WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.440 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission 00:00:06.440 --> 00:00:09.840 work session meeting for Wednesday, July 14th, 2021. 00:00:09.840 --> 00:00:16.360 Seeing that we have a quorum, I'll call the meeting to order at 433. 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 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 00:00:24.320 --> 00:00:25.320 agenda items. 00:00:25.320 --> 00:00:31.640 Meeting first with item two, consider the approval of the June 23rd, 2021 minutes. 00:00:31.640 --> 00:00:37.360 Is there any edits or talking points on the minutes this evening? 00:00:37.360 --> 00:00:38.360 Great. 00:00:38.360 --> 00:00:41.080 That moves us to our consent agenda. 00:00:41.080 --> 00:00:44.000 We have two, a final plat and a preliminary plat. 00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:47.560 Is there any questions on these that we can call up? 00:00:47.560 --> 00:00:48.560 City planners on this. 00:00:48.560 --> 00:00:50.440 Any questions on the consent? 00:00:50.440 --> 00:00:51.440 Okay. 00:00:51.440 --> 00:00:52.440 Great. 00:00:52.440 --> 00:01:00.760 Let's hop into the items for individual consideration, starting with 4AFP20-0027C, presented by 00:01:00.760 --> 00:01:01.760 Haley. 00:01:01.760 --> 00:01:02.760 You're presenting this one? 00:01:02.760 --> 00:01:03.760 >> I will. 00:01:03.760 --> 00:01:04.760 Yeah. 00:01:04.760 --> 00:01:07.760 Who do you mind filling up the presentation? 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 00:01:14.840 --> 00:01:15.840 Street. 00:01:15.840 --> 00:01:18.040 It's one you all have seen several times before. 00:01:18.040 --> 00:01:21.760 A new version of the plat was sent to you just this afternoon. 00:01:21.760 --> 00:01:27.420 So since the agenda posting, the applicant has been able to work through all of their 00:01:27.420 --> 00:01:31.120 outstanding comments related to review of their deed restrictions and some just easement 00:01:31.120 --> 00:01:35.740 mislabelings and cleanup type items. 00:01:35.740 --> 00:01:38.920 So we are able to recommend approval of the plat this evening. 00:01:38.920 --> 00:01:44.080 I'm happy to answer any questions if you all have them on this one. 00:01:44.080 --> 00:01:45.560 Any questions for Haley? 00:01:45.560 --> 00:01:46.560 Okay. 00:01:46.560 --> 00:01:53.680 Seeing none, we'll move to the next item of business, item 4B, PP21-0012. 00:01:53.680 --> 00:01:55.120 This also is Haley. 00:01:55.120 --> 00:01:56.120 Yes. 00:01:56.120 --> 00:02:02.280 So this next plat is a single lot industrial development for -- I'm sorry. 00:02:02.280 --> 00:02:04.440 This is actually three lots. 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 00:02:09.480 --> 00:02:10.940 recently rezoned. 00:02:10.940 --> 00:02:16.080 So at this time, the plat is recommended for denial as they have several outstanding comments 00:02:16.080 --> 00:02:17.440 that they have not yet worked through. 00:02:17.440 --> 00:02:20.160 However, they have requested that extension. 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 00:02:23.960 --> 00:02:24.960 now. 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 00:02:28.500 --> 00:02:29.920 to that request. 00:02:29.920 --> 00:02:32.640 So I'm happy to answer any questions on this project as well. 00:02:32.640 --> 00:02:35.200 Any questions for Haley? 00:02:35.200 --> 00:02:39.060 All right. 00:02:39.060 --> 00:02:44.580 Seeing none, we'll move to the next item, 4C, FR21-0006. 00:02:44.580 --> 00:02:45.720 This is Ron's item. 00:02:45.720 --> 00:02:46.720 I had a question. 00:02:46.720 --> 00:02:51.400 I just had a quick question. 00:02:51.400 --> 00:02:52.400 What was the date on that? 00:02:52.400 --> 00:02:54.440 I just didn't hear. 00:02:54.440 --> 00:02:55.440 It was August 4th. 00:02:55.440 --> 00:02:56.440 Okay. 00:02:56.440 --> 00:02:57.440 Thank you. 00:02:57.440 --> 00:03:09.160 A development just south of I-35, Eagle Creek. 00:03:09.160 --> 00:03:10.520 It is a residential development. 00:03:10.520 --> 00:03:13.160 It is a multi-phase development. 00:03:13.160 --> 00:03:17.760 The development or the phase that they're proposing with this final replant is phase 00:03:17.760 --> 00:03:18.760 4. 00:03:18.760 --> 00:03:26.080 It contains 216 residential lots and three open space lots, HOA lots. 00:03:26.080 --> 00:03:31.520 The staff is recommending denial as the applicant has not met the requirements or the criteria 00:03:31.520 --> 00:03:41.920 for approval per the DDC, specifically sections 832D, 835, and 836J related to notification 00:03:41.920 --> 00:03:45.280 as well as HOA documentation. 00:03:45.280 --> 00:03:50.280 There was an extension already on this item, so there will not be an extension. 00:03:50.280 --> 00:03:54.880 Again, staff is recommending denial, and I'll stand for any questions. 00:03:54.880 --> 00:03:59.000 Ron, has the other phases already been plotted, if you can remind me? 00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:00.000 There have been approvals. 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 00:04:05.240 --> 00:04:07.080 has already been approved. 00:04:07.080 --> 00:04:08.080 Okay. 00:04:08.080 --> 00:04:09.080 Yes. 00:04:09.080 --> 00:04:10.080 Great. 00:04:10.080 --> 00:04:11.080 Any other questions for Ron? 00:04:11.080 --> 00:04:12.080 All right. 00:04:12.080 --> 00:04:14.040 I don't see any. 00:04:14.040 --> 00:04:19.200 Next is item 4D, PP21-0011B. 00:04:19.200 --> 00:04:20.200 This is Corrina. 00:04:20.200 --> 00:04:21.200 Good afternoon. 00:04:21.200 --> 00:04:24.680 Corrina Maldonado, Associate Planner. 00:04:24.680 --> 00:04:30.600 The preliminary plat before you today is PP21-0011B. 00:04:30.600 --> 00:04:33.960 This was brought forth to you at the previous Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and 00:04:33.960 --> 00:04:39.200 you recommended an extension of this item. 00:04:39.200 --> 00:04:44.560 Staff was previously recommending denial of this item, and is now recommending approval, 00:04:44.560 --> 00:04:51.320 as they now have met all requirements, including preliminary tree preservation within our code, 00:04:51.320 --> 00:04:53.320 and I can take any questions on this. 00:04:53.320 --> 00:04:54.320 Great. 00:04:54.320 --> 00:04:57.320 Any questions for Corrina? 00:04:57.320 --> 00:04:58.320 I do not see any. 00:04:58.320 --> 00:04:59.320 Thank you. 00:04:59.320 --> 00:05:10.680 That brings us to item 4E, ZCP21-0017, and this is also Corrina. 00:05:10.680 --> 00:05:16.920 Thank you. 00:05:16.920 --> 00:05:25.640 This is ZCP21-0017 for Razor Ranch Multifamily at Heritage Trail. 00:05:25.640 --> 00:05:30.680 The request today is for a consideration of approval of a site plan for a multifamily 00:05:30.680 --> 00:05:31.680 use. 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 00:05:40.220 --> 00:05:41.840 East addition. 00:05:41.840 --> 00:05:46.080 They will have to replat into one lot for this site. 00:05:46.080 --> 00:05:48.760 It is located in the Razor Ranch Overlay District. 00:05:48.760 --> 00:05:51.760 You can see that the aerial map doesn't give it justice. 00:05:51.760 --> 00:05:55.600 A lot of this is already starting to develop, but it is located here in yellow. 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 00:06:01.380 --> 00:06:08.720 Trail to the west, Panhandle Street to the south, and East Park Boulevard to the east. 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 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 00:06:20.240 --> 00:06:23.560 South Mixed Use District of the Overlay District. 00:06:23.560 --> 00:06:29.520 The proposed use of multifamily is permitted in this area, and just wanted to point out 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 00:06:37.240 --> 00:06:42.800 or amending the concept plan to revise the southern portion, which was previously indicating 00:06:42.800 --> 00:06:49.000 a park use, and changed that to now allow for the multifamily use. 00:06:49.000 --> 00:06:54.680 The multifamily standards for this site, those located east of Heritage Trail, are subject 00:06:54.680 --> 00:07:00.240 to architectural landscape standards found in Ordinance Z18-0026, and that would be 00:07:00.240 --> 00:07:03.200 Exhibit C2A. 00:07:03.200 --> 00:07:09.120 Like all other site plans for the Razor Ranch Overlay District, this does require approval 00:07:09.120 --> 00:07:10.800 through the Planning and Zoning Commission. 00:07:10.800 --> 00:07:13.960 Typically, you don't see these site plans. 00:07:13.960 --> 00:07:17.920 They're administrative with staff, but for Razor Ranch, this is why you're seeing this 00:07:17.920 --> 00:07:18.920 today. 00:07:18.920 --> 00:07:22.920 So what is included in this approval today, or consideration of approval, is the site 00:07:22.920 --> 00:07:27.000 plan, landscape plan, and elevations. 00:07:27.000 --> 00:07:31.500 So the criteria for approval of site plans within the Overlay District are located on 00:07:31.500 --> 00:07:32.500 the screen. 00:07:32.500 --> 00:07:38.080 So those would be that the site plan substantially complies with the concept and schematic plan 00:07:38.080 --> 00:07:42.560 that's approved by council for the Overlay District, second that the site plan provides 00:07:42.560 --> 00:07:47.360 for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that would not adversely affect 00:07:47.360 --> 00:07:52.280 adjoining neighborhoods or properties, third that the site plan provides for adequate and 00:07:52.280 --> 00:07:58.000 safe circulation of vehicular traffic, and that the plan fully complies with all other 00:07:58.000 --> 00:08:01.600 sections of the Overlay District. 00:08:01.600 --> 00:08:04.200 So first, I'll go through the site plan. 00:08:04.200 --> 00:08:08.120 I've tried to highlight some areas to make it easier to identify. 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 00:08:19.720 --> 00:08:22.440 as the administrative leasing office. 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. 00:08:27.160 --> 00:08:33.280 It's a total of 322 dwelling units with multiple amenities on site. 00:08:33.280 --> 00:08:39.560 That includes a dock park located in this green area here, a sports court, pool amenity 00:08:39.560 --> 00:08:46.840 area, the clubhouse, and a tot park playground and plaza area. 00:08:46.840 --> 00:08:50.840 So overall, they're providing 74.9% lot coverage. 00:08:50.840 --> 00:08:54.200 That's less than the maximum of 90%. 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. 00:09:00.000 --> 00:09:04.180 The maximum required is 8%. 00:09:04.180 --> 00:09:07.240 The maximum allowed height in this area is 100 feet. 00:09:07.240 --> 00:09:09.680 They're actually under with 85 feet. 00:09:09.680 --> 00:09:15.120 This is about seven stories, and they're providing 515 parking spaces. 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, 00:09:20.840 --> 00:09:24.880 they are allowed to exceed the maximum. 00:09:24.880 --> 00:09:27.280 So this is the landscape plan for the site. 00:09:27.280 --> 00:09:30.360 It does meet all the minimum landscape requirements. 00:09:30.360 --> 00:09:33.840 They are providing 21% landscape area. 00:09:33.840 --> 00:09:36.240 The minimum would be 10%. 00:09:36.240 --> 00:09:41.440 They're also providing 42% tree canopy, and the minimum being 20%. 00:09:41.440 --> 00:09:46.840 On this site, they are also incorporating some various alternatives. 00:09:46.840 --> 00:09:51.280 That would be the use of green screens on the southern parking. 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 00:09:56.040 --> 00:10:03.280 raised planters on the southern parking, which is a split parking design. 00:10:03.280 --> 00:10:06.920 I'm just very quickly going through the elevations. 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, 00:10:14.440 --> 00:10:19.760 and then these would be the outward facing elevations, facing East Park and Heritage 00:10:19.760 --> 00:10:20.760 Trail. 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 00:10:27.840 --> 00:10:33.800 well as the split parking that's viewable from Panhandle Street. 00:10:33.800 --> 00:10:37.440 So with that, staff is recommending approval of the request, as it does meet the established 00:10:37.440 --> 00:10:41.720 requirements of the Razor Ranch Overlay District, with the following conditions. 00:10:41.720 --> 00:10:47.440 First, that any public utility easements that are shown on the site plan is being abandoned 00:10:47.440 --> 00:10:52.680 in order to accommodate the proposed building locations, must be abandoned prior to the 00:10:52.680 --> 00:10:54.880 issuance of any building permits. 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 00:11:00.360 --> 00:11:05.880 the Razor Ranch East addition into one lot, again, prior to any building permits. 00:11:05.880 --> 00:11:08.080 And with that, I can take any questions. 00:11:08.080 --> 00:11:09.080 Great. 00:11:09.080 --> 00:11:10.200 Thank you. 00:11:10.200 --> 00:11:12.200 Any questions for Karina? 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 00:11:20.200 --> 00:11:21.200 – that's fine. 00:11:21.200 --> 00:11:22.200 This one's – nope. 00:11:22.200 --> 00:11:23.200 That one's perfect. 00:11:23.200 --> 00:11:24.200 Okay. 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 00:11:28.400 --> 00:11:29.400 park. 00:11:29.400 --> 00:11:33.800 Was there any conversation around putting the kids' park right at that intersection? 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 00:11:39.480 --> 00:11:43.000 seem like not the most protected spot for kids to be playing in. 00:11:43.000 --> 00:11:44.420 Was there any conversation around that? 00:11:44.420 --> 00:11:49.640 There was no direct conversation related to the placement adjacent on the east side where 00:11:49.640 --> 00:11:52.600 the senior living apartment complex is. 00:11:52.600 --> 00:11:59.480 They did a similar design where I believe it's a pool area. 00:11:59.480 --> 00:12:02.880 That conversation was had then about the placement. 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. 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 00:12:14.400 --> 00:12:17.120 opposite side of East Park. 00:12:17.120 --> 00:12:21.320 And for clarification, there's a pool opposite the intersection here? 00:12:21.320 --> 00:12:22.320 I haven't heard of that either. 00:12:22.320 --> 00:12:23.680 Haley can speak to it better than I can. 00:12:23.680 --> 00:12:25.720 This was more when she came through with Razor. 00:12:25.720 --> 00:12:26.720 Correct. 00:12:26.720 --> 00:12:32.500 You can kind of see it on the kind of northeast corner of your screen there. 00:12:32.500 --> 00:12:37.120 The amenity – outdoor amenity area and pool at the adjacent facility on the opposite side 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, 00:12:42.320 --> 00:12:43.900 Razor Ranch Park to the north. 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 00:12:48.080 --> 00:12:52.040 back a little bit, having that amenity area at the front. 00:12:52.040 --> 00:12:55.720 And I believe it will be fenced, of course, at this location for security. 00:12:55.720 --> 00:12:56.720 Yes. 00:12:56.720 --> 00:12:57.720 And I apologize. 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. 00:13:02.280 --> 00:13:07.120 This area here is where they are fencing in around that top park. 00:13:07.120 --> 00:13:09.120 It does extend here. 00:13:09.120 --> 00:13:12.560 So the building would basically block any entrance. 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 00:13:17.480 --> 00:13:23.720 walls and then pedestrian entrances from East Park Heritage in the north on Linden. 00:13:23.720 --> 00:13:27.360 But this is, as Haley mentioned, a fenced-in area. 00:13:27.360 --> 00:13:28.360 Great. 00:13:28.360 --> 00:13:29.360 Thanks. 00:13:29.360 --> 00:13:30.360 Any other questions? 00:13:30.360 --> 00:13:33.200 I don't see any. 00:13:33.200 --> 00:13:34.880 Thank you, Corina. 00:13:34.880 --> 00:13:37.600 The next item of business moves us into the public hearings. 00:13:37.600 --> 00:13:43.080 We'll start with 5AZ21-0007C. 00:13:43.080 --> 00:13:46.680 And this is yours, Corina. 00:13:46.680 --> 00:13:50.720 All right. 00:13:50.720 --> 00:13:51.720 Thank you again. 00:13:51.720 --> 00:13:58.960 This is a zoning case, so Z21-007 for the Jim Crystal Road rezoning. 00:13:58.960 --> 00:14:04.600 The request is for, again, a rezoning for approximately 30.43 acres. 00:14:04.600 --> 00:14:09.940 This is going from public facilities to Light Industrial District. 00:14:09.940 --> 00:14:13.160 The site can be shown here in yellow. 00:14:13.160 --> 00:14:20.360 This is city-owned property that was acquired in 2017 to accommodate the Denton Energy Center. 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 00:14:24.400 --> 00:14:29.920 aerial, of what is city-owned property, so the rezoning would just be two portions within 00:14:29.920 --> 00:14:35.560 that area, which I'll refer to as the northern and southern portions. 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 00:14:41.920 --> 00:14:48.280 that's owned by public entities, including the city, was automatically zoned PF, and 00:14:48.280 --> 00:14:54.560 these areas are, again, intended for provision of public and community services like fire 00:14:54.560 --> 00:14:59.400 stations, schools, basic utilities like the Denton Energy Center. 00:14:59.400 --> 00:15:06.800 So the rezoning is intended to support Denton Municipal Electric's proposed ground lease 00:15:06.800 --> 00:15:11.440 to a third party as part of a modular data center warehouse development. 00:15:11.440 --> 00:15:16.600 This was brought forth with city council in previous work session. 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 00:15:23.840 --> 00:15:31.160 that warehouse use, which would be permitted in LI but not in the PF zoning district. 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 00:15:37.560 --> 00:15:39.820 something. 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 00:15:46.280 --> 00:15:47.280 2019. 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. 00:15:53.720 --> 00:15:58.760 That was one of our previous industrial zonings. 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 00:16:02.920 --> 00:16:11.160 slide, the PF taken out, that would have transitioned to the HI zoning district. 00:16:11.160 --> 00:16:17.840 You can see that reflected in this small area here where the Encore substation is. 00:16:17.840 --> 00:16:23.640 So anything that's not city owned property has transitioned to the HI district, and so 00:16:23.640 --> 00:16:30.320 the request today is actually for a lesser intensive zoning district of the LI, Light 00:16:30.320 --> 00:16:33.680 Industrial District. 00:16:33.680 --> 00:16:36.000 So I'll go through the general approval criteria. 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 00:16:39.840 --> 00:16:46.680 today, including the comprehensive plan, impacts to surrounding property, and adequate public 00:16:46.680 --> 00:16:47.680 facilities. 00:16:47.680 --> 00:16:53.560 Again, with the zoning criteria, I'll just go over the ones highlighted that are similar 00:16:53.560 --> 00:16:56.520 to the general criteria. 00:16:56.520 --> 00:17:01.060 So first, the general criterion three and zoning criterion one related to the Denton 00:17:01.060 --> 00:17:02.840 Plan 2030. 00:17:02.840 --> 00:17:06.880 So the future land use for this area is industrial commerce. 00:17:06.880 --> 00:17:12.080 It is predominantly intended for light and heavy industrial, so the light industrial 00:17:12.080 --> 00:17:17.960 district is consistent with this designation, but it does offer a less intensive zoning 00:17:17.960 --> 00:17:21.880 than a heavy industrial district would allow. 00:17:21.880 --> 00:17:27.480 The primary uses for this industrial commerce area are for manufacturing, assembly, fabrication, 00:17:27.480 --> 00:17:32.400 and wholesale and distribution, so the proposed warehouse use is consistent with the intended 00:17:32.400 --> 00:17:35.680 uses in this designation. 00:17:35.680 --> 00:17:42.880 Next, speaking about general criterion eight and zoning criterion five, and minimizing 00:17:42.880 --> 00:17:45.920 the adverse impacts to the surrounding property. 00:17:45.920 --> 00:17:52.080 So as you can see, the northern portion is approximately 1,000 feet east and approximately 00:17:52.080 --> 00:17:54.120 1,000 feet south. 00:17:54.120 --> 00:17:58.760 From the nearest residential zoning, it's difficult to see here, so I've provided some 00:17:58.760 --> 00:18:00.280 arrows to show. 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 00:18:04.960 --> 00:18:08.800 buffered by an HI zoning. 00:18:08.800 --> 00:18:15.080 The closest, most adjacent uses to that northern portion is, again, the Encore substation, 00:18:15.080 --> 00:18:21.880 and then the Denton Electric Energy Center, excuse me, to the south, as well as flood 00:18:21.880 --> 00:18:24.420 plain on the east side. 00:18:24.420 --> 00:18:30.480 So the southern portion is very similar in adjacent uses. 00:18:30.480 --> 00:18:35.360 Actually to the south, it is abutted by the rural residential zoning. 00:18:35.360 --> 00:18:41.800 That property to the south was annexed in 2010, and under the 2002 zoning was given 00:18:41.800 --> 00:18:45.120 the placeholder zoning of RD5X. 00:18:45.120 --> 00:18:53.400 When this transitioned in the 2019 zoning, it was given that RR as a base zoning. 00:18:53.400 --> 00:18:59.120 Existing on the southern portion, or sorry, south of the southern portion, are some active 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 00:19:05.360 --> 00:19:11.400 into residential in the future due to our gas well setbacks. 00:19:11.400 --> 00:19:18.240 Next, just talking about existing facilities, so to serve the site, there is existing water 00:19:18.240 --> 00:19:22.440 and sewer to both the northern and southern portions. 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. 00:19:28.440 --> 00:19:34.360 The subject sites do have access directly from Jim Crystal through way of private access, 00:19:34.360 --> 00:19:39.200 and for emergency services, the site is served by Fire Station 3. 00:19:39.200 --> 00:19:43.760 This is the new fire station at 1401 Underwood. 00:19:43.760 --> 00:19:47.880 We did have some public outreach notices were sent out. 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 00:19:51.960 --> 00:19:56.840 property with a few exceptions, so we have not received any responses. 00:19:56.840 --> 00:20:01.360 We did hold a virtual community meeting on June 17th. 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 00:20:07.160 --> 00:20:08.160 site. 00:20:08.160 --> 00:20:15.640 The main questions, we did have a few people in attendance, were related to noise mitigation, 00:20:15.640 --> 00:20:20.200 what the adjacent zoning looked like, and how they would be impacted by the supply for 00:20:20.200 --> 00:20:21.200 electricity. 00:20:21.200 --> 00:20:27.600 DME was in attendance to address any concerns, and the overall response from the public was 00:20:27.600 --> 00:20:28.600 positive. 00:20:28.600 --> 00:20:33.840 With this, staff does recommend approval of the request as it does comply with the general 00:20:33.840 --> 00:20:39.080 criteria and zoning criteria in Section 2.4E of the Debt and Development Code in Section 00:20:39.080 --> 00:20:42.080 272D. 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. 00:20:48.640 --> 00:20:51.960 That's next Tuesday. 00:20:51.960 --> 00:20:57.480 In relation to the project, on July 27th, city council will consider a lease agreement 00:20:57.480 --> 00:21:00.280 and a power purchase agreement for the site. 00:21:00.280 --> 00:21:02.480 With that, I can take any questions. 00:21:02.480 --> 00:21:08.920 DME will be here to answer any questions during the regular session. 00:21:08.920 --> 00:21:09.920 Great. 00:21:09.920 --> 00:21:10.920 Thank you, Carina. 00:21:10.920 --> 00:21:11.920 Any questions? 00:21:11.920 --> 00:21:16.920 I have maybe two. 00:21:16.920 --> 00:21:23.120 One, tangential to this conversation, you said the property to the west is buffered 00:21:23.120 --> 00:21:24.120 by an HI. 00:21:24.120 --> 00:21:32.180 Is HI an appropriate buffer from a LI zoning into R2? 00:21:32.180 --> 00:21:36.800 The HI is an existing zoning. 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, 00:21:41.280 --> 00:21:42.280 so it's PF. 00:21:42.280 --> 00:21:44.560 HI is what's already existing. 00:21:44.560 --> 00:21:49.720 The space between the HI and the proposed site, maybe I should just pull the presentation 00:21:49.720 --> 00:21:50.720 back up. 00:21:50.720 --> 00:21:54.440 But there is a significant spacing in between. 00:21:54.440 --> 00:21:58.440 If there's any development of the HI, there is mitigations when an HI development goes 00:21:58.440 --> 00:22:01.160 into an R2. 00:22:01.160 --> 00:22:04.480 Right now, the R2, there's an existing home there. 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 00:22:12.340 --> 00:22:19.200 all industrial in nature, even if it's city property, the existing uses are substations 00:22:19.200 --> 00:22:20.200 and gas wells. 00:22:20.200 --> 00:22:21.200 Gotcha. 00:22:21.200 --> 00:22:23.160 You mentioned on the earlier slide that it's a private company. 00:22:23.160 --> 00:22:25.200 Is that contract existing? 00:22:25.200 --> 00:22:26.800 Is it public? 00:22:26.800 --> 00:22:29.400 I think someone can answer that. 00:22:29.400 --> 00:22:30.680 That is not me. 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. 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 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 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. 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. 00:22:58.800 --> 00:23:03.280 That's why I was wondering, is the company public? 00:23:03.280 --> 00:23:07.280 I do not believe so, defer to Matt on that one. 00:23:07.280 --> 00:23:08.280 Right. 00:23:08.280 --> 00:23:13.240 My understanding at this point is it's still subject to non-disclosure agreement. 00:23:13.240 --> 00:23:17.800 Whoever Tanaska is working with, so that's still not public information at this point. 00:23:17.800 --> 00:23:18.800 Okay. 00:23:18.800 --> 00:23:19.800 Great. 00:23:19.800 --> 00:23:22.480 Any other questions for Karina? 