1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:06,440
 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission

2
00:00:06,440 --> 00:00:09,840
 work session meeting for Wednesday, July 14th, 2021.

3
00:00:09,840 --> 00:00:16,360
 Seeing that we have a quorum, I'll call the meeting to order at 433.

4
00:00:16,360 --> 00:00:19,880
 On the agenda this evening, there's no work session reports and there's not any comments

5
00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:24,320
 on the citizen or the consent agenda item, so we'll hop right into the regular meeting

6
00:00:24,320 --> 00:00:25,320
 agenda items.

7
00:00:25,320 --> 00:00:31,640
 Meeting first with item two, consider the approval of the June 23rd, 2021 minutes.

8
00:00:31,640 --> 00:00:37,360
 Is there any edits or talking points on the minutes this evening?

9
00:00:37,360 --> 00:00:38,360
 Great.

10
00:00:38,360 --> 00:00:41,080
 That moves us to our consent agenda.

11
00:00:41,080 --> 00:00:44,000
 We have two, a final plat and a preliminary plat.

12
00:00:44,000 --> 00:00:47,560
 Is there any questions on these that we can call up?

13
00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:48,560
 City planners on this.

14
00:00:48,560 --> 00:00:50,440
 Any questions on the consent?

15
00:00:50,440 --> 00:00:51,440
 Okay.

16
00:00:51,440 --> 00:00:52,440
 Great.

17
00:00:52,440 --> 00:01:00,760
 Let's hop into the items for individual consideration, starting with 4AFP20-0027C, presented by

18
00:01:00,760 --> 00:01:01,760
 Haley.

19
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,760
 You're presenting this one?

20
00:01:02,760 --> 00:01:03,760
 >> I will.

21
00:01:03,760 --> 00:01:04,760
 Yeah.

22
00:01:04,760 --> 00:01:07,760
 Who do you mind filling up the presentation?

23
00:01:07,760 --> 00:01:14,840
 Yeah, while Karina gets that one pulled up, this is a final plat for the woodlands on McKinney

24
00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:15,840
 Street.

25
00:01:15,840 --> 00:01:18,040
 It's one you all have seen several times before.

26
00:01:18,040 --> 00:01:21,760
 A new version of the plat was sent to you just this afternoon.

27
00:01:21,760 --> 00:01:27,420
 So since the agenda posting, the applicant has been able to work through all of their

28
00:01:27,420 --> 00:01:31,120
 outstanding comments related to review of their deed restrictions and some just easement

29
00:01:31,120 --> 00:01:35,740
 mislabelings and cleanup type items.

30
00:01:35,740 --> 00:01:38,920
 So we are able to recommend approval of the plat this evening.

31
00:01:38,920 --> 00:01:44,080
 I'm happy to answer any questions if you all have them on this one.

32
00:01:44,080 --> 00:01:45,560
 Any questions for Haley?

33
00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:46,560
 Okay.

34
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:53,680
 Seeing none, we'll move to the next item of business, item 4B, PP21-0012.

35
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,120
 This also is Haley.

36
00:01:55,120 --> 00:01:56,120
 Yes.

37
00:01:56,120 --> 00:02:02,280
 So this next plat is a single lot industrial development for -- I'm sorry.

38
00:02:02,280 --> 00:02:04,440
 This is actually three lots.

39
00:02:04,440 --> 00:02:09,480
 This is the urban logistics facility on I-35, the frontage of the Acme property that was

40
00:02:09,480 --> 00:02:10,940
 recently rezoned.

41
00:02:10,940 --> 00:02:16,080
 So at this time, the plat is recommended for denial as they have several outstanding comments

42
00:02:16,080 --> 00:02:17,440
 that they have not yet worked through.

43
00:02:17,440 --> 00:02:20,160
 However, they have requested that extension.

44
00:02:20,160 --> 00:02:23,960
 We don't quite have 30 days, but August 4th would put them at approximately 20 days from

45
00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:24,960
 now.

46
00:02:24,960 --> 00:02:28,500
 So that is the date certain that they've requested that extension to and staff has no objection

47
00:02:28,500 --> 00:02:29,920
 to that request.

48
00:02:29,920 --> 00:02:32,640
 So I'm happy to answer any questions on this project as well.

49
00:02:32,640 --> 00:02:35,200
 Any questions for Haley?

50
00:02:35,200 --> 00:02:39,060
 All right.

51
00:02:39,060 --> 00:02:44,580
 Seeing none, we'll move to the next item, 4C, FR21-0006.

52
00:02:44,580 --> 00:02:45,720
 This is Ron's item.

53
00:02:45,720 --> 00:02:46,720
 I had a question.

54
00:02:46,720 --> 00:02:51,400
 I just had a quick question.

55
00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:52,400
 What was the date on that?

56
00:02:52,400 --> 00:02:54,440
 I just didn't hear.

57
00:02:54,440 --> 00:02:55,440
 It was August 4th.

58
00:02:55,440 --> 00:02:56,440
 Okay.

59
00:02:56,440 --> 00:02:57,440
 Thank you.

60
00:02:57,440 --> 00:03:09,160
 A development just south of I-35, Eagle Creek.

61
00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:10,520
 It is a residential development.

62
00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:13,160
 It is a multi-phase development.

63
00:03:13,160 --> 00:03:17,760
 The development or the phase that they're proposing with this final replant is phase

64
00:03:17,760 --> 00:03:18,760
 4.

65
00:03:18,760 --> 00:03:26,080
 It contains 216 residential lots and three open space lots, HOA lots.

66
00:03:26,080 --> 00:03:31,520
 The staff is recommending denial as the applicant has not met the requirements or the criteria

67
00:03:31,520 --> 00:03:41,920
 for approval per the DDC, specifically sections 832D, 835, and 836J related to notification

68
00:03:41,920 --> 00:03:45,280
 as well as HOA documentation.

69
00:03:45,280 --> 00:03:50,280
 There was an extension already on this item, so there will not be an extension.

70
00:03:50,280 --> 00:03:54,880
 Again, staff is recommending denial, and I'll stand for any questions.

71
00:03:54,880 --> 00:03:59,000
 Ron, has the other phases already been plotted, if you can remind me?

72
00:03:59,000 --> 00:04:00,000
 There have been approvals.

73
00:04:00,000 --> 00:04:05,240
 I'll double check if they've been filed with the count, but yeah, phase one and two, there

74
00:04:05,240 --> 00:04:07,080
 has already been approved.

75
00:04:07,080 --> 00:04:08,080
 Okay.

76
00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:09,080
 Yes.

77
00:04:09,080 --> 00:04:10,080
 Great.

78
00:04:10,080 --> 00:04:11,080
 Any other questions for Ron?

79
00:04:11,080 --> 00:04:12,080
 All right.

80
00:04:12,080 --> 00:04:14,040
 I don't see any.

81
00:04:14,040 --> 00:04:19,200
 Next is item 4D, PP21-0011B.

82
00:04:19,200 --> 00:04:20,200
 This is Corrina.

83
00:04:20,200 --> 00:04:21,200
 Good afternoon.

84
00:04:21,200 --> 00:04:24,680
 Corrina Maldonado, Associate Planner.

85
00:04:24,680 --> 00:04:30,600
 The preliminary plat before you today is PP21-0011B.

86
00:04:30,600 --> 00:04:33,960
 This was brought forth to you at the previous Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and

87
00:04:33,960 --> 00:04:39,200
 you recommended an extension of this item.

88
00:04:39,200 --> 00:04:44,560
 Staff was previously recommending denial of this item, and is now recommending approval,

89
00:04:44,560 --> 00:04:51,320
 as they now have met all requirements, including preliminary tree preservation within our code,

90
00:04:51,320 --> 00:04:53,320
 and I can take any questions on this.

91
00:04:53,320 --> 00:04:54,320
 Great.

92
00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:57,320
 Any questions for Corrina?

93
00:04:57,320 --> 00:04:58,320
 I do not see any.

94
00:04:58,320 --> 00:04:59,320
 Thank you.

95
00:04:59,320 --> 00:05:10,680
 That brings us to item 4E, ZCP21-0017, and this is also Corrina.

96
00:05:10,680 --> 00:05:16,920
 Thank you.

97
00:05:16,920 --> 00:05:25,640
 This is ZCP21-0017 for Razor Ranch Multifamily at Heritage Trail.

98
00:05:25,640 --> 00:05:30,680
 The request today is for a consideration of approval of a site plan for a multifamily

99
00:05:30,680 --> 00:05:31,680
 use.

100
00:05:31,680 --> 00:05:40,220
 The site is approximately 5.906 acres, located on Lot 1 and Lot 2 Block E of the Razor Ranch

101
00:05:40,220 --> 00:05:41,840
 East addition.

102
00:05:41,840 --> 00:05:46,080
 They will have to replat into one lot for this site.

103
00:05:46,080 --> 00:05:48,760
 It is located in the Razor Ranch Overlay District.

104
00:05:48,760 --> 00:05:51,760
 You can see that the aerial map doesn't give it justice.

105
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:55,600
 A lot of this is already starting to develop, but it is located here in yellow.

106
00:05:55,600 --> 00:06:01,380
 It is surrounded by four public streets, so that would be Linden Drive to the north, Heritage

107
00:06:01,380 --> 00:06:08,720
 Trail to the west, Panhandle Street to the south, and East Park Boulevard to the east.

108
00:06:08,720 --> 00:06:13,200
 As I mentioned, this is located in the Razor Ranch Overlay District, which has a base zoning

109
00:06:13,200 --> 00:06:20,240
 of RCCD that goes back to our 2002 Denton Development Code, and it is located in the

110
00:06:20,240 --> 00:06:23,560
 South Mixed Use District of the Overlay District.

111
00:06:23,560 --> 00:06:29,520
 The proposed use of multifamily is permitted in this area, and just wanted to point out

112
00:06:29,520 --> 00:06:37,240
 that the last time you saw this site in particular was with the zoning case where they were revising

113
00:06:37,240 --> 00:06:42,800
 or amending the concept plan to revise the southern portion, which was previously indicating

114
00:06:42,800 --> 00:06:49,000
 a park use, and changed that to now allow for the multifamily use.

115
00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:54,680
 The multifamily standards for this site, those located east of Heritage Trail, are subject

116
00:06:54,680 --> 00:07:00,240
 to architectural landscape standards found in Ordinance Z18-0026, and that would be

117
00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:03,200
 Exhibit C2A.

118
00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:09,120
 Like all other site plans for the Razor Ranch Overlay District, this does require approval

119
00:07:09,120 --> 00:07:10,800
 through the Planning and Zoning Commission.

120
00:07:10,800 --> 00:07:13,960
 Typically, you don't see these site plans.

121
00:07:13,960 --> 00:07:17,920
 They're administrative with staff, but for Razor Ranch, this is why you're seeing this

122
00:07:17,920 --> 00:07:18,920
 today.

123
00:07:18,920 --> 00:07:22,920
 So what is included in this approval today, or consideration of approval, is the site

124
00:07:22,920 --> 00:07:27,000
 plan, landscape plan, and elevations.

125
00:07:27,000 --> 00:07:31,500
 So the criteria for approval of site plans within the Overlay District are located on

126
00:07:31,500 --> 00:07:32,500
 the screen.

127
00:07:32,500 --> 00:07:38,080
 So those would be that the site plan substantially complies with the concept and schematic plan

128
00:07:38,080 --> 00:07:42,560
 that's approved by council for the Overlay District, second that the site plan provides

129
00:07:42,560 --> 00:07:47,360
 for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that would not adversely affect

130
00:07:47,360 --> 00:07:52,280
 adjoining neighborhoods or properties, third that the site plan provides for adequate and

131
00:07:52,280 --> 00:07:58,000
 safe circulation of vehicular traffic, and that the plan fully complies with all other

132
00:07:58,000 --> 00:08:01,600
 sections of the Overlay District.

133
00:08:01,600 --> 00:08:04,200
 So first, I'll go through the site plan.

134
00:08:04,200 --> 00:08:08,120
 I've tried to highlight some areas to make it easier to identify.

135
00:08:08,120 --> 00:08:19,720
 Overall, it's 3,100, 500 square feet of building area, and so that's located in blue, as well

136
00:08:19,720 --> 00:08:22,440
 as the administrative leasing office.

137
00:08:22,440 --> 00:08:27,160
 So the two areas, Building A and Building B, you can see here these L-shaped buildings.

138
00:08:27,160 --> 00:08:33,280
 It's a total of 322 dwelling units with multiple amenities on site.

139
00:08:33,280 --> 00:08:39,560
 That includes a dock park located in this green area here, a sports court, pool amenity

140
00:08:39,560 --> 00:08:46,840
 area, the clubhouse, and a tot park playground and plaza area.

141
00:08:46,840 --> 00:08:50,840
 So overall, they're providing 74.9% lot coverage.

142
00:08:50,840 --> 00:08:54,200
 That's less than the maximum of 90%.

143
00:08:54,200 --> 00:09:00,000
 They're providing 9.6% open space, and I'll go over that in the next slide.

144
00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:04,180
 The maximum required is 8%.

145
00:09:04,180 --> 00:09:07,240
 The maximum allowed height in this area is 100 feet.

146
00:09:07,240 --> 00:09:09,680
 They're actually under with 85 feet.

147
00:09:09,680 --> 00:09:15,120
 This is about seven stories, and they're providing 515 parking spaces.

148
00:09:15,120 --> 00:09:20,840
 That's a few spaces above the minimum of 504, but within the Razor Ranch Overlay District,

149
00:09:20,840 --> 00:09:24,880
 they are allowed to exceed the maximum.

150
00:09:24,880 --> 00:09:27,280
 So this is the landscape plan for the site.

151
00:09:27,280 --> 00:09:30,360
 It does meet all the minimum landscape requirements.

152
00:09:30,360 --> 00:09:33,840
 They are providing 21% landscape area.

153
00:09:33,840 --> 00:09:36,240
 The minimum would be 10%.

154
00:09:36,240 --> 00:09:41,440
 They're also providing 42% tree canopy, and the minimum being 20%.

155
00:09:41,440 --> 00:09:46,840
 On this site, they are also incorporating some various alternatives.

156
00:09:46,840 --> 00:09:51,280
 That would be the use of green screens on the southern parking.

157
00:09:51,280 --> 00:09:56,040
 You can see that in these kind of these highlighted green areas along the edge, as well as some

158
00:09:56,040 --> 00:10:03,280
 raised planters on the southern parking, which is a split parking design.

159
00:10:03,280 --> 00:10:06,920
 I'm just very quickly going through the elevations.

160
00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:14,440
 This is both building A and building B from Linden Drive, so that's facing south on Linden,

161
00:10:14,440 --> 00:10:19,760
 and then these would be the outward facing elevations, facing East Park and Heritage

162
00:10:19,760 --> 00:10:20,760
 Trail.

163
00:10:20,760 --> 00:10:27,840
 There's a few elevations of the amenity building that can be viewed from Linden Drive, as

164
00:10:27,840 --> 00:10:33,800
 well as the split parking that's viewable from Panhandle Street.

165
00:10:33,800 --> 00:10:37,440
 So with that, staff is recommending approval of the request, as it does meet the established

166
00:10:37,440 --> 00:10:41,720
 requirements of the Razor Ranch Overlay District, with the following conditions.

167
00:10:41,720 --> 00:10:47,440
 First, that any public utility easements that are shown on the site plan is being abandoned

168
00:10:47,440 --> 00:10:52,680
 in order to accommodate the proposed building locations, must be abandoned prior to the

169
00:10:52,680 --> 00:10:54,880
 issuance of any building permits.

170
00:10:54,880 --> 00:11:00,360
 And then second, that a replat must be submitted and approved to combine lots one and two of

171
00:11:00,360 --> 00:11:05,880
 the Razor Ranch East addition into one lot, again, prior to any building permits.

172
00:11:05,880 --> 00:11:08,080
 And with that, I can take any questions.

173
00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:09,080
 Great.

174
00:11:09,080 --> 00:11:10,200
 Thank you.

175
00:11:10,200 --> 00:11:12,200
 Any questions for Karina?

176
00:11:12,200 --> 00:11:20,200
 Karina, can you go back to any of the earlier slides that show the aerial or the actual

177
00:11:20,200 --> 00:11:21,200
 – that's fine.

178
00:11:21,200 --> 00:11:22,200
 This one's – nope.

179
00:11:22,200 --> 00:11:23,200
 That one's perfect.

180
00:11:23,200 --> 00:11:24,200
 Okay.

181
00:11:24,200 --> 00:11:28,400
 I know in the northeast corner, the road kind of juts out there, where they have the tot

182
00:11:28,400 --> 00:11:29,400
 park.

183
00:11:29,400 --> 00:11:33,800
 Was there any conversation around putting the kids' park right at that intersection?

184
00:11:33,800 --> 00:11:39,480
 It seems – I know the landscape plan has some trees, and I assume a fence, but it does

185
00:11:39,480 --> 00:11:43,000
 seem like not the most protected spot for kids to be playing in.

186
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,420
 Was there any conversation around that?

187
00:11:44,420 --> 00:11:49,640
 There was no direct conversation related to the placement adjacent on the east side where

188
00:11:49,640 --> 00:11:52,600
 the senior living apartment complex is.

189
00:11:52,600 --> 00:11:59,480
 They did a similar design where I believe it's a pool area.

190
00:11:59,480 --> 00:12:02,880
 That conversation was had then about the placement.

191
00:12:02,880 --> 00:12:08,080
 And so since it was a similar concept, we didn't want to rehash the same item out.

192
00:12:08,080 --> 00:12:14,400
 So there was no specific conversation had, but it is kind of mirroring what's on the

193
00:12:14,400 --> 00:12:17,120
 opposite side of East Park.

194
00:12:17,120 --> 00:12:21,320
 And for clarification, there's a pool opposite the intersection here?

195
00:12:21,320 --> 00:12:22,320
 I haven't heard of that either.

196
00:12:22,320 --> 00:12:23,680
 Haley can speak to it better than I can.

197
00:12:23,680 --> 00:12:25,720
 This was more when she came through with Razor.

198
00:12:25,720 --> 00:12:26,720
 Correct.

199
00:12:26,720 --> 00:12:32,500
 You can kind of see it on the kind of northeast corner of your screen there.

200
00:12:32,500 --> 00:12:37,120
 The amenity – outdoor amenity area and pool at the adjacent facility on the opposite side

201
00:12:37,120 --> 00:12:42,320
 of East Park is right there at the corner to kind of create open spaces facing the park,

202
00:12:42,320 --> 00:12:43,900
 Razor Ranch Park to the north.

203
00:12:43,900 --> 00:12:48,080
 So they were kind of mirroring that open space concept here at the corner, pulling the buildings

204
00:12:48,080 --> 00:12:52,040
 back a little bit, having that amenity area at the front.

205
00:12:52,040 --> 00:12:55,720
 And I believe it will be fenced, of course, at this location for security.

206
00:12:55,720 --> 00:12:56,720
 Yes.

207
00:12:56,720 --> 00:12:57,720
 And I apologize.

208
00:12:57,720 --> 00:13:02,280
 I kind of zoomed through the presentation, but it's a little bit hard to see here.

209
00:13:02,280 --> 00:13:07,120
 This area here is where they are fencing in around that top park.

210
00:13:07,120 --> 00:13:09,120
 It does extend here.

211
00:13:09,120 --> 00:13:12,560
 So the building would basically block any entrance.

212
00:13:12,560 --> 00:13:17,480
 And then for the areas that don't have any security, there's fencing here plus retaining

213
00:13:17,480 --> 00:13:23,720
 walls and then pedestrian entrances from East Park Heritage in the north on Linden.

214
00:13:23,720 --> 00:13:27,360
 But this is, as Haley mentioned, a fenced-in area.

215
00:13:27,360 --> 00:13:28,360
 Great.

216
00:13:28,360 --> 00:13:29,360
 Thanks.

217
00:13:29,360 --> 00:13:30,360
 Any other questions?

218
00:13:30,360 --> 00:13:33,200
 I don't see any.

219
00:13:33,200 --> 00:13:34,880
 Thank you, Corina.

220
00:13:34,880 --> 00:13:37,600
 The next item of business moves us into the public hearings.

221
00:13:37,600 --> 00:13:43,080
 We'll start with 5AZ21-0007C.

222
00:13:43,080 --> 00:13:46,680
 And this is yours, Corina.

223
00:13:46,680 --> 00:13:50,720
 All right.

224
00:13:50,720 --> 00:13:51,720
 Thank you again.

225
00:13:51,720 --> 00:13:58,960
 This is a zoning case, so Z21-007 for the Jim Crystal Road rezoning.

226
00:13:58,960 --> 00:14:04,600
 The request is for, again, a rezoning for approximately 30.43 acres.

227
00:14:04,600 --> 00:14:09,940
 This is going from public facilities to Light Industrial District.

228
00:14:09,940 --> 00:14:13,160
 The site can be shown here in yellow.

229
00:14:13,160 --> 00:14:20,360
 This is city-owned property that was acquired in 2017 to accommodate the Denton Energy Center.

230
00:14:20,360 --> 00:14:24,400
 You can see in green, I've kind of surrounded the area of what is shown, at least on this

231
00:14:24,400 --> 00:14:29,920
 aerial, of what is city-owned property, so the rezoning would just be two portions within

232
00:14:29,920 --> 00:14:35,560
 that area, which I'll refer to as the northern and southern portions.

233
00:14:35,560 --> 00:14:41,920
 So like I mentioned, this is city-owned property, and so as part of our 2019 DDC, all property

234
00:14:41,920 --> 00:14:48,280
 that's owned by public entities, including the city, was automatically zoned PF, and

235
00:14:48,280 --> 00:14:54,560
 these areas are, again, intended for provision of public and community services like fire

236
00:14:54,560 --> 00:14:59,400
 stations, schools, basic utilities like the Denton Energy Center.

237
00:14:59,400 --> 00:15:06,800
 So the rezoning is intended to support Denton Municipal Electric's proposed ground lease

238
00:15:06,800 --> 00:15:11,440
 to a third party as part of a modular data center warehouse development.

239
00:15:11,440 --> 00:15:16,600
 This was brought forth with city council in previous work session.

240
00:15:16,600 --> 00:15:23,840
 And again, the PF zoning is limited to community uses, and so the rezoning is to allow for

241
00:15:23,840 --> 00:15:31,160
 that warehouse use, which would be permitted in LI but not in the PF zoning district.

242
00:15:31,160 --> 00:15:37,560
 So this is just previous and current zoning for this site, and I just wanted to highlight

243
00:15:37,560 --> 00:15:39,820
 something.

244
00:15:39,820 --> 00:15:46,280
 So the 2002 zoning map on the left hand of the slide does show the previous zoning before

245
00:15:46,280 --> 00:15:47,280
 2019.

246
00:15:47,280 --> 00:15:53,720
 So you can see the area I kind of roughly drew it in was previously zoned ICG.

247
00:15:53,720 --> 00:15:58,760
 That was one of our previous industrial zonings.

248
00:15:58,760 --> 00:16:02,920
 When it transitioned to the 2019, which you can see here on the center portion of the

249
00:16:02,920 --> 00:16:11,160
 slide, the PF taken out, that would have transitioned to the HI zoning district.

250
00:16:11,160 --> 00:16:17,840
 You can see that reflected in this small area here where the Encore substation is.

251
00:16:17,840 --> 00:16:23,640
 So anything that's not city owned property has transitioned to the HI district, and so

252
00:16:23,640 --> 00:16:30,320
 the request today is actually for a lesser intensive zoning district of the LI, Light

253
00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:33,680
 Industrial District.

254
00:16:33,680 --> 00:16:36,000
 So I'll go through the general approval criteria.

255
00:16:36,000 --> 00:16:39,840
 I won't go through all of them, but I have highlighted the ones that I will focus on

256
00:16:39,840 --> 00:16:46,680
 today, including the comprehensive plan, impacts to surrounding property, and adequate public

257
00:16:46,680 --> 00:16:47,680
 facilities.

258
00:16:47,680 --> 00:16:53,560
 Again, with the zoning criteria, I'll just go over the ones highlighted that are similar

259
00:16:53,560 --> 00:16:56,520
 to the general criteria.

260
00:16:56,520 --> 00:17:01,060
 So first, the general criterion three and zoning criterion one related to the Denton

261
00:17:01,060 --> 00:17:02,840
 Plan 2030.

262
00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:06,880
 So the future land use for this area is industrial commerce.

263
00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:12,080
 It is predominantly intended for light and heavy industrial, so the light industrial

264
00:17:12,080 --> 00:17:17,960
 district is consistent with this designation, but it does offer a less intensive zoning

265
00:17:17,960 --> 00:17:21,880
 than a heavy industrial district would allow.

266
00:17:21,880 --> 00:17:27,480
 The primary uses for this industrial commerce area are for manufacturing, assembly, fabrication,

267
00:17:27,480 --> 00:17:32,400
 and wholesale and distribution, so the proposed warehouse use is consistent with the intended

268
00:17:32,400 --> 00:17:35,680
 uses in this designation.

269
00:17:35,680 --> 00:17:42,880
 Next, speaking about general criterion eight and zoning criterion five, and minimizing

270
00:17:42,880 --> 00:17:45,920
 the adverse impacts to the surrounding property.

271
00:17:45,920 --> 00:17:52,080
 So as you can see, the northern portion is approximately 1,000 feet east and approximately

272
00:17:52,080 --> 00:17:54,120
 1,000 feet south.

273
00:17:54,120 --> 00:17:58,760
 From the nearest residential zoning, it's difficult to see here, so I've provided some

274
00:17:58,760 --> 00:18:00,280
 arrows to show.

275
00:18:00,280 --> 00:18:04,960
 Just right here, there's an R2 zoning, and on the west side, an R2, which is actually

276
00:18:04,960 --> 00:18:08,800
 buffered by an HI zoning.

277
00:18:08,800 --> 00:18:15,080
 The closest, most adjacent uses to that northern portion is, again, the Encore substation,

278
00:18:15,080 --> 00:18:21,880
 and then the Denton Electric Energy Center, excuse me, to the south, as well as flood

279
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:24,420
 plain on the east side.

280
00:18:24,420 --> 00:18:30,480
 So the southern portion is very similar in adjacent uses.

281
00:18:30,480 --> 00:18:35,360
 Actually to the south, it is abutted by the rural residential zoning.

282
00:18:35,360 --> 00:18:41,800
 That property to the south was annexed in 2010, and under the 2002 zoning was given

283
00:18:41,800 --> 00:18:45,120
 the placeholder zoning of RD5X.

284
00:18:45,120 --> 00:18:53,400
 When this transitioned in the 2019 zoning, it was given that RR as a base zoning.

285
00:18:53,400 --> 00:18:59,120
 Existing on the southern portion, or sorry, south of the southern portion, are some active

286
00:18:59,120 --> 00:19:05,360
 gas wells that you can see kind of scattered around the site, so that area would not develop

287
00:19:05,360 --> 00:19:11,400
 into residential in the future due to our gas well setbacks.

288
00:19:11,400 --> 00:19:18,240
 Next, just talking about existing facilities, so to serve the site, there is existing water

289
00:19:18,240 --> 00:19:22,440
 and sewer to both the northern and southern portions.

290
00:19:22,440 --> 00:19:28,440
 Any extension of utilities would be looked at with any platting if this were to be approved.

291
00:19:28,440 --> 00:19:34,360
 The subject sites do have access directly from Jim Crystal through way of private access,

292
00:19:34,360 --> 00:19:39,200
 and for emergency services, the site is served by Fire Station 3.

293
00:19:39,200 --> 00:19:43,760
 This is the new fire station at 1401 Underwood.

294
00:19:43,760 --> 00:19:47,880
 We did have some public outreach notices were sent out.

295
00:19:47,880 --> 00:19:51,960
 Due to the location of the site, there's not much that's close to it except for city-owned

296
00:19:51,960 --> 00:19:56,840
 property with a few exceptions, so we have not received any responses.

297
00:19:56,840 --> 00:20:01,360
 We did hold a virtual community meeting on June 17th.

298
00:20:01,360 --> 00:20:07,160
 The radius for how many people were notified, I believe, was about 1,000 feet from the subject

299
00:20:07,160 --> 00:20:08,160
 site.

300
00:20:08,160 --> 00:20:15,640
 The main questions, we did have a few people in attendance, were related to noise mitigation,

301
00:20:15,640 --> 00:20:20,200
 what the adjacent zoning looked like, and how they would be impacted by the supply for

302
00:20:20,200 --> 00:20:21,200
 electricity.

303
00:20:21,200 --> 00:20:27,600
 DME was in attendance to address any concerns, and the overall response from the public was

304
00:20:27,600 --> 00:20:28,600
 positive.

305
00:20:28,600 --> 00:20:33,840
 With this, staff does recommend approval of the request as it does comply with the general

306
00:20:33,840 --> 00:20:39,080
 criteria and zoning criteria in Section 2.4E of the Debt and Development Code in Section

307
00:20:39,080 --> 00:20:42,080
 272D.

308
00:20:42,080 --> 00:20:48,640
 The next steps after this request is that it will go to the city council on July 20th.

309
00:20:48,640 --> 00:20:51,960
 That's next Tuesday.

310
00:20:51,960 --> 00:20:57,480
 In relation to the project, on July 27th, city council will consider a lease agreement

311
00:20:57,480 --> 00:21:00,280
 and a power purchase agreement for the site.

312
00:21:00,280 --> 00:21:02,480
 With that, I can take any questions.

313
00:21:02,480 --> 00:21:08,920
 DME will be here to answer any questions during the regular session.

314
00:21:08,920 --> 00:21:09,920
 Great.

315
00:21:09,920 --> 00:21:10,920
 Thank you, Carina.

316
00:21:10,920 --> 00:21:11,920
 Any questions?

317
00:21:11,920 --> 00:21:16,920
 I have maybe two.

318
00:21:16,920 --> 00:21:23,120
 One, tangential to this conversation, you said the property to the west is buffered

319
00:21:23,120 --> 00:21:24,120
 by an HI.

320
00:21:24,120 --> 00:21:32,180
 Is HI an appropriate buffer from a LI zoning into R2?

321
00:21:32,180 --> 00:21:36,800
 The HI is an existing zoning.

322
00:21:36,800 --> 00:21:41,280
 It's kind of odd in the way that it looks right now because it's city-owned property,

323
00:21:41,280 --> 00:21:42,280
 so it's PF.

324
00:21:42,280 --> 00:21:44,560
 HI is what's already existing.

325
00:21:44,560 --> 00:21:49,720
 The space between the HI and the proposed site, maybe I should just pull the presentation

326
00:21:49,720 --> 00:21:50,720
 back up.

327
00:21:50,720 --> 00:21:54,440
 But there is a significant spacing in between.

328
00:21:54,440 --> 00:21:58,440
 If there's any development of the HI, there is mitigations when an HI development goes

329
00:21:58,440 --> 00:22:01,160
 into an R2.

330
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:04,480
 Right now, the R2, there's an existing home there.

331
00:22:04,480 --> 00:22:12,340
 I would say it's unlikely that that would develop anytime soon just because it's really

332
00:22:12,340 --> 00:22:19,200
 all industrial in nature, even if it's city property, the existing uses are substations

333
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,200
 and gas wells.

334
00:22:20,200 --> 00:22:21,200
 Gotcha.

335
00:22:21,200 --> 00:22:23,160
 You mentioned on the earlier slide that it's a private company.

336
00:22:23,160 --> 00:22:25,200
 Is that contract existing?

337
00:22:25,200 --> 00:22:26,800
 Is it public?

338
00:22:26,800 --> 00:22:29,400
 I think someone can answer that.

339
00:22:29,400 --> 00:22:30,680
 That is not me.

340
00:22:30,680 --> 00:22:36,240
 I'm just curious on who's putting a data warehouse in the city if that's public.

341
00:22:36,240 --> 00:22:44,360
 What I can provide is the city is working with Tanaska on the development of this site

342
00:22:44,360 --> 00:22:47,880
 through the power purchase agreement, and I'm not sure if maybe Haley or Matt can jump

343
00:22:47,880 --> 00:22:54,080
 in, but that will be going to council, and there has been a work session on it.

344
00:22:54,080 --> 00:22:58,800
 There is an NDA on a portion of it, so that's why I hesitate to say anything.

345
00:22:58,800 --> 00:23:03,280
 That's why I was wondering, is the company public?

346
00:23:03,280 --> 00:23:07,280
 I do not believe so, defer to Matt on that one.

347
00:23:07,280 --> 00:23:08,280
 Right.

348
00:23:08,280 --> 00:23:13,240
 My understanding at this point is it's still subject to non-disclosure agreement.

349
00:23:13,240 --> 00:23:17,800
 Whoever Tanaska is working with, so that's still not public information at this point.

350
00:23:17,800 --> 00:23:18,800
 Okay.

351
00:23:18,800 --> 00:23:19,800
 Great.

352
00:23:19,800 --> 00:23:22,480
 Any other questions for Karina?

353
00:23:22,480 --> 00:23:26,320
 All right.

354
00:23:26,320 --> 00:23:31,960
 Moving on to item 5B, Z20-0005B.

355
00:23:31,960 --> 00:23:34,120
 This is Julie Wyatt's item.

356
00:23:34,120 --> 00:23:36,040
 Good evening.

357
00:23:36,040 --> 00:23:40,440
 Let me pull up my presentation.

358
00:23:40,440 --> 00:23:44,920
 Here we go.

359
00:23:44,920 --> 00:23:45,920
 Good evening.

360
00:23:45,920 --> 00:23:51,520
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the city of Denton, and I am presenting Z20-0005B,

361
00:23:51,520 --> 00:23:53,640
 Denton Commerce Center.

362
00:23:53,640 --> 00:23:57,560
 So the request before you is to rezone approximately 142 acres.

363
00:23:57,560 --> 00:23:58,560
 Julie.

364
00:23:58,560 --> 00:23:59,560
 Presentation.

365
00:23:59,560 --> 00:24:00,560
 It's not shared.

366
00:24:00,560 --> 00:24:08,800
 I promised I wouldn't do that, and then I did it.

367
00:24:08,800 --> 00:24:14,040
 I apologize.

368
00:24:14,040 --> 00:24:15,040
 There we go.

369
00:24:15,040 --> 00:24:16,040
 Okay.

370
00:24:16,040 --> 00:24:23,760
 So, the request is to rezone about 142 acres from mixed use regional to light industrial

371
00:24:23,760 --> 00:24:24,760
 district.

372
00:24:24,760 --> 00:24:32,120
 Light is located along the west side of I-35, where Loop 288 currently ends, but it will

373
00:24:32,120 --> 00:24:33,640
 eventually be extended.

374
00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:40,280
 It's just on the north side of that future Loop 288 alignment.

375
00:24:40,280 --> 00:24:45,120
 The current zoning map has the subject property as mixed use regional, that MR, and they are

376
00:24:45,120 --> 00:24:49,040
 proposing LI, which is in the light blue.

377
00:24:49,040 --> 00:24:52,880
 The criteria for approval for a zoning case is in subchapter 2 of the Denton Development

378
00:24:52,880 --> 00:24:56,200
 code, both the general and specific.

379
00:24:56,200 --> 00:25:00,160
 First thing we always look at is the future land use map, the Denton Plan 2030.

380
00:25:00,160 --> 00:25:04,520
 The subject property has a future land use designation of business innovation.

381
00:25:04,520 --> 00:25:09,600
 That's intended for those large tracts of land to support those employment type uses,

382
00:25:09,600 --> 00:25:15,200
 larger scale offices, employment parks, industrial type uses.

383
00:25:15,200 --> 00:25:20,640
 It does have supporting uses such as retail, hotels, and residential that could be potentially

384
00:25:20,640 --> 00:25:22,840
 be appropriate.

385
00:25:22,840 --> 00:25:27,000
 Currently we see two zoning districts within business innovation, LI and GO.

