1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:03,240 Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton Planning 2 00:00:03,240 --> 00:00:04,080 and Zoning Commission 3 00:00:04,080 --> 00:00:08,789 work session for July the 12th 2017. This meeting has been 4 00:00:08,789 --> 00:00:09,960 duly posted and we do 5 00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:13,990 have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 5 o 2 6 00:00:13,990 --> 00:00:15,300 and at this time I 7 00:00:15,300 --> 00:00:18,899 will turn us over to Ron for a clarification of our agenda 8 00:00:18,899 --> 00:00:19,480 items this 9 00:00:19,480 --> 00:00:26,100 evening. Thank you chair. The item of the agenda is that we 10 00:00:26,100 --> 00:00:26,760 have we don't have any 11 00:00:26,760 --> 00:00:29,210 platt so we're going to go straight into our public hearing 12 00:00:29,210 --> 00:00:30,079 items and the first 13 00:00:30,079 --> 00:00:35,070 one is going to be presented by our senior planner Julie 14 00:00:35,070 --> 00:00:41,600 Wyatt. Good evening 15 00:00:41,600 --> 00:00:48,859 I'm Julie Wyatt and I'm presenting 1711 Blue Beacon to you 16 00:00:48,859 --> 00:00:52,740 this evening. The item 17 00:00:52,740 --> 00:00:56,340 before you is a request to hold a public hearing and for 18 00:00:56,340 --> 00:00:57,960 initial zoning of 19 00:00:57,960 --> 00:01:02,649 employment center commercial on approximately 16 acres. The 20 00:01:02,649 --> 00:01:03,520 property is 21 00:01:03,520 --> 00:01:06,930 located on the northwest side of the city. It's adjacent to 22 00:01:06,930 --> 00:01:10,120 I-35 and Bartol Road. 23 00:01:10,120 --> 00:01:14,189 Current zoning is RD 5X. You might be familiar with this 24 00:01:14,189 --> 00:01:15,480 area. We saw a 25 00:01:15,480 --> 00:01:18,650 rezoning for the adjacent property earlier this year. As 26 00:01:18,650 --> 00:01:19,560 they were going 27 00:01:19,560 --> 00:01:21,849 through with their site planning process they realized they 28 00:01:21,849 --> 00:01:22,640 needed a little more 29 00:01:22,640 --> 00:01:25,439 room in order to make their turning radiuses for their 30 00:01:25,439 --> 00:01:26,959 trucks so they've 31 00:01:26,959 --> 00:01:31,920 they've they are proposing to also include the adjacent 32 00:01:31,920 --> 00:01:32,920 property with their 33 00:01:32,920 --> 00:01:35,760 commercial development. That property was in the ETJ so as 34 00:01:35,760 --> 00:01:36,319 part of the 35 00:01:36,319 --> 00:01:39,159 development they have annexed to that property and now they 36 00:01:39,159 --> 00:01:40,000 're coming in for 37 00:01:40,000 --> 00:01:43,109 the initial zoning. When we annex property within the city 38 00:01:43,109 --> 00:01:44,120 of Denton they 39 00:01:44,120 --> 00:01:47,730 all come in as RD 5X which is that initial place holding 40 00:01:47,730 --> 00:01:49,359 zoning. It follows 41 00:01:49,359 --> 00:01:52,829 that RD 5 zoning within subchapter 5 of the Denton 42 00:01:52,829 --> 00:01:55,560 development code. So when 43 00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:57,650 we looked at the request we looked at the properties that 44 00:01:57,650 --> 00:01:58,359 were immediately 45 00:01:58,359 --> 00:02:03,329 adjacent to the to the subject property. Here we have the 46 00:02:03,329 --> 00:02:05,400 property next door that 47 00:02:05,400 --> 00:02:08,349 that was subject to that earlier is a rezoning case and 48 00:02:08,349 --> 00:02:09,960 that is zoned ECC and 49 00:02:09,960 --> 00:02:13,310 then has a proposed commercial development. To the south of 50 00:02:13,310 --> 00:02:14,039 that there's 51 00:02:14,039 --> 00:02:17,599 also ECC and that is currently under development as a 52 00:02:17,599 --> 00:02:19,080 travel center use. 53 00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:24,520 Also along I-35 is RCR 1 that property is undeveloped. To 54 00:02:24,520 --> 00:02:25,360 the north of the 55 00:02:25,360 --> 00:02:29,789 subject property is also RD 5X. To the west is in ETJ and 56 00:02:29,789 --> 00:02:31,120 that's undeveloped 57 00:02:31,120 --> 00:02:35,039 and to the south is RCCN and that has some commercial 58 00:02:35,039 --> 00:02:36,879 development on it. As we 59 00:02:36,879 --> 00:02:40,680 zoom out a little further we take in some property across I 60 00:02:40,680 --> 00:02:42,039 -35 and that has 61 00:02:42,039 --> 00:02:45,110 a zoning designation of RCCD and that is developed with the 62 00:02:45,110 --> 00:02:46,879 travel use as well. 63 00:02:46,879 --> 00:02:51,090 When we look at the mobility of the area we see that the 64 00:02:51,090 --> 00:02:52,800 the dominant feature is 65 00:02:52,800 --> 00:02:58,120 I-35 that corridor right here. We also have Elm and Barth 66 00:02:58,120 --> 00:02:59,479 old Road. Elm and 67 00:02:59,479 --> 00:03:03,620 Barthold will eventually connect. They will though it'll be 68 00:03:03,620 --> 00:03:04,680 realigned here at 69 00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:08,550 the at the intersection of I-35 and Barthold Road and that 70 00:03:08,550 --> 00:03:09,879 's that's sometime 71 00:03:09,879 --> 00:03:13,919 in the near future. Commissioner Beck. 72 00:03:13,919 --> 00:03:17,080 So it's going to actually clip that corner lot that the 73 00:03:17,080 --> 00:03:20,199 love station. It will yes sir yes sir. 74 00:03:20,199 --> 00:03:23,860 That'll ease the connectivity between the two sides. Right 75 00:03:23,860 --> 00:03:24,199 now it's a 76 00:03:24,199 --> 00:03:29,340 little awkward. We also looked at the analysis and the 77 00:03:29,340 --> 00:03:30,360 compatibility of what 78 00:03:30,360 --> 00:03:33,870 all these these zoning districts and the uses mean. So the 79 00:03:33,870 --> 00:03:35,159 surrounding area is 80 00:03:35,159 --> 00:03:38,340 comprised of travel center commercial developments and also 81 00:03:38,340 --> 00:03:38,680 large 82 00:03:38,680 --> 00:03:41,080 undeveloped tracts of land particularly to the north and 83 00:03:41,080 --> 00:03:42,120 the west of the subject 84 00:03:42,120 --> 00:03:47,409 property. They have access from I-35 and the US 77 North El 85 00:03:47,409 --> 00:03:49,759 m. The adjacent RCCN 86 00:03:49,759 --> 00:03:53,259 and ECC districts they currently permit large-scale 87 00:03:53,259 --> 00:03:54,840 commercial and employment 88 00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:58,500 uses. An ECC district is appropriate in this location 89 00:03:58,500 --> 00:03:59,599 because it also permits 90 00:03:59,599 --> 00:04:02,699 similar employment and commercial uses at a scale that's 91 00:04:02,699 --> 00:04:04,000 typically found along 92 00:04:04,000 --> 00:04:08,120 I or long highway corridors and the adjacent zoning 93 00:04:08,120 --> 00:04:10,280 districts. ECC is also a 94 00:04:10,280 --> 00:04:13,610 logical extension of the existing ECC district to the east 95 00:04:13,610 --> 00:04:14,599 and the south of 96 00:04:14,599 --> 00:04:19,110 the subject property. We looked at the future land use 97 00:04:19,110 --> 00:04:20,759 designation didn't plan 98 00:04:20,759 --> 00:04:24,439 2030. This is in a business innovation future land use 99 00:04:24,439 --> 00:04:26,040 designation. The intent 100 00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:29,139 of business innovation is to encourage the large-scale 101 00:04:29,139 --> 00:04:30,519 office development and 102 00:04:30,519 --> 00:04:34,879 employment centers and then those retail and commercial 103 00:04:34,879 --> 00:04:36,680 services that serve to 104 00:04:36,680 --> 00:04:43,180 provide adjacency and additional places for the workers to 105 00:04:43,180 --> 00:04:44,759 go places to eat and 106 00:04:44,759 --> 00:04:49,069 shop. The mix of commercial or the mix of commercial and 107 00:04:49,069 --> 00:04:50,199 light manufacturing 108 00:04:50,199 --> 00:04:54,680 uses in ECC meets the intent of that business innovation 109 00:04:54,680 --> 00:04:55,600 future land use 110 00:04:55,600 --> 00:04:59,829 designation. We sent out a public notification of this of 111 00:04:59,829 --> 00:05:01,639 the request. We 112 00:05:01,639 --> 00:05:06,189 received one letter and it was from and it you should have 113 00:05:06,189 --> 00:05:07,639 it on your desk it 114 00:05:07,639 --> 00:05:11,240 was from the the property owner to the south the loves and 115 00:05:11,240 --> 00:05:12,079 they were in 116 00:05:12,079 --> 00:05:16,560 support of the request. Due to the criteria in sub chapter 117 00:05:16,560 --> 00:05:18,079 4 of the Denton 118 00:05:18,079 --> 00:05:21,399 Development Code and the adjacent character of the area 119 00:05:21,399 --> 00:05:22,079 staff does 120 00:05:22,079 --> 00:05:25,389 recommend approval of the request and I'll stand for any 121 00:05:25,389 --> 00:05:27,040 questions. Commissioner 122 00:05:27,040 --> 00:05:33,560 Reck. Thank you Chair. I just got a little nitpick about 123 00:05:33,560 --> 00:05:36,000 the semantics of this thing. In the 124 00:05:36,000 --> 00:05:39,730 comprehensive plan it points out that this the future land 125 00:05:39,730 --> 00:05:41,000 use designations is 126 00:05:41,000 --> 00:05:44,430 business innovation and I stress that word innovation and 127 00:05:44,430 --> 00:05:45,519 then it points out 128 00:05:45,519 --> 00:05:47,819 for well-planned larger scale office and employment parks 129 00:05:47,819 --> 00:05:48,920 with supporting use 130 00:05:48,920 --> 00:05:54,029 such as retails hotels and residential. I have no problem 131 00:05:54,029 --> 00:05:55,959 with this truck wash in 132 00:05:55,959 --> 00:06:00,410 the ECC designation. I just you know as a matter of sem 133 00:06:00,410 --> 00:06:01,360 antics so you know when 134 00:06:01,360 --> 00:06:04,560 somebody looks at business innovation I don't think truck 135 00:06:04,560 --> 00:06:05,800 wash would come to mind 136 00:06:05,800 --> 00:06:09,230 or truck stop or anything like that. So I mean just for 137 00:06:09,230 --> 00:06:11,079 future purposes when we 138 00:06:11,079 --> 00:06:13,139 say innovative we're talking about something new and 139 00:06:13,139 --> 00:06:14,759 different and that 140 00:06:14,759 --> 00:06:18,040 doesn't just quit quite fit that criteria. So I don't know 141 00:06:18,040 --> 00:06:18,800 do we need to 142 00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:20,949 keep it like that is this something that could probably be 143 00:06:20,949 --> 00:06:23,120 worked on with the DCC 144 00:06:23,120 --> 00:06:28,160 revision or would that even fall in into that purview? 145 00:06:28,160 --> 00:06:29,839 Chair if I can answer 146 00:06:29,839 --> 00:06:33,160 just that question. Absolutely. Comments you're absolutely 147 00:06:33,160 --> 00:06:34,560 correct Commissioner 148 00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:40,000 Beck. One of the goals of the DEN plan 2030 is to start 149 00:06:40,000 --> 00:06:41,199 looking at some areas 150 00:06:41,199 --> 00:06:45,069 in the city that can accommodate our business innovation 151 00:06:45,069 --> 00:06:46,399 you know business 152 00:06:46,399 --> 00:06:48,689 parks that sort of thing but as we look at this site and 153 00:06:48,689 --> 00:06:49,480 one thing that we 154 00:06:49,480 --> 00:06:53,189 discussed with staff is besides in this particular location 155 00:06:53,189 --> 00:06:54,240 it's a little narrow 156 00:06:54,240 --> 00:06:58,360 so we felt that this was okay but yes we will hopefully 157 00:06:58,360 --> 00:07:00,959 refine our we are 158 00:07:00,959 --> 00:07:04,079 refining our zoning districts as we move forward with our 159 00:07:04,079 --> 00:07:06,279 code update and that is 160 00:07:06,279 --> 00:07:09,100 something that we will make sure we're in line with our 161 00:07:09,100 --> 00:07:10,040 future land use 162 00:07:10,040 --> 00:07:14,339 designations. If I may follow up. I was looking for 163 00:07:14,339 --> 00:07:15,800 anything and I went through 164 00:07:15,800 --> 00:07:18,149 this list of permitted uses and about the only thing that 165 00:07:18,149 --> 00:07:18,959 came close to it was 166 00:07:18,959 --> 00:07:23,610 under commercial land use quick vehicle servicing so there 167 00:07:23,610 --> 00:07:24,800 's a little element 168 00:07:24,800 --> 00:07:27,620 there that lets you squeeze in but I just again the idea of 169 00:07:27,620 --> 00:07:28,160 business 170 00:07:28,160 --> 00:07:33,360 innovative probably needs to change. Thank you. 171 00:07:35,759 --> 00:07:41,310 Any other questions for Julie? I think you have the next 172 00:07:41,310 --> 00:07:43,519 one too. I'm sorry 173 00:07:43,519 --> 00:07:47,370 Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Hey Julie just I guess 174 00:07:47,370 --> 00:07:48,560 a quick question and I 175 00:07:48,560 --> 00:07:53,329 guess just more for clarification for me it says that the 176 00:07:53,329 --> 00:07:54,639 site includes some 177 00:07:54,639 --> 00:07:58,319 frontage along the newly aligned Bartold Road and it 178 00:07:58,319 --> 00:08:00,480 contains a gas pipeline. Is 179 00:08:00,480 --> 00:08:03,569 that an issue with what is being developed? What's being 180 00:08:03,569 --> 00:08:04,360 developed is not 181 00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:07,740 considered a protected use but they would have to meet all 182 00:08:07,740 --> 00:08:08,319 setback 183 00:08:08,319 --> 00:08:14,600 requirements for any industrial use or any production 184 00:08:14,600 --> 00:08:15,279 facility. This 185 00:08:15,279 --> 00:08:19,410 isn't this isn't necessarily a gas well but they would have 186 00:08:19,410 --> 00:08:20,240 to meet all 187 00:08:20,240 --> 00:08:22,810 requirements and we'll look at that a little more deeply 188 00:08:22,810 --> 00:08:23,620 when we get to the 189 00:08:23,620 --> 00:08:33,320 site plan and any platting. Anybody else? Thank you. You 190 00:08:33,320 --> 00:08:36,480 got the next one too. 191 00:08:45,279 --> 00:09:02,279 [inaudible] 192 00:09:02,279 --> 00:09:09,919 Now I'm presenting S17-4 McDonald's. The item before you is 193 00:09:09,919 --> 00:09:10,440 to hold a 194 00:09:10,440 --> 00:09:13,649 public hearing and consider a request for a specific use 195 00:09:13,649 --> 00:09:14,679 permit to allow a 196 00:09:14,679 --> 00:09:18,250 drive-through facility. The subject property is located 197 00:09:18,250 --> 00:09:19,360 north of I-35 198 00:09:19,360 --> 00:09:24,009 adjacent to North Texas Boulevard. We're gonna go we're 199 00:09:24,009 --> 00:09:25,120 gonna do a little bit of 200 00:09:25,120 --> 00:09:28,190 a dive into the the background of the property because the 201 00:09:28,190 --> 00:09:29,200 property boundaries 202 00:09:29,200 --> 00:09:32,269 don't necessarily match with what we're used to seeing on 203 00:09:32,269 --> 00:09:33,200 that site so we're 204 00:09:33,200 --> 00:09:38,740 gonna kind of jump back and forth. So I got this this more 205 00:09:38,740 --> 00:09:40,360 updated aerial 206 00:09:40,360 --> 00:09:43,500 photograph from from Google Maps and it shows more 207 00:09:43,500 --> 00:09:45,320 accurately what's on the site 208 00:09:45,320 --> 00:09:48,809 now. So the subject property was originally developed as a 209 00:09:48,809 --> 00:09:49,679 McDonald's 210 00:09:49,679 --> 00:09:54,269 with the drive-through. As we all know I-35 is under an 211 00:09:54,269 --> 00:09:56,000 expansion project and 212 00:09:56,000 --> 00:10:01,000 so there TextDOT acquired some frontage from the subject 213 00:10:01,000 --> 00:10:02,039 property in order to 214 00:10:02,039 --> 00:10:07,320 accommodate that expansion. Within that acquisition the the 215 00:10:07,320 --> 00:10:08,820 if you remember the 216 00:10:08,820 --> 00:10:11,929 gas station that was right here and the McDonald's were 217 00:10:11,929 --> 00:10:13,159 were taken out as well 218 00:10:13,159 --> 00:10:17,000 as the parking. McDonald's would like to rebuild but the 219 00:10:17,000 --> 00:10:18,000 amount of property left 220 00:10:18,000 --> 00:10:21,210 on that original site is not sufficient to accommodate the 221 00:10:21,210 --> 00:10:22,120 building in the 222 00:10:22,120 --> 00:10:25,720 parking. So they've actually taken in in their subject 223 00:10:25,720 --> 00:10:28,440 property this IHOP lot. So 224 00:10:28,440 --> 00:10:30,799 now we'll go over the site plan and hopefully it'll make 225 00:10:30,799 --> 00:10:31,759 sense if it doesn't 226 00:10:31,759 --> 00:10:34,549 tell me to back up and we'll we'll we'll go over it and try 227 00:10:34,549 --> 00:10:35,679 to point out all of 228 00:10:35,679 --> 00:10:40,629 the landmarks. So here's the the site plan that McDonald's 229 00:10:40,629 --> 00:10:42,279 is proposing. If you 230 00:10:42,279 --> 00:10:45,940 can kind of visually see this was the original McDonald's 231 00:10:45,940 --> 00:10:47,519 lot, the gas station 232 00:10:47,519 --> 00:10:52,299 was right here and then this is the the IHOP lot. So the 233 00:10:52,299 --> 00:10:54,720 area and in yellow is 234 00:10:54,720 --> 00:10:59,220 the building, the proposed building. They're also proposing 235 00:10:59,220 --> 00:11:00,159 two signs, two 236 00:11:00,159 --> 00:11:03,429 pole signs, one on I-35 and one on North Texas Boulevard 237 00:11:03,429 --> 00:11:04,559 and we're going to talk 238 00:11:04,559 --> 00:11:06,820 about that sign a little more when we get to the 239 00:11:06,820 --> 00:11:08,960 recommendations. They're also 240 00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:13,399 proposing within their site plan package two drive-throughs 241 00:11:13,399 --> 00:11:14,840 in order to 242 00:11:14,840 --> 00:11:17,740 accommodate enough vehicle storage to get through the drive 243 00:11:17,740 --> 00:11:18,240 -through 244 00:11:18,240 --> 00:11:24,299 efficiently. Some pedestrian crosswalks across the the 245 00:11:24,299 --> 00:11:25,480 driveways. They're 246 00:11:25,480 --> 00:11:29,080 proposing a bike rack and then there's also going to be 247 00:11:29,080 --> 00:11:30,080 some sidewalk 248 00:11:30,080 --> 00:11:33,789 improvements associated with the development. There will be 249 00:11:33,789 --> 00:11:34,399 there are 250 00:11:34,399 --> 00:11:38,700 proposed four driveways, one off of I-35, one off of Kind 251 00:11:38,700 --> 00:11:40,519 orf, one off of Wilshire 252 00:11:40,519 --> 00:11:44,730 and one off of North Texas Boulevard. And then we'll look 253 00:11:44,730 --> 00:11:46,120 at the landscape plan. 254 00:11:46,120 --> 00:11:48,929 Currently there's not a whole lot of landscaping or trees 255 00:11:48,929 --> 00:11:50,200 on the site. They 256 00:11:50,200 --> 00:11:53,460 will be adding trees and landscaping in accordance with the 257 00:11:53,460 --> 00:11:54,399 Denton Development 258 00:11:54,399 --> 00:11:58,700 Code requirements which includes a 20% canopy in the DCG 259 00:11:58,700 --> 00:12:00,519 district. Also parking 260 00:12:00,519 --> 00:12:04,289 lot screening. They do have enhanced landscaping along the 261 00:12:04,289 --> 00:12:05,360 menu boards as 262 00:12:05,360 --> 00:12:10,759 well. Here are the proposed elevations for the subject 263 00:12:10,759 --> 00:12:11,720 property. They are 264 00:12:11,720 --> 00:12:17,809 proposing a masonry building with stone accents. Subchapter 265 00:12:17,809 --> 00:12:18,879 6 of the Denton 266 00:12:18,879 --> 00:12:22,250 Development Code outlines the criteria for approval for SU 267 00:12:22,250 --> 00:12:23,240 Ps and I believe that 268 00:12:23,240 --> 00:12:26,899 the full criteria is in your backup but in general it 269 00:12:26,899 --> 00:12:28,679 requires consistency with 270 00:12:28,679 --> 00:12:32,340 the zoning regulations, conformity with the Denton plan and 271 00:12:32,340 --> 00:12:33,620 also consistency with 272 00:12:33,620 --> 00:12:36,690 the surrounding development in terms of access, nuisance 273 00:12:36,690 --> 00:12:38,679 and scale of development. 274 00:12:38,679 --> 00:12:41,750 Let's talk about the zoning just for a minute. The subject 275 00:12:41,750 --> 00:12:43,240 property is zoned DCG. 276 00:12:43,240 --> 00:12:47,220 The proposed site plan does comply with the requirements 277 00:12:47,220 --> 00:12:48,519 within the DCG 278 00:12:48,519 --> 00:12:52,309 zoning district. Restaurants are permitted but drive- 279 00:12:52,309 --> 00:12:52,759 throughs do 280 00:12:52,759 --> 00:12:57,129 require an SUP and that is intended because often we find 281 00:12:57,129 --> 00:12:57,960 DCG in our 282 00:12:57,960 --> 00:13:00,570 downtown areas or university areas where we often have a 283 00:13:00,570 --> 00:13:01,399 lot of pedestrian 284 00:13:01,399 --> 00:13:05,059 oriented development. We want to ensure that any drive- 285 00:13:05,059 --> 00:13:06,200 throughs that come 286 00:13:06,200 --> 00:13:09,320 in those areas are sensitive to the pedestrian oriented 287 00:13:09,320 --> 00:13:09,960 nature. 288 00:13:09,960 --> 00:13:13,620 Question. Yes sir. Did the previous McDonald's that was 289 00:13:13,620 --> 00:13:15,600 located on that site have an SUP? 290 00:13:15,600 --> 00:13:20,549 They did not. It was it was pre Denton Development Code, 291 00:13:20,549 --> 00:13:22,840 pre 2002. And so 292 00:13:22,840 --> 00:13:25,909 TechStop took them out and they want to rebuild the 293 00:13:25,909 --> 00:13:27,559 business on the same side 294 00:13:27,559 --> 00:13:31,159 and now they were required to get an SUP? They are. They 295 00:13:31,159 --> 00:13:34,320 are. I'm gonna listen a little. 296 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:38,070 The site's proximity to I-35 does suggest that an auto 297 00:13:38,070 --> 00:13:39,080 oriented use is 298 00:13:39,080 --> 00:13:42,309 appropriate in this location. Although we typically see 299 00:13:42,309 --> 00:13:43,320 pedestrian oriented 300 00:13:43,320 --> 00:13:48,059 development in university areas because of that I-35 access 301 00:13:48,059 --> 00:13:49,240 , because of the 302 00:13:49,240 --> 00:13:53,379 location of a lot of the UNT parking lots in this area, it 303 00:13:53,379 --> 00:13:54,720 is it does lean 304 00:13:54,720 --> 00:13:59,879 more toward the auto oriented uses. We also just in general 305 00:13:59,879 --> 00:14:00,600 drive-throughs 306 00:14:00,600 --> 00:14:05,799 are typical development that you see along highways. Let's 307 00:14:05,799 --> 00:14:05,960 look let's talk 308 00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:09,029 about the area and first the properties that are adjacent 309 00:14:09,029 --> 00:14:10,120 to the site. The 310 00:14:10,120 --> 00:14:13,000 subject property is in a DCG zoning district. There is a 311 00:14:13,000 --> 00:14:14,279 little bit of DR2 312 00:14:14,279 --> 00:14:17,419 to the north. What's surrounding them to the north and the 313 00:14:17,419 --> 00:14:18,559 east and the west are 314 00:14:18,559 --> 00:14:22,360 UNT facilities and also some UNT parking areas. You can see 315 00:14:22,360 --> 00:14:23,399 there's a commuter lot 316 00:14:23,399 --> 00:14:28,350 here, commuter lot here. Across the highway in R3, there's 317 00:14:28,350 --> 00:14:29,279 an R3 district 318 00:14:29,279 --> 00:14:31,840 with single-family. There's a little bit in R2 here and I 319 00:14:31,840 --> 00:14:32,559 believe that is the 320 00:14:32,559 --> 00:14:38,039 football stadium. As we zoom out a little bit we see more 321 00:14:38,039 --> 00:14:39,840 UNT facilities coming 322 00:14:39,840 --> 00:14:43,070 into focus. There's a dormitory here. There's once again 323 00:14:43,070 --> 00:14:44,159 some more commuter 324 00:14:44,159 --> 00:14:46,950 lots. There's some commercial development here with with 325 00:14:46,950 --> 00:14:47,399 parking and 326 00:14:47,399 --> 00:14:50,610 then the UNT performance. There's a performance facility in 327 00:14:50,610 --> 00:14:51,600 this location. 328 00:14:51,600 --> 00:14:57,919 And then the general area. You see more of the UNT campus. 329 00:14:57,919 --> 00:14:59,120 There's residential 330 00:14:59,120 --> 00:15:03,340 near the subject property and then the I-35 corridor in 331 00:15:03,340 --> 00:15:04,919 this case as well is a 332 00:15:04,919 --> 00:15:09,899 real dominant feature in this area. The future land use for 333 00:15:09,899 --> 00:15:11,279 the subject property 334 00:15:11,279 --> 00:15:15,580 is commercial and this is not really a mixed use future 335 00:15:15,580 --> 00:15:17,360 land use designation. It 336 00:15:17,360 --> 00:15:20,799 is to be concentrated commercial development and auto 337 00:15:20,799 --> 00:15:21,899 oriented uses such 338 00:15:21,899 --> 00:15:24,840 as drive-throughs are appropriate in this future land use. 339 00:15:24,840 --> 00:15:26,320 The mobility of the 340 00:15:26,320 --> 00:15:29,500 area, once again I-35, a really dominant feature provides a 341 00:15:29,500 --> 00:15:30,539 lot of access to the 342 00:15:30,539 --> 00:15:33,620 site as well as the North Texas Boulevard that is a 343 00:15:33,620 --> 00:15:35,120 secondary arterial and 344 00:15:35,120 --> 00:15:38,460 then the hatched black lines are collectors that run 345 00:15:38,460 --> 00:15:41,200 through the area. 346 00:15:41,200 --> 00:15:44,320 Commissioner Ellison. Thank you Chair. I guess why you have 347 00:15:44,320 --> 00:15:45,000 that up one of my 348 00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:48,070 questions has to do with if you're coming from let's say 349 00:15:48,070 --> 00:15:49,019 campus or coming 350 00:15:49,019 --> 00:15:52,370 down North Texas Boulevard. I didn't see where there was a 351 00:15:52,370 --> 00:15:54,759 way into this site. I'm 352 00:15:54,759 --> 00:15:57,360 assuming you'd have to go Eagle to Kendoff to get there? 353 00:15:57,360 --> 00:15:58,320 You're right. There 354 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:01,440 are there is some limit there is some control access and 355 00:16:01,440 --> 00:16:02,159 engineering will be 356 00:16:02,159 --> 00:16:05,309 here to answer questions. There is some control access and 357 00:16:05,309 --> 00:16:06,240 I believe this is 358 00:16:06,240 --> 00:16:10,649 just a ride-in ride-out here. Jim is okay there'll be a 359 00:16:10,649 --> 00:16:12,000 median here so it'll just 360 00:16:12,000 --> 00:16:14,820 be a ride-in ride-out in this location so they would have 361 00:16:14,820 --> 00:16:16,519 to turn and come in 362 00:16:16,519 --> 00:16:20,480 from a different angle. Can they come in off a wheelchair? 363 00:16:20,480 --> 00:16:22,200 Should I call Jim up? 364 00:16:22,200 --> 00:16:42,000 I'm gonna call Jim. Good evening everyone. Jim Jenks from 365 00:16:42,000 --> 00:16:42,480 the Engineering 366 00:16:42,480 --> 00:16:47,429 Department. Looking at TexDOT's ultimate schematic there 367 00:16:47,429 --> 00:16:49,720 will be a median along 368 00:16:49,720 --> 00:16:56,039 North Texas Boulevard from the service road up north of Wil 369 00:16:56,039 --> 00:16:58,320 shire. So their 370 00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:01,669 southbound traffic on North Texas Boulevard would not be 371 00:17:01,669 --> 00:17:03,399 able to turn into 372 00:17:03,399 --> 00:17:16,339 this site directly or via Wilshire. They would I don't have 373 00:17:16,339 --> 00:17:17,680 a map handy that 374 00:17:17,680 --> 00:17:21,680 shows the area farther out. 375 00:17:27,240 --> 00:17:31,400 They'd have to go Eagle. 376 00:17:39,640 --> 00:17:44,980 Currently there are median cuts that would allow access to 377 00:17:44,980 --> 00:17:46,680 Wilshire but not 378 00:17:46,680 --> 00:17:51,190 in their ultimate schematic. How far out is the ultimate 379 00:17:51,190 --> 00:17:54,039 schematic? Is that in this 380 00:17:54,039 --> 00:18:00,319 phase or we time? I don't think it's I would have to get 381 00:18:00,319 --> 00:18:01,000 back to you on that. 382 00:18:01,000 --> 00:18:04,920 Julie can you go back to that satellite image? Yeah. 383 00:18:04,920 --> 00:18:07,480 Because Google Maps looks 384 00:18:07,480 --> 00:18:09,720 like it shows that there is a median currently there. 385 00:18:09,720 --> 00:18:13,680 Currently in the 386 00:18:13,680 --> 00:18:17,279 you had one that yes there is a there is a cut right there 387 00:18:17,279 --> 00:18:17,920 in the median though. 388 00:18:17,920 --> 00:18:20,950 It didn't look like it. Maybe my eyes are failing me but it 389 00:18:20,950 --> 00:18:21,880 looks like grass all 390 00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:26,319 the way over Wilshire. 391 00:18:32,519 --> 00:18:33,299 Yeah it looks like Wilshire is blocked but maybe the 392 00:18:33,299 --> 00:18:36,680 parking lot entrance isn't. 393 00:18:36,680 --> 00:18:40,670 There are cones but there isn't grass it looks like. It's a 394 00:18:40,670 --> 00:18:41,440 little further south 395 00:18:41,440 --> 00:18:49,519 you're talking about right? Gotcha. I wish I could project 396 00:18:49,519 --> 00:18:51,640 mine on the screen 397 00:18:51,640 --> 00:18:57,000 here. I'll just show you. 398 00:19:12,440 --> 00:19:13,160 I can have an answer for you on the timing by the regular 399 00:19:13,160 --> 00:19:18,240 meeting. Okay 400 00:19:18,240 --> 00:19:23,329 great thank you. Sure. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. 401 00:19:23,329 --> 00:19:25,119 The area we're talking 402 00:19:25,119 --> 00:19:25,119 about where there's a medium and we need a cut through is 403 00:19:25,119 --> 00:19:30,039 that that's not text 404 00:19:30,039 --> 00:19:30,039 dots property is it? That's not there right away. Is it the 405 00:19:30,039 --> 00:19:36,640 universities? It is not 406 00:19:36,640 --> 00:19:41,700 text dots. I mean it's the city's it's a city street North 407 00:19:41,700 --> 00:19:43,000 Texas Boulevard is. So 408 00:19:43,000 --> 00:19:48,410 the city could do a cut through couldn't it? And the reason 409 00:19:48,410 --> 00:19:50,000 I'm even bringing this up 410 00:19:50,000 --> 00:19:52,859 is if you get traffic coming off going to McDonald's they 411 00:19:52,859 --> 00:19:53,799 have to kind of look 412 00:19:53,799 --> 00:19:55,980 back around and get on the interstate and deal with that 413 00:19:55,980 --> 00:19:56,880 traffic like before 414 00:19:56,880 --> 00:19:59,740 they can get back onto the interstate again where if they 415 00:19:59,740 --> 00:20:01,160 could cross over you 416 00:20:01,160 --> 00:20:04,230 know North Texas and then hang a right there on the service 417 00:20:04,230 --> 00:20:04,819 road they would 418 00:20:04,819 --> 00:20:08,680 have to deal with that traffic signal. It is a city street 419 00:20:08,680 --> 00:20:11,079 text dot has as part of 420 00:20:11,079 --> 00:20:15,809 their schematic they show improving it all the way up to 421 00:20:15,809 --> 00:20:17,000 the next street 422 00:20:17,000 --> 00:20:21,009 intersection beyond Wilshire. I think it's basically the 423 00:20:21,009 --> 00:20:22,000 transition to their 424 00:20:22,000 --> 00:20:32,680 improvements. That next one I can't tell from that. They're 425 00:20:32,680 --> 00:20:33,599 not showing a medium 426 00:20:33,599 --> 00:20:36,730 but that's the end of their project. Commissioner Tyler has 427 00:20:36,730 --> 00:20:38,400 a follow-up. Thank 428 00:20:38,400 --> 00:20:42,259 you chair. So I guess just to continue on this the next one 429 00:20:42,259 --> 00:20:43,440 is Eagle and I think 430 00:20:43,440 --> 00:20:46,359 because of the shortness of the blocks and the radius they 431 00:20:46,359 --> 00:20:47,440 would probably never 432 00:20:47,440 --> 00:20:50,160 put a cut there. So you'd have to turn on Eagle and come 433 00:20:50,160 --> 00:20:51,960 down Kindle. That's how 434 00:20:51,960 --> 00:20:54,420 it is now with all the construction. So I don't think it's 435 00:20:54,420 --> 00:20:55,119 really out of the 436 00:20:55,119 --> 00:20:59,779 ordinary. My question is more pertaining to the little rem 437 00:20:59,779 --> 00:21:01,119 nant lot. I don't know 438 00:21:01,119 --> 00:21:04,190 if this is a good view or if the site plan might be a 439 00:21:04,190 --> 00:21:05,720 better view of the small 440 00:21:05,720 --> 00:21:10,670 remnant lot of the old gas station. Right now there's 441 00:21:10,670 --> 00:21:12,440 indicated a curb cut and you 442 00:21:12,440 --> 00:21:16,910 can see there's actually a driveway but it seems is that a 443 00:21:16,910 --> 00:21:20,519 text dot property or 444 00:21:20,519 --> 00:21:25,839 is that still owned by some private owner? 