WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.240
Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton Planning

00:00:03.240 --> 00:00:04.080
and Zoning Commission

00:00:04.080 --> 00:00:08.789
work session for July the 12th 2017. This meeting has been

00:00:08.789 --> 00:00:09.960
duly posted and we do

00:00:09.960 --> 00:00:13.990
have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 5 o 2

00:00:13.990 --> 00:00:15.300
and at this time I

00:00:15.300 --> 00:00:18.899
will turn us over to Ron for a clarification of our agenda

00:00:18.899 --> 00:00:19.480
items this

00:00:19.480 --> 00:00:26.100
evening. Thank you chair. The item of the agenda is that we

00:00:26.100 --> 00:00:26.760
have we don't have any

00:00:26.760 --> 00:00:29.210
platt so we're going to go straight into our public hearing

00:00:29.210 --> 00:00:30.079
items and the first

00:00:30.079 --> 00:00:35.070
one is going to be presented by our senior planner Julie

00:00:35.070 --> 00:00:41.600
Wyatt. Good evening

00:00:41.600 --> 00:00:48.859
I'm Julie Wyatt and I'm presenting 1711 Blue Beacon to you

00:00:48.859 --> 00:00:52.740
this evening. The item

00:00:52.740 --> 00:00:56.340
before you is a request to hold a public hearing and for

00:00:56.340 --> 00:00:57.960
initial zoning of

00:00:57.960 --> 00:01:02.649
employment center commercial on approximately 16 acres. The

00:01:02.649 --> 00:01:03.520
property is

00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:06.930
located on the northwest side of the city. It's adjacent to

00:01:06.930 --> 00:01:10.120
I-35 and Bartol Road.

00:01:10.120 --> 00:01:14.189
Current zoning is RD 5X. You might be familiar with this

00:01:14.189 --> 00:01:15.480
area. We saw a

00:01:15.480 --> 00:01:18.650
rezoning for the adjacent property earlier this year. As

00:01:18.650 --> 00:01:19.560
they were going

00:01:19.560 --> 00:01:21.849
through with their site planning process they realized they

00:01:21.849 --> 00:01:22.640
needed a little more

00:01:22.640 --> 00:01:25.439
room in order to make their turning radiuses for their

00:01:25.439 --> 00:01:26.959
trucks so they've

00:01:26.959 --> 00:01:31.920
they've they are proposing to also include the adjacent

00:01:31.920 --> 00:01:32.920
property with their

00:01:32.920 --> 00:01:35.760
commercial development. That property was in the ETJ so as

00:01:35.760 --> 00:01:36.319
part of the

00:01:36.319 --> 00:01:39.159
development they have annexed to that property and now they

00:01:39.159 --> 00:01:40.000
're coming in for

00:01:40.000 --> 00:01:43.109
the initial zoning. When we annex property within the city

00:01:43.109 --> 00:01:44.120
of Denton they

00:01:44.120 --> 00:01:47.730
all come in as RD 5X which is that initial place holding

00:01:47.730 --> 00:01:49.359
zoning. It follows

00:01:49.359 --> 00:01:52.829
that RD 5 zoning within subchapter 5 of the Denton

00:01:52.829 --> 00:01:55.560
development code. So when

00:01:55.560 --> 00:01:57.650
we looked at the request we looked at the properties that

00:01:57.650 --> 00:01:58.359
were immediately

00:01:58.359 --> 00:02:03.329
adjacent to the to the subject property. Here we have the

00:02:03.329 --> 00:02:05.400
property next door that

00:02:05.400 --> 00:02:08.349
that was subject to that earlier is a rezoning case and

00:02:08.349 --> 00:02:09.960
that is zoned ECC and

00:02:09.960 --> 00:02:13.310
then has a proposed commercial development. To the south of

00:02:13.310 --> 00:02:14.039
that there's

00:02:14.039 --> 00:02:17.599
also ECC and that is currently under development as a

00:02:17.599 --> 00:02:19.080
travel center use.

00:02:19.080 --> 00:02:24.520
Also along I-35 is RCR 1 that property is undeveloped. To

00:02:24.520 --> 00:02:25.360
the north of the

00:02:25.360 --> 00:02:29.789
subject property is also RD 5X. To the west is in ETJ and

00:02:29.789 --> 00:02:31.120
that's undeveloped

00:02:31.120 --> 00:02:35.039
and to the south is RCCN and that has some commercial

00:02:35.039 --> 00:02:36.879
development on it. As we

00:02:36.879 --> 00:02:40.680
zoom out a little further we take in some property across I

00:02:40.680 --> 00:02:42.039
-35 and that has

00:02:42.039 --> 00:02:45.110
a zoning designation of RCCD and that is developed with the

00:02:45.110 --> 00:02:46.879
travel use as well.

00:02:46.879 --> 00:02:51.090
When we look at the mobility of the area we see that the

00:02:51.090 --> 00:02:52.800
the dominant feature is

00:02:52.800 --> 00:02:58.120
I-35 that corridor right here. We also have Elm and Barth

00:02:58.120 --> 00:02:59.479
old Road. Elm and

00:02:59.479 --> 00:03:03.620
Barthold will eventually connect. They will though it'll be

00:03:03.620 --> 00:03:04.680
realigned here at

00:03:04.680 --> 00:03:08.550
the at the intersection of I-35 and Barthold Road and that

00:03:08.550 --> 00:03:09.879
's that's sometime

00:03:09.879 --> 00:03:13.919
in the near future. Commissioner Beck.

00:03:13.919 --> 00:03:17.080
So it's going to actually clip that corner lot that the

00:03:17.080 --> 00:03:20.199
love station. It will yes sir yes sir.

00:03:20.199 --> 00:03:23.860
That'll ease the connectivity between the two sides. Right

00:03:23.860 --> 00:03:24.199
now it's a

00:03:24.199 --> 00:03:29.340
little awkward. We also looked at the analysis and the

00:03:29.340 --> 00:03:30.360
compatibility of what

00:03:30.360 --> 00:03:33.870
all these these zoning districts and the uses mean. So the

00:03:33.870 --> 00:03:35.159
surrounding area is

00:03:35.159 --> 00:03:38.340
comprised of travel center commercial developments and also

00:03:38.340 --> 00:03:38.680
large

00:03:38.680 --> 00:03:41.080
undeveloped tracts of land particularly to the north and

00:03:41.080 --> 00:03:42.120
the west of the subject

00:03:42.120 --> 00:03:47.409
property. They have access from I-35 and the US 77 North El

00:03:47.409 --> 00:03:49.759
m. The adjacent RCCN

00:03:49.759 --> 00:03:53.259
and ECC districts they currently permit large-scale

00:03:53.259 --> 00:03:54.840
commercial and employment

00:03:54.840 --> 00:03:58.500
uses. An ECC district is appropriate in this location

00:03:58.500 --> 00:03:59.599
because it also permits

00:03:59.599 --> 00:04:02.699
similar employment and commercial uses at a scale that's

00:04:02.699 --> 00:04:04.000
typically found along

00:04:04.000 --> 00:04:08.120
I or long highway corridors and the adjacent zoning

00:04:08.120 --> 00:04:10.280
districts. ECC is also a

00:04:10.280 --> 00:04:13.610
logical extension of the existing ECC district to the east

00:04:13.610 --> 00:04:14.599
and the south of

00:04:14.599 --> 00:04:19.110
the subject property. We looked at the future land use

00:04:19.110 --> 00:04:20.759
designation didn't plan

00:04:20.759 --> 00:04:24.439
2030. This is in a business innovation future land use

00:04:24.439 --> 00:04:26.040
designation. The intent

00:04:26.040 --> 00:04:29.139
of business innovation is to encourage the large-scale

00:04:29.139 --> 00:04:30.519
office development and

00:04:30.519 --> 00:04:34.879
employment centers and then those retail and commercial

00:04:34.879 --> 00:04:36.680
services that serve to

00:04:36.680 --> 00:04:43.180
provide adjacency and additional places for the workers to

00:04:43.180 --> 00:04:44.759
go places to eat and

00:04:44.759 --> 00:04:49.069
shop. The mix of commercial or the mix of commercial and

00:04:49.069 --> 00:04:50.199
light manufacturing

00:04:50.199 --> 00:04:54.680
uses in ECC meets the intent of that business innovation

00:04:54.680 --> 00:04:55.600
future land use

00:04:55.600 --> 00:04:59.829
designation. We sent out a public notification of this of

00:04:59.829 --> 00:05:01.639
the request. We

00:05:01.639 --> 00:05:06.189
received one letter and it was from and it you should have

00:05:06.189 --> 00:05:07.639
it on your desk it

00:05:07.639 --> 00:05:11.240
was from the the property owner to the south the loves and

00:05:11.240 --> 00:05:12.079
they were in

00:05:12.079 --> 00:05:16.560
support of the request. Due to the criteria in sub chapter

00:05:16.560 --> 00:05:18.079
4 of the Denton

00:05:18.079 --> 00:05:21.399
Development Code and the adjacent character of the area

00:05:21.399 --> 00:05:22.079
staff does

00:05:22.079 --> 00:05:25.389
recommend approval of the request and I'll stand for any

00:05:25.389 --> 00:05:27.040
questions. Commissioner

00:05:27.040 --> 00:05:33.560
Reck. Thank you Chair. I just got a little nitpick about

00:05:33.560 --> 00:05:36.000
the semantics of this thing. In the

00:05:36.000 --> 00:05:39.730
comprehensive plan it points out that this the future land

00:05:39.730 --> 00:05:41.000
use designations is

00:05:41.000 --> 00:05:44.430
business innovation and I stress that word innovation and

00:05:44.430 --> 00:05:45.519
then it points out

00:05:45.519 --> 00:05:47.819
for well-planned larger scale office and employment parks

00:05:47.819 --> 00:05:48.920
with supporting use

00:05:48.920 --> 00:05:54.029
such as retails hotels and residential. I have no problem

00:05:54.029 --> 00:05:55.959
with this truck wash in

00:05:55.959 --> 00:06:00.410
the ECC designation. I just you know as a matter of sem

00:06:00.410 --> 00:06:01.360
antics so you know when

00:06:01.360 --> 00:06:04.560
somebody looks at business innovation I don't think truck

00:06:04.560 --> 00:06:05.800
wash would come to mind

00:06:05.800 --> 00:06:09.230
or truck stop or anything like that. So I mean just for

00:06:09.230 --> 00:06:11.079
future purposes when we

00:06:11.079 --> 00:06:13.139
say innovative we're talking about something new and

00:06:13.139 --> 00:06:14.759
different and that

00:06:14.759 --> 00:06:18.040
doesn't just quit quite fit that criteria. So I don't know

00:06:18.040 --> 00:06:18.800
do we need to

00:06:18.800 --> 00:06:20.949
keep it like that is this something that could probably be

00:06:20.949 --> 00:06:23.120
worked on with the DCC

00:06:23.120 --> 00:06:28.160
revision or would that even fall in into that purview?

00:06:28.160 --> 00:06:29.839
Chair if I can answer

00:06:29.839 --> 00:06:33.160
just that question. Absolutely. Comments you're absolutely

00:06:33.160 --> 00:06:34.560
correct Commissioner

00:06:34.560 --> 00:06:40.000
Beck. One of the goals of the DEN plan 2030 is to start

00:06:40.000 --> 00:06:41.199
looking at some areas

00:06:41.199 --> 00:06:45.069
in the city that can accommodate our business innovation

00:06:45.069 --> 00:06:46.399
you know business

00:06:46.399 --> 00:06:48.689
parks that sort of thing but as we look at this site and

00:06:48.689 --> 00:06:49.480
one thing that we

00:06:49.480 --> 00:06:53.189
discussed with staff is besides in this particular location

00:06:53.189 --> 00:06:54.240
it's a little narrow

00:06:54.240 --> 00:06:58.360
so we felt that this was okay but yes we will hopefully

00:06:58.360 --> 00:07:00.959
refine our we are

00:07:00.959 --> 00:07:04.079
refining our zoning districts as we move forward with our

00:07:04.079 --> 00:07:06.279
code update and that is

00:07:06.279 --> 00:07:09.100
something that we will make sure we're in line with our

00:07:09.100 --> 00:07:10.040
future land use

00:07:10.040 --> 00:07:14.339
designations. If I may follow up. I was looking for

00:07:14.339 --> 00:07:15.800
anything and I went through

00:07:15.800 --> 00:07:18.149
this list of permitted uses and about the only thing that

00:07:18.149 --> 00:07:18.959
came close to it was

00:07:18.959 --> 00:07:23.610
under commercial land use quick vehicle servicing so there

00:07:23.610 --> 00:07:24.800
's a little element

00:07:24.800 --> 00:07:27.620
there that lets you squeeze in but I just again the idea of

00:07:27.620 --> 00:07:28.160
business

00:07:28.160 --> 00:07:33.360
innovative probably needs to change. Thank you.

00:07:35.759 --> 00:07:41.310
Any other questions for Julie? I think you have the next

00:07:41.310 --> 00:07:43.519
one too. I'm sorry

00:07:43.519 --> 00:07:47.370
Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Hey Julie just I guess

00:07:47.370 --> 00:07:48.560
a quick question and I

00:07:48.560 --> 00:07:53.329
guess just more for clarification for me it says that the

00:07:53.329 --> 00:07:54.639
site includes some

00:07:54.639 --> 00:07:58.319
frontage along the newly aligned Bartold Road and it

00:07:58.319 --> 00:08:00.480
contains a gas pipeline. Is

00:08:00.480 --> 00:08:03.569
that an issue with what is being developed? What's being

00:08:03.569 --> 00:08:04.360
developed is not

00:08:04.360 --> 00:08:07.740
considered a protected use but they would have to meet all

00:08:07.740 --> 00:08:08.319
setback

00:08:08.319 --> 00:08:14.600
requirements for any industrial use or any production

00:08:14.600 --> 00:08:15.279
facility. This

00:08:15.279 --> 00:08:19.410
isn't this isn't necessarily a gas well but they would have

00:08:19.410 --> 00:08:20.240
to meet all

00:08:20.240 --> 00:08:22.810
requirements and we'll look at that a little more deeply

00:08:22.810 --> 00:08:23.620
when we get to the

00:08:23.620 --> 00:08:33.320
site plan and any platting. Anybody else? Thank you. You

00:08:33.320 --> 00:08:36.480
got the next one too.

00:08:45.279 --> 00:09:02.279
[inaudible]

00:09:02.279 --> 00:09:09.919
Now I'm presenting S17-4 McDonald's. The item before you is

00:09:09.919 --> 00:09:10.440
to hold a

00:09:10.440 --> 00:09:13.649
public hearing and consider a request for a specific use

00:09:13.649 --> 00:09:14.679
permit to allow a

00:09:14.679 --> 00:09:18.250
drive-through facility. The subject property is located

00:09:18.250 --> 00:09:19.360
north of I-35

00:09:19.360 --> 00:09:24.009
adjacent to North Texas Boulevard. We're gonna go we're

00:09:24.009 --> 00:09:25.120
gonna do a little bit of

00:09:25.120 --> 00:09:28.190
a dive into the the background of the property because the

00:09:28.190 --> 00:09:29.200
property boundaries

00:09:29.200 --> 00:09:32.269
don't necessarily match with what we're used to seeing on

00:09:32.269 --> 00:09:33.200
that site so we're

00:09:33.200 --> 00:09:38.740
gonna kind of jump back and forth. So I got this this more

00:09:38.740 --> 00:09:40.360
updated aerial

00:09:40.360 --> 00:09:43.500
photograph from from Google Maps and it shows more

00:09:43.500 --> 00:09:45.320
accurately what's on the site

00:09:45.320 --> 00:09:48.809
now. So the subject property was originally developed as a

00:09:48.809 --> 00:09:49.679
McDonald's

00:09:49.679 --> 00:09:54.269
with the drive-through. As we all know I-35 is under an

00:09:54.269 --> 00:09:56.000
expansion project and

00:09:56.000 --> 00:10:01.000
so there TextDOT acquired some frontage from the subject

00:10:01.000 --> 00:10:02.039
property in order to

00:10:02.039 --> 00:10:07.320
accommodate that expansion. Within that acquisition the the

00:10:07.320 --> 00:10:08.820
if you remember the

00:10:08.820 --> 00:10:11.929
gas station that was right here and the McDonald's were

00:10:11.929 --> 00:10:13.159
were taken out as well

00:10:13.159 --> 00:10:17.000
as the parking. McDonald's would like to rebuild but the

00:10:17.000 --> 00:10:18.000
amount of property left

00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:21.210
on that original site is not sufficient to accommodate the

00:10:21.210 --> 00:10:22.120
building in the

00:10:22.120 --> 00:10:25.720
parking. So they've actually taken in in their subject

00:10:25.720 --> 00:10:28.440
property this IHOP lot. So

00:10:28.440 --> 00:10:30.799
now we'll go over the site plan and hopefully it'll make

00:10:30.799 --> 00:10:31.759
sense if it doesn't

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

00:10:34.549 --> 00:10:35.679
to point out all of

00:10:35.679 --> 00:10:40.629
the landmarks. So here's the the site plan that McDonald's

00:10:40.629 --> 00:10:42.279
is proposing. If you

00:10:42.279 --> 00:10:45.940
can kind of visually see this was the original McDonald's

00:10:45.940 --> 00:10:47.519
lot, the gas station

00:10:47.519 --> 00:10:52.299
was right here and then this is the the IHOP lot. So the

00:10:52.299 --> 00:10:54.720
area and in yellow is

00:10:54.720 --> 00:10:59.220
the building, the proposed building. They're also proposing

00:10:59.220 --> 00:11:00.159
two signs, two

00:11:00.159 --> 00:11:03.429
pole signs, one on I-35 and one on North Texas Boulevard

00:11:03.429 --> 00:11:04.559
and we're going to talk

00:11:04.559 --> 00:11:06.820
about that sign a little more when we get to the

00:11:06.820 --> 00:11:08.960
recommendations. They're also

00:11:08.960 --> 00:11:13.399
proposing within their site plan package two drive-throughs

00:11:13.399 --> 00:11:14.840
in order to

00:11:14.840 --> 00:11:17.740
accommodate enough vehicle storage to get through the drive

00:11:17.740 --> 00:11:18.240
-through

00:11:18.240 --> 00:11:24.299
efficiently. Some pedestrian crosswalks across the the

00:11:24.299 --> 00:11:25.480
driveways. They're

00:11:25.480 --> 00:11:29.080
proposing a bike rack and then there's also going to be

00:11:29.080 --> 00:11:30.080
some sidewalk

00:11:30.080 --> 00:11:33.789
improvements associated with the development. There will be

00:11:33.789 --> 00:11:34.399
there are

00:11:34.399 --> 00:11:38.700
proposed four driveways, one off of I-35, one off of Kind

00:11:38.700 --> 00:11:40.519
orf, one off of Wilshire

00:11:40.519 --> 00:11:44.730
and one off of North Texas Boulevard. And then we'll look

00:11:44.730 --> 00:11:46.120
at the landscape plan.

00:11:46.120 --> 00:11:48.929
Currently there's not a whole lot of landscaping or trees

00:11:48.929 --> 00:11:50.200
on the site. They

00:11:50.200 --> 00:11:53.460
will be adding trees and landscaping in accordance with the

00:11:53.460 --> 00:11:54.399
Denton Development

00:11:54.399 --> 00:11:58.700
Code requirements which includes a 20% canopy in the DCG

00:11:58.700 --> 00:12:00.519
district. Also parking

00:12:00.519 --> 00:12:04.289
lot screening. They do have enhanced landscaping along the

00:12:04.289 --> 00:12:05.360
menu boards as

00:12:05.360 --> 00:12:10.759
well. Here are the proposed elevations for the subject

00:12:10.759 --> 00:12:11.720
property. They are

00:12:11.720 --> 00:12:17.809
proposing a masonry building with stone accents. Subchapter

00:12:17.809 --> 00:12:18.879
6 of the Denton

00:12:18.879 --> 00:12:22.250
Development Code outlines the criteria for approval for SU

00:12:22.250 --> 00:12:23.240
Ps and I believe that

00:12:23.240 --> 00:12:26.899
the full criteria is in your backup but in general it

00:12:26.899 --> 00:12:28.679
requires consistency with

00:12:28.679 --> 00:12:32.340
the zoning regulations, conformity with the Denton plan and

00:12:32.340 --> 00:12:33.620
also consistency with

00:12:33.620 --> 00:12:36.690
the surrounding development in terms of access, nuisance

00:12:36.690 --> 00:12:38.679
and scale of development.

