WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.530
Commission meeting for March the 22nd 2017. This meeting

00:00:04.530 --> 00:00:07.480
has been duly posted and we have a quorum present and

00:00:07.679 --> 00:00:10.080
I will call our work session to order at

00:00:10.960 --> 00:00:14.669
434 and I will turn it over to Shandria for clarification

00:00:14.669 --> 00:00:17.160
of agenda items. Okay. Good evening.

00:00:17.600 --> 00:00:20.350
We have one item. Well, actually do we have any comments or

00:00:20.350 --> 00:00:23.120
questions about the minutes from March 8th?

00:00:24.679 --> 00:00:26.160
Okay

00:00:26.160 --> 00:00:29.730
For the consent agenda, we have one item. It's a final plat

00:00:29.730 --> 00:00:32.619
for Ryan Meadows if there's no questions or there is a

00:00:32.619 --> 00:00:33.079
question.

00:00:35.079 --> 00:00:38.119
Julie Wyatt up just in case. Okay. Thank you chair.

00:00:44.479 --> 00:00:45.920
Okay

00:00:45.920 --> 00:00:49.009
Concerned about the roadway access in this area. We've got

00:00:49.009 --> 00:00:51.000
the what is it Creekwood Drive.

00:00:51.320 --> 00:00:54.280
Now as this development is going up it'll eventually

00:00:54.280 --> 00:00:56.560
connect up there by Ryan Elementary, right?

00:00:56.560 --> 00:00:59.619
Yes. And on the north end then on the south end it'll

00:00:59.619 --> 00:01:00.840
connect to where Creekwood

00:01:01.359 --> 00:01:03.359
dead ends. Okay.

00:01:03.640 --> 00:01:07.629
This road though, it's a connector line. What is the right-

00:01:07.629 --> 00:01:09.799
of-way width for a connector there?

00:01:09.799 --> 00:01:13.450
Is this something that can be since this is the only main

00:01:13.450 --> 00:01:16.560
road for all these other feeder roads to get people out

00:01:16.560 --> 00:01:16.840
there?

00:01:16.840 --> 00:01:19.840
Would that be a double lane or a four lane or would it be a

00:01:19.840 --> 00:01:21.840
two lane with a center strike?

00:01:21.840 --> 00:01:23.840
Are you referring to Creekdale? Yes.

00:01:23.840 --> 00:01:24.840
Yes.

00:01:24.840 --> 00:01:26.840
Creekwood Drive.

00:01:26.840 --> 00:01:28.840
It's

00:01:30.840 --> 00:01:32.840
85 foot right away.

00:01:32.840 --> 00:01:35.870
It is 85 foot. That's what I'm saying. You know, I don't

00:01:35.870 --> 00:01:39.219
have engineering here to see just how that roads going to

00:01:39.219 --> 00:01:39.840
be designed.

00:01:39.840 --> 00:01:42.769
Okay. That's what I was curious about if we knew if that

00:01:42.769 --> 00:01:45.840
was going to be wide enough to handle, you know.

00:01:45.840 --> 00:01:50.340
Engineering has reviewed it and has released it to be so it

00:01:50.340 --> 00:01:54.390
does meet that that road right away with does meet the

00:01:54.390 --> 00:01:55.840
technical requirements in order to

00:01:56.840 --> 00:02:00.000
accommodate the traffic flow that is anticipated through

00:02:00.000 --> 00:02:01.900
development. So if I can run my roll down he could probably

00:02:01.900 --> 00:02:02.840
give me a better answer.

00:02:02.840 --> 00:02:04.840
Yes sir. Okay. Thank you. Sure.

00:02:05.840 --> 00:02:08.689
Commissioner Sullivan. Maybe I'm confused with another plat

00:02:08.689 --> 00:02:08.840
en.

00:02:08.840 --> 00:02:12.729
Doesn't isn't there going to be a Hickory Creek is going to

00:02:12.729 --> 00:02:16.840
be coming south of this or is it further south?

00:02:16.840 --> 00:02:18.840
When you were talking about that, you know, one of the few

00:02:18.840 --> 00:02:22.840
entrance and exits going into this division subdivision.

00:02:22.840 --> 00:02:26.840
Where is Hickory Creek coming in below? I thought it was.

00:02:26.840 --> 00:02:30.840
Earl Escobar just walked in. So I may call upon him.

00:02:30.840 --> 00:02:34.000
Let me pull up a map and then maybe we can look at it

00:02:34.000 --> 00:02:35.840
together if that's

00:02:37.840 --> 00:02:39.840
And we can see

00:02:40.840 --> 00:02:44.439
Earl we're talking about the Ryan Meadows Plat and they

00:02:44.439 --> 00:02:48.840
have questions regarding the design of Creekdale Drive.

00:02:52.840 --> 00:02:54.840
I'm going to make sure I'm getting in the right spot.

00:03:04.840 --> 00:03:07.840
Ryan Meadows is actually further to the west.

00:03:10.840 --> 00:03:14.389
So this is Ryan Meadows phase two to the south here and if

00:03:14.389 --> 00:03:18.840
I turn on the mobility plan, it should show Creekdale

00:03:19.840 --> 00:03:23.039
actually continuing further south and then to the east and

00:03:23.039 --> 00:03:26.449
connect to the existing portion, which is I believe

00:03:26.449 --> 00:03:27.840
somewhere in this area.

00:03:29.840 --> 00:03:33.759
Commissioner Sullivan is the red dot. Is that the proposed

00:03:33.759 --> 00:03:37.840
Hickory Creek? That should be so that you got some

00:03:37.840 --> 00:03:42.330
So you do have another out to the south of Creekdale coming

00:03:42.330 --> 00:03:45.840
down to the proposed Hickory Creek.

00:03:46.840 --> 00:03:51.189
Right over here. Change. Yeah. There's a feature collector

00:03:51.189 --> 00:03:53.840
that connects Creekdale to Hickory Creek Road.

00:03:54.840 --> 00:03:58.629
So that would relieve some of the pressure off of the

00:03:58.629 --> 00:04:02.490
traffic going on to Ryan Road or mainly going on to Ryan

00:04:02.490 --> 00:04:02.840
Road.

00:04:03.840 --> 00:04:06.840
And this outlet over here should already be existing. It is

00:04:06.840 --> 00:04:06.840
.

00:04:07.840 --> 00:04:10.810
So there is already an outlet that connects Creekdale to H

00:04:10.810 --> 00:04:11.840
ickory Creek.

00:04:12.840 --> 00:04:15.840
Just want to make sure I was thinking of the right area.

00:04:15.840 --> 00:04:15.840
That's all.

00:04:16.839 --> 00:04:19.529
Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. Thanks for pointing

00:04:19.529 --> 00:04:19.839
that out.

00:04:20.839 --> 00:04:22.649
Commissioner Sullivan, I wasn't even aware that we were

00:04:22.649 --> 00:04:24.250
going to have that little jump in there, but that's

00:04:24.250 --> 00:04:24.839
futuristic.

00:04:25.839 --> 00:04:30.350
As this development gets done though, it will connect to

00:04:30.350 --> 00:04:34.379
Ryan, come down to Creekdale and hit a street there I can't

00:04:34.379 --> 00:04:36.839
think of that will bring it down to Hickory Creek.

00:04:37.839 --> 00:04:39.839
We can call it Larry Beck Boulevard.

00:04:43.839 --> 00:04:47.550
But we've got no idea when Hickory Creek is going to even

00:04:47.550 --> 00:04:48.839
be started doing.

00:04:49.839 --> 00:04:52.149
My question for you guys in here is how wide is Creekdale

00:04:52.149 --> 00:04:55.220
going to be? Is that going to be like a four lane or a two

00:04:55.220 --> 00:04:56.839
lane with a center turn?

00:04:57.839 --> 00:05:00.120
It'll be a two lane road with parking on either side. It's

00:05:00.120 --> 00:05:01.839
a residential collector.

00:05:02.839 --> 00:05:05.240
Okay. Considering it's a main road that will be pulling a

00:05:05.240 --> 00:05:07.720
lot of those people out there, I would have thought it

00:05:07.720 --> 00:05:10.230
would have been a little bit, it would have allowed for

00:05:10.230 --> 00:05:11.839
more traffic flow one time.

00:05:12.839 --> 00:05:14.839
But no, just two way would.

00:05:15.839 --> 00:05:18.019
We could strap it either way. It gives us flexibility

00:05:18.019 --> 00:05:21.649
depending on traffic volumes right now. The standard cross

00:05:21.649 --> 00:05:25.089
sections, two lanes, one lane in either direction with

00:05:25.089 --> 00:05:25.839
parking on the side.

00:05:26.839 --> 00:05:28.720
We'd also stripe it three lanes with a one lane in each

00:05:28.720 --> 00:05:31.839
direction with a turn lane, continuous turn lane.

00:05:32.839 --> 00:05:35.329
Okay. It's wide enough though where in the future if we

00:05:35.329 --> 00:05:38.250
need to, we could probably add another lane on each side

00:05:38.250 --> 00:05:38.839
then.

00:05:39.839 --> 00:05:39.839
If we need to.

00:05:40.839 --> 00:05:40.839
Okay. Thank you.

00:05:41.839 --> 00:05:42.839
Commissioner Sullivan.

00:05:43.839 --> 00:05:48.199
What's happening to Ryan Road? I mean during school

00:05:48.199 --> 00:05:52.509
mornings and afternoon, Ryan Road getting on to Country

00:05:52.509 --> 00:05:54.839
Club is a real disaster.

00:05:55.839 --> 00:05:58.910
And when you add all those houses right there, dump it into

00:05:58.910 --> 00:06:03.810
Ryan Road, is Ryan Road going to be widened at some point

00:06:03.810 --> 00:06:06.839
or when and what's the...

00:06:07.839 --> 00:06:10.740
There is no definite time frame for the widening of Ryan

00:06:10.740 --> 00:06:13.839
Road. It is slated to be a four lane divided roadway.

00:06:14.839 --> 00:06:20.399
We did apply for a signal at Ryan and FM 1830, Country Club

00:06:20.399 --> 00:06:20.839
.

00:06:21.839 --> 00:06:24.180
It was denied by TextDOT because it did not meet their war

00:06:24.180 --> 00:06:24.839
rants.

00:06:25.839 --> 00:06:28.410
And unfortunately TextDOT, in order to meet TextDOT war

00:06:28.410 --> 00:06:31.839
rants, it has to be based on actual traffic counts.

00:06:32.839 --> 00:06:34.300
So you really need, the development has to come first

00:06:34.300 --> 00:06:35.839
before the signal can...

00:06:36.839 --> 00:06:37.839
Create chaos.

00:06:38.839 --> 00:06:39.839
In order for it to then get solved.

00:06:40.839 --> 00:06:41.839
That's correct.

00:06:42.839 --> 00:06:43.839
Okay. Thank you.

00:06:47.839 --> 00:06:50.839
Any other questions for Julie on this item?

00:06:53.839 --> 00:06:57.850
Okay. Under public hearing, we have four items and I will

00:06:57.850 --> 00:07:01.279
note that two have been postponed until the April 12th

00:07:01.279 --> 00:07:01.839
meeting.

00:07:02.839 --> 00:07:06.839
And those are items B and C.

00:07:09.839 --> 00:07:14.519
Okay. And then items B and C under public hearing have been

00:07:14.519 --> 00:07:16.839
postponed until April 12th.

00:07:17.839 --> 00:07:24.449
And then I'll invite Haley Zagorski up to discuss item Z16

00:07:24.449 --> 00:07:31.230
28, which is a rezoning request for MSGSB Limited property

00:07:31.230 --> 00:07:33.839
owned by that group.

00:07:40.839 --> 00:07:45.920
Alright. Good evening. So this is case Z1628 for the Harris

00:07:45.920 --> 00:07:46.839
property.

00:07:47.839 --> 00:07:55.839
Alright. So the request was for us to hold a public hearing

00:07:55.839 --> 00:07:59.389
and consider a request for rezoning approximately a half

00:07:59.389 --> 00:08:02.839
acre from DR2 districts to a DCG.

00:08:03.839 --> 00:08:04.839
That's Downtown Commercial General.

00:08:05.839 --> 00:08:08.839
The property is located at 1604 West Hickory.

00:08:09.839 --> 00:08:11.839
It's currently developed with four duplexes.

00:08:12.839 --> 00:08:16.029
The two that you see on the back portion of the lot are

00:08:16.029 --> 00:08:18.839
connected by a breezeway carport there.

00:08:19.839 --> 00:08:23.139
And it's approximately 85 feet east of Avenue C to give you

00:08:23.139 --> 00:08:25.839
a little point of reference there.

00:08:26.839 --> 00:08:28.839
I want to point out some features in the area.

00:08:29.839 --> 00:08:31.850
There is currently multifamily to the north and the west of

00:08:31.850 --> 00:08:32.840
this property.

00:08:33.840 --> 00:08:35.480
That's across the street apartments and the lights

00:08:35.480 --> 00:08:36.840
apartment complexes.

00:08:37.840 --> 00:08:39.840
CVS is located there at the corner of Avenue B in Hickory.

00:08:40.840 --> 00:08:43.519
The two properties in between the subject property and CVS

00:08:43.519 --> 00:08:46.159
are actually owned by the same entity that owns the subject

00:08:46.159 --> 00:08:46.840
property.

00:08:47.840 --> 00:08:49.480
It's currently developed with the Jackson Chang apartment

00:08:49.480 --> 00:08:52.549
office and then they have a couple of residences next door

00:08:52.549 --> 00:08:54.840
that are used for multifamily as well.

00:08:55.840 --> 00:08:57.480
And then of course the UNT campus is located directly

00:08:57.480 --> 00:08:58.840
across Hickory Street.

00:09:01.840 --> 00:09:04.840
So currently this property is zoned Downtown Residential 2

00:09:04.840 --> 00:09:07.840
and the proposal is to rezone this to DCG.

00:09:08.840 --> 00:09:10.960
And as you can see there are two properties that adjoin

00:09:10.960 --> 00:09:12.840
this one to the east are currently zoned DCG.

00:09:13.840 --> 00:09:15.610
So their intent is to put all three properties under one

00:09:15.610 --> 00:09:18.840
zoning district to help facilitate future redevelopment.

00:09:21.840 --> 00:09:23.120
So the future land use designation for this property is

00:09:23.120 --> 00:09:26.840
neighborhood university compatibility area.

00:09:27.840 --> 00:09:29.610
As you're all probably familiar by now that is a

00:09:29.610 --> 00:09:33.179
designation applied to areas that adjoin our two university

00:09:33.179 --> 00:09:37.840
campuses to help transition from that campus

00:09:38.840 --> 00:09:43.190
and form and land use into the surrounding established

00:09:43.190 --> 00:09:43.840
neighborhoods.

00:09:44.840 --> 00:09:47.730
So you can see here this one like I said is directly across

00:09:47.730 --> 00:09:49.840
the street from UNT's campus.

00:09:50.840 --> 00:09:53.519
And that neighborhood university compatibility area extends

00:09:53.519 --> 00:09:56.360
pretty far to the north of this property before you get

00:09:56.360 --> 00:09:57.840
into those lower residential areas.

00:10:00.840 --> 00:10:01.649
So some of the considerations that staff looked at for this

00:10:01.649 --> 00:10:05.389
was that the rezoning is consistent with the surrounding

00:10:05.389 --> 00:10:06.840
zoning pattern.

00:10:07.840 --> 00:10:10.840
There's already a mix of DCG and DR2 within this block.

00:10:11.840 --> 00:10:14.379
And as I mentioned before the two adjoining properties that

00:10:14.379 --> 00:10:17.710
this owner currently has are already have the DCG zoning

00:10:17.710 --> 00:10:18.840
designation.

00:10:19.840 --> 00:10:21.070
This district is consistent with the future land use

00:10:21.070 --> 00:10:21.840
designation.

00:10:22.840 --> 00:10:25.240
The neighborhood university compatibility area calls for

00:10:25.240 --> 00:10:28.529
densities and services to be provided in close proximity to

00:10:28.529 --> 00:10:31.840
the college campuses to promote walkability in the area.

00:10:32.840 --> 00:10:37.840
And to give the area character and versatility.

00:10:39.840 --> 00:10:41.090
And as I mentioned previously this would consolidate the

00:10:41.090 --> 00:10:44.279
zoning designation for these three properties that are

00:10:44.279 --> 00:10:47.450
under the same ownership to allow for more cohesive future

00:10:47.450 --> 00:10:49.840
development under one set of zoning regulations.

00:10:53.840 --> 00:10:57.779
Another consideration is that this allowing this redevelop

00:10:57.779 --> 00:11:01.809
ment for denser use potentially in this area does promote

00:11:01.809 --> 00:11:03.840
transportation efficient design.

00:11:04.840 --> 00:11:07.019
And what that means is that it's providing resources and

00:11:07.019 --> 00:11:10.740
potentially housing in a close proximity to UNT that would

00:11:10.740 --> 00:11:13.409
then promote bicycle and pedestrian activity near this

00:11:13.409 --> 00:11:13.840
campus.

00:11:14.840 --> 00:11:17.090
And that in turn would limit students vehicle trips to and

00:11:17.090 --> 00:11:17.840
from campus.

00:11:18.840 --> 00:11:21.259
And eventually could limit parking in the surrounding

00:11:21.259 --> 00:11:23.789
neighborhoods by providing them areas to live and get the

00:11:23.789 --> 00:11:25.840
resources that they need close to campus.

00:11:28.840 --> 00:11:31.830
And just to give you some idea of how these two districts

00:11:31.830 --> 00:11:36.269
compare, DR2 has a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per

00:11:36.269 --> 00:11:36.840
acre.

00:11:37.840 --> 00:11:39.840
DCG would substantially increase that to 150.

00:11:40.840 --> 00:11:42.840
The lot coverage is fairly comparable.

00:11:43.840 --> 00:11:45.840
It would increase from 75% to 85%.

00:11:46.840 --> 00:11:48.840
And then decrease the landscaping from 25% to 15%.

00:11:49.840 --> 00:11:51.860
And this would allow for the building height on this parcel

00:11:51.860 --> 00:11:55.360
to increase from a maximum of 45 feet to a maximum of 100

00:11:55.360 --> 00:11:55.840
feet.

00:11:58.840 --> 00:12:01.399
Notices were sent for this case and we received no written

00:12:01.399 --> 00:12:02.840
responses.

00:12:03.840 --> 00:12:05.039
I did pass out the one response from the neighborhood

00:12:05.039 --> 00:12:06.840
meeting that was held back in February.

00:12:07.840 --> 00:12:10.840
And as you can see that person was neutral to this request.

00:12:13.840 --> 00:12:16.240
And with all that being said, staff recommends approval of

00:12:16.240 --> 00:12:18.220
this request because of its compatibility with the

00:12:18.220 --> 00:12:21.019
surrounding established zoning districts as well as its

00:12:21.019 --> 00:12:22.840
consistency with that future land use designation.

00:12:23.840 --> 00:12:24.840
And I can answer any questions.

00:12:26.840 --> 00:12:27.840
Commissioner Ellis.

00:12:27.840 --> 00:12:28.840
Thank you, Chair.

00:12:28.840 --> 00:12:29.840
Hi, Haley.

00:12:30.840 --> 00:12:33.440
I read in the backup that the subject property is not pl

00:12:33.440 --> 00:12:34.840
atted currently.

00:12:35.840 --> 00:12:36.840
I believe that's correct.

00:12:36.840 --> 00:12:40.440
And is the other property, is that platted, the other

00:12:40.440 --> 00:12:42.840
property that this person owns?

00:12:42.840 --> 00:12:43.840
I don't believe so.

00:12:43.840 --> 00:12:46.559
They expressed an intent to potentially plait the three

00:12:46.559 --> 00:12:48.840
lots together at some point in the future.

00:12:49.840 --> 00:12:49.840
Okay.

00:12:49.840 --> 00:12:53.360
And that's probably where my concern lies with this is repl

00:12:53.360 --> 00:12:56.840
atting it and then we're going to have a footprint for a gin

00:12:56.840 --> 00:12:58.840
ormous development request.

00:12:59.840 --> 00:13:00.840
So I do have concerns.

00:13:01.840 --> 00:13:04.700
Another question I have is where is the Frye District

00:13:04.700 --> 00:13:06.840
overlay and coming west?

00:13:07.840 --> 00:13:09.840
Let me see if we still have that map pulled up here.

00:13:13.840 --> 00:13:15.990
So let me turn off a few layers here and get us to the

00:13:15.990 --> 00:13:17.840
right area.

00:13:27.840 --> 00:13:28.019
Got a little bit of lag time here between the mouse and the

00:13:28.019 --> 00:13:29.840
computer.

00:13:35.840 --> 00:13:36.840
All right.

00:13:37.840 --> 00:13:38.840
So.

00:13:42.840 --> 00:13:43.840
Should have a layer four.

00:13:48.840 --> 00:13:52.070
Yeah, so looks like the Frye Street area goes up to Avenue

00:13:52.070 --> 00:13:52.840
B.

00:13:54.840 --> 00:13:56.820
So it would not be, it would not count for this particular

00:13:56.820 --> 00:13:57.840
property?

00:13:57.840 --> 00:13:58.840
No.

00:13:58.840 --> 00:13:59.840
Okay.

00:13:59.840 --> 00:14:00.840
Okay.

00:14:00.840 --> 00:14:01.840
That was my fear.

00:14:01.840 --> 00:14:02.840
Thank you.

00:14:02.840 --> 00:14:03.840
Commissioner Beck.

00:14:03.840 --> 00:14:08.840
On that, what about West Oak Historical?

00:14:08.840 --> 00:14:10.840
Where is it in coming from the west?

00:14:11.840 --> 00:14:12.840
And West Oak is there in blue.

00:14:12.840 --> 00:14:13.840
Okay.

00:14:13.840 --> 00:14:14.840
Okay.

00:14:14.840 --> 00:14:16.840
Is the applicant going to be here for this?

00:14:16.840 --> 00:14:17.840
I believe so.

00:14:17.840 --> 00:14:19.840
I believe he intends to be here for the hearing tonight.

00:14:19.840 --> 00:14:20.840
I have a question too for him.

00:14:21.840 --> 00:14:26.059
In the background material under site data points out one

00:14:26.059 --> 00:14:29.580
way secondary major arterial requires 66 feet of right of

00:14:29.580 --> 00:14:32.840
way and designed to accommodate approximately 10,000

00:14:32.840 --> 00:14:33.840
vehicle trips per day.

00:14:34.840 --> 00:14:37.519
And then it says West Hickory is not currently built to the

00:14:37.519 --> 00:14:39.840
second major arterial standard.

00:14:39.840 --> 00:14:41.840
So what does this entail?

00:14:41.840 --> 00:14:45.309
Are we going to have to widen that or add some things to it

00:14:45.309 --> 00:14:47.840
to get it up to speed?

00:14:47.840 --> 00:14:52.200
And if so, does that mean this is going to affect Hickory

00:14:52.200 --> 00:14:55.840
probably all the way from Carroll to Bonnie Bray?

00:14:55.840 --> 00:14:59.080
I'll actually let Earl answer that question if he knows

00:14:59.080 --> 00:15:00.840
future plans for Hickory.

00:15:05.840 --> 00:15:09.840
Hickory and Oak Street are considered one way couplets.

00:15:09.840 --> 00:15:14.480
It's basically two lanes for each roadway in each direction

00:15:14.480 --> 00:15:14.840
.

00:15:14.840 --> 00:15:19.840
Right now Hickory is a two lane roadway.

00:15:19.840 --> 00:15:23.759
And so capacity wise you're really not going to increase

00:15:23.759 --> 00:15:27.840
any capacity into that since it's already two lanes.

00:15:27.840 --> 00:15:31.639
So the maximum capacity for that roadway is about 10,000

00:15:31.639 --> 00:15:32.840
vehicles per day.

00:15:32.840 --> 00:15:36.259
The additional right of way is going to be mainly for the

00:15:36.259 --> 00:15:38.840
parkway where your sidewalks are going to be located.

00:15:38.840 --> 00:15:43.200
So that would bring Hickory then up to this secondary major

00:15:43.200 --> 00:15:44.840
arterial standard.

00:15:54.840 --> 00:15:57.840
Earl, do we have traffic counts for Hickory?

00:15:57.840 --> 00:15:59.840
I'm sorry?

00:15:59.840 --> 00:16:01.840
Do we have traffic counts for Hickory?

00:16:01.840 --> 00:16:06.059
Yes, there's currently about 6,000 vehicles on that roadway

00:16:06.059 --> 00:16:06.840
right now.

00:16:06.840 --> 00:16:09.840
Okay. Yeah, it shouldn't increase that much.

00:16:09.840 --> 00:16:14.200
But again, what has to be done here to bring it up to the

00:16:14.200 --> 00:16:16.840
second major arterial standard?

00:16:16.840 --> 00:16:20.490
If we're not there yet, it's indicating we're going to have

00:16:20.490 --> 00:16:20.840
to.

00:16:20.840 --> 00:16:23.840
I'm just curious, what does that entail?

00:16:23.840 --> 00:16:28.480
Well, when we say it's not actually a secondary major arter

00:16:28.480 --> 00:16:28.840
ial.

00:16:28.840 --> 00:16:33.960
A secondary major arterial is two lanes divided, four lanes

00:16:33.960 --> 00:16:36.840
divided, two lanes in each direction.

00:16:36.840 --> 00:16:39.840
And that's not going to be the case with Hickory.

00:16:39.840 --> 00:16:42.460
Okay. Okay. So you're not saying it has to be brought up to

00:16:42.460 --> 00:16:42.840
that.

00:16:42.840 --> 00:16:46.070
But I don't, just the fact that it even raised that

00:16:46.070 --> 00:16:48.840
indicated that we were going to have to make some changes

00:16:48.840 --> 00:16:48.840
to Hickory.

00:16:48.840 --> 00:16:49.840
But you're saying we don't.

00:16:49.840 --> 00:16:52.360
Right. I think if you combine Hickory and Oak, it kind of

00:16:52.360 --> 00:16:55.840
gives you the same concept as a secondary arterial.

00:16:55.840 --> 00:16:59.450
Okay. With the two lanes in each direction with the block

00:16:59.450 --> 00:17:01.840
in between serving as your median.

00:17:01.840 --> 00:17:05.009
That makes sense. And I'm assuming the speed limit will be

00:17:05.009 --> 00:17:05.839
unchanged.

00:17:05.839 --> 00:17:09.390
Yeah. But the 66 foot right away right now, it's not

00:17:09.390 --> 00:17:12.839
currently 66. It's probably more in the neighborhood of 60.

00:17:12.839 --> 00:17:16.549
So that additional six feet is just accommodate a wider

00:17:16.549 --> 00:17:18.839
parkway for your sidewalk.

00:17:18.839 --> 00:17:23.789
Okay. Do we know, let's maybe go back to, do we actually

00:17:23.789 --> 00:17:28.029
know the actual acreage of these, was it three parcels

00:17:28.029 --> 00:17:28.839
combined?

00:17:28.839 --> 00:17:31.839
Thank you, Earl.

00:17:31.839 --> 00:17:35.839
Do we have a full acre there?

00:17:35.839 --> 00:17:40.390
Let me see. I believe I have both, information for both of

00:17:40.390 --> 00:17:41.839
their properties.

00:17:41.839 --> 00:17:46.400
So the subject property is 0.55 acres. The other two lots

00:17:46.400 --> 00:17:50.839
are 0.68. So it would be just over an acre combined.

00:17:50.839 --> 00:17:53.839
Okay. Thank you.

00:17:53.839 --> 00:17:55.839
Commissioner Rossell.

00:17:55.839 --> 00:18:00.009
Thank you. Commissioner, back to some of my questions, but

00:18:00.009 --> 00:18:01.839
I wanted to follow up on one of them.

00:18:01.839 --> 00:18:06.579
Generally speaking, when we look at a rezoning like this,

00:18:06.579 --> 00:18:11.059
how does the current infrastructure in terms of traffic

00:18:11.059 --> 00:18:13.839
play into the process of approval?

00:18:13.839 --> 00:18:17.339
More thinking generally to help me out going forward, but

00:18:17.339 --> 00:18:20.549
also specifically here, where you have the potential for a

00:18:20.549 --> 00:18:21.839
massive building to go in.

00:18:21.839 --> 00:18:27.250
City says the current street is not built to the standards

00:18:27.250 --> 00:18:31.839
in which the current street is supposed to be. Does that

00:18:31.839 --> 00:18:31.839
play into any hesitation in the approval process?

00:18:31.839 --> 00:18:35.430
Like if we had a gravel road there, but it was zoned DCG,

00:18:35.430 --> 00:18:38.839
would city be like, okay, well it needs to be this.

00:18:38.839 --> 00:18:42.440
And because it can be this, I just want to know how traffic

00:18:42.440 --> 00:18:45.839
plays into the decision process, because it wasn't, it

00:18:45.839 --> 00:18:47.599
doesn't seem like it was a big enough deal to not be

00:18:47.599 --> 00:18:48.839
overcome in this situation.

00:18:48.839 --> 00:18:51.240
But there has to be a tipping point at some point where the

00:18:51.240 --> 00:18:52.839
traffic's a real consideration.

00:18:52.839 --> 00:18:56.380
I'm wondering the thought process behind city staff in

00:18:56.380 --> 00:18:57.839
determining that.

00:18:57.839 --> 00:19:00.329
Well, Earl might be best suited to answer that. I know we

00:19:00.329 --> 00:19:03.700
do reserve the right to request a traffic impact analysis

00:19:03.700 --> 00:19:04.839
with each case.

00:19:04.839 --> 00:19:07.690
In this case, they weren't very specific in what their

00:19:07.690 --> 00:19:08.839
future intent is.

00:19:08.839 --> 00:19:13.450
So I think that played into why that wasn't done at this

00:19:13.450 --> 00:19:17.839
point, but I can let you speak more to Federal.

00:19:17.839 --> 00:19:22.900
Yeah, we've noticed over time lately that traffic has

00:19:22.900 --> 00:19:26.839
become an issue for a zoning case.

00:19:26.839 --> 00:19:29.240
And so now what we've done is started to require a traffic

00:19:29.240 --> 00:19:29.839
analysis.

00:19:29.839 --> 00:19:34.529
If the area that they're trying to rezone is a, I guess a

00:19:34.529 --> 00:19:38.839
sensitive area in terms of traffic, unfortunately.

00:19:38.839 --> 00:19:42.839
But this one, it's already currently developed.

00:19:42.839 --> 00:19:48.119
And so depending on, and it's really speculative. They don

00:19:48.119 --> 00:19:50.029
't even know what they're wanting to put in there based on

00:19:50.029 --> 00:19:50.839
their narrative.

00:19:50.839 --> 00:19:53.549
So the traffic study comes in when there's actually some

00:19:53.549 --> 00:19:55.839
plans drawn from potential construction?

00:19:55.839 --> 00:19:56.839
Right.

00:19:56.839 --> 00:19:57.839
Okay.

00:19:57.839 --> 00:20:00.349
Because we don't know if they were going to combine this

00:20:00.349 --> 00:20:03.029
lot with the lots adjacent to it and make it one big lot,

00:20:03.029 --> 00:20:05.349
or is it, they were just going to develop as individual

00:20:05.349 --> 00:20:05.839
lots.

00:20:05.839 --> 00:20:10.059
So that's why we couldn't really pinpoint a traffic study

00:20:10.059 --> 00:20:12.839
to determine if this was feasible.

00:20:12.839 --> 00:20:15.839
That makes sense. I think that's all I might have for you.

00:20:15.839 --> 00:20:18.839
But I have one more question regarding the project.

00:20:18.839 --> 00:20:24.480
Because of the zoning across the street, would the

00:20:24.480 --> 00:20:28.259
potential project on a DCG in this specific area have any

00:20:28.259 --> 00:20:30.839
residential slope requirements?

00:20:30.839 --> 00:20:31.839
The residential proximity slope?

00:20:31.839 --> 00:20:32.839
Yeah.

00:20:32.839 --> 00:20:36.069
No, so that's dependent on the adjoining properties. And in

00:20:36.069 --> 00:20:38.490
this case, they have multifamilies surrounding them to the

00:20:38.490 --> 00:20:41.259
north and the west and then the university across the

00:20:41.259 --> 00:20:41.839
street.

00:20:41.839 --> 00:20:44.980
So at this point, it doesn't look like that would apply. If

00:20:44.980 --> 00:20:48.640
there was a single family residence on any surrounding side

00:20:48.640 --> 00:20:50.980
, then that could come into play. But it doesn't look like

00:20:50.980 --> 00:20:51.839
it would here.

00:20:51.839 --> 00:20:52.839
Okay. Thank you.

00:20:52.839 --> 00:20:57.380
We'll follow up on the traffic. Since we've done the

00:20:57.380 --> 00:21:02.119
traffic impact fees now, the burden for the streets now

00:21:02.119 --> 00:21:07.230
pretty much shifts to the city and they pay the fee versus

00:21:07.230 --> 00:21:11.069
the old way of if the road is not improved in your site,

00:21:11.069 --> 00:21:12.839
you're doing perimeter street paving.

00:21:12.839 --> 00:21:17.289
That has gone away now with the traffic impact. Is that

00:21:17.289 --> 00:21:20.839
correct or is that not exactly how that works anymore?

00:21:20.839 --> 00:21:26.119
It depends. If the development is going to create such a

00:21:26.119 --> 00:21:30.769
negative impact on our existing road infrastructure, they

00:21:30.769 --> 00:21:33.839
should actually mitigate for that.

00:21:33.839 --> 00:21:36.990
And now whether or not they'll be eligible for credit just

00:21:36.990 --> 00:21:39.839
depends on what those mitigation measures are.

00:21:39.839 --> 00:21:42.240
On deals like this, it shouldn't be. That's going to be

00:21:42.240 --> 00:21:46.710
like razor ranch and large projects like this, not smaller

00:21:46.710 --> 00:21:48.839
infield type projects.

00:21:48.839 --> 00:21:51.910
And we have a clause in our ordinance as well with infield

00:21:51.910 --> 00:21:55.440
developments that if they're not proposing a development

00:21:55.440 --> 00:21:58.839
that's 10 times greater than the previous use.

00:21:58.839 --> 00:22:01.349
I don't know what the current use is now. It is currently

00:22:01.349 --> 00:22:04.150
developed. But as long as they're within that 10 times

00:22:04.150 --> 00:22:06.789
threshold, then they wouldn't be subject to road impact

00:22:06.789 --> 00:22:08.839
fees to help promote infield development.

00:22:08.839 --> 00:22:13.599
Do we have any general guidelines, say for instance the

00:22:13.599 --> 00:22:17.869
road just physically can't handle traffic such as

00:22:17.869 --> 00:22:22.839
Commissioner Roselle's example, or the roads not there yet,

00:22:22.839 --> 00:22:25.839
what are our criteria in those cases?

00:22:25.839 --> 00:22:30.190
Because you can't really pay into a fund to get access if

00:22:30.190 --> 00:22:31.839
it doesn't exist.

00:22:31.839 --> 00:22:35.690
Well, if the roads not there, they have to build that road.

00:22:35.690 --> 00:22:39.089
And so, and then they would be eligible for those right

00:22:39.089 --> 00:22:42.039
away credits if it's in our either on our mobility plan or

00:22:42.039 --> 00:22:44.839
if it's in our roadway CIP plan.

00:22:44.839 --> 00:22:45.839
Okay.

00:22:45.839 --> 00:22:48.839
Commissioner Sullivan.

00:22:48.839 --> 00:22:52.839
I guess that this is a disframatification.

00:22:52.839 --> 00:22:57.200
How are we to vote on changing the zoning if we don't know

00:22:57.200 --> 00:22:59.839
what the plans are to go there?

00:22:59.839 --> 00:23:06.309
I mean, I kind of see this as a game of Pac-Man where we're

00:23:06.309 --> 00:23:10.769
starting to chomp away and pretty soon we're coming up to

00:23:10.769 --> 00:23:15.869
next door to the historic district, and we've got 110 foot

00:23:15.869 --> 00:23:20.829
structure going to be built and everybody's going to say,

00:23:20.829 --> 00:23:21.839
why don't y'all do that?

00:23:21.839 --> 00:23:29.839
Well, that's sort of the nature of zoning. It requires a

00:23:29.839 --> 00:23:29.839
little bit of, I guess, foresight.

00:23:29.839 --> 00:23:33.339
And the way you were basically zone in the dirt, not the

00:23:33.339 --> 00:23:36.839
use. So we're thinking about what could go in that spot and

00:23:36.839 --> 00:23:39.839
if, if what could go in that spot will work or not.

00:23:39.839 --> 00:23:43.400
And so those are the questions that you would need to ask

00:23:43.400 --> 00:23:47.279
yourself what's possible under the zoning that you allow to

00:23:47.279 --> 00:23:50.920
go in this space to be built in those are the questions you

00:23:50.920 --> 00:23:53.839
would have to weigh as a commissioner.

00:23:53.839 --> 00:23:55.839
Thank you.

00:23:55.839 --> 00:24:09.940
If I could jump in real fast. Thank you. To Commissioner

00:24:09.940 --> 00:24:10.269
Sullivan's point, early on that was a contention I had and

00:24:10.269 --> 00:24:10.619
Commissioner Taylor really helped out in helping me through

00:24:10.619 --> 00:24:11.089
that. It often convolutes the zoning case and we actually

00:24:11.089 --> 00:24:11.359
know what the applicant is because then we think, okay,

00:24:11.359 --> 00:24:11.619
well it's just going to be an apartment complex, let's

00:24:11.619 --> 00:24:14.539
approve it, but they could just flip it, sell it, put a

00:24:14.539 --> 00:24:15.839
movie theater in or something like that.

00:24:15.839 --> 00:24:19.240
So it's, it's ideal, in my opinion, not to know what the

00:24:19.240 --> 00:24:22.730
specific use case use case could be. So when we look at all

00:24:22.730 --> 00:24:26.450
these possible potentials we actually think through, which

00:24:26.450 --> 00:24:29.839
should these be any of these should be in this area.

00:24:29.839 --> 00:24:33.539
So it's helpful to actually bifurcate those out completely.

00:24:33.539 --> 00:24:36.910
So we're looking at zoning, we shouldn't shouldn't take

00:24:36.910 --> 00:24:40.410
into consideration what someone's saying they might build

00:24:40.410 --> 00:24:43.420
because they could sell the property they can build

00:24:43.420 --> 00:24:45.839
whatever they want once it's zoned. So it has to be taken

00:24:45.839 --> 00:24:45.839
independent of the actual potential use being built.

00:24:45.839 --> 00:24:47.839
Thank you.

00:24:47.839 --> 00:24:52.190
Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair and just to piggyback

00:24:52.190 --> 00:24:55.880
further on that, that is my concern with this, just to put

00:24:55.880 --> 00:24:59.640
food for thought, they can replat all of these that they

00:24:59.640 --> 00:25:02.839
own once this is done and they can sell it.

00:25:02.839 --> 00:25:06.630
And we could be having an issue that we've had on multiple

00:25:06.630 --> 00:25:09.880
occasions already in this area with a large scale

00:25:09.880 --> 00:25:13.839
development, high density large scale development.

00:25:13.839 --> 00:25:16.559
So that's where my concerns lie with this because we never

00:25:16.559 --> 00:25:19.109
know changing zoning what it's going to be even even if

00:25:19.109 --> 00:25:21.839
they come to us and say this is what we're going to do.

00:25:21.839 --> 00:25:27.359
I mean, it's not tied together so it helps I guess yes to

00:25:27.359 --> 00:25:30.720
your point not to know but at the same point we need to

00:25:30.720 --> 00:25:34.559
consider really what all that could all that it could be in

00:25:34.559 --> 00:25:36.839
doing want all that it could be.

00:25:36.839 --> 00:25:43.839
So thank you.

00:25:43.839 --> 00:25:47.839
Any other questions for highly.

00:25:47.839 --> 00:25:50.839
Thank you.

00:25:50.839 --> 00:25:56.450
So the final item under public hearing is development code

00:25:56.450 --> 00:26:02.509
amendment related to multifamily dwellings, and I'll invite

00:26:02.509 --> 00:26:05.839
run the Gita up for a presentation.

00:26:05.839 --> 00:26:09.839
Later this evening.

00:26:09.839 --> 00:26:11.839
Thank you Chair members of the Commission members of staff.

00:26:11.839 --> 00:26:15.529
This is a great segue on the discussion that we just had a

00:26:15.529 --> 00:26:16.839
few seconds ago.

