WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.919 meeting for January 25th 2017. This meeting has been duly 00:00:05.919 --> 00:00:06.820 posted and we do 00:00:06.820 --> 00:00:09.890 have a quorum present and I'm going to call our meeting to 00:00:09.890 --> 00:00:11.160 order at 11 after 00:00:11.160 --> 00:00:15.449 4. This will be our work session and we will begin with 00:00:15.449 --> 00:00:16.800 clarification of agenda 00:00:16.800 --> 00:00:21.929 items and I will turn it over to Shandria for presentation. 00:00:21.929 --> 00:00:23.719 Good evening. 00:00:23.719 --> 00:00:28.129 The first item is the approval of the PNZ meetings from 00:00:28.129 --> 00:00:29.160 meeting minutes from 00:00:29.160 --> 00:00:32.939 January 11th. If anybody has any discussion on that we'll 00:00:32.939 --> 00:00:36.520 open it up. Okay. 00:00:36.520 --> 00:00:39.859 Do we want to have a clarification about the item that's 00:00:39.859 --> 00:00:41.520 going to come later just 00:00:41.520 --> 00:00:45.689 so everybody else has an idea on 4A or just handle that at 00:00:45.689 --> 00:00:50.640 that time? Okay. We'll leave that alone then. 00:00:50.640 --> 00:00:55.340 Anybody have any questions on the minutes? No changes? Okay 00:00:55.340 --> 00:00:57.640 . Okay. On the consent 00:00:57.640 --> 00:01:01.990 agenda we have two plats both are for the razor-wrench 00:01:01.990 --> 00:01:04.200 phase three and I'll 00:01:04.200 --> 00:01:07.269 invite Mike Bell up to do a presentation if you guys have 00:01:07.269 --> 00:01:10.120 any questions. Does 00:01:10.120 --> 00:01:18.989 anybody have questions? Okay. For the for the final plan I 00:01:18.989 --> 00:01:20.120 did pass out an 00:01:20.120 --> 00:01:23.790 updated version. Two minor tweaks, the labeling of the lots 00:01:23.790 --> 00:01:24.959 , they went from 00:01:24.959 --> 00:01:28.579 block one to block A and there's a corner clip designation 00:01:28.579 --> 00:01:29.519 at Panhandle 00:01:29.519 --> 00:01:31.829 in 35. So those are the two changes from what you got from 00:01:31.829 --> 00:01:34.400 your previous backup. 00:01:38.000 --> 00:01:42.909 And under individual considerations we have two items. The 00:01:42.909 --> 00:01:45.239 first item for A, 00:01:45.239 --> 00:01:49.469 this is the one that chair was referring to, we are going 00:01:49.469 --> 00:01:52.120 to have to postpone the 00:01:52.120 --> 00:01:56.689 action on that item until we can repost it to actually set 00:01:56.689 --> 00:01:58.439 up the committee. So 00:01:58.439 --> 00:02:00.959 we have to set up the committee first and then we can nom 00:02:00.959 --> 00:02:02.799 inate commissioners. 00:02:02.799 --> 00:02:08.389 All right. And then 4B is a site is a request for approval 00:02:08.389 --> 00:02:09.400 of a site plan in 00:02:09.400 --> 00:02:12.210 the razor-wrench overlay district and if anybody has 00:02:12.210 --> 00:02:13.599 questions, well Mike will do a 00:02:13.599 --> 00:02:16.400 presentation on that. 00:02:22.800 --> 00:02:25.930 So this project would be SP 16-3, it's a retail building, 00:02:25.930 --> 00:02:31.240 143,000 square foot 00:02:31.240 --> 00:02:33.969 retail development in the RR 1 area of the razor-wrench 00:02:33.969 --> 00:02:35.240 overlay district. As 00:02:35.240 --> 00:02:39.020 normal it has to comply with the site plan landscape plan 00:02:39.020 --> 00:02:40.400 and elevations have 00:02:40.400 --> 00:02:44.689 to comply with the exhibits of the ordinance. To show you 00:02:44.689 --> 00:02:46.120 kind of where this 00:02:46.120 --> 00:02:49.060 project is in relation to the overall town center, this is 00:02:49.060 --> 00:02:50.240 380 on the north 00:02:50.240 --> 00:02:56.900 side and 35 and the subject property is this area here. So 00:02:56.900 --> 00:02:58.360 it forms a major 00:02:58.360 --> 00:03:01.800 anchor of the town center just south of the in-and-out and 00:03:01.800 --> 00:03:03.159 the chiles that have 00:03:03.159 --> 00:03:08.289 been built. And to the right is just a blow-up how that 00:03:08.289 --> 00:03:11.919 site will work. This is 00:03:11.919 --> 00:03:14.979 the northern half of that lot, the landscape plan, see 00:03:14.979 --> 00:03:16.599 plantings meet code 00:03:16.599 --> 00:03:20.479 requirements for landscape islands and screening. The same 00:03:20.479 --> 00:03:21.840 for the south half. 00:03:21.840 --> 00:03:27.379 And then this exhibit is the hardscape plan, plaza space is 00:03:27.379 --> 00:03:28.479 required with the 00:03:28.479 --> 00:03:30.520 razor ordinance. They have met their plaza space 00:03:30.520 --> 00:03:32.840 requirements at the 00:03:32.840 --> 00:03:37.419 entrances, they provided seating and as well as a 00:03:37.419 --> 00:03:38.599 substantial amount of 00:03:38.599 --> 00:03:41.419 landscaping around the building. And in addition there will 00:03:41.419 --> 00:03:42.120 be this kind of 00:03:42.120 --> 00:03:46.139 courtyard as from the entrance to this door into the town 00:03:46.139 --> 00:03:48.120 center area. So at 00:03:48.120 --> 00:03:51.539 some point there will be some additional plaza space there. 00:03:51.539 --> 00:03:53.080 And I've shown two 00:03:53.080 --> 00:03:55.900 elevations here that represent the four sides. So the top 00:03:55.900 --> 00:03:56.879 view is what you'd see 00:03:56.879 --> 00:04:00.870 from I-35 and then this would be what you'd see from the 00:04:00.870 --> 00:04:01.800 north or the south. 00:04:01.800 --> 00:04:07.729 They're very similar elevations. I've outlined the criteria 00:04:07.729 --> 00:04:09.240 for approval in 00:04:09.240 --> 00:04:11.659 the backup. I'm happy to go through that and we will be 00:04:11.659 --> 00:04:12.879 recommending approval. 00:04:12.879 --> 00:04:16.199 Happy to answer any questions. 00:04:18.399 --> 00:04:26.720 Thank you Mike. The first item under public hearing is a 00:04:26.720 --> 00:04:29.800 request for regarding 00:04:29.800 --> 00:04:33.089 the historic landmark designation and I'll invite Roman Mc 00:04:33.089 --> 00:04:33.879 Allen up for a 00:04:33.879 --> 00:04:36.399 presentation. 00:04:39.480 --> 00:04:45.149 Hello. This item is historic landmark designation for 00:04:45.149 --> 00:04:50.160 property at 2106 North 00:04:50.160 --> 00:04:53.639 Bell. The request is to hold this public meeting and 00:04:53.639 --> 00:04:54.920 consider making a 00:04:54.920 --> 00:04:57.439 recommendation to City Council regarding an application for 00:04:57.439 --> 00:04:58.279 historic landmark 00:04:58.279 --> 00:05:01.459 designation of 2106 North Bell Avenue which is on the 00:05:01.459 --> 00:05:02.560 southeast corner of 00:05:02.560 --> 00:05:07.879 Bell Avenue and Sherman Drive. The home was surveyed in 00:05:07.879 --> 00:05:11.199 1996 as part of the city 00:05:11.199 --> 00:05:16.269 wide historic resources survey and at that time it was 00:05:16.269 --> 00:05:17.680 labeled as a high 00:05:17.680 --> 00:05:22.870 priority structure in the in the Tudor revival style. This 00:05:22.870 --> 00:05:23.720 is an image from that 00:05:23.720 --> 00:05:28.620 survey. A summary of why this these items come before you 00:05:28.620 --> 00:05:30.319 is that the historic 00:05:30.319 --> 00:05:33.519 landmark is from per the code the historic landmark 00:05:33.519 --> 00:05:34.639 Commission makes a 00:05:34.639 --> 00:05:37.269 recommendation to the planning and zoning Commission which 00:05:37.269 --> 00:05:38.000 then considers 00:05:38.000 --> 00:05:42.560 it and makes a recommendation to the City Council who makes 00:05:42.560 --> 00:05:43.360 the final 00:05:43.360 --> 00:05:50.279 ordinance decision. Doing this designating historic 00:05:50.279 --> 00:05:51.480 resources has to do 00:05:51.480 --> 00:05:56.040 with the comprehensive plan in various ways and one of them 00:05:56.040 --> 00:05:57.480 is that element 4 00:05:57.480 --> 00:06:00.350 of that plan calls for the preservation maintenance and 00:06:00.350 --> 00:06:01.600 creation of character 00:06:01.600 --> 00:06:05.670 areas within the city and then element 7 calls us for the 00:06:05.670 --> 00:06:07.319 city to be proactive in 00:06:07.319 --> 00:06:10.370 neighborhood conservation and using historic designations 00:06:10.370 --> 00:06:11.000 as a defense 00:06:11.000 --> 00:06:15.500 mechanism to some some development in those areas where 00:06:15.500 --> 00:06:16.360 there are historic 00:06:16.360 --> 00:06:21.019 properties. So then there are 13 criteria you only need one 00:06:21.019 --> 00:06:22.319 to be a designated 00:06:22.319 --> 00:06:26.910 historic landmark and I just chose three the applicant had 00:06:26.910 --> 00:06:28.199 submitted also 00:06:28.199 --> 00:06:33.399 several others. One in this case is that is one is it says 00:06:33.399 --> 00:06:35.120 character the 00:06:35.120 --> 00:06:38.800 home or the property has character interest or value as 00:06:38.800 --> 00:06:40.500 part of the 00:06:40.500 --> 00:06:43.699 development heritage or cultural characteristics of our 00:06:43.699 --> 00:06:45.120 city. So this one 00:06:45.120 --> 00:06:49.089 meets that in in a couple of ways it's very prominently 00:06:49.089 --> 00:06:50.680 located on Sherman and 00:06:50.680 --> 00:06:54.100 North Bell so whether you're coming from the north down 00:06:54.100 --> 00:06:55.240 south you know you're 00:06:55.240 --> 00:06:58.339 sort of entering the historic core of the city and if you 00:06:58.339 --> 00:07:00.279 're going north you 00:07:00.279 --> 00:07:04.089 you experience that same knowledge because this is a really 00:07:04.089 --> 00:07:05.040 prominent home. 00:07:05.040 --> 00:07:10.170 When it started out it was a little smaller two-story is 00:07:10.170 --> 00:07:11.920 represented here in 00:07:11.920 --> 00:07:17.490 the early 30s and then it was added on to and the chimney 00:07:17.490 --> 00:07:19.279 was shifted to the 00:07:19.279 --> 00:07:22.769 south and the property was picked up and so it sits really 00:07:22.769 --> 00:07:24.000 prominent at that 00:07:24.000 --> 00:07:31.220 intersection. And then with respect to that style I just 00:07:31.220 --> 00:07:33.439 want to point out the 00:07:33.439 --> 00:07:39.600 Tudor style is represented in many ways throughout Denton 00:07:39.600 --> 00:07:41.480 it's like the second 00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:45.730 most popular home style that you think of in the United 00:07:45.730 --> 00:07:47.279 States after in the in 00:07:47.279 --> 00:07:51.610 the early 20th century. Here are two other ones in the Oak 00:07:51.610 --> 00:07:52.199 Hickory 00:07:52.199 --> 00:07:56.240 historic district these are brick versions and this is a 00:07:56.240 --> 00:07:57.660 more typical Tudor 00:07:57.660 --> 00:08:00.839 style with the brick or the masonry work and then sort of 00:08:00.839 --> 00:08:02.120 the half timbering that 00:08:02.120 --> 00:08:05.060 you see in those two gables the gable on the house on your 00:08:05.060 --> 00:08:06.879 left over the door it's 00:08:06.879 --> 00:08:12.009 kind of stucco and that it's called half timbering. And 00:08:12.009 --> 00:08:13.639 another version this 00:08:13.639 --> 00:08:16.879 property just recently got historic property of the month 00:08:16.879 --> 00:08:17.959 and surveyors back 00:08:17.959 --> 00:08:21.310 then also called this a Tudor style although here it's not 00:08:21.310 --> 00:08:22.079 half timbering 00:08:22.079 --> 00:08:25.759 those are actually pretty massive structural timbers that 00:08:25.759 --> 00:08:26.480 hold up the 00:08:26.480 --> 00:08:32.519 front porch. Another so I talked about that another is the 00:08:32.519 --> 00:08:33.360 specimen that so is 00:08:33.360 --> 00:08:35.509 this a good specimen and the home is a great specimen now 00:08:35.509 --> 00:08:36.320 the current owners 00:08:36.320 --> 00:08:40.289 have fully restored I believe they removed a synthetic form 00:08:40.289 --> 00:08:41.139 of siding or 00:08:41.139 --> 00:08:44.159 something that had been on it when they acquired it and 00:08:44.159 --> 00:08:45.399 they may be here this 00:08:45.399 --> 00:08:48.820 evening. They even went that's their notes on the lower 00:08:48.820 --> 00:08:50.120 right they went so 00:08:50.120 --> 00:08:53.740 far as to find the redwood and have the redwood milled into 00:08:53.740 --> 00:08:55.039 the right siding for 00:08:55.039 --> 00:08:58.590 any repair work that they did. Then finally another 00:08:58.590 --> 00:08:59.840 criteria meets is 00:08:59.840 --> 00:09:04.840 association with a significant person in or civic person to 00:09:04.840 --> 00:09:06.080 the city or to the 00:09:06.080 --> 00:09:08.929 state and I just threw a couple this home is stately enough 00:09:08.929 --> 00:09:09.720 that who knows 00:09:09.720 --> 00:09:13.539 this is a neighborhood probably birthday party on the left 00:09:13.539 --> 00:09:14.759 and a lot of faces 00:09:14.759 --> 00:09:17.850 that were part of the city. On the right I believe this is 00:09:17.850 --> 00:09:18.919 probably the judge 00:09:18.919 --> 00:09:22.129 although the owners will be here later the Judge Boyd and I 00:09:22.129 --> 00:09:23.200 saved this image 00:09:23.200 --> 00:09:25.919 just having a little fun the child the children there you 00:09:25.919 --> 00:09:26.840 won't see this too 00:09:26.840 --> 00:09:29.309 often they're pretty rug in front you turn that rug around 00:09:29.309 --> 00:09:30.000 and something 00:09:30.000 --> 00:09:33.379 you're not going to see much more these days is a big polar 00:09:33.379 --> 00:09:34.799 bear rug on that 00:09:34.799 --> 00:09:37.889 carpet. So the judge coming back to the judge and who that 00:09:37.889 --> 00:09:38.960 was Judge Ben Boyd 00:09:38.960 --> 00:09:43.710 and Ida Boyd owned the house in from 48 to 63 they were 00:09:43.710 --> 00:09:44.679 distinguished members of 00:09:44.679 --> 00:09:48.480 Denton Society. He was an associate justice of the Second 00:09:48.480 --> 00:09:49.240 Court of Civil 00:09:49.240 --> 00:09:53.720 Appeals in Fort Worth for ten years and then held some 00:09:53.720 --> 00:09:54.840 district county 00:09:54.840 --> 00:10:00.600 judgeships as well. He here's just an he gave an address 00:10:00.600 --> 00:10:03.559 here at the 1940 in 00:10:03.559 --> 00:10:09.870 1946 at the UNT. Here's a couple newspaper articles the one 00:10:09.870 --> 00:10:10.320 on the left 00:10:10.320 --> 00:10:14.100 just about a case a prominent case that the judge handled 00:10:14.100 --> 00:10:15.399 and on the right is 00:10:15.399 --> 00:10:20.600 some information about Mrs. Boyd's position with the Texas 00:10:20.600 --> 00:10:20.960 Women's 00:10:20.960 --> 00:10:25.450 Federation. So we've sent out notices to the neighborhood 00:10:25.450 --> 00:10:26.120 we've gotten just a 00:10:26.120 --> 00:10:30.730 couple of notices back and they were favorable and we would 00:10:30.730 --> 00:10:31.700 not recommend 00:10:31.700 --> 00:10:39.269 approval for this property. I'll take any questions. 00:10:39.269 --> 00:10:41.320 Commissioner Rosell. Thank you I 00:10:41.320 --> 00:10:46.600 actually have several questions. First just my own 00:10:46.600 --> 00:10:48.440 notification every time I 00:10:48.440 --> 00:10:53.139 hear Tudor style I think brick, half timbers, what outside 00:10:53.139 --> 00:10:54.360 of that can you go 00:10:54.360 --> 00:10:57.200 over that how do you define the Tudor outside of that is it 00:10:57.200 --> 00:10:58.080 's a steep pitch 00:10:58.080 --> 00:11:03.039 roof or the steep pitch and I think often they talk about 00:11:03.039 --> 00:11:04.720 the facade having 00:11:04.720 --> 00:11:08.330 you're looking at the gable and so it's it's not a side g 00:11:08.330 --> 00:11:09.720 able house typically 00:11:09.720 --> 00:11:13.110 you're looking at how do you refer it's not a hip roof so 00:11:13.110 --> 00:11:14.320 you're looking at the 00:11:14.320 --> 00:11:18.929 gable in the facade and here you got actually three if we 00:11:18.929 --> 00:11:21.080 go back we've got 00:11:21.080 --> 00:11:25.169 kind of three gables that we're looking at and I would say 00:11:25.169 --> 00:11:26.600 the pitch roof the 00:11:26.600 --> 00:11:31.570 gabling is really what's going to get you there and you're 00:11:31.570 --> 00:11:32.799 it is unusual that 00:11:32.799 --> 00:11:38.350 it's not stone that sort of the Bible on this topic McAll 00:11:38.350 --> 00:11:40.559 ister's book he almost 00:11:40.559 --> 00:11:45.080 every examples brick or masonry but you can't deny when you 00:11:45.080 --> 00:11:46.399 hold this up to the 00:11:46.399 --> 00:11:49.620 others it just does that so this one these on these so you 00:11:49.620 --> 00:11:50.480 see the pitch roof 00:11:50.480 --> 00:11:52.460 on the left is right this one's a little bit long this 00:11:52.460 --> 00:11:54.120 house on the right looks a 00:11:54.120 --> 00:11:57.059 little like a Swiss chalet I mean you can try to figure out 00:11:57.059 --> 00:11:57.919 what's going on 00:11:57.919 --> 00:12:00.740 but again same same thing both of them have the curve 00:12:00.740 --> 00:12:03.000 entries and you know it 00:12:03.000 --> 00:12:05.440 is a highly subjective feel and the sort of eclectic 00:12:05.440 --> 00:12:06.840 versions of them but I think 00:12:06.840 --> 00:12:08.990 in a way this is sort of an eclectic version of it the 00:12:08.990 --> 00:12:09.919 other thing that's 00:12:09.919 --> 00:12:13.750 unusual in this house or above that front door the three 00:12:13.750 --> 00:12:15.240 square windows 00:12:15.240 --> 00:12:19.110 normally the front facade of a Tudor will have elongated 00:12:19.110 --> 00:12:20.519 windows almost all 00:12:20.519 --> 00:12:23.269 the way across some sort of rectangular elongated when the 00:12:23.269 --> 00:12:24.559 other thing is a very 00:12:24.559 --> 00:12:28.629 substantial fireplace is the norm to kind of anchoring one 00:12:28.629 --> 00:12:30.120 side the other 00:12:30.120 --> 00:12:33.169 question has is you mentioned element seven says to pro 00:12:33.169 --> 00:12:34.919 actively the city's 00:12:34.919 --> 00:12:37.919 charged to proactively look into these can you tell me how 00:12:37.919 --> 00:12:39.039 does that manifest 00:12:39.039 --> 00:12:41.120 itself how's the city practically doing that is there 00:12:41.120 --> 00:12:42.279 applications that are 00:12:42.279 --> 00:12:46.600 streamlined for this or how can citizens do how can we do 00:12:46.600 --> 00:12:48.320 more of this in terms 00:12:48.320 --> 00:12:51.889 of proactivity that's a really good question I'm glad you 00:12:51.889 --> 00:12:53.080 asked it well one 00:12:53.080 --> 00:12:56.679 way and I've there's been a citizen led movement on this 00:12:56.679 --> 00:12:57.799 for some time is 00:12:57.799 --> 00:13:01.769 there's a fee associated with with this is two fees the fee 00:13:01.769 --> 00:13:02.919 for the application 00:13:02.919 --> 00:13:07.720 is I want to say it's $60 where they combine fees end up at 00:13:07.720 --> 00:13:09.000 265 with the 00:13:09.000 --> 00:13:12.049 paying for the mailing is allegedly the other reason I 00:13:12.049 --> 00:13:13.799 personally think we should 00:13:13.799 --> 00:13:17.850 waive be waiving those fees it's such a minimal part to the 00:13:17.850 --> 00:13:19.200 city's budget but 00:13:19.200 --> 00:13:22.090 it's at least one little incentive that we're offering to 00:13:22.090 --> 00:13:23.120 someone work we're 00:13:23.120 --> 00:13:27.120 honoring their home and that place and and people are 00:13:27.120 --> 00:13:29.279 really proud of it in 00:13:29.279 --> 00:13:34.409 this case this home is owned by the the the second chair or 00:13:34.409 --> 00:13:35.200 someone on the 00:13:35.200 --> 00:13:39.610 historic Landmark Commission but the the other way we do it 00:13:39.610 --> 00:13:40.919 for example is we 00:13:40.919 --> 00:13:43.190 just did a historic property the month was just something 00:13:43.190 --> 00:13:44.039 we just came up with 00:13:44.039 --> 00:13:48.120 just to have public relations and as I do that almost every 00:13:48.120 --> 00:13:49.480 time someone says 00:13:49.480 --> 00:13:52.259 well I want my home to be designated and so I had a guy 00:13:52.259 --> 00:13:53.480 walk in this week and 00:13:53.480 --> 00:13:59.059 he's already submitted the application so I think it's a 00:13:59.059 --> 00:14:00.799 matter of just getting 00:14:00.799 --> 00:14:04.610 out in the community and talking to people and the dent and 00:14:04.610 --> 00:14:06.039 television doing 00:14:06.039 --> 00:14:08.080 a little promotion of the property the month helps and 00:14:08.080 --> 00:14:09.159 people make people aware 00:14:09.159 --> 00:14:14.799 of it we also of course can designate whole neighborhoods 00:14:14.799 --> 00:14:16.480 and that's fine too 00:14:16.480 --> 00:14:19.350 either one either you know when the community does that but 00:14:19.350 --> 00:14:20.519 I would say 00:14:20.519 --> 00:14:22.940 that's the main thing one we probably ought to be looking 00:14:22.940 --> 00:14:24.320 at that fee and even 00:14:24.320 --> 00:14:27.610 if we do decide to remove that just publicizing that 00:14:27.610 --> 00:14:28.840 because a lot of people 00:14:28.840 --> 00:14:31.340 would like that but that's a pretty big thing the other 00:14:31.340 --> 00:14:32.399 thing is then once you're 00:14:32.399 --> 00:14:37.330 designated you do qualify for a tax credit if you've spent 00:14:37.330 --> 00:14:39.240 ten thousand dollars and 00:14:39.240 --> 00:14:41.990 within two years of that designation then you can receive 00:14:41.990 --> 00:14:43.720 half off of your city 00:14:43.720 --> 00:14:49.049 property taxes I could I'm probably leaving out another way 00:14:49.049 --> 00:14:50.519 we could really 00:14:50.519 --> 00:14:55.269 promote that but they seem to be coming in a good stream 00:14:55.269 --> 00:14:56.919 now I think there are 00:14:56.919 --> 00:14:59.730 two files on my desk of people who didn't want to pay the 00:14:59.730 --> 00:15:00.600 fee and that was 00:15:00.600 --> 00:15:05.179 before I arrived here and then I have at least two pending 00:15:05.179 --> 00:15:06.120 I think that property 00:15:06.120 --> 00:15:10.279 the month on Egan is interested as well thank you very much 00:15:10.279 --> 00:15:10.960 the last question I 00:15:10.960 --> 00:15:14.049 have is more from a commission standpoint there's some 00:15:14.049 --> 00:15:15.000 items that come 00:15:15.000 --> 00:15:17.250 to us that we kind of rubber stamp through like consent not 00:15:17.250 --> 00:15:18.120 a consent but 00:15:18.120 --> 00:15:22.639 the final class and stuff what would cause what should I be 00:15:22.639 --> 00:15:23.159 looking forward to 00:15:23.159 --> 00:15:27.200 deny this if it's I mean if it's coming towards from us 00:15:27.200 --> 00:15:30.200 from their review I want 00:15:30.200 --> 00:15:33.409 to know I'm filtering this decision properly because I don 00:15:33.409 --> 00:15:34.080 't