Apr 26, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2017-04-26 5:30 PM

for April 26th. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 535 and I will turn our meeting over to Shandrin for work session clarification. Thank you Chair. Before we get started I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce a new employee . We have Robert Bob Mikowski who is serving as our new planning supervisor in the development review section of planning. Bob is a civil cultureist and he comes to us with experience from the US Forest Service and the Florida Forest Service. So Bob if you want to come and introduce yourself and tell us a little bit about yourself. Well Shandrin mentioned I'm Bob Mikowski and I retired from the US Forest Service after 32 and a half years of federal service and some of that was with military installations. I was stationed at Eglin Air Force Base as a civilian. Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta, Fort Knox, Kentucky. Working as chief of plans programs and analysis, environmental analysis. Also worked as a forester on those bases, natural and cultural resource manager and most recently with the federal government I was a regional civil cultureist out Atlanta, handled the national forest from Virginia to Texas. Retired down to Florida. Two weeks later I was working for this Florida Forest Service as the county forester for Polk Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. Well my daughter who lives in Savannah recently had her second grandchild and was pulling at us to come out this way. I said only if I can find work. I'm not gonna come out there and babysit 24/7 but Nana wanted out here so I look for gainful employment and was fortunate enough to land in the city here so I look forward to working with y'all. Thank you. So now I only have one job instead of two so I'm very excited that Bob is on board. He's helping me with the planners. He'll be supervising Hay wood as well as the planners, the case managers that come through the planning commission so he'll be helping me out. One more thing before we get into the cases the Clarion group is working full steam ahead on the DDC rewrite and we are planning to do a public kickoff meeting in June. At that same time I wanted to convene the PNZ subcommittee for the DDC rewrite so I wanted to see if that first week of June is workable or doable for the group. I'm thinking June 6th, 5th or 6th. Can you remind us of the members? I know I know I am. Okay. That's what I thought. Ellis, it's either a Tuesday or a Wednesday. Did you say what time you were wanting to meet? Would it be work hours or after hours ? Whatever you prefer they'll be in town for those two days so I'm trying to... May 2nd or 3rd? It's going to be the week of June 5th so probably the 6th is the day that I'm shooting for during the day if we can. City Council is the 5th? Of course it affects you Commissioner. I'm available that week during the week or after. Okay. Everybody good? Okay. So we'll get that scheduled. Moving to the agenda, does anybody have any discussion on the minutes for March 2nd or April 12th? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. I do have a question and I don't know if we can confirm it since Commissioner Hugsmith isn't here but it's line 35 on page 5 March 22nd minutes. I'm pretty sure that that line is not correct since he made the motion to approve it. And so I don't know if his name is... it's supposed to be a different Commissioner who said that or if it's just written wrong so that was my question. Okay we'll make that note. Yeah but I mean in there it says he does not agree with the rezone except he motioned to approve it so there's something about that line that's not right. Okay. So I just wanted to bring that up. So do we want to not vote on that this evening and get that cleaned up since he 's not here or how do we want to proceed on that? We'll see if he's here for the regular session. Okay. All right. Was that it for the minutes? Okay. On the considered agenda we have two plots a prelim for Harvest Hill and an associated final plot and if there's any questions we can answer those. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Kingsrow is currently a 2-8 collector street and I didn't see any plans on the mobility plan to expand that so there appears to be only one means of ingress and egress into this new development loop 288. Has the traffic impact analysis been done to see if Kingsrow is gonna be able to handle this and Kingsrow yeah Kingsrow gonna be able to handle this as it is now. Did we look at that? I believe Poinsettia is gonna go out onto the loop and that 's our single means of ingress and egress into the new development. Is that correct? Roll us over engineering. Yeah as part of this development they are extending Poinsettia to a future loop 288 collector road. There are no plans to construct that road at this time since that's the only portion that's being dedicated along this stretch. Will it be done in conjunction with the development? Right as future development occurs along the loop 288 furn ished then we'll acquire additional right-of-way. You say collector road or is that gonna be a service road? Same. Okay yeah it's the same term I'm sorry. It will serve as a service road to the loop 288 in the future and as soon as we have a significant amount of right-of-way as development occurs along the loop and we'll probably plan a that'd be a good time to plan a CIP project to build that service road to provide that. Another question on this. Is the developer responsible for the construction of that new service road? No they were just going to dedicate the right-of-way at this time. Okay so that loop 288 is text- out I believe right? Loop 280 is text-out but the back of the service road will be City of Denton. Oh it will be okay. So it's purely our nickel. Okay. And there are plans to expand King's Row along their frontage. It is a partially improved road. They're just going to expand it to make it a full width roadway. Okay good. Okay that's all I had on the road. I noticed this may go back to Haley. Lot 6 which is along loop 