00:12:38.679 --> 00:12:41.750
Let's talk about the zoning just for a minute. The subject

00:12:41.750 --> 00:12:43.240
property is zoned DCG.

00:12:43.240 --> 00:12:47.220
The proposed site plan does comply with the requirements

00:12:47.220 --> 00:12:48.519
within the DCG

00:12:48.519 --> 00:12:52.309
zoning district. Restaurants are permitted but drive-

00:12:52.309 --> 00:12:52.759
throughs do

00:12:52.759 --> 00:12:57.129
require an SUP and that is intended because often we find

00:12:57.129 --> 00:12:57.960
DCG in our

00:12:57.960 --> 00:13:00.570
downtown areas or university areas where we often have a

00:13:00.570 --> 00:13:01.399
lot of pedestrian

00:13:01.399 --> 00:13:05.059
oriented development. We want to ensure that any drive-

00:13:05.059 --> 00:13:06.200
throughs that come

00:13:06.200 --> 00:13:09.320
in those areas are sensitive to the pedestrian oriented

00:13:09.320 --> 00:13:09.960
nature.

00:13:09.960 --> 00:13:13.620
Question. Yes sir. Did the previous McDonald's that was

00:13:13.620 --> 00:13:15.600
located on that site have an SUP?

00:13:15.600 --> 00:13:20.549
They did not. It was it was pre Denton Development Code,

00:13:20.549 --> 00:13:22.840
pre 2002. And so

00:13:22.840 --> 00:13:25.909
TechStop took them out and they want to rebuild the

00:13:25.909 --> 00:13:27.559
business on the same side

00:13:27.559 --> 00:13:31.159
and now they were required to get an SUP? They are. They

00:13:31.159 --> 00:13:34.320
are. I'm gonna listen a little.

00:13:34.320 --> 00:13:38.070
The site's proximity to I-35 does suggest that an auto

00:13:38.070 --> 00:13:39.080
oriented use is

00:13:39.080 --> 00:13:42.309
appropriate in this location. Although we typically see

00:13:42.309 --> 00:13:43.320
pedestrian oriented

00:13:43.320 --> 00:13:48.059
development in university areas because of that I-35 access

00:13:48.059 --> 00:13:49.240
, because of the

00:13:49.240 --> 00:13:53.379
location of a lot of the UNT parking lots in this area, it

00:13:53.379 --> 00:13:54.720
is it does lean

00:13:54.720 --> 00:13:59.879
more toward the auto oriented uses. We also just in general

00:13:59.879 --> 00:14:00.600
drive-throughs

00:14:00.600 --> 00:14:05.799
are typical development that you see along highways. Let's

00:14:05.799 --> 00:14:05.960
look let's talk

00:14:05.960 --> 00:14:09.029
about the area and first the properties that are adjacent

00:14:09.029 --> 00:14:10.120
to the site. The

00:14:10.120 --> 00:14:13.000
subject property is in a DCG zoning district. There is a

00:14:13.000 --> 00:14:14.279
little bit of DR2

00:14:14.279 --> 00:14:17.419
to the north. What's surrounding them to the north and the

00:14:17.419 --> 00:14:18.559
east and the west are

00:14:18.559 --> 00:14:22.360
UNT facilities and also some UNT parking areas. You can see

00:14:22.360 --> 00:14:23.399
there's a commuter lot

00:14:23.399 --> 00:14:28.350
here, commuter lot here. Across the highway in R3, there's

00:14:28.350 --> 00:14:29.279
an R3 district

00:14:29.279 --> 00:14:31.840
with single-family. There's a little bit in R2 here and I

00:14:31.840 --> 00:14:32.559
believe that is the

00:14:32.559 --> 00:14:38.039
football stadium. As we zoom out a little bit we see more

00:14:38.039 --> 00:14:39.840
UNT facilities coming

00:14:39.840 --> 00:14:43.070
into focus. There's a dormitory here. There's once again

00:14:43.070 --> 00:14:44.159
some more commuter

00:14:44.159 --> 00:14:46.950
lots. There's some commercial development here with with

00:14:46.950 --> 00:14:47.399
parking and

00:14:47.399 --> 00:14:50.610
then the UNT performance. There's a performance facility in

00:14:50.610 --> 00:14:51.600
this location.

00:14:51.600 --> 00:14:57.919
And then the general area. You see more of the UNT campus.

00:14:57.919 --> 00:14:59.120
There's residential

00:14:59.120 --> 00:15:03.340
near the subject property and then the I-35 corridor in

00:15:03.340 --> 00:15:04.919
this case as well is a

00:15:04.919 --> 00:15:09.899
real dominant feature in this area. The future land use for

00:15:09.899 --> 00:15:11.279
the subject property

00:15:11.279 --> 00:15:15.580
is commercial and this is not really a mixed use future

00:15:15.580 --> 00:15:17.360
land use designation. It

00:15:17.360 --> 00:15:20.799
is to be concentrated commercial development and auto

00:15:20.799 --> 00:15:21.899
oriented uses such

00:15:21.899 --> 00:15:24.840
as drive-throughs are appropriate in this future land use.

00:15:24.840 --> 00:15:26.320
The mobility of the

00:15:26.320 --> 00:15:29.500
area, once again I-35, a really dominant feature provides a

00:15:29.500 --> 00:15:30.539
lot of access to the

00:15:30.539 --> 00:15:33.620
site as well as the North Texas Boulevard that is a

00:15:33.620 --> 00:15:35.120
secondary arterial and

00:15:35.120 --> 00:15:38.460
then the hatched black lines are collectors that run

00:15:38.460 --> 00:15:41.200
through the area.

00:15:41.200 --> 00:15:44.320
Commissioner Ellison. Thank you Chair. I guess why you have

00:15:44.320 --> 00:15:45.000
that up one of my

00:15:45.000 --> 00:15:48.070
questions has to do with if you're coming from let's say

00:15:48.070 --> 00:15:49.019
campus or coming

00:15:49.019 --> 00:15:52.370
down North Texas Boulevard. I didn't see where there was a

00:15:52.370 --> 00:15:54.759
way into this site. I'm

00:15:54.759 --> 00:15:57.360
assuming you'd have to go Eagle to Kendoff to get there?

00:15:57.360 --> 00:15:58.320
You're right. There

00:15:58.320 --> 00:16:01.440
are there is some limit there is some control access and

00:16:01.440 --> 00:16:02.159
engineering will be

00:16:02.159 --> 00:16:05.309
here to answer questions. There is some control access and

00:16:05.309 --> 00:16:06.240
I believe this is

00:16:06.240 --> 00:16:10.649
just a ride-in ride-out here. Jim is okay there'll be a

00:16:10.649 --> 00:16:12.000
median here so it'll just

00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:14.820
be a ride-in ride-out in this location so they would have

00:16:14.820 --> 00:16:16.519
to turn and come in

00:16:16.519 --> 00:16:20.480
from a different angle. Can they come in off a wheelchair?

00:16:20.480 --> 00:16:22.200
Should I call Jim up?

00:16:22.200 --> 00:16:42.000
I'm gonna call Jim. Good evening everyone. Jim Jenks from

00:16:42.000 --> 00:16:42.480
the Engineering

00:16:42.480 --> 00:16:47.429
Department. Looking at TexDOT's ultimate schematic there

00:16:47.429 --> 00:16:49.720
will be a median along

00:16:49.720 --> 00:16:56.039
North Texas Boulevard from the service road up north of Wil

00:16:56.039 --> 00:16:58.320
shire. So their

00:16:58.320 --> 00:17:01.669
southbound traffic on North Texas Boulevard would not be

00:17:01.669 --> 00:17:03.399
able to turn into

00:17:03.399 --> 00:17:16.339
this site directly or via Wilshire. They would I don't have

00:17:16.339 --> 00:17:17.680
a map handy that

00:17:17.680 --> 00:17:21.680
shows the area farther out.

00:17:27.240 --> 00:17:31.400
They'd have to go Eagle.

00:17:39.640 --> 00:17:44.980
Currently there are median cuts that would allow access to

00:17:44.980 --> 00:17:46.680
Wilshire but not

00:17:46.680 --> 00:17:51.190
in their ultimate schematic. How far out is the ultimate

00:17:51.190 --> 00:17:54.039
schematic? Is that in this

00:17:54.039 --> 00:18:00.319
phase or we time? I don't think it's I would have to get

00:18:00.319 --> 00:18:01.000
back to you on that.

00:18:01.000 --> 00:18:04.920
Julie can you go back to that satellite image? Yeah.

00:18:04.920 --> 00:18:07.480
Because Google Maps looks

00:18:07.480 --> 00:18:09.720
like it shows that there is a median currently there.

00:18:09.720 --> 00:18:13.680
Currently in the

00:18:13.680 --> 00:18:17.279
you had one that yes there is a there is a cut right there

00:18:17.279 --> 00:18:17.920
in the median though.

00:18:17.920 --> 00:18:20.950
It didn't look like it. Maybe my eyes are failing me but it

00:18:20.950 --> 00:18:21.880
looks like grass all

00:18:21.880 --> 00:18:26.319
the way over Wilshire.

00:18:32.519 --> 00:18:33.299
Yeah it looks like Wilshire is blocked but maybe the

00:18:33.299 --> 00:18:36.680
parking lot entrance isn't.

00:18:36.680 --> 00:18:40.670
There are cones but there isn't grass it looks like. It's a

00:18:40.670 --> 00:18:41.440
little further south

00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:49.519
you're talking about right? Gotcha. I wish I could project

00:18:49.519 --> 00:18:51.640
mine on the screen

00:18:51.640 --> 00:18:57.000
here. I'll just show you.

00:19:12.440 --> 00:19:13.160
I can have an answer for you on the timing by the regular

00:19:13.160 --> 00:19:18.240
meeting. Okay

00:19:18.240 --> 00:19:23.329
great thank you. Sure. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair.

00:19:23.329 --> 00:19:25.119
The area we're talking

00:19:25.119 --> 00:19:25.119
about where there's a medium and we need a cut through is

00:19:25.119 --> 00:19:30.039
that that's not text

00:19:30.039 --> 00:19:30.039
dots property is it? That's not there right away. Is it the

00:19:30.039 --> 00:19:36.640
universities? It is not

00:19:36.640 --> 00:19:41.700
text dots. I mean it's the city's it's a city street North

00:19:41.700 --> 00:19:43.000
Texas Boulevard is. So

00:19:43.000 --> 00:19:48.410
the city could do a cut through couldn't it? And the reason

00:19:48.410 --> 00:19:50.000
I'm even bringing this up

00:19:50.000 --> 00:19:52.859
is if you get traffic coming off going to McDonald's they

00:19:52.859 --> 00:19:53.799
have to kind of look

00:19:53.799 --> 00:19:55.980
back around and get on the interstate and deal with that

00:19:55.980 --> 00:19:56.880
traffic like before

00:19:56.880 --> 00:19:59.740
they can get back onto the interstate again where if they

00:19:59.740 --> 00:20:01.160
could cross over you

00:20:01.160 --> 00:20:04.230
know North Texas and then hang a right there on the service

00:20:04.230 --> 00:20:04.819
road they would

00:20:04.819 --> 00:20:08.680
have to deal with that traffic signal. It is a city street

00:20:08.680 --> 00:20:11.079
text dot has as part of

00:20:11.079 --> 00:20:15.809
their schematic they show improving it all the way up to

00:20:15.809 --> 00:20:17.000
the next street

00:20:17.000 --> 00:20:21.009
intersection beyond Wilshire. I think it's basically the

00:20:21.009 --> 00:20:22.000
transition to their

00:20:22.000 --> 00:20:32.680
improvements. That next one I can't tell from that. They're

00:20:32.680 --> 00:20:33.599
not showing a medium

00:20:33.599 --> 00:20:36.730
but that's the end of their project. Commissioner Tyler has

00:20:36.730 --> 00:20:38.400
a follow-up. Thank

00:20:38.400 --> 00:20:42.259
you chair. So I guess just to continue on this the next one

00:20:42.259 --> 00:20:43.440
is Eagle and I think

00:20:43.440 --> 00:20:46.359
because of the shortness of the blocks and the radius they

00:20:46.359 --> 00:20:47.440
would probably never

00:20:47.440 --> 00:20:50.160
put a cut there. So you'd have to turn on Eagle and come

00:20:50.160 --> 00:20:51.960
down Kindle. That's how

00:20:51.960 --> 00:20:54.420
it is now with all the construction. So I don't think it's

00:20:54.420 --> 00:20:55.119
really out of the

00:20:55.119 --> 00:20:59.779
ordinary. My question is more pertaining to the little rem

00:20:59.779 --> 00:21:01.119
nant lot. I don't know

00:21:01.119 --> 00:21:04.190
if this is a good view or if the site plan might be a

00:21:04.190 --> 00:21:05.720
better view of the small

00:21:05.720 --> 00:21:10.670
remnant lot of the old gas station. Right now there's

00:21:10.670 --> 00:21:12.440
indicated a curb cut and you

00:21:12.440 --> 00:21:16.910
can see there's actually a driveway but it seems is that a

00:21:16.910 --> 00:21:20.519
text dot property or

00:21:20.519 --> 00:21:25.839
is that still owned by some private owner?

00:21:26.799 --> 00:21:33.299
They acquired, text dot acquired so much of that lot. Yeah

00:21:33.299 --> 00:21:34.079
I wonder if they just

00:21:34.079 --> 00:21:36.230
acquired the whole thing because there's just such a small

00:21:36.230 --> 00:21:37.559
remnant left. I think

00:21:37.559 --> 00:21:43.400
that may be the case. Can we tell on there? Yeah. Are you

00:21:43.400 --> 00:21:44.519
talking about that

00:21:44.519 --> 00:21:49.150
little small to the left of the monument sign? On the DCAD

00:21:49.150 --> 00:21:50.400
map that shows that

00:21:50.400 --> 00:21:55.400
little sliver shows to be North Texas. Oh so UNTO owns it?

00:21:55.400 --> 00:21:56.759
The little bitty piece

00:21:56.759 --> 00:21:59.960
right there. Okay. Okay. Yeah I was just trying to see if

00:21:59.960 --> 00:22:01.319
that that driveway to

00:22:01.319 --> 00:22:04.119
nowhere, that curb cut to nowhere very close to the

00:22:04.119 --> 00:22:05.519
intersection had any plans

00:22:05.519 --> 00:22:10.069
but not related to this I guess. No not related to this. I

00:22:10.069 --> 00:22:11.319
can't see it being

00:22:11.319 --> 00:22:14.849
related to anything actually. I mean it's with as small as

00:22:14.849 --> 00:22:16.920
that remnant is. There'd

00:22:16.920 --> 00:22:23.069
be nothing much to drive into and there's this site would

00:22:23.069 --> 00:22:24.319
not be using it.

00:22:24.319 --> 00:22:30.930
In fact there are the we are still we've reviewed a final

00:22:30.930 --> 00:22:33.960
replant submittal. I

00:22:33.960 --> 00:22:36.750
don't think it's been approved yet and we still have the

00:22:36.750 --> 00:22:37.920
site plan phase yet to

00:22:37.920 --> 00:22:42.880
go so we're still reviewing and commenting on the site but

00:22:42.880 --> 00:22:43.559
there will

00:22:43.559 --> 00:22:47.240
be some driveways that are going away as a result of this

00:22:47.240 --> 00:22:48.980
project along the 35

00:22:48.980 --> 00:22:52.140
service road and then going north just north of the

00:22:52.140 --> 00:22:53.720
intersection along North

00:22:53.720 --> 00:22:58.400
Texas Boulevard. There'll be a net reduction in driveways

00:22:58.400 --> 00:22:59.599
here especially

00:22:59.599 --> 00:23:02.759
near that intersection. And I guess maybe UNT could build a

00:23:02.759 --> 00:23:04.720
sign on that corner.

00:23:04.720 --> 00:23:08.109
Who knows that may be what they have in mind I don't know.

00:23:08.109 --> 00:23:09.759
Nothing that could I

00:23:09.759 --> 00:23:14.369
don't see anything that can be driven into though. Any

00:23:14.369 --> 00:23:18.440
other questions for Jim?

00:23:18.799 --> 00:23:22.160
Thank you Jim.

00:23:24.680 --> 00:23:28.549
I don't have much left to add I just want to go over one or

00:23:28.549 --> 00:23:30.240
a couple more

00:23:30.240 --> 00:23:34.470
things. I did put a letter on your desks from I received

00:23:34.470 --> 00:23:36.319
from UNT last night. I

00:23:36.319 --> 00:23:42.039
wasn't able to get the opposition percentage calculated

00:23:42.039 --> 00:23:44.119
today. Our GIS was

00:23:44.119 --> 00:23:48.490
in a meeting so but we anticipate that the 20% opposition

00:23:48.490 --> 00:23:50.200
has threshold has been

00:23:50.200 --> 00:23:53.279
met and so a super majority would be required at City

00:23:53.279 --> 00:23:54.359
Council but we're still

00:23:54.359 --> 00:23:59.380
we're still making sure that they do that that is the case.

00:23:59.380 --> 00:24:00.680
Commissioner Roseau.

00:24:00.680 --> 00:24:07.799
Did they provide any elaboration of their reason? No sir.

00:24:07.799 --> 00:24:12.400
Based upon the criteria we discussed the character of the

00:24:12.400 --> 00:24:13.960
area the access to the

00:24:13.960 --> 00:24:18.190
area staff does recommend approval of the request with two

00:24:18.190 --> 00:24:19.920
conditions. One that

00:24:19.920 --> 00:24:22.990
it's substantially comply with the site plan landscape plan

00:24:22.990 --> 00:24:23.680
and building

00:24:23.680 --> 00:24:27.519
elevations that were submitted with the with the SUP and

00:24:27.519 --> 00:24:28.920
then also the signage

00:24:28.920 --> 00:24:32.539
on North Texas Boulevard. Right now they are proposing two

00:24:32.539 --> 00:24:34.279
pole signs in

00:24:34.279 --> 00:24:37.430
accordance with the sign regulations within the city of

00:24:37.430 --> 00:24:39.519
Denton. Staff felt like

00:24:39.519 --> 00:24:43.180
that reducing the size of the sign on North Texas Boulevard

00:24:43.180 --> 00:24:44.279
to a monument sign

00:24:44.279 --> 00:24:47.730
that is that is architecturally compatible with the primary

00:24:47.730 --> 00:24:48.400
structure

00:24:48.400 --> 00:24:51.470
that is a maximum of height of five feet and a maximum

00:24:51.470 --> 00:24:53.200
effective area of 40 feet

00:24:53.200 --> 00:24:56.420
would be more in keeping with the character of the of the

00:24:56.420 --> 00:24:57.240
street of North

00:24:57.240 --> 00:25:00.309
Texas Boulevard. We understand the need for the pole sign

00:25:00.309 --> 00:25:01.319
on I-35 because you

00:25:01.319 --> 00:25:04.829
want that visibility to the motoring public but we felt

00:25:04.829 --> 00:25:05.440
like that that

00:25:05.440 --> 00:25:08.759
monument side on North Texas Boulevard met the character of

00:25:08.759 --> 00:25:09.519
the general

00:25:09.519 --> 00:25:12.319
area so those are the two conditions that staff has

00:25:12.319 --> 00:25:14.759
recommended. So based

00:25:14.759 --> 00:25:18.480
upon that I'll answer any questions. What was the applicant

00:25:18.480 --> 00:25:19.599
's response to that

00:25:19.599 --> 00:25:22.480
having it reduced to monument sign? They do not agree with

00:25:22.480 --> 00:25:24.000
staff's recommendation.