00:23:22.480 --> 00:23:26.320 All right. 00:23:26.320 --> 00:23:31.960 Moving on to item 5B, Z20-0005B. 00:23:31.960 --> 00:23:34.120 This is Julie Wyatt's item. 00:23:34.120 --> 00:23:36.040 Good evening. 00:23:36.040 --> 00:23:40.440 Let me pull up my presentation. 00:23:40.440 --> 00:23:44.920 Here we go. 00:23:44.920 --> 00:23:45.920 Good evening. 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, 00:23:51.520 --> 00:23:53.640 Denton Commerce Center. 00:23:53.640 --> 00:23:57.560 So the request before you is to rezone approximately 142 acres. 00:23:57.560 --> 00:23:58.560 Julie. 00:23:58.560 --> 00:23:59.560 Presentation. 00:23:59.560 --> 00:24:00.560 It's not shared. 00:24:00.560 --> 00:24:08.800 I promised I wouldn't do that, and then I did it. 00:24:08.800 --> 00:24:14.040 I apologize. 00:24:14.040 --> 00:24:15.040 There we go. 00:24:15.040 --> 00:24:16.040 Okay. 00:24:16.040 --> 00:24:23.760 So, the request is to rezone about 142 acres from mixed use regional to light industrial 00:24:23.760 --> 00:24:24.760 district. 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 00:24:32.120 --> 00:24:33.640 eventually be extended. 00:24:33.640 --> 00:24:40.280 It's just on the north side of that future Loop 288 alignment. 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 00:24:45.120 --> 00:24:49.040 proposing LI, which is in the light blue. 00:24:49.040 --> 00:24:52.880 The criteria for approval for a zoning case is in subchapter 2 of the Denton Development 00:24:52.880 --> 00:24:56.200 code, both the general and specific. 00:24:56.200 --> 00:25:00.160 First thing we always look at is the future land use map, the Denton Plan 2030. 00:25:00.160 --> 00:25:04.520 The subject property has a future land use designation of business innovation. 00:25:04.520 --> 00:25:09.600 That's intended for those large tracts of land to support those employment type uses, 00:25:09.600 --> 00:25:15.200 larger scale offices, employment parks, industrial type uses. 00:25:15.200 --> 00:25:20.640 It does have supporting uses such as retail, hotels, and residential that could be potentially 00:25:20.640 --> 00:25:22.840 be appropriate. 00:25:22.840 --> 00:25:27.000 Currently we see two zoning districts within business innovation, LI and GO. 00:25:27.000 --> 00:25:29.640 In this instance, LI is consistent. 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 00:25:34.920 --> 00:25:39.160 scale that is typically found in business innovation. 00:25:39.160 --> 00:25:43.640 One commissioner did have questions about commercial development standards. 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 00:25:50.000 --> 00:25:55.240 Development code requires that any structures within 250 feet of that ultimate right of 00:25:55.240 --> 00:25:59.360 way would have to comply with our commercial design standards. 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 00:26:03.200 --> 00:26:04.460 it would have to comply. 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 00:26:10.920 --> 00:26:14.440 areas that it would have to comply with those commercial design standards. 00:26:14.440 --> 00:26:18.880 Then additionally, I just wanted to point out that both the Planning and Zoning Commission 00:26:18.880 --> 00:26:23.760 and City Council have talked about a small area plan for this general area because there 00:26:23.760 --> 00:26:28.480 is a lot of development pressure and this is one of our gateways to the city. 00:26:28.480 --> 00:26:34.280 As indicated in those discussions about that small area plan, it's kind of indicated that 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. 00:26:39.800 --> 00:26:44.160 This is consistent with that discussion. 00:26:44.160 --> 00:26:48.480 Another criterion for approval is significant changes in the area to warrant the zoning 00:26:48.480 --> 00:26:50.240 change. 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. 00:26:54.840 --> 00:26:58.200 We looked at that 1999 Denton plan. 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 00:27:05.560 --> 00:27:12.000 mixed use center, more commercial uses, and the zoning reflected that vision. 00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:19.160 The zoning was one of our regional mixed use districts that was available under that 2002 00:27:19.160 --> 00:27:20.160 code. 00:27:20.160 --> 00:27:25.880 So that 1999 plan, that vision, and the zoning were consistent. 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 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 00:27:36.520 --> 00:27:41.360 a regional commercial center and so the vision for this area changed to that more employment 00:27:41.360 --> 00:27:43.400 uses, that business innovation. 00:27:43.400 --> 00:27:46.200 However, the zoning kind of stayed in place. 00:27:46.200 --> 00:27:52.320 So that zoning then transitioned with the 2019 plan to that MR district. 00:27:52.320 --> 00:27:55.000 So that's really how that zoning got in place. 00:27:55.000 --> 00:27:57.320 So you can see the subject property here. 00:27:57.320 --> 00:27:58.320 This map is from 1999. 00:27:58.320 --> 00:28:01.800 There wasn't a lot out there in 1999. 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 00:28:07.880 --> 00:28:13.840 Plan showing that regional mixed use center along with the subject property with that 00:28:13.840 --> 00:28:14.840 star. 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 00:28:19.240 --> 00:28:21.680 that new vision. 00:28:21.680 --> 00:28:25.840 Another criterion minimizes adverse impacts on surrounding property. 00:28:25.840 --> 00:28:31.520 LI district is appropriate in this area, not anticipated to create adverse impacts. 00:28:31.520 --> 00:28:36.360 A lot of the surrounding property is either undeveloped or maybe has agricultural uses. 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 00:28:41.720 --> 00:28:47.560 that future land use designation and that that zoning will continue to track with that 00:28:47.560 --> 00:28:51.040 comprehensive plan. 00:28:51.040 --> 00:28:53.160 Public facilities available to serve the property. 00:28:53.160 --> 00:28:59.640 There are, there's adequate transportation currently and it will also continue to improve. 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. 00:29:06.880 --> 00:29:13.060 However, as you're probably aware, there are improvements that are imminent in this corridor. 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 00:29:19.640 --> 00:29:21.320 Loop 288. 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, 00:29:28.480 --> 00:29:29.480 I believe. 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 00:29:34.800 --> 00:29:37.040 extension of that roadway. 00:29:37.040 --> 00:29:41.560 And there is a concurrent comprehensive plan amendment that we're going to be talking about 00:29:41.560 --> 00:29:44.280 regarding mobility in the area. 00:29:44.280 --> 00:29:47.680 There is water and wastewater available to the site. 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 00:29:52.920 --> 00:29:56.160 platting stage. 00:29:56.160 --> 00:29:57.160 Public outreach was done. 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 00:30:03.080 --> 00:30:05.440 consistent with what is required. 00:30:05.440 --> 00:30:08.760 This was a cut and paste error. 00:30:08.760 --> 00:30:13.640 It is consistent with our requirements for newspaper ads, as well as the property was 00:30:13.640 --> 00:30:18.080 posted on July 2nd of this year. 00:30:18.080 --> 00:30:21.360 So they did meet all of that notification requirements. 00:30:21.360 --> 00:30:24.840 We haven't received any responses regarding this case. 00:30:24.840 --> 00:30:29.100 So staff does recommend approval of the request, is that it complies with the criteria for 00:30:29.100 --> 00:30:31.640 approval and I'll be happy to answer any questions. 00:30:31.640 --> 00:30:35.600 And the applicant will be here with a presentation tonight. 00:30:35.600 --> 00:30:38.360 Any questions for Julie? 00:30:38.360 --> 00:30:43.760 I have a couple questions. 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 00:30:46.880 --> 00:30:49.360 momentum towards that? 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 00:30:53.960 --> 00:30:55.720 move forward with that small area plan. 00:30:55.720 --> 00:30:59.360 I don't think it's gotten underway yet, but it is. 00:30:59.360 --> 00:31:00.720 No, that's correct. 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 00:31:05.720 --> 00:31:08.920 they were in favor of staff moving forward with that, but that has not officially kicked 00:31:08.920 --> 00:31:09.920 off today. 00:31:09.920 --> 00:31:11.960 But we are definitely moving in that direction. 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? 00:31:19.640 --> 00:31:21.360 They have talked about distribution. 00:31:21.360 --> 00:31:24.140 They've also talked about other employment uses. 00:31:24.140 --> 00:31:29.440 So we don't have an end user or a final reviewed site plan. 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 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 00:31:44.160 --> 00:31:48.440 developed to that scale that would be permitted under LI. 00:31:48.440 --> 00:31:54.240 And then the last question I think I have is you mentioned that under business innovation, 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? 00:31:59.960 --> 00:32:01.960 That is a great question. 00:32:01.960 --> 00:32:09.100 No, so we have our typical zoning districts that we often see related to certain future 00:32:09.100 --> 00:32:12.280 land use designations, but there is flexibility within that. 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. 00:32:19.840 --> 00:32:26.440 So while there are kind of typical zoning districts that we often see and that really 00:32:26.440 --> 00:32:32.000 slot well within those future land use designations, there is flexibility since that comp plan 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 00:32:39.480 --> 00:32:40.480 not codified. 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 00:32:48.720 --> 00:32:50.040 in long-term planning. 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 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 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 00:33:07.840 --> 00:33:14.720 this warehousing center for a lot of the corporate job opportunities that are not getting to 00:33:14.720 --> 00:33:15.720 Denton. 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 00:33:23.360 --> 00:33:31.200 distribution doesn't align with what I would think of business innovation and these kind 00:33:31.200 --> 00:33:35.880 of headquarter business parks that we had talked about years ago of drawing in. 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 00:33:40.680 --> 00:33:41.680 that. 00:33:41.680 --> 00:33:42.680 Any... 00:33:42.680 --> 00:33:43.680 Commissioner Smith? 00:33:43.680 --> 00:33:44.680 Thank you, Chair. 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 00:33:50.520 --> 00:33:55.080 that Hirschbach property went out and we started talking about the small area plan, would Margie 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 00:33:58.560 --> 00:34:05.560 anything from that, be helpful just to see what recommendations we made as a commission 00:34:05.560 --> 00:34:10.080 that city council I know is reviewing and they said that city staff should start looking 00:34:10.080 --> 00:34:11.080 into it. 00:34:11.080 --> 00:34:13.200 What were y'all's thoughts in that process? 00:34:13.200 --> 00:34:14.200 Yeah. 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 00:34:18.760 --> 00:34:19.760 to council? 00:34:19.760 --> 00:34:20.760 Sure. 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 00:34:24.720 --> 00:34:27.720 of that if that would be helpful. 00:34:27.720 --> 00:34:28.720 Yes. 00:34:28.720 --> 00:34:32.520 We took the same presentation that we did to the planning zoning commission, shared your 00:34:32.520 --> 00:34:38.960 concerns related to that area and wanting to have the small area plan for that area. 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 00:34:44.040 --> 00:34:46.640 staff they directed us to move forward with it. 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 00:34:51.440 --> 00:34:57.160 sure that the comp plan update as well as the small area plan is in concert. 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 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 00:35:06.880 --> 00:35:10.080 inform what that small area plan is to be. 00:35:10.080 --> 00:35:11.380 So that's where we are. 00:35:11.380 --> 00:35:15.960 So there really wasn't any recommendations by the planning zoning commission other than 00:35:15.960 --> 00:35:19.240 to initiate that small area plan. 00:35:19.240 --> 00:35:20.240 And council concurred. 00:35:20.240 --> 00:35:21.240 Yeah. 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 00:35:26.280 --> 00:35:28.160 we would like to see that kind of stuff. 00:35:28.160 --> 00:35:29.160 No. 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 00:35:32.040 --> 00:35:35.520 and stakeholder interviews or stakeholder involvement. 00:35:35.520 --> 00:35:36.520 Okay. 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, 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 00:35:44.640 --> 00:35:47.440 how do we protect and actually plan that area. 00:35:47.440 --> 00:35:51.280 And there was mention at the time that there's some industrial or warehousing needs that 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 00:35:54.960 --> 00:35:56.600 that north. 00:35:56.600 --> 00:36:00.240 But to Ron's point, we didn't talk about what we wanted to see there. 00:36:00.240 --> 00:36:06.280 We just want something, some planning to be done around that massive intersection as a 00:36:06.280 --> 00:36:07.760 gateway into the city. 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 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 00:36:16.520 --> 00:36:17.520 the SAP. 00:36:17.520 --> 00:36:18.520 That's right. 00:36:18.520 --> 00:36:19.520 Right. 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. 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. 00:36:26.040 --> 00:36:27.040 Got it. 00:36:27.040 --> 00:36:30.120 I'll say the rest of my comments for public. 00:36:30.120 --> 00:36:33.560 No, I agree with the chair on this. 00:36:33.560 --> 00:36:35.680 I don't want to see that intersection. 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. 00:36:40.040 --> 00:36:43.040 I don't want to see it become just a warehouse district. 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 00:36:50.860 --> 00:36:51.860 and all that stuff along there. 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 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 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. 00:37:06.440 --> 00:37:08.680 Any other questions for Ron or statements? 00:37:08.680 --> 00:37:09.680 Okay. 00:37:09.680 --> 00:37:10.680 Great. 00:37:10.680 --> 00:37:11.680 Thanks, Ron. 00:37:11.680 --> 00:37:15.920 Next item of business is item 5C, CA21-0001. 00:37:15.920 --> 00:37:17.840 And this is back to Julie. 00:37:17.840 --> 00:37:29.340 All right, so this is a, let me get to it. 00:37:29.340 --> 00:37:36.120 This is a companion request to the previous zoning request. 00:37:36.120 --> 00:37:42.600 All right. 00:37:42.600 --> 00:37:50.940 So this is a comprehensive plan amendment, CA21-0001, Denton Commerce Center. 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 00:37:54.500 --> 00:37:58.960 planning in the city of Denton and how all of this ties together. 00:37:58.960 --> 00:38:04.600 We haven't seen a mobility plan amendment at the Plating and Zoning Commission, I think, 00:38:04.600 --> 00:38:05.600 since 2011. 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. 00:38:11.920 --> 00:38:16.940 So the mobility plan is one element to our comprehensive planning efforts. 00:38:16.940 --> 00:38:22.800 It establishes our future roadway network, and that can include cars and pedestrian as 00:38:22.800 --> 00:38:24.560 well as bicycle networks. 00:38:24.560 --> 00:38:27.860 So it's, it should be looked at comprehensively. 00:38:27.860 --> 00:38:35.960 Mobility plans are updated both intermittently as well as on a regular, ongoing basis. 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 00:38:40.840 --> 00:38:41.840 effort. 00:38:41.840 --> 00:38:47.920 So the request in 2011 was related to a specific project, as is this one tonight. 00:38:47.920 --> 00:38:53.120 However, the city is currently updating their mobility plan, and we'll talk some about that 00:38:53.120 --> 00:38:54.120 tonight. 00:38:54.120 --> 00:38:59.920 The mobility plan really establishes those transportation networks, and within that, 00:38:59.920 --> 00:39:03.780 it defines that hierarchy of roadways. 00:39:03.780 --> 00:39:09.360 And that includes the biggest roads, which are highways, and then you've got your arterials, 00:39:09.360 --> 00:39:12.920 and then a little smaller than that, you have your collectors, and then your neighborhood 00:39:12.920 --> 00:39:16.080 roadways really aren't included in a mobility plan. 00:39:16.080 --> 00:39:19.600 Those are more site-specific. 00:39:19.600 --> 00:39:28.080 Our current plan was adopted in early 2016, and that replaced our 1998 plan, which had 00:39:28.080 --> 00:39:33.520 been amended every so often, so it really is kind of that 2011 mobility plan. 00:39:33.520 --> 00:39:39.840 And as I mentioned, our current update is underway. 00:39:39.840 --> 00:39:43.060 So now I'll get to the specific request. 00:39:43.060 --> 00:39:49.040 In 2016, when we adopted our current plan, Cindy Lane, which is a neighborhood street 00:39:49.040 --> 00:39:56.760 within the Ranch Estates, was kind of reclassified and upgraded to a secondary arterial, and 00:39:56.760 --> 00:40:05.720 that mobility plan took Cindy Lane from its current location, so connecting to Highway 00:40:05.720 --> 00:40:10.460 380 with a signalized intersection, and then connecting it all the way to the north to 00:40:10.460 --> 00:40:15.200 FM 156 as that secondary arterial. 00:40:15.200 --> 00:40:20.840 When projects develop within the city, they have to, if a mobility plan roadway is coming 00:40:20.840 --> 00:40:27.800 through their property, they have to dedicate that right-of-way associated with that roadway. 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 00:40:30.680 --> 00:40:33.400 with the plats. 00:40:33.400 --> 00:40:37.840 In this case, the update to the mobility plan that engineering has been working on will 00:40:37.840 --> 00:40:44.720 actually remove that Cindy Lane and sort of simplify that arterial network within this 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 00:40:52.340 --> 00:40:56.240 to be something that our engineering staff wants to take forward with that update to 00:40:56.240 --> 00:40:58.760 the mobility plan. 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 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 00:41:09.520 --> 00:41:13.520 then that's where it cuts through the subject property. 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 00:41:17.640 --> 00:41:21.360 mobility map, that one that's under review with engineering. 00:41:21.360 --> 00:41:25.240 Subject property is, again, outlined here in yellow. 00:41:25.240 --> 00:41:27.700 Cindy Lane is that green dashed line. 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 00:41:35.520 --> 00:41:40.920 that neighborhood, and then would, as proposed under the current mobility plan, would extend 00:41:40.920 --> 00:41:49.680 it toward the north through these large tracts of land and then on upward. 00:41:49.680 --> 00:41:56.280 The proposed mobility plan, Cindy Lane would actually just remain as a neighborhood street, 00:41:56.280 --> 00:42:06.080 so it wouldn't have any expansion related to that roadway, it would just end here. 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 00:42:11.800 --> 00:42:16.760 connectivity through this general area. 00:42:16.760 --> 00:42:20.000 Criteria for approval for a comprehensive plan, since the mobility plan is an element 00:42:20.000 --> 00:42:26.400 of the comprehensive plan, is in subchapter 2, and then there are specific criteria for 00:42:26.400 --> 00:42:27.640 approval. 00:42:27.640 --> 00:42:32.280 There's really two subsections for the specific criteria for approval. 00:42:32.280 --> 00:42:38.920 The first subsection, it would need to meet one of that criteria, and then those additional 00:42:38.920 --> 00:42:43.160 review standards are listed after that. 00:42:43.160 --> 00:42:46.920 We'll touch on these as we move forward. 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 00:42:51.960 --> 00:42:56.440 I get into the analysis, I just want to kind of orient you toward the map. 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 00:43:02.640 --> 00:43:04.180 at. 00:43:04.180 --> 00:43:08.680 I have the mobility plan overlaid on the future land use map here. 00:43:08.680 --> 00:43:16.880 Here's where Cindy Lane connects to Highway 380 and then cuts to the north. 00:43:16.880 --> 00:43:22.240 Business innovation is one of those dominant future land use designations in this area. 00:43:22.240 --> 00:43:27.920 It covers the subject site as well as that surrounding area, that's that light purple. 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 00:43:32.160 --> 00:43:33.160 ranch estates. 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 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. 00:43:44.560 --> 00:43:47.160 So that does sort of give it that policy protection. 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 00:43:52.480 --> 00:43:57.800 area just south, kind of hugging that airport in south of Highway 380. 00:43:57.800 --> 00:44:04.840 So you can see that Cindy Lane really crosses those three future land use designations. 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 00:44:12.320 --> 00:44:18.520 or to move toward the north through that roadway as it's proposed. 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 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 00:44:25.600 --> 00:44:30.640 got to look at other goals that we have in the city. 00:44:30.640 --> 00:44:34.960 So first, one of our mobility goals is to provide for the safe, efficient movements 00:44:34.960 --> 00:44:39.600 of motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians in a sustainable way that complements Denton's 00:44:39.600 --> 00:44:42.480 plan growth strategy. 00:44:42.480 --> 00:44:49.120 Given the divergent goals of these diverse future land use designations that are impacted 00:44:49.120 --> 00:44:56.360 by Cindy Lane, that connectivity that Cindy Lane in its location could conflict with that 00:44:56.360 --> 00:44:57.360 growth strategy. 00:44:57.360 --> 00:45:03.800 So we really, it has, that business innovation has different goals than the low density residential, 00:45:03.800 --> 00:45:07.760 yet we've got this roadway cutting through there that would essentially bind those two 00:45:07.760 --> 00:45:10.920 future land use designations together. 00:45:10.920 --> 00:45:17.160 So with that mobility plan update that engineering is moving forward with, it would remove that 00:45:17.160 --> 00:45:20.360 Cindy Lane, as I showed you in an earlier slide. 00:45:20.360 --> 00:45:25.800 It would focus then using Mosh Bit Branch, Lovers Lane Corridors, also the future Loop 00:45:25.800 --> 00:45:34.640 288 and I-35 to move that truck traffic along those arterials, avoiding that expansion into 00:45:34.640 --> 00:45:41.360 that residential, kind of leaving them alone as an island. 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 00:45:46.000 --> 00:45:48.040 in the intent. 00:45:48.040 --> 00:45:53.640 So that is intended for those employment uses and often they want really large acreage. 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 00:45:59.600 --> 00:46:04.680 hundred acre areas for those larger campuses and larger structures. 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 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 00:46:18.520 --> 00:46:24.240 runs diagonally, getting closer to 35 as you go toward the south. 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 00:46:30.520 --> 00:46:35.400 that business innovation and those employment uses really are bisected and it could reduce 00:46:35.400 --> 00:46:38.720 the developability of those lots. 00:46:38.720 --> 00:46:45.080 Secondary arterials require anywhere from, well they often, 65 to 110 feet of right of 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. 00:46:53.080 --> 00:46:58.160 And then finally, when we look at the implementation of the comprehensive plan, our mobility plan 00:46:58.160 --> 00:47:02.080 should really be updated every five years along with that comprehensive plan. 00:47:02.080 --> 00:47:03.240 That's kind of the goal. 00:47:03.240 --> 00:47:06.500 We don't always reach that goal, but that is the goal. 00:47:06.500 --> 00:47:11.800 And so the city is undertaking the updating of the mobility plan. 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 00:47:15.040 --> 00:47:23.740 to provide the flexibility and the ability to change with changing circumstances. 00:47:23.740 --> 00:47:28.920 So another criterion is the events, trends, or facts that have changed since that mobility 00:47:28.920 --> 00:47:30.520 plan was adopted. 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 00:47:37.720 --> 00:47:42.660 in 2015 and then how that's changed to 2019, which is our most current aerials. 00:47:42.660 --> 00:47:48.240 So in 2015, we didn't have a lot of industrial growth in this area. 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 00:47:57.920 --> 00:48:05.240 it really hadn't started moving north along Western Center Boulevard. 00:48:05.240 --> 00:48:10.800 Since then, we have seen a lot of industrial development in the area. 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 00:48:14.240 --> 00:48:20.840 stage, but all of those yellow dots represent a new industrial development or an industrial 00:48:20.840 --> 00:48:27.040 development that's in the planning stages along that corridor, sort of, you know, really 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 00:48:32.400 --> 00:48:34.240 this area. 00:48:34.240 --> 00:48:41.520 This current classification of Cindy Lane really would induce those trucks to move forward 00:48:41.520 --> 00:48:48.480 and potentially tag up to loop 288 north of the subject or near the subject property, 00:48:48.480 --> 00:48:52.680 cutting through that neighborhood as it's currently aligned. 