288 up there on I guess it would be the Northeast end. It's intended to be the drainage and detention Eastman area which is going to be maintained by the HOA. Any idea what this is going to look like? Is this going to be maybe a green space or something like that or just curious? I'm not specifically familiar with those plans. I would imagine the way it's worded is a common area a lot that it would be some sort of green space maintained by the HOA but I'm not sure if there's specific plans for that. Okay thank you. Commissioner Ells. Thank you chair. I just had a question on the note number seven note where it said prior to final plat the flood study would be conducted. Do you know if that was done? Zoom into that note real quick. A drainage flood study was performed as part of this final plot before we would consider approving this plot. It looks like this note just needs to be removed from the plot and we'll make sure it gets removed before we file the plot. Okay thank you. Were there any more questions about Harvest Hill? Okay for our public hearing items we have an SUP request for the Denton Bible Church and I'll invite Haley Zagoski. All right good evening. So this is S-17-2 for Denton Calv ary Academy and the request is to hold a public hearing and consider a request by Denton Bible Church for a specific use permit to allow for a high school use on approximately 13.7 acres. As you can see here outlined in yellow the property is located at the southwest corner of the University Drive Not tingham Drive intersection. As I mentioned the site's just a little over 13 and a half acres. It has frontage on University Nottingham and Mingo Road and the site plan was provided in your backup but just to walk you through what's going on here. This is a fully developed site consisting of four lots and in 1999 an ordinance was approved or SUP was approved that allowed for Denton Calv ary Academy to develop on the in the four buildings shown in green and that's lot one R of the development and Denton Calvary Academy is a private school that serves elementary through high school. In the NRMU zoning district elementary and middle school are permitted by right. The high school use requires an SUP so that's why at that time they sought that just for the high school portion of their activity. The proposal now is they would they're int ending to purchase the remainder of the property from Denton Bible Church and they would then like to extend the use elementary through high school to the remainder of the property to all of these buildings that are outlined here in yellow. So the request is specifically for the high school but it would encompass the entire school with all grades. At this time they're proposing to make no changes to everything that's existing on the site so parking landsca ping and the exterior buildings and the footprints of those buildings would all stay the same. So to give you an idea of what's going on in the area if we look at the immediately adjoining properties you see the subject property is zoned NRMU so neighborhood residential mixed use and what we have there currently is the four buildings where Denton Calvary Academy operates and then on the other three lots are buildings that are owned and operated by Denton Bible Church at this time. Across Nottingham Drive in a CMG district we have the main campus for Denton Bible Church and then on the other sides of the property north and west we have NR3 district and those are currently developed with single- family neighborhoods. Looking a little bit further out you can see the CMG district extends across University we get some more retail and restaurant uses at that time. On the south side of Mingo Road we have more of the NRMU district there's the railroad tracks immediately south of Mingo and then multifamily uses beyond that and then you can see to the north and west more NR3 with single-family development. And just to give you a broader picture of what 's in this area you can see it's a very broad mix of residential and commercial and institutional uses encompassing several zoning districts. We do have a couple of city parks in the area as well. The future land use for this area is community mixed use so this designation is intended to promote a mixture of uses predominantly commercial with supporting residential and service uses. It's intended to promote connectivity and multimodal transportation in an area as well as promoting both vertical and horizontal mixtures of uses and schools, places of worship and parks are all permitted by right. So the use is the use that they're proposing for the property does support areas supported by this future land use designation. To give you an idea of the mobility in this area University Drive is a primary arterial. Nottingham which runs along the eastern border of the property is a collector street and the Mingo Road is a secondary arterial. There's also existing or proposed bike routes along all of those roads as well as Denton County Transit Authority bus routes that run through this area. So many means of access and transportation to this site. Just to look a little more specifically at the site it does have two entrances along University that serve the current school campus. Three drives currently exist on Nottingham Road and then the portion of the property that adjoins Mingo currently doesn't have anything developed on it. At the time of the original adoption of the SUP for the current campus just on that northern portion it was determined that the landscaping existing on site was sufficient to provide compatibility between the school and that neighborhood are joining to the south. And as you can see here there is a substantial amount of landscaping on site and it does exceed the minimum requirement for the NRMU district on all lots. Just some site photos to give you an idea if you're not familiar with the campus. This is looking towards the west at one of the existing school buildings. You can see here this there's these are some of the buildings on the eastern side of the property along Nottingham Drive and then these are the southernmost buildings and you