1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:07,480
 Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission

2
00:00:07,480 --> 00:00:12,280
 work session for Wednesday, May 5, seeing that we have a quorum, I will call the meeting

3
00:00:12,280 --> 00:00:14,840
 to order at 5.05.

4
00:00:14,840 --> 00:00:20,200
 The first item of our agenda is citizen comment on the consent agenda items.

5
00:00:20,200 --> 00:00:29,260
 We actually have two, and so I just want to for the record note that agenda item 3AFP21-009B,

6
00:00:29,260 --> 00:00:30,880
 there is one against.

7
00:00:30,880 --> 00:00:41,480
 And for item 3BPP21-0002B, there is one against these comments were also emailed to the commissioners

8
00:00:41,480 --> 00:00:46,000
 and are going to be included in the meeting record.

9
00:00:46,000 --> 00:00:50,720
 With that, we can hop into the work session reports for this afternoon.

10
00:00:50,720 --> 00:00:56,280
 And I believe we just have the one over the city's extra territorial jurisdiction.

11
00:00:56,280 --> 00:01:10,400
 And Richard Canone is going to present, I do believe.

12
00:01:10,400 --> 00:01:26,040
 Richard, whenever you're ready, the floor is yours.

13
00:01:26,040 --> 00:01:49,960
 And you are muted, Richard.

14
00:01:49,960 --> 00:01:57,760
 Nope, still.

15
00:01:57,760 --> 00:02:06,600
 Richard, you're still muted, someone in the back, unmute him.

16
00:02:06,600 --> 00:02:12,640
 I think it's actually on the Zoom, the actual dashboard.

17
00:02:12,640 --> 00:02:13,640
 There we go.

18
00:02:13,640 --> 00:02:16,640
 I think I'm there, okay.

19
00:02:16,640 --> 00:02:17,640
 You made it.

20
00:02:17,640 --> 00:02:21,160
 Sorry, I don't know what's going on with this tonight.

21
00:02:21,160 --> 00:02:22,160
 Quite a bit of slides here.

22
00:02:22,160 --> 00:02:25,680
 Some of this stuff I'm going to kind of breeze over pretty quickly.

23
00:02:25,680 --> 00:02:31,320
 This was a presentation that was done obviously January 26th with City Council.

24
00:02:31,320 --> 00:02:36,440
 They had provided some direction for staff kind of working through some of the issues

25
00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:43,160
 that we have mostly with our interlocal agreement, but just as just also how we deal with our

26
00:02:43,160 --> 00:02:51,520
 ETJ, how we have requested times to swap areas of our ETJ with adjacent municipalities.

27
00:02:51,520 --> 00:02:55,640
 And so this really was kind of that bringing it all together, getting some policy direction

28
00:02:55,640 --> 00:03:03,720
 from council, and we'll be bringing a right now we're anticipating bringing back sort

29
00:03:03,720 --> 00:03:10,240
 of the findings and kind of the draft agreement on I think it's May 25th is what we're looking

30
00:03:10,240 --> 00:03:11,800
 at now.

31
00:03:11,800 --> 00:03:16,880
 For me, again, just kind of the overview of what this presentation will entail.

32
00:03:16,880 --> 00:03:22,560
 Regulatory framework, the regulatory documents, some of this stuff I think almost all of you

33
00:03:22,560 --> 00:03:27,040
 are familiar with it at this point, so I probably won't spend any time with that.

34
00:03:27,040 --> 00:03:31,640
 Development application types, purpose of ETJ, the authority, kind of the legislative

35
00:03:31,640 --> 00:03:36,320
 history interlocal, legislative changes at the state, and then some of our current challenges,

36
00:03:36,320 --> 00:03:40,800
 and then that policy direction that we were requesting from council.

37
00:03:40,800 --> 00:03:46,340
 And so first again, this is sort of that regulatory framework that we have, obviously City of Denton

38
00:03:46,340 --> 00:03:51,720
 Comprehensive Plan Development Code, also Code of Ordinances, there's the Lake Ray Roberts

39
00:03:51,720 --> 00:03:58,360
 zoning that we deal with in certain parts of the ETJ, we have an existing interlocal

40
00:03:58,360 --> 00:04:02,440
 agreement with Denton County, and then the variety of local government code sections

41
00:04:02,440 --> 00:04:05,960
 as well as the Texas Agricultural Code.

42
00:04:05,960 --> 00:04:11,440
 Again, our regulatory documents, I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this, I think most

43
00:04:11,440 --> 00:04:14,880
 everyone kind of understands it, kind of that comprehensive plan, I kind of look at it as

44
00:04:14,880 --> 00:04:17,520
 the base, and then everything kind of grows from there.

45
00:04:17,520 --> 00:04:21,200
 The DDC needs to be consistent with, and then we have our subdivision regulations again,

46
00:04:21,200 --> 00:04:28,040
 which are part of that DDC, and then obviously the building codes follow suit.

47
00:04:28,040 --> 00:04:34,040
 Some of the major development application types that we look at, again, for platting

48
00:04:34,040 --> 00:04:42,040
 variances site plan, kind of what's in the city, what's in the ETJ, so really it just

49
00:04:42,040 --> 00:04:45,880
 has to do with platting, and that authority is granted obviously to Planning and Zoning

50
00:04:45,880 --> 00:04:47,460
 Commission.

51
00:04:47,460 --> 00:04:54,240
 And this is kind of that non-typical, or I'm sorry, the typical non-ETJ process, preliminary

52
00:04:54,240 --> 00:04:59,480
 plat engineering plans for those public improvements, final plat construction agreements, which

53
00:04:59,480 --> 00:05:03,560
 what we refer to as a three-way agreement, and then there's the construction inspection

54
00:05:03,560 --> 00:05:10,280
 of those public improvements and then the ultimate acceptance of those dedications.

55
00:05:10,280 --> 00:05:14,840
 And then the ETJ process is a little bit different, obviously we don't have annexation, future

56
00:05:14,840 --> 00:05:20,240
 land use zoning, platting, it really just goes straight to platting.

57
00:05:20,240 --> 00:05:27,920
 And so going back again, looking at the purpose of the ETJ, it really was established to really

58
00:05:27,920 --> 00:05:32,680
 promote and protect the kind of the health safety welfare of the city, again, this was

59
00:05:32,680 --> 00:05:36,320
 created some time ago and it really looked at ways that the municipality could start

60
00:05:36,320 --> 00:05:41,960
 to plan for growth adjacent to it, obviously the rules have changed quite a bit in what

61
00:05:41,960 --> 00:05:49,760
 and how we can annex, but really the ETJ is established by Chapter 42 of the Local Government

62
00:05:49,760 --> 00:05:59,320
 Code, and if you're between 50 and 99,999 inhabitants, your ETJ is set at three and

63
00:05:59,320 --> 00:06:04,360
 a half miles, if you're greater, at 100 or greater, it's set at five miles, and so our

64
00:06:04,360 --> 00:06:10,240
 existing ILA, obviously we have the Division 1, Division 2, when that ILA was created,

65
00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:16,800
 we were right at about almost getting close to that 100,000 mark, and really our ETJ Division

66
00:06:16,800 --> 00:06:22,200
 1 is that three and a half mile mark, and so anything from three and a half to five

67
00:06:22,200 --> 00:06:24,300
 is essentially our Division 2.

68
00:06:24,300 --> 00:06:30,200
 For the most part, what our ETJ Division 1 follows is our CCN, or Certificate of Convenience

69
00:06:30,200 --> 00:06:36,560
 of Necessity, which establishes where we sell water and have wastewater services, so that's

70
00:06:36,560 --> 00:06:42,760
 kind of how we've established at least the existing ETJ Division 1, and then does the

71
00:06:42,760 --> 00:06:44,080
 ETJ expand?

72
00:06:44,080 --> 00:06:53,260
 Yes, so as areas annex, that ETJ obviously expands out, probably a good representation

73
00:06:53,260 --> 00:07:01,560
 of that as we grew to the north and kind of snaked up the stream, that in turn then extended

74
00:07:01,560 --> 00:07:06,320
 our ETJ all the way into, believe it or not, it goes into Cook County, and then can it

75
00:07:06,320 --> 00:07:07,320
 be reduced?

76
00:07:07,320 --> 00:07:15,180
 Absolutely, it's happened before, and so at times we will trade ETJs with adjacent municipalities,

77
00:07:15,180 --> 00:07:19,720
 but this just gives that broad view of kind of that three and a half to five mile and

78
00:07:19,720 --> 00:07:28,520
 just how wide our net casts, and then authority to regulate in the ETJ, platting and subdivision,

79
00:07:28,520 --> 00:07:33,420
 it prohibits us from essentially those zoning type of standards, but there is the ability

80
00:07:33,420 --> 00:07:41,400
 to do development agreements that authorizes certain items that we can enforce.

81
00:07:41,400 --> 00:07:46,840
 The most common that we have are non-annexation agreements, follow that 212.172 development

82
00:07:46,840 --> 00:07:54,200
 agreement requirements, and again, just kind of touched on this already, that legislative

83
00:07:54,200 --> 00:08:00,340
 history, '93 is when that Division 1, Division 2 was established, there were some amendments

84
00:08:00,340 --> 00:08:05,280
 that were done in '94, two different amendments, and really what those were related to is our

85
00:08:05,280 --> 00:08:14,400
 CCN extended, so it just followed suit with that, and then in 2003 there were some changes

86
00:08:14,400 --> 00:08:23,160
 that we had that essentially put in place that interlocal agreement, and then in 2017

87
00:08:23,160 --> 00:08:28,920
 we had a peripheral annexation or a peripheral development annexation component to our DDC,

88
00:08:28,920 --> 00:08:35,100
 and what that meant was if we were extending water and sewer to you, you were required

89
00:08:35,100 --> 00:08:37,220
 to annex into the city.

90
00:08:37,220 --> 00:08:42,480
 There's been changes since the annexation laws that we no longer can do that, and so

91
00:08:42,480 --> 00:08:47,400
 again, kind of the summary of that interlocal cooperation agreement, this just gives you

92
00:08:47,400 --> 00:09:00,840
 the idea of the city limits in green, Division 1 in blue, and Division 2 in purple.

93
00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:06,920
 And again, some of the responsibilities, obviously we do all of the subdivision review and permitting

94
00:09:06,920 --> 00:09:14,300
 related to that subdivision within the county, there's a standard in there that if the county

95
00:09:14,300 --> 00:09:19,240
 standard is more stringent, that applies, this has been much debated as far as what's

96
00:09:19,240 --> 00:09:26,520
 more stringent, they believe that their county rural road standard is more stringent than

97
00:09:26,520 --> 00:09:32,840
 curb gutter with storm water, and so we've gone back and forth about what that actually

98
00:09:32,840 --> 00:09:39,240
 means, there's no guidance, and in addition to that, the county does not want to maintain

99
00:09:39,240 --> 00:09:46,760
 curb and gutter concrete roads, and so they've given an indication that while the ILA says

100
00:09:46,760 --> 00:09:51,240
 that they will maintain roads, they take the position that it was only those roads that

101
00:09:51,240 --> 00:09:57,800
 existed when the ILA was executed 18 years ago, and so those are the disagreements as

102
00:09:57,800 --> 00:10:06,680
 to really what prompted the need for updating that ILA, again, it does allow us to issue

103
00:10:06,680 --> 00:10:11,520
 floodplain and culvert permits, 9 out of 10 culvert permits, unless they are abutting

104
00:10:11,520 --> 00:10:18,960
 a city street, we actually defer to Denton County to handle culvert permits for driveways

105
00:10:18,960 --> 00:10:27,320
 adjacent to a county roadway, and again, some of those annexation changes, some of the action,

106
00:10:27,320 --> 00:10:33,760
 but it really did, you know, essentially took all of our ability to require annexation for

107
00:10:33,760 --> 00:10:37,780
 extending water and sewer, and so what we've, you know, kind of what we've seen, what's

108
00:10:37,780 --> 00:10:42,400
 been the effect of that, obviously we've seen a proliferation of MUDs, our municipal utility

109
00:10:42,400 --> 00:10:49,400
 districts within our ETJs, both 1 and 2, as you're aware, we've had some single family

110
00:10:49,400 --> 00:10:56,720
 subdivision within the ETJ, council did pass the ordinance last night unanimously prohibiting

111
00:10:56,720 --> 00:11:04,720
 going back to prohibiting preliminary plots in the ETJ, the inability for us to collect

112
00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:10,440
 roadway impact fees as they will continue to use our roadway network, regional network,

113
00:11:10,440 --> 00:11:15,200
 but also potential increases in calls for police, fire, EMS, as those 911 calls come

114
00:11:15,200 --> 00:11:24,280
 in, there is some deferral of costs that the county has for fire and EMS calls, obviously

115
00:11:24,280 --> 00:11:29,360
 it does not cover the full cost of service, we have to respond to those calls within those

116
00:11:29,360 --> 00:11:32,880
 areas and nothing either for police.

117
00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:34,360
 >> Chair?

118
00:11:34,360 --> 00:11:36,520
 >> Commissioner Beck.

119
00:11:36,520 --> 00:11:45,960
 >> Thank you, Chair, Richard, what happens for the overlapping ETJs, I assume the closest

120
00:11:45,960 --> 00:11:48,680
 municipality wins?

121
00:11:48,680 --> 00:11:52,680
 >> There's some provisions in the local government code.

122
00:11:52,680 --> 00:11:59,640
 I don't recall off the top of my head, I know we don't have any of those, our sort of districts

123
00:11:59,640 --> 00:12:05,520
 were pretty, when we established way back when, we were obviously the much larger city

124
00:12:05,520 --> 00:12:11,400
 than even Krumsanger, even though they're still relatively small, they were even smaller

125
00:12:11,400 --> 00:12:18,800
 back then, so they really haven't grown out as much as we have, so that's why when you

126
00:12:18,800 --> 00:12:32,120
 see our boundary, it extends pretty far out, the reason it does not extend that far to

127
00:12:32,120 --> 00:12:37,640
 the south, obviously at Ponder and some of the other communities, I think Dish and others

128
00:12:37,640 --> 00:12:45,920
 are on the west side of 35, and then for the most part, this is built between Argyle, I

129
00:12:45,920 --> 00:12:59,560
 can't think of the master plan community, Lantana and obviously Flower Mound and Copper

130
00:12:59,560 --> 00:13:01,200
 Canyon.

131
00:13:01,200 --> 00:13:08,080
 >> So the ETJs are static, ours is growing with our border, but as we grow in or around

132
00:13:08,080 --> 00:13:15,440
 or as other municipalities grow in, get bigger, what happens to the definitions of ETJs?

133
00:13:15,440 --> 00:13:24,920
 >> They extend and expand, so if there's not an already ETJ established, ours would continue

134
00:13:24,920 --> 00:13:32,160
 to grow, that's what's happened to the north, where we've now grown into Cook County, but

135
00:13:32,160 --> 00:13:40,760
 you'll see on a later slide that I have where that area up around the lake, it gets a little,

136
00:13:40,760 --> 00:13:48,680
 there's a multitude of ETJs that kind of intersect each other, not necessarily overlapping, but

137
00:13:48,680 --> 00:13:55,920
 you have Pilot Point, Aubrey, Denton and Sanger to some extent, kind of all converge in those

138
00:13:55,920 --> 00:13:56,920
 areas.

139
00:13:56,920 --> 00:13:59,920
 >> Okay, thank you.

140
00:13:59,920 --> 00:14:05,960
 >> And then obviously everyone's aware of kind of some of these legislative game changers,

141
00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:13,240
 where we are with the 30-day shot clock and what that's done to us and kind of where it's

142
00:14:13,240 --> 00:14:15,760
 put us.

143
00:14:15,760 --> 00:14:21,520
 Obviously tree preservation was another item that we discussed, it was something that we

144
00:14:21,520 --> 00:14:28,980
 will come back to eventually, but there is a court case in San Antonio where they were

145
00:14:28,980 --> 00:14:37,920
 challenged for enforcing tree preservation in their ETJ, it was upheld, however, we have

146
00:14:37,920 --> 00:14:47,680
 not done a code amendment to enforce our tree code within our ETJ.

147
00:14:47,680 --> 00:14:54,520
 And I think, again, this is really one of the items that prompted that code change,

148
00:14:54,520 --> 00:14:59,640
 the Stuart Ridge Subdivision, this was the one that the county contended that they would

149
00:14:59,640 --> 00:15:06,520
 not most likely not accept the dedication of those roads.

150
00:15:06,520 --> 00:15:12,680
 And so we're continuing to work with the applicant or developer now on this property, as far

151
00:15:12,680 --> 00:15:17,640
 as how they're moving forward, again, they have an approved final plat for phase one,

152
00:15:17,640 --> 00:15:23,320
 they have an approved preliminary plat, so they are essentially vested, they are going

153
00:15:23,320 --> 00:15:28,840
 to build to our standard, but again, who actually owns those roads at the end of the day, they're

154
00:15:28,840 --> 00:15:34,080
 dedicated to the public, we will inspect them, but we will not accept those roads, that will

155
00:15:34,080 --> 00:15:41,180
 be up to the Commissioner's Court, they take formal action on any dedications, and so whether

156
00:15:41,180 --> 00:15:47,040
 or not they decide to vote to accept those is entirely up to the Commissioner's Court.

157
00:15:47,040 --> 00:15:52,380
 And so we're, again, continuing to work with this applicant to make sure that we're not

158
00:15:52,380 --> 00:15:57,760
 stuck with a situation where, whether they're now still the owner of those roads, the HOA,

159
00:15:57,760 --> 00:16:02,720
 quite honestly, at this point, it's kind of still up in the air, but there's not much

160
00:16:02,720 --> 00:16:04,400
 we can do about it at this point.

161
00:16:04,400 --> 00:16:05,400
 Commissioner Beck.

162
00:16:05,400 --> 00:16:06,400
 Thank you, Chair.

163
00:16:06,400 --> 00:16:13,720
 Richard, so in that case, I mean, if worst case scenario, the HOA would own the roads

164
00:16:13,720 --> 00:16:19,240
 and be required to maintain them?