00:25:24.000 --> 00:25:30.369
They... What did they have previously? Previous well they

00:25:30.369 --> 00:25:31.319
did not I you know I

00:25:31.319 --> 00:25:33.880
don't know what was at that location previously it's a good

00:25:33.880 --> 00:25:34.640
question I'm not

00:25:34.640 --> 00:25:37.710
quite sure if there was a pole sign at that location. They

00:25:37.710 --> 00:25:39.119
are proposing that I

00:25:39.119 --> 00:25:41.410
believe a 20-foot pole sign in that spot. I believe on

00:25:41.410 --> 00:25:42.839
their old building they had four

00:25:42.839 --> 00:25:47.319
points of access as well just like they have with the new

00:25:47.319 --> 00:25:48.279
one that they're

00:25:48.279 --> 00:25:52.130
proposing and I don't know if they I don't recall if they

00:25:52.130 --> 00:25:52.880
had a sign over on

00:25:52.880 --> 00:25:56.680
North Texas on that access point or not. Commissioner Ellis

00:25:56.680 --> 00:25:57.599
. Thank you chair if I

00:25:57.599 --> 00:26:00.990
can chime into that because I was there a lot with kids

00:26:00.990 --> 00:26:03.839
dancing at UNT. They did

00:26:03.839 --> 00:26:08.799
have a small like driveway sign off of UNT there or North

00:26:08.799 --> 00:26:10.480
Texas Boulevard. I

00:26:10.480 --> 00:26:13.549
don't I don't remember the necessarily the size it was not

00:26:13.549 --> 00:26:15.000
a big huge pole sign.

00:26:15.000 --> 00:26:21.839
Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Well I don't understand

00:26:21.839 --> 00:26:22.960
why they want the two pole

00:26:22.960 --> 00:26:25.869
signs. What would be the distance between the two? It's got

00:26:25.869 --> 00:26:28.200
to be a small gap. Well

00:26:28.200 --> 00:26:31.000
within the city of Denton you can have two ground signs

00:26:31.000 --> 00:26:32.119
provided that they're

00:26:32.119 --> 00:26:35.420
on on two different arterial roads that they meet the

00:26:35.420 --> 00:26:36.480
height and and those

00:26:36.480 --> 00:26:39.549
requirements so that that would those two pole signs would

00:26:39.549 --> 00:26:40.599
meet the the minimum

00:26:40.599 --> 00:26:44.079
sign requirements within the city of Denton. I don't know I

00:26:44.079 --> 00:26:44.559
don't know as far

00:26:44.559 --> 00:26:47.480
as what their spacing is between the two. And I understand

00:26:47.480 --> 00:26:48.279
that it meets that

00:26:48.279 --> 00:26:50.630
criteria but what purpose does it serve to have them so

00:26:50.630 --> 00:26:51.980
close together? I mean

00:26:51.980 --> 00:26:54.599
the visual it seems like they would get from the one on I-

00:26:54.599 --> 00:26:56.720
35. I'm not sure how

00:26:56.720 --> 00:27:00.799
they're served with one on North Texas Boulevard. But you

00:27:00.799 --> 00:27:01.400
don't know what the gap is.

00:27:01.400 --> 00:27:06.839
No sir. Commissioner Roselle. Julie can you walk me through

00:27:06.839 --> 00:27:07.559
the standards for

00:27:07.559 --> 00:27:10.730
monument signs is the the recommendation from staff the

00:27:10.730 --> 00:27:11.799
standard monument

00:27:11.799 --> 00:27:15.029
qualifications or is that something that was created for

00:27:15.029 --> 00:27:16.359
this project? It was

00:27:16.359 --> 00:27:19.559
created for this project if you have I believe I'll have to

00:27:19.559 --> 00:27:20.680
check make sure I'm

00:27:20.680 --> 00:27:23.400
quoting correctly but I believe a monument sign within the

00:27:23.400 --> 00:27:24.079
city of Denton

00:27:24.079 --> 00:27:27.880
does not have a maximum effective area so that it can be

00:27:27.880 --> 00:27:29.359
any any size if it's a

00:27:29.359 --> 00:27:32.160
monument sign so it goes all the way down to the ground.

00:27:32.160 --> 00:27:33.359
Pole signs do have a

00:27:33.359 --> 00:27:39.480
maximum height. And when the the 40 square feet that means

00:27:39.480 --> 00:27:40.720
it can what you're

00:27:40.720 --> 00:27:43.579
recommending it cannot take up more than a 4 by 10 or the

00:27:43.579 --> 00:27:45.079
sign portion the yes

00:27:45.079 --> 00:27:48.740
the correct face of the sign like if you're looking at it.

00:27:48.740 --> 00:27:49.599
Let me get my code

00:27:49.599 --> 00:27:53.599
and maybe I can get you a definition for it.

00:28:00.359 --> 00:28:04.799
I'll make sure I give you good information.

00:28:16.200 --> 00:28:17.750
Chair well Julie's looking that up I just wanted to clarify

00:28:17.750 --> 00:28:20.720
your comment

00:28:20.720 --> 00:28:20.720
question earlier regarding the SUP. There was no SUP

00:28:20.720 --> 00:28:28.079
required I guess for

00:28:28.079 --> 00:28:33.039
the McDonald's back prior to 2002 however this site that

00:28:33.039 --> 00:28:34.200
their proposal

00:28:34.200 --> 00:28:38.069
extends past that parcel so since they're extending onto

00:28:38.069 --> 00:28:39.200
another property

00:28:39.200 --> 00:28:45.319
we felt that the SUP would be required for this particular

00:28:45.319 --> 00:28:46.559
site plan.

00:28:46.559 --> 00:28:50.680
That answers your question. I'm gonna bite my tongue for a

00:28:50.680 --> 00:28:51.039
little longer

00:28:51.039 --> 00:28:55.000
before I respond. Okay. I'll let get to the monument sign.

00:28:55.000 --> 00:28:55.920
Commissioner Roselle

00:28:55.920 --> 00:29:01.059
effective area is the the shape or combination of regular

00:29:01.059 --> 00:29:02.119
shapes that will

00:29:02.119 --> 00:29:05.880
encompass the extreme limits of the riding representation

00:29:05.880 --> 00:29:06.839
emblem or other

00:29:06.839 --> 00:29:10.690
display. So it would be the display area wouldn't it wouldn

00:29:10.690 --> 00:29:11.960
't be the base of the

00:29:11.960 --> 00:29:16.279
structure. And then let me check.

00:29:23.400 --> 00:29:27.599
Monument sign effective area is there is no maximum

00:29:27.599 --> 00:29:29.680
effective area for monument

00:29:29.680 --> 00:29:31.880
sign.

00:29:35.880 --> 00:29:39.079
Maximum height

00:29:42.200 --> 00:29:46.930
would still be 20 feet from what I can tell on the sign

00:29:46.930 --> 00:29:49.880
code. For a monument

00:29:49.880 --> 00:29:54.670
sign? It doesn't give a maximum height for the monument

00:29:54.670 --> 00:29:55.960
sign it just gives a

00:29:55.960 --> 00:30:02.400
map for other primary arterials which North Texas Boulevard

00:30:02.400 --> 00:30:02.640
would be

00:30:02.640 --> 00:30:06.079
another primary primary I'm sorry it would be in all other

00:30:06.079 --> 00:30:06.960
streets it wouldn't

00:30:06.960 --> 00:30:10.670
because it's a secondary arterial. It'd be a maximum height

00:30:10.670 --> 00:30:12.519
of six feet all signs

00:30:12.519 --> 00:30:15.319
are maximum height of six feet and then the monument

00:30:15.319 --> 00:30:17.160
effective area would be they

00:30:17.160 --> 00:30:19.509
could have it as big effective area there's no there's no

00:30:19.509 --> 00:30:20.279
maximum for that

00:30:20.279 --> 00:30:23.349
for monument sign. That's because we were making it upon

00:30:23.349 --> 00:30:24.519
monument sign versus a

00:30:24.519 --> 00:30:28.480
pole sign. Yes sir. Okay. Did your questions get answered

00:30:28.480 --> 00:30:32.039
before I ask? They did thank you.

00:30:32.039 --> 00:30:36.569
I was gonna follow up on the pole sign. So in our standard

00:30:36.569 --> 00:30:38.640
code you can have two

00:30:38.640 --> 00:30:43.589
pole signs. Yes sir. Well staff is recommending that they

00:30:43.589 --> 00:30:44.720
only have one in

00:30:44.720 --> 00:30:48.079
a monument even though our code says that they can have two

00:30:48.079 --> 00:30:49.200
. Yes sir. And we're

00:30:49.200 --> 00:30:55.289
making that recommendation because? Because of the size of

00:30:55.289 --> 00:30:56.400
and the character

00:30:56.400 --> 00:31:01.119
of North Texas Boulevard. It's a less you know people don't

00:31:01.119 --> 00:31:01.680
travel it's

00:31:01.680 --> 00:31:04.480
fast down it so they have more opportunity to see a

00:31:04.480 --> 00:31:06.079
monument sign. You

00:31:06.079 --> 00:31:09.259
know I understand that the necessity of a pole sign on a

00:31:09.259 --> 00:31:10.759
highway because you

00:31:10.759 --> 00:31:12.880
need the visibility and people are traveling at a high rate

00:31:12.880 --> 00:31:13.759
of speed so you

00:31:13.759 --> 00:31:17.000
need to you need to be able to to reach your customer base.

00:31:17.000 --> 00:31:19.039
We felt like a

00:31:19.039 --> 00:31:22.240
monument sign on North Texas Boulevard was sufficient for

00:31:22.240 --> 00:31:23.440
them to advertise. We

00:31:23.440 --> 00:31:25.650
want them to be able to advertise our businesses but still

00:31:25.650 --> 00:31:26.440
meet the character

00:31:26.440 --> 00:31:30.880
of the area. I don't know their reasoning other than when

00:31:30.880 --> 00:31:33.440
they come to a stop sign

00:31:33.440 --> 00:31:37.579
on the other side of 35 to turn and go north on North Texas

00:31:37.579 --> 00:31:39.000
Boulevard it may be

00:31:39.000 --> 00:31:43.140
hard to see that if you're at a angle and with North Texas

00:31:43.140 --> 00:31:44.599
owning that corner

00:31:44.599 --> 00:31:48.119
if they decide to put a sign or screening then you may not

00:31:48.119 --> 00:31:48.960
even be able

00:31:48.960 --> 00:31:52.349
to see too much of their building and that may be why they

00:31:52.349 --> 00:31:53.599
want a larger sign

00:31:53.599 --> 00:31:57.150
there to be able to give some visibility to their site for

00:31:57.150 --> 00:31:58.079
people that are coming

00:31:58.079 --> 00:32:04.750
from west and turning and going north on there. So any

00:32:04.750 --> 00:32:06.519
other questions on the pole

00:32:06.519 --> 00:32:10.180
sign? Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. I'm just trying

00:32:10.180 --> 00:32:11.400
to understand that

00:32:11.400 --> 00:32:14.980
you said the secondary arterials there's limits of six foot

00:32:14.980 --> 00:32:16.200
height on monument

00:32:16.200 --> 00:32:21.390
signs? Well the table and our sign code doesn't really

00:32:21.390 --> 00:32:22.599
doesn't give a monument

00:32:22.599 --> 00:32:25.109
sign maximum height so I would just apply the maximum

00:32:25.109 --> 00:32:27.000
height. It does give

00:32:27.000 --> 00:32:30.069
the monument sign effective area it doesn't they can have a

00:32:30.069 --> 00:32:30.920
monument sign as

00:32:30.920 --> 00:32:35.220
large as they would like in terms of effective area. Okay

00:32:35.220 --> 00:32:36.559
and so but then the

00:32:36.559 --> 00:32:38.750
other that's and this is the other streets category all

00:32:38.750 --> 00:32:39.400
other streets

00:32:39.400 --> 00:32:42.470
category or something like that what did you what did you

00:32:42.470 --> 00:32:44.079
call it? Well there are

00:32:44.079 --> 00:32:46.910
there are other primary arterials and then all other

00:32:46.910 --> 00:32:48.319
streets. And so in all

00:32:48.319 --> 00:32:53.789
other streets they allow a 20-foot pole sign? Yes. No they

00:32:53.789 --> 00:32:55.359
would allow a six foot

00:32:55.359 --> 00:32:58.799
pole sign. Okay. They would still need to keep it they

00:32:58.799 --> 00:33:00.079
would still need to at a

00:33:00.079 --> 00:33:04.380
minimum they would need to meet the sign code so. So the

00:33:04.380 --> 00:33:05.960
biggest thing they could

00:33:05.960 --> 00:33:10.059
have there is a six foot pole sign with a maximum effective

00:33:10.059 --> 00:33:11.200
area of how big?

00:33:11.200 --> 00:33:16.529
Six foot or a 20 foot? It's a pole sign not a monument sign

00:33:16.529 --> 00:33:18.200
. Yeah there's no

00:33:18.200 --> 00:33:20.920
there's no height limit on monument but there's a six foot

00:33:20.920 --> 00:33:21.920
height limit on pole

00:33:21.920 --> 00:33:34.230
signs. I thought they were wanting a 20 foot pole sign and

00:33:34.230 --> 00:33:35.839
a 40 foot pole sign on

00:33:35.839 --> 00:33:40.650
the interstate and we were not gonna recommend a pole sign

00:33:40.650 --> 00:33:41.680
on North Texas

00:33:41.680 --> 00:33:45.200
the requirement for a monument the maximum height was six

00:33:45.200 --> 00:33:46.759
foot. Maybe I

00:33:46.759 --> 00:33:51.740
misheard the explanation but I thought that was where we

00:33:51.740 --> 00:33:53.119
were. If I can try to

00:33:53.119 --> 00:33:56.319
clear it up. We can I want to clear it up and do in

00:33:56.319 --> 00:33:58.160
presentation in public that's

00:33:58.160 --> 00:34:00.960
fine. We can yeah we can pull up the chart that's in our

00:34:00.960 --> 00:34:03.640
municipal code and

00:34:03.640 --> 00:34:08.119
share that with the Commission during the public hearing

00:34:08.119 --> 00:34:09.920
and present it that way.

00:34:09.920 --> 00:34:14.440
Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you Chair. Are there any other

00:34:14.440 --> 00:34:16.320
signs in the area I

00:34:16.320 --> 00:34:21.119
mean I know there's anjo's and other places other

00:34:21.119 --> 00:34:22.599
businesses in the area are

00:34:22.599 --> 00:34:27.769
there other signs that are not monument signs on Avenue C

00:34:27.769 --> 00:34:29.599
for example or any

00:34:29.599 --> 00:34:32.840
other place in that area? We didn't really do a study on on

00:34:32.840 --> 00:34:33.679
existing signs

00:34:33.679 --> 00:34:37.340
we really just looked at this at this specific side and as

00:34:37.340 --> 00:34:38.880
it redevelops the

00:34:38.880 --> 00:34:43.440
type of signage that we that you know we think would be

00:34:43.440 --> 00:34:44.280
appropriate on North

00:34:44.280 --> 00:34:50.059
Texas Boulevard. Okay thank you. Sure. Anybody else

00:34:50.059 --> 00:34:52.400
questions? I'm gonna come

00:34:52.400 --> 00:34:58.119
back to this UP then. I'm gonna go back several years

00:34:58.119 --> 00:34:59.280
Commissioner Taylor would

00:34:59.280 --> 00:35:02.000
probably remember this he and I guess are the two old-tim

00:35:02.000 --> 00:35:03.760
ers here. There was a lot

00:35:03.760 --> 00:35:09.119
of discussion years ago about when I-35 was going to be

00:35:09.119 --> 00:35:10.519
improved and we knew all

00:35:10.519 --> 00:35:13.590
these things were going to happen that they were going to

00:35:13.590 --> 00:35:14.760
be some concessions

00:35:14.760 --> 00:35:18.639
made for existing properties along I-35 and their

00:35:18.639 --> 00:35:20.639
businesses were affected as to

00:35:20.639 --> 00:35:24.010
how we were going to work with them and there were going to

00:35:24.010 --> 00:35:25.039
be things that were

00:35:25.039 --> 00:35:27.530
going to be non-conforming and issues that were going to

00:35:27.530 --> 00:35:28.320
come up and this

00:35:28.320 --> 00:35:32.969
seems like a prime example of that to me. It is and and we

00:35:32.969 --> 00:35:34.360
looked at this

00:35:34.360 --> 00:35:39.400
because the McDonald's fell under the Denton Development

00:35:39.400 --> 00:35:40.360
Code has a provision

00:35:40.360 --> 00:35:43.429
called special exception and because the McDonald's was

00:35:43.429 --> 00:35:44.440
developed under a

00:35:44.440 --> 00:35:48.099
previous code it it was considered a special exception much

00:35:48.099 --> 00:35:49.679
like for that I-35

00:35:49.679 --> 00:35:52.969
redevelopment of the corridor. Where the difference is on

00:35:52.969 --> 00:35:54.480
this side is they have

00:35:54.480 --> 00:35:59.940
to they're expanding to the IHOP lot and in order to... Can

00:35:59.940 --> 00:36:02.480
I pause there? Sure. The only reason

00:36:02.480 --> 00:36:05.550
they're doing that is because their business got taken out

00:36:05.550 --> 00:36:06.559
by I-35 in the

00:36:06.559 --> 00:36:09.980
first place. Correct. Is that correct? But the code, yes

00:36:09.980 --> 00:36:11.360
you are correct, but the code

00:36:11.360 --> 00:36:15.369
says that... Otherwise they'd still we could still be going

00:36:15.369 --> 00:36:15.920
through there and

00:36:15.920 --> 00:36:19.269
getting McDonald's right now. They wouldn't wouldn't be

00:36:19.269 --> 00:36:21.199
doing this. But the

00:36:21.199 --> 00:36:24.630
code in sub chapter 11 the code says a land use under the

00:36:24.630 --> 00:36:25.960
special exceptions a

00:36:25.960 --> 00:36:29.579
land use may expand within the same lot expansion of a

00:36:29.579 --> 00:36:31.199
special exception to an

00:36:31.199 --> 00:36:34.809
adjoining lot will require approval of the City Council

00:36:34.809 --> 00:36:36.059
using the zoning of

00:36:36.059 --> 00:36:39.940
members procedure. So we talked about it we talked about it

00:36:39.940 --> 00:36:41.000
in the planning

00:36:41.000 --> 00:36:44.789
division and they were going to have to either do an SUP or

00:36:44.789 --> 00:36:46.000
do a zoning amendment

00:36:46.000 --> 00:36:50.030
procedure to expand the special exception. So we felt like

00:36:50.030 --> 00:36:50.800
the SUP was

00:36:50.800 --> 00:36:54.119
the way to go. We have criteria for approval. We we can

00:36:54.119 --> 00:36:55.000
look at the site plan.

00:36:55.000 --> 00:36:58.230
They would have had to follow the same process regardless

00:36:58.230 --> 00:36:59.320
of whether they had

00:36:59.320 --> 00:37:01.869
expanded their special exception or whether they went

00:37:01.869 --> 00:37:05.159
forward with the SUP.

00:37:06.559 --> 00:37:09.630
Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you Chair. Is it beyond the

00:37:09.630 --> 00:37:11.440
realm of possibility to go

00:37:11.440 --> 00:37:14.610
back and see what they were approved for to begin with and

00:37:14.610 --> 00:37:15.780
since it's the same

00:37:15.780 --> 00:37:20.170
business in basically the same position same place and just

00:37:20.170 --> 00:37:21.559
let them have what

00:37:21.559 --> 00:37:25.309
they had to begin with? We couldn't do that because of the

00:37:25.309 --> 00:37:26.599
expansion onto the

00:37:26.599 --> 00:37:31.599
IHOP lot. That's really what triggered this whole process.

