>> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the planning and zoning work session
meeting for Wednesday, April 21, 2020.
Seeing that we have a quorum, I will call the meeting to order at 5.02.
We do not have any citizen comments on the consent agenda items this evening, so we'll
jump right into item number two, which is work session reports.
The first one is PZ21-026, receive a report and hold the discussion and give staff direction
regarding updates to the didn't plan 2030 and small area plans.
And I believe this is Ron Minguita's item.
Is that correct?
>> Yes, it is.
>> All right.
Floor is yours whenever you're ready.
>> Thank you, Chair.
Ron Minguita, principal plan with development services.
Let me pull up my screen, share that with y'all.
Let me know if you see it.
>> Yes.
>> Great.
I just want to, just before we start, just want to mention that this is going to be a
team effort.
Julie Wyatt is going to be taking the second half of this presentation, I'll be doing the
first half, and also mention that Haley was also a big part of this presentation, so she
will not be making a presentation, but she put this presentation together for us.
Really quick, just part of the request for this work session came from a January 20th
meeting earlier this year where the commission discussed a PD application, and through that
discussion there were some communications or discussion about a potential small area
plan that could potentially be for this particular area, Highway 77 and I-35, in that vicinity
of the city.
Not only because of that PD discussion, the commission also recognized that there are
multiple zoning applications and PD requests in this area in the last year, so we're going
to focus on or talk about the comprehensive plan update and then get into this particular
area later in the presentation.
For this particular item, we're going to be talking about comprehensive plan update, really
what's going on, provide a little bit of an overview of where we are, talk about the scope
of work that we're working on, and then the public outreach effort that's happening as
we speak, then transition from that to our small area plan discussion, what the purpose
is and what the process is for creating small area plans, what we have today in the city
in terms of small area plans, talk about how the comprehensive plan has recommendations
as far as what needs to be included in the SAP, how we get started and that sort of information,
how then we use what we've learned and what the commission has seen through the various
applications in the process to start the initiation of small area plans.
And then lastly, we're going to be discussing how we prioritize which small area plan area
we want to focus on in the next coming years.
So real quick, the comprehensive plan, as you all know, kicked off earlier this year
in February to be specific, it is to update the DEN Plan 2030, the DEN Plan 2030 was adopted
back in February 2015, and most if not all of you were part of that or were involved
in the development of that comprehensive plan update.
It's been almost six years, a little bit over past six years since that adoption.
So what we normally look for between five to seven years is to just kind of revisit
the comprehensive plan, making sure that what's there, what's in place is still relevant,
it's still practical in cases.
There are areas that we never even contemplated back in 2015, even earlier than that, 2014-2013.
So it's good to revisit some of those areas so that our plan is as updated to the existing
conditions as much as possible.
In the plan, there are 10 elements, the 10 elements are listed here, and you can see
they range from land use to economic to parks, mobility, housing, and community health service
and safety.
One of the most important part of the comprehensive plan, in my opinion, is also the infrastructure
and utilities and implementation and monitoring.
That's chapter 10, chapter 10 is the implementation and monitoring chapter or element and in there
is the what to do next.
It's not that we have a plan, we need to know how to implement it, what happens next and
what we need to do to ensure that the work that we put together in this plan gets done.
So that's where that language is and in that chapter or element is small area plans.
So we'll touch base on chapter 10 later in this presentation.
So as far as the scope of work for this upcoming update to the comprehensive plan, we have
enlisted or hired a consultant.
They're helping us with the analysis in order to identify recommendations and ultimately
update the plan that we see here.
So they've started actually, phase one is really the existing conditions assessment
report that they will be putting together looking at major local issues and then putting
a report together as well.
Part of that effort is interviewing stakeholders, focus groups, conducting workshops and they've
done that already.
So they're almost done with phase one, phase two and three are upcoming and we hope to
continue that effort through another workshop and hopefully other events as part of that
effort.
Included in the scope of work is a special topic discussion where we will be talking
about the downtown master plan.
This is a small area plan technically.
When you think about it, it's a more refined, more detailed plan for the downtown.
So that is something that they will be also evaluating and assessing in order to again
determine where we are on that plan and what we can do to update it in terms of vision,
goals, policies and actions.
Ultimately we have to make sure we have buy-in and account for the input from our citizens
and stakeholders.
So public outreach plan is part of the scope of work and that again we'll cover in the
coming slide or two and ultimately update the comprehensive plan.
We are calling this plan the Den Plan 2040.
We always want to look out as much as we can.
15 to 20 years is the time frame that we normally look at for a comprehensive plan.
So what do we want to be or what should we be in 15 to 20 years?
So that's what we're shooting for and the expectations with this update is listed here.
I won't read all of the items but I just want to focus on three specific items.
The community vision statement which is an outline of what again we want to be in 2040
as a city.
The preferred growth concept map.
That is something that we will be evaluating and hopefully delineating areas in the city
as we hear from our communities as to where growth should happen.
And then last the future language map.
You all know this future language map from previous presentations through zoning, through
other PD applications and the like.
So that also will be evaluated and assessed not obviously not in a bubble.
We will obviously be getting input from again stakeholders and other members of the community.
This slide here just to illustrate for those that are not familiar with the community vision
statement and the comprehensive plan, it is a two pager.
It's a lot of information there but it's a very comprehensive, I was trying to think
of the word.
It talks about the character of the people, the institutions and the government and again
where we want to be in 15 to 20 years.
The economy is a big part of the city and also growth.
Big part of where we want to be is also where we want to grow.
So that is also covered in the community vision statement.
And again I won't read all of it but I just want to illustrate that this particular page
or pages will be revised and reviewed to reflect what our vision is as of today.
The other two items that I referenced in the earlier slide is the future language map that
you see there but also the preferred growth concept.
Those that are not familiar with the preferred growth concept is what you see here is where
in this city we would like growth to occur or like for it to happen in the next 15 to
20 years.
So in 2014, 2015, this was the direction, the direction was to focus in our corridors,
our centers and primarily in the core of the city.
So you see the areas in red are centers, the areas along major corridors are obviously
those are the corridor areas and then the yellow is just the areas surrounding those
areas as they blend in, that is the area typically we would like development to occur.
You see that we also identify ropes and ranch, there's parts of the coal hunter ranch area
and then also the airport area is also highlighted in that preferred growth concept.
So I think we're doing a good job as far as identifying and looking and seeing where development
is occurring and it matches to a certain degree of what we have shown here.
I know that again we're going to be talking a little bit more in this presentation to
the area to the north.
So that's also identified in this preferred growth concept map.
Really quickly this is the public outreach plan that we plan on using or have been using
to gather input and feedback on the update.
The website I would like to specifically mention is obviously has written here on on on PowerPoint
presentation cityofden.com/den2040.
In this website you will find everything you need to know about the comprehensive plan
update.
There are a number of exercises and just to highlight one specifically is this map exercise
where citizens residents anyone can go on to again cityofden.com/den2040 and using the
map identifying the area where there's opportunity where you would like to see opportunity happen
as well as issues and you can click on any of these buttons here and when you click one
of them you can click on the map and it'll transfer that information onto the map and
you can actually enter comments on what you're talking about as far as any opportunities
as far as issues that you want to see addressed.
So I think that's a helpful tool it gives not only the staff and other people also an
idea of where other individuals see opportunities are and issues are in the city.
So this is a really cool way of getting information and I encourage anyone that's listening to
visit and again the cityofden.com/den2040 web page.
Christopher Beck.
Thank you chair.
Just real quick and leave the slide up to what extent are we advertising this I know
we are Ryan Adams and everybody I'm sure is advertising the heck out of this but because
I agree with you this is a great tool and I think a lot of questions that people send
to me would be at least in terms of feedback would be answered if more people were aware
of this so yeah we you know on our website you know our general website we have posted
the link we also send email bus to members that we have collected email addresses for.
We worked with the DRC Dan Recher Chronicle to spread the word as well and through presentations
such as this I've made this presentation is not only to obviously this commission but
to other boards and commissions so hopefully we're getting the word out and of course anyone
on this commission too if you would like please encourage other members of the community to
again visit the site and not only enter their input but also learn about what comprehensive
plan what the comprehensive plan is and how they can help shape that plan for the next
15 to 20 years.
Thanks Rob I appreciate it.
