WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.519
meeting our work session for April the 13th 2016. It is 5.

00:00:06.519 --> 00:00:07.839
05. Our meeting has

00:00:07.839 --> 00:00:11.509
been duly posted and we have a quorum present and our first

00:00:11.509 --> 00:00:12.240
order of business

00:00:12.240 --> 00:00:15.519
in our work session is going to be to receive clarification

00:00:15.519 --> 00:00:16.359
of agenda items

00:00:16.359 --> 00:00:20.600
and I will turn that over to Manal for presentation. Thank

00:00:20.600 --> 00:00:21.039
you Chairperson Strange.

00:00:21.039 --> 00:00:24.140
We have a few plots on the agenda if you'd be interested in

00:00:24.140 --> 00:00:24.519
going through

00:00:24.519 --> 00:00:26.679
those we can do that. If you have any questions on a

00:00:26.679 --> 00:00:27.679
specific plot we can

00:00:27.679 --> 00:00:31.399
address those. Commissioner Beck. I do have a couple of

00:00:31.399 --> 00:00:32.159
questions probably

00:00:32.159 --> 00:00:35.770
nothing we can deal with but yeah a couple of them. Okay.

00:00:35.770 --> 00:00:36.520
Something popped up.

00:00:36.520 --> 00:00:44.600
Okay should we address them one by one which plot? Okay.

00:00:50.719 --> 00:00:57.090
Okay on PP15-0024 the Meadow Oaks Division. It mentioned

00:00:57.090 --> 00:00:58.439
that the proposed

00:00:58.439 --> 00:01:01.869
residential lots exceed the maximum permitted density of

00:01:01.869 --> 00:01:03.799
four dwellings units

00:01:03.799 --> 00:01:07.519
per acre however based upon a continuous level permitting

00:01:07.519 --> 00:01:08.719
and planning. In other words

00:01:08.719 --> 00:01:12.519
we can do this anyway because of something that was done in

00:01:12.519 --> 00:01:15.680
1970. So can

00:01:15.680 --> 00:01:19.400
I get that clarified? I'll invite Julie Wyatt to go ahead

00:01:19.400 --> 00:01:22.159
and go over this plot and explain the

00:01:22.159 --> 00:01:26.209
technicalities associated with it. I mean I looked at the

00:01:26.209 --> 00:01:27.359
lots on the houses that

00:01:27.359 --> 00:01:31.000
are already there and got a little measure in there and it

00:01:31.000 --> 00:01:32.799
didn't look like they're that much bigger so how are we

00:01:32.799 --> 00:01:33.640
getting more?

00:01:33.640 --> 00:01:38.640
Well the current zoning, let me make sure I have my, is NR4

00:01:38.640 --> 00:01:41.239
and so the

00:01:41.239 --> 00:01:46.329
existing the 43 lots exceeds the permitted density for NR4,

00:01:46.329 --> 00:01:46.519
four

00:01:46.519 --> 00:01:51.269
dwelling units per acre. This Meadow Oaks edition was

00:01:51.269 --> 00:01:54.840
originally plotted in 1970

00:01:54.840 --> 00:01:58.519
since that preliminary or the preliminary plot was approved

00:01:58.519 --> 00:01:59.439
in 1970.

00:01:59.439 --> 00:02:03.280
Since that time there have been a series of final plots

00:02:03.280 --> 00:02:04.719
done and permits that

00:02:04.719 --> 00:02:08.289
have been pulled developing those residential lots ever

00:02:08.289 --> 00:02:10.439
since then. So last

00:02:10.439 --> 00:02:16.439
summer the property owner approached us and requested a

00:02:16.439 --> 00:02:17.319
vested rights

00:02:17.319 --> 00:02:21.930
determination and at that time we looked at the request and

00:02:21.930 --> 00:02:23.280
legal looked at it as

00:02:23.280 --> 00:02:25.770
well as the city manager and determined that because those

00:02:25.770 --> 00:02:26.879
permits had continued

00:02:26.879 --> 00:02:31.449
to be pulled and those plots had continued to be approved

00:02:31.449 --> 00:02:32.300
that it was

00:02:32.300 --> 00:02:35.580
vested to what was approved in 1970. So it's a little more

00:02:35.580 --> 00:02:36.520
dense than what is

00:02:36.520 --> 00:02:39.900
typically permitted in NR4 but because of the vested rights

00:02:39.900 --> 00:02:40.919
that's why it's

00:02:40.919 --> 00:02:44.120
why it's got that little those additional lots.

00:02:44.120 --> 00:02:50.069
Nothing real noticeable so let's see, let's see, the other

00:02:50.069 --> 00:02:59.520
one, CB 16-02, that's, is it, Beverly's and Bitt Mike's.

00:02:59.520 --> 00:03:05.500
Oh okay, do we know exactly what DME is going to use that

00:03:05.500 --> 00:03:09.360
lot for? Because you got three houses that I think people

00:03:09.360 --> 00:03:13.919
are living in now. Just curious.

00:03:13.919 --> 00:03:15.919
Mike Bell will address them.

00:03:17.919 --> 00:03:19.919
I think I can find it up here.

00:03:24.919 --> 00:03:27.740
Doesn't seem to be up here but I think it's this lot right

00:03:27.740 --> 00:03:30.729
here. Yeah that's kind of the side of, part of that is the

00:03:30.729 --> 00:03:31.919
existing substation right now.

00:03:31.919 --> 00:03:32.419
Yeah.

00:03:32.419 --> 00:03:34.659
And when the new substation comes in that's going to be dec

00:03:34.659 --> 00:03:36.919
ommissioned but they don't have any plans for it at this

00:03:36.919 --> 00:03:36.919
time.

00:03:36.919 --> 00:03:40.919
Okay, it could stay vacant then. Okay, okay. Thank you.

00:03:40.919 --> 00:03:47.919
And then lastly FP 16-02, Bill, Judge Carmel.

00:03:47.919 --> 00:03:54.430
There is that one area that is called the upland habitat

00:03:54.430 --> 00:03:57.120
and environmental sensitive area so we're not building on

00:03:57.120 --> 00:03:58.919
that, that's correct, right?

00:03:58.919 --> 00:04:01.639
That's correct. Actually this entire lot is under contract

00:04:01.639 --> 00:04:03.919
with the Parks Department to be purchased for a park.

00:04:03.919 --> 00:04:06.919
We've got right away there for the future post oak road.

00:04:06.919 --> 00:04:07.919
That's correct.

00:04:07.919 --> 00:04:10.919
Okay, very good. Thank you. That's it.

00:04:13.919 --> 00:04:17.209
Seeing no other plaque questions I'm actually going to, yes

00:04:17.209 --> 00:04:17.920
, sorry.

00:04:17.920 --> 00:04:19.920
Sorry, I should flip the page.

00:04:21.920 --> 00:04:24.920
FP 15-035, Teesley trails.

00:04:27.920 --> 00:04:30.920
There is an existing pond there, very big one.

00:04:30.920 --> 00:04:34.279
I'm just curious, it looks like according to the plans we

00:04:34.279 --> 00:04:37.420
're going to build over that so is that going to be plowed

00:04:37.420 --> 00:04:37.920
over?

00:04:39.920 --> 00:04:41.920
I have a picture of it right here.

00:04:43.920 --> 00:04:53.920
Let's see if I can rotate it so we...

00:04:58.920 --> 00:05:02.920
Was it on the print, the plat?

00:05:02.920 --> 00:05:04.920
Let's see, let me see where you're...

00:05:04.920 --> 00:05:07.920
So here's the existing houses right here to the north.

00:05:07.920 --> 00:05:10.920
I guess Teesley kind of does this thing.

00:05:13.920 --> 00:05:18.589
I'm not sure where exactly you're looking at, but this is

00:05:18.589 --> 00:05:21.920
in conformance with the preliminary plot that was approved.

00:05:21.920 --> 00:05:25.389
If there are any ponds on site or any drainage areas on

00:05:25.389 --> 00:05:28.920
site, they would have to accommodate for that.

00:05:28.920 --> 00:05:34.779
And they would have to make sure that that is directed to

00:05:34.779 --> 00:05:36.920
the storm sewer.

00:05:36.920 --> 00:05:40.029
Maybe I was just, I got on Google, got the Google map and

00:05:40.029 --> 00:05:43.100
got down in the general area and I thought it looked like

00:05:43.100 --> 00:05:43.920
right there.

00:05:43.920 --> 00:05:47.920
Because again, where are the houses that are already in

00:05:47.920 --> 00:05:50.920
existence there to this development?

00:05:50.920 --> 00:05:54.389
This is that road that's cutting in now right off of Tees

00:05:54.389 --> 00:05:54.920
ley.

00:05:54.920 --> 00:05:57.920
Are you saying houses north of there?

00:05:57.920 --> 00:06:00.740
Well, I guess it would be considered north because at that

00:06:00.740 --> 00:06:02.920
point Teesley is going north and south.

00:06:02.920 --> 00:06:19.920
Let me get to...now it's going to be slow.

00:06:19.920 --> 00:06:21.920
Let's see if we can figure out.

00:06:21.920 --> 00:06:24.920
Get on the same page here.

00:06:24.920 --> 00:06:39.920
Maybe.

00:06:39.920 --> 00:06:41.920
So are you talking about this pond?

00:06:41.920 --> 00:06:42.920
Yes.

00:06:42.920 --> 00:06:43.920
Okay.

00:06:43.920 --> 00:06:44.920
This is south of there.

00:06:44.920 --> 00:06:50.899
So it's kind of hard to see because on these maps the parc

00:06:50.899 --> 00:06:55.920
els aren't reflecting what you're seeing.

00:06:55.920 --> 00:07:02.139
So this little section right here lines up with,

00:07:02.139 --> 00:07:06.920
approximately with this section.

00:07:06.920 --> 00:07:09.920
So that pond is north of this development.

00:07:09.920 --> 00:07:13.199
So yes sir, this area, the platted area is going to be more

00:07:13.199 --> 00:07:14.920
in this general direction.

00:07:14.920 --> 00:07:15.920
All right.

00:07:15.920 --> 00:07:16.920
That's it.

00:07:16.920 --> 00:07:17.920
For sure.

00:07:17.920 --> 00:07:18.920
Thank you.

00:07:18.920 --> 00:07:19.920
Sure.

00:07:19.920 --> 00:07:28.920
Any other questions on plats?

00:07:28.920 --> 00:07:29.920
No.

00:07:29.920 --> 00:07:33.920
We'll move on to our next presentation.

00:07:33.920 --> 00:07:37.920
The next presentation is for the ADP 160003B.

00:07:37.920 --> 00:07:45.920
I'm going to ask Mike Belt to make this presentation.

00:07:45.920 --> 00:08:03.920
Thank you, and all members of the commission.

00:08:03.920 --> 00:08:04.920
All right.

00:08:04.920 --> 00:08:06.920
So this is ADP 160003.

00:08:06.920 --> 00:08:08.920
This is an alternative development plan.

00:08:08.920 --> 00:08:11.970
So for those in the audience, this is a request to deviate

00:08:11.970 --> 00:08:13.920
from site design standards only,

00:08:13.920 --> 00:08:16.519
and those are located in subchapter 13 of the development

00:08:16.519 --> 00:08:16.920
code.

00:08:16.920 --> 00:08:18.920
This is not a zoning issue.

00:08:18.920 --> 00:08:19.920
It's not a platting issue.

00:08:19.920 --> 00:08:22.920
It's strictly site design regulations.

00:08:22.920 --> 00:08:25.920
The subject property is roughly shown here in yellow.

00:08:25.920 --> 00:08:27.920
It's located on the south side of Fannin Street.

00:08:27.920 --> 00:08:31.920
The University of North Texas is up here to the north.

00:08:31.920 --> 00:08:33.919
35 East is located down here.

00:08:33.919 --> 00:08:39.759
It's kind of in an eclectic area with a mix of housing

00:08:39.759 --> 00:08:40.919
types.

00:08:40.919 --> 00:08:44.200
It's in a downtown residential two zoning district, which

00:08:44.200 --> 00:08:44.919
allows multifamily,

00:08:44.919 --> 00:08:47.919
which is what they're trying to build here.

00:08:47.919 --> 00:08:51.490
And it's in a future language area, neighborhood university

00:08:51.490 --> 00:08:52.919
compatibility area.