00:26:16.839 --> 00:26:21.589
The item that we have today is a consideration for a sup

00:26:21.589 --> 00:26:25.839
requirement for zoning districts D.

00:26:25.839 --> 00:26:28.839
Are to DCN and DCG.

00:26:28.839 --> 00:26:33.940
The code amendment is to add a specific use permit to these

00:26:33.940 --> 00:26:39.839
zoning districts when multifamily development is proposed.

00:26:39.839 --> 00:26:43.009
So for definition purposes or the definition for multif

00:26:43.009 --> 00:26:46.240
amily is a structure that contains three or more dwelling

00:26:46.240 --> 00:26:47.839
units so any development.

00:26:47.839 --> 00:26:51.539
That has three or more units on a single lot would qualify

00:26:51.539 --> 00:26:55.119
as a multifamily development and if that is proposed say a

00:26:55.119 --> 00:26:58.039
fourplex they would fall under this requirement for a

00:26:58.039 --> 00:26:59.839
specific use permit as well.

00:26:59.839 --> 00:27:03.549
So just to clarify and define what multifamily is it could

00:27:03.549 --> 00:27:06.839
be a four unit it could be a hundred unit it could be

00:27:06.839 --> 00:27:09.839
whatever as long as it's more than three.

00:27:09.839 --> 00:27:12.839
Three or more.

00:27:12.839 --> 00:27:15.839
For your for the DC.

00:27:15.839 --> 00:27:20.839
These are the zoning districts that permit multifamily.

00:27:20.839 --> 00:27:25.839
Either with a sup or with a limitation.

00:27:25.839 --> 00:27:32.490
You see here on this side here it's listed up what an RC

00:27:32.490 --> 00:27:36.839
and an RMU 12 DC and DCG and so forth.

00:27:36.839 --> 00:27:39.740
The three that we're going to be focusing on or is under

00:27:39.740 --> 00:27:42.839
consideration is are these three zoning districts here.

00:27:42.839 --> 00:27:48.509
And currently these are the only three zoning districts

00:27:48.509 --> 00:27:54.299
that don't require a either an sup or the limitations that

00:27:54.299 --> 00:27:56.839
you see here L4 or L6.

00:27:56.839 --> 00:28:02.740
L4 requires that a multifamily be permitted with either the

00:28:02.740 --> 00:28:07.900
following if they fall under the following five criteria or

00:28:07.900 --> 00:28:09.839
five categories here.

00:28:09.839 --> 00:28:14.349
If they obtain a specific use permit are part of a mixed

00:28:14.349 --> 00:28:19.029
use development or as part of a massive plan development

00:28:19.029 --> 00:28:19.839
existing.

00:28:19.839 --> 00:28:24.539
If it was received if they received a development approval

00:28:24.539 --> 00:28:29.400
back prior to 2005 and also if it's part of a small area

00:28:29.400 --> 00:28:29.839
plan.

00:28:29.839 --> 00:28:35.099
So if they meet any of those then they meet the limitation

00:28:35.099 --> 00:28:35.839
of L4.

00:28:35.839 --> 00:28:40.680
L5 for the three that we see here limitation there is

00:28:40.680 --> 00:28:42.839
related to density.

00:28:42.839 --> 00:28:46.329
So what it states here is that within this district the

00:28:46.329 --> 00:28:50.049
density of an apartment will calculate as one bedroom equ

00:28:50.049 --> 00:28:51.839
ating to half the unit.

00:28:51.839 --> 00:28:56.059
So for example if there is a four bedroom unit that unit

00:28:56.059 --> 00:29:00.019
actually equates to two units because each bedroom is half

00:29:00.019 --> 00:29:00.839
a unit.

00:29:00.839 --> 00:29:04.839
So that's the limitation.

00:29:04.839 --> 00:29:09.200
Limit number six, limitation number six states that if a

00:29:09.200 --> 00:29:12.470
proposed multifamily is proposed in any of these zoning

00:29:12.470 --> 00:29:15.839
districts that have a L6 associated with it.

00:29:15.839 --> 00:29:22.160
Must have a non-residential use on the ground floor if it

00:29:22.160 --> 00:29:26.839
is along an avenue collector or an arterial street.

00:29:26.839 --> 00:29:28.839
Otherwise it would not be permitted.

00:29:28.839 --> 00:29:33.329
So those are the limitations under each of these zoning

00:29:33.329 --> 00:29:36.839
districts that allow for multifamily.

00:29:36.839 --> 00:29:40.839
So before I move on does anybody have any questions related

00:29:40.839 --> 00:29:47.559
to the requirements or the need for multifamily as it falls

00:29:47.559 --> 00:29:49.839
under these zoning districts?

00:29:49.839 --> 00:29:50.839
Commissioner Beck.

00:29:50.839 --> 00:29:51.839
Thank you Chair.

00:29:51.839 --> 00:29:57.789
So for clarification then L6 you can't build multifamily on

00:29:57.789 --> 00:29:59.839
the ground level. It's got to be above a commercial.

00:29:59.839 --> 00:30:05.109
Correct. As long as it falls or is along an arterial

00:30:05.109 --> 00:30:08.839
collector and an avenue street.

00:30:08.839 --> 00:30:15.839
Okay thanks.

00:30:15.839 --> 00:30:18.839
Commissioner Hitchwith.

00:30:18.839 --> 00:30:23.059
Are those, let's see so we have office, retail and

00:30:23.059 --> 00:30:23.839
commercial.

00:30:23.839 --> 00:30:27.460
Is there a working definition tied to the document in and

00:30:27.460 --> 00:30:31.210
of itself somewhere or does someone make a judgment call on

00:30:31.210 --> 00:30:31.839
those?

00:30:31.839 --> 00:30:33.839
As well as, yes.

00:30:33.839 --> 00:30:39.829
So like last week we had a conversation, I say last week,

00:30:39.829 --> 00:30:45.960
last week a conversation about single home, I mean single

00:30:45.960 --> 00:30:49.599
family, multifamily. So who makes those kind of decisions

00:30:49.599 --> 00:30:50.839
if it's iffy on a commercial or if it's iffy on retail.

00:30:50.839 --> 00:30:52.839
Who kind of is the tiebreaker?

00:30:52.839 --> 00:30:56.299
Well the DRC administrator and ultimately the planning

00:30:56.299 --> 00:30:59.839
director can make those determinations as far as the type

00:30:59.839 --> 00:31:00.839
of use it is.

00:31:00.839 --> 00:31:04.170
Typically if it's non-residential in the sense it falls

00:31:04.170 --> 00:31:07.839
under the commercial land use categories, then those will

00:31:07.839 --> 00:31:09.839
qualify as commercial uses.

00:31:09.839 --> 00:31:13.940
And we also have definitions in the DDC that explain what

00:31:13.940 --> 00:31:15.839
each of the uses entail.

00:31:15.839 --> 00:31:16.839
Office, retail.

00:31:16.839 --> 00:31:19.839
But then development code.

00:31:19.839 --> 00:31:21.839
I have a question.

00:31:21.839 --> 00:31:24.839
Rather than a question I'll say maybe an observation.

00:31:24.839 --> 00:31:30.430
The criteria that we have L4 through 6, those three design

00:31:30.430 --> 00:31:35.759
ations, DR2, N and G, effectively those are the only three z

00:31:35.759 --> 00:31:39.839
onings that you can by right go build multifamily in.

00:31:39.839 --> 00:31:40.839
Correct.

00:31:40.839 --> 00:31:42.839
Or as, yes.

00:31:42.839 --> 00:31:46.940
Or if they will use L4 as an example, if it's a mixed use

00:31:46.940 --> 00:31:47.839
then yes.

00:31:47.839 --> 00:31:50.839
But if it's plainly multifamily you are correct.

00:31:50.839 --> 00:31:52.839
That's the only three that were permitted by right.

00:31:52.839 --> 00:31:56.740
But currently if you're going to do multifamily outside

00:31:56.740 --> 00:32:00.839
those three zones, you have to fit the box with review.

00:32:00.839 --> 00:32:03.259
Those three are the only ones that if somebody buys

00:32:03.259 --> 00:32:06.000
properties that I want to build an apartment unit and it's

00:32:06.000 --> 00:32:08.839
zoned that way and it's in a small area plan I can go out

00:32:08.839 --> 00:32:12.210
and start building apartments and I don't have to have go

00:32:12.210 --> 00:32:14.839
through all of the.

00:32:14.839 --> 00:32:16.839
Public hearings or what not.

00:32:16.839 --> 00:32:17.839
Stuff.

00:32:17.839 --> 00:32:21.230
Just to clarify that, the other thing is obviously to

00:32:21.230 --> 00:32:24.839
comply with the L5 which is the density limitation.

00:32:24.839 --> 00:32:26.839
But other than that, you're correct.

00:32:26.839 --> 00:32:30.839
It would be permitted by right.

00:32:30.839 --> 00:32:31.839
Thank you.

00:32:31.839 --> 00:32:35.289
That's all I'm going to make at this point and go on with

00:32:35.289 --> 00:32:36.839
your presentation.

00:32:36.839 --> 00:32:40.859
So just to give a little bit more background on multifamily

00:32:40.859 --> 00:32:45.049
and specifically these three zoning districts, what would

00:32:45.049 --> 00:32:49.089
be required and what the requirements are in regards to set

00:32:49.089 --> 00:32:53.839
backs, maximum building heights, and maximum lock coverage.

00:32:53.839 --> 00:32:59.839
As we continue to discuss these proposals for multifamily,

00:32:59.839 --> 00:33:02.599
we often ask ourselves, well what's the height limit, right

00:33:02.599 --> 00:33:02.839
?

00:33:02.839 --> 00:33:07.950
And so DCG, we'll use that as an example, DCG has a 100

00:33:07.950 --> 00:33:10.839
feet maximum building height.

00:33:10.839 --> 00:33:18.839
It requires up to or requires up to 85% lock coverage.

00:33:18.839 --> 00:33:22.839
As far as setbacks, there are none.

00:33:22.839 --> 00:33:26.759
However, we know that the fire department requires certain

00:33:26.759 --> 00:33:30.839
setbacks if it's adjacent to a fence or another structure.

00:33:30.839 --> 00:33:35.230
So these are the regulations that we look at when we review

00:33:35.230 --> 00:33:39.900
a multifamily development that comes in, again, under the

00:33:39.900 --> 00:33:40.839
DR2, DCG.

00:33:40.839 --> 00:33:41.839
Commissioner Beck.

00:33:41.839 --> 00:33:42.839
Thank you, Chair.

00:33:42.839 --> 00:33:46.130
Just, and I should know this, just for clarification, we're

00:33:46.130 --> 00:33:47.839
talking about lock coverage.

00:33:47.839 --> 00:33:50.930
We're talking about what that building is going to be

00:33:50.930 --> 00:33:51.839
sitting on.

00:33:51.839 --> 00:33:52.839
Right.

00:33:52.839 --> 00:33:56.349
Yes, the way we define lock coverage is just at

00:33:56.349 --> 00:34:00.839
Commissioner Beck, but also any impervious material.

00:34:00.839 --> 00:34:02.839
So the driveways would count as lock coverage.

00:34:02.839 --> 00:34:03.839
Okay.

00:34:03.839 --> 00:34:04.839
And parking.

00:34:04.839 --> 00:34:05.839
Okay.

00:34:05.839 --> 00:34:06.839
Right.

00:34:06.839 --> 00:34:10.550
So would I be right in saying that the more, the greater

00:34:10.550 --> 00:34:13.840
the lock coverage, the higher the density?

00:34:13.840 --> 00:34:16.840
Is that what those two fit?

00:34:16.840 --> 00:34:18.869
Technically, you can, yeah, you can build more with the

00:34:18.869 --> 00:34:19.840
higher lock coverage.

00:34:19.840 --> 00:34:23.840
Okay, thank you.

00:34:23.840 --> 00:34:27.539
We also have design standards, which is in sub-chapter 3513

00:34:27.539 --> 00:34:27.840
.

00:34:27.840 --> 00:34:31.389
Again, another set of provisions that we look at when we

00:34:31.389 --> 00:34:33.840
review developments of multifamily.

00:34:33.840 --> 00:34:38.659
And you all have seen this proximity slope, but in that

00:34:38.659 --> 00:34:42.840
section it also includes orientation, building materials,

00:34:42.840 --> 00:34:46.840
open space requirements, architectural requirements, and

00:34:46.840 --> 00:34:48.840
any other.

00:34:48.840 --> 00:34:51.949
If it belongs, or it's within a special overlay district,

00:34:51.949 --> 00:34:54.929
those will also have additional criteria or additional

00:34:54.929 --> 00:34:55.840
standards.

00:34:55.840 --> 00:35:00.500
But generally, if a development comes in for multifamily,

00:35:00.500 --> 00:35:05.840
these site design standards are under the section 3513.

00:35:05.840 --> 00:35:07.840
Parking.

00:35:07.840 --> 00:35:10.840
This is the ratio required.

00:35:10.840 --> 00:35:15.289
You see we've got different categories for dwelling units,

00:35:15.289 --> 00:35:19.840
and efficient, which is defined as 600 square feet or less.

00:35:19.840 --> 00:35:22.840
And that is 1.25 per unit.

00:35:22.840 --> 00:35:27.900
If it is a one bedroom or an efficiency that's over 600,

00:35:27.900 --> 00:35:30.840
they're required to provide 1.5 space per unit.

00:35:30.840 --> 00:35:33.840
Two bedroom is 1.75.

00:35:33.840 --> 00:35:36.840
Three bedrooms is two spaces.

00:35:36.840 --> 00:35:39.840
Four bedrooms would be one per bedroom.

00:35:39.840 --> 00:35:43.409
And then a retirement or senior living facility would be

00:35:43.409 --> 00:35:44.840
one space per unit.

00:35:44.840 --> 00:35:49.059
So again, these are what we look at when we review a multif

00:35:49.059 --> 00:35:52.840
amily development that comes in for development.

00:35:52.840 --> 00:35:54.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

00:35:54.840 --> 00:35:58.840
Where do the infamous SROs stand in this diagram?

00:35:58.840 --> 00:36:00.840
Good question.

00:36:00.840 --> 00:36:05.199
SROs, we do not have a separate use that's classified or

00:36:05.199 --> 00:36:06.840
categorized as SROs.

00:36:06.840 --> 00:36:10.840
We categorize them as multifamily at this point.

00:36:10.840 --> 00:36:14.840
So they would fall under multifamily.

00:36:14.840 --> 00:36:18.840
But I mean, would it be one and a quarter space per unit or

00:36:18.840 --> 00:36:18.840
?

00:36:18.840 --> 00:36:21.840
It would depend on how many bedrooms they are proposing.

00:36:21.840 --> 00:36:25.429
Again, if they have three bedrooms, they would be required

00:36:25.429 --> 00:36:26.840
two parking spaces.

00:36:26.840 --> 00:36:30.840
If they were four unit, a four bedroom unit, then they

00:36:30.840 --> 00:36:33.840
would require one space per bedroom.

00:36:33.840 --> 00:36:38.199
So they would fall under the same requirements that you see

00:36:38.199 --> 00:36:38.840
here.

00:36:38.840 --> 00:36:39.840
Okay, thank you.

00:36:39.840 --> 00:36:40.840
Commissioner Rizal.

00:36:40.840 --> 00:36:43.840
Just so I'm, excuse me, clear.

00:36:43.840 --> 00:36:46.400
A three bedroom unit, that's a three bedroom unit is one

00:36:46.400 --> 00:36:46.840
unit?

00:36:46.840 --> 00:36:48.840
Correct, with three bedrooms.

00:36:48.840 --> 00:36:52.079
So if an apartment has three bedrooms, the requirement is

00:36:52.079 --> 00:36:54.840
two spaces per that one apartment door.

00:36:54.840 --> 00:36:55.840
Correct.

00:36:55.840 --> 00:36:59.130
But if it's a four bedroom unit, you have to have four

00:36:59.130 --> 00:36:59.840
spaces.

00:36:59.840 --> 00:37:01.840
Correct.

00:37:01.840 --> 00:37:08.960
I'm wondering why the difference, because on one it's two

00:37:08.960 --> 00:37:12.840
thirds per bedroom and then it jumps up to one per bedroom.

00:37:12.840 --> 00:37:13.840
And it's the only one that has a per bedroom.

00:37:13.840 --> 00:37:14.840
Can you help me out with that?

00:37:14.840 --> 00:37:17.920
Yeah, I think going back, I'm sure there was a code

00:37:17.920 --> 00:37:18.840
amendment.

00:37:18.840 --> 00:37:21.840
I'm not 100% sure exactly when that was.

00:37:21.840 --> 00:37:26.199
But I think that was to address the four bedroom units that

00:37:26.199 --> 00:37:30.059
were being developed in primarily student housing, I'm

00:37:30.059 --> 00:37:30.840
guessing, on that.

00:37:30.840 --> 00:37:34.449
And that's why that required up the parking requirements

00:37:34.449 --> 00:37:36.840
for that particular type of unit.

00:37:36.840 --> 00:37:39.840
Okay.

00:37:39.840 --> 00:37:43.840
Yeah.

00:37:43.840 --> 00:37:44.840
Commissioner Ellis.

00:37:44.840 --> 00:37:45.840
Thank you, Chair.

00:37:45.840 --> 00:37:48.409
Going back to you answering Commissioner Sullivan with

00:37:48.409 --> 00:37:50.840
regard to the collegiate type housing projects.

00:37:50.840 --> 00:37:55.190
So you're saying like in their typical development, let's

00:37:55.190 --> 00:37:57.300
say it would be like a four quad with the living in the

00:37:57.300 --> 00:37:57.840
center.

00:37:57.840 --> 00:37:58.840
Right.

00:37:58.840 --> 00:38:01.159
So that would be treated as a four bedroom, right, needing

00:38:01.159 --> 00:38:02.840
four spaces for that particular unit.

00:38:02.840 --> 00:38:07.199
Yes, we treat them the same as a multifamily and the

00:38:07.199 --> 00:38:11.840
bedroom count is transferred as well to this ratio.

00:38:11.840 --> 00:38:12.840
Okay.

00:38:12.840 --> 00:38:13.840
Yes.

00:38:13.840 --> 00:38:19.840
Thanks.

00:38:19.840 --> 00:38:21.900
Just real quick, I know you have this in your backup, I

00:38:21.900 --> 00:38:24.190
just wanted to go over really quick and maybe potentially

00:38:24.190 --> 00:38:25.840
answer any questions that you may have.

00:38:25.840 --> 00:38:29.579
We do have a section in the DDC that's specific to specific

00:38:29.579 --> 00:38:30.840
use permits.

00:38:30.840 --> 00:38:32.840
It discusses the procedures.

00:38:32.840 --> 00:38:36.440
It goes through the planning and zoning and then ultimately

00:38:36.440 --> 00:38:38.840
to city council for their approval.

00:38:38.840 --> 00:38:40.840
It is approved by ordinance.

00:38:40.840 --> 00:38:45.190
There's an approval criteria that lists compatibility,

00:38:45.190 --> 00:38:48.789
capacity levels, and all the good things that need to be in

00:38:48.789 --> 00:38:49.840
conformance.

00:38:49.840 --> 00:38:52.840
It also has submittal requirements.

00:38:52.840 --> 00:38:58.539
Typically we request a site plan if applicable, a landscape

00:38:58.539 --> 00:39:01.840
plan and/or elevations as well.

00:39:01.840 --> 00:39:05.440
With that, we can, when I say we, the staff, the planning,

00:39:05.440 --> 00:39:08.840
zoning commission, and city council can also impose

00:39:08.840 --> 00:39:09.840
conditions to make,

00:39:09.840 --> 00:39:14.570
to ensure that the proposed use conforms with the approval

00:39:14.570 --> 00:39:17.840
criteria that's stated in this section.

00:39:17.840 --> 00:39:21.809
And ultimately if it is approved and there is a change in

00:39:21.809 --> 00:39:26.170
the site plan or the conditions that were approved by city

00:39:26.170 --> 00:39:26.840
council,

00:39:26.840 --> 00:39:30.360
it would have to go back to the same process as it was

00:39:30.360 --> 00:39:34.579
approved and that being planning the zoning commission and

00:39:34.579 --> 00:39:35.840
city council.

00:39:35.840 --> 00:39:36.840
Commissioner Ellis.

00:39:36.840 --> 00:39:37.840
Thank you, Chair.

00:39:37.840 --> 00:39:41.179
Ron, when I was reading through this particular section in

00:39:41.179 --> 00:39:43.840
the code, it mentioned the word approval authority.

00:39:43.840 --> 00:39:45.840
I assume that's city council, right?

00:39:45.840 --> 00:39:48.239
They're making the final decision as it runs through the

00:39:48.239 --> 00:39:50.840
process, but they're the approval authority on an SUP.

00:39:50.840 --> 00:39:51.840
Is that correct?

00:39:51.840 --> 00:39:51.840
Correct.

00:39:51.840 --> 00:39:51.840
Okay.

00:39:51.840 --> 00:39:52.840
Thank you.

00:39:52.840 --> 00:39:53.840
Yes.

00:39:53.840 --> 00:39:58.550
Ultimately the city council approves the SUPs through

00:39:58.550 --> 00:39:59.840
ordinance.

00:39:59.840 --> 00:40:04.760
So with all that, we're here again to propose a code

00:40:04.760 --> 00:40:10.349
amendment to add a specific use permit for the three zoning

00:40:10.349 --> 00:40:10.840
districts,

00:40:10.840 --> 00:40:15.190
as was pointed out earlier, don't require a specific use

00:40:15.190 --> 00:40:16.840
permit at this moment.

00:40:16.840 --> 00:40:22.840
The three zoning districts are the DR2, DCN, and DCG.

00:40:22.840 --> 00:40:27.539
And how we came to that is you see here in the urban core

00:40:27.539 --> 00:40:29.840
that's shown on this map,

00:40:29.840 --> 00:40:36.639
the majority of the zoning districts that are adjacent to

00:40:36.639 --> 00:40:41.710
our established neighborhoods, our historic districts, and

00:40:41.710 --> 00:40:43.840
our special overlay districts,

00:40:43.840 --> 00:40:49.360
but these zoning districts in the form of either the DR2,

00:40:49.360 --> 00:40:50.840
DCN, or DCG.

00:40:50.840 --> 00:40:55.639
And staff's recommendation is that we add this specific use

00:40:55.639 --> 00:41:01.349
permit to provide that additional analytical tool to bring

00:41:01.349 --> 00:41:01.840
forward,

00:41:01.840 --> 00:41:05.630
not only with the applicant and discuss what we can do to

00:41:05.630 --> 00:41:07.840
address any potential impacts,

00:41:07.840 --> 00:41:10.780
also but to the planning zoning commission and ultimately

00:41:10.780 --> 00:41:11.840
city council as well,

00:41:11.840 --> 00:41:16.199
to identify what mitigation or conditions we can use to

00:41:16.199 --> 00:41:18.840
minimize those potential impacts.

00:41:18.840 --> 00:41:22.440
And that could be the height of the building if it is too

00:41:22.440 --> 00:41:25.840
high for that particular area, and so on and so forth.

00:41:25.840 --> 00:41:29.840
There's a number of conditions that can be placed.

00:41:29.840 --> 00:41:33.550
And this is really the tool that can be used to address

00:41:33.550 --> 00:41:35.840
those concerns that we have.

00:41:35.840 --> 00:41:39.360
And when I say we, I say that in general, the citizens, the

00:41:39.360 --> 00:41:42.840
planning zoning commissions, and the city council.

00:41:42.840 --> 00:41:49.489
Ultimately, there are options to provide other requirements

00:41:49.489 --> 00:41:49.840
.

00:41:49.840 --> 00:41:53.389
Again, I said parking, building height, and we can also

00:41:53.389 --> 00:41:57.789
talk about sustainability in the form of some specific site

00:41:57.789 --> 00:41:59.840
design requirements.

00:41:59.840 --> 00:42:06.489
So all those can be folded in to the approval of a specific

00:42:06.489 --> 00:42:09.840
use permit as a condition.

00:42:09.840 --> 00:42:12.840
I kind of went over this already briefly.

00:42:12.840 --> 00:42:15.599
The staff obviously is bringing this forward and we're

00:42:15.599 --> 00:42:19.650
recommending approval as the specific use permit will serve

00:42:19.650 --> 00:42:22.840
as an analytical tool

00:42:22.840 --> 00:42:27.199
to review land use as far as massing and scale to

00:42:27.199 --> 00:42:31.199
surrounding areas, surrounding properties, to address

00:42:31.199 --> 00:42:31.840
compatibility.

00:42:31.840 --> 00:42:36.369
And again, it's consistent to our comprehensive plan in the

00:42:36.369 --> 00:42:40.119
form that it is within the compatibility area, the

00:42:40.119 --> 00:42:42.840
neighborhood university compatibility area.

00:42:42.840 --> 00:42:48.070
And it's in this area that we feel that we really need

00:42:48.070 --> 00:42:53.079
another level of review, and that is through a specific use

00:42:53.079 --> 00:42:53.840
permit.

00:42:53.840 --> 00:42:56.840
So with that, that concludes my presentation.

00:42:56.840 --> 00:42:58.840
I'll be happy to answer any further questions.

00:42:58.840 --> 00:43:00.840
>> Commissioner Ellis.

00:43:00.840 --> 00:43:01.840
>> Thank you, Chair.

00:43:01.840 --> 00:43:04.840
Okay, Ron, so how did we get here?

00:43:04.840 --> 00:43:08.760
I have a feeling like from what I understand, this started

00:43:08.760 --> 00:43:10.840
because we wanted a definition,

00:43:10.840 --> 00:43:13.840
or council wanted a definition, or the city as a whole

00:43:13.840 --> 00:43:16.840
wanted a definition for SRO collegiate housing.

00:43:16.840 --> 00:43:20.840
How did we go from there to here?

00:43:20.840 --> 00:43:25.960
Was it just too hard to define and put into another, I

00:43:25.960 --> 00:43:29.840
guess, code requirements for that type of development?

00:43:29.840 --> 00:43:34.199
Because my only fear with this is, are we negatively

00:43:34.199 --> 00:43:39.469
affecting other types of multifamily by adding this other

00:43:39.469 --> 00:43:41.840
layer and expense for developers and developments?

00:43:41.840 --> 00:43:46.199
And so I want to know where your brain was in the think

00:43:46.199 --> 00:43:48.840
tank room that we got to this.

00:43:48.840 --> 00:43:51.840
>> Sure, we started this several months ago.

00:43:51.840 --> 00:43:54.840
We've had several meetings with the city council.

00:43:54.840 --> 00:44:00.840
Obviously, the issue, if you want to call it a concern,

00:44:00.840 --> 00:44:04.550
was we were seeing these development pressures in the form

00:44:04.550 --> 00:44:12.840
of SROs that were impacting the area in various aspects.

00:44:12.840 --> 00:44:16.460
So we started looking at how we would address these types

00:44:16.460 --> 00:44:17.840
of developments.

00:44:17.840 --> 00:44:24.360
We talked about defining a specific use or come up with a

00:44:24.360 --> 00:44:28.519
use within itself as a SRO or collegiate housing, is what

00:44:28.519 --> 00:44:29.840
we were calling it.

00:44:29.840 --> 00:44:34.199
And identifying where that use would be permitted in a

00:44:34.199 --> 00:44:35.840
zoning district.

00:44:35.840 --> 00:44:39.840
So similar to adding a use to the development code,

00:44:39.840 --> 00:44:43.159
identifying a zoning district and potentially adding

00:44:43.159 --> 00:44:45.840
additional design criteria for that particular use.

00:44:45.840 --> 00:44:51.840
We had a work session with city council and the council

00:44:51.840 --> 00:44:57.989
couldn't come up with a unanimous determination or

00:44:57.989 --> 00:45:01.840
direction to move forward with that particular proposal.

00:45:01.840 --> 00:45:06.190
So we came back after that and staff kind of went over what

00:45:06.190 --> 00:45:10.380
our other options are and what we can do to address the

00:45:10.380 --> 00:45:13.179
issues that we were dealing with on these development

00:45:13.179 --> 00:45:13.840
pressures.

00:45:13.840 --> 00:45:18.219
And we felt that the SUP would address those issues, give

00:45:18.219 --> 00:45:23.070
the community the opportunity to discuss and hopefully come

00:45:23.070 --> 00:45:24.840
up with solutions.

00:45:24.840 --> 00:45:29.679
Give the staff the tools needed to propose options or

00:45:29.679 --> 00:45:30.840
conditions.

00:45:30.840 --> 00:45:34.199
And ultimately have city council and the planning zoning

00:45:34.199 --> 00:45:37.840
commission hold public hearings to further that discussion.

00:45:37.840 --> 00:45:41.440
Because, as you know, if a property were to develop in the

00:45:41.440 --> 00:45:41.840
DCG,

00:45:41.840 --> 00:45:45.360
and I understand your point Commissioner Nowles, we talked

00:45:45.360 --> 00:45:48.579
about small multifamily to large and it does encompass that

00:45:48.579 --> 00:45:48.840
.

00:45:48.840 --> 00:45:51.840
And that was my first comment on my first slide.

00:45:51.840 --> 00:45:53.840
And I wanted to make sure that was clear.

00:45:53.840 --> 00:45:57.840
It does affect those multifamily from small to large.

00:45:57.840 --> 00:46:00.570
So did you have discussion though about the negative effect

00:46:00.570 --> 00:46:04.659
on, like somebody let's just say building a fourplex on a

00:46:04.659 --> 00:46:05.840
typical lot?

00:46:05.840 --> 00:46:08.940
Because now they have a much larger timeframe, right,

00:46:08.940 --> 00:46:11.840
before they can commence development, right?

00:46:11.840 --> 00:46:15.840
Because would it be one public hearing here or two?

00:46:15.840 --> 00:46:18.840
Two, one from PNZ and one from city council.

00:46:18.840 --> 00:46:19.840
Just one at city council?

00:46:19.840 --> 00:46:20.840
Correct.

00:46:20.840 --> 00:46:22.840
Okay.

00:46:22.840 --> 00:46:23.840
Good afternoon commissioners.

00:46:23.840 --> 00:46:28.190
I just wanted to add on to some of Ron's comments and

00:46:28.190 --> 00:46:28.840
statements.

00:46:28.840 --> 00:46:33.289
The SRO discussion was prompted by council directed staff,

00:46:33.289 --> 00:46:38.880
meaning the planning division, to evaluate the implications

00:46:38.880 --> 00:46:42.840
or perhaps lack thereof of SRO development.

00:46:42.840 --> 00:46:45.880
We conducted benchmark analyses to discern what that would

00:46:45.880 --> 00:46:48.670
be and we went to talk about collegiate housing through

00:46:48.670 --> 00:46:49.840
that discussion.

00:46:49.840 --> 00:46:51.840
When that item was presented to the city council,

00:46:51.840 --> 00:46:55.199
ultimately there was consensus with the council to in

00:46:55.199 --> 00:46:57.840
essence review the multifamily development standards

00:46:57.840 --> 00:47:02.380
as it relates to areas that could potentially have a

00:47:02.380 --> 00:47:06.260
greater impact as it relates to denser uses and the

00:47:06.260 --> 00:47:09.690
associated residential or well established neighborhoods

00:47:09.690 --> 00:47:10.840
and what have you.

00:47:10.840 --> 00:47:14.750
And that is why when we went back, because initially we had

00:47:14.750 --> 00:47:17.489
our discussion with council where we did discuss collegiate

00:47:17.489 --> 00:47:20.050
housing and explained how that would be included in the

00:47:20.050 --> 00:47:20.840
definition.

00:47:20.840 --> 00:47:24.630
But more importantly, when we speak about SROs, the other

00:47:24.630 --> 00:47:28.329
question was this doesn't address some of the single family

00:47:28.329 --> 00:47:32.190
homes that are also being converted for multiple dwelling

00:47:32.190 --> 00:47:34.840
uses, for the lack of a better phrase.

00:47:34.840 --> 00:47:38.219
So what we did is we evaluated as Ron indicated the core,

00:47:38.219 --> 00:47:42.000
which is your Ds, your DCGs, your DRNs, your DR2s and those

00:47:42.000 --> 00:47:45.349
districts and also evaluated what else is around that area

00:47:45.349 --> 00:47:47.840
as it relates to the built out environment.

00:47:47.840 --> 00:47:50.869
You have proximity to historic districts, you have older

00:47:50.869 --> 00:47:55.019
residential neighborhoods that are well established and you

00:47:55.019 --> 00:47:58.050
also have some neighborhoods that are in need of a makeover

00:47:58.050 --> 00:48:00.840
as well as some areas that are in need of a makeover.

00:48:00.840 --> 00:48:04.070
So the intent of the specific use permit is not to create

00:48:04.070 --> 00:48:07.090
obstacles or hurdles for anybody who is coming in to

00:48:07.090 --> 00:48:10.360
perhaps revitalize an area or perhaps look at an area in

00:48:10.360 --> 00:48:13.840
proximity to an established residential neighborhood.

00:48:13.840 --> 00:48:18.199
The intent of the specific use permit is purely a tool to

00:48:18.199 --> 00:48:21.949
evaluate the use and its adjacency to the surrounding land

00:48:21.949 --> 00:48:22.840
use pattern.

00:48:22.840 --> 00:48:27.590
And what measures can be provided from an aesthetic measure

00:48:27.590 --> 00:48:31.530
or from building material or spacing, massing your spatial

00:48:31.530 --> 00:48:32.840
design and analysis.

00:48:32.840 --> 00:48:34.840
How would that play into that?

00:48:34.840 --> 00:48:38.039
And the specific use permit is a dual public hearing

00:48:38.039 --> 00:48:38.840
process.

00:48:38.840 --> 00:48:41.519
So it would come before you, the Planning and Zoning

00:48:41.519 --> 00:48:44.360
Commission, the recommending body and then move on to

00:48:44.360 --> 00:48:47.400
council and then your roles would be depending on community

00:48:47.400 --> 00:48:51.840
input, how you wanted to proceed with that SUP.

00:48:51.840 --> 00:48:53.840
Commissioner Rossell.

00:48:53.840 --> 00:48:56.840
Thank you Chair. I have several questions.

00:48:56.840 --> 00:48:59.860
Hopefully they make logical sense. I was kind of jotting

00:48:59.860 --> 00:49:01.840
them down as I was thinking about them.

00:49:01.840 --> 00:49:06.679
This seems to be prompted by collegiate housing SROs

00:49:06.679 --> 00:49:11.280
several months ago. Has there been any project thus far in

00:49:11.280 --> 00:49:12.840
the city that by rights?

00:49:12.840 --> 00:49:18.650
They took advantage of the, I mean, I guess what I'm saying

00:49:18.650 --> 00:49:22.739
is, is there any precedent, apart from individuals coming

00:49:22.739 --> 00:49:25.840
and asking to build SROs that we've seen in the city?

00:49:25.840 --> 00:49:29.340
Has someone taken advantage of current by right zoning that

00:49:29.340 --> 00:49:32.630
's affected neighborhoods or the city? Do we know of any

00:49:32.630 --> 00:49:33.840
projects like that?

00:49:33.840 --> 00:49:37.550
Or are we just not wanting SUPs and these to continue

00:49:37.550 --> 00:49:39.840
coming on the north side of UNT?

00:49:39.840 --> 00:49:43.130
We've had, I mean, you've seen several zoning cases come

00:49:43.130 --> 00:49:47.840
through. I'm trying to think of some developments.

00:49:47.840 --> 00:49:53.489
The one on Eagle, I'm blanking on the name, I believe that

00:49:53.489 --> 00:49:57.840
's zone DCG and that was permitted by right.

00:49:57.840 --> 00:50:01.909
And there may be some variances that were required, maybe

00:50:01.909 --> 00:50:05.840
an ADP, but the use or the zoning did permit that use.

00:50:05.840 --> 00:50:10.320
Again, Eagle and Bernard, the south corner. I actually have

00:50:10.320 --> 00:50:10.840
a photo of it.

00:50:10.840 --> 00:50:14.840
That's fine. It means dead center in the urban core green.

00:50:14.840 --> 00:50:19.199
I was just trying to think if there's been an actual

00:50:19.199 --> 00:50:22.280
project that would make this a precipice other than the

00:50:22.280 --> 00:50:27.329
city PNZ council thinking about, well, this could be an

00:50:27.329 --> 00:50:29.840
issue or we get a lot of requests for this.

00:50:29.840 --> 00:50:33.630
So I was saying this is reactive or proactive and if it's

00:50:33.630 --> 00:50:37.789
proactive, what is it necessarily based on? I don't know if

00:50:37.789 --> 00:50:39.840
there's a good answer for that.

00:50:39.840 --> 00:50:44.659
Have we gotten any feedback from the citizens or the city

00:50:44.659 --> 00:50:47.789
in regards to to moving forward on this or is this just

00:50:47.789 --> 00:50:49.840
internalized from staff and council?

00:50:49.840 --> 00:50:54.190
This has been, we actually posted it for tonight's public

00:50:54.190 --> 00:50:59.880
hearing. We've received several input from folks after

00:50:59.880 --> 00:51:02.840
hearing the work session at city council.

00:51:02.840 --> 00:51:07.190
Some of them were in favor and some of them were in

00:51:07.190 --> 00:51:07.840
opposition.

00:51:07.840 --> 00:51:12.059
I would just add to that. I think probably the impetus was

00:51:12.059 --> 00:51:15.840
the normal inscription projects that keep coming up.

00:51:15.840 --> 00:51:20.059
They have that same business model. So we've seen it before

00:51:20.059 --> 00:51:23.599
and we, I guess we want to figure out a way to allow those

00:51:23.599 --> 00:51:26.590
in the community, but to do it in a way that is compatible

00:51:26.590 --> 00:51:27.840
with the neighborhoods.

00:51:27.840 --> 00:51:32.579
And so finding that happy medium is, I guess, this is the

00:51:32.579 --> 00:51:33.840
first step.

00:51:33.840 --> 00:51:41.840
Right. Is there a way to on a use case have a boundary from

00:51:41.840 --> 00:51:46.329
conflicting zoning so that SROs couldn't be built within

00:51:46.329 --> 00:51:48.840
500 feet of any conflicting zone?

00:51:48.840 --> 00:51:52.070
Have we thought about just kind of creating around this

00:51:52.070 --> 00:51:53.840
green block just a buffer?

00:51:53.840 --> 00:51:56.239
Because it sounds like the city is not against SROs because

00:51:56.239 --> 00:51:58.909
it might be just easiest to ban them, but it seems like we

00:51:58.909 --> 00:52:00.840
're okay with them in some places.

00:52:00.840 --> 00:52:04.190
And if that's the case, then can we not just better tell S

00:52:04.190 --> 00:52:07.840
RO developments where they're friendly to them in the city?

00:52:07.840 --> 00:52:12.480
Right. I mean, well, I mean, the zoning right now as it is

00:52:12.480 --> 00:52:15.840
would permit it, but I think what is important to note that

00:52:15.840 --> 00:52:20.050
is there are also existing established neighborhoods that

00:52:20.050 --> 00:52:21.840
would be affected as well.

00:52:21.840 --> 00:52:24.909
And those areas are throughout the area that we're talking

00:52:24.909 --> 00:52:25.840
about as well.

00:52:25.840 --> 00:52:30.190
So this would serve to help protect those established

00:52:30.190 --> 00:52:30.840
neighborhoods.

00:52:30.840 --> 00:52:37.840
Again, the proposal that we've seen have been in the north.

00:52:37.840 --> 00:52:40.179
We've seen some zoning cases come through around the

00:52:40.179 --> 00:52:43.650
southern part of the university, but we haven't seen them

00:52:43.650 --> 00:52:47.840
develop except for maybe this development right here.

00:52:47.840 --> 00:52:52.019
Now, this particular development, there are single families

00:52:52.019 --> 00:52:55.840
to the back of it, and if there were a specific use permit,

00:52:55.840 --> 00:52:59.179
maybe there would have been an opportunity to address some

00:52:59.179 --> 00:53:02.380
of the impacts that they may be feeling or having at this

00:53:02.380 --> 00:53:02.840
time.

00:53:02.840 --> 00:53:07.840
And I guess my last point is to Commissioner Ellis's point.

00:53:07.840 --> 00:53:11.210
It seems as though a small minority of projects are going

00:53:11.210 --> 00:53:14.130
to create a lot of work for a lot of good projects,

00:53:14.130 --> 00:53:17.150
especially considering all the different zoning

00:53:17.150 --> 00:53:18.840
requirements we have.

