WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.990
This evening time is 432 and this meeting has been duly

00:00:04.990 --> 00:00:05.780
posted and we do

00:00:05.780 --> 00:00:08.800
have a quorum present and I'm going to call our meeting to

00:00:08.800 --> 00:00:10.099
order and I will

00:00:10.099 --> 00:00:13.880
turn it over to Shandra for clarification of agenda items.

00:00:13.880 --> 00:00:15.140
Thank you

00:00:15.140 --> 00:00:23.199
chair. Tonight we have several well two items on the

00:00:23.199 --> 00:00:24.219
consent agenda,

00:00:24.219 --> 00:00:28.339
two items for individual consideration and then eight items

00:00:28.339 --> 00:00:29.820
under public hearing.

00:00:29.820 --> 00:00:33.920
Before we start I'd like to see if there's any discussion

00:00:33.920 --> 00:00:34.759
on the minutes

00:00:34.759 --> 00:00:41.689
from the October 26th meeting. Okay and so with that I'll

00:00:41.689 --> 00:00:43.079
invite Julie Wyatt up

00:00:43.079 --> 00:00:48.630
for the presentation on the preliminary, I'm sorry, prelim

00:00:48.630 --> 00:00:51.759
plat for the service

00:00:51.759 --> 00:00:57.039
King edition. And just for the record this is for

00:00:57.039 --> 00:00:59.399
clarification purposes so

00:00:59.399 --> 00:01:03.909
she will be going over it if there's a question. It is a

00:01:03.909 --> 00:01:05.680
preliminary plat for a

00:01:05.680 --> 00:01:08.739
commercial development it's adjacent to I-35 and I'll

00:01:08.739 --> 00:01:10.560
answer it's two lots and

00:01:10.560 --> 00:01:14.400
I'll answer any questions you have. I had a question and it

00:01:14.400 --> 00:01:15.799
may just be for my

00:01:15.799 --> 00:01:23.099
learning curve. Why are there drainage easements and water

00:01:23.099 --> 00:01:24.239
easements inside and

00:01:24.239 --> 00:01:26.920
shown on the right away? I thought when we have a right

00:01:26.920 --> 00:01:28.239
away that easements and

00:01:28.239 --> 00:01:31.560
things typically aren't shown inside there. There were a

00:01:31.560 --> 00:01:32.799
lot of existing

00:01:32.799 --> 00:01:37.359
easements that that affected this lot and those may be the

00:01:37.359 --> 00:01:38.040
haven't been

00:01:38.040 --> 00:01:42.519
removed yet. Well or that that affect the lot and Earl did

00:01:42.519 --> 00:01:43.879
you have any that

00:01:43.879 --> 00:01:46.480
you'd like to add?

00:01:51.599 --> 00:01:55.219
It's got I think a 70 foot right away on it and then the

00:01:55.219 --> 00:01:57.079
drainage easement kind

00:01:57.079 --> 00:01:59.659
to the west goes through it and I thought there was also a

00:01:59.659 --> 00:02:01.640
20 foot water

00:02:01.640 --> 00:02:05.939
line easement that's inside the right away. A lot of the

00:02:05.939 --> 00:02:07.799
easements were

00:02:07.799 --> 00:02:10.800
previously within the property but then textile went in and

00:02:10.800 --> 00:02:11.800
acquired a bunch of

00:02:11.800 --> 00:02:14.669
right away needed for the widening and those easements just

00:02:14.669 --> 00:02:15.479
happened to end up

00:02:15.479 --> 00:02:17.699
being in the new right away line. Okay so that just haven't

00:02:17.699 --> 00:02:19.240
been removed. But the right

00:02:19.240 --> 00:02:22.330
away will supersede the easement within the portion that's.

00:02:22.330 --> 00:02:22.840
Well that was kind of

00:02:22.840 --> 00:02:24.819
my question normally when we have right away we don't

00:02:24.819 --> 00:02:26.039
usually have easements. No

00:02:26.039 --> 00:02:28.919
we typically don't. I was just curious as to why this one

00:02:28.919 --> 00:02:30.360
had some easements in it

00:02:30.360 --> 00:02:33.319
and were inside the right away and so what you're saying

00:02:33.319 --> 00:02:34.599
the easements

00:02:34.599 --> 00:02:36.810
pre-existed the right away and they just haven't had the

00:02:36.810 --> 00:02:37.919
easements removed and

00:02:37.919 --> 00:02:40.789
they're just showing up on the plat search. Or the eas

00:02:40.789 --> 00:02:41.759
ements removed that are

00:02:41.759 --> 00:02:44.259
within the right away. Right. But typically you don't need

00:02:44.259 --> 00:02:44.960
to because the

00:02:44.960 --> 00:02:47.280
right away encompasses the easement. Okay that was my only

00:02:47.280 --> 00:02:50.840
question on that. Thank you.

00:02:51.599 --> 00:02:58.469
Okay thank you Julie and actually you're up next. This is

00:02:58.469 --> 00:02:59.639
for the Ranch View

00:02:59.639 --> 00:03:03.389
Specialty Hospital. This is our final plan. This is the

00:03:03.389 --> 00:03:06.599
last step that y'all

00:03:06.599 --> 00:03:08.740
will see for the Ranch View Specialty Hospital. I know you

00:03:08.740 --> 00:03:09.280
've seen this this

00:03:09.280 --> 00:03:14.919
project several times. It is a commercial development. It's

00:03:14.919 --> 00:03:15.560
for medical

00:03:15.560 --> 00:03:20.840
offices adjacent to I-35W and Crawford Road and you've seen

00:03:20.840 --> 00:03:21.280
the preliminary

00:03:21.280 --> 00:03:24.189
plat and this is in conformance with that preliminary plat

00:03:24.189 --> 00:03:25.000
and I'll answer

00:03:25.000 --> 00:03:31.599
any questions I can. Any questions? All right. Thank you

00:03:31.599 --> 00:03:35.039
Julie. And then Julie you

00:03:35.039 --> 00:03:44.280
might as well stay. The next item is the PDA Plan

00:03:44.280 --> 00:03:48.240
Development Amendment for Ropes

00:03:48.240 --> 00:03:53.800
and Ranch. All right good evening I'm Julie Wyatt, Senior

00:03:53.800 --> 00:03:54.680
Planner with the City

00:03:54.680 --> 00:03:57.150
of Denton. I know you've seen this one before. We'll go

00:03:57.150 --> 00:03:58.639
over some of the things

00:03:58.639 --> 00:04:02.610
to refresh your memory from the October 12th meeting but

00:04:02.610 --> 00:04:04.280
this is a request to

00:04:04.280 --> 00:04:06.990
consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding

00:04:06.990 --> 00:04:07.740
a detailed plan

00:04:07.740 --> 00:04:11.319
amendment for ropes and ranch in order to blend the

00:04:11.319 --> 00:04:12.840
residential uses within the

00:04:12.840 --> 00:04:17.310
land use plan. This is something you saw on October 12th

00:04:17.310 --> 00:04:19.040
and it was continued to

00:04:19.040 --> 00:04:25.050
today. The subject property is located on Crawford Road 35W

00:04:25.050 --> 00:04:26.240
is actually in this

00:04:26.240 --> 00:04:33.819
area so it's in the southwest part of town. A little

00:04:33.819 --> 00:04:35.959
background of PDs within

00:04:35.959 --> 00:04:40.120
the City of Denton. There are two part processes within the

00:04:40.120 --> 00:04:41.360
1991 code. They're

00:04:41.360 --> 00:04:45.319
actually not permitted within the 2002 code but we do have

00:04:45.319 --> 00:04:46.600
some PDs left over

00:04:46.600 --> 00:04:51.149
from prior to the 2002 code adoption. So any PDs that

00:04:51.149 --> 00:04:53.000
remain from previously

00:04:53.000 --> 00:04:57.470
follow that 1991 code and that code required two steps.

00:04:57.470 --> 00:04:58.600
First the concept

00:04:58.600 --> 00:05:01.860
plan which was the general guidelines including the uses.

00:05:01.860 --> 00:05:02.839
For ropes and ranch

00:05:02.839 --> 00:05:06.420
it was approved in 1999 and that concept plan emphasized

00:05:06.420 --> 00:05:07.160
flexibility

00:05:07.160 --> 00:05:11.879
and variety of housing options. And embedded within that

00:05:11.879 --> 00:05:13.000
were residential

00:05:13.000 --> 00:05:17.360
uses and there were five. Single-family luxury, single-

00:05:17.360 --> 00:05:18.399
family premier, single-

00:05:18.399 --> 00:05:21.310
family casita. All of those were single-family detached

00:05:21.310 --> 00:05:23.560
homes. Single-family

00:05:23.560 --> 00:05:27.660
villa was single-family attached so a duplex and then there

00:05:27.660 --> 00:05:29.120
was the multi-family

00:05:29.120 --> 00:05:32.689
component which also allowed development for elderly

00:05:32.689 --> 00:05:35.319
housing or that sort of use.

00:05:35.319 --> 00:05:38.189
Nursing homes that sort of thing. So those were the

00:05:38.189 --> 00:05:39.720
residential uses permitted

00:05:39.720 --> 00:05:43.600
within that concept plan. There have been several detailed

00:05:43.600 --> 00:05:44.639
plans that have been

00:05:44.639 --> 00:05:48.240
approved throughout the years. The most recent one being

00:05:48.240 --> 00:05:50.120
2011 and what that did

00:05:50.120 --> 00:05:54.589
is it depicted the precise locations of those individual

00:05:54.589 --> 00:05:55.639
residential land use

00:05:55.639 --> 00:06:01.149
categories and that included 63 of those single-family vill

00:06:01.149 --> 00:06:03.040
as or SFVs or duplexes.

00:06:03.040 --> 00:06:08.029
So and those were clustered along an arterial. And this is

00:06:08.029 --> 00:06:08.800
what that looks

00:06:08.800 --> 00:06:12.370
like. So you have all of the arrows point to the

00:06:12.370 --> 00:06:13.439
traditional lots which would be

00:06:13.439 --> 00:06:19.439
the casitas. The premier lots are the gray. The the

00:06:19.439 --> 00:06:20.399
preserved lots which are

00:06:20.399 --> 00:06:23.550
the the largest lots that they have are in the blue. There

00:06:23.550 --> 00:06:24.800
's one little section

00:06:24.800 --> 00:06:29.480
and then here are those duplex lots. Those were along the

00:06:29.480 --> 00:06:31.120
arterial there. So

00:06:31.120 --> 00:06:35.220
that was the 2011 plan. This is the proposed land use plan

00:06:35.220 --> 00:06:36.079
that you saw on

00:06:36.079 --> 00:06:41.069
October 12th. It it reallocated all those residential uses

00:06:41.069 --> 00:06:41.839
and combined them into

00:06:41.839 --> 00:06:46.600
one residential overarching use where any of those

00:06:46.600 --> 00:06:48.720
residential uses except for

00:06:48.720 --> 00:06:52.600
multi-family to could be located anywhere in that yellow.

00:06:52.600 --> 00:06:54.319
And that proposal

00:06:54.319 --> 00:07:00.189
included some text that include that said the SFL, SFP, SFC

00:07:00.189 --> 00:07:01.800
and SFV land uses

00:07:01.800 --> 00:07:04.410
would be permitted in anywhere within the R. That it

00:07:04.410 --> 00:07:05.600
permitted a maximum of

00:07:05.600 --> 00:07:11.000
1,200 of those SFV units and that the multi-family to MF2

00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:11.680
would only be

00:07:11.680 --> 00:07:15.870
permitted if it was depicted in this land use plan which it

00:07:15.870 --> 00:07:17.199
wasn't or as part

00:07:17.199 --> 00:07:19.519
of a detailed plan amendment. So any multi-family they

00:07:19.519 --> 00:07:20.279
would have to come

00:07:20.279 --> 00:07:24.379
back before you and City Council in order to get approval

00:07:24.379 --> 00:07:25.680
for that. So

00:07:25.680 --> 00:07:29.000
throughout the discussion on October 12th there were some

00:07:29.000 --> 00:07:30.120
current concerns that

00:07:30.120 --> 00:07:34.720
were raised regarding those villas those duplexes and by

00:07:34.720 --> 00:07:36.120
both this commission as

00:07:36.120 --> 00:07:40.579
well as the neighbors and some revisions that were proposed

00:07:40.579 --> 00:07:41.639
by P&Z included the

00:07:41.639 --> 00:07:45.310
reduction a reduction in the number from 1,200 to 600 which

00:07:45.310 --> 00:07:46.399
would be a total of

00:07:46.399 --> 00:07:51.790
300 structures. A requirement that those uses be clustered,

00:07:51.790 --> 00:07:53.399
buffer or transition

00:07:53.399 --> 00:07:57.310
requirements between those duplex uses and the single-

00:07:57.310 --> 00:07:59.000
family detach uses. A

00:07:59.000 --> 00:08:02.480
prohibition against the front facades of duplexes and

00:08:02.480 --> 00:08:03.800
single-family homes facing

00:08:03.800 --> 00:08:07.370
each other and then possibly providing general locations

00:08:07.370 --> 00:08:08.759
for those for those

00:08:08.759 --> 00:08:16.639
SFV villas duplex uses. So the applicant went back and made

00:08:16.639 --> 00:08:18.800
some revisions and

00:08:18.800 --> 00:08:25.009
what they resubmitted to us was to retain that overarching

00:08:25.009 --> 00:08:25.279
R

00:08:25.279 --> 00:08:30.360
residential use in this area which would permit the SFL,

00:08:30.360 --> 00:08:32.399
the SFP, the SFC and the

00:08:32.399 --> 00:08:37.049
SFV within all areas shown in yellow to also retain that

00:08:37.049 --> 00:08:38.519
maximum 1,200 units

00:08:38.519 --> 00:08:42.789
once again permit the provisions regarding multifamily but

00:08:42.789 --> 00:08:43.799
then remove

00:08:43.799 --> 00:08:48.000
all of the areas outlined in blue from the request so those

00:08:48.000 --> 00:08:49.320
would fall back to

00:08:49.320 --> 00:08:53.159
previous detail plans in terms of development and what

00:08:53.159 --> 00:08:54.320
which which housing

00:08:54.320 --> 00:09:01.250
goes where. So that was their that was their revision we

00:09:01.250 --> 00:09:02.159
asked them if they

00:09:02.159 --> 00:09:05.059
wanted. Commissioner Rossell. Yes sir. Thank you. Sorry for

00:09:05.059 --> 00:09:06.720
the interruption. Do you know of the

00:09:06.720 --> 00:09:10.049
the build out of what's the outline in blue is that

00:09:10.049 --> 00:09:11.720
currently fully built out

00:09:11.720 --> 00:09:13.769
or is there land still in that blue outline that has not

00:09:13.769 --> 00:09:14.799
been developed? It's

00:09:14.799 --> 00:09:18.370
everything that's been platted, final platted up till now.

00:09:18.370 --> 00:09:19.440
So yes some of it is

00:09:19.440 --> 00:09:23.600
built out some of it for instance this 10.1 10.2 these

00:09:23.600 --> 00:09:25.039
these plots are fairly

00:09:25.039 --> 00:09:28.610
recent so they're they're working through those and then

00:09:28.610 --> 00:09:29.399
and then this

00:09:29.399 --> 00:09:33.269
right here that's a fairly recent plat as well. So thank

00:09:33.269 --> 00:09:33.639
you.

00:09:33.639 --> 00:09:37.809
Commissioner Sullivan. I've gotten some questions about

00:09:37.809 --> 00:09:41.220
this. There are a few lots in here that are outside the

00:09:41.220 --> 00:09:44.639
blue line that are in fact already developed.

00:09:44.639 --> 00:09:47.970
And so I don't know if it was just an oversight on their

00:09:47.970 --> 00:09:54.639
part or if they were using an older map to begin with that

00:09:54.639 --> 00:09:58.639
would indicate that maybe it's not built out there.

00:09:58.639 --> 00:10:04.129
For example if I can approach the map here. Sure. These

00:10:04.129 --> 00:10:08.950
three specifically these three lots here are already built.

00:10:08.950 --> 00:10:10.639
These three lots right here?

00:10:10.639 --> 00:10:15.740
They're already in existence. And so that's one thing that

00:10:15.740 --> 00:10:17.639
's just sort of an oversight.

00:10:17.639 --> 00:10:25.629
Okay. Those three people are upset. And so the other issue

00:10:25.629 --> 00:10:31.639
is that the things that in yellow that above the blue line

00:10:31.639 --> 00:10:36.159
that while they are not currently developed that when the

00:10:36.159 --> 00:10:40.299
people bought that's along the inside of the blue line were

00:10:40.299 --> 00:10:44.639
told specific types of housing is going to go in there.

00:10:44.639 --> 00:10:47.850
And under this under this plan of ours a lot better than

00:10:47.850 --> 00:10:52.460
the last one. It's still getting leeway to where possibly

00:10:52.460 --> 00:10:57.059
the people who bought then are not going to have what they

00:10:57.059 --> 00:10:58.639
were told later.

00:10:58.639 --> 00:11:03.779
I don't know how hard and fast this blue line is or what

00:11:03.779 --> 00:11:09.649
the assurances are that Robeson is going to issue to the

00:11:09.649 --> 00:11:14.639
homeowners saying told you this that will continue.

00:11:14.639 --> 00:11:19.649
Well and we did we did approach Robeson about adding more

00:11:19.649 --> 00:11:24.870
of those elements that y'all suggested in the last meeting

00:11:24.870 --> 00:11:28.799
in into this and they declined to do so. But they will be

00:11:28.799 --> 00:11:29.379
here tonight and that may be something that we want that

00:11:29.379 --> 00:11:31.639
you might want to discuss about about pushing that that

00:11:31.639 --> 00:11:34.990
boundary line a little further in order to give more

00:11:34.990 --> 00:11:38.009
certainty to those property owners that are that are

00:11:38.009 --> 00:11:39.639
adjacent to that blue line.

00:11:39.639 --> 00:11:46.710
Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. So Julie as I

00:11:46.710 --> 00:11:48.590
understand that the only change from what we saw previously

00:11:48.590 --> 00:11:50.649
October 12th is that they're just not including anything

00:11:50.649 --> 00:11:53.210
that's already plotted. Other than that everything's the

00:11:53.210 --> 00:11:53.639
same.

00:11:53.639 --> 00:12:10.809
Yes ma'am. Okay. Thank you. All right. So the

00:12:10.809 --> 00:12:11.259
considerations that we looked at when we when we analyze

00:12:11.259 --> 00:12:11.799
this we really went back to that 1991 code and and I know

00:12:11.799 --> 00:12:12.340
we've discussed this before that 91 code does have criteria

00:12:12.340 --> 00:12:12.639
for approval that we look at.

00:12:12.639 --> 00:12:17.169
We have to analyze the request against first does it apply

00:12:17.169 --> 00:12:21.610
with the general concept plan. This does that general

00:12:21.610 --> 00:12:26.129
concept plan did embed within it that idea of flexibility

00:12:26.129 --> 00:12:28.639
and a variety of housing types.

00:12:28.639 --> 00:12:31.840
Does it provide a compatible arrangement with buildings and

00:12:31.840 --> 00:12:34.850
land uses that would not adversely affect the adjoining

00:12:34.850 --> 00:12:37.639
neighborhoods or properties outside the plan.

00:12:37.639 --> 00:12:41.210
We looked at that and we don't we don't see that there is

00:12:41.210 --> 00:12:44.419
going to be an impact to the properties adjoining the

00:12:44.419 --> 00:12:48.179
development that's an that is undeveloped property and we

00:12:48.179 --> 00:12:50.639
don't perceive an impact there.

00:12:50.639 --> 00:12:55.309
But it is difficult to ascertain what the impact is of the

00:12:55.309 --> 00:12:59.639
of the additional duplexes within the development.

00:12:59.639 --> 00:13:02.669
It provides for adequate and safe circulation of vehicular

00:13:02.669 --> 00:13:05.779
traffic because this request doesn't actually increase the

00:13:05.779 --> 00:13:10.649
total number of dwelling units. It merely reallocates those

00:13:10.649 --> 00:13:12.639
land use categories.

00:13:12.639 --> 00:13:18.309
So the the duplex is the villas. If those increase within

00:13:18.309 --> 00:13:22.179
the ropes and ranch development then a different than

00:13:22.179 --> 00:13:26.600
another residential housing type would decrease increase

00:13:26.600 --> 00:13:27.639
decrease.

00:13:27.639 --> 00:13:31.289
So it would it would balance out and maintain that that 60

00:13:31.289 --> 00:13:35.200
37 dwelling units and is it in substantial compliance with

00:13:35.200 --> 00:13:38.740
the landscape science subdivision and other regulations of

00:13:38.740 --> 00:13:39.639
the city.

00:13:39.639 --> 00:13:43.639
Yes it is.

00:13:43.639 --> 00:13:46.940
And while planning does not have an objection to the

00:13:46.940 --> 00:13:50.320
request in light of the discussions that we had here on

00:13:50.320 --> 00:13:54.330
October 12th as well as feedback that we have received from

00:13:54.330 --> 00:13:55.639
the neighborhood.

00:13:55.639 --> 00:14:00.669
The additional conditions that were suggested by this by

00:14:00.669 --> 00:14:07.440
this board are are appropriate would be appropriate in this

00:14:07.440 --> 00:14:08.639
instance.

00:14:08.639 --> 00:14:11.509
A public notification was sent out here. Here are my totals

00:14:11.509 --> 00:14:18.720
. We've received 31 in opposition 44 in favor and then 19 in

00:14:18.720 --> 00:14:19.639
neutral.

00:14:19.639 --> 00:14:26.639
Staff recommend's approval of the request. Sorry.

00:14:26.639 --> 00:14:31.720
No sir no sir. It was just that one public notification. I

00:14:31.720 --> 00:14:35.879
did continue to receive feedback and phone calls and emails

00:14:35.879 --> 00:14:46.639
but no additional public or mailing was then.

00:14:46.639 --> 00:14:51.129
Well yes and it would but it is still a part of the total

00:14:51.129 --> 00:14:55.889
development. So it is part because those houses are a part

00:14:55.889 --> 00:15:00.049
of the PD and that whole PD is being amended that it would

00:15:00.049 --> 00:15:03.639
still you know we're still looking at them.

00:15:16.639 --> 00:15:31.639
Sure sure.

00:15:31.639 --> 00:15:38.639
Sure sure yes.

00:15:38.639 --> 00:15:45.279
The request was continued so that's why there wasn't a re

00:15:45.279 --> 00:15:47.809
notice. So thank you. We did. Yes go ahead. Sorry

00:15:47.809 --> 00:15:53.559
Commissioner Hesbeth. Thank you chair. So I guess can we

00:15:53.559 --> 00:15:58.639
just to talk amongst ourselves so I can understand.

00:15:58.639 --> 00:16:04.279
I'm curious. I need some guidance as to where to weigh

00:16:04.279 --> 00:16:08.039
decisions. If I look at the blue line it looks like they

00:16:08.039 --> 00:16:11.799
tried to follow the golf course and even the three houses

00:16:11.799 --> 00:16:15.129
that Commissioner Sullivan pointed out it's in their

00:16:15.129 --> 00:16:15.639
backyard.

00:16:15.639 --> 00:16:26.889
So we've set out a prerequisite before saying hey we don't

00:16:26.889 --> 00:16:33.000
want to face in each other. So it looks like they've drawn

00:16:33.000 --> 00:16:33.720
the line such that it's it meets the previous request. So I

00:16:33.720 --> 00:16:34.389
'm just curious if we're how we're going to or how to weigh

00:16:34.389 --> 00:16:36.639
decisions right it's like it's obvious.

00:16:36.639 --> 00:16:43.110
It's a need. It's obvious that it's well supported in the

00:16:43.110 --> 00:16:46.769
entire community. And so those dissenting how do you weigh

00:16:46.769 --> 00:16:48.440
that do you weigh it. I mean because I don't think there's

00:16:48.440 --> 00:16:49.639
ever a perfect place for blue line.

00:16:49.639 --> 00:16:53.389
You know and so that's as we go through the presentation

00:16:53.389 --> 00:16:57.220
that's what I'm weighing that's what I'm I'm going to

00:16:57.220 --> 00:17:00.659
struggle with it's it looks like the prerequisites

00:17:00.659 --> 00:17:04.509
generally have been you know factored in and it looks like

00:17:04.509 --> 00:17:08.160
they tried to follow the golf course to give you that

00:17:08.160 --> 00:17:11.789
buffer between the two and the others in the backyard so it

00:17:11.789 --> 00:17:15.640
's not facing one of the other houses.

00:17:15.640 --> 00:17:20.640
So that just says we go forward I'll be listening to see

00:17:20.640 --> 00:17:26.009
how to weigh dissenting opinions and process that. I think

00:17:26.009 --> 00:17:28.640
I'll try to answer that question.

00:17:28.640 --> 00:17:36.829
So once we are amending the full PD, the notification goes

00:17:36.829 --> 00:17:44.230
out to the property owner that we originally sent the

00:17:44.230 --> 00:17:50.640
notice to. And so the 20% should it. Should we fall into,

00:17:50.640 --> 00:17:50.640
should we get to that point where there's 20% opposition,

00:17:50.640 --> 00:17:50.640
that total will be counted based on that that original

00:17:50.640 --> 00:17:50.640
boundary.

00:17:50.640 --> 00:17:56.640
Unless somebody has a different interpretation.

00:17:56.640 --> 00:18:00.279
And right now because it is such a large development, even

00:18:00.279 --> 00:18:03.640
though we've we received quite a few letters back.

00:18:03.640 --> 00:18:07.960
The percentages of opposition or even in favor neutral or

00:18:07.960 --> 00:18:12.640
are fairly low just because it's such a large development.

00:18:12.640 --> 00:18:18.640
So I'll answer any questions I can.

00:18:18.640 --> 00:18:21.309
Commissioner Ellis. Thank you, Chair so Julie these

00:18:21.309 --> 00:18:24.250
responses that we have are the same ones we got on October

00:18:24.250 --> 00:18:25.640
12 is that right.

00:18:25.640 --> 00:18:29.210
Some are new. Okay, and I mixed them all up. Okay, so I

00:18:29.210 --> 00:18:31.599
have no idea what your name is so I'm sorry I apologize I

00:18:31.599 --> 00:18:34.000
killed a few trees on that one so I want to make sure you

00:18:34.000 --> 00:18:36.640
had all the available information in front of you.

00:18:36.640 --> 00:18:41.640
Thanks.

00:18:41.640 --> 00:18:56.740
All right. Thank you. There's a few more questions. I was

00:18:56.740 --> 00:18:56.890
going to call on Commissioner Sullivan since you live in Ro

00:18:56.890 --> 00:18:57.039
bson Ranch. Can you share just kind of what the feeling from

00:18:57.039 --> 00:18:57.180
Robson Ranch what you've been told about their feelings

00:18:57.180 --> 00:18:57.640
about the changes that are being proposed.

00:18:57.640 --> 00:19:03.880
Whether it was a town hall meeting that I attended in Robs

00:19:03.880 --> 00:19:04.640
on.

00:19:04.640 --> 00:19:08.630
I used to love double speaker people would ask specific

00:19:08.630 --> 00:19:12.869
question regarding what about what's going to be behind my

00:19:12.869 --> 00:19:16.410
house, and they say well you know it's going to be

00:19:16.410 --> 00:19:17.640
residents.

00:19:17.640 --> 00:19:27.009
What does that mean that a duplex or single family or what

00:19:27.009 --> 00:19:35.640
have you. So people were concerned about that. That, again,

00:19:35.640 --> 00:19:35.640
people that I've talked with you got emails from are

00:19:35.640 --> 00:19:35.640
concerned that, again, the people that are on that blue

00:19:35.640 --> 00:19:35.640
line.

00:19:35.640 --> 00:19:42.000
While their house may back up to the blue line and so

00:19:42.000 --> 00:19:48.640
therefore the front house don't face each other.

00:19:48.640 --> 00:19:56.640
Make sure your mic is on I think.

00:19:56.640 --> 00:19:59.640
It's greener now greener.

00:19:59.640 --> 00:20:07.640
Those guys will be happy.

00:20:07.640 --> 00:20:12.329
So that the people that whose backyard backs up to the

00:20:12.329 --> 00:20:17.000
backyard of the villa. It's two different lifestyles that

00:20:17.000 --> 00:20:20.640
the the villa people tend to live on the patios more.

00:20:20.640 --> 00:20:25.920
And so it's you know very close proximity and it's just not

00:20:25.920 --> 00:20:29.640
in their thought not very conducive.

00:20:29.640 --> 00:20:33.240
So that's, it's a concern for those who are closer to the

00:20:33.240 --> 00:20:36.789
area impact area than it is to those who are further away

00:20:36.789 --> 00:20:40.640
from it because their areas are fairly well built out.

00:20:40.640 --> 00:20:44.460
And the concern they had was that if there's an empty lot

00:20:44.460 --> 00:20:48.450
in the middle of street according to the old map they could

00:20:48.450 --> 00:20:50.640
have put a duplex in there.

00:20:50.640 --> 00:20:54.349
And so that was their concern that they didn't want you

00:20:54.349 --> 00:20:57.640
know the infill areas to be used as duplexes.

00:20:57.640 --> 00:21:00.519
So they've taken you know they've taken that off the board

00:21:00.519 --> 00:21:01.640
which is positive.

00:21:01.640 --> 00:21:05.740
But it's still it's the the backyard issue and the fact

00:21:05.740 --> 00:21:09.950
that people have in fact I just got an email when I pulled

00:21:09.950 --> 00:21:13.450
in this evening that said to that you know we were told

00:21:13.450 --> 00:21:16.640
that a premier houses were going to be built behind us.

00:21:16.640 --> 00:21:20.609
Well that's not what's you know what's being shown now and

00:21:20.609 --> 00:21:22.640
so that's their concern.

00:21:22.640 --> 00:21:26.819
So they would like more assurance from Robson or somebody

00:21:26.819 --> 00:21:30.730
to say what we told you when you bought is still going to

00:21:30.730 --> 00:21:31.640
happen.

00:21:31.640 --> 00:21:34.589
You know that's not going to affect anything it's just for

00:21:34.589 --> 00:21:37.490
the stuff that's on further north where these things are

00:21:37.490 --> 00:21:38.640
going to happen.

00:21:38.640 --> 00:21:42.490
So that's that's sort of the give and take that's going on

00:21:42.490 --> 00:21:44.640
in the in the area out there.

00:21:44.640 --> 00:21:45.640
Okay.

00:21:45.640 --> 00:21:46.640
Thank you for that.

00:21:46.640 --> 00:21:47.640
Commissioner Ellis.

00:21:47.640 --> 00:21:48.640
Thank you, Chair.

00:21:48.640 --> 00:21:51.650
Commissioner Sullivan just to ask there was discussion on

00:21:51.650 --> 00:21:54.849
October 12 that the developer come back and talk with the

00:21:54.849 --> 00:21:55.640
residents.

00:21:55.640 --> 00:21:56.640
Did that happen?

00:21:56.640 --> 00:21:59.339
Are you saying that meeting happened in between the

00:21:59.339 --> 00:22:03.460
continuation or is that the first one after the last time

00:22:03.460 --> 00:22:04.640
they were here.

00:22:04.640 --> 00:22:07.569
In fact it was probably a month and a half ago that they

00:22:07.569 --> 00:22:10.869
came back and had another town hall meeting and that's that

00:22:10.869 --> 00:22:12.640
's the one that I attended.

00:22:12.640 --> 00:22:17.349
And again it was the concerns were what's going to happen

00:22:17.349 --> 00:22:19.640
to the houses behind me.

00:22:19.640 --> 00:22:23.210
That's where that really was the biggest voice and that's

00:22:23.210 --> 00:22:27.220
where Robson didn't really I mean the answer the question

00:22:27.220 --> 00:22:31.630
technically but not specifically because a multifamily

00:22:31.630 --> 00:22:36.569
villa is a residence just like a single family home is a

00:22:36.569 --> 00:22:37.640
residence.

00:22:37.640 --> 00:22:42.700
And so that's where they were kind of dancing around the

00:22:42.700 --> 00:22:43.640
issue.

00:22:43.640 --> 00:22:44.640
Sure.

00:22:44.640 --> 00:22:47.900
That was let me just say that was one thing I was going to

00:22:47.900 --> 00:22:50.980
ask staff about and we didn't talk about in today's

00:22:50.980 --> 00:22:54.630
presentation but my recollection from last time was that on

00:22:54.630 --> 00:22:56.640
the casitas the duplexes.

00:22:56.640 --> 00:23:00.359
They actually count as one unit it's not two separate units

00:23:00.359 --> 00:23:00.640
.

00:23:00.640 --> 00:23:01.640
Is that correct?

00:23:01.640 --> 00:23:05.759
No it's two separate dwelling units because each the way

00:23:05.759 --> 00:23:10.170
the development code defines the dwelling unit is a kitchen

00:23:10.170 --> 00:23:14.640
basically and so there would be each would be two separate.

00:23:14.640 --> 00:23:18.210
Each structure would be two separate dwelling units so it

00:23:18.210 --> 00:23:22.390
would be so they're they're proposing or requesting 1200 du

00:23:22.390 --> 00:23:25.640
plexes, but it would be 600 structures.

00:23:25.640 --> 00:23:26.640
Okay.

00:23:26.640 --> 00:23:30.349
So I misunderstood about there's two structures being

00:23:30.349 --> 00:23:31.640
counted as one.

00:23:31.640 --> 00:23:35.960
Well, let me rephrase the duplex two families and wasn't

00:23:35.960 --> 00:23:40.640
residents count says two residential structures rather than

00:23:40.640 --> 00:23:43.640
one to residential dwelling units.

00:23:43.640 --> 00:23:44.640
Yes, sir.

00:23:44.640 --> 00:23:47.230
Okay, I was misunderstood it was mistaken on my

00:23:47.230 --> 00:23:49.640
understanding so they're two separate.

00:23:49.640 --> 00:23:52.640
It's been a little confusing so I'm with you.

00:23:52.640 --> 00:23:54.640
Thank you for the clarification.

00:23:54.640 --> 00:23:56.640
Mr. Husband.

00:23:56.640 --> 00:24:03.740
Yeah, I just, I do get hung up on our previous meeting we

00:24:03.740 --> 00:24:06.640
outlined some, some bullets.

00:24:06.640 --> 00:24:11.220
Those bullets get hit, and then it's, oh by the way, and I

00:24:11.220 --> 00:24:14.640
do in practice, I don't.

00:24:14.640 --> 00:24:18.450
I struggle with making the connection that that's a bad

00:24:18.450 --> 00:24:22.220
thing right, because my understanding just as it was

00:24:22.220 --> 00:24:25.640
understood as it was laid out these are homes.

00:24:25.640 --> 00:24:28.730
I mean the townhomes whatever there are the people leave,

00:24:28.730 --> 00:24:31.849
and they come back and they kind of vacillate a bit. I don

00:24:31.849 --> 00:24:33.640
't understand what's bad about that.

00:24:33.640 --> 00:24:37.220
You know, if my neighbors would leave all the time that'd

00:24:37.220 --> 00:24:39.769
be great, you know, you know, what am I looking at the

00:24:39.769 --> 00:24:41.880
backup, you know that that type of thing so I don't, I don

00:24:41.880 --> 00:24:43.640
't see that as a negative and I don't see.

00:24:43.640 --> 00:24:47.500
I just don't think it's right to keep moving the goal line,

00:24:47.500 --> 00:24:50.890
you know, it's like hey well, here's these four prerequis

00:24:50.890 --> 00:24:53.220
ites we really like to see you come back with those four

00:24:53.220 --> 00:24:56.640
prerequisites and now I'm worried about my backyard.

00:24:56.640 --> 00:24:59.299
Before it was hate I don't want to face it. Now it's I don

00:24:59.299 --> 00:25:02.509
't want it in back of me. And we're another four months out

00:25:02.509 --> 00:25:05.640
and we already know that it's in need.

00:25:05.640 --> 00:25:09.740
And so I just, I just think it's a dangerous precedent to

00:25:09.740 --> 00:25:13.710
to ask someone to meet we specifically laid out these,

00:25:13.710 --> 00:25:17.640
these points we specifically set a date certain.

00:25:17.640 --> 00:25:22.230
And so, is it perfect? Absolutely not. But I think short

00:25:22.230 --> 00:25:24.640
comings would fall on.

00:25:24.640 --> 00:25:28.890
I'd almost put it on me for not asking a better question

00:25:28.890 --> 00:25:33.339
than on them for doing what we in spirit, ask them to do is

00:25:33.339 --> 00:25:35.640
it again is it perfect no.

00:25:35.640 --> 00:25:41.269
But I need someone I'd need to hear a reason why someone

00:25:41.269 --> 00:25:45.640
that's gone half the year is in my backyard is a bad thing.

00:25:45.640 --> 00:25:47.640
I mean, so I don't I don't understand that to be bad.

00:25:47.640 --> 00:25:50.839
If I could just a second, I want to, I got a clarification

00:25:50.839 --> 00:25:54.089
from legal that we're getting a little outside the bounds

00:25:54.089 --> 00:25:57.640
of our work session of getting information presented to us

00:25:57.640 --> 00:26:00.799
and having a lot of discussion and the recommendation is if

00:26:00.799 --> 00:26:02.960
we're going to get into quite a bit discussion I would

00:26:02.960 --> 00:26:07.640
rather us have it there in our public session with citizens

00:26:07.640 --> 00:26:10.160
there that can hear rather than we do it all here and just

00:26:10.160 --> 00:26:13.640
make a motion to vote in there that we've discussed it so

00:26:13.640 --> 00:26:16.640
unless there's another question specifically for staff.

00:26:16.640 --> 00:26:20.210
I'm going to say that this item has been presented and we

00:26:20.210 --> 00:26:23.500
'll move to our next one unless there's a particular

00:26:23.500 --> 00:26:27.640
question for staff that we want to follow up on.

00:26:27.640 --> 00:26:32.109
Sure. Commissioner was oh, thank you chair. Julian and in

00:26:32.109 --> 00:26:36.640
your discussions with the applicant.

00:26:36.640 --> 00:26:39.640
Commissioner Sullivan brought up the point about these

00:26:39.640 --> 00:26:42.869
three houses. And it does seem like maybe low hanging fruit

00:26:42.869 --> 00:26:46.009
of those exist. I'm not saying we start blurring that blue

00:26:46.009 --> 00:26:46.640
line.