can see here the substantial amount of well-established trees that are in the parking lot as well as back there along back here in the back that would be the western border. So you can see there's a substantial amount of landscaping as well as fencing that runs between this and the neighborhood . And just to give you an idea there's also hedgerows and large established trees that screen the parking lot on all lots from the existing roadways. Not ification was sent out about this case. We received two in favor and one in opposition and you can see here where the two in favor were in the existing neighborhood to the south and then one in opposition across University Drive there. And I believe I failed to pass out that opposition to you so I can do that. Staff is recommending approval for this case based on our analysis here. It does meet all of the requirements for SUP approval that are outlined in subchapter 6 of the DDC. Given that the use or yeah the use already exists on a portion of the property and the site is fully developed at this time and it was also found to be compatible under that 1999 ordinance we felt that it met all those criteria for approval. The expansion as I mentioned is onto a fully developed site. They're intending no changes to the exterior at this time. They mentioned doing some interior remodel to accommodate classrooms but that would be the extent of the changes to the site. And the use is also consistent with the future land use designation under the Denton Plan 2030. So staff is recommending approval with the following conditions. Condition one being that the use be restricted to the existing buildings that were shown on the site plan. The existing landscaping coverage and parking count should be maintained as they're shown on the site plan. And then any changes that they intend to make to the footprint, the parking count, the layout and flow of the site, and the landscaping should then be approved through an amendment to the SUP so that we can ensure that compatibility with the neighborhood is maintained. We also suggest that ordinance 99277 be repealed and replaced by this new ordinance so that there's only one SUP controlling this use on the property. And I can answer any questions. Commissioner Rozelle. Thank you. So starting last first with the repeal of ordinance 9927, does this SUP fully contain all things on the ordinance 99277? Yes, we would recommend appealing that ordinance in its entirety. But does this SUP cover everything on that ordinance or would there be changes? So the existing ordinance was provided in your backup. It had several provisions about the hours of operation, the number of students on the campus, and we felt given the information that was provided by the applicant that those were a bit onerous. At full capacity they anticipated they could handle approximately 1,500 students. Whichever they would ever reach that full potential, I'm not sure. But the existing ordinance, for example, limited them to 500 students with no more than 250 being there on any given day. So we felt that some of those things may not need to be carried forward, but we do want to make sure that the site conditions as you see on the site plan are not changed without further amendment and approval of the SUP. Thank you. And then another question. When, specific to this case, but also in general, when an SUP comes forward, does the city re-measure all the requirements for the zoning? Because this zoning was done in 99. Does it meet current parking? Does that get re- triggered? And if so, was that looked at or do they get grandfathered and even though they're initiated kind of a re-look at the zoning? In this case, since it was all existing, we did verify to see it does meet the landscaping requirements and lot coverage requirements for NRMU. The buildings are within the height restrictions and all of those components. In terms of parking, there are, I believe, 694 spaces existing. The parking count shown on the SUP was based on an absolute worst-case scenario if the buildings were ever to reach full public occupancy that was allowed. And that seems like an unlikely scenario given that schools are generally calculated based on a classroom basis, but not knowing how they might remodel, we couldn't determine the specific parking ratio that would be required. So all of that was looked at and staff felt comfortable with it meeting the parking demand and everything that would be required for the site. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you, Chair. So Haley, do we have the new written ordinance? Do we have a cop? We don't have that? Staff typically prepares that for our City Council. Okay, so that's when everything will be written? Yes, based on the recommendations that you all have and anything you might want to change in those requirements. Okay, thanks. Commissioner Tyler. Thank you, Chair. Regarding condition number one, there is an undeveloped area on this lot, so obviously the proposed use must be restricted to existing buildings, but then we get down to landscaping coverage and parking counts. It seems like if they build anything on the mingo and they're going to have to put in a parking lot. Yes, sir. And so, and since that's not part of the proposed use, would it apply? Or is the proposed use only, I guess I'm trying to tease out if it prevents them from doing anything on the undeveloped area without coming back and amending the SUP? Or if it only applies to portions of the lot that are part of the proposed use? Certainly. Did you want to answer that, Chancellor? Sure, I'll go. So if the proposed use, the future use is permitted outright in the zoning district, doesn't require an SUP, then it goes through our normal development process. We'll check, we'll do zoning verification, we'll check for parking, just like we would any other site, and it would not have to be approved by City Council. But if the new use is another, is extension of the high school, then it would come back through the SUP process. Does that answer your question? Yes, so even with a binding site plan, we bind them to a site plan that says no, no building on the south end, and then they, if they want to build it, they can build a building on the south end without amending the SUP? The limits of construction for the SUP include the undeveloped parcel? Yes, they show all that on the site plan. Okay, so we may need to amend the limits of construction for the SUP to remove that. That's a good catch. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you. The next case is the zoning, the rezoning request for property located at the corner of Hopson Lane and Country Club Road, and this is a continuation of the CST case that we heard a month or so ago. So this is case Z17-7, again for the CST corner store. So the request is to hold a public hearing and consider a request by the property owners to rezone 0.8 acres from neighborhood residential mixed use to CMG district, and this portion of the property is located on the north side of Hopson Lane, about 340 feet east of Country Club Road. So you may remember a couple of months ago we had the rez oning for the property that's shown here in pink that was rezoned from NRMU to CMG for the development of a corner store. At that time that rendered this subject property an isolated pocket of NRMU zoning, so as a condition of that staff had recommended that they rezone this, consolidate the zoning on the property, because this is all one lot and at this current time it has three zoning designations across it. So again, currently this portion of NRMU is isolated with no connectivity to other portions of NRMU district. Immediately adjoining we have the recently rezoned CMG part of the property that's currently vacant on the south side with a single-family home on the north. To the north and east we have NR6 district, chiefly vacant there are some single-family homes developed further north. NR2 district exists to the south across Hopson Lane with single-family homes, and then a little further to the west along Country Club there's NRMU district with offices and existing fuel ing station and some multifamily development. Expanding further out you can see this area gets a little more complicated. Across Fort Worth Drive there's a mixture of employment center and industrial zonings with some manufactured housing, landscape companies, a veterinarian's office, a variety of uses over there. Again further to the south we maintain the NR2 district zoning and then the NR6 continues to the north and east. Just to give you a broader view of the area you can see this area has a wide mixture of commercial and industrial and residential uses going on in it. This entire area along Fort Worth Drive at Hopson and Country Club is designated by our future land use map as community mixed use. So like we just mentioned with the last case this is intended to promote a mixture of uses mainly commercial with service and residential uses complementing that. Again it's intended to provide connectivity, promote multimodal transportation, promote that mixture horizontally and vertically of various uses and some of the typical developments that are called out in the Denton plan for this area are service stations, shopping, supermarkets and office uses. If we look at our mobility plan you can see Fort Worth Drive is a primary arterial. Country Club and Hopson are both secondary arterials and in this area Hopson Lane is currently a two-lane undivided roadway so not yet fully developed to those secondary arterial standards in this area. And with this case we did send out notifications again and we had one in opposition and one in favor. And staff is recommending approval based on this land use analysis that CMG is compatible with those surrounding zoning and land uses. It eliminates that isolated zoning district that was created with the last re-zoning and CMG is consistent with the future land use designation under the Denton plan 2030. And I can answer any questions at this time. Commissioner Back. Thank you Chair. The people making this zoning request are the same people that are going to build that convenience store, is that correct? Yes sir it's the same owner and same developer. Seems to me to indicate they have plans on building something there. This request was triggered primarily by staff's concern that we had created that isolated pocket of NRMU so that was the reason for their application. At this time I'm not sure based on their site plan whether their proposal will extend into this area or not. Okay thank you. Thank you Haley. And then the final public hearing item which deals with the Kruger at Shady Shores. The applicant has requested an indefinite post-poll ment of this item so we won't actually hear this but Jennifer will you go through the process for how we are going to handle this one? Yeah last time we actually kept the public hearing open so that it would not have to be republished so we're gonna have to close that and then we can entertain a motion for postpon ement indefinitely and then we'll have to repel a shuttle later time. Does Commissioner Roselle is there an opportunity to give testimony before it closes or is the chair just gonna simply state it and close it? Do we have to provide opportunity for people here to speak about it? We do not have to that is at the discretion of the chair. Okay I think last time we didn't have anybody that came on this particular issue. We'll look and see if there's people there I think we'll take a look see how many people show up and see what we need to do at that time . Okay with that I will close our work session at 6.02 and we'll reconvene in council chambers at 6.30. Thank you. Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for April the 26th 2017. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us into order at 6.34 . Our first order of business will be to stand and give the pledge to the US and the Texas flags. The Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one indivisible. The next item on our agenda this evening will be to consider a approval of our planning and zoning Commission meeting minutes and I will take that in two motions because I think we have some changes on one of our sets so a chair would entertain a motion for March 22nd. Commissioner Rizzo. The March 22nd is the one that needs to be changed is that correct? I think that's correct. So I move approval pending the change for Commissioner Hutzbeth. You're okay with that? Okay. Yeah I move for a motion for approval for the March 22nd minutes. With an amendment or a change? Right the change with Commissioner H utzbeth's remarks. Okay thank you. Commissioner Ellis. I'll second. Okay we have a first and a second for approval with a update on the language for Commissioner H utzbeth. All those in favor I'll call for a vote on the board. Chair's gonna back up a step before we call for a vote we 're gonna ask for a clarification on the motion of what exactly the change is. Can I defer to City for that explanation? What was wrong with the minutes to begin with is on page 6 line 37 is that correct? So for clarification on line 35 it says Commissioner Hutzb eth stated he does not agree with the rezone that should be Commissioner Hutzbeth stated he does agree with the rezone is that correct Commissioner Hutzbeth? Commissioner Hutzbeth. I'm sorry is that with you? Yes. Bear with me because I thought it was correct. It's correct. The change is correct. Okay but we 're keeping it doesn't belong in this area? No I thought Commissioner Rose lle just changed his motion. Striking the last part of that sentence. Thank you. We have clear do we need to continue this for another meeting or are we good? Okay. So we have a Commissioner Roselle would you restate your motion and we 'll see if we can get a second on it again. Sure I move for approval for the March 22nd minutes with the change on page 5 line 35 to read Commissioner Hutzbeth stated he does agree with the rezone and striking the it doesn't belong in this area. Great. You'd like to second again for Commissioner Beck. Commissioner Beck for a second this time. I second. All right we have a first and a second. Any discussion further discussion on this item? Seeing none we'll call for a vote on the board. Motion carries five with one recuse. Commissioner Taylor. I move approval of our April 12th minutes. Okay. Chair will second. Any discussion? Seeing none call for a vote on board. The motion carries six to zero. It will take us to our consent agenda. Commissioner Beck. I move we approve the consent agenda. Okay. Commissioner Roselle. Second. Okay. We have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion on the consent agenda? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on board. The motion carries six to zero which will move us to our public hearing section. I 'm going to open the public hearing for item A S17-0002 and I will call on Haley for a presentation of this item. All right good evening this is case S17-2 for Denton Calv ary Academy. The request was to hold a public hearing and consider a request by the Denton Bible Church for a specific use permit to allow a high school use on approximately 13.7 acres. The property is located at the southwest corner of the East University Drive and Nottingham Drive intersection and it is shown in yellow on this map. As I mentioned the property is approximately 13.7 acres total. It has frontage on University Drive, Nottingham Drive and Mingo Road. The site plan that was included in your backup will go through briefly. A little history on the property in 1999 and ordinance for an SUP was approved to allow Denton Calvary Academy to operate a private elementary through high school . Specifically the high school use being the reason for the SUP and the four buildings on lot 1R that are outlined in green on the map. The proposal now is to expand this use specifically the high school being the portion that requires the SUP onto all of the buildings that are outlined in orange on the remainder of the property. Just a note for clarification in the NRMU zoning district the elementary and middle school uses are permitted by right so the high school use at the school is the specific aspect that requires this SUP. Everything shown on the site plan is existing on the site today and the applicant at this time is proposing no changes to the parking landscaping or building footprints that are shown here on the site plan. To give you an idea of what's in the area the subject property as I mentioned is zoned NRMU. Currently the northern portion is Denton Calvary Academy. Denton Bible Church owns and operates uses on the remainder of the subject property. To the north and west is an NR3 zoning district with single-family homes developed and to the east across Nottingham Drive is the CMG district where Denton Bible Church has its primary campus. Expanding a little bit further out we gained some retail and restaurant uses north of the property along University as well as a church located across there in the NR3 district. The community garden is located on the south side of Mingo Road in an NR2 district as well as some railroad tracks and then further south a multifamily property. In general you can see this area or this portion of town has a wide variety of residential institutional and commercial uses as well as a wide array of zoning districts ranging from residential to getting into some employment centers and industrial uses off to the east. This area of town is designated by the Denton Plan 2030 and the future land use map as an area of community mixed use. This designation is intended to promote a mixture of uses predominantly commercial uses with supporting residential and service uses. It's intended to be an area that we promote connectivity and multimodal transportation as well as a mixture of uses both vertically and horizontally and in this designation schools, places of worship and parks are all permitted by rights so this use is consistent with the future land use designation. To look at the mobility plan we have University Drive on the north which is a primary arterial, Nottingham Drive to the east is considered a collector and then Mingo Road to the south is a secondary arterial. In keeping with that multimodal transportation that the future land use calls for there are existing and or proposed bike routes on all of the adjoining