Jan 27, 2016 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2016-01-27 5:00 PM

for the City of Denton. It is five o'clock. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and our first item of business in our work session is going to be clarification of agenda items. Thank you Chairperson Strange. If the Commission has any questions regarding the plots we can go over this. Over those else we can dive straight into the other two public hearing items that we have. I just wanted to get a feel if we were comfortable with the plants. Question on plants. One of the plants we 're looking at is that where caliber collision is asking okay my I had a question about. Let me recognize you Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. No I'm thinking of the one where they're going to do cavenders. That's not a plant issue is it? Okay. Super. Anybody else on the question on plant or we're going to move on to something else? In that case we'll go ahead and move on to our public hearing items that will be heard at the public hearing. The first one is regarding an amendment to the Fry Street overlay district. I'm going to ask Sophie Humer to make that presentation for us. Good evening Commissioners. Sophie Hum er, Assistant Planner. I'll be presenting to you Z1529 the Fry Street overlay district amendment. The request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding amending subchapter 3575 Fry Street overlay district to create a new sub district in development standards for a mixed-use building on approximately 1.7 acres. The proposed development is located on West Oak and West Hickory Street. It has frontage on both of those roads. It's also located between Fry Street and Avenue B. However it does not have frontage on either of those roads. The zoning for the property is downtown commercial general but it's located within the Fry Street overlay district and in a couple slides I'll get into what exactly that means. It's also important to remember that multif amily and retail are permitted by right in the district. So the Fry Street overlay district was created in 2000 to preserve the unique history and character of the area. Under sub area A at this time and as it stands in the ordinance today, in sub area A you can have a building of 45 feet in height maximum of three stories and the density of multifamily units is based on a minimum unit size. So for example efficiency apartments are approximately 1,000 square feet and so on. In 2010 the Fry Street overlay district was further amended to accommodate a mixed-use development. Again multifamily and retail on the bottom and in this sub area the height of the building went to 55 feet, a total of four stories and the density was set at 72.5 units per acre. What remains in this green area is still sub area A. Commissioner Beck. Units are what? Bed rooms or the entire part? Are we counting kitchens? Sure one bedroom is equal to one half of a unit and so all of the measurements you'll see are based on that . They're essentially calibrated to that density. So two bedroom apartment is a unit? Unit. Okay thank you. So the applicant EDR is proposing to further amend the Fry Street overlay district creating sub area B1 to accommodate multifamily and retail. In this sub district or sub area the height would be 58 feet, a total of five stories and the density would be 88.2 units per acre. The applicant is also requesting amendments to the multifamily parking regulations. Sub area A and B only require one space for multi-family units with two or more bedrooms. Sub area B1 is asking for units with two or more bedrooms to only require 0.75 spaces per bedroom. No other amendments are going to be made to the parking ratios of the Fry Street overlay district in this proposal. This is just a summary slide and we can come back to this at the end of the presentation of the current sub areas and then the proposed sub area B1. So now I want to delve a little bit into the neighborhood university compatibility future land use designation and what that means to the area . So the subject property is located in this neighborhood university compatibility area. UNT is to the south and it's flanked on the east and west by low residential future land use designations and to the north is a neighborhood mixed use designation. Some of the goals of the neighborhood university land use chapter and this is direct from the Denton plan 2030 is that the area should provide a gradual transition in scale use and character between the universities and the surrounding neighborhoods. Development should also encourage uses that are in close proximity to one another and encourage walking and bicycling. Character of the area should also be maintained to ensure that new development is sensitive to the surrounding and surrounding built and natural environment in terms of scale and form. The development should also adequately address parking needs to mitigate the impact to adjacent neighborhoods. So now moving into the considerations the purpose of the Fry Street overlay district originally was to maintain the character of the area. It's traditionally commercial area. Proposed amendment would allow for one of the highest densities that we've seen in the area and while the use is permitted the original intent again of the overlay was to maintain cohesive development and maintain the character of the area. There's also a deficit between what is required by the overlay district and what the proposed amendment would do to that parking requirement for this development essentially there would be a 110 space deficit in the parking and reductions on this site-by-site basis aren't a comprehensive approach to analyzing the impact of parking reductions in the greater Fry Street area . These are some departmental considerations. The scoping for the traffic impact analysis has been initiated however the TIA has not been submitted for review and also from the fire department the applicant has not yet been able to verify the aerial apparatus access to the building with the site plans that we've provided in your backup. Commissioner Taylor. Just to clarify what is that last phrase about aerial apparatus access? Sure they you know in addition to the minimum or sorry in addition to the sprinkler system inside the building the fire truck also has to be able to air aerially access the building. They need I believe 15 feet off of the building and then a 26 foot wide fire lane. Currently based on the site plan they only have 10 feet. The Sterling Fry development went through a council initiated process. The developer initiated it it had to go to council where they eliminated parking on Fry and Welch. I believe that is something that the applicant is still pursuing however staff has not been able to review anything yet. So there isn't a question of having the equipment it's just having enough access for the equipment to reach. Correct. Okay thank you. Commissioner Beck. Do we have reasons why both of these are not available now? Why they've been delayed? It's timing. In the backup we provided a project timeline. The full submittal was done in December and it went through its first review process. Technically its status is currently returned for review which means that fire engineering planning still have some outstanding concerns. However it is the full right of the applicant to move it forward to PNZ. Some of these will affect the site plan. There are there is a minor amendment procedure already in the Fry Street overlay district so some of these could come back and be minor amendments if they hit that threshold. Okay thanks. And just to clarify if I may the applicant if the request from the applicant is request for approval of the amendments that are proposed in front of you so as it relates to the site plan and as it relates to if this were approved and they're building permit approval would be contingent on ensuring the TIA was addressed, accurately reviewed and addressed and all the comments associated with that as well as all health and safety requirements associated with the fire department. Just a question. I don't recall us having projects come before us since most things haven't been done correctly or I don't say correctly yet before it's presented to us. Is there some sort of reason why there's a fast track as to why they're have a deadline or something they're trying to meet and we should even consider moving this on to council and let them take care of this before it gets to council? When the applicant turned in their submittal when they intimated that they were wanting to proceed with this program their primary intent was to determine if they would actually secure approval of these amendments. In order to review the amendments they did give a concept plan that showed the massing of the building and through that review these elements were identified. As part of a zoning change request they can't anybody can come in and request a zoning change or amendment to a zoning document or an overlay district and then it is the responsibility of the planning staff to do a slide use analysis to determine the appropriateness of the request and of course the Commission then can recommend favorably table the item add considerations or conditions to it and move it on to City Council or deny the request and move it on to City Council. Okay thank you. So in analysis of the development in its kind of cohesiveness with the Denton plan 2030 we recognize that the development would increase the stock of student housing which is an important component of the Denton plan 2030. However there are some associated development conditions that aren't consistent with the Dent on plan and these are very important considerations to staff and also to the neighborhood. One is that it doesn't adequately address the parking needs for the project and doesn't mitigate spillover to the surrounding area. There's also a potential impact on surrounding infrastructure and there's an inconsistency in urban form and scale specifically related to the height. Staff also has concerns about the continuous amendments to the Fry Street overlay district standards without fully understanding the impact of higher density and intensity projects on infrastructure, transportation and parking network, neighborhood compatibility. However we do see development pressure in this area and we want to make sure that those things are taken care of so the developer can come in request these changes and have them fully compatible with the neighborhood. So staff has taken a look at doing a revised Fry Street area small area plan that was presented to Council yesterday to favorable reception so I just wanted to throw that in as a FYI. Staff presented just a draft work plan to City Council during work session about a Fry Street small area plan and it would try to address these needs so that developers could come in and see that there are things that we're working on and trying to get just take a look at. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. What specific infrastructure is concerning? Sure, there I believe sewer. There are some outstanding issues on the sewer whether an upsize is needed to align. I believe it's on Hickory. I think Earl can correct me if I'm wrong. Okay. This also this area there's old infrastructure and there are some CIP projects in this area and it just needs a comprehensive look to see what these intensity projects do to this area. Thank you. I'll chime in on that question. Is it a capacity issue or the age of the infrastructure? I would ask Earl to answer that question. Good evening. It's more of a capacity issue given the intensity of the uses coming in and the size of the infrastructure that's along H ickory. Okay I just want to make sure it's a capacity that they would be responsible for that versus. No if it's the age of the infrastructure it'd be more of a maintenance. Correct. Okay. So is this just to follow up. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you. Is the the capacity is it a localized issue or is it from Fry Street to Mayhill needs to be upgraded? It would be more of a localized issue we just haven't really gone into evaluation without any demand information. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you Chair. Obviously I wasn't around in 2010 to understand the sub area B. It seems as though that the two main differences are the height and the parking considerations. If anyone knows can someone walk me through. Is there any differences I'm missing because it's a three foot higher building and there's the parking which is I think substantial. Is there anything else significant about the two? I'm wondering why these other issues were they addressed and the other sub area B and how did that get passed? Maybe some history of that would be helpful. Sure in 2010 the application came forward it was very I believe it was very similar to this one multifamily use project mixed use. That project the Ster ling Fry located a little bit further east of this project. They were able to meet their parking requirements. They were able to do one-for-one parking once they got the alleviation on Fry Street and Welch. The size I believe was also a consideration. Based on our neighborhood meetings that we've held recently a lot of the neighbors aren't happy with the way that parking is in the neighborhood. They're also concerned about buildings being brought up to the street line. Landscape was also brought up during those neighborhood meetings and just a couple other kind of public realm issues. So I wasn't here in 2010 . And if I can chime in from a staff perspective or from a planning discipline perspective one of the criteria that we have to strongly understand and analyze is are we further compromising an overlay district that was established to meet a specific goal or some specific criteria or goals. In this instance then the question arises are we going to continue to amend this overlay district or to accommodate development or do we need to look at the bigger picture and revisit that corridor or the Fry Street overlay district and come up with criteria that are actually more attractive and can sustain and attract development. And that's the bigger picture that we have to analyze at this point as well. So to follow up with that. Commissioner Rosale. Thank you. By rights if this met parking and height requirements they wouldn't need the new overlay? Correct. So if they if they complied with the existing conditions specified in sub area B, A I'm sorry in sub area A and they met all those requirements which is parking and building height they would go straight from building permits at the moment. Thank you. Before we move on you mentioned there was a they just passed a slide the Fry Street small area plan. Would it be appropriate to share or not at this time the direction and the favorable response from council to give us a little better idea of where we're going with this or is that premature to get into that? We can discuss what was presented at the City Council work session yesterday. Two things that we need to preface this discussion or conversation with is one we adopted the comprehensive plan just recently. One of the major goals primary short-term goals of this comprehensive plan Denton plan 2030 is to revisit our small area plans and it specifically highlights or addresses this area as well. That being said we started evaluating and understanding what small areas do we need to start looking at. We've received a lot of queries regarding this area and we strongly feel that we need to have parameters in place that would accommodate that. We also know that the neighborhood is extremely involved and active in improving their community and their neighborhood. That being said we also presented to the City Council yesterday in a work session saying we would like to initiate a small area plan and through that address the Fry Street small area plan. Do that as a subset. Create a small Fry Street small area plan and address overlay conditions on a parallel track once the small area plan is initiated. We received a lot of questions from our City Council and we feel we sufficiently addressed those, succinctly addressed those as well and we will now proceed to the next steps which is to hopefully establish a committee through nomination by City Council. So we have a ways to go then? Yes. Okay. Thanks. So just to expand on those neighborhood meetings, two of them were held. Neighborhood expressed the level of comfort with sub area A of the Fry Street overlay district as it was written. Concerns were raised by attendance of the meeting that included increased traffic along Oak and Hickory, pedestrian and veh icular traffic as well as bike traffic, increased parking in single-family neighborhoods adjacent to the project, that parking spillover, and also the lack of a shade study to study for the height of the building. Per section 3573 of the Denton Development Code, special purpose overlay districts are established to protect and enhance specific neighborhoods, groupings of buildings. These buildings have characteristics or these areas have characteristics which are distinct from lands and structures outside of those districts. Changes to the overlay district must enhance or conform to the purpose of the overlay district's goals and objectives. As submitted, the proposed development only further amends the district to conform to specific development proposal without comprehensive analysis of the impact to adjacent neighborhoods. That notification date is wrong. Public notifications were sent out earlier this year. 27 were sent out. 27 200 foot public notices were sent out. 500 courtesy notices were sent out via regular mail and I can get that date for you in regular session. -Sophie? -Yes. -Pardon me. Can you go back to that last slide? -Commissioner Bruegel. -Thank you, Chair. So I know that there's been neighborhood meetings about this and I've been hearing from people who live in this neighborhood. Have any notifications come in since? I mean, I would think that there would be something highlighted in this 200 and 500 foot buffer? Did I get lost in the mail ? Where are they? -A lot of these, if you look at the land use around this, they're mostly businesses, multi-family, they're not owner occupied. That is the limitation of the 200 and the 500 foot notice that's required by state law. Of course we take it head to head when we consider the input from those neighborhood meetings. I think I provided additional information in the staff report as well . But no, even by phone I have not heard. We also provide our emails on those notification letters, phone numbers, all of that. -Okay. Yeah, thanks. -No problem. -Commissioner Beck. -That does seem odd. I made the public aware of just literally what we're gonna do at the workshop today and that was all I pointed out. And there were several people that acted like they weren't aware of this at all. And one was a business owner, Kim, sorry, I can't remember the last name. So I'm wondering if, you know, we did make contact well enough. I know the attempt was, okay, nothing ain't there, but there's probably more opposition to this than this indicates here. So how do we go about revisiting this, I guess, based on what I'm seeing in here? -If I can cut in. -Commissioner Bruegel. -Thank you, Chair. I'm glad that we have the public hearing process because if we're only contacting the owners of the properties who may not, I don't know if they live in the area or not, I'm glad that the there is that public hearing process so we will have an opportunity to hear from the public and that, you know, there have been neighborhood meetings on this because I'm really curious to hear what the people who actually live in that area have to say about that because this map is not, it doesn't help, it doesn't give me a good sense of where the neighborhood's at so I'm glad we have this this evening. -We're doing the public hearing today, right? -Commissioner Peck, I think I'll throw in maybe where you're going. I mean, obviously the knows that the center's certified so they definitely get them. Where these come back into play and you have people outside have an opinion but this comes into play in far as our vote the percentage of responses that we get that would be opposed affects the majority that we have to have or voting wise on this board so at this time based on this map we don't have to have a super majority it would just be a simple majority vote based on what the no opposition for that within the 200 foot buffer is. -Okay, so if we get into the public here and we do have somebody that is in this area and states their opposition to it then that'll fall into place at that time like the super majority requirement. -Actually it's a the Ditten code when I did further research does not require super majority for this board so we're only going to do it for council so that we are able to have written objection all the way up to the actual public hearing date for council. -Thank you for the correction. -So staff is recommending denial of Z1529 based on the considerations presented and as the request the requested amendment further compromises the Fry Street overlay district standards. That's the end of my presentation. Commissioner Bruegel. -Thank you chair. So I guess I have more of a comment for staff than a question and this has come up in in other amendments and ordinances that I've reviewed. Specifically on now this is the draft so I wish that this would have gotten fixed before it came to us but on page 11 on page 11 twice it mentions hold on I want to find exactly the words here. Sorry thank you okay and this is in the draft so I wish it would have gotten fixed before it came to us. -Of the overlay. -Yeah yeah yeah no my point my point is just kind of a general one not really specific to this plan but in general on page 11 twice it mentions the director of planning and development or quote his designee and I mean we are an inclusive city and I would very much like if the language that we have in these ordinances and amendments could be more inclusive as well so that's my that's my comment in general to staff is like when we get red line stuff like let's just take care of that yeah. -Commissioner Bruegel that will be addressed. -Thank you. -I'm sensitive to that too so we will start saying their designee. -Thank you thank you ladies appreciate it. -Commissioner Beck. -Thank you chair. Let's see you indicate that while this parking does align with the goals of creating more walkable and pedestrian mine environment reductions in the requirement on a site-by-site occurrence is not a comprehensive approach to analyzing the impact of parking reduction and correct you know so let me see if I understand what we 're talking about here the idea here with creating additions where there's fewer parking spaces is automatically going to enhance more walking is that the idea behind what they're thinking is? -There's well-established literature on parking minimums essentially create induced parking demand if there are parking spaces people are going to be encouraged to drive and of course we want there to be adequate parking in our neighborhood districts in our downtown for people to come and visit but for people that live in that area that may want to walk and do that sort of thing parking minimums are best adopted at a more macro level rather on a site-by-site basis where they're hard to track and it's hard to track the impact of those on those developments. -And Sophie if you could talk a little bit about let's talk about the overlay district itself the existing conditions the existing environment the existing land uses and then the fact that we also have a campus adjacent to that overlay district we also have an off-street parking requirement we have a CIP program how is that off-street going to work UNT is looking at their parking program as well right now and that obviously dominos into any development that occurs with this within this area so we don't want to compromise accessibility parking requirements to an extent where it becomes impossible to utilize the site either or surrounding properties to be able to be accessed. -Anybody else? Okay thank you Sophie. Our next item Ross Cobbiston will be presenting then our senior planner and he's going to discuss a change in zoning from industrial center employment to RCCD. Thank you Ross. -Thank you Chair Maddahl. This is Z15 31, Cavendish boot city. As a request as Maddahl said to recommend to City Council regarding a rezoning from industrial center employment ICE district to a regional center commercial downtown district RCCD on approximately 2.9 acres. Subject property is located on the west side of the I-35 frontage road approximately a thousand feet south of West University Drive. When we look at the zoning the intact zoning on the property is ICE which was established with the 2002 city rezoning for light industrial uses within the area and it was anticipated to help support use anticipated support uses such as office warehouse and hotels to support the larger ICG district which is industrial commercial general over to the west which is located more towards the Denton Enterprise Airport and parcels in between this section and the airport. The ICE district does not permit retail activity and has a general retail activity and limits retail activity to only gas station uses by limitation L18 and caps the square footage for retail as 10,000 square feet only in conjunction to gas station uses. RCCD on the other hand being proposed in the purple permits retail and regional activity commercial activity generally throughout the district. When we look at RCCD zoning the intent of this is to promote mixed-use development with urban character. It permits a wide array of commercial and retail uses and it's typically been used as a zoning category for regional commercial centers