00:26:46.640 --> 00:26:50.210
Because I agree with Commissioner has but it seems like a

00:26:50.210 --> 00:26:52.849
natural kind of break. But those three houses are built. Do

00:26:52.849 --> 00:26:56.630
you feel the applicant would be a minimal to moving that

00:26:56.630 --> 00:26:57.640
line back.

00:26:57.640 --> 00:27:00.630
They like hard because it seems like they declined some of

00:27:00.630 --> 00:27:03.579
our requests. And I guess I asked the applicant I'm just

00:27:03.579 --> 00:27:06.640
curious about if they would move it three houses back.

00:27:06.640 --> 00:27:09.880
I can absolutely approach them prior to the regular meeting

00:27:09.880 --> 00:27:12.640
and see if that's something that they could do.

00:27:12.640 --> 00:27:16.640
I'm just curious if that's like a deal breaker for them.

00:27:16.640 --> 00:27:20.339
Thank you. Commissioner else. Thank you chair. On that same

00:27:20.339 --> 00:27:23.660
note, is that a hard line or you said everything that's

00:27:23.660 --> 00:27:24.640
already been plotted.

00:27:24.640 --> 00:27:27.390
So if those three homes are there, they're plotted. So they

00:27:27.390 --> 00:27:31.220
should be not included. Well, and that was just a shorthand

00:27:31.220 --> 00:27:34.640
that that I used. This was what they submitted.

00:27:34.640 --> 00:27:39.109
So this is they didn't they didn't qualify it. They just

00:27:39.109 --> 00:27:43.420
submitted a new draw a new map. So so that's a hard line as

00:27:43.420 --> 00:27:47.640
far as what they're presenting to us then. Yes. Okay.

00:27:47.640 --> 00:27:49.640
Understood. Thank you.

00:27:49.640 --> 00:27:54.359
I have I guess final question. Help me understand staff's

00:27:54.359 --> 00:27:58.910
perspective to approve this when it's so counter to how we

00:27:58.910 --> 00:28:03.450
do zoning throughout the rest of our city that you know it

00:28:03.450 --> 00:28:07.359
is in our six and that's what goes in it and then our three

00:28:07.359 --> 00:28:08.640
and you can have in our immune.

00:28:08.640 --> 00:28:12.519
We don't have a mix of that in our city. So I'm having a

00:28:12.519 --> 00:28:16.609
hard time after maybe I'm just the old guy with long in the

00:28:16.609 --> 00:28:20.000
tooth here how we've always done it. I'm having a hard time

00:28:20.000 --> 00:28:21.640
getting there with this approach. Sure.

00:28:21.640 --> 00:28:26.549
And I understand and we have those conversations because it

00:28:26.549 --> 00:28:31.029
's a PD because that type of mixing of housing was was put

00:28:31.029 --> 00:28:35.690
into the PD is as one of the one of the guiding principles,

00:28:35.690 --> 00:28:40.640
then that PD does allow for that flexibility and for it to

00:28:40.640 --> 00:28:43.640
be a little less

00:28:43.640 --> 00:28:47.779
hard and fast as we have in the rest of the zoning. So yes,

00:28:47.779 --> 00:28:51.509
it doesn't really follow the way we typically look at

00:28:51.509 --> 00:28:56.250
things within the broader city, but within this PD because

00:28:56.250 --> 00:29:01.890
because it's its own development and it's got its own own

00:29:01.890 --> 00:29:05.640
standards and criteria that allows that a little more

00:29:05.640 --> 00:29:09.640
flexibility for staff to look at these types of specific

00:29:09.640 --> 00:29:12.640
requests in a little more detail that way.

00:29:12.640 --> 00:29:15.640
Can you push back a little.

00:29:15.640 --> 00:29:19.640
I hear that in the flexibility and understand it.

00:29:19.640 --> 00:29:22.690
But we don't do that anywhere else in our city that we have

00:29:22.690 --> 00:29:25.589
a duplex on one lot and then a single family home next to

00:29:25.589 --> 00:29:28.819
it. We've had things come before this commission and had a

00:29:28.819 --> 00:29:32.009
lot of spirited discussion about staff saying well this is

00:29:32.009 --> 00:29:35.869
existing neighborhood and you know we're going to put a

00:29:35.869 --> 00:29:37.640
couple duplexes here on the corner

00:29:37.640 --> 00:29:41.210
and that's exactly what this is this is going to be a or

00:29:41.210 --> 00:29:45.220
has the capability of being duplex single family all this,

00:29:45.220 --> 00:29:49.230
whatever kind of floats and that's just very different than

00:29:49.230 --> 00:29:53.279
what we typically do is and I've stood here and argued that

00:29:53.279 --> 00:29:57.640
very very thing.

00:29:57.640 --> 00:30:01.539
But because it really does come down to the nature of the

00:30:01.539 --> 00:30:05.539
PD. And so it is it is different than that that straight

00:30:05.539 --> 00:30:09.349
zoning that we have to the rest of the city or, or we're

00:30:09.349 --> 00:30:13.430
reviewing it in that that different so I hear you we have,

00:30:13.430 --> 00:30:17.640
we have had those spirited discussions here.

00:30:17.640 --> 00:30:22.670
But, but because of the nature of the PD and Chandler and

00:30:22.670 --> 00:30:25.640
all want to add anything to that.

00:30:25.640 --> 00:30:28.720
I guess I'm just a little puzzled as to why we're not doing

00:30:28.720 --> 00:30:31.539
more of a cluster that you can do it here or do it there

00:30:31.539 --> 00:30:34.690
versus you can just do it anywhere, other than it makes it

00:30:34.690 --> 00:30:37.859
very easy for the developer to whatever they want to build

00:30:37.859 --> 00:30:40.640
however they want to build to never have to come back and

00:30:40.640 --> 00:30:44.079
say, hey, market conditions have changed, we have more

00:30:44.079 --> 00:30:46.640
demand here and we would like to just like we do in any

00:30:46.640 --> 00:30:50.480
other projects, make a change and come back and talk about

00:30:50.480 --> 00:30:53.779
it versus we want a blank check, and we don't ever want to

00:30:53.779 --> 00:30:54.640
have to come back and we'll build what we want to build.

00:30:54.640 --> 00:30:57.839
It fits this box and if it's gonna be outside the box, we

00:30:57.839 --> 00:31:01.430
'll come back but otherwise, we'll never be back before this

00:31:01.430 --> 00:31:05.029
commission or city council again. And you know, after our

00:31:05.029 --> 00:31:08.250
last discussion we did go back and we talked about it and

00:31:08.250 --> 00:31:11.809
when they did submit this, this new map to us, you know I,

00:31:11.809 --> 00:31:14.329
I contacted them and say but this doesn't address any of

00:31:14.329 --> 00:31:17.000
those other concerns that PNC Do you not want to add those

00:31:17.000 --> 00:31:17.640
in there.

00:31:17.640 --> 00:31:21.829
And they declined to do so but we have put in our

00:31:21.829 --> 00:31:27.490
recommendation that although we're okay with the request,

00:31:27.490 --> 00:31:32.819
we've certainly heard your concerns and we think that any

00:31:32.819 --> 00:31:38.220
requirements to provide buffers or transitions between

00:31:38.220 --> 00:31:40.640
those two uses could be appropriate.

00:31:40.640 --> 00:31:44.839
So, I think I think you're, you're right and that what you

00:31:44.839 --> 00:31:48.880
have suggested to us could be appropriate measures that

00:31:48.880 --> 00:31:52.819
that y'all could could recommend to to add to this map as

00:31:52.819 --> 00:31:53.640
well.

00:31:53.640 --> 00:31:58.750
Right, and just add more. Hopefully it's more. But with PDs

00:31:58.750 --> 00:32:03.220
you also we with PDs we tend to allow greater flexibility

00:32:03.220 --> 00:32:07.680
because ideally we get a better product in the end then we

00:32:07.680 --> 00:32:10.640
could get with straight zoning.

00:32:10.640 --> 00:32:14.450
So typically you get more open space you get connections

00:32:14.450 --> 00:32:18.220
you get a better quality product. As far as design

00:32:18.220 --> 00:32:22.170
standards, the, the facades of the buildings are typically

00:32:22.170 --> 00:32:25.640
more than what we require for the base zoning.

00:32:25.640 --> 00:32:29.740
And so that's why there's a little bit of a give and take

00:32:29.740 --> 00:32:30.640
with PDs.

00:32:30.640 --> 00:32:34.799
But surely, if you sense zoning is discretionary and this

00:32:34.799 --> 00:32:38.609
is zoning. Should you see things that you should you

00:32:38.609 --> 00:32:42.640
identify things that you would like to see in the PD.

00:32:42.640 --> 00:32:47.640
Those can be recommendations that you make as a commission.

00:32:47.640 --> 00:32:50.529
This is a carry one one step further. Either

00:32:50.529 --> 00:32:54.339
recommendations that we can form consensus on. And if for

00:32:54.339 --> 00:32:58.059
some reason, there isn't consensus and this doesn't move

00:32:58.059 --> 00:33:01.839
forward at least from a PNC where the recommendation it

00:33:01.839 --> 00:33:03.640
does go to city council.

00:33:03.640 --> 00:33:04.640
Is that correct.

00:33:04.640 --> 00:33:08.319
And if it didn't pass here it would take a supermajority at

00:33:08.319 --> 00:33:12.019
council then to to to address whatever changes need to be

00:33:12.019 --> 00:33:14.640
made. Yes, sir. Okay.

00:33:14.640 --> 00:33:20.640
Other questions for staff.

00:33:20.640 --> 00:33:21.640
Buddy.

00:33:21.640 --> 00:33:24.640
Okay. Thank you, Julie. Thank you.

00:33:24.640 --> 00:33:30.640
Okay. The next item is the approving the 2017 calendar.

00:33:30.640 --> 00:33:35.460
There should be a copy of this in your backup. And if you

00:33:35.460 --> 00:33:40.180
will please let us know if any of the dates. You feel we

00:33:40.180 --> 00:33:42.640
need to change or if not.

00:33:42.640 --> 00:34:01.640
Can you carry this forward.

00:34:01.640 --> 00:34:07.769
On the calendar the only thing I remember looking at it but

00:34:07.769 --> 00:34:13.639
I don't know that I saw spring break on was it missed. That

00:34:13.639 --> 00:34:13.639
's the only other thing that I saw.

00:34:13.639 --> 00:34:22.199
It looked like we missed most of the other holidays and

00:34:22.199 --> 00:34:31.639
things so anybody else have some conflicts on the calendar.

00:34:31.639 --> 00:34:35.639
Commissioner has but did you have some conflicts or no.

00:34:35.639 --> 00:34:38.639
Good. Okay.

00:34:38.639 --> 00:34:55.380
That takes us to our public hearings and I'll invite Haley

00:34:55.380 --> 00:35:06.639
's a girl ski up for the Darnell edition.

00:35:06.639 --> 00:35:09.639
Okay, so you've seen this one recently as a zoning case.

00:35:09.639 --> 00:35:12.719
This is replats to combine three lots into one for the

00:35:12.719 --> 00:35:16.300
purpose of developing a pastoral center on McCormick Street

00:35:16.300 --> 00:35:16.639
.

00:35:16.639 --> 00:35:22.639
So if you have any questions I can address those now.

00:35:22.639 --> 00:35:26.860
Now there were some concerns when this was before us about

00:35:26.860 --> 00:35:31.170
parking and some of those I don't know if any commissioners

00:35:31.170 --> 00:35:35.239
want to address any of that or feel like this is okay as is

00:35:35.239 --> 00:35:37.639
or want to come back to me that.

00:35:37.639 --> 00:35:38.639
Okay.

00:35:38.639 --> 00:35:44.639
Thank you. Thank you.

00:35:44.639 --> 00:35:52.219
Next we have Julie Wyatt who's presenting on the Maple Leaf

00:35:52.219 --> 00:35:54.639
homes, final reply.

00:35:54.639 --> 00:35:55.639
All right.

00:35:55.639 --> 00:35:59.650
They're replating the subject property in order to

00:35:59.650 --> 00:36:02.639
accommodate a townhome development.

00:36:02.639 --> 00:36:05.639
It's all McKinney.

00:36:05.639 --> 00:36:15.639
Any questions.

00:36:15.639 --> 00:36:18.980
There's not because of the zoning district that it's in it

00:36:18.980 --> 00:36:22.010
's in our in you and so it's not a single family zoning

00:36:22.010 --> 00:36:25.369
district so there's no mailing notification there still

00:36:25.369 --> 00:36:27.639
wasn't a newspaper notification.

00:36:27.639 --> 00:36:32.639
Gotcha. Okay.

00:36:32.639 --> 00:36:35.639
Any questions for Julie.

00:36:35.639 --> 00:36:37.639
Thank you.

00:36:37.639 --> 00:36:40.639
If you're back or not. Yeah, I'm just gonna stay here.

00:36:40.639 --> 00:36:44.460
Titus edition. Titus edition. All right. Let me rotate this

00:36:44.460 --> 00:36:44.639
.

00:36:44.639 --> 00:36:46.639
All right.

00:36:46.639 --> 00:36:51.639
This is an industrial development on the west side of town.

00:36:51.639 --> 00:37:01.090
They're not changing the lot configuration they're merely

00:37:01.090 --> 00:37:07.030
moving some utility easements. And I believe there's also a

00:37:07.030 --> 00:37:07.920
pipeline easement that's being dedicated with this plot so

00:37:07.920 --> 00:37:08.639
no additional lots being created.

00:37:08.639 --> 00:37:11.639
Any questions.

00:37:11.639 --> 00:37:17.639
Thank you Julie and guess you're stay up there.

00:37:17.639 --> 00:37:22.699
I'm trying to reply for the didn't ISD. All right. And once

00:37:22.699 --> 00:37:26.179
again this is one that you have seen. We had a zoning case

00:37:26.179 --> 00:37:30.610
come before you guys and they elected to go to ZBA ZBA did

00:37:30.610 --> 00:37:34.840
approve a variance for lot coverage and building height for

00:37:34.840 --> 00:37:36.639
the didn't ISD administration building.

00:37:36.639 --> 00:37:41.139
So they are going to move forward with their development.

00:37:41.139 --> 00:37:45.280
So they are replating this in order to combine a bunch of

00:37:45.280 --> 00:37:49.639
old old lots and also to abandon an alleyway through it.

00:37:49.639 --> 00:37:54.679
So if this does require a mailing and you have two letters

00:37:54.679 --> 00:38:03.309
on your desk. I had one in opposition and two in favor of

00:38:03.309 --> 00:38:05.639
the request.

00:38:05.639 --> 00:38:14.639
And I'll stand for any questions.

00:38:14.639 --> 00:38:19.630
Nice but coming I'm glad that the ISD and staff was able to

00:38:19.630 --> 00:38:23.639
get together and come up a way to get a variance created on

00:38:23.639 --> 00:38:27.239
that because I think it solves what was going to be a

00:38:27.239 --> 00:38:30.639
really big issue so good job on all parties.

00:38:30.639 --> 00:38:33.639
Thank you.

00:38:33.639 --> 00:38:38.920
So our next item is a request for historic landmark

00:38:38.920 --> 00:38:45.639
designation for 717 West Oak, and I invite Roman McAllen up

00:38:45.639 --> 00:38:45.639
.

00:38:45.639 --> 00:38:47.639
Thank you.

00:38:47.639 --> 00:38:51.440
I'm Roman McAllen I'm the historic preservation officer for

00:38:51.440 --> 00:38:52.639
the city of Denton.

00:38:52.639 --> 00:38:58.199
And this is, these are two, two, two houses that have been

00:38:58.199 --> 00:39:00.639
asked to be a landmark.

00:39:00.639 --> 00:39:05.639
The first one is at 716 West Oak.

00:39:05.639 --> 00:39:09.210
And this is an image from the 1940s of it. I have a few

00:39:09.210 --> 00:39:11.440
slides I'll just click quickly through these and then if

00:39:11.440 --> 00:39:12.639
you have any questions.

00:39:12.639 --> 00:39:16.250
Generally speaking this is all in your packet. The request

00:39:16.250 --> 00:39:19.059
is for a landmark designation, the owners Don and John

00:39:19.059 --> 00:39:22.159
Morris, the location there at south side of West Oak Street

00:39:22.159 --> 00:39:25.639
midway between Denton Street and Mounts Avenue and Oak

00:39:25.639 --> 00:39:27.639
history, Oak Hickory Historic District.

00:39:27.639 --> 00:39:31.940
And this designation complies with the Denton 2030 plan and

00:39:31.940 --> 00:39:37.639
I've got a slide on that. There's a request we're making.

00:39:37.639 --> 00:39:40.920
Historic landmark designations for those you know have been

00:39:40.920 --> 00:39:43.639
been done here in Denton since 1986.

00:39:43.639 --> 00:39:48.409
And we're just continuing that tradition. This particular

00:39:48.409 --> 00:39:53.949
house was built around 1925, according to one survey in 19

00:39:53.949 --> 00:39:58.639
23 or 24 according to a couple of other records.

00:39:58.639 --> 00:40:02.440
This is the language as to how the why this is before the

00:40:02.440 --> 00:40:06.820
planning and zoning commission, because the commission has

00:40:06.820 --> 00:40:09.659
to approve it after recommendation from the, from the

00:40:09.659 --> 00:40:10.639
landmark committee.

00:40:10.639 --> 00:40:13.639
Landmark Commission.

00:40:13.639 --> 00:40:18.389
The, with respect to the Denton plan 2030 there's kind of

00:40:18.389 --> 00:40:21.789
two elements to element four and seven that relate to this

00:40:21.789 --> 00:40:24.639
and I think this is just important to note.

00:40:24.639 --> 00:40:28.340
Four element four was developed to identify preserve

00:40:28.340 --> 00:40:32.340
maintain and create character areas within the city, and

00:40:32.340 --> 00:40:36.210
seven specifically calls out for defense mechanisms to

00:40:36.210 --> 00:40:40.860
prevent spillover impacts from adjacent corridor and center

00:40:40.860 --> 00:40:43.639
development and from capital investments such as road widen

00:40:43.639 --> 00:40:43.639
ing.

00:40:43.639 --> 00:40:47.639
So, you know, that's the idea behind.

00:40:47.639 --> 00:40:51.849
It's why people, why the city has supported landmark design

00:40:51.849 --> 00:40:52.639
ations.

00:40:52.639 --> 00:40:56.489
And this particular property again in the 1996 historic

00:40:56.489 --> 00:41:00.000
resource survey which was a very comprehensive survey that

00:41:00.000 --> 00:41:04.110
was city wide and in 1996 every building that was 50 years

00:41:04.110 --> 00:41:05.639
or older was surveyed.

00:41:05.639 --> 00:41:09.210
There were a couple thousand buildings at that time and

00:41:09.210 --> 00:41:13.199
this house was listed as a colonial revival style. It's

00:41:13.199 --> 00:41:16.829
referred to as a different way but those those terms, it's

00:41:16.829 --> 00:41:20.639
kind of a blend of style so it.

00:41:20.639 --> 00:41:23.639
It's important that it's just 1925 and mostly original.

00:41:23.639 --> 00:41:28.199
There are 13 criteria, any one of those criteria qualify a

00:41:28.199 --> 00:41:30.639
house for landmark designation.

00:41:30.639 --> 00:41:34.210
And those are in your packet in this particular house I

00:41:34.210 --> 00:41:37.849
just pick three or the actually applicant pick three embod

00:41:37.849 --> 00:41:41.920
iment of a distinguishing characteristic of an architectural

00:41:41.920 --> 00:41:42.639
type.

00:41:42.639 --> 00:41:47.699
And then here it refers to the colonial revival style and

00:41:47.699 --> 00:41:49.639
how you get there.

00:41:49.639 --> 00:41:54.289
The embodiment of elements of architectural design of

00:41:54.289 --> 00:41:57.349
innovation and this home represents that it'll see this

00:41:57.349 --> 00:41:59.539
home is a contributing home in oak history historic

00:41:59.539 --> 00:42:02.139
district as indicated by its architectural integrity so you

00:42:02.139 --> 00:42:05.639
can't be a contributing home in any historic district if

00:42:05.639 --> 00:42:08.219
you don't have enough architectural integrity this home has

00:42:08.219 --> 00:42:08.639
it.

00:42:08.639 --> 00:42:12.449
And then finally you can also be identified so a home could

00:42:12.449 --> 00:42:16.250
actually have very little left of it but if it meets number

00:42:16.250 --> 00:42:20.210
11 which is it's you know historical person in this case

00:42:20.210 --> 00:42:23.769
that the how the original Jackson family has been very

00:42:23.769 --> 00:42:25.639
prominent in.

00:42:25.639 --> 00:42:27.639
In Denton.

00:42:27.639 --> 00:42:30.630
Specifically the the senior how Jackson was it Brent

00:42:30.630 --> 00:42:33.880
Jackson senior was an attorney and a county judge and then

00:42:33.880 --> 00:42:37.170
his son how was, if you go through your documentation it's

00:42:37.170 --> 00:42:40.599
pretty impressive stuff that he's been involved in this was

00:42:40.599 --> 00:42:42.639
the home when the owner bought it.

00:42:42.639 --> 00:42:46.610
This is the home today it's also been fully rehabilitated

00:42:46.610 --> 00:42:50.639
so we'll probably see a tax exemption requests later.

00:42:50.639 --> 00:42:56.639
And we recommend approval for landmark designation.

00:42:56.639 --> 00:43:00.420
So, quick question just for my identification once the

00:43:00.420 --> 00:43:04.219
designation has been permitted to a property is there

00:43:04.219 --> 00:43:07.909
limitations on what that homeowner or property owner can

00:43:07.909 --> 00:43:11.769
then do in terms of updating windows or painting the house

00:43:11.769 --> 00:43:14.639
or are there limitations then put on the property

00:43:14.639 --> 00:43:17.639
because it's designated as a landmark.

00:43:17.639 --> 00:43:23.579
Not specifically as such it. The, the historic landmark

00:43:23.579 --> 00:43:27.550
designation, or any property in one of the three historic

00:43:27.550 --> 00:43:28.639
districts.

00:43:28.639 --> 00:43:32.119
When they apply for a building permit. They also have to

00:43:32.119 --> 00:43:35.639
get us what's called certificate of appropriateness.

00:43:35.639 --> 00:43:39.239
And that could either be approved administratively by the

00:43:39.239 --> 00:43:42.510
preservation officer if it's kind of routine maintenance

00:43:42.510 --> 00:43:46.010
roofing painting course any kind of repairs even when

00:43:46.010 --> 00:43:48.280
rotten wood repair. But if you're getting to where you're

00:43:48.280 --> 00:43:49.639
alter altering the structure, especially

00:43:49.639 --> 00:43:52.639
if you're altering the front of it, or what's visible from

00:43:52.639 --> 00:43:55.389
the roadway or the sides, then you would take it to the

00:43:55.389 --> 00:43:58.119
historic landmark commission who would apply the US

00:43:58.119 --> 00:44:01.289
Secretary of Interior standards for historic preservation

00:44:01.289 --> 00:44:04.639
and an approver deny that you can

00:44:04.639 --> 00:44:07.219
change windows, windows are kind of one of the most

00:44:07.219 --> 00:44:10.099
important things because there have been many studies to

00:44:10.099 --> 00:44:12.980
show that if your historical windows are there and intact

00:44:12.980 --> 00:44:15.980
that they're the most sustainable way to go that the, that

00:44:15.980 --> 00:44:18.639
you don't get a real big payback by, so we discourage going

00:44:18.639 --> 00:44:18.639
in

00:44:18.639 --> 00:44:21.760
with that. On the other hand if you put in a real high

00:44:21.760 --> 00:44:24.860
quality window that matches the facade and that's that's

00:44:24.860 --> 00:44:29.650
usually going to be allowed. And a lot of things can be

00:44:29.650 --> 00:44:30.639
allowed it's

00:44:30.639 --> 00:44:34.210
in general when you're looking at a structure, you don't

00:44:34.210 --> 00:44:37.900
want to alter it significantly is the rule of thumb. Then

00:44:37.900 --> 00:44:41.650
if the historic landmark commission did deny certificate of

00:44:41.650 --> 00:44:45.030
appropriateness that may be appealed to the PNC that

00:44:45.030 --> 00:44:45.639
decision may be

00:44:45.639 --> 00:44:52.260
appealed to the city or appeal to the City Council as well.

00:44:52.260 --> 00:44:58.480
So there's a lot of opportunities for someone to get with

00:44:58.480 --> 00:45:00.639
what they need. Yeah. Thank you.

00:45:00.639 --> 00:45:06.639
Any other questions for staff on this particular residence.

00:45:06.639 --> 00:45:11.170
Next one. Sure. Thank you, sir. The next one is that is HL

00:45:11.170 --> 00:45:16.639
16 seven. This is 616 Pearl Street again in 1940s image.

00:45:16.639 --> 00:45:19.550
This home. Also, and if I felt in both of these some of

00:45:19.550 --> 00:45:22.639
these largely intact including the windows on all of the

00:45:22.639 --> 00:45:22.639
side.

00:45:22.639 --> 00:45:26.070
This home is there also in the oak history is okay, history

00:45:26.070 --> 00:45:34.239
, historic district. Here the owners, William and Angela

00:45:34.239 --> 00:45:38.269
Matthews. And this home was constructed around 1917 I

00:45:38.269 --> 00:45:41.039
believe it also there's some differences on that date but a

00:45:41.039 --> 00:45:42.639
little little before or after

00:45:42.639 --> 00:45:53.650
1917 is the accurate number purse and deed records that the

00:45:53.650 --> 00:45:59.639
owner has 1920s what was a guest. This are the three

00:45:59.639 --> 00:45:59.639
elements that it would meet. It's a specific style in case

00:45:59.639 --> 00:45:59.639
of number three. It's contributes to the history historic

00:45:59.639 --> 00:45:59.639
district 12 and the sense of pride 13.

00:45:59.639 --> 00:46:02.780
With all these HLs, there's, you could really get most of

00:46:02.780 --> 00:46:05.869
the homes on a lot of those 13 criteria you just need to

00:46:05.869 --> 00:46:08.780
pick one here's the home today just for the record it's

00:46:08.780 --> 00:46:12.639
undergone also an extensive rehabilitation. It's a great

00:46:12.639 --> 00:46:14.639
looking home as is the other.

00:46:14.639 --> 00:46:21.639
Both of these do a lot for our residents.

00:46:21.639 --> 00:46:26.630
And that's actually insignificant that it could be an HL

00:46:26.630 --> 00:46:31.579
but it's these happen to also just have the be really good

00:46:31.579 --> 00:46:33.639
quality restoration.

00:46:33.639 --> 00:46:51.639
That's we have on that one.

00:46:51.639 --> 00:47:14.639
That's great. Thank you. Okay. Thanks.

00:47:14.639 --> 00:47:18.969
Good morning so this first case is a z 1621 it's a zoning

00:47:18.969 --> 00:47:21.639
case for the North Elm Apartments.

00:47:21.639 --> 00:47:23.840
So the request is for us to hold a public hearing and

00:47:23.840 --> 00:47:26.590
consider making a recommendation to city council regarding

00:47:26.590 --> 00:47:29.219
a rezoning from regional center commercial downtown to

00:47:29.219 --> 00:47:33.590
neighborhood residential mixed use on approximately 12.97

00:47:33.590 --> 00:47:34.639
acres.

00:47:34.639 --> 00:47:38.250
Located on the kind of west northwest side of the rainy

00:47:38.250 --> 00:47:42.989
road Elm Street intersection. It's about 1900 feet east of

00:47:42.989 --> 00:47:44.639
Bonnie Bray Street.

00:47:44.639 --> 00:47:48.210
Just a little more idea of what's in the area to the north

00:47:48.210 --> 00:47:51.739
across Elm is a UNT discovery park. It's bordered on the

00:47:51.739 --> 00:47:54.809
south by North Lake Park across rainy road, and then two

00:47:54.809 --> 00:47:57.639
properties to the west and southwest of it have recently

00:47:57.639 --> 00:48:01.639
been plotted for town home development in the future.

00:48:01.639 --> 00:48:07.539
So currently it is our zone RCC D, their proposal is to go

00:48:07.539 --> 00:48:08.639
to NRM you.

00:48:08.639 --> 00:48:12.219
The future land use designation for the property is

00:48:12.219 --> 00:48:15.480
neighborhood mixed use, which applies to primarily

00:48:15.480 --> 00:48:19.360
residential areas where we encourage a mix of housing types

00:48:19.360 --> 00:48:23.139
and densities, as well as supporting retail and service

00:48:23.139 --> 00:48:23.639
uses.

00:48:23.639 --> 00:48:26.510
So, rezoning NRM you is kind of a logical extension because

00:48:26.510 --> 00:48:29.480
there's already neighborhood residential designations to

00:48:29.480 --> 00:48:32.199
the south and the east of the property. And it is

00:48:32.199 --> 00:48:35.760
consistent with that future land use designation of

00:48:35.760 --> 00:48:37.639
neighborhood mixed use.

00:48:37.639 --> 00:48:40.840
If you compare the scale of development that would be

00:48:40.840 --> 00:48:44.480
permitted between these two districts, and given what's

00:48:44.480 --> 00:48:47.949
around it being primarily residential uses of attached

00:48:47.949 --> 00:48:51.389
single family single family and other apartments in the

00:48:51.389 --> 00:48:54.840
area, and our immune seems much more fitting with the scale

00:48:54.840 --> 00:48:57.000
in terms of density and building height and things like

00:48:57.000 --> 00:48:57.639
that for the area.

00:48:57.639 --> 00:49:00.590
And also in your backup was the schedule of permitted uses

00:49:00.590 --> 00:49:03.329
and if you look through that you can see that NRM you as a

00:49:03.329 --> 00:49:06.280
much less intense district in terms of the commercial and

00:49:06.280 --> 00:49:08.639
some industrial uses that are allowed.

00:49:08.639 --> 00:49:12.510
So it would seem more appropriate for the character of the

00:49:12.510 --> 00:49:13.639
area as well.

00:49:13.639 --> 00:49:17.239
So the applicant indicated that they're requesting this rez

00:49:17.239 --> 00:49:20.579
oning, because under the RCC district there is a limitation

00:49:20.579 --> 00:49:23.909
that requires multifamily uses be part of a mixed use

00:49:23.909 --> 00:49:27.289
development that would require commercial uses be on the

00:49:27.289 --> 00:49:29.639
ground floor along any Avenue collector or arterial.

00:49:29.639 --> 00:49:33.429
So in this case they would have required commercial uses on

00:49:33.429 --> 00:49:36.639
the ground floor along both Riney and Elm Street.

00:49:36.639 --> 00:49:40.449
And rezoning NRM you. There is also a limitation for mixed

00:49:40.449 --> 00:49:44.269
use, but it does allow multifamily development to occur,

00:49:44.269 --> 00:49:47.699
either as part of a mixed use development under a small

00:49:47.699 --> 00:49:49.639
area plan or with an SUV.

00:49:49.639 --> 00:49:53.059
So that's why they've concurrently submitted an application

00:49:53.059 --> 00:49:54.639
for a specific use permit.

00:49:54.639 --> 00:49:58.579
So if both of those are permitted or approved then they

00:49:58.579 --> 00:50:02.440
would be allowed to pursue this without the mixed use

00:50:02.440 --> 00:50:03.639
component.

00:50:03.639 --> 00:50:06.789
So the applicant also recommended that the property be part

00:50:06.789 --> 00:50:09.639
of a mixed use development under a small area plan.

00:50:09.639 --> 00:50:12.789
So that's the request for the area right now it's currently

00:50:12.789 --> 00:50:15.889
vacant land and notifications were sent out five notices

00:50:15.889 --> 00:50:19.639
sent to properties within 200 feet six within 500.

00:50:19.639 --> 00:50:22.610
And one response was received in favor who is from the

00:50:22.610 --> 00:50:25.449
current owner of the property, and they did hold a

00:50:25.449 --> 00:50:28.650
neighborhood meeting on November 22, there was no

00:50:28.650 --> 00:50:30.639
attendance at the meeting.

00:50:30.639 --> 00:50:33.639
The future land use designation.

00:50:33.639 --> 00:50:35.639
So there any questions on the zoning case.

00:50:35.639 --> 00:50:36.639
One question.

00:50:36.639 --> 00:50:39.639
Commissioner was L.

00:50:39.639 --> 00:50:43.210
This, instead of me assuming I'd rather just ask an SGP

00:50:43.210 --> 00:50:46.570
couldn't be done on the current zoning to skip the mixed

00:50:46.570 --> 00:50:49.869
use it has to be into mixed use and then an SGP on top of

00:50:49.869 --> 00:50:50.639
that.

00:50:50.639 --> 00:50:54.889
So there's two limitations applied in our CCD one of them

00:50:54.889 --> 00:50:58.949
is the same one that it has under NRM you that allows the

00:50:58.949 --> 00:51:03.659
SGP. However, the other one does specifically call out the

00:51:03.659 --> 00:51:07.730
need for commercial uses on the ground floor along the

00:51:07.730 --> 00:51:08.639
streets.

00:51:08.639 --> 00:51:11.639
So, yeah, go any other questions.

00:51:11.639 --> 00:51:14.639
Alright, so they can go quickly through the SGP here.

00:51:14.639 --> 00:51:16.639
Much of the same information.

00:51:16.639 --> 00:51:20.639
In this case as 16 five.

00:51:20.639 --> 00:51:23.630
Again, they're requesting this SGP for multifamily

00:51:23.630 --> 00:51:29.139
development. The same property here on Rhenie and North Elm

00:51:29.139 --> 00:51:29.639
.

00:51:29.639 --> 00:51:33.219
So just a reminder there are requesting this rezoning to NR

00:51:33.219 --> 00:51:36.420
M you, and it is compatible with that future land use

00:51:36.420 --> 00:51:37.639
designation.

00:51:37.639 --> 00:51:40.510
So pending approval of the rezoning they're proposing a

00:51:40.510 --> 00:51:43.639
multifamily development without a mixed use component.

00:51:43.639 --> 00:51:46.840
So, again, it is consistent with the future land use and

00:51:46.840 --> 00:51:49.909
the development that's occurring in the area, and it

00:51:49.909 --> 00:51:53.289
generally complies with the criteria for approval of an SGP

00:51:53.289 --> 00:51:58.639
that are outlined in 3564 of the DDC.

00:51:58.639 --> 00:52:06.659
Just go quickly through their site plan. What they're

00:52:06.659 --> 00:52:14.639
proposing is to divide the property into three lots. So the

00:52:14.639 --> 00:52:14.639
two that are outlined in blue would have the multifamily

00:52:14.639 --> 00:52:14.639
development on it. The third lot that's at the very corner

00:52:14.639 --> 00:52:14.639
of Elm and Rhenie is being reserved for development at a

00:52:14.639 --> 00:52:14.639
later date.

00:52:14.639 --> 00:52:17.989
They haven't indicated an intent to do anything with that

00:52:17.989 --> 00:52:18.639
lot yet.

00:52:18.639 --> 00:52:21.650
And in addition to the two lots, they're also proposing a

00:52:21.650 --> 00:52:24.650
new right of way that would be called Discovery Boulevard

00:52:24.650 --> 00:52:27.639
connecting north to south from Rhenie to North Elm.

00:52:27.639 --> 00:52:30.650
To give you a general idea of their product they're looking

00:52:30.650 --> 00:52:33.639
to develop, lot one, which is the lot on the west side,

00:52:33.639 --> 00:52:36.639
would have two four story apartment buildings on it.

00:52:36.639 --> 00:52:40.119
There would be 89 one bedroom units and 66 two bedroom

00:52:40.119 --> 00:52:41.639
units in those buildings.

00:52:41.639 --> 00:52:45.550
On lot two, they would have three three story buildings, 86

00:52:45.550 --> 00:52:48.639
one bedroom units and 48 two bedroom units.

00:52:48.639 --> 00:52:52.239
And looking at their calculations, they are parked

00:52:52.239 --> 00:52:56.199
appropriately with on-site parking as well as parallel

00:52:56.199 --> 00:52:58.639
parking along Discovery Boulevard.

00:52:58.639 --> 00:53:03.639
And to kind of mitigate the use here, a type B buffer,

00:53:03.639 --> 00:53:06.670
which is a 10 foot wide planted area, is required between

00:53:06.670 --> 00:53:09.650
this multifamily and the proposed attached single family

00:53:09.650 --> 00:53:10.639
units to the west.

00:53:10.639 --> 00:53:13.889
In addition to that 10 foot wide planting area, they also

00:53:13.889 --> 00:53:16.769
have indicated that they intend to leave the existing

00:53:16.769 --> 00:53:19.889
vegetation along the western border to help intensify that

00:53:19.889 --> 00:53:20.639
buffer.

00:53:20.639 --> 00:53:23.400
And the way they've laid out the site, they do have some

00:53:23.400 --> 00:53:25.639
parking that would be along Rhenie Road.

00:53:25.639 --> 00:53:28.690
So to mitigate for any nuisances that could be caused by

00:53:28.690 --> 00:53:32.360
that parking, they've proposed a planting of small trees

00:53:32.360 --> 00:53:35.639
and shrubs in that it is in an electric utility easement,

00:53:35.639 --> 00:53:37.639
so it restricted what they could plant.

00:53:37.639 --> 00:53:41.239
But they worked with DME and found some plants that would

00:53:41.239 --> 00:53:43.639
be appropriate in that easement.

00:53:43.639 --> 00:53:45.639
Just an idea of their elevations.

00:53:45.639 --> 00:53:48.590
For all of the buildings, they are proposing materials that

00:53:48.590 --> 00:53:51.639
would be brick, stone, stucco and fiber cement siding.

00:53:51.639 --> 00:53:55.420
Each of the buildings has an average of 60 to 70% masonry

00:53:55.420 --> 00:53:56.639
components on it.

00:53:56.639 --> 00:53:59.320
I did include the elevations for each of the buildings just

00:53:59.320 --> 00:54:01.639
to give you an idea of what they're looking at.

00:54:01.639 --> 00:54:06.110
So this is building one which would have the leasing center

00:54:06.110 --> 00:54:07.639
and offices in it.

00:54:07.639 --> 00:54:10.679
There's a close up to show you more of how they're planning

00:54:10.679 --> 00:54:12.639
to distribute those materials.

00:54:12.639 --> 00:54:14.869
And this would be the other four story building that they

00:54:14.869 --> 00:54:15.639
're looking at.

00:54:15.639 --> 00:54:18.090
And all of these are also included in your backup if you'd

00:54:18.090 --> 00:54:19.639
like to see them in more detail.