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 00:48:58.160 --> 00:48:59.160 would be. 00:48:59.160 --> 00:49:04.200 You know, we've been really successful in our industrial sector, but there will be a 00:49:04.200 --> 00:49:07.600 lot of traffic associated with it. 00:49:07.600 --> 00:49:10.160 Additional review standards, substantial benefit to the city. 00:49:10.160 --> 00:49:13.740 This proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan. 00:49:13.740 --> 00:49:17.880 It's also consistent with our future land use goals, as we've discussed. 00:49:17.880 --> 00:49:22.560 It would not negatively alter the existing or proposed land use pattern. 00:49:22.560 --> 00:49:25.720 It wouldn't change that. 00:49:25.720 --> 00:49:31.920 And it would not adversely impact those existing uses because of increased traffic. 00:49:31.920 --> 00:49:38.000 The -- those existing and those planned arterial network, those are sufficient to meet the 00:49:38.000 --> 00:49:44.320 demand of that traffic generated by the development of this area. 00:49:44.320 --> 00:49:48.680 And since Cindy Lane currently doesn't extend beyond Ranch Estates, there's no -- it would 00:49:48.680 --> 00:49:51.120 not change those existing traffic patterns. 00:49:51.120 --> 00:49:53.920 So there's -- that road isn't there yet. 00:49:53.920 --> 00:50:00.500 So nobody's relying on that to accommodate traffic. 00:50:00.500 --> 00:50:04.560 Public outreach was done on the request. 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 00:50:09.280 --> 00:50:10.400 get your email. 00:50:10.400 --> 00:50:13.040 I did talk with that property owner. 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 00:50:20.320 --> 00:50:22.140 he was in favor. 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. 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, 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 00:50:40.280 --> 00:50:41.280 it. 00:50:41.280 --> 00:50:42.400 So I did talk with him about that. 00:50:42.400 --> 00:50:45.160 So I just want to let you know that. 00:50:45.160 --> 00:50:47.160 So staff does recommend approval of the request. 00:50:47.160 --> 00:50:52.520 It meets the criteria for approval, and it is consistent with our current planning efforts. 00:50:52.520 --> 00:50:54.640 And I'll be happy to answer any questions. 00:50:54.640 --> 00:51:02.880 And engineering is also here if you have -- if you need more technical questions answered. 00:51:02.880 --> 00:51:08.360 Commissioner Ellis. 00:51:08.360 --> 00:51:09.360 Thank you, Chair. 00:51:09.360 --> 00:51:12.440 Julie, back to the comment that was emailed to us. 00:51:12.440 --> 00:51:14.040 So he just misunderstood. 00:51:14.040 --> 00:51:15.040 Yes, ma'am. 00:51:15.040 --> 00:51:16.040 And it's now clarified. 00:51:16.040 --> 00:51:17.040 Yes, ma'am. 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 00:51:22.320 --> 00:51:26.720 call him prior to City Council and get that update. 00:51:26.720 --> 00:51:27.720 Okay. 00:51:27.720 --> 00:51:32.120 Second question is, does this stand alone from the zoning change? 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? 00:51:38.240 --> 00:51:39.240 Yes, ma'am. 00:51:39.240 --> 00:51:40.240 It stands alone. 00:51:40.240 --> 00:51:41.240 Separate on its own. 00:51:41.240 --> 00:51:42.240 Okay. 00:51:42.240 --> 00:51:43.240 Thank you. 00:51:43.240 --> 00:51:44.240 You bet. 00:51:44.240 --> 00:51:45.240 Any other questions? 00:51:45.240 --> 00:51:46.240 Commissioner Smith. 00:51:46.240 --> 00:51:50.320 And really, this might be a question for mobility. 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 00:51:53.680 --> 00:51:57.840 a really low density neighborhood in the first place to connect into business innovation? 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 00:52:03.000 --> 00:52:08.400 -- that we may have a mobility draft that currently has things like this that are out 00:52:08.400 --> 00:52:09.400 there? 00:52:09.400 --> 00:52:10.400 Because, yeah. 00:52:10.400 --> 00:52:11.400 It's -- yeah. 00:52:11.400 --> 00:52:14.480 I'm going to let engineering answer that. 00:52:14.480 --> 00:52:15.480 Sounds good. 00:52:15.480 --> 00:52:19.280 Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioner. 00:52:19.280 --> 00:52:22.160 This is Chandra with Traffic Engineering. 00:52:22.160 --> 00:52:28.440 When drafting the mobility plan, the consultant we hired, they take into consideration of 00:52:28.440 --> 00:52:34.160 all the traffic at the current condition and 20, 30 years into the future. 00:52:34.160 --> 00:52:39.360 So they plug in all the models and run and see how the networks are loaded. 00:52:39.360 --> 00:52:45.440 So they will evaluate and see where appropriate arterial or a collector is needed. 00:52:45.440 --> 00:52:51.320 So that's how we arrived at those networks that it's in the draft. 00:52:51.320 --> 00:52:54.640 It doesn't really answer the question, but I get it. 00:52:54.640 --> 00:52:55.640 Yeah, that works. 00:52:55.640 --> 00:52:56.640 All right. 00:52:56.640 --> 00:52:57.640 Thank you. 00:52:57.640 --> 00:52:58.640 Thank you. 00:52:58.640 --> 00:53:00.920 Any other questions for Julie? 00:53:00.920 --> 00:53:02.520 Commissioner Pruitt. 00:53:02.520 --> 00:53:03.520 Yeah. 00:53:03.520 --> 00:53:12.280 Can you -- I guess I understand the considerations with the existing portion of -- I'm sorry, 00:53:12.280 --> 00:53:18.760 I'm terrible with names -- the roadway that we were talking about extending north to south. 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 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 00:53:31.960 --> 00:53:40.320 of that, can you explain why having connectivity from Mosh Branch northward crossing the future 00:53:40.320 --> 00:53:45.960 Loop 288 is not desired? 00:53:45.960 --> 00:53:50.480 I'm going to have engineering answer that as well. 00:53:50.480 --> 00:53:58.880 Actually, with the proposed loop, unlike the existing loop on the eastern side, the proposed 00:53:58.880 --> 00:54:07.320 loop will contain frontage roads and then the main lanes, and also on the other designation 00:54:07.320 --> 00:54:15.400 of the roadway networks, they thought the northern section of Cindy could be removed. 00:54:15.400 --> 00:54:22.600 The frontage roads also have connectivity to the collectors and the neighborhood streets, 00:54:22.600 --> 00:54:26.360 which the eastern section, the existing loop, doesn't have it. 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 00:54:33.160 --> 00:54:35.560 from those north-south arterials. 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 00:54:43.760 --> 00:54:49.100 Lane that we're talking about, would that change whether or not a crossing either over 00:54:49.100 --> 00:54:55.600 or under the future Loop 288 is provided, a north-south crossing right there? 00:54:55.600 --> 00:55:04.800 Yes, but based on the other network being proposed, this seems to be irrelevant anymore. 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 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. 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 00:55:23.760 --> 00:55:29.040 extended, so that will also relieve some of the projected traffic. 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 00:55:37.480 --> 00:55:42.400 required there because the main freeways are getting widened, and therefore there'd be 00:55:42.400 --> 00:55:47.320 a longer route that somebody could take along the frontage and the interstates to get around 00:55:47.320 --> 00:55:48.320 to their destination? 00:55:48.320 --> 00:55:49.320 That's right. 00:55:49.320 --> 00:55:57.080 Usually they put in arterials at approximately 1,200 feet apart, but now with these Loop 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 00:56:04.760 --> 00:56:06.880 Cindy Lane required anymore. 00:56:06.880 --> 00:56:10.680 Okay, thank you. 00:56:10.680 --> 00:56:12.720 Any other questions for Julie? 00:56:12.720 --> 00:56:16.320 I've got a couple. 00:56:16.320 --> 00:56:22.160 What's the draft mobility plan timeline for implementation? 00:56:22.160 --> 00:56:24.840 Haley might be able to answer that, or Chandra. 00:56:24.840 --> 00:56:28.920 I believe it's running in parallel fashion with the comprehensive plan update. 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, 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 00:56:43.080 --> 00:56:46.960 I correct? 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 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 00:57:00.800 --> 00:57:08.520 subject property, why are we not just going ahead right now and removing Cindy Lane entirely 00:57:08.520 --> 00:57:14.560 and aligning Cindy Lane up 100% to the draft mobility plan in the interim? 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. 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, 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 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 00:57:39.520 --> 00:57:49.640 removed given the public notification piece, but yeah, it is sort of an incremental step. 00:57:49.640 --> 00:57:55.520 Yeah, and I guess you said something that I want to clarify, the applicant is filing 00:57:55.520 --> 00:58:00.200 for this to be removed, this isn't city initiated to align with the applicant. 00:58:00.200 --> 00:58:01.200 Correct. 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, 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, 00:58:15.560 --> 00:58:16.560 correct? 00:58:16.560 --> 00:58:19.400 That's a good point, yes, theoretically. 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 00:58:24.600 --> 00:58:25.600 Julie? 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 00:58:33.880 --> 00:58:34.880 for presentation. 00:58:34.880 --> 00:58:40.360 Good evening Chair and members of the commission. 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. 00:59:08.000 --> 00:59:13.680 Okay, good evening Chair and members of the commission. 00:59:13.680 --> 00:59:21.840 My name is Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner, presenting Z21-0002, prominence. 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. 00:59:31.360 --> 00:59:36.960 It's divided into requests for 24.93 acres from current planned development and light 00:59:36.960 --> 00:59:44.000 industrial zoning to general office, approximately 23.47 acres from planned development to mixed 00:59:44.000 --> 00:59:48.680 use neighborhood, and approximately 9.7 acres from planned development to light industrial 00:59:48.680 --> 00:59:49.680 zoning. 00:59:49.680 --> 00:59:55.600 Again, this property is bounded by loop 288, University Drive, Mayhill Road, and prominence 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 01:00:00.840 --> 01:00:06.880 to L.I. to the northwest, and a single family neighborhood south across prominence way. 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 01:00:11.760 --> 01:00:14.360 in those maps in the lower right-hand corner there. 01:00:14.360 --> 01:00:18.760 One shows the current ESA map, you have the current floodplain map, significant tree canopy 01:00:18.760 --> 01:00:22.360 in that floodplain area, as well as along prominence way. 01:00:22.360 --> 01:00:28.200 This zoning change would replace the old existing PD with current zoning districts containing 01:00:28.200 --> 01:00:33.360 similar mix of uses, some additional ones, under current DDC standards. 01:00:33.360 --> 01:00:39.680 So just to give you a little background here, this planned development was approved in 2000 01:00:39.680 --> 01:00:44.800 under an interim zoning, an interim DDC essentially. 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, 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 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 01:00:59.720 --> 01:01:03.760 of uses, including commercial, industrial, and/or residential. 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 01:01:09.320 --> 01:01:11.880 for future park dedication when this developed. 01:01:11.880 --> 01:01:17.880 This was vested in those standards under that interim DDC, so 1991 use table, 1988 landscape 01:01:17.880 --> 01:01:18.880 code. 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 01:01:26.480 --> 01:01:27.480 commercial. 01:01:27.480 --> 01:01:31.560 That property that was included in this rezoning tonight, essentially, to bring that into line 01:01:31.560 --> 01:01:35.840 with how the PD would be rezoned adjacent to it. 01:01:35.840 --> 01:01:42.080 So in 2021, then, this proposal is taking those four areas, putting them into current 01:01:42.080 --> 01:01:46.480 zoning districts that generally match up similar uses. 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 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 01:01:56.880 --> 01:01:57.880 light industrial. 01:01:57.880 --> 01:02:04.360 I also just note that the Parks Department is in talks still with the current developer 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 01:02:09.960 --> 01:02:11.760 this property. 01:02:11.760 --> 01:02:15.680 Because the property never developed, that property has never come to us as parks since 01:02:15.680 --> 01:02:18.760 the time that it was designated. 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. 01:02:23.720 --> 01:02:29.960 So here would be the proposed zoning, see that GEO area encompasses essentially A and 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. 01:02:37.280 --> 01:02:41.520 As you know, we have our general criteria for approval, as well as our specific zoning 01:02:41.520 --> 01:02:44.900 criteria for approval, and we'll touch on some key elements of that. 01:02:44.900 --> 01:02:49.320 So first off, look at our Denton Plan 2030 comprehensive plan. 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 01:02:54.760 --> 01:02:58.000 density residential and some neighborhood residential mixed use. 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 01:03:02.600 --> 01:03:06.920 residential and retail, and that moderate density residential is intended for a mix 01:03:06.920 --> 01:03:12.240 of residential, particularly near retail, near parkland. 01:03:12.240 --> 01:03:17.360 These proposed zonings that are trying to mix, fit that mix of uses allowed in business 01:03:17.360 --> 01:03:23.240 innovation, and the residential uses would fit with that moderate density residential 01:03:23.240 --> 01:03:27.760 in that proposed MN area. 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 01:03:32.960 --> 01:03:39.140 DDC standards, which of course align more fully with our comprehensive plan. 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 01:03:45.880 --> 01:03:50.040 major routes there, which is in line with our preferred growth concept, and it's providing 01:03:50.040 --> 01:03:54.240 employment moderate density housing near what would be, hopefully, a potential future park 01:03:54.240 --> 01:03:55.840 and trail area. 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 01:04:00.040 --> 01:04:01.640 permitted under the PD. 01:04:01.640 --> 01:04:07.000 I want to highlight here, particularly minimizing adverse environmental impacts. 01:04:07.000 --> 01:04:11.860 As I noted, there's a significant amount of both trees and environmentally sensitive areas. 01:04:11.860 --> 01:04:16.240 When this PD was put in place, our current protections essentially didn't exist. 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 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. 01:04:25.320 --> 01:04:29.920 Zoning out of this PD ensures that we can apply all of our current environmentally sensitive 01:04:29.920 --> 01:04:34.320 area and tree standard protections, which aligns with our comprehensive plan to try to protect 01:04:34.320 --> 01:04:37.960 trees and increase tree canopy. 01:04:37.960 --> 01:04:42.120 With that, minimizing adverse impacts, we would have higher standards coming in. 01:04:42.120 --> 01:04:46.440 So again, it wasn't the minimum tree canopy planting requirement at that time either. 01:04:46.440 --> 01:04:50.560 These new zoning districts would bring in our current tree canopy requirements, varying 01:04:50.560 --> 01:04:52.280 by zoning district. 01:04:52.280 --> 01:04:55.900 Would also bring in our current requirements for right-of-way screening, which would help 01:04:55.900 --> 01:04:58.040 the neighborhood to the south of prominence. 01:04:58.040 --> 01:05:03.080 We now require much greater significant right-of-way screening, and that would be required under 01:05:03.080 --> 01:05:04.080 this. 01:05:04.080 --> 01:05:11.680 It would also bring in heightened commercial building standards under the current DDC. 01:05:11.680 --> 01:05:16.300 Just touching on parks, again, because of discussions with the applicant, Parks Department 01:05:16.300 --> 01:05:24.560 is actually proposing a trail, potentially on their draft trail map, through this area. 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 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 01:05:35.560 --> 01:05:40.840 to the proposed, well, what would develop in the future potentially. 01:05:40.840 --> 01:05:43.200 I definitely want to touch on transportation. 01:05:43.200 --> 01:05:47.160 This is an area that has a number of intersections around it that are difficult. 01:05:47.160 --> 01:05:51.400 There was a very detailed TIA done, although there's no planned uses. 01:05:51.400 --> 01:05:55.120 Estimates were done based on looking at some of the highest possible traffic generation 01:05:55.120 --> 01:05:57.400 uses that could come in. 01:05:57.400 --> 01:06:03.880 So that led to an estimate of 7,565 daily trips, as you can see there. 01:06:03.880 --> 01:06:08.040 The TIA focused on ten key intersections surrounding the site. 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 01:06:12.400 --> 01:06:16.920 know is kind of our baseline for really paying attention to. 01:06:16.920 --> 01:06:22.120 Three of those ten currently, right now with no changes, operate at a level of service 01:06:22.120 --> 01:06:23.120 E or F. 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 01:06:29.000 --> 01:06:30.000 intersections. 01:06:30.000 --> 01:06:36.640 The dashed circles are intersections proposed that may come about as part of this development. 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 01:06:43.800 --> 01:06:46.560 one that's along the loop 380 frontage road. 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 01:06:51.680 --> 01:06:54.400 at a level of service F. 01:06:54.400 --> 01:07:01.560 So and the TIA indicates that there would be increasing delays over until out to 2029 01:07:01.560 --> 01:07:03.440 over the period studied. 01:07:03.440 --> 01:07:08.240 However the traffic actually generated by development of the site would be a small part 01:07:08.240 --> 01:07:10.120 of those issues. 01:07:10.120 --> 01:07:14.560 It's much more due to, it's loop 288 and University driver there. 01:07:14.560 --> 01:07:16.320 That's what's driving this. 01:07:16.320 --> 01:07:21.840 However, there were some mitigation items recommended by the TIA. 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 01:07:27.720 --> 01:07:31.880 Audra in the future, it may actually be warranted sooner, in part because of this development. 01:07:31.880 --> 01:07:35.800 That'd be studied when civil engineering plans came in for this development. 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. 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 01:07:44.280 --> 01:07:49.960 service C, would actually be higher than it is right now with no development. 01:07:49.960 --> 01:07:55.080 Also recommended a right turn deceleration lane along loop 288 going north. 01:07:55.080 --> 01:07:59.560 And that would again be looked at when civil engineering plans came in for this project. 01:07:59.560 --> 01:08:05.240 And then it was recommended that textile in the city of Denton consider allowing two driveways 01:08:05.240 --> 01:08:12.000 along that extended loop 288 ramp there in order that they would actually be able to 01:08:12.000 --> 01:08:14.200 function at a good level of service. 01:08:14.200 --> 01:08:19.680 Other long-term solutions that were noted, TextOdd is planning to extend the median at 01:08:19.680 --> 01:08:25.280 Spring Valley across from QuickTrip, and so you would no longer have cars trying to cross 01:08:25.280 --> 01:08:27.320 back and forth University Drive there. 01:08:27.320 --> 01:08:29.440 They wouldn't be able to. 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 01:08:35.680 --> 01:08:39.600 some of the traffic pressure at that intersection. 01:08:39.600 --> 01:08:46.480 So overall, TI determined that the actual, with the mitigation and the actual traffic 01:08:46.480 --> 01:08:50.720 generated by this site, it's not having a significant impact that wouldn't be addressed 01:08:50.720 --> 01:08:52.000 by this mitigation. 01:08:52.000 --> 01:08:56.800 And that would be looked at more thoroughly at the CEP stage. 01:08:56.800 --> 01:09:00.480 Water and wastewater service is available, and the property owner is currently constructing 01:09:00.480 --> 01:09:02.560 additional wastewater connection. 01:09:02.560 --> 01:09:04.880 No utility capacity issues have been identified. 01:09:04.880 --> 01:09:09.680 That's within the eight minutes or less response time boundary for Fire Station 2. 01:09:09.680 --> 01:09:13.440 No law enforcement issues are expected to increase here. 01:09:13.440 --> 01:09:17.280 We did do our public outreach and received one response in opposition. 01:09:17.280 --> 01:09:19.240 It was a neighborhood meeting. 01:09:19.240 --> 01:09:24.600 Two citizens attended, asked questions, expressed some concerns about multifamily development 01:09:24.600 --> 01:09:29.200 causing traffic on prominence, about traffic on loop 288, and they expressed their appreciation 01:09:29.200 --> 01:09:33.040 for the proposed GO zoning. 01:09:33.040 --> 01:09:37.960 So with that, staff does recommend approval of the request as it complies with our criteria 01:09:37.960 --> 01:09:39.320 for approval. 01:09:39.320 --> 01:09:42.520 And I will stand for any questions. 01:09:42.520 --> 01:09:45.760 Thank you, Sean. 01:09:45.760 --> 01:09:46.760 Any questions? 01:09:46.760 --> 01:09:47.760 Krischer Smith. 01:09:47.760 --> 01:09:48.760 Thank you, Chair. 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 01:09:55.600 --> 01:10:00.120 that we did in '19, right, that became PD whenever we did the rezone in '19. 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 01:10:04.280 --> 01:10:05.280 like that. 01:10:05.280 --> 01:10:09.760 It wasn't the way that our PDs are being done now underneath our current code. 01:10:09.760 --> 01:10:12.520 What exactly was that PD's restrictions? 01:10:12.520 --> 01:10:13.520 What happened within there? 01:10:13.520 --> 01:10:17.520 Give us some more information about specifically that PD that's being rezoned away. 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. 01:10:24.200 --> 01:10:26.240 It just moved forward as a PD. 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 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 01:10:38.800 --> 01:10:43.200 zoning and then there was changes in criteria that were specific to just that site. 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 01:10:48.000 --> 01:10:49.000 site? 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 01:10:55.240 --> 01:10:56.920 a base zoning that was put in place. 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 01:11:01.800 --> 01:11:05.500 you can design buildings. 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 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 01:11:16.600 --> 01:11:19.320 zoning districts we have now. 01:11:19.320 --> 01:11:24.600 But there wasn't, there's not necessarily a simple zoning district from our, a straight 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 01:11:28.400 --> 01:11:29.400 of like that. 01:11:29.400 --> 01:11:30.400 Okay. 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 01:11:34.320 --> 01:11:36.360 a better question during public comment. 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. 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 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. 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 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 01:12:01.800 --> 01:12:03.240 familiar with in the last two decades. 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. 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, 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 01:12:16.320 --> 01:12:17.320 of it. 01:12:17.320 --> 01:12:18.320 Correct. 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 01:12:22.400 --> 01:12:23.400 things. 01:12:23.400 --> 01:12:24.400 Correct. 01:12:24.400 --> 01:12:25.400 It's not the PD overlay that we had. 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 01:12:28.720 --> 01:12:30.040 stuff that's in that section. 01:12:30.040 --> 01:12:31.040 Correct. 01:12:31.040 --> 01:12:32.040 So okay. 01:12:32.040 --> 01:12:33.040 Right. 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 01:12:34.960 --> 01:12:40.920 between like moving to geo, any differences in height versus where, basically do we have 01:12:40.920 --> 01:12:41.920 to rezone it? 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, 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 01:12:48.600 --> 01:12:51.400 I understand from Haley's answer that I understand where we're coming from now. 01:12:51.400 --> 01:12:52.400 So okay. 01:12:52.400 --> 01:12:53.400 Thank you. 01:12:53.400 --> 01:12:54.400 Certainly. 01:12:54.400 --> 01:12:55.400 Any other questions? 01:12:55.400 --> 01:12:57.400 Commissioner Ellis. 01:12:57.400 --> 01:12:58.400 Thank you, Chair. 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 01:13:01.920 --> 01:13:03.840 it for a second, because I just want some clarification. 