along I-35E. Your staff report indicates kind of those series of developments along the I-35 corridor where our CCD zoning has allowed large retail activity. Looking at some adjacent uses we do have a gas station on the hard corner on the southwest corner of 380 and 35. We have permits in for a future vehicle repair use kind of in between the vacant area. There's a existing commercial and warehouse storage units existing on site where the north of the proposed Cavendish site and then down a little bit further is a professional office building and light manufacturing a little bit further south than that. As you can see there's the main retail portions with razor-anched to the east. Just some dividing lines here the railroad line as mentioned in your staff report is an appropriate divider between industrial uses and commercial uses and as the sections grow within this area on the I-35 frontage it would be better served to be rezoned for future retail uses with I under RCCD zoning even though at this point I can't get to the pointer but this area will maintain be maintained as ICE until further rezoning occurs. Future land use the future land use map for the comprehensive plan indicates regional mixed use and then the dividing line of the railroad shows that industrial commerce is a land use category on the west side and that rezoning to RCCD is consistent with the future land use plan. So under the considerations for their request RCCD would permit commercial and retail uses without zoning limitations. RCCD has been used to zone regional commercial areas along I-35. The rail line is an appropriate divider between industrial land uses and commercial land uses and it's more reasonable that reason that development and economic patterns would suggest using the I-35 frontage for commercial activity instead of industrial support surfaces so and it is consistent with the future land use map. So under the criteria for approval points one and two staff has evaluated and confers that we are in support of the zoning for those for those points. Public notifications were made to property owners 200 and 500 and we only have one in response which is the major property owner and again we recommend approval and I can stand for any questions. Commissioner Beck. Correct. Correct. We'll just keep it to that level. Thank you chair. Commissioner Taylor. So you showed that there was going to be a slice to the south potentially rezoned RCCD this is that a request coming? No that was it's stated in your report that we did ask the developer to consider that he is a major property owner for the entire area and he was not willing to help to codify that at this point and just allows options to be open until but we did state that you know there is the potentiality of putting industrial uses as that's the zoning on the ground now. And the site immediately to the north of this one? Yes. Storage and warehouse? Yes. That front building has several retails basis is that correct? Correct. Is that a conform ing use? Yes it is. It's retail in conformance to a the warehouse product warehouses to the back so they're kind of symbiotic. So that's considered like a just lost a office warehouse district or something. Okay so and so what's the so the limitation on retail is less than 10,000 square feet? Correct. And I see okay yeah I just look at this and you know we we are planning to do some other work in this area so I was I agree that the railroad track is a natural barrier and this area facing an interstate and a US highway gets a ton of traffic could be a really good retail location so I I was wondering again why we what why we aren 't looking at both the area to the north and the area to the south for a more appropriate kind of retail oriented use while not excluding the warehouse aspect perhaps but but allowing greater retail use. Any other questions for Ross? Thank you. I think what I'm going to do at this time it's almost 540 we've got food and I think we've got some pretty long presentations according to staff so I think we'll take a five minute recess if I get food and then we'll start our time our next round of presentations. At 548 I think the next item we have on here is to receive a report regarding the bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Thank you Chairperson Strange I'll invite Julie Anderson to make this presentation for us tonight. Good afternoon Commissioners good afternoon it's evening close enough. I am Julie Anderson I am the bike and ped coordinator for the city I've been here for a year yesterday was my year anniversary date. I think up some past meetings there are just some questions by the Commissioners of how we actually implement the bike plan what's the P&Z role in that where are we at so I'm here to just provide you with a very nice status update of our bike plan and where we are so just what we're going to cover today what is this actually an update to I'm going to go through that part very briefly to get to the real meat of it which is how we implement our bike plan I'm going to go over some of our upcoming and completed projects and then do an overview I'm going to switch gears and do an overview of our 2015 bike ped counts that we did in September and I actually forgot to include the bike ped report count report in your backup so I printed it off today and handed it to you so you all have that and I will discuss that at the end so first of all so we're all on the same page of where actually the bike ped plan fits in the overall grand context of the city so this is our it's officially called the pedestrian and bicycle linkage component of the Denton mobility plan which means it's a part of our mobility plan which you guys have heard a lot about recently so we have the bike ped component we have the roadway component and I think there's also a trucking freight component and these are all part of our Denton plan 2030 our comprehensive plan so that's where it falls in the grand scheme of things and in case you're wondering what exactly is it an update to why do we call it the update to well in April of 2001 they passed an ordinance of the bike ped the ped bike linkage component map and this was just an ordinance with some talking points about why we plan for pedestrians and bicyclists three highlights sidewalks should be given priority in funding talked about bike and ped trails that were eight feet in width since then Ashtos upgraded their minimum to 10 and then I talked about bike routes how we generally put them on collector streets and those that are less than 40 miles an hour but to also consider bike routes on streets that parallel major materials this is what the map looks like sorry it's a really awful looking map nobody seemed to have an original digital copy of it so this is a scanned image and this is what it was it was just a map so this was in 2001 we did some work to implement that but we decided in 2010 about that time we needed to update it have kind of a little bit more than just a map so they had to start it off with two public meetings one was in March one was in April you might think those dates are really far apart from each other but in between those they had four focus group meetings focus group included local cyclists park staff other people who are in just I think Commissioner Briegel was actually on future commissioners you know yeah so those this group of people were the core group who took feedback and talked with the consultants and city staff on what to include in the bike plan what routes to choose all those things so after we had they had those meetings we presented all of it to the Commission's you can see it came to PNZ three different times two work sessions and then the public hearing and then finally in February of 2012 it was adopted by City Council so this is our bike plan it's no more just a map it's actually a document now with a map that has lots of information and that's what I'm gonna go over so the plan it does talk about facilities we're gonna have in our city so shared routes a wide curb lane bike lane a side path it also gives a brief it like images can't think of the correct word sorry images of what the infrastructure would look like if you were to implement it on our roadway it gives a very simple cost estimates we were finding that their cost estimates are actually higher than what they have in here because the bike plan their estimates they provide don't include right of way acquisition reconstruction restriping or signs and signals so it's a very base number that they provide in here and we don't really use the provided numbers very much also what we got out of the plan is when they did the public meeting avoided people actually want if you had a million dollars what would you do with a million dollars and we could actually do a whole lot with a million dollars for bike and pet projects it's only a drop in the bucket if you're doing your street you know reconstruction but a million can get you really far with bike infrastructure and the number one thing people wanted 31% said they want to designate more lanes on streets and so that is what we're talking about today is how do we get those lanes on the street how do we implement what the bike plan has said and there's actually two paths we can go down there's the city of dentin path where they pay for it we pay for it or what I call coming soon it's the development that 's where P&Z comes in they do have a development has a small and sometimes significant role in how we implement the bike plan so the city of dentin path there's essentially three different ways there's our CIP projects our big bond projects like bonnie bray mayhill East Hickory those are paid through our bond project our bond funding which we did a bond election in 2014 and then I want to say is also in 2011 or 2012 streets and engineering and drainage also have other projects they're working on Hinkle is a drainage project that's underway it's not underway it's in design right now we have a bike accommodation on that roadway so we piggyback on that Montecito was a street reconstruction project it was also a route on our bike plan and so when they redid it we added charrows to that road and then Highland was a street reconstruction as well as a big street project and we came in and also striped as a contraflow bike lane and that wasn't a complete street project I mean it was a completely paid for by streets part of that came out the bike fund which the third way we implement is the bike fund that's dedicated funding each year it's two hundred thousand dollars and I work with our transportation engineer Noreen house right on implementing and spending that money so we put charrows on Alice this year we did Oakland Windsor Drive was also a bike fun project that was a road diet we went from two lanes each direction to one lane each direction with the continuous turn lane and then bike lanes on either side so you might think great we have all these plans to pay for them but how do you actually make sure that all gets implemented with a bike plan so that's my job bike ped coordinator I attend lots of meetings to coordinate with people so there 's a monthly utility and CIP coordination meeting that's where all the different departments who work within our right of way so we have water wastewater streets our traffic ops people we meet monthly to talk about our projects and that's actually been very beneficial because previously we weren't doing that so there were a few projects that this year that had to get delayed because we weren't aware that there was a utility project going on I also meet with our transportation engineer every month sometimes it's more than that but we do meet at least once a month to talk about our upcoming projects that we've put on our bike fund this is the most common way that our projects are funded because it's usually big projects or it's our money and we're controlling it so much simpler for us to do and these are just photos of just in case you were curious that's Hickory Street our Sharos the middle one is our contraflow bike lane on Highland and then the end one is Sharos on Old North Julie Commissioner Bruegel thank you chair so the City Council allocates $200,000 a year for the bike plan correct I think the overall projected cost was like 1.6 million or something so it's gonna be like over a 10-year project 1.6 not for the entire plan okay you can maybe 1.5 million could get you I think what the plan says is you could do 1.5 million for the it's broken into immediate short range and then long range so yeah so my question is how much money has City Council set aside to date and how much money has been spent from the bike plan I have a slide for that oh awesome okay continue thank you yes so and this yeah I said this is the most common way that we get things paid for it because they're large projects that cover a large length of roadway there's a development path this is where P&Z comes in as you know you guys deal with new development coming in so I attend our development review committee each week I also attend some pre development review committee meetings with engineering and transportation which has been very beneficial I work with each of the planning and engineering groups within the development review and then this is also where you notice other items like we should probably put bike racks in here you know I advocate for bike racks whenever I tend to meeting oh this development needs to have a bike rack and people will say oh well who's riding their bike there I don't know maybe the employees you know employees ride their bikes too so we talk about sidewalks and access pathways this is where new development pays for the improvements so that's a bike rack at Target I imagine we had to ask Target to put in bike racks with their development it's not required so they generally don't just do it on their own but bike racks are super cheap when you compare it to the cost of a large project you can get the simplest one for 200 if you're gonna go really fancy maybe a thousand dollars so this mixture is a unicorn lake correct we just the code I think just recommends it but nothing is required yeah well it's hard to encourage development that's already built we can't force anybody that's already built but we can ask new development to put it in or we could actually put in our code where it was a requirement and I've had preliminary discussions with the planning department about making that happen Commissioner Dudowitz one suggestion to piggyback on that is had the city pay for it and asked the owner of that property if you wouldn't mind that putting it in that would might solve that problem because if somebody came to my property and said hey we're willing to do this okay why not right we and we've discussed that as well too do we have a program of repurchase bike racks and we offer them to the public there's been some legal questions but I mean that's definitely an option that we've talked about what's the legal do we own it do we do we install it yeah yeah nothing it's not an option and we've definitely discussed it yeah I'm just making sure that you know Larry there is some options out there that you know may not be a big issue other than going that direction Commissioner Roselle speaking back on both you because you know it's your property owner what what would the city be able to do to encourage you to incur that cost to put it in nothing okay thank you I'm serious I mean that we have cars come up to my facility mission that was bicycle we now we have employees that do ride bicycles and there's a there's a way for them to secure their bicycles and we make sure of that but it's not a for the public because the public is not coming to my facility and bicycles to get service they're coming with their cars I'm sorry but but I 'm you know I'm be honest with you yeah what's your business we service motor vehicles trucks light trucks heavy-duty trucks yeah I just want to give you opportunity Commissioner Briegel if I can just chime in real quick Commissioner Beck over the summer I met with them a group of cyclists and they had mentioned this they're like well why don't we require that in the in the parking requirements I'm like that's a good idea and so ever since then whenever we see the Commission has seen whenever we see a new development I'm like hey we're the bike racks now like oh yeah we can do that so you know I'm just good we can just keep bringing it up and we can't require it but they that they seem perfectly amenable in those cases to add them and you may notice even on some plats and site plans and stuff or not class but some of the site plans we're starting to see not only bike racks but like they're pointing about hey here's a bike rack so I think we can stay on top of it and I'm it's nice to know that you're in conversation with you know that this might be something as we when we relook at our parking requirements as a city that that could be something at that point that possibly could be written into the code I want to chime in on that I know we've had some discussions before when projects come and ask about bike racks I think if it's not a part of our code I don't know that it's correct for us commissioners when we're getting ready to take a vote to ask them they want to put one of those in there I think it 's voluntary if they feel like it's okay to do that with their business they should do it I don't think it's appropriate for us or at least for me to say you know I'd like to see you put a bike rack in there right before take a vote and I certainly and I certainly hope that my language in the past has not made it seem like I'm twisting their arm to put that in there but I do think sometimes it is an oversight that people just if just remind them you know hey this is a multifamily complex not everyone's gonna have a car sure so I think it's worth mentioning Commissioner Taylor what's next thank you chair I do believe that this Commission has the power to recommend changes to the D DC so it might be appropriate especially in high density and mixed use zoning categories that are designed for downtown and urban type areas to begin requiring some basic you know bike parking standard or perhaps in the case of multifamily you might get pushback trying to require it just everywhere but I think that could be something that we can look at is I don't do we we have a process where once per year we recommend changes don't we I'm going to I'm not aware of that once per year requirement but shoot the Commission is more than welcome to initiate this and ask staff to come forward with a DDC amendment draft to discuss in a workshop session and then proceed on from there to public hearing Commissioner Dudowitz thank you on that issue is it appropriate for staffed in working with developers and mixed use and other retail projects to recommend in the development stage or in the discussion or the consultant stage to say excuse me but the PZ Commission would encourage would like you encourage bicycle racks were appropriate and considerate and as miss Briegel brought up it's we've seen it and more and more projects coming forward so I'm assuming someone's making that observation and suggestion and I know that in one particular project I met with a developer and suggested it ahead of time so they wouldn't be caught on it in another appropriate inappropriate situation Commissioner Dudowitz I'm really happy you brought that up because we do encourage development proposals that come in and encourage them to provide these facilities and we have also mentioned that it is a recommended from the PNC that this they would favor that not that their recommendation would change but it is something they would never do it however if we also look at the zoning and try and encourage it to looking at is this a multifamily development complex and it does warrant that so we encourage that those be installed early on and so that it doesn't come in as a recommendation type component as they move forward but try and get it in on the onset unless that Commissioner back the chair do we spend or can we spend some of that money we have there to educate these businesses like that say we go to these businesses where there's no bike red you know I'm opposed to you know imposing our will on to but you've got a lot of useful information here I think it's part of our didn't plan 2032 progresses long and just make them business owners aware that this kind of travel is expanding and how beneficial it would be to their business so can we spend some of that money on educating the businesses I'm sorry what what money the 200,000 part of that no the 200,000 is just for infrastructure I do have a separate money I have $20,000 for the bike head program to do safety education outreach and that could be something I use it towards as of yet no yes I would I have provided to the Planning Department a guideline of bike racks to them so that when they do tell a developer we want we think you should provide a bike rack they have standards and some guides that they can look at so it's not just the wave rack honestly the wave rack is not the best rack so we're trying to get away from using the wave rack also lots of other cities have bike parking requirements we would not be the only one you can do it either just a blanket statement all development that's not industrial has to have or single family has to have five percent or you can do it by zoning so only certain classification to it there's also different ways you can do it but again we're not the only city to do it so it's definitely a good thing to do also if we're making this try to be a bike friendly city having bike parking is a big part of making you want to ride your bike if you ride your bike somewhere and you can't park it there you're not going to want to ride it it legitimizes that your form of transportation is by providing you a place to park it that's not to a sign post or railing okay so we have these different ways that we do but we also know okay we're having these meetings to plan for bikes and peds how do we actually do that well we have design manuals and we have guidance so we have our denton development code which are probably all familiar with chapter 20 is the one that talks about transportation and it does have three different facilities that it talks about sidewalks which are required on all neighborhood and arterial streets an on-road bicycle path which we would consider a bike lane or a share own these are required on arterials and in accordance with the bike ped plan and an off-road combo bike ped path that's required on collectors freeways and in accordance with our bike ped plan so currently we build eight foot sidewalks on all of our collector streets eight foot's really good for pedestrians but I wouldn't quite consider eight foot sidewalk a bicycle accommodation it can be useful in some instances so all of these if so the sorry the development code classifies what our streets are and sort of defines them but they all need to be in accordance with our transportation criteria manual which as you can see was last updated in July of 2013 so section 2 talks about pedestrian bicycle facility design that's where it says bicycle parking is recommended and then it says that all the alignments can be found in the appendix a of cross sections so the code defines it and then the criteria manual actually gives you that what the cross-section is we have the denton the downtown development into implementation plan the D tip they have cross sections in there for the downtown section and that actually was included in this update to the criteria manual so the downtown streets that are in the D tip do have cross sections for bike accommodations I could not find our cross sections for streets online I wasn't able to get my hands on to them before this meeting but our bike plan does have some of them in the back so you can see up top is the current accommodation what you would do for a mixed-use collector Street essentially it's just a wide outside lane or you could have the side path on either side but the bike plans suggest different alternatives we can add a share you can add bike lanes you can add the wide curb lane which I would recommend we I would hardly ever recommend to do just a wide outside lane it also has cross sections for Julie yes I know we've got two other items to go before 630 I'm told we've got to cover at least one of them do you know how many more and we may just have to stop at 630 we may have to come back after P&Z to do these other two yeah I think I'm almost done with that's what we would prefer design manuals yeah I can go through these real quick and we can stop if you want when we get to bike counts because that is kind of a separate topic okay we have various design manuals that we use to implement it we have our asht ow guide the urban bikeway design guide this is not adopted this is for sort of urban streets as opposed to large highways text I also had memorandum back in 2011 that all text our roads will accommodate peds and bikes there's different levels of what they do based on if they're reconstructing it or just working within the present right of way and that's my question sorry I know that we're short on time Commissioner Bribble thank you chair so we I know in our debt in 2030 plan we had emphasized designing our roads as per NACTO standards which have a more of a complete streets design right than ashtow so I 'm curious and I know our our bike plan was written with ashtow standards in mind and I assume that our transportation manual guidelines are also I'm assuming I wasn't here in 2013 so I'm just wondering is I guess maybe this would be a question for a different work session but as we're and I'm trying to keep this as brief as possible because I know we're short on time how are we implementing our vision for NACTO designed roads if if all of our old documents