want to 00:15:34.080 --> 00:15:36.350 question their work it seems like we're good to go I didn't 00:15:36.350 --> 00:15:37.200 know if that's kind 00:15:37.200 --> 00:15:42.110 of what we should do or if there should be things we're 00:15:42.110 --> 00:15:43.200 looking at 00:15:55.799 --> 00:15:59.059 you're absolutely right when you look at this you're 00:15:59.059 --> 00:16:00.639 looking at a dual public 00:16:00.639 --> 00:16:03.620 hearing process associated with this the historic landmark 00:16:03.620 --> 00:16:04.679 Commission provides 00:16:04.679 --> 00:16:07.100 their recommendation to you to the planning and zoning 00:16:07.100 --> 00:16:08.000 Commission to then 00:16:08.000 --> 00:16:10.269 forward your recommendation to the City Council and 00:16:10.269 --> 00:16:11.480 sometimes it looks like an 00:16:11.480 --> 00:16:14.649 extra step or an extremist step however the advantage to 00:16:14.649 --> 00:16:15.480 that is that the 00:16:15.480 --> 00:16:17.610 planning and zoning Commission basically has the 00:16:17.610 --> 00:16:18.879 opportunity to provide more 00:16:18.879 --> 00:16:22.139 insight or more input and typically the planning and zoning 00:16:22.139 --> 00:16:23.200 Commission is the 00:16:23.200 --> 00:16:27.679 recommending body to the City Council on zoning matters 00:16:27.679 --> 00:16:29.440 because the historic 00:16:29.440 --> 00:16:33.340 districts are in the Denton Development Code the DDC and 00:16:33.340 --> 00:16:34.480 their special purpose 00:16:34.480 --> 00:16:37.090 district or overlay district the special purpose districts 00:16:37.090 --> 00:16:37.759 any changes or 00:16:37.759 --> 00:16:40.259 amendments or additions to that warrant than the public 00:16:40.259 --> 00:16:41.399 hearing process because 00:16:41.399 --> 00:16:44.529 we also have an H designation with historic landmark design 00:16:44.529 --> 00:16:45.159 ations and 00:16:45.159 --> 00:16:48.250 that's why although sometimes it does seem like an extr 00:16:48.250 --> 00:16:49.919 aneous step it actually 00:16:49.919 --> 00:16:52.710 just follows the critical path so to speak without the 00:16:52.710 --> 00:16:54.440 criticalness associated 00:16:54.440 --> 00:16:58.990 with it when it comes to an approval so it would be a bit 00:16:58.990 --> 00:17:00.919 of a yeah that makes 00:17:00.919 --> 00:17:05.440 perfect sense so this is actually a zoning overlay change 00:17:05.440 --> 00:17:06.160 to that specific 00:17:06.160 --> 00:17:09.839 process or the property so because we have the overlay 00:17:09.839 --> 00:17:10.720 district or the 00:17:10.720 --> 00:17:14.440 historic districts already established when we or when 00:17:14.440 --> 00:17:15.839 there is a request to 00:17:15.839 --> 00:17:20.160 the city to secure a historic landmark designation that 00:17:20.160 --> 00:17:21.400 historic landmark 00:17:21.400 --> 00:17:24.099 designation with the eight simple symbol is placed on that 00:17:24.099 --> 00:17:25.880 property and as a 00:17:25.880 --> 00:17:28.849 result in order to follow the notification process and 00:17:28.849 --> 00:17:29.680 transparency 00:17:29.680 --> 00:17:32.039 those elements then go through the public hearing process 00:17:32.039 --> 00:17:32.640 it's a public 00:17:32.640 --> 00:17:36.799 hearing not necessarily a change in zoning it's just 00:17:36.799 --> 00:17:38.039 follows the dual public 00:17:38.039 --> 00:17:41.720 door public like a zoning case but it's not a zoning case 00:17:41.720 --> 00:17:43.079 by law so you do have 00:17:43.079 --> 00:17:45.750 discretion there's no ministerial type authority it's a 00:17:45.750 --> 00:17:46.880 current discretionary 00:17:46.880 --> 00:17:48.930 okay as to whether or not it meets the designation 00:17:48.930 --> 00:17:50.119 requirements that are laid 00:17:50.119 --> 00:17:53.799 out in your AIS and that's why Roman explained those 00:17:53.799 --> 00:17:54.920 factors or those 00:17:54.920 --> 00:17:58.079 criteria associated with it and what fit this category 00:17:58.079 --> 00:17:59.680 perfect thank you 00:17:59.680 --> 00:18:08.880 sure okay thank you and the next item is we're actually 00:18:08.880 --> 00:18:10.119 going to take item C 00:18:10.119 --> 00:18:15.880 before item B and I will invite Haley's deGrasse up to 00:18:15.880 --> 00:18:16.880 present 00:18:26.599 --> 00:18:35.759 good afternoon so this is case DCA 17 one it is a code 00:18:35.759 --> 00:18:36.799 amendment proposal for 00:18:36.799 --> 00:18:41.200 the development codes compatibility buffer requirements so 00:18:41.200 --> 00:18:42.279 the request 00:18:42.279 --> 00:18:44.549 before you is to hold a public hearing and consider a 00:18:44.549 --> 00:18:45.680 proposed revision of the 00:18:45.680 --> 00:18:48.509 development code specifically to amend the requirements in 00:18:48.509 --> 00:18:49.640 subchapter 13 that 00:18:49.640 --> 00:18:53.880 pertain to compatibility buffers a little bit of background 00:18:53.880 --> 00:18:54.799 on this last 00:18:54.799 --> 00:18:57.819 April the development review committee and members of the 00:18:57.819 --> 00:18:59.000 lean government team 00:18:59.000 --> 00:19:03.519 had a process improvement event and as part of that event 00:19:03.519 --> 00:19:04.240 they developed 00:19:04.240 --> 00:19:07.339 several recommendations for areas within sub chapters 13 00:19:07.339 --> 00:19:08.400 and 14 the design 00:19:08.400 --> 00:19:11.859 criteria and the development code that we could improve 00:19:11.859 --> 00:19:13.400 primarily to eliminate 00:19:13.400 --> 00:19:16.430 routine waiver requests that come before us and before you 00:19:16.430 --> 00:19:18.160 all and time did not 00:19:18.160 --> 00:19:20.920 permit them to further flesh out those code amendments and 00:19:20.920 --> 00:19:21.480 what they should be 00:19:21.480 --> 00:19:24.730 so we're doing that now so this proposal for the buffer 00:19:24.730 --> 00:19:26.119 code amendments was 00:19:26.119 --> 00:19:29.410 formulated based on their those recommendations as well as 00:19:29.410 --> 00:19:30.000 a benchmark 00:19:30.000 --> 00:19:35.400 survey of several comparable cities requirements so just to 00:19:35.400 --> 00:19:36.039 clarify 00:19:36.039 --> 00:19:39.099 landscape buffers or compatibility buffers are required to 00:19:39.099 --> 00:19:39.599 minimize 00:19:39.599 --> 00:19:43.240 nuisances such as noise light glare you know that things 00:19:43.240 --> 00:19:44.720 generated by parking 00:19:44.720 --> 00:19:47.450 and general activity at a site and provide a physical 00:19:47.450 --> 00:19:48.640 separate separation 00:19:48.640 --> 00:19:52.539 between potentially incompatible uses so these photos are 00:19:52.539 --> 00:19:53.640 just a couple of 00:19:53.640 --> 00:19:57.710 examples in the one on the left you can see there's some 00:19:57.710 --> 00:19:59.279 commercial developments 00:19:59.279 --> 00:20:01.900 that backs up to a neighborhood so there's a little bit of 00:20:01.900 --> 00:20:02.640 a buffer there 00:20:02.640 --> 00:20:06.990 comprised looks like of a fence and some trees and things 00:20:06.990 --> 00:20:08.319 like that that just 00:20:08.319 --> 00:20:10.819 provides a separation between those and then the same thing 00:20:10.819 --> 00:20:11.640 on the right you can 00:20:11.640 --> 00:20:14.089 see a single-family property adjoining a multi-family so 00:20:14.089 --> 00:20:14.839 there's a bit of a 00:20:14.839 --> 00:20:17.539 buffer between them to help minimize you know nuisances 00:20:17.539 --> 00:20:18.400 that could be generated 00:20:18.400 --> 00:20:23.359 on the more intensive side just a couple more examples here 00:20:23.359 --> 00:20:25.000 this is an industrial 00:20:25.000 --> 00:20:27.269 use adjoining a single-family use so you see a bit more 00:20:27.269 --> 00:20:28.359 width there in the buffer 00:20:28.359 --> 00:20:31.779 those are fairly new plantings in the aerial photo so they 00:20:31.779 --> 00:20:32.519 haven't you know 00:20:32.519 --> 00:20:35.279 reached their full capacity yet to buffer between there and 00:20:35.279 --> 00:20:36.079 then that's just 00:20:36.079 --> 00:20:40.049 a head-on photo to let you see you know how that physical 00:20:40.049 --> 00:20:42.559 separation looks so our 00:20:42.559 --> 00:20:46.279 existing code requirements specify what type of buffers are 00:20:46.279 --> 00:20:47.079 required in 00:20:47.079 --> 00:20:50.559 situations where your uses adjoin each other but it does 00:20:50.559 --> 00:20:51.480 not specify who's 00:20:51.480 --> 00:20:53.750 responsible for installing the buffer so this is our 00:20:53.750 --> 00:20:55.279 existing buffer matrix you 00:20:55.279 --> 00:20:58.500 can see if you have a single-family use adjoining a 00:20:58.500 --> 00:21:00.079 commercial use a type C 00:21:00.079 --> 00:21:02.769 buffer would be required but it doesn't specify which one 00:21:02.769 --> 00:21:03.740 of those parties has 00:21:03.740 --> 00:21:07.220 to install that buffer and then once you've determined what 00:21:07.220 --> 00:21:08.299 type of buffer is 00:21:08.299 --> 00:21:11.809 required between your two properties those four types are 00:21:11.809 --> 00:21:13.039 further defined in 00:21:13.039 --> 00:21:15.690 our requirements so type a and you can see these in the 00:21:15.690 --> 00:21:16.799 diagram on the right 00:21:16.799 --> 00:21:20.819 there type a is a six foot high opaque fence of approved 00:21:20.819 --> 00:21:22.400 material type B is a 00:21:22.400 --> 00:21:26.210 little bit a little bit wider there a 10 foot planting area 00:21:26.210 --> 00:21:27.359 is required with a 00:21:27.359 --> 00:21:30.359 combination of five evergreen and deciduous trees and 30 00:21:30.359 --> 00:21:31.079 shrubs for every 00:21:31.079 --> 00:21:36.430 100 feet type C is then a 15 foot area with six trees and 00:21:36.430 --> 00:21:37.880 25 shrubs and type D 00:21:37.880 --> 00:21:41.299 is the most intensive buffer and that's a 30 foot planting 00:21:41.299 --> 00:21:42.599 area with eight trees 00:21:42.599 --> 00:21:48.640 and 20 shrubs so the intent of this amendment is to help 00:21:48.640 --> 00:21:49.640 further streamline 00:21:49.640 --> 00:21:52.180 the development review process by eliminating the need for 00:21:52.180 --> 00:21:53.000 frequent waivers 00:21:53.000 --> 00:21:56.240 that we get to these buffer requirements some examples of 00:21:56.240 --> 00:21:58.039 that would be people 00:21:58.039 --> 00:22:00.539 that were you know want to use a fence or a wall on their 00:22:00.539 --> 00:22:01.519 site in place of some 00:22:01.519 --> 00:22:04.750 of those planting materials or often in the downtown area 00:22:04.750 --> 00:22:05.759 we get requests to 00:22:05.759 --> 00:22:08.220 wave the buffer entirely because lots are so small and cr 00:22:08.220 --> 00:22:09.079 amped and there just 00:22:09.079 --> 00:22:11.809 isn't room on a site for you know say a 15 foot planting 00:22:11.809 --> 00:22:12.759 area on the side of 00:22:12.759 --> 00:22:17.500 your property and currently in the code an alternative 00:22:17.500 --> 00:22:19.119 buffer can be approved by 00:22:19.119 --> 00:22:22.119 the director of development services and or often if there 00:22:22.119 --> 00:22:23.119 are other waivers 00:22:23.119 --> 00:22:26.079 needed we roll it as part of an ADP that comes to you all 00:22:26.079 --> 00:22:28.319 so our existing buffer 00:22:28.319 --> 00:22:30.720 width and composition requirements through the benchmark 00:22:30.720 --> 00:22:31.599 analysis showed to 00:22:31.599 --> 00:22:34.480 be generally similar to what other nearby cities require 00:22:34.480 --> 00:22:35.839 however since we 00:22:35.839 --> 00:22:38.109 do receive these routine waivers we feel that that 00:22:38.109 --> 00:22:39.119 demonstrates a need for 00:22:39.119 --> 00:22:43.130 greater flexibility in our requirements so the main 00:22:43.130 --> 00:22:44.720 components of the proposed 00:22:44.720 --> 00:22:47.569 amendment that you have in your backup are to clarify the 00:22:47.569 --> 00:22:48.720 party responsible for 00:22:48.720 --> 00:22:51.420 installing the buffer maintain the existing width 00:22:51.420 --> 00:22:52.480 requirement since they 00:22:52.480 --> 00:22:55.079 were found to be comparable however we want to allow more 00:22:55.079 --> 00:22:56.160 flexibility in how 00:22:56.160 --> 00:22:58.500 buffers are designed and to do that we've introduced a 00:22:58.500 --> 00:22:59.359 point system that 00:22:59.359 --> 00:23:02.299 I'll discuss in a little more detail and then we also want 00:23:02.299 --> 00:23:03.400 to continue to promote 00:23:03.400 --> 00:23:08.180 infill and redevelopment by maintaining the current waiver 00:23:08.180 --> 00:23:09.240 for buffers within the 00:23:09.240 --> 00:23:13.210 infill special purpose district and extending that to waive 00:23:13.210 --> 00:23:14.079 the need for 00:23:14.079 --> 00:23:18.170 buffers within the entire downtown University core zoning 00:23:18.170 --> 00:23:19.200 district so to 00:23:19.200 --> 00:23:22.839 show you what that looks like the areas in green there are 00:23:22.839 --> 00:23:23.440 the downtown 00:23:23.440 --> 00:23:28.509 University core so that's dr1 dr2 DCN and DCG districts and 00:23:28.509 --> 00:23:29.680 then you can see on 00:23:29.680 --> 00:23:31.819 the red boundary there would be the infill boundary so 00:23:31.819 --> 00:23:32.519 there is a lot of 00:23:32.519 --> 00:23:34.660 overlap between them but we just want to you know make sure 00:23:34.660 --> 00:23:35.440 all of the downtown 00:23:35.440 --> 00:23:41.759 area is covered so I mentioned a point system so within the 00:23:41.759 --> 00:23:42.559 proposed amendment 00:23:42.559 --> 00:23:46.690 once the use is assigned a width based on you know the 10 00:23:46.690 --> 00:23:49.200 15 30 foot rules that 00:23:49.200 --> 00:23:52.779 we discussed earlier and within that buffer yard width a 00:23:52.779 --> 00:23:54.079 property has to earn 00:23:54.079 --> 00:23:56.910 a designated number of points so you can see here single- 00:23:56.910 --> 00:23:58.039 family and agricultural 00:23:58.039 --> 00:24:01.630 require 10 points multifamily would be 20 30 for commercial 00:24:01.630 --> 00:24:02.359 commercial and 00:24:02.359 --> 00:24:05.990 institutional uses and then 50 for industrial to acquire 00:24:05.990 --> 00:24:07.079 those points 00:24:07.079 --> 00:24:10.079 there is a second table that provides different options for 00:24:10.079 --> 00:24:10.960 buffer elements 00:24:10.960 --> 00:24:14.930 and different point values assigned to them so the more 00:24:14.930 --> 00:24:16.559 intensive elements would 00:24:16.559 --> 00:24:20.079 obtain you more points there's options for fencing masonry 00:24:20.079 --> 00:24:21.519 walls providing 00:24:21.519 --> 00:24:24.220 additional buffer width and then several options for 00:24:24.220 --> 00:24:25.440 providing combinations of 00:24:25.440 --> 00:24:28.130 shrubs and trees and there is a provision that if a buffer 00:24:28.130 --> 00:24:28.880 requires two 00:24:28.880 --> 00:24:31.039 or more elements if it's doing plantings we need to see a 00:24:31.039 --> 00:24:31.960 combination of trees 00:24:31.960 --> 00:24:36.519 and shrubs to provide variations in canopy height so to 00:24:36.519 --> 00:24:38.039 give you an example 00:24:38.039 --> 00:24:40.640 of how this would work if we have a commercial use that's 00:24:40.640 --> 00:24:41.279 developing 00:24:41.279 --> 00:24:44.349 adjoining a single-family use and say they have 200 feet of 00:24:44.349 --> 00:24:45.240 shared property 00:24:45.240 --> 00:24:48.329 line under the existing code they would be assigned a type 00:24:48.329 --> 00:24:49.319 C buffer requirement 00:24:49.319 --> 00:24:52.049 so they would provide a 15 foot wide area with a 00:24:52.049 --> 00:24:53.799 combination of six trees and 00:24:53.799 --> 00:24:57.109 25 shrubs and that would equate to of course 12 trees and 00:24:57.109 --> 00:24:58.119 50 shrubs total for 00:24:58.119 --> 00:25:01.369 the width or for the length under this proposal they would 00:25:01.369 --> 00:25:02.279 we maintain that 15 00:25:02.279 --> 00:25:05.059 foot width requirement but they would have multiple options 00:25:05.059 --> 00:25:05.839 for how they can 00:25:05.839 --> 00:25:08.240 pose that buffer to obtain the 30 points that would be 00:25:08.240 --> 00:25:10.519 required and so there are 00:25:10.519 --> 00:25:13.369 several potential combinations I've listed three of them 00:25:13.369 --> 00:25:14.319 here that would be 00:25:14.319 --> 00:25:17.289 possibilities for them so you can see it gives a little 00:25:17.289 --> 00:25:19.440 more flexibility and what 00:25:19.440 --> 00:25:22.539 they put in that if a wall better suits their site versus 00:25:22.539 --> 00:25:23.480 you know a large 00:25:23.480 --> 00:25:26.319 combination of trees and shrubs they could do that or it 00:25:26.319 --> 00:25:27.559 could be all 00:25:27.559 --> 00:25:30.359 planting materials and would just provide variations in 00:25:30.359 --> 00:25:31.240 canopy height to 00:25:31.240 --> 00:25:35.940 provide full coverage and so just to give you an example of 00:25:35.940 --> 00:25:36.920 what these 00:25:36.920 --> 00:25:40.309 elements look like all put together just this diagram shows 00:25:40.309 --> 00:25:41.119 you know how a 00:25:41.119 --> 00:25:44.259 fencing and variations and planting heights could provide 00:25:44.259 --> 00:25:45.000 an effective 00:25:45.000 --> 00:25:48.220 buffer between two uses so that photo kind of shows the 00:25:48.220 --> 00:25:49.279 same thing as the 00:25:49.279 --> 00:25:51.140 diagram there just to give you an idea of what all of that 00:25:51.140 --> 00:25:51.759 could look like 00:25:51.759 --> 00:25:56.400 together and we did send up public notification about these 00:25:56.400 --> 00:25:56.680 through the 00:25:56.680 --> 00:26:00.680 newspaper earlier this month and at this point I will say 00:26:00.680 --> 00:26:02.039 we recommend approval 00:26:02.039 --> 00:26:05.960 of this and answer any questions you might have. 00:26:08.200 --> 00:26:14.519 Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Hi Haley. How with the 00:26:14.519 --> 00:26:16.099 point system do they 00:26:16.099 --> 00:26:18.559 have to be approved with how they put that together or are 00:26:18.559 --> 00:26:19.319 we just letting 00:26:19.319 --> 00:26:22.039 them put that together and come up with their own points? 00:26:22.039 --> 00:26:23.119 During their site plan 00:26:23.119 --> 00:26:25.200 they would submit what they're proposing to meet those 00:26:25.200 --> 00:26:26.319 points requirements and 00:26:26.319 --> 00:26:28.359 then the planners would review that with the landscape 00:26:28.359 --> 00:26:29.279 administrator and make 00:26:29.279 --> 00:26:31.980 sure that it seems like a workable combination of things 00:26:31.980 --> 00:26:32.880 that they've put 00:26:32.880 --> 00:26:35.549 together there. So it's part of this the site plan approval 00:26:35.549 --> 00:26:37.079 at that point? Okay. I 00:26:37.079 --> 00:26:42.019 think I had another I made several notes as I was reading 00:26:42.019 --> 00:26:45.079 this. Biggest one is is 00:26:45.079 --> 00:26:50.059 the last state the last statement on page four of the 00:26:50.059 --> 00:26:52.480 proposed rewrite seems 00:26:52.480 --> 00:26:58.880 really confusing to me that paragraph. I you know we're set 00:26:58.880 --> 00:27:00.799 to clarify these 00:27:00.799 --> 00:27:06.089 buffers and then we put in this paragraph that says but if 00:27:06.089 --> 00:27:07.000 you want to 00:27:07.000 --> 00:27:11.329 circumvent this here's an option for you. I was can you 00:27:11.329 --> 00:27:13.240 tell me how that came to 00:27:13.240 --> 00:27:16.589 be written in there? Yeah so that is a provision that's in 00:27:16.589 --> 00:27:17.680 something very 00:27:17.680 --> 00:27:21.339 similar to that statement is in the current code and so all 00:27:21.339 --> 00:27:22.319 that would be an 00:27:22.319 --> 00:27:24.430 instance is where you know if the width couldn't be met or 00:27:24.430 --> 00:27:25.279 something like that 00:27:25.279 --> 00:27:28.549 an alternative could still be proposed you know say if they 00:27:28.549 --> 00:27:29.440 can meet the point 00:27:29.440 --> 00:27:31.420 requirements but they can't give us the full 30 foot of 00:27:31.420 --> 00:27:32.240 width or something like 00:27:32.240 --> 00:27:35.069 that it provides a provision for us to be able to approve 00:27:35.069 --> 00:27:36.599 some alternative so 00:27:36.599 --> 00:27:39.539 long as it meets the intensity that we're seeking with this 00:27:39.539 --> 00:27:40.039 . Does that make 00:27:40.039 --> 00:27:45.069 sense? It makes sense it just it's just well it's set up 00:27:45.069 --> 00:27:46.599 for yeah to circumvent 00:27:46.599 --> 00:27:51.730 the whole thing I think the way it's written. Yeah we can 00:27:51.730 --> 00:27:53.359 take another look at 00:27:53.359 --> 00:27:55.630 that but that that is a statement that we currently have in 00:27:55.630 --> 00:27:56.279 the code and that's 00:27:56.279 --> 00:27:59.990 how alternative buffers are proposed is by bringing in 00:27:59.990 --> 00:28:01.119 their best effort to meet 00:28:01.119 --> 00:28:03.579 the code and if they can't do that then we'll take a closer 00:28:03.579 --> 00:28:04.440 look and you know 00:28:04.440 --> 00:28:09.990 the director can approve some alternative. Yes yes member 00:28:09.990 --> 00:28:11.160 Ellis could 00:28:11.160 --> 00:28:14.940 you tell me again for the record what page that was on? It 00:28:14.940 --> 00:28:15.920 's on the 00:28:15.920 --> 00:28:22.299 proposed copy in our material so it's on on page 4 of that 00:28:22.299 --> 00:28:25.319 PDF and it's item 4. 00:28:30.359 --> 00:28:33.700 Yeah because on the screen it's different from what's in I 00:28:33.700 --> 00:28:35.160 believe online 00:28:35.160 --> 00:28:38.210 for people to look at at home. I can read that out if that 00:28:38.210 --> 00:28:38.799 would be helpful. 