386
00:25:27,000 --> 00:25:29,640
 In this instance, LI is consistent.

387
00:25:29,640 --> 00:25:34,920
 It does provide those types of uses that we want to see in business innovation at that

388
00:25:34,920 --> 00:25:39,160
 scale that is typically found in business innovation.

389
00:25:39,160 --> 00:25:43,640
 One commissioner did have questions about commercial development standards.

390
00:25:43,640 --> 00:25:50,000
 Given that this is along one of our primary corridors, I-35 as well as Loop 288, the Denton

391
00:25:50,000 --> 00:25:55,240
 Development code requires that any structures within 250 feet of that ultimate right of

392
00:25:55,240 --> 00:25:59,360
 way would have to comply with our commercial design standards.

393
00:25:59,360 --> 00:26:03,200
 This property is kind of unique in that and it's really along three rights of way that

394
00:26:03,200 --> 00:26:04,460
 it would have to comply.

395
00:26:04,460 --> 00:26:10,920
 I've created a little, it's not to scale, but a little exhibit here showing all of those

396
00:26:10,920 --> 00:26:14,440
 areas that it would have to comply with those commercial design standards.

397
00:26:14,440 --> 00:26:18,880
 Then additionally, I just wanted to point out that both the Planning and Zoning Commission

398
00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:23,760
 and City Council have talked about a small area plan for this general area because there

399
00:26:23,760 --> 00:26:28,480
 is a lot of development pressure and this is one of our gateways to the city.

400
00:26:28,480 --> 00:26:34,280
 As indicated in those discussions about that small area plan, it's kind of indicated that

401
00:26:34,280 --> 00:26:39,800
 the industrial, that west side of I-35 corridor is where we want to see our industrial centers.

402
00:26:39,800 --> 00:26:44,160
 This is consistent with that discussion.

403
00:26:44,160 --> 00:26:48,480
 Another criterion for approval is significant changes in the area to warrant the zoning

404
00:26:48,480 --> 00:26:50,240
 change.

405
00:26:50,240 --> 00:26:54,840
 We had to kind of go way back to figure out how the property was zoned the way it was.

406
00:26:54,840 --> 00:26:58,200
 We looked at that 1999 Denton plan.

407
00:26:58,200 --> 00:27:05,560
 At that time, the city anticipated that this part of the city would develop with a regional

408
00:27:05,560 --> 00:27:12,000
 mixed use center, more commercial uses, and the zoning reflected that vision.

409
00:27:12,000 --> 00:27:19,160
 The zoning was one of our regional mixed use districts that was available under that 2002

410
00:27:19,160 --> 00:27:20,160
 code.

411
00:27:20,160 --> 00:27:25,880
 So that 1999 plan, that vision, and the zoning were consistent.

412
00:27:25,880 --> 00:27:31,360
 Denton Plan 2030 kind of looked at the area and looked at the broader Denton and determined

413
00:27:31,360 --> 00:27:36,520
 that we already had three other regional commercial centers and this really wasn't going to be

414
00:27:36,520 --> 00:27:41,360
 a regional commercial center and so the vision for this area changed to that more employment

415
00:27:41,360 --> 00:27:43,400
 uses, that business innovation.

416
00:27:43,400 --> 00:27:46,200
 However, the zoning kind of stayed in place.

417
00:27:46,200 --> 00:27:52,320
 So that zoning then transitioned with the 2019 plan to that MR district.

418
00:27:52,320 --> 00:27:55,000
 So that's really how that zoning got in place.

419
00:27:55,000 --> 00:27:57,320
 So you can see the subject property here.

420
00:27:57,320 --> 00:27:58,320
 This map is from 1999.

421
00:27:58,320 --> 00:28:01,800
 There wasn't a lot out there in 1999.

422
00:28:01,800 --> 00:28:07,880
 The subject site has that star on it and here is just a screenshot from that 1999 Denton

423
00:28:07,880 --> 00:28:13,840
 Plan showing that regional mixed use center along with the subject property with that

424
00:28:13,840 --> 00:28:14,840
 star.

425
00:28:14,840 --> 00:28:19,240
 So that vision of the area really has changed, but that zoning hasn't been updated to reflect

426
00:28:19,240 --> 00:28:21,680
 that new vision.

427
00:28:21,680 --> 00:28:25,840
 Another criterion minimizes adverse impacts on surrounding property.

428
00:28:25,840 --> 00:28:31,520
 LI district is appropriate in this area, not anticipated to create adverse impacts.

429
00:28:31,520 --> 00:28:36,360
 A lot of the surrounding property is either undeveloped or maybe has agricultural uses.

430
00:28:36,360 --> 00:28:41,720
 However, as it starts to develop, we do anticipate that it's going to develop consistent with

431
00:28:41,720 --> 00:28:47,560
 that future land use designation and that that zoning will continue to track with that

432
00:28:47,560 --> 00:28:51,040
 comprehensive plan.

433
00:28:51,040 --> 00:28:53,160
 Public facilities available to serve the property.

434
00:28:53,160 --> 00:28:59,640
 There are, there's adequate transportation currently and it will also continue to improve.

435
00:28:59,640 --> 00:29:06,880
 They do, the site currently has access to I-35, that corridor, as well as FM 1173.

436
00:29:06,880 --> 00:29:13,060
 However, as you're probably aware, there are improvements that are imminent in this corridor.

437
00:29:13,060 --> 00:29:19,640
 There are improvements to the, to I-35 that TexDOT is moving forward with as well as that

438
00:29:19,640 --> 00:29:21,320
 Loop 288.

439
00:29:21,320 --> 00:29:28,480
 It's currently under design and they anticipate that Loop 288 is going to start around 2026,

440
00:29:28,480 --> 00:29:29,480
 I believe.

441
00:29:29,480 --> 00:29:34,800
 It's probably a fluid date, but it is under design now, so it is moving forward, that

442
00:29:34,800 --> 00:29:37,040
 extension of that roadway.

443
00:29:37,040 --> 00:29:41,560
 And there is a concurrent comprehensive plan amendment that we're going to be talking about

444
00:29:41,560 --> 00:29:44,280
 regarding mobility in the area.

445
00:29:44,280 --> 00:29:47,680
 There is water and wastewater available to the site.

446
00:29:47,680 --> 00:29:52,920
 A new lift station may be required for that sewer, but that will be determined at that

447
00:29:52,920 --> 00:29:56,160
 platting stage.

448
00:29:56,160 --> 00:29:57,160
 Public outreach was done.

449
00:29:57,160 --> 00:30:03,080
 That says February 27th, it was actually, and I wrote down on a note, it was actually

450
00:30:03,080 --> 00:30:05,440
 consistent with what is required.

451
00:30:05,440 --> 00:30:08,760
 This was a cut and paste error.

452
00:30:08,760 --> 00:30:13,640
 It is consistent with our requirements for newspaper ads, as well as the property was

453
00:30:13,640 --> 00:30:18,080
 posted on July 2nd of this year.

454
00:30:18,080 --> 00:30:21,360
 So they did meet all of that notification requirements.

455
00:30:21,360 --> 00:30:24,840
 We haven't received any responses regarding this case.

456
00:30:24,840 --> 00:30:29,100
 So staff does recommend approval of the request, is that it complies with the criteria for

457
00:30:29,100 --> 00:30:31,640
 approval and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

458
00:30:31,640 --> 00:30:35,600
 And the applicant will be here with a presentation tonight.

459
00:30:35,600 --> 00:30:38,360
 Any questions for Julie?

460
00:30:38,360 --> 00:30:43,760
 I have a couple questions.

461
00:30:43,760 --> 00:30:46,880
 The small area plan that you mentioned, has that been approved, or is that just like there's

462
00:30:46,880 --> 00:30:49,360
 momentum towards that?

463
00:30:49,360 --> 00:30:53,960
 Haley might know more than me, but I believe there is momentum that council did want to

464
00:30:53,960 --> 00:30:55,720
 move forward with that small area plan.

465
00:30:55,720 --> 00:30:59,360
 I don't think it's gotten underway yet, but it is.

466
00:30:59,360 --> 00:31:00,720
 No, that's correct.

467
00:31:00,720 --> 00:31:05,720
 There was a work session with council following the discussion that we had with you all, and

468
00:31:05,720 --> 00:31:08,920
 they were in favor of staff moving forward with that, but that has not officially kicked

469
00:31:08,920 --> 00:31:09,920
 off today.

470
00:31:09,920 --> 00:31:11,960
 But we are definitely moving in that direction.

471
00:31:11,960 --> 00:31:19,640
 And at the risk of breaking my own rule on a zoning case, is the proposed use to warehousing?

472
00:31:19,640 --> 00:31:21,360
 They have talked about distribution.

473
00:31:21,360 --> 00:31:24,140
 They've also talked about other employment uses.

474
00:31:24,140 --> 00:31:29,440
 So we don't have an end user or a final reviewed site plan.

475
00:31:29,440 --> 00:31:34,880
 They've shared some kind of conceptual plans with us, but given that this is a straight

476
00:31:34,880 --> 00:31:44,160
 zoning case, really any of those uses permitted under that LI, if it's approved, could be

477
00:31:44,160 --> 00:31:48,440
 developed to that scale that would be permitted under LI.

478
00:31:48,440 --> 00:31:54,240
 And then the last question I think I have is you mentioned that under business innovation,

479
00:31:54,240 --> 00:31:59,960
 it's LI and GO, is that codified or is that just like a working, these typically fit?

480
00:31:59,960 --> 00:32:01,960
 That is a great question.

481
00:32:01,960 --> 00:32:09,100
 No, so we have our typical zoning districts that we often see related to certain future

482
00:32:09,100 --> 00:32:12,280
 land use designations, but there is flexibility within that.

483
00:32:12,280 --> 00:32:19,840
 I know we've seen HC within business innovation when it's been adjacent to the highway corridor.

484
00:32:19,840 --> 00:32:26,440
 So while there are kind of typical zoning districts that we often see and that really

485
00:32:26,440 --> 00:32:32,000
 slot well within those future land use designations, there is flexibility since that comp plan

486
00:32:32,000 --> 00:32:39,480
 is that policy document and has a lot of provisions that could inform that zoning case, but so

487
00:32:39,480 --> 00:32:40,480
 not codified.

488
00:32:40,480 --> 00:32:48,720
 Yeah, and maybe I'll bring this up in the regular meeting, but I have some concerns

489
00:32:48,720 --> 00:32:50,040
 in long-term planning.

490
00:32:50,040 --> 00:32:56,080
 I understand like there's a need or at least a market for light industrial in Denton and

491
00:32:56,080 --> 00:33:02,080
 they like the airport in west of 35, but I don't want Denton to become the warehousing

492
00:33:02,080 --> 00:33:07,840
 for Plano and Frisco as Plano and Frisco attract all the big headquarters and then Denton becomes

493
00:33:07,840 --> 00:33:14,720
 this warehousing center for a lot of the corporate job opportunities that are not getting to

494
00:33:14,720 --> 00:33:15,720
 Denton.

495
00:33:15,720 --> 00:33:23,360
 And so I have this tension of we have an area for business innovation and cognitively warehousing

496
00:33:23,360 --> 00:33:31,200
 distribution doesn't align with what I would think of business innovation and these kind

497
00:33:31,200 --> 00:33:35,880
 of headquarter business parks that we had talked about years ago of drawing in.

498
00:33:35,880 --> 00:33:40,680
 And so I'll just have to think through that, but that's where my mind is right now with

499
00:33:40,680 --> 00:33:41,680
 that.

500
00:33:41,680 --> 00:33:42,680
 Any...

501
00:33:42,680 --> 00:33:43,680
 Commissioner Smith?

502
00:33:43,680 --> 00:33:44,680
 Thank you, Chair.

503
00:33:44,680 --> 00:33:50,520
 I wasn't present for the work session discussion that happened around the small area plan after

504
00:33:50,520 --> 00:33:55,080
 that Hirschbach property went out and we started talking about the small area plan, would Margie

505
00:33:55,080 --> 00:33:58,560
 or Ronnie or Andrew, would you guys maybe fill me on the discussion if you guys remember

506
00:33:58,560 --> 00:34:05,560
 anything from that, be helpful just to see what recommendations we made as a commission

507
00:34:05,560 --> 00:34:10,080
 that city council I know is reviewing and they said that city staff should start looking

508
00:34:10,080 --> 00:34:11,080
 into it.

509
00:34:11,080 --> 00:34:13,200
 What were y'all's thoughts in that process?

510
00:34:13,200 --> 00:34:14,200
 Yeah.

511
00:34:14,200 --> 00:34:18,760
 Haley, do you know what was reported out to council maybe to frame what actually left PNZ

512
00:34:18,760 --> 00:34:19,760
 to council?

513
00:34:19,760 --> 00:34:20,760
 Sure.

514
00:34:20,760 --> 00:34:24,720
 Ron actually did that presentation and he is here tonight so he can give us a brief overview

515
00:34:24,720 --> 00:34:27,720
 of that if that would be helpful.

516
00:34:27,720 --> 00:34:28,720
 Yes.

517
00:34:28,720 --> 00:34:32,520
 We took the same presentation that we did to the planning zoning commission, shared your

518
00:34:32,520 --> 00:34:38,960
 concerns related to that area and wanting to have the small area plan for that area.

519
00:34:38,960 --> 00:34:44,040
 The city council was also in favor of that and again as mentioned earlier by Haley and

520
00:34:44,040 --> 00:34:46,640
 staff they directed us to move forward with it.

521
00:34:46,640 --> 00:34:51,440
 Now the issue here, not the issue, but really the timing that we're trying to do is to make

522
00:34:51,440 --> 00:34:57,160
 sure that the comp plan update as well as the small area plan is in concert.

523
00:34:57,160 --> 00:35:01,000
 So we're working towards that right now and putting together a timeline for that to happen

524
00:35:01,000 --> 00:35:06,880
 around the same time so we don't go into it without really having the comp plan really

525
00:35:06,880 --> 00:35:10,080
 inform what that small area plan is to be.

526
00:35:10,080 --> 00:35:11,380
 So that's where we are.

527
00:35:11,380 --> 00:35:15,960
 So there really wasn't any recommendations by the planning zoning commission other than

528
00:35:15,960 --> 00:35:19,240
 to initiate that small area plan.

529
00:35:19,240 --> 00:35:20,240
 And council concurred.

530
00:35:20,240 --> 00:35:21,240
 Yeah.

531
00:35:21,240 --> 00:35:26,280
 So it was all mainly logistics conversation, it wasn't typical type of use what we think

532
00:35:26,280 --> 00:35:28,160
 we would like to see that kind of stuff.

533
00:35:28,160 --> 00:35:29,160
 No.

534
00:35:29,160 --> 00:35:32,040
 It's too premature for that and we wanted to make sure that there was public outreach

535
00:35:32,040 --> 00:35:35,520
 and stakeholder interviews or stakeholder involvement.

536
00:35:35,520 --> 00:35:36,520
 Okay.

537
00:35:36,520 --> 00:35:40,240
 Yeah, I think and Commissioner Ellis and others can correct me if my memory is failing me,

538
00:35:40,240 --> 00:35:44,640
 but I think there was the idea that people are entering into our town right there and

539
00:35:44,640 --> 00:35:47,440
 how do we protect and actually plan that area.

540
00:35:47,440 --> 00:35:51,280
 And there was mention at the time that there's some industrial or warehousing needs that

541
00:35:51,280 --> 00:35:54,960
 are kind of getting cluttered by the airport and there's a market demand kind of moving

542
00:35:54,960 --> 00:35:56,600
 that north.

543
00:35:56,600 --> 00:36:00,240
 But to Ron's point, we didn't talk about what we wanted to see there.

544
00:36:00,240 --> 00:36:06,280
 We just want something, some planning to be done around that massive intersection as a

545
00:36:06,280 --> 00:36:07,760
 gateway into the city.

546
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:11,360
 So as far as I understand, there's the current momentum to still continue that, but there's

547
00:36:11,360 --> 00:36:16,520
 not any that I've seen or you're telling me now, any direction on what is contained in

548
00:36:16,520 --> 00:36:17,520
 the SAP.

549
00:36:17,520 --> 00:36:18,520
 That's right.

550
00:36:18,520 --> 00:36:19,520
 Right.

551
00:36:19,520 --> 00:36:22,760
 And part of that effort that we would be initiating is also to set the boundary of that area too.

552
00:36:22,760 --> 00:36:26,040
 So a lot of work has to still be done in order to get to that point.

553
00:36:26,040 --> 00:36:27,040
 Got it.

554
00:36:27,040 --> 00:36:30,120
 I'll say the rest of my comments for public.

555
00:36:30,120 --> 00:36:33,560
 No, I agree with the chair on this.

556
00:36:33,560 --> 00:36:35,680
 I don't want to see that intersection.

557
00:36:35,680 --> 00:36:40,040
 That's the main throat, you know, 35 and that new loop is going to be a major intersection.

558
00:36:40,040 --> 00:36:43,040
 I don't want to see it become just a warehouse district.

559
00:36:43,040 --> 00:36:50,860
 I mean, let's put that like on the, you know, further out and have like nice commercial restaurants

560
00:36:50,860 --> 00:36:51,860
 and all that stuff along there.

561
00:36:51,860 --> 00:36:56,640
 I mean, I know that's stuff that you're going to discuss later, but I just want to kind

562
00:36:56,640 --> 00:37:00,040
 of reiterate what chair is saying as well, that I don't think that would look good for

563
00:37:00,040 --> 00:37:06,440
 a city that didn't just be in a warehouse district right there on the major thoroughfare.

564
00:37:06,440 --> 00:37:08,680
 Any other questions for Ron or statements?

565
00:37:08,680 --> 00:37:09,680
 Okay.

566
00:37:09,680 --> 00:37:10,680
 Great.

567
00:37:10,680 --> 00:37:11,680
 Thanks, Ron.

568
00:37:11,680 --> 00:37:15,920
 Next item of business is item 5C, CA21-0001.

569
00:37:15,920 --> 00:37:17,840
 And this is back to Julie.

570
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:29,340
 All right, so this is a, let me get to it.

571
00:37:29,340 --> 00:37:36,120
 This is a companion request to the previous zoning request.

572
00:37:36,120 --> 00:37:42,600
 All right.

573
00:37:42,600 --> 00:37:50,940
 So this is a comprehensive plan amendment, CA21-0001, Denton Commerce Center.

574
00:37:50,940 --> 00:37:54,500
 So before we get into the specific request, I want to talk a little bit about mobility

575
00:37:54,500 --> 00:37:58,960
 planning in the city of Denton and how all of this ties together.

576
00:37:58,960 --> 00:38:04,600
 We haven't seen a mobility plan amendment at the Plating and Zoning Commission, I think,

577
00:38:04,600 --> 00:38:05,600
 since 2011.

578
00:38:05,600 --> 00:38:11,920
 So this is, this doesn't happen very often, but it is a part of the comprehensive plan.

579
00:38:11,920 --> 00:38:16,940
 So the mobility plan is one element to our comprehensive planning efforts.

580
00:38:16,940 --> 00:38:22,800
 It establishes our future roadway network, and that can include cars and pedestrian as

581
00:38:22,800 --> 00:38:24,560
 well as bicycle networks.

582
00:38:24,560 --> 00:38:27,860
 So it's, it should be looked at comprehensively.

583
00:38:27,860 --> 00:38:35,960
 Mobility plans are updated both intermittently as well as on a regular, ongoing basis.

584
00:38:35,960 --> 00:38:40,840
 And that can be in response to a specific request or as part of that comprehensive planning

585
00:38:40,840 --> 00:38:41,840
 effort.

586
00:38:41,840 --> 00:38:47,920
 So the request in 2011 was related to a specific project, as is this one tonight.

587
00:38:47,920 --> 00:38:53,120
 However, the city is currently updating their mobility plan, and we'll talk some about that

588
00:38:53,120 --> 00:38:54,120
 tonight.

589
00:38:54,120 --> 00:38:59,920
 The mobility plan really establishes those transportation networks, and within that,

590
00:38:59,920 --> 00:39:03,780
 it defines that hierarchy of roadways.

591
00:39:03,780 --> 00:39:09,360
 And that includes the biggest roads, which are highways, and then you've got your arterials,

592
00:39:09,360 --> 00:39:12,920
 and then a little smaller than that, you have your collectors, and then your neighborhood

593
00:39:12,920 --> 00:39:16,080
 roadways really aren't included in a mobility plan.

594
00:39:16,080 --> 00:39:19,600
 Those are more site-specific.

595
00:39:19,600 --> 00:39:28,080
 Our current plan was adopted in early 2016, and that replaced our 1998 plan, which had

596
00:39:28,080 --> 00:39:33,520
 been amended every so often, so it really is kind of that 2011 mobility plan.

597
00:39:33,520 --> 00:39:39,840
 And as I mentioned, our current update is underway.

598
00:39:39,840 --> 00:39:43,060
 So now I'll get to the specific request.

599
00:39:43,060 --> 00:39:49,040
 In 2016, when we adopted our current plan, Cindy Lane, which is a neighborhood street

600
00:39:49,040 --> 00:39:56,760
 within the Ranch Estates, was kind of reclassified and upgraded to a secondary arterial, and

601
00:39:56,760 --> 00:40:05,720
 that mobility plan took Cindy Lane from its current location, so connecting to Highway

602
00:40:05,720 --> 00:40:10,460
 380 with a signalized intersection, and then connecting it all the way to the north to

603
00:40:10,460 --> 00:40:15,200
 FM 156 as that secondary arterial.

604
00:40:15,200 --> 00:40:20,840
 When projects develop within the city, they have to, if a mobility plan roadway is coming

605
00:40:20,840 --> 00:40:27,800
 through their property, they have to dedicate that right-of-way associated with that roadway.

606
00:40:27,800 --> 00:40:30,680
 Sometimes they have to build it, so I know that's something that y'all look at often

607
00:40:30,680 --> 00:40:33,400
 with the plats.

608
00:40:33,400 --> 00:40:37,840
 In this case, the update to the mobility plan that engineering has been working on will

609
00:40:37,840 --> 00:40:44,720
 actually remove that Cindy Lane and sort of simplify that arterial network within this

610
00:40:44,720 --> 00:40:52,340
 area, and so they are proposing to remove that section of Cindy Lane as it's not going

611
00:40:52,340 --> 00:40:56,240
 to be something that our engineering staff wants to take forward with that update to

612
00:40:56,240 --> 00:40:58,760
 the mobility plan.

613
00:40:58,760 --> 00:41:02,840
 So you can see the subject property is the same one we talked about earlier, and here's

614
00:41:02,840 --> 00:41:09,520
 that Cindy Lane, it's kind of difficult to see, but it's that green dotted line, and

615
00:41:09,520 --> 00:41:13,520
 then that's where it cuts through the subject property.

616
00:41:13,520 --> 00:41:17,640
 So we're going to look at the current mobility map and then how that relates to the proposed

617
00:41:17,640 --> 00:41:21,360
 mobility map, that one that's under review with engineering.

618
00:41:21,360 --> 00:41:25,240
 Subject property is, again, outlined here in yellow.

619
00:41:25,240 --> 00:41:27,700
 Cindy Lane is that green dashed line.

620
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:35,520
 You can see here's where it connects to Highway 380, that's in this location, goes through

621
00:41:35,520 --> 00:41:40,920
 that neighborhood, and then would, as proposed under the current mobility plan, would extend

622
00:41:40,920 --> 00:41:49,680
 it toward the north through these large tracts of land and then on upward.

623
00:41:49,680 --> 00:41:56,280
 The proposed mobility plan, Cindy Lane would actually just remain as a neighborhood street,

624
00:41:56,280 --> 00:42:06,080
 so it wouldn't have any expansion related to that roadway, it would just end here.

625
00:42:06,080 --> 00:42:11,800
 Windsor would cut across, and then we do have that Loop 288 corridor that's providing that

626
00:42:11,800 --> 00:42:16,760
 connectivity through this general area.

627
00:42:16,760 --> 00:42:20,000
 Criteria for approval for a comprehensive plan, since the mobility plan is an element

628
00:42:20,000 --> 00:42:26,400
 of the comprehensive plan, is in subchapter 2, and then there are specific criteria for

629
00:42:26,400 --> 00:42:27,640
 approval.

630
00:42:27,640 --> 00:42:32,280
 There's really two subsections for the specific criteria for approval.

631
00:42:32,280 --> 00:42:38,920
 The first subsection, it would need to meet one of that criteria, and then those additional

632
00:42:38,920 --> 00:42:43,160
 review standards are listed after that.

633
00:42:43,160 --> 00:42:46,920
 We'll touch on these as we move forward.

634
00:42:46,920 --> 00:42:51,960
 So I first want to talk about how this relates to the overall comprehensive plan, and before

635
00:42:51,960 --> 00:42:56,440
 I get into the analysis, I just want to kind of orient you toward the map.

636
00:42:56,440 --> 00:43:02,640
 So the subject property here has that red star, so that's sort of that area we're looking

637
00:43:02,640 --> 00:43:04,180
 at.

638
00:43:04,180 --> 00:43:08,680
 I have the mobility plan overlaid on the future land use map here.

639
00:43:08,680 --> 00:43:16,880
 Here's where Cindy Lane connects to Highway 380 and then cuts to the north.

640
00:43:16,880 --> 00:43:22,240
 Business innovation is one of those dominant future land use designations in this area.

641
00:43:22,240 --> 00:43:27,920
 It covers the subject site as well as that surrounding area, that's that light purple.

642
00:43:27,920 --> 00:43:32,160
 One place I'd like to draw your attention to, that's that low residential, that's that

643
00:43:32,160 --> 00:43:33,160
 ranch estates.

644
00:43:33,160 --> 00:43:37,320
 It's sort of an island, it's a large lot, established neighborhood, it's been there

645
00:43:37,320 --> 00:43:44,560
 for a long time, and that has that protection of that low residential future land use designation.

646
00:43:44,560 --> 00:43:47,160
 So that does sort of give it that policy protection.

647
00:43:47,160 --> 00:43:52,480
 And then south of that, we've got our industrial commerce, so that's our more heavier industrial

648
00:43:52,480 --> 00:43:57,800
 area just south, kind of hugging that airport in south of Highway 380.

649
00:43:57,800 --> 00:44:04,840
 So you can see that Cindy Lane really crosses those three future land use designations.

650
00:44:04,840 --> 00:44:12,320
 It's rural to the north, but it would essentially sort of induce those trucks to move forward

651
00:44:12,320 --> 00:44:18,520
 or to move toward the north through that roadway as it's proposed.

652
00:44:18,520 --> 00:44:22,160
 So we looked at the analysis, we looked at all parts of the comprehensive plan when we

653
00:44:22,160 --> 00:44:25,600
 analyzed this, because we don't just have that future land use map to rely on, we've

654
00:44:25,600 --> 00:44:30,640
 got to look at other goals that we have in the city.

655
00:44:30,640 --> 00:44:34,960
 So first, one of our mobility goals is to provide for the safe, efficient movements

656
00:44:34,960 --> 00:44:39,600
 of motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians in a sustainable way that complements Denton's

657
00:44:39,600 --> 00:44:42,480
 plan growth strategy.

658
00:44:42,480 --> 00:44:49,120
 Given the divergent goals of these diverse future land use designations that are impacted

659
00:44:49,120 --> 00:44:56,360
 by Cindy Lane, that connectivity that Cindy Lane in its location could conflict with that

660
00:44:56,360 --> 00:44:57,360
 growth strategy.

661
00:44:57,360 --> 00:45:03,800
 So we really, it has, that business innovation has different goals than the low density residential,

662
00:45:03,800 --> 00:45:07,760
 yet we've got this roadway cutting through there that would essentially bind those two

663
00:45:07,760 --> 00:45:10,920
 future land use designations together.

664
00:45:10,920 --> 00:45:17,160
 So with that mobility plan update that engineering is moving forward with, it would remove that

665
00:45:17,160 --> 00:45:20,360
 Cindy Lane, as I showed you in an earlier slide.

666
00:45:20,360 --> 00:45:25,800
 It would focus then using Mosh Bit Branch, Lovers Lane Corridors, also the future Loop

667
00:45:25,800 --> 00:45:34,640
 288 and I-35 to move that truck traffic along those arterials, avoiding that expansion into

668
00:45:34,640 --> 00:45:41,360
 that residential, kind of leaving them alone as an island.

669
00:45:41,360 --> 00:45:46,000
 Other thing we did look at as related to that future land use map is business innovation

670
00:45:46,000 --> 00:45:48,040
 in the intent.

671
00:45:48,040 --> 00:45:53,640
 So that is intended for those employment uses and often they want really large acreage.

672
00:45:53,640 --> 00:45:59,600
 It can range anywhere from a smaller size to 20 to 30 acres all the way up to like that

673
00:45:59,600 --> 00:46:04,680
 hundred acre areas for those larger campuses and larger structures.

674
00:46:04,680 --> 00:46:11,000
 So as Cindy Lane is currently proposed, and it's a little bit difficult to see, but there

675
00:46:11,000 --> 00:46:18,520
 is a railroad corridor along the western side of the subject property and then it sort of

676
00:46:18,520 --> 00:46:24,240
 runs diagonally, getting closer to 35 as you go toward the south.

677
00:46:24,240 --> 00:46:30,520
 Cindy Lane sort of bisects that so that these large tracts of land that would be ideal for

678
00:46:30,520 --> 00:46:35,400
 that business innovation and those employment uses really are bisected and it could reduce

679
00:46:35,400 --> 00:46:38,720
 the developability of those lots.

680
00:46:38,720 --> 00:46:45,080
 Secondary arterials require anywhere from, well they often, 65 to 110 feet of right of

681
00:46:45,080 --> 00:46:53,080
 way so it would be a swath of land that would sort of reduce that developable area.

682
00:46:53,080 --> 00:46:58,160
 And then finally, when we look at the implementation of the comprehensive plan, our mobility plan

683
00:46:58,160 --> 00:47:02,080
 should really be updated every five years along with that comprehensive plan.

684
00:47:02,080 --> 00:47:03,240
 That's kind of the goal.

685
00:47:03,240 --> 00:47:06,500
 We don't always reach that goal, but that is the goal.

686
00:47:06,500 --> 00:47:11,800
 And so the city is undertaking the updating of the mobility plan.

687
00:47:11,800 --> 00:47:15,040
 You know, we want to make sure that we understand where our roads are going, but we also want

688
00:47:15,040 --> 00:47:23,740
 to provide the flexibility and the ability to change with changing circumstances.

689
00:47:23,740 --> 00:47:28,920
 So another criterion is the events, trends, or facts that have changed since that mobility

690
00:47:28,920 --> 00:47:30,520
 plan was adopted.

691
00:47:30,520 --> 00:47:37,720
 So in order to talk through this, I've provided an aerial of what was going on in this area

692
00:47:37,720 --> 00:47:42,660
 in 2015 and then how that's changed to 2019, which is our most current aerials.

693
00:47:42,660 --> 00:47:48,240
 So in 2015, we didn't have a lot of industrial growth in this area.

694
00:47:48,240 --> 00:47:57,920
 We did have some industrial clustered near the I-35 split as well as the airport, but

695
00:47:57,920 --> 00:48:05,240
 it really hadn't started moving north along Western Center Boulevard.

696
00:48:05,240 --> 00:48:10,800
 Since then, we have seen a lot of industrial development in the area.

697
00:48:10,800 --> 00:48:14,240
 And some of them are on the ground and some of them are still sort of in the development

698
00:48:14,240 --> 00:48:20,840
 stage, but all of those yellow dots represent a new industrial development or an industrial

699
00:48:20,840 --> 00:48:27,040
 development that's in the planning stages along that corridor, sort of, you know, really

700
00:48:27,040 --> 00:48:32,400
 showing what kind of truck traffic, what kind of movement is going to be going along in

701
00:48:32,400 --> 00:48:34,240
 this area.

702
00:48:34,240 --> 00:48:41,520
 This current classification of Cindy Lane really would induce those trucks to move forward

703
00:48:41,520 --> 00:48:48,480
 and potentially tag up to loop 288 north of the subject or near the subject property,

704
00:48:48,480 --> 00:48:52,680
 cutting through that neighborhood as it's currently aligned.

705
00:48:52,680 --> 00:48:58,160
 And that's why that draft mobility plan really has sort of changed what that road classification

706
00:48:58,160 --> 00:48:59,160
 would be.

707
00:48:59,160 --> 00:49:04,200
 You know, we've been really successful in our industrial sector, but there will be a

708
00:49:04,200 --> 00:49:07,600
 lot of traffic associated with it.

709
00:49:07,600 --> 00:49:10,160
 Additional review standards, substantial benefit to the city.

710
00:49:10,160 --> 00:49:13,740
 This proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan.

711
00:49:13,740 --> 00:49:17,880
 It's also consistent with our future land use goals, as we've discussed.

712
00:49:17,880 --> 00:49:22,560
 It would not negatively alter the existing or proposed land use pattern.

713
00:49:22,560 --> 00:49:25,720
 It wouldn't change that.

714
00:49:25,720 --> 00:49:31,920
 And it would not adversely impact those existing uses because of increased traffic.

715
00:49:31,920 --> 00:49:38,000
 The -- those existing and those planned arterial network, those are sufficient to meet the

716
00:49:38,000 --> 00:49:44,320
 demand of that traffic generated by the development of this area.

717
00:49:44,320 --> 00:49:48,680
 And since Cindy Lane currently doesn't extend beyond Ranch Estates, there's no -- it would

718
00:49:48,680 --> 00:49:51,120
 not change those existing traffic patterns.

719
00:49:51,120 --> 00:49:53,920
 So there's -- that road isn't there yet.

720
00:49:53,920 --> 00:50:00,500
 So nobody's relying on that to accommodate traffic.

721
00:50:00,500 --> 00:50:04,560
 Public outreach was done on the request.

722
00:50:04,560 --> 00:50:09,280
 An opposition letter was emailed to you today, and I also have hard copies if you didn't

723
00:50:09,280 --> 00:50:10,400
 get your email.

724
00:50:10,400 --> 00:50:13,040
 I did talk with that property owner.

725
00:50:13,040 --> 00:50:20,320
 He said opposition on the marking, but then the text of his letter kind of sounded like

726
00:50:20,320 --> 00:50:22,140
 he was in favor.

727
00:50:22,140 --> 00:50:29,080
 And so I called him because I wanted to find out, you know, what his intent was.

728
00:50:29,080 --> 00:50:35,720
 And he was a gentleman that is currently -- his property is on the alignment for Cindy Lane,

729
00:50:35,720 --> 00:50:40,280
 and that wasn't something -- he thought we were putting the road on it instead of removing

730
00:50:40,280 --> 00:50:41,280
 it.

731
00:50:41,280 --> 00:50:42,400
 So I did talk with him about that.

732
00:50:42,400 --> 00:50:45,160
 So I just want to let you know that.

733
00:50:45,160 --> 00:50:47,160
 So staff does recommend approval of the request.

734
00:50:47,160 --> 00:50:52,520
 It meets the criteria for approval, and it is consistent with our current planning efforts.

735
00:50:52,520 --> 00:50:54,640
 And I'll be happy to answer any questions.

736
00:50:54,640 --> 00:51:02,880
 And engineering is also here if you have -- if you need more technical questions answered.

737
00:51:02,880 --> 00:51:08,360
 Commissioner Ellis.

738
00:51:08,360 --> 00:51:09,360
 Thank you, Chair.

739
00:51:09,360 --> 00:51:12,440
 Julie, back to the comment that was emailed to us.

740
00:51:12,440 --> 00:51:14,040
 So he just misunderstood.

741
00:51:14,040 --> 00:51:15,040
 Yes, ma'am.

742
00:51:15,040 --> 00:51:16,040
 And it's now clarified.

743
00:51:16,040 --> 00:51:17,040
 Yes, ma'am.