00:54:19.639 --> 00:54:23.780
And then there are three story buildings which would be on

00:54:23.780 --> 00:54:24.639
lot two.

00:54:24.639 --> 00:54:26.639
Again, all very similar materials.

00:54:26.639 --> 00:54:31.639
They do have garages under some of the units.

00:54:31.639 --> 00:54:34.639
And again, with this case, we did send out notification.

00:54:34.639 --> 00:54:37.219
We got one response in favor from the current property

00:54:37.219 --> 00:54:37.639
owner.

00:54:37.639 --> 00:54:40.639
And they did hold a neighborhood meeting.

00:54:40.639 --> 00:54:42.639
But again, no attendance at that meeting.

00:54:42.639 --> 00:54:45.639
So for this case, staff recommends approval of the request

00:54:45.639 --> 00:54:48.639
because of its compatibility with the surrounding area.

00:54:48.639 --> 00:54:53.380
And with the Denton Plan 2030, we do put one condition on

00:54:53.380 --> 00:54:55.639
our recommendation.

00:54:55.639 --> 00:54:58.059
And that would be that it substantially complies with the

00:54:58.059 --> 00:55:01.170
site plan, landscape plan, and elevations that you've seen

00:55:01.170 --> 00:55:01.639
here.

00:55:01.639 --> 00:55:05.639
So any questions on this?

00:55:05.639 --> 00:55:07.639
Commissioner Heskett.

00:55:07.639 --> 00:55:09.639
And stop me if I get out of scope.

00:55:09.639 --> 00:55:12.639
But I have -- and it may be a question for Earl.

00:55:12.639 --> 00:55:20.670
I have road improvement and type questions, infrastructure,

00:55:20.670 --> 00:55:24.639
because riding road is pretty narrow.

00:55:24.639 --> 00:55:26.639
So I'm assuming they're going to do improvements.

00:55:26.639 --> 00:55:31.809
And there's -- seems like this area is getting developed

00:55:31.809 --> 00:55:33.639
pretty quickly.

00:55:33.639 --> 00:55:37.219
So I want to try to get an understanding of what

00:55:37.219 --> 00:55:40.639
improvements they're going to be making on Riney.

00:55:40.639 --> 00:55:45.340
Because I know the water lines don't come -- I'm not sure

00:55:45.340 --> 00:55:49.639
if they come all the way down Riney or existing.

00:55:49.639 --> 00:55:50.639
Okay.

00:55:50.639 --> 00:55:53.639
So what improvements do they have to make to the road?

00:55:53.639 --> 00:55:54.639
Okay.

00:55:54.639 --> 00:55:57.230
There is an existing townhome development located on the

00:55:57.230 --> 00:55:59.639
south side of Riney, just west of this site here.

00:55:59.639 --> 00:56:04.820
There is another townhome development approved and about to

00:56:04.820 --> 00:56:08.789
start construction here soon, directly west of this

00:56:08.789 --> 00:56:09.639
development.

00:56:09.639 --> 00:56:12.639
So both of these developments have improved Riney Road.

00:56:12.639 --> 00:56:16.840
So you'll have a full improved section of Riney along both

00:56:16.840 --> 00:56:18.639
of these frontages.

00:56:18.639 --> 00:56:22.420
When this development does come in, it would -- it was best

00:56:22.420 --> 00:56:26.639
for this development to go ahead and improve Riney Road.

00:56:26.639 --> 00:56:28.639
It would be 25 feet worth of pavement.

00:56:28.639 --> 00:56:31.820
I believe the existing pavement out there is only 20 feet,

00:56:31.820 --> 00:56:32.639
if even that.

00:56:32.639 --> 00:56:36.210
And so they'll improve 25 feet of pavement all the way

00:56:36.210 --> 00:56:38.539
along their furnish, which extends all the way to the

00:56:38.539 --> 00:56:39.639
intersection of Willam Street.

00:56:39.639 --> 00:56:44.659
They're also building a full road -- public roadway that

00:56:44.659 --> 00:56:52.090
bisects their site and connects Riney to 77 as well, along

00:56:52.090 --> 00:56:57.639
with a left turn lane within this existing median opening.

00:56:57.639 --> 00:56:59.639
Excellent.

00:56:59.639 --> 00:57:00.639
And --

00:57:00.639 --> 00:57:01.639
Continue. Sure.

00:57:01.639 --> 00:57:02.639
Thank you.

00:57:02.639 --> 00:57:11.639
Any pause in traffic darting across Elm from there?

00:57:11.639 --> 00:57:13.639
Will the openings prohibit that?

00:57:13.639 --> 00:57:17.329
Or, I mean, because -- what is the speed limit on Elm there

00:57:17.329 --> 00:57:17.639
?

00:57:17.639 --> 00:57:20.059
I mean, you can get up to going pretty -- I don't know what

00:57:20.059 --> 00:57:20.639
the speed limit is.

00:57:20.639 --> 00:57:21.639
I think it's 50.

00:57:21.639 --> 00:57:22.639
Yeah.

00:57:22.639 --> 00:57:23.639
55.1.

00:57:23.639 --> 00:57:24.639
Yes.

00:57:24.639 --> 00:57:32.199
But coming out of there, is there a gradual merge, or do

00:57:32.199 --> 00:57:36.639
you think they would use Riney?

00:57:36.639 --> 00:57:40.639
Oh, heading -- if you're coming southbound on to the site?

00:57:40.639 --> 00:57:42.639
Moreover, if you're leaving the site.

00:57:42.639 --> 00:57:43.639
Leaving the site, so yes.

00:57:43.639 --> 00:57:47.739
I'm assuming if they're attracting someone that's going to

00:57:47.739 --> 00:57:51.610
be needing to get to Discovery Park, let's say, you're

00:57:51.610 --> 00:57:56.239
tempted to try to cross four lanes of traffic at 50, have

00:57:56.239 --> 00:57:59.639
we done an analysis of that?

00:57:59.639 --> 00:58:03.500
And again, because there's going to be quite the injection

00:58:03.500 --> 00:58:07.219
of people in this area, has that been looked at, how they

00:58:07.219 --> 00:58:10.719
're going to get across Elm, let's say they want to go to

00:58:10.719 --> 00:58:14.329
Razor Ranch and don't want to take the scenic route and go

00:58:14.329 --> 00:58:15.639
to the right.

00:58:15.639 --> 00:58:18.400
You're tempted to go to the left, but again, you've got to

00:58:18.400 --> 00:58:19.639
go across four lanes.

00:58:19.639 --> 00:58:22.840
But Riney Road, the existing Riney Road does extend all the

00:58:22.840 --> 00:58:25.880
way to Bonny Bray, so if they wanted to go to Razor, they

00:58:25.880 --> 00:58:29.019
would probably end up taking the existing Riney all the way

00:58:29.019 --> 00:58:31.849
down to Bonny Bray and taking a left and heading south

00:58:31.849 --> 00:58:32.639
there.

00:58:32.639 --> 00:58:37.670
In terms of crossing the entire width of Elm Street to the

00:58:37.670 --> 00:58:41.639
Discovery Center, it's a possibility.

00:58:41.639 --> 00:58:42.639
It can be done.

00:58:42.639 --> 00:58:45.769
They also have the protection of the median, since it's

00:58:45.769 --> 00:58:48.900
such a wide opening, they can, if they can't make it all

00:58:48.900 --> 00:58:52.099
the way through, they can at least make it halfway, wait

00:58:52.099 --> 00:58:55.639
until it clears and then cross the other half, if need be.

00:58:55.639 --> 00:58:58.360
And same thing with making a left out as well. They have

00:58:58.360 --> 00:59:01.639
that protection of that median opening.

00:59:01.639 --> 00:59:02.639
Thank you.

00:59:02.639 --> 00:59:05.789
Do we have any information on when or if a light would be

00:59:05.789 --> 00:59:07.639
installed at that location?

00:59:07.639 --> 00:59:13.130
No, the light will actually be installed at Nicosia, which

00:59:13.130 --> 00:59:17.380
is not too far down to where the new animal shelter is

00:59:17.380 --> 00:59:18.639
going to be.

00:59:18.639 --> 00:59:21.949
There's just not going to be enough traffic to warrant, and

00:59:21.949 --> 00:59:24.969
the spacing is not going to meet textile requirements

00:59:24.969 --> 00:59:29.920
anyway, but Nicosia is going to be the busier intersection

00:59:29.920 --> 00:59:31.639
between the two.

00:59:31.639 --> 00:59:34.019
Do you have a timeline on that one? The Nicosia

00:59:34.019 --> 00:59:34.639
intersection?

00:59:34.639 --> 00:59:42.639
There is no timeline for that.

00:59:42.639 --> 00:59:45.639
I'd have a follow up question on engineering then.

00:59:45.639 --> 00:59:49.210
So if they're going to be doing the improvements on Riney

00:59:49.210 --> 00:59:52.119
Road instead of the traffic impact fee, is that how they're

00:59:52.119 --> 00:59:52.639
going to do that?

00:59:52.639 --> 00:59:57.110
They'll get credit towards that. So the way it works is

00:59:57.110 --> 01:00:01.780
they'll have the maximum amount which they'll be proportion

01:00:01.780 --> 01:00:05.329
ately responsible to build up to, and if that amount is

01:00:05.329 --> 01:00:09.119
greater than, I guess if the cost of the road improvements

01:00:09.119 --> 01:00:11.880
is greater than the calculated amount that they would

01:00:11.880 --> 01:00:17.539
normally just pay, then they would just be credited towards

01:00:17.539 --> 01:00:20.949
that calculated amount, not be required to pay any roadway

01:00:20.949 --> 01:00:21.639
impact fees.

01:00:21.639 --> 01:00:27.320
Okay. So they are going to, so are they required to put in

01:00:27.320 --> 01:00:28.639
that street section or not in this?

01:00:28.639 --> 01:00:33.179
It's a tough call because you have the option. Do you want

01:00:33.179 --> 01:00:35.960
them to improve the road or do you want to collect the fee

01:00:35.960 --> 01:00:38.960
at a significantly reduced amount that you can apply within

01:00:38.960 --> 01:00:41.639
that six square mile area of that service area?

01:00:41.639 --> 01:00:44.940
And in this case, staff felt that it would be best to just

01:00:44.940 --> 01:00:48.469
have them improve the road and credit it towards their road

01:00:48.469 --> 01:00:49.639
way impact fees.

01:00:49.639 --> 01:00:52.639
So that is required. They don't get an option to choose.

01:00:52.639 --> 01:00:54.639
They're going to have to improve Riney Road?

01:00:54.639 --> 01:00:55.639
That's correct.

01:00:55.639 --> 01:01:08.639
Okay. Any other questions for Earl?

01:01:08.639 --> 01:01:13.639
Thank you, Earl.

01:01:13.639 --> 01:01:14.639
Commissioner Ellis.

01:01:14.639 --> 01:01:17.829
Thank you, Chair. Haley, on your last slide, and this is

01:01:17.829 --> 01:01:20.960
just for my own clarification, with the condition, and I

01:01:20.960 --> 01:01:24.400
see the term used a lot, substantially comply, do we have a

01:01:24.400 --> 01:01:27.639
definition for what that actually means?

01:01:27.639 --> 01:01:32.639
Sharon, would you like to answer that?

01:01:32.639 --> 01:01:34.639
Yeah.

01:01:34.639 --> 01:01:38.260
There is no hard definition of what that means. It's

01:01:38.260 --> 01:01:41.639
discretionary with the planner.

01:01:41.639 --> 01:01:46.429
And I think we do that on purpose so that there's a little

01:01:46.429 --> 01:01:47.639
bit more room.

01:01:47.639 --> 01:01:51.260
If something is, it can't be done and you have to move

01:01:51.260 --> 01:01:54.639
something, then it's easier to do that way.

01:01:54.639 --> 01:01:58.949
So obviously we do look at the number of units in that same

01:01:58.949 --> 01:02:01.639
ballpark that they presented.

01:02:01.639 --> 01:02:05.800
We want to see the elevation be consistent. Obviously there

01:02:05.800 --> 01:02:09.480
may be some tweaks that they need to make down the line,

01:02:09.480 --> 01:02:12.659
but the end product should look substantially like what

01:02:12.659 --> 01:02:13.639
they presented here.

01:02:13.639 --> 01:02:17.639
And that's sort of how we go on that one.

01:02:17.639 --> 01:02:23.639
I'm sorry.

01:02:23.639 --> 01:02:24.639
Commissioner Taylor.

01:02:24.639 --> 01:02:29.110
Thank you. Kind of a related question. The site plan

01:02:29.110 --> 01:02:31.639
includes interior layouts.

01:02:31.639 --> 01:02:34.639
That's not very typical.

01:02:34.639 --> 01:02:38.639
If you zoom in, those are actually rooms and stuff.

01:02:38.639 --> 01:02:39.639
Yeah, that's not very typical.

01:02:39.639 --> 01:02:42.710
Yeah. And so I just wanted to make sure that normally we

01:02:42.710 --> 01:02:44.929
make site plan binding, but the site plan just has a

01:02:44.929 --> 01:02:45.639
footprint.

01:02:45.639 --> 01:02:50.380
So is the developer aware that they're going to be

01:02:50.380 --> 01:02:54.639
potentially bound to a layout with this?

01:02:54.639 --> 01:02:57.639
As long as it has to be substantially similar to...

01:02:57.639 --> 01:02:59.800
We would allow some wiggle room there on that if they

01:02:59.800 --> 01:03:00.639
couldn't do it.

01:03:00.639 --> 01:03:03.550
But yeah, they are aware that we're holding them to the

01:03:03.550 --> 01:03:05.639
site plan as they've presented it.

01:03:05.639 --> 01:03:08.719
Okay, I just wanted to... They don't want to substitute in

01:03:08.719 --> 01:03:12.639
the next hour a site plan with only a footprint, do they?

01:03:12.639 --> 01:03:13.639
We could ask them.

01:03:13.639 --> 01:03:16.219
Okay, like I said, I just don't want to get them in a bind

01:03:16.219 --> 01:03:20.130
where, you know, the garage is in the wrong side or that

01:03:20.130 --> 01:03:23.309
one's a two bedroom, not a three bedroom or something like

01:03:23.309 --> 01:03:23.639
that.

01:03:23.639 --> 01:03:27.210
And things like that, if the garage is facing... visible

01:03:27.210 --> 01:03:30.739
from the street, stairwells visible from the street, we

01:03:30.739 --> 01:03:34.750
will hold them to that because that impacts the visual, the

01:03:34.750 --> 01:03:37.639
aesthetics of the development.

01:03:37.639 --> 01:03:40.760
Obviously, if they need to adjust the layout due to

01:03:40.760 --> 01:03:43.980
engineering or some other issue that comes up during

01:03:43.980 --> 01:03:46.639
construction, we can work with them.

01:03:46.639 --> 01:03:52.610
But generally, what they present is what we would look for

01:03:52.610 --> 01:03:54.639
when it comes in.

01:03:54.639 --> 01:03:56.639
Any other questions?

01:03:56.639 --> 01:03:57.639
All right. Thank you.

01:03:57.639 --> 01:04:03.639
Thank you.

01:04:03.639 --> 01:04:14.639
That's it.

01:04:14.639 --> 01:04:19.219
With that, we have gone through all the items that we have

01:04:19.219 --> 01:04:23.429
on our both our work session and then to present in our

01:04:23.429 --> 01:04:28.409
public session later on this evening. So, unless there any

01:04:28.409 --> 01:04:33.639
other questions at this time prior to closing work session.

01:04:33.639 --> 01:04:52.639
Then I'm going to close our work session at 537. Thank you.

01:04:52.639 --> 01:04:56.619
Good evening and welcome to the November 30 planning and

01:04:56.619 --> 01:04:59.639
zoning Commission for the city of Denton.

01:04:59.639 --> 01:05:03.639
This meeting has been duly posted and a quorum is present.

01:05:03.639 --> 01:05:07.349
It is 631 and I will call our meeting to order at this time

01:05:07.349 --> 01:05:07.639
.

01:05:07.639 --> 01:05:14.639
Please stand and join us to say the US and the Texas flag.

01:05:14.639 --> 01:05:18.909
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

01:05:18.909 --> 01:05:24.070
America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation

01:05:24.070 --> 01:05:29.639
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

01:05:29.639 --> 01:05:44.139
I pledge allegiance to the city of Texas, one state under

01:05:44.139 --> 01:05:49.639
God, one indivisible.

01:05:49.639 --> 01:05:54.920
The next item on our agenda this evening will be to

01:05:54.920 --> 01:06:01.429
consider approval of our PNC Commission meeting minutes for

01:06:01.429 --> 01:06:03.639
October the 26.

01:06:03.639 --> 01:06:04.639
Commissioner Hussbuth.

01:06:04.639 --> 01:06:06.639
Move approval.

01:06:06.639 --> 01:06:07.639
Commissioner Ellis.

01:06:07.639 --> 01:06:08.639
Second.

01:06:08.639 --> 01:06:09.639
Okay.

01:06:09.639 --> 01:06:33.639
We have a first and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none,

01:06:33.639 --> 01:06:33.639
I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:06:33.639 --> 01:06:42.639
Motion carries five zero. I don't know why it's five.

01:06:42.639 --> 01:06:47.639
I don't see recuse but anyway.

01:06:47.639 --> 01:06:51.639
Five zero and one recuse.

01:06:51.639 --> 01:06:56.639
Is that correct?

01:06:56.639 --> 01:07:02.639
That will take us to our consent agenda.

01:07:02.639 --> 01:07:03.639
Commissioner Rossell.

01:07:03.639 --> 01:07:06.639
I move for approval of the consent agenda.

01:07:06.639 --> 01:07:07.639
Commissioner Taylor.

01:07:07.639 --> 01:07:08.639
Second.

01:07:08.639 --> 01:07:09.639
Okay.

01:07:09.639 --> 01:07:16.639
Have a first and a second. Any discussion?

01:07:16.639 --> 01:07:30.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:07:30.639 --> 01:07:33.639
Motion carries six zero.

01:07:33.639 --> 01:07:38.639
Move us to item four, items for individual consideration.

01:07:38.639 --> 01:07:46.230
The first item we'll have will be PDA 16-0007A and we'll

01:07:46.230 --> 01:07:53.639
call on Julie Wyatt for the presentation.

01:07:53.639 --> 01:07:55.320
Julie, before you get started, I want to announce to the

01:07:55.320 --> 01:07:58.639
crowd, this is an individual consideration item.

01:07:58.639 --> 01:08:01.340
This was a public hearing at our last meeting and if you

01:08:01.340 --> 01:08:03.980
spoke, our rules are that you can't speak at a public

01:08:03.980 --> 01:08:04.639
hearing.

01:08:04.639 --> 01:08:07.900
However, since this is an individual consideration item, if

01:08:07.900 --> 01:08:11.039
you would like to speak after we have it presented, if you

01:08:11.039 --> 01:08:13.389
want to fill out a card, you'll be allowed to speak at that

01:08:13.389 --> 01:08:13.639
time.

01:08:13.639 --> 01:08:16.979
So if you would like to speak on it, please fill out a card

01:08:16.979 --> 01:08:20.210
and we will be happy to have you before us to answer your

01:08:20.210 --> 01:08:22.640
question to receive your comments.

01:08:22.640 --> 01:08:23.640
Thank you, Julie.

01:08:23.640 --> 01:08:24.640
Sure.

01:08:24.640 --> 01:08:25.640
Good evening.

01:08:25.640 --> 01:08:28.640
I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton.

01:08:28.640 --> 01:08:31.640
This is PDA 16-7, Robeson Ranch.

01:08:31.640 --> 01:08:34.029
The request before you is to consider making a

01:08:34.029 --> 01:08:37.119
recommendation to city council regarding a detailed plan

01:08:37.119 --> 01:08:40.640
amendment for plan development 173, Robeson Ranch.

01:08:40.640 --> 01:08:44.289
This is to permit the blending of residential uses within

01:08:44.289 --> 01:08:45.640
the land use plan.

01:08:45.640 --> 01:08:51.279
Originally, the public hearing was heard on the October 12

01:08:51.279 --> 01:08:55.640
th P&Z meeting and it was continued to tonight.

01:08:55.640 --> 01:09:00.229
The subject property is located on Robeson Ranch Road, 35W,

01:09:00.229 --> 01:09:01.640
west of 35W.

01:09:01.640 --> 01:09:08.640
35W is about right here and here's Robeson Ranch Road.

01:09:08.640 --> 01:09:09.640
All right.

01:09:09.640 --> 01:09:10.640
This is a plan development.

01:09:10.640 --> 01:09:14.279
The current Denton development code does not permit PDs

01:09:14.279 --> 01:09:18.199
except for a few left from prior to the adoption of the

01:09:18.199 --> 01:09:20.640
2002 Denton development code.

01:09:20.640 --> 01:09:25.159
So when we analyze a PD, when we look at it, we look at the

01:09:25.159 --> 01:09:29.640
1991 code and the requirements within it.

01:09:29.640 --> 01:09:33.800
That 1991 code did permit PDs and it was a two-step process

01:09:33.800 --> 01:09:36.640
, the concept plan and then a detail plan.

01:09:36.640 --> 01:09:40.899
The concept plan for Robeson Ranch was approved in 1999 and

01:09:40.899 --> 01:09:45.789
it did include provisions to provide flexibility and a

01:09:45.789 --> 01:09:49.640
variety of housing options within the plan development.

01:09:49.640 --> 01:09:53.640
It also included five residential uses.

01:09:53.640 --> 01:09:57.239
Three of those, the single-family luxury, the single-family

01:09:57.239 --> 01:10:00.819
Premier and the single-family Casita, were all single-

01:10:00.819 --> 01:10:02.640
family detached homes.

01:10:02.640 --> 01:10:08.189
The single-family villa is a two-family attached, so what

01:10:08.189 --> 01:10:12.640
we normally think of as a duplex is a single-family villa.

01:10:12.640 --> 01:10:15.619
And then multi-family too, that is the multi-family

01:10:15.619 --> 01:10:18.779
component or it would also include maybe something like

01:10:18.779 --> 01:10:21.640
nursing homes or assisted living facilities.

01:10:21.640 --> 01:10:25.430
So those are the five residential uses included in that

01:10:25.430 --> 01:10:26.640
concept plan.

01:10:26.640 --> 01:10:30.239
After the concept plan comes the detail plan and it

01:10:30.239 --> 01:10:33.640
provides maybe where those uses are going to go.

01:10:33.640 --> 01:10:35.859
And the detail plans for Robeson Ranch, there have been

01:10:35.859 --> 01:10:39.640
several of them, the most recent being 2011.

01:10:39.640 --> 01:10:42.569
And that depicted the precise locations of those

01:10:42.569 --> 01:10:44.640
residential land use categories.

01:10:44.640 --> 01:10:50.960
And that included 63 clustered single-family villas, which

01:10:50.960 --> 01:10:52.640
is the duplex.

01:10:52.640 --> 01:10:57.640
So we'll take a look at that 2011 land use plan.

01:10:57.640 --> 01:11:00.640
As you can see, the yellow was the single-family Casita.

01:11:00.640 --> 01:11:02.640
Those were the traditional lots.

01:11:02.640 --> 01:11:06.640
The Premier lots, the single-family Premier with a gray.

01:11:06.640 --> 01:11:08.640
This little blue was the Preserve lots.

01:11:08.640 --> 01:11:09.640
Those were the largest lots.

01:11:09.640 --> 01:11:14.109
And then down here in the corner, clustered on an arterial

01:11:14.109 --> 01:11:18.640
were the 63 duplexes, the single-family villas.

01:11:18.640 --> 01:11:25.079
On October 12th, you were presented the proposed land use

01:11:25.079 --> 01:11:29.640
plan that reallocated all of those residential uses

01:11:29.640 --> 01:11:33.640
and grouped them under one use and that'd be residential.

01:11:33.640 --> 01:11:37.859
So all that yellow, any of those residential land uses,

01:11:37.859 --> 01:11:43.420
except for MF2, multifamily 2, could be permitted within

01:11:43.420 --> 01:11:45.640
that yellow area.

01:11:45.640 --> 01:11:51.880
And so that proposal on October 12th included that yellow

01:11:51.880 --> 01:11:53.640
area, the residential area,

01:11:53.640 --> 01:11:56.119
would include the single-family luxury, the single-family

01:11:56.119 --> 01:11:58.640
Premier, the single-family Casita,

01:11:58.640 --> 01:12:02.640
and the single-family villas all within that yellow area.

01:12:02.640 --> 01:12:06.949
It permitted a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units for the du

01:12:06.949 --> 01:12:08.640
plexes, for the SFV.

01:12:08.640 --> 01:12:12.869
And then it also addressed the multifamily 2 and that that

01:12:12.869 --> 01:12:17.090
wasn't, if it wasn't depicted in that land use plan and it

01:12:17.090 --> 01:12:17.640
wasn't,

01:12:17.640 --> 01:12:20.920
then any multifamily would come forward, would have to have

01:12:20.920 --> 01:12:26.960
a plan development amendment, much like what you're hearing

01:12:26.960 --> 01:12:28.640
tonight.

01:12:28.640 --> 01:12:33.109
So during the discussion on October 12th, a lot of concerns

01:12:33.109 --> 01:12:36.300
were raised, not only by the P&Z, but also by the

01:12:36.300 --> 01:12:38.640
neighborhood and the residents.

01:12:38.640 --> 01:12:41.649
And so in order to address those concerns, P&Z had some

01:12:41.649 --> 01:12:42.640
suggestions.

01:12:42.640 --> 01:12:48.170
First, to reduce the number of permitted single-family vill

01:12:48.170 --> 01:12:52.640
as to 600, to require that the duplexes be clustered

01:12:52.640 --> 01:12:54.640
together,

01:12:54.640 --> 01:12:58.210
to provide a buffer or transition areas between those

01:12:58.210 --> 01:13:02.640
single-family detached residential uses and the duplexes,

01:13:02.640 --> 01:13:05.789
to prohibit the duplexes from facing a single-family

01:13:05.789 --> 01:13:10.220
detached home, and then also possibly providing for general

01:13:10.220 --> 01:13:13.640
locations for those duplexes.

01:13:13.640 --> 01:13:19.069
So those are some suggestions that P&Z made and charged the

01:13:19.069 --> 01:13:23.640
applicant to go back and make some revisions.

01:13:23.640 --> 01:13:27.899
The applicant did make some revisions that this is the

01:13:27.899 --> 01:13:31.640
proposed land use plan that they sent to staff.

01:13:31.640 --> 01:13:37.640
And it retains that the SFL, the SFP, the SFC, and the SFV,

01:13:37.640 --> 01:13:41.090
so those four residential land use categories, would still

01:13:41.090 --> 01:13:43.640
all be permitted in the yellow areas.

01:13:43.640 --> 01:13:47.619
Still retain that maximum 1200 dwelling units and once

01:13:47.619 --> 01:13:50.640
again, keep those provisions for the MF2.

01:13:50.640 --> 01:13:55.550
But what they did change is they removed the areas outlined

01:13:55.550 --> 01:13:57.640
in blue from the request,

01:13:57.640 --> 01:14:02.960
so that those would fall back to previous detailed plan

01:14:02.960 --> 01:14:06.640
requirements, so that they would,

01:14:06.640 --> 01:14:12.260
the new amendment would only apply to those outside of the

01:14:12.260 --> 01:14:13.640
blue area.

01:14:13.640 --> 01:14:17.520
Staff did approach the applicant about some additional

01:14:17.520 --> 01:14:21.310
requirements that were brought up by the Planning and Z

01:14:21.310 --> 01:14:22.640
oning Commission,

01:14:22.640 --> 01:14:27.640
and they declined to move forward with those.

01:14:27.640 --> 01:14:30.720
So considerations we looked at are the criteria for

01:14:30.720 --> 01:14:34.430
approval that are in that 1991 code, first that it complies

01:14:34.430 --> 01:14:35.640
with the general concept plan.

01:14:35.640 --> 01:14:40.109
This proposal does comply with the general concept plan and

01:14:40.109 --> 01:14:44.439
that it does emphasize the flexibility and variety embedded

01:14:44.439 --> 01:14:45.640
within that.

01:14:45.640 --> 01:14:48.229
Provides a compatible arrangement for buildings and land

01:14:48.229 --> 01:14:50.329
uses that would not adversely affect adjoining

01:14:50.329 --> 01:14:52.640
neighborhoods or properties outside the plan.

01:14:52.640 --> 01:14:56.550
While there is no perceived impact for the request on

01:14:56.550 --> 01:15:00.640
properties outside of the Robeson Ranch community,

01:15:00.640 --> 01:15:04.510
it would be difficult to ascertain the impact of the

01:15:04.510 --> 01:15:09.010
increased number of villas due to that, you know, the lack

01:15:09.010 --> 01:15:11.640
of separation or delineation between those products.

01:15:11.640 --> 01:15:16.630
So it provides adequate and safe circulation for vehicular

01:15:16.630 --> 01:15:17.640
traffic.

01:15:17.640 --> 01:15:21.560
Since this request does not include an increase in the

01:15:21.560 --> 01:15:23.640
number of dwelling units,

01:15:23.640 --> 01:15:28.920
it would maintain the existing number, the 6037 dwelling

01:15:28.920 --> 01:15:31.640
units approved in 2011.

01:15:31.640 --> 01:15:34.739
It would just reallocate where those uses would or what

01:15:34.739 --> 01:15:36.640
types of uses those would be.

01:15:36.640 --> 01:15:41.640
There's not an anticipated resulting increase in traffic.

01:15:41.640 --> 01:15:44.329
And in substantial compliance with the landscape sign,

01:15:44.329 --> 01:15:47.189
subdivision, other regulations of the city, the plan is in

01:15:47.189 --> 01:15:48.640
compliance with all of those.

01:15:48.640 --> 01:15:52.739
So just while planning, it does not have an objection to

01:15:52.739 --> 01:15:53.640
the request.

01:15:53.640 --> 01:15:57.800
In light of those discussions at the October 12th meeting

01:15:57.800 --> 01:16:00.640
and discussions with the neighborhood,

01:16:00.640 --> 01:16:05.359
those additional conditions or similar conditions that PNZ

01:16:05.359 --> 01:16:10.039
suggested on October 12th to reduce any impacts could be

01:16:10.039 --> 01:16:13.640
considered appropriate.

01:16:13.640 --> 01:16:15.640
Public notification was sent out.

01:16:15.640 --> 01:16:20.640
Since the October 12th meeting, I did receive a few more

01:16:20.640 --> 01:16:22.640
letters and responses.

01:16:22.640 --> 01:16:27.640
We have 31 in opposition, 44 in favor and 19 neutral.

01:16:27.640 --> 01:16:32.630
So based upon the criteria for approval, staff recommends

01:16:32.630 --> 01:16:34.640
approval of the request

01:16:34.640 --> 01:16:38.430
and consistent with the PNZ recommendations on the October

01:16:38.430 --> 01:16:39.640
12th meeting.

01:16:39.640 --> 01:16:45.640
I'll stand for any questions and the applicant is here.

01:16:45.640 --> 01:16:56.640
Any questions for staff?

01:16:56.640 --> 01:16:58.640
Well, I'll ask a question then.

01:16:58.640 --> 01:17:02.079
Do we have anywhere else in the city of Denton in our other

01:17:02.079 --> 01:17:06.199
zoning categories that we intermix duplexes and single

01:17:06.199 --> 01:17:06.640
family just side by side?

01:17:06.640 --> 01:17:13.640
However, we do that.

01:17:13.640 --> 01:17:16.060
In maybe one or two of the neighborhood residential zoning

01:17:16.060 --> 01:17:20.720
districts, we do permit duplexes, but there are

01:17:20.720 --> 01:17:21.640
requirements,

01:17:21.640 --> 01:17:24.100
there are limitations based upon that, that they can't be

01:17:24.100 --> 01:17:25.640
on the edge of the neighborhood.

01:17:25.640 --> 01:17:29.430
So there are some limitations to where those duplexes could

01:17:29.430 --> 01:17:32.220
go and that they would each side would have to be on their

01:17:32.220 --> 01:17:33.640
own separate platted lot.

01:17:33.640 --> 01:17:39.640
So I believe that's in our four, but yeah.

01:17:39.640 --> 01:17:44.640
Do we have any areas with 1,200 of them, 1,200 duplexes?

01:17:44.640 --> 01:17:46.640
Not that I'm aware of.

01:17:46.640 --> 01:17:50.640
So it's a small area then?

01:17:50.640 --> 01:17:51.640
That this would be a--

01:17:51.640 --> 01:17:54.789
The couple of places you say that we do allow that, they

01:17:54.789 --> 01:17:56.770
are fairly small in number then in comparison to what's

01:17:56.770 --> 01:17:57.640
being asked here?

01:17:57.640 --> 01:17:58.640
Yes, sir.

01:17:58.640 --> 01:17:59.640
Okay, great.

01:17:59.640 --> 01:18:04.640
Thank you.

01:18:04.640 --> 01:18:11.210
If the applicants here would like to speak or present your

01:18:11.210 --> 01:18:16.640
project, please come forward at this time.

01:18:16.640 --> 01:18:20.239
And then so far I've got two cards in to speak that I will

01:18:20.239 --> 01:18:22.640
recognize after the applicant.

01:18:22.640 --> 01:18:28.920
So if anyone else would like to speak on this item, please

01:18:28.920 --> 01:18:31.640
fill out a card for us.

01:18:31.640 --> 01:18:32.640
Good evening.

01:18:32.640 --> 01:18:35.789
My name is Steve Soriano and I'm here on behalf of Ropes

01:18:35.789 --> 01:18:36.640
and Ranch.

01:18:36.640 --> 01:18:38.640
Do you guys do the address thing here?

01:18:38.640 --> 01:18:39.640
Please.

01:18:39.640 --> 01:18:45.439
Okay, my address is 9532 East Riggs Road, Sun Lakes,

01:18:45.439 --> 01:18:46.640
Arizona.

01:18:46.640 --> 01:18:47.640
I don't have much of a presentation.

01:18:47.640 --> 01:18:52.109
I did have the opportunity to watch a work session earlier

01:18:52.109 --> 01:18:56.710
today and there were instances where I wanted to--where I

01:18:56.710 --> 01:18:59.119
said things to the computer saying, well, that's not

01:18:59.119 --> 01:19:00.640
exactly right, that's not exactly right.

01:19:00.640 --> 01:19:04.350
So I don't have much of a presentation beyond what staff

01:19:04.350 --> 01:19:05.640
has presented.

01:19:05.640 --> 01:19:08.220
Other than to point out that we've been working with the

01:19:08.220 --> 01:19:09.640
city now for 20 years.

01:19:09.640 --> 01:19:12.640
There's been a lot of give and take on this master plan.

01:19:12.640 --> 01:19:15.989
We work with the homeowners and it's an ever increasing

01:19:15.989 --> 01:19:19.510
number of homeowners. We're now up to about 1,900 residents

01:19:19.510 --> 01:19:20.640
within the community.

01:19:20.640 --> 01:19:25.920
All 1,900 of the residents were notified either by staff,

01:19:25.920 --> 01:19:31.029
by mail, staff by certified mail, or they were invited to

01:19:31.029 --> 01:19:35.640
two open houses that we held on the site.

01:19:35.640 --> 01:19:39.739
They were invited by email and by a message board that's

01:19:39.739 --> 01:19:41.640
within the community.

01:19:41.640 --> 01:19:47.250
So 1,900 people or 1,900 homes worth of people have been

01:19:47.250 --> 01:19:51.609
apprised of this and have had the opportunity to object, to

01:19:51.609 --> 01:19:54.640
support or to show up here tonight.

01:19:54.640 --> 01:19:57.960
We did have a second meeting after your last P&Z meeting

01:19:57.960 --> 01:19:59.640
where you continued it.

01:19:59.640 --> 01:20:02.640
We had a second meeting within the community.

01:20:02.640 --> 01:20:07.630
There were 200ish, maybe 225ish people that showed up and

01:20:07.630 --> 01:20:11.640
some people had concerns and we tried to address them.

01:20:11.640 --> 01:20:16.920
Some people had some concerns and we were unable to solve

01:20:16.920 --> 01:20:22.640
them, but we tried.

01:20:22.640 --> 01:20:27.109
The whole community is actually going to be about 6,500,

01:20:27.109 --> 01:20:31.640
maybe 7,000, somewhere about 6,500 homes.

01:20:31.640 --> 01:20:36.640
So to address your questions to staff leading up to this,

01:20:40.640 --> 01:20:44.420
the number of villas within the community, I would look at

01:20:44.420 --> 01:20:47.640
it as a percentage rather than saying the absolute number.

01:20:47.640 --> 01:20:49.989
Or I would ask that you look at it as a percentage rather

01:20:49.989 --> 01:20:52.630
than the absolute number because as a percentage it's not a

01:20:52.630 --> 01:20:53.640
very large amount.

01:20:53.640 --> 01:20:56.600
The only other fact that, staff has done an excellent job

01:20:56.600 --> 01:20:59.640
presenting it to you, I've got no complaints with it.

01:20:59.640 --> 01:21:04.100
The only fact that you guys don't know is that the average

01:21:04.100 --> 01:21:09.640
price of the villas we've sold so far was $277,000.

01:21:09.640 --> 01:21:14.170
And there's been some insinuations by some people that the

01:21:14.170 --> 01:21:17.899
villas are lesser than the traditions or the premiers of

01:21:17.899 --> 01:21:18.640
the estates.

01:21:18.640 --> 01:21:21.640
And I just wanted to tell you that no they're not.

01:21:21.640 --> 01:21:26.640
They're actually $277,000 average closing price so far.

01:21:26.640 --> 01:21:29.720
And the people that live in them are just as nice as the

01:21:29.720 --> 01:21:33.640
people that would live in traditions, premiers, or estates.

01:21:33.640 --> 01:21:38.460
With that, I'd like to answer any questions you may have

01:21:38.460 --> 01:21:41.640
and hopefully get you to vote yes.

01:21:46.640 --> 01:21:47.640
>> Got a few questions for you.

01:21:47.640 --> 01:21:49.640
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:21:49.640 --> 01:21:55.640
>> Yes, I would like to thank you all for the green button.

01:21:55.640 --> 01:21:56.640
Sorry about that.

01:21:56.640 --> 01:21:59.510
I would like to express my appreciation for coming back

01:21:59.510 --> 01:22:01.640
with the plan that you all submitted.

01:22:01.640 --> 01:22:04.960
I think it is far superior than it was when you put in the

01:22:04.960 --> 01:22:07.770
blue line and anything inside the blue line was not going

01:22:07.770 --> 01:22:08.640
to be affected.