streets as well as bus routes through DCTA on University and Mingo Road. To look a little more specifically at what's on the site today you can see here all the existing buildings and parking there the entire site is in compliance with the minimum 20% landscape area that's required by the zoning district and I wanted to point out that the original SUP ordinance for Denton Calvary Academy found that the existing landsca ping on site was sufficient to provide compatibility between the school and the surrounding neighborhood. Just to go through some site photos this picture is looking towards the west at the existing campus these are some of the buildings located on the east side of the property along Nottingham Drive and then these being the southernmost buildings located down on lot four of the property and this photo also shows some of the landscaping you can see they have landscaping islands trees to provide canopy coverage for the parking lot as is required in the DDC and then towards the back of the photo you can see the western property boundary has a substantial amount of landscaping to provide a buffer between the school and the residential uses and then this photo is intended to show the screening that's provided for the parking lot there are hedgerows and trees existing all along the perimeter of the site that screen the parking from the adjacent right-of-way. Notification was sent out about this request we received three responses two in favor that were from the neighborhood to the south and one in opposition that was from the neighborhood to the north across University Drive. Staff is recommending approval of this request based on our land use analysis we found that it meets all of the requirements for SUP approval outlined in subch apter 6 of the DDC. The use is already existing on a portion of the property and was found to be compatible under the original SUP and the expansion of this use will be onto a fully developed site as you saw on the site plan and they 're proposing no changes to that at this time and the use is also consistent with the Denton plan 2030. Staff is recommending approval with two conditions the first being that the use be restricted to the existing buildings on the four lots that you saw on the site plan. We are also proposing that the landsca ping coverage and parking count be maintained as is reflected on the site plan and that any changes to what is shown on the site plan be approved to require approval through an amendment of the SUP. Our second criteria being that we recommend ordinance 99277 be repealed and replaced by a new ordinance that would be approved by City Council for this case so that only one SUP controls the operation of the high school use on the property and I can stand for any questions at this time. I have a couple questions Commissioner Beck. Thank You Chair. Haley just for clarification concerning Commissioner Taylor's concern regarding that impulot that undeveloped lot there on Mingo. If the Academy decides to build a facility on that that would generate another SUP to amend this SUP is that correct? With the existing recommendation language it would be as we indicated previously though staff would be amen able to altering that language to allow them to develop permitted uses on lot four if it were to be at the high school use or another use that requires an SUP then we would still require the SUP approval. We'd have to come back through. Okay. Commissioner Roseau. Thank You Chair. One of the the second condition says ordinance 99277 must be repealed and replaced. There's my understanding work session that would be replaced completely with this new SUP is that correct? Yes. So in section one of the current ordinance there's four limitations that would be effectively removed. Student maximum over students hours operation but then the last one says that any change in light on the property shall be designed and maintained so as not to shine on otherwise or otherwise disturb residential property. If that's removed is there any provision and protection from the neighborhood under in our MU zoning that would effectively help with that light treatment? Yes sir that's actually a provision as well in sub chapter 13 of the DDC there are lighting provisions that require all light be directed downwards so as not to diffuse on other properties as well as limitations on the amount of light that can exist at the perimeter of a property so any changes would require an SUP and site plan amendment and that would be taken care of inherently through the DDC requirements for lighting. Okay thank you. I have a question to follow up from our work session since we don't have the actual SUP before us it will be done at City Council's I believe what you said in work session would you give us the the numbers for the number of students that will be approved as it moves forward to City Council what's been presented to us as well as the parking places so we'll all have that stated on the record here. Yes sir so the parking count the existing parking count is outlined on the site plan I believe it is 694 spaces that are existing and the number of students was indicated by the applicant that they believe they could hold up to 1,500 students but that number is not nailed down on the site plan at this time. Will that go into the SUP that this is good up to 1,500 students in? Staff wasn't intending for that too certainly something that you all could consider if you wanted to add that as an additional condition. Is it open-ended then so they can have as many students if there's not a limitation? Yes it would be as many students as they could hold within the existing buildings. So for their benefit if we don't put a number on it and they want to exceed it it still falls under the SUP they can go as high as they would like? Yes sir. Great we'll leave it like it is. Any other questions for staff? Thank you Hamie. This is a public hearing that one card to speak and I've got a number of cards and I'll read into the record. Not requesting to speak our first speaker is Stacey Baxter. Good evening I'm Stacey Baxter the principal at Denton Calgary