744
00:51:17,040 --> 00:51:22,320
 And did he change his -- I haven't received an updated letter from him, but I can certainly

745
00:51:22,320 --> 00:51:26,720
 call him prior to City Council and get that update.

746
00:51:26,720 --> 00:51:27,720
 Okay.

747
00:51:27,720 --> 00:51:32,120
 Second question is, does this stand alone from the zoning change?

748
00:51:32,120 --> 00:51:38,240
 So if the zoning change, let's say, does not get approved, is this still being considered?

749
00:51:38,240 --> 00:51:39,240
 Yes, ma'am.

750
00:51:39,240 --> 00:51:40,240
 It stands alone.

751
00:51:40,240 --> 00:51:41,240
 Separate on its own.

752
00:51:41,240 --> 00:51:42,240
 Okay.

753
00:51:42,240 --> 00:51:43,240
 Thank you.

754
00:51:43,240 --> 00:51:44,240
 You bet.

755
00:51:44,240 --> 00:51:45,240
 Any other questions?

756
00:51:45,240 --> 00:51:46,240
 Commissioner Smith.

757
00:51:46,240 --> 00:51:50,320
 And really, this might be a question for mobility.

758
00:51:50,320 --> 00:51:53,680
 Why was it ever thought that it would be a good idea to put a primary arterial through

759
00:51:53,680 --> 00:51:57,840
 a really low density neighborhood in the first place to connect into business innovation?

760
00:51:57,840 --> 00:52:03,000
 I know that's a loaded question, but more of like, are there other properties that are

761
00:52:03,000 --> 00:52:08,400
 -- that we may have a mobility draft that currently has things like this that are out

762
00:52:08,400 --> 00:52:09,400
 there?

763
00:52:09,400 --> 00:52:10,400
 Because, yeah.

764
00:52:10,400 --> 00:52:11,400
 It's -- yeah.

765
00:52:11,400 --> 00:52:14,480
 I'm going to let engineering answer that.

766
00:52:14,480 --> 00:52:15,480
 Sounds good.

767
00:52:15,480 --> 00:52:19,280
 Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioner.

768
00:52:19,280 --> 00:52:22,160
 This is Chandra with Traffic Engineering.

769
00:52:22,160 --> 00:52:28,440
 When drafting the mobility plan, the consultant we hired, they take into consideration of

770
00:52:28,440 --> 00:52:34,160
 all the traffic at the current condition and 20, 30 years into the future.

771
00:52:34,160 --> 00:52:39,360
 So they plug in all the models and run and see how the networks are loaded.

772
00:52:39,360 --> 00:52:45,440
 So they will evaluate and see where appropriate arterial or a collector is needed.

773
00:52:45,440 --> 00:52:51,320
 So that's how we arrived at those networks that it's in the draft.

774
00:52:51,320 --> 00:52:54,640
 It doesn't really answer the question, but I get it.

775
00:52:54,640 --> 00:52:55,640
 Yeah, that works.

776
00:52:55,640 --> 00:52:56,640
 All right.

777
00:52:56,640 --> 00:52:57,640
 Thank you.

778
00:52:57,640 --> 00:52:58,640
 Thank you.

779
00:52:58,640 --> 00:53:00,920
 Any other questions for Julie?

780
00:53:00,920 --> 00:53:02,520
 Commissioner Pruitt.

781
00:53:02,520 --> 00:53:03,520
 Yeah.

782
00:53:03,520 --> 00:53:12,280
 Can you -- I guess I understand the considerations with the existing portion of -- I'm sorry,

783
00:53:12,280 --> 00:53:18,760
 I'm terrible with names -- the roadway that we were talking about extending north to south.

784
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:24,960
 I guess my question is, if we just look at the northern portion, say, from the proposed

785
00:53:24,960 --> 00:53:31,960
 alignment of Mosh Branch Road as it crosses the railroad tracks over to I-35 and northward

786
00:53:31,960 --> 00:53:40,320
 of that, can you explain why having connectivity from Mosh Branch northward crossing the future

787
00:53:40,320 --> 00:53:45,960
 Loop 288 is not desired?

788
00:53:45,960 --> 00:53:50,480
 I'm going to have engineering answer that as well.

789
00:53:50,480 --> 00:53:58,880
 Actually, with the proposed loop, unlike the existing loop on the eastern side, the proposed

790
00:53:58,880 --> 00:54:07,320
 loop will contain frontage roads and then the main lanes, and also on the other designation

791
00:54:07,320 --> 00:54:15,400
 of the roadway networks, they thought the northern section of Cindy could be removed.

792
00:54:15,400 --> 00:54:22,600
 The frontage roads also have connectivity to the collectors and the neighborhood streets,

793
00:54:22,600 --> 00:54:26,360
 which the eastern section, the existing loop, doesn't have it.

794
00:54:26,360 --> 00:54:33,160
 So those network of smaller roadways can connect with the frontage and take off a lot of traffic

795
00:54:33,160 --> 00:54:35,560
 from those north-south arterials.

796
00:54:35,560 --> 00:54:43,760
 I guess just for clarification, if the mobility plan is amended to remove the section of Cindy

797
00:54:43,760 --> 00:54:49,100
 Lane that we're talking about, would that change whether or not a crossing either over

798
00:54:49,100 --> 00:54:55,600
 or under the future Loop 288 is provided, a north-south crossing right there?

799
00:54:55,600 --> 00:55:04,800
 Yes, but based on the other network being proposed, this seems to be irrelevant anymore.

800
00:55:04,800 --> 00:55:11,360
 Back in 2015, we didn't have any plans for frontage roads on the loop, but now Techstart

801
00:55:11,360 --> 00:55:17,720
 has put in the frontage roads to begin with, and then later they will add the main lanes.

802
00:55:17,720 --> 00:55:23,760
 So it's a change in policy, and also 35 is being widened with the frontage roads being

803
00:55:23,760 --> 00:55:29,040
 extended, so that will also relieve some of the projected traffic.

804
00:55:29,040 --> 00:55:37,480
 Okay, so just trying to understand, so the concept is that a north-south route is not

805
00:55:37,480 --> 00:55:42,400
 required there because the main freeways are getting widened, and therefore there'd be

806
00:55:42,400 --> 00:55:47,320
 a longer route that somebody could take along the frontage and the interstates to get around

807
00:55:47,320 --> 00:55:48,320
 to their destination?

808
00:55:48,320 --> 00:55:49,320
 That's right.

809
00:55:49,320 --> 00:55:57,080
 Usually they put in arterials at approximately 1,200 feet apart, but now with these Loop

810
00:55:57,080 --> 00:56:04,760
 288 frontage and also the 35 widening, it seems those models doesn't seem to have those

811
00:56:04,760 --> 00:56:06,880
 Cindy Lane required anymore.

812
00:56:06,880 --> 00:56:10,680
 Okay, thank you.

813
00:56:10,680 --> 00:56:12,720
 Any other questions for Julie?

814
00:56:12,720 --> 00:56:16,320
 I've got a couple.

815
00:56:16,320 --> 00:56:22,160
 What's the draft mobility plan timeline for implementation?

816
00:56:22,160 --> 00:56:24,840
 Haley might be able to answer that, or Chandra.

817
00:56:24,840 --> 00:56:28,920
 I believe it's running in parallel fashion with the comprehensive plan update.

818
00:56:28,920 --> 00:56:36,560
 We want to make sure our mobility plan and our future land use map work together well,

819
00:56:36,560 --> 00:56:43,080
 and so I believe that that is sort of, the intent is to kind of keep them parallel, am

820
00:56:43,080 --> 00:56:46,960
 I correct?

821
00:56:46,960 --> 00:56:56,200
 Going to that is if we're using the rationale that the Cindy Lane northbound is going away

822
00:56:56,200 --> 00:57:00,800
 in the draft plan as the rationale that we can take this snippet apart now out of the

823
00:57:00,800 --> 00:57:08,520
 subject property, why are we not just going ahead right now and removing Cindy Lane entirely

824
00:57:08,520 --> 00:57:14,560
 and aligning Cindy Lane up 100% to the draft mobility plan in the interim?

825
00:57:14,560 --> 00:57:19,200
 I'm curious why we're just taking one section out, if we know it's all going away.

826
00:57:19,200 --> 00:57:25,640
 Well because it was just related to this one request, so that's why we just kept it localized,

827
00:57:25,640 --> 00:57:32,840
 but I thought about that when we were drafting it, and so we noticed for only that part that

828
00:57:32,840 --> 00:57:39,520
 the applicant is requesting having be removed, so I'm not sure if the whole thing could be

829
00:57:39,520 --> 00:57:49,640
 removed given the public notification piece, but yeah, it is sort of an incremental step.

830
00:57:49,640 --> 00:57:55,520
 Yeah, and I guess you said something that I want to clarify, the applicant is filing

831
00:57:55,520 --> 00:58:00,200
 for this to be removed, this isn't city initiated to align with the applicant.

832
00:58:00,200 --> 00:58:01,200
 Correct.

833
00:58:01,200 --> 00:58:10,120
 I guess going to Commissioner Ellis' question, if item B doesn't get passed for some reason,

834
00:58:10,120 --> 00:58:15,560
 it would be up to the applicant to still pursue item C, they could pull item C theoretically,

835
00:58:15,560 --> 00:58:16,560
 correct?

836
00:58:16,560 --> 00:58:19,400
 That's a good point, yes, theoretically.

837
00:58:19,400 --> 00:58:24,600
 Maybe we'll go ahead and remove it straight for us, but okay, any other questions for

838
00:58:24,600 --> 00:58:25,600
 Julie?

839
00:58:25,600 --> 00:58:33,880
 All right, let's move to the last item, 5D, Z21-0002, and I will invite Sean Jacobson

840
00:58:33,880 --> 00:58:34,880
 for presentation.

841
00:58:34,880 --> 00:58:40,360
 Good evening Chair and members of the commission.

842
00:58:40,360 --> 00:59:08,000
 I'm just going to pull up on here, let's see, okay, all right, and there we go.

843
00:59:08,000 --> 00:59:13,680
 Okay, good evening Chair and members of the commission.

844
00:59:13,680 --> 00:59:21,840
 My name is Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner, presenting Z21-0002, prominence.

845
00:59:21,840 --> 00:59:31,360
 This is a request for a rezoning of approximately 58.55 acres at the corner of loop 288 in University.

846
00:59:31,360 --> 00:59:36,960
 It's divided into requests for 24.93 acres from current planned development and light

847
00:59:36,960 --> 00:59:44,000
 industrial zoning to general office, approximately 23.47 acres from planned development to mixed

848
00:59:44,000 --> 00:59:48,680
 use neighborhood, and approximately 9.7 acres from planned development to light industrial

849
00:59:48,680 --> 00:59:49,680
 zoning.

850
00:59:49,680 --> 00:59:55,600
 Again, this property is bounded by loop 288, University Drive, Mayhill Road, and prominence

851
00:59:55,600 --> 01:00:00,840
 way with a mix of undeveloped and commercial lots and a residential lot, all of that zone

852
01:00:00,840 --> 01:00:06,880
 to L.I. to the northwest, and a single family neighborhood south across prominence way.

853
01:00:06,880 --> 01:00:11,760
 About 26 acres of floodplain covers the north and center of the property, as you can see

854
01:00:11,760 --> 01:00:14,360
 in those maps in the lower right-hand corner there.

855
01:00:14,360 --> 01:00:18,760
 One shows the current ESA map, you have the current floodplain map, significant tree canopy

856
01:00:18,760 --> 01:00:22,360
 in that floodplain area, as well as along prominence way.

857
01:00:22,360 --> 01:00:28,200
 This zoning change would replace the old existing PD with current zoning districts containing

858
01:00:28,200 --> 01:00:33,360
 similar mix of uses, some additional ones, under current DDC standards.

859
01:00:33,360 --> 01:00:39,680
 So just to give you a little background here, this planned development was approved in 2000

860
01:00:39,680 --> 01:00:44,800
 under an interim zoning, an interim DDC essentially.

861
01:00:44,800 --> 01:00:50,720
 At the time, it was a PD concept plan, subject property was divided into four areas, A, B,

862
01:00:50,720 --> 01:00:55,480
 C, and E. You're not wrong, there was a D, but it is unrelated to the property we're

863
01:00:55,480 --> 01:00:59,720
 dealing with, so we're not talking about it, but each was authorized for a different mix

864
01:00:59,720 --> 01:01:03,760
 of uses, including commercial, industrial, and/or residential.

865
01:01:03,760 --> 01:01:09,320
 And there was a remaining 18 acres, it was essentially in section C, but it was designated

866
01:01:09,320 --> 01:01:11,880
 for future park dedication when this developed.

867
01:01:11,880 --> 01:01:17,880
 This was vested in those standards under that interim DDC, so 1991 use table, 1988 landscape

868
01:01:17,880 --> 01:01:18,880
 code.

869
01:01:18,880 --> 01:01:26,480
 In 2002, the city council zoned out approximately 3.92 acres of area A to employment center

870
01:01:26,480 --> 01:01:27,480
 commercial.

871
01:01:27,480 --> 01:01:31,560
 That property that was included in this rezoning tonight, essentially, to bring that into line

872
01:01:31,560 --> 01:01:35,840
 with how the PD would be rezoned adjacent to it.

873
01:01:35,840 --> 01:01:42,080
 So in 2021, then, this proposal is taking those four areas, putting them into current

874
01:01:42,080 --> 01:01:46,480
 zoning districts that generally match up similar uses.

875
01:01:46,480 --> 01:01:52,600
 So A and B would be going into a GEO district, as well as a sum of C, the rest of C would

876
01:01:52,600 --> 01:01:56,880
 be going into MN, and then E, which was designated for light industrial, would be going into

877
01:01:56,880 --> 01:01:57,880
 light industrial.

878
01:01:57,880 --> 01:02:04,360
 I also just note that the Parks Department is in talks still with the current developer

879
01:02:04,360 --> 01:02:09,960
 to once again do a dedication of that parkland, about 18 acres, at the time of platting of

880
01:02:09,960 --> 01:02:11,760
 this property.

881
01:02:11,760 --> 01:02:15,680
 Because the property never developed, that property has never come to us as parks since

882
01:02:15,680 --> 01:02:18,760
 the time that it was designated.

883
01:02:18,760 --> 01:02:23,720
 And just give you a glance here, that's what that original PD concept plan looked like.

884
01:02:23,720 --> 01:02:29,960
 So here would be the proposed zoning, see that GEO area encompasses essentially A and

885
01:02:29,960 --> 01:02:37,280
 B, the MN in the area that was C, and then the LI, the area that was E.

886
01:02:37,280 --> 01:02:41,520
 As you know, we have our general criteria for approval, as well as our specific zoning

887
01:02:41,520 --> 01:02:44,900
 criteria for approval, and we'll touch on some key elements of that.

888
01:02:44,900 --> 01:02:49,320
 So first off, look at our Denton Plan 2030 comprehensive plan.

889
01:02:49,320 --> 01:02:54,760
 It's primarily a business innovation, future land use, but it also does have areas of moderate

890
01:02:54,760 --> 01:02:58,000
 density residential and some neighborhood residential mixed use.

891
01:02:58,000 --> 01:03:02,600
 So it's intended for large tracts of land to develop with a mix of commercial, supporting

892
01:03:02,600 --> 01:03:06,920
 residential and retail, and that moderate density residential is intended for a mix

893
01:03:06,920 --> 01:03:12,240
 of residential, particularly near retail, near parkland.

894
01:03:12,240 --> 01:03:17,360
 These proposed zonings that are trying to mix, fit that mix of uses allowed in business

895
01:03:17,360 --> 01:03:23,240
 innovation, and the residential uses would fit with that moderate density residential

896
01:03:23,240 --> 01:03:27,760
 in that proposed MN area.

897
01:03:27,760 --> 01:03:32,960
 Also note that zoning out of the current PD ensures that the property is held to all 2019

898
01:03:32,960 --> 01:03:39,140
 DDC standards, which of course align more fully with our comprehensive plan.

899
01:03:39,140 --> 01:03:45,880
 It also enables a mix of uses that would be at a key corridor at the intersection of two

900
01:03:45,880 --> 01:03:50,040
 major routes there, which is in line with our preferred growth concept, and it's providing

901
01:03:50,040 --> 01:03:54,240
 employment moderate density housing near what would be, hopefully, a potential future park

902
01:03:54,240 --> 01:03:55,840
 and trail area.

903
01:03:55,840 --> 01:04:00,040
 It also allows a broader range of uses that fit our future land use map and are currently

904
01:04:00,040 --> 01:04:01,640
 permitted under the PD.

905
01:04:01,640 --> 01:04:07,000
 I want to highlight here, particularly minimizing adverse environmental impacts.

906
01:04:07,000 --> 01:04:11,860
 As I noted, there's a significant amount of both trees and environmentally sensitive areas.

907
01:04:11,860 --> 01:04:16,240
 When this PD was put in place, our current protections essentially didn't exist.

908
01:04:16,240 --> 01:04:21,400
 They basically said, "ESAs are a thing, and please tell us how many trees you're planning

909
01:04:21,400 --> 01:04:25,320
 to take out and maybe try not to take out too many," and that was about it.

910
01:04:25,320 --> 01:04:29,920
 Zoning out of this PD ensures that we can apply all of our current environmentally sensitive

911
01:04:29,920 --> 01:04:34,320
 area and tree standard protections, which aligns with our comprehensive plan to try to protect

912
01:04:34,320 --> 01:04:37,960
 trees and increase tree canopy.

913
01:04:37,960 --> 01:04:42,120
 With that, minimizing adverse impacts, we would have higher standards coming in.

914
01:04:42,120 --> 01:04:46,440
 So again, it wasn't the minimum tree canopy planting requirement at that time either.

915
01:04:46,440 --> 01:04:50,560
 These new zoning districts would bring in our current tree canopy requirements, varying

916
01:04:50,560 --> 01:04:52,280
 by zoning district.

917
01:04:52,280 --> 01:04:55,900
 Would also bring in our current requirements for right-of-way screening, which would help

918
01:04:55,900 --> 01:04:58,040
 the neighborhood to the south of prominence.

919
01:04:58,040 --> 01:05:03,080
 We now require much greater significant right-of-way screening, and that would be required under

920
01:05:03,080 --> 01:05:04,080
 this.

921
01:05:04,080 --> 01:05:11,680
 It would also bring in heightened commercial building standards under the current DDC.

922
01:05:11,680 --> 01:05:16,300
 Just touching on parks, again, because of discussions with the applicant, Parks Department

923
01:05:16,300 --> 01:05:24,560
 is actually proposing a trail, potentially on their draft trail map, through this area.

924
01:05:24,560 --> 01:05:30,320
 So that would be one thing that would be a benefit as part of the planting process following

925
01:05:30,320 --> 01:05:35,560
 this rezoning, to be the potential for about 18 acres of parkland to come to the city next

926
01:05:35,560 --> 01:05:40,840
 to the proposed, well, what would develop in the future potentially.

927
01:05:40,840 --> 01:05:43,200
 I definitely want to touch on transportation.

928
01:05:43,200 --> 01:05:47,160
 This is an area that has a number of intersections around it that are difficult.

929
01:05:47,160 --> 01:05:51,400
 There was a very detailed TIA done, although there's no planned uses.

930
01:05:51,400 --> 01:05:55,120
 Estimates were done based on looking at some of the highest possible traffic generation

931
01:05:55,120 --> 01:05:57,400
 uses that could come in.

932
01:05:57,400 --> 01:06:03,880
 So that led to an estimate of 7,565 daily trips, as you can see there.

933
01:06:03,880 --> 01:06:08,040
 The TIA focused on ten key intersections surrounding the site.

934
01:06:08,040 --> 01:06:12,400
 Six out of ten of them would operate at a level of service D or better, which as you

935
01:06:12,400 --> 01:06:16,920
 know is kind of our baseline for really paying attention to.

936
01:06:16,920 --> 01:06:22,120
 Three of those ten currently, right now with no changes, operate at a level of service

937
01:06:22,120 --> 01:06:23,120
 E or F.

938
01:06:23,120 --> 01:06:29,000
 Just note, if you're looking on the map there, the circles that are not dashed are current

939
01:06:29,000 --> 01:06:30,000
 intersections.

940
01:06:30,000 --> 01:06:36,640
 The dashed circles are intersections proposed that may come about as part of this development.

941
01:06:36,640 --> 01:06:43,800
 The ones in yellow, those are the four that either are currently at an E or an F, or the

942
01:06:43,800 --> 01:06:46,560
 one that's along the loop 380 frontage road.

943
01:06:46,560 --> 01:06:51,680
 It's anticipated that if that was put in just as one driveway there that it would operate

944
01:06:51,680 --> 01:06:54,400
 at a level of service F.

945
01:06:54,400 --> 01:07:01,560
 So and the TIA indicates that there would be increasing delays over until out to 2029

946
01:07:01,560 --> 01:07:03,440
 over the period studied.

947
01:07:03,440 --> 01:07:08,240
 However the traffic actually generated by development of the site would be a small part

948
01:07:08,240 --> 01:07:10,120
 of those issues.

949
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:14,560
 It's much more due to, it's loop 288 and University driver there.

950
01:07:14,560 --> 01:07:16,320
 That's what's driving this.

951
01:07:16,320 --> 01:07:21,840
 However, there were some mitigation items recommended by the TIA.

952
01:07:21,840 --> 01:07:27,720
 A major one would be a signal light at prominence drive, which either when it's relined with

953
01:07:27,720 --> 01:07:31,880
 Audra in the future, it may actually be warranted sooner, in part because of this development.

954
01:07:31,880 --> 01:07:35,800
 That'd be studied when civil engineering plans came in for this development.

955
01:07:35,800 --> 01:07:40,800
 And this site would be estimated to be responsible for about 25% of the cost of that signal.

956
01:07:40,800 --> 01:07:44,280
 And when that signal, if that goes in, that would raise that intersection to a level of

957
01:07:44,280 --> 01:07:49,960
 service C, would actually be higher than it is right now with no development.

958
01:07:49,960 --> 01:07:55,080
 Also recommended a right turn deceleration lane along loop 288 going north.

959
01:07:55,080 --> 01:07:59,560
 And that would again be looked at when civil engineering plans came in for this project.

960
01:07:59,560 --> 01:08:05,240
 And then it was recommended that textile in the city of Denton consider allowing two driveways

961
01:08:05,240 --> 01:08:12,000
 along that extended loop 288 ramp there in order that they would actually be able to

962
01:08:12,000 --> 01:08:14,200
 function at a good level of service.

963
01:08:14,200 --> 01:08:19,680
 Other long-term solutions that were noted, TextOdd is planning to extend the median at

964
01:08:19,680 --> 01:08:25,280
 Spring Valley across from QuickTrip, and so you would no longer have cars trying to cross

965
01:08:25,280 --> 01:08:27,320
 back and forth University Drive there.

966
01:08:27,320 --> 01:08:29,440
 They wouldn't be able to.

967
01:08:29,440 --> 01:08:35,680
 There's also, TextOdd is looking at a freeway bypass at 380 and 288, which would relieve

968
01:08:35,680 --> 01:08:39,600
 some of the traffic pressure at that intersection.

969
01:08:39,600 --> 01:08:46,480
 So overall, TI determined that the actual, with the mitigation and the actual traffic

970
01:08:46,480 --> 01:08:50,720
 generated by this site, it's not having a significant impact that wouldn't be addressed

971
01:08:50,720 --> 01:08:52,000
 by this mitigation.

972
01:08:52,000 --> 01:08:56,800
 And that would be looked at more thoroughly at the CEP stage.

973
01:08:56,800 --> 01:09:00,480
 Water and wastewater service is available, and the property owner is currently constructing

974
01:09:00,480 --> 01:09:02,560
 additional wastewater connection.

975
01:09:02,560 --> 01:09:04,880
 No utility capacity issues have been identified.

976
01:09:04,880 --> 01:09:09,680
 That's within the eight minutes or less response time boundary for Fire Station 2.

977
01:09:09,680 --> 01:09:13,440
 No law enforcement issues are expected to increase here.

978
01:09:13,440 --> 01:09:17,280
 We did do our public outreach and received one response in opposition.

979
01:09:17,280 --> 01:09:19,240
 It was a neighborhood meeting.

980
01:09:19,240 --> 01:09:24,600
 Two citizens attended, asked questions, expressed some concerns about multifamily development

981
01:09:24,600 --> 01:09:29,200
 causing traffic on prominence, about traffic on loop 288, and they expressed their appreciation

982
01:09:29,200 --> 01:09:33,040
 for the proposed GO zoning.

983
01:09:33,040 --> 01:09:37,960
 So with that, staff does recommend approval of the request as it complies with our criteria

984
01:09:37,960 --> 01:09:39,320
 for approval.

985
01:09:39,320 --> 01:09:42,520
 And I will stand for any questions.

986
01:09:42,520 --> 01:09:45,760
 Thank you, Sean.

987
01:09:45,760 --> 01:09:46,760
 Any questions?

988
01:09:46,760 --> 01:09:47,760
 Krischer Smith.

989
01:09:47,760 --> 01:09:48,760
 Thank you, Chair.

990
01:09:48,760 --> 01:09:55,600
 Sean, what was the, this PD that's existing there, was a PD that was underneath the rezone

991
01:09:55,600 --> 01:10:00,120
 that we did in '19, right, that became PD whenever we did the rezone in '19.

992
01:10:00,120 --> 01:10:04,280
 So it was probably due to a zoning change that happened with like a restriction or something

993
01:10:04,280 --> 01:10:05,280
 like that.

994
01:10:05,280 --> 01:10:09,760
 It wasn't the way that our PDs are being done now underneath our current code.

995
01:10:09,760 --> 01:10:12,520
 What exactly was that PD's restrictions?

996
01:10:12,520 --> 01:10:13,520
 What happened within there?

997
01:10:13,520 --> 01:10:17,520
 Give us some more information about specifically that PD that's being rezoned away.

998
01:10:17,520 --> 01:10:24,200
 So that PD that was put in place in 2000 wasn't actually changed in any way by the 2019.

999
01:10:24,200 --> 01:10:26,240
 It just moved forward as a PD.

1000
01:10:26,240 --> 01:10:34,120
 I guess the, it's a PD and it has, and correct me if I'm wrong, but being a PD zoning, meaning

1001
01:10:34,120 --> 01:10:38,800
 that it has obviously some sort of base zoning, I know it's from 2000, but some sort of base

1002
01:10:38,800 --> 01:10:43,200
 zoning and then there was changes in criteria that were specific to just that site.

1003
01:10:43,200 --> 01:10:48,000
 I guess that's my question, is what are those specific changes that were done just to that

1004
01:10:48,000 --> 01:10:49,000
 site?

1005
01:10:49,000 --> 01:10:55,240
 So the way that PDs were put in place in 2000 when this was done, there wasn't necessarily

1006
01:10:55,240 --> 01:10:56,920
 a base zoning that was put in place.

1007
01:10:56,920 --> 01:11:01,800
 They literally said, here are the uses, here's the list of uses you're allowed, here's how

1008
01:11:01,800 --> 01:11:05,500
 you can design buildings.

1009
01:11:05,500 --> 01:11:11,120
 It was actually kind of detailed in laying that out and so what we looked at was what

1010
01:11:11,120 --> 01:11:16,600
 zoning districts would generally line up with how that was set up in our current list of

1011
01:11:16,600 --> 01:11:19,320
 zoning districts we have now.

1012
01:11:19,320 --> 01:11:24,600
 But there wasn't, there's not necessarily a simple zoning district from our, a straight

1013
01:11:24,600 --> 01:11:28,400
 zoning district from previous time that I could refer to that to say, well, it was kind

1014
01:11:28,400 --> 01:11:29,400
 of like that.

1015
01:11:29,400 --> 01:11:30,400
 Okay.

1016
01:11:30,400 --> 01:11:34,320
 I'll look, I'm going to look more at the, but you guys send the backup and I'll formulate

1017
01:11:34,320 --> 01:11:36,360
 a better question during public comment.

1018
01:11:36,360 --> 01:11:41,200
 Maybe just to clarify a little bit, so in 2000 we were under an interim zoning code.

1019
01:11:41,200 --> 01:11:45,560
 It was kind of a hybrid of our '91 code and the 2002 code that came about, so it truly

1020
01:11:45,560 --> 01:11:51,440
 was a PD in the sense of PDs that we have today that created its own development regulations.

1021
01:11:51,440 --> 01:11:55,440
 The old code did not necessarily require that they have a base zoning for that, so it is

1022
01:11:55,440 --> 01:12:01,800
 truly a standalone document that doesn't necessarily follow any of the codes that we have become

1023
01:12:01,800 --> 01:12:03,240
 familiar with in the last two decades.

1024
01:12:03,240 --> 01:12:08,540
 It was kind of an interim hybrid situation at the time, so it's a very unique animal.

1025
01:12:08,540 --> 01:12:13,040
 So basically it was, and that's what I saw in the backup there, it was just more of like,

1026
01:12:13,040 --> 01:12:16,320
 it was its own zoning that had its own blend of these different pieces that are all part

1027
01:12:16,320 --> 01:12:17,320
 of it.

1028
01:12:17,320 --> 01:12:18,320
 Correct.

1029
01:12:18,320 --> 01:12:22,400
 So there wasn't any other criteria on like deviation on height or any of those kinds of

1030
01:12:22,400 --> 01:12:23,400
 things.

1031
01:12:23,400 --> 01:12:24,400
 Correct.

1032
01:12:24,400 --> 01:12:25,400
 It's not the PD overlay that we had.

1033
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,720
 We didn't have a really good one that fit at all, and so it's just this mixed bag of

1034
01:12:28,720 --> 01:12:30,040
 stuff that's in that section.

1035
01:12:30,040 --> 01:12:31,040
 Correct.

1036
01:12:31,040 --> 01:12:32,040
 So okay.

1037
01:12:32,040 --> 01:12:33,040
 Right.

1038
01:12:33,040 --> 01:12:34,960
 I just didn't know what, if there were some criteria that we could do exact comparisons

1039
01:12:34,960 --> 01:12:40,920
 between like moving to geo, any differences in height versus where, basically do we have

1040
01:12:40,920 --> 01:12:41,920
 to rezone it?

1041
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:45,760
 That's kind of where I was getting to on that piece, is that underneath its current zoning,

1042
01:12:45,760 --> 01:12:48,600
 what are we really changing in the way that it really makes a big difference, but I think

1043
01:12:48,600 --> 01:12:51,400
 I understand from Haley's answer that I understand where we're coming from now.

1044
01:12:51,400 --> 01:12:52,400
 So okay.

1045
01:12:52,400 --> 01:12:53,400
 Thank you.

1046
01:12:53,400 --> 01:12:54,400
 Certainly.

1047
01:12:54,400 --> 01:12:55,400
 Any other questions?

1048
01:12:55,400 --> 01:12:57,400
 Commissioner Ellis.

1049
01:12:57,400 --> 01:12:58,400
 Thank you, Chair.

1050
01:12:58,400 --> 01:13:01,920
 Sean, I know you said we're not talking about area D, but I just, I want to talk about

1051
01:13:01,920 --> 01:13:03,840
 it for a second, because I just want some clarification.

1052
01:13:03,840 --> 01:13:10,440
 I assume that that's the southern part that's remaining in PD that I see on the proposed

1053
01:13:10,440 --> 01:13:14,240
 zoning exhibit that you have in here.

1054
01:13:14,240 --> 01:13:17,040
 Do you know what those uses are for area D?

1055
01:13:17,040 --> 01:13:21,520
 So area D was primarily a residential use designation.

1056
01:13:21,520 --> 01:13:25,760
 I believe there was some retail that was permitted in that area, and some of that is actually

1057
01:13:25,760 --> 01:13:29,600
 the neighborhood to the south that you see now, that's actually used to be part of area

1058
01:13:29,600 --> 01:13:30,600
 D.

1059
01:13:30,600 --> 01:13:31,600
 Okay.

1060
01:13:31,600 --> 01:13:34,480
 So that left the PD and was zoned, I believe, R6 and R4.

1061
01:13:34,480 --> 01:13:35,480
 Okay.

1062
01:13:35,480 --> 01:13:39,200
 And right now that's remaining as area D in the PD?

1063
01:13:39,200 --> 01:13:42,960
 The neighborhood is not in PD, but yes, the other area, yes, it's remaining area D in

1064
01:13:42,960 --> 01:13:43,960
 the PD.

1065
01:13:43,960 --> 01:13:46,920
 It's a different landowner who's not part of this request.

1066
01:13:46,920 --> 01:13:47,920
 Okay.

1067
01:13:47,920 --> 01:13:48,920
 Understood.

1068
01:13:48,920 --> 01:13:49,920
 Okay.

1069
01:13:49,920 --> 01:13:53,520
 I think that's it for now.

1070
01:13:53,520 --> 01:13:54,520
 Thanks.

1071
01:13:54,520 --> 01:13:55,520
 Any other questions?

1072
01:13:55,520 --> 01:14:02,640
 First, for what it's worth, this seems more like business innovation to me, which is,

1073
01:14:02,640 --> 01:14:09,040
 makes my head a little wrap around the previous item, and B versus this one, it actually seems

1074
01:14:09,040 --> 01:14:10,800
 innovative.

1075
01:14:10,800 --> 01:14:18,800
 But the question I have is early on your slides, you had some FEMA designations and ESA designations.

1076
01:14:18,800 --> 01:14:26,040
 Does staff have any hesitation on the development of the property given that half of it is in

1077
01:14:26,040 --> 01:14:28,720
 potentially restricted development areas?

1078
01:14:28,720 --> 01:14:32,560
 Well, I will note that that is the current FEMA map.

1079
01:14:32,560 --> 01:14:38,480
 There will be some changes because the landowner has a previous approval for a letter of map

1080
01:14:38,480 --> 01:14:44,800
 revision, and so some of that in the northwestern corner is being removed from the flood plain

1081
01:14:44,800 --> 01:14:46,920
 under that previous approval.

1082
01:14:46,920 --> 01:14:51,680
 But from staff's perspective, much of that remaining area is going to parkland that will

1083
01:14:51,680 --> 01:14:56,120
 benefit the development in that area, so we think that actually helps create a beneficial

1084
01:14:56,120 --> 01:14:57,120
 mix.

1085
01:14:57,120 --> 01:14:58,120
 Great.

1086
01:14:58,120 --> 01:14:59,120
 Thanks for that clarification.

1087
01:14:59,120 --> 01:15:00,120
 Christopher?

1088
01:15:00,120 --> 01:15:04,120
 Yeah, if you don't mind, can you go back to that slide with the trail corridor that you

1089
01:15:04,120 --> 01:15:05,120
 showed?

1090
01:15:05,120 --> 01:15:06,120
 Certainly.

1091
01:15:06,120 --> 01:15:10,040
 Sorry, just a moment.

1092
01:15:10,040 --> 01:15:11,040
 Sorry.

1093
01:15:11,040 --> 01:15:38,200
 Yeah, thank you.

1094
01:15:38,200 --> 01:15:45,360
 So I'm trying to understand the implications of the parkland dedication that was made under

1095
01:15:45,360 --> 01:15:54,040
 the old PD versus the requirements of the 2019 DDC that would apply insofar as they

1096
01:15:54,040 --> 01:16:00,480
 provide an easement or dedication to allow this in the future.

1097
01:16:00,480 --> 01:16:04,800
 My understanding is that the 2019 DDC only requires an extension of a trail if it already

1098
01:16:04,800 --> 01:16:13,480
 exists at the border, and that the ESA requirements are really more geared toward development

1099
01:16:13,480 --> 01:16:19,760
 of the site as opposed to which portions of the ESA need to be dedicated versus doing

1100
01:16:19,760 --> 01:16:23,280
 a funds in lieu of or other sort of arrangement, right?