00:37:31.599 --> 00:37:33.519
I mean I understand that

00:37:33.519 --> 00:37:37.280
that's sort of the legal issue but reality is if they were

00:37:37.280 --> 00:37:38.800
there before they

00:37:38.800 --> 00:37:41.429
enjoyed being there they enjoyed it so much made so much

00:37:41.429 --> 00:37:42.440
money they want to go

00:37:42.440 --> 00:37:46.869
back because of all the students that live to the northeast

00:37:46.869 --> 00:37:47.840
of them and that's

00:37:47.840 --> 00:37:50.639
where they get their business not coming down to North

00:37:50.639 --> 00:37:52.400
Texas necessarily but

00:37:52.400 --> 00:37:57.119
whatever sign they had there that was approved before just

00:37:57.119 --> 00:37:58.000
let it put the same

00:37:58.000 --> 00:38:01.329
kind of sign. Oh in terms of the sign. Oh yeah we could go

00:38:01.329 --> 00:38:03.079
back and do the research on the sign

00:38:03.079 --> 00:38:07.789
I don't know if we could permit what was approved at that

00:38:07.789 --> 00:38:09.239
time because the

00:38:09.239 --> 00:38:14.219
sign code may have changed but the problem is is that it's

00:38:14.219 --> 00:38:16.119
destroyed now so

00:38:16.119 --> 00:38:21.840
it's a rebuild and that means that it's not non-conforming

00:38:21.840 --> 00:38:23.099
at the time that the

00:38:23.099 --> 00:38:28.539
DDC was adopted in 2002 it had a different zoning than what

00:38:28.539 --> 00:38:29.360
was given to

00:38:29.360 --> 00:38:34.619
it in 2002 and before that is when the sign was created so

00:38:34.619 --> 00:38:36.199
it lost any kind of

00:38:36.199 --> 00:38:38.500
non-conforming rights it became one of those special

00:38:38.500 --> 00:38:39.599
exceptions that aren't

00:38:39.599 --> 00:38:43.079
typical zoning special exceptions but it was our own

00:38:43.079 --> 00:38:44.880
creation where they're able

00:38:44.880 --> 00:38:49.530
to maintain those rights they really are but because they

00:38:49.530 --> 00:38:51.039
expanded when you

00:38:51.039 --> 00:38:53.829
expand a special exception our code requires us to go

00:38:53.829 --> 00:38:54.679
through a certain

00:38:54.679 --> 00:38:57.849
procedure like Julie said and it would go to counsel in

00:38:57.849 --> 00:38:59.000
order to make that

00:38:59.000 --> 00:39:02.250
determination so I believe the applicant is the one didn't

00:39:02.250 --> 00:39:03.559
they decide that

00:39:03.559 --> 00:39:08.039
they'd rather do the SUP procedure so yes they do have they

00:39:08.039 --> 00:39:09.559
have the ability to

00:39:09.559 --> 00:39:13.440
put the driveway back but because they're expanding it onto

00:39:13.440 --> 00:39:13.960
another lot

00:39:13.960 --> 00:39:18.469
the code actually requires them to go under this procedure

00:39:18.469 --> 00:39:19.639
in order to get

00:39:19.639 --> 00:39:22.110
permission to do that in order to expand their special

00:39:22.110 --> 00:39:24.280
exception over so we were

00:39:24.280 --> 00:39:28.250
a little bit put into a difficult spot because of that code

00:39:28.250 --> 00:39:30.079
provision well even

00:39:30.079 --> 00:39:33.179
with the staff recommendation center you have a monument

00:39:33.179 --> 00:39:34.260
size sign of a certain

00:39:34.260 --> 00:39:37.500
size can you go back and say look this is what you had to

00:39:37.500 --> 00:39:38.320
begin with so will

00:39:38.320 --> 00:39:40.739
allow you to have the same thing if they're not gonna have

00:39:40.739 --> 00:39:41.440
two pole signs

00:39:41.440 --> 00:39:45.280
which is allowed instead you're gonna recommend that they

00:39:45.280 --> 00:39:47.119
have a second sign

00:39:47.119 --> 00:39:50.989
that's a different size and shape why not just offer them

00:39:50.989 --> 00:39:52.199
the same size and

00:39:52.199 --> 00:39:56.880
shape that they had to begin with I don't know what they

00:39:56.880 --> 00:39:57.800
had to begin with

00:39:57.800 --> 00:39:59.889
so that's why I'm asking maybe this is a bigger side that y

00:39:59.889 --> 00:40:00.800
'all are recommending

00:40:00.800 --> 00:40:03.360
I don't know and I don't know what was there before it wasn

00:40:03.360 --> 00:40:04.280
't something that

00:40:04.280 --> 00:40:08.619
they asked there was no pole sign there there was no pole

00:40:08.619 --> 00:40:10.960
sign there yeah so

00:40:10.960 --> 00:40:15.039
they're getting basically what they had before yeah

00:40:15.039 --> 00:40:16.880
Commissioner back thank you

00:40:16.880 --> 00:40:21.349
chair just a question for the staff here I'm usually don't

00:40:21.349 --> 00:40:21.880
have a problem with

00:40:21.880 --> 00:40:25.980
the SUP says but I agree with the chair in this case is

00:40:25.980 --> 00:40:27.559
this in this particular

00:40:27.559 --> 00:40:34.489
case this SUP is a technical thing is there any way the

00:40:34.489 --> 00:40:35.679
administrator could

00:40:35.679 --> 00:40:39.269
make a call on this or do we have to go is there a leeway

00:40:39.269 --> 00:40:40.440
for the administrator

00:40:40.440 --> 00:40:43.150
to make a specific call on this rather than go through the

00:40:43.150 --> 00:40:45.039
SUP process well if

00:40:45.039 --> 00:40:48.940
it was a normal case then and it required an SAP of course

00:40:48.940 --> 00:40:49.880
you have to go

00:40:49.880 --> 00:40:53.099
through the SUP process but if there was room for a sign

00:40:53.099 --> 00:40:54.559
variance they could do

00:40:54.559 --> 00:41:00.800
that not referring to the sign now just strictly SUP no no

00:41:00.800 --> 00:41:03.440
no okay well I'm

00:41:03.440 --> 00:41:06.679
gonna thank you for that I'm gonna follow up my guess and

00:41:06.679 --> 00:41:07.719
looking at the

00:41:07.719 --> 00:41:10.429
site plan is the reason that they've expanded to the north

00:41:10.429 --> 00:41:11.119
is for parking

00:41:11.119 --> 00:41:15.429
requirements because they lost as I recall they had a lot

00:41:15.429 --> 00:41:16.679
of parking over

00:41:16.679 --> 00:41:21.269
there long on the East property line and so they probably

00:41:21.269 --> 00:41:23.039
are meeting our code

00:41:23.039 --> 00:41:27.489
now having to expand to get the additional parking so it's

00:41:27.489 --> 00:41:28.039
kind of

00:41:28.039 --> 00:41:30.929
they're in a box wherever they try to go and push we make

00:41:30.929 --> 00:41:32.039
them do something else

00:41:32.039 --> 00:41:36.800
and now we're another requirement they were I guess willing

00:41:36.800 --> 00:41:38.199
to go with an SUP

00:41:38.199 --> 00:41:41.679
and now we have this nice letter that popped up last night

00:41:41.679 --> 00:41:43.480
by their neighbor

00:41:43.480 --> 00:41:48.500
who's gonna throw them into supermajority vote which I don

00:41:48.500 --> 00:41:49.000
't know

00:41:49.000 --> 00:41:54.559
where that ends up going that's beyond us here tonight but

00:41:54.559 --> 00:41:56.139
I've enjoyed the

00:41:56.139 --> 00:41:59.440
discussion I'm discouraged or disappointed that this is the

00:41:59.440 --> 00:41:59.800
place

00:41:59.800 --> 00:42:02.869
that they are and trying to go back and do their business

00:42:02.869 --> 00:42:03.559
right back where they

00:42:03.559 --> 00:42:07.150
were and I don't know where it goes with the vote on the

00:42:07.150 --> 00:42:08.199
supermajority on getting

00:42:08.199 --> 00:42:12.340
SUP but it seems like it's a lot that they've had to go

00:42:12.340 --> 00:42:13.840
through to try to

00:42:13.840 --> 00:42:18.150
rebuild a business that they didn't want to have to do in

00:42:18.150 --> 00:42:20.639
the first place so is

00:42:20.639 --> 00:42:23.710
there any other questions for staff on this we've spent

00:42:23.710 --> 00:42:25.039
probably more time than

00:42:25.039 --> 00:42:27.829
we were allotted on this but I think it was an important

00:42:27.829 --> 00:42:29.960
and good discussion

00:42:29.960 --> 00:42:34.920
anybody else questions for Julie thank you great job

00:42:34.920 --> 00:42:37.679
presentation thank you

00:42:39.039 --> 00:42:47.070
yes we can have Haley present the last public human item

00:42:47.070 --> 00:42:50.159
for the Commission

00:42:57.920 --> 00:42:58.610
good evening I'm Haley Zagorski with the Planning

00:42:58.610 --> 00:43:02.599
Department this is case s 16

00:43:02.599 --> 00:43:06.739
7 for the Riney Road Apartments so this request is to hold

00:43:06.739 --> 00:43:08.280
a public hearing and

00:43:08.280 --> 00:43:11.440
consider a request for a specific use permit to allow for a

00:43:11.440 --> 00:43:12.719
multifamily use on

00:43:12.719 --> 00:43:16.440
a property that's approximately 0.9 acres as you can see

00:43:16.440 --> 00:43:17.400
here the property

00:43:17.400 --> 00:43:21.710
is outlined in yellow and it has frontage on Riney Court R

00:43:21.710 --> 00:43:22.519
iney Road and

00:43:22.519 --> 00:43:26.639
North Elm Street so it's kind of a unique configuration I

00:43:26.639 --> 00:43:27.840
'll start by

00:43:27.840 --> 00:43:31.849
walking you through their site plan what they're proposing

00:43:31.849 --> 00:43:32.960
is a 10 unit

00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:35.679
apartment complex total so it would feature two buildings

00:43:35.679 --> 00:43:36.400
you can see them

00:43:36.400 --> 00:43:39.239
outlined on the screen in yellow each of these buildings

00:43:39.239 --> 00:43:40.280
would feature five

00:43:40.280 --> 00:43:43.360
apartment units the proposal is for all of those to be

00:43:43.360 --> 00:43:44.360
three-bedroom two and a

00:43:44.360 --> 00:43:48.719
half bathrooms and they're kind of uniquely designed and

00:43:48.719 --> 00:43:49.119
that they're more

00:43:49.119 --> 00:43:53.139
like individual townhomes each unit would have a rear yard

00:43:53.139 --> 00:43:54.079
that would be

00:43:54.079 --> 00:43:56.550
fenced in with a wrought-iron fence and you can see

00:43:56.550 --> 00:43:57.920
outlined in green the area

00:43:57.920 --> 00:44:00.750
that would be devoted to the rear yards for each of these

00:44:00.750 --> 00:44:01.800
the property would

00:44:01.800 --> 00:44:04.510
also feature a storage building that's outlined in red and

00:44:04.510 --> 00:44:05.360
this would be just

00:44:05.360 --> 00:44:08.429
to provide extra storage for each unit it's designed to

00:44:08.429 --> 00:44:09.480
have one exterior

00:44:09.480 --> 00:44:12.550
entrance into a hallway that would have then 10 separate

00:44:12.550 --> 00:44:14.280
rooms off of it the

00:44:14.280 --> 00:44:17.389
site would also feature 23 parking spaces the code

00:44:17.389 --> 00:44:18.800
requirement for a

00:44:18.800 --> 00:44:21.190
three-bed for three-bedroom apartments would get them to 20

00:44:21.190 --> 00:44:22.480
spaces so the three

00:44:22.480 --> 00:44:26.699
additional spaces that they're proposing would be pervious

00:44:26.699 --> 00:44:27.239
pavers

00:44:27.599 --> 00:44:31.460
looking at the landscape plan you can see that the property

00:44:31.460 --> 00:44:32.559
would meet the

00:44:32.559 --> 00:44:36.409
intent of the DDC in terms of providing street trees they

00:44:36.409 --> 00:44:37.519
're also preserving

00:44:37.519 --> 00:44:40.650
existing trees in this area shown in green those trees are

00:44:40.650 --> 00:44:41.519
pretty much the

00:44:41.519 --> 00:44:43.429
only trees that are on the site today and their intent is

00:44:43.429 --> 00:44:44.159
to preserve all of

00:44:44.159 --> 00:44:47.670
those along Rainy Court the site it was also required to

00:44:47.670 --> 00:44:49.199
provide a type B buffer

00:44:49.199 --> 00:44:52.269
because there is a single-family residence adjoining the

00:44:52.269 --> 00:44:52.880
property so

00:44:52.880 --> 00:44:56.389
they're providing the required ratio of five trees and 30

00:44:56.389 --> 00:44:57.960
shrubs per 100 linear

00:44:57.960 --> 00:45:00.849
feet in addition to the required plantings they're also

00:45:00.849 --> 00:45:01.360
proposing an

00:45:01.360 --> 00:45:03.909
eight-foot tall cedar fence to provide an additional buffer

00:45:03.909 --> 00:45:04.559
there for that

00:45:04.559 --> 00:45:08.429
single-family residence one of the other key landscape

00:45:08.429 --> 00:45:10.280
features is here at the

00:45:10.280 --> 00:45:12.860
front of the property outlined in yellow they have an area

00:45:12.860 --> 00:45:14.400
that would be a patio

00:45:14.400 --> 00:45:17.469
open space for the residents that is well landscaped and

00:45:17.469 --> 00:45:18.519
there would also be

00:45:18.519 --> 00:45:22.639
a monument sign with the apartment complex name located

00:45:22.639 --> 00:45:23.760
here along the

00:45:23.760 --> 00:45:27.519
front of that area overall the property meets the landscape

00:45:27.519 --> 00:45:28.199
requirements of the

00:45:28.199 --> 00:45:31.400
development code it exceeds the 40% landscaping that's

00:45:31.400 --> 00:45:32.400
required there at

00:45:32.400 --> 00:45:37.960
approximately 48% overall looking at the proposed building

00:45:37.960 --> 00:45:39.000
elevations this is

00:45:39.000 --> 00:45:41.289
building one which is the building located on the southern

00:45:41.289 --> 00:45:41.719
side of the

00:45:41.719 --> 00:45:45.400
property you can see it's a two-story building each of the

00:45:45.400 --> 00:45:47.320
units has a their

00:45:47.320 --> 00:45:51.039
own exterior front entry and rear exit into their backyard

00:45:51.039 --> 00:45:52.480
you'll notice the

00:45:52.480 --> 00:45:54.619
front doors aren't visible on here they are kind of to the

00:45:54.619 --> 00:45:55.719
side in little alcoves

00:45:55.719 --> 00:45:58.670
so there's no front door strictly visible in the front of

00:45:58.670 --> 00:46:00.340
the building so

00:46:00.340 --> 00:46:02.630
this building would be five units and it would be composed

00:46:02.630 --> 00:46:03.519
of brick and stucco

00:46:03.519 --> 00:46:08.800
materials building two on the north side of the property

00:46:08.800 --> 00:46:10.119
fairly similar again

00:46:10.119 --> 00:46:13.880
two-story design with each unit having its own exterior

00:46:13.880 --> 00:46:15.239
front and rear exit

00:46:15.239 --> 00:46:20.260
again brick and stucco materials and just so you know this

00:46:20.260 --> 00:46:21.800
is the design for

00:46:21.800 --> 00:46:24.590
their storage building so it's just a little over 700

00:46:24.590 --> 00:46:25.800
square feet as I

00:46:25.800 --> 00:46:28.590
mentioned it does just have one exterior entry so it doesn

00:46:28.590 --> 00:46:29.559
't have ten separate

00:46:29.559 --> 00:46:32.360
entrances on the outside they're accessed by this interior

00:46:32.360 --> 00:46:33.599
hallway and it

00:46:33.599 --> 00:46:39.480
is intended to be a brick construction as well so our SUP

00:46:39.480 --> 00:46:40.480
criteria are outlined

00:46:40.480 --> 00:46:43.670
in subchapter 6 of the Denton development code there's many

00:46:43.670 --> 00:46:44.280
criteria

00:46:44.280 --> 00:46:46.650
there in summary that they ensure that we provide

00:46:46.650 --> 00:46:48.159
consistency with the zoning

00:46:48.159 --> 00:46:50.960
regulations conformity with the goals of our Denton plan

00:46:50.960 --> 00:46:52.760
2030 and consistency

00:46:52.760 --> 00:46:55.230
with surrounding development in terms of access nuisance

00:46:55.230 --> 00:46:56.360
prevention and the scale

00:46:56.360 --> 00:46:59.519
of development so now we'll go through each of those

00:46:59.519 --> 00:47:01.039
criteria briefly this

00:47:01.039 --> 00:47:04.760
property is zoned neighborhood residential mixed-use 12 so

00:47:04.760 --> 00:47:05.760
this zoning

00:47:05.760 --> 00:47:08.070
designation allows for many types of residential

00:47:08.070 --> 00:47:09.539
development single-family

00:47:09.539 --> 00:47:12.610
duplex and townhomes are all permitted by right multifamily

00:47:12.610 --> 00:47:14.159
does require has a

00:47:14.159 --> 00:47:16.949
limitation that requires it either be approved through an

00:47:16.949 --> 00:47:17.800
SUP or as part of a

00:47:17.800 --> 00:47:22.219
mixed-use development or a small area plan so just some

00:47:22.219 --> 00:47:24.280
brief outline of the

00:47:24.280 --> 00:47:27.349
NRMU 12 regulations they do meet their minimum lot size the

00:47:27.349 --> 00:47:28.559
maximum density for

00:47:28.559 --> 00:47:31.849
the property is 12 units per acre so at 10 units they come

00:47:31.849 --> 00:47:33.000
in under that density

00:47:33.000 --> 00:47:37.679
maximum they are allowed a maximum of 60% lot coverage with

00:47:37.679 --> 00:47:38.800
40% landscaping

00:47:38.800 --> 00:47:43.750
and their buildings maximum height would be 40 feet looking

00:47:43.750 --> 00:47:44.800
at what's within

00:47:44.800 --> 00:47:47.920
about 200 feet of the subject property we have a mixture of

00:47:47.920 --> 00:47:49.400
NRMU 12 district and

00:47:49.400 --> 00:47:53.110
neighborhood residential to within the NR 2 district to the

00:47:53.110 --> 00:47:53.880
north and to the

00:47:53.880 --> 00:47:57.369
southwest of the property are single-family homes within

00:47:57.369 --> 00:47:58.320
the NRMU 12

00:47:58.320 --> 00:48:01.389
district we have the subject property here which is vacant

00:48:01.389 --> 00:48:02.000
some other

00:48:02.000 --> 00:48:05.619
undeveloped property to the east across rhynie road and

00:48:05.619 --> 00:48:06.880
then this area to the

00:48:06.880 --> 00:48:11.880
south and west is all a North Lakes Park. Zooming out a

00:48:11.880 --> 00:48:13.280
little bit more you see

00:48:13.280 --> 00:48:16.349
continuation across Elm Street we get start to get a little

00:48:16.349 --> 00:48:17.440
bit higher density

00:48:17.440 --> 00:48:21.150
here with some duplexes a continuation North Lakes Park

00:48:21.150 --> 00:48:22.199
here you can see better

00:48:22.199 --> 00:48:25.000
to the south now the animal shelter is just further to the

00:48:25.000 --> 00:48:27.360
northwest there and

00:48:27.360 --> 00:48:30.900
then zooming out to give you a better idea of where this is

00:48:30.900 --> 00:48:31.960
at and this part

00:48:31.960 --> 00:48:34.679
of town we have UNT's Discovery Park here just north of

00:48:34.679 --> 00:48:35.519
there along Elm

00:48:35.519 --> 00:48:39.489
Street again North Lakes Park as much of this area we've

00:48:39.489 --> 00:48:41.519
recently seen an SUP

00:48:41.519 --> 00:48:44.400
request for apartments up here on this parcel and then you

00:48:44.400 --> 00:48:45.119
can see just a

00:48:45.119 --> 00:48:48.190
mixture of residential type developments here single-family

00:48:48.190 --> 00:48:49.039
duplexes and

00:48:49.039 --> 00:48:54.039
apartments in this area. Looking at the future land use map

00:48:54.039 --> 00:48:55.239
this property kind

00:48:55.239 --> 00:48:58.090
of splits between the neighborhood mixed use and moderate

00:48:58.090 --> 00:48:59.519
residential future land

00:48:59.519 --> 00:49:01.539
use designations it's right there on the buffer zone

00:49:01.539 --> 00:49:02.679
between those two districts

00:49:02.679 --> 00:49:05.760
the use of the property that they're proposing does fit

00:49:05.760 --> 00:49:06.760
within each of these

00:49:06.760 --> 00:49:09.869
neighborhood mixed use is intended for residents

00:49:09.869 --> 00:49:11.480
residential areas with a

00:49:11.480 --> 00:49:14.280
mixture of housing types along with supporting retail and

00:49:14.280 --> 00:49:15.119
service uses and

00:49:15.119 --> 00:49:19.880
then moderate residential promotes protection of existing

00:49:19.880 --> 00:49:23.079
neighborhoods as well as development of residential uses

00:49:23.079 --> 00:49:24.360
between 4 and 12

00:49:24.360 --> 00:49:26.750
dwelling units per acre so this fits comfortably within

00:49:26.750 --> 00:49:27.699
that designation as

00:49:27.699 --> 00:49:32.110
well. To give you an idea of the mobility plan in this area

00:49:32.110 --> 00:49:33.159
Elm Street is a

00:49:33.159 --> 00:49:36.710
text dot roadway that's a primary arterial. Riney Road is a

00:49:36.710 --> 00:49:37.480
collector

00:49:37.480 --> 00:49:40.360
street and then Riney Court is just a neighborhood street.

