOU, DID EVERYBODY GET ONE? OKAY.

WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU GUYS COME TAKE A PICTURE WITH ME PLEASE? ALRIGHT.

SO YEAH, WE'RE, THAT'S GREAT.

WE'RE DARK GRAY TODAY.

AM I ON? ALL RIGHT.

[Proclamation: April is National Volunteer Month, and we celebrate and acknowledge the generous contributions of our volunteers.]

WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE APRIL AS OUR NATIONAL VOLUNTEER MONTH WITH A PROCLAMATION.

AND WE'D LOVE TO RECOGNIZE NINE STUDENT VOLUNTEERS THAT WILL RECEIVE THE MAYOR'S VOLUNTEER SERVICE AWARD FOR VOLUNTEERING OVER A HUNDRED HOURS OF SERVICE WITH THE CITY.

SO I'D LIKE TO CALL FORWARD KARINA SADLER, VOLUNTEER RESOURCE MANAGER AND MORGAN GREEN GRIFFIN, VOLUNTEER RESOURCES COORDINATOR.

I NEED YOUR HELP.

VOLUNTEERS, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RICH DIVERSITY OF OUR COMMUNITY, FROM SCOUTS TO OLDER ADULTS, FROM LIFELONG RESIDENTS TO NEW ARRIVALS, ALL WHO PARTICIPATE IN SERVICE TO BETTER PLANO.

SO I'M, I'M GOING TO, UH, READ THE PROCLAMATION NATIONAL VOLUNTEER MONTH, APRIL, 2026.

WHEREAS VOLUNTEERS IN PLANO ENGAGES

[00:05:01]

WHEREAS VOLUNTEERS ENHANCE SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE CITY OF PLANO RESIDENTS AND EXTEND CAPACITY OF CITY DEPARTMENTS.

AND WHEREAS VOLUNTEERS GIVE THEIR TIME AND TALENTS TO THE MANY WONDERFUL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS IN PLANO TO CONTRIBUTE TO A VIBRANT, HEALTHY, AND STRONGER COMMUNITY.

WHEREAS 6,755 DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS SERVE 95,954 HOURS WITH THE CITY OF PLANO IN 2025.

THIS REPRESENTED A TOTAL VALUE OF $3.3 MILLION.

AND WHEREAS NATIONAL VOLUNTEER MONTH TAKES PLACE EACH YEAR TO CELEBRATE THE IMPACT OF VOLUNTEER SERVICE AND THE POWER OF VOLUNTEERS TO TACKLE SOCIETY'S GREAT CHALLENGES, TO BUILD STRONGER COMMUNITIES AND BE A FORCE THAT TRANSFORMS THE WORLD.

NOW, THEREFORE, I JOHN MUS, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF PLANO, TEXAS DO HEREBY PROCLAIM APRIL, 2026 AS NATIONAL VOLUNTEER MONTH IN PLANO.

AND I DO THEREBY ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO JOIN ME AND THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL IN HONORING AND THANKING ALL WHO VOLUNTEER IN THE CITY OF EXCELLENCE.

CONGRATULATIONS.

AND WE HAVE SEVERAL, WE HAVE NINE STUDENT VOLUNTEERS TO RECEIVE THE MAYOR'S VOLUNTEER SERVICE AWARD.

SO WHEN I CALL YOU YOUR NAME, WOULD YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD? A ADITI SHANKER? HERE I'LL COME.

COME.

ADITI RIVA.

ELIZA KINE DEEP TEA A YAM, MILEY CHAMA NEIL, JACOB HIN, BAJA RAMAN, SHAR BONDI AND SIMONS.

CONGRATULATIONS.

LET'S GIVE THEM A HAND.

COME OVER HERE.

LET'S TAKE A PICTURE.

SO EVERYBODY RIGHT HERE, KEEP MOVING.

KEEP MOVING A LITTLE MORE.

I'M GONNA SNEAK IN.

YEAH, THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH.

THANK YOU GUYS VERY MUCH.

CONGRATULATIONS.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR, YOUR HELP.

ALRIGHT, ANY MORE? OH, HOLD ON.

ANY MORE PICTURES? , YOU GUYS HAVE TO STAND UP SO I CAN SEE.

ALRIGHT.

ALRIGHT, EVERYBODY LOOK UP.

THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH.

[00:10:05]

[CONSENT AGENDA]

CONSENT AGENDA.

THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS WHICH ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION BY A COUNCIL MEMBER OF THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY CITIZEN.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS.

MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEMS A, C AND I.

OKAY, SECOND.

ITEM A APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 9TH MINUTES.

I HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO, UH, APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A C AND I PLEASE VOTE.

[(a)

March 9, 2026

]

AND THE SPEAKER ON THAT ONE IS AMBER CHAFIN.

HI EVERYONE, NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

MY NAME IS EMBER AND I'M A PLANO RESIDENT.

I'M REQUESTING THAT THE MARCH 9TH PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING MINUTES BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE I BELIEVE THEY DESERVE INVI INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND A PUBLIC RECORD OF MY CONCERN.

THESE MINUTES DOCUMENT THAT THE COUNCIL CONVENED AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR BOTH LEGAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

21 MINUTES LATER, THE COUNCIL DECIDED TO MOVE PUBLIC COMMENTS TO ONCE PER MONTH TO THE END OF THE MEETING AND ELIMINATE ZOOM ACCESS FOR COUNCIL AND ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

A DECISION RESTRICTING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION WAS MADE IN THE SAME BREATH AS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S WHY I PULLED THIS ITEM.

I'M NOT HERE TO MAKE ACCUSATIONS.

I'M HERE TO MAKE A REQUEST SIN.

IF Y'ALL DO TRUST THE DECISION ON RESTRICTING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, ONE THAT AFFECTS EVERY RESIDENT IN THE CITY OF PLANO, I WOULD PREFER THAT IT BE DISCUSSED MORE OPENLY, MAYBE AT A MEETING THAT MORE PEOPLE ATTEND AND WATCH, NOT BURIED AT THE PALM MEETING AT FIVE O'CLOCK ON A MONDAY.

PUT IT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA, SEND AN EMAIL, RUN AN INSTAGRAM AD, UH, DEFEND IT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC.

I'D ALSO LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER WHO THIS RESTRICTION SILENCE IS AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS THAT WE ALL TALKED ABOUT PROTECTING, UH, RESIDENTS WHO COME TO THIS PODIUM, WHO JOIN VIA ZOOM, SEEK ACCOUNTABILITY ON MATTERS.

FAR MORE PERSONAL THAN ANYTHING I'VE EVER COME UP HERE FOR.

AND THE COUNCIL HAS THE POWER TO HELP.

SECTION THREE POINT 13 ALLOWS THE CITY TO SUBPOENA POWER, ABILITY TO COMPEL TESTIMONY, AND TO DEMAND AN ANSWERS THAT POWER EXISTS FOR A REASON.

THIS RESTRICTION DOES NOT LINE WITH A CITY FACING WHAT'S COMING UP, SOMETHING LARGE, EXPENSIVE, AND EXTRAORDINARILY TRAFFIC INDUCING THAT'S ALREADY ON OUR DOORSTEP.

AND NO, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT FIFA.

IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE TALK ABOUT TRANSPORTATION, UH, TRANSPARENT IMPLEMENTATION, COMMUNITY INPUT, SUBURBAN CHARACTER.

AND I KNOW THAT NOT EVERYONE HERE APPROVED THAT, BUT NOWHERE ON THERE DOES IT SAY NATIONAL SPORTS ARENA.

UM, MAYOR MUNGS SAID PUBLICLY IN DECEMBER THAT ATTRACTING THE STARS WAS A PRIORITY, YET THERE'S BEEN NO PUBLIC PRESENTATION, NO FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, NO COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

SO I FILED THE PUBLIC RECORD REQUEST, THE CITY WITHHELD IT, AND THE AG WILL UPHELD THAT TOO.

UH, THIS MAKES SENSE GIVEN THAT THE LAW FIRM, UH, THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY PAYING A LOT OF MONEY TO THOSE TAXPAYER DOLLARS IS PROBABLY WORKING ON STRUCTURING A DEAL VERY SIMILAR TO AT AND T SO THAT WE CAN MOVE MORE CARS 30 MILES NORTH.

MEANWHILE, WE CAN'T GET BIKE LANES OR A SPRING CREEK STATION.

YOU'RE ASKING THE PLANO PEOPLE TO TRUST THE PROCESS AND NOW YOU'RE NOT LETTING US SPEAK.

THAT'S WHY I OPPOSE 20 MINUTES OR 20 SECONDS.

I'LL GO.

I OPPOSE THE APPROVAL OF THESE MINUTES.

A DECISION WITH THIS TYPE OF IMPACT DE DESERVES TO BE DISCUSSED ON THE, IN THE FULL MEETING BECAUSE YOU GUYS KNOW A PUCK'S NOT GONNA BE DROPPING WITHOUT US SAYING ANYTHING.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

UM, CONSENT AGENDA ITEM A.

SECOND.

SO I HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO APPROVE.

UH, AGENDA ITEM A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM A PLEASE VOTE

[00:15:01]

[(c)

]

C, ITEM C.

ITEM C TO RATIFY THE PURCHASE OF EXPEDITED POOL REPAIRS FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF 156,000 FROM SUNBELT POOLS INCORPORATED THROUGH AN EXISTING CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.

AND WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER ON THIS TOPIC AND IT'S BILL LYLE.

GOOD EVENING COUNSEL.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU.

UH, THIS ITEM HAS TO DO WITH THE OAK POINT WAVE POOL.

UM, IN THE BACKGROUND THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO.

I WAS SURPRISED THAT IT DIDN'T EXPLAIN TO Y'ALL THAT THIS POOL OPENED IN, UH, MAY OF 2023, WHICH MEANS IT'S THREE YEARS OLD.

UH, I DID CHECK WITH STAFF AND THEY LET ME KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT UNDER WARRANTY ANY LONGER.

IMAGINE BUILDING A POOL THAT DOESN'T HOLD WATER THREE YEARS AFTER YOU GOT DONE BUILDING IT AND GOING BACK TO THE ENGINEER AND THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND THEM SAYING, WE DIDN'T KNOW YOU WANTED IT TO HOLD WATER.

SO WE'RE SPENDING $150,000 TO FIX A BRAND NEW POOL THAT IS FAR FROM EXCELLENT.

I THINK IT DESERVES QUESTIONS FROM YOU ALL ON HOW THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS IS HAPPENING AND REALLY WHAT WENT WRONG.

WHEN YOU HAVE AN ENGINEER, THEY BUILD A POOL, IT SHOULD LAST 30 YEARS.

UH, YOU HAVE SOIL TESTS THAT ARE DONE.

YOU HAVE, UH, A CONTRACTOR THAT HOPEFULLY WAS REPUTABLE IN BUILDING POOLS, BUT TODAY WE HAVE A POOL THAT DOESN'T HOLD WATER.

THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, DR. SMITH IS HERE TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.

RON, DO YOU MIND TELLING US WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE ON, ON THIS REPAIR? YEAH, THIS WAS, UH, POOL AS MR. LYLE STATED OPEN IN 2023.

THE DESIGNER WAS WESTON SAMPSON, REPUTABLE ARCHITECT AND DESIGN FIRM, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, CORE CONSTRUCTION.

THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK HERE IN PLANO, NOT JUST FOR THE CITY SITUATION WHERE THE, UH, ORIGINAL PORE WITH THE POOL IS ON PIERS, THE SURROUNDING AREA, WHICH IS ABOUT 1.25 ACRES ON, UH, GRADE BEAM.

SOME SHIFTING TOOK PLACE BETWEEN THOSE TWO DIFFERENT PORES.

AND WE'VE GOT THOSE REPAIRS UNDERWAY RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE GONNA BE READY TO GO MAY, UH, 2026 FOR OPENING DAY.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

GO AHEAD.

UM, AS MR. LYLE WAS POINTING OUT FROM A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE IN OUR, THE ENTITY THAT DESIGNED THE POOL, WE MET THOSE GUYS AND THEY SEEMED TO BE COMPETENT.

WEREN'T THEY ABLE TO FORESEE THAT WE HAVE A APPEAR AND BEAM AND THEN WE HAVE SLAB WITH, I ASSUME THEY HAVE GRADE BEAMS UNDER THE SLAB.

CORRECT.

THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO TIE IT ALL AND UNIFY IT TO, TO KEEP IT FROM CRACKING LIKE IT HAS.

MM-HMM .

YEAH, YOU KNOW, WE, UH, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS WERE DONE.

WE FOLLOW THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS AS WE TYPICALLY DO FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE AND SCOPE.

IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THAT SHIFTING TOOK PLACE.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ANTICIPATE THAT THE REPAIRS, REPAIRS HAVE A A ONE YEAR WARRANTY FOR WORK.