As I mentioned earlier we started this back in February we entered phase two with the
community meeting it was all virtual we did get over a hundred and I want to say 140 participants
in total with community workshop number one we are planning community workshop number
two it will also be virtual it will be in May we again encourage people to look for
that information the details of that workshop on the website that will include a number
of charrettes and again more exercises to gather input from the community.
We hope that in the next coming months we are allowed or able to meet in person so we
are looking at potentially having an in-person event but until then we are not planning for
that yet but when we are allowed to plan for it we will do so because we understand that
not everyone is able to go on Zoom or prefer not to not necessarily prefer but would rather
be in person and participate so again as soon as we're able to we will make sure that we
have an in-person event to again gather the input that we need in order to update the
plan.
We will have a public open house in August work sessions in September and then ultimately
October will be our public hearings of which will include the planning zoning commission
for you all to make a recommendation to the City Council so again October of this year
is the time frame and timeline of when we hope to get this plan updated and approved
by City Council.
So with that before I go we go on to the next part of this presentation just any other questions
about the update in the schedule or anything that you'd like to ask.
I do not see any questions Ron.
Okay.
Oh and let's go to Commissioner Pernod do you have any okay great you're good Ron.
I'm going to share the screen again.
So I know when we mentioned earlier that we are here to talk about small year plan as
well chapter 10 which is the implementation in monitoring chapter or element of the plan
has a section of it that talks about small year planning or small year plans and it lists
the following reasons or opportunities for small year planning.
A lot of it is also mentioned throughout the conference plan in terms of goals policies
and actions so in the end of this if this comprehensive plan it talks about what and
how things are done to have a small year plan started and hopefully completed so I think
you all know and I'm just going to read this for the viewing public a small year plan what
it is used for it is it responds to local challenges but also opportunities in terms
of developing and redeveloping in an area and enhancing an area obviously an example
would be the downtown master plan would be an example of what we would like to do in
order to see the opportunities and enhance the area as much as we can also providing
opportunities for the community members and stakeholders to provide input so it's not
only a staff driven or staff drafted there's a lot of input in public outreach effort in
order to get the plan prepared and I've got some examples of some small year plans and
I can share with you all how we got input from the community throughout that process.
It applies to principles of the comprehensive plan like I said earlier the comprehensive
plan has several areas of the other elements that talk about small year plans so in order
to achieve those policies and those goals implement those goals and take action we want
to be consistent with the comprehensive plan and part of that you see here on the screen
is what is shown as center of focus areas quarter focus areas those ultimately are potential
small area plan areas so we've identified a number of areas through that process earlier
again back in 2015 and those that you see here that are centers or corridors are again
potential areas for small year plan and just to kind of highlight a little bit the area
that we were talking about or have been talking about in the past couple of months highway
77 and I-35 you do see some of those focus centers and gateway focus areas as well in
that general vicinity. Lastly is to create a public support for implementation actions
I think this comes back to the commission's discussion and potential recommendations for
small year planning you all recognize that this area that we're referring to could be
helped with a small year plan and again that last bullet talks specifically about that.
Small area planning process I won't read all of this other than just highlighted the bolded
areas obviously we need to establish an area you know once you establish an area you start
to define the boundaries talk about who's going to be involved how you involve steering
committee members or other stakeholders then you then you begin the vision of and understanding
the existing conditions of that area ultimately the plan gives you gives the reader an idea
of what this area should be and should be developed as. Of course you need to have some
sort of illustration of what that area is going to look like and that's through a plan
development plan development is essentially a conceptual development that shows what you
know where land uses are and what uses are permitted in those areas intensity density
all of that is covered under the plan development and then ultimately the small plan is adopted
after recommendation from the planning zoning commission and once it's adopted the implementation
begins. Part of a small area plan is just that it's a plan it doesn't really have per
se any right requirements or standards that falls under what we call a zoning overlay
district and that is one that is incorporated into the development code so those overlay
districts are typically what follows after a small area plan and again is adopted and
included as part of the development code. And this talks a little bit more this slide
here talks a little bit more about the zoning overlay district it's a little bit more closer
to the ground as far as what developers what residents and property owners need to know
in terms of what is allowed in that particular area.
Chris you're back. Could you oh could you put the slides back
up and go back to the previous slide please sure. This slide here yeah perfect. I had
a lot of that's real clear and we do that a lot but I think for myself and maybe for
the public what's what's the triggering mechanism for step one? I mean obviously like here in
planning and zoning we were recommending that we need to do this but is that enough of a
trigger to start step one or does council need to trigger that or what's what's the
actual trigger to start the steps? I think the trigger is really the communication
that y'all provided. Obviously we do have a lot of things that we are tasked to do but
the initial you know recommendation or suggestion is really I think the first step. Once we
have that we can certainly plan and prioritize how that fits in with our workload because
ultimately it's going to be something that we're going to have to start and have done
and the commission is really involved in a lot of the development in terms of you know
approvals and this and that but the short answer is letting staff know and then the
staff will take it to the next level and ultimately include it in our work plan for the year.
If we can fit it in then obviously it's going to begin there. I can't say you know if the
planning zoning commission says we need to do it and of course it's going to have to
be reviewed and identified as a priority and again Julie will be talking a little bit about
how we prioritize small area plans. Awesome. Thank you. I appreciate it. That was a long
answer to a short question. We have another question with Mr. Pernetta. Yeah and basically
this is going to be asking you to make that answer a little bit longer. So say there's
like a there's a neighborhood like a community of interest that kind of says you know hey
we are there's something unique about us in this area and we'd like to you know have something
put in place that preserves something like say something in Southeast Ed and that kind
of thing. What would be like the process for like this group? Would they just come to the
city and talk to staff and then that starts a process with us or is how would one initiate
this without it being staff or say us going. This seems like something before you do it.
Yeah yeah Commissioner Pernetta I got a great example. You know last year when we were doing
the city initiated rezoning we looked at the Ranch Estates area and as part of that discussion
you know we went through the process you know actually we worked with them on the rezoning
of their entire development or entire community that is and from that discussion the community
goes hey we would like to know more about what we can do to protect our neighborhood
and one of the responses I provided them was a small area plan. You know telling people
this is what you know this area is and it adds that other layer of review or understanding
of what you know an area should be developed as and so they brought it back to me and they're
working with me now and wanting to put together a small area plan and again you know either
through the commission through citizens you know I think bringing it up bringing it up
to staff and ultimately Richard and Scott obviously and ultimately also Sarah are going
to decide on you know if you know if this is something we need to do and we'll take
it ultimately forward through the planning zoning commission and city council for for
your buy-in and start the process. Richard if I if I can just add something really
quick I think if it's something that that the commission wants to do or wants to make
that sort of formal recommendation and Mack and I were just talking it probably should
be in a formal agenda item that's prepared and so whether that wants to be discussed
as part of the work session if there's consensus or even after now might even be the appropriate
time as part of that work session staff can prepare a simple item for the next the next
meeting if if the commission so desires to make that a formal recommendation to city
council for the small area plan for a specific area.