00:49:40.360 --> 00:49:41.880
There are some bus

00:49:41.880 --> 00:49:43.909
routes that run along North Elm Street that would provide

00:49:43.909 --> 00:49:44.639
other means of access

00:49:44.639 --> 00:49:49.760
to the property. Just to give you an idea of what the

00:49:49.760 --> 00:49:51.039
property looks like today as

00:49:51.039 --> 00:49:53.840
I mentioned it's primarily vacant you can't see there is

00:49:53.840 --> 00:49:55.000
some well there are

00:49:55.000 --> 00:49:59.010
well-established trees here along Riney Court. So

00:49:59.010 --> 00:50:01.239
notifications were sent about

00:50:01.239 --> 00:50:04.320
this we received four opposition responses that were all

00:50:04.320 --> 00:50:04.840
included in your

00:50:04.840 --> 00:50:08.340
backup the when you look at the total land area within 200

00:50:08.340 --> 00:50:09.039
feet they were at

00:50:09.039 --> 00:50:12.519
about 33% of that land area in opposition so that would

00:50:12.519 --> 00:50:13.000
also trigger

00:50:13.000 --> 00:50:15.389
that super majority vote that we spoke about at City

00:50:15.389 --> 00:50:17.519
Council. The applicant did

00:50:17.519 --> 00:50:19.849
hold a neighborhood meeting back in May there were

00:50:19.849 --> 00:50:21.440
approximately 11 people in

00:50:21.440 --> 00:50:24.150
attendance at that meeting and believe many of those are

00:50:24.150 --> 00:50:24.760
the ones that

00:50:24.760 --> 00:50:30.019
submitted the opposition notices you have before you. Given

00:50:30.019 --> 00:50:31.079
all the criteria

00:50:31.079 --> 00:50:33.880
we looked at in the mixed-use nature of this area staff is

00:50:33.880 --> 00:50:34.840
recommending approval

00:50:34.840 --> 00:50:37.909
of the request it's generally compatible with the

00:50:37.909 --> 00:50:39.039
surrounding development in this

00:50:39.039 --> 00:50:41.329
area it's consistent with the goals and objectives of the

00:50:41.329 --> 00:50:42.800
Denton plan 2030 and

00:50:42.800 --> 00:50:46.639
we are recommending one criteria that they substantially

00:50:46.639 --> 00:50:47.920
comply with the site

00:50:47.920 --> 00:50:50.000
plan landscape plan and building elevations that were

00:50:50.000 --> 00:50:50.760
attached with the

00:50:50.760 --> 00:50:55.059
SUP request and with that I can stand for any questions.

00:50:55.059 --> 00:50:56.039
Commissioner Ellis.

00:50:56.039 --> 00:50:59.599
Thank you chair. Hey Haley I noticed in one of the

00:50:59.599 --> 00:51:01.920
responses they mentioned that

00:51:01.920 --> 00:51:06.039
there is a current drainage problem there do we know it is

00:51:06.039 --> 00:51:08.639
there one? And what

00:51:08.639 --> 00:51:12.949
is the do we know the problem? As I heard expressed there's

00:51:12.949 --> 00:51:14.000
a concern with some

00:51:14.000 --> 00:51:16.349
flooding along Riney Court I believe and with the one

00:51:16.349 --> 00:51:17.559
quarter of this property

00:51:17.559 --> 00:51:20.170
that stays kind of marshy in the wet season when I was out

00:51:20.170 --> 00:51:21.039
there it hadn't

00:51:21.039 --> 00:51:24.130
rained in a while so I didn't observe the problem directly

00:51:24.130 --> 00:51:25.079
but I know when they

00:51:25.079 --> 00:51:27.880
get to the site plan process their drainage will be

00:51:27.880 --> 00:51:29.039
analyzed in terms of

00:51:29.039 --> 00:51:31.610
existing conditions and their developed conditions to

00:51:31.610 --> 00:51:32.679
ensure that there's no

00:51:32.679 --> 00:51:39.250
negative impact to adjoining properties. Commissioner Rose

00:51:39.250 --> 00:51:41.400
lle. Thank you chair. I

00:51:41.400 --> 00:51:47.800
want to talk or try to figure out the differences between a

00:51:47.800 --> 00:51:49.119
duplex townhome

00:51:49.119 --> 00:51:55.489
and multifamily especially if a multifamily is five units.

00:51:55.489 --> 00:51:56.239
So I have a

00:51:56.239 --> 00:52:01.570
couple questions. By right could someone build four duplex

00:52:01.570 --> 00:52:03.320
es on this for eight

00:52:03.320 --> 00:52:06.610
units? If there were to be duplexes they would have to be

00:52:06.610 --> 00:52:07.400
subdivided into at

00:52:07.400 --> 00:52:11.260
least four separate lots with one duplex per lot. I believe

00:52:11.260 --> 00:52:12.239
the applicant

00:52:12.239 --> 00:52:14.480
considered some other residential options but given that

00:52:14.480 --> 00:52:14.800
unique

00:52:14.800 --> 00:52:17.510
configuration it's kind of triangular there with three

00:52:17.510 --> 00:52:18.559
frontages they found

00:52:18.559 --> 00:52:21.349
challenges and figuring out how to subdivide the property.

00:52:21.349 --> 00:52:21.800
Is that the same

00:52:21.800 --> 00:52:25.280
with townhomes? Those are each different plots? Yes so if

00:52:25.280 --> 00:52:26.559
it's anything three

00:52:26.559 --> 00:52:29.079
between three and eight units and they're all on their own

00:52:29.079 --> 00:52:30.039
separate lot but

00:52:30.039 --> 00:52:32.880
share an attached wall we would consider that a townhome.

00:52:32.880 --> 00:52:34.719
And do you know if they

00:52:34.719 --> 00:52:38.210
looked into that? It was this configuration of property? I

00:52:38.210 --> 00:52:38.679
think it again was yeah

00:52:38.679 --> 00:52:41.880
figuring out how to you know provide because each of those

00:52:41.880 --> 00:52:42.480
lots would have to

00:52:42.480 --> 00:52:44.230
have frontage so they would have probably had to provide

00:52:44.230 --> 00:52:44.679
some sort of

00:52:44.679 --> 00:52:47.750
interior street within the lot and then let the townhomes

00:52:47.750 --> 00:52:48.760
access off of that and

00:52:48.760 --> 00:52:50.920
I think they just face challenges trying to figure out how

00:52:50.920 --> 00:52:51.760
to subdivide the

00:52:51.760 --> 00:52:54.960
property. Okay. I believe the applicant is intending to be

00:52:54.960 --> 00:52:55.719
here tonight so he

00:52:55.719 --> 00:52:57.940
could address that a little more in terms of what he

00:52:57.940 --> 00:53:01.920
considered. Thanks. Can

00:53:01.920 --> 00:53:05.960
you go back to the site plan that shows the streets on it?

00:53:10.840 --> 00:53:16.099
What's the parking or allowance for parking on either Riney

00:53:16.099 --> 00:53:16.880
Road or Riney

00:53:16.880 --> 00:53:21.510
Court? Is that permitted or not permitted? Jim would you

00:53:21.510 --> 00:53:21.960
mind addressing

00:53:21.960 --> 00:53:24.239
that?

00:53:31.920 --> 00:53:43.070
In the ultimate configuration of those streets parking

00:53:43.070 --> 00:53:43.920
would be committed,

00:53:43.920 --> 00:53:50.920
would be permitted. Riney Road being a collector and Riney

00:53:50.920 --> 00:53:51.719
Court being a

00:53:51.719 --> 00:53:55.769
residential street but with the width that they have now it

00:53:55.769 --> 00:53:56.719
's really not

00:53:56.719 --> 00:54:01.820
feasible at this point. Riney Court is I mean functionally

00:54:01.820 --> 00:54:03.039
it's it's maybe 20

00:54:03.039 --> 00:54:06.239
feet wide it's more like a residential lane which we would

00:54:06.239 --> 00:54:07.320
not allow parking

00:54:07.320 --> 00:54:13.679
along. Riney Road is really not much wider than that so

00:54:13.679 --> 00:54:14.760
ultimately there would

00:54:14.760 --> 00:54:20.329
be but I would say at this point I mean there's not no

00:54:20.329 --> 00:54:21.920
parking signs up that I

00:54:21.920 --> 00:54:26.280
know of but we would not consider it a street that's wide

00:54:26.280 --> 00:54:27.519
enough. It's not even

00:54:27.519 --> 00:54:32.960
28 foot wide I don't think. Riney Road so we wouldn't

00:54:32.960 --> 00:54:33.840
consider it wide enough to

00:54:33.840 --> 00:54:39.239
park along. Well I went by there and I looked at Riney Road

00:54:39.239 --> 00:54:40.360
and it has curb and

00:54:40.360 --> 00:54:46.139
gutter on the west side right on this side perimeter street

00:54:46.139 --> 00:54:47.559
paving. On the

00:54:47.559 --> 00:54:51.289
east side that's the side that is unimproved essentially it

00:54:51.289 --> 00:54:52.000
has no curb

00:54:52.000 --> 00:54:55.289
and gutter. I don't remember looking at Riney Court whether

00:54:55.289 --> 00:54:56.519
it has curb and

00:54:56.519 --> 00:55:02.079
gutter on it or it does not at all because that's been the

00:55:02.079 --> 00:55:02.199
biggest

00:55:02.199 --> 00:55:07.679
concern that's been addressed to me is parking. I know the

00:55:07.679 --> 00:55:08.760
applicant said that

00:55:08.760 --> 00:55:13.429
they have added some parking places I think they are above

00:55:13.429 --> 00:55:14.920
what is required.

00:55:14.920 --> 00:55:18.599
Three spaces more than is required right? Yes the three

00:55:18.599 --> 00:55:20.039
spaces that are in gray here are

00:55:20.039 --> 00:55:24.139
pervious paving those are above what's required by code. So

00:55:24.139 --> 00:55:26.199
they have responded

00:55:26.199 --> 00:55:30.510
as best they can with a tough site to I think the neighbors

00:55:30.510 --> 00:55:31.480
to put even more

00:55:31.480 --> 00:55:35.039
spaces in them what they're required and then the overflow

00:55:35.039 --> 00:55:36.239
parking that you would

00:55:36.239 --> 00:55:40.179
normally be able to have on sites like this along public

00:55:40.179 --> 00:55:41.880
streets which they're

00:55:41.880 --> 00:55:46.349
allowed to have because the streets are not improved that

00:55:46.349 --> 00:55:48.119
impedes the project

00:55:48.119 --> 00:55:53.639
even more as far as overflow parking but when they are

00:55:53.639 --> 00:55:55.679
improved as they should be

00:55:55.679 --> 00:55:58.980
at some point then if there is overflow parking they could

00:55:58.980 --> 00:55:59.880
park on both Riney

00:55:59.880 --> 00:56:04.059
Road and Riney Court if necessary is that correct? Yes the

00:56:04.059 --> 00:56:05.119
ultimate sections

00:56:05.119 --> 00:56:11.340
would allow for that. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair I

00:56:11.340 --> 00:56:13.480
'm kind of piggybacking

00:56:13.480 --> 00:56:19.170
on this is Riney Road even in on the radar at all about you

00:56:19.170 --> 00:56:20.280
know in the back

00:56:20.280 --> 00:56:23.349
of it says that it needs to be brought up even to current

00:56:23.349 --> 00:56:24.599
full right of way and

00:56:24.599 --> 00:56:29.559
do we anywhere on anyone's plan? Not that I'm aware of ma'

00:56:29.559 --> 00:56:32.239
am. No. Commissioner

00:56:32.239 --> 00:56:37.800
Tyler. Thank you chair. I have a question regarding the lot

00:56:37.800 --> 00:56:39.260
directly north on

00:56:39.260 --> 00:56:43.050
Riney Court the lots directly north on Riney Court is there

00:56:43.050 --> 00:56:44.239
a map like maybe

00:56:44.239 --> 00:56:47.730
the Google Maps view or the parcel map view that would be

00:56:47.730 --> 00:56:49.820
able to see those so

00:56:49.820 --> 00:56:52.119
there are two. Yeah the gray outline shows the parcel

00:56:52.119 --> 00:56:55.559
boundaries there. Yeah so right there there are two small

00:56:55.559 --> 00:56:58.780
lots and one with a house and one even smaller that looks

00:56:58.780 --> 00:57:00.159
like it's got a part

00:57:00.159 --> 00:57:08.840
of a cul-de-sac on it. Those are also zoned NRMU 12. Could

00:57:08.840 --> 00:57:10.239
they feasibly be

00:57:10.239 --> 00:57:19.880
developed and with any kind of multifamily or attached or

00:57:19.880 --> 00:57:21.599
whatever

00:57:21.599 --> 00:57:24.400
commercial look the NRMU 12 they probably can't have a

00:57:24.400 --> 00:57:25.360
driveway on to Elm

00:57:25.360 --> 00:57:29.510
because of text dot regulations so they'd have to have a

00:57:29.510 --> 00:57:31.119
driveway on to Riney.

00:57:31.119 --> 00:57:37.519
I'm just trying to like I said look at logical progression

00:57:37.519 --> 00:57:38.280
of development here

00:57:38.280 --> 00:57:43.340
is this is this a reasonable. Yeah and based on the zoning

00:57:43.340 --> 00:57:44.280
those lots could be

00:57:44.280 --> 00:57:47.079
developed with any of those uses you mentioned but the

00:57:47.079 --> 00:57:47.840
logistics of it would

00:57:47.840 --> 00:57:50.989
probably be challenging much like we see with this site in

00:57:50.989 --> 00:57:52.119
terms of access and

00:57:52.119 --> 00:57:56.559
configuration there. So maybe like if you removed the house

00:57:56.559 --> 00:57:57.320
you could build a

00:57:57.320 --> 00:57:59.559
duplex there or something you wouldn't fit an apartment

00:57:59.559 --> 00:58:00.760
building on those two

00:58:00.760 --> 00:58:04.119
lots put together. Most likely not I'm not sure of their

00:58:04.119 --> 00:58:05.159
size but it would be

00:58:05.159 --> 00:58:14.920
challenging. Yeah okay thank you. Commissioner Beck. I went

00:58:14.920 --> 00:58:15.320
out and visited

00:58:15.320 --> 00:58:19.090
two and I actually the two houses up Riney Court there one

00:58:19.090 --> 00:58:20.039
's up for sale

00:58:20.039 --> 00:58:22.989
currently and the other ones are rental property. My

00:58:22.989 --> 00:58:25.280
concern and then I never did

00:58:25.280 --> 00:58:28.099
I knocked on the door of the other one down there no one

00:58:28.099 --> 00:58:29.920
was home but something

00:58:29.920 --> 00:58:35.179
dawned on me later that access to this new development is

00:58:35.179 --> 00:58:35.880
not gonna be possible

00:58:35.880 --> 00:58:38.780
for Riney Court is that correct? I mean that's because it's

00:58:38.780 --> 00:58:39.679
gonna be blocked off

00:58:39.679 --> 00:58:43.400
with trees and everything there's no inlet no sidewalk for

00:58:43.400 --> 00:58:44.519
people to park on

00:58:44.519 --> 00:58:49.469
Riney Court and then okay but I would be concerned that a

00:58:49.469 --> 00:58:52.199
long haul driver rented

00:58:52.199 --> 00:58:56.400
one of the townhouses there and parked his rig in that

00:58:56.400 --> 00:59:00.199
court up there so I could see

00:59:00.199 --> 00:59:03.699
neighbors being concerned about the use of that cul-de-sac

00:59:03.699 --> 00:59:04.679
for something like

00:59:04.679 --> 00:59:08.659
that so just throwing that out there to consider maybe to

00:59:08.659 --> 00:59:09.960
allay those concerns

00:59:09.960 --> 00:59:14.059
we address that with you know prohibited parking or

00:59:14.059 --> 00:59:15.639
something like that so they

00:59:15.639 --> 00:59:19.000
don't get stuck with something like that and people start

00:59:19.000 --> 00:59:20.639
making a path through

00:59:20.639 --> 00:59:27.480
there. Jennifer correct me if I'm wrong but I mean the city

00:59:27.480 --> 00:59:28.639
does have a

00:59:28.639 --> 00:59:38.050
procedure in which a resident or a developer could appeal

00:59:38.050 --> 00:59:39.000
to our

00:59:39.000 --> 00:59:45.280
traffic engineer to post no parking signage and I think

00:59:45.280 --> 00:59:45.760
they would have to

00:59:45.760 --> 00:59:49.469
get they have to get signatures from a certain amount of

00:59:49.469 --> 00:59:50.599
neighbors I believe I

00:59:50.599 --> 00:59:54.719
mean that's that's an option available am I right? I'm not

00:59:54.719 --> 00:59:55.559
familiar with the

00:59:55.559 --> 00:59:59.860
appeal and the parking regulations but we can look that out

00:59:59.860 --> 01:00:02.239
for you. Thank you.

01:00:03.440 --> 01:00:07.480
Any other questions for staff?

01:00:09.239 --> 01:00:12.679
Thank you Jim. Thank you Haley.

01:00:18.000 --> 01:00:19.159
Okay I believe that's all the items that we have on our

01:00:19.159 --> 01:00:22.519
work session this evening

01:00:22.519 --> 01:00:28.809
so at 6.02 I will close our work session and we will recon

01:00:28.809 --> 01:00:29.599
vene in

01:00:39.000 --> 01:00:42.000
a minute.

01:01:09.000 --> 01:01:12.000
[inaudible]

01:01:39.000 --> 01:01:42.000
[inaudible]

01:02:09.000 --> 01:02:12.000
[inaudible]

01:02:24.280 --> 01:02:24.329
Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and

01:02:24.329 --> 01:02:28.079
Zoning Commission

01:02:28.079 --> 01:02:32.449
meeting for July the 12th 2017. This meeting has been duly

01:02:32.449 --> 01:02:33.599
posted and we do

01:02:33.599 --> 01:02:37.909
have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 634.

01:02:37.909 --> 01:02:39.039
Our first order of

01:02:39.039 --> 01:02:42.929
business will be to stand and give the pledge to the US of

01:02:42.929 --> 01:02:44.000
the Texas flag.

01:02:44.000 --> 01:02:48.960
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

01:02:48.960 --> 01:02:53.320
America and to the republic for which it stands one nation

01:02:53.320 --> 01:02:59.000
under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

01:02:59.000 --> 01:03:07.050
I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God one

01:03:07.050 --> 01:03:10.000
indivisible.

01:03:16.000 --> 01:03:18.800
Our next order of business will be the Planning and Zoning

01:03:18.800 --> 01:03:21.239
Commission meeting

01:03:21.239 --> 01:03:25.550
minutes for June the 28th. The chair will entertain a

01:03:25.550 --> 01:03:26.360
motion. Commissioner Taylor.

01:03:26.360 --> 01:03:29.429
I move we approve our minutes for June 20th meeting.

01:03:29.429 --> 01:03:31.119
Commissioner Beck. Second.

01:03:31.119 --> 01:03:36.760
We have a first and a second for approval any discussion?