00:53:18.840 --> 00:53:21.590
We have three zoning that disallow by right and we're just

00:53:21.590 --> 00:53:22.840
going to remove that.

00:53:22.840 --> 00:53:25.519
So it seems like effectively anyone who wants to build a

00:53:25.519 --> 00:53:28.050
multifamily development in Denton has to go to P&Z and

00:53:28.050 --> 00:53:28.840
council.

00:53:28.840 --> 00:53:31.719
That's in effect what would be happening through this, and

00:53:31.719 --> 00:53:34.360
that causes me some concern to try to be, we already

00:53:34.360 --> 00:53:36.409
generally have a reputation about not being business

00:53:36.409 --> 00:53:36.840
friendly.

00:53:36.840 --> 00:53:39.079
I don't think everyone's trying to fight that, but I don't

00:53:39.079 --> 00:53:41.440
know how this helps that fight and saying, if you want to

00:53:41.440 --> 00:53:44.610
build apartments in Denton, you have a dual hearing process

00:53:44.610 --> 00:53:44.840
.

00:53:44.840 --> 00:53:48.070
And it doesn't necessarily end up just wanting to regulate

00:53:48.070 --> 00:53:51.139
SROs or you wouldn't be discussing the increased design

00:53:51.139 --> 00:53:52.840
criteria or other things.

00:53:52.840 --> 00:53:56.059
So it seems like an opportunity for the city to not just

00:53:56.059 --> 00:53:59.840
regulate SROs, but also put any other criteria they want.

00:53:59.840 --> 00:54:02.269
Senator Bill there, we would really like you to use this

00:54:02.269 --> 00:54:04.789
material and make it look like this, and I just don't think

00:54:04.789 --> 00:54:07.079
that gives a lot of control or autonomy to the project

00:54:07.079 --> 00:54:07.840
coming in.

00:54:07.840 --> 00:54:11.840
So I wish there was a better solution.

00:54:11.840 --> 00:54:15.190
If this is all about SROs, then I think it would be better

00:54:15.190 --> 00:54:18.489
just to define SROs out so that other projects aren't so

00:54:18.489 --> 00:54:19.840
affected by this.

00:54:19.840 --> 00:54:22.840
>> Right, and like we discussed earlier, we tried that.

00:54:22.840 --> 00:54:25.699
I think when we looked at this, this was not just SROs,

00:54:25.699 --> 00:54:29.000
these would be multifamily developments, your traditional

00:54:29.000 --> 00:54:30.840
multifamily developments.

00:54:30.840 --> 00:54:33.539
Again, what we're looking at is established neighborhoods,

00:54:33.539 --> 00:54:37.150
their historic districts, and our special overlay districts

00:54:37.150 --> 00:54:41.010
as well would be potentially impacted by multifamily, not

00:54:41.010 --> 00:54:43.840
necessarily just single room occupancy development.

00:54:43.840 --> 00:54:46.679
>> I definitely understand that, but also, so if we're not

00:54:46.679 --> 00:54:49.840
talking about SROs, it seems like we have a zoning of DCG.

00:54:49.840 --> 00:54:52.840
And someone by right can come in and build 100 stories.

00:54:52.840 --> 00:54:54.840
Well, now we have a measure to stop that.

00:54:54.840 --> 00:54:56.840
Now we're like, oh, right there, we don't want 100 stories.

00:54:56.840 --> 00:55:00.840
So now we can almost spot, zone every piece of property.

00:55:00.840 --> 00:55:04.579
So we have this DCG, 100 feet, but if they come in with 100

00:55:04.579 --> 00:55:08.019
foot, we can say, actually, in this area, it would be more

00:55:08.019 --> 00:55:09.840
applicable to be 45 feet.

00:55:09.840 --> 00:55:14.059
And so it doesn't, I don't feel this is a solution, SROs,

00:55:14.059 --> 00:55:18.340
it's a solution to provide oversight that I think is beyond

00:55:18.340 --> 00:55:21.840
what is necessary or helpful to business.

00:55:21.840 --> 00:55:25.539
And if we're not okay with DCG in some locations being 100

00:55:25.539 --> 00:55:29.309
feet, for example, then I think it's on us to, for us to go

00:55:29.309 --> 00:55:30.840
back and pinpoint.

00:55:30.840 --> 00:55:34.199
And I don't know if it creates small area plans or overlays

00:55:34.199 --> 00:55:35.840
or new zoning districts.

00:55:35.840 --> 00:55:39.019
But if there's areas we know we don't want 100 feet, then

00:55:39.019 --> 00:55:41.820
let's rezone it and give them parameters before they come

00:55:41.820 --> 00:55:44.400
in with a project in which the city is like, okay, but we

00:55:44.400 --> 00:55:45.840
want these limitations on it.

00:55:45.840 --> 00:55:48.840
That doesn't compute with me.

00:55:48.840 --> 00:55:50.840
No, take it. Thank you.

00:55:50.840 --> 00:55:53.840
I'm going to concur with Commissioner O'Zell.

00:55:53.840 --> 00:55:57.619
I'm concerned that we're just putting a whole level and I

00:55:57.619 --> 00:56:01.500
may be fitting a larger blanket. It's almost like we're

00:56:01.500 --> 00:56:05.389
down zoning without really down zoning by putting the use

00:56:05.389 --> 00:56:06.840
of an SUP on here.

00:56:06.840 --> 00:56:09.900
Under the current environment, the consensus, at least at

00:56:09.900 --> 00:56:12.840
this commission, has been even trying to compromise.

00:56:12.840 --> 00:56:16.170
If somebody wants to do 100 feet, we can't find a

00:56:16.170 --> 00:56:18.840
compromise even below what they can do.

00:56:18.840 --> 00:56:23.280
And this is just going to be another opportunity to have to

00:56:23.280 --> 00:56:27.840
go through a hearing process to take somebody's ability to

00:56:27.840 --> 00:56:31.840
build by right what they can and minimize that.

00:56:31.840 --> 00:56:35.019
So I'm concerned about it and it is a very large area of

00:56:35.019 --> 00:56:38.690
our city. It's not to Commissioner O'Zell's point, just

00:56:38.690 --> 00:56:41.840
around North Texas in the historical district.

00:56:41.840 --> 00:56:46.269
You put the map back up there. It's a huge area of our city

00:56:46.269 --> 00:56:50.840
, and it will affect small projects, large projects.

00:56:50.840 --> 00:56:53.460
And I guess the other concern I have with it, and I might

00:56:53.460 --> 00:56:57.130
take exception with the 2030 plan, is that the whole gen

00:56:57.130 --> 00:57:01.449
esis of the 2030 plan, my understanding is for it to be dens

00:57:01.449 --> 00:57:03.840
er and for it to be inside the loop.

00:57:03.840 --> 00:57:07.550
And so we've drawn the plan to do that, and now we're going

00:57:07.550 --> 00:57:11.510
to do other things to have the possibility of limiting that

00:57:11.510 --> 00:57:11.840
.

00:57:11.840 --> 00:57:16.300
And I think it just continues to be more and more burdens

00:57:16.300 --> 00:57:22.760
ome, more timely as far as time consuming for going through

00:57:22.760 --> 00:57:25.840
all that process, more expense.

00:57:25.840 --> 00:57:28.530
And at some point I think there needs to be some place that

00:57:28.530 --> 00:57:31.070
you can look and go, you know what, if I want to build X

00:57:31.070 --> 00:57:34.579
building, I can go out there and go build that versus, well

00:57:34.579 --> 00:57:38.139
, I guess I need to look and see what the favor of P&Z and

00:57:38.139 --> 00:57:40.840
council is going to be as to whether I even want to mess

00:57:40.840 --> 00:57:45.409
with providing, taking an opportunity to put some money on

00:57:45.409 --> 00:57:48.840
the table and put forth a project.

00:57:48.840 --> 00:57:53.440
My concern is a lot of people will look at that based on

00:57:53.440 --> 00:57:58.150
the public testimony that we've had, not even going to do

00:57:58.150 --> 00:58:00.840
it, whether it's a fourplex or SRO.

00:58:00.840 --> 00:58:05.639
Because again, the words that we say here on this board,

00:58:05.639 --> 00:58:10.239
city council, people that come up and testify and make

00:58:10.239 --> 00:58:15.380
their opinions known about projects, people look and watch

00:58:15.380 --> 00:58:20.440
those meetings and say, you know what, it's too much hassle

00:58:20.440 --> 00:58:22.840
, it's too expensive, and it's too much uncertainty.

00:58:22.840 --> 00:58:26.969
I'm going to go somewhere else to do my project. And that's

00:58:26.969 --> 00:58:31.039
my concern that this is a pretty heavy handed response over

00:58:31.039 --> 00:58:34.670
a very large area of our city in my opinion from what it

00:58:34.670 --> 00:58:38.800
sounds like to borrow Commissioner Rosell's term, the SRO

00:58:38.800 --> 00:58:39.840
issue.

00:58:39.840 --> 00:58:42.320
And I think if it's an SRO issue, you need to deal with

00:58:42.320 --> 00:58:45.360
that. And I think there needs to be an area that's set

00:58:45.360 --> 00:58:45.840
aside.

00:58:45.840 --> 00:58:49.019
You know, if you want to go build that type of project, you

00:58:49.019 --> 00:58:52.349
can go build it. Everybody keeps talking about they want it

00:58:52.349 --> 00:58:54.840
west of UNT, set it up and fix it that way.

00:58:54.840 --> 00:58:57.969
And then I would look at being more favorable to doing

00:58:57.969 --> 00:59:01.489
something like this, but just to do blanket over the whole

00:59:01.489 --> 00:59:04.840
thing and not have any opportunity in other places.

00:59:04.840 --> 00:59:08.550
I'm concerned about it. I think it sends the wrong message

00:59:08.550 --> 00:59:09.840
to people.

00:59:09.840 --> 00:59:14.030
Well, what I can agree is that it will take obviously more

00:59:14.030 --> 00:59:17.880
time because it has to go through the dual public hearing

00:59:17.880 --> 00:59:18.840
process.

00:59:18.840 --> 00:59:22.250
But what I would like to add is that there is approval

00:59:22.250 --> 00:59:24.840
criteria for a specific use permit.

00:59:24.840 --> 00:59:28.840
So although it will take longer to get through the process,

00:59:28.840 --> 00:59:32.789
the commission can make a determination or recommendation

00:59:32.789 --> 00:59:35.980
to city council that there be no additional conditions

00:59:35.980 --> 00:59:36.840
placed on it.

00:59:36.840 --> 00:59:41.440
Again, so that's what this commission can do. Ultimately,

00:59:41.440 --> 00:59:42.840
city council can do the same thing.

00:59:42.840 --> 00:59:46.050
And if there isn't a need for a condition, they can approve

00:59:46.050 --> 00:59:47.840
the SEP without a condition.

00:59:47.840 --> 00:59:51.820
And that would not lessen the density, that would not less

00:59:51.820 --> 00:59:55.840
en the design as long as it meets our approval criteria.

00:59:55.840 --> 00:59:59.130
And what we're trying to do here is to find a solution,

00:59:59.130 --> 01:00:03.190
like you all were saying, to address those concerns that we

01:00:03.190 --> 01:00:03.840
all have.

01:00:03.840 --> 01:00:07.840
And we felt that what the city feels that the department

01:00:07.840 --> 01:00:11.840
feels that that is through the specific use permit.

01:00:11.840 --> 01:00:15.300
The only concern I have with that to follow up is that

01:00:15.300 --> 01:00:18.840
currently by right, you don't have to go through all the

01:00:18.840 --> 01:00:21.530
concept drawings and put all of that together, spend all

01:00:21.530 --> 01:00:22.840
the expenses to come and look and go.

01:00:22.840 --> 01:00:25.780
We like your design. We like the height. We like the color

01:00:25.780 --> 01:00:28.949
of the brick and the percentage and all of the things that

01:00:28.949 --> 01:00:32.349
you have to do to even be able to come and bring it for an

01:00:32.349 --> 01:00:32.840
SEP.

01:00:32.840 --> 01:00:37.920
Correct? Correct. And so that's my point is you'll have to,

01:00:37.920 --> 01:00:40.539
everybody will have to go through that step before they

01:00:40.539 --> 01:00:43.769
even get an opportunity to come present to say, can I even

01:00:43.769 --> 01:00:44.840
do my project or not?

01:00:44.840 --> 01:00:47.239
Versus you can look at it and go, you know what, I can go

01:00:47.239 --> 01:00:48.840
build over here on the corner.

01:00:48.840 --> 01:00:51.699
And as long as I build under the development code, I can

01:00:51.699 --> 01:00:55.840
build my project. And that will not be the case here.

01:00:55.840 --> 01:00:58.550
All of those steps I just mentioned will have to be gone

01:00:58.550 --> 01:01:01.650
through on every single opportunity that somebody wants to

01:01:01.650 --> 01:01:05.639
take to do a project, all that expense, and cross their

01:01:05.639 --> 01:01:07.840
fingers like the gentleman did two weeks ago.

01:01:07.840 --> 01:01:11.000
I hope they like it. And I guess I'm going to find out

01:01:11.000 --> 01:01:13.360
after spending a few hundred thousand dollars whether they

01:01:13.360 --> 01:01:13.840
do or not.

01:01:13.840 --> 01:01:17.000
And I think that's a difficult place that we're going to

01:01:17.000 --> 01:01:20.190
put people in that want to come to Denton and do business

01:01:20.190 --> 01:01:20.840
there.

01:01:20.840 --> 01:01:23.670
And I think that's a big heavy burden that we really need

01:01:23.670 --> 01:01:26.840
to think about and talk about before we move this forward.

01:01:26.840 --> 01:01:28.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:01:28.840 --> 01:01:32.110
Thank you, Chair. First of all, can we get a copy of the

01:01:32.110 --> 01:01:32.840
presentation?

01:01:32.840 --> 01:01:35.269
Because there's some good information here that I would

01:01:35.269 --> 01:01:36.840
like to have for my personal use.

01:01:36.840 --> 01:01:39.750
But I guess I'm trying to decide, are we trying to

01:01:39.750 --> 01:01:42.840
encourage something or discourage something?

01:01:42.840 --> 01:01:46.429
And that's where I'm getting confused because it seems to

01:01:46.429 --> 01:01:50.019
me like Commissioner Rozelle and Chair Strange is that we

01:01:50.019 --> 01:01:52.840
're concerned about one type of project.

01:01:52.840 --> 01:01:55.769
I don't know, and I haven't been here very long, but I can

01:01:55.769 --> 01:02:02.230
't think of a two story or a three story project that had

01:02:02.230 --> 01:02:06.840
any, you know, vote, any negative vote.

01:02:06.840 --> 01:02:11.900
That all the discussions that we've had, the time that we

01:02:11.900 --> 01:02:15.840
took is all centered around the SRO issue.

01:02:15.840 --> 01:02:18.920
And if that's what we're trying to avoid and trying to

01:02:18.920 --> 01:02:22.239
solve and trying to figure out how to deal with, I agree

01:02:22.239 --> 01:02:26.500
with Commissioner Rozelle, is let's just say we can't have

01:02:26.500 --> 01:02:27.840
them in certain places.

01:02:27.840 --> 01:02:32.239
And here's an area where you can build your SROs to the

01:02:32.239 --> 01:02:33.840
world's level.

01:02:33.840 --> 01:02:38.690
I mean, I think that again with Chairman Strange is that we

01:02:38.690 --> 01:02:45.840
're affecting a whole lot of the city for very few projects,

01:02:45.840 --> 01:02:50.489
although very impactful projects that raises the ire of

01:02:50.489 --> 01:02:56.059
everybody that's around it and it puts us in a position to

01:02:56.059 --> 01:03:00.840
where, you know, yeah, it's a great idea, just not there.

01:03:00.840 --> 01:03:05.199
And I'm trying to decide if this had been in place two

01:03:05.199 --> 01:03:09.739
weeks ago, would we have still gone to one o'clock in the

01:03:09.739 --> 01:03:10.840
morning?

01:03:10.840 --> 01:03:15.559
Would that have alleviated, you know, would this SUP allevi

01:03:15.559 --> 01:03:16.840
ated all of that?

01:03:16.840 --> 01:03:21.619
Or would we have more one o'clock, you know, in the morning

01:03:21.619 --> 01:03:26.349
meetings because every stinking project has to go through

01:03:26.349 --> 01:03:27.840
this process.

01:03:27.840 --> 01:03:31.250
You know, that's, I'm just trying to figure out, are we

01:03:31.250 --> 01:03:34.840
trying to solve a problem or are we producing a problem?

01:03:34.840 --> 01:03:39.639
Well, I think we're trying to solve a problem, but we do

01:03:39.639 --> 01:03:44.500
have those situations where those smaller developments that

01:03:44.500 --> 01:03:48.840
may not have a potential impact,

01:03:48.840 --> 01:03:53.030
again, we have to go through the process of obtaining an SU

01:03:53.030 --> 01:03:57.389
P other than, obviously, the time that would be the only set

01:03:57.389 --> 01:03:59.840
back for those developments.

01:03:59.840 --> 01:04:03.280
But other than that, we have the option or the opportunity

01:04:03.280 --> 01:04:05.840
to address a larger issue in that sense,

01:04:05.840 --> 01:04:10.199
in the sense that we can mitigate some of those potential

01:04:10.199 --> 01:04:14.840
developments that cause impacts to adjacent neighborhoods.

01:04:14.840 --> 01:04:15.840
Commissioner Ellis.

01:04:15.840 --> 01:04:16.840
Thank you, Chair.

01:04:16.840 --> 01:04:19.670
Well, I mean, I have similar concerns because I know, again

01:04:19.670 --> 01:04:23.719
, this all initiated, like I said before, with the colleg

01:04:23.719 --> 01:04:24.840
iate housing issue.

01:04:24.840 --> 01:04:28.630
And I'm not even sure that this really addresses that in

01:04:28.630 --> 01:04:32.789
the sense that we'll have the public hearing and we'll

01:04:32.789 --> 01:04:33.840
possibly deny it.

01:04:33.840 --> 01:04:36.840
And in the end, city council can approve it.

01:04:36.840 --> 01:04:39.630
I mean, even if we deny it, they can still approve it three

01:04:39.630 --> 01:04:40.840
quarters of the way.

01:04:40.840 --> 01:04:45.460
So in the end, I mean, I wish your direction was different

01:04:45.460 --> 01:04:46.840
from council.

01:04:46.840 --> 01:04:50.139
I wish it was city-initiated zoning in a particular area

01:04:50.139 --> 01:04:53.230
that these keep coming up, that we keep going until one in

01:04:53.230 --> 01:04:55.840
the morning and getting the community in an ire,

01:04:55.840 --> 01:05:01.179
and say you can't do this here and figure that part of it

01:05:01.179 --> 01:05:03.840
out, as I think many of us have said.

01:05:03.840 --> 01:05:11.960
I just, I feel like this negatively affects people. It

01:05:11.960 --> 01:05:13.840
doesn't need to negatively affect.

01:05:13.840 --> 01:05:16.179
Commissioner Ellis, completely understand where you're

01:05:16.179 --> 01:05:16.840
coming from.

01:05:16.840 --> 01:05:20.300
Chairperson Strange, Commissioner Rozelle, we do understand

01:05:20.300 --> 01:05:21.840
what you're explaining.

01:05:21.840 --> 01:05:24.840
In fact, when we did go to council initially, we went with

01:05:24.840 --> 01:05:28.840
a definition for collegiate housing/SROs.

01:05:28.840 --> 01:05:32.199
We talked about location, zoning, where they would fit,

01:05:32.199 --> 01:05:33.840
where they wouldn't fit.

01:05:33.840 --> 01:05:37.170
The discussion that stemmed from there was really the city

01:05:37.170 --> 01:05:41.789
council, from what I understand, and that's why we're here

01:05:41.789 --> 01:05:43.840
before you tonight,

01:05:43.840 --> 01:05:48.900
was is the issue collegiate housing, SRO, or is the issue

01:05:48.900 --> 01:05:53.190
more the density and building height and parking ratio

01:05:53.190 --> 01:05:56.840
requirements associated with multifamily development?

01:05:56.840 --> 01:06:01.360
And if that is the case, should we not revisit the multif

01:06:01.360 --> 01:06:05.309
amily development standards and that we, I'm speaking

01:06:05.309 --> 01:06:05.840
collectively,

01:06:05.840 --> 01:06:10.460
visit those requirements and come back with a revised

01:06:10.460 --> 01:06:14.840
schedule of uses requiring a specific use permit,

01:06:14.840 --> 01:06:18.409
so that the public would have the ability to voice their

01:06:18.409 --> 01:06:21.840
opinion on specific multifamily development.

01:06:21.840 --> 01:06:26.190
As it relates to our benchmarking study, we researched a

01:06:26.190 --> 01:06:29.840
number of communities, college towns, college cities,

01:06:29.840 --> 01:06:33.840
to determine how do they address collegiate housing.

01:06:33.840 --> 01:06:37.199
I think there were two, maybe three actually, that had

01:06:37.199 --> 01:06:40.530
definitions for collegiate housing and pretty much did

01:06:40.530 --> 01:06:43.840
require the SUP requirement associated with them.

01:06:43.840 --> 01:06:45.840
And they defined what that SRO was.

01:06:45.840 --> 01:06:48.519
And we went to the extent where we provided a draft

01:06:48.519 --> 01:06:51.840
ordinance related to collegiate housing for the council.

01:06:51.840 --> 01:06:54.519
But our direction was different and we were asked to come

01:06:54.519 --> 01:06:55.840
back with an ordinance.

01:06:55.840 --> 01:07:00.199
The opportunity that you have before you now is to, you

01:07:00.199 --> 01:07:03.400
could say that you are comfortable with it and would like

01:07:03.400 --> 01:07:03.840
to proceed.

01:07:03.840 --> 01:07:07.840
Or you could say, well, you're not comfortable with it and

01:07:07.840 --> 01:07:09.840
you can deny it and request a further study.

01:07:09.840 --> 01:07:16.840
Or a new DDC amendment associated with collegiate housing.

01:07:16.840 --> 01:07:19.840
Or you could ask for a continuance.

01:07:19.840 --> 01:07:23.840
I think, hold on a second. Commissioner Ellis.

01:07:23.840 --> 01:07:26.840
Thank you, Chair. Can you tell me what was wrong?

01:07:26.840 --> 01:07:30.840
I didn't see that particular City Council meeting.

01:07:30.840 --> 01:07:33.519
When you came to them with the definition and they gave you

01:07:33.519 --> 01:07:34.840
this direction instead,

01:07:34.840 --> 01:07:38.699
can you tell me what the concern was with the definition or

01:07:38.699 --> 01:07:39.840
the problem?

01:07:39.840 --> 01:07:47.360
I think that, to say concern might seem too onerous on the

01:07:47.360 --> 01:07:47.840
council,

01:07:47.840 --> 01:07:52.230
but I think their viewpoint was that really probably the

01:07:52.230 --> 01:07:55.840
concern shouldn't be collegiate housing.

01:07:55.840 --> 01:07:59.440
It should be more of the density as it relates to multif

01:07:59.440 --> 01:08:03.840
amily development in specific areas,

01:08:03.840 --> 01:08:08.840
especially in the university core area.

01:08:08.840 --> 01:08:11.730
But do you think as a development staff that we have an

01:08:11.730 --> 01:08:12.840
issue with that?

01:08:12.840 --> 01:08:17.949
I mean, other than the development de jure of the SRO

01:08:17.949 --> 01:08:20.840
projects in college towns,

01:08:20.840 --> 01:08:24.449
do we have a problem with the other developers who are

01:08:24.449 --> 01:08:28.920
going to come in with their more typical type multifamily

01:08:28.920 --> 01:08:29.840
projects?

01:08:29.840 --> 01:08:35.489
If I can preface with discussion of an SUP, a specific use

01:08:35.489 --> 01:08:35.840
permit,

01:08:35.840 --> 01:08:38.840
in the little bit of experience that I have with SUPs,

01:08:38.840 --> 01:08:44.369
they can actually prove very favorable to a developer if we

01:08:44.369 --> 01:08:46.840
have the appetite for that.

01:08:46.840 --> 01:08:51.199
And what I mean by that is you can do some really wonderful

01:08:51.199 --> 01:08:53.840
design and deviate from the Denton development code

01:08:53.840 --> 01:08:56.840
or any code to provide the ability to do that.

01:08:56.840 --> 01:08:58.989
It could be increased height, it could be greater density,

01:08:58.989 --> 01:09:00.840
it could be surface parking or garage parking.

01:09:00.840 --> 01:09:03.840
I'm just speaking very simply, very plainly here.

01:09:03.840 --> 01:09:04.840
So it is an opportunity.

01:09:04.840 --> 01:09:08.319
Yes, it is time intensive, and absolutely it does cost a

01:09:08.319 --> 01:09:09.840
little -- I'm going to say a little bit more money,

01:09:09.840 --> 01:09:13.640
but it does cost a substantial amount for the developer to

01:09:13.640 --> 01:09:15.840
bring their project forward.

01:09:15.840 --> 01:09:18.840
But I think it also gives the opportunity for the community

01:09:18.840 --> 01:09:22.449
to see and understand that this project indeed is a good

01:09:22.449 --> 01:09:22.840
fit.

01:09:22.840 --> 01:09:26.180
Now, there will be times where we have conflicting zoning

01:09:26.180 --> 01:09:27.840
as we've discussed earlier,

01:09:27.840 --> 01:09:30.439
where perhaps we can look at the city-initiated zoning

01:09:30.439 --> 01:09:30.840
option,

01:09:30.840 --> 01:09:33.970
which we've been talking about at length where we can

01:09:33.970 --> 01:09:35.840
evaluate these arenas too.

01:09:35.840 --> 01:09:40.060
Also keeping in mind that we have the Denton development

01:09:40.060 --> 01:09:41.840
code update that is online.

01:09:41.840 --> 01:09:42.840
It's already kicked off.

01:09:42.840 --> 01:09:43.840
It's initiated.

01:09:43.840 --> 01:09:48.199
And we will be reevaluating the schedule of uses, the

01:09:48.199 --> 01:09:50.189
permitted uses within the Denton development code in the

01:09:50.189 --> 01:09:51.840
specific zoning districts.

01:09:51.840 --> 01:09:54.829
And perhaps there will be a general requirement to add SUP

01:09:54.829 --> 01:09:56.840
for all multifamily development.

01:09:56.840 --> 01:10:00.170
I'm just giving an example that is not mixed use, just

01:10:00.170 --> 01:10:03.840
something to discuss or whet your appetite with.

01:10:03.840 --> 01:10:09.750
So if we look at -- from my perspective, who is responsible

01:10:09.750 --> 01:10:11.840
for the permanent development services,

01:10:11.840 --> 01:10:15.840
this SUP may not be as onerous as it seems at this point.

01:10:15.840 --> 01:10:19.279
However, from the other angle of, but we're not addressing

01:10:19.279 --> 01:10:22.350
what the original discussion was about, which was colleg

01:10:22.350 --> 01:10:22.840
iate housing,

01:10:22.840 --> 01:10:26.300
then that is something the Planning and Zoning Commission

01:10:26.300 --> 01:10:30.840
can push or recommend that staff move forward with that.

01:10:30.840 --> 01:10:36.369
But I would, to be very candid, request a recommendation

01:10:36.369 --> 01:10:37.840
from the PNZ.

01:10:37.840 --> 01:10:39.840
I would agree.

01:10:39.840 --> 01:10:43.060
I think we need to move it forward to council and they get

01:10:43.060 --> 01:10:43.840
to decide.

01:10:43.840 --> 01:10:44.840
Commissioner Rozelle.

01:10:44.840 --> 01:10:47.239
No, if I could pick your brain just for a couple more

01:10:47.239 --> 01:10:47.840
minutes.

01:10:47.840 --> 01:10:49.840
Not much left.

01:10:49.840 --> 01:10:52.680
Is there a reason in these helpful charts here that say

01:10:52.680 --> 01:10:55.840
what's permitted, limited by zoning,

01:10:55.840 --> 01:11:00.189
that we couldn't just have a row of single occupancy

01:11:00.189 --> 01:11:02.840
resident -- could we just have an SRO?

01:11:02.840 --> 01:11:05.119
Commissioner Rozelle, we would have to create that

01:11:05.119 --> 01:11:05.840
definition.

01:11:05.840 --> 01:11:07.840
So we would still be amending the Denton development code.

01:11:07.840 --> 01:11:12.189
We would have to create that definition for single room

01:11:12.189 --> 01:11:14.840
occupancy or collegiate housing.

01:11:14.840 --> 01:11:21.840
And that could be included or incorporated.

01:11:21.840 --> 01:11:23.840
That's fair enough.

01:11:23.840 --> 01:11:27.399
I guess to your point, the project that was here two weeks

01:11:27.399 --> 01:11:27.840
ago,

01:11:27.840 --> 01:11:32.899
it was very tough for me as a sitting commissioner to

01:11:32.899 --> 01:11:38.020
understand if the city feedback was because of SRO or if it

01:11:38.020 --> 01:11:40.050
was because the building was very tall, the normal, the

01:11:40.050 --> 01:11:41.840
scripture, that project.

01:11:41.840 --> 01:11:42.840
Was it two weeks ago?

01:11:42.840 --> 01:11:43.840
Right.

01:11:43.840 --> 01:11:47.350
It was hard for me to determine, to your point, if the

01:11:47.350 --> 01:11:52.569
issue is collegiate housing or if the issue is how tall it

01:11:52.569 --> 01:11:54.520
was and the density and traffic and wherever it was going

01:11:54.520 --> 01:11:54.840
to park.

01:11:54.840 --> 01:11:59.199
I understand that it might be a mixture of both in terms of

01:11:59.199 --> 01:12:00.840
the city concern.

01:12:00.840 --> 01:12:02.840
And so I definitely see that.

01:12:02.840 --> 01:12:06.369
I don't know if it's just a collegiate housing issue as a

01:12:06.369 --> 01:12:07.840
blanket concern.

01:12:07.840 --> 01:12:12.199
But that nevertheless still brings me to my point about

01:12:12.199 --> 01:12:16.069
making a buffer zone where there could be less dense, less

01:12:16.069 --> 01:12:18.840
tall buildings that are also not collegiate housing.

01:12:18.840 --> 01:12:24.840
So there could be a true transition from the DCG.

01:12:24.840 --> 01:12:27.890
Right, a vertical planning perspective or a development

01:12:27.890 --> 01:12:28.840
perspective.

01:12:28.840 --> 01:12:30.710
One other thing, when you do speak about collegiate housing

01:12:30.710 --> 01:12:33.920
, and I know we're using both terms loosely, SRO and colleg

01:12:33.920 --> 01:12:34.840
iate housing,

01:12:34.840 --> 01:12:36.609
they're actually, they could be deemed as two different

01:12:36.609 --> 01:12:38.579
things because we have the SRO concept with our single

01:12:38.579 --> 01:12:40.840
family homes right now where they are converted.

01:12:40.840 --> 01:12:44.270
So those are two separate issues that I wanted to raise as

01:12:44.270 --> 01:12:44.840
well.

01:12:44.840 --> 01:12:45.840
Definitely noted.

01:12:45.840 --> 01:12:49.300
I guess the last thing that I would say is I also have seen

01:12:49.300 --> 01:12:52.840
SUPs that can be worked favorably to the applicant.

01:12:52.840 --> 01:12:57.189
But to Chair's point earlier, the amount of questions still

01:12:57.189 --> 01:13:00.079
in place and if there's going to be another appointment to

01:13:00.079 --> 01:13:03.840
a commissioner or council, it just leaves a lot open.

01:13:03.840 --> 01:13:07.329
And we, somewhere in years past, we decided that DCG can

01:13:07.329 --> 01:13:08.840
allow these things.

01:13:08.840 --> 01:13:11.989
And now it seems that we're trying to spot correct that

01:13:11.989 --> 01:13:14.840
rather than maybe look at the overall zoning.

01:13:14.840 --> 01:13:19.060
And I'm going to use an example that it's a case in

01:13:19.060 --> 01:13:19.840
progress.

01:13:19.840 --> 01:13:23.760
So Trey, please correct me if I overstep the parameters of

01:13:23.760 --> 01:13:26.840
this discussion from a legal perspective.

01:13:26.840 --> 01:13:31.189
The Park 7 discussion for the property at Normal and

01:13:31.189 --> 01:13:34.229
Scripture, the request for change in zoning to consolidate

01:13:34.229 --> 01:13:36.840
the zoning, that was what was before you.

01:13:36.840 --> 01:13:41.289
Obviously, you had to factor in what the community had to

01:13:41.289 --> 01:13:45.359
say from a planning division perspective, from staff's

01:13:45.359 --> 01:13:47.649
perspective, that zoning change was appropriate and we

01:13:47.649 --> 01:13:48.840
recommended favorably.

01:13:48.840 --> 01:13:53.199
And if we did not factor in the use, we factored in the

01:13:53.199 --> 01:13:57.390
schedule of uses, all the potential uses that could be

01:13:57.390 --> 01:13:59.840
permitted in the DCG district.

01:13:59.840 --> 01:14:01.840
And that was our analysis.

01:14:01.840 --> 01:14:03.840
Our analysis was based on that.

01:14:03.840 --> 01:14:07.060
The SRO discussion, the collegiate housing discussion, and

01:14:07.060 --> 01:14:10.840
now the multifamily amendment discussion that is before you

01:14:10.840 --> 01:14:14.869
was initiated, if I'm not mistaken, late last year or early

01:14:14.869 --> 01:14:15.840
this year.

01:14:15.840 --> 01:14:19.439
So I don't know if this specific project was the impetus,

01:14:19.439 --> 01:14:22.840
but the impetus was there from other projects.

01:14:22.840 --> 01:14:23.840
Absolutely. Thank you.

01:14:23.840 --> 01:14:27.789
I'm glad you brought that up because I was getting ready to

01:14:27.789 --> 01:14:31.989
bring it back up about staff supporting Park 7 because from

01:14:31.989 --> 01:14:36.000
a planning standpoint in the zoning map, from staff's, all

01:14:36.000 --> 01:14:40.029
of its experience, felt that was an appropriate rezoning,

01:14:40.029 --> 01:14:42.840
even with knowing what we all knew at that point.

01:14:42.840 --> 01:14:46.710
And tonight we have a similar case that we've all talked

01:14:46.710 --> 01:14:50.810
about that's taking a very different approach instead of

01:14:50.810 --> 01:14:53.840
trying to come and be very forthcoming. Here's what we're

01:14:53.840 --> 01:14:53.840
planning to do and show everybody.

01:14:53.840 --> 01:14:57.109
We're going to go the other way and say, is this an

01:14:57.109 --> 01:15:00.640
appropriate rezone? And you guys figure out what we're

01:15:00.640 --> 01:15:01.840
going to do with it.

01:15:01.840 --> 01:15:07.829
And to staff's point, that is supported and push for or

01:15:07.829 --> 01:15:11.840
push but suggested for approval.

01:15:11.840 --> 01:15:16.649
So to me, this is again, some of this goes away from

01:15:16.649 --> 01:15:20.479
planning to somewhat of political views of what we think

01:15:20.479 --> 01:15:24.000
are appropriate or not appropriate versus what is

01:15:24.000 --> 01:15:25.840
appropriate planning.

01:15:25.840 --> 01:15:30.659
What is already been drafted in our 2030 plan and what

01:15:30.659 --> 01:15:34.750
staff feels like is appropriate uses to very specific

01:15:34.750 --> 01:15:38.090
concerns about things that are way outside of what's

01:15:38.090 --> 01:15:39.840
appropriate planning.

01:15:39.840 --> 01:15:43.760
And that's the concern that I get is that when we do these

01:15:43.760 --> 01:15:48.130
things in response to political issues, they're then in

01:15:48.130 --> 01:15:54.520
place, things change, and then there's a very different

01:15:54.520 --> 01:15:57.619
view of what's appropriate to be built in a zone and what's

01:15:57.619 --> 01:15:57.840
not.

01:15:57.840 --> 01:16:00.800
And sometimes to some groups it may be great that, you know

01:16:00.800 --> 01:16:03.840
what, the only thing that will be approved is two stories.

01:16:03.840 --> 01:16:08.789
And then other places, some other group may say 100 feet,

01:16:08.789 --> 01:16:12.840
well, 120 feet because it's so beautiful.

01:16:12.840 --> 01:16:15.750
And so I think this commission and city council obviously

01:16:15.750 --> 01:16:18.390
will make the final call and that's going to be my push

01:16:18.390 --> 01:16:21.689
tonight as this moves forward to city council to let them

01:16:21.689 --> 01:16:25.020
decide is that it's kind of the old political deal is

01:16:25.020 --> 01:16:27.130
sometimes you think you're going to get something and it

01:16:27.130 --> 01:16:29.840
works for a little while and the ball swings the other way.

01:16:29.840 --> 01:16:34.060
And then you've got a very different situation to deal with

01:16:34.060 --> 01:16:37.829
and that's my concern on such a large area that we're

01:16:37.829 --> 01:16:40.840
responding to fairly specific issue.

01:16:40.840 --> 01:16:44.020
They may have some very large implications over a long

01:16:44.020 --> 01:16:46.840
period of time as things change in our city.

01:16:46.840 --> 01:16:48.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:16:48.840 --> 01:16:53.810
I guess my concern is the idea of using the term multif

01:16:53.810 --> 01:16:59.840
amily and collegiate housing as if they are the same people.

01:16:59.840 --> 01:17:04.060
In my mind, they are not the same people multifamily

01:17:04.060 --> 01:17:08.119
meaning man woman child doesn't care about living across

01:17:08.119 --> 01:17:12.840
the street or within a 15 minute walk of the university.

01:17:12.840 --> 01:17:16.319
They're looking at where we're going to live where the

01:17:16.319 --> 01:17:19.930
school is going to be how can I get to work, those kinds of

01:17:19.930 --> 01:17:20.840
issues.

01:17:20.840 --> 01:17:26.710
A single 19 to 21 year old cares about how close it is to

01:17:26.710 --> 01:17:32.460
the school. Can I buy it? Can I get a bus or what have you?

01:17:32.460 --> 01:17:37.760
And when I go 377, there are a couple of apartment

01:17:37.760 --> 01:17:42.840
complexes where you and T buses run all day long.

01:17:42.840 --> 01:17:47.699
Breaker kids standing there at the curb waiting for the bus

01:17:47.699 --> 01:17:52.340
to come. And so again, I'm going back to the same point

01:17:52.340 --> 01:17:58.210
that if we're trying to limit the 18 to 21 year olds who

01:17:58.210 --> 01:18:02.739
have a bedroom only because for whatever reason, they think

01:18:02.739 --> 01:18:03.840
that's cool.

01:18:03.840 --> 01:18:08.279
Then we limit to where that can be. And where it's a big

01:18:08.279 --> 01:18:12.689
open space and they can have it 10 stories, and nobody

01:18:12.689 --> 01:18:17.279
cares, because it doesn't interfere with the single family

01:18:17.279 --> 01:18:22.250
or the duplexes that are on a nice street that's tree lined

01:18:22.250 --> 01:18:23.840
and it's just a great neighborhood.

01:18:23.840 --> 01:18:27.770
And so when we start disrupting that neighborhood effect I

01:18:27.770 --> 01:18:31.529
think that's where the problem is so again I'm going back

01:18:31.529 --> 01:18:35.180
to the same issue and that is, if we're trying to limit

01:18:35.180 --> 01:18:39.199
where the collegiate housing is, let's just limit where the

01:18:39.199 --> 01:18:40.840
collegiate housing can be.

01:18:40.840 --> 01:18:45.489
Leave the multifamily people alone. If it's a two story

01:18:45.489 --> 01:18:46.840
apartment.

01:18:46.840 --> 01:18:51.539
Again, I don't know of a single time that that's come up

01:18:51.539 --> 01:18:56.350
and it's been an issue. And so this I think is creating far

01:18:56.350 --> 01:19:00.649
more problems than what we've talked about is the three or

01:19:00.649 --> 01:19:03.840
four cases we've had in the last six months.

01:19:03.840 --> 01:19:07.420
And I appreciate that comment because I guess the question

01:19:07.420 --> 01:19:10.489
we need to ask ourselves then from a philosophical

01:19:10.489 --> 01:19:14.029
standpoint is, had the project had a certain project in an

01:19:14.029 --> 01:19:17.350
area that was requesting a zoning, if it were not an SRO

01:19:17.350 --> 01:19:19.840
and it was multifamily and it could go up to 100 feet,

01:19:19.840 --> 01:19:25.840
would that still be an issue?

