WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.400
meeting it is December 9th 2015 and we are opening our

00:00:05.400 --> 00:00:06.480
meeting at 5 p.m. it's

00:00:06.480 --> 00:00:10.000
been posted in accordance to the Texas Open Meetings Act

00:00:10.000 --> 00:00:11.400
and our first item on

00:00:11.400 --> 00:00:14.759
the work on the agenda is clarification of agenda items

00:00:14.759 --> 00:00:16.199
listed on the agenda for

00:00:16.199 --> 00:00:18.320
this meeting and discussion of issues not briefed in the

00:00:18.320 --> 00:00:18.960
written backup

00:00:18.960 --> 00:00:22.559
materials. Thank You Commissioner Bruegel. We have a final

00:00:22.559 --> 00:00:23.960
plat for Redbird Ridge

00:00:23.960 --> 00:00:27.059
Edition. I'm going to ask Ross Culbertson to go ahead and

00:00:27.059 --> 00:00:27.339
make that

00:00:27.339 --> 00:00:36.799
presentation for us tonight. Thank You, Ms. Bruegel.

00:00:52.479 --> 00:00:56.710
We have a final plat for Redbird Ridge Estates or Redbird

00:00:56.710 --> 00:00:59.200
Ridge Edition. This is

00:00:59.200 --> 00:01:05.239
a 41 acre subject property that includes 19 one-point acre

00:01:05.239 --> 00:01:09.359
lots, one 17.9 acre lot,

00:01:09.359 --> 00:01:15.069
and two HOA lots within the ETJ. This is this property is

00:01:15.069 --> 00:01:17.120
off of Fincher Road in

00:01:17.120 --> 00:01:21.980
Oak Ridge Lane. There was a way I could give you a context

00:01:21.980 --> 00:01:24.159
with an aerial map if

00:01:24.159 --> 00:01:29.230
you need one. Cutting in between the triangle portion of

00:01:29.230 --> 00:01:30.439
the rural areas of

00:01:30.439 --> 00:01:35.510
Denton. The owner, the property owner has maintained a

00:01:35.510 --> 00:01:36.959
residential homestead in

00:01:36.959 --> 00:01:42.290
this location on the 40 acres and is now releasing part of

00:01:42.290 --> 00:01:43.719
the project for

00:01:43.719 --> 00:01:47.939
residential development. With that the project is split

00:01:47.939 --> 00:01:49.159
between a public

00:01:49.159 --> 00:01:55.500
section and a private homestead lot section here within the

00:01:55.500 --> 00:01:57.519
ETJ. The owner

00:01:57.519 --> 00:02:02.170
also is trying to consider a or is proposing a equestrian

00:02:02.170 --> 00:02:03.319
and greenbelt

00:02:03.319 --> 00:02:07.140
trail for public access onto the private lands and those

00:02:07.140 --> 00:02:08.599
items will be codified

00:02:08.599 --> 00:02:13.419
within upcoming HOA documents and greenbelt documents that

00:02:13.419 --> 00:02:14.039
kind of

00:02:14.039 --> 00:02:16.949
describe the maintenance and responsibilities of this eas

00:02:16.949 --> 00:02:17.479
ement and

00:02:17.479 --> 00:02:22.550
access for horse trails and access on to and off public and

00:02:22.550 --> 00:02:24.879
private properties.

00:02:24.879 --> 00:02:28.349
With that this plan has been reviewed by the county

00:02:28.349 --> 00:02:30.240
engineers and through the

00:02:30.240 --> 00:02:33.229
city's development review committee so staff is

00:02:33.229 --> 00:02:35.840
recommending approval submitted

00:02:35.840 --> 00:02:40.919
to you. If you have any questions I could try to answer.

00:02:40.919 --> 00:02:44.479
Commissioner Taylor. Thank

00:02:44.479 --> 00:02:51.090
you chair. I just have some clarification questions. You

00:02:51.090 --> 00:02:51.840
mentioned that

00:02:51.840 --> 00:02:55.520
there will be a private homestead on the large lot at the

00:02:55.520 --> 00:02:57.840
back of the property

00:02:57.840 --> 00:03:02.949
and then potentially a public access easement for equest

00:03:02.949 --> 00:03:04.800
rian trail and then

00:03:04.800 --> 00:03:07.699
you referred to the front half of the property as public

00:03:07.699 --> 00:03:09.919
access. Correct. So I

00:03:09.919 --> 00:03:13.650
mean those will be private lots. Is it the street that will

00:03:13.650 --> 00:03:14.719
be public access?

00:03:14.719 --> 00:03:20.719
Public Street with with private lots for for ownership yes.

00:03:20.719 --> 00:03:22.240
Okay and then but it's

00:03:22.240 --> 00:03:26.719
not a private development enclosed at the entry here it's a

00:03:26.719 --> 00:03:27.680
private development

00:03:27.680 --> 00:03:31.090
enclosed here for the private residents in the back. So

00:03:31.090 --> 00:03:32.099
really there's so

00:03:32.099 --> 00:03:36.629
basically it's not a gated community but there's a gate for

00:03:36.629 --> 00:03:37.879
one house at the

00:03:37.879 --> 00:03:42.009
back of the property and I was trying to understand the

00:03:42.009 --> 00:03:43.560
restrictions that you're

00:03:43.560 --> 00:03:45.639
talking about they sound a lot like what might be an indeed

00:03:45.639 --> 00:03:47.199
restriction. Are those

00:03:47.199 --> 00:03:50.139
applied through the plat or would those be applied through

00:03:50.139 --> 00:03:51.199
some other instrument?

00:03:51.199 --> 00:03:55.340
Applied with the plat and will be finalized before plat

00:03:55.340 --> 00:03:58.719
filing. Okay I'm now a

00:03:58.719 --> 00:04:00.800
process question this is pretty uncommon to have

00:04:00.800 --> 00:04:01.680
restrictions on the plat.

00:04:01.680 --> 00:04:05.159
Would that have basically the same force as a deed

00:04:05.159 --> 00:04:07.080
restriction and stay in place

00:04:07.080 --> 00:04:17.069
until the plat is amended? Yes. Okay thank you. Any other

00:04:17.069 --> 00:04:19.759
questions for this item?

00:04:19.759 --> 00:04:24.839
Okay moving on. Thank you Commissioner Bruegel. The next

00:04:24.839 --> 00:04:26.480
item is a final flat of

00:04:26.480 --> 00:04:29.949
perfect finished landscaping addition. Mike Bell would you

00:04:29.949 --> 00:04:31.600
please make this

00:04:31.600 --> 00:04:35.480
presentation for us tonight?

00:04:47.279 --> 00:04:54.209
Give me as I pull it up here. This is FB 1521 it's perfect

00:04:54.209 --> 00:04:54.279
land perfect

00:04:54.279 --> 00:04:57.189
finished landscaping addition we did see a preliminary plat

00:04:57.189 --> 00:04:57.959
for this several

00:04:57.959 --> 00:05:00.740
months ago. They want to do an office warehouse development

00:05:00.740 --> 00:05:01.360
off the fish

00:05:01.360 --> 00:05:06.560
trap road. It is located in an employment center industrial

00:05:06.560 --> 00:05:07.040
zoning

00:05:07.040 --> 00:05:09.850
districts which does support that use. As I pull the plat

00:05:09.850 --> 00:05:12.040
up here which you'll see

00:05:12.040 --> 00:05:18.720
it's a long narrow lot and there's a small portion of ESA

00:05:18.720 --> 00:05:19.720
on the background

00:05:19.720 --> 00:05:23.360
which they've dedicated some easement for.

00:05:26.759 --> 00:05:28.529
You can see it's a long narrow lot and towards the back is

00:05:28.529 --> 00:05:30.160
some floodplain

00:05:30.160 --> 00:05:33.470
and environmental sensitive area and they've dedicated eas

00:05:33.470 --> 00:05:35.360
ement for that and

00:05:35.360 --> 00:05:38.720
this is fish trap road along the front.

00:05:45.120 --> 00:05:52.920
Any questions? Thank you. We have on Mike you just you may

00:05:52.920 --> 00:05:53.680
want to just stay there.

00:05:53.680 --> 00:05:57.759
If you notice on your agenda item 3a is a final replant.

00:05:57.759 --> 00:05:59.199
This item has been

00:05:59.199 --> 00:06:02.100
withdrawn by the applicant at this time if you recall it

00:06:02.100 --> 00:06:03.319
was on your agenda last

00:06:03.319 --> 00:06:06.529
time too. The applicant is trying to make some decisions as

00:06:06.529 --> 00:06:07.639
it relates to whether

00:06:07.639 --> 00:06:11.029
she wants to pursue this or not so it's been withdrawn. The

00:06:11.029 --> 00:06:12.959
next item is an SUP

00:06:12.959 --> 00:06:16.199
for multifamily dwellings on property that's on NRMU 12 and

00:06:16.199 --> 00:06:17.079
I'm gonna ask Mike

00:06:17.079 --> 00:06:21.240
Bell to make this presentation tonight. This is S1512 for

00:06:21.240 --> 00:06:21.680
the Meadowview

00:06:21.680 --> 00:06:26.319
loss. It is an SUP request to allow multifamily development

00:06:26.319 --> 00:06:26.879
. It's they want

00:06:26.879 --> 00:06:29.600
34 plexes but according to DDC that would be considered

00:06:29.600 --> 00:06:30.240
multifamily

00:06:30.240 --> 00:06:35.600
development on two properties at 609 and 612 Meadowview

00:06:35.600 --> 00:06:38.160
Court. The properties are

00:06:38.160 --> 00:06:43.740
outlined here in yellow. It is zoned neighborhood

00:06:43.740 --> 00:06:45.639
residential mixed use 12

00:06:45.639 --> 00:06:50.709
which requires an SUP for multifamily development. Some

00:06:50.709 --> 00:06:51.920
background this site

00:06:51.920 --> 00:06:55.389
was originally a planned development it was PD8 approved in

00:06:55.389 --> 00:06:56.959
1970 and this lot

00:06:56.959 --> 00:07:02.000
roughly here was approved for apartments but it was platted

00:07:02.000 --> 00:07:03.360
in 1972 in its

00:07:03.360 --> 00:07:07.029
current configuration which you see here. Ultimately in

00:07:07.029 --> 00:07:09.319
1984 PD8 was amended to

00:07:09.319 --> 00:07:13.000
allow duplexes on these lots including the two subject

00:07:13.000 --> 00:07:14.800
properties excuse me

00:07:14.800 --> 00:07:18.500
four plexes on these properties. In 1985 you can see that

00:07:18.500 --> 00:07:19.560
five of them were built

00:07:19.560 --> 00:07:22.579
along Meadowview Court and these two the subject properties

00:07:22.579 --> 00:07:23.439
were never built

00:07:23.439 --> 00:07:26.790
even though they had approval of a site plan and the lot

00:07:26.790 --> 00:07:29.040
here in the middle was

00:07:29.040 --> 00:07:30.779
actually a pool at one point you can see kind of the

00:07:30.779 --> 00:07:31.839
outline where it was filled

00:07:31.839 --> 00:07:36.100
in. That pool pre-existed the four plexes on the site it's

00:07:36.100 --> 00:07:37.079
not included in

00:07:37.079 --> 00:07:42.360
this request and then in 2002 in citywide rezoning it was

00:07:42.360 --> 00:07:43.399
rezoned NRMU 12

00:07:43.399 --> 00:07:46.180
which is that what triggered the SUP requirement and that's

00:07:46.180 --> 00:07:46.720
why we're here

00:07:46.720 --> 00:07:54.040
tonight. There's some photos to show you what's on the side

00:07:54.040 --> 00:07:55.560
you see the lots are

00:07:55.560 --> 00:07:57.839
just undeveloped with some some trees along the back

00:07:57.839 --> 00:08:01.120
property lines and to

00:08:01.120 --> 00:08:03.759
give you an idea what those existing four plexes look like

00:08:03.759 --> 00:08:05.040
these are the ones

00:08:05.040 --> 00:08:06.889
on the north side and this is the one on the south side of

00:08:06.889 --> 00:08:09.639
Meadowview Court

00:08:10.560 --> 00:08:13.959
roughly two stories four units each and here's a site plan

00:08:13.959 --> 00:08:15.480
what the applicant's

00:08:15.480 --> 00:08:19.550
proposing he wants the buildings running Meadowview Court

00:08:19.550 --> 00:08:21.000
when the original

00:08:21.000 --> 00:08:23.699
development they were originally gonna have all have access

00:08:23.699 --> 00:08:24.439
to a driveway in

00:08:24.439 --> 00:08:26.420
the back the easements were never dedicated for that

00:08:26.420 --> 00:08:27.959
purpose so now it's

00:08:27.959 --> 00:08:30.360
under different ownership he can't get access to those

00:08:30.360 --> 00:08:32.320
driveways so we're

00:08:32.320 --> 00:08:37.519
allowing him access from the front along Meadowview Court

00:08:37.519 --> 00:08:39.720
and ultimately he's

00:08:39.720 --> 00:08:44.299
proposing generally all brick facades some siding generally

00:08:44.299 --> 00:08:45.600
consistent with

00:08:45.600 --> 00:08:51.340
what's out there today. Some considerations in our

00:08:51.340 --> 00:08:53.720
recommendation it

00:08:53.720 --> 00:08:56.620
is it has been intended for multifamily since 1970 and four

00:08:56.620 --> 00:08:58.000
plexes since 1984

00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:01.409
the other ones were built in 1985 the proposal is

00:09:01.409 --> 00:09:03.080
consistent scale the density

00:09:03.080 --> 00:09:05.370
of surrounding properties and it does comply with the

00:09:05.370 --> 00:09:07.120
criteria for approval in

00:09:07.120 --> 00:09:08.740
your backup I'd be happy to go through that if you have any

00:09:08.740 --> 00:09:09.279
questions about

00:09:09.279 --> 00:09:14.669
that and we did send notice to property owners we received

00:09:14.669 --> 00:09:15.879
one in opposition and

00:09:15.879 --> 00:09:21.480
one neutral and based on those considerations we do

00:09:21.480 --> 00:09:22.240
recommend approval

00:09:22.240 --> 00:09:25.950
this request with conditions first that the maximum density

00:09:25.950 --> 00:09:27.159
shall be four units

00:09:27.159 --> 00:09:29.879
each building shall have no greater than two stories in

00:09:29.879 --> 00:09:30.639
height and the

00:09:30.639 --> 00:09:33.190
development shall substantially comply with the attached

00:09:33.190 --> 00:09:34.759
site plan with that

00:09:34.759 --> 00:09:40.940
I'll stand for any questions. Commissioner Beck. Thank you

00:09:40.940 --> 00:09:44.039
Chair. The lot where it was a pool at one time it's filled

00:09:44.039 --> 00:09:46.769
over everything and there's a rickety old chain lead fence

00:09:46.769 --> 00:09:51.379
there now. Is that going to be kept isolated from the other

00:09:51.379 --> 00:09:51.919
lots?

00:09:51.919 --> 00:09:55.019
Yes when he originally came in we said we asked him is

00:09:55.019 --> 00:09:56.000
there way you could

00:09:56.000 --> 00:09:57.899
approach that owner maybe incorporate that in it makes a

00:09:57.899 --> 00:09:58.919
little more practical

00:09:58.919 --> 00:10:01.259
sense if that were included in the development he agreed

00:10:01.259 --> 00:10:01.960
and did approach

00:10:01.960 --> 00:10:04.440
the property owner but he wasn't willing to sell so

00:10:04.440 --> 00:10:06.159
ultimately it will kind of be

00:10:06.159 --> 00:10:08.649
isolated but not through the effects of this owner through

00:10:08.649 --> 00:10:09.159
the effects of

00:10:09.159 --> 00:10:13.820
previous owners. Will they keep the fence up? That I don't

00:10:13.820 --> 00:10:17.879
know. Okay and you mentioned that the newer ones are pretty

00:10:17.879 --> 00:10:21.029
much all brick? That's correct. It looked like the picture

00:10:21.029 --> 00:10:23.639
you're showing us of the old ones mainly siding. They were

00:10:23.639 --> 00:10:25.320
siding on the second floor and brick on the first floor.

00:10:25.320 --> 00:10:29.000
Okay okay and then one question for educational purposes in

00:10:29.000 --> 00:10:29.679
here it says the

00:10:29.679 --> 00:10:32.879
density of moderate residential which this area is should

00:10:32.879 --> 00:10:34.360
range between 4 to 12

00:10:34.360 --> 00:10:37.179
units per acre so what are you calling a unit here you've

00:10:37.179 --> 00:10:38.480
got four plexes is that

00:10:38.480 --> 00:10:45.090
a unit or is each four plex considered a single unit? Each

00:10:45.090 --> 00:10:47.440
unit within the four plexes is a unit so four units would

00:10:47.440 --> 00:10:49.600
be a four plex. Okay okay.

00:10:49.600 --> 00:10:56.370
Thank you. Commissioner Hutzbeth. Thank you chair. Can you

00:10:56.370 --> 00:11:01.960
walk me through the easement I'm curious if you've given

00:11:01.960 --> 00:11:04.679
that any thought so you have this these two units you have

00:11:04.679 --> 00:11:08.279
access from the front and what are we talking years

00:11:08.279 --> 00:11:11.600
everyone's been able to you know I just I'm curious about

00:11:11.600 --> 00:11:15.000
that have you given that any thought and what was the your

00:11:15.000 --> 00:11:19.210
words they couldn't get an easement in the back and so help

00:11:19.210 --> 00:11:19.519
me understand.

00:11:19.519 --> 00:11:22.230
Okay the area will probably help me demonstrate that a

00:11:22.230 --> 00:11:23.799
little bit better but

00:11:23.799 --> 00:11:27.029
you'll see there are driveways on the back of the existing

00:11:27.029 --> 00:11:28.240
properties that's

00:11:28.240 --> 00:11:31.940
how they get their access and the original plan from 1984

00:11:31.940 --> 00:11:32.679
showed this

00:11:32.679 --> 00:11:36.860
driveway wrapping all the way around the site but without

00:11:36.860 --> 00:11:38.320
any easements

00:11:38.320 --> 00:11:41.639
dedicated that these that a new owner could access through

00:11:41.639 --> 00:11:43.279
these properties he

00:11:43.279 --> 00:11:46.090
has no right to access through those driveways he'd have to

00:11:46.090 --> 00:11:46.820
purchase the

00:11:46.820 --> 00:11:49.820
easement that he can connect to his property in the back

00:11:49.820 --> 00:11:51.559
ultimately decided

00:11:51.559 --> 00:11:57.200
was he can have access from the front. So were those

00:11:57.200 --> 00:12:04.960
conversations so is it I don't

00:12:04.960 --> 00:12:07.120
understand how you can own the property maybe I'm missing

00:12:07.120 --> 00:12:08.320
something he owns that

00:12:08.320 --> 00:12:11.139
property but you're saying he doesn't have the right to

00:12:11.139 --> 00:12:12.480
drive he owns these two

00:12:12.480 --> 00:12:14.990
properties right he does not own these two properties got

00:12:14.990 --> 00:12:15.879
it and those two

00:12:15.879 --> 00:12:21.919
properties do not have an easement correct okay got it. Now

00:12:21.919 --> 00:12:25.990
Mike. Commission Jadowitz. As I look at the plant they'll

00:12:25.990 --> 00:12:27.480
have access from the front

00:12:27.480 --> 00:12:30.039
but actually they'll be parking in the side of the back

00:12:30.039 --> 00:12:30.759
that's correct that's

00:12:30.759 --> 00:12:34.000
just a drive that's correct requirement for that driveway

00:12:34.000 --> 00:12:37.440
in another sense of a

00:12:37.440 --> 00:12:42.840
homeowner having a driveway up to the side of the building.

00:12:42.840 --> 00:12:42.840
Okay.

00:12:46.440 --> 00:12:48.950
Commissioner Buck. The one opposition we got here is on Don

00:12:48.950 --> 00:12:51.120
ister. Is that that

00:12:51.120 --> 00:12:55.440
hat right there? Okay.

00:13:00.440 --> 00:13:05.730
Anyone else? Okay thank you Mike. The next item on the

00:13:05.730 --> 00:13:09.679
agenda is a consider a

00:13:09.679 --> 00:13:15.269
public hearing for a specific use permit or basic utility

00:13:15.269 --> 00:13:17.080
for a substation and

00:13:17.080 --> 00:13:21.820
I'm going to have Mike Bell make this presentation as well.

00:13:21.820 --> 00:13:23.360
All right this one

00:13:23.360 --> 00:13:28.200
is S1511 for the DME Locust substation. This request is an

00:13:28.200 --> 00:13:29.519
SUP for a basic

00:13:29.519 --> 00:13:33.039
utility or it's going to be eventually be a DME substation

00:13:33.039 --> 00:13:34.559
on 6.2 acres in the

00:13:34.559 --> 00:13:38.370
DCG zoning district. It's located on the southwest corner

00:13:38.370 --> 00:13:39.799
of Collins Street and

00:13:39.799 --> 00:13:43.429
Locust Street in the area shown in yellow. There's an

00:13:43.429 --> 00:13:44.639
existing substation

00:13:44.639 --> 00:13:47.580
south of the property. This is part of the DME's overall

00:13:47.580 --> 00:13:48.879
upgrade to their system

00:13:48.879 --> 00:13:52.179
requires upgrade to this substation. This is the site that

00:13:52.179 --> 00:13:53.440
's been approved by City

00:13:53.440 --> 00:13:57.519
Council for the substation. Site photo is showing you what

00:13:57.519 --> 00:14:00.320
's on site. This was in

00:14:00.320 --> 00:14:04.110
auto repair shop. It's been demolished and then undeveloped

00:14:04.110 --> 00:14:05.120
property on the

00:14:05.120 --> 00:14:10.220
north side. And this is the housing to the north side of

00:14:10.220 --> 00:14:11.840
Collins Street. You can see

00:14:11.840 --> 00:14:14.649
there's a house, one or two houses with this general style

00:14:14.649 --> 00:14:15.799
and then one house on

00:14:15.799 --> 00:14:20.870
the corner of Collins and Locust that has this metal fence.

00:14:20.870 --> 00:14:24.519
The zoning is DCG.

00:14:24.519 --> 00:14:27.009
It's located with an area that's intended to be kind of

00:14:27.009 --> 00:14:27.879
high-intensity

00:14:27.879 --> 00:14:33.240
central business district type development. It allows

00:14:33.240 --> 00:14:35.399
things like multifamily and

00:14:35.399 --> 00:14:40.879
commercial. This is the proposed site plan of the site.

00:14:40.879 --> 00:14:42.440
These are the interior

00:14:42.440 --> 00:14:46.149
drives of Collins and two off of Locust. They need these

00:14:46.149 --> 00:14:47.000
drives for the

00:14:47.000 --> 00:14:48.909
maneuvering of the large trucks that bring the transformers

00:14:48.909 --> 00:14:49.519
into the site.

00:14:49.519 --> 00:14:52.629
Very large trucks have a big turning radius. That's why

00:14:52.629 --> 00:14:54.120
there's so much area

00:14:54.120 --> 00:14:57.509
devoted to the driveways. There will be a 10-foot masonry

00:14:57.509 --> 00:14:58.320
wall as we've seen

00:14:58.320 --> 00:15:01.940
with all the substations that have come through here and

00:15:01.940 --> 00:15:02.600
they will maintain

00:15:02.600 --> 00:15:06.200
open space and the trees to the southern end of the lot.

00:15:06.200 --> 00:15:08.460
And then to protect the

00:15:08.460 --> 00:15:11.559
neighbor or the existing houses to the north, they provided

00:15:11.559 --> 00:15:13.279
enhanced landscaping

00:15:13.279 --> 00:15:17.659
and trees, street trees and sidewalk along Collins Street.

00:15:17.659 --> 00:15:19.080
This is an example

00:15:19.080 --> 00:15:23.720
of the masonry wall that they've done on other substations.

00:15:24.200 --> 00:15:27.789
And this is a section of what you'll see on the Collins

00:15:27.789 --> 00:15:30.480
side. The 10-foot masonry

00:15:30.480 --> 00:15:34.090
wall here, a three-foot planting area with a sidewalk,

00:15:34.090 --> 00:15:35.679
eight foot sidewalk and

00:15:35.679 --> 00:15:39.750
10 foot, 10 and a half foot parkway with street trees in it

00:15:39.750 --> 00:15:41.200
to kind of relieve the

00:15:41.200 --> 00:15:42.759
starkness of that wall.

00:15:46.559 --> 00:15:47.830
Some of our considerations and our recommendation, subst

00:15:47.830 --> 00:15:49.919
ations are an essential

00:15:49.919 --> 00:15:52.289
component of the city's infrastructure and therefore when

00:15:52.289 --> 00:15:53.039
it's necessary to

00:15:53.039 --> 00:15:56.279
look at them in urban areas, the site should be created to

00:15:56.279 --> 00:15:57.360
create the least

00:15:57.360 --> 00:15:59.960
amount of impact on surrounding properties. To do that they

00:15:59.960 --> 00:16:01.120
've provided

00:16:01.120 --> 00:16:03.590
the 10-foot masonry wall and enhanced landscaping as I've

00:16:03.590 --> 00:16:05.039
discussed to protect

00:16:05.039 --> 00:16:06.879
the existing single-family homes.