1101
01:16:23,280 --> 01:16:31,520
 So I guess my question is, what level of confidence do we have that if the zoning changes is approved

1102
01:16:31,520 --> 01:16:39,320
 that that corridor would be available to our parks department in the future, and what guarantees

1103
01:16:39,320 --> 01:16:40,960
 that if anything?

1104
01:16:40,960 --> 01:16:48,200
 Well, I will clarify first that the land was never actually dedicated under the PD.

1105
01:16:48,200 --> 01:16:52,360
 It was if this developed under the PD, then this would be provided.

1106
01:16:52,360 --> 01:16:54,640
 And so in some ways we're in a similar situation.

1107
01:16:54,640 --> 01:16:59,000
 The landowner has actually been the one that has, through this process, approached the

1108
01:16:59,000 --> 01:17:04,440
 parks department saying, "I'd like to give this to the city.

1109
01:17:04,440 --> 01:17:05,520
 Are you good with this?"

1110
01:17:05,520 --> 01:17:09,800
 And the parks department said, they thought about it, and they said, "Yeah, okay."

1111
01:17:09,800 --> 01:17:13,640
 So there's not a guarantee built into this, and that would certainly be something that

1112
01:17:13,640 --> 01:17:18,560
 city council could add as a condition of approval.

1113
01:17:18,560 --> 01:17:23,440
 But from our perspective, the landowner, the developer has expressed a strong interest

1114
01:17:23,440 --> 01:17:28,880
 in dedicating this park, and they would actually have park dedication requirement even with

1115
01:17:28,880 --> 01:17:31,440
 potential future development.

1116
01:17:31,440 --> 01:17:36,280
 And so there would be that benefit in it as well, besides the fact that we're fairly familiar

1117
01:17:36,280 --> 01:17:40,480
 with landowners preferring not to have the maintenance responsibility for land that they

1118
01:17:40,480 --> 01:17:41,920
 can't develop.

1119
01:17:41,920 --> 01:17:48,240
 So it's not a guarantee, but it is something that I believe we have a level of comfort

1120
01:17:48,240 --> 01:17:50,600
 with the desire to provide that area support plan.

1121
01:17:50,600 --> 01:17:51,600
 Okay.

1122
01:17:51,600 --> 01:17:52,600
 Thank you.

1123
01:17:52,600 --> 01:17:55,600
 Any other questions for Sean?

1124
01:17:55,600 --> 01:17:56,600
 Great.

1125
01:17:56,600 --> 01:17:58,520
 Thanks for the presentation, Sean.

1126
01:17:58,520 --> 01:18:01,960
 Before breaking, I would want to turn it over to Haley.

1127
01:18:01,960 --> 01:18:04,320
 She has a couple of announcements for us.

1128
01:18:04,320 --> 01:18:05,320
 Yeah.

1129
01:18:05,320 --> 01:18:09,040
 Just to put them on the spot, maybe embarrass them a little bit, I wanted to make an announcement

1130
01:18:09,040 --> 01:18:13,680
 that we are very happy to announce that both Corina and Sean have been recently promoted

1131
01:18:13,680 --> 01:18:15,720
 from assistant planners to associate planners.

1132
01:18:15,720 --> 01:18:22,360
 So congratulations are in order for their hard work.

1133
01:18:22,360 --> 01:18:23,800
 Congratulations.

1134
01:18:23,800 --> 01:18:25,200
 Well deserved.

1135
01:18:25,200 --> 01:18:31,520
 With that, I will close the work session meeting at 5.51 and we will return here at 6.30.

1136
01:18:31,520 --> 01:18:38,520
 Thank you.

1137
01:18:38,520 --> 01:18:41,560
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

1138
01:18:41,560 --> 01:18:45,600
 for Wednesday, July 14th, 2021.

1139
01:18:45,600 --> 01:18:49,120
 Seeing that we have a quorum, I'll call this meeting to order at 6.32.

1140
01:18:49,120 --> 01:18:53,160
 And please let the record show that Commissioner Cole is not with us this evening.

1141
01:18:53,160 --> 01:18:56,560
 The first item of business is to stand and provide a pledge of allegiance to the U.S.

1142
01:18:56,560 --> 01:18:57,560
 and Texas flag.

1143
01:18:57,560 --> 01:19:06,560
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for

1144
01:19:06,560 --> 01:19:16,080
 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

1145
01:19:16,080 --> 01:19:17,080
 Honor the Texas flag.

1146
01:19:17,080 --> 01:19:18,080
 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible

1147
01:19:18,080 --> 01:19:19,080
 with liberty and justice for all.

1148
01:19:19,080 --> 01:19:20,080
 Honor the Texas flag.

1149
01:19:20,080 --> 01:19:21,080
 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible

1150
01:19:21,080 --> 01:19:22,080
 with liberty and justice for all.

1151
01:19:22,080 --> 01:19:23,080
 Honor the Texas flag.

1152
01:19:23,080 --> 01:19:24,080
 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible

1153
01:19:24,080 --> 01:19:25,080
 with liberty and justice for all.

1154
01:19:25,080 --> 01:19:26,080
 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible

1155
01:19:26,080 --> 01:19:27,080
 with liberty and justice for all.

1156
01:19:27,080 --> 01:19:28,080
 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible

1157
01:19:28,080 --> 01:19:29,080
 with liberty and justice for all.

1158
01:19:29,080 --> 01:19:32,080
 The next item of business is to consider the approval of the June 23rd, 2021 minutes.

1159
01:19:32,080 --> 01:19:33,080
 Commissioner Smith.

1160
01:19:33,080 --> 01:19:34,080
 Make a motion to approve.

1161
01:19:34,080 --> 01:19:36,380
 We have a first for approval.

1162
01:19:36,380 --> 01:19:37,380
 Commissioner Ellis.

1163
01:19:37,380 --> 01:19:38,380
 Second.

1164
01:19:38,380 --> 01:19:43,080
 We have a first and a second for approval of the minutes.

1165
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:46,080
 Any discussion?

1166
01:19:46,080 --> 01:19:48,680
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1167
01:19:48,680 --> 01:19:49,680
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1168
01:19:49,680 --> 01:19:50,680
 Aye.

1169
01:19:50,680 --> 01:19:51,680
 Commissioner Smith.

1170
01:19:51,680 --> 01:19:52,680
 Aye.

1171
01:19:52,680 --> 01:19:53,680
 Second.

1172
01:19:53,680 --> 01:19:54,680
 Chair is an aye.

1173
01:19:54,680 --> 01:19:55,680
 Commissioner Anderson.

1174
01:19:55,680 --> 01:19:56,680
 Aye.

1175
01:19:56,680 --> 01:19:57,680
 Commissioner Ellis.

1176
01:19:57,680 --> 01:19:58,680
 Aye.

1177
01:19:58,680 --> 01:19:59,680
 Motion carries 6-0.

1178
01:19:59,680 --> 01:20:04,960
 The next item of business is to consider our consent agenda.

1179
01:20:04,960 --> 01:20:05,960
 Commissioner Ellis.

1180
01:20:05,960 --> 01:20:10,280
 I move approval.

1181
01:20:10,280 --> 01:20:11,280
 We have a first for approval.

1182
01:20:11,280 --> 01:20:12,280
 Commissioner Smith.

1183
01:20:12,280 --> 01:20:13,280
 Make a second.

1184
01:20:13,280 --> 01:20:16,320
 We have a first and a second for approval of the consent agenda.

1185
01:20:16,320 --> 01:20:19,320
 Any discussion?

1186
01:20:19,320 --> 01:20:21,280
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1187
01:20:21,280 --> 01:20:22,280
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1188
01:20:22,280 --> 01:20:23,280
 Aye.

1189
01:20:23,280 --> 01:20:24,280
 Commissioner Smith.

1190
01:20:24,280 --> 01:20:25,280
 Aye.

1191
01:20:25,280 --> 01:20:26,280
 Commissioner McDade.

1192
01:20:26,280 --> 01:20:27,280
 Chair is an aye.

1193
01:20:27,280 --> 01:20:28,280
 Commissioner Ellis.

1194
01:20:28,280 --> 01:20:29,280
 Aye.

1195
01:20:29,280 --> 01:20:30,280
 Commissioner Anderson.

1196
01:20:30,280 --> 01:20:31,280
 Aye.

1197
01:20:31,280 --> 01:20:32,600
 Motion carries 6-0.

1198
01:20:32,600 --> 01:20:40,760
 The next item of business is our individual consideration items, starting with 4A FP20-0027.

1199
01:20:40,760 --> 01:20:44,080
 I'll invite Haley Zagorski for presentation.

1200
01:20:44,080 --> 01:20:46,280
 All right.

1201
01:20:46,280 --> 01:20:47,280
 Good evening.

1202
01:20:47,280 --> 01:20:49,240
 Carina is getting the plat pulled up.

1203
01:20:49,240 --> 01:20:53,120
 This is a final plat for the Woodlands and McKinney Street.

1204
01:20:53,120 --> 01:20:59,000
 This is a manufactured home development with a single large lot.

1205
01:20:59,000 --> 01:21:03,060
 Since the time of the agenda posting, a new plat has been sent to you all.

1206
01:21:03,060 --> 01:21:09,120
 They were able to resolve all conditions that were -- or all staff comments that were outstanding

1207
01:21:09,120 --> 01:21:13,040
 on the plat rather related to their HOA documents and some easement and labeling items on the

1208
01:21:13,040 --> 01:21:15,560
 plat, so we are now recommending approval of this request.

1209
01:21:15,560 --> 01:21:18,240
 I'm happy to answer any questions.

1210
01:21:18,240 --> 01:21:19,960
 Any questions for Haley?

1211
01:21:19,960 --> 01:21:21,920
 Commissioner Smith.

1212
01:21:21,920 --> 01:21:23,840
 I make a motion to approve.

1213
01:21:23,840 --> 01:21:25,360
 We have a first for approval.

1214
01:21:25,360 --> 01:21:26,360
 Commissioner Anderson.

1215
01:21:26,360 --> 01:21:27,360
 I second.

1216
01:21:27,360 --> 01:21:30,160
 We have first and second for approval.

1217
01:21:30,160 --> 01:21:31,160
 Real fast.

1218
01:21:31,160 --> 01:21:33,920
 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1219
01:21:33,920 --> 01:21:35,800
 Good evening, Chair.

1220
01:21:35,800 --> 01:21:37,200
 No, there is none.

1221
01:21:37,200 --> 01:21:38,200
 Thank you.

1222
01:21:38,200 --> 01:21:41,440
 Any further discussion on the item?

1223
01:21:41,440 --> 01:21:43,520
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1224
01:21:43,520 --> 01:21:44,520
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1225
01:21:44,520 --> 01:21:45,520
 Aye.

1226
01:21:45,520 --> 01:21:46,520
 Commissioner Smith.

1227
01:21:46,520 --> 01:21:47,520
 Aye.

1228
01:21:47,520 --> 01:21:48,520
 Thank you.

1229
01:21:48,520 --> 01:21:49,520
 Chair is an aye.

1230
01:21:49,520 --> 01:21:50,520
 Commissioner Anderson.

1231
01:21:50,520 --> 01:21:51,520
 Aye.

1232
01:21:51,520 --> 01:21:52,520
 Commissioner Ellis.

1233
01:21:52,520 --> 01:21:53,520
 Aye.

1234
01:21:53,520 --> 01:21:54,520
 Motion carries 6-0.

1235
01:21:54,520 --> 01:21:58,520
 The next item of business is item 4B, PP21-0012.

1236
01:21:58,520 --> 01:22:03,000
 I'll invite Haley back for presentation.

1237
01:22:03,000 --> 01:22:05,880
 Good evening.

1238
01:22:05,880 --> 01:22:08,880
 This is a preliminary plat for the Urban Logistics Edition.

1239
01:22:08,880 --> 01:22:12,000
 This property is located on the south side of I-35E.

1240
01:22:12,000 --> 01:22:15,860
 The preliminary plat includes three lots, the largest of which would be intended for

1241
01:22:15,860 --> 01:22:20,560
 industrial development, the other two left as commercial parcels.

1242
01:22:20,560 --> 01:22:23,920
 At this time, there are several outstanding comments that are outlined in Exhibit 2 of

1243
01:22:23,920 --> 01:22:26,120
 your backup, so staff is recommending denial.

1244
01:22:26,120 --> 01:22:30,640
 However, the applicant has requested an extension, and staff has no objection, and that would

1245
01:22:30,640 --> 01:22:33,880
 be to a date certain of August 4th.

1246
01:22:33,880 --> 01:22:34,880
 Thank you, Haley.

1247
01:22:34,880 --> 01:22:37,520
 Any questions for Haley?

1248
01:22:37,520 --> 01:22:39,600
 And Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1249
01:22:39,600 --> 01:22:42,760
 No, Chair, there is none.

1250
01:22:42,760 --> 01:22:43,760
 Thank you.

1251
01:22:43,760 --> 01:22:44,760
 Commissioner Smith.

1252
01:22:44,760 --> 01:22:49,000
 Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of August 4th, 2021.

1253
01:22:49,000 --> 01:22:52,320
 We have a first for the 30-day extension to a date certain of August 4th.

1254
01:22:52,320 --> 01:22:53,320
 Commissioner Ellis.

1255
01:22:53,320 --> 01:22:54,320
 Second.

1256
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:56,480
 We have a first and a second for the extension.

1257
01:22:56,480 --> 01:22:59,160
 Any discussion?

1258
01:22:59,160 --> 01:23:01,320
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1259
01:23:01,320 --> 01:23:02,320
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1260
01:23:02,320 --> 01:23:03,320
 Aye.

1261
01:23:03,320 --> 01:23:04,320
 Commissioner Smith.

1262
01:23:04,320 --> 01:23:05,320
 Aye.

1263
01:23:05,320 --> 01:23:06,320
 Commissioner McDade.

1264
01:23:06,320 --> 01:23:07,320
 Aye.

1265
01:23:07,320 --> 01:23:08,320
 Chairs, an aye.

1266
01:23:08,320 --> 01:23:09,320
 Commissioner Anderson.

1267
01:23:09,320 --> 01:23:10,320
 Aye.

1268
01:23:10,320 --> 01:23:11,320
 Commissioner Ellis.

1269
01:23:11,320 --> 01:23:12,320
 Aye.

1270
01:23:12,320 --> 01:23:13,320
 Motion carries 6-0.

1271
01:23:13,320 --> 01:23:19,320
 Item number 4C, FR21-0006, and I'll invite Ron to present.

1272
01:23:19,320 --> 01:23:23,360
 Thank you, Chair, members of the Commission.

1273
01:23:23,360 --> 01:23:28,960
 This item, for your consideration, is a final replat application for a residential subdivision,

1274
01:23:28,960 --> 01:23:30,240
 Eagle Creek.

1275
01:23:30,240 --> 01:23:36,040
 The application did come to the Commission last time you all met for an extension, and

1276
01:23:36,040 --> 01:23:37,760
 that was approved.

1277
01:23:37,760 --> 01:23:43,440
 However, between then and now, the applicant has not been able to address the comments,

1278
01:23:43,440 --> 01:23:51,200
 specifically sections 832D, 835, as well as 836J, per the development code.

1279
01:23:51,200 --> 01:23:55,400
 So therefore, staff is recommending denial of this subject item, and I will be happy

1280
01:23:55,400 --> 01:23:56,400
 to answer any questions.

1281
01:23:56,400 --> 01:23:57,400
 Great.

1282
01:23:57,400 --> 01:23:58,400
 Thanks, Ron.

1283
01:23:58,400 --> 01:23:59,720
 Any questions for Ron?

1284
01:23:59,720 --> 01:24:01,840
 And Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1285
01:24:01,840 --> 01:24:05,000
 No, sir, not this.

1286
01:24:05,000 --> 01:24:06,000
 Thank you.

1287
01:24:06,000 --> 01:24:09,320
 Commissioner Anderson, I'll make a motion to deny.

1288
01:24:09,320 --> 01:24:12,880
 We have a first for deny.

1289
01:24:12,880 --> 01:24:13,880
 Commissioner Smith.

1290
01:24:13,880 --> 01:24:14,880
 Second.

1291
01:24:14,880 --> 01:24:15,960
 We have a first and a second to deny.

1292
01:24:15,960 --> 01:24:17,760
 Any discussion on this item?

1293
01:24:17,760 --> 01:24:18,760
 Okay.

1294
01:24:18,760 --> 01:24:20,640
 I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1295
01:24:20,640 --> 01:24:24,200
 Just a reminder, a vote in the affirmative is to deny.

1296
01:24:24,200 --> 01:24:25,200
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1297
01:24:25,200 --> 01:24:26,200
 Aye.

1298
01:24:26,200 --> 01:24:27,200
 Commissioner Smith.

1299
01:24:27,200 --> 01:24:28,200
 Aye.

1300
01:24:28,200 --> 01:24:29,200
 Commissioner McDade.

1301
01:24:29,200 --> 01:24:30,200
 Aye.

1302
01:24:30,200 --> 01:24:31,200
 Chair is also an aye.

1303
01:24:31,200 --> 01:24:32,200
 Commissioner Anderson.

1304
01:24:32,200 --> 01:24:33,200
 Aye.

1305
01:24:33,200 --> 01:24:34,200
 Commissioner Ellis.

1306
01:24:34,200 --> 01:24:35,200
 Aye.

1307
01:24:35,200 --> 01:24:36,200
 Chair is also an aye.

1308
01:24:36,200 --> 01:24:44,080
 The next item of business is item 4D, PP21-0011B, by Karina for presentation.

1309
01:24:44,080 --> 01:24:48,760
 Good evening, Karina Maldonado, Associate Planner.

1310
01:24:48,760 --> 01:24:53,800
 The item before you today is a preliminary plat, PP21-001B.

1311
01:24:53,800 --> 01:25:01,160
 This is a preliminary plat for an eight-acre site for 35 residential lots and one common

1312
01:25:01,160 --> 01:25:02,960
 area lot.

1313
01:25:02,960 --> 01:25:09,000
 Since the posting of this agenda, the applicant has addressed all comments, so staff is now

1314
01:25:09,000 --> 01:25:13,280
 recommending approval of this request as it does meet the established requirements in

1315
01:25:13,280 --> 01:25:14,280
 the DDC.

1316
01:25:14,280 --> 01:25:16,280
 With that, I can take any questions.

1317
01:25:16,280 --> 01:25:17,280
 Great.

1318
01:25:17,280 --> 01:25:18,280
 Any questions for Karina?

1319
01:25:18,280 --> 01:25:21,200
 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1320
01:25:21,200 --> 01:25:23,280
 No, not this one.

1321
01:25:23,280 --> 01:25:26,080
 Thank you.

1322
01:25:26,080 --> 01:25:29,080
 Any other discussion?

1323
01:25:29,080 --> 01:25:33,200
 Chair, we'll make a motion for approval.

1324
01:25:33,200 --> 01:25:34,200
 Commissioner Smith.

1325
01:25:34,200 --> 01:25:35,200
 Second.

1326
01:25:35,200 --> 01:25:37,720
 We have first and second for approval.

1327
01:25:37,720 --> 01:25:38,720
 Any discussion?

1328
01:25:38,720 --> 01:25:42,600
 Seeing none, I call for a vote via roll call.

1329
01:25:42,600 --> 01:25:43,600
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1330
01:25:43,600 --> 01:25:44,600
 Aye.

1331
01:25:44,600 --> 01:25:45,600
 Commissioner Smith.

1332
01:25:45,600 --> 01:25:46,600
 Aye.

1333
01:25:46,600 --> 01:25:47,600
 Commissioner McDade.

1334
01:25:47,600 --> 01:25:48,600
 Aye.

1335
01:25:48,600 --> 01:25:49,600
 Chair is an aye.

1336
01:25:49,600 --> 01:25:50,600
 Commissioner Anderson.

1337
01:25:50,600 --> 01:25:51,600
 Aye.

1338
01:25:51,600 --> 01:25:52,600
 Commissioner Ellis.

1339
01:25:52,600 --> 01:25:53,600
 Aye.

1340
01:25:53,600 --> 01:25:54,600
 Motion carries 6-0.

1341
01:25:54,600 --> 01:26:05,860
 I call for ZCP21-0017 and I'll invite Karina for presentation.

1342
01:26:05,860 --> 01:26:12,880
 All right.

1343
01:26:12,880 --> 01:26:16,680
 The request today is for ZCP21-0017.

1344
01:26:16,680 --> 01:26:20,600
 This is for Razor Ranch Multifamily at Heritage Trail.

1345
01:26:20,600 --> 01:26:25,600
 So the request before you today is for approval of a site plan for a multifamily use.

1346
01:26:25,600 --> 01:26:33,040
 This is approximately 5.906 acres located on lot 1 and lot 2, block E of the Razor Ranch

1347
01:26:33,040 --> 01:26:34,040
 addition.

1348
01:26:34,040 --> 01:26:38,940
 This site, although it's two lots currently, will need to be replatted to combine those

1349
01:26:38,940 --> 01:26:42,800
 two lots into one for this development.

1350
01:26:42,800 --> 01:26:48,520
 The subject site is surrounded by four public streets.

1351
01:26:48,520 --> 01:26:50,700
 On the north is Linden Drive.

1352
01:26:50,700 --> 01:26:52,880
 To the west, Heritage Trail.

1353
01:26:52,880 --> 01:26:58,560
 To the south is Panhandle Street and then to the east is East Park Boulevard.

1354
01:26:58,560 --> 01:27:02,800
 So this subject site is located within the Razor Ranch Overlay District.

1355
01:27:02,800 --> 01:27:05,880
 It has a base zoning of RCCD.

1356
01:27:05,880 --> 01:27:12,440
 That is because the Razor Ranch Overlay District is based on the 2002 Denton Development Code.

1357
01:27:12,440 --> 01:27:18,760
 So the site is also located within the South Mixed Use District and the proposed use is

1358
01:27:18,760 --> 01:27:22,520
 for multifamily, which is permitted in this area.

1359
01:27:22,520 --> 01:27:28,320
 I did want to mention that the concept plan for the Razor Ranch Overlay District was amended

1360
01:27:28,320 --> 01:27:36,400
 in April 2021 to permit the multifamily use on the southern portion or lot 2 of the site.

1361
01:27:36,400 --> 01:27:41,600
 So multifamily located east of Heritage Trail are also subject to the architectural landscape

1362
01:27:41,600 --> 01:27:49,280
 standards in ordinance number Z18-0026C and that is exhibit C2A that they would need to

1363
01:27:49,280 --> 01:27:51,560
 comply with.

1364
01:27:51,560 --> 01:27:57,840
 So the reason why you're seeing this today is that site plans within the Razor Ranch

1365
01:27:57,840 --> 01:28:02,920
 Overlay District do require P&Z approval before moving forward.

1366
01:28:02,920 --> 01:28:06,320
 Traditionally, site plans do not require P&Z approval.

1367
01:28:06,320 --> 01:28:09,040
 They're approved at an administrative level.

1368
01:28:09,040 --> 01:28:13,160
 So the approval today or consideration today includes the following elements.

1369
01:28:13,160 --> 01:28:17,880
 That is the site plan, landscape plan, and elevations.

1370
01:28:17,880 --> 01:28:25,120
 The criteria for approval for a site plan for the Razor Ranch Overlay District includes

1371
01:28:25,120 --> 01:28:26,440
 four elements.

1372
01:28:26,440 --> 01:28:30,480
 First being that the site plan substantially complies with the concept and schematic plan

1373
01:28:30,480 --> 01:28:32,320
 approved by council.

1374
01:28:32,320 --> 01:28:36,640
 Second that the site plan provides for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that

1375
01:28:36,640 --> 01:28:41,040
 would not adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods or properties.

1376
01:28:41,040 --> 01:28:45,640
 Third that the site plan provides for adequate and safe circulation of vehicular traffic

1377
01:28:45,640 --> 01:28:51,840
 and last that the plan fully complies with all other sections of the overlay district.

1378
01:28:51,840 --> 01:28:53,640
 So first I'll just go over the site plan.

1379
01:28:53,640 --> 01:28:57,320
 I did highlight some areas to make it easier to identify.

1380
01:28:57,320 --> 01:29:06,280
 Overall, 311,500 square feet of buildings on the site or building coverage on the site.

1381
01:29:06,280 --> 01:29:09,400
 That includes 322 dwelling units.

1382
01:29:09,400 --> 01:29:14,200
 Those dwelling units are located in two multifamily buildings.

1383
01:29:14,200 --> 01:29:22,480
 Those are these L-shaped buildings in blue, as well as the amenity center located here

1384
01:29:22,480 --> 01:29:23,900
 in green.

1385
01:29:23,900 --> 01:29:32,840
 So as well as the amenity center, there is also a dog park located here on the southwest

1386
01:29:32,840 --> 01:29:39,280
 portion of the site, a sports court park on the opposite end, a pool amenity area, the

1387
01:29:39,280 --> 01:29:45,600
 clubhouse, a tot park playground area and plaza that can be seen here on the north part

1388
01:29:45,600 --> 01:29:46,600
 of the site.

1389
01:29:46,600 --> 01:29:50,440
 Previously, that was not mentioned in work session, I do want to highlight that there

1390
01:29:50,440 --> 01:29:57,000
 are pedestrian entrances on the north side of Linden Street where this promenade area

1391
01:29:57,000 --> 01:30:03,600
 is on the west side along Heritage Trail and then on the east side on East Park, and these

1392
01:30:03,600 --> 01:30:11,880
 are gated areas with entrances for the residents that would be occupying this multifamily development.

1393
01:30:11,880 --> 01:30:17,840
 So overall, the site shows 74.9 percent lot coverage, that's within the 90 percent maximum

1394
01:30:17,840 --> 01:30:18,840
 on the site.

1395
01:30:18,840 --> 01:30:25,920
 They are proposing 9.6 percent open space, that's all the areas shown in green.

1396
01:30:25,920 --> 01:30:30,060
 This will be, these multifamily buildings will be seven stories with a maximum height

1397
01:30:30,060 --> 01:30:35,280
 of 85 feet, that's less than the allowed 100 feet.

1398
01:30:35,280 --> 01:30:42,240
 And then parking proposed is 515 spaces, that does exceed the minimum of 504, but within

1399
01:30:42,240 --> 01:30:46,600
 the Razor Ranch Overlay District, they are permitted to exceed that number.

1400
01:30:46,600 --> 01:30:54,040
 And the last item I wanted to bring up is the red boxes that you see here on the site.

1401
01:30:54,040 --> 01:31:01,640
 Those are existing easements that they intend to abandon to serve this site.

1402
01:31:01,640 --> 01:31:06,760
 So just briefly going over the landscape plan, they are meeting the minimum requirements

1403
01:31:06,760 --> 01:31:10,720
 and exceeding in some areas the standards.

1404
01:31:10,720 --> 01:31:16,260
 So 21 percent landscape area is proposed, the minimum required is 10 percent.

1405
01:31:16,260 --> 01:31:22,360
 And then 42 percent tree canopy is proposed and 20 percent is what's required, and as

1406
01:31:22,360 --> 01:31:27,960
 you can see they have street trees along all frontages with some raised planter beds and

1407
01:31:27,960 --> 01:31:35,880
 green screens in areas where maybe some easements are blocking the required planting locations.

1408
01:31:35,880 --> 01:31:42,880
 So just briefly going over the elevations, the applicant is here and may provide a presentation

1409
01:31:42,880 --> 01:31:46,380
 on additional elevations if you all would like.

1410
01:31:46,380 --> 01:31:51,620
 So first here is the elevations of the two multifamily buildings along Linden Drive facing

1411
01:31:51,620 --> 01:31:54,320
 south.

1412
01:31:54,320 --> 01:31:58,840
 These are the elevations along East Park and Heritage Trail, these would be the right of

1413
01:31:58,840 --> 01:32:01,920
 way facing elevations.

1414
01:32:01,920 --> 01:32:07,720
 The clubhouse which is visible from Linden Street as well as a portion of their split

1415
01:32:07,720 --> 01:32:12,360
 parking structure that you can see from Panhandle.

1416
01:32:12,360 --> 01:32:16,080
 So staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets the established requirements

1417
01:32:16,080 --> 01:32:20,560
 of the Razor Ranch Overlay District with the following conditions.

1418
01:32:20,560 --> 01:32:25,280
 First that any public utility easements shown as being abandoned on the site plan in order

1419
01:32:25,280 --> 01:32:30,160
 to accommodate the proposed building locations must be abandoned prior to issuance of any

1420
01:32:30,160 --> 01:32:31,600
 building permits.

1421
01:32:31,600 --> 01:32:36,560
 And second that a replat must be submitted and approved to combine lots one and two,

1422
01:32:36,560 --> 01:32:42,000
 block E of the Razor Ranch East addition into one lot prior to issuance of any building

1423
01:32:42,000 --> 01:32:44,040
 permits for this development.

1424
01:32:44,040 --> 01:32:48,400
 And with that I believe the applicant is here, I'm not sure if he wants to give a presentation

1425
01:32:48,400 --> 01:32:50,680
 but I can also take questions before that.

1426
01:32:50,680 --> 01:32:54,800
 Sure, is there any questions for Karina?

1427
01:32:54,800 --> 01:32:56,920
 Is the applicant Gerald Lewicki?

1428
01:32:56,920 --> 01:32:57,920
 Yes.

1429
01:32:57,920 --> 01:32:58,920
 Perfect.

1430
01:32:58,920 --> 01:32:59,920
 Can we pull up your presentation?

1431
01:32:59,920 --> 01:33:00,920
 Sure.

1432
01:33:00,920 --> 01:33:24,800
 Okay, if it won't pop up, someone might have exited out of it.

1433
01:33:24,800 --> 01:33:33,360
 Sorry, give me one second while I pull up the presentation.

1434
01:33:33,360 --> 01:33:37,760
 Thank you.

1435
01:33:37,760 --> 01:33:43,720
 Good evening, Commission.

1436
01:33:43,720 --> 01:33:50,720
 I'm Gerald Lewicki with Hodges Architecture 13642 Omega in Dallas and we're honored to

1437
01:33:50,720 --> 01:33:56,120
 be here to present the AHS Development and Razor Ranch to you.

1438
01:33:56,120 --> 01:33:57,120
 Sorry.

1439
01:33:57,120 --> 01:33:58,120
 It looks like...

1440
01:33:58,120 --> 01:34:01,120
 There you go.

1441
01:34:01,120 --> 01:34:19,600
 All right, I'll just briefly run through this.

1442
01:34:19,600 --> 01:34:25,280
 As you know, overall Razor Ranch, this is a larger section of Razor Ranch but still just

1443
01:34:25,280 --> 01:34:32,300
 a portion of that and our site is immediately south of the park as Karina has mentioned.

1444
01:34:32,300 --> 01:34:36,440
 So the design of the site is set up so that it's on the axis of the park.

1445
01:34:36,440 --> 01:34:50,760
 So as the park comes down and relates to street, to Linden Street, then the axis continues on.

1446
01:34:50,760 --> 01:34:53,720
 All right.

1447
01:34:53,720 --> 01:35:00,120
 And landscape plan that we looked at, the site is heavily landscaped or approximately

1448
01:35:00,120 --> 01:35:08,680
 double the required landscaping and shade tree coverage for the site and also have amenity

1449
01:35:08,680 --> 01:35:18,160
 areas as Karina brought up, the dog park, the sports court on the southern portion of

1450
01:35:18,160 --> 01:35:24,980
 the site and then the tot lot area and plaza on the north portion as well as the entry

1451
01:35:24,980 --> 01:35:29,520
 element as you're coming into the main clubhouse building.

1452
01:35:29,520 --> 01:35:34,880
 And Chair, to answer your question about the tot lot, yes, that was a specific request.

1453
01:35:34,880 --> 01:35:39,300
 We did not feel like we had the room needed in the other two amenity areas.

1454
01:35:39,300 --> 01:35:45,960
 It is fenced, has a fence around the entire development but especially around this area

1455
01:35:45,960 --> 01:35:51,840
 as well and the lot itself is brought in towards the building so it's easily accessible to

1456
01:35:51,840 --> 01:35:53,440
 the buildings themselves.

1457
01:35:53,440 --> 01:36:00,280
 So that was the reason for that location.

1458
01:36:00,280 --> 01:36:06,480
 Just quickly looking at some views, some perspective views, this is from the northeast corner looking

1459
01:36:06,480 --> 01:36:12,880
 back into the project and again this is the entrance off of Linden Street in between the

1460
01:36:12,880 --> 01:36:19,240
 main buildings with the amenity area back behind in this location.

1461
01:36:19,240 --> 01:36:31,900
 Then this is from the northwest corner viewing at the corner of Heritage and Linden.

1462
01:36:31,900 --> 01:36:34,600
 These are just some interior shots of the amenity areas.

1463
01:36:34,600 --> 01:36:40,120
 They have some top notch amenities within the clubhouse area.

1464
01:36:40,120 --> 01:36:48,640
 They have a business center, they have interior gathering areas, outdoor cooking areas adjacent

1465
01:36:48,640 --> 01:36:54,600
 to the pool, outdoor pool area and seating areas.

1466
01:36:54,600 --> 01:37:01,840
 I just want to give you a flavor of fitness room, fitness area as well as part of the

1467
01:37:01,840 --> 01:37:03,600
 amenity package.

1468
01:37:03,600 --> 01:37:08,240
 I just want to give you a flavor of the development and let you know that again we're pleased

1469
01:37:08,240 --> 01:37:12,200
 to be able to present this and bring this project to Razor Ranch and here to answer

1470
01:37:12,200 --> 01:37:13,200
 any questions.

1471
01:37:13,200 --> 01:37:14,560
 Thank you very much.

1472
01:37:14,560 --> 01:37:16,360
 Any questions for the applicant?

1473
01:37:16,360 --> 01:37:26,360
 Just out of curiosity, you showed kind of the alignment of this particular site plan

1474
01:37:26,360 --> 01:37:30,320
 with the park across the street there and how the entrance is right in the middle between

1475
01:37:30,320 --> 01:37:31,320
 the two buildings.

1476
01:37:31,320 --> 01:37:32,320
 Yes.

1477
01:37:32,320 --> 01:37:34,400
 Is there a planned mid-block crossing crosswalk there?

1478
01:37:34,400 --> 01:37:38,360
 Initially that was contemplated but we felt that from a safety standpoint it would be

1479
01:37:38,360 --> 01:37:44,160
 better to leave the crossings at the street intersections so it encourages pedestrian

1480
01:37:44,160 --> 01:37:48,560
 circulation all along that north side of Linden.

1481
01:37:48,560 --> 01:37:55,080
 Okay so if someone were to walk out the exit through the center of this grand entrance

1482
01:37:55,080 --> 01:37:59,000
 then they have to walk all the way to the correct intersection and cross and then walk

1483
01:37:59,000 --> 01:38:01,360
 back in order to get to the middle of the park?

1484
01:38:01,360 --> 01:38:02,360
 Absolutely.

1485
01:38:02,360 --> 01:38:03,360
 Okay.

1486
01:38:03,360 --> 01:38:07,560
 Now there's kind of a curve in Linden at that point and a little bit of gray differential

1487
01:38:07,560 --> 01:38:14,520
 still we felt that it was safer at the corners.

1488
01:38:14,520 --> 01:38:15,520
 Okay.

1489
01:38:15,520 --> 01:38:18,520
 Any other questions for the applicant?

1490
01:38:18,520 --> 01:38:19,520
 I don't see any.

1491
01:38:19,520 --> 01:38:20,520
 Thank you very much.

1492
01:38:20,520 --> 01:38:21,520
 All right.

1493
01:38:21,520 --> 01:38:22,520
 Thank you.

1494
01:38:22,520 --> 01:38:25,520
 Rachel is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1495
01:38:25,520 --> 01:38:27,520
 No Chair.

1496
01:38:27,520 --> 01:38:29,080
 Perfect.