165
00:16:19,240 --> 00:16:23,480
 That's probably something I would want to have legal weigh in on, I don't know if it

166
00:16:23,480 --> 00:16:28,680
 would be the HOA, I don't know if it would be the original landowner, I think there's

167
00:16:28,680 --> 00:16:37,240
 a much bigger discussion with probably our in-house council, real estate attorneys and

168
00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:42,040
 the like, but I'm not aware, I'm not sure what would happen at that point.

169
00:16:42,040 --> 00:16:46,280
 And that's a fine answer at this point, I don't want to have legal look up anything,

170
00:16:46,280 --> 00:16:50,440
 thank you.

171
00:16:50,440 --> 00:16:53,660
 And so again, so here, you know, some of those some of those challenges that we have with

172
00:16:53,660 --> 00:16:59,720
 our current ILA, again, looking at as it as we look at Platts and the ETJ, those roadway

173
00:16:59,720 --> 00:17:06,000
 standards, that difference of what's the stricter, the bar ditch versus curb and gutter, again,

174
00:17:06,000 --> 00:17:09,640
 issuing culvert permits, we don't believe that should be the city's responsibility really

175
00:17:09,640 --> 00:17:15,400
 should be the county, it's their roadway network, and drainage network for that for the most

176
00:17:15,400 --> 00:17:20,360
 part, the maintenance of the roads, obviously the dedication of new roads, I think I've

177
00:17:20,360 --> 00:17:23,160
 hit on that.

178
00:17:23,160 --> 00:17:28,160
 And then other items we need we need to continue to work through with this new ILA is the transfer

179
00:17:28,160 --> 00:17:33,440
 of those maintenance bonds for those new roads, location of our water and sewer lines, the

180
00:17:33,440 --> 00:17:37,480
 county does not want those water and sewer lines within any roads that would essentially

181
00:17:37,480 --> 00:17:39,460
 be dedicated to them.

182
00:17:39,460 --> 00:17:46,200
 And so it's making sure that we have adequate easements to to lay those lay our water and

183
00:17:46,200 --> 00:17:49,080
 in sewer lines.

184
00:17:49,080 --> 00:17:54,520
 There are currently lot size requirements in the Lake Ray Roberts planning area that

185
00:17:54,520 --> 00:17:55,800
 they've established.

186
00:17:55,800 --> 00:18:01,360
 There has been an instance where we approved a plat it was a minor plat that did not meet

187
00:18:01,360 --> 00:18:06,720
 the minimum lot size for that for that area.

188
00:18:06,720 --> 00:18:11,480
 But again, it's not addressed in our ILA and so we can enforce as you saw from the local

189
00:18:11,480 --> 00:18:16,920
 government code, we can enforce lot layouts or lot size.

190
00:18:16,920 --> 00:18:20,560
 And so this was something then that they had to go to the Commissioner's Court and seek

191
00:18:20,560 --> 00:18:25,360
 a variance and so these are just items we want to avoid, there's no reason that someone

192
00:18:25,360 --> 00:18:27,760
 should have to do that.

193
00:18:27,760 --> 00:18:31,960
 But again, we're not able to enforce it because it's not part of our part of that interlocal

194
00:18:31,960 --> 00:18:38,160
 agreement and again, making sure that the non annexation agreements, there's just one

195
00:18:38,160 --> 00:18:41,240
 more place that everybody's aware of.

196
00:18:41,240 --> 00:18:48,600
 There are standards that for those those properties can remain in the ETJ but there any development

197
00:18:48,600 --> 00:18:52,880
 that they would do, i.e. building a home, they're limited in what they could do.

198
00:18:52,880 --> 00:18:58,800
 But building permits are issued by the city as part of those agreements, as well as following

199
00:18:58,800 --> 00:19:04,440
 the city's development standards.

200
00:19:04,440 --> 00:19:09,900
 Some of the other challenges that we that we face, again, not necessarily has to do

201
00:19:09,900 --> 00:19:17,040
 with amendments to the ILA but something that we're going to want to revisit upon completion

202
00:19:17,040 --> 00:19:19,440
 of the comp plan update.

203
00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:24,380
 And I think I think we've talked about this as part of the 2019 DDC update is really some

204
00:19:24,380 --> 00:19:30,400
 of these split parcels that we have, and as a result of strip annexations.

205
00:19:30,400 --> 00:19:34,720
 This is one where you know obviously it's an industrial use.

206
00:19:34,720 --> 00:19:39,840
 At one point in time, we annex you know the first whatever it is 500 feet off the right

207
00:19:39,840 --> 00:19:40,840
 away.

208
00:19:40,840 --> 00:19:46,440
 Obviously since then 380 has has grown so that that that distance that that is now in

209
00:19:46,440 --> 00:19:48,920
 the city has shrunk.

210
00:19:48,920 --> 00:19:55,040
 But we've now the front of their property is is zoned residential.

211
00:19:55,040 --> 00:19:59,840
 And so, depending, you know, essentially what they need to do or can do it's all nonconforming

212
00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:04,040
 and and it also would affect what they can can and can't do on the back of the property

213
00:20:04,040 --> 00:20:08,880
 because they are accessing it through through a zone or residential portion.

214
00:20:08,880 --> 00:20:12,800
 That is, I think our one or our to the majority of these.

215
00:20:12,800 --> 00:20:16,240
 And so this is something that what we are going to need to take a look at as part of

216
00:20:16,240 --> 00:20:19,200
 that comp plan update.

217
00:20:19,200 --> 00:20:24,480
 Should we change the most of these have a rural if I'm not mistaken a rural future land

218
00:20:24,480 --> 00:20:29,040
 use again as a holding pattern so again taking that hard look what should these really be

219
00:20:29,040 --> 00:20:36,520
 land used, and then zoning them zoning them accordingly.

220
00:20:36,520 --> 00:20:42,160
 One of the other issues that we continue to face is requests that we have from adjacent

221
00:20:42,160 --> 00:20:48,120
 municipalities for essentially exchanging areas of E.T.J.

222
00:20:48,120 --> 00:20:53,160
 We've had a number, at least when I first started here, we're saying or was was asking

223
00:20:53,160 --> 00:20:59,640
 and crumb, we're asking for kind of swaps of E.T.J. areas, and there's there's been

224
00:20:59,640 --> 00:21:05,080
 no formal policy or guidance that that we received ever from from council.

225
00:21:05,080 --> 00:21:09,500
 I think in the past, at one point in time it was sort of a one for one so if we're going

226
00:21:09,500 --> 00:21:14,760
 to give you an acre, you give us an acre, but there was no real guidance even even beyond

227
00:21:14,760 --> 00:21:15,760
 that.

228
00:21:15,760 --> 00:21:20,360
 And so really our intent was if we're going to do this, we should probably have some guidance

229
00:21:20,360 --> 00:21:26,360
 from council at least some policy direction about how we how we do this.

230
00:21:26,360 --> 00:21:29,920
 Should it just be acre for acre or should we look at other other alternatives and I'll

231
00:21:29,920 --> 00:21:36,760
 get into that, but we have a current current one pending from pilot point that has asked

232
00:21:36,760 --> 00:21:44,240
 for some exchange of our E.T.J. division two, which is adjacent to their E.T.J. division

233
00:21:44,240 --> 00:21:45,240
 one.

234
00:21:45,240 --> 00:21:50,680
 So this just kind of gives you that idea of this is our division one here.

235
00:21:50,680 --> 00:21:54,120
 Actually our municipal boundary, this is our water treatment plant.

236
00:21:54,120 --> 00:21:56,480
 All of this is our division two.

237
00:21:56,480 --> 00:22:03,280
 And then you have city of pilot point pilot point E.T.J. and then I believe this is Aubrey

238
00:22:03,280 --> 00:22:07,460
 E.T.J.

239
00:22:07,460 --> 00:22:11,800
 And so getting back to that, you know, that request from pilot point, what they were looking

240
00:22:11,800 --> 00:22:24,680
 to to really do is take on take over a lease agreement for for the Ildebo and I'm sorry

241
00:22:24,680 --> 00:22:28,320
 for the Lake Ray Roberts Jordan unit.

242
00:22:28,320 --> 00:22:34,640
 They're looking to take over a concessionaires agreement.

243
00:22:34,640 --> 00:22:38,840
 There's been some other developments as we've learned that we are actually the the lease

244
00:22:38,840 --> 00:22:40,680
 holder of this land.

245
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:44,760
 So I think it'll be a much different conversation when we bring this back when we bring this

246
00:22:44,760 --> 00:22:46,840
 back to council.

247
00:22:46,840 --> 00:22:52,960
 But what they were really kind of asking because there's no land that they would have to swap.

248
00:22:52,960 --> 00:22:55,340
 There's nothing that we would need to take.

249
00:22:55,340 --> 00:22:59,880
 And so the idea that they instead of a land swap, what they were looking to do it in exchange

250
00:22:59,880 --> 00:23:09,480
 of was some type of revenue share or sales tax swap or even looking at I think there

251
00:23:09,480 --> 00:23:12,920
 was a hotel at that marina.

252
00:23:12,920 --> 00:23:19,280
 We had some concerns with with receiving some proceeds from hot tax in that area, just given

253
00:23:19,280 --> 00:23:24,880
 where we have to spend it and the limitations up there, but at least entertaining a variety

254
00:23:24,880 --> 00:23:30,000
 of rather than just a land swap, whether it be a component of sales tax revenue share

255
00:23:30,000 --> 00:23:34,400
 from other streams or even a component of property tax.

256
00:23:34,400 --> 00:23:39,360
 And so those were all options that that at least as we develop that policy, at least

257
00:23:39,360 --> 00:23:43,440
 items that that we can look at prior to bringing it to council.

258
00:23:43,440 --> 00:23:49,200
 So we're just not kind of shooting from the hip and have some clear guidance and what

259
00:23:49,200 --> 00:23:51,380
 council is comfortable with.

260
00:23:51,380 --> 00:23:55,340
 And so that was really the you know, one of the first questions that we had with respect

261
00:23:55,340 --> 00:23:59,680
 to policy direction is, should we even the first was, should we even continue to regulate

262
00:23:59,680 --> 00:24:06,320
 plats and in in Division one or just completely give all of that to to the county.

263
00:24:06,320 --> 00:24:11,200
 And so the direction was, you know, to continue, continue to regulate a plot within within

264
00:24:11,200 --> 00:24:16,920
 Division one and kind of that second one, second policy direction that we requested

265
00:24:16,920 --> 00:24:21,960
 had to do with what should be that standard when we met with the county, what we really

266
00:24:21,960 --> 00:24:28,400
 looked at was adopting their rural standard in the E.T.J. to, you know, sort of kind of

267
00:24:28,400 --> 00:24:34,400
 that first step, I think, as I indicated, was removing the ability to do those preliminary

268
00:24:34,400 --> 00:24:35,400
 plats.

269
00:24:35,400 --> 00:24:39,840
 But if you are going to develop in the county or in the E.T.J. and if you if the county

270
00:24:39,840 --> 00:24:47,200
 is going to accept those roads, which most likely we would want, then they should be

271
00:24:47,200 --> 00:24:49,040
 built to their standard.

272
00:24:49,040 --> 00:24:54,080
 And really what this would do is if somebody wanted them to build a subdivision with curb

273
00:24:54,080 --> 00:25:00,160
 and gutter, sort of a traditional subdivision in order to take advantage or use the city

274
00:25:00,160 --> 00:25:03,280
 standard, they would be required to annex into the city.

275
00:25:03,280 --> 00:25:07,960
 And then at that point, they would go through that that process from one of the previous

276
00:25:07,960 --> 00:25:13,840
 slides where obviously go through annexation, voluntary annexation, and then there would

277
00:25:13,840 --> 00:25:18,880
 need to be most likely a land use plan map amendment rezoning so they would follow that

278
00:25:18,880 --> 00:25:26,280
 public hearing process and then ultimately get to get to platting if those are approved.

279
00:25:26,280 --> 00:25:28,600
 And so that was the direction that we got from from council.

280
00:25:28,600 --> 00:25:32,900
 And so that's what we're currently working working through to just have that standard

281
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:37,080
 identified within the I.L.A.

282
00:25:37,080 --> 00:25:38,080
 Mayor Beck.

283
00:25:38,080 --> 00:25:39,640
 Thank you, Chair.

284
00:25:39,640 --> 00:25:48,520
 Richard, is is there any rule about that parcel like that that wanted to annex in has to be

285
00:25:48,520 --> 00:25:51,280
 continuous with our traditional border?

286
00:25:51,280 --> 00:25:52,280
 Correct.

287
00:25:52,280 --> 00:25:56,240
 There would need to be continuity unless there would need to have the border would need to

288
00:25:56,240 --> 00:25:58,200
 be contiguous.

289
00:25:58,200 --> 00:26:03,680
 So we would have to annex a connected piece up to a property that was separated.

290
00:26:03,680 --> 00:26:04,680
 Correct.

291
00:26:04,680 --> 00:26:06,840
 OK, thank you.

292
00:26:06,840 --> 00:26:12,720
 They would have to petition, I should say.

293
00:26:12,720 --> 00:26:14,720
 And then again, this was sort of an easier one.

294
00:26:14,720 --> 00:26:18,880
 But again, wanted to make sure that that direction was clear and making sure that within within

295
00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:24,120
 the I.L.A., we include those standards from the Lake Ray Roberts planning area again.

296
00:26:24,120 --> 00:26:29,560
 We don't want to get into a situation where we're approving plats that go against the zoning

297
00:26:29,560 --> 00:26:33,400
 standards that are established and then forcing someone to have to go to the commissioner's

298
00:26:33,400 --> 00:26:38,000
 court for a for a subdivision variance or a lot variance, because now they can't get

299
00:26:38,000 --> 00:26:45,040
 a building permit because it doesn't meet the the minimum lot size.

300
00:26:45,040 --> 00:26:50,600
 And then again, the permitting of of of culverts in the E.T.J., again, this is something if

301
00:26:50,600 --> 00:26:53,880
 we're going to go with a rural standard, we believe this is something that the county

302
00:26:53,880 --> 00:26:56,040
 they're they're doing it now.

303
00:26:56,040 --> 00:27:03,920
 It doesn't make sense for us to to do culvert permit driveway permits for for ranches or

304
00:27:03,920 --> 00:27:08,480
 whatever it may be.

305
00:27:08,480 --> 00:27:12,480
 Should the city enforce tree preservation mitigation in the E.T.J.?

306
00:27:12,480 --> 00:27:19,200
 This is something that that they requested we come back on at a later date.

307
00:27:19,200 --> 00:27:25,760
 Our recommendation really was to not to not enforce tree preservation and mitigation within

308
00:27:25,760 --> 00:27:26,760
 the E.T.J.

309
00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:30,680
 Again, that San Antonio case, I don't think is binding, and Matt can probably speak to

310
00:27:30,680 --> 00:27:35,080
 this better than I could, you know, statewide.

311
00:27:35,080 --> 00:27:40,440
 But again, most of you know, as as you probably are aware, most of the lands within the E.T.J.

312
00:27:40,440 --> 00:27:46,760
 are large, kind of these larger ranches and farms that are, you know, would meet the definition

313
00:27:46,760 --> 00:27:49,760
 of agricultural operation to some extent.

314
00:27:49,760 --> 00:27:55,440
 And so whether or not they would even would even be subject to it, even if we were subject

315
00:27:55,440 --> 00:27:58,520
 to the standards, might be slim to none.

316
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:05,040
 Additionally, most of those treat areas are are within floodplain or FEMA.

317
00:28:05,040 --> 00:28:11,120
 And so they're not necessarily developing or removing those those trees anyways.

318
00:28:11,120 --> 00:28:15,720
 And really just looking at the enforcement of that.

319
00:28:15,720 --> 00:28:20,400
 This is not something that we would go through, you know, a code enforcement hearing, we would

320
00:28:20,400 --> 00:28:28,560
 have to enforce that or if their lack of doing and cutting down all the trees and not complying,

321
00:28:28,560 --> 00:28:32,560
 the enforcement of that would have to actually be through district court.

322
00:28:32,560 --> 00:28:39,200
 And just given what that could potentially do to challenges to our tree code, we just

323
00:28:39,200 --> 00:28:46,560
 looked at it as not really not really worth the what we would get in in return, the risk

324
00:28:46,560 --> 00:28:47,560
 associated with that.

325
00:28:47,560 --> 00:28:53,200
 And again, there was no there was no direction from from council.

326
00:28:53,200 --> 00:28:57,720
 So it was something that they wanted to to look at further.

327
00:28:57,720 --> 00:29:03,920
 Again, that exchange for ETJ, the direction at that point was in our recommendation was

328
00:29:03,920 --> 00:29:09,720
 to bring back a policy that really looked at kind of let everything kind of all options

329
00:29:09,720 --> 00:29:14,400
 on the table, not just land area exchange, but looking at that revenue share, direct

330
00:29:14,400 --> 00:29:20,200
 payment or, you know, a variety of other options to kind of think outside the box, in some

331
00:29:20,200 --> 00:29:25,160
 instances where it might be advantageous to to do that, but at least we have some guidance

332
00:29:25,160 --> 00:29:31,680
 as far as the policy that that direction where council council what council is comfortable

333
00:29:31,680 --> 00:29:34,360
 with.

334
00:29:34,360 --> 00:29:41,320
 And then really, again, looking at that, that release of that ETJ, it's a pilot point.

335
00:29:41,320 --> 00:29:47,720
 Quite honestly, I don't think there was a full consensus that that they were ready to

336
00:29:47,720 --> 00:29:53,640
 say yes, but the direction was to bring back the item, at least for consideration to see

337
00:29:53,640 --> 00:30:00,320
 what what it what it looked like, and what that sales tax revenue could even generate.

338
00:30:00,320 --> 00:30:04,920
 But again, I think we're in a we'll be having a different conversation when when this does

339
00:30:04,920 --> 00:30:12,360
 go back on the 25th. And part of the other is looking at, you know,

340
00:30:12,360 --> 00:30:17,360
 looking at depending what we ultimately do with with pilot point, but looking at this

341
00:30:17,360 --> 00:30:24,080
 area of, of division two, that's just on the other side of our water treatment plant, and

342
00:30:24,080 --> 00:30:28,200
 really looking at should should as part of this amendment to the ILA, should we just

343
00:30:28,200 --> 00:30:36,920
 bring that area into into our division one, our recommendation was yes, if we have if

344
00:30:36,920 --> 00:30:41,040
 our bound if our municipal boundary already goes up the stream.