00:08:52.919 --> 00:08:55.190
So the comp plan has called this out as an area that's

00:08:55.190 --> 00:08:55.919
going to see a mix of housing types

00:08:55.919 --> 00:08:58.779
and a bit of a transition as it goes from what was a single

00:08:58.779 --> 00:08:59.919
family neighborhood

00:08:59.919 --> 00:09:05.919
to more mix of housing types.

00:09:05.919 --> 00:09:08.919
What you can see here is a proposed site plan.

00:09:08.919 --> 00:09:12.149
It contains two buildings that are proposed for immediate

00:09:12.149 --> 00:09:12.919
development

00:09:12.919 --> 00:09:14.919
and then one kind of reserved.

00:09:14.919 --> 00:09:16.919
They'll build one here in the future.

00:09:16.919 --> 00:09:19.490
It's got the parking spaces and the sidewalk directly from

00:09:19.490 --> 00:09:23.919
the street to serve the property.

00:09:23.919 --> 00:09:25.919
How this deviates from the site design standards.

00:09:25.919 --> 00:09:29.919
First of all, there's a requirement that for multifamily

00:09:29.919 --> 00:09:30.919
buildings

00:09:30.919 --> 00:09:36.299
that at least 50% of the frontage have buildings within 20

00:09:36.299 --> 00:09:37.919
feet of the curb.

00:09:37.919 --> 00:09:39.669
So what that means is if you take 20 feet back from the

00:09:39.669 --> 00:09:42.919
curb, you draw this line across it,

00:09:42.919 --> 00:09:46.919
50% of that needs to be touched by building at some point.

00:09:46.919 --> 00:09:49.200
This standard is really kind of more for large scale

00:09:49.200 --> 00:09:49.919
developments,

00:09:49.919 --> 00:09:57.100
not meant for this kind of small lot type of one or two

00:09:57.100 --> 00:09:59.919
unit buildings.

00:09:59.919 --> 00:10:01.600
And then the second requirement there are questions to dev

00:10:01.600 --> 00:10:02.919
iate from is that buildings

00:10:02.919 --> 00:10:04.919
shall be directly accessed from the street and sidewalk,

00:10:04.919 --> 00:10:07.539
and that one ground floor entrance be oriented towards the

00:10:07.539 --> 00:10:09.919
street and include a porch.

00:10:09.919 --> 00:10:14.409
The African originally intended to do a, or proposed to do

00:10:14.409 --> 00:10:15.919
kind of a false door here

00:10:15.919 --> 00:10:20.100
with a landing and no connectivity to the sidewalk to kind

00:10:20.100 --> 00:10:21.919
of meet that provision.

00:10:21.919 --> 00:10:24.179
We all thought it was best just not to have a fake door and

00:10:24.179 --> 00:10:25.919
enhance the elevations a little bit.

00:10:25.919 --> 00:10:29.919
So that's what they proposed to do.

00:10:29.919 --> 00:10:32.919
And that's where it would be required by code.

00:10:32.919 --> 00:10:38.100
That right arrow is there instead going to do it right here

00:10:38.100 --> 00:10:39.919
on this walkway.

00:10:39.919 --> 00:10:42.139
And to kind of mitigate those requirements, provide a

00:10:42.139 --> 00:10:42.919
little enhanced aesthetics.

00:10:42.919 --> 00:10:46.620
They're going to do 100% masonry and stone on the buildings

00:10:46.620 --> 00:10:46.919
.

00:10:46.919 --> 00:10:50.340
The north side is what you'll see from the street right

00:10:50.340 --> 00:10:50.919
here.

00:10:50.919 --> 00:10:54.490
I will note that the applicant did take, we did work with

00:10:54.490 --> 00:10:56.919
the applicant to screen the stairwell.

00:10:56.919 --> 00:10:59.919
So they went above and beyond to make this screening here

00:10:59.919 --> 00:11:01.919
so you won't see it from the street.

00:11:01.919 --> 00:11:07.919
And then all four sides are masonry or brick.

00:11:07.919 --> 00:11:11.220
To give you an idea of what the landscaping will be, so it

00:11:11.220 --> 00:11:12.919
's not just building front.

00:11:12.919 --> 00:11:16.779
There will be landscaping along the front and in front of

00:11:16.779 --> 00:11:18.919
the parking spaces as well.

00:11:18.919 --> 00:11:21.419
Just kind of put that site plan reference of what's around

00:11:21.419 --> 00:11:22.919
it to give you an idea of scale.

00:11:22.919 --> 00:11:27.289
It's completely in scale with what's around there in height

00:11:27.289 --> 00:11:28.919
and size and density.

00:11:28.919 --> 00:11:32.919
And planning feels that it's an appropriate request.

00:11:32.919 --> 00:11:34.919
So staff does recommend approval of the ADP.

00:11:34.919 --> 00:11:36.919
We're going to recommend a few conditions.

00:11:36.919 --> 00:11:40.049
One, that it comply with the site plan, landscape plan and

00:11:40.049 --> 00:11:40.919
elevations.

00:11:40.919 --> 00:11:43.809
One, that the building facades be 100% masonry or brick as

00:11:43.809 --> 00:11:44.919
they're proposing.

00:11:44.919 --> 00:11:49.190
And third, this is just clarification for the future to let

00:11:49.190 --> 00:11:50.759
everybody know that one additional building is going to

00:11:50.759 --> 00:11:51.919
come in.

00:11:51.919 --> 00:11:54.049
And that we're allowing that without amending the ADP so

00:11:54.049 --> 00:11:56.919
long as they comply with all our requirements.

00:11:56.919 --> 00:11:57.919
Just to make that clear.

00:11:57.919 --> 00:12:01.919
So with that I'll take any questions you might have.

00:12:01.919 --> 00:12:02.919
Commissioner Detowich.

00:12:02.919 --> 00:12:05.860
>> In essence, it's going to be further from the road than

00:12:05.860 --> 00:12:07.919
originally, which is kind of nice.

00:12:07.919 --> 00:12:11.730
And they're turning the building sideways instead of having

00:12:11.730 --> 00:12:14.919
the front sidewalk coming up to a door or patio.

00:12:14.919 --> 00:12:18.389
So it's really kind of enhancing, I think, what they're

00:12:18.389 --> 00:12:20.899
building here compared to what it would have to be to meet

00:12:20.899 --> 00:12:21.919
code originally.

00:12:21.919 --> 00:12:23.639
>> Considering the neighborhood and the narrow width of the

00:12:23.639 --> 00:12:24.919
lot, I think it's appropriate as well.

00:12:24.919 --> 00:12:27.919
>> Good. Thank you.

00:12:27.919 --> 00:12:29.919
>> Commissioner Weigel.

00:12:29.919 --> 00:12:30.919
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:12:30.919 --> 00:12:33.940
Mike, can you show me where there might be a sidewalk on F

00:12:33.940 --> 00:12:34.919
annin Street?

00:12:34.919 --> 00:12:37.049
Is the sidewalk that's built on the property, does that

00:12:37.049 --> 00:12:38.919
connect with another sidewalk that's already?

00:12:38.919 --> 00:12:39.919
>> It does not.

00:12:39.919 --> 00:12:41.720
>> Is the applicant proposing to build a sidewalk on Fannin

00:12:41.720 --> 00:12:41.919
?

00:12:41.919 --> 00:12:44.919
There's a high pedestrian area really close to UNT.

00:12:44.919 --> 00:12:46.919
There's a lot of students that live there.

00:12:46.919 --> 00:12:50.120
Are they going to be walking in the street or are they

00:12:50.120 --> 00:12:53.539
going to be making like a path in the grass as they try and

00:12:53.539 --> 00:12:53.919
stay?

00:12:53.919 --> 00:12:56.200
>> What they'll be doing is connecting, they will be

00:12:56.200 --> 00:12:59.100
connecting from the driveway here, but not connecting the

00:12:59.100 --> 00:12:59.919
entire width.

00:12:59.919 --> 00:13:02.240
They're going to do payment in lieu of construction as

00:13:02.240 --> 00:13:03.919
there aren't any other sidewalks.

00:13:03.919 --> 00:13:05.919
>> Are there other sidewalks in the neighborhood?

00:13:05.919 --> 00:13:06.919
>> There are not.

00:13:06.919 --> 00:13:08.610
>> But doesn't it require, don't we require new

00:13:08.610 --> 00:13:10.370
developments to build a sidewalk so that when other new

00:13:10.370 --> 00:13:12.940
developments come in, eventually we'll have sidewalks

00:13:12.940 --> 00:13:13.919
everywhere?

00:13:13.919 --> 00:13:15.919
>> We do, typically.

00:13:15.919 --> 00:13:18.429
Engineering allowed payment in lieu of, in this case, and

00:13:18.429 --> 00:13:20.919
we'll come back and put the sidewalk in at a future date.

00:13:20.919 --> 00:13:22.919
>> So someone will put a sidewalk in later?

00:13:22.919 --> 00:13:25.110
>> They're paying the cost to put a sidewalk in to the city

00:13:25.110 --> 00:13:26.919
so that we can come back in later and do it.

00:13:26.919 --> 00:13:29.860
I don't know if there are any imminent plans at this point,

00:13:29.860 --> 00:13:31.919
but that's the purpose of the payment.

00:13:31.919 --> 00:13:35.490
>> I see. Okay, so the applicant is not building a sidewalk

00:13:35.490 --> 00:13:35.919
now.

00:13:35.919 --> 00:13:38.419
They're giving money to the city so that whenever that,

00:13:38.419 --> 00:13:41.899
whenever Fannin gets redone, a sidewalk will be built at

00:13:41.899 --> 00:13:42.919
least on that stretch,

00:13:42.919 --> 00:13:46.330
or will a sidewalk eventually be built along the whole

00:13:46.330 --> 00:13:47.919
length of that block?

00:13:47.919 --> 00:13:48.919
Explain that to me a little bit more.

00:13:48.919 --> 00:13:50.919
When are we getting a sidewalk?

00:13:50.919 --> 00:13:51.919
>> That I don't know.

00:13:51.919 --> 00:13:54.029
The payment is paid so that if they do ever come in and do

00:13:54.029 --> 00:13:56.240
a project on Fannin, that money can go towards putting a

00:13:56.240 --> 00:13:59.919
sidewalk in on the entire stretch of Fannin.

00:13:59.919 --> 00:14:01.919
>> How often do other developers do that?

00:14:01.919 --> 00:14:05.399
I mean, wouldn't it make more sense to have the developer

00:14:05.399 --> 00:14:08.919
just, if there's no immediate plans to rebuild Fannin,

00:14:08.919 --> 00:14:11.629
why wouldn't we just require the applicant to build the

00:14:11.629 --> 00:14:14.340
sidewalk like we would require any developer to build a

00:14:14.340 --> 00:14:14.919
sidewalk?

00:14:14.919 --> 00:14:18.730
>> And then when the city does eventually go back in and

00:14:18.730 --> 00:14:22.330
repair the street, then we would repair or stay off of the

00:14:22.330 --> 00:14:23.919
sidewalk or repair the sidewalk at the same time.

00:14:23.919 --> 00:14:26.629
I mean, it just, it seems a little backwards to me to have

00:14:26.629 --> 00:14:29.500
them pay that and then maybe we do a sidewalk 15 years from

00:14:29.500 --> 00:14:32.919
now, but we kind of need one now.

00:14:32.919 --> 00:14:34.919
>> I wish I had a better answer for you for that.

00:14:34.919 --> 00:14:37.059
Unfortunately, that's kind of, our engineering department

00:14:37.059 --> 00:14:37.919
makes that decision.

00:14:37.919 --> 00:14:40.960
And it is, it's uncommon that they do that in areas where

00:14:40.960 --> 00:14:42.919
there aren't a lot of sidewalks.

00:14:42.919 --> 00:14:45.100
I'm sure that's something we could get engineering in here

00:14:45.100 --> 00:14:45.919
to explain maybe.

00:14:45.919 --> 00:14:48.100
>> It sounds like a bigger problem we might need to talk

00:14:48.100 --> 00:14:48.919
about as a team.

00:14:48.919 --> 00:14:52.919
>> Sure. >> Okay, all right, thank you.

00:14:52.919 --> 00:14:53.919
>> Commissioner Rossell.

00:14:53.919 --> 00:14:55.919
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:14:55.919 --> 00:14:59.200
Before we question, listening to your comments, recall

00:14:59.200 --> 00:15:01.220
Commissioner Dudowitz talking about how that was a

00:15:01.220 --> 00:15:03.419
requirement for one of your businesses and you have a

00:15:03.419 --> 00:15:05.919
sidewalk to nowhere, or you have a road to nowhere.