445 00:21:26,799 --> 00:21:33,299 They acquired, text dot acquired so much of that lot. Yeah 446 00:21:33,299 --> 00:21:34,079 I wonder if they just 447 00:21:34,079 --> 00:21:36,230 acquired the whole thing because there's just such a small 448 00:21:36,230 --> 00:21:37,559 remnant left. I think 449 00:21:37,559 --> 00:21:43,400 that may be the case. Can we tell on there? Yeah. Are you 450 00:21:43,400 --> 00:21:44,519 talking about that 451 00:21:44,519 --> 00:21:49,150 little small to the left of the monument sign? On the DCAD 452 00:21:49,150 --> 00:21:50,400 map that shows that 453 00:21:50,400 --> 00:21:55,400 little sliver shows to be North Texas. Oh so UNTO owns it? 454 00:21:55,400 --> 00:21:56,759 The little bitty piece 455 00:21:56,759 --> 00:21:59,960 right there. Okay. Okay. Yeah I was just trying to see if 456 00:21:59,960 --> 00:22:01,319 that that driveway to 457 00:22:01,319 --> 00:22:04,119 nowhere, that curb cut to nowhere very close to the 458 00:22:04,119 --> 00:22:05,519 intersection had any plans 459 00:22:05,519 --> 00:22:10,069 but not related to this I guess. No not related to this. I 460 00:22:10,069 --> 00:22:11,319 can't see it being 461 00:22:11,319 --> 00:22:14,849 related to anything actually. I mean it's with as small as 462 00:22:14,849 --> 00:22:16,920 that remnant is. There'd 463 00:22:16,920 --> 00:22:23,069 be nothing much to drive into and there's this site would 464 00:22:23,069 --> 00:22:24,319 not be using it. 465 00:22:24,319 --> 00:22:30,930 In fact there are the we are still we've reviewed a final 466 00:22:30,930 --> 00:22:33,960 replant submittal. I 467 00:22:33,960 --> 00:22:36,750 don't think it's been approved yet and we still have the 468 00:22:36,750 --> 00:22:37,920 site plan phase yet to 469 00:22:37,920 --> 00:22:42,880 go so we're still reviewing and commenting on the site but 470 00:22:42,880 --> 00:22:43,559 there will 471 00:22:43,559 --> 00:22:47,240 be some driveways that are going away as a result of this 472 00:22:47,240 --> 00:22:48,980 project along the 35 473 00:22:48,980 --> 00:22:52,140 service road and then going north just north of the 474 00:22:52,140 --> 00:22:53,720 intersection along North 475 00:22:53,720 --> 00:22:58,400 Texas Boulevard. There'll be a net reduction in driveways 476 00:22:58,400 --> 00:22:59,599 here especially 477 00:22:59,599 --> 00:23:02,759 near that intersection. And I guess maybe UNT could build a 478 00:23:02,759 --> 00:23:04,720 sign on that corner. 479 00:23:04,720 --> 00:23:08,109 Who knows that may be what they have in mind I don't know. 480 00:23:08,109 --> 00:23:09,759 Nothing that could I 481 00:23:09,759 --> 00:23:14,369 don't see anything that can be driven into though. Any 482 00:23:14,369 --> 00:23:18,440 other questions for Jim? 483 00:23:18,799 --> 00:23:22,160 Thank you Jim. 484 00:23:24,680 --> 00:23:28,549 I don't have much left to add I just want to go over one or 485 00:23:28,549 --> 00:23:30,240 a couple more 486 00:23:30,240 --> 00:23:34,470 things. I did put a letter on your desks from I received 487 00:23:34,470 --> 00:23:36,319 from UNT last night. I 488 00:23:36,319 --> 00:23:42,039 wasn't able to get the opposition percentage calculated 489 00:23:42,039 --> 00:23:44,119 today. Our GIS was 490 00:23:44,119 --> 00:23:48,490 in a meeting so but we anticipate that the 20% opposition 491 00:23:48,490 --> 00:23:50,200 has threshold has been 492 00:23:50,200 --> 00:23:53,279 met and so a super majority would be required at City 493 00:23:53,279 --> 00:23:54,359 Council but we're still 494 00:23:54,359 --> 00:23:59,380 we're still making sure that they do that that is the case. 495 00:23:59,380 --> 00:24:00,680 Commissioner Roseau. 496 00:24:00,680 --> 00:24:07,799 Did they provide any elaboration of their reason? No sir. 497 00:24:07,799 --> 00:24:12,400 Based upon the criteria we discussed the character of the 498 00:24:12,400 --> 00:24:13,960 area the access to the 499 00:24:13,960 --> 00:24:18,190 area staff does recommend approval of the request with two 500 00:24:18,190 --> 00:24:19,920 conditions. One that 501 00:24:19,920 --> 00:24:22,990 it's substantially comply with the site plan landscape plan 502 00:24:22,990 --> 00:24:23,680 and building 503 00:24:23,680 --> 00:24:27,519 elevations that were submitted with the with the SUP and 504 00:24:27,519 --> 00:24:28,920 then also the signage 505 00:24:28,920 --> 00:24:32,539 on North Texas Boulevard. Right now they are proposing two 506 00:24:32,539 --> 00:24:34,279 pole signs in 507 00:24:34,279 --> 00:24:37,430 accordance with the sign regulations within the city of 508 00:24:37,430 --> 00:24:39,519 Denton. Staff felt like 509 00:24:39,519 --> 00:24:43,180 that reducing the size of the sign on North Texas Boulevard 510 00:24:43,180 --> 00:24:44,279 to a monument sign 511 00:24:44,279 --> 00:24:47,730 that is that is architecturally compatible with the primary 512 00:24:47,730 --> 00:24:48,400 structure 513 00:24:48,400 --> 00:24:51,470 that is a maximum of height of five feet and a maximum 514 00:24:51,470 --> 00:24:53,200 effective area of 40 feet 515 00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:56,420 would be more in keeping with the character of the of the 516 00:24:56,420 --> 00:24:57,240 street of North 517 00:24:57,240 --> 00:25:00,309 Texas Boulevard. We understand the need for the pole sign 518 00:25:00,309 --> 00:25:01,319 on I-35 because you 519 00:25:01,319 --> 00:25:04,829 want that visibility to the motoring public but we felt 520 00:25:04,829 --> 00:25:05,440 like that that 521 00:25:05,440 --> 00:25:08,759 monument side on North Texas Boulevard met the character of 522 00:25:08,759 --> 00:25:09,519 the general 523 00:25:09,519 --> 00:25:12,319 area so those are the two conditions that staff has 524 00:25:12,319 --> 00:25:14,759 recommended. So based 525 00:25:14,759 --> 00:25:18,480 upon that I'll answer any questions. What was the applicant 526 00:25:18,480 --> 00:25:19,599 's response to that 527 00:25:19,599 --> 00:25:22,480 having it reduced to monument sign? They do not agree with 528 00:25:22,480 --> 00:25:24,000 staff's recommendation. 529 00:25:24,000 --> 00:25:30,369 They... What did they have previously? Previous well they 530 00:25:30,369 --> 00:25:31,319 did not I you know I 531 00:25:31,319 --> 00:25:33,880 don't know what was at that location previously it's a good 532 00:25:33,880 --> 00:25:34,640 question I'm not 533 00:25:34,640 --> 00:25:37,710 quite sure if there was a pole sign at that location. They 534 00:25:37,710 --> 00:25:39,119 are proposing that I 535 00:25:39,119 --> 00:25:41,410 believe a 20-foot pole sign in that spot. I believe on 536 00:25:41,410 --> 00:25:42,839 their old building they had four 537 00:25:42,839 --> 00:25:47,319 points of access as well just like they have with the new 538 00:25:47,319 --> 00:25:48,279 one that they're 539 00:25:48,279 --> 00:25:52,130 proposing and I don't know if they I don't recall if they 540 00:25:52,130 --> 00:25:52,880 had a sign over on 541 00:25:52,880 --> 00:25:56,680 North Texas on that access point or not. Commissioner Ellis 542 00:25:56,680 --> 00:25:57,599 . Thank you chair if I 543 00:25:57,599 --> 00:26:00,990 can chime into that because I was there a lot with kids 544 00:26:00,990 --> 00:26:03,839 dancing at UNT. They did 545 00:26:03,839 --> 00:26:08,799 have a small like driveway sign off of UNT there or North 546 00:26:08,799 --> 00:26:10,480 Texas Boulevard. I 547 00:26:10,480 --> 00:26:13,549 don't I don't remember the necessarily the size it was not 548 00:26:13,549 --> 00:26:15,000 a big huge pole sign. 549 00:26:15,000 --> 00:26:21,839 Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Well I don't understand 550 00:26:21,839 --> 00:26:22,960 why they want the two pole 551 00:26:22,960 --> 00:26:25,869 signs. What would be the distance between the two? It's got 552 00:26:25,869 --> 00:26:28,200 to be a small gap. Well 553 00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:31,000 within the city of Denton you can have two ground signs 554 00:26:31,000 --> 00:26:32,119 provided that they're 555 00:26:32,119 --> 00:26:35,420 on on two different arterial roads that they meet the 556 00:26:35,420 --> 00:26:36,480 height and and those 557 00:26:36,480 --> 00:26:39,549 requirements so that that would those two pole signs would 558 00:26:39,549 --> 00:26:40,599 meet the the minimum 559 00:26:40,599 --> 00:26:44,079 sign requirements within the city of Denton. I don't know I 560 00:26:44,079 --> 00:26:44,559 don't know as far 561 00:26:44,559 --> 00:26:47,480 as what their spacing is between the two. And I understand 562 00:26:47,480 --> 00:26:48,279 that it meets that 563 00:26:48,279 --> 00:26:50,630 criteria but what purpose does it serve to have them so 564 00:26:50,630 --> 00:26:51,980 close together? I mean 565 00:26:51,980 --> 00:26:54,599 the visual it seems like they would get from the one on I- 566 00:26:54,599 --> 00:26:56,720 35. I'm not sure how 567 00:26:56,720 --> 00:27:00,799 they're served with one on North Texas Boulevard. But you 568 00:27:00,799 --> 00:27:01,400 don't know what the gap is. 569 00:27:01,400 --> 00:27:06,839 No sir. Commissioner Roselle. Julie can you walk me through 570 00:27:06,839 --> 00:27:07,559 the standards for 571 00:27:07,559 --> 00:27:10,730 monument signs is the the recommendation from staff the 572 00:27:10,730 --> 00:27:11,799 standard monument 573 00:27:11,799 --> 00:27:15,029 qualifications or is that something that was created for 574 00:27:15,029 --> 00:27:16,359 this project? It was 575 00:27:16,359 --> 00:27:19,559 created for this project if you have I believe I'll have to 576 00:27:19,559 --> 00:27:20,680 check make sure I'm 577 00:27:20,680 --> 00:27:23,400 quoting correctly but I believe a monument sign within the 578 00:27:23,400 --> 00:27:24,079 city of Denton 579 00:27:24,079 --> 00:27:27,880 does not have a maximum effective area so that it can be 580 00:27:27,880 --> 00:27:29,359 any any size if it's a 581 00:27:29,359 --> 00:27:32,160 monument sign so it goes all the way down to the ground. 582 00:27:32,160 --> 00:27:33,359 Pole signs do have a 583 00:27:33,359 --> 00:27:39,480 maximum height. And when the the 40 square feet that means 584 00:27:39,480 --> 00:27:40,720 it can what you're 585 00:27:40,720 --> 00:27:43,579 recommending it cannot take up more than a 4 by 10 or the 586 00:27:43,579 --> 00:27:45,079 sign portion the yes 587 00:27:45,079 --> 00:27:48,740 the correct face of the sign like if you're looking at it. 588 00:27:48,740 --> 00:27:49,599 Let me get my code 589 00:27:49,599 --> 00:27:53,599 and maybe I can get you a definition for it. 590 00:28:00,359 --> 00:28:04,799 I'll make sure I give you good information. 591 00:28:16,200 --> 00:28:17,750 Chair well Julie's looking that up I just wanted to clarify 592 00:28:17,750 --> 00:28:20,720 your comment 593 00:28:20,720 --> 00:28:20,720 question earlier regarding the SUP. There was no SUP 594 00:28:20,720 --> 00:28:28,079 required I guess for 595 00:28:28,079 --> 00:28:33,039 the McDonald's back prior to 2002 however this site that 596 00:28:33,039 --> 00:28:34,200 their proposal 597 00:28:34,200 --> 00:28:38,069 extends past that parcel so since they're extending onto 598 00:28:38,069 --> 00:28:39,200 another property 599 00:28:39,200 --> 00:28:45,319 we felt that the SUP would be required for this particular 600 00:28:45,319 --> 00:28:46,559 site plan. 601 00:28:46,559 --> 00:28:50,680 That answers your question. I'm gonna bite my tongue for a 602 00:28:50,680 --> 00:28:51,039 little longer 603 00:28:51,039 --> 00:28:55,000 before I respond. Okay. I'll let get to the monument sign. 604 00:28:55,000 --> 00:28:55,920 Commissioner Roselle 605 00:28:55,920 --> 00:29:01,059 effective area is the the shape or combination of regular 606 00:29:01,059 --> 00:29:02,119 shapes that will 607 00:29:02,119 --> 00:29:05,880 encompass the extreme limits of the riding representation 608 00:29:05,880 --> 00:29:06,839 emblem or other 609 00:29:06,839 --> 00:29:10,690 display. So it would be the display area wouldn't it wouldn 610 00:29:10,690 --> 00:29:11,960 't be the base of the 611 00:29:11,960 --> 00:29:16,279 structure. And then let me check. 612 00:29:23,400 --> 00:29:27,599 Monument sign effective area is there is no maximum 613 00:29:27,599 --> 00:29:29,680 effective area for monument 614 00:29:29,680 --> 00:29:31,880 sign. 615 00:29:35,880 --> 00:29:39,079 Maximum height 616 00:29:42,200 --> 00:29:46,930 would still be 20 feet from what I can tell on the sign 617 00:29:46,930 --> 00:29:49,880 code. For a monument 618 00:29:49,880 --> 00:29:54,670 sign? It doesn't give a maximum height for the monument 619 00:29:54,670 --> 00:29:55,960 sign it just gives a 620 00:29:55,960 --> 00:30:02,400 map for other primary arterials which North Texas Boulevard 621 00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:02,640 would be 622 00:30:02,640 --> 00:30:06,079 another primary primary I'm sorry it would be in all other 623 00:30:06,079 --> 00:30:06,960 streets it wouldn't 624 00:30:06,960 --> 00:30:10,670 because it's a secondary arterial. It'd be a maximum height 625 00:30:10,670 --> 00:30:12,519 of six feet all signs 626 00:30:12,519 --> 00:30:15,319 are maximum height of six feet and then the monument 627 00:30:15,319 --> 00:30:17,160 effective area would be they 628 00:30:17,160 --> 00:30:19,509 could have it as big effective area there's no there's no 629 00:30:19,509 --> 00:30:20,279 maximum for that 630 00:30:20,279 --> 00:30:23,349 for monument sign. That's because we were making it upon 631 00:30:23,349 --> 00:30:24,519 monument sign versus a 632 00:30:24,519 --> 00:30:28,480 pole sign. Yes sir. Okay. Did your questions get answered 633 00:30:28,480 --> 00:30:32,039 before I ask? They did thank you. 634 00:30:32,039 --> 00:30:36,569 I was gonna follow up on the pole sign. So in our standard 635 00:30:36,569 --> 00:30:38,640 code you can have two 636 00:30:38,640 --> 00:30:43,589 pole signs. Yes sir. Well staff is recommending that they 637 00:30:43,589 --> 00:30:44,720 only have one in 638 00:30:44,720 --> 00:30:48,079 a monument even though our code says that they can have two 639 00:30:48,079 --> 00:30:49,200 . Yes sir. And we're 640 00:30:49,200 --> 00:30:55,289 making that recommendation because? Because of the size of 641 00:30:55,289 --> 00:30:56,400 and the character 642 00:30:56,400 --> 00:31:01,119 of North Texas Boulevard. It's a less you know people don't 643 00:31:01,119 --> 00:31:01,680 travel it's 644 00:31:01,680 --> 00:31:04,480 fast down it so they have more opportunity to see a 645 00:31:04,480 --> 00:31:06,079 monument sign. You 646 00:31:06,079 --> 00:31:09,259 know I understand that the necessity of a pole sign on a 647 00:31:09,259 --> 00:31:10,759 highway because you 648 00:31:10,759 --> 00:31:12,880 need the visibility and people are traveling at a high rate 649 00:31:12,880 --> 00:31:13,759 of speed so you 650 00:31:13,759 --> 00:31:17,000 need to you need to be able to to reach your customer base. 651 00:31:17,000 --> 00:31:19,039 We felt like a 652 00:31:19,039 --> 00:31:22,240 monument sign on North Texas Boulevard was sufficient for 653 00:31:22,240 --> 00:31:23,440 them to advertise. We 654 00:31:23,440 --> 00:31:25,650 want them to be able to advertise our businesses but still 655 00:31:25,650 --> 00:31:26,440 meet the character 656 00:31:26,440 --> 00:31:30,880 of the area. I don't know their reasoning other than when 657 00:31:30,880 --> 00:31:33,440 they come to a stop sign 658 00:31:33,440 --> 00:31:37,579 on the other side of 35 to turn and go north on North Texas 659 00:31:37,579 --> 00:31:39,000 Boulevard it may be 660 00:31:39,000 --> 00:31:43,140 hard to see that if you're at a angle and with North Texas 661 00:31:43,140 --> 00:31:44,599 owning that corner 662 00:31:44,599 --> 00:31:48,119 if they decide to put a sign or screening then you may not 663 00:31:48,119 --> 00:31:48,960 even be able 664 00:31:48,960 --> 00:31:52,349 to see too much of their building and that may be why they 665 00:31:52,349 --> 00:31:53,599 want a larger sign 666 00:31:53,599 --> 00:31:57,150 there to be able to give some visibility to their site for 667 00:31:57,150 --> 00:31:58,079 people that are coming 668 00:31:58,079 --> 00:32:04,750 from west and turning and going north on there. So any 669 00:32:04,750 --> 00:32:06,519 other questions on the pole 670 00:32:06,519 --> 00:32:10,180 sign? Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. I'm just trying 671 00:32:10,180 --> 00:32:11,400 to understand that 672 00:32:11,400 --> 00:32:14,980 you said the secondary arterials there's limits of six foot 673 00:32:14,980 --> 00:32:16,200 height on monument 674 00:32:16,200 --> 00:32:21,390 signs? Well the table and our sign code doesn't really 675 00:32:21,390 --> 00:32:22,599 doesn't give a monument 676 00:32:22,599 --> 00:32:25,109 sign maximum height so I would just apply the maximum 677 00:32:25,109 --> 00:32:27,000 height. It does give 678 00:32:27,000 --> 00:32:30,069 the monument sign effective area it doesn't they can have a 679 00:32:30,069 --> 00:32:30,920 monument sign as 680 00:32:30,920 --> 00:32:35,220 large as they would like in terms of effective area. Okay 681 00:32:35,220 --> 00:32:36,559 and so but then the 682 00:32:36,559 --> 00:32:38,750 other that's and this is the other streets category all 683 00:32:38,750 --> 00:32:39,400 other streets 684 00:32:39,400 --> 00:32:42,470 category or something like that what did you what did you 685 00:32:42,470 --> 00:32:44,079 call it? Well there are 686 00:32:44,079 --> 00:32:46,910 there are other primary arterials and then all other 687 00:32:46,910 --> 00:32:48,319 streets. And so in all 688 00:32:48,319 --> 00:32:53,789 other streets they allow a 20-foot pole sign? Yes. No they 689 00:32:53,789 --> 00:32:55,359 would allow a six foot 690 00:32:55,359 --> 00:32:58,799 pole sign. Okay. They would still need to keep it they 691 00:32:58,799 --> 00:33:00,079 would still need to at a 692 00:33:00,079 --> 00:33:04,380 minimum they would need to meet the sign code so. So the 693 00:33:04,380 --> 00:33:05,960 biggest thing they could 694 00:33:05,960 --> 00:33:10,059 have there is a six foot pole sign with a maximum effective 695 00:33:10,059 --> 00:33:11,200 area of how big? 696 00:33:11,200 --> 00:33:16,529 Six foot or a 20 foot? It's a pole sign not a monument sign 697 00:33:16,529 --> 00:33:18,200 . Yeah there's no 698 00:33:18,200 --> 00:33:20,920 there's no height limit on monument but there's a six foot 699 00:33:20,920 --> 00:33:21,920 height limit on pole 700 00:33:21,920 --> 00:33:34,230 signs. I thought they were wanting a 20 foot pole sign and 701 00:33:34,230 --> 00:33:35,839 a 40 foot pole sign on 702 00:33:35,839 --> 00:33:40,650 the interstate and we were not gonna recommend a pole sign 703 00:33:40,650 --> 00:33:41,680 on North Texas 704 00:33:41,680 --> 00:33:45,200 the requirement for a monument the maximum height was six 705 00:33:45,200 --> 00:33:46,759 foot. Maybe I 706 00:33:46,759 --> 00:33:51,740 misheard the explanation but I thought that was where we 707 00:33:51,740 --> 00:33:53,119 were. If I can try to 708 00:33:53,119 --> 00:33:56,319 clear it up. We can I want to clear it up and do in 709 00:33:56,319 --> 00:33:58,160 presentation in public that's 710 00:33:58,160 --> 00:34:00,960 fine. We can yeah we can pull up the chart that's in our 711 00:34:00,960 --> 00:34:03,640 municipal code and 712 00:34:03,640 --> 00:34:08,119 share that with the Commission during the public hearing 713 00:34:08,119 --> 00:34:09,920 and present it that way. 714 00:34:09,920 --> 00:34:14,440 Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you Chair. Are there any other 715 00:34:14,440 --> 00:34:16,320 signs in the area I 716 00:34:16,320 --> 00:34:21,119 mean I know there's anjo's and other places other 717 00:34:21,119 --> 00:34:22,599 businesses in the area are 718 00:34:22,599 --> 00:34:27,769 there other signs that are not monument signs on Avenue C 719 00:34:27,769 --> 00:34:29,599 for example or any 720 00:34:29,599 --> 00:34:32,840 other place in that area? We didn't really do a study on on 721 00:34:32,840 --> 00:34:33,679 existing signs 722 00:34:33,679 --> 00:34:37,340 we really just looked at this at this specific side and as 723 00:34:37,340 --> 00:34:38,880 it redevelops the 724 00:34:38,880 --> 00:34:43,440 type of signage that we that you know we think would be 725 00:34:43,440 --> 00:34:44,280 appropriate on North 726 00:34:44,280 --> 00:34:50,059 Texas Boulevard. Okay thank you. Sure. Anybody else 727 00:34:50,059 --> 00:34:52,400 questions? I'm gonna come 728 00:34:52,400 --> 00:34:58,119 back to this UP then. I'm gonna go back several years 729 00:34:58,119 --> 00:34:59,280 Commissioner Taylor would 730 00:34:59,280 --> 00:35:02,000 probably remember this he and I guess are the two old-tim 731 00:35:02,000 --> 00:35:03,760 ers here. There was a lot 732 00:35:03,760 --> 00:35:09,119 of discussion years ago about when I-35 was going to be 733 00:35:09,119 --> 00:35:10,519 improved and we knew all 734 00:35:10,519 --> 00:35:13,590 these things were going to happen that they were going to 735 00:35:13,590 --> 00:35:14,760 be some concessions 736 00:35:14,760 --> 00:35:18,639 made for existing properties along I-35 and their 737 00:35:18,639 --> 00:35:20,639 businesses were affected as to 738 00:35:20,639 --> 00:35:24,010 how we were going to work with them and there were going to 739 00:35:24,010 --> 00:35:25,039 be things that were 740 00:35:25,039 --> 00:35:27,530 going to be non-conforming and issues that were going to 741 00:35:27,530 --> 00:35:28,320 come up and this 742 00:35:28,320 --> 00:35:32,969 seems like a prime example of that to me. It is and and we 743 00:35:32,969 --> 00:35:34,360 looked at this 744 00:35:34,360 --> 00:35:39,400 because the McDonald's fell under the Denton Development 745 00:35:39,400 --> 00:35:40,360 Code has a provision 746 00:35:40,360 --> 00:35:43,429 called special exception and because the McDonald's was 747 00:35:43,429 --> 00:35:44,440 developed under a 748 00:35:44,440 --> 00:35:48,099 previous code it it was considered a special exception much 749 00:35:48,099 --> 00:35:49,679 like for that I-35 750 00:35:49,679 --> 00:35:52,969 redevelopment of the corridor. Where the difference is on 751 00:35:52,969 --> 00:35:54,480 this side is they have 752 00:35:54,480 --> 00:35:59,940 to they're expanding to the IHOP lot and in order to... Can 753 00:35:59,940 --> 00:36:02,480 I pause there? Sure. The only reason 754 00:36:02,480 --> 00:36:05,550 they're doing that is because their business got taken out 755 00:36:05,550 --> 00:36:06,559 by I-35 in the 756 00:36:06,559 --> 00:36:09,980 first place. Correct. Is that correct? But the code, yes 757 00:36:09,980 --> 00:36:11,360 you are correct, but the code 758 00:36:11,360 --> 00:36:15,369 says that... Otherwise they'd still we could still be going 759 00:36:15,369 --> 00:36:15,920 through there and 760 00:36:15,920 --> 00:36:19,269 getting McDonald's right now. They wouldn't wouldn't be 761 00:36:19,269 --> 00:36:21,199 doing this. But the 762 00:36:21,199 --> 00:36:24,630 code in sub chapter 11 the code says a land use under the 763 00:36:24,630 --> 00:36:25,960 special exceptions a 764 00:36:25,960 --> 00:36:29,579 land use may expand within the same lot expansion of a 765 00:36:29,579 --> 00:36:31,199 special exception to an 766 00:36:31,199 --> 00:36:34,809 adjoining lot will require approval of the City Council 767 00:36:34,809 --> 00:36:36,059 using the zoning of 768 00:36:36,059 --> 00:36:39,940 members procedure. So we talked about it we talked about it 769 00:36:39,940 --> 00:36:41,000 in the planning 770 00:36:41,000 --> 00:36:44,789 division and they were going to have to either do an SUP or 771 00:36:44,789 --> 00:36:46,000 do a zoning amendment 772 00:36:46,000 --> 00:36:50,030 procedure to expand the special exception. So we felt like 773 00:36:50,030 --> 00:36:50,800 the SUP was 774 00:36:50,800 --> 00:36:54,119 the way to go. We have criteria for approval. We we can 775 00:36:54,119 --> 00:36:55,000 look at the site plan. 776 00:36:55,000 --> 00:36:58,230 They would have had to follow the same process regardless 777 00:36:58,230 --> 00:36:59,320 of whether they had 778 00:36:59,320 --> 00:37:01,869 expanded their special exception or whether they went 779 00:37:01,869 --> 00:37:05,159 forward with the SUP. 780 00:37:06,559 --> 00:37:09,630 Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you Chair. Is it beyond the 781 00:37:09,630 --> 00:37:11,440 realm of possibility to go 782 00:37:11,440 --> 00:37:14,610 back and see what they were approved for to begin with and 783 00:37:14,610 --> 00:37:15,780 since it's the same 784 00:37:15,780 --> 00:37:20,170 business in basically the same position same place and just 785 00:37:20,170 --> 00:37:21,559 let them have what 786 00:37:21,559 --> 00:37:25,309 they had to begin with? We couldn't do that because of the 787 00:37:25,309 --> 00:37:26,599 expansion onto the 788 00:37:26,599 --> 00:37:31,599 IHOP lot. That's really what triggered this whole process. 789 00:37:31,599 --> 00:37:33,519 I mean I understand that 790 00:37:33,519 --> 00:37:37,280 that's sort of the legal issue but reality is if they were 791 00:37:37,280 --> 00:37:38,800 there before they 792 00:37:38,800 --> 00:37:41,429 enjoyed being there they enjoyed it so much made so much 793 00:37:41,429 --> 00:37:42,440 money they want to go 794 00:37:42,440 --> 00:37:46,869 back because of all the students that live to the northeast 795 00:37:46,869 --> 00:37:47,840 of them and that's 796 00:37:47,840 --> 00:37:50,639 where they get their business not coming down to North 797 00:37:50,639 --> 00:37:52,400 Texas necessarily but 798 00:37:52,400 --> 00:37:57,119 whatever sign they had there that was approved before just 799 00:37:57,119 --> 00:37:58,000 let it put the same 800 00:37:58,000 --> 00:38:01,329 kind of sign. Oh in terms of the sign. Oh yeah we could go 801 00:38:01,329 --> 00:38:03,079 back and do the research on the sign 802 00:38:03,079 --> 00:38:07,789 I don't know if we could permit what was approved at that 803 00:38:07,789 --> 00:38:09,239 time because the 804 00:38:09,239 --> 00:38:14,219 sign code may have changed but the problem is is that it's 805 00:38:14,219 --> 00:38:16,119 destroyed now so 806 00:38:16,119 --> 00:38:21,840 it's a rebuild and that means that it's not non-conforming 807 00:38:21,840 --> 00:38:23,099 at the time that the 808 00:38:23,099 --> 00:38:28,539 DDC was adopted in 2002 it had a different zoning than what 809 00:38:28,539 --> 00:38:29,360 was given to 810 00:38:29,360 --> 00:38:34,619 it in 2002 and before that is when the sign was created so 811 00:38:34,619 --> 00:38:36,199 it lost any kind of 812 00:38:36,199 --> 00:38:38,500 non-conforming rights it became one of those special 813 00:38:38,500 --> 00:38:39,599 exceptions that aren't 814 00:38:39,599 --> 00:38:43,079 typical zoning special exceptions but it was our own 815 00:38:43,079 --> 00:38:44,880 creation where they're able 816 00:38:44,880 --> 00:38:49,530 to maintain those rights they really are but because they 817 00:38:49,530 --> 00:38:51,039 expanded when you 818 00:38:51,039 --> 00:38:53,829 expand a special exception our code requires us to go 819 00:38:53,829 --> 00:38:54,679 through a certain 820 00:38:54,679 --> 00:38:57,849 procedure like Julie said and it would go to counsel in 821 00:38:57,849 --> 00:38:59,000 order to make that 822 00:38:59,000 --> 00:39:02,250 determination so I believe the applicant is the one didn't 823 00:39:02,250 --> 00:39:03,559 they decide that 824 00:39:03,559 --> 00:39:08,039 they'd rather do the SUP procedure so yes they do have they 825 00:39:08,039 --> 00:39:09,559 have the ability to 826 00:39:09,559 --> 00:39:13,440 put the driveway back but because they're expanding it onto 827 00:39:13,440 --> 00:39:13,960 another lot 828 00:39:13,960 --> 00:39:18,469 the code actually requires them to go under this procedure 829 00:39:18,469 --> 00:39:19,639 in order to get 830 00:39:19,639 --> 00:39:22,110 permission to do that in order to expand their special 831 00:39:22,110 --> 00:39:24,280 exception over so we were 832 00:39:24,280 --> 00:39:28,250 a little bit put into a difficult spot because of that code 833 00:39:28,250 --> 00:39:30,079 provision well even 834 00:39:30,079 --> 00:39:33,179 with the staff recommendation center you have a monument 835 00:39:33,179 --> 00:39:34,260 size sign of a certain 836 00:39:34,260 --> 00:39:37,500 size can you go back and say look this is what you had to 837 00:39:37,500 --> 00:39:38,320 begin with so will 838 00:39:38,320 --> 00:39:40,739 allow you to have the same thing if they're not gonna have 839 00:39:40,739 --> 00:39:41,440 two pole signs 840 00:39:41,440 --> 00:39:45,280 which is allowed instead you're gonna recommend that they 841 00:39:45,280 --> 00:39:47,119 have a second sign 842 00:39:47,119 --> 00:39:50,989 that's a different size and shape why not just offer them 843 00:39:50,989 --> 00:39:52,199 the same size and 844 00:39:52,199 --> 00:39:56,880 shape that they had to begin with I don't know what they 845 00:39:56,880 --> 00:39:57,800 had to begin with 846 00:39:57,800 --> 00:39:59,889 so that's why I'm asking maybe this is a bigger side that y 847 00:39:59,889 --> 00:40:00,800 'all are recommending 848 00:40:00,800 --> 00:40:03,360 I don't know and I don't know what was there before it wasn 849 00:40:03,360 --> 00:40:04,280 't something that 850 00:40:04,280 --> 00:40:08,619 they asked there was no pole sign there there was no pole 851 00:40:08,619 --> 00:40:10,960 sign there yeah so 852 00:40:10,960 --> 00:40:15,039 they're getting basically what they had before yeah 853 00:40:15,039 --> 00:40:16,880 Commissioner back thank you 854 00:40:16,880 --> 00:40:21,349 chair just a question for the staff here I'm usually don't 855 00:40:21,349 --> 00:40:21,880 have a problem with 856 00:40:21,880 --> 00:40:25,980 the SUP says but I agree with the chair in this case is 857 00:40:25,980 --> 00:40:27,559 this in this particular 858 00:40:27,559 --> 00:40:34,489 case this SUP is a technical thing is there any way the 859 00:40:34,489 --> 00:40:35,679 administrator could 