345
00:30:41,040 --> 00:30:45,440
 If the west side of the stream is division one, why not make the east side division to

346
00:30:45,440 --> 00:30:53,480
 that way, again, it could provide for additional opportunities for annexation, as well as plotting

347
00:30:53,480 --> 00:30:58,800
 authority through through the through that green belt, our trail system. And then again,

348
00:30:58,800 --> 00:31:03,080
 looking at potentially what the Army Corps wants to do, whether or not we have a state

349
00:31:03,080 --> 00:31:07,920
 park within our, you know, within our city limits, we're pretty darn close with the with

350
00:31:07,920 --> 00:31:13,640
 the treatment plant. But again, just looking for future future opportunities.

351
00:31:13,640 --> 00:31:18,480
 Mr. Anderson. Thank you, Chair. Richard, I got a quick question.

352
00:31:18,480 --> 00:31:25,080
 If we are going to annex the part of Aldabra State Park, and the Trail Corridor, why not

353
00:31:25,080 --> 00:31:29,440
 just keep that other part, the Jordan unit, because it's going to butt up, it's going

354
00:31:29,440 --> 00:31:36,040
 to butt up to it eventually you can do it as well. Because I lived right there in PowerPoint

355
00:31:36,040 --> 00:31:40,640
 for years, and I don't think there's gonna be much sales tax from that area that that

356
00:31:40,640 --> 00:31:45,000
 place has changed hands so many times up there and it's nothing really.

357
00:31:45,000 --> 00:31:50,760
 Yeah, and we later learned, actually, after the meeting there, believe it or not, the

358
00:31:50,760 --> 00:31:56,720
 while the land is all owned by Army Corps, and it's a state park, the state park is a

359
00:31:56,720 --> 00:32:02,720
 sublease from the city of Dent and the city of Dallas. So we are actually the first lease

360
00:32:02,720 --> 00:32:09,040
 holder of that land around the lake. And that had to do with really, since that's our drinking

361
00:32:09,040 --> 00:32:15,320
 water. And so that was one of those agreements that were just buried somewhere that we later

362
00:32:15,320 --> 00:32:20,440
 found out after the work session. And so I think that's something, you know, when we

363
00:32:20,440 --> 00:32:26,040
 come back on the 25th Making Council where that even if we were to grant that area to

364
00:32:26,040 --> 00:32:31,400
 pilot point, anything that they do, the way the agreements are structured, would still

365
00:32:31,400 --> 00:32:38,040
 require sign off from the city, because we're the first lease holder of that land. And so

366
00:32:38,040 --> 00:32:47,880
 they would almost essentially be a sublease of the state park. And so it's sort of a multitude

367
00:32:47,880 --> 00:32:54,960
 of layers, but even more so, you know, looking at both us in first position, but equal in

368
00:32:54,960 --> 00:33:02,140
 first position is the city of Dallas, because they're also pulling water for their drinking

369
00:33:02,140 --> 00:33:07,360
 water from that lake. And so part of that, I think the broader policy question is do

370
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:14,960
 we want or should we have greater authority over platting of what goes on around our boundary

371
00:33:14,960 --> 00:33:20,280
 of the lake where we pull our drinking water? That's something that council will have to

372
00:33:20,280 --> 00:33:28,320
 weigh in on. And again, so this was kind of the timeline, and kind of when we were looking

373
00:33:28,320 --> 00:33:33,640
 to bring it back. So kind of on track, but again, we're looking to bring that item back.

374
00:33:33,640 --> 00:33:37,520
 I think what kind of through a wrench in it is learning that this agreement was out there.

375
00:33:37,520 --> 00:33:42,320
 So we've been, again, having additional meetings with both the Army Corps, Texas Parks and

376
00:33:42,320 --> 00:33:48,120
 Wildlife, among others. And so that's kind of where we're at is looking at bringing that

377
00:33:48,120 --> 00:33:58,400
 policy, we set draft policy back. I suspect what's going to happen given the just brevity

378
00:33:58,400 --> 00:34:03,560
 of this, we'll probably split this into two work sessions again. So I suspect on the 25th,

379
00:34:03,560 --> 00:34:10,320
 the main focus will be that ETJ swap with pilot point and the policy associated with

380
00:34:10,320 --> 00:34:15,600
 that moving forward. And then how and what our ETJ boundary should be division one, division

381
00:34:15,600 --> 00:34:22,280
 two, and then coming back within a week or two later with the with the ILA draft agreement.

382
00:34:22,280 --> 00:34:27,320
 And so as those move forward, we'll make sure that I'll make sure that PNZ is updated. But

383
00:34:27,320 --> 00:34:34,320
 that was essentially the the presentation that was presented back in January to City

384
00:34:34,320 --> 00:34:40,200
 Council. Great. Thank you, Richard. Any questions for

385
00:34:40,200 --> 00:34:49,860
 Richard? It was a lot. It was but helpful. Appreciate it. I do not see any questions.

386
00:34:49,860 --> 00:34:55,440
 Move on to the other parts of our agenda item. This one let the record show that Mr. Anderson

387
00:34:55,440 --> 00:35:05,320
 has joined us this evening. Welcome, Mr. Anderson. The next item on our agenda would be the consideration

388
00:35:05,320 --> 00:35:10,260
 for the minutes. Is there any discussion around the minutes this evening that we can make

389
00:35:10,260 --> 00:35:20,920
 note of now? Okay, then we move into our consent agenda. We have two items. FP 21 dash 009b,

390
00:35:20,920 --> 00:35:26,120
 which is Karina Maldonado. She actually has both this evening. So any questions for her?

391
00:35:26,120 --> 00:35:35,840
 Do you want to bring those up? Looking around, I don't see any questions.

392
00:35:35,840 --> 00:35:42,440
 Commissioner Ellis. Thank you, Chair. So earlier, when you started

393
00:35:42,440 --> 00:35:47,600
 the meeting, you said we had citizen comments on each of these. Is that correct?

394
00:35:47,600 --> 00:35:53,800
 We did. For context, we had one citizen oppose every item on the agenda this evening, and

395
00:35:53,800 --> 00:35:59,800
 the two of the items of the five opposed were the consent agenda items.

396
00:35:59,800 --> 00:36:06,320
 Okay. And so no details other than that, right? I think the note was sent to us. She opposes

397
00:36:06,320 --> 00:36:11,300
 I believe she was mentioning multifamily development. Understood. So that was the one we got five

398
00:36:11,300 --> 00:36:19,100
 from the same person. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Correct. All right. Well, I don't see

399
00:36:19,100 --> 00:36:24,240
 any questions for the consent, so we'll just hop into individual items. Starting with 4A

400
00:36:24,240 --> 00:36:34,200
 PP 21 dash 0005. This is Sean Jacobson's item. And so I'll invite him to present this item.

401
00:36:34,200 --> 00:36:44,660
 Good evening, Chair and members of the Commission. I'm pulling up my presentation now in just

402
00:36:44,660 --> 00:37:11,080
 a moment. Okay. Go ahead and share that. All right. So this item is PP 21 0005, request

403
00:37:11,080 --> 00:37:17,380
 for a preliminary plat, and staff is recommending denial of this request, as it does not meet

404
00:37:17,380 --> 00:37:23,840
 the established requirements as outlined in Exhibit 2. The applicant has requested an

405
00:37:23,840 --> 00:37:32,220
 extension to date certain of May 19th, 2021. I'll be happy to answer any questions that

406
00:37:32,220 --> 00:37:37,420
 you have on this item. Great. Thanks, Sean. Any questions for Sean

407
00:37:37,420 --> 00:37:49,440
 on this item? Okay. I don't see any. Next item is 4B PP 21 dash 0006. This is Julie

408
00:37:49,440 --> 00:38:10,080
 Wyatt's item. I'll invite Julie for presentation. Good evening. Just a minute to pull up my

409
00:38:10,080 --> 00:38:21,980
 presentation. All right. Here we go. So this is a preliminary

410
00:38:21,980 --> 00:38:29,280
 plat for a new unit within Robeson Ranch. They are still working through a few things

411
00:38:29,280 --> 00:38:35,520
 in order to meet the criteria for approval. And so the staff recommends denial of the

412
00:38:35,520 --> 00:38:39,660
 request. They have requested an extension to the May 19th Planning and Zoning Commission

413
00:38:39,660 --> 00:38:45,780
 to wrap those items up, and staff has no objection to that extension, and I'll be happy to answer

414
00:38:45,780 --> 00:38:50,740
 any questions. Any questions for Julie?

415
00:38:50,740 --> 00:38:56,580
 Christian or Beck? Thank you, Chair. Julie, as I understood the

416
00:38:56,580 --> 00:39:02,960
 plat, it looks like it's completely within the golf course.

417
00:39:02,960 --> 00:39:09,360
 We can't, Christian. Go ahead, Christian Beck.

418
00:39:09,360 --> 00:39:16,720
 It's completely within the golf course region. This development is completely inside the

419
00:39:16,720 --> 00:39:22,820
 -- I'm just confirming that. The residential lots actually kind of surround

420
00:39:22,820 --> 00:39:28,340
 one of the golf course holes. So you're correct. It is sort of hugged up against that golf

421
00:39:28,340 --> 00:39:32,000
 course lot. Okay. Thank you. That's all the clarity I

422
00:39:32,000 --> 00:39:35,240
 could give you. Sure.

423
00:39:35,240 --> 00:39:39,720
 Any other questions? Commissioner Anderson, you had your hand up.

424
00:39:39,720 --> 00:39:45,540
 I don't know if you're just testing tech or if you had a question.

425
00:39:45,540 --> 00:39:51,320
 Do you have any questions on this item, Commissioner Anderson?

426
00:39:51,320 --> 00:39:54,280
 He's having technical difficulties. That's what it looks like.

427
00:39:54,280 --> 00:39:59,280
 All right. Well, no worries. We'll hear it again in public session if you had any questions.

428
00:39:59,280 --> 00:40:04,640
 Commissioner Cole? Yeah, I'm zooming in on this location map,

429
00:40:04,640 --> 00:40:14,280
 on the site location map. And that might be my family's property right

430
00:40:14,280 --> 00:40:21,120
 next to this. So I don't -- I'm not 100% sure.

431
00:40:21,120 --> 00:40:29,120
 But I think there's a good possibility. I don't know if I should vote on this.

432
00:40:29,120 --> 00:40:38,280
 Because I see that lake. Yeah, I think it is.

433
00:40:38,280 --> 00:40:47,480
 Commissioner Cole, would it be possible to verify before meeting?

434
00:40:47,480 --> 00:40:49,680
 Northeast corner? Right?

435
00:40:49,680 --> 00:40:54,280
 Yeah, it looks like the northeast corner. It is, yes, sir.

436
00:40:54,280 --> 00:41:03,000
 Yeah, because that lake, that big lake up there is owned by us and is split between

437
00:41:03,000 --> 00:41:06,920
 Hillwood and us. We're on one side, they're on the other.

438
00:41:06,920 --> 00:41:16,320
 Yeah, I feel pretty uncomfortable with this. So I think I need to punch out on the vote.

439
00:41:16,320 --> 00:41:20,640
 Okay. I don't know if you'd be right.

440
00:41:20,640 --> 00:41:27,160
 I mean, I'd like a legal opinion on that. Mack, you have any insight to his recusal?

441
00:41:27,160 --> 00:41:30,560
 Yeah, I mean, obviously, if you're within 200 feet, you absolutely have to recuse.

442
00:41:30,560 --> 00:41:33,880
 If it's in doubt, I would recommend go ahead and recuse as well and abstain.

443
00:41:33,880 --> 00:41:37,560
 So to not participate in any deliberation as well as not vote.

444
00:41:37,560 --> 00:41:41,440
 So yeah, if you can figure out exactly where it is, you could know for sure.

445
00:41:41,440 --> 00:41:44,080
 But if there's doubt in your mind, I would recommend not.

446
00:41:44,080 --> 00:41:53,880
 I'm pretty sure it touches in that corner. I'm not for sure, but I'm better safe than

447
00:41:53,880 --> 00:41:59,080
 sorry. So I think I need to punch out.

448
00:41:59,080 --> 00:42:05,840
 Mack, when we did this in person, the individual actually physically recused himself on Zoom.

449
00:42:05,840 --> 00:42:10,720
 Is it just a matter of muting themselves or do they need to actually be put in the lobby

450
00:42:10,720 --> 00:42:11,720
 during the discussion?

451
00:42:11,720 --> 00:42:17,360
 No, I think what we've done over the past year is mute yourself and stop your video.

452
00:42:17,360 --> 00:42:18,360
 OK, great.

453
00:42:18,360 --> 00:42:23,800
 Commissioner Cole, we'll just take care of that in the public normal regular session.

454
00:42:23,800 --> 00:42:25,760
 We'll notify that then.

455
00:42:25,760 --> 00:42:33,640
 I just, you know, I zoomed in real heavy on that and I've noticed where that that lake

456
00:42:33,640 --> 00:42:40,000
 and that I, you know, I should realize that before, but I did not.

457
00:42:40,000 --> 00:42:45,080
 No worries. We'll continue on discussion without you right now, because your pernetta.

458
00:42:45,080 --> 00:42:50,480
 I just had a question on how we handle the recusal and recusal with the zoom.

459
00:42:50,480 --> 00:42:56,120
 And I guess the other thing is today, we're only having a vote on they requested an extension,

460
00:42:56,120 --> 00:42:57,120
 right?

461
00:42:57,120 --> 00:43:00,320
 So today we're just voting on whether or not to have an extension.

462
00:43:00,320 --> 00:43:01,320
 Correct.

463
00:43:01,320 --> 00:43:02,320
 OK, all right.

464
00:43:02,320 --> 00:43:03,320
 Thank you.

465
00:43:03,320 --> 00:43:04,320
 Yeah.

466
00:43:04,320 --> 00:43:08,640
 Any other questions for Julie on this item?

467
00:43:08,640 --> 00:43:11,120
 OK, great.

468
00:43:11,120 --> 00:43:13,240
 Just to confirm, I believe it is.

469
00:43:13,240 --> 00:43:15,320
 I believe Commissioner Cole is correct.

470
00:43:15,320 --> 00:43:25,080
 Looking at the looking at our map, it is, I believe, in the SF2 or SLF2, Cole property.

471
00:43:25,080 --> 00:43:29,480
 So it is that I believe it is within that ownership structure.

472
00:43:29,480 --> 00:43:30,480
 OK, great.

473
00:43:30,480 --> 00:43:37,840
 Well, I appreciate him speaking up and I agree with legal better safe than sorry.

474
00:43:37,840 --> 00:43:45,840
 Let's move on to the next item for CPP21-0004A and this also is Julie Wyatt's item.

475
00:43:45,840 --> 00:43:52,120
 All right, let me share my screen.

476
00:43:52,120 --> 00:43:56,480
 So this one you've seen before, this is for a preliminary plat off of Ganser Road.

477
00:43:56,480 --> 00:43:59,360
 It's in our ETJ.

478
00:43:59,360 --> 00:44:02,120
 They still have some items to work through.

479
00:44:02,120 --> 00:44:04,440
 And so staff does recommend denial.

480
00:44:04,440 --> 00:44:09,680
 They have already had one extension granted.

481
00:44:09,680 --> 00:44:14,200
 You did hear from the applicant today regarding some concerns with comments, and so I just

482
00:44:14,200 --> 00:44:19,480
 kind of wanted to briefly just talk through those and summarize those so you'll understand

483
00:44:19,480 --> 00:44:25,080
 what those comments are related to to staff's review.

484
00:44:25,080 --> 00:44:27,400
 I kind of look at them in a few buckets.

485
00:44:27,400 --> 00:44:34,400
 One would be there is a road in our mobility plan that crosses the subject property on

486
00:44:34,400 --> 00:44:36,200
 the north side.

487
00:44:36,200 --> 00:44:42,400
 So that needs to be reflected in the plan per the requirements for that mobility plan.

488
00:44:42,400 --> 00:44:47,640
 There's also a correction related to easement widths for offsite easements.

489
00:44:47,640 --> 00:44:53,160
 They do need to make some updates to their TIA in order to accommodate some revisions

490
00:44:53,160 --> 00:44:56,920
 to the plan since the TIA was first submitted.

491
00:44:56,920 --> 00:45:00,320
 And then they have some standard notes and formatting comments.

492
00:45:00,320 --> 00:45:05,680
 We will have -- we do have engineering on the line if they're the subject matter experts

493
00:45:05,680 --> 00:45:12,000
 regarding those items, and we'll be happy to let them answer any questions.

494
00:45:12,000 --> 00:45:16,760
 And they'll also be on the line during the regular session.

495
00:45:16,760 --> 00:45:22,880
 So staff does recommend denial due to those reasons, and I will be happy to answer any

496
00:45:22,880 --> 00:45:25,920
 questions or have engineering do so.

497
00:45:25,920 --> 00:45:27,640
 Great.

498
00:45:27,640 --> 00:45:28,640
 Thank you, Julie.

499
00:45:28,640 --> 00:45:34,720
 The understanding the applicant has given us notice that they are not in agreement with

500
00:45:34,720 --> 00:45:36,000
 this decision by staff.

501
00:45:36,000 --> 00:45:37,000
 Is that correct?

502
00:45:37,000 --> 00:45:38,000
 Correct.

503
00:45:38,000 --> 00:45:41,920
 I do believe they'll be calling in this evening to discuss those comments.

504
00:45:41,920 --> 00:45:42,920
 Okay.

505
00:45:42,920 --> 00:45:43,920
 Great.

506
00:45:43,920 --> 00:45:50,320
 Is there any questions for Julie on this?

507
00:45:50,320 --> 00:45:54,520
 And just for the edification of myself and the rest of the commission, if it proves helpful,

508
00:45:54,520 --> 00:45:59,720
 I'm not sure, Julie, can you just verify?

509
00:45:59,720 --> 00:46:07,440
 It's not often that we have a plat being debated on the approval process.