01:03:36.760 --> 01:03:38.639
Seeing none call for a

01:03:38.639 --> 01:03:52.659
vote on the board. Motion carries five zero. We'll move us

01:03:52.659 --> 01:03:53.440
to our public hearing

01:03:53.440 --> 01:03:56.590
section. At this time I'm going to open the public hearing

01:03:56.590 --> 01:03:58.079
for item A which is Z

01:03:58.079 --> 01:04:06.320
17-0011A and call on Julie Wyatt for presentation.

01:04:15.199 --> 01:04:18.400
I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the City of Denton.

01:04:18.400 --> 01:04:19.440
Would you like for me to

01:04:19.440 --> 01:04:23.309
go through the whole presentation or just the summary slide

01:04:23.309 --> 01:04:24.480
? I think summary we

01:04:24.480 --> 01:04:28.360
had a great presentation earlier thank you. All right so

01:04:28.360 --> 01:04:29.480
the item before you is

01:04:29.480 --> 01:04:35.760
Z 17-11 blue beacon. As we discussed in the work session

01:04:35.760 --> 01:04:37.679
the request is to rezone

01:04:37.679 --> 01:04:43.210
or actually initially zone 16 acres from RD 5X district to

01:04:43.210 --> 01:04:44.960
ECC district. The

01:04:44.960 --> 01:04:48.670
subject property is in the northwest part of the city. It's

01:04:48.670 --> 01:04:50.039
adjacent or near to

01:04:50.039 --> 01:04:54.989
I-35 north of Barthol road. Staff did analyze the request

01:04:54.989 --> 01:04:55.960
and has found that

01:04:55.960 --> 01:04:59.030
DCC district conforms with the future land use designation

01:04:59.030 --> 01:05:00.000
and is compatible

01:05:00.000 --> 01:05:02.710
with the surrounding properties at designations and uses

01:05:02.710 --> 01:05:03.480
and therefore we

01:05:03.480 --> 01:05:06.550
recommend approval of the request. The applicant is here

01:05:06.550 --> 01:05:07.519
and I'll be happy to

01:05:07.519 --> 01:05:14.679
answer any questions. Any questions for staff?

01:05:15.960 --> 01:05:20.289
Thank you Julie. Thank you. This is a public hearing and I

01:05:20.289 --> 01:05:22.400
do have a card from Dana

01:05:22.400 --> 01:05:27.150
Morse as applicant. Would you like to come forward? Mr.

01:05:27.150 --> 01:05:29.559
Chairman, Commissioners,

01:05:29.559 --> 01:05:34.760
again it's Dana Morse 500 Graves excuse me Boulevard, Sal

01:05:34.760 --> 01:05:36.639
ina Kansas. We could

01:05:36.639 --> 01:05:40.030
have made this simpler I think. When we started this

01:05:40.030 --> 01:05:41.480
process we went under

01:05:41.480 --> 01:05:44.789
contract by the whole 21 acres. We really thought we could

01:05:44.789 --> 01:05:45.400
fit on that

01:05:45.400 --> 01:05:49.440
property that was already in the city limits and so we rez

01:05:49.440 --> 01:05:50.800
oned it and then as

01:05:50.800 --> 01:05:53.869
we worked with TechStat and with the city we found we

01:05:53.869 --> 01:05:55.039
really needed with

01:05:55.039 --> 01:05:58.110
Barthol being realigned we needed to move our access point

01:05:58.110 --> 01:05:59.159
to the west so

01:05:59.159 --> 01:06:03.360
that aligned with Lowe's truck stop entrance and exit and

01:06:03.360 --> 01:06:04.099
so that's why

01:06:04.099 --> 01:06:07.969
we're asking for this to be rezoned and it's already been

01:06:07.969 --> 01:06:09.239
annexed and try and

01:06:09.239 --> 01:06:13.579
wrap this thing up so we can get started construction. We

01:06:13.579 --> 01:06:16.320
don't have any plans

01:06:16.320 --> 01:06:19.980
really for the remainder of this. Approximately 10 acres

01:06:19.980 --> 01:06:21.039
after we're done.

01:06:21.039 --> 01:06:26.000
I'm sure we'll sell to someone who has an interest for that

01:06:26.000 --> 01:06:27.480
related truck stop

01:06:27.480 --> 01:06:31.489
type business. So if you have any questions that's really

01:06:31.489 --> 01:06:33.039
all I have. Okay any

01:06:33.039 --> 01:06:39.639
questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you sir. I

01:06:39.639 --> 01:06:41.079
have one other comment

01:06:41.079 --> 01:06:48.409
or email from Rick Shuffield and he has no objection to L

01:06:48.409 --> 01:06:49.320
owe's truck stop so I'll

01:06:49.320 --> 01:06:53.199
read that into the record as well. This is a public hearing

01:06:53.199 --> 01:06:53.840
anyone else?

01:06:53.840 --> 01:06:57.039
Commissioner Beck. I do.

01:07:03.239 --> 01:07:06.420
Never mind it's not this one. Sorry. Okay this is a public

01:07:06.420 --> 01:07:09.440
hearing anyone who

01:07:09.440 --> 01:07:14.039
would like to speak on this item please come forward at

01:07:14.039 --> 01:07:16.400
this time. Seeing none I

01:07:16.400 --> 01:07:20.449
will close the public hearing and open the floor for

01:07:20.449 --> 01:07:22.519
discussion or motion.

01:07:23.360 --> 01:07:28.320
Commissioner Taylor. Thank you chair. So I first I want to

01:07:28.320 --> 01:07:29.920
piggyback on some

01:07:29.920 --> 01:07:32.820
comments that Commissioner Beck made in the in the work

01:07:32.820 --> 01:07:35.679
session. This is in our

01:07:35.679 --> 01:07:39.440
future land use map identified as a business innovation

01:07:39.440 --> 01:07:41.519
district which we

01:07:41.519 --> 01:07:45.570
are aiming to fill this district with large offices,

01:07:45.570 --> 01:07:47.960
research centers, office

01:07:47.960 --> 01:07:51.639
parks that type of thing. However this is also at the conf

01:07:51.639 --> 01:07:55.159
luence of the furthest

01:07:55.159 --> 01:07:59.739
most primary arterial and I-35 in Denton and it's obviously

01:07:59.739 --> 01:08:01.119
a logical place for

01:08:01.119 --> 01:08:05.599
for truck services. There's a truck stop, two truck stops

01:08:05.599 --> 01:08:06.199
you know at the at

01:08:06.199 --> 01:08:09.269
different corners of the intersection. This is obviously

01:08:09.269 --> 01:08:10.400
compatible and I think

01:08:10.400 --> 01:08:14.500
this is so while this area I believe is very appropriate

01:08:14.500 --> 01:08:15.679
for you know heavy

01:08:15.679 --> 01:08:19.850
equipment servicing I do want us to keep in mind in the

01:08:19.850 --> 01:08:22.000
future that the business

01:08:22.000 --> 01:08:25.880
innovation district it should be reserved generally for

01:08:25.880 --> 01:08:27.720
office parks but

01:08:27.720 --> 01:08:33.159
because of the I guess the effect of I-35 this this is a

01:08:33.159 --> 01:08:34.840
logical use and I

01:08:34.840 --> 01:08:39.210
think this also plays into some of our later cases where we

01:08:39.210 --> 01:08:40.680
have this almost a

01:08:40.680 --> 01:08:43.579
conflict between what is generally planned and then we have

01:08:43.579 --> 01:08:44.119
this area

01:08:44.119 --> 01:08:48.630
affected by 35 further south as well. So with that said I

01:08:48.630 --> 01:08:50.640
move we approve this

01:08:50.640 --> 01:08:55.760
initial zoning. Commissioner Ells. Thank you chair and I

01:08:55.760 --> 01:08:56.920
will second that. Okay I

01:08:56.920 --> 01:09:01.890
have a first and a second for approval any discussion or

01:09:01.890 --> 01:09:06.880
comments? Seeing none

01:09:06.880 --> 01:09:10.119
I'll call for a vote on the board.

01:09:15.960 --> 01:09:24.109
Motion carries six to zero. That will move us to item B and

01:09:24.109 --> 01:09:25.119
at this time I'm

01:09:25.119 --> 01:09:30.960
going to open the public hearing for S 17 - 0004 and we'll

01:09:30.960 --> 01:09:31.840
call on Julie Wyatt

01:09:31.840 --> 01:09:35.520
for presentation of that item as well.

01:09:46.880 --> 01:09:47.569
Would you like for me to quickly go through the

01:09:47.569 --> 01:09:51.239
presentation again or would

01:09:51.239 --> 01:09:54.119
you like the summary how would you like for me to move

01:09:54.119 --> 01:09:55.800
forward? I think probably

01:09:55.800 --> 01:09:57.640
on this one and I think we have a number of interested

01:09:57.640 --> 01:09:58.720
parties here let's go ahead

01:09:58.720 --> 01:09:58.720
and have the full presentation. Okay so this is S 17 - 0004

01:09:58.720 --> 01:10:07.800
McDonald's. The item

01:10:07.800 --> 01:10:12.970
before you is a public hearing to consider a request for a

01:10:12.970 --> 01:10:14.239
specific use

01:10:14.239 --> 01:10:17.770
permit for a drive-through facility. The subject property

01:10:17.770 --> 01:10:19.760
is north of I-35. It is

01:10:19.760 --> 01:10:23.590
adjacent to North Texas Boulevard. The current lot

01:10:23.590 --> 01:10:25.359
configuration doesn't

01:10:25.359 --> 01:10:28.149
exactly match this existing aerial so we're going to go

01:10:28.149 --> 01:10:29.039
through a little bit

01:10:29.039 --> 01:10:32.920
of a background of the site and I'm going to use this this

01:10:32.920 --> 01:10:34.039
this aerial from

01:10:34.039 --> 01:10:37.430
Google Maps. It shows what is what more what is more

01:10:37.430 --> 01:10:38.479
accurate on the on the

01:10:38.479 --> 01:10:43.479
property right now. So up until recently there was a

01:10:43.479 --> 01:10:44.920
McDonald's on the

01:10:44.920 --> 01:10:50.239
site. It did have a drive-through as I-35 as the I-35

01:10:50.239 --> 01:10:52.199
expansion project has

01:10:52.199 --> 01:10:56.920
progressed. TxDOT has acquired the front or acquired the

01:10:56.920 --> 01:10:57.840
frontage of the

01:10:57.840 --> 01:11:01.079
McDonald's property and that required that the building be

01:11:01.079 --> 01:11:01.960
removed as well

01:11:01.960 --> 01:11:05.029
excuse me as well some parking. There was also if you

01:11:05.029 --> 01:11:06.279
recall a gas station at

01:11:06.279 --> 01:11:09.130
the corner as well so that property most of that property

01:11:09.130 --> 01:11:10.760
was acquired with the

01:11:10.760 --> 01:11:15.109
I-35 widening as well. So in order for McDonald's to

01:11:15.109 --> 01:11:18.039
rebuild they would need in

01:11:18.039 --> 01:11:21.109
order for to have sufficient parking and the building they

01:11:21.109 --> 01:11:22.199
needed additional

01:11:22.199 --> 01:11:27.460
space so their proposal is to take in the lot that

01:11:27.460 --> 01:11:28.920
currently has the IHOP on

01:11:28.920 --> 01:11:32.289
it so so that's where we get this current configuration

01:11:32.289 --> 01:11:33.319
here and we'll see

01:11:33.319 --> 01:11:36.390
that more clearly on the site plan. So here's the proposed

01:11:36.390 --> 01:11:37.319
site plan for the

01:11:37.319 --> 01:11:41.420
project. If you can see that this this area was once the

01:11:41.420 --> 01:11:42.279
the existing

01:11:42.279 --> 01:11:49.319
McDonald's and then this part here is that that IHOP. The

01:11:49.319 --> 01:11:50.880
area in yellow is the

01:11:50.880 --> 01:11:55.600
proposed building. They're also proposing to drive-through

01:11:55.600 --> 01:11:57.319
menus to be located

01:11:57.319 --> 01:12:00.590
approximately here in order to provide sufficient vehicle

01:12:00.590 --> 01:12:01.840
storage and stacking

01:12:01.840 --> 01:12:05.229
for that drive-through. In addition within their site plan

01:12:05.229 --> 01:12:06.439
they're proposing

01:12:06.439 --> 01:12:11.020
bike racks, some pedestrian crossings at some of the drive

01:12:11.020 --> 01:12:11.960
ways as well as through

01:12:11.960 --> 01:12:17.960
the parking lot, sidewalk improvements along Wilshire and

01:12:17.960 --> 01:12:21.380
Kendoff will be required as part of the development of the

01:12:21.380 --> 01:12:22.399
site and then they're

01:12:22.399 --> 01:12:26.529
also proposing two signs. We'll talk more about this sign

01:12:26.529 --> 01:12:27.720
in just a few minutes

01:12:27.720 --> 01:12:30.239
just to let you know I know we talked about it in work

01:12:30.239 --> 01:12:31.460
session regarding what

01:12:31.460 --> 01:12:36.579
is actually required or what are the requirements for signs

01:12:36.579 --> 01:12:39.479
on. Commissioner

01:12:39.479 --> 01:12:43.460
Vett. Thank you Chair. While you've got this illustration

01:12:43.460 --> 01:12:44.319
up there can you show

01:12:44.319 --> 01:12:48.159
us the path that the drive-through will take coming off of

01:12:48.159 --> 01:12:50.359
35? Certainly so the

01:12:50.359 --> 01:12:53.289
path that drive-through if you if you drove in here you

01:12:53.289 --> 01:12:54.119
would have to get

01:12:54.119 --> 01:12:57.189
actually go around the building and then come through to

01:12:57.189 --> 01:12:58.359
the drive-through in

01:12:58.359 --> 01:13:05.350
this location. This is a one-way circulation pattern. Where

01:13:05.350 --> 01:13:05.720
's the point

01:13:05.720 --> 01:13:09.000
where they place their order is it at the... They would

01:13:09.000 --> 01:13:10.479
place their orders in these

01:13:10.479 --> 01:13:14.140
in that location there. Yes sir and then the cars would

01:13:14.140 --> 01:13:16.420
filter down through to the

01:13:16.420 --> 01:13:23.359
window here. Okay okay okay thank you. Sure so there was

01:13:23.359 --> 01:13:24.100
discussion of work

01:13:24.100 --> 01:13:27.020
session regarding that sign and I talked to the applicant

01:13:27.020 --> 01:13:28.119
and we consulted with

01:13:28.119 --> 01:13:33.319
the sign code and it is has been determined that because

01:13:33.319 --> 01:13:34.319
North Texas

01:13:34.319 --> 01:13:38.520
Boulevard is not a primary arterial it is a secondary arter

01:13:38.520 --> 01:13:39.119
ial it's

01:13:39.119 --> 01:13:44.319
considered in all other streets classification in terms of

01:13:44.319 --> 01:13:45.640
signs and in

01:13:45.640 --> 01:13:49.569
that case any ground signs in that location cannot exceed

01:13:49.569 --> 01:13:52.239
six feet. Now pole

01:13:52.239 --> 01:13:55.300
signs in that location you could have a pole sign as long

01:13:55.300 --> 01:13:56.279
as it didn't exceed

01:13:56.279 --> 01:14:00.489
six feet the maximum effective area which is just the

01:14:00.489 --> 01:14:01.680
writing for the sign

01:14:01.680 --> 01:14:07.579
would be 60 feet. A monument sign in that location there's

01:14:07.579 --> 01:14:08.720
no maximum effective

01:14:08.720 --> 01:14:12.020
area so as long as they did not exceed that six feet in

01:14:12.020 --> 01:14:13.439
height they could

01:14:13.439 --> 01:14:18.560
have you know any size effective area that they that they

01:14:18.560 --> 01:14:20.920
would apply for. So

01:14:20.920 --> 01:14:23.810
hopefully that clears it up a little bit I know we had some

01:14:23.810 --> 01:14:24.800
confusion and work

01:14:24.800 --> 01:14:27.590
session so. I'm gonna ask a question while we're on that

01:14:27.590 --> 01:14:29.880
subject did you say the pole sign can't be

01:14:29.880 --> 01:14:33.479
taller than six feet? Correct yes sir no matter what no

01:14:33.479 --> 01:14:35.159
sign can be taller than

01:14:35.159 --> 01:14:38.319
six feet in that location yes sir. Okay. Per the current

01:14:38.319 --> 01:14:41.640
sign code. Commissioner

01:14:41.640 --> 01:14:45.840
Rizzo. There was a maximum effective size for the pole sign

01:14:45.840 --> 01:14:48.640
what was that? 60 feet.

01:14:48.640 --> 01:14:55.899
60 square feet yes sir. Thank you. Commissioner Taylor.

01:14:55.899 --> 01:14:57.960
Sorry to stop you now. No that's okay.

01:14:57.960 --> 01:15:00.460
Thank you I guess we're since we're sitting on the site

01:15:00.460 --> 01:15:00.840
plan and we're

01:15:00.840 --> 01:15:02.720
asking a bunch of questions I thought I'd jump in with mine

01:15:02.720 --> 01:15:05.680
. What is the what is

01:15:05.680 --> 01:15:09.170
the total stacking of the drive-thru? It does meet our

01:15:09.170 --> 01:15:10.720
requirements I believe our

01:15:10.720 --> 01:15:16.409
requirements are five and that is from and Jim may jump in

01:15:16.409 --> 01:15:17.800
here but I believe

01:15:17.800 --> 01:15:22.430
our stacking is from the window back and they do meet the

01:15:22.430 --> 01:15:25.039
stacking. I we did talk

01:15:25.039 --> 01:15:27.760
a lot about the dual window and whether or not it would

01:15:27.760 --> 01:15:29.159
would be sufficient and

01:15:29.159 --> 01:15:33.470
and so part of that having that dual window is to make sure

01:15:33.470 --> 01:15:34.600
that they have

01:15:34.600 --> 01:15:38.130
that sufficient stacking. Okay so. Menu board rather. So

01:15:38.130 --> 01:15:40.560
dual menu board. I'm not

01:15:40.560 --> 01:15:42.750
familiar with dual menu boards how does that work? Dual

01:15:42.750 --> 01:15:43.739
menu boards coming to a

01:15:43.739 --> 01:15:48.689
single lane so is this you jump into the closest line and

01:15:48.689 --> 01:15:49.439
try and cut in front of

01:15:49.439 --> 01:15:52.829
the other guy as you go in? I will let the applicant I'm

01:15:52.829 --> 01:15:54.039
not sure I mean I've

01:15:54.039 --> 01:15:57.479
been through one and it seemed to work out but but the

01:15:57.479 --> 01:15:58.960
applicant is here and

01:15:58.960 --> 01:16:02.159
they can probably they can probably answer maybe how their

01:16:02.159 --> 01:16:02.960
research on the

01:16:02.960 --> 01:16:07.069
functioning of it. And then I'm also trying to see if there

01:16:07.069 --> 01:16:08.199
were completely

01:16:08.199 --> 01:16:12.520
stacking to the point it hit the street. So there's 13 cars

01:16:12.520 --> 01:16:13.439
in the little

01:16:13.439 --> 01:16:16.789
diagram here and then you have the entire south side of the

01:16:16.789 --> 01:16:18.199
property so

01:16:18.199 --> 01:16:21.689
about another six cars seven cars and then you hit the west

01:16:21.689 --> 01:16:22.399
side of the

01:16:22.399 --> 01:16:26.180
property which is another four cars and then three more

01:16:26.180 --> 01:16:27.760
would get you maybe out

01:16:27.760 --> 01:16:33.850
onto North Texas Boulevard. So 27 or 28 vehicles stacked

01:16:33.850 --> 01:16:36.199
could eventually

01:16:36.199 --> 01:16:40.880
hinder the right lane of North Texas Boulevard but then I-

01:16:40.880 --> 01:16:42.560
35 it looks like is

01:16:42.560 --> 01:16:47.119
this black line some kind of curb or barrier? That's the

01:16:47.119 --> 01:16:48.640
property line? No I'm

01:16:48.640 --> 01:16:52.050
at the the curved black line right around the car the drive

01:16:52.050 --> 01:16:53.399
through. That's a

01:16:53.399 --> 01:16:57.279
painted line? Is it painted it's not a no barrier? It is

01:16:57.279 --> 01:16:58.239
not a barrier because you

01:16:58.239 --> 01:17:02.100
do have to have that that exit. Okay yeah so I'm just

01:17:02.100 --> 01:17:03.760
trying to see if you actually

01:17:03.760 --> 01:17:06.850
stacked all the way to the 35 entrance you'd have 40 cars

01:17:06.850 --> 01:17:07.760
or something you go

01:17:07.760 --> 01:17:12.840
around the building twice basically. Okay thank you.