THERE'S SOME REPLASTERING THAT'S GONNA BE DONE THAT'S GOT A SEVEN YEAR PRODUCT WARRANTY.

WE HOPE THAT THIS REPAIR IS THE ONE REPAIR THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE IN THIS AREA.

TIME FOR MEMORIAL DAY, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY WHEN OUR POOL'S OPEN IN PLANO, THIS IS THE SOLUTION.

WELL AGAIN, I'M JUST KIND OF, WE HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE LARGER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BESIDES THIS POOL.

AND AGAIN, THIS POOL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT DUAL WAVE POOL.

THAT'S CORRECT.

WHICH TAKES A LOT OF STRESS IN ITSELF FROM THE LIVE LOAD THAT'S BEING TH THRUST ON IT WITH THESE WAVES.

SO I WOULD'VE THOUGHT THAT THE DESIGNER WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION PRIOR TO THIS HAVING THESE CRACKS THREE YEARS AFTER WE HAD A RIBBON CUTTING.

SO, UM, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, BUT WE NEED TO GET THE POOL UP AND RUNNING BEFORE SUMMER GETS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER SOLUTIONS HERE.

THE SOLUTION TO GET THE, THE POOL OPEN, UH, ON

[00:20:01]

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'VE MOVED FORWARD WITH IT.

AND WE'RE BRINGING THIS AS A RATIFICATION IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WORKS.

AS FAR AS GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT THE ENGINEERING SIDE OF THINGS IN THE PROCESS, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THAT PROCESS TO, TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE, UM, BETTER DESIGN AND, AND BETTER OUTCOMES FOR, FOR FUTURE PROJECTS LIKE THIS.

IS THERE, UM, I'M NOT SURE THIS IS THE FORM TO DISCUSS THAT, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF PATH FORWARD ON MAYBE SEEKING RECOVERY? WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE WARRANTY PERIOD HAS EXPIRED, BUT, UH, IF YOU'RE ASKING US TO MEET WITH LEGAL TO SEE IF THERE'S A, A POTENTIAL TO GO FORWARD WITH SOME SORT OF LEGAL ACTION, WE CAN EXPLORE THAT.

OKAY, THANK YOU DR. THOMAS.

MY QUESTION IS, WHY SUCH A SMALL WINDOW FOR THE WARRANTY? WELL, UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS A SMALL WINDOW.

A TWO YEAR CONSTRUCTION WARRANTY I THINK IS TYPICAL IN THE INDUSTRY AND THAT TWO YEAR WINDOW HAS COME AND GONE AND CLOSED, UH, MAY OF 2025.

COUNCIL MEMBER CANTILLA.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

UM, MY COMMENT IS REGARDS TO ADDING ON TO WHAT HORN MENTIONED ABOUT LOOKING AT RECOVERING OF THAT COST OR WERE THERE ANY OTHER AVENUES TO RESEARCH FOR PAYMENT OF THIS OR FINDING A CLAIM WITH THEM OR ANY OF THAT ASPECT WITH NO WARRANTY, COUNCILMAN WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITHOUT A CONTRACT FOR, FOR THIS? YEAH, SO IT WOULD BE LEGAL ACTION THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO, TO SEEK TO BE ABLE TO, OKAY.

AND LET'S LOOK INTO THE LEGAL ACTION ASPECT.

'CAUSE AFTER THREE YEARS IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEM, UH, CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM C.

I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT MOTION WITH A CAVEAT THAT WE REVIEW ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR RECOVERY OF FUNDS WITH LEGAL, UH, MR. MAYOR.

I, I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, THAT SHOULD GO INTO A, A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM OR SOMETHING TO BE DISCUSSED FURTHER.

WE'RE ACTUALLY MODIFYING THE CONSENT AGENDA, THEN WE NEED TO PULL IT FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND I GUESS WE REJECTED MAY I? NO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I'VE RECEIVED THE DIRECTION FROM MULTIPLE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO LOOK INTO COST RECOVERY AND I'VE MENTIONED LOOKING INTO THE LEGAL SIDE, NO FURTHER DIRECTION IS NEEDED BEYOND THAT FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION.

SO THEN THAT, THAT'D BE THE CASE.

AND THEN WITH YOU HAVING DIRECTION, UM, I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION SO WE CAN GET THE POOL OPEN FOR MEMORIAL DAY.

SO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO, UM, APPROVE ITEM C.

PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM I, ITEM I TO APPROVE AN EXPENDITURE FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR PARKWOOD BOULEVARD PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, PROJECT NUMBER ENGS 0 0 0 2 9 IN THE AMOUNT OF $185,250 FROM KINLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED FOR THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.

MOTION PASSES SIX TO TWO.

UM,

[(i) To approve an expenditure for engineering professional services for Parkwood Boulevard Pedestrian Bridge, Project No. ENG-S-00029, in the amount of $185,250 from Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Engineering Department; and authorizing the City Manager to execute all necessary documents.]

AND THE SPEAKER ON THAT ITEM IS CORY REKER.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THIS ITEM TO STUDY A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AT PARKWOOD AND LEGACY CAUGHT MY ATTENTION.

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS UNDOUBTEDLY AN ISSUE IN OUR CITY.

LAST YEAR'S TRAGIC ACCIDENT AT THIS VERY INTERSECTION.

MAKES THAT POINT.

A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, HOWEVER, IS NOT PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE.

A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IS CAR INFRASTRUCTURE.

IT IS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT REMOVES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MOTORISTS TO WORRY ABOUT PEDESTRIANS.

ACCORDING TO THE INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY, QUOTE, PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES DO NOT ENCOURAGE WALKABLE, LIVABLE COMMUNITIES, NOR DO THEY IMPROVE ROAD SAFETY FOR DRIVERS OR CYCLISTS.

SEPARATING PEOPLE FROM THE STREET REINFORCES PRIORITIZATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES WHILE ENCOURAGING SPEEDING DRIVER NEGLIGENCE AND TRAFFIC FATALITIES, END STUDYING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL.

THERE ARE OVER 10,000 JOBS COMING TO THIS AREA IN THE NEAR VERY NEAR FUTURE.

[00:25:01]

MOBILITY STUDIES HAVE MADE THE POINT THAT ALTERNATIVE ACTIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION ARE ESSENTIAL TO COUNTERING THE ALREADY BAD ROADWAY CONGESTION.

YOU SHOULD APPROVE THIS ITEM, BUT I'D ASK THAT YOU DIRECT STAFF TO MODIFY THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY TO EXAMINE SOLUTIONS BEYOND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO MEANINGFULLY IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND WALKABILITY IN THIS AREA.

DO HAVE A MOTION? YOUR HONOR, I I'M HAPPY DOING THE MOTION THAT I LIKE HEAR THE RESPONSE PRIOR TO DOING SO LEMME GO AHEAD.

SO, UH, CALEB THORNHILL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND, UH, TO THE CITIZEN'S POINT EXACTLY WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LOCATION.

UH, WE DO HAVE, UH, SEVERAL AREAS WHERE WE'RE LACKING SIDEWALKS, UH, ALONG LEGACY IN THIS AREA.

WE DO HAVE SEVERAL, SEVERAL NEW, UH, REDEVELOPMENTS UH, CORPORATE EXPANSIONS.

UH, AND SO THIS IS A OPTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

THIS IS A CONCEPT LEVEL STUDY, AS WAS MENTIONED.

UH, THIS IS NOT THE FINAL SOLUTION.

THIS WAS JUST TO EVALUATE A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AT THIS LOCATION.

SO IS THAT, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE WALKABILITY OF, I MEAN, SPECIFICALLY FOCUSING ON THE PEDESTRIAN RATHER THAN JUST THE, THE MOTORISTS OR THE, THE, THE CARS? UH, IT'LL LOOK AT BOTH, BUT THIS WILL BE LOOKING AT THE GETTING PEDESTRIANS ACROSS THIS INTERSECTION.

I, I'LL, I'LL MOVE, I'LL MOVE TO, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

I HAVE, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE, UM, CONSENT AGENDA.

[(1) Public Hearing and consideration of an Ordinance as requested in Zoning Case 2025-003 to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City, Ordinance No. 2015-5-2, as heretofore amended, so as to expand and amend Urban Mixed-Use-1 on 160.4 acres of land 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; directing a change accordingly in the official zoning map of the City; and providing a penalty clause, a repealer clause, a savings clause, a severability clause, a publication clause, and an effective date. Petitioner: Rosewood Property Company]

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, APPLICANTS ARE LIMITED TO 15 MINUTES PRESENTATION TIME WITH A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL IF NEEDED.

REMAINING SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 30 TOTAL MINUTES OF TESTIMONY TIME WITH THREE MINUTES ASSIGNED PER SPEAKER.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY AMEND THESE TIMES AS DEEMED NECESSARY NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

THE RESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA, AND TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY AND MAY INCLUDE A CUMULATIVE TIME LIMIT, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED, AND THE ORDER THE REQUESTS ARE RECEIVED UNTIL THE CUMULATIVE TIME IS EXHAUSTED.

ITEM NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AS REQUESTED IN ZONING CASE 2025 DASH 0 0 3 TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ORDINANCE NUMBER 2015 DASH FIVE DASH TWO AS HERETOFORE AMENDED SO AS TO EXPAND AND AMEND URBAN MIXED JUICE, ONE ON 160.4 ACRES OF LAND 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 JUICE.

ONE TO MODIFY THE REQUIRED USE OF MIXES TO ALLOW FOR 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 JUICE ONE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE AND LOCATED AT THE, WITHIN THE ONE 90 TOLLWAY AND PLANO PARKWAY AND EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS DIRECTING A CHANGE ACCORDINGLY IN THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY, PROVIDING A PENALTY CLAUSE, A REPEAL CLAUSE, A SAVINGS CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, A PUBLICATION CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR, COUNSEL AND EXECUTIVES.

I AM CHRISTINA DAY, THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING HERE TO PRESENT ZONING CASE 20 25 0 0 3 TO YOU THIS EVENING.

SO THIS IS THE URBAN MIXED USE ONE DISTRICT.

IT IS A LARGE PROPERTY THAT IS, UM, HAS BEEN DEVELOPED OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS, STILL CONTAINING VACANT LAND THAT IS YET TO BE DEVELOPED.

UM, AND IT IS SOUTH OF PLANO PARKWAY NORTH OF PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE BETWEEN ALMA AND CUSTER.

[00:30:01]

YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, THERE IS PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST, MULTIFAMILY ZONING TO THE EAST AND THE CITY OF RICHARDSON TO THE SOUTH.

THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S PROPOSED THIS EVENING.

THE A URBAN MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH IT, AND THIS IS A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT EXISTS TODAY AND IS THE PROPOSAL FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.

SO ZOOMING IN, YOU CAN SEE, UM, WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON AREAS THAT ARE UNDEVELOPED TODAY.

SO THE PROPERTIES ON, AGAIN, THE WESTERN PORTION, BLOCK A TWO, UM, IS PROPOSED FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT.

AND THEN THE KIND OF SOUTHERN PORTION, UH, ON THE SCREEN IS FULLY UNDEVELOPED, STARTING AT BLOCK A THREE ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

BLOCK F UH, IS A MIX OF OFFICE, UM, RETAIL, RESTAURANT AND, UH, MULTIFAMILY USES INCLUDING OPEN SPACE.

THEN AS WE CONTINUE MOVING EAST PAST THE ROUNDABOUT, THERE IS SOME VACANT LAND IN BLOCKS L AND M, WHICH ARE PROPOSED FOR OFFICE USES, AS WELL AS SOME ADDITIONAL LAND THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE ADDED TO THE ZONING DISTRICT BLOCK Z.

UM, CURRENTLY THAT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE ZONING, AND, UH, YOU MAY RECOLLECT, IN FACT I MAY JUST KIND OF REVERSE HERE FOR A MOMENT TO SHOW YOU THAT KIND OF NOTCH OUT OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, THAT IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING AND YOU SEE THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE ADDED TO THE DISTRICT.

SO THE REQUEST DOES A NUMBER OF THINGS.

IT'S A RATHER COMPLEX, UH, ZONING REQUEST.

IT'S EXPANDING THE ZONING DISTRICT BY OVER FOUR ACRES, INCORPORATING WHAT'S CURRENTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING, UM, ADJACENT A A PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY, UM, MODIFYING THE MIX OF USES ON THE PROPERTY.

IT WOULD THEN EXCEED THE STANDARD MINIMUM ALLOWANCE WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICT BY ADDING MORE RESIDENTIAL THAN WOULD TYPICALLY BE ALLOWED IN URBAN MIXED USE ZONING.