Mr. Beck thank you you mean generically so if if we had an idea we would float that here
and propose that for the matrix or something like that or specifically like for this region
we were talking about at the 35 gateway correct so if if the commission as a group felt felt
strongly that there really needs to be a small area plan developed for this area then we
should have a formal agenda item prepared so that then that recommendation can be made
to council and then we can fully assess whether that's something we do in-house hire outside
to to get that done but I think it is within your purview to make that formal to make that
formal recommendation okay so I guess I guess again just just to be pedantic are we saying
that as part of any work session or or just to put it on the matrix and bring it up at
the next agenda or I mean how would you like this isn't me trying to lead this is trying
to get you to leave I think I think I think if it's related to the item we're discussing
now at the work session certainly it can be brought up if it comes up you know a month
from now or two months from now I think that's something that can be discussed at as part
of the matrix so sorry if I wasn't clear it could be brought up at either time given that
we're talking about it today if there is that desire I think it's definitely you have that
ability to at least bring it up as part of the discussion awesome thank you Ron I think
back to you okay
so again you know smaller plan is really the first step and you can establish the vision
the goals a little bit more refined more closer to the ground than I say a comprehensive plan
after a smaller plan you're looking at a overlay zoning district as part of that next step
in terms of getting established you know zone regulations and standards as we discussed
earlier so the next couple slides is to talk about some of the smaller plans that we have
in the city currently this is one of the first ones that that I'm aware of again the fry
street smaller plan was adopted in 1999 and this was during the process or doing the same
time as the previous conference plan was being prepared but I mentioned 1999 because I know
that in the car in the smaller your plan there were discussions about or the purpose of why
this was created and maybe back to some of the questions asked earlier this area as you
all know the fry street area at the time was seeing some some changes there were also some
some issues in terms of crime and debris and so the the folks that were involved or specifically
with this recommendation to do a smaller plan were residents you know were business owners
were just general stakeholders of this area and wanted to see something more than what
was there today or then at the time so in in return after a smaller plan was adopted
the overlay district was also adopted in 2000 so again that first step is a smaller plan
the second step is the overlay district and currently we have the small area plan I'm
sorry the overlay district in den development code as part of chapter four of the ddc so
this is just an example of one of the smaller plans now this is obviously was done in 1999
in there has been updates to it and we'll get that in the next slide or two another
area a smaller plan area that is was for the denia neighborhood almost the same time as
the fry street the denia neighborhood also wanted to address some of the concerns I see
a question okay mr prunetta yeah and I'm pretty sure I know the answer on this one
already but you know you mentioned the fry street plan and everything and we had a gateway
that kind of overlapped some of that about a year or two ago when we have a small area
plan affecting you know areas like that and I'm particularly thinking of you know like
the neighborhoods that are between unt and 35 you know just a little bit west of you
know mccormick and things does this in any way protect residents from the ever-expanding
eminent domain type situations or are we still at the mercy of whatever unt wants to acquire
at that point regardless of our intentions the second part the second part all right
just just wanted to get that on there okay okay yes and we'll get into the old gateway
I think it's the next slide after this so um similar to the smaller plan for the fry
street the folks in the denia neighborhood and I know that they still have the same concerns
and issues today we meet with them we used to meet them once with them once a month to
go over what kind of issues and concerns they have and I know that when they started this
or when they were thinking of a smaller plan they were wanting to protect their neighborhood
from the development that were happening in the city and they wanted to keep it as a neighborhood
as there is today as much as possible in one of the goals for the denia neighborhood was
to limit commercial development within the boundaries of this this smaller plan so that's
a big goal a big strategy in this effort now the small area plan like I said earlier is
just the first step in in the effort in making sure that things happen um an overlay district
uh would make it stronger because that is something that's adopted and included in the
development code uh for now the small area plan only informs uh the the development in
terms of what the goal vision in in want for this area ultimately um an overlay district
or the zoning districts within this area would need to be the more more protective effort
in meeting those goals um and visions for the denia neighborhood commissioner beck thank
you chair uh ron I'm super glad you brought that up no no put that back up okay I keep
telling everyone I want to be sure we see you um I guess I guess my question was like
in the southeast corner you know um that that's the the wooded region that has been of somewhat
contentious development lately and so I think you said this in your last point at the end
of that this slides discussion but I mean to to actually have um made changes to that
to the water tower wooded region for that upland habitat region it would have required
not just a small area plan which this area already has but would have required that those
additional steps you were talking about to to actually change the code so that that development
of that wooden region would not have been consistent with with those changes is that
correct that's correct um either either as an overall requirement or standard that would
apply citywide or an overlay district which again would be more specific to this area
that would have added uh regulations or added standards um so again think of it as um you
know in the code like what's what's in the development code um we can have it in general
terms as as far as in the um sections throughout the code or we can have it as far as an overall
as part of an overlay district um that's in chapter four of the development code more
specific okay thanks thanks for confirming that I appreciate it okay ron no more questions
okay um so here's the um the smaller plan um that we were discussing earlier as far
as the oh gateway and and I've obviously there's a reason for why we started this and at the
time when we started this there was a lot of activity there's still a lot of activity
around the university and we um particularly we're looking at the the fry street area but
also um mainly north of oak street uh long oak and hickory uh at at the time we also
then looked at other areas around the university knowing that the same issues and concerns
were affecting those areas so you can see north of the university is where you know
we have our historic districts where we have a lot of the contentious you know zoning cases
that that we've been dealing with in recent years but we also know that the issues that
they're dealing with is also evident in the area west of the university uh the owsley
park area you know with parking with redevelopment so we expanded our boundaries to include this
area we also know that it's also happening on the south side of the university in terms
of parking again in the housing there is some some really nice enclaves here that we found
and we certainly want to see if we can protect them as much as possible and then also on
the east side so what i guess what i'm saying is the area that we were focusing on initially
was the area to the north of campus but that area expanded to to reflect more of what was
going on around the university and this small year plan i mentioned earlier was well um
involved did involve a lot of community input there was a stakeholder or steering committee
that is and uh two members of the commission were part of this effort and they can attest
that there was a lot of uh input received and there's a lot of discussion ultimately
uh we have a plan a gateway area plan that has a lot of goals a lot of strategies a lot
of actions and some of those actions have been already implemented parking for example
we started with painting you know parking spaces along some of those streets lighting
and sidewalks soon followed so there's still a lot of work that needs to be put in here
we were also looking at looking at the overlay district for the fry street there is a recommendation
in this plan to expand and refine that overlay district but again that's something that we
will be doing sometime in the future so you can see i think it was commissioner prunetta
you mentioned that it overlaps the fry street over overlay and in smart plan it does and
the hope was to um ultimately replace the fry street area plan with the old gateway
plan and also look at revising the fry street overlay district again to help again expand
that area and focus on where the issues are in addressing them through that uh new or
expanded overlay district
so the next slide here uh kind of going back to our discussion with the comprehensive plan
and we're gonna begin to talk about how our efforts with the comprehensive plan is going
to help inform and educate where the next smaller plans are going to be in the near
future the comprehensive plan as you all know is a very high level area and this map right
here that shows the future land use map you can see that the areas surrounding the universities
both unt and tw you see some blue hatching marks those are the areas for what we call
as compatibility areas and those are potentially areas for a smaller plan the old gateway which
we talked about recently involved or included that area that's hatched you see here so that
was a result of our future land use map in our comprehensive plan back in 2015 that informed
and said hey we need to look at this area and we need to develop a smaller plan and
it's it's referred to as the neighborhood university compatibility area and so that's
all we did we worked on that around the downtown which is obviously shown here in this more
mauve or maroon color there are brown hatching marks are hatched areas and these areas also
are potential for smaller plans in the future as you know the downtown grows as some of
the areas here needs help in enhancement or protection a smaller plan is a potential tool
that can help in that effort and then lastly centers and corridors we already touched on
this in previous slides these areas that we've identified as centers or corridors are also
potential smaller plans and in respect of where they are but also what activity is happening
in those areas development activities which kind of brings us to our next slide this map
here shows our what we call a heat map of where development has occurred in the last
five to six years 2015 is as far back as our GIS analyst Cody Yates went back as far as
mapping out where in the city has development occurred in terms of platting zoning cases
you know pd's every application was identified and mapped and put on on this heat map and
you can see that a lot of that activity has occurred partly in the downtown area south
of you know the downtown the university which we talked about razor range has a lot of activity
here obviously there's a lot of development new development occurring we also see parts
of the area just south of loop 288 by the med park area the hospital area and then McKinney