860 00:40:35,679 --> 00:40:39,269 make a call on this or do we have to go is there a leeway 861 00:40:39,269 --> 00:40:40,440 for the administrator 862 00:40:40,440 --> 00:40:43,150 to make a specific call on this rather than go through the 863 00:40:43,150 --> 00:40:45,039 SUP process well if 864 00:40:45,039 --> 00:40:48,940 it was a normal case then and it required an SAP of course 865 00:40:48,940 --> 00:40:49,880 you have to go 866 00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:53,099 through the SUP process but if there was room for a sign 867 00:40:53,099 --> 00:40:54,559 variance they could do 868 00:40:54,559 --> 00:41:00,800 that not referring to the sign now just strictly SUP no no 869 00:41:00,800 --> 00:41:03,440 no okay well I'm 870 00:41:03,440 --> 00:41:06,679 gonna thank you for that I'm gonna follow up my guess and 871 00:41:06,679 --> 00:41:07,719 looking at the 872 00:41:07,719 --> 00:41:10,429 site plan is the reason that they've expanded to the north 873 00:41:10,429 --> 00:41:11,119 is for parking 874 00:41:11,119 --> 00:41:15,429 requirements because they lost as I recall they had a lot 875 00:41:15,429 --> 00:41:16,679 of parking over 876 00:41:16,679 --> 00:41:21,269 there long on the East property line and so they probably 877 00:41:21,269 --> 00:41:23,039 are meeting our code 878 00:41:23,039 --> 00:41:27,489 now having to expand to get the additional parking so it's 879 00:41:27,489 --> 00:41:28,039 kind of 880 00:41:28,039 --> 00:41:30,929 they're in a box wherever they try to go and push we make 881 00:41:30,929 --> 00:41:32,039 them do something else 882 00:41:32,039 --> 00:41:36,800 and now we're another requirement they were I guess willing 883 00:41:36,800 --> 00:41:38,199 to go with an SUP 884 00:41:38,199 --> 00:41:41,679 and now we have this nice letter that popped up last night 885 00:41:41,679 --> 00:41:43,480 by their neighbor 886 00:41:43,480 --> 00:41:48,500 who's gonna throw them into supermajority vote which I don 887 00:41:48,500 --> 00:41:49,000 't know 888 00:41:49,000 --> 00:41:54,559 where that ends up going that's beyond us here tonight but 889 00:41:54,559 --> 00:41:56,139 I've enjoyed the 890 00:41:56,139 --> 00:41:59,440 discussion I'm discouraged or disappointed that this is the 891 00:41:59,440 --> 00:41:59,800 place 892 00:41:59,800 --> 00:42:02,869 that they are and trying to go back and do their business 893 00:42:02,869 --> 00:42:03,559 right back where they 894 00:42:03,559 --> 00:42:07,150 were and I don't know where it goes with the vote on the 895 00:42:07,150 --> 00:42:08,199 supermajority on getting 896 00:42:08,199 --> 00:42:12,340 SUP but it seems like it's a lot that they've had to go 897 00:42:12,340 --> 00:42:13,840 through to try to 898 00:42:13,840 --> 00:42:18,150 rebuild a business that they didn't want to have to do in 899 00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:20,639 the first place so is 900 00:42:20,639 --> 00:42:23,710 there any other questions for staff on this we've spent 901 00:42:23,710 --> 00:42:25,039 probably more time than 902 00:42:25,039 --> 00:42:27,829 we were allotted on this but I think it was an important 903 00:42:27,829 --> 00:42:29,960 and good discussion 904 00:42:29,960 --> 00:42:34,920 anybody else questions for Julie thank you great job 905 00:42:34,920 --> 00:42:37,679 presentation thank you 906 00:42:39,039 --> 00:42:47,070 yes we can have Haley present the last public human item 907 00:42:47,070 --> 00:42:50,159 for the Commission 908 00:42:57,920 --> 00:42:58,610 good evening I'm Haley Zagorski with the Planning 909 00:42:58,610 --> 00:43:02,599 Department this is case s 16 910 00:43:02,599 --> 00:43:06,739 7 for the Riney Road Apartments so this request is to hold 911 00:43:06,739 --> 00:43:08,280 a public hearing and 912 00:43:08,280 --> 00:43:11,440 consider a request for a specific use permit to allow for a 913 00:43:11,440 --> 00:43:12,719 multifamily use on 914 00:43:12,719 --> 00:43:16,440 a property that's approximately 0.9 acres as you can see 915 00:43:16,440 --> 00:43:17,400 here the property 916 00:43:17,400 --> 00:43:21,710 is outlined in yellow and it has frontage on Riney Court R 917 00:43:21,710 --> 00:43:22,519 iney Road and 918 00:43:22,519 --> 00:43:26,639 North Elm Street so it's kind of a unique configuration I 919 00:43:26,639 --> 00:43:27,840 'll start by 920 00:43:27,840 --> 00:43:31,849 walking you through their site plan what they're proposing 921 00:43:31,849 --> 00:43:32,960 is a 10 unit 922 00:43:32,960 --> 00:43:35,679 apartment complex total so it would feature two buildings 923 00:43:35,679 --> 00:43:36,400 you can see them 924 00:43:36,400 --> 00:43:39,239 outlined on the screen in yellow each of these buildings 925 00:43:39,239 --> 00:43:40,280 would feature five 926 00:43:40,280 --> 00:43:43,360 apartment units the proposal is for all of those to be 927 00:43:43,360 --> 00:43:44,360 three-bedroom two and a 928 00:43:44,360 --> 00:43:48,719 half bathrooms and they're kind of uniquely designed and 929 00:43:48,719 --> 00:43:49,119 that they're more 930 00:43:49,119 --> 00:43:53,139 like individual townhomes each unit would have a rear yard 931 00:43:53,139 --> 00:43:54,079 that would be 932 00:43:54,079 --> 00:43:56,550 fenced in with a wrought-iron fence and you can see 933 00:43:56,550 --> 00:43:57,920 outlined in green the area 934 00:43:57,920 --> 00:44:00,750 that would be devoted to the rear yards for each of these 935 00:44:00,750 --> 00:44:01,800 the property would 936 00:44:01,800 --> 00:44:04,510 also feature a storage building that's outlined in red and 937 00:44:04,510 --> 00:44:05,360 this would be just 938 00:44:05,360 --> 00:44:08,429 to provide extra storage for each unit it's designed to 939 00:44:08,429 --> 00:44:09,480 have one exterior 940 00:44:09,480 --> 00:44:12,550 entrance into a hallway that would have then 10 separate 941 00:44:12,550 --> 00:44:14,280 rooms off of it the 942 00:44:14,280 --> 00:44:17,389 site would also feature 23 parking spaces the code 943 00:44:17,389 --> 00:44:18,800 requirement for a 944 00:44:18,800 --> 00:44:21,190 three-bed for three-bedroom apartments would get them to 20 945 00:44:21,190 --> 00:44:22,480 spaces so the three 946 00:44:22,480 --> 00:44:26,699 additional spaces that they're proposing would be pervious 947 00:44:26,699 --> 00:44:27,239 pavers 948 00:44:27,599 --> 00:44:31,460 looking at the landscape plan you can see that the property 949 00:44:31,460 --> 00:44:32,559 would meet the 950 00:44:32,559 --> 00:44:36,409 intent of the DDC in terms of providing street trees they 951 00:44:36,409 --> 00:44:37,519 're also preserving 952 00:44:37,519 --> 00:44:40,650 existing trees in this area shown in green those trees are 953 00:44:40,650 --> 00:44:41,519 pretty much the 954 00:44:41,519 --> 00:44:43,429 only trees that are on the site today and their intent is 955 00:44:43,429 --> 00:44:44,159 to preserve all of 956 00:44:44,159 --> 00:44:47,670 those along Rainy Court the site it was also required to 957 00:44:47,670 --> 00:44:49,199 provide a type B buffer 958 00:44:49,199 --> 00:44:52,269 because there is a single-family residence adjoining the 959 00:44:52,269 --> 00:44:52,880 property so 960 00:44:52,880 --> 00:44:56,389 they're providing the required ratio of five trees and 30 961 00:44:56,389 --> 00:44:57,960 shrubs per 100 linear 962 00:44:57,960 --> 00:45:00,849 feet in addition to the required plantings they're also 963 00:45:00,849 --> 00:45:01,360 proposing an 964 00:45:01,360 --> 00:45:03,909 eight-foot tall cedar fence to provide an additional buffer 965 00:45:03,909 --> 00:45:04,559 there for that 966 00:45:04,559 --> 00:45:08,429 single-family residence one of the other key landscape 967 00:45:08,429 --> 00:45:10,280 features is here at the 968 00:45:10,280 --> 00:45:12,860 front of the property outlined in yellow they have an area 969 00:45:12,860 --> 00:45:14,400 that would be a patio 970 00:45:14,400 --> 00:45:17,469 open space for the residents that is well landscaped and 971 00:45:17,469 --> 00:45:18,519 there would also be 972 00:45:18,519 --> 00:45:22,639 a monument sign with the apartment complex name located 973 00:45:22,639 --> 00:45:23,760 here along the 974 00:45:23,760 --> 00:45:27,519 front of that area overall the property meets the landscape 975 00:45:27,519 --> 00:45:28,199 requirements of the 976 00:45:28,199 --> 00:45:31,400 development code it exceeds the 40% landscaping that's 977 00:45:31,400 --> 00:45:32,400 required there at 978 00:45:32,400 --> 00:45:37,960 approximately 48% overall looking at the proposed building 979 00:45:37,960 --> 00:45:39,000 elevations this is 980 00:45:39,000 --> 00:45:41,289 building one which is the building located on the southern 981 00:45:41,289 --> 00:45:41,719 side of the 982 00:45:41,719 --> 00:45:45,400 property you can see it's a two-story building each of the 983 00:45:45,400 --> 00:45:47,320 units has a their 984 00:45:47,320 --> 00:45:51,039 own exterior front entry and rear exit into their backyard 985 00:45:51,039 --> 00:45:52,480 you'll notice the 986 00:45:52,480 --> 00:45:54,619 front doors aren't visible on here they are kind of to the 987 00:45:54,619 --> 00:45:55,719 side in little alcoves 988 00:45:55,719 --> 00:45:58,670 so there's no front door strictly visible in the front of 989 00:45:58,670 --> 00:46:00,340 the building so 990 00:46:00,340 --> 00:46:02,630 this building would be five units and it would be composed 991 00:46:02,630 --> 00:46:03,519 of brick and stucco 992 00:46:03,519 --> 00:46:08,800 materials building two on the north side of the property 993 00:46:08,800 --> 00:46:10,119 fairly similar again 994 00:46:10,119 --> 00:46:13,880 two-story design with each unit having its own exterior 995 00:46:13,880 --> 00:46:15,239 front and rear exit 996 00:46:15,239 --> 00:46:20,260 again brick and stucco materials and just so you know this 997 00:46:20,260 --> 00:46:21,800 is the design for 998 00:46:21,800 --> 00:46:24,590 their storage building so it's just a little over 700 999 00:46:24,590 --> 00:46:25,800 square feet as I 1000 00:46:25,800 --> 00:46:28,590 mentioned it does just have one exterior entry so it doesn 1001 00:46:28,590 --> 00:46:29,559 't have ten separate 1002 00:46:29,559 --> 00:46:32,360 entrances on the outside they're accessed by this interior 1003 00:46:32,360 --> 00:46:33,599 hallway and it 1004 00:46:33,599 --> 00:46:39,480 is intended to be a brick construction as well so our SUP 1005 00:46:39,480 --> 00:46:40,480 criteria are outlined 1006 00:46:40,480 --> 00:46:43,670 in subchapter 6 of the Denton development code there's many 1007 00:46:43,670 --> 00:46:44,280 criteria 1008 00:46:44,280 --> 00:46:46,650 there in summary that they ensure that we provide 1009 00:46:46,650 --> 00:46:48,159 consistency with the zoning 1010 00:46:48,159 --> 00:46:50,960 regulations conformity with the goals of our Denton plan 1011 00:46:50,960 --> 00:46:52,760 2030 and consistency 1012 00:46:52,760 --> 00:46:55,230 with surrounding development in terms of access nuisance 1013 00:46:55,230 --> 00:46:56,360 prevention and the scale 1014 00:46:56,360 --> 00:46:59,519 of development so now we'll go through each of those 1015 00:46:59,519 --> 00:47:01,039 criteria briefly this 1016 00:47:01,039 --> 00:47:04,760 property is zoned neighborhood residential mixed-use 12 so 1017 00:47:04,760 --> 00:47:05,760 this zoning 1018 00:47:05,760 --> 00:47:08,070 designation allows for many types of residential 1019 00:47:08,070 --> 00:47:09,539 development single-family 1020 00:47:09,539 --> 00:47:12,610 duplex and townhomes are all permitted by right multifamily 1021 00:47:12,610 --> 00:47:14,159 does require has a 1022 00:47:14,159 --> 00:47:16,949 limitation that requires it either be approved through an 1023 00:47:16,949 --> 00:47:17,800 SUP or as part of a 1024 00:47:17,800 --> 00:47:22,219 mixed-use development or a small area plan so just some 1025 00:47:22,219 --> 00:47:24,280 brief outline of the 1026 00:47:24,280 --> 00:47:27,349 NRMU 12 regulations they do meet their minimum lot size the 1027 00:47:27,349 --> 00:47:28,559 maximum density for 1028 00:47:28,559 --> 00:47:31,849 the property is 12 units per acre so at 10 units they come 1029 00:47:31,849 --> 00:47:33,000 in under that density 1030 00:47:33,000 --> 00:47:37,679 maximum they are allowed a maximum of 60% lot coverage with 1031 00:47:37,679 --> 00:47:38,800 40% landscaping 1032 00:47:38,800 --> 00:47:43,750 and their buildings maximum height would be 40 feet looking 1033 00:47:43,750 --> 00:47:44,800 at what's within 1034 00:47:44,800 --> 00:47:47,920 about 200 feet of the subject property we have a mixture of 1035 00:47:47,920 --> 00:47:49,400 NRMU 12 district and 1036 00:47:49,400 --> 00:47:53,110 neighborhood residential to within the NR 2 district to the 1037 00:47:53,110 --> 00:47:53,880 north and to the 1038 00:47:53,880 --> 00:47:57,369 southwest of the property are single-family homes within 1039 00:47:57,369 --> 00:47:58,320 the NRMU 12 1040 00:47:58,320 --> 00:48:01,389 district we have the subject property here which is vacant 1041 00:48:01,389 --> 00:48:02,000 some other 1042 00:48:02,000 --> 00:48:05,619 undeveloped property to the east across rhynie road and 1043 00:48:05,619 --> 00:48:06,880 then this area to the 1044 00:48:06,880 --> 00:48:11,880 south and west is all a North Lakes Park. Zooming out a 1045 00:48:11,880 --> 00:48:13,280 little bit more you see 1046 00:48:13,280 --> 00:48:16,349 continuation across Elm Street we get start to get a little 1047 00:48:16,349 --> 00:48:17,440 bit higher density 1048 00:48:17,440 --> 00:48:21,150 here with some duplexes a continuation North Lakes Park 1049 00:48:21,150 --> 00:48:22,199 here you can see better 1050 00:48:22,199 --> 00:48:25,000 to the south now the animal shelter is just further to the 1051 00:48:25,000 --> 00:48:27,360 northwest there and 1052 00:48:27,360 --> 00:48:30,900 then zooming out to give you a better idea of where this is 1053 00:48:30,900 --> 00:48:31,960 at and this part 1054 00:48:31,960 --> 00:48:34,679 of town we have UNT's Discovery Park here just north of 1055 00:48:34,679 --> 00:48:35,519 there along Elm 1056 00:48:35,519 --> 00:48:39,489 Street again North Lakes Park as much of this area we've 1057 00:48:39,489 --> 00:48:41,519 recently seen an SUP 1058 00:48:41,519 --> 00:48:44,400 request for apartments up here on this parcel and then you 1059 00:48:44,400 --> 00:48:45,119 can see just a 1060 00:48:45,119 --> 00:48:48,190 mixture of residential type developments here single-family 1061 00:48:48,190 --> 00:48:49,039 duplexes and 1062 00:48:49,039 --> 00:48:54,039 apartments in this area. Looking at the future land use map 1063 00:48:54,039 --> 00:48:55,239 this property kind 1064 00:48:55,239 --> 00:48:58,090 of splits between the neighborhood mixed use and moderate 1065 00:48:58,090 --> 00:48:59,519 residential future land 1066 00:48:59,519 --> 00:49:01,539 use designations it's right there on the buffer zone 1067 00:49:01,539 --> 00:49:02,679 between those two districts 1068 00:49:02,679 --> 00:49:05,760 the use of the property that they're proposing does fit 1069 00:49:05,760 --> 00:49:06,760 within each of these 1070 00:49:06,760 --> 00:49:09,869 neighborhood mixed use is intended for residents 1071 00:49:09,869 --> 00:49:11,480 residential areas with a 1072 00:49:11,480 --> 00:49:14,280 mixture of housing types along with supporting retail and 1073 00:49:14,280 --> 00:49:15,119 service uses and 1074 00:49:15,119 --> 00:49:19,880 then moderate residential promotes protection of existing 1075 00:49:19,880 --> 00:49:23,079 neighborhoods as well as development of residential uses 1076 00:49:23,079 --> 00:49:24,360 between 4 and 12 1077 00:49:24,360 --> 00:49:26,750 dwelling units per acre so this fits comfortably within 1078 00:49:26,750 --> 00:49:27,699 that designation as 1079 00:49:27,699 --> 00:49:32,110 well. To give you an idea of the mobility plan in this area 1080 00:49:32,110 --> 00:49:33,159 Elm Street is a 1081 00:49:33,159 --> 00:49:36,710 text dot roadway that's a primary arterial. Riney Road is a 1082 00:49:36,710 --> 00:49:37,480 collector 1083 00:49:37,480 --> 00:49:40,360 street and then Riney Court is just a neighborhood street. 1084 00:49:40,360 --> 00:49:41,880 There are some bus 1085 00:49:41,880 --> 00:49:43,909 routes that run along North Elm Street that would provide 1086 00:49:43,909 --> 00:49:44,639 other means of access 1087 00:49:44,639 --> 00:49:49,760 to the property. Just to give you an idea of what the 1088 00:49:49,760 --> 00:49:51,039 property looks like today as 1089 00:49:51,039 --> 00:49:53,840 I mentioned it's primarily vacant you can't see there is 1090 00:49:53,840 --> 00:49:55,000 some well there are 1091 00:49:55,000 --> 00:49:59,010 well-established trees here along Riney Court. So 1092 00:49:59,010 --> 00:50:01,239 notifications were sent about 1093 00:50:01,239 --> 00:50:04,320 this we received four opposition responses that were all 1094 00:50:04,320 --> 00:50:04,840 included in your 1095 00:50:04,840 --> 00:50:08,340 backup the when you look at the total land area within 200 1096 00:50:08,340 --> 00:50:09,039 feet they were at 1097 00:50:09,039 --> 00:50:12,519 about 33% of that land area in opposition so that would 1098 00:50:12,519 --> 00:50:13,000 also trigger 1099 00:50:13,000 --> 00:50:15,389 that super majority vote that we spoke about at City 1100 00:50:15,389 --> 00:50:17,519 Council. The applicant did 1101 00:50:17,519 --> 00:50:19,849 hold a neighborhood meeting back in May there were 1102 00:50:19,849 --> 00:50:21,440 approximately 11 people in 1103 00:50:21,440 --> 00:50:24,150 attendance at that meeting and believe many of those are 1104 00:50:24,150 --> 00:50:24,760 the ones that 1105 00:50:24,760 --> 00:50:30,019 submitted the opposition notices you have before you. Given 1106 00:50:30,019 --> 00:50:31,079 all the criteria 1107 00:50:31,079 --> 00:50:33,880 we looked at in the mixed-use nature of this area staff is 1108 00:50:33,880 --> 00:50:34,840 recommending approval 1109 00:50:34,840 --> 00:50:37,909 of the request it's generally compatible with the 1110 00:50:37,909 --> 00:50:39,039 surrounding development in this 1111 00:50:39,039 --> 00:50:41,329 area it's consistent with the goals and objectives of the 1112 00:50:41,329 --> 00:50:42,800 Denton plan 2030 and 1113 00:50:42,800 --> 00:50:46,639 we are recommending one criteria that they substantially 1114 00:50:46,639 --> 00:50:47,920 comply with the site 1115 00:50:47,920 --> 00:50:50,000 plan landscape plan and building elevations that were 1116 00:50:50,000 --> 00:50:50,760 attached with the 1117 00:50:50,760 --> 00:50:55,059 SUP request and with that I can stand for any questions. 1118 00:50:55,059 --> 00:50:56,039 Commissioner Ellis. 1119 00:50:56,039 --> 00:50:59,599 Thank you chair. Hey Haley I noticed in one of the 1120 00:50:59,599 --> 00:51:01,920 responses they mentioned that 1121 00:51:01,920 --> 00:51:06,039 there is a current drainage problem there do we know it is 1122 00:51:06,039 --> 00:51:08,639 there one? And what 1123 00:51:08,639 --> 00:51:12,949 is the do we know the problem? As I heard expressed there's 1124 00:51:12,949 --> 00:51:14,000 a concern with some 1125 00:51:14,000 --> 00:51:16,349 flooding along Riney Court I believe and with the one 1126 00:51:16,349 --> 00:51:17,559 quarter of this property 1127 00:51:17,559 --> 00:51:20,170 that stays kind of marshy in the wet season when I was out 1128 00:51:20,170 --> 00:51:21,039 there it hadn't 1129 00:51:21,039 --> 00:51:24,130 rained in a while so I didn't observe the problem directly 1130 00:51:24,130 --> 00:51:25,079 but I know when they 1131 00:51:25,079 --> 00:51:27,880 get to the site plan process their drainage will be 1132 00:51:27,880 --> 00:51:29,039 analyzed in terms of 1133 00:51:29,039 --> 00:51:31,610 existing conditions and their developed conditions to 1134 00:51:31,610 --> 00:51:32,679 ensure that there's no 1135 00:51:32,679 --> 00:51:39,250 negative impact to adjoining properties. Commissioner Rose 1136 00:51:39,250 --> 00:51:41,400 lle. Thank you chair. I 1137 00:51:41,400 --> 00:51:47,800 want to talk or try to figure out the differences between a 1138 00:51:47,800 --> 00:51:49,119 duplex townhome 1139 00:51:49,119 --> 00:51:55,489 and multifamily especially if a multifamily is five units. 1140 00:51:55,489 --> 00:51:56,239 So I have a 1141 00:51:56,239 --> 00:52:01,570 couple questions. By right could someone build four duplex 1142 00:52:01,570 --> 00:52:03,320 es on this for eight 1143 00:52:03,320 --> 00:52:06,610 units? If there were to be duplexes they would have to be 1144 00:52:06,610 --> 00:52:07,400 subdivided into at 1145 00:52:07,400 --> 00:52:11,260 least four separate lots with one duplex per lot. I believe 1146 00:52:11,260 --> 00:52:12,239 the applicant 1147 00:52:12,239 --> 00:52:14,480 considered some other residential options but given that 1148 00:52:14,480 --> 00:52:14,800 unique 1149 00:52:14,800 --> 00:52:17,510 configuration it's kind of triangular there with three 1150 00:52:17,510 --> 00:52:18,559 frontages they found 1151 00:52:18,559 --> 00:52:21,349 challenges and figuring out how to subdivide the property. 1152 00:52:21,349 --> 00:52:21,800 Is that the same 1153 00:52:21,800 --> 00:52:25,280 with townhomes? Those are each different plots? Yes so if 1154 00:52:25,280 --> 00:52:26,559 it's anything three 1155 00:52:26,559 --> 00:52:29,079 between three and eight units and they're all on their own 1156 00:52:29,079 --> 00:52:30,039 separate lot but 1157 00:52:30,039 --> 00:52:32,880 share an attached wall we would consider that a townhome. 1158 00:52:32,880 --> 00:52:34,719 And do you know if they 1159 00:52:34,719 --> 00:52:38,210 looked into that? It was this configuration of property? I 1160 00:52:38,210 --> 00:52:38,679 think it again was yeah 1161 00:52:38,679 --> 00:52:41,880 figuring out how to you know provide because each of those 1162 00:52:41,880 --> 00:52:42,480 lots would have to 1163 00:52:42,480 --> 00:52:44,230 have frontage so they would have probably had to provide 1164 00:52:44,230 --> 00:52:44,679 some sort of 1165 00:52:44,679 --> 00:52:47,750 interior street within the lot and then let the townhomes 1166 00:52:47,750 --> 00:52:48,760 access off of that and 1167 00:52:48,760 --> 00:52:50,920 I think they just face challenges trying to figure out how 1168 00:52:50,920 --> 00:52:51,760 to subdivide the 1169 00:52:51,760 --> 00:52:54,960 property. Okay. I believe the applicant is intending to be 1170 00:52:54,960 --> 00:52:55,719 here tonight so he 1171 00:52:55,719 --> 00:52:57,940 could address that a little more in terms of what he 1172 00:52:57,940 --> 00:53:01,920 considered. Thanks. Can 1173 00:53:01,920 --> 00:53:05,960 you go back to the site plan that shows the streets on it? 1174 00:53:10,840 --> 00:53:16,099 What's the parking or allowance for parking on either Riney 1175 00:53:16,099 --> 00:53:16,880 Road or Riney 1176 00:53:16,880 --> 00:53:21,510 Court? Is that permitted or not permitted? Jim would you 1177 00:53:21,510 --> 00:53:21,960 mind addressing 1178 00:53:21,960 --> 00:53:24,239 that? 1179 00:53:31,920 --> 00:53:43,070 In the ultimate configuration of those streets parking 1180 00:53:43,070 --> 00:53:43,920 would be committed, 1181 00:53:43,920 --> 00:53:50,920 would be permitted. Riney Road being a collector and Riney 1182 00:53:50,920 --> 00:53:51,719 Court being a 1183 00:53:51,719 --> 00:53:55,769 residential street but with the width that they have now it 1184 00:53:55,769 --> 00:53:56,719 's really not 1185 00:53:56,719 --> 00:54:01,820 feasible at this point. Riney Court is I mean functionally 1186 00:54:01,820 --> 00:54:03,039 it's it's maybe 20 1187 00:54:03,039 --> 00:54:06,239 feet wide it's more like a residential lane which we would 1188 00:54:06,239 --> 00:54:07,320 not allow parking 1189 00:54:07,320 --> 00:54:13,679 along. Riney Road is really not much wider than that so 1190 00:54:13,679 --> 00:54:14,760 ultimately there would 1191 00:54:14,760 --> 00:54:20,329 be but I would say at this point I mean there's not no 1192 00:54:20,329 --> 00:54:21,920 parking signs up that I 1193 00:54:21,920 --> 00:54:26,280 know of but we would not consider it a street that's wide 1194 00:54:26,280 --> 00:54:27,519 enough. It's not even 1195 00:54:27,519 --> 00:54:32,960 28 foot wide I don't think. Riney Road so we wouldn't 1196 00:54:32,960 --> 00:54:33,840 consider it wide enough to 1197 00:54:33,840 --> 00:54:39,239 park along. Well I went by there and I looked at Riney Road 1198 00:54:39,239 --> 00:54:40,360 and it has curb and 1199 00:54:40,360 --> 00:54:46,139 gutter on the west side right on this side perimeter street 1200 00:54:46,139 --> 00:54:47,559 paving. On the 1201 00:54:47,559 --> 00:54:51,289 east side that's the side that is unimproved essentially it 1202 00:54:51,289 --> 00:54:52,000 has no curb 1203 00:54:52,000 --> 00:54:55,289 and gutter. I don't remember looking at Riney Court whether 1204 00:54:55,289 --> 00:54:56,519 it has curb and 1205 00:54:56,519 --> 00:55:02,079 gutter on it or it does not at all because that's been the 1206 00:55:02,079 --> 00:55:02,199 biggest 1207 00:55:02,199 --> 00:55:07,679 concern that's been addressed to me is parking. I know the 1208 00:55:07,679 --> 00:55:08,760 applicant said that 1209 00:55:08,760 --> 00:55:13,429 they have added some parking places I think they are above 1210 00:55:13,429 --> 00:55:14,920 what is required. 1211 00:55:14,920 --> 00:55:18,599 Three spaces more than is required right? Yes the three 1212 00:55:18,599 --> 00:55:20,039 spaces that are in gray here are 1213 00:55:20,039 --> 00:55:24,139 pervious paving those are above what's required by code. So 1214 00:55:24,139 --> 00:55:26,199 they have responded 1215 00:55:26,199 --> 00:55:30,510 as best they can with a tough site to I think the neighbors 1216 00:55:30,510 --> 00:55:31,480 to put even more 1217 00:55:31,480 --> 00:55:35,039 spaces in them what they're required and then the overflow 1218 00:55:35,039 --> 00:55:36,239 parking that you would 1219 00:55:36,239 --> 00:55:40,179 normally be able to have on sites like this along public 1220 00:55:40,179 --> 00:55:41,880 streets which they're 1221 00:55:41,880 --> 00:55:46,349 allowed to have because the streets are not improved that 1222 00:55:46,349 --> 00:55:48,119 impedes the project 1223 00:55:48,119 --> 00:55:53,639 even more as far as overflow parking but when they are 1224 00:55:53,639 --> 00:55:55,679 improved as they should be 1225 00:55:55,679 --> 00:55:58,980 at some point then if there is overflow parking they could 1226 00:55:58,980 --> 00:55:59,880 park on both Riney 1227 00:55:59,880 --> 00:56:04,059 Road and Riney Court if necessary is that correct? Yes the 1228 00:56:04,059 --> 00:56:05,119 ultimate sections 1229 00:56:05,119 --> 00:56:11,340 would allow for that. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair I 1230 00:56:11,340 --> 00:56:13,480 'm kind of piggybacking 1231 00:56:13,480 --> 00:56:19,170 on this is Riney Road even in on the radar at all about you 1232 00:56:19,170 --> 00:56:20,280 know in the back 1233 00:56:20,280 --> 00:56:23,349 of it says that it needs to be brought up even to current 1234 00:56:23,349 --> 00:56:24,599 full right of way and 1235 00:56:24,599 --> 00:56:29,559 do we anywhere on anyone's plan? Not that I'm aware of ma' 1236 00:56:29,559 --> 00:56:32,239 am. No. Commissioner 1237 00:56:32,239 --> 00:56:37,800 Tyler. Thank you chair. I have a question regarding the lot 1238 00:56:37,800 --> 00:56:39,260 directly north on 1239 00:56:39,260 --> 00:56:43,050 Riney Court the lots directly north on Riney Court is there 1240 00:56:43,050 --> 00:56:44,239 a map like maybe 1241 00:56:44,239 --> 00:56:47,730 the Google Maps view or the parcel map view that would be 1242 00:56:47,730 --> 00:56:49,820 able to see those so 1243 00:56:49,820 --> 00:56:52,119 there are two. Yeah the gray outline shows the parcel 1244 00:56:52,119 --> 00:56:55,559 boundaries there. Yeah so right there there are two small 1245 00:56:55,559 --> 00:56:58,780 lots and one with a house and one even smaller that looks 1246 00:56:58,780 --> 00:57:00,159 like it's got a part 1247 00:57:00,159 --> 00:57:08,840 of a cul-de-sac on it. Those are also zoned NRMU 12. Could 1248 00:57:08,840 --> 00:57:10,239 they feasibly be 1249 00:57:10,239 --> 00:57:19,880 developed and with any kind of multifamily or attached or 1250 00:57:19,880 --> 00:57:21,599 whatever 1251 00:57:21,599 --> 00:57:24,400 commercial look the NRMU 12 they probably can't have a 1252 00:57:24,400 --> 00:57:25,360 driveway on to Elm 1253 00:57:25,360 --> 00:57:29,510 because of text dot regulations so they'd have to have a 1254 00:57:29,510 --> 00:57:31,119 driveway on to Riney. 1255 00:57:31,119 --> 00:57:37,519 I'm just trying to like I said look at logical progression 1256 00:57:37,519 --> 00:57:38,280 of development here 1257 00:57:38,280 --> 00:57:43,340 is this is this a reasonable. Yeah and based on the zoning 1258 00:57:43,340 --> 00:57:44,280 those lots could be 1259 00:57:44,280 --> 00:57:47,079 developed with any of those uses you mentioned but the 1260 00:57:47,079 --> 00:57:47,840 logistics of it would 1261 00:57:47,840 --> 00:57:50,989 probably be challenging much like we see with this site in 1262 00:57:50,989 --> 00:57:52,119 terms of access and 1263 00:57:52,119 --> 00:57:56,559 configuration there. So maybe like if you removed the house 1264 00:57:56,559 --> 00:57:57,320 you could build a 1265 00:57:57,320 --> 00:57:59,559 duplex there or something you wouldn't fit an apartment 1266 00:57:59,559 --> 00:58:00,760 building on those two 1267 00:58:00,760 --> 00:58:04,119 lots put together. Most likely not I'm not sure of their 1268 00:58:04,119 --> 00:58:05,159 size but it would be 1269 00:58:05,159 --> 00:58:14,920 challenging. Yeah okay thank you. Commissioner Beck. I went 1270 00:58:14,920 --> 00:58:15,320 out and visited 1271 00:58:15,320 --> 00:58:19,090 two and I actually the two houses up Riney Court there one 1272 00:58:19,090 --> 00:58:20,039 's up for sale 1273 00:58:20,039 --> 00:58:22,989 currently and the other ones are rental property. My 1274 00:58:22,989 --> 00:58:25,280 concern and then I never did 1275 00:58:25,280 --> 00:58:28,099 I knocked on the door of the other one down there no one 1276 00:58:28,099 --> 00:58:29,920 was home but something 1277 00:58:29,920 --> 00:58:35,179 dawned on me later that access to this new development is 1278 00:58:35,179 --> 00:58:35,880 not gonna be possible 1279 00:58:35,880 --> 00:58:38,780 for Riney Court is that correct? I mean that's because it's 1280 00:58:38,780 --> 00:58:39,679 gonna be blocked off 1281 00:58:39,679 --> 00:58:43,400 with trees and everything there's no inlet no sidewalk for 1282 00:58:43,400 --> 00:58:44,519 people to park on 1283 00:58:44,519 --> 00:58:49,469 Riney Court and then okay but I would be concerned that a 1284 00:58:49,469 --> 00:58:52,199 long haul driver rented 1285 00:58:52,199 --> 00:58:56,400 one of the townhouses there and parked his rig in that 1286 00:58:56,400 --> 00:59:00,199 court up there so I could see 1287 00:59:00,199 --> 00:59:03,699 neighbors being concerned about the use of that cul-de-sac 1288 00:59:03,699 --> 00:59:04,679 for something like 1289 00:59:04,679 --> 00:59:08,659 that so just throwing that out there to consider maybe to 1290 00:59:08,659 --> 00:59:09,960 allay those concerns 1291 00:59:09,960 --> 00:59:14,059 we address that with you know prohibited parking or 1292 00:59:14,059 --> 00:59:15,639 something like that so they 1293 00:59:15,639 --> 00:59:19,000 don't get stuck with something like that and people start 1294 00:59:19,000 --> 00:59:20,639 making a path through 1295 00:59:20,639 --> 00:59:27,480 there. Jennifer correct me if I'm wrong but I mean the city 1296 00:59:27,480 --> 00:59:28,639 does have a 1297 00:59:28,639 --> 00:59:38,050 procedure in which a resident or a developer could appeal 1298 00:59:38,050 --> 00:59:39,000 to our 1299 00:59:39,000 --> 00:59:45,280 traffic engineer to post no parking signage and I think 1300 00:59:45,280 --> 00:59:45,760 they would have to 1301 00:59:45,760 --> 00:59:49,469 get they have to get signatures from a certain amount of 1302 00:59:49,469 --> 00:59:50,599 neighbors I believe I 1303 00:59:50,599 --> 00:59:54,719 mean that's that's an option available am I right? I'm not 1304 00:59:54,719 --> 00:59:55,559 familiar with the 1305 00:59:55,559 --> 00:59:59,860 appeal and the parking regulations but we can look that out 1306 00:59:59,860 --> 01:00:02,239 for you. Thank you. 1307 01:00:03,440 --> 01:00:07,480 Any other questions for staff? 