00:15:05.919 --> 00:15:09.320
>> I'm the only one that has a sidewalk and within half a

00:15:09.320 --> 00:15:10.919
mile of the side of me.

00:15:10.919 --> 00:15:13.440
>> So I understand what you're saying, but I also am

00:15:13.440 --> 00:15:15.919
conflicted on a sidewalk to nowhere.

00:15:15.919 --> 00:15:18.240
Someone's going to be walking on grass and get a great

00:15:18.240 --> 00:15:19.919
sidewalk just to be back on grass.

00:15:19.919 --> 00:15:22.149
So, and who knows if when fanning gets redone, if it ever

00:15:22.149 --> 00:15:24.340
gets redone, if that would have to tear up a sidewalk and

00:15:24.340 --> 00:15:25.919
then you're duplicating efforts.

00:15:25.919 --> 00:15:27.919
So I think I'm okay with the sidewalk issue.

00:15:27.919 --> 00:15:31.809
But the question I have is, does the ADP not have to put

00:15:31.809 --> 00:15:32.919
out notice?

00:15:32.919 --> 00:15:33.919
>> No, it does not.

00:15:33.919 --> 00:15:37.919
>> But the ADP we had for the S that does require notice.

00:15:37.919 --> 00:15:40.470
>> Alternative ESA, it's given an ADP name because we don't

00:15:40.470 --> 00:15:41.919
have another acronym for it.

00:15:41.919 --> 00:15:44.370
But that is part of our zoning map and so it does require

00:15:44.370 --> 00:15:44.919
notice.

00:15:44.919 --> 00:15:49.919
>> Got you. Thank you.

00:15:49.919 --> 00:15:52.919
>> Commissioner Beck.

00:15:52.919 --> 00:15:54.919
>> There's no tree mitigation with this change.

00:15:54.919 --> 00:15:57.629
I notice they're removing three secondary trees and one

00:15:57.629 --> 00:15:58.919
large secondary tree.

00:15:58.919 --> 00:16:01.330
>> Yes, it's been reviewed by our forester and they will be

00:16:01.330 --> 00:16:02.919
required to mitigate those trees.

00:16:02.919 --> 00:16:11.919
>> Okay.

00:16:11.919 --> 00:16:20.919
>> Thank you, Mike.

00:16:20.919 --> 00:16:24.269
>> The next item on our agenda would be a zoning case and

00:16:24.269 --> 00:16:26.919
an SUP to be heard at the same time.

00:16:26.919 --> 00:16:32.309
For 160002 and SUP150014, Julie White will be presenting

00:16:32.309 --> 00:16:32.919
this.

00:16:32.919 --> 00:16:35.919
Thanks, Julie.

00:16:35.919 --> 00:16:38.919
>> Good evening.

00:16:38.919 --> 00:16:39.919
All right.

00:16:39.919 --> 00:16:43.320
This request is to consider a rezoning from NR3 to NR6 and

00:16:43.320 --> 00:16:47.919
also a specific use permit for elderly housing.

00:16:47.919 --> 00:16:52.919
Just to orient you to the site, here is North Carroll.

00:16:52.919 --> 00:16:57.919
The property is right here. You're probably familiar with

00:16:57.919 --> 00:16:57.919
the Denton Rehab.

00:16:57.919 --> 00:17:01.879
And there is residential development to the north and also

00:17:01.879 --> 00:17:02.919
to the east.

00:17:02.919 --> 00:17:05.920
To the south, there's some religious institutions.

00:17:05.920 --> 00:17:09.920
Also the fairgrounds are here.

00:17:09.920 --> 00:17:12.920
And then farther south is the Denton Center.

00:17:12.920 --> 00:17:16.720
To the west, you then have some additional elderly housing

00:17:16.720 --> 00:17:18.920
and some undeveloped property.

00:17:18.920 --> 00:17:21.440
So to take you back in time, just give you a little

00:17:21.440 --> 00:17:23.920
background on what's happened on this site.

00:17:23.920 --> 00:17:28.920
So in 1964, it was an open piece of property.

00:17:28.920 --> 00:17:31.420
You can see there is some residential development to the

00:17:31.420 --> 00:17:31.920
north.

00:17:31.920 --> 00:17:35.400
There is some development, residential development in this

00:17:35.400 --> 00:17:35.920
area.

00:17:35.920 --> 00:17:39.920
Fairgrounds are there and then the Denton Center is there.

00:17:39.920 --> 00:17:42.920
Skip ahead to 1972.

00:17:42.920 --> 00:17:45.900
The previous codes did allow this use in the zoning

00:17:45.900 --> 00:17:47.920
district in which it was located.

00:17:47.920 --> 00:17:51.920
And so here you have the subject property.

00:17:51.920 --> 00:17:55.920
The first section of the facility had been built.

00:17:55.920 --> 00:17:58.920
It was built in 1969.

00:17:58.920 --> 00:18:02.039
There was more residential development to the north, a

00:18:02.039 --> 00:18:04.920
little more in this area.

00:18:04.920 --> 00:18:09.930
In 1997, they had come back for an SUP to add on this

00:18:09.930 --> 00:18:11.920
section in the back.

00:18:11.920 --> 00:18:15.539
The neighborhood just to the north, the adjacent

00:18:15.539 --> 00:18:19.920
neighborhood had begun and so houses were being built there

00:18:19.920 --> 00:18:19.920
.

00:18:19.920 --> 00:18:24.730
And then it looks to be that this area here was pretty much

00:18:24.730 --> 00:18:25.920
built out.

00:18:25.920 --> 00:18:29.630
And then in 2001, the neighborhood just to the north was

00:18:29.630 --> 00:18:31.920
pretty much complete.

00:18:31.920 --> 00:18:34.920
And it had built adjacent to the property.

00:18:34.920 --> 00:18:39.220
And then all other elements seemed to have remained the

00:18:39.220 --> 00:18:39.920
same.

00:18:39.920 --> 00:18:43.529
So last fall, maybe late last summer, the applicant

00:18:43.529 --> 00:18:48.460
submitted for a building permit in order to update the

00:18:48.460 --> 00:18:55.920
facility to meet more industry standards today.

00:18:55.920 --> 00:19:00.920
So update the facility, get some new elements to it.

00:19:00.920 --> 00:19:04.980
In that building permit, they requested to remove one of

00:19:04.980 --> 00:19:08.000
these wings and then one of these wings and add this new

00:19:08.000 --> 00:19:08.920
wing here.

00:19:08.920 --> 00:19:12.210
The net result, the net square footage that would be

00:19:12.210 --> 00:19:16.490
proposed is about 5,300 square feet in addition to what's

00:19:16.490 --> 00:19:17.920
on the ground now.

00:19:17.920 --> 00:19:21.339
So they're taking some, they're adding some, so it would be

00:19:21.339 --> 00:19:24.920
a net of about an additional 5,300 square feet.

00:19:24.920 --> 00:19:28.920
Here zooms in a little bit to what they're proposing.

00:19:28.920 --> 00:19:32.890
They are proposing to meet that 15 foot buffer that is

00:19:32.890 --> 00:19:36.920
required adjacent to the single family residential.

00:19:36.920 --> 00:19:42.549
But this is really all that they're asking to change on the

00:19:42.549 --> 00:19:43.920
property.

00:19:43.920 --> 00:19:46.920
Here's the landscape plan that goes with that.

00:19:46.920 --> 00:19:51.039
Here are the plantings that are required per that type C 15

00:19:51.039 --> 00:19:52.920
foot landscape buffer.

00:19:52.920 --> 00:19:57.740
Within this modification and renovation, they're also

00:19:57.740 --> 00:20:00.920
proposing a landscape courtyard in the center.

00:20:00.920 --> 00:20:05.920
And here it is pulled out, some additional landscaping.

00:20:05.920 --> 00:20:09.339
Also within the building permit, they had an updated

00:20:09.339 --> 00:20:12.039
elevation currently, and you can see how the building

00:20:12.039 --> 00:20:12.920
currently looks now.

00:20:12.920 --> 00:20:14.920
It's a masonry building.

00:20:14.920 --> 00:20:15.920
It's one story.

00:20:15.920 --> 00:20:20.920
It's somewhat residential in nature.

00:20:20.920 --> 00:20:24.930
With this request and with this renovation, they would add

00:20:24.930 --> 00:20:28.920
some additional decorative elements to the building.

00:20:28.920 --> 00:20:33.769
Also add a steeper pitch to the roof, some rock elements to

00:20:33.769 --> 00:20:34.920
the front.

00:20:34.920 --> 00:20:38.920
Here's the rendering of what they're proposing.

00:20:38.920 --> 00:20:40.920
So when we got that building permit, we looked at it.

00:20:40.920 --> 00:20:43.509
We realized that the use was not permitted in the zoning

00:20:43.509 --> 00:20:44.920
district in which it sits.

00:20:44.920 --> 00:20:49.910
In 2002, the city was rezoned citywide, and some new zoning

00:20:49.910 --> 00:20:51.920
districts were applied.

00:20:51.920 --> 00:20:53.920
In this case, it was NR3.

00:20:53.920 --> 00:20:56.920
NR3 does not permit elderly housing.

00:20:56.920 --> 00:20:59.799
So we discussed this with the applicant, and we talked

00:20:59.799 --> 00:21:01.920
about how they should move forward.

00:21:01.920 --> 00:21:04.930
And so they came back to us proposing a neighborhood

00:21:04.930 --> 00:21:11.400
residential 6 zoning district with an SUP for the elderly

00:21:11.400 --> 00:21:13.920
housing use.

00:21:13.920 --> 00:21:15.920
So here's the future land use map.

00:21:15.920 --> 00:21:19.920
As you can see, north of -- here's the site right here.

00:21:19.920 --> 00:21:22.970
North of the site, there is a low density residential

00:21:22.970 --> 00:21:24.920
future land use designation.

00:21:24.920 --> 00:21:30.039
The site is in the middle of a moderate density residential

00:21:30.039 --> 00:21:32.920
future land use designation.

00:21:32.920 --> 00:21:36.720
And then down here near university, as you get closer to

00:21:36.720 --> 00:21:41.250
the Denton Center and the development on university, you

00:21:41.250 --> 00:21:43.920
have community mixed use.

00:21:43.920 --> 00:21:46.140
So when we look at the criteria for approval for both

00:21:46.140 --> 00:21:48.849
zoning and SUP, really the first place we start is the

00:21:48.849 --> 00:21:49.920
future land use.

00:21:49.920 --> 00:21:53.730
This future land use designation of moderate density

00:21:53.730 --> 00:21:57.920
residential, the intent is to have more residential

00:21:57.920 --> 00:22:01.309
development with a density of about 4 to 12 dwelling units

00:22:01.309 --> 00:22:01.920
per acre.

00:22:01.920 --> 00:22:04.779
This should complement the existing established

00:22:04.779 --> 00:22:05.920
neighborhoods.

00:22:05.920 --> 00:22:08.920
This is often in infill areas.

00:22:08.920 --> 00:22:10.920
But it should also provide a transition area.

00:22:10.920 --> 00:22:13.920
So between -- let's go back to the map.

00:22:13.920 --> 00:22:17.109
So between the low density residential and then the

00:22:17.109 --> 00:22:20.509
commercial, you can see that this is a great example of

00:22:20.509 --> 00:22:22.920
where moderate density residential should be.

00:22:22.920 --> 00:22:26.339
Because it really provides a transition zone between the

00:22:26.339 --> 00:22:29.880
more suburban low density development and the commercial

00:22:29.880 --> 00:22:30.920
development.

00:22:30.920 --> 00:22:36.920
It also provides a buffer between those two designations.

00:22:36.920 --> 00:22:38.920
Other considerations we looked at.

00:22:38.920 --> 00:22:42.640
Well, first of all, so the proposed NR6 does meet the

00:22:42.640 --> 00:22:46.920
intent of the moderate density future land use designation.

00:22:46.920 --> 00:22:49.920
The maximum density is six dwelling units per acre.

00:22:49.920 --> 00:22:53.210
It has primarily residential uses, so it would complement

00:22:53.210 --> 00:22:55.920
the character and what's existing out there.

00:22:55.920 --> 00:23:00.779
So if the property ever did redevelop, it would be

00:23:00.779 --> 00:23:04.920
compatible with what it's adjacent to.