UM, IT ALSO REDUCES THE REQUIREMENT FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS OVERALL, UM, KIND OF MODIFYING THE INTENSITY OF THE DISTRICT, PROVIDING ALTERNATE EXPRESSWAY, CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT MITIGATION STANDARDS, AND THEN MODIFYING SOME OTHER STANDARDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT I'LL DETAIL.

SO YOU CAN SEE THIS PROPERTY STARTED OUT IN 2014 WITH A VERY INTENSE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT CONTINUED THROUGH 2017 WITH A LOT OF OFFICE USES.

UM, THE MARKET CHANGED AND YOU SEE THEN THAT BEING REFLECTED THROUGH REQUEST IN 2021 AND NOW, UM, THE 2025 ZONING REQUEST WITH THE AMOUNT OF OFFICE BEING REQUESTED THAT REALLY REFLECTING THE OFFICE MARKET, UH, THAT IS, UH, BEING FELT IN THIS LOCATION.

SO THE ANTICIPATED GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OFFICE DROPPING SUBSTANTIALLY WITH TIME AND RESIDENTIAL USES INCREASING OVER TIME WITH HOTEL.

ALSO, UM, DIMINISHING AND RETAIL REMAINING RELATIVELY FLAT.

SO THE DISTRICT EXPANSION, THIS IS A CLOSEUP VIEW OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE BASICALLY TAKING WHAT'S A LARGELY, UH, UNUTILIZED OR SUBSTANTIALLY UNDERUTILIZED PARKING LOT FOR THIS PROPERTY AND, UH, CARVING IT OUT TO CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, TOWN HOMES.

SO, UM, THAT WOULD BE ADDED TO THE DISTRICT.

SO WITH REGARD TO MODIFYING THE USES, YOU CAN SEE THESE TWO COMPARISONS.

THE ZONING CURRENTLY HAS CERTAIN SET STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY, SECONDARY, AND TERTIARY USES WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

AND THIS SORT OF GETS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF WHAT'S NORMAL WITHIN A UMU DISTRICT.

THEY ARE REQUESTING, AND THE PNZ HAS RECOMMENDED, UM, THESE STANDARDS.

SO TO ALLOW PRIMARY USES TO GO UP TO 88% FOR RESIDENTIAL RETAIL TO RETAIN ITS TERTIARY USE STATUS AT, UH, ABOUT UNDER 20%.

AND THEN OFFICE AND PROFESSIONAL USES TO MOVE FROM A SECONDARY STATUS TO A TERTIARY STATUS.

AND THEN YOU SEE HOW THAT'S REFLECTED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, WITH A GROSS FLOOR AREA, UM, AND HOW THOSE ARE SHOWN AS PERCENTAGES.

[00:35:01]

AND THEN ELIMINATION OF HOTEL USE ON THE SITE.

SO THE, THIS ITEM WAS TABLED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

IT WAS PRESENTED IN JANUARY.

UM, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MADE SOME REQUESTS OF THE APPLICANT.

UM, THEY, UH, TABLED IN JANUARY AND CAME BACK, WORKED WITH STAFF, PRESENTED SOME CHANGES TO THE REQUEST, AND ONE OF THOSE CHANGES.

AND ONE OF THE MORE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WAS THE ADDITION OF A PHASING REQUEST.

SO THAT PHASING REQUEST INCLUDED A REQUIREMENT TO ADD NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AS A REQUIREMENT TO BUILD THE ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY UNITS.

SO THAT PHASING INCLUDES 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF, OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE BLUE AREAS.

THOSE BLOCKS, UM, IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCIES FOR BOTH BLOCK F AND BLOCK A TWO THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN SORT OF THE PINK PURPLE COLOR OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT IS ANOTHER ADDITIONAL USE THAT THIS IS A CHANGE REQUESTED ON.

THIS WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED IN THESE TWO BLOCKS, A FIVE AND C, WHICH ARE SORT OF CENTRALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH PART OF THE PROJECT.

AND THIS WOULD ALLOW GAME COURTS, TABLE GAMES, MINIATURE GOLF AND SIMILAR TYPE LEISURE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE INTENDED TO ACTIVATE THESE RETAIL AND RESTAURANT SPACES ALONG THE OPEN SPACES AND BLOCK Y.

UM, THEY WILL STILL BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE CITY'S NOISE AND LIGHTING ORDINANCES AND INTENDED TO BE COMPLIMENTARY TO THE DISTRICT, ESPECIALLY ACTIVATING THE, UH, SPACE ALONG DALHART, WHICH IS INTENDED TO BE THE ACTIVITY CENTER OF THE DISTRICT.

SO ALL THE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS ARE WITHIN THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT.

THIS WAS SUBMITTED UNDER THE ORDINANCE PRIOR TO SB EIGHT 40, SO IS JUDGED, UM, LARGELY IN THAT CAPACITY AND WAS SUBMITTED UNDER THAT.

SO EACH OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS, UH, AGAIN, IS UNDER THE ECA, UM, OR THE EXPRESSWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT.

SO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONSIDERED MITIGATION FOR EACH OF THESE BLOCKS, GIVEN THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THESE BLOCKS.

SO THEY WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE BLOCK CA HUNDRED FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS, AT LEAST TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT.

UM, P AND Z DID REQUEST OR DID SUPPORT EITHER A HUNDRED FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER IN BLOCK M OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

ONE STORY IN HEIGHT ON BLOCK M AS ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION STANDARDS IN THIS AREA.

UH, WITH REGARD TO BLOCK F, UM, THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE A HUNDRED FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

AND PNZ SUPPORTED EITHER EXISTING OPEN, THE EXISTING OPEN SPACE WITH A MATURE TREE LINE AND A MINOR STREET.

SO THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO THINGS AS THE ALTERNATIVE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS.

THEN IN A TWO, WHICH IS, UH, THE ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY BLOCK, UM, THEY REQUIRED THE EAST, THE CECA, UM, AREA REQUIRES THAT MULTIFAMILY UNITS BE BUFFERED BY A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE EDGE FROM A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE.

BUT GIVEN THE DESIGN OF THE STREET, THAT WAS IMPRACTICAL BECAUSE OF THE STREET FRONTAGE OF THE BUILDING.

SO P AND Z SUPPORTED WAVING THIS REQUEST AS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE URBAN FORM.

SO OTHER ECA STANDARDS, UM, RELATE TO VENTILATION.

AND THE E THE CECA PRIOR TO EIGHT 40 REQUIRES THAT ALL AIR INTAKE FOR MULTIFAMILY BE LOCATED ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT'S OPPOSITE OF A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE, SUCH AS, UH, THE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE.

SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE AIR INTAKES BE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INCLUDED A RECOMMENDATION TO ADD THE INTERIOR COURTYARDS.

UM, SO EITHER THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING OR THE INTERIOR COURTYARDS WERE, UH, RECOMMENDED AS ALLOWABLE BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

OTHER MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDE LOT COVERAGE, DECREASED BUILDING HEIGHTS BEING DECREASED, AND A REDUCTION IN FREESTANDING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SIZES.

TYPICALLY, THOSE ARE REQUIRED TO BE 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND THOSE WERE REDUCED IN THE DISTRICT, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS WELL.

[00:40:01]

AS YOU'RE AWARE, THERE HAVE BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN STATE LAW.

AND SO JUST FOR DISCLOSURE, UH, THE APPLICANT COULD SUBMIT A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SITE WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A ZONING CHANGE AND IT WOULD BE REVIEWED UNDER THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REGARDING CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE, THIS IS IN THE URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER, ALSO OPEN SPACE THAT'S EXISTING IS ACKNOWLEDGED ON THE SITE.

THIS DOES INCREASE THE OVERALL HOUSING ACREAGE ABOVE THE RECOMMENDED RANGE.

THE MULTIFAMILY TYPES ABOVE THE MECCA, RECOMMENDED RANGE RETAIL TYPES AND OFFICE.

UH, IT, SO THOSE ARE INCREASED.

IT INCREASES SINGLE FAMILY TYPES WITHIN THE RECOMMENDED RANGE AND DECREASES THE OFFICE TYPES BELOW THE RECOMMENDED RANGE.

SO IT LARGELY MEETS THE DESIRABLE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DECREASE IN INTENSITY.

AND THEN, UM, IT MEETS THE DESCRIPTION AND PRIORITIES IN PART AND THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS FALLS OUTSIDE THE MIX OF USES AND A LOT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICIES.

BUT DOES MEET OUR TRANSPORTATION AND PARKS PLANNING MAPS AS WELL AS FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY.

SO WITH THAT, IT DOES REQUIRE UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS, THE FINDINGS FORMS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

WERE INADVERTENTLY LEFT OUT OF THE COUNCIL PACKET, BUT ARE POSTED IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKET FOR TOMORROW NIGHT'S MEETING.

SO YOU CAN FIND THOSE PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN SEEING THEM ONLINE.

I ALSO HAVE A COPY HERE IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED IN SEEING THOSE OR DISCUSSING THOSE, I CAN, I'M GLAD TO SHOW THEM ON THE OVERHEAD CAMERA.

THEY'RE PART OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST PNZ MEETING AND ARE AGAIN POSTED FOR TOMORROW'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

SO RESPONSES WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC.

ON THIS ITEM WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WE HAVE SIGNED LETTERS OF SUPPORT, 25 LETTERS OF SUPPORT, THREE NEUTRAL LETTERS AND TWO IN OPPOSITION.

AND YOU SEE THE ACREAGE TOTALS THERE.

WE HAVE FOUR LETTERS IN SUPPORT FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.

SO IN TOTAL THE RESPONSES CITYWIDE 34 LETTERS OR RES ONLINE RESPONSES IN SUPPORT THREE NEUTRAL AND 14 IN OPPOSITION FOR 51 TOTAL RESPONSES.

WE HAVE TWO OTHER LETTERS AND EMAILS.

SO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL BY A VOTE OF SIX TO ZERO, INCLUDING CHANGES TO PHASING AND AIR INTAKE REQUIREMENTS, UM, THAT ARE SUMMARIZED BELOW.

UM, AND SO THE ZONING STANDARD, UM, WOULD REQUIRE THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO HAVE AIR INTAKE STANDARDS.

THE 1200 FEET IS UNDER THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.

THE PRE, UM, SEPTEMBER 1ST ORDINANCE DOES NOT HAVE A DISTANCE REQUIREMENT, SO IT JUST REQUIRES, UM, AIR INTAKES TO BE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, UM, AND I BELIEVE YOU'LL SEE THIS IN THEIR SLIDE DECK, IS TO ALLOW NORTHEAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE BUILDING WITH INTERIOR COURTYARDS.

THEY DID, THEIR MOTION WAS FOR 500 FEET.

UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS, UM, NOT THEIR INTENT.

THE CHAIR WROTE A LETTER TO THE MAYOR THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL.

AND WE BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE 1200 FEET, NOT TO MODIFY THE STANDARD THAT'S IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE OR TO REDUCE, UM, THE INTENT.

AND I BELIEVE I'LL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES, BUT THEY ALSO ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT BASED ON THEIR PROPOSAL CONSISTENT AT 1200 FEET.

SO WITH THAT, I AM CONCLUDING MY PRESENTATION.

THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND HAS A PRESENTATION AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THIS ITEM.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COUNCIL MEMBER CARE? YES.

UM, THANK YOU CHRISTINA.

I DO HAVE A, A FEW QUESTIONS.

UM, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MY MY HEAD AROUND EXACTLY WHAT THE REQUEST IS.

AND SO FOR THIS AREA, WE'RE, WE'RE DOING A FEW THINGS.

WE'RE ADDING TO RESIDENTIAL ABOVE WHAT HAD BEEN, UH, ZONED BEFORE FOR UMU.

WE'RE REDUCING THE,

[00:45:01]

UM, OFFICE SPACE.

WE ARE ADDING, WE'RE EXTENDING THE DISTANCE OF IT.

I GUESS IT'S THE ENCLOSURE.

IT'S, IT'S IS THE ENCLOSURE IS IS ADDING MORE SPACE ON THERE, IS THAT CORRECT? LIKE WHERE THE TOWN HOMES ARE AND WHERE THE THE BLOCKED OFF AREA IS? THAT'S CORRECT.

THEY'RE ADDING LAND INTO THE DISTRICT.

THAT'S CURRENTLY A, THE PARKING LOT YOU SAW FOR THAT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.

UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER UMU AREAS THAT HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, UM, ADJACENCY? UM, I'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

UH, THERE PROBABLY IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING, ALTHOUGH IT COULD BE CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL.

UM, AT LEAST IN THE VICINITY OF BEACON SQUARE, THE UMU DISTRICT THERE IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

UH, I DUNNO WHETHER IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT, BUT IT IS IN THE VICINITY.