00:16:09.279 --> 00:16:13.450
We did send notice to residents within 200 feet and 79 feet

00:16:13.450 --> 00:16:14.879
. We did receive three

00:16:14.879 --> 00:16:18.240
in favor and then we received the one typewritten

00:16:18.240 --> 00:16:19.200
opposition letter that you

00:16:19.200 --> 00:16:21.799
received prior to the meeting.

00:16:24.000 --> 00:16:26.950
And the ones in favor were just these slivers here that are

00:16:26.950 --> 00:16:29.279
barely within the line,

00:16:29.279 --> 00:16:30.559
just in case you're curious.

00:16:34.240 --> 00:16:36.559
Mike, would you go back to that slide please?

00:16:37.120 --> 00:16:39.679
They are located along Forward Drive. You can see there's a

00:16:39.679 --> 00:16:40.960
slight bit of green.

00:16:41.759 --> 00:16:45.070
That fell, their property that counts in the percentage,

00:16:45.070 --> 00:16:47.360
that fell within 200 feet

00:16:47.360 --> 00:16:49.909
and there's a slide exactly right here. You can't really

00:16:49.909 --> 00:16:51.360
see it on this map but...

00:16:51.360 --> 00:16:52.720
And where's the opposition?

00:16:53.039 --> 00:16:55.440
The opposition was, I forget, it's one of these houses

00:16:55.440 --> 00:16:57.039
right here along Collins Street.

00:16:57.039 --> 00:17:00.629
Well it gives an address as Elm Street. I'm sorry, that's

00:17:00.629 --> 00:17:00.799
you.

00:17:00.799 --> 00:17:01.600
Okay, I'm sorry.

00:17:01.600 --> 00:17:02.799
120 West Collins?

00:17:02.799 --> 00:17:03.299
Yeah.

00:17:04.720 --> 00:17:06.319
So it's just not filled?

00:17:07.599 --> 00:17:09.599
We got it this afternoon as before I made the presentation.

00:17:11.279 --> 00:17:12.319
I apologize for that.

00:17:15.839 --> 00:17:17.680
Based on the considerations and what you received in your

00:17:17.680 --> 00:17:18.400
backup,

00:17:18.400 --> 00:17:20.839
staff does recommend approval of this SUP subject to two

00:17:20.839 --> 00:17:21.440
conditions.

00:17:22.319 --> 00:17:25.619
One, that the substation shall provide the 10-foot masonry

00:17:25.619 --> 00:17:25.920
wall

00:17:25.920 --> 00:17:28.559
and that the substation comply with the attached site plan.

00:17:28.559 --> 00:17:30.720
These are the standard conditions we've applied to every

00:17:30.720 --> 00:17:31.759
substation that we've seen.

00:17:32.480 --> 00:17:33.920
And with that I'll answer any questions.

00:17:35.920 --> 00:17:36.720
Commissioner Rossell.

00:17:37.279 --> 00:17:37.779
Thank you, Chair.

00:17:39.200 --> 00:17:42.079
You mentioned large trucks needed for the construction.

00:17:42.079 --> 00:17:46.720
Two questions. Do large trucks come in on a continual basis

00:17:46.720 --> 00:17:48.000
or is that a one-time shot,

00:17:48.000 --> 00:17:51.700
build it and they leave? And second to that is last time I

00:17:51.700 --> 00:17:53.359
was on Collins and Locust,

00:17:53.359 --> 00:17:55.440
those streets are not in the greatest condition.

00:17:56.319 --> 00:17:58.640
In the current condition, do they support a one-time

00:17:58.640 --> 00:18:00.480
movement of big trucks or going back to the

00:18:00.480 --> 00:18:02.720
first point, multiple uses of big trucks?

00:18:02.720 --> 00:18:04.700
Let me answer the first question. The first question is

00:18:04.700 --> 00:18:05.920
they'll be there for the construction

00:18:05.920 --> 00:18:09.809
of the site to install the transformers and then if need be

00:18:09.809 --> 00:18:12.160
in an emergency event that one of those

00:18:12.160 --> 00:18:14.279
goes down and they need to restore power, that truck may

00:18:14.279 --> 00:18:15.440
have to come back for that.

00:18:15.440 --> 00:18:18.160
But other than that, the daily traffic would be one DME

00:18:18.160 --> 00:18:20.400
pickup truck going to check on the side every day.

00:18:20.400 --> 00:18:20.900
Okay.

00:18:21.839 --> 00:18:24.319
Secondly, the improvement of the road.

00:18:24.319 --> 00:18:26.240
There are agreements with engineering that they repair any

00:18:26.240 --> 00:18:27.039
damage done to the

00:18:27.039 --> 00:18:28.799
existing roads during construction.

00:18:28.799 --> 00:18:29.299
Okay.

00:18:32.000 --> 00:18:32.720
Commissioner Taylor.

00:18:33.759 --> 00:18:36.240
Thank you, Chair. I had a couple of questions about the

00:18:36.240 --> 00:18:36.799
site plan.

00:18:40.960 --> 00:18:45.690
So I'm just noticing that the southernmost portion is in

00:18:45.690 --> 00:18:49.039
the request, but it has no plans for

00:18:49.039 --> 00:18:52.049
improvement. Is that just to make sure that all of the DME-

00:18:52.049 --> 00:18:53.519
owned property is

00:18:54.640 --> 00:18:57.279
correctly permitted in case they expand or...?

00:18:57.279 --> 00:18:58.960
It was that and as well as meeting their tree code

00:18:58.960 --> 00:19:01.440
requirements, they had they preserved those trees.

00:19:01.440 --> 00:19:04.000
Okay, so I see part of the mitigation.

00:19:04.000 --> 00:19:07.519
My second question is the sidewalk along Collins is pretty

00:19:07.519 --> 00:19:10.400
great. The large parkway and the eight

00:19:10.400 --> 00:19:13.609
foot sidewalk. Is there any plan to do any kind of sidewalk

00:19:13.609 --> 00:19:17.039
along Locust? Is there just like any...?

00:19:17.039 --> 00:19:18.890
Yes, there will be a sidewalk, but there will not be

00:19:18.890 --> 00:19:19.920
landscaping per se.

00:19:19.920 --> 00:19:21.519
And that's the side facing the road runs.

00:19:22.240 --> 00:19:24.940
Okay, so it's not on the site plan, but it just will be

00:19:24.940 --> 00:19:25.279
required?

00:19:25.279 --> 00:19:27.579
It would be in the right way at this point. Yeah, just this

00:19:27.579 --> 00:19:29.119
one had limited space, so we

00:19:29.119 --> 00:19:30.400
may have to force the sidewalk back.

00:19:31.039 --> 00:19:31.539
Thank you.

00:19:34.000 --> 00:19:35.279
Commissioner Hunstead.

00:19:35.279 --> 00:19:35.839
Thank you, Chair.

00:19:37.119 --> 00:19:42.700
So near the train track, obviously the other substation is

00:19:42.700 --> 00:19:45.519
the same, but does that give

00:19:46.799 --> 00:19:52.319
any consideration to the same masonry wall next to a train

00:19:52.319 --> 00:19:54.400
track? Train comes off the rails,

00:19:55.519 --> 00:19:59.609
power issues? I mean, I'm just thinking that there is a

00:19:59.609 --> 00:20:02.799
distinct difference in one that's on Bonnie

00:20:02.799 --> 00:20:05.910
Bray isolated and if a car comes off the road, it hits the

00:20:05.910 --> 00:20:08.480
10 foot wall that built the same versus

00:20:09.599 --> 00:20:12.400
a train coming off. And also there's that intersection

00:20:12.400 --> 00:20:16.400
there at, I guess that's Doherty

00:20:16.400 --> 00:20:21.009
that goes across the track, so hits a car and it's just a

00:20:21.009 --> 00:20:23.519
lot more at stake than just the small one.

00:20:23.519 --> 00:20:27.359
It's kind of set back. Did that warrant any consideration?

00:20:28.000 --> 00:20:30.269
Are you talking in terms of somebody crashing into the wall

00:20:30.269 --> 00:20:31.359
of the substation?

00:20:31.359 --> 00:20:32.960
Yes, the train coming off.

00:20:32.960 --> 00:20:36.559
And I have to ask DME if they've got any concerns with

00:20:36.559 --> 00:20:37.839
their engineering of that wall. We've had

00:20:37.839 --> 00:20:40.849
that question before about cars, but I don't know that it's

00:20:40.849 --> 00:20:42.319
happened with the train.

00:20:42.319 --> 00:20:43.759
Does DME have anything to offer on that?

00:20:56.079 --> 00:20:58.240
Phil Williams, General Manager, Dent Municipal Electric.

00:20:59.599 --> 00:21:03.029
So south of here is the existing substation that's been

00:21:03.029 --> 00:21:05.359
there for about 50 years with a

00:21:05.359 --> 00:21:09.869
cyclone fence. And so while certainly it'd be hard to stop

00:21:09.869 --> 00:21:14.319
a train, and that would be at risk,

00:21:14.319 --> 00:21:17.500
our greatest security for our substations is duplication of

00:21:17.500 --> 00:21:19.119
those substations having one to

00:21:19.119 --> 00:21:22.019
back up another one, which is why we have our expansion

00:21:22.019 --> 00:21:25.440
plan. And so we now instead of just a

00:21:25.440 --> 00:21:28.660
cyclone fence which surrounds the existing substation, we

00:21:28.660 --> 00:21:30.240
put a masonry wall and that's

00:21:30.240 --> 00:21:35.309
our future standard for all our substations to prevent

00:21:35.309 --> 00:21:38.559
drive-by shooting into substation and

00:21:38.559 --> 00:21:41.480
protect from it give us better protection from cars and

00:21:41.480 --> 00:21:43.359
things driving into a substation.

00:21:44.160 --> 00:21:46.430
As far as that preventing a train from driving in there,

00:21:46.430 --> 00:21:49.759
probably not. But I guess the greater

00:21:49.759 --> 00:21:53.440
security we have for it is having to back up substation

00:21:53.440 --> 00:21:55.680
that each of these substations are

00:21:55.680 --> 00:21:58.079
built to back up the other in case that kind of event.

00:21:59.039 --> 00:22:01.039
Okay. Thank you.

00:22:02.480 --> 00:22:03.930
Phil, I'm sorry, could you stay there for a second? I have

00:22:03.930 --> 00:22:04.960
a question, please.

00:22:07.519 --> 00:22:10.349
Recently DME brought a proposal to city council for a subst

00:22:10.349 --> 00:22:12.319
ation near UNT. I believe it was like

00:22:12.319 --> 00:22:15.920
Harvin Collins area and that was rejected by city council.

00:22:15.920 --> 00:22:18.160
I'm curious, is this a totally separate

00:22:19.039 --> 00:22:22.150
project or is this maybe the alternative to what you all

00:22:22.150 --> 00:22:23.839
were trying to do there?

00:22:23.839 --> 00:22:26.579
No, that's part of what we're trying to do for our overall

00:22:26.579 --> 00:22:28.480
capital program is both aging

00:22:28.480 --> 00:22:32.710
infrastructure replacement and growth. And so this is a

00:22:32.710 --> 00:22:36.000
little bit of both. It's addressing the 50

00:22:36.000 --> 00:22:38.509
year old substation that we're trying to replace and

00:22:38.509 --> 00:22:41.599
upgrade from 69,000 volt substation to 138.

00:22:42.319 --> 00:22:45.279
And so but it's also bigger. And so it's addressing both

00:22:45.279 --> 00:22:46.480
those. It's replacing the

00:22:46.480 --> 00:22:50.089
aging infrastructure and growth. The additional substation,

00:22:50.089 --> 00:22:52.319
the Eagle substation that was proposed

00:22:54.000 --> 00:22:58.690
and council gave us direction to exclude consideration of

00:22:58.690 --> 00:23:00.720
one of the sites called the

00:23:00.720 --> 00:23:05.640
blue site that was involved 13, 14 homes and focus on other

00:23:05.640 --> 00:23:09.359
sites. That's in addition to this one.

00:23:09.359 --> 00:23:11.809
That was seen because of growth. Okay. It's just the

00:23:11.809 --> 00:23:14.000
additional growth at UNT and all the additional

00:23:14.000 --> 00:23:16.690
growth around downtown right now that load or part of that

00:23:16.690 --> 00:23:18.400
load is being carried by this local

00:23:18.400 --> 00:23:21.920
substation with the additional substation capacity to for

00:23:21.920 --> 00:23:23.440
now and for the future.

00:23:23.440 --> 00:23:25.680
Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful. Thank you.

00:23:28.000 --> 00:23:33.279
Thank you. Is there a, do you have a doc? Obviously you do,

00:23:33.279 --> 00:23:35.119
but is there something that you could share

00:23:35.119 --> 00:23:39.569
that kind of captures what you just said that the loads and

00:23:39.569 --> 00:23:42.000
what stations do and what they're,

00:23:42.000 --> 00:23:46.009
you know, just a visual of where the backup is, where it

00:23:46.009 --> 00:23:48.400
needs to expand or how the system

00:23:49.279 --> 00:23:51.369
just functions. That would just be good for me to

00:23:51.369 --> 00:23:53.599
understand that better and the redundancy,

00:23:53.599 --> 00:23:57.039
that sort of thing. Just have a some sort of roadmap on how

00:23:57.039 --> 00:23:58.559
it all kind of works together.

00:23:59.119 --> 00:24:04.369
Certainly, Mr. We have a every year we file our capital

00:24:04.369 --> 00:24:06.960
improvement program and we review that

00:24:06.960 --> 00:24:10.069
with city management, then with our public utility board,

00:24:10.069 --> 00:24:12.240
which fits that and then ultimately with

00:24:12.240 --> 00:24:15.700
city council that approves that capital improvement program

00:24:15.700 --> 00:24:18.000
. And so involved in that capital improvement

00:24:18.000 --> 00:24:22.029
program is our capital plans for the next five years of all

00:24:22.029 --> 00:24:24.559
the substations we plan to build and

00:24:25.200 --> 00:24:27.519
and how they're related to each other and what the timing

00:24:27.519 --> 00:24:28.160
is of those.

00:24:28.160 --> 00:24:31.289
I believe we address those issues and we'd be glad to

00:24:31.289 --> 00:24:33.279
provide that. Okay, great. Thank you.

00:24:37.519 --> 00:24:39.069
And we have had, I think some new commissioners come on

00:24:39.069 --> 00:24:44.240
board since we last had DME come in before all the

00:24:44.960 --> 00:24:46.700
first five or six substations, it might be beneficial. We

00:24:46.700 --> 00:24:48.079
've got a couple some of those,

00:24:48.079 --> 00:24:50.579
like you said, on Eagle and another on Hickory that are

00:24:50.579 --> 00:24:52.559
going to be closer to downtown, so maybe

00:24:52.559 --> 00:24:56.029
it might be beneficial if we have them back in to explain

00:24:56.029 --> 00:24:57.599
that process. Yes.

00:25:02.480 --> 00:25:04.000
Are there any other questions for this item?

00:25:06.319 --> 00:25:08.079
No? Okay, thanks Mike.

00:25:12.799 --> 00:25:17.049
So I believe we're moving on at this point. Yes, absolutely

00:25:17.049 --> 00:25:20.240
. Talk about our receiver report, item

00:25:20.240 --> 00:25:23.240
one, I'm sorry, item 2a, work session report. Receive a

00:25:23.240 --> 00:25:25.119
report and hold a discussion regarding

00:25:25.119 --> 00:25:29.420
proposed amendments to sub chapter 13 site design standards

00:25:29.420 --> 00:25:32.319
, section 35 13 7 tree preservation and

00:25:32.319 --> 00:25:35.430
landscape requirements of the debt and development code.

00:25:35.430 --> 00:25:38.079
Thank you Commissioner Birgel. Shandrin Jarvis

00:25:38.079 --> 00:25:40.779
will be presenting this item to us tonight. Thank you Shand

00:25:40.779 --> 00:25:42.559
rin. You're welcome. Good evening

00:25:42.559 --> 00:25:46.259
commissioners. I'm Shandrin Jarvis with the planning

00:25:46.259 --> 00:25:50.000
division. The next item is SI 1524. These are

00:25:50.000 --> 00:25:53.410
proposed amendments to the tree preservation and landscape

00:25:53.410 --> 00:25:55.599
requirements. As many of you know,

00:25:55.599 --> 00:25:58.160
staff is in the process of updating this section of the

00:25:58.160 --> 00:26:01.519
debt and development code and the intent

00:26:01.519 --> 00:26:05.650
of tonight's meeting is to give you a progress report, an

00:26:05.650 --> 00:26:08.160
update on our progress to date.

00:26:09.519 --> 00:26:14.000
We do intend to bring a full report with the final staff

00:26:14.000 --> 00:26:17.599
recommendations forward for consideration

00:26:17.599 --> 00:26:22.640
in the first part of 2016. So with that I will begin.

00:26:26.880 --> 00:26:31.069
The existing regulations were adopted in 2004 to promote

00:26:31.069 --> 00:26:34.160
tree preservation and to facilitate

00:26:34.160 --> 00:26:37.710
site design and construction that would allow for the long-

00:26:37.710 --> 00:26:39.200
term viability of trees.

00:26:41.359 --> 00:26:44.720
Over time the regulations have proved to be a bit complex.

00:26:44.720 --> 00:26:48.319
What we hear from our development

00:26:48.319 --> 00:26:52.349
community is that the regulations, there's so many

00:26:52.349 --> 00:26:55.519
variations in the regulations that it's often

00:26:56.480 --> 00:26:59.349
difficult to determine which standards to apply for a given

00:26:59.349 --> 00:27:03.359
project. From our tree advocates we

00:27:03.359 --> 00:27:07.480
hear that the existing regulations don't seem to be very

00:27:07.480 --> 00:27:10.079
effective because we're still losing

00:27:10.079 --> 00:27:18.640
a significant amount of tree cover. Between 2007 and 2013

00:27:18.640 --> 00:27:20.480
there were multiple attempts to

00:27:20.480 --> 00:27:26.119
update this section of code and none have been successful

00:27:26.119 --> 00:27:28.400
because for the failure to reach a

00:27:28.400 --> 00:27:32.180
consensus on the proposed amendments. So there's still a

00:27:32.180 --> 00:27:36.160
need to provide clarity, sorry, in the

00:27:36.160 --> 00:27:41.230
section of code to facilitate future permitting and then to

00:27:41.230 --> 00:27:44.079
reach to achieve the goals that we've

00:27:44.079 --> 00:27:47.730
identified in the existing ordinance, in the comprehensive

00:27:47.730 --> 00:27:49.839
plan, and then in the city strategic

00:27:49.839 --> 00:27:53.900
plan. And this is part of the reason why council directed

00:27:53.900 --> 00:27:56.559
staff, well I understand it was before my

00:27:56.559 --> 00:28:03.140
time, to begin this latest update. So as a part of this

00:28:03.140 --> 00:28:09.200
effort staff identified the key task and

00:28:09.200 --> 00:28:12.750
milestones that you see on the screen. As you can see we've

00:28:12.750 --> 00:28:15.200
completed our research and benchmark

00:28:15.200 --> 00:28:19.740
analysis. We've wrapped up our internal stakeholders with

00:28:19.740 --> 00:28:23.839
the other city departments. We have kicked

00:28:23.839 --> 00:28:27.299
off our external stakeholder meetings. The first one we had

00:28:27.299 --> 00:28:29.440
last week was with the DIN Community

00:28:29.440 --> 00:28:33.619
Development Alliance which we received some very helpful

00:28:33.619 --> 00:28:37.839
feedback. We have another meeting

00:28:37.839 --> 00:28:41.119
scheduled for this week with Keep Dinnin' Beautiful and in

00:28:41.119 --> 00:28:43.279
addition to that we will be conducting

00:28:44.160 --> 00:28:47.730
a visual preference survey of the community. So all that

00:28:47.730 --> 00:28:49.599
with the goal of again coming back

00:28:50.240 --> 00:28:52.720
for full consideration at the beginning of next year.

00:28:56.880 --> 00:28:59.460
So in a few minutes. Commissioner Dudowitz, you have a

00:28:59.460 --> 00:29:00.559
question? I have a question.

00:29:01.279 --> 00:29:03.680
You want me to go back to the stakeholders. You're

00:29:03.680 --> 00:29:06.880
involving citizens. Have you had discussions with

00:29:06.880 --> 00:29:09.910
any of the developers within the city or anybody that has

00:29:09.910 --> 00:29:11.839
that side of the perspective? Yes, we

00:29:11.839 --> 00:29:19.589
actually met with the DIN Community Development Alliance

00:29:19.589 --> 00:29:21.759
last week.

00:29:26.559 --> 00:29:31.039
So in a minute you'll hear Haywood who's our urban forester

00:29:31.039 --> 00:29:33.920
present our initial staff recommendations.

00:29:34.559 --> 00:29:37.299
But first I wanted to go through what we did for the

00:29:37.299 --> 00:29:39.359
benchmark city analysis.

00:29:40.400 --> 00:29:45.119
We looked at 10 cities around the state, most of which have

00:29:45.119 --> 00:29:46.720
similar population sizes

00:29:47.440 --> 00:29:51.859
and growth projections to Dinnin'. And we focused on five

00:29:51.859 --> 00:29:54.880
key areas which were the established tree

00:29:54.880 --> 00:29:59.130
designations and these are the tree classifications that

00:29:59.130 --> 00:30:01.839
will be subject to the preservation

00:30:01.839 --> 00:30:06.420
ordinance. Minimum preservation percentages which is the

00:30:06.420 --> 00:30:09.759
percentage of existing trees on the site

00:30:09.759 --> 00:30:14.559
that would have to be preserved during site development.

00:30:14.559 --> 00:30:16.960
Tree mitigation ratios which would

00:30:16.960 --> 00:30:20.319
get applied when the minimum preservation percentages are

00:30:20.319 --> 00:30:23.440
not met. And then the tree

00:30:23.440 --> 00:30:26.619
fund or payment and loot option which these are fees that

00:30:26.619 --> 00:30:30.240
get collected if the... and Haywood,

00:30:30.240 --> 00:30:35.529
you'll have to help me out. When the minimum preservation

00:30:35.529 --> 00:30:37.920
percentages are not met

00:30:39.119 --> 00:30:44.400
and let me just go through this. Just a second. So these

00:30:44.400 --> 00:30:46.400
payments get collected when it's

00:30:46.400 --> 00:30:49.789
determined that the mitigation of tree removal by planting

00:30:49.789 --> 00:30:51.839
of trees on site is not feasible or

00:30:51.839 --> 00:30:55.009
desirable. And then we finally we have the preservation

00:30:55.009 --> 00:30:56.880
incentives which are inducements

00:30:56.880 --> 00:30:59.519
or encouragements for the developers to go above the

00:30:59.519 --> 00:31:03.279
minimum requirements. Commissioner Becker.

00:31:03.279 --> 00:31:07.779
Thank you, Chair. So if we're not going to get our minimum

00:31:07.779 --> 00:31:10.319
trees because of what they're building

00:31:10.319 --> 00:31:12.450
there and they have to fork over some money to put trees

00:31:12.450 --> 00:31:15.279
elsewhere, is that essentially what you're saying?

00:31:15.279 --> 00:31:18.380
They either they have the option to plant trees in other

00:31:18.380 --> 00:31:20.720
places on the site or they can pay into

00:31:20.720 --> 00:31:25.599
the funds to get... and Haywood will... he's much more vers

00:31:25.599 --> 00:31:27.759
ed in this than I am and he'll get into

00:31:27.759 --> 00:31:36.569
that in the next part of our presentation. Okay. So what we

00:31:36.569 --> 00:31:37.519
found was that

00:31:38.720 --> 00:31:42.329
DEN's tree and landscape code is probably one of the most

00:31:42.329 --> 00:31:44.319
complex of the ones that we've studied.

00:31:44.960 --> 00:31:48.460
We have seven tree designations compared to an average of

00:31:48.460 --> 00:31:50.160
three for the benchmark cities.

00:31:51.440 --> 00:31:56.819
And our 39 options for preservation which vary based on lot

00:31:56.819 --> 00:31:59.039
size, development type,

00:31:59.039 --> 00:32:04.240
and tree designations are significantly more than the

00:32:04.240 --> 00:32:05.119
benchmark cities.

00:32:06.400 --> 00:32:09.089
We also found that in terms of the preservation and

00:32:09.089 --> 00:32:13.039
mitigation standards themselves, we're trailing

00:32:13.039 --> 00:32:16.539
when compared to the other cities. For example, we have the

00:32:16.539 --> 00:32:18.880
lowest minimum tree preservation

00:32:18.880 --> 00:32:22.690
requirements. We have no requirement or incentive to save

00:32:22.690 --> 00:32:25.359
large trees or anything over 18 inches.

00:32:25.920 --> 00:32:28.440
And then we have the lowest mitigation rates for tree

00:32:28.440 --> 00:32:30.559
removal of the cities that we study.