have ashtow requirements so ash toe is the standard that's what we've adopted it has been updated in 2012 so our bike plan is not current with what the most current ashtow is NACTO is more of a guideline as opposed to they're a little bit different this we can adopt it some cities have adopted it as a design manual I know that when I go to meetings when I'm advocating for our bike infrastructure I definitely reference NACTO our transportation engineer Noreen is aware of it so it's really just having the conversation at the stage of where we have the conversation and we're at the very beginning is this and is that I mean is that working so far do we have do you think we might have to update our it's working there are some things that I haven't been able to get because it's not in our design manual right so that might be something that the PNC Commission might have to push forward if it's in our 2030 plan but it's not in any of our I guess design criteria manuals right there's a disconnect it does get a little difficult to implement with other departments occasionally when well it's not our design manual okay it's a goal but it's not required okay thank you Commissioner Taylor was first thank you chair to follow up on on those that line of questions you stated that the transportation criteria manual was updated in 2013 but yeah but none of the none of the non downtown implementation plan streets street profiles were updated so our current transportation manual does not indicate bike lanes on arterials for example I do not think it does I couldn't find them and I get it back in time yeah and so but our ordinance requires it does does didn't development code trump the transportation criteria manual or do our streets get built to a criteria manual as opposed to our ordinance I'm not sure which one trumps which code trumps the manual and the code does say that we have to require bike lane on road bike lanes on arterials okay and so whenever is what would it take to get our our criteria manual to match the ordinance that was written in 2001 it would require an update and I'm not quite sure of that process I imagine it has to go through many engineering streets drainage all those people I don't know if that's staff initiated I imagine it is so and it's a large undertaking I imagine so and is there any review where if a street is designed to the current the criteria manual but not to the ordinance where it would be reviewed and seen before it's built reviewed by staff or public reviewed by somebody who would notice that it's not built to the ordinance staff I feel like staff is fairly confident of what the manual say and Ron could possibly speak better to it thanks Ron as you all know PSR brought to you all a process to amend the criteria manuals some time ago and it's as Julie mentioned a staff-initiated exercise that we can do certainly something that we are looking at doing is amending the criteria manual and we are able to do that it does not need necessarily to need to go through this body or City Council it can be done primarily in-house and so that's to that's to change the criteria manuals I was specifically talking about if there is a design that doesn't meet ordinance does it get built anyway if it does not meet the development code a development code that's correct if it meets if it's built to the criteria manual which conflicts with debt and development code right are we building streets that meet the criteria manual but are violating the debt and development code well well we're certainly gonna try to make sure that whatever is built meets the development code a criterion manual should follow and something that we would have to look into I can't answer that question I'm assuming that if they follow the development code and that's the that's how they're constructed but again I can't confirm or deny thank you Commissioner dead always Julie couple questions just for clarification are you a department or a person or both I guess I'm a department slash person I fall under the Department of Transportation and I'm the only person in the bike pedicure report into which group Department of Transportation Mark Nelson is my boss okay when your group decides to put a bike lane in let's say Montecito per case or shared lane okay who's who approved that that you could do that well it's on their bike plan so we're what person or department said that's okay to put it there are my boss and engineering okay okay so all right so I'm saying did anybody talk to the residents on that street yes they did okay so there is some process where we have some citizens being having some review is saying hey that's a good idea or a bad idea for whatever reason yes okay okay so just very quickly is an overview of our upcoming projects and the projects we've done up to date by end of 16 will have nine miles of bike lanes and 24 miles of shared routes we have upcoming projects on Eagle Drive Congress Paisley and Parkside and Amherst which you can see in orange here's just another overview of our projects this year and our funding and what we estimated our cost to be and then this is how much we have spent on the bike plan or allocated so just shy of over 1 million has been allocated to us we've spent our allocated 800,000 and we have 200,000 to work with 281,000 to work with this year and some of that's already been set aside for the Eagle Drive project so that's what we have spent the money on I think my next slide is bike counts yes so Julie could we Julie I think because of what I've been told we've got a full house out there that we need to start right on 630 would this be a good place to pause an excellent place to come back to us okay before we close the work session we have an item it's item C in our work session it's the DCA 15 and we're going to come back just as Commissioner so nobody leave after our meeting out in public we're going to come back in here to work session and reopen work session to hear that item before we head out tonight so we have to do that when we run along on another other thing so and be and but due to the time that B is going to take staff has asked that we just postpone that completely and they come back because that's about another 40 minutes so sorry guys for showing up tonight I'm sorry we run long but thanks for being willing to come back so Commissioner have any question about our what our schedule is going to be for our closed work session and we reconvene right at 630 so Commissioner Dudowitz I'm gonna be postponed to another date yes completely okay with that it is 621 and we're going to close this we're gonna know we're gonna close it or how should we do that for coming back close it and then reopen another one okay 6 21 we're going to close the work session and we'll reconvene in chambers at 6 30 good evening and welcome to the planning and zoning Commission meeting it is 630 and our meeting has been duly posted and we have a quorum present so I'll call our meeting to order and our first order of business is going to be to rise and say the pledge the US and the Texas flags Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one indivisible. The next item on our agenda is going to be the minutes do we have a motion? Commissioner Bruegel I move approval of the minutes. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Taven thank you. Call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 6-0 with one recusal. Next item is our consent agenda. Chair, Commissioner Taylor. I move approval of our consent agenda. Commissioner Det owitz. I second the motion. The first and a second I'll call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 7-0. Our next item will be our public hearings. The first item we're going to have is going to be item Z15-002 and I will open the public hearing now and ask for from all to call on presentation. Just for the record that Z15-0029. Thank you. Thank you Chairperson. I'm going to ask Sophie Humer, Associate Planner to make this presentation. Good evening Commissioners. I'm here presenting Z15-0029 Freistree overlay district amendment. The request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding amending sub chapter 3575 the Freistree overlay district to create a new sub district and development standards for a mixed-use building on approximately 1.7 acres. Subject property has approximately 220 feet of frontage on West Oak and approximately 280 feet of frontage on West H ickory Street. It's also located between Freistree and Avenue B however it does not have frontage on either of those roads. Subject the proposed sub district is also located in a downtown commercial general zoning district but it's further located within the Freistree overlay district. I'll get into those regulations later in the presentation. It's also important to remember that multif amily and retail are also permitted by right in the zoning district and in the overlay district. So the Freistree overlay district was created in 2000 to preserve the unique history and character of the area. In that sub area the building height was limited to 45 feet and three stories and the density was based on a minimum unit size. For example efficiency apartments were limited to units that were no less than a thousand square feet. In 2010 this Freistree overlay district was further amended to accommodate a mixed-use development known as sub area B. Here the height was permitted to be 55 feet no taller than four stories and the density is at 72.5 units an acre. The amendment before you tonight the applicant is proposing to further amend the Freistree overlay district creating sub area B1 to accommodate multifamily and retail. It's the yellow sub district located on the screen in red. The proposed sub area B1 the permitted height would be 58 feet capped at five stories and the density here would be 88.2 units an acre. The applicant is also requesting changes to the multifamily parking regulations in the Freistree overlay district. Sub area A and B for multifamily units require one space for units with two or more bedrooms. Sub area B1 is asking for units with two or more bedrooms to require only 0.75 spaces. No other amendments are going to be made to the other parking ratios within that district. This is just a summary of the changes and as you move through your discussion we can refer back to this slide. I want to talk a little bit about the neighborhood university compatibility future land use designation and its importance to this area. Debt and Plan 2030 calls out some very specific goals for this area. The neighborhood university compatibility area should provide a gradual transition and scale using character as well as intensity between the universities and the surrounding neighborhoods. Development should encourage uses that are in close proximity to one another and encourage walking and biking. Character of the area should be maintained by ensuring that any new development is sensitive to the surrounding built and natural environment in context of scale and form. And development should also adequately address parking needs and mitigate impact to adjacent neighborhoods. So the purpose of the original Freistree overlay district was to maintain the character of the area. The proposed amendment would allow for the highest density in the area and while that use is permitted the original intent of the overlay was to have cohesive development and maintain character of the area. With a consideration for the parking requirement the deficit between the required parking per the overlay district as it's currently written and then the proposed amendment to the overlay district there's a deficit of 110 spaces. Reductions in the requirement to parking on a site-by-site basis is not a comprehensive approach to analyzing the impact of parking reductions on the greater Freistree area. These are two considerations from other departments on the project. The scoping for the traffic impact analysis has been initiated however a formal traffic impact analysis has not been submitted for review. Also from the fire department the applicant has not been able to verify on the site plans provided in your backup the aerial apparatus access to the building. So while the development does increase the stock of student housing which is an important goal in the debt and plan 2030 the proposed amendment and associated development conditions are not consistent with the debt and plan 2030 in some other ways. First it doesn't adequately address the parking needs of the project and it does not mitigate spillover into the surrounding neighborhood. The potential impact on the surrounding infrastructure particularly to the sewer and inconsistency in urban form and scale. Staff has concerns about these continuous amendments to the Freistree overlay district standards without fully understanding the impact of these higher density and intensity projects on infrastructure the transportation and parking network and neighborhood compatibility. And just as an aside note we know the planning department understands that these are hurdles for the development community and a Freistree small area plan the work draft plan was presented to City Council yesterday during work session. Small area plans allow for the planning department to go back with other departments and look at this area at a more macro level to understand what the community vision is and also what the debt and plan 2030s vision is. Two neighborhood meetings were held the neighborhood expressed a level of comfort with sub area A of the Freistree overlay district is written but concerns were raised by attendance of the meetings those included increased traffic along Oak and Hickory increased parking in Semigul family neighborhoods adjacent to the project and lack of a shade study for height of the building. Per section 3573 of the Denton development code special purpose overlay districts are established to protect and enhance specific lands which just by the virtue of their type and location have characteristics which are distinct from lands and structures outside of such special districts. Changes to the overlay district must enhance or conform to the purpose of the overlay districts goals and objectives and the current the proposed amendments as submitted are a continuous amendment to the Freistree overlay district and they are a comprehensive analysis of their impact to the adjacent neighborhoods. Public notifications were sent out on January 13th 2016 27 were sent within 200 feet 71 within 500 feet and we have not had any 200 foot response returned. Staff recommends denial of Z 1529 based on the considerations presented as requested the amendment further compromises the Freistree overlay district standards and I will stand for any questions. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. I was just trying to understand some some procedural options here. If if there were a project to come forward in an overlay district and they wanted a variance on just just on number of parking lots or parking spaces in their parking lot do would they have to amend the overlay or could they come in for like a variance or an ADP is there is there any other process that they can use other than am ending the overlay? Less spots would be through the variance procedure I believe. So if this just to clarify if the overlay district standards specify a parking ratio and there is a the African is if it says you must have a minimum of X spaces or you must have no more than so many spaces where that ratio is specified and that ratio is being changed then it would warrant an amendment to the overlay district because that specification is in the overlay district. And there's no so a variance is not an option and ADP is not an option there 's no other option except for to amend the overlay. Okay thank you. Commissioner Bruegel. Thank you chair. I'm Sophie in one of your slides you said that there was going to be a deficit of about 110 parking spaces how many dwelling units are proposed in this? I believe it comes out to total number of bedrooms was sorry The bed count is 308 I believe. 300 on the nose. There's 300 bedrooms with a potential of 300 residents. I mean could two or more people share a bedroom in that in this situation I mean. The breakout there are one two sorry there are two three and four bedroom units. Right so this 300 so my I guess my question is how many people are projected to live there is it 300 because there 's 300 bedrooms or is it 500 because someone might have a roommate in there? To my knowledge they are rented by the room so that would be 300 students and the applicant can correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you I appreciate that thank you. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you chair. Can staff speak to this I'm not sure if this question can be answered but sub area B the original sub area that had the one-to-one parking do we know if that was adequate parking is there a lot completely full or do they have extra spaces in the other parking is a one-for-one a good standard to have do we know? As it's written in sub area B the requirement is one-for-one. As for the current parking in the Fry Street overlay district during the neighborhood meetings there was very vocal there is a large portion of that community that felt like parking wasn 't addressed in that one-to-one ratio. I've also heard that it's not completely parked all the time so there's some conflicting information there's a lot of literature that says the parking minimums induce extra parking however we have to look at this area and realize that if we allow site-by-site reductions of parking we're not able to take it from a macro level and understand what the true parking problems are in that district and until we do that it's hard to reconcile those into an amendment to the overlay district. So from the feedback you've been provided although all the parking spots might not be used there is some spillage happening on the side streets? Okay thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Excuse me just for some clarification now these aren't or are they true one-bedroom two-bedroom apartments are they what I guess we call shared apartments where there's maybe one two or three bedrooms but they share a common area and a kitchen? Based on the first floor site plan that the building layout that I have yes that's the that the there are two three and four bedroom units and they share common space the applicant is here and can speak more to that product. Okay thank you. Commissioner Dadowitz. Further clarification please I understand there's gonna be retail businesses on the bottom floor yes sir and I suspect there's gonna be need for parking for those people that's gonna visit those retail establishments yes sir how is that provided for? Currently those parking numbers are in the provided parking there's 220 spaces provided so based on their ratio they've provided for both the multi-family component and for the retail component and yet you still say they're 120 plus short? Yes they are. Now you mentioned something about remote parking in off-street parking to serve that a building is that considered in part of that count also? Sure in the Fry Street Overlay District when you come in for a see-over property if you don't have the parking maybe on- site as we know a lot of those don't you can provide a shared parking agreement that's recorded through the county and that can be within a thousand feet of that building I believe in the DDC and other areas of the city that's limited to 300 feet. Thank you. So if I have one question on our code our code states that one bedroom is counts for a half a unit correct? Yes sir. So two bedrooms and makes one unit. Yes sir. Okay thank you. Commissioner Tyler. Thank you chair so one more question I couldn't I couldn't locate it in the overlay is there a requirement in the overlay district for a mixed-use nature on these larger projects does it specify a ratio of residential to retail square footage? No there's no requirement for that ratio no. Thank you. Commissioner Bruegel. Sorry thank you circling back to piggybacking off of you so two bedrooms would be considered one unit so how many parking spaces are provided there's a hundred and ten parking space deficit. There if they followed sub area B or sorry sub area A requirements they would be required to have 330 parking spaces what they've provided is 220 parking spaces which complies with their proposed amendment. I see thank you. Any other questions for staff? Thank you Sophie. This is a public hearing and we've got a number of cards I'm going to start we have one group card and then we'll move to individuals the group card I have is from looks like Rob Baldwin applicant please this is Rodney I'm Rob. I'm technically the applicant but Rodney's the developer so if it's okay I'd like for him to go first and then Ten minutes. Good evening Mr. Chair good evening commission ers my name is Rodney King this is the conceptual housing plan for the fresh street project that we want to do. I'm vice president of real estate development with EDR before we go into the project I want to give you guys just an overview of what EDR is and what EDR does. We're based in Memphis Tennessee where the nation's second largest student housing REIT with 52 years old and this is an important important point that I want to make we own and manage all of our projects we don't sub out our management group to anybody else so we wouldn't build a project that would not be financially feasible. We have six other properties here in Texas. This just shows you a brief map of our Texas properties. We have one property that is very close to here and that serves Texas Christian University over in Fort Worth so I encourage all the commissioners and members of the public to actually go see their property you can see the quality of development that we develop. Here are just a few projects that we have in the area this Arizona State University that's a picture of the Texas TCU property. Minnesota and Texas Tech University of Connecticut and UT Austin. One important point on all those properties that I just showed you none of those properties are parked one-to- one. Good sound good sound planning practices does not encourage one-to-one parking in any urban intense development. This development has been we've been in the community for quite a while we've started thinking about this development about this time last year and we started making our public outreach. We've had several public meetings informal informal with several members of the community starting back till early September. We met with the historic the leaders of the historic neighborhoods we met with the University of North Texas we've had two public meetings and an additional follow-up meeting with the University of North Texas and one important point with the public meetings we initially proposed a plan that had 374 beds and there was about 60% parked. During that public meeting we heard some opposition so we went back to the drawing table reduce the bed count and increase the parking ratio to where we are today. I'm gonna let Rob talk a little bit about the D IN plan 2030 and how this project supports that. Thank you very much my name is Rob Baldwin office at 3904 Elm Street Suite B in Dallas and I'm an urban planner and a planning consultant and I'm helping EDR with this. The DIN plan 2030 it's big there's a lot that it says but there's a couple of things that I think is important here. One it promotes mixed-use development especially mixed-use development next to the University and it states that the mixed-use development you should take a look at the parking requirements make sure they're adequate and there's actually a provision in the urban design standards that says if you're a mixed-use project with the University you shouldn't even have to provide off-street parking. I think that's a little extreme and I don't think that that we're asking for that but I think it does recognize that maybe since we're proximity to a large generator of where people are going and we have students right across the street from where they're going to be going maybe a relaxation the parking standards make sense. In fact the city's land development code says that parking should be looked at an individual basis if it doesn't there it's warranted to take a look at specific projects that may the one-to-one parking may not make sense and the great way to bring it forward is this to the planning Commission and zoning Commission to take a look at it. So the 2030 plan says that this type of this area should serve as a buffer between the University and the residential to the north and I think this does it. This project is very similar to the Frye Street Center project in fact it's the same architect the difference is it's smaller it's not as it's not as doesn't take up a full block it is actually shorter by three feet or two feet then than that the parking garage and that existing project can go up to 60 feet where the buildings can go to 55 feet we're proposing 58 feet the difference is all of our parking is internal. This is consistent with the plans recommendation that the goal provided multi-mode transportation near the University this is interesting that we have zip car if I don't know familiar with zip car where cars are on site so if someone needs a car they can rent it for the day they can rent it for the hour. EDR is a partner with uber when people come in they get to rent there they get uber coupons we're right on transit line it's they have a bicycle sharing program and they have a large bicycle storage area in the garage so this is truly a multi-modal project right across from the University which seems from a plan standpoint in my mind to make sense and this project also furthers the urban design guidelines there the urban design guidance want to have a good presence along the