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 01:13:10.440 --> 01:13:14.240 zoning exhibit that you have in here. 01:13:14.240 --> 01:13:17.040 Do you know what those uses are for area D? 01:13:17.040 --> 01:13:21.520 So area D was primarily a residential use designation. 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 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 01:13:29.600 --> 01:13:30.600 D. 01:13:30.600 --> 01:13:31.600 Okay. 01:13:31.600 --> 01:13:34.480 So that left the PD and was zoned, I believe, R6 and R4. 01:13:34.480 --> 01:13:35.480 Okay. 01:13:35.480 --> 01:13:39.200 And right now that's remaining as area D in the PD? 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 01:13:42.960 --> 01:13:43.960 the PD. 01:13:43.960 --> 01:13:46.920 It's a different landowner who's not part of this request. 01:13:46.920 --> 01:13:47.920 Okay. 01:13:47.920 --> 01:13:48.920 Understood. 01:13:48.920 --> 01:13:49.920 Okay. 01:13:49.920 --> 01:13:53.520 I think that's it for now. 01:13:53.520 --> 01:13:54.520 Thanks. 01:13:54.520 --> 01:13:55.520 Any other questions? 01:13:55.520 --> 01:14:02.640 First, for what it's worth, this seems more like business innovation to me, which is, 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 01:14:09.040 --> 01:14:10.800 innovative. 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. 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 01:14:26.040 --> 01:14:28.720 potentially restricted development areas? 01:14:28.720 --> 01:14:32.560 Well, I will note that that is the current FEMA map. 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 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 01:14:44.800 --> 01:14:46.920 under that previous approval. 01:14:46.920 --> 01:14:51.680 But from staff's perspective, much of that remaining area is going to parkland that will 01:14:51.680 --> 01:14:56.120 benefit the development in that area, so we think that actually helps create a beneficial 01:14:56.120 --> 01:14:57.120 mix. 01:14:57.120 --> 01:14:58.120 Great. 01:14:58.120 --> 01:14:59.120 Thanks for that clarification. 01:14:59.120 --> 01:15:00.120 Christopher? 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 01:15:04.120 --> 01:15:05.120 showed? 01:15:05.120 --> 01:15:06.120 Certainly. 01:15:06.120 --> 01:15:10.040 Sorry, just a moment. 01:15:10.040 --> 01:15:11.040 Sorry. 01:15:11.040 --> 01:15:38.200 Yeah, thank you. 01:15:38.200 --> 01:15:45.360 So I'm trying to understand the implications of the parkland dedication that was made under 01:15:45.360 --> 01:15:54.040 the old PD versus the requirements of the 2019 DDC that would apply insofar as they 01:15:54.040 --> 01:16:00.480 provide an easement or dedication to allow this in the future. 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 01:16:04.800 --> 01:16:13.480 exists at the border, and that the ESA requirements are really more geared toward development 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 01:16:19.760 --> 01:16:23.280 a funds in lieu of or other sort of arrangement, right? 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 01:16:31.520 --> 01:16:39.320 that that corridor would be available to our parks department in the future, and what guarantees 01:16:39.320 --> 01:16:40.960 that if anything? 01:16:40.960 --> 01:16:48.200 Well, I will clarify first that the land was never actually dedicated under the PD. 01:16:48.200 --> 01:16:52.360 It was if this developed under the PD, then this would be provided. 01:16:52.360 --> 01:16:54.640 And so in some ways we're in a similar situation. 01:16:54.640 --> 01:16:59.000 The landowner has actually been the one that has, through this process, approached the 01:16:59.000 --> 01:17:04.440 parks department saying, "I'd like to give this to the city. 01:17:04.440 --> 01:17:05.520 Are you good with this?" 01:17:05.520 --> 01:17:09.800 And the parks department said, they thought about it, and they said, "Yeah, okay." 01:17:09.800 --> 01:17:13.640 So there's not a guarantee built into this, and that would certainly be something that 01:17:13.640 --> 01:17:18.560 city council could add as a condition of approval. 01:17:18.560 --> 01:17:23.440 But from our perspective, the landowner, the developer has expressed a strong interest 01:17:23.440 --> 01:17:28.880 in dedicating this park, and they would actually have park dedication requirement even with 01:17:28.880 --> 01:17:31.440 potential future development. 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 01:17:36.280 --> 01:17:40.480 with landowners preferring not to have the maintenance responsibility for land that they 01:17:40.480 --> 01:17:41.920 can't develop. 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 01:17:48.240 --> 01:17:50.600 with the desire to provide that area support plan. 01:17:50.600 --> 01:17:51.600 Okay. 01:17:51.600 --> 01:17:52.600 Thank you. 01:17:52.600 --> 01:17:55.600 Any other questions for Sean? 01:17:55.600 --> 01:17:56.600 Great. 01:17:56.600 --> 01:17:58.520 Thanks for the presentation, Sean. 01:17:58.520 --> 01:18:01.960 Before breaking, I would want to turn it over to Haley. 01:18:01.960 --> 01:18:04.320 She has a couple of announcements for us. 01:18:04.320 --> 01:18:05.320 Yeah. 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 01:18:09.040 --> 01:18:13.680 that we are very happy to announce that both Corina and Sean have been recently promoted 01:18:13.680 --> 01:18:15.720 from assistant planners to associate planners. 01:18:15.720 --> 01:18:22.360 So congratulations are in order for their hard work. 01:18:22.360 --> 01:18:23.800 Congratulations. 01:18:23.800 --> 01:18:25.200 Well deserved. 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. 01:18:31.520 --> 01:18:38.520 Thank you. 01:18:38.520 --> 01:18:41.560 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting 01:18:41.560 --> 01:18:45.600 for Wednesday, July 14th, 2021. 01:18:45.600 --> 01:18:49.120 Seeing that we have a quorum, I'll call this meeting to order at 6.32. 01:18:49.120 --> 01:18:53.160 And please let the record show that Commissioner Cole is not with us this evening. 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. 01:18:56.560 --> 01:18:57.560 and Texas flag. 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 01:19:06.560 --> 01:19:16.080 which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:16.080 --> 01:19:17.080 Honor the Texas flag. 01:19:17.080 --> 01:19:18.080 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible 01:19:18.080 --> 01:19:19.080 with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:19.080 --> 01:19:20.080 Honor the Texas flag. 01:19:20.080 --> 01:19:21.080 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible 01:19:21.080 --> 01:19:22.080 with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:22.080 --> 01:19:23.080 Honor the Texas flag. 01:19:23.080 --> 01:19:24.080 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible 01:19:24.080 --> 01:19:25.080 with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:25.080 --> 01:19:26.080 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible 01:19:26.080 --> 01:19:27.080 with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:27.080 --> 01:19:28.080 I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible 01:19:28.080 --> 01:19:29.080 with liberty and justice for all. 01:19:29.080 --> 01:19:32.080 The next item of business is to consider the approval of the June 23rd, 2021 minutes. 01:19:32.080 --> 01:19:33.080 Commissioner Smith. 01:19:33.080 --> 01:19:34.080 Make a motion to approve. 01:19:34.080 --> 01:19:36.380 We have a first for approval. 01:19:36.380 --> 01:19:37.380 Commissioner Ellis. 01:19:37.380 --> 01:19:38.380 Second. 01:19:38.380 --> 01:19:43.080 We have a first and a second for approval of the minutes. 01:19:43.080 --> 01:19:46.080 Any discussion? 01:19:46.080 --> 01:19:48.680 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:19:48.680 --> 01:19:49.680 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:19:49.680 --> 01:19:50.680 Aye. 01:19:50.680 --> 01:19:51.680 Commissioner Smith. 01:19:51.680 --> 01:19:52.680 Aye. 01:19:52.680 --> 01:19:53.680 Second. 01:19:53.680 --> 01:19:54.680 Chair is an aye. 01:19:54.680 --> 01:19:55.680 Commissioner Anderson. 01:19:55.680 --> 01:19:56.680 Aye. 01:19:56.680 --> 01:19:57.680 Commissioner Ellis. 01:19:57.680 --> 01:19:58.680 Aye. 01:19:58.680 --> 01:19:59.680 Motion carries 6-0. 01:19:59.680 --> 01:20:04.960 The next item of business is to consider our consent agenda. 01:20:04.960 --> 01:20:05.960 Commissioner Ellis. 01:20:05.960 --> 01:20:10.280 I move approval. 01:20:10.280 --> 01:20:11.280 We have a first for approval. 01:20:11.280 --> 01:20:12.280 Commissioner Smith. 01:20:12.280 --> 01:20:13.280 Make a second. 01:20:13.280 --> 01:20:16.320 We have a first and a second for approval of the consent agenda. 01:20:16.320 --> 01:20:19.320 Any discussion? 01:20:19.320 --> 01:20:21.280 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:20:21.280 --> 01:20:22.280 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:20:22.280 --> 01:20:23.280 Aye. 01:20:23.280 --> 01:20:24.280 Commissioner Smith. 01:20:24.280 --> 01:20:25.280 Aye. 01:20:25.280 --> 01:20:26.280 Commissioner McDade. 01:20:26.280 --> 01:20:27.280 Chair is an aye. 01:20:27.280 --> 01:20:28.280 Commissioner Ellis. 01:20:28.280 --> 01:20:29.280 Aye. 01:20:29.280 --> 01:20:30.280 Commissioner Anderson. 01:20:30.280 --> 01:20:31.280 Aye. 01:20:31.280 --> 01:20:32.600 Motion carries 6-0. 01:20:32.600 --> 01:20:40.760 The next item of business is our individual consideration items, starting with 4A FP20-0027. 01:20:40.760 --> 01:20:44.080 I'll invite Haley Zagorski for presentation. 01:20:44.080 --> 01:20:46.280 All right. 01:20:46.280 --> 01:20:47.280 Good evening. 01:20:47.280 --> 01:20:49.240 Carina is getting the plat pulled up. 01:20:49.240 --> 01:20:53.120 This is a final plat for the Woodlands and McKinney Street. 01:20:53.120 --> 01:20:59.000 This is a manufactured home development with a single large lot. 01:20:59.000 --> 01:21:03.060 Since the time of the agenda posting, a new plat has been sent to you all. 01:21:03.060 --> 01:21:09.120 They were able to resolve all conditions that were -- or all staff comments that were outstanding 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 01:21:13.040 --> 01:21:15.560 plat, so we are now recommending approval of this request. 01:21:15.560 --> 01:21:18.240 I'm happy to answer any questions. 01:21:18.240 --> 01:21:19.960 Any questions for Haley? 01:21:19.960 --> 01:21:21.920 Commissioner Smith. 01:21:21.920 --> 01:21:23.840 I make a motion to approve. 01:21:23.840 --> 01:21:25.360 We have a first for approval. 01:21:25.360 --> 01:21:26.360 Commissioner Anderson. 01:21:26.360 --> 01:21:27.360 I second. 01:21:27.360 --> 01:21:30.160 We have first and second for approval. 01:21:30.160 --> 01:21:31.160 Real fast. 01:21:31.160 --> 01:21:33.920 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? 01:21:33.920 --> 01:21:35.800 Good evening, Chair. 01:21:35.800 --> 01:21:37.200 No, there is none. 01:21:37.200 --> 01:21:38.200 Thank you. 01:21:38.200 --> 01:21:41.440 Any further discussion on the item? 01:21:41.440 --> 01:21:43.520 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:21:43.520 --> 01:21:44.520 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:21:44.520 --> 01:21:45.520 Aye. 01:21:45.520 --> 01:21:46.520 Commissioner Smith. 01:21:46.520 --> 01:21:47.520 Aye. 01:21:47.520 --> 01:21:48.520 Thank you. 01:21:48.520 --> 01:21:49.520 Chair is an aye. 01:21:49.520 --> 01:21:50.520 Commissioner Anderson. 01:21:50.520 --> 01:21:51.520 Aye. 01:21:51.520 --> 01:21:52.520 Commissioner Ellis. 01:21:52.520 --> 01:21:53.520 Aye. 01:21:53.520 --> 01:21:54.520 Motion carries 6-0. 01:21:54.520 --> 01:21:58.520 The next item of business is item 4B, PP21-0012. 01:21:58.520 --> 01:22:03.000 I'll invite Haley back for presentation. 01:22:03.000 --> 01:22:05.880 Good evening. 01:22:05.880 --> 01:22:08.880 This is a preliminary plat for the Urban Logistics Edition. 01:22:08.880 --> 01:22:12.000 This property is located on the south side of I-35E. 01:22:12.000 --> 01:22:15.860 The preliminary plat includes three lots, the largest of which would be intended for 01:22:15.860 --> 01:22:20.560 industrial development, the other two left as commercial parcels. 01:22:20.560 --> 01:22:23.920 At this time, there are several outstanding comments that are outlined in Exhibit 2 of 01:22:23.920 --> 01:22:26.120 your backup, so staff is recommending denial. 01:22:26.120 --> 01:22:30.640 However, the applicant has requested an extension, and staff has no objection, and that would 01:22:30.640 --> 01:22:33.880 be to a date certain of August 4th. 01:22:33.880 --> 01:22:34.880 Thank you, Haley. 01:22:34.880 --> 01:22:37.520 Any questions for Haley? 01:22:37.520 --> 01:22:39.600 And Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? 01:22:39.600 --> 01:22:42.760 No, Chair, there is none. 01:22:42.760 --> 01:22:43.760 Thank you. 01:22:43.760 --> 01:22:44.760 Commissioner Smith. 01:22:44.760 --> 01:22:49.000 Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of August 4th, 2021. 01:22:49.000 --> 01:22:52.320 We have a first for the 30-day extension to a date certain of August 4th. 01:22:52.320 --> 01:22:53.320 Commissioner Ellis. 01:22:53.320 --> 01:22:54.320 Second. 01:22:54.320 --> 01:22:56.480 We have a first and a second for the extension. 01:22:56.480 --> 01:22:59.160 Any discussion? 01:22:59.160 --> 01:23:01.320 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:23:01.320 --> 01:23:02.320 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:23:02.320 --> 01:23:03.320 Aye. 01:23:03.320 --> 01:23:04.320 Commissioner Smith. 01:23:04.320 --> 01:23:05.320 Aye. 01:23:05.320 --> 01:23:06.320 Commissioner McDade. 01:23:06.320 --> 01:23:07.320 Aye. 01:23:07.320 --> 01:23:08.320 Chairs, an aye. 01:23:08.320 --> 01:23:09.320 Commissioner Anderson. 01:23:09.320 --> 01:23:10.320 Aye. 01:23:10.320 --> 01:23:11.320 Commissioner Ellis. 01:23:11.320 --> 01:23:12.320 Aye. 01:23:12.320 --> 01:23:13.320 Motion carries 6-0. 01:23:13.320 --> 01:23:19.320 Item number 4C, FR21-0006, and I'll invite Ron to present. 01:23:19.320 --> 01:23:23.360 Thank you, Chair, members of the Commission. 01:23:23.360 --> 01:23:28.960 This item, for your consideration, is a final replat application for a residential subdivision, 01:23:28.960 --> 01:23:30.240 Eagle Creek. 01:23:30.240 --> 01:23:36.040 The application did come to the Commission last time you all met for an extension, and 01:23:36.040 --> 01:23:37.760 that was approved. 01:23:37.760 --> 01:23:43.440 However, between then and now, the applicant has not been able to address the comments, 01:23:43.440 --> 01:23:51.200 specifically sections 832D, 835, as well as 836J, per the development code. 01:23:51.200 --> 01:23:55.400 So therefore, staff is recommending denial of this subject item, and I will be happy 01:23:55.400 --> 01:23:56.400 to answer any questions. 01:23:56.400 --> 01:23:57.400 Great. 01:23:57.400 --> 01:23:58.400 Thanks, Ron. 01:23:58.400 --> 01:23:59.720 Any questions for Ron? 01:23:59.720 --> 01:24:01.840 And Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? 01:24:01.840 --> 01:24:05.000 No, sir, not this. 01:24:05.000 --> 01:24:06.000 Thank you. 01:24:06.000 --> 01:24:09.320 Commissioner Anderson, I'll make a motion to deny. 01:24:09.320 --> 01:24:12.880 We have a first for deny. 01:24:12.880 --> 01:24:13.880 Commissioner Smith. 01:24:13.880 --> 01:24:14.880 Second. 01:24:14.880 --> 01:24:15.960 We have a first and a second to deny. 01:24:15.960 --> 01:24:17.760 Any discussion on this item? 01:24:17.760 --> 01:24:18.760 Okay. 01:24:18.760 --> 01:24:20.640 I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:24:20.640 --> 01:24:24.200 Just a reminder, a vote in the affirmative is to deny. 01:24:24.200 --> 01:24:25.200 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:24:25.200 --> 01:24:26.200 Aye. 01:24:26.200 --> 01:24:27.200 Commissioner Smith. 01:24:27.200 --> 01:24:28.200 Aye. 01:24:28.200 --> 01:24:29.200 Commissioner McDade. 01:24:29.200 --> 01:24:30.200 Aye. 01:24:30.200 --> 01:24:31.200 Chair is also an aye. 01:24:31.200 --> 01:24:32.200 Commissioner Anderson. 01:24:32.200 --> 01:24:33.200 Aye. 01:24:33.200 --> 01:24:34.200 Commissioner Ellis. 01:24:34.200 --> 01:24:35.200 Aye. 01:24:35.200 --> 01:24:36.200 Chair is also an aye. 01:24:36.200 --> 01:24:44.080 The next item of business is item 4D, PP21-0011B, by Karina for presentation. 01:24:44.080 --> 01:24:48.760 Good evening, Karina Maldonado, Associate Planner. 01:24:48.760 --> 01:24:53.800 The item before you today is a preliminary plat, PP21-001B. 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 01:25:01.160 --> 01:25:02.960 area lot. 01:25:02.960 --> 01:25:09.000 Since the posting of this agenda, the applicant has addressed all comments, so staff is now 01:25:09.000 --> 01:25:13.280 recommending approval of this request as it does meet the established requirements in 01:25:13.280 --> 01:25:14.280 the DDC. 01:25:14.280 --> 01:25:16.280 With that, I can take any questions. 01:25:16.280 --> 01:25:17.280 Great. 01:25:17.280 --> 01:25:18.280 Any questions for Karina? 01:25:18.280 --> 01:25:21.200 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? 01:25:21.200 --> 01:25:23.280 No, not this one. 01:25:23.280 --> 01:25:26.080 Thank you. 01:25:26.080 --> 01:25:29.080 Any other discussion? 01:25:29.080 --> 01:25:33.200 Chair, we'll make a motion for approval. 01:25:33.200 --> 01:25:34.200 Commissioner Smith. 01:25:34.200 --> 01:25:35.200 Second. 01:25:35.200 --> 01:25:37.720 We have first and second for approval. 01:25:37.720 --> 01:25:38.720 Any discussion? 01:25:38.720 --> 01:25:42.600 Seeing none, I call for a vote via roll call. 01:25:42.600 --> 01:25:43.600 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:25:43.600 --> 01:25:44.600 Aye. 01:25:44.600 --> 01:25:45.600 Commissioner Smith. 01:25:45.600 --> 01:25:46.600 Aye. 01:25:46.600 --> 01:25:47.600 Commissioner McDade. 01:25:47.600 --> 01:25:48.600 Aye. 01:25:48.600 --> 01:25:49.600 Chair is an aye. 01:25:49.600 --> 01:25:50.600 Commissioner Anderson. 01:25:50.600 --> 01:25:51.600 Aye. 01:25:51.600 --> 01:25:52.600 Commissioner Ellis. 01:25:52.600 --> 01:25:53.600 Aye. 01:25:53.600 --> 01:25:54.600 Motion carries 6-0. 01:25:54.600 --> 01:26:05.860 I call for ZCP21-0017 and I'll invite Karina for presentation. 01:26:05.860 --> 01:26:12.880 All right. 01:26:12.880 --> 01:26:16.680 The request today is for ZCP21-0017. 01:26:16.680 --> 01:26:20.600 This is for Razor Ranch Multifamily at Heritage Trail. 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. 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 01:26:33.040 --> 01:26:34.040 addition. 01:26:34.040 --> 01:26:38.940 This site, although it's two lots currently, will need to be replatted to combine those 01:26:38.940 --> 01:26:42.800 two lots into one for this development. 01:26:42.800 --> 01:26:48.520 The subject site is surrounded by four public streets. 01:26:48.520 --> 01:26:50.700 On the north is Linden Drive. 01:26:50.700 --> 01:26:52.880 To the west, Heritage Trail. 01:26:52.880 --> 01:26:58.560 To the south is Panhandle Street and then to the east is East Park Boulevard. 01:26:58.560 --> 01:27:02.800 So this subject site is located within the Razor Ranch Overlay District. 01:27:02.800 --> 01:27:05.880 It has a base zoning of RCCD. 01:27:05.880 --> 01:27:12.440 That is because the Razor Ranch Overlay District is based on the 2002 Denton Development Code. 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 01:27:18.760 --> 01:27:22.520 for multifamily, which is permitted in this area. 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 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. 01:27:36.400 --> 01:27:41.600 So multifamily located east of Heritage Trail are also subject to the architectural landscape 01:27:41.600 --> 01:27:49.280 standards in ordinance number Z18-0026C and that is exhibit C2A that they would need to 01:27:49.280 --> 01:27:51.560 comply with. 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 01:27:57.840 --> 01:28:02.920 Overlay District do require P&Z approval before moving forward. 01:28:02.920 --> 01:28:06.320 Traditionally, site plans do not require P&Z approval. 01:28:06.320 --> 01:28:09.040 They're approved at an administrative level. 01:28:09.040 --> 01:28:13.160 So the approval today or consideration today includes the following elements. 01:28:13.160 --> 01:28:17.880 That is the site plan, landscape plan, and elevations. 01:28:17.880 --> 01:28:25.120 The criteria for approval for a site plan for the Razor Ranch Overlay District includes 01:28:25.120 --> 01:28:26.440 four elements. 01:28:26.440 --> 01:28:30.480 First being that the site plan substantially complies with the concept and schematic plan 01:28:30.480 --> 01:28:32.320 approved by council. 01:28:32.320 --> 01:28:36.640 Second that the site plan provides for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that 01:28:36.640 --> 01:28:41.040 would not adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods or properties. 01:28:41.040 --> 01:28:45.640 Third that the site plan provides for adequate and safe circulation of vehicular traffic 01:28:45.640 --> 01:28:51.840 and last that the plan fully complies with all other sections of the overlay district. 01:28:51.840 --> 01:28:53.640 So first I'll just go over the site plan. 01:28:53.640 --> 01:28:57.320 I did highlight some areas to make it easier to identify. 01:28:57.320 --> 01:29:06.280 Overall, 311,500 square feet of buildings on the site or building coverage on the site. 01:29:06.280 --> 01:29:09.400 That includes 322 dwelling units. 01:29:09.400 --> 01:29:14.200 Those dwelling units are located in two multifamily buildings. 01:29:14.200 --> 01:29:22.480 Those are these L-shaped buildings in blue, as well as the amenity center located here 01:29:22.480 --> 01:29:23.900 in green. 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 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 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 01:29:45.600 --> 01:29:46.600 of the site. 01:29:46.600 --> 01:29:50.440 Previously, that was not mentioned in work session, I do want to highlight that there 01:29:50.440 --> 01:29:57.000 are pedestrian entrances on the north side of Linden Street where this promenade area 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 01:30:03.600 --> 01:30:11.880 are gated areas with entrances for the residents that would be occupying this multifamily development. 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 01:30:17.840 --> 01:30:18.840 on the site. 01:30:18.840 --> 01:30:25.920 They are proposing 9.6 percent open space, that's all the areas shown in green. 01:30:25.920 --> 01:30:30.060 This will be, these multifamily buildings will be seven stories with a maximum height 01:30:30.060 --> 01:30:35.280 of 85 feet, that's less than the allowed 100 feet. 01:30:35.280 --> 01:30:42.240 And then parking proposed is 515 spaces, that does exceed the minimum of 504, but within 01:30:42.240 --> 01:30:46.600 the Razor Ranch Overlay District, they are permitted to exceed that number. 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. 01:30:54.040 --> 01:31:01.640 Those are existing easements that they intend to abandon to serve this site. 01:31:01.640 --> 01:31:06.760 So just briefly going over the landscape plan, they are meeting the minimum requirements 01:31:06.760 --> 01:31:10.720 and exceeding in some areas the standards. 01:31:10.720 --> 01:31:16.260 So 21 percent landscape area is proposed, the minimum required is 10 percent. 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 01:31:22.360 --> 01:31:27.960 you can see they have street trees along all frontages with some raised planter beds and 01:31:27.960 --> 01:31:35.880 green screens in areas where maybe some easements are blocking the required planting locations. 01:31:35.880 --> 01:31:42.880 So just briefly going over the elevations, the applicant is here and may provide a presentation 01:31:42.880 --> 01:31:46.380 on additional elevations if you all would like. 01:31:46.380 --> 01:31:51.620 So first here is the elevations of the two multifamily buildings along Linden Drive facing 01:31:51.620 --> 01:31:54.320 south. 01:31:54.320 --> 01:31:58.840 These are the elevations along East Park and Heritage Trail, these would be the right of 01:31:58.840 --> 01:32:01.920 way facing elevations. 01:32:01.920 --> 01:32:07.720 The clubhouse which is visible from Linden Street as well as a portion of their split 01:32:07.720 --> 01:32:12.360 parking structure that you can see from Panhandle. 01:32:12.360 --> 01:32:16.080 So staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets the established requirements 01:32:16.080 --> 01:32:20.560 of the Razor Ranch Overlay District with the following conditions. 01:32:20.560 --> 01:32:25.280 First that any public utility easements shown as being abandoned on the site plan in order 01:32:25.280 --> 01:32:30.160 to accommodate the proposed building locations must be abandoned prior to issuance of any 01:32:30.160 --> 01:32:31.600 building permits. 01:32:31.600 --> 01:32:36.560 And second that a replat must be submitted and approved to combine lots one and two, 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 01:32:42.000 --> 01:32:44.040 permits for this development. 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 01:32:48.400 --> 01:32:50.680 but I can also take questions before that. 01:32:50.680 --> 01:32:54.800 Sure, is there any questions for Karina? 01:32:54.800 --> 01:32:56.920 Is the applicant Gerald Lewicki? 01:32:56.920 --> 01:32:57.920 Yes. 01:32:57.920 --> 01:32:58.920 Perfect. 01:32:58.920 --> 01:32:59.920 Can we pull up your presentation? 01:32:59.920 --> 01:33:00.920 Sure. 01:33:00.920 --> 01:33:24.800 Okay, if it won't pop up, someone might have exited out of it. 01:33:24.800 --> 01:33:33.360 Sorry, give me one second while I pull up the presentation. 01:33:33.360 --> 01:33:37.760 Thank you. 01:33:37.760 --> 01:33:43.720 Good evening, Commission. 01:33:43.720 --> 01:33:50.720 I'm Gerald Lewicki with Hodges Architecture 13642 Omega in Dallas and we're honored to 01:33:50.720 --> 01:33:56.120 be here to present the AHS Development and Razor Ranch to you. 01:33:56.120 --> 01:33:57.120 Sorry. 