510
00:46:07,440 --> 00:46:14,080
 And so this evening, if they are presenting different evidence or objections to save us

511
00:46:14,080 --> 00:46:19,380
 from a banter back and forth, Julie, you'll present -- they can present their letter or

512
00:46:19,380 --> 00:46:25,360
 their findings, and then you have a rebuttal for them, or can you tell us kind of how that

513
00:46:25,360 --> 00:46:28,360
 flow is going to happen this evening?

514
00:46:28,360 --> 00:46:32,880
 I don't know if Richard wants to take that up.

515
00:46:32,880 --> 00:46:37,600
 I believe that is the -- that's sort of the framework for the discussion.

516
00:46:37,600 --> 00:46:44,160
 Yeah, but what we thought we would kind of set this up or at least a way to manage the

517
00:46:44,160 --> 00:46:49,800
 conversation treated very much like we do with our Zoning Board of Adjustment if there's

518
00:46:49,800 --> 00:46:56,200
 an appeal of a staff decision or a similar request where it's typically presentation

519
00:46:56,200 --> 00:47:02,920
 by staff and then presentation by the applicant.

520
00:47:02,920 --> 00:47:06,440
 So that way, at least we have the facts out there.

521
00:47:06,440 --> 00:47:12,120
 And then obviously the rebuttal, rebuttal by staff, rebuttal by the applicant.

522
00:47:12,120 --> 00:47:17,000
 And then if there's any questions by any -- by the commission, and then obviously the decision

523
00:47:17,000 --> 00:47:18,000
 by the commission.

524
00:47:18,000 --> 00:47:20,000
 I think I got it right.

525
00:47:20,000 --> 00:47:24,760
 Hopefully I didn't miss the order up.

526
00:47:24,760 --> 00:47:28,000
 And this, you said, has been brought before us, Julie.

527
00:47:28,000 --> 00:47:32,440
 Is there not a 30-day extension opportunity here?

528
00:47:32,440 --> 00:47:33,440
 Not at this time.

529
00:47:33,440 --> 00:47:40,040
 There was a 30-day extension granted on April 7th, and so there's only a one-time 30-day

530
00:47:40,040 --> 00:47:45,720
 extension that can be granted under the state regulations.

531
00:47:45,720 --> 00:47:50,280
 And has the applicant been briefed about the implications of a denial and how they bring

532
00:47:50,280 --> 00:47:53,240
 the project back to the staff?

533
00:47:53,240 --> 00:47:54,440
 I can verify that.

534
00:47:54,440 --> 00:48:00,600
 We have talked with them about that this would be a denial, but I can certainly verify that

535
00:48:00,600 --> 00:48:05,480
 they understand what they would have to do in order to bring it back.

536
00:48:05,480 --> 00:48:06,480
 Okay.

537
00:48:06,480 --> 00:48:10,880
 I think that might help the conversation if they just understand the implications of the

538
00:48:10,880 --> 00:48:11,880
 decision.

539
00:48:11,880 --> 00:48:12,880
 Sure.

540
00:48:12,880 --> 00:48:13,880
 Commissioner Beck.

541
00:48:13,880 --> 00:48:15,880
 Thank you, Chair.

542
00:48:15,880 --> 00:48:31,400
 Richard, given the passing of the preliminary plat in ETJ Tuesday, this -- if this type

543
00:48:31,400 --> 00:48:36,600
 of development had happened, it would still be allowed because it's a single development

544
00:48:36,600 --> 00:48:37,600
 all at once.

545
00:48:37,600 --> 00:48:43,000
 I mean, I'm connecting them together because this is an example of a preliminary plat in

546
00:48:43,000 --> 00:48:45,440
 the ETJ.

547
00:48:45,440 --> 00:48:50,000
 And this is the only one -- I think this is the only one that's kind of still pending,

548
00:48:50,000 --> 00:48:51,000
 if you will.

549
00:48:51,000 --> 00:48:55,460
 So it will continue as is.

550
00:48:55,460 --> 00:49:01,780
 So it's treated like any other preliminary plat that we would -- I mean, I understand

551
00:49:01,780 --> 00:49:04,760
 this one is vested.

552
00:49:04,760 --> 00:49:10,680
 And so the ordinance essentially is effective in 10 days or nine days.

553
00:49:10,680 --> 00:49:16,760
 And so once that ordinance becomes effective, then that code is changed.

554
00:49:16,760 --> 00:49:21,560
 That law is essentially amended in our DDC.

555
00:49:21,560 --> 00:49:29,400
 We don't have any -- given our submittal schedule, we did not receive any new preliminary

556
00:49:29,400 --> 00:49:34,120
 plats that were submitted yesterday.

557
00:49:34,120 --> 00:49:41,840
 So the likelihood of us having one come in is essentially slim to none because we just

558
00:49:41,840 --> 00:49:47,840
 don't have that submittal schedule established where they're able to submit another preliminary

559
00:49:47,840 --> 00:49:54,220
 plat in the ETJ prior to that 10-day period before the ordinance is effective.

560
00:49:54,220 --> 00:49:58,720
 >> But that 10-day -- if they get denied, that 10-day would not impact them because

561
00:49:58,720 --> 00:50:00,920
 this is a prior action, correct?

562
00:50:00,920 --> 00:50:01,920
 >> Correct.

563
00:50:01,920 --> 00:50:05,000
 It was submitted prior to the effective date of the ordinance.

564
00:50:05,000 --> 00:50:06,000
 >> All right.

565
00:50:06,000 --> 00:50:07,000
 Thank you.

566
00:50:07,000 --> 00:50:09,840
 >> Any other questions for Julie?

567
00:50:09,840 --> 00:50:10,840
 All right.

568
00:50:10,840 --> 00:50:16,160
 Seeing none, we'll move on to the final item for individual consideration, which is item

569
00:50:16,160 --> 00:50:23,800
 D, PZ21-064, consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding creating a small

570
00:50:23,800 --> 00:50:30,000
 area plan for the area near Interstate 35 North and Highway 77.

571
00:50:30,000 --> 00:50:34,480
 >> Thank you, Chair.

572
00:50:34,480 --> 00:50:37,040
 Let me pull up a presentation.

573
00:50:37,040 --> 00:50:49,160
 It should be a quick presentation.

574
00:50:49,160 --> 00:50:52,560
 Hopefully you all can see the presentation on the screen.

575
00:50:52,560 --> 00:50:53,560
 >> Yes.

576
00:50:53,560 --> 00:50:54,560
 >> Great.

577
00:50:54,560 --> 00:50:58,320
 As mentioned in the introduction, this is a discussion regarding a small area plan for

578
00:50:58,320 --> 00:51:01,080
 an area north of town.

579
00:51:01,080 --> 00:51:02,480
 Just quick background.

580
00:51:02,480 --> 00:51:08,000
 This was heard just two weeks ago on April 21st, where we discussed the comprehensive

581
00:51:08,000 --> 00:51:11,160
 plan as well as the small area plan.

582
00:51:11,160 --> 00:51:15,120
 But just to go back a little bit further, January 20th, there was a request for a work

583
00:51:15,120 --> 00:51:18,000
 session to discuss small area plan.

584
00:51:18,000 --> 00:51:24,160
 At that time, there was several discussions over PD and zoning cases in that area, and

585
00:51:24,160 --> 00:51:28,400
 so the Planning, Zoning Commission felt that a small area plan was appropriate for this

586
00:51:28,400 --> 00:51:32,760
 area, again, around I-35 North and Highway 77.

587
00:51:32,760 --> 00:51:35,640
 We had the presentation on April 21st.

588
00:51:35,640 --> 00:51:40,600
 During that presentation, during that day, there was a request from the Planning, Zoning

589
00:51:40,600 --> 00:51:47,520
 Commission to bring back an item for consideration for a recommendation for this area to be considered

590
00:51:47,520 --> 00:51:49,320
 as a small area plan.

591
00:51:49,320 --> 00:51:51,840
 I'm going to skip this slide.

592
00:51:51,840 --> 00:51:57,200
 This is the subject area that we're talking about, again, I-35 North and Highway 77, the

593
00:51:57,200 --> 00:52:02,600
 general area that's shown on these multiple exhibits.

594
00:52:02,600 --> 00:52:06,280
 We've seen these exhibits before.

595
00:52:06,280 --> 00:52:12,440
 As far as next steps, if the Planning, Zoning Commission recommends for this small area plan

596
00:52:12,440 --> 00:52:17,000
 to be created, we will take this to City Council as a work session item.

597
00:52:17,000 --> 00:52:22,000
 In fact, that June 21 date, we initially had that date, but I think it's going to be moved

598
00:52:22,000 --> 00:52:23,240
 up earlier.

599
00:52:23,240 --> 00:52:26,600
 We're thinking of a May 18th work session for City Council.

600
00:52:26,600 --> 00:52:31,920
 So in a couple of weeks, again, if this Planning, Zoning Commission recommends that it be created,

601
00:52:31,920 --> 00:52:37,120
 we will bring this to the City Council, again, May 18th.

602
00:52:37,120 --> 00:52:40,960
 Following that, there will be a couple of other items, next steps that we would need

603
00:52:40,960 --> 00:52:45,720
 to do to get the small area plan underway.

604
00:52:45,720 --> 00:52:49,400
 One of them, of course, is to establish that boundary.

605
00:52:49,400 --> 00:52:55,560
 So that will be part of that effort after we get direction from City Council.

606
00:52:55,560 --> 00:53:01,480
 With that, the options for the Planning, Zoning Commission is to obviously recommend that

607
00:53:01,480 --> 00:53:07,160
 the creation of the small area plan be done, not recommend, or just continue to design.

608
00:53:07,160 --> 00:53:10,120
 That concludes my presentation.

609
00:53:10,120 --> 00:53:11,720
 There you go.

610
00:53:11,720 --> 00:53:14,800
 Yeah, and this is just kind of a basic question.

611
00:53:14,800 --> 00:53:19,080
 I know when we had the discussion about this a couple of weeks ago, we talked about the

612
00:53:19,080 --> 00:53:24,960
 previous plans that we've had, and generally, those plans were put into place by citizens

613
00:53:24,960 --> 00:53:29,160
 with a vision of something that they wanted to maintain or something that they wanted

614
00:53:29,160 --> 00:53:30,840
 to achieve.

615
00:53:30,840 --> 00:53:34,920
 This area is kind of a bit of a tabula rasa, right?

616
00:53:34,920 --> 00:53:37,720
 There's nothing predetermined.

617
00:53:37,720 --> 00:53:44,080
 So when we are voting for this, are we simply voting to create something exploratory that

618
00:53:44,080 --> 00:53:52,960
 doesn't have a predetermined idea of what we should be, or is that in the purview?

619
00:53:52,960 --> 00:53:56,640
 Or are we just simply saying, "Hey, this is something that we should bring people together

620
00:53:56,640 --> 00:54:03,640
 for," and then whatever the outcome is that they determine is something that we'll go

621
00:54:03,640 --> 00:54:04,640
 for?

622
00:54:04,640 --> 00:54:10,560
 I'm just trying to figure out what message we're sending right now, or if it's simply

623
00:54:10,560 --> 00:54:12,840
 that we're just going to look at this.

624
00:54:12,840 --> 00:54:17,640
 That is my understanding regarding the area.

625
00:54:17,640 --> 00:54:21,720
 We actually have a large area, understood, and there are numerous projects that affect

626
00:54:21,720 --> 00:54:22,720
 this area.

627
00:54:22,720 --> 00:54:29,640
 So I think the consideration or the discussion last time we met was to explore that opportunity

628
00:54:29,640 --> 00:54:31,320
 for a smaller area plan.

629
00:54:31,320 --> 00:54:36,680
 We obviously need to, again, identify a boundary, and then once we do that, further look at

630
00:54:36,680 --> 00:54:41,520
 the area as far as land use, zoning, and all the other things that come along with that

631
00:54:41,520 --> 00:54:44,680
 as part of a smaller area plan effort.

632
00:54:44,680 --> 00:54:45,680
 Okay.

633
00:54:45,680 --> 00:54:53,480
 And once again, we're just saying, "Hey, generally speaking, we think we should look

634
00:54:53,480 --> 00:54:59,840
 into this," and then whatever comes of it is a separate issue altogether.

635
00:54:59,840 --> 00:55:07,960
 We don't have a predetermined desire to impose any type of future for this right now.

636
00:55:07,960 --> 00:55:12,400
 Yeah, I think the exercise will happen once we start that work, and of course, the Planning

637
00:55:12,400 --> 00:55:17,560
 Zoning Commission and other stakeholders would be involved in that process.

638
00:55:17,560 --> 00:55:18,560
 Okay.

639
00:55:18,560 --> 00:55:19,560
 Thank you very much.

640
00:55:19,560 --> 00:55:20,560
 All right.

641
00:55:20,560 --> 00:55:21,560
 Commissioner Ellis.

642
00:55:21,560 --> 00:55:22,560
 Thank you, Chair.

643
00:55:22,560 --> 00:55:28,800
 Yeah, so just on that a little bit, really the only thing that we are doing is voting

644
00:55:28,800 --> 00:55:30,520
 to move this to city council.

645
00:55:30,520 --> 00:55:34,400
 In the end, it will be their decision whether a small area plan is created.

646
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:35,400
 Is that correct?

647
00:55:35,400 --> 00:55:36,400
 That is correct.

648
00:55:36,400 --> 00:55:42,520
 It's a recommendation for that area to become a small area plan or have a small area plan.

649
00:55:42,520 --> 00:55:43,520
 Right.

650
00:55:43,520 --> 00:55:44,520
 Right.

651
00:55:44,520 --> 00:55:45,520
 Okay.

652
00:55:45,520 --> 00:55:46,520
 Thank you.

653
00:55:46,520 --> 00:55:47,520
 Commissioner Beck.

654
00:55:47,520 --> 00:55:49,040
 Thank you, Chair.

655
00:55:49,040 --> 00:56:01,040
 So playing on both those questions, the concepts for it, let's say the council votes yes, that

656
00:56:01,040 --> 00:56:07,560
 they want to do it, the concepts for the small area plan, the design concepts, the goals

657
00:56:07,560 --> 00:56:10,160
 will come from whom?

658
00:56:10,160 --> 00:56:16,800
 From public outreach, from the stakeholders, property owners, individuals that have interest

659
00:56:16,800 --> 00:56:18,120
 in that area.

660
00:56:18,120 --> 00:56:19,120
 Okay.

661
00:56:19,120 --> 00:56:21,680
 Thank you.

662
00:56:21,680 --> 00:56:27,440
 Any other questions for Ron on this item of moving the SAP forward?

663
00:56:27,440 --> 00:56:31,280
 Commissioner Beck.

664
00:56:31,280 --> 00:56:33,440
 Actually I hadn't muted yet.

665
00:56:33,440 --> 00:56:42,120
 So sort of indirect, I've had citizens approach me about different regions and possibly developing

666
00:56:42,120 --> 00:56:47,800
 a small area plan, but there was a question, some of these people that approached me were

667
00:56:47,800 --> 00:56:51,360
 not actually Denton citizens, they were ETJ citizens.

668
00:56:51,360 --> 00:56:56,520
 And so how does that impact requests for a small area plan?

669
00:56:56,520 --> 00:57:01,600
 I assume that they would have to have a citizen partner.

670
00:57:01,600 --> 00:57:03,040
 I would definitely agree with that.

671
00:57:03,040 --> 00:57:07,360
 Obviously we would act on input from a citizen.

672
00:57:07,360 --> 00:57:11,400
 Now, depending on the area, I'm not sure the areas that you're referring to, obviously

673
00:57:11,400 --> 00:57:17,080
 there may be more than other individuals that are interested in that area plan.

674
00:57:17,080 --> 00:57:23,920
 So certainly partnering with them or sharing the same sentiments with staff, we can certainly

675
00:57:23,920 --> 00:57:27,160
 consider them at that time.

676
00:57:27,160 --> 00:57:37,420
 But staff would be unable to respond to ETJ citizens.

677
00:57:37,420 --> 00:57:43,400
 They would have to respond to Denton's proper citizens, proper that sounds weird, but within

678
00:57:43,400 --> 00:57:46,280
 the city boundary of Denton.

679
00:57:46,280 --> 00:57:50,760
 There wouldn't be much that we would be able, there wouldn't be much teeth or authority

680
00:57:50,760 --> 00:57:58,120
 for that plan, given the limitations of what we can enforce in the ETJ, assuming it's even

681
00:57:58,120 --> 00:58:02,460
 our ETJ Division 1 versus Division 2.

682
00:58:02,460 --> 00:58:06,820
 If that was something they did approach us with, obviously if it's in our Division 1,

683
00:58:06,820 --> 00:58:10,840
 we would want to be part of it, but I would probably think that planning exercise would

684
00:58:10,840 --> 00:58:17,620
 probably be better to be handled through Denton County, taking the lead, whether or not they

685
00:58:17,620 --> 00:58:22,760
 create a special district like they did with Lake Ray Roberts planning area, but it would

686
00:58:22,760 --> 00:58:26,820
 definitely be something that I would think we would want to be, at least my recommendation

687
00:58:26,820 --> 00:58:33,060
 would be, we would be part of it because it is within our ETJ, it's right next to us.

688
00:58:33,060 --> 00:58:39,040
 But again, with our limited authority of what we can and can't do, it would just be enforcing

689
00:58:39,040 --> 00:58:44,320
 subdivision regulations and again, we can't do anything with respect to use, lot size,

690
00:58:44,320 --> 00:58:45,320
 anything like that.

691
00:58:45,320 --> 00:58:52,480
 So, I'll be less coy so it is more clear, and that is, these are hardly field ETJ residents,

692
00:58:52,480 --> 00:58:58,640
 so therefore the actual property that they would be wanting to explore would be Carter

693
00:58:58,640 --> 00:59:02,560
 to the north, which is in our boundary.

694
00:59:02,560 --> 00:59:13,700
 So the question is more of a, can an ETJ citizen, an ETJ citizen would have to have a citizen

695
00:59:13,700 --> 00:59:23,480
 partner in order to initiate that, you know, even if it was for Denton property?