01:22:08.640 --> 01:22:14.329
I think that eased a lot of people's concerns about coming

01:22:14.329 --> 01:22:18.529
in and using vacant lots to put duplexes in the middle of a

01:22:18.529 --> 01:22:19.640
neighborhood.

01:22:19.640 --> 01:22:23.640
And so I appreciate the work that you did with that.

01:22:23.640 --> 01:22:27.739
However, there are still some issues that I've heard from

01:22:27.739 --> 01:22:31.640
people that, and I don't know if the blue line is a hard,

01:22:31.640 --> 01:22:36.250
fast line that this is the line in the sand, so to speak,

01:22:36.250 --> 01:22:38.640
that's not going to move.

01:22:38.640 --> 01:22:46.199
But for example, on the map, block 25, there's an area

01:22:46.199 --> 01:22:51.010
there that is outside the blue line that is actually off of

01:22:51.010 --> 01:22:52.640
Ambrosia Lane.

01:22:52.640 --> 01:22:57.640
And right before the golf course.

01:22:57.640 --> 01:23:00.640
And yes, exactly.

01:23:00.640 --> 01:23:06.420
So that area that right now is, has been depicted as the

01:23:06.420 --> 01:23:09.640
premier homes, I believe.

01:23:09.640 --> 01:23:13.739
And that's one of the concerns that I've heard from about

01:23:13.739 --> 01:23:18.100
four people on that street that they told us it was going

01:23:18.100 --> 01:23:21.640
to be premier and now could be whatever they want it to be.

01:23:21.640 --> 01:23:25.210
And I think that's a concern that instead of using the golf

01:23:25.210 --> 01:23:26.640
course as the buffer,

01:23:26.640 --> 01:23:30.430
that that area is now in yellow so that it could be

01:23:30.430 --> 01:23:33.640
whatever you all wanted to put there.

01:23:33.640 --> 01:23:36.810
And that's not what people were told when they bought the

01:23:36.810 --> 01:23:37.640
property.

01:23:37.640 --> 01:23:39.640
And so that's a concern.

01:23:39.640 --> 01:23:43.399
So I mean, is that, again, is there leeway in y'all's

01:23:43.399 --> 01:23:46.640
planning that can allow for things like that?

01:23:46.640 --> 01:23:48.640
Or how is that going to be addressed?

01:23:48.640 --> 01:23:52.640
Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Sullivan, for the question.

01:23:52.640 --> 01:23:56.789
And to answer that question specifically, I just spoke with

01:23:56.789 --> 01:24:00.350
the planner and we're willing to draw the blue line across

01:24:00.350 --> 01:24:01.640
those three lots.

01:24:01.640 --> 01:24:06.920
So if the camera can zoom in, you'll see a gray area on

01:24:06.920 --> 01:24:10.640
this map that represents open space.

01:24:10.640 --> 01:24:12.640
And this map is in your material.

01:24:12.640 --> 01:24:18.640
So it's not for the people in the audience.

01:24:18.640 --> 01:24:20.640
This is the area you're talking about.

01:24:20.640 --> 01:24:23.140
These are the three lots that you have a question about,

01:24:23.140 --> 01:24:23.640
right?

01:24:23.640 --> 01:24:26.640
Well, those are three.

01:24:26.640 --> 01:24:29.640
But then if you go on the other side of the blue line,

01:24:29.640 --> 01:24:33.640
right there where the number 25 is.

01:24:33.640 --> 01:24:36.640
Yeah. The unit you're talking about is the north of 25.

01:24:36.640 --> 01:24:38.640
And I think it's called 25-2.

01:24:38.640 --> 01:24:42.819
It's that single street that has unit 25 on the south side

01:24:42.819 --> 01:24:45.640
and has golf course on the north side.

01:24:45.640 --> 01:24:45.640
Yes.

01:24:45.640 --> 01:24:51.640
We would agree to alter the line to take that unit 25-2

01:24:51.640 --> 01:24:56.640
under the prohibition of no villas.

01:24:56.640 --> 01:25:00.550
I understand that there's people that live in 25 that don't

01:25:00.550 --> 01:25:02.640
want traditions behind them.

01:25:02.640 --> 01:25:06.920
So we would agree to take that blue line and move it to

01:25:06.920 --> 01:25:09.640
include unit 25-22.

01:25:09.640 --> 01:25:10.640
Just move it up.

01:25:10.640 --> 01:25:15.359
Because again, in the last town hall meeting, I think that

01:25:15.359 --> 01:25:18.859
was probably the number one question I asked was what's

01:25:18.859 --> 01:25:19.640
going to be behind me?

01:25:19.640 --> 01:25:21.640
A lot of people asked that.

01:25:21.640 --> 01:25:23.640
And that's really what I think is the biggest concern.

01:25:23.640 --> 01:25:24.640
Okay.

01:25:24.640 --> 01:25:26.640
We'll take 25-2 out.

01:25:26.640 --> 01:25:29.039
And then most of the other blue line is either separated by

01:25:29.039 --> 01:25:30.640
a major boulevard or a golf course.

01:25:30.640 --> 01:25:36.579
So if that addresses your concern, the name of that unit is

01:25:36.579 --> 01:25:37.640
25-2.

01:25:37.640 --> 01:25:42.340
And we'll agree to put the blue line prohibition against

01:25:42.340 --> 01:25:47.640
villas on the north side of 25-2 against the golf course,

01:25:47.640 --> 01:25:50.640
solving that concern.

01:25:50.640 --> 01:25:52.640
Perfect. Thank you.

01:25:52.640 --> 01:25:55.640
Thank you, sir.

01:25:55.640 --> 01:25:56.640
Commissioner Rossell.

01:25:56.640 --> 01:25:58.640
Thank you, Chair.

01:25:58.640 --> 01:26:02.779
So I appreciate the context of the explanation about the

01:26:02.779 --> 01:26:04.640
villas in terms of price and quality.

01:26:04.640 --> 01:26:08.739
From the information I've received, both from individuals

01:26:08.739 --> 01:26:12.670
writing in as well as public testimony from last meeting,

01:26:12.670 --> 01:26:14.640
it seems like there's high praise for the villas.

01:26:14.640 --> 01:26:16.640
I haven't heard any question about the quality.

01:26:16.640 --> 01:26:17.640
And maybe I'm just out of it.

01:26:17.640 --> 01:26:20.260
But there's people who actually were testifying to the

01:26:20.260 --> 01:26:22.640
quality and actually wanting to get into one.

01:26:22.640 --> 01:26:25.640
So I think the quality for the villas is there.

01:26:25.640 --> 01:26:30.140
I heard the issues of being next to or adjacent to a duplex

01:26:30.140 --> 01:26:33.640
type structure apart from the quality.

01:26:33.640 --> 01:26:37.279
Someone has a nice big loft, a nice house, and you have the

01:26:37.279 --> 01:26:39.640
ability to one off, put a duplex.

01:26:39.640 --> 01:26:44.920
So I was the one last meeting who brought up the idea of cl

01:26:44.920 --> 01:26:46.640
ustering them.

01:26:46.640 --> 01:26:50.640
And it seems like that request was declined.

01:26:50.640 --> 01:26:56.619
So my question to you is, do you envision ever building one

01:26:56.619 --> 01:27:01.270
unit of a villa interspersed with other lots, your premier

01:27:01.270 --> 01:27:02.640
lots, your luxury lots?

01:27:02.640 --> 01:27:03.640
Would you do that?

01:27:03.640 --> 01:27:05.640
No.

01:27:05.640 --> 01:27:07.640
That makes sense to me.

01:27:07.640 --> 01:27:11.430
So I'm curious of why then if you wouldn't do that

01:27:11.430 --> 01:27:15.819
inherently, you wouldn't agree to provide some assurance to

01:27:15.819 --> 01:27:19.640
the residents to build in a cluster of four, eight, twelve.

01:27:19.640 --> 01:27:22.640
Why wouldn't you agree to cluster them?

01:27:22.640 --> 01:27:25.640
Well, maybe we can agree to that.

01:27:25.640 --> 01:27:26.640
It depends.

01:27:26.640 --> 01:27:29.380
I don't know what a cluster is because cluster is not a

01:27:29.380 --> 01:27:32.640
defined term within our within our PD or within anything.

01:27:32.640 --> 01:27:34.960
But if you look at the plan and I know I just asked for it

01:27:34.960 --> 01:27:35.640
to zoom in.

01:27:35.640 --> 01:27:37.520
If you zoom back out, you'll see that everything's a

01:27:37.520 --> 01:27:38.640
numbered neighborhood.

01:27:38.640 --> 01:27:40.640
And then there's just logical.

01:27:40.640 --> 01:27:45.630
There's individual neighborhoods that are defined as unit

01:27:45.630 --> 01:27:46.640
numbers.

01:27:46.640 --> 01:27:54.310
Okay. We'll agree not to mix villas and other within the

01:27:54.310 --> 01:27:57.960
same units, which is how we plan on addressing one of the

01:27:57.960 --> 01:28:03.569
concerns, which is no villas facing a premier tradition or

01:28:03.569 --> 01:28:04.640
estate.

01:28:04.640 --> 01:28:08.319
And that's how we also plan on addressing that there'll be

01:28:08.319 --> 01:28:11.640
no villas next to a tradition premier or estate.

01:28:11.640 --> 01:28:16.640
So I don't know what a cluster is exactly. We call them

01:28:16.640 --> 01:28:16.640
villages or unit numbers.

01:28:16.640 --> 01:28:18.640
But I think you're getting what you asked for.

01:28:18.640 --> 01:28:22.340
I think we are okay with it because what we will commit to

01:28:22.340 --> 01:28:26.199
is that there'll be no mixing of traditions in the same

01:28:26.199 --> 01:28:27.640
units as same plats.

01:28:27.640 --> 01:28:31.279
And the plats come before you, by the way, the plats come

01:28:31.279 --> 01:28:33.640
before you before they get to go to the next stage.

01:28:33.640 --> 01:28:37.350
But there'll be no traditions mixed with premieres. I'm

01:28:37.350 --> 01:28:41.199
sorry. There'll be no villas mixed with premieres,

01:28:41.199 --> 01:28:42.640
traditions or estates.

01:28:42.640 --> 01:28:46.640
That's extremely helpful. Thank you.

01:28:46.640 --> 01:28:47.640
Commissioner Taylor.

01:28:47.640 --> 01:28:48.640
Thank you, Chair.

01:28:48.640 --> 01:28:54.010
So I made a good chunk of the recommendation last time

01:28:54.010 --> 01:28:59.720
about let's lay down in this amendment to the PD some text

01:28:59.720 --> 01:29:05.640
that describes what the rules would be for placement.

01:29:05.640 --> 01:29:11.010
So you've had a month to write any rule you wanted and you

01:29:11.010 --> 01:29:16.659
came back with exactly what you came here with minus a blue

01:29:16.659 --> 01:29:18.640
line a month ago.

01:29:18.640 --> 01:29:24.460
So I don't know if we need to do we need to wait another

01:29:24.460 --> 01:29:30.510
month and get the text that you would agree to because we

01:29:30.510 --> 01:29:34.640
don't really want to write a rule up here from the DS.

01:29:34.640 --> 01:29:39.109
And that would have unintended consequences probably for

01:29:39.109 --> 01:29:41.640
for both residents and for you.

01:29:41.640 --> 01:29:45.789
So we would much prefer you to write the rule that's amen

01:29:45.789 --> 01:29:50.640
able to you that includes these protections of clustering.

01:29:50.640 --> 01:29:53.510
Maybe no unit will be mixed if that's if that's how you

01:29:53.510 --> 01:29:55.640
define it or how you want to build it.

01:29:55.640 --> 01:29:58.899
You know, to me, I would say some of these units are really

01:29:58.899 --> 01:30:01.869
big and you might actually be able to say half the unit

01:30:01.869 --> 01:30:04.640
will be, you know, villas and half won't.

01:30:04.640 --> 01:30:07.220
And here's how we'll, you know, provide a buffer between

01:30:07.220 --> 01:30:07.640
them.

01:30:07.640 --> 01:30:11.750
You know, so I'm kind of surprised that you're saying

01:30:11.750 --> 01:30:15.970
tonight to us that you will unit by unit build all villas

01:30:15.970 --> 01:30:18.640
or all of a different product.

01:30:18.640 --> 01:30:23.630
Also, following on Commissioner Sullivan's question, you're

01:30:23.630 --> 01:30:28.590
talking about unit 24 and 25, I believe, how people living

01:30:28.590 --> 01:30:31.640
in 24 are worried about what might go into 25.

01:30:31.640 --> 01:30:35.220
That was that that area that he asked the blue line be

01:30:35.220 --> 01:30:36.640
extended around.

01:30:36.640 --> 01:30:41.149
I think I think he asked about 25 and the unnumbered unit

01:30:41.149 --> 01:30:45.640
just north of 25, which is also known as 25 to.

01:30:45.640 --> 01:30:48.380
OK, I guess the map I'm looking at doesn't indicate a split

01:30:48.380 --> 01:30:48.640
.

01:30:48.640 --> 01:30:51.640
So now that makes sense.

01:30:51.640 --> 01:30:56.819
But if you look at, say, unit 27, one and 27 to 27 one

01:30:56.819 --> 01:31:00.890
builds first just on the other side of the golf course

01:31:00.890 --> 01:31:06.510
there, the people that live there might suddenly get duplex

01:31:06.510 --> 01:31:08.640
es in their backyard.

01:31:08.640 --> 01:31:12.220
And so so we're by drawing the blue line, you're saying

01:31:12.220 --> 01:31:15.869
basically this is the only area where people can know what

01:31:15.869 --> 01:31:17.640
to expect behind them.

01:31:17.640 --> 01:31:20.640
Well, I'm sorry.

01:31:20.640 --> 01:31:23.710
If you ever saw, I mean, I love the blue line basically

01:31:23.710 --> 01:31:26.640
represents where homes have been sold already.

01:31:26.640 --> 01:31:31.220
The idea is that anybody that buys in the future will know

01:31:31.220 --> 01:31:35.689
that there may be other ropes and homes in their in their

01:31:35.689 --> 01:31:37.640
in their backyard.

01:31:37.640 --> 01:31:40.569
I to address your concern about another delay, we've gone

01:31:40.569 --> 01:31:43.640
over six months now without any sales and villas.

01:31:43.640 --> 01:31:47.640
And while that's not your problem, it zero sales is really,

01:31:47.640 --> 01:31:49.640
really bad for a community.

01:31:49.640 --> 01:31:53.640
And we would not like a delay, a further delay of any.

01:31:53.640 --> 01:31:55.640
We've been working with staff for a long time.

01:31:55.640 --> 01:31:59.340
Some of the staff is has moved on, but we would definitely

01:31:59.340 --> 01:32:00.640
not like a delay.

01:32:00.640 --> 01:32:03.789
We would like we would like to vote this this evening if

01:32:03.789 --> 01:32:04.640
possible.

01:32:04.640 --> 01:32:07.220
As far as people knowing what's going to be in their back

01:32:07.220 --> 01:32:10.770
yards, if you're outside the blue line, you already had a

01:32:10.770 --> 01:32:13.640
variability of whether they were going to be traditions,

01:32:13.640 --> 01:32:14.640
premieres or states.

01:32:14.640 --> 01:32:17.670
Now you'll have a variability of traditions, premieres, est

01:32:17.670 --> 01:32:18.640
ates or villas.

01:32:18.640 --> 01:32:21.100
So it's not like there was it's not like there was a

01:32:21.100 --> 01:32:23.640
certainty as to what was going to be behind you.

01:32:23.640 --> 01:32:25.960
I talked with Brian Boylan, who's our sales manager before

01:32:25.960 --> 01:32:29.850
this meeting, and he said that before people buy, they

01:32:29.850 --> 01:32:31.640
always say, hey, what's going to be behind me?

01:32:31.640 --> 01:32:36.289
That's a regular question. And he rolls out a map and shows

01:32:36.289 --> 01:32:37.369
them what the unit is and he tells them what the options

01:32:37.369 --> 01:32:37.640
are.

01:32:37.640 --> 01:32:40.640
We'll continue to do that. But there was no certainty.

01:32:40.640 --> 01:32:43.989
There's never any certainty beyond your property line of

01:32:43.989 --> 01:32:45.640
what's going to be there.

01:32:45.640 --> 01:32:48.649
We're now offering that certainty by saying we're not going

01:32:48.649 --> 01:32:51.640
to mix villas with traditions, premieres or estates.

01:32:51.640 --> 01:32:57.640
So there's more certainty here than there was previously.

01:32:57.640 --> 01:32:59.989
I don't know how else to I don't know how other than people

01:32:59.989 --> 01:33:02.640
asking the question, hey, what's going to be behind me?

01:33:02.640 --> 01:33:06.600
I don't know how else to get them that that level of

01:33:06.600 --> 01:33:07.640
comfort.

01:33:07.640 --> 01:33:10.510
So what we're asking for is instead of yellow just being

01:33:10.510 --> 01:33:13.180
traditions, premieres and estates, we're asking if we do

01:33:13.180 --> 01:33:14.640
traditions, premieres, estates and villas.

01:33:14.640 --> 01:33:19.630
And so I believe in your response to Commissioner Roselle,

01:33:19.630 --> 01:33:23.140
you'd said that you would be so you do an entire unit and

01:33:23.140 --> 01:33:25.640
you would be OK with.

01:33:25.640 --> 01:33:28.989
Not having the front facade face the front front facade of

01:33:28.989 --> 01:33:32.409
villas, facing the front facade of other products and then

01:33:32.409 --> 01:33:36.640
not having the sidewall like side by side, not having one.

01:33:36.640 --> 01:33:41.109
Right. So now that does create the way your units are laid

01:33:41.109 --> 01:33:41.640
out.

01:33:41.640 --> 01:33:47.640
You have several units that the last lot of unit 27 to is

01:33:47.640 --> 01:33:52.640
next door to the first lot of twenty seven one.

01:33:52.640 --> 01:33:56.210
And so I just want to like, you know, if we are going to be

01:33:56.210 --> 01:33:58.640
writing these rules on the fly up here.

01:33:58.640 --> 01:34:00.640
Well, I don't want to write rules on the fly.

01:34:00.640 --> 01:34:02.640
But what we worked out what we didn't work it out.

01:34:02.640 --> 01:34:06.220
That's not true. What we discussed with staff was having a

01:34:06.220 --> 01:34:09.239
designated buffer between traditions units and non

01:34:09.239 --> 01:34:10.640
traditions units.

01:34:10.640 --> 01:34:12.970
And that would be essentially property or real estate that

01:34:12.970 --> 01:34:13.640
we would eat.

01:34:13.640 --> 01:34:15.640
We would take the cost of those of those buffers.

01:34:15.640 --> 01:34:18.640
Well, how big do those buffers need to be?

01:34:18.640 --> 01:34:23.699
The depth of a tradition lot, excuse me, the depth of a

01:34:23.699 --> 01:34:28.680
villa lot is ten, maybe 15 feet shorter than that of a

01:34:28.680 --> 01:34:29.640
tradition lot.

01:34:29.640 --> 01:34:32.550
So for a lot of people, as Commissioner Sullivan said, a

01:34:32.550 --> 01:34:34.640
lot of people live in their backyard.

01:34:34.640 --> 01:34:36.829
They live on their back patio, the barbecues, you know,

01:34:36.829 --> 01:34:38.640
watching the sunset, that kind of thing.

01:34:38.640 --> 01:34:42.210
So the only difference between a villa and a tradition

01:34:42.210 --> 01:34:44.640
might be 10 or 15 feet in depth.

01:34:44.640 --> 01:34:48.430
We'll agree to a 20 foot buffer on top of whatever the

01:34:48.430 --> 01:34:49.640
normal buffer is.

01:34:49.640 --> 01:34:53.930
We'll agree to a 20 foot buffer between a villa

01:34:53.930 --> 01:34:58.640
neighborhood and a tradition of premier in a state.

01:34:58.640 --> 01:35:01.779
So it sounds like you've already discussed with staff the

01:35:01.779 --> 01:35:03.640
terms that you would agree to.

01:35:03.640 --> 01:35:04.640
Informally.

01:35:04.640 --> 01:35:08.640
Okay. But you didn't bring any here to us.

01:35:08.640 --> 01:35:12.369
We were the ones that requested the amendment, like the

01:35:12.369 --> 01:35:14.640
adjustments to the amendment.

01:35:14.640 --> 01:35:18.640
Okay. That's all my questions. Thank you.

01:35:18.640 --> 01:35:20.640
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:35:20.640 --> 01:35:23.640
I'm just curious, you said no villas had been sold.

01:35:23.640 --> 01:35:26.510
How many other homes have been sold during the period of

01:35:26.510 --> 01:35:28.640
time you said no villas had been sold?

01:35:28.640 --> 01:35:32.640
I think we are selling about 25 a month.

01:35:32.640 --> 01:35:33.640
Solds?

01:35:33.640 --> 01:35:40.069
Which is, well, below 25 a month, which is we desperately

01:35:40.069 --> 01:35:42.640
need the villas approved.

01:35:42.640 --> 01:35:45.640
Because we're not making the sales we need to.

01:35:45.640 --> 01:35:49.640
And I don't think anybody in Robeson is anti-villa.

01:35:49.640 --> 01:35:52.640
Because there is, I can see a need for it.

01:35:52.640 --> 01:35:54.640
I may be in one someday.

01:35:54.640 --> 01:35:57.840
But I think it's just the fact that in Robeson the way you

01:35:57.840 --> 01:36:01.640
all have structured things, very well I might add,

01:36:01.640 --> 01:36:04.640
is that neighborhood is important.

01:36:04.640 --> 01:36:06.640
Everything goes on in the neighborhood.

01:36:06.640 --> 01:36:11.640
Whether it's card groups, game groups, wine groups,

01:36:11.640 --> 01:36:14.640
everything centers around the neighborhood.

01:36:14.640 --> 01:36:19.640
And when you have a neighborhood that includes the villas

01:36:19.640 --> 01:36:24.350
where a lot of people live there full time, some people don

01:36:24.350 --> 01:36:24.640
't.

01:36:24.640 --> 01:36:29.630
So that sort of disrupts that neighborhood atmosphere that

01:36:29.630 --> 01:36:31.640
Robeson is all about.

01:36:31.640 --> 01:36:33.640
And so I think that's, again, the concern.

01:36:33.640 --> 01:36:37.210
And you've addressed that I think to some degree in that no

01:36:37.210 --> 01:36:40.640
unit will have a mixture of villas and regular homes.

01:36:40.640 --> 01:36:43.640
And I think that's positive.

01:36:43.640 --> 01:36:46.510
And so I just think that, again, what has been said is that

01:36:46.510 --> 01:36:49.640
it would have been nice if we had all of that here

01:36:49.640 --> 01:36:52.359
so that we could have it in writing so that we don't vote

01:36:52.359 --> 01:36:54.640
on something that we don't have in writing.

01:36:54.640 --> 01:36:57.250
And then all of a sudden people have amnesia and we don't

01:36:57.250 --> 01:36:58.640
remember what was said.

01:36:58.640 --> 01:37:03.640
And so I think that's the concern that's being voiced.

01:37:03.640 --> 01:37:04.640
I understand.

01:37:04.640 --> 01:37:06.640
I wish.

01:37:06.640 --> 01:37:10.319
You know, like I said, I watched the work session and I'm

01:37:10.319 --> 01:37:15.640
trying to answer the questions that I saw were concerns.

01:37:15.640 --> 01:37:25.329
And I apologize for the delay, but, you know, hopefully we

01:37:25.329 --> 01:37:28.640
can get past that.

01:37:28.640 --> 01:37:29.640
Commissioner Ellis.

01:37:29.640 --> 01:37:30.640
Thank you, Chair.

01:37:30.640 --> 01:37:31.640
Good evening.

01:37:31.640 --> 01:37:33.640
I have several questions.

01:37:33.640 --> 01:37:37.779
I guess let me start out with you asked us to look at the

01:37:37.779 --> 01:37:39.640
villas as a percentage.

01:37:39.640 --> 01:37:46.640
And the way you have, I guess this written, is it 25% of

01:37:46.640 --> 01:37:49.640
that 6,500?

01:37:49.640 --> 01:37:50.640
Yes.

01:37:50.640 --> 01:37:51.640
Okay.

01:37:51.640 --> 01:37:54.640
And where were you originally with villas?

01:37:54.640 --> 01:37:55.640
Zero percent.

01:37:55.640 --> 01:37:58.640
You didn't have a percentage in the original?

01:37:58.640 --> 01:38:02.250
The villas were not in approved use under the PAD or the PD

01:38:02.250 --> 01:38:04.640
, excuse me, 20 years ago.

01:38:04.640 --> 01:38:09.170
But what we discussed with previous city councils and

01:38:09.170 --> 01:38:12.909
previous PNCs is that we would be back in front of you

01:38:12.909 --> 01:38:16.630
multiple times over the next 20, 30, 40 years because

01:38:16.630 --> 01:38:19.640
consumer demands will change.

01:38:19.640 --> 01:38:23.979
And we have been back in front of you, your boards, for

01:38:23.979 --> 01:38:28.060
probably half a dozen times with different changes and

01:38:28.060 --> 01:38:29.640
different modifications.

01:38:29.640 --> 01:38:34.220
And there'll be more as staff pointed out during the

01:38:34.220 --> 01:38:36.640
opening presentation.

01:38:36.640 --> 01:38:39.939
One of the concerns that the community has voiced is multi-

01:38:39.939 --> 01:38:40.640
family.

01:38:40.640 --> 01:38:43.369
Nobody wants to find themselves next door to a three-story

01:38:43.369 --> 01:38:44.640
building by surprise.

01:38:44.640 --> 01:38:49.640
Well, that's MR2.

01:38:49.640 --> 01:38:50.640
MF2, sorry.

01:38:50.640 --> 01:38:52.640
That's MF2.

01:38:52.640 --> 01:38:54.640
And we're not asking for any MF2.

01:38:54.640 --> 01:38:57.640
So we'll be back in front of you someday.

01:38:57.640 --> 01:38:59.640
I don't know when, asking for MF2.

01:38:59.640 --> 01:39:03.640
All we're asking for tonight is these duplex villas.

01:39:03.640 --> 01:39:05.640
And you said you haven't sold any villas.

01:39:05.640 --> 01:39:07.640
Is that because you can't build any villas?

01:39:07.640 --> 01:39:11.539
We don't have any more land approved for it until we get

01:39:11.539 --> 01:39:15.640
through the staff, PNC, and city council process.

01:39:15.640 --> 01:39:16.640
Okay.

01:39:16.640 --> 01:39:19.409
And then I guess a follow-up question to people's concern

01:39:19.409 --> 01:39:21.640
about, namely, their property value.

01:39:21.640 --> 01:39:24.640
I mean, that's really what everybody's concern is.

01:39:24.640 --> 01:39:28.289
In coming into some of these builds, some residents are

01:39:28.289 --> 01:39:30.640
paying lot premiums, correct?

01:39:30.640 --> 01:39:31.640
Absolutely.

01:39:31.640 --> 01:39:32.640
Right.

01:39:32.640 --> 01:39:38.310
So if somebody's paying a lot premium and then suddenly a

01:39:38.310 --> 01:39:43.649
villa is put in their backyard, what are they paying a

01:39:43.649 --> 01:39:44.640
premium for?

01:39:44.640 --> 01:39:48.609
And I understand that going into new construction anywhere

01:39:48.609 --> 01:39:50.640
with vacant land behind you, next to you,

01:39:50.640 --> 01:39:53.350
you don't necessarily know what you're getting, it could be

01:39:53.350 --> 01:39:55.640
sold to another developer at some point,

01:39:55.640 --> 01:39:58.640
another builder who could change things.

01:39:58.640 --> 01:40:00.640
So that I understand.

01:40:00.640 --> 01:40:05.460
But when somebody's paying premium lot and building your

01:40:05.460 --> 01:40:10.640
luxury line of product, they don't expect that,

01:40:10.640 --> 01:40:13.329
and again, a villa is a pretty product and people do want

01:40:13.329 --> 01:40:13.640
it,

01:40:13.640 --> 01:40:18.930
but people who have paid the luxury tag don't necessarily

01:40:18.930 --> 01:40:22.640
want that unknown in their backyard.

01:40:22.640 --> 01:40:26.210
And that's certainly a concern, and I know that has been a

01:40:26.210 --> 01:40:27.640
concern of this commission

01:40:27.640 --> 01:40:32.399
as to why we wanted more designated spaces marked for vill

01:40:32.399 --> 01:40:37.119
as or clusters marked for villas to eliminate some of that

01:40:37.119 --> 01:40:37.640
concern.

01:40:37.640 --> 01:40:44.640
And we didn't get that with the blue line, for sure.

01:40:44.640 --> 01:40:46.640
A couple of answers.

01:40:46.640 --> 01:40:49.640
One is that people do pay lot premiums on the villas.

01:40:49.640 --> 01:40:52.569
I believe that some lot premiums on the villas were six

01:40:52.569 --> 01:40:54.640
figures or larger on some of them.

01:40:54.640 --> 01:40:58.630
Some of them were zero, but some of them were six figures

01:40:58.630 --> 01:40:59.640
or larger.

01:40:59.640 --> 01:41:04.470
A lot premium is generally a function of what it looks out

01:41:04.470 --> 01:41:08.550
over or what it's next to or where it is within the

01:41:08.550 --> 01:41:09.640
community.

01:41:09.640 --> 01:41:14.289
And by putting people on notice that a villa is something

01:41:14.289 --> 01:41:16.640
that could be behind them,

01:41:16.640 --> 01:41:19.640
they'll know that before they make the purchase.

01:41:19.640 --> 01:41:22.390
If there's going to be a villa behind them, they're going

01:41:22.390 --> 01:41:25.189
to know that before they make the purchase, if they ask the

01:41:25.189 --> 01:41:28.640
question, if they choose to ask.

01:41:28.640 --> 01:41:30.640
How would they know that, though?

01:41:30.640 --> 01:41:35.640
They could ask, and we can unroll the plans and show them.

01:41:35.640 --> 01:41:41.130
Because as we slowly work our way north through the

01:41:41.130 --> 01:41:46.010
community, we're planning 18, 24 months before we're

01:41:46.010 --> 01:41:46.640
selling.

01:41:46.640 --> 01:41:49.640
So we'll know what's going to be behind.

01:41:49.640 --> 01:41:53.750
And all of our buyers are a student of to say, well, if

01:41:53.750 --> 01:41:57.640
that's really going to be a golf course, I want to plat.

01:41:57.640 --> 01:42:00.710
I want to sign plat showing me that that's going to be a

01:42:00.710 --> 01:42:01.640
golf course.

01:42:01.640 --> 01:42:06.640
If the design is showing back to back with something else,

01:42:06.640 --> 01:42:09.640
then they know it could be one of the approved uses.

01:42:09.640 --> 01:42:12.640
How many villas are built currently?

01:42:12.640 --> 01:42:15.640
65? 63.

01:42:15.640 --> 01:42:19.640
And how many different groups on this map?

01:42:19.640 --> 01:42:20.640
Presently one.

01:42:20.640 --> 01:42:23.640
OK.

01:42:23.640 --> 01:42:28.640
And it's presently this piece inside the blue line.

01:42:28.640 --> 01:42:30.640
What did I do with my pen?

01:42:30.640 --> 01:42:33.640
See this long, narrow piece?

01:42:33.640 --> 01:42:35.640
So that's currently all villas.

01:42:35.640 --> 01:42:39.210
And the next place we want to go is right over here, the

01:42:39.210 --> 01:42:42.750
yellow one just right across the street from there by the

01:42:42.750 --> 01:42:43.640
dog park.

01:42:43.640 --> 01:42:47.960
And then what we're asking for tonight is we're not asking

01:42:47.960 --> 01:42:51.640
for any increase in the total number of units.

01:42:51.640 --> 01:42:55.909
We're not asking for any more than 600 structures or 1200

01:42:55.909 --> 01:42:57.640
duplexes, whatever nomenclature.

01:42:57.640 --> 01:42:58.640
You know what I mean?

01:42:58.640 --> 01:43:00.640
I want to make sure we're talking about the same fact set.

01:43:00.640 --> 01:43:04.640
So we're asking for 600 structures, AKA 1200 duplexes.

01:43:04.640 --> 01:43:08.640
And we want the ability to do it anywhere on the yellow.

01:43:08.640 --> 01:43:14.279
And in the past, I might have suggested that we probably

01:43:14.279 --> 01:43:18.640
won't do duplexes along the golf course.

01:43:18.640 --> 01:43:21.930
But we're getting-- there's such heavy demand for the du

01:43:21.930 --> 01:43:25.720
plexes within the community from people, couples, singles,

01:43:25.720 --> 01:43:26.640
whatever.

01:43:26.640 --> 01:43:27.640
There's such heavy demand.

01:43:27.640 --> 01:43:33.649
And we got the premium within the current section of duplex

01:43:33.649 --> 01:43:39.369
es that we may do duplexes, you know, villas on the golf

01:43:39.369 --> 01:43:40.640
course.

01:43:40.640 --> 01:43:45.640
Thank you.

01:43:45.640 --> 01:43:49.210
Just as housekeeping for our board, we've got two cards to

01:43:49.210 --> 01:43:49.640
speak.

01:43:49.640 --> 01:43:53.640
I know we have some more questions.

01:43:53.640 --> 01:43:56.640
I'm going to ask some at this time.

01:43:56.640 --> 01:43:58.640
I don't have a problem with the villas.

01:43:58.640 --> 01:44:02.220
I understand, Margaret, I'm in the construction business,

01:44:02.220 --> 01:44:03.640
development business.

01:44:03.640 --> 01:44:06.640
So I understand the fluidity of needing to change.

01:44:06.640 --> 01:44:11.470
I'm somewhat really puzzled as to why you all elected with

01:44:11.470 --> 01:44:16.090
all the guidance that we gave at our last meeting to come

01:44:16.090 --> 01:44:19.640
back and essentially put a blue line on

01:44:19.640 --> 01:44:23.359
and not address those in any way and yet then stand before

01:44:23.359 --> 01:44:27.199
us and say we're willing to do the things that we talked

01:44:27.199 --> 01:44:27.640
about.

01:44:27.640 --> 01:44:31.750
As chair, typically we've always tried because as I think

01:44:31.750 --> 01:44:35.840
Commissioner Taylor stated, in the past when we do things

01:44:35.840 --> 01:44:38.640
on the fly, it usually doesn't work out well.

01:44:38.640 --> 01:44:42.210
So we were-- I was hopeful that when you came back to us

01:44:42.210 --> 01:44:46.199
that the questions, concerns, suggestions would be

01:44:46.199 --> 01:44:46.640
addressed.

01:44:46.640 --> 01:44:51.289
And this was a hopefully a pretty straightforward meeting

01:44:51.289 --> 01:44:52.640
this evening.

01:44:52.640 --> 01:44:57.199
Can you tell us why you all chose not to address those in a

01:44:57.199 --> 01:45:00.750
way that could be worked out with staff in a organized

01:45:00.750 --> 01:45:04.640
presentation back before our commission?

01:45:04.640 --> 01:45:08.640
The-- first let me apologize for that, OK?

01:45:08.640 --> 01:45:09.640
I apologize for that.

01:45:09.640 --> 01:45:15.640
I'm sorry that we weren't able to accomplish that.

01:45:15.640 --> 01:45:18.640
We met with the homeowners.

01:45:18.640 --> 01:45:21.640
We answered a lot of questions from homeowners.

01:45:21.640 --> 01:45:26.640
Again, not everybody is convinced.

01:45:26.640 --> 01:45:31.229
One of the requests that P&Z put forward last time was

01:45:31.229 --> 01:45:35.350
specific identification of the units that are going to be

01:45:35.350 --> 01:45:37.659
villas versus the units that are going to be traditions

01:45:37.659 --> 01:45:40.640
versus premieres versus estates versus whatever.

01:45:40.640 --> 01:45:42.640
And we're unable to do that.

01:45:42.640 --> 01:45:44.859
We're unable to do that because we don't know what market

01:45:44.859 --> 01:45:46.989
demand is going to be until we get in there and actually

01:45:46.989 --> 01:45:48.640
topo an area.

01:45:48.640 --> 01:45:52.890
We don't know what it's going to lend itself to on layouts,

01:45:52.890 --> 01:45:55.640
what it's going to lend itself to.

01:45:55.640 --> 01:45:58.970
We're over two miles, maybe three miles from our south

01:45:58.970 --> 01:46:02.640
boundary to our north boundary of our property holdings.

01:46:02.640 --> 01:46:06.350
So the size of this property is different than just

01:46:06.350 --> 01:46:10.640
planning a 60 unit or an 80 unit subdivision.

01:46:10.640 --> 01:46:15.289
We're trying to-- we're circling in on what the development

01:46:15.289 --> 01:46:16.640
is going to be.

01:46:16.640 --> 01:46:19.640
First was the concept plan.

01:46:19.640 --> 01:46:21.640
And this is still the same concept plan.

01:46:21.640 --> 01:46:23.640
Then is the detail plan.

01:46:23.640 --> 01:46:25.640
And then we come to you with plats.

01:46:25.640 --> 01:46:30.409
So you'll have a chance to see the plats before they get

01:46:30.409 --> 01:46:31.640
approved.

01:46:31.640 --> 01:46:34.640
We can't with any certainty say what's going to be where.

01:46:34.640 --> 01:46:37.220
And that's why we weren't able to do that between the last

01:46:37.220 --> 01:46:38.640
meeting and this meeting.

01:46:38.640 --> 01:46:40.640
We can't agree to broad bright lines.

01:46:40.640 --> 01:46:41.640
Bright line.

01:46:41.640 --> 01:46:44.640
No villas next to traditions, premieres, or estates.

01:46:44.640 --> 01:46:47.920
We can agree to bright lines where the definition of next

01:46:47.920 --> 01:46:49.640
to is an extra 20 feet.

01:46:49.640 --> 01:46:51.640
So we can agree to certain bright lines.

01:46:51.640 --> 01:46:58.100
But we don't know how many or where they're going to be

01:46:58.100 --> 01:47:01.640
until we see how sales go.

01:47:01.640 --> 01:47:05.640
So I guess your point is instead of coming back and saying,

01:47:05.640 --> 01:47:07.640
well, maybe instead of doing clusters,

01:47:07.640 --> 01:47:11.640
we're going to do in this unit or that unit, just said,

01:47:11.640 --> 01:47:12.640
will you leave it like it is?

01:47:12.640 --> 01:47:15.640
We'll figure it out essentially.