00:23:04.920 --> 00:23:09.980
It's also the -- it also provides the transition between

00:23:09.980 --> 00:23:14.920
the low density residential, that NR3 and NR4 to the north.

00:23:14.920 --> 00:23:19.160
And then the NRMU, the more commercial districts to the

00:23:19.160 --> 00:23:19.920
south.

00:23:19.920 --> 00:23:23.690
When we look at the SUP, this facility has been there since

00:23:23.690 --> 00:23:24.920
1969.

00:23:24.920 --> 00:23:28.920
The residential has developed adjacent to it.

00:23:28.920 --> 00:23:32.210
So when staff looks at that and when we look at what an

00:23:32.210 --> 00:23:35.920
elderly housing use is, we really think in terms of what

00:23:35.920 --> 00:23:39.920
the use is, that is appropriate for residential areas.

00:23:39.920 --> 00:23:43.119
Where we can run into difficulty sometimes with elderly

00:23:43.119 --> 00:23:45.920
housing is maybe on the scale and the design.

00:23:45.920 --> 00:23:47.920
And so that's why the SUP is important.

00:23:47.920 --> 00:23:50.940
Because you can look at the scale, the design of what they

00:23:50.940 --> 00:23:54.190
're proposing, and make sure that it fits within the

00:23:54.190 --> 00:23:55.920
character and

00:23:55.920 --> 00:23:59.920
it is appropriate within the surrounding area.

00:23:59.920 --> 00:24:03.920
In this case, staff does feel it's appropriate.

00:24:03.920 --> 00:24:07.109
We feel like what they're proposing is really a

00:24:07.109 --> 00:24:11.140
continuation of what's been existing out there for quite a

00:24:11.140 --> 00:24:11.920
while.

00:24:11.920 --> 00:24:14.650
Additionally, due to the scope of what they're proposing,

00:24:14.650 --> 00:24:16.920
there's no substantial increase in traffic.

00:24:16.920 --> 00:24:17.920
They're not increasing the beds.

00:24:17.920 --> 00:24:22.039
They're really kind of reconfiguring how the beds and how

00:24:22.039 --> 00:24:23.920
the space is laid out.

00:24:23.920 --> 00:24:27.089
Permitting the existing elderly housing to expand wouldn't

00:24:27.089 --> 00:24:31.200
prevent the adjacent properties from developing with the

00:24:31.200 --> 00:24:33.920
residential land use pattern.

00:24:33.920 --> 00:24:37.720
And we feel that the use is compatible with residential

00:24:37.720 --> 00:24:38.920
development.

00:24:38.920 --> 00:24:40.920
Public notification was sent out.

00:24:40.920 --> 00:24:45.839
We've received two in favor, one of them being the

00:24:45.839 --> 00:24:48.920
applicant and two neutral.

00:24:48.920 --> 00:24:52.019
Based upon the considerations that I've discussed and the

00:24:52.019 --> 00:24:54.920
criteria for approval in the Denton Development Code,

00:24:54.920 --> 00:24:57.809
staff does recommend approval of the zoning case and also

00:24:57.809 --> 00:25:00.920
approval of the specific use permit for the elderly housing

00:25:00.920 --> 00:25:00.920
.

00:25:00.920 --> 00:25:04.630
With the following conditions, it must substantially comply

00:25:04.630 --> 00:25:06.920
with the site plan and the landscape plan.

00:25:06.920 --> 00:25:11.380
And that includes a maximum building square footage of 60,7

00:25:11.380 --> 00:25:12.920
30 square feet.

00:25:12.920 --> 00:25:15.869
They must maintain that type C buffer adjacent to the

00:25:15.869 --> 00:25:16.920
neighborhood.

00:25:16.920 --> 00:25:21.910
We want to make sure that those uses are, that they mesh

00:25:21.910 --> 00:25:22.920
together well.

00:25:22.920 --> 00:25:26.920
And we believe that that buffer would help in that.

00:25:26.920 --> 00:25:30.920
And that no additional parking spaces would be permitted.

00:25:30.920 --> 00:25:35.920
So I'll stand for any questions.

00:25:35.920 --> 00:25:38.920
Commissioner Hussbett.

00:25:38.920 --> 00:25:42.920
Can you give me, how did we arrive at 60,730?

00:25:42.920 --> 00:25:44.920
That's what they're proposing.

00:25:44.920 --> 00:25:48.920
That's the size of the building that they're proposing.

00:25:48.920 --> 00:25:50.920
So we wanted to make sure that that was maximum.

00:25:50.920 --> 00:25:55.920
If they did intend to come back and do a larger building

00:25:55.920 --> 00:25:57.920
that they would need to come back and get a new SUP.

00:25:57.920 --> 00:26:02.329
Because staff would need to look at that and make sure that

00:26:02.329 --> 00:26:06.920
it remained compatible with the adjacent residential.

00:26:06.920 --> 00:26:06.920
Continue.

00:26:06.920 --> 00:26:08.920
Thank you.

00:26:08.920 --> 00:26:12.230
Have they given an indication that that is, I mean,

00:26:12.230 --> 00:26:13.920
obviously it's, I mean, it's a need.

00:26:13.920 --> 00:26:16.920
And it's a growing industry.

00:26:16.920 --> 00:26:17.920
Sure.

00:26:17.920 --> 00:26:22.920
And so I understand the methodology to have them come back.

00:26:22.920 --> 00:26:26.359
But have they expressed, I mean, because I think that is

00:26:26.359 --> 00:26:29.470
going to, ultimately I think it will come up, especially

00:26:29.470 --> 00:26:30.920
with all the land in the back.

00:26:30.920 --> 00:26:31.920
You know, so it's kind of.

00:26:31.920 --> 00:26:34.920
They have a phase two that they are proposing.

00:26:34.920 --> 00:26:38.019
But this is not a part of this request because they're just

00:26:38.019 --> 00:26:40.920
, they're not ready to move forward with that yet.

00:26:40.920 --> 00:26:44.839
Also within NR6, there is a maximum lot coverage that they

00:26:44.839 --> 00:26:45.920
have to meet.

00:26:45.920 --> 00:26:48.940
And that was really important to staff because we wanted to

00:26:48.940 --> 00:26:51.920
make sure the scale stayed compatible with the area.

00:26:51.920 --> 00:26:55.240
So we'll just have to look at what they propose when they

00:26:55.240 --> 00:26:56.920
come forward with that.

00:26:56.920 --> 00:26:59.740
And we just wanted to limit the size at this point and we

00:26:59.740 --> 00:27:01.920
can review it further when it comes in.

00:27:01.920 --> 00:27:02.920
Does that answer your question?

00:27:02.920 --> 00:27:03.920
Yes.

00:27:03.920 --> 00:27:04.920
Kind of.

00:27:04.920 --> 00:27:06.920
Thank you.

00:27:06.920 --> 00:27:08.920
Commissioner Rosell.

00:27:08.920 --> 00:27:12.950
I'm not sure if this is possible, but this response that we

00:27:12.950 --> 00:27:15.920
have here, I'm kind of confused.

00:27:15.920 --> 00:27:17.920
If there's clarity to be had, I'd love it.

00:27:17.920 --> 00:27:19.920
If not, I'll live with my confusion.

00:27:19.920 --> 00:27:22.359
If I'm reading this correctly, it says I'm assuming the

00:27:22.359 --> 00:27:25.299
nursing home is expanding its size so that some building

00:27:25.299 --> 00:27:26.920
would be directly behind my property.

00:27:26.920 --> 00:27:27.920
Explanation point.

00:27:27.920 --> 00:27:29.920
But it's listed as a neutral.

00:27:29.920 --> 00:27:30.920
Yes.

00:27:30.920 --> 00:27:34.220
And so I'm confused about, so I spoke to this person, he

00:27:34.220 --> 00:27:37.660
was just telling us what's happening and he's neutral to it

00:27:37.660 --> 00:27:37.920
or if.

00:27:37.920 --> 00:27:40.920
I have not spoken with the person, but I saw that as well.

00:27:40.920 --> 00:27:41.920
Okay.

00:27:41.920 --> 00:27:44.920
He hasn't contacted me further on it.

00:27:44.920 --> 00:27:45.920
Okay.

00:27:45.920 --> 00:27:47.920
Thanks.

00:27:47.920 --> 00:27:48.920
Commissioner Dedowitz.

00:27:48.920 --> 00:27:49.920
Two questions.

00:27:49.920 --> 00:27:54.920
Can you bring up the site location map, please?

00:27:54.920 --> 00:27:55.920
Correct.

00:27:55.920 --> 00:27:58.920
What's the building directly to the south?

00:27:58.920 --> 00:27:59.920
It's a church, it's a religious institution.

00:27:59.920 --> 00:28:01.920
Religious, and then what's to the south of that?

00:28:01.920 --> 00:28:02.920
Religious institution.

00:28:02.920 --> 00:28:03.920
I'm sorry?

00:28:03.920 --> 00:28:04.920
Religious institution.

00:28:04.920 --> 00:28:10.920
All right, can you now bring up the zoning map, please?

00:28:10.920 --> 00:28:11.920
Okay.

00:28:11.920 --> 00:28:14.920
So that's the site, which is outlined in black.

00:28:14.920 --> 00:28:18.920
We are recommending, or you're recommending, an NR6.

00:28:18.920 --> 00:28:23.210
And what the subcommittee has been wrestling with is, okay,

00:28:23.210 --> 00:28:27.410
we make that an NR6, and now within that whole square block

00:28:27.410 --> 00:28:31.920
area, we have a NR, what is it, an NR3.

00:28:31.920 --> 00:28:36.069
So my point is, you know, here we are at cookie cutting

00:28:36.069 --> 00:28:40.420
again, and should we not look at this as, and do the whole

00:28:40.420 --> 00:28:45.009
thing as a, and make it compatible, make it all NR6 or NRMU

00:28:45.009 --> 00:28:50.920
12 or whatever, so that area there is compatible.

00:28:50.920 --> 00:28:53.920
I had some of the same, because if you'll look at the,

00:28:53.920 --> 00:28:58.769
really, this is kind of the first zoning case to match what

00:28:58.769 --> 00:29:00.920
the future land use is.

00:29:00.920 --> 00:29:03.920
And we struggle with that as staff.

00:29:03.920 --> 00:29:07.490
We address the cases that come before us, and I know that

00:29:07.490 --> 00:29:11.269
our long-range planning arm is working toward identifying

00:29:11.269 --> 00:29:14.829
those areas where we need to get moving and make sure that

00:29:14.829 --> 00:29:17.920
our zoning matches our future land use map.

00:29:17.920 --> 00:29:21.490
For the purpose of communicating with the whole commission,

00:29:21.490 --> 00:29:24.789
the last meeting, subcommittee meeting, we looked at one

00:29:24.789 --> 00:29:26.920
little piece, and it made sense.

00:29:26.920 --> 00:29:30.049
And it took us all about three seconds to say that was a

00:29:30.049 --> 00:29:33.400
good idea, and then we asked staff to say, well, don't

00:29:33.400 --> 00:29:36.289
bring us one at a time, bring us a number of these things

00:29:36.289 --> 00:29:38.920
so that we can get them done quickly, because some of them

00:29:38.920 --> 00:29:41.440
are no brainers, and this might be one of those situations

00:29:41.440 --> 00:29:44.549
where that whole thing should be rezoned because of what's

00:29:44.549 --> 00:29:47.319
there now and what's going to be anticipated as well as

00:29:47.319 --> 00:29:48.920
what, you know, we know.

00:29:48.920 --> 00:29:53.099
So if that's the case, is we just able to, not able to, do

00:29:53.099 --> 00:29:59.730
this now but come back and rezone that already? Okay. Thank

00:29:59.730 --> 00:30:01.920
you.

00:30:01.920 --> 00:30:03.920
Anybody else? I have a question.

00:30:03.920 --> 00:30:07.920
Will you go to the staff recommendations, please?

00:30:07.920 --> 00:30:11.920
With the conditions.

00:30:11.920 --> 00:30:14.829
Is there a reason why we don't have, why we're limiting

00:30:14.829 --> 00:30:16.920
their additional parking spaces?

00:30:16.920 --> 00:30:21.079
They're actually over-parked at this point, per our elderly

00:30:21.079 --> 00:30:22.920
housing requirements.

00:30:22.920 --> 00:30:26.490
We're not asking that they remove those and chunk those up

00:30:26.490 --> 00:30:26.920
now.