01:19:25.840 --> 01:19:27.840
Chair.

01:19:27.840 --> 01:19:30.310
Well, I don't understand the question. What was the

01:19:30.310 --> 01:19:30.840
question?

01:19:30.840 --> 01:19:34.779
The question is that understanding that collegiate housing

01:19:34.779 --> 01:19:38.340
perhaps that needs to be revisited in terms of actually

01:19:38.340 --> 01:19:40.840
defining the use and what have you.

01:19:40.840 --> 01:19:45.979
But the question is then, for example, if a property is z

01:19:45.979 --> 01:19:49.109
oned DCG in close proximity to a well established single

01:19:49.109 --> 01:19:50.840
family residential neighborhood,

01:19:50.840 --> 01:19:54.310
then if multifamily zoning is permitted there and a

01:19:54.310 --> 01:19:58.520
developer develops a hundred foot multifamily complex, not

01:19:58.520 --> 01:20:02.180
an SRO or not a collegiate housing facility but just a

01:20:02.180 --> 01:20:06.319
multifamily complex, would there still be concern related

01:20:06.319 --> 01:20:07.840
to that use?

01:20:07.840 --> 01:20:12.680
Absolutely, but I don't know too many multifamily

01:20:12.680 --> 01:20:18.550
properties that would be going 10 stories in the middle of

01:20:18.550 --> 01:20:20.840
a residential area.

01:20:20.840 --> 01:20:24.109
I just don't see that happening. I don't see the

01:20:24.109 --> 01:20:29.260
promotional advertisement that would go along. This isn't

01:20:29.260 --> 01:20:29.840
New York City.

01:20:29.840 --> 01:20:31.840
I don't disagree with you.

01:20:31.840 --> 01:20:35.170
So I don't think that people are looking to live with

01:20:35.170 --> 01:20:40.840
families in a 10 story building. That's not our world.

01:20:40.840 --> 01:20:44.800
And again, just I wanted to put that out there because what

01:20:44.800 --> 01:20:48.279
I'm trying to explain is that as we evolve with our zoning

01:20:48.279 --> 01:20:52.840
patterns and our land uses and you have a mixed use,

01:20:52.840 --> 01:20:56.260
I'm not talking about multifamily and residential to a

01:20:56.260 --> 01:20:59.909
retail with that top bottom floor issue, but just having a

01:20:59.909 --> 01:21:03.350
plethora of uses within a very confined area, then you

01:21:03.350 --> 01:21:04.840
might have that opportunity crop up.

01:21:04.840 --> 01:21:07.579
So I'm just saying as we think ahead, this might be

01:21:07.579 --> 01:21:10.750
something you want to park and think about and digest and

01:21:10.750 --> 01:21:12.840
see how you want to move forward.

01:21:12.840 --> 01:21:14.840
Commissioner Hatchbuth.

01:21:14.840 --> 01:21:16.840
Thank you.

01:21:16.840 --> 01:21:19.840
I'm not going to say it all because I need an audio book.

01:21:19.840 --> 01:21:25.680
But I want to point out that I stand and sit here, the only

01:21:25.680 --> 01:21:32.890
person that voted for the development on Fry Street in the

01:21:32.890 --> 01:21:36.840
middle of downtown, I mean university-ish area.

01:21:36.840 --> 01:21:40.539
I'm the only person that voted for that and then also voted

01:21:40.539 --> 01:21:44.159
against it being on the edge of what would be a transition

01:21:44.159 --> 01:21:44.840
area.

01:21:44.840 --> 01:21:51.140
And so I feel like I have a pretty good record in not being

01:21:51.140 --> 01:21:53.840
anti-multifamily.

01:21:53.840 --> 01:21:57.619
I'm anti-building multifamily on the edge of what would be

01:21:57.619 --> 01:21:58.840
a transition.

01:21:58.840 --> 01:22:02.840
And so I challenge anyone to give me a good reason.

01:22:02.840 --> 01:22:05.239
I don't let my kids play on the edge of the curb by the

01:22:05.239 --> 01:22:05.840
street.

01:22:05.840 --> 01:22:07.840
I don't jump off the edge of anything.

01:22:07.840 --> 01:22:11.840
Edges aren't for big, risky stuff.

01:22:11.840 --> 01:22:13.840
That's just not where it should go.

01:22:13.840 --> 01:22:15.840
My humble opinion.

01:22:15.840 --> 01:22:22.399
On topic with this, I think I struggle as well but for a

01:22:22.399 --> 01:22:23.840
different reason.

01:22:23.840 --> 01:22:30.039
Because when you talk definitions, the cable industry has

01:22:30.039 --> 01:22:32.760
been, and the movie industry has been trying to get in

01:22:32.760 --> 01:22:34.840
front of pirating since the beginning of time.

01:22:34.840 --> 01:22:37.149
And I'm going to sit here and tell you that no matter what

01:22:37.149 --> 01:22:40.649
you title it, no matter how you write it up, a developer is

01:22:40.649 --> 01:22:41.840
going to take his pencil and say,

01:22:41.840 --> 01:22:47.489
okay, you can't have a kitchen by itself, okay, well I'll

01:22:47.489 --> 01:22:48.840
draw this and make that happen.

01:22:48.840 --> 01:22:49.840
You'll go change the definition.

01:22:49.840 --> 01:22:52.869
They'll change the design just a touch just to get outside

01:22:52.869 --> 01:22:53.840
of that scope.

01:22:53.840 --> 01:22:56.310
You're chasing your tail at that point to try to come up

01:22:56.310 --> 01:22:58.840
with, hey, we're going to box them into a corner.

01:22:58.840 --> 01:22:59.840
No, you're not.

01:22:59.840 --> 01:23:00.840
That doesn't work.

01:23:00.840 --> 01:23:02.840
They move faster than we do.

01:23:02.840 --> 01:23:05.840
So then it becomes a matter of a bigger issue.

01:23:05.840 --> 01:23:09.550
The same council's direction says for more public input,

01:23:09.550 --> 01:23:11.840
for more opportunity to speak.

01:23:11.840 --> 01:23:14.840
Well, council routinely ignores the public.

01:23:14.840 --> 01:23:16.840
You know, so I don't get that.

01:23:16.840 --> 01:23:18.840
That doesn't affect change.

01:23:18.840 --> 01:23:21.279
And so for me, I think the glaring issue and everything,

01:23:21.279 --> 01:23:23.840
everyone said, no one's mentioned the stakeholders.

01:23:23.840 --> 01:23:28.840
No one's mentioned we talked to developers and they said.

01:23:28.840 --> 01:23:29.840
That's the problem.

01:23:29.840 --> 01:23:32.840
We sit in a vacuum and try to make a decision.

01:23:32.840 --> 01:23:35.930
And so this board or this body needs to create, you need

01:23:35.930 --> 01:23:37.840
two sets of lab rats, right?

01:23:37.840 --> 01:23:40.840
You need a lab rat that sits on P and Z.

01:23:40.840 --> 01:23:43.779
You need, so that we don't have to have the meeting

01:23:43.779 --> 01:23:44.840
restrictions.

01:23:44.840 --> 01:23:47.439
So we grab two or three people from P and Z and two or

01:23:47.439 --> 01:23:49.840
three people from a development community.

01:23:49.840 --> 01:23:51.840
And you bounce those ideas off of each other.

01:23:51.840 --> 01:23:52.840
You have a conversation.

01:23:52.840 --> 01:23:56.229
But I just think no one's mentioned that they talked to the

01:23:56.229 --> 01:23:58.840
developers and got their input on that.

01:23:58.840 --> 01:24:05.119
And so I think that that to me is troubling that we, it

01:24:05.119 --> 01:24:08.840
just, you're not going to get in front of it by definition.

01:24:08.840 --> 01:24:11.659
You're going to freeze them out, which is going to be a

01:24:11.659 --> 01:24:13.840
problem by just in its basic premise.

01:24:13.840 --> 01:24:18.369
And then it just doesn't, you're not giving the citizens

01:24:18.369 --> 01:24:22.840
any extra input or that input has not been acted upon.

01:24:22.840 --> 01:24:27.060
And so for me, I think it's silly to talk about definitions

01:24:27.060 --> 01:24:29.840
because that's not going to cause them.

01:24:29.840 --> 01:24:32.449
And even this project before this, I'm going to digress a

01:24:32.449 --> 01:24:32.840
bit.

01:24:32.840 --> 01:24:38.210
So we're talking about, just before you get to CVS, about

01:24:38.210 --> 01:24:40.840
this development going in and if they're saying something

01:24:40.840 --> 01:24:44.840
and if they don't, none of that matters.

01:24:44.840 --> 01:24:49.840
Traffic on that road, are you, you get past, what is that?

01:24:49.840 --> 01:24:52.840
The giant apartments on the corner, what street is that?

01:24:52.840 --> 01:24:53.840
Is that Welch?

01:24:53.840 --> 01:24:56.840
Yeah, you get past Welch and that street is so deplorable,

01:24:56.840 --> 01:25:00.180
you're going to go one mile per hour no matter what it is,

01:25:00.180 --> 01:25:00.840
right?

01:25:00.840 --> 01:25:04.920
So you're talking about increased traffic upstream on a one

01:25:04.920 --> 01:25:08.840
way that we're all doomed to fail once you cross Welch.

01:25:08.840 --> 01:25:12.640
And so for me, it really, this conversation lacks reality

01:25:12.640 --> 01:25:15.840
because it's not talking to the stakeholders.

01:25:15.840 --> 01:25:19.449
It's not taking into consideration that you're not going to

01:25:19.449 --> 01:25:21.840
get in front of it definition wise.

01:25:21.840 --> 01:25:25.529
And so I'd love to see something that has a touch of

01:25:25.529 --> 01:25:26.840
reality to it.

01:25:26.840 --> 01:25:31.189
So I don't feel like we should, right now I don't think we

01:25:31.189 --> 01:25:32.840
should send it to council as is.

01:25:32.840 --> 01:25:37.680
I think they need, we should send direction on our input

01:25:37.680 --> 01:25:41.840
and I don't think definition is the way to go.

01:25:41.840 --> 01:25:45.350
I think it should be, because I think developers will reach

01:25:45.350 --> 01:25:48.840
out and they'll say, hey, what do you think about this?

01:25:48.840 --> 01:25:49.840
Where is this going?

01:25:49.840 --> 01:25:54.189
And so I think there needs to be a smaller body that can

01:25:54.189 --> 01:25:58.420
meet with a small body of developers that would negotiate

01:25:58.420 --> 01:25:59.840
or speak in earnest.

01:25:59.840 --> 01:26:03.329
And then those four people, those six people sit down and

01:26:03.329 --> 01:26:04.840
have a conversation.

01:26:04.840 --> 01:26:07.840
And maybe you mix in, you put in three citizens.

01:26:07.840 --> 01:26:12.189
So you have nine people that sit down and have a real

01:26:12.189 --> 01:26:15.680
conversation versus this, which is, hey, we're going to

01:26:15.680 --> 01:26:17.840
come roll this downhill on you.

01:26:17.840 --> 01:26:22.199
And they're going to skirt it and we'll have to redo it all

01:26:22.199 --> 01:26:22.840
over.

01:26:22.840 --> 01:26:26.060
We're not going to be able to write the development code

01:26:26.060 --> 01:26:29.069
faster than they can take their pencil and make two k

01:26:29.069 --> 01:26:29.840
itchens.

01:26:29.840 --> 01:26:32.750
So now there's one general kitchen and one kitchen tied to

01:26:32.750 --> 01:26:34.840
this room, so now it's multifamily.

01:26:34.840 --> 01:26:39.840
So I just don't think that's a good path.

01:26:39.840 --> 01:26:40.840
Sure.

01:26:40.840 --> 01:26:42.840
Call on Laco.

01:26:42.840 --> 01:26:44.840
Just a quick comment.

01:26:44.840 --> 01:26:48.170
Reaching out to developers, I can see as a good idea and

01:26:48.170 --> 01:26:49.840
want to get their input.

01:26:49.840 --> 01:26:53.250
I cannot recommend that you purposefully pick a less than

01:26:53.250 --> 01:26:57.279
half number of your group to meet with them to try to skirt

01:26:57.279 --> 01:27:00.840
the quorum rules, just for the record.

01:27:00.840 --> 01:27:03.840
Well, I think it's not really to skirt the quorum rules.

01:27:03.840 --> 01:27:07.840
It's to take in the fact that time is money, regardless.

01:27:07.840 --> 01:27:15.140
And I think if you ignore that fact, then that doesn't make

01:27:15.140 --> 01:27:16.840
it go away.

01:27:16.840 --> 01:27:22.840
So I think if ultimately you come back to the full body,

01:27:22.840 --> 01:27:26.369
then I think it ultimately satisfies that because you can

01:27:26.369 --> 01:27:27.840
meet twice in a week.

01:27:27.840 --> 01:27:28.840
You meet three times in a week.

01:27:28.840 --> 01:27:33.479
You can meet, you know, you can satisfy and get a consensus

01:27:33.479 --> 01:27:37.010
and get things done, which I know is a scary premise to

01:27:37.010 --> 01:27:39.840
actually get stuff done, but it's really cool.

01:27:39.840 --> 01:27:44.189
And so I think that's kind of my point is what are we doing

01:27:44.189 --> 01:27:47.460
productive that moves us along and moves us in a good

01:27:47.460 --> 01:27:47.840
direction,

01:27:47.840 --> 01:27:52.609
that realizes citizen input, realizes our developer input,

01:27:52.609 --> 01:27:56.750
and makes them feel as though we're listening and we're

01:27:56.750 --> 01:27:58.840
trying to find a consensus.

01:27:58.840 --> 01:28:03.199
And I think that's where you'll get people negotiating in

01:28:03.199 --> 01:28:07.840
earnest and doing due diligence versus trying to find ways

01:28:07.840 --> 01:28:13.189
to get around our code that we can't amend fast enough to

01:28:13.189 --> 01:28:14.840
beat the curve.

01:28:14.840 --> 01:28:16.840
That's my thought.

01:28:16.840 --> 01:28:19.520
If I can interject and provide some feedback from a

01:28:19.520 --> 01:28:22.239
planning perspective, from the planning discipline, from a

01:28:22.239 --> 01:28:26.500
land use perspective, the intent of a specific use permit

01:28:26.500 --> 01:28:27.840
is not to be onerous, number one.

01:28:27.840 --> 01:28:28.840
That's not the intent.

01:28:28.840 --> 01:28:32.539
It's actually a level of evaluation that let's assume that

01:28:32.539 --> 01:28:35.899
a use is not permitted unless a specific use permit is

01:28:35.899 --> 01:28:36.840
provided.

01:28:36.840 --> 01:28:38.840
Let's look at the flip side.

01:28:38.840 --> 01:28:41.939
That provides an opportunity for a developer to actually

01:28:41.939 --> 01:28:44.840
look at opportunities that are available to them.

01:28:44.840 --> 01:28:49.199
The goal from the planning division is never to exclude any

01:28:49.199 --> 01:28:49.840
party.

01:28:49.840 --> 01:28:52.960
We do have an obligation to our community and our citizens

01:28:52.960 --> 01:28:56.000
to ensure that we have as to the greatest extent possible

01:28:56.000 --> 01:28:57.840
sound planning principles.

01:28:57.840 --> 01:29:02.199
So when it relates to, for instance, a development code

01:29:02.199 --> 01:29:04.840
update, that will not be done in a vacuum.

01:29:04.840 --> 01:29:06.840
There will be citizen outreach.

01:29:06.840 --> 01:29:09.840
There will be community engagement associated with that.

01:29:09.840 --> 01:29:14.800
As it relates to this specific request that is before you

01:29:14.800 --> 01:29:18.840
tonight, this came forward, and again, by the council.

01:29:18.840 --> 01:29:20.840
So we are presenting this to you.

01:29:20.840 --> 01:29:24.229
Staff has reviewed and analyzed opportunities or options

01:29:24.229 --> 01:29:27.840
that are available when it comes to multifamily development

01:29:27.840 --> 01:29:33.079
within proximity to certain areas or within specific zoning

01:29:33.079 --> 01:29:33.840
districts.

01:29:33.840 --> 01:29:35.840
And that is why it's here before you.

01:29:35.840 --> 01:29:40.579
The PNZ does have the opportunity to even deny this, and it

01:29:40.579 --> 01:29:43.840
would move forward to city council.

01:29:43.840 --> 01:29:44.840
Commissioner Beck.

01:29:44.840 --> 01:29:45.840
Thank you, Chair.

01:29:45.840 --> 01:29:49.220
And if I start rambling here, it's because I'm trying to

01:29:49.220 --> 01:29:50.840
put everything together.

01:29:50.840 --> 01:29:52.840
I'm going to let everybody ramble mode tonight.

01:29:52.840 --> 01:29:55.840
Well, I want to be as concise as possible.

01:29:55.840 --> 01:29:58.840
When I first saw this, to me, it looked pretty simplistic.

01:29:58.840 --> 01:30:02.029
So I appreciate everybody's input to show me that there's

01:30:02.029 --> 01:30:05.159
more -- it's a little bit more complicated than I thought

01:30:05.159 --> 01:30:05.840
it was.

01:30:05.840 --> 01:30:09.029
But to me, it was the perfect tool, I think, that if we'd

01:30:09.029 --> 01:30:12.159
had it a couple of weeks ago, we could have resolved the

01:30:12.159 --> 01:30:13.840
issue with the Park 7 thing.

01:30:13.840 --> 01:30:18.199
And I think when you look at this entire area that it could

01:30:18.199 --> 01:30:21.029
affect, there's only one area that we're really going to be

01:30:21.029 --> 01:30:21.840
dealing with.

01:30:21.840 --> 01:30:25.279
And it's going to be the sensitive neighborhood areas on

01:30:25.279 --> 01:30:26.840
the north side of UNT.

01:30:26.840 --> 01:30:31.899
All these other areas, they're not a problem with SROs and

01:30:31.899 --> 01:30:33.840
high rises so much.

01:30:33.840 --> 01:30:36.840
But it is more than just collegiate housing.

01:30:36.840 --> 01:30:37.840
It is height.

01:30:37.840 --> 01:30:39.840
It is density.

01:30:39.840 --> 01:30:44.260
We had the situation where DISD wanted to build a higher

01:30:44.260 --> 01:30:48.350
building over off of Bolivar, I think it was, right across

01:30:48.350 --> 01:30:49.840
the street from the neighborhood.

01:30:49.840 --> 01:30:50.840
So it is more than that.

01:30:50.840 --> 01:30:55.210
And I think what this tool does is protect those kind of

01:30:55.210 --> 01:30:56.840
neighborhoods.

01:30:56.840 --> 01:31:00.020
And if you look around the green area and everything, you

01:31:00.020 --> 01:31:03.100
're not going to see many sensitive neighborhood areas that

01:31:03.100 --> 01:31:04.840
are going to be impacted here.

01:31:04.840 --> 01:31:08.170
Now, the fact that an SUP is required, yes, means the

01:31:08.170 --> 01:31:10.840
developer's got to do a little bit more.

01:31:10.840 --> 01:31:13.520
But I think, like Manal was saying, that this could be to

01:31:13.520 --> 01:31:14.840
their advantage as well.

01:31:14.840 --> 01:31:16.840
So I thought this was a good idea.

01:31:16.840 --> 01:31:21.369
I'm not opposed to the idea that as we've got the DDC under

01:31:21.369 --> 01:31:25.920
revision that maybe we could stipulate SROs in specific

01:31:25.920 --> 01:31:26.840
areas.

01:31:26.840 --> 01:31:28.840
I'm not opposed to that.

01:31:28.840 --> 01:31:32.630
But to me, this would be a good tool to protect just a few

01:31:32.630 --> 01:31:34.840
sensitive areas in this city.

01:31:34.840 --> 01:31:38.130
And mainly, to me, it's just the areas north of the UNT

01:31:38.130 --> 01:31:38.840
campus.

01:31:38.840 --> 01:31:40.840
So I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

01:31:40.840 --> 01:31:43.840
But then that's me.

01:31:43.840 --> 01:31:46.840
Politics, there's politics in everything.

01:31:46.840 --> 01:31:48.840
You try not to.

01:31:48.840 --> 01:31:51.840
We want to try and work within certain parameters.

01:31:51.840 --> 01:31:55.550
But there's always going to be a political element in just

01:31:55.550 --> 01:31:59.789
about any decision any city, state, or federal government

01:31:59.789 --> 01:32:00.840
employee has.

01:32:00.840 --> 01:32:03.840
So that's just the nature of the beast.

01:32:03.840 --> 01:32:05.840
But anyway, to me, it seemed like a good tool.

01:32:05.840 --> 01:32:07.840
I would have promoted it.

01:32:07.840 --> 01:32:11.079
But yeah, if we need to maybe push it up a little bit and

01:32:11.079 --> 01:32:14.840
look a little bit closer, I'm not opposed to that either.

01:32:14.840 --> 01:32:21.840
Any other questions for staff on this item?

01:32:21.840 --> 01:32:24.840
Thank you all.

01:32:24.840 --> 01:32:28.840
I think--

01:32:28.840 --> 01:32:30.840
Commissioner Beck.

01:32:30.840 --> 01:32:32.840
I did have one question.

01:32:32.840 --> 01:32:34.840
It was so small compared to what we were dealing with here.

01:32:34.840 --> 01:32:40.649
But since I've got it, let me ask, in considerations on

01:32:40.649 --> 01:32:45.840
page 3, number 9, it says, if applicable, an SUP

01:32:45.840 --> 01:32:48.289
application may require this to middle of a site plan,

01:32:48.289 --> 01:32:51.840
landscape plan, or architectural elevation.

01:32:51.840 --> 01:32:54.060
That surprised me when you said, if applicable, it's a

01:32:54.060 --> 01:32:54.840
reservation.

01:32:54.840 --> 01:32:56.859
I would have thought that had been automatic, that those

01:32:56.859 --> 01:32:58.840
kind of things would have been required with an SUP.

01:32:58.840 --> 01:33:00.840
Not all SUPs.

01:33:00.840 --> 01:33:06.840
There are some uses that are not so site-specific.

01:33:06.840 --> 01:33:09.840
So that's the reason why there's a may.

01:33:09.840 --> 01:33:10.840
All right.

01:33:10.840 --> 01:33:13.840
Thank you.

01:33:13.840 --> 01:33:15.840
OK.

01:33:15.840 --> 01:33:18.840
That's it.

01:33:18.840 --> 01:33:22.680
That will conclude our working through our agenda here at

01:33:22.680 --> 01:33:23.840
work session.

01:33:23.840 --> 01:33:37.850
So at 6.07, I will close our work session, and we will

01:33:37.850 --> 01:33:40.840
reconvene--

01:33:40.840 --> 01:33:44.439
Good evening, and welcome to the City of Denton Planning

01:33:44.439 --> 01:33:48.840
and Zoning Commission meeting for March 22, 2017.

01:33:48.840 --> 01:33:51.840
This meeting has been dually posted, and we do have a qu

01:33:51.840 --> 01:33:52.840
orum present.

01:33:52.840 --> 01:33:55.840
And I'm going to call our meeting to order at 6.35.

01:33:55.840 --> 01:33:58.520
Our first order of business will be to stand and give the

01:33:58.520 --> 01:34:03.840
pledge to the U.S. and the Texas flags.

01:34:03.840 --> 01:34:08.199
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

01:34:08.199 --> 01:34:08.840
America,

01:34:08.840 --> 01:34:13.270
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under

01:34:13.270 --> 01:34:19.840
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

01:34:19.840 --> 01:34:23.279
I pledge allegiance to the Texas flag, and to the republic

01:34:23.279 --> 01:34:30.399
for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible,

01:34:30.399 --> 01:34:38.840
with liberty and justice for all.

01:34:38.840 --> 01:34:42.550
We'll move us to our second item this evening, which will

01:34:42.550 --> 01:34:46.840
be to entertain a motion for our minutes for March 8.

01:34:46.840 --> 01:34:47.840
Commissioner Rozelle.

01:34:47.840 --> 01:34:49.840
I move to approve.

01:34:49.840 --> 01:34:51.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:34:51.840 --> 01:34:52.840
I second.

01:34:52.840 --> 01:34:54.840
We have a first and a second for approval.

01:34:54.840 --> 01:34:58.840
Any discussion?

01:34:58.840 --> 01:35:10.840
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:35:10.840 --> 01:35:13.840
Motion carries 6 to 0.

01:35:13.840 --> 01:35:19.840
That will move us to our consent agenda.

01:35:19.840 --> 01:35:27.840
Chair would entertain a motion.

01:35:27.840 --> 01:35:28.840
Commissioner Ellis.

01:35:28.840 --> 01:35:29.840
Thank you, Chair.

01:35:29.840 --> 01:35:31.840
I make a motion to approve our consent agenda.

01:35:31.840 --> 01:35:32.840
Okay.

01:35:32.840 --> 01:35:33.840
Commissioner Beck.

01:35:33.840 --> 01:35:34.840
Second.

01:35:34.840 --> 01:35:35.840
Okay.

01:35:35.840 --> 01:35:37.840
We have a first and a second for approval.

01:35:37.840 --> 01:35:40.840
Any discussion?

01:35:40.840 --> 01:35:49.840
Seeing none, we will call for a vote on the board.

01:35:49.840 --> 01:35:52.840
Motion carries 6 to 0.

01:35:52.840 --> 01:36:00.840
We'll move us to our public hearing section tonight.

01:36:00.840 --> 01:36:12.649
I'm going to open the public hearing for item A, which is Z

01:36:12.649 --> 01:36:25.840
16-0028, and call on Haley for presentation.

01:36:25.840 --> 01:36:26.840
All right.

01:36:26.840 --> 01:36:30.529
Good evening, this is case Z16-28, and I'll run through the

01:36:30.529 --> 01:36:33.840
presentation briefly for the benefit of our audience.

01:36:33.840 --> 01:36:36.800
So the request is to hold a public hearing and consider a

01:36:36.800 --> 01:36:40.840
request to rezone approximately a half acre from downtown

01:36:40.840 --> 01:36:43.840
residential 2 to downtown commercial general.

01:36:43.840 --> 01:36:47.840
The property is located at 1604 West Hickory.

01:36:47.840 --> 01:36:50.720
As you can see from the map, there are existing multifamily

01:36:50.720 --> 01:36:52.840
developments to the north and the west.

01:36:52.840 --> 01:36:55.949
Properties, two properties directly to the east of the

01:36:55.949 --> 01:36:59.319
subject property, outlined in red on the map, are under the

01:36:59.319 --> 01:37:01.840
same ownership as the subject property.

01:37:01.840 --> 01:37:06.289
You can see that UNT is located directly across Hickory

01:37:06.289 --> 01:37:08.840
Street from this property.

01:37:08.840 --> 01:37:11.630
As I mentioned currently, it's zoned downtown residential 2

01:37:11.630 --> 01:37:11.840
.

01:37:11.840 --> 01:37:16.840
The proposal is for downtown commercial general.

01:37:16.840 --> 01:37:19.909
The future land use designation of the area is neighborhood

01:37:19.909 --> 01:37:21.840
university compatibility area.

01:37:21.840 --> 01:37:24.520
This designation is generally applied to the areas

01:37:24.520 --> 01:37:27.369
surrounding our two universities in town, which are

01:37:27.369 --> 01:37:29.840
affected by their proximity to that university.

01:37:29.840 --> 01:37:33.289
And the goal of this designation is to allow for compatible

01:37:33.289 --> 01:37:36.560
form and land use to develop in these areas to create a

01:37:36.560 --> 01:37:40.529
transition from the campus to the established surrounding

01:37:40.529 --> 01:37:41.840
neighborhoods.

01:37:41.840 --> 01:37:43.840
Staff's considerations.

01:37:43.840 --> 01:37:46.050
First, the rezoning is consistent with the surrounding

01:37:46.050 --> 01:37:46.840
zoning pattern.

01:37:46.840 --> 01:37:50.180
You can see from the map here that there is currently a mix

01:37:50.180 --> 01:37:53.840
of DR2 and DCG within the block that this property is on.

01:37:53.840 --> 01:37:56.869
This designation is also consistent with the future land

01:37:56.869 --> 01:37:59.840
use designation because that designation calls for density

01:37:59.840 --> 01:38:02.479
and services be provided near the campuses to promote walk

01:38:02.479 --> 01:38:05.840
ability and a versatile character for these areas.

01:38:05.840 --> 01:38:10.840
And that could be accommodated with the DCG district.

01:38:10.840 --> 01:38:13.819
This would also consolidate the zoning for all of the

01:38:13.819 --> 01:38:16.880
properties that are under the same ownership here and

01:38:16.880 --> 01:38:20.359
therefore allow for more cohesive future development under

01:38:20.359 --> 01:38:22.840
a single set of zoning regulations.

01:38:22.840 --> 01:38:26.109
This request would also allow us to promote transportation

01:38:26.109 --> 01:38:29.840
efficient design by providing a higher density of resources

01:38:29.840 --> 01:38:34.289
and living spaces within close proximity to UNT that would

01:38:34.289 --> 01:38:37.250
then promote pedestrian and bicycle activity and could

01:38:37.250 --> 01:38:37.840
potentially

01:38:37.840 --> 01:38:40.279
alleviate some vehicle trips and parking through the

01:38:40.279 --> 01:38:41.840
surrounding neighborhoods.

01:38:41.840 --> 01:38:46.029
It also helps to promote more compact design by allowing

01:38:46.029 --> 01:38:48.840
that higher density near the campus.

01:38:48.840 --> 01:38:51.850
To give you a comparison, DCG does allow for a

01:38:51.850 --> 01:38:56.069
substantially higher density than DR2, would also allow for

01:38:56.069 --> 01:38:59.840
100 foot maximum building height as opposed to 45.

01:38:59.840 --> 01:39:03.550
So it does have some increases there in terms of the scale

01:39:03.550 --> 01:39:06.840
of development that would be permitted.

01:39:06.840 --> 01:39:07.840
Notices were sent out.

01:39:07.840 --> 01:39:10.840
We received no written notices in response to that.

01:39:10.840 --> 01:39:14.060
The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting on February

01:39:14.060 --> 01:39:14.840
15th.

01:39:14.840 --> 01:39:18.130
One person attended and was neutral to that request and I

01:39:18.130 --> 01:39:21.560
passed out their response that was provided at the meeting

01:39:21.560 --> 01:39:23.840
to you all before the work session.

01:39:23.840 --> 01:39:26.340
With that, staff is recommending approval of this request

01:39:26.340 --> 01:39:28.789
because of its compatibility with the surrounding zoning

01:39:28.789 --> 01:39:31.579
districts as well as its consistency with the goals and

01:39:31.579 --> 01:39:33.840
objectives of the Denton Plan 2030.

01:39:33.840 --> 01:39:36.840
And I can stand for any questions.

01:39:36.840 --> 01:39:41.840
Any questions for staff?

01:39:41.840 --> 01:39:43.840
Thank you, Haley.

01:39:43.840 --> 01:39:45.840
And I believe the applicant is here.

01:39:45.840 --> 01:39:48.840
I have three cards to speak.

01:39:48.840 --> 01:39:54.060
First card I will call on will be the applicant, Gary Chang

01:39:54.060 --> 01:39:58.840
, to be followed by Kim McKibbin and Paul Messler.

01:39:58.840 --> 01:40:01.850
Please state your name and address for the record and since

01:40:01.850 --> 01:40:03.840
the applicant has 10 minutes.

01:40:03.840 --> 01:40:04.840
Good evening.

01:40:04.840 --> 01:40:06.840
Gary Chang.

01:40:06.840 --> 01:40:12.840
I live at 3608 Lake Country Drive, Denton, Texas, 76210.

01:40:12.840 --> 01:40:15.840
I represent MSGSB and here's a little background.

01:40:15.840 --> 01:40:18.840
We are a locally owned property management company.

01:40:18.840 --> 01:40:21.840
We operate under the name Jackson Chang Apartments.

01:40:21.840 --> 01:40:24.840
We've been here since 1982.

01:40:24.840 --> 01:40:29.250
I'm here to request that our lot be up zoned from DR2 to DC

01:40:29.250 --> 01:40:33.420
G such that it will be congruent with the adjacent lots

01:40:33.420 --> 01:40:34.840
which we own.

01:40:34.840 --> 01:40:38.779
The subject lot, which consists of four duplexes, has been

01:40:38.779 --> 01:40:41.840
under our ownership since 2003.

01:40:41.840 --> 01:40:45.859
The adjacent lots, which consist of our leasing office and

01:40:45.859 --> 01:40:49.840
two rent houses, have been owned since 1988.

01:40:49.840 --> 01:40:53.819
We have been operating our leasing office out of 1600 West

01:40:53.819 --> 01:40:55.840
Hickory since 1998.

01:40:55.840 --> 01:40:59.840
We feel that it is time to redevelop the area into a new le

01:40:59.840 --> 01:41:03.840
asing office and multifamily apartment complex.

01:41:03.840 --> 01:41:07.090
The buildings on site are near the end of their economic

01:41:07.090 --> 01:41:10.840
usefulness and would be better served being redeveloped.

01:41:10.840 --> 01:41:14.430
So tonight's agenda is to request zoning be changed to be

01:41:14.430 --> 01:41:16.840
congruent with our adjacent lot.

01:41:16.840 --> 01:41:20.439
Once that is accomplished, we will commence drawing up rede

01:41:20.439 --> 01:41:22.840
velopment plans under DCG zoning.

01:41:22.840 --> 01:41:25.840
Thank you. I can take any questions.

01:41:25.840 --> 01:41:27.840
Any questions for the applicant?

01:41:27.840 --> 01:41:29.840
Commissioner Beck.

01:41:29.840 --> 01:41:32.119
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chang, for your

01:41:32.119 --> 01:41:32.840
presentation.

01:41:32.840 --> 01:41:36.289
In our background material, it states that your intent is

01:41:36.289 --> 01:41:39.840
to redevelop the site with office and multifamily uses.

01:41:39.840 --> 01:41:44.949
So this zone change, then, is this in lieu of constructing

01:41:44.949 --> 01:41:50.840
a building between the height of 45 feet and 100 feet?

01:41:50.840 --> 01:41:51.840
Yes.

01:41:51.840 --> 01:41:59.899
Okay. And would you -- is this going to be multifamily in

01:41:59.899 --> 01:42:02.399
the sense that it will accommodate families who want to set

01:42:02.399 --> 01:42:02.840
down roots,

01:42:02.840 --> 01:42:05.840
or is this going to be more accommodating for students?

01:42:05.840 --> 01:42:10.189
Well, given the proximity of our site with respect to the

01:42:10.189 --> 01:42:14.699
University of North Texas, we would cater towards student

01:42:14.699 --> 01:42:15.840
housing.

01:42:15.840 --> 01:42:16.840
Right.

01:42:16.840 --> 01:42:19.840
But we lease to anybody who is qualified.

01:42:19.840 --> 01:42:25.840
Right. But as an SRO, it's not necessarily family-friendly.

01:42:25.840 --> 01:42:28.840
And it's your property. You're free to do what you want.

01:42:28.840 --> 01:42:30.840
Please don't misunderstand me.

01:42:30.840 --> 01:42:35.989
It's just my concern is there's an abundance of SROs, and

01:42:35.989 --> 01:42:37.840
it seems like they're continually growing,

01:42:37.840 --> 01:42:42.199
and Denton has a real need for family, affordable family,

01:42:42.199 --> 01:42:44.840
affordable housing for families.

01:42:44.840 --> 01:42:49.569
So I just lay that out there to encourage you to think

01:42:49.569 --> 01:42:52.979
about that, because down the road, there will be a need,

01:42:52.979 --> 01:42:55.840
even in close proximity to the University.

01:42:55.840 --> 01:43:00.710
But one other question is how do you plan on dealing with

01:43:00.710 --> 01:43:01.840
parking?

01:43:01.840 --> 01:43:05.050
That's a rough area for traffic anyway. So your design, how

01:43:05.050 --> 01:43:06.840
will it allow for parking?

01:43:06.840 --> 01:43:12.680
We will have a parking garage, and we will also have just

01:43:12.680 --> 01:43:14.840
on-site parking.

01:43:14.840 --> 01:43:15.840
Okay.

01:43:15.840 --> 01:43:16.840
Yes.

01:43:16.840 --> 01:43:19.840
You don't plan on street parking being a factor?

01:43:19.840 --> 01:43:22.520
Well, if shared parking is allowed, we would take that into

01:43:22.520 --> 01:43:23.840
consideration for credit.

01:43:23.840 --> 01:43:27.840
Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir.

01:43:27.840 --> 01:43:32.840
Any other questions for the applicant?

01:43:32.840 --> 01:43:33.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

01:43:33.840 --> 01:43:40.220
I think my concern is what I would call zone creep, where

01:43:40.220 --> 01:43:44.350
right now on the properties that you have that allows for

01:43:44.350 --> 01:43:46.840
100-foot buildings,

01:43:46.840 --> 01:43:51.449
the other property that we're talking about tonight allows

01:43:51.449 --> 01:43:54.680
for a 45-foot building, I would think that since you're

01:43:54.680 --> 01:43:58.840
just about a block away from a historical district,

01:43:58.840 --> 01:44:04.189
that that would be a good transition for a 45-foot building

01:44:04.189 --> 01:44:07.840
to be in the subject property this evening,

01:44:07.840 --> 01:44:11.939
and then going up to a 100-foot building on the property

01:44:11.939 --> 01:44:15.840
that you already own that already has that designation.

01:44:15.840 --> 01:44:19.329
And I would think that that would be more conducive to the

01:44:19.329 --> 01:44:24.310
overall neighborhood of taking into account the fact that

01:44:24.310 --> 01:44:26.840
you could still do some of the things that you want to do,

01:44:26.840 --> 01:44:29.840
just not to the 100-foot level.

01:44:29.840 --> 01:44:35.010
And so that's my biggest concern is not necessarily what

01:44:35.010 --> 01:44:38.880
you do, but what's going to happen to the property to the

01:44:38.880 --> 01:44:43.510
west of that, and then again goes into the zone creep issue

01:44:43.510 --> 01:44:43.840
.

01:44:43.840 --> 01:44:48.189
My response to your concern would be that our lot is

01:44:48.189 --> 01:44:51.840
surrounded by apartment complexes as well as the CVS,

01:44:51.840 --> 01:44:57.489
and I believe that would provide enough of the transition

01:44:57.489 --> 01:45:00.840
that would, for our lot, what we're talking about.

01:45:00.840 --> 01:45:04.140
I can't control what happens in the neighborhood, but for

01:45:04.140 --> 01:45:06.359
our lot, I think it would be appropriate, because we

01:45:06.359 --> 01:45:07.840
already have two-story apartments.

01:45:07.840 --> 01:45:11.319
We're surrounded by two-story apartments as well as by the

01:45:11.319 --> 01:45:13.840
CVS as well as the chemistry building.

01:45:13.840 --> 01:45:17.359
So our lot should not affect if we were able to develop up

01:45:17.359 --> 01:45:18.840
to 100 feet.

01:45:18.840 --> 01:45:20.840
We shouldn't affect the neighborhood.

01:45:20.840 --> 01:45:24.840
And that would be my response.

01:45:24.840 --> 01:45:29.840
Any other questions for the applicant?

01:45:29.840 --> 01:45:32.840
Thank you, sir.

01:45:32.840 --> 01:45:39.840
The next card I have requesting to speak is Kim McKibbin.

01:45:39.840 --> 01:45:44.520
Good evening. My name is Kim McKibbin, 1306 West Hickory,

01:45:44.520 --> 01:45:45.840
Denton, Texas.

01:45:45.840 --> 01:45:52.949
I am here to ask you to very seriously consider opposing

01:45:52.949 --> 01:45:58.390
this rezoning simply because we do not have a clear idea of

01:45:58.390 --> 01:46:00.840
what the use is going to be.

01:46:00.840 --> 01:46:04.409
We've talked over and over again for the last three years

01:46:04.409 --> 01:46:07.119
now, some of you were here when I got started with this and

01:46:07.119 --> 01:46:08.840
some of you weren't,

01:46:08.840 --> 01:46:13.510
that the transition zone between the university and the

01:46:13.510 --> 01:46:15.840
northern part of the camp,

01:46:15.840 --> 01:46:20.079
or the northern sections of those, particularly there along

01:46:20.079 --> 01:46:23.039
Hickory Street and down in what used to be the Fry Street

01:46:23.039 --> 01:46:23.840
overlay district,

01:46:23.840 --> 01:46:28.199
parts of that still are, is a place where the university is

01:46:28.199 --> 01:46:31.829
supposed to transition slowly into the surrounding

01:46:31.829 --> 01:46:32.840
community.