street and this doesn't it's going to look very similar to the project down the street where we have a nice street wall a lot of landscaping a lot of pedestrian amenities so I think we are consistent with the plan again it's a big plan there's a lot of places where you can pick and choose I think the overall thrust is let's use some planning and some common sense when you have a use a mixed use next to the University and I think that we're doing that and I'm gonna turn it back over to Rodney and then I'll be here to answer any questions you may have after Rodney's done I see the timer ticking on me may I ask for additional time because we want to address clarification of staff each of you get 10 minutes for a total of 20 so okay no problem just to clarify some of the project information is 300 bits 83 units 222 parking spaces that equates to 74 percent part and as you know this project is adjacent to the University of North Texas on a more macro level to compare this project to the previously approved projects at this council and this commission this and the council has passed this is very similar to both of those projects with one major difference between the youth center at fresh dress fresh street project that project is a hundred percent part and based on our market study from the management company who operates that property they only utilize about 70 to 75 percent of their parking they can't even charge for parking because they don't have the demand for it here's a more architectural comparison of that property we're about three feet higher than the building but two feet shorter than the garage you guys have hard copies of this packet in your it your desk this property is most similar to the property that we're requesting this property is actually about 70 78 percent part 427 days 348 parking spaces and 275 of those spaces are occupied which equates to 56 to 64 percent utilization utilization rate and this is from the directly from the management company so we don't necessarily believe that the demand for 100 percent parking is there I'm going to have Adam and Don talk about the preliminary results of the traffic study you can take that off of my time good evening my name is Don says name the director of traffic engineering services with Dunaway Associates and just to give you a little bit of background I'm gonna actually go to the next slide before I go to this one we basically did a traffic study our preliminary the traffic study is in progress and the reason why it's in progress there's two fold we we had to wait for the students to get back in campus in order to collect some additional traffic count data the bulk of the data was collected last semester just before finals week and there were there are a couple more intersections that that they wanted counted so we had to wait for the students get back in session second of all we we asked for city approval of our proposed scope and we got those comments back late Friday afternoon so it's it 's work in progress as far as the traffic study goes just to summarize some of the findings here the vehicular trips during the peak hours the a.m. and p.m. as you can see in the morning we're expecting 30 additional vehicles and in the evening we're expecting 41 additional vehicles bulk of the traffic will be pedestrian trips in the a.m. we anticipate 67 pedestrians and in the p.m. 94 pedestrians to summarize the intersection operations all the intersections now that all the intersections were from Welch along Oak and Hickory all the way down to Bonnie Bray and then we also looked at the Bonnie Bray and scripture intersection all the intersections are expected to operate in level service here better except for Oak and Welch which is currently un-signalized and it's currently operating at level service D the problem movement there is the north bound left turn with site traffic it's going to decrease to level service E and when I talk about level service it's synonymous with grades in school they go from a to F a being good F being bad and then Bonnie Bray and scripture is currently operating at level service D and from my understanding it's soon to be signalized and once it's signalized it will improve the level service A so getting back to the pedestrians this here is what I'm calling potential pedestrian paths the blue dots within the red area are the residential access points these could be elevators I think the one in within the garage is an elevator and then the two on the outer outer boundaries are stairwells the green dot is the retail front door so looking at potential paths for the pedestrians the different lines that are indicate potential pedestrian paths now ideally we'd like all the pedestrians to cross at the signalized intersections but will that happen so one of the things we might consider is how do how do we address that pedestrian movement it could be a mid- block crossing it could be some additional enhancements at the the the intersection to the southwest there having to be so in summary I think the there's not going to be a vehicular issue with this with this project but pedestrians is definitely something that needs to be addressed I'll turn back over to Rodney thank you I think Rob touched on this area earlier just some of the amenities in this project that will actually reduce vehicular traffic is zip car we have a service called gotcha bike where it's a community bike program any resident can use a bike for a specific amount of time they just have to rent it out and bring it back it's very similar to a city bike in Dallas and uber I'm gonna let Adam or Randall with Don away as an associate to talk about site capacities and site infrastructure how this project will have a positive or negative impact on that good evening commissioners Adam Reeves Don away associates 170 North Preston Prosper Texas Don and I work together he's the expert on the traffic that's why he spoke before I'll try and give an overview of the remainder of the engineering questions you may have in terms of site capacity the utilities around the site obviously Hickory and Oak have been around for many many years there is full infrastructure both on each one of those roads that we would connect into through pre-development meetings we've had with the city staff gone back and forth with the engineering department several times there are waterline connections sewer line connections on both of those roadways which we would propose tying into early studies that the city has done has told us from a sewer capacity standpoint essentially we would just split our building flow north and south to each one of those roads in that split into those two systems would provide the capacity we need for the hotels the room or excuse me the rooms that we're going to have on the site from a waterline standpoint water pressure we believe everything is fine for the system if it comes down to it when we get to the engineering if anything just do the height of the building potential look at fire pumps or something in that situation to make sure the pressure inside the building is adequate when we get that extra elevation from a storm drainage standpoint that site is essentially developed to a fully impervious condition at today well with the sidewalks along both streets the parking lot and the buildings taking up almost the entire lot that we're going to take so essentially it would just be almost a one-for-one condition however that drainage is today it would be the same amount of runoff that you would see in the ultimate condition and just over the course of not the zoning separate but during the zoning is approved during our construction plan process for those plans we would make sure that we're proving each one of those conditions out and coordinating with your engineering staff to make sure they're satisfied with what we're proposing I'll be around if there's more questions as well just to refute a comment that was made in the earlier work session based on our talks with the city engineering staff the site does have enough capacity for this project and just some of the advantages and requests that we're actually making from project as you all know this project is within steps of the University of North Texas so we truly believe and we have evidence throughout our 60 properties that we operate across the country that students will not take their cars from this project to the University of Texas so we believe this project will actually help in the traffic congestion problem that's around Fry, Hickory and Oak Street and also this project is walkable to entertainment venues that should help on the late night traffic as you hear it done say we believe the majority of our traffic exiting this building will be actually pedestrians they're not necessarily vehicle traffic and the two key requests that we're making is increase the height limitation from 45 feet to 58 feet which is three feet higher a yardstick higher than the existing building at U Center Fry Street and two feet smaller shorter than the garage and reduce the parking ratio from one to one to 0.7 to one. Rob did you just sum it up sure I think this is a great example of mixed-use development in an appropriate location and we think that with EDR's experience in doing this they wouldn't propose something they couldn't finance operate or maintain they do not sell their products so they're not they're not going to go forward to do something that's going to cause them a headache later. We're here to answer any questions you may have and we hope you can be supportive of what we're asking for thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. For anyone here these are going to be apartments for students correct? Correct. Okay. We believe the intended uses for students obviously via fair housing laws we can't restrict a residency from the open general public okay but been across the street from the University of North Texas we believe 99% of our tenants will be students of North Texas. Okay and I don't disagree with your argument that once these students are there they're not going to use their vehicles a lot right they're going to do a lot of walking and biking but my question is to you how do they get to this dwelling in the first place they're coming from out of town or maybe the other side of town they're not necessarily going to walk or drive so where do they put their car when we run out of parking spaces in your facility in the garage I guess where you're going to be putting below the surface is that correct? Well no the parking spaces I don't know if you guys have the exact site plan the parking garage is interior building so there is a 222 space parking garage that's concealed by the housing development. Okay gotcha you're right so where when these students get here where they gonna put their cars if there's no place in that facility put it they're gonna put them on the streets and that's I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the overflow how that'll affect? Based on the two direct most comparable properties in the market we don't necessarily believe that we will have a hundred percent a hundred percent of our tenants will not have cars. Okay how do they get there though how does that how does that work out I mean what is that based on do their parents come and drop them off and then come get them when they go home? A lot of college students don't necessarily own or have cars so typically however they got to school they would just live in our apartment and utilize the pedestrian access points that we will construct to go to class. Okay again I'm not sure maybe I'm not making clear I'm not sure you're answering my question they've got to get there by some mode of transportation I would suspect that very few of them are going to walk or bike if they live in those apartments they're probably okay sure. I have a daughter in college and she's in a suburban college location and you would expect a lot of people to have cars it's in California you know where it's a California car culture there's probably 20 to 30 percent of her class she 's a sophomore that own cars the rest of people they they drive their parents drive them and drop them off. Okay so that's pretty much what your base in your estimates on then is that? Well in their experience they have how many projects in Texas? We have six properties in Texas we own or manage around 40,000 bids across the country so as Rob alluded to earlier we would not build a project that would not be successful. We are a nationally recognized company and we don't sell our projects we're actually penalized if we develop something and sell it because we're a real estate investment trust traded on the New York Stock has changed the stock ticker EDR. Okay one last question then I'll turn it over these Texas sites that you have how long have they been in existence where if we did want to go view them have they been around? The most yes they've been around the the one that was the most recently developed was delivered in 2013 in Austin Texas we have a site under construction now in San Marcos Texas that is 69% parked. What about the TCU? TCU has been around since 2005 but don't quote me on that and I would encourage you to go look at that site and you look at the utilization of our parking garage. Okay thank you. Commissioner Bruegel. Thank you chair. Mr. King I acknowledge that you you have made some accommodations after meeting with the neighborhood you scaled back the size of the or the number of dwelling bedrooms and increased parking spaces I'm wondering were there other accommodations that were made when you met with the neighborhood? Well those were the two items of note we've made some some additional architectural changes to actually let the space on the first floor be subdivided for future use if smaller tenants want to come in but that wasn't necessarily an issue with the neighborhood the primary point of focus with the neighborhood meetings was the parking. And what about the height of the building did anyone mention that to you in their neighborhood meetings? Believe it or not we thought height would be a big issue but when you look at the height on the raw terms it's pretty comparable as I said earlier it's a yard stick taller than the building that's down the street and most neighbors have it hasn't that issue hasn't arose again since we provide the data. Okay thank you. Commissioner Hutsmith. So I have two questions. One I'm curious if you have any documentation so you've you've alluded to the numbers for your site your other sites and and so and the the document you alluded to the numbers of the sites on that same in that same area but there's there's no I'm assuming from your the properties you could have easily or have gotten that written down that says here's our current usage here's our current there's nothing that that that documents other than you representing it so. Well I can definitely get that information but we didn't think that information was relevant we thought the two properties that are in the market are the most relevant comps. So sure and I agree and you've had a conversation with them and so I'm assuming at some level they would write that. Well you got to remember their competitors so they're not looking for a competitor to come into the market so I wouldn't want to put my fate in their hands. Okay my only my only point to that is if they're discussing it with you then obviously they're revealing something behind some closed order that you know they've gone a step if I want to keep something secret I won't even discuss it with you so the fact that they've discussed it with you means there's some level of in my opinion and I could be wrong I could just be ignorant to that but I don't I'll tell you where I struggle with I have your word correct and nothing in documenting those those facts. Well to your point there are two properties they're owned by two different groups one group is owned by ACC which is out of Austin Texas which is our chief competitor and we have a friendly arrangement that we share information back and forth we did get objective information on the Eagle Street property that property was on the market to be sold so we do have the due diligence materials there they're typically out open to the public so that information has been verified through the marketing of the property. Okay and then if I may the other question I had is so I've you've highlighted the similarities correct what's the difference what is that what is the and give me give me just the the top one or two what what what value add do you bring to that to that area? The differences in this project is actually smaller than both of those projects that are on Hick on Fry Street and the Eagle Drive project so we're not looking for a massive intensive use like the youth center at Fry Street project and also one of the differences is it may not necessarily answer your question but the University of North Texas is growing and they have an aggressive growth plan and they're going there is a need for this type of housing the entire market here in Den Texas is 99% occupied . One other thing I think they bring is that they own and operate their own facilities they're not merchant builders they don't build it and then sell it so they're they're going to be around to make sure it's maintained for their investors. If I may. Continue you have the floor. So a but really I'm looking for a tangible I guess that's my point I understand the need for apartments and housing for the students I understand that due to that need someone's going to build an apartment but what I'm specifically saying what tangible I could I for example there's grocery stores and needed what what what value add what tangible if I'm talking to a student a resident in that area that's going to be against your proposal there's got to be do you have something that says here's why this is a good project for not only the students that it's walkable that sort of thing but for the area. I think you just hit on it there are about 13 purpose-built student properties here and then two of them only two out of 13 of pedestrian to campus so the value we bring to this project is the location and the proximity to the University of North Texas. Okay thank you. Correct and that is one important point that Rob just brought up I don 't know if you guys can see it in the conceptual plan but Vortmans right now occupies that site Vortmans will be going back into the building on the first floor and they will own their space. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you sir. I have a question about the renting of the apartments if it's a two-bedroom is it rented as a two-bedroom for one name lease or is it two different people in the lease? We rent per bedroom so a two-bedroom apartment can have two tenants in it they cannot share or double up in the bedroom so we have 300 beds we intend to have 300 residents hopefully if we're successful in this development. So if if me and a friend go in and rent two bedrooms and he decides that he wants out, breaks the lease and leaves are you free to rent that room out to any applicant? Correct that's the beauty of the purpose-built student housing. Parents really like the concept because you're not liable for your roommates rent you're only liable for the lease you signed so if your friend you know prunex on his lease we can rent that we can relit that space to another tenant. But that other tenant could be a non-student? Technically it could be but with the proximity and use we own or manage 40,000 beds across the country about 99% of our residents are students. Sure I understand that I'd still have a concern about bringing in an older individual who can just room with with any student on campus. And that's one of the points we have our own management partner if there is a roommate conflict we offer services to deal with that we typically interface with the university on a monthly basis so if there's a grave or you know concern about your roommate we'll do our best to relocate that roommate to make sure they're comfortable. Thank you. Commissioner Dudowitz. Thank you chair just to get some more clarification what's the cost to a student or a resident per bed and how is it allocated per month or quarter per semester? They pay monthly rent the cost would be very similar to the youth center and frasteries starting about 650 for a four-bedroom I think a three bedroom goes all the way up to about 900 bucks. So between 650 to 900 per month? Correct. What happens during the summer when classes are out? There are 12 month leases. There are 12 month lease. Are they allowed to sublease? No. Okay again that's another question. Parking how is one access to the parking lot is it a gate? I don't know if you can see the conceptual plan and this may be a little bit confusing what you're looking at now that private drive is not there now with the construction of this building we will create a private drive so if you see that opening in the conceptual painting right with a car that's where the garage is. That's a good point I want to make that no traffic or car stacking will occur on Hickory or Oak Street it will all occur on the private drive. Okay now is there a metered gate? Correct there is secured access to the garage. But not for the retail parking. Excuse me? There's secured access to the parking garage for the residents not for the retail parking spaces. Okay so that's right okay so the gate is further up so retail can come in and park on the ground level and how many parking spaces have you allocated to that? We haven't detailed that out yet we're still in negotiations with the city to see we got to kind of get some bookmarks to see what the usage but we believe the retail the allotted square footage that we have now per code requires 18 spaces for the retail we believe have more than enough to accommodate that. Further to the owner of the space may want more. Okay further to the retail besides Vortmans how many other storefronts are planned? I'm sorry besides Vortmans how many retail storefronts? We have two we have Vortmans and the Subway restaurant is expressed in the interest of going back in. So you only have two retail? That's all of the space though we have two named tenants which will occupy 100% of the square footage. So it's not four or five six it's just two two residents and that's the extent of retail. Correct and the both of those the extent of retail is about 15,000 square feet which will occupy the entire Hickory Street frontage. But Subway and Vortmans? Correct. Which were displaced or will be displaced but coming back in so they're so they 're already there. Correct. And the business and traffic they have there now will just come right back. Is that your? I believe so. Okay so it's not adding anything more or less in your opinion as we discussed? Okay thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Mr. King kind of staying with Commissioner Hudspeth's concerns about your data regarding based on similar apartment units and their need for parking. You mentioned that the Eagle Street apartment I can't think of the name of but you know what I 'm talking about. 33 degrees. Right right you mentioned that you got your data from the due diligence made from the sale of the property is that correct? Well we got our data made we got our initial data from that packet and we confirmed with the management company on January 6th of this month. Okay so there was two time periods there. What was the difference between time periods a month? Well the due diligence packet went out late last year when the property was on the market. Yeah. So we confirmed we reconfirmed that information earlier this month. Okay and I'm gonna get into near you may or may not know it but they were selling their property is it because they were unable to keep enough occupancy to make any money do you know? That property is a hundred percent occupied they were selling the property because Rob alluded to this earlier. A typical developers build develop a property and then about two years of operation they sell it to maximize their profit and go on to the next development. We don't do that we will develop this property on and operate it in perpetuity. Okay so as far as you know they sold their property to somebody else to keep it running is that correct? I'm sorry. The people at the Eagle Street Department they were selling it not because business was bad. No they were selling because business is great. Okay okay thanks. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you Jim I might be the last one up here to ask you a question before we move into the public hearing. So could you explain a little bit more in this this concept plan I think I understand it now but you show a lot of green space and a corner on a street that doesn't currently exist could you just walk us through and lay us out where this is ? Okay well right now this site I wish I had a site map but I don't this site is right now where it's currently occupying the Bortman's lot and if you look at this car here that's where the coffee shop is right right off the map so this private drive will be will intersect Oak and Hickory. Actually let me let the architect explain it a little bit better than me. There was a site plan. I'm sorry yeah. I wanted to explain their pretty picture. Staff we have a site plan in your module that I think might suffice that it's not in their deck. Okay. That the public can see. Is that a mouse? Yeah there's a mouse here. [Silence] 138 139 and 143. Okay my name is Yao Yu from Humphrey's and Partners Architects. I live in 2529 Scenic Drive Plano, Texas. So on this let me just explain how this works. You can see my mouse? Yeah. So you know this this is Hickory Street and then that's on the south and Oak Street on the north. So we have a private drive that basically connects those two streets and that also act as a service drive. So basically if you're a student or a retail user you come through that and then and then in the middle that's where you enter the gate. Not the gated garage. So this is how you enter it through the service drive. So off that then you can enter the garage. So you know probably this is the portion that's for the retails and then you get up the ramp which where we will have a probably a gate somewhere here to segregate the retail parking versus the residential parking . The retails are all rated basically on Hickory Street. That's where it is. And then on the elevation that you see. So the side is not flat. It has about a feet of drop. So that's why you can see that the side basically goes up. So the corner of southeast is really the lowest point. That's where we have all the retail entries. Basically the bookstore and subways. And the so then that other area that 's that kind of becomes a basement heads back into the hills. That's a warehouse area for the bookstore. Yes that's what we are planning at this moment. It's not a warehouse area. It's usable, runnable space for the bookstore. Right but it's not it's not street accessible. It's not like a storefront. It's going to be the back of the store or something like that. And so this is 17,000 square feet of retail. Is that something like that? I think it's about 15. 