00:30:26.920 --> 00:30:42.359
So at this point, we don't foresee or need additional

00:30:42.359 --> 00:30:48.089
parking spaces. If they did come back for another SUP, that

00:30:48.089 --> 00:30:48.359
might be something that staff would then, you know, either

00:30:48.359 --> 00:30:48.599
not recommend as a condition or we would just have to look

00:30:48.599 --> 00:30:48.920
and see what they're proposing.

00:30:48.920 --> 00:30:52.039
So they didn't ask for any additional? No. So they feel

00:30:52.039 --> 00:30:53.920
like it's sufficient then?

00:30:53.920 --> 00:31:00.950
Okay. I just was concerned with them expanding that we'll

00:31:00.950 --> 00:31:04.299
be back and the reason that that comment got put in there,

00:31:04.299 --> 00:31:06.920
if there was a pushback or why it was there.

00:31:06.920 --> 00:31:11.089
We want to make sure that it stays, you know, a low

00:31:11.089 --> 00:31:13.920
intensity and compatible use.

00:31:13.920 --> 00:31:19.420
So. Well, I understand that, but I guess where I'm going

00:31:19.420 --> 00:31:22.210
with this, they've been there since the 60s before all

00:31:22.210 --> 00:31:23.920
these other people are there.

00:31:23.920 --> 00:31:27.019
And so now we need to worry about what everybody else has

00:31:27.019 --> 00:31:31.329
done that's coming around them and put limitations on this

00:31:31.329 --> 00:31:35.049
particular business versus these guys were there when

00:31:35.049 --> 00:31:37.430
nobody else was there and now we're concerned that they're

00:31:37.430 --> 00:31:38.920
impacting other people.

00:31:38.920 --> 00:31:46.920
That seems a little backwards to me. Just an observation.

00:31:46.920 --> 00:31:59.849
Commissioner Hussbett. And to your point, there is, there

00:31:59.849 --> 00:32:00.670
are two parking lots on the backside there that are pretty

00:32:00.670 --> 00:32:00.920
good size.

00:32:00.920 --> 00:32:03.920
I had to go there and serve somebody.

00:32:03.920 --> 00:32:08.920
So I was there recently.

00:32:08.920 --> 00:32:10.750
There's not much that's what I'm saying. There's there's

00:32:10.750 --> 00:32:15.369
not much in the back. There's limited usage up front, but

00:32:15.369 --> 00:32:17.920
in the back it's it's pretty.

00:32:17.920 --> 00:32:26.920
Thanks for scoping it out for us.

00:32:26.920 --> 00:32:34.920
What he's got to do with any other questions.

00:32:34.920 --> 00:32:38.920
Thank you, Julie.

00:32:38.920 --> 00:32:57.920
Ron just showed up in time.

00:32:57.920 --> 00:33:02.920
That whole area should be re looked at.

00:33:02.920 --> 00:33:06.519
Yes, well, just just north of there too. I mean, we have

00:33:06.519 --> 00:33:09.700
one yellow block is shown is all in our three but we got

00:33:09.700 --> 00:33:12.920
two churches in this and baking property there.

00:33:12.920 --> 00:33:17.819
And it's it's a good it's like a piece of a of a of an R3

00:33:17.819 --> 00:33:24.920
is being taken out of.

00:33:24.920 --> 00:33:25.920
Okay.

00:33:25.920 --> 00:33:33.079
We don't talk about the bill another item this matrix to me

00:33:33.079 --> 00:33:34.920
about that.

00:33:34.920 --> 00:33:37.630
I believe Commissioner Beck would like to add during the

00:33:37.630 --> 00:33:40.339
regular meeting towards the end for future agenda items so

00:33:40.339 --> 00:33:42.809
we can bring that up then and add it to the matrix but if

00:33:42.809 --> 00:33:46.160
there any questions with what's in your packet as it

00:33:46.160 --> 00:33:49.750
relates to the matrix, I'd be happy to address those or

00:33:49.750 --> 00:33:52.920
discuss those.

00:33:52.920 --> 00:33:56.920
I don't see any.

00:33:56.920 --> 00:34:02.140
Early and having no other items of business on our work

00:34:02.140 --> 00:34:06.799
session we've covered them all. It is 540 and we'll close

00:34:06.799 --> 00:34:11.670
the work session and we're going to reconvene for our

00:34:11.670 --> 00:34:16.920
regular meeting and council chambers at six.

00:34:16.920 --> 00:34:20.840
Good evening and welcome to the city of Denton planning and

00:34:20.840 --> 00:34:24.920
zoning meeting. It is 630 on April the 13th.

00:34:24.920 --> 00:34:27.539
And our meeting has been duly posted and we have a quorum

00:34:27.539 --> 00:34:30.340
present, and I'm going to call our meeting to order at this

00:34:30.340 --> 00:34:30.920
time.

00:34:30.920 --> 00:34:37.880
Our first order of business is to sand for the US and Texas

00:34:37.880 --> 00:34:38.920
flag.

00:34:38.920 --> 00:34:44.219
I believe you can apply to the United States of America,

00:34:44.219 --> 00:34:49.639
and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under

00:34:49.639 --> 00:34:54.920
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

00:34:54.920 --> 00:35:13.849
I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God, one

00:35:13.849 --> 00:35:15.920
indivisible.

00:35:15.920 --> 00:35:21.449
Just as a point of order on our agenda tonight, we do not

00:35:21.449 --> 00:35:25.360
have a set of minutes to review. I assume those will come

00:35:25.360 --> 00:35:25.920
before our next meeting.

00:35:25.920 --> 00:35:36.920
With that said, I will move on to our consent agenda.

00:35:36.920 --> 00:35:38.920
Commissioner Beck.

00:35:38.920 --> 00:35:41.920
I move we approve the consent agenda.

00:35:41.920 --> 00:35:42.920
Commissioner Bruegel.

00:35:42.920 --> 00:35:44.920
I second.

00:35:44.920 --> 00:35:49.030
The first and the second, any discussion on the consent

00:35:49.030 --> 00:35:49.920
agenda?

00:35:49.920 --> 00:35:58.920
Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board.

00:35:58.920 --> 00:36:05.920
Motion passes six to zero with one absent.

00:36:05.920 --> 00:36:09.920
That moves us to agenda item number three.

00:36:09.920 --> 00:36:15.920
Items for individual consideration.

00:36:15.920 --> 00:36:19.920
Item A, ADP 16-0003.

00:36:19.920 --> 00:36:24.920
I believe that will be presented by Mike Bell.

00:36:24.920 --> 00:36:26.920
Thank you, Chair, members of the commission.

00:36:26.920 --> 00:36:28.920
This project is ADP 16-3.

00:36:28.920 --> 00:36:31.630
It's an alternative development plan that would allow a

00:36:31.630 --> 00:36:34.920
multifamily development to deviate from some of the design

00:36:34.920 --> 00:36:38.090
standards in subchapter 13 regarding building location and

00:36:38.090 --> 00:36:38.920
orientation.

00:36:38.920 --> 00:36:40.920
We presented more detail in the work session.

00:36:40.920 --> 00:36:43.750
But generally the small acreage and narrow width of this

00:36:43.750 --> 00:36:46.920
lot are factors that limit strict compliance with the DDC.

00:36:46.920 --> 00:36:50.349
The proposed site plan is consistent with what's around in

00:36:50.349 --> 00:36:52.920
the area and meets the intent of the code.

00:36:52.920 --> 00:36:55.519
Staff does have a recommendation of approval with

00:36:55.519 --> 00:36:57.920
conditions that are listed in your backup.

00:36:57.920 --> 00:36:59.920
I'd be happy to go through anything more in detail.

00:36:59.920 --> 00:37:05.920
I do know the applicant is also here to speak.

00:37:05.920 --> 00:37:09.920
Any questions for staff?

00:37:09.920 --> 00:37:19.920
Thank you, Mike.

00:37:19.920 --> 00:37:24.920
Since this is not public hearing, Commissioner Rosell.

00:37:24.920 --> 00:37:29.710
I motion to approve the agenda item with the staff's

00:37:29.710 --> 00:37:31.920
conditions listed.

00:37:31.920 --> 00:37:32.920
Commissioner Hesbeth.

00:37:32.920 --> 00:37:35.920
Second.

00:37:35.920 --> 00:37:37.920
The first and the second.

00:37:37.920 --> 00:37:40.949
And now we will recognize Commissioner Bruegel for

00:37:40.949 --> 00:37:41.920
discussion.

00:37:41.920 --> 00:37:42.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:37:42.920 --> 00:37:45.159
I just want to say once again, I love when we get these inf

00:37:45.159 --> 00:37:46.920
ill developments coming our way.

00:37:46.920 --> 00:37:49.739
It's a small, funky little piece of property in a high

00:37:49.739 --> 00:37:50.920
pedestrian area.

00:37:50.920 --> 00:37:52.920
And I think it seems to fit well.

00:37:52.920 --> 00:38:02.920
And I just I'm always a fan of infills. So way to go.

00:38:02.920 --> 00:38:06.869
Seeing no further discussion. Any other questions or

00:38:06.869 --> 00:38:08.920
discussion?

00:38:08.920 --> 00:38:20.920
Seeing none, we will call for a vote on the board.

00:38:20.920 --> 00:38:25.920
Motion carries six zero.

00:38:25.920 --> 00:38:31.219
We'll move us to item four on our agenda tonight, our

00:38:31.219 --> 00:38:32.920
public hearings.

00:38:32.920 --> 00:38:36.860
At this time, I'm going to open the public hearing for item

00:38:36.860 --> 00:38:44.199
A Z 16 dash zero zero zero two and S 15 dash zero zero one

00:38:44.199 --> 00:38:45.920
four.

00:38:45.920 --> 00:38:50.920
I don't know. Do we have the applicant here?

00:38:50.920 --> 00:38:55.619
And if the applicant is here, we'd like to hear from you

00:38:55.619 --> 00:38:58.920
first, please present your project.

00:38:58.920 --> 00:39:01.739
Since this is a public hearing, anybody is going to wish to

00:39:01.739 --> 00:39:02.920
speak on this item.

00:39:02.920 --> 00:39:05.440
If you will either go ahead and fill out a card for us

00:39:05.440 --> 00:39:08.219
before you speak or at the time that you do come up and

00:39:08.219 --> 00:39:12.920
speak, please fill out a card for us before you leave.

00:39:12.920 --> 00:39:17.599
Thank you. If you'll give your name and address and present

00:39:17.599 --> 00:39:17.920
your project.

00:39:17.920 --> 00:39:23.469
My name is Chad Benson. I live at 1600 Pecan Point, McKin

00:39:23.469 --> 00:39:24.920
ney Drive.

00:39:24.920 --> 00:39:28.920
Or Pecan Point in McKinney.

00:39:28.920 --> 00:39:30.920
Thank you.

00:39:30.920 --> 00:39:35.719
I am one of the owners of the project and we have been in

00:39:35.719 --> 00:39:38.920
business since 1969 caring for the elderly.

00:39:38.920 --> 00:39:42.719
The site has been there for a long time. It was originally

00:39:42.719 --> 00:39:48.119
built in 69, modified and added to in mid 80s, added again

00:39:48.119 --> 00:39:49.920
in the 90s.

00:39:49.920 --> 00:39:53.019
And so it is time again to do a little refresh to the

00:39:53.019 --> 00:39:53.920
building.

00:39:53.920 --> 00:39:57.369
So we would like to do that for just to keep up with the

00:39:57.369 --> 00:40:01.480
Joneses to to update the facility, to give provide better

00:40:01.480 --> 00:40:04.880
care to the patients and make it more accessible for the

00:40:04.880 --> 00:40:05.920
staff,

00:40:05.920 --> 00:40:12.369
making it more modern and more applicable to modern medical

00:40:12.369 --> 00:40:12.920
care.

00:40:12.920 --> 00:40:15.920
We're a five star rated facility. We have quality care.

00:40:15.920 --> 00:40:19.050
So we would just now like to update our facility as well to

00:40:19.050 --> 00:40:19.920
match that.

00:40:19.920 --> 00:40:21.920
Any questions?

00:40:21.920 --> 00:40:24.019
I do have one question if you're done with your

00:40:24.019 --> 00:40:24.920
presentation.

00:40:24.920 --> 00:40:25.920
Yeah.

00:40:25.920 --> 00:40:26.920
Commissioner Beck.

00:40:26.920 --> 00:40:29.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:40:29.920 --> 00:40:32.789
As briefly as you can or whatever it takes, I'd be

00:40:32.789 --> 00:40:36.429
interested in hearing this, what you're doing the expansion

00:40:36.429 --> 00:40:36.920
for.

