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.