01:33:57.120 --> 01:33:58.120 It looks like... 01:33:58.120 --> 01:34:01.120 There you go. 01:34:01.120 --> 01:34:19.600 All right, I'll just briefly run through this. 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 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. 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. 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. 01:34:50.760 --> 01:34:53.720 All right. 01:34:53.720 --> 01:35:00.120 And landscape plan that we looked at, the site is heavily landscaped or approximately 01:35:00.120 --> 01:35:08.680 double the required landscaping and shade tree coverage for the site and also have amenity 01:35:08.680 --> 01:35:18.160 areas as Karina brought up, the dog park, the sports court on the southern portion of 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 01:35:24.980 --> 01:35:29.520 element as you're coming into the main clubhouse building. 01:35:29.520 --> 01:35:34.880 And Chair, to answer your question about the tot lot, yes, that was a specific request. 01:35:34.880 --> 01:35:39.300 We did not feel like we had the room needed in the other two amenity areas. 01:35:39.300 --> 01:35:45.960 It is fenced, has a fence around the entire development but especially around this area 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 01:35:51.840 --> 01:35:53.440 the buildings themselves. 01:35:53.440 --> 01:36:00.280 So that was the reason for that location. 01:36:00.280 --> 01:36:06.480 Just quickly looking at some views, some perspective views, this is from the northeast corner looking 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 01:36:12.880 --> 01:36:19.240 main buildings with the amenity area back behind in this location. 01:36:19.240 --> 01:36:31.900 Then this is from the northwest corner viewing at the corner of Heritage and Linden. 01:36:31.900 --> 01:36:34.600 These are just some interior shots of the amenity areas. 01:36:34.600 --> 01:36:40.120 They have some top notch amenities within the clubhouse area. 01:36:40.120 --> 01:36:48.640 They have a business center, they have interior gathering areas, outdoor cooking areas adjacent 01:36:48.640 --> 01:36:54.600 to the pool, outdoor pool area and seating areas. 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 01:37:01.840 --> 01:37:03.600 amenity package. 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 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 01:37:12.200 --> 01:37:13.200 any questions. 01:37:13.200 --> 01:37:14.560 Thank you very much. 01:37:14.560 --> 01:37:16.360 Any questions for the applicant? 01:37:16.360 --> 01:37:26.360 Just out of curiosity, you showed kind of the alignment of this particular site plan 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 01:37:30.320 --> 01:37:31.320 the two buildings. 01:37:31.320 --> 01:37:32.320 Yes. 01:37:32.320 --> 01:37:34.400 Is there a planned mid-block crossing crosswalk there? 01:37:34.400 --> 01:37:38.360 Initially that was contemplated but we felt that from a safety standpoint it would be 01:37:38.360 --> 01:37:44.160 better to leave the crossings at the street intersections so it encourages pedestrian 01:37:44.160 --> 01:37:48.560 circulation all along that north side of Linden. 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 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 01:37:59.000 --> 01:38:01.360 back in order to get to the middle of the park? 01:38:01.360 --> 01:38:02.360 Absolutely. 01:38:02.360 --> 01:38:03.360 Okay. 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 01:38:07.560 --> 01:38:14.520 still we felt that it was safer at the corners. 01:38:14.520 --> 01:38:15.520 Okay. 01:38:15.520 --> 01:38:18.520 Any other questions for the applicant? 01:38:18.520 --> 01:38:19.520 I don't see any. 01:38:19.520 --> 01:38:20.520 Thank you very much. 01:38:20.520 --> 01:38:21.520 All right. 01:38:21.520 --> 01:38:22.520 Thank you. 01:38:22.520 --> 01:38:25.520 Rachel is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? 01:38:25.520 --> 01:38:27.520 No Chair. 01:38:27.520 --> 01:38:29.080 Perfect. 01:38:29.080 --> 01:38:32.160 Any further discussion or questions for staff? 01:38:32.160 --> 01:38:35.840 Commissioner Smith. 01:38:35.840 --> 01:38:37.760 Make a motion to approve with staff recommendations. 01:38:37.760 --> 01:38:40.600 We have a first for approval with recommendations. 01:38:40.600 --> 01:38:41.600 Kush Ellis. 01:38:41.600 --> 01:38:42.600 Second. 01:38:42.600 --> 01:38:44.800 We have a first and a second. 01:38:44.800 --> 01:38:47.200 Any discussion on the item? 01:38:47.200 --> 01:38:49.840 See oh Kush approved. 01:38:49.840 --> 01:38:50.840 Just a comment. 01:38:50.840 --> 01:38:57.280 I think I don't oppose this but just a little bit of common sense. 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 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. 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 01:39:10.760 --> 01:39:17.280 flag this as a potential area for accommodating that in the future. 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. 01:39:22.800 --> 01:39:27.360 Unfortunately there wasn't a mechanism for us to require that of the developer. 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 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 01:39:37.560 --> 01:39:41.560 no requirement that they provide that. 01:39:41.560 --> 01:39:42.560 Okay. 01:39:42.560 --> 01:39:43.560 Thank you. 01:39:43.560 --> 01:39:44.560 Any other? 01:39:44.560 --> 01:39:45.560 Commissioner Anderson. 01:39:45.560 --> 01:39:48.120 No I'm going to vote for this as well. 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 01:39:57.520 --> 01:39:58.520 angles and stuff. 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 01:40:02.200 --> 01:40:08.000 some little setbacks and stuff like this that's just architectural stuff but instead of just 01:40:08.000 --> 01:40:12.800 a flat front wall you know. 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 01:40:16.040 --> 01:40:22.380 District they are required to have a certain amount of relief in their elevations. 01:40:22.380 --> 01:40:24.920 It might not have been pretty easy to identify. 01:40:24.920 --> 01:40:25.920 Could you pull it up again? 01:40:25.920 --> 01:40:26.920 Yeah. 01:40:26.920 --> 01:40:43.520 I'm not going to hold this up but it's just. 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 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 01:40:54.960 --> 01:40:58.400 are actually the perspective may show it a little bit better. 01:40:58.400 --> 01:41:08.760 We can share the applicant's presentation again and I believe it has a better viewpoint. 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 01:41:13.480 --> 01:41:19.760 District within the ordinance specific to this area it does it does have requirements 01:41:19.760 --> 01:41:20.760 towards that. 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 01:41:25.040 --> 01:41:27.080 I thought it was just going to be a flat wall. 01:41:27.080 --> 01:41:28.080 No. 01:41:28.080 --> 01:41:29.080 Okay. 01:41:29.080 --> 01:41:33.000 It has insets and projections within the façade. 01:41:33.000 --> 01:41:35.920 Yeah well thank you. 01:41:35.920 --> 01:41:36.920 You're fine. 01:41:36.920 --> 01:41:46.280 Okay yeah for some reason this is it's not working. 01:41:46.280 --> 01:41:47.840 Any other questions or discussion? 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 01:41:54.160 --> 01:41:55.160 call. 01:41:55.160 --> 01:41:56.160 Commissioner Pruitt? 01:41:56.160 --> 01:41:57.160 Aye. 01:41:57.160 --> 01:41:58.160 Commissioner Smith? 01:41:58.160 --> 01:41:59.160 Aye. 01:41:59.160 --> 01:42:00.160 Commissioner McDade? 01:42:00.160 --> 01:42:01.160 Aye. 01:42:01.160 --> 01:42:02.160 Chair is an aye. 01:42:02.160 --> 01:42:03.160 Commissioner Anderson? 01:42:03.160 --> 01:42:04.160 Aye. 01:42:04.160 --> 01:42:05.160 Commissioner Ellis? 01:42:05.160 --> 01:42:06.160 Aye. 01:42:06.160 --> 01:42:07.160 Motion carries 6-0 congratulations. 01:42:07.160 --> 01:42:14.320 Next item of business is item 5A Z21-0007C. 01:42:14.320 --> 01:42:20.720 I'll open the public hearing and invite Carina Maldonado for presentation. 01:42:20.720 --> 01:42:39.040 It's me again it's Carina Maldonado Associate Planner with the City of Denton. 01:42:39.040 --> 01:42:43.360 This request is a public hearing for Z21-0007. 01:42:43.360 --> 01:42:47.040 This is a Jim Crystal Road rezoning. 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 01:42:54.800 --> 01:42:57.480 industrial LI district zoning. 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 01:43:03.640 --> 01:43:11.520 tract of city owned property that was acquired in 2016 to accommodate the Denton Energy Center. 01:43:11.520 --> 01:43:17.160 So just to depict it within the aerial at least within the perspective shown the area 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 01:43:23.920 --> 01:43:24.920 in yellow. 01:43:24.920 --> 01:43:30.320 So I will be referring to this as the northern and southern portions. 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 01:43:36.880 --> 01:43:44.240 many public owned facilities automatically were assigned to PF zoning district. 01:43:44.240 --> 01:43:50.520 Within these districts it's intended for public community services such as fire station schools, 01:43:50.520 --> 01:43:55.920 civic buildings as well as basic utilities provided by the city. 01:43:55.920 --> 01:44:00.680 So the request today is intended to support Denton Municipal Electric's proposed ground 01:44:00.680 --> 01:44:06.800 lease to a private company as part of a modular data center warehouse development. 01:44:06.800 --> 01:44:15.080 This project was brought forth to city council earlier in June regarding the use. 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 01:44:20.680 --> 01:44:23.640 in case you have questions for them. 01:44:23.640 --> 01:44:29.360 So prior to any development being established on this site the property must be rezoned 01:44:29.360 --> 01:44:34.920 to a district that would permit the modular data center warehouse use and so the proposal 01:44:34.920 --> 01:44:38.040 is for the LI district. 01:44:38.040 --> 01:44:41.520 So just a little bit of zoning history on this site. 01:44:41.520 --> 01:44:49.120 So prior to 2019 with the 2002 zoning map the subject site was previously zoned ICG. 01:44:49.120 --> 01:44:55.780 That is one of our heavier industrial districts within the 2002 zoning. 01:44:55.780 --> 01:45:00.960 So again when the 2019 zoning came through all city owned property transitioned to the 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 01:45:06.280 --> 01:45:10.680 the city of Denton it would have transitioned to the heavy industrial district. 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 01:45:15.320 --> 01:45:20.720 the Encore substation, I'm sorry not Encore, I believe it's Encore, substation. 01:45:20.720 --> 01:45:24.680 So the zoning there of ICG did transition to HI. 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 01:45:29.840 --> 01:45:32.520 likely transitioned to HI. 01:45:32.520 --> 01:45:39.800 However the request is to rezone to a lesser intensive zoning district of light industrial. 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 01:45:45.360 --> 01:45:50.840 and I've highlighted the items that I'll cover in bold. 01:45:50.840 --> 01:45:55.400 So first touching on general criterion three and zoning criterion one regarding the Denton 01:45:55.400 --> 01:45:57.180 plan 2030. 01:45:57.180 --> 01:46:04.500 So these subject site, the northern and southern tract both are designated for industrial commerce. 01:46:04.500 --> 01:46:10.240 This future land use designation is predominantly for light and heavy industrial. 01:46:10.240 --> 01:46:14.680 The light industrial district is consistent with this designation and it does provide 01:46:14.680 --> 01:46:22.280 a less intensive zoning within the area than the heavy industrial district would. 01:46:22.280 --> 01:46:27.240 Heavy uses within the industrial commerce area are manufacturing, assembly, fabrication 01:46:27.240 --> 01:46:29.800 as well as wholesale and distribution. 01:46:29.800 --> 01:46:35.960 The proposed warehouse does or is consistent with the intended uses in this designation. 01:46:35.960 --> 01:46:39.400 Excuse me. 01:46:39.400 --> 01:46:44.400 Next we'll talk about the general criterion eight and zoning criterion five regarding 01:46:44.400 --> 01:46:47.720 minimizing adverse impacts on surrounding property. 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 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 01:47:01.920 --> 01:47:05.000 feet south of the nearest residential zoning. 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 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 01:47:16.000 --> 01:47:17.240 R2. 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 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. 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 01:47:38.300 --> 01:47:42.800 is actually, it holds an existing residential use and I believe that that property owner 01:47:42.800 --> 01:47:48.400 also owns the property within the R2 district as well. 01:47:48.400 --> 01:47:55.440 So in relation to that northern portion, the closest adjacent uses really are the electric 01:47:55.440 --> 01:48:02.400 substations as well as existing gas wells and flood plain around that northern portion. 01:48:02.400 --> 01:48:10.000 The southern portion is located directly south of the Denton Energy Center and directly adjacent 01:48:10.000 --> 01:48:14.960 to that southern portion on the south is a rural residential zoning designation. 01:48:14.960 --> 01:48:21.800 However, that RR zoning, that property was annexed in 2010. 01:48:21.800 --> 01:48:28.320 In the 2002 zoning was assigned an RD5X which was the placeholder zoning after annexation 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 01:48:35.000 --> 01:48:36.000 zoning. 01:48:36.000 --> 01:48:42.680 However, I did also want to mention that that southern RR property does have significant 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 01:48:49.320 --> 01:48:52.880 adjacent to the substation and flood plain on the west side. 01:48:52.880 --> 01:48:58.520 So any development on the south really would not end up being a residential development 01:48:58.520 --> 01:49:05.280 due to the gas wells and the required setbacks from those gas wells. 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 01:49:10.440 --> 01:49:14.440 facilities and capacity to serve the site. 01:49:14.440 --> 01:49:18.880 So existing water and sewer are available to the property. 01:49:18.880 --> 01:49:23.840 Capacity in any extension of utilities would be assessed with platting and site development 01:49:23.840 --> 01:49:30.960 of the two portions of the sites and then access is provided or is accessible through 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 01:49:37.200 --> 01:49:44.800 Station 3 which is the new station at 1401 Underwood which would serve any industrial 01:49:44.800 --> 01:49:48.800 developments on the west side of I-35. 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 01:49:54.320 --> 01:49:58.480 the zoning boundaries that mostly hits just city owned property. 01:49:58.480 --> 01:50:03.360 However, staff and DME did host a community meeting. 01:50:03.360 --> 01:50:06.520 This was a virtual meeting held on June 17th. 01:50:06.520 --> 01:50:10.360 I believe the notification radius was about a thousand feet. 01:50:10.360 --> 01:50:13.000 We did have about five people in attendance. 01:50:13.000 --> 01:50:20.040 They asked questions related to noise mitigation, adjacent zoning as well as any impact that 01:50:20.040 --> 01:50:25.600 the proposed city project would have on the supply for electricity for residents. 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 01:50:30.280 --> 01:50:34.740 more about the use and the overall response was positive. 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. 01:50:42.760 --> 01:50:47.240 Staff does recommend approval of the request as it does comply with the general approval 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. 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 01:51:01.760 --> 01:51:06.500 council will consider a ground lease agreement as well as a power purchase agreement related 01:51:06.500 --> 01:51:08.640 to the project. 01:51:08.640 --> 01:51:10.200 With that I can take any questions. 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 01:51:17.680 --> 01:51:19.280 any questions as well. 01:51:19.280 --> 01:51:20.280 Great. 01:51:20.280 --> 01:51:22.280 Thank you so much for the presentation. 01:51:22.280 --> 01:51:26.440 Any questions for staff? 01:51:26.440 --> 01:51:27.840 This is a public hearing. 01:51:27.840 --> 01:51:29.920 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so. 01:51:29.920 --> 01:51:32.840 Rachel is there anyone who's called in on this item? 01:51:32.840 --> 01:51:34.960 No callers for this one chair. 01:51:34.960 --> 01:51:35.960 Thank you. 01:51:35.960 --> 01:51:39.920 Anyone present wishing to speak? 01:51:39.920 --> 01:51:42.440 Seeing none I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. 01:51:42.440 --> 01:51:43.440 Commissioner Smith. 01:51:43.440 --> 01:51:45.240 Make a motion to approve. 01:51:45.240 --> 01:51:46.240 Commissioner Anderson. 01:51:46.240 --> 01:51:47.240 Second. 01:51:47.240 --> 01:51:49.960 We have a first and a second for approval. 01:51:49.960 --> 01:51:53.600 Any discussion on this item? 01:51:53.600 --> 01:51:55.840 Seeing none I'll call for a vote via roll call. 01:51:55.840 --> 01:51:56.840 Commissioner Pruitt. 01:51:56.840 --> 01:51:57.840 Aye. 01:51:57.840 --> 01:51:58.840 Commissioner Smith. 01:51:58.840 --> 01:51:59.840 Aye. 01:51:59.840 --> 01:52:00.840 Commissioner McDade. 01:52:00.840 --> 01:52:01.840 Aye. 01:52:01.840 --> 01:52:02.840 Chairs an aye. 01:52:02.840 --> 01:52:03.840 Commissioner Anderson. 01:52:03.840 --> 01:52:04.840 Aye. 01:52:04.840 --> 01:52:05.840 Commissioner Ellis. 01:52:05.840 --> 01:52:06.840 Aye. 01:52:06.840 --> 01:52:09.480 Motion carries 6-0. 01:52:09.480 --> 01:52:16.160 Next item of business is item 5BZ20-0005B. 01:52:16.160 --> 01:52:20.280 I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation and open the public hearing. 01:52:20.280 --> 01:52:23.280 Good evening. 01:52:23.280 --> 01:52:34.080 Let me share my presentation. 01:52:34.080 --> 01:52:42.000 All right. 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 01:52:45.480 --> 01:52:50.680 Z20-0005B Denton Commerce Center. 01:52:50.680 --> 01:52:58.000 So request before you is to rezone approximately 142 acres from mixed use regional MR district 01:52:58.000 --> 01:53:03.640 to light industrial district that's LI. 01:53:03.640 --> 01:53:08.320 I'm just a comparison of the current zoning map versus the proposed zoning map. 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 01:53:13.160 --> 01:53:16.320 to go to that LI. 01:53:16.320 --> 01:53:19.680 The criteria for approval for a zoning case is in sub chapter 2 of Denton Development 01:53:19.680 --> 01:53:20.680 Code. 01:53:20.680 --> 01:53:24.960 It includes both the general and specific criteria. 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. 01:53:30.440 --> 01:53:35.080 The site is designated as business innovation that's intended for large tracts of land that 01:53:35.080 --> 01:53:38.960 are appropriate for well planned large scale office and employment parks. 01:53:38.960 --> 01:53:46.080 It also has room for things like supporting uses like retail, hotels, and residential. 01:53:46.080 --> 01:53:50.960 The typical districts that we see kind of fit within that business innovation future 01:53:50.960 --> 01:53:55.680 land use designation is our LI and GO. 01:53:55.680 --> 01:54:00.040 In this instance they are proposing LI which is consistent with the future land use map 01:54:00.040 --> 01:54:04.560 given the permitted uses as well as development scale. 01:54:04.560 --> 01:54:13.080 There was a question about the development of the property and those design considerations. 01:54:13.080 --> 01:54:18.040 The Denton Development Code does require that properties within the LI district, they do 01:54:18.040 --> 01:54:24.160 have to conform to our commercial development standards any structures within 250 feet of 01:54:24.160 --> 01:54:26.220 the ultimate right of way. 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. 01:54:31.840 --> 01:54:35.800 You have the FM 1173 on the north. 01:54:35.800 --> 01:54:40.280 You have I-35 on the east property boundary and then loop 288. 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 01:54:45.720 --> 01:54:47.800 and it is developed. 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 01:54:53.320 --> 01:54:59.500 will take up a significant portion of that southern portion of the property. 01:54:59.500 --> 01:55:03.960 So all of those rights of way they would have to conform to those commercial development 01:55:03.960 --> 01:55:10.680 standards for any structures within 250 feet of any of those rights of way. 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 01:55:15.560 --> 01:55:21.000 area plan we have had quite a few projects come forward in this general area. 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 01:55:25.480 --> 01:55:30.200 zoning commission as well as city council have talked to staff and directed staff to 01:55:30.200 --> 01:55:33.000 move forward with the small area plan. 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 01:55:38.600 --> 01:55:43.640 with our comprehensive plan amendment or I'm sorry our comprehensive plan update. 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 01:55:47.240 --> 01:55:51.880 in these areas. 01:55:51.880 --> 01:55:56.120 Another criterion for approval is significant changes to warrant the zoning change. 01:55:56.120 --> 01:56:00.680 So to determine this we had to go back a couple of decades. 01:56:00.680 --> 01:56:03.360 We looked at the 1999 Denton plan. 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. 01:56:09.360 --> 01:56:14.800 So shopping and maybe higher density residential uses. 01:56:14.800 --> 01:56:20.760 So you can see this is a snapshot of that 1999 Denton plan. 01:56:20.760 --> 01:56:25.800 All of that purple was intended to be that regional mixed use center. 01:56:25.800 --> 01:56:28.720 And the zoning at that time reflected that vision. 01:56:28.720 --> 01:56:32.440 So it was that regional zoning designation. 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 01:56:39.240 --> 01:56:44.480 regional shopping and regional centers we had and determined that those existing ones, 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 01:56:49.320 --> 01:56:54.760 was moving forward, determined that this area was unlikely to develop with that regional 01:56:54.760 --> 01:56:55.760 shopping. 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 01:57:00.560 --> 01:57:01.560 innovation. 01:57:01.560 --> 01:57:08.920 So looking at more of those employment uses, particularly along that 35 corridor. 01:57:08.920 --> 01:57:14.920 And so that's when that future land use designation changed to that business innovation. 01:57:14.920 --> 01:57:21.120 The current zoning of MR is sort of a vestige of that 1999 plan. 01:57:21.120 --> 01:57:27.040 When we implemented the 2019 Denton Development Code, all of those older zoning districts 01:57:27.040 --> 01:57:32.160 just sort of transitioned to comparable districts or compatible districts. 01:57:32.160 --> 01:57:36.400 So it really just sort of moved that 1999 plan forward. 01:57:36.400 --> 01:57:42.960 However, that isn't consistent with the current vision of the area. 01:57:42.960 --> 01:57:47.100 This criterion minimizes adverse impacts on surrounding property. 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 01:57:53.680 --> 01:57:57.000 of a business innovation future land use designation. 01:57:57.000 --> 01:58:00.880 Currently, much of the surrounding property is undeveloped. 01:58:00.880 --> 01:58:05.080 It's either agricultural uses or just undeveloped property. 01:58:05.080 --> 01:58:11.040 However, given that future land use designation, we do anticipate that the surrounding properties 01:58:11.040 --> 01:58:17.720 will develop in a manner consistent with our future land use map and that business innovation, 01:58:17.720 --> 01:58:21.720 and that LI district, the permitted uses within it are consistent with that. 01:58:21.720 --> 01:58:27.360 And so we anticipate that that will continue to develop in a like manner. 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 01:58:35.300 --> 01:58:36.300 uses mean. 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 01:58:42.480 --> 01:58:48.280 employment uses comparing the existing zoning with those two districts that we typically 01:58:48.280 --> 01:58:51.100 see in that business innovation. 01:58:51.100 --> 01:58:53.440 This isn't all the uses. 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 01:58:56.680 --> 01:58:57.680 Code. 01:58:57.680 --> 01:59:02.240 I just sort of pulled out some of those kind of more employment uses. 01:59:02.240 --> 01:59:09.760 And you can see that while there are some minor differences, there are – GEO and LI 01:59:09.760 --> 01:59:14.560 are fairly comparable, and it's somewhat comparable to that MR as well. 01:59:14.560 --> 01:59:20.160 These are a lot of our more intense uses in more intense districts. 01:59:20.160 --> 01:59:25.120 So they allow – all of these zoning districts allow a lot of those employment uses. 01:59:25.120 --> 01:59:30.960 GEO and LI are a little more toward that employment, a little less commercial. 01:59:30.960 --> 01:59:33.620 They don't have as many residential uses as the MR. 01:59:33.620 --> 01:59:39.140 They really kind of stick to more of those employment uses. 01:59:39.140 --> 01:59:43.240 Public facilities and services available to serve the property. 01:59:43.240 --> 01:59:46.220 We look at transportation and water and wastewater. 01:59:46.220 --> 01:59:53.040 There is adequate access to the site from I-35 and FM 1173 at this time. 01:59:53.040 --> 01:59:56.720 This is kind of turned a little funny that north is this direction. 01:59:56.720 --> 01:59:58.800 This is 1173 right here. 01:59:58.800 --> 02:00:01.300 This is that I-35 corridor. 