01:47:15.640 --> 01:47:16.640
No.

01:47:16.640 --> 01:47:21.760
Well, what we're saying is that in the bright yellows, if

01:47:21.760 --> 01:47:23.640
you're buying in the bright yellow,

01:47:23.640 --> 01:47:26.510
and if we, excuse me, if we're going to come back to the

01:47:26.510 --> 01:47:28.640
city with a plat for the bright yellow,

01:47:28.640 --> 01:47:32.739
uses available to it under the detail plan would include

01:47:32.739 --> 01:47:36.640
premieres, estates, villas, and traditions.

01:47:36.640 --> 01:47:38.640
That's what we're asking for.

01:47:38.640 --> 01:47:41.789
We're asking for the areas that are marked in yellow, which

01:47:41.789 --> 01:47:46.640
would exclude the area in the south of the blue line,

01:47:46.640 --> 01:47:52.180
be available to bring a plat forward for consideration for

01:47:52.180 --> 01:47:54.640
any of those four uses.

01:47:54.640 --> 01:47:57.039
And I think when a plat comes before our commission, if it

01:47:57.039 --> 01:48:02.640
meets the criteria that it's specified for,

01:48:02.640 --> 01:48:05.640
then we pretty much are obligated to approve it.

01:48:05.640 --> 01:48:09.640
So if we, to use your point, if you want to do a plat to us

01:48:09.640 --> 01:48:12.640
that we've said you can do any of these four mixes,

01:48:12.640 --> 01:48:16.420
you could do half, quarter of the pod, villas, and whatever

01:48:16.420 --> 01:48:18.640
mix you would want to as long as it's within,

01:48:18.640 --> 01:48:21.770
then it could be essentially it's in compliance and

01:48:21.770 --> 01:48:25.449
according to the detail plan, and we would need to approve

01:48:25.449 --> 01:48:25.640
it,

01:48:25.640 --> 01:48:30.939
essentially if we move this forward the way that it's

01:48:30.939 --> 01:48:34.640
proposed by you all to us tonight.

01:48:34.640 --> 01:48:39.500
But for the caveats that I'm agreeing to now, which is we

01:48:39.500 --> 01:48:43.640
would not mix within units or villages or clusters,

01:48:43.640 --> 01:48:47.880
we would not mix within those units single family and

01:48:47.880 --> 01:48:49.640
attached product.

01:48:49.640 --> 01:48:50.640
Right.

01:48:50.640 --> 01:48:52.640
That's what you're offering now.

01:48:52.640 --> 01:48:57.000
But my point is what you've brought to us, if we approve it

01:48:57.000 --> 01:49:01.470
as is, you can plat it in any configuration that you want

01:49:01.470 --> 01:49:01.640
to.

01:49:01.640 --> 01:49:04.760
And since it is in compliance with the detail plan, we

01:49:04.760 --> 01:49:07.640
would essentially need to approve it because we've already

01:49:07.640 --> 01:49:09.640
given you permission to do so.

01:49:09.640 --> 01:49:15.380
And you're offering now before us kind of on the fly to

01:49:15.380 --> 01:49:20.640
draft some of this and try to make it work out.

01:49:20.640 --> 01:49:26.640
I'm trying to solve the concerns that I've heard.

01:49:26.640 --> 01:49:27.640
Okay.

01:49:27.640 --> 01:49:30.840
I think the concerns are the same ones that were here a

01:49:30.840 --> 01:49:36.640
month ago, and now we're trying to do it on the clock here.

01:49:36.640 --> 01:49:39.640
It figured out.

01:49:39.640 --> 01:49:43.340
I'm somewhat of the opinion that we need to I'm not going

01:49:43.340 --> 01:49:47.670
to make a motion, but I'm just going to state my opinion is

01:49:47.670 --> 01:49:49.640
that we deny it and move it forward to city council.

01:49:49.640 --> 01:49:53.210
You all can draft it all however it needs to be drafted,

01:49:53.210 --> 01:49:57.199
and then it can be approved at that point, and hopefully it

01:49:57.199 --> 01:50:00.640
will be worked out in your best interest.

01:50:00.640 --> 01:50:02.640
I agree with Commissioner Tedder.

01:50:02.640 --> 01:50:06.899
I don't want to be up here drafting policy for your subdiv

01:50:06.899 --> 01:50:11.069
ision that you all have invested a tremendous amount of

01:50:11.069 --> 01:50:11.640
money,

01:50:11.640 --> 01:50:15.260
and you have clients and residents that have invested

01:50:15.260 --> 01:50:19.199
tremendously in it, and we're up here trying to draft

01:50:19.199 --> 01:50:22.869
something that doesn't get drafted correctly, and then we

01:50:22.869 --> 01:50:25.640
're having to fix it later.

01:50:25.640 --> 01:50:27.640
So those are my comments and my questions.

01:50:27.640 --> 01:50:30.640
I appreciate your answers and responses.

01:50:30.640 --> 01:50:33.640
Are there any other questions for the applicant?

01:50:33.640 --> 01:50:38.640
Thank you for your answers and your time.

01:50:38.640 --> 01:50:42.640
I have two cards.

01:50:42.640 --> 01:50:43.640
Okay, I just stay on the board.

01:50:43.640 --> 01:50:44.640
Commissioner Husbeth, I'm sorry.

01:50:44.640 --> 01:50:45.640
No, sir, I didn't.

01:50:45.640 --> 01:50:49.859
I'm going to I want to hear from those that are here to

01:50:49.859 --> 01:50:52.640
speak, and then I'll have a question for you.

01:50:52.640 --> 01:50:55.640
Yes, please.

01:50:55.640 --> 01:50:58.640
Thank you.

01:50:58.640 --> 01:51:01.789
At this time, I just have two cards wishing to speak on

01:51:01.789 --> 01:51:02.640
this item.

01:51:02.640 --> 01:51:05.640
I have Bruce Walker.

01:51:05.640 --> 01:51:12.119
Mr. Walker, if you'd like to come forward, and then the

01:51:12.119 --> 01:51:16.640
other card I have is from Elma Walker.

01:51:16.640 --> 01:51:17.640
Good evening.

01:51:17.640 --> 01:51:22.640
Bruce Walker, 9805 Grandview Drive.

01:51:22.640 --> 01:51:27.760
I live at Ropes and Ranch, and I'm not like Mr. Steve over

01:51:27.760 --> 01:51:28.640
here.

01:51:28.640 --> 01:51:31.640
I'm not against these villas.

01:51:31.640 --> 01:51:35.279
I have some concerns, but this is the first time I've

01:51:35.279 --> 01:51:39.840
looked at this map, and so my comments may be a little bit

01:51:39.840 --> 01:51:44.640
out of context in that I haven't seen this map in a while.

01:51:44.640 --> 01:51:49.199
There's a couple of gas wells on this that were I looked at

01:51:49.199 --> 01:51:56.640
the 2011 map that were marked as gas wells, and let's see,

01:51:56.640 --> 01:52:00.640
this one here and this one here.

01:52:00.640 --> 01:52:08.640
Both of them say now they're -- let's see.

01:52:08.640 --> 01:52:10.640
I apologize.

01:52:10.640 --> 01:52:11.640
Yeah.

01:52:11.640 --> 01:52:17.710
Both of them basically say on the proposed plan, it's a gas

01:52:17.710 --> 01:52:18.640
park.

01:52:18.640 --> 01:52:21.640
It used to say it was on a gas park.

01:52:21.640 --> 01:52:24.640
Now it says it's a future detailed plan, exceptions E.

01:52:24.640 --> 01:52:30.850
The other one says it used to be a gas park. Now it's a

01:52:30.850 --> 01:52:32.239
proposed plan, detail exception F, and I don't know what E

01:52:32.239 --> 01:52:32.640
and F is.

01:52:32.640 --> 01:52:33.640
Okay?

01:52:33.640 --> 01:52:38.810
Up in this far corner up here, there's another -- it used

01:52:38.810 --> 01:52:42.640
to be Biltmore gas plan number 14.

01:52:42.640 --> 01:52:45.640
Now it's future detailed plan exception D.

01:52:45.640 --> 01:52:48.829
So having looked at that and having the old plan, I'm

01:52:48.829 --> 01:52:50.640
wondering what changed.

01:52:50.640 --> 01:53:01.180
Also, we have here this gray area here which basically says

01:53:01.180 --> 01:53:06.640
-- let's see.

01:53:06.640 --> 01:53:10.369
Oh, this was basically supposed to be a clubhouse, and now

01:53:10.369 --> 01:53:12.640
it says future plan exception C.

01:53:12.640 --> 01:53:16.890
So my question was, is the clubhouse still going to be

01:53:16.890 --> 01:53:18.640
built there or not?

01:53:18.640 --> 01:53:22.640
A couple other issues have come up.

01:53:22.640 --> 01:53:28.260
This gas well here, in the meeting when this -- when Chris

01:53:28.260 --> 01:53:33.640
-- Mayor Chris Watts was not mayor but was a councilman,

01:53:33.640 --> 01:53:38.630
that particular gas well was supposed to have 250,000 feet,

01:53:38.630 --> 01:53:41.640
and Mr. Soriano basically --

01:53:41.640 --> 01:53:47.640
Mr. Soriano agreed to make that 250 feet from homes.

01:53:47.640 --> 01:53:51.640
It doesn't show on the map here.

01:53:51.640 --> 01:53:54.789
It slows right next to where it was before, so that makes

01:53:54.789 --> 01:53:59.640
me wonder if that somehow got missed in the translation.

01:53:59.640 --> 01:54:02.220
And the other thing that -- again, none of this affects me

01:54:02.220 --> 01:54:03.640
because I don't live there.

01:54:03.640 --> 01:54:06.640
I live way deep in the blue line.

01:54:06.640 --> 01:54:07.640
Okay?

01:54:07.640 --> 01:54:11.640
This is just me thinking about neighbors of the future.

01:54:11.640 --> 01:54:16.699
The other area of concern is right over here, which is P

01:54:16.699 --> 01:54:17.640
onder.

01:54:17.640 --> 01:54:18.640
Okay?

01:54:18.640 --> 01:54:25.640
There's a major compressor station, waste injection well,

01:54:25.640 --> 01:54:29.640
eight-acre wastewater collection pond,

01:54:29.640 --> 01:54:33.640
and my wonder, even though this is us, that's Ponder.

01:54:33.640 --> 01:54:38.640
How close can homes be to that area safely?

01:54:38.640 --> 01:54:41.520
I don't know what the rules are, but I certainly wouldn't

01:54:41.520 --> 01:54:42.640
want to live there.

01:54:42.640 --> 01:54:44.640
Those are my questions.

01:54:44.640 --> 01:54:45.640
Okay.

01:54:45.640 --> 01:54:52.130
I'll call on staff to see if we can get some answers to

01:54:52.130 --> 01:54:54.640
your questions.

01:54:54.640 --> 01:54:58.640
I think I can answer the question on the grayed-out areas.

01:54:58.640 --> 01:55:01.640
Since the request wasn't a part -- since gas wells weren't

01:55:01.640 --> 01:55:02.640
a part of the request,

01:55:02.640 --> 01:55:04.640
it was just having to do with the residential uses,

01:55:04.640 --> 01:55:07.779
those were grayed out as not a part of the detailed plan or

01:55:07.779 --> 01:55:09.640
the land use plan amendment.

01:55:09.640 --> 01:55:13.840
As far as the compressor station in Ponder, I'm not certain

01:55:13.840 --> 01:55:15.640
about the setbacks.

01:55:15.640 --> 01:55:19.739
I'm not sure if we have any setbacks regarding that, but

01:55:19.739 --> 01:55:20.640
anyway.

01:55:20.640 --> 01:55:21.640
Okay.

01:55:21.640 --> 01:55:25.640
Thank you, Julie.

01:55:25.640 --> 01:55:30.640
I'll call on Emma Walker.

01:55:30.640 --> 01:55:38.640
I have one other card that's been added, Julian Rimsky.

01:55:38.640 --> 01:55:43.640
Emma Walker, 9805 Grandview.

01:55:43.640 --> 01:55:50.640
So that map that he was referring to was 2011, by the way.

01:55:50.640 --> 01:55:54.640
We never did receive anything on this in the mail.

01:55:54.640 --> 01:55:55.640
Okay.

01:55:55.640 --> 01:55:59.640
So I don't know about other people, but we never did.

01:55:59.640 --> 01:56:02.640
So I went to see Julie because I heard about it.

01:56:02.640 --> 01:56:03.640
Okay.

01:56:03.640 --> 01:56:05.640
That shouldn't be happening.

01:56:05.640 --> 01:56:09.359
I wanted to confirm how many two-family units were proposed

01:56:09.359 --> 01:56:09.640
.

01:56:09.640 --> 01:56:11.640
I heard you talking about that.

01:56:11.640 --> 01:56:15.640
And I'd like to suggest that we only give approval for half

01:56:15.640 --> 01:56:17.640
of the two-family --

01:56:17.640 --> 01:56:22.710
or two-family units proposed, the duplexes, including those

01:56:22.710 --> 01:56:23.640
already built.

01:56:23.640 --> 01:56:28.699
And then Robeson to come back to planning to propose the

01:56:28.699 --> 01:56:31.640
last half of those two-family units

01:56:31.640 --> 01:56:37.640
and any other proposed changes at that time.

01:56:37.640 --> 01:56:43.260
I support the P&Z revision proposing the prohibition of the

01:56:43.260 --> 01:56:45.640
front facade of duplexes

01:56:45.640 --> 01:56:50.630
facing the front facade of single-family detached

01:56:50.630 --> 01:56:54.640
residential uses that you came up with.

01:56:54.640 --> 01:56:59.640
I support the P&Z revision proposing the duplexes should be

01:56:59.640 --> 01:57:00.640
clustered together

01:57:00.640 --> 01:57:03.640
in their own sections or small neighborhoods

01:57:03.640 --> 01:57:06.510
and single-family homes in their own sections or

01:57:06.510 --> 01:57:07.640
neighborhoods.

01:57:07.640 --> 01:57:12.109
This protects homeowners in the future from duplexes being

01:57:12.109 --> 01:57:15.640
interspersed with the single-family homes.

01:57:15.640 --> 01:57:22.640
I support the P&Z revision that buffer or transition --

01:57:22.640 --> 01:57:26.960
that have buffer or transition requirements that should

01:57:26.960 --> 01:57:31.640
exist between single-family detached residential uses.

01:57:31.640 --> 01:57:35.239
Now, for example, the current duplex neighborhood is

01:57:35.239 --> 01:57:39.640
separated from single-family homes by the golf course.

01:57:39.640 --> 01:57:42.880
Whether the people on the one side of the golf course that

01:57:42.880 --> 01:57:46.619
have a balcony overlooking the golf course and the duplexes

01:57:46.619 --> 01:57:49.640
knew about that, that's up for grabs.

01:57:49.640 --> 01:57:51.640
Okay.

01:57:51.640 --> 01:57:56.920
I want you to revise that chart, Julie, where the fifth

01:57:56.920 --> 01:58:00.640
choice, the multi-family --

01:58:00.640 --> 01:58:04.640
two- or three-story is still on that list.

01:58:04.640 --> 01:58:05.640
That shouldn't even be on the list.

01:58:05.640 --> 01:58:08.640
It must have caused some confusion in the neighborhood.

01:58:08.640 --> 01:58:12.430
I did see a message on the message board that talked about

01:58:12.430 --> 01:58:17.640
multi-family, and that kind of upsets people.

01:58:17.640 --> 01:58:23.640
Now, so having said all that, I think that in the future

01:58:23.640 --> 01:58:26.050
you're going to be dealing more and more with this kind of

01:58:26.050 --> 01:58:26.640
thing.

01:58:26.640 --> 01:58:29.640
This was a PD before they had MPCs.

01:58:29.640 --> 01:58:33.210
I know all about MPCs because I've been involved with over

01:58:33.210 --> 01:58:34.640
looking that, too.

01:58:34.640 --> 01:58:38.210
We have Hunter Ranch on one side and Cole Ranch on the

01:58:38.210 --> 01:58:41.569
other, and between those two exits on I-35, we will double

01:58:41.569 --> 01:58:43.640
the population in Denton.

01:58:43.640 --> 01:58:46.640
So we are talking about a major, major thing.

01:58:46.640 --> 01:58:50.640
It needs to be handled differently.

01:58:50.640 --> 01:58:52.640
And you're doing a good job.

01:58:52.640 --> 01:58:56.640
So there we go.

01:58:56.640 --> 01:59:01.510
When you were talking about, like, exceptions to that blue

01:59:01.510 --> 01:59:05.489
line thing, and I don't know whether I can -- oh, that's

01:59:05.489 --> 01:59:06.640
how you do it.

01:59:06.640 --> 01:59:08.640
Right over here is another one of those.

01:59:08.640 --> 01:59:11.640
See the indentations?

01:59:11.640 --> 01:59:13.640
Right now there are some houses there.

01:59:13.640 --> 01:59:16.920
And the implication is that it will adhere with that kind

01:59:16.920 --> 01:59:17.640
of thing.

01:59:17.640 --> 01:59:20.930
But at any point in time, you know, across that -- on the

01:59:20.930 --> 01:59:25.640
other side of the blue line, it could be duplexes.

01:59:25.640 --> 01:59:29.210
That may be the person buying across the street didn't know

01:59:29.210 --> 01:59:29.640
about.

01:59:29.640 --> 01:59:32.640
So that is a possibility.

01:59:32.640 --> 01:59:34.640
That's a concern.

01:59:34.640 --> 01:59:38.739
Now, having said that, I will also say that there is a

01:59:38.739 --> 01:59:42.609
possibility my husband and I will move into a duplex

01:59:42.609 --> 01:59:43.640
someday.

01:59:43.640 --> 01:59:45.640
So we are not anti-village.

01:59:45.640 --> 01:59:48.640
We think it's a great idea.

01:59:48.640 --> 01:59:49.640
All right.

01:59:49.640 --> 01:59:53.279
My final comment would be this, that back when they were

01:59:53.279 --> 01:59:57.289
talking about a longer distance from a gas well, Mr. Sur

01:59:57.289 --> 02:00:02.130
iano called a meeting out at Robeson and everybody who could

02:00:02.130 --> 02:00:03.640
attend I'm sure was there.

02:00:03.640 --> 02:00:07.210
And we were basically threatened that they would be pulling

02:00:07.210 --> 02:00:10.640
out of Robeson Ranch if they didn't get this taken care of.

02:00:10.640 --> 02:00:15.350
In fact, that's when the council meeting followed and Chris

02:00:15.350 --> 02:00:19.670
Watts, now our mayor, bartered a deal to have at least a

02:00:19.670 --> 02:00:24.640
250 distance from a house and a gas well pad.

02:00:24.640 --> 02:00:27.640
So we like things in writing.

02:00:27.640 --> 02:00:31.739
And I think that you should require these things in writing

02:00:31.739 --> 02:00:34.640
because otherwise they may not happen.

02:00:34.640 --> 02:00:37.640
You'll be some other people sitting up here.

02:00:37.640 --> 02:00:39.640
I may be dead.

02:00:39.640 --> 02:00:43.420
And I think that we need to take care of this considering

02:00:43.420 --> 02:00:45.640
the size of it for the future.

02:00:45.640 --> 02:00:46.640
Thank you.

02:00:46.640 --> 02:00:54.640
Thank you.

02:00:54.640 --> 02:00:56.640
I have one final card.

02:00:56.640 --> 02:00:58.640
Julianne Rimsky.

02:00:58.640 --> 02:01:02.210
Anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please

02:01:02.210 --> 02:01:05.640
fill out a card and come forward when I call your name.

02:01:05.640 --> 02:01:07.640
Good evening and thank you.

02:01:07.640 --> 02:01:09.640
As I said, my name is Julianne Rimsky.

02:01:09.640 --> 02:01:15.640
I live at 11904 Glenbrook, Robeson resident.

02:01:15.640 --> 02:01:21.340
And if I could hopefully do things with the map

02:01:21.340 --> 02:01:27.399
appropriately, I am going to speak in favor of the way the

02:01:27.399 --> 02:01:30.640
proposal was somewhat presented.

02:01:30.640 --> 02:01:34.739
And the reason I'm saying somewhat is because I did miss

02:01:34.739 --> 02:01:36.640
some of the beginning.

02:01:36.640 --> 02:01:40.220
One of the things in regard to, and I've got nothing to do

02:01:40.220 --> 02:01:43.720
with having been on a zoning board, I'm not a builder

02:01:43.720 --> 02:01:47.640
developer, but just in having studied it.

02:01:47.640 --> 02:01:52.420
When a builder is initially going in, he has to run his

02:01:52.420 --> 02:01:57.640
support system, his streets, his water, his sewer.

02:01:57.640 --> 02:02:01.539
He puts it in as to a certain grid, and then as he's

02:02:01.539 --> 02:02:06.130
developing the rest of the plan, he's going to go further

02:02:06.130 --> 02:02:07.640
out from that.

02:02:07.640 --> 02:02:11.640
In order to say for sure where something is going to go,

02:02:11.640 --> 02:02:15.939
part of that is going to be based on how he's extending his

02:02:15.939 --> 02:02:19.640
water, his sewer, and the electrical going in.

02:02:19.640 --> 02:02:25.640
He needs to do that in what is most economical for himself.

02:02:25.640 --> 02:02:29.270
He's put in the request of putting villas just on the other

02:02:29.270 --> 02:02:30.640
side of Michelle.

02:02:30.640 --> 02:02:33.640
I live further up on Michelle.

02:02:33.640 --> 02:02:35.640
Putting in villas.

02:02:35.640 --> 02:02:39.289
If you want to slide the map up, we can follow where you're

02:02:39.289 --> 02:02:40.640
trying to show us.

02:02:40.640 --> 02:02:42.640
Okay.

02:02:42.640 --> 02:02:42.640
All righty.

02:02:42.640 --> 02:02:44.640
This is Michelle.

02:02:44.640 --> 02:02:46.640
You presently have villas at this side.

02:02:46.640 --> 02:02:49.510
The next spot that he wants to put them in is over here

02:02:49.510 --> 02:02:50.640
across the street.

02:02:50.640 --> 02:02:55.810
I think he wants to put in a total of 30, which would be 15

02:02:55.810 --> 02:03:00.600
units or thereabouts, because when you say 30, it's 30

02:03:00.600 --> 02:03:03.640
individual but 15 buildings.

02:03:03.640 --> 02:03:04.640
Okay.

02:03:04.640 --> 02:03:09.640
That will finish up your building area in through there.

02:03:09.640 --> 02:03:13.050
That is a good place to put them, because it has the buffer

02:03:13.050 --> 02:03:14.640
of the community park.

02:03:14.640 --> 02:03:17.640
It has the dog park, et cetera.

02:03:17.640 --> 02:03:23.770
If he gets and wants to put in more villas, if we go to the

02:03:23.770 --> 02:03:28.920
area where the blue is and they've spoken of 25 and

02:03:28.920 --> 02:03:34.840
changing 25-1 and 25-2 and the like, and I'm not the

02:03:34.840 --> 02:03:43.640
builder, I'm that, but my common sense would say,

02:03:43.640 --> 02:03:47.329
okay, this area right in here, you would remain with

02:03:47.329 --> 02:03:48.640
regular homes.

02:03:48.640 --> 02:03:49.640
This little pod here.

02:03:49.640 --> 02:03:54.439
Now, pods, clusters, neighborhoods, they all kind of mean

02:03:54.439 --> 02:03:57.640
the same depending on where you're at.

02:03:57.640 --> 02:04:03.640
Whatever you put in as a villa, you have to keep together.

02:04:03.640 --> 02:04:08.140
The rationale being is they're all getting their water paid

02:04:08.140 --> 02:04:12.550
for by the private HOA, and I'm calling it private, but it

02:04:12.550 --> 02:04:14.640
's a sub-HOA they're in.

02:04:14.640 --> 02:04:18.859
There's no way that anybody is going to want to put a villa

02:04:18.859 --> 02:04:23.069
in the middle of another house area, because you're not

02:04:23.069 --> 02:04:25.640
going to get the support for it.

02:04:25.640 --> 02:04:29.739
They've used the terms lock and leave, and that, I think,

02:04:29.739 --> 02:04:31.640
is a big misconception.

02:04:31.640 --> 02:04:36.640
In other areas of the community or country, you have places

02:04:36.640 --> 02:04:41.640
where I kind of maybe would have liked to have had it with

02:04:41.640 --> 02:04:41.640
moving in,

02:04:41.640 --> 02:04:44.640
where I didn't have to worry about hiring my gardener,

02:04:44.640 --> 02:04:50.640
hiring my, yeah, I'm going to blank out.

02:04:50.640 --> 02:04:54.970
Okay, the person to put down the weed and feed, somebody to

02:04:54.970 --> 02:04:59.270
come and trim the shrubs, etc., whether or not my watering

02:04:59.270 --> 02:05:00.640
system is working.

02:05:00.640 --> 02:05:03.640
These are things that are taken care of.

02:05:03.640 --> 02:05:07.399
It doesn't mean that I'm going to leave the place and have

02:05:07.399 --> 02:05:08.640
it go derelict.

02:05:08.640 --> 02:05:12.640
It just means I've got something better to do with my time,

02:05:12.640 --> 02:05:17.039
which might include going off to the schools, reading to

02:05:17.039 --> 02:05:20.640
the children, tutoring them, etc.

02:05:20.640 --> 02:05:24.220
I think that's a little bit more productive sometime than

02:05:24.220 --> 02:05:27.640
worrying about whether or not my grass has gotten cut.

02:05:27.640 --> 02:05:35.020
Looking at the proposal in the way I understood it was that

02:05:35.020 --> 02:05:39.909
they would like to have the feasibility that say in two

02:05:39.909 --> 02:05:40.640
months,

02:05:40.640 --> 02:05:45.640
they find out that they need to put in X number of villas.

02:05:45.640 --> 02:05:48.939
To have that feasibility of looking with where they're

02:05:48.939 --> 02:05:53.229
digging, how the land is laid out, how they can do the

02:05:53.229 --> 02:05:54.640
support system,

02:05:54.640 --> 02:05:57.510
and whether or not they would then determine that this

02:05:57.510 --> 02:05:59.920
neighborhood over here would be a villa or this

02:05:59.920 --> 02:06:02.640
neighborhood up here would be a set of villas,

02:06:02.640 --> 02:06:07.649
and they would be separated by be a street, be a golf

02:06:07.649 --> 02:06:11.640
course, be a wetlands or that thing.

02:06:11.640 --> 02:06:16.630
They would still come back to you at that time, but they

02:06:16.630 --> 02:06:22.640
don't want to go through all of the initial preliminaries.

02:06:22.640 --> 02:06:27.359
To say to have all of that ready today, well, we drove down

02:06:27.359 --> 02:06:30.640
one of the streets and they're bulldozing and working on it

02:06:30.640 --> 02:06:30.640
,

02:06:30.640 --> 02:06:34.739
and until they find out how that lot of land is going to

02:06:34.739 --> 02:06:37.640
pan out when you're on a bulldozer,

02:06:37.640 --> 02:06:43.770
then they can't figure out what it would be working best

02:06:43.770 --> 02:06:44.640
for.

02:06:44.640 --> 02:06:49.750
A concern, I think, for some of the neighbors or within the

02:06:49.750 --> 02:06:54.489
community of Robeson ought to be that if Robeson cannot

02:06:54.489 --> 02:06:57.640
maintain their buildings

02:06:57.640 --> 02:07:02.630
and for some reason they do end up pulling out, then I as a

02:07:02.630 --> 02:07:07.640
homeowner, based on the rules and regulations of the zoning

02:07:07.640 --> 02:07:09.640
and the city council

02:07:09.640 --> 02:07:13.300
and what is based on the CC and ours of Robeson, we're

02:07:13.300 --> 02:07:17.220
going to be the ones that are going to have to take care of

02:07:17.220 --> 02:07:18.640
our own streets.

02:07:18.640 --> 02:07:22.760
We're going to have to worry about those things that right

02:07:22.760 --> 02:07:26.640
now the city of Denton does not have to take care of.

02:07:26.640 --> 02:07:32.350
We pay for our trash. We maintain our own streets, et

02:07:32.350 --> 02:07:34.640
cetera. I thank you.

02:07:34.640 --> 02:07:37.640
Thank you.

02:07:37.640 --> 02:07:41.640
That's the last card that I have on this item.

02:07:41.640 --> 02:07:46.539
So at this time I'm going to go back and answer the

02:07:46.539 --> 02:07:50.710
questions Mr. Walker had on some of the gas well issues I

02:07:50.710 --> 02:07:51.640
can answer.

02:07:51.640 --> 02:07:53.640
Julie couldn't answer.

02:07:53.640 --> 02:07:54.640
Okay.

02:07:54.640 --> 02:07:58.350
I've got, Legal would like to clarify, I think, some of the

02:07:58.350 --> 02:08:02.199
gas well questions, and then we will open and die us up for

02:08:02.199 --> 02:08:03.640
discussion and a motion.

02:08:03.640 --> 02:08:07.239
I just wanted to touch on the gas well issues that Mr.

02:08:07.239 --> 02:08:11.640
Walker had raised, specifically the Ponder ETJ issue,

02:08:11.640 --> 02:08:15.500
as well as also some of the comments made by, on the

02:08:15.500 --> 02:08:19.550
history of this project, made by Julie Wyatt, our senior

02:08:19.550 --> 02:08:22.640
planner who presented this item.

02:08:22.640 --> 02:08:26.930
As far as the separation standards that Mr. Walker was

02:08:26.930 --> 02:08:30.640
referring to are normally called setbacks.

02:08:30.640 --> 02:08:35.369
Now, under Texas law, cities are allowed to regulate uses

02:08:35.369 --> 02:08:40.640
and distances between uses and internally within a use

02:08:40.640 --> 02:08:43.640
through the concept of zoning.

02:08:43.640 --> 02:08:47.520
And zoning is only effective, or should I say, the city

02:08:47.520 --> 02:08:51.640
only has the power to use zoning within the city limits.

02:08:51.640 --> 02:08:56.109
Once you go outside the city limits, it's no longer a, we

02:08:56.109 --> 02:09:00.689
don't have zoning power, so we can't enforce or implement a

02:09:00.689 --> 02:09:03.329
separation standard for a use that's outside the city

02:09:03.329 --> 02:09:05.640
limits to uses that are inside.

02:09:05.640 --> 02:09:09.890
And that's even further reinforced when that particular use

02:09:09.890 --> 02:09:13.479
happens to be in another city's extra-territorial

02:09:13.479 --> 02:09:14.640
jurisdiction,

02:09:14.640 --> 02:09:19.180
which is they can regulate through their platting just like

02:09:19.180 --> 02:09:21.640
we regulate plats in the ETJ.

02:09:21.640 --> 02:09:25.210
So with that, that's why we don't have a system, nor are we

02:09:25.210 --> 02:09:28.239
allowed to by Texas law, to implement some type of a set

02:09:28.239 --> 02:09:36.109
back from a wastewater injection well that may be located in

02:09:36.109 --> 02:09:37.640
the ETJ of another city.

02:09:37.640 --> 02:09:39.640
So hopefully that answers that question.

02:09:39.640 --> 02:09:44.970
The other part, as far as what Julie Wyatt confirmed, you

02:09:44.970 --> 02:09:48.569
know, what happened in 2011, and some of the comments about

02:09:48.569 --> 02:09:52.010
the discussions involving Council Member Watson, Mayor

02:09:52.010 --> 02:09:54.640
Watson, who was a council member at the time.

02:09:54.640 --> 02:09:58.289
And as I'm looking at the planners in this room, you know,

02:09:58.289 --> 02:10:01.130
they're all newer, and I guess I've been here five and a

02:10:01.130 --> 02:10:04.189
half years, and I've more or less become institutional

02:10:04.189 --> 02:10:06.640
knowledge on this particular project.

02:10:06.640 --> 02:10:10.489
I was there in 2011 at the P&Z and at the City Council

02:10:10.489 --> 02:10:14.939
discussions, and I know that gas wells were raised at that

02:10:14.939 --> 02:10:15.640
time.

02:10:15.640 --> 02:10:21.720
I can't remember exactly specifics or whether the 250-foot

02:10:21.720 --> 02:10:25.640
agreement was reached at that meeting.

02:10:25.640 --> 02:10:28.970
I'm assuming that that was not reflected in the actual

02:10:28.970 --> 02:10:32.640
ordinance at the time, or if there's any mention of that.

02:10:32.640 --> 02:10:35.569
So just like some comments had been made earlier by P&Z,

02:10:35.569 --> 02:10:39.619
unless it's actually written down, it's very difficult to

02:10:39.619 --> 02:10:44.779
go back and determine what exactly was said or agreed to or

02:10:44.779 --> 02:10:47.640
decided if it's not written.

02:10:47.640 --> 02:10:51.479
And that is something I guess I'm in agreement with some of

02:10:51.479 --> 02:10:55.319
the members on the P&Z that have expressed that opinion or

02:10:55.319 --> 02:10:56.640
their concern.

02:10:56.640 --> 02:10:59.739
We need some conditions that are definitely written down so

02:10:59.739 --> 02:11:02.260
that we don't have to come back here to decide what

02:11:02.260 --> 02:11:05.789
actually occurred five, six, ten, fifteen, twenty years,

02:11:05.789 --> 02:11:08.760
because this development will continue developing for many

02:11:08.760 --> 02:11:09.640
years to come.

02:11:09.640 --> 02:11:15.640
So with that, I just wanted to add that to the record.

02:11:15.640 --> 02:11:18.640
Thank you.

02:11:18.640 --> 02:11:20.640
Commissioner Hutchibeth.

02:11:20.640 --> 02:11:21.640
Thank you, Chair.

02:11:21.640 --> 02:11:25.319
If I could have the gentleman behind you, Mr. Chair, I

02:11:25.319 --> 02:11:26.640
forget his name. He spoke to us before.

02:11:26.640 --> 02:11:27.640
Yes, sir, if you would please.

02:11:27.640 --> 02:11:30.640
Thank you.

02:11:30.640 --> 02:11:36.640
And if I could have the map, please.

02:11:36.640 --> 02:11:40.640
The map they have out there.

02:11:40.640 --> 02:11:46.029
As an overarching narrative, I share concern of my fellow

02:11:46.029 --> 02:11:51.649
commissioners, but I'm hoping there's a consensus to be

02:11:51.649 --> 02:11:52.640
made here.

02:11:52.640 --> 02:11:59.640
I found your presentation to be easy for me to understand.

02:11:59.640 --> 02:12:02.689
Give me just, and I'm not going to hold you to it, I just

02:12:02.689 --> 02:12:04.640
need to have a kind of a visual.

02:12:04.640 --> 02:12:08.800
Can you give me a general, can we pan out a little bit so

02:12:08.800 --> 02:12:10.640
we see the whole map?

02:12:10.640 --> 02:12:12.640
She'll adjust it.

02:12:12.640 --> 02:12:16.640
I think.

02:12:16.640 --> 02:12:17.640
Cool. Thank you.

02:12:17.640 --> 02:12:25.220
So what, using the existing villas that sliver as kind of a

02:12:25.220 --> 02:12:29.640
mile marker, you said there's 63.

02:12:29.640 --> 02:12:35.310
What does the max, in yellow space, if you can, what would,

02:12:35.310 --> 02:12:38.340
if we just kind of grouped it all together, just so I can

02:12:38.340 --> 02:12:45.859
get a proportion, what is 1200, I get units, what does that

02:12:45.859 --> 02:12:46.640
look like?

02:12:46.640 --> 02:12:48.369
What sections kind of, can you give me a general, I mean,

02:12:48.369 --> 02:12:51.109
and again, I'm not holding you to it, I just need to kind

02:12:51.109 --> 02:12:55.090
of have some visual to say this general area would

02:12:55.090 --> 02:12:57.640
encompass that type space.

02:12:57.640 --> 02:13:00.640
Yes sir. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission.

02:13:00.640 --> 02:13:04.210
Given that the 6000 to 37 unit maximum for the whole

02:13:04.210 --> 02:13:07.899
project and that we're currently around 1900 units, so let

02:13:07.899 --> 02:13:10.159
's say there's a plus or minus 5% swing, I think we

02:13:10.159 --> 02:13:13.640
discussed last time around, so if we say 6300 as a maximum,

02:13:13.640 --> 02:13:17.640
we're around 19 now leaving 43, 4400.

02:13:17.640 --> 02:13:22.109
So that's a very in yellow, not within the hatched zone,

02:13:22.109 --> 02:13:28.699
being 4400 units, 4300 units, 1200 of those to be the vill

02:13:28.699 --> 02:13:33.149
as, I'd say about a third of that yellow space if that lends

02:13:33.149 --> 02:13:33.640
any detail to it.

02:13:33.640 --> 02:13:40.640
So if I run up the side there, let's say from.

02:13:40.640 --> 02:13:41.640
Like in that area?

02:13:41.640 --> 02:13:42.640
Yeah.

02:13:42.640 --> 02:13:46.640
So straight up from there, kind of, generally, and again.

02:13:46.640 --> 02:13:48.640
Generally, I would say so.

02:13:48.640 --> 02:13:49.640
Yes.

02:13:49.640 --> 02:13:51.640
30%, something like that, that's probably reasonable.

02:13:51.640 --> 02:13:52.640
Got it.

02:13:52.640 --> 02:13:53.640
Okay.

02:13:53.640 --> 02:13:59.989
And then, help me understand when we say, when I'm thinking

02:13:59.989 --> 02:14:04.659
the neighborhood sections, the numbers, what do you call

02:14:04.659 --> 02:14:05.640
them again?

02:14:05.640 --> 02:14:06.640
Neighborhoods, units.

02:14:06.640 --> 02:14:07.640
Yeah, so neighborhood units.

02:14:07.640 --> 02:14:12.539
So is 27 one and then 27 two, that's two different

02:14:12.539 --> 02:14:14.640
neighborhood units?

02:14:14.640 --> 02:14:16.640
Yes, sir, typically phasing.

02:14:16.640 --> 02:14:17.640
Okay.

02:14:17.640 --> 02:14:18.640
Exactly right.

02:14:18.640 --> 02:14:24.640
Got it.

02:14:24.640 --> 02:14:29.640
I guess I'm not asking you to answer this.

02:14:29.640 --> 02:14:32.640
I'm just going to, I'm speaking out loud, Mr. Sorrell.

02:14:32.640 --> 02:14:38.949
So my thought is, I'm hoping we can come to an agreement on

02:14:38.949 --> 02:14:44.640
a section and then at least get the ball rolling.