1308 01:00:09,239 --> 01:00:12,679 Thank you Jim. Thank you Haley. 1309 01:00:18,000 --> 01:00:19,159 Okay I believe that's all the items that we have on our 1310 01:00:19,159 --> 01:00:22,519 work session this evening 1311 01:00:22,519 --> 01:00:28,809 so at 6.02 I will close our work session and we will recon 1312 01:00:28,809 --> 01:00:29,599 vene in 1313 01:00:39,000 --> 01:00:42,000 a minute. 1314 01:01:09,000 --> 01:01:12,000 [inaudible] 1315 01:01:39,000 --> 01:01:42,000 [inaudible] 1316 01:02:09,000 --> 01:02:12,000 [inaudible] 1317 01:02:24,280 --> 01:02:24,329 Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and 1318 01:02:24,329 --> 01:02:28,079 Zoning Commission 1319 01:02:28,079 --> 01:02:32,449 meeting for July the 12th 2017. This meeting has been duly 1320 01:02:32,449 --> 01:02:33,599 posted and we do 1321 01:02:33,599 --> 01:02:37,909 have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 634. 1322 01:02:37,909 --> 01:02:39,039 Our first order of 1323 01:02:39,039 --> 01:02:42,929 business will be to stand and give the pledge to the US of 1324 01:02:42,929 --> 01:02:44,000 the Texas flag. 1325 01:02:44,000 --> 01:02:48,960 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of 1326 01:02:48,960 --> 01:02:53,320 America and to the republic for which it stands one nation 1327 01:02:53,320 --> 01:02:59,000 under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. 1328 01:02:59,000 --> 01:03:07,050 I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one 1329 01:03:07,050 --> 01:03:10,000 indivisible. 1330 01:03:16,000 --> 01:03:18,800 Our next order of business will be the Planning and Zoning 1331 01:03:18,800 --> 01:03:21,239 Commission meeting 1332 01:03:21,239 --> 01:03:25,550 minutes for June the 28th. The chair will entertain a 1333 01:03:25,550 --> 01:03:26,360 motion. Commissioner Taylor. 1334 01:03:26,360 --> 01:03:29,429 I move we approve our minutes for June 20th meeting. 1335 01:03:29,429 --> 01:03:31,119 Commissioner Beck. Second. 1336 01:03:31,119 --> 01:03:36,760 We have a first and a second for approval any discussion? 1337 01:03:36,760 --> 01:03:38,639 Seeing none call for a 1338 01:03:38,639 --> 01:03:52,659 vote on the board. Motion carries five zero. We'll move us 1339 01:03:52,659 --> 01:03:53,440 to our public hearing 1340 01:03:53,440 --> 01:03:56,590 section. At this time I'm going to open the public hearing 1341 01:03:56,590 --> 01:03:58,079 for item A which is Z 1342 01:03:58,079 --> 01:04:06,320 17-0011A and call on Julie Wyatt for presentation. 1343 01:04:15,199 --> 01:04:18,400 I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the City of Denton. 1344 01:04:18,400 --> 01:04:19,440 Would you like for me to 1345 01:04:19,440 --> 01:04:23,309 go through the whole presentation or just the summary slide 1346 01:04:23,309 --> 01:04:24,480 ? I think summary we 1347 01:04:24,480 --> 01:04:28,360 had a great presentation earlier thank you. All right so 1348 01:04:28,360 --> 01:04:29,480 the item before you is 1349 01:04:29,480 --> 01:04:35,760 Z 17-11 blue beacon. As we discussed in the work session 1350 01:04:35,760 --> 01:04:37,679 the request is to rezone 1351 01:04:37,679 --> 01:04:43,210 or actually initially zone 16 acres from RD 5X district to 1352 01:04:43,210 --> 01:04:44,960 ECC district. The 1353 01:04:44,960 --> 01:04:48,670 subject property is in the northwest part of the city. It's 1354 01:04:48,670 --> 01:04:50,039 adjacent or near to 1355 01:04:50,039 --> 01:04:54,989 I-35 north of Barthol road. Staff did analyze the request 1356 01:04:54,989 --> 01:04:55,960 and has found that 1357 01:04:55,960 --> 01:04:59,030 DCC district conforms with the future land use designation 1358 01:04:59,030 --> 01:05:00,000 and is compatible 1359 01:05:00,000 --> 01:05:02,710 with the surrounding properties at designations and uses 1360 01:05:02,710 --> 01:05:03,480 and therefore we 1361 01:05:03,480 --> 01:05:06,550 recommend approval of the request. The applicant is here 1362 01:05:06,550 --> 01:05:07,519 and I'll be happy to 1363 01:05:07,519 --> 01:05:14,679 answer any questions. Any questions for staff? 1364 01:05:15,960 --> 01:05:20,289 Thank you Julie. Thank you. This is a public hearing and I 1365 01:05:20,289 --> 01:05:22,400 do have a card from Dana 1366 01:05:22,400 --> 01:05:27,150 Morse as applicant. Would you like to come forward? Mr. 1367 01:05:27,150 --> 01:05:29,559 Chairman, Commissioners, 1368 01:05:29,559 --> 01:05:34,760 again it's Dana Morse 500 Graves excuse me Boulevard, Sal 1369 01:05:34,760 --> 01:05:36,639 ina Kansas. We could 1370 01:05:36,639 --> 01:05:40,030 have made this simpler I think. When we started this 1371 01:05:40,030 --> 01:05:41,480 process we went under 1372 01:05:41,480 --> 01:05:44,789 contract by the whole 21 acres. We really thought we could 1373 01:05:44,789 --> 01:05:45,400 fit on that 1374 01:05:45,400 --> 01:05:49,440 property that was already in the city limits and so we rez 1375 01:05:49,440 --> 01:05:50,800 oned it and then as 1376 01:05:50,800 --> 01:05:53,869 we worked with TechStat and with the city we found we 1377 01:05:53,869 --> 01:05:55,039 really needed with 1378 01:05:55,039 --> 01:05:58,110 Barthol being realigned we needed to move our access point 1379 01:05:58,110 --> 01:05:59,159 to the west so 1380 01:05:59,159 --> 01:06:03,360 that aligned with Lowe's truck stop entrance and exit and 1381 01:06:03,360 --> 01:06:04,099 so that's why 1382 01:06:04,099 --> 01:06:07,969 we're asking for this to be rezoned and it's already been 1383 01:06:07,969 --> 01:06:09,239 annexed and try and 1384 01:06:09,239 --> 01:06:13,579 wrap this thing up so we can get started construction. We 1385 01:06:13,579 --> 01:06:16,320 don't have any plans 1386 01:06:16,320 --> 01:06:19,980 really for the remainder of this. Approximately 10 acres 1387 01:06:19,980 --> 01:06:21,039 after we're done. 1388 01:06:21,039 --> 01:06:26,000 I'm sure we'll sell to someone who has an interest for that 1389 01:06:26,000 --> 01:06:27,480 related truck stop 1390 01:06:27,480 --> 01:06:31,489 type business. So if you have any questions that's really 1391 01:06:31,489 --> 01:06:33,039 all I have. Okay any 1392 01:06:33,039 --> 01:06:39,639 questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you sir. I 1393 01:06:39,639 --> 01:06:41,079 have one other comment 1394 01:06:41,079 --> 01:06:48,409 or email from Rick Shuffield and he has no objection to L 1395 01:06:48,409 --> 01:06:49,320 owe's truck stop so I'll 1396 01:06:49,320 --> 01:06:53,199 read that into the record as well. This is a public hearing 1397 01:06:53,199 --> 01:06:53,840 anyone else? 1398 01:06:53,840 --> 01:06:57,039 Commissioner Beck. I do. 1399 01:07:03,239 --> 01:07:06,420 Never mind it's not this one. Sorry. Okay this is a public 1400 01:07:06,420 --> 01:07:09,440 hearing anyone who 1401 01:07:09,440 --> 01:07:14,039 would like to speak on this item please come forward at 1402 01:07:14,039 --> 01:07:16,400 this time. Seeing none I 1403 01:07:16,400 --> 01:07:20,449 will close the public hearing and open the floor for 1404 01:07:20,449 --> 01:07:22,519 discussion or motion. 1405 01:07:23,360 --> 01:07:28,320 Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. So I first I want to 1406 01:07:28,320 --> 01:07:29,920 piggyback on some 1407 01:07:29,920 --> 01:07:32,820 comments that Commissioner Beck made in the in the work 1408 01:07:32,820 --> 01:07:35,679 session. This is in our 1409 01:07:35,679 --> 01:07:39,440 future land use map identified as a business innovation 1410 01:07:39,440 --> 01:07:41,519 district which we 1411 01:07:41,519 --> 01:07:45,570 are aiming to fill this district with large offices, 1412 01:07:45,570 --> 01:07:47,960 research centers, office 1413 01:07:47,960 --> 01:07:51,639 parks that type of thing. However this is also at the conf 1414 01:07:51,639 --> 01:07:55,159 luence of the furthest 1415 01:07:55,159 --> 01:07:59,739 most primary arterial and I-35 in Denton and it's obviously 1416 01:07:59,739 --> 01:08:01,119 a logical place for 1417 01:08:01,119 --> 01:08:05,599 for truck services. There's a truck stop, two truck stops 1418 01:08:05,599 --> 01:08:06,199 you know at the at 1419 01:08:06,199 --> 01:08:09,269 different corners of the intersection. This is obviously 1420 01:08:09,269 --> 01:08:10,400 compatible and I think 1421 01:08:10,400 --> 01:08:14,500 this is so while this area I believe is very appropriate 1422 01:08:14,500 --> 01:08:15,679 for you know heavy 1423 01:08:15,679 --> 01:08:19,850 equipment servicing I do want us to keep in mind in the 1424 01:08:19,850 --> 01:08:22,000 future that the business 1425 01:08:22,000 --> 01:08:25,880 innovation district it should be reserved generally for 1426 01:08:25,880 --> 01:08:27,720 office parks but 1427 01:08:27,720 --> 01:08:33,159 because of the I guess the effect of I-35 this this is a 1428 01:08:33,159 --> 01:08:34,840 logical use and I 1429 01:08:34,840 --> 01:08:39,210 think this also plays into some of our later cases where we 1430 01:08:39,210 --> 01:08:40,680 have this almost a 1431 01:08:40,680 --> 01:08:43,579 conflict between what is generally planned and then we have 1432 01:08:43,579 --> 01:08:44,119 this area 1433 01:08:44,119 --> 01:08:48,630 affected by 35 further south as well. So with that said I 1434 01:08:48,630 --> 01:08:50,640 move we approve this 1435 01:08:50,640 --> 01:08:55,760 initial zoning. Commissioner Ells. Thank you chair and I 1436 01:08:55,760 --> 01:08:56,920 will second that. Okay I 1437 01:08:56,920 --> 01:09:01,890 have a first and a second for approval any discussion or 1438 01:09:01,890 --> 01:09:06,880 comments? Seeing none 1439 01:09:06,880 --> 01:09:10,119 I'll call for a vote on the board. 1440 01:09:15,960 --> 01:09:24,109 Motion carries six to zero. That will move us to item B and 1441 01:09:24,109 --> 01:09:25,119 at this time I'm 1442 01:09:25,119 --> 01:09:30,960 going to open the public hearing for S 17 - 0004 and we'll 1443 01:09:30,960 --> 01:09:31,840 call on Julie Wyatt 1444 01:09:31,840 --> 01:09:35,520 for presentation of that item as well. 1445 01:09:46,880 --> 01:09:47,569 Would you like for me to quickly go through the 1446 01:09:47,569 --> 01:09:51,239 presentation again or would 1447 01:09:51,239 --> 01:09:54,119 you like the summary how would you like for me to move 1448 01:09:54,119 --> 01:09:55,800 forward? I think probably 1449 01:09:55,800 --> 01:09:57,640 on this one and I think we have a number of interested 1450 01:09:57,640 --> 01:09:58,720 parties here let's go ahead 1451 01:09:58,720 --> 01:09:58,720 and have the full presentation. Okay so this is S 17 - 0004 1452 01:09:58,720 --> 01:10:07,800 McDonald's. The item 1453 01:10:07,800 --> 01:10:12,970 before you is a public hearing to consider a request for a 1454 01:10:12,970 --> 01:10:14,239 specific use 1455 01:10:14,239 --> 01:10:17,770 permit for a drive-through facility. The subject property 1456 01:10:17,770 --> 01:10:19,760 is north of I-35. It is 1457 01:10:19,760 --> 01:10:23,590 adjacent to North Texas Boulevard. The current lot 1458 01:10:23,590 --> 01:10:25,359 configuration doesn't 1459 01:10:25,359 --> 01:10:28,149 exactly match this existing aerial so we're going to go 1460 01:10:28,149 --> 01:10:29,039 through a little bit 1461 01:10:29,039 --> 01:10:32,920 of a background of the site and I'm going to use this this 1462 01:10:32,920 --> 01:10:34,039 this aerial from 1463 01:10:34,039 --> 01:10:37,430 Google Maps. It shows what is what more what is more 1464 01:10:37,430 --> 01:10:38,479 accurate on the on the 1465 01:10:38,479 --> 01:10:43,479 property right now. So up until recently there was a 1466 01:10:43,479 --> 01:10:44,920 McDonald's on the 1467 01:10:44,920 --> 01:10:50,239 site. It did have a drive-through as I-35 as the I-35 1468 01:10:50,239 --> 01:10:52,199 expansion project has 1469 01:10:52,199 --> 01:10:56,920 progressed. TxDOT has acquired the front or acquired the 1470 01:10:56,920 --> 01:10:57,840 frontage of the 1471 01:10:57,840 --> 01:11:01,079 McDonald's property and that required that the building be 1472 01:11:01,079 --> 01:11:01,960 removed as well 1473 01:11:01,960 --> 01:11:05,029 excuse me as well some parking. There was also if you 1474 01:11:05,029 --> 01:11:06,279 recall a gas station at 1475 01:11:06,279 --> 01:11:09,130 the corner as well so that property most of that property 1476 01:11:09,130 --> 01:11:10,760 was acquired with the 1477 01:11:10,760 --> 01:11:15,109 I-35 widening as well. So in order for McDonald's to 1478 01:11:15,109 --> 01:11:18,039 rebuild they would need in 1479 01:11:18,039 --> 01:11:21,109 order for to have sufficient parking and the building they 1480 01:11:21,109 --> 01:11:22,199 needed additional 1481 01:11:22,199 --> 01:11:27,460 space so their proposal is to take in the lot that 1482 01:11:27,460 --> 01:11:28,920 currently has the IHOP on 1483 01:11:28,920 --> 01:11:32,289 it so so that's where we get this current configuration 1484 01:11:32,289 --> 01:11:33,319 here and we'll see 1485 01:11:33,319 --> 01:11:36,390 that more clearly on the site plan. So here's the proposed 1486 01:11:36,390 --> 01:11:37,319 site plan for the 1487 01:11:37,319 --> 01:11:41,420 project. If you can see that this this area was once the 1488 01:11:41,420 --> 01:11:42,279 the existing 1489 01:11:42,279 --> 01:11:49,319 McDonald's and then this part here is that that IHOP. The 1490 01:11:49,319 --> 01:11:50,880 area in yellow is the 1491 01:11:50,880 --> 01:11:55,600 proposed building. They're also proposing to drive-through 1492 01:11:55,600 --> 01:11:57,319 menus to be located 1493 01:11:57,319 --> 01:12:00,590 approximately here in order to provide sufficient vehicle 1494 01:12:00,590 --> 01:12:01,840 storage and stacking 1495 01:12:01,840 --> 01:12:05,229 for that drive-through. In addition within their site plan 1496 01:12:05,229 --> 01:12:06,439 they're proposing 1497 01:12:06,439 --> 01:12:11,020 bike racks, some pedestrian crossings at some of the drive 1498 01:12:11,020 --> 01:12:11,960 ways as well as through 1499 01:12:11,960 --> 01:12:17,960 the parking lot, sidewalk improvements along Wilshire and 1500 01:12:17,960 --> 01:12:21,380 Kendoff will be required as part of the development of the 1501 01:12:21,380 --> 01:12:22,399 site and then they're 1502 01:12:22,399 --> 01:12:26,529 also proposing two signs. We'll talk more about this sign 1503 01:12:26,529 --> 01:12:27,720 in just a few minutes 1504 01:12:27,720 --> 01:12:30,239 just to let you know I know we talked about it in work 1505 01:12:30,239 --> 01:12:31,460 session regarding what 1506 01:12:31,460 --> 01:12:36,579 is actually required or what are the requirements for signs 1507 01:12:36,579 --> 01:12:39,479 on. Commissioner 1508 01:12:39,479 --> 01:12:43,460 Vett. Thank you Chair. While you've got this illustration 1509 01:12:43,460 --> 01:12:44,319 up there can you show 1510 01:12:44,319 --> 01:12:48,159 us the path that the drive-through will take coming off of 1511 01:12:48,159 --> 01:12:50,359 35? Certainly so the 1512 01:12:50,359 --> 01:12:53,289 path that drive-through if you if you drove in here you 1513 01:12:53,289 --> 01:12:54,119 would have to get 1514 01:12:54,119 --> 01:12:57,189 actually go around the building and then come through to 1515 01:12:57,189 --> 01:12:58,359 the drive-through in 1516 01:12:58,359 --> 01:13:05,350 this location. This is a one-way circulation pattern. Where 1517 01:13:05,350 --> 01:13:05,720 's the point 1518 01:13:05,720 --> 01:13:09,000 where they place their order is it at the... They would 1519 01:13:09,000 --> 01:13:10,479 place their orders in these 1520 01:13:10,479 --> 01:13:14,140 in that location there. Yes sir and then the cars would 1521 01:13:14,140 --> 01:13:16,420 filter down through to the 1522 01:13:16,420 --> 01:13:23,359 window here. Okay okay okay thank you. Sure so there was 1523 01:13:23,359 --> 01:13:24,100 discussion of work 1524 01:13:24,100 --> 01:13:27,020 session regarding that sign and I talked to the applicant 1525 01:13:27,020 --> 01:13:28,119 and we consulted with 1526 01:13:28,119 --> 01:13:33,319 the sign code and it is has been determined that because 1527 01:13:33,319 --> 01:13:34,319 North Texas 1528 01:13:34,319 --> 01:13:38,520 Boulevard is not a primary arterial it is a secondary arter 1529 01:13:38,520 --> 01:13:39,119 ial it's 1530 01:13:39,119 --> 01:13:44,319 considered in all other streets classification in terms of 1531 01:13:44,319 --> 01:13:45,640 signs and in 1532 01:13:45,640 --> 01:13:49,569 that case any ground signs in that location cannot exceed 1533 01:13:49,569 --> 01:13:52,239 six feet. Now pole 1534 01:13:52,239 --> 01:13:55,300 signs in that location you could have a pole sign as long 1535 01:13:55,300 --> 01:13:56,279 as it didn't exceed 1536 01:13:56,279 --> 01:14:00,489 six feet the maximum effective area which is just the 1537 01:14:00,489 --> 01:14:01,680 writing for the sign 1538 01:14:01,680 --> 01:14:07,579 would be 60 feet. A monument sign in that location there's 1539 01:14:07,579 --> 01:14:08,720 no maximum effective 1540 01:14:08,720 --> 01:14:12,020 area so as long as they did not exceed that six feet in 1541 01:14:12,020 --> 01:14:13,439 height they could 1542 01:14:13,439 --> 01:14:18,560 have you know any size effective area that they that they 1543 01:14:18,560 --> 01:14:20,920 would apply for. So 1544 01:14:20,920 --> 01:14:23,810 hopefully that clears it up a little bit I know we had some 1545 01:14:23,810 --> 01:14:24,800 confusion and work 1546 01:14:24,800 --> 01:14:27,590 session so. I'm gonna ask a question while we're on that 1547 01:14:27,590 --> 01:14:29,880 subject did you say the pole sign can't be 1548 01:14:29,880 --> 01:14:33,479 taller than six feet? Correct yes sir no matter what no 1549 01:14:33,479 --> 01:14:35,159 sign can be taller than 1550 01:14:35,159 --> 01:14:38,319 six feet in that location yes sir. Okay. Per the current 1551 01:14:38,319 --> 01:14:41,640 sign code. Commissioner 1552 01:14:41,640 --> 01:14:45,840 Rizzo. There was a maximum effective size for the pole sign 1553 01:14:45,840 --> 01:14:48,640 what was that? 60 feet. 1554 01:14:48,640 --> 01:14:55,899 60 square feet yes sir. Thank you. Commissioner Taylor. 1555 01:14:55,899 --> 01:14:57,960 Sorry to stop you now. No that's okay. 1556 01:14:57,960 --> 01:15:00,460 Thank you I guess we're since we're sitting on the site 1557 01:15:00,460 --> 01:15:00,840 plan and we're 1558 01:15:00,840 --> 01:15:02,720 asking a bunch of questions I thought I'd jump in with mine 1559 01:15:02,720 --> 01:15:05,680 . What is the what is 1560 01:15:05,680 --> 01:15:09,170 the total stacking of the drive-thru? It does meet our 1561 01:15:09,170 --> 01:15:10,720 requirements I believe our 1562 01:15:10,720 --> 01:15:16,409 requirements are five and that is from and Jim may jump in 1563 01:15:16,409 --> 01:15:17,800 here but I believe 1564 01:15:17,800 --> 01:15:22,430 our stacking is from the window back and they do meet the 1565 01:15:22,430 --> 01:15:25,039 stacking. I we did talk 1566 01:15:25,039 --> 01:15:27,760 a lot about the dual window and whether or not it would 1567 01:15:27,760 --> 01:15:29,159 would be sufficient and 1568 01:15:29,159 --> 01:15:33,470 and so part of that having that dual window is to make sure 1569 01:15:33,470 --> 01:15:34,600 that they have 1570 01:15:34,600 --> 01:15:38,130 that sufficient stacking. Okay so. Menu board rather. So 1571 01:15:38,130 --> 01:15:40,560 dual menu board. I'm not 1572 01:15:40,560 --> 01:15:42,750 familiar with dual menu boards how does that work? Dual 1573 01:15:42,750 --> 01:15:43,739 menu boards coming to a 1574 01:15:43,739 --> 01:15:48,689 single lane so is this you jump into the closest line and 1575 01:15:48,689 --> 01:15:49,439 try and cut in front of 1576 01:15:49,439 --> 01:15:52,829 the other guy as you go in? I will let the applicant I'm 1577 01:15:52,829 --> 01:15:54,039 not sure I mean I've 1578 01:15:54,039 --> 01:15:57,479 been through one and it seemed to work out but but the 1579 01:15:57,479 --> 01:15:58,960 applicant is here and 1580 01:15:58,960 --> 01:16:02,159 they can probably they can probably answer maybe how their 1581 01:16:02,159 --> 01:16:02,960 research on the 1582 01:16:02,960 --> 01:16:07,069 functioning of it. And then I'm also trying to see if there 1583 01:16:07,069 --> 01:16:08,199 were completely 1584 01:16:08,199 --> 01:16:12,520 stacking to the point it hit the street. So there's 13 cars 1585 01:16:12,520 --> 01:16:13,439 in the little 1586 01:16:13,439 --> 01:16:16,789 diagram here and then you have the entire south side of the 1587 01:16:16,789 --> 01:16:18,199 property so 1588 01:16:18,199 --> 01:16:21,689 about another six cars seven cars and then you hit the west 1589 01:16:21,689 --> 01:16:22,399 side of the 1590 01:16:22,399 --> 01:16:26,180 property which is another four cars and then three more 1591 01:16:26,180 --> 01:16:27,760 would get you maybe out 1592 01:16:27,760 --> 01:16:33,850 onto North Texas Boulevard. So 27 or 28 vehicles stacked 1593 01:16:33,850 --> 01:16:36,199 could eventually 1594 01:16:36,199 --> 01:16:40,880 hinder the right lane of North Texas Boulevard but then I- 1595 01:16:40,880 --> 01:16:42,560 35 it looks like is 1596 01:16:42,560 --> 01:16:47,119 this black line some kind of curb or barrier? That's the 1597 01:16:47,119 --> 01:16:48,640 property line? No I'm 1598 01:16:48,640 --> 01:16:52,050 at the the curved black line right around the car the drive 1599 01:16:52,050 --> 01:16:53,399 through. That's a 1600 01:16:53,399 --> 01:16:57,279 painted line? Is it painted it's not a no barrier? It is 1601 01:16:57,279 --> 01:16:58,239 not a barrier because you 1602 01:16:58,239 --> 01:17:02,100 do have to have that that exit. Okay yeah so I'm just 1603 01:17:02,100 --> 01:17:03,760 trying to see if you actually 1604 01:17:03,760 --> 01:17:06,850 stacked all the way to the 35 entrance you'd have 40 cars 1605 01:17:06,850 --> 01:17:07,760 or something you go 1606 01:17:07,760 --> 01:17:12,840 around the building twice basically. Okay thank you. 1607 01:17:12,840 --> 01:17:15,760 Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you 1608 01:17:15,760 --> 01:17:20,750 I pulled up a picture of this location on to that taken on 1609 01:17:20,750 --> 01:17:22,199 2005 showing the 1610 01:17:22,199 --> 01:17:25,800 McDonald's regarding the signage that we talked about and 1611 01:17:25,800 --> 01:17:27,840 at that point there was 1612 01:17:27,840 --> 01:17:32,159 IHOP, Exxon and McDonald's the McDonald's sign was at the 1613 01:17:32,159 --> 01:17:34,279 corner of the the front 1614 01:17:34,279 --> 01:17:37,630 of the building and so on the property that we're talking 1615 01:17:37,630 --> 01:17:39,399 about here where 1616 01:17:39,399 --> 01:17:45,449 you've got the the blue outline at the bottom just below 1617 01:17:45,449 --> 01:17:47,159 that one between that 1618 01:17:47,159 --> 01:17:50,229 area and at the top of the property line there were 1619 01:17:50,229 --> 01:17:52,239 actually three pole signs in 1620 01:17:52,239 --> 01:17:57,289 that area and so it goes back to my question earlier and 1621 01:17:57,289 --> 01:17:59,079 that is why can't 1622 01:17:59,079 --> 01:18:02,890 we just give them what they had before since then there 1623 01:18:02,890 --> 01:18:04,560 were three signs three 1624 01:18:04,560 --> 01:18:08,449 pole signs the Exxon was a huge sign and now we're we're 1625 01:18:08,449 --> 01:18:10,439 getting down to is one 1626 01:18:10,439 --> 01:18:15,439 sign and so it looks like from a signage standpoint we're 1627 01:18:15,439 --> 01:18:16,399 actually improving the 1628 01:18:16,399 --> 01:18:21,359 situation by doing doing that and not putting the the 1629 01:18:21,359 --> 01:18:23,239 owners who again must 1630 01:18:23,239 --> 01:18:26,409 like this place because of rebuilding after it been you 1631 01:18:26,409 --> 01:18:29,000 know demolished so 1632 01:18:29,000 --> 01:18:32,579 well at this point we're applying the current code 1633 01:18:32,579 --> 01:18:34,359 requirements to to that 1634 01:18:34,359 --> 01:18:38,510 application to the proposal and then when staff looks at an 1635 01:18:38,510 --> 01:18:39,680 SUP we also look 1636 01:18:39,680 --> 01:18:42,840 at the character of the area and so that was the reason for 1637 01:18:42,840 --> 01:18:44,000 the condition and I 1638 01:18:44,000 --> 01:18:47,109 know we'll go over the condition about about a monument 1639 01:18:47,109 --> 01:18:48,439 sign in this location 1640 01:18:48,439 --> 01:18:52,229 was was in order to meet the SUP criteria for to meet the 1641 01:18:52,229 --> 01:18:53,239 character of 1642 01:18:53,239 --> 01:18:59,050 the area and the the surrounding development pattern and 1643 01:18:59,050 --> 01:18:59,960 scale so thank 1644 01:18:59,960 --> 01:19:05,659 you I'm also with within this site there are four four 1645 01:19:05,659 --> 01:19:07,239 points of access one on I 1646 01:19:07,239 --> 01:19:12,640 35 one on Kindle one on Wilshire and one on North Texas 1647 01:19:12,640 --> 01:19:14,640 Boulevard and they have 1648 01:19:14,640 --> 01:19:17,909 also proposed a landscape plan it does meet the Denton 1649 01:19:17,909 --> 01:19:19,079 development code 1650 01:19:19,079 --> 01:19:23,850 requirements in terms of providing tree canopy parking lot 1651 01:19:23,850 --> 01:19:25,079 screening and and 1652 01:19:25,079 --> 01:19:27,869 parking lot tree canopy and landscaping they've also got 1653 01:19:27,869 --> 01:19:28,239 some additional 1654 01:19:28,239 --> 01:19:33,439 landscaping around the menu boards there that's enhanced 1655 01:19:33,439 --> 01:19:34,920 these are the proposed 1656 01:19:34,920 --> 01:19:37,869 elevations of the building they are proposing a masonry 1657 01:19:37,869 --> 01:19:39,039 building with stone 1658 01:19:39,039 --> 01:19:44,159 accents so sub chapter 6 of the Denton development code 1659 01:19:44,159 --> 01:19:45,319 outlines the SUP 1660 01:19:45,319 --> 01:19:48,390 criteria and I know that the full listings in your backup 1661 01:19:48,390 --> 01:19:48,920 but just in 1662 01:19:48,920 --> 01:19:52,359 general the SUP criteria is it needs to be consistent with 1663 01:19:52,359 --> 01:19:53,720 the zoning regulations 1664 01:19:53,720 --> 01:19:56,909 needs to conform with the Denton plan 2030 and it should be 1665 01:19:56,909 --> 01:19:57,800 consistent with 1666 01:19:57,800 --> 01:20:00,930 the surrounding development pattern in terms of access nu 1667 01:20:00,930 --> 01:20:02,239 isance prevention and 1668 01:20:02,239 --> 01:20:08,829 scale let's look at the zoning of the area first so the 1669 01:20:08,829 --> 01:20:09,880 subject property has a 1670 01:20:09,880 --> 01:20:13,109 DCG zoning district the proposed site plan and landscape 1671 01:20:13,109 --> 01:20:14,399 plan conformed to the 1672 01:20:14,399 --> 01:20:18,810 requirements of the DCG zoning district restaurants are 1673 01:20:18,810 --> 01:20:20,000 permitted in DCG 1674 01:20:20,000 --> 01:20:23,920 however drive-through uses do require a specific use permit 1675 01:20:23,920 --> 01:20:26,100 did DCG is often 1676 01:20:26,100 --> 01:20:28,890 found in our downtown areas and near our universities and 1677 01:20:28,890 --> 01:20:30,159 those are it can often 1678 01:20:30,159 --> 01:20:32,949 be pedestrian oriented places so we want to take a little 1679 01:20:32,949 --> 01:20:33,920 harder look at specific 1680 01:20:33,920 --> 01:20:36,800 projects in terms of drive-through uses to make sure that 1681 01:20:36,800 --> 01:20:37,840 they're compatible 1682 01:20:37,840 --> 01:20:42,619 with pedestrian oriented areas this site's location with 1683 01:20:42,619 --> 01:20:44,159 its proximity to I 1684 01:20:44,159 --> 01:20:48,529 35 lends itself to more auto oriented uses however it's 1685 01:20:48,529 --> 01:20:50,239 right there on I 35 1686 01:20:50,239 --> 01:20:53,960 this is the type of development you typically see on I 35 1687 01:20:53,960 --> 01:20:55,119 there's also 1688 01:20:55,119 --> 01:20:58,329 several parking lots and commuter parking lots in the area 1689 01:20:58,329 --> 01:20:59,119 which sort of 1690 01:20:59,119 --> 01:21:05,600 lend itself to the more commuter side of this of this area 1691 01:21:05,600 --> 01:21:07,600 we looked at the 1692 01:21:07,600 --> 01:21:10,680 surrounding property so the property adjacent to the 1693 01:21:10,680 --> 01:21:11,720 subject site so within 1694 01:21:11,720 --> 01:21:17,810 about 200 feet we have nearby DCG zoning and dr2 zoning 1695 01:21:17,810 --> 01:21:20,359 this has UNT facilities 1696 01:21:20,359 --> 01:21:24,670 as well as some UNT parking areas across the highway is an 1697 01:21:24,670 --> 01:21:26,199 nr3 zoning district 1698 01:21:26,199 --> 01:21:29,720 with single-family development when we zoom out a little 1699 01:21:29,720 --> 01:21:31,520 bit to about 500 feet 1700 01:21:31,520 --> 01:21:34,670 within the subject property we see a lot more of the UNT 1701 01:21:34,670 --> 01:21:36,119 campus coming into view 1702 01:21:36,119 --> 01:21:40,319 with there's a UNT facility off to the in this location 1703 01:21:40,319 --> 01:21:42,199 there's a dormitory to 1704 01:21:42,199 --> 01:21:45,050 the north as well as parking some offices there's also 1705 01:21:45,050 --> 01:21:45,600 commercial 1706 01:21:45,600 --> 01:21:49,420 development in this area with with that's associated 1707 01:21:49,420 --> 01:21:50,560 parking the UNT 1708 01:21:50,560 --> 01:21:57,489 stadium is in this location and then the general area we 1709 01:21:57,489 --> 01:21:59,079 see now residential 1710 01:21:59,079 --> 01:22:04,859 areas around UNT to the north and to the east here this you 1711 01:22:04,859 --> 01:22:06,159 can see from from 1712 01:22:06,159 --> 01:22:10,930 this view the the prominence of the I 35 corridor that that 1713 01:22:10,930 --> 01:22:11,840 is a pretty 1714 01:22:11,840 --> 01:22:19,670 substantial feature of this map the future land use of this 1715 01:22:19,670 --> 01:22:20,640 subject property 1716 01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:25,170 is commercial this is not one of our mixed-use future land 1717 