00:32:34.319 --> 00:32:38.849
So again, I want to just want to reiterate that these the

00:32:38.849 --> 00:32:40.559
recommendations that you're about to

00:32:40.559 --> 00:32:44.640
hear are our initial first cut after we've done our

00:32:44.640 --> 00:32:48.640
research. We do intend to incorporate the

00:32:48.640 --> 00:32:51.180
feedback that we that we receive from the stakeholders

00:32:51.180 --> 00:32:52.400
before we get to the final

00:32:52.400 --> 00:32:55.059
recommendations. And unless you have any questions for me,

00:32:55.059 --> 00:32:56.720
I'm going to turn it over to Haywood.

00:32:58.160 --> 00:33:02.539
Commissioner Roselle. Thank you. You studied the 10 other

00:33:02.539 --> 00:33:06.400
cities. Is there a way or is it public

00:33:06.400 --> 00:33:09.369
information easy for me to access the tree preservation

00:33:09.369 --> 00:33:11.359
requirements in those 10 other

00:33:11.359 --> 00:33:14.369
cities so that maybe I can contextualize exactly what their

00:33:14.369 --> 00:33:16.880
requirements are currently? Yes.

00:33:17.759 --> 00:33:21.109
We actually do. We have the backup data for that and I

00:33:21.109 --> 00:33:22.880
believe we did a summary table

00:33:23.839 --> 00:33:26.640
for each of the cities that we can make available to you.

00:33:26.640 --> 00:33:27.759
Perfect. Thank you. Okay.

00:33:28.640 --> 00:33:32.819
I have a question. So we're comparing our tree code with 10

00:33:32.819 --> 00:33:34.720
other benchmark cities.

00:33:35.519 --> 00:33:37.599
You said that we're trailing these other cities, but how

00:33:37.599 --> 00:33:39.920
are those cities doing? Are they increasing

00:33:39.920 --> 00:33:42.400
their tree canopy? Are they just maintaining it? Are they

00:33:42.400 --> 00:33:43.759
also losing it but at a slightly

00:33:44.400 --> 00:33:48.579
slower pace? How are they doing? In the cross section, it

00:33:48.579 --> 00:33:51.599
varies just based on where you are.

00:33:52.160 --> 00:33:55.950
And Haywood can speak to that. I'm not the tree expert. I'm

00:33:55.950 --> 00:33:57.440
sorry. That's fine. It's okay. Thank

00:33:57.440 --> 00:33:59.450
you. But we'll get into that. Yes ma'am. Thank you. In the

00:33:59.450 --> 00:34:02.319
next part. Okay. And just to iterate what

00:34:02.319 --> 00:34:04.700
Shandrin said, what we're doing is we want to work

00:34:04.700 --> 00:34:07.359
collaboratively with yourselves and start moving

00:34:07.359 --> 00:34:10.719
forward with discussing, for instance, the benchmarking. We

00:34:10.719 --> 00:34:12.239
'll get you the summary table

00:34:12.239 --> 00:34:15.760
to that. But tonight's discussion is just for us to get the

00:34:15.760 --> 00:34:18.239
ball rolling, start getting your input.

00:34:18.239 --> 00:34:20.809
You will be seeing this item more and more through work

00:34:20.809 --> 00:34:23.360
sessions prior to any final recommendation.

00:34:24.079 --> 00:34:26.679
But from what we've seen when we start looking at the

00:34:26.679 --> 00:34:30.159
parameters associated with landscaping

00:34:30.159 --> 00:34:33.179
and tree preservation requirements, perhaps how we're

00:34:33.179 --> 00:34:35.519
viewing our mitigation requirements from

00:34:37.280 --> 00:34:39.300
caliper inch to caliper inch, or should it be looked at

00:34:39.300 --> 00:34:41.360
differently from a canopy cover

00:34:41.360 --> 00:34:44.070
perspective, all that will be brought to light. And we want

00:34:44.070 --> 00:34:45.920
to go through this very slowly and

00:34:45.920 --> 00:34:48.070
somewhat painstakingly just to make sure we're all on the

00:34:48.070 --> 00:34:51.679
same page. Commissioner Dutowitz. Yes.

00:34:52.800 --> 00:34:55.489
Let's talk about the benchmark cities in the list. How were

00:34:55.489 --> 00:34:57.679
those determined? What was the criteria

00:34:57.679 --> 00:35:03.750
for them? What was the methodology, I guess? We studied the

00:35:03.750 --> 00:35:07.199
, looked at the population size.

00:35:07.199 --> 00:35:11.119
So we wanted cities that were similar in size to what Den

00:35:11.119 --> 00:35:12.719
is and where we are going.

00:35:15.360 --> 00:35:17.440
They have some of the same components that we're dealing

00:35:17.440 --> 00:35:18.880
with. Some of them,

00:35:18.880 --> 00:35:21.230
most of them have universities and they're dealing with

00:35:21.230 --> 00:35:22.719
those different kind of issues.

00:35:24.800 --> 00:35:28.650
They're cities that, in a sense, we compete with for

00:35:28.650 --> 00:35:32.719
business. For what, please? Business and for,

00:35:36.239 --> 00:35:39.679
in terms of attracting growth and those different things.

00:35:39.679 --> 00:35:43.360
They're in a sense our competitors.

00:35:43.360 --> 00:35:47.460
Okay, because I'm looking at the list in South Lake, Mount

00:35:47.460 --> 00:35:49.440
Rock. I mean, these are different types of

00:35:49.440 --> 00:35:52.800
cities and yet we do have some close ones here, which is Fr

00:35:52.800 --> 00:35:56.000
isco and McKinney and Plano, but I would

00:35:56.000 --> 00:35:59.079
like to look at what Louisville is doing and or Flower

00:35:59.079 --> 00:36:01.519
Mountain because they're next door and they

00:36:01.519 --> 00:36:04.980
do compete with us for business purposes in homesteads and

00:36:04.980 --> 00:36:07.119
developments. And those cities,

00:36:08.480 --> 00:36:11.619
we did look and they're not included on this list, but we

00:36:11.619 --> 00:36:15.280
did look at those for ideas on how to write

00:36:15.280 --> 00:36:18.940
the code. They're just not listed. So we have taken some of

00:36:18.940 --> 00:36:21.599
their, the way they've organized the code

00:36:21.599 --> 00:36:25.170
and the way they're implementing the code for Flower

00:36:25.170 --> 00:36:27.760
Mountain. There was another couple of

00:36:27.760 --> 00:36:31.829
more cities that we didn't put on the official list, but

00:36:31.829 --> 00:36:35.119
they did inform the decision. Can I ask them

00:36:35.119 --> 00:36:38.039
that we look at those under the same criteria to see where

00:36:38.039 --> 00:36:40.320
they are in comparison to us? It'd be

00:36:40.320 --> 00:36:42.949
because they're in South of us and quite frankly a lot of

00:36:42.949 --> 00:36:46.000
our business issues and development issues

00:36:46.000 --> 00:36:49.460
are competitive with those to the South of us. Okay. I mean

00:36:49.460 --> 00:36:51.679
, we can add a couple more. I think

00:36:51.679 --> 00:36:54.000
they would be very helpful and they may be behind us, which

00:36:54.000 --> 00:36:55.760
is all right. I mean, we need to move on,

00:36:55.760 --> 00:36:58.269
but I just like to have a benchmark against what we're

00:36:58.269 --> 00:37:00.719
competing with in our growth development

00:37:00.719 --> 00:37:08.320
area, which is those two to the South of us. Okay. Okay.

00:37:08.320 --> 00:37:10.880
Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you.

00:37:18.320 --> 00:37:20.590
Good evening. Heywood Morgan, Urban Forester Development

00:37:20.590 --> 00:37:22.079
Services

00:37:22.639 --> 00:37:26.159
Department. I'll be going over specifically what we're

00:37:26.159 --> 00:37:28.159
looking at as far as recommendations

00:37:28.159 --> 00:37:34.679
for changes to the current tree code. So, okay. So one of

00:37:34.679 --> 00:37:38.320
the things that Shandra mentioned is that,

00:37:38.320 --> 00:37:41.159
you know, we have the most tree categories out of the

00:37:41.159 --> 00:37:43.440
benchmark cities that we looked at. So what

00:37:43.440 --> 00:37:47.460
we're looking at is actually reducing that number from

00:37:47.460 --> 00:37:50.719
seven to three to include heritage trees,

00:37:50.719 --> 00:37:54.010
protected trees, and just general canopy trees. The

00:37:54.010 --> 00:37:56.480
heritage trees and protected trees will be

00:37:57.440 --> 00:38:01.119
trees above a certain diameter, inch, and size. The

00:38:01.119 --> 00:38:04.639
heritage trees will also be a specific listing

00:38:04.639 --> 00:38:08.530
of trees. Some of those characteristics of the cross tim

00:38:08.530 --> 00:38:11.679
bers, your oaks, your better species of

00:38:11.679 --> 00:38:15.429
trees, your high quality trees. Your protected trees will

00:38:15.429 --> 00:38:18.320
have that size requirement, but they'll be

00:38:18.320 --> 00:38:21.840
all the other trees that are not on that list. And canopy

00:38:21.840 --> 00:38:24.800
is just the general tree population on the

00:38:24.800 --> 00:38:30.050
specific site. The next thing we're looking at is allowing

00:38:30.050 --> 00:38:32.800
exempt trees to be removed without

00:38:32.800 --> 00:38:36.050
penalty. And what we looked at when we were looking at

00:38:36.050 --> 00:38:38.719
exempt trees are those trees that are right now

00:38:38.719 --> 00:38:42.289
categorized in our code as secondary trees. Your mesquite,

00:38:42.289 --> 00:38:44.320
which technically by definition,

00:38:44.880 --> 00:38:47.760
in Denton does not grow to be a tree. It's a rather large

00:38:47.760 --> 00:38:51.199
shrub. Definition of a tree, single stem

00:38:51.199 --> 00:38:54.739
woody plant, at least 15 feet in height. If you've seen mes

00:38:54.739 --> 00:38:57.280
quite around here, it's nowhere close to

00:38:57.920 --> 00:39:00.429
really meeting that definition. If you go further south in

00:39:00.429 --> 00:39:02.159
the state, you'll have mesquite that'll

00:39:02.159 --> 00:39:06.679
grow to a decent size tree, but not here in Denton. We're

00:39:06.679 --> 00:39:09.039
also looking at the locust,

00:39:09.039 --> 00:39:12.699
bowdark, trees that have negative characteristics, trees

00:39:12.699 --> 00:39:15.039
that you really wouldn't want to have in

00:39:15.039 --> 00:39:18.150
your backyard. The ones with the big thorns, the bowdark

00:39:18.150 --> 00:39:20.480
with the large fruit. So we'll have a list

00:39:20.480 --> 00:39:24.769
of trees that are less desirable for the landscape that we

00:39:24.769 --> 00:39:27.679
really wouldn't want to have included,

00:39:27.679 --> 00:39:31.639
you know, in areas of the city that we're developing to be

00:39:31.639 --> 00:39:33.840
removed without having penalty

00:39:34.400 --> 00:39:39.469
against developers. Yes. Commissioner Beck. Thank you,

00:39:39.469 --> 00:39:41.679
Chair. So it sounds like we're pretty much

00:39:42.320 --> 00:39:45.579
just considering its appearance value. Is that what I'm

00:39:45.579 --> 00:39:48.800
hearing? Well, it's appearance, but also the

00:39:48.800 --> 00:39:51.489
interaction with people. I mean, I don't know if you've, if

00:39:51.489 --> 00:39:53.760
you had much experience around locust

00:39:53.760 --> 00:39:57.190
trees, the common locusts that have the thorns or the bowd

00:39:57.190 --> 00:40:00.480
ark, things that, you know, if you left them

00:40:00.480 --> 00:40:04.239
in the landscape, would be considered a nuisance and in

00:40:04.239 --> 00:40:08.639
some case a hazard to pedestrians. You know,

00:40:08.639 --> 00:40:12.190
the trees, like the locusts in particular, you know, has

00:40:12.190 --> 00:40:15.039
the thorns. You wouldn't want your kids

00:40:15.039 --> 00:40:17.880
climbing those trees because, you know, those, I've been

00:40:17.880 --> 00:40:20.559
stuck by them. They're pretty, you know.

00:40:22.079 --> 00:40:24.800
The only thing I was thinking of was,

00:40:27.280 --> 00:40:31.250
has any consideration, any value been given to the root

00:40:31.250 --> 00:40:33.440
systems and stability it gives to the

00:40:33.440 --> 00:40:36.380
soil or anything like that? Do they have any value in that

00:40:36.380 --> 00:40:38.079
regard? Of course. Yeah. I mean,

00:40:38.719 --> 00:40:41.530
these trees, they have, you know, they provide us with

00:40:41.530 --> 00:40:45.039
benefits, soil stability. They provide

00:40:45.039 --> 00:40:47.920
benefits for cleaning the air. But when, you know, I'm

00:40:47.920 --> 00:40:51.119
looking at the urban forest as a whole,

00:40:51.119 --> 00:40:54.960
and, you know, my background is specifically urban forestry

00:40:54.960 --> 00:40:57.519
. So I look at the overall population of

00:40:57.519 --> 00:41:01.599
trees within a city. And so I'm looking at this, you know,

00:41:01.599 --> 00:41:03.760
long term, how are these trees going

00:41:03.760 --> 00:41:06.190
to perform in the landscape? How are they going to interact

00:41:06.190 --> 00:41:08.239
with people? Is this going to create,

00:41:08.239 --> 00:41:11.320
you know, an attractive nuisance for kids? You know, things

00:41:11.320 --> 00:41:14.480
along that line. So, you know, they

00:41:14.480 --> 00:41:17.170
provide those benefits, but is it a tree that we would go

00:41:17.170 --> 00:41:19.119
and plant in our backyard? Is it a tree

00:41:19.119 --> 00:41:21.250
that we would approve a developer to plant in a new

00:41:21.250 --> 00:41:23.760
development? We wouldn't permit those trees. So

00:41:24.559 --> 00:41:28.559
why should we have those trees preserved or have those

00:41:28.559 --> 00:41:31.360
required to be preserved if we're not even

00:41:31.360 --> 00:41:34.969
allowing those to be planted as a part of the new landscape

00:41:34.969 --> 00:41:37.280
? So that's kind of the thinking and the

00:41:37.280 --> 00:41:41.840
rationale with having that, you know, specific list of

00:41:41.840 --> 00:41:44.960
exempt trees from tree protection.

00:41:48.000 --> 00:41:51.579
So the next thing we looked at is changing the mitigation

00:41:51.579 --> 00:41:54.800
ratios. Right now, our mitigation

00:41:54.800 --> 00:41:59.179
ratios and mitigation, and Sandra touched on it a bit

00:41:59.179 --> 00:42:02.400
earlier, mitigation is required when the

00:42:02.400 --> 00:42:06.989
developer cannot meet the minimum preservation requirements

00:42:06.989 --> 00:42:09.599
. So our code allows for the developer

00:42:09.599 --> 00:42:14.670
to remove this, say if the developer has to preserve, and

00:42:14.670 --> 00:42:17.360
right now it's in diameter, it's

00:42:18.000 --> 00:42:20.820
the developer has to preserve a thousand inches of trees

00:42:20.820 --> 00:42:22.960
and for some reason they can't meet that

00:42:23.679 --> 00:42:27.869
requirement. The code allows for half of those trees to be

00:42:27.869 --> 00:42:30.320
removed and mitigated either through

00:42:30.320 --> 00:42:34.449
replanting on site or payment into the city's tree fund.

00:42:34.449 --> 00:42:37.119
The mitigation ratio comes into play

00:42:38.159 --> 00:42:41.679
and currently our mitigation ratio goes from basically

00:42:41.679 --> 00:42:44.480
nothing to a one to a two ratio

00:42:45.199 --> 00:42:49.170
depending on the size of the property, the types of trees.

00:42:49.170 --> 00:42:52.000
So the mitigation ratio is basically a

00:42:52.000 --> 00:42:57.340
multiplying factor to mitigate those trees that, you know,

00:42:57.340 --> 00:42:59.519
were removed that should have been

00:42:59.519 --> 00:43:02.960
preserved and that's where mitigation comes into play. So

00:43:02.960 --> 00:43:05.760
we're looking at increasing that ratio

00:43:05.760 --> 00:43:09.119
from right now it's a maximum of one to two to a one to

00:43:09.119 --> 00:43:12.079
four ratio and, you know, again we're looking at,

00:43:13.760 --> 00:43:16.980
you know, we have that list of exempt trees so we're giving

00:43:16.980 --> 00:43:18.800
a little bit there but we're really

00:43:18.800 --> 00:43:22.400
trying to encourage developers to preserve the trees that

00:43:22.400 --> 00:43:24.559
are desirable in the landscape and

00:43:24.559 --> 00:43:27.440
that's why we're looking at increasing that ratio from,

00:43:27.440 --> 00:43:29.599
like I said, right now a maximum of one to

00:43:29.599 --> 00:43:33.380
two to one to four. Yes? Commissioner Beck. Thank you,

00:43:33.380 --> 00:43:37.599
Chair. The trees that do replace, that get

00:43:37.599 --> 00:43:39.599
mitigated, that have to come in and replace them, are they

00:43:39.599 --> 00:43:43.440
going to be the same diameter or is that

00:43:43.440 --> 00:43:45.710
factored in? Do we lose a little bit in diameter if we're

00:43:45.710 --> 00:43:48.239
replacing trees? Well currently under the

00:43:48.239 --> 00:43:51.760
code once you figure out the diameter inches that you have

00:43:51.760 --> 00:43:54.320
to replace, you have to replace the same

00:43:54.320 --> 00:43:57.559
equivalent diameter. So if you cut down a 10-inch tree you

00:43:57.559 --> 00:43:59.440
don't have to replace a 10-inch tree but

00:43:59.440 --> 00:44:02.670
you may have to replace that 10-inch tree with five two-

00:44:02.670 --> 00:44:04.880
inch trees. So as long as the diameter

00:44:04.880 --> 00:44:08.199
inches add up to that mitigation amount you meet the

00:44:08.199 --> 00:44:10.800
requirement. You can plant, you know, the

00:44:10.800 --> 00:44:13.750
minimum size is two inch but you can plant up as much as

00:44:13.750 --> 00:44:15.920
your your pocketbook or the developer's

00:44:15.920 --> 00:44:18.880
pocketbook will allow them to. The larger the tree, you

00:44:18.880 --> 00:44:21.440
know, once you really get past probably a

00:44:21.440 --> 00:44:24.400
four inch in diameter it gets really, you know, a lot more

00:44:24.400 --> 00:44:26.559
costly to get, you know, those larger

00:44:26.559 --> 00:44:31.630
trees in. But generally developers will plant, you know, at

00:44:31.630 --> 00:44:34.400
least a two inch. They may go, you know,

00:44:34.400 --> 00:44:37.920
three inch or they get into the larger sizes if they are,

00:44:37.920 --> 00:44:40.400
you know, restricted with space on the

00:44:40.400 --> 00:44:43.360
site and so they'll plant in larger diameter trees to meet

00:44:43.360 --> 00:44:47.280
that requirement. And so, Heywood, so when

00:44:47.280 --> 00:44:50.389
we're changing the mitigation ratio from one, you gave a

00:44:50.389 --> 00:44:52.960
one-to-one example there. Now we're changing

00:44:52.960 --> 00:44:55.820
it to one to four so the developer would then be required

00:44:55.820 --> 00:44:59.119
to plant 22-inch trees? Yeah. If they can

00:44:59.119 --> 00:45:01.449
fit them all in there? I mean, how, where are they, where

00:45:01.449 --> 00:45:03.920
are they going to put all those trees? Do they

00:45:03.920 --> 00:45:07.300
plant them on that property that they're developing? Yes,

00:45:07.300 --> 00:45:10.000
it's either replanting on the site or

00:45:10.000 --> 00:45:12.389
payment into the tree fund under the current, under the

00:45:12.389 --> 00:45:15.360
current code. We are considering,

00:45:16.159 --> 00:45:18.159
you know, with the code and it's not really covered in this

00:45:18.159 --> 00:45:19.840
because this is mainly covered,

00:45:19.840 --> 00:45:23.309
the main issues, but we are considering maybe giving an

00:45:23.309 --> 00:45:25.599
option for possibly off-site mitigation

00:45:25.599 --> 00:45:28.599
or adjacent to the site to give, you know, more

00:45:28.599 --> 00:45:31.519
possibilities for replanting. Because, you know,

00:45:31.519 --> 00:45:35.519
ultimately I'd rather see the developer either A, preserve

00:45:35.519 --> 00:45:37.920
the trees on site, meet the code,

00:45:37.920 --> 00:45:40.550
you know, don't worry about payment into the tree fund or

00:45:40.550 --> 00:45:43.199
replanting, or B, if they have to mitigate

00:45:43.199 --> 00:45:46.900
to replant on site, I'd much rather receive trees in the

00:45:46.900 --> 00:45:49.280
ground versus a check in the bank. Yeah.

00:45:49.280 --> 00:45:51.710
Because, you know, they're there, the work is done, and the

00:45:51.710 --> 00:45:53.440
trees are growing. Yeah, and I would agree

00:45:53.440 --> 00:45:56.570
with that. I'm just, I was curious where they would put all

00:45:56.570 --> 00:45:59.039
those, those 22-inch trees on that site,

00:45:59.039 --> 00:46:01.170
but it sounds like you, you've thought of this and you're

00:46:01.170 --> 00:46:02.719
trying to think of other alternatives. If

00:46:02.719 --> 00:46:05.139
they can't meet that, they will have other options. Right,

00:46:05.139 --> 00:46:07.679
right. Cool, thank you. Yep, you're welcome.

00:46:08.719 --> 00:46:13.210
So next on our list, we have the base preservation minimum

00:46:13.210 --> 00:46:16.960
for tree canopy. We're looking at,

00:46:16.960 --> 00:46:21.789
instead of going by diameter inches and going to canopy

00:46:21.789 --> 00:46:25.280
cover, the reason behind, you know,

00:46:25.280 --> 00:46:30.519
this conversion, well, A, our landscape code is already

00:46:30.519 --> 00:46:34.159
currently in canopy cover. So it would

00:46:34.159 --> 00:46:39.010
actually make the preservation portion of the code parallel

00:46:39.010 --> 00:46:41.760
to what's already done and established

00:46:41.760 --> 00:46:45.269
with the landscape tree canopy code. And the landscape tree

00:46:45.269 --> 00:46:46.880
canopy is, are new trees that

00:46:46.880 --> 00:46:49.349
are required to be planted by the developer. It could be

00:46:49.349 --> 00:46:51.440
trees in the parking lot, along the street,

00:46:51.440 --> 00:46:54.599
or just in the landscape in general. So why go to canopy

00:46:54.599 --> 00:46:58.000
cover for preservation? Well, when we look at,

00:46:58.880 --> 00:47:02.139
and I'm looking, you know, industry-wide urban forestry as

00:47:02.139 --> 00:47:04.239
a whole, the benefits that we derive

00:47:04.239 --> 00:47:08.650
from trees are all related back to the canopy cover. When

00:47:08.650 --> 00:47:11.199
you look at studies that are done on

00:47:12.480 --> 00:47:16.380
the benefits of trees, it's all based on the percentage of

00:47:16.380 --> 00:47:20.000
canopy you have. So to be

00:47:20.000 --> 00:47:23.159
consistent with that and also to align with, you know,

00:47:23.159 --> 00:47:26.320
basically industry standards, we're recommending

00:47:26.320 --> 00:47:30.800
going to canopy cover as opposed to diameter inches. For

00:47:30.800 --> 00:47:33.920
example, you could have a 30-inch

00:47:33.920 --> 00:47:38.320
diameter tree, which is a nice large tree, and it basically

00:47:38.320 --> 00:47:41.519
, under the current codes, equates to,

00:47:41.519 --> 00:47:44.340
you know, three 10-inch trees. Well, those three 10-inch

00:47:44.340 --> 00:47:47.199
trees could quite possibly and likely have

00:47:47.199 --> 00:47:52.269
larger canopy cover than the one 30-inch tree. So when

00:47:52.269 --> 00:47:56.000
looking at the benefits that trees provide,

00:47:56.000 --> 00:48:00.239
and industry standards, we're looking to go to canopy cover

00:48:00.239 --> 00:48:02.239
as opposed to diameter inches.