01:46:32.840 --> 01:46:37.500
A hundred foot building is not a slow transition, which we

01:46:37.500 --> 01:46:40.840
have discussed on multiple occasions.

01:46:40.840 --> 01:46:47.489
Now, yourself, Chairperson, mentioned two weeks ago, there

01:46:47.489 --> 01:46:49.840
needs to be some compromise.

01:46:49.840 --> 01:46:53.380
And I think that there is a possibility for a compromise

01:46:53.380 --> 01:46:54.840
that comes in here.

01:46:54.840 --> 01:47:00.470
But to make this approval for another half acre that is z

01:47:00.470 --> 01:47:02.840
oned to allow a hundred foot building

01:47:02.840 --> 01:47:07.199
with unbelievable density in a place that already has

01:47:07.199 --> 01:47:10.840
density that prevents parking and causes pedestrian

01:47:10.840 --> 01:47:15.840
problems and causes bicycle problems is to be considered.

01:47:15.840 --> 01:47:20.199
Even if this, they say they're going to develop this, once

01:47:20.199 --> 01:47:24.350
this is, you know, parceled out and zoned the way they want

01:47:24.350 --> 01:47:24.840
it,

01:47:24.840 --> 01:47:28.130
the developers will be beating on their doors. They're

01:47:28.130 --> 01:47:30.649
after this property. They're after any property that they

01:47:30.649 --> 01:47:31.840
can make a profit out of.

01:47:31.840 --> 01:47:35.939
I think there is a zone creep element to this that you need

01:47:35.939 --> 01:47:39.840
to realize and needs to be taken into consideration

01:47:39.840 --> 01:47:43.439
because what you decide here is going to make a very

01:47:43.439 --> 01:47:47.579
significant difference on what gets decided in several

01:47:47.579 --> 01:47:48.840
other places.

01:47:48.840 --> 01:47:52.039
When was this these other two lots zoned the way it is? Has

01:47:52.039 --> 01:47:55.449
that been something recent? Was that something that was

01:47:55.449 --> 01:47:56.840
originally planned?

01:47:56.840 --> 01:48:01.510
So overall, I disagree with planning people that this is

01:48:01.510 --> 01:48:04.840
compatible with the 2030 plan

01:48:04.840 --> 01:48:08.720
because it does not fit the character, the walkability and

01:48:08.720 --> 01:48:13.569
the livability of the situation that's in that surrounding

01:48:13.569 --> 01:48:15.840
area and moving north.

01:48:15.840 --> 01:48:20.899
We have a very huge apartment building down the street.

01:48:20.899 --> 01:48:22.840
Sometimes it's full. Sometimes it's not full.

01:48:22.840 --> 01:48:26.340
It does cause problems not only for the historic district,

01:48:26.340 --> 01:48:29.840
but it's caused problems for other places in the region.

01:48:29.840 --> 01:48:34.199
So I think that it's important to very carefully consider

01:48:34.199 --> 01:48:38.840
this. And I would ask that you delay making this decision

01:48:38.840 --> 01:48:43.060
until some other things are basically known and situated

01:48:43.060 --> 01:48:45.840
out about the Denton zoning things.

01:48:45.840 --> 01:48:50.189
What are we going to do about SROs? Why do we need any more

01:48:50.189 --> 01:48:52.840
of those? Everybody needs a place to live.

01:48:52.840 --> 01:48:56.250
And the students use the SRO as a jump off place. They get

01:48:56.250 --> 01:48:59.310
out of the dorms into there and as soon as they can get

01:48:59.310 --> 01:49:00.840
into a private apartment,

01:49:00.840 --> 01:49:04.399
private apartment, they're moving in there. I have no

01:49:04.399 --> 01:49:08.840
problems with multifamily housing that has adequate parking

01:49:08.840 --> 01:49:11.840
and has adequate green space.

01:49:11.840 --> 01:49:16.670
What I do have problems with is the potential of building a

01:49:16.670 --> 01:49:21.840
hundred foot apartment building with whatever might be in

01:49:21.840 --> 01:49:21.840
it

01:49:21.840 --> 01:49:24.630
and then them coming and say, oh, we don't have places for

01:49:24.630 --> 01:49:26.640
people to park and oh, we want to come all the way to the

01:49:26.640 --> 01:49:28.840
curb so we don't have to plan anything.

01:49:28.840 --> 01:49:33.550
So please delay this decision until some other decisions

01:49:33.550 --> 01:49:38.140
are made in the city that can better define this specific

01:49:38.140 --> 01:49:38.840
use.

01:49:38.840 --> 01:49:41.840
And that's what I would ask you to do tonight.

01:49:41.840 --> 01:49:44.840
I have some questions for you. Commissioner Ellis.

01:49:44.840 --> 01:49:49.300
Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your thoughts. Do you have

01:49:49.300 --> 01:49:52.939
a vision of what you would see there, you know, knowing you

01:49:52.939 --> 01:49:53.840
're not against redevelopment there,

01:49:53.840 --> 01:49:57.010
you're not against multifamily? What do you think would be

01:49:57.010 --> 01:49:57.840
appropriate?

01:49:57.840 --> 01:50:00.109
Well, the buildings that are surrounding them that he's

01:50:00.109 --> 01:50:02.189
talking about, apartment buildings, they're two and three

01:50:02.189 --> 01:50:02.840
story buildings.

01:50:02.840 --> 01:50:05.409
I don't think it's economically feasible to build a two

01:50:05.409 --> 01:50:08.399
story apartment building, although there are a whole bunch

01:50:08.399 --> 01:50:12.840
of those down on West Street, brand new on the west side.

01:50:12.840 --> 01:50:16.439
Brand new ones. I mean, nice brick buildings that I wouldn

01:50:16.439 --> 01:50:17.840
't mind living in.

01:50:17.840 --> 01:50:22.449
But when when you start talking about what fits in that

01:50:22.449 --> 01:50:25.840
area, maybe a four story building.

01:50:25.840 --> 01:50:28.840
But I can't see anything much higher than that.

01:50:28.840 --> 01:50:31.789
It sits at the top of the hill and it will tower over a

01:50:31.789 --> 01:50:34.840
whole bunch of things as you come down the hill.

01:50:34.840 --> 01:50:39.199
So the the concept of what's on the other side, like the

01:50:39.199 --> 01:50:42.840
chemistry building, that's the university.

01:50:42.840 --> 01:50:45.520
That's the university. I don't even think that should be

01:50:45.520 --> 01:50:48.840
considered as part of the.

01:50:48.840 --> 01:50:51.840
The community. Well, it is part of the community overlay,

01:50:51.840 --> 01:50:54.840
but that's the university and they do their thing.

01:50:54.840 --> 01:50:58.430
But we have the potential to direct the type of development

01:50:58.430 --> 01:51:01.840
that is on the other side of the street that is part of the

01:51:01.840 --> 01:51:03.840
city of Denton.

01:51:03.840 --> 01:51:08.199
And yeah, maybe something that's somewhere in between those

01:51:08.199 --> 01:51:09.840
back to a compromise.

01:51:09.840 --> 01:51:13.380
How can we find a compromise with the people that want to

01:51:13.380 --> 01:51:18.119
responsibly develop their property and be good stewards to

01:51:18.119 --> 01:51:19.840
the community

01:51:19.840 --> 01:51:24.979
without allowing something that's totally inappropriate in

01:51:24.979 --> 01:51:25.840
the space?

01:51:25.840 --> 01:51:28.960
Because we still have to worry about the infrastructure. We

01:51:28.960 --> 01:51:30.840
've got to worry about the sewer.

01:51:30.840 --> 01:51:33.399
It was right in front of this property that there was a ge

01:51:33.399 --> 01:51:34.840
yser just a few months ago.

01:51:34.840 --> 01:51:37.850
I mean, the big gaping hole in the middle of the street

01:51:37.850 --> 01:51:40.840
where a sewer line busted or a water line busted.

01:51:40.840 --> 01:51:45.199
But I think that if we find some way to work with these

01:51:45.199 --> 01:51:51.840
people and to satisfy what really is the intent of the 2030

01:51:51.840 --> 01:51:51.840
thing,

01:51:51.840 --> 01:51:56.510
the intent of the the zone between the university and the

01:51:56.510 --> 01:51:57.840
neighborhoods,

01:51:57.840 --> 01:52:01.689
because like I said, all those apartments surrounding all

01:52:01.689 --> 01:52:04.840
those buildings surrounding them are about two stories tall

01:52:04.840 --> 01:52:04.840
.

01:52:04.840 --> 01:52:07.979
Even on one of these lots, there's a two story of rock

01:52:07.979 --> 01:52:08.840
building.

01:52:08.840 --> 01:52:12.829
But to take it up to much more than four, you're going to

01:52:12.829 --> 01:52:15.840
be overpowering and dominating it.

01:52:15.840 --> 01:52:18.520
And what kind of materials are they going to build this out

01:52:18.520 --> 01:52:18.840
of?

01:52:18.840 --> 01:52:24.649
Is it going to look like the stuff that's there now, which

01:52:24.649 --> 01:52:27.840
is aesthetically pleasing? Not pleasing.

01:52:27.840 --> 01:52:30.189
I mean, they're kind of like they said at the end of their

01:52:30.189 --> 01:52:34.000
usefulness, but still there is a brick and mortar feel to

01:52:34.000 --> 01:52:35.840
that particular area.

01:52:35.840 --> 01:52:40.210
It's not aluminum. It's not, you know, different kinds of

01:52:40.210 --> 01:52:43.840
things that makes that the feel that's in there.

01:52:43.840 --> 01:52:49.119
And we really are as a community down there trying to bring

01:52:49.119 --> 01:52:52.260
people into the community, down to the businesses, down to

01:52:52.260 --> 01:52:53.840
the things that are there.

01:52:53.840 --> 01:52:56.520
And students aren't going to do that. They're going to be

01:52:56.520 --> 01:52:58.840
there. They're going to be gone.

01:52:58.840 --> 01:53:02.399
So my I would, you know, I would love to see efficiency

01:53:02.399 --> 01:53:05.840
apartments that would suit graduate students.

01:53:05.840 --> 01:53:08.279
I would like to see one and two bedroom apartments that

01:53:08.279 --> 01:53:11.649
would would work effectively, not be outpriced or out of

01:53:11.649 --> 01:53:12.840
the price zone.

01:53:12.840 --> 01:53:17.060
My children have lived in these people's properties. So I

01:53:17.060 --> 01:53:20.189
know that they're there. They've been there for a really

01:53:20.189 --> 01:53:20.840
long time.

01:53:20.840 --> 01:53:24.949
I just don't want a mistake to be made that we can't back

01:53:24.949 --> 01:53:25.840
up with.

01:53:25.840 --> 01:53:30.199
And I think that you don't have all the variables in place

01:53:30.199 --> 01:53:32.840
right now to make the decision.

01:53:32.840 --> 01:53:38.840
I mean, that's just my opinion about it.

01:53:38.840 --> 01:53:46.840
Any other questions? Thank you for your comments.

01:53:46.840 --> 01:53:51.840
Paul Missler.

01:53:51.840 --> 01:53:56.840
It's Paul Meltzer. Meltzer. My apologies.

01:53:56.840 --> 01:54:03.340
1914 West Oak Street. And how do I get it so I can see the

01:54:03.340 --> 01:54:06.840
desktop here?

01:54:06.840 --> 01:54:18.840
Anyone? OK. Tech help on the way.

01:54:18.840 --> 01:54:23.060
All right. I'm going to share with you a presentation I was

01:54:23.060 --> 01:54:26.840
pleased to make at the candidate forum on Monday at Stoke.

01:54:26.840 --> 01:54:32.689
And I think it sort of 85 percent applies and I think will

01:54:32.689 --> 01:54:33.840
be helpful.

01:54:33.840 --> 01:54:43.840
And it addresses the area of north of UNT and west of UNT.

01:54:43.840 --> 01:54:46.180
I call it a plan for peace and prosperity in downtown

01:54:46.180 --> 01:54:51.210
District 3 because you certainly heard kind of no end of

01:54:51.210 --> 01:54:54.840
lack of peace on this sort of part of town.

01:54:54.840 --> 01:54:57.680
And there is an opportunity for a lot of prosperity for

01:54:57.680 --> 01:54:58.840
developers here.

01:54:58.840 --> 01:55:01.949
But the part that I thought was particularly relevant that

01:55:01.949 --> 01:55:05.149
made me want to share this with you today is that I hear

01:55:05.149 --> 01:55:09.390
Denton 2030 plan evoked kind of like the Bible and

01:55:09.390 --> 01:55:11.500
everybody can get their own interpretation out of it and

01:55:11.500 --> 01:55:14.840
say, by golly, that's what Denton 2030 plan says.

01:55:14.840 --> 01:55:17.680
And it actually says some opposing things. And let's just

01:55:17.680 --> 01:55:20.939
at least be clear about the fact that it doesn't just say

01:55:20.939 --> 01:55:21.840
one thing.

01:55:21.840 --> 01:55:25.840
It does talk about growing compactly, as you referred to.

01:55:25.840 --> 01:55:28.529
And a couple of other things I've noted here are just

01:55:28.529 --> 01:55:31.359
things I tend to hear in meetings like this that I think

01:55:31.359 --> 01:55:33.840
are persuasive that we need dense infill.

01:55:33.840 --> 01:55:36.289
Otherwise, we have sprawl that sprawl creates traffic,

01:55:36.289 --> 01:55:37.840
contributes to poor air quality.

01:55:37.840 --> 01:55:41.840
I do see the logic of the fact that it's next to UNT.

01:55:41.840 --> 01:55:46.060
So you could there I can understand the desire to have

01:55:46.060 --> 01:55:49.840
student housing near where students go to school.

01:55:49.840 --> 01:55:56.260
I hear that. We also see in Denton 2030 the goal of

01:55:56.260 --> 01:55:57.409
maintaining and strengthening neighborhoods, that single

01:55:57.409 --> 01:56:00.039
family neighborhoods should be protected from abrupt

01:56:00.039 --> 01:56:01.840
contrast of scale and intensity.

01:56:01.840 --> 01:56:04.600
We also have a goal of identifying character and protecting

01:56:04.600 --> 01:56:07.220
Denton's historic character areas through thoughtful

01:56:07.220 --> 01:56:09.840
preservation and integration of new development.

01:56:09.840 --> 01:56:12.850
And specifically in relation to this neighborhood

01:56:12.850 --> 01:56:16.270
university compatibility area, as the previous speaker

01:56:16.270 --> 01:56:19.479
mentioned, it talks about compatibility and gradual

01:56:19.479 --> 01:56:22.840
transition in scale, use, character, and intensity.

01:56:22.840 --> 01:56:27.189
So that's your 2030 plan that we keep on quoting. Gradual

01:56:27.189 --> 01:56:31.840
transition in scale, use, character, and intensity.

01:56:31.840 --> 01:56:35.420
No part of a 100 foot tower would meet that thing that is

01:56:35.420 --> 01:56:37.840
in the Bible of Denton 2030.

01:56:37.840 --> 01:56:41.489
So both of these impulses conflict in the UNT area, but

01:56:41.489 --> 01:56:44.840
they're both addressed in 2030 plan.

01:56:44.840 --> 01:56:47.840
So what guidance can we get?

01:56:47.840 --> 01:56:50.590
Well, we have the future land use map and we also have

01:56:50.590 --> 01:56:54.180
comments in the Denton 2030 plan that says this isn't every

01:56:54.180 --> 01:56:55.840
answer to every problem.

01:56:55.840 --> 01:56:58.270
That we need small area plans. In fact, it says we need

01:56:58.270 --> 01:56:59.840
many small area plans.

01:56:59.840 --> 01:57:03.210
Well, what I would suggest to you is that even though all

01:57:03.210 --> 01:57:06.880
of the light blue areas are called university compatibility

01:57:06.880 --> 01:57:08.840
, they're not all the same.

01:57:08.840 --> 01:57:11.979
Let's look at the area north of UNT. Here we're not talking

01:57:11.979 --> 01:57:13.840
about obviously Hickory Street.

01:57:13.840 --> 01:57:16.409
So this, I really had the kind of scripture project more in

01:57:16.409 --> 01:57:20.840
mind. But take a look at the pictures, all of y'all.

01:57:20.840 --> 01:57:24.390
You looking? So, you know, that's kind of the character of

01:57:24.390 --> 01:57:27.449
that area north of UNT. Not on Hickory, but just, you know,

01:57:27.449 --> 01:57:28.840
this will help us in future conversations too.

01:57:28.840 --> 01:57:32.350
Many single family well-treated historic structures,

01:57:32.350 --> 01:57:34.840
traditional neighborhood feeling.

01:57:34.840 --> 01:57:37.850
This is what west of UNT looks like. It has the same

01:57:37.850 --> 01:57:41.489
designation on the future land use map. Does it look the

01:57:41.489 --> 01:57:41.840
same?

01:57:41.840 --> 01:57:46.340
I submit to you it does not. It's treeless, multifamily,

01:57:46.340 --> 01:57:48.840
serves a very important use.

01:57:48.840 --> 01:57:51.399
And it's all two story and I have no idea why. I'm sure it

01:57:51.399 --> 01:57:52.840
made sense at some point.

01:57:52.840 --> 01:57:56.000
It was probably protecting some transition at some point,

01:57:56.000 --> 01:57:58.840
but whatever it was, it's all transitioned now.

01:57:58.840 --> 01:58:03.189
So, you know, we look at that and say what's really

01:58:03.189 --> 01:58:05.840
appropriate to each of these areas.

01:58:05.840 --> 01:58:09.800
I suggest that there are two neighborhood appropriate SAPs

01:58:09.800 --> 01:58:11.840
that should be considered.

01:58:11.840 --> 01:58:17.359
In the west, it's all multifamily. Let it be urban. Call it

01:58:17.359 --> 01:58:19.840
university city instead of cement city.

01:58:19.840 --> 01:58:23.939
Let that go from DR2 to DCG. Open up tremendous economic

01:58:23.939 --> 01:58:26.449
development opportunity for people like the applicant and

01:58:26.449 --> 01:58:29.840
anyone else is willing to invest in Denton that way.

01:58:29.840 --> 01:58:32.829
There you can have heights up to 100 feet and I'd say plan

01:58:32.829 --> 01:58:35.840
it intelligently with first floor retail, with garages,

01:58:35.840 --> 01:58:36.840
with green space.

01:58:36.840 --> 01:58:39.550
Make a percentage of it affordable so you're not entirely

01:58:39.550 --> 01:58:41.840
displacing the community that's there now.

01:58:41.840 --> 01:58:45.210
You could triple the area housing units that are adjacent

01:58:45.210 --> 01:58:47.840
to campus and you'd have your dense infill.

01:58:47.840 --> 01:58:51.189
A huge amount of dense infill. Great economic development

01:58:51.189 --> 01:58:51.840
opportunity.

01:58:51.840 --> 01:58:57.359
And looking at the difference between the north and the

01:58:57.359 --> 01:59:01.840
west, I'd say go historic district compatible there.

01:59:01.840 --> 01:59:07.840
Any questions for our speaker?

01:59:07.840 --> 01:59:11.840
Commissioner Hussbeth.

01:59:11.840 --> 01:59:16.840
So, do you have more slides?

01:59:16.840 --> 01:59:19.680
Well, an inappropriate campaign slide because as you know I

01:59:19.680 --> 01:59:22.159
'm running for city council from district three and I am the

01:59:22.159 --> 01:59:25.029
only representative, the only candidate for district three

01:59:25.029 --> 01:59:25.840
here today.

01:59:25.840 --> 01:59:30.029
Outstanding. Okay. So my question, you're awesome. My

01:59:30.029 --> 01:59:33.789
question is this though. If we have a realistic

01:59:33.789 --> 01:59:39.840
conversation, using your words, gradual decrease, right?

01:59:39.840 --> 01:59:47.189
Gradual transition. Yes. Transition, right? So you got to

01:59:47.189 --> 01:59:47.640
start at the apex, right? And then you're going to

01:59:47.640 --> 01:59:50.840
gradually descend. Is that fair?

01:59:50.840 --> 01:59:54.579
You're going to have some point that you're going to

01:59:54.579 --> 01:59:58.119
descend from. There's got to be some point that's higher

01:59:58.119 --> 02:00:01.039
and then you kind of are used, that's higher and then you

02:00:01.039 --> 02:00:02.840
kind of gradually go to lesser use.

02:00:02.840 --> 02:00:05.569
I guess I think of it the opposite way. You're

02:00:05.569 --> 02:00:09.140
transitioning from a single, you know, it is essentially a

02:00:09.140 --> 02:00:11.840
single family neighborhood and then you've got a kind of,

02:00:11.840 --> 02:00:15.840
you know, low elevation commercial area there.

02:00:15.840 --> 02:00:18.720
So I'd say, you know, you're going to go up in increments

02:00:18.720 --> 02:00:21.840
from what's there. Perfect. Okay.

02:00:21.840 --> 02:00:26.579
Well, then I have a hard time and help me reconcile it. If

02:00:26.579 --> 02:00:31.319
the, if ultimately, if you're ascending and its highest

02:00:31.319 --> 02:00:35.840
point is just before the end of the trip, if you will,

02:00:35.840 --> 02:00:39.840
which is the university, how is that counterintuitive?

02:00:39.840 --> 02:00:43.710
If I say everything after whatever they put on this lot is

02:00:43.710 --> 02:00:47.960
lesser than, so I'm going neighborhood, I'm going two story

02:00:47.960 --> 02:00:52.329
and then I'm going whatever they put there, right? You're

02:00:52.329 --> 02:00:55.840
ascending and that's kind of what you described.

02:00:55.840 --> 02:00:58.920
Well, I mean, I don't know if we're getting a little

02:00:58.920 --> 02:01:02.039
tangled up here without needing to be. I mean, we're, you

02:01:02.039 --> 02:01:05.550
know, what we can see clearly is there's nothing close to a

02:01:05.550 --> 02:01:06.840
hundred foot there.

02:01:06.840 --> 02:01:11.199
And it's, you know, council member, a council member on a

02:01:11.199 --> 02:01:15.039
previous project near this one talked about the fact that

02:01:15.039 --> 02:01:19.060
if you stand facing the university, a hundred foot looks

02:01:19.060 --> 02:01:22.149
okay. If you stand facing the neighborhood, it looks

02:01:22.149 --> 02:01:23.840
completely out of character.

02:01:23.840 --> 02:01:27.130
So, you know, I guess, you know, it's a hard in shades of

02:01:27.130 --> 02:01:30.180
gray to define exactly where you need to be, but you can

02:01:30.180 --> 02:01:33.479
see that, you know, somewhere in between the two would be

02:01:33.479 --> 02:01:34.840
transitional.

02:01:34.840 --> 02:01:42.039
Okay. And so my, my, absent this body, you know, absent the

02:01:42.039 --> 02:01:46.180
detail, right, because they don't have to provide that and

02:01:46.180 --> 02:01:52.859
absent, I'll assume that the people that own the apartments

02:01:52.859 --> 02:01:57.340
in Seamont City and around the adjacent area, the two story

02:01:57.340 --> 02:02:00.840
areas, are doing pretty well financially.

02:02:00.840 --> 02:02:03.920
And I'm assuming there's a premium on those properties if I

02:02:03.920 --> 02:02:07.840
want to buy them and uproot them. And so I think if you

02:02:07.840 --> 02:02:13.329
have an opportunity in this property that they can build

02:02:13.329 --> 02:02:17.989
and realize that and not, I mean, it's, I'll tell you, let

02:02:17.989 --> 02:02:18.840
me just get to it.

02:02:18.840 --> 02:02:23.439
It's hard, they're surrounded by apartments. Behind them,

02:02:23.439 --> 02:02:27.859
apartments. Not even in the same block, the next block over

02:02:27.859 --> 02:02:31.960
, there's apartments but for the house on the side. There

02:02:31.960 --> 02:02:32.840
used to be some sort of frat house or something, I think.

02:02:32.840 --> 02:02:36.289
There's businesses, there's a CVS. I just, candidly, and

02:02:36.289 --> 02:02:40.840
you talked me out of it, I have a hard time voting against

02:02:40.840 --> 02:02:42.840
something right across the street.

02:02:42.840 --> 02:02:46.130
Like, if I can't put an apartment complex right across the

02:02:46.130 --> 02:02:49.090
street from the university, across the street from a

02:02:49.090 --> 02:02:52.699
monster building surrounded by apartments, I don't know

02:02:52.699 --> 02:02:55.840
where else I can put a complex in Denton.

02:02:55.840 --> 02:03:00.189
Just, I just, I'm looking at a Google aerial map and I, I'm

02:03:00.189 --> 02:03:04.340
, I don't, if I can't put it here, then I don't see the

02:03:04.340 --> 02:03:07.840
rationale in putting it in Seamont City.

02:03:07.840 --> 02:03:11.199
I do see the rationale. I just think those people are

02:03:11.199 --> 02:03:14.729
financially doing pretty well and it's going to cost you

02:03:14.729 --> 02:03:17.840
and then you get out of the scope of this body.

02:03:17.840 --> 02:03:21.680
I can't become a business consultant at that point either,

02:03:21.680 --> 02:03:22.840
you know, so.

02:03:22.840 --> 02:03:26.840
So I got to look at the use of the land and if it fits.

02:03:26.840 --> 02:03:30.840
What that use is, they don't have to disclose.

02:03:30.840 --> 02:03:38.229
Do you allow me to respond then? Sure, yes sir. We, we may

02:03:38.229 --> 02:03:40.510
assume, and I have no way of knowing, that the area west of

02:03:40.510 --> 02:03:44.880
UNT is maximized financially within the constraints that

02:03:44.880 --> 02:03:45.840
the city's placed upon it.

02:03:45.840 --> 02:03:50.380
That has no bearing on whether you would unleash tremendous

02:03:50.380 --> 02:03:54.840
economic opportunity by removing those constraints.

02:03:54.840 --> 02:03:59.260
So, you know, that, that's unknown. Although it seems, you

02:03:59.260 --> 02:04:02.829
know, evident on the face of it that if you permit the

02:04:02.829 --> 02:04:06.180
opportunity to have triple what's there, somebody's going

02:04:06.180 --> 02:04:07.840
to want to realize that opportunity.

02:04:07.840 --> 02:04:13.449
As far as the use, you know, directly north of UNT on this,

02:04:13.449 --> 02:04:17.640
on this proposed site, really the issue comes down to scale

02:04:17.640 --> 02:04:17.840
.

02:04:17.840 --> 02:04:22.630
There is, there are not 100 foot towers there and I realize

02:04:22.630 --> 02:04:26.840
that they are permitted by right on the adjacent lots.

02:04:26.840 --> 02:04:30.449
But they're not there now. And if I were to give more

02:04:30.449 --> 02:04:34.949
specific guidance to this body, I'd say you might consider,

02:04:34.949 --> 02:04:37.840
you know, two options that I think would be palatable.

02:04:37.840 --> 02:04:40.979
One would be doing nothing because you're not obligated to

02:04:40.979 --> 02:04:44.239
change zoning just because somebody asks you to. That's

02:04:44.239 --> 02:04:45.840
already agreed upon law.

02:04:45.840 --> 02:04:49.550
An alternative that I think would probably be palatable in

02:04:49.550 --> 02:04:54.380
the nature of compromise would be to go with the, remind me

02:04:54.380 --> 02:04:57.739
what it's called, DCG, the requested zoning, but with an

02:04:57.739 --> 02:05:03.840
overlay that doesn't allow 100 foot tower.

02:05:03.840 --> 02:05:05.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

02:05:05.840 --> 02:05:09.760
Yes, let me help you out a little bit because Commissioner

02:05:09.760 --> 02:05:13.810
Hatsbeth, I think the way I'm looking at this is that next

02:05:13.810 --> 02:05:17.840
door to the subject property is a two story apartment.

02:05:17.840 --> 02:05:22.840
Across the street is the chemistry department.

02:05:22.840 --> 02:05:26.060
I don't judge heights very well. So I'm assuming that since

02:05:26.060 --> 02:05:29.539
it's three stories, 30 feet. Is that right? I don't know

02:05:29.539 --> 02:05:31.840
how tall is the chemistry building.

02:05:31.840 --> 02:05:37.119
I think it's three stories. Is it more? I mean, I'm asking

02:05:37.119 --> 02:05:38.079
that, you know. I guess it's more than 30 feet. Is it? Okay

02:05:38.079 --> 02:05:39.840
. I don't know how that works.

02:05:39.840 --> 02:05:43.399
So, but I guess the point that I'm looking at is that under

02:05:43.399 --> 02:05:50.100
the current zoning, that if you have a two story apartment

02:05:50.100 --> 02:05:55.239
complex going east, that would then go to 45 feet, which is

02:05:55.239 --> 02:05:59.840
zoned now, to then go to 100 feet, which is zoned now.

02:05:59.840 --> 02:06:03.939
Then you get into commercial, CVS, Jack in the Box, Ori

02:06:03.939 --> 02:06:07.840
ental Garden, Vortmans, and all of that business.

02:06:07.840 --> 02:06:12.220
To the north, you've got apartments, and you go maybe a

02:06:12.220 --> 02:06:16.319
block and a half before you start getting into single

02:06:16.319 --> 02:06:19.840
family or maybe duplex type situations.

02:06:19.840 --> 02:06:26.810
And so I see that this lot is really the transition area

02:06:26.810 --> 02:06:35.840
where you're going from two story to 45 feet to 100 feet.

02:06:35.840 --> 02:06:40.189
Just like we spent way too much time two weeks ago trying

02:06:40.189 --> 02:06:44.840
to figure out how could we get that 100 foot space and

02:06:44.840 --> 02:06:48.840
trying to work out a compromise at 45 feet.

02:06:48.840 --> 02:06:53.060
And that's really what this is already doing for us is kind

02:06:53.060 --> 02:06:54.840
of what I'm thinking.

02:06:54.840 --> 02:06:58.689
And I think that, you know, somebody that could go in and

02:06:58.689 --> 02:07:02.789
develop a portion of this at 45 feet, a portion of it at

02:07:02.789 --> 02:07:07.039
100 feet, while I don't know that 100 feet is necessary, it

02:07:07.039 --> 02:07:09.840
's allowed by current zoning.

02:07:09.840 --> 02:07:11.840
So it'd be okay.

02:07:11.840 --> 02:07:14.840
And so I think that's where that transition phase is.

02:07:14.840 --> 02:07:22.039
I'm going from the private residences moving into the

02:07:22.039 --> 02:07:24.840
commercial area.

02:07:24.840 --> 02:07:29.840
That's kind of the way I'm looking at it.

02:07:29.840 --> 02:07:31.840
Commissioner Roseau.

02:07:31.840 --> 02:07:34.840
Thank you, Chair. Mr. Meltzer, I appreciate you being here.

02:07:34.840 --> 02:07:38.329
Can I just ask a question? You said that you're opposed to

02:07:38.329 --> 02:07:39.840
the 100 foot height.

02:07:39.840 --> 02:07:42.289
You mentioned specifically having an overlay to protect

02:07:42.289 --> 02:07:43.840
against 100 foot height.

02:07:43.840 --> 02:07:49.840
Is that your single contention on the change to DCG?

02:07:49.840 --> 02:07:52.859
Yes, and I think that's what you heard from the previous

02:07:52.859 --> 02:07:55.840
speaker as well is that the scale is incompatible.

02:07:55.840 --> 02:08:00.590
I appreciate that. And to the Commissioner Sullivan's point

02:08:00.590 --> 02:08:03.979
, the transition is not only happening from east to west, it

02:08:03.979 --> 02:08:06.840
also is happening from north, from south to north.

02:08:06.840 --> 02:08:12.149
And to Commissioner Hussman's point, the south is

02:08:12.149 --> 02:08:14.840
university. So that by definition that we all can agree on,

02:08:14.840 --> 02:08:18.840
that property is on the transition.

02:08:18.840 --> 02:08:22.199
And if we look at just the scope of transitioning, it's as

02:08:22.199 --> 02:08:25.659
close to the original apex as Commissioner Hussman said to

02:08:25.659 --> 02:08:26.840
anything else.

02:08:26.840 --> 02:08:29.840
It's literally across the street. So if there was like this

02:08:29.840 --> 02:08:32.840
transition of height, it wouldn't be at the 20 foot level

02:08:32.840 --> 02:08:33.840
because it's not close.

02:08:33.840 --> 02:08:36.149
It would have to be at the upper end of that transition,

02:08:36.149 --> 02:08:38.840
whether that's 100 feet is obviously up for debate.

02:08:38.840 --> 02:08:42.199
But it certainly by proximity would be at the very, very

02:08:42.199 --> 02:08:45.489
most dense classification of transition because it's

02:08:45.489 --> 02:08:47.840
literally across the street from the university.

02:08:47.840 --> 02:08:51.310
That chemistry building is way taller, 30 feet. But more

02:08:51.310 --> 02:08:54.689
over, we can't assume the applicant is doing anything with

02:08:54.689 --> 02:08:55.840
that property.

02:08:55.840 --> 02:08:57.640
We can't assume they're putting 100 feet. And by density

02:08:57.640 --> 02:09:01.109
rule, I can't in my mind fathom how 100 foot even make any

02:09:01.109 --> 02:09:02.840
sense or if it's possible.

02:09:02.840 --> 02:09:06.020
It's very difficult for me to kind of fathom if that's even

02:09:06.020 --> 02:09:08.460
possible. But if we look at other uses, maybe they just

02:09:08.460 --> 02:09:09.840
want to put a restaurant there.

02:09:09.840 --> 02:09:12.680
They can't put a restaurant there now. And so if we look

02:09:12.680 --> 02:09:15.989
holistically about the possibilities that they can do or

02:09:15.989 --> 02:09:18.310
anyone else if they sell the property or whoever takes

02:09:18.310 --> 02:09:20.840
control of it, we're looking at what they can do.

02:09:20.840 --> 02:09:25.449
And so it seems as though as staff has has diagnosed this,

02:09:25.449 --> 02:09:30.060
that it is in accordance with the future land use map, the

02:09:30.060 --> 02:09:34.840
2030 plan as part of that transitioning down.

02:09:34.840 --> 02:09:38.920
And so those are my thoughts. I appreciate your feedback

02:09:38.920 --> 02:09:39.840
and your being here.

02:09:39.840 --> 02:09:44.199
Yes, as I indicated before, the debt in 2030 plan calls for

02:09:44.199 --> 02:09:45.840
multiple small area plans.

02:09:45.840 --> 02:09:49.939
And the essence of my presentation was that the fact that

02:09:49.939 --> 02:09:54.149
all of these areas today have a common designation fails to

02:09:54.149 --> 02:09:57.840
realize the distinctions within those areas.

02:09:57.840 --> 02:10:01.479
So I believe you're in the work session and I engaged in

02:10:01.479 --> 02:10:04.840
that discussion to segment those areas out.

02:10:04.840 --> 02:10:08.250
I 100 percent agree with that. But it seems as though the

02:10:08.250 --> 02:10:11.840
yes, no decision on the table tonight would be the reason.

02:10:11.840 --> 02:10:13.810
I'm not I don't show it's in our purview to start

02:10:13.810 --> 02:10:16.239
introducing small area plans in this meeting, although I

02:10:16.239 --> 02:10:18.840
would love to entertain that conversation going forward.

02:10:18.840 --> 02:10:21.840
No, no, no would be a way to buy time as well.

02:10:21.840 --> 02:10:25.489
And I propose that alternative way to rather than to merely

02:10:25.489 --> 02:10:29.100
say no, that I'm learning from from attending and paying

02:10:29.100 --> 02:10:30.840
attention to all that.

02:10:30.840 --> 02:10:33.800
Sometimes you can do things with conditions that the only

02:10:33.800 --> 02:10:35.840
choices are not. Yes or no.

02:10:35.840 --> 02:10:39.069
In fact, the lack of of compromise you may feel is because

02:10:39.069 --> 02:10:41.840
you present cards that say oppose support.

02:10:41.840 --> 02:10:44.960
Those are the choices. And you'll see on the next one. I I

02:10:44.960 --> 02:10:46.840
chose a different alternative.

02:10:46.840 --> 02:10:49.149
You know, you want a more creative exchange with the

02:10:49.149 --> 02:10:49.840
community. Sure.

02:10:49.840 --> 02:10:54.090
So and this but as far as your suggestion that it could be

02:10:54.090 --> 02:10:57.829
a restaurant or a commercial use, I don't I'm not here

02:10:57.829 --> 02:10:59.840
presenting any objection to that.

02:10:59.840 --> 02:11:04.359
It's just to scale. And if you are at the very upper end of

02:11:04.359 --> 02:11:08.409
matching off to the chemistry building, you might be

02:11:08.409 --> 02:11:11.840
gradual from that end in terms of achieving gradual

02:11:11.840 --> 02:11:11.840
transition.

02:11:11.840 --> 02:11:15.250
But then you're not gradual in terms of the surrounding

02:11:15.250 --> 02:11:15.840
area.

02:11:15.840 --> 02:11:20.189
And as far as whether it's feasible for them to put a

02:11:20.189 --> 02:11:24.060
hundred foot tower on the property, that isn't the decision

02:11:24.060 --> 02:11:24.840
before you.

02:11:24.840 --> 02:11:27.939
The decision before you is whether you will permit that,

02:11:27.939 --> 02:11:31.020
because if you just say yes with no further elaboration or

02:11:31.020 --> 02:11:34.840
condition, you are saying yes to that possibility.

02:11:34.840 --> 02:11:39.840
Thank you. Thank you, sir. See no further questions.

02:11:39.840 --> 02:11:42.300
And this is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to

02:11:42.300 --> 02:11:45.840
speak on this item, please come forward at this time.

02:11:45.840 --> 02:11:51.840
Anyone wishing to speak? Commissioner Beck.

02:11:51.840 --> 02:11:54.069
Thank you, Chair. I have to close the public hearing yet,

02:11:54.069 --> 02:11:56.029
so I was going to give you the opportunity if you had

02:11:56.029 --> 02:11:56.840
another question.

02:11:56.840 --> 02:12:01.189
Well, I wanted to see if we bring the applicant back now.

02:12:01.189 --> 02:12:07.840
Sure. I'm going to ask him a question.

02:12:07.840 --> 02:12:11.270
Thank you, Mr. Chang. And let me just kind of reiterate

02:12:11.270 --> 02:12:15.819
what I said before, but point out you've been in business

02:12:15.819 --> 02:12:18.840
here in Denton for looks like about 30 years.

02:12:18.840 --> 02:12:21.840
Is that about right? Yes, we are a family owned business.

02:12:21.840 --> 02:12:23.840
We've been here since 82. Right.

02:12:23.840 --> 02:12:26.859
So you're committed to Denton. That's obvious. And we're

02:12:26.859 --> 02:12:29.359
glad you're here, too. We love Denton. We need more people

02:12:29.359 --> 02:12:29.840
like you.

02:12:29.840 --> 02:12:34.189
So based on what you've heard tonight, my reservation here

02:12:34.189 --> 02:12:36.840
is more the type of dwelling it is.

02:12:36.840 --> 02:12:40.170
The height is important, too, but, you know, it would be

02:12:40.170 --> 02:12:42.930
more it would be more critical if we were closer to

02:12:42.930 --> 02:12:44.840
historical neighborhoods.

02:12:44.840 --> 02:12:49.329
But again, being a part of it as you are and want to see

02:12:49.329 --> 02:12:53.840
Denton's future in a progressive way,

02:12:53.840 --> 02:13:00.560
do you see any advantages to developing your property in a

02:13:00.560 --> 02:13:08.430
way that would accommodate units that aren't supportive of

02:13:08.430 --> 02:13:10.840
a transit population like students?

02:13:10.840 --> 02:13:14.130
In other words, multifamily dwellings, four and five

02:13:14.130 --> 02:13:15.840
stories high, probably.

02:13:15.840 --> 02:13:20.199
But then accommodate residents who are probably going to

02:13:20.199 --> 02:13:24.640
sit down roots here, be here for a long time and contribute

02:13:24.640 --> 02:13:27.810
something to Denton's future as opposed to a transit

02:13:27.810 --> 02:13:29.840
population like students.

02:13:29.840 --> 02:13:36.039
So the question is, do you see any development in the

02:13:36.039 --> 02:13:42.340
future of this? You mentioned it's going to be with your

02:13:42.340 --> 02:13:45.840
office, your real estate office and multifamily uses.