02:14:44.640 --> 02:14:49.289
I respect the fact that there's 44 people that said they're

02:14:49.289 --> 02:14:50.640
in favor of it.

02:14:50.640 --> 02:14:52.640
I'm not willing to ignore that.

02:14:52.640 --> 02:14:55.640
There's two people that said, hey, we need a couple issues,

02:14:55.640 --> 02:15:00.640
but none of them, none of the issues aren't corrected by Mr

02:15:00.640 --> 02:15:00.640
.

02:15:00.640 --> 02:15:04.640
Sorrell's willingness to bookend everything.

02:15:04.640 --> 02:15:09.640
So that leaves me with, I can either ignore the 44 people,

02:15:09.640 --> 02:15:13.640
ignore the two people that spoke today saying they're

02:15:13.640 --> 02:15:17.640
willing to be amenable to some adjustments.

02:15:17.640 --> 02:15:21.460
And the one person that spoke that said she's amenable to

02:15:21.460 --> 02:15:25.270
the adjustments, I'm not willing to ignore all that for

02:15:25.270 --> 02:15:26.640
another month.

02:15:26.640 --> 02:15:32.880
But I guess my question is, and I don't, you don't have to

02:15:32.880 --> 02:15:34.640
answer this.

02:15:34.640 --> 02:15:39.310
That may be for Mr. Sorrell, but is there a section,

02:15:39.310 --> 02:15:45.659
because I'm assuming we're not moving up to section 46

02:15:45.659 --> 02:15:47.640
because that's at the very top and nothing else is there.

02:15:47.640 --> 02:15:51.810
So I think we can, with a reasonable amount of certainty,

02:15:51.810 --> 02:15:55.699
zone in on a segment that says, hey, let's get the ball

02:15:55.699 --> 02:15:58.649
rolling, understanding there's a need and understanding I

02:15:58.649 --> 02:16:00.640
don't want you to lose not one customer.

02:16:00.640 --> 02:16:06.159
And then that gives us time to fix the rest, the language,

02:16:06.159 --> 02:16:08.640
et cetera, et cetera.

02:16:08.640 --> 02:16:16.300
So I think hopefully that's a good mix. I'll see what else

02:16:16.300 --> 02:16:17.640
comes.

02:16:17.640 --> 02:16:22.720
But that was my question for you. And so I just, I know I

02:16:22.720 --> 02:16:25.640
can count on you. So thank you.

02:16:25.640 --> 02:16:28.760
I appreciate that. If I can make one comment to pseudo

02:16:28.760 --> 02:16:29.640
response.

02:16:29.640 --> 02:16:32.399
In terms of the layout, I know it was a lot of discussion

02:16:32.399 --> 02:16:35.459
last time, identify, pause, and have some locations that

02:16:35.459 --> 02:16:36.639
are pinned right down.

02:16:36.639 --> 02:16:40.479
Within some context, some offset, some buffers, some of the

02:16:40.479 --> 02:16:42.639
facades not facing each other.

02:16:42.639 --> 02:16:45.110
We took a look and just started into the effort to see what

02:16:45.110 --> 02:16:47.389
is it going to take to identify those and kind of pick a

02:16:47.389 --> 02:16:49.639
spot like unit 27.2 came up.

02:16:49.639 --> 02:16:52.370
So if there's lots on the golf course, they're going to be

02:16:52.370 --> 02:16:54.639
usually typically a higher end product.

02:16:54.639 --> 02:16:57.139
They're not going to be bills across from them. Now there's

02:16:57.139 --> 02:16:59.920
some amount of a buffer, maybe 20 feet, hasn't really been

02:16:59.920 --> 02:17:00.639
pinned down.

02:17:00.639 --> 02:17:03.389
We start kind of running into these roadblocks with every

02:17:03.389 --> 02:17:06.010
decision that need to be made in order to get some finite

02:17:06.010 --> 02:17:07.639
locations.

02:17:07.639 --> 02:17:10.110
We found we were hitting more roadblocks and we were making

02:17:10.110 --> 02:17:12.639
headway, which turned us into the neighborhood meeting and

02:17:12.639 --> 02:17:15.219
some further discussions and left our effort to right or

02:17:15.219 --> 02:17:15.639
wrong.

02:17:15.639 --> 02:17:18.120
And again, we apologize if that's a surprise and it sounds

02:17:18.120 --> 02:17:21.120
like it was coming here tonight, but some kind of a stip

02:17:21.120 --> 02:17:23.639
ulated approval with some of the staff report.

02:17:23.639 --> 02:17:27.219
I know staff did a great job again, appreciate their help

02:17:27.219 --> 02:17:30.850
identifying a handful of the buffer zone, the offset, the

02:17:30.850 --> 02:17:34.639
facades, and that side by side together with our hatching.

02:17:34.639 --> 02:17:38.809
We greatly appreciate an ability to identify what we hope

02:17:38.809 --> 02:17:42.639
are fairly summarizable list of the issues that are pending

02:17:42.639 --> 02:17:42.639
.

02:17:42.639 --> 02:17:45.040
And then our land planning can take those turns with

02:17:45.040 --> 02:17:48.770
accurate, hard and fast limitations and draw real lines and

02:17:48.770 --> 02:17:52.030
start that planning, start all that engineering work that

02:17:52.030 --> 02:17:52.639
was for whatever it's worth.

02:17:52.639 --> 02:17:57.639
The rationale behind how we're coming for you tonight.

02:17:57.639 --> 02:17:59.639
I'll ask you a question.

02:17:59.639 --> 02:18:01.639
Follow up.

02:18:01.639 --> 02:18:03.639
I'm not opposed to what you're trying to do.

02:18:03.639 --> 02:18:06.639
And I said I'm not opposed to villas.

02:18:06.639 --> 02:18:10.209
We're talking about hypotheticals and kind of going off the

02:18:10.209 --> 02:18:10.639
fly.

02:18:10.639 --> 02:18:13.930
If I understand you're trying to get this going, and at

02:18:13.930 --> 02:18:16.700
least for myself, I don't want to be a roadblock to your

02:18:16.700 --> 02:18:17.639
development.

02:18:17.639 --> 02:18:20.719
I'd like to see it be successful, it's been successful, I'd

02:18:20.719 --> 02:18:22.639
like it to continue to be that way.

02:18:22.639 --> 02:18:29.420
If as an option we were to deny it at PNC, it moves on to

02:18:29.420 --> 02:18:31.639
City Council.

02:18:31.639 --> 02:18:34.799
You're able then to work out all these issues that you're

02:18:34.799 --> 02:18:37.780
talking about between tonight and when you go to City

02:18:37.780 --> 02:18:38.639
Council.

02:18:38.639 --> 02:18:41.790
I know it's not the answer that you want to be a denial,

02:18:41.790 --> 02:18:45.090
but I'm not comfortable trying to be up here after you all

02:18:45.090 --> 02:18:48.309
spent a month working on it and not been able to come up to

02:18:48.309 --> 02:18:51.129
it and we're going to work it out an hour tonight and draft

02:18:51.129 --> 02:18:53.639
language to send on to City Council.

02:18:53.639 --> 02:18:56.219
Is that something that you're willing to consider even

02:18:56.219 --> 02:18:57.639
though I know it's a denial?

02:18:57.639 --> 02:18:59.639
It does move your project forward.

02:18:59.639 --> 02:19:02.959
I'm hopeful City Council between now and when you go there,

02:19:02.959 --> 02:19:05.969
you can work out all of these issues and the things that

02:19:05.969 --> 02:19:09.370
you've talked about that you're willing to do, which were

02:19:09.370 --> 02:19:12.500
our concerns as a commissioner or some of our concerns as

02:19:12.500 --> 02:19:13.639
commissioners.

02:19:13.639 --> 02:19:16.260
If that's a viable option, even though it's a denial and

02:19:16.260 --> 02:19:19.639
nobody likes to hear that, it does keep you moving forward.

02:19:19.639 --> 02:19:22.870
It does allow you the time to resolve these things and get

02:19:22.870 --> 02:19:25.639
it done at City Council to move forward.

02:19:25.639 --> 02:19:29.209
I don't know if that's something you all would like to

02:19:29.209 --> 02:19:32.510
consider as an option or if that's just not something you

02:19:32.510 --> 02:19:33.639
want to talk about.

02:19:33.639 --> 02:19:36.639
If, excuse me, if I can try to respond to that.

02:19:36.639 --> 02:19:39.340
One of the issues under that scenario where that would

02:19:39.340 --> 02:19:42.309
happen and we still have issues to work out, where I feel

02:19:42.309 --> 02:19:45.270
we're going to come into the same situation where our

02:19:45.270 --> 02:19:48.360
ability to pin down layouts and really move forward and

02:19:48.360 --> 02:19:51.360
tighten anything up, given the TOPO and then all the other

02:19:51.360 --> 02:19:53.639
issues that plan with it, I know you understand,

02:19:53.639 --> 02:19:57.579
isn't going to be any more solidified until that approval

02:19:57.579 --> 02:19:58.639
is in place.

02:19:58.639 --> 02:20:01.780
So get into that point where we can actually put pen to

02:20:01.780 --> 02:20:05.059
paper and know exactly what the constraints are and get

02:20:05.059 --> 02:20:06.639
things put together.

02:20:06.639 --> 02:20:09.649
We're having a hard time with that, and I think that would

02:20:09.649 --> 02:20:11.639
still exist under that scenario.

02:20:11.639 --> 02:20:15.219
Given that the red hatched area has eliminated a lot of the

02:20:15.219 --> 02:20:18.639
concern last time, which was the infill surprises.

02:20:18.639 --> 02:20:21.590
So we think that's taken care of and understanding it isn't

02:20:21.590 --> 02:20:24.459
a preference to, on the fly, I mentioned, work through

02:20:24.459 --> 02:20:25.639
these other issues.

02:20:25.639 --> 02:20:28.340
But if there's a potential to move it forward with stip

02:20:28.340 --> 02:20:31.870
ulations for the handful of the buffer zone, 20 foot has

02:20:31.870 --> 02:20:34.930
come up, the handful of other issues, the façade's not

02:20:34.930 --> 02:20:38.780
facing each other in the future units, and then not being

02:20:38.780 --> 02:20:42.639
side by side, I think that there's really a handful of them

02:20:42.639 --> 02:20:42.639
that are left.

02:20:42.639 --> 02:20:45.790
And if there's an ability to have a motion that tries to

02:20:45.790 --> 02:20:49.219
address those three with a hard and fast limit, then we can

02:20:49.219 --> 02:20:52.079
know where we stand better and when we actually get final

02:20:52.079 --> 02:20:53.639
ized, be able to proceed.

02:20:53.639 --> 02:20:57.610
And until that point, we're going to be a little bit unable

02:20:57.610 --> 02:21:00.639
to jump right in for lack of a better term.

02:21:00.639 --> 02:21:03.139
Excuse me. I don't know if that helps. That would be our

02:21:03.139 --> 02:21:03.639
preference.

02:21:03.639 --> 02:21:07.209
That's what we're requesting is, I guess, a stipulated

02:21:07.209 --> 02:21:10.659
approval with that addresses those, I'll say three terms I

02:21:10.659 --> 02:21:12.639
think that are outstanding.

02:21:12.639 --> 02:21:15.899
Okay. I've got one other question. Commissioner Rosano, do

02:21:15.899 --> 02:21:18.340
you have a question or just something else for this

02:21:18.340 --> 02:21:19.639
particular speaker?

02:21:19.639 --> 02:21:21.670
It's not necessarily for the particular speaker. I

02:21:21.670 --> 02:21:22.639
appreciate your feedback.

02:21:22.639 --> 02:21:23.639
Thanks.

02:21:23.639 --> 02:21:28.629
I have some thoughts and then I have a concern to express

02:21:28.629 --> 02:21:33.700
as the momentum's carrying us to some sort of motion. The

02:21:33.700 --> 02:21:35.639
report that we received from our city staff says that P&Z

02:21:35.639 --> 02:21:38.639
made recommendations for revisions and continued the

02:21:38.639 --> 02:21:41.829
request the applicant could further collect from

02:21:41.829 --> 02:21:44.639
neighborhood input and revise proposal.

02:21:44.639 --> 02:21:47.780
And from what I gather, there were six things that was

02:21:47.780 --> 02:21:51.040
needed or that we proposed. There's a reduction in the

02:21:51.040 --> 02:21:54.620
number of permitted villas, a requirement that the duplexes

02:21:54.620 --> 02:21:59.079
be clustered, a buffer, a prohibition of front-facing fac

02:21:59.079 --> 02:22:02.809
ades, general locations, and then a protection for those

02:22:02.809 --> 02:22:06.639
already platted. So that's six items.

02:22:06.639 --> 02:22:10.610
You all came today with one of those addressed on record.

02:22:10.610 --> 02:22:14.639
The proposal we have one in which you protected an area.

02:22:14.639 --> 02:22:17.989
And it says the applicant submitted the revised detailed

02:22:17.989 --> 02:22:21.360
land use plan but made no additional effort to address the

02:22:21.360 --> 02:22:25.649
concerns raised. Yet I'm hearing of those six items, we can

02:22:25.649 --> 02:22:27.639
knock off four of them real fast.

02:22:27.639 --> 02:22:31.209
We can change the cluster because you said you build by

02:22:31.209 --> 02:22:34.719
unit so we have the cluster one checked off. We have the

02:22:34.719 --> 02:22:38.790
buffer that you've provided tonight about buffering. And

02:22:38.790 --> 02:22:41.049
then we have this front-facing facade that you're fine

02:22:41.049 --> 02:22:41.639
changing.

02:22:41.639 --> 02:22:45.239
And so I'm sitting here thinking if you all would have come

02:22:45.239 --> 02:22:48.069
to us with four out of the six proposals that we

02:22:48.069 --> 02:22:51.670
recommended a month ago in writing, I don't want to speak

02:22:51.670 --> 02:22:54.969
on behalf of the commission, but it would have been a

02:22:54.969 --> 02:22:58.639
little bit more smooth than what we're experiencing tonight

02:22:58.639 --> 02:22:58.639
.

02:22:58.639 --> 02:23:03.229
And so there's a little bit of Chairman said surprise. That

02:23:03.229 --> 02:23:07.549
's a decent word to hear that two thirds of everything that

02:23:07.549 --> 02:23:12.360
was suggested to you. It was actually amenable. And you all

02:23:12.360 --> 02:23:14.639
are okay with doing it tonight.

02:23:14.639 --> 02:23:18.290
It's a little frustrating because I think we can all agree

02:23:18.290 --> 02:23:22.200
that we're not against villas. We I feel a little bit hand

02:23:22.200 --> 02:23:25.659
tied by the way this was presented to us and it seems like

02:23:25.659 --> 02:23:29.639
staff provided some opportunities to get this clarified.

02:23:29.639 --> 02:23:33.010
So my concern, those are my thoughts. My concern is if I

02:23:33.010 --> 02:23:36.100
was to hypothetically make a motion, it would sound

02:23:36.100 --> 02:23:39.620
something like I approve with the condition that we include

02:23:39.620 --> 02:23:42.969
unit 25-2 in the hatched zone that would include no

02:23:42.969 --> 02:23:46.110
products being mixed by villas, premier estates or

02:23:46.110 --> 02:23:49.989
traditions that a buffer behind villas would be at least 20

02:23:49.989 --> 02:23:51.639
feet and there wouldn't be front-facing facades.

02:23:51.639 --> 02:23:55.319
And I'm not an attorney to even write that language, but it

02:23:55.319 --> 02:23:58.979
would have to include all those things. And I hope you can

02:23:58.979 --> 02:24:02.649
see our hesitancy to just make that a condition for

02:24:02.649 --> 02:24:04.639
approval because it is on the fly.

02:24:04.639 --> 02:24:07.600
I don't even know if what I just mentioned could even put

02:24:07.600 --> 02:24:10.329
it into motion. But those are the four things that I've

02:24:10.329 --> 02:24:12.879
heard, which it seems everyone's on the same page with the

02:24:12.879 --> 02:24:16.639
agreeable. I just wish it was brought to us first.

02:24:16.639 --> 02:24:26.360
And so, yeah, I guess my thought is I'm not okay with

02:24:26.360 --> 02:24:29.549
making those conditions. It's hard to approve on those

02:24:29.549 --> 02:24:30.639
conditions.

02:24:30.639 --> 02:24:36.610
And so I probably side with the chair here in that a denial

02:24:36.610 --> 02:24:43.000
and then city council can super majority, I believe, vote

02:24:43.000 --> 02:24:49.309
it through. It's just unfortunate that at 8 o'clock the

02:24:49.309 --> 02:24:55.469
night of we are hearing these things that everyone's okay

02:24:55.469 --> 02:24:56.639
with.

02:24:56.639 --> 02:25:00.319
I don't have any other speakers and I don't have a motioner

02:25:00.319 --> 02:25:03.639
. So someone else, Commissioner Taylor.

02:25:03.639 --> 02:25:07.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:25:07.639 --> 02:25:10.639
Yeah, I really think four of six would have been enough.

02:25:10.639 --> 02:25:27.670
It would have been about a 10 minute item or less. So I

02:25:27.670 --> 02:25:28.309
think hearing consensus building on the commission, I'm

02:25:28.309 --> 02:25:28.930
going to make a motion for denial. And I would like to add

02:25:28.930 --> 02:25:30.989
notes as to the reason why this is a denial because I think

02:25:30.989 --> 02:25:33.639
most of us here wanted to vote yes to this.

02:25:33.639 --> 02:25:36.520
And I really thought this would be like you said, there's

02:25:36.520 --> 02:25:39.340
going to be a list of there's going to be two paragraphs of

02:25:39.340 --> 02:25:42.159
text that lay out how these things are going to be located

02:25:42.159 --> 02:25:43.639
and it'll sail through.

02:25:43.639 --> 02:25:48.489
But instead, we got almost the identical proposal we had a

02:25:48.489 --> 02:25:49.639
month ago.

02:25:49.639 --> 02:25:54.629
So I move we recommend denials to city council to this

02:25:54.629 --> 02:26:00.659
amendment to the plan development 173 because it does not

02:26:00.659 --> 02:26:05.969
address the issue of Villa lots being directly across the

02:26:05.969 --> 02:26:10.639
street from other single family lots because it does not

02:26:10.639 --> 02:26:16.180
include a 20 foot buffer in the form of golf course park or

02:26:16.180 --> 02:26:18.639
other open space.

02:26:18.639 --> 02:26:26.430
Because it does not indicate any grouping or clustering of

02:26:26.430 --> 02:26:28.639
the units.

02:26:28.639 --> 02:26:33.639
Trying to make sure I have them all.

02:26:33.639 --> 02:26:41.219
And because of the concerns that this will put

02:26:41.219 --> 02:26:51.639
approximately 28 to 30% of all future development in Robes

02:26:51.639 --> 02:26:59.639
on into higher density attached dwelling category.

02:26:59.639 --> 02:27:08.639
Commissioner Roselle.

02:27:08.639 --> 02:27:10.639
So I second the motion.

02:27:10.639 --> 02:27:14.520
But just as Commissioner Taylor did, as council is reading

02:27:14.520 --> 02:27:18.329
over these minutes, I would like to strongly suggest that

02:27:18.329 --> 02:27:21.889
as if council is to hear this that if the applicant comes

02:27:21.889 --> 02:27:25.250
forward with the discussed items that Commissioner Taylor

02:27:25.250 --> 02:27:28.639
just laid out, then I am for approving this project.

02:27:28.639 --> 02:27:31.659
So for what it's worth to the council, I am a proponent of

02:27:31.659 --> 02:27:32.639
this project.

02:27:32.639 --> 02:27:40.639
I just wish it was complete when came to us.

02:27:40.639 --> 02:27:43.639
We have a first and a second.

02:27:43.639 --> 02:27:46.639
Any further discussion.

02:27:46.639 --> 02:27:51.639
Commissioner has with.

02:27:51.639 --> 02:27:56.639
Yeah, I just.

02:27:56.639 --> 02:27:59.639
I just don't think it's good to deny it.

02:27:59.639 --> 02:28:00.639
I really don't.

02:28:00.639 --> 02:28:02.639
I think there's a mechanism.

02:28:02.639 --> 02:28:05.819
So my pitch is there's a mechanism where we can identify a

02:28:05.819 --> 02:28:08.639
section that allows them to start building.

02:28:08.639 --> 02:28:14.120
And again, we're talking about a segment of a population

02:28:14.120 --> 02:28:16.639
that it's time sensitive.

02:28:16.639 --> 02:28:19.639
It's option sensitive.

02:28:19.639 --> 02:28:26.639
It's we I didn't want to put it off to the month we did.

02:28:26.639 --> 02:28:30.639
And I'm sensitive to the points being made.

02:28:30.639 --> 02:28:33.639
I don't think it is that onerous.

02:28:33.639 --> 02:28:37.450
If you have broad strokes, I think it becomes onerous to

02:28:37.450 --> 02:28:41.270
write something when you're in the in the weeds to detail

02:28:41.270 --> 02:28:42.639
something out.

02:28:42.639 --> 02:28:47.110
But to take broad strokes and say thou shall not X, Y, Z, I

02:28:47.110 --> 02:28:50.639
think is is palatable for me understanding.

02:28:50.639 --> 02:28:52.639
I'm kind of out there by myself.

02:28:52.639 --> 02:29:00.200
I just don't think whenever we never get this response ever

02:29:00.200 --> 02:29:00.639
.

02:29:00.639 --> 02:29:06.389
And for a commission to ignore this response or take it

02:29:06.389 --> 02:29:10.770
lightly or take personal preferences and supersede it, it

02:29:10.770 --> 02:29:11.639
troubles me.

02:29:11.639 --> 02:29:14.430
It troubles me that I would I mean, do we go to every

02:29:14.430 --> 02:29:16.639
household and ask them the questions?

02:29:16.639 --> 02:29:18.959
We're talking about adult community that knows the due

02:29:18.959 --> 02:29:19.639
diligence.

02:29:19.639 --> 02:29:21.639
They know the questions to ask.

02:29:21.639 --> 02:29:23.959
And so to me, for me, for us to say, hey, well, they don't

02:29:23.959 --> 02:29:25.639
know what's going in their backyard.

02:29:25.639 --> 02:29:26.639
I disagree.

02:29:26.639 --> 02:29:28.639
We're not talking about 20 year old kids.

02:29:28.639 --> 02:29:31.579
We're talking about adults that understand due diligence

02:29:31.579 --> 02:29:32.639
better than most.

02:29:32.639 --> 02:29:33.639
They've owned businesses.

02:29:33.639 --> 02:29:35.639
They've sold businesses.

02:29:35.639 --> 02:29:36.639
They bought businesses.

02:29:36.639 --> 02:29:39.219
And I don't think we go house to house and search for

02:29:39.219 --> 02:29:41.639
knives to make sure they have plug protectors.

02:29:41.639 --> 02:29:45.209
I mean, I think you get a little bit onerous and you get to

02:29:45.209 --> 02:29:50.639
where, hey, these are adults making a purchase that have

02:29:50.639 --> 02:29:54.639
are fully capable of making intelligent decisions.

02:29:54.639 --> 02:29:57.639
And they don't need us to babysit them.

02:29:57.639 --> 02:30:03.280
Our job is to make sure that the land is utilized

02:30:03.280 --> 02:30:05.639
appropriately.

02:30:05.639 --> 02:30:08.639
And I think we can get that done at least in one segment.

02:30:08.639 --> 02:30:14.870
Let's say if this is if I'm not the lone wolf wolf pack of

02:30:14.870 --> 02:30:21.639
one, then you're looking at section 17 three that's next to

02:30:21.639 --> 02:30:27.479
the the villas currently that is, hey, we can agree to that

02:30:27.479 --> 02:30:27.639
.

02:30:27.639 --> 02:30:29.639
That gets the ball rolling.

02:30:29.639 --> 02:30:31.639
And then they come back and clean it up.

02:30:31.639 --> 02:30:34.639
So that's that's just my thought.

02:30:34.639 --> 02:30:38.799
I think we're going it's it's into to almost a personal

02:30:38.799 --> 02:30:39.639
level.

02:30:39.639 --> 02:30:43.340
I hear people talking about backyards and I never hear that

02:30:43.340 --> 02:30:43.639
.

02:30:43.639 --> 02:30:46.219
I mean, I've been I've been on this commission that long,

02:30:46.219 --> 02:30:48.790
but I've never heard anyone say, hey, I don't want to vote

02:30:48.790 --> 02:30:51.639
for something because it might affect Bob's backyard.

02:30:51.639 --> 02:30:53.639
Bob is a grown man.

02:30:53.639 --> 02:30:57.069
And in this instance, mature grown man and Bob understands

02:30:57.069 --> 02:30:58.639
and has good questions.

02:30:58.639 --> 02:31:00.639
This has been the most intelligent group we've dealt with.

02:31:00.639 --> 02:31:03.639
Most active community didn't has.

02:31:03.639 --> 02:31:06.510
And 44 of those active communities and the three that sat

02:31:06.510 --> 02:31:08.639
before us today said they're good with it.

02:31:08.639 --> 02:31:12.209
And for this commission to ignore the populace is what our

02:31:12.209 --> 02:31:12.639
job.

02:31:12.639 --> 02:31:14.639
Our job is I have personal preferences.

02:31:14.639 --> 02:31:15.639
I got to set those aside.

02:31:15.639 --> 02:31:16.639
It does it taste great?

02:31:16.639 --> 02:31:17.639
Absolutely not.

02:31:17.639 --> 02:31:20.639
I'm all for having things written and buttoned down.

02:31:20.639 --> 02:31:22.639
But the fact of the matter is they did not.

02:31:22.639 --> 02:31:23.639
They've apologized.

02:31:23.639 --> 02:31:25.639
I take them at their word.

02:31:25.639 --> 02:31:28.879
He is probably one of the best presenters I've seen since I

02:31:28.879 --> 02:31:31.639
've been here as far as getting to the chase.

02:31:31.639 --> 02:31:33.639
And yes is yes and no is no.

02:31:33.639 --> 02:31:35.639
And I take them at their word.

02:31:35.639 --> 02:31:42.440
But again, my hope is that this particular motion is set

02:31:42.440 --> 02:31:43.639
aside.

02:31:43.639 --> 02:31:44.639
We can go back.

02:31:44.639 --> 02:31:47.510
We can pick a section and allow them to begin to serve

02:31:47.510 --> 02:31:52.639
their community, serve Denton County by proxy and city of

02:31:52.639 --> 02:31:52.639
Denton.

02:31:52.639 --> 02:31:56.639
And then we can clean it up.

02:31:56.639 --> 02:32:00.639
But that's my soliloquy.

02:32:00.639 --> 02:32:02.639
Commissioner Sullivan.

02:32:02.639 --> 02:32:06.739
Commissioner Hespeth, I would agree with you in most of

02:32:06.739 --> 02:32:10.219
what you said regarding the agent intelligence of the

02:32:10.219 --> 02:32:11.639
people out there,

02:32:11.639 --> 02:32:14.639
me being one of them.

02:32:14.639 --> 02:32:18.219
But you have to understand that what we're really talking

02:32:18.219 --> 02:32:22.389
about are protecting the people who have already made an

02:32:22.389 --> 02:32:23.639
investment

02:32:23.639 --> 02:32:26.139
based on things that were told to them at the time that

02:32:26.139 --> 02:32:27.639
they made those decisions.

02:32:27.639 --> 02:32:31.209
We're not talking about people in the future because we don

02:32:31.209 --> 02:32:32.639
't know who they are.

02:32:32.639 --> 02:32:35.889
And so that's really I think what the issue for me is, is

02:32:35.889 --> 02:32:41.260
that I don't want anything to change that has already been

02:32:41.260 --> 02:32:42.639
said to those people.

02:32:42.639 --> 02:32:48.010
And of the 41 people that we have in favor of it, not a

02:32:48.010 --> 02:32:52.639
single one of them live on the fringe near the blue line.

02:32:52.639 --> 02:32:55.340
They all live down in the middle where it's not going to

02:32:55.340 --> 02:32:56.639
affect them one iota.

02:32:56.639 --> 02:33:01.440
And so I think that when you look at the fact that a notice

02:33:01.440 --> 02:33:04.969
did not go out to those people that are closest to that

02:33:04.969 --> 02:33:05.639
blue line,

02:33:05.639 --> 02:33:09.360
we don't really have an indication of how those people feel

02:33:09.360 --> 02:33:09.639
.

02:33:09.639 --> 02:33:14.290
We have an indication of how the people down in the middle

02:33:14.290 --> 02:33:18.200
of the area feel because they just, everybody likes to live

02:33:18.200 --> 02:33:18.639
out there.

02:33:18.639 --> 02:33:21.590
And they say, hey, whatever Robeson says, that's fine with

02:33:21.590 --> 02:33:23.639
me because it's not in their backyard.

02:33:23.639 --> 02:33:27.219
And so I think that's really the key for me is I want to

02:33:27.219 --> 02:33:30.790
protect the people who have made the investment and not

02:33:30.790 --> 02:33:32.639
change what they have already been told.

02:33:32.639 --> 02:33:34.639
And I've heard that they're willing to do that.

02:33:34.639 --> 02:33:38.479
I just wish like everybody has said that they had come with

02:33:38.479 --> 02:33:41.920
that in hand and given it to us and I'd be ready to vote

02:33:41.920 --> 02:33:42.639
for it.

02:33:42.639 --> 02:33:47.639
But they didn't, so we can't.

02:33:47.639 --> 02:33:51.639
Mr. Chairman, can I address one thing, please?

02:33:51.639 --> 02:33:53.639
I'll take a much more of your time.

02:33:53.639 --> 02:33:56.639
Appreciate all the comments and feedback and kind words.

02:33:56.639 --> 02:33:59.920
Certainly the fluidity and dynamics of how this has gone

02:33:59.920 --> 02:34:03.079
has come as a surprise to you all and we do apologize for

02:34:03.079 --> 02:34:03.639
that.

02:34:03.639 --> 02:34:06.639
We, in working through it and hearing concerns and rolling

02:34:06.639 --> 02:34:09.270
with the punches, if you will, that's kind of led us down

02:34:09.270 --> 02:34:09.639
the road.

02:34:09.639 --> 02:34:12.639
We are and we have and here we are.

02:34:12.639 --> 02:34:17.290
Rather, as opposed to having stipulations tied for reasons

02:34:17.290 --> 02:34:18.639
not to approve,

02:34:18.639 --> 02:34:20.950
we would greatly appreciate if there's any ability to spin

02:34:20.950 --> 02:34:23.920
it the other way, have the motion carried that takes the

02:34:23.920 --> 02:34:26.360
best shot at what we are pinning down, what we are willing

02:34:26.360 --> 02:34:29.799
to offer, recognizing that it could have been presented

02:34:29.799 --> 02:34:30.639
better.

02:34:30.639 --> 02:34:32.729
We greatly appreciate some ability and we think it's

02:34:32.729 --> 02:34:34.639
something that we can get our hands around.

02:34:34.639 --> 02:34:37.809
It sounds generally agreeable, although not pinned down

02:34:37.809 --> 02:34:38.639
specifically.

02:34:38.639 --> 02:34:41.620
If we could rather than have a motion that talks about why

02:34:41.620 --> 02:34:44.989
it recommends denial, make that recommendation for approval

02:34:44.989 --> 02:34:48.639
based on those same motions, same stipulations, I'm sorry.

02:34:48.639 --> 02:34:51.959
That would greatly appreciate that and be very helpful for

02:34:51.959 --> 02:34:53.639
our development effort.

02:34:53.639 --> 02:35:01.069
Well, I might ask legal if there's a way if we were to, on

02:35:01.069 --> 02:35:04.860
the vote, to deny if it didn't pass and someone wanted to

02:35:04.860 --> 02:35:07.639
make a motion to approve and put all those conditions on,

02:35:07.639 --> 02:35:11.620
how that moves from this commission on to city council to

02:35:11.620 --> 02:35:16.059
those concerns being able to be addressed in an appropriate

02:35:16.059 --> 02:35:19.889
manner, being that we've specified them once and they haven

02:35:19.889 --> 02:35:23.010
't so far, how we as a commission can move that forward to

02:35:23.010 --> 02:35:23.639
council.

02:35:23.639 --> 02:35:28.389
If I understood your question correctly, if the motion to

02:35:28.389 --> 02:35:32.959
deny fails and a subsequent commissioner makes a motion to

02:35:32.959 --> 02:35:34.639
approve with conditions,

02:35:34.639 --> 02:35:40.889
as actually was suggested by Commissioner Rosell, and

02:35:40.889 --> 02:35:47.540
seconded and approved, knowing that it's just, basically it

02:35:47.540 --> 02:35:48.639
's concepts.

02:35:48.639 --> 02:35:53.290
Sometimes it's tricky to take concepts and put them down to

02:35:53.290 --> 02:35:55.639
paper and translate them.

02:35:55.639 --> 02:36:02.389
But the way to do that, and we have done this in the past

02:36:02.389 --> 02:36:05.639
when I used to be on here, your council,

02:36:05.639 --> 02:36:12.579
was to direct staff and legal in the interim between this

02:36:12.579 --> 02:36:16.690
meeting and the council meeting to actually draft that

02:36:16.690 --> 02:36:19.639
language for the council's consideration,

02:36:19.639 --> 02:36:25.729
knowing that we would try to capture the intent that you

02:36:25.729 --> 02:36:31.049
all wanted us to put down to paper, but there is a risk

02:36:31.049 --> 02:36:33.639
that it may not fully capture.

02:36:33.639 --> 02:36:35.639
But that's your discretion.

02:36:35.639 --> 02:36:41.600
You can direct that and we'll do our best, and that would

02:36:41.600 --> 02:36:48.100
then be presented to council with whatever recommendations

02:36:48.100 --> 02:36:54.639
you all may make, whether you're positive or against it.

02:36:54.639 --> 02:36:56.639
Does that answer your question?

02:36:56.639 --> 02:36:59.969
I appreciate it. It sounds to be an option, how rigid, if

02:36:59.969 --> 02:37:03.040
there's an ability on our part to aid, if that were to be

02:37:03.040 --> 02:37:06.639
something successful that took a drafting between tonight

02:37:06.639 --> 02:37:07.639
and council,

02:37:07.639 --> 02:37:12.920
we could quickly respond and measure it in a day if that is

02:37:12.920 --> 02:37:16.639
of any assistance in that scenario.

02:37:16.639 --> 02:37:18.639
We would greatly appreciate it.

02:37:18.639 --> 02:37:21.510
Well, I'm not opposed to that. I'm the one that initially

02:37:21.510 --> 02:37:22.639
floated the idea about denial.

02:37:22.639 --> 02:37:24.989
And let me tell you why. It's because in the past when we

02:37:24.989 --> 02:37:28.379
have done this and it moves forward, a lot of things don't

02:37:28.379 --> 02:37:29.639
get addressed.

02:37:29.639 --> 02:37:31.639
And then there are commissioners that are concerned that,

02:37:31.639 --> 02:37:35.469
hey, we made a motion to move it forward and it was not

02:37:35.469 --> 02:37:38.639
addressed and it's now gone beyond us.

02:37:38.639 --> 02:37:46.639
So that's why I've made the statements that I have earlier.

02:37:46.639 --> 02:37:50.329
Again, I'm disappointed that this is a position that we're

02:37:50.329 --> 02:37:53.790
put in as a council or as a commission to try to draft this

02:37:53.790 --> 02:37:55.639
language here and move it forward

02:37:55.639 --> 02:38:00.409
when we were hopeful in doing it in 30 days that this just

02:38:00.409 --> 02:38:04.639
comes forward and been tickled for a 10-minute presentation

02:38:04.639 --> 02:38:08.639
and it moves on and you guys are good to go.

02:38:08.639 --> 02:38:14.770
That was our intent in putting it forward the way that it

02:38:14.770 --> 02:38:15.639
was.

02:38:15.639 --> 02:38:20.639
We have a motion and a second before us.

02:38:20.639 --> 02:38:22.639
I've got so many people on the board.

02:38:22.639 --> 02:38:26.739
I don't know who's still wanting to speak on this before we

02:38:26.739 --> 02:38:30.420
call for a vote or if this is -- I'm a recognized

02:38:30.420 --> 02:38:33.110
commissioner, Alice, and then we're going to vote on the

02:38:33.110 --> 02:38:33.639
motion.

02:38:33.639 --> 02:38:36.639
Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to say just a couple words

02:38:36.639 --> 02:38:37.639
for the record.

02:38:37.639 --> 02:38:41.819
I don't think anybody on this commission feels good about a

02:38:41.819 --> 02:38:42.639
denial.

02:38:42.639 --> 02:38:46.739
We gave a lot of good recommendation a month ago and to

02:38:46.739 --> 02:38:50.670
come forward just with the blue line was very disappointing

02:38:50.670 --> 02:38:53.639
because no one's against what it is that you want to do.

02:38:53.639 --> 02:38:57.930
And clearly there's a need, as Commissioner Hutspeth has

02:38:57.930 --> 02:38:58.639
said.

02:38:58.639 --> 02:39:02.739
I mean, many people are in favor and many people want the

02:39:02.739 --> 02:39:06.639
Villa product to get started so they can get into it.

02:39:06.639 --> 02:39:13.010
It's just many, many concerns were not addressed and to try

02:39:13.010 --> 02:39:16.959
to, as Commissioner Taylor addressed earlier, to try to

02:39:16.959 --> 02:39:20.860
craft this up here when you've had a month to do it is

02:39:20.860 --> 02:39:23.639
difficult certainly for us.

02:39:23.639 --> 02:39:27.469
And I still have the question that out there I think that

02:39:27.469 --> 02:39:31.219
Chair asked is why did you only bring back the blue line

02:39:31.219 --> 02:39:35.209
and why didn't you address the things that you are willing

02:39:35.209 --> 02:39:38.639
to now have us hurry up and put into a motion?

02:39:38.639 --> 02:39:40.639
I still would like that answered.

02:39:40.639 --> 02:39:45.440
Why weren't these concerns addressed a month ago between

02:39:45.440 --> 02:39:49.639
you so that we could have voted in favor of this?

02:39:49.639 --> 02:39:53.639
Thank you. And again, my apologies in the fact that this is

02:39:53.639 --> 02:39:53.639
how it's playing out.

02:39:53.639 --> 02:39:56.069
For part of our rationale I mentioned earlier about the

02:39:56.069 --> 02:39:58.479
effort we made to try to start, make some decisions and

02:39:58.479 --> 02:40:01.370
creating a new layer that would identify pods and hitting

02:40:01.370 --> 02:40:04.159
challenges there, not overcomeable, but challenges that

02:40:04.159 --> 02:40:07.290
forced decisions that were a little bit fluid at the time

02:40:07.290 --> 02:40:09.639
based on widths of offsets and such.