696
00:59:23,480 --> 00:59:28,200
 I think it could come from a multitude of, you know, whether P&Z wanted to do that, or

697
00:59:28,200 --> 00:59:35,800
 I think if that request came in, I don't know that, I'd have to look at the comp plan of

698
00:59:35,800 --> 00:59:41,320
 how it would it, what it says specifically, but I don't know that there's limitations.

699
00:59:41,320 --> 00:59:43,520
 I just can't recall off the top of my head.

700
00:59:43,520 --> 00:59:47,000
 And I don't want to rabbit hole us, because that's not this direct item too much.

701
00:59:47,000 --> 00:59:48,600
 So I'll just stop there.

702
00:59:48,600 --> 00:59:49,960
 Commissioner Pernetta.

703
00:59:49,960 --> 00:59:57,440
 And this is, and not to rabbit hole too much, but this, you know, that question that Commissioner

704
00:59:57,440 --> 01:00:02,240
 Beck was raising, you know, that area out in your Hartley field is surrounded, you know,

705
01:00:02,240 --> 01:00:06,360
 like we have little pockets that are Denton, little pockets that are not, generally, and

706
01:00:06,360 --> 01:00:12,340
 this is just a general question, not as specific to this for smaller area plans.

707
01:00:12,340 --> 01:00:13,960
 What authority do we have?

708
01:00:13,960 --> 01:00:23,520
 If we have an area that surrounds or is adjacent to ETJ in a way, can we include ETJ in a small

709
01:00:23,520 --> 01:00:25,160
 area plan?

710
01:00:25,160 --> 01:00:29,480
 If we have Denton surrounding, Denton below, Denton, you know, those types of things, or

711
01:00:29,480 --> 01:00:39,640
 can we only address what is specifically in Denton proper right now?

712
01:00:39,640 --> 01:00:45,800
 Quite honestly, I think we can put whatever we want in our, you know, in, it's our plan.

713
01:00:45,800 --> 01:00:52,200
 That's really part of the premise or origination of the ETJ was to, for cities to plan growth

714
01:00:52,200 --> 01:00:54,400
 on their edge.

715
01:00:54,400 --> 01:00:59,920
 So whether there's other policies that guide future annexation, you know, how we extend

716
01:00:59,920 --> 01:01:06,640
 water, wastewater, capital projects, all of that could be included.

717
01:01:06,640 --> 01:01:13,280
 I think what makes it even more unique for us is if you look at that Northern, you know,

718
01:01:13,280 --> 01:01:19,760
 north of 380 or north of the loop, really, our boundaries zigzag in and out.

719
01:01:19,760 --> 01:01:26,040
 So to not include, you know, we almost have to include ETJ in that planning, in addition

720
01:01:26,040 --> 01:01:30,680
 to, you know, even Denton County, what their plans are, given the, you know, just some

721
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:35,280
 of the environmental sensitive areas, not necessarily calling them ESA, but they're,

722
01:01:35,280 --> 01:01:38,560
 they're, you know, you have the green belt, there's a lot of streams.

723
01:01:38,560 --> 01:01:46,280
 There's just a lot of different, you know, elevation changes out there that, again, kind

724
01:01:46,280 --> 01:01:50,360
 of zigzag between whether you're in the city or you're in our ETJ.

725
01:01:50,360 --> 01:01:56,960
 So depending where that plan, you know, if it extends to other areas, I think you almost

726
01:01:56,960 --> 01:02:02,320
 have to include the ETJ as part of that, as part of that, again, from a limited aspect,

727
01:02:02,320 --> 01:02:05,520
 but definitely part of that, part of that plan.

728
01:02:05,520 --> 01:02:10,600
 And just to quickly add to Richard's comment or response, you know, the future land use

729
01:02:10,600 --> 01:02:15,720
 plan map, you know, extends outside the city limits, the mobility plan extends outside

730
01:02:15,720 --> 01:02:18,280
 the city limits, and it's similar in situation.

731
01:02:18,280 --> 01:02:22,200
 This is a smaller your plan, again, as Richard mentions, the planning now, when it comes

732
01:02:22,200 --> 01:02:28,840
 to overlay districts, which would be the next step, if that is the case, that only must

733
01:02:28,840 --> 01:02:33,080
 be within the city limits, of course, because that's under, you know, zoning regulations

734
01:02:33,080 --> 01:02:35,280
 or development review requirements.

735
01:02:35,280 --> 01:02:38,240
 So that, unfortunately, would just be within the city of them.

736
01:02:38,240 --> 01:02:41,240
 Thank you guys so much.

737
01:02:41,240 --> 01:02:42,240
 That's all I had.

738
01:02:42,240 --> 01:02:43,240
 I'll pull this out of that rabbit hole.

739
01:02:43,240 --> 01:02:47,960
 I've got nothing else on this particular item.

740
01:02:47,960 --> 01:02:51,040
 Any other questions for Ron on this item?

741
01:02:51,040 --> 01:02:53,480
 Okay, great.

742
01:02:53,480 --> 01:02:56,640
 That concludes the agenda for our work session.

743
01:02:56,640 --> 01:03:04,680
 We will take a short break and reconvene back here at 630, which is at about 22 minutes.

744
01:03:04,680 --> 01:03:06,680
 And we'll see everyone there.

745
01:03:06,680 --> 01:03:09,040
 Thank you.

746
01:03:09,040 --> 01:03:14,920
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission regular

747
01:03:14,920 --> 01:03:19,360
 meeting for Wednesday, May 5th, 2021.

748
01:03:19,360 --> 01:03:24,160
 Seeing that we do have a quorum, I'll call the meeting to order at 631.

749
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:28,160
 The first item of business this evening is to provide a pledge of allegiance to the U.S.

750
01:03:28,160 --> 01:03:29,940
 and Texas flag.

751
01:03:29,940 --> 01:03:35,400
 Other commissioners are more than welcome to join me by unmuting their mics.

752
01:03:35,400 --> 01:03:40,920
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for

753
01:03:40,920 --> 01:03:49,580
 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

754
01:03:49,580 --> 01:03:51,360
 Honor the Texas flag.

755
01:03:51,360 --> 01:03:58,440
 I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God, one indivisible.

756
01:03:58,440 --> 01:04:04,680
 The next item of business is to consider our consent agenda.

757
01:04:04,680 --> 01:04:11,880
 Commissioner Beck.

758
01:04:11,880 --> 01:04:12,880
 You're muted there.

759
01:04:12,880 --> 01:04:22,520
 I think that was a motion.

760
01:04:22,520 --> 01:04:25,320
 We'll give him one more second.

761
01:04:25,320 --> 01:04:26,320
 Still nothing.

762
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,320
 Commissioner Beck.

763
01:04:27,320 --> 01:04:28,320
 Commissioner Smith.

764
01:04:28,320 --> 01:04:29,320
 Make an motion to approve.

765
01:04:29,320 --> 01:04:30,320
 Perfect.

766
01:04:30,320 --> 01:04:31,320
 We have a first.

767
01:04:31,320 --> 01:04:32,320
 Commissioner Ellis.

768
01:04:32,320 --> 01:04:37,320
 Yes, Chair, if I might.

769
01:04:37,320 --> 01:04:41,200
 We did skip over the approval of the minutes.

770
01:04:41,200 --> 01:04:46,280
 So I don't know if we want to handle this item and then go back or what?

771
01:04:46,280 --> 01:04:47,280
 Yeah.

772
01:04:47,280 --> 01:04:48,280
 Thank you for reminding me.

773
01:04:48,280 --> 01:04:50,200
 It seems like every time you do that, I appreciate it.

774
01:04:50,200 --> 01:04:56,140
 We'll consider the motion on the floor for the consent agenda item three and we'll head

775
01:04:56,140 --> 01:04:57,800
 back to the minutes.

776
01:04:57,800 --> 01:04:59,440
 Commissioner Ellis.

777
01:04:59,440 --> 01:05:00,680
 I will second.

778
01:05:00,680 --> 01:05:01,680
 Thank you.

779
01:05:01,680 --> 01:05:03,960
 We have a first and second for approval of the consent agenda.

780
01:05:03,960 --> 01:05:11,840
 Any discussion?

781
01:05:11,840 --> 01:05:12,840
 Commissioner Beck.

782
01:05:12,840 --> 01:05:13,840
 Can you hear me now?

783
01:05:13,840 --> 01:05:14,840
 We can.

784
01:05:14,840 --> 01:05:15,840
 Perfect.

785
01:05:15,840 --> 01:05:16,840
 Yay.

786
01:05:16,840 --> 01:05:17,840
 Fixed it.

787
01:05:17,840 --> 01:05:18,840
 I assume that was your discussion point or did you?

788
01:05:18,840 --> 01:05:19,840
 That was my discussion point.

789
01:05:19,840 --> 01:05:20,840
 All right.

790
01:05:20,840 --> 01:05:25,320
 Seeing no other discussion, we'll go ahead and call a vote via roll call, starting with

791
01:05:25,320 --> 01:05:26,320
 Commissioner Ellis.

792
01:05:26,320 --> 01:05:27,320
 Aye.

793
01:05:27,320 --> 01:05:28,320
 Commissioner Beck.

794
01:05:28,320 --> 01:05:29,320
 Aye.

795
01:05:29,320 --> 01:05:30,320
 Commissioner Cole.

796
01:05:30,320 --> 01:05:31,320
 Aye.

797
01:05:31,320 --> 01:05:32,320
 Commissioner Anderson.

798
01:05:32,320 --> 01:05:33,320
 Aye.

799
01:05:33,320 --> 01:05:34,320
 Commissioner Smith.

800
01:05:34,320 --> 01:05:35,320
 Aye.

801
01:05:35,320 --> 01:05:36,320
 Commissioner Pronetta.

802
01:05:36,320 --> 01:05:37,320
 Aye.

803
01:05:37,320 --> 01:05:39,360
 Chair is also an aye.

804
01:05:39,360 --> 01:05:41,040
 Motion carries seven zero.

805
01:05:41,040 --> 01:05:46,600
 Heading back up one item is our minutes and the chair will entertain a motion on the April

806
01:05:46,600 --> 01:05:48,600
 21st, 2021 minutes.

807
01:05:48,600 --> 01:05:49,600
 Commissioner Smith.

808
01:05:49,600 --> 01:05:51,040
 Make a motion to approve.

809
01:05:51,040 --> 01:05:53,360
 We have a first for approval.

810
01:05:53,360 --> 01:05:54,360
 Commissioner Anderson.

811
01:05:54,360 --> 01:05:55,360
 Second the motion.

812
01:05:55,360 --> 01:05:58,360
 We have a first and a second.

813
01:05:58,360 --> 01:06:01,400
 Any discussion on this item?

814
01:06:01,400 --> 01:06:03,280
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

815
01:06:03,280 --> 01:06:04,280
 Commissioner Ellis.

816
01:06:04,280 --> 01:06:05,280
 Aye.

817
01:06:05,280 --> 01:06:06,280
 Commissioner Beck.

818
01:06:06,280 --> 01:06:07,280
 Aye.

819
01:06:07,280 --> 01:06:08,280
 Commissioner Cole.

820
01:06:08,280 --> 01:06:09,280
 Aye.

821
01:06:09,280 --> 01:06:10,280
 Commissioner Anderson.

822
01:06:10,280 --> 01:06:11,280
 Aye.

823
01:06:11,280 --> 01:06:12,280
 Commissioner Smith.

824
01:06:12,280 --> 01:06:13,280
 Aye.

825
01:06:13,280 --> 01:06:14,280
 Commissioner Pronetta.

826
01:06:14,280 --> 01:06:15,280
 Aye.

827
01:06:15,280 --> 01:06:16,680
 Chair is also an aye.

828
01:06:16,680 --> 01:06:18,800
 Motion carries seven zero.

829
01:06:18,800 --> 01:06:28,720
 That moves us to our items for individual considerations, starting with 4A PP21-0005.

830
01:06:28,720 --> 01:06:33,480
 And I'll invite Sean Jacobson for presentation.

831
01:06:33,480 --> 01:06:37,840
 Good evening, Chair and members of the commission, Sean Jacobson, Assistant Planner.

832
01:06:37,840 --> 01:06:42,280
 I am pulling up my presentation now.

833
01:06:42,280 --> 01:06:54,640
 Okay, hopefully you should now see that.

834
01:06:54,640 --> 01:07:01,920
 All right, so this is a request by Priya Acharya of Weir and Associates on behalf of the property

835
01:07:01,920 --> 01:07:05,840
 owner for a preliminary plot of the Yolo First Edition.

836
01:07:05,840 --> 01:07:12,960
 The approximately 6.838 acre property is generally located on the west side of Teasley Lane, approximately

837
01:07:12,960 --> 01:07:18,000
 692 feet north of the intersection of Teasley Lane and Hickory Creek Road in the City of

838
01:07:18,000 --> 01:07:19,000
 Den.

839
01:07:19,000 --> 01:07:21,240
 Staff recommends denial of this request.

840
01:07:21,240 --> 01:07:29,800
 However, the applicant has requested an extension to the May 19th, 2021 agenda, and staff has

841
01:07:29,800 --> 01:07:33,260
 no objection to this request.

842
01:07:33,260 --> 01:07:34,260
 That is my presentation.

843
01:07:34,260 --> 01:07:37,400
 I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have.

844
01:07:37,400 --> 01:07:39,200
 Thank you very much, Sean.

845
01:07:39,200 --> 01:07:41,640
 Any questions for staff on this?

846
01:07:41,640 --> 01:07:47,880
 Okay, seeing none, I just wanted to let the commission know and any viewers know that

847
01:07:47,880 --> 01:07:51,800
 for this item, there was one person that filled out an online white virtual card.

848
01:07:51,800 --> 01:07:54,360
 There was zero in support and one in opposition.

849
01:07:54,360 --> 01:07:59,440
 These cards were emailed to all the commissioners and will be included in the meeting record.

850
01:07:59,440 --> 01:08:01,560
 Commissioner Smith.

851
01:08:01,560 --> 01:08:06,640
 Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of May 19th, 2021.

852
01:08:06,640 --> 01:08:11,400
 Okay, we have a first for the 30 day extension to the May 19th meeting.

853
01:08:11,400 --> 01:08:12,400
 Commissioner Anderson.

854
01:08:12,400 --> 01:08:13,400
 I second the motion.

855
01:08:13,400 --> 01:08:17,280
 We have a first and a second for this item.

856
01:08:17,280 --> 01:08:20,640
 Is there any discussion?

857
01:08:20,640 --> 01:08:22,800
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote and be a roll call.

858
01:08:22,800 --> 01:08:23,800
 Commissioner Ellis.

859
01:08:23,800 --> 01:08:24,800
 Aye.

860
01:08:24,800 --> 01:08:25,800
 Commissioner Beck.

861
01:08:25,800 --> 01:08:26,800
 Aye.

862
01:08:26,800 --> 01:08:27,800
 Commissioner Cole.

863
01:08:27,800 --> 01:08:28,800
 Aye.

864
01:08:28,800 --> 01:08:29,800
 Commissioner Anderson.

865
01:08:29,800 --> 01:08:30,800
 Aye.

866
01:08:30,800 --> 01:08:31,800
 Commissioner Smith.

867
01:08:31,800 --> 01:08:32,800
 Aye.

868
01:08:32,800 --> 01:08:33,800
 Commissioner Pernetta.

869
01:08:33,800 --> 01:08:34,800
 Aye.

870
01:08:34,800 --> 01:08:36,560
 Chair is also an aye.

871
01:08:36,560 --> 01:08:39,440
 Motion carries 7-0.

872
01:08:39,440 --> 01:08:44,760
 The next item of business is item 4B, PP21-0006.

873
01:08:44,760 --> 01:08:49,640
 This item is Julie Wyatt's and I will let everyone know that Commissioner Cole is recusing

874
01:08:49,640 --> 01:08:55,680
 himself from this item so he has left the meeting temporarily for that.

875
01:08:55,680 --> 01:08:58,280
 With that, Julie, whenever you're ready, it is your floor.

876
01:08:58,280 --> 01:08:59,280
 All right.

877
01:08:59,280 --> 01:09:06,760
 Let me pull up my presentation.

878
01:09:06,760 --> 01:09:09,680
 So this item is PP21-0006.

879
01:09:09,680 --> 01:09:15,360
 It is a preliminary plat within the Robeson Ranch plan development.

880
01:09:15,360 --> 01:09:19,440
 They still have a few outstanding items that they need to work through before staff can

881
01:09:19,440 --> 01:09:21,920
 recommend approval of this request.

882
01:09:21,920 --> 01:09:25,760
 So they have requested an extension to the May 19th Planning and Zoning Commission to

883
01:09:25,760 --> 01:09:27,920
 give them time to work through those.

884
01:09:27,920 --> 01:09:33,640
 Staff has no objection to that extension and I will be happy to answer any questions.

885
01:09:33,640 --> 01:09:34,640
 Great.

886
01:09:34,640 --> 01:09:35,640
 Thank you, Julie.

887
01:09:35,640 --> 01:09:40,000
 Any questions for Julie or staff?

888
01:09:40,000 --> 01:09:41,400
 Okay.

889
01:09:41,400 --> 01:09:44,640
 Just like the other item, I just want to let everyone know that for this item, there was

890
01:09:44,640 --> 01:09:47,720
 one person that filled out an online virtual white card.

891
01:09:47,720 --> 01:09:51,960
 That person was in opposition and this comment was emailed to all the commissioners and will

892
01:09:51,960 --> 01:09:57,080
 be included in the meeting record.

893
01:09:57,080 --> 01:09:58,080
 Commissioner Smith.

894
01:09:58,080 --> 01:10:02,800
 I make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of May 19th of 2021.

895
01:10:02,800 --> 01:10:03,800
 Great.

896
01:10:03,800 --> 01:10:04,800
 Thank you.

897
01:10:04,800 --> 01:10:07,140
 I second the motion.

898
01:10:07,140 --> 01:10:13,240
 We have a first and a second to extend this 30 days to a date certain of May 19th, 2021.

899
01:10:13,240 --> 01:10:14,240
 Any discussion?

900
01:10:14,240 --> 01:10:19,920
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call starting with Commissioner Ellis.