02:13:45.840 --> 02:13:50.899
So do you see your development excluding SROs and being

02:13:50.899 --> 02:13:56.539
something that's more family oriented? Does that make sense

02:13:56.539 --> 02:13:56.840
? Am I?

02:13:56.840 --> 02:14:01.199
You're asking me if I'm going to exclude SROs from any

02:14:01.199 --> 02:14:01.840
thinking.

02:14:01.840 --> 02:14:06.189
In light of the fact that it deals with the transit

02:14:06.189 --> 02:14:06.840
population, yes, I am.

02:14:06.840 --> 02:14:11.199
I think it impacts the way a neighborhood develops over

02:14:11.199 --> 02:14:11.840
time.

02:14:11.840 --> 02:14:16.989
And in my opinion, a transit population is good in some

02:14:16.989 --> 02:14:21.979
areas, but for future growth, I think it hurts more than

02:14:21.979 --> 02:14:22.840
helps.

02:14:22.840 --> 02:14:26.840
Yes. We've had that under consideration.

02:14:26.840 --> 02:14:31.279
We have not had any plans, whether SRO or just but we

02:14:31.279 --> 02:14:36.460
mainly deal in multifamily where people stay and go through

02:14:36.460 --> 02:14:37.840
four years.

02:14:37.840 --> 02:14:41.439
We've developed here before. We've built 24 unit apartment

02:14:41.439 --> 02:14:44.210
complexes here before, as well as a 20 unit apartment

02:14:44.210 --> 02:14:44.840
complex.

02:14:44.840 --> 02:14:49.840
So we are in the business to keep people staying.

02:14:49.840 --> 02:14:52.140
OK, that's the sense I wanted to get because from a

02:14:52.140 --> 02:14:54.899
business perspective, it helps you where you don't have a

02:14:54.899 --> 02:14:55.840
lot of turnover.

02:14:55.840 --> 02:14:58.130
That's right. It seems with the transit population like

02:14:58.130 --> 02:14:59.840
students, you're going to have a lot of turnover.

02:14:59.840 --> 02:15:05.520
So just again, speaking hypothetically here, it seems like

02:15:05.520 --> 02:15:08.310
it would serve your interest as well as the interest of

02:15:08.310 --> 02:15:12.840
Denton's future growth that we do avoid SROs where we can.

02:15:12.840 --> 02:15:17.060
It's a situation that could get worse over time and we

02:15:17.060 --> 02:15:19.840
could actually overbuild on SROs.

02:15:19.840 --> 02:15:23.130
So just throwing that out there and for something for you

02:15:23.130 --> 02:15:24.840
to consider in the future.

02:15:24.840 --> 02:15:26.840
Yes, we will have that under consideration.

02:15:26.840 --> 02:15:27.840
OK, all right.

02:15:27.840 --> 02:15:29.840
I have one more question for you. Commissioner Ellis.

02:15:29.840 --> 02:15:32.840
Thank you, Chair. Hi, Mr. Chang.

02:15:32.840 --> 02:15:37.989
Hearing some of the citizens concerns today, would you be

02:15:37.989 --> 02:15:43.029
amenable to any kind of overlay if this were to be approved

02:15:43.029 --> 02:15:46.840
by scaling down the height of the building?

02:15:46.840 --> 02:15:48.840
We would be open to that.

02:15:48.840 --> 02:15:52.260
But at the same time, I'd like to comment that I've been

02:15:52.260 --> 02:15:56.840
following this Park 7 and Park 7 is maybe two blocks away.

02:15:56.840 --> 02:16:00.859
And there's already been a lot of struggles with the PNZ

02:16:00.859 --> 02:16:02.840
and the neighborhood.

02:16:02.840 --> 02:16:06.069
And they already have 10 stories that they can just build

02:16:06.069 --> 02:16:06.840
like that.

02:16:06.840 --> 02:16:09.930
And we, on the other hand, we're right across the street

02:16:09.930 --> 02:16:10.840
from campus.

02:16:10.840 --> 02:16:14.840
And if I haven't said how many stories we haven't had any

02:16:14.840 --> 02:16:19.840
plans yet, but if we can't build it, how can they build it?

02:16:19.840 --> 02:16:23.840
I don't see what the logic would be in that.

02:16:23.840 --> 02:16:29.420
And we are not we even we have not had 100 foot planned yet

02:16:29.420 --> 02:16:29.840
.

02:16:29.840 --> 02:16:31.840
We haven't had any development plans yet.

02:16:31.840 --> 02:16:36.500
But we just want to get the zoning change such that we can

02:16:36.500 --> 02:16:38.840
proceed with the plans.

02:16:38.840 --> 02:16:40.840
Great. I see no other questions.

02:16:40.840 --> 02:16:42.840
Thank you, sir, for coming back up.

02:16:42.840 --> 02:16:44.840
Again, this is a public hearing.

02:16:44.840 --> 02:16:49.200
Anyone who would like to speak on this item, please come

02:16:49.200 --> 02:16:50.840
forward at this time.

02:16:50.840 --> 02:16:54.440
Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and open the

02:16:54.440 --> 02:16:56.840
floor for a motion or discussion.

02:16:56.840 --> 02:17:03.840
Commissioner Hutzbeth. Chair, I'm going to ask.

02:17:03.840 --> 02:17:08.840
Use your expertise to give me some round numbers.

02:17:08.840 --> 02:17:14.840
So I think we were talking approaching two acres or so.

02:17:14.840 --> 02:17:17.659
This this property all total around there a little over a

02:17:17.659 --> 02:17:18.840
little over an acre.

02:17:18.840 --> 02:17:23.899
Okay. So my question to you is, can you give me generally

02:17:23.899 --> 02:17:27.840
not not hypothetical the footprint needed for what?

02:17:27.840 --> 02:17:31.440
Like when you're talking when you're building multifamily

02:17:31.440 --> 02:17:34.840
type building, just hypothetical and you have and assume

02:17:34.840 --> 02:17:38.350
you have a little less than two acres and assume it's in a

02:17:38.350 --> 02:17:39.840
dense area.

02:17:39.840 --> 02:17:41.840
How much what does that square foot look like?

02:17:41.840 --> 02:17:46.729
I mean, you have to how does that stack up or how how do

02:17:46.729 --> 02:17:48.840
you use that space? How much space does it take per story

02:17:48.840 --> 02:17:48.840
per parking?

02:17:48.840 --> 02:17:50.840
Can you give me some sense of that?

02:17:50.840 --> 02:17:54.690
I can't specifically other than just to say that an acre is

02:17:54.690 --> 02:17:58.840
forty three thousand five hundred and sixty square feet.

02:17:58.840 --> 02:18:03.840
How many forty three thousand five hundred and sixty.

02:18:03.840 --> 02:18:05.840
Okay.

02:18:05.840 --> 02:18:09.500
So that's the maximum footprint on an acre and then

02:18:09.500 --> 02:18:12.559
whatever falls inside that. So if it's an acre and a

02:18:12.559 --> 02:18:14.440
quarter, it's one point two five times forty three five

02:18:14.440 --> 02:18:14.840
sixty.

02:18:14.840 --> 02:18:18.200
And then whatever the setbacks are. So I mean, you can

02:18:18.200 --> 02:18:20.840
cover a lot of property with it.

02:18:20.840 --> 02:18:23.840
Okay. Structure.

02:18:23.840 --> 02:18:26.840
Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair.

02:18:26.840 --> 02:18:28.840
This is a tough one.

02:18:28.840 --> 02:18:33.190
Obviously, the concern here for height and density close to

02:18:33.190 --> 02:18:37.260
the sensitive neighborhoods is always going to be an issue

02:18:37.260 --> 02:18:37.840
with me.

02:18:37.840 --> 02:18:40.520
And I, you know, I have an ear and a heart for the people

02:18:40.520 --> 02:18:41.840
that live in that area.

02:18:41.840 --> 02:18:48.100
If I were to vote for this, I would do so reluctantly and

02:18:48.100 --> 02:18:52.350
and hopefully maybe take the same in a direction where an

02:18:52.350 --> 02:18:56.200
overlay could be applied here to at least ameliorate that

02:18:56.200 --> 02:18:57.840
concern of height and density.

02:18:57.840 --> 02:19:02.200
By right, the applicant, you know, has the right to, you

02:19:02.200 --> 02:19:05.229
know, at least on those two parcels to build something up

02:19:05.229 --> 02:19:07.819
to a hundred feet and something up to forty five feet on

02:19:07.819 --> 02:19:08.840
the other one.

02:19:08.840 --> 02:19:12.030
And design wise, I would think that what you've got now,

02:19:12.030 --> 02:19:13.840
you could accommodate that.

02:19:13.840 --> 02:19:20.450
But anyway, just need to put out there that this is a tough

02:19:20.450 --> 02:19:21.840
one for me.

02:19:21.840 --> 02:19:24.809
I'm sorry if I find myself voting for it. I do so reluct

02:19:24.809 --> 02:19:27.790
antly with the hope that we can still address the issues

02:19:27.790 --> 02:19:29.840
that concern the neighborhood.

02:19:29.840 --> 02:19:31.840
Commissioner Ellis.

02:19:31.840 --> 02:19:35.010
And just to further the discussion, I'm having a hard time

02:19:35.010 --> 02:19:37.840
with this as well as I addressed in work session.

02:19:37.840 --> 02:19:41.170
Just, you know, we've got unplatted property and I

02:19:41.170 --> 02:19:44.840
understand staff's recommendation and the applicant's

02:19:44.840 --> 02:19:47.840
desire to make all of these properties one.

02:19:47.840 --> 02:19:50.899
But when it is replatted, it's a considerable large piece

02:19:50.899 --> 02:19:52.840
of property with and with D.C.G.

02:19:52.840 --> 02:19:56.840
zoning does allow a very large development there.

02:19:56.840 --> 02:19:59.790
We keep coming back to the same area north of the

02:19:59.790 --> 02:20:00.840
university.

02:20:00.840 --> 02:20:04.420
This particular area is not covered by the Fry Street

02:20:04.420 --> 02:20:08.409
overlay, which was clarified in work session, but just a

02:20:08.409 --> 02:20:09.840
block away it is.

02:20:09.840 --> 02:20:13.500
If this does get approved and we've got a hundred foot

02:20:13.500 --> 02:20:16.840
building on on that footprint, you know,

02:20:16.840 --> 02:20:19.840
Burtman's that's still out there.

02:20:19.840 --> 02:20:21.840
Council has kept that alive. That's just a block away.

02:20:21.840 --> 02:20:23.840
I mean, I think that brings them back.

02:20:23.840 --> 02:20:27.840
I think it opens up to what Commissioner Sullivan said.

02:20:27.840 --> 02:20:32.440
And that whole area is just going to kind of trickle down

02:20:32.440 --> 02:20:34.840
or up with with this case.

02:20:34.840 --> 02:20:41.170
So I think we as a city needed to find what this transition

02:20:41.170 --> 02:20:42.840
needs to be.

02:20:42.840 --> 02:20:44.840
What does it look like?

02:20:44.840 --> 02:20:48.840
I understand what the future land use map looks like.

02:20:48.840 --> 02:20:50.840
But but I mean, that's that's a living document.

02:20:50.840 --> 02:20:53.829
That's something that we still have to study because we

02:20:53.829 --> 02:20:55.840
keep coming back to the same area.

02:20:55.840 --> 02:20:59.000
We keep coming back with this desires for these large scale

02:20:59.000 --> 02:21:02.840
developments and we keep finding ourselves,

02:21:02.840 --> 02:21:05.829
at least I do for sure, on this commission, find myself

02:21:05.829 --> 02:21:10.840
wondering if that's really what we want in that transition

02:21:10.840 --> 02:21:12.840
area of the university.

02:21:12.840 --> 02:21:16.780
Putting a student housing project in there, I know it's

02:21:16.780 --> 02:21:19.840
across the street from the university,

02:21:19.840 --> 02:21:22.190
but perhaps that's not the best use between two historic

02:21:22.190 --> 02:21:22.840
districts.

02:21:22.840 --> 02:21:27.200
We don't address use for staff, faculty at UNT or graduate

02:21:27.200 --> 02:21:32.190
students, older students, other developments might be more

02:21:32.190 --> 02:21:32.840
appropriate there.

02:21:32.840 --> 02:21:37.790
And so I'm having a hard time getting behind this and the

02:21:37.790 --> 02:21:41.840
DCG and what it allows.

02:21:41.840 --> 02:21:43.840
Commissioner Hussbuth.

02:21:43.840 --> 02:21:44.840
Thank you, Chair.

02:21:44.840 --> 02:21:50.700
Well, again, I can't reconcile anything if we can't put an

02:21:50.700 --> 02:21:52.840
apartment there.

02:21:52.840 --> 02:21:56.540
One, I'm not a builder and I can't get the information I

02:21:56.540 --> 02:21:57.840
need on the fly.

02:21:57.840 --> 02:22:01.840
But simple math says I don't even think it works there.

02:22:01.840 --> 02:22:06.229
And even if it does work there, I would strongly advocate

02:22:06.229 --> 02:22:10.530
for them to contact Park 7 and lure that thing closer to

02:22:10.530 --> 02:22:15.840
the university and save the neighborhood.

02:22:15.840 --> 02:22:21.840
I think it transitions to the neighborhood.

02:22:21.840 --> 02:22:27.680
And so I'm going to move that we approve this because if we

02:22:27.680 --> 02:22:33.840
, again, if you cannot put an apartment complex next to

02:22:33.840 --> 02:22:35.840
across the street from the university,

02:22:35.840 --> 02:22:42.840
then that puts us consistency wise in a real tough area.

02:22:42.840 --> 02:22:45.840
And there's no family I know.

02:22:45.840 --> 02:22:50.440
I respect the thought of a family living there, but it's a

02:22:50.440 --> 02:22:55.500
one way street, 20 miles per hour, around a whole bunch of

02:22:55.500 --> 02:22:57.840
kids and there's no parking.

02:22:57.840 --> 02:23:01.840
That's not utopia for any family I know.

02:23:01.840 --> 02:23:04.840
That's not a goal of any family I know.

02:23:04.840 --> 02:23:06.840
Again, you can't go out.

02:23:06.840 --> 02:23:10.549
You have to go towards CVS, make a left, then make another

02:23:10.549 --> 02:23:13.840
left to get out of your neighborhood every day.

02:23:13.840 --> 02:23:15.840
You can't just say I'm going to go right or left.

02:23:15.840 --> 02:23:20.840
It's not conducive to a family environment.

02:23:20.840 --> 02:23:22.840
It's 20 miles per hour.

02:23:22.840 --> 02:23:29.840
So I'm going to move approval and we'll see.

02:23:29.840 --> 02:23:30.840
Thank you.

02:23:30.840 --> 02:23:33.840
>> Commissioner Osello.

02:23:33.840 --> 02:23:34.840
>> Thank you, Chair.

02:23:34.840 --> 02:23:38.250
I have a couple points here and then to spoil the end, I'm

02:23:38.250 --> 02:23:39.840
going to second this.

02:23:39.840 --> 02:23:43.079
First, I agree with Commissioner Ellis that there is

02:23:43.079 --> 02:23:46.110
needing to be maybe a more clear definition of what

02:23:46.110 --> 02:23:47.840
transition looks like.

02:23:47.840 --> 02:23:50.520
But I don't know if that's necessarily for staff to present

02:23:50.520 --> 02:23:51.840
to us and just telling us.

02:23:51.840 --> 02:23:54.579
But I think it needs to go down to a zoning level or an

02:23:54.579 --> 02:23:57.819
overlay level or a small area plan level in which there's

02:23:57.819 --> 02:24:00.409
not staff coming and saying this is designed to be a

02:24:00.409 --> 02:24:00.840
transition.

02:24:00.840 --> 02:24:01.840
We get that.

02:24:01.840 --> 02:24:05.129
What's lacking is what's actually permitted, what's limited

02:24:05.129 --> 02:24:07.840
, what actually does the transition look like?

02:24:07.840 --> 02:24:11.069
And so I think that's the ongoing conversation that we're

02:24:11.069 --> 02:24:13.840
going to have and even more so later tonight.

02:24:13.840 --> 02:24:17.549
But in regards to this property, I think Commissioner Ose

02:24:17.549 --> 02:24:21.309
llo also mentioned it's the same area that keeps on coming

02:24:21.309 --> 02:24:21.840
up.

02:24:21.840 --> 02:24:25.059
This is the same area as Park 7 in that it is not part of a

02:24:25.059 --> 02:24:29.309
historic district on either the historic, the West Oak or H

02:24:29.309 --> 02:24:30.840
ickory side.

02:24:30.840 --> 02:24:34.170
It is this weird peninsula of transition in which if you

02:24:34.170 --> 02:24:37.129
just look at a future land use map and point to this

02:24:37.129 --> 02:24:39.840
property and say that's going to be an apartment complex,

02:24:39.840 --> 02:24:40.840
in my mind, I reconcile it.

02:24:40.840 --> 02:24:44.040
It looks like a piece of property that is an apartment

02:24:44.040 --> 02:24:44.840
complex.

02:24:44.840 --> 02:24:48.549
And moreover, that's got to be the most prime location for

02:24:48.549 --> 02:24:50.840
a chemistry student possible.

02:24:50.840 --> 02:24:55.840
I mean, it just screams science student living there.

02:24:55.840 --> 02:24:59.840
But additional to that, the Park 7 development was on

02:24:59.840 --> 02:25:01.840
almost two acres of land.

02:25:01.840 --> 02:25:06.440
We saw their 100 story design and I just cannot reconcile

02:25:06.440 --> 02:25:10.260
that that would even fit on less acreage and even a skin

02:25:10.260 --> 02:25:11.840
nier plot of land.

02:25:11.840 --> 02:25:15.059
So I just don't, I'd be impressed if there's 100 feet

02:25:15.059 --> 02:25:15.840
possible.

02:25:15.840 --> 02:25:17.840
But regardless of that, I'm not making my decision on that.

02:25:17.840 --> 02:25:18.840
I just, food for thought.

02:25:18.840 --> 02:25:19.840
I don't think 100 feet is possible.

02:25:19.840 --> 02:25:23.139
But my main point is this, we see developments come in here

02:25:23.139 --> 02:25:26.049
all the time for SROs or apartment complexes and a

02:25:26.049 --> 02:25:28.629
recurring theme previously that hasn't been brought up in a

02:25:28.629 --> 02:25:31.959
while, these outside companies coming in, they build up and

02:25:31.959 --> 02:25:32.840
then they sell.

02:25:32.840 --> 02:25:36.260
When they have one manager there or they're just kind of a

02:25:36.260 --> 02:25:39.530
fly by night that come in able to build and then they can

02:25:39.530 --> 02:25:40.840
get out of here.

02:25:40.840 --> 02:25:41.840
This is not the case.

02:25:41.840 --> 02:25:42.840
They've been here 35 years.

02:25:42.840 --> 02:25:44.840
I feel like they're invested in the city.

02:25:44.840 --> 02:25:47.059
I don't feel that they're going to do something that

02:25:47.059 --> 02:25:49.840
determines one, their business or their property value.

02:25:49.840 --> 02:25:52.840
They don't have any current SRO projects.

02:25:52.840 --> 02:25:55.020
It doesn't sound like it sounds like they're all multif

02:25:55.020 --> 02:25:55.840
amily projects.

02:25:55.840 --> 02:25:59.440
So we're making assumptions that they're going to build 100

02:25:59.440 --> 02:26:02.670
foot SRO that I think is maybe presumptuous and further not

02:26:02.670 --> 02:26:04.840
to the point of this rezoning case.

02:26:04.840 --> 02:26:09.260
And so as staff has recommended, I second Commissioner Huts

02:26:09.260 --> 02:26:12.840
pitz move to approve.

02:26:12.840 --> 02:26:15.840
Commissioner Ellis, we have a first and a second.

02:26:15.840 --> 02:26:16.840
Thank you.

02:26:16.840 --> 02:26:21.190
I would just like to comment on Commissioner Hutspitz and

02:26:21.190 --> 02:26:22.840
Commissioner Roselle.

02:26:22.840 --> 02:26:24.840
First of all, I never said multifamily.

02:26:24.840 --> 02:26:26.840
I can't see here.

02:26:26.840 --> 02:26:31.840
It's my fear of what DCG allows and what it could be.

02:26:31.840 --> 02:26:35.840
And it's absolutely no disrespect to the Chang family.

02:26:35.840 --> 02:26:38.399
I understand how long you've been here and I walk by your

02:26:38.399 --> 02:26:40.840
properties every single day on Bernard Street.

02:26:40.840 --> 02:26:43.840
And lovely complexes.

02:26:43.840 --> 02:26:47.840
This is not against you and what you do in this city.

02:26:47.840 --> 02:26:49.840
I appreciate the developments that you have.

02:26:49.840 --> 02:26:52.840
This is a protection thing for me.

02:26:52.840 --> 02:26:54.840
We make the zoning change.

02:26:54.840 --> 02:26:56.840
We replat it.

02:26:56.840 --> 02:27:00.840
It just opens up a door that I'm not comfortable with.

02:27:00.840 --> 02:27:05.840
And I do think that it will have a trickle effect.

02:27:05.840 --> 02:27:08.840
I'm not against multifamily here.

02:27:08.840 --> 02:27:10.840
Maybe it belongs to a chemistry student.

02:27:10.840 --> 02:27:13.840
Maybe it belongs to a more grown up person at UNT.

02:27:13.840 --> 02:27:17.170
Maybe that's what that zone should be between these

02:27:17.170 --> 02:27:18.840
historic districts.

02:27:18.840 --> 02:27:19.840
I don't know.

02:27:19.840 --> 02:27:22.520
I would love that discussion and I would love us to come up

02:27:22.520 --> 02:27:26.209
with what this transition point north of the university

02:27:26.209 --> 02:27:26.840
should look like.

02:27:26.840 --> 02:27:28.840
I would like that definition.

02:27:28.840 --> 02:27:31.659
But I'm not against this developer and I'm certainly not

02:27:31.659 --> 02:27:33.840
against the multifamily project here.

02:27:33.840 --> 02:27:39.790
I'm against the scale that this allows when we make the

02:27:39.790 --> 02:27:41.840
zoning change.

02:27:41.840 --> 02:27:43.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

02:27:43.840 --> 02:27:46.520
I'm in agreement with Commissioner Ellis from the

02:27:46.520 --> 02:27:49.840
standpoint that has nothing to do with the people involved.

02:27:49.840 --> 02:27:53.549
In fact, we talked about this in our work session that we

02:27:53.549 --> 02:27:55.840
can't look at what's here now.

02:27:55.840 --> 02:27:57.899
We've got to look at what's the general use and when is

02:27:57.899 --> 02:28:00.579
that going to happen and how could it happen and what would

02:28:00.579 --> 02:28:01.840
happen in the future.

02:28:01.840 --> 02:28:06.190
And I think that's my biggest concern given the fact that

02:28:06.190 --> 02:28:11.510
in both designations, fraternities, sororities, dormitories

02:28:11.510 --> 02:28:11.840
,

02:28:11.840 --> 02:28:16.639
multifamily housing, all of that thing is the same for both

02:28:16.639 --> 02:28:18.840
of these designations.

02:28:18.840 --> 02:28:21.540
Granted, you can't have a bar or restaurant under the

02:28:21.540 --> 02:28:22.840
current designation.

02:28:22.840 --> 02:28:27.840
But again, I don't see that being at that area anyway.

02:28:27.840 --> 02:28:32.270
And so I'm not thinking about what necessarily the Chang

02:28:32.270 --> 02:28:33.840
family would do.

02:28:33.840 --> 02:28:39.360
I guess I'm thinking about what if we change this and then

02:28:39.360 --> 02:28:42.540
somebody comes to them and say, hey, have I got a deal for

02:28:42.540 --> 02:28:42.840
you?

02:28:42.840 --> 02:28:44.840
I will buy your property.

02:28:44.840 --> 02:28:49.200
And they're here to make a living and we all understand

02:28:49.200 --> 02:28:49.840
that.

02:28:49.840 --> 02:28:53.709
And somebody gives them something they can't refuse, then

02:28:53.709 --> 02:28:54.840
they sell it.

02:28:54.840 --> 02:29:02.280
And now the next SRO group or something goes in that is 100

02:29:02.280 --> 02:29:05.840
feet all the way across the acre and whatever it takes.

02:29:05.840 --> 02:29:08.569
So that's I think that's my biggest concern is the what ifs

02:29:08.569 --> 02:29:08.840
.

02:29:08.840 --> 02:29:11.719
And that's kind of what I was struggling with earlier in

02:29:11.719 --> 02:29:12.840
the work session.

02:29:12.840 --> 02:29:16.200
But more from the standpoint is, gosh, I wish we had a set

02:29:16.200 --> 02:29:18.840
of plans to know what they're planning on.

02:29:18.840 --> 02:29:21.840
That would make it a little bit easier.

02:29:21.840 --> 02:29:27.209
And so I just I just can't see in the future well enough to

02:29:27.209 --> 02:29:32.350
know or to trust what could happen if the Chang family were

02:29:32.350 --> 02:29:33.840
to sell out.

02:29:33.840 --> 02:29:37.290
And another Park seven or whoever comes in and does the

02:29:37.290 --> 02:29:40.840
same thing as we're dealt with a couple of weeks ago.

02:29:40.840 --> 02:29:47.139
So I'm going to be supporting the motion that we have

02:29:47.139 --> 02:29:48.840
before us.

02:29:48.840 --> 02:29:52.840
One reason is because staff has recommended it.

02:29:52.840 --> 02:29:56.360
That's been on the last two issues before us that I think

02:29:56.360 --> 02:29:58.840
is an appropriate use for the area.

02:29:58.840 --> 02:30:01.940
I also think that there's probably not a more appropriate

02:30:01.940 --> 02:30:04.840
use right across the street from the university.

02:30:04.840 --> 02:30:09.059
It is not in either one of the overlays of the historic

02:30:09.059 --> 02:30:09.840
districts.

02:30:09.840 --> 02:30:11.840
Part of the property is already D.C.G.

02:30:11.840 --> 02:30:15.649
And so they have another parcel that allows them to do a

02:30:15.649 --> 02:30:17.840
more uniform development.

02:30:17.840 --> 02:30:20.170
They don't know that it will be 100 feet tall across the

02:30:20.170 --> 02:30:20.840
whole thing.

02:30:20.840 --> 02:30:24.129
It may be like what was brought before us a couple of weeks

02:30:24.129 --> 02:30:27.840
ago that it's 48 feet or whatever and neither parts 50

02:30:27.840 --> 02:30:28.840
something.

02:30:28.840 --> 02:30:35.840
And it allows them I think probably the opportunity to do a

02:30:35.840 --> 02:30:37.840
a better overall design.

02:30:37.840 --> 02:30:41.489
That was my concern with Park seven is that we were going

02:30:41.489 --> 02:30:46.549
to cut off our nose to spite our face for pushing them to

02:30:46.549 --> 02:30:46.840
build the maximum.

02:30:46.840 --> 02:30:49.840
They can build in some areas versus a compromise.

02:30:49.840 --> 02:30:50.840
You know what?

02:30:50.840 --> 02:30:54.000
They probably are going to build that tall overall and give

02:30:54.000 --> 02:30:56.840
them the flexibility to do something less scale.

02:30:56.840 --> 02:31:00.340
I don't think there's a better place walkability wise right

02:31:00.340 --> 02:31:02.840
across the street from the university.

02:31:02.840 --> 02:31:07.190
And so for that reason, I'm going to be supporting the

02:31:07.190 --> 02:31:07.840
motion.

02:31:07.840 --> 02:31:10.840
I think it's a good rezone for the area.

02:31:10.840 --> 02:31:14.739
I'd love to see it redeveloped into something new and nice

02:31:14.739 --> 02:31:18.489
and the fees and the taxes that would come off of that and

02:31:18.489 --> 02:31:20.840
a nicer place for kids to live.

02:31:20.840 --> 02:31:22.840
And so for that, I think it just makes sense.

02:31:22.840 --> 02:31:26.840
And I think it's a a good decision by staff.

02:31:26.840 --> 02:31:29.940
And I'm going to support staff's recommendation and the

02:31:29.940 --> 02:31:31.840
first and the second before us.

02:31:31.840 --> 02:31:33.840
Commissioner Beck.

02:31:33.840 --> 02:31:35.840
Thank you, Chair.

02:31:35.840 --> 02:31:39.030
Just a question before we take this to the vote, probably

02:31:39.030 --> 02:31:40.840
should go to legal, I guess.

02:31:40.840 --> 02:31:48.889
Can we attach an amendment to this that deals with an

02:31:48.889 --> 02:31:50.840
overlay?

02:31:50.840 --> 02:31:51.840
You can.

02:31:51.840 --> 02:31:54.909
I mean, the applicants here, if the applicant is amenable

02:31:54.909 --> 02:31:57.840
to an overlay, that is something you can recommend.

02:31:57.840 --> 02:31:58.840
OK.

02:31:58.840 --> 02:32:00.840
And I guess we need to get him back up here.

02:32:00.840 --> 02:32:07.020
I thought he said he was open to it, but if Mr. Chang,

02:32:07.020 --> 02:32:11.840
would you mind one more time confirming or.

02:32:11.840 --> 02:32:12.840
Yes, we would consider it.

02:32:12.840 --> 02:32:13.840
OK.

02:32:13.840 --> 02:32:19.440
I want to approve this to with just the reservations I have

02:32:19.440 --> 02:32:19.840
.

02:32:19.840 --> 02:32:22.149
But I think I saw you kind of nod your head when

02:32:22.149 --> 02:32:25.489
Commissioner Rizzo said I was saying, you know, you guys

02:32:25.489 --> 02:32:27.840
weren't gung ho about SROs.

02:32:27.840 --> 02:32:29.840
And I like that.

02:32:29.840 --> 02:32:30.840
So those are my concerns.

02:32:30.840 --> 02:32:33.840
I think that's the concerns of the neighborhood, too.

02:32:33.840 --> 02:32:39.010
But so if you're amenable to that, then, yeah, I would like

02:32:39.010 --> 02:32:43.989
to approve this with the amendment that we apply an overlay

02:32:43.989 --> 02:32:44.840
to it.

02:32:44.840 --> 02:32:47.899
I will say at the moment there is a motion on the floor

02:32:47.899 --> 02:32:50.840
that it has been seconded to approve it as is.

02:32:50.840 --> 02:32:51.840
OK.

02:32:51.840 --> 02:32:53.840
So I've got to take that up first.

02:32:53.840 --> 02:32:54.840
All right.

02:32:54.840 --> 02:32:59.840
OK, so.

02:32:59.840 --> 02:33:01.840
So how does this work then?

02:33:01.840 --> 02:33:05.079
If it gets approved, do I then come in and suggest an

02:33:05.079 --> 02:33:08.840
overlay at that point, an amendment to it as approved?

02:33:08.840 --> 02:33:10.840
If it fails.

02:33:10.840 --> 02:33:11.840
Pardon me?

02:33:11.840 --> 02:33:14.850
If it fails, then a new motion could be made and the motion

02:33:14.850 --> 02:33:16.840
could be made with a overlay on it.

02:33:16.840 --> 02:33:18.840
OK. Otherwise, no.

02:33:18.840 --> 02:33:19.840
Right.

02:33:19.840 --> 02:33:20.840
OK.

02:33:20.840 --> 02:33:21.840
Thank you.

02:33:21.840 --> 02:33:24.659
I think I could ask for a friendly amendment if you want to

02:33:24.659 --> 02:33:26.840
have some discussion about that, too.

02:33:26.840 --> 02:33:30.420
Well, I would rather go there rather than vote no and then

02:33:30.420 --> 02:33:32.840
start discussing from that point.

02:33:32.840 --> 02:33:33.840
So, yes, a friendly amendment.

02:33:33.840 --> 02:33:34.840
Can we discuss that?

02:33:34.840 --> 02:33:41.549
Do you have a height you want to throw out for friendly

02:33:41.549 --> 02:33:44.840
discussion purposes?

02:33:44.840 --> 02:33:46.840
I don't think it can accept 100 feet either.

02:33:46.840 --> 02:33:53.190
But if we could see kind of a build down from the east to

02:33:53.190 --> 02:34:00.129
the west from, say, a five story to a four story, that

02:34:00.129 --> 02:34:05.840
seems like a practical move and may allow you to, you know,

02:34:05.840 --> 02:34:08.659
get the economic benefits that you want by redeveloping

02:34:08.659 --> 02:34:11.840
that property.

02:34:11.840 --> 02:34:13.840
Is that specific enough?

02:34:13.840 --> 02:34:17.090
I don't think it's a height because right now the DCG

02:34:17.090 --> 02:34:18.840
allows 100 feet.

02:34:18.840 --> 02:34:19.840
Right.

02:34:19.840 --> 02:34:20.840
And the other is 45.

02:34:20.840 --> 02:34:25.200
So I would assume that the applicant would want something

02:34:25.200 --> 02:34:30.299
between 45 and closer to 100 and less than 100 if they're

02:34:30.299 --> 02:34:33.809
going to agree to allow that to be imposed on their

02:34:33.809 --> 02:34:34.840
property.

02:34:34.840 --> 02:34:40.889
I'll call on staff to give us some direction and help on

02:34:40.889 --> 02:34:42.840
this, Manal.

02:34:42.840 --> 02:34:44.840
Can you see me?

02:34:44.840 --> 02:34:45.840
Thank you, Chairperson.

02:34:45.840 --> 02:34:46.840
That's strange.

02:34:46.840 --> 02:34:49.850
I do want to add that the request before you is for one

02:34:49.850 --> 02:34:50.840
specific lot.

02:34:50.840 --> 02:34:54.069
Are you looking at the entire development once it's brought

02:34:54.069 --> 02:34:54.840
together?

02:34:54.840 --> 02:34:57.450
Because the zoning request is for a change on one specific

02:34:57.450 --> 02:34:57.840
lot.

02:34:57.840 --> 02:35:02.200
So your overlay that you're proposing would be specific to

02:35:02.200 --> 02:35:02.840
that.

02:35:02.840 --> 02:35:03.840
To just the lot.

02:35:03.840 --> 02:35:07.840
Exactly.

02:35:07.840 --> 02:35:12.840
Okay. Thank you.

02:35:12.840 --> 02:35:16.840
You still have the floor.

02:35:16.840 --> 02:35:20.840
How about a height of 60 feet?

02:35:20.840 --> 02:35:24.239
A height of 60 foot for the subject lot we're talking about

02:35:24.239 --> 02:35:24.840
today.

02:35:24.840 --> 02:35:25.840
Right.

02:35:25.840 --> 02:35:30.840
I think that I would need to talk it over.

02:35:30.840 --> 02:35:32.840
But I think it's pretty close.

02:35:32.840 --> 02:35:35.840
How about 70?

02:35:35.840 --> 02:35:37.840
We will be building what's feasible.

02:35:37.840 --> 02:35:38.840
Right.

02:35:38.840 --> 02:35:41.840
Whether or not it's 50 feet, 60 feet, 70 feet.

02:35:41.840 --> 02:35:45.250
But whatever's feasible, I don't know if we would even get

02:35:45.250 --> 02:35:45.840
up to 70.

02:35:45.840 --> 02:35:48.840
But I don't want to fence us in.

02:35:48.840 --> 02:35:51.840
Sure.

02:35:51.840 --> 02:35:52.840
Okay. Thank you.

02:35:52.840 --> 02:35:53.840
Thank you.

02:35:53.840 --> 02:35:55.840
Commissioner Hussbuss.

02:35:55.840 --> 02:36:06.350
I don't want to put staff through the exercise, but if you

02:36:06.350 --> 02:36:08.129
can close your eyes and imagine with me a Google Maps

02:36:08.129 --> 02:36:08.840
aerial view of Denton.

02:36:08.840 --> 02:36:13.200
And then just kind of go with me on where first we're over

02:36:13.200 --> 02:36:15.840
stepping our duties by a mile.

02:36:15.840 --> 02:36:16.840
Right.

02:36:16.840 --> 02:36:18.840
And then if -- I'm big on consistency.

02:36:18.840 --> 02:36:23.190
So this body, to be consistent in its applications and its

02:36:23.190 --> 02:36:23.840
decisions.

02:36:23.840 --> 02:36:27.040
Mind you, coming from the person that voted by himself on

02:36:27.040 --> 02:36:28.840
the lot just down the street.

02:36:28.840 --> 02:36:33.190
So the absolutely epitome of consistency in my own humble

02:36:33.190 --> 02:36:33.840
opinion.

02:36:33.840 --> 02:36:42.840
But take an aerial view of Denton in your Google Maps mind.

02:36:42.840 --> 02:36:46.459
Where are you going to put -- where is there no building,

02:36:46.459 --> 02:36:49.840
no neighborhood, nobody that's okay with building?

02:36:49.840 --> 02:36:52.280
And then who is the builder willing to put the

02:36:52.280 --> 02:36:54.840
infrastructure there to put the building?

02:36:54.840 --> 02:36:59.309
I mean, you know, really you got to -- somehow this body is

02:36:59.309 --> 02:37:01.840
not -- we're not business consultants.

02:37:01.840 --> 02:37:04.840
We're not apartment managers.

02:37:04.840 --> 02:37:09.840
We make decisions on what fits where generally.

02:37:09.840 --> 02:37:12.870
And for us to overstep those bounds today means we have to

02:37:12.870 --> 02:37:14.840
continue to do so going forward.

02:37:14.840 --> 02:37:18.840
And that's just a slippery slope for me to go down.

02:37:18.840 --> 02:37:22.389
I just don't want to be inconsistent in that regard because

02:37:22.389 --> 02:37:26.040
I don't think it's fair to anyone that would come before us

02:37:26.040 --> 02:37:28.840
to wonder if we're going to be --

02:37:28.840 --> 02:37:31.670
if we're going to get a hint of what someone's going to do

02:37:31.670 --> 02:37:36.459
with their property and then try to impose our will on that

02:37:36.459 --> 02:37:36.840
.

02:37:36.840 --> 02:37:39.840
That's just -- that's not our duty.

02:37:39.840 --> 02:37:46.290
So the conversation is -- I'm not going to -- no friendly

02:37:46.290 --> 02:37:46.840
amendment.

02:37:46.840 --> 02:37:49.840
I think they have a good point.

02:37:49.840 --> 02:37:52.790
They have a great piece of property that -- and I don't

02:37:52.790 --> 02:37:53.840
think it fits.

02:37:53.840 --> 02:37:57.020
I think that's the whole point, that you don't have to put

02:37:57.020 --> 02:37:57.840
a cap on it.

02:37:57.840 --> 02:38:00.840
It caps itself.

02:38:00.840 --> 02:38:05.489
And then so my question for legal is what is the end result

02:38:05.489 --> 02:38:05.840
?

02:38:05.840 --> 02:38:07.840
So 3-3 is what we're projecting.

02:38:07.840 --> 02:38:08.840
That goes to counsel.

02:38:08.840 --> 02:38:11.840
Does that require a super majority or no?

02:38:11.840 --> 02:38:15.440
Off the top of my head, I'm not sure if that would require

02:38:15.440 --> 02:38:16.840
a super majority.

02:38:16.840 --> 02:38:19.719
I can look through the stuff and see if I can find an

02:38:19.719 --> 02:38:20.840
answer for you.

02:38:20.840 --> 02:38:28.840
Thank you.

02:38:28.840 --> 02:38:31.840
Just wanted to clarify, wouldn't the motion fail then?

02:38:31.840 --> 02:38:33.840
We haven't taken a vote yet.

02:38:33.840 --> 02:38:36.809
I'm just saying that as you do your research, if you could

02:38:36.809 --> 02:38:37.840
look into that.

02:38:37.840 --> 02:38:38.840
Yeah, the motion would fail.

02:38:38.840 --> 02:38:41.840
3-3?

02:38:41.840 --> 02:38:42.840
I think so.

02:38:42.840 --> 02:38:43.840
I think it's 4.

02:38:43.840 --> 02:38:44.840
Okay.

02:38:44.840 --> 02:38:46.840
It's not going to go either way.

02:38:46.840 --> 02:38:47.840
You still have a 4.

02:38:47.840 --> 02:38:48.840
3-3 either way.

02:38:48.840 --> 02:38:49.840
We're at impasse.

02:38:49.840 --> 02:38:50.840
So then where do we go?

02:38:50.840 --> 02:38:51.840
Right?

02:38:51.840 --> 02:38:53.840
So if it fails, someone else makes a new motion.

02:38:53.840 --> 02:38:54.840
Same three hold the line.

02:38:54.840 --> 02:38:55.840
The other three hold the line.