02:40:09.639 --> 02:40:12.850
They kind of created some issues there that turned into

02:40:12.850 --> 02:40:16.219
maybe we should state some of these conditions on the map

02:40:16.219 --> 02:40:19.639
and have that be the document that would be standalone.

02:40:19.639 --> 02:40:22.149
But then if those conditions were to change, now is the map

02:40:22.149 --> 02:40:24.350
at a date, so would it be better to write it down or to

02:40:24.350 --> 02:40:26.639
have it to the point where it comes to a motion?

02:40:26.639 --> 02:40:29.219
That was part of my understanding and as is evident in an

02:40:29.219 --> 02:40:32.030
accurate understanding. But thinking that we could keep

02:40:32.030 --> 02:40:34.879
some fluidity, this map would still be this map. It wouldn

02:40:34.879 --> 02:40:37.659
't be edited. There wouldn't be text on it that's now no

02:40:37.659 --> 02:40:39.639
longer valid or slightly different.

02:40:39.639 --> 02:40:42.629
So for that reason it didn't get stated on the map and by

02:40:42.629 --> 02:40:45.639
design, getting right, wrong or indifferent.

02:40:45.639 --> 02:40:48.780
But that was the rationale that led to why we're here, if

02:40:48.780 --> 02:40:50.639
that answers your question.

02:40:50.639 --> 02:40:53.969
I guess it does. Thank you. It answers part of it. And I

02:40:53.969 --> 02:40:57.030
understand the blue line in that addresses a great deal of

02:40:57.030 --> 02:41:00.780
concern about a duplex being thrown in the middle of a

02:41:00.780 --> 02:41:02.639
single family street.

02:41:02.639 --> 02:41:05.989
But what you're throwing out there now, like buffers and

02:41:05.989 --> 02:41:09.229
all that, that would have been really great information to

02:41:09.229 --> 02:41:12.290
have in writing right now because it would alleviate a lot

02:41:12.290 --> 02:41:15.600
of concern that is still out there for a great deal of

02:41:15.600 --> 02:41:16.639
residents out there.

02:41:16.639 --> 02:41:22.600
And that's my concern. And I don't understand why you didn

02:41:22.600 --> 02:41:23.639
't draft that.

02:41:23.639 --> 02:41:26.739
I appreciate that. I guess our hope and still our hope is

02:41:26.739 --> 02:41:29.969
that that could be something that was stipulated with a

02:41:29.969 --> 02:41:33.639
very little bit of text. But that's what we're requesting.

02:41:33.639 --> 02:41:38.639
Thank you.

02:41:38.639 --> 02:41:40.829
I have Commissioner Rossell and Commissioner Hesboski. You

02:41:40.829 --> 02:41:42.639
all both wanted to speak again?

02:41:42.639 --> 02:41:47.639
I just have a quick comment. I initially second the motion.

02:41:47.639 --> 02:41:54.819
Listening to a potential legal option to put forth an

02:41:54.819 --> 02:41:58.639
option that legal can kind of clean up in the interim.

02:41:58.639 --> 02:42:02.629
I'm inclined to see about that. And I don't technically I

02:42:02.629 --> 02:42:04.770
don't know if I can vote against my own motion. So I

02:42:04.770 --> 02:42:08.639
clicked withdrawal. I don't know what the procedure is.

02:42:08.639 --> 02:42:10.959
That's more I don't know if it's a question. Should I

02:42:10.959 --> 02:42:13.139
officially withdraw my second or just vote against my

02:42:13.139 --> 02:42:13.639
motion?

02:42:13.639 --> 02:42:14.639
You can withdraw your second.

02:42:14.639 --> 02:42:20.639
Okay. Then I've done that.

02:42:20.639 --> 02:42:23.540
I'm going to call on Commissioner Taylor and then I'll

02:42:23.540 --> 02:42:26.850
recognize Commissioner Hesboski since your motion has been

02:42:26.850 --> 02:42:27.639
unsealed.

02:42:27.639 --> 02:42:32.639
Thank you, Chair. Yeah.

02:42:32.639 --> 02:42:40.670
So I wish we could split this and send forward approval for

02:42:40.670 --> 02:42:44.639
unit 17 so that you can start construction tomorrow.

02:42:44.639 --> 02:42:49.920
But I don't think it's possible for us to split and have a

02:42:49.920 --> 02:42:55.649
partial plan go forward while the other half of the plan

02:42:55.649 --> 02:42:56.639
gets revised.

02:42:56.639 --> 02:43:00.569
Without a second. So as far as Commissioner Hesbos brought

02:43:00.569 --> 02:43:04.719
up, I would be all for that. But it's just not procedurally

02:43:04.719 --> 02:43:05.639
possible.

02:43:05.639 --> 02:43:11.090
And I would be amenable to the recommendation with all the

02:43:11.090 --> 02:43:12.639
conditions.

02:43:12.639 --> 02:43:15.139
But again, I don't I don't feel that comfortable just

02:43:15.139 --> 02:43:17.920
saying for staff to decide. I really think we do need to

02:43:17.920 --> 02:43:19.639
lay them out as best as possible.

02:43:19.639 --> 02:43:24.409
Since my motion doesn't have a second, I suppose I can

02:43:24.409 --> 02:43:26.639
substitute a new motion.

02:43:26.639 --> 02:43:28.639
You have to withdraw your original motion.

02:43:28.639 --> 02:43:30.959
Okay. So I guess I will withdraw my original motion. Let

02:43:30.959 --> 02:43:33.639
the conversation carry on.

02:43:33.639 --> 02:43:35.860
I'm going to speak up just a sec before I recognize our

02:43:35.860 --> 02:43:39.639
next speaker. Our next meeting is December the 14th.

02:43:39.639 --> 02:43:42.959
Obviously, you can see how much trouble we're trying to

02:43:42.959 --> 02:43:47.670
come up with, how to deny it, approve it, conditions to put

02:43:47.670 --> 02:43:48.639
on it.

02:43:48.639 --> 02:43:52.209
We have the option to continue this again to the 14th and

02:43:52.209 --> 02:43:55.360
give you all the option to clean this up, get with staff

02:43:55.360 --> 02:43:56.639
and bring it back to us.

02:43:56.639 --> 02:44:01.780
And it's clean and it's done versus us trying to figure out

02:44:01.780 --> 02:44:05.639
somehow a way to do it by the fly up here.

02:44:05.639 --> 02:44:09.239
Is that something you all would like to kick around and

02:44:09.239 --> 02:44:12.790
right quick and let us know while I recognize our next

02:44:12.790 --> 02:44:13.639
speaker?

02:44:13.639 --> 02:44:16.219
We're going to try to get this moved on because I know we

02:44:16.219 --> 02:44:18.750
've got lots of other people out here this evening that

02:44:18.750 --> 02:44:19.639
would like to have their project heard.

02:44:19.639 --> 02:44:22.639
I hope that they're prepared and ready to move forward.

02:44:22.639 --> 02:44:23.639
Yes.

02:44:23.639 --> 02:44:27.209
So I'm going to recognize Commissioner Hudsworth and if you

02:44:27.209 --> 02:44:29.639
all will let us know about the 14th.

02:44:29.639 --> 02:44:33.639
So I have a question for legal.

02:44:33.639 --> 02:44:40.510
In our commission's commission, if you will, does people's

02:44:40.510 --> 02:44:43.639
property rights fall in?

02:44:43.639 --> 02:44:49.329
Is that our job? Is that lined out in our responsibility to

02:44:49.329 --> 02:44:53.639
protect people's -- I'll give you a hypothetical.

02:44:53.639 --> 02:44:59.659
Is that the responsibility of the commission to purchase

02:44:59.659 --> 02:45:04.659
some property and then is it this commission's

02:45:04.659 --> 02:45:06.829
responsibility to protect the property in which they

02:45:06.829 --> 02:45:07.639
purchase and the agreements they're in?

02:45:07.639 --> 02:45:12.920
You may have heard that type of analysis probably called a

02:45:12.920 --> 02:45:16.639
different term, compatibility of uses, where you're looking

02:45:16.639 --> 02:45:20.989
to make sure where their particular use is compatible with

02:45:20.989 --> 02:45:21.639
the surrounding land uses.

02:45:21.639 --> 02:45:24.840
Whether this type of use, what type of impacts would it

02:45:24.840 --> 02:45:27.639
have on adjoining use or surrounding uses?

02:45:27.639 --> 02:45:32.920
And that in the cases where you have existing built homes

02:45:32.920 --> 02:45:37.049
or structures and unbuilt, that would be a factor you'd

02:45:37.049 --> 02:45:37.639
look in.

02:45:37.639 --> 02:45:41.280
You're not really saying these people don't want this in

02:45:41.280 --> 02:45:42.639
their backyard.

02:45:42.639 --> 02:45:46.760
In essence, you are performing some of that analysis in the

02:45:46.760 --> 02:45:48.639
compatibility of uses.

02:45:48.639 --> 02:45:50.639
So one follow-up to that.

02:45:50.639 --> 02:45:53.670
Given the hypothetical, someone purchased a property, they

02:45:53.670 --> 02:45:56.459
disagreed that they were told in advance what's going to be

02:45:56.459 --> 02:45:57.639
in their backyard.

02:45:57.639 --> 02:46:01.639
Does that still fall into our purview?

02:46:01.639 --> 02:46:06.209
That would be more -- whatever promises they were made by

02:46:06.209 --> 02:46:11.379
the developer, that's a private party agreement or a

02:46:11.379 --> 02:46:12.639
promise.

02:46:12.639 --> 02:46:14.639
It's not anything involving the city.

02:46:14.639 --> 02:46:23.639
I agree.

02:46:23.639 --> 02:46:24.639
Commissioner Tyler.

02:46:24.639 --> 02:46:26.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:46:26.639 --> 02:46:28.639
Before I recognize it, I'm sorry.

02:46:28.639 --> 02:46:30.639
Did you all have a response for the 14th?

02:46:30.639 --> 02:46:31.639
I wanted to.

02:46:31.639 --> 02:46:32.639
I didn't want to interrupt you.

02:46:32.639 --> 02:46:36.120
In terms of the terms of events that's left us here tonight

02:46:36.120 --> 02:46:39.250
, regrettable terms of events that isn't the clear

02:46:39.250 --> 02:46:42.639
presentation that we all would have liked to have.

02:46:42.639 --> 02:46:44.639
Our vast preference would be to move forward.

02:46:44.639 --> 02:46:48.950
We're requesting a decision tonight under the stipulations,

02:46:48.950 --> 02:46:53.319
a handful, if it's a buffer zone, say 20 feet, if it's no

02:46:53.319 --> 02:46:57.500
facades facing, and none side by side, and of course none

02:46:57.500 --> 02:46:58.639
in the hatched area.

02:46:58.639 --> 02:47:02.739
We would greatly appreciate to have that approved tonight,

02:47:02.739 --> 02:47:03.639
of course.

02:47:03.639 --> 02:47:05.639
Up and down, rather, continuance.

02:47:05.639 --> 02:47:06.639
Yes, sir.

02:47:06.639 --> 02:47:07.639
Okay.

02:47:07.639 --> 02:47:08.639
Thank you.

02:47:08.639 --> 02:47:09.639
Commissioner Tyler.

02:47:09.639 --> 02:47:10.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:47:10.639 --> 02:47:14.389
In regard to whether this is about property values or

02:47:14.389 --> 02:47:18.219
something like that, I think for me this is more about

02:47:18.219 --> 02:47:20.639
consistency in development.

02:47:20.639 --> 02:47:25.739
The only category that allows single family homes and

02:47:25.739 --> 02:47:31.659
attached dwellings by right in our code is NR6, which is a

02:47:31.659 --> 02:47:36.340
pretty restrictive small lot line zoning that is used very

02:47:36.340 --> 02:47:39.040
rarely and is very contentious every time we put it in a

02:47:39.040 --> 02:47:39.639
neighborhood.

02:47:39.639 --> 02:47:44.170
And it tends to be a buffer between apartments and either a

02:47:44.170 --> 02:47:47.639
commercial area or a single family area.

02:47:47.639 --> 02:47:51.959
And people come out with pitchforks whenever a developer

02:47:51.959 --> 02:47:57.639
wants to put in 100 acres of NR6 next to existing NR4, NR3.

02:47:57.639 --> 02:48:05.819
So that continuity of use and compatible uses next to each

02:48:05.819 --> 02:48:11.379
other is the issue here. It is possible, and NR4 and NR3

02:48:11.379 --> 02:48:14.120
allow with specific use permit to put duplexes inside of

02:48:14.120 --> 02:48:17.040
those more traditional single family zoning, but that's

02:48:17.040 --> 02:48:17.639
pretty rare.

02:48:17.639 --> 02:48:20.639
And they're well designed and well laid out.

02:48:20.639 --> 02:48:24.760
And your proposing is well designed and well laid out, so

02:48:24.760 --> 02:48:29.040
it kind of follows that NR4 plus some nice duplexes tucked

02:48:29.040 --> 02:48:29.639
in.

02:48:29.639 --> 02:48:34.500
Normally we vote up or down every single duplex development

02:48:34.500 --> 02:48:35.639
like that.

02:48:35.639 --> 02:48:38.719
And so to come forward with, you know, this anywhere in

02:48:38.719 --> 02:48:41.850
yellow, I understand that you all are trying to protect

02:48:41.850 --> 02:48:45.049
your investment and you're not going to, you know, shoot

02:48:45.049 --> 02:48:47.639
yourselves in the foot or destroy value.

02:48:47.639 --> 02:48:51.639
This is different than every other area of the city.

02:48:51.639 --> 02:48:55.420
And it's not consistent with, you know, our normal

02:48:55.420 --> 02:48:57.639
residential development.

02:48:57.639 --> 02:48:59.049
And that's why we want to do some restrictions. We want to

02:48:59.049 --> 02:49:01.639
give you the flexibility to put in more of these units.

02:49:01.639 --> 02:49:06.379
And I think it's great, higher density, less maintenance,

02:49:06.379 --> 02:49:08.639
easier for the residents.

02:49:08.639 --> 02:49:11.840
It fits a need in the type of housing. So all of these

02:49:11.840 --> 02:49:14.639
things are really wonderful.

02:49:14.639 --> 02:49:17.639
And that's why we had the six requirements.

02:49:17.639 --> 02:49:22.479
So I guess I'm going to make a motion to approve with

02:49:22.479 --> 02:49:28.290
additional with the recommendations that is on the item now

02:49:28.290 --> 02:49:37.639
, as well as a set of recommendations or set of conditions.

02:49:37.639 --> 02:49:43.350
First, all Villa lots shall be located in a unit that is

02:49:43.350 --> 02:49:45.639
solely Villa lots.

02:49:45.639 --> 02:49:49.639
Second, all second. We're writing that. I'm sorry.

02:49:49.639 --> 02:49:51.639
Okay. This moment to catch it.

02:49:51.639 --> 02:50:00.170
All Villa lots or SFV lots shall be located in a unit that

02:50:00.170 --> 02:50:03.639
is solely SFV lots.

02:50:03.639 --> 02:50:09.069
The second additional condition is all SFV lots shall be

02:50:09.069 --> 02:50:17.809
separated from SFC, SFP and SFL lots by at least 20 feet of

02:50:17.809 --> 02:50:21.639
golf course park or open space.

02:50:21.639 --> 02:50:29.670
By at least 20 feet of golf course golf course park or open

02:50:29.670 --> 02:50:30.639
space.

02:50:30.639 --> 02:50:34.639
Not road can't be across the road from each other.

02:50:34.639 --> 02:50:45.690
No SFV lot shall be located directly adjacent across a

02:50:45.690 --> 02:50:52.639
street from an SFC, SFP or SFL lot.

02:50:52.639 --> 02:50:57.290
That that would the way you've worded that that's located

02:50:57.290 --> 02:51:00.639
directly adjacent across the street. That means they face

02:51:00.639 --> 02:51:00.639
each other.

02:51:00.639 --> 02:51:03.370
But if they're if they're one house down, then it doesn't

02:51:03.370 --> 02:51:04.639
meet that condition.

02:51:04.639 --> 02:51:08.639
That would be okay.

02:51:08.639 --> 02:51:10.639
That's the problem with trying to.

02:51:10.639 --> 02:51:14.969
Yeah, this is this is this is the fun part of writing laws

02:51:14.969 --> 02:51:15.639
up here.

02:51:15.639 --> 02:51:16.639
Within the pod.

02:51:16.639 --> 02:51:17.639
Yes, sir.

02:51:17.639 --> 02:51:17.639
Okay.

02:51:17.639 --> 02:51:20.979
Yeah, unless unless there's some units are across the

02:51:20.979 --> 02:51:24.639
street from each other. Okay, so you could have.

02:51:24.639 --> 02:51:27.239
And I believe there was one more. I'm trying to figure out

02:51:27.239 --> 02:51:27.639
what it was.

02:51:27.639 --> 02:51:30.639
Anybody has any.

02:51:30.639 --> 02:51:34.639
That's the across the street.

02:51:34.639 --> 02:51:39.639
Oh, and it's a blue line to 25 to 25 dash two.

02:51:39.639 --> 02:51:45.770
And the the blue line and restriction on not changing or

02:51:45.770 --> 02:51:51.950
not allowing SFV lots shall be extended to include all of

02:51:51.950 --> 02:51:53.639
unit 25 to.

02:51:53.639 --> 02:52:03.639
Yes, sir.

02:52:03.639 --> 02:52:07.260
I have a motion on the floor to have a second or a friendly

02:52:07.260 --> 02:52:09.639
amendment if we miss something.

02:52:09.639 --> 02:52:12.639
I I can't second it.

02:52:12.639 --> 02:52:16.639
I'll second that motion just for clarity, though.

02:52:16.639 --> 02:52:23.049
In in your language, if a backyard street backyard, that is

02:52:23.049 --> 02:52:29.639
okay to cross product types.

02:52:29.639 --> 02:52:34.670
I don't I didn't actually word it that way. I don't think

02:52:34.670 --> 02:52:37.639
do you have backyard street backyard.

02:52:37.639 --> 02:52:39.639
Some cases are arterial roads.

02:52:39.639 --> 02:52:40.639
Yeah, arterials.

02:52:40.639 --> 02:52:43.639
Oh, yeah, I don't know.

02:52:43.639 --> 02:52:47.209
Okay. So would you like to make a friendly amendment to

02:52:47.209 --> 02:52:47.639
adjust that?

02:52:47.639 --> 02:52:51.639
Why does mine include the 20 foot barrier to include

02:52:51.639 --> 02:52:52.639
concrete or roads?

02:52:52.639 --> 02:52:57.370
But then if the how do you do out the side, not the front,

02:52:57.370 --> 02:52:59.639
you're the corner lot.

02:52:59.639 --> 02:53:04.729
When the cluster if you look at the if you look at the unit

02:53:04.729 --> 02:53:07.549
layouts, there are units that are directly across the

02:53:07.549 --> 02:53:09.639
street like you the east side of the streets.

02:53:09.639 --> 02:53:13.639
One unit, the west side of the streets, another unit.

02:53:13.639 --> 02:53:17.639
I think if if I may.

02:53:17.639 --> 02:53:20.040
We'll let them finish and make sure we've got our first and

02:53:20.040 --> 02:53:22.639
second squared away and then we'll open for discussion.

02:53:22.639 --> 02:53:33.639
So do you have a map in front of you, Mr. Taylor?

02:53:33.639 --> 02:53:35.639
So would you like an example?

02:53:35.639 --> 02:53:39.450
Well, I'm just wondering, like above twenty seven to there

02:53:39.450 --> 02:53:41.639
's that little thirty two unit.

02:53:41.639 --> 02:53:44.639
But above that's like thirty three touches thirty seven.

02:53:44.639 --> 02:53:47.850
Right. So the language you used would prohibit thirty three

02:53:47.850 --> 02:53:49.639
or thirty seven being villas.

02:53:49.639 --> 02:53:52.639
But thirty two could be a villa.

02:53:52.639 --> 02:53:55.680
Well, thirty three could be a villa if they had a twenty

02:53:55.680 --> 02:53:57.639
foot buffer up to thirty seven.

02:53:57.639 --> 02:54:00.639
Yeah. Like they would have to do the backyard buffer.

02:54:00.639 --> 02:54:02.639
Perfect. That makes sense.

02:54:02.639 --> 02:54:06.639
I'm good with the second. I second the motion.

02:54:06.639 --> 02:54:11.110
OK, we have a first and a second to approve with a number

02:54:11.110 --> 02:54:12.639
of conditions.

02:54:12.639 --> 02:54:15.639
Commissioner Husband.

02:54:15.639 --> 02:54:17.639
You're good. OK.

02:54:17.639 --> 02:54:19.639
All right. We've got a first and a second.

02:54:19.639 --> 02:54:21.639
Any further discussion?

02:54:21.639 --> 02:54:23.639
Comment.

02:54:23.639 --> 02:54:24.639
Commissioner Ellis.

02:54:24.639 --> 02:54:25.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:54:25.639 --> 02:54:28.340
I guess I would have to ask the applicant if they're OK

02:54:28.340 --> 02:54:30.639
with all of these conditions as written.

02:54:30.639 --> 02:54:32.959
We are and we appreciate the cooperation and effort at

02:54:32.959 --> 02:54:34.639
resolving this given all the time.

02:54:34.639 --> 02:54:39.639
And thank you for it.

02:54:39.639 --> 02:54:43.639
Anybody else for a call for a vote on board?

02:54:43.639 --> 02:54:46.510
My only comment is I hope we've moved it forward and we

02:54:46.510 --> 02:54:49.149
haven't stepped on and made a bigger mess than we fixed

02:54:49.149 --> 02:54:49.639
tonight.

02:54:49.639 --> 02:54:51.639
So good luck at council.

02:54:51.639 --> 02:54:54.639
And we've done our best to get you to the next spot.

02:54:54.639 --> 02:54:57.639
And I don't think anybody here was opposed to your project.

02:54:57.639 --> 02:55:01.049
We just wanted you all to draft the language rather than us

02:55:01.049 --> 02:55:04.219
so that we could move your project forward and not create

02:55:04.219 --> 02:55:04.639
an issue.

02:55:04.639 --> 02:55:07.040
At least that's I'm going to speak for myself, my intent

02:55:07.040 --> 02:55:09.639
and I think several other commissioners have said that.

02:55:09.639 --> 02:55:10.639
So I hope we've done that.

02:55:10.639 --> 02:55:20.639
And I'm going to call for a vote on the board.

02:55:20.639 --> 02:55:31.639
Sure.

02:55:31.639 --> 02:55:34.639
We need to do a handbook.

02:55:34.639 --> 02:55:35.639
We can do whatever.

02:55:35.639 --> 02:55:37.639
Can I have a question?

02:55:37.639 --> 02:55:38.639
Yes.

02:55:38.639 --> 02:55:39.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:55:39.639 --> 02:55:42.639
Can I have it?

02:55:42.639 --> 02:55:45.639
Restate the motion, please.

02:55:45.639 --> 02:55:46.639
I appreciate it.

02:55:46.639 --> 02:55:47.639
Sorry.

02:55:47.639 --> 02:55:50.639
Commissioner Taylor, would you like to restate your motion?

02:55:50.639 --> 02:55:51.639
I'm going to let you have that one.

02:55:51.639 --> 02:56:02.639
Thank you.

02:56:02.639 --> 02:56:03.290
Approval with a recommended approval to city council with

02:56:03.290 --> 02:56:04.639
the original condition in our backup.

02:56:04.639 --> 02:56:10.639
Plus all Villa lot shall be located in a unit that is

02:56:10.639 --> 02:56:10.639
solely Villa lots.

02:56:10.639 --> 02:56:14.459
All Villa lots shall be separated from other single family

02:56:14.459 --> 02:56:19.639
lots by at least 20 feet of golf course park or open space.

02:56:19.639 --> 02:56:27.219
No Villa lot shall be located directly adjacent across the

02:56:27.219 --> 02:56:34.639
street from one of the other single family lot types.

02:56:34.639 --> 02:56:52.629
So the unit 25 to shall retain its existing use or category

02:56:52.629 --> 02:56:52.639
.

02:56:52.639 --> 02:56:57.639
Are we able to get a vote on the board with conditions?

02:56:57.639 --> 02:56:58.639
All illegal?

02:56:58.639 --> 02:57:03.920
I just wanted to add that the blue line concept and all

02:57:03.920 --> 02:57:06.200
that, I might change it and actually reference like

02:57:06.200 --> 02:57:06.639
Commissioner Ellis said within its original configuration.

02:57:06.639 --> 02:57:09.850
And the only reason why is that these documents get scanned

02:57:09.850 --> 02:57:12.639
in laser fish and they're not scanned in color.

02:57:12.639 --> 02:57:15.639
So when you say blue line, in five, 10 years from now,

02:57:15.639 --> 02:57:18.639
nobody's going to know what you were talking about.

02:57:18.639 --> 02:57:29.649
And so I will word that in such a way to include it using

02:57:29.649 --> 02:57:36.639
Commissioner Ellis's suggestion.

02:57:36.639 --> 02:57:41.639
You want us to do a hand vote?

02:57:41.639 --> 02:57:45.639
Hasn't come up yet.

02:57:45.639 --> 02:57:46.639
Here we are.

02:57:46.639 --> 02:57:48.639
All right.

02:57:48.639 --> 02:57:57.520
Please vote on the board and a motion to approve with

02:57:57.520 --> 02:57:59.639
conditions.

02:57:59.639 --> 02:58:01.639
Motion carries six to zero.

02:58:01.639 --> 02:58:02.639
Good luck with your project.

02:58:02.639 --> 02:58:04.639
Thank you all very much for your time and effort.

02:58:04.639 --> 02:58:05.639
It's greatly appreciated.

02:58:05.639 --> 02:58:10.639
Likewise, staff.

02:58:10.639 --> 02:58:15.760
We'll move us on to our next item this evening, item B,

02:58:15.760 --> 02:58:18.639
which is PZ 16-188.

02:58:18.639 --> 02:58:21.030
That will be considered approval of our planning and zoning

02:58:21.030 --> 02:58:22.639
commission calendar for next year.

02:58:22.639 --> 02:58:26.639
And I don't know who will make that presentation.

02:58:26.639 --> 02:58:33.639
Do we have a presenter or we just?

02:58:33.639 --> 02:58:36.639
Okay.

02:58:36.639 --> 02:58:38.819
Well, just like our minutes, I'm going to treat this just

02:58:38.819 --> 02:58:39.639
like our minutes.

02:58:39.639 --> 02:58:44.200
The calendar is in our packet for everyone to review and

02:58:44.200 --> 02:58:45.639
public to review.

02:58:45.639 --> 02:58:49.209
And unless legal has got a I just remember what the

02:58:49.209 --> 02:58:51.639
previous plan directors would say with respect to this item

02:58:51.639 --> 02:58:51.639
.

02:58:51.639 --> 02:58:54.639
It's basically this is before you for consideration.

02:58:54.639 --> 02:58:56.979
You've had an opportunity to look at the dates on the

02:58:56.979 --> 02:58:57.639
calendar.

02:58:57.639 --> 02:59:01.739
Is there anything dates there that may not be compatible

02:59:01.739 --> 02:59:05.639
with this commission or, you know, the fall on a holiday?

02:59:05.639 --> 02:59:11.299
Sometimes that happens. If not, then a motion was called

02:59:11.299 --> 02:59:13.639
and seconded.

02:59:13.639 --> 02:59:14.639
Commissioner Ellis.

02:59:14.639 --> 02:59:15.639
Thank you, Chair.

02:59:15.639 --> 02:59:19.889
I make a motion to approve the 2017 planning and zoning

02:59:19.889 --> 02:59:21.639
commission calendar.

02:59:21.639 --> 02:59:22.639
Commissioner Rozelle.

02:59:22.639 --> 02:59:24.639
I second the motion.

02:59:24.639 --> 02:59:26.639
Have a first and second. Any discussion?

02:59:26.639 --> 02:59:30.639
Any conflicts on the calendar?

02:59:30.639 --> 02:59:48.639
Seeing none, I call for a vote on the board.

02:59:48.639 --> 02:59:50.639
Motion carries six to zero.

02:59:50.639 --> 02:59:53.840
That will move us to our public hearing section this

02:59:53.840 --> 02:59:54.639
evening.

02:59:54.639 --> 03:00:12.200
I'm going to open the public hearing for F.R. 16-0024 and I

03:00:12.200 --> 03:00:23.639
will call on Haley Zagurski for presentation.

03:00:23.639 --> 03:00:24.639
Good evening.

03:00:24.639 --> 03:00:27.639
I'm Haley Zagurski with the planning department.

03:00:27.639 --> 03:00:32.639
So this is F.R. 16-0024.

03:00:32.639 --> 03:00:36.639
It's a final plat of lot 2R of the FM Darnell edition.

03:00:36.639 --> 03:00:40.219
And the purpose of this replat is to combine three existing

03:00:40.219 --> 03:00:44.219
lots into a single lot for the intent to develop a pastoral

03:00:44.219 --> 03:00:47.079
center on the east side of McCormick Street just south of

03:00:47.079 --> 03:00:47.639
Eagle Drive.

03:00:47.639 --> 03:00:51.639
And if you have any questions, I can answer those now.

03:00:51.639 --> 03:00:56.639
Any questions for staff?

03:00:56.639 --> 03:01:01.639
Thank you, Haley.

03:01:01.639 --> 03:01:03.639
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:01:03.639 --> 03:01:08.469
Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come

03:01:08.469 --> 03:01:10.639
forward at this time.

03:01:10.639 --> 03:01:13.649
Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and chair will

03:01:13.649 --> 03:01:15.639
entertain a motion or discussion.

03:01:15.639 --> 03:01:17.639
Commissioner Taylor.

03:01:17.639 --> 03:01:20.639
I move approval of final replat.

03:01:20.639 --> 03:01:21.639
Commissioner Hesmuth.

03:01:21.639 --> 03:01:22.639
I second.

03:01:22.639 --> 03:01:23.639
Okay.

03:01:23.639 --> 03:01:25.639
We have a first and a second for approval.

03:01:25.639 --> 03:01:30.639
Any discussion?

03:01:30.639 --> 03:01:34.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:01:34.639 --> 03:01:56.639
Motion carries 6-0.

03:01:56.639 --> 03:02:04.870
Next item will be item B, and I'm going to open the public

03:02:04.870 --> 03:02:14.870
hearing for FR15-0022 and call on Julie Wyatt for that

03:02:14.870 --> 03:02:17.639
presentation.

03:02:17.639 --> 03:02:18.639
Good evening.

03:02:18.639 --> 03:02:19.639
I'm Julie Wyatt.

03:02:19.639 --> 03:02:24.290
This is a replat of a piece of property in order to develop

03:02:24.290 --> 03:02:26.639
the site with townhomes.

03:02:26.639 --> 03:02:33.639
And I'll stand for any questions.

03:02:33.639 --> 03:02:34.639
Commissioner Ellis.

03:02:34.639 --> 03:02:35.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:02:35.639 --> 03:02:39.569
Julie, just for clarification, no notice is went out for

03:02:39.569 --> 03:02:42.639
this because it's not a zoning change?

03:02:42.639 --> 03:02:44.639
It is not a zoning change.

03:02:44.639 --> 03:02:47.690
A replat does require a public notification in the

03:02:47.690 --> 03:02:48.639
newspaper.

03:02:48.639 --> 03:02:52.030
If a property has a zoning designation on it that limits it

03:02:52.030 --> 03:02:55.620
to single-family homes, duplexes or single-family homes,

03:02:55.620 --> 03:03:02.120
then you would be required to send a mailing notice through

03:03:02.120 --> 03:03:05.280
the mail since this doesn't have a zoning designation that

03:03:05.280 --> 03:03:12.639
limits it to either of those uses and one wasn't required.

03:03:12.639 --> 03:03:13.639
Thank you, Julie.

03:03:13.639 --> 03:03:15.639
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:03:15.639 --> 03:03:21.549
Anyone here who would like to speak on this item, please

03:03:21.549 --> 03:03:24.639
come forward at this time.

03:03:24.639 --> 03:03:29.629
Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and open the

03:03:29.629 --> 03:03:32.639
floor for discussion or motion.

03:03:32.639 --> 03:03:34.639
Commissioner Hussbuth.

03:03:34.639 --> 03:03:38.639
Move approval.

03:03:38.639 --> 03:03:39.639
Commissioner O'Zell.

03:03:39.639 --> 03:03:41.639
I second the motion.

03:03:41.639 --> 03:03:43.639
I have a first and a second for approval.

03:03:43.639 --> 03:03:48.639
Any discussion?

03:03:48.639 --> 03:04:01.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:04:01.639 --> 03:04:09.639
Motion carries six to zero.

03:04:09.639 --> 03:04:15.850
I move us to item C. I'm going to open the public hearing

03:04:15.850 --> 03:04:26.870
for FR 16-0022 and we'll call on Julie Wyatt for the

03:04:26.870 --> 03:04:30.639
presentation.

03:04:30.639 --> 03:04:38.639
Did I do the right one?

03:04:38.639 --> 03:04:49.639
Sorry, I have the wrong one.

03:04:49.639 --> 03:04:50.639
There we go.

03:04:50.639 --> 03:04:58.639
Sorry about that.

03:04:58.639 --> 03:04:59.639
All right.

03:04:59.639 --> 03:05:03.739
This request is for a replat for an industrial development

03:05:03.739 --> 03:05:05.639
on the west side of town.

03:05:05.639 --> 03:05:09.370
They're not proposing to reconfigure the lots, merely to

03:05:09.370 --> 03:05:13.700
modify some existing easements as well as dedicate a new

03:05:13.700 --> 03:05:17.639
pipeline easement or reflect it on the plat.

03:05:17.639 --> 03:05:20.639
So I'll stand for any questions.

03:05:20.639 --> 03:05:27.639
Any questions for staff?

03:05:27.639 --> 03:05:29.639
Seeing none, thank you, Julie.

03:05:29.639 --> 03:05:31.639
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:05:31.639 --> 03:05:35.750
Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come

03:05:35.750 --> 03:05:37.639
forward at this time.

03:05:37.639 --> 03:05:43.770
Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and open the

03:05:43.770 --> 03:05:47.639
floor for discussion or motion.

03:05:47.639 --> 03:05:49.639
Commissioner O'Zell.

03:05:49.639 --> 03:05:57.639
I move to approve item FR 16-0022.

03:05:57.639 --> 03:06:01.639
I will second that motion.

03:06:01.639 --> 03:06:03.639
Motion for first and second for approval.

03:06:03.639 --> 03:06:07.639
Any discussion?

03:06:07.639 --> 03:06:18.639
Seeing none, we'll call for a vote on the board.

03:06:18.639 --> 03:06:22.639
Motion carries 6-0.

03:06:22.639 --> 03:06:23.639
We'll move us to item D.

03:06:23.639 --> 03:06:30.639
We'll open the public hearing for FR 16-0004A.

03:06:30.639 --> 03:06:33.639
I'll call on Julie Wyatt for that presentation.

03:06:33.639 --> 03:06:35.639
Last time I'm coming up tonight.

03:06:35.639 --> 03:06:36.639
All right.

03:06:36.639 --> 03:06:39.739
This is a replat for a piece of property for Denton ISD

03:06:39.739 --> 03:06:41.639
Administration Building.

03:06:41.639 --> 03:06:45.209
This one did require a written notification because it does

03:06:45.209 --> 03:06:48.500
have an NR3 zoning district which does limit the uses to

03:06:48.500 --> 03:06:49.639
single family.

03:06:49.639 --> 03:06:54.639
So this one actually did have a mailing component to it.

03:06:54.639 --> 03:06:58.920
They are requesting a replat in order to combine all the

03:06:58.920 --> 03:07:02.440
lots and abandon a public alley in order to redevelop the

03:07:02.440 --> 03:07:07.799
site or add some new development to the site for the Denton

03:07:07.799 --> 03:07:08.639
ISD Administration Building.

03:07:08.639 --> 03:07:11.639
So I'll stand for any questions.

03:07:11.639 --> 03:07:12.639
Commissioner Tyler.

03:07:12.639 --> 03:07:14.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:07:14.639 --> 03:07:16.639
This is novel to me.

03:07:16.639 --> 03:07:21.760
The abandoning of a public alley is I guess because the

03:07:21.760 --> 03:07:26.639
city controls it, the city can just abandon it at any time?

03:07:26.639 --> 03:07:29.639
This was, because I checked with real estate to make sure,

03:07:29.639 --> 03:07:33.209
this was the right mechanism in order to abandon that

03:07:33.209 --> 03:07:36.639
because they own all the properties around it.

03:07:36.639 --> 03:07:43.219
So because they control that entire block, then this is how

03:07:43.219 --> 03:07:43.639
.

03:07:43.639 --> 03:07:47.309
Okay. So it's similar like I guess a street right of way

03:07:47.309 --> 03:07:47.639
abandonment.

03:07:47.639 --> 03:07:50.819
If you did have a street that was surrounded like an old

03:07:50.819 --> 03:07:52.639
cul-de-sac or something.

03:07:52.639 --> 03:07:55.700
Well, Gary Street actually adjacent to it, they are looking

03:07:55.700 --> 03:07:58.639
to abandon that and that does have to go to city council.

03:07:58.639 --> 03:08:02.639
So that is treated a little differently than this alley.

03:08:02.639 --> 03:08:03.639
So just alleys.

03:08:03.639 --> 03:08:05.639
In this instance, yes.

03:08:05.639 --> 03:08:08.639
I can't speak for all instances, but in this one, yes.

03:08:08.639 --> 03:08:11.639
Thank you.

03:08:11.639 --> 03:08:16.639
So you know the questions. Thank you, Julie.

03:08:16.639 --> 03:08:20.209
I've got two letters to read in and then I have a card from

03:08:20.209 --> 03:08:24.639
Mr. Coleman in support.

03:08:24.639 --> 03:08:26.639
He does not wish to speak my apology.

03:08:26.639 --> 03:08:28.639
I thought you wanted to speak, Bill.

03:08:28.639 --> 03:08:29.639
He's in support of this.

03:08:29.639 --> 03:08:32.639
Bill Coleman at 502 West Oak.

03:08:32.639 --> 03:08:34.639
And I also have two other.

03:08:34.639 --> 03:08:41.260
I have Eddie Lane at 111 West McKinney Street in favor of

03:08:41.260 --> 03:08:42.639
the request.