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 02:00:07.320 --> 02:00:10.740 that I-35 corridor and the expansion. 02:00:10.740 --> 02:00:14.240 There are future improvements planned for I-35. 02:00:14.240 --> 02:00:17.780 Those are moving along, as well as Loop 288. 02:00:17.780 --> 02:00:20.080 Loop 288 is moving along as well. 02:00:20.080 --> 02:00:25.960 It's under the design phase right now, and we'll get under construction within the 02:00:25.960 --> 02:00:26.960 decade. 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 02:00:32.300 --> 02:00:33.480 toward the south. 02:00:33.480 --> 02:00:37.880 There's also a concurrent comprehensive plan amendment related to mobility that we'll 02:00:37.880 --> 02:00:39.560 be talking about next. 02:00:39.560 --> 02:00:42.480 There are water and wastewater available to the site. 02:00:42.480 --> 02:00:45.560 Sewer – a new list station may be required. 02:00:45.560 --> 02:00:50.000 That will all be determined if this is approved at that platting stage. 02:00:50.000 --> 02:00:52.800 Public outreach was sent out. 02:00:52.800 --> 02:00:59.560 We haven't received any in favor or opposition to this project for the zoning part. 02:00:59.560 --> 02:01:03.720 So based upon the criteria for approval, staff does recommend approval of the request. 02:01:03.720 --> 02:01:08.080 It's consistent with the comprehensive plan, and I'll be happy to answer any questions. 02:01:08.080 --> 02:01:11.240 And the applicant is here, and he also has a presentation as well. 02:01:11.240 --> 02:01:12.240 Great. 02:01:12.240 --> 02:01:13.240 Commissioner Smith. 02:01:13.240 --> 02:01:14.240 Thank you, Chair. 02:01:14.240 --> 02:01:18.080 Julie, I know this is a straight zoning case, but for whatever is – whatever would be 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 02:01:21.880 --> 02:01:22.880 site itself? 02:01:22.880 --> 02:01:23.880 Would it be off 1173? 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 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? 02:01:33.180 --> 02:01:37.220 The applicant has actually already started discussions with TextDOT to kind of figure 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 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 02:01:45.420 --> 02:01:46.420 of those roads. 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. 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 02:01:58.720 --> 02:01:59.720 the north. 02:01:59.720 --> 02:02:04.160 However, that current alignment is going to remain in place as a secondary arterial. 02:02:04.160 --> 02:02:08.520 So under the current mobility plan or that draft mobility plan, they would have access 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. 02:02:13.120 --> 02:02:14.120 Okay. 02:02:14.120 --> 02:02:15.120 Another question. 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 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 02:02:27.720 --> 02:02:31.240 probably flyovers down on the extension. 02:02:31.240 --> 02:02:37.800 So at the very beginning, if this zoning was approved, that 250 ROW would be essentially 02:02:37.800 --> 02:02:39.280 codified, right? 02:02:39.280 --> 02:02:44.160 And then if their – whenever a design comes back with the 288 expansion, that right of 02:02:44.160 --> 02:02:49.160 way would then be reset once the flyover or whatever the interchange is between 288 and 02:02:49.160 --> 02:02:50.160 35. 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 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? 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 02:03:04.160 --> 02:03:09.720 because that design is further along and they're further along in those plans. 02:03:09.720 --> 02:03:12.740 Loop 288, that is still under design. 02:03:12.740 --> 02:03:16.640 Our city staff works pretty closely with TxDOT there. 02:03:16.640 --> 02:03:19.880 They have at least a monthly meeting. 02:03:19.880 --> 02:03:23.000 They often have more meetings than that with TxDOT. 02:03:23.000 --> 02:03:28.400 So we would try to determine what that right – that correct right of way dedication is 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 02:03:35.400 --> 02:03:40.180 minor changes, an additional right of way would need to be acquired by TxDOT in order 02:03:40.180 --> 02:03:45.000 to accommodate their final design of the road, then TxDOT would have to acquire that right 02:03:45.000 --> 02:03:46.000 of way. 02:03:46.000 --> 02:03:47.000 Okay. 02:03:47.000 --> 02:03:48.000 Got it. 02:03:48.000 --> 02:03:49.000 Thank you. 02:03:49.000 --> 02:03:50.000 Sure. 02:03:50.000 --> 02:03:52.200 Any other questions for Julie? 02:03:52.200 --> 02:03:54.360 Thanks, Julie. 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 02:04:05.480 --> 02:04:06.480 for the record. 02:04:06.480 --> 02:04:10.320 I'm going to go ahead and share your presentation, okay? 02:04:10.320 --> 02:04:11.320 Is that it? 02:04:11.320 --> 02:04:12.320 I'm sorry. 02:04:12.320 --> 02:04:13.320 Andrew? 02:04:13.320 --> 02:04:14.320 I think you just state your name and address for the record. 02:04:14.320 --> 02:04:15.320 Hi. 02:04:15.320 --> 02:04:16.320 My name is Todd Finley. 02:04:16.320 --> 02:04:17.320 I'm with CLX Ventures. 02:04:17.320 --> 02:04:19.580 Thanks, first of all, for having me here. 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 02:04:23.800 --> 02:04:28.080 a quick little presentation and I'll answer some of your questions and whatever questions 02:04:28.080 --> 02:04:31.760 you guys may have. 02:04:31.760 --> 02:04:38.840 So let me make sure I don't mess this up. 02:04:38.840 --> 02:04:40.840 We're CLX Ventures. 02:04:40.840 --> 02:04:45.000 We are a local group. 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 02:04:49.080 --> 02:04:50.880 Investment Properties. 02:04:50.880 --> 02:04:57.640 Brad Copeland and Tony Long, our co-founders – Tony was with CBRE for 30 years, Trammell 02:04:57.640 --> 02:05:02.880 Crowe as well, and Brad Copeland was also with Trammell Crowe, Crowe Holdings and Clarion 02:05:02.880 --> 02:05:05.440 Partners. 02:05:05.440 --> 02:05:12.680 And Eli Ellis is our VP of all our financials. 02:05:12.680 --> 02:05:18.720 Just development activity, this is just – we only focus in the state of Texas. 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. 02:05:22.560 --> 02:05:28.360 So this is just – we do multifamily and industrial, Brad and I focus mainly on industrial, 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 02:05:33.440 --> 02:05:37.600 we've done. 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 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 02:05:48.840 --> 02:05:50.600 we've done in the past. 02:05:50.600 --> 02:05:53.800 This is at DFW Airport. 02:05:53.800 --> 02:05:58.600 It's – the top picture on the right is the rendering, and then the picture after 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 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 02:06:07.520 --> 02:06:11.320 building comes out and it's like this – this doesn't look anything like the rendering. 02:06:11.320 --> 02:06:18.240 So typical tilt wall, everything you see from Alliance to the stuff that's going, you 02:06:18.240 --> 02:06:35.180 know, Exeter is doing, and all throughout the DFW is what we do. 02:06:35.180 --> 02:06:36.800 Yeah Amazon took this building. 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. 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. 02:06:54.160 --> 02:06:55.640 That building was a 40 foot clear. 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, 02:07:01.000 --> 02:07:03.740 that fronts 35. 02:07:03.740 --> 02:07:09.540 Trailer storage. 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 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 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 02:07:28.540 --> 02:07:36.440 to being a part of it. 02:07:36.440 --> 02:07:42.760 This was another building we did in Dallas off of Interstate 20, just similar to the 02:07:42.760 --> 02:07:44.640 one at DFW, a little bit different. 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 02:07:50.480 --> 02:07:56.340 glass, and the tilt wall. 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. 02:08:05.240 --> 02:08:12.440 I can send you guys this package or any photos if you need any. 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 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 02:08:26.240 --> 02:08:28.640 right-of-way at 288. 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 02:08:36.520 --> 02:08:41.840 I-35 that borders this has already been taken by TxDOT. 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. 02:08:46.840 --> 02:08:51.320 We know where that right-of-way line is, so we have that worked through. 02:08:51.320 --> 02:08:54.600 We have the future driveways from 288. 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 02:09:01.040 --> 02:09:02.040 actually get built. 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 02:09:06.800 --> 02:09:10.760 all the way through, but we've already been coordinating where those future drives will 02:09:10.760 --> 02:09:11.760 be. 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 02:09:18.320 --> 02:09:19.320 them as well. 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 02:09:26.400 --> 02:09:31.680 south of that that will tie into the new frontage road for I-35. 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. 02:09:37.560 --> 02:09:38.560 So we're still working through that. 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. 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. 02:09:50.160 --> 02:09:55.880 I've got another in-person meeting with TXDOT in a couple weeks. 02:09:55.880 --> 02:09:56.880 Great. 02:09:56.880 --> 02:09:59.840 I appreciate the presentation. 02:09:59.840 --> 02:10:00.840 Any questions? 02:10:00.840 --> 02:10:01.840 Oh, Commissioner Smith. 02:10:01.840 --> 02:10:02.840 Thank you, Chair. 02:10:02.840 --> 02:10:03.840 Brad? 02:10:03.840 --> 02:10:04.840 Todd. 02:10:04.840 --> 02:10:05.840 Todd, sorry. 02:10:05.840 --> 02:10:06.840 My apologies. 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 02:10:15.360 --> 02:10:19.400 off 35, once those access points are granted in about three years, once that starts. 02:10:19.400 --> 02:10:24.480 And then probably access points off 288 as well, once that right-of-way gets cut. 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 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 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 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 02:10:47.320 --> 02:10:48.320 the future frontage. 02:10:48.320 --> 02:10:49.320 Okay. 02:10:49.320 --> 02:10:50.320 And so. 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, 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. 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 02:11:03.160 --> 02:11:07.280 talking about exactly plotting and where the building would be located, but in your opinion 02:11:07.280 --> 02:11:12.540 as a developer, where would the property, if this were to be zoned, where would this 02:11:12.540 --> 02:11:14.060 property be located on that? 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 02:11:18.240 --> 02:11:21.400 away from 35, closer to the railroad? 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 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 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 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 02:11:45.840 --> 02:11:47.920 detention pond in front of that. 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 02:11:54.200 --> 02:11:55.200 road. 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 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 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 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. 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, 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 02:12:24.160 --> 02:12:31.880 of 1173, and then access points north of the future, eight years from now, 288 frontage 02:12:31.880 --> 02:12:32.880 road. 02:12:32.880 --> 02:12:33.880 Sure. 02:12:33.880 --> 02:12:39.280 And I would assume that it'd probably be designed as a more industrial actual manufacturing 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 02:12:45.400 --> 02:12:49.080 of office or clerical pieces, it would be up front, closer to 35. 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 02:12:53.080 --> 02:12:54.080 approach that? 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 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 02:13:06.520 --> 02:13:07.520 something like that. 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 02:13:12.160 --> 02:13:16.540 dress up with storefront, the glass and stuff that I was showing earlier. 02:13:16.540 --> 02:13:20.920 And so, you know, the front building, what I'm saying, was... 02:13:20.920 --> 02:13:23.520 Like, take that one that you talked about in Houston there. 02:13:23.520 --> 02:13:25.280 Yeah, so right here. 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 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 02:13:32.520 --> 02:13:33.520 main thoroughfares. 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. 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 02:13:45.760 --> 02:13:48.360 dock doors are, you won't see that. 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 02:13:53.680 --> 02:13:55.560 said, "Okay, let's try to have that." 02:13:55.560 --> 02:14:01.740 But then buildings behind that towards the railroad will have, you know, placed. 02:14:01.740 --> 02:14:08.560 Right now, we have the dock doors not even facing an 1173 or 288, so... 02:14:08.560 --> 02:14:09.560 Okay. 02:14:09.560 --> 02:14:10.560 Be facing the railroad, pretty much. 02:14:10.560 --> 02:14:11.560 Pretty much, yeah. 02:14:11.560 --> 02:14:12.560 Okay. 02:14:12.560 --> 02:14:13.560 All right. 02:14:13.560 --> 02:14:14.560 Thanks. 02:14:14.560 --> 02:14:19.480 But we're following, you know, all the ordinances, all the guidelines, and all the... 02:14:19.480 --> 02:14:22.060 Thank you. 02:14:22.060 --> 02:14:24.920 Any other questions for the applicant? 02:14:24.920 --> 02:14:25.920 Chris Anderson. 02:14:25.920 --> 02:14:26.920 Thanks, Chair. 02:14:26.920 --> 02:14:34.800 You all are planning on building just strictly industrial distribution centers, right there, 02:14:34.800 --> 02:14:35.800 correct? 02:14:35.800 --> 02:14:37.760 That's our current plan, yes, sir. 02:14:37.760 --> 02:14:38.760 Okay. 02:14:38.760 --> 02:14:39.760 Thanks. 02:14:39.760 --> 02:14:45.720 I don't see any other questions at this time. 02:14:45.720 --> 02:14:50.000 I appreciate you being here for presentation and being here to answer questions. 02:14:50.000 --> 02:14:51.000 Thank you. 02:14:51.000 --> 02:14:52.000 Okay. 02:14:52.000 --> 02:14:53.000 Thank you. 02:14:53.000 --> 02:14:54.000 Rachel, is anyone calling in for this item? 02:14:54.000 --> 02:14:55.000 No callers, Chair. 02:14:55.000 --> 02:14:59.520 This is a public hearing. 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. 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 02:15:14.440 --> 02:15:15.960 motion and then some discussion. 02:15:15.960 --> 02:15:16.960 Commissioner Smith. 02:15:16.960 --> 02:15:20.520 I'm going to make a motion to approve staff recommendations. 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 02:15:26.320 --> 02:15:30.760 was on the east side of 35 down 77. 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 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 02:15:39.920 --> 02:15:44.440 that's the front pushing most of this development further off 35. 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 02:15:49.280 --> 02:15:51.800 that is meant to be for that industrial piece. 02:15:51.800 --> 02:15:57.120 So with that being said, my comments being said, I think that the motion stands. 02:15:57.120 --> 02:15:59.080 We have a first for approval. 02:15:59.080 --> 02:16:01.080 Commissioner Ellis. 02:16:01.080 --> 02:16:03.400 I'll second. 02:16:03.400 --> 02:16:07.480 We have a first and a second for approval. 02:16:07.480 --> 02:16:08.480 Any discussion on this item? 02:16:08.480 --> 02:16:09.480 Commissioner Ellis. 02:16:09.480 --> 02:16:10.480 Thank you. 02:16:10.480 --> 02:16:11.480 Yeah. 02:16:11.480 --> 02:16:14.480 I just had a few comments. 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 02:16:20.760 --> 02:16:22.920 that other side of the freeway. 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 02:16:27.880 --> 02:16:32.740 more residential and that part of Denton. 02:16:32.740 --> 02:16:37.920 This side of the freeway does seem to be headed this way into warehousing. 02:16:37.920 --> 02:16:43.280 Warehousing does bring jobs, hopefully we can get some good leases in these buildings 02:16:43.280 --> 02:16:45.520 and some good jobs for the city. 02:16:45.520 --> 02:16:51.640 But I'm okay with the zoning change on that side of the freeway. 02:16:51.640 --> 02:16:52.640 Any other discussion? 02:16:52.640 --> 02:17:01.680 Before I call for a vote, I would probably echo Commissioner Ellis's thoughts, but also 02:17:01.680 --> 02:17:03.360 Commissioner Smith's. 02:17:03.360 --> 02:17:10.040 In my finite mind, I think about the business innovation area of Denton being corporate 02:17:10.040 --> 02:17:15.920 headquarters and campuses and parks that we see down in Plano and in Southlake. 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 02:17:21.440 --> 02:17:24.280 a lot of sense on the east side. 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 02:17:30.320 --> 02:17:36.040 into a pretty, could be a big interchange in the future. 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. 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 02:17:47.040 --> 02:17:50.280 in Denton, I'm in support of the project. 02:17:50.280 --> 02:17:53.440 With that, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 02:17:53.440 --> 02:17:54.440 Commissioner Pruitt? 02:17:54.440 --> 02:17:55.440 Aye. 02:17:55.440 --> 02:17:56.440 Commissioner Smith? 02:17:56.440 --> 02:17:57.440 Aye. 02:17:57.440 --> 02:17:58.440 Commissioner McDade? 02:17:58.440 --> 02:17:59.440 Aye. 02:17:59.440 --> 02:18:00.440 Chair is an aye. 02:18:00.440 --> 02:18:01.440 Commissioner Anderson? 02:18:01.440 --> 02:18:02.440 Nay. 02:18:02.440 --> 02:18:03.440 Commissioner Ellis? 02:18:03.440 --> 02:18:04.440 Aye. 02:18:04.440 --> 02:18:06.400 This motion carries 5-1. 02:18:06.400 --> 02:18:07.400 Congratulations. 02:18:07.400 --> 02:18:14.320 The next item of business is item 5C, CA21-0001. 02:18:14.320 --> 02:18:20.080 And I'll invite Julie back out for presentation and open the public hearing. 02:18:20.080 --> 02:18:34.280 Okay, let me ... This is CA21-0001, Denton Commerce Center. 02:18:34.280 --> 02:18:40.800 Before we get too into the request, I just want to talk briefly about mobility planning 02:18:40.800 --> 02:18:41.800 in Denton. 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 02:18:46.600 --> 02:18:47.880 plan. 02:18:47.880 --> 02:18:52.360 The mobility plan is intended to establish the future roadway network, but that also 02:18:52.360 --> 02:18:58.120 includes both pedestrian and bicycle networks, not just cars. 02:18:58.120 --> 02:19:06.200 The mobility plan is intended to be modified and amended over time and updated intermittently. 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 02:19:11.160 --> 02:19:12.160 plan amendment. 02:19:12.160 --> 02:19:17.360 And that is something that the city has undertaken and is currently updating our mobility plan, 02:19:17.360 --> 02:19:22.680 kind of running in parallel fashion with the update of our comprehensive plan. 02:19:22.680 --> 02:19:28.700 And the mobility plan establishes our transportation networks and that defined hierarchy of roads. 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 02:19:34.440 --> 02:19:40.120 secondary arterials, then to our eventually collectors and neighborhood streets, which 02:19:40.120 --> 02:19:42.120 aren't always all on the plan. 02:19:42.120 --> 02:19:47.880 It's usually those larger roads, but it does create, establish that hierarchy of roads. 02:19:47.880 --> 02:19:56.420 Our current plan was adopted in early 2016, and that replaced our 1998 plan. 02:19:56.420 --> 02:19:59.320 I show it as the 2011 mobility plan. 02:19:59.320 --> 02:20:05.520 That's because it was amended over time, and the last iteration was 2011. 02:20:05.520 --> 02:20:11.360 So those two plans, or the 2016, replaced that 1998. 02:20:11.360 --> 02:20:15.240 And as I mentioned, the update is currently underway. 02:20:15.240 --> 02:20:18.600 So now we'll get to the request. 02:20:18.600 --> 02:20:28.240 With that adoption of the 2016 plan, the mobility plan reclassified what is a neighborhood street, 02:20:28.240 --> 02:20:31.240 Cindy Lane, to a secondary arterial. 02:20:31.240 --> 02:20:39.720 So that it would extend from its connection to US 380 at that signalized intersection, 02:20:39.720 --> 02:20:45.800 all the way north to FM 156. 02:20:45.800 --> 02:20:52.360 Under Denton Development Code Section 7.8.7, if a development includes a corridor that 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 02:20:58.240 --> 02:20:59.240 build that road. 02:20:59.240 --> 02:21:03.520 And that's something that y'all have seen in platting from time to time. 02:21:03.520 --> 02:21:08.040 So that's pretty standard for developments. 02:21:08.040 --> 02:21:13.160 In this instance, the applicant would like to revise the mobility plan to remove that 02:21:13.160 --> 02:21:17.600 section of Cindy Lane, which runs north and south to the center of the site. 02:21:17.600 --> 02:21:20.720 So here you can see the site right here outlined in yellow. 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 02:21:29.160 --> 02:21:34.880 proposing to remove it from their site. 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. 02:21:40.620 --> 02:21:44.520 Here we show that current plan, showing Cindy Lane. 02:21:44.520 --> 02:21:52.400 Here's where it connects to US 380 and western center to the south. 02:21:52.400 --> 02:21:59.420 Goes all the way up, crosses the railroad track, and then on to parts north. 02:21:59.420 --> 02:22:03.480 The proposed mobility plan sort of simplifies it, kind of takes some of those collectors 02:22:03.480 --> 02:22:14.540 out, provides a little more simplified and grid of those arterial roadways, and it does 02:22:14.540 --> 02:22:19.880 remove Cindy Lane, kind of converts it back to what it was, that neighborhood street, 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 02:22:29.360 --> 02:22:33.320 move that traffic around in the area. 02:22:33.320 --> 02:22:39.320 And the proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan. 02:22:39.320 --> 02:22:43.440 Criteria for approval for all applications is in subchapter two. 02:22:43.440 --> 02:22:46.920 And because the mobility plan is a part of the comprehensive plan, it goes through the 02:22:46.920 --> 02:22:53.760 comprehensive plan amendment process, that specific criteria is also in subchapter two. 02:22:53.760 --> 02:22:57.840 There's two subsections to the criteria for approval. 02:22:57.840 --> 02:23:03.520 The first subsection, they have to meet at least one of those criterion, and then there 02:23:03.520 --> 02:23:07.560 are additional review standards. 02:23:07.560 --> 02:23:10.660 So first, I want to talk about didn't plan 2030. 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 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. 02:23:19.980 --> 02:23:24.460 So the subject property is shown with that red star. 02:23:24.460 --> 02:23:28.940 This is the future land use map overlaid on the mobility plan. 02:23:28.940 --> 02:23:36.240 You can see that that Cindy Lane kind of snaking north from 380. 02:23:36.240 --> 02:23:39.920 And you can see there are several future land use designation colors on the map. 02:23:39.920 --> 02:23:44.280 The subject property has that business innovation that's in that kind of lighter pink. 02:23:44.280 --> 02:23:46.340 You've got rural to the north. 02:23:46.340 --> 02:23:50.440 And then there is a little island here of low residential, that's that yellow piece. 02:23:50.440 --> 02:23:55.680 And that is that ranch estates, and that low residential future land use designation is 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 02:24:03.680 --> 02:24:10.360 would be informed by that future land use designation, that yellow. 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 02:24:15.840 --> 02:24:20.400 got our industrial commerce south of 380. 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. 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, 02:24:31.640 --> 02:24:36.760 in the mobility section, to provide for the safe, efficient movements of motor vehicles, 02:24:36.760 --> 02:24:43.040 bicycles, and pedestrians in a sustainable way that complements Denton's Plan Grow Strategy. 02:24:43.040 --> 02:24:48.640 Given that we've got these two different future land use designations with sort of divergent 02:24:48.640 --> 02:24:54.560 goals, low residential has different goals than business innovation. 02:24:54.560 --> 02:25:01.080 But then Cindy Lane sort of marries the two with this roadway cutting through, and especially 02:25:01.080 --> 02:25:03.640 cutting through that neighborhood. 02:25:03.640 --> 02:25:11.560 And that could conflict with that growth strategy, that roadway, because it doesn't really marry 02:25:11.560 --> 02:25:14.400 those two goals together very well. 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. 02:25:24.800 --> 02:25:31.960 And so this proposal is consistent with that goal, as well as the mobility plan update. 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, 02:25:38.360 --> 02:25:40.360 large-employment facilities. 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 02:25:45.200 --> 02:25:48.000 you're seeing tonight. 02:25:48.000 --> 02:25:54.640 And by splitting these parcels with Cindy Lane, you're potentially reducing the developability 02:25:54.640 --> 02:26:01.560 of them, because you're sort of just bisecting them and reducing that overall acreage. 