01:22:25,170 --> 01:22:26,520 uses this is it 1718 01:22:26,520 --> 01:22:29,319 this really is intended for areas of commercial 1719 01:22:29,319 --> 01:22:31,319 concentration and auto 1720 01:22:31,319 --> 01:22:35,390 oriented uses and drive-throughs are are meet the goals of 1721 01:22:35,390 --> 01:22:37,079 this area and and meet 1722 01:22:37,079 --> 01:22:42,069 the intent of the commercial future land use the mobility 1723 01:22:42,069 --> 01:22:44,199 in the area once again 1724 01:22:44,199 --> 01:22:49,149 I 35 is a dominant feature and that is this red here North 1725 01:22:49,149 --> 01:22:50,319 Texas Boulevard is 1726 01:22:50,319 --> 01:22:53,239 a secondary arterial that's intended to move people 1727 01:22:53,239 --> 01:22:54,239 efficiently through the city 1728 01:22:54,239 --> 01:22:58,000 is the intent of a secondary arterial and then you also 1729 01:22:58,000 --> 01:22:59,520 have collector streets 1730 01:22:59,520 --> 01:23:05,039 throughout this UNT area in order to move vehicular traffic 1731 01:23:05,039 --> 01:23:06,000 public 1732 01:23:06,000 --> 01:23:08,909 notification was sent out on the subject property we did 1733 01:23:08,909 --> 01:23:10,079 receive one letter of 1734 01:23:10,079 --> 01:23:13,199 opposition and I provided to that to you during work 1735 01:23:13,199 --> 01:23:15,520 session our GIS department 1736 01:23:15,520 --> 01:23:19,029 did not have an opportunity to calculate the percentage of 1737 01:23:19,029 --> 01:23:20,399 opposition today but 1738 01:23:20,399 --> 01:23:25,359 we suspect it will be because of the of the amount of 1739 01:23:25,359 --> 01:23:27,359 property around it we 1740 01:23:27,359 --> 01:23:33,079 suspect it is going to exceed 20% which would require super 1741 01:23:33,079 --> 01:23:34,159 majority approval by 1742 01:23:34,159 --> 01:23:38,319 City Council so based upon the criteria for approval staff 1743 01:23:38,319 --> 01:23:39,600 recommends approval 1744 01:23:39,600 --> 01:23:43,039 of the request with two conditions that the proposed use 1745 01:23:43,039 --> 01:23:43,960 must substantially 1746 01:23:43,960 --> 01:23:46,350 comply with the attached site plan landscape plan and 1747 01:23:46,350 --> 01:23:47,359 building elevations 1748 01:23:47,359 --> 01:23:51,119 and that signage on North Texas Boulevard be limited to one 1749 01:23:51,119 --> 01:23:51,720 monument 1750 01:23:51,720 --> 01:23:54,829 sign with a maximum fight height of five feet a maximum 1751 01:23:54,829 --> 01:23:56,239 effective area of 40 1752 01:23:56,239 --> 01:23:58,760 square feet and to be constructed of masonry or stone to 1753 01:23:58,760 --> 01:23:59,520 complement the 1754 01:23:59,520 --> 01:24:02,409 primary structure and I will stand for any questions and 1755 01:24:02,409 --> 01:24:03,680 the applicant is here 1756 01:24:03,680 --> 01:24:07,439 to answer any questions got a question Commissioner Roselle 1757 01:24:07,439 --> 01:24:08,680 this is more 1758 01:24:08,680 --> 01:24:11,750 addressing I guess the question I might have for 1759 01:24:11,750 --> 01:24:13,760 Commissioner Sullivan you had 1760 01:24:13,760 --> 01:24:19,449 an image from 2005 that showed a pole sign on North Texas 1761 01:24:19,449 --> 01:24:22,239 Boulevard yes 2005 1762 01:24:22,239 --> 01:24:25,720 had three pole signs I'm looking at I'm looking at an image 1763 01:24:25,720 --> 01:24:26,640 from 2005 and 1764 01:24:26,640 --> 01:24:29,949 there's one pole sign from McDonald's one from McDonald's 1765 01:24:29,949 --> 01:24:31,159 but also Exxon and 1766 01:24:31,159 --> 01:24:34,270 then I hop but the McDonald's one is on the I-35 not North 1767 01:24:34,270 --> 01:24:36,159 Texas Boulevard was 1768 01:24:36,159 --> 01:24:39,289 that at the same location same basic location when you're 1769 01:24:39,289 --> 01:24:40,079 looking at it 1770 01:24:40,079 --> 01:24:43,439 coming from the highway you see all three signs you would 1771 01:24:43,439 --> 01:24:44,319 see all three 1772 01:24:44,319 --> 01:24:47,119 signs when you were coming from the service road and then 1773 01:24:47,119 --> 01:24:48,039 turning on the 1774 01:24:48,039 --> 01:24:50,880 North Texas Boulevard you'd see all three and so they're 1775 01:24:50,880 --> 01:24:51,760 proposing to have 1776 01:24:51,760 --> 01:24:54,920 two pole signs not just one well but the I think the 1777 01:24:54,920 --> 01:24:57,199 McDonald's sign was was not 1778 01:24:57,199 --> 01:24:59,989 on the service road it was really next to the building it 1779 01:24:59,989 --> 01:25:01,039 was off the service 1780 01:25:01,039 --> 01:25:06,159 road in fact it was really almost behind the Exxon station 1781 01:25:06,159 --> 01:25:06,520 that's not a small one 1782 01:25:06,520 --> 01:25:13,840 it was a pole sign okay I'm not sure if that added clarity 1783 01:25:13,840 --> 01:25:15,279 I apologize for that 1784 01:25:15,279 --> 01:25:19,119 what is the height of the pole sign that they are being 1785 01:25:19,119 --> 01:25:20,840 approved to put on the 1786 01:25:20,840 --> 01:25:24,720 North Texas side 40 feet well they've asked for 20 feet but 1787 01:25:24,720 --> 01:25:25,520 that doesn't meet 1788 01:25:25,520 --> 01:25:27,600 the sign request so no matter I mean they would have to 1789 01:25:27,600 --> 01:25:28,239 meet the sign 1790 01:25:28,239 --> 01:25:31,689 requirement so and what is the sign requirements for a pole 1791 01:25:31,689 --> 01:25:32,840 sign on the 35 1792 01:25:32,840 --> 01:25:38,739 a pole sign on I-35 can be 40 feet above the travel lanes 1793 01:25:38,739 --> 01:25:40,079 of the highway so 1794 01:25:40,079 --> 01:25:42,970 depending on the height of the highway some if the highway 1795 01:25:42,970 --> 01:25:43,880 were elevated they 1796 01:25:43,880 --> 01:25:46,670 had it has to be 40 it can only be 40 feet above the travel 1797 01:25:46,670 --> 01:25:47,319 lanes of the 1798 01:25:47,319 --> 01:25:52,479 highway okay and that's making assumptions is the 20 feet 1799 01:25:52,479 --> 01:25:53,859 within the 40 1800 01:25:53,859 --> 01:25:58,960 feet above is that why they're saying 20 feet above a 20- 1801 01:25:58,960 --> 01:26:01,720 foot sign is that a 1802 01:26:01,720 --> 01:26:08,460 total of 40 feet above the travel height of the road the 40 1803 01:26:08,460 --> 01:26:09,319 -foot sign would be on 1804 01:26:09,319 --> 01:26:15,600 I-35 right on North Texas Boulevard they they're proposing 1805 01:26:15,600 --> 01:26:16,279 in their site plan 1806 01:26:16,279 --> 01:26:18,850 they have a 20-foot sign per the sign code they could only 1807 01:26:18,850 --> 01:26:20,079 have a 6-foot sign 1808 01:26:20,079 --> 01:26:23,329 right but on 35 they're also proposing a 20-foot that could 1809 01:26:23,329 --> 01:26:24,439 be well I mean it 1810 01:26:24,439 --> 01:26:27,300 could be 20 feet from the ground level or 20 feet from the 1811 01:26:27,300 --> 01:26:28,000 travel lanes 1812 01:26:28,000 --> 01:26:31,920 depending on how I-35 is designed at that site I got you 1813 01:26:31,920 --> 01:26:33,079 thank you 1814 01:26:33,079 --> 01:26:37,119 Commissioner Beck thank you just raised something 1815 01:26:37,119 --> 01:26:38,840 interesting did you say that 1816 01:26:38,840 --> 01:26:45,340 height for the sign on the I-35 side had to be maximum 40 1817 01:26:45,340 --> 01:26:47,439 feet from the level of 1818 01:26:47,439 --> 01:26:52,220 the travel the travel lanes yes sir okay well that's gonna 1819 01:26:52,220 --> 01:26:54,119 sit down 35 goes 1820 01:26:54,119 --> 01:26:57,189 under North Texas there so it drops down quite a bit so it 1821 01:26:57,189 --> 01:26:58,119 would be so they 1822 01:26:58,119 --> 01:27:00,399 couldn't have they have to take that distance in 1823 01:27:00,399 --> 01:27:02,279 consideration no no it would 1824 01:27:02,279 --> 01:27:04,569 be let me get let me get to that part of the sign code that 1825 01:27:04,569 --> 01:27:05,960 way I'll I can quote 1826 01:27:05,960 --> 01:27:11,920 it exactly okay I-35 measurement along I I-35 the height 1827 01:27:11,920 --> 01:27:12,960 may be measured from the 1828 01:27:12,960 --> 01:27:16,479 principal lanes the frontage road or the ground whichever 1829 01:27:16,479 --> 01:27:17,359 allows the greater 1830 01:27:17,359 --> 01:27:22,199 height frontage road okay all right thanks 1831 01:27:24,119 --> 01:27:31,359 I guess the only clarification I want to make from work 1832 01:27:31,359 --> 01:27:32,239 session we had 1833 01:27:32,239 --> 01:27:36,750 discussion about the North Texas Boulevard could have a 20- 1834 01:27:36,750 --> 01:27:38,279 foot pole sign 1835 01:27:38,279 --> 01:27:41,069 and the clarification that you're coming back after doing 1836 01:27:41,069 --> 01:27:42,039 the research is the 1837 01:27:42,039 --> 01:27:44,840 maximum height whether it's a pole or whether it's a 1838 01:27:44,840 --> 01:27:45,880 monument sign on North 1839 01:27:45,880 --> 01:27:49,600 Texas Boulevard per our sign code is 6 foot period yes the 1840 01:27:49,600 --> 01:27:51,439 only variance is how 1841 01:27:51,439 --> 01:27:55,520 much area or size the sign can be whether it's a pole sign 1842 01:27:55,520 --> 01:27:56,479 I think there's 1843 01:27:56,479 --> 01:27:59,319 a limitation on that if it's a monument sign there's not a 1844 01:27:59,319 --> 01:28:00,319 limitation in the 1845 01:28:00,319 --> 01:28:03,600 square footage amount of the sign correct but it's six foot 1846 01:28:03,600 --> 01:28:04,279 regardless 1847 01:28:04,279 --> 01:28:09,039 based on the clarification okay Commissioner Taylor thank 1848 01:28:09,039 --> 01:28:11,680 you chair 1849 01:28:15,560 --> 01:28:17,779 sorry just lost my train of thought let's see if I can 1850 01:28:17,779 --> 01:28:19,880 figure out where I 1851 01:28:19,880 --> 01:28:24,520 what I was looking at just a second ago oh so yeah actually 1852 01:28:24,520 --> 01:28:26,359 the the letter that 1853 01:28:26,359 --> 01:28:29,699 we received does indicate that they're they disagree with 1854 01:28:29,699 --> 01:28:30,479 the parking 1855 01:28:30,479 --> 01:28:34,579 calculations is there is there they're saying that they 1856 01:28:34,579 --> 01:28:36,560 should be 47 or 49 1857 01:28:36,560 --> 01:28:39,439 instead of 40 is that because it's a different use 1858 01:28:39,439 --> 01:28:40,479 restaurants are calculated 1859 01:28:40,479 --> 01:28:43,319 differently than commercial or restaurants have two ways 1860 01:28:43,319 --> 01:28:43,720 before we get 1861 01:28:43,720 --> 01:28:46,140 started discussion will you clarify which letter we're 1862 01:28:46,140 --> 01:28:47,479 discussing here okay 1863 01:28:47,479 --> 01:28:52,840 so we received a letter objection from I believe from UNT 1864 01:28:52,840 --> 01:28:53,640 doesn't actually have a 1865 01:28:53,640 --> 01:28:58,359 from on the header regarding this project and their 1866 01:28:58,359 --> 01:29:01,319 criteria a in bold 1867 01:29:01,319 --> 01:29:05,310 third paragraph says 49 spaces are required one per hundred 1868 01:29:05,310 --> 01:29:06,119 square feet 1869 01:29:06,119 --> 01:29:09,189 of leasable area however only 40 are provided so I just 1870 01:29:09,189 --> 01:29:10,159 wanted to address 1871 01:29:10,159 --> 01:29:12,630 that make sure that we are calculating parking spaces 1872 01:29:12,630 --> 01:29:13,760 correctly we are 1873 01:29:13,760 --> 01:29:17,090 restaurants can be calculated in one of in one of two ways 1874 01:29:17,090 --> 01:29:17,800 they can be 1875 01:29:17,800 --> 01:29:19,960 calculated by gross square footage or they can be 1876 01:29:19,960 --> 01:29:22,199 calculated by seating so it 1877 01:29:22,199 --> 01:29:28,310 does it does provide so so the the proposal meets the the 1878 01:29:28,310 --> 01:29:28,920 parking 1879 01:29:28,920 --> 01:29:32,369 requirements based upon seating so that's that's the discre 1880 01:29:32,369 --> 01:29:33,159 pancy in the 1881 01:29:33,159 --> 01:29:38,109 square footage Commissioner Ellis thank you chair Julie 1882 01:29:38,109 --> 01:29:39,159 when you mentioned 1883 01:29:39,159 --> 01:29:44,140 reaching the 20% opposition is that one property owner it 1884 01:29:44,140 --> 01:29:44,960 is one property owner 1885 01:29:44,960 --> 01:29:54,520 isn't it one final question on the SUP if this is approved 1886 01:29:54,520 --> 01:29:55,479 image forward to City 1887 01:29:55,479 --> 01:29:59,520 Council has proved and it's under an SUP anytime they make 1888 01:29:59,520 --> 01:30:00,359 any kind of 1889 01:30:00,359 --> 01:30:04,329 modifications or changes remodeling can you share that they 1890 01:30:04,329 --> 01:30:05,520 will have to come 1891 01:30:05,520 --> 01:30:10,300 back and apply for another issue P or we do try to provide 1892 01:30:10,300 --> 01:30:11,840 some flexibility and 1893 01:30:11,840 --> 01:30:16,279 are because when we look at an SUP we often recommend that 1894 01:30:16,279 --> 01:30:17,479 they tie the site 1895 01:30:17,479 --> 01:30:21,359 plan the landscape plan in the elevations to that SUP to 1896 01:30:21,359 --> 01:30:22,239 ensure that 1897 01:30:22,239 --> 01:30:28,859 that any that the criteria for the SUP approval is met but 1898 01:30:28,859 --> 01:30:30,640 we do try to we 1899 01:30:30,640 --> 01:30:33,710 understand that when when you get to site plan or possibly 1900 01:30:33,710 --> 01:30:34,640 building permit 1901 01:30:34,640 --> 01:30:38,989 there could be variations that have to be built into the 1902 01:30:38,989 --> 01:30:40,680 project so we add the 1903 01:30:40,680 --> 01:30:45,640 words substantially comply to that recommendation that it 1904 01:30:45,640 --> 01:30:46,779 with the site 1905 01:30:46,779 --> 01:30:49,850 plan landscape plan elevation so that way if there are 1906 01:30:49,850 --> 01:30:50,840 minor changes they 1907 01:30:50,840 --> 01:30:53,909 wouldn't have to go back through the public hearing process 1908 01:30:53,909 --> 01:30:54,520 they could just 1909 01:30:54,520 --> 01:30:58,010 those changes could be made at the staff level but down the 1910 01:30:58,010 --> 01:30:59,159 road say ten years 1911 01:30:59,159 --> 01:31:02,000 from now if they want to do a facelift to this building 1912 01:31:02,000 --> 01:31:03,479 they'll have to probably 1913 01:31:03,479 --> 01:31:08,680 come back potentially yes sir okay okay any other questions 1914 01:31:08,680 --> 01:31:12,199 for staff thank you 1915 01:31:12,199 --> 01:31:17,479 Julie good job this is a public hearing and I'm going to 1916 01:31:17,479 --> 01:31:18,720 call on I believe this 1917 01:31:18,720 --> 01:31:22,020 is the applicant first I've got a card here that says in 1918 01:31:22,020 --> 01:31:23,359 support and it's got 1919 01:31:23,359 --> 01:31:28,619 Greg Massey Beneguire Jimmy Lopez Sigeon Brooks and Sandy 1920 01:31:28,619 --> 01:31:30,159 Phillips I don't know 1921 01:31:30,159 --> 01:31:33,359 if any of you all were requesting to speak or who on the 1922 01:31:33,359 --> 01:31:34,560 card please as you 1923 01:31:34,560 --> 01:31:37,170 come forward give us your name and address and you'll have 1924 01:31:37,170 --> 01:31:38,800 ten minutes okay 1925 01:31:38,800 --> 01:31:41,979 good evening my name is Greg Massey I'm with Red Plains 1926 01:31:41,979 --> 01:31:45,590 professional the engineering consultant for McDonald's on 1927 01:31:45,590 --> 01:31:48,560 this site 2933 East 1928 01:31:48,560 --> 01:31:52,520 Bryant Avenue Edmond Oklahoma I don't want to rehash 1929 01:31:52,520 --> 01:31:54,680 everything that Julie has 1930 01:31:54,680 --> 01:31:58,430 already done she did a wonderful job for us as far as the 1931 01:31:58,430 --> 01:31:59,560 monument signage on 1932 01:31:59,560 --> 01:32:03,039 North Texas Boulevard we are in agreement with staff on the 1933 01:32:03,039 --> 01:32:03,600 five foot 1934 01:32:03,600 --> 01:32:09,859 height and 40 square foot of face area on that sign again 1935 01:32:09,859 --> 01:32:11,760 we we do still want 1936 01:32:11,760 --> 01:32:17,550 to request the 40 foot pole sign on the I-35 frontage but 1937 01:32:17,550 --> 01:32:19,880 again overall when you 1938 01:32:19,880 --> 01:32:22,600 look at the combined tracks for the McDonald's and the IHOP 1939 01:32:22,600 --> 01:32:23,640 we are reducing 1940 01:32:23,640 --> 01:32:29,689 overall signage I guess just a brief history and the 1941 01:32:29,689 --> 01:32:30,760 original McDonald's was 1942 01:32:30,760 --> 01:32:36,640 constructed in 1973 so it was an operation here over 40 1943 01:32:36,640 --> 01:32:38,800 years we have the 1944 01:32:38,800 --> 01:32:42,380 owner operator present if you'd like to ask questions that 1945 01:32:42,380 --> 01:32:43,000 was question earlier 1946 01:32:43,000 --> 01:32:47,649 concerning you know use of the students and pedestrian 1947 01:32:47,649 --> 01:32:49,760 versus vehicle traffic 1948 01:32:49,760 --> 01:32:52,550 she can give you the numbers on that and let you know what 1949 01:32:52,550 --> 01:32:53,560 kind of traffic they 1950 01:32:53,560 --> 01:32:57,630 did with the students in the area versus you know local 1951 01:32:57,630 --> 01:33:00,640 traffic on the interstate 1952 01:33:00,640 --> 01:33:05,619 as Julie stated the original restaurant was slightly 1953 01:33:05,619 --> 01:33:07,119 smaller than than this 1954 01:33:07,119 --> 01:33:10,689 footprint that we're proposing but with the taking of the 1955 01:33:10,689 --> 01:33:12,479 additional right-of-way 1956 01:33:12,479 --> 01:33:16,789 it wasn't able to continue operating and with the right-of- 1957 01:33:16,789 --> 01:33:18,359 way taking text dot 1958 01:33:18,359 --> 01:33:23,460 did the demolition on the site it was always intended to 1959 01:33:23,460 --> 01:33:27,039 rebuild that site 1960 01:33:27,279 --> 01:33:31,090 initially we thought it would be allowed to be rebuilt 1961 01:33:31,090 --> 01:33:33,119 under a special exception 1962 01:33:33,119 --> 01:33:36,779 because it was an existing use however we needed the 1963 01:33:36,779 --> 01:33:38,640 additional property which 1964 01:33:38,640 --> 01:33:42,250 was next door which extended the drive-through use onto an 1965 01:33:42,250 --> 01:33:43,760 adjacent property 1966 01:33:43,760 --> 01:33:47,890 so that's why we're here asking for the special use permit 1967 01:33:47,890 --> 01:33:49,039 to allow the drive 1968 01:33:49,039 --> 01:33:52,539 through to be reconstructed with the restaurant I'll be 1969 01:33:52,539 --> 01:33:53,920 happy to answer any 1970 01:33:53,920 --> 01:33:57,979 questions got one to start with Commissioner Roselle thank 1971 01:33:57,979 --> 01:33:58,439 you chair 1972 01:33:58,439 --> 01:34:02,449 mr. Massey if there was not a requirement for a five foot 1973 01:34:02,449 --> 01:34:03,680 high monument 1974 01:34:03,680 --> 01:34:06,920 sign with 40 square feet effective area would it be your 1975 01:34:06,920 --> 01:34:08,039 preference to make a 1976 01:34:08,039 --> 01:34:11,109 larger one if there wasn't a condition what size would you 1977 01:34:11,109 --> 01:34:12,760 build we would 1978 01:34:12,760 --> 01:34:17,720 comply with the city code and the 20 foot sign that was 1979 01:34:17,720 --> 01:34:19,399 originally planned 1980 01:34:19,399 --> 01:34:25,199 came from I guess some I don't want to say misinformation 1981 01:34:25,199 --> 01:34:26,800 misclassification of 1982 01:34:26,800 --> 01:34:30,670 North Texas Boulevard as a major arterial it's actually a 1983 01:34:30,670 --> 01:34:31,760 minor arterial 1984 01:34:31,760 --> 01:34:39,270 and that maximum height is six foot so if bottom line if 1985 01:34:39,270 --> 01:34:40,840 staff didn't say five 1986 01:34:40,840 --> 01:34:44,369 foot and 40 square feet we'd be a maximum six foot and 60 1987 01:34:44,369 --> 01:34:45,840 square feet okay 1988 01:34:45,840 --> 01:34:50,199 thank you you're welcome Commissioner Beck thank you chair 1989 01:34:50,199 --> 01:34:51,640 thank you mr. Massey 1990 01:34:51,640 --> 01:34:55,229 for coming down speaking personally I'm glad you're gonna 1991 01:34:55,229 --> 01:34:57,680 go along with the the 1992 01:34:57,680 --> 01:35:01,119 smaller sign I just the idea of two pole signs close 1993 01:35:01,119 --> 01:35:03,119 together is distracting to 1994 01:35:03,119 --> 01:35:06,510 me but let me ask you this convey some or alleviate some 1995 01:35:06,510 --> 01:35:08,079 concern for me here and I 1996 01:35:08,079 --> 01:35:12,850 think the the one opponent to this stacking coming off of 1997 01:35:12,850 --> 01:35:14,199 the service road 1998 01:35:14,199 --> 01:35:18,630 you're you're you began ordering just almost as soon as you 1999 01:35:18,630 --> 01:35:20,159 turn into McDonald's 2000 01:35:20,159 --> 01:35:24,279 there what if on a busy day you start having people 2001 01:35:24,279 --> 01:35:25,560 starting to pile out back 2002 01:35:25,560 --> 01:35:30,649 on to 35 there the other thing that bothers me too is they 2003 01:35:30,649 --> 01:35:31,680 they pretty much 2004 01:35:31,680 --> 01:35:34,390 have to come all the way around the other side because they 2005 01:35:34,390 --> 01:35:35,039 're gonna get 2006 01:35:35,039 --> 01:35:38,229 their food order at the other end of it and it doesn't give 2007 01:35:38,229 --> 01:35:39,300 them they pretty 2008 01:35:39,300 --> 01:35:42,420 much have to exit if they want to get back on 35 through 2009 01:35:42,420 --> 01:35:43,479 the same area they 2010 01:35:43,479 --> 01:35:48,539 came in on alleviate some concern here how they could be a 2011 01:35:48,539 --> 01:35:49,319 problem on a busy 2012 01:35:49,319 --> 01:35:56,710 day yes and keep in mind before we go to site plan approval 2013 01:35:56,710 --> 01:35:57,960 on this it runs 2014 01:35:57,960 --> 01:36:01,350 through McDonald's operations group and they look at those 2015 01:36:01,350 --> 01:36:02,439 particular items 2016 01:36:02,439 --> 01:36:05,710 making determination as to whether or not additional cur 2017 01:36:05,710 --> 01:36:06,880 bing is required on 2018 01:36:06,880 --> 01:36:10,239 that outside lane to prevent what you were talking about 2019 01:36:10,239 --> 01:36:12,479 the intent is to have 2020 01:36:12,479 --> 01:36:17,029 or force that traffic coming off the I-35 frontage road to 2021 01:36:17,029 --> 01:36:18,479 have to circulate 2022 01:36:18,479 --> 01:36:21,739 the building to get to the drive-through lane rather than 2023 01:36:21,739 --> 01:36:23,000 coming straight off the 2024 01:36:23,000 --> 01:36:30,000 interstate and into it that alleviates a concern thank you 2025 01:36:30,000 --> 01:36:32,159 yes commissioner 2026 01:36:32,159 --> 01:36:35,720 Taylor thank you chair I guess I'll ask my question about 2027 01:36:35,720 --> 01:36:37,199 this double double 2028 01:36:37,199 --> 01:36:43,939 order single lane thing how does how does that work I'm 2029 01:36:43,939 --> 01:36:47,039 gonna allow mr. 2030 01:36:47,039 --> 01:36:50,939 Ben Aguirre and or Jimmy Lopez they handle the operation 2031 01:36:50,939 --> 01:36:53,760 side all right good 2032 01:36:53,760 --> 01:36:55,819 evening my name is Ben Aguirre I'm an area construction 2033 01:36:55,819 --> 01:36:56,680 manager for McDonald's 2034 01:36:56,680 --> 01:37:00,630 corporation and can you give us your address also oh yes 2035 01:37:00,630 --> 01:37:02,479 address is 1204 2036 01:37:02,479 --> 01:37:07,079 129th Street Oklahoma City Oklahoma thank you so to answer 2037 01:37:07,079 --> 01:37:07,760 the question the 2038 01:37:07,760 --> 01:37:11,329 way the we internally we call that design a 1 2 1 so you 2039 01:37:11,329 --> 01:37:12,399 enter in one lane 2040 01:37:12,399 --> 01:37:15,189 you split to two order points and you merge back to one 2041 01:37:15,189 --> 01:37:16,680 lane in fact most of 2042 01:37:16,680 --> 01:37:19,119 our restaurants nowadays are being constructed with that or 2043 01:37:19,119 --> 01:37:19,720 have been over 2044 01:37:19,720 --> 01:37:22,640 the last you know 18 24 months and and really what that 2045 01:37:22,640 --> 01:37:23,720 does is it allows more 2046 01:37:23,720 --> 01:37:26,520 throughput is what we're finding out is what it handles 2047 01:37:26,520 --> 01:37:27,640 quick arrival rates 2048 01:37:27,640 --> 01:37:30,770 better so that we prevent long stacking out into the 2049 01:37:30,770 --> 01:37:32,239 streets and so forth so 2050 01:37:32,239 --> 01:37:35,850 there's also some internal efficiencies that happen for us 2051 01:37:35,850 --> 01:37:37,359 with operations and 2052 01:37:37,359 --> 01:37:40,430 serving customers quicker but from from a planning 2053 01:37:40,430 --> 01:37:42,119 perspective it allows us to 2054 01:37:42,119 --> 01:37:46,130 handle the car stack right at the pinch point and then I 2055 01:37:46,130 --> 01:37:49,239 guess you just it's one 2056 01:37:49,239 --> 01:37:52,310 side is waiting to order so the other side pulls forward 2057 01:37:52,310 --> 01:37:53,399 the the coordination 2058 01:37:53,399 --> 01:37:55,750 you don't have any coordination problems there with yeah 2059 01:37:55,750 --> 01:37:56,960 some of you have been to 2060 01:37:56,960 --> 01:38:00,100 one of our double lane drive-through restaurants you'll you 2061 01:38:00,100 --> 01:38:01,000 'll be familiar 2062 01:38:01,000 --> 01:38:04,069 with the sign that says any lane at any time we also have 2063 01:38:04,069 --> 01:38:05,439 some proprietary 2064 01:38:05,439 --> 01:38:08,579 software that can be as sophisticated as taking a picture 2065 01:38:08,579 --> 01:38:09,760 of the vehicle so that 2066 01:38:09,760 --> 01:38:12,829 when they get to the order point we know which order goes 2067 01:38:12,829 --> 01:38:13,840 with which vehicle 2068 01:38:13,840 --> 01:38:20,199 thank you good evening my name is Jimmy Lopez I reside at 2069 01:38:20,199 --> 01:38:21,920 2020 Lower Valley 2070 01:38:21,920 --> 01:38:25,319 Drive Keller Texas I'm the regional construction manager 2071 01:38:25,319 --> 01:38:26,199 but one of the 2072 01:38:26,199 --> 01:38:29,770 things is Ben is talking about the software but at the same 2073 01:38:29,770 --> 01:38:30,359 time our 2074 01:38:30,359 --> 01:38:33,720 order takers are set up to where they stagger each other so 2075 01:38:33,720 --> 01:38:35,239 if you get to lane 2076 01:38:35,239 --> 01:38:37,949 number one and they're taking your order the the second 2077 01:38:37,949 --> 01:38:38,840 order take will actually 2078 01:38:38,840 --> 01:38:41,180 ask you to pull up to the second lane but won't be taking 2079 01:38:41,180 --> 01:38:42,039 your orders at the 2080 01:38:42,039 --> 01:38:45,800 same time thus you get alternating vehicles taking orders 2081 01:38:45,800 --> 01:38:47,359 and all that so it 2082 01:38:47,359 --> 01:38:50,149 is a huge not only all the software inside of our buildings 2083 01:38:50,149 --> 01:38:50,760 but also we 2084 01:38:50,760 --> 01:38:53,640 train our our staff inside the restaurants to make sure we 2085 01:38:53,640 --> 01:38:54,319 stagger the 2086 01:38:54,319 --> 01:38:57,029 order so you'll never have one what you know you'll never 2087 01:38:57,029 --> 01:38:57,960 have to order take is 2088 01:38:57,960 --> 01:39:00,319 taken to order at the same time so you don't have that it's 2089 01:39:00,319 --> 01:39:01,079 my term type 2090 01:39:01,079 --> 01:39:07,960 scenario thank you Commissioner Beck thank you chair maybe 2091 01:39:07,960 --> 01:39:08,479 y'all can answer 2092 01:39:08,479 --> 01:39:11,750 this for me I'm not trying to tell you how to design your 2093 01:39:11,750 --> 01:39:13,880 product here but the 2094 01:39:13,880 --> 01:39:18,920 exit rim coming off 35 does it sit back do you know if it 2095 01:39:18,920 --> 01:39:20,039 sits back considerably 2096 01:39:20,039 --> 01:39:24,420 before you get to Kendall there which would be because you 2097 01:39:24,420 --> 01:39:25,640 've got an entrance 2098 01:39:25,640 --> 01:39:30,159 point on that side and I'll defer to our engineer okay 2099 01:39:30,159 --> 01:39:32,039 because if it's it what I'm 2100 01:39:32,039 --> 01:39:35,279 thinking if it sits back far enough seems like you could 2101 01:39:35,279 --> 01:39:36,279 put a sign at the 2102 01:39:36,279 --> 01:39:38,840 corner there making that your entrance instead of having 2103 01:39:38,840 --> 01:39:39,880 people come in off the 2104 01:39:39,880 --> 01:39:42,949 service road and circle all the way around it where if they 2105 01:39:42,949 --> 01:39:43,520 could come off 2106 01:39:43,520 --> 01:39:48,000 Kindle off there and then just have that and then make that 2107 01:39:48,000 --> 01:39:49,319 that opening there on 2108 01:39:49,319 --> 01:39:52,670 the service road and exit that seems like it would 2109 01:39:52,670 --> 01:39:53,960 eliminate a lot of 2110 01:39:53,960 --> 01:40:00,960 stacking comment yes I understand what you're saying and 2111 01:40:00,960 --> 01:40:03,560 the gore of the ramp 2112 01:40:03,560 --> 01:40:08,029 exiting I-35 onto the frontage road does sit considerably 2113 01:40:08,029 --> 01:40:09,039 further back 2114 01:40:09,039 --> 01:40:14,229 unfortunately Kindle is a dead-end street at this point and 2115 01:40:14,229 --> 01:40:15,199 to my knowledge 2116 01:40:15,199 --> 01:40:21,800 unless that's changed recently dead-end doesn't come into 2117 01:40:21,800 --> 01:40:22,880 the service road will 2118 01:40:22,880 --> 01:40:28,319 not be reopened for access so the only access from the I-35 2119 01:40:28,319 --> 01:40:29,640 frontage into this 2120 01:40:29,640 --> 01:40:34,010 track has to come either from this drive or off of North 2121 01:40:34,010 --> 01:40:36,600 Texas Boulevard did not 2122 01:40:36,600 --> 01:40:42,920 know that thank you you're welcome Commissioner Ellis thank 2123 01:40:42,920 --> 01:40:43,800 you chair can 2124 01:40:43,800 --> 01:40:46,750 we can we check with engineering is that true that kind of 2125 01:40:46,750 --> 01:40:47,460 is not going to be 2126 01:40:47,460 --> 01:40:51,640 reopened because then the only way back on to 35 once they 2127 01:40:51,640 --> 01:40:53,319 visit McDonald's is 2128 01:40:53,319 --> 01:40:59,430 is to go back out that one drive on 35 right they would 2129 01:40:59,430 --> 01:41:00,880 either have to exit the 2130 01:41:00,880 --> 01:41:07,529 drive on 35 or go north to Wilshire right but where do and 2131 01:41:07,529 --> 01:41:08,640 how did they get 2132 01:41:08,640 --> 01:41:12,750 back to 35 well from I believe from Wilshire there's a Wil 2133 01:41:12,750 --> 01:41:13,439 shire there's a 2134 01:41:13,439 --> 01:41:18,239 median cut that you like that you turn 2135 01:41:24,119 --> 01:41:30,020 my understanding is as Greg alluded to is that yes Kindle 2136 01:41:30,020 --> 01:41:32,600 will be closed at 2137 01:41:32,600 --> 01:41:38,720 there at the service road but I believe there has been 2138 01:41:38,720 --> 01:41:39,439 correct me if I'm wrong 2139 01:41:39,439 --> 01:41:43,109 you all have had some correspondence with text dot in which 2140 01:41:43,109 --> 01:41:43,800 they have 2141 01:41:43,800 --> 01:41:46,869 indicated that being that can also be closed they would be 2142 01:41:46,869 --> 01:41:48,279 okay with their your 2143 01:41:48,279 --> 01:41:53,279 drive being preserved there that is correct 2144 01:41:55,800 --> 01:42:04,119 the ultimate text dot schematic shows a median that goes 2145 01:42:04,119 --> 01:42:06,079 across the Wilshire 2146 01:42:06,079 --> 01:42:13,279 intersection but as far as their the current condition I 2147 01:42:13,279 --> 01:42:15,000 have