00:28:38.799 --> 00:28:44.549 Yeah that would be great. Okay so it's would be item 35 13 00:28:44.549 --> 00:28:47.079 8 e 4 it says for developments 00:28:47.079 --> 00:28:49.529 with required buffers an alternative buffer may be provided 00:28:49.529 --> 00:28:49.960 with the 00:28:49.960 --> 00:28:52.920 authorization of the director of development services or 00:28:52.920 --> 00:28:54.039 designee if the 00:28:54.039 --> 00:28:56.910 proposed width and combination of elephant elements meet 00:28:56.910 --> 00:28:57.599 the intent of 00:28:57.599 --> 00:29:00.269 mitigating or minimizing potential nuisances as described 00:29:00.269 --> 00:29:01.000 in the purpose 00:29:01.000 --> 00:29:11.480 statement in this section. Commissioner Roselle. Two 00:29:11.480 --> 00:29:14.119 questions you mentioned that 00:29:14.119 --> 00:29:18.259 it seemed like our current structure is is in line with 00:29:18.259 --> 00:29:20.240 what other cities use is 00:29:20.240 --> 00:29:24.240 that correct? Yes generally the the requirements we have 00:29:24.240 --> 00:29:25.279 for width and the 00:29:25.279 --> 00:29:27.809 items that go in a buffer are generally consistent there's 00:29:27.809 --> 00:29:28.640 a lot of variation 00:29:28.640 --> 00:29:32.609 across cities but in general you know ours fell in range 00:29:32.609 --> 00:29:33.400 with what other 00:29:33.400 --> 00:29:36.029 cities were doing. Are any other cities doing a point 00:29:36.029 --> 00:29:38.839 system? Yeah this was 00:29:38.839 --> 00:29:41.309 formulated based on Austin and Fort Worth both have very 00:29:41.309 --> 00:29:42.359 similar systems and 00:29:42.359 --> 00:29:45.089 so we devised a variation of that that we thought would 00:29:45.089 --> 00:29:46.839 work here in Denton. And 00:29:46.839 --> 00:29:51.970 then if I understood the current is a matrix so if it's a 00:29:51.970 --> 00:29:53.000 residential to 00:29:53.000 --> 00:29:57.750 industrial that's a A, B, or C, A, B, C, or D the new one 00:29:57.750 --> 00:30:03.200 doesn't have a matrix. Is that correct? No it designates 00:30:03.200 --> 00:30:06.519 just based on the type of use what style of buffer would be 00:30:06.519 --> 00:30:07.359 required. 00:30:07.359 --> 00:30:12.430 But it only you only do that if the adjacent zoning was 00:30:12.430 --> 00:30:14.839 different correct? Yes. 00:30:14.839 --> 00:30:18.259 So if someone is building an industrial property regardless 00:30:18.259 --> 00:30:19.079 of the different 00:30:19.079 --> 00:30:22.430 zoning around it it requires 50 points period. Yes yeah 00:30:22.430 --> 00:30:23.720 that's that's what we're 00:30:23.720 --> 00:30:26.359 proposing it would be a commercial next to single-family 00:30:26.359 --> 00:30:28.799 multi-family or you 00:30:28.799 --> 00:30:31.150 know a different type of use category. Can you show the 00:30:31.150 --> 00:30:31.960 grid what would an 00:30:31.960 --> 00:30:38.960 industrial to commercial be right now is that a type D? So 00:30:38.960 --> 00:30:40.640 in that situation 00:30:40.640 --> 00:30:45.109 they're having to double the requirement? The width yes 00:30:45.109 --> 00:30:46.079 would double and that 00:30:46.079 --> 00:30:48.930 would be a case where we can consider an alternative if 00:30:48.930 --> 00:30:50.200 they if they chose to go 00:30:50.200 --> 00:30:54.099 that route. So that brings up a maybe a concern I have is 00:30:54.099 --> 00:30:56.000 we have a matrix that 00:30:56.000 --> 00:31:01.549 seems pretty sufficient for different uses because it makes 00:31:01.549 --> 00:31:02.759 sense to me if 00:31:02.759 --> 00:31:05.769 industrial is going to get single-family D but industrial 00:31:05.769 --> 00:31:07.839 to commercial being B 00:31:07.839 --> 00:31:10.880 also seems to make sense to me because it's it's not a 00:31:10.880 --> 00:31:12.279 single-family property 00:31:12.279 --> 00:31:15.279 but now under the current system it's not gonna be that way 00:31:15.279 --> 00:31:16.200 and it almost sounds 00:31:16.200 --> 00:31:18.240 like it's built in well previously we could do a B so we'll 00:31:18.240 --> 00:31:19.039 just go ahead and 00:31:19.039 --> 00:31:21.839 do an alternative and Commissioner Ellis's point it's kind 00:31:21.839 --> 00:31:23.319 of built in we 00:31:23.319 --> 00:31:24.829 can we can go ahead and downgrade those and if we're 00:31:24.829 --> 00:31:26.720 already thinking about or 00:31:26.720 --> 00:31:29.470 if I just brought up and the thought is now being talked 00:31:29.470 --> 00:31:30.480 about that in that 00:31:30.480 --> 00:31:34.289 situation we can go ahead and downgrade to a B then I have 00:31:34.289 --> 00:31:35.319 some concerns about 00:31:35.319 --> 00:31:41.029 not continuing the matrix it seems like I just lost it 00:31:41.029 --> 00:31:43.480 there is five different 00:31:43.480 --> 00:31:49.039 point rows that it's not loading yeah there's five or point 00:31:49.039 --> 00:31:50.740 rows now and there 00:31:50.740 --> 00:31:57.059 was four different types it seems like maybe we should have 00:31:57.059 --> 00:31:58.440 five types and 00:31:58.440 --> 00:32:01.990 continue with with a matrix and have well even two of those 00:32:01.990 --> 00:32:03.200 are ten points so 00:32:03.200 --> 00:32:08.829 it seems like we can send you with an ABCD okay matrix and 00:32:08.829 --> 00:32:10.119 if it's a it's ten 00:32:10.119 --> 00:32:13.059 points B it's 20 points and so forth rather than already 00:32:13.059 --> 00:32:13.980 kind of having this 00:32:13.980 --> 00:32:18.480 built in well if it's industrial versus commercial 50 seems 00:32:18.480 --> 00:32:19.680 it is seemed like a 00:32:19.680 --> 00:32:23.029 lot that seems counterintuitive to streamline in this 00:32:23.029 --> 00:32:24.640 process certainly we 00:32:24.640 --> 00:32:27.440 can we can consider that 00:32:28.079 --> 00:32:32.990 Commissioner Sullivan thank you looking at the applic 00:32:32.990 --> 00:32:37.440 ability and number one 00:32:37.440 --> 00:32:41.220 where says the mode the more intensive use category must 00:32:41.220 --> 00:32:42.599 provide the buffer 00:32:42.599 --> 00:32:45.579 when two or more go back to the first of the sentence with 00:32:45.579 --> 00:32:46.240 two or more 00:32:46.240 --> 00:32:49.500 non-residential uses from different categories a joy and 00:32:49.500 --> 00:32:50.640 the more intensive 00:32:50.640 --> 00:32:57.910 use category must provide the buffer so that would seem if 00:32:57.910 --> 00:32:59.720 a less intensive 00:32:59.720 --> 00:33:04.680 business category wants to come in and develop property 00:33:04.680 --> 00:33:06.640 with a category that's 00:33:06.640 --> 00:33:11.049 already there that's going to require the people the people 00:33:11.049 --> 00:33:11.480 already there 00:33:11.480 --> 00:33:15.759 provide the buffer no the the existing property wouldn't be 00:33:15.759 --> 00:33:16.640 required to provide 00:33:16.640 --> 00:33:22.740 a buffer retroactively but that's not what it says is there 00:33:22.740 --> 00:33:23.359 am I reading it 00:33:23.359 --> 00:33:27.980 wrong are you looking at just to make sure on the same page 00:33:27.980 --> 00:33:28.759 a one is that the 00:33:28.759 --> 00:33:35.980 correct item a one yes yes the last sentence seems to 00:33:35.980 --> 00:33:37.319 reflect that the most 00:33:37.319 --> 00:33:41.569 intensive of the two are going to be required to put the 00:33:41.569 --> 00:33:43.440 buffer in it yes 00:33:43.440 --> 00:33:49.960 that would be the case yeah and that would be if a property 00:33:49.960 --> 00:33:50.559 is vacant so this 00:33:50.559 --> 00:33:53.130 is for developing properties not you know we wouldn't be 00:33:53.130 --> 00:33:53.880 retroactive to 00:33:53.880 --> 00:33:57.849 existing developments this would be if say an industrial 00:33:57.849 --> 00:33:59.160 use is coming in and 00:33:59.160 --> 00:34:01.759 the adjoining property is vacant and zone commercial then 00:34:01.759 --> 00:34:02.680 the industrial use 00:34:02.680 --> 00:34:06.980 would provide it rather than waiting for the other property 00:34:06.980 --> 00:34:10.440 to develop I'm 00:34:10.440 --> 00:34:15.869 confused if I mean so we already know what the category is 00:34:15.869 --> 00:34:16.559 going to be 00:34:16.559 --> 00:34:20.909 whenever a business comes in or can they come in with the 00:34:20.909 --> 00:34:22.519 opportunity to change 00:34:22.519 --> 00:34:25.679 that category well it's based on the zoning designations 00:34:25.679 --> 00:34:26.480 would be at like an 00:34:26.480 --> 00:34:31.230 industrial zoning next to a commercial zoning is what the 00:34:31.230 --> 00:34:33.239 use is based on so 00:34:33.239 --> 00:34:38.039 let me jump in so for example if you have two vacant pieces 00:34:38.039 --> 00:34:39.440 of property and 00:34:39.440 --> 00:34:43.090 you want to develop one industrial and one commercial the 00:34:43.090 --> 00:34:44.679 if say and you're 00:34:44.679 --> 00:34:49.250 doing the industrial first they would put the buffer in to 00:34:49.250 --> 00:34:50.199 buffer for the 00:34:50.199 --> 00:34:55.269 commercial development but say you have an already 00:34:55.269 --> 00:34:57.760 established multifamily unit 00:34:57.760 --> 00:35:01.469 and then a single-family residence wants to come in next to 00:35:01.469 --> 00:35:02.599 it then the single 00:35:02.599 --> 00:35:05.360 family would put the put the wall in because they came in 00:35:05.360 --> 00:35:06.440 later does that 00:35:06.440 --> 00:35:09.420 make sense so the okay I just want to make sure the 00:35:09.420 --> 00:35:10.840 existing business or 00:35:10.840 --> 00:35:14.619 structure is not required to do something just because 00:35:14.619 --> 00:35:15.880 somebody decides 00:35:15.880 --> 00:35:19.670 to move in and build something next to them correct okay I 00:35:19.670 --> 00:35:20.559 just it just seemed 00:35:20.559 --> 00:35:24.719 like that wasn't what that said so if that's what it says 00:35:24.719 --> 00:35:24.719 okay all right 00:35:24.719 --> 00:35:29.639 thank you and run sure I think Commissioner Tyler was next 00:35:29.639 --> 00:35:30.679 thank you 00:35:30.679 --> 00:35:33.920 chair so I wanted to echo some of the concerns that 00:35:33.920 --> 00:35:34.519 Commissioner was all 00:35:34.519 --> 00:35:41.739 pointed out I am this this point system doesn't allow it 00:35:41.739 --> 00:35:42.800 requires the same 00:35:42.800 --> 00:35:45.219 buffer industrial a single family as industrial a 00:35:45.219 --> 00:35:46.400 commercial and a lot of 00:35:46.400 --> 00:35:48.849 times commercial can be very close to industrial and we 00:35:48.849 --> 00:35:50.480 probably don't need a 00:35:50.480 --> 00:35:54.769 very large vegetative barrier with fences and walls and so 00:35:54.769 --> 00:35:56.440 forth so so I do 00:35:56.440 --> 00:36:00.829 think a matrix of points or you take your points and you 00:36:00.829 --> 00:36:02.599 subtract the points 00:36:02.599 --> 00:36:05.559 of the thing next to you and so industrial a commercial 00:36:05.559 --> 00:36:06.760 equals 20 points 00:36:06.760 --> 00:36:08.340 or something I don't know I don't know how complex you want 00:36:08.340 --> 00:36:08.840 to make it or if 00:36:08.840 --> 00:36:12.099 you just want to stick in a little a little grid just to 00:36:12.099 --> 00:36:13.539 kind of keep the 00:36:13.539 --> 00:36:16.159 fairness to not require because industrial the single 00:36:16.159 --> 00:36:16.880 family is very 00:36:16.880 --> 00:36:21.010 different from industrial to a commercial use that could be 00:36:21.010 --> 00:36:21.920 pretty close to 00:36:21.920 --> 00:36:25.739 industrial certainly we can we can look at a way to use the 00:36:25.739 --> 00:36:27.159 current matrix and 00:36:27.159 --> 00:36:31.480 modify it to meet the system yeah and I wanted to just 00:36:31.480 --> 00:36:32.519 clarify that that last 00:36:32.519 --> 00:36:36.099 clause that the waiver clause the exempt the exemption 00:36:36.099 --> 00:36:38.119 clause right now you said 00:36:38.119 --> 00:36:42.320 that's being used pretty frequently because a development 00:36:42.320 --> 00:36:43.559 might not be able 00:36:43.559 --> 00:36:45.949 to build a class C and so they have if they're five feet 00:36:45.949 --> 00:36:47.039 too narrow they have to 00:36:47.039 --> 00:36:51.099 apply to the waiver to the yes sir and do you have an idea 00:36:51.099 --> 00:36:51.880 of about how many 00:36:51.880 --> 00:36:56.320 cases a month or year right now they're processed kind of 00:36:56.320 --> 00:36:57.360 you know just as a part 00:36:57.360 --> 00:36:59.340 of the site plan or something like that so we don't have a 00:36:59.340 --> 00:37:00.239 way of tracking those 00:37:00.239 --> 00:37:02.219 because they're not a specific type of application that we 00:37:02.219 --> 00:37:02.880 could you know pull 00:37:02.880 --> 00:37:07.269 a report for so I wasn't able to pull that data but just 00:37:07.269 --> 00:37:08.199 anecdotally we have 00:37:08.199 --> 00:37:10.469 you know discussing it with other planners and people that 00:37:10.469 --> 00:37:10.920 have been in 00:37:10.920 --> 00:37:13.400 the department for a while it is a frequent issue that 00:37:13.400 --> 00:37:14.840 arises and so this is 00:37:14.840 --> 00:37:17.360 like you're going through your site plan approval it's 00:37:17.360 --> 00:37:19.239 impossible to meet your 00:37:19.239 --> 00:37:22.579 required class C buffer and so now you have to do it write 00:37:22.579 --> 00:37:23.760 a separate letter 00:37:23.760 --> 00:37:26.940 basically to the head of development services and say here 00:37:26.940 --> 00:37:27.760 's why can I please 00:37:27.760 --> 00:37:30.719 have a waiver yes and that gets approved so kind of puts 00:37:30.719 --> 00:37:31.519 you back a couple weeks 00:37:31.519 --> 00:37:34.539 it does yeah because it takes a while you know they they 00:37:34.539 --> 00:37:35.679 bring us their best 00:37:35.679 --> 00:37:38.090 effort and you know if it can't work sometimes they do they 00:37:38.090 --> 00:37:38.719 write up a letter 00:37:38.719 --> 00:37:41.510 or send in some sort of proposal to us and we have to take 00:37:41.510 --> 00:37:42.559 it to the director 00:37:42.559 --> 00:37:44.900 and get that approved or it gets rolled in with an ADP if 00:37:44.900 --> 00:37:45.880 they're requesting 00:37:45.880 --> 00:37:49.039 other waivers so this isn't going to be any different than 00:37:49.039 --> 00:37:49.639 that like it just 00:37:49.639 --> 00:37:52.119 hopefully they'll have a menu to pick from and they'll run 00:37:52.119 --> 00:37:52.920 into the problem 00:37:52.920 --> 00:37:55.769 less often that's our goal is providing more options would 00:37:55.769 --> 00:37:56.880 lessen those requests 00:37:56.880 --> 00:38:01.789 and one final question on the the trees for example on this 00:38:01.789 --> 00:38:03.119 on industrial 00:38:03.119 --> 00:38:06.539 buffers that require lots of points could they do something 00:38:06.539 --> 00:38:07.559 like two lines 00:38:07.559 --> 00:38:10.539 of large trees in their 30-foot buffer and get ten points 00:38:10.539 --> 00:38:11.519 for this one and ten 00:38:11.519 --> 00:38:14.679 points for that one yes they could you know kind of mix and 00:38:14.679 --> 00:38:15.440 match that as they 00:38:15.440 --> 00:38:18.010 need to and we would just have our landscape administrator 00:38:18.010 --> 00:38:18.719 you know look at 00:38:18.719 --> 00:38:20.800 that and make sure it seems like those could both grow to 00:38:20.800 --> 00:38:21.679 their full potential 00:38:21.679 --> 00:38:23.949 and have enough room there if that's what they chose to do 00:38:23.949 --> 00:38:25.039 okay thank you 00:38:25.039 --> 00:38:28.269 Commissioner Roselle thank you chair I just wanted to 00:38:28.269 --> 00:38:29.760 circle back to Commissioner 00:38:29.760 --> 00:38:32.920 Sullivan's questions I don't make sure I understand this 00:38:32.920 --> 00:38:34.400 currently if the 00:38:34.400 --> 00:38:37.360 property is being built and there is a vacant lot next to 00:38:37.360 --> 00:38:38.440 it with a different 00:38:38.440 --> 00:38:42.409 category is that development required to put in a buffer at 00:38:42.409 --> 00:38:43.880 construction is that 00:38:43.880 --> 00:38:50.800 currently procedure they put a buffer onto a vacant lot or 00:38:50.800 --> 00:38:52.039 between their 00:38:52.039 --> 00:38:54.360 property in a vacant lot we require a buffer at that time 00:38:54.360 --> 00:38:55.239 yes the current code 00:38:55.239 --> 00:38:57.550 says when an abutting property is vacant the land use 00:38:57.550 --> 00:38:58.760 category designation of the 00:38:58.760 --> 00:39:01.510 vacant abutting property will determine the type of buffer 00:39:01.510 --> 00:39:02.519 required on that side 00:39:02.519 --> 00:39:05.579 of the property at the time of development it's the current 00:39:05.579 --> 00:39:06.320 clause and 00:39:06.320 --> 00:39:14.250 that is under a four in the red line version okay I just 00:39:14.250 --> 00:39:14.880 want to make sure 00:39:14.880 --> 00:39:17.230 that's currently happening so we don't get into a situation 00:39:17.230 --> 00:39:17.760 which a less 00:39:17.760 --> 00:39:21.639 intensive unit comes in and the more intensive property is 00:39:21.639 --> 00:39:24.920 being retroactively 00:39:24.920 --> 00:39:29.659 required to put in the buffer but that's our new code that 00:39:29.659 --> 00:39:32.239 's perfect any other 00:39:32.239 --> 00:39:34.559 questions 00:39:36.880 --> 00:39:38.380 then we've had a lot of questions we might have to have 00:39:38.380 --> 00:39:40.360 some more around this 00:39:40.360 --> 00:39:45.900 let's get some this cleared out but anyway thank you for 00:39:45.900 --> 00:39:47.880 your presentation 00:39:57.480 --> 00:40:02.960 so we're back on item 5B and I'll invite Julie White to 00:40:02.960 --> 00:40:03.840 talk about parking 00:40:03.840 --> 00:40:12.420 all right I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the city and 00:40:12.420 --> 00:40:14.159 I am presenting to you 00:40:14.159 --> 00:40:19.139 some proposed code amendments that relate to parking so the 00:40:19.139 --> 00:40:20.280 request is to 00:40:20.280 --> 00:40:23.150 consider a proposed revision of the DDC to specifically 00:40:23.150 --> 00:40:24.559 amend sub chapters 13 00:40:24.559 --> 00:40:28.260 and 14 as they pertain to the parking requirements so 00:40:28.260 --> 00:40:30.280 during that same process 00:40:30.280 --> 00:40:34.440 improvement event some some issues with the parking 00:40:34.440 --> 00:40:36.559 regulations came up and at 00:40:36.559 --> 00:40:39.710 this time we're now working through those so just a little 00:40:39.710 --> 00:40:40.519 bit of background 00:40:40.519 --> 00:40:44.190 about how the DDC works parking is addressed in sub 00:40:44.190 --> 00:40:46.639 chapters 13 and 14 sub 00:40:46.639 --> 00:40:51.030 chapter 13 mostly deals with the design requirements of 00:40:51.030 --> 00:40:52.079 parking lots the 00:40:52.079 --> 00:40:55.710 landscaping and that sort of those sort of issues and then 00:40:55.710 --> 00:40:57.119 sub chapter 14 00:40:57.119 --> 00:41:00.960 discusses the parking ratios the the location some of the 00:41:00.960 --> 00:41:02.039 location of the 00:41:02.039 --> 00:41:05.570 parking and then how the specific parking is is put 00:41:05.570 --> 00:41:06.840 together so so it's 00:41:06.840 --> 00:41:10.079 spread out over two chapters sub chapters and then further 00:41:10.079 --> 00:41:10.679 more in sub 00:41:10.679 --> 00:41:14.190 chapter 13 parking requirements are kind of sprinkled 00:41:14.190 --> 00:41:15.519 throughout the sub chapter 00:41:15.519 --> 00:41:18.610 so they're there in site design and then they're in some 00:41:18.610 --> 00:41:19.920 some access areas so 00:41:19.920 --> 00:41:22.769 it's kind of sprinkled throughout sub chapter 13 the intent 00:41:22.769 --> 00:41:23.400 of these 00:41:23.400 --> 00:41:26.750 amendments is to provide clarity to critical portions of 00:41:26.750 --> 00:41:27.679 the DDC that are 00:41:27.679 --> 00:41:30.619 subject to routine variance requests and you're probably 00:41:30.619 --> 00:41:31.679 familiar with those 00:41:31.679 --> 00:41:34.639 those are those are those alternative development plans 00:41:34.639 --> 00:41:36.079 that give the Planning 00:41:36.079 --> 00:41:38.449 and Zoning Commission discretion on some of the design 00:41:38.449 --> 00:41:39.559 considerations in sub 00:41:39.559 --> 00:41:44.469 chapter 13 the intent is also to improve the process by 00:41:44.469 --> 00:41:46.360 allowing some structured 00:41:46.360 --> 00:41:49.909 administrative approvals so thereby reducing the time for 00:41:49.909 --> 00:41:50.800 development so 00:41:50.800 --> 00:41:54.769 putting into some of the design considerations elements 00:41:54.769 --> 00:41:56.239 from those ADPs 00:41:56.239 --> 00:42:00.039 that we see so that it allows staff to approve those and so 00:42:00.039 --> 00:42:01.280 they can move forward 00:42:01.280 --> 00:42:05.800 more quickly we formulated these based upon some benchmark 00:42:05.800 --> 00:42:07.000 analysis of similar 00:42:07.000 --> 00:42:10.789 cities and evaluation of the current review process and 00:42:10.789 --> 00:42:12.079 then an examination 00:42:12.079 --> 00:42:15.860 of what kind of ADPs we see so we're going to go over a 00:42:15.860 --> 00:42:17.719 summary of what's 00:42:17.719 --> 00:42:21.559 what's before you so when we're in terms of sub chapter 13 00:42:21.559 --> 00:42:25.000 where the proposal is 00:42:25.000 --> 00:42:28.429 first for flexibility for parking in front of commercial 00:42:28.429 --> 00:42:29.280 buildings in 00:42:29.280 --> 00:42:32.630 suburban areas and that includes the parking lot screening 00:42:32.630 --> 00:42:33.760 to require storm 00:42:33.760 --> 00:42:37.199 water runoff treatment through ice swim techniques on all 00:42:37.199 --> 00:42:38.519 new parking lots and 00:42:38.519 --> 00:42:41.929 expanded parking lots to modify the parking lot landscaping 00:42:41.929 --> 00:42:42.920 requirements to 00:42:42.920 --> 00:42:45.579 be less vague a little more certainty and where we want the 00:42:45.579 --> 00:42:46.639 plantings and and and 00:42:46.639 --> 00:42:51.260 what they should look like and then to make sub chapter 13 00:42:51.260 --> 00:42:52.719 function a little 00:42:52.719 --> 00:42:55.949 better by relocating all of those general parking lot 00:42:55.949 --> 00:42:57.119 design requirements 00:42:57.119 --> 00:43:01.219 to one sort of central location within sub chapter 13 in 00:43:01.219 --> 00:43:03.679 sub chapter 14 we're 00:43:03.679 --> 00:43:07.030 proposing to clarify the CBD parking exemption also add 00:43:07.030 --> 00:43:08.360 some specificity to 00:43:08.360 --> 00:43:11.840 the parking requirements for residential development in the 00:43:11.840 --> 00:43:12.760 CBD to remove the 00:43:12.760 --> 00:43:15.949 maximum parking provision while addressing those concerns 00:43:15.949 --> 00:43:16.679 that so often 00:43:16.679 --> 00:43:20.469 come before you and then increase the permitted distance 00:43:20.469 --> 00:43:21.440 between development 00:43:21.440 --> 00:43:24.489 and off-site parking from 300 feet to a thousand feet and 00:43:24.489 --> 00:43:25.780 then require bicycle 00:43:25.780 --> 00:43:29.380 parking for all new development so we're going to talk 00:43:29.380 --> 00:43:30.039 about our 00:43:30.039 --> 00:43:32.349 considerations we're going to talk about and then I'm going 00:43:32.349 --> 00:43:32.960 to try to show you 00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:37.400 what what that means I know the red lines sort of make 00:43:37.400 --> 00:43:38.400 everyone's eyes go 00:43:38.400 --> 00:43:41.340 