1497
01:38:29,080 --> 01:38:32,160
 Any further discussion or questions for staff?

1498
01:38:32,160 --> 01:38:35,840
 Commissioner Smith.

1499
01:38:35,840 --> 01:38:37,760
 Make a motion to approve with staff recommendations.

1500
01:38:37,760 --> 01:38:40,600
 We have a first for approval with recommendations.

1501
01:38:40,600 --> 01:38:41,600
 Kush Ellis.

1502
01:38:41,600 --> 01:38:42,600
 Second.

1503
01:38:42,600 --> 01:38:44,800
 We have a first and a second.

1504
01:38:44,800 --> 01:38:47,200
 Any discussion on the item?

1505
01:38:47,200 --> 01:38:49,840
 See oh Kush approved.

1506
01:38:49,840 --> 01:38:50,840
 Just a comment.

1507
01:38:50,840 --> 01:38:57,280
 I think I don't oppose this but just a little bit of common sense.

1508
01:38:57,280 --> 01:39:00,600
 I think if people are living there and they exit their apartment and they want to go to

1509
01:39:00,600 --> 01:39:04,780
 the park they're going to end up walking across the middle of that street there anyway.

1510
01:39:04,780 --> 01:39:10,760
 So I would encourage staff to at least monitor what happens as this development goes up and

1511
01:39:10,760 --> 01:39:17,280
 flag this as a potential area for accommodating that in the future.

1512
01:39:17,280 --> 01:39:22,800
 So the item of concern that you brought up was actually brought up by staff as well.

1513
01:39:22,800 --> 01:39:27,360
 Unfortunately there wasn't a mechanism for us to require that of the developer.

1514
01:39:27,360 --> 01:39:32,720
 I'm not sure if it's an option in any other means of adding that but just wanted to let

1515
01:39:32,720 --> 01:39:37,560
 you know that staff did consider a mid-block crossing but again we couldn't, there was

1516
01:39:37,560 --> 01:39:41,560
 no requirement that they provide that.

1517
01:39:41,560 --> 01:39:42,560
 Okay.

1518
01:39:42,560 --> 01:39:43,560
 Thank you.

1519
01:39:43,560 --> 01:39:44,560
 Any other?

1520
01:39:44,560 --> 01:39:45,560
 Commissioner Anderson.

1521
01:39:45,560 --> 01:39:48,120
 No I'm going to vote for this as well.

1522
01:39:48,120 --> 01:39:57,520
 I just wanted to ask, it looks very nice I will say that, but I'd like to see some different

1523
01:39:57,520 --> 01:39:58,520
 angles and stuff.

1524
01:39:58,520 --> 01:40:02,200
 Instead of just a flat wall with doors and windows it would be kind of nice if it had

1525
01:40:02,200 --> 01:40:08,000
 some little setbacks and stuff like this that's just architectural stuff but instead of just

1526
01:40:08,000 --> 01:40:12,800
 a flat front wall you know.

1527
01:40:12,800 --> 01:40:16,040
 I don't know if you want me to pull up the elevation so within the Razor Ranch Overlay

1528
01:40:16,040 --> 01:40:22,380
 District they are required to have a certain amount of relief in their elevations.

1529
01:40:22,380 --> 01:40:24,920
 It might not have been pretty easy to identify.

1530
01:40:24,920 --> 01:40:25,920
 Could you pull it up again?

1531
01:40:25,920 --> 01:40:26,920
 Yeah.

1532
01:40:26,920 --> 01:40:43,520
 I'm not going to hold this up but it's just.

1533
01:40:43,520 --> 01:40:50,000
 So although it does look like just one kind of just one flat wall it's hard to see in

1534
01:40:50,000 --> 01:40:54,960
 this depiction but some of those areas are recessed back and I'm not sure if your elevations

1535
01:40:54,960 --> 01:40:58,400
 are actually the perspective may show it a little bit better.

1536
01:40:58,400 --> 01:41:08,760
 We can share the applicant's presentation again and I believe it has a better viewpoint.

1537
01:41:08,760 --> 01:41:13,480
 As it pulls up it's loading a bit slow but it is something within the Razor Ranch Overlay

1538
01:41:13,480 --> 01:41:19,760
 District within the ordinance specific to this area it does it does have requirements

1539
01:41:19,760 --> 01:41:20,760
 towards that.

1540
01:41:20,760 --> 01:41:25,040
 I mean for something that looks really nice I mean it looks really nice it's just I didn't

1541
01:41:25,040 --> 01:41:27,080
 I thought it was just going to be a flat wall.

1542
01:41:27,080 --> 01:41:28,080
 No.

1543
01:41:28,080 --> 01:41:29,080
 Okay.

1544
01:41:29,080 --> 01:41:33,000
 It has insets and projections within the façade.

1545
01:41:33,000 --> 01:41:35,920
 Yeah well thank you.

1546
01:41:35,920 --> 01:41:36,920
 You're fine.

1547
01:41:36,920 --> 01:41:46,280
 Okay yeah for some reason this is it's not working.

1548
01:41:46,280 --> 01:41:47,840
 Any other questions or discussion?

1549
01:41:47,840 --> 01:41:54,160
 We have a first and a second for approval I will call I'll call for a vote via roll

1550
01:41:54,160 --> 01:41:55,160
 call.

1551
01:41:55,160 --> 01:41:56,160
 Commissioner Pruitt?

1552
01:41:56,160 --> 01:41:57,160
 Aye.

1553
01:41:57,160 --> 01:41:58,160
 Commissioner Smith?

1554
01:41:58,160 --> 01:41:59,160
 Aye.

1555
01:41:59,160 --> 01:42:00,160
 Commissioner McDade?

1556
01:42:00,160 --> 01:42:01,160
 Aye.

1557
01:42:01,160 --> 01:42:02,160
 Chair is an aye.

1558
01:42:02,160 --> 01:42:03,160
 Commissioner Anderson?

1559
01:42:03,160 --> 01:42:04,160
 Aye.

1560
01:42:04,160 --> 01:42:05,160
 Commissioner Ellis?

1561
01:42:05,160 --> 01:42:06,160
 Aye.

1562
01:42:06,160 --> 01:42:07,160
 Motion carries 6-0 congratulations.

1563
01:42:07,160 --> 01:42:14,320
 Next item of business is item 5A Z21-0007C.

1564
01:42:14,320 --> 01:42:20,720
 I'll open the public hearing and invite Carina Maldonado for presentation.

1565
01:42:20,720 --> 01:42:39,040
 It's me again it's Carina Maldonado Associate Planner with the City of Denton.

1566
01:42:39,040 --> 01:42:43,360
 This request is a public hearing for Z21-0007.

1567
01:42:43,360 --> 01:42:47,040
 This is a Jim Crystal Road rezoning.

1568
01:42:47,040 --> 01:42:54,800
 So the request today is to rezone approximately 30.43 acres from public facilities PF to light

1569
01:42:54,800 --> 01:42:57,480
 industrial LI district zoning.

1570
01:42:57,480 --> 01:43:03,640
 The subject site is located on or is city owned property and is located within a larger

1571
01:43:03,640 --> 01:43:11,520
 tract of city owned property that was acquired in 2016 to accommodate the Denton Energy Center.

1572
01:43:11,520 --> 01:43:17,160
 So just to depict it within the aerial at least within the perspective shown the area

1573
01:43:17,160 --> 01:43:23,920
 in green is all city owned property and then the subject site is two portions of that shown

1574
01:43:23,920 --> 01:43:24,920
 in yellow.

1575
01:43:24,920 --> 01:43:30,320
 So I will be referring to this as the northern and southern portions.

1576
01:43:30,320 --> 01:43:36,880
 So as I mentioned this is all city owned property and so with the 2019 Denton Development Code

1577
01:43:36,880 --> 01:43:44,240
 many public owned facilities automatically were assigned to PF zoning district.

1578
01:43:44,240 --> 01:43:50,520
 Within these districts it's intended for public community services such as fire station schools,

1579
01:43:50,520 --> 01:43:55,920
 civic buildings as well as basic utilities provided by the city.

1580
01:43:55,920 --> 01:44:00,680
 So the request today is intended to support Denton Municipal Electric's proposed ground

1581
01:44:00,680 --> 01:44:06,800
 lease to a private company as part of a modular data center warehouse development.

1582
01:44:06,800 --> 01:44:15,080
 This project was brought forth to city council earlier in June regarding the use.

1583
01:44:15,080 --> 01:44:20,680
 We won't get into that too specifically today but just to let you know DME is in attendance

1584
01:44:20,680 --> 01:44:23,640
 in case you have questions for them.

1585
01:44:23,640 --> 01:44:29,360
 So prior to any development being established on this site the property must be rezoned

1586
01:44:29,360 --> 01:44:34,920
 to a district that would permit the modular data center warehouse use and so the proposal

1587
01:44:34,920 --> 01:44:38,040
 is for the LI district.

1588
01:44:38,040 --> 01:44:41,520
 So just a little bit of zoning history on this site.

1589
01:44:41,520 --> 01:44:49,120
 So prior to 2019 with the 2002 zoning map the subject site was previously zoned ICG.

1590
01:44:49,120 --> 01:44:55,780
 That is one of our heavier industrial districts within the 2002 zoning.

1591
01:44:55,780 --> 01:45:00,960
 So again when the 2019 zoning came through all city owned property transitioned to the

1592
01:45:00,960 --> 01:45:06,280
 PF zoning however if that PF zoning was not there or if the property was not owned by

1593
01:45:06,280 --> 01:45:10,680
 the city of Denton it would have transitioned to the heavy industrial district.

1594
01:45:10,680 --> 01:45:15,320
 And as you can see with this kind of little square patch above the subject site that is

1595
01:45:15,320 --> 01:45:20,720
 the Encore substation, I'm sorry not Encore, I believe it's Encore, substation.

1596
01:45:20,720 --> 01:45:24,680
 So the zoning there of ICG did transition to HI.

1597
01:45:24,680 --> 01:45:29,840
 So again without the PF being there or without the city owning that property it would have

1598
01:45:29,840 --> 01:45:32,520
 likely transitioned to HI.

1599
01:45:32,520 --> 01:45:39,800
 However the request is to rezone to a lesser intensive zoning district of light industrial.

1600
01:45:39,800 --> 01:45:45,360
 So I will go over very briefly the general approval criteria as well as the zoning criteria

1601
01:45:45,360 --> 01:45:50,840
 and I've highlighted the items that I'll cover in bold.

1602
01:45:50,840 --> 01:45:55,400
 So first touching on general criterion three and zoning criterion one regarding the Denton

1603
01:45:55,400 --> 01:45:57,180
 plan 2030.

1604
01:45:57,180 --> 01:46:04,500
 So these subject site, the northern and southern tract both are designated for industrial commerce.

1605
01:46:04,500 --> 01:46:10,240
 This future land use designation is predominantly for light and heavy industrial.

1606
01:46:10,240 --> 01:46:14,680
 The light industrial district is consistent with this designation and it does provide

1607
01:46:14,680 --> 01:46:22,280
 a less intensive zoning within the area than the heavy industrial district would.

1608
01:46:22,280 --> 01:46:27,240
 Heavy uses within the industrial commerce area are manufacturing, assembly, fabrication

1609
01:46:27,240 --> 01:46:29,800
 as well as wholesale and distribution.

1610
01:46:29,800 --> 01:46:35,960
 The proposed warehouse does or is consistent with the intended uses in this designation.

1611
01:46:35,960 --> 01:46:39,400
 Excuse me.

1612
01:46:39,400 --> 01:46:44,400
 Next we'll talk about the general criterion eight and zoning criterion five regarding

1613
01:46:44,400 --> 01:46:47,720
 minimizing adverse impacts on surrounding property.

1614
01:46:47,720 --> 01:46:53,680
 So I do have a bit zoomed in version of the aerial here just to depict the northern portion

1615
01:46:53,680 --> 01:47:01,920
 that you see here is located at least or approximately 1,000 feet east of and approximately 1,000

1616
01:47:01,920 --> 01:47:05,000
 feet south of the nearest residential zoning.

1617
01:47:05,000 --> 01:47:12,080
 That residential zoning would be the R2 district and so it's a little bit cut off but at the

1618
01:47:12,080 --> 01:47:16,000
 end of this arrow is Jim Crystal Road and then on the northern side of Jim Crystal is

1619
01:47:16,000 --> 01:47:17,240
 R2.

1620
01:47:17,240 --> 01:47:24,600
 If we kind of head just straight north and then to the, I would say to the northwest

1621
01:47:24,600 --> 01:47:32,940
 of the northern subject site is the HI district and then just adjacent is the R2 district.

1622
01:47:32,940 --> 01:47:38,300
 And just to make a point of clarification that came up in work session, the HI district

1623
01:47:38,300 --> 01:47:42,800
 is actually, it holds an existing residential use and I believe that that property owner

1624
01:47:42,800 --> 01:47:48,400
 also owns the property within the R2 district as well.

1625
01:47:48,400 --> 01:47:55,440
 So in relation to that northern portion, the closest adjacent uses really are the electric

1626
01:47:55,440 --> 01:48:02,400
 substations as well as existing gas wells and flood plain around that northern portion.

1627
01:48:02,400 --> 01:48:10,000
 The southern portion is located directly south of the Denton Energy Center and directly adjacent

1628
01:48:10,000 --> 01:48:14,960
 to that southern portion on the south is a rural residential zoning designation.

1629
01:48:14,960 --> 01:48:21,800
 However, that RR zoning, that property was annexed in 2010.

1630
01:48:21,800 --> 01:48:28,320
 In the 2002 zoning was assigned an RD5X which was the placeholder zoning after annexation

1631
01:48:28,320 --> 01:48:35,000
 and with the transition to the 2019 zoning was given that RR as a placeholder as initial

1632
01:48:35,000 --> 01:48:36,000
 zoning.

1633
01:48:36,000 --> 01:48:42,680
 However, I did also want to mention that that southern RR property does have significant

1634
01:48:42,680 --> 01:48:49,320
 amount of active gas wells, those are these red dots that you'll see as well as being

1635
01:48:49,320 --> 01:48:52,880
 adjacent to the substation and flood plain on the west side.

1636
01:48:52,880 --> 01:48:58,520
 So any development on the south really would not end up being a residential development

1637
01:48:58,520 --> 01:49:05,280
 due to the gas wells and the required setbacks from those gas wells.

1638
01:49:05,280 --> 01:49:10,440
 So moving on to general criteria 11 and 12 as well as zoning criteria 6 regarding public

1639
01:49:10,440 --> 01:49:14,440
 facilities and capacity to serve the site.

1640
01:49:14,440 --> 01:49:18,880
 So existing water and sewer are available to the property.

1641
01:49:18,880 --> 01:49:23,840
 Capacity in any extension of utilities would be assessed with platting and site development

1642
01:49:23,840 --> 01:49:30,960
 of the two portions of the sites and then access is provided or is accessible through

1643
01:49:30,960 --> 01:49:37,200
 Jim Crystal Road and if there were emergencies related to the use it would be served by Fire

1644
01:49:37,200 --> 01:49:44,800
 Station 3 which is the new station at 1401 Underwood which would serve any industrial

1645
01:49:44,800 --> 01:49:48,800
 developments on the west side of I-35.

1646
01:49:48,800 --> 01:49:54,320
 So we did send out notices within the 200 foot and 500 foot area as you'll see within

1647
01:49:54,320 --> 01:49:58,480
 the zoning boundaries that mostly hits just city owned property.

1648
01:49:58,480 --> 01:50:03,360
 However, staff and DME did host a community meeting.

1649
01:50:03,360 --> 01:50:06,520
 This was a virtual meeting held on June 17th.

1650
01:50:06,520 --> 01:50:10,360
 I believe the notification radius was about a thousand feet.

1651
01:50:10,360 --> 01:50:13,000
 We did have about five people in attendance.

1652
01:50:13,000 --> 01:50:20,040
 They asked questions related to noise mitigation, adjacent zoning as well as any impact that

1653
01:50:20,040 --> 01:50:25,600
 the proposed city project would have on the supply for electricity for residents.

1654
01:50:25,600 --> 01:50:30,280
 DME was available to answer those questions for them so it was less about the zoning and

1655
01:50:30,280 --> 01:50:34,740
 more about the use and the overall response was positive.

1656
01:50:34,740 --> 01:50:42,760
 So we did not receive any responses to date and with that I can get to the recommendation.

1657
01:50:42,760 --> 01:50:47,240
 Staff does recommend approval of the request as it does comply with the general approval

1658
01:50:47,240 --> 01:50:53,680
 criteria as well as the zoning criteria and then just some final next steps for the project.

1659
01:50:53,680 --> 01:51:01,760
 This will go to city council July 20th after PNC's recommendation and then July 27th city

1660
01:51:01,760 --> 01:51:06,500
 council will consider a ground lease agreement as well as a power purchase agreement related

1661
01:51:06,500 --> 01:51:08,640
 to the project.

1662
01:51:08,640 --> 01:51:10,200
 With that I can take any questions.

1663
01:51:10,200 --> 01:51:17,680
 DME staff is also available for questions as well as the third party to NASCA to answer

1664
01:51:17,680 --> 01:51:19,280
 any questions as well.

1665
01:51:19,280 --> 01:51:20,280
 Great.

1666
01:51:20,280 --> 01:51:22,280
 Thank you so much for the presentation.

1667
01:51:22,280 --> 01:51:26,440
 Any questions for staff?

1668
01:51:26,440 --> 01:51:27,840
 This is a public hearing.

1669
01:51:27,840 --> 01:51:29,920
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

1670
01:51:29,920 --> 01:51:32,840
 Rachel is there anyone who's called in on this item?

1671
01:51:32,840 --> 01:51:34,960
 No callers for this one chair.

1672
01:51:34,960 --> 01:51:35,960
 Thank you.

1673
01:51:35,960 --> 01:51:39,920
 Anyone present wishing to speak?

1674
01:51:39,920 --> 01:51:42,440
 Seeing none I'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

1675
01:51:42,440 --> 01:51:43,440
 Commissioner Smith.

1676
01:51:43,440 --> 01:51:45,240
 Make a motion to approve.

1677
01:51:45,240 --> 01:51:46,240
 Commissioner Anderson.

1678
01:51:46,240 --> 01:51:47,240
 Second.

1679
01:51:47,240 --> 01:51:49,960
 We have a first and a second for approval.

1680
01:51:49,960 --> 01:51:53,600
 Any discussion on this item?

1681
01:51:53,600 --> 01:51:55,840
 Seeing none I'll call for a vote via roll call.

1682
01:51:55,840 --> 01:51:56,840
 Commissioner Pruitt.

1683
01:51:56,840 --> 01:51:57,840
 Aye.

1684
01:51:57,840 --> 01:51:58,840
 Commissioner Smith.

1685
01:51:58,840 --> 01:51:59,840
 Aye.

1686
01:51:59,840 --> 01:52:00,840
 Commissioner McDade.

1687
01:52:00,840 --> 01:52:01,840
 Aye.

1688
01:52:01,840 --> 01:52:02,840
 Chairs an aye.

1689
01:52:02,840 --> 01:52:03,840
 Commissioner Anderson.

1690
01:52:03,840 --> 01:52:04,840
 Aye.

1691
01:52:04,840 --> 01:52:05,840
 Commissioner Ellis.

1692
01:52:05,840 --> 01:52:06,840
 Aye.

1693
01:52:06,840 --> 01:52:09,480
 Motion carries 6-0.

1694
01:52:09,480 --> 01:52:16,160
 Next item of business is item 5BZ20-0005B.

1695
01:52:16,160 --> 01:52:20,280
 I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation and open the public hearing.

1696
01:52:20,280 --> 01:52:23,280
 Good evening.

1697
01:52:23,280 --> 01:52:34,080
 Let me share my presentation.

1698
01:52:34,080 --> 01:52:42,000
 All right.

1699
01:52:42,000 --> 01:52:45,480
 Good evening I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the City of Denton and I am presenting

1700
01:52:45,480 --> 01:52:50,680
 Z20-0005B Denton Commerce Center.

1701
01:52:50,680 --> 01:52:58,000
 So request before you is to rezone approximately 142 acres from mixed use regional MR district

1702
01:52:58,000 --> 01:53:03,640
 to light industrial district that's LI.

1703
01:53:03,640 --> 01:53:08,320
 I'm just a comparison of the current zoning map versus the proposed zoning map.

1704
01:53:08,320 --> 01:53:13,160
 Currently that property has that zoning designation of MR that's that purple and they are proposing

1705
01:53:13,160 --> 01:53:16,320
 to go to that LI.

1706
01:53:16,320 --> 01:53:19,680
 The criteria for approval for a zoning case is in sub chapter 2 of Denton Development

1707
01:53:19,680 --> 01:53:20,680
 Code.

1708
01:53:20,680 --> 01:53:24,960
 It includes both the general and specific criteria.

1709
01:53:24,960 --> 01:53:30,440
 First thing we always look at is the Denton Plan 2030 so that future land use map.

1710
01:53:30,440 --> 01:53:35,080
 The site is designated as business innovation that's intended for large tracts of land that

1711
01:53:35,080 --> 01:53:38,960
 are appropriate for well planned large scale office and employment parks.

1712
01:53:38,960 --> 01:53:46,080
 It also has room for things like supporting uses like retail, hotels, and residential.

1713
01:53:46,080 --> 01:53:50,960
 The typical districts that we see kind of fit within that business innovation future

1714
01:53:50,960 --> 01:53:55,680
 land use designation is our LI and GO.

1715
01:53:55,680 --> 01:54:00,040
 In this instance they are proposing LI which is consistent with the future land use map

1716
01:54:00,040 --> 01:54:04,560
 given the permitted uses as well as development scale.

1717
01:54:04,560 --> 01:54:13,080
 There was a question about the development of the property and those design considerations.

1718
01:54:13,080 --> 01:54:18,040
 The Denton Development Code does require that properties within the LI district, they do

1719
01:54:18,040 --> 01:54:24,160
 have to conform to our commercial development standards any structures within 250 feet of

1720
01:54:24,160 --> 01:54:26,220
 the ultimate right of way.

1721
01:54:26,220 --> 01:54:31,840
 This is kind of an interesting property because there's three rights of way which impact it.

1722
01:54:31,840 --> 01:54:35,800
 You have the FM 1173 on the north.

1723
01:54:35,800 --> 01:54:40,280
 You have I-35 on the east property boundary and then loop 288.

1724
01:54:40,280 --> 01:54:45,720
 I do want to mention that loop 288 there will be a right of way dedication if this is approved

1725
01:54:45,720 --> 01:54:47,800
 and it is developed.

1726
01:54:47,800 --> 01:54:53,320
 When platting occurs they will have to dedicate right of way for that loop 288 extension which

1727
01:54:53,320 --> 01:54:59,500
 will take up a significant portion of that southern portion of the property.

1728
01:54:59,500 --> 01:55:03,960
 So all of those rights of way they would have to conform to those commercial development

1729
01:55:03,960 --> 01:55:10,680
 standards for any structures within 250 feet of any of those rights of way.

1730
01:55:10,680 --> 01:55:15,560
 Also we talked about at work session and we've talked about several times before that small

1731
01:55:15,560 --> 01:55:21,000
 area plan we have had quite a few projects come forward in this general area.

1732
01:55:21,000 --> 01:55:25,480
 There's been a lot of development toward the north side of Denton and so the planning and

1733
01:55:25,480 --> 01:55:30,200
 zoning commission as well as city council have talked to staff and directed staff to

1734
01:55:30,200 --> 01:55:33,000
 move forward with the small area plan.

1735
01:55:33,000 --> 01:55:38,600
 That hasn't yet kicked off but it is something that we are moving forward with in conjunction

1736
01:55:38,600 --> 01:55:43,640
 with our comprehensive plan amendment or I'm sorry our comprehensive plan update.

1737
01:55:43,640 --> 01:55:47,240
 We want to make sure that we have the right design standards and the right permitted uses

1738
01:55:47,240 --> 01:55:51,880
 in these areas.

1739
01:55:51,880 --> 01:55:56,120
 Another criterion for approval is significant changes to warrant the zoning change.

1740
01:55:56,120 --> 01:56:00,680
 So to determine this we had to go back a couple of decades.

1741
01:56:00,680 --> 01:56:03,360
 We looked at the 1999 Denton plan.

1742
01:56:03,360 --> 01:56:09,360
 At that time the thought was that this part of town would be a regional mixed use center.

1743
01:56:09,360 --> 01:56:14,800
 So shopping and maybe higher density residential uses.

1744
01:56:14,800 --> 01:56:20,760
 So you can see this is a snapshot of that 1999 Denton plan.

1745
01:56:20,760 --> 01:56:25,800
 All of that purple was intended to be that regional mixed use center.

1746
01:56:25,800 --> 01:56:28,720
 And the zoning at that time reflected that vision.

1747
01:56:28,720 --> 01:56:32,440
 So it was that regional zoning designation.

1748
01:56:32,440 --> 01:56:39,240
 With the update for our comprehensive plan, for the 2030 plan, we sort of looked at what

1749
01:56:39,240 --> 01:56:44,480
 regional shopping and regional centers we had and determined that those existing ones,

1750
01:56:44,480 --> 01:56:49,320
 the South Loop 288, we had a Denton Enterprise Airport and then at that time Razor Ranch

1751
01:56:49,320 --> 01:56:54,760
 was moving forward, determined that this area was unlikely to develop with that regional

1752
01:56:54,760 --> 01:56:55,760
 shopping.

1753
01:56:55,760 --> 01:57:00,560
 So they sort of kind of came up with a new vision for this area and that was that business

1754
01:57:00,560 --> 01:57:01,560
 innovation.

1755
01:57:01,560 --> 01:57:08,920
 So looking at more of those employment uses, particularly along that 35 corridor.

1756
01:57:08,920 --> 01:57:14,920
 And so that's when that future land use designation changed to that business innovation.

1757
01:57:14,920 --> 01:57:21,120
 The current zoning of MR is sort of a vestige of that 1999 plan.

1758
01:57:21,120 --> 01:57:27,040
 When we implemented the 2019 Denton Development Code, all of those older zoning districts

1759
01:57:27,040 --> 01:57:32,160
 just sort of transitioned to comparable districts or compatible districts.

1760
01:57:32,160 --> 01:57:36,400
 So it really just sort of moved that 1999 plan forward.

1761
01:57:36,400 --> 01:57:42,960
 However, that isn't consistent with the current vision of the area.

1762
01:57:42,960 --> 01:57:47,100
 This criterion minimizes adverse impacts on surrounding property.

1763
01:57:47,100 --> 01:57:53,680
 The subject site, as you can see in this little inset here, is sort of kind of in the middle

1764
01:57:53,680 --> 01:57:57,000
 of a business innovation future land use designation.

1765
01:57:57,000 --> 01:58:00,880
 Currently, much of the surrounding property is undeveloped.

1766
01:58:00,880 --> 01:58:05,080
 It's either agricultural uses or just undeveloped property.

1767
01:58:05,080 --> 01:58:11,040
 However, given that future land use designation, we do anticipate that the surrounding properties

1768
01:58:11,040 --> 01:58:17,720
 will develop in a manner consistent with our future land use map and that business innovation,

1769
01:58:17,720 --> 01:58:21,720
 and that LI district, the permitted uses within it are consistent with that.

1770
01:58:21,720 --> 01:58:27,360
 And so we anticipate that that will continue to develop in a like manner.

1771
01:58:27,360 --> 01:58:35,300
 One question we had at the work session was kind of what that means and what those employment

1772
01:58:35,300 --> 01:58:36,300
 uses mean.

1773
01:58:36,300 --> 01:58:42,480
 So I put together this slide on the break just to kind of talk about especially those

1774
01:58:42,480 --> 01:58:48,280
 employment uses comparing the existing zoning with those two districts that we typically

1775
01:58:48,280 --> 01:58:51,100
 see in that business innovation.

1776
01:58:51,100 --> 01:58:53,440
 This isn't all the uses.

1777
01:58:53,440 --> 01:58:56,680
 There's an exhibit in your backup that has all of the uses in the Debt and Development

1778
01:58:56,680 --> 01:58:57,680
 Code.

1779
01:58:57,680 --> 01:59:02,240
 I just sort of pulled out some of those kind of more employment uses.

1780
01:59:02,240 --> 01:59:09,760
 And you can see that while there are some minor differences, there are – GEO and LI

1781
01:59:09,760 --> 01:59:14,560
 are fairly comparable, and it's somewhat comparable to that MR as well.

1782
01:59:14,560 --> 01:59:20,160
 These are a lot of our more intense uses in more intense districts.

1783
01:59:20,160 --> 01:59:25,120
 So they allow – all of these zoning districts allow a lot of those employment uses.

1784
01:59:25,120 --> 01:59:30,960
 GEO and LI are a little more toward that employment, a little less commercial.

1785
01:59:30,960 --> 01:59:33,620
 They don't have as many residential uses as the MR.

1786
01:59:33,620 --> 01:59:39,140
 They really kind of stick to more of those employment uses.

1787
01:59:39,140 --> 01:59:43,240
 Public facilities and services available to serve the property.

1788
01:59:43,240 --> 01:59:46,220
 We look at transportation and water and wastewater.

1789
01:59:46,220 --> 01:59:53,040
 There is adequate access to the site from I-35 and FM 1173 at this time.

1790
01:59:53,040 --> 01:59:56,720
 This is kind of turned a little funny that north is this direction.

1791
01:59:56,720 --> 01:59:58,800
 This is 1173 right here.

1792
01:59:58,800 --> 02:00:01,300
 This is that I-35 corridor.

1793
02:00:01,300 --> 02:00:07,320
 This is Loop 288, and this is a schematic from the – from the tech stop plans for

1794
02:00:07,320 --> 02:00:10,740
 that I-35 corridor and the expansion.

1795
02:00:10,740 --> 02:00:14,240
 There are future improvements planned for I-35.

1796
02:00:14,240 --> 02:00:17,780
 Those are moving along, as well as Loop 288.

1797
02:00:17,780 --> 02:00:20,080
 Loop 288 is moving along as well.

1798
02:00:20,080 --> 02:00:25,960
 It's under the design phase right now, and we'll get under construction within the

1799
02:00:25,960 --> 02:00:26,960
 decade.

1800
02:00:26,960 --> 02:00:32,300
 So that – kind of the intent is to really push that Loop 288 forward and connect that

1801
02:00:32,300 --> 02:00:33,480
 toward the south.

1802
02:00:33,480 --> 02:00:37,880
 There's also a concurrent comprehensive plan amendment related to mobility that we'll

1803
02:00:37,880 --> 02:00:39,560
 be talking about next.

1804
02:00:39,560 --> 02:00:42,480
 There are water and wastewater available to the site.

1805
02:00:42,480 --> 02:00:45,560
 Sewer – a new list station may be required.

1806
02:00:45,560 --> 02:00:50,000
 That will all be determined if this is approved at that platting stage.

1807
02:00:50,000 --> 02:00:52,800
 Public outreach was sent out.

1808
02:00:52,800 --> 02:00:59,560
 We haven't received any in favor or opposition to this project for the zoning part.

1809
02:00:59,560 --> 02:01:03,720
 So based upon the criteria for approval, staff does recommend approval of the request.

1810
02:01:03,720 --> 02:01:08,080
 It's consistent with the comprehensive plan, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

1811
02:01:08,080 --> 02:01:11,240
 And the applicant is here, and he also has a presentation as well.

1812
02:01:11,240 --> 02:01:12,240
 Great.

1813
02:01:12,240 --> 02:01:13,240
 Commissioner Smith.

1814
02:01:13,240 --> 02:01:14,240
 Thank you, Chair.

1815
02:01:14,240 --> 02:01:18,080
 Julie, I know this is a straight zoning case, but for whatever is – whatever would be

1816
02:01:18,080 --> 02:01:21,880
 on this site if the zoning was approved, what would be the best point of access to that

1817
02:01:21,880 --> 02:01:22,880
 site itself?

1818
02:01:22,880 --> 02:01:23,880
 Would it be off 1173?

1819
02:01:23,880 --> 02:01:28,120
 Would it be entrances on a long road, I mean, out of the way of the right of way, off of

1820
02:01:28,120 --> 02:01:33,180
 the access road of 35, off of an access road, off of the 288 expansion, all three?

1821
02:01:33,180 --> 02:01:37,220
 The applicant has actually already started discussions with TextDOT to kind of figure

1822
02:01:37,220 --> 02:01:41,320
 out where those access points will be, and so they might – may be able to talk further

1823
02:01:41,320 --> 02:01:45,420
 about kind of what their – what their ideas are, but they would have access to all three

1824
02:01:45,420 --> 02:01:46,420
 of those roads.

1825
02:01:46,420 --> 02:01:52,840
 Of course, Loop 288 is not quite as much because there isn't – that road's not there yet.

1826
02:01:52,840 --> 02:01:58,720
 In terms of the mobility plan, FM 1173, that road's actually going to kind of shift to

1827
02:01:58,720 --> 02:01:59,720
 the north.

1828
02:01:59,720 --> 02:02:04,160
 However, that current alignment is going to remain in place as a secondary arterial.

1829
02:02:04,160 --> 02:02:08,520
 So under the current mobility plan or that draft mobility plan, they would have access

1830
02:02:08,520 --> 02:02:13,120
 to that road as well as 35 and then at some point in the future, Loop 288 as well.

1831
02:02:13,120 --> 02:02:14,120
 Okay.

1832
02:02:14,120 --> 02:02:15,120
 Another question.

1833
02:02:15,120 --> 02:02:22,000
 Talking about the right of way that's being taken up on that land, with 30 – with it

1834
02:02:22,000 --> 02:02:27,720
 kind of being somewhat of a U-shape with that 250-foot buffer, and then 288 having essentially

1835
02:02:27,720 --> 02:02:31,240
 probably flyovers down on the extension.

1836
02:02:31,240 --> 02:02:37,800
 So at the very beginning, if this zoning was approved, that 250 ROW would be essentially

1837
02:02:37,800 --> 02:02:39,280
 codified, right?

1838
02:02:39,280 --> 02:02:44,160
 And then if their – whenever a design comes back with the 288 expansion, that right of

1839
02:02:44,160 --> 02:02:49,160
 way would then be reset once the flyover or whatever the interchange is between 288 and

1840
02:02:49,160 --> 02:02:50,160
 35.

1841
02:02:50,160 --> 02:02:53,560
 How does that get reset and how does that affect the zoning and the planning and everything

1842
02:02:53,560 --> 02:02:57,720
 else in this project, even if we were to approve it to go through and start that process?

1843
02:02:57,720 --> 02:03:04,160
 Well, I think the I-35 corridor, that right of way dedication could be pretty easily discernible

1844
02:03:04,160 --> 02:03:09,720
 because that design is further along and they're further along in those plans.

1845
02:03:09,720 --> 02:03:12,740
 Loop 288, that is still under design.

1846
02:03:12,740 --> 02:03:16,640
 Our city staff works pretty closely with TxDOT there.

1847
02:03:16,640 --> 02:03:19,880
 They have at least a monthly meeting.

1848
02:03:19,880 --> 02:03:23,000
 They often have more meetings than that with TxDOT.

1849
02:03:23,000 --> 02:03:28,400
 So we would try to determine what that right – that correct right of way dedication is

1850
02:03:28,400 --> 02:03:35,400
 at that platting stage and get that – at that time, if for some reason there were some

1851
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:40,180
 minor changes, an additional right of way would need to be acquired by TxDOT in order

1852
02:03:40,180 --> 02:03:45,000
 to accommodate their final design of the road, then TxDOT would have to acquire that right

1853
02:03:45,000 --> 02:03:46,000
 of way.

1854
02:03:46,000 --> 02:03:47,000
 Okay.

1855
02:03:47,000 --> 02:03:48,000
 Got it.

1856
02:03:48,000 --> 02:03:49,000
 Thank you.