and the loop now the loop and us 380 and then also to the north of town and that's again
why we're here today is the commission wanted to see what we can do as far as identifying
but also potentially looking at a smaller plan to the north of town so we don't see
a whole lot happening in this area but there is still activity so this this kind of gives
you a more general idea where in the city we see activity and that is a I guess a identifier
for smart plan is development pressures and opportunities where is it happening in the
city so I kind of skipped over this list the comp plan update we talked about the changes
in land use that we have going on throughout the city the development pressure that you
see in this heat map and then the infrastructure needs that's that's also important and identifying
where there should be smaller plans again to address some of those capacity issues and
then lastly you know community interest and partnership and going back to Commissioner
Beck and Commissioner Hernandez comments you know you know the community is going to be
a big player in this effort and we want to certainly address any areas in the city that
they feel needs to be addressed so again all of these factors play into how we want to
prioritize the next smaller plan for the future so with that I'm going to turn this presentation
over to Julie Wyatt and she's going to talk a bit more about the area north of the loop
and highway 77 thanks Ron hello evening Julie good evening let me get my stuff set up okay
so you've been talking about comprehensive planning and the small area plan and now we
thought we would bring it back to the place that started the whole conversation about
small area planning and that is that North Denton area so in the last few months you've
seen a few cases come before you in this in this area and and especially you can kind
of see on that heat map that it might not be bright red at at highway 77 and I-35 but
it is certainly seems to be marching in that direction so that's why we're we've been talking
about it and I'm sure we'll continue to talk about it even without those developments though
that area is kind of slated to change and part of it is is related to mobility I-35
will expand in upcoming years as part of that the Barthol road will it will be expanded
and it will be straightened out west of 35 and then loop 288 is is slated in the future
to to extend toward the west and then eventually loop down and connect the south part of Denton
so there will be a lot of mobility changes a lot of changes in this area and it's certainly
something that the comprehensive plan looks at in terms of gateways and focus areas and
you can see that these this is a sampling of those projects that you've seen you haven't
seen all of these but some of them have come before you there there was the the PD request
at loop 288 and highway 77 you've seen other zoning cases along I-35 as you're probably
aware the high school is under construction near this area as well as other residential
projects so we're really seeing a lot of a lot of mix of uses so not only residential
but also employment uses and institutional uses so there's a there's um it is coming
in that direction so how does that relate to the comprehensive plan and the future for
the area as as we've talked about before the comprehensive plan is the umbrella it is it
is the overarching policy document that really sort of drives the vision for an area but
then right under that are embedded within that we also have these focus areas so we
have that gateway area at highway 77 and 35 there's also that center focus area at loop
288 and 35 that's going to become a lot more prominent especially as i as loop 288 extends
to the west so those are those focus areas are embedded within this business innovation
that really dominates this north part of town and then and then underneath that as that
small area planning effort moves forward that kind of goes underneath that umbrella so those
are those policy documents that then regulate specific areas within that overarching future
land use designation so there could be specifics small area plans for a variety of areas within
an overall area within an overall business innovation general area and then finally the
zoning map that we all know is on your screen and that really is that really is that regulatory
document that's that's what's on the ground that really defines what permitted uses and
development scale could go in an area and and those those those comprehensive planning
small planning efforts those are what inform that zoning and and that's how we make those
decisions and that's how we'll continue to make decisions for for this area so in terms
of next steps for for north denton so first of all we've got the comprehensive plan update
that is moving forward and and as part of that we'll be looking at that future land use map
as well as those focus areas and those flight future land use designations and what those mean
we'll look at inconsistencies with our zoning to see where we can make sure that we're consistent
we're consistent not only with what's on the ground but what our vision for for an area is
and how the city wants to realize our goals and then mobility a plan updates there is an update
for the mobility plan that's kind of running in parallel fashion to the comprehensive plan
and and you know as as ron said those public facilities are a really big part of those those
planning efforts and so those those mobility plan updates really are going lockstep with that
comprehensive planning effort also just looking i think as richard said about about how how we
want to move forward with any small area planning efforts and then how we refine those boundaries of
those areas what are the limits of those of those small area plans are they are they centered along
corridors are they looking at those those those focus areas those sort of circular areas within
within the comprehensive plan or we're just looking at where those pressure areas are
and then and then you know we have to look we're not in a in a bubble we we do have other
other entities that can impact our our planning efforts tech stop plans those those those those
roadway improvements are going to impact those those properties and we want to make sure that we
take that into consideration and then we we just track our ongoing development applications and
requests within the development process we have we have several stages that a development can
developer typically goes through and it starts with something called a pre-application and so
you know we can kind of start seeing where areas are emerging or areas of pressure emerging with
kind of where those pre-applications are coming from and then the dynamic city and it's kind of
just everywhere is growing but we we do get some hints at what's to come so just continuing to
track those applications and requests to see where that pressure is coming from
and that concludes our presentation and I'll be happy to answer any questions
uh yes here's your back thank you chair Julie um so in that North Denton region
I feel like maybe you can help me understand how we how we maneuver this choppy seas there's a
little bit of a catch 22 we have existing 2030 plan that's being revised into the 2040 plan we
have existing zoning and and sort of goals for the region but we sort of all said well this area
isn't quite aligning with maybe what would be a greater vision um that and and yet we may or may
not have to allow certain developments to come in because that's up to the property owners what to
some degree what goes in there uh who's interested in the region and so how do we get around the catch
22 of say having a particular vision that's more conducive to one kind of development
and but existing on the ground uh circumstances that may be allowing more or or promoting more
other kinds of development while we're in the process of revising the plan it feels like if
we don't put a small area plan concept in early then then the you know it's it's the 2040 plan
would have to be it would have to include these concepts of a small area plan but yet the it has
to be guided by the 2040 plan too so it's a little catch 22 I guess is my question so what's what's
the best path forward for something like that so let me make sure I understand your question um is
your question related to if if the planning and zoning commission recommended to kind of
pursue a small area plan in this area um is the question of the timing of that versus the
comprehensive plan yeah that that you're you're going in the right direction I I guess my concern
was you know we're in the process of updating the 2040 plan and and and but if we don't have the I
the elements of a small area plan placed in the 2040 plan may not be conducive to a small area
plan so the timing is the exact question I guess yes yeah if I can just add I think a lot of it
starts with the with the with the comp plan and land use plan um I think even if you think back
to some of the discussions we've had both on the one project in this area and and others as it
related to that business innovation land use category it's pretty broad in in how it's defined
and so I think part of it is defining that whether we define it better come up with a new category
but at least have those broad policy goals of of what we want and and really if you kind of go back
to that the first part of of the presentation that the the intent is really of that small area plan
to grow out of the out of the future land use and so it's kind of sets those broad those broad uses
those broad policy goals and then the the smaller plane kind of digs in a little bit deeper um and
so I think that's that's kind of that that first broad brush everything should be consistent with
the comp plan okay all right I'll cogitate on that thanks guys uh commissioner pronetta
so you know as long as we're discussing that particular area oh what is the criteria for
determining the time to establish a small area plan because in most of the ones that we've seen
before there are kind of established communities and basically you know their their neighborhoods
that initiated you know whether it's the gateway whether it was fry street you know wanting to
protect fry street you know denia when we have an area like we're looking at you know in that right
net right now we don't really have a lot there it can go in any direction it can it can be houses
in the future or uh you know it could be more industrial it could be be anything um what is
the process for or or is there a criteria for for going we should put something in now when we
haven't really an idea of what it would naturally wind up leaning towards and and how do we find
who the stakeholders are in something where we don't really have people who are um completely
invested in maintaining a particular character of an area does that make sense it it does and
i think what's what's unique about this area even though it's there's you know essentially not much
there um you do have essentially two mpcs that are there um so kind of think hunter and coal ranch
um we've got you know on a little bit of a smaller scale um but almost a you know a huge segment of
this area at least on the north side of the loop um it's kind of already pre-planned um i don't
know that they're they're looking to abandon that that mpc maybe some amendments in in the future
similar to what we did again some of these mpcs are a you know a 2007 version of the 2002 ddc
and so there's probably some benefit to to uh to change those but that's kind of that and i think
that's where that property owner was was you know in opposition they they have this vision
i mean granted they've held that property for for a long time so whether that vision is still
still true but they they definitely are a key key player in this um as is text dot you know text
dot's looking at plans for 380 uh to connect into the loop and and then as you as julie showed the
loop connecting on down i mean that that will really be in you know an interstate for all
intense purposes and so while while we talk single family and residential does it make sense to have