crossed so we're going to work through it together and if 00:43:41.340 --> 00:43:42.360 you have any questions 00:43:42.360 --> 00:43:47.320 we'll we'll address those so here we go so the variances to 00:43:47.320 --> 00:43:48.239 address sub chapter 00:43:48.239 --> 00:43:52.989 13 requirements and and for front parking are routinely 00:43:52.989 --> 00:43:53.679 approved by the 00:43:53.679 --> 00:43:58.380 PNZ and the analysis points that we look at when we when we 00:43:58.380 --> 00:43:59.519 're when we're 00:43:59.519 --> 00:44:02.610 going through the review process of those is first of all 00:44:02.610 --> 00:44:03.519 environmental 00:44:03.519 --> 00:44:07.360 concerns and then second of all the visual impacts when we 00:44:07.360 --> 00:44:08.019 look at an 00:44:08.019 --> 00:44:10.559 alternative development plan we try to look at the intent 00:44:10.559 --> 00:44:11.400 of why those code 00:44:11.400 --> 00:44:14.610 requirements are there why is the parking maximum there why 00:44:14.610 --> 00:44:15.119 are with why 00:44:15.119 --> 00:44:18.840 is there a prohibition against front parking and and those 00:44:18.840 --> 00:44:19.800 are the two the 00:44:19.800 --> 00:44:23.769 two elements we look at most often when we're talking about 00:44:23.769 --> 00:44:25.199 parking maximums 00:44:25.199 --> 00:44:30.000 we're looking at pollutants within the storm water that are 00:44:30.000 --> 00:44:31.119 created by the 00:44:31.119 --> 00:44:34.539 excess parking and then for visual impacts large parking 00:44:34.539 --> 00:44:35.480 areas do have 00:44:35.480 --> 00:44:37.980 visual impacts particularly when they're adjacent to the 00:44:37.980 --> 00:44:39.800 right-of-way so so those 00:44:39.800 --> 00:44:43.769 are the two elements we typically look at with the ADPs 00:44:43.769 --> 00:44:45.840 this proposal just goes 00:44:45.840 --> 00:44:49.449 ahead and codifies those common conditions that we put on 00:44:49.449 --> 00:44:50.119 those ADP 00:44:50.119 --> 00:44:53.500 approvals so we have these issues that we want the code to 00:44:53.500 --> 00:44:54.800 address we're just 00:44:54.800 --> 00:44:57.599 going to go ahead and and put in the code what we want to 00:44:57.599 --> 00:44:59.199 address those issues 00:44:59.199 --> 00:45:05.239 so so how we're proposing to do that is to go ahead and 00:45:05.239 --> 00:45:09.400 require iSWIM be be 00:45:09.400 --> 00:45:11.920 implemented in all new parking areas and their parking 00:45:11.920 --> 00:45:13.639 areas that are subject to 00:45:13.639 --> 00:45:17.420 subject to the expansion applicability table and that that 00:45:17.420 --> 00:45:19.320 includes treating 00:45:19.320 --> 00:45:22.199 the first endeavor of may correct me the first one and a 00:45:22.199 --> 00:45:23.360 half inches of water 00:45:23.360 --> 00:45:28.920 quality volume during a rain event so we didn't specify 00:45:28.920 --> 00:45:31.159 what those iSWIM what 00:45:31.159 --> 00:45:35.489 what technique they should use land development and each 00:45:35.489 --> 00:45:36.559 parcel is somewhat 00:45:36.559 --> 00:45:40.030 different and we don't necessarily know what iSWIM 00:45:40.030 --> 00:45:41.480 technique would work for 00:45:41.480 --> 00:45:43.750 which parcel so we've kind of left that up to the developer 00:45:43.750 --> 00:45:44.599 of how they want to 00:45:44.599 --> 00:45:47.469 treat that water quality volume but we do require that it 00:45:47.469 --> 00:45:48.360 be treated and they'd 00:45:48.360 --> 00:45:50.949 be maintained in accordance with the industry standards and 00:45:50.949 --> 00:45:51.360 the best 00:45:51.360 --> 00:45:55.230 practices and then we're also proposing that they ensure 00:45:55.230 --> 00:45:57.000 adequate landscaping to 00:45:57.000 --> 00:46:00.480 mute those visual impacts of the of the parking areas so 00:46:00.480 --> 00:46:02.000 let's just take a look 00:46:02.000 --> 00:46:05.780 at iSWIM these are some of the things that could be 00:46:05.780 --> 00:46:07.880 implemented as part of the 00:46:07.880 --> 00:46:11.440 iSWIM as part of the stormwater treatment y'all may have 00:46:11.440 --> 00:46:12.360 heard us talk 00:46:12.360 --> 00:46:16.010 about gray and green solutions with iSWIM green being the 00:46:16.010 --> 00:46:17.239 plantings and the 00:46:17.239 --> 00:46:21.989 way the site is designed in order to for the the landscape 00:46:21.989 --> 00:46:23.119 areas to filter the 00:46:23.119 --> 00:46:26.409 water so those are the green solutions and and for that we 00:46:26.409 --> 00:46:27.960 see areas bioswales 00:46:27.960 --> 00:46:32.659 we see we see sawtooth cuts in the curbs where the water 00:46:32.659 --> 00:46:34.119 can drain to the 00:46:34.119 --> 00:46:37.320 landscape areas and provide filtrate natural filtration for 00:46:37.320 --> 00:46:38.119 the stormwater 00:46:38.119 --> 00:46:41.750 and then we also see gray solutions we see technological 00:46:41.750 --> 00:46:43.039 solutions to these 00:46:43.039 --> 00:46:49.360 recently you saw QT add the inlet filters the buckets that 00:46:49.360 --> 00:46:49.880 filter the 00:46:49.880 --> 00:46:53.630 water we've seen other developments use other types of 00:46:53.630 --> 00:46:55.880 technological solutions 00:46:55.880 --> 00:46:58.230 so that would be up to the development and that would be 00:46:58.230 --> 00:46:59.239 reviewed at the site 00:46:59.239 --> 00:47:05.599 plan process as a corollary to the to the the landscaping 00:47:05.599 --> 00:47:07.559 that we want to mute 00:47:07.559 --> 00:47:10.909 the visual effects of parking we want to make sure that we 00:47:10.909 --> 00:47:12.199 are clear about what 00:47:12.199 --> 00:47:15.070 kind of landscaping we want and where we want it our 00:47:15.070 --> 00:47:17.519 current code states that 00:47:17.519 --> 00:47:21.360 seven percent of the parking area has to be landscaped and 00:47:21.360 --> 00:47:23.039 15 percent has to be 00:47:23.039 --> 00:47:25.539 under tree canopy but and it says it's got to be 00:47:25.539 --> 00:47:27.000 distributed evenly throughout 00:47:27.000 --> 00:47:29.849 the parking area but that's that's kind of vague and it's 00:47:29.849 --> 00:47:31.280 you know where's the 00:47:31.280 --> 00:47:33.869 where's that dividing line between parking lot landscaping 00:47:33.869 --> 00:47:34.599 and other types 00:47:34.599 --> 00:47:37.980 of landscaping so it's it can make it difficult can create 00:47:37.980 --> 00:47:39.280 additional reviews 00:47:39.280 --> 00:47:43.769 for for site plan process or building permit it can just 00:47:43.769 --> 00:47:45.039 provide uncertainty 00:47:45.039 --> 00:47:48.880 for the developer so we wanted to be more specific and in 00:47:48.880 --> 00:47:50.280 that case we're 00:47:50.280 --> 00:47:54.469 looking at propose we're proposing parking lot landscaping 00:47:54.469 --> 00:47:55.519 islands every 00:47:55.519 --> 00:47:59.510 seven parking spaces that are sufficiently sized in order 00:47:59.510 --> 00:47:59.719 to 00:47:59.719 --> 00:48:03.710 accommodate two trees and we've determined that as kind of 00:48:03.710 --> 00:48:04.400 a short hand 00:48:04.400 --> 00:48:08.110 two parking spaces so the landscape island needs to be the 00:48:08.110 --> 00:48:08.880 size of two 00:48:08.880 --> 00:48:12.679 parking spaces and that it's got to be planted with two 00:48:12.679 --> 00:48:14.480 trees and you can see 00:48:14.480 --> 00:48:18.449 here this is actually in the proposed amendment that they 00:48:18.449 --> 00:48:19.119 can they can 00:48:19.119 --> 00:48:21.909 configure those parking spaces what works best for their 00:48:21.909 --> 00:48:22.760 site they can either 00:48:22.760 --> 00:48:28.050 do them long ways or wide but that would a permit permit 00:48:28.050 --> 00:48:29.639 them to plant the large 00:48:29.639 --> 00:48:33.550 canopy trees so we can get sufficient tree canopy in the 00:48:33.550 --> 00:48:35.639 parking areas while 00:48:35.639 --> 00:48:39.320 providing where we actually want it also within the 00:48:39.320 --> 00:48:42.000 proposed amendment so here 00:48:42.000 --> 00:48:45.309 would be a depiction of what those parking lot landscape 00:48:45.309 --> 00:48:46.000 islands would look 00:48:46.000 --> 00:48:49.739 like there's also a provision in your backup and the red 00:48:49.739 --> 00:48:51.039 line that they could 00:48:51.039 --> 00:48:54.849 instead of the parking lot islands provide a landscape 00:48:54.849 --> 00:48:56.599 median and that 00:48:56.599 --> 00:48:59.239 median would be eight feet wide once again to provide 00:48:59.239 --> 00:49:00.320 sufficient room for 00:49:00.320 --> 00:49:03.480 those trees to grow to their potential it would need to be 00:49:03.480 --> 00:49:04.679 a permeable surface 00:49:04.679 --> 00:49:06.989 so rainwater could get through it and it would be 00:49:06.989 --> 00:49:08.840 considered a landscape area and 00:49:08.840 --> 00:49:12.510 then they would need to plant a large canopy tree every 30 00:49:12.510 --> 00:49:13.559 feet in order to 00:49:13.559 --> 00:49:16.610 provide sufficient canopy for that parking lot area in 00:49:16.610 --> 00:49:17.599 addition to those 00:49:17.599 --> 00:49:22.010 just like the current code now in caps would be required in 00:49:22.010 --> 00:49:23.800 order to control 00:49:23.800 --> 00:49:26.369 the access throughout the development if they do want to 00:49:26.369 --> 00:49:27.679 count those in caps as 00:49:27.679 --> 00:49:31.650 landscape islands there would need to be sufficient area 00:49:31.650 --> 00:49:32.800 within those in caps in 00:49:32.800 --> 00:49:39.800 order to support the trees and what does that look like so 00:49:39.800 --> 00:49:41.480 what what's what are 00:49:41.480 --> 00:49:44.309 we wanting to accomplish here and these are these are 00:49:44.309 --> 00:49:45.559 parking lots that do 00:49:45.559 --> 00:49:49.590 have parking lot can it or a tree canopy and landscape that 00:49:49.590 --> 00:49:51.039 is kind of what we'd 00:49:51.039 --> 00:49:58.449 like to see and here's another here's a a development that 00:49:58.449 --> 00:49:59.280 has the landscape 00:49:59.280 --> 00:50:02.619 islands you can see there the they're the dual like we're 00:50:02.619 --> 00:50:03.960 proposing they have 00:50:03.960 --> 00:50:07.739 two trees and then here is here's one that doesn't so you 00:50:07.739 --> 00:50:09.039 can see the visual 00:50:09.039 --> 00:50:13.090 difference and and what we want to see and then you know 00:50:13.090 --> 00:50:14.639 how it could develop 00:50:14.639 --> 00:50:17.639 if you don't have specificity on where you want the parking 00:50:17.639 --> 00:50:18.599 lot islands to go 00:50:18.599 --> 00:50:22.659 and I should I should I should just state the current code 00:50:22.659 --> 00:50:24.280 does require parking 00:50:24.280 --> 00:50:27.500 lot islands every 10 parking spaces if you have front 00:50:27.500 --> 00:50:28.840 parking but if you have 00:50:28.840 --> 00:50:32.309 side parking or rear parking there is no requirement for 00:50:32.309 --> 00:50:33.860 landscape islands so we 00:50:33.860 --> 00:50:38.320 want to make that a requirement for all parking areas 00:50:38.320 --> 00:50:44.639 another proposed amendment that we're putting forward is 00:50:44.639 --> 00:50:46.599 currently we if if a 00:50:46.599 --> 00:50:50.570 development does want to install parking in front of a 00:50:50.570 --> 00:50:52.239 building they have to 00:50:52.239 --> 00:50:57.920 screen that parking with a 15-foot landscape area when when 00:50:57.920 --> 00:50:58.679 the 00:50:58.679 --> 00:51:01.909 development is on a text dot right-of-way that has to be 00:51:01.909 --> 00:51:03.039 located outside 00:51:03.039 --> 00:51:06.639 of the public utility easement we have a lot of text dot 00:51:06.639 --> 00:51:08.159 roads within the city of 00:51:08.159 --> 00:51:13.739 Denton and our our requirements is that our requirement our 00:51:13.739 --> 00:51:16.079 code requires a 20 00:51:16.079 --> 00:51:19.860 foot PUE outside of the right-of-way on a text dot road so 00:51:19.860 --> 00:51:20.960 you would have the 00:51:20.960 --> 00:51:23.940 right-of-way line you would have a 20 foot public utility 00:51:23.940 --> 00:51:24.920 easement and from 00:51:24.920 --> 00:51:28.599 there you would start your 15 foot landscape area so that 00:51:28.599 --> 00:51:30.400 takes 35 feet out 00:51:30.400 --> 00:51:34.130 of developable area and it pushes it pushes the development 00:51:34.130 --> 00:51:35.000 back away from 00:51:35.000 --> 00:51:37.309 the street and really what we want is the development to 00:51:37.309 --> 00:51:38.039 come forward and 00:51:38.039 --> 00:51:41.210 define that street edge that's the kind of good design we 00:51:41.210 --> 00:51:42.360 want to see but this 00:51:42.360 --> 00:51:46.090 requirement is kind of pushing it further back so we're 00:51:46.090 --> 00:51:47.760 proposing to to 00:51:47.760 --> 00:51:53.000 remove that minimum landscape area and more in favor of a 00:51:53.000 --> 00:51:55.039 like the buffer system 00:51:55.039 --> 00:51:57.809 like the buffers that are proposed a point system where we 00:51:57.809 --> 00:51:58.800 get the screening 00:51:58.800 --> 00:52:02.679 we get the the the planting material we want that defines 00:52:02.679 --> 00:52:03.800 the street that 00:52:03.800 --> 00:52:07.280 screens the parking but they can do it in a in an area that 00:52:07.280 --> 00:52:08.599 is sufficient for 00:52:08.599 --> 00:52:12.570 that planting and not necessarily on a specific amount of 00:52:12.570 --> 00:52:13.760 property so let's 00:52:13.760 --> 00:52:17.599 just take a look and see how that functions so here's a 00:52:17.599 --> 00:52:18.719 property within the 00:52:18.719 --> 00:52:22.349 city of Denton if they did want to develop it is on I-35 so 00:52:22.349 --> 00:52:23.039 that's a text 00:52:23.039 --> 00:52:27.519 dot road and it would require a 20 foot PUE in front of it 00:52:27.519 --> 00:52:30.000 and then from there 00:52:30.000 --> 00:52:33.130 they would have to have the 15 foot landscape area so all 00:52:33.130 --> 00:52:34.079 this area in pink 00:52:34.079 --> 00:52:38.079 would be dedicated to that and could not be developed so it 00:52:38.079 --> 00:52:39.440 would it would 00:52:39.440 --> 00:52:42.860 inhibit the ability for this smaller parcel to to develop 00:52:42.860 --> 00:52:44.079 in a way that would 00:52:44.079 --> 00:52:49.840 that would make sense for them so what we're proposing is 00:52:49.840 --> 00:52:51.880 for for properties is 00:52:51.880 --> 00:52:55.300 to take away that 15 feet and have the screening elements 00:52:55.300 --> 00:52:56.719 that each property 00:52:56.719 --> 00:53:00.309 when they develop they have to get 20 points out of the 00:53:00.309 --> 00:53:01.800 screening elements in 00:53:01.800 --> 00:53:05.840 order to appropriately screen the property parking lot 00:53:05.840 --> 00:53:06.760 these are the same 00:53:06.760 --> 00:53:10.139 things that are currently included in that 15 foot area 00:53:10.139 --> 00:53:11.239 within the DDC they're 00:53:11.239 --> 00:53:13.659 modified a little bit and I can point those out to you but 00:53:13.659 --> 00:53:14.079 they're they're 00:53:14.079 --> 00:53:17.019 really the same things they're just they can compact them a 00:53:17.019 --> 00:53:18.400 little bit reclaim a 00:53:18.400 --> 00:53:20.710 little more a bit of their property you still get you can 00:53:20.710 --> 00:53:21.559 still get something 00:53:21.559 --> 00:53:24.590 like this where it defines the street edge it looks great 00:53:24.590 --> 00:53:25.599 and it screens the 00:53:25.599 --> 00:53:28.179 parking area but they can do it in a little more compact 00:53:28.179 --> 00:53:29.800 way those screening 00:53:29.800 --> 00:53:34.230 elements include a landscape berm large canopy tree planted 00:53:34.230 --> 00:53:35.559 every 40 linear 00:53:35.559 --> 00:53:38.099 feet and this can also count toward their street tree 00:53:38.099 --> 00:53:40.119 requirements of three 00:53:40.119 --> 00:53:44.530 small accent trees clustered every 30 feet a three foot 00:53:44.530 --> 00:53:46.760 high hedge of evergreen 00:53:46.760 --> 00:53:49.630 shrubs this is one one change right now it could be it 00:53:49.630 --> 00:53:51.079 could be a monoculture it 00:53:51.079 --> 00:53:55.559 could be all the same head shrubs we're proposing that only 00:53:55.559 --> 00:53:56.719 50% can be of the 00:53:56.719 --> 00:54:00.480 same species and so they would need to to to change that up 00:54:00.480 --> 00:54:01.519 a little bit and 00:54:01.519 --> 00:54:05.639 then or they could put in a wall a three foot high wall 00:54:05.639 --> 00:54:07.079 either of wrought iron 00:54:07.079 --> 00:54:10.500 masonry or stone if it is wrought iron the current code 00:54:10.500 --> 00:54:11.760 today as well as what 00:54:11.760 --> 00:54:14.420 we're proposing requires that vines be planted on that so 00:54:14.420 --> 00:54:15.480 you actually get that 00:54:15.480 --> 00:54:19.920 opaque so you actually get the screening effect 00:54:20.480 --> 00:54:25.920 and then proposed amendments to sub chapter 14 right now 00:54:25.920 --> 00:54:27.239 there is within 00:54:27.239 --> 00:54:31.239 sub chapter 14 an exemption for parking for commercial 00:54:31.239 --> 00:54:33.760 development in the CBD it 00:54:33.760 --> 00:54:37.539 has a word additional on there and that that has created a 00:54:37.539 --> 00:54:38.880 bit of confusion so 00:54:38.880 --> 00:54:42.050 staff is recommending removing that word additional in 00:54:42.050 --> 00:54:44.199 order to clarify that CBD 00:54:44.199 --> 00:54:49.349 parking addition we are also clarifying that residential 00:54:49.349 --> 00:54:51.320 parking requirement 00:54:51.320 --> 00:54:55.500 within the CBD right now it states that any residential 00:54:55.500 --> 00:54:56.519 development that has 00:54:56.519 --> 00:55:00.829 more than 10 dwelling units has to provide parking we kind 00:55:00.829 --> 00:55:01.960 of felt like we 00:55:01.960 --> 00:55:04.559 wanted to be a little more specific and have it relate to 00:55:04.559 --> 00:55:05.559 to what our parking 00:55:05.559 --> 00:55:08.849 requirements are so we we had maxed it at 20 bedrooms 00:55:08.849 --> 00:55:10.480 because you could have a 00:55:10.480 --> 00:55:14.360 10 dwelling unit apartment complex and each dwelling unit 00:55:14.360 --> 00:55:15.679 has four bedrooms and 00:55:15.679 --> 00:55:18.050 that's a lot of people and we want to make sure that there 00:55:18.050 --> 00:55:18.639 is adequate 00:55:18.639 --> 00:55:21.519 parking for the residential development downtown so we've 00:55:21.519 --> 00:55:22.920 actually moved it to 00:55:22.920 --> 00:55:25.650 that bedroom requirement instead of dwelling unit 00:55:25.650 --> 00:55:26.639 requirement we've 00:55:26.639 --> 00:55:29.590 increased the allowable distance between a primary use and 00:55:29.590 --> 00:55:30.719 a shared parking site 00:55:30.719 --> 00:55:36.320 from 300 feet to a thousand feet and then we've we've added 00:55:36.320 --> 00:55:37.360 in a requirement 00:55:37.360 --> 00:55:40.780 for bicycle part parking so it will can we can accommodate 00:55:40.780 --> 00:55:42.159 in our development 00:55:42.159 --> 00:55:46.590 multiple modes of transportation right now we have a 00:55:46.590 --> 00:55:48.760 parking sub chapter 14 00:55:48.760 --> 00:55:52.659 includes bicycle parking but it's not a requirement so we 00:55:52.659 --> 00:55:55.159 're actually modifying 00:55:55.159 --> 00:55:59.039 that in order to require the bicycle parking and let's talk 00:55:59.039 --> 00:55:59.960 about that just 00:55:59.960 --> 00:56:04.079 for a minute so here's a map this red line is the CBD 00:56:04.079 --> 00:56:06.880 boundary and that is the 00:56:06.880 --> 00:56:10.849 area that has that parking exemption all of the area in 00:56:10.849 --> 00:56:13.000 green not all of the area 00:56:13.000 --> 00:56:16.449 it's it's pretty close it's there there's a couple of areas 00:56:16.449 --> 00:56:17.320 around the 00:56:17.320 --> 00:56:20.670 courthouse that it's actually in the green and it shouldn't 00:56:20.670 --> 00:56:21.599 be but but most 00:56:21.599 --> 00:56:24.769 of the area in the green is is actually parking within the 00:56:24.769 --> 00:56:26.920 CBD which is about 00:56:26.920 --> 00:56:31.449 30% of our land area within our CBD is parking is dedicated 00:56:31.449 --> 00:56:33.000 to parking lots and 00:56:33.000 --> 00:56:39.429 so so we looked at that when we analyzed this proposal and 00:56:39.429 --> 00:56:41.039 and to make sure that 00:56:41.039 --> 00:56:45.099 there was adequate parking downtown we also kind of looked 00:56:45.099 --> 00:56:46.360 at well can you walk 00:56:46.360 --> 00:56:48.630 to all those parking because we want to make sure that you 00:56:48.630 --> 00:56:49.320 know if there is 00:56:49.320 --> 00:56:52.360 adequate parking that everybody can get to it and you can 00:56:52.360 --> 00:56:53.360 see this blue dot 00:56:53.360 --> 00:56:57.329 right here this is actually about a 10 to 15 minute walk 00:56:57.329 --> 00:56:58.800 from the courthouse so 00:56:58.800 --> 00:57:01.440 there's a lot of parking within our CBD that is actually 00:57:01.440 --> 00:57:02.360 within a walking 00:57:02.360 --> 00:57:06.769 distance from all of those areas that people like to go and 00:57:06.769 --> 00:57:08.360 then we also when 00:57:08.360 --> 00:57:11.289 we looked at this proposal we looked at other some 00:57:11.289 --> 00:57:13.280 benchmark cities around us to 00:57:13.280 --> 00:57:17.519 see you know how they address parking in their core areas 00:57:17.519 --> 00:57:19.079 and most of the areas 00:57:19.079 --> 00:57:22.039 around us and McKinney being one of them and their their 00:57:22.039 --> 00:57:23.519 square they don't require 00:57:23.519 --> 00:57:27.750 any parking within their within their square their their 00:57:27.750 --> 00:57:29.199 core so this is 00:57:29.199 --> 00:57:31.880 really in line with what other areas are doing it really is 00:57:31.880 --> 00:57:32.920 just a clarification 00:57:32.920 --> 00:57:37.519 of what's existing in the code I'm in the bike parking our 00:57:37.519 --> 00:57:40.519 dent plan 2030 you 00:57:40.519 --> 00:57:43.449 know has a goal of multimodal transportation and 00:57:43.449 --> 00:57:44.679 sustainability we 00:57:44.679 --> 00:57:47.500 have a bike plan within the city of Denton and so we really 00:57:47.500 --> 00:57:48.119 want our new 00:57:48.119 --> 00:57:54.320 developments to to engage in the biking and provide parking 00:57:54.320 --> 00:57:55.719 for for our bikes 00:57:55.719 --> 00:58:00.769 and so so that's a part of the code amendment to require 00:58:00.769 --> 00:58:02.440 bike parking one 00:58:02.440 --> 00:58:06.960 space one bike parking space for every 5% of of the 00:58:06.960 --> 00:58:09.400 required parking