1857
02:03:49,000 --> 02:03:50,000
 Sure.

1858
02:03:50,000 --> 02:03:52,200
 Any other questions for Julie?

1859
02:03:52,200 --> 02:03:54,360
 Thanks, Julie.

1860
02:03:54,360 --> 02:04:05,480
 I'll invite the applicant to present and if you could just state your name and address

1861
02:04:05,480 --> 02:04:06,480
 for the record.

1862
02:04:06,480 --> 02:04:10,320
 I'm going to go ahead and share your presentation, okay?

1863
02:04:10,320 --> 02:04:11,320
 Is that it?

1864
02:04:11,320 --> 02:04:12,320
 I'm sorry.

1865
02:04:12,320 --> 02:04:13,320
 Andrew?

1866
02:04:13,320 --> 02:04:14,320
 I think you just state your name and address for the record.

1867
02:04:14,320 --> 02:04:15,320
 Hi.

1868
02:04:15,320 --> 02:04:16,320
 My name is Todd Finley.

1869
02:04:16,320 --> 02:04:17,320
 I'm with CLX Ventures.

1870
02:04:17,320 --> 02:04:19,580
 Thanks, first of all, for having me here.

1871
02:04:19,580 --> 02:04:23,800
 My co-founder – our co-founder, Brad Copeland, is also here, so just wanted to run through

1872
02:04:23,800 --> 02:04:28,080
 a quick little presentation and I'll answer some of your questions and whatever questions

1873
02:04:28,080 --> 02:04:31,760
 you guys may have.

1874
02:04:31,760 --> 02:04:38,840
 So let me make sure I don't mess this up.

1875
02:04:38,840 --> 02:04:40,840
 We're CLX Ventures.

1876
02:04:40,840 --> 02:04:45,000
 We are a local group.

1877
02:04:45,000 --> 02:04:49,080
 I've been doing industrial for the last 15 years prior to this, so I was with Hillwood

1878
02:04:49,080 --> 02:04:50,880
 Investment Properties.

1879
02:04:50,880 --> 02:04:57,640
 Brad Copeland and Tony Long, our co-founders – Tony was with CBRE for 30 years, Trammell

1880
02:04:57,640 --> 02:05:02,880
 Crowe as well, and Brad Copeland was also with Trammell Crowe, Crowe Holdings and Clarion

1881
02:05:02,880 --> 02:05:05,440
 Partners.

1882
02:05:05,440 --> 02:05:12,680
 And Eli Ellis is our VP of all our financials.

1883
02:05:12,680 --> 02:05:18,720
 Just development activity, this is just – we only focus in the state of Texas.

1884
02:05:18,720 --> 02:05:22,560
 We've done our share of travel over the years, so we're kind of trying to stay local.

1885
02:05:22,560 --> 02:05:28,360
 So this is just – we do multifamily and industrial, Brad and I focus mainly on industrial,

1886
02:05:28,360 --> 02:05:33,440
 and so this is just kind of the areas we're at in Texas, showing our pipeline and what

1887
02:05:33,440 --> 02:05:37,600
 we've done.

1888
02:05:37,600 --> 02:05:42,880
 This is a – Julie and I have been working on this project together for the last eight

1889
02:05:42,880 --> 02:05:48,840
 and a half months, and she thought it would be helpful to show a rendering of something

1890
02:05:48,840 --> 02:05:50,600
 we've done in the past.

1891
02:05:50,600 --> 02:05:53,800
 This is at DFW Airport.

1892
02:05:53,800 --> 02:05:58,600
 It's – the top picture on the right is the rendering, and then the picture after

1893
02:05:58,600 --> 02:06:03,160
 it is an actual – we have, you know, tons of different photos just to show the type

1894
02:06:03,160 --> 02:06:07,520
 of product we do, where, you know, a lot of times you get renderings and then the actual

1895
02:06:07,520 --> 02:06:11,320
 building comes out and it's like this – this doesn't look anything like the rendering.

1896
02:06:11,320 --> 02:06:18,240
 So typical tilt wall, everything you see from Alliance to the stuff that's going, you

1897
02:06:18,240 --> 02:06:35,180
 know, Exeter is doing, and all throughout the DFW is what we do.

1898
02:06:35,180 --> 02:06:36,800
 Yeah Amazon took this building.

1899
02:06:36,800 --> 02:06:48,120
 It's a million footer, 40 foot clear, and they leased that a year ago from us.

1900
02:06:48,120 --> 02:06:54,160
 These are just the specifications for it, just to give you kind of an idea, it's ESFR.

1901
02:06:54,160 --> 02:06:55,640
 That building was a 40 foot clear.

1902
02:06:55,640 --> 02:07:01,000
 What we're proposing is some 36 foot clear and then some smaller stuff, 32 foot clear,

1903
02:07:01,000 --> 02:07:03,740
 that fronts 35.

1904
02:07:03,740 --> 02:07:09,540
 Trailer storage.

1905
02:07:09,540 --> 02:07:16,760
 This is just talking about nothing that anyone in this room doesn't know, just how hot

1906
02:07:16,760 --> 02:07:23,000
 the economic environment is in the state of Texas and in DFW and Denton, I'm sure you

1907
02:07:23,000 --> 02:07:28,540
 guys know better than us, but it's a desired place to be and so we're looking forward

1908
02:07:28,540 --> 02:07:36,440
 to being a part of it.

1909
02:07:36,440 --> 02:07:42,760
 This was another building we did in Dallas off of Interstate 20, just similar to the

1910
02:07:42,760 --> 02:07:44,640
 one at DFW, a little bit different.

1911
02:07:44,640 --> 02:07:50,480
 We use the same designer, so it just kind of gives you an idea of the storefront, the

1912
02:07:50,480 --> 02:07:56,340
 glass, and the tilt wall.

1913
02:07:56,340 --> 02:08:05,240
 This is a project that Brad and I did in Houston off of I-45, and so same kind of look, colors.

1914
02:08:05,240 --> 02:08:12,440
 I can send you guys this package or any photos if you need any.

1915
02:08:12,440 --> 02:08:18,280
 One thing I was going to answer, Tim, your question, the right-of-way, our civil engineer

1916
02:08:18,280 --> 02:08:26,240
 is PKE and they are the civil engineer for TxDOT, so they're already working on that

1917
02:08:26,240 --> 02:08:28,640
 right-of-way at 288.

1918
02:08:28,640 --> 02:08:36,520
 The I-35 right-of-way has already been dedicated and purchased by TxDOT, so everything along

1919
02:08:36,520 --> 02:08:41,840
 I-35 that borders this has already been taken by TxDOT.

1920
02:08:41,840 --> 02:08:46,840
 The 288 right-of-way, we are working with TxDOT since we were using the same civil engineer.

1921
02:08:46,840 --> 02:08:51,320
 We know where that right-of-way line is, so we have that worked through.

1922
02:08:51,320 --> 02:08:54,600
 We have the future driveways from 288.

1923
02:08:54,600 --> 02:09:01,040
 288 is a ways out, I'll just say that, as far as when it goes to let and when it will

1924
02:09:01,040 --> 02:09:02,040
 actually get built.

1925
02:09:02,040 --> 02:09:06,800
 I think it's in eight years from now that it potentially just the frunge rows will go

1926
02:09:06,800 --> 02:09:10,760
 all the way through, but we've already been coordinating where those future drives will

1927
02:09:10,760 --> 02:09:11,760
 be.

1928
02:09:11,760 --> 02:09:18,320
 The I-35, that works coming in the next three years, and so we've been coordinating with

1929
02:09:18,320 --> 02:09:19,320
 them as well.

1930
02:09:19,320 --> 02:09:26,400
 So we'll have access points from 1173, and then we'll have another access point just

1931
02:09:26,400 --> 02:09:31,680
 south of that that will tie into the new frontage road for I-35.

1932
02:09:31,680 --> 02:09:37,560
 And then we'll have access points once the 288 frontage road is extended in the future.

1933
02:09:37,560 --> 02:09:38,560
 So we're still working through that.

1934
02:09:38,560 --> 02:09:44,680
 I've probably had eight calls with TXDOT and the city of Denton at the same time.

1935
02:09:44,680 --> 02:09:50,160
 We're working on a temporary access through 288 to the southern part of our site now.

1936
02:09:50,160 --> 02:09:55,880
 I've got another in-person meeting with TXDOT in a couple weeks.

1937
02:09:55,880 --> 02:09:56,880
 Great.

1938
02:09:56,880 --> 02:09:59,840
 I appreciate the presentation.

1939
02:09:59,840 --> 02:10:00,840
 Any questions?

1940
02:10:00,840 --> 02:10:01,840
 Oh, Commissioner Smith.

1941
02:10:01,840 --> 02:10:02,840
 Thank you, Chair.

1942
02:10:02,840 --> 02:10:03,840
 Brad?

1943
02:10:03,840 --> 02:10:04,840
 Todd.

1944
02:10:04,840 --> 02:10:05,840
 Todd, sorry.

1945
02:10:05,840 --> 02:10:06,840
 My apologies.

1946
02:10:06,840 --> 02:10:15,360
 So a couple things just to confirm, you said access points would be off 1173 and then obviously

1947
02:10:15,360 --> 02:10:19,400
 off 35, once those access points are granted in about three years, once that starts.

1948
02:10:19,400 --> 02:10:24,480
 And then probably access points off 288 as well, once that right-of-way gets cut.

1949
02:10:24,480 --> 02:10:31,640
 We're trying to get access point off of 288 less than three years, but right-of-way we'll

1950
02:10:31,640 --> 02:10:39,000
 have two access points, 1173 and then another piece that we will, you know, where the paper

1951
02:10:39,000 --> 02:10:42,800
 clip, I don't know if you know the little U-turn that you go west on 288, we'll have

1952
02:10:42,800 --> 02:10:47,320
 a north, actually where the water tower is, just north of that, we'll have a tie-in to

1953
02:10:47,320 --> 02:10:48,320
 the future frontage.

1954
02:10:48,320 --> 02:10:49,320
 Okay.

1955
02:10:49,320 --> 02:10:50,320
 And so.

1956
02:10:50,320 --> 02:10:54,880
 So yeah, I guess with it kind of coming from all three areas, all three sides, everything,

1957
02:10:54,880 --> 02:10:59,540
 but the railroad, which you probably shouldn't have an access point there, that'd be weird.

1958
02:10:59,540 --> 02:11:03,160
 What would, kind of where would you, I know this is a straight zoning case, so we're not

1959
02:11:03,160 --> 02:11:07,280
 talking about exactly plotting and where the building would be located, but in your opinion

1960
02:11:07,280 --> 02:11:12,540
 as a developer, where would the property, if this were to be zoned, where would this

1961
02:11:12,540 --> 02:11:14,060
 property be located on that?

1962
02:11:14,060 --> 02:11:18,240
 Would it be closer, as close to 35 as you possibly can, would it be further set back

1963
02:11:18,240 --> 02:11:21,400
 away from 35, closer to the railroad?

1964
02:11:21,400 --> 02:11:30,560
 It will be, where the right-of-way is, that's been dedicated, our building, our front building

1965
02:11:30,560 --> 02:11:35,400
 will be a rear load, meaning the dock doors will be in the back, so this is something

1966
02:11:35,400 --> 02:11:41,000
 that I've worked through with Julie and her team for a long time, and so we want to make

1967
02:11:41,000 --> 02:11:45,840
 that to where there's no dock doors as you're coming across 35, and so we'll have also a

1968
02:11:45,840 --> 02:11:47,920
 detention pond in front of that.

1969
02:11:47,920 --> 02:11:54,200
 So it's gonna be pretty far, our first building is gonna be pretty far away from the frontage

1970
02:11:54,200 --> 02:11:55,200
 road.

1971
02:11:55,200 --> 02:11:59,200
 Yeah, I was looking at the map, I was measuring it out, and it looks like from where 35 exists

1972
02:11:59,200 --> 02:12:04,720
 now to that railroad, it's about give or take where you are, because the railroad comes across

1973
02:12:04,720 --> 02:12:09,360
 at an angle from west to east, and so if you're looking at it as, you know, it's about three

1974
02:12:09,360 --> 02:12:14,720
 quarters of a mile away from 35, so you're probably talking about a quarter of a mile.

1975
02:12:14,720 --> 02:12:19,900
 So we'll have a building up close to the frontage of our property set back from a detention,

1976
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:24,160
 and then we'll have other buildings behind that, but they'll be, you know, just south

1977
02:12:24,160 --> 02:12:31,880
 of 1173, and then access points north of the future, eight years from now, 288 frontage

1978
02:12:31,880 --> 02:12:32,880
 road.

1979
02:12:32,880 --> 02:12:33,880
 Sure.

1980
02:12:33,880 --> 02:12:39,280
 And I would assume that it'd probably be designed as a more industrial actual manufacturing

1981
02:12:39,280 --> 02:12:45,400
 the backside of it, and more of whatever would be, if this development would need some sort

1982
02:12:45,400 --> 02:12:49,080
 of office or clerical pieces, it would be up front, closer to 35.

1983
02:12:49,080 --> 02:12:53,080
 I would assume that's what you guys, in your past projects, is that kind of the way you

1984
02:12:53,080 --> 02:12:54,080
 approach that?

1985
02:12:54,080 --> 02:13:01,240
 Yeah, I mean everything we do is distribution, and so this is speculative, so if an Amazon

1986
02:13:01,240 --> 02:13:06,520
 comes and leases something, so they may need, you know, 45,000 square feet of office or

1987
02:13:06,520 --> 02:13:07,520
 something like that.

1988
02:13:07,520 --> 02:13:12,160
 But we always have, you know, entrances where we believe need to be, and that's where we

1989
02:13:12,160 --> 02:13:16,540
 dress up with storefront, the glass and stuff that I was showing earlier.

1990
02:13:16,540 --> 02:13:20,920
 And so, you know, the front building, what I'm saying, was...

1991
02:13:20,920 --> 02:13:23,520
 Like, take that one that you talked about in Houston there.

1992
02:13:23,520 --> 02:13:25,280
 Yeah, so right here.

1993
02:13:25,280 --> 02:13:28,560
 There's warehousing and distribution and whatnot that's backside of it, and that's the closest

1994
02:13:28,560 --> 02:13:32,520
 point of access, or the main facade piece that people are seeing when they're traveling down

1995
02:13:32,520 --> 02:13:33,520
 main thoroughfares.

1996
02:13:33,520 --> 02:13:40,520
 What we are planning on orientating, when you drive by 35, you won't see dock doors.

1997
02:13:40,520 --> 02:13:45,760
 You'll see storefront glass, not this exact one, and then you'll also, you see where these

1998
02:13:45,760 --> 02:13:48,360
 dock doors are, you won't see that.

1999
02:13:48,360 --> 02:13:53,680
 There'll be probably two or three more storefront entrances, and so that's kind of where we

2000
02:13:53,680 --> 02:13:55,560
 said, "Okay, let's try to have that."

2001
02:13:55,560 --> 02:14:01,740
 But then buildings behind that towards the railroad will have, you know, placed.

2002
02:14:01,740 --> 02:14:08,560
 Right now, we have the dock doors not even facing an 1173 or 288, so...

2003
02:14:08,560 --> 02:14:09,560
 Okay.

2004
02:14:09,560 --> 02:14:10,560
 Be facing the railroad, pretty much.

2005
02:14:10,560 --> 02:14:11,560
 Pretty much, yeah.

2006
02:14:11,560 --> 02:14:12,560
 Okay.

2007
02:14:12,560 --> 02:14:13,560
 All right.

2008
02:14:13,560 --> 02:14:14,560
 Thanks.

2009
02:14:14,560 --> 02:14:19,480
 But we're following, you know, all the ordinances, all the guidelines, and all the...

2010
02:14:19,480 --> 02:14:22,060
 Thank you.

2011
02:14:22,060 --> 02:14:24,920
 Any other questions for the applicant?

2012
02:14:24,920 --> 02:14:25,920
 Chris Anderson.

2013
02:14:25,920 --> 02:14:26,920
 Thanks, Chair.

2014
02:14:26,920 --> 02:14:34,800
 You all are planning on building just strictly industrial distribution centers, right there,

2015
02:14:34,800 --> 02:14:35,800
 correct?

2016
02:14:35,800 --> 02:14:37,760
 That's our current plan, yes, sir.

2017
02:14:37,760 --> 02:14:38,760
 Okay.

2018
02:14:38,760 --> 02:14:39,760
 Thanks.

2019
02:14:39,760 --> 02:14:45,720
 I don't see any other questions at this time.

2020
02:14:45,720 --> 02:14:50,000
 I appreciate you being here for presentation and being here to answer questions.

2021
02:14:50,000 --> 02:14:51,000
 Thank you.

2022
02:14:51,000 --> 02:14:52,000
 Okay.

2023
02:14:52,000 --> 02:14:53,000
 Thank you.

2024
02:14:53,000 --> 02:14:54,000
 Rachel, is anyone calling in for this item?

2025
02:14:54,000 --> 02:14:55,000
 No callers, Chair.

2026
02:14:55,000 --> 02:14:59,520
 This is a public hearing.

2027
02:14:59,520 --> 02:15:09,100
 Anyone wishing to speak on this item can certainly do so, if you have thoughts or comments.

2028
02:15:09,100 --> 02:15:14,440
 Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and then turn it to the dais for a

2029
02:15:14,440 --> 02:15:15,960
 motion and then some discussion.

2030
02:15:15,960 --> 02:15:16,960
 Commissioner Smith.

2031
02:15:16,960 --> 02:15:20,520
 I'm going to make a motion to approve staff recommendations.

2032
02:15:20,520 --> 02:15:26,320
 I think it's a...certainly we've seen this when we voted on the Hirschbach property that

2033
02:15:26,320 --> 02:15:30,760
 was on the east side of 35 down 77.

2034
02:15:30,760 --> 02:15:35,400
 It seems like the right of way and the way to be chiseling away that a lot of the fear

2035
02:15:35,400 --> 02:15:39,920
 that we brought up in work session might be very mitigated by the amount of right of way

2036
02:15:39,920 --> 02:15:44,440
 that's the front pushing most of this development further off 35.

2037
02:15:44,440 --> 02:15:49,280
 That makes me feel a little more comfortable that this is really in that section of town

2038
02:15:49,280 --> 02:15:51,800
 that is meant to be for that industrial piece.

2039
02:15:51,800 --> 02:15:57,120
 So with that being said, my comments being said, I think that the motion stands.

2040
02:15:57,120 --> 02:15:59,080
 We have a first for approval.

2041
02:15:59,080 --> 02:16:01,080
 Commissioner Ellis.

2042
02:16:01,080 --> 02:16:03,400
 I'll second.

2043
02:16:03,400 --> 02:16:07,480
 We have a first and a second for approval.

2044
02:16:07,480 --> 02:16:08,480
 Any discussion on this item?

2045
02:16:08,480 --> 02:16:09,480
 Commissioner Ellis.

2046
02:16:09,480 --> 02:16:10,480
 Thank you.

2047
02:16:10,480 --> 02:16:11,480
 Yeah.

2048
02:16:11,480 --> 02:16:14,480
 I just had a few comments.

2049
02:16:14,480 --> 02:16:20,760
 I was a big proponent of getting the small area plan underway, and it was namely for

2050
02:16:20,760 --> 02:16:22,920
 that other side of the freeway.

2051
02:16:22,920 --> 02:16:27,880
 That's what, in my opinion, we need to figure out as a city and as people are entering that

2052
02:16:27,880 --> 02:16:32,740
 more residential and that part of Denton.

2053
02:16:32,740 --> 02:16:37,920
 This side of the freeway does seem to be headed this way into warehousing.

2054
02:16:37,920 --> 02:16:43,280
 Warehousing does bring jobs, hopefully we can get some good leases in these buildings

2055
02:16:43,280 --> 02:16:45,520
 and some good jobs for the city.

2056
02:16:45,520 --> 02:16:51,640
 But I'm okay with the zoning change on that side of the freeway.

2057
02:16:51,640 --> 02:16:52,640
 Any other discussion?

2058
02:16:52,640 --> 02:17:01,680
 Before I call for a vote, I would probably echo Commissioner Ellis's thoughts, but also

2059
02:17:01,680 --> 02:17:03,360
 Commissioner Smith's.

2060
02:17:03,360 --> 02:17:10,040
 In my finite mind, I think about the business innovation area of Denton being corporate

2061
02:17:10,040 --> 02:17:15,920
 headquarters and campuses and parks that we see down in Plano and in Southlake.

2062
02:17:15,920 --> 02:17:21,440
 I think it'd be an inviting way into the city, but to Commissioner Ellis's point, that makes

2063
02:17:21,440 --> 02:17:24,280
 a lot of sense on the east side.

2064
02:17:24,280 --> 02:17:30,320
 This plot of land is kind of quirky with the right of ways and it's kind of being tucked

2065
02:17:30,320 --> 02:17:36,040
 into a pretty, could be a big interchange in the future.

2066
02:17:36,040 --> 02:17:42,000
 I don't know if a grandiose corporate headquarters and campus is going to be found at that spot.

2067
02:17:42,000 --> 02:17:47,040
 That being said, if there's someone here who can employ locals and provide some jobs here

2068
02:17:47,040 --> 02:17:50,280
 in Denton, I'm in support of the project.

2069
02:17:50,280 --> 02:17:53,440
 With that, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

2070
02:17:53,440 --> 02:17:54,440
 Commissioner Pruitt?

2071
02:17:54,440 --> 02:17:55,440
 Aye.

2072
02:17:55,440 --> 02:17:56,440
 Commissioner Smith?

2073
02:17:56,440 --> 02:17:57,440
 Aye.

2074
02:17:57,440 --> 02:17:58,440
 Commissioner McDade?

2075
02:17:58,440 --> 02:17:59,440
 Aye.

2076
02:17:59,440 --> 02:18:00,440
 Chair is an aye.

2077
02:18:00,440 --> 02:18:01,440
 Commissioner Anderson?

2078
02:18:01,440 --> 02:18:02,440
 Nay.

2079
02:18:02,440 --> 02:18:03,440
 Commissioner Ellis?

2080
02:18:03,440 --> 02:18:04,440
 Aye.

2081
02:18:04,440 --> 02:18:06,400
 This motion carries 5-1.

2082
02:18:06,400 --> 02:18:07,400
 Congratulations.

2083
02:18:07,400 --> 02:18:14,320
 The next item of business is item 5C, CA21-0001.

2084
02:18:14,320 --> 02:18:20,080
 And I'll invite Julie back out for presentation and open the public hearing.

2085
02:18:20,080 --> 02:18:34,280
 Okay, let me ... This is CA21-0001, Denton Commerce Center.

2086
02:18:34,280 --> 02:18:40,800
 Before we get too into the request, I just want to talk briefly about mobility planning

2087
02:18:40,800 --> 02:18:41,800
 in Denton.

2088
02:18:41,800 --> 02:18:46,600
 It is a component of our comprehensive plan, so it is one of the chapters of our comprehensive

2089
02:18:46,600 --> 02:18:47,880
 plan.

2090
02:18:47,880 --> 02:18:52,360
 The mobility plan is intended to establish the future roadway network, but that also

2091
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:58,120
 includes both pedestrian and bicycle networks, not just cars.

2092
02:18:58,120 --> 02:19:06,200
 The mobility plan is intended to be modified and amended over time and updated intermittently.

2093
02:19:06,200 --> 02:19:11,160
 And that can either be in response to a specific request, like tonight, or as part of the comprehensive

2094
02:19:11,160 --> 02:19:12,160
 plan amendment.

2095
02:19:12,160 --> 02:19:17,360
 And that is something that the city has undertaken and is currently updating our mobility plan,

2096
02:19:17,360 --> 02:19:22,680
 kind of running in parallel fashion with the update of our comprehensive plan.

2097
02:19:22,680 --> 02:19:28,700
 And the mobility plan establishes our transportation networks and that defined hierarchy of roads.

2098
02:19:28,700 --> 02:19:34,440
 So we've got our large highways, which funnels to our smaller arterials, to then our smaller

2099
02:19:34,440 --> 02:19:40,120
 secondary arterials, then to our eventually collectors and neighborhood streets, which

2100
02:19:40,120 --> 02:19:42,120
 aren't always all on the plan.

2101
02:19:42,120 --> 02:19:47,880
 It's usually those larger roads, but it does create, establish that hierarchy of roads.

2102
02:19:47,880 --> 02:19:56,420
 Our current plan was adopted in early 2016, and that replaced our 1998 plan.

2103
02:19:56,420 --> 02:19:59,320
 I show it as the 2011 mobility plan.

2104
02:19:59,320 --> 02:20:05,520
 That's because it was amended over time, and the last iteration was 2011.

2105
02:20:05,520 --> 02:20:11,360
 So those two plans, or the 2016, replaced that 1998.

2106
02:20:11,360 --> 02:20:15,240
 And as I mentioned, the update is currently underway.

2107
02:20:15,240 --> 02:20:18,600
 So now we'll get to the request.

2108
02:20:18,600 --> 02:20:28,240
 With that adoption of the 2016 plan, the mobility plan reclassified what is a neighborhood street,

2109
02:20:28,240 --> 02:20:31,240
 Cindy Lane, to a secondary arterial.

2110
02:20:31,240 --> 02:20:39,720
 So that it would extend from its connection to US 380 at that signalized intersection,

2111
02:20:39,720 --> 02:20:45,800
 all the way north to FM 156.

2112
02:20:45,800 --> 02:20:52,360
 Under Denton Development Code Section 7.8.7, if a development includes a corridor that

2113
02:20:52,360 --> 02:20:58,240
 is shown on our mobility plan, that developer has to dedicate that right of way and sometimes

2114
02:20:58,240 --> 02:20:59,240
 build that road.

2115
02:20:59,240 --> 02:21:03,520
 And that's something that y'all have seen in platting from time to time.

2116
02:21:03,520 --> 02:21:08,040
 So that's pretty standard for developments.

2117
02:21:08,040 --> 02:21:13,160
 In this instance, the applicant would like to revise the mobility plan to remove that

2118
02:21:13,160 --> 02:21:17,600
 section of Cindy Lane, which runs north and south to the center of the site.

2119
02:21:17,600 --> 02:21:20,720
 So here you can see the site right here outlined in yellow.

2120
02:21:20,720 --> 02:21:29,160
 And here's that mobility plan, that Cindy Lane in that green dotted line, and they are

2121
02:21:29,160 --> 02:21:34,880
 proposing to remove it from their site.

2122
02:21:34,880 --> 02:21:40,620
 So I wanted to take a look at the current mobility plan versus that draft mobility plan.

2123
02:21:40,620 --> 02:21:44,520
 Here we show that current plan, showing Cindy Lane.

2124
02:21:44,520 --> 02:21:52,400
 Here's where it connects to US 380 and western center to the south.

2125
02:21:52,400 --> 02:21:59,420
 Goes all the way up, crosses the railroad track, and then on to parts north.

2126
02:21:59,420 --> 02:22:03,480
 The proposed mobility plan sort of simplifies it, kind of takes some of those collectors

2127
02:22:03,480 --> 02:22:14,540
 out, provides a little more simplified and grid of those arterial roadways, and it does

2128
02:22:14,540 --> 02:22:19,880
 remove Cindy Lane, kind of converts it back to what it was, that neighborhood street,

2129
02:22:19,880 --> 02:22:29,360
 and then relies on the loop 288 and I-35 corridor and at some point in the future Windsor to

2130
02:22:29,360 --> 02:22:33,320
 move that traffic around in the area.

2131
02:22:33,320 --> 02:22:39,320
 And the proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan.

2132
02:22:39,320 --> 02:22:43,440
 Criteria for approval for all applications is in subchapter two.

2133
02:22:43,440 --> 02:22:46,920
 And because the mobility plan is a part of the comprehensive plan, it goes through the

2134
02:22:46,920 --> 02:22:53,760
 comprehensive plan amendment process, that specific criteria is also in subchapter two.

2135
02:22:53,760 --> 02:22:57,840
 There's two subsections to the criteria for approval.

2136
02:22:57,840 --> 02:23:03,520
 The first subsection, they have to meet at least one of those criterion, and then there

2137
02:23:03,520 --> 02:23:07,560
 are additional review standards.

2138
02:23:07,560 --> 02:23:10,660
 So first, I want to talk about didn't plan 2030.

2139
02:23:10,660 --> 02:23:15,280
 We're not really talking about the future land use map per se, but it does, the two

2140
02:23:15,280 --> 02:23:19,980
 things inform each other, so I want to talk a little bit about the map before the analysis.

2141
02:23:19,980 --> 02:23:24,460
 So the subject property is shown with that red star.

2142
02:23:24,460 --> 02:23:28,940
 This is the future land use map overlaid on the mobility plan.

2143
02:23:28,940 --> 02:23:36,240
 You can see that that Cindy Lane kind of snaking north from 380.

2144
02:23:36,240 --> 02:23:39,920
 And you can see there are several future land use designation colors on the map.

2145
02:23:39,920 --> 02:23:44,280
 The subject property has that business innovation that's in that kind of lighter pink.

2146
02:23:44,280 --> 02:23:46,340
 You've got rural to the north.

2147
02:23:46,340 --> 02:23:50,440
 And then there is a little island here of low residential, that's that yellow piece.

2148
02:23:50,440 --> 02:23:55,680
 And that is that ranch estates, and that low residential future land use designation is

2149
02:23:55,680 --> 02:24:03,680
 kind of a policy protection for that neighborhood, so that it does sort of, any zoning decision

2150
02:24:03,680 --> 02:24:10,360
 would be informed by that future land use designation, that yellow.

2151
02:24:10,360 --> 02:24:15,840
 And then to the south of that, of the business innovation and the low residential, we've

2152
02:24:15,840 --> 02:24:20,400
 got our industrial commerce south of 380.

2153
02:24:20,400 --> 02:24:25,220
 So now that we've sort of oriented on the map, we're gonna talk about some of our analysis.

2154
02:24:25,220 --> 02:24:31,640
 So we looked throughout the plan, it's sort of for guidance in this question, in the first,

2155
02:24:31,640 --> 02:24:36,760
 in the mobility section, to provide for the safe, efficient movements of motor vehicles,

2156
02:24:36,760 --> 02:24:43,040
 bicycles, and pedestrians in a sustainable way that complements Denton's Plan Grow Strategy.

2157
02:24:43,040 --> 02:24:48,640
 Given that we've got these two different future land use designations with sort of divergent

2158
02:24:48,640 --> 02:24:54,560
 goals, low residential has different goals than business innovation.

2159
02:24:54,560 --> 02:25:01,080
 But then Cindy Lane sort of marries the two with this roadway cutting through, and especially

2160
02:25:01,080 --> 02:25:03,640
 cutting through that neighborhood.

2161
02:25:03,640 --> 02:25:11,560
 And that could conflict with that growth strategy, that roadway, because it doesn't really marry

2162
02:25:11,560 --> 02:25:14,400
 those two goals together very well.

2163
02:25:14,400 --> 02:25:24,800
 And that's why the mobility plan update and that draft plan really does just take Cindy out of the equation and moves the truck traffic and the industrial traffic to other areas.

2164
02:25:24,800 --> 02:25:31,960
 And so this proposal is consistent with that goal, as well as the mobility plan update.

2165
02:25:31,960 --> 02:25:38,360
 And then when we look at business innovation, as we mentioned, that's intended for large-scale,

2166
02:25:38,360 --> 02:25:40,360
 large-employment facilities.

2167
02:25:40,360 --> 02:25:45,200
 Their common lot sizes can range anywhere from 20 acres all the way to over 100 acres, as

2168
02:25:45,200 --> 02:25:48,000
 you're seeing tonight.

2169
02:25:48,000 --> 02:25:54,640
 And by splitting these parcels with Cindy Lane, you're potentially reducing the developability

2170
02:25:54,640 --> 02:26:01,560
 of them, because you're sort of just bisecting them and reducing that overall acreage.

2171
02:26:01,560 --> 02:26:08,080
 And then finally, in the implementation section of the Denton Plan 2030, we really should

2172
02:26:08,080 --> 02:26:11,400
 be looking at our mobility plan on a pretty regular basis.

2173
02:26:11,400 --> 02:26:15,720
 We do want to make sure that we know where those roads are connecting in the future.

2174
02:26:15,720 --> 02:26:21,040
 And so I-35 probably is not going to change its alignment much, but we do want to make

2175
02:26:21,040 --> 02:26:26,120
 sure that we are flexible and that we're looking at new conditions as we move forward, as we're

2176
02:26:26,120 --> 02:26:28,360
 planning for these roads.

2177
02:26:28,360 --> 02:26:35,800
 Another criterion, the events, trends, or facts that could have changed since the adoption

2178
02:26:35,800 --> 02:26:43,200
 of that Denton Plan 2030, I've got two aerial maps on your screen, one from 2015 when the

2179
02:26:43,200 --> 02:26:49,120
 mobility plan and the Denton Plan 2030 were adopted, and then one from now.

2180
02:26:49,120 --> 02:26:56,160
 And then I've got that Cindy Lane shown in that sort of-that green line.

2181
02:26:56,160 --> 02:27:01,880
 The industrial and distribution sectors have grown in this area, and that indicates that

2182
02:27:01,880 --> 02:27:05,920
 there may be some changes to the mobility warranted.

2183
02:27:05,920 --> 02:27:13,880
 And you can see that these yellow dots are either industrial or distribution-type facilities

2184
02:27:13,880 --> 02:27:17,880
 that are either already on the ground or are currently planned, so-and those weren't there

2185
02:27:17,880 --> 02:27:18,880
 in 2015.

2186
02:27:18,880 --> 02:27:23,000
 So you can see there's been a lot of growth in the last six years in that area.

2187
02:27:23,000 --> 02:27:27,760
 And then that-and that truck traffic and all the other trips that would be associated with

2188
02:27:27,760 --> 02:27:37,040
 it will impact the area as it would impact the area, and as that Cindy Lane is currently

2189
02:27:37,040 --> 02:27:43,920
 drawn, it really would induce those trucks to go north on Cindy Lane and tag up to Loop

2190
02:27:43,920 --> 02:27:51,800
 288, which would not be appropriate for that current neighborhood to have those trucks

2191
02:27:51,800 --> 02:27:54,600
 go north through that area.

2192
02:27:54,600 --> 02:27:58,880
 And that's why the engineering staff has really modified this area with that mobility plan

2193
02:27:58,880 --> 02:28:05,480
 update, simplifying the area's arterial system, removing Cindy Lane, and then pushing that

2194
02:28:05,480 --> 02:28:09,880
 truck traffic to other roadways.

2195
02:28:09,880 --> 02:28:14,800
 Additional review standards, the proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan.

2196
02:28:14,800 --> 02:28:16,960
 It's consistent with our land use goals.

2197
02:28:16,960 --> 02:28:20,800
 It would not negatively impact that proposed land use pattern.

2198
02:28:20,800 --> 02:28:26,520
 Those properties can still develop in accordance with that future land use designation with

2199
02:28:26,520 --> 02:28:32,200
 the-with the draft mobility plan and those existing roadways.

2200
02:28:32,200 --> 02:28:37,400
 And the draft mobility plan includes a network of future arterial roadways and highways that-that

2201
02:28:37,400 --> 02:28:42,200
 are designed to accommodate the projected buildout of that area.

2202
02:28:42,200 --> 02:28:47,640
 And additionally, Cindy Lane is not there, so cars aren't relying on it to get around

2203
02:28:47,640 --> 02:28:48,640
 in the area.

2204
02:28:48,640 --> 02:28:54,080
 It's not-it's not part of our traffic accommodation right now.

2205
02:28:54,080 --> 02:28:56,160
 Public outreach was done.

2206
02:28:56,160 --> 02:28:59,380
 We received one letter in opposition.