00:48:04.000 --> 00:48:07.260
Okay, so this next map, and this is what we're currently

00:48:07.260 --> 00:48:10.480
looking at, is basing the preservation

00:48:11.519 --> 00:48:15.650
on the percentage of tree cover on the site pre-development

00:48:15.650 --> 00:48:20.079
. Currently, the amount that you

00:48:20.079 --> 00:48:23.940
preserve is based on a combination of things, one being the

00:48:23.940 --> 00:48:26.559
size of the property. It doesn't take

00:48:26.559 --> 00:48:29.570
into account, well, how many trees are on this site to

00:48:29.570 --> 00:48:31.760
start with. So what we're looking at

00:48:32.800 --> 00:48:37.610
is, you know, here your existing tree canopy percentage. So

00:48:37.610 --> 00:48:40.159
on a site that has a lower

00:48:41.360 --> 00:48:44.630
existing canopy percentage, your preservation percentage

00:48:44.630 --> 00:48:47.519
will actually be higher, because what

00:48:47.519 --> 00:48:50.070
we're looking at, you know, okay, you may have this 10-acre

00:48:50.070 --> 00:48:52.480
site and it's only 20% canopy. Well,

00:48:53.519 --> 00:48:57.309
to kind of even things out with the sites that are more

00:48:57.309 --> 00:49:00.079
heavily canopied, we're looking at having

00:49:00.079 --> 00:49:03.980
that percentage higher. It's really an inverse relation. So

00:49:03.980 --> 00:49:06.239
the lower your canopy cover existing,

00:49:06.880 --> 00:49:10.719
the higher your percentage of preservation. The higher

00:49:10.719 --> 00:49:13.360
canopy existing, the lower percentage of

00:49:13.360 --> 00:49:17.739
preservation. And like I say, it's all based on the

00:49:17.739 --> 00:49:22.000
existing canopy on the site. The map that we have

00:49:22.000 --> 00:49:27.329
here is actually an existing site that our GIS looked at

00:49:27.329 --> 00:49:30.960
and, you know, calculated the canopy

00:49:30.960 --> 00:49:33.840
cover on this site. And this is a site right down on McKin

00:49:33.840 --> 00:49:36.480
ney. McKinney is actually the majestic

00:49:36.480 --> 00:49:39.900
apartment site. You've probably seen this configuration,

00:49:39.900 --> 00:49:42.239
but this is what their existing

00:49:42.239 --> 00:49:47.280
canopy looks like. So with this example, the total acreage

00:49:47.280 --> 00:49:50.239
of the site is 11.39 acres.

00:49:50.800 --> 00:49:55.179
The percentage of canopy is 49.7% canopy. So they're

00:49:55.179 --> 00:49:58.079
falling into the range of 50% canopy cover.

00:49:59.039 --> 00:50:03.079
The area with the red outline represents canopy. The area

00:50:03.079 --> 00:50:06.400
with the green outline represents canopy.

00:50:06.400 --> 00:50:10.440
The red are trees that they could remove under the code and

00:50:10.440 --> 00:50:12.880
develop. The green is areas that

00:50:12.880 --> 00:50:16.170
would have to be preserved. This is only for example

00:50:16.170 --> 00:50:19.039
purposes, just an illustration to show

00:50:19.039 --> 00:50:22.960
what that looks like on an exact, on a, on a, an actual

00:50:22.960 --> 00:50:26.400
site. The configuration of where the trees

00:50:26.400 --> 00:50:30.099
are preserved is totally up to the developer. As long as

00:50:30.099 --> 00:50:33.199
you reach out to, you meet that 50%

00:50:33.199 --> 00:50:40.800
preservation of the existing canopy. Question to Rosalyn.

00:50:40.800 --> 00:50:42.719
Thank you. I hope I can word this

00:50:42.719 --> 00:50:46.760
in an appropriate way. If they are replacing a tree that

00:50:46.760 --> 00:50:49.360
they're taking down for mitigation,

00:50:49.360 --> 00:50:51.829
that's still going to be measured by diameter inches or

00:50:51.829 --> 00:50:54.079
that be canopy as well? It will,

00:50:54.079 --> 00:50:59.309
it will be canopy based on the, the, the mature canopy size

00:50:59.309 --> 00:51:01.599
of a large, small, and medium-sized

00:51:01.599 --> 00:51:04.519
tree which is already established within the landscape

00:51:04.519 --> 00:51:07.920
portion of the code. There's a formula

00:51:07.920 --> 00:51:10.610
that I've been working on to, to convert that to make, you

00:51:10.610 --> 00:51:13.119
know, to make it accurate. And,

00:51:13.119 --> 00:51:16.340
and what my goal is, is to basically have it, have a

00:51:16.340 --> 00:51:18.960
spreadsheet, an Excel spreadsheet where

00:51:18.960 --> 00:51:21.840
the developer can plug in his information and it spits out

00:51:21.840 --> 00:51:24.320
what he has to preserve to make it,

00:51:24.320 --> 00:51:26.530
you know, easier on the calculation. Right now, you know,

00:51:26.530 --> 00:51:28.000
everyone is doing their calculations

00:51:28.000 --> 00:51:31.519
manually. I have to check over manually. For me, it makes

00:51:31.519 --> 00:51:34.000
sense to do it in an Excel spreadsheet.

00:51:34.000 --> 00:51:37.699
My site is this big. My canopy cover is this much. How much

00:51:37.699 --> 00:51:39.280
do I have to preserve?

00:51:40.960 --> 00:51:43.780
So the idea would be to know potentially what that tree

00:51:43.780 --> 00:51:46.559
canopy would be sometime in the future?

00:51:46.559 --> 00:51:50.599
Correct. And plant that. Secondly, and, and only somewhat

00:51:50.599 --> 00:51:53.440
related, is this putting a preference

00:51:53.440 --> 00:51:57.429
on the trees that would be grown in our city based on I

00:51:57.429 --> 00:52:00.320
mean the cheapest tree that has the most

00:52:00.320 --> 00:52:05.880
canopy? Is it, is it incorrectly putting a, a premium, like

00:52:05.880 --> 00:52:08.159
maybe not on a pine tree,

00:52:08.719 --> 00:52:12.260
but on a pecan tree? Does that make sense? Yeah, I

00:52:12.260 --> 00:52:14.639
understand what you're saying. And,

00:52:15.599 --> 00:52:18.579
and actually when you go on price trees in a nursery, you

00:52:18.579 --> 00:52:21.039
know, it's based on either the,

00:52:21.039 --> 00:52:23.730
if it's a container tree, it's, you know, by the gallon

00:52:23.730 --> 00:52:25.599
size of the containers grown in,

00:52:25.599 --> 00:52:28.679
or by the caliper inches, the diameter of that actual tree.

00:52:28.679 --> 00:52:31.599
And what our code currently does is,

00:52:32.239 --> 00:52:36.139
you know, it basically categorizes those as large, medium,

00:52:36.139 --> 00:52:38.960
and small, regardless of, you know,

00:52:38.960 --> 00:52:43.420
what species and desirability they are. But, you know, you

00:52:43.420 --> 00:52:45.679
can have an oak tree, for example,

00:52:46.239 --> 00:52:48.510
is in the large category, the same as a pecan would be in

00:52:48.510 --> 00:52:49.760
the large category.

00:52:51.360 --> 00:52:54.349
One more question, I apologize. This is out of ignorance.

00:52:54.349 --> 00:52:57.119
Are there such things as really big,

00:52:57.119 --> 00:52:58.639
cheap, ugly trees?

00:53:03.840 --> 00:53:04.590
Well, big, cheap, ugly. Well, there's a difference

00:53:04.590 --> 00:53:10.159
aesthetics, you know, for tree. And if it's just a

00:53:10.159 --> 00:53:13.750
matter of what a satellite image says on, on how much it's

00:53:13.750 --> 00:53:16.159
covering, then if I'm a developer,

00:53:16.159 --> 00:53:19.730
I'm going to look for the cheapest. Well, it's still what

00:53:19.730 --> 00:53:21.679
we would approve to be replaced is

00:53:21.679 --> 00:53:25.750
still subject to our approved tree list. So you may find

00:53:25.750 --> 00:53:28.480
some trees that are less desirable, say

00:53:29.039 --> 00:53:31.449
cottonwood. There's, there's actually a variety of cotton

00:53:31.449 --> 00:53:34.639
less cottonwood. But it's still a fast

00:53:34.639 --> 00:53:37.599
growing tree. It's still a tree that, you know, I wouldn't

00:53:37.599 --> 00:53:39.440
recommend for the long term for the

00:53:39.440 --> 00:53:44.699
landscape. But that would actually be covered in our

00:53:44.699 --> 00:53:48.079
recommended or require, you know, our approved

00:53:48.079 --> 00:53:51.599
tree list. Thank you. Commissioner Back. Thank you, Chair.

00:53:51.599 --> 00:53:53.599
That kind of raised a question for me,

00:53:53.599 --> 00:53:56.489
then. Are we going to try and maintain then what's native

00:53:56.489 --> 00:53:58.159
to this area? In other words,

00:53:58.159 --> 00:54:00.719
we're not going to lose so many of a certain type of tree

00:54:00.719 --> 00:54:01.840
that we really want

00:54:02.800 --> 00:54:07.309
to do the developer. Are we going to try and maintain the

00:54:07.309 --> 00:54:09.519
percentage of oaks and ash and

00:54:10.079 --> 00:54:13.570
other trees native to this area? Or is that even a

00:54:13.570 --> 00:54:17.440
consideration in the plan? Well, what I recommend

00:54:17.440 --> 00:54:21.530
is a planting of native and adopted trees. One of the

00:54:21.530 --> 00:54:24.880
things when you look at managing the population

00:54:24.880 --> 00:54:30.610
of trees is you want to have a good distribution of species

00:54:30.610 --> 00:54:34.480
types, but also age types of trees.

00:54:36.000 --> 00:54:37.699
There are trees that will grow here that are not

00:54:37.699 --> 00:54:41.199
necessarily native here, but there's nothing wrong

00:54:41.199 --> 00:54:47.039
with the tree. It's, you know, perfectly good tree. So,

00:54:50.079 --> 00:54:52.110
some of those trees are on the list, but they're not the

00:54:52.110 --> 00:54:54.800
only trees on the list. Because if we

00:54:54.800 --> 00:54:58.519
did that, we'd end up with, you know, a lot of oak trees.

00:54:58.519 --> 00:55:01.199
And when you get a high population of one

00:55:01.199 --> 00:55:05.199
species of tree, history has shown us with the American elm

00:55:05.199 --> 00:55:08.559
and Dutch elm disease, you had,

00:55:08.559 --> 00:55:12.940
you know, cities that had trees, street, tree-lined streets

00:55:12.940 --> 00:55:14.719
that were American elms,

00:55:14.719 --> 00:55:18.820
beautiful streets. The bug came and what happened, you end

00:55:18.820 --> 00:55:20.960
up clear cutting entire neighborhoods.

00:55:21.760 --> 00:55:24.449
Some cities are still recovering from Dutch elm disease

00:55:24.449 --> 00:55:26.559
that hit in the 1960s and 70s.

00:55:27.599 --> 00:55:30.969
Currently, we're dealing with emerald ash borer in parts of

00:55:30.969 --> 00:55:34.719
the country, which ash is one of the

00:55:34.719 --> 00:55:38.150
trees that actually removed from the recommended list.

00:55:38.150 --> 00:55:41.360
Because currently, the emerald ash borer is

00:55:41.360 --> 00:55:45.659
only about 300 miles away from Denton, Texas, in Louisiana

00:55:45.659 --> 00:55:48.320
and Arkansas. It's not a matter of if

00:55:48.320 --> 00:55:52.079
it's get here, it's more so when it gets here. With the

00:55:52.079 --> 00:55:54.719
highway system, a lot of times it travels

00:55:54.719 --> 00:55:58.150
with firewood or on vehicles even, and you know, it'll be

00:55:58.150 --> 00:56:02.159
here sooner or later. Okay, thanks. Yeah.

00:56:03.199 --> 00:56:06.159
And Heywood, I have some feedback. I don't know, I can't

00:56:06.159 --> 00:56:07.920
speak for the rest of the commission, but

00:56:07.920 --> 00:56:10.920
this, I understand the reasoning. You know, if you have

00:56:10.920 --> 00:56:14.239
zero to 20% tree canopy, you've got a lot of

00:56:14.239 --> 00:56:17.969
room to work with. So let's preserve 70% of those trees. I

00:56:17.969 --> 00:56:20.320
feel really uneasy with that last number,

00:56:20.320 --> 00:56:24.320
80 to 100%, only preserving 30% of the trees. I would like

00:56:24.320 --> 00:56:26.960
to see that number increased. I know

00:56:26.960 --> 00:56:30.550
it could hinder development in that area, but it could also

00:56:30.550 --> 00:56:33.199
create a really creative development

00:56:33.199 --> 00:56:35.690
idea because it's, it's, we're really preserving a lot of

00:56:35.690 --> 00:56:38.800
our trees. If our focus is, is to preserve

00:56:38.800 --> 00:56:40.719
as much of the trees as possible, then I would think we

00:56:40.719 --> 00:56:42.320
would put a higher emphasis on the lots

00:56:42.320 --> 00:56:45.280
that are already heavily forested and make sure that we're

00:56:45.280 --> 00:56:47.119
really preserving as many of those trees

00:56:47.119 --> 00:56:50.710
as possible. So I would like for staff to, to work with

00:56:50.710 --> 00:56:53.599
that, that 30% and see how we can increase

00:56:53.599 --> 00:56:56.480
that, maybe compare that to what other cities are doing and

00:56:56.480 --> 00:56:58.400
maybe show us some examples of what that

00:56:58.400 --> 00:57:03.039
might look like 30% versus 35 versus 40%. Yeah, I actually,

00:57:03.039 --> 00:57:06.239
yeah, our GIS guy, when I gave him these

00:57:06.239 --> 00:57:09.519
percentages, he actually threw it all into an Excel

00:57:09.519 --> 00:57:12.559
spreadsheet to show, you know, how much would be

00:57:12.559 --> 00:57:16.119
preserved of the existing trees throughout these

00:57:16.119 --> 00:57:20.000
distributions. And amazingly, the percentage or

00:57:20.000 --> 00:57:24.280
the amount is fairly even across it. It kind of zigzags

00:57:24.280 --> 00:57:27.280
like a, like a saw. You know, if you, you

00:57:27.280 --> 00:57:29.820
know, look at a zigzag motion, that's kind of how the

00:57:29.820 --> 00:57:32.159
distribution looks. But that's something, you

00:57:32.159 --> 00:57:36.260
know, we can, you know, consider. Like as Chandra mentioned

00:57:36.260 --> 00:57:38.960
, this is just kind of our first, you know,

00:57:38.960 --> 00:57:41.070
look at and that's, you know, one of the reasons we're here

00:57:41.070 --> 00:57:43.440
to get feedback and to look at, you

00:57:43.440 --> 00:57:46.869
know, the feasibility of making adjustments or even looking

00:57:46.869 --> 00:57:49.760
at this as a whole. Thank you.

00:57:50.320 --> 00:57:54.809
Commissioner Hudson. So I'm not an outside guy at all. Like

00:57:54.809 --> 00:57:56.559
if I'm outside, I'm walking to my car.

00:57:56.559 --> 00:58:01.630
But I have a question. So how transferable are trees? And I

00:58:01.630 --> 00:58:04.159
ask that for part B of the question,

00:58:04.159 --> 00:58:07.130
and that is, is there a, and I'm going to use a word that

00:58:07.130 --> 00:58:09.840
probably doesn't exist. Is there like a

00:58:09.840 --> 00:58:13.760
tree craigslist for, so for example, we have buckies that's

00:58:13.760 --> 00:58:16.559
going in and it's 40 acres or so,

00:58:16.559 --> 00:58:20.050
and it's somewhat forested. And so they're going to cut

00:58:20.050 --> 00:58:22.719
those trees down. Are those trees able to

00:58:22.719 --> 00:58:27.130
be harvested in a network of people talking and developers

00:58:27.130 --> 00:58:29.920
talking and saying almost like you have

00:58:30.480 --> 00:58:33.460
landfill dirt that, hey, we'll take it if you have it type

00:58:33.460 --> 00:58:35.360
thing? I mean, I don't know how that works.

00:58:35.360 --> 00:58:39.099
And if they would survive the transfer, if it's worth it,

00:58:39.099 --> 00:58:41.679
it may not be worth it. I'm just,

00:58:41.679 --> 00:58:47.719
I'm learning. Trees can be transplanted. Even under the

00:58:47.719 --> 00:58:50.480
current code, one of the methods of

00:58:50.480 --> 00:58:53.380
preserving trees will allow for trees to be relocated on

00:58:53.380 --> 00:58:56.559
that existing site. The biggest

00:58:56.559 --> 00:59:00.079
limiting factor on that, and there are companies that'll

00:59:00.079 --> 00:59:03.519
move trees 20, 30 inches in diameter,

00:59:04.320 --> 00:59:06.789
but it's really the biggest limiting factor is cost and

00:59:06.789 --> 00:59:09.280
where you're going to move that tree to.

00:59:10.159 --> 00:59:14.369
Because the larger you get in size, you really kind of

00:59:14.369 --> 00:59:16.719
limit your distance where you can actually

00:59:16.719 --> 00:59:21.239
move that tree to. But for trees that are, I would say, in

00:59:21.239 --> 00:59:23.840
that eight inches in diameter,

00:59:23.840 --> 00:59:29.780
10 inches range, they're relatively easy to transplant. But

00:59:29.780 --> 00:59:34.079
I haven't heard of the correct

00:59:34.079 --> 00:59:38.320
list for trees per se. Well, I mean, but I think maybe if I

00:59:38.320 --> 00:59:40.079
incentivize, because obviously,

00:59:40.079 --> 00:59:43.869
contractors talk and developers talk. And so there may be a

00:59:43.869 --> 00:59:46.639
way to, I've got to get rid of these,

00:59:46.719 --> 00:59:50.210
and I need these, and they work together and as a city

00:59:50.210 --> 00:59:54.000
somehow incentivize them to build that

00:59:54.000 --> 00:59:57.489
communication because it's already successful. I mean,

00:59:57.489 --> 00:59:59.840
because otherwise you have a tree that may

00:59:59.840 --> 01:00:02.239
or may not make it, may or may not have issues that's

01:00:02.239 --> 01:00:04.079
planted that we got to go back and double

01:00:04.079 --> 01:00:07.019
check on, that sort of thing. I know that risk never goes

01:00:07.019 --> 01:00:09.360
away, but I'm just saying if we have

01:00:09.360 --> 01:00:12.460
something that's already here, that there's a way that we

01:00:12.460 --> 01:00:14.800
can incentivize developers to talk and have

01:00:14.800 --> 01:00:20.760
those conversations and see what it produces or see if

01:00:20.760 --> 01:00:24.719
there's a way to build a community, if you will.

01:00:24.719 --> 01:00:26.880
So just a thought. Okay.

01:00:26.880 --> 01:00:28.880
Yeah.

01:00:28.880 --> 01:00:33.440
Within the plan, is there regulations or stipulations of

01:00:33.440 --> 01:00:35.280
how we protect the current trees on the

01:00:35.280 --> 01:00:38.800
property from soil compaction because of construction? I

01:00:38.800 --> 01:00:42.239
know we do sometimes put barriers around

01:00:42.239 --> 01:00:45.940
fences, but I'm wondering if it's maintained properly in

01:00:45.940 --> 01:00:47.920
the sense of how far out they have

01:00:47.920 --> 01:00:51.170
to go to protect that drip line and that canopy because I

01:00:51.170 --> 01:00:52.960
've seen some sites where we have some

01:00:52.960 --> 01:00:56.980
beautiful trees and yet they're only protected minimally.

01:00:56.980 --> 01:00:59.440
And then I know over time, bulldozers

01:00:59.440 --> 01:01:02.380
and whatnot, that soil gets compacted and those trees end

01:01:02.380 --> 01:01:04.880
up losing limbs and dying because of that.

01:01:04.880 --> 01:01:06.800
Is there going to be something within the plan that says,

01:01:06.800 --> 01:01:08.079
okay, if we're going to preserve these

01:01:08.079 --> 01:01:11.440
trees, you must maintain a certain boundary, a protection

01:01:11.440 --> 01:01:14.480
boundary? Yes. Currently, our code

01:01:14.480 --> 01:01:18.099
requires and what I require is basically tree protection

01:01:18.099 --> 01:01:20.239
out to the drip line of the tree

01:01:20.239 --> 01:01:23.679
as far out as the branches go. And, you know, typically

01:01:23.679 --> 01:01:25.519
that's the orange construction fence

01:01:25.519 --> 01:01:28.630
metal T-pose, something that's visible so that, you know,

01:01:28.630 --> 01:01:30.480
the guy that's on the bulldozer doing

01:01:30.480 --> 01:01:33.559
his work, you know, it's easily, you know, visible for him

01:01:33.559 --> 01:01:37.599
to see. Additionally, what I'm looking at

01:01:37.599 --> 01:01:40.769
aligning with to maybe make adjustments to that is looking

01:01:40.769 --> 01:01:42.960
at, you know, best management industry

01:01:42.960 --> 01:01:46.739
standards. There's standards for tree protection that, you

01:01:46.739 --> 01:01:49.119
know, are basically industry standards

01:01:49.119 --> 01:01:52.659
nationwide. And so, you know, I'll compare what we

01:01:52.659 --> 01:01:55.280
currently do to those best management

01:01:55.280 --> 01:01:58.110
practice and make adjustments where, you know, I feel

01:01:58.110 --> 01:02:01.840
necessary. And follow up, who follows up and

01:02:01.840 --> 01:02:05.409
who monitors that? That would be I. So you're monitoring

01:02:05.409 --> 01:02:07.280
all the sites under current...

01:02:07.280 --> 01:02:11.659
when I can get out of the office from, you know, doing

01:02:11.659 --> 01:02:14.159
reviews and tree code work.

01:02:14.800 --> 01:02:17.070
I just want to decide it because I'm seeing where I don't

01:02:17.070 --> 01:02:18.559
think they're following that

01:02:18.559 --> 01:02:22.159
drip line situation. And those trees are going to... they

01:02:22.159 --> 01:02:24.960
're going to see the worst of it in

01:02:24.960 --> 01:02:29.340
five to six years, you know that. So we need to, I guess,

01:02:29.340 --> 01:02:31.039
find a way to bolster that up if we're

01:02:31.039 --> 01:02:33.440
going to look to preserve as much as we can. Right, yeah.

01:02:33.440 --> 01:02:34.880
As much as I can get out there,

01:02:34.880 --> 01:02:37.280
about there. And, you know, on days like today it makes it

01:02:37.280 --> 01:02:39.360
really easy, but even today I wasn't

01:02:39.360 --> 01:02:43.250
able to get out as much as I would like to. Was that... let

01:02:43.250 --> 01:02:45.360
me follow up again. I mean, obviously

01:02:45.360 --> 01:02:49.210
there's on-site code enforcement. There's city people,

01:02:49.210 --> 01:02:51.599
employees, they look at the ordinances

01:02:51.599 --> 01:02:54.960
and whatnot that are being followed or if they meet code or

01:02:54.960 --> 01:02:58.320
whatever, we can ask them to also be

01:02:58.320 --> 01:03:02.840
part of that process, I would assume. That may be a

01:03:02.840 --> 01:03:06.480
possibility. It just kind of depends on,

01:03:06.480 --> 01:03:08.340
you know, I don't like to commit other people's... I

01:03:08.340 --> 01:03:10.480
understand. ...people, but right now it's...

01:03:11.119 --> 01:03:14.789
So we can write that into our... Yes. ...our codes, you

01:03:14.789 --> 01:03:17.920
know. Yeah. That's what we're here for.

01:03:19.039 --> 01:03:21.780
Yeah, thank you, Chair. I have a few questions. Yes. I'm

01:03:21.780 --> 01:03:23.119
assuming you're basically done with your

01:03:23.119 --> 01:03:26.750
slides. I have one more slide, but... Is it the any

01:03:26.750 --> 01:03:31.360
questions slide or... Not yet. I have a few more

01:03:31.360 --> 01:03:33.570
and then I'll still stand for, you know, any additional

01:03:33.570 --> 01:03:35.280
questions with that slide. So...

01:03:35.280 --> 01:03:39.199
Okay, well then I'll let you finish. Okay, sure. Okay, so

01:03:39.199 --> 01:03:44.159
also what we're looking at is incentivizing

01:03:44.159 --> 01:03:47.570
and encouraging preservation of designated trees. So for

01:03:47.570 --> 01:03:50.239
the trees that fall within that heritage

01:03:50.239 --> 01:03:54.519
tree category, we're looking at giving an incentive to

01:03:54.519 --> 01:03:57.920
protect that tree. And let me back up just one

01:03:57.920 --> 01:04:02.710
step to, you know, the first bullet. Under our current tree

01:04:02.710 --> 01:04:05.199
code, the trees that are saved or

01:04:05.199 --> 01:04:09.260
preserved on the site don't count towards the total canopy

01:04:09.260 --> 01:04:11.440
requirements for the site.