so when you 00:58:09.400 --> 00:58:13.039 figure a hundred if you if you're building something that 00:58:13.039 --> 00:58:13.480 requires a 00:58:13.480 --> 00:58:17.800 hundred parking spaces you're really looking at five bike 00:58:17.800 --> 00:58:18.800 parking so it's it's 00:58:18.800 --> 00:58:22.070 you know it's it's a step in the right direction of 00:58:22.070 --> 00:58:24.320 providing for multimodal 00:58:24.320 --> 00:58:28.440 transportation and we also did a benchmark on this or bike 00:58:28.440 --> 00:58:28.760 peg 00:58:28.760 --> 00:58:31.409 coordinator did and and you know there's a lot of once 00:58:31.409 --> 00:58:32.639 again the benchmark cities 00:58:32.639 --> 00:58:37.440 around us require bike parking bike parking just as a 00:58:37.440 --> 00:58:38.199 course of development 00:58:38.199 --> 00:58:42.780 Dallas for instance requires bike parking so so it's really 00:58:42.780 --> 00:58:43.760 in line with 00:58:43.760 --> 00:58:48.460 what other communities are doing a public notification was 00:58:48.460 --> 00:58:50.079 sent out staff 00:58:50.079 --> 00:58:55.210 does recommend approval and I will stand for any questions 00:58:55.210 --> 00:58:56.880 what I do 00:58:57.800 --> 00:59:05.159 Commissioner Sullivan thank you store the last first I've 00:59:05.159 --> 00:59:07.159 gone how many do you 00:59:07.159 --> 00:59:12.769 have me bicycle racks parking there is at the square I don 00:59:12.769 --> 00:59:13.840 't our bike peg 00:59:13.840 --> 00:59:16.710 coordinator should be here later and so she may be able to 00:59:16.710 --> 00:59:17.880 answer that but I am 00:59:17.880 --> 00:59:21.929 not sure how many are on the square it is the square our 00:59:21.929 --> 00:59:23.119 downtown area is 00:59:23.119 --> 00:59:26.110 actually exempt from the bike parking requirement which 00:59:26.110 --> 00:59:26.719 might seem 00:59:26.719 --> 00:59:29.559 counterintuitive but a lot of those a lot of those 00:59:29.559 --> 00:59:30.679 buildings are pulled right 00:59:30.679 --> 00:59:33.619 up to the right-of-way so they may not have space on their 00:59:33.619 --> 00:59:34.639 property to actually 00:59:34.639 --> 00:59:38.260 provide for the bike parking so I know they're on every 00:59:38.260 --> 00:59:39.840 corner and there and 00:59:39.840 --> 00:59:43.460 there are some in public areas as well the point I'm making 00:59:43.460 --> 00:59:44.320 is that and I've 00:59:44.320 --> 00:59:48.670 come downtown various times of the day various days of the 00:59:48.670 --> 00:59:50.440 week and I have made 00:59:50.440 --> 00:59:56.280 a point to see how many were ever in use I've never seen a 00:59:56.280 --> 00:59:57.320 time when every 00:59:57.320 --> 01:00:02.889 back right back rack was in use ever and most of the time 01:00:02.889 --> 01:00:04.320 it's maybe at the most 01:00:04.320 --> 01:00:11.019 half used it's I'm just curious why this attachment to 01:00:11.019 --> 01:00:13.800 bicycle parking when I 01:00:13.800 --> 01:00:18.050 don't think I see very many people you know with the bag of 01:00:18.050 --> 01:00:20.440 groceries riding 01:00:20.440 --> 01:00:26.199 anywhere any distance at all I'm just curious this fetish 01:00:26.199 --> 01:00:28.079 about bicycles well 01:00:28.079 --> 01:00:30.869 it is a part of our comprehensive plan that we do provide 01:00:30.869 --> 01:00:32.039 for these other modes 01:00:32.039 --> 01:00:36.219 of transportation it's a good question Julie is supposed to 01:00:36.219 --> 01:00:37.159 be here later on 01:00:37.159 --> 01:00:39.610 this evening and so she might be able to provide more 01:00:39.610 --> 01:00:40.880 statistics for you as far 01:00:40.880 --> 01:00:44.079 as what kind of ridership we're seeing within the city but 01:00:44.079 --> 01:00:45.320 it is something that 01:00:45.320 --> 01:00:48.739 is a part of the plans that we've adopted and so we're 01:00:48.739 --> 01:00:49.480 trying to 01:00:49.480 --> 01:00:52.920 incorporate that within the code I see a lot more bicycl 01:00:52.920 --> 01:00:54.159 ists out on the highways 01:00:54.159 --> 01:00:58.769 you know taking up land the traffic do you know coming down 01:00:58.769 --> 01:01:00.199 to the square I'm 01:01:00.199 --> 01:01:06.039 just you know my observation sure sure I'll follow up on 01:01:06.039 --> 01:01:08.159 that is there any 01:01:08.159 --> 01:01:12.190 point system or credits that you get for doing bike things 01:01:12.190 --> 01:01:13.599 like you do with the 01:01:13.599 --> 01:01:16.679 other landscape well there is and I've got these in here 01:01:16.679 --> 01:01:18.320 but I didn't just on 01:01:18.320 --> 01:01:28.400 the slide just beat y'all up so well so our our bicycle 01:01:28.400 --> 01:01:31.199 parking proposal there's 01:01:31.199 --> 01:01:36.510 not a credit there is there is a proposal within this that 01:01:36.510 --> 01:01:37.960 if you provide 01:01:37.960 --> 01:01:43.170 bike parking in excess of what's required you can reduce 01:01:43.170 --> 01:01:46.199 your your vehicle 01:01:46.199 --> 01:01:50.800 parking by 5% so if you did add additional parking bike 01:01:50.800 --> 01:01:51.440 parking you 01:01:51.440 --> 01:01:55.820 could reduce your your surface parking but as far as 01:01:55.820 --> 01:01:58.079 credits for just providing 01:01:58.079 --> 01:02:00.869 it we're proposing that it just be a requirement for all 01:02:00.869 --> 01:02:01.880 development to go 01:02:01.880 --> 01:02:04.429 ahead and provide I'll make it optional but if you want to 01:02:04.429 --> 01:02:05.360 buy cracks at your 01:02:05.360 --> 01:02:07.869 business you can put them in and you get credits against 01:02:07.869 --> 01:02:09.039 other things versus 01:02:09.039 --> 01:02:11.829 they're required and there's no credit currently it is 01:02:11.829 --> 01:02:13.239 optional so that's that's 01:02:13.239 --> 01:02:18.559 what we have currently we we see it a lot it was 01:02:18.559 --> 01:02:20.440 specifically like with ADP's 01:02:20.440 --> 01:02:23.079 where we say hey add bike parking in you know it's a 01:02:23.079 --> 01:02:24.559 college town there's a lot 01:02:24.559 --> 01:02:27.710 of kids on bikes let's go ahead and add that in so we felt 01:02:27.710 --> 01:02:28.519 like this was 01:02:28.519 --> 01:02:31.369 something that we could just codify it would be something 01:02:31.369 --> 01:02:32.239 that you know all 01:02:32.239 --> 01:02:35.579 developments would require it's something that you know I 01:02:35.579 --> 01:02:36.440 sat in a in a 01:02:36.440 --> 01:02:39.460 development meeting with a developer and I said if you want 01:02:39.460 --> 01:02:40.400 you could add bike 01:02:40.400 --> 01:02:43.690 parking said okay well Dallas requires it I'm like we're 01:02:43.690 --> 01:02:47.719 not that so so it is 01:02:47.719 --> 01:02:52.530 something that you know it you know we feel that it would 01:02:52.530 --> 01:02:54.480 would encourage that 01:02:54.480 --> 01:02:57.820 type of you know multimodal behavior so well I'm gonna get 01:02:57.820 --> 01:02:58.880 off topic I've 01:02:58.880 --> 01:03:01.840 listened to the both the presentation before here and I'm 01:03:01.840 --> 01:03:03.320 as a developer and 01:03:03.320 --> 01:03:06.170 the only one on this Commission I wonder who pays for all 01:03:06.170 --> 01:03:07.679 this and these are all 01:03:07.679 --> 01:03:10.260 some of these are great ideas and they sound good and 01:03:10.260 --> 01:03:11.519 somebody came up with them 01:03:11.519 --> 01:03:13.989 but somebody has to pay for all this stuff and when you 01:03:13.989 --> 01:03:15.239 change parking spaces 01:03:15.239 --> 01:03:18.659 from 10 to 7 on the islands it's just more cost and all 01:03:18.659 --> 01:03:20.079 these things are more 01:03:20.079 --> 01:03:25.480 more more and I'm gonna echo Commissioner Sullivan I know 01:03:25.480 --> 01:03:26.039 sometimes 01:03:26.039 --> 01:03:29.420 these are ideas that people would like but the practicality 01:03:29.420 --> 01:03:30.559 of some of them and 01:03:30.559 --> 01:03:34.289 who's gonna pay for it and how much it costs I wonder if 01:03:34.289 --> 01:03:35.639 there's discussions 01:03:35.639 --> 01:03:38.690 with staff to go okay when we're gonna change all this on a 01:03:38.690 --> 01:03:40.000 typical site that's 01:03:40.000 --> 01:03:44.340 ten thousand dollars fifty thousand dollars is there any 01:03:44.340 --> 01:03:45.760 number crunching 01:03:45.760 --> 01:03:49.179 that goes into what are the cost impacts for these things 01:03:49.179 --> 01:03:50.480 we don't have the 01:03:50.480 --> 01:03:53.989 information to do that the number crunching but part of 01:03:53.989 --> 01:03:55.119 this part of the 01:03:55.119 --> 01:04:00.030 the impetus for this is because so often our developments 01:04:00.030 --> 01:04:02.119 that the site plan 01:04:02.119 --> 01:04:07.510 approval process or the review can take quite a few reviews 01:04:07.510 --> 01:04:08.719 and quite a few 01:04:08.719 --> 01:04:11.739 quite quite a long time and we also know time is money so 01:04:11.739 --> 01:04:13.239 we're trying to we're 01:04:13.239 --> 01:04:17.280 trying to standardize some of the things that that come up 01:04:17.280 --> 01:04:18.679 over and over again 01:04:18.679 --> 01:04:22.199 particularly with that front parking with the 15-foot 01:04:22.199 --> 01:04:24.239 landscape area that 01:04:24.239 --> 01:04:27.110 takes a lot of property out of development and we think it 01:04:27.110 --> 01:04:28.039 's probably a 01:04:28.039 --> 01:04:32.659 little much and so so you know although we don't have the 01:04:32.659 --> 01:04:33.920 information necessarily 01:04:33.920 --> 01:04:38.260 to crunch the numbers I think we are cognizant of of the of 01:04:38.260 --> 01:04:39.480 the effects on 01:04:39.480 --> 01:04:43.559 the development community and we want to make sure that we 01:04:43.559 --> 01:04:45.159 we are specific in in 01:04:45.159 --> 01:04:48.780 what in what the requirements are and that so we can try to 01:04:48.780 --> 01:04:49.719 shorten that 01:04:49.719 --> 01:04:53.179 review time and and and allow them to develop as much of 01:04:53.179 --> 01:04:54.880 the site as possible 01:04:54.880 --> 01:04:57.630 so I'm a follow-up on your you know I don't want to 01:04:57.630 --> 01:04:58.920 dominate the conversation 01:04:58.920 --> 01:05:01.190 here but so how many meetings have you had with the 01:05:01.190 --> 01:05:02.320 development community to 01:05:02.320 --> 01:05:05.670 review all these to get their feedback on cost and so forth 01:05:05.670 --> 01:05:06.679 on this we have not 01:05:06.679 --> 01:05:09.969 met with the development community regarding this we felt 01:05:09.969 --> 01:05:10.639 like these were 01:05:10.639 --> 01:05:16.679 were kind of more administrative fixes things that we could 01:05:16.679 --> 01:05:18.039 move forward you 01:05:18.039 --> 01:05:22.510 know quickly so we haven't met with them well to that to my 01:05:22.510 --> 01:05:23.719 point we're talking 01:05:23.719 --> 01:05:27.500 about going from islands from 10 to 7 so that means 01:05:27.500 --> 01:05:29.400 essentially 50% for every 01:05:29.400 --> 01:05:32.639 essential 20 spaces you've now got to have another island 01:05:32.639 --> 01:05:34.039 we're requiring I 01:05:34.039 --> 01:05:37.920 swim now on the projects we haven't done that in the past 01:05:37.920 --> 01:05:39.639 your example with I 01:05:39.639 --> 01:05:42.389 think the QTO there on the corner of Carroll and Eagle that 01:05:42.389 --> 01:05:43.239 was something the 01:05:43.239 --> 01:05:46.670 city required of them they didn't offer to do that in 01:05:46.670 --> 01:05:48.360 regards to get there I 01:05:48.360 --> 01:05:53.489 think their SUP for their extra parking spaces in the back 01:05:53.489 --> 01:05:54.519 I don't know if 01:05:54.519 --> 01:05:56.559 there's any studies that have been done that the ice swims 01:05:56.559 --> 01:05:57.320 are more effective 01:05:57.320 --> 01:06:00.400 in parking lots versus out in the roadways themselves where 01:06:00.400 --> 01:06:00.960 we've got 01:06:00.960 --> 01:06:04.679 15,000 cars a day going up and forth and they're sitting at 01:06:04.679 --> 01:06:06.599 traffic lights maybe 01:06:06.599 --> 01:06:09.340 it's more effective that the city put in ice swims in those 01:06:09.340 --> 01:06:10.039 areas versus 01:06:10.039 --> 01:06:14.349 businesses putting them in parking lots so I'm just curious 01:06:14.349 --> 01:06:15.800 and we put all these 01:06:15.800 --> 01:06:22.639 ideas up and say my question is how much time is put into 01:06:22.639 --> 01:06:24.079 addressing really what 01:06:24.079 --> 01:06:27.610 the issues are and then who's going to pay for it and 01:06:27.610 --> 01:06:28.360 whether it's public 01:06:28.360 --> 01:06:31.539 people that are going to pay for it or private developers 01:06:31.539 --> 01:06:32.719 that have to pay for 01:06:32.719 --> 01:06:36.760 all these things I'm concerned about as long as I've been 01:06:36.760 --> 01:06:37.719 on planning and zoning 01:06:37.719 --> 01:06:42.679 the long list of additional costs cost cost cost and at 01:06:42.679 --> 01:06:45.079 some point that becomes 01:06:45.079 --> 01:06:47.719 a big concern I think for business owners and people that 01:06:47.719 --> 01:06:48.239 want to do 01:06:48.239 --> 01:06:52.639 business in our community Dallas may have requirements for 01:06:52.639 --> 01:06:53.159 a bicycle we're 01:06:53.159 --> 01:06:57.900 way different than Dallas in our community much different 01:06:57.900 --> 01:06:59.159 on trying to 01:06:59.159 --> 01:07:02.449 take bikes out Luke 288 go grocery shopping and all these 01:07:02.449 --> 01:07:03.159 types of things 01:07:03.159 --> 01:07:07.210 where as these things come into play I don't know how 01:07:07.210 --> 01:07:09.159 practical they are to be 01:07:09.159 --> 01:07:11.929 used every day versus they look good on paper and somebody 01:07:11.929 --> 01:07:12.880 paid to put them in 01:07:12.880 --> 01:07:16.969 so I'm going to open the floor for some other questions I 01:07:16.969 --> 01:07:17.960 think I'm going to go 01:07:17.960 --> 01:07:20.619 Commissioner Rozelle and we'll come back over here thank 01:07:20.619 --> 01:07:22.199 you chair some of the 01:07:22.199 --> 01:07:26.440 things I have might be redundant but I feel go ahead and 01:07:26.440 --> 01:07:28.000 speak them but I wanted 01:07:28.000 --> 01:07:31.969 to start back at bikes real fast because that's where my 01:07:31.969 --> 01:07:33.380 notes start to 01:07:33.380 --> 01:07:35.139 Commissioner Sullivan's point I work downtown my brother 01:07:35.139 --> 01:07:35.679 owns a business 01:07:35.679 --> 01:07:40.989 downtown the bike stands are on the interior a lot of times 01:07:40.989 --> 01:07:42.280 with a square 01:07:42.280 --> 01:07:44.750 not next necessarily the businesses so if you go like 01:07:44.750 --> 01:07:46.280 during morning coffee and 01:07:46.280 --> 01:07:48.920 check out Jupiter house or West Oak bikes are littered but 01:07:48.920 --> 01:07:49.960 they're not going 01:07:49.960 --> 01:07:52.949 to the corner to lock their bike up and then going back to 01:07:52.949 --> 01:07:54.320 the businesses so it 01:07:54.320 --> 01:07:57.610 might be a placement issue not necessarily use issue which 01:07:57.610 --> 01:07:58.280 is an issue 01:07:58.280 --> 01:08:01.219 nonetheless but I think there are a lot of bike traffic on 01:08:01.219 --> 01:08:02.159 the square it's just 01:08:02.159 --> 01:08:04.469 the placement of those is not necessarily most convenient 01:08:04.469 --> 01:08:04.880 to like an 01:08:04.880 --> 01:08:08.230 interior shop like Beth Marie's or West Oak where they're 01:08:08.230 --> 01:08:09.840 not near the corner 01:08:09.840 --> 01:08:13.679 staying with bikes we have a bike plan as you mentioned and 01:08:13.679 --> 01:08:14.800 it seems like the 01:08:14.800 --> 01:08:18.399 bike plan is to encourage certain bike traffic through town 01:08:18.399 --> 01:08:19.720 and so I would like 01:08:19.720 --> 01:08:23.920 to see it's a the Commissioner's point earlier if we know 01:08:23.920 --> 01:08:25.479 where bikes where we 01:08:25.479 --> 01:08:29.159 want bikes to be then maybe we should incentivize those 01:08:29.159 --> 01:08:31.319 businesses to have the 01:08:31.319 --> 01:08:36.079 bike stands more prevalent than others so a new Home Depot 01:08:36.079 --> 01:08:37.000 out on the loop or 01:08:37.000 --> 01:08:40.289 something may not require we don't maybe not get bikes they 01:08:40.289 --> 01:08:41.199 're not hauling lumber 01:08:41.199 --> 01:08:44.880 home with that however if we know they're traveling we know 01:08:44.880 --> 01:08:45.399 that we travel 01:08:45.399 --> 01:08:47.960 on Sherman because we're making that a new thoroughfare 01:08:47.960 --> 01:08:48.840 then maybe we should 01:08:48.840 --> 01:08:52.189 incentivize more strongly bikes there so that in tandem 01:08:52.189 --> 01:08:53.520 with where we're wanting 01:08:53.520 --> 01:08:56.159 to put bike paths and bike traffic we can leverage 01:08:56.159 --> 01:08:57.239 businesses to help 01:08:57.239 --> 01:09:02.420 incentivize that bicycle growth and to the chairs point in 01:09:02.420 --> 01:09:04.399 that situation if 01:09:04.399 --> 01:09:07.010 they're on the path then I think a credit should be given 01:09:07.010 --> 01:09:07.720 to parking to 01:09:07.720 --> 01:09:10.659 further incentivize the use of bikes it doesn't seem like 01:09:10.659 --> 01:09:12.079 there's a necessarily 01:09:12.079 --> 01:09:16.050 a tandem credit system with running bikes but it seems like 01:09:16.050 --> 01:09:16.960 we I guess we can 01:09:16.960 --> 01:09:21.079 reduce parking by 5% but it's still a requirement so I have 01:09:21.079 --> 01:09:21.880 some maybe some 01:09:21.880 --> 01:09:28.880 issues about that in regards to the parking if I'm 01:09:28.880 --> 01:09:29.399 understanding this 01:09:29.399 --> 01:09:32.409 correctly the increase to parking islands does not decrease 01:09:32.409 --> 01:09:33.239 the required 01:09:33.239 --> 01:09:36.479 overall parking spots for the property is that correct 01:09:36.479 --> 01:09:38.119 correct okay so their 01:09:38.119 --> 01:09:44.239 real estate is now being more used by parking spaces if 01:09:44.239 --> 01:09:45.560 they want a hundred 01:09:45.560 --> 01:09:49.529 spots and they're not to use more property to get those 01:09:49.529 --> 01:09:50.880 hundred spots now 01:09:50.880 --> 01:09:56.050 yes they would the size of their of their parking area 01:09:56.050 --> 01:09:58.159 would be larger but 01:09:58.159 --> 01:10:01.350 there's there would be more pervious material within the 01:10:01.350 --> 01:10:02.439 parking lot so yes 01:10:02.439 --> 01:10:06.699 it would take up more space just as a whole yeah so with 01:10:06.699 --> 01:10:07.760 encouraging bike 01:10:07.760 --> 01:10:11.029 traffic and then I am so sorry Commissioner Beck's not here 01:10:11.029 --> 01:10:11.680 because he's 01:10:11.680 --> 01:10:14.930 done the research about the necessity for even more parking 01:10:14.930 --> 01:10:15.579 because to 01:10:15.579 --> 01:10:17.680 Commissioner Sullivan's point if you drive around Denton 01:10:17.680 --> 01:10:18.239 count the number of 01:10:18.239 --> 01:10:20.510 empty parking spots at any given time in any business yet 01:10:20.510 --> 01:10:21.560 we have a requirement 01:10:21.560 --> 01:10:24.750 to have parking there and those are not being used if you 01:10:24.750 --> 01:10:26.079 go to Medical City 01:10:26.079 --> 01:10:32.119 Denton it's it's just a concrete jungle out there so I'm 01:10:32.119 --> 01:10:33.520 saddened to see that 01:10:33.520 --> 01:10:37.810 we're increasing the developers number of islands but not 01:10:37.810 --> 01:10:39.279 decreasing the parking 01:10:39.279 --> 01:10:41.810 requirements so now to chairs point they're having to 01:10:41.810 --> 01:10:42.840 leverage more of the 01:10:42.840 --> 01:10:47.159 property for parking that most likely will not be used for 01:10:47.159 --> 01:10:49.239 this and then I 01:10:49.239 --> 01:10:53.210 guess lastly it's surprising to me that we did consult I 01:10:53.210 --> 01:10:53.920 think on two different 01:10:53.920 --> 01:10:57.180 occasions the I don't know their name the downtown 01:10:57.180 --> 01:10:58.520 development group about 01:10:58.520 --> 01:11:02.600 trees they've been very involved in tree canopy processing 01:11:02.600 --> 01:11:03.279 but they weren't 01:11:03.279 --> 01:11:06.279 involved in what I think is significantly going to change a 01:11:06.279 --> 01:11:06.520 lot 01:11:06.520 --> 01:11:09.630 developments in town so I would encourage that conversation 01:11:09.630 --> 01:11:10.039 to take 01:11:10.039 --> 01:11:14.130 place that we can get feedback about the actual legitimate 01:11:14.130 --> 01:11:15.439 impact that these 01:11:15.439 --> 01:11:17.750 changes are going to have because I personally don't think 01:11:17.750 --> 01:11:18.159 it's just 01:11:18.159 --> 01:11:21.510 administrative it seems a little more invasive than that it 01:11:21.510 --> 01:11:23.359 's all I got 01:11:23.359 --> 01:11:27.680 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I guess my question is 01:11:27.680 --> 01:11:28.720 we're planning to 01:11:28.720 --> 01:11:31.979 rewrite the DDC correct yes ma'am so are we planning to 01:11:31.979 --> 01:11:33.880 address this chapter 01:11:33.880 --> 01:11:36.890 which I would think would be yes it will all be then if if 01:11:36.890 --> 01:11:38.800 this moves forward it 01:11:38.800 --> 01:11:41.840 would all be then incorporated in with the the DDC rewrite 01:11:41.840 --> 01:11:42.760 well because it 01:11:42.760 --> 01:11:45.689 sounds like with a lot of concerns we have we need more 01:11:45.689 --> 01:11:47.800 discussion on it so it 01:11:47.800 --> 01:11:52.229 would seem like a lot of this should wait in my opinion 01:11:52.229 --> 01:11:53.380 until the sub 01:11:53.380 --> 01:11:56.670 committee and the rewrite of the DDC is moving forward I 01:11:56.670 --> 01:11:58.720 don't understand you 01:11:58.720 --> 01:12:01.970 know taking the time to rewrite this when there are things 01:12:01.970 --> 01:12:02.920 left open on the 01:12:02.920 --> 01:12:06.970 table to discuss with entities in the business that it 01:12:06.970 --> 01:12:08.520 directly affects to 01:12:08.520 --> 01:12:12.800 consider I'm not sure why we would want to do something 01:12:12.800 --> 01:12:14.039 like this now when we 01:12:14.039 --> 01:12:17.880 have that looming before us and we discussed that 01:12:17.880 --> 01:12:19.079 internally and we felt 01:12:19.079 --> 01:12:22.510 like some of these issues particularly the front parking 01:12:22.510 --> 01:12:24.239 screening particularly 01:12:24.239 --> 01:12:30.640 the parking maximums that those things were so so part of 01:12:30.640 --> 01:12:32.180 just every 01:12:32.180 --> 01:12:34.750 development