02:38:55.840 --> 02:38:56.840
We're at impasse.

02:38:56.840 --> 02:38:57.840
So what then?

02:38:57.840 --> 02:38:58.840
So where are we?

02:38:58.840 --> 02:39:01.840
That's I guess my --

02:39:01.840 --> 02:39:03.840
We'll see where this goes.

02:39:03.840 --> 02:39:05.840
Commissioner Ellis.

02:39:05.840 --> 02:39:06.840
Thank you, Chair.

02:39:06.840 --> 02:39:09.180
I just want to clarify to Commissioner Huntsman that I'm

02:39:09.180 --> 02:39:15.309
consistent too, and it's that we need to redefine this area

02:39:15.309 --> 02:39:15.840
.

02:39:15.840 --> 02:39:23.000
Any other discussion before I call for a vote on the motion

02:39:23.000 --> 02:39:24.840
to approve?

02:39:24.840 --> 02:39:25.840
Chair.

02:39:25.840 --> 02:39:26.840
Sorry.

02:39:26.840 --> 02:39:28.840
Commissioner Beck.

02:39:28.840 --> 02:39:33.229
I'm going to reluctantly go along with this with the

02:39:33.229 --> 02:39:37.840
understanding that if we do an overlay, I agree this thing

02:39:37.840 --> 02:39:38.840
isn't going to take 100 feet.

02:39:38.840 --> 02:39:41.420
And if I agree to 70 feet, it probably wouldn't even take

02:39:41.420 --> 02:39:41.840
that.

02:39:41.840 --> 02:39:42.840
If it did, it would be right under it.

02:39:42.840 --> 02:39:45.840
So it's a no-game situation there.

02:39:45.840 --> 02:39:49.840
Again, at heart here is, you know, the precedent this sets.

02:39:49.840 --> 02:39:54.190
But we're dealing with a family business that has a

02:39:54.190 --> 02:39:57.969
tradition here and I think has the interest of Denton's

02:39:57.969 --> 02:39:59.840
future growth in it.

02:39:59.840 --> 02:40:04.190
So for that reason and because staff has approved of it, I

02:40:04.190 --> 02:40:07.840
'm going to reluctantly go along with it too.

02:40:07.840 --> 02:40:09.840
Okay.

02:40:09.840 --> 02:40:12.840
Any further discussion before I call for a vote?

02:40:12.840 --> 02:40:16.840
Seeing none, I will call for a vote on the board.

02:40:16.840 --> 02:40:30.840
The motion before us is a motion to approve.

02:40:30.840 --> 02:40:36.840
That motion carries four to two.

02:40:36.840 --> 02:40:42.840
That will take us to our, kind of these together?

02:40:42.840 --> 02:40:46.840
I think we have to do it individually.

02:40:46.840 --> 02:40:49.840
We have, I will take us to our next one.

02:40:49.840 --> 02:40:57.840
I'm going to open the public hearing for Z17-0002.

02:40:57.840 --> 02:41:02.620
And I believe this item has been postponed until April the

02:41:02.620 --> 02:41:04.840
12th, 2017.

02:41:04.840 --> 02:41:10.430
And we will look for a motion then to continue this till

02:41:10.430 --> 02:41:11.840
that time.

02:41:11.840 --> 02:41:13.840
Commissioner Rozelle.

02:41:13.840 --> 02:41:19.840
I move to continue Z17-002 to April 12th.

02:41:19.840 --> 02:41:21.840
Commissioner Hussbuth.

02:41:21.840 --> 02:41:22.840
Second.

02:41:22.840 --> 02:41:23.840
Okay.

02:41:23.840 --> 02:41:26.840
We have a first and a second to continue.

02:41:26.840 --> 02:41:28.840
Any discussion?

02:41:28.840 --> 02:41:40.840
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

02:41:40.840 --> 02:41:42.840
That motion carries six to zero.

02:41:42.840 --> 02:41:44.840
We'll take us to item C.

02:41:44.840 --> 02:41:50.840
I'm going to open the public hearing for Z16-0030.

02:41:50.840 --> 02:41:54.760
And the applicant has requested that this item be continued

02:41:54.760 --> 02:41:57.840
to April the 12th, 2017 as well.

02:41:57.840 --> 02:41:58.840
Commissioner Beck.

02:41:58.840 --> 02:42:01.840
I move we continue this till April 12th.

02:42:01.840 --> 02:42:02.840
April 12th.

02:42:02.840 --> 02:42:05.840
Okay.

02:42:05.840 --> 02:42:06.840
Chair will second.

02:42:06.840 --> 02:42:08.840
Any discussion?

02:42:08.840 --> 02:42:20.840
Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

02:42:20.840 --> 02:42:23.840
That motion carries six to zero.

02:42:23.840 --> 02:42:25.840
That will move us to item D.

02:42:25.840 --> 02:42:39.229
And I will open the public hearing for DCA 17-0005 and call

02:42:39.229 --> 02:42:45.840
on Ron McGee for a presentation.

02:42:45.840 --> 02:42:48.360
Thank you, Chair, members of the commission, members of

02:42:48.360 --> 02:42:48.840
staff.

02:42:48.840 --> 02:42:53.200
I'll brought forward to you today is a consideration for a

02:42:53.200 --> 02:42:56.840
recommendation to city council on a request to add a

02:42:56.840 --> 02:43:03.379
specific use requirement for the DR2, DCN and DCG zoning

02:43:03.379 --> 02:43:04.840
districts.

02:43:04.840 --> 02:43:09.780
By way of definition, multifamily is defined as a structure

02:43:09.780 --> 02:43:14.350
that contains three or more dwelling units as part of the

02:43:14.350 --> 02:43:15.840
development.

02:43:15.840 --> 02:43:18.559
As we discussed in our work session, these are the

02:43:18.559 --> 02:43:22.139
following zoning districts that permit multifamily either

02:43:22.139 --> 02:43:26.840
by right, through an SUP or through limitations.

02:43:26.840 --> 02:43:33.840
The limitations here are L4, L5 and L6.

02:43:33.840 --> 02:43:38.190
General regulations for multifamily specifically, I'm sorry

02:43:38.190 --> 02:43:42.569
, for all development, including multifamily, in the DR2, DC

02:43:42.569 --> 02:43:45.840
N and DCG are shown on this particular slide.

02:43:45.840 --> 02:43:52.840
The height for DR2 is 45, DCN is 100, as well as DCG.

02:43:52.840 --> 02:43:58.840
Setbacks are shown here and a lot of coverage as well.

02:43:58.840 --> 02:44:03.200
Site design standards for development, and this in

02:44:03.200 --> 02:44:07.840
particular design standard 3513 for multifamily.

02:44:07.840 --> 02:44:11.190
There are specific requirements in regards to orientation,

02:44:11.190 --> 02:44:14.129
proximity slope, building materials, open space,

02:44:14.129 --> 02:44:15.840
architectural requirements.

02:44:15.840 --> 02:44:20.370
And as noted, there are also, if a multifamily is within a

02:44:20.370 --> 02:44:25.010
special purpose overlay district, they also have special

02:44:25.010 --> 02:44:26.840
design standards.

02:44:26.840 --> 02:44:31.190
Parking requirements for development in multifamily

02:44:31.190 --> 02:44:33.840
development that is, is shown here.

02:44:33.840 --> 02:44:40.309
We have two bedrooms at 1.75 space per unit, three bedrooms

02:44:40.309 --> 02:44:45.540
, two space per unit, and four bedrooms is one space per

02:44:45.540 --> 02:44:46.840
bedroom.

02:44:46.840 --> 02:44:52.829
Specific use permits for background is covered under 35136,

02:44:52.829 --> 02:44:57.569
covers procedures on what is required to obtain a specific

02:44:57.569 --> 02:44:58.840
use permit.

02:44:58.840 --> 02:45:02.000
It requires a dual public hearing process that comes to the

02:45:02.000 --> 02:45:04.959
Planning, Zoning Commission for recommendation and

02:45:04.959 --> 02:45:07.840
ultimately to City Council for their approval.

02:45:07.840 --> 02:45:10.840
There are requirements for submittal.

02:45:10.840 --> 02:45:15.190
As discussed, conditions can be placed with a specific use

02:45:15.190 --> 02:45:17.840
permit and it's outlined in this section.

02:45:17.840 --> 02:45:22.200
And also, a specific use permit, if approved and later

02:45:22.200 --> 02:45:28.459
altered, either the specific use or the conditions, it has

02:45:28.459 --> 02:45:33.840
to go through the same process as it was approved.

02:45:33.840 --> 02:45:38.190
What staff is recommending is a code amendment to add,

02:45:38.190 --> 02:45:42.840
again, a specific use requirement for the DR2, DCN and DCG

02:45:42.840 --> 02:45:47.840
to address multifamily proposals in the DIN core.

02:45:47.840 --> 02:45:51.840
And that core is identified on this map.

02:45:51.840 --> 02:45:54.840
The DCG, as you can see, is the darker green.

02:45:54.840 --> 02:45:58.840
DCN is the one with the hatching.

02:45:58.840 --> 02:46:00.840
And then DR2 is the lighter green.

02:46:00.840 --> 02:46:05.200
And I wanted to point out on this map the areas that we are

02:46:05.200 --> 02:46:09.350
trying to protect with this proposal are the established

02:46:09.350 --> 02:46:13.840
neighborhoods, the historic districts, as well as the

02:46:13.840 --> 02:46:15.840
special overlay districts.

02:46:15.840 --> 02:46:19.840
We've got West Oak here, Oak Hickory.

02:46:19.840 --> 02:46:22.840
We've got a Bernard neighborhood here.

02:46:22.840 --> 02:46:26.840
Some neighbor here to the east of the railroad tracks.

02:46:26.840 --> 02:46:31.190
We've got the Stroud neighborhood shown in this lighter

02:46:31.190 --> 02:46:31.840
yellow.

02:46:31.840 --> 02:46:35.270
And we also have some clusters of residential development

02:46:35.270 --> 02:46:38.840
here, single family, that's also in that core area that we

02:46:38.840 --> 02:46:39.840
're proposing.

02:46:39.840 --> 02:46:44.579
The SGP allows for the opportunity for not just the council

02:46:44.579 --> 02:46:47.840
, but the Planning and Zoning Commission and the community

02:46:47.840 --> 02:46:51.840
to come together and address any potential impacts that may

02:46:51.840 --> 02:46:54.840
arise from a proposed multifamily development.

02:46:54.840 --> 02:46:58.530
And that could be looking at the parking ratio, the

02:46:58.530 --> 02:47:02.909
building height, as well as any design standards to conform

02:47:02.909 --> 02:47:07.370
to compatibility matters, again, that would be adjacent to

02:47:07.370 --> 02:47:09.840
established neighborhoods.

02:47:09.840 --> 02:47:13.229
Stafford's recommending approval of this request as we are

02:47:13.229 --> 02:47:14.840
bringing this forward.

02:47:14.840 --> 02:47:16.840
It is a land use analysis tool.

02:47:16.840 --> 02:47:21.190
Again, repeating myself here, addressing massing and scale

02:47:21.190 --> 02:47:21.840
compatibility.

02:47:21.840 --> 02:47:24.840
And again, it's consistent with the Dem Plan 2030.

02:47:24.840 --> 02:47:27.840
With that, that concludes my presentation.

02:47:27.840 --> 02:47:29.840
I will be happy to answer any questions.

02:47:29.840 --> 02:47:31.840
Questions for Commissioner Ellis.

02:47:31.840 --> 02:47:32.840
Thank you, Chair.

02:47:32.840 --> 02:47:35.540
Hey, Ron, when would this take effect if this did get

02:47:35.540 --> 02:47:36.840
approved by council?

02:47:36.840 --> 02:47:40.489
We are scheduled tentatively scheduled to PNZ, I'm sorry,

02:47:40.489 --> 02:47:42.840
to City Council at their next meeting.

02:47:42.840 --> 02:47:45.840
I believe it's April 4th.

02:47:45.840 --> 02:47:51.010
If that were to go on the April 4th, City Council, and if

02:47:51.010 --> 02:47:55.059
again, if they approve this code amendment, I believe it's

02:47:55.059 --> 02:47:59.840
14 days after April 4th, so mid to late April.

02:47:59.840 --> 02:48:01.840
And would it exclude any projects?

02:48:01.840 --> 02:48:03.840
How would that go?

02:48:03.840 --> 02:48:07.110
My understanding is that if the zoning is in place, and

02:48:07.110 --> 02:48:09.840
Shannon, you may help me out here.

02:48:09.840 --> 02:48:14.200
If the zoning is already being considered, I don't know if

02:48:14.200 --> 02:48:18.680
they would be vested or if the platting would vest them in

02:48:18.680 --> 02:48:19.840
a project.

02:48:19.840 --> 02:48:22.139
They wouldn't vest with zoning, they would vest when they

02:48:22.139 --> 02:48:22.840
file the plat.

02:48:22.840 --> 02:48:27.840
So the plat is considered the first permit.

02:48:27.840 --> 02:48:30.840
Vesting doesn't occur with zoning of a property.

02:48:30.840 --> 02:48:34.129
It occurs with the plat, which is typically the first

02:48:34.129 --> 02:48:34.840
permit.

02:48:34.840 --> 02:48:38.549
The plat or the first permit, but the plat is typically the

02:48:38.549 --> 02:48:39.840
first permit.

02:48:39.840 --> 02:48:41.840
Thank you.

02:48:41.840 --> 02:48:42.840
Continue.

02:48:42.840 --> 02:48:43.840
Thank you.

02:48:43.840 --> 02:48:46.459
Okay, so on that same note, so anything that's got its

02:48:46.459 --> 02:48:48.899
first plat and would not, this would not apply to them,

02:48:48.899 --> 02:48:51.629
then it would play anything new going forward at that point

02:48:51.629 --> 02:48:51.840
.

02:48:51.840 --> 02:48:57.840
So if they've already been platted in the zoning changes,

02:48:57.840 --> 02:49:02.840
then they're vested under the old requirements.

02:49:02.840 --> 02:49:05.840
Does that make sense?

02:49:05.840 --> 02:49:08.329
Right, so they would not require an SUP if they're at that

02:49:08.329 --> 02:49:08.840
stage.

02:49:08.840 --> 02:49:11.920
It would only be something new coming forward then after

02:49:11.920 --> 02:49:14.840
whatever you said, 14 days after approval.

02:49:14.840 --> 02:49:17.290
The April 4th, again, that's a tentative City Council

02:49:17.290 --> 02:49:17.840
meeting.

02:49:17.840 --> 02:49:22.840
Okay, thank you.

02:49:22.840 --> 02:49:27.840
Any other questions for staff?

02:49:27.840 --> 02:49:28.840
You have another question?

02:49:28.840 --> 02:49:29.840
Actually, I'm sorry.

02:49:29.840 --> 02:49:30.840
That's okay.

02:49:30.840 --> 02:49:31.840
Commissioner Ellis.

02:49:31.840 --> 02:49:32.840
I'm sorry.

02:49:32.840 --> 02:49:33.840
It's on the same note.

02:49:33.840 --> 02:49:39.000
So is that in just a request for platting or is that an

02:49:39.000 --> 02:49:40.840
approved plat?

02:49:40.840 --> 02:49:42.840
Actually, it's the application.

02:49:42.840 --> 02:49:48.840
If they show intent to develop the property in that manner,

02:49:48.840 --> 02:49:52.129
by submitting an application, they actually can prove v

02:49:52.129 --> 02:49:53.840
esting with just that action.

02:49:53.840 --> 02:49:54.840
Okay, so like --

02:49:54.840 --> 02:49:59.360
The state law is a little bit unclear, but it's been tried

02:49:59.360 --> 02:50:00.840
in that manner.

02:50:00.840 --> 02:50:03.840
Okay, so trying to wrap my head around what just happened.

02:50:03.840 --> 02:50:07.579
So that particular zoning change we just made, if he quick

02:50:07.579 --> 02:50:12.030
turns an application in tomorrow for a plat, doesn't apply,

02:50:12.030 --> 02:50:15.840
or even the day of this or 14 days after this is approved,

02:50:15.840 --> 02:50:18.000
if he just submits the application for that, then this

02:50:18.000 --> 02:50:18.840
would not apply to that particular property.

02:50:18.840 --> 02:50:21.690
If they indicate intent to develop that property in that

02:50:21.690 --> 02:50:22.840
manner, then yes.

02:50:22.840 --> 02:50:23.840
And it would not apply then?

02:50:23.840 --> 02:50:24.840
Right.

02:50:24.840 --> 02:50:26.840
Okay, thank you.

02:50:26.840 --> 02:50:29.840
Any other questions for Ron?

02:50:29.840 --> 02:50:30.840
Thank you.

02:50:30.840 --> 02:50:35.840
Thank you.

02:50:35.840 --> 02:50:39.200
This is a public hearing, and I have two cards for

02:50:39.200 --> 02:50:40.840
questions to speak.

02:50:40.840 --> 02:50:48.840
Kim McKibbin, followed by Paul Meltzer.

02:50:48.840 --> 02:50:49.840
Hello again.

02:50:49.840 --> 02:50:53.840
Kim McKibbin, 1306 West Hickory Street.

02:50:53.840 --> 02:50:57.850
I was not going to comment on this, but after hearing some

02:50:57.850 --> 02:51:01.940
of the work session, I did want to mention that the special

02:51:01.940 --> 02:51:05.840
use permit might be a step in the right direction.

02:51:05.840 --> 02:51:09.639
I put a question mark on whether or not I agreed with it

02:51:09.639 --> 02:51:13.579
simply because I did listen to what you guys said in the

02:51:13.579 --> 02:51:14.840
work meeting.

02:51:14.840 --> 02:51:21.700
And at some point, someone has to take responsibility for

02:51:21.700 --> 02:51:24.840
the planning of Denton.

02:51:24.840 --> 02:51:27.989
Now, nobody wants to ruffle any feathers or get anybody

02:51:27.989 --> 02:51:29.840
upset or anything like that.

02:51:29.840 --> 02:51:34.579
But if you people do not make some decisions about what you

02:51:34.579 --> 02:51:39.030
are going to allow and what you are not going to allow in

02:51:39.030 --> 02:51:43.659
certain areas, there is going to be a lot of trouble very

02:51:43.659 --> 02:51:44.840
quickly.

02:51:44.840 --> 02:51:48.309
Denton is not the same Denton it was in 1981 when I came

02:51:48.309 --> 02:51:48.840
here.

02:51:48.840 --> 02:51:51.959
It's all over all these places about the best place to

02:51:51.959 --> 02:51:55.209
retire, the best place to do this, the best place to do

02:51:55.209 --> 02:51:55.840
that.

02:51:55.840 --> 02:51:57.840
And people want to come here.

02:51:57.840 --> 02:52:02.969
And in wanting to come here, you have to be prudent in what

02:52:02.969 --> 02:52:07.350
you allow to be developed and how you allow it to be

02:52:07.350 --> 02:52:08.840
developed.

02:52:08.840 --> 02:52:11.840
Now, I'm not saying I'm an expert in that.

02:52:11.840 --> 02:52:15.139
I came up here, I bought a business, you know, I want to

02:52:15.139 --> 02:52:16.840
invest in the community.

02:52:16.840 --> 02:52:19.940
I want to see good things happen and I want to see it

02:52:19.940 --> 02:52:20.840
continue.

02:52:20.840 --> 02:52:24.549
Now, you know, one of the things that we keep talking about

02:52:24.549 --> 02:52:28.319
is the overlay districts we talk about, the transition

02:52:28.319 --> 02:52:28.840
areas.

02:52:28.840 --> 02:52:32.549
And I think that perhaps my idea about the transition area

02:52:32.549 --> 02:52:36.319
from the university is that the university is the tallest

02:52:36.319 --> 02:52:38.840
point and it goes down from there.

02:52:38.840 --> 02:52:41.860
I know some other people think that it ascends up to the

02:52:41.860 --> 02:52:42.840
university.

02:52:42.840 --> 02:52:46.840
I think the university is the peak and it ascends down.

02:52:46.840 --> 02:52:49.680
And what you're looking at are two story, three story

02:52:49.680 --> 02:52:51.840
buildings surrounding the university.

02:52:51.840 --> 02:52:57.010
And we need to be aware of the developers will continue to

02:52:57.010 --> 02:52:57.840
come.

02:52:57.840 --> 02:53:04.959
They will continue to try to ask for special treatment or

02:53:04.959 --> 02:53:08.350
understanding about, well, this is zoned, you know, for

02:53:08.350 --> 02:53:10.840
single family, but I really want to do this with it.

02:53:10.840 --> 02:53:15.680
And if we start at the university and go out, you know, as

02:53:15.680 --> 02:53:20.829
the compatibility area goes down, not starting at 100 feet

02:53:20.829 --> 02:53:24.840
and then turning up at two stories several blocks away.

02:53:24.840 --> 02:53:29.200
But you start at two stories and you end up at 100 feet

02:53:29.200 --> 02:53:30.840
several blocks away.

02:53:30.840 --> 02:53:34.040
So a little bit different way to look at what that

02:53:34.040 --> 02:53:35.840
compatibility area is.

02:53:35.840 --> 02:53:40.190
But I am really asking you guys, the special overlay

02:53:40.190 --> 02:53:44.840
district may not be the optimum solution to this, but

02:53:44.840 --> 02:53:50.840
somewhere somebody is going to have to just kind of step

02:53:50.840 --> 02:53:55.389
off this cliff and see what we can do to preserve the parts

02:53:55.389 --> 02:53:59.319
of Denton that are really, really what make Denton what it

02:53:59.319 --> 02:53:59.840
is.

02:53:59.840 --> 02:54:03.250
If people want to do certain things in certain areas that

02:54:03.250 --> 02:54:06.840
really don't fit with the zoning and that does not fit what

02:54:06.840 --> 02:54:11.209
the overall community that surrounds that area is looking

02:54:11.209 --> 02:54:14.840
at, we once again, where's the compromise?

02:54:14.840 --> 02:54:18.459
Where can we compromise between the communities and the

02:54:18.459 --> 02:54:21.989
developers in finding housing for Denton and making it

02:54:21.989 --> 02:54:25.840
someplace that continues to be livable and desirable?

02:54:25.840 --> 02:54:30.059
So I'm asking you to step off that cliff or maybe get a

02:54:30.059 --> 02:54:34.260
little closer to the edge by considering this or whatever

02:54:34.260 --> 02:54:36.840
you're going to do with this.

02:54:36.840 --> 02:54:38.840
Something's got to start somewhere.

02:54:38.840 --> 02:54:41.690
And if it is special use permits for certain areas, that

02:54:41.690 --> 02:54:42.840
might be what it is.

02:54:42.840 --> 02:54:46.850
I do disagree with the fact that there it just needs to be

02:54:46.850 --> 02:54:47.840
the core.

02:54:47.840 --> 02:54:51.129
There are certain areas right on the outskirts of this core

02:54:51.129 --> 02:54:54.170
that are going to be impacted and have been in the past by

02:54:54.170 --> 02:54:56.840
apartments being built inappropriately.

02:54:56.840 --> 02:54:57.840
I have a question for you.

02:54:57.840 --> 02:54:58.840
Yes, sir.

02:54:58.840 --> 02:55:02.840
I appreciate your comments, and I think they're with merit.

02:55:02.840 --> 02:55:06.409
And I would agree with you that a key to successful

02:55:06.409 --> 02:55:10.790
development for our community, in my opinion, is here are

02:55:10.790 --> 02:55:13.940
the rules, and then you leave them and people then can

02:55:13.940 --> 02:55:14.840
abide by them.

02:55:14.840 --> 02:55:18.680
I think the difficulty comes is when we want to keep adding

02:55:18.680 --> 02:55:20.840
things and changing things.

02:55:20.840 --> 02:55:23.840
The uncertainty is what creates the problems.

02:55:23.840 --> 02:55:26.520
And I'd like to respond to I appreciate you've been here at

02:55:26.520 --> 02:55:27.840
a number of our meetings.

02:55:27.840 --> 02:55:32.200
I know you and I may not look eye to eye on some issues,

02:55:32.200 --> 02:55:33.840
and that's okay.

02:55:33.840 --> 02:55:38.229
And so I would share back with you that as a longtime Dent

02:55:38.229 --> 02:55:41.350
on resident also, there have been a number of things that

02:55:41.350 --> 02:55:42.840
have been done for communities.

02:55:42.840 --> 02:55:46.180
So that's why the Fry Street overlay is there, the Oak, the

02:55:46.180 --> 02:55:47.840
Hickory Street overlay.

02:55:47.840 --> 02:55:50.780
Those are all there, and they were put in there for exactly

02:55:50.780 --> 02:55:53.840
the reason that you said, to protect particular areas.

02:55:53.840 --> 02:55:56.379
And the issue sometimes that I have a difficult time as a

02:55:56.379 --> 02:55:59.090
commissioner, because you're right, we do have to make a

02:55:59.090 --> 02:55:59.840
decision.

02:55:59.840 --> 02:56:02.829
It's a yes or a no, is that even when we have those

02:56:02.829 --> 02:56:06.340
districts and all of the discussion and all the work that

02:56:06.340 --> 02:56:07.840
has gone into those,

02:56:07.840 --> 02:56:10.620
we then still have areas that are outside of those that

02:56:10.620 --> 02:56:13.370
then we say, well, it's close to this area or it's two

02:56:13.370 --> 02:56:14.840
blocks down the street.

02:56:14.840 --> 02:56:16.840
And so we have to do all these other things.

02:56:16.840 --> 02:56:20.200
And I'm torn between the position of what we have put those

02:56:20.200 --> 02:56:22.840
in for special protection of those areas.

02:56:22.840 --> 02:56:25.840
And to the west of this is zoned in R3.

02:56:25.840 --> 02:56:29.549
And so it's not going to creepy crawl over there because

02:56:29.549 --> 02:56:32.840
that is a very low density zoning in our city.

02:56:32.840 --> 02:56:35.840
And so I would appreciate kind of the same thing back.

02:56:35.840 --> 02:56:38.270
We do the very best we can with a lot of different

02:56:38.270 --> 02:56:39.840
circumstances that come.

02:56:39.840 --> 02:56:42.520
And we try to look, or at least I try to look at what's

02:56:42.520 --> 02:56:45.540
been done in the past, what the overlays, what the

02:56:45.540 --> 02:56:46.840
districts were,

02:56:46.840 --> 02:56:50.129
and try to come up with, I hope, a reasonable decision and

02:56:50.129 --> 02:56:52.840
then say that usually it has to be a yes or a no.

02:56:52.840 --> 02:56:55.840
So thank you for continuing to come out.

02:56:55.840 --> 02:56:56.840
Thank you for your feedback.

02:56:56.840 --> 02:57:00.069
It's nice to have some reasoned discussion versus just

02:57:00.069 --> 02:57:01.840
getting kind of thrown at you.

02:57:01.840 --> 02:57:03.809
And you're just kind of like, well, I don't know what to do

02:57:03.809 --> 02:57:04.840
with that, but take it.

02:57:04.840 --> 02:57:07.920
So thank you for your reasonable discussion and your

02:57:07.920 --> 02:57:09.840
feedback to this commission.

02:57:09.840 --> 02:57:11.840
So with that, Commissioner Rozelle.

02:57:11.840 --> 02:57:12.840
Thank you, Chair.

02:57:12.840 --> 02:57:15.989
And I'll take my notes back that you're reading from me

02:57:15.989 --> 02:57:16.840
just then.

02:57:16.840 --> 02:57:19.840
But I'll be redundant, I guess.

02:57:19.840 --> 02:57:20.840
I'll have to be.

02:57:20.840 --> 02:57:22.840
Well, you and I swap with that once in a while.

02:57:22.840 --> 02:57:25.840
I was, I mean, bullet by bullet, apparently.

02:57:25.840 --> 02:57:30.840
One, I wanted to thank you, Ms. Givens, for coming out.

02:57:30.840 --> 02:57:33.239
You've been consistent with anything that happens with Hick

02:57:33.239 --> 02:57:33.840
ory and Oak.

02:57:33.840 --> 02:57:38.559
And so it's you and Mr. Meltzer who stay late nights with

02:57:38.559 --> 02:57:42.329
us and have decent dialogue to help us think through these

02:57:42.329 --> 02:57:42.840
processes.

02:57:42.840 --> 02:57:43.840
So I wanted to thank you for that.

02:57:43.840 --> 02:57:48.200
And the first part of your presentation, I wholeheartedly

02:57:48.200 --> 02:57:48.840
agree.

02:57:48.840 --> 02:57:50.850
I think there needs to be, I think you said, an allow and

02:57:50.850 --> 02:57:51.840
not allow provision.

02:57:51.840 --> 02:57:57.190
I think to Chair's point, once we have the box, then a

02:57:57.190 --> 02:58:00.620
developer or anyone who buys the property can say, this is

02:58:00.620 --> 02:58:01.840
what I'm allowed to do.

02:58:01.840 --> 02:58:04.840
And I think I would disagree that SUP is a start in the

02:58:04.840 --> 02:58:07.690
right direction because I think an SUP just adds more

02:58:07.690 --> 02:58:09.840
questions to that allow and not allow.

02:58:09.840 --> 02:58:14.840
And so I agree with you in that.

02:58:14.840 --> 02:58:16.840
I think there needs to be some measures.

02:58:16.840 --> 02:58:18.840
I think the conversation is how does that look?

02:58:18.840 --> 02:58:20.840
Is it an overlay district?

02:58:20.840 --> 02:58:24.579
Or what can we do to provide greater direction and some

02:58:24.579 --> 02:58:29.030
black and white measures to encourage or discourage certain

02:58:29.030 --> 02:58:32.840
developments from happening in certain places?

02:58:32.840 --> 02:58:35.280
And so I think we're thinking along those same lines of

02:58:35.280 --> 02:58:38.000
what to do to protect areas that need to be protected, not

02:58:38.000 --> 02:58:40.840
just in the core, but as you mentioned, in other areas.

02:58:40.840 --> 02:58:45.940
What I also had for you is you mentioned that you feel that

02:58:45.940 --> 02:58:50.969
everything should work down from the university. I imagine

02:58:50.969 --> 02:58:51.840
you meant in height and density, but mostly height.

02:58:51.840 --> 02:58:53.840
UNT doesn't have a lot of tall buildings.

02:58:53.840 --> 02:58:56.520
It's not like TWA where you can get like 150 story building

02:58:56.520 --> 02:58:57.840
or 150 foot building.

02:58:57.840 --> 02:59:01.629
But to that point, it seems as though there is general

02:59:01.629 --> 02:59:05.450
consensus about high rises or tall buildings on the west

02:59:05.450 --> 02:59:06.840
side of campus.

02:59:06.840 --> 02:59:07.840
But you didn't mention that necessarily.

02:59:07.840 --> 02:59:11.549
So I'd love to know your thoughts on if you were here for

02:59:11.549 --> 02:59:13.840
the earlier presentation.

02:59:13.840 --> 02:59:17.440
Maybe you're not in favor of 100 foot on Hickory, 100 foot

02:59:17.440 --> 02:59:18.840
building on Hickory.

02:59:18.840 --> 02:59:23.530
Are you OK with 100 foot story or 100 feet tall building

02:59:23.530 --> 02:59:24.840
west of campus?

02:59:24.840 --> 02:59:25.840
How do you feel about that?

02:59:25.840 --> 02:59:27.840
OK, I'm not from Texas.

02:59:27.840 --> 02:59:31.440
So when you say west of campus, I think going down Hickory

02:59:31.440 --> 02:59:32.840
Street is east.

02:59:32.840 --> 02:59:33.840
That's correct.

02:59:33.840 --> 02:59:40.840
OK, so a lot of that stuff that's out that direction on out

02:59:40.840 --> 02:59:40.840
.

02:59:40.840 --> 02:59:44.079
I think the University Boulevard and then from University

02:59:44.079 --> 02:59:47.450
Boulevard kind of towards the hospital area where there's a

02:59:47.450 --> 02:59:48.840
lot of there's a lot of two stories.

02:59:48.840 --> 02:59:49.840
Two stories.

02:59:49.840 --> 02:59:51.840
There's a lot of older things.

02:59:51.840 --> 02:59:54.809
Well, when you say Cement City, I think down off Eagle,

02:59:54.809 --> 02:59:57.739
that is the apartments that I moved in when I moved here in

02:59:57.739 --> 02:59:58.840
1981.

02:59:58.840 --> 02:59:58.840
Sure.

02:59:58.840 --> 03:00:00.840
So it's a different concept.

03:00:00.840 --> 03:00:03.879
I think that if you if you choose an area and you say to

03:00:03.879 --> 03:00:07.520
developers, this is where you can build this, but you can't

03:00:07.520 --> 03:00:08.840
build that here.

03:00:08.840 --> 03:00:11.840
You know, I can understand that.

03:00:11.840 --> 03:00:16.200
I certainly understand the concept of taking a section and

03:00:16.200 --> 03:00:20.040
really working with all the people that are involved in the

03:00:20.040 --> 03:00:22.940
development to develop it into something that has walk

03:00:22.940 --> 03:00:26.840
ability, bicycles, green space, those kinds of things.

03:00:26.840 --> 03:00:31.200
So if you're asking me if I thought there's a place for a

03:00:31.200 --> 03:00:36.000
hundred foot apartment building down that direction, I'm

03:00:36.000 --> 03:00:38.840
not sure everything down there right now is three story.

03:00:38.840 --> 03:00:40.840
And that's about as high as it gets.

03:00:40.840 --> 03:00:45.440
A hundred story building is the first state bank building

03:00:45.440 --> 03:00:46.840
on the square.

03:00:46.840 --> 03:00:47.840
That's a hundred foot.

03:00:47.840 --> 03:00:50.840
At least that's pretty close to it from what I understand.

03:00:50.840 --> 03:00:55.190
I don't I haven't seen much apartment buildings in Denver

03:00:55.190 --> 03:00:59.479
or in downtown Dallas or any place where there's a need for

03:00:59.479 --> 03:01:01.840
density that are that tall.

03:01:01.840 --> 03:01:03.840
I really have not.

03:01:03.840 --> 03:01:08.200
Down around the hospital districts in Dallas, they're

03:01:08.200 --> 03:01:09.840
building Max four.

03:01:09.840 --> 03:01:12.840
In Denver, they're building Max five.

03:01:12.840 --> 03:01:15.840
And those are the two areas that I'm familiar with.

03:01:15.840 --> 03:01:21.229
So I would have to, you know, really look at what the plans

03:01:21.229 --> 03:01:21.840
is.

03:01:21.840 --> 03:01:24.159
Is it something that's still and goes straight up out of

03:01:24.159 --> 03:01:24.840
the ground?

03:01:24.840 --> 03:01:26.840
Does it gradually move around?

03:01:26.840 --> 03:01:29.780
But I think that if you if you have something that says

03:01:29.780 --> 03:01:33.110
people can build a hundred foot building, they're going to

03:01:33.110 --> 03:01:33.840
push it.

03:01:33.840 --> 03:01:35.840
They're going to push it to a hundred feet.

03:01:35.840 --> 03:01:37.709
And then they're going to ask you for 10 more feet for the

03:01:37.709 --> 03:01:38.840
air conditioning units on top.

03:01:38.840 --> 03:01:42.840
So why is it a hundred feet?

03:01:42.840 --> 03:01:46.860
You know, why is there not something between forty five and

03:01:46.860 --> 03:01:47.840
a hundred?

03:01:47.840 --> 03:01:49.840
Will the will the fire department even be able to service a

03:01:49.840 --> 03:01:50.840
hundred foot building?

03:01:50.840 --> 03:01:53.340
Do we have the ladders and all of that kind of stuff for

03:01:53.340 --> 03:01:53.840
that?

03:01:53.840 --> 03:01:55.840
I mean, I don't even know.

03:01:55.840 --> 03:01:59.309
And it would be terrible to have the buildings outgrow what

03:01:59.309 --> 03:02:00.840
the city can provide.

03:02:00.840 --> 03:02:05.899
Sure. So I don't have any objection to a certain area being

03:02:05.899 --> 03:02:07.840
designated that way.

03:02:07.840 --> 03:02:10.340
I would like to see some of the areas, the more blighted

03:02:10.340 --> 03:02:10.840
areas.

03:02:10.840 --> 03:02:14.059
I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but there's some

03:02:14.059 --> 03:02:16.840
places that that need to be redone.

03:02:16.840 --> 03:02:18.840
We need to be revitalized.

03:02:18.840 --> 03:02:23.469
And it's the it's the single family houses that get torn

03:02:23.469 --> 03:02:28.090
down to get these things put up that that disturbs me in a

03:02:28.090 --> 03:02:28.840
way.

03:02:28.840 --> 03:02:29.840
I appreciate the feedback. Thank you.

03:02:29.840 --> 03:02:31.840
OK, I'm sorry. I couldn't be more direct.

03:02:31.840 --> 03:02:34.840
That helps. I can't even think of a hundred foot.

03:02:34.840 --> 03:02:36.840
How many stories is that?

03:02:36.840 --> 03:02:38.840
Nine, ten, eight.

03:02:38.840 --> 03:02:43.899
I can't even I can't even envision one of those except in

03:02:43.899 --> 03:02:48.420
in right in downtown Dallas is the only place I'm seeing

03:02:48.420 --> 03:02:51.840
around the American American Pavilion Center.

03:02:51.840 --> 03:02:53.840
Yeah. Thank you.

03:02:53.840 --> 03:02:56.840
Thank you for your comments. Appreciate them.

03:02:56.840 --> 03:02:58.840
Anybody else?

03:02:58.840 --> 03:03:00.840
Thank you for allowing me to speak.

03:03:00.840 --> 03:03:02.840
Thank you for coming out again this evening.

03:03:02.840 --> 03:03:05.840
You're welcome.

03:03:05.840 --> 03:03:13.969
Mr. Melcher, since you raised the plan that I presented, I

03:03:13.969 --> 03:03:19.030
'll just touch on that briefly that you could you can look

03:03:19.030 --> 03:03:20.840
at the presentation to a large community.

03:03:20.840 --> 03:03:25.059
I can just share with you that I've had universal positive

03:03:25.059 --> 03:03:28.790
response to that notion of making a more urban area in that

03:03:28.790 --> 03:03:33.840
area that does kind of beg for redevelopment and equally

03:03:33.840 --> 03:03:34.840
strong reaction.

03:03:34.840 --> 03:03:39.059
I'm just sharing with you presented this to lots of people

03:03:39.059 --> 03:03:42.850
in large rooms and I think you'll find I think you'll find

03:03:42.850 --> 03:03:45.870
it rewarding and interesting to ask that question to many

03:03:45.870 --> 03:03:46.840
other people.

03:03:46.840 --> 03:03:51.620
And I think you'll find that that people resonate with it

03:03:51.620 --> 03:03:53.840
specifically on this.

03:03:53.840 --> 03:03:56.840
I think there's a medium term issue and a short term issue.

03:03:56.840 --> 03:04:02.079
Medium term, clearly we collectively as a community are not

03:04:02.079 --> 03:04:05.340
done yet actually planning. I mean, I would agree with the

03:04:05.340 --> 03:04:05.840
previous speaker on that.

03:04:05.840 --> 03:04:09.139
And, you know, really making some decisions and that's

03:04:09.139 --> 03:04:12.840
going to make life easier, certainly for this commission.

03:04:12.840 --> 03:04:16.049
And it's the nibbling away like ducks, you know, bite by

03:04:16.049 --> 03:04:19.159
bite that that kind of destroys any sense of planning or

03:04:19.159 --> 03:04:20.840
well-ordered community.

03:04:20.840 --> 03:04:24.049
And yet that's sort of the only mechanism we have is nib

03:04:24.049 --> 03:04:27.840
bling away bite by bite as each project is brought forward.

03:04:27.840 --> 03:04:34.840
So the idea of of SUPs is kind of more of the same.

03:04:34.840 --> 03:04:39.399
But but I recognize the value where we do have these outs

03:04:39.399 --> 03:04:43.510
ized projects, at least viewed by some as outsized projects

03:04:43.510 --> 03:04:47.329
in some of these sensitive areas that, you know, I respect

03:04:47.329 --> 03:04:49.840
the impulse to try to give the community at least some

03:04:49.840 --> 03:04:49.840
opportunity.

03:04:49.840 --> 03:04:53.170
You know, to share their views with you routinely on those

03:04:53.170 --> 03:04:56.260
concern raised at work session was you're just going to

03:04:56.260 --> 03:04:58.840
catch too many dolphins with the tuna.