00:40:36.920 --> 00:40:38.920
I found it interesting in the background material.

00:40:38.920 --> 00:40:42.920
But could you just for purposes of letting the public know,

00:40:42.920 --> 00:40:44.809
could you just give us a little bit of information on what

00:40:44.809 --> 00:40:45.920
you're going to be doing here, please?

00:40:45.920 --> 00:40:46.920
You bet.

00:40:46.920 --> 00:40:50.920
So in elderly care, we have two primary units.

00:40:50.920 --> 00:40:52.920
We have what would be a short term unit.

00:40:52.920 --> 00:40:55.239
So someone coming right out of the hospital, a knee or a

00:40:55.239 --> 00:40:57.920
hip replacement, and they need 20 days of rehab.

00:40:57.920 --> 00:40:59.920
Get them better. Get them home.

00:40:59.920 --> 00:41:02.920
Then we have what would be a long term unit.

00:41:02.920 --> 00:41:05.260
That would be more your traditional nursing home where

00:41:05.260 --> 00:41:07.920
people live there for five, ten years.

00:41:07.920 --> 00:41:09.920
They can't care for themselves at home.

00:41:09.920 --> 00:41:14.139
This would be an update, a refresh of making those short

00:41:14.139 --> 00:41:18.429
term care focused unit for those coming right out of the

00:41:18.429 --> 00:41:18.920
hospital,

00:41:18.920 --> 00:41:23.000
private rooms, private showers, nice amenities, higher

00:41:23.000 --> 00:41:27.000
medical standard of living for those patients coming out of

00:41:27.000 --> 00:41:32.079
the hospital and giving them a nice place to be before they

00:41:32.079 --> 00:41:32.920
go home.

00:41:32.920 --> 00:41:34.920
So it would be a short term focused unit.

00:41:34.920 --> 00:41:41.920
Great. Thank you.

00:41:41.920 --> 00:41:44.239
The only question I would have is, I know there are several

00:41:44.239 --> 00:41:46.269
conditions that we're going to place if this is move

00:41:46.269 --> 00:41:46.920
forward.

00:41:46.920 --> 00:41:49.920
Do you have any objection to those conditions for approval?

00:41:49.920 --> 00:41:50.920
Not at this time. No.

00:41:50.920 --> 00:41:51.920
Okay. Great.

00:41:51.920 --> 00:41:54.920
I see no further questions.

00:41:54.920 --> 00:41:57.920
So thank you for your presentation.

00:41:57.920 --> 00:42:06.599
This time I'll call on staff, which would be Julie Wyatt to

00:42:06.599 --> 00:42:10.920
provide the staff report.

00:42:10.920 --> 00:42:14.920
Good evening. Just as a summary for Z15-2 and S15-2.

00:42:14.920 --> 00:42:15.920
Julie, if I could interrupt?

00:42:15.920 --> 00:42:18.869
I want to make sure on my comments, anyone that will wish

00:42:18.869 --> 00:42:21.489
to speak as soon as the staff report is given, feel free to

00:42:21.489 --> 00:42:22.920
come forward at that time.

00:42:22.920 --> 00:42:24.920
I'm sorry I didn't make that clear earlier.

00:42:24.920 --> 00:42:27.349
So we'll certainly call on you as soon as Julie gives the

00:42:27.349 --> 00:42:27.920
report.

00:42:27.920 --> 00:42:28.920
Thank you.

00:42:28.920 --> 00:42:32.489
Just as a summary of the request before you, it is a

00:42:32.489 --> 00:42:37.820
proposed rezoning from NR3 to NR6 and an SUP for elderly

00:42:37.820 --> 00:42:38.920
housing.

00:42:38.920 --> 00:42:43.219
Staff has analyzed the proposal and finds that the request

00:42:43.219 --> 00:42:47.519
is consistent with the Denton Plan 2030 and that the use is

00:42:47.519 --> 00:42:51.119
compatible with the adjacent surrounding residential and

00:42:51.119 --> 00:42:52.920
institutional development.

00:42:52.920 --> 00:42:57.949
Staff does recommend approval with conditions that the

00:42:57.949 --> 00:43:03.400
development conform to the attached site plan and landscape

00:43:03.400 --> 00:43:06.920
plan, and that includes a maximum building square footage,

00:43:06.920 --> 00:43:11.190
the maintenance of the type C buffer on the north property

00:43:11.190 --> 00:43:14.920
line, and then no additional parking spaces.

00:43:14.920 --> 00:43:17.920
I'll stand for any questions.

00:43:17.920 --> 00:43:21.920
Any questions for staff? I see none.

00:43:21.920 --> 00:43:23.920
Thank you, Julie.

00:43:23.920 --> 00:43:25.949
At this time, this is a public hearing, so if there's

00:43:25.949 --> 00:43:28.380
anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please

00:43:28.380 --> 00:43:31.920
come forward at this time and give your name and address

00:43:31.920 --> 00:43:34.920
and please fill out a card for us.

00:43:34.920 --> 00:43:36.920
Where's the cards?

00:43:36.920 --> 00:43:38.920
There should be cards after you give your comment.

00:43:38.920 --> 00:43:41.309
There should be some either here or there's some outside on

00:43:41.309 --> 00:43:41.920
the table.

00:43:41.920 --> 00:43:42.920
All right.

00:43:42.920 --> 00:43:46.760
My name is Paul Bowers and I live in 505 Strata, and so

00:43:46.760 --> 00:43:49.920
that's about 30 feet from my back door.

00:43:49.920 --> 00:43:51.920
This is the first time I've -- this has come up.

00:43:51.920 --> 00:43:54.280
I'm the first time a house owner, so this is all kind of

00:43:54.280 --> 00:43:54.920
new to me.

00:43:54.920 --> 00:43:56.920
But I just had a couple of brief questions.

00:43:56.920 --> 00:43:59.920
One is you said that there would be a type C barrier.

00:43:59.920 --> 00:44:01.920
I don't know what that means.

00:44:01.920 --> 00:44:04.170
My concern is it's a chain link fence right now, and if

00:44:04.170 --> 00:44:06.769
they're going to start construction or something like that,

00:44:06.769 --> 00:44:07.920
would that be improved?

00:44:07.920 --> 00:44:13.219
And then the second question is what kind of impact would

00:44:13.219 --> 00:44:17.920
that happen on the property values in the area?

00:44:17.920 --> 00:44:19.920
I will call on staff.

00:44:19.920 --> 00:44:21.920
Those are my two questions.

00:44:21.920 --> 00:44:24.329
I think they can certainly speak to your first question

00:44:24.329 --> 00:44:26.980
about the -- I think what you're asking about is the type C

00:44:26.980 --> 00:44:29.840
buffer is what that might be composed of and make into that

00:44:29.840 --> 00:44:30.920
here from the dias.

00:44:30.920 --> 00:44:31.920
Yes.

00:44:31.920 --> 00:44:33.869
We'll put up the site plan and go over that with you, the

00:44:33.869 --> 00:44:35.920
landscape plan, to show you what's being proposed.

00:44:35.920 --> 00:44:44.920
Okay.

00:44:44.920 --> 00:44:45.920
All right.

00:44:45.920 --> 00:44:49.920
A type C buffer is a 15-foot landscape buffer.

00:44:49.920 --> 00:44:55.920
It includes, I believe, six deciduous and evergreen trees.

00:44:55.920 --> 00:44:58.920
And let me verify the number of shrubs.

00:44:58.920 --> 00:45:01.920
Is there a way to blow that up, Penny?

00:45:01.920 --> 00:45:17.920
I can certainly try.

00:45:17.920 --> 00:45:19.920
25 shrubs per linear feet.

00:45:19.920 --> 00:45:26.920
Let's see if I can do this.

00:45:26.920 --> 00:45:33.920
That didn't work.

00:45:33.920 --> 00:45:37.269
So as you can see -- and also just to let you know, there

00:45:37.269 --> 00:45:40.920
is a small elevation change between the subject property

00:45:40.920 --> 00:45:42.920
and the adjacent residential.

00:45:42.920 --> 00:45:47.230
So the subject property is a little lower than the adjacent

00:45:47.230 --> 00:45:48.920
residential uses.

00:45:48.920 --> 00:45:52.920
There is an existing tree line there.

00:45:52.920 --> 00:45:56.489
And -- but many of those trees aren't on their property, so

00:45:56.489 --> 00:45:59.599
we wanted to make sure that that buffer was, you know, met

00:45:59.599 --> 00:46:01.920
the code and was sufficient.

00:46:01.920 --> 00:46:05.489
So there are trees here and there's a cluster here, cluster

00:46:05.489 --> 00:46:05.920
here.

00:46:05.920 --> 00:46:07.920
There's also a row of shrubs.

00:46:07.920 --> 00:46:10.280
There will be a sidewalk as well and there's a small

00:46:10.280 --> 00:46:11.920
retaining wall there as well.

00:46:11.920 --> 00:46:14.920
There's additional shrubs here, shrubs here, more trees.

00:46:14.920 --> 00:46:18.519
So all the way down, it sort of repeats that pattern of

00:46:18.519 --> 00:46:19.920
trees and shrubs.

00:46:19.920 --> 00:46:23.199
Julie, just a clarification, would you give what the shrub

00:46:23.199 --> 00:46:25.920
count, I think it's per 100 linear feet?

00:46:25.920 --> 00:46:26.920
Yes, sir.

00:46:26.920 --> 00:46:28.920
25 -- I've lost it.

00:46:28.920 --> 00:46:30.920
25 shrubs per 100 linear feet.

00:46:30.920 --> 00:46:31.920
100 linear feet.

00:46:31.920 --> 00:46:32.920
Okay.

00:46:32.920 --> 00:46:33.920
Thank you.

00:46:33.920 --> 00:46:34.920
Sure.

00:46:34.920 --> 00:46:37.920
I've got two ahead of you if you'd like to ring.

00:46:37.920 --> 00:46:38.920
Commissioner Hussbett.

00:46:38.920 --> 00:46:39.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:46:39.920 --> 00:46:45.650
Julie, could you pull up that initial map you had up,

00:46:45.650 --> 00:46:46.920
please?

00:46:46.920 --> 00:46:53.920
Because I think it's -- no, no, the -- that shows the area.

00:46:53.920 --> 00:46:55.920
This -- or let me go.

00:46:55.920 --> 00:46:56.920
There you go.

00:46:56.920 --> 00:46:57.920
That --

00:46:57.920 --> 00:46:58.920
Yes.

00:46:58.920 --> 00:46:59.920
Okay.

00:46:59.920 --> 00:47:03.489
And so I think it would be -- and I'm sorry, I did not

00:47:03.489 --> 00:47:04.920
catch your name.

00:47:04.920 --> 00:47:05.920
Paul.

00:47:05.920 --> 00:47:06.920
Paul Babich.

00:47:06.920 --> 00:47:07.920
Yes, sir.

00:47:07.920 --> 00:47:13.550
I think -- do you -- your home is to the left of the yellow

00:47:13.550 --> 00:47:16.920
squared area, I do believe?

00:47:16.920 --> 00:47:20.719
It's just to the left of the -- it's where the corner of

00:47:20.719 --> 00:47:23.920
the yellow -- that's my house.

00:47:23.920 --> 00:47:24.920
Okay.

00:47:24.920 --> 00:47:25.920
Got it.

00:47:25.920 --> 00:47:29.559
And so, Julie, could you -- my understanding is the

00:47:29.559 --> 00:47:31.920
construction is more towards --

00:47:31.920 --> 00:47:32.920
Right.

00:47:32.920 --> 00:47:34.920
That is -- let me go back.

00:47:34.920 --> 00:47:39.730
Okay, so I guess the citizen's home would be in about this

00:47:39.730 --> 00:47:40.920
location.

00:47:40.920 --> 00:47:41.920
Right.

00:47:41.920 --> 00:47:42.920
The impact area really is here.

00:47:42.920 --> 00:47:43.920
Right.

00:47:43.920 --> 00:47:47.150
There's no additional improvements proposed at this time in

00:47:47.150 --> 00:47:47.920
this area.

00:47:47.920 --> 00:47:51.920
So really it's up toward the front, closer to Carroll.

00:47:51.920 --> 00:47:52.920
Perfect.

00:47:52.920 --> 00:47:53.920
That was my understanding.

00:47:53.920 --> 00:47:54.920
Okay.