that next to um you know right up up against an interstate or are we looking at some commercial
activities office um light industrial where again is it the i think the it can run the gamut but i
think kind of looking at that one kind of the mpc what's already has been in in place for quite a
while probably isn't going to change anytime soon seeing we're 35 the loop are going uh with with
respect to expansion and then how we want to grow both from the south side and north south is seems
to already be taking shape um we've got a new school we've got another pd um that will be coming
forward uh for sort of a new use um that that we're we're looking at um but it really should
start with that future land use category and and maybe business innovation is just a little too
broad uh and and it kind of all all encompassing and and maybe that maybe that's something that
needs to be refined or or just a different a different category but i think conditions
east of 35 and west of 35 definitely are two different uh two different scenarios if that helps i hope
any other questions i do not see any thank you julie and ron for the presentation
uh next on our agenda item is item 2b receive a report and hold discussion regarding regulations
and procedures for variances and non-conformities is this you richard or who's taking this one
this will be hayley got it
good evening let me get the presentation pulled up here
here we go sorry about that had to locate the presentation here
okay there we go
all right so our second uh work session item for the evening is another uh in our boot camp series
this one related to variances and non-conformities so we'll briefly just go over the the role of the
zoning board of adjustment and then discuss variances and non-conformities in turn so that
you can get a little familiarity with both of those terms so some background on this the the
root cause of this also dates back to one of our january pnz meetings you may recall there was a
proposed change to the ddc to modify the setbacks in the r3 district that led to a pretty lengthy
discussion and as part of that there we noted there were several questions related to what
non-conformities may have been created with the the 2019 code update as well as whether some of
those were better handled but through the variance process rather than amending the ddc so we wanted
to bring these items forward just to have a discussion and make sure you all have some
background on what both of those items are and and when when they might be appropriate
so to start the discussion it's important to first look at the board that handles these items and that
would be our zoning board of adjustment or the zba they are a quasi-judicial body that consists
of a total of 10 members they have seven regular members and three alternates the need for those
alternates is because as a quasi-judicial board they have to have 75 percent of their members in
attendance to hold a meeting so you have to have six out of seven present to have a meeting and
then also for any of their decisions they have to have an affirmative vote by six out of seven
members the zba is a very important board because all of their decisions are final appeals of their
decisions your next step after that is a district court and state law does provide some stipulations
with respect to the timing of that and how you have to get to district court within 10 days after
a zba decision for an appeal if you're interested in looking at who those current members are and
what vacancies we have there is a boards and commissions website on city of dentons home page
that gives us kind of the details of that what they're how their terms work and who's currently
serving on that board and which spaces are vacant in general the zba hears four types of requests
the the most frequent of those would be the variances that we'll look at in a little more
detail they can hear variances from both the ddc and chapter 33 of our code of ordinances which
is the sign code they can also hear requests for relief from our gas well setbacks and reverse
setbacks they can hear appeals of administrative decisions and then finally they can hear requests
related to non-conformities which we'll also be talking about tonight as i mentioned earlier
the zba's votes are a little bit different than pnz and council rather than a simple majority
they do have to have 75 percent concurrence for for something to pass through the zba they do
typically meet once a month appeals are a little bit different and do require them to hold two
separate meetings but those are are not heard very often and then just for reference for you all
there's some information here related to where you can read more about the zba and state law as well
as the city of dentons ordinances so we'll move now into more specifics about what a variance is
so a variance is defined in the ddc as any deviation from the specific terms of the code
that wouldn't be contrary to public interest and that is justified because of special conditions
where the literal enforcement of the ddc would create a practical difficulty or hardship
so we'll talk a little bit more in detail about what that what a hardship is and how you can prove
that when we look at their criteria for approval so variances are only applicable in very unique
circumstances there has to be something physically associated with the property that prevents it from
being developed or used in a way that similarly situated properties could be used a variance
explicitly cannot be used for allowing a use where one wouldn't be permitted that would require a
zoning action or a specific use permit or something of that nature it cannot be used to alleviate
inconveniences or financial burdens so there's a very high bar that you have to meet in order
to qualify to even request a variance and in general pretty much every other option should
be exhausted before you go the route of a variance so that includes looking at alternative designs
for the property or alternative uses whether there is the ability for minor modifications
that could resolve some of the issues that's a new term that was created with the 2019 ddc
that allows for some staff approval of limited flexibility and things like setbacks and building
coverage and then finally sometimes the rezoning is the appropriate option rather than a variance
and that is because like i said there is a very high bar for the zba to be able to approve a
variance they must find that all of these criteria have been met for them to be able to approve
something and they do produce a written findings after their decision is made that documents how
they have reached that decision essentially so those criteria are one like we mentioned earlier
that there are special circumstances or conditions that are unique to that property that don't apply
to other properties in the area that would generate the hardship and that would deprive
the applicant of reasonable use of their property they have to find that the variance wouldn't be
detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other properties in the area they also have to
find that what they are approving is the minimum variance needed to accomplish the purpose so they
can't for example if someone could achieve what they're wanting to do with a five foot reduction
and set back they couldn't say okay well we'll go ahead and grant you 10 just so you have some
flexibility they would have to stick with that minimum and then finally the the last criteria
are that they would have to find that the strict application of the code would create an unnecessary
hardship that is inconsistent with the intent of the ddc and that the variance itself would
preserve the spirit of the ddc they have to find that the variance isn't solely for the purpose of
mitigating financial hardships and then it did not the need for the variance didn't result from the
owner's actions so we'll look at a couple of examples to kind of help you see how that how
that works in practice both of these examples that we'll look at are very recent cases that have
gone to zba this one is is kind of the typical variance request that i'd say we see in a lot of
the older parts of denton where we have these very narrow lots this subdivision was plotted in
the 1920s the lot is only 25 feet wide the property transitioned with our 2019 code to the r4
district which requires some pretty sizable setbacks so because it's a corner lot the 20
foot front yard setback was applicable on both street frontages they had a five foot side yard
requirement for the interior side of the property and then a 10 foot setback in the rear so no matter
which way the owner oriented a home on this lot essentially the entire width of the lot was
consumed by those setback requirements so in that case the strict application of those would have
prevented development of the property in this instance given the very specific plan that they
brought forward the zba did allow the variances necessary to build just this product so they gave
them an allowance for a five foot setback on crawford street and a two and a half foot setback
on their interior side to allow development of a home that was similar in size to what's in the area
in this instance that actually the very same night at zba they heard both of these cases
this was a case where they found that it was the property owner's actions that generated the need
and that it was not something unique to the property so this request was actually denied
in this case the property owner built a an accessory structure without seeking a permit
they located it two feet from their rear property line their pd required a minimum of three feet
setback from the property line so when they went to zba to seek that variance their request was
denied so they will have to modify or relocate the structure if they wish to keep it on their
property and the zba did that because they couldn't find that it meant all of their criteria
there was no unique feature of the property that generated the need for the reduction
that three foot setback versus a two foot would not have deprived them of the use of their property
or from putting an accessory structure and it was the owner's actions that generated the need for
the variance so in this case that request was denied and then the last thing related to variances
that i wanted to to bring to your attention some of you may recall that prior to the 2019
development code we did have a separate process for subdivision variances so things related to
driveways roadway standards and then our subdivision standards under the 02 code
would have come to the planning and zoning commission that is a process that's still
referenced in our transportation criteria manual so we do have some some inconsistency there that
we'll be looking to clean up but currently the 2019 code would strictly state that those
variances would go to zba which is not appropriate given the link to the platting process that's
created by the local government code so this is something that staff will be bringing to our
development code review committee to clean up and and you all will soon be seeing that subdivision
variance process hopefully being something that would come back under your purview
and i will pause here and see if we have any questions on variances before we
go to those last few slides about non-conformities
that doesn't look like it all right i know this is a riveting topic so hang with me just a few
more minutes and we'll get through the rest of this and move on with our agenda so non-conformities
again being a function of the zba is something that they would make decisions related to
so just briefly wanted to go over what these are and the types that our code defines
so non-conformities are things that were legally established under previous regulations so under a
prior development code perhaps that are no longer consistent with our current zoning standards
we do have some very general standards for non-conformities that allow them to continue
in their current state but those standards are written in a way that discourages the long-term
continuation or further reinvestment into those properties with the non-conformity with the goal