UM, WHEN YOU MENTIONED, UH, AN URBAN ACTIVITY ZONE, UH, AND THAT IN THIS CASE THEY'RE ADDING RES OR EXCEEDING THEIR NORMAL AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL, THIS URBAN ACTIVITY ZONE, WHERE IS THAT? IS THAT JUST THAT AREA WHERE WE'RE LOOKING, WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO REZONE OR IS IT EXTEND BEYOND THAT? IT'S JUST THIS ZONING DISTRICT.

SO THE AREA THAT'S DESIGNATED AS UMU ONE, SO THE AREA THAT'S ESSENTIALLY BOUNDED, UM, BY THE HATCH, THE HATCHED AREA THAT YOU SEE HERE, THE ZONING DISTRICT ITSELF IS THE AREA THAT WE'RE JUDGING UNDER THOSE STANDARDS OF, OF THE ZONING BOUNDARIES.

AND THAT'S FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT'S IN THE ZONING DISTRICT ITSELF.

IT HAS PRIMARY, SECONDARY, AND TERTIARY USES, AND EACH OF THOSE FALL INTO A CATEGORY OF 40 TO 70% FOR PRIMARY USE.

UM, 40 TO 20% FOR A SECONDARY USE AND 20% OR LESS FOR A, UM, TERTIARY USE.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER UMU AREAS THAT HAVE NO SECONDARY BUT ONLY TWO, BUT TWO TERTIARY? OH, YOU'RE REALLY TESTING MY KNOWLEDGE OF DESIGN.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS A MEMORY TEST.

UM, WE HAVE TWO OTHER UMU ZONING DISTRICTS.

UH, THE COL CREEK MALL IS ONE AND BEACON SQUARE.

AND BOY WOULD I, UM, I WOULD, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE TO FIND REALLY, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S ANY PRECEDENT.

SIMPLY UNDERSTAND.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A PRECEDENT, BUT I WOULD WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK BEFORE I SAID DEFINITIVELY PERHAPS.

UM, MOLLY CORELLE, UH, PLANNER, LET'S SEE.

LEAD PLANNER HERE WITH ME.

COULD WE COULD LOOK THAT UP AND GET BACK TO YOU AFTER THE PRESENTATION? OKAY.

UH, THE OUTDOOR, UH, COMMERCIAL, DO WE KNOW WHAT THAT USE IS OR IS IT SOMETHING I SHOULD ASK THE APPLICANT? UM, YES.

I BELIEVE THEY HAVE SOME USERS THAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING WITH AND THAT, UH, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THAT.

WOULD YOU MIND SHARING THE FINDINGS WITH US AND HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS? ABSOLUTELY.

BE GLAD TO DO THAT.

SO START, YOU CAN SEE THAT.

THAT IS THE CHAIRS.

I'LL LEAVE THAT UP THERE FOR A MOMENT.

YOU KNOW WHAT CHRISTINA, JUST IF YOU WANT, JUST BRING 'EM OVER HERE AND JUST, WE'LL JUST PASS 'EM DOWN.

IT THEY'RE TOO SMALL.

DO YOU WANT, UH, IF THE PUBLIC, HUH? WE WANT THE CHAIR COMMENTED THAT IT PROVIDES A MIX OF HOUSING, THE HOUSING TRENDS ANALYSIS AND CONTINUES THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUCCESSFUL PROJECT IN A KEY CORRIDOR.

MAYBE THAT'S FASTER.

GO AHEAD IF, UNLESS YOU NO, YOU'RE FINE.

WE HAVE FOUND A COMPROMISE THAT WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT TO PROCEED.

UM, COMMISSIONER TONG, UH, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

THE USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE BIGGER ENVIRONMENT OF THE SURROUNDINGS.

IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER BUILDER IS A REPUTABLE LONG-TERM PARTNER OF THE CITY OF PLANO.

THE PRODUCTS THAT THEY HAVE BUILT, HAVE DEVELOPED, UH, HAVE HELPED THE COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORS.

I BELIEVE THEY WOULD DO THE SAME THING WITH THIS ONE, SUPPORTED BY FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY, FUTURE LAND USE MAPS AND DASHBOARD CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND DASHBOARDS, DESCRIPTION AND POLICIES.

IF WE DIDN'T APPROVE THIS PLAN, THE APPLICANT COULD USE THE NEW STATE LAW AND BUILD MORE APARTMENT BUILDINGS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH P AND Z.

I BELIEVE THIS CURRENT PLAN IS THE BEST WE CAN GET FOR THIS LAND.

UM, COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER SAID SP EIGHT 40 OVERRIDES THE COMP PLAN AND THIS IS THE BEST COMPROMISE.

STATED THAT REPEATEDLY.

UH, COMMISSIONER BRONSKI, ALTHOUGH I HAVE CONCERNS THAT THE AIR FILTRATION THAT THE DEVELOPER'S REQUESTING FOR A TWO IS AS ROBUST AND PROTECTIVE OF OUR CITIZENS CURRENT AND FUTURE, UM, SHOULD EXPECT.

I BELIEVE

[00:50:01]

I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HOLD THE DEVELOPER TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF BREATHABLE AIR FOR FUTURE PARENTS AND CHILDREN'S THAT WILL LIVE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.

FINALLY, ALTHOUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT FURTHER DEGRADES FROM THE PURPOSES OF THE UMU DISTRICT, IT'S MY HOPE THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL NOT COME BACK AGAIN AND BE FAITHFUL TO THE COMMITMENT THEY HAVE MADE WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS.

FOR MANY FUTURE GENERATIONS.

MICHAEL BRUNO VOTED IN OPPOSITION.

UM, THE APPLICATION DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA OF AN URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT.

THE PROPOSED MIX OF USES DOES NOT COMPLY WITH UMU DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS.

THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT PROVIDE A COMPACT, WALKABLE AREA FOR LIVING, WORKING, ENTERTAINING, RECREATING, SHOPPING, EATING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, OR ATTRACTION OF LARGE CORPORATIONS.

IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF AN URBAN MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE MIX OF USES, DESCRIPTION AND PRIORITIES OF FUTURE LAND USE, MAP AND DASHBOARDS, REDEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY ACTIONS ONE, FIVE AND EIGHT.

AND THEN FINALLY, UM, TWO MORE.

COMMISSIONER ALI STATED WITH THE STIPULATION PUT ON THE ZONING REQUEST.

I BELIEVE IT WILL KEEP THE URBAN MIX FEEL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND RESPECT THE CHARACTER AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.

AND, UH, COMMISSIONER BENDER STATES THAT THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

BECAUSE OF SB EIGHT 40, THE REQUEST IS SUBSTANTIALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND GENERAL PUBLIC BECAUSE SB EIGHT 40 WOULD ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO COME BACK AND MAKE AN APPLICATION AND BUILD DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO INFLUENCE.

AND SB EIGHT 40 WILL CONTINUE.

UH, THIS WILL CONTINUE TO REVITALIZE THE AREA UNDER THE MODIFIED UU ONE THAT WAS CREATED IN 2014.

THAT'S IT.

GOOD.

THEY'RE MODIFYING THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

UH, AND THE APPLICANT CHOOSES WHEN, WHEN WE GO INTO PLANNING AND ZONING AND COMING BEFORE US, THEY CHOOSE WHAT, UM, ZONING TYPE, IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S UP TO THEM TO DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO USE UMU OR CHOOSE ANOTHER ZONING, UH, TYPE.

UH, THE ZONING IS SET WITH THE PROPERTY AND CAN ONLY BE CHANGED, UH, BY ORDINANCE APPROVED BY THIS BODY.

AND, UH, THIS AT HERITAGE CREEKSIDE, THERE'S ALREADY, UH, RETAIL THERE, THERE'S RESTAURANTS THERE, THERE'S APARTMENTS THERE.

UH, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A, AN EXTENSION OF ALL THAT WORK UP, UP, UH, TO THE, TO THE WEST.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? RIGHT.

THE UMU DISTRICT IS TIED TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS MODIFYING WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THE, UH, AVAILABLE LAND THAT IS UNDEVELOPED.

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS.

THE FIRST ARE, UM, THE APPLICANT AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES.

I'M TIM HARRIS WITH ROSEWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY, UM, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

UM, TONIGHT I'M JOINED BY, UH, BILL STROM OF JACKSON WALKER AND RICK PERDUE, OUR PRESIDENT OF ROSEWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY.

UH, TONIGHT I'M PRESENTING ON A DI DYNAMIC MIXED USE OPPORTUNITY FOR HERITAGE CREEKSIDE.

THIS PROPOSAL IS A WONDERFUL PLACEMAKING OPPORTUNITY FOR DESTINATION DRIVEN ENTERTAINMENT RESTAURANT AND RETAIL CONCEPTS.

I BELIEVE Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR AFTER, UH, THE STAFF'S, UM, REVIEW OF THIS, BUT WE'RE LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 75 AND GEORGE BUSH JUST SOUTH OF PLANO PARKWAY AND BETWEEN ALMA AND CUSTER ROAD.

UM, THIS LANE HAS BEEN OWNED, UM, BY ROSEWOOD SINCE THE 1970S.

AND, UM, GO, UM, ROSEWOOD WAS ACTUALLY FOUNDED IN THE 1970S.

UM, WE'RE BEST KNOWN FOR THE CRESCENT DEVELOPMENT AND THE ROSEWOOD HOTELS.

UM, AND THIS LAND HAS BEEN OWNED BY THE FAMILY THAT OWNS ROSEWOOD SINCE THAT TIME.

UM, ROSEWOOD ACTUALLY JOINED THE PLANO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN 1983 AND HAS CONTINUED TO, UH, TRANSFORM THIS EAST SIDE OF PLANO SINCE THAT TIME.

UM, IN 2014, ROSEWOOD WORKED ON, UH, WITH THE CITY OF PLANO TO REZONE THE 156 ACRE PROPERTY INTO THE FIRST UMU ZONING.

HENCE THE NAME UMU ONE.

UM, THIS WAS FALLING ON THE HEELS OF RICHARDSON'S NEARBY STATE FARM CAMPUS.

UH, IN 2021, WE CAME BACK AND AMENDED THE UMUU ONE TO RIGHT SIZE THE OFFICE DENSITY, UM, IN THE SURROUNDING RETAIL AND AD FOR SALE TOWN HOMES.

UM, FROM EAST TO WEST, APPROXIMATELY 70%

[00:55:01]

OF HERITAGE CREEKSIDE LAND HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.

UM, THE DRIVER FOR THIS AMENDMENT IS THAT THE OFFICE DEMAND HAS NOT MATERIALIZED.

UM, ROSEWOOD HAS MARKETED THIS LAND FOR OFFICE FOR OVER 12 YEARS, UM, WITH TOP OFFICE BROKERS AND DEVELOPERS WITHOUT BARELY ANY TRACTION AT ALL.

UM, NO SIGNIFICANT NEW OFFICE HAS ACTUALLY BEEN BUILT DOWN THIS PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH CORRIDOR SINCE KD C'S CITY LINE DEVELOPMENT, UM, AND KDC RECENTLY.

UM, REZONED THEIR MASTER PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL PHASES OF RESIDENTIAL DUE TO THE LACK OF OFFICE INTERESTS AND ALSO THE NEED TO SUPPORT ALL THE EXISTING RETAIL.

UM, THE PROBLEMS IN THE OFFICE MARKET ARE OBVIOUSLY EXACERBATED BY COVID-19 AND ALL THE NEW SUPPLY.

UM, IT'S VERY TOUGH FOR US TO COMPETE WITH SO MUCH AVAILABLE OFFICE SPACE, BOTH NEARBY AND OTHER PARTS OF PLANO.

I THINK THIS WAS, UM, REALLY WELL, UH, CLARIFIED, UM, BY CHRISTINA.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE SUBMITTED OUR, WE SUBMITTED OUR AMENDMENT IN MARCH OF 24, 20 25, ACTUALLY 364 DAYS AGO.

UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SAME PLAN THAT WE SUBMITTED IN LARGE PART, UM, BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PLAN FOR OVER A YEAR.

UM, SB EIGHT 40 CAME INTO LAW IN JUNE AND, UM, WENT INTO EFFECT IN SEPTEMBER.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, UM, STAFF ASKED, CAME BACK AND ASKED US WHETHER WE WANTED TO KEEP OUR PROPOSAL PRESB EIGHT 40 AND UNDER THE ORDINANCES BEFORE SB EIGHT 40 OR TO GO INTO A POST SB EIGHT 40 ZONING ORDINANCE.

UM, WE'VE A VIEW, I'VE ALWAYS VIEWED HERITAGE CREEKSIDE AS A 50 YEAR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF PLANO.

AND WE DECIDED, UM, TO REQUEST THESE, UH, CHANGES TO YOU ALL, UM, THE RIGHT WAY AND KEEP IT UNDERNEATH THE, UM, THE PRIOR ZONING ORDINANCES.

THIS IS A REVIEW OF THE APPROVED AND PROPOSED PLANS.