01:17:12.840 --> 01:17:15.760
Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you

01:17:15.760 --> 01:17:20.750
I pulled up a picture of this location on to that taken on

01:17:20.750 --> 01:17:22.199
2005 showing the

01:17:22.199 --> 01:17:25.800
McDonald's regarding the signage that we talked about and

01:17:25.800 --> 01:17:27.840
at that point there was

01:17:27.840 --> 01:17:32.159
IHOP, Exxon and McDonald's the McDonald's sign was at the

01:17:32.159 --> 01:17:34.279
corner of the the front

01:17:34.279 --> 01:17:37.630
of the building and so on the property that we're talking

01:17:37.630 --> 01:17:39.399
about here where

01:17:39.399 --> 01:17:45.449
you've got the the blue outline at the bottom just below

01:17:45.449 --> 01:17:47.159
that one between that

01:17:47.159 --> 01:17:50.229
area and at the top of the property line there were

01:17:50.229 --> 01:17:52.239
actually three pole signs in

01:17:52.239 --> 01:17:57.289
that area and so it goes back to my question earlier and

01:17:57.289 --> 01:17:59.079
that is why can't

01:17:59.079 --> 01:18:02.890
we just give them what they had before since then there

01:18:02.890 --> 01:18:04.560
were three signs three

01:18:04.560 --> 01:18:08.449
pole signs the Exxon was a huge sign and now we're we're

01:18:08.449 --> 01:18:10.439
getting down to is one

01:18:10.439 --> 01:18:15.439
sign and so it looks like from a signage standpoint we're

01:18:15.439 --> 01:18:16.399
actually improving the

01:18:16.399 --> 01:18:21.359
situation by doing doing that and not putting the the

01:18:21.359 --> 01:18:23.239
owners who again must

01:18:23.239 --> 01:18:26.409
like this place because of rebuilding after it been you

01:18:26.409 --> 01:18:29.000
know demolished so

01:18:29.000 --> 01:18:32.579
well at this point we're applying the current code

01:18:32.579 --> 01:18:34.359
requirements to to that

01:18:34.359 --> 01:18:38.510
application to the proposal and then when staff looks at an

01:18:38.510 --> 01:18:39.680
SUP we also look

01:18:39.680 --> 01:18:42.840
at the character of the area and so that was the reason for

01:18:42.840 --> 01:18:44.000
the condition and I

01:18:44.000 --> 01:18:47.109
know we'll go over the condition about about a monument

01:18:47.109 --> 01:18:48.439
sign in this location

01:18:48.439 --> 01:18:52.229
was was in order to meet the SUP criteria for to meet the

01:18:52.229 --> 01:18:53.239
character of

01:18:53.239 --> 01:18:59.050
the area and the the surrounding development pattern and

01:18:59.050 --> 01:18:59.960
scale so thank

01:18:59.960 --> 01:19:05.659
you I'm also with within this site there are four four

01:19:05.659 --> 01:19:07.239
points of access one on I

01:19:07.239 --> 01:19:12.640
35 one on Kindle one on Wilshire and one on North Texas

01:19:12.640 --> 01:19:14.640
Boulevard and they have

01:19:14.640 --> 01:19:17.909
also proposed a landscape plan it does meet the Denton

01:19:17.909 --> 01:19:19.079
development code

01:19:19.079 --> 01:19:23.850
requirements in terms of providing tree canopy parking lot

01:19:23.850 --> 01:19:25.079
screening and and

01:19:25.079 --> 01:19:27.869
parking lot tree canopy and landscaping they've also got

01:19:27.869 --> 01:19:28.239
some additional

01:19:28.239 --> 01:19:33.439
landscaping around the menu boards there that's enhanced

01:19:33.439 --> 01:19:34.920
these are the proposed

01:19:34.920 --> 01:19:37.869
elevations of the building they are proposing a masonry

01:19:37.869 --> 01:19:39.039
building with stone

01:19:39.039 --> 01:19:44.159
accents so sub chapter 6 of the Denton development code

01:19:44.159 --> 01:19:45.319
outlines the SUP

01:19:45.319 --> 01:19:48.390
criteria and I know that the full listings in your backup

01:19:48.390 --> 01:19:48.920
but just in

01:19:48.920 --> 01:19:52.359
general the SUP criteria is it needs to be consistent with

01:19:52.359 --> 01:19:53.720
the zoning regulations

01:19:53.720 --> 01:19:56.909
needs to conform with the Denton plan 2030 and it should be

01:19:56.909 --> 01:19:57.800
consistent with

01:19:57.800 --> 01:20:00.930
the surrounding development pattern in terms of access nu

01:20:00.930 --> 01:20:02.239
isance prevention and

01:20:02.239 --> 01:20:08.829
scale let's look at the zoning of the area first so the

01:20:08.829 --> 01:20:09.880
subject property has a

01:20:09.880 --> 01:20:13.109
DCG zoning district the proposed site plan and landscape

01:20:13.109 --> 01:20:14.399
plan conformed to the

01:20:14.399 --> 01:20:18.810
requirements of the DCG zoning district restaurants are

01:20:18.810 --> 01:20:20.000
permitted in DCG

01:20:20.000 --> 01:20:23.920
however drive-through uses do require a specific use permit

01:20:23.920 --> 01:20:26.100
did DCG is often

01:20:26.100 --> 01:20:28.890
found in our downtown areas and near our universities and

01:20:28.890 --> 01:20:30.159
those are it can often

01:20:30.159 --> 01:20:32.949
be pedestrian oriented places so we want to take a little

01:20:32.949 --> 01:20:33.920
harder look at specific

01:20:33.920 --> 01:20:36.800
projects in terms of drive-through uses to make sure that

01:20:36.800 --> 01:20:37.840
they're compatible

01:20:37.840 --> 01:20:42.619
with pedestrian oriented areas this site's location with

01:20:42.619 --> 01:20:44.159
its proximity to I

01:20:44.159 --> 01:20:48.529
35 lends itself to more auto oriented uses however it's

01:20:48.529 --> 01:20:50.239
right there on I 35

01:20:50.239 --> 01:20:53.960
this is the type of development you typically see on I 35

01:20:53.960 --> 01:20:55.119
there's also

01:20:55.119 --> 01:20:58.329
several parking lots and commuter parking lots in the area

01:20:58.329 --> 01:20:59.119
which sort of

01:20:59.119 --> 01:21:05.600
lend itself to the more commuter side of this of this area

01:21:05.600 --> 01:21:07.600
we looked at the

01:21:07.600 --> 01:21:10.680
surrounding property so the property adjacent to the

01:21:10.680 --> 01:21:11.720
subject site so within

01:21:11.720 --> 01:21:17.810
about 200 feet we have nearby DCG zoning and dr2 zoning

01:21:17.810 --> 01:21:20.359
this has UNT facilities

01:21:20.359 --> 01:21:24.670
as well as some UNT parking areas across the highway is an

01:21:24.670 --> 01:21:26.199
nr3 zoning district

01:21:26.199 --> 01:21:29.720
with single-family development when we zoom out a little

01:21:29.720 --> 01:21:31.520
bit to about 500 feet

01:21:31.520 --> 01:21:34.670
within the subject property we see a lot more of the UNT

01:21:34.670 --> 01:21:36.119
campus coming into view

01:21:36.119 --> 01:21:40.319
with there's a UNT facility off to the in this location

01:21:40.319 --> 01:21:42.199
there's a dormitory to

01:21:42.199 --> 01:21:45.050
the north as well as parking some offices there's also

01:21:45.050 --> 01:21:45.600
commercial

01:21:45.600 --> 01:21:49.420
development in this area with with that's associated

01:21:49.420 --> 01:21:50.560
parking the UNT

01:21:50.560 --> 01:21:57.489
stadium is in this location and then the general area we

01:21:57.489 --> 01:21:59.079
see now residential

01:21:59.079 --> 01:22:04.859
areas around UNT to the north and to the east here this you

01:22:04.859 --> 01:22:06.159
can see from from

01:22:06.159 --> 01:22:10.930
this view the the prominence of the I 35 corridor that that

01:22:10.930 --> 01:22:11.840
is a pretty

01:22:11.840 --> 01:22:19.670
substantial feature of this map the future land use of this

01:22:19.670 --> 01:22:20.640
subject property

01:22:20.640 --> 01:22:25.170
is commercial this is not one of our mixed-use future land

01:22:25.170 --> 01:22:26.520
uses this is it

01:22:26.520 --> 01:22:29.319
this really is intended for areas of commercial

01:22:29.319 --> 01:22:31.319
concentration and auto

01:22:31.319 --> 01:22:35.390
oriented uses and drive-throughs are are meet the goals of

01:22:35.390 --> 01:22:37.079
this area and and meet

01:22:37.079 --> 01:22:42.069
the intent of the commercial future land use the mobility

01:22:42.069 --> 01:22:44.199
in the area once again

01:22:44.199 --> 01:22:49.149
I 35 is a dominant feature and that is this red here North

01:22:49.149 --> 01:22:50.319
Texas Boulevard is

01:22:50.319 --> 01:22:53.239
a secondary arterial that's intended to move people

01:22:53.239 --> 01:22:54.239
efficiently through the city

01:22:54.239 --> 01:22:58.000
is the intent of a secondary arterial and then you also

01:22:58.000 --> 01:22:59.520
have collector streets

01:22:59.520 --> 01:23:05.039
throughout this UNT area in order to move vehicular traffic

01:23:05.039 --> 01:23:06.000
public

01:23:06.000 --> 01:23:08.909
notification was sent out on the subject property we did

01:23:08.909 --> 01:23:10.079
receive one letter of

01:23:10.079 --> 01:23:13.199
opposition and I provided to that to you during work

01:23:13.199 --> 01:23:15.520
session our GIS department

01:23:15.520 --> 01:23:19.029
did not have an opportunity to calculate the percentage of

01:23:19.029 --> 01:23:20.399
opposition today but

01:23:20.399 --> 01:23:25.359
we suspect it will be because of the of the amount of

01:23:25.359 --> 01:23:27.359
property around it we

01:23:27.359 --> 01:23:33.079
suspect it is going to exceed 20% which would require super

01:23:33.079 --> 01:23:34.159
majority approval by

01:23:34.159 --> 01:23:38.319
City Council so based upon the criteria for approval staff

01:23:38.319 --> 01:23:39.600
recommends approval

01:23:39.600 --> 01:23:43.039
of the request with two conditions that the proposed use

01:23:43.039 --> 01:23:43.960
must substantially

01:23:43.960 --> 01:23:46.350
comply with the attached site plan landscape plan and

01:23:46.350 --> 01:23:47.359
building elevations

01:23:47.359 --> 01:23:51.119
and that signage on North Texas Boulevard be limited to one

01:23:51.119 --> 01:23:51.720
monument

01:23:51.720 --> 01:23:54.829
sign with a maximum fight height of five feet a maximum

01:23:54.829 --> 01:23:56.239
effective area of 40

01:23:56.239 --> 01:23:58.760
square feet and to be constructed of masonry or stone to

01:23:58.760 --> 01:23:59.520
complement the

01:23:59.520 --> 01:24:02.409
primary structure and I will stand for any questions and

01:24:02.409 --> 01:24:03.680
the applicant is here

01:24:03.680 --> 01:24:07.439
to answer any questions got a question Commissioner Roselle

01:24:07.439 --> 01:24:08.680
this is more

01:24:08.680 --> 01:24:11.750
addressing I guess the question I might have for

01:24:11.750 --> 01:24:13.760
Commissioner Sullivan you had

01:24:13.760 --> 01:24:19.449
an image from 2005 that showed a pole sign on North Texas

01:24:19.449 --> 01:24:22.239
Boulevard yes 2005

01:24:22.239 --> 01:24:25.720
had three pole signs I'm looking at I'm looking at an image

01:24:25.720 --> 01:24:26.640
from 2005 and

01:24:26.640 --> 01:24:29.949
there's one pole sign from McDonald's one from McDonald's

01:24:29.949 --> 01:24:31.159
but also Exxon and

01:24:31.159 --> 01:24:34.270
then I hop but the McDonald's one is on the I-35 not North

01:24:34.270 --> 01:24:36.159
Texas Boulevard was

01:24:36.159 --> 01:24:39.289
that at the same location same basic location when you're

01:24:39.289 --> 01:24:40.079
looking at it

01:24:40.079 --> 01:24:43.439
coming from the highway you see all three signs you would

01:24:43.439 --> 01:24:44.319
see all three

01:24:44.319 --> 01:24:47.119
signs when you were coming from the service road and then

01:24:47.119 --> 01:24:48.039
turning on the

01:24:48.039 --> 01:24:50.880
North Texas Boulevard you'd see all three and so they're

01:24:50.880 --> 01:24:51.760
proposing to have

01:24:51.760 --> 01:24:54.920
two pole signs not just one well but the I think the

01:24:54.920 --> 01:24:57.199
McDonald's sign was was not

01:24:57.199 --> 01:24:59.989
on the service road it was really next to the building it

01:24:59.989 --> 01:25:01.039
was off the service

01:25:01.039 --> 01:25:06.159
road in fact it was really almost behind the Exxon station

01:25:06.159 --> 01:25:06.520
that's not a small one

01:25:06.520 --> 01:25:13.840
it was a pole sign okay I'm not sure if that added clarity

01:25:13.840 --> 01:25:15.279
I apologize for that

01:25:15.279 --> 01:25:19.119
what is the height of the pole sign that they are being

01:25:19.119 --> 01:25:20.840
approved to put on the

01:25:20.840 --> 01:25:24.720
North Texas side 40 feet well they've asked for 20 feet but

01:25:24.720 --> 01:25:25.520
that doesn't meet

01:25:25.520 --> 01:25:27.600
the sign request so no matter I mean they would have to

01:25:27.600 --> 01:25:28.239
meet the sign

01:25:28.239 --> 01:25:31.689
requirement so and what is the sign requirements for a pole

01:25:31.689 --> 01:25:32.840
sign on the 35

01:25:32.840 --> 01:25:38.739
a pole sign on I-35 can be 40 feet above the travel lanes

01:25:38.739 --> 01:25:40.079
of the highway so

01:25:40.079 --> 01:25:42.970
depending on the height of the highway some if the highway

01:25:42.970 --> 01:25:43.880
were elevated they

01:25:43.880 --> 01:25:46.670
had it has to be 40 it can only be 40 feet above the travel

01:25:46.670 --> 01:25:47.319
lanes of the

01:25:47.319 --> 01:25:52.479
highway okay and that's making assumptions is the 20 feet

01:25:52.479 --> 01:25:53.859
within the 40

01:25:53.859 --> 01:25:58.960
feet above is that why they're saying 20 feet above a 20-

01:25:58.960 --> 01:26:01.720
foot sign is that a

01:26:01.720 --> 01:26:08.460
total of 40 feet above the travel height of the road the 40

01:26:08.460 --> 01:26:09.319
-foot sign would be on

01:26:09.319 --> 01:26:15.600
I-35 right on North Texas Boulevard they they're proposing

01:26:15.600 --> 01:26:16.279
in their site plan

01:26:16.279 --> 01:26:18.850
they have a 20-foot sign per the sign code they could only

01:26:18.850 --> 01:26:20.079
have a 6-foot sign

01:26:20.079 --> 01:26:23.329
right but on 35 they're also proposing a 20-foot that could

01:26:23.329 --> 01:26:24.439
be well I mean it

01:26:24.439 --> 01:26:27.300
could be 20 feet from the ground level or 20 feet from the

01:26:27.300 --> 01:26:28.000
travel lanes

01:26:28.000 --> 01:26:31.920
depending on how I-35 is designed at that site I got you

01:26:31.920 --> 01:26:33.079
thank you

01:26:33.079 --> 01:26:37.119
Commissioner Beck thank you just raised something

01:26:37.119 --> 01:26:38.840
interesting did you say that

01:26:38.840 --> 01:26:45.340
height for the sign on the I-35 side had to be maximum 40

01:26:45.340 --> 01:26:47.439
feet from the level of

01:26:47.439 --> 01:26:52.220
the travel the travel lanes yes sir okay well that's gonna

01:26:52.220 --> 01:26:54.119
sit down 35 goes

01:26:54.119 --> 01:26:57.189
under North Texas there so it drops down quite a bit so it

01:26:57.189 --> 01:26:58.119
would be so they

01:26:58.119 --> 01:27:00.399
couldn't have they have to take that distance in

01:27:00.399 --> 01:27:02.279
consideration no no it would

01:27:02.279 --> 01:27:04.569
be let me get let me get to that part of the sign code that

01:27:04.569 --> 01:27:05.960
way I'll I can quote

01:27:05.960 --> 01:27:11.920
it exactly okay I-35 measurement along I I-35 the height

01:27:11.920 --> 01:27:12.960
may be measured from the

01:27:12.960 --> 01:27:16.479
principal lanes the frontage road or the ground whichever

01:27:16.479 --> 01:27:17.359
allows the greater

01:27:17.359 --> 01:27:22.199
height frontage road okay all right thanks

01:27:24.119 --> 01:27:31.359
I guess the only clarification I want to make from work

01:27:31.359 --> 01:27:32.239
session we had

01:27:32.239 --> 01:27:36.750
discussion about the North Texas Boulevard could have a 20-

01:27:36.750 --> 01:27:38.279
foot pole sign

01:27:38.279 --> 01:27:41.069
and the clarification that you're coming back after doing

01:27:41.069 --> 01:27:42.039
the research is the

01:27:42.039 --> 01:27:44.840
maximum height whether it's a pole or whether it's a

01:27:44.840 --> 01:27:45.880
monument sign on North

01:27:45.880 --> 01:27:49.600
Texas Boulevard per our sign code is 6 foot period yes the

01:27:49.600 --> 01:27:51.439
only variance is how

01:27:51.439 --> 01:27:55.520
much area or size the sign can be whether it's a pole sign

01:27:55.520 --> 01:27:56.479
I think there's

01:27:56.479 --> 01:27:59.319
a limitation on that if it's a monument sign there's not a

01:27:59.319 --> 01:28:00.319
limitation in the

01:28:00.319 --> 01:28:03.600
square footage amount of the sign correct but it's six foot

01:28:03.600 --> 01:28:04.279
regardless

01:28:04.279 --> 01:28:09.039
based on the clarification okay Commissioner Taylor thank

01:28:09.039 --> 01:28:11.680
you chair

01:28:15.560 --> 01:28:17.779
sorry just lost my train of thought let's see if I can

01:28:17.779 --> 01:28:19.880
figure out where I

01:28:19.880 --> 01:28:24.520
what I was looking at just a second ago oh so yeah actually

01:28:24.520 --> 01:28:26.359
the the letter that

01:28:26.359 --> 01:28:29.699
we received does indicate that they're they disagree with

01:28:29.699 --> 01:28:30.479
the parking

01:28:30.479 --> 01:28:34.579
calculations is there is there they're saying that they

01:28:34.579 --> 01:28:36.560
should be 47 or 49

01:28:36.560 --> 01:28:39.439
instead of 40 is that because it's a different use

01:28:39.439 --> 01:28:40.479
restaurants are calculated

01:28:40.479 --> 01:28:43.319
differently than commercial or restaurants have two ways

01:28:43.319 --> 01:28:43.720
before we get

01:28:43.720 --> 01:28:46.140
started discussion will you clarify which letter we're

01:28:46.140 --> 01:28:47.479
discussing here okay

01:28:47.479 --> 01:28:52.840
so we received a letter objection from I believe from UNT

01:28:52.840 --> 01:28:53.640
doesn't actually have a

01:28:53.640 --> 01:28:58.359
from on the header regarding this project and their