02:26:01.560 --> 02:26:08.080 And then finally, in the implementation section of the Denton Plan 2030, we really should 02:26:08.080 --> 02:26:11.400 be looking at our mobility plan on a pretty regular basis. 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. 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 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 02:26:26.120 --> 02:26:28.360 planning for these roads. 02:26:28.360 --> 02:26:35.800 Another criterion, the events, trends, or facts that could have changed since the adoption 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 02:26:43.200 --> 02:26:49.120 mobility plan and the Denton Plan 2030 were adopted, and then one from now. 02:26:49.120 --> 02:26:56.160 And then I've got that Cindy Lane shown in that sort of-that green line. 02:26:56.160 --> 02:27:01.880 The industrial and distribution sectors have grown in this area, and that indicates that 02:27:01.880 --> 02:27:05.920 there may be some changes to the mobility warranted. 02:27:05.920 --> 02:27:13.880 And you can see that these yellow dots are either industrial or distribution-type facilities 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 02:27:17.880 --> 02:27:18.880 in 2015. 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. 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 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 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 02:27:43.920 --> 02:27:51.800 288, which would not be appropriate for that current neighborhood to have those trucks 02:27:51.800 --> 02:27:54.600 go north through that area. 02:27:54.600 --> 02:27:58.880 And that's why the engineering staff has really modified this area with that mobility plan 02:27:58.880 --> 02:28:05.480 update, simplifying the area's arterial system, removing Cindy Lane, and then pushing that 02:28:05.480 --> 02:28:09.880 truck traffic to other roadways. 02:28:09.880 --> 02:28:14.800 Additional review standards, the proposal is consistent with that draft mobility plan. 02:28:14.800 --> 02:28:16.960 It's consistent with our land use goals. 02:28:16.960 --> 02:28:20.800 It would not negatively impact that proposed land use pattern. 02:28:20.800 --> 02:28:26.520 Those properties can still develop in accordance with that future land use designation with 02:28:26.520 --> 02:28:32.200 the-with the draft mobility plan and those existing roadways. 02:28:32.200 --> 02:28:37.400 And the draft mobility plan includes a network of future arterial roadways and highways that-that 02:28:37.400 --> 02:28:42.200 are designed to accommodate the projected buildout of that area. 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 02:28:47.640 --> 02:28:48.640 in the area. 02:28:48.640 --> 02:28:54.080 It's not-it's not part of our traffic accommodation right now. 02:28:54.080 --> 02:28:56.160 Public outreach was done. 02:28:56.160 --> 02:28:59.380 We received one letter in opposition. 02:28:59.380 --> 02:29:03.980 We talked about that at work session and talked with them about the current mobility plan 02:29:03.980 --> 02:29:07.320 versus the draft mobility plan. 02:29:07.320 --> 02:29:11.480 And staff does recommend the approval of the request, as it does comply with the criteria 02:29:11.480 --> 02:29:12.480 for approval. 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 02:29:16.800 --> 02:29:17.800 as well. 02:29:17.800 --> 02:29:19.000 Thank you, Julie. 02:29:19.000 --> 02:29:21.000 Any questions for Julie? 02:29:21.000 --> 02:29:22.000 Christopher? 02:29:22.000 --> 02:29:25.600 I have a question for staff. 02:29:25.600 --> 02:29:28.440 It may be for traffic, I'm not sure. 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 02:29:38.640 --> 02:29:41.760 other secondary arterials in that area were not necessary? 02:29:41.760 --> 02:29:45.840 In other words, are-are they based on the future land use map of business innovation, 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 02:29:51.800 --> 02:29:52.800 use assumed? 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 02:29:58.740 --> 02:30:01.600 the latest one with the draft mobility. 02:30:01.600 --> 02:30:06.840 They take into account of the future as well as what's developed so far. 02:30:06.840 --> 02:30:08.560 So sort of a hybrid between the two? 02:30:08.560 --> 02:30:09.560 That's right. 02:30:09.560 --> 02:30:10.560 Okay. 02:30:10.560 --> 02:30:11.560 Thank you. 02:30:11.560 --> 02:30:17.460 Any other questions for staff, Julie, traffic? 02:30:17.460 --> 02:30:18.840 This is a public hearing. 02:30:18.840 --> 02:30:23.920 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so. 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 02:30:29.440 --> 02:30:31.960 name and address for the record, you have four minutes to speak. 02:30:31.960 --> 02:30:36.160 Michael Marshall, 2892 Marshall Road. 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. 02:30:42.440 --> 02:30:45.500 It encroaches just across our property. 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 02:30:52.000 --> 02:30:53.000 Marshall Road. 02:30:53.000 --> 02:30:54.960 There's no 35 access. 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. 02:31:01.520 --> 02:31:06.680 Now, I wasn't excited originally about giving up our residential property for commercial 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 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 02:31:13.860 --> 02:31:16.040 Marshall Road and Ranch Estates. 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 02:31:21.680 --> 02:31:24.920 approved for which is general office. 02:31:24.920 --> 02:31:33.200 Just for clarification, you own or you represent the property just south of the subject property 02:31:33.200 --> 02:31:34.200 in question here? 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 02:31:40.480 --> 02:31:42.960 is the Turner Trust property. 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 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 02:31:56.160 --> 02:32:01.260 with general office now, Ranch Estates would hate it. 02:32:01.260 --> 02:32:08.560 So just so I understand, you're opposed to the removal of the full Cindy... 02:32:08.560 --> 02:32:12.200 Based on our zoning currently, yes I am. 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 02:32:18.640 --> 02:32:23.640 on their property, you're more concerned about the entirety of Cindy way being removed from 02:32:23.640 --> 02:32:24.640 the mobility plan. 02:32:24.640 --> 02:32:25.640 That's correct. 02:32:25.640 --> 02:32:26.640 Gotcha. 02:32:26.640 --> 02:32:27.640 Okay. 02:32:27.640 --> 02:32:28.640 That makes sense. 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 02:32:33.800 --> 02:32:34.800 are available to you. 02:32:34.800 --> 02:32:35.800 Sorry to be contacting you prior to the meeting. 02:32:35.800 --> 02:32:36.800 Okay. 02:32:36.800 --> 02:32:37.800 But I appreciate you being here. 02:32:37.800 --> 02:32:38.800 Yeah. 02:32:38.800 --> 02:32:39.800 Thank you. 02:32:39.800 --> 02:32:40.800 Any questions? 02:32:40.800 --> 02:32:41.800 Commissioner Smith. 02:32:41.800 --> 02:32:42.800 Thank you, Chair. 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 02:32:51.880 --> 02:32:53.840 land back there? 02:32:53.840 --> 02:32:57.600 The Turner property has a sliver that goes around our property. 02:32:57.600 --> 02:32:58.600 Okay. 02:32:58.600 --> 02:33:02.080 So that's between like RV World and our property. 02:33:02.080 --> 02:33:03.080 Okay. 02:33:03.080 --> 02:33:04.080 Gotcha. 02:33:04.080 --> 02:33:06.080 Your zone, G.O.? 02:33:06.080 --> 02:33:07.080 Yes. 02:33:07.080 --> 02:33:08.080 Yep. 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 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 02:33:21.160 --> 02:33:22.160 R.R. if we move over. 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 02:33:26.720 --> 02:33:28.720 did the rezone, I don't know how it ended up G.O., so. 02:33:28.720 --> 02:33:29.720 Yep. 02:33:29.720 --> 02:33:30.720 I can find out. 02:33:30.720 --> 02:33:31.720 Thanks. 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 02:33:38.400 --> 02:33:39.400 to speak. 02:33:39.400 --> 02:33:45.040 Hey, my name is Arthur Smuck, I live at 5100 Barthold Road, Denton, Texas. 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 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 02:33:54.760 --> 02:33:55.760 we support the project. 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 02:33:59.960 --> 02:34:00.960 windows. 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 02:34:05.000 --> 02:34:07.200 rid of it and doesn't run it through the middle of our property. 02:34:07.200 --> 02:34:09.560 Well, I appreciate you being here and letting us know. 02:34:09.560 --> 02:34:11.560 Thank you. 02:34:11.560 --> 02:34:14.480 Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? 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. 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 02:34:30.480 --> 02:34:34.120 off of Marshall Lane going north. 02:34:34.120 --> 02:34:39.480 As it's proposed right now, the new Cindy Road goes straight through my house. 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 02:34:50.440 --> 02:34:57.680 about a lot of traffic coming down through the area and dumping into the other residential 02:34:57.680 --> 02:35:02.000 area to the south. 02:35:02.000 --> 02:35:06.720 Just to confirm, you are in support of removing Cindy Lane from the mobility? 02:35:06.720 --> 02:35:07.720 Yes. 02:35:07.720 --> 02:35:08.720 Great. 02:35:08.720 --> 02:35:09.720 Thank you. 02:35:09.720 --> 02:35:10.720 Any questions for Sism? 02:35:10.720 --> 02:35:11.720 Great. 02:35:11.720 --> 02:35:16.200 Thank you for being here and letting us know your perspective. 02:35:16.200 --> 02:35:18.440 Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? 02:35:18.440 --> 02:35:19.440 Okay. 02:35:19.440 --> 02:35:23.360 Rachel, is there anyone wishing to speak via phone? 02:35:23.360 --> 02:35:25.840 No, Chair, not at this time. 02:35:25.840 --> 02:35:26.840 Great. 02:35:26.840 --> 02:35:30.440 I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. 02:35:30.440 --> 02:35:31.440 Commissioner Anderson? 02:35:31.440 --> 02:35:33.760 You've got to hold it down. 02:35:33.760 --> 02:35:34.760 There you go. 02:35:34.760 --> 02:35:35.760 I'm making motion to approve. 02:35:35.760 --> 02:35:36.760 Great. 02:35:36.760 --> 02:35:37.760 We have a first for approval. 02:35:37.760 --> 02:35:38.760 Commissioner Smith? 02:35:38.760 --> 02:35:39.760 Second. 02:35:39.760 --> 02:35:42.440 We have a first and a second for approval. 02:35:42.440 --> 02:35:43.640 Any discussion on this? 02:35:43.640 --> 02:35:44.640 Commissioner Pruitt? 02:35:44.640 --> 02:35:52.320 I have a question for the applicant or the requester of the -- are they still here? 02:35:52.320 --> 02:35:53.320 Yes. 02:35:53.320 --> 02:35:54.320 Sorry. 02:35:54.320 --> 02:35:59.640 I think I understand that you're just trying to be a good citizen. 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 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 02:36:11.360 --> 02:36:13.480 that you can move forward with your development? 02:36:13.480 --> 02:36:16.480 Is that a correct summarization? 02:36:16.480 --> 02:36:17.480 Yeah. 02:36:17.480 --> 02:36:24.760 And through the planning with the engineering and staff, this was discussed by maybe the 02:36:24.760 --> 02:36:30.240 previous city engineer, and so it was always discussed that, well, the current thoroughfare 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 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 02:36:41.560 --> 02:36:42.560 care of that? 02:36:42.560 --> 02:36:43.560 How is this being handled? 02:36:43.560 --> 02:36:47.720 And so they recommended us to do it through this process. 02:36:47.720 --> 02:36:48.720 Okay. 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 02:36:53.520 --> 02:36:54.520 mobility plan. 02:36:54.520 --> 02:36:55.520 Yeah. 02:36:55.520 --> 02:36:59.480 So I really appreciate that, and I don't fault you at all. 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 02:37:06.500 --> 02:37:14.320 access there, but there was not a need for a full secondary arterial roadway width, say, 02:37:14.320 --> 02:37:20.200 something like a collector, is that something that would still allow you to move forward 02:37:20.200 --> 02:37:21.200 with your development? 02:37:21.200 --> 02:37:22.200 It would -- 02:37:22.200 --> 02:37:23.200 If it was a reduced right-of-way? 02:37:23.200 --> 02:37:29.140 I mean, it would be a negative, obviously, because when we plan the speculative, I mean, 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 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. 02:37:39.680 --> 02:37:45.580 So to answer your question, yeah, I mean, it could become a big problem. 02:37:45.580 --> 02:37:51.840 And that's why when we do these developments, we like to understand the thoroughfare plans, 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 02:37:56.360 --> 02:38:00.960 zoning and close on our land, because to go through all the design, spend hundreds and 02:38:00.960 --> 02:38:07.240 thousands of dollars, and then the city say, "Hey, what about a connector street that may 02:38:07.240 --> 02:38:09.400 not really be warranted?" 02:38:09.400 --> 02:38:11.400 Yeah, it's significant. 02:38:11.400 --> 02:38:12.400 Okay. 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 02:38:17.200 --> 02:38:20.520 of the mobility planning process? 02:38:20.520 --> 02:38:25.080 It's more just the sheer amount of land lost to the right-of-way dedication? 02:38:25.080 --> 02:38:32.880 Yeah, it's the flexibility of building a larger building versus smaller building. 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, 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, 02:38:44.840 --> 02:38:48.000 that could be a potential impact not knowing what that is. 02:38:48.000 --> 02:38:49.000 Okay. 02:38:49.000 --> 02:38:56.560 If you could come to the microphone just so it's on record. 02:38:56.560 --> 02:39:02.680 And just for clarification, what I was alluding to is I believe in our transportation criteria 02:39:02.680 --> 02:39:09.360 manual or maybe it's in the mobility planning process, there's some amount of flexibility 02:39:09.360 --> 02:39:14.400 of the particular right-of-way that is chosen for those mobility roadways within I think 02:39:14.400 --> 02:39:19.240 1,000 feet of the shown location on the map. 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 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 02:39:27.680 --> 02:39:29.120 due to roadway dedication? 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. 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 02:39:38.440 --> 02:39:39.440 middle of my house. 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 02:39:44.320 --> 02:39:45.320 it. 02:39:45.320 --> 02:39:49.620 And usually cities don't until developers come through and say, "Hey, I'm ready to 02:39:49.620 --> 02:39:50.620 develop. 02:39:50.620 --> 02:39:51.620 I'm ready to plat." 02:39:51.620 --> 02:39:55.120 And so that's why this comes out, but you're right. 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 02:40:02.040 --> 02:40:03.040 it's not official. 02:40:03.040 --> 02:40:06.080 And so I don't know where shifting it would go. 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 02:40:11.160 --> 02:40:16.880 the railroad, are you jumping over the railroad, then jumping over 288 with bridges, and then 02:40:16.880 --> 02:40:19.520 jumping back over the railroad?" 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 02:40:27.400 --> 02:40:31.640 rationale for wanting to maybe have maximum flexibility to maybe cut through the site 02:40:31.640 --> 02:40:32.640 somewhere there. 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 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 02:40:42.960 --> 02:40:44.920 been talking to economic development and so forth. 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, 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 02:40:56.160 --> 02:41:02.360 the possibility of going to this site because it would bisect the manufacturing facility 02:41:02.360 --> 02:41:04.440 that they're looking at. 02:41:04.440 --> 02:41:10.560 So again, from our perspective, it probably would be a showstopper for us. 02:41:10.560 --> 02:41:12.920 Even if it were shifted to the left with that flexibility? 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 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 02:41:21.040 --> 02:41:26.400 circulation drives, we'll have private drives that circulate traffic all through the development, 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 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. 02:41:38.640 --> 02:41:39.640 Okay. 02:41:39.640 --> 02:41:40.640 Does that make sense? 02:41:40.640 --> 02:41:41.640 Yeah, thank you. 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 02:41:48.120 --> 02:41:53.980 with 1173, is it starts to curve up and it'll eventually tie into 77. 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 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, 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 02:42:12.600 --> 02:42:16.880 the fastest way to get anywhere is on 35, so, but. 02:42:16.880 --> 02:42:21.640 Yes, thank you very much. 02:42:21.640 --> 02:42:23.160 Thank you. 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, 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, 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 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 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 02:42:44.400 --> 02:42:45.600 mobility plan. 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. 02:42:54.200 --> 02:42:57.040 Does that make sense? 02:42:57.040 --> 02:43:00.560 I think I lost you at the very end there, but. 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 02:43:04.320 --> 02:43:06.640 a secondary arterial, they would have had to dedicate the right-of-way. 02:43:06.640 --> 02:43:07.640 Yes. 02:43:07.640 --> 02:43:10.120 And would have empty land there for a while. 02:43:10.120 --> 02:43:11.120 Right. 02:43:11.120 --> 02:43:12.120 Yeah. 02:43:12.120 --> 02:43:16.560 Any other questions or discussions? 02:43:16.560 --> 02:43:19.960 We have a first and a second for approval, is that correct? 02:43:19.960 --> 02:43:22.160 We did get that, correct? 02:43:22.160 --> 02:43:23.160 Okay. 02:43:23.160 --> 02:43:25.880 Seeing no other discussion, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 02:43:25.880 --> 02:43:27.160 Mr. Pruitt? 02:43:27.160 --> 02:43:28.520 Sorry, discussion? 02:43:28.520 --> 02:43:30.280 Go for it. 02:43:30.280 --> 02:43:33.360 Okay, thank you. 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 02:43:45.760 --> 02:43:49.720 the railroad turns into. 02:43:49.720 --> 02:43:55.940 As we look at how the mobility plan impacts the developability of that land, the usability 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 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 02:44:07.780 --> 02:44:10.240 before you get to something that you can turn onto. 02:44:10.240 --> 02:44:14.240 That's the way I see it. 02:44:14.240 --> 02:44:18.240 If that's an incorrect impression, then please correct me. 02:44:18.240 --> 02:44:20.400 So that concerns me. 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, 02:44:26.760 --> 02:44:32.160 in the mobility chapter, it says, "Well-connected street networks result in more direct routes 02:44:32.160 --> 02:44:38.200 and shorter travel times as opposed to a few large multi-lane arterials which create congested 02:44:38.200 --> 02:44:43.600 intersections and longer, more circuitous routes." 02:44:43.600 --> 02:44:51.440 I think this is an example where we are planning to create more circuitous routes. 02:44:51.440 --> 02:44:52.440 Does that matter? 02:44:52.440 --> 02:44:55.880 Again, it really depends on how this land develops. 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 02:45:01.240 --> 02:45:02.900 that much. 02:45:02.900 --> 02:45:09.780 If there are some more general office, other things that are consistent with the business 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 02:45:16.720 --> 02:45:26.760 periodically, being trapped in a triangle there doesn't strike me as conducive to development 02:45:26.760 --> 02:45:33.400 in that area. 02:45:33.400 --> 02:45:36.560 So then the question is, okay, what would provide that? 02:45:36.560 --> 02:45:42.520 To me, the big deal is crossing these large freeways. 02:45:42.520 --> 02:45:46.000 When you talk about crossing a railroad, the answer is always no. 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 02:45:50.040 --> 02:45:53.040 time, maybe yes." 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 02:46:01.080 --> 02:46:02.080 out. 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 02:46:06.960 --> 02:46:14.240 to great extents to create a crossing that aligns with Windsor there. 02:46:14.240 --> 02:46:18.560 But north, we're basically going to shut this off. 02:46:18.560 --> 02:46:20.160 And so that concerns me. 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 02:46:26.360 --> 02:46:33.280 future of Loop 288 without going up through this property. 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 02:46:40.600 --> 02:46:44.440 has some different ways to go. 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. 02:46:48.360 --> 02:46:56.120 Yeah, and Julie, if you have the draft mobility, that might be the most helpful document. 02:46:56.120 --> 02:47:00.040 And Chair, I will say, I don't blame the applicant in this at all. 02:47:00.040 --> 02:47:05.320 I completely realize that this is what our draft plan shows, and I appreciate that. 02:47:05.320 --> 02:47:09.320 I think you've gone through the process as well as possible. 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 02:47:15.040 --> 02:47:16.040 a couple of things. 02:47:16.040 --> 02:47:20.400 That we do still have the Windsor overpass on 35 that would cut through this area. 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 02:47:25.400 --> 02:47:28.740 that are already stubbed going towards the north. 02:47:28.740 --> 02:47:32.920 So as these larger parcels continue to develop, there's certainly nothing that would prevent 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 02:47:36.920 --> 02:47:42.640 some collectors through this area for extra maneuverability in the future. 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 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. 02:47:54.160 --> 02:47:59.400 Because local streets might be sufficient to get everyone to those major corridors. 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 02:48:05.360 --> 02:48:08.560 has a lot of collectors on it. 02:48:08.560 --> 02:48:13.800 Our proposed mobility plan actually pulls out some of those collectors to allow and 02:48:13.800 --> 02:48:22.280 sort of sets that arterial grid, but that would allow those collectors to be developed 02:48:22.280 --> 02:48:28.760 within that kind of more harder grid pattern to allow for that flexibility. 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 02:48:34.740 --> 02:48:38.080 some of those collectors within that framework. 02:48:38.080 --> 02:48:39.280 So I don't know if that helps. 02:48:39.280 --> 02:48:43.360 And just to point out this, so this is Barcelona right here. 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 02:48:49.120 --> 02:48:55.800 to be extended toward the north, and then Windsor will eventually cross I-35. 02:48:55.800 --> 02:48:57.080 That's on TxDOT's radar. 02:48:57.080 --> 02:49:01.240 So I don't know if that helps kind of organize that area. 02:49:01.240 --> 02:49:02.240 Yeah. 02:49:02.240 --> 02:49:03.240 It does help. 02:49:03.240 --> 02:49:04.800 And thank you for pointing that out. 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? 02:49:13.560 --> 02:49:20.520 A zoning classification might be requested to change in 20 years or something for redevelopment. 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. 02:49:27.800 --> 02:49:34.160 And so that's why I get concerned about this. 02:49:34.160 --> 02:49:36.680 I guess I don't want to belabor the point. 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, 02:49:50.400 --> 02:49:55.520 in the remainder of the adoption of the 2020 mobility plan process, is there an opportunity 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 02:50:05.160 --> 02:50:11.320 south of 288 to westbound 288 from that segment south of there? 02:50:11.320 --> 02:50:14.360 I'm going to have engineering come up. 02:50:14.360 --> 02:50:16.640 It again depends on the land development. 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 02:50:21.360 --> 02:50:22.360 be restricted. 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 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 02:50:35.320 --> 02:50:41.400 of loop 288, again, with permission from TxDOT, since we don't control their access. 02:50:41.400 --> 02:50:42.400 Right. 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 02:50:50.600 --> 02:50:55.840 on 288 from south of this subject property? 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. 02:51:02.480 --> 02:51:03.480 Okay. 02:51:03.480 --> 02:51:04.480 Thank you. 02:51:04.480 --> 02:51:05.480 Sure. 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 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 02:51:16.680 --> 02:51:17.680 subcommittees. 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 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 02:51:25.560 --> 02:51:28.680 roads that at least we control. 02:51:28.680 --> 02:51:30.440 Is there any other discussion? 02:51:30.440 --> 02:51:31.440 Okay. 02:51:31.440 --> 02:51:37.840 I'm going to go ahead and call a vote via roll call. 02:51:37.840 --> 02:51:39.160 Commissioner Pruitt? 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 02:51:50.280 --> 02:51:53.480 alignment westward to still allow the development. 02:51:53.480 --> 02:51:55.040 Commissioner Smith? 02:51:55.040 --> 02:51:56.040 Aye. 02:51:56.040 --> 02:51:58.080 Commissioner McDade? 02:51:58.080 --> 02:51:59.080 Nay. 02:51:59.080 --> 02:52:01.320 Chair is a aye. 02:52:01.320 --> 02:52:02.960 Commissioner Anderson? 