Academy and I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening. I'm here to explain to you the benefit of our school to the community to the community of Denton and just this year alone our high school students 9th to 12th grade have clocked over 4,000 hours in community service. As a Christian school we're committed to doing good in the Lord's name and it is a requirement but you should know that our students go well above what is required and are frequently logging many extra hours above and beyond. Another benefit to the community I wanted to share with you is that I often get phone calls and/or emails from local businesses and business owners who tell me they would like to hire employ my students in particular high school of working age because of their high character and their commitment and that they're reliable employees so they often call me and say I'm looking to hire and who do you have that is willing so that's another good thing. Recently I received an email from a person who was a retired military and observed some of the behavior of our high school students after a baseball game and took the time to email the school to compliment our students and their character and he said that it has renewed his belief that in the youth of today and greatly encouraged him one of our students extended his hand and said thank you for your service to our country and he was so moved that he went to our website to find out my name so that he could let me know that that happened and that it encouraged him greatly. We have been on this property for 18 years as you have heard and we have expanded we've had consistent growth I think you should know that that is due to the the partnership the very very close partnership that we have with our parents it is a true partnership between the home and the school and so the accountability is very high and therefore I can ensure you all that we will continue to be a benefit to this community. We want to reach out and give back as a matter of fact when you had your map up there I want you to know that I personally with the students have gone along Nottingham and Mingo to pick up trash and so we want to be leaving it better than we found it but as we expand and and become owners that commitment stands and so I wanted to give you my word on that. It's an excellent school we have received many many awards for our academics fine arts and athletics and art a fully accredited school and I just really thank you for the opportunity for me to speak to you tonight about the benefit of Denton Calv ary in your community in my community thank you. I'll second all your comments there's some great students out there I know a lot of the students and the families it's a great school and we're glad to have you here before us and hopefully get you an SUP thank you. Anybody else that would like to speak it's a public hearing so feel free and otherwise I'll read cards into the record here. I have Everett Newland in support I have Darren Thompson in support I have Ryan Sawyer support Zach Rozelle in support Pat Smith in support Jenny Newland in support Max Robertson in support Perla Mc Bean in support and Courtney Robertson in support. Again this is a public hearing anybody who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time . Last call. Seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion. Commissioner Rozelle. Commissioner Taylor makes the motion I just wanted to clarify with legal how that motion would be worded exactly to exclude to make the correction that staff suggested there's not limitation on NRMU buildings. You got it okay. Commissioner Tyler. I think I've got it thank you chair so I move we recommend approval of this SUP with staff's conditions and an additional clarification my final sentence added to condition number one currently it reads any changes to building footprints parking counts parking lot layouts or landscaping area must be approved by amending the SUP say on lots one two and three lot four are can develop any with any permitted use in accordance with debt and development code meeting debt and development code standards legal does that sound like that okay. Commissioner Rozelle. I second. Any discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on board. Motion carries six to zero congratulations. I'll give the room a few minutes to clear. At this time I will open the public hearing for item B Z 17 - zero zero zero zero seven and I will call on Haley Zygursky for presentation. All right so this is case Z 17 7 for CST corner store. The request was to hold a public hearing and consider a rezoning request by Vanda Smith developers to rezone approximately 0.8 acres from neighborhood residential mixed use district to CMG district. The property is located on the north side of Hobson Lane approximately 340 feet east of Country Club Road. As I mentioned the property is just under one acre and it has about 100 feet of frontage on Hobson Lane. You can see here looking at the property and the zoning map that currently the subject property is an isolated area of NRMU district. You may remember we recently had a request and the rezoning was approved for the property directly to the east rezoning that from NRMU to CM G and as a part of that that rendered the subject property an isolated zoning district so staff had recommended at that time that we proceed with rezoning the remainder of that to provide two zoning districts on this larger parent tract and facilitate more cohesive development of the site. So immediately adjo ining the property to the east as I've mentioned or to the west I'm sorry we have a CMG district currently vacant land with a single-family home on the north side. To the north and east of the property we have in our sixth district primarily vacant property with some single-family uses to the north. Across Hobson Lane is NR2 district with single-family uses and then further to the west along Country Club Road we have NRMU district developed with offices, a fueling station and some multifamily development. Extending further out you see there's a wider mix of zoning districts in this area