2207
02:28:59,380 --> 02:29:03,980
 We talked about that at work session and talked with them about the current mobility plan

2208
02:29:03,980 --> 02:29:07,320
 versus the draft mobility plan.

2209
02:29:07,320 --> 02:29:11,480
 And staff does recommend the approval of the request, as it does comply with the criteria

2210
02:29:11,480 --> 02:29:12,480
 for approval.

2211
02:29:12,480 --> 02:29:16,800
 And I'll be happy to stand for any questions, and-and the applicant is here for questions

2212
02:29:16,800 --> 02:29:17,800
 as well.

2213
02:29:17,800 --> 02:29:19,000
 Thank you, Julie.

2214
02:29:19,000 --> 02:29:21,000
 Any questions for Julie?

2215
02:29:21,000 --> 02:29:22,000
 Christopher?

2216
02:29:22,000 --> 02:29:25,600
 I have a question for staff.

2217
02:29:25,600 --> 02:29:28,440
 It may be for traffic, I'm not sure.

2218
02:29:28,440 --> 02:29:38,640
 Is-do you know what the future land use assumptions were to determine that Cindy Lane and some

2219
02:29:38,640 --> 02:29:41,760
 other secondary arterials in that area were not necessary?

2220
02:29:41,760 --> 02:29:45,840
 In other words, are-are they based on the future land use map of business innovation,

2221
02:29:45,840 --> 02:29:51,800
 are they based on the current zoning of much of it being rural, what-what was that land

2222
02:29:51,800 --> 02:29:52,800
 use assumed?

2223
02:29:52,800 --> 02:29:58,740
 I'm not sure how they adopted the 2015 and what assumptions went in, but all I know is

2224
02:29:58,740 --> 02:30:01,600
 the latest one with the draft mobility.

2225
02:30:01,600 --> 02:30:06,840
 They take into account of the future as well as what's developed so far.

2226
02:30:06,840 --> 02:30:08,560
 So sort of a hybrid between the two?

2227
02:30:08,560 --> 02:30:09,560
 That's right.

2228
02:30:09,560 --> 02:30:10,560
 Okay.

2229
02:30:10,560 --> 02:30:11,560
 Thank you.

2230
02:30:11,560 --> 02:30:17,460
 Any other questions for staff, Julie, traffic?

2231
02:30:17,460 --> 02:30:18,840
 This is a public hearing.

2232
02:30:18,840 --> 02:30:23,920
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

2233
02:30:23,920 --> 02:30:29,440
 He was actually moving first, so I'm gonna give him the-if you could just state your

2234
02:30:29,440 --> 02:30:31,960
 name and address for the record, you have four minutes to speak.

2235
02:30:31,960 --> 02:30:36,160
 Michael Marshall, 2892 Marshall Road.

2236
02:30:36,160 --> 02:30:42,440
 So our property is at the very bottom from-based on the 2030 of the right of way.

2237
02:30:42,440 --> 02:30:45,500
 It encroaches just across our property.

2238
02:30:45,500 --> 02:30:52,000
 And our issue is that we're zoned general office and so-but the only access is through

2239
02:30:52,000 --> 02:30:53,000
 Marshall Road.

2240
02:30:53,000 --> 02:30:54,960
 There's no 35 access.

2241
02:30:54,960 --> 02:31:01,520
 With Cindy Lane as it is in the 2030, there's access to get from 35 to our property.

2242
02:31:01,520 --> 02:31:06,680
 Now, I wasn't excited originally about giving up our residential property for commercial

2243
02:31:06,680 --> 02:31:10,560
 purposes or a lot of industrial, but we're kind of hamstrung here because we're general

2244
02:31:10,560 --> 02:31:13,860
 office but we don't have a way to get to it because you can't bring the trucks through

2245
02:31:13,860 --> 02:31:16,040
 Marshall Road and Ranch Estates.

2246
02:31:16,040 --> 02:31:21,680
 So we can't build houses on it and we don't have access for the general use that it's

2247
02:31:21,680 --> 02:31:24,920
 approved for which is general office.

2248
02:31:24,920 --> 02:31:33,200
 Just for clarification, you own or you represent the property just south of the subject property

2249
02:31:33,200 --> 02:31:34,200
 in question here?

2250
02:31:34,200 --> 02:31:40,480
 Well, ours is a sliver that's 18 acres or 17 acres surrounded by about 70 acres, which

2251
02:31:40,480 --> 02:31:42,960
 is the Turner Trust property.

2252
02:31:42,960 --> 02:31:48,760
 So I guess the feeling is we should either be residential because we're part of Ranch

2253
02:31:48,760 --> 02:31:56,160
 Estates or we should be general office with access from 35, because if we did a development

2254
02:31:56,160 --> 02:32:01,260
 with general office now, Ranch Estates would hate it.

2255
02:32:01,260 --> 02:32:08,560
 So just so I understand, you're opposed to the removal of the full Cindy...

2256
02:32:08,560 --> 02:32:12,200
 Based on our zoning currently, yes I am.

2257
02:32:12,200 --> 02:32:18,640
 But to be even more specific, it sounds like you're not opposing the removal of Cindy way

2258
02:32:18,640 --> 02:32:23,640
 on their property, you're more concerned about the entirety of Cindy way being removed from

2259
02:32:23,640 --> 02:32:24,640
 the mobility plan.

2260
02:32:24,640 --> 02:32:25,640
 That's correct.

2261
02:32:25,640 --> 02:32:26,640
 Gotcha.

2262
02:32:26,640 --> 02:32:27,640
 Okay.

2263
02:32:27,640 --> 02:32:28,640
 That makes sense.

2264
02:32:28,640 --> 02:32:33,800
 And I would highly encourage you to talk to Julie to start with, to try to see what options

2265
02:32:33,800 --> 02:32:34,800
 are available to you.

2266
02:32:34,800 --> 02:32:35,800
 Sorry to be contacting you prior to the meeting.

2267
02:32:35,800 --> 02:32:36,800
 Okay.

2268
02:32:36,800 --> 02:32:37,800
 But I appreciate you being here.

2269
02:32:37,800 --> 02:32:38,800
 Yeah.

2270
02:32:38,800 --> 02:32:39,800
 Thank you.

2271
02:32:39,800 --> 02:32:40,800
 Any questions?

2272
02:32:40,800 --> 02:32:41,800
 Commissioner Smith.

2273
02:32:41,800 --> 02:32:42,800
 Thank you, Chair.

2274
02:32:42,800 --> 02:32:51,880
 The Turner property, are you right there behind like the I-35 RV Superstore and that's your

2275
02:32:51,880 --> 02:32:53,840
 land back there?

2276
02:32:53,840 --> 02:32:57,600
 The Turner property has a sliver that goes around our property.

2277
02:32:57,600 --> 02:32:58,600
 Okay.

2278
02:32:58,600 --> 02:33:02,080
 So that's between like RV World and our property.

2279
02:33:02,080 --> 02:33:03,080
 Okay.

2280
02:33:03,080 --> 02:33:04,080
 Gotcha.

2281
02:33:04,080 --> 02:33:06,080
 Your zone, G.O.?

2282
02:33:06,080 --> 02:33:07,080
 Yes.

2283
02:33:07,080 --> 02:33:08,080
 Yep.

2284
02:33:08,080 --> 02:33:15,200
 Any staff, Julie, not for, I know we're just getting through public comment, but at some

2285
02:33:15,200 --> 02:33:21,160
 point in time, maybe after, can we visit and just see how he ended up as G.O. and not as

2286
02:33:21,160 --> 02:33:22,160
 R.R. if we move over.

2287
02:33:22,160 --> 02:33:26,720
 I don't know how, well, it should have probably been R.D. 5X or moved over to R.R. when we

2288
02:33:26,720 --> 02:33:28,720
 did the rezone, I don't know how it ended up G.O., so.

2289
02:33:28,720 --> 02:33:29,720
 Yep.

2290
02:33:29,720 --> 02:33:30,720
 I can find out.

2291
02:33:30,720 --> 02:33:31,720
 Thanks.

2292
02:33:31,720 --> 02:33:38,400
 Sir, your next view to state your name and address for the record, you have four minutes

2293
02:33:38,400 --> 02:33:39,400
 to speak.

2294
02:33:39,400 --> 02:33:45,040
 Hey, my name is Arthur Smuck, I live at 5100 Barthold Road, Denton, Texas.

2295
02:33:45,040 --> 02:33:50,000
 So we're the property on the north side of Barthold and to the extent that getting rid

2296
02:33:50,000 --> 02:33:54,760
 of Cindy Lane no longer runs it right through the center of my house, I just want to say

2297
02:33:54,760 --> 02:33:55,760
 we support the project.

2298
02:33:55,760 --> 02:33:59,960
 It's either right through our house or I was going to be able to high five people out our

2299
02:33:59,960 --> 02:34:00,960
 windows.

2300
02:34:00,960 --> 02:34:05,000
 We're thinking you guys didn't want us here, but we're in support of it given that it gets

2301
02:34:05,000 --> 02:34:07,200
 rid of it and doesn't run it through the middle of our property.

2302
02:34:07,200 --> 02:34:09,560
 Well, I appreciate you being here and letting us know.

2303
02:34:09,560 --> 02:34:11,560
 Thank you.

2304
02:34:11,560 --> 02:34:14,480
 Anyone else wishing to speak on this item?

2305
02:34:14,480 --> 02:34:22,160
 If you could state your name and address for the record, you'll have four minutes to speak.

2306
02:34:22,160 --> 02:34:30,480
 My name is Ken Chambers, I live at 2099 Marshall Road, which is at the end of the private road

2307
02:34:30,480 --> 02:34:34,120
 off of Marshall Lane going north.

2308
02:34:34,120 --> 02:34:39,480
 As it's proposed right now, the new Cindy Road goes straight through my house.

2309
02:34:39,480 --> 02:34:50,440
 I'm on the south side of the proposed ETJ division development and also I'm concerned

2310
02:34:50,440 --> 02:34:57,680
 about a lot of traffic coming down through the area and dumping into the other residential

2311
02:34:57,680 --> 02:35:02,000
 area to the south.

2312
02:35:02,000 --> 02:35:06,720
 Just to confirm, you are in support of removing Cindy Lane from the mobility?

2313
02:35:06,720 --> 02:35:07,720
 Yes.

2314
02:35:07,720 --> 02:35:08,720
 Great.

2315
02:35:08,720 --> 02:35:09,720
 Thank you.

2316
02:35:09,720 --> 02:35:10,720
 Any questions for Sism?

2317
02:35:10,720 --> 02:35:11,720
 Great.

2318
02:35:11,720 --> 02:35:16,200
 Thank you for being here and letting us know your perspective.

2319
02:35:16,200 --> 02:35:18,440
 Anyone else wishing to speak on this item?

2320
02:35:18,440 --> 02:35:19,440
 Okay.

2321
02:35:19,440 --> 02:35:23,360
 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak via phone?

2322
02:35:23,360 --> 02:35:25,840
 No, Chair, not at this time.

2323
02:35:25,840 --> 02:35:26,840
 Great.

2324
02:35:26,840 --> 02:35:30,440
 I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing.

2325
02:35:30,440 --> 02:35:31,440
 Commissioner Anderson?

2326
02:35:31,440 --> 02:35:33,760
 You've got to hold it down.

2327
02:35:33,760 --> 02:35:34,760
 There you go.

2328
02:35:34,760 --> 02:35:35,760
 I'm making motion to approve.

2329
02:35:35,760 --> 02:35:36,760
 Great.

2330
02:35:36,760 --> 02:35:37,760
 We have a first for approval.

2331
02:35:37,760 --> 02:35:38,760
 Commissioner Smith?

2332
02:35:38,760 --> 02:35:39,760
 Second.

2333
02:35:39,760 --> 02:35:42,440
 We have a first and a second for approval.

2334
02:35:42,440 --> 02:35:43,640
 Any discussion on this?

2335
02:35:43,640 --> 02:35:44,640
 Commissioner Pruitt?

2336
02:35:44,640 --> 02:35:52,320
 I have a question for the applicant or the requester of the -- are they still here?

2337
02:35:52,320 --> 02:35:53,320
 Yes.

2338
02:35:53,320 --> 02:35:54,320
 Sorry.

2339
02:35:54,320 --> 02:35:59,640
 I think I understand that you're just trying to be a good citizen.

2340
02:35:59,640 --> 02:36:06,320
 You realize that we have some evolving plans that are not yet approved, and if we're planning

2341
02:36:06,320 --> 02:36:11,360
 on removing this roadway from the future mobility plan, why not go ahead and do that now so

2342
02:36:11,360 --> 02:36:13,480
 that you can move forward with your development?

2343
02:36:13,480 --> 02:36:16,480
 Is that a correct summarization?

2344
02:36:16,480 --> 02:36:17,480
 Yeah.

2345
02:36:17,480 --> 02:36:24,760
 And through the planning with the engineering and staff, this was discussed by maybe the

2346
02:36:24,760 --> 02:36:30,240
 previous city engineer, and so it was always discussed that, well, the current thoroughfare

2347
02:36:30,240 --> 02:36:35,800
 plan has it on there, but the future mobility plan, it's being removed, so as we're coming

2348
02:36:35,800 --> 02:36:41,560
 to the point to go through zoning, I've asked the city, hey, how -- are you guys taking

2349
02:36:41,560 --> 02:36:42,560
 care of that?

2350
02:36:42,560 --> 02:36:43,560
 How is this being handled?

2351
02:36:43,560 --> 02:36:47,720
 And so they recommended us to do it through this process.

2352
02:36:47,720 --> 02:36:48,720
 Okay.

2353
02:36:48,720 --> 02:36:53,520
 So that's -- we're just trying to clean up what the city has already decided that future

2354
02:36:53,520 --> 02:36:54,520
 mobility plan.

2355
02:36:54,520 --> 02:36:55,520
 Yeah.

2356
02:36:55,520 --> 02:36:59,480
 So I really appreciate that, and I don't fault you at all.

2357
02:36:59,480 --> 02:37:06,500
 I guess my question is, if there was some reason why the city wanted to have some through

2358
02:37:06,500 --> 02:37:14,320
 access there, but there was not a need for a full secondary arterial roadway width, say,

2359
02:37:14,320 --> 02:37:20,200
 something like a collector, is that something that would still allow you to move forward

2360
02:37:20,200 --> 02:37:21,200
 with your development?

2361
02:37:21,200 --> 02:37:22,200
 It would --

2362
02:37:22,200 --> 02:37:23,200
 If it was a reduced right-of-way?

2363
02:37:23,200 --> 02:37:29,140
 I mean, it would be a negative, obviously, because when we plan the speculative, I mean,

2364
02:37:29,140 --> 02:37:34,080
 we're buying a lot of land, and we try to plan for what the market needs, but we also

2365
02:37:34,080 --> 02:37:39,680
 want to be able to have the flexibility to land a big facility, maybe a million-footer.

2366
02:37:39,680 --> 02:37:45,580
 So to answer your question, yeah, I mean, it could become a big problem.

2367
02:37:45,580 --> 02:37:51,840
 And that's why when we do these developments, we like to understand the thoroughfare plans,

2368
02:37:51,840 --> 02:37:56,360
 and if something is being removed, we need to know that before we go through with the

2369
02:37:56,360 --> 02:38:00,960
 zoning and close on our land, because to go through all the design, spend hundreds and

2370
02:38:00,960 --> 02:38:07,240
 thousands of dollars, and then the city say, "Hey, what about a connector street that may

2371
02:38:07,240 --> 02:38:09,400
 not really be warranted?"

2372
02:38:09,400 --> 02:38:11,400
 Yeah, it's significant.

2373
02:38:11,400 --> 02:38:12,400
 Okay.

2374
02:38:12,400 --> 02:38:17,200
 So it's not really the placement from east to west that could be shifted with the freedom

2375
02:38:17,200 --> 02:38:20,520
 of the mobility planning process?

2376
02:38:20,520 --> 02:38:25,080
 It's more just the sheer amount of land lost to the right-of-way dedication?

2377
02:38:25,080 --> 02:38:32,880
 Yeah, it's the flexibility of building a larger building versus smaller building.

2378
02:38:32,880 --> 02:38:40,280
 Say there's a huge prospect that wants to come to Denton, it would be great for Denton,

2379
02:38:40,280 --> 02:38:44,840
 and they needed to do a large building, and when it went through all the city approvals,

2380
02:38:44,840 --> 02:38:48,000
 that could be a potential impact not knowing what that is.

2381
02:38:48,000 --> 02:38:49,000
 Okay.

2382
02:38:49,000 --> 02:38:56,560
 If you could come to the microphone just so it's on record.

2383
02:38:56,560 --> 02:39:02,680
 And just for clarification, what I was alluding to is I believe in our transportation criteria

2384
02:39:02,680 --> 02:39:09,360
 manual or maybe it's in the mobility planning process, there's some amount of flexibility

2385
02:39:09,360 --> 02:39:14,400
 of the particular right-of-way that is chosen for those mobility roadways within I think

2386
02:39:14,400 --> 02:39:19,240
 1,000 feet of the shown location on the map.

2387
02:39:19,240 --> 02:39:23,000
 So that's what I was trying to see was is the main problem the fact that it runs through

2388
02:39:23,000 --> 02:39:27,680
 the middle, or is it just a problem because of the amount of land that you would lose

2389
02:39:27,680 --> 02:39:29,120
 due to roadway dedication?

2390
02:39:29,120 --> 02:39:34,640
 The flexibility, what you're referring to is it's usually 1,000 to 1,500 feet.

2391
02:39:34,640 --> 02:39:38,440
 And so that's why you have people here like, "Hey, it's shown right going through the

2392
02:39:38,440 --> 02:39:39,440
 middle of my house.

2393
02:39:39,440 --> 02:39:44,320
 I wouldn't like that," because it's conceptual, but you still have to recognize it and understand

2394
02:39:44,320 --> 02:39:45,320
 it.

2395
02:39:45,320 --> 02:39:49,620
 And usually cities don't until developers come through and say, "Hey, I'm ready to

2396
02:39:49,620 --> 02:39:50,620
 develop.

2397
02:39:50,620 --> 02:39:51,620
 I'm ready to plat."

2398
02:39:51,620 --> 02:39:55,120
 And so that's why this comes out, but you're right.

2399
02:39:55,120 --> 02:40:02,040
 And so, I mean, I don't know where, we were told it wasn't going to be on the plan, but

2400
02:40:02,040 --> 02:40:03,040
 it's not official.

2401
02:40:03,040 --> 02:40:06,080
 And so I don't know where shifting it would go.

2402
02:40:06,080 --> 02:40:11,160
 If you shifted it, if I said, "Hey, if we can shift it further to the west, closer to

2403
02:40:11,160 --> 02:40:16,880
 the railroad, are you jumping over the railroad, then jumping over 288 with bridges, and then

2404
02:40:16,880 --> 02:40:19,520
 jumping back over the railroad?"

2405
02:40:19,520 --> 02:40:27,400
 Well, I was just going to say one other thing to, I mean, to your point and understand the

2406
02:40:27,400 --> 02:40:31,640
 rationale for wanting to maybe have maximum flexibility to maybe cut through the site

2407
02:40:31,640 --> 02:40:32,640
 somewhere there.

2408
02:40:32,640 --> 02:40:36,940
 But I mean, we're actually working with a prospect right now at this point in time that

2409
02:40:36,940 --> 02:40:42,960
 is a large user that could, manufacturing, and I believe staff's aware of it, but they've

2410
02:40:42,960 --> 02:40:44,920
 been talking to economic development and so forth.

2411
02:40:44,920 --> 02:40:50,120
 So this is not a surprise, I don't think, to anybody in Denton, but if they did that,

2412
02:40:50,120 --> 02:40:56,160
 if the facility they're trying to build or would like to do there would basically eliminate

2413
02:40:56,160 --> 02:41:02,360
 the possibility of going to this site because it would bisect the manufacturing facility

2414
02:41:02,360 --> 02:41:04,440
 that they're looking at.

2415
02:41:04,440 --> 02:41:10,560
 So again, from our perspective, it probably would be a showstopper for us.

2416
02:41:10,560 --> 02:41:12,920
 Even if it were shifted to the left with that flexibility?

2417
02:41:12,920 --> 02:41:16,200
 Yeah, I mean, if you took it all the way over, like Todd was saying, if you took it all the

2418
02:41:16,200 --> 02:41:21,040
 way over to the west side of the site, then perhaps, because we're going to have interior

2419
02:41:21,040 --> 02:41:26,400
 circulation drives, we'll have private drives that circulate traffic all through the development,

2420
02:41:26,400 --> 02:41:32,760
 but if you took it to the very western border perhaps, I would think that you could probably

2421
02:41:32,760 --> 02:41:38,640
 run something down, as long as it's not running through the main body of the site.

2422
02:41:38,640 --> 02:41:39,640
 Okay.

2423
02:41:39,640 --> 02:41:40,640
 Does that make sense?

2424
02:41:40,640 --> 02:41:41,640
 Yeah, thank you.

2425
02:41:41,640 --> 02:41:48,120
 The other, and you guys have seen this, the other issue with that is the future alignment

2426
02:41:48,120 --> 02:41:53,980
 with 1173, is it starts to curve up and it'll eventually tie into 77.

2427
02:41:53,980 --> 02:42:00,200
 So you have that working, and that's not a 90 degree deal, it's a curve right after

2428
02:42:00,200 --> 02:42:05,680
 the railroad, and so it comes up, and so I think, I believe, I can't speak for engineering,

2429
02:42:05,680 --> 02:42:12,600
 but I think that will be a new large artery that will take traffic from there, and then

2430
02:42:12,600 --> 02:42:16,880
 the fastest way to get anywhere is on 35, so, but.

2431
02:42:16,880 --> 02:42:21,640
 Yes, thank you very much.

2432
02:42:21,640 --> 02:42:23,160
 Thank you.

2433
02:42:23,160 --> 02:42:28,480
 Just for the edification of those listed in the dais, as a reminder, and to you, Kirsten,

2434
02:42:28,480 --> 02:42:33,400
 to prove it, a secondary arterial on a mobility plan, they have to provide the right-of-way,

2435
02:42:33,400 --> 02:42:36,200
 so I know you're confident in being a good neighbor, and you might, you very well could

2436
02:42:36,200 --> 02:42:40,520
 be, but they had to do something with that and remove it from their site, or when they

2437
02:42:40,520 --> 02:42:44,400
 came to Platting, they would have to deal with the secondary arterial if it's on the

2438
02:42:44,400 --> 02:42:45,600
 mobility plan.

2439
02:42:45,600 --> 02:42:54,200
 So the removal of that is a necessity, unless they dedicate the right-of-way from the beginning.

2440
02:42:54,200 --> 02:42:57,040
 Does that make sense?

2441
02:42:57,040 --> 02:43:00,560
 I think I lost you at the very end there, but.

2442
02:43:00,560 --> 02:43:04,320
 Even if there wasn't a road there for another decade, if it's on the mobility plan, it's

2443
02:43:04,320 --> 02:43:06,640
 a secondary arterial, they would have had to dedicate the right-of-way.

2444
02:43:06,640 --> 02:43:07,640
 Yes.

2445
02:43:07,640 --> 02:43:10,120
 And would have empty land there for a while.

2446
02:43:10,120 --> 02:43:11,120
 Right.

2447
02:43:11,120 --> 02:43:12,120
 Yeah.

2448
02:43:12,120 --> 02:43:16,560
 Any other questions or discussions?

2449
02:43:16,560 --> 02:43:19,960
 We have a first and a second for approval, is that correct?

2450
02:43:19,960 --> 02:43:22,160
 We did get that, correct?

2451
02:43:22,160 --> 02:43:23,160
 Okay.

2452
02:43:23,160 --> 02:43:25,880
 Seeing no other discussion, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

2453
02:43:25,880 --> 02:43:27,160
 Mr. Pruitt?

2454
02:43:27,160 --> 02:43:28,520
 Sorry, discussion?

2455
02:43:28,520 --> 02:43:30,280
 Go for it.

2456
02:43:30,280 --> 02:43:33,360
 Okay, thank you.

2457
02:43:33,360 --> 02:43:45,760
 So I'm really concerned about what the triangle to the south of 288, west of I-35, east of

2458
02:43:45,760 --> 02:43:49,720
 the railroad turns into.

2459
02:43:49,720 --> 02:43:55,940
 As we look at how the mobility plan impacts the developability of that land, the usability

2460
02:43:55,940 --> 02:44:02,400
 of that land in the future, it sounds like the plan is to make that an isolated triangle

2461
02:44:02,400 --> 02:44:07,780
 where the only way out is to jump on an access road and drive three or four miles in a circle

2462
02:44:07,780 --> 02:44:10,240
 before you get to something that you can turn onto.

2463
02:44:10,240 --> 02:44:14,240
 That's the way I see it.

2464
02:44:14,240 --> 02:44:18,240
 If that's an incorrect impression, then please correct me.

2465
02:44:18,240 --> 02:44:20,400
 So that concerns me.

2466
02:44:20,400 --> 02:44:26,760
 I will point out, just because I think it's good to refer to the R-2030 plan periodically,

2467
02:44:26,760 --> 02:44:32,160
 in the mobility chapter, it says, "Well-connected street networks result in more direct routes

2468
02:44:32,160 --> 02:44:38,200
 and shorter travel times as opposed to a few large multi-lane arterials which create congested

2469
02:44:38,200 --> 02:44:43,600
 intersections and longer, more circuitous routes."

2470
02:44:43,600 --> 02:44:51,440
 I think this is an example where we are planning to create more circuitous routes.

2471
02:44:51,440 --> 02:44:52,440
 Does that matter?

2472
02:44:52,440 --> 02:44:55,880
 Again, it really depends on how this land develops.

2473
02:44:55,880 --> 02:45:01,240
 If it's a lot of warehousing, truck traffic, that sort of thing, it probably doesn't matter

2474
02:45:01,240 --> 02:45:02,900
 that much.

2475
02:45:02,900 --> 02:45:09,780
 If there are some more general office, other things that are consistent with the business

2476
02:45:09,780 --> 02:45:16,720
 innovation district, say we get some corporate areas, say they want a place to go to lunch

2477
02:45:16,720 --> 02:45:26,760
 periodically, being trapped in a triangle there doesn't strike me as conducive to development

2478
02:45:26,760 --> 02:45:33,400
 in that area.

2479
02:45:33,400 --> 02:45:36,560
 So then the question is, okay, what would provide that?

2480
02:45:36,560 --> 02:45:42,520
 To me, the big deal is crossing these large freeways.

2481
02:45:42,520 --> 02:45:46,000
 When you talk about crossing a railroad, the answer is always no.

2482
02:45:46,000 --> 02:45:50,040
 When you talk about a freeway, the answer is, "Well, if you get in 10 years ahead of

2483
02:45:50,040 --> 02:45:53,040
 time, maybe yes."

2484
02:45:53,040 --> 02:46:01,080
 To me, this presents an opportunity to either make sure that this area has one or two routes

2485
02:46:01,080 --> 02:46:02,080
 out.

2486
02:46:02,080 --> 02:46:06,960
 You have Mosh Branch, if you go all the way south, to cross east, eventually we're going

2487
02:46:06,960 --> 02:46:14,240
 to great extents to create a crossing that aligns with Windsor there.

2488
02:46:14,240 --> 02:46:18,560
 But north, we're basically going to shut this off.

2489
02:46:18,560 --> 02:46:20,160
 And so that concerns me.

2490
02:46:20,160 --> 02:46:26,360
 Now maybe there's a middle ground, maybe there's a way that we can get a crossing under the

2491
02:46:26,360 --> 02:46:33,280
 future of Loop 288 without going up through this property.

2492
02:46:33,280 --> 02:46:40,600
 But what I see here concerns me that maybe we're cutting off all northern access that

2493
02:46:40,600 --> 02:46:44,440
 has some different ways to go.

2494
02:46:44,440 --> 02:46:48,360
 Just going to see if Julie could pull up a map to help orient everyone real quick.

2495
02:46:48,360 --> 02:46:56,120
 Yeah, and Julie, if you have the draft mobility, that might be the most helpful document.

2496
02:46:56,120 --> 02:47:00,040
 And Chair, I will say, I don't blame the applicant in this at all.

2497
02:47:00,040 --> 02:47:05,320
 I completely realize that this is what our draft plan shows, and I appreciate that.

2498
02:47:05,320 --> 02:47:09,320
 I think you've gone through the process as well as possible.

2499
02:47:09,320 --> 02:47:15,040
 Yeah, and Julie can point some of this out on the map, but I just wanted to touch on

2500
02:47:15,040 --> 02:47:16,040
 a couple of things.

2501
02:47:16,040 --> 02:47:20,400
 That we do still have the Windsor overpass on 35 that would cut through this area.

2502
02:47:20,400 --> 02:47:25,400
 And there's also, a little further south of here, there are some local streets and collectors

2503
02:47:25,400 --> 02:47:28,740
 that are already stubbed going towards the north.

2504
02:47:28,740 --> 02:47:32,920
 So as these larger parcels continue to develop, there's certainly nothing that would prevent

2505
02:47:32,920 --> 02:47:36,920
 and we would even require connection to some of those that are already stubbed out to provide

2506
02:47:36,920 --> 02:47:42,640
 some collectors through this area for extra maneuverability in the future.

2507
02:47:42,640 --> 02:47:47,800
 But I think the general need that our mobility plan study has shown is that an arterial through

2508
02:47:47,800 --> 02:47:54,160
 that little wedge of the pie that you identified between the railroad and 35 may not be necessary.

2509
02:47:54,160 --> 02:47:59,400
 Because local streets might be sufficient to get everyone to those major corridors.

2510
02:47:59,400 --> 02:48:05,360
 And I would add on to that, part of that proposed mobility plan, so our current mobility plan

2511
02:48:05,360 --> 02:48:08,560
 has a lot of collectors on it.

2512
02:48:08,560 --> 02:48:13,800
 Our proposed mobility plan actually pulls out some of those collectors to allow and

2513
02:48:13,800 --> 02:48:22,280
 sort of sets that arterial grid, but that would allow those collectors to be developed

2514
02:48:22,280 --> 02:48:28,760
 within that kind of more harder grid pattern to allow for that flexibility.

2515
02:48:28,760 --> 02:48:34,740
 So that's kind of one of the intents of that draft mobility plan is to kind of rely on

2516
02:48:34,740 --> 02:48:38,080
 some of those collectors within that framework.

2517
02:48:38,080 --> 02:48:39,280
 So I don't know if that helps.

2518
02:48:39,280 --> 02:48:43,360
 And just to point out this, so this is Barcelona right here.

2519
02:48:43,360 --> 02:48:49,120
 And once again, it's not shown as a collector on the draft mobility plan, but it stubs out

2520
02:48:49,120 --> 02:48:55,800
 to be extended toward the north, and then Windsor will eventually cross I-35.

2521
02:48:55,800 --> 02:48:57,080
 That's on TxDOT's radar.

2522
02:48:57,080 --> 02:49:01,240
 So I don't know if that helps kind of organize that area.

2523
02:49:01,240 --> 02:49:02,240
 Yeah.

2524
02:49:02,240 --> 02:49:03,240
 It does help.

2525
02:49:03,240 --> 02:49:04,800
 And thank you for pointing that out.

2526
02:49:04,800 --> 02:49:13,560
 I guess my perspective on this is just that a building might last 50 or 60 years, right?

2527
02:49:13,560 --> 02:49:20,520
 A zoning classification might be requested to change in 20 years or something for redevelopment.

2528
02:49:20,520 --> 02:49:27,800
 A roadway right-of-way and a crossing of a TxDOT freeway is going to last 100, 200 years.

2529
02:49:27,800 --> 02:49:34,160
 And so that's why I get concerned about this.

2530
02:49:34,160 --> 02:49:36,680
 I guess I don't want to belabor the point.

2531
02:49:36,680 --> 02:49:50,400
 Just a question to staff, if we were to agree to remove this alignment through this property,

2532
02:49:50,400 --> 02:49:55,520
 in the remainder of the adoption of the 2020 mobility plan process, is there an opportunity

2533
02:49:55,520 --> 02:50:05,160
 to say that there should still be a roadway that has a crossing so that you can get from

2534
02:50:05,160 --> 02:50:11,320
 south of 288 to westbound 288 from that segment south of there?

2535
02:50:11,320 --> 02:50:14,360
 I'm going to have engineering come up.

2536
02:50:14,360 --> 02:50:16,640
 It again depends on the land development.

2537
02:50:16,640 --> 02:50:21,360
 Say if the south of the land that they want to come and develop, their access would not

2538
02:50:21,360 --> 02:50:22,360
 be restricted.

2539
02:50:22,360 --> 02:50:28,240
 If they want to dedicate, say, 55 feet or 65 feet of roadway, then we would be able

2540
02:50:28,240 --> 02:50:35,320
 to take the dedication and provide connection to 35 or the future Windsor or to the frontage

2541
02:50:35,320 --> 02:50:41,400
 of loop 288, again, with permission from TxDOT, since we don't control their access.

2542
02:50:41,400 --> 02:50:42,400
 Right.

2543
02:50:42,400 --> 02:50:50,600
 So we wouldn't have any say over whether TxDOT would provide crossing of 288 to go westbound

2544
02:50:50,600 --> 02:50:55,840
 on 288 from south of this subject property?

2545
02:50:55,840 --> 02:51:02,480
 I have to check the final plans, but by law, they would not be restricted of access.

2546
02:51:02,480 --> 02:51:03,480
 Okay.

2547
02:51:03,480 --> 02:51:04,480
 Thank you.

2548
02:51:04,480 --> 02:51:05,480
 Sure.

2549
02:51:05,480 --> 02:51:11,740
 Yeah, and just so you know, as we go through the draft mobility plan, having been on the

2550
02:51:11,740 --> 02:51:16,680
 last mobility plan approval process, there's going to be work sessions and a ton of input

2551
02:51:16,680 --> 02:51:17,680
 subcommittees.

2552
02:51:17,680 --> 02:51:21,200
 There's going to be a lot of opportunities to speak into it, and there's an opportunity

2553
02:51:21,200 --> 02:51:25,560
 for you to highlight this area if there needs to be a deeper examination over this on the

2554
02:51:25,560 --> 02:51:28,680
 roads that at least we control.

2555
02:51:28,680 --> 02:51:30,440
 Is there any other discussion?

2556
02:51:30,440 --> 02:51:31,440
 Okay.

2557
02:51:31,440 --> 02:51:37,840
 I'm going to go ahead and call a vote via roll call.

2558
02:51:37,840 --> 02:51:39,160
 Commissioner Pruitt?

2559
02:51:39,160 --> 02:51:50,280
 I'm going to say nay just because I think there's sufficient flexibility to move this

2560
02:51:50,280 --> 02:51:53,480
 alignment westward to still allow the development.

2561
02:51:53,480 --> 02:51:55,040
 Commissioner Smith?

2562
02:51:55,040 --> 02:51:56,040
 Aye.

2563
02:51:56,040 --> 02:51:58,080
 Commissioner McDade?

2564
02:51:58,080 --> 02:51:59,080
 Nay.

2565
02:51:59,080 --> 02:52:01,320
 Chair is a aye.

2566
02:52:01,320 --> 02:52:02,960
 Commissioner Anderson?

2567
02:52:02,960 --> 02:52:03,960
 Aye.

2568
02:52:03,960 --> 02:52:05,840
 Commissioner Ellis?

2569
02:52:05,840 --> 02:52:06,840
 Aye.

2570
02:52:06,840 --> 02:52:11,720
 Motion carries four, two.

2571
02:52:11,720 --> 02:52:19,120
 The next item of business is item 5DZ21-0002.

2572
02:52:19,120 --> 02:52:26,080
 I'll invite Sean Jacobson for presentation and open the public hearing.

2573
02:52:26,080 --> 02:52:41,280
 And members of the commission, if you'll give me just a moment, go ahead and pull up the

2574
02:52:41,280 --> 02:52:43,120
 presentation.