01:04:12.320 --> 01:04:16.559
What we're proposing is allowing the tree canopy to count

01:04:16.559 --> 01:04:19.119
for the total canopy of the site because

01:04:19.119 --> 01:04:22.510
that's really what our measuring is if we're being

01:04:22.510 --> 01:04:25.760
successful, especially when we look at

01:04:25.760 --> 01:04:30.239
establishing a tree canopy goal for the entire city. So,

01:04:30.239 --> 01:04:32.239
you know, currently it's only when they

01:04:32.880 --> 01:04:37.150
preserve beyond the minimum. So under our suggestions, what

01:04:37.150 --> 01:04:38.880
we're recommending is what

01:04:38.880 --> 01:04:42.489
they preserve counts toward their landscape canopy

01:04:42.489 --> 01:04:46.079
requirement. They still will be required to do the

01:04:46.079 --> 01:04:50.059
street trees, parking lot trees, but they also have the

01:04:50.059 --> 01:04:52.960
benefit of these trees counting towards that

01:04:53.840 --> 01:04:57.239
requirement. With that, we're looking at the trees that are

01:04:57.239 --> 01:05:00.159
on that heritage tree list,

01:05:00.800 --> 01:05:03.429
giving them more credit. And those are our larger trees

01:05:03.429 --> 01:05:05.679
because a lot of times, you know, we see

01:05:05.679 --> 01:05:09.420
sites and, you know, they meet the code requirement, but

01:05:09.420 --> 01:05:11.440
there are a lot of big trees. Well,

01:05:11.440 --> 01:05:15.010
under the current code, there is no incentive to preserve

01:05:15.010 --> 01:05:17.360
large trees. It's just preserve it if

01:05:17.360 --> 01:05:21.199
you can. If you can't, you mitigate for it. You pay into

01:05:21.199 --> 01:05:24.480
the tree fund. So what we're looking at

01:05:24.480 --> 01:05:27.889
is incentivizing that and, you know, also on the way to

01:05:27.889 --> 01:05:30.159
encourage, you know, preservation of those

01:05:30.159 --> 01:05:35.889
larger trees on new developments. The last point I have

01:05:35.889 --> 01:05:40.639
here is recommending that we review the tree

01:05:40.639 --> 01:05:44.690
mitigation payment on a two-year cycle. The tree mitigation

01:05:44.690 --> 01:05:49.440
payment, which is currently $125 per

01:05:49.440 --> 01:05:53.329
diameter inch, is supposed to be based on the market value

01:05:53.329 --> 01:05:55.519
of what it would cost to plant a

01:05:55.519 --> 01:05:59.039
two-inch caliper tree and maintain it for three years. Well

01:05:59.039 --> 01:06:01.920
, trees are a commodity. The prices of

01:06:01.920 --> 01:06:05.000
trees fluctuate just like any other commodity. Sometimes it

01:06:05.000 --> 01:06:06.880
goes up, sometimes it go down. So

01:06:08.639 --> 01:06:11.329
what we're recommending is actually reviewing that on a

01:06:11.329 --> 01:06:14.559
regular basis to ensure that our tree

01:06:14.559 --> 01:06:18.269
mitigation payment amount is, you know, aligned with what

01:06:18.269 --> 01:06:20.800
the actual costs are in the marketplace.

01:06:22.079 --> 01:06:26.469
And this is my final slide. I'll stand for any additional

01:06:26.469 --> 01:06:28.719
questions. Commissioner Taylor.

01:06:29.599 --> 01:06:34.449
Thank you, Chair. So I like the cleaning up of the code. I

01:06:34.449 --> 01:06:36.000
think the current version of the tree

01:06:36.000 --> 01:06:40.170
ordinance was modified from another very complex ordinance

01:06:40.170 --> 01:06:43.920
that first introduced all this kind of

01:06:43.920 --> 01:06:48.840
counting and then certain ones were 1.5 and 1.25 and then

01:06:48.840 --> 01:06:51.360
there were six or seven mitigation options

01:06:52.000 --> 01:06:54.949
and every single development always just ended up paying

01:06:54.949 --> 01:06:57.599
into the fund because it was easier than

01:06:57.599 --> 01:07:00.510
trying to figure out the other six options. So the simpl

01:07:00.510 --> 01:07:02.239
ification I think is really good.

01:07:04.639 --> 01:07:07.719
And like you said, we have these, you know, we already have

01:07:07.719 --> 01:07:09.599
these quality definitions and all of

01:07:09.599 --> 01:07:14.090
these other definitions and it equates to a 0.25 difference

01:07:14.090 --> 01:07:17.119
in mitigation. There's no real incentive

01:07:17.119 --> 01:07:20.150
to preserve. So I like the idea of having that incentive to

01:07:20.150 --> 01:07:23.119
preserve especially like over 12 or

01:07:23.119 --> 01:07:26.239
over 18 inch diameter quality species. I think that's a

01:07:26.239 --> 01:07:28.880
really good thing to include. You know,

01:07:28.880 --> 01:07:32.599
I'd rather they keep that 20 inch oak that might be not in

01:07:32.599 --> 01:07:34.960
the optimal position on that acreage

01:07:34.960 --> 01:07:38.800
than that stand of four and six inch oaks, you know, over

01:07:38.800 --> 01:07:41.199
in the corner. You can argue habitat

01:07:41.199 --> 01:07:44.650
quality but I think just for an aesthetic reason I think

01:07:44.650 --> 01:07:47.840
and the history of that 90 or 100 year old

01:07:47.840 --> 01:07:50.940
tree being preserved over those 15 or 20 year old trees

01:07:50.940 --> 01:07:57.280
being preserved. My concerns lie in the math

01:07:58.159 --> 01:08:03.360
in the details of math. Right now the DBH requirements, if

01:08:03.360 --> 01:08:06.000
you cut down an 18 inch oak,

01:08:06.000 --> 01:08:10.320
you can replace it with, you know, six three inch oaks or,

01:08:10.320 --> 01:08:12.079
you know, nine two inch oaks. So you're

01:08:12.079 --> 01:08:15.090
cutting down a 90 year old or 80 year old tree and you're

01:08:15.090 --> 01:08:17.039
replacing it with a bunch of seven or eight

01:08:17.039 --> 01:08:20.689
year old trees perhaps, maybe 10 year old trees. And that

01:08:20.689 --> 01:08:22.880
those are equivalent that always bothered

01:08:22.880 --> 01:08:26.399
me and the fact that it costs if you cut down, you know,

01:08:26.399 --> 01:08:29.439
three six inch trees that has the same value

01:08:29.439 --> 01:08:34.149
as cutting down an 18 inch tree that is 50 years older. I

01:08:34.149 --> 01:08:38.479
think that maybe a surface area instead

01:08:38.479 --> 01:08:43.750
of diameter or maybe the canopy function can can do that.

01:08:43.750 --> 01:08:46.560
So like I said, I want to value those

01:08:46.560 --> 01:08:51.319
larger diameter much older trees more than just by diameter

01:08:51.319 --> 01:08:54.399
, you know, that that 18 inches diameter

01:08:54.399 --> 01:08:58.989
equals 18 inches diameter. I want to understand that

01:08:58.989 --> 01:09:02.000
minimum you showed with the chart of how

01:09:02.000 --> 01:09:06.210
much you could remove. If you if the development can't meet

01:09:06.210 --> 01:09:09.039
that requirement, is there then

01:09:09.039 --> 01:09:13.159
mitigation after that point? Yes, yes. If they can't meet

01:09:13.159 --> 01:09:16.399
the minimum preservation requirement and

01:09:16.399 --> 01:09:18.640
let me find that slide so I can get back to it.

01:09:30.560 --> 01:09:32.829
And this is this is probably good enough just to see it.

01:09:32.829 --> 01:09:34.960
Okay. So in this case, for example,

01:09:35.680 --> 01:09:39.909
they're putting in apartments and they're planning on

01:09:39.909 --> 01:09:43.119
having, you know, most of the area covered in

01:09:43.119 --> 01:09:46.130
construction and parking lot and they're going to have to

01:09:46.130 --> 01:09:47.840
cut into that green area as well,

01:09:47.840 --> 01:09:51.680
then they would have to mitigate the additional area they

01:09:51.680 --> 01:09:54.880
remove. Right, right, up to 50% of

01:09:55.439 --> 01:09:58.930
of the minimum requirement. Okay, so they would have to

01:09:58.930 --> 01:10:01.039
keep 50%. This is the minimum and they

01:10:01.039 --> 01:10:03.420
would have to keep so the minimum minimum is half of the

01:10:03.420 --> 01:10:05.600
minimum. Right, okay. Right, because, you

01:10:05.600 --> 01:10:08.449
know, and some sites, I mean, you know, they get into where

01:10:08.449 --> 01:10:10.159
they they've done what they can and,

01:10:11.119 --> 01:10:13.609
you know, they just they can't meet it. So we have to, you

01:10:13.609 --> 01:10:16.159
know, have some some adjustment there,

01:10:16.159 --> 01:10:19.510
some leeway. So that's kind of the idea of of allowing them

01:10:19.510 --> 01:10:21.680
to kind of dip below the the state

01:10:21.680 --> 01:10:26.779
at minimum. And so then like that that minimum minimum part

01:10:26.779 --> 01:10:29.520
there, they'd have to mitigate

01:10:29.520 --> 01:10:33.750
those. Correct. And that could that mitigation could

01:10:33.750 --> 01:10:35.199
potentially be on-site mitigation or

01:10:35.199 --> 01:10:37.470
otherwise it's something like tree fund, tree trust,

01:10:37.470 --> 01:10:39.359
something like that. Yeah, payment into

01:10:39.359 --> 01:10:44.050
the tree fund or replanting on-site. Okay, and then are we

01:10:44.050 --> 01:10:47.840
going to keep our tree canopy cover

01:10:47.840 --> 01:10:52.770
requirements based on zoning? That's something that we we

01:10:52.770 --> 01:10:56.079
haven't specifically dove into. What

01:10:56.079 --> 01:10:59.229
I would kind of like to eventually get into is contact

01:10:59.229 --> 01:11:02.159
specific tree canopy requirements. So in

01:11:02.159 --> 01:11:06.020
a downtown area, your tree canopy requirement may not be as

01:11:06.020 --> 01:11:08.159
much or won't be as much as, say,

01:11:08.159 --> 01:11:11.619
a residential area simply based on the available planting

01:11:11.619 --> 01:11:14.239
space. And, you know, the amount of tree

01:11:14.239 --> 01:11:16.979
canopies, that's really what it boils down to is the

01:11:16.979 --> 01:11:19.439
available planting space you have in,

01:11:19.439 --> 01:11:22.039
you know, a downtown area or retail area or residential

01:11:22.039 --> 01:11:25.840
area. And I guess another thing to

01:11:25.840 --> 01:11:27.979
keep in mind, I'm sure you're probably aware of this, is

01:11:27.979 --> 01:11:29.439
when you're going out in cow pastures,

01:11:29.439 --> 01:11:32.300
and there really is there are some areas that that have no

01:11:32.300 --> 01:11:34.640
trees at all right now, no no canopy.

01:11:35.439 --> 01:11:38.359
And so would there be a landscape requirement that they

01:11:38.359 --> 01:11:40.479
would have to come in and provide some

01:11:40.479 --> 01:11:43.659
amount of, you know, correct forestation? Correct. And

01:11:43.659 --> 01:11:45.920
right now I think that is dictated basically

01:11:45.920 --> 01:11:50.159
by zoning like that they need a 45% canopy cover. Right.

01:11:50.159 --> 01:11:58.159
And so my final concern is in the canopy

01:11:58.159 --> 01:12:04.489
calculation. We've over the years seen a lot of discussion

01:12:04.489 --> 01:12:08.399
about parking lot trees and 20% canopy

01:12:08.399 --> 01:12:12.300
coverage and things like crepe myrtles qualify for a fair

01:12:12.300 --> 01:12:14.960
amount of canopy and arguments about,

01:12:14.960 --> 01:12:17.979
well, it says 20% canopy coverage, but even whenever

01:12:17.979 --> 01:12:20.479
everything's fully established in 20 years,

01:12:21.039 --> 01:12:22.979
you're only going to have about 5% of that parking lot

01:12:22.979 --> 01:12:27.279
covered in shade. So I would like to make sure,

01:12:27.279 --> 01:12:31.050
just so everybody understands what canopy calculations,

01:12:31.050 --> 01:12:32.960
what those canopy calculations

01:12:32.960 --> 01:12:36.750
will look like, and how it might not actually be shadow on

01:12:36.750 --> 01:12:41.119
the ground kind of canopy. Just so

01:12:41.119 --> 01:12:44.399
everybody's aware that 40% canopy coverage, that sounds

01:12:44.399 --> 01:12:46.399
like it's going to be a heavily wooded

01:12:46.399 --> 01:12:49.560
area. Well, depending on how the math works out, and

01:12:49.560 --> 01:12:52.159
depending on what the species lists and so

01:12:52.159 --> 01:12:55.380
forth are, you know, you could have parking lots that

01:12:55.380 --> 01:12:58.239
approach 40% canopy coverage that really only

01:12:58.239 --> 01:13:02.640
have about maybe 10 or 15% shade. Yeah, that's very, very

01:13:02.640 --> 01:13:04.560
possible because the canopy covers

01:13:04.560 --> 01:13:07.899
are all based on the maximum, you know, size of the tree.

01:13:07.899 --> 01:13:10.640
And if the tree doesn't reach as potential,

01:13:10.640 --> 01:13:16.550
you don't have as much canopy. Thank you. I've got a

01:13:16.550 --> 01:13:19.520
question too about, so this is what we're

01:13:19.520 --> 01:13:23.750
requiring developers to adhere to. Do we require ourselves

01:13:23.750 --> 01:13:26.159
to adhere to the same standards? So like

01:13:26.159 --> 01:13:29.949
when the city has a drainage project or a new substation

01:13:29.949 --> 01:13:32.479
and some trees are going to be cut down,

01:13:33.279 --> 01:13:35.649
do are we held to the same standard as far as mitigation

01:13:35.649 --> 01:13:38.560
and preservation is concerned? Depends

01:13:38.560 --> 01:13:41.970
on the type of project. If it is the construction of a

01:13:41.970 --> 01:13:45.119
building, they have the same requirements.

01:13:46.079 --> 01:13:50.850
If it's a part of infrastructure, utilities projects, then

01:13:50.850 --> 01:13:53.439
they are exempt from the requirement. And

01:13:54.239 --> 01:13:57.380
utilities, if it's a part of their master plan, DME has

01:13:57.380 --> 01:14:00.560
their master plan for upgrading their

01:14:00.560 --> 01:14:03.479
substations, their, you know, right of ways. They have

01:14:03.479 --> 01:14:05.840
certain federal guidelines that they have to

01:14:05.840 --> 01:14:09.909
adhere to as far as clearance from those facilities. So

01:14:09.909 --> 01:14:13.199
they are exempt from the tree code. If a

01:14:13.199 --> 01:14:16.500
developer is required to expand a street, even for

01:14:16.500 --> 01:14:19.920
residential commercial development, if there's,

01:14:19.920 --> 01:14:23.000
if engineers, an engineer tells them to expand the street,

01:14:23.000 --> 01:14:24.880
widen the street for that development,

01:14:24.880 --> 01:14:27.600
then any trees that lie in there, they're exempt from the

01:14:27.600 --> 01:14:29.760
tree code because we're telling them

01:14:29.760 --> 01:14:33.439
you have to require this for your project to move on. So if

01:14:33.439 --> 01:14:36.720
the city were to build a new library

01:14:37.359 --> 01:14:40.880
somewhere, any trees that would be cut down would still, we

01:14:40.880 --> 01:14:42.800
would still adhere to the same.

01:14:42.800 --> 01:14:45.920
Correct. I understand. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Are

01:14:45.920 --> 01:14:47.279
there any other questions?

01:14:48.000 --> 01:14:49.899
Real quickly, and I know we're running short of time. You

01:14:49.899 --> 01:14:52.479
don't have to elaborate on this,

01:14:52.479 --> 01:14:55.289
but maybe this isn't the place to do it. But part of the

01:14:55.289 --> 01:14:57.600
concern here, of course, is canopy and

01:14:57.600 --> 01:15:01.890
aesthetics. The other part of keeping trees clean is the

01:15:01.890 --> 01:15:04.880
air. It helps preserve the ecology of the

01:15:04.880 --> 01:15:08.720
place. So where we can't plant trees, say there is a lot of

01:15:08.720 --> 01:15:12.560
building, have been in consideration

01:15:12.560 --> 01:15:18.180
for rooftop vegetation to take up that slack to compensate

01:15:18.180 --> 01:15:21.600
for that loss. It's, it's an option

01:15:21.600 --> 01:15:25.619
for any any development to do a green roof, basically. But

01:15:25.619 --> 01:15:27.680
it's, it's not a requirement.

01:15:27.680 --> 01:15:30.630
Is that something though that we can look at and maybe see

01:15:30.630 --> 01:15:32.560
if we could put in the plan?

01:15:35.279 --> 01:15:39.170
I'm not sure if it'll fit in with this part of the plan. It

01:15:39.170 --> 01:15:41.520
may be, you know, larger, you know,

01:15:41.520 --> 01:15:46.920
development or DDC requirement or, you know, option. But it

01:15:46.920 --> 01:15:48.880
wouldn't necessarily

01:15:48.880 --> 01:15:52.779
fit in with the tree preservation aspect of it. Okay. So

01:15:52.779 --> 01:15:55.039
you wouldn't want to factor in the other

01:15:55.680 --> 01:16:00.199
value that trees have other than canopy? Well, those, those

01:16:00.199 --> 01:16:02.159
, those are all, the other values

01:16:02.159 --> 01:16:04.590
that trees have all relate back to the canopy. So that's

01:16:04.590 --> 01:16:07.359
why we're focusing on canopy. I would

01:16:07.359 --> 01:16:11.880
like to, to do an i-tree eco study, which will give us, you

01:16:11.880 --> 01:16:14.720
know, specifically the structural value

01:16:14.720 --> 01:16:17.829
of our trees. It'll give us the dollar amount that we're

01:16:17.829 --> 01:16:20.319
benefiting from storm water mitigation,

01:16:20.319 --> 01:16:23.920
CO2 uptake, nitrogen uptake, all the benefits that we know

01:16:23.920 --> 01:16:26.000
trees do. Well, there's actually ways to

01:16:26.000 --> 01:16:30.180
put dollar values on those, those benefits. And that's, you

01:16:30.180 --> 01:16:32.479
know, one of my goals is to get one

01:16:32.479 --> 01:16:36.260
of those studies done here and then so that when we say we

01:16:36.260 --> 01:16:39.199
value trees, we can actually show, you

01:16:39.199 --> 01:16:41.470
know, the value that they provide and the structural value

01:16:41.470 --> 01:16:45.920
of the trees. Yes. So, well, so before you

01:16:45.920 --> 01:16:48.829
ask that question, commissioner Rosal, we do have one more

01:16:48.829 --> 01:16:51.119
presentation. It's 6 15 and there's some

01:16:51.119 --> 01:16:54.520
food to get. I'm wondering, are you, are you okay holding

01:16:54.520 --> 01:16:56.800
onto this question and asking Haywood

01:16:57.359 --> 01:17:00.319
after the meeting or emailing him or is it pressing? Do you

01:17:00.319 --> 01:17:01.760
need to ask it now or?

01:17:01.760 --> 01:17:04.170
Definitely. I'm sorry to cut you off, but in the interest

01:17:04.170 --> 01:17:05.760
of staying on time, I'd like to

01:17:06.560 --> 01:17:09.090
move on. And I think we've given staff some really good

01:17:09.090 --> 01:17:11.359
suggestions and ideas and asked some good

01:17:11.359 --> 01:17:14.050
questions. This is coming back to us again. Absolutely. So

01:17:14.050 --> 01:17:16.159
we'll have another opportunity to

01:17:16.159 --> 01:17:20.670
speak on this. So, so thank you, commissioner Rosal for

01:17:20.670 --> 01:17:24.000
yielding the floor. So if we could take just a

01:17:24.000 --> 01:17:27.859
very quick recess and grab some food and then we'll return

01:17:27.859 --> 01:17:30.560
back to our next agenda item. So I'm going

01:17:30.560 --> 01:17:35.430
to pause our meeting. Yes. At 6 18 and we will reconvene in

01:17:35.430 --> 01:17:37.760
just a few minutes. Thank you.

01:17:43.680 --> 01:17:45.180
Willing, willing to sell the imminent domain process may

01:17:45.180 --> 01:17:49.279
take even longer. And so ultimately

01:17:49.279 --> 01:17:51.789
at the end, what we see in this commission is that the

01:17:51.789 --> 01:17:53.840
final product ends up being the SUP

01:17:54.720 --> 01:17:57.350
to get the substation approved. Well, from the time that

01:17:57.350 --> 01:17:59.840
the public hearing for PEB and council

01:17:59.840 --> 01:18:02.789
to buy the site, we have to engineer it, design it, bring

01:18:02.789 --> 01:18:04.399
it to us two or three months of staff

01:18:04.399 --> 01:18:08.439
review. It may be months or even years before that is that

01:18:08.439 --> 01:18:11.039
SUP gets before this commission and back

01:18:11.039 --> 01:18:14.500
to city council. And what staffs observe and y'all probably

01:18:14.500 --> 01:18:16.960
observe yourself on these substations is

01:18:16.960 --> 01:18:20.680
that we get, well, while staff's trying to solicit feedback

01:18:20.680 --> 01:18:23.199
about buffers and screening and setbacks,

01:18:23.199 --> 01:18:25.270
things like that to improve the site design and condition

01:18:25.270 --> 01:18:26.880
the SUP, we're hearing a lot of feedback

01:18:28.159 --> 01:18:30.560
frankly that about the signing of that substation that it

01:18:30.560 --> 01:18:32.640
shouldn't be there. And frankly, that's a

01:18:32.640 --> 01:18:35.079
little late in the conversation and it puts us a little bit

01:18:35.079 --> 01:18:36.720
awkward position to say, well, you know,

01:18:36.720 --> 01:18:39.569
council's already approved this. Can we really talk about

01:18:39.569 --> 01:18:41.600
screening and landscaping? And so what we

01:18:41.600 --> 01:18:44.479
like to do is really move that public input process that we

01:18:44.479 --> 01:18:46.239
have with the SUP and move it up to the

01:18:46.239 --> 01:18:49.810
very beginning so that those conversations can be had. The

01:18:49.810 --> 01:18:52.319
public is more aware of a final site

01:18:52.319 --> 01:18:54.869
of a decision before council even approves the purchase of

01:18:54.869 --> 01:18:56.319
it. And that's what that's going to

01:18:56.319 --> 01:18:59.100
require is a code amendment. Currently it's the SUP process

01:18:59.100 --> 01:19:00.399
. So what you will be seeing,

01:19:01.119 --> 01:19:03.590
and we're in the very, very early stages, so I don't know

01:19:03.590 --> 01:19:05.359
exactly when, but you will be seeing

01:19:05.359 --> 01:19:08.609
some type of code amendment coming forward discussing that

01:19:08.609 --> 01:19:10.239
type of process. And if in the

01:19:10.239 --> 01:19:13.409
end we can agree on some, the SUP process being earlier in

01:19:13.409 --> 01:19:15.520
the system, then there's some criteria

01:19:15.520 --> 01:19:19.010
that these facilities can follow that's vetted through the

01:19:19.010 --> 01:19:21.199
public that we all can agree upon.

01:19:21.199 --> 01:19:23.470
So I just want to give you a heads up that that was coming

01:19:23.470 --> 01:19:24.960
and if you have any questions,

01:19:24.960 --> 01:19:28.060
I'll be happy to take them. And if I can just piggyback on

01:19:28.060 --> 01:19:31.359
Mike's presentation just now,

01:19:31.359 --> 01:19:34.000
and the discussion that we're having, I want everybody to

01:19:34.000 --> 01:19:35.760
keep in their mind two things. One,

01:19:35.760 --> 01:19:38.840
if you recall, everybody's been talking about substations.

01:19:38.840 --> 01:19:40.479
We also have to broaden our mind a

01:19:40.479 --> 01:19:43.430
little bit and think about the CIP program that, for

01:19:43.430 --> 01:19:46.159
instance, DME has and what the future is for

01:19:46.159 --> 01:19:49.520
those developments, those types of other programs that they

01:19:49.520 --> 01:19:51.520
might have. Also the city council

01:19:52.399 --> 01:19:56.600
has taken a lead and is charging that we reevaluate certain

01:19:56.600 --> 01:19:58.880
processes as it relates to

01:19:58.880 --> 01:20:03.260
the infrastructure needs that DME has. That being said, the

01:20:03.260 --> 01:20:05.439
only reason we wanted to highlight this

01:20:05.439 --> 01:20:08.390
to you is we are making an effort with all our programs

01:20:08.390 --> 01:20:09.840
that we bring before you,

01:20:10.479 --> 01:20:12.619
is that we've started thinking about something. We're vet

01:20:12.619 --> 01:20:14.560
ting that with you. We're moving forward.

01:20:14.560 --> 01:20:17.670
Could the scope change? Potentially yes, but we want you to

01:20:17.670 --> 01:20:19.279
be involved from the onset.

01:20:19.920 --> 01:20:23.020
I appreciate Mike and his team, Ross and Beverly, taking

01:20:23.020 --> 01:20:24.319
the initiative on this,

01:20:24.319 --> 01:20:27.210
and we'll keep moving forward and providing you insight and

01:20:27.210 --> 01:20:28.960
data as to the progress. And

01:20:28.960 --> 01:20:31.000
eventually there will be a code amendment, but we need to

01:20:31.000 --> 01:20:32.239
look at the broader picture.

01:20:32.880 --> 01:20:35.119
So we just wanted to bring that to your attention.

01:20:39.439 --> 01:20:40.159
Anything else?

01:20:42.880 --> 01:20:47.500
Okay. Well with that, we are going to close our work

01:20:47.500 --> 01:20:52.319
session at 627. We will take a brief break

01:20:52.319 --> 01:20:57.520
and then we will reconvene in the council chambers around 6

01:20:57.520 --> 01:21:00.239
35 or so. So thank you.

01:21:07.840 --> 01:21:09.090
Good evening and welcome to tonight's Planning and Zoning

01:21:09.090 --> 01:21:12.000
Commission regular meeting.