an aerial at 2148 01:42:15,000 --> 01:42:19,960 least showing that there is not one currently 2149 01:42:24,119 --> 01:42:27,970 and Greg correct me if I'm wrong I think that the thought 2150 01:42:27,970 --> 01:42:30,319 is that even in this 2151 01:42:30,319 --> 01:42:37,390 ultimate condition to get back on to 35 they would take the 2152 01:42:37,390 --> 01:42:39,520 they would use the 2153 01:42:39,520 --> 01:42:45,039 drive approach on the service road directly that is correct 2154 01:42:50,640 --> 01:42:54,880 any other questions for the applicant 2155 01:42:57,199 --> 01:43:04,359 thank you and this is a public hearing have a card 2156 01:43:04,359 --> 01:43:06,000 requesting to speak Amy 2157 01:43:06,000 --> 01:43:11,319 Armstrong from UNT in opposition 2158 01:43:15,000 --> 01:43:19,159 good evening I am Amy Armstrong I'm the interim news 2159 01:43:19,159 --> 01:43:20,359 manager at the University 2160 01:43:20,359 --> 01:43:25,159 of North Texas the address is 2310 North Interstate 35 East 2161 01:43:25,159 --> 01:43:26,720 the University of 2162 01:43:26,720 --> 01:43:30,479 North Texas and University of North Texas systems as the 2163 01:43:30,479 --> 01:43:31,479 sole owner of all 2164 01:43:31,479 --> 01:43:34,640 adjacent property is opposed to a request for a specific 2165 01:43:34,640 --> 01:43:35,600 use permit for a 2166 01:43:35,600 --> 01:43:38,829 drive-through facility at this location we have reviewed 2167 01:43:38,829 --> 01:43:39,840 the criteria for 2168 01:43:39,840 --> 01:43:42,989 approval for a specific use permit the proposed project 2169 01:43:42,989 --> 01:43:44,239 plan does not meet the 2170 01:43:44,239 --> 01:43:48,279 criteria a criteria B conditions four and seven and 2171 01:43:48,279 --> 01:43:50,000 criteria D conditions one 2172 01:43:50,000 --> 01:43:54,119 two three and six criteria a requires that the proposed 2173 01:43:54,119 --> 01:43:55,159 project must be in 2174 01:43:55,159 --> 01:43:57,710 conformance with all standards within the zoning district 2175 01:43:57,710 --> 01:43:58,600 in which the use is 2176 01:43:58,600 --> 01:44:02,970 proposed as noted in the application materials on sheet C 6 2177 01:44:02,970 --> 01:44:05,359 .0 49 parking 2178 01:44:05,359 --> 01:44:09,369 spaces are required one per 100 square feet of leasable 2179 01:44:09,369 --> 01:44:11,079 area however only 40 2180 01:44:11,079 --> 01:44:14,159 spaces are provided failure to meet the zoning requirement 2181 01:44:14,159 --> 01:44:14,760 means that the 2182 01:44:14,760 --> 01:44:17,699 proposed project plan cannot be found in compliance with 2183 01:44:17,699 --> 01:44:18,920 all current standards 2184 01:44:18,920 --> 01:44:22,119 and therefore cannot be approved in its current form 2185 01:44:22,119 --> 01:44:23,979 criteria be identify 2186 01:44:23,979 --> 01:44:26,130 several conditions that must be met in order for the 2187 01:44:26,130 --> 01:44:27,239 Commission to recommend 2188 01:44:27,239 --> 01:44:29,810 approval the proposed development does not meet two of 2189 01:44:29,810 --> 01:44:30,960 these conditions numbers 2190 01:44:30,960 --> 01:44:35,640 four and seven condition before requires that the proposed 2191 01:44:35,640 --> 01:44:36,399 arrangement of 2192 01:44:36,399 --> 01:44:39,470 vehicular and pedestrian traffic not adversely affect the 2193 01:44:39,470 --> 01:44:40,359 general public or 2194 01:44:40,359 --> 01:44:43,890 adjacent uses the work by the Texas Department of 2195 01:44:43,890 --> 01:44:46,399 Transportation on I-35 and 2196 01:44:46,399 --> 01:44:49,600 associated intersections has caused changes to the traffic 2197 01:44:49,600 --> 01:44:50,239 conditions in 2198 01:44:50,239 --> 01:44:52,850 this area that make a drive-through in this location 2199 01:44:52,850 --> 01:44:54,079 harmful to surrounding 2200 01:44:54,079 --> 01:44:57,680 property owners the proposed layout of driveways is also 2201 01:44:57,680 --> 01:44:58,399 fundamentally 2202 01:44:58,399 --> 01:45:01,119 different than the earlier development with the addition of 2203 01:45:01,119 --> 01:45:01,800 the North Texas 2204 01:45:01,800 --> 01:45:04,600 Boulevard median second drive-through lane and an 2205 01:45:04,600 --> 01:45:05,920 additional driveway on 2206 01:45:05,920 --> 01:45:09,000 Wilshire vehicular and pedestrian traffic will be impacted 2207 01:45:09,000 --> 01:45:09,479 in three 2208 01:45:09,479 --> 01:45:13,920 specific ways I-35 frontage road traffic traveling north on 2209 01:45:13,920 --> 01:45:15,159 I-35 frontage road 2210 01:45:15,159 --> 01:45:17,960 will be negatively impacted by peak hour trips to the 2211 01:45:17,960 --> 01:45:18,960 restaurant for both 2212 01:45:18,960 --> 01:45:22,090 entering and exiting traffic at this driveway location if 2213 01:45:22,090 --> 01:45:23,359 entering traffic 2214 01:45:23,359 --> 01:45:26,069 is backed up into the frontage road access to the right 2215 01:45:26,069 --> 01:45:27,119 turn stacking lane 2216 01:45:27,119 --> 01:45:30,310 will be negatively impacted additionally exiting traffic 2217 01:45:30,310 --> 01:45:31,359 from the same drive-through 2218 01:45:31,359 --> 01:45:34,859 has no restrictions on unsafe lane changes to reach the 2219 01:45:34,859 --> 01:45:35,840 left turn or you 2220 01:45:35,840 --> 01:45:39,560 turn lanes to return south on I-35 adversely affecting the 2221 01:45:39,560 --> 01:45:40,239 general public 2222 01:45:40,239 --> 01:45:43,569 as well as access to the University especially during peak 2223 01:45:43,569 --> 01:45:45,239 hours North Texas 2224 01:45:45,239 --> 01:45:48,310 Boulevard due to the installation of the median on North 2225 01:45:48,310 --> 01:45:49,880 Texas Boulevard exiting 2226 01:45:49,880 --> 01:45:52,949 traffic will be forced to turn right on Wilshire Eagle or 2227 01:45:52,949 --> 01:45:54,239 further into UNT 2228 01:45:54,239 --> 01:45:57,180 campus which will have a negative impact on pedestrian and 2229 01:45:57,180 --> 01:45:58,760 vehicular movements on 2230 01:45:58,760 --> 01:46:02,960 these streets Wilshire Drive new access on Wilshire Drive 2231 01:46:02,960 --> 01:46:03,640 will introduce 2232 01:46:03,640 --> 01:46:07,000 significant increased traffic to UNT property adversely 2233 01:46:07,000 --> 01:46:08,479 affecting University 2234 01:46:08,479 --> 01:46:12,149 uses these new traffic patterns exasperate existing 2235 01:46:12,149 --> 01:46:13,199 difficult conditions 2236 01:46:13,199 --> 01:46:16,949 for pedestrian crossings on North Texas Boulevard and Eagle 2237 01:46:16,949 --> 01:46:18,119 Drive and traffic 2238 01:46:18,119 --> 01:46:21,579 circulation in the southern end of campus a traffic impact 2239 01:46:21,579 --> 01:46:22,560 analysis by the 2240 01:46:22,560 --> 01:46:25,699 developer is needed to fully evaluate these adverse impacts 2241 01:46:25,699 --> 01:46:26,760 and understand how 2242 01:46:26,760 --> 01:46:29,840 this new traffic circulation will impact the surrounding 2243 01:46:29,840 --> 01:46:31,720 property owners however 2244 01:46:31,720 --> 01:46:34,029 it is clear that as currently presented the proposed 2245 01:46:34,029 --> 01:46:35,199 project does not meet this 2246 01:46:35,199 --> 01:46:40,359 criteria condition B7 requires that landscaping and 2247 01:46:40,359 --> 01:46:42,319 screening be harmonious 2248 01:46:42,319 --> 01:46:45,630 and compatible with adjacent uses the proposed landscaping 2249 01:46:45,630 --> 01:46:46,600 and screening is 2250 01:46:46,600 --> 01:46:49,210 not compatible with its location as adjacent to the 2251 01:46:49,210 --> 01:46:50,439 University's primary 2252 01:46:50,439 --> 01:46:53,789 vehicular entry point the property is located directly 2253 01:46:53,789 --> 01:46:55,000 across from the North 2254 01:46:55,000 --> 01:46:58,100 Texas Boulevard from a site on which the University has 2255 01:46:58,100 --> 01:46:59,239 recently invested 2256 01:46:59,239 --> 01:47:02,100 approximately five hundred and forty thousand dollars in 2257 01:47:02,100 --> 01:47:02,800 landscaping 2258 01:47:02,800 --> 01:47:06,630 improvements and a relocated monument sign the code minimum 2259 01:47:06,630 --> 01:47:07,800 approach taken in 2260 01:47:07,800 --> 01:47:10,869 the proposed project is not compatible with this adjacent 2261 01:47:10,869 --> 01:47:12,000 use significant 2262 01:47:12,000 --> 01:47:14,739 improvements would be needed to address this criteria and 2263 01:47:14,739 --> 01:47:15,800 more compatible with 2264 01:47:15,800 --> 01:47:19,800 the city's comprehensive plan specifically the community 2265 01:47:19,800 --> 01:47:19,800 community 2266 01:47:19,800 --> 01:47:26,600 character chapter as proposed we do have your letter thank 2267 01:47:26,600 --> 01:47:27,479 you for reading some 2268 01:47:27,479 --> 01:47:29,869 of it and we'll make sure that the rest of it gets into our 2269 01:47:29,869 --> 01:47:30,800 record okay thank 2270 01:47:30,800 --> 01:47:34,619 you have some questions for you Commissioner back thank you 2271 01:47:34,619 --> 01:47:35,239 chair thank 2272 01:47:35,239 --> 01:47:38,270 you miss Armstrong for your presentation let me pick at you 2273 01:47:38,270 --> 01:47:39,039 a little bit here 2274 01:47:39,039 --> 01:47:43,840 you've heard comments about the parking situation how it 2275 01:47:43,840 --> 01:47:45,399 can be rated in a couple 2276 01:47:45,399 --> 01:47:49,060 different ways and we've obviously used the city's looked 2277 01:47:49,060 --> 01:47:50,159 at it from one way 2278 01:47:50,159 --> 01:47:56,109 where 40 parking spaces is allowed so does that eliminate 2279 01:47:56,109 --> 01:47:57,159 that argument in 2280 01:47:57,159 --> 01:48:01,199 your in your opinion I would have to run that by people at 2281 01:48:01,199 --> 01:48:02,640 campus and get get you 2282 01:48:02,640 --> 01:48:07,720 I'm happy to get you an answer for that okay and some of 2283 01:48:07,720 --> 01:48:09,520 your comments are 2284 01:48:09,520 --> 01:48:13,270 understandably concerned but they're not really backed up 2285 01:48:13,270 --> 01:48:15,000 by facts you say it's 2286 01:48:15,000 --> 01:48:17,520 clear that it's currently presented proposed project does 2287 01:48:17,520 --> 01:48:18,119 not meet this 2288 01:48:18,119 --> 01:48:22,729 criteria and that it it's going to create excessive traffic 2289 01:48:22,729 --> 01:48:23,960 but you don't 2290 01:48:23,960 --> 01:48:27,199 have any information to back that up now I don't disagree 2291 01:48:27,199 --> 01:48:29,520 that maybe we do need a 2292 01:48:29,520 --> 01:48:34,699 TIA here and I guess I could ask staff is that forthcoming 2293 01:48:34,699 --> 01:48:35,640 are we going to be 2294 01:48:35,640 --> 01:48:45,000 doing that can anybody know I guess we wait on Jim to come 2295 01:48:45,000 --> 01:48:45,840 down or if it's 2296 01:48:45,840 --> 01:48:49,600 required by just to see if we're gonna have that TIA but I 2297 01:48:49,600 --> 01:48:51,760 just if miss 2298 01:48:51,760 --> 01:48:56,239 Armstrong can hang on to we have not we have not stated 2299 01:48:56,239 --> 01:48:58,359 that our TIA is required 2300 01:48:58,359 --> 01:49:02,550 given that there was a McDonald's there already as well as 2301 01:49:02,550 --> 01:49:03,720 a gas station which 2302 01:49:03,720 --> 01:49:09,500 has gone away and an IHOP which is going away okay okay 2303 01:49:09,500 --> 01:49:14,560 again are you still 2304 01:49:14,560 --> 01:49:19,109 concerned that with the analysis that we've done here that 2305 01:49:19,109 --> 01:49:20,199 it's going to 2306 01:49:20,199 --> 01:49:25,199 create a problem for traffic flow for North Texas and when 2307 01:49:25,199 --> 01:49:25,920 you talk about 2308 01:49:25,920 --> 01:49:31,300 surrounding property owners who's there really besides the 2309 01:49:31,300 --> 01:49:32,520 universe you've got 2310 01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:36,369 other businesses over off of Avenue C I'm not sure how they 2311 01:49:36,369 --> 01:49:37,399 're adversely 2312 01:49:37,399 --> 01:49:42,880 affected by it and the houses are on the other side of I-35 2313 01:49:42,880 --> 01:49:43,600 I don't see them 2314 01:49:43,600 --> 01:49:47,109 impacted being impacted at all well the statement is the 2315 01:49:47,109 --> 01:49:47,960 information that I have 2316 01:49:47,960 --> 01:49:52,039 tonight as I said I'm happy to get answers in your convey 2317 01:49:52,039 --> 01:49:52,680 ance okay I got 2318 01:49:52,680 --> 01:49:57,279 you thank you sorry I didn't put you in this thank you 2319 01:49:57,279 --> 01:50:00,760 Commissioner Roselle I 2320 01:50:00,760 --> 01:50:04,109 have several questions with this letter but I fear that 2321 01:50:04,109 --> 01:50:05,560 there's not going to be 2322 01:50:05,560 --> 01:50:10,560 many responses to it so I don't know how to handle my 2323 01:50:10,560 --> 01:50:12,479 concerns except just ask 2324 01:50:12,479 --> 01:50:17,529 them and we'll see what responses we get the section under 2325 01:50:17,529 --> 01:50:19,479 condition before where 2326 01:50:19,479 --> 01:50:23,270 it says it's negatively impacting the traffic way three 2327 01:50:23,270 --> 01:50:24,640 ways the first one is 2328 01:50:24,640 --> 01:50:28,029 stated as the I-35 fronted road frontage road and you talk 2329 01:50:28,029 --> 01:50:29,479 about stacking onto 2330 01:50:29,479 --> 01:50:33,939 the front of the road and then the exiting issues and so I 2331 01:50:33,939 --> 01:50:35,399 'm wondering how 2332 01:50:35,399 --> 01:50:37,949 that is any different than the McDonald's that was there 2333 01:50:37,949 --> 01:50:39,760 for 40 years so 2334 01:50:39,760 --> 01:50:42,199 not to be a broken record but the statement is the 2335 01:50:42,199 --> 01:50:43,279 information I have 2336 01:50:43,279 --> 01:50:46,350 yeah I'm happy to to get answers to yeah that might that 2337 01:50:46,350 --> 01:50:47,720 might be the answer to a 2338 01:50:47,720 --> 01:50:50,199 couple more questions let's just get the questions on the 2339 01:50:50,199 --> 01:50:51,279 record then we can get 2340 01:50:51,279 --> 01:50:56,229 them back I guess my other question is maybe it's maybe it 2341 01:50:56,229 --> 01:50:56,920 's just a statement 2342 01:50:56,920 --> 01:51:02,039 so this is better I find it interesting that based on a 2343 01:51:02,039 --> 01:51:03,840 investment that North 2344 01:51:03,840 --> 01:51:06,909 Texas voluntarily put into redoing landscaping and the 2345 01:51:06,909 --> 01:51:07,680 relocation of a 2346 01:51:07,680 --> 01:51:10,239 monument sign that they're holding their neighbors to a 2347 01:51:10,239 --> 01:51:11,399 higher standard than the 2348 01:51:11,399 --> 01:51:14,539 landscaping requirement by the city which is noted here 2349 01:51:14,539 --> 01:51:15,600 that it's implied 2350 01:51:15,600 --> 01:51:18,670 that University of North Texas spent half a million dollars 2351 01:51:18,670 --> 01:51:19,640 on a sign which I 2352 01:51:19,640 --> 01:51:23,939 have other concerns about that but that doesn't necessarily 2353 01:51:23,939 --> 01:51:25,039 necessitate the 2354 01:51:25,039 --> 01:51:28,189 neighbors to it's implied that they should spend five 2355 01:51:28,189 --> 01:51:29,439 hundred forty thousand 2356 01:51:29,439 --> 01:51:31,829 dollars on landscaping I'm not sure the implication here 2357 01:51:31,829 --> 01:51:32,680 but I'm necessarily 2358 01:51:32,680 --> 01:51:37,970 agree with what I'm inferring it and it seems as though if 2359 01:51:37,970 --> 01:51:38,920 I could just 2360 01:51:38,920 --> 01:51:42,640 understand this the McDonald's was not torn down by choice 2361 01:51:42,640 --> 01:51:43,359 can someone confirm 2362 01:51:43,359 --> 01:51:48,399 this they didn't have a choice who can confirm this for me 2363 01:51:48,399 --> 01:51:49,920 they made their owner 2364 01:51:49,920 --> 01:51:53,470 can can I get confirmation could did you have a choice to 2365 01:51:53,470 --> 01:51:55,960 tear down your building 2366 01:51:55,960 --> 01:51:59,270 yes my name is Sajan Brooks I'm from the law firm in baron 2367 01:51:59,270 --> 01:52:00,960 other cloth and Odo I 2368 01:52:00,960 --> 01:52:05,329 represented of address 808 new aces Austin Texas seven 2369 01:52:05,329 --> 01:52:06,800 eight seven zero one I 2370 01:52:06,800 --> 01:52:09,869 represent McDonald's corporation and our operator in the 2371 01:52:09,869 --> 01:52:11,039 condemnation of this 2372 01:52:11,039 --> 01:52:14,250 matter this combination was a bisection by the Texas 2373 01:52:14,250 --> 01:52:15,399 Department of Transportation 2374 01:52:15,399 --> 01:52:18,470 meaning the Texas Department of Transportation as you heard 2375 01:52:18,470 --> 01:52:18,960 actually 2376 01:52:18,960 --> 01:52:21,350 performed the demolition which means the property line was 2377 01:52:21,350 --> 01:52:22,239 cutting the building 2378 01:52:22,239 --> 01:52:25,069 back and textile went on and on its own volition to cut the 2379 01:52:25,069 --> 01:52:26,119 building back from 2380 01:52:26,119 --> 01:52:29,199 every move to suck was it possible for McDonald's to 2381 01:52:29,199 --> 01:52:30,359 continue operations after 2382 01:52:30,359 --> 01:52:33,939 that was done no no text department transportation went in 2383 01:52:33,939 --> 01:52:34,920 and demolished 2384 01:52:34,920 --> 01:52:36,829 the building on their own okay I appreciate that 2385 01:52:36,829 --> 01:52:37,840 clarification thank you 2386 01:52:37,840 --> 01:52:44,970 back to miss Armstrong I it seems as though you know Texas 2387 01:52:44,970 --> 01:52:46,079 is taking advantage 2388 01:52:46,079 --> 01:52:51,039 of a situation that McDonald's had no control over there I 2389 01:52:51,039 --> 01:52:52,239 'd love to see the 2390 01:52:52,239 --> 01:52:55,310 traffic study but it's reducing there's not a gas station 2391 01:52:55,310 --> 01:52:56,399 there any longer so 2392 01:52:56,399 --> 01:53:00,149 I'm I'm curious as the actual traffic increasing with this 2393 01:53:00,149 --> 01:53:01,359 McDonald's to the 2394 01:53:01,359 --> 01:53:04,449 extent which you're saying if you reduce the exon traffic 2395 01:53:04,449 --> 01:53:05,680 and anecdotally that 2396 01:53:05,680 --> 01:53:08,199 seemed to have more traffic continually than McDonald's 2397 01:53:08,199 --> 01:53:09,279 when I when I saw it and 2398 01:53:09,279 --> 01:53:13,109 so I just take a little bit of issue that North Texas based 2399 01:53:13,109 --> 01:53:14,239 on nothing that 2400 01:53:14,239 --> 01:53:18,220 this company did or the property owners did is now coming 2401 01:53:18,220 --> 01:53:19,479 in and denying or 2402 01:53:19,479 --> 01:53:22,659 wanting to deny the rebuilding of a building that's been 2403 01:53:22,659 --> 01:53:24,039 there for 40 years 2404 01:53:24,039 --> 01:53:27,329 and so though I appreciate the the diligence and this 2405 01:53:27,329 --> 01:53:29,199 letter being drafted I 2406 01:53:29,199 --> 01:53:32,560 just have a lot of issues with with the position that North 2407 01:53:32,560 --> 01:53:33,720 Texas has decided to 2408 01:53:33,720 --> 01:53:35,810 take on this and again I understand I appreciate you coming 2409 01:53:35,810 --> 01:53:36,159 here and 2410 01:53:36,159 --> 01:53:40,720 presenting this to you but those are my concerns with this 2411 01:53:40,720 --> 01:53:42,439 letter commissioner 2412 01:53:42,439 --> 01:53:46,039 Ellis thank you chair I'm sure you may not have an answer 2413 01:53:46,039 --> 01:53:47,159 to this without your 2414 01:53:47,159 --> 01:53:51,520 group but maybe you do ideally what would the owners 2415 01:53:51,520 --> 01:53:53,439 surrounding UNT as the 2416 01:53:53,439 --> 01:53:57,750 sole owner in opposition here what would you like to see 2417 01:53:57,750 --> 01:54:00,079 developed on this site 2418 01:54:00,079 --> 01:54:03,899 the same information I have tonight I'm happy to you can 2419 01:54:03,899 --> 01:54:05,079 answer us for you to 2420 01:54:05,079 --> 01:54:10,680 that I would yeah for an existing McDonald's that was by no 2421 01:54:10,680 --> 01:54:11,239 fault of their 2422 01:54:11,239 --> 01:54:14,310 own torn down I mean you could have a great relationship 2423 01:54:14,310 --> 01:54:14,840 McDonald's does a 2424 01:54:14,840 --> 01:54:18,500 great job at community building UNT and McDonald's it could 2425 01:54:18,500 --> 01:54:19,439 I mean could do 2426 01:54:19,439 --> 01:54:24,399 great things together and it's I'm just curious as to you 2427 01:54:24,399 --> 01:54:25,939 know with this two 2428 01:54:25,939 --> 01:54:29,369 page letter where you're going and what would be the ideal 2429 01:54:29,369 --> 01:54:30,760 development for this 2430 01:54:30,760 --> 01:54:40,119 site if it can't be this commissioner Taylor thank you 2431 01:54:40,119 --> 01:54:42,359 chair I believe my 2432 01:54:42,359 --> 01:54:44,449 questions are going to be along the same lines I I 2433 01:54:44,449 --> 01:54:46,760 appreciate the detail in the 2434 01:54:46,760 --> 01:54:51,520 letter we often have extremely vague concerns so you you 2435 01:54:51,520 --> 01:54:52,399 are extremely 2436 01:54:52,399 --> 01:54:56,130 detailed and you do tight even tie it back to criteria for 2437 01:54:56,130 --> 01:54:58,760 SUP approval I I do 2438 01:54:58,760 --> 01:55:03,810 have a concern that many of these items are very narrowly 2439 01:55:03,810 --> 01:55:06,600 cherry-picked the the 2440 01:55:06,600 --> 01:55:10,569 traffic conditions two years ago there was a McDonald's a 2441 01:55:10,569 --> 01:55:12,119 gas station in IHOP 2442 01:55:12,119 --> 01:55:16,189 you had there were seven I think driveways total now we're 2443 01:55:16,189 --> 01:55:16,960 going to four 2444 01:55:16,960 --> 01:55:20,130 driveways total one restaurant instead of two restaurants 2445 01:55:20,130 --> 01:55:21,640 in a gas station so 2446 01:55:21,640 --> 01:55:25,119 to say that traffic will be adversely impacted once the 2447 01:55:25,119 --> 01:55:27,600 constructions done the 2448 01:55:27,600 --> 01:55:30,989 this area will have much lower traffic than it used to it 2449 01:55:30,989 --> 01:55:31,720 'll have better 2450 01:55:31,720 --> 01:55:34,569 circulation that McDonald's was a kind of a pain to get to 2451 01:55:34,569 --> 01:55:35,640 before especially 2452 01:55:35,640 --> 01:55:38,180 with Kindle often that really sharp exit ramp all of those 2453 01:55:38,180 --> 01:55:39,000 issues have been 2454 01:55:39,000 --> 01:55:42,619 alleviated because of text dots improvements die 35 just 2455 01:55:42,619 --> 01:55:43,359 moving down the 2456 01:55:43,359 --> 01:55:49,409 list on the condition D criteria floor area ratio is 2457 01:55:49,409 --> 01:55:52,319 referenced to a single lot 2458 01:55:52,319 --> 01:55:55,890 to the north which just happens to be the densest thing in 2459 01:55:55,890 --> 01:55:56,960 probably half a 2460 01:55:56,960 --> 01:56:00,560 mile and saying that this is this lot's gonna be less dense 2461 01:56:00,560 --> 01:56:01,640 but then if you just 2462 01:56:01,640 --> 01:56:04,840 go west there's an open field of 20 or 30 acres of open 2463 01:56:04,840 --> 01:56:06,000 field if you go east 2464 01:56:06,000 --> 01:56:10,199 there's the what used to be the second save which is now I 2465 01:56:10,199 --> 01:56:11,579 believe a UNT office 2466 01:56:11,579 --> 01:56:15,699 space which is a very low floor area ratio you go northeast 2467 01:56:15,699 --> 01:56:17,640 you hit an impound 2468 01:56:17,640 --> 01:56:22,159 lot that's zero for area ratio so to critique the floor 2469 01:56:22,159 --> 01:56:23,359 area ratio based on 2470 01:56:23,359 --> 01:56:27,039 one single parcel out of ten surrounding parcels isn't 2471 01:56:27,039 --> 01:56:29,439 really representative the 2472 01:56:29,439 --> 01:56:33,170 the same thing on the pedestrian requirements this might 2473 01:56:33,170 --> 01:56:33,899 not be the 2474 01:56:33,899 --> 01:56:37,010 perfect pedestrian pathway across the North Texas bridge 2475 01:56:37,010 --> 01:56:37,800 and I know especially 2476 01:56:37,800 --> 01:56:40,869 with apogee stadium this is going to become a major 2477 01:56:40,869 --> 01:56:42,439 pedestrian thoroughfare 2478 01:56:42,439 --> 01:56:46,960 the design does accommodate pedestrian use UNT's own 2479 01:56:46,960 --> 01:56:49,039 property at Wilshire and 2480 01:56:49,039 --> 01:56:51,329 Kindle that they've owned for at least 15 years they've 2481 01:56:51,329 --> 01:56:52,520 never bothered to put a 2482 01:56:52,520 --> 01:56:56,229 sidewalk in on the south side of Wilshire or on either side 2483 01:56:56,229 --> 01:56:57,960 of Kindle the 2484 01:56:57,960 --> 01:57:01,069 north side of Wilshire they don't have ADA curb cuts in the 2485 01:57:01,069 --> 01:57:02,520 sidewalk it also 2486 01:57:02,520 --> 01:57:06,720 that doesn't continue the entire length of Wilshire so if 2487 01:57:06,720 --> 01:57:08,399 they really wanted to 2488 01:57:08,399 --> 01:57:11,310 increase the pedestrian access to the for this area say 2489 01:57:11,310 --> 01:57:12,199 from Avenue C to 2490 01:57:12,199 --> 01:57:15,539 apogee stadium they would have built sidewalks on their own 2491 01:57:15,539 --> 01:57:16,560 property so to 2492 01:57:16,560 --> 01:57:20,789 to criticize a five-foot sidewalk and a couple of crosswalk 2493 01:57:20,789 --> 01:57:22,079 s at McDonald's when 2494 01:57:22,079 --> 01:57:24,789 you don't even have a sidewalk like the McDonald's sidewalk 2495 01:57:24,789 --> 01:57:25,960 is going to end when 2496 01:57:25,960 --> 01:57:29,510 the UNT property starts so that's it's not a fair criticism 2497 01:57:29,510 --> 01:57:30,420 to say that they're 2498 01:57:30,420 --> 01:57:33,840 not doing enough when you haven't done anything so 2499 01:57:33,840 --> 01:57:35,039 unfortunately you you 2500 01:57:35,039 --> 01:57:39,100 undermine your own your own arguments by by your own 2501 01:57:39,100 --> 01:57:41,760 behavior in the area those 2502 01:57:41,760 --> 01:57:46,319 are my comments okay any other questions for this 2503 01:57:46,319 --> 01:57:50,319 particular speaker thank you 2504 01:57:50,319 --> 01:57:52,710 for your comments and your letter we'll make sure that the 2505 01:57:52,710 --> 01:57:53,479 rest of it's in the 2506 01:57:53,479 --> 01:58:00,720 record I did have one other sheet from James McGuire 2507 01:58:00,720 --> 01:58:03,199 representing UNT systems 2508 01:58:03,199 --> 01:58:07,850 1901 Main Street in Dallas Texas he is also opposed the 2509 01:58:07,850 --> 01:58:09,880 request again this is a 2510 01:58:09,880 --> 01:58:12,680 public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item 2511 01:58:12,680 --> 01:58:13,560 please come forward 2512 01:58:13,560 --> 01:58:16,000 at this time 2513 01:58:19,439 --> 01:58:22,510 seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the 2514 01:58:22,510 --> 01:58:23,640 floor for discussion 2515 01:58:23,640 --> 01:58:28,239 and emotion Commissioner Sullivan can I ask you a question 2516 01:58:28,239 --> 01:58:29,079 of the applicant 2517 01:58:29,079 --> 01:58:34,939 absolutely could y'all answer or give me an idea of how 2518 01:58:34,939 --> 01:58:37,159 many she be how many UNT 2519 01:58:37,159 --> 01:58:40,260 students were employed at the old restaurant and how many 2520 01:58:40,260 --> 01:58:41,159 you anticipate 2521 01:58:41,159 --> 01:59:00,510 employing at the new restaurant so bear with us we're 2522 01:59:00,510 --> 01:59:01,079 giving you a little bit 2523 01:59:01,079 --> 01:59:05,390 state your name again so we'll have Jimmy Lopez 2020 Laurel 2524 01:59:05,390 --> 01:59:06,520 Valley, Keller, Texas 2525 01:59:06,520 --> 01:59:10,579 76248 the data we have is a couple of years old we've been 2526 01:59:10,579 --> 01:59:12,199 shut down a bit as 2527 01:59:12,199 --> 01:59:15,520 I was talking to the franchisee miss Sandy Phillips has 2528 01:59:15,520 --> 01:59:16,439 actually owned this 2529 01:59:16,439 --> 01:59:21,199 restaurant 43 of the 44 years that it's been there she said 2530 01:59:21,199 --> 01:59:22,159 any we would have 2531 01:59:22,159 --> 01:59:25,579 anywhere between 50 and 60 employees at the restaurant and 2532 01:59:25,579 --> 01:59:26,800 half of them would be 2533 01:59:26,800 --> 01:59:30,479 UNT students roughly half of them 45 50 percent she said so 2534 01:59:30,479 --> 01:59:33,439 roughly 20 25 of the 2535 01:59:33,439 --> 01:59:36,529 folks working in the McDonald's restaurants were students 2536 01:59:36,529 --> 01:59:37,800 at UNT again 2537 01:59:37,800 --> 01:59:42,479 that's a couple of years old understand thank you very much 2538 01:59:42,960 --> 01:59:48,239 Commissioner back thank you chair just for the record I'd 2539 01:59:48,239 --> 01:59:49,000 like to state I'm 2540 01:59:49,000 --> 01:59:52,920 sorely disappointed in UNT throwing miss Armstrong in the 2541 01:59:52,920 --> 01:59:53,880 phrase sending 2542 01:59:53,880 --> 01:59:58,060 somebody that isn't prepared to answer a lot of questions 2543 01:59:58,060 --> 01:59:59,800 we had here that being 2544 01:59:59,800 --> 02:00:04,279 said I make a motion that we recommend approval of this SAP 2545 02:00:04,279 --> 02:00:05,399 subject to the 2546 02:00:05,399 --> 02:00:11,880 condition stated okay Commissioner Roselle thank you chair 2547 02:00:11,880 --> 02:00:13,760 I too would like 2548 02:00:13,760 --> 02:00:16,960 to approve this but I would like to see the motion not 2549 02:00:16,960 --> 02:00:18,159 include a signage 2550 02:00:18,159 --> 02:00:23,130 restriction I just I don't understand why in all reality 2551 02:00:23,130 --> 02:00:24,920 this should just be a 2552 02:00:24,920 --> 02:00:27,750 simple rebuild of something that's been there for 43 years 2553 02:00:27,750 --> 02:00:28,640 but yet because of 2554 02:00:28,640 --> 02:00:31,460 some weird nuances forced upon the applicant by text dot 2555 02:00:31,460 --> 02:00:32,359 they're having to 2556 02:00:32,359 --> 02:00:35,840 come to the SAP and like we've seen very many times before 2557 02:00:35,840 --> 02:00:37,039 it often feels like 2558 02:00:37,039 --> 02:00:40,109 when there's an SAP on the floor the city feels like there 2559 02:00:40,109 --> 02:00:41,079 's it's like that's 2560 02:00:41,079 --> 02:00:43,560 the start of a negotiation and I don't know if that always 2561 02:00:43,560 --> 02:00:44,399 has to be the case 2562 02:00:44,399 --> 02:00:46,789 that if they asked for an SAP then we get to ask for 2563 02:00:46,789 --> 02:00:48,399 something and it's a 2564 02:00:48,399 --> 02:00:52,449 matter of a foot less in height and it just feels like we 2565 02:00:52,449 --> 02:00:54,359 're fighting for a win 2566 02:00:54,359 --> 02:00:57,520 or something on our end and so I would prefer to see this 2567 02:00:57,520 --> 02:00:58,600 motion carry force 2568 02:00:58,600 --> 02:01:02,189 to council with just condition one that it would remain in 2569 02:01:02,189 --> 02:01:03,520 compliance with the 2570 02:01:03,520 --> 02:01:06,800 attached site plan landscape plan and building elevations 2571 02:01:06,800 --> 02:01:08,439 and not include the 2572 02:01:08,439 --> 02:01:12,960 sign restriction set up friendly amendment the motioner 2573 02:01:12,960 --> 02:01:13,439 would like to 2574 02:01:13,439 --> 02:01:18,000 entertain no I just wanted to make comment to the 2575 02:01:18,000 --> 02:01:18,880 Commissioner Roselle's 2576 02:01:18,880 --> 02:01:25,000 concern about the sign and I understand