03:04:58.840 --> 03:05:02.110
And, you know, every you have to go through this process on

03:05:02.110 --> 03:05:04.840
everything that wouldn't otherwise need it.

03:05:04.840 --> 03:05:09.059
So my simple recommendation to you would be to put some

03:05:09.059 --> 03:05:13.149
kind of a, you know, some kind of a floor on it that, you

03:05:13.149 --> 03:05:17.649
know, every multifamily project with more than I'm making

03:05:17.649 --> 03:05:18.840
up a number of people.

03:05:18.840 --> 03:05:22.350
I'm making up a number 30 bedrooms needs to go through an

03:05:22.350 --> 03:05:22.840
SUP.

03:05:22.840 --> 03:05:26.450
And then I think it meets the objective of saying until we

03:05:26.450 --> 03:05:29.840
have an actual plan, we'll talk about each one.

03:05:29.840 --> 03:05:32.840
But by each one, we only mean the big ones.

03:05:32.840 --> 03:05:33.840
That's what I suggest to you.

03:05:33.840 --> 03:05:36.840
Thanks.

03:05:36.840 --> 03:05:38.840
Again, this is a public hearing.

03:05:38.840 --> 03:05:44.840
Anyone else wish to wish to speak on this item?

03:05:44.840 --> 03:05:47.840
Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

03:05:47.840 --> 03:05:48.840
We're back.

03:05:48.840 --> 03:05:49.840
Thank you, Chair.

03:05:49.840 --> 03:05:52.920
Got a question for legal and then would like to make a

03:05:52.920 --> 03:05:53.840
statement.

03:05:53.840 --> 03:06:01.120
Who initiates overlay districts or SAPs, small action or

03:06:01.120 --> 03:06:02.840
small area plans?

03:06:02.840 --> 03:06:04.840
The small area plans?

03:06:04.840 --> 03:06:06.840
Well, or the SUPs.

03:06:06.840 --> 03:06:07.840
And overlay districts.

03:06:07.840 --> 03:06:11.440
Does that start with somebody at city level or is that

03:06:11.440 --> 03:06:13.840
somebody out in the community?

03:06:13.840 --> 03:06:14.840
It can.

03:06:14.840 --> 03:06:15.840
It can be city.

03:06:15.840 --> 03:06:15.840
Right.

03:06:15.840 --> 03:06:16.840
It can be either.

03:06:16.840 --> 03:06:19.840
It can be city or it can be -- right.

03:06:19.840 --> 03:06:21.840
Or citizen initiated.

03:06:21.840 --> 03:06:22.840
Okay.

03:06:22.840 --> 03:06:25.840
Who within the city then would initiate it?

03:06:25.840 --> 03:06:27.840
Mostly --

03:06:27.840 --> 03:06:29.840
Our long-range planning department.

03:06:29.840 --> 03:06:33.840
Ron Mingito is going to speak today.

03:06:33.840 --> 03:06:34.840
That would be me.

03:06:34.840 --> 03:06:35.840
Okay.

03:06:35.840 --> 03:06:40.840
So you would do it based on somebody's recommendation or --

03:06:40.840 --> 03:06:41.840
Yeah.

03:06:41.840 --> 03:06:43.809
We have, as you know, we have an existing small area plan,

03:06:43.809 --> 03:06:44.840
the Friday Street overlay.

03:06:44.840 --> 03:06:45.840
Right.

03:06:45.840 --> 03:06:47.840
I'm sorry, Friday Street small area plan.

03:06:47.840 --> 03:06:48.840
Yeah.

03:06:48.840 --> 03:06:53.500
And just a quick note, we have started the process of the

03:06:53.500 --> 03:06:55.840
small area plan study for this

03:06:55.840 --> 03:06:56.840
area.

03:06:56.840 --> 03:06:59.840
We just haven't gotten it kicked off yet.

03:06:59.840 --> 03:07:00.840
Okay.

03:07:00.840 --> 03:07:01.840
Okay.

03:07:01.840 --> 03:07:02.840
Thank you.

03:07:02.840 --> 03:07:09.840
Regarding the SUP, I'm for it, really.

03:07:09.840 --> 03:07:13.049
Now, there's probably something we can do better, but I

03:07:13.049 --> 03:07:14.840
think staff has looked at this pretty

03:07:14.840 --> 03:07:15.840
differently.

03:07:15.840 --> 03:07:18.450
And I think maybe some here are overthinking this a little

03:07:18.450 --> 03:07:19.840
bit because when I first read

03:07:19.840 --> 03:07:22.520
it, I thought here's the perfect tool to control the very

03:07:22.520 --> 03:07:24.840
situations we ran into two weeks

03:07:24.840 --> 03:07:25.840
ago.

03:07:25.840 --> 03:07:29.170
As I mentioned in the workshop, I realize we're dealing

03:07:29.170 --> 03:07:30.840
with a large area here, but

03:07:30.840 --> 03:07:37.559
I don't think there's going to be hardly any challenge for

03:07:37.559 --> 03:07:40.840
somebody who wants to build

03:07:40.840 --> 03:07:45.479
something with high density and large heights, pretty much

03:07:45.479 --> 03:07:47.840
anywhere close to this area, except

03:07:47.840 --> 03:07:51.840
for a few neighborhoods, obviously, north of UNT.

03:07:51.840 --> 03:07:56.200
But it's a good tool to at least step in and protect a

03:07:56.200 --> 03:07:58.840
sensitive neighborhood when we've

03:07:58.840 --> 03:07:59.840
got nothing else.

03:07:59.840 --> 03:08:03.790
When it's already zoned and if that were in place tonight,

03:08:03.790 --> 03:08:05.840
I wouldn't have had an easier

03:08:05.840 --> 03:08:09.190
time voting yes on this, knowing that with an SUP, we could

03:08:09.190 --> 03:08:10.840
have some restrictions on

03:08:10.840 --> 03:08:11.840
it.

03:08:11.840 --> 03:08:13.840
So I think the staff has looked at it critically.

03:08:13.840 --> 03:08:17.629
I think if you overthink this too much, it'll make it

03:08:17.629 --> 03:08:19.840
probably more complicated.

03:08:19.840 --> 03:08:24.840
So I think it's a good plan, and I would vote for it.

03:08:24.840 --> 03:08:26.840
Commissioner Ellis.

03:08:26.840 --> 03:08:27.840
Thank you, Chair.

03:08:27.840 --> 03:08:31.690
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this and

03:08:31.690 --> 03:08:33.840
wanting to approve it because I'm

03:08:33.840 --> 03:08:35.840
just still so confused on how we got here.

03:08:35.840 --> 03:08:39.840
You know, the discussion started with counsel talking about

03:08:39.840 --> 03:08:41.840
SROs and a definition and then

03:08:41.840 --> 03:08:43.809
gave you direction that I wish they didn't give you, and I

03:08:43.809 --> 03:08:44.840
understand that's what you

03:08:44.840 --> 03:08:45.840
had to do.

03:08:45.840 --> 03:08:48.659
That's what you're tasked with, and that's what we're

03:08:48.659 --> 03:08:49.840
tasked with today.

03:08:49.840 --> 03:08:54.190
I just think, you know, contrary to what Chair may believe

03:08:54.190 --> 03:08:56.840
about me, I'm really not anti-development.

03:08:56.840 --> 03:09:01.840
It's a specific area that I've had issue with.

03:09:01.840 --> 03:09:06.370
And I do think that this steps on toes of, you know, areas

03:09:06.370 --> 03:09:08.840
that, you know, and hinders

03:09:08.840 --> 03:09:11.440
development where it doesn't need to be hindered and it

03:09:11.440 --> 03:09:12.840
doesn't really address the issue at

03:09:12.840 --> 03:09:18.110
hand, which were these collegiate housing developments in

03:09:18.110 --> 03:09:19.840
specific areas.

03:09:19.840 --> 03:09:22.700
So I guess my question for Ron on this is you talked about

03:09:22.700 --> 03:09:23.840
small area plans.

03:09:23.840 --> 03:09:25.840
Did you talk to counsel about that?

03:09:25.840 --> 03:09:29.840
Did that come up in this discussion?

03:09:29.840 --> 03:09:34.840
[ Inaudible ]

03:09:34.840 --> 03:09:37.840
Addressed during those discussions, during work session.

03:09:37.840 --> 03:09:40.840
And yet they still gave you direction?

03:09:40.840 --> 03:09:41.840
Right.

03:09:41.840 --> 03:09:46.200
Again, the timing probably was the main issue to get a

03:09:46.200 --> 03:09:47.840
small area plan.

03:09:47.840 --> 03:09:49.840
We're still in the initial stages.

03:09:49.840 --> 03:09:53.840
What is the -- I know there's no specific time, but I mean,

03:09:53.840 --> 03:09:54.840
is there a ballpark figure

03:09:54.840 --> 03:09:56.840
that you gave them that scared them or --

03:09:56.840 --> 03:10:00.780
We actually, as I mentioned earlier, we haven't officially

03:10:00.780 --> 03:10:02.840
kicked it off, but we anticipate

03:10:02.840 --> 03:10:03.840
getting it started soon.

03:10:03.840 --> 03:10:08.440
And as you know, it will take some time before a study can

03:10:08.440 --> 03:10:09.840
be completed.

03:10:09.840 --> 03:10:15.040
So there was not an immediate timeline that we presented to

03:10:15.040 --> 03:10:15.840
them.

03:10:15.840 --> 03:10:19.280
As that's being discussed, is there a way for the city, if

03:10:19.280 --> 03:10:21.840
there -- let's take this area,

03:10:21.840 --> 03:10:24.049
for example, north of the university that we've been

03:10:24.049 --> 03:10:25.840
discussing today and a couple of

03:10:25.840 --> 03:10:29.540
weeks ago and a month before that, if we were discussing a

03:10:29.540 --> 03:10:31.840
small area plan, if you all were

03:10:31.840 --> 03:10:36.750
initiating that discussion, can some kind of stoppage on

03:10:36.750 --> 03:10:39.840
building be done at that point?

03:10:39.840 --> 03:10:42.299
Can the city do something like that or do things just

03:10:42.299 --> 03:10:44.840
continue as is until this gets done?

03:10:44.840 --> 03:10:45.840
Correct.

03:10:45.840 --> 03:10:48.520
Unless there's direction from counsel to do something like

03:10:48.520 --> 03:10:49.840
what you just suggested.

03:10:49.840 --> 03:10:52.840
So yeah, I'm just trying to follow counsel's mind on this.

03:10:52.840 --> 03:10:56.549
Is that what they were trying to do by doing this blanket

03:10:56.549 --> 03:10:58.840
SUP thing that, again, I don't

03:10:58.840 --> 03:11:02.069
really think does what perhaps they set out to do in

03:11:02.069 --> 03:11:04.840
November and it got kind of convoluted.

03:11:04.840 --> 03:11:09.200
Because honestly, an SUP -- I mean, I don't even think

03:11:09.200 --> 03:11:11.840
addresses a collegiate housing project

03:11:11.840 --> 03:11:14.290
because, number one, we already know from talking to the

03:11:14.290 --> 03:11:15.840
developers that it has to be a certain

03:11:15.840 --> 03:11:17.840
size for it to even work.

03:11:17.840 --> 03:11:21.840
It's all based on numbers for those types of projects.

03:11:21.840 --> 03:11:25.069
So even if they went through the expense and we went

03:11:25.069 --> 03:11:26.840
through the discussion, I still don't

03:11:26.840 --> 03:11:29.840
think we would ever get to terms.

03:11:29.840 --> 03:11:34.500
We didn't certainly on the discussion a couple of weeks ago

03:11:34.500 --> 03:11:34.840
.

03:11:34.840 --> 03:11:40.809
So it seems like such a waste of expense and time for not

03:11:40.809 --> 03:11:44.840
only developers but staff, too,

03:11:44.840 --> 03:11:50.360
and unnecessary for a good portion of this downtown urban

03:11:50.360 --> 03:11:53.840
district, these D zones that

03:11:53.840 --> 03:11:55.840
aren't necessary.

03:11:55.840 --> 03:12:00.059
Did that come up with your discussion with counsel, the --

03:12:00.059 --> 03:12:01.840
readdressing the D zones and

03:12:01.840 --> 03:12:02.840
its criteria?

03:12:02.840 --> 03:12:04.840
There was some discussion.

03:12:04.840 --> 03:12:08.790
The mayor did bring up, you know, smaller developments and

03:12:08.790 --> 03:12:10.840
how that would be affected.

03:12:10.840 --> 03:12:14.829
I believe he asked about timing and cost, and we provided

03:12:14.829 --> 03:12:16.840
that information and still

03:12:16.840 --> 03:12:18.840
went forward with the direction to move forward.

03:12:18.840 --> 03:12:19.840
I see.

03:12:19.840 --> 03:12:20.840
Okay.

03:12:20.840 --> 03:12:21.840
Thanks.

03:12:21.840 --> 03:12:24.840
I'll let other people talk.

03:12:24.840 --> 03:12:25.840
I'll respond back.

03:12:25.840 --> 03:12:27.840
I appreciate your comments.

03:12:27.840 --> 03:12:31.350
And, yes, I respect that sometimes we may agree on one item

03:12:31.350 --> 03:12:32.840
and the next we disagree,

03:12:32.840 --> 03:12:36.260
but at the end of the night we just continue on and each do

03:12:36.260 --> 03:12:37.840
what we think is best.

03:12:37.840 --> 03:12:39.840
So I appreciate that.

03:12:39.840 --> 03:12:43.840
And respect that from you.

03:12:43.840 --> 03:12:48.840
I have a lot of concern about this.

03:12:48.840 --> 03:12:51.770
In listening to our staff presentation, it sounds like this

03:12:51.770 --> 03:12:53.840
is about the third or fourth

03:12:53.840 --> 03:12:58.190
attempt from counsel's direction on how to address a very

03:12:58.190 --> 03:12:59.840
specific issue, and let's just

03:12:59.840 --> 03:13:02.840
call it what it is, the SRO issue.

03:13:02.840 --> 03:13:06.850
And it's a very global approach over a very large area of

03:13:06.850 --> 03:13:07.840
our city.

03:13:07.840 --> 03:13:11.760
And I'm very concerned about how that will impact very

03:13:11.760 --> 03:13:13.840
small projects that are not really

03:13:13.840 --> 03:13:15.840
what the problem is.

03:13:15.840 --> 03:13:19.129
And I think the cost and the time involved, to your point,

03:13:19.129 --> 03:13:20.840
are very well taken because

03:13:20.840 --> 03:13:24.069
I think there will be a lot of dolphins that get caught in

03:13:24.069 --> 03:13:25.840
the tuna net, to use another

03:13:25.840 --> 03:13:27.840
analogy here this evening.

03:13:27.840 --> 03:13:31.399
And I think it doesn't send the right message to the people

03:13:31.399 --> 03:13:32.840
that are coming to our city

03:13:32.840 --> 03:13:37.190
to do business, that if there's a particular issue in one

03:13:37.190 --> 03:13:38.840
area and we're not able to deal

03:13:38.840 --> 03:13:41.600
with it, we might just throw a blanket over the whole thing

03:13:41.600 --> 03:13:41.840
.

03:13:41.840 --> 03:13:48.049
And I think it sends a very -- I don't think it sends the

03:13:48.049 --> 03:13:49.840
right message to people that

03:13:49.840 --> 03:13:52.840
want to come and do business here in our city.

03:13:52.840 --> 03:13:57.190
And yet I also understand that, you know, our board is a

03:13:57.190 --> 03:13:58.840
recommending board to city

03:13:58.840 --> 03:14:03.840
council, and this is a city council directed issue.

03:14:03.840 --> 03:14:07.170
And I think this needs to be moved on this evening rather

03:14:07.170 --> 03:14:08.840
than continued and kicked

03:14:08.840 --> 03:14:12.540
around and talked about and let city council get to the

03:14:12.540 --> 03:14:13.840
bottom of this.

03:14:13.840 --> 03:14:15.840
At the end of the day, they get to decide.

03:14:15.840 --> 03:14:19.549
They're the ones that are held accountable voting-wise, and

03:14:19.549 --> 03:14:20.840
we find folks here get

03:14:20.840 --> 03:14:23.840
appointed and serve at the pleasure until we're not at the

03:14:23.840 --> 03:14:25.840
pleasure anymore or we're

03:14:25.840 --> 03:14:27.840
term-limited out.

03:14:27.840 --> 03:14:33.649
And so with that, I'm going to go ahead and get a motion on

03:14:33.649 --> 03:14:35.840
the table here, and I'd

03:14:35.840 --> 03:14:37.840
like to have some further discussion.

03:14:37.840 --> 03:14:42.059
And my motion is going to be for denial to move this on to

03:14:42.059 --> 03:14:43.840
city council, and then they

03:14:43.840 --> 03:14:46.870
can take it up and they can discuss it further, and

03:14:46.870 --> 03:14:49.840
hopefully they can come up with a

03:14:49.840 --> 03:14:54.200
resolution with staff's help and guidance that addresses

03:14:54.200 --> 03:14:56.840
the issue that really needs

03:14:56.840 --> 03:15:02.690
to get addressed rather than a -- what I think is an over

03:15:02.690 --> 03:15:05.840
kill issue to a very specific

03:15:05.840 --> 03:15:08.299
problem that I think will have and could have a lot of

03:15:08.299 --> 03:15:09.840
unintended consequences.

03:15:09.840 --> 03:15:13.840
And so with that, my motion is for denial on this.

03:15:13.840 --> 03:15:15.840
Commissioner Rozelle.

03:15:15.840 --> 03:15:16.840
Thank you, Chair.

03:15:16.840 --> 03:15:20.549
I just have a decent point and probably a less decent point

03:15:20.549 --> 03:15:21.840
, admittedly.

03:15:21.840 --> 03:15:26.899
But the first one is we talk tonight about zoning creep,

03:15:26.899 --> 03:15:29.840
that if we change this property,

03:15:29.840 --> 03:15:32.250
then we can go ahead and change the next property, the next

03:15:32.250 --> 03:15:32.840
property.

03:15:32.840 --> 03:15:37.209
And I see some similarities in terms of the power trying to

03:15:37.209 --> 03:15:39.840
be given over to this commission

03:15:39.840 --> 03:15:40.840
and to city council.

03:15:40.840 --> 03:15:45.200
I don't know the logical end, but if we're now saying any

03:15:45.200 --> 03:15:47.840
commercial area can't be built

03:15:47.840 --> 03:15:51.299
by rights, where's the next step in which council or this

03:15:51.299 --> 03:15:52.840
commission wants to put on

03:15:52.840 --> 03:15:55.840
SUP requirements for some building in the future?

03:15:55.840 --> 03:15:59.219
There starts to be a creep of the control in which we would

03:15:59.219 --> 03:16:00.840
like or the council would

03:16:00.840 --> 03:16:04.840
like to add input and remove the by right building.

03:16:04.840 --> 03:16:06.840
Does this creep into residential neighborhoods?

03:16:06.840 --> 03:16:10.489
Should we now start getting SUPs for basic houses because

03:16:10.489 --> 03:16:12.840
we want to check the roof pitch?

03:16:12.840 --> 03:16:15.559
I don't know what the logical end is, and I am speaking

03:16:15.559 --> 03:16:16.840
hyperbolically here, but

03:16:16.840 --> 03:16:21.309
nevertheless, it seems like this is authoritative creeping

03:16:21.309 --> 03:16:23.840
in terms of the power that we should

03:16:23.840 --> 03:16:26.840
have in regards to the zoning that's been established.

03:16:26.840 --> 03:16:28.840
That's my first point.

03:16:28.840 --> 03:16:33.190
The second one is I know staff was saying that there is

03:16:33.190 --> 03:16:35.840
benefit to having the SUP process

03:16:35.840 --> 03:16:37.840
because sometimes it benefits the applicant.

03:16:37.840 --> 03:16:41.450
And not to mix metaphors too much, but if I'm not speeding

03:16:41.450 --> 03:16:42.840
and I get pulled over by the

03:16:42.840 --> 03:16:45.850
police officer, that police officer gives me an opportunity

03:16:45.850 --> 03:16:46.840
to defend myself, but I'd

03:16:46.840 --> 03:16:48.860
much rather not have been pulled over for speeding when I

03:16:48.860 --> 03:16:50.840
wasn't speeding to begin with.

03:16:50.840 --> 03:16:53.520
And so I don't see a massive dissimilarity when someone

03:16:53.520 --> 03:16:54.840
comes in by right to build and

03:16:54.840 --> 03:16:58.440
we're like, well, we just want to check everything out, get

03:16:58.440 --> 03:16:59.840
approval by a rolling commission

03:16:59.840 --> 03:17:02.690
that then gets moved on to council by a rolling council to

03:17:02.690 --> 03:17:03.840
then get approved.

03:17:03.840 --> 03:17:08.360
I'd much rather go ahead and second this motion, put it to

03:17:08.360 --> 03:17:09.840
council to come up with a more

03:17:09.840 --> 03:17:13.829
definitive solution than having an SUP be very arbitrary

03:17:13.829 --> 03:17:15.840
from project to project.

03:17:15.840 --> 03:17:18.840
Commissioner Sullivan.

03:17:18.840 --> 03:17:19.840
Thank you.

03:17:19.840 --> 03:17:24.840
I'm looking through the information we have here.

03:17:24.840 --> 03:17:33.450
49,000 dwelling units, 42% multifamily is 20,580 multif

03:17:33.450 --> 03:17:35.840
amily housing units.

03:17:35.840 --> 03:17:40.559
The city this year, I believe it was, lost $500,000 in

03:17:40.559 --> 03:17:44.840
government money due to the lack of affordable housing.

03:17:44.840 --> 03:17:52.159
And here we are using a sledgehammer to drive a nail into

03:17:52.159 --> 03:17:55.840
preventing collegiate housing that

03:17:55.840 --> 03:18:02.840
in no way could be converted to multifamily housing.

03:18:02.840 --> 03:18:07.190
It in no way brings affordable housing because I don't

03:18:07.190 --> 03:18:09.840
really think that's too affordable housing,

03:18:09.840 --> 03:18:13.840
it's not very affordable housing.

03:18:13.840 --> 03:18:19.649
And so I just don't see that subjecting such a large area

03:18:19.649 --> 03:18:23.840
of the city to get more regulation,

03:18:23.840 --> 03:18:30.770
more questions, more cost when the council has it within

03:18:30.770 --> 03:18:38.840
their authority to simply say yes here and no there.

03:18:38.840 --> 03:18:42.549
I sit on the charter review committee and one of the things

03:18:42.549 --> 03:18:46.840
we've got to talk about is they don't understand the word

03:18:46.840 --> 03:18:48.840
may and shall.

03:18:48.840 --> 03:18:53.649
So we're going to change the charter so that they will hire

03:18:53.649 --> 03:18:57.899
an auditor, not a, you know, that's what it says, you shall

03:18:57.899 --> 03:18:58.840
hire.

03:18:58.840 --> 03:19:03.190
And so I think that I would like to send a message to

03:19:03.190 --> 03:19:05.840
council, y'all need to put a stop to this stuff.

03:19:05.840 --> 03:19:10.540
You know, say this is where it needs to go, this is where

03:19:10.540 --> 03:19:11.840
it can't go.

03:19:11.840 --> 03:19:15.840
End of story and move on with life.

03:19:15.840 --> 03:19:16.840
Commissioner Beck.

03:19:16.840 --> 03:19:18.840
Thank you, chair.

03:19:18.840 --> 03:19:24.649
And again, I just, to Commissioner Rosell's point, you know

03:19:24.649 --> 03:19:28.840
, I appreciate him defining it as hyperbolic.

03:19:28.840 --> 03:19:31.840
Again, we can overthink this thing and that's nothing

03:19:31.840 --> 03:19:34.840
against my good friend Commissioner Rosell at all.

03:19:34.840 --> 03:19:36.840
We're just agree to disagree.

03:19:36.840 --> 03:19:38.840
But this is a very specific agenda.

03:19:38.840 --> 03:19:41.840
It deals strictly with multifamily dwellings.

03:19:41.840 --> 03:19:45.549
I think intent to me anyway was pretty clear, this allows

03:19:45.549 --> 03:19:50.840
us some control when these multifamily dwellings go into

03:19:50.840 --> 03:19:54.840
sensitive neighborhood areas and they turn out to be SROs.

03:19:54.840 --> 03:19:56.840
I thought that's all it was.

03:19:56.840 --> 03:19:57.840
I think that's all it will be.

03:19:57.840 --> 03:19:59.840
I could, of course, be wrong.

03:19:59.840 --> 03:20:01.840
But I'm going to go ahead and still vote for it.

03:20:01.840 --> 03:20:04.530
But I don't have any problem if it doesn't make it through,

03:20:04.530 --> 03:20:07.000
you know, and gets to council where they have to make a

03:20:07.000 --> 03:20:07.840
decision to.

03:20:07.840 --> 03:20:11.760
But just again, I think it's specific enough and its intent

03:20:11.760 --> 03:20:15.840
is clear enough where I don't have a problem voting for it.

03:20:15.840 --> 03:20:16.840
Okay.

03:20:16.840 --> 03:20:18.840
Commissioner Ellis.

03:20:18.840 --> 03:20:23.840
Thank you, chair.

03:20:23.840 --> 03:20:26.719
I absolutely am in support of denial of this because I

03:20:26.719 --> 03:20:29.840
absolutely don't think it addresses the true issue.

03:20:29.840 --> 03:20:33.370
So my hope is that council denies it as well and gives you

03:20:33.370 --> 03:20:34.840
different direction.

03:20:34.840 --> 03:20:39.059
Because I think the direction is you need to address the

03:20:39.059 --> 03:20:45.840
collegiate housing issue definition, where it's allowed.

03:20:45.840 --> 03:20:49.049
Let's talk about DCG zoning or maybe something needs to be

03:20:49.049 --> 03:20:51.840
in between the 45 and the 100 feet.

03:20:51.840 --> 03:20:54.569
Let's talk about city initiated zoning, especially between

03:20:54.569 --> 03:20:55.840
the historic districts.

03:20:55.840 --> 03:21:00.680
There's issues that I hope council will see need to be

03:21:00.680 --> 03:21:05.739
addressed that will address the specific issue of cont

03:21:05.739 --> 03:21:08.840
ention in this city right now.

03:21:08.840 --> 03:21:13.620
This doesn't do it and it unfortunately, it just -- it's

03:21:13.620 --> 03:21:16.840
not working on the right problem.

03:21:16.840 --> 03:21:19.840
So I certainly can't support it as it's written.

03:21:19.840 --> 03:21:20.840
Okay.

03:21:20.840 --> 03:21:23.840
Commissioner Hussmuth.

03:21:23.840 --> 03:21:25.840
Thank you, chair.

03:21:25.840 --> 03:21:30.899
Briefly, I think what's missing -- I think it does reach a

03:21:30.899 --> 03:21:35.829
bit far, but I also would like to renew my point from work

03:21:35.829 --> 03:21:37.840
session that it needs citizen input.

03:21:37.840 --> 03:21:44.840
It needs stakeholder and the developer input to it.

03:21:44.840 --> 03:21:49.899
And such that this particular version does not have that

03:21:49.899 --> 03:21:50.840
input.

03:21:50.840 --> 03:21:55.840
It's all kind of internal while thoughtful.

03:21:55.840 --> 03:21:59.950
It just -- I think it would be better -- it's just better

03:21:59.950 --> 03:22:04.120
if it's more diversely represented and there's more input,

03:22:04.120 --> 03:22:08.840
which by its very nature maybe takes it longer to roll out.

03:22:08.840 --> 03:22:14.649
But I don't want to -- I think -- an SUP requires citizens

03:22:14.649 --> 03:22:15.840
to come up and talk.

03:22:15.840 --> 03:22:19.450
And then they may or may not be -- that conversation or

03:22:19.450 --> 03:22:22.840
those comments may not be weighted properly.

03:22:22.840 --> 03:22:25.090
So I think to have their input on the front end where they

03:22:25.090 --> 03:22:28.649
're shaping it, they're crafting it, where they know they're

03:22:28.649 --> 03:22:33.350
getting representation is a better product than what would

03:22:33.350 --> 03:22:38.059
happen in a hearing where they stand before a, again, mig

03:22:38.059 --> 03:22:41.840
rating body that then may or may not receive their comments

03:22:41.840 --> 03:22:41.840
well.

03:22:41.840 --> 03:22:43.840
So thank you.

03:22:43.840 --> 03:22:44.840
Commissioner Ellis.

03:22:44.840 --> 03:22:47.840
Just a quick comment on Commissioner Hudspeth's discussion.

03:22:47.840 --> 03:22:51.309
I don't know that we'd ever get a developer who would want

03:22:51.309 --> 03:22:54.860
an SUP because it's just -- it's another layer for them and

03:22:54.860 --> 03:22:56.840
more expense and more time.

03:22:56.840 --> 03:23:00.409
So I don't know what their input for this particular thing

03:23:00.409 --> 03:23:00.840
is.

03:23:00.840 --> 03:23:05.190
I do know that when staff puts together and we as a

03:23:05.190 --> 03:23:09.260
recommending body and city council as a voting body and

03:23:09.260 --> 03:23:12.389
decision maker, you know, we have to put these things in

03:23:12.389 --> 03:23:13.840
place that are best for our city, not necessarily best for

03:23:13.840 --> 03:23:13.840
the city.

03:23:13.840 --> 03:23:16.840
Not necessarily best for the developer per se.

03:23:16.840 --> 03:23:19.520
So I'm not sure we'd ever get them on board with an SUP

03:23:19.520 --> 03:23:20.840
discussion anyway.

03:23:20.840 --> 03:23:22.840
That's just my thought.

03:23:22.840 --> 03:23:23.840
Commissioner Beck.

03:23:23.840 --> 03:23:26.049
I'm going to let Commissioner Hudspeth go ahead and speak

03:23:26.049 --> 03:23:27.840
because I know he wants to reply directly.

03:23:27.840 --> 03:23:29.840
If that's okay, then I'll follow him.

03:23:29.840 --> 03:23:29.840
Sure.

03:23:29.840 --> 03:23:31.840
We'll recognize Commissioner Hudspeth.

03:23:31.840 --> 03:23:33.840
That's so kind of you.

03:23:33.840 --> 03:23:36.840
You're awesome.

03:23:36.840 --> 03:23:40.200
No, I think your point is valid, but I think also that's

03:23:40.200 --> 03:23:43.840
where as a council and as a body I think we miss it, right?

03:23:43.840 --> 03:23:47.180
So if I extend the invitation and you reject it or you don

03:23:47.180 --> 03:23:50.280
't negotiate in earnest, then I can say I extended the

03:23:50.280 --> 03:23:53.219
invitation and I tried to earnestly deal with you and you

03:23:53.219 --> 03:23:53.840
did not.

03:23:53.840 --> 03:23:57.840
Versus them continuing to say we don't ever loop them in.

03:23:57.840 --> 03:24:00.969
I can say I always loop you in and you always come up with

03:24:00.969 --> 03:24:04.139
answers that aren't realistic or you're not willing to

03:24:04.139 --> 03:24:04.840
engage.

03:24:04.840 --> 03:24:09.190
You know, that to me puts a city and it's a better

03:24:09.190 --> 03:24:12.790
representation of our city to me that hey, I tried to

03:24:12.790 --> 03:24:15.840
include you in all earnestly, but you just would not.

03:24:15.840 --> 03:24:16.840
And that's okay.

03:24:16.840 --> 03:24:19.549
But I just at least want to at least send the invitation

03:24:19.549 --> 03:24:22.360
and then you can they can decide if they want to engage or

03:24:22.360 --> 03:24:22.840
not.

03:24:22.840 --> 03:24:24.840
But I tried.

03:24:24.840 --> 03:24:25.840
Commissioner Beck.

03:24:25.840 --> 03:24:28.840
Thank you, Chair.

03:24:28.840 --> 03:24:34.239
This is probably a question for either legal or excuse me

03:24:34.239 --> 03:24:38.840
illustrious director of planning up there.

03:24:38.840 --> 03:24:41.190
This thing is probably going to go down in flames despite

03:24:41.190 --> 03:24:47.360
that I'm going to vote for it anyway, but if it were to go

03:24:47.360 --> 03:24:48.840
through.

03:24:48.840 --> 03:24:53.579
I mean, just as because I see it as a good tool, how

03:24:53.579 --> 03:24:58.959
different once it's and got passed by City Council. How

03:24:58.959 --> 03:25:00.829
difficult is it to turn it back around if we do see enough

03:25:00.829 --> 03:25:03.129
problems with it that it's not serving the purpose that at

03:25:03.129 --> 03:25:04.840
least I think it will.

03:25:04.840 --> 03:25:08.229
Let me just make sure I understand your question. If City

03:25:08.229 --> 03:25:09.840
Council does what with it.

03:25:09.840 --> 03:25:14.200
If if if it didn't go down in flames and made it to City

03:25:14.200 --> 03:25:18.840
Council and they approved it to this this agenda item.

03:25:18.840 --> 03:25:21.780
How difficult would it be to reverse this if we know it

03:25:21.780 --> 03:25:24.780
came to light to people like me to be the same process we

03:25:24.780 --> 03:25:27.909
're taking now would be a it would be an amendment to the to

03:25:27.909 --> 03:25:31.149
the code like we're doing now so we're in the same world

03:25:31.149 --> 03:25:35.840
that we could turn it around if we.

03:25:35.840 --> 03:25:40.780
I'll leave that to your your fellow commissioners to define

03:25:40.780 --> 03:25:44.940
but no no it's it's the same process it's just a code

03:25:44.940 --> 03:25:46.840
amendment process so I mean.

03:25:46.840 --> 03:26:06.840
I just want to interject just a little bit. If this does by

03:26:06.840 --> 03:26:06.840
some miracle pass and you decide that this isn't what you

03:26:06.840 --> 03:26:06.840
want to do. We are doing the DDC rewrite. And so there's an

03:26:06.840 --> 03:26:06.840
opportunity to fix these to write these wrongs if you will.

03:26:06.840 --> 03:26:11.840
Next year. That's a good point. Thank you.

03:26:11.840 --> 03:26:16.200
We have a motion and a second on the floor for a denial of

03:26:16.200 --> 03:26:20.079
this. I'm going to call for any other questions or

03:26:20.079 --> 03:26:22.840
discussions before I call for a vote.

03:26:22.840 --> 03:26:31.889
My house so it was Commissioner strange on the motion and

03:26:31.889 --> 03:26:35.840
result in the second.

03:26:35.840 --> 03:26:40.389
Okay seeing no other requests for discussion again the

03:26:40.389 --> 03:26:45.209
motion before us is a vote or is a motion for denial. So a

03:26:45.209 --> 03:26:49.840
vote for is to deny this on to city council.

03:26:49.840 --> 03:27:02.840
Okay. So with that I will call for a vote on the board.

03:27:02.840 --> 03:27:07.059
And the motion carries five to one that will move us to our

03:27:07.059 --> 03:27:11.030
final item on our agenda this evening which is going to be

03:27:11.030 --> 03:27:12.840
our project matrix.

03:27:12.840 --> 03:27:18.659
I am taking any requests for more information to add to our

03:27:18.659 --> 03:27:19.840
matrix.

03:27:19.840 --> 03:27:21.840
Commissioner Ellis.

03:27:21.840 --> 03:27:23.840
Thank you.

03:27:23.840 --> 03:27:28.899
Well this is probably piggybacking on one that's already

03:27:28.899 --> 03:27:32.979
there but it has to do with signage on lots. I know we've

03:27:32.979 --> 03:27:33.649
had this discussion. I need an update of where are we

03:27:33.649 --> 03:27:34.840
because there's no improvement.

03:27:34.840 --> 03:27:38.069
I drove by the property that that was postponed today with

03:27:38.069 --> 03:27:39.840
in off of thirty five there.

03:27:39.840 --> 03:27:43.280
Those signs are so small you absolutely still cannot read

03:27:43.280 --> 03:27:43.840
them.

03:27:43.840 --> 03:27:46.520
And I also had a neighbor come to me on the hops and

03:27:46.520 --> 03:27:49.659
country club one and she said she tried multiple times to

03:27:49.659 --> 03:27:51.840
try to read it take pictures of it.

03:27:51.840 --> 03:27:55.180
She just couldn't do it. So need an update on where we are

03:27:55.180 --> 03:27:57.649
for that for improving that because we desperately need

03:27:57.649 --> 03:27:59.840
that improved.

03:27:59.840 --> 03:28:03.360
Just to be clear this is for signage for zoning and rez

03:28:03.360 --> 03:28:04.840
oning for public right.

03:28:04.840 --> 03:28:08.379
Our postage on these these lots for for a public hearing

03:28:08.379 --> 03:28:14.840
for zoning change. Yes.

03:28:14.840 --> 03:28:15.840
Anything else.

03:28:15.840 --> 03:28:17.840
Commissioner Roselle.

03:28:17.840 --> 03:28:18.840
Thank you.

03:28:18.840 --> 03:28:21.959
Maybe it goes the same but I wanted to make it official. I

03:28:21.959 --> 03:28:27.360
would like to know the next steps in the small area plan

03:28:27.360 --> 03:28:32.360
for that north university campus peninsula that sits

03:28:32.360 --> 03:28:35.840
between the historic district and the Hickory historic

03:28:35.840 --> 03:28:36.840
district.

03:28:36.840 --> 03:28:41.190
It seems to be the hotbed of of activity. And so I for one

03:28:41.190 --> 03:28:45.170
don't necessarily want to wait or know the process for

03:28:45.170 --> 03:28:49.139
council to protect that area. So I would like to know the

03:28:49.139 --> 03:28:52.840
steps in order for this commission to move forward with a

03:28:52.840 --> 03:28:56.840
small area plan for that specific area for protection.

03:28:56.840 --> 03:29:01.840
Okay.

03:29:01.840 --> 03:29:04.840
Commissioner has with.

03:29:04.840 --> 03:29:09.770
Just following up on. So there's no identifying number but

03:29:09.770 --> 03:29:14.840
my request for the developer workshop and builder workshop.

03:29:14.840 --> 03:29:19.200
I again I think that insight is just critical for me to

03:29:19.200 --> 03:29:20.840
make decisions.

03:29:20.840 --> 03:29:25.200
I got to understand a day in their life so that I can then

03:29:25.200 --> 03:29:29.309
factor it in either to make help me make better decisions

03:29:29.309 --> 03:29:33.840
or dispel myths rumors you know fake news.

03:29:33.840 --> 03:29:40.899
You know I need to I need to understand that better so just

03:29:40.899 --> 03:29:43.840
renewing that request.

03:29:43.840 --> 03:29:45.840
Commissioner back. Thank you.

03:29:45.840 --> 03:29:50.690
Just on my only two contributions here, the review parking

03:29:50.690 --> 03:29:55.440
space requirements that's been on hold indefinitely and I

03:29:55.440 --> 03:29:59.969
never did get a definitive response on why so I would like

03:29:59.969 --> 03:30:04.840
to get a definitive response on where we're at and if we're

03:30:04.840 --> 03:30:06.840
going to move forward on that for not why not.

03:30:06.840 --> 03:30:11.469
And my other contribution that is marked as completed and I

03:30:11.469 --> 03:30:16.000
agree we did have the presentation about it, but this one

03:30:16.000 --> 03:30:20.809
deals with providing information right to the notifying the

03:30:20.809 --> 03:30:21.840
public.

03:30:21.840 --> 03:30:28.870
We nothing's actually been set in motion. We've had a

03:30:28.870 --> 03:30:36.520
presentation, but nothing's been set in motion on this yet

03:30:36.520 --> 03:30:40.840
so just where we are with that.

03:30:40.840 --> 03:30:45.840
Tackle with the DDC rewrite since this already kicked off.

03:30:45.840 --> 03:30:51.219
So we'll roll that into that project that's already going

03:30:51.219 --> 03:30:54.420
on. Okay. And then as far as the notification requirements

03:30:54.420 --> 03:30:56.940
to signage. We are working on that actually we met this

03:30:56.940 --> 03:30:59.409
week, and we'll be bringing something forward to City

03:30:59.409 --> 03:31:02.840
Council in the, in the near future, in the near future.

03:31:02.840 --> 03:31:04.840
Couldn't be date specific.

03:31:04.840 --> 03:31:17.840
April 25. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

03:31:17.840 --> 03:31:18.840
Okay.

03:31:18.840 --> 03:31:20.840
That it.

03:31:20.840 --> 03:31:21.840
Okay.

03:31:21.840 --> 03:31:30.590
With that I will close our meeting this evening at 834.

03:31:30.590 --> 03:31:35.840
Thank you everyone for coming out.