03:08:42.639 --> 03:08:47.639
And then I have Samuel Smith at 158 Village Estates Drive

03:08:47.639 --> 03:08:49.639
in Highland Village, Texas.

03:08:49.639 --> 03:08:51.639
That is opposed to the request.

03:08:51.639 --> 03:08:55.639
Those are the only cards that we have on this item.

03:08:55.639 --> 03:09:00.920
Anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please

03:09:00.920 --> 03:09:03.639
come forward at this time.

03:09:03.639 --> 03:09:06.639
Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

03:09:06.639 --> 03:09:09.840
And before I call for -- well, I'm going to call for

03:09:09.840 --> 03:09:11.639
discussion or a motion.

03:09:11.639 --> 03:09:12.639
I'm going to make a comment.

03:09:12.639 --> 03:09:16.639
I want to applaud staff and DISD on this item.

03:09:16.639 --> 03:09:18.639
I know this was before us several weeks ago.

03:09:18.639 --> 03:09:21.930
And I'm glad to see that there was a good solution that was

03:09:21.930 --> 03:09:26.219
worked out with the Zoning Board of Adjustment to get this

03:09:26.219 --> 03:09:26.639
addressed

03:09:26.639 --> 03:09:29.799
and for it to come back to us at this time to move it on

03:09:29.799 --> 03:09:30.639
forward.

03:09:30.639 --> 03:09:32.639
So good job, staff.

03:09:32.639 --> 03:09:36.639
And I am going to recognize Commissioner Taylor.

03:09:36.639 --> 03:09:37.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:09:37.639 --> 03:09:41.639
I also would like to say this case worked out really well.

03:09:41.639 --> 03:09:43.639
It was getting to be somewhat contentious.

03:09:43.639 --> 03:09:47.620
And it found a nice solution at ZBA that balanced the needs

03:09:47.620 --> 03:09:49.639
of all parties involved.

03:09:49.639 --> 03:09:54.629
And with that, I'd like to recommend approval -- sorry,

03:09:54.629 --> 03:09:56.639
move we approve.

03:09:56.639 --> 03:09:59.639
Final replat 160004A.

03:09:59.639 --> 03:10:00.639
Okay.

03:10:00.639 --> 03:10:02.639
Commissioner Rizzo.

03:10:02.639 --> 03:10:04.639
I too echo the opinions of the other commissioners.

03:10:04.639 --> 03:10:06.639
I'm glad to see that this was resolved.

03:10:06.639 --> 03:10:07.639
I was excited about the project.

03:10:07.639 --> 03:10:09.639
So great work.

03:10:09.639 --> 03:10:11.639
And I second the motion.

03:10:11.639 --> 03:10:12.639
Okay.

03:10:12.639 --> 03:10:13.639
We have a first and second for approval.

03:10:13.639 --> 03:10:17.639
Any other discussion or comments?

03:10:17.639 --> 03:10:28.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:10:28.639 --> 03:10:31.639
Motion carries 6-0.

03:10:31.639 --> 03:10:33.639
We'll move us to item E.

03:10:33.639 --> 03:10:39.639
I'm going to open the public hearing for HL16-0005

03:10:39.639 --> 03:10:42.639
and call on Roman McAllen for presentation.

03:10:58.639 --> 03:10:59.639
Okay.

03:10:59.639 --> 03:11:01.639
Good evening.

03:11:01.639 --> 03:11:03.639
Good evening, commissioners.

03:11:03.639 --> 03:11:08.639
This is to designate the property at 716 West Oak Street.

03:11:08.639 --> 03:11:12.639
And I'm looking for a recommendation to the city council

03:11:12.639 --> 03:11:16.639
for approval of this as a historic landmark.

03:11:16.639 --> 03:11:19.639
Just very quickly.

03:11:19.639 --> 03:11:21.639
Sorry.

03:11:21.639 --> 03:11:22.639
That's true.

03:11:22.639 --> 03:11:29.639
7-07 you should be seeing is what we're talking about.

03:11:29.639 --> 03:11:30.639
We do.

03:11:30.639 --> 03:11:33.639
And it is 7 -- thank you for correcting.

03:11:33.639 --> 03:11:35.639
717.

03:11:35.639 --> 03:11:38.639
So it's correct on your agenda is what you're looking at.

03:11:38.639 --> 03:11:40.639
And sorry about that.

03:11:40.639 --> 03:11:43.639
The owners are Don and John Morris.

03:11:43.639 --> 03:11:46.639
And why am I not getting this slide?

03:11:46.639 --> 03:11:47.639
Here we go.

03:11:47.639 --> 03:11:49.639
Sorry about that.

03:11:49.639 --> 03:11:56.139
And as you know, this comes before you as a result of -- as

03:11:56.139 --> 03:11:59.639
we're called of our development code.

03:11:59.639 --> 03:12:03.639
And this is a property that was surveyed in 1996.

03:12:03.639 --> 03:12:05.639
This is a very significant property.

03:12:05.639 --> 03:12:08.639
It was designated as a high priority.

03:12:08.639 --> 03:12:13.319
It meets three or more of the 13 criteria, only one of

03:12:13.319 --> 03:12:15.639
which is needed for designation.

03:12:15.639 --> 03:12:17.639
This is the home prior to its renovation.

03:12:17.639 --> 03:12:19.639
This is the home today.

03:12:19.639 --> 03:12:22.639
And we'll recommend approval of this request.

03:12:22.639 --> 03:12:24.639
And I'll answer any questions.

03:12:24.639 --> 03:12:25.639
I'm sorry.

03:12:25.639 --> 03:12:26.639
Let me add one more thing.

03:12:26.639 --> 03:12:30.209
This item did go -- did have a mail out 200 feet and 500

03:12:30.209 --> 03:12:30.639
feet.

03:12:30.639 --> 03:12:32.639
And there were three positive responses.

03:12:32.639 --> 03:12:37.110
Do you need me to read the people who made those responses

03:12:37.110 --> 03:12:38.639
into the record?

03:12:38.639 --> 03:12:41.639
I don't think so if they're part of our record.

03:12:41.639 --> 03:12:42.639
Okay.

03:12:42.639 --> 03:12:43.639
Great.

03:12:43.639 --> 03:12:44.639
Thanks.

03:12:44.639 --> 03:12:45.639
Any questions?

03:12:45.639 --> 03:12:49.639
Any questions for staff?

03:12:49.639 --> 03:12:51.639
Thank you.

03:12:51.639 --> 03:12:52.639
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:12:52.639 --> 03:13:01.680
Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come

03:13:01.680 --> 03:13:05.639
forward at this time.

03:13:05.639 --> 03:13:06.639
I'm Donna Morris.

03:13:06.639 --> 03:13:10.639
My address is 918 West Oak.

03:13:10.639 --> 03:13:13.569
And we bought this house and refurbished it and our

03:13:13.569 --> 03:13:16.639
daughter and her family have moved in there.

03:13:16.639 --> 03:13:21.290
And this was what is known in town as the Hal Jackson House

03:13:21.290 --> 03:13:21.639
.

03:13:21.639 --> 03:13:25.639
And I respectfully request your approval.

03:13:25.639 --> 03:13:26.639
Great.

03:13:26.639 --> 03:13:29.590
Were you pleased when you had time to fill out a card for

03:13:29.590 --> 03:13:31.639
us before you leave this evening?

03:13:31.639 --> 03:13:32.639
Thank you.

03:13:32.639 --> 03:13:33.639
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:13:33.639 --> 03:13:38.219
Anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please

03:13:38.219 --> 03:13:40.639
come forward at this time.

03:13:40.639 --> 03:13:46.649
Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and open this

03:13:46.649 --> 03:13:50.639
item up for discussion or a motion.

03:13:50.639 --> 03:13:54.639
I'd like to make a motion to approve.

03:13:54.639 --> 03:13:55.639
Commissioner Hatchbuth?

03:13:55.639 --> 03:13:56.639
Second.

03:13:56.639 --> 03:13:59.639
I have a first and a second for approval.

03:13:59.639 --> 03:14:04.639
Any discussion?

03:14:04.639 --> 03:14:15.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:14:15.639 --> 03:14:17.639
Motion carries 6-0.

03:14:17.639 --> 03:14:18.639
Congratulations.

03:14:18.639 --> 03:14:21.639
Nice job on your home.

03:14:21.639 --> 03:14:31.639
We'll move us to item F, which will be HL16-0007.

03:14:31.639 --> 03:14:36.149
And I'm going to open the public hearing and call on Roman

03:14:36.149 --> 03:14:38.639
McGowan for presentation.

03:14:38.639 --> 03:14:39.639
Okay.

03:14:39.639 --> 03:14:42.959
And this is the exact same type of designation, different

03:14:42.959 --> 03:14:48.639
property in the same historic district, 619 Pearl Street.

03:14:48.639 --> 03:14:51.639
And I'm going to open it up for you for the same reasons.

03:14:51.639 --> 03:14:55.379
This property also had three responses back from the

03:14:55.379 --> 03:14:58.639
neighborhood, and one of them was pretty significant.

03:14:58.639 --> 03:15:00.639
And I just want to mention it.

03:15:00.639 --> 03:15:05.639
It's from, it looks like a Lindy Dodd.

03:15:05.639 --> 03:15:08.700
And they said, "We wholeheartedly support this historic

03:15:08.700 --> 03:15:11.639
landmark designation for 619 Pearl Street.

03:15:11.639 --> 03:15:14.639
And we support preservation of historical homes in Denton,

03:15:14.639 --> 03:15:16.639
regardless of the location.

03:15:16.639 --> 03:15:20.629
And we support planning and zoning and city-supported

03:15:20.629 --> 03:15:25.639
designation and preservation of all resources in Denton."

03:15:25.639 --> 03:15:27.639
So this is, again, that same sort of designation.

03:15:27.639 --> 03:15:29.850
It's just a wonderful thing that the city does to protect

03:15:29.850 --> 03:15:30.639
our resources.

03:15:30.639 --> 03:15:32.639
And this is that property today.

03:15:32.639 --> 03:15:36.639
Any questions?

03:15:36.639 --> 03:15:37.639
Commissioner Tyler.

03:15:37.639 --> 03:15:39.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:15:39.639 --> 03:15:43.739
So I'm looking at the aerial, and it does not show a

03:15:43.739 --> 03:15:46.639
detached garage or outbuilding.

03:15:46.639 --> 03:15:48.639
Is there a detached garage on this?

03:15:48.639 --> 03:15:50.639
I'm thinking of the right corner, I believe.

03:15:50.639 --> 03:15:51.639
There is.

03:15:51.639 --> 03:15:53.639
Is it here on the image on the right?

03:15:53.639 --> 03:15:54.639
Okay, yeah.

03:15:54.639 --> 03:15:55.639
And I was curious.

03:15:55.639 --> 03:15:57.639
So that is a new structure.

03:15:57.639 --> 03:15:59.639
That is a new structure.

03:15:59.639 --> 03:16:03.350
And is the outbuilding required to meet all of the same

03:16:03.350 --> 03:16:07.639
criteria as the main building, or is it just the house?

03:16:07.639 --> 03:16:09.639
I'm trying to remember.

03:16:09.639 --> 03:16:12.639
That's a good question.

03:16:12.639 --> 03:16:16.649
I think when we list these as a landmark, that they would

03:16:16.649 --> 03:16:18.639
apply to the whole site.

03:16:18.639 --> 03:16:22.510
In this case, when you're making the consideration, you're

03:16:22.510 --> 03:16:25.639
looking at the original structure on the site.

03:16:25.639 --> 03:16:29.290
Obviously, the new structure, it doesn't have the same

03:16:29.290 --> 03:16:33.639
historical value, but as long as it was built.

03:16:33.639 --> 03:16:36.790
And in this case, it would meet the standard, the United

03:16:36.790 --> 03:16:39.260
States Secretary of Interior's standards for historic

03:16:39.260 --> 03:16:41.639
preservation or building in a historic district.

03:16:41.639 --> 03:16:43.639
The HLC approved that structure.

03:16:43.639 --> 03:16:48.760
It met all those guidelines, and it's a magician in the

03:16:48.760 --> 03:16:49.639
site.

03:16:49.639 --> 03:16:50.639
So it's just there.

03:16:50.639 --> 03:16:52.639
So we actually just said right there.

03:16:52.639 --> 03:16:57.479
So if this had been a historic landmark before the out

03:16:57.479 --> 03:17:03.649
building was built, the outbuilding would have met all the

03:17:03.649 --> 03:17:04.639
requirements.

03:17:04.639 --> 03:17:06.649
Because I think it does meet the facade requirements and

03:17:06.649 --> 03:17:07.639
all that stuff, right?

03:17:07.639 --> 03:17:09.639
It goes to your question earlier, Andrew.

03:17:09.639 --> 03:17:11.639
You could build a building like that.

03:17:11.639 --> 03:17:12.639
You can build additions.

03:17:12.639 --> 03:17:17.639
You can build other quarters, carports and things.

03:17:17.639 --> 03:17:19.639
They just need to meet the standard.

03:17:19.639 --> 03:17:22.729
You wouldn't, if that home was, say, for example, set

03:17:22.729 --> 03:17:26.510
farther back, putting something in front of it, probably

03:17:26.510 --> 03:17:28.639
not going to fly.

03:17:28.639 --> 03:17:30.639
Thank you.

03:17:30.639 --> 03:17:34.639
Any other questions for staff?

03:17:34.639 --> 03:17:36.639
Thank you.

03:17:36.639 --> 03:17:38.639
And this is a public hearing.

03:17:38.639 --> 03:17:44.159
Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come

03:17:44.159 --> 03:17:46.639
forward at this time.

03:17:46.639 --> 03:17:50.209
Singh and I will close the public hearing and open the

03:17:50.209 --> 03:17:52.639
floor for discussion or motion.

03:17:52.639 --> 03:17:54.639
Commissioner Rizzo.

03:17:54.639 --> 03:17:57.270
I just wanted to say that I'm appreciative of the citizens

03:17:57.270 --> 03:17:59.639
who didn't take care of this part of town for us.

03:17:59.639 --> 03:18:02.829
So I commend the hard work and effort put forth to have

03:18:02.829 --> 03:18:05.889
these buildings approved, and I'm glad they're being

03:18:05.889 --> 03:18:06.639
protected.

03:18:06.639 --> 03:18:08.639
I hope this is a catalyst for even more.

03:18:08.639 --> 03:18:12.639
And so I happily move to approve this item.

03:18:12.639 --> 03:18:14.639
Commissioner Ellis.

03:18:14.639 --> 03:18:17.639
Thank you, Chair, and I will happily second that motion.

03:18:17.639 --> 03:18:20.639
We have a first and a second for approval.

03:18:20.639 --> 03:18:24.639
Any discussion?

03:18:24.639 --> 03:18:34.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:18:34.639 --> 03:18:36.639
Motion carries six to zero.

03:18:36.639 --> 03:18:38.639
Another great job on preservation here in Denton.

03:18:38.639 --> 03:18:40.639
Thank you.

03:18:40.639 --> 03:18:46.610
We'll move us to item G, and I'm going to open the public

03:18:46.610 --> 03:18:50.639
hearing for Z16-0021.

03:18:50.639 --> 03:19:00.639
And we'll call on Haley Zagurski for presentation.

03:19:00.639 --> 03:19:01.639
Good evening.

03:19:01.639 --> 03:19:07.639
So this is case Z1621 for the North Elm Street Apartments.

03:19:07.639 --> 03:19:10.239
I'll keep this brief and just do a summary of the case, but

03:19:10.239 --> 03:19:12.450
if you would like me to go over anything that we discussed

03:19:12.450 --> 03:19:14.639
in the work session, I'd be happy to do so.

03:19:14.639 --> 03:19:18.219
So the request is to rezone approximately 12.97 acres from

03:19:18.219 --> 03:19:20.950
Regional Center Commercial Downtown District to the

03:19:20.950 --> 03:19:23.639
Neighborhood Residential Mixed Use District.

03:19:23.639 --> 03:19:27.360
The property is located on the northwest side of the Rainey

03:19:27.360 --> 03:19:29.639
Road-Elm Street intersection.

03:19:29.639 --> 03:19:32.639
It's approximately 1,900 feet east of Bonneberry Street.

03:19:32.639 --> 03:19:36.209
And staff found through our analysis that the proposed rez

03:19:36.209 --> 03:19:39.540
oning to NRMU conforms with the future land use designation

03:19:39.540 --> 03:19:42.639
for the property of neighborhood mixed use,

03:19:42.639 --> 03:19:45.879
and is also compatible with surrounding zoning designations

03:19:45.879 --> 03:19:47.639
and property uses in the area.

03:19:47.639 --> 03:19:49.639
So we recommend approval of this case.

03:19:49.639 --> 03:19:52.639
And I'll stand for any questions.

03:19:52.639 --> 03:19:55.079
I'm going to ask a question on behalf of Commissioner

03:19:55.079 --> 03:19:55.639
Taylor.

03:19:55.639 --> 03:19:56.639
I think he brought up in work session.

03:19:56.639 --> 03:19:58.639
Did we get an answer on the site plan?

03:19:58.639 --> 03:20:01.639
It's the things that were shown on site plan, if there was

03:20:01.639 --> 03:20:03.639
going to be a substitution or not.

03:20:03.639 --> 03:20:05.639
There is no substitution.

03:20:05.639 --> 03:20:08.510
I spoke with the applicant who is here, and they're

03:20:08.510 --> 03:20:10.639
comfortable with it as presented.

03:20:10.639 --> 03:20:12.639
As presented. Okay, great.

03:20:12.639 --> 03:20:16.639
Any other questions for staff?

03:20:16.639 --> 03:20:18.639
Thank you, Haley.

03:20:18.639 --> 03:20:24.379
I have a card, but I guess I have a comment I'll read into

03:20:24.379 --> 03:20:27.639
the record from Randall Smith.

03:20:27.639 --> 03:20:31.639
5428 Lake Victoria Court in Flower Mound, Texas.

03:20:31.639 --> 03:20:35.639
He is in favor of this request.

03:20:35.639 --> 03:20:37.639
And this is a public hearing.

03:20:37.639 --> 03:20:42.219
Anyone else who would like to speak on this item, please

03:20:42.219 --> 03:20:44.639
come forward at this time.

03:20:44.639 --> 03:20:48.479
Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and chair will

03:20:48.479 --> 03:20:56.639
entertain a motion or would there be further discussion?

03:20:56.639 --> 03:20:58.639
Commissioner Hussbett.

03:20:58.639 --> 03:21:02.639
Move approval of Z16-0021.

03:21:02.639 --> 03:21:05.639
Okay.

03:21:05.639 --> 03:21:06.639
Commissioner Ellis.

03:21:06.639 --> 03:21:08.639
Thank you, Chair. I will second that.

03:21:08.639 --> 03:21:09.639
Okay.

03:21:09.639 --> 03:21:11.639
I have a first and a second for approval.

03:21:11.639 --> 03:21:17.639
Any further discussion?

03:21:17.639 --> 03:21:27.639
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

03:21:27.639 --> 03:21:34.639
Motion carries 6-0.

03:21:34.639 --> 03:21:37.639
That will move us to item H.

03:21:37.639 --> 03:21:44.639
I'm going to open the public hearing for S16-0005.

03:21:44.639 --> 03:21:47.639
We'll call on Haley for presentation.

03:21:47.639 --> 03:22:02.639
Thank you.

03:22:02.639 --> 03:22:03.639
Okay.

03:22:03.639 --> 03:22:07.940
So this is request S16-05, and this is for a specific use

03:22:07.940 --> 03:22:12.639
permit that follows the zoning case that we just heard.

03:22:12.639 --> 03:22:16.739
So the request is for an SUP to allow for multifamily

03:22:16.739 --> 03:22:21.049
development on the same 12.97 acres of land at Raine and

03:22:21.049 --> 03:22:22.639
North Elm.

03:22:22.639 --> 03:22:25.030
The applicant has proposed a multifamily development that

03:22:25.030 --> 03:22:27.370
would have a total of five buildings, a mixture of four-

03:22:27.370 --> 03:22:30.719
story and three-story buildings with a total of

03:22:30.719 --> 03:22:32.639
approximately 289 units.

03:22:32.639 --> 03:22:35.530
And after analysis, staff found that the development is

03:22:35.530 --> 03:22:38.309
compatible with surrounding property uses and is also

03:22:38.309 --> 03:22:41.030
consistent with the objectives of the future land use

03:22:41.030 --> 03:22:43.639
designation in the Denton Plan 2030.

03:22:43.639 --> 03:22:47.319
So staff recommends approval of S16-05 with the condition

03:22:47.319 --> 03:22:50.569
that the proposed development substantially complies with

03:22:50.569 --> 03:22:53.790
the site plan, landscape plan, and elevations that were

03:22:53.790 --> 03:22:54.639
provided.

03:22:54.639 --> 03:22:56.639
Got some questions for you.

03:22:56.639 --> 03:22:57.639
Yes, sir.

03:22:57.639 --> 03:22:58.639
Commissioner Taylor.

03:22:58.639 --> 03:23:00.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:23:00.639 --> 03:23:05.639
Has the site plan hasn't gone through DRC yet, or has it?

03:23:05.639 --> 03:23:08.780
The site plan was reviewed as part of the SUP, but it will

03:23:08.780 --> 03:23:11.770
go through the final site plan process following the

03:23:11.770 --> 03:23:13.639
planning of the property.

03:23:13.639 --> 03:23:14.639
Okay.

03:23:14.639 --> 03:23:20.850
I'm just noticing I believe the trash and recycling enclos

03:23:20.850 --> 03:23:25.639
ures might not meet the criteria manuals.

03:23:25.639 --> 03:23:28.989
So it just seems like they're not -- well, that one looks

03:23:28.989 --> 03:23:32.639
big enough, but this other one doesn't look big enough.

03:23:32.639 --> 03:23:35.510
So, of course, I guess in that case, this is where

03:23:35.510 --> 03:23:37.639
substantially complies comes in.

03:23:37.639 --> 03:23:41.309
So obviously I want -- the site generally looks good, but I

03:23:41.309 --> 03:23:44.709
would want to make sure that it meets all of our criteria

03:23:44.709 --> 03:23:45.639
manuals.

03:23:45.639 --> 03:23:46.639
Yes, sir.

03:23:46.639 --> 03:23:48.639
And it will be reviewed in more detail with the site plan.

03:23:48.639 --> 03:23:49.639
Okay.

03:23:49.639 --> 03:23:51.639
Thank you.

03:23:51.639 --> 03:23:53.639
Commissioner Rossell.

03:23:53.639 --> 03:23:54.639
Thank you, Chair.

03:23:54.639 --> 03:23:58.430
You mentioned in the work session this lower corner, that

03:23:58.430 --> 03:24:01.729
would come back to us for another site plan, is that

03:24:01.729 --> 03:24:02.639
correct?

03:24:02.639 --> 03:24:05.840
If they're to build on that or if it meets zoning, they can

03:24:05.840 --> 03:24:08.639
just build by right, I guess, for the MIMU?

03:24:08.639 --> 03:24:09.639
For the third lot?

03:24:09.639 --> 03:24:10.639
Yes.

03:24:10.639 --> 03:24:13.639
Yes, so that is not part of the multifamily request.

03:24:13.639 --> 03:24:16.510
I believe there is other development intended for that site

03:24:16.510 --> 03:24:16.639
.

03:24:16.639 --> 03:24:20.000
But it could go -- once it's platted, it could go straight

03:24:20.000 --> 03:24:23.239
to the site plan process, but you will see the property

03:24:23.239 --> 03:24:24.639
again at platting.

03:24:24.639 --> 03:24:25.639
Okay.

03:24:25.639 --> 03:24:27.639
Thanks.

03:24:27.639 --> 03:24:32.639
Any other questions for staff?

03:24:32.639 --> 03:24:35.639
Thank you, Hayley.

03:24:35.639 --> 03:24:39.629
I have -- it's not a card, but I have a comment in favor

03:24:39.629 --> 03:24:45.180
request, Randall Smith, 5428 Lake Victoria Court, Flower M

03:24:45.180 --> 03:24:46.639
ound, Texas.

03:24:46.639 --> 03:24:48.639
Again, he's in favor.

03:24:48.639 --> 03:24:50.639
This is a public hearing.

03:24:50.639 --> 03:24:54.819
Anyone else who would like to come forward and speak on

03:24:54.819 --> 03:24:58.639
this item at this time, please come forward.

03:24:58.639 --> 03:25:02.319
Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and open the

03:25:02.319 --> 03:25:04.639
floor for discussion or motion.

03:25:04.639 --> 03:25:07.639
Mr. Chair?

03:25:07.639 --> 03:25:08.639
Yes.

03:25:08.639 --> 03:25:09.639
I have a question.

03:25:09.639 --> 03:25:13.540
I was looking at the staff's recommendation, and I've

03:25:13.540 --> 03:25:17.799
noticed that they've changed somewhat, especially with

03:25:17.799 --> 03:25:24.639
these types of projects that are on a road classification

03:25:24.639 --> 03:25:25.639
377.

03:25:25.639 --> 03:25:30.110
Usually they're dependent on TextDOT improving the curb cut

03:25:30.110 --> 03:25:31.639
at that location.

03:25:31.639 --> 03:25:35.639
I see that they have a proposed curb cut.

03:25:35.639 --> 03:25:37.639
Sometimes they can't get that from TextDOT.

03:25:37.639 --> 03:25:38.639
Sometimes they can't.

03:25:38.639 --> 03:25:40.959
I was trying to find whether something like that is

03:25:40.959 --> 03:25:43.639
included as part of the recommendation or requirement.

03:25:43.639 --> 03:25:47.600
We don't know that, but typically we covered that by

03:25:47.600 --> 03:25:53.079
including a provision that they comply with all other city

03:25:53.079 --> 03:25:57.100
ordinances and state and federal laws that may be

03:25:57.100 --> 03:26:00.639
applicable to cover those kinds of situations as well.

03:26:00.639 --> 03:26:05.260
Because right now as it stands, it wouldn't cover a

03:26:05.260 --> 03:26:10.440
situation like that unless they already have the curb cut

03:26:10.440 --> 03:26:15.370
and I didn't find approval from TextDOT and I didn't see

03:26:15.370 --> 03:26:17.639
that in the backup.

03:26:17.639 --> 03:26:22.159
We have preliminarily met with TextDOT about this curb cut

03:26:22.159 --> 03:26:23.639
onto US 77.

03:26:23.639 --> 03:26:25.639
They had no issues with it.

03:26:25.639 --> 03:26:28.280
They had no issues with the proposed left turn lane onto

03:26:28.280 --> 03:26:31.190
the site, but it hasn't been formally approved because they

03:26:31.190 --> 03:26:33.639
haven't applied for a formal TextDOT permit.

03:26:33.639 --> 03:26:35.639
It's something that would be dependent otherwise.

03:26:35.639 --> 03:26:40.629
We don't have it in our -- I don't want to put the building

03:26:40.629 --> 03:26:44.280
department in a position where they have to issue a permit

03:26:44.280 --> 03:26:48.010
when they haven't gotten necessary approvals from a state

03:26:48.010 --> 03:26:51.639
agency because it's kind of an awkward position.

03:26:51.639 --> 03:26:54.899
I would recommend that some type of additional condition be

03:26:54.899 --> 03:26:58.129
put in that they comply with all other local ordinances and

03:26:58.129 --> 03:27:00.639
state and applicable state laws as well.

03:27:00.639 --> 03:27:03.639
That would cover the TextDOT issue.

03:27:03.639 --> 03:27:06.790
Do you have some specific language or is that it that you'd

03:27:06.790 --> 03:27:07.639
like to add?

03:27:07.639 --> 03:27:09.639
We could do a friendly amendment.

03:27:09.639 --> 03:27:13.100
Something that can be done by a friendly amendment, but it

03:27:13.100 --> 03:27:16.540
's something just to cover everything and make sure that we

03:27:16.540 --> 03:27:18.639
're not deficient in any areas.

03:27:18.639 --> 03:27:22.290
I don't remember who the original motioner or seconder was

03:27:22.290 --> 03:27:24.639
for a friendly amendment to that.

03:27:24.639 --> 03:27:26.639
We haven't even done it.

03:27:26.639 --> 03:27:28.639
I can't make the amendments.

03:27:28.639 --> 03:27:29.639
We've had a few items and it's a long night.

03:27:29.639 --> 03:27:32.639
I apologize.

03:27:32.639 --> 03:27:40.219
So any further discussion or motion with a friendly

03:27:40.219 --> 03:27:41.639
amendment?

03:27:41.639 --> 03:27:43.639
Commissioner Hussbeth.

03:27:43.639 --> 03:27:51.200
I move that we approve S16-0005 with the requirement that

03:27:51.200 --> 03:27:58.909
they meet all state and city requirements pertaining to the

03:27:58.909 --> 03:28:03.639
right of ways, curbs, streets, access, et cetera.

03:28:03.639 --> 03:28:04.639
Okay.

03:28:04.639 --> 03:28:07.250
Legal, does that suffice on the condition you are looking

03:28:07.250 --> 03:28:07.639
for?

03:28:07.639 --> 03:28:09.639
No, that would be sufficient.

03:28:09.639 --> 03:28:10.639
Great.

03:28:10.639 --> 03:28:13.639
Thank you, Commissioner Hussbeth.

03:28:13.639 --> 03:28:16.639
Commissioner Ellis.

03:28:16.639 --> 03:28:19.510
I will second that as long as we're including staff

03:28:19.510 --> 03:28:21.639
recommendations on that as well.

03:28:21.639 --> 03:28:22.639
Okay.

03:28:22.639 --> 03:28:23.639
Correct.

03:28:23.639 --> 03:28:24.639
Great.

03:28:24.639 --> 03:28:30.219
We have a motion, first and a second, to approve with the

03:28:30.219 --> 03:28:36.639
condition as drafted by Commissioner Hussbeth and

03:28:36.639 --> 03:28:39.639
recommended also by legal.

03:28:39.639 --> 03:28:45.639
We'll call for further discussion on this item.

03:28:45.639 --> 03:28:47.639
Seeing none, Commissioner Taylor.

03:28:47.639 --> 03:28:50.639
So clarifying and the staff recommendation too?

03:28:50.639 --> 03:28:52.639
I didn't, sorry, I just wanted to make sure.

03:28:52.639 --> 03:28:53.639
Yes.

03:28:53.639 --> 03:28:56.639
Okay.

03:28:56.639 --> 03:29:00.639
Someone help me if I've gotten something messed up.

03:29:00.639 --> 03:29:01.889
I just didn't like, in the original motion was with the

03:29:01.889 --> 03:29:03.219
condition of legal, I just wanted to make sure, and also

03:29:03.219 --> 03:29:10.639
the site landscape plan and so forth will be by the law.

03:29:10.639 --> 03:29:11.639
Okay.

03:29:11.639 --> 03:29:12.639
All of the conditions that are mentioned.

03:29:12.639 --> 03:29:13.639
Okay.

03:29:13.639 --> 03:29:14.639
Thank you for the clarification.

03:29:14.639 --> 03:29:19.290
Do we need any clarification on that with a seconder or not

03:29:19.290 --> 03:29:19.639
?

03:29:19.639 --> 03:29:24.110
No, I thought the seconder actually reiterated that staff

03:29:24.110 --> 03:29:25.639
recommendation.

03:29:25.639 --> 03:29:26.639
Great.

03:29:26.639 --> 03:29:35.879
Okay, so with a seconder and a first and a second, I'll

03:29:35.879 --> 03:29:45.639
call for a vote on the board to approve with conditions.

03:29:45.639 --> 03:29:48.639
Motion carries six to zero.

03:29:48.639 --> 03:29:57.409
That concludes our public hearing section and we'll move us

03:29:57.409 --> 03:30:00.639
to our project matrix.

03:30:00.639 --> 03:30:05.399
Yes, you should open your packet, the latest list of

03:30:05.399 --> 03:30:08.639
requests for information.

03:30:08.639 --> 03:30:11.639
Are there any additions at this time?

03:30:11.639 --> 03:30:15.639
I have a couple questions.

03:30:15.639 --> 03:30:16.639
Commissioner Zell.

03:30:16.639 --> 03:30:20.209
I was in the matrix and it looks like Commissioner Briegel

03:30:20.209 --> 03:30:23.510
and Dudowitz a while ago, where one of the items is future

03:30:23.510 --> 03:30:26.639
plans for additional parking to the downtown area.

03:30:26.639 --> 03:30:29.510
In light of the television ads that are being run for Waus

03:30:29.510 --> 03:30:33.479
el Fest this Friday, I know, just present in my mind, the

03:30:33.479 --> 03:30:37.649
massive parking disarray we're about to experience downtown

03:30:37.649 --> 03:30:38.639
this weekend.

03:30:38.639 --> 03:30:41.290
Is there any update on when we'll know about that specific

03:30:41.290 --> 03:30:43.989
item, about the parking downtown, or are we going to get a

03:30:43.989 --> 03:30:44.639
report?

03:30:44.639 --> 03:30:47.920
It says upcoming work session. Do we have a timeframe on

03:30:47.920 --> 03:30:48.639
that one?

03:30:48.639 --> 03:30:52.780
I do not at this time, but staff is, we're coordinating,

03:30:52.780 --> 03:30:56.530
core work, I'm sleepy, coordinated internally and there's a

03:30:56.530 --> 03:30:57.639
meeting next week.

03:30:57.639 --> 03:31:01.739
So we'll bring forward the schedule after we get it

03:31:01.739 --> 03:31:03.639
together on our ends.

03:31:03.639 --> 03:31:06.750
Perfect. And the other thing, I don't know if this is to

03:31:06.750 --> 03:31:09.639
add to the matrix or rather maybe offline clarification,

03:31:09.639 --> 03:31:13.639
but I would love to know the city thresholds.

03:31:13.639 --> 03:31:17.879
City thresholds for installing sidewalks to pre-existing

03:31:17.879 --> 03:31:18.639
roads.

03:31:18.639 --> 03:31:24.959
I don't know what has to happen to necessitate a sidewalk

03:31:24.959 --> 03:31:29.659
being built, but there are some streets that just seem like

03:31:29.659 --> 03:31:31.639
they're crying for a sidewalk.

03:31:31.639 --> 03:31:35.750
And I don't know the process of getting a sidewalk added or

03:31:35.750 --> 03:31:39.639
if there's general conditions that have to be met.

03:31:39.639 --> 03:31:43.639
I'd welcome some more information about sidewalks in town.

03:31:43.639 --> 03:31:46.639
Okay.

03:31:46.639 --> 03:31:47.639
Sure.

03:31:47.639 --> 03:31:50.510
I know I haven't been on here for a while, but I noticed

03:31:50.510 --> 03:31:53.489
that there are several new members that have come up within

03:31:53.489 --> 03:31:56.639
or come on this commission in the last year, two years.

03:31:56.639 --> 03:32:00.780
I recommend that maybe it is time for a discussion or

03:32:00.780 --> 03:32:04.639
actually a legal presentation on gas wells.

03:32:04.639 --> 03:32:09.639
We do have a new gas well ordinance that was adopted. I

03:32:09.639 --> 03:32:09.639
think some of you weren't on the commission yet.

03:32:09.639 --> 03:32:15.889
The gas well issues are a big issue in this town and they

03:32:15.889 --> 03:32:18.879
were in part of the Robeson Ranch and that's something that

03:32:18.879 --> 03:32:20.940
needs some further discussion internally about that

03:32:20.940 --> 03:32:21.639
particular project.

03:32:21.639 --> 03:32:25.219
But it's something for you all to know and be able to

03:32:25.219 --> 03:32:29.200
identify what those requirements are when you see these

03:32:29.200 --> 03:32:32.639
plots come before you that have gas wells in them.

03:32:32.639 --> 03:32:42.639
Okay.

03:32:42.639 --> 03:32:48.639
I've got one to add. I know I had asked for an update on

03:32:48.639 --> 03:32:52.639
the tech stock plans for May Hill in 35.

03:32:52.639 --> 03:32:56.569
I don't know when those are planning to come to us, but I

03:32:56.569 --> 03:33:00.680
have another request that can probably go under that same

03:33:00.680 --> 03:33:02.639
category of Ryan Road.

03:33:02.639 --> 03:33:08.110
We have a number of subdivisions that are going in on Ryan

03:33:08.110 --> 03:33:13.290
Road and I believe the new procedure we have is the impact

03:33:13.290 --> 03:33:17.719
fees rather than perimeter street paving and all the road

03:33:17.719 --> 03:33:18.639
improvements.

03:33:18.639 --> 03:33:23.110
And I think there was a condition put on that roadway

03:33:23.110 --> 03:33:28.360
impact that once the road got to a certain level that would

03:33:28.360 --> 03:33:31.639
trigger the city to come in and improve that road.

03:33:31.639 --> 03:33:37.250
And I'd be curious to know what Ryan Road's current rating

03:33:37.250 --> 03:33:43.760
is currently or proposed after however many 500, 600 or

03:33:43.760 --> 03:33:46.750
however many lots that are currently under development

03:33:46.750 --> 03:33:47.639
right there.

03:33:47.639 --> 03:33:52.200
Where that stands and possibly a light at the end of Ryan

03:33:52.200 --> 03:33:58.290
at 1830 because that's the only way for those people to get

03:33:58.290 --> 03:33:58.639
out.

03:33:58.639 --> 03:34:01.639
I think.

03:34:01.639 --> 03:34:03.639
What's wrong.

03:34:03.639 --> 03:34:06.739
That's okay. And I do have that information on May Hill. I

03:34:06.739 --> 03:34:09.639
'm just I want to put it in a memo.

03:34:09.639 --> 03:34:15.110
If it's better to handle as a memo and nobody else cares

03:34:15.110 --> 03:34:18.639
about fine you can send it to me but I'll take it.

03:34:18.639 --> 03:34:21.649
So that's fine. A memo on that and a memo on Ryan rather

03:34:21.649 --> 03:34:24.719
than taking up work session time unless staff feels like

03:34:24.719 --> 03:34:27.639
that's the most appropriate way to deal with it.

03:34:27.639 --> 03:34:32.639
So anybody else?

03:34:32.639 --> 03:34:35.639
Good meeting. Long meeting tonight.

03:34:35.639 --> 03:34:39.209
At 9 o'clock I'm going to close our PNC meeting for this

03:34:39.209 --> 03:34:42.510
evening and thank you everybody for a very good discussion

03:34:42.510 --> 03:34:44.639
on some tough issues tonight.

03:34:44.639 --> 03:34:45.639
Thank you.