the wish to let the 2577 02:01:25,000 --> 02:01:28,479 party builder 2578 02:01:28,600 --> 02:01:32,079 McDonald's the way it was before I'm not sure I see a need 2579 02:01:32,079 --> 02:01:33,279 for two pull signs 2580 02:01:33,279 --> 02:01:36,430 that's the only thing I'm not sure they're gonna lose out 2581 02:01:36,430 --> 02:01:37,119 by having a 2582 02:01:37,119 --> 02:01:40,829 monarch sign on one side and their pull sign on the other 2583 02:01:40,829 --> 02:01:42,479 so that was reason I 2584 02:01:42,479 --> 02:01:47,430 just the idea of pull signs are distracted anyway in my 2585 02:01:47,430 --> 02:01:49,640 opinion so if I 2586 02:01:49,640 --> 02:01:54,050 can't get a second emotion then I'll make a comment I think 2587 02:01:54,050 --> 02:01:54,640 we clarified that 2588 02:01:54,640 --> 02:01:57,739 there's not going to be a pole sign regardless on North 2589 02:01:57,739 --> 02:01:58,840 Texas Boulevard I 2590 02:01:58,840 --> 02:02:01,550 think there were some misunderstandings in our original 2591 02:02:01,550 --> 02:02:03,680 work session okay and due 2592 02:02:03,680 --> 02:02:06,470 to the street classification the only thing that's allowed 2593 02:02:06,470 --> 02:02:07,359 over on North Texas 2594 02:02:07,359 --> 02:02:09,750 Boulevard is going to be a monument sign and the question 2595 02:02:09,750 --> 02:02:10,680 is going to be whether 2596 02:02:10,680 --> 02:02:15,079 it's a six foot height or a five and I think that's the 2597 02:02:15,079 --> 02:02:17,199 issue that is before so 2598 02:02:17,199 --> 02:02:19,560 there will not be a pole sign regardless because of our 2599 02:02:19,560 --> 02:02:20,199 city code and 2600 02:02:20,199 --> 02:02:22,119 the applicant has stated that they're going to follow our 2601 02:02:22,119 --> 02:02:23,000 code okay so the 2602 02:02:23,000 --> 02:02:26,470 only condition then is that they abide by the site plans 2603 02:02:26,470 --> 02:02:27,439 and everything like 2604 02:02:27,439 --> 02:02:33,359 that and I'm okay with that okay so we want to do we need 2605 02:02:33,359 --> 02:02:34,560 to restate our motion 2606 02:02:34,560 --> 02:02:39,039 or just go with that staff I believe you agree to the 2607 02:02:39,039 --> 02:02:40,039 friendly amendment did you 2608 02:02:40,039 --> 02:02:43,319 not so just condition more yes just condition just 2609 02:02:43,319 --> 02:02:44,279 condition one can we have 2610 02:02:44,279 --> 02:02:48,909 a first and second for approval with only the first 2611 02:02:48,909 --> 02:02:51,319 condition being required 2612 02:02:51,319 --> 02:02:59,460 okay any further discussion I'm sorry Commissioner Roselle 2613 02:02:59,460 --> 02:03:00,119 was a second on 2614 02:03:00,119 --> 02:03:04,079 that I apologize yes I do second the motion by Commissioner 2615 02:03:04,079 --> 02:03:06,319 Beck okay now we 2616 02:03:06,319 --> 02:03:10,760 have a first and a second for approval with only the first 2617 02:03:10,760 --> 02:03:12,039 item as a condition 2618 02:03:12,039 --> 02:03:20,640 on this any other comments or discussion I'll make a 2619 02:03:20,640 --> 02:03:23,079 comment I'm gonna support 2620 02:03:23,079 --> 02:03:27,529 the motion as it is proposed and I'm too I'm a little 2621 02:03:27,529 --> 02:03:29,479 surprised by the response 2622 02:03:29,479 --> 02:03:32,989 from North Texas I'm sure the amount of money that's been 2623 02:03:32,989 --> 02:03:34,159 spent on the monument 2624 02:03:34,159 --> 02:03:38,579 sign you may not want a McDonald's they're sharing the 2625 02:03:38,579 --> 02:03:39,520 entrance on North 2626 02:03:39,520 --> 02:03:46,109 Texas Boulevard and I'm hopeful that if that's something 2627 02:03:46,109 --> 02:03:47,199 that's that important 2628 02:03:47,199 --> 02:03:50,109 to North Texas they can reach some type of an arrangement 2629 02:03:50,109 --> 02:03:51,319 with the owner of 2630 02:03:51,319 --> 02:03:55,170 McDonald's to rectify that but I don't think it's in at 2631 02:03:55,170 --> 02:03:56,640 least in my opinion 2632 02:03:56,640 --> 02:04:02,930 this purview of my vote to help North Texas accomplish that 2633 02:04:02,930 --> 02:04:03,680 at the expense of 2634 02:04:03,680 --> 02:04:05,880 the owner I think the owner should be able to rebuild their 2635 02:04:05,880 --> 02:04:06,600 business they 2636 02:04:06,600 --> 02:04:09,779 didn't have an option to do that text dot tore it down they 2637 02:04:09,779 --> 02:04:11,159 did not and I 2638 02:04:11,159 --> 02:04:13,989 think it's at least from my vote is going to give them the 2639 02:04:13,989 --> 02:04:14,760 option to put 2640 02:04:14,760 --> 02:04:18,560 back their business and if North Texas wants to purchase it 2641 02:04:18,560 --> 02:04:19,520 they certainly can 2642 02:04:19,520 --> 02:04:22,659 do it as a business versus a piece of property that can't 2643 02:04:22,659 --> 02:04:23,479 have a McDonald's 2644 02:04:23,479 --> 02:04:27,090 back on it and the financial implications that that might 2645 02:04:27,090 --> 02:04:28,159 have so I'm 2646 02:04:28,159 --> 02:04:32,069 going to support the motion and with no other comments or 2647 02:04:32,069 --> 02:04:33,640 discussion I will call 2648 02:04:33,640 --> 02:04:37,039 for a vote on the board 2649 02:04:47,520 --> 02:04:54,909 that motion is going to carry six to zero is everybody okay 2650 02:04:54,909 --> 02:04:56,920 to continue do 2651 02:04:56,920 --> 02:05:02,520 need to take a break before we start our next item okay and 2652 02:05:02,520 --> 02:05:03,319 we'll move us to our 2653 02:05:03,319 --> 02:05:08,800 item C thank you all best luck on your project 2654 02:05:14,439 --> 02:05:18,390 at this time I'm going to open the public hearing for item 2655 02:05:18,390 --> 02:05:22,239 s 16 - 0 0 0 7 B 2656 02:05:22,239 --> 02:05:27,119 we'll call on Haley for presentation 2657 02:05:33,319 --> 02:05:55,369 give us a minute to warm up okay all right so my name is H 2658 02:05:55,369 --> 02:05:56,000 aley's aggressive 2659 02:05:56,000 --> 02:05:59,119 with the planning division and this is case s 16 7 for the 2660 02:05:59,119 --> 02:05:59,680 rainy road 2661 02:05:59,680 --> 02:06:02,630 apartments and I'll run through this pretty quickly since 2662 02:06:02,630 --> 02:06:03,199 we do have a few 2663 02:06:03,199 --> 02:06:07,520 people in the audience so the request was to hold a public 2664 02:06:07,520 --> 02:06:08,039 hearing and 2665 02:06:08,039 --> 02:06:11,239 consider a request for a specific use permit to allow a 2666 02:06:11,239 --> 02:06:12,520 multifamily use on a 2667 02:06:12,520 --> 02:06:15,659 property that's approximately point nine acres the property 2668 02:06:15,659 --> 02:06:16,840 is located at the 2669 02:06:16,840 --> 02:06:19,909 rainy road and rainy court intersection and is uniquely 2670 02:06:19,909 --> 02:06:20,840 configured having 2671 02:06:20,840 --> 02:06:26,529 frontage on Elm Street rainy road and rainy court a look at 2672 02:06:26,529 --> 02:06:27,680 what the proposal 2673 02:06:27,680 --> 02:06:30,869 is our site plan shows that this would be two apartment 2674 02:06:30,869 --> 02:06:31,920 buildings each one 2675 02:06:31,920 --> 02:06:34,319 would be comprised of five units the units are each 2676 02:06:34,319 --> 02:06:35,359 proposed as the three 2677 02:06:35,359 --> 02:06:39,659 bedroom two and a half bathroom configuration and as you 2678 02:06:39,659 --> 02:06:40,199 can see 2679 02:06:40,199 --> 02:06:42,489 outlined in green each of these units would feature a rear 2680 02:06:42,489 --> 02:06:43,239 yard that would be 2681 02:06:43,239 --> 02:06:48,329 fenced there's also a storage building proposed on the site 2682 02:06:48,329 --> 02:06:49,199 it is shown here in 2683 02:06:49,199 --> 02:06:51,989 red and buildings a little over 700 square feet would 2684 02:06:51,989 --> 02:06:53,079 feature a storage unit 2685 02:06:53,079 --> 02:06:56,289 for each of the apartments and the site is required to have 2686 02:06:56,289 --> 02:06:58,119 20 parking spaces by 2687 02:06:58,119 --> 02:07:01,470 code they're proposing 23 spaces and the three spaces that 2688 02:07:01,470 --> 02:07:02,399 are shown in gray 2689 02:07:02,399 --> 02:07:05,640 would be pervy's make constructed a pervious papers to 2690 02:07:05,640 --> 02:07:06,359 comply with the 2691 02:07:06,359 --> 02:07:10,800 development code their landscape plan as you can see here 2692 02:07:10,800 --> 02:07:11,520 shows that they are 2693 02:07:11,520 --> 02:07:14,319 complying with the provisions of our development code for 2694 02:07:14,319 --> 02:07:15,159 landscaping they 2695 02:07:15,159 --> 02:07:19,000 exceed the required 40% by approximately 8% extra landscape 2696 02:07:19,000 --> 02:07:20,539 area some of the key 2697 02:07:20,539 --> 02:07:23,430 features of the site would be the type B buffer that's 2698 02:07:23,430 --> 02:07:24,840 required to the adjoining 2699 02:07:24,840 --> 02:07:28,310 single-family residence this buffer requires five trees and 2700 02:07:28,310 --> 02:07:29,239 30 shrubs for 2701 02:07:29,239 --> 02:07:32,310 every 100 linear feet in addition to that the applicants 2702 02:07:32,310 --> 02:07:33,159 also proposing an 2703 02:07:33,159 --> 02:07:36,699 eight-foot tall cedar fence along that property line they 2704 02:07:36,699 --> 02:07:38,079 are proposing to 2705 02:07:38,079 --> 02:07:41,220 maintain the existing tree line along reiney court it's 2706 02:07:41,220 --> 02:07:42,159 outlined in green on 2707 02:07:42,159 --> 02:07:44,680 the site plan and then in orange you can see one of their 2708 02:07:44,680 --> 02:07:45,800 other features will be 2709 02:07:45,800 --> 02:07:48,699 a patio and trellis area that also features some landsca 2710 02:07:48,699 --> 02:07:49,680 ping that would be 2711 02:07:49,680 --> 02:07:54,390 open space for the residents the building elevations this 2712 02:07:54,390 --> 02:07:55,600 is building one 2713 02:07:55,600 --> 02:07:57,800 which would be on the southern side of the property this 2714 02:07:57,800 --> 02:07:58,680 building would have 2715 02:07:58,680 --> 02:08:01,750 five units as I mentioned they would each have an exterior 2716 02:08:01,750 --> 02:08:02,479 front and rear 2717 02:08:02,479 --> 02:08:07,640 entrance and the materials are primarily brick and stucco 2718 02:08:07,640 --> 02:08:09,199 building two would be 2719 02:08:09,199 --> 02:08:11,720 located on the northern side you can see a very similar 2720 02:08:11,720 --> 02:08:13,079 configuration here with 2721 02:08:13,079 --> 02:08:17,720 five units each with the exterior front and rear entrances 2722 02:08:17,720 --> 02:08:18,960 also brick and stucco 2723 02:08:18,960 --> 02:08:23,770 materials here is the proposed elevation for the storage 2724 02:08:23,770 --> 02:08:24,680 building you can see it 2725 02:08:24,680 --> 02:08:26,960 has one exterior entrance point that would open to a 2726 02:08:26,960 --> 02:08:28,119 hallway that would then 2727 02:08:28,119 --> 02:08:31,340 have the ten separate storage areas off of that and this 2728 02:08:31,340 --> 02:08:32,840 building is proposed as 2729 02:08:32,840 --> 02:08:37,630 brick construction as well our criteria for approval for an 2730 02:08:37,630 --> 02:08:38,720 issue peer outlined 2731 02:08:38,720 --> 02:08:41,510 in detail in subchapter 6 of the Denton Development Code 2732 02:08:41,510 --> 02:08:43,439 just in summary they 2733 02:08:43,439 --> 02:08:46,510 generally provide considerations that would require 2734 02:08:46,510 --> 02:08:47,720 consistency with the 2735 02:08:47,720 --> 02:08:50,949 zoning regulations conformity with the goals of the Denton 2736 02:08:50,949 --> 02:08:52,640 plan 2030 as well as 2737 02:08:52,640 --> 02:08:55,560 consistency and compatibility with the surrounding area in 2738 02:08:55,560 --> 02:08:56,479 terms of the scale 2739 02:08:56,479 --> 02:09:00,970 of the development so to look at each of those in turn at 2740 02:09:00,970 --> 02:09:02,239 the existing zoning for 2741 02:09:02,239 --> 02:09:04,479 the property is in our MU 12 that's neighborhood 2742 02:09:04,479 --> 02:09:06,439 residential mixed use this 2743 02:09:06,439 --> 02:09:09,680 zoning district allows for a variety of residential uses 2744 02:09:09,680 --> 02:09:11,000 the multifamily use is 2745 02:09:11,000 --> 02:09:13,939 required to either have an SUP or be part of an approved 2746 02:09:13,939 --> 02:09:15,000 small area plan or 2747 02:09:15,000 --> 02:09:18,560 as part of a mixed use development some of the general 2748 02:09:18,560 --> 02:09:20,119 regulations as I mentioned 2749 02:09:20,119 --> 02:09:23,239 they had a 40% minimum landscaping that they are complying 2750 02:09:23,239 --> 02:09:24,199 with which then in 2751 02:09:24,199 --> 02:09:26,329 turn means they're in compliance with their maximum lot 2752 02:09:26,329 --> 02:09:27,600 coverage the maximum 2753 02:09:27,600 --> 02:09:29,970 density they could reach is 12 units with this being 2754 02:09:29,970 --> 02:09:31,079 approximately one acre 2755 02:09:31,079 --> 02:09:35,409 with 10 units they're just under that to look at the 2756 02:09:35,409 --> 02:09:36,880 surrounding area within 2757 02:09:36,880 --> 02:09:40,539 approximately 200 feet we have some single-family homes 2758 02:09:40,539 --> 02:09:41,039 within a 2759 02:09:41,039 --> 02:09:44,149 neighborhood residential to zoning district and then the 2760 02:09:44,149 --> 02:09:45,359 subject property as 2761 02:09:45,359 --> 02:09:47,449 well as some of the surrounding residences and vacant 2762 02:09:47,449 --> 02:09:48,319 property are within 2763 02:09:48,319 --> 02:09:53,270 the NRMU 12 district zooming out a little bit further we 2764 02:09:53,270 --> 02:09:54,520 see across Elm 2765 02:09:54,520 --> 02:09:57,340 Street more single-family residences we do start to get 2766 02:09:57,340 --> 02:09:58,199 into a mixture of higher 2767 02:09:58,199 --> 02:10:01,800 densities with some duplexes here North Lakes Park is 2768 02:10:01,800 --> 02:10:03,159 located just to the south 2769 02:10:03,159 --> 02:10:07,720 of the property within an NRMU 12 district and then this 2770 02:10:07,720 --> 02:10:08,399 general area of 2771 02:10:08,399 --> 02:10:11,819 town you see as a wide array of uses on North Elm Street on 2772 02:10:11,819 --> 02:10:12,920 the north side as 2773 02:10:12,920 --> 02:10:15,439 well as the south there's a mixture of residential uses 2774 02:10:15,439 --> 02:10:17,039 single-family duplexes 2775 02:10:17,039 --> 02:10:21,369 apartments we also have North Lakes Park to the south UNT's 2776 02:10:21,369 --> 02:10:22,560 Discovery Park you 2777 02:10:22,560 --> 02:10:25,449 can see in purple there on the north side so they are near 2778 02:10:25,449 --> 02:10:26,399 a UNT property as 2779 02:10:26,399 --> 02:10:31,420 well the future land use designation for this property is 2780 02:10:31,420 --> 02:10:32,319 it's kind of on the 2781 02:10:32,319 --> 02:10:35,239 buffer between two designations that are neighborhood mixed 2782 02:10:35,239 --> 02:10:36,039 use and moderate 2783 02:10:36,039 --> 02:10:39,130 residential the proposed use is in conformity with both of 2784 02:10:39,130 --> 02:10:39,520 those 2785 02:10:39,520 --> 02:10:43,380 designations neighborhood mixed use allows for a mixture of 2786 02:10:43,380 --> 02:10:43,960 housing types 2787 02:10:43,960 --> 02:10:47,220 with supporting retail services and moderate residential 2788 02:10:47,220 --> 02:10:48,119 encourages the 2789 02:10:48,119 --> 02:10:51,350 protection of existing neighborhoods as well as development 2790 02:10:51,350 --> 02:10:52,279 with a density in 2791 02:10:52,279 --> 02:10:56,270 the range of 4 to 12 units per acre so this fits within 2792 02:10:56,270 --> 02:10:58,880 that range the mobility 2793 02:10:58,880 --> 02:11:01,300 for this area as I mentioned it has frontage on three 2794 02:11:01,300 --> 02:11:02,439 different roads North 2795 02:11:02,439 --> 02:11:05,920 Elm Street is a text out roadway and a primary arterial Re 2796 02:11:05,920 --> 02:11:07,159 iny Road is a 2797 02:11:07,159 --> 02:11:11,720 collector Street and Reiny Court is a neighborhood Street 2798 02:11:11,720 --> 02:11:13,279 subject property as 2799 02:11:13,279 --> 02:11:16,439 you can see is primarily vacant there is the existing tree 2800 02:11:16,439 --> 02:11:17,680 line along Reiny Court 2801 02:11:17,680 --> 02:11:22,069 that they intend to preserve notifications were sent for 2802 02:11:22,069 --> 02:11:22,720 this request 2803 02:11:22,720 --> 02:11:25,979 we received four opposition letters that are in your backup 2804 02:11:25,979 --> 02:11:27,119 and our GIS team did 2805 02:11:27,119 --> 02:11:30,359 run the calculations and within the 200 foot buffer they 2806 02:11:30,359 --> 02:11:31,119 were at approximately 2807 02:11:31,119 --> 02:11:34,720 33% of the land area expressing opposition so that would 2808 02:11:34,720 --> 02:11:35,239 require the 2809 02:11:35,239 --> 02:11:38,359 super majority vote at council a neighborhood meeting was 2810 02:11:38,359 --> 02:11:39,039 held back in 2811 02:11:39,039 --> 02:11:43,680 May and there were 11 people in attendance at that meeting 2812 02:11:43,680 --> 02:11:44,920 given all 2813 02:11:44,920 --> 02:11:47,039 these criteria we've discussed staff is staff is 2814 02:11:47,039 --> 02:11:48,399 recommending approval of the 2815 02:11:48,399 --> 02:11:51,140 request it's generally compatible with the surrounding land 2816 02:11:51,140 --> 02:11:52,000 use pattern and is 2817 02:11:52,000 --> 02:11:54,220 consistent with the goals and objectives of our Denton plan 2818 02:11:54,220 --> 02:11:55,920 2030 we do recommend 2819 02:11:55,920 --> 02:11:59,260 one condition and that be that the use substantially comply 2820 02:11:59,260 --> 02:12:00,319 with the site plan 2821 02:12:00,319 --> 02:12:03,109 landscape plan and building elevations that were included 2822 02:12:03,109 --> 02:12:04,640 here and with that I 2823 02:12:04,640 --> 02:12:11,020 can stand for any questions Commissioner Tyler thank you 2824 02:12:11,020 --> 02:12:12,880 chair could you return 2825 02:12:12,880 --> 02:12:17,560 to the site plan certainly so I'm assuming rental property 2826 02:12:17,560 --> 02:12:18,880 this close to 2827 02:12:18,880 --> 02:12:23,680 research park is probably aiming at students to some degree 2828 02:12:23,680 --> 02:12:24,600 I'm not sure 2829 02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,529 what their target audience is I know they're designed a 2830 02:12:26,529 --> 02:12:27,319 little bit more like 2831 02:12:27,319 --> 02:12:30,390 townhomes that could encourage you know family use but I 2832 02:12:30,390 --> 02:12:31,560 believe the applicant 2833 02:12:31,560 --> 02:12:33,649 is here and he could speak more to what their target 2834 02:12:33,649 --> 02:12:35,239 audience would be okay my 2835 02:12:35,239 --> 02:12:39,899 question is I don't notice any bike parking here and I do 2836 02:12:39,899 --> 02:12:40,920 know that the 2837 02:12:40,920 --> 02:12:44,979 city is just put in an 8-foot multi-use path maybe a couple 2838 02:12:44,979 --> 02:12:46,039 hundred yards from 2839 02:12:46,039 --> 02:12:48,840 here and again I there's going to be some amount of 2840 02:12:48,840 --> 02:12:49,760 students probably in this 2841 02:12:49,760 --> 02:12:53,680 so I was wondering am I missing it or is it not on the plan 2842 02:12:53,680 --> 02:12:55,439 as far as I can tell 2843 02:12:55,439 --> 02:12:57,800 I don't believe there is bike parking incorporated like 2844 02:12:57,800 --> 02:12:59,279 something most of the 2845 02:12:59,279 --> 02:13:06,000 applicant perhaps thank you any other questions for staff 2846 02:13:06,000 --> 02:13:08,600 there's one 2847 02:13:08,600 --> 02:13:13,630 Commissioner Ellis like camera thank you chair Haley that 2848 02:13:13,630 --> 02:13:14,680 that parking lot I 2849 02:13:14,680 --> 02:13:18,430 notice on the site plan it looks really tight I assume that 2850 02:13:18,430 --> 02:13:20,520 where the dumpster 2851 02:13:20,520 --> 02:13:23,989 is located on this site plan that that waste management can 2852 02:13:23,989 --> 02:13:25,000 get in there and 2853 02:13:25,000 --> 02:13:28,520 empty and turn out appropriately or back up appropriately I 2854 02:13:28,520 --> 02:13:29,199 mean I assume that's 2855 02:13:29,199 --> 02:13:32,550 been looked at or will be looked at yes it was looked at 2856 02:13:32,550 --> 02:13:33,800 with this request it 2857 02:13:33,800 --> 02:13:35,949 will be looked at in further detail with their site plan 2858 02:13:35,949 --> 02:13:37,199 submittal but I believe 2859 02:13:37,199 --> 02:13:39,439 they did have a proper stacking distance and the width of 2860 02:13:39,439 --> 02:13:40,239 the dry bottle was 2861 02:13:40,239 --> 02:13:43,159 appropriate for fire access as well as solid waste okay 2862 02:13:43,159 --> 02:13:45,560 thank you 2863 02:13:46,520 --> 02:13:51,779 thank you Jim is coming up to add something yes 2864 02:13:51,779 --> 02:13:53,359 Commissioner we did look 2865 02:13:53,359 --> 02:14:00,930 at that on on sites with a short a dry vial is this one we 2866 02:14:00,930 --> 02:14:02,000 don't require 2867 02:14:02,000 --> 02:14:07,899 turnaround provisions for the trucks they can they can back 2868 02:14:07,899 --> 02:14:11,680 up any other 2869 02:14:11,680 --> 02:14:14,319 questions for him 2870 02:14:15,279 --> 02:14:20,239 thank you thank you can this is a public hearing anyone who 2871 02:14:20,239 --> 02:14:21,000 would like to speak 2872 02:14:21,000 --> 02:14:24,359 please come forward at this time 2873 02:14:27,399 --> 02:14:30,199 you'll state your name and address and then I don't have a 2874 02:14:30,199 --> 02:14:31,800 card for me so if 2875 02:14:31,800 --> 02:14:34,189 you'll fill out a card for us when you before you leave 2876 02:14:34,189 --> 02:14:35,560 okay well I got here 2877 02:14:35,560 --> 02:14:42,180 so my name is Brad Andrus I'm with the applicant I live at 2878 02:14:42,180 --> 02:14:44,640 8855 FM 1173 in 2879 02:14:44,640 --> 02:14:50,420 crumb appreciate your consideration this item this evening 2880 02:14:50,420 --> 02:14:52,039 the as I know is in 2881 02:14:52,039 --> 02:14:55,529 your background material my brother and I purchased this 2882 02:14:55,529 --> 02:14:56,560 lot a couple of years 2883 02:14:56,560 --> 02:15:00,739 ago with a different use in mind and and after really an 2884 02:15:00,739 --> 02:15:03,560 unfortunate event of our 2885 02:15:03,560 --> 02:15:06,890 business partner that we were going to do an assisted 2886 02:15:06,890 --> 02:15:08,479 living project with she 2887 02:15:08,479 --> 02:15:14,920 suddenly passed away of cancer and so we kind of had to 2888 02:15:14,920 --> 02:15:15,920 Brock and I looked at 2889 02:15:15,920 --> 02:15:18,489 each other like we don't know how to run assisted living 2890 02:15:18,489 --> 02:15:20,000 facility this is she was 2891 02:15:20,000 --> 02:15:22,880 going to do that for us we looked at other options on doing 2892 02:15:22,880 --> 02:15:24,939 that and in the 2893 02:15:24,939 --> 02:15:28,720 end we just became uncomfortable with that particular use 2894 02:15:28,720 --> 02:15:30,140 so started to 2895 02:15:30,140 --> 02:15:33,010 explore other options and what what other uses could be 2896 02:15:33,010 --> 02:15:33,979 done in that that 2897 02:15:33,979 --> 02:15:40,569 property and the I'm I do commercial real estate for a 2898 02:15:40,569 --> 02:15:42,600 living and develop 2899 02:15:42,600 --> 02:15:48,520 office buildings and some other small retail type projects 2900 02:15:48,520 --> 02:15:49,680 as well as lease a 2901 02:15:49,680 --> 02:15:53,300 variety of commercial properties and as I considered based 2902 02:15:53,300 --> 02:15:54,359 on my experience 2903 02:15:54,359 --> 02:15:58,039 what type of properties would work there I really didn't 2904 02:15:58,039 --> 02:15:59,119 see a good fit other 2905 02:15:59,119 --> 02:16:03,880 than some sort of residential use and so the we started 2906 02:16:03,880 --> 02:16:05,760 looking at okay well 2907 02:16:05,760 --> 02:16:08,149 within the zoning what's allowed we looked at 2908 02:16:08,149 --> 02:16:10,000 configurations for duplexes 2909 02:16:10,000 --> 02:16:13,180 or townhomes which are allowed within the zoning and based 2910 02:16:13,180 --> 02:16:14,479 on this very odd 2911 02:16:14,479 --> 02:16:18,789 site configuration this triangular lot with streets on on 2912 02:16:18,789 --> 02:16:20,399 three sides we just 2913 02:16:20,399 --> 02:16:23,529 were having a heck of a time coming up with a layout and it 2914 02:16:23,529 --> 02:16:25,000 really initially 2915 02:16:25,000 --> 02:16:28,470 was working with Julie on this and it was kind of at her 2916 02:16:28,470 --> 02:16:29,800 suggestion that we 2917 02:16:29,800 --> 02:16:33,479 look at an SUP and so that's why we're presenting that that 2918 02:16:33,479 --> 02:16:34,440 's kind of the 2919 02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:39,559 history of it and what I've really tried to do is is focus 2920 02:16:39,559 --> 02:16:41,079 design this in a way 2921 02:16:41,079 --> 02:16:44,959 that would look similar to a townhome development and so 2922 02:16:44,959 --> 02:16:46,280 while there's not 2923 02:16:46,280 --> 02:16:49,479 garages on the buildings everything short of that I think 2924 02:16:49,479 --> 02:16:50,440 it looks and feels 2925 02:16:50,440 --> 02:16:53,610 very much like a townhome project which is what is a use 2926 02:16:53,610 --> 02:16:55,000 that would be allowed 2927 02:16:55,000 --> 02:16:58,659 without an SUP and so the reason we couldn't really 2928 02:16:58,659 --> 02:17:00,000 consider the SU or the 2929 02:17:00,000 --> 02:17:03,879 townhome use in and of itself is the way again the lot was 2930 02:17:03,879 --> 02:17:05,000 configured and with the 2931 02:17:05,000 --> 02:17:08,139 lot the platting of the lots and the way that would have to 2932 02:17:08,139 --> 02:17:09,000 be set up it just 2933 02:17:09,000 --> 02:17:12,760 wasn't working and so trying to do something that 2934 02:17:12,760 --> 02:17:14,000 essentially would look 2935 02:17:14,000 --> 02:17:18,690 like something that would be already approved we've we've 2936 02:17:18,690 --> 02:17:19,719 gone we've tried to 2937 02:17:19,719 --> 02:17:23,879 go above and beyond on our landscape not only are we 8% 2938 02:17:23,879 --> 02:17:25,879 more in landscape area 2939 02:17:25,879 --> 02:17:31,440 but we're we've we're actually 78% have a 78% tree canopy 2940 02:17:31,440 --> 02:17:33,719 versus a 45% canopy 2941 02:17:33,719 --> 02:17:37,739 that's required per code so and of course done that that 2942 02:17:37,739 --> 02:17:39,200 trellis and that 2943 02:17:39,200 --> 02:17:42,549 kind of park area over there trying to add and to the 2944 02:17:42,549 --> 02:17:44,280 aesthetics of the project 2945 02:17:44,280 --> 02:17:48,159 as well I would like to address your question Mr. Taylor 2946 02:17:48,159 --> 02:17:49,639 about the bike or 2947 02:17:49,639 --> 02:17:52,440 really kind of wanted to get back to the what our 2948 02:17:52,440 --> 02:17:54,159 intentions are as far as our 2949 02:17:54,159 --> 02:17:58,459 demographic or target market we really see it as more 2950 02:17:58,459 --> 02:18:00,680 family could students 2951 02:18:00,680 --> 02:18:04,069 live there certainly but the the the three bedroom two and 2952 02:18:04,069 --> 02:18:04,840 a half bath was 2953 02:18:04,840 --> 02:18:10,120 really more kind of designed with with families in mind so 2954 02:18:10,120 --> 02:18:11,360 hadn't even thought 2955 02:18:11,360 --> 02:18:14,870 about a park bike rack to be honest with wide open to 2956 02:18:14,870 --> 02:18:15,879 putting one on there we've 2957 02:18:15,879 --> 02:18:19,350 got no problem with doing that we'd welcome that if that 2958 02:18:19,350 --> 02:18:20,559 were become a part 2959 02:18:20,559 --> 02:18:26,250 of the the SUP provision so and with the storage you know 2960 02:18:26,250 --> 02:18:28,000 when we when we met 2961 02:18:28,000 --> 02:18:31,600 with the neighbors a couple of months ago and discussed you 2962 02:18:31,600 --> 02:18:32,479 know primary 2963 02:18:32,479 --> 02:18:36,360 concerns for them that I heard were well generally we don't 2964 02:18:36,360 --> 02:18:37,639 want this use here 2965 02:18:37,639 --> 02:18:41,149 and that's something I don't have other than saying well we 2966 02:18:41,149 --> 02:18:42,360 'll just leave it as 2967 02:18:42,360 --> 02:18:45,870 an empty lot I didn't have a lot to kind of come back with 2968 02:18:45,870 --> 02:18:47,559 on that but parking 2969 02:18:47,559 --> 02:18:51,159 was an overall concern so we went back to the drawing board 2970 02:18:51,159 --> 02:18:51,959 added three 2971 02:18:51,959 --> 02:18:55,280 additional parking spaces that of course those three will 2972 02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:58,479 be pervious spaces we 2973 02:18:58,479 --> 02:19:02,370 talked about whether they prefer you know a wall all the 2974 02:19:02,370 --> 02:19:03,799 way around you know 2975 02:19:03,799 --> 02:19:07,819 a screening wall all the way around or leave this natural 2976 02:19:07,819 --> 02:19:09,000 barrier here on 2977 02:19:09,000 --> 02:19:12,709 Riney Court and it was kind of mixed but I heard more of 2978 02:19:12,709 --> 02:19:14,280 let's leave it as much 2979 02:19:14,280 --> 02:19:17,430 like it is as possible and so that's kind of why we don't 2980 02:19:17,430 --> 02:19:18,399 have you know we 2981 02:19:18,399 --> 02:19:21,319 only have that screen 8-foot screening wall on that west 2982 02:19:21,319 --> 02:19:22,440 west side we did 2983 02:19:22,440 --> 02:19:25,870 consider that on the Riney Court side as well so tried to 2984 02:19:25,870 --> 02:19:27,399 be you know work with 2985 02:19:27,399 --> 02:19:29,979 the neighbors as much as possible and addressing some of 2986 02:19:29,979 --> 02:19:30,760 their concerns 2987 02:19:30,760 --> 02:19:34,549 throughout the project so that if you have any questions 2988 02:19:34,549 --> 02:19:35,719 for me I'd love to 2989 02:19:35,719 --> 02:19:39,200 address them. Commissioner Back. Thank you Chair and thank 2990 02:19:39,200 --> 02:19:39,920 you Brad for your 2991 02:19:39,920 --> 02:19:43,879 presentation I personally I like the design I think you've 2992 02:19:43,879 --> 02:19:44,360 done well in 2993 02:19:44,360 --> 02:19:46,729 trying to accommodate the neighbors I like the fact that 2994 02:19:46,729 --> 02:19:47,440 you've kept all 2995 02:19:47,440 --> 02:19:53,399 those trees on the Riney Court side and with ten units to 2996 02:19:53,399 --> 02:19:55,000 direct attention to 2997 02:19:55,000 --> 02:19:58,799 some of the concerns of local residents I'm not sure 2998 02:19:58,799 --> 02:20:00,959 traffic is going to be 2999 02:20:00,959 --> 02:20:07,889 anything of an increased traffic flow because I mean we're 3000 02:20:07,889 --> 02:20:08,360 dealing with ten 3001 02:20:08,360 --> 02:20:13,680 units here Riney is a connector road between 35 and Windsor 3002 02:20:13,680 --> 02:20:14,399 I believe it is 3003 02:20:14,399 --> 02:20:18,059 so the fact that apartments are coming in to residential 3004 02:20:18,059 --> 02:20:19,280 neighborhood that's 3005 02:20:19,280 --> 02:20:22,079 not a good thing that's that's an argument that I don't 3006 02:20:22,079 --> 02:20:23,079 always buy into 3007 02:20:23,079 --> 02:20:28,680 because that's not an automatic one concern was mentioned 3008 02:20:28,680 --> 02:20:29,520 about drainage 3009 02:20:29,520 --> 02:20:34,780 though so can you tell us share with us on grading this lot 3010 02:20:34,780 --> 02:20:36,360 how is it going to 3011 02:20:36,360 --> 02:20:39,430 be graded is most of it going to go out towards Riney Road 3012 02:20:39,430 --> 02:20:40,719 and Elmer's are we 3013 02:20:40,719 --> 02:20:45,239 going to get a considerable amount back on Riney Court? I 3014 02:20:45,239 --> 02:20:46,360 appreciate the question 3015 02:20:46,360 --> 02:20:49,079 unfortunately I don't have a good answer for you because I 3016 02:20:49,079 --> 02:20:50,200 have not gone to the 3017 02:20:50,200 --> 02:20:55,629 point of having a topo survey done to know exactly what the 3018 02:20:55,629 --> 02:20:57,559 fall is that some 3019 02:20:57,559 --> 02:21:00,350 of the neighbors concerned is mine too I want as much as 3020 02:21:00,350 --> 02:21:01,559 the neighbors wanted I 3021 02:21:01,559 --> 02:21:05,870 want to keep that that natural tree barrier there on on R 3022 02:21:05,870 --> 02:21:07,159 iney Court there is 3023 02:21:07,159 --> 02:21:11,030 some concern that that maybe the drainage will have to be 3024 02:21:11,030 --> 02:21:12,319 worked in such a way 3025 02:21:12,319 --> 02:21:17,280 that some of that would have to be removed there's Jim 3026 02:21:17,280 --> 02:21:18,360 probably could 3027 02:21:18,360 --> 02:21:23,440 answer better where where the inlets are for that side I 3028 02:21:23,440 --> 02:21:25,360 think it goes towards 3029 02:21:25,360 --> 02:21:29,399 Riney Road doesn't it or will it go towards Elm but again 3030 02:21:29,399 --> 02:21:30,520 don't know the 3031 02:21:30,520 --> 02:21:33,799 exact topography of it so probably gonna struggle answering 3032 02:21:33,799 --> 02:21:34,920 that. 3033 02:21:34,920 --> 02:21:41,850 It goes towards Riney Court. Can I put this down here for 3034 02:21:41,850 --> 02:21:42,719 display? 