00:47:54.920 --> 00:47:55.920
Senator.

00:47:55.920 --> 00:47:56.920
Great.

00:47:56.920 --> 00:47:58.920
Did that address your question?

00:47:58.920 --> 00:47:59.920
That did, thank you.

00:47:59.920 --> 00:48:00.920
Great.

00:48:00.920 --> 00:48:01.920
Thank you, Julie.

00:48:01.920 --> 00:48:06.920
I'm sorry, we have a couple other -- my apologies.

00:48:06.920 --> 00:48:07.920
Commissioner Begg.

00:48:07.920 --> 00:48:08.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:48:08.920 --> 00:48:12.199
And just for Paul's sake, confirm that that chain link

00:48:12.199 --> 00:48:14.920
fence that's there now will remain

00:48:14.920 --> 00:48:16.920
there, is that right?

00:48:16.920 --> 00:48:19.500
It's my understanding that that's not being removed at this

00:48:19.500 --> 00:48:19.920
time.

00:48:19.920 --> 00:48:20.920
Okay.

00:48:20.920 --> 00:48:21.920
Nope.

00:48:21.920 --> 00:48:22.920
There is no chain link fence.

00:48:22.920 --> 00:48:25.920
I think he may be referring to his fairgrounds.

00:48:25.920 --> 00:48:26.920
Okay.

00:48:26.920 --> 00:48:29.920
Yeah, I'm back to the -- I'm back to fairgrounds.

00:48:29.920 --> 00:48:30.920
Okay.

00:48:30.920 --> 00:48:33.630
I was looking at the original background, it would go down

00:48:33.630 --> 00:48:34.920
pretty close to my house,

00:48:34.920 --> 00:48:38.280
and that's the reason why I was asking about the chain link

00:48:38.280 --> 00:48:38.920
fence.

00:48:38.920 --> 00:48:39.920
Okay.

00:48:39.920 --> 00:48:40.920
All right.

00:48:40.920 --> 00:48:41.920
There's no chain link fence that's going to remain.

00:48:41.920 --> 00:48:42.920
The applicant has made --

00:48:42.920 --> 00:48:45.539
If we're going to start crosstalk kind of out here in the

00:48:45.539 --> 00:48:46.920
audience, we need to come to

00:48:46.920 --> 00:48:49.739
the front so everybody that's watching online and are

00:48:49.739 --> 00:48:50.920
recording can hear.

00:48:50.920 --> 00:48:53.949
So if we need to address the chain link fence, we certainly

00:48:53.949 --> 00:48:55.920
can if that's an issue or concern.

00:48:55.920 --> 00:48:59.489
The applicant has stated that the chain link fence is not

00:48:59.489 --> 00:49:00.920
on their property.

00:49:00.920 --> 00:49:05.869
It is on the fairgrounds' own property that they have a

00:49:05.869 --> 00:49:08.920
wood fence on their property line.

00:49:08.920 --> 00:49:09.920
Right.

00:49:09.920 --> 00:49:11.920
One final question.

00:49:11.920 --> 00:49:12.920
Commissioner Dudowitz.

00:49:12.920 --> 00:49:15.920
Just another point of clarification for the citizens.

00:49:15.920 --> 00:49:20.739
The spoke on the current housing at 2 o'clock is going to

00:49:20.739 --> 00:49:22.920
be taken down to allow for this

00:49:22.920 --> 00:49:23.920
new expansion.

00:49:23.920 --> 00:49:26.920
So, you know, just to let you know.

00:49:26.920 --> 00:49:29.739
And the improvements and the aesthetics is going to be, we

00:49:29.739 --> 00:49:30.920
've seen pretty good and pretty

00:49:30.920 --> 00:49:33.920
much up to date and really enhance the area.

00:49:33.920 --> 00:49:34.920
That's correct.

00:49:34.920 --> 00:49:35.920
That's a good way to say it.

00:49:35.920 --> 00:49:41.920
12 o'clock and 2 o'clock are being removed.

00:49:41.920 --> 00:49:43.920
I see no other questions for Julie at this time.

00:49:43.920 --> 00:49:46.920
Thank you, Julie.

00:49:46.920 --> 00:49:48.920
Again, this is a public hearing.

00:49:48.920 --> 00:49:51.409
So anyone that would like to speak on this item at this

00:49:51.409 --> 00:49:52.920
time, please come forward, state

00:49:52.920 --> 00:50:05.920
your name and address.

00:50:05.920 --> 00:50:09.360
My name is William Nielsen and my residence address is 12

00:50:09.360 --> 00:50:10.920
Funny Oak Tree Street.

00:50:10.920 --> 00:50:17.289
I own the property at 439 Stratter, which sits right in

00:50:17.289 --> 00:50:19.920
back of the property that we're

00:50:19.920 --> 00:50:21.920
talking about.

00:50:21.920 --> 00:50:26.039
My interest in being here at this time is that if you look

00:50:26.039 --> 00:50:28.920
out the backside of the house,

00:50:28.920 --> 00:50:34.920
you look at a series of roofs on the subject property here.

00:50:34.920 --> 00:50:38.650
And I'm wondering if there's any kind of mitigation

00:50:38.650 --> 00:50:41.920
possible in the event that the site type

00:50:41.920 --> 00:50:48.369
mitigation, if the story, if the structures that are going

00:50:48.369 --> 00:50:50.920
to be put in are higher rising

00:50:50.920 --> 00:50:52.920
than the current ones.

00:50:52.920 --> 00:50:53.920
Okay.

00:50:53.920 --> 00:51:02.920
Julie, would you like to address that question for us?

00:51:02.920 --> 00:51:08.920
That actually was a question that staff had.

00:51:08.920 --> 00:51:12.639
We wanted to make sure that it met all residential setbacks

00:51:12.639 --> 00:51:12.920
.

00:51:12.920 --> 00:51:14.920
And then if I could get to here.

00:51:14.920 --> 00:51:19.750
So they are increasing the pitch of the roof and so that is

00:51:19.750 --> 00:51:21.920
going to be adjacent.

00:51:21.920 --> 00:51:24.289
But we felt like the pitch of this roof and what they're

00:51:24.289 --> 00:51:25.920
proposing really is residential

00:51:25.920 --> 00:51:28.920
and something you would see in any neighborhood.

00:51:28.920 --> 00:51:31.250
That's the type of roof that you would look at your

00:51:31.250 --> 00:51:31.920
neighbor.

00:51:31.920 --> 00:51:36.099
So it will be higher than what it is now because right now

00:51:36.099 --> 00:51:37.920
it's a much lower roof pitch.

00:51:37.920 --> 00:51:42.920
But it would meet all buffers and residential setbacks.

00:51:42.920 --> 00:51:45.920
And it stays single story so it's not multi-story.

00:51:45.920 --> 00:51:46.920
Correct.

00:51:46.920 --> 00:51:48.539
So it's still single story and the roof pitch is slightly

00:51:48.539 --> 00:51:48.920
taller.

00:51:48.920 --> 00:51:49.920
Correct.

00:51:49.920 --> 00:51:50.920
Okay.

00:51:50.920 --> 00:51:51.920
Julie.

00:51:51.920 --> 00:51:52.920
Commissioner Roselk, another question.

00:51:52.920 --> 00:51:53.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:51:53.920 --> 00:51:54.920
Just for clarification.

00:51:54.920 --> 00:51:55.920
Sure.

00:51:55.920 --> 00:51:59.630
The roof is a composite or what is the material of the roof

00:51:59.630 --> 00:51:59.920
?

00:51:59.920 --> 00:52:10.289
I'm going to have the applicant come up and answer that

00:52:10.289 --> 00:52:12.920
question.

00:52:12.920 --> 00:52:13.920
Good evening.

00:52:13.920 --> 00:52:14.920
I'm Zellma Loeb, Loeb Architects.

00:52:14.920 --> 00:52:17.920
I'm the registered architect on the project.

00:52:17.920 --> 00:52:21.230
For Denton Rehab and Nursing, my personal residential

00:52:21.230 --> 00:52:23.920
address is 1705 Brookview Drive,

00:52:23.920 --> 00:52:27.920
Carrollton, Texas, 75007.

00:52:27.920 --> 00:52:31.199
The front elevation you're looking at right now on the far

00:52:31.199 --> 00:52:33.920
right end, the pitch of that roof is put in.

00:52:33.920 --> 00:52:35.920
So give us some more residential look.

00:52:35.920 --> 00:52:40.500
Now that ridge line only carries back a little ways and

00:52:40.500 --> 00:52:44.920
then it will drop down lower because that's expensive to do

00:52:44.920 --> 00:52:45.920
all the way back on that wing.

00:52:45.920 --> 00:52:48.920
So we did drop back down lower.

00:52:48.920 --> 00:52:51.920
One thing I know, Julie started to talk about it.

00:52:51.920 --> 00:52:55.719
I don't think she finished, but we are actually further

00:52:55.719 --> 00:53:00.389
away with the new construction from the homes and the side

00:53:00.389 --> 00:53:03.550
yard and the setback and property line than we are right

00:53:03.550 --> 00:53:03.920
now.

00:53:03.920 --> 00:53:07.659
The building is going to be further back when we do the

00:53:07.659 --> 00:53:08.920
type C buffer.

00:53:08.920 --> 00:53:11.420
That's going to be further back than what the existing

00:53:11.420 --> 00:53:12.920
construction is right now.

00:53:12.920 --> 00:53:13.920
And the material?

00:53:13.920 --> 00:53:15.920
It is a composite roof.

00:53:15.920 --> 00:53:17.920
You said it drops back.

00:53:17.920 --> 00:53:18.920
It's not going back to flat.

00:53:18.920 --> 00:53:21.920
It's just being the... It's going to lower the pitch.

00:53:21.920 --> 00:53:24.369
It'll go across and then once it gets to the front nurse's

00:53:24.369 --> 00:53:26.909
station, which is up towards the front of the building,

00:53:26.909 --> 00:53:28.920
about 20 feet in, then it'll dip down.

00:53:28.920 --> 00:53:29.920
Perfect.

00:53:29.920 --> 00:53:30.920
Thanks for clarifying that.

00:53:30.920 --> 00:53:33.920
Oh, you're welcome.

00:53:33.920 --> 00:53:37.960
Sir, did you have any other comments or any other questions

00:53:37.960 --> 00:53:39.920
we could address for you?

00:53:39.920 --> 00:53:40.920
Thank you, sir.

00:53:40.920 --> 00:53:42.920
Appreciate your comments and feedback.

00:53:42.920 --> 00:53:44.920
Again, it's a public hearing.

00:53:44.920 --> 00:53:46.920
Is there anyone else that would like to speak on this item?

00:53:46.920 --> 00:53:53.920
At this time, please come forward.

00:53:53.920 --> 00:54:03.469
Seeing no one else, I will close the public hearing on this

00:54:03.469 --> 00:54:04.920
item.

00:54:04.920 --> 00:54:05.920
Commissioner Dudowitz.

00:54:05.920 --> 00:54:08.070
If there's no further discussion, I would make a

00:54:08.070 --> 00:54:13.150
recommendation that we approve and approve this with

00:54:13.150 --> 00:54:15.920
subjects to the conditions that the staff put in.

00:54:15.920 --> 00:54:16.920
All three?

00:54:16.920 --> 00:54:17.920
All three.

00:54:17.920 --> 00:54:18.920
Okay.

00:54:18.920 --> 00:54:20.920
Commissioner Beck.

00:54:20.920 --> 00:54:21.920
Second, sir.

00:54:21.920 --> 00:54:22.920
Okay.

00:54:22.920 --> 00:54:27.070
We have a first and a second to approve with the three

00:54:27.070 --> 00:54:28.920
staff conditions.

00:54:28.920 --> 00:54:37.920
Any further discussion or comments?

00:54:37.920 --> 00:54:39.920
Commissioner Hesmuth.

00:54:39.920 --> 00:54:46.219
I did want to point out for the residents that this is set

00:54:46.219 --> 00:54:53.440
up such that if there's future adjustments, they would come

00:54:53.440 --> 00:54:54.920
back and request those.

00:54:54.920 --> 00:55:01.409
So please continue to stay active and continue to give the

00:55:01.409 --> 00:55:06.920
feedback because it's greatly appreciated.

00:55:06.920 --> 00:55:10.920
Any other comments or questions?

00:55:10.920 --> 00:55:28.920
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

00:55:28.920 --> 00:55:31.920
Motion carries six to zero.