901
01:10:19,920 --> 01:10:20,920
 Aye.

902
01:10:20,920 --> 01:10:21,920
 Commissioner Beck.

903
01:10:21,920 --> 01:10:22,920
 Aye.

904
01:10:22,920 --> 01:10:23,920
 Commissioner Anderson.

905
01:10:23,920 --> 01:10:24,920
 Aye.

906
01:10:24,920 --> 01:10:25,920
 Commissioner Smith.

907
01:10:25,920 --> 01:10:26,920
 Aye.

908
01:10:26,920 --> 01:10:27,920
 Commissioner Pernetta.

909
01:10:27,920 --> 01:10:28,920
 Aye.

910
01:10:28,920 --> 01:10:31,320
 Chair is also an aye.

911
01:10:31,320 --> 01:10:34,320
 Motion carries 6-0.

912
01:10:34,320 --> 01:10:38,040
 Moving on to the next item, I invite Commissioner Cole back to join us and then we'll move to

913
01:10:38,040 --> 01:10:43,400
 item 4C, PP21-0004A.

914
01:10:43,400 --> 01:10:45,600
 This is also Julie Wyatt's item.

915
01:10:45,600 --> 01:10:51,000
 You have the floor.

916
01:10:51,000 --> 01:10:53,240
 Okay.

917
01:10:53,240 --> 01:10:56,600
 This is PP21-0004A.

918
01:10:56,600 --> 01:11:01,120
 It's a preliminary plat within the ETJ of the city.

919
01:11:01,120 --> 01:11:04,000
 They still have some outstanding items that they need to work through.

920
01:11:04,000 --> 01:11:07,360
 And so staff recommends denial of this request.

921
01:11:07,360 --> 01:11:10,280
 Just want to mention, we talked about them briefly in the work session.

922
01:11:10,280 --> 01:11:13,640
 We do have engineering staff on the line.

923
01:11:13,640 --> 01:11:19,960
 And I do believe the applicant would like to, will be speaking in response to those comments

924
01:11:19,960 --> 01:11:21,720
 of those outstanding items.

925
01:11:21,720 --> 01:11:24,980
 But just to sort of summarize what those are, they are in your backup.

926
01:11:24,980 --> 01:11:31,080
 But there is, there's a road that is shown on the mobility plan that needs to be reflected

927
01:11:31,080 --> 01:11:32,080
 in this plat.

928
01:11:32,080 --> 01:11:34,400
 That is one comment that needs to be addressed.

929
01:11:34,400 --> 01:11:39,120
 There's some easement widths that need to be addressed for some off-site easements.

930
01:11:39,120 --> 01:11:40,120
 They're showing 20 feet.

931
01:11:40,120 --> 01:11:42,720
 I believe 25 feet is required.

932
01:11:42,720 --> 01:11:48,280
 There's a TIA that was submitted for the project in 2019 due to some project changes and some

933
01:11:48,280 --> 01:11:50,480
 review of that TIA.

934
01:11:50,480 --> 01:11:55,080
 It does need to be a revision to the TIA to ensure that there's adequate turn lanes and

935
01:11:55,080 --> 01:11:57,760
 phasing of the project.

936
01:11:57,760 --> 01:12:03,160
 And then finally, we've just got some standard notes and some formatting issues that need

937
01:12:03,160 --> 01:12:07,120
 to be corrected prior to staff being able to recommend approval.

938
01:12:07,120 --> 01:12:12,720
 There was a question in the work session regarding if the applicant was aware of those processes

939
01:12:12,720 --> 01:12:14,760
 for after denial.

940
01:12:14,760 --> 01:12:19,440
 I did send an email in the interim between our discussion in the work session and the

941
01:12:19,440 --> 01:12:20,440
 meeting.

942
01:12:20,440 --> 01:12:21,440
 I haven't heard back from them.

943
01:12:21,440 --> 01:12:28,720
 But just to kind of summarize that, if the plat is denied tonight, then they would need

944
01:12:28,720 --> 01:12:29,720
 to resubmit.

945
01:12:29,720 --> 01:12:34,400
 They can resubmit under this existing preliminary plat number.

946
01:12:34,400 --> 01:12:35,800
 Additional fees would be required.

947
01:12:35,800 --> 01:12:42,040
 50% of that original fee amount would be required for that resubmittal.

948
01:12:42,040 --> 01:12:48,320
 And then staff would review that preliminary plat, and it would go on to a Planning and

949
01:12:48,320 --> 01:12:53,400
 Zoning Commission agenda 15 days after that resubmittal.

950
01:12:53,400 --> 01:12:57,920
 So I will pull down the presentation and be happy to answer any questions.

951
01:12:57,920 --> 01:13:01,160
 Julie, do you know what the fee amount was?

952
01:13:01,160 --> 01:13:05,880
 If they come back, it's 50% of the original fee amount, if I understood that correctly.

953
01:13:05,880 --> 01:13:07,600
 Do we have a dollar amount on that?

954
01:13:07,600 --> 01:13:09,540
 I'm going to look that up right now, sir.

955
01:13:09,540 --> 01:13:10,540
 Great.

956
01:13:10,540 --> 01:13:25,440
 Thank you.

957
01:13:25,440 --> 01:13:36,880
 So that fee for the preliminary plat was $7,568 for the review.

958
01:13:36,880 --> 01:13:37,880
 Thank you so much, Julie.

959
01:13:37,880 --> 01:13:38,880
 Sure.

960
01:13:38,880 --> 01:13:42,760
 I'm sure the applicant is here prior to getting to them.

961
01:13:42,760 --> 01:13:46,120
 Is there any questions for Julie in the interim?

962
01:13:46,120 --> 01:13:47,120
 Okay.

963
01:13:47,120 --> 01:13:48,600
 Perfect.

964
01:13:48,600 --> 01:13:53,640
 And if the applicant is here, can we get them unmuted and then have them state their

965
01:13:53,640 --> 01:14:04,880
 name and address for the record?

966
01:14:04,880 --> 01:14:07,200
 My name is Aaron Ketchum with Hologun Communities.

967
01:14:07,200 --> 01:14:09,800
 I'm Director of Development.

968
01:14:09,800 --> 01:14:19,120
 And what did you, also the address, 14114 Dallas Parkway, Dallas, Texas.

969
01:14:19,120 --> 01:14:20,120
 Great.

970
01:14:20,120 --> 01:14:25,560
 I appreciate you being here tonight and you certainly have, I believe, I don't have the

971
01:14:25,560 --> 01:14:26,560
 cheat sheet in front of me.

972
01:14:26,560 --> 01:14:29,920
 I think you have four minutes to discuss your project.

973
01:14:29,920 --> 01:14:30,920
 Okay.

974
01:14:30,920 --> 01:14:34,680
 I tried to start my video.

975
01:14:34,680 --> 01:14:37,600
 I guess that's on your end.

976
01:14:37,600 --> 01:14:39,240
 I apologize.

977
01:14:39,240 --> 01:14:42,760
 That's my technical difficulty there.

978
01:14:42,760 --> 01:14:43,880
 Appreciate your time, commissioners.

979
01:14:43,880 --> 01:14:52,760
 I do have on the call with me my project manager, Chris Fairley, as well as our engineer, Brian

980
01:14:52,760 --> 01:14:56,320
 Dench with Land Design for any questions.

981
01:14:56,320 --> 01:15:08,160
 I did watch briefly the work session discussion and we are aware of the ramifications of a

982
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,160
 denial tonight.

983
01:15:09,160 --> 01:15:16,760
 However, I do ask that the commission consider some context.

984
01:15:16,760 --> 01:15:20,400
 Just for the record, we've owned this property for two years and have been in discussions

985
01:15:20,400 --> 01:15:26,000
 with both the city and the county for a better part of a year regarding this project, namely

986
01:15:26,000 --> 01:15:33,840
 off-site sanitary and water extensions that ultimately tie into 77 at the TA list station.

987
01:15:33,840 --> 01:15:42,800
 There's been quite a bit of work on this and we are before you tonight feeling as though

988
01:15:42,800 --> 01:15:47,800
 we don't have much else of a choice than to present a preliminary plat application that

989
01:15:47,800 --> 01:15:55,840
 we feel satisfies all the city listed preliminary platting requirements subject to some engineering

990
01:15:55,840 --> 01:16:02,520
 comments that we just feel are either premature or that are going to be addressed at the CEP

991
01:16:02,520 --> 01:16:07,040
 civil engineering plan approval timeline, as well as the final plat or are just not

992
01:16:07,040 --> 01:16:09,200
 applicable outright.

993
01:16:09,200 --> 01:16:18,960
 I'm happy to go not met by each comment by staff to address each one of them.

994
01:16:18,960 --> 01:16:27,360
 We have reasons for each that have been discussed several times with staff on various, this

995
01:16:27,360 --> 01:16:32,740
 is the fourth submittal of this preliminary plat at this point.

996
01:16:32,740 --> 01:16:40,720
 But for, again, quick context, what we are seeking is a one lot preliminary plat whereby

997
01:16:40,720 --> 01:16:47,880
 all on-site improvements are private with connections to public right away and ultimate

998
01:16:47,880 --> 01:16:53,520
 wet utilities that we would be extending on behalf of the city approximately two to three

999
01:16:53,520 --> 01:16:57,720
 miles to open up this area.

1000
01:16:57,720 --> 01:17:02,920
 What we do is develop manufactured housing developments where we own the entirety of

1001
01:17:02,920 --> 01:17:09,900
 the development and we lease land to homeowners who are fee simple owners of the actual homes.

1002
01:17:09,900 --> 01:17:15,400
 So between their mortgage payment and our land lease payment is their effective housing

1003
01:17:15,400 --> 01:17:16,400
 cost.

1004
01:17:16,400 --> 01:17:24,800
 As you guys are well aware, I'm sure everyone is, there is high demand for affordable housing.

1005
01:17:24,800 --> 01:17:33,680
 This is a niche that we think is a great option for potential homeowners.

1006
01:17:33,680 --> 01:17:40,840
 But where we stand today is having our preliminary plat held up by matters not that we're trying

1007
01:17:40,840 --> 01:17:49,040
 to circumvent or comments, but rather address at the appropriate stage of the design approval

1008
01:17:49,040 --> 01:17:50,880
 process.

1009
01:17:50,880 --> 01:17:59,280
 Any reference to a TIA, which we have already begun the process of, we were told originally

1010
01:17:59,280 --> 01:18:02,480
 that that would have been addressed and should be addressed at the civil engineering plan

1011
01:18:02,480 --> 01:18:04,560
 approval process.

1012
01:18:04,560 --> 01:18:10,160
 Any discussions regarding phasing was as a result of us asking the question, does it

1013
01:18:10,160 --> 01:18:17,840
 really make sense to improve 1500 feet of Gans or road while the county has bar ditch

1014
01:18:17,840 --> 01:18:22,800
 and asphalt for the remainder of the 13,000 feet of bark?

1015
01:18:22,800 --> 01:18:27,360
 So staff says we don't, the city doesn't do escrow agreements, but we do have some life

1016
01:18:27,360 --> 01:18:31,320
 safety and constructability concerns of being requested.

1017
01:18:31,320 --> 01:18:36,000
 So there's some technicalities on the engineering side that has bled over unnecessarily in our

1018
01:18:36,000 --> 01:18:42,280
 opinion to a preliminary plat discussion, especially when we are platting in the preliminary

1019
01:18:42,280 --> 01:18:51,280
 plat, the full required city right away widths in anticipation of all of that.

1020
01:18:51,280 --> 01:18:59,760
 So I'm happy to discuss again, comment by comment, every one of these objections and

1021
01:18:59,760 --> 01:19:06,200
 just kind of a request that there be some consideration given to a group that's been

1022
01:19:06,200 --> 01:19:12,200
 trying to get this advanced for the better part of a year, knowing full well we were

1023
01:19:12,200 --> 01:19:19,680
 not trying to, we have and continue to seek to work things out with staff and addressing

1024
01:19:19,680 --> 01:19:20,680
 all comments.

1025
01:19:20,680 --> 01:19:24,920
 The last thing we want to do is seek approval over noted objections.

1026
01:19:24,920 --> 01:19:33,160
 But in our case, in our case, that that has become a circular discussion and yeah, we

1027
01:19:33,160 --> 01:19:39,260
 feel like we're a little, you know, we are caught, you know, watching the work session,

1028
01:19:39,260 --> 01:19:46,160
 we are caught a little bit clearly between the county and the city ETJ conundrums and

1029
01:19:46,160 --> 01:19:52,660
 the challenges even in the ILA discussion that you had during the work session.

1030
01:19:52,660 --> 01:19:59,800
 So I know I'm running out of time, I'm trying to be sensitive to that, I would love to go

1031
01:19:59,800 --> 01:20:09,160
 through each one of these noted recommendations of denial or noting that we've not met something.

1032
01:20:09,160 --> 01:20:13,960
 But there is a reason for each one of these, you guys do, I do ask that you be made aware

1033
01:20:13,960 --> 01:20:14,960
 of that.

1034
01:20:14,960 --> 01:20:22,680
 We did submit for to hopefully be included in your packet, our latest response letter

1035
01:20:22,680 --> 01:20:26,520
 which would have been the third submittal, which noted some of the things that I would

1036
01:20:26,520 --> 01:20:31,460
 speak to as to reasons why they aren't included on the preliminary plaque, or we're asking

1037
01:20:31,460 --> 01:20:39,360
 to be deferred to the civil engineering approval timeframe for so I'm not sure if that was

1038
01:20:39,360 --> 01:20:46,920
 provided or not, but I'm happy to answer any specific questions, and or defer to my colleagues

1039
01:20:46,920 --> 01:20:56,600
 or any one of these recommendations or notations of a requirement not being met, and, and hopefully

1040
01:20:56,600 --> 01:21:04,320
 provide if if needed any more context as to why we are seeking an approval of a of a one

1041
01:21:04,320 --> 01:21:11,640
 lot preliminary plaque that we feel meets the city requirements.

1042
01:21:11,640 --> 01:21:14,400
 I certainly appreciate that context.

1043
01:21:14,400 --> 01:21:18,560
 Is there any questions with questions to begin?

1044
01:21:18,560 --> 01:21:22,880
 All right, Christian Alice.

1045
01:21:22,880 --> 01:21:24,360
 Thank you, Chair.

1046
01:21:24,360 --> 01:21:31,400
 Um, hi, Mr. Ketchum, I guess my first question to you would be, did you go over with staff

1047
01:21:31,400 --> 01:21:33,320
 line by line.

1048
01:21:33,320 --> 01:21:40,800
 This doesn't seem the right platform to be discussing line by line.

1049
01:21:40,800 --> 01:21:47,040
 So yes, staff's recommendation so I guess I'm a little bit confused.

1050
01:21:47,040 --> 01:21:49,880
 As as to to that statement by you.

1051
01:21:49,880 --> 01:22:00,800
 So yes, the simple answer to your question is yes, really on the last two rounds of submittals.

1052
01:22:00,800 --> 01:22:07,440
 We have tried to address all of these items, and the items that are before you I think

1053
01:22:07,440 --> 01:22:15,360
 are a little redundant from looking at the staff analysis report there's upwards of 17

1054
01:22:15,360 --> 01:22:21,200
 noted not met but they really kind of cross reference each other I think Julie added accurately

1055
01:22:21,200 --> 01:22:31,440
 kind of encapsulated the the buckets of general areas where the comments kind of center around

1056
01:22:31,440 --> 01:22:37,620
 one being the traffic impact need drainage, things like that.

1057
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:45,000
 But to answer your question, yes, we, we have discussed every one of these, if not over

1058
01:22:45,000 --> 01:22:51,960
 a team meeting or call via submittals and then just sat comment turnarounds, the last

1059
01:22:51,960 --> 01:22:55,920
 of which we only got last night until around six.

1060
01:22:55,920 --> 01:23:03,740
 But, but again, these are all items that we have kind of not gotten any resolution on

1061
01:23:03,740 --> 01:23:09,880
 for differences of opinion or just inconsistencies of what we've been told today.

1062
01:23:09,880 --> 01:23:14,280
 So is that just because you just don't like what staff is telling you.

1063
01:23:14,280 --> 01:23:19,760
 I mean, the staff analysis that that is being done on your project is the staff analysis

1064
01:23:19,760 --> 01:23:25,720
 that is done on everything that comes before them and us, and until everything's met.

1065
01:23:25,720 --> 01:23:29,480
 They can't recommend a platform for approval.

1066
01:23:29,480 --> 01:23:32,440
 So that's a good that's a good question.

1067
01:23:32,440 --> 01:23:36,440
 So let's just take examples, if you would, if you may, if I may.

1068
01:23:36,440 --> 01:23:43,400
 The traffic impact analysis requirement or recommendation for denial was a was originally

1069
01:23:43,400 --> 01:23:52,120
 presented to us from staff as a TIA will need to be re updated and resubmitted for review

1070
01:23:52,120 --> 01:23:53,120
 and approval.

1071
01:23:53,120 --> 01:23:58,760
 But that can occur at the civil engineering plan and final plat stages.

1072
01:23:58,760 --> 01:24:03,940
 That was what we were told during the course of our submittals.

1073
01:24:03,940 --> 01:24:11,800
 We have asked the question, can what can we discuss the design parameters of cancer road,

1074
01:24:11,800 --> 01:24:18,600
 as well as the timing of when those improvements would need to be made, because we have questions,

1075
01:24:18,600 --> 01:24:24,600
 not so much of the required city requirements, but of the buildability and life safety issue

1076
01:24:24,600 --> 01:24:31,120
 concerns that we have of having city, you know, paved perimeter street on the along

1077
01:24:31,120 --> 01:24:38,800
 Ganzer on our frontage, connecting 1500 feet apart, connecting back to Ganzer road as an

1078
01:24:38,800 --> 01:24:45,480
 asphalt bar ditch profile, which is county standards.

1079
01:24:45,480 --> 01:24:53,600
 So we were so in that discussion, staff then made a made a decision that we disagree with

1080
01:24:53,600 --> 01:24:59,640
 that says no, now you need to submit a TIA for the preliminary plat because of phasing.