UM, THIS IS A CLOSEUP OF THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE HERITAGE CREEK SIDE, WHICH IS THE UNDEVELOPED PORTION, UM, WHICH WE WERE ASKING TO AMEND.

THE TOP IS CURRENTLY APPROVED AND THE BOTTOM IS PROPOSED, UM, STARTING ON THE RIGHT AND WORKING LEFT.

UM, THE BLOCK Z IS THE PORTION THAT WE'RE ASKING TO BE ADDED INTO THE UMU AND THIS IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT WE'RE ASKING TO BE TURNED INTO TOWNHOME HOMELAND BLOCKS L AND M ARE FOR LARGE PART, KEEPING THEIR EXISTING USE.

WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR SOME CHANGES SO THAT WE CAN, UM, WORK THROUGH A LIVE DEAL THAT WE HAVE ON THAT OFFICE PORTION RIGHT THERE.

BLOCK F IS A NEW, UM, MULTIFAMILY THAT WE'RE REQUESTING.

WE'RE REMOVING HOTEL AND OFFICE ON THAT BLOCK.

WE ARE INCREASING, UH, THE USABLE OPEN SPACE IN BLOCK Y TO THE LEFT OF THAT.

AND THEN TO THE LEFT OF THAT IS BLOCK C, A FIVE AND A FOUR, UH, WHICH IS ADDING MORE DYNAMIC RETAIL AND ENTERTAINMENT.

UM, WHAT WAS HERE BEFORE, AS YOU CAN SEE WAS OFFICE, HOTEL AND RETAIL AND PARKING GARAGES.

WE'VE RETAINED THE OFFICE ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.

WE BELIEVE IF WE CAN EXECUTE ON, UM, THIS RETAIL PLAY THAT WE CAN POTENTIALLY ATTRACT AN AN OFFICE USER.

AND THEN AT THE TOP LEFT, WE'RE ADDING A RESIDENTIAL USE THAT IS, UM, FALLS INTO THE FABRIC OF THE REST OF THE USES ALONG THE NORTHERN SIDE AGAINST PLANO PARKWAY, AS WELL AS ADDING RETAIL IN THAT CORNER.

UH, TO ACTIVATE IT, THIS IS A SHOW SHOWING OF KINDA THE MASSING.

YOU CAN REALLY SEE THE OPEN SPACE IN THE RETAIL, HOW THAT CHANGES THE LANDSCAPE AND THE DESIRABILITY HERE.

UM, GOING FROM THE FAR RIGHT WHERE BLOCK Z WAS, THIS WAS, WE'VE SOUGHT TO ACQUIRE THIS, WE CALL THIS THE DONUT HOLE, THE MISSING PIECE.

AND WE'VE TRIED TO INCORPORATE THIS WITHIN HERITAGE CREEKSIDE SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING.

UM, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND UM, THE CELLAR WAS ACTUALLY PURSUING A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL SAIL, SO THINK BOATS AND CONTAINERS AND OUTDOOR STORAGE.

UM, WE WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO, UM, GET THIS PROPERTY ON OUR CONTRACT AND WE WERE HOPEFUL TO REZONE IT BEFORE OUR CONTRACT TIME CAME UP.

BUT THIS ZONING CASE HAS TAKEN SO LONG WE JUST DECIDED TO, TO BUY IT ANYWAYS, HOPE, HOPING THAT WE'D GET THIS ZONING.

UM, 'CAUSE WE REALLY WANTED TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, AND WE, WE REALLY THOUGHT DEVELOPING FIRST SALE TOWN HOMES ON THIS BLOCK WOULD REALLY CREATE A GREAT BLEND AND SHIELD AROUND THE EXISTING PROPERTY.

UM, WE'LL, WE'LL LIKELY LOSE MONEY ON THIS BLOCK, BUT WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, BLOCKS L AND M, THIS IS JUST A LIVE ACTIVE DEAL.

WE ASKED FOR A FEW CHANGES ON LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING.

UM, THE LAND USE IS COMPLIANT WITH THE ZONING, BUT IT'S A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION PROPOSED BY SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.

WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO SELL THIS PROPERTY FOR 12 YEARS AND, UM, WE FINALLY FOUND A, FOUND A PURCHASER, UM, 18 MONTHS AGO.

WE CANVASED ALL THE REAL ESTATE SECTORS, THE EXPERTS IN THE WHO'S, WHO'S, UM, AN OFFICE, HOTEL, RETAIL, MULTIFAMILY.

AND WE, WE REALLY ASKED FOR THEIR INPUT TO HELP US RE REDEVELOP THE REST OF THE REMAINING PARTIALS.

UM, THERE WAS AN EXTREME LACK OF INTEREST FROM RETAIL, HOTEL, AND OFFICE USE IN

[01:00:01]

THIS BLOCK F ZONE.

WE HAVE A REALLY INTENSE, UM, TREE LINE AND CREEK KIND OF RUNNING THROUGH THERE.

AND IT'S ACTUALLY WHAT MAKES HERITAGE CREEKSIDE SPECIAL IS THE NATURAL AMENITY.

BUT IT'S ACTUALLY, UM, DUE TO THE LACK OF VISIBILITY, A VERY HARD PARCEL TO SELL.

UM, SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO A MULTIFAMILY THERE.

ROSEWOOD HAS BUILT TWO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES OUT AT HERITAGE CREEKSIDE, THE LUDLOW ONE, THE BEST MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY OF THE YEAR IN THE DALLAS BUSINESS JOURNAL.

AND THE BUCKLEY IS THE SECOND ONE, WHICH JUST OPENED THIS MONTH.

AND, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY A FINALIST FOR THAT SAME AWARD FOR BEST MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY, UM, BLOCKS F AND A TWO WHERE WE'RE SHOWING MULTIFAMILY.

WE'D LIKE TO CONTINUE THAT TREND AND BUILD SOME OF THE BEST MULTIFAMILY IN THE CITY.

HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF OUR TREE LINE AND BLOCK A FIVE, A FOUR AND C, WE GOT A SIGNIFICANT, UM, AMOUNT OF INTEREST AND OPPORTUNITY FOR PLACEMAKING.

UM, EVERYONE LOVED THE ACCESS AND THE VISIBILITY, AND THIS IS REALLY WHERE THE RETAIL GROUPS THOUGHT THAT WE HAD SOMETHING SPECIAL FOR RETAIL HERE.

UM, WE'RE REALLY PIGGYBACKING OFF OF THE SUCCESS OF THE ROSEWOOD RETAIL THAT'S AT THE CORNER OF ALMA IN PLANO PARKWAY, WHERE RODEO GOAT FLYING FISH, TACO JOINT, ORANGETHEORY, CROSSROADS DINER ARE ALL THERE.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING BEST IN CLASS RESTAURANTS, ENTERTAINMENTS, UM, THAT WOULD BE STUFF LIKE PUTT PUTT AND FAMILY FRIENDLY OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES THAT PEOPLE COULD DO TOGETHER.

UM, ICE HOUSES, BEER GARDENS, BREWERIES, UM, BUT ALL TO ACTIVATE THAT REALLY GREAT GREEN SPACE THAT WE DO HAVE.

WE DID MAINTAIN A, A BLOCK FOR, FOR OFFICE, THE FEEDBACK FROM THE OFFICE GROUPS WAS WE NEEDED SOMETHING TO ATTRACT PEOPLE TO, TO HERITAGE CREEKSIDE.

AND THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE RETAIL COMES IN.

AND WE THINK IF, IF WE CAN GET, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THIS TO ALL COME TOGETHER, THEN THIS PROMINENT NORTHEAST, UM, CORNER OF CUSTER ONE 90 COULD ACTUALLY ATTRACT SOMETHING LIKE A MASS TIMBER OFFICE BUILDING.

UM, BUT WE NEED THE NEARBY AMENITIES TO DO THAT.

UM, LASTLY, I, YOU KNOW, I, OUR OPEN SPACE IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAD IN OUR PRIOR PLAN.

WE WORKED REALLY HARD.

UM, AS YOU CAN TELL, WE WERE ACTUALLY PUTTING SOME GARAGES IN A PRIOR VERSION UP AGAINST SOME OF OUR BEST OPEN SPACE.

AND NOW WE'RE CONNECTING IT ALL.

WE'RE ACTIVATING IT, WE'RE PUTTING PLAZA AREAS.

WE'RE ACTUALLY CREATING A STRETCH FROM, FROM RIGHT TO LEFT TO CONNECT ALL THE ACTIVATED SPACE TOGETHER AND ACTUALLY CREATE MORE OF A DISTRICT.

UM, A FEW OTHER CONSIDERATIONS I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN 12 YEARS THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY REQUESTED ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY AFTER TRYING FOR OFFICE THROUGHOUT THAT ENTIRE TIMEFRAME.

UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT FOR OUR PROPOSAL IS OUTSTANDING.

IT'S, UM, FOR THOSE THAT LIVE IN AND AROUND HERITAGE CREEK SITE, IT'S 28 IN FAVOR VERSUS TWO OPPOSED.

UM, THIS IS AN IMMENSE OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE THE CITY TAX REVENUE FROM AG LAND TO DEVELOPMENT.

AND OUR HOTEL INTEREST HAS BEEN REALLY LIMITED SERVICE HOTELS.

WE, WE INITIALLY SHOWED HOTELS ON OUR PLAN BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR OFFICE USERS.

WITHOUT THE OFFICE, THE ONLY HOTEL INTEREST WE'VE RECEIVED IS REALLY LIMITED SERVICE HOTELS, WHICH WOULD NOT BE INDICATIVE OF THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE CREATED OUT THERE.

SO IN SUMMARY, UM, WE THINK THIS IS A GREAT PLACE MAKING OPPORTUNITY FOR DESTINATION DRIVEN ENTERTAINMENT, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT CONCEPTS.

IT'S AN ACTIONABLE PLAN BASED ON ALL SORTS OF EXPERTS WITHIN THE DFW MARKET.

UM, AND THEIR FEEDBACK.

IT'S A MORE WALKABLE AND COHESIVE MIXED USE DESIGN.

IT'S BETTER OPEN SPACES WE'RE BRINGING IN FOR SALE TOWN HOMES IN LIEU OF DOING AN OUTDOOR STORAGE OPPORTUNITY.

UH, IT RETAINS THE OFFICE BUILDING ON A HARD CORNER, UH, ALIGNS WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PROVIDING A MIX OF USES.

IT DECREASES TRACK TRAFFIC AND INFRASTRUCTURE BURDEN.

IT STIMULATES LOCAL ECONOMY, UH, ECONOMIC JOB GROWTH, AND IT'S REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY TO DRIVE NEW REDEVELOPMENT IN THIS ENTIRE CORRIDOR OF PLANO.

UM, CHRISTINA DID A REALLY AWESOME DUCK JOB OF EXPLAINING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT PNZ RECOMMENDED AND WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO FOR THE PHASING.

UM, THE SHORTENED VERSION OF IT IS, UM, THAT PNZ WANTED US TO DO, UM, RETAIL AND JUST BLOCK CA FIVE AND A FOUR.

UM, WE WENT TO PNZ THE FIRST TIME.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A PHASING PLAN.

THEY ASKED US TO GO BACK.

WE WENT BACK WITH STAFF.

WE ACTUALLY ACCEPTED, UM, WE MET THE NEXT DAY, I THINK IT WAS WITH STAFF.

WE ACTUALLY ACCEPTED WHAT THEY PLANNED AND PROPOSED AND, UM, WHICH IS THAT WE WOULD GET CREDIT FOR ANY COMMERCIAL USE THAT WAS DONE ON THE REMAINING UNDEVELOPED LAND.

AND SO THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.

AND, AND BILL IS GONNA CLARIFY THAT RECOMMENDATION.

UM, THE REASON WE DON'T WANT TO DO BLOCK CA FIVE AND A FOUR FIRST, OR AS A REQUIREMENT TO DO THE MULTIFAMILY, IS THAT WE REALLY WANNA DO BUILD

[01:05:01]

TO SUIT AND CUSTOM RETAIL.

UM, WE WANT TO MAINTAIN FLEXIBILITY TO MEET THE DEMAND.

AND IF WE WENT IN WITH SPEC RETAIL SPACES THAT WE HAD TO FIT LATER, THAT WOULD BE A MUCH HARDER PROPOSAL.

UM, THE OUTSIDE AIR, REALLY, THIS IS A VERY WELL INTENTIONED, UM, ORDINANCE.

UM, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING IN PRESB EIGHT 40, WE, WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS.

IF, IF IT WAS POST SB EIGHT 40, WE WOULDN'T BE, UM, WHAT REALLY THE BIGGEST CHANGES WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING IN OUTSIDE AIR FROM THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE BUILDING, UM, AS WELL AS THE CORRIDOR AND THE NORTHERN SIDES.