of eventually eliminating non-conformities over time to preserve the integrity of our zoning
ordinances and these these regulations are all found in section 1.5 of the dbc and i wanted to
point out that with the 2019 code there was intentionally an exception written in for existing
single-family duplex and townhome dwellings and lots so if those were legally existing
before 2019 they were not made non-conforming so we do have that protection for single-family uses
structures and lots that allows them to be considered lawful and not non-conforming
so generally speaking non-conformities like i said you can continue to use and occupy those
with some limitations that again is intended to discourage further investment into those properties
minor maintenance and repairs are permitted so you can do things like bring it up to the current
building code standards if there's a safety issue if you need to restripe your parking lot basic
routine maintenance and repair can be done but you can't expand to the degree of non-conformity with
it with your actions if a non-conforming use or structure is discontinued so it's not used for a
year or more and and there are some provisions that allow for you know making attempts to sell
a property or things like that that could extend that but generally speaking after that one year
the non-conforming rights would cease and further use or development of that property would be
required to come into compliance with our current standards and there are also provisions that would
allow council to initiate amortization of those non-conforming uses and structures
so if council decided to do that and and over time phase out non-conformities in a part of the city
the zba would then be responsible for setting a plan for how to compensate those properties
and how to establish the termination dates for those uses the code just briefly i'll go through
these does define several types of non-conformities that are all handled a little differently
non-conforming uses of course would be a land use that no longer conforms to the ddc
so it may have been permitted under a previous zoning and now it's not those uses may not be
expanded into new structures within a property so you can extend expand the use within its existing
structure but not to other structures and there are allowances for a non-conforming use to be
changed to a different use that may also be non-conforming that would have been permitted
under that previous zoning but that's less intensive or would have less impacts if that is
done then you cannot go back to the more intensive non-conforming use after the fact non-conforming
structures are exactly what they sound like it's a structure that was legal at the time but now it
it doesn't conform to something such as setbacks or building coverage if those structures are
destroyed by natural causes and that damage is to less than 50 then the property owner could rebuild
it to that original condition if that damage is to more than 50 or if it's voluntarily demolished
then that non-conforming structure cannot be rebuilt and then finally we also define a
non-conforming lot and non-conforming site features these are exactly what they sound like
a non-conforming lot is one that no longer meets the dimensions of our zoning those lots can be
built upon as long as all the other zoning provisions could be met so if setbacks and
lot coverage could be met or building coverage then that lot could be used even though it is
non-conforming a non-conforming site feature is something like driveways or landscaping parking
perhaps these things can continue as they are on the property but if the owner seeks to do expansions
or additions on the lot then they would have to bring those into compliance with the current code
and then finally wanted to touch on how non-conformities are eliminated
as we mentioned earlier the council could choose to initiate amortization procedures through the zba
alternatively a property owner could modify their non-conformity to come into compliance with the
code to make their site legally conforming or if it's more severe and that can be easily
accomplished then rezoning would probably be the best method to do so and just wanted to show you
some recent examples of things where we've we've seen this done the texas health resource campus
was a recent case that came before you all in the council and was approved that rezoned this site to
a plan development because the overall campus was non-conforming to our current parking standards
and landscaping standards the through the pd process they proposed some some new standards
suitable to their site that would allow them to continue to use it and have the site be deemed
legal and then a couple of years ago some of you may remember this one just an example of how
some of those smaller lots the variance process may not always be appropriate in this case this
lot on prairie street was very similar to what we looked at before it was too small for a structure
to be built on but when you looked at the zoning map you saw that perhaps there was an error in
assigning that zoning this was the only lot in its subdivision zoned nr2 as opposed to nr4
so they elected to go through the zoning process and change that to r4 and some overlay conditions
were applied that that resulted in it now being shown as pd r4 on our map
and that is all i have for you this evening on those topics i will pull down
the presentation and happy to answer any questions you may have thanks hailey for the presentation
uh commissioner beck
so thanks chair um hailey what um some some properties have the in the 2019 uh conversion
were declared no not legally non-conforming or or whatever the language you used the double
negative i i didn't get it exactly correct but um do we have an idea of how many legally conforming
but in actuality non-conforming properties that we have i don't know that that exact analysis has
been done um i'm gonna see if richard had any thoughts on that i don't think we've done that
analysis i believe the number for single family was going to be pretty substantial though because
some of those setback changes and us switching from a density-based code to a one that relies
on lot dimensions um so because of that that provision was added to to prevent a large number
of single family homeowners from having non-conforming property but i don't have that
number on that that may be something probably take our gis wizards a little bit of time to
do but i'm sure they could come up with a number there i i was just curious if we had sort of an
idea of the sort of amount of gray area that was that's out there i mean legally it's not gray i'm
not trying to say there's any issues with what we did i'm just curious how when you say something is
this is the definition of something but not in this case you you create sort of a conundrum
sometimes and so you know i'm not saying we did anything wrong or anything i'm just saying
i'm curious what that level is you know two percent five percent you know 25 i i just sort
of what's the kind of rough ballpark magnitude of that transition and if you don't know that's fine
look into uh related to lot size no no no it's i don't think it's important enough to ask you to
go to any effort i was just curious okay any other questions for hayley
i do not see any thank you hayley for the presentation
now looking at the time i think we have a little bit uh just enough time to get
uh the actual agenda and it's pretty short this evening uh the first thing that we have if we
continue on with the agenda is our regular meeting items starting with uh minutes is there any notes
on the april 7 minutes okay seeing none i'm just checking real fast with richard the agenda is is as
is um item 4a is just being pulled right no action taken no action needed uh but consent and item
4b are good right yes sir great let's just hop into that real fast there's two items for consent
i'll invite hayley back up real fast to go over 3a
all right good evening this is a final plat for phase one of the sagebrook edition which you all
may remember from a recent plan development request that came before you so this is a
single-family subdivision located on the south side of all red road just on the west side of
the railroad tracks in fort worth drive and then as you can see on the plat there will be that
future extension of brush creek road on the south side of the property staff is recommending
approval of this phase one final plat as it meets all the established requirements i'm happy to answer
any questions great any questions on this plot for hayley i do not see any i appreciate hayley
the next is item 3b pp 20-26c and this is carina maldenato's item is she good evening can you hear
me yep we can all right um good evening carina maldenato assistant planner um this request is
for a preliminary plat um for six commercial lots located on the northeast corner of mckinney and
loop 288 um if you can remember this was brought back in december of last year um was recommended
for denial due to um outstanding issues with tree preservation um and then just you know some
formatting related to drainage and um right away dedication all those items have been addressed
so staff is now recommending approval of this item and i can answer any questions related
thanks carina i do not see any questions give it a second yep no questions on this i appreciate
your presentation and then uh lastly for our work session we have item four right 4b dca 21-0002
and this is looks like richards item good evening and i don't have a presentation for this um it's
pretty straightforward um if you recall uh the 2002 ddc did not allow preliminary plats in the
etj um this is part of a we're recommending we kind of go back to that um we've had some some
challenges uh at least with one subdivision potentially some others that are are kind of
floating out there haven't formally submitted uh part of the concern were sort of a two-phase
approach to this um one we're working through an update of the ila to address certain standards
given our inability to annex these properties um we used to have the authority in the in the ddc
at least to annex property that we were extending water and sore particularly if it was adjacent to
our municipality we could no longer do that um in addition there's a differing of difference of
opinion between uh the city and the county with respect to uh roadway standards um and again these
are all um contained within within the inner local so we're trying to button that up uh and and
really uh the county does not want to own or maintain uh roads with curb and gutter uh they
want to maintain their their rural uh standard um and where where it's caused a real issue for us
is some of these larger subdivisions that have multi-phases um obviously the likelihood of them
you know putting all of the infrastructure for a 500 or 600 unit a single-family subdivision is
is is probably slim to none um and so that's where we're seeing this this phased approach
through a a preliminary plat and so what we're trying to do is one just eliminate the ability
to do that uh preliminary plat um so if you do want to build it still wouldn't prohibit it but
you would have to put all that infrastructure in um at at in in one in one phase um but we will have
an updated inner local um moving forward here in the next probably month month and a half
and then look to bring that back to the county for for consideration and then formal adoption
and the intent really is to um for those properties in the etj uh use the county rural standard
so if you want to use the city standard um curb and gutter and and take advantage of those um
opportunities then really uh the best bet would be to annex into that voluntarily annex into the
city that's kind of it in a nutshell uh chris you're back so you know we're looking at like
basically to get the interlocals finalized you know maybe by the end of the summer
so the only sort of gray areas that might crop up is developments between now and when that happens
is that correct correct and and we've had some that are very small uh in the etj um where it's