1081
01:24:59,640 --> 01:25:04,680
 Well, we have not decided whether or not we would like to phase it.

1082
01:25:04,680 --> 01:25:12,640
 But what we intend to do is plat our lot with anticipation of building it.

1083
01:25:12,640 --> 01:25:21,300
 But if there is, but here again, we are stuck in between this county and city uncertainty

1084
01:25:21,300 --> 01:25:27,000
 limbo as to what it is we're supposed to be doing.

1085
01:25:27,000 --> 01:25:30,840
 Like Ganzer, there was a disagreement, there was only resolution like last week as to actually

1086
01:25:30,840 --> 01:25:36,280
 what right away width we were supposed to be using on our plat for Ganzer.

1087
01:25:36,280 --> 01:25:43,200
 We've been waiting quite some, you know, where we asked the question and there's this discussion

1088
01:25:43,200 --> 01:25:52,760
 that has happened outside of our, you know, purview that we're just kind of held up.

1089
01:25:52,760 --> 01:25:53,760
 But what did we do?

1090
01:25:53,760 --> 01:26:02,760
 We went ahead and assumed, in this case, the full city Ganzer right away width and on the

1091
01:26:02,760 --> 01:26:03,980
 plat.

1092
01:26:03,980 --> 01:26:08,360
 So yes, we have discussed these things.

1093
01:26:08,360 --> 01:26:12,840
 We don't feel like a TIA is necessary at this point.

1094
01:26:12,840 --> 01:26:18,520
 We feel like the plat accounts for kind of like worst case scenario on the right of ways

1095
01:26:18,520 --> 01:26:26,820
 for both Barthold and Ganzer and we'd like to ask for action to be taken on the plat.

1096
01:26:26,820 --> 01:26:32,960
 Another one is the, Julie referenced that we did not incorporate the 2015 mobility plan

1097
01:26:32,960 --> 01:26:40,680
 arterial that's supposed to bisect our property, which what you may not know, you may know,

1098
01:26:40,680 --> 01:26:45,840
 is that on the proposed 2020 mobility plan, that has been removed.

1099
01:26:45,840 --> 01:26:51,480
 And so that is why we are asking that it not be reflected on our preliminary plat.

1100
01:26:51,480 --> 01:27:00,060
 Now we understand staff cannot recommend approval if that 2020 mobility plan hasn't been adopted,

1101
01:27:00,060 --> 01:27:07,960
 but we know that that is not on the 2020 mobility plan and we can't continue just to be held

1102
01:27:07,960 --> 01:27:13,920
 just at bay, you know, hostage, not to take this, you know, but that may be not the right

1103
01:27:13,920 --> 01:27:16,200
 term, but we were kind of held in limbo.

1104
01:27:16,200 --> 01:27:17,200
 Yeah.

1105
01:27:17,200 --> 01:27:22,200
 So, Mr. Ketchum, I mean, I would say to me, in my opinion, more discussion is still needing

1106
01:27:22,200 --> 01:27:24,120
 to be had between you and staff.

1107
01:27:24,120 --> 01:27:30,720
 And yes, it is complicated between when a piece of land like this is in the ETJ, but

1108
01:27:30,720 --> 01:27:34,440
 I mean, you knew the land was in the ETJ and there would be proposed challenges.

1109
01:27:34,440 --> 01:27:41,440
 So I don't think you're being made out, being put on hold on purpose.

1110
01:27:41,440 --> 01:27:47,560
 I think that there is just more to be discussed and vetted before staff can give approval

1111
01:27:47,560 --> 01:27:49,440
 on this.

1112
01:27:49,440 --> 01:27:53,640
 And I'm not going to continue on the platform because my fellow commissioners may want to

1113
01:27:53,640 --> 01:27:54,640
 say something.

1114
01:27:54,640 --> 01:27:55,640
 Okay.

1115
01:27:55,640 --> 01:27:56,640
 Thank you.

1116
01:27:56,640 --> 01:27:58,560
 I was actually going to ask Richard to say something.

1117
01:27:58,560 --> 01:28:00,480
 Yeah, actually, sure.

1118
01:28:00,480 --> 01:28:05,280
 If I may, I like to have I know Erica Moronic is on the phone.

1119
01:28:05,280 --> 01:28:08,680
 She's our she's over our project facilitation group.

1120
01:28:08,680 --> 01:28:14,360
 This is one of her projects, and they're really the ones managing sort of that interdisciplinary

1121
01:28:14,360 --> 01:28:17,960
 review, even though Julie's right right there and the planners are.

1122
01:28:17,960 --> 01:28:23,040
 But I think Erica's added added in a much more greater depth, and I'd like her to just

1123
01:28:23,040 --> 01:28:32,880
 provide a little more context if that's okay.

1124
01:28:32,880 --> 01:28:43,840
 Hopefully we can unmute her.

1125
01:28:43,840 --> 01:28:45,440
 Good evening, chair commissioners.

1126
01:28:45,440 --> 01:28:46,560
 My name is Erica Moronic.

1127
01:28:46,560 --> 01:28:51,320
 I'm a project facilitator with the Department of Development Services, and I've been working

1128
01:28:51,320 --> 01:28:57,400
 with Mr. Kachin and Mr. Fairley from Hologun communities on this project in the city of

1129
01:28:57,400 --> 01:28:59,920
 Denton Division one ETJ.

1130
01:28:59,920 --> 01:29:07,480
 A couple things that Mr. Kachin mentioned included in our reasons, our findings of fact

1131
01:29:07,480 --> 01:29:11,760
 for why we recommended denial of this preliminary class this evening.

1132
01:29:11,760 --> 01:29:17,260
 One and probably the major one is the lack of the inclusion of the East West collector

1133
01:29:17,260 --> 01:29:20,920
 that is on the 2015 mobility plan.

1134
01:29:20,920 --> 01:29:25,960
 That plan is what is in effect at this time has been adopted by city council at the time

1135
01:29:25,960 --> 01:29:30,580
 of their pre application meeting that was held last summer in 2020.

1136
01:29:30,580 --> 01:29:36,240
 They were provided with the proposed 2020 mobility plan, and at that time they are correct.

1137
01:29:36,240 --> 01:29:38,520
 It was not shown to exist.

1138
01:29:38,520 --> 01:29:43,380
 However, that document has not moved forward for council consideration, and it has been

1139
01:29:43,380 --> 01:29:48,040
 held up for whatever reason, I believe that engineering staff may be waiting until we

1140
01:29:48,040 --> 01:29:54,000
 move forward with adopted updates to our current comprehensive and the Denton plan.

1141
01:29:54,000 --> 01:30:00,440
 So at this time we cannot approve a document that is not consistent with an adopted thoroughfare

1142
01:30:00,440 --> 01:30:01,440
 plan.

1143
01:30:01,440 --> 01:30:06,060
 So that is one reason that information has been provided to their group.

1144
01:30:06,060 --> 01:30:10,480
 In regards to offsite utility layout, we have been working with them.

1145
01:30:10,480 --> 01:30:15,000
 We've had several meetings with our water and wastewater utility staff and have provided

1146
01:30:15,000 --> 01:30:20,680
 direction as to how that should occur that design decision is up to their design team

1147
01:30:20,680 --> 01:30:21,920
 that they hire.

1148
01:30:21,920 --> 01:30:26,880
 However, we have provided feedback on the minimum easement width and per our water and

1149
01:30:26,880 --> 01:30:31,600
 wastewater criteria manual when you have both water and sewer lines within the same public

1150
01:30:31,600 --> 01:30:35,820
 utility easement, they need to be a minimum 25 width.

1151
01:30:35,820 --> 01:30:42,120
 There may be under certain circumstances, some flexibility within the easement width,

1152
01:30:42,120 --> 01:30:47,080
 but those need to be determined on a case by case basis.

1153
01:30:47,080 --> 01:30:52,200
 In regards to the traffic impact analysis, that is something that we can defer until

1154
01:30:52,200 --> 01:30:55,840
 civil engineering plan approval, definitely before final flat approval.

1155
01:30:55,840 --> 01:31:01,700
 However, the one that has been dormant for some time since 2019 included a completely

1156
01:31:01,700 --> 01:31:05,720
 different layout and it's not consistent with the current plan before you.

1157
01:31:05,720 --> 01:31:11,280
 So we have concerns about that and how that would include any additional improvements

1158
01:31:11,280 --> 01:31:16,040
 that may be required along Ganser, the extension of Barthold road and the future collector

1159
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:17,760
 through the property.

1160
01:31:17,760 --> 01:31:25,860
 Mr. Kachan has mentioned that we have had multiple meetings, Microsoft team meetings,

1161
01:31:25,860 --> 01:31:27,280
 where we've provided feedback.

1162
01:31:27,280 --> 01:31:32,680
 There has been some time in coordination because this is in the EPJ and we do have to reach

1163
01:31:32,680 --> 01:31:36,600
 out to development services for Denton County to get their feedback.

1164
01:31:36,600 --> 01:31:41,840
 So the ultimate right away with for Ganser, he provided as an example, yes, we met with

1165
01:31:41,840 --> 01:31:46,720
 Stephen Bell Knapp, who's the assistant director of development services for Denton County

1166
01:31:46,720 --> 01:31:48,360
 to provide that feedback.

1167
01:31:48,360 --> 01:31:53,720
 We also had to meet with the county in order to determine the best utility location for

1168
01:31:53,720 --> 01:31:58,120
 this private development, whether that was to be within the right of way or outside of

1169
01:31:58,120 --> 01:32:03,240
 the right of way, under the pavement or immediately backing up to the pavement.

1170
01:32:03,240 --> 01:32:09,040
 So these conversations have been had, feedback has been provided and in some instances, their

1171
01:32:09,040 --> 01:32:12,960
 revisions have incorporated that feedback and then others they have not.

1172
01:32:12,960 --> 01:32:16,600
 And I think you can see before you that they have not incorporated all of the feedback

1173
01:32:16,600 --> 01:32:22,740
 and therefore that informs our recommendation to your commission for recommended recommendation

1174
01:32:22,740 --> 01:32:24,640
 of the miles of time.

1175
01:32:24,640 --> 01:32:27,680
 I'm available for any questions.

1176
01:32:27,680 --> 01:32:31,680
 Commissioner Beck.

1177
01:32:31,680 --> 01:32:39,440
 Thank you, Chair, Erica or Julie, are any of the the items of contention within staff's

1178
01:32:39,440 --> 01:32:49,200
 flexibility parameters or are they all outside flexibility?

1179
01:32:49,200 --> 01:32:56,560
 I can speak to the mobility plan issue that the code requires a comprehensive plan amendment

1180
01:32:56,560 --> 01:32:59,560
 in order to make modifications to the mobility plan.

1181
01:32:59,560 --> 01:33:05,440
 So for that east-west collector, that would require a comprehensive plan amendment.

1182
01:33:05,440 --> 01:33:10,920
 I would probably defer to Erica for the other comments since she has a little more expertise

1183
01:33:10,920 --> 01:33:11,920
 in those.

1184
01:33:11,920 --> 01:33:16,880
 I'm sorry, can you repeat the question, please?

1185
01:33:16,880 --> 01:33:23,920
 The question, yes, the question was, are any of the items that are in discrepancy between

1186
01:33:23,920 --> 01:33:31,220
 the applicant and staff, are any of those within the flexibility parameters for those

1187
01:33:31,220 --> 01:33:40,640
 types of items or are they outside the range of flexibility?

1188
01:33:40,640 --> 01:33:50,560
 The items that I mentioned were connections to the city public utility system.

1189
01:33:50,560 --> 01:33:54,920
 We do have some flexibility there, the timing of the traffic impact analysis race the middle,

1190
01:33:54,920 --> 01:34:01,200
 we do have some flexibility there, but not accounting for or planning for a future change

1191
01:34:01,200 --> 01:34:06,840
 that hasn't been adopted by council as far as the east-west connector is not possible

1192
01:34:06,840 --> 01:34:08,080
 at a staff level.

1193
01:34:08,080 --> 01:34:15,120
 Additionally, I believe I'm outstanding discrepancies between phasing, we've asked for some phasing

1194
01:34:15,120 --> 01:34:16,120
 information.

1195
01:34:16,120 --> 01:34:20,520
 I don't believe they provided that they haven't determined that yet, which is their prerogative

1196
01:34:20,520 --> 01:34:25,760
 however, it makes it difficult, especially with preliminary plots, because once it's

1197
01:34:25,760 --> 01:34:29,960
 approved, if there's changes, my understanding is that would have to come back to you for

1198
01:34:29,960 --> 01:34:32,480
 future consideration.

1199
01:34:32,480 --> 01:34:39,320
 So essentially even, and I assume staff is generally willing to be flexible as governed

1200
01:34:39,320 --> 01:34:46,980
 by the DDC, but even if you wanted to be flexible, these are outside what your flexibility parameters

1201
01:34:46,980 --> 01:34:47,980
 will allow.

1202
01:34:47,980 --> 01:34:49,480
 Is that what I'm hearing?

1203
01:34:49,480 --> 01:34:50,960
 Yes, sir.

1204
01:34:50,960 --> 01:34:53,080
 Okay, thank you.

1205
01:34:53,080 --> 01:35:01,480
 Is there any other questions for Julie, Erica, applicant?

1206
01:35:01,480 --> 01:35:07,000
 Okay, I did not see any other questions.

1207
01:35:07,000 --> 01:35:10,040
 I wanted to make note that for this item, there were three people that filled out the

1208
01:35:10,040 --> 01:35:11,680
 online virtual white card.

1209
01:35:11,680 --> 01:35:13,880
 All three were in opposition.

1210
01:35:13,880 --> 01:35:18,520
 These comments were emailed to all the commissioners and will be included in the meeting record,

1211
01:35:18,520 --> 01:35:23,200
 but without any other discussion, I'll certainly listen to any motions.

1212
01:35:23,200 --> 01:35:24,200
 Commissioner Smith.

1213
01:35:24,200 --> 01:35:27,840
 Can I make a motion to deny the project?

1214
01:35:27,840 --> 01:35:34,880
 I think that applicant, Mr. Ketchum, I think that your arguments are compelling and I do

1215
01:35:34,880 --> 01:35:41,600
 feel for you on this project, but I do think that it is prudent that this application is

1216
01:35:41,600 --> 01:35:47,240
 denied just for the fact of the pieces that are missing and because of the shot clock,

1217
01:35:47,240 --> 01:35:52,800
 it just kind of seems like we're stuck between a rock and a hard place and it's probably

1218
01:35:52,800 --> 01:35:58,480
 best for this to be cleaned up, more discussions to be had, as Commissioner Ellis mentioned,

1219
01:35:58,480 --> 01:36:03,160
 and then to come back and be presented back to this body with plenty of ample time for

1220
01:36:03,160 --> 01:36:07,880
 additions and changes where needed.

1221
01:36:07,880 --> 01:36:12,600
 We have a motion to deny.

1222
01:36:12,600 --> 01:36:13,600
 Commissioner Cole.

1223
01:36:13,600 --> 01:36:14,600
 I'll second.

1224
01:36:14,600 --> 01:36:21,220
 We have a first and a second to deny this item.

1225
01:36:21,220 --> 01:36:25,980
 Any discussion from the commissioners?

1226
01:36:25,980 --> 01:36:28,640
 Seeing none, I will call for a vote via roll call.

1227
01:36:28,640 --> 01:36:33,240
 Chair, I just want to clarify that the reasons for the denial are the reasons in the staff

1228
01:36:33,240 --> 01:36:34,680
 report provided by staff.

1229
01:36:34,680 --> 01:36:35,680
 Is that correct?

1230
01:36:35,680 --> 01:36:36,680
 That is correct.

1231
01:36:36,680 --> 01:36:37,680
 Thank you.

1232
01:36:37,680 --> 01:36:38,680
 I appreciate that.

1233
01:36:38,680 --> 01:36:46,960
 And real quick before I call roll call, I would echo Commissioner Smith's sentiments.

1234
01:36:46,960 --> 01:36:52,440
 This is a really fun denial and there are some complications that we're trying to work

1235
01:36:52,440 --> 01:36:59,400
 out with ETJ and ILA, but there's also just items that need to be cleaned up and hopefully

1236
01:36:59,400 --> 01:37:05,280
 you can bring it back quickly and staff can work with you to get a project that we can

1237
01:37:05,280 --> 01:37:09,520
 approve unanimously, so I look forward to seeing it back in front of us.

1238
01:37:09,520 --> 01:37:13,800
 With that, Commissioner Ellis, we'll start with you.

1239
01:37:13,800 --> 01:37:14,800
 Aye.

1240
01:37:14,800 --> 01:37:16,120
 Commissioner Beck.

1241
01:37:16,120 --> 01:37:17,120
 Aye.

1242
01:37:17,120 --> 01:37:18,120
 Commissioner Anderson.

1243
01:37:18,120 --> 01:37:19,120
 Aye.

1244
01:37:19,120 --> 01:37:20,120
 Commissioner Smith.

1245
01:37:20,120 --> 01:37:21,120
 Aye.

1246
01:37:21,120 --> 01:37:22,120
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1247
01:37:22,120 --> 01:37:23,120
 Aye.

1248
01:37:23,120 --> 01:37:24,120
 Commissioner Cole.

1249
01:37:24,120 --> 01:37:25,120
 Aye.

1250
01:37:25,120 --> 01:37:30,040
 Chair, it's also an aye.

1251
01:37:30,040 --> 01:37:37,920
 Next item of business is item 4D, PZ21-064 and Ron McGuida is going to present on this

1252
01:37:37,920 --> 01:37:41,440
 regarding small area plan.

1253
01:37:41,440 --> 01:37:46,960
 Thank you, Chair.

1254
01:37:46,960 --> 01:38:03,360
 Give me a few minutes to load my presentation.

1255
01:38:03,360 --> 01:38:04,360
 Good evening.

1256
01:38:04,360 --> 01:38:08,720
 Ron McGuida, Principal Planner with Development Services, City of Den, brought forward for

1257
01:38:08,720 --> 01:38:15,580
 your consideration this evening is a request for the creation of a small area plan located

1258
01:38:15,580 --> 01:38:22,920
 in the north part of town in the area of I-35 and Highway 77.