UM, IF WE WERE LEFT WITH JUST VENTING OR PULLING IN AIR FROM THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE BUILDING, THE DUCK RUNS FOR OUTSIDE AIR WOULD GET TOO LONG, OVER 200 FEET AND THEY WOULD MAKE IT BASICALLY OBSOLETE.

WE WOULDN'T BE ACTUALLY PULLING IN OUTSIDE AIR.

SO I THINK THIS IS, UM, REALLY WE'RE PROVIDING BETTER OUTSIDE AIR FOR OUR RESIDENTS IF WE'RE PULLING FROM BOTH THE SIDES AND THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT THE FRONT.

UM, AND WE'LL, WE WILL HAVE A MOTION AS WELL, UM, THAT WILL CLARIFY THAT.

SO WITH THAT, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

I THINK BILL'S GONNA DO THAT CLARIFICATION FOR YOU GUYS HAND TO MR. CARE AND THEN TO SECRETARY.

MR. MAYOR COUNCILMAN IS BILL DOST FROM 2323 ROSS AVENUE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

UH, I JUST WANTED TO COVER TWO POINTS, AND THOSE ARE THE TWO POINTS TIM MENTIONED AND THEY WERE ESSENTIALLY IN CHRISTINA'S PRESENTATION AS WELL, WHAT WE WOULD, WHAT OUR PREFERENCE WOULD BE ON THOSE LAST TWO POINTS ON PHASING.

AND I'M GONNA REPEAT WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD, BUT WE ARE REQUESTING THAT, UM, THERE'S A SECTION, UH, 1.0, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE BUILDING PERMITS, UH, ASKING THAT.

BUILDING PERMITS FOR NO LESS THAN 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACE IN THE AGGREGATE MUST BE ISSUED FOR BLOCKS A TWO LOT TWO OR BLOCKS A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE, C, L, OR M BEFORE ANY CO IS ISSUED FOR A MULTIFAMILY USE IN BLOCK F.

SO WE'RE ASKING THAT AS OPPOSED TO JUST FOCUSING ON A, UH, THREE, FOUR, AND C, THAT THE NON-RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS WOULD, WOULD FALL INTO THAT.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, IT WOULD BE A TWO UPPER LEFT SIDE, UH, THE, THE RED, THE, UH, COMMERCIAL OR BLOCKS L AND M OFF TO THE RIGHT.

SO THE A 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING PERMITS MUST BE ISSUED FOR THEIR, THOSE SPACES, UH, PRIOR TO A CO FOR MULTIFAMILY, UH, CON BLOCK F, WHICH IS THE ONE IN THE CENTRAL CENTER GOING ON A COMMERCIAL SHELL BUILDING PERMIT FOR NO LESS THAN 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACE IN THE AGGREGATE MUST BE FINALED, MUST BE FINALED IN BLOCKS A TWO LOT TWO OR BLOCKS A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE C OR L OR M BEFORE A CO IS ISSUED FOR A MULTIFAMILY USE IN BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE, WHICH IS IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE UPPER LEFT SIDE.

SO THE FIRST IS WE NEED TO GET BUILDING PERMITS FOR 12,000.

AND THEN THE SECOND IS WE HAVE TO GET, UH, UH, THE, THE PERMITS MUST BE FINAL FOR 12,000 SQUARE FEET BEFORE WE CAN GET A CO IN BLOCK A TWO LOT ONE.

AND THEN AS IT RELATES TO THE AIR INTAKE'S, EXACTLY WHAT TIM WAS SAYING EARLIER, UM, I'VE, I'VE ACTUALLY HANDED THIS OUT THAT WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE INTAKE OPENINGS FOR OUTDOOR AIR AS DEFINED BY THE ADOPTED INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE AS AMENDED MUST BE LOCATED ON SIDES OF THE SIDES OF THE BUILDING.

OTHER THAN THAT, THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FACING A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE LOCATED WITHIN 1200 SQUARE FEET OF A TYPE A THIRD FOR A RIGHT OF WAY.

SO AS TIM WAS SAYING, HERE'S A GREAT EXHIBIT.

UH, WE, WE COULDN'T PUT THE AIR INTAKES FACING ONE 90, BUT THEY COULD BE ON THE SIDES OR ON THE BACK OR WITHIN THE COURTYARD.

UH, SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR WITH THE, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED IS THE ABILITY TO PUT THE AIR INTAKES ON THE SIDES OF THE BUILDING, UH, IN ADDITION TO THE COURTYARD AND ON THE NORTH SIDE.

AND, UH, AGAIN, I THINK THIS WAS REFLECTIVE OF WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN BOTH, UH, THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS, UH, TIM'S PRESENTATION.

WE WOULD ASK THAT THESE BE INCLUDED AS, AS PART OF, UH, THE, THE, THE, THE RECOMMEND OR THE APPRO APPROVAL OF OUR ZONING CASE TONIGHT.

AND WE ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

OUR ENGINEERS ARE HERE.

MR. PERDUE, THE PRESIDENT OF ROSEWOOD PROPERTY COMPANY IS HERE AS WELL, IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

OKAY, LET ME FINISH THE SPEAKERS.

OKAY, LET'S FINISH THE SPEAKERS.

[01:10:01]

ALRIGHT, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ALEX STEIN AND BILL LYLE.

GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COUNSEL.

UM, AS A RESIDENT AND A LANDOWNER IN EAST PLANO, THERE'S NOBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS BE SUCCESSFUL AS MUCH AS ME.

I I DO THINK THERE'S A FEW COMMENTS WORTH MAKING THOUGH I AM PRO REASONABLE LAND USE.

UM, Y'ALL KNOW THAT IF I DISAGREE WITH STAFF, I WILL MAKE THAT KNOWN.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EACH OF Y'ALL KNOW THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WAS DENIAL.

UH, THEY USE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE.

SOMETIMES THEY'LL SAY THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH POLICIES.

SOMETIMES THEY'LL SAY SOMETHING AS STRONG AS RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID.

IN THIS CASE.

UH, THIS AFTERNOON I DID HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S, UH, FINDINGS FORMS. AND ODDLY, MANY OF THEM REFERENCE SB EIGHT 40, WHICH IS A IMPORTANT POINT I WANNA MAKE TO YOU GUYS.

THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN NOT TO DEVELOP UNDER EIGHT 40.

SO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SHOULDN'T CONSIDER EIGHT 40 IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS CASE.

I THINK IT IS, I, I, LET ME SAY THIS, WE SHOULD NOT ERODE ESTABLISHED UMU DISTRICTS UNDER THE POSTURING OF DEVELOPMENT UNDER EIGHT 40.

IT SETS A BAD PRECEDENT.

I AGREE THAT THEY COULD COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT ZONING CASE UNDER EIGHT 40 AND DEVELOP SOME OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO HERE.

BUT THIS COUNCIL ADOPTED MANY PROVISIONS BEFORE SB EIGHT 40 WAS PASSED TO PROTECT THE CITY AND TO GET DIFFERENT THINGS OUT OF IT.

UM, LIKE, WELL, YOU, YOU, Y'ALL DID IT.

SO THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS THAT Y'ALL WROTE INTO THE LAW TO MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF EIGHT 40.

THEY'VE CHOSEN NOT TO COME IN UNDER EIGHT 40, AND SO DON'T CONSIDER IT UNDER EIGHT 40.

UM, THE DONUT HOLE WITH IT BEING LI ONE, THEY TALK ABOUT THIS BEING A SCREEN AGAINST THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, BUT THEY'RE JUST PUTTING RESIDENTIAL AGAIN RIGHT NEXT TO THE LI ONE.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE THIS A MORE BENEFICIAL SITUATION IS IF THEY ACQUIRED THE ENTIRE DONUT HOLE AND WERE ABLE TO INCORPORATE THE ENTIRE THING, BUT THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT.

THEY JUST, THEY'RE JUST PUTTING MORE RESIDENTIAL NEXT TO THE LI ONE USE THAT HAS THE CHANCE OF BEING SOMETHING ELSE IN THE FUTURE.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY STATE IN THE PACKET THAT WENT TO PNZ WAS THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF THEIR UMU DISTRICT.

WELL, I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THAT AS A BUSINESS OWNER, BUT I CAN'T COME IN HERE AND SAY, WELL, THIS LAND USE NO LONGER MAKES ME MONEY.

I WANT TO CHANGE IT.

THEY DEVELOPED THIS UMU DISTRICT, AND SO AGAIN, I THINK IT'S POOR POLICY TO HAVE SOMEONE POSTURE UNDER EIGHT 40 AND SAY, WE CAN DO THIS, UH, AND THEN COME IN AND JUST GET YOU TO REWRITE IT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK, IS THAT WE KNOW THE EFFECT THAT EIGHT 40 ACTUALLY HAS ON THE CITY OF PLANO GOING FORWARD, AND IF WE JUST KEEP RIGHT REWRITING OUR ORDINANCES, WE DON'T EVER KNOW WHAT THAT EFFECT WAS, BECAUSE NO ONE'S GONNA DEVELOP UNDER IT.

THANKS FOR YOUR LISTENING.

THAT IT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CONFINE THE COMMENTS TO THE COUNCIL MAYOR PROTO.

UM, I, I NEED SOME ANSWERS FROM CHRISTINE.

I, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED.

SHE'S THERE, , ACTUALLY, I'M VERY CONFUSED.

SO AT THIS POINT, UM, I'M GONNA SIMPLIFY AND YOU TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT I'M OVERSIMPLIFYING.

SO BASICALLY, THIS IS A AREA THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED FOR ZONING FOR, UM, UMU? THAT'S CORRECT.

IT EXISTS AS UMU ONE.

AND AT THIS POINT, THE APPLICANT IS COMING BACK BECAUSE THEY WANT TO CHANGE SOME OF THE PROPOSAL THAT, THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED UNDER THE, THE, THE PREVIOUS UMU? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THE REASON WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE MOD, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, UM, HAVING DIFFERENT PLOTS THAT ARE BEING ADDED TO THIS.

AM I, WE'RE JUST EXPANDING A LITTLE BIT.

THEY'RE CHANGING THE USES, UM, THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY.

SO THE PROPERTY'S ALREADY IN EXISTENCE, RIGHT? YES.

I MEAN, EXCEPT FOR THE ADDITION OF THAT ONE AREA WHERE THEY'RE ADDING THE TOWNHOUSES, THE DONUT HOLE, AND THE PARKING, THE DONUT HOLE.

CORRECT.

NEED FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND MULTIFAMILY.

SO AT THIS POINT, WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE, WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH IS, OKAY, ORIGINALLY SOME OF THE AREAS THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING IS SUPPOSED TO BE OFFICE BUILDINGS OR INDUSTRIAL OFFICE IS NOT DOING VERY WELL.

UM, HOWEVER, THERE SEEMS TO BE A

[01:15:01]

IS THAT, AM I GETTING THAT, THAT THAT IS CORRECT.

SO THE APPLICANTS NOW IS COMING BACK AND SAYING, LOOK, WE CAN'T MAKE MONEY AND WE CAN'T REALLY MAKE OFFICE BUILDING TO WORK FINANCIALLY OR PROFITABLY.

SO WE'RE ASKING IF WE COULD, AS A WHOLE MAKE THIS INTO WHERE THE DONUT HOLE, WHERE WE'RE GONNA HAVE RES AT THE TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL.

THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE'RE GONNA ADD, UM, I, I THINK THE MULTIFAMILY ALREADY EXISTS, RIGHT? AND IS THAT THEY'RE ADDING MORE MULTIFAMILY, MORE, MORE MULTIFAMILY IN THE MIDDLE WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE FOR OFFICE.

WE'RE GONNA MAKE IT INTO CUSTOMIZED OFFICE BUILDING AND THEN POSSIBLY SOME RECREATIONAL CENTER AND MORE HOSPITALITY TYPE, UM, UH, PROJECTS.

AM I, AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT? RIGHT.

THEY'RE REMOVING A NUMBER OF OFFICE BUILDINGS AND PUTTING SOME LOW DENSITY, UH, RETAIL RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT IN ITS PLACE.

SO SOMETHING LIKE MINI CAR, MINI GOLF, OR, UM, POSSIBLY SOME OUTDOOR EVENT CENTER TYPE, UM, MORE GREEN.

SOME ACT ACTIVE USES.

LIKE YOU HEARD.

SO, ALL RIGHT.

I THINK I UNDERSTAND NOW.

AND, UM, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE SECOND THING, WHICH IS WHAT IS THIS PROPOSAL THAT THEY'RE COMING BACK WITH? I, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.

SO DID THE PNZ APPROVE OR DID THE PNZ NOT APPROVE? I MEAN, ARE, ARE WE MODIFYING, ARE WE, WHAT ARE WE MODIFYING? THEY, THEY DID NOT DISTRIBUTE COPIES TO STAFF, SO I DON'T PARTICULARLY KNOW WHAT EXACTLY YOU WERE GIVEN.