review that we felt like this was something 01:12:34.750 --> 01:12:35.560 that needed to go 01:12:35.560 --> 01:12:39.850 forward more quickly so that so that the development 01:12:39.850 --> 01:12:41.640 community you know we can we 01:12:41.640 --> 01:12:45.420 can remove that ADP that extra layer that extra step of 01:12:45.420 --> 01:12:47.039 process for them as 01:12:47.039 --> 01:12:50.880 quickly as possible so that's why why we went forward with 01:12:50.880 --> 01:12:51.560 these that they were 01:12:51.560 --> 01:12:56.159 just just something that tends to over and over affect 01:12:56.159 --> 01:12:57.159 development within 01:12:57.159 --> 01:13:03.479 within the city and and we were trying to minimize the the 01:13:03.479 --> 01:13:04.600 pain of some of 01:13:04.600 --> 01:13:07.159 those processes so that that that's why it went forward 01:13:07.159 --> 01:13:09.359 before just as a point 01:13:09.359 --> 01:13:13.729 of order if at the time that this item comes up during the 01:13:13.729 --> 01:13:15.319 regular session the 01:13:15.319 --> 01:13:17.829 Commission feels like they want to go ahead and delay it 01:13:17.829 --> 01:13:18.800 until they have more 01:13:18.800 --> 01:13:21.649 information and more opportunity to review the item then we 01:13:21.649 --> 01:13:22.439 would just need 01:13:22.439 --> 01:13:25.029 such a motion to put the postpone it and it can be indefin 01:13:25.029 --> 01:13:26.039 ite or it could be to 01:13:26.039 --> 01:13:29.659 date certain and so long as that second it and voted on we 01:13:29.659 --> 01:13:31.000 can go ahead and and 01:13:31.000 --> 01:13:36.279 not make decisions tonight did you have a follow-up to that 01:13:36.279 --> 01:13:37.399 to your point well 01:13:37.399 --> 01:13:40.119 Mr. Ellis thank you chair well now I have a follow-up to 01:13:40.119 --> 01:13:41.720 that so do we have to 01:13:41.720 --> 01:13:45.619 vote on this tonight as it's written as it's proposed is 01:13:45.619 --> 01:13:47.640 that well it's an 01:13:47.640 --> 01:13:51.640 independent I'm sorry an individual consideration item so 01:13:51.640 --> 01:13:53.520 it is ripe for a 01:13:53.520 --> 01:13:56.630 vote but if you feel like you need to move it you can so 01:13:56.630 --> 01:13:57.840 that would be your 01:13:57.840 --> 01:14:01.310 motion okay well I do have a follow-up to Julie I have a 01:14:01.310 --> 01:14:02.359 specific question to 01:14:02.359 --> 01:14:04.289 one of the proposals on here if you have the floor and I'll 01:14:04.289 --> 01:14:05.039 come to Commissioner 01:14:05.039 --> 01:14:11.680 Sullivan next thank you okay so it is chapter 14 okay 14 01:14:11.680 --> 01:14:18.640 for a one and the way 01:14:18.640 --> 01:14:23.100 I'm reading this I'm just very confused with relation to 01:14:23.100 --> 01:14:24.680 parking spaces for 01:14:24.680 --> 01:14:27.939 residential uses and the line the number of spaces for 01:14:27.939 --> 01:14:29.439 single-family duplex 01:14:29.439 --> 01:14:33.010 attached single-family dwellings must not exceed the 01:14:33.010 --> 01:14:34.840 required number of spaces 01:14:34.840 --> 01:14:39.989 which is two so what happens if somebody wants a three-car 01:14:39.989 --> 01:14:46.239 garage the garage would 01:14:46.239 --> 01:14:50.399 be different than the outside so okay so the required 01:14:50.399 --> 01:14:52.039 spaces for a single 01:14:52.039 --> 01:14:57.600 family can you describe that to me what what we require for 01:14:57.600 --> 01:14:58.779 single-family is to 01:14:58.779 --> 01:15:02.920 parking spaces not in the garage it has to be on a parking 01:15:02.920 --> 01:15:04.840 pad right now the 01:15:04.840 --> 01:15:09.449 code requires additional spaces for duplexes for that have 01:15:09.449 --> 01:15:10.720 that more than 01:15:10.720 --> 01:15:16.760 three bedrooms those tend to get then we want to make sure 01:15:16.760 --> 01:15:17.560 that we minimize the 01:15:17.560 --> 01:15:25.359 maybe the the amount of parking that is associated with 01:15:25.359 --> 01:15:26.720 that residential use so 01:15:26.720 --> 01:15:31.710 we wanted to keep the parking maximum for residential right 01:15:31.710 --> 01:15:32.439 now we have a 01:15:32.439 --> 01:15:35.789 parking maximum for everything and so we maintain the 01:15:35.789 --> 01:15:37.159 parking maximum for 01:15:37.159 --> 01:15:40.340 residential so that those parking lot lot areas for 01:15:40.340 --> 01:15:41.880 residential didn't get 01:15:41.880 --> 01:15:45.920 enormous but removed it for the commercial and industrial 01:15:45.920 --> 01:15:46.159 are you 01:15:46.159 --> 01:15:49.239 talking you're talking carports then would be part of this 01:15:49.239 --> 01:15:50.880 no I mean a car 01:15:50.880 --> 01:15:53.569 port would be an accessory structure so that that's a 01:15:53.569 --> 01:15:55.279 little different okay 01:15:55.279 --> 01:15:58.510 thank you for the clarification sure I want to follow up on 01:15:58.510 --> 01:15:59.640 your clear faith so 01:15:59.640 --> 01:16:02.369 the maximum is so if you have a three-car garage you can 01:16:02.369 --> 01:16:03.119 only have two 01:16:03.119 --> 01:16:07.279 spaces outside you can't have three and if that's something 01:16:07.279 --> 01:16:08.680 that y'all wanted to 01:16:08.680 --> 01:16:11.880 that wasn't something that you wanted to move forward with 01:16:11.880 --> 01:16:13.079 the proposal you could 01:16:13.079 --> 01:16:17.500 certainly I don't know how you have access to the third 01:16:17.500 --> 01:16:20.600 garage then 01:16:26.439 --> 01:16:30.020 I'm just trying to draw a visual picture of a site plan in 01:16:30.020 --> 01:16:33.000 my mind of how you do 01:16:33.000 --> 01:16:36.680 that who determines whether it's a parking space or a drive 01:16:36.680 --> 01:16:38.119 space what would 01:16:38.119 --> 01:16:41.060 you say Shandrine I'm sorry I don't think that that was the 01:16:41.060 --> 01:16:42.680 intent so we 01:16:42.680 --> 01:16:45.380 would have to revisit the requirement if you wanted to 01:16:45.380 --> 01:16:47.239 allow three spaces per 01:16:47.239 --> 01:16:50.880 unit then we may need to increase it to three spaces for a 01:16:50.880 --> 01:16:52.800 lot thank you for 01:16:52.800 --> 01:16:56.000 your patience Commissioner Sullivan yes on the the front 01:16:56.000 --> 01:16:56.840 screening of the front 01:16:56.840 --> 01:17:02.390 parking screening yes if I understand you correctly at the 01:17:02.390 --> 01:17:03.640 curb since we're 01:17:03.640 --> 01:17:09.180 gonna take away the requirement past the utility easement 01:17:09.180 --> 01:17:10.600 is that what we're 01:17:10.600 --> 01:17:13.869 talking about so that the screening is gonna be closer to 01:17:13.869 --> 01:17:15.479 the curb it won't on 01:17:15.479 --> 01:17:18.770 text dot roads it won't be closer to the curb you'll still 01:17:18.770 --> 01:17:20.520 have that 20-foot PUE 01:17:20.520 --> 01:17:25.550 what we want to do is minimize that landscape that 15-foot 01:17:25.550 --> 01:17:26.880 landscape area 01:17:26.880 --> 01:17:31.130 because it's rather large and to require the the same 01:17:31.130 --> 01:17:33.000 amount of vegetation the 01:17:33.000 --> 01:17:35.670 same amount of screening we know we want that to be screen 01:17:35.670 --> 01:17:37.079 ed but just to allow 01:17:37.079 --> 01:17:41.220 them to shrink that space if they can or if they want to to 01:17:41.220 --> 01:17:42.720 accommodate their 01:17:42.720 --> 01:17:46.020 development so it still would be moved back because of the 01:17:46.020 --> 01:17:47.399 PUE and if it's not 01:17:47.399 --> 01:17:51.960 text doc road is the front screening still going to be 01:17:51.960 --> 01:17:53.279 required yes sir and 01:17:53.279 --> 01:17:55.880 how far from the curb would that be it would just it would 01:17:55.880 --> 01:17:56.680 have to be out of 01:17:56.680 --> 01:17:59.529 the right-of-way so wherever the right-of-way line is we're 01:17:59.529 --> 01:18:00.399 on when that 01:18:00.399 --> 01:18:05.149 lots of my concern is when you I've been a lot in a lot of 01:18:05.149 --> 01:18:06.319 shopping centers and 01:18:06.319 --> 01:18:09.979 you pull out and you can't see because the shrubbery there 01:18:09.979 --> 01:18:10.720 there would be 01:18:10.720 --> 01:18:13.239 visibility clips that they would have to meet they couldn't 01:18:13.239 --> 01:18:14.239 they couldn't okay so 01:18:14.239 --> 01:18:20.560 somebody's gonna regulate shrubbery yes sir it couldn't it 01:18:20.560 --> 01:18:20.960 would and that's 01:18:20.960 --> 01:18:23.720 something that we have to look at now because you're right 01:18:23.720 --> 01:18:24.720 you don't want 01:18:24.720 --> 01:18:28.069 someone to have an accident because of a shrub or maybe 01:18:28.069 --> 01:18:29.479 just not have shrubs a 01:18:29.479 --> 01:18:33.510 certain distance from the driveway make them trees so that 01:18:33.510 --> 01:18:34.880 you don't have that 01:18:34.880 --> 01:18:40.010 issue that somebody's not driving around checking the yard 01:18:40.010 --> 01:18:41.000 stick whether or not 01:18:41.000 --> 01:18:44.289 it's sure in the line of sight sure yes sir we already 01:18:44.289 --> 01:18:46.319 include the street the 01:18:46.319 --> 01:18:49.210 site visibility triangle for street design so they the 01:18:49.210 --> 01:18:50.399 plannings would have 01:18:50.399 --> 01:18:56.399 to stay out of that area that we designate for that okay 01:18:56.399 --> 01:19:01.310 Commissioner Rozelle this last thing can you give an 01:19:01.310 --> 01:19:02.960 example of the benefit or 01:19:02.960 --> 01:19:06.039 situation in which parking would be moved from 300 to a 01:19:06.039 --> 01:19:07.000 thousand feet I'm 01:19:07.000 --> 01:19:10.420 just trying to figure out the use case for that absolutely 01:19:10.420 --> 01:19:14.239 okay so I have I 01:19:14.239 --> 01:19:20.079 have a specific all right so we have a we have a business 01:19:20.079 --> 01:19:21.439 so you can see the 01:19:21.439 --> 01:19:24.750 boundary of the CBD it really doesn't include what all we 01:19:24.750 --> 01:19:25.479 think of as 01:19:25.479 --> 01:19:28.140 downtown right because you're kind of here's Hickory right 01:19:28.140 --> 01:19:28.800 here and it's 01:19:28.800 --> 01:19:32.310 leaving off substantial blocks so it really doesn't doesn't 01:19:32.310 --> 01:19:33.199 conform to what 01:19:33.199 --> 01:19:37.680 we think of as downtown so these buildings right here don't 01:19:37.680 --> 01:19:38.479 have that 01:19:38.479 --> 01:19:42.260 parking exemption but yet they don't have any parking so 01:19:42.260 --> 01:19:44.399 what they have to do 01:19:44.399 --> 01:19:49.310 is they have to they have to demonstrate that they can meet 01:19:49.310 --> 01:19:50.560 their parking 01:19:50.560 --> 01:19:54.880 requirements and what they do is they a nearby landowner 01:19:54.880 --> 01:19:56.680 somebody who has excess 01:19:56.680 --> 01:20:00.260 parking they communicate with them and see if they can 01:20:00.260 --> 01:20:01.960 lease spaces or how they 01:20:01.960 --> 01:20:09.180 you know how they or rent whatever they have to do and 300 01:20:09.180 --> 01:20:10.560 feet that 300 feet is 01:20:10.560 --> 01:20:14.750 measured leaving the door of that business and walking in a 01:20:14.750 --> 01:20:16.000 pedestrian way 01:20:16.000 --> 01:20:20.079 to that first parking space and 300 feet when you think 01:20:20.079 --> 01:20:21.560 about walking down the 01:20:21.560 --> 01:20:24.270 sidewalk and finding a crosswalk and going is a pretty 01:20:24.270 --> 01:20:26.159 short distance so the 01:20:26.159 --> 01:20:30.449 1,000 feet allows them to go a little further to find the 01:20:30.449 --> 01:20:31.720 necessary parking in 01:20:31.720 --> 01:20:34.960 order to meet their parking needs you know if they can meet 01:20:34.960 --> 01:20:35.760 their parking 01:20:35.760 --> 01:20:38.739 needs without having to pour another you know tear down a 01:20:38.739 --> 01:20:39.720 building to pour 01:20:39.720 --> 01:20:43.569 another parking lot then that that just makes sense and so 01:20:43.569 --> 01:20:45.039 it just allows them 01:20:45.039 --> 01:20:49.720 to meet their parking needs a little more easily. Thank you 01:20:49.720 --> 01:20:49.720 . 01:20:49.720 --> 01:20:53.560 Commissioner Sullivan. So would it be possible for say in 01:20:53.560 --> 01:20:54.239 the area that you 01:20:54.239 --> 01:20:58.720 just represented there that there may be three businesses 01:20:58.720 --> 01:21:00.079 that all are counting 01:21:00.079 --> 01:21:05.750 the same parking lot as their off-site parking and so how 01:21:05.750 --> 01:21:07.520 would that be the 01:21:07.520 --> 01:21:11.359 square footage and how many spaces available? That actually 01:21:11.359 --> 01:21:12.159 because our code 01:21:12.159 --> 01:21:15.760 is somewhat vague on that it really does it says they have 01:21:15.760 --> 01:21:16.720 to be evidenced by 01:21:16.720 --> 01:21:19.239 deed or some other similar instrument but it's not really 01:21:19.239 --> 01:21:21.640 clear and it's not 01:21:21.640 --> 01:21:25.720 really clear that the that the the giving spaces have the 01:21:25.720 --> 01:21:27.000 capacity to give 01:21:27.000 --> 01:21:32.279 them so what we have put into into the proposal is saying 01:21:32.279 --> 01:21:33.319 adding a sentence 01:21:33.319 --> 01:21:36.539 that those that giving parking lot has to have excess 01:21:36.539 --> 01:21:38.239 capacity and it has to be 01:21:38.239 --> 01:21:40.880 evidenced by that deed or some other similar written 01:21:40.880 --> 01:21:42.159 instrument and recorded 01:21:42.159 --> 01:21:46.350 with Denton County so that it is a public record who you 01:21:46.350 --> 01:21:47.760 know what spaces 01:21:47.760 --> 01:21:50.590 are being used for whom and it has to be for the duration 01:21:50.590 --> 01:21:52.140 of the use that's using 01:21:52.140 --> 01:21:56.130 those parking spaces so right now we really don't have 01:21:56.130 --> 01:21:57.640 something that that 01:21:57.640 --> 01:22:02.710 would that would allow us to have a good record keeping of 01:22:02.710 --> 01:22:04.000 who's keeping who's 01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:09.000 using what and and we're we're we're trying to correct that 01:22:09.000 --> 01:22:09.560 by adding a 01:22:09.560 --> 01:22:12.600 little more specificity within there. Does the parking lot 01:22:12.600 --> 01:22:14.039 that they are using 01:22:14.039 --> 01:22:18.800 as the off-site parking do they need do they get permission 01:22:18.800 --> 01:22:20.079 from that business 01:22:20.079 --> 01:22:25.020 owner or it would have to be it would have to be who owns 01:22:25.020 --> 01:22:26.119 that parking lot and 01:22:26.119 --> 01:22:29.409 who does use it as their CEO and once again they would have 01:22:29.409 --> 01:22:30.399 to provide evidence 01:22:30.399 --> 01:22:36.010 that they meet the parking requirements in the DDC and that 01:22:36.010 --> 01:22:36.920 if they have any 01:22:36.920 --> 01:22:45.039 additional spaces that they could then sell. Yes. Rent. 01:22:45.039 --> 01:22:47.960 Okay thank you. 01:22:47.960 --> 01:22:52.300 Commissioner Taylor. Thank you Chair. So overall I was 01:22:52.300 --> 01:22:53.079 pretty impressed by this 01:22:53.079 --> 01:22:57.270 the parking standards have always been hard to follow. I'm 01:22:57.270 --> 01:22:58.720 sad to see two 01:22:58.720 --> 01:23:02.880 things go but I understand why the maximum parking hard cap 01:23:02.880 --> 01:23:03.760 I always thought 01:23:03.760 --> 01:23:06.649 that was a good way to prevent over parking which if you 01:23:06.649 --> 01:23:07.880 drive down University 01:23:07.880 --> 01:23:13.010 Drive you know Denton Center just a lot of places around 01:23:13.010 --> 01:23:14.000 just always 01:23:14.000 --> 01:23:20.109 have see a sea of empty parking lot and it's it's it makes 01:23:20.109 --> 01:23:22.000 the entire development 01:23:22.000 --> 01:23:24.619 less attractive makes you not want to shop there it's a 01:23:24.619 --> 01:23:25.479 good place to do 01:23:25.479 --> 01:23:28.359 donuts when you're in high school you know it can go about 01:23:28.359 --> 01:23:29.520 45 miles an hour 01:23:29.520 --> 01:23:31.789 across that parking lot it's so much is good whenever 01:23:31.789 --> 01:23:32.640 universities under 01:23:32.640 --> 01:23:37.010 construction because there's a nice straight path from from 01:23:37.010 --> 01:23:38.119 Hinkle all the 01:23:38.119 --> 01:23:41.720 way to to Carroll you know with all you have to do is cont 01:23:41.720 --> 01:23:43.079 end with Kroger at the 01:23:43.079 --> 01:23:46.739 very end so the the removal of the maximum maximum parking 01:23:46.739 --> 01:23:47.119 like I said I 01:23:47.119 --> 01:23:49.810 understand why why that's been done but I as kind of sad to 01:23:49.810 --> 01:23:50.840 see that one go and 01:23:50.840 --> 01:23:54.590 the permeable parking which nobody ever builds but I always 01:23:54.590 --> 01:23:55.720 liked that we had 01:23:55.720 --> 01:23:59.159 that in as as the requirement for over parking if you want 01:23:59.159 --> 01:24:00.279 to over park you 01:24:00.279 --> 01:24:03.659 need to put in permeable parking but I swim now kind of 01:24:03.659 --> 01:24:06.119 replaces that and I was 01:24:06.119 --> 01:24:10.640 I was curious if you know or if maybe engineering knows how 01:24:10.640 --> 01:24:12.239 many cities now in 01:24:12.239 --> 01:24:16.369 the DFW area use ice swim standards well Deborah is here 01:24:16.369 --> 01:24:17.600 and she can tell you 01:24:17.600 --> 01:24:24.380 about she has a presentation I'm going straight to this 01:24:24.380 --> 01:24:25.680 line right now I 01:24:25.680 --> 01:24:28.359 believe there 01:24:43.119 --> 01:24:46.590 these are all the cities that are ice swim city right now 01:24:46.590 --> 01:24:50.640 and two four 01:24:50.640 --> 01:24:56.470 that one's right there six eight ten twelve fourteen 01:24:56.470 --> 01:24:59.319 fifteen cities and those 01:24:59.319 --> 01:24:59.319 are the one who actually have applied to be called ice swim 01:24:59.319 --> 01:25:04.520 cities just keep in 01:25:04.520 --> 01:25:04.520 mind that I should have three components of it and many of 01:25:04.520 --> 01:25:08.439 the cities have 01:25:08.439 --> 01:25:11.550 already adopted some portion of it but those are the one 01:25:11.550 --> 01:25:13.119 who have adopted most 01:25:13.119 --> 01:25:17.619 of the ice wing components which is blood control stream 01:25:17.619 --> 01:25:18.800 bank protection and 01:25:18.800 --> 01:25:23.399 water control and water quality control and I do I do think 01:25:23.399 --> 01:25:24.000 that it would it 01:25:24.000 --> 01:25:26.819 would be unfair to require developers to meet these 01:25:26.819 --> 01:25:27.960 standards whenever the city 01:25:27.960 --> 01:25:32.699 itself does not but I hope this is the first step in the 01:25:32.699 --> 01:25:35.000 city moving from an 01:25:35.000 --> 01:25:40.680 old-fashioned pave over everything stream solution to to 01:25:40.680 --> 01:25:41.359 using you know 01:25:41.359 --> 01:25:44.869 environmental solutions for drainage and flood water and 01:25:44.869 --> 01:25:46.079 stream banks and so 01:25:46.079 --> 01:25:49.479 forth so I understand there might be added costs for 01:25:49.479 --> 01:25:50.800 developers and I I do 01:25:50.800 --> 01:25:54.220 hope that city engineering follows very soon and all of our 01:25:54.220 --> 01:25:55.159 streets are built to 01:25:55.159 --> 01:25:59.210 these standards as well and my my last comment is on the 01:25:59.210 --> 01:26:00.239 bike parking 01:26:00.239 --> 01:26:04.109 requirements today you can go to Kroger and there are 01:26:04.109 --> 01:26:05.760 probably two or three bikes 01:26:05.760 --> 01:26:09.180 chained to trees because there's no bike parking on Kroger 01:26:09.180 --> 01:26:10.800 on University and 01:26:10.800 --> 01:26:13.640 here are the Walmart on University and there are always 01:26:13.640 --> 01:26:14.840 several bikes parked 01:26:14.840 --> 01:26:17.960 there if you go over to where the freebirds and the yogurt 01:26:17.960 --> 01:26:19.399 places there's 01:26:19.399 --> 01:26:24.619 always a bike or two chained to a trash can or a bench or a 01:26:24.619 --> 01:26:26.800 tree and those very 01:26:26.800 --> 01:26:29.489 well might be employees that work at the nail salon or at 01:26:29.489 --> 01:26:30.520 the little you know 01:26:30.520 --> 01:26:34.100 freebirds burrito place or whatever but there is nowhere to 01:26:34.100 --> 01:26:35.319 park there because 01:26:35.319 --> 01:26:37.840 nobody thought about it and it wasn't required and so it 01:26:37.840 --> 01:26:39.560 didn't get put in the 01:26:39.560 --> 01:26:42.510 cost of a bicycle staple rack which is the little one that 01:26:42.510 --> 01:26:43.479 comes up and goes 01:26:43.479 --> 01:26:47.260 down it's pretty stylish they're about $189 plus a little 01:26:47.260 --> 01:26:48.159 concrete plus about 01:26:48.159 --> 01:26:52.159 10 square feet of you know landscape area so the cost on 01:26:52.159 --> 01:26:53.319 bike parking is 01:26:53.319 --> 01:26:56.319 minimal compared to you know potentially these other costs 01:26:56.319 --> 01:26:57.520 and landscaping and so 01:26:57.520 --> 01:27:00.689 forth but there's already already definitely demand you 01:27:00.689 --> 01:27:01.920 know I have ridden 01:27:01.920 --> 01:27:05.909 to 288 my bicycle and gone to Target and gone shopping and 01:27:05.909 --> 01:27:06.880 I have gone to Home 01:27:06.880 --> 01:27:11.220 Depot and with a backpack or peneers you can you know I'm 01:27:11.220 --> 01:27:12.640 buying a five pound box 01:27:12.640 --> 01:27:15.659 of drywall screws is not a problem you might not be going 01:27:15.659 --> 01:27:16.840 home with you know a 01:27:16.840 --> 01:27:21.000 back yeah enough to build a back deck or something but 01:27:21.000 --> 01:27:22.199 there there is some 01:27:22.199 --> 01:27:25.619 traffic in those ways and Denton does have if I remember 01:27:25.619 --> 01:27:26.479 correctly before the 01:27:26.479 --> 01:27:28.340 bike plan was implemented we were at like a three and a 01:27:28.340 --> 01:27:29.800 half percent mode 01:27:29.800 --> 01:27:33.590 share of bicycles which is really high especially for Texas 01:27:33.590 --> 01:27:34.399 and that was 01:27:34.399 --> 01:27:37.289 whenever we had one and a half miles of bike lanes in the 01:27:37.289 --> 01:27:38.800 entire city so 01:27:38.800 --> 01:27:42.050 encouraging this especially you know apartments downtown 01:27:42.050 --> 01:27:43.560 and apartments even 01:27:43.560 --> 01:27:45.960 out on 288 that might be a student that rides the rail 01:27:45.960 --> 01:27:47.720 trail up to class or to 01:27:47.720 --> 01:27:51.369 downtown you know five percent they're really cheap to put 01:27:51.369 --> 01:27:52.319 in