1259
01:38:22,920 --> 01:38:30,020
 By way of background, on January 20, 2021, there was a request for a small area plan

1260
01:38:30,020 --> 01:38:34,320
 work session to discuss potential small area plan.

1261
01:38:34,320 --> 01:38:38,080
 The area again is I-35 and Highway 77.

1262
01:38:38,080 --> 01:38:42,800
 At the time, the Planning Zoning Commission felt that a small area plan was appropriate

1263
01:38:42,800 --> 01:38:50,160
 for this area due to the activity in terms of zoning applications and PD specifically.

1264
01:38:50,160 --> 01:38:56,640
 So on August -- I'm sorry, April 21, the Planning Zoning Commission received a presentation

1265
01:38:56,640 --> 01:39:04,080
 on regards to the comprehensive plan as well as small area planning and small area plans.

1266
01:39:04,080 --> 01:39:09,720
 As a result of that presentation, the Planning Zoning Commission requested that an item be

1267
01:39:09,720 --> 01:39:19,560
 brought back for the P&Z to consider a recommendation to create the small area plan for the area

1268
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:26,320
 that is shown generally in these exhibits, again, along I-35 and Highway 77.

1269
01:39:26,320 --> 01:39:28,880
 An exact boundary has not yet been identified.

1270
01:39:28,880 --> 01:39:36,440
 However, during the small area plan exercise, that will be determined at that time.

1271
01:39:36,440 --> 01:39:44,200
 Six steps, if, again, this were to be recommended for creation, we will take this to City Council.

1272
01:39:44,200 --> 01:39:50,000
 The date specific, we've identified one already, and it will be May 18th.

1273
01:39:50,000 --> 01:39:54,920
 Later this month, in a couple weeks, again, if it was a recommendation, we will take this

1274
01:39:54,920 --> 01:39:56,240
 to City Council.

1275
01:39:56,240 --> 01:40:01,160
 City Council will give us direction, and we will continue our work towards the small area

1276
01:40:01,160 --> 01:40:07,400
 plan, again, if that is the direction that we receive from City Council.

1277
01:40:07,400 --> 01:40:12,160
 The option for the Planning Zoning Commission this evening is, as you see here, recommend

1278
01:40:12,160 --> 01:40:16,520
 this small area plan, do not recommend, or continue this item.

1279
01:40:16,520 --> 01:40:17,900
 That concludes my presentation.

1280
01:40:17,900 --> 01:40:20,320
 I will stand for any questions.

1281
01:40:20,320 --> 01:40:21,320
 Great.

1282
01:40:21,320 --> 01:40:23,320
 Commissioner Beck.

1283
01:40:23,320 --> 01:40:26,600
 Thank you, Chair.

1284
01:40:26,600 --> 01:40:31,840
 So I think it's probably clear, and I shouldn't speak for anyone, that it sounds like there's

1285
01:40:31,840 --> 01:40:41,080
 a lot of interest in this, but I will ask, what governs the limitations in the scope?

1286
01:40:41,080 --> 01:40:49,000
 We're talking about developing this for the 288 I-35 region, and I know you specifically

1287
01:40:49,000 --> 01:40:56,800
 said that the boundaries would be determined, but how far west, east, north can we go within

1288
01:40:56,800 --> 01:41:04,000
 our jurisdiction before it's not a small area plan, but it's a medium area plan?

1289
01:41:04,000 --> 01:41:05,000
 Does that make sense?

1290
01:41:05,000 --> 01:41:10,400
 That does make sense, and for those that are aware, I'll just use the way of an example,

1291
01:41:10,400 --> 01:41:12,500
 the Oak Gateway area plan.

1292
01:41:12,500 --> 01:41:17,860
 We knew it was going to be of an area adjacent to the university, but through the exercise

1293
01:41:17,860 --> 01:41:23,200
 with the stakeholders, even with the steering committee, that area grew to a little bit

1294
01:41:23,200 --> 01:41:28,640
 larger than what you would consider a small area plan, but it was needed in order to identify

1295
01:41:28,640 --> 01:41:33,320
 and address the concerns that we heard through the exercise, again, through meeting with

1296
01:41:33,320 --> 01:41:37,040
 stakeholders, with citizens and residents.

1297
01:41:37,040 --> 01:41:41,800
 We heard that it wasn't just the north side of the university, it was also on the west,

1298
01:41:41,800 --> 01:41:43,280
 as well as the south side of the university.

1299
01:41:43,280 --> 01:41:49,720
 So that area boundary grew, and again, we won't really know until we fully vet through

1300
01:41:49,720 --> 01:41:50,720
 the exercise.

1301
01:41:50,720 --> 01:41:55,640
 Again, we're going to target the area on the northeast corner of that intersection, but

1302
01:41:55,640 --> 01:41:58,260
 it can certainly grow to the south.

1303
01:41:58,260 --> 01:42:03,880
 We will obviously know more once we continue or work with and go through the public outreach

1304
01:42:03,880 --> 01:42:04,880
 effort.

1305
01:42:04,880 --> 01:42:05,880
 That makes sense.

1306
01:42:05,880 --> 01:42:08,320
 Thank you.

1307
01:42:08,320 --> 01:42:13,760
 Any other questions for Ron?

1308
01:42:13,760 --> 01:42:14,760
 All right.

1309
01:42:14,760 --> 01:42:15,760
 Fantastic.

1310
01:42:15,760 --> 01:42:16,760
 Commissioner Smith.

1311
01:42:16,760 --> 01:42:22,920
 Make a motion to approve a recommendation to create a small area plan.

1312
01:42:22,920 --> 01:42:24,520
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1313
01:42:24,520 --> 01:42:25,520
 Second the motion.

1314
01:42:25,520 --> 01:42:26,520
 Great.

1315
01:42:26,520 --> 01:42:29,280
 We have a first and a second to provide a recommendation to city council to pursue a

1316
01:42:29,280 --> 01:42:32,920
 small area plan at 35 and 77.

1317
01:42:32,920 --> 01:42:34,720
 Any discussion on this item?

1318
01:42:34,720 --> 01:42:35,720
 Commissioner Ellis.

1319
01:42:35,720 --> 01:42:36,720
 Thanks, Chair.

1320
01:42:36,720 --> 01:42:40,240
 It's been a couple minutes since I kind of wanted this on the agenda.

1321
01:42:40,240 --> 01:42:43,320
 So I just want to say it's a great opportunity.

1322
01:42:43,320 --> 01:42:49,240
 A lot of times we create small area plans after something undesirable has moved into

1323
01:42:49,240 --> 01:42:50,240
 an area.

1324
01:42:50,240 --> 01:42:55,920
 And this is an opportunity for us as a city to create something so that we can plan what

1325
01:42:55,920 --> 01:42:56,920
 we want.

1326
01:42:56,920 --> 01:43:03,600
 We've already heard things that we know we don't want, at least at this moment in that

1327
01:43:03,600 --> 01:43:04,600
 area.

1328
01:43:04,600 --> 01:43:06,960
 So I think it's a great thing.

1329
01:43:06,960 --> 01:43:07,960
 Great.

1330
01:43:07,960 --> 01:43:09,800
 Any other discussion on this?

1331
01:43:09,800 --> 01:43:10,800
 Commissioner Smith.

1332
01:43:10,800 --> 01:43:16,520
 Sorry for stealing your thunder, Commissioner Ellis.

1333
01:43:16,520 --> 01:43:17,520
 Any other discussion?

1334
01:43:17,520 --> 01:43:18,520
 All right.

1335
01:43:18,520 --> 01:43:24,240
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call starting with Commissioner Ellis.

1336
01:43:24,240 --> 01:43:25,240
 Aye.

1337
01:43:25,240 --> 01:43:26,240
 Commissioner Beck.

1338
01:43:26,240 --> 01:43:27,240
 Aye.

1339
01:43:27,240 --> 01:43:28,240
 Commissioner Anderson.

1340
01:43:28,240 --> 01:43:29,240
 Aye.

1341
01:43:29,240 --> 01:43:30,240
 Commissioner Smith.

1342
01:43:30,240 --> 01:43:31,240
 Aye.

1343
01:43:31,240 --> 01:43:32,240
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1344
01:43:32,240 --> 01:43:33,240
 Aye.

1345
01:43:33,240 --> 01:43:34,680
 Commissioner Cole.

1346
01:43:34,680 --> 01:43:35,680
 Aye.

1347
01:43:35,680 --> 01:43:38,480
 Chair is also an aye.

1348
01:43:38,480 --> 01:43:40,900
 Motion carries 7-0.

1349
01:43:40,900 --> 01:43:44,520
 That brings us to the Planning and Zoning Commission matrix.

1350
01:43:44,520 --> 01:43:50,400
 I will turn the floor over to Richard for any updates and then to the virtual dais for

1351
01:43:50,400 --> 01:43:51,400
 discussion.

1352
01:43:51,400 --> 01:43:53,000
 Thank you, Chair.

1353
01:43:53,000 --> 01:43:56,240
 Just quickly, nothing to add on the matrix.

1354
01:43:56,240 --> 01:44:00,380
 We will be getting some of those items as I've indicated scheduled.

1355
01:44:00,380 --> 01:44:07,160
 Just a quick update, last night City Council approved an extension of an SUP of one year

1356
01:44:07,160 --> 01:44:09,000
 for Forest Crossing.

1357
01:44:09,000 --> 01:44:11,640
 That was an individual consideration item.

1358
01:44:11,640 --> 01:44:15,440
 So because that was already an ordinance passed, it did not have to come back to PNC.

1359
01:44:15,440 --> 01:44:21,160
 It was just an extension of that approval.

1360
01:44:21,160 --> 01:44:25,160
 And then the other items that were approved were the Geesling Road industrial.

1361
01:44:25,160 --> 01:44:28,600
 If you recall, that was Geesling and 380.

1362
01:44:28,600 --> 01:44:34,160
 They did approve that as well as the Alt ESA for the Exeter-Martino project.

1363
01:44:34,160 --> 01:44:41,080
 And then in addition, the legacy multifamily SUP was approved as well as I indicated earlier,

1364
01:44:41,080 --> 01:44:45,320
 the ordinance eliminating the ability to do a preliminary planning ETJ.

1365
01:44:45,320 --> 01:44:49,960
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

1366
01:44:49,960 --> 01:44:50,960
 Commissioner Smith.

1367
01:44:50,960 --> 01:45:00,200
 Just to, one, has the City discussed a timeline yet on us returning back to doing commission

1368
01:45:00,200 --> 01:45:02,280
 or council meetings back in person?

1369
01:45:02,280 --> 01:45:03,280
 Not that I'm pushing for them.

1370
01:45:03,280 --> 01:45:07,320
 I think I think many of the commissioners like doing this from their homes via Zoom,

1371
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:12,240
 but just didn't know if it's even been up to discussion yet, if it's even been tossed

1372
01:45:12,240 --> 01:45:14,440
 around by the City yet.

1373
01:45:14,440 --> 01:45:15,440
 It is.

1374
01:45:15,440 --> 01:45:18,680
 I think that's something Council's looking at.

1375
01:45:18,680 --> 01:45:21,840
 Just a little update.

1376
01:45:21,840 --> 01:45:27,960
 I think it's just monitoring how everyone's responding.

1377
01:45:27,960 --> 01:45:33,800
 Starting June 1st, we'll be going – staff will start coming into the office, and so

1378
01:45:33,800 --> 01:45:41,160
 we're looking at at least two days a week to start working in the office, two to even

1379
01:45:41,160 --> 01:45:42,160
 three days a week.

1380
01:45:42,160 --> 01:45:47,520
 Some of us are already here intermittently, so I think it's just monitoring that, making

1381
01:45:47,520 --> 01:45:54,160
 sure that cases – hopefully there's not new cases as a result, monitoring that.

1382
01:45:54,160 --> 01:45:59,440
 But I think the goal ultimately is to get back to meeting in person, as well as having

1383
01:45:59,440 --> 01:46:04,240
 fully staffed offices.

1384
01:46:04,240 --> 01:46:09,760
 Second item, I did send you a contact information for Jessica Robinson.

1385
01:46:09,760 --> 01:46:16,800
 She is with Discover Denton, but they are – they notified me just through a random

1386
01:46:16,800 --> 01:46:22,400
 chance meeting that Discover Denton is in the process of working with a third-party

1387
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:28,200
 marketing firm to build a marketing brand for what Denton is and how they're marketing

1388
01:46:28,200 --> 01:46:29,200
 it.

1389
01:46:29,200 --> 01:46:33,680
 And so they're almost to the stakeholder phase of getting garnering feedback from what

1390
01:46:33,680 --> 01:46:36,360
 that consulting group has presented.

1391
01:46:36,360 --> 01:46:41,400
 And I know they're going to bring it to Council, and I invited her to be introduced to you

1392
01:46:41,400 --> 01:46:45,960
 to be able to bring it to PNZ and present it to us for feedback and stakeholder feedback.

1393
01:46:45,960 --> 01:46:50,880
 So just wanted to put that on the matrix and see if we can possibly get that for a work

1394
01:46:50,880 --> 01:46:55,480
 session item at some point in time, whenever that presentation is done.

1395
01:46:55,480 --> 01:46:57,200
 Do that.

1396
01:46:57,200 --> 01:47:00,360
 Commissioner Pernetta?

1397
01:47:00,360 --> 01:47:05,000
 Yeah, to the question about when we're going back to in-person meetings, you know, one

1398
01:47:05,000 --> 01:47:09,080
 of the things that I've noticed, and I think probably all of us have noticed, is that the

1399
01:47:09,080 --> 01:47:14,800
 number of people appearing to speak on individual items is down, right?

1400
01:47:14,800 --> 01:47:18,280
 Usually we used to see, you know, maybe it doesn't or whatever show up for particular

1401
01:47:18,280 --> 01:47:19,280
 things.

1402
01:47:19,280 --> 01:47:21,800
 Now they're not.

1403
01:47:21,800 --> 01:47:24,480
 Even though Zoom is technically, you know, more accessible to people, they don't have

1404
01:47:24,480 --> 01:47:28,920
 to show up at a certain time and wait all night to speak on something.

1405
01:47:28,920 --> 01:47:35,760
 Has staff, you know, not just for PNZ, but across the board for any committees or commissions

1406
01:47:35,760 --> 01:47:42,960
 that take public input, have we been monitoring feedback from the public on whether they find

1407
01:47:42,960 --> 01:47:49,200
 the Zooms, you know, generally speaking, beneficial if people feel like they've been underrepresented

1408
01:47:49,200 --> 01:47:51,160
 in this type of thing?

1409
01:47:51,160 --> 01:47:56,760
 Is there anything that staff or the city is kind of doing to try and figure out if we

1410
01:47:56,760 --> 01:48:03,640
 have a hybrid going forward, that kind of thing, to ensure that we have maximum engagement?

1411
01:48:03,640 --> 01:48:05,480
 I'm not 100% sure.

1412
01:48:05,480 --> 01:48:12,120
 I'll find out through our public information officer just how they're sort of tracking

1413
01:48:12,120 --> 01:48:16,520
 out if they've developed metrics for it.

1414
01:48:16,520 --> 01:48:22,080
 I will say at least our comp plan, you know, the comp plan and workshops that we had, had,

1415
01:48:22,080 --> 01:48:24,360
 you know, tremendous turnout.

1416
01:48:24,360 --> 01:48:30,080
 I don't know that we would have got that if we even had a facility that big to hold that

1417
01:48:30,080 --> 01:48:31,200
 many people.

1418
01:48:31,200 --> 01:48:36,400
 So I think it's sort of a little bit of both, you know, in some instances, I think even

1419
01:48:36,400 --> 01:48:39,920
 some of our community meetings that we've had, you know, developer, the meetings that

1420
01:48:39,920 --> 01:48:45,920
 they hold, it almost appears that we've had some, a better turnout in some instances,

1421
01:48:45,920 --> 01:48:50,560
 but just because it's, you don't have to find a sitter, you can do it, you know, you can

1422
01:48:50,560 --> 01:48:52,360
 do it from home.

1423
01:48:52,360 --> 01:49:00,040
 But I'll find out and report back if they've been able to measure that and see what feedback

1424
01:49:00,040 --> 01:49:01,040
 they've got.

1425
01:49:01,040 --> 01:49:07,480
 I'm just not sure 100%.

1426
01:49:07,480 --> 01:49:13,040
 The only thing I have to add to this evening is a congratulations to Commissioner Brian

1427
01:49:13,040 --> 01:49:14,040
 Beck.

1428
01:49:14,040 --> 01:49:20,480
 He will be, I imagine leaving us shortly, I think this is your last meeting, if I understand

1429
01:49:20,480 --> 01:49:21,480
 the calendar.

1430
01:49:21,480 --> 01:49:24,400
 I just want to say thank you for your service.

1431
01:49:24,400 --> 01:49:29,280
 It's not we all know that that it's a sacrifice to read over everything and you're going into

1432
01:49:29,280 --> 01:49:32,000
 even more of it going forward.

1433
01:49:32,000 --> 01:49:36,700
 And I've said many times that I'm not in favor of a homogenized commission.

1434
01:49:36,700 --> 01:49:39,340
 So I appreciate your counter perspective.

1435
01:49:39,340 --> 01:49:44,960
 And to me, we disagree on some things, but you've always brought in my opinion, a thoughtful

1436
01:49:44,960 --> 01:49:49,320
 discussion to the table and I sincerely appreciate it and wish you the best at council.

1437
01:49:49,320 --> 01:49:50,320
 Congratulations Brian.

1438
01:49:50,320 --> 01:49:51,320
 Thank you.

1439
01:49:51,320 --> 01:49:52,320
 I appreciate that.

1440
01:49:52,320 --> 01:49:53,320
 Congratulations.

1441
01:49:53,320 --> 01:49:54,320
 Thank you, Margie.

1442
01:49:54,320 --> 01:49:55,320
 Thanks.

1443
01:49:55,320 --> 01:50:00,740
 Without any other discussion, looking around the big board here, we will close this meeting

1444
01:50:00,740 --> 01:50:03,460
 tonight at 718.

1445
01:50:03,460 --> 01:50:07,640
 We'll see you in two weeks.