it's the typical you know what we typically used to see in the etj um you know one acre lots um
where they might have you know we have a lot of one acre lots in our southern area of the etj
that's actually served by argyle water and so they they typically want to maintain that rural
standard they don't want sidewalks um they're usually an acre acre and a half wooded lot um
with septic and so they it's really hasn't been an issue where it's been an issue is
where we've had uh development particularly off a long road um that's a continuation of a subdivision
and completely adjacent to the city um that um we can no longer require annexation so they're
they're developing it um to um you know whatever standard they essentially they they want they have
to meet our roadway standards because of the um the code but that's where it's an issue with
denton county where um whether or not the county actually it's it's a sort of a two-prong approach
one is the actual dedication of the right-of-way uh and then the other is once those uh improvements
are done there's a formal acceptance um so whether or not the county actually formally accepts those
is is another it is really the big concern because if they don't um then the question comes in who
who's going to own and maintain those and really the concern is uh in 10 years from now uh the
likelihood of of those residents um petitioning to annex the city into the city i would assume
would be pretty high um and our concern is then if if we would have to annex that land um it would
put us put the city at a serious uh financial burden especially if there's repairs that would
need to be made immediately to those roads so just to follow up real briefly because i know
other people have questions um our only recourse in that case is is to what essentially request
nicely to the county to please not allow something that is going to hurt us in 10 years well it and
it's it that's where it's the challenge because it's it's under our you know it's under our
authority because it's our etj division one um there's just a differing uh sort of opinion on
on the standard um and uh you know again the county does not want to want to maintain
those those concrete roads with with curb and gutter and so it again it hasn't been an issue
until this this last year and and kind of i think what what that unintended consequence of of having
an option to do preliminary plat is is what was ended up being the result of this so um what we
want to do is just eliminate that ability um right now and then uh sort of the second phase
of that is to to change the standard through the ila thanks commissioner prunetta um yeah and just
kind of like a put a focus on on what we're talking about i think it was last year we had
something that was uh i think somewhere around stewart road or something like that where there
was a division subdivision coming up and their their streets were narrow and i think they were
like kind of asphalt or something like that and we we didn't really have any leeway any say over
it my understanding is that it was most likely they're going to annex right after they're done
and these are going to be streets that we're going that are we're going to wind up having to
pave for pretty quickly because they're not sturdy enough to handle what we normally accept
this is to address that type of situation right it's hoping to address it where where you you
wouldn't have that phase that phase development plan which we typically see with the preliminary
plat because they i i have not seen a subdivision go in you know five six hundred units in in one
phase they're typically even a three or four hundred but they're usually a hundred hundred
units per phase maybe a little less maybe a little more um and then it's sort of just you know smaller
bites at the apple as they develop that infrastructure sell those lots and then and then begin the begin
the second phase so what we're really attempting to do is stop that ability to do these phased
phased developments within the etj
christer alice thank you chair richard with your first example that you gave that is has not been
a problem so that one acre plus lot served by argyle water where does this leave a situation like
that those never come in for preliminary plat um they those those properties um i want to because
again that preliminary plat is optional and so uh that one for example went straight to um they had
their construction engineering plans and and they wanted to have those approved and then uh final
plat it um and in fact most i would say the majority at least you know two years ago a good
portion of the plats that we did review in the etj were primarily minor plats which are which are
done at an administrative level where they they didn't exceed four you know four lots um sort of
the outlier would be those maybe eight lot ten lot developments but again um they weren't it really
wouldn't affect them because i don't know any that have ever there's no benefit for them to
preliminary plat a lot of them are our custom home builders to begin with and so they just want to
establish that those lot boundaries and um work with that custom builder so is the goal to revoke
this down the road once the inner local is done or for i would think it would just stay stay in
place um just just to have as another again we keep getting you know every two years limitations
in what what we can and we can't do um but again it's sort of you know somewhat of a protection
measure looking long term so we're not we're not stuck holding the bag unfortunately um with some
of these subdivisions that you know once they're built and gone they're that that's it um now you
have homeowners to contend with um but it also is a strain because you know those 911 calls are going
to come in and it's going to be a strain on our our police and fire as well or we're not getting
those those tax revenues from that from those subdivisions thanks thanks christner back
real briefly this falls on from commissioner elissa's point is there a mechanism to give you
the benefit that we had a preliminary plats in the future so yes i understand the rationale
for doing it now um but the bent there is some benefits and that you get some long-range planning
and you see things coming a little earlier and less shot clocky and other things but well i guess
that doesn't apply to the etj as much right but anyway um is is there a way to get that benefit
back in the future if we leave it off now i think really the benefit would be to to if they want to
you know take advantage of that curb and gutter and and have kind of this the typical urban or
suburban standard is to really annex into the city at that point we can fully assess it um
you know there there's a process that's involved through that annexation there's an annexation
plan that that goes with it uh and then you know if you've noticed then they're going through a
future land use plan amendment um they're going then for a rezoning typically associated right
with that and so there's there's public hearings involved and it's just um i think a much better
process and ability for us to truly truly plan uh accordingly at our um in our etj so we recover
the benefit through these other mechanisms that makes sense i appreciate it oh thanks
any other questions for richard on this item
great seeing none that wraps this up for our work session uh meeting i will close this meeting at
6 33 and we'll meet back in let's say five minutes what's going to be a short meeting so
let's take five minutes and be back here and start promptly at 6 38
uh good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the planning zoning commission meeting for april
21st 2021 seeing that we do have a quorum i'll call the meeting to order at 6 39 please let the
record note that commissioner smith is absent this evening the first item of business is to
uh provide a pledge of allegiance to the u.s and texas flag
if other commissioners would like to join me you can please unmute yourself i pledge allegiance
to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation
under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all for all honor honor the texas flag i pledge
allegiance to the texas one state under god one and indivisible the next item of business is item
two the consideration of our minutes and i will take a discussion or vote our motion uh commissioner
alice i move approval uh commissioner anderson second we have a first and a second for approval
any discussion seeing none i'll call for a vote via roll call just going around my screen we'll
start with commissioner alice aye commissioner anderson aye commissioner prunetta aye commissioner
cole aye commissioner beck aye uh chair is awesome and i motion carries six zero the next
is our consent agenda the chair will take a motion or discussion on it commissioner anderson
making motion to approve we have a first for approval commissioner prunetta a second we have
first and a second for approval of the consent agenda any discussion seeing none i'll call for
a vote via roll call uh commissioner alice aye commissioner anderson uh commissioner prunetta
aye commissioner cole aye commissioner beck aye chair is also an i motion carries six zero that
moves us to our public hearings items four item 4a is um being pulled tonight there'll be no action
taken on item 4a which leaves us with just 4b dca 21-0002 for discussion i will open the public
hearing and i will turn it over to uh richard canoni for presentation thank you chair uh
commissioner it's just a brief presentation i don't have a powerpoint prepared for this item
what we're what staff is proposing uh with this uh city initiated text amendment uh is to eliminate
the ability to do a preliminary plat in the etj uh you may recall prior to the adoption of the
2019 ddc uh preliminary plats were um were not allowed in in the etj uh as of as of recent um
since the adoption of the 2019 ddc and some um inconsistencies with our ila in our local
cooperation agreement with denton county it's caused some issues with larger subdivisions
developing on our on uh adjacent to our boundary um and and concerns with with the future of those
developments uh and and how that right away dedication and acceptance if at all would be
done by denton county and so what we're attempting to do with this uh amendment is go back to that
prohibition of of having uh preliminary plats in the etj uh and uh really working towards if someone
wants to use and take advantage of our of our standards uh then uh annex into the city so that
we can properly uh plan plan accordingly and with that i'll be happy to answer any questions
all right is there any questions for richard on this item
and it doesn't appear that we have any oh commissioner alice thank you chair yeah richard
just a quick question about you know i know it we can't ask someone to annex into the city
so if they brought this before us are we asking them to annex into the city or well we we actually
we don't we don't have a we don't have a prohibition against okay so we can ask we just
can't do it we we can't there's there it's very hard for us to to involuntarily you know to
forcibly annex someone but there are many times that that um that's one of the first especially
at a pre-application meeting um we will ask if they would consider consider annexing in into the
city um there are some that um you know like sagebrook i think was is is one if you recall
this is off of between 35 and and um 377 uh they just didn't they wanted to be part of the city and
and you know they were aware of of this potential issue with with with the acceptance and what right
away would would be required um but they just thought it would be in the best interest to just
annex into the city now and and and that's what they did they went through and then obviously
rezoned and platted the property we had it on on the agenda earlier tonight um but but um no we
certainly do uh do uh do ask yeah and so by by having this uh in place to where it's prohibited
in the etj we're hoping it's more of an incentive to or motivation right and then doesn't get us in