00:55:31.920 --> 00:55:40.110
That will move us to our final items on our agenda tonight,

00:55:40.110 --> 00:55:46.920
our project matrix and our concluding items.

00:55:46.920 --> 00:55:48.920
Commissioner Bruegel.

00:55:48.920 --> 00:55:51.920
Thank you, Chair.

00:55:51.920 --> 00:55:54.739
So as I'm looking at the matrix, there were three things

00:55:54.739 --> 00:55:57.619
that I had requested a while back that aren't in there, so

00:55:57.619 --> 00:56:00.559
I'm wondering, it might just be happening in the overall D

00:56:00.559 --> 00:56:04.059
DC rewrite that I know staff is working on, but I had

00:56:04.059 --> 00:56:08.400
requested a report a while back on the growing movement of

00:56:08.400 --> 00:56:12.130
tiny houses that we're seeing across the country, and I

00:56:12.130 --> 00:56:17.309
know we have like a minimum lot requirement for structures,

00:56:17.309 --> 00:56:20.920
and tiny houses don't always fit with that.

00:56:20.920 --> 00:56:24.320
And so I was wondering, and I know Commissioner Connor, way

00:56:24.320 --> 00:56:28.000
back in like June of 2015, had asked about a report on lot

00:56:28.000 --> 00:56:31.320
coverage, and we're still kind of working on that, so that

00:56:31.320 --> 00:56:32.920
might fit with there.

00:56:32.920 --> 00:56:37.579
Another request I had made a while back was alternatives to

00:56:37.579 --> 00:56:41.880
some of these landscape requirements, trying to encourage

00:56:41.880 --> 00:56:44.719
more zero escaping whenever possible, and I didn't see that

00:56:44.719 --> 00:56:47.920
in there in the matrix, and also I know we're working on

00:56:47.920 --> 00:56:49.920
like kind of clustering

00:56:49.920 --> 00:56:53.300
developments to preserve more green space so homes are

00:56:53.300 --> 00:56:56.659
closer together and we're having more open space and so

00:56:56.659 --> 00:57:00.300
maybe all of that is kind of coming in these general over

00:57:00.300 --> 00:57:04.380
right rewrites of the DDC but if we can maybe include that

00:57:04.380 --> 00:57:06.400
somewhere just kind of know where y'all are at in the

00:57:06.400 --> 00:57:07.920
process, I think that would be helpful.

00:57:07.920 --> 00:57:10.360
That's my first point did you want to address that first

00:57:10.360 --> 00:57:10.920
before I'm okay.

00:57:10.920 --> 00:57:11.920
No, okay.

00:57:11.920 --> 00:57:12.920
I'll forget otherwise.

00:57:12.920 --> 00:57:14.920
Okay.

00:57:14.920 --> 00:57:18.760
So, and then my other comment was, I know last at our last

00:57:18.760 --> 00:57:22.639
meeting we briefly looked at the tree ordinance, and the

00:57:22.639 --> 00:57:26.260
developers all came out and had requested more time to

00:57:26.260 --> 00:57:30.039
review it and I know staff had said that they were going to

00:57:30.039 --> 00:57:31.920
organize a meeting with the

00:57:31.920 --> 00:57:34.820
developers and I think that's fantastic. I'd also like to

00:57:34.820 --> 00:57:37.619
encourage staff to facilitate a meeting with the general

00:57:37.619 --> 00:57:40.239
public, because this is a partnership, the what the

00:57:40.239 --> 00:57:43.090
developers build is what we're living with, and we want to

00:57:43.090 --> 00:57:46.460
make sure that this is fitting with the community and so I

00:57:46.460 --> 00:57:46.920
would

00:57:46.920 --> 00:57:51.949
like to encourage staff, I don't know if you partner with K

00:57:51.949 --> 00:57:56.550
DB or if you want me to just rent a room at the North Lakes

00:57:56.550 --> 00:58:00.960
rec center or something but I just I want I want to see

00:58:00.960 --> 00:58:02.920
that happen too.

00:58:02.920 --> 00:58:05.619
Anything needs to be addressed with that monologue just yes

00:58:05.619 --> 00:58:08.920
if I can just give her a couple of updates.

00:58:08.920 --> 00:58:12.199
The greenhouse movement that you've mentioned that's

00:58:12.199 --> 00:58:15.690
something that is on our radar, it's not referenced on this

00:58:15.690 --> 00:58:18.679
matrix just yet. The other elements that you also raise

00:58:18.679 --> 00:58:21.170
with the zero escaping although we have that provision in

00:58:21.170 --> 00:58:22.920
our landscape, you know, landscaping

00:58:22.920 --> 00:58:26.610
requirements, those will be revisited as well. We're

00:58:26.610 --> 00:58:31.829
looking at a comprehensive analysis and potential rewrite

00:58:31.829 --> 00:58:35.219
of the Denton Development Code. So we're working on that

00:58:35.219 --> 00:58:37.920
the reason why we haven't given you any succinct data just

00:58:37.920 --> 00:58:37.920
yet is because we're

00:58:37.920 --> 00:58:41.199
creating our project timelines associated with that. It is

00:58:41.199 --> 00:58:42.920
definitely on our radar.

00:58:42.920 --> 00:58:46.570
As it relates to the tree code amendment, the tree

00:58:46.570 --> 00:58:49.920
preservation component of the tree code.

00:58:49.920 --> 00:58:54.039
Yes, we're absolutely in process we've started meeting with

00:58:54.039 --> 00:58:59.119
our development community. We have also discussed a game

00:58:59.119 --> 00:59:03.329
plan to involve the community at large, so that everybody

00:59:03.329 --> 00:59:06.920
is apprised and we can secure their feedback as well.

00:59:06.920 --> 00:59:10.369
I will get back with you hopefully tomorrow towards the

00:59:10.369 --> 00:59:13.880
close of the week to give you some status on that and we do

00:59:13.880 --> 00:59:17.309
want to meet with everybody and actually vet the program

00:59:17.309 --> 00:59:20.920
with all individuals within Denton the development

00:59:20.920 --> 00:59:25.920
community, our residents, and of course the staff and those

00:59:25.920 --> 00:59:26.920
that are involved in it.

00:59:26.920 --> 00:59:31.650
So, I think we're going to anticipate much longer meetings

00:59:31.650 --> 00:59:36.099
in the very near future where we will be addressing these

00:59:36.099 --> 00:59:39.090
items. Thank you. Can I ask for clarification on that, your

00:59:39.090 --> 00:59:46.920
tree comments. If I understand the tree update came from a

00:59:46.920 --> 00:59:50.510
solicitation of public input to come into that already,

00:59:50.510 --> 00:59:50.920
didn't it?

00:59:50.920 --> 00:59:55.460
It is my understanding that if you recall the City Council

00:59:55.460 --> 01:00:00.090
last year started looking at the tree fund that was created

01:00:00.090 --> 01:00:04.710
and the monies within that tree fund and how to responsibly

01:00:04.710 --> 01:00:09.340
expend those monies to create programs that would benefit

01:00:09.340 --> 01:00:10.920
the community.

01:00:10.920 --> 01:00:15.000
We have five pilot programs that we initiated in the parks.

01:00:15.000 --> 01:00:18.519
In addition to that, we also created some incentive

01:00:18.519 --> 01:00:22.920
programs in collaboration with KDB, Keep Denton Beautiful.

01:00:22.920 --> 01:00:26.309
And from there, there was discussion from the City Council

01:00:26.309 --> 01:00:29.559
and our leadership team to start revisiting our tree code

01:00:29.559 --> 01:00:33.449
to determine if it is indeed viable, is it consistent with

01:00:33.449 --> 01:00:37.130
our benchmarking communities, what are we doing, what do we

01:00:37.130 --> 01:00:38.920
need to improve, what works,

01:00:38.920 --> 01:00:42.489
and to basically streamline it where it's more readily

01:00:42.489 --> 01:00:43.920
understandable.

01:00:43.920 --> 01:00:45.920
We did a survey.

01:00:45.920 --> 01:00:48.429
We did. We benchmarked several communities. We did a

01:00:48.429 --> 01:00:53.170
community survey. We met with stakeholders such as KDB. We

01:00:53.170 --> 01:00:57.789
met with DCDA. We posted the agenda. We are always welcome

01:00:57.789 --> 01:01:00.320
if there are any comments from the community as well. We do

01:01:00.320 --> 01:01:03.639
want to hopefully have some meetings with the community as

01:01:03.639 --> 01:01:05.920
well to start moving forward with that.

01:01:05.920 --> 01:01:10.219
That is just a component of the entire tree code, which has

01:01:10.219 --> 01:01:14.389
landscaping elements in it too. So there will be more work

01:01:14.389 --> 01:01:15.920
associated with that.

01:01:15.920 --> 01:01:19.019
But we thought it would be more appropriate to start

01:01:19.019 --> 01:01:22.519
tackling this ordinance so that we could all understand it

01:01:22.519 --> 01:01:25.909
very well and move slowly into progressing into a viable

01:01:25.909 --> 01:01:26.920
ordinance.

01:01:26.920 --> 01:01:30.489
That's great. Yeah, I guess I just remembered when we had

01:01:30.489 --> 01:01:33.880
our bike plan. We would have several events at the Civic

01:01:33.880 --> 01:01:37.719
Center and there would be different stations. I was like,

01:01:37.719 --> 01:01:41.920
let's do something fun like that and get some public input.

01:01:41.920 --> 01:01:43.920
But it sounds like you guys are addressing that already.

01:01:43.920 --> 01:01:47.719
And I really appreciate the comments and we will strive to

01:01:47.719 --> 01:01:49.920
make sure it's all inclusive.

01:01:49.920 --> 01:01:51.920
Great. Thank you.

01:01:51.920 --> 01:01:52.920
Commissioner Beck.

01:01:52.920 --> 01:01:56.280
Thank you, Chair. I'd just simply like to add a work

01:01:56.280 --> 01:01:59.880
session item at our next PNZ meeting to discuss and better

01:01:59.880 --> 01:02:09.920
understand the public hearing notification issue process.

01:02:09.920 --> 01:02:12.920
I think you brought that up and yes, I agree with you.

01:02:12.920 --> 01:02:15.920
I did. I can't. I didn't hear.

01:02:15.920 --> 01:02:24.519
Do you want to restate your comment? Yeah, I just wanted to

01:02:24.519 --> 01:02:26.030
add a work session item at our next PNZ meeting where we

01:02:26.030 --> 01:02:27.550
can discuss and better understand the public notification

01:02:27.550 --> 01:02:33.920
process when we're building or zone changing.

01:02:33.920 --> 01:02:37.829
We can have a work session item at the next PNZ meeting to

01:02:37.829 --> 01:02:41.769
elaborate on the process and explain what it is we do and

01:02:41.769 --> 01:02:45.969
how we do it in accordance with Texas Local Government Code

01:02:45.969 --> 01:02:49.829
and shed some light on that for the Planning and Zoning

01:02:49.829 --> 01:02:50.920
Commission.

01:02:50.920 --> 01:02:51.920
Commissioner Dadovitz.

01:02:51.920 --> 01:02:55.719
And that's a good point because we all need to be aware of

01:02:55.719 --> 01:02:59.739
how the notices go up, but also to understand the problems

01:02:59.739 --> 01:03:03.920
we're having with it and if there is any solutions to it.

01:03:03.920 --> 01:03:03.920
And there may not be.

01:03:03.920 --> 01:03:06.340
But I agree because a lot of people come to front of us and

01:03:06.340 --> 01:03:07.920
say, hey, I wasn't notified.

01:03:07.920 --> 01:03:10.820
And we find out that they're not the original owner or

01:03:10.820 --> 01:03:14.059
there's some lag in communication with the who's got title

01:03:14.059 --> 01:03:15.920
of what property, what not.

01:03:15.920 --> 01:03:19.489
So there might be. I agree. It's been raised several times

01:03:19.489 --> 01:03:22.909
by several commissioners questions. I think it's a good use

01:03:22.909 --> 01:03:25.409
of time if possible in our next work session to address

01:03:25.409 --> 01:03:25.920
that.

01:03:25.920 --> 01:03:34.139
So any other items to be added to our matrix or future

01:03:34.139 --> 01:03:35.920
agenda?

01:03:35.920 --> 01:03:40.090
Seeing none, I will close the meeting, our PNZ meeting at 6

01:03:40.090 --> 01:03:40.920
58.

01:03:40.920 --> 01:04:02.920
Thank you very much.