02:52:02.960 --> 02:52:03.960 Aye. 02:52:03.960 --> 02:52:05.840 Commissioner Ellis? 02:52:05.840 --> 02:52:06.840 Aye. 02:52:06.840 --> 02:52:11.720 Motion carries four, two. 02:52:11.720 --> 02:52:19.120 The next item of business is item 5DZ21-0002. 02:52:19.120 --> 02:52:26.080 I'll invite Sean Jacobson for presentation and open the public hearing. 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 02:52:41.280 --> 02:52:43.120 presentation. 02:52:43.120 --> 02:52:44.640 Okay. 02:52:44.640 --> 02:52:48.240 Good evening. 02:52:48.240 --> 02:52:56.040 Sean Jacobson, Associate Planner, presenting Z21-0002, prominence. 02:52:56.040 --> 02:53:00.840 This is a request to rezone approximately 58.55 acres. 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 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 02:53:13.120 --> 02:53:16.760 from PD plan development to light industrial. 02:53:16.760 --> 02:53:23.440 This property is bounded by loop 288 north, University Drive, Mayhill Road, and then prominence 02:53:23.440 --> 02:53:24.440 way. 02:53:24.440 --> 02:53:29.320 There's a mix of undeveloped and commercial lots, one residential lot, all zoned LI to 02:53:29.320 --> 02:53:34.320 the northwest, single family neighborhood south across prominence way. 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 02:53:40.000 --> 02:53:41.000 plain. 02:53:41.000 --> 02:53:45.400 It covers the north and center of the property, the extensive environmentally sensitive areas 02:53:45.400 --> 02:53:50.040 in that area, and significant tree canopy in that area, as well as along prominence way. 02:53:50.040 --> 02:53:57.440 This zoning change would be to replace this current and old PD with current zoning districts 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 02:54:04.160 --> 02:54:06.600 under the current development code standards. 02:54:06.600 --> 02:54:12.720 So just to give a little history, this planned development was created in 2000. 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, 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 02:54:23.480 --> 02:54:26.000 partly developed already. 02:54:26.000 --> 02:54:30.920 Each of those areas authorizes a different mix of uses, including commercial, industrial, 02:54:30.920 --> 02:54:31.920 residential. 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 02:54:37.680 --> 02:54:41.240 park dedication from when the plan developed. 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 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 02:54:52.320 --> 02:54:59.200 applies 1991 zoning and uses, 1988 landscape code, and its own mix of processes. 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 02:55:06.960 --> 02:55:11.280 center commercial zoning, which became a light industrial zoning. 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 02:55:17.080 --> 02:55:22.000 is proposed to go to GEO just for consistency's sake. 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 02:55:29.680 --> 02:55:33.360 office, MN, and LI, bring them under current DDC standards. 02:55:33.360 --> 02:55:39.080 In regard to the park area, the parks department is actually in discussion with the applicant 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 02:55:44.560 --> 02:55:47.640 location to where the park was proposed under the PT. 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 02:55:53.760 --> 02:55:54.760 to be zoned. 02:55:54.760 --> 02:56:00.920 Of course, we have our general criteria and our specific criteria for zoning approval 02:56:00.920 --> 02:56:02.840 to consider. 02:56:02.840 --> 02:56:04.720 First off, we look at our comprehensive plan. 02:56:04.720 --> 02:56:09.640 The site is primarily business innovation future land use, so intended for those large 02:56:09.640 --> 02:56:14.160 tracts of land developed with a mix of commercial supporting residential and retail. 02:56:14.160 --> 02:56:18.240 It does also have a transitional moderate density residential area. 02:56:18.240 --> 02:56:21.360 It's intended for a mix of denser residential areas. 02:56:21.360 --> 02:56:23.960 It's located near retail and parks. 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 02:56:29.760 --> 02:56:34.840 business innovation area and a mix of residential uses, including multifamily in that moderate 02:56:34.840 --> 02:56:39.440 density residential area. 02:56:39.440 --> 02:56:44.280 Other ways it lines up the comprehensive plan, obviously bringing this property into compliance 02:56:44.280 --> 02:56:49.320 with the full current debt and development code for all future approvals on the site. 02:56:49.320 --> 02:56:53.200 The current DDC is much more in line with the comprehensive plan than whatever was in 02:56:53.200 --> 02:56:55.440 place in 2000. 02:56:55.440 --> 02:57:00.480 It's also ensuring development along two major corridors, which is in line with our preferred 02:57:00.480 --> 02:57:01.480 growth concept. 02:57:01.480 --> 02:57:05.960 And it's providing employment and moderate density housing near a potential future park 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 02:57:11.280 --> 02:57:15.160 use map than is currently permitted under the PD. 02:57:15.160 --> 02:57:20.400 One key here is particularly minimizing adverse environmental impacts because under the PD 02:57:20.400 --> 02:57:27.880 there is minimal to no protection of environmentally sensitive areas and tree preservation, whereas 02:57:27.880 --> 02:57:31.440 taking it out of the PD would require full compliance with all of our environmentally 02:57:31.440 --> 02:57:36.080 sensitive area protections for future approvals as well as our tree preservation standards 02:57:36.080 --> 02:57:41.760 for future approvals on this site, which aligns with the goals of our comprehensive plan. 02:57:41.760 --> 02:57:47.720 There are also enhanced standards that come into play with our current DDC versus what 02:57:47.720 --> 02:57:51.360 would be required under the PD as you can see there. 02:57:51.360 --> 02:57:55.920 The landscape areas would be approximately the same but tree canopy, there really wasn't 02:57:55.920 --> 02:58:00.160 a requirement for that under the PD and we would have a fairly significant tree canopy 02:58:00.160 --> 02:58:05.160 requirement for all future development as well as street tree requirements and right 02:58:05.160 --> 02:58:08.840 of way screening, which would be beneficial for the neighborhood to the south of this 02:58:08.840 --> 02:58:13.520 development, providing a great amount of landscaping between them and any future development on 02:58:13.520 --> 02:58:19.320 the site, as well as improved commercial building design standards. 02:58:19.320 --> 02:58:23.560 Just looking at parks here, again the applicant is in discussion with the Parks Department 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 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 02:58:34.440 --> 02:58:35.440 to that development. 02:58:35.440 --> 02:58:42.760 In terms of transportation, this is an area that has some current significant traffic 02:58:42.760 --> 02:58:43.960 issues. 02:58:43.960 --> 02:58:49.120 There was a detailed traffic impact analysis done, although there's no proposed use for 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 02:58:54.420 --> 02:58:57.800 uses that could develop on the site after the rezoning. 02:58:57.800 --> 02:59:02.080 Be looking at about 7,565 daily trips at full development. 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 02:59:07.920 --> 02:59:13.480 of service of D or better, going out to a horizon of 2029. 02:59:13.480 --> 02:59:18.400 Three of 10 of those are intersections that currently without any additional development 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 02:59:23.200 --> 02:59:28.400 for this site, subject detects out approval that if nothing, if that was the only driveway 02:59:28.400 --> 02:59:32.440 along loop 288, it would operate at a level of service of F. 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 02:59:40.880 --> 02:59:47.720 were to develop as estimated, however, the potential site development is actually fairly 02:59:47.720 --> 02:59:53.240 minimal in its contribution compared to the traffic that would already be occurring because 02:59:53.240 --> 02:59:56.840 of current and future growth in the area. 02:59:56.840 --> 03:00:00.280 This is on 288, it's on University. 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 03:00:03.680 --> 03:00:04.680 the other. 03:00:04.680 --> 03:00:09.800 However, there were some mitigations recommended, a major one is a signal light at prominence 03:00:09.800 --> 03:00:15.640 drive either when Audra is realigned south or possibly sooner that would be assessed 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 03:00:20.160 --> 03:00:24.000 for 25% of that cost. 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 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. 03:00:34.120 --> 03:00:38.960 There's also recommendation for a right turn deceleration lane along loop 288, again that 03:00:38.960 --> 03:00:44.440 would be assessed when civil engineering plans came in and the TI also recommended that 03:00:44.440 --> 03:00:50.520 techs.net consider recommending, consider approving a second driveway access point along 03:00:50.520 --> 03:00:57.920 loop 288 to reduce the pressure of having just one off point there for this development. 03:00:57.920 --> 03:01:03.720 And then other long term solutions that will help reduce traffic tension in the area are 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 03:01:07.800 --> 03:01:15.800 trying to cross 380 there and then the future techs.freeway bypass of 380 at 288. 03:01:15.800 --> 03:01:22.600 So essentially the TIA concluded that overall the development of this site won't materially 03:01:22.600 --> 03:01:27.920 negatively impact the area but it may be able to help contribute to future improvements. 03:01:27.920 --> 03:01:32.520 Water and waste water is available, fire response is within 8 minutes or less, law enforcement 03:01:32.520 --> 03:01:37.280 issues are unexpected to be made worse by this development. 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 03:01:42.080 --> 03:01:48.240 meeting two citizens attended expressed concerns about potential traffic generation and appreciation 03:01:48.240 --> 03:01:54.360 for proposed geo-zoning, so with that staff does recommend approval as the request complies 03:01:54.360 --> 03:01:56.520 with our criteria for approval. 03:01:56.520 --> 03:02:00.480 The applicant is here and I'll be happy to stand for any questions. 03:02:00.480 --> 03:02:02.680 Great thanks Sean. 03:02:02.680 --> 03:02:06.160 Commissioner Anderson. 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 03:02:14.160 --> 03:02:16.240 is that just recommended? 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 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 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 03:02:31.000 --> 03:02:32.000 place. 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 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 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 03:02:45.960 --> 03:02:51.760 immediately because that's probably what a quarter of a mile, a little stretch and I 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 03:02:59.440 --> 03:03:04.440 not putting red lights and having traffic stop. 03:03:04.440 --> 03:03:08.480 Definitely something that engineering and tech stop would look at and I believe that's 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 03:03:13.800 --> 03:03:19.140 prominence so that you would have one intersection where there would be light rather than having 03:03:19.140 --> 03:03:22.040 turning from Audre and then hitting that point. 03:03:22.040 --> 03:03:24.320 Thank you sir. 03:03:24.320 --> 03:03:26.200 Any other questions for Sean? 03:03:26.200 --> 03:03:29.840 Okay I don't see any, thank you very much. 03:03:29.840 --> 03:03:38.320 I do have one card, it's the applicant Mr. Lee Allison. 03:03:38.320 --> 03:03:42.680 I think you know the drill but name and address and you'll have ten minutes. 03:03:42.680 --> 03:03:46.000 I don't know if I remember but it's been awhile. 03:03:46.000 --> 03:03:51.120 Lee Allison with Allison Engineering Group 2415 North Elm, Denton, Texas. 03:03:51.120 --> 03:03:54.860 With me this evening in the audience is Henry Reif, the landowner. 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 03:03:58.680 --> 03:04:03.480 some of the items that came up during the work session. 03:04:03.480 --> 03:04:09.320 One related to park dedication, I personally am excited to see a park department now that 03:04:09.320 --> 03:04:12.160 is wants these kind of dedications. 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 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 03:04:21.080 --> 03:04:26.080 excellent opportunities along streams and flood plains for hiking and biking paths and 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. 03:04:32.320 --> 03:04:36.920 So for no other reason than business reasons we're inclined for it to occur. 03:04:36.920 --> 03:04:41.560 We certainly for business decisions would like for the park dedication to count towards 03:04:41.560 --> 03:04:48.800 any required park dedication for the residential type uses as they occur and we would like 03:04:48.800 --> 03:04:54.120 for any dedication above and beyond that because the required park land dedication is not going 03:04:54.120 --> 03:04:57.360 to be the 18 acres, that's just something we're doing. 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 03:05:01.800 --> 03:05:05.600 those kind of things so that's an interest with park dedication. 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 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 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 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 03:05:25.400 --> 03:05:30.960 he came forward with a PD to preserve his efforts at that date and time. 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, 03:05:38.800 --> 03:05:43.800 which meant he didn't have a tree preservation requirement to speak of or tree mitigation, 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 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 03:05:53.120 --> 03:05:56.200 so those things are there out of the way. 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, 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 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 03:06:13.320 --> 03:06:18.080 on the actual developable land so that's not a good comparison between the two zonings 03:06:18.080 --> 03:06:23.920 if you look at it that directly that way but this is really more compatible. 03:06:23.920 --> 03:06:29.000 Another thing with business today marketability on a speculative development such as this 03:06:29.000 --> 03:06:34.760 one, actually straight zoning is better to promote than a PD because a PD nobody knows 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 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 03:06:42.560 --> 03:06:46.040 it is and you make your decisions and move forward. 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. 03:06:52.680 --> 03:06:56.760 The proposed zoning is essentially the same intensity as what there is today so we're 03:06:56.760 --> 03:06:59.560 having zero impact on traffic. 03:06:59.560 --> 03:07:04.080 What the traffic impact analysis does is it shows the issues that exist today whether 03:07:04.080 --> 03:07:08.240 we zone or not including the potential for a red light on Audra. 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 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 03:07:17.920 --> 03:07:20.520 when the first development comes through. 03:07:20.520 --> 03:07:25.160 This TIA that we did will probably serve as the background TIA for the future developments 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 03:07:29.280 --> 03:07:32.080 reality. 03:07:32.080 --> 03:07:38.220 Related to the status there was a conditional letter of map revision approved with FEMA. 03:07:38.220 --> 03:07:41.080 The grading for all of that work has been done. 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 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 03:07:51.640 --> 03:07:52.640 we prepared. 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 03:07:56.440 --> 03:08:01.400 be a little lesser amount but there's still going to be significant floodplain there. 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 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 03:08:10.680 --> 03:08:14.320 pardon me, I believe that covers the issues I heard come up. 03:08:14.320 --> 03:08:18.680 I'll be glad to respond to any other questions you might have at this time. 03:08:18.680 --> 03:08:20.520 Any questions for Mr. Allison? 03:08:20.520 --> 03:08:21.520 Commissioner Pruitt? 03:08:21.520 --> 03:08:22.520 Just a quick one. 03:08:22.520 --> 03:08:27.640 I really appreciate your efforts on this parcel. 03:08:27.640 --> 03:08:32.800 Given your enthusiasm for cooperation with parks and whatnot would you be amenable to 03:08:32.800 --> 03:08:38.800 a requirement that that corridor be preserved whether it be by dedication or easement for 03:08:38.800 --> 03:08:40.560 a future trail corridor? 03:08:40.560 --> 03:08:41.560 Mr. Reif's here. 03:08:41.560 --> 03:08:45.560 We've discussed this earlier and I believe he would be amenable to anything that would 03:08:45.560 --> 03:08:46.560 preserve that. 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 03:08:50.440 --> 03:08:51.440 that. 03:08:51.440 --> 03:08:52.440 Thank you. 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. 03:08:56.160 --> 03:09:01.560 Is that a recommendation to council? 03:09:01.560 --> 03:09:10.240 I'm going to consult Mack Reinwald and see what he says we can do here. 03:09:10.240 --> 03:09:11.480 There's probably several options. 03:09:11.480 --> 03:09:17.160 The most legally viable method is probably to do a park development agreement in association 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 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 03:09:26.520 --> 03:09:31.240 council that would memorialize how the park development and dedication would work. 03:09:31.240 --> 03:09:33.000 Thank you. 03:09:33.000 --> 03:09:39.480 Sorry, I didn't quite catch all of that. 03:09:39.480 --> 03:09:42.040 Could you try again? 03:09:42.040 --> 03:09:47.560 Right well there's a couple of options but one being somewhat unusual would be putting 03:09:47.560 --> 03:09:51.680 a condition on a straight zoning case which I think is one idea. 03:09:51.680 --> 03:09:56.560 The other would be actually taking a park dedication agreement to council in conjunction 03:09:56.560 --> 03:10:01.000 with the zoning and that's something that council if they approve the zoning could also 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 03:10:05.440 --> 03:10:11.600 best way of memorializing that actual concept rather than attaching it as a condition to 03:10:11.600 --> 03:10:13.720 a straight zoning case. 03:10:13.720 --> 03:10:17.480 Our only concern with the park dedication agreement would be would it delay the timing 03:10:17.480 --> 03:10:19.520 for our zoning hearing with city council? 03:10:19.520 --> 03:10:24.640 We would really like to go with the next possible city council meeting. 03:10:24.640 --> 03:10:28.980 Certainly and I think that's something that staff could expedite. 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 03:10:33.720 --> 03:10:38.560 with the recommendation of a park dedication or with the condition of a park dedication 03:10:38.560 --> 03:10:40.560 going to council? 03:10:40.560 --> 03:10:49.760 I think the preference is B, to direct staffed. 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 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 03:10:56.960 --> 03:10:59.320 actual motion on the zoning case. 03:10:59.320 --> 03:11:00.320 Understood. 03:11:00.320 --> 03:11:01.320 You understand? 03:11:01.320 --> 03:11:02.320 Are we good? 03:11:02.320 --> 03:11:03.320 Yep. 03:11:03.320 --> 03:11:04.320 Great. 03:11:04.320 --> 03:11:08.480 Any other questions for Mr. Allison or the applicant? 03:11:08.480 --> 03:11:10.920 I don't see any. 03:11:10.920 --> 03:11:11.920 All right. 03:11:11.920 --> 03:11:12.920 Thank you. 03:11:12.920 --> 03:11:13.920 This is a public hearing. 03:11:13.920 --> 03:11:15.520 Anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so. 03:11:15.520 --> 03:11:17.560 Rachel, do we have anyone calling in? 03:11:17.560 --> 03:11:18.560 No, Chair. 03:11:18.560 --> 03:11:19.560 I'm not on this item. 03:11:19.560 --> 03:11:22.840 We struck out on all items. 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 03:11:26.520 --> 03:11:29.280 hearing and turn it for a motion and discussion. 03:11:29.280 --> 03:11:30.280 Commissioner Smith. 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 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 03:11:41.160 --> 03:11:42.160 of that. 03:11:42.160 --> 03:11:44.960 We have a first for approval, Commissioner Anderson. 03:11:44.960 --> 03:11:45.960 Second. 03:11:45.960 --> 03:11:51.280 We have a first and a second for approval with the recommendation for some staff work 03:11:51.280 --> 03:11:57.200 before council having it not delay any kind of forward progress in the project. 03:11:57.200 --> 03:12:00.480 Any discussion on the item? 03:12:00.480 --> 03:12:02.580 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote via roll call. 03:12:02.580 --> 03:12:03.580 Commissioner Pruitt. 03:12:03.580 --> 03:12:04.580 Aye. 03:12:04.580 --> 03:12:05.580 Commissioner Smith. 03:12:05.580 --> 03:12:06.580 Aye. 03:12:06.580 --> 03:12:07.580 Commissioner McDade. 03:12:07.580 --> 03:12:08.580 Aye. 03:12:08.580 --> 03:12:09.580 Chair is an aye. 03:12:09.580 --> 03:12:10.580 Commissioner Anderson. 03:12:10.580 --> 03:12:15.240 I would not hold that traffic light against you guys, so I vote as an aye. 03:12:15.240 --> 03:12:17.280 You say you're in support? 03:12:17.280 --> 03:12:18.280 Okay. 03:12:18.280 --> 03:12:19.280 Commissioner Ellis. 03:12:19.280 --> 03:12:20.280 Aye. 03:12:20.280 --> 03:12:21.280 Chair is 6-0. 03:12:21.280 --> 03:12:22.280 Congratulations. 03:12:22.280 --> 03:12:30.520 That brings us to the last item this evening, which is to talk about the matrix. 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. 03:12:35.600 --> 03:12:41.440 I actually don't think I have any updates this evening. 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 03:12:46.360 --> 03:12:48.240 before them yet. 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 03:12:52.320 --> 03:12:54.680 at upcoming work sessions. 03:12:54.680 --> 03:12:55.920 Great. 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? 03:13:03.040 --> 03:13:04.040 Commissioner Smith. 03:13:04.040 --> 03:13:05.040 Thank you, Chair. 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 03:13:11.120 --> 03:13:14.600 mobility plan is there. 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 03:13:19.000 --> 03:13:28.440 other neighborhoods like Rancho States that has an arterial that's mobility planned to 03:13:28.440 --> 03:13:29.440 go right through it. 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 03:13:33.680 --> 03:13:37.320 a couple other sets of eyes of folks that know neighborhoods and whatnot might be good. 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 03:13:41.640 --> 03:13:43.720 over, try to see if there's any trouble spots and bring up. 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 03:13:47.160 --> 03:13:48.160 now. 03:13:48.160 --> 03:13:49.160 Bring up any points. 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 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 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. 03:14:01.240 --> 03:14:02.240 Sure, yeah. 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. 03:14:06.720 --> 03:14:07.720 Okay. 03:14:07.720 --> 03:14:09.880 I have one item. 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 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 03:14:26.400 --> 03:14:27.520 for new commissioners. 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. 03:14:32.280 --> 03:14:37.680 I don't know, but I would strongly encourage some kind of structure around that. 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 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. 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 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 03:15:01.820 --> 03:15:03.200 easy as possible. 03:15:03.200 --> 03:15:07.040 If staff could start thinking about that, I think it would be really helpful for all 03:15:07.040 --> 03:15:10.260 commissioners to have that resource as they on board. 03:15:10.260 --> 03:15:11.260 Sure. 03:15:11.260 --> 03:15:13.040 That is very much appreciated. 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 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 03:15:21.440 --> 03:15:24.920 so that that can become kind of a handbook for new commissioners, but in the meantime 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 03:15:29.160 --> 03:15:32.320 get up to speed as well as your potential replacements. 03:15:32.320 --> 03:15:33.320 Awesome. 03:15:33.320 --> 03:15:34.560 Thank you. 03:15:34.560 --> 03:15:37.520 Any other items for the matrix, commissioner Ellis. 03:15:37.520 --> 03:15:38.520 Thank you, chair. 03:15:38.520 --> 03:15:41.320 Just actually just wanted to comment a little bit on that point. 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. 03:15:46.600 --> 03:15:48.860 I think we got away from that a little bit. 03:15:48.860 --> 03:15:50.420 It absolutely needs to happen. 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 03:15:55.040 --> 03:16:01.120 just the high level overview of what the role is. 03:16:01.120 --> 03:16:03.960 So yeah, we need to put that back in. 03:16:03.960 --> 03:16:07.880 And I know we're shortstaffed and busy. 03:16:07.880 --> 03:16:09.440 Thank you. 03:16:09.440 --> 03:16:10.440 Okay. 03:16:10.440 --> 03:16:14.560 Seeing no other items, I'm going to close the meeting at 829. 03:16:14.560 --> 03:16:15.800 Thank you.