EXCUSE ME.

I I, I DID SEND THAT TO STAFF THIS AFTERNOON.

I'M, AND THIS IS NOT A NEW PROPOSAL.

THESE ARE ACTUALLY WHAT WE PREFERRED THAT WAS ACTUALLY ALREADY PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION.

BUT MY QUESTION IS, DID P AND Z APPROVE THIS? THIS, THIS IS NOT WHAT THE PLANNING, AND SO I APOLOGIZE, BILL.

I HAVE BEEN IN MEETINGS UP TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT THE, SO THIS IS, SO I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THIS SPECIFICALLY.

I HAVE NOT COMPARED THIS TO WHAT WAS IN, BUT THE STAFF REPORT DID INCLUDE ADDITIONAL BLOCKS, LIKE WHAT IS PROPOSED HERE.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ELIMINATED BLOCKS AND SAID THEY WANTED, LIKE, SOME OF THESE BLOCKS, I BELIEVE YOU'LL SEE BLACK BLOCKS L AND M IF, IF WE COULD SEE THE, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE, UM, WE CAN'T REALLY TOGGLE BETWEEN THIS, BUT LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BLOCKS L AND M ARE THE KIND OF NARROW STRIPS THAT INCLUDE THE SMALL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.

UM, THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY WOULD BE INCLUDED SO THEY COULD UTILIZE THOSE TO MEET THEIR 12,000 FEET OF SPACE.

I THINK THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REALLY WANTED TO LIMIT IT TO THE ACTIVE SPACES.

SO THEY INCLUDED ONLY BLOCK CA FOUR AND FIVE.

SO THOSE AREAS THAT YOU SAW IN MY PRESENTATION THAT WERE HIGHLIGHTED, THEY SAID, WE WANNA SEE THE ACTIVE SPACES, THE 12,000 SQUARE FEET AND THE ACTIVE SPACES.

THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE, THE PROPOSAL THAT WAS MADE, UM, BY THE APPLICANT IN THEIR PRESENTATION THEY OFFERED WHEN THEY CAME BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING TO DO, UM, BASICALLY 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE REMAINING COMMERCIAL BLOCKS.

THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, IF I MAY, CHRISTINA, THAT THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.

WHAT WE, WHAT WAS IN, ON THE VERY TOP SECTION IS WHAT WE CAME BACK WITH AFTER OUR MEETING WITH THE PLAN, WITH THE PLANNING STAFF STAFF, UM, VERBATIM THAT BEFORE WE COULD GET A CO FOR BLOCK F, WE WOULD NEED BUILDING PERMITS FOR, FOR MORE NO LESS THAN 12,000 SQUARE FEET OF, THERE YOU GO.

12,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACE IN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS.

Z MODIFIED IT BY TAKING OUT BLOCKS, UH, A TO L AND M.

AND THEN BEFORE WE COULD GET A CO FOR THE OTHER APARTMENT BUILDING, WE WOULD HAVE TO GET A COMMERCIAL SHELL BUILDING PERMIT FINALIZED FOR 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS.

THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE CAME BACK WITH.

AFTER THE P THE FIRST P AND Z IN JANUARY, WE WERE ASKED TO GO TAKE A STEP BACK AND GET WITH STAFF AND COME UP WITH A PHASING PLAN.

THIS IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH, AND THIS IS WHAT THE P UH, TO THE P AND ZP AND

[01:20:01]

SO THE OFFICE BLOCK.

SO WHAT YOU ARE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO BASICALLY MODIFY WHAT THE PNZ HAS APPROVED AND GIVE BACK TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

WELL, I WOULD SAY, I'M SORRY.

I WOULD SAY THAT, THAT WE ASK YOU WHAT IS IT, WHAT, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WANNA BRING BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION? THIS IS WHAT THEY WERE WILLING TO OFFER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

UM, SO THAT WAS WHAT WAS PROPOSED IN OUR STAFF REPORT.

SO THIS WAS ROSEWOODS INITIAL OFFER TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED A LIMITED NUMBER OF BLOCKS.

SO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THEY WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO BACK TO THEIR ORIGINAL OFFER.

YEAH.

WHICH WE CAME UP WITH AFTER THE P AND Z, THE FIRST P AND Z HEARING IN JANUARY.

THEIR, THEIR, YES.

THEIR ORIGINAL PHASING OFFER.

UM, GOING BACK TO THAT ISSUE, UM, FOR THE, FOR QUALITY RETAIL IN THOSE, UH, IN THAT RESTAURANT ENTERTAINING ENTERTAINMENT, UM, SECTION, YOU'D NEED SOME DENSITY OF PEOPLE IN ON THE PROPERTY.

AND BEFORE THIS, SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN BEFORE YOU'RE GONNA BUILD A MULTIFAMILY OR TO DO THE PHASING.

SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING BASICALLY IS TO ADD BACK IN THE, UH, OFFICE CONDOMINIUMS, WHICH WOULD ADD AT LEAST A FEW MORE FOLKS, UH, WHO MIGHT, UH, BE THERE FOR BREAKFAST, LUNCH, UM, AND, UH, WITH SOME LUCK, MAYBE THE OFFICE BUILDING ON THE CORNER, UM, IN THE EVENT THAT, UH, THAT COULD HAPPEN BEFORE THE MULTIFAMILY, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOUR REQUEST TO, TO HAVE SOME PEOPLE, UH, OCCUPYING THE LAND, UH, YOU KNOW, SO THAT YOU CAN ATTRACT, UH, QUALITY RESTAURANTS, UH, ENTERTAINMENT, ET CETERA.

UM, SO THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ONE ISSUE.

AND, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE, YOU'VE SPENT A DECADE TRYING TO GET THE ORIGINAL ZONING TO WORK.

YOU'VE TRIED TO GET MORE RET, EXCUSE ME, OFFICE AND HOTEL AND SUCH IN THERE UNSUCCESSFULLY.

IS THAT THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

AND AS WE'VE SAID, YOU COULD COME BACK UNDER EIGHT 40 AND BUILD THE, THE MULTIFAMILY REGARDLESS OF THE PHASING AND SUCH, THAT MIGHT COME AT A LATER DATE.

THAT IS A POSSIBILITY.

WE HAVE NEVER POSTURED THIS CASE ON THAT PREMISE.

WE CAME IN WANTING TO CONTINUE THE SUCCESS WE'VE CREATED FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

IT WASN'T UNTIL STAFF ASKED US IF WE WANTED TO COME BACK UNDER EIGHT 40.

DID I EVEN COME UP? OKAY.

AND I'M GONNA SWITCH NOW TO THE INTAKE OPENINGS.

UM, THE PNZ SUGGESTED INTERIOR INTAKES, UH, FROM THE INSIDE THE COURTYARD.

YOU'VE INDICATED THAT THE, JUST DOING THIS, UH, ON THE, UH, THE FAR NORTH SIDE WOULD BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE THE LENGTH OF OF TIME, OR EXCUSE ME, NOT TIME, THE LENGTH OF THE, THE RUNS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE IS A, AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM.

UM, WHAT ABOUT JUST COMBINING THAT WITH THE COURTYARD? WHY DO YOU NEED IT ON THE, THE OUT EXTERIOR SIDES? YEAH, WE, WE RAN THAT DOWN.

YOU ACTUALLY CANNOT GO THROUGH A FIRE.

UH, IT'S A FIRE CODE ISSUE TO TAKE FROM THE OUTSIDE AND GO TO THE CORRIDORS, WHICH I, I PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT WE COULD MAYBE DO THAT UNTIL WE, WE LEARNED FROM OUR ARCHITECT ENGINEERS, YOU CANNOT.

SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU CAN'T DO IT FROM THE, FROM THE, YEAH.

YOU CAN'T GO THROUGH THE FIREWALLS, THE ADDITIONAL FIREWALL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CORRIDOR TO PULL IN AIR.

OTHERWISE, IF THERE WAS A FIRE, THEN YOU'D ACTUALLY BE PULLING IN FIRE FROM ONE SIDE OF THE CORRIDOR TO THE OTHER.

SO YOU CAN'T DO IT.

SO CODE CODE DOESN'T ALLOW IT.

IT'S JUST YOU CAN'T DO IT FROM THE CORRIDORS.

SO YOU YEAH, WE CAN'T GO THROUGH A CORRIDOR TO PULL OUTSIDE AIR.

UM, BUT WE CAN FOR THE UNITS THAT FACE THE CORRIDORS, OR I MEAN, SORRY, UH, THE COURTYARDS, THAT'S NO PROBLEM.

SO THE OPTION THAT PNZ, UH, THE PNZ SUGGESTED IS NOT ONE.

WE, WE CAN FOR THE UNITS THAT FACE THE, THE, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GO BACK,

[01:25:01]

IT'S JUST THAT FROM THE UNITS THAT ARE ON THE OUTSIDE OF 'EM, WE CAN'T GO THROUGH THOSE UNITS THAT ARE, UH, FACING THE, THE COURTYARD, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, SIR.

I, I JUST WANNA MAKE A STATEMENT THAT THIS IS THE CITY STANDARD, AND WE HAVE, WE HAVE APPROVED OTHER, OTHER PROPERTIES THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH BUILDING PERMITTING.

SO, UM, WE HAVE VERIFIED THIS THROUGH OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL THAT THERE ARE MEANS TO DO THIS.

IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE, BUT THERE ARE MEANS TO, TO ACCOMPLISH THE OUTDOOR AIR BECAUSE OTHERWISE OTHER BUILDINGS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO MEET THE BUILDING CODE.

THE, THESE, THESE ARE POSSIBLE BY JUST COMING FROM THE NORTH SIDE.

BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE COULD NOT HAVE THIS IN OUR CODE AND BE ABLE TO PERMIT BUILDINGS.

UM, IT, IT IS, IT IS POSSIBLE.

IT IS A MORE EXPENSIVE PROCESS.

ALL RIGHT.

COUNCIL MEMBER CARE.

UM, SO I, I I WANT TO CHECK ON A COUPLE THINGS.

SO IN YOUR PROPOSAL, YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF, IT'S REALLY A, UH, A TIMING ISSUE, RIGHT? WHERE YOU, WHERE THE CITY WANTS YOU TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF RETAIL PERMITTED OR PERHAPS EVEN LIKE THE SHELL BUILT BEFORE YOU CAN GET YOUR CO ON THE MULTIFAMILY.

AND, UH, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT A DIFFERENT SET OF PHASING REQUIREMENTS THAN WHAT P AND Z APPROVED E ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE ASKING TO ADD MORE BLOCKS TO IT TO DISTRIBUTE IT.

YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT SUGGESTING YOU'RE GONNA BUILD MORE THAN 12,000 BEFORE WE GET THE CO YOU JUST WANNA DISTRIBUTE IT OVER MORE, UH, BLOCKS.

THAT'S RIGHT.

WE JUST WANNA DISTRIBUTE OVER MORE BLOCKS.

P AND Z EXCLUDED BLOCK A THREE, OR OUR OFFICE IS CURRENTLY SITUATED AS WELL AS THE BLOCK, A TWO LOT TWO, OR THAT RETAIL AND P AND Z EXCLUDED BLOCKS L AND M OR THE OFFICES.

AND ALL OUR REQUEST IS, IS JUST TO ADD THAT BACK INTO THE PHASING.

CAN SOMEONE SPEAK TO WHY PLEA, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING REMOVED SOME OF THE BLOCKS THEY THOUGHT IT WAS? WELL, I'M SPEAKING FOR THEM, BUT MY INTERPRETATION IS THEY THOUGHT IT WAS SO IMPORTANT TO GET THE RETAIL ON A FIVE AND C AND A FOUR GOING FIRST, BESIDES THE OTHER PARTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

UH, I, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE PNZ FOR A REASON.

THE OTHER QUESTION I'D HAVE REALLY RELATED TO THIS NORTH SIDE AIR, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I I, I STRUGGLE TO VEER AWAY FROM WHAT PLANNING AND ZONING HAS COME BACK TO US, PARTICULARLY SINCE THERE ARE QUITE A LOT OF CHANGES THAT IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THIS.

SO I, I AM JUST STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT WITH THE WHOLE AIR INTAKE THING.

CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO ANY MITIGATIONS IN TERMS OF THE AIR POLLUTANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? IF YOU'RE TAKEN FROM THE OUTSIDE ON THE EAST AND WEST, HOW, HOW THAT IS MITIGATED IN, IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE SAFE FOR RESIDENTS? YEAH.

I HONESTLY, PNZ WAS CONFUSED.

I WAS CONFUSED AT PNZ.

IT WAS VERY CLUNKY, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT.