3035 02:21:42,719 --> 02:21:46,000 Eye in the sky. 3036 02:21:48,000 --> 02:21:59,360 Okay. Thank you. I've got the topographic map here and I've 3037 02:21:59,360 --> 02:22:00,239 added some flow 3038 02:22:00,239 --> 02:22:04,420 arrows where you can see the site itself and this is all 3039 02:22:04,420 --> 02:22:05,840 current topography and 3040 02:22:05,840 --> 02:22:08,770 this is with our GIS so it's sort of high level it's not 3041 02:22:08,770 --> 02:22:11,879 topo survey but it 3042 02:22:11,879 --> 02:22:18,719 it basically drains right now towards Riney Court and 3043 02:22:18,719 --> 02:22:21,719 towards the park really 3044 02:22:21,719 --> 02:22:27,600 there's an existing swale along the east side of Riney Road 3045 02:22:27,600 --> 02:22:29,079 that appears to 3046 02:22:29,079 --> 02:22:32,409 collect the area I've shown in red the runoff from that 3047 02:22:32,409 --> 02:22:33,879 area and then there's a 3048 02:22:33,879 --> 02:22:37,110 couple of culverts crossing Riney Road and the first 3049 02:22:37,110 --> 02:22:38,600 driveway there in that 3050 02:22:38,600 --> 02:22:43,549 first house going on a ditch along the south or west side 3051 02:22:43,549 --> 02:22:44,360 of Riney Court 3052 02:22:44,360 --> 02:22:48,680 towards the park. Jim let me ask you this in your opinion 3053 02:22:48,680 --> 02:22:51,159 if the applicant is able 3054 02:22:51,159 --> 02:22:55,149 to develop this with altering that flow at least on that 3055 02:22:55,149 --> 02:22:56,760 lot back out the other 3056 02:22:56,760 --> 02:22:59,559 way is that going to create some negative impact just 3057 02:22:59,559 --> 02:23:00,440 outside the 3058 02:23:00,440 --> 02:23:04,920 property? Well we would not allow development that creates 3059 02:23:04,920 --> 02:23:05,620 negative 3060 02:23:05,620 --> 02:23:10,000 development negative drainage impact on neighboring 3061 02:23:10,000 --> 02:23:13,000 property. I mean there would 3062 02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:16,959 be it's a very small site it's like 0.9 of an acre I think 3063 02:23:16,959 --> 02:23:18,920 so even when they 3064 02:23:18,920 --> 02:23:22,959 develop it there will be some increased runoff but not much 3065 02:23:22,959 --> 02:23:24,719 we we still have yet 3066 02:23:24,719 --> 02:23:29,079 to I think receive and review the site plan cemental that 3067 02:23:29,079 --> 02:23:29,319 will have a 3068 02:23:29,319 --> 02:23:32,719 grading plan to have the drainage calculations and routing 3069 02:23:32,719 --> 02:23:33,920 we will check it 3070 02:23:33,920 --> 02:23:41,309 all for that one this is just an idea I have this is 3071 02:23:41,309 --> 02:23:42,399 subject to change but 3072 02:23:42,399 --> 02:23:46,879 looking at seeing how the drainage currently runs I'm 3073 02:23:46,879 --> 02:23:48,440 wondering if it would 3074 02:23:48,440 --> 02:23:51,579 make sense it almost seems like it wants to go towards that 3075 02:23:51,579 --> 02:23:52,680 green area which is 3076 02:23:52,680 --> 02:23:57,799 actually a sort of a finger of the park property one thing 3077 02:23:57,799 --> 02:23:59,639 I mean you can always 3078 02:23:59,639 --> 02:24:02,709 detain we're not talking about much in the way of 3079 02:24:02,709 --> 02:24:04,479 additional runoff here on 3080 02:24:04,479 --> 02:24:08,790 this site one thing we have allowed in certain situations 3081 02:24:08,790 --> 02:24:10,159 is if you have like a 3082 02:24:10,159 --> 02:24:13,469 pipe you may have I don't know if there's a culvert across 3083 02:24:13,469 --> 02:24:14,360 for any court 3084 02:24:14,360 --> 02:24:19,049 there if not you may have to put one in if you have a sort 3085 02:24:19,049 --> 02:24:20,680 of concentrated 3086 02:24:20,680 --> 02:24:23,750 discharge there under the park property we require you to 3087 02:24:23,750 --> 02:24:25,239 get a little easement 3088 02:24:25,239 --> 02:24:28,549 at that discharge point and a letter from them 3089 02:24:28,549 --> 02:24:30,879 acknowledging the additional 3090 02:24:30,879 --> 02:24:34,209 runoff that's just a thought to me that's looking at this 3091 02:24:34,209 --> 02:24:34,920 that seems to be 3092 02:24:34,920 --> 02:24:38,159 what how it wants to work okay well we can look at it down 3093 02:24:38,159 --> 02:24:38,920 the road been when 3094 02:24:38,920 --> 02:24:43,319 the site plan comes in and discuss it then thank you any 3095 02:24:43,319 --> 02:24:44,120 other questions for 3096 02:24:44,120 --> 02:24:46,479 the applicant 3097 02:24:48,840 --> 02:24:53,799 strange may I just make one comment the of course as Jim 3098 02:24:53,799 --> 02:24:55,600 says you know we'll 3099 02:24:55,600 --> 02:24:58,870 have to get full civil and approved by the by the city and 3100 02:24:58,870 --> 02:25:00,360 in that drainage 3101 02:25:00,360 --> 02:25:03,430 concern would exist whether we're an office building or any 3102 02:25:03,430 --> 02:25:04,200 you know any other 3103 02:25:04,200 --> 02:25:08,090 type of use that were allowed in in the in the current 3104 02:25:08,090 --> 02:25:14,120 zoning we I this is not 3105 02:25:14,120 --> 02:25:16,579 soft story but I've thought about going to that point 3106 02:25:16,579 --> 02:25:17,680 because I knew it was a 3107 02:25:17,680 --> 02:25:21,909 concern some of the neighbors were about 10,000 into just 3108 02:25:21,909 --> 02:25:23,479 getting to this point on 3109 02:25:23,479 --> 02:25:26,549 what we've done and so I feel like well until I get it know 3110 02:25:26,549 --> 02:25:27,200 whether I've got 3111 02:25:27,200 --> 02:25:29,489 something approved here what will cross that bridge when we 3112 02:25:29,489 --> 02:25:30,840 need to we know we 3113 02:25:30,840 --> 02:25:38,090 recognize we'll need to address that so thank you thank you 3114 02:25:38,090 --> 02:25:39,520 again this is a 3115 02:25:39,520 --> 02:25:41,989 public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item 3116 02:25:41,989 --> 02:25:42,840 please come forward 3117 02:25:42,840 --> 02:25:50,659 at this time please give us your name and your address and 3118 02:25:50,659 --> 02:25:51,360 then before you go 3119 02:25:51,360 --> 02:25:53,739 if you'll fill out a card for us I see no appreciate it my 3120 02:25:53,739 --> 02:25:56,280 name is Janice JAN I 3121 02:25:56,280 --> 02:26:01,540 S Cunningham 3501 Northam didn't Texas thank you and we 3122 02:26:01,540 --> 02:26:04,079 live on that north side 3123 02:26:04,079 --> 02:26:12,569 if you can pull up where there's the one house is there 3124 02:26:12,569 --> 02:26:14,920 okay and if you pull it 3125 02:26:14,920 --> 02:26:23,239 up can we get a little bit closer okay that's our house 3126 02:26:23,239 --> 02:26:24,840 right there at the top 3127 02:26:24,840 --> 02:26:31,889 that long white thing is our travel trailer and we have it 3128 02:26:31,889 --> 02:26:34,040 behind the fence 3129 02:26:34,040 --> 02:26:39,819 what we're concerned with is parking if there's ten 3130 02:26:39,819 --> 02:26:43,159 apartments and everybody has 3131 02:26:43,159 --> 02:26:48,879 two cars that's 20 okay now you've got three extra places 3132 02:26:48,879 --> 02:26:50,399 the Christmas 3133 02:26:50,399 --> 02:26:56,760 birthdays for kids when grandma grandpa come what where 3134 02:26:56,760 --> 02:26:59,719 they gonna park well they 3135 02:26:59,719 --> 02:27:05,500 on the other side of Ronnie Road there that belongs to Tom 3136 02:27:05,500 --> 02:27:07,879 Nelson and you can't 3137 02:27:07,879 --> 02:27:12,040 get down in there between those houses on on Ronnie Court 3138 02:27:12,040 --> 02:27:12,920 then you've got the 3139 02:27:12,920 --> 02:27:19,139 cul-de-sac which is where people aren't parking now but if 3140 02:27:19,139 --> 02:27:20,159 you let people 3141 02:27:20,159 --> 02:27:24,870 park along the back of our fence and we want out to go 3142 02:27:24,870 --> 02:27:27,280 camping I'm afraid we 3143 02:27:27,280 --> 02:27:30,639 can't and when we come in that's when we worry because my 3144 02:27:30,639 --> 02:27:32,159 husband and I have 3145 02:27:32,159 --> 02:27:37,360 enough trouble getting in there anyway so the parking is 3146 02:27:37,360 --> 02:27:39,760 the main thing and the 3147 02:27:39,760 --> 02:27:45,280 water now there is a little drainage that goes under there 3148 02:27:45,280 --> 02:27:46,520 and they put that 3149 02:27:46,520 --> 02:27:51,850 in for us because we had so much water in our backyard at 3150 02:27:51,850 --> 02:27:54,799 one time several years 3151 02:27:54,799 --> 02:28:00,760 ago they put that drainage in but we still have water okay 3152 02:28:00,760 --> 02:28:02,840 thank you I have a 3153 02:28:02,840 --> 02:28:05,719 question for you Commissioner Roselle thank you miss C 3154 02:28:05,719 --> 02:28:06,959 unningham for for being 3155 02:28:06,959 --> 02:28:10,879 here and providing your perspective on that I have a 3156 02:28:10,879 --> 02:28:13,079 question you enter your 3157 02:28:13,079 --> 02:28:16,389 house off Elm correct so Ronnie Court is in your backyard 3158 02:28:16,389 --> 02:28:18,079 right and you have two 3159 02:28:18,079 --> 02:28:21,270 neighbors across your back fence yes has Christmas or 3160 02:28:21,270 --> 02:28:22,559 birthday party at their 3161 02:28:22,559 --> 02:28:28,079 house ever blocked your trailer in no okay but when they 3162 02:28:28,079 --> 02:28:30,239 the YMCA was down 3163 02:28:30,239 --> 02:28:35,190 there on Ronnie Road yes they blocked in our trailer that's 3164 02:28:35,190 --> 02:28:36,159 where they parked is 3165 02:28:36,159 --> 02:28:44,639 YMCA still there no okay thank you thank you ma'am again 3166 02:28:44,639 --> 02:28:45,680 this is a public hearing 3167 02:28:45,680 --> 02:28:48,069 anyone else with wishing to speak on this item please come 3168 02:28:48,069 --> 02:28:48,760 forward at this 3169 02:28:48,760 --> 02:28:56,469 time seeing none or close the public hearing and 3170 02:28:56,469 --> 02:28:58,799 Commissioner Taylor thank 3171 02:28:58,799 --> 02:29:01,290 you chair I was curious if I don't know if this would be a 3172 02:29:01,290 --> 02:29:02,440 question for for staff 3173 02:29:02,440 --> 02:29:07,920 or engineering what would it take to get parking 3174 02:29:07,920 --> 02:29:11,360 limitations on Ronnie Court 3175 02:29:13,120 --> 02:29:18,110 yeah I think this was discussed earlier typical is a 3176 02:29:18,110 --> 02:29:20,920 petition and goes through 3177 02:29:20,920 --> 02:29:23,629 the Traffic Safety Commission and ultimately City Council 3178 02:29:23,629 --> 02:29:24,200 would have to 3179 02:29:24,200 --> 02:29:29,889 prove a no parking zone by ordinance and that's something 3180 02:29:29,889 --> 02:29:32,159 that we can afford but 3181 02:29:32,159 --> 02:29:36,239 it goes through that process okay I and so that would have 3182 02:29:36,239 --> 02:29:37,319 to be I guess 3183 02:29:37,319 --> 02:29:40,110 neighborhood initiated like the residents of the street 3184 02:29:40,110 --> 02:29:40,920 would probably 3185 02:29:40,920 --> 02:29:45,079 have to request it is that typically yes and there has to 3186 02:29:45,079 --> 02:29:47,079 be some sort of reason 3187 02:29:47,079 --> 02:29:52,559 of course to back that petition up okay 3188 02:30:00,879 --> 02:30:04,309 review of these development projects one of the parties I 3189 02:30:04,309 --> 02:30:05,840 meet with every week is 3190 02:30:05,840 --> 02:30:10,899 our traffic engineer and I will make a point of relaying 3191 02:30:10,899 --> 02:30:12,920 these concerns to him 3192 02:30:12,920 --> 02:30:18,629 and also seek his his guidance or suggestions about the 3193 02:30:18,629 --> 02:30:19,799 process of 3194 02:30:19,799 --> 02:30:27,049 applying for and possibly having agreed to no parking sign 3195 02:30:27,049 --> 02:30:28,120 age I'll see what the 3196 02:30:28,120 --> 02:30:31,030 process is I'll make him aware of the concern for sure we 3197 02:30:31,030 --> 02:30:32,760 will still see the 3198 02:30:32,760 --> 02:30:35,979 I mean I'll do it next week when I see him but also we 3199 02:30:35,979 --> 02:30:37,479 still have yet to see we 3200 02:30:37,479 --> 02:30:41,659 will receive a site plan permit application for this site 3201 02:30:41,659 --> 02:30:42,559 which we can 3202 02:30:42,559 --> 02:30:50,379 revisit it thank you so I there's a lot of opposition in 3203 02:30:50,379 --> 02:30:51,040 the neighborhood there's 3204 02:30:51,040 --> 02:30:56,149 surprising amount actually it's rare to get a large block 3205 02:30:56,149 --> 02:30:57,079 of neighbors to all 3206 02:30:57,079 --> 02:31:00,700 come out opposed to a project and I and I definitely 3207 02:31:00,700 --> 02:31:02,360 understand the concern of 3208 02:31:02,360 --> 02:31:06,559 you know apartments in a residential area there's a 3209 02:31:06,559 --> 02:31:08,920 challenge along Elm Elm 3210 02:31:08,920 --> 02:31:12,790 has a mix of some residences there are quite a few directly 3211 02:31:12,790 --> 02:31:14,760 north of here and 3212 02:31:14,760 --> 02:31:20,030 then it has a bunch of maybe two to five acre lots of many 3213 02:31:20,030 --> 02:31:21,920 triangular some are 3214 02:31:21,920 --> 02:31:25,020 already developed commercially and many and most of them 3215 02:31:25,020 --> 02:31:25,959 are zoned to some 3216 02:31:25,959 --> 02:31:29,120 commercial development either NRM you NRM you 12 or 3217 02:31:29,120 --> 02:31:31,719 something more intense and 3218 02:31:31,719 --> 02:31:38,979 there isn't really a feasible way to develop the the three 3219 02:31:38,979 --> 02:31:40,120 acre lot that's 3220 02:31:40,120 --> 02:31:44,930 500 or 800 feet further south on Elm here or the you know 3221 02:31:44,930 --> 02:31:46,239 the the eight acre 3222 02:31:46,239 --> 02:31:50,739 triangle up near Reini or Reini goes east west or you know 3223 02:31:50,739 --> 02:31:52,120 the one across from 3224 02:31:52,120 --> 02:31:55,879 that were behind the Jehovah's Witness Hall or the funny 3225 02:31:55,879 --> 02:31:57,360 trapezoidal one down 3226 02:31:57,360 --> 02:32:01,340 by the dollar general in the residential pattern you know 3227 02:32:01,340 --> 02:32:02,680 that doesn't like just 3228 02:32:02,680 --> 02:32:06,860 having single-family homes there doesn't work and so I look 3229 02:32:06,860 --> 02:32:08,860 at this and I'm in my 3230 02:32:08,860 --> 02:32:12,040 initial concern was is this going to be like dramatically 3231 02:32:12,040 --> 02:32:12,840 altering the 3232 02:32:12,840 --> 02:32:15,639 neighborhood are we going to be bringing a you know multif 3233 02:32:15,639 --> 02:32:17,319 amily in across on the 3234 02:32:17,319 --> 02:32:22,770 side of the street and you know frankly low density multif 3235 02:32:22,770 --> 02:32:25,879 amily or small 3236 02:32:25,879 --> 02:32:29,219 neighborhood commercial strip centers which would be 3237 02:32:29,219 --> 02:32:30,760 challenging to make work 3238 02:32:30,760 --> 02:32:34,100 here are are the only things that can go on about ten of 3239 02:32:34,100 --> 02:32:36,000 these lots along Elm and 3240 02:32:36,000 --> 02:32:39,709 so then we come to mitigating the concerns in the 3241 02:32:39,709 --> 02:32:42,799 neighborhood this is ten 3242 02:32:42,799 --> 02:32:46,239 units it you know if it was in duplexes you might get four 3243 02:32:46,239 --> 02:32:47,680 duplexes about eight 3244 02:32:47,680 --> 02:32:51,399 units in there and so it's not dramatically more dense it's 3245 02:32:51,399 --> 02:32:51,760 not a 3246 02:32:51,760 --> 02:32:57,010 three-story student housing project and so and with the 3247 02:32:57,010 --> 02:32:58,959 with the vegetative 3248 02:32:58,959 --> 02:33:02,030 buffers and I think especially with the parking concerns 3249 02:33:02,030 --> 02:33:03,440 there's maybe a 24 foot 3250 02:33:03,440 --> 02:33:09,360 wide Reini Road and then Reini Court with with no curbs and 3251 02:33:09,360 --> 02:33:10,959 maybe 20 feet of 3252 02:33:10,959 --> 02:33:14,079 pavement that's not an appropriate place to park you know 3253 02:33:14,079 --> 02:33:15,200 if you had six or eight 3254 02:33:15,200 --> 02:33:18,149 cars lined up they'd be kind of in the ditch or blocking 3255 02:33:18,149 --> 02:33:20,120 driveways and so I 3256 02:33:20,120 --> 02:33:22,639 think if we can if we can alleviate those parking concerns 3257 02:33:22,639 --> 02:33:25,799 and just realize 3258 02:33:25,799 --> 02:33:30,440 that there isn't much other option for this or the several 3259 02:33:30,440 --> 02:33:32,040 other small kind of 3260 02:33:32,040 --> 02:33:36,649 irregular lots along Elm except for NRM you type uses kind 3261 02:33:36,649 --> 02:33:37,440 of low density 3262 02:33:37,440 --> 02:33:44,159 apartments or commercial strip so with all that I am going 3263 02:33:44,159 --> 02:33:46,200 to move we recommend 3264 02:33:46,200 --> 02:33:53,409 approval to City Council with staffs recommendation and 3265 02:33:53,409 --> 02:33:55,079 with the added 3266 02:33:55,079 --> 02:34:01,200 requirement that there be secure bike parking provided for 3267 02:34:01,200 --> 02:34:02,760 at a one bike to 3268 02:34:02,760 --> 02:34:09,319 ten car ratio so three three bike spots one small bike rack 3269 02:34:09,319 --> 02:34:11,719 basically 3270 02:34:13,159 --> 02:34:19,920 Commissioner Roselle I certainly echo what Commissioner 3271 02:34:19,920 --> 02:34:21,239 Taylor saying about 3272 02:34:21,239 --> 02:34:25,590 the obstacles in this property and I think I'm encouraged 3273 02:34:25,590 --> 02:34:28,079 to see at least the 3274 02:34:28,079 --> 02:34:32,049 design and site plan by the applicant when I first saw it I 3275 02:34:32,049 --> 02:34:33,239 actually asked 3276 02:34:33,239 --> 02:34:35,420 this in work session the difference between this in a town 3277 02:34:35,420 --> 02:34:37,040 home because just 3278 02:34:37,040 --> 02:34:41,069 looking at it looks like a townhome type development which 3279 02:34:41,069 --> 02:34:42,479 I think not not just 3280 02:34:42,479 --> 02:34:46,190 to pick lesser of evils but it's certainly a way to develop 3281 02:34:46,190 --> 02:34:47,000 this in the 3282 02:34:47,000 --> 02:34:51,110 least obtrusive way and so I actually hope that this sets 3283 02:34:51,110 --> 02:34:53,000 the standard going 3284 02:34:53,000 --> 02:34:56,170 south and those other areas in which we can kind of 3285 02:34:56,170 --> 02:34:57,959 transition these residential 3286 02:34:57,959 --> 02:35:03,399 areas without making super dense or maybe insignificant 3287 02:35:03,399 --> 02:35:05,559 strip centers so with 3288 02:35:05,559 --> 02:35:09,629 all that said if I if I could there's the button Devin hasn 3289 02:35:09,629 --> 02:35:10,680 't motioned Devin 3290 02:35:10,680 --> 02:35:14,639 can you click that I'll second this motion with the 3291 02:35:14,639 --> 02:35:16,440 addition of the required 3292 02:35:16,440 --> 02:35:23,079 one to ten ratio for bikes Commissioner Beck thank you 3293 02:35:23,079 --> 02:35:24,120 chair I'm gonna go along 3294 02:35:24,120 --> 02:35:27,190 as to just wanted to comment I don't want to seem unsympath 3295 02:35:27,190 --> 02:35:28,079 etic to the local 3296 02:35:28,079 --> 02:35:31,479 residents and additional traffic or anything like that but 3297 02:35:31,479 --> 02:35:32,079 I think as 3298 02:35:32,079 --> 02:35:36,399 mentioned here this is an NRMU 12 zone there it's not like 3299 02:35:36,399 --> 02:35:37,440 we're rezoning it 3300 02:35:37,440 --> 02:35:40,760 for this type of thing by right this can go there and this 3301 02:35:40,760 --> 02:35:41,959 seems like a good fit 3302 02:35:41,959 --> 02:35:46,459 as opposed to strip a little strip commercial area or 3303 02:35:46,459 --> 02:35:47,879 something even 3304 02:35:47,879 --> 02:35:55,129 heavier so on holidays I suspect half those apartments may 3305 02:35:55,129 --> 02:35:56,280 be empty - they may 3306 02:35:56,280 --> 02:35:59,530 be going to grandma's and grandpa's so not sure how big a 3307 02:35:59,530 --> 02:36:00,840 problem that is but I 3308 02:36:00,840 --> 02:36:03,979 don't I understand the concern there too but hopefully this 3309 02:36:03,979 --> 02:36:05,920 will all work out so 3310 02:36:05,920 --> 02:36:12,959 thank you yeah comments Commissioner Ellis thank you chair 3311 02:36:12,959 --> 02:36:13,479 I'll just say a 3312 02:36:13,479 --> 02:36:18,559 couple of words I do understand the neighborhood opposition 3313 02:36:18,559 --> 02:36:20,280 but I but I will 3314 02:36:20,280 --> 02:36:22,879 support this but I think it's an excellent design for a 3315 02:36:22,879 --> 02:36:23,799 really tough lot 3316 02:36:23,799 --> 02:36:30,280 and I think you know from what the applicant has shown us 3317 02:36:30,280 --> 02:36:31,840 this site plan 3318 02:36:31,840 --> 02:36:36,610 and I look forward to it going forward it is is great- 3319 02:36:36,610 --> 02:36:38,440 looking I think it will 3320 02:36:38,440 --> 02:36:44,079 actually add to that corner and I think if we can get 3321 02:36:44,079 --> 02:36:45,440 engineering behind maybe 3322 02:36:45,440 --> 02:36:48,790 posting no parking down the road in that court and as we 3323 02:36:48,790 --> 02:36:50,280 move forward with what 3324 02:36:50,280 --> 02:36:53,680 these roads are going to be in the future I think we 3325 02:36:53,680 --> 02:36:56,280 alleviate parking 3326 02:36:56,280 --> 02:37:02,500 issues I'm gonna echo as well I must support this this 3327 02:37:02,500 --> 02:37:04,559 evening as well for a 3328 02:37:04,559 --> 02:37:06,920 lot of the same reasons I felt commissioners have is by 3329 02:37:06,920 --> 02:37:07,479 right they 3330 02:37:07,479 --> 02:37:11,229 could do duplexes or town homes there and because they have 3331 02:37:11,229 --> 02:37:12,639 designed a two-story 3332 02:37:12,639 --> 02:37:16,459 design versus a very tall design and they are less dense 3333 02:37:16,459 --> 02:37:17,799 what they could be 3334 02:37:17,799 --> 02:37:20,600 and they provided additional parking I think it is a 3335 02:37:20,600 --> 02:37:22,280 difficult site something 3336 02:37:22,280 --> 02:37:25,750 ultimately will get built there that may be denser it may 3337 02:37:25,750 --> 02:37:26,559 not have some of the 3338 02:37:26,559 --> 02:37:30,879 extra amenities that this particular applicant is proposing 3339 02:37:30,879 --> 02:37:32,360 and it's always 3340 02:37:32,360 --> 02:37:35,309 difficult to try to balance existing neighbors and then 3341 02:37:35,309 --> 02:37:36,440 also look at what can 3342 02:37:36,440 --> 02:37:40,799 go there in the future I think it is a good use for the 3343 02:37:40,799 --> 02:37:42,000 property and with that 3344 02:37:42,000 --> 02:37:46,350 I'm going to support the SUP request there are no other 3345 02:37:46,350 --> 02:37:48,079 comments and we will 3346 02:37:48,079 --> 02:37:51,159 call for a vote on the board 3347 02:37:58,040 --> 02:38:01,750 and motion is going to carry six to zero that will move us 3348 02:38:01,750 --> 02:38:05,440 to our final item on 3349 02:38:05,440 --> 02:38:08,510 our agenda this evening the project matrix Commissioner 3350 02:38:08,510 --> 02:38:10,959 Roselle I have 3351 02:38:10,959 --> 02:38:14,579 nothing to add us want to follow up on Commissioner Beck's 3352 02:38:14,579 --> 02:38:15,760 request on the tree 3353 02:38:15,760 --> 02:38:18,479 code it says staff waiting results of legislation scheduled 3354 02:38:18,479 --> 02:38:19,000 for special 3355 02:38:19,000 --> 02:38:21,719 session just a clarification that's the one that starts 3356 02:38:21,719 --> 02:38:23,500 next week for 30 days so 3357 02:38:23,500 --> 02:38:28,520 after mid-august we'll have more clarification when we can 3358 02:38:28,520 --> 02:38:28,719 talk about 3359 02:38:28,719 --> 02:38:32,579 tree code and it's maybe I should look up the agenda for 3360 02:38:32,579 --> 02:38:33,920 the special session 3361 02:38:33,920 --> 02:38:38,870 but what is the state talking about that would impact our 3362 02:38:38,870 --> 02:38:39,760 tree code 3363 02:38:43,840 --> 02:38:49,030 there was a bill that was introduced that restricts the 3364 02:38:49,030 --> 02:38:52,319 ability to or how we 3365 02:38:52,319 --> 02:38:56,280 issue credits basically and paying into the tree fund so it 3366 02:38:56,280 --> 02:38:58,959 may or may not have 3367 02:38:58,959 --> 02:39:03,510 an impact on the tree code as written and the proposed tree 3368 02:39:03,510 --> 02:39:05,000 code we won't know 3369 02:39:05,000 --> 02:39:07,090 into I believe it's in committee where they're trying to 3370 02:39:07,090 --> 02:39:07,719 hammer out some 3371 02:39:07,719 --> 02:39:11,840 differences between the houses is that right you guys have 3372 02:39:11,840 --> 02:39:12,799 been following that 3373 02:39:12,799 --> 02:39:15,920 well that's correct the special session has a lot of agenda 3374 02:39:15,920 --> 02:39:16,879 items and one of it 3375 02:39:16,879 --> 02:39:22,569 is the tree preservation requirements that the cities can 3376 02:39:22,569 --> 02:39:24,239 apply and so that's 3377 02:39:24,239 --> 02:39:28,010 going to be discussed in roughly 30 days starting next week 3378 02:39:28,010 --> 02:39:29,879 on the 18th and after 3379 02:39:29,879 --> 02:39:35,819 that we'll know better as to what the bills are okay thank 3380 02:39:35,819 --> 02:39:36,760 you 3381 02:39:36,760 --> 02:39:43,559 Commissioner Taylor okay 3382 02:39:45,600 --> 02:39:55,520 I was trying not to drag you into it Bob there have been a 3383 02:39:55,520 --> 02:39:56,440 couple bills that 3384 02:39:56,440 --> 02:40:00,739 entered in this special session and two of them would 3385 02:40:00,739 --> 02:40:02,879 basically wipe out local 3386 02:40:02,879 --> 02:40:06,389 tree ordinances it would also take away the right of 3387 02:40:06,389 --> 02:40:09,040 homeowners HOA's from being 3388 02:40:09,040 --> 02:40:11,670 able to restrict people from cutting their own their trees 3389 02:40:11,670 --> 02:40:12,719 down as well so 3390 02:40:12,719 --> 02:40:17,670 it's not just reaching into cities but it's reaching into 3391 02:40:17,670 --> 02:40:20,520 HOA's thank you 3392 02:40:20,520 --> 02:40:25,780 Commissioner Taylor thank you chair I was curious if we 3393 02:40:25,780 --> 02:40:27,280 could get our iPads 3394 02:40:27,280 --> 02:40:32,379 updated I'm I don't have the password for the admin account 3395 02:40:32,379 --> 02:40:33,520 so my I legislate 3396 02:40:33,520 --> 02:40:37,559 is like two years old I know we've talked about this before 3397 02:40:37,559 --> 02:40:37,920 I don't know if 3398 02:40:37,920 --> 02:40:59,319 somebody knows the password the admin password okay any 3399 02:40:59,319 --> 02:41:00,559 other updates on the 3400 02:41:00,559 --> 02:41:07,639 project matrix what will be coming before same time soon or 3401 02:41:07,639 --> 02:41:08,799 well there's a 3402 02:41:08,799 --> 02:41:13,379 couple that I know what it here we noted here one hopefully 3403 02:41:13,379 --> 02:41:14,799 we'll bring at our 3404 02:41:14,799 --> 02:41:19,319 next meeting or at least in April I'm sorry August a small 3405 02:41:19,319 --> 02:41:20,399 area plan that 3406 02:41:20,399 --> 02:41:23,709 we're working on as well as the results of the notification 3407 02:41:23,709 --> 02:41:24,920 discussion that we 3408 02:41:24,920 --> 02:41:28,139 had several months ago we've had some direction from 3409 02:41:28,139 --> 02:41:29,040 Council so I'll bring 3410 02:41:29,040 --> 02:41:35,000 that up as a work session item in August question for that 3411 02:41:35,000 --> 02:41:37,879 there's the the code 3412 02:41:37,879 --> 02:41:41,670 rewrite that's going on the ongoing long project over the 3413 02:41:41,670 --> 02:41:43,360 next year is going to 3414 02:41:43,360 --> 02:41:46,299 address some small area plan issues as well as a lot of 3415 02:41:46,299 --> 02:41:48,159 other things how do we 3416 02:41:48,159 --> 02:41:52,950 as a commission best navigate we just we go with what is on 3417 02:41:52,950 --> 02:41:54,600 books now and just 3418 02:41:54,600 --> 02:41:58,520 know that it could be changing or do we do we start to have 3419 02:41:58,520 --> 02:41:59,840 a little more vision 3420 02:41:59,840 --> 02:42:03,719 going forward in terms of some of these things commission 3421 02:42:03,719 --> 02:42:04,520 ers are you referring 3422 02:42:04,520 --> 02:42:08,489 to as a the planning zoning Commission or as the sub 3423 02:42:08,489 --> 02:42:10,399 committee no as the 3424 02:42:10,399 --> 02:42:14,540 Commission Commission as as is as obviously what's in the 3425 02:42:14,540 --> 02:42:15,840 books now okay 3426 02:42:15,840 --> 02:42:20,440 so the small area plan discussion will be beneficial for 3427 02:42:20,440 --> 02:42:22,120 the time in which it's 3428 02:42:22,120 --> 02:42:27,159 current and then maybe we'll have to correct we're working 3429 02:42:27,159 --> 02:42:27,799 with the 3430 02:42:27,799 --> 02:42:32,219 consultants both consultants if when we get to that point 3431 02:42:32,219 --> 02:42:33,479 we'll be coordinating 3432 02:42:33,479 --> 02:42:36,299 those efforts so there hopefully won't be too much of the 3433 02:42:36,299 --> 02:42:37,040 conflict the guys 3434 02:42:37,040 --> 02:42:41,340 that make sense thank you okay thank you for the update and 3435 02:42:41,340 --> 02:42:42,639 with that I will 3436 02:42:42,639 --> 02:42:47,959 close this this evening at 814 thank you everyone