01:21:12.000 --> 01:21:15.960
The time is 642. I'm sorry to those of you who are waiting

01:21:15.960 --> 01:21:18.159
for us. We did run a little bit long

01:21:18.159 --> 01:21:20.539
at our work session, so thank you for your patience. It is

01:21:20.539 --> 01:21:23.600
December 9th, 2015, and this

01:21:23.600 --> 01:21:27.289
meeting has been posted in accordance to the Texas Open

01:21:27.289 --> 01:21:30.319
Meetings Act. Our first order of business

01:21:30.319 --> 01:21:32.239
is the pledge to the U.S. and the Texas flags.

01:21:42.000 --> 01:21:47.069
For which it stands, one nation under God, one visible,

01:21:47.069 --> 01:21:49.199
with liberty and justice for all.

01:22:06.880 --> 01:22:11.380
Thank you. Our next item of business is the consent agenda.

01:22:11.380 --> 01:22:14.319
Do I have a motion from anyone?

01:22:18.399 --> 01:22:19.199
Commissioner Taylor.

01:22:20.000 --> 01:22:21.680
I move approval of the consent agenda.

01:22:23.760 --> 01:22:24.880
Commissioner Dudowitz.

01:22:24.880 --> 01:22:26.000
I second the motion.

01:22:26.000 --> 01:22:29.619
Is there any discussion? Okay, then please vote on the

01:22:29.619 --> 01:22:29.920
board.

01:22:37.520 --> 01:22:42.399
That motion passes, six to zero.

01:22:44.479 --> 01:22:48.770
Our next item is public hearing. A bit of housekeeping.

01:22:48.770 --> 01:22:51.920
Item 3A has been withdrawn

01:22:51.920 --> 01:22:55.000
by the applicant, so we will not be hearing that case this

01:22:55.000 --> 01:22:55.680
evening.

01:22:59.119 --> 01:22:59.119
Yeah, it's FR150024, final replant of the Vasquez addition,

01:22:59.119 --> 01:23:06.159
lots 1R and 2R, block four.

01:23:07.520 --> 01:23:10.079
We will not be hearing this item tonight, so if you're here

01:23:10.079 --> 01:23:12.640
for that, I guess you're excused.

01:23:13.920 --> 01:23:19.119
And then our next item would be 3B, S150012, hold a public

01:23:19.119 --> 01:23:21.840
hearing and consider making a

01:23:21.840 --> 01:23:24.789
recommendation to city council regarding a specific use

01:23:24.789 --> 01:23:26.640
permit for multifamily dwellings

01:23:26.640 --> 01:23:29.859
on two properties, zone neighborhood residential mixed use

01:23:29.859 --> 01:23:31.359
12, or NRMU 12.

01:23:31.359 --> 01:23:35.489
The subject properties are approximately .25 and .33 acres

01:23:35.489 --> 01:23:35.920
in size

01:23:35.920 --> 01:23:39.920
and are located at 609 and 612 Meadowview Court in Denton.

01:23:44.560 --> 01:23:48.079
This is S1512, the project name is Meadowview Lots.

01:23:50.399 --> 01:23:52.000
The request before you tonight is to consider a

01:23:52.000 --> 01:23:54.000
recommendation for a specific use permit or

01:23:54.000 --> 01:23:57.390
SUP to allow multifamily developments on properties in the

01:23:57.390 --> 01:23:58.720
NRMU 12 district.

01:23:59.279 --> 01:24:02.899
They're located at 609 and 612 Meadowview Court, shown here

01:24:02.899 --> 01:24:03.520
in yellow.

01:24:04.319 --> 01:24:06.920
The two properties in yellow at the end of Meadowview, at

01:24:06.920 --> 01:24:08.079
the cul-de-sac of Meadowview Court.

01:24:10.800 --> 01:24:13.119
As I said, they are within a neighborhood residential mixed

01:24:13.119 --> 01:24:13.840
use 12

01:24:13.840 --> 01:24:16.479
district which requires the SUP for multifamily.

01:24:17.760 --> 01:24:19.970
A little bit of background on the side, in 1970 it was

01:24:19.970 --> 01:24:21.279
approved as a planned development.

01:24:22.079 --> 01:24:25.359
Apartments were shown on this whole block for Meadowview.

01:24:26.479 --> 01:24:29.880
In 1972 it was platted into this current configuration with

01:24:29.880 --> 01:24:30.960
these lots.

01:24:32.560 --> 01:24:36.399
Then 1984 PD-8 was amended to allow fourplexes on the site

01:24:36.399 --> 01:24:37.520
on seven of the eight lots.

01:24:38.560 --> 01:24:41.359
One of these lots was a pool that was pre-existing.

01:24:42.960 --> 01:24:45.229
In 1985 you can see that five of those fourplexes were

01:24:45.229 --> 01:24:46.000
constructed

01:24:46.880 --> 01:24:52.229
here and the two had approval for fourplexes but were never

01:24:52.229 --> 01:24:53.279
constructed.

01:24:54.800 --> 01:24:57.930
And then in 2002 the citywide rezoning rezoned it to the NR

01:24:57.930 --> 01:24:59.279
MU 12 that it is today

01:24:59.279 --> 01:25:01.359
and then triggered the SUP requirement.

01:25:02.560 --> 01:25:05.920
These are some photos of the site.

01:25:07.199 --> 01:25:09.470
These two sites you can see that they're undeveloped with

01:25:09.470 --> 01:25:11.119
some tree lines in the back.

01:25:12.960 --> 01:25:15.840
These are some photos of the other fourplexes on the street

01:25:15.840 --> 01:25:15.840
.

01:25:16.560 --> 01:25:19.029
You can see they're roughly two stories, four units each,

01:25:19.029 --> 01:25:21.279
brick on the bottom with siding on top.

01:25:23.199 --> 01:25:25.890
What the applicant is proposing to do is construct this

01:25:25.890 --> 01:25:26.720
site plan

01:25:28.720 --> 01:25:31.800
with the building shown here, driveway access off Meadow

01:25:31.800 --> 01:25:33.920
view Court, and the building here with

01:25:33.920 --> 01:25:36.760
another access off Meadowview Court with all parking to the

01:25:36.760 --> 01:25:38.319
side or rear of the property.

01:25:40.800 --> 01:25:43.880
These are generally the proposed elevations for the four

01:25:43.880 --> 01:25:44.319
plexes.

01:25:44.319 --> 01:25:48.699
They'll be generally brick construction, composition angle

01:25:48.699 --> 01:25:50.079
roof, similar to what's out there

01:25:50.800 --> 01:25:52.739
and the scale and size and architecture of what's currently

01:25:52.739 --> 01:25:54.319
existing on Meadowview Court.

01:25:56.319 --> 01:25:58.640
Some considerations and staff's recommendation.

01:25:58.640 --> 01:26:00.920
The property has always been intended for multiple families

01:26:00.920 --> 01:26:01.760
since 1970.

01:26:02.319 --> 01:26:06.529
And fourplexes were approved on it originally in 1984 and

01:26:06.529 --> 01:26:07.680
were built in 1985.

01:26:08.640 --> 01:26:10.500
The proposal is consistent with the scale and density of

01:26:10.500 --> 01:26:12.000
the surrounding properties

01:26:12.000 --> 01:26:13.920
and it complies with other criteria for approval and then

01:26:13.920 --> 01:26:15.119
development codes.

01:26:15.119 --> 01:26:17.329
Vowel on that in your backup. I'd be happy to go through it

01:26:17.329 --> 01:26:17.840
if you wish.

01:26:19.439 --> 01:26:22.010
We did send notice of this public hearing to 22 owners

01:26:22.010 --> 01:26:23.279
within 200 feet

01:26:23.279 --> 01:26:25.680
and 65 physical addresses within 500 feet.

01:26:26.319 --> 01:26:31.060
We received two responses, one in opposition, shown here in

01:26:31.060 --> 01:26:33.359
red, and one neutral, shown here in yellow.

01:26:36.000 --> 01:26:38.069
Based on the considerations presented and the requirements

01:26:38.069 --> 01:26:39.279
of the development code,

01:26:39.279 --> 01:26:42.130
staff does recommend approval of this SCP subject to the

01:26:42.130 --> 01:26:43.520
following conditions.

01:26:43.520 --> 01:26:45.609
One, that the maximum density of each lot shall be four

01:26:45.609 --> 01:26:45.920
units.

01:26:46.960 --> 01:26:49.229
Each building shall be no greater than two stories in

01:26:49.229 --> 01:26:49.680
height.

01:26:49.680 --> 01:26:52.000
And three, that the proposed development shall

01:26:52.000 --> 01:26:54.319
substantially comply with the attached site plan.

01:26:54.319 --> 01:26:56.109
And with that I'll stand for any questions. I believe the

01:26:56.109 --> 01:26:57.680
applicant is here to answer questions as well.

01:27:00.319 --> 01:27:01.199
Commissioner Taylor.

01:27:02.079 --> 01:27:04.600
Thank you, Chair. I have a question regarding the site plan

01:27:04.600 --> 01:27:04.800
.

01:27:09.279 --> 01:27:12.260
So it's kind of hard to see up on the screen here, but

01:27:12.260 --> 01:27:15.279
there are four grade areas in the driveway there.

01:27:17.119 --> 01:27:17.760
What are those?

01:27:18.319 --> 01:27:21.569
Those are previous pavers because they are above their lot

01:27:21.569 --> 01:27:23.439
coverage without previous pavement.

01:27:23.439 --> 01:27:26.000
Because the lot is so small for the zoning requirement.

01:27:26.960 --> 01:27:29.199
They're not parking spaces, they're just previous pavers.

01:27:29.199 --> 01:27:32.640
Okay, and were each of these lots considered individually

01:27:32.640 --> 01:27:36.800
or were they both considered together for the lot coverage?

01:27:37.439 --> 01:27:40.369
They're individually for the lot coverage. For density, it

01:27:40.369 --> 01:27:43.039
's by subdivision, so it's not by individual lot.

01:27:43.039 --> 01:27:45.359
Okay, so in this case that's a slightly smaller parcel,

01:27:45.359 --> 01:27:47.119
needs more previous?

01:27:47.119 --> 01:27:48.000
Correct.

01:27:48.000 --> 01:27:49.520
Okay, thank you.

01:27:53.600 --> 01:27:56.880
Any other questions for staff at this moment?

01:27:59.840 --> 01:28:00.340
Okay.

01:28:01.119 --> 01:28:03.039
Is there anybody who can say anything about this?

01:28:03.039 --> 01:28:05.680
Yes, sir. That's my next step. You beat me to the punch.

01:28:05.680 --> 01:28:08.829
This is a public hearing and you're certainly welcome to,

01:28:08.829 --> 01:28:11.039
if you would like to speak to this item,

01:28:11.039 --> 01:28:12.720
to please approach the podium and

01:28:16.399 --> 01:28:17.189
state your name and address for the record please. And then

01:28:17.189 --> 01:28:18.720
when you're done,

01:28:18.720 --> 01:28:18.720
if you could just do us a favor and fill out a card and

01:28:18.720 --> 01:28:21.680
hand it to Athene.

01:28:21.680 --> 01:28:24.000
I'll fill that out outside, but okay.

01:28:24.000 --> 01:28:24.880
Okay, thank you.

01:28:24.880 --> 01:28:28.159
I'm Brent Duncan. I own property at 3106 Donner Road, which

01:28:28.159 --> 01:28:30.880
I've got basically 420 foot of property across.

01:28:31.920 --> 01:28:33.609
Quite a bit of this right here encroaches on my back

01:28:33.609 --> 01:28:35.199
property. I've been,

01:28:35.199 --> 01:28:38.640
I only bought the property in 2006. Since then, I've, you

01:28:38.640 --> 01:28:40.479
know, who owned the property?

01:28:40.479 --> 01:28:43.220
I've been maintaining the fence line, cutting boat arc

01:28:43.220 --> 01:28:45.359
trees and everything down since 2007,

01:28:45.359 --> 01:28:48.760
disposing of stuff. My problem is on that right there. We,

01:28:48.760 --> 01:28:49.680
you know, bought things,

01:28:49.680 --> 01:28:52.109
we got a nice property right there. I've got that one

01:28:52.109 --> 01:28:53.840
corner of my property, I've got a bunch of

01:28:53.840 --> 01:28:56.560
duplexes. I've got no problem with development. I'm a self-

01:28:56.560 --> 01:28:59.039
employed plumber, but the thing is on it

01:28:59.039 --> 01:29:01.819
right there, we've got, I get dirty diapers, everything

01:29:01.819 --> 01:29:04.399
thrown over the fence. I mean, it's,

01:29:04.399 --> 01:29:07.359
you know, it's, it's not been a good deal. We've had, it's

01:29:07.359 --> 01:29:09.039
kind of like a natural environment back

01:29:09.039 --> 01:29:12.750
there. Get along good, they're better than ever. My

01:29:12.750 --> 01:29:16.399
complaint, only thing about this is, we're putting,

01:29:16.399 --> 01:29:18.750
you know, two plexes up. I was looking at, I've owned two

01:29:18.750 --> 01:29:22.319
lots right there, got 2.5, 2, 3, 4 acres.

01:29:22.319 --> 01:29:25.279
I was looking at replatting it, putting a house back there.

01:29:25.279 --> 01:29:27.359
But, I mean, this right here changed

01:29:27.359 --> 01:29:29.569
my whole view of the face because I'm fixing it up with

01:29:29.569 --> 01:29:31.520
four plexes with upstairs viewing right back

01:29:31.520 --> 01:29:34.069
down on what's going to be in my backyard. You know, it's

01:29:34.069 --> 01:29:36.239
going to be one of my kids, my upper house.

01:29:36.239 --> 01:29:38.510
I was going to live back there. We put a shop, went to the

01:29:38.510 --> 01:29:40.399
city council, you know, planning and zoning,

01:29:40.399 --> 01:29:44.439
put up a shop, got back. I work on cars, some trucking. You

01:29:44.439 --> 01:29:46.560
know, it's not a bad thing. It's

01:29:46.560 --> 01:29:49.539
been like a residential neighborhood. We love everything.

01:29:49.539 --> 01:29:51.119
The only thing I've got is on that

01:29:51.119 --> 01:29:54.060
right there, you're putting two stories in that are backing

01:29:54.060 --> 01:29:55.760
up to property and the rest of them,

01:29:56.399 --> 01:29:58.479
none of the rest of the properties down, any of the

01:29:58.479 --> 01:30:01.119
property north of me are two, you know,

01:30:01.119 --> 01:30:03.630
four plexes that are two stories. You know, I can see it,

01:30:03.630 --> 01:30:06.479
you know, single story, two plexes going

01:30:06.479 --> 01:30:09.630
in, duplexes going in, you know, where I'm not just looking

01:30:09.630 --> 01:30:13.439
right down on me. I don't know, you

01:30:13.439 --> 01:30:16.189
know, it's going to go through. They marked the trees two

01:30:16.189 --> 01:30:18.159
months ago. They look, most of the trees

01:30:18.159 --> 01:30:20.079
they tagged were a bunch of boat arches, which are trash

01:30:20.079 --> 01:30:21.520
trees anywhere that are that big that I've

01:30:21.520 --> 01:30:25.710
been trimming since 2007. Yeah, but the only complaint I

01:30:25.710 --> 01:30:27.840
had was, I mean, it's going to go

01:30:27.840 --> 01:30:30.539
through. I know that. I know what the process and didn't

01:30:30.539 --> 01:30:32.560
does, how long it takes me to get permits

01:30:32.560 --> 01:30:35.010
and go through planning zoning. How long it took me to put

01:30:35.010 --> 01:30:36.479
up a accessory building and back my

01:30:36.479 --> 01:30:39.109
property took me three and a half months, three to three

01:30:39.109 --> 01:30:41.039
and a half months just to get approval and

01:30:41.039 --> 01:30:43.510
put it up. Went through the proper channels and did

01:30:43.510 --> 01:30:45.600
everything. Thing is I'm looking at, we had a

01:30:45.600 --> 01:30:47.939
nice residential neighborhood, we're fixing that four plex

01:30:47.939 --> 01:30:49.520
es looking down on it. And I think that

01:30:49.520 --> 01:30:52.470
would decrease the value of a property if what we want to

01:30:52.470 --> 01:30:54.800
do is build a house. I'm not going to want

01:30:54.800 --> 01:30:57.590
to have it with a bunch of four plexes looking right down

01:30:57.590 --> 01:30:59.359
on my property on a house that I'm

01:30:59.359 --> 01:31:02.220
looking at replatting and building a house on that's

01:31:02.220 --> 01:31:06.399
morning flight. But that's, you know,

01:31:06.399 --> 01:31:08.909
if they do decide to do it, put me a 10 foot proxy fence

01:31:08.909 --> 01:31:10.079
across there. I mean,

01:31:11.119 --> 01:31:13.069
you know, that way I'll keep my chicken hen coops and stuff

01:31:13.069 --> 01:31:14.720
away from there, not leaving their

01:31:14.720 --> 01:31:21.489
permit. Thank you. Thank you. If you could hand. Oh, pardon

01:31:21.489 --> 01:31:23.680
me, sir. I'm sorry. Looks like our

01:31:23.680 --> 01:31:25.710
commission, the commissioners have a couple of questions

01:31:25.710 --> 01:31:27.039
for you. Do you mind saying a question?

01:31:27.039 --> 01:31:31.029
So commissioner, that's that, please. Thank you. Sure. So

01:31:31.029 --> 01:31:33.359
my question simply is, so you touched on

01:31:33.359 --> 01:31:37.079
a few different things. Can you give me the, your top most

01:31:37.079 --> 01:31:39.520
important concern? Is it the, the, the

01:31:39.520 --> 01:31:42.729
vantage point or what's kind of most important to you? Well

01:31:42.729 --> 01:31:44.640
, the thing is I've got a couple,

01:31:44.640 --> 01:31:46.909
I've got a couple of grandkids, I brought in, they run back

01:31:46.909 --> 01:31:48.880
there and everything. We've had some

01:31:48.880 --> 01:31:52.590
duplexes stuff that are Jason, probably I'd say 40, I got

01:31:52.590 --> 01:31:55.039
like 420 foot across my back property.

01:31:55.600 --> 01:31:58.819
It's nice. I got probably 40 feet, I'd say roughly. I didn

01:31:58.819 --> 01:32:00.720
't measure that or anything, but I've got

01:32:01.520 --> 01:32:04.939
a proxy fence there, but I got some duplexes that have mean

01:32:04.939 --> 01:32:05.359
dogs,

01:32:05.359 --> 01:32:07.399
try to shoot holes through the fence and everything else. I

01:32:07.399 --> 01:32:09.039
mean, you can't pick your neighbors.

01:32:09.039 --> 01:32:11.850
You know, I try to be nice to everybody, but at the same

01:32:11.850 --> 01:32:15.359
time, if these end up being some duplexes

01:32:15.359 --> 01:32:20.000
that are not, you know, I don't know, you know, I don't

01:32:20.000 --> 01:32:23.279
know. You can't, you get good neighbors,

01:32:23.279 --> 01:32:25.680
you get bad neighbors. I try to get along good with

01:32:25.680 --> 01:32:27.760
everybody. The thing is on it though, I'm

01:32:27.760 --> 01:32:30.510
just looking at the point where I'm thinking, you know,

01:32:30.510 --> 01:32:32.479
when I bought this thing, I looked at the

01:32:32.479 --> 01:32:34.569
lot, we drove around that area right there. I didn't think

01:32:34.569 --> 01:32:36.640
they'd ever built there. I didn't come,

01:32:36.640 --> 01:32:38.989
this first top meeting like this I've ever been to in my

01:32:38.989 --> 01:32:41.760
life. I just did not think, and I'm thinking

01:32:41.760 --> 01:32:45.470
it could kind of decrease my values and my property later

01:32:45.470 --> 01:32:48.079
on. But I don't know. It's just, it might

01:32:48.079 --> 01:32:50.649
increase it. I have no idea. But I was just looking at that

01:32:50.649 --> 01:32:52.640
. If they did build this thing right there,

01:32:52.640 --> 01:32:55.529
why don't they put up a nice fence across there so, you

01:32:55.529 --> 01:32:57.840
know, it doesn't encroach on my property

01:32:57.840 --> 01:33:00.829
near as much as what, you know, because I got barbed wire

01:33:00.829 --> 01:33:02.880
fence across there and chicken wire.

01:33:02.880 --> 01:33:05.510
I got a nice dog that cruises the back area, kills all the

01:33:05.510 --> 01:33:06.960
possums, try to get my hands,

01:33:07.680 --> 01:33:09.760
everything else. But at the same time, I'm just trying to

01:33:09.760 --> 01:33:10.800
keep the place nice,

01:33:11.520 --> 01:33:13.729
you know, because I got grandkids ride little cars and

01:33:13.729 --> 01:33:15.600
stuff around there and I try to just

01:33:15.600 --> 01:33:18.800
keep it clean and try to protect the area. Okay, thank you.

01:33:18.800 --> 01:33:20.720
Any other questions?

01:33:20.720 --> 01:33:23.680
Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for coming

01:33:23.680 --> 01:33:24.239
down and speaking.

01:33:26.159 --> 01:33:28.939
The tree buffer, and I might have to get staff back up here

01:33:28.939 --> 01:33:31.119
to answer, are you aware that they're

01:33:31.119 --> 01:33:34.800
creating a buffer that's part of the, have you seen that?

01:33:34.800 --> 01:33:37.039
Are you aware? Well, those things,

01:33:37.039 --> 01:33:40.229
there's all kinds of, there's trees. The previous owners of

01:33:40.229 --> 01:33:41.920
my place had put a bunch of privet back

01:33:41.920 --> 01:33:44.890
there, which is a nasty invasive weed brought from China

01:33:44.890 --> 01:33:46.800
years ago, I don't like the name.

01:33:46.800 --> 01:33:48.960
It's kind of an invasive weed. They did that, I know why.

01:33:48.960 --> 01:33:50.479
They put a bunch of that across there

01:33:50.479 --> 01:33:53.840
to try to, you know, kind of buffer the area. If anything,

01:33:53.840 --> 01:33:55.760
I'm going to take that stuff out.

01:33:55.760 --> 01:33:58.640
I cleaned the fence line with hackberries and everything,

01:33:58.640 --> 01:33:59.920
you know, because hackberries grow up

01:33:59.920 --> 01:34:02.239
in the, in that basin barbwire fence all the way down

01:34:02.239 --> 01:34:04.640
through there, they'll ruin a fence. I keep

01:34:04.640 --> 01:34:07.880
my property, any tree that's within all my property line,

01:34:07.880 --> 01:34:09.600
which I think I've already seen

01:34:10.239 --> 01:34:12.670
on my plat and everything, it looks like my fence is

01:34:12.670 --> 01:34:14.720
basically just right inside that,

01:34:14.720 --> 01:34:17.350
it's barbwire. So I try to keep that cleaned up. The rest

01:34:17.350 --> 01:34:19.279
of trees on that property, I mean,

01:34:19.279 --> 01:34:21.909
I'm not going to make a complaint. I, you know, I have to m

01:34:21.909 --> 01:34:24.239
ow it all the time. So what I do is,

01:34:24.239 --> 01:34:26.640
I mean, all the tree branches hanging down, I cut them,

01:34:26.640 --> 01:34:28.159
take care of them. But the thing is,

01:34:28.159 --> 01:34:30.960
honestly, most of the trees that I did see about a month

01:34:30.960 --> 01:34:32.800
and a half ago, I guess, they came in and

01:34:32.800 --> 01:34:35.579
put the pink tags, there's one, those are Boad Ark trees.

01:34:35.579 --> 01:34:37.199
Once I come in there, take them out,

01:34:37.199 --> 01:34:40.029
put a good red up, live up, something that's going to, you

01:34:40.029 --> 01:34:42.159
know, be better. I'm at the trees,

01:34:42.159 --> 01:34:45.369
I'm not a tree hugger by any means, but I want at least

01:34:45.369 --> 01:34:47.600
nice trees. I mean, I could care less,

01:34:47.600 --> 01:34:50.739
that's on somebody else's property, you know. But the way I

01:34:50.739 --> 01:34:53.680
look at it though, is just, it'd be nice

01:34:53.680 --> 01:34:56.909
if they did decide to develop this thing right there,

01:34:56.909 --> 01:34:59.439
because it's going to probably go through.

01:34:59.439 --> 01:35:01.750
They've already spent a lot of money, invested their time

01:35:01.750 --> 01:35:03.119
in it. I don't hate to see anybody

01:35:03.119 --> 01:35:05.909
waste money, but if they're going to do that, at least put

01:35:05.909 --> 01:35:07.920
maybe a prophecy fence on that side.

01:35:08.640 --> 01:35:10.359
I don't have the money to go ahead and do it on my side,

01:35:10.359 --> 01:35:11.920
but I would help maintain it.

01:35:12.640 --> 01:35:15.149
But the thing is on it though, because I know how it is,

01:35:15.149 --> 01:35:17.359
having duplexes or apartments. Yeah,

01:35:17.359 --> 01:35:20.210
we bought this thing, there's a bunch of apartments back in

01:35:20.210 --> 01:35:22.479
there behind us. We had section 8 on one

01:35:22.479 --> 01:35:26.470
side, not really issues. I've just had, I talked to people,

01:35:26.470 --> 01:35:28.560
tried to talk to them point blank,

01:35:28.560 --> 01:35:31.100
just say, "Hey, we're throwing your trash over the fence

01:35:31.100 --> 01:35:33.520
and it seems to stop." You just gotta be nice.