UM, REALLY THE INTENT IS THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SKIRT THROUGH ANYTHING, BUT STILL PROVIDE GREAT OUT OUTDOOR AIR FOR OUR RESIDENTS.

UM, THE ONLY ARROW THAT PNZ IS NOT ALLOWING US TO DO BASED ON THIS PRESENTATION, IS THE ONES THAT GO EAST AND WEST TO THE OUTSIDE.

WE'RE ASKING TO ADD THOSE BACK IN.

UM, THE REASON BEING IS THAT OUR DUCT WORK GOES REALLY A LONG DISTANCE AND OUR ENGINEER HAS SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE REALLY STRUGGLING TO PULL OUT ANY OUTDOOR, UH, OUTSIDE AIR WHEN YOU DO THAT.

AS CHRISTINA SAID, IT IS PROBABLY POSSIBLE.

IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE.

IT PROBABLY DOESN'T CHANGE A THING TO JUST PULL IT FROM RIGHT.

THE OUTSIDE.

I THINK IT'S A WELL-INTENTIONED ZONING ORDINANCE.

UM, WE'RE, WE'RE HAPPY TO TRY TO COMPLY WITH IT AS BEST WE CAN, BUT IT, THIS IS A HEALTH STANDARD THING.

CORRECT.

AND, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THE QUALITY OF AIR THAT'S COMING IN IS GONNA BE FINE FOR THE RESIDENTS.

THANK YOU MAYOR PROTO.

YEAH, I, I, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING.

SO, UM, I, I GUESS THE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

I'M, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY, UM, THE CHANGES.

I MEAN, IF, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU'RE CIRCUMVENTING P AND Z'S APPROVAL, WHATEVER THEY APPROVE IN ORDER TO COME TO US AND SAY, LOOK, I KNOW WHAT PN P AND Z APPROVED, BUT WE STILL WANT WHAT WE WANT.

AND SO CAN YOU PLEASE MODIFY IT BACK TO WHAT WE HAVE, UH, REQUESTED? AND, AND I'VE, I'M VERY,

[01:30:02]

WE ASK THEM TO ANALYZE AND TO, UM, MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL WITH REGARD TO WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS, UM, THE BEST USE OF, UM, A, A PROPERTY.

AND AT THIS POINT, I, YOU KNOW, I, I'M FINE WITH, UH, WHATEVER PLANNING AND ZONING IS RECOMMENDING.

I I DO HAVE PROBLEMS WITH, UM, MAKING MODIFICATION THAT HAS NOT BEEN, UM, I GUESS BLESSED BY, UM, THE PLANNING AND ZONING.

SO, UM, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO MAKE THESE MODIFICATION, I MEAN, CAN YOU, DO YOU WANNA GO BACK AND TALK TO P PLANNING AND ZONING AND, AND SEE IF THEY ARE WILLING TO AGREE WITH YOUR, YOUR REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION? OR ARE YOU, DO YOU WANT US TO JUST AGREED.

LIKE I SAID, I, I'M HAPPY TO GO WITH WHAT PLANNING AND ZONING IS RECOMMENDING AND, YOU KNOW, WITH THE NORTH SIDE AIR, WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE PHASING IN AS THE WAY THAT, UH, PNC HAS RECOMMENDED COUNCIL MEMBER TWO, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE P AND Z.

WE THINK THAT THIS IS A BETTER WAY OF DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY TO ALLOW THE 1200, 12,000 SQUARE FEET TO COME FROM ANYWHERE WITHIN THE PROPERTY.

OTHERWISE WE'RE, WE'RE FORCING A, A RETAIL OR RESTAURANT PRODUCT ON, ON A TRACT OF LAND.

AND WHOEVER GOES IN THERE, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE ALL SPEC.

WHOEVER GOES IN THERE WILL PROBABLY CHANGE IT.

WE'RE, AND YOU WE'RE READY, WILLING AND ABLE TO GET STARTED ON BLOCK L AND M AND BEGIN SOME OF THE MULTI-FAMILY.

UM, WE, WE, WE'VE BEEN AT THIS AS, AS YOU HEARD, WE OVER A YEAR NOW.

AND, UH, I MEAN, WE, WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD.

WELL, WE THINK IT'S IN EVERYBODY'S BEST INTEREST, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

BUT WE ARE COMING BACK TO YOU APPEALING WHAT P AND Z RECOMMENDED.

UH, WE THINK IT'S MORE REASONABLE TO ALLOW US TO DO THE 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN A BROADER AREA SO THAT WE AREN'T FORCED INTO DOING SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOING TO NOT GONNA WORK.

ALRIGHT.

ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, LEMME SAY THANK YOU GUYS FOR TAKING ON A HERCULEAN TASK.

I, I THINK THE MAYOR AND I HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS FOR OVER SIX YEARS.

UH, MAYBE EVEN, UM, MAYOR PRO TIM TOO HAS LOOKED AT IT FOR SIX YEARS AND WE'VE BOTH GOTTEN A LITTLE GRAYER, I THINK BILL OVER THIS.

SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

AND WE KNOW ROSEWOOD, THEY ALWAYS PUT TOGETHER A QUALITY PRODUCT AND HERITAGE CREEKSIDE IS NO EXCEPTION TO THAT.

I LIKE YOUR PHASING APPROACH, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU.

AND I CERTAINLY LIKE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT FOR BLOCKS L AND M WITH REGARDS TO THE SINGLE OFFICES THERE.

THAT SEEMS TO BE A GOOD USE OF THAT.

WE'RE SEEING THAT ALONG THE 1 21 QUARTER THERE.

AND I THINK WE MODEL SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST USE FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

'CAUSE THOSE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS COULD BE, UH, UH, SOLD TO INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS WHO, WHO DO OPTOMETRY OR WHATEVER THE CASE THEY WANT TO DO THERE.

AND I LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THAT, UH, THOSE TOWN HOMES OVER THERE.

UH, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.

UM, THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE REALLY WITH ALL THESE QUESTIONS, AND I KNOW YOUR RETAILS YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE, THOSE ARE ALL GONNA BE, UH, CONSTRUCTED TO THE USER, CORRECT? WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE RESTAURANTS OR BARS OR, UM, MIXED USE, WHATEVER, WHATEVER WE'RE GONNA USE FOR THOSE FACILITIES.

I HAVE ONE QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO THAT MIDDLE APARTMENT COMPLEX.

THE REASON WE, WHERE I HAVE MY ISSUES HERE IS WITH REGARDS TO, UH, TWO ELEMENTS.

NOISE IS ONE, AND THE SECOND IS THE AIR PM 2.5 IN PARTICULAR.

AND, UH, PM 10, WHICH ARE GENERATED THROUGH ROAD, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC, HIGH DENSITY TRAFFIC, PARTICULARLY ALONG THE BUSH THERE.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH ANY OF THE INTAKE ALONG CUSTER ROAD.

I DON'T SEE FROM A MODELING PERSPECTIVE THAT APARTMENT THAT'S OVER THERE ON BLOCK A LOT ONE, I DON'T SEE WHERE THAT WOULD BE ANY HICCUP THERE.

BUT I CERTAINLY SEE WHERE THERE WOULD BE SOME ISSUES WITH AIR COMING IN FROM THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT BLOCK, FI GUESS, WHICH IS THAT MIDDLE UNIT THERE, AND POSSIBLY FROM THE SIDES.

BUT FROM WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING HERE FROM A SCHEMATIC, IT LOOKS LIKE ANY AIR INTAKE FROM THE NORTH SIDE AND FROM THE COURTYARDS WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT YOU WITH SUPPLYING FRESH AIR ON THAT MIDDLE UNIT.

SO THOSE ARE JUST MY OBSERVATIONS LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAVE HERE.

[01:35:01]

UM, AGAIN, MY PERSONAL OPINION THERE, I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO AND HOW TO TRY TO COMPLETE THAT IN TODAY'S E UH, ECONOMY.

IT'S A CHALLENGE THERE, BUT I THINK WE HAVE A, A GOOD MIX OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND RETAIL AND SINGLE OFFICES.

I THINK THAT'S JUST A KIND OF A GOOD COMPLIMENT TO FINISH OUT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WE'LL TAKE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER CARE.

YEAH, I'M SORRY, I, I JUST KIND OF WANNA GO BACK TO, UM, PARTICULARLY THE AIR.

I MEAN, I, I'M, I THINK I'M LEANING TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PHASING BEING OKAY, BECAUSE I THINK WE WANNA GET THE, THE RIGHT, UM, ITEMS IN THERE FOR RETAIL.

AND BY GIVING YOU A LITTLE MORE SPACE TO DO THAT, MORE OPTIONS, I THINK THAT COULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL.

BUT I'M REALLY STRUGGLING WITH THE PART THAT PLEA, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING HAD, UH, HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE AIR INTAKE ON THE APARTMENT.

UM, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HERE ON COUNCIL HAS ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT ANYWAY, TO, TO DEAL WITH THAT? OR DO YOU WANNA WELL, I, I THINK, I THINK YOU GUYS ON ON LOT, LOT A OBVIOUSLY IN, IN, IF, IF THAT ENDS UP BEING YOUR PLAT AND, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES SENSE.

YOU COULD, YOU COULD GO FROM THE EAST AND THE NORTH.

THERE'S NO REASON TO GO FROM THE WEST ON THAT ONE, BUT DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, LIKE, UH, DEPUTY MAYOR PROTI SAID THE NORTH, UH, ON THE ONE THAT'S, THAT'S PRIMARILY EAST AND WEST AND THE OTHER SMALLER ONE THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

SO I MEAN, IT, THEY'RE BOTH POSITIONED IN DIFFERENT WAYS THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO, TO USE EAST AND NORTH AND JUST NORTH ON THE BOTTOM PART.

AND THEN ON, ON THE LOT A, YOU, YOU CAN UTILIZE THE E THE EAST SIDE AND, AND, AND THE NORTH LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.

SO I, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO COMPLICATE THINGS, BUT IT, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THAT, THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE OF, OF GETTING THE CLEANEST AIR AND, AND, AND NOT RUNNING, UH, YOUR DUCKS IN, IN A, YOU KNOW, UNSUITABLE WAY SAYING YES AS FAR AS THE, UM, THE PHASING GOES, UM, I, I WANT YOU GUYS TO BE ABLE TO, TO CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE RETAIL, BUT I ALSO WANT TO GIVE YOU THE FLEXIBILITY THAT, THAT YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET NON-RESIDENTIAL, UH, PRODUCTS ON THE GROUND AND GOING.

SO, UM, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.

UM, COUNCIL MEMBER LEVINE.

THANK YOU MAYOR.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE, UH, A MOTION TO, UH, APPROVE, UH, ZONING CASE 25 20 25 0 0 0 3, UH, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS.

UH, REGARDING PHASING, UH, WE WOULD, UH, MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, THEIR REQUESTED 1200 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACE IN THE AGGREGATE, UH, ISSUED WITHIN BLOCK A TWO LOT, TWO OR BLOCKS A THREE, A FOUR, A FIVE CL OR M BEFORE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS ISSUED FOR A MULTIFAMILY USE IN BLOCK F.

AND ALSO, UH, FOR REGARDING THE INTAKES, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, PROVIDE THE STIPULATION AS WE HAVE JUST BEEN DISCUSSED THAT FOR, UH, BLOCK F UH, THAT THE AIR INTAKE BE FROM THE NORTH, UH, OR THE INTERIOR AND, UH, THAT FOUR BLOCK, UH, TWO, UH, THAT IT BE FROM THE EAST AND THE NORTH.

MAY I ASK A QUESTION? YEAH.

UH, AS FAR AS THE PHASING GOES, THERE WAS A SECOND PART OF THE PHASING, UH, REGARDING SECTION ONE.

DO BOTH, BOTH OF THEM.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T READ THAT.

THANK YOU, SIR.

COUNCIL MEMBER LEVINE, I BELIEVE YOU ACTUALLY SAID, UH, 1200 INSTEAD OF 12,000.

YES, I PROBABLY DID.

UH, MY LAST QUESTION IS ON BLOCK A TWO, CAN WE STILL COME INTO THE INTERIOR COURT YARDS THAT PNZ RECOMMENDED? WE COULD YEAH, I SAID, I SAID THAT, UM, YEAH, INTERIOR AND, AND NORTH.

YEAH.

[01:40:02]

I'LL SECOND THAT.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND.

ARE WE GOOD ON THE, UH, THE MOTION, LISA? OKAY.

TO APPROVE, UH, 25 20 25 0 0 0 3 WITH THE, UH, PHASING SECTION ONE, UH, AND THE, THE SECOND PHASING AND OBVIOUSLY THE INTAKE, UH, OPENINGS THAT, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER LEVINE, JUST, JUST READ EVERYBODY.

PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION PASSES FIVE TO TWO WITH ONE ABSTENTION.