2575
02:52:43,120 --> 02:52:44,640
 Okay.

2576
02:52:44,640 --> 02:52:48,240
 Good evening.

2577
02:52:48,240 --> 02:52:56,040
 Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner, presenting Z21-0002, prominence.

2578
02:52:56,040 --> 02:53:00,840
 This is a request to rezone approximately 58.55 acres.

2579
02:53:00,840 --> 02:53:06,080
 It's divided out to be 24.93 acres going from planned development and light industrial to

2580
02:53:06,080 --> 02:53:13,120
 general office, 23.47 acres going from PD to mixed use neighborhood, and 9.7 acres going

2581
02:53:13,120 --> 02:53:16,760
 from PD plan development to light industrial.

2582
02:53:16,760 --> 02:53:23,440
 This property is bounded by loop 288 north, University Drive, Mayhill Road, and then prominence

2583
02:53:23,440 --> 02:53:24,440
 way.

2584
02:53:24,440 --> 02:53:29,320
 There's a mix of undeveloped and commercial lots, one residential lot, all zoned LI to

2585
02:53:29,320 --> 02:53:34,320
 the northwest, single family neighborhood south across prominence way.

2586
02:53:34,320 --> 02:53:40,000
 As you can see in the FEMA map on the lower corner there, there's about 26 acres of flood

2587
02:53:40,000 --> 02:53:41,000
 plain.

2588
02:53:41,000 --> 02:53:45,400
 It covers the north and center of the property, the extensive environmentally sensitive areas

2589
02:53:45,400 --> 02:53:50,040
 in that area, and significant tree canopy in that area, as well as along prominence way.

2590
02:53:50,040 --> 02:53:57,440
 This zoning change would be to replace this current and old PD with current zoning districts

2591
02:53:57,440 --> 02:54:04,160
 that contain a similar mix of uses, some additional ones, and then require that it all falls, develops

2592
02:54:04,160 --> 02:54:06,600
 under the current development code standards.

2593
02:54:06,600 --> 02:54:12,720
 So just to give a little history, this planned development was created in 2000.

2594
02:54:12,720 --> 02:54:18,280
 It was, there was a concept plan that divided the subject property into four areas, A, B,

2595
02:54:18,280 --> 02:54:23,480
 C, and E. There was a D, but it's not part of this request, it's to the south and has

2596
02:54:23,480 --> 02:54:26,000
 partly developed already.

2597
02:54:26,000 --> 02:54:30,920
 Each of those areas authorizes a different mix of uses, including commercial, industrial,

2598
02:54:30,920 --> 02:54:31,920
 residential.

2599
02:54:31,920 --> 02:54:37,680
 There was a remaining 18 acres that was nominally part of area C, but was intended for future

2600
02:54:37,680 --> 02:54:41,240
 park dedication from when the plan developed.

2601
02:54:41,240 --> 02:54:47,800
 All of this property was vested in standards under the 2000 interim DDC, which was an odd

2602
02:54:47,800 --> 02:54:52,320
 document that was in effect while we were trying to write the 2002 DDC, and so it essentially

2603
02:54:52,320 --> 02:54:59,200
 applies 1991 zoning and uses, 1988 landscape code, and its own mix of processes.

2604
02:54:59,200 --> 02:55:06,960
 In 2002, city council did approve zoning out almost four acres of area A to an employment

2605
02:55:06,960 --> 02:55:11,280
 center commercial zoning, which became a light industrial zoning.

2606
02:55:11,280 --> 02:55:17,080
 That property is tonight also proposed to zone to a GEO to match where the plan development

2607
02:55:17,080 --> 02:55:22,000
 is proposed to go to GEO just for consistency's sake.

2608
02:55:22,000 --> 02:55:29,680
 So this request again is to take those areas A through E to current zoning districts, general

2609
02:55:29,680 --> 02:55:33,360
 office, MN, and LI, bring them under current DDC standards.

2610
02:55:33,360 --> 02:55:39,080
 In regard to the park area, the parks department is actually in discussion with the applicant

2611
02:55:39,080 --> 02:55:44,560
 to move forward with likely about an 18-acre park dedication at the time of platting, similar

2612
02:55:44,560 --> 02:55:47,640
 location to where the park was proposed under the PT.

2613
02:55:47,640 --> 02:55:53,760
 This is that concept plan, you can see the areas there, and then how it would be proposed

2614
02:55:53,760 --> 02:55:54,760
 to be zoned.

2615
02:55:54,760 --> 02:56:00,920
 Of course, we have our general criteria and our specific criteria for zoning approval

2616
02:56:00,920 --> 02:56:02,840
 to consider.

2617
02:56:02,840 --> 02:56:04,720
 First off, we look at our comprehensive plan.

2618
02:56:04,720 --> 02:56:09,640
 The site is primarily business innovation future land use, so intended for those large

2619
02:56:09,640 --> 02:56:14,160
 tracts of land developed with a mix of commercial supporting residential and retail.

2620
02:56:14,160 --> 02:56:18,240
 It does also have a transitional moderate density residential area.

2621
02:56:18,240 --> 02:56:21,360
 It's intended for a mix of denser residential areas.

2622
02:56:21,360 --> 02:56:23,960
 It's located near retail and parks.

2623
02:56:23,960 --> 02:56:29,760
 These proposed zonings line up with future land use, bringing in a mix of uses in the

2624
02:56:29,760 --> 02:56:34,840
 business innovation area and a mix of residential uses, including multifamily in that moderate

2625
02:56:34,840 --> 02:56:39,440
 density residential area.

2626
02:56:39,440 --> 02:56:44,280
 Other ways it lines up the comprehensive plan, obviously bringing this property into compliance

2627
02:56:44,280 --> 02:56:49,320
 with the full current debt and development code for all future approvals on the site.

2628
02:56:49,320 --> 02:56:53,200
 The current DDC is much more in line with the comprehensive plan than whatever was in

2629
02:56:53,200 --> 02:56:55,440
 place in 2000.

2630
02:56:55,440 --> 02:57:00,480
 It's also ensuring development along two major corridors, which is in line with our preferred

2631
02:57:00,480 --> 02:57:01,480
 growth concept.

2632
02:57:01,480 --> 02:57:05,960
 And it's providing employment and moderate density housing near a potential future park

2633
02:57:05,960 --> 02:57:11,280
 and trail and allowing for a broader range of uses that would fit in our future land

2634
02:57:11,280 --> 02:57:15,160
 use map than is currently permitted under the PD.

2635
02:57:15,160 --> 02:57:20,400
 One key here is particularly minimizing adverse environmental impacts because under the PD

2636
02:57:20,400 --> 02:57:27,880
 there is minimal to no protection of environmentally sensitive areas and tree preservation, whereas

2637
02:57:27,880 --> 02:57:31,440
 taking it out of the PD would require full compliance with all of our environmentally

2638
02:57:31,440 --> 02:57:36,080
 sensitive area protections for future approvals as well as our tree preservation standards

2639
02:57:36,080 --> 02:57:41,760
 for future approvals on this site, which aligns with the goals of our comprehensive plan.

2640
02:57:41,760 --> 02:57:47,720
 There are also enhanced standards that come into play with our current DDC versus what

2641
02:57:47,720 --> 02:57:51,360
 would be required under the PD as you can see there.

2642
02:57:51,360 --> 02:57:55,920
 The landscape areas would be approximately the same but tree canopy, there really wasn't

2643
02:57:55,920 --> 02:58:00,160
 a requirement for that under the PD and we would have a fairly significant tree canopy

2644
02:58:00,160 --> 02:58:05,160
 requirement for all future development as well as street tree requirements and right

2645
02:58:05,160 --> 02:58:08,840
 of way screening, which would be beneficial for the neighborhood to the south of this

2646
02:58:08,840 --> 02:58:13,520
 development, providing a great amount of landscaping between them and any future development on

2647
02:58:13,520 --> 02:58:19,320
 the site, as well as improved commercial building design standards.

2648
02:58:19,320 --> 02:58:23,560
 Just looking at parks here, again the applicant is in discussion with the Parks Department

2649
02:58:23,560 --> 02:58:30,120
 to donate about 18 acres of the floodplain to the city and the Parks Department is looking

2650
02:58:30,120 --> 02:58:34,440
 at providing a trail through that area, which would of course be a benefit to the city and

2651
02:58:34,440 --> 02:58:35,440
 to that development.

2652
02:58:35,440 --> 02:58:42,760
 In terms of transportation, this is an area that has some current significant traffic

2653
02:58:42,760 --> 02:58:43,960
 issues.

2654
02:58:43,960 --> 02:58:49,120
 There was a detailed traffic impact analysis done, although there's no proposed use for

2655
02:58:49,120 --> 02:58:54,420
 the site right now and so it was, these are estimates based on possible high traffic generation

2656
02:58:54,420 --> 02:58:57,800
 uses that could develop on the site after the rezoning.

2657
02:58:57,800 --> 02:59:02,080
 Be looking at about 7,565 daily trips at full development.

2658
02:59:02,080 --> 02:59:07,920
 TI looked at about 10 adjacent intersections, 6 out of 10 of them would operate at a level

2659
02:59:07,920 --> 02:59:13,480
 of service of D or better, going out to a horizon of 2029.

2660
02:59:13,480 --> 02:59:18,400
 Three of 10 of those are intersections that currently without any additional development

2661
02:59:18,400 --> 02:59:23,200
 there already operate at a level of service E or F and then there's a proposed driveway

2662
02:59:23,200 --> 02:59:28,400
 for this site, subject detects out approval that if nothing, if that was the only driveway

2663
02:59:28,400 --> 02:59:32,440
 along loop 288, it would operate at a level of service of F.

2664
02:59:32,440 --> 02:59:40,880
 The TI indicates that there would be increased delays going to 2029 with the, if this site

2665
02:59:40,880 --> 02:59:47,720
 were to develop as estimated, however, the potential site development is actually fairly

2666
02:59:47,720 --> 02:59:53,240
 minimal in its contribution compared to the traffic that would already be occurring because

2667
02:59:53,240 --> 02:59:56,840
 of current and future growth in the area.

2668
02:59:56,840 --> 03:00:00,280
 This is on 288, it's on University.

2669
03:00:00,280 --> 03:00:03,680
 Most of the delays there are being caused by growth that's going to come one way or

2670
03:00:03,680 --> 03:00:04,680
 the other.

2671
03:00:04,680 --> 03:00:09,800
 However, there were some mitigations recommended, a major one is a signal light at prominence

2672
03:00:09,800 --> 03:00:15,640
 drive either when Audra is realigned south or possibly sooner that would be assessed

2673
03:00:15,640 --> 03:00:20,160
 when civil engineering plans came in for this site and this site is estimated to be responsible

2674
03:00:20,160 --> 03:00:24,000
 for 25% of that cost.

2675
03:00:24,000 --> 03:00:27,480
 If that's, if when that's put in place that would raise the intersection to a level of

2676
03:00:27,480 --> 03:00:34,120
 service C versus where it's currently operating often at an E or F at peak times right now.

2677
03:00:34,120 --> 03:00:38,960
 There's also recommendation for a right turn deceleration lane along loop 288, again that

2678
03:00:38,960 --> 03:00:44,440
 would be assessed when civil engineering plans came in and the TI also recommended that

2679
03:00:44,440 --> 03:00:50,520
 techs.net consider recommending, consider approving a second driveway access point along

2680
03:00:50,520 --> 03:00:57,920
 loop 288 to reduce the pressure of having just one off point there for this development.

2681
03:00:57,920 --> 03:01:03,720
 And then other long term solutions that will help reduce traffic tension in the area are

2682
03:01:03,720 --> 03:01:07,800
 the extension of the median at the intersection with Spring Valley so you won't have cars

2683
03:01:07,800 --> 03:01:15,800
 trying to cross 380 there and then the future techs.freeway bypass of 380 at 288.

2684
03:01:15,800 --> 03:01:22,600
 So essentially the TIA concluded that overall the development of this site won't materially

2685
03:01:22,600 --> 03:01:27,920
 negatively impact the area but it may be able to help contribute to future improvements.

2686
03:01:27,920 --> 03:01:32,520
 Water and waste water is available, fire response is within 8 minutes or less, law enforcement

2687
03:01:32,520 --> 03:01:37,280
 issues are unexpected to be made worse by this development.

2688
03:01:37,280 --> 03:01:42,080
 We did do public outreach and there was one response in opposition, there was also a neighborhood

2689
03:01:42,080 --> 03:01:48,240
 meeting two citizens attended expressed concerns about potential traffic generation and appreciation

2690
03:01:48,240 --> 03:01:54,360
 for proposed geo-zoning, so with that staff does recommend approval as the request complies

2691
03:01:54,360 --> 03:01:56,520
 with our criteria for approval.

2692
03:01:56,520 --> 03:02:00,480
 The applicant is here and I'll be happy to stand for any questions.

2693
03:02:00,480 --> 03:02:02,680
 Great thanks Sean.

2694
03:02:02,680 --> 03:02:06,160
 Commissioner Anderson.

2695
03:02:06,160 --> 03:02:14,160
 Sean if we vote for this, are we voting for a traffic light at Audre and 288 as well or

2696
03:02:14,160 --> 03:02:16,240
 is that just recommended?

2697
03:02:16,240 --> 03:02:20,800
 It's a recommendation but when civil engineering plans come in for this site there would be

2698
03:02:20,800 --> 03:02:26,160
 a warrant study and if it's concluded that it's needed there then there would at least

2699
03:02:26,160 --> 03:02:31,000
 be I believe a requirement that this development help pay for that if and when it's put in

2700
03:02:31,000 --> 03:02:32,000
 place.

2701
03:02:32,000 --> 03:02:36,760
 I don't mind voting for the project but I just don't want another red light right there

2702
03:02:36,760 --> 03:02:42,520
 at Audre because when you're on University of 380 and you're taking a right onto Loop

2703
03:02:42,520 --> 03:02:45,960
 going southbound you're just going to get up to speed and you're going to have to stop

2704
03:02:45,960 --> 03:02:51,760
 immediately because that's probably what a quarter of a mile, a little stretch and I

2705
03:02:51,760 --> 03:02:59,440
 thought the reason we have these major thoroughfares like Loop 288 and 380 is to keep traffic moving

2706
03:02:59,440 --> 03:03:04,440
 not putting red lights and having traffic stop.

2707
03:03:04,440 --> 03:03:08,480
 Definitely something that engineering and tech stop would look at and I believe that's

2708
03:03:08,480 --> 03:03:13,800
 part of the reason why it's something that may be delayed until Audre is realigned with

2709
03:03:13,800 --> 03:03:19,140
 prominence so that you would have one intersection where there would be light rather than having

2710
03:03:19,140 --> 03:03:22,040
 turning from Audre and then hitting that point.

2711
03:03:22,040 --> 03:03:24,320
 Thank you sir.

2712
03:03:24,320 --> 03:03:26,200
 Any other questions for Sean?

2713
03:03:26,200 --> 03:03:29,840
 Okay I don't see any, thank you very much.

2714
03:03:29,840 --> 03:03:38,320
 I do have one card, it's the applicant Mr. Lee Allison.

2715
03:03:38,320 --> 03:03:42,680
 I think you know the drill but name and address and you'll have ten minutes.

2716
03:03:42,680 --> 03:03:46,000
 I don't know if I remember but it's been awhile.

2717
03:03:46,000 --> 03:03:51,120
 Lee Allison with Allison Engineering Group 2415 North Elm, Denton, Texas.

2718
03:03:51,120 --> 03:03:54,860
 With me this evening in the audience is Henry Reif, the landowner.

2719
03:03:54,860 --> 03:03:58,680
 I don't have this power point or a formal presentation but I would like to speak to

2720
03:03:58,680 --> 03:04:03,480
 some of the items that came up during the work session.

2721
03:04:03,480 --> 03:04:09,320
 One related to park dedication, I personally am excited to see a park department now that

2722
03:04:09,320 --> 03:04:12,160
 is wants these kind of dedications.

2723
03:04:12,160 --> 03:04:16,960
 When this project was started they didn't want them, the PD actually was more to make

2724
03:04:16,960 --> 03:04:21,080
 sure the city would take it not to make sure the developer would give it, but these are

2725
03:04:21,080 --> 03:04:26,080
 excellent opportunities along streams and flood plains for hiking and biking paths and

2726
03:04:26,080 --> 03:04:32,320
 help get some of that traffic off of the roadways and avoid that conflict of traffic there.

2727
03:04:32,320 --> 03:04:36,920
 So for no other reason than business reasons we're inclined for it to occur.

2728
03:04:36,920 --> 03:04:41,560
 We certainly for business decisions would like for the park dedication to count towards

2729
03:04:41,560 --> 03:04:48,800
 any required park dedication for the residential type uses as they occur and we would like

2730
03:04:48,800 --> 03:04:54,120
 for any dedication above and beyond that because the required park land dedication is not going

2731
03:04:54,120 --> 03:04:57,360
 to be the 18 acres, that's just something we're doing.

2732
03:04:57,360 --> 03:05:01,800
 We want to make sure there's a notable difference obviously for tax purposes and donations and

2733
03:05:01,800 --> 03:05:05,600
 those kind of things so that's an interest with park dedication.

2734
03:05:05,600 --> 03:05:12,000
 When it comes to the zoning history Mr. Smith, this was started back before 2000, there was

2735
03:05:12,000 --> 03:05:18,100
 a different set of rules in place, the developer had gone to a lot of work trying to make plans

2736
03:05:18,100 --> 03:05:21,900
 for this and then all of a sudden there was going to be a zoning change, well those zoning

2737
03:05:21,900 --> 03:05:25,400
 change were going to kind of undo all the plans and at the recommendation of the city

2738
03:05:25,400 --> 03:05:30,960
 he came forward with a PD to preserve his efforts at that date and time.

2739
03:05:30,960 --> 03:05:38,800
 With that though he was vested in times of the time, rules in the time, at the time,

2740
03:05:38,800 --> 03:05:43,800
 which meant he didn't have a tree preservation requirement to speak of or tree mitigation,

2741
03:05:43,800 --> 03:05:49,160
 there weren't any ESAs so those things weren't in place, in removing this zoning the PD and

2742
03:05:49,160 --> 03:05:53,120
 going to straight zoning today now the property is going to be back under the current rules

2743
03:05:53,120 --> 03:05:56,200
 so those things are there out of the way.

2744
03:05:56,200 --> 03:06:02,760
 One of the differences for example was multifamily under the PD allows for 10 units per acre,

2745
03:06:02,760 --> 03:06:08,480
 that sounds pretty low but when you figure 18 acres of floodplain there's 180 units right

2746
03:06:08,480 --> 03:06:13,320
 there and then you pack them on the remaining five, now you're up to 20, 30 units per acre

2747
03:06:13,320 --> 03:06:18,080
 on the actual developable land so that's not a good comparison between the two zonings

2748
03:06:18,080 --> 03:06:23,920
 if you look at it that directly that way but this is really more compatible.

2749
03:06:23,920 --> 03:06:29,000
 Another thing with business today marketability on a speculative development such as this

2750
03:06:29,000 --> 03:06:34,760
 one, actually straight zoning is better to promote than a PD because a PD nobody knows

2751
03:06:34,760 --> 03:06:38,400
 what you have and they got to go find the ordinance and see what's written in it and

2752
03:06:38,400 --> 03:06:42,560
 study it, especially this way it's standard city zoning, you look it up, you see what

2753
03:06:42,560 --> 03:06:46,040
 it is and you make your decisions and move forward.

2754
03:06:46,040 --> 03:06:52,680
 Relative to the traffic impact analysis I want to point out we didn't want to do one.

2755
03:06:52,680 --> 03:06:56,760
 The proposed zoning is essentially the same intensity as what there is today so we're

2756
03:06:56,760 --> 03:06:59,560
 having zero impact on traffic.

2757
03:06:59,560 --> 03:07:04,080
 What the traffic impact analysis does is it shows the issues that exist today whether

2758
03:07:04,080 --> 03:07:08,240
 we zone or not including the potential for a red light on Audra.

2759
03:07:08,240 --> 03:07:13,560
 If we didn't do any rezoning and came in developed today and did a traffic impact analysis that

2760
03:07:13,560 --> 03:07:17,920
 issue would come up and those considerations would have to be made and those will be made

2761
03:07:17,920 --> 03:07:20,520
 when the first development comes through.

2762
03:07:20,520 --> 03:07:25,160
 This TIA that we did will probably serve as the background TIA for the future developments

2763
03:07:25,160 --> 03:07:29,280
 and it will get refined every time a development comes through and we go from speculation to

2764
03:07:29,280 --> 03:07:32,080
 reality.

2765
03:07:32,080 --> 03:07:38,220
 Related to the status there was a conditional letter of map revision approved with FEMA.

2766
03:07:38,220 --> 03:07:41,080
 The grading for all of that work has been done.

2767
03:07:41,080 --> 03:07:46,520
 There's still two bridges to be constructed and when those are completed then we can go

2768
03:07:46,520 --> 03:07:51,640
 follow the letter of map revision that will change the FEMA floodplain on one of our exhibits

2769
03:07:51,640 --> 03:07:52,640
 we prepared.

2770
03:07:52,640 --> 03:07:56,440
 We showed where it's going to be revised to and that's what will come back so that'll

2771
03:07:56,440 --> 03:08:01,400
 be a little lesser amount but there's still going to be significant floodplain there.

2772
03:08:01,400 --> 03:08:05,960
 There's a sanitary sewer that the design's been approved and the applicant's about to

2773
03:08:05,960 --> 03:08:10,680
 get under construction as soon as he can get his three-way agreements out of the way and

2774
03:08:10,680 --> 03:08:14,320
 pardon me, I believe that covers the issues I heard come up.

2775
03:08:14,320 --> 03:08:18,680
 I'll be glad to respond to any other questions you might have at this time.

2776
03:08:18,680 --> 03:08:20,520
 Any questions for Mr. Allison?

2777
03:08:20,520 --> 03:08:21,520
 Commissioner Pruitt?

2778
03:08:21,520 --> 03:08:22,520
 Just a quick one.

2779
03:08:22,520 --> 03:08:27,640
 I really appreciate your efforts on this parcel.

2780
03:08:27,640 --> 03:08:32,800
 Given your enthusiasm for cooperation with parks and whatnot would you be amenable to

2781
03:08:32,800 --> 03:08:38,800
 a requirement that that corridor be preserved whether it be by dedication or easement for

2782
03:08:38,800 --> 03:08:40,560
 a future trail corridor?

2783
03:08:40,560 --> 03:08:41,560
 Mr. Reif's here.

2784
03:08:41,560 --> 03:08:45,560
 We've discussed this earlier and I believe he would be amenable to anything that would

2785
03:08:45,560 --> 03:08:46,560
 preserve that.

2786
03:08:46,560 --> 03:08:50,440
 I mean we want to make sure the Parks Department will take it so I think we'll be good with

2787
03:08:50,440 --> 03:08:51,440
 that.

2788
03:08:51,440 --> 03:08:52,440
 Thank you.

2789
03:08:52,440 --> 03:08:56,160
 I don't know if it can be done or how but we'll be good with it.

2790
03:08:56,160 --> 03:09:01,560
 Is that a recommendation to council?

2791
03:09:01,560 --> 03:09:10,240
 I'm going to consult Mack Reinwald and see what he says we can do here.

2792
03:09:10,240 --> 03:09:11,480
 There's probably several options.

2793
03:09:11,480 --> 03:09:17,160
 The most legally viable method is probably to do a park development agreement in association

2794
03:09:17,160 --> 03:09:21,320
 with the zoning when it goes to council so that's something we could work on over the

2795
03:09:21,320 --> 03:09:26,520
 next few weeks if it's the preference of this board to go ahead and take an agreement to

2796
03:09:26,520 --> 03:09:31,240
 council that would memorialize how the park development and dedication would work.

2797
03:09:31,240 --> 03:09:33,000
 Thank you.

2798
03:09:33,000 --> 03:09:39,480
 Sorry, I didn't quite catch all of that.

2799
03:09:39,480 --> 03:09:42,040
 Could you try again?

2800
03:09:42,040 --> 03:09:47,560
 Right well there's a couple of options but one being somewhat unusual would be putting

2801
03:09:47,560 --> 03:09:51,680
 a condition on a straight zoning case which I think is one idea.

2802
03:09:51,680 --> 03:09:56,560
 The other would be actually taking a park dedication agreement to council in conjunction

2803
03:09:56,560 --> 03:10:01,000
 with the zoning and that's something that council if they approve the zoning could also

2804
03:10:01,000 --> 03:10:05,440
 take a second item up and approve an agreement on the same night and that'd be probably the

2805
03:10:05,440 --> 03:10:11,600
 best way of memorializing that actual concept rather than attaching it as a condition to

2806
03:10:11,600 --> 03:10:13,720
 a straight zoning case.

2807
03:10:13,720 --> 03:10:17,480
 Our only concern with the park dedication agreement would be would it delay the timing

2808
03:10:17,480 --> 03:10:19,520
 for our zoning hearing with city council?

2809
03:10:19,520 --> 03:10:24,640
 We would really like to go with the next possible city council meeting.

2810
03:10:24,640 --> 03:10:28,980
 Certainly and I think that's something that staff could expedite.

2811
03:10:28,980 --> 03:10:33,720
 And just, practically speaking, when we put a motion on the table do we just put a motion

2812
03:10:33,720 --> 03:10:38,560
 with the recommendation of a park dedication or with the condition of a park dedication

2813
03:10:38,560 --> 03:10:40,560
 going to council?

2814
03:10:40,560 --> 03:10:49,760
 I think the preference is B, to direct staffed.

2815
03:10:49,760 --> 03:10:52,400
 I don't think necessarily needs to be a part of your motion this evening but if you wanted

2816
03:10:52,400 --> 03:10:56,960
 to direct staff tonight to take an agreement as well that way it stays separate from the

2817
03:10:56,960 --> 03:10:59,320
 actual motion on the zoning case.

2818
03:10:59,320 --> 03:11:00,320
 Understood.

2819
03:11:00,320 --> 03:11:01,320
 You understand?

2820
03:11:01,320 --> 03:11:02,320
 Are we good?

2821
03:11:02,320 --> 03:11:03,320
 Yep.

2822
03:11:03,320 --> 03:11:04,320
 Great.

2823
03:11:04,320 --> 03:11:08,480
 Any other questions for Mr. Allison or the applicant?

2824
03:11:08,480 --> 03:11:10,920
 I don't see any.

2825
03:11:10,920 --> 03:11:11,920
 All right.

2826
03:11:11,920 --> 03:11:12,920
 Thank you.

2827
03:11:12,920 --> 03:11:13,920
 This is a public hearing.

2828
03:11:13,920 --> 03:11:15,520
 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so.

2829
03:11:15,520 --> 03:11:17,560
 Rachel, do we have anyone calling in?

2830
03:11:17,560 --> 03:11:18,560
 No, Chair.

2831
03:11:18,560 --> 03:11:19,560
 I'm not on this item.

2832
03:11:19,560 --> 03:11:22,840
 We struck out on all items.

2833
03:11:22,840 --> 03:11:26,520
 Seeing that there's no one else here to speak I'm going to go ahead and close the public

2834
03:11:26,520 --> 03:11:29,280
 hearing and turn it for a motion and discussion.

2835
03:11:29,280 --> 03:11:30,280
 Commissioner Smith.

2836
03:11:30,280 --> 03:11:35,960
 I'm going to make a motion to approve with a strong recommendation to staff to have a

2837
03:11:35,960 --> 03:11:41,160
 park dedication agreement or discussion brought up at city council for it to be put a part

2838
03:11:41,160 --> 03:11:42,160
 of that.

2839
03:11:42,160 --> 03:11:44,960
 We have a first for approval, Commissioner Anderson.

2840
03:11:44,960 --> 03:11:45,960
 Second.

2841
03:11:45,960 --> 03:11:51,280
 We have a first and a second for approval with the recommendation for some staff work

2842
03:11:51,280 --> 03:11:57,200
 before council having it not delay any kind of forward progress in the project.

2843
03:11:57,200 --> 03:12:00,480
 Any discussion on the item?

2844
03:12:00,480 --> 03:12:02,580
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call.

2845
03:12:02,580 --> 03:12:03,580
 Commissioner Pruitt.

2846
03:12:03,580 --> 03:12:04,580
 Aye.

2847
03:12:04,580 --> 03:12:05,580
 Commissioner Smith.

2848
03:12:05,580 --> 03:12:06,580
 Aye.

2849
03:12:06,580 --> 03:12:07,580
 Commissioner McDade.

2850
03:12:07,580 --> 03:12:08,580
 Aye.

2851
03:12:08,580 --> 03:12:09,580
 Chair is an aye.

2852
03:12:09,580 --> 03:12:10,580
 Commissioner Anderson.

2853
03:12:10,580 --> 03:12:15,240
 I would not hold that traffic light against you guys, so I vote as an aye.

2854
03:12:15,240 --> 03:12:17,280
 You say you're in support?

2855
03:12:17,280 --> 03:12:18,280
 Okay.

2856
03:12:18,280 --> 03:12:19,280
 Commissioner Ellis.

2857
03:12:19,280 --> 03:12:20,280
 Aye.

2858
03:12:20,280 --> 03:12:21,280
 Chair is 6-0.

2859
03:12:21,280 --> 03:12:22,280
 Congratulations.

2860
03:12:22,280 --> 03:12:30,520
 That brings us to the last item this evening, which is to talk about the matrix.

2861
03:12:30,520 --> 03:12:35,600
 And I will turn it to Hayley for any updates first and then to the dais for discussion.

2862
03:12:35,600 --> 03:12:41,440
 I actually don't think I have any updates this evening.

2863
03:12:41,440 --> 03:12:46,360
 There was kind of that summer break for council, if you will, so we haven't had any items go

2864
03:12:46,360 --> 03:12:48,240
 before them yet.

2865
03:12:48,240 --> 03:12:52,320
 So no updates tonight, but happy to add anything to the matrix that you all might want to see

2866
03:12:52,320 --> 03:12:54,680
 at upcoming work sessions.

2867
03:12:54,680 --> 03:12:55,920
 Great.

2868
03:12:55,920 --> 03:13:03,040
 Any questions about the matrix or any items that we would like to place on the matrix?

2869
03:13:03,040 --> 03:13:04,040
 Commissioner Smith.

2870
03:13:04,040 --> 03:13:05,040
 Thank you, Chair.

2871
03:13:05,040 --> 03:13:11,120
 Hayley, I know we talked about a change to the mobility plan based off of what the draft

2872
03:13:11,120 --> 03:13:14,600
 mobility plan is there.

2873
03:13:14,600 --> 03:13:19,000
 Regardless of the conversation that happened the night of the dais, I'm afraid if there's

2874
03:13:19,000 --> 03:13:28,440
 other neighborhoods like Rancho States that has an arterial that's mobility planned to

2875
03:13:28,440 --> 03:13:29,440
 go right through it.

2876
03:13:29,440 --> 03:13:33,680
 Nothing obviously in it works for it, but in the mobility plan it's there, and so maybe

2877
03:13:33,680 --> 03:13:37,320
 a couple other sets of eyes of folks that know neighborhoods and whatnot might be good.

2878
03:13:37,320 --> 03:13:41,640
 If there is a draft mobility plan, you can send out to the commission, they can look

2879
03:13:41,640 --> 03:13:43,720
 over, try to see if there's any trouble spots and bring up.

2880
03:13:43,720 --> 03:13:47,160
 It's not necessarily a work session item, but more of just this is where it's at right

2881
03:13:47,160 --> 03:13:48,160
 now.

2882
03:13:48,160 --> 03:13:49,160
 Bring up any points.

2883
03:13:49,160 --> 03:13:53,080
 I know you'll be bringing them back to the commission to review, but it might save us

2884
03:13:53,080 --> 03:13:57,840
 some time during work session reports of having to see mobility plans, and it gives us a little

2885
03:13:57,840 --> 03:14:01,240
 bit more time to chew on it now and throw up some red flags if we see any.

2886
03:14:01,240 --> 03:14:02,240
 Sure, yeah.

2887
03:14:02,240 --> 03:14:06,720
 I'll talk to our city engineer and see if we can get you all a link to that.

2888
03:14:06,720 --> 03:14:07,720
 Okay.

2889
03:14:07,720 --> 03:14:09,880
 I have one item.

2890
03:14:09,880 --> 03:14:16,720
 I recently met with the individual potentially going to be taking over my seat in the short

2891
03:14:16,720 --> 03:14:26,400
 order, and I just want to encourage or reinforce or even ask that there's a formal orientation

2892
03:14:26,400 --> 03:14:27,520
 for new commissioners.

2893
03:14:27,520 --> 03:14:32,280
 I don't know what was in place for Commissioner McDade, they might have had a great one.

2894
03:14:32,280 --> 03:14:37,680
 I don't know, but I would strongly encourage some kind of structure around that.

2895
03:14:37,680 --> 03:14:41,600
 I don't know if it's Julie's boot camp that she's been working on over the years, and

2896
03:14:41,600 --> 03:14:46,840
 I'm happy now to volunteer my time to sit in those meetings or to help figure that out.

2897
03:14:46,840 --> 03:14:53,120
 For the sake of continuity and continued progress as big projects are coming on, I would love

2898
03:14:53,120 --> 03:15:01,820
 to see, and I'm volunteering any of my help to try to make commissioner transition as

2899
03:15:01,820 --> 03:15:03,200
 easy as possible.

2900
03:15:03,200 --> 03:15:07,040
 If staff could start thinking about that, I think it would be really helpful for all

2901
03:15:07,040 --> 03:15:10,260
 commissioners to have that resource as they on board.

2902
03:15:10,260 --> 03:15:11,260
 Sure.

2903
03:15:11,260 --> 03:15:13,040
 That is very much appreciated.

2904
03:15:13,040 --> 03:15:16,560
 Just so you all know, we are planning hopefully starting next meeting to once a month start

2905
03:15:16,560 --> 03:15:21,440
 up the boot camp series and get a very solid set of those completed by the end of the year

2906
03:15:21,440 --> 03:15:24,920
 so that that can become kind of a handbook for new commissioners, but in the meantime

2907
03:15:24,920 --> 03:15:29,160
 certainly I think we'd be amenable to setting up some meetings and helping the new commissioners

2908
03:15:29,160 --> 03:15:32,320
 get up to speed as well as your potential replacements.

2909
03:15:32,320 --> 03:15:33,320
 Awesome.

2910
03:15:33,320 --> 03:15:34,560
 Thank you.

2911
03:15:34,560 --> 03:15:37,520
 Any other items for the matrix, commissioner Ellis.

2912
03:15:37,520 --> 03:15:38,520
 Thank you, chair.

2913
03:15:38,520 --> 03:15:41,320
 Just actually just wanted to comment a little bit on that point.

2914
03:15:41,320 --> 03:15:46,600
 I know when I came on some five years ago, there was a one on one that I came and had.

2915
03:15:46,600 --> 03:15:48,860
 I think we got away from that a little bit.

2916
03:15:48,860 --> 03:15:50,420
 It absolutely needs to happen.

2917
03:15:50,420 --> 03:15:55,040
 I mean, it was, you know, obviously we can't go through everything, but at least there is

2918
03:15:55,040 --> 03:16:01,120
 just the high level overview of what the role is.

2919
03:16:01,120 --> 03:16:03,960
 So yeah, we need to put that back in.

2920
03:16:03,960 --> 03:16:07,880
 And I know we're shortstaffed and busy.

2921
03:16:07,880 --> 03:16:09,440
 Thank you.

2922
03:16:09,440 --> 03:16:10,440
 Okay.

2923
03:16:10,440 --> 03:16:14,560
 Seeing no other items, I'm going to close the meeting at 829.

2924
03:16:14,560 --> 03:16:15,800
 Thank you.