01:35:33.520 --> 01:35:36.630
On the fence, what were you looking for? A privacy fence?

01:35:36.630 --> 01:35:39.439
What's that, sir? You were talking about a

01:35:39.439 --> 01:35:41.289
fence, if we could put a fence up. Well, if they did

01:35:41.289 --> 01:35:43.119
something like that, you know, like we bought

01:35:43.119 --> 01:35:46.119
that thing because it's basically country living in the

01:35:46.119 --> 01:35:48.640
city. Everybody in our whole neighborhood,

01:35:48.640 --> 01:35:52.319
we get along. I mean, everybody looks out for each other.

01:35:52.319 --> 01:35:54.319
We mind our own business, but everybody

01:35:54.319 --> 01:35:56.670
gets along, you know, in our neighborhood. The old Don, it

01:35:56.670 --> 01:35:58.479
's called the Don of the Old States.

01:35:58.479 --> 01:36:00.560
We're trying to improve our neighborhood and keep our

01:36:00.560 --> 01:36:03.520
houses up to standard. And, but the way I

01:36:03.520 --> 01:36:08.020
looked at it, just, you know, putting that back, it kind of

01:36:08.020 --> 01:36:10.399
ruined my aspect on replatting my,

01:36:10.399 --> 01:36:12.750
one of my plats and putting a house right there. I don't

01:36:12.750 --> 01:36:14.399
want to do it right back there because I

01:36:14.399 --> 01:36:16.539
thought it was just going to be tree property back there. I

01:36:16.539 --> 01:36:18.239
thought it was, I did not realize that we'd

01:36:18.239 --> 01:36:21.590
had truck, you know, fourplexes looking down on top of it.

01:36:21.590 --> 01:36:23.760
I've got no problem. I just don't like the

01:36:23.760 --> 01:36:27.399
fourplex idea. The duplexes, I got no problem with. But I

01:36:27.399 --> 01:36:29.520
mean, if y'all decide to do that,

01:36:29.520 --> 01:36:31.609
nothing I can say about it. I'm just kind of trying to

01:36:31.609 --> 01:36:34.319
voice my opinion on that. And my only

01:36:34.319 --> 01:36:36.399
thing is if they did do something like that and put four

01:36:36.399 --> 01:36:38.000
plexes up, it'd be nice to have a decent

01:36:38.000 --> 01:36:41.439
fence. So we're not seeing everything all the time. Okay.

01:36:41.439 --> 01:36:44.720
All right. Thank you. One, I would like to

01:36:44.720 --> 01:36:49.170
do a follow up probably with Mike on the barrier. Let's

01:36:49.170 --> 01:36:53.199
finish if we, yeah. Can we come back to that?

01:36:54.000 --> 01:36:56.800
Okay. Sure. On that thought. Yes. Commissioner Dottois, did

01:36:56.800 --> 01:36:58.640
you have a question? Mike, could you help,

01:36:58.640 --> 01:37:02.079
could you put up the site allocation, location aerial map

01:37:02.079 --> 01:37:03.199
and I could have some questions,

01:37:03.199 --> 01:37:09.430
some clarification. So I understand. Okay. Let's work. What

01:37:09.430 --> 01:37:11.199
do you want to lighten up?

01:37:11.199 --> 01:37:14.800
This is my two lots right here. Yes. I'm seeing a different

01:37:14.800 --> 01:37:17.039
photograph, which is a little bit larger.

01:37:17.039 --> 01:37:20.720
Let's try this one. Okay. There we go. And your property is

01:37:20.720 --> 01:37:23.600
? Is the arrow here? Yes. I'm not,

01:37:23.600 --> 01:37:25.380
I don't know anything about a computer. I'm going to let

01:37:25.380 --> 01:37:27.520
Mike help you there. Yes. So that's your

01:37:27.520 --> 01:37:30.960
property, both those sites there and that building with the

01:37:30.960 --> 01:37:33.520
gray. With the blue roof, that is mine.

01:37:33.520 --> 01:37:36.399
What is that? That is my storage building. I got a 48 Ford

01:37:36.399 --> 01:37:38.239
super deluxe eight coupe in there. I've

01:37:38.239 --> 01:37:40.789
got some cars I'm working on. I've had for years. I'm

01:37:40.789 --> 01:37:43.039
trying to get worked on. So it's kind of a

01:37:43.039 --> 01:37:46.369
storage workout. I mean, a garage and cars. I see a number

01:37:46.369 --> 01:37:48.560
of vehicles there. Okay. And then where's

01:37:48.560 --> 01:37:51.050
your residence at please? My residence is, well, I can't do

01:37:51.050 --> 01:37:52.800
it. It's right here. The one with the

01:37:52.800 --> 01:37:57.369
blue roof. Oh, okay. Okay. That's the one I'm looking at. I

01:37:57.369 --> 01:37:59.199
was trying to, we were looking at

01:37:59.199 --> 01:38:01.920
replating this lot right here. The one that's kind of

01:38:01.920 --> 01:38:04.159
triangular zone and putting a house here. And

01:38:04.159 --> 01:38:07.119
that's, that was our whole intention. I grew up in, didn't

01:38:07.119 --> 01:38:10.239
love the area, but. Mike, you have a

01:38:11.119 --> 01:38:14.479
site photo that I saw you through because I could.

01:38:17.119 --> 01:38:18.880
Maybe it's my backup. Excuse me.

01:38:21.920 --> 01:38:30.729
I'm going to put. Okay. So I'm looking at your storage

01:38:30.729 --> 01:38:32.239
right there. And those are, I can see

01:38:32.239 --> 01:38:34.619
there's some boat arc trees there and some other things

01:38:34.619 --> 01:38:36.399
that you go back. Yeah. These, these, these

01:38:36.399 --> 01:38:38.710
trees all along there. Most of the majority of our bas

01:38:38.710 --> 01:38:41.039
ements are boat arc. Yeah. You know, I'm at.

01:38:42.079 --> 01:38:45.279
And so there's somewhat of a buffer there now. And Mike,

01:38:45.279 --> 01:38:46.239
are we looking at a,

01:38:47.199 --> 01:38:50.569
an additional trees in that site? Well, yeah, that's

01:38:50.569 --> 01:38:52.399
actually a part of the discussion. Now

01:38:52.399 --> 01:38:55.199
there is a 16 foot utility, utility easement back in there.

01:38:55.199 --> 01:38:56.720
So there are some issues with buffering

01:38:56.720 --> 01:38:59.189
trees there. So fence may be the better option. I don't

01:38:59.189 --> 01:39:01.039
want to speak for the African blue. That's

01:39:01.039 --> 01:39:03.250
something we're still kind of in the works with discussing.

01:39:03.250 --> 01:39:05.279
Thank you. There is that utility

01:39:05.279 --> 01:39:07.829
easement that, you know, it's kind of weird. I have never

01:39:07.829 --> 01:39:09.359
seen that on any of my flat drawings

01:39:09.359 --> 01:39:11.760
or anything when I bought the property. I did not even

01:39:11.760 --> 01:39:13.840
realize it was 16 foot utility easement back

01:39:13.840 --> 01:39:16.590
there. There's a lot of things and didn't goes on. I mean,

01:39:16.590 --> 01:39:19.760
I deal with city, you know, utility

01:39:19.760 --> 01:39:22.329
departments and everything else. And a lot of times you'll

01:39:22.329 --> 01:39:24.000
find stuff that you don't find on these

01:39:24.000 --> 01:39:28.239
flat drawings. So that's, you know, I think anybody else,

01:39:28.239 --> 01:39:30.720
any questions that helps. Thank you very

01:39:30.720 --> 01:39:33.930
much. And commissioner back. Did you have a question for

01:39:33.930 --> 01:39:35.680
staff? No, that that's essentially

01:39:35.680 --> 01:39:38.760
what I was going to ask Mike too. I would ask, is the

01:39:38.760 --> 01:39:41.760
developer here tonight? Okay.

01:39:43.039 --> 01:39:44.239
Would you care to speak, sir?

01:39:53.119 --> 01:39:57.279
He mentioned the, um, the two stories looking down on him.

01:39:57.279 --> 01:40:00.960
I don't have the rear. I just have the side in the front.

01:40:10.960 --> 01:40:13.439
Basically what I was going to show is that they're actually

01:40:13.439 --> 01:40:14.399
, um,

01:40:15.119 --> 01:40:17.239
sir, if you could approach the microphone and state your

01:40:17.239 --> 01:40:18.319
name and address for the record.

01:40:18.319 --> 01:40:22.060
Kevin Dean, architect, um, for the project. Um, and

01:40:22.060 --> 01:40:23.600
basically I was just going to show that,

01:40:24.319 --> 01:40:27.569
if you look at the site plan, the angle portion here has a

01:40:27.569 --> 01:40:29.359
window in it and then the,

01:40:31.520 --> 01:40:33.939
and it's actually on this, this side. So it's facing

01:40:33.939 --> 01:40:35.439
somewhat away from him.

01:40:35.439 --> 01:40:38.390
And then this side has one facing north, but none of the

01:40:38.390 --> 01:40:40.399
windows are directly facing his property.

01:40:40.399 --> 01:40:44.239
So hopefully that helps alleviate some of his concern. If

01:40:44.239 --> 01:40:46.479
there's any other questions.

01:40:49.359 --> 01:40:51.479
Could you, could you say that again into the microphone for

01:40:51.479 --> 01:40:52.239
the, so we can hear that?

01:40:52.239 --> 01:40:54.239
Any other questions? No, I'm sorry. Oh, the whole thing?

01:40:54.239 --> 01:40:55.520
Yeah. Start over. Yeah.

01:40:55.520 --> 01:40:58.920
Basically there are two windows. One faces due north and

01:40:58.920 --> 01:41:02.479
one faces kind of southwest, um,

01:41:02.479 --> 01:41:04.859
somewhat toward his property, but none of the, none of the

01:41:04.859 --> 01:41:06.479
facade facing his property has windows

01:41:06.479 --> 01:41:11.569
directly looking at that property line. Basically. Thank

01:41:11.569 --> 01:41:15.039
you. Oh, sorry. Commissioner Beck,

01:41:15.039 --> 01:41:18.159
you had a question? Thank you, chair. The idea about the

01:41:18.159 --> 01:41:21.439
fence, uh, any consideration on your

01:41:21.439 --> 01:41:24.550
part about putting a fence up there or privacy fence? I

01:41:24.550 --> 01:41:26.399
would assume you mentioned, um, helping

01:41:26.399 --> 01:41:29.680
with the maintenance of it. I think that would help, um,

01:41:29.680 --> 01:41:32.399
talk to the landowner and, uh, okay.

01:41:32.399 --> 01:41:34.529
So y'all could probably get together and work something out

01:41:34.529 --> 01:41:35.680
. I would think that would be,

01:41:35.680 --> 01:41:38.149
that'd be great. A feasible option. That one little lot in

01:41:38.149 --> 01:41:39.439
between where the pool was,

01:41:40.479 --> 01:41:42.689
how are you going to assimilate that into this? And

01:41:42.689 --> 01:41:45.039
basically we're just going to, it's, it's

01:41:45.760 --> 01:41:49.069
fairly well treed basically. And our idea was just to leave

01:41:49.069 --> 01:41:50.560
it alone and keep that green

01:41:51.279 --> 01:41:53.319
as it is. It's got that old rickety. We don't own it, so we

01:41:53.319 --> 01:41:54.560
actually can't do anything to it.

01:41:55.199 --> 01:41:58.479
Okay. That's right. Okay. Thank you. No problem.

01:41:58.479 --> 01:42:01.039
Commissioner Taylor? Thank you, chair. So a

01:42:01.039 --> 01:42:05.640
follow up question on the fence, uh, as, uh, in order to,

01:42:05.640 --> 01:42:07.920
to mitigate, you know, potential nuisance

01:42:07.920 --> 01:42:10.289
to the neighbors there, I think we're, we're probably

01:42:10.289 --> 01:42:12.239
leaning toward putting a requirement in

01:42:12.239 --> 01:42:16.659
to the SUP to require a fence. Do you have, uh, would you

01:42:16.659 --> 01:42:18.319
prefer a requirement for something like

01:42:18.319 --> 01:42:20.890
a masonry fence or a wooden privacy fence of a certain

01:42:20.890 --> 01:42:22.640
height or is there something that makes

01:42:22.640 --> 01:42:25.170
it easier for you to? The client's always going to go back

01:42:25.170 --> 01:42:27.039
to cost. What's most cost effective?

01:42:28.159 --> 01:42:32.319
And whether or not does that need to run the full 420 feet

01:42:32.319 --> 01:42:34.960
or is it just the extents of the building

01:42:34.960 --> 01:42:39.880
footprint? Is there some way to reduce that? Yeah, I think

01:42:39.880 --> 01:42:42.960
it would probably have to run at least

01:42:42.960 --> 01:42:45.229
along the parking segment and the building segment. So it

01:42:45.229 --> 01:42:48.239
would be, and it would probably end up just

01:42:48.239 --> 01:42:54.029
being the entire west, uh, boundary there just for, uh, to

01:42:54.029 --> 01:42:57.600
prevent, uh, misunderstanding in the

01:42:57.600 --> 01:43:00.800
writing of the SUP. So is that, would that be objectionable

01:43:00.800 --> 01:43:02.720
? I would think he would consider

01:43:02.720 --> 01:43:07.100
that. Yeah. Okay. I didn't hear the answer. I would think

01:43:07.100 --> 01:43:10.000
that the client would, um, my client

01:43:10.000 --> 01:43:19.810
would consider that. Thank you, sir. This is a public

01:43:19.810 --> 01:43:22.479
hearing. If anyone would like to approach

01:43:22.479 --> 01:43:25.579
the dais and speak, or if you prefer not to speak, if you

01:43:25.579 --> 01:43:26.800
could fill out a card.

01:43:26.800 --> 01:43:31.920
Yes, I did. Could you, we would like to see that. Thank you

01:43:31.920 --> 01:43:31.920
.

01:43:38.000 --> 01:43:41.590
Good evening. My name is Paul King. I live at 3112 Donner

01:43:41.590 --> 01:43:44.640
Road, uh, next to Brent Duncan.

01:43:45.680 --> 01:43:48.640
My principal concern for coming here this evening is based

01:43:48.640 --> 01:43:51.600
on the increased population density that

01:43:51.600 --> 01:43:55.119
Fourplexes would bring to the behind my house as well as

01:43:55.119 --> 01:43:57.600
his. When it seems like right now,

01:43:57.600 --> 01:44:01.069
although I didn't do a survey before coming, that a lot of

01:44:01.069 --> 01:44:03.279
the properties are largely vacant.

01:44:05.840 --> 01:44:06.560
And right now,

01:44:09.520 --> 01:44:13.359
with Fourplexes leering over the fence, your own

01:44:13.359 --> 01:44:17.039
photographs showed how dilapidated the ones that

01:44:17.039 --> 01:44:21.239
are there are already, and they're being held to what a

01:44:21.239 --> 01:44:23.840
less standard is, I think, to the home that

01:44:23.840 --> 01:44:27.890
I live in. And that concerns me. They'll look all real

01:44:27.890 --> 01:44:30.880
pretty new and polished and freshly painted

01:44:31.920 --> 01:44:35.500
for ever so short of a period of time. And then they'll

01:44:35.500 --> 01:44:37.439
turn into the eyesores that the ones on

01:44:37.439 --> 01:44:41.920
the corner had become. And that concerns me. Uh, and those

01:44:41.920 --> 01:44:44.159
are my principal concerns.

01:44:46.720 --> 01:44:50.739
Okay. Any questions? I've lived there for 30 years. I'm the

01:44:50.739 --> 01:44:51.680
second owner in the home.

01:44:53.039 --> 01:44:57.109
And I've seen lots of things come and go in that area. And

01:44:57.109 --> 01:44:58.399
I just don't think this is the

01:44:58.399 --> 01:45:01.180
appropriate thing at this time. Is there a correct time for

01:45:01.180 --> 01:45:02.800
this to happen? I don't know.

01:45:03.840 --> 01:45:07.090
There may be a better plan to execute it possibly, but

01:45:07.090 --> 01:45:09.119
those are my concerns.

01:45:10.560 --> 01:45:12.829
Thank you. Okay. Looks like we've got a question for you

01:45:12.829 --> 01:45:14.000
too. Commissioner Huntsman.

01:45:14.000 --> 01:45:18.430
So just one quick question. Orient me. You are to the west

01:45:18.430 --> 01:45:22.079
north of his, of his, of his property.

01:45:22.079 --> 01:45:25.039
Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

01:45:29.039 --> 01:45:30.399
Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.

01:45:32.960 --> 01:45:36.079
This is a public hearing. So you were certainly, if there's

01:45:36.079 --> 01:45:37.119
anyone in the audience that would like

01:45:37.119 --> 01:45:42.510
to speak on this item, welcome to approach the dais, the

01:45:42.510 --> 01:45:46.560
podium rather. Anyone else?

01:45:49.680 --> 01:45:52.039
Okay. So this is my first time sitting in the seat. Do we

01:45:52.039 --> 01:45:53.600
close the public hearing now

01:45:53.600 --> 01:45:55.720
and then move on to discussion? Okay. At this time I will

01:45:55.720 --> 01:45:57.199
close the public hearing

01:45:57.199 --> 01:46:00.000
and we will open it up for discussion. Commissioner Taylor.

01:46:00.800 --> 01:46:06.100
Thank you, chair. I have a question for staff. I believe we

01:46:06.100 --> 01:46:08.239
have a property owner within the

01:46:08.239 --> 01:46:12.289
200 foot notification distance that is indicated opposition

01:46:12.289 --> 01:46:15.199
or potential opposition. So I'd like

01:46:15.199 --> 01:46:18.880
to just get perhaps from legal or from staff what that,

01:46:18.880 --> 01:46:21.680
what implication that might have on any vote

01:46:21.680 --> 01:46:26.329
for your city council. So there's only one property. I don

01:46:26.329 --> 01:46:27.600
't have the actual percentage.

01:46:27.600 --> 01:46:30.880
I'm going to rely on Mike. If it surpasses the 20%

01:46:30.880 --> 01:46:31.840
threshold.

01:46:31.840 --> 01:46:33.920
Well, it was just presented tonight. I don't have that

01:46:33.920 --> 01:46:36.079
calculation. That will be super majority

01:46:36.079 --> 01:46:38.989
per council if it is over 20%. But I will clarify, we will

01:46:38.989 --> 01:46:41.199
need that written, it needs to be written

01:46:41.199 --> 01:46:44.409
response. So we will need to get that from the off, from

01:46:44.409 --> 01:46:47.119
the, the neighbor. And then we'll calculate

01:46:47.119 --> 01:46:48.890
that prior to council to determine if the super majority is

01:46:48.890 --> 01:46:50.800
required. Would it be possible for you

01:46:50.800 --> 01:46:56.600
to bring up the display of the notification zones? So if we

01:46:56.600 --> 01:46:59.520
, if we look at this, just so,

01:46:59.520 --> 01:47:04.720
so everybody is aware, the city ordinances require a super

01:47:04.720 --> 01:47:07.039
majority for any approval

01:47:07.039 --> 01:47:11.220
whenever there is a 20% or greater of the property and

01:47:11.220 --> 01:47:13.119
surrounding the project

01:47:13.680 --> 01:47:17.859
opposes it. And so that's, that's why I'm asking these

01:47:17.859 --> 01:47:21.359
questions. It would appear to my untrained

01:47:21.359 --> 01:47:25.420
eye that the property directly to the west probably

01:47:25.420 --> 01:47:28.720
accounts for more than 20% of the

01:47:28.720 --> 01:47:33.109
surrounding properties around the project. And I definitely

01:47:33.109 --> 01:47:36.239
understand the, the neighboring

01:47:36.239 --> 01:47:40.210
property owners concerns about pollution, you know, nu

01:47:40.210 --> 01:47:43.359
isance, you know, higher density and that can,

01:47:43.359 --> 01:47:45.630
that can bring a lot of different nuisances. So when you

01:47:45.630 --> 01:47:47.920
share a back fence with, you know,

01:47:47.920 --> 01:47:52.159
a much higher density property type. On the other hand,

01:47:52.159 --> 01:47:55.520
this area was zoned for apartments in

01:47:55.520 --> 01:48:00.779
1975 or so, had, has had fourplexes on it since 1985, 30,

01:48:00.779 --> 01:48:04.319
30 plus years. And so it's really hard

01:48:04.319 --> 01:48:08.939
to say that fourplexes are not a, you know, congruent use

01:48:08.939 --> 01:48:11.359
because it's in between two other

01:48:11.359 --> 01:48:16.720
fourplexes. But I do think that whatever reasonable steps

01:48:16.720 --> 01:48:19.439
we can take to mitigate any potential

01:48:19.439 --> 01:48:23.899
nuisance to the neighbors to the west is very important. So

01:48:23.899 --> 01:48:26.319
if, if the architect can speak

01:48:26.319 --> 01:48:30.380
on behalf of the developer and accept a modification of the

01:48:30.380 --> 01:48:33.199
SUP, or if we need to postpone for two weeks

01:48:33.199 --> 01:48:36.619
and or until our next meeting until the owner can, can

01:48:36.619 --> 01:48:40.319
speak on it. I think it is important for us

01:48:40.319 --> 01:48:43.399
to at least have a requirement for a fence on that west

01:48:43.399 --> 01:48:45.439
wall of a certain height and a certain

01:48:45.439 --> 01:48:48.960
construction. And again, whatever, whatever that would be

01:48:48.960 --> 01:48:52.239
that's most appropriate and protects

01:48:52.239 --> 01:48:54.869
the neighbors to the west while meeting the needs of the

01:48:54.869 --> 01:48:59.039
developer. Sure. I think my recommendation

01:48:59.039 --> 01:49:02.750
to staff would be that if you feel that offense is

01:49:02.750 --> 01:49:06.079
necessary, the architect has said that he may be

01:49:06.079 --> 01:49:08.640
comfortable with that. We do have time between now and

01:49:08.640 --> 01:49:10.399
council to meet with the actual owner.

01:49:10.399 --> 01:49:13.260
And we can represent this to council and let them know that

01:49:13.260 --> 01:49:14.880
this was a decision at P&Z.

01:49:15.600 --> 01:49:18.109
We did meet with the owner and then he objects to that

01:49:18.109 --> 01:49:20.079
condition at a later point. That way

01:49:20.079 --> 01:49:22.640
council can make that decision. The reason I, the reason I

01:49:22.640 --> 01:49:24.239
say that is because we do have a holiday

01:49:24.239 --> 01:49:27.239
coming up and that postpones the timeline of this project

01:49:27.239 --> 01:49:29.760
if we, if we table it. But certainly we

01:49:29.760 --> 01:49:37.600
could probably do that. Commissioner Hudspeth. I have a, a

01:49:37.600 --> 01:49:41.359
thought to the opposite of offense.

01:49:41.359 --> 01:49:45.039
I'm okay with a buffer. Here's my concern. Understanding

01:49:45.039 --> 01:49:48.960
the neighborhood, is it a privacy

01:49:48.960 --> 01:49:56.060
fence or is it somewhere to hide? You know, so I think for

01:49:56.060 --> 01:50:00.319
security reasons, I'm all for extra

01:50:00.319 --> 01:50:05.699
trees, extra density, something, a productive tree. But I,

01:50:05.699 --> 01:50:08.720
I, I would ask even the neighbor to the

01:50:08.720 --> 01:50:12.279
west to kind of contemplate that if I'm in those apartments

01:50:12.279 --> 01:50:15.439
and there's nowhere to hide, but for

01:50:15.439 --> 01:50:20.510
this fence, I'm going to go hide behind the fence. And so I

01:50:20.510 --> 01:50:23.439
think to have some level of visibility

01:50:23.439 --> 01:50:26.539
where he could then from the west shine a light so that he

01:50:26.539 --> 01:50:28.960
's protecting his, I mean, because if I'm

01:50:28.960 --> 01:50:31.539
in an apartment, I've never seen a chicken before. So now I

01:50:31.539 --> 01:50:33.119
see a chicken, I can go grab it. I can

01:50:33.119 --> 01:50:36.060
hide behind the fence. I mean, it just, all kinds of bad

01:50:36.060 --> 01:50:38.800
things can happen. In my, you know, and so I

01:50:38.800 --> 01:50:43.229
really, I'm for the buffer, but I think maybe a tree or

01:50:43.229 --> 01:50:46.960
something is more fitting for this scenario.