take up very 01:27:52.319 --> 01:27:54.819 little space I think it's a really great idea that we're 01:27:54.819 --> 01:27:56.319 and the bus but you can 01:27:56.319 --> 01:27:59.020 take your bike on the bus in the city of Denton too so you 01:27:59.020 --> 01:27:59.960 could if you have 01:27:59.960 --> 01:28:03.109 barriers to riding your bike like on if you're I would not 01:28:03.109 --> 01:28:04.119 ride my bike on loop 01:28:04.119 --> 01:28:07.760 288 because I'm a chicken but but you could you could put 01:28:07.760 --> 01:28:09.119 it on a bus and and 01:28:09.119 --> 01:28:12.250 get over that barrier to biking just to speak to your 01:28:12.250 --> 01:28:14.439 parking maximum I kind of 01:28:14.439 --> 01:28:18.029 I kind of like you know I kind of held on to it pretty 01:28:18.029 --> 01:28:19.680 tight because as 01:28:19.680 --> 01:28:23.060 planners we like to see the the right parking in the right 01:28:23.060 --> 01:28:23.960 spot you know 01:28:23.960 --> 01:28:27.960 that's that's what we like to see and and and the parking 01:28:27.960 --> 01:28:29.159 maximum has an 01:28:29.159 --> 01:28:32.800 effect on that but but when we looked at it and we looked 01:28:32.800 --> 01:28:34.439 at just how often 01:28:34.439 --> 01:28:39.880 people were coming to us for additional parking and and 01:28:39.880 --> 01:28:41.520 particularly in our in 01:28:41.520 --> 01:28:44.810 our maybe our highway development or more regional center 01:28:44.810 --> 01:28:45.760 development and 01:28:45.760 --> 01:28:49.640 then what we asked for you know parking lots can have all 01:28:49.640 --> 01:28:51.039 kinds of effects heat 01:28:51.039 --> 01:28:55.180 island or pollutants are all and and by introducing the ice 01:28:55.180 --> 01:28:56.159 swim and the tree 01:28:56.159 --> 01:29:00.609 canopy it would mitigate some of those elements with the 01:29:00.609 --> 01:29:02.119 the parking lots and 01:29:02.119 --> 01:29:06.180 so it was kind of it was kind of a give-and-take regarding 01:29:06.180 --> 01:29:08.760 that so 01:29:12.279 --> 01:29:15.539 it doesn't always increase the cost to do your development 01:29:15.539 --> 01:29:17.279 because if you 01:29:17.279 --> 01:29:22.720 properly design integrate the low-impact design techniques 01:29:22.720 --> 01:29:24.479 it can help to treat 01:29:24.479 --> 01:29:28.310 your water and meet the needs that you have engineering 01:29:28.310 --> 01:29:29.439 wise and be cost 01:29:29.439 --> 01:29:35.220 effective so it's I think what we have to do a better job 01:29:35.220 --> 01:29:37.359 of is educating our 01:29:37.359 --> 01:29:39.899 development community on how to use that and how to 01:29:39.899 --> 01:29:41.159 integrate it into their 01:29:41.159 --> 01:29:46.329 projects so that it's not so it's not a difficult concept 01:29:46.329 --> 01:29:48.239 to grasp and it's not 01:29:48.239 --> 01:29:52.489 so difficult to implement so I think there may be a little 01:29:52.489 --> 01:29:53.260 bit of the 01:29:53.260 --> 01:29:56.979 hesitancy that we've seen but overall we've already have 01:29:56.979 --> 01:29:58.439 projects around the 01:29:58.439 --> 01:30:02.239 city that's doing it that is integrated into razor wrench 01:30:02.239 --> 01:30:03.399 the new fire station 01:30:03.399 --> 01:30:07.100 will have elements of low-impact design and you'll see it 01:30:07.100 --> 01:30:08.560 more and more around 01:30:08.560 --> 01:30:13.680 the city so it's not completely new to them 01:30:14.439 --> 01:30:20.000 I'm chiming on that this is upper I'm open to those things 01:30:20.000 --> 01:30:21.079 I get concerned 01:30:21.079 --> 01:30:24.520 when we put all this stuff out and nobody can say if we 01:30:24.520 --> 01:30:25.359 vote on this 01:30:25.359 --> 01:30:28.619 tonight it moves forward and we can't get a question 01:30:28.619 --> 01:30:29.960 answered as it costs 01:30:29.960 --> 01:30:35.500 $5,000 or $10,000 as anybody even asks the question that's 01:30:35.500 --> 01:30:36.279 a concern to me that 01:30:36.279 --> 01:30:39.979 I'm a businessman and so that that's just the language that 01:30:39.979 --> 01:30:40.960 I speak when we 01:30:40.960 --> 01:30:43.899 start talking about changing all these things well how much 01:30:43.899 --> 01:30:44.920 does it cost if 01:30:44.920 --> 01:30:48.380 we're gonna do a building for a client and they call it me 01:30:48.380 --> 01:30:49.960 up and say hey I'm 01:30:49.960 --> 01:30:51.689 thinking about buying this piece of property tell me what 01:30:51.689 --> 01:30:52.399 these things cost 01:30:52.399 --> 01:30:56.810 that's the first question that's asked and need to know the 01:30:56.810 --> 01:30:57.920 answers to those 01:30:57.920 --> 01:31:03.470 things and so it concerns me as as a commissioner and as a 01:31:03.470 --> 01:31:06.159 city as a typical 01:31:06.159 --> 01:31:09.180 business thing that those things are not even in the 01:31:09.180 --> 01:31:10.840 discussion when these things 01:31:10.840 --> 01:31:13.989 come before us versus we've had meetings we've talked about 01:31:13.989 --> 01:31:15.039 it we've done several 01:31:15.039 --> 01:31:19.220 different designs it doesn't create any additional cost it 01:31:19.220 --> 01:31:21.600 's $20,000 that to me 01:31:21.600 --> 01:31:25.470 just is sound business principles that may just be my way 01:31:25.470 --> 01:31:26.720 of looking at things 01:31:26.720 --> 01:31:30.109 and it's not the way the rest of the Commission or the rest 01:31:30.109 --> 01:31:31.960 of this body does 01:31:31.960 --> 01:31:34.840 but that that's how I look at it and that's why I'm 01:31:34.840 --> 01:31:36.479 concerned when I hear all 01:31:36.479 --> 01:31:41.010 these things and yet there's there's no backup to come and 01:31:41.010 --> 01:31:42.520 be put before us of 01:31:42.520 --> 01:31:46.170 what the cost is to do all this if it's nothing that's a 01:31:46.170 --> 01:31:46.960 great piece of 01:31:46.960 --> 01:31:50.180 background information to say we've looked at this and we 01:31:50.180 --> 01:31:50.920 don't think 01:31:50.920 --> 01:31:54.529 there's a cost impact or we've looked at it and we think it 01:31:54.529 --> 01:31:56.239 is so much per acre 01:31:56.239 --> 01:32:02.109 or per thousand square feet some quantifiable thing to come 01:32:02.109 --> 01:32:02.880 so when 01:32:02.880 --> 01:32:05.750 people ask us how you voted for that and it's going to cost 01:32:05.750 --> 01:32:07.680 $25,000 on my project 01:32:07.680 --> 01:32:10.439 well you know it's nice to know that on the front end when 01:32:10.439 --> 01:32:11.479 we're going to vote 01:32:11.479 --> 01:32:16.550 on these matters what is the impact or not and so same 01:32:16.550 --> 01:32:17.520 thing to follow up like 01:32:17.520 --> 01:32:22.319 on the ice when I don't know whether that's a $5,000 deal 01:32:22.319 --> 01:32:23.800 not only how much 01:32:23.800 --> 01:32:26.960 is it cost to put it in but it's got to be monitored and 01:32:26.960 --> 01:32:27.880 you got to submit the 01:32:27.880 --> 01:32:31.850 reports whatever it is three times a year so what is the 01:32:31.850 --> 01:32:32.720 cost impact of that 01:32:32.720 --> 01:32:38.039 for a ten-year period do you have to replace it after two 01:32:38.039 --> 01:32:39.399 years or five years 01:32:39.399 --> 01:32:43.939 or six months and what does it cost so to me if we're going 01:32:43.939 --> 01:32:46.520 to continue this 01:32:46.520 --> 01:32:49.939 this would be the vote the voice of the Commission but when 01:32:49.939 --> 01:32:50.960 it if it is 01:32:50.960 --> 01:32:53.899 continued and we are going to hear it again I'd like to 01:32:53.899 --> 01:32:55.000 have those kinds of 01:32:55.000 --> 01:32:58.149 items added to the presentation to come back and say we 01:32:58.149 --> 01:32:59.439 would like these things 01:32:59.439 --> 01:33:03.670 to be implemented and this is what we see is a cost factor 01:33:03.670 --> 01:33:04.960 of those things and 01:33:04.960 --> 01:33:11.479 that's just my my perspective on this coming back so does 01:33:11.479 --> 01:33:12.960 anybody else have 01:33:12.960 --> 01:33:17.460 question Commissioner Hesbeth. Thank You Chair just one and 01:33:17.460 --> 01:33:18.159 I think it may go 01:33:18.159 --> 01:33:24.600 legal but are we at all contractually tied any time 01:33:24.600 --> 01:33:26.680 requirement with I swim are 01:33:26.680 --> 01:33:32.229 we is it just we can start stop there's no connection with 01:33:32.229 --> 01:33:33.920 them as far as being 01:33:33.920 --> 01:33:38.159 ice when certified or as far as using their product or 01:33:38.159 --> 01:33:39.520 recommend a product for 01:33:39.520 --> 01:33:50.560 any time or okay thank you thank you 01:33:54.640 --> 01:33:57.159 so the other two items have been withdrawn and just for 01:33:57.159 --> 01:33:59.119 clarification 01:33:59.119 --> 01:34:04.670 item E is a proposed with a proposed amendment related to 01:34:04.670 --> 01:34:05.520 building materials 01:34:05.520 --> 01:34:09.859 it was noticed incorrectly so we're going to pull that for 01:34:09.859 --> 01:34:16.960 now okay with 01:34:16.960 --> 01:34:23.760 that I'm going to close our work session at 545 and we will 01:34:23.760 --> 01:34:26.359 reconvene in council 01:34:26.359 --> 01:34:29.560 chambers at 630 01:34:36.520 --> 01:34:37.819 good evening and welcome to the city of Denton planning and 01:34:37.819 --> 01:34:40.600 zoning Commission 01:34:40.600 --> 01:34:45.439 meeting for January the 25th 2017 this meeting has been du 01:34:45.439 --> 01:34:46.880 ly posted and we have 01:34:46.880 --> 01:34:51.140 a quorum present and I'll call our meeting to order at 634 01:34:51.140 --> 01:34:52.279 our first order 01:34:52.279 --> 01:34:56.130 of business will be to stand to give the pledge the US and 01:34:56.130 --> 01:34:57.199 the Texas flag 01:35:06.520 --> 01:35:09.520 stands 01:35:34.159 --> 01:35:37.779 next item of business will be to consider approval of the 01:35:37.779 --> 01:35:38.560 planning is 01:35:38.560 --> 01:35:43.319 only Commission meeting minutes for January the 11th 01:35:48.119 --> 01:35:50.439 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I will make a motion to 01:35:50.439 --> 01:35:52.000 approve the 01:35:52.000 --> 01:35:56.800 minutes Commissioner Sullivan okay we have a first and a 01:35:56.800 --> 01:35:57.800 second for approval 01:35:57.800 --> 01:36:05.609 any discussion seeing none will call for a vote on the 01:36:05.609 --> 01:36:06.560 board 01:36:20.640 --> 01:36:31.239 motion carries five zero with one recuse I move us to our 01:36:31.239 --> 01:36:33.239 item three which will be 01:36:33.239 --> 01:36:39.770 our consent agenda Commissioner Taylor I move we approve 01:36:39.770 --> 01:36:41.760 our consent agenda 01:36:41.760 --> 01:36:45.760 Commissioner Roselle I second the motion okay we have a 01:36:45.760 --> 01:36:47.039 first and a second for 01:36:47.039 --> 01:36:54.720 approval any discussion seeing none will call for a vote on 01:36:54.720 --> 01:36:57.000 the board 01:37:03.359 --> 01:37:11.479 motion carries six to zero that will move us to our items 01:37:11.479 --> 01:37:13.079 four which will be 01:37:13.079 --> 01:37:20.680 individual consideration on our item a which is PZ 17 - 024 01:37:20.680 --> 01:37:22.640 we have a clerical 01:37:22.640 --> 01:37:25.739 error on that it was not noticed correctly so we will not 01:37:25.739 --> 01:37:26.600 be hearing that 01:37:26.600 --> 01:37:31.399 tonight and it will be renoticed and come back before this 01:37:31.399 --> 01:37:33.359 Commission with 01:37:33.359 --> 01:37:40.930 that we will move on to item B we'll call on Mike Bell for 01:37:40.930 --> 01:37:43.039 presentation 01:38:01.640 --> 01:38:05.210 thank you chair members of the Commission this project is 01:38:05.210 --> 01:38:06.279 SP 16 3 it's 01:38:06.279 --> 01:38:10.260 for a retail building at razor ranch town center the 01:38:10.260 --> 01:38:11.960 request is for a hundred 01:38:11.960 --> 01:38:14.590 and forty three thousand square foot retail development it 01:38:14.590 --> 01:38:15.399 's located in the 01:38:15.399 --> 01:38:19.529 RR 1 sub area of the razor ranch overlay district like all 01:38:19.529 --> 01:38:21.239 razor projects it's 01:38:21.239 --> 01:38:24.170 required to comply with the design guidelines of the 01:38:24.170 --> 01:38:25.479 ordinance and requires 01:38:25.479 --> 01:38:28.270 a site plan landscape plan and elevations to be approved by 01:38:28.270 --> 01:38:28.520 the 01:38:28.520 --> 01:38:32.699 planning and zoning Commission on the left you'll see the 01:38:32.699 --> 01:38:34.079 overall site plan 01:38:34.079 --> 01:38:37.270 for the the town center area of razor ranch south of 01:38:37.270 --> 01:38:39.000 University Drive there's 01:38:39.000 --> 01:38:43.470 an University Drive to the north I-35 here on the west the 01:38:43.470 --> 01:38:44.880 subject property is 01:38:44.880 --> 01:38:50.710 located in this area here and on the right is the is a blow 01:38:50.710 --> 01:38:52.199 -up it is located 01:38:52.199 --> 01:38:55.619 just south of the in-and-out and the chilies on University 01:38:55.619 --> 01:38:57.920 Drive and will be 01:38:57.920 --> 01:39:00.869 there will be three entrances to the side or four inches 01:39:00.869 --> 01:39:02.000 excuse me on all 01:39:02.000 --> 01:39:04.569 four sides as well as an entrance into the what will be the 01:39:04.569 --> 01:39:05.399 town formal town 01:39:05.399 --> 01:39:10.310 center in the center of the project this plan shows the 01:39:10.310 --> 01:39:12.000 northern half of the side 01:39:12.000 --> 01:39:14.579 and the landscape plantings that comply with the code 01:39:14.579 --> 01:39:15.600 requirements in the 01:39:15.600 --> 01:39:22.600 exhibit this is the southern half of the landscape plan 01:39:22.600 --> 01:39:25.319 these two exhibits show 01:39:25.319 --> 01:39:30.880 the hardscape plan requirements for razor ranch and notice 01:39:30.880 --> 01:39:31.920 that there are 01:39:31.920 --> 01:39:35.760 plaza areas at the entrances as well as some seating areas 01:39:35.760 --> 01:39:36.800 and significant 01:39:36.800 --> 01:39:41.119 amount of landscaping around the perimeter of the building 01:39:41.119 --> 01:39:43.199 these are two 01:39:43.199 --> 01:39:48.109 elevations for the property this top one is with the view 01:39:48.109 --> 01:39:52.000 from I-35 and the south 01:39:52.000 --> 01:39:55.800 is this one on the bottom would be similar to the north and 01:39:55.800 --> 01:39:56.800 the south sides 01:39:56.800 --> 01:40:04.770 they're very similar this is the north elevation the 01:40:04.770 --> 01:40:05.880 criteria for approval are 01:40:05.880 --> 01:40:08.000 listed here outline them in your backup I'd be happy to go 01:40:08.000 --> 01:40:08.800 through that if you 01:40:08.800 --> 01:40:13.199 wish based on this criteria staff will recommend approval 01:40:13.199 --> 01:40:14.119 of the site plan and 01:40:14.119 --> 01:40:23.720 I will stand for any questions any questions for staff 01:40:23.720 --> 01:40:27.000 thank you Mike do 01:40:27.000 --> 01:40:32.000 you have one card in on this item to speak looks like 01:40:32.000 --> 01:40:34.640 Dustin Gibbs 01:40:38.680 --> 01:40:47.609 please come forward and state your name and address Dustin 01:40:47.609 --> 01:40:51.960 Gibbs my address is 01:40:51.960 --> 01:40:59.289 300 Washington Street suite 400 Monroe Louisiana and I'm 01:40:59.289 --> 01:41:00.520 with architecture plus 01:41:00.520 --> 01:41:03.529 for the architects for Dillard's and we weren't really 01:41:03.529 --> 01:41:04.920 wanting to speak but just 01:41:04.920 --> 01:41:08.029 answer any questions that come up about the building elev 01:41:08.029 --> 01:41:09.319 ations or design okay 01:41:09.319 --> 01:41:14.989 when to have any questions thank you thank you for your 01:41:14.989 --> 01:41:15.720 card and support 01:41:15.720 --> 01:41:25.729 appreciate it again this is an individual consideration 01:41:25.729 --> 01:41:26.319 item it's not a 01:41:26.319 --> 01:41:28.590 public hearing but if there's anyone else that wants to 01:41:28.590 --> 01:41:29.319 speak on this item 01:41:29.319 --> 01:41:34.899 you may certainly do so otherwise we will move forward this 01:41:34.899 --> 01:41:36.640 time seeing no 01:41:36.640 --> 01:41:39.000 one else 01:41:41.439 --> 01:41:45.560 Commissioner Taylor thank you chair I did have a question 01:41:45.560 --> 01:41:47.640 of staff mr. Belfort 01:41:47.640 --> 01:41:56.390 come back I'm trying to remember the there there's some 01:41:56.390 --> 01:41:57.399 limit about the the 01:41:57.399 --> 01:42:00.899 amount of kind of flat wall that can face you know a 01:42:00.899 --> 01:42:02.520 parking lot or publicly 01:42:02.520 --> 01:42:08.069 viewed area in razor ranch and does this does that apply to 01:42:08.069 --> 01:42:09.159 this building and how 01:42:09.159 --> 01:42:12.579 does like what what mitigating features are there that 01:42:12.579 --> 01:42:13.960 break up the front of the 01:42:13.960 --> 01:42:16.600 building there are that requirement however there's also 01:42:16.600 --> 01:42:17.279 provision that you 01:42:17.279 --> 01:42:19.590 can use trees in place of that and there's a significant 01:42:19.590 --> 01:42:20.279 amount of trees 01:42:20.279 --> 01:42:22.590 along the front to meet that requirement okay so that's and 01:42:22.590 --> 01:42:23.880 that's why it's it's 01:42:23.880 --> 01:42:27.100 it's a fairly flat facade because of because of the landsca 01:42:27.100 --> 01:42:30.119 ping thank you 01:42:36.800 --> 01:42:44.020 Commissioner Tyler I move that we approve this site plan 01:42:44.020 --> 01:42:45.159 Commissioner Ellis 01:42:45.159 --> 01:42:49.039 thank you chair I'll second that okay first and a second 01:42:49.039 --> 01:42:50.399 for approval any 01:42:50.399 --> 01:42:59.960 discussion seeing none we'll call for a vote on the board 01:43:05.119 --> 01:43:12.439 motion is going to carry six to zero that will move us to 01:43:12.439 --> 01:43:15.199 our public hearing 01:43:15.199 --> 01:43:19.520 section tonight at this time I'm going to open the public 01:43:19.520 --> 01:43:21.079 hearing for item a 01:43:21.079 --> 01:43:27.880 HL 16 - 0 0 0 6 and I will call on Roman McEllen for 01:43:27.880 --> 01:43:37.399 presentation good evening 01:43:37.399 --> 01:43:41.420 everyone this was a request for a designating his local 01:43:41.420 --> 01:43:42.640 historic landmark 01:43:42.640 --> 01:43:46.789 and specifically the property at 2106 North Bell Avenue the 01:43:46.789 --> 01:43:47.640 owners are here 01:43:47.640 --> 01:43:51.460 this evening and today we want to hold a public hearing and 01:43:51.460 --> 01:43:52.239 consider making a 01:43:52.239 --> 01:43:55.409 recommendation to the City Council regarding this 01:43:55.409 --> 01:43:56.720 application and the 01:43:56.720 --> 01:43:59.600 properties on the southeast corner of North Bell Avenue and 01:43:59.600 --> 01:44:01.239 Sherman Drive and 01:44:01.239 --> 01:44:04.640 I'll answer any questions yeah 01:44:05.800 --> 01:44:12.560 questions for staff did a good presentation work session 01:44:12.560 --> 01:44:13.119 thank you 01:44:13.119 --> 01:44:20.520 Roman thank you do you have a card that wishes to to speak 01:44:20.520 --> 01:44:22.720 in support be Gary 01:44:22.720 --> 01:44:27.199 Hayden at 2106 North Bell Avenue please give your name and 01:44:27.199 --> 01:44:28.300 address when you come 01:44:28.300 --> 01:44:31.520 the mic and you'll have four minutes hi thanks for hearing 01:44:31.520 --> 01:44:32.600 me okay yes Gary 01:44:32.600 --> 01:44:39.439 Hayden 2106 North Bell Ave Denton Texas okay you'd like to 01:44:39.439 --> 01:44:40.119 hear a little bit 01:44:40.119 --> 01:44:43.260 about the history but I'm gonna keep it short the land 01:44:43.260 --> 01:44:44.680 around there seem to have 01:44:44.680 --> 01:44:47.500 come from Governor Reynolds and a land grant he was one of 01:44:47.500 --> 01:44:48.239 the governors 01:44:48.239 --> 01:44:55.840 between Texas Republic and the CSA Mr. Albert Woodrum is 01:44:55.840 --> 01:44:57.520 the fellow who built 01:44:57.520 --> 01:45:01.760 the house and I was told he was a self-made man it seems 01:45:01.760 --> 01:45:02.399 that he was an 01:45:02.399 --> 01:45:06.680 early service stations around here and he added on to the 01:45:06.680 --> 01:45:08.119 house about six or 01:45:08.119 --> 01:45:12.180 seven years after he built it and we have some indication 01:45:12.180 --> 01:45:13.319 that he might have 01:45:13.319 --> 01:45:17.850 been prosperous because we have a photo family photo of a 01:45:17.850 --> 01:45:19.479 bear rug in front of 01:45:19.479 --> 01:45:26.029 the fireplace and it's a polar bear rug so he we think he 01:45:26.029 --> 01:45:26.560 did okay 01:45:26.560 --> 01:45:33.039 Judge Boyd moved in next he was very well respected he was 01:45:33.039 --> 01:45:34.600 in the house about 01:45:34.600 --> 01:45:40.199 20 years his wife was very active in women's federations 01:45:40.199 --> 01:45:41.840 around Texas and so 01:45:41.840 --> 01:45:49.529 my home was a hotbed of I don't know tea parties and garden 01:45:49.529 --> 01:45:50.560 parties and things 01:45:50.560 --> 01:45:57.000 like that okay we know the house was used for Sunday school 01:45:57.000 --> 01:45:58.560 Denton precinct 01:45:58.560 --> 01:46:03.539 meetings Democratic precinct meetings dr. Weathers lived 01:46:03.539 --> 01:46:04.399 there for a little while 01:46:04.399 --> 01:46:09.399 about 20 years we had some other folks in there one of the 01:46:09.399 --> 01:46:10.359 things that when Deb 01:46:10.359 --> 01:46:14.439 and I moved in her wife Deb Conti is here the other owner 01:46:14.439 --> 01:46:16.159 when we moved in it 01:46:16.159 --> 01:46:20.920 wasn't long after that Peggy Caps and the city Main Street 01:46:20.920 --> 01:46:21.880 came to us and said 01:46:21.880 --> 01:46:25.920 gee wouldn't be nice to have an historical district here 01:46:25.920 --> 01:46:26.600 and so the 01:46:26.600 --> 01:46:29.720 first meeting for the Bell Avenue Conservation District was 01:46:29.720 --> 01:46:30.319 held in our 01:46:30.319 --> 01:46:35.060 house and the neighbors got together and that's now reality 01:46:35.060 --> 01:46:36.600 so unless you have 01:46:36.600 --> 01:46:42.920 any other questions about the history I thank you very much 01:46:42.920 --> 01:46:44.199 just make a comment 01:46:44.199 --> 01:46:46.989 we saw pictures in the work session of your home and it's a 01:46:46.989 --> 01:46:48.199 beautiful home so 01:46:48.199 --> 01:46:51.140 congratulations and I've done my hard work on it thank you 01:46:51.140 --> 01:46:54.000 very much you got 01:46:57.239 --> 01:46:59.670 and this is a public hearing anyone else who would like to 01:46:59.670 --> 01:47:01.279 speak on this item 01:47:01.279 --> 01:47:08.340 please come forward at this time seeing none