15. And how much is existing on the site now? Right now Wortmans occupies about 24,000 square feet. Correct. Wort mans occupies about 24,000 square feet. They're reducing their footprint to about 11. A subway occupies about 1500. So they'll roughly be about the same amount. And are there any other current existing retail occupants? No. But the Vertman store does have the ability to further reduce its space and attract additional retailers. We've designed the site in such a way that it can be subdivided in the future. And a final question. Did you consider building a 35 foot high building and just removing the upper floor? We did. But in order for development to be financially feasible, you have to have a certain amount of scale. And with land prices in the area, that's what's dict ating the height of the building. Thank you. I've got a couple questions. You just mentioned that you've got an eight feet rise on the property. Correct. So I guess the west end of the building essentially on your measurements can be eight feet shorter than your tallest portion. Correct. Correct. Correct. Correct. Correct. Correct. We don't have any details as far as your concept plan. So this is the first ones that we've got an opportunity to see. Is the tallest part here on the corner and then the other parts of the building are stepping down because we don't have any of those details to review? Correct. The tallest part is at the southeast corner. The entry, the retail entry of the building. Okay. And what about the west end of the building? The west end of the building? Yes, sir. Up the street? Yes, sir. It's about eight foot shorter. But it is a continuous, it's 58 feet, it's 58 across the... Well, from the point of the base is 50 feet, but the ground rises eight feet. So the building is 50 feet tall on the west side and it grows to 58 as you come down the street. You just did it in reverse. You're going from the west going east and I'm going east going west. Okay. What you see in the corner is the highest corner, basically . Gotcha. And then the second question, I think one of the main elements that was missing is what's the issue with the fire apparatus? Right now we know there's an issue and we're working with the city to address that issue. Adam, yeah, you can speak to the actual technicalities of the fire apparatus issue. But if we don't solve that issue, we cannot develop this property. Yeah, basically we were proposing either the Hickory Street or the Oak Street as a fire apparatus road. And the width and the distance from basically require a 26 foot wide fire lane. And then from that edge of that fire lane to the building, there's a minimum requirement of 15 feet and a maximum requirement of 30 feet. So we meet all that. However, the fire marshal right now thinks there's going to be street parking on that to maybe blocking some of the parking, fire truck parking. So she is having some reservation on that. But to the letter of the fire code, we meet it. There's a small sentence at the end that says that the local fire marshal's discretion. So that's the part we're working through. Okay, so you can't meet it with your private drive area then? No. Okay. We've widened the private drive 26 feet, but from the edge of the private drive to the building is 10 feet instead of 15. So we're working through that. Okay. Looks like I've spoken. We've got some more questions now. Commissioner Hodgepitt. Thank you. I just, quick question. The private drive, is that two-way? Yes. And give me a, help me see that. Is that just a, is it an alleyway cement on either side? Obviously the building's on one side. What's on that, what's on the side of the coffee shop there ? Yeah, landscaping. Yes, that's what's shown right now. It's on the landscaping plan here. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Commissioner Begg. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair. Hopefully this will be the last question to help from us. But, and this is totally unrelated to the type of question we've been having, but it is related to something that concerns the city with our renewable energy. Okay. I didn't plan. What green construction practices are y'all planning on utilizing? We typically utilize all the LEED practices. Y'all can speak to more of that. We won't be commissioning the building for any sort of LEED certification, but we do believe it's good operational and maintenance practices to design a renewable and energy sustainable building. Okay. Because we will operate it in its perpetuity. Using the LEED standards? Using LEED standards. Right. L-E-D. Right. Got it. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions? Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, guys. Again, this is a public hearing . I have a number of cards. I'm going to start. I'm going to change the order. We have cards, blue cards to speak, and we have white cards that do not wish to speak. So I'm going to read those into the record first. So if those people are here and want to leave, they at least know their comments have been brought into the record. And I want to remind the audience, as a reminder from staff to me, is that we have two items as a commission that we're able to consider on this project . One is the height of the building, and the second item is in regards to the ratio on the parking. Other than that, this project does meet the zoning requirements for this area. It can be built there if it was shorter. If the parking requirements were met, they could build a project. So the two items that we have to, again, to consider is the building height and the parking. And with that clarification, I'm going to start with, I have Bridget Corbett. Okay. These are the ones that aren't. She did not wish to speak. She was in opposition to the project , and there's no comment as to why. Then there is Penny Coo ley. She is in opposition, does not wish to speak, and there is no additional comment on that. And then there is B. Elaine Davis. She does not wish to speak, and she is in opposition with no particular comment. I think there's one other item is the density. Is that correct? So three items instead of two. Okay. My apologies. And we have our blue cards. These are individuals that do wish to speak. Again, this is a public hearing, so as I call you forward, I'm going to go ahead because of the number. I will give the next person to speak if you'll get ready. When you come up, if you will state your name and address for the record, you'll have three minutes to speak. Our first card will be Darlene Mullenweg at 711 West Oak, followed by Mary Anderson. Before my time starts, how long do I have? Three minutes. All right. Darlene Mullenweg, 711 West Oak Street. I live about one and a half blocks from this project. I do not have any doubt this will be a very successful housing project. And they are very liquid, a very good company. I've checked them out. I do have a problem with their asking for a variance on parking. Their impact study, which the city has not done, they left it to the developer to do that, was done when they said our peak times at Welch and I believe Avenue B. I came down there about three weeks ago after school had started going east on Hickory, leaving CVS out their back way, got the light at B. There was a bus that stops south there. He turned the corner in front of me. He goes down and stops at Fry Street. There's two lanes of traffic that cannot get through. I waited for three lights at Fry Street. And we don't even have this. So my problem is not with their project. It's with the traffic that it is going to cause. And he said they're going to have bicycles. There are no bicycle lanes on Oak and Hickory Street. They don't even start until you get west of Avenue B. And even if they had bicycle lanes like they do on Alice when I went down today and they were using the full lane because they're allowed to use the full lane, you can't go anywhere. So there is a real problem because high schoolers have their own cars. So definitely college kids have their own cars. And maybe their study has shows that in the Austin area, because there are a lot of people from around Austin, they can take the bus from their little suburbs into the area. People here are commuting in. It's too far for them not to have a car. So I really object to that. I don't think a variant should be allowed for this. And I think until we get this complete overlay for Fry Street, complete and know what we really need there and a traffic impact study, that this cannot go forward. And I have nothing against these people. I mean, there's a quality company. But I just truly object because of the traffic. Before you go, we have a question for you. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Darlene, for coming down and speaking on this. And I appreciate your insights on the traffic condition you experienced that day. Let me ask you, this traffic is a big concern, but parking too. What were parking conditions like that day on Hickory and Oak? Well, they were parked, you know, in every metered parking there was a car. I live on Oak Street, which only allows parking on the south side of the street. And they say this will have a private drive. I have a private drive. I can't get out of my private drive . The other morning, I waited for 16 cars to go past my private drive to back out. So I can't see that additional traffic is going to improve. That's the other thing. This is supposed to be a compatible university neighborhood overlay. And I don't see this being compatible. I don't think there's enough green space in that area. We 're we're creating the Grand Canyon down there with cars instead of watercraft. OK, one earth question. Commissioner Roseau. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here and giving testimony. I have a question. You live to the east of campus, correct? I do. So you have all the traffic going to the campus. All the traffic. In terms of. Not only. Go ahead. Vehicle. We have lots of pedestrian traffic. Sure. Sure. Yeah. My question is in terms of the staff mentioned it previously, the parking induces cars if there's 200 spots, then 200 cars. No, they can have a parking spot. If you increase that to 300 cars, do you not see an additional 100 cars then more on Oak? Or how do you can provide insight to that? Double deck them . I don't know where they're going to go. Not in terms of parking time, but would would increasing the number of parking spots increase traffic on your street ? Of course. But you're in favor of adding parking spots. I'm just trying to understand the impact to you personally on that. Add 300 residents to that one point seven acres. I have an 80 acre farm. I know how big one point seven acres is. It's not big. That is an incredible amount of my pads and vehicles for one point seven acres. Sure. You know, this this project should be in a high traffic urban area. And it's not. It is because university is across the street from Hickory, but across the street from Oak, it's a residential area, folks. So this isn't to me compatible, you know, with with the size of the project. And I know they reduced it. I was here before. And I think they did a fairly good job. But I'm a tell the city figures out how we can manage the vehicles that we have in the parking in this city and do a really in depth study and do a traffic impact study. I think you would be floored at the amount of traffic that 's on that street. Sure. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Have Mary Anderson to be followed by Jeff Paula. So only three minutes they get to all right. Mary Anderson, nine twenty four West Oak. I am against this because of density and parking and traffic. They can build a building that is higher than anything else now in the area. Absolutely the highest thing that will be there because it 's above what's given. But the parking is horrible. I also live on. I live even closer than Darlene. And it's often that I sit and wait and wait and I can't get out. And the bicycles do hog the road along with the buses and everything else just because you believe they won't park there. This isn't Austin. Keep calling us UT. It's UNT. I work at a university. I won't specify. But students like their cars. They need to get to work so they can pay the bills. So not only they go to class, they're not always partying. Believe it or not, they actually work to pay. So they need a car to get to work and a car to get home. And the girlfriends and the boyfriends come over and there 's no accounting that they only rent to one bed. But I, you know, it could be a double bed, right? So there could be even more people there. Six hundred people there. That's a lot of cars. There are many times I can't get out of my house very easily. We need to have better than I think or I believe. I want to thank you, Mr. Hudsworth, for asking for data. I really appreciate that because I'm tired of I believe. I 'm a scientist. I must show data or I'm left out of here. I can believe the moon is made of green cheese, but they would laugh me out of science. I am laughing at their data because they're not showing it proprietary. But believe me, trust me, I've heard that before. They say that on 33 North Apartments that on January 6th, they weren't full. School didn't start till the 21st. I know. I teach. So that's a joke. They can fill those spaces. They're picking their data. It's a phony data set. Please have an independent study of traffic, not on the summers, not during exam week when the students are home studying and only a few come into campus to take things. You know, ask some people in the university. They cite the university. Has there been a piece of paper that says the university needs this? The university is in the business of running their own housing. This is a nice profit making thing. I have no problem. But they don't live here. They don't see the traffic I deal with. They don't see all of that. And there's going to be more traffic. I don't care whether you cut down the number of parking spaces. Just means I'm going to call a tow truck more often so I can get out of my driveway. And, you know, it's supposed to be an overlay that enhances . It's supposed to be a gradual transition. This project is neither one. Make it smaller. Provide parking. Don't be a burden to your neighbors. You can still make a profit. It may not be 200 percent a year. It might only be 20 percent a year, but I'd be pretty happy with that. And please don't fear that they'll go away. They won't go away. They'll come back. Somebody else will buy this and put up something else and we'll be going through this again. Get it right. Wait until we have a decent overlay. There is no rush. You know, we don't live in the heart of Austin where everything is rush, rush, rush. This is debt. Thank you. Thank you. Questions? No questions. Thank you, ma'am. Jeff Paula to be followed by looks like Kerry McKibbin. Jeff Pala from 716 West Oak Street. Thank you all for your time being here tonight. This is a really important topic for me. I am my wife and I are raising our two young children on an already busy Oak Street, a highly traveled Oak Street, high density of cars, frequent travel. I have a hard time getting out of my driveway as well. The density of this project is what concerns me most. The three hundred and thirty beds and the lack of parking. If you live here as you do, if you travel down to that area and you try to park, you can't find parking. There's no adequate parking and there's no way to say the college kids are not going to bring their cars and they're going to bike and they're going to Uber. That's just not reality. This is just not reality. You know , the height of the building. Fine. Looks OK. It does have a large lack of green space. I mean, it is it is it is concrete jungle, which is not really a good transition from the Oak Hickory neighborhood to the facility. I think many things have already been said, but the density is is is disturbing. The density is too much and the lack of parking is is laugh able. It's inadequate. Thank you. No questions. Thank you, sir. Carrie McKibbin, followed by Brent at thirteen, fourteen Hickory. Can't read your last name there. So Brent will be next. Carrie, I'm Kim. I'm Kim McKibbin. And other than Brent, I probably have more invested in this anything because I own the building in the business at thirteen oh six. Wex history. It's pretty interesting how the statistics have been presented when the studies have been done. Yes, there were lots of concerns about height because they 'll put my building in the dark most of the time, particularly in the winter when it snows real hard. You know, that driveway that they're talking about that's two lanes wide. That's going to be an issue if all I can address is the density, the parking and the height. Is that basically what we're basically can address whatever you like? Those are the things that we can. I have spoken to the city council. I came and asked them to grant no variances to the five street overlay for any new construction in the area for all the reasons that you've heard tonight. And if you look at the original thing, the purpose and intent of the overlay district is to promote the public's peace, safety, cleanliness and general welfare for community members and patrons of the five street district for providing for regulations on off street and remote parking. The location of solid waste containers and the regulation of signs sets back and residential and commercial density. This apartment building is going to be denser than just about anything we've got out there. I'm pleased to know that he has reduced their prices from seven hundred ninety nine dollars a month per bedroom to what he's saying now was six hundred and fifty. I think the initial contact that we had, that was what the price was, was seven ninety nine a month. And so they've changed their mind on that. That's nice for the students. Also, the beautiful outlay that you're seeing does not include the area buildings when they compare to the five street or the sterling complex. They have to realize that that was built on an empty block. They're wanting to build this building taller than any other building that's out there, not on a block by itself, but in a block that contains my building, my tenants, our neighbors, a house that set up into apartments, a church. These are all on that side of the thing. So they are not developing by themselves in isolation. The impact they're going to have is phenomenal for parking. What they're not telling you is that currently there is approximately sixty one parking spaces in the Vortman lot, in the subway lot and in the adjacent place that used to be a sushi place. Sixty one spots. Now, if they if you take out the additional six public places that are going to be in front of the retail entrance thing so they can get the cars in and out. Plus, then the other six free spots on Oak Street, you've got a fairly high number of public parking spaces you're going to leave. I also have some problems with someone's math here. The scale shows twelve thousand seven hundred square feet and the current overlay says that for every four hundred square feet you have to have one space for commercial. That means they're missing thirty one point seventy five spaces in addition to what they've already told you. Ask me questions. I've been here every meeting. No questions. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Brent, followed by Helen Dewey. My name is Brent Erskine. I am the owner of Burtman's thirteen fourteen West Hickory. I do understand that there is a parking issue. I'm partners in eight other stores across the country and I can assure you there is a parking issue at every single one of those being next to a university of that size. That is what comes with the territory and living that close to a university. I will say, though, at six a.m. when I get to work in the mornings and you go down Oak, there are no cars parked along the street with the exception of some of the small houses that have been chopped up by some of their neighbors and turns into apartment complexes. That's the only place that you'll see cars parked along the street. So the students that are living in the youth center that live in the youth center are not parking along the street when they're in their beds at six a.m. because we all know kids are in their beds at six a.m. They're not getting up early. I will also say that as an employer of over one hundred students, there are many of those students that do not have cars. I know that it's hard to fathom coming from many of us that are probably middle class that most kids have cars, but we do have several employees that don't have vehicles that they carpool with their friends and they do live in student student housing complexes even farther away from youth center or thirty three degrees north. They carpool from some of the ones out by Chuck E. Cheese. So that is not maybe as uncommon coming from the middle class family that every kid has a car as UNT is not the most expensive place to go to school. And there are other kids of other demographics going to school. Those are the comments that I had a question before you go. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. These people that work for you, though, they live in them, right? So their parents do not live in didn't know. Okay, they live in didn't because they go to school and didn't. Okay, but they do not live in didn't with their parents. They live in some of these student apartment complexes. Gotcha. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. No other further questions. This is a I'm sorry. I've got a couple more that just popped up. Apologize. Commissioner Hudge. Yeah, so unique perspective, right? So for you, how like what do you look? What are the changes? How do the changes affect your business? What what do you look forward to? What what impact do you see coming if this is allowed or if it's built? I think it cleans up the area as the owner of the property. I think it could be enhanced. We're at a crossing point to where we either try and sell it to somebody that can bring more traffic to the businesses in the area by adding beds. If I could buy into Mike's coffee, I would definitely love to do that. And she's going to have 300 new customers sitting right next to her. I'm sure that their business flow will come up. So as a business owner myself, I would be loved to have 300 new customers right above my business. It cleans up the area. It makes it look nicer with the newer building, not a building that I know some people want to say that it's historic, but it's actually been added on to six different times. And it has it's there's nothing historic about it besides the name itself, which is which we want to preserve as times change. And we are not what Mr. Verman had it with all of the fine gifts in China that he used to have in there. The times have changed. We have to condense down in order to make sure that we ensure viability. Big boxes out. I look at what Walmart you can go across the board. They're getting smaller. We have to do the same thing to make sure that we maintain our business and the vermin's name continues on. If I may continue and how are your sales? Great. They're down. We took it over and we took it over in 2013 and our sales have done nothing but grown every year since we've taken it over. And you attribute that to more students more. It's it's easily accessible that that sort of thing that it 's always it's been in the same location. So location doesn't have anything to do with it. I'd like you to think that it was myself and my staff was what I'd like to think. And having an owner actually on site and giving a personal customer experience is what we like to hope. Even some of the folks that are opposing, I think they'd say that we're friendly neighbors. OK. And one last thing. Sure. So the parking in back that that's a valid point. What is give me a day in the life of your parking lot. Sure. It's it's it's during the first week of school, we actually pay people to sit out in the parking lot to keep customers from parking there. It's definitely not you send our custom people parking in our lot. It's commuters that are parking in our lot. So we definitely that is a problem. There's no doubt about that. But I don't know that this is going to add to the problem. They say that it adds to it. But there's nowhere else to park on the street. There's nowhere else that can't get any worse than what it is. There's already parking on every single space. During school hours outside of school hours, you're not it 's like I said, 6 a.m. I have a video on my phone at 6 a.m. I drove down there, took video, probably shouldn't have been doing it. But there's there's nothing there's no cars parked there except that these chopped up apartments. So is it bad? Yes. But it's the commuters coming into town to go to class there, not the people who live in the area. Thank you. Another question for you. And we didn't get for the record. Were you in favor or opposed? In favor. In favor. Thank you. Commissioner Dudowitz. Some more clarification, please. Your business is existing today. Do you own the property? Yes, sir. And you're in favor of selling it to the developer? Yes, sir. We will sell it. We will sell the property to the developer. We will move off. We will move to a temporary location, much like the university bookstore did recently with their renovations. We will then move back into the new location where we will own our space in that building. Lease it or own it? Own it. OK. So you'll cut it out and you'll own the space. Yes, sir. So the nearly 12,000 square feet on that bottom floor, we will continue to own that space. And just as an aside, I drive these streets here just to avoid the backup on university that's going on in this town . But I've been there early in the morning and late at night. There is some traffic, but it's not like it is during the day. I admit it's kind of crazy there. But you are testifying, though, that it's commuter traffic more so than the residential traffic. That's kind of what I want to make sure that I'm seeing and hearing because the residents obviously are impacted by commuter traffic, parking in their driveways and whatnot. But that exists now even without this. And it has been for how long have you been there? I opened up a small spot called Campus Bookstore right next to back in the day at Point Bank back in November 2007. So I've been in that community parking on that street, especially when we were there because we had no parking at that location. There was zero parking for our space. And I would park along that street. And in the mornings, there's plenty of parking there in the mornings at 6, 7 a.m. And I understand with 300 more potential customers, that's a good thing. That's never a bad thing for business. If you have a business, you would like to have more customers, obviously. There's no question. And I think that several of the business owners down there have said the same thing. I'm sorry? Yes. Businesses would prefer to have more customers. Thank you. No further questions. Thank you, sir. Helen Dewey, followed by Michelle Lin, and then I have two more cards. This is a public hearing. So if you would like to speak, please fill out a card and bring that down. Or if you want to come speak afterwards, you'll need to make sure and fill out a card before you leave. Thank you, Helen. My name is Helen Dewey Rykovsky. I reside at 73 West Oak Street. I do work at that named university at UNT, but I also work in Dallas and I also work at First United Methodist Church. So I'm very typical of a lot of people at UNT where we live . I walk to the university when I don't have to go to one of my other jobs. When I have to go to one of my other jobs, then I need to have my parking space on campus. And then I drive to that one and then I drive to that one and then I drive home again. So one of the things that I'm speaking against on this proposal is because not only the density and the parking, I really appreciated the question, Mr. Rosell, about if we 're opposed to how much traffic problem there is and how much parking problem there is, why would we want to say, please don't have any variances if there are 300 beds, then why have 300 vehicles parked? But what we need is a place for everything and everything in its place. If we have more people living in that area, we will have more cars, whether they're owned or whether they're the visitors. And if we don't have a spot for each one of those cars, yes , we'll have more traffic, but then that traffic will be congested and not know where to go. So we hope that you will not change. We will not have any variances. We appreciate the changes that the company has made by listening to the neighbors. And perhaps more changes could be made because these sound like they would be very good neighbors. We do want development, but as has been said, this is development for students at the university. But that is only one of the four sides of this development. And we neighbors on the east side, the more traffic that comes down Oak Street and back through Hickory Street, those streets are not built for that. The city had a survey for parking in 1999. Yes, 1999. And the city survey at that time found there were 21,000 trips down Oak Street and back Hickory Street. The I'm looking for the actual statistics because Mr. Hudsb eth will want to know exactly which is exactly right. What it says here. So the the city decides that engineering standards used by the city rate, the maximum level of service for four lane divided couplet at about 21,000 trips per day. So as you can see in 1999, we were already at the maximum amount of traffic that we could tolerate properly going up and down that street. It's only grown since then. So the density of the project is a difficulty for us. It adds the parking and the and the traffic itself is a difficulty. Perhaps some of the changes that could be looked at from this point on, maybe with the proper one to one ratio of parking, maybe there would be more revenue for the business to go ahead and sell that parking to commuters or to others that are busy on our our neighborhood streets. Do you have any questions? Do you have a question for you? Commissioner Oselle. Thank you, sir. I appreciate your insight to what's going on here. I have a question. You speak about traffic, but if I understood you correctly, you're OK with the increased traffic or that's amenable as long as they have some place to park. I would not say it that way. If I might restate it. Sure. We are troubled by the amount of traffic, but the amount of traffic will only be worsened if there are not parking spaces for every car that's legal to be living in the neighborhood. And that I know not everyone owns a car, but the students that I teach at University of North Texas, they drive everywhere for employment. And so the students that I know from from full scholarship students to whomever, whether they're middle class or not, there are cars. And so those cars need to have a place. So the traffic is difficult and it would behoove the city to look at on the west side how we can have more access to the university because it's growing. And that's a good thing. But from the east, that's that's our neighborhood. And it has as much traffic as it can handle. And if you don't have parking spaces for the other cars that will make because they're parking in front of our houses every day. And it's before eight in the morning. And those are the people that can't put the money in the meter on Hickory Street or don't have the parking permit on the campus. Sure. Thank you. One other question. Commissioner Hatchbuth. Thank you. So just real quick question. So when you're what what are your times that you're normally driving to Dallas or what have you observed during those times that you're driving? My day job is in the College of Music. My night job is at the Dallas Opera. And so I'm often leaving the UNT area about five thirty. Well often six o'clock until we get into further rehearsals at five thirty. The traffic coming north is amazing to see from Dallas. So there is traffic in surges moving in and out of our community. It's like the people who do morning classes the people who do afternoon classes the commuters who come up in the evening and then go back or stay with friends. Because sometimes they stay a few days and then they go back. So but you're leaving the Frost Street area around five or so is that. Did I get that right. Five five five thirty very often. And what is the traffic like then. It's awful. So give me it. So you're traveling on Hickory. Yes. And so Hickory do you hit the Frost Street light. How many times do you have to wait or give me give me a day in the life of. Drive anywhere. Lunchtime. You'll wait at least three lights. OK. Thank. I'm just my comment. Commissioner. That is that anywhere in Denton from four thirty to six thirty is a nightmare. I mean even loop 288 takes forever to get around. It's what's happening here. I mean price is unusual with that. But so where are the other place. We have a lot of pedestrians too as you know we have a very nice neighborhood to walk through and to get to the square. And it's lovely to see that amount of traffic. And so the density of this having more cars more people there that'd be great if more people are walking downtown and back again. But more cars parked on the street even later at night because if there are not enough spots in the indoor parking garage then those residents are going to be parking on the streets when the students don't need to the commuter students don't need to. And again that's more cars on the street. It's a little bit more danger for the pedestrians. You know you're crossing streets and you're walking downtown and it's when we try to back out or pull out of our driveways on Oak Street or on Hickory Street it's really scary because you have to look past the parked cars wait for the gap in the red light. And then you know so we'll just have more and more of that if we don't have those parked cars off the street. I see no further questions. Thank you. Michelle Lin followed by I can't read the first name last name Hall. Good evening everyone I'm Michelle Lin I'm at 1401 Egan Street in Denton and I'm here tonight because our town is growing and this is a good thing. I support this project in certain ways. I'm glad someone is interested in a strong new high quality development and I like mixed use. But your job as commissioners is your highest goal is going to be to bring smart growth to our town. The difference between being open for business and welcome for growth and allowing developers to rewrite our city's comprehensive plan. To their own desires that 2030 plan I look at the names in this commission and I see Hutzpeth and Roselle and strange and Briggle and these are all families who were involved with this plan at one point. Our city decided after more than a year of really intense collaboration from people in every part of the city that this is going to be our comprehensive plan. I urge you to think about potential parking problems and neighborhood compatibility. I am not against this building. I'm against making the parking situation even worse. I'm against something that is going to detract significantly from the quality of life for the homeowners in the university compatibility area. Mr. Beck commented about tenants and where they will put their cars and I'm pretty sure that 18 retail spots would be used up by the people who are working in these stores let alone the customers. Personally I'm very vested in this area. I live a couple blocks north of it in the university compatibility area. My homestead is there. I own several rental properties in the area and I will say that every single tenant I have ever had has had a car and parked there. And when there are more than two people or three people in the house there's two or three cars. So this is a pretty serious concern to me. I would be happy with this project if it did follow the 2030 comprehensive city plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, I can't read the name. Last name is Hall followed by Jay West. Again this is a public hearing. I've got two cards left so if you would like to speak please fill out a card, the blue card or if you'd like to speak a white card as if you just would like to record your opposition or support for the record and not speak. Thank you Mr. Hall. Hello ladies and gentlemen of the commission. Lucas Hall, 815 Cresto Place in Denton. And I come as a citizen and voter of Denton who lives several miles from the Fry Street area and frankly I rarely ever drive by. But I'm here to object to this proposal as written and I would object to any version of the proposal that exceeds or requires relaxation of the Fry Street overlay as currently written. This might sound a little philosophical or not necessarily practical but I think as a matter of policy making that before a governing body agrees to amend the code, especially in this case it's my understanding that the Fry Street overlay specifically is the product of a lot of community wide collaboration that came about when the other developer was here. But that code is the product of broad debate, negotiation, revision and finally a community, a broad swath of the community came to identify that and identify that code as law. And so it's my suggestion that before you decide to recommend to amend the code, whether it's this section or any part of the code, to ask yourself, am I satisfying an urgent substantial need of the community? And I posit that in this case the answer is easily no. It will be advantageous for a couple of parties but as the nearby residents in the neighborhood have spoken more intelligently to the parking density and congestion issues than I could, this is not going to satisfy a substantial need of the community. And so, and this is frankly I just became aware today that there's the possibility of this small area plan that I get the impression this will be another community based discussion, whereby we will perhaps decide as a community and not just as a small group of selected interested parties how we want to design and organize our physical spaces. In this case where we live and work. And so just to reiterate, I reject this on the basis of it being requiring relaxation of the code as written and if the community, the greater community later on decides to amend the code in the small plan, then so be it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I see no questions. Thank you for your comments. >> Next item is for Jay West. Again, this is a public hearing and anyone is invited to speak but we will need a card filled out. >> Evening commissioners. I'm Jay West. I'm a commercial real estate broker. I live in Dallas, Texas, 2606 Shelby Avenue and I've been involved in the student housing business. For the last 20 years and I've sold land to developers in the Denton area for various projects and I actually worked on the U-Center Fry Street land but the developer I had it lined up was unable to complete the task so it got done a little later. And I'll just mention a couple of points because I've been watching this market for 15 years, got a little bit of historical perspective. Denton has grown and gotten nicer and gotten better like crazy over the last 15 years. So I commend the city for the good things that it's accomplished. Downtown is great, traffic's got the new loop 288, doing a lot of good things. University of North Texas, when I started coming here 15 years ago I had 20,000 students. It's got 36,000 students today and they're attracting a higher quality of student. It's only in the last two or three years that there has been adequate rental rates to justify the kind of construction that you see happening just in the last few years. And the two projects I'm referring to are U-Center Fry Street, originally called Sterling and Fry Street, takes up an entire city block with the exception of the little cut out for Cool Beans restaurant and imbibing facility. And it has 600 beds, it's like four acres I believe. By comparison, the proposed project on Hicker Street is on less than half the amount of land and it has half the number of beds. Now density, where is that? Just the density has been mentioned here this evening as a concern. The density on units per acre of the existing Fry Street project is 44 units per acre and the proposed project is 49 units per acre. The density is very slightly different. So I guess I would make the point that the density is not really the big thing . They're bringing a smaller project. I think it's responsive to the needs of the community. I would echo what the owner of Virtman said that you've got some old, tired buildings today and these gentlemen are proposing to come to your community and build a beautiful new facility that I think people will like. Students will love it, I can assure you. They love it on every campus that I've visited. And I've visited, since it 's my business, I've visited University of Texas, I've visited Texas State, I've visited TCU. My son attended TCU, graduated in 2010 and I'm familiar with the project that was in the slide that this community, this developer built there and it's a fantastic project. My understanding is that project is 80% parked, but the students only use about half the spaces. So they have a lot of empty spaces. And so going back to the, and I apologize, if I can run it over, okay. The Youth Center, Fry Street project is 70-75% parked and we know that because we visited the project. If you look at the retail, they have some retail parking. It's empty. I mean, it's like people don't know where it is . And rarely is there any cars on the top level. So that's where we, it's pretty reliable to estimate that only, they 're only using 75% of spaces. The other project where we had data cited as January 6th, that wasn't point data. That's the parking for the entire term, spring and fall. That's how many students leave parking spaces. So it was 56 to 64%. So just a point of clarification. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. I have one question that's just popped up. Commissioner back. Mr. West, you mentioned that the information you have on parking has been based on what you currently see. Right. Have you made any evaluations that project what's going to be in the future? Is any of your assessments based on what's going to eventually happen? Well, I mean, I just say anecdotally, you know, as universities get more dense, fewer students use cars because they don't need them. And because it's harder to get around, so it's just easier to leave the car at home or leave it in the garage and walk to class and take the shuttle bus. And, you know, when you've got students that live a mile or two from campus, they're going to use their cars to commute to campus. And they're going to leave them in the campus parking lot. Unfortunately, I think what a lot of University of North Texas students do, the university has a garage and it never fills up because it costs a little bit of money. The students would rather park for free, unfortunately, on these people's streets. And, you know, I don't think this project is going to change that. I don't think it's going to make it worse. It's not going to make it better, though. So I would say maybe there are some other ideas that could be put forth where the city could figure out a way to help these people who can't get out of their driveways on Oak Street. Because that would bother me. That would bother me. And I don't know what the solution is, but I'd say maybe somebody can get their thinking cap on and figure that one out. I think the trend is, you know, as a society, we're moving away from vehicles. More mass transit and Denton is on the leading edge. You know, you've got a rapid transit thing that connects to Dart in Dallas. That's a, you know, that's pretty leading edge for a community of this size to have a transit facility connecting to Dallas rapid transit. I mean, I applaud you. Thank you, sir. Thank you. No further questions. Thank you. I've received one other card. This is from Jennifer Meyer. She does not wish to speak and she is in opposition and she does have some comments on the back. Why are we considering variances to the already fleshed out plan for the area? And then what is the plan for handling such growing density down the road? And then Oak and Hickory Streets cannot be widened. What is your long term plan? So those are her comments. That's the final card that I have. This is a public hearing. It's open to the public so anyone who would like to speak is welcome to speak. If you would like, approach the mic and give your name and address and when you've made your comments, please fill out a card for us. My name is Brigid Corbett and I did fill out a white card. I just, I didn't have any comments at the time. I live at 1220 Ector Street. I live in the neighborhood. That is to the north of the university, very close to University Drive. And I came tonight because I'm concerned about development on the outside of this kind of larger neighborhood that's bordered by UNT to the south and University Drive to the north. And I do object to this project because I think it's too many people and too small of a space and it's not, it doesn 't make a good transition. But the reason I got up to speak was because in all this discussion about the parking, and I'm not saying this to try to make this project be approved and go forward, but it strikes me that it's been put forth that all of these types of housing have unused parking spaces. And then there are people nearby who have problems with cars that are parking too much on their streets. And I wonder if the developers of these kinds of things could make available parking for people other than the residents. And that might ease some of the issues that the surrounding neighborhoods have. And that was the only comment I had to add. Thank you. I don't see any questions. Thank you. Again, public hearing or open to the public to speak. Hi, my name is Esther Rodriguez Phelps. I live at 606 Adley Street. I've been a resident of Denton, Texas for over 30 years. I'm very familiar with the area of the Fry Street area and where this Burtman's area is. I keep going back to the very beginning of this meeting where our own city staff members said to deny this. They said it at the very beginning. Their proposal was to deny this development based upon the variances for the overlays that were already difficultly and with much gnashing of teeth agreed upon many years ago. And for an outsider, yes, we want Denton to grow. I am in, I'm a real estate appraiser. Yes, it's growing left and right. But this is still Denton. And we need to take into consideration what this town is about, what our culture is about, what our livability is about, and how we can communicate and coordinate all of that is wonderful. I'm sure Mr. The owner of Burtman's was very much interested in selling his property and being able to have his own unit within this development. But that enhances him. It doesn't necessarily enhance everybody else within the neighborhood. And the developers who come to Denton need to be good neighbors. Thank you very much. Would you please fill out a blue card for us, ma'am? Thank you. Again, it's a public hearing. Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come forward at this time. You can make your comments and then please fill out a card afterwards. Again, anyone else that would like to speak on this item? No, no, sir, I'm sorry. Seeing no further comments or people wishing to speak, I'm going to close the public hearing at this time and open it for discussion. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you, Chair. So I have a wide variety of views on this project and in this area. So I'd like to give a little context and then I think I'm going to move forward with a motion. I grew up in the Denton area. I lived at 302 Fry Street for a time and I did not own a car. And I walked to campus. I walked to my job. And I walked to the entertainment area and it was all about six, eight blocks away. I've also lived at 1513 West Oak, which was an apartment building, apartment building in quotes, built in about 1930. So it was older than most of the development in the Fry Street area. There's some parts of the old Fry Street commercial area that was built in the '20s, so it's comparable in age. And I've also lived far off of campus in neighborhoods in North Denton. And I was a commuter to UNT and I was too cheap to buy a parking pass and I would park in the neighborhoods and troll around to find a spot. And I can tell you that it's not the apartment dwellers right next to campus that are the traffic problem or the parking problem. It's the starving commuters that do troll for spots and swo op in at the meters or the little not quite marked but not unmarked, not orange -curved spots. So just for that perspective, I'm sure a lot of you already know that. I am also a huge fan of density. I've lived in a lot of cities across the country. Density brings all of the amenities that people talk about that they want. They want a walkable neighborhood. They want to be able to walk to a coffee shop a lot of times. They want to be able to have a lot of storefronts in their commercial areas like in their walkable commercial areas so that you don't just have one store for 10 blocks of traffic or 10 blocks of neighborhood. You have strips with a lot of options. That requires enough customers within walking distance. So that doesn't come unless we get density. This also, the trends in universities and university students is fewer and fewer millennials and younger people are owning cars. Whenever I turned 16 and everybody I knew, we rushed out to get our driver's license in our car. My nephew who is turning 18 in a month, waited a year and a half after finishing his driver's ed to go take his test because he didn't care about driving. That's a single example, but the overall trend is 95% of 16-year-olds had a car in 1990. It's about 80% to 75% today. These trends do lead to a need for walkable development. So I really like the density, but I have a problem with the process here. The Fry Street overlay was a long fought process and it's only about 12 pages long, which is remarkably short for an overlay. Our Razor Ranch overlay I think is about 600 pages. The airport overlay, which really just deals with you can't build a building that blocks the lights or the airplanes, is I believe 40 or 50 pages. And then this one manages to come in at 12. That's probably because that's all the varied neighborhoods in the area could agree upon. So you have the historic district built at the turn of the last century. The university has been there since about 1910. The student housing that I lived in on Oak Street that had been built in 1930 or so. These are all competing interests, all coming to a point at Fry Street. And so that overlay, as lacking as it may be and as kind of as unfilled out as it is, was the culmination of a large community with a lot of different views. So for us to just basically take a third of the property out of section A or area A or whatever the term is, to meet one project, I think that I have a problem with it on the process side. I think if this project had been proposed on the south side of campus across Eagle, there isn't a cohesive neighborhood. There aren't three or four competing areas closing in together that create a lot of friction and a lot of different demands. It would be great. The only other aside I would have on the density is I think this project lacks retail. As we bring more and more customers down, we're going from 30,000 to 15,000 square feet. I know that apartment developers are in the business of building apartment buildings and so they don't really want to deal with a lot of retail. But I think that's what this area needs as it gets more dense. But because of the small area, Fry Street plan, that's moving forward now, which is another community input process, to come up with not just this three block area, but a greater probably five by five block roughly zone in this neighborhood. And because this is really cutting out a good chunk of the overlay standard for a single project, I move that we deny this application. We've got discussion. The Chair is going to, at this time I have a whole bank of people who would like to speak. Would you be okay to hold your motion and give everybody an opportunity to speak and then we'll come back for a second. I'll withdraw my motion. Okay. Let me know when you'd like to bring it back. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. And thank you everyone of you all for coming out and speaking your mind. I really appreciate it and it was important that you did this. When I first came to live in Denton and go to what was then North Texas State University back in the early '70s, the city layout then was kind of a patchwork quilt design. There seemed to be no rhyme or reason where some buildings were, why they were there and how streets just ended abruptly. There simply didn't seem to be any apparent concept of future growth then. But over the last 30 years or so, new leadership began to focus on this problem and it has led to a vision that I think we can all be proud of. Its most current manifestation has been mentioned here. It's the Denton Plan 2030 that allows us for a while longer to keep the small town flavor that we're all fond of. So I'd just like to echo here many of the thoughts that people, all of you have expressed, how this dwelling will diminish the goals set out in the Denton Plan 2030 in regards to the way we want it to sustain the character of the neighborhood. And though I plan on speaking a lot to the size of this thing, that's not something we're going to vote on, but so I'll bypass that. If we honor this zone change though, to me I think it attempts to stretch our codes for the Fry Street area beyond what some of us feel is already a bit much and crowd even more people in the small area. And as Commissioner Taylor said, it took us a while to get this overlay set and here we go changing it. And it kind of sets a precedent to, you know, it just kind of inches us towards something bigger and more congested. We need more student housing and the city is willing to work with UNT and TWU to do this, but we have to do so in a fashion that sustains our treasured areas around the campuses or we'll lose that which gives our community value, which I think is an appealing display between what the campus needs are and with the surrounding homes and businesses. Thinking that we can minimize parking by inhibiting the numbers of cars of those who will occupy this dwelling seems a little unrealistic to me. In an age where the individual and the automobile are still pretty much inseparable, though I'm sure, again, Commissioner Taylor's statistics show that that's changing. But I think this thinking drifts into wishful thinking and lays the groundwork for problems down the road when too many cars and people put too great a stress on our infrastructure and our emergency services of fire and police. I would encourage EDR to go back to the drawing board and design units that accommodate our current codes for Fry Street District. We'd love to have you as part of the dent in future, but it must be on a scale that doesn't overwhelm what we're trying to preserve here. So until then, I'll stand with the PNZ staff's decision to deny the request on the amendment. Thank you. Commissioner Bruegel. Thank you, Chair. I know some of the people who came out from the neighborhood and thank you all for staying late on a school night. Some of you did speak favorably about parts of this development and it sounds like you all would be very good neighbors. You know, you've got a good business plan. This meets a need for more student housing in town. But I think there's pieces that are missing still. We're missing the traffic impact analysis. The fire department hasn't had all their questions answered . There is a small area plan that's soon to be in the works. We have an overlay that took a long time to come in agreement for that. I would rather see, rather than this being denied, rather than you all go back and speak again with the neighborhood, any changes to the overlay must enhance the neighborhood. And I'm not sure that this enhances the neighborhood to the degree that rewriting or overwriting the overlay would... I'm not sure that... Sorry, excuse me. It is a school night and it is a bit late. So I'm not sure that the changes that we would be making would actually enhance the overlay. I'm concerned also, and I hear Commissioner Taylor, you know, we agree about a lot of things. I'm also a fan of density and I understand that the trend is for fewer cars. In fact, we just had a presentation in our work session about bikes. You know, we want to be a bikeable community. So I get that maybe not all the residents will have cars, but I'm still... I would like for the developer to show their math and I think Ms Anderson spoke about that. Show your math. Where's your data coming from? I would like to see, you know, what is the parking that will be needed, especially because these students are going to be driving to work. And also we've created with the loss of Sack and Safe, we now have a food desert in this neighborhood. So how are they going to get to the grocery store? I know I'm not going to want to Uber my ride up to Kroger and back. So I see some value in this project. I sincerely do, but not to the point where I'm ready to approve it. And yet I don't want to outright deny it either because I think there is... It does fit a need in the community. So I would be more in favor of postponing it until we can get more data. Go back to the neighborhood. Let's hear about the small area plan. Let's talk more about this overlay and how can we move forward? Because it's a good project, but just it's all about smart growth in this town. Just because we can build it, we're a growing town. Just because we can build it doesn't make it right for right now either. Does that make sense? So I'd be more in favor of postponing this until we get a little more data and speak with the neighborhood again. Commissioner Hudspeth. Thank you, Chair. So and I agree with Commissioner Bruegel that I would like to ultimately have the two parties, if you will, go back and talk. And for this reason, I think it is a great project. I'm very practical in my approach to things. And here's the realistic thing is, anywhere else in Denton, if there's a traffic jam or traffic backup, I can circumnavigate that and go a different way. Well, the problem with this particular area is, to the right, everything for as far as you can see is 20 miles per hour. That's just not appeasing at all. I mean, at minimum, I'm going 40 everywhere. So I mean, that doesn't work. And then it also ignores the fact that you can have all the parking on the planet, but you still have to drive in a circle to get up there. And if I'm running late, I'm not going to drive in a circle to get up there. I'm going to absolutely park right on the edge of someone's house on Oak and hustle to class. And so I think there is some value, but I think it needs a practical application to, hey, really, that's a no-brainer. I don't want to drive in that circle. Even if I have the best parking spot on the roof, that's three trips behind someone that drives super slow. I'm still doing less than 40, and it's just not appeasing. So I think there is an opportunity. But I will tell you this. I am encouraged by the retail, kind of contrary to what you pointed out, in that if you look down the street, there was four places that they said were going to be just inundated with business because the apartments up there had been 30 different restaurants. It was a mac and cheese place. I don't even know what's there now anymore. And it doesn't -- and it's just getting decimated. So to have someone that's been there that I know is going to be there and Subway is going to be there, and you keep it concise, I 'm all for that. I think that is outstanding. That's a plus for me versus the alternative, which is just a revolving door of whoever and whenever. So I think the two things I would like to see is one, it's overwhelming the people that came and spoke that live in the -- that came in the neighborhood are against it. So why? Let's go talk and let's go hash that out. And then secondly, just come up with a pedestrian plan that fits the area, because I think that too would be, as the kids are walking back and forth, let's deal with that sooner than later. Thank you. Commissioner Rosell. Thank you, sir. I want to reiterate everyone -- what everyone else has said in terms of thanking everyone for coming out and voicing their concerns . It's very helpful for us to cultivate discussion and try to hash out the thoughts of not just us, but the city at large. So I thank you for that. I personally kind of align with Commissioner Taylor in terms of me being torn. In my estimation, and this is obviously just anecdotal for me, I certainly see a lesser car ownership happening pervas ively, especially through college students. I have a college friend who lives in the Rawlings dorm. It's the honors dorm on campus. And I was speaking with him, he said that maybe 60% of that dorm owns cars and has them on campus. So I think the numbers that Mr. King and his team provided tonight, they resonate with me. I believe it. It's not just a matter of like take their word for it. I have my own intuition and knowledge of the people I know. I know currently not a whole lot of college freshmen, but of four of them that I do know, one owns a car. And so I can extrapolate and kind of understand how TCU might be at 60% or the one on Eagle could be at 60%. That can make sense in my mind. And so I'm wondering if there needs to be a one-for-one parking requirement in this overlay. And I'm in favor, in the presentation that you provided, I thought was spot on, and I think it would be a great development. And I think the reason why Warren and Commissioner Taylor brought this up is a lot of work and sweat went in before I became a commissioner on making this overlay exist. And so I feel kind of short-sighted to come in here tonight and this week and look over this and think that what I've heard tonight should circumvent the work done previously and bifurcate an overlay that's already there. And so again, Commissioner Taylor's point, and that's where I think my decision ultimately lies, is there was work previously done and I feel like we probably need to honor that work and maybe the small area plan can help us maneuver this. I would love to see an EDR property on that site. I think you would be good neighbors. Tonight, though, I don't know if it's a postpone or if it's an outright denial, but because of what has to happen to a sub-district, I couldn't support that. Commissioner Duttlewitz. Thank you, Chair. It's sort of an unwritten procedure of this commission for all of us to express our concerns or vote for or vote against. So you've heard a lot of comments from the current commissioners and I guess I'm the last one to comment. Gosh, this project is obviously needed. It does bring some quality to the housing units that we see and then that are provided for students. But without going through all the other comments, it's really the issue of amending, not changing the zoning, it's amending an overlay. And I believe that overlay was put in by the citizens for a purpose. And I'm in agreement that we don't amend it, leave the overlay as is, and let the developers work within the confines of that overlay. I think everybody would be happy with that. So for the purposes of postponing any more discussion, I think we're going to come back to, it's an overlay, here's what the overlay says, let's build our developments within that and everything will be fine. And I think the residents will be happy with that. I know that the board will be happy with that. It may be a consternation for the developers, but that's what the overlay is. And you've always heard Commissioner Taylor say that if this was located in another area, a zoning issue or something, we might be able to work with, but not to oversee or turn over an overlay that's already been put in place and been working. And as much as I would love to have this project and see it come to fruition, I can't support turning down an overlay that's already in place. Commissioner Taylor. Thank you, Chair. I have a question, perhaps, for our Deputy Director or legal. The process of amending an overlay, like on an SUP, you can't reapply for a year if your SUP is denied. In this case, would a denial now preclude any changes three months from now, six months from now? The SUP process is the only one that I know of currently in the DDC that requires a year wait period. It says it's zoning too. Okay. I can get back to you on that, but I think that if there is a wait period, then it would typically be 12 months from the date of the denial. So what I'm thinking is that because this is a code change, you know, we could initiate another code change as opposed to like a zoning change on a property. But I would like to clarify this because I don't want to prevent a change that's negotiated by the neighborhood and the developer from moving forth. But I do not think this current amendment is viable. You've hit the exact problem that I'm struggling with here because it's not only a DDC amendment, but it's an actual overlay amendment, which is a zoning document. So whether or not the 12 months comes into play is something that I'm going to have to look at. But the DDC typically does not have, of course, a waiting period. You can bring that any time. Okay. And I guess one final question. Since we are recommending to city council, if it doesn't get to city council and a new proposal is brought forth, that wouldn't have a 12-month time around, would it? No, as long as it's substantially different. So hearing that, I would like to move forward with my original motion to move to recommend denial to city council of the amendment to the overlay. Commissioner Dudowitz, please. You were speaking that direction, so I didn't hear all of your comment, but can you explain what you were looking at doing? So I just wanted to make sure with staff and legal that if we recommend denial tonight, that if a new plan is-- a new amendment is negotiated between the neighborhood and the developer, that they could choose not to move forward with this amendment and they could bring another amendment to us without waiting a year or some amount of time. Okay, thank you. Manon, please. I'd like to clarify a couple of points. The first thing is if the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation is that of denial, then the applicant can choose to withdraw their application . However, their other option is to proceed to city council and seek their final decision or determination. The issue that you have raised earlier was when does that clock start ticking should the city-- does it start ticking at city council? Absolutely it does. So the 12-year timeframe would kick in at that time, not at P&Z denial. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Manon. Okay, so we have a motion on the floor and we're looking for a second. I heard it up there. I thought-- Well, I think he withdrew his motion technically and so-- We need to clear the board. We need to clear the board. We need to clear the board. Okay, I apologize. We have a second from Commissioner Beck. I second Commissioner Taylor's vote. Thank you. If we have a first and a second, do we have any further discussion? Commissioner Bruegel. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Taylor, I hear your strategy with this. Yeah. And I am going to vote for denial, but I don't want to scare EDR off either. I think this is-- it's promising. It's very promising and I'd like to see you guys come back again, but there are some major-- There are some edits that need to be made to your project, I think, before I would be voting in favor of this. So I want you to know I don't want to scare you off, yeah, but I am going to vote for denial for this. Thank you. Any other discussion? Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board. The clarification, a vote for is to deny. Correct. Motion carries 6-1. The next item we have on our agenda tonight is going to be item Z15-0031, and I'm going to open the public hearing at this time. 847. At 847. Thank you, Chairperson Strange. I'm going to ask Ross Colbittson, our senior planner, to make this presentation. [inaudible] Gotcha. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. The room's cleared out, and I want to thank the applicants of this project for holding on for tonight's presentation here. This is Z15-31, Cavender's Boot City. A request before you is to hold a public hearing with the recommended city council regarding a rezoning request from an industrial center employment ICE district to a regional center commercial downtown RCCD district on approximately 2.9 acres. The subject for the rezoning is located on the west side of the I-35 frontage road approximately 1,000 feet south of West University, which is Highway 380. If you want to look at the existing conditions, the property is zoned ICE, which was established with the 2002 rezoning for the city and incorporated the light industrial uses on the property. It also anticipated service uses such as office, warehouse, and hotel to support the larger ICG, which is Industrial Commercial General Zoning District, which is over to the west near the Denton Enterprise Airport and properties in between this and the airport. When we look at ICE, it does not permit general retail activity as general service use, but does permit retail as a limitation, L18, with our Denton Development Code, which limits retail to gas station uses only and even caps the square footage of retail to 10,000 square feet within those uses. However, RCCD, which is contrasted from the light blue of ICE to RCCD in the purple, permits retail and regional commercial uses by right. RCCD in its analysis is a zoning district that promotes mixed-use development with urban character, permits wide array of commercial and retail uses, and is used typically within the city of Denton as a zoning classification for regional commercial centers along the I-35E corridor. And in your staff report, I itemize kind of the sequence of regional retail activity, likely starting with the Razor Ranch areas going all the way down to the Denton Regional Hospital. When we look at adjacent uses to the proposed site, there is a gas station on the southeast southwest corner of 380 and University, 380 and 35. We are processing building permits for a future vehicle repair just north, just south of the gas station. Next in line is a commercial warehouse storage area that has some retail activity to it in conjunction to the warehouse retail storage use. Below that is the anticipated proposed Cavender site. Professional office, there's a small little office complex, one-story office building further south, and then even further south of that is Light Manufacturing, which is off the spur of the railroad track, which kind of divides the site. When we look at that division, we can see that the railroad line is an appropriate divider between industrial land uses and commercial land uses. The rezoning is only for the 2.9 acres for the Cavender's retail store, adjacent uses to the south or property to the south is still currently zoned ICE, but I wanted to highlight that the city anticipates future retail activity in this area, and we would consider RCC an appropriate zoning district when such uses come into play. But as of now, the majority owner of this land wishes to maximize the availability of land and zoning to his benefit by not rezoning at this time. Land use per the didn't plan 2030 indicates that this is a regional mixed use on this side on the east side of the railroad tracks, which is that dash dotted line. In west of the rail line is a category called Industrial Commerce, which meets the industrial uses on that side. So rezoning to RCCD is consistent with regional mixed use, and that's a very important future land use category. The considerations for the rezoning submitted to you that RCCD would permit commercial and retail uses without zoning limitations. RCCD zoning has been used as the predominant rezoning classification for regional commercial areas along I-35. The railroad line is an appropriate divider between industrial land uses and the commercial land uses with the frontage on I-35. And thus, reasonable development and economic pattern suggest using the I-35 frontage for commercial activity instead of industrial support services, and it is consistent with the future land use map. Staff uses the criteria for approval within the DIN development code 3534B2, which lists the two points there, and the staff finds that this request meets those criteria for approval. We did do public notifications, where as you can see, there was kind of limited properties. Most of them were just commercial viable properties. Four notices within 200 feet and five notices within 500 feet, and the one in favor was the majority property owner. So based on the considerations of the DIN development code, staff recommends approval, and I can stand for any questions you may have. Questions for staff? Thank you, Ross. Thank you. This is a public hearing. I do not have any cards on this item. If there's anyone that would like to speak, applicant or anyone else that would like to speak for or against this project, please approach the podium. Give your name and address, and if you do speak, please fill out a card for us. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Juan Vasquez. The Vasquez Engineering, 1919 South Shiloh Road, Suite 440, Garland, Texas. I'm a civil engineer for Cavenders Boots City. Cavenders is vested in the property as they own the property, and so they're committed to the site, and they've committed to myself, and to the project architect. They want a store open this year. We work closely with staff. We also work with the property owner who sold the property to Cavenders, and so they're in favor of our rezoning proposal. They're not ready to come in with us at this time because we're such in a hurry to get started, and we want to get the store open this year. If you have any questions you might have, also the project architect for Cavenders is also here with us today. Any questions for the applicant? No? Thank you, sir. Again, this is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come forward at this time. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing at 855 and open the floor for a motion or discussion. Commissioner Dudowitz. I move we approve the recommendation for the rezoning as submitted. Thank you. Commissioner Bribble. I'll second that. It seems like a smart location to put something like that right on the front engine next to Razor Ranch, so I'm in full support. I have a first and a second. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 7-0. Congratulations. Hurry up and build it. Sorry we didn't change the order. Apologies. We're not done yet. All right. Moves us to our concluding items for this evening. Before we get to that, just as a point of order, I want to address something that we discussed on item 4A, and Commissioner Taylor's question. It looks like in 35.3.4.C.6 of the Denton Development Code, it would be a wait period, even though it's considered both the DDC amendment and the zoning document, they're all under the zoning amendment procedure, and that requires 12-month wait period after denial. Does that--that's after denial by city council? By city council, not PNZ. So they still are not in a position where they, like, tomorrow would have to wait 12 months to come up back with an adapted plan? Correct. They could actually withdraw their application at this time and avoid that. Okay. But if they would have council with their current plan and council denied it, then they'd have to wait 12 months before they could come back. And could they modify their plan as it goes to-- Substantially. It has to be substantially modified. Could they modify their proposal before it goes to council? We would have to-- I'm gonna bring it back here. --renotify that if there were any discrepancies or changes to what we've already noted. They would have to withdraw it and resubmit. Okay. All right. Commissioner Donovan. If I heard correctly, if they withdraw from-- then they can start all over again? No timetable. Correct. Okay. Before council. Before council. Before. Right. They have to withdraw before council. Right. Because we're only recommending denial. So once it's officially denied, it's too late, they're gonna have to abide by the waiting period. Thank you. And just for future reference, this is-- Mr. Tyler. Thank you, Chair. This is for any-- basically any zoning-related change. Any zoning-related change. Okay. Thank you. Or DDC amendment. Okay. [laughter] Okay. Back to concluding items featured in the-- Commissioner Tyler. Thank you, Chair. As we discussed in work session, I'd like to see if staff could get-- put together a proposal to amend the DDC parking standards for bike parking as appropriate. Commissioner Tyler, we will go ahead and revisit the parking standards to accommodate bike parking. I do want to apprise the commission that we are in the process of revising our scope of services to potentially-- again, this is still in discussion, so to potentially rework or revisit the amendment to the Denton Development Code. If this is an item that is of immediate urgency, we can go ahead and do that. But we do anticipate within the next few months or within another quarter to actually initiate that program . So if you would give staff the liberty to, one, revisit the matrix that's already established to see priority, and then with this, we can go ahead and start looking at this and inserting this as an immediate DDC amendment if that is the wish of the commission. All right. Do you have a wish now? Yes, please. [laughter] Well, it would be my wish that this be a small few sentences that can be quickly inserted. Noted. [laughter] Well done. [laughter] Commissioner Rossell. Thank you, Chair. Maybe Commissioner Taylor could provide an update to this. But this last project that came across, this ICE rezoning that's stripped to the west, seems like a perfect opportunity for the subcommittee that was formed to proactively get that rezoned. So I'd love to raise the priority of that subcommittee meeting so we can start getting stuff like this knocked out. I think it seemed like that's a low-hanging fruit that maybe we can attack. In fact, staff completely concurs. That is what we were talking about. And we're going to start scheduling a meeting and get this process going and initiate with one of these programs, this project that came forward. Not this project, but the surrounding project. Perfect. Thank you. Commissioner Burrell. Thank you, Chair. I found Julie Anderson's presentation riveting. I have waited five years to hear from a bike and pedestrian coordinator. So I would really like for her to come back sooner rather than later and for us to devote some time. I mean, for the other commissioners, you may have found a two or three page printed up handout that was--I compiled that after a meeting with two dozen or more cyclists of all abilities just last night. So there is clear community interest in this. So please, Julie Anderson, come back and talk to us because it's really important. Thank you. Commissioner Dudowitz. Manala, you indicated something you're working on. Does that include the commission's powers and duties that I raised the question about that you were going to find? We have researched that. In fact, a memo will be forthcoming to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the next meeting. Okay. But the current code says that we have certain duties. Does it-- Yes. Okay. And it outlines what those duties are that it concurs with those duties in addition to what the next steps are. So it outlines the process. Okay. But there was another committee or somebody that was also looking at it? The Health and Building Standards Commission is a commission that is appointed by the City Council that if a building has been deemed hazardous or unsafe that through a process of revitalization, it is either fixed or it is demoed. But that's a separate-- But you'll fill us in on that. Absolutely. And it's outlined in the memo that will come to you in-- Thank you. --in the first meeting in February. Commissioner Beck. I mentioned in the workshop that I'm interested in getting Julie Anderson to spend some of her money on educating commercial interest to hit by-- Would this be the-- Commissioner Beck, can you make sure your microphone's on? Can you hear me? We have a problem with that chair. I think you need to get it to the microphone. I know. [laughter] It's always that chair. Anyway, let me restate. I say in the workshop, an interest in getting Julie Anderson to spend some of her money on educating-- getting print literature made up to educate commercial interest in getting bike racks. Would this be the forum where we could set something like that in motion? Is she going to handle that on her own? She can make that part of her next presentation. Great. We could advise her of the, you know-- Okay. --reminder of the discussion that occurred at the work session and see if she can incorporate that in her discussion, her second part of her discussion. Good. Just want to keep the fire burning on it. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no other concluding items, we'll close the meeting at 9.05. Thank you. [inaudible] Yep. [no audio] It's 9.13 and I'm going to call our work session back in order. Do we need a notice about-- notice publicly in a quorum again? Or since we're-- No, just work session. Just call our work session back in order at 9.13. And I think we have one other item that we're going to go through this evening, receive a report on item C. Right. If you recall, on December 9th, we kind of came forward to you and told you that this type of update was coming. The intent of Brent's presentation, that was item 2B, was he was going to kind of set the stage and tell you where we've been since the DME first came to you in 2013, for those of you that were here, and explain why all these substations are going to come forward. We've had quite a bit. We're not going to go into that. But this has really come out of that whole process. Council has asked us to look into this process of kind of bringing some requirements specific to substations. Just kind of go over this quickly. We're going to talk about existing requirements, what we've done. We're going to go into what that process means and what the new process is going to look like and that kind of framework. What that means to requirements of the DDC and lastly we'll get into the details of what these documents are that you received prior to the meeting. Currently substations are permitted only in the rural districts, employment districts, or industrial centers. It requires an SUP everywhere else, the neighborhood mixed use centers and the downtown university core. So most of the substations that we've all seen are in those districts. There are six, how can I write, seven that have been approved through an SUP already. And there are several more that were permitted in employment centers that you ought to never get to see. But we've done a lot of these SUPs. We've had consistent conditions throughout all of them and it's always been a 10 foot masonry wall on every substation. And then these weren't specific conditions of the SUP but with the site plans that were approved we saw consistent buffers to residential zones, comply with tree canopy coverage, their driveways were DDC requirements for some special considerations and they always provided sidewalks. So we're going to codify that to some degree. This is the existing process where that SUP falls into a VME process. The first thing they do is they develop several options for the site, typically three or four. They'll take all those options to a neighborhood meeting, a public open house, and they'll notice everybody in the ranges of those sites. Once they've kind of come up with taking that public input as well as their cost analysis, they'll take that to public hearings of the public utility board and city council. They pick a preferred site out of those three or four. They then give VME the power to go forward and negotiate a sales price. If they agree to a sale price where they ultimately have to come back for eminent domain, they have to go back to public utility board and city council for those purposes. Those are two public hearings. They go in, they purchase the site, they own it, they do the final site design, and then they come back to this board for an SUP, re-notice all the neighborhoods. And sometimes that could be years apart, and so at that time the neighborhoods forgot what's going on. It seemed to come back up that this SUP is whether this substation is going to go here or not, and it's really not in question anymore. It's really about the site design. And if they get the SUP, the site's constructed. So what we want to do with this process is kind of flip these around so that we're putting that notification that's equivalent to what they would do with an SUP prior to city council giving approval to purchase the site. And if they do that, then they no longer have to do an SUP but instead a site plan with some criteria that we're going to establish here. Can you go back to that, please? I'm sorry. Sure. So the top line is over here. Commissioner Dudowitz. Yes, the top line is what we're doing now. And then it comes down to the second line. This is what we're proposing. And I don't see P and Z in that process. Right. You'll have P and Z in terms of a site plan potentially. We'll get into that in a bit. But we're going to codify all these conditions that we've done through the seven SUPs so that hopefully we can take that out. But really the important factor is we're putting the public hearing process and all that notification input before the site's even purchased where it makes more logical sense. That's really what we're trying to do. So to do that, we're going to add a new use. We're going to pull it. Right now it's a basic utility. Everything, gas, water, electric, is a basic utility. We're going to pull it out and make a new use onto itself for substations and switch stations. We're going to add specific standards for screening, buffering, access. We'll get into all that. And we're going to create a site plan process. And then what we're adding is a new limitation in the zoning. So where it currently says an SUP is required, we're going to say an SUP is required unless you're part of a CIP master plan, unless you've done the public notification, and you have to have a site plan approved by P&Z. If you can't do all that, the SUP is still required. This is just what that limitation looks like. Again, the notice is the same thing as an SUP. 200, 500 foot notices, a sign on the property, and actually neighborhood meetings required in this case too. So that's the A, B, and C. That's all in your backup that you were given if you want to look in more detail. How that looks visually, start here. If you've done the public notification, if you have not, you go to an SUP. Once that SUP is approved, then you get a billing permit through staff. If you did do all the notification, the 200, 500 neighborhood meeting, then you go to this box, and that's all the site design criteria that we're going to get to here in just a minute. If you meet all that, then the site plan can be approved by staff. If for some reason you cannot meet this criteria, then it has to come before you all for consideration, similar to an alternative development plan. It's kind of the same process. What this means is that the top process, because the notification has to be part of a CIP approved by council, because it has to be noticed that only DME can really do that top process. All the other private utilities like COSERV, they have to go the SUP route. Everybody tracking so far? Good. Commissioner Bruegel. Thank you, Chair. Public notification, are you talking about just the mailers? People, are we talking about a public hearing? It is notification that the public hearing is happening at PUB and City Council for the purchase of the site for specifically a substation. I see. Right. We're saying, everybody listen, we're buying the site. We want to put a substation here. Come out and tell us whether you think a substation is good or not before we even buy it. That's a great idea. The public hearing is going to happen now with the PUB and City Council and not through... wouldn't necessarily be looking for... on the top line, they wouldn't be looking for an SUP through planning and zoning. Correct. Okay. Thank you. And the reason for that is, I'm sorry, the reason for that is because in their current process they already do that. So once they've had their... they've vetted the property, they've met with the neighborhood, then they go back to the City Council... the PUB and the City Council saying this is the property we're going to purchase for the substation and then we've got an extra added step and then it says, okay, all that's done. City Council has agreed. PUB has agreed. The community neighborhood has been informed. Discussion has occurred. And then they come back in for an SUP which is another added public hearing step. And in this instance, because all that occurs, the public notification criteria are addressed and met beforehand. Does it really warrant... the statement we're making is does it really warrant to have the SUP specific use permit process occur at that point through another public hearing process? So the public has two opportunities two separate public hearings, one at PUB, one at City Council. If that moves forward, then the City will purchase the land and not before that public hearing process. Am I understanding that correctly? Yes. Okay. Thank you. A couple questions. Commissioner Rossell. Thank you. Can you go back one slide? Sure. So you're going to place a signed advertising public hearing on the property you haven't purchased yet? Yes. Is that legal? Same with the zoning case or... D&E already does this, right? So they go out and put signs on the property they're going to do negotiations with or looking to buy. Does this hinder the negotiation to say, "We're going to buy it." I mean, if I was the property owner and I knew all this has already happened and you have to buy it, I'm going to put a premium on that property. Are we losing some economic value here by identifying the site so explicitly? Let's take it back because there's another step before all that. The preferred site selection is right here. So we've got four or five options. We haven't agreed to a price. We haven't agreed to anything. We just say, "This is the one we want." Go and negotiate. They do negotiations before they notice it in public. So chances are they come back to counsel in a closed session and say, "Is this price okay? Do you want it? Can we move forward on it?" That's a closed session. Then they have to do a public hearing to the public to say, "We're agreeing to purchase this site for this price." The negotiations already happened. So before that sign goes in the yard of that property, that owner already has that deal? They've already negotiated and they've already domain it. That's helpful. Thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. I'll put it back up to one more. Other way? Well, anyway, the initial public notification is met through just mayors. Right. Exactly like it's done through an SUP. Certified mail, 200 feet to property owners, 500 feet, non-certified to fiscal addresses. It goes in public publications. Well, this isn't required in the newspaper, but every public hearing for city council requires a newspaper. It's still being handled. Okay. So it's not specifically called out in this one. So we can attract the idea of what we're trying to do, bring it all to the forefront. Okay. Now, I think this right here is going to be key because we've done this six times, so hopefully we've got to get a handle on what's been, what's approvable. Okay, so here's kind of the meat and bones of it. Here's the regulations. We're going to add these to SUP Chapter 24, which already exists for utility standards. We're going to add these sections and I'll kind of go through them one at a time. It's late, so it's the purpose. I won't get into all that detail, but if you have any questions about it, feel free to let me know. It's really just to add these standards and adopt some of the federal standards that were already in the code. Definitions. We're going to define a substation as basically any structure as part of a transmission system that routes voltage down for distribution into a local or regional area or conversion of two transmission lines. A switch station is basically the same thing. It just doesn't have any transformers to route the power. It's one voltage all the way through the station in case that wasn't clear. We're going to have some general regulations. This is really where the federal standards are going to get put in. NERC and NESC, the National Electric Safety Council, they're rules that DME is already following. We're just inserting them in this section. Then we're going to add the transmission line clearance easements for 69 kV and 138 kV. Part of this, I wish Brent had given the presentation before because he would have explained all this, but they're moving from a 68 kV system to a 138 kV system. That's the reason we're doing all these substations. They have higher voltage, therefore they require higher clearance zones. We're codifying those clearance zones that we're already enforcing today. What we're also doing is instead of preliminary final plan through subchapter B of the government code, we can do development plots at a staff level. We're going to make those plots for those substations, just a development plot. Going really fast. Are we still good? Okay. All right. Moving into screening, like with every condition of every SCP, we're going to require a minimum 10-foot masonry screening wall around the perimeter of the site. Outside of that screening wall, you have to have a 10-foot landscape area that includes ornamental trees and shrubs every 30 feet. We're going to require a gate that opaquely screens the interior of the site, and we're specifically prohibiting chain link as that fence material. You may have noticed that DME has chain link on their fences now. They're currently in the process of upgrading all those fences. We're going to require that they comply with all the federal standards, however, anywhere where the DDC is stricter, the DDC applies, not the federal standard. And if there's any special circumstances that exist, the Director of Development Services and his or her designated May Grant alternative screening measures. So in this case, it's going to be something like you haven't seen it yet, Hickory Substation. It's right next to a historic district. They met with the neighborhood. They agreed to this really elaborate wall that doesn't necessarily comply with what we've done here, but it was done through a lot of neighborhood input, so we're allowing the director in that case to approve what the neighborhood's already done at his or her discretion. Moving on, we've got the buffer requirements. Except when you're next to an industrial zone, a 20-foot buffer is required. The common includes five trees and 30 shrubs per 100 linear feet. That's kind of somewhere between a type C and a type D that you all are familiar with that's kind of in between. And then again, where special circumstances exist, the Director of Development may grant this alternative buffering. An example of this where the director might approve of it is when you're next to a flood plan, you've got a giant tree landscaped area already. There's no need to add an additional 20-foot to buffer the flood plan. Trees, again, these are already in the DDC. The street trees are required in accordance with Subject 13, which is where our SAC design criteria for standard development is. But street lights may be used in lieu of street trees provided at the same number and spacing. And these are not your big street lights. These are the ornamental pedestrian-sized lights. They are exempt from the tree code as they currently are. And we're looking into this. The tree code update is coming forward. So we're kind of looking at these to make sure they blend and match and are consistent. So that may be tweaked just a little bit. And then lastly, as required now, you have to comply with the tree canopy coverage per the zoning district. Access and transportation. The first rule is driveways can't be located across from the front yards of residential uses or districts, unless approved by the director. Primary access is limited to the lowest classification street. So if you have an arterial in a collector, you take it off the collector and take it off the arterial. No more than two driveways per each perimeter street. Your separation is per the transportation criteria manual. Driveways must be concrete from the back of the curb to the entrance of the site. No gravel driveways where the public can see it. And sidewalks are required with the development. Again, all this is already in place, just codifying it in this chapter. This is kind of a new one. This is kind of one of the federal standards from the NESC that you have to have a 20-foot clearance zone to go climbing aids for the security and safety of the site. We're going to mandate this for our code. You have to have a 20-foot site and you can't have landscape in it so long as it's properly maintained doesn't grow to a height that you could climb or scale the wall. Commissioner Hatchbuth. Thank you. Sidewalks. So generally they're going to be further out. I'm assuming the areas you're going to try to select are, but should there be some parameters there? It shouldn't just be a sidewalk in the middle of nowhere, right? For example, let's use the one on McKinney. The substation just finished. There's no sidewalk there. What would you envision that saying? What does that mean, sidewalk? Where would you put a sidewalk? How far does it have to go? Does it have to connect? All that is kind of already outlined in our Transportation Criteria Manual. So even if there are nothing to connect to, at some point those sites are going to develop. So McKinney is a great site. We've got the substation going in first, and now we've got two apartments going in the other side. And now we are having a long connection. So the plan is as all these sites develop we will get that connection. And the size, the placement location is all outlined in our street sections per street classification. So stand with McKinney. There just be a sidewalk that connects to nothing until everything else builds? That's correct. That's what we do. Have you seen the sidewalks from nowhere? And then no sidewalk, and then everything builds in and there's a gap because they didn't build the sidewalk ten years ago. Are you sure? Because cement shifts, right? I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but it shifts. It doesn't play well with each other. It needs to be, you know what I mean? It doesn't work. I mean, I've learned trial and error. I'm not a builder. I've just seen it. They put what's called expansion joints in there. But it just, am I wrong? I mean, I want to make sure that it doesn't play well with each other. Sure, it sounds like you're sitting in one of our Thursday meetings with applicants. We hear that all the time. It's true, but you do have to start somewhere. I jacked up my house by putting a porch and they don't play well with each other. I mean, and I'm like, what's happening? It's cement. It's a fair point. We deal with that all the time. We do have to start somewhere. We typically are pretty standard about making them put it in. But there are cases where, like say you're building a single-family house in an established neighborhood that has no sidewalks. The engineering department will take a payment and move the building in that sidewalk. So that at some point in the future we may come in and put it in ourself. Well, and so that would be my question. Is there not a better work around to say, hey, look, we're going to allocate this budget hard and fast for this sidewalk once everything, once there's three quarters or whatever, such that it can connect to something, but a sidewalk in the middle of nowhere that you're then going to connect other sidewalks to and they're going to fight doesn't, it doesn't seem like a good use of resource. For example, I mean, there's no one walking right there on McKinney right now. So you'd have this one patch where there's nothing going on. That is, that's like throwing money out the window to me. I'm just, I don't know. I don't know. There's got to be a better way. Mr. Gerrard. Commissioner Dudowitz. I built the property in 2005 on University Drive East. I had to put a sidewalk in. Properties on both sides don't have any. Not only that, but I had to put in a frontage entrance exit. So in case we wanted, they wanted to route traffic. So in my property, I have a street in front of me with parking, one of those blocks or whatever. And it looks like a road that would go, but it doesn't. And I have a sidewalk in front of me. Nobody on the other side of me has. And I had to put those in. Yeah, no, I mean, I would just, I mean, again, if I have any say so in it, I would urge that I would put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. I mean, I would just put a sidewalk in front of me. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. We have nothing else in work session so I'm going to close our work session at 940. Thank you everyone.