specifically across Fort Worth Drive there's a mixture of employment center and industrial zoning districts with uses such as manufactured housing there's a landsca ping company with a large property over there as well as some other commercial uses such as a veterinarian's office. And you can see again the NR6 district and NR2 district extend further to the north and south respectively and then a continuation of the NRMU district to the southwest. Looking at this general area of town you can see it's a wide variety of zonings a mixture of industrial commercial residential uses throughout the area. The future land use for this larger area of the city along Fort Worth Drive and Country Club and Hobson specifically where the property is is designated as community mixed use by the future land use map so again this area is intended to promote mixture of uses predominantly commercial with some supporting other services in residential areas. Again intended to accommodate multimodal transportation and connectivity throughout the area by providing a mixture of vertical and horizontal uses across these properties and typical developments would include things such as service stations, shopping centers, supermarkets, offices and that variety of commercial uses. Looking at the mobility plan Hobson Lane and Country Club are both designated as secondary arterial roads Fort Worth Drive is a primary arterial Fort Worth Drive and Country Club are both text out roadways and immediately adjacent to the subject property Hobson is currently only developed as a two-lane undivided roadway not yet built out to full secondary arterial standards. Notifications were sent about this request we received two written responses one in opposition and one in favor and staff is recommending approval based on our land use analysis it is compatible with the surrounding zoning and land uses it does eliminate that isolated zoning district of NRMU and it is consistent with the Denton plan 2030 designation for this area and with that I can answer any questions. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you chair just for clarification this property owner came to us two meetings ago and because of some zoning discrepancies is staff asked them to come back just so we could unify those two properties? Yes it was a staff initiated request that they were amenable to to promote or facilitate future development under just two zoning districts on the property. So this is more of a just a follow-up from the left behind land from a couple weeks ago? Yes sir. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Thank you having again this is a public hearing anybody wishing to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Please state your name and address. Nathan Toon 3717 Merrim ack Drive in Denton. I'm a representative of Vanda Smith developers just here if you have any questions. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Anybody else that would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none I'll close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion. Commissioner Roselle. I move to approve item Z 17 - 7. Commissioner Hudsworth. Second. Okay. I have a first and a second for approval. Any further discussion? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. I am going to support this tonight but I just wanted to get on the record a few comments. I was against this rezoning to CMG the last time and and I am sorry that it passed but being that it did pass it doesn't make any sense for me to vote against this particular tract of land but I wanted to get that on the record as to why I am voting for this tonight. Thank you for the clarification. Any other discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on board. Motion carries 6 to 0. That will move us to our item C and I'm going to ask for just a clarification. We currently have a public hearing open on that so we need to call for anybody that would like to speak on that first correct? We do not have any cards to speak but yes you can make a call. I'm going to just for a point of order on our item Z 17 - 0002 C this item is still open from our previous meeting so if there's anyone here who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none I will close the public hearing and Commissioner Taylor. I move we postpone this item indefinitely until such time as the applicant has held a community meeting. Commissioner Ellis. I will second. Okay Commissioner Rozelle. Just to clarify is that a condition that before they come back they have to have a community meeting ? Yes. I believe that's more informational is what Commissioner Taylor was trying to say and our postponement will be indefinitely until they bring it back. Thank you. Well I guess I was clear they don't have to submit proof that they had a community meeting to come back in the future? No that won't be a condition of the motion. Thank you. Does the chair need to ask for an amendment to clarify that of the motioner and a seconder? I understand that's clear I just want a clarification I suppose. That was the motion so shall I restate? Please restate your motion with the clarification. I move we postpone this public hearing indefinitely. Commissioner Ellis. Yes I will second. Second all right good. Any further discussion or clarification? Seeing none let's call for a vote on the board. That motion carries six to zero. That will move us to our project matrix this evening. Okay are there any items that you guys would like to add to the matrix at this time? Okay I'm just gonna ask a follow-up. I had a pretty lengthy one that I put on from last meeting. I don't know when that will possibly come before us or if that's maybe more appropriate when we get past elections I'll leave that up for staff to give us an update on that. Is this one referring to the financial analysis? Correct. Yeah and you can take that one. We were going to get with you individually okay and discuss it before we bring forward anything. Perfect let me know when we'd like to get together on that. Anybody else? Okay seeing none I will close our meeting this evening at 7.06. Thank you everyone.