close the 01:47:08.340 --> 01:47:10.039 public hearing and open 01:47:10.039 --> 01:47:13.329 the floor for discussion or emotion Commissioner Rizel 01:47:13.329 --> 01:47:14.880 thank you chair I just 01:47:14.880 --> 01:47:17.039 wanted to say thank you for the hard work you put into the 01:47:17.039 --> 01:47:18.239 house and providing 01:47:18.239 --> 01:47:20.279 us the history it's always at least for me on the 01:47:20.279 --> 01:47:21.600 Commission fund to see those 01:47:21.600 --> 01:47:24.390 come through and it's a joy to to be able to put those 01:47:24.390 --> 01:47:25.640 forth to the council 01:47:25.640 --> 01:47:27.909 for approval and so thank you for being here and thank you 01:47:27.909 --> 01:47:28.600 for your home and 01:47:28.600 --> 01:47:32.920 Denton with that I motion to approve this agenda item 01:47:32.920 --> 01:47:34.920 Commissioner Ellis and 01:47:34.920 --> 01:47:37.989 I will second that and also would like to say I'm thrilled 01:47:37.989 --> 01:47:39.239 to support this this 01:47:39.239 --> 01:47:42.439 home has caught my eye every it does every time I'm at the 01:47:42.439 --> 01:47:43.760 intersection so 01:47:43.760 --> 01:47:46.460 it's always made me smile and it will make me smile even 01:47:46.460 --> 01:47:47.359 more now with the 01:47:47.359 --> 01:47:55.000 designation we have a first and a second for approval any 01:47:55.000 --> 01:47:59.119 discussion seeing none 01:47:59.119 --> 01:48:09.289 we'll call for a vote on the board motion carries six to 01:48:09.289 --> 01:48:13.119 zero congratulations 01:48:17.359 --> 01:48:36.850 that will move us to item B and I've read a question okay 01:48:36.850 --> 01:48:41.359 under item B and C 01:48:41.359 --> 01:48:45.890 we had quite a bit of discussion in our work session so 01:48:45.890 --> 01:48:47.640 before I open those 01:48:47.640 --> 01:48:50.930 public hearings I don't know if there was a commissioner 01:48:50.930 --> 01:48:52.600 that wants to make a 01:48:52.600 --> 01:48:58.640 motion before we open these for continuance Commissioner R 01:48:58.640 --> 01:48:59.520 izel as you 01:48:59.520 --> 01:49:02.229 said thank you chair because of the discussion I would 01:49:02.229 --> 01:49:03.359 motion I'm not sure 01:49:03.359 --> 01:49:06.239 if these need two separate motions so I just motion for 01:49:06.239 --> 01:49:07.880 clarification from legal 01:49:07.880 --> 01:49:11.720 separate or one together they were both have the same I 01:49:11.720 --> 01:49:12.520 would go ahead and make 01:49:12.520 --> 01:49:16.699 them separate motions separate okay another motion item DCA 01:49:16.699 --> 01:49:19.000 17 3 to be 01:49:19.000 --> 01:49:26.569 continued to a date uncertain that would be postponed inde 01:49:26.569 --> 01:49:28.159 finitely until it comes 01:49:28.159 --> 01:49:31.119 back onto your agenda then I motion for it to be postponed 01:49:31.119 --> 01:49:34.000 indefinitely 01:49:34.000 --> 01:49:38.899 Commissioner Ellis I will second them second that okay have 01:49:38.899 --> 01:49:39.600 a first and a 01:49:39.600 --> 01:49:47.199 second to postpone indefinitely any discussion Commissioner 01:49:47.199 --> 01:49:48.960 Taylor thank you 01:49:48.960 --> 01:49:53.199 chair so I don't know if anybody in the audience is 01:49:53.199 --> 01:49:54.920 following this issue the 01:49:54.920 --> 01:49:59.529 this was a cleanup of our parking standards but it also 01:49:59.529 --> 01:50:01.359 included several 01:50:01.359 --> 01:50:07.960 nuanced changes to parking islands landscape coverage etc I 01:50:07.960 --> 01:50:09.359 personally feel 01:50:09.359 --> 01:50:13.800 like this this proposal is moving in the right direction it 01:50:13.800 --> 01:50:14.920 's going to make 01:50:14.920 --> 01:50:19.119 parking lots nicer in Denton it provides for bike parking 01:50:19.119 --> 01:50:22.319 it removes a few of the 01:50:22.319 --> 01:50:25.880 old kind of restrictions we had that led to a lot of ADPs 01:50:25.880 --> 01:50:27.039 for rather minor 01:50:27.039 --> 01:50:30.390 requests like a maximum parking that we used to have in the 01:50:30.390 --> 01:50:31.439 old code is being 01:50:31.439 --> 01:50:34.859 removed so now there isn't a maximum parking requirement 01:50:34.859 --> 01:50:36.399 for pervious paving 01:50:36.399 --> 01:50:39.479 that in my time here I think I've seen just maybe two or 01:50:39.479 --> 01:50:40.779 three projects in the 01:50:40.779 --> 01:50:43.310 last five and a half years that did the previous paving and 01:50:43.310 --> 01:50:44.279 everybody else came 01:50:44.279 --> 01:50:47.840 in and asked for a variance to not do previous paving so as 01:50:47.840 --> 01:50:48.920 much as I'd like 01:50:48.920 --> 01:50:52.819 to see previous paving it obviously wasn't feasible and so 01:50:52.819 --> 01:50:54.319 we do have some 01:50:54.319 --> 01:50:58.079 questions about cost and some details of implementation but 01:50:58.079 --> 01:50:59.239 I do think this is a 01:50:59.239 --> 01:51:04.140 step in the right direction Commissioner Roselle thank you 01:51:04.140 --> 01:51:06.079 chair I just mostly 01:51:06.079 --> 01:51:08.930 probably want to echo Commissioner Taylor's points I think 01:51:08.930 --> 01:51:09.920 this is moving 01:51:09.920 --> 01:51:12.229 in the right direction what I'd like to see when it comes 01:51:12.229 --> 01:51:12.800 back is more 01:51:12.800 --> 01:51:16.220 information about the real costs as well as I brought up in 01:51:16.220 --> 01:51:17.760 work session thoughts 01:51:17.760 --> 01:51:22.890 about aligning bike stand incentives with the bike plan 01:51:22.890 --> 01:51:24.239 that we have in place 01:51:24.239 --> 01:51:27.880 to maybe join those together to further incentivize bike 01:51:27.880 --> 01:51:29.399 traffic where the city 01:51:29.399 --> 01:51:31.960 has already kind of thought through where bikes would be so 01:51:31.960 --> 01:51:32.640 hopefully when it 01:51:32.640 --> 01:51:35.460 comes back those two things as well as some discussion from 01:51:35.460 --> 01:51:36.039 the Dinton 01:51:36.039 --> 01:51:39.909 development group would be helpful to getting even more 01:51:39.909 --> 01:51:41.439 context to the impact 01:51:41.439 --> 01:51:46.920 of these changes have Commissioner Hussbeth thank you chair 01:51:46.920 --> 01:51:49.439 so I want to 01:51:49.439 --> 01:51:53.949 make sure kind of a note for staff that I do like the 01:51:53.949 --> 01:51:56.640 provision for the bike racks 01:51:56.640 --> 01:52:02.000 only in that we have quite the active community in that 01:52:02.000 --> 01:52:03.239 segment of our 01:52:03.239 --> 01:52:08.000 community and I think it's important for us to be sensitive 01:52:08.000 --> 01:52:09.680 to to their thoughts 01:52:09.680 --> 01:52:13.100 and and desires and so I think there's a there's a meeting 01:52:13.100 --> 01:52:14.560 of the minds to be had 01:52:14.560 --> 01:52:18.909 but I do want to see that provision stay in some capacity 01:52:18.909 --> 01:52:21.279 because I I agree the 01:52:21.279 --> 01:52:27.689 cost is is not that significant and it's going to be asked 01:52:27.689 --> 01:52:28.960 of every project 01:52:28.960 --> 01:52:33.000 anyway so we should probably be on the front end of that 01:52:33.000 --> 01:52:36.600 and then I think the 01:52:36.600 --> 01:52:41.510 other thing that jumps out at me is that I think there were 01:52:41.510 --> 01:52:42.760 some fair questions 01:52:42.760 --> 01:52:47.229 about the clarity of how to read the charts the graphs that 01:52:47.229 --> 01:52:48.520 type thing I'd 01:52:48.520 --> 01:52:51.869 like to see some some different options as far as how to 01:52:51.869 --> 01:52:53.640 combine those matrices 01:52:53.640 --> 01:52:58.189 to to make sure that that's user-friendly and then lastly 01:52:58.189 --> 01:52:58.600 if we 01:52:58.600 --> 01:53:01.890 could just as I said before in the development code I do 01:53:01.890 --> 01:53:03.079 want to meet 01:53:03.079 --> 01:53:05.550 with the building community but I want to hold their feet 01:53:05.550 --> 01:53:06.520 to the fire so I 01:53:06.520 --> 01:53:10.170 would encourage staff to have specific notes because if 01:53:10.170 --> 01:53:11.560 there is if there are 01:53:11.560 --> 01:53:14.680 developers that just continue to vacillate and won't give a 01:53:14.680 --> 01:53:15.359 number and 01:53:15.359 --> 01:53:19.159 won't lock in then then I think the record should reflect 01:53:19.159 --> 01:53:20.319 that going forward 01:53:20.319 --> 01:53:22.850 so that we can we can lend proper weight to those 01:53:22.850 --> 01:53:24.920 individuals and those that are 01:53:24.920 --> 01:53:29.720 willing to come to the table and negotiate in earnest then 01:53:29.720 --> 01:53:30.840 that carries a 01:53:30.840 --> 01:53:34.090 different weight in my eyes but I want to have transcripts 01:53:34.090 --> 01:53:35.159 that then kind of 01:53:35.159 --> 01:53:39.869 clearly line out those individuals that just refuse to to 01:53:39.869 --> 01:53:41.399 lock in and those 01:53:41.399 --> 01:53:46.529 that just will perpetually vacillate so that we can we can 01:53:46.529 --> 01:53:49.399 I personally can 01:53:49.399 --> 01:53:55.560 account for that so thank you I've got some comments as 01:53:55.560 --> 01:53:56.079 well I had a 01:53:56.079 --> 01:54:00.880 number of questions in work session along with Commissioner 01:54:00.880 --> 01:54:01.600 Taylor I know 01:54:01.600 --> 01:54:05.880 there are some things in this cleanup that are probably 01:54:05.880 --> 01:54:07.399 overdue I did have 01:54:07.399 --> 01:54:10.430 some concerns and brought those up in work session about 01:54:10.430 --> 01:54:11.600 some of the costs and 01:54:11.600 --> 01:54:15.409 the changes that were made and my concerns really stem from 01:54:15.409 --> 01:54:16.520 standpoint of 01:54:16.520 --> 01:54:20.840 not having impact from the stakeholders and the people that 01:54:20.840 --> 01:54:22.399 will be asked to 01:54:22.399 --> 01:54:25.659 make these changes and comply with these new regulations I 01:54:25.659 --> 01:54:26.600 think once those 01:54:26.600 --> 01:54:30.760 answers are provided and some of the costs associated I 01:54:30.760 --> 01:54:32.119 think we can have a 01:54:32.119 --> 01:54:35.170 productive discussion in our next work session and have 01:54:35.170 --> 01:54:36.000 this item back 01:54:36.000 --> 01:54:41.640 hopefully fairly soon Commissioner Ellis thank you chair 01:54:41.640 --> 01:54:42.399 and one thing I just 01:54:42.399 --> 01:54:46.130 wanted to add when this does come back before us is maybe 01:54:46.130 --> 01:54:47.760 we can have you know 01:54:47.760 --> 01:54:52.390 a workshop session in our work session then you could take 01:54:52.390 --> 01:54:52.920 a lot of our 01:54:52.920 --> 01:54:56.189 suggestions maybe and hear them and then maybe implement 01:54:56.189 --> 01:54:57.399 them and then bring it 01:54:57.399 --> 01:55:00.739 back to us I think that would that would help since since 01:55:00.739 --> 01:55:01.880 many of us had concern 01:55:01.880 --> 01:55:07.920 on clarity and and and questions and needed more than was 01:55:07.920 --> 01:55:09.079 given to us today I 01:55:09.079 --> 01:55:14.430 think that would be appreciative when it does come back any 01:55:14.430 --> 01:55:19.520 other comments okay 01:55:19.520 --> 01:55:23.399 with that we have a first and a second for continuance to 01:55:23.399 --> 01:55:25.000 date certain and 01:55:25.000 --> 01:55:34.319 we'll call for a vote on the board do we not have a second 01:55:34.319 --> 01:55:37.239 just for my clarity 01:55:37.239 --> 01:55:42.239 do we have a first and a second on this item okay great 01:55:42.239 --> 01:55:45.680 okay with that a first 01:55:45.680 --> 01:55:50.640 and a second call for a vote on the board 01:55:56.000 --> 01:56:02.039 motion carries six zero to continue indefinitely I will 01:56:02.039 --> 01:56:06.000 record on this item 01:56:06.000 --> 01:56:08.680 it was a public hearing since we've continued it prior to 01:56:08.680 --> 01:56:09.680 opening the public 01:56:09.680 --> 01:56:12.439 hearing whenever it's put on the agenda in the future we 01:56:12.439 --> 01:56:13.720 would have to re-notice 01:56:13.720 --> 01:56:17.180 it just so that the public is aware and if anybody came to 01:56:17.180 --> 01:56:18.399 speak on that item 01:56:18.399 --> 01:56:26.159 today obviously we won't have those speeches today okay 01:56:26.159 --> 01:56:27.560 that will move us to 01:56:27.560 --> 01:56:32.479 our item C we had some similar discussion in our work 01:56:32.479 --> 01:56:33.920 session and so 01:56:33.920 --> 01:56:36.960 prior to opening the work session I'm going to open the 01:56:36.960 --> 01:56:38.159 floor here to see if 01:56:38.159 --> 01:56:43.289 Commissioner would like to offer a motion to continue this 01:56:43.289 --> 01:56:44.359 item as well 01:56:45.319 --> 01:56:49.819 Commissioner Tyler again this is this is kind of similar to 01:56:49.819 --> 01:56:52.119 the last one where in 01:56:52.119 --> 01:56:57.800 general the I think the code is good we I had a concern 01:56:57.800 --> 01:57:03.439 about the fixed rate of 01:57:03.439 --> 01:57:10.800 points needed per type as opposed to kind of the old matrix 01:57:10.800 --> 01:57:11.520 style where 01:57:11.520 --> 01:57:13.829 industrial next to commercial needs less buffer than 01:57:13.829 --> 01:57:14.720 industrial next to 01:57:14.720 --> 01:57:17.720 residential and I would I would prefer it go back to the 01:57:17.720 --> 01:57:19.880 the older style matrix 01:57:19.880 --> 01:57:23.550 and I do really like the point system and it makes it a 01:57:23.550 --> 01:57:25.439 little more complex and 01:57:25.439 --> 01:57:28.920 somebody's got to work a little bit harder to maybe to it 01:57:28.920 --> 01:57:29.840 isn't just as 01:57:29.840 --> 01:57:32.840 clean read of here's a type a buffer you shall have a tree 01:57:32.840 --> 01:57:34.199 every 20 feet and a 01:57:34.199 --> 01:57:37.550 shrub every 16 feet or whatever it is but it does give a 01:57:37.550 --> 01:57:38.399 lot more flexibility 01:57:38.399 --> 01:57:42.270 and I think in general this is good but because of the 01:57:42.270 --> 01:57:43.680 changes and other 01:57:43.680 --> 01:57:47.100 concerns I believe the Commission has I move to postpone 01:57:47.100 --> 01:57:47.800 this item 01:57:47.800 --> 01:57:55.560 indefinitely Commissioner Ozel thank you chair as I 01:57:55.560 --> 01:57:56.720 mentioned the work session I 01:57:56.720 --> 01:58:01.630 would like to see a merge between the current grid system 01:58:01.630 --> 01:58:03.199 for buffers with the 01:58:03.199 --> 01:58:06.470 ABCD and the new point system I do think the point system 01:58:06.470 --> 01:58:08.479 is a step forward but 01:58:08.479 --> 01:58:11.020 as I brought up in work session there seems to be some 01:58:11.020 --> 01:58:12.079 built-in loopholes 01:58:12.079 --> 01:58:16.109 already there so I'd love to see those point systems 10 20 01:58:16.109 --> 01:58:17.600 30 50 I think up to 01:58:17.600 --> 01:58:22.510 50 correlated back to an ABCD type matrix or whatever the 01:58:22.510 --> 01:58:23.119 solution might be 01:58:23.119 --> 01:58:26.760 with that though I second this motion to postpone inde 01:58:26.760 --> 01:58:29.319 finitely okay I have a first 01:58:29.319 --> 01:58:33.710 and a second to propose to continue this item indefinitely 01:58:33.710 --> 01:58:35.319 any other discussion 01:58:35.319 --> 01:58:44.180 or questions I can't speak seeing none I'll call for a vote 01:58:44.180 --> 01:58:47.399 on the board 01:58:53.720 --> 01:58:59.760 the motion to continue indefinitely passes six to zero that 01:58:59.760 --> 01:59:01.039 will move us to 01:59:01.039 --> 01:59:08.439 item D and I believe on a clarification from legal we're 01:59:08.439 --> 01:59:09.760 gonna open this and 01:59:09.760 --> 01:59:13.449 then continue it rather than continue it's gonna same 01:59:13.449 --> 01:59:17.039 motion okay on item D I'm going to 01:59:17.039 --> 01:59:22.640 open the public hearing for Z 16 - zero zero one and this 01:59:22.640 --> 01:59:23.800 item has been 01:59:23.800 --> 01:59:26.739 requested to be postponed so the chair would entertain a 01:59:26.739 --> 01:59:28.399 motion for it to be 01:59:28.399 --> 01:59:33.539 continued to February the 8th Commissioner Roselle I motion 01:59:33.539 --> 01:59:33.800 for this 01:59:33.800 --> 01:59:37.859 item to be postponed to the February 8th planning zoning 01:59:37.859 --> 01:59:38.640 meeting okay 01:59:38.640 --> 01:59:42.250 Commissioner Hussman second okay we have a first and a 01:59:42.250 --> 01:59:46.399 second any discussion 01:59:48.119 --> 01:59:52.560 seeing none we'll call for a vote on the board 01:59:58.399 --> 02:00:12.720 motion carries six to zero and I want to make an 02:00:12.720 --> 02:00:15.279 announcement on this item the 02:00:15.279 --> 02:00:18.130 clarification from legal that says this item has been 02:00:18.130 --> 02:00:20.239 opened and continued that 02:00:20.239 --> 02:00:23.390 anyone who's posted a card at this time will be able to 02:00:23.390 --> 02:00:24.840 come and speak we don't 02:00:24.840 --> 02:00:31.579 have any cards on this item I'm sorry but if if when this 02:00:31.579 --> 02:00:32.960 item comes back it 02:00:32.960 --> 02:00:35.520 will be a public hearing and anyone would that would like 02:00:35.520 --> 02:00:36.359 to speak may come 02:00:36.359 --> 02:00:44.460 forward at that time and then that will move us to item E 02:00:44.460 --> 02:00:45.239 and we have a 02:00:45.239 --> 02:00:50.039 clarification on that this was noticed as building 02:00:50.039 --> 02:00:52.159 materials and it has been 02:00:52.159 --> 02:00:55.449 postponed indefinitely these are the same items in regards 02:00:55.449 --> 02:00:56.039 to the didn't 02:00:56.039 --> 02:00:59.060 development code and the building materials notice it was 02:00:59.060 --> 02:00:59.720 posted didn't 02:00:59.720 --> 02:01:02.760 record Chronicle just will make that clarification for the 02:01:02.760 --> 02:01:04.239 record and it has 02:01:04.239 --> 02:01:07.659 been postponed indefinitely and we'll be taking no action 02:01:07.659 --> 02:01:10.159 on that tonight this 02:01:10.159 --> 02:01:16.479 will move us to our project matrix and concluding items and 02:01:16.479 --> 02:01:17.880 first item I have 02:01:17.880 --> 02:01:22.130 as a note here is that Mike Bell is going to be leaving the 02:01:22.130 --> 02:01:23.359 city of Denton 02:01:23.359 --> 02:01:28.329 and we wish him well in his endeavors and want to thank him 02:01:28.329 --> 02:01:29.760 for his service 02:01:29.760 --> 02:01:34.750 here at the city has always been a great person to go to 02:01:34.750 --> 02:01:36.880 for questions and very 02:01:36.880 --> 02:01:40.260 knowledgeable and you will be missed so congratulations and 02:01:40.260 --> 02:01:41.479 good luck on your new 02:01:41.479 --> 02:01:47.859 opportunity and plan will miss you and with that we'll open 02:01:47.859 --> 02:01:50.359 the floor for items 02:01:50.359 --> 02:01:55.000 to be put on our agenda for in the future 02:01:56.000 --> 02:01:59.560 are there any items to be added to the future agenda's 02:01:59.560 --> 02:02:03.119 matrix yeah I have 02:02:03.119 --> 02:02:07.279 something to bring up by it and Rowan McAllen's talk today 02:02:07.279 --> 02:02:08.239 we asked him about 02:02:08.239 --> 02:02:13.159 proactive ways to incentivize or to help with the fitzl its 02:02:13.159 --> 02:02:14.119 facilitation of 02:02:14.119 --> 02:02:18.920 the stork applications what process needs to happen in 02:02:18.920 --> 02:02:20.479 order to look into 02:02:20.479 --> 02:02:24.020 those fees that he talked about specifically is it in our 02:02:24.020 --> 02:02:24.739 purview to 02:02:24.739 --> 02:02:31.560 bring up the discussion about waiving that $265 I don't 02:02:31.560 --> 02:02:32.300 think it's be added to the 02:02:32.300 --> 02:02:36.270 matrix or followed up offline but I'd love to see what we 02:02:36.270 --> 02:02:37.399 can do to if he has 02:02:37.399 --> 02:02:41.920 two applications that are not happening because of $265 I'd 02:02:41.920 --> 02:02:42.439 like to see how we 02:02:42.439 --> 02:02:47.920 can help out that process 02:02:58.720 --> 02:02:59.939 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I don't know if this is 02:02:59.939 --> 02:03:02.960 for the matrix 02:03:02.960 --> 02:03:08.029 certainly a concern and and you can tell me where it needs 02:03:08.029 --> 02:03:09.439 to go we had some 02:03:09.439 --> 02:03:13.060 confusion last meeting about discussion at work session and 02:03:13.060 --> 02:03:13.680 what should be 02:03:13.680 --> 02:03:16.909 discussed at work session and what should hold off till the 02:03:16.909 --> 02:03:17.560 meeting in 02:03:17.560 --> 02:03:23.479 chambers I'm thinking can we have maybe discussion on that 02:03:23.479 --> 02:03:24.600 I feel like 02:03:24.600 --> 02:03:28.279 sometimes yeah at work session I do feel like sometimes the 02:03:28.279 --> 02:03:29.760 public is left out 02:03:29.760 --> 02:03:32.850 because we if they don't watch the work session I know it's 02:03:32.850 --> 02:03:34.000 being recorded so it 02:03:34.000 --> 02:03:38.020 is available certainly but sometimes when we get to this 02:03:38.020 --> 02:03:42.680 point I guess yeah if we 02:03:42.680 --> 02:03:47.829 could discuss that further that would be appreciated okay I 02:03:47.829 --> 02:03:51.199 guess the only item 02:03:51.199 --> 02:03:55.199 nobody has anything else is I appreciate it getting the 02:03:55.199 --> 02:03:56.960 handout last meeting 02:03:56.960 --> 02:04:03.000 about Ryan Road I didn't see anything on Mayhill and I've 02:04:03.000 --> 02:04:03.960 actually had now a call 02:04:03.960 --> 02:04:08.229 from somebody wanting to have an update on that and wanting 02:04:08.229 --> 02:04:08.840 to know what I know 02:04:08.840 --> 02:04:12.590 about it so is that plan to come before us or we're just 02:04:12.590 --> 02:04:13.319 going to get a handout 02:04:13.319 --> 02:04:16.609 on that I know we've been brought up now I think three or 02:04:16.609 --> 02:04:19.079 four meetings so the 02:04:19.079 --> 02:04:22.859 actual the memo for may he'll was prepared in October it 02:04:22.859 --> 02:04:24.520 came as an email 02:04:24.520 --> 02:04:32.800 to the PNC so we can be send that if we need to I missed it 02:04:32.800 --> 02:04:34.359 okay we'll we'll 02:04:34.359 --> 02:04:38.199 rescind that okay thank you I wouldn't have kept asking 02:04:38.199 --> 02:04:39.239 about it if you just 02:04:39.239 --> 02:04:47.560 said hey you just gotta check your email thank you anybody 02:04:47.560 --> 02:04:50.359 else okay with that I 02:04:50.359 --> 02:04:55.489 will close our meeting this evening at 7 o 5 thank you 02:04:55.489 --> 02:04:56.479 everyone and thanks to the 02:04:56.479 --> 02:04:58.720 public