Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Pd Expansion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plano approves downtown plan-development expansion but strips air-filtration signage requirement
Summary
Council approved an expansion to a downtown PD district that adds a small parcel for a multifamily phase; council members voted 8-0 after removing a Planning & Zoning stipulation requiring property managers to post air-filtration replacement specs and logs, which members said would be difficult to enforce.
The Plano City Council approved a request to expand a downtown plan-development district to include a 0.2-acre parcel adjacent to 14th Street, clearing the way for a final multifamily phase, but removed a Planning & Zoning Commission stipulation that would have required property management to post air-filtration replacement specifications and a log of recent filter changes.
Eric Hill, the city's assistant director for planning, told the council the request would bring an additional tract into PD 123 and that no net new multifamily units were being requested for the district overall; he said the proposal conforms with the comprehensive plan and noted Planning & Zoning recommended approval 6-2. Hill explained staff and the applicant worked through parking and EHA (Expressway Corridor Environmental Health Area 1) mitigation stipulations.
The applicant, Mark Leon of Cross Architects, said the project remains within the PD allowance and is not asking for variances. —We are not adding any new units,— he said, and described the proposal as —luxury high-end apartments— and —not affordable housing, not assisted living, not Section 8.— He said the added 0.2-acre parcel is primarily to provide parking to support the project and that third-party noise monitoring showed the design complied with relevant standards.
Several council members raised concerns about a Planning & Zoning addition that would require property management to post signage with manufacturers' recommended filter replacement schedules and to maintain a log of filter changes accessible to residents. One council member argued the provision would set a precedent of mandating internal property management practices and compared it to requiring a restaurant to post its cleaning schedule. Another member said the logistics and enforcement would be impractical — the applicant noted tenants typically do not replace in-unit filters and replacements tend to happen when units are turned over.
Council member (unnamed on the record) moved to strike the air-filtration clause (listed as 2-3 in the PD stipulations); the amendment was seconded. The council then voted 8-0 to approve the ordinance with that amendment, adopting the PD expansion while removing the filter-posting requirement.
The vote completes the zoning case (Zoning Case 20-24-2) action on the council's agenda; the applicant and staff said other PD stipulations and mitigation measures remain in force as written.