any trouble by saying look you can't do it this way because that's against yeah there's no
requirement in in the local government code 212 that that requires us to to uh uh have to allow
a preliminary plight in the etj just defers to the city's rules okay perfect thanks all right
commissioner beck thank you chair uh richard that that brings up a question commissioner list this
point brings up a question to me um if somebody comes in with you know 100 homes something that
would be a phase one but still should actually have the kind of oversight we'd like to have um
and they're just recalcitrant they don't want they don't want to follow along um
then i mean is this enough restriction that i mean so the the the sort of language was for
multi-phase but if they're willing to do it in a single phase that's almost as big as a multi-phase
um are we going to get into a an ugly thing where we have to let them do it we don't have that
prohibition i think if somebody wanted to come in and do a single phase you know single phase
development um during this and again remember this is sort of a two-pronged approach so the first is
making sure that we kind of just eliminate this now and continue and continue in the future
but coming right on the heels of this will be that update to the interlocal agreement
that will have a completely different roadway standard for properties within the etj
and so there there won't be that huge of a window where if somebody really wanted to come in um it
it would take some obviously some planning because in order to um apply for before you can get to
your final plat um you would need to do all your construction engineering plans and there's a lot
of studies and and your tia your downstream assessment your flood drain all of those those
studies would need to be a component of those construction engineering plans that typically
you'll see in between the preliminary plat and and final as those those engineering plans are are
reviewed and approved and so when it's just that single phase the first step is getting those
those construction engineering plans and so again that's a big investment for for a large
development right right off the bat without even having any preliminary plat approval that that
would essentially vest you for for a certain time period okay not saying it not saying it can't
happen but i would say the likelihood would be um would not be that the probability would not be
that high again given that we're going to update the the um interlocal we're in the process of
updating it now but and so i it just just for clarity they wouldn't be if they brought it in
before we have that interlocal agreement would that tie our hands the way uh ddc changes tie our
hands well they they the only the big difference is they just wouldn't be able to to preliminary
plat they could they can come in with with a a kind of we're rolling it back to where we were
in 2002 and so the the standards are are the same right now until that interlocal uh is updated um
this just eliminates eliminates that ability to essentially kind of vest you um with that preliminary
plat okay thanks any other questions for richard great and we don't have any callers so i'll go
ahead and close the public hearing and i'll turn it to the commission for a motion
commissioner ellis i move approval and commissioner prunetta a second the first and second for approval
as presented uh by staff any discussion seeing none i'll call for a vote via roll call uh
commissioner ellis aye commissioner anderson aye commissioner prunetta aye commissioner cole
okay i think i think it was an eye commissioner cole perfect commissioner beck
hi chair is also an eye motion carries six zero the last item for this evening's agenda is the
commission project matrix i'll first turn it over to richard for any updates and today's for
discussion uh thank you um no no real updates we have the two items on there that that again will
will be moving forward as as we get through the code amendments one item i did want to bring up
gary packen from parks reached out to me yesterday they have a a presentation as part that they put
together as part of an ada transition plan analysis as it relates to their parks and trails
and he asked if that was something that the commission would be interested in in hearing
at a at a work session and so i thought it could perhaps i think given given the number of trails
and and parks and integration that we see i thought it could be beneficial but wanted to at least
bring that up to the commission to see if they were if that's something they would be they would
be interested in so if that's the case i'll work with gary and and get that on on an upcoming
work session or upcoming agenda the the only other item i wanted to update everyone on is
council action i think the only item that that they did take action last night on was the um
actually two items um the the formal action item was the urban logistics alternative esa
if you remember that that had that had uh had come through some some timing i want to say maybe in
december january um council had asked uh for some additional changes to that and so they did modify
that plan they eliminated one of the um drainage drainage ponds and so they were able to have a
remove some of that treat area that that was initially planned to be uh cut down um so again
it's not necessarily part of their development it's still part of um the adjacent property but
at least uh they did get it down to just the one uh one drainage pond so wanted to provide an update
on that um the only other item uh and again it's it's a pending pending application so it'll
ultimately uh could be in front of you uh in in the near future we're still doing our analysis
but i do know you're getting a multitude of of emails uh forwarded to you uh regarding the the
hartley field um pd request that that and and future land use amendment and so just wanted to
let you know that item was was presented um at least the uh they're also asking for a a public
improvement district or a pid and so that item was discussed at last yesterday's afternoon's work
session um one just gauging whether or not that's something uh before they it's a pretty uh intense
review there's a lot of studies that are associated with it um and so that that work session really
was is this something council even wants to consider um and so i while there were essentially four
uh members that that i think were okay with moving it along there were there were substantial um what
i would call substantial um considerations that that that that development group needs to take
into account um especially with respect to lot size and and some retail and some other
issues that that were raised and so um i have not heard where where they're at as of as of yesterday
but um just wanted to bring that that that pd uh and future land use um will ultimately be
be on the agenda for for consideration but i just wanted to kind of let you know the context of of
the the multitude of emails that are that are coming your way great thanks richard it seemed
like just from nods i think we're in support of having uh gary present to us so let's go ahead
and get that scheduled christner back thank you chair um on that last point richard um so
one of the things that was brought to my attention and i i wanted to bring it up either for this
commission to ask for it to be put on the matrix or or just to get your your two cents on it i
guess at the outset and that is uh the denton county greenbelt plan um and the denton county
greenbelt plan for this this last item that you just mentioned um which apparently we're signatories
on talks about uh a land use preservation of the drainages um which now it feels like
the development of those regions would be directly in conflict so i i guess i'm trying to understand
what we're limiting ourselves to when we sign on to the denton county greenbelt plan
and then how does that impact our decision process as this item that you were mentioning
goes forward um it can can you i mean i don't know maybe that's a future work session i'm
really the two cents right now but you i'll i'll i'll shut up and yeah i i probably would prefer to
to um i don't like to shoot from the hip so i would prefer to to to actually come back and
and look at that you know talk through that greenbelt plan and and actually what what it means
um if you've ever looked at our our municipal boundary it kind of snakes up um that's how we
get to um you know the water plant that we have you know adjacent to adjacent to the lake um and
so there's there's a what's interesting is there's there's you know our municipal boundary if you're
east of east of the creek or east of the the the stream your etj division one and for whatever
reason on on the east side uh it's etj division two and so that's something we're also looking
at as part of that interlocal um and and maybe what i will do is actually bring that presentation
i know i had talked about it i'll bring that presentation forward because it i think it'll
help in kind of the context for with with some of this at least um what we were looking at for for
council on some policy considerations and whether or not uh you know what staff looked at is does
this just make sense to for all of that area to be part of our etj division one so it's under our
purview for platting likelihood of something developing there on that east side probably
slim to none but at least it gets us uh some some authority at least over platting and looking at
uh sort of the trail network that that parks is working on um through that area but i i will
what i'll do is i'll add two items to the matrix one being the greenbelt plan and i'll make sure
everyone has a copy of that the second will just be that update to the ila um given that that it does
um does does affect does affect pnz ultimately as you're as you're reviewing plats and so
i will uh i will get an agenda item uh hopefully for the next meeting i'll try to get that prepared
it'll be the same presentation so i'll i'll provide that um in advance so if that's helpful
that that'll be helpful i appreciate it christian alice thank you chair richard i'd like to see how
we can move forward oh no forward with the small area plan discussion so whether that means it has
to go on a future agenda maybe if that's if we need to take a formal action on it or whatever
to kind of move forward yeah let me um i'll get together with with mac and we can look at how the
best prepare you know whether it's just a general item or if there's if it's for a specific area if
there's consensus on that then we can we can prepare prepare an item for consideration
michelle is you're kind of choppy do you have any other follow-ups or questions about that
okay great um the only thing i have uh richard is while ago we talked about parking minimums downtown
and where that was headed or i just wanted to kind of bring back the discussion i don't know
if that falls under small area plans or uh just we we talked about it last fall in our winter
and i don't know where that conversation fizzled to but can i just bring that back to the forefront
to get an update on on where where that is certainly um that will be that will be uh
one of the items commissioner anderson's uh that that will be one of the items that will actually
be discussed even as part of dcrc um we're looking at the overall just updates to parking um and what
i'll i'll have ron um we'll bring ron back again um for a a just a discussion item overall on that
but but i what i also wanted to bring up is we do have a special study area or a special meeting if
you will um as part of the comp plan update that will focus just on kind of the downtown
and so i do know ron has met uh this week with with the boards um within the terse board and
and the main street uh association to get some some initial feedback and and uh input so uh we
we can share that and then i'll talk to him about preparing an item as part of that that discussion
okay great i appreciate it any other things for the matrix to be discussed
all right seeing none i will end this meeting at 6 58 thank you everyone thanks bye