01:50:58.000 --> 01:51:03.199
Commissioner Taylor. So seeing no more discussion, I'm, I'm

01:51:03.199 --> 01:51:04.479
ready to make a

01:51:05.279 --> 01:51:10.350
pretty flexible motion here. So I moved that the planning

01:51:10.350 --> 01:51:12.800
zoning commission recommend approval to

01:51:12.800 --> 01:51:18.409
city council with the added condition that a fence or

01:51:18.409 --> 01:51:24.720
appropriate vegetative barrier be added along

01:51:24.720 --> 01:51:29.850
the western side of the site in order to mitigate any

01:51:29.850 --> 01:51:34.399
potential nuisance to the homeowners to the

01:51:34.399 --> 01:51:38.369
west. And I understand that there's a utility easement that

01:51:38.369 --> 01:51:40.399
's going to affect what can and

01:51:40.399 --> 01:51:43.500
can't be planted there or built there. And that there are

01:51:43.500 --> 01:51:46.239
potentially concerns from the developer

01:51:47.680 --> 01:51:50.869
and that in this case, the, the neighbors have a fair

01:51:50.869 --> 01:51:54.560
amount of power if they voice,

01:51:55.760 --> 01:51:58.289
formally voice opposition to the project, because it will

01:51:58.289 --> 01:52:00.560
require a super majority vote.

01:52:00.560 --> 01:52:04.399
So hopefully we can, all sides can come together and find

01:52:04.399 --> 01:52:06.640
an amenable solution.

01:52:14.960 --> 01:52:16.380
Part, sir. I'm so sorry. The public hearing has been closed

01:52:16.380 --> 01:52:20.560
at this point. Thank you.

01:52:24.560 --> 01:52:27.079
Um, sorry, my request to speak button does not work for

01:52:27.079 --> 01:52:29.439
some reason. I guess that's

01:52:29.439 --> 01:52:32.960
it. That's right. It's conspiracy here. I know it's been a

01:52:32.960 --> 01:52:34.479
while since I've been up here, but

01:52:34.479 --> 01:52:36.800
I just wanted to add, clarify the motion you made

01:52:36.800 --> 01:52:38.239
commissioner Taylor before.

01:52:39.760 --> 01:52:42.029
Does that also include staff's recommendation? You made a

01:52:42.029 --> 01:52:43.439
motion to recommend approval with

01:52:43.439 --> 01:52:46.520
that added condition. Yeah, with the added condition on top

01:52:46.520 --> 01:52:47.439
of staff's recommendation.

01:52:47.439 --> 01:52:48.880
Okay. Thank you.

01:52:51.279 --> 01:52:54.159
Commissioner Taylor, were you done with your, okay. So

01:52:54.159 --> 01:52:55.520
commissioner Beck.

01:52:56.399 --> 01:53:00.289
I second commissioner Taylor's very detailed and lengthy

01:53:00.289 --> 01:53:00.720
motion.

01:53:02.960 --> 01:53:04.880
Is there any discussion? Yes. Commissioner Roselle.

01:53:05.840 --> 01:53:08.000
I have a question, maybe legal or staff can talk to this.

01:53:08.000 --> 01:53:10.479
Although I appreciate the,

01:53:10.479 --> 01:53:13.279
the motion, it seems really ambiguous to hold anyone to

01:53:13.279 --> 01:53:17.039
that standard and what mutually gets

01:53:17.039 --> 01:53:19.439
a relieving it to the client, the homeowner, what mutually

01:53:19.439 --> 01:53:20.640
is agreeable, because that

01:53:21.439 --> 01:53:25.659
might not be the, the best method. So I'm wondering if this

01:53:25.659 --> 01:53:28.239
is the most helpful thing to leave

01:53:29.039 --> 01:53:34.359
that barrier ambiguous for individuals to decide outside

01:53:34.359 --> 01:53:36.640
council or even outside this commission.

01:53:37.439 --> 01:53:40.010
I don't have an answer. I just, I'm concerned about the

01:53:40.010 --> 01:53:40.720
ambiguity.

01:53:45.920 --> 01:53:50.109
I, I didn't see in his, in his motion any ambiguity. What I

01:53:50.109 --> 01:53:52.000
, what he mentioned was the

01:53:52.000 --> 01:53:54.380
actual, the privacy fence that he once extended on the west

01:53:54.380 --> 01:53:56.239
side or he's recommending for approval.

01:53:57.840 --> 01:54:00.170
We have standards on how that privacy fence actually gets

01:54:00.170 --> 01:54:02.079
constructed. So,

01:54:03.600 --> 01:54:06.550
I know there was discussion early on about the both, you

01:54:06.550 --> 01:54:07.359
know, the,

01:54:07.920 --> 01:54:10.880
the homeowner who was up here along with the client that

01:54:10.880 --> 01:54:12.479
the architect is representing to have

01:54:12.479 --> 01:54:15.060
some private discussions on how maybe they can come up with

01:54:15.060 --> 01:54:16.079
some type of feasible,

01:54:16.079 --> 01:54:19.069
feasible solution to address those privacy concerns. That's

01:54:19.069 --> 01:54:20.399
for them to discuss privacy,

01:54:21.119 --> 01:54:23.899
privately outside this forum and they can do that. We're

01:54:23.899 --> 01:54:26.399
not bound to them, but if they come up with

01:54:26.399 --> 01:54:29.970
something, I'm, you as a board, as a commission or the city

01:54:29.970 --> 01:54:32.239
council would gladly like to hear that.

01:54:33.439 --> 01:54:38.060
But I, I guess I'm not, don't see the ambiguity that you

01:54:38.060 --> 01:54:40.479
might be referencing unless something else.

01:54:40.479 --> 01:54:43.279
I thought there was, there was an either or. Okay.

01:54:43.279 --> 01:54:44.319
Commissioner Taylor?

01:54:44.319 --> 01:54:47.239
Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I, I, in my motion I did say either

01:54:47.239 --> 01:54:50.560
a vegetative barrier or a fence and I,

01:54:50.560 --> 01:54:52.880
I wanted to do that. Normally we would specify, you know, m

01:54:52.880 --> 01:54:54.640
asonry fence eight feet tall or wooden

01:54:54.640 --> 01:54:58.220
fence seven feet tall or something like that. But in this

01:54:58.220 --> 01:55:00.239
case, if there are concerns, if,

01:55:00.239 --> 01:55:03.399
if a vegetative barrier solves a problem, so they basically

01:55:03.399 --> 01:55:05.600
have two choices, a fence or a vegetative

01:55:05.600 --> 01:55:08.930
barrier. And I was doing that. Normally we would vote on a

01:55:08.930 --> 01:55:11.199
specific recommendation, but since this

01:55:11.199 --> 01:55:14.489
is going to go to city council, I don't want to recommend

01:55:14.489 --> 01:55:16.880
narrowly a fence if they come to resolution

01:55:16.880 --> 01:55:20.180
on a vegetative barrier. Then maybe what you could do as

01:55:20.180 --> 01:55:23.199
part of that motion or as part of the

01:55:23.199 --> 01:55:25.640
discussion for staff to convey to council is that while you

01:55:25.640 --> 01:55:27.439
may recommend, let's say the privacy

01:55:27.439 --> 01:55:32.859
fence, you and the commission as a whole are not, you know,

01:55:32.859 --> 01:55:36.000
would also approve of this other type

01:55:36.000 --> 01:55:39.810
of a vegetative buffer if that, you know, if the applicant

01:55:39.810 --> 01:55:42.079
and the home and the neighbor come to

01:55:42.079 --> 01:55:45.420
that agreement. I, I, I see the, you know, the either or.

01:55:45.420 --> 01:55:47.680
You would have to recommend one and then,

01:55:47.680 --> 01:55:50.050
but there's nothing to prevent you from saying, but we also

01:55:50.050 --> 01:55:52.159
find acceptable the other.

01:55:52.159 --> 01:55:58.680
Can I clarify my motion or do I need to withdraw and rest

01:55:58.680 --> 01:56:02.699
ate the motion? And I wish to apologize for Commissioner Ros

01:56:02.699 --> 01:56:03.319
sell on that.

01:56:03.319 --> 01:56:11.779
Okay, so let's start over. Go ahead. Legal if you could

01:56:11.779 --> 01:56:18.460
walk me through what do I need to do? If I was a

01:56:18.460 --> 01:56:21.140
Commissioner making a motion I would suggest something

01:56:21.140 --> 01:56:21.640
along the lines of,

01:56:21.640 --> 01:56:26.869
I recommend a motion to recommend to City Council to

01:56:26.869 --> 01:56:31.960
approve this item with the following conditions.

01:56:31.960 --> 01:56:38.789
So I withdraw my original motion and I move that we

01:56:38.789 --> 01:56:46.760
recommend approval of this project to City Council with

01:56:46.760 --> 01:56:49.640
staff's conditions and with the additional condition

01:56:49.640 --> 01:56:53.029
that a privacy fence be constructed along the western

01:56:53.029 --> 01:56:58.140
boundary of the development site and with the stipulation

01:56:58.140 --> 01:57:02.039
that the commission would be amenable to a vegetative

01:57:02.039 --> 01:57:05.640
barrier in lieu of a fence.

01:57:05.640 --> 01:57:13.289
Commissioner Beck? I second that motion. Okay. We're all on

01:57:13.289 --> 01:57:17.319
board here with this. Okay. Is there any discussion about

01:57:17.319 --> 01:57:18.640
this before we vote?

01:57:18.640 --> 01:57:39.640
Okay. I guess then we're going to vote on the board.

01:57:39.640 --> 01:57:52.109
That motion passes 6-0. Thank you for your input tonight.

01:57:52.109 --> 01:57:55.510
Our next item is Public Hearing 3C. Hold a public hearing

01:57:55.510 --> 01:57:58.750
and consider a recommendation to City Council regarding a

01:57:58.750 --> 01:58:01.640
specific use permit to allow a basic utility,

01:58:01.640 --> 01:58:05.819
a Denton Municipal Electric substation on approximately 6.2

01:58:05.819 --> 01:58:09.640
acres within a downtown commercial general DCG district.

01:58:09.640 --> 01:58:11.329
The subject property is generally located at the southwest

01:58:11.329 --> 01:58:15.140
corner of South Locust and West Collins in the city of Dent

01:58:15.140 --> 01:58:15.640
on.

01:58:15.640 --> 01:58:19.109
Thank you, Chair. Members of the commission, this is S1511

01:58:19.109 --> 01:58:22.460
for DME Locust substation. As the Chair just stated, this

01:58:22.460 --> 01:58:26.039
is a request for an SUP to allow a DME substation on 6.2

01:58:26.039 --> 01:58:26.640
acres.

01:58:26.640 --> 01:58:29.619
The site is located at the southwest corner of West Collins

01:58:29.619 --> 01:58:32.739
Street and South Locust Street, shown here in yellow. To

01:58:32.739 --> 01:58:35.800
the west, you have some commercial and industrial uses. To

01:58:35.800 --> 01:58:38.640
the north, there are some single family units.

01:58:38.640 --> 01:58:42.420
To the east is the railroad, and to the south is the

01:58:42.420 --> 01:58:45.640
existing substation on Locust Street.

01:58:45.640 --> 01:58:49.430
These are photos of the site as they exist today. To the

01:58:49.430 --> 01:58:53.630
left, there's a fence separating, runs roughly right here

01:58:53.630 --> 01:58:57.369
on the aerial. There's also what was an old auto repair

01:58:57.369 --> 01:59:00.640
shop that has been demolished on the side.

01:59:00.640 --> 01:59:04.210
To the north was the neighborhood I talked about. These are

01:59:04.210 --> 01:59:07.430
the typical homes that are on those plots, as well as on

01:59:07.430 --> 01:59:11.390
the corner of Locust and Collins. There is this site with

01:59:11.390 --> 01:59:14.640
the large fence facing Collins Street.

01:59:14.640 --> 01:59:18.539
The site is zoned Downtown Commercial General, as is the

01:59:18.539 --> 01:59:22.739
surrounding area, which generally permits a downtown type

01:59:22.739 --> 01:59:27.640
character, multi-family commercial, very high-intense uses.

01:59:27.640 --> 01:59:30.449
This is the proposed site plan of the substation. It will

01:59:30.449 --> 01:59:33.109
have two access points on Collins Street and two access

01:59:33.109 --> 01:59:38.039
points on Locust Street. As I said in the work session, the

01:59:38.039 --> 01:59:43.439
need for these drives are for large trucks that bring the

01:59:43.439 --> 01:59:46.640
transformers onto the site.

01:59:46.640 --> 01:59:48.909
They're very large trucks. They only come once for

01:59:48.909 --> 01:59:51.279
construction, and then if they have an outage, they may

01:59:51.279 --> 01:59:53.569
need to get the truck back in there, but it wouldn't be

01:59:53.569 --> 01:59:55.640
typical that that truck would be on site.

01:59:55.640 --> 01:59:59.239
And then as well, they will provide a 10-foot screening

01:59:59.239 --> 02:00:02.630
wall around the perimeter of the site and some additional

02:00:02.630 --> 02:00:04.640
landscaping along Collins.

02:00:04.640 --> 02:00:07.720
This is an example of the type of wall that they've built

02:00:07.720 --> 02:00:10.640
from other substations that would be used here.

02:00:10.640 --> 02:00:13.239
This is a section of the street on Collins. You can see

02:00:13.239 --> 02:00:18.390
they have a 10-foot wall, a 3-foot planning area, a 8-foot

02:00:18.390 --> 02:00:24.640
sidewalk, and a tree, and then the back of the curb.

02:00:24.640 --> 02:00:26.909
Considerations and staff recommendations is that subst

02:00:26.909 --> 02:00:29.210
ations are essential to our infrastructure, and when it's

02:00:29.210 --> 02:00:31.449
necessary to look at them in urban areas, we should

02:00:31.449 --> 02:00:33.920
consider site criteria that provide the least impact on

02:00:33.920 --> 02:00:35.640
surrounding properties.

02:00:35.640 --> 02:00:38.970
To do that, they provide a 10-foot masonry wall, as well as

02:00:38.970 --> 02:00:40.640
the enhanced landscaping.

02:00:40.640 --> 02:00:45.140
Staff did send notice to 25 property owners within 200 feet

02:00:45.140 --> 02:00:49.800
, and 79 notices to physical addresses within 500 feet. We

02:00:49.800 --> 02:00:53.600
received three responses in favor from these areas in green

02:00:53.600 --> 02:00:57.789
, this property and these two properties, and one that we

02:00:57.789 --> 02:01:02.640
received today from a property on Collins in opposition.

02:01:02.640 --> 02:01:05.550
Based on the considerations presented and what's in your

02:01:05.550 --> 02:01:07.979
backup and the criteria for approval in the DENT

02:01:07.979 --> 02:01:11.140
development code, staff does recommend approval of this SUP

02:01:11.140 --> 02:01:13.810
subject to the conditions that, one, substation shall be

02:01:13.810 --> 02:01:17.100
screened by a minimum 10-foot masonry screen wall, and two,

02:01:17.100 --> 02:01:19.260
that the substation shall comply with the attached site

02:01:19.260 --> 02:01:19.640
plan.

02:01:19.640 --> 02:01:22.640
And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

02:01:22.640 --> 02:01:24.640
Commissioner Rossell.

02:01:24.640 --> 02:01:27.640
Thank you, Chair. I have two questions.

02:01:27.640 --> 02:01:31.560
First, the current substation located to the south, what's

02:01:31.560 --> 02:01:33.640
the future of that property?

02:01:33.640 --> 02:01:35.640
I don't think that's been determined at this point.

02:01:35.640 --> 02:01:36.640
Okay.

02:01:36.640 --> 02:01:39.909
The second question is, if I understand the topography of

02:01:39.909 --> 02:01:43.369
Denton, that's actually on a hill, an elevated area, but in

02:01:43.369 --> 02:01:46.640
the backup it mentions that the towers might be up to 95

02:01:46.640 --> 02:01:47.640
feet tall.

02:01:47.640 --> 02:01:50.739
Is there already designs that they would be 95 feet above

02:01:50.739 --> 02:01:54.000
property, or is that 90? I mean, I'm just wondering if it

02:01:54.000 --> 02:01:56.329
will reach the capacity or if it will take into

02:01:56.329 --> 02:01:59.380
consideration current topography in terms of how high those

02:01:59.380 --> 02:02:00.640
towers would be.

02:02:00.640 --> 02:02:02.229
I think generally it would be 95 feet from wherever they're

02:02:02.229 --> 02:02:05.020
installed. If that's in a higher location, it would be

02:02:05.020 --> 02:02:06.640
higher than 95 feet.

02:02:06.640 --> 02:02:08.640
Okay. Thank you.

02:02:08.640 --> 02:02:09.640
Commissioner Beck.

02:02:09.640 --> 02:02:11.640
Thank you, Chair.

02:02:11.640 --> 02:02:15.609
When they build the station, there will be more lighting on

02:02:15.609 --> 02:02:20.640
Collins Street, correct? Will they be adding lighting?

02:02:20.640 --> 02:02:23.500
No, typically the lighting that's provided on site is

02:02:23.500 --> 02:02:24.640
oriented inward.

02:02:24.640 --> 02:02:26.640
So there will be no additional lighting?

02:02:26.640 --> 02:02:27.640
All right.

02:02:27.640 --> 02:02:32.640
Okay.

02:02:32.640 --> 02:02:36.640
Other questions for staff?

02:02:36.640 --> 02:02:37.640
Okay. Thank you, Mike.

02:02:37.640 --> 02:02:42.189
This is a public hearing. If anyone would like to speak for

02:02:42.189 --> 02:02:44.220
or against this item, you're certainly welcome to approach

02:02:44.220 --> 02:02:48.640
the dais, rather the podium, sorry.

02:02:48.640 --> 02:02:55.220
Is there anyone that would like to speak for or against?

02:02:55.220 --> 02:03:01.979
Okay. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and open

02:03:01.979 --> 02:03:07.640
it up for discussion among the commissioners.

02:03:07.640 --> 02:03:10.149
Commissioner Beck, did you want to speak again? No? Just

02:03:10.149 --> 02:03:11.640
hasn't gotten cleared off.

02:03:11.640 --> 02:03:14.640
Oh, sorry. Hey, Frank, down there.

02:03:14.640 --> 02:03:15.640
Commissioner Dudowitz.

02:03:15.640 --> 02:03:20.550
Yes, I would like to make a motion to approve as submitted

02:03:20.550 --> 02:03:21.640
by staff.

02:03:21.640 --> 02:03:24.640
Commissioner Rossell.

02:03:24.640 --> 02:03:26.640
I'd like to second the motion.

02:03:26.640 --> 02:03:32.640
We have a first and a second. So any further discussion?

02:03:32.640 --> 02:03:43.640
Okay, please vote on the board.

02:03:43.640 --> 02:03:47.640
That motion also passes six zero.

02:03:47.640 --> 02:03:50.720
Our next item is item four a the planning and zoning

02:03:50.720 --> 02:03:52.640
commission project matrix.

02:03:52.640 --> 02:03:54.640
Did you have something to add?

02:03:54.640 --> 02:03:56.640
Yes, I did. Thank you, Commissioner Bruegel.

02:03:56.640 --> 02:03:59.800
You have the planning and zoning matrix in your backup

02:03:59.800 --> 02:04:00.640
material.

02:04:00.640 --> 02:04:05.710
Unfortunately, we accidentally or inadvertently included a

02:04:05.710 --> 02:04:07.640
previous matrix.

02:04:07.640 --> 02:04:11.350
And if you recall, there were a couple of things that were

02:04:11.350 --> 02:04:13.640
brought up at the last meeting.

02:04:13.640 --> 02:04:17.579
I just wanted to apprise the commission that we will be

02:04:17.579 --> 02:04:21.640
providing a presentation regarding perimeter street.

02:04:21.640 --> 02:04:24.439
If you recall, that was a discussion that was raised by the

02:04:24.439 --> 02:04:25.640
commission as well.

02:04:25.640 --> 02:04:29.510
And also we will be having on January 26th, if I'm not

02:04:29.510 --> 02:04:34.529
mistaken, the bike and pedestrian mobility component will

02:04:34.529 --> 02:04:36.039
be presented to the planning and zoning commission,

02:04:36.039 --> 02:04:36.640
understanding how it will be implemented.

02:04:36.640 --> 02:04:39.550
And that will be done by the bike and pedestrian

02:04:39.550 --> 02:04:42.640
coordinator, Julie Anderson with the city.

02:04:42.640 --> 02:04:44.640
So we just wanted to apprise you of that.

02:04:44.640 --> 02:04:48.640
At the next meeting, you will see the revised matrix.

02:04:48.640 --> 02:04:53.640
Thank you. Thank you.

02:04:53.640 --> 02:04:57.739
And that brings us to our final item or last time, if

02:04:57.739 --> 02:05:00.069
anyone has any future agenda items they would like to

02:05:00.069 --> 02:05:00.640
address.

02:05:00.640 --> 02:05:03.640
The boards lighten up. Commissioner Rossell.

02:05:03.640 --> 02:05:07.220
Thank you, chair. It was mentioned in the work session that

02:05:07.220 --> 02:05:08.710
we could have DME come in and provide an update

02:05:08.710 --> 02:05:11.640
presentation to the new commissioners.

02:05:11.640 --> 02:05:14.949
So I'd like to put forth that just so that myself and other

02:05:14.949 --> 02:05:18.680
commissioners perhaps would be interested in understanding

02:05:18.680 --> 02:05:19.640
DME's work.

02:05:19.640 --> 02:05:23.039
We will coordinate a date with them to see when they can do

02:05:23.039 --> 02:05:23.640
that.

02:05:23.640 --> 02:05:25.640
Thank you.

02:05:25.640 --> 02:05:27.640
Commissioner Dedowitz.

02:05:27.640 --> 02:05:30.640
Yes, just some information here, please.

02:05:30.640 --> 02:05:33.619
When I was researching for another project, code of

02:05:33.619 --> 02:05:37.220
ordinance for the planning and zoning commission powers and

02:05:37.220 --> 02:05:39.640
duties, I ran across this, and I wasn't aware of this,

02:05:39.640 --> 02:05:42.590
but we are allowed to make and recommend plans for the

02:05:42.590 --> 02:05:46.069
clearance and rebuilding of any slum, districts or blighted

02:05:46.069 --> 02:05:47.640
areas within the city.

02:05:47.640 --> 02:05:52.710
I'd like to understand that process because I'm aware of

02:05:52.710 --> 02:05:57.189
two such properties that were gas stations that had been

02:05:57.189 --> 02:05:58.640
abandoned for 10 years

02:05:58.640 --> 02:06:03.340
and now are in blight. They're falling down. They are

02:06:03.340 --> 02:06:07.640
collecting debris and rodents and vagrancies.

02:06:07.640 --> 02:06:10.850
So I would like to know the process by which we as a

02:06:10.850 --> 02:06:15.560
commission address this and/or what else do we do in this

02:06:15.560 --> 02:06:16.640
situation?

02:06:16.640 --> 02:06:20.199
Because there are a number of other situations. There's

02:06:20.199 --> 02:06:24.640
another property on the loop 288 just north of Spencer.

02:06:24.640 --> 02:06:29.020
That house has been sitting there since that thing was --

02:06:29.020 --> 02:06:32.640
and again, it's falling apart and whatnot.

02:06:32.640 --> 02:06:34.640
Thank you, Commissioner Dedowitz.

02:06:34.640 --> 02:06:37.420
A couple of things. One, I'll double check the code that

02:06:37.420 --> 02:06:39.640
you're reading and compare it to the DDC.

02:06:39.640 --> 02:06:42.420
The second thing is we also have a health and building

02:06:42.420 --> 02:06:45.180
standard commission that identifies if there are hazardous

02:06:45.180 --> 02:06:47.640
buildings and what the procedure is for that.

02:06:47.640 --> 02:06:48.640
We have a what, please?

02:06:48.640 --> 02:06:51.010
We have a commission. It's called HABSCO, Health and

02:06:51.010 --> 02:06:52.640
Building Standards Commission.

02:06:52.640 --> 02:06:54.909
They are charged with the responsibility if there is an

02:06:54.909 --> 02:06:56.739
unsafe structure to take it through the process to

02:06:56.739 --> 02:06:59.640
determine if it can be -- if the situation can be remedied.

02:06:59.640 --> 02:07:04.159
So I'll make sure that there's no conflict with what you've

02:07:04.159 --> 02:07:07.630
read to me tonight and with HABSCO, and I'll give you some

02:07:07.630 --> 02:07:08.640
detail on that too.

02:07:08.640 --> 02:07:10.640
Just a follow-up for the rest of the commissioners.

02:07:10.640 --> 02:07:11.640
Sure.

02:07:11.640 --> 02:07:16.180
My business property on Bonnie Bray and University was next

02:07:16.180 --> 02:07:19.640
door to an old restaurant called Captain D's.

02:07:19.640 --> 02:07:23.289
And we had issues with rodents and vagrancy there and made

02:07:23.289 --> 02:07:26.640
a complaint to the city, you know, seven, eight years ago,

02:07:26.640 --> 02:07:27.640
and that was knocked down.

02:07:27.640 --> 02:07:31.640
And now we have a better and a newer facility there.

02:07:31.640 --> 02:07:34.640
So that's what caught my eye when I read this.

02:07:34.640 --> 02:07:38.640
Thank you for bringing that to our attention.

02:07:38.640 --> 02:07:40.640
Anything else?

02:07:40.640 --> 02:07:41.640
Okay.

02:07:41.640 --> 02:07:46.970
With that, I will close our meeting at 729 and thank you

02:07:46.970 --> 02:07:49.640
all for being here tonight.