01:28:58.359 --> 01:29:01.319
criteria a in bold

01:29:01.319 --> 01:29:05.310
third paragraph says 49 spaces are required one per hundred

01:29:05.310 --> 01:29:06.119
square feet

01:29:06.119 --> 01:29:09.189
of leasable area however only 40 are provided so I just

01:29:09.189 --> 01:29:10.159
wanted to address

01:29:10.159 --> 01:29:12.630
that make sure that we are calculating parking spaces

01:29:12.630 --> 01:29:13.760
correctly we are

01:29:13.760 --> 01:29:17.090
restaurants can be calculated in one of in one of two ways

01:29:17.090 --> 01:29:17.800
they can be

01:29:17.800 --> 01:29:19.960
calculated by gross square footage or they can be

01:29:19.960 --> 01:29:22.199
calculated by seating so it

01:29:22.199 --> 01:29:28.310
does it does provide so so the the proposal meets the the

01:29:28.310 --> 01:29:28.920
parking

01:29:28.920 --> 01:29:32.369
requirements based upon seating so that's that's the discre

01:29:32.369 --> 01:29:33.159
pancy in the

01:29:33.159 --> 01:29:38.109
square footage Commissioner Ellis thank you chair Julie

01:29:38.109 --> 01:29:39.159
when you mentioned

01:29:39.159 --> 01:29:44.140
reaching the 20% opposition is that one property owner it

01:29:44.140 --> 01:29:44.960
is one property owner

01:29:44.960 --> 01:29:54.520
isn't it one final question on the SUP if this is approved

01:29:54.520 --> 01:29:55.479
image forward to City

01:29:55.479 --> 01:29:59.520
Council has proved and it's under an SUP anytime they make

01:29:59.520 --> 01:30:00.359
any kind of

01:30:00.359 --> 01:30:04.329
modifications or changes remodeling can you share that they

01:30:04.329 --> 01:30:05.520
will have to come

01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:10.300
back and apply for another issue P or we do try to provide

01:30:10.300 --> 01:30:11.840
some flexibility and

01:30:11.840 --> 01:30:16.279
are because when we look at an SUP we often recommend that

01:30:16.279 --> 01:30:17.479
they tie the site

01:30:17.479 --> 01:30:21.359
plan the landscape plan in the elevations to that SUP to

01:30:21.359 --> 01:30:22.239
ensure that

01:30:22.239 --> 01:30:28.859
that any that the criteria for the SUP approval is met but

01:30:28.859 --> 01:30:30.640
we do try to we

01:30:30.640 --> 01:30:33.710
understand that when when you get to site plan or possibly

01:30:33.710 --> 01:30:34.640
building permit

01:30:34.640 --> 01:30:38.989
there could be variations that have to be built into the

01:30:38.989 --> 01:30:40.680
project so we add the

01:30:40.680 --> 01:30:45.640
words substantially comply to that recommendation that it

01:30:45.640 --> 01:30:46.779
with the site

01:30:46.779 --> 01:30:49.850
plan landscape plan elevation so that way if there are

01:30:49.850 --> 01:30:50.840
minor changes they

01:30:50.840 --> 01:30:53.909
wouldn't have to go back through the public hearing process

01:30:53.909 --> 01:30:54.520
they could just

01:30:54.520 --> 01:30:58.010
those changes could be made at the staff level but down the

01:30:58.010 --> 01:30:59.159
road say ten years

01:30:59.159 --> 01:31:02.000
from now if they want to do a facelift to this building

01:31:02.000 --> 01:31:03.479
they'll have to probably

01:31:03.479 --> 01:31:08.680
come back potentially yes sir okay okay any other questions

01:31:08.680 --> 01:31:12.199
for staff thank you

01:31:12.199 --> 01:31:17.479
Julie good job this is a public hearing and I'm going to

01:31:17.479 --> 01:31:18.720
call on I believe this

01:31:18.720 --> 01:31:22.020
is the applicant first I've got a card here that says in

01:31:22.020 --> 01:31:23.359
support and it's got

01:31:23.359 --> 01:31:28.619
Greg Massey Beneguire Jimmy Lopez Sigeon Brooks and Sandy

01:31:28.619 --> 01:31:30.159
Phillips I don't know

01:31:30.159 --> 01:31:33.359
if any of you all were requesting to speak or who on the

01:31:33.359 --> 01:31:34.560
card please as you

01:31:34.560 --> 01:31:37.170
come forward give us your name and address and you'll have

01:31:37.170 --> 01:31:38.800
ten minutes okay

01:31:38.800 --> 01:31:41.979
good evening my name is Greg Massey I'm with Red Plains

01:31:41.979 --> 01:31:45.590
professional the engineering consultant for McDonald's on

01:31:45.590 --> 01:31:48.560
this site 2933 East

01:31:48.560 --> 01:31:52.520
Bryant Avenue Edmond Oklahoma I don't want to rehash

01:31:52.520 --> 01:31:54.680
everything that Julie has

01:31:54.680 --> 01:31:58.430
already done she did a wonderful job for us as far as the

01:31:58.430 --> 01:31:59.560
monument signage on

01:31:59.560 --> 01:32:03.039
North Texas Boulevard we are in agreement with staff on the

01:32:03.039 --> 01:32:03.600
five foot

01:32:03.600 --> 01:32:09.859
height and 40 square foot of face area on that sign again

01:32:09.859 --> 01:32:11.760
we we do still want

01:32:11.760 --> 01:32:17.550
to request the 40 foot pole sign on the I-35 frontage but

01:32:17.550 --> 01:32:19.880
again overall when you

01:32:19.880 --> 01:32:22.600
look at the combined tracks for the McDonald's and the IHOP

01:32:22.600 --> 01:32:23.640
we are reducing

01:32:23.640 --> 01:32:29.689
overall signage I guess just a brief history and the

01:32:29.689 --> 01:32:30.760
original McDonald's was

01:32:30.760 --> 01:32:36.640
constructed in 1973 so it was an operation here over 40

01:32:36.640 --> 01:32:38.800
years we have the

01:32:38.800 --> 01:32:42.380
owner operator present if you'd like to ask questions that

01:32:42.380 --> 01:32:43.000
was question earlier

01:32:43.000 --> 01:32:47.649
concerning you know use of the students and pedestrian

01:32:47.649 --> 01:32:49.760
versus vehicle traffic

01:32:49.760 --> 01:32:52.550
she can give you the numbers on that and let you know what

01:32:52.550 --> 01:32:53.560
kind of traffic they

01:32:53.560 --> 01:32:57.630
did with the students in the area versus you know local

01:32:57.630 --> 01:33:00.640
traffic on the interstate

01:33:00.640 --> 01:33:05.619
as Julie stated the original restaurant was slightly

01:33:05.619 --> 01:33:07.119
smaller than than this

01:33:07.119 --> 01:33:10.689
footprint that we're proposing but with the taking of the

01:33:10.689 --> 01:33:12.479
additional right-of-way

01:33:12.479 --> 01:33:16.789
it wasn't able to continue operating and with the right-of-

01:33:16.789 --> 01:33:18.359
way taking text dot

01:33:18.359 --> 01:33:23.460
did the demolition on the site it was always intended to

01:33:23.460 --> 01:33:27.039
rebuild that site

01:33:27.279 --> 01:33:31.090
initially we thought it would be allowed to be rebuilt

01:33:31.090 --> 01:33:33.119
under a special exception

01:33:33.119 --> 01:33:36.779
because it was an existing use however we needed the

01:33:36.779 --> 01:33:38.640
additional property which

01:33:38.640 --> 01:33:42.250
was next door which extended the drive-through use onto an

01:33:42.250 --> 01:33:43.760
adjacent property

01:33:43.760 --> 01:33:47.890
so that's why we're here asking for the special use permit

01:33:47.890 --> 01:33:49.039
to allow the drive

01:33:49.039 --> 01:33:52.539
through to be reconstructed with the restaurant I'll be

01:33:52.539 --> 01:33:53.920
happy to answer any

01:33:53.920 --> 01:33:57.979
questions got one to start with Commissioner Roselle thank

01:33:57.979 --> 01:33:58.439
you chair

01:33:58.439 --> 01:34:02.449
mr. Massey if there was not a requirement for a five foot

01:34:02.449 --> 01:34:03.680
high monument

01:34:03.680 --> 01:34:06.920
sign with 40 square feet effective area would it be your

01:34:06.920 --> 01:34:08.039
preference to make a

01:34:08.039 --> 01:34:11.109
larger one if there wasn't a condition what size would you

01:34:11.109 --> 01:34:12.760
build we would

01:34:12.760 --> 01:34:17.720
comply with the city code and the 20 foot sign that was

01:34:17.720 --> 01:34:19.399
originally planned

01:34:19.399 --> 01:34:25.199
came from I guess some I don't want to say misinformation

01:34:25.199 --> 01:34:26.800
misclassification of

01:34:26.800 --> 01:34:30.670
North Texas Boulevard as a major arterial it's actually a

01:34:30.670 --> 01:34:31.760
minor arterial

01:34:31.760 --> 01:34:39.270
and that maximum height is six foot so if bottom line if

01:34:39.270 --> 01:34:40.840
staff didn't say five

01:34:40.840 --> 01:34:44.369
foot and 40 square feet we'd be a maximum six foot and 60

01:34:44.369 --> 01:34:45.840
square feet okay

01:34:45.840 --> 01:34:50.199
thank you you're welcome Commissioner Beck thank you chair

01:34:50.199 --> 01:34:51.640
thank you mr. Massey

01:34:51.640 --> 01:34:55.229
for coming down speaking personally I'm glad you're gonna

01:34:55.229 --> 01:34:57.680
go along with the the

01:34:57.680 --> 01:35:01.119
smaller sign I just the idea of two pole signs close

01:35:01.119 --> 01:35:03.119
together is distracting to

01:35:03.119 --> 01:35:06.510
me but let me ask you this convey some or alleviate some

01:35:06.510 --> 01:35:08.079
concern for me here and I

01:35:08.079 --> 01:35:12.850
think the the one opponent to this stacking coming off of

01:35:12.850 --> 01:35:14.199
the service road

01:35:14.199 --> 01:35:18.630
you're you're you began ordering just almost as soon as you

01:35:18.630 --> 01:35:20.159
turn into McDonald's

01:35:20.159 --> 01:35:24.279
there what if on a busy day you start having people

01:35:24.279 --> 01:35:25.560
starting to pile out back

01:35:25.560 --> 01:35:30.649
on to 35 there the other thing that bothers me too is they

01:35:30.649 --> 01:35:31.680
they pretty much

01:35:31.680 --> 01:35:34.390
have to come all the way around the other side because they

01:35:34.390 --> 01:35:35.039
're gonna get

01:35:35.039 --> 01:35:38.229
their food order at the other end of it and it doesn't give

01:35:38.229 --> 01:35:39.300
them they pretty

01:35:39.300 --> 01:35:42.420
much have to exit if they want to get back on 35 through

01:35:42.420 --> 01:35:43.479
the same area they

01:35:43.479 --> 01:35:48.539
came in on alleviate some concern here how they could be a

01:35:48.539 --> 01:35:49.319
problem on a busy

01:35:49.319 --> 01:35:56.710
day yes and keep in mind before we go to site plan approval

01:35:56.710 --> 01:35:57.960
on this it runs

01:35:57.960 --> 01:36:01.350
through McDonald's operations group and they look at those

01:36:01.350 --> 01:36:02.439
particular items

01:36:02.439 --> 01:36:05.710
making determination as to whether or not additional cur

01:36:05.710 --> 01:36:06.880
bing is required on

01:36:06.880 --> 01:36:10.239
that outside lane to prevent what you were talking about

01:36:10.239 --> 01:36:12.479
the intent is to have

01:36:12.479 --> 01:36:17.029
or force that traffic coming off the I-35 frontage road to

01:36:17.029 --> 01:36:18.479
have to circulate

01:36:18.479 --> 01:36:21.739
the building to get to the drive-through lane rather than

01:36:21.739 --> 01:36:23.000
coming straight off the

01:36:23.000 --> 01:36:30.000
interstate and into it that alleviates a concern thank you

01:36:30.000 --> 01:36:32.159
yes commissioner

01:36:32.159 --> 01:36:35.720
Taylor thank you chair I guess I'll ask my question about

01:36:35.720 --> 01:36:37.199
this double double

01:36:37.199 --> 01:36:43.939
order single lane thing how does how does that work I'm

01:36:43.939 --> 01:36:47.039
gonna allow mr.

01:36:47.039 --> 01:36:50.939
Ben Aguirre and or Jimmy Lopez they handle the operation

01:36:50.939 --> 01:36:53.760
side all right good

01:36:53.760 --> 01:36:55.819
evening my name is Ben Aguirre I'm an area construction

01:36:55.819 --> 01:36:56.680
manager for McDonald's

01:36:56.680 --> 01:37:00.630
corporation and can you give us your address also oh yes

01:37:00.630 --> 01:37:02.479
address is 1204

01:37:02.479 --> 01:37:07.079
129th Street Oklahoma City Oklahoma thank you so to answer

01:37:07.079 --> 01:37:07.760
the question the

01:37:07.760 --> 01:37:11.329
way the we internally we call that design a 1 2 1 so you

01:37:11.329 --> 01:37:12.399
enter in one lane

01:37:12.399 --> 01:37:15.189
you split to two order points and you merge back to one

01:37:15.189 --> 01:37:16.680
lane in fact most of

01:37:16.680 --> 01:37:19.119
our restaurants nowadays are being constructed with that or

01:37:19.119 --> 01:37:19.720
have been over

01:37:19.720 --> 01:37:22.640
the last you know 18 24 months and and really what that

01:37:22.640 --> 01:37:23.720
does is it allows more

01:37:23.720 --> 01:37:26.520
throughput is what we're finding out is what it handles

01:37:26.520 --> 01:37:27.640
quick arrival rates

01:37:27.640 --> 01:37:30.770
better so that we prevent long stacking out into the

01:37:30.770 --> 01:37:32.239
streets and so forth so

01:37:32.239 --> 01:37:35.850
there's also some internal efficiencies that happen for us

01:37:35.850 --> 01:37:37.359
with operations and

01:37:37.359 --> 01:37:40.430
serving customers quicker but from from a planning

01:37:40.430 --> 01:37:42.119
perspective it allows us to

01:37:42.119 --> 01:37:46.130
handle the car stack right at the pinch point and then I

01:37:46.130 --> 01:37:49.239
guess you just it's one

01:37:49.239 --> 01:37:52.310
side is waiting to order so the other side pulls forward

01:37:52.310 --> 01:37:53.399
the the coordination

01:37:53.399 --> 01:37:55.750
you don't have any coordination problems there with yeah

01:37:55.750 --> 01:37:56.960
some of you have been to

01:37:56.960 --> 01:38:00.100
one of our double lane drive-through restaurants you'll you

01:38:00.100 --> 01:38:01.000
'll be familiar

01:38:01.000 --> 01:38:04.069
with the sign that says any lane at any time we also have

01:38:04.069 --> 01:38:05.439
some proprietary

01:38:05.439 --> 01:38:08.579
software that can be as sophisticated as taking a picture

01:38:08.579 --> 01:38:09.760
of the vehicle so that

01:38:09.760 --> 01:38:12.829
when they get to the order point we know which order goes

01:38:12.829 --> 01:38:13.840
with which vehicle

01:38:13.840 --> 01:38:20.199
thank you good evening my name is Jimmy Lopez I reside at

01:38:20.199 --> 01:38:21.920
2020 Lower Valley

01:38:21.920 --> 01:38:25.319
Drive Keller Texas I'm the regional construction manager

01:38:25.319 --> 01:38:26.199
but one of the

01:38:26.199 --> 01:38:29.770
things is Ben is talking about the software but at the same

01:38:29.770 --> 01:38:30.359
time our

01:38:30.359 --> 01:38:33.720
order takers are set up to where they stagger each other so

01:38:33.720 --> 01:38:35.239
if you get to lane

01:38:35.239 --> 01:38:37.949
number one and they're taking your order the the second

01:38:37.949 --> 01:38:38.840
order take will actually

01:38:38.840 --> 01:38:41.180
ask you to pull up to the second lane but won't be taking

01:38:41.180 --> 01:38:42.039
your orders at the

01:38:42.039 --> 01:38:45.800
same time thus you get alternating vehicles taking orders

01:38:45.800 --> 01:38:47.359
and all that so it

01:38:47.359 --> 01:38:50.149
is a huge not only all the software inside of our buildings

01:38:50.149 --> 01:38:50.760
but also we

01:38:50.760 --> 01:38:53.640
train our our staff inside the restaurants to make sure we

01:38:53.640 --> 01:38:54.319
stagger the

01:38:54.319 --> 01:38:57.029
order so you'll never have one what you know you'll never

01:38:57.029 --> 01:38:57.960
have to order take is

01:38:57.960 --> 01:39:00.319
taken to order at the same time so you don't have that it's

01:39:00.319 --> 01:39:01.079
my term type

01:39:01.079 --> 01:39:07.960
scenario thank you Commissioner Beck thank you chair maybe

01:39:07.960 --> 01:39:08.479
y'all can answer

01:39:08.479 --> 01:39:11.750
this for me I'm not trying to tell you how to design your

01:39:11.750 --> 01:39:13.880
product here but the

01:39:13.880 --> 01:39:18.920
exit rim coming off 35 does it sit back do you know if it

01:39:18.920 --> 01:39:20.039
sits back considerably

01:39:20.039 --> 01:39:24.420
before you get to Kendall there which would be because you

01:39:24.420 --> 01:39:25.640
've got an entrance

01:39:25.640 --> 01:39:30.159
point on that side and I'll defer to our engineer okay

01:39:30.159 --> 01:39:32.039
because if it's it what I'm

01:39:32.039 --> 01:39:35.279
thinking if it sits back far enough seems like you could

01:39:35.279 --> 01:39:36.279
put a sign at the

01:39:36.279 --> 01:39:38.840
corner there making that your entrance instead of having

01:39:38.840 --> 01:39:39.880
people come in off the

01:39:39.880 --> 01:39:42.949
service road and circle all the way around it where if they

01:39:42.949 --> 01:39:43.520
could come off

01:39:43.520 --> 01:39:48.000
Kindle off there and then just have that and then make that

01:39:48.000 --> 01:39:49.319
that opening there on

01:39:49.319 --> 01:39:52.670
the service road and exit that seems like it would

01:39:52.670 --> 01:39:53.960
eliminate a lot of

01:39:53.960 --> 01:40:00.960
stacking comment yes I understand what you're saying and

01:40:00.960 --> 01:40:03.560
the gore of the ramp

01:40:03.560 --> 01:40:08.029
exiting I-35 onto the frontage road does sit considerably

01:40:08.029 --> 01:40:09.039
further back

01:40:09.039 --> 01:40:14.229
unfortunately Kindle is a dead-end street at this point and

01:40:14.229 --> 01:40:15.199
to my knowledge

01:40:15.199 --> 01:40:21.800
unless that's changed recently dead-end doesn't come into

01:40:21.800 --> 01:40:22.880
the service road will

01:40:22.880 --> 01:40:28.319
not be reopened for access so the only access from the I-35

01:40:28.319 --> 01:40:29.640
frontage into this

01:40:29.640 --> 01:40:34.010
track has to come either from this drive or off of North

01:40:34.010 --> 01:40:36.600
Texas Boulevard did not

01:40:36.600 --> 01:40:42.920
know that thank you you're welcome Commissioner Ellis thank

01:40:42.920 --> 01:40:43.800
you chair can

01:40:43.800 --> 01:40:46.750
we can we check with engineering is that true that kind of

01:40:46.750 --> 01:40:47.460
is not going to be

01:40:47.460 --> 01:40:51.640
reopened because then the only way back on to 35 once they

01:40:51.640 --> 01:40:53.319
visit McDonald's is

01:40:53.319 --> 01:40:59.430
is to go back out that one drive on 35 right they would

01:40:59.430 --> 01:41:00.880
either have to exit the

01:41:00.880 --> 01:41:07.529
drive on 35 or go north to Wilshire right but where do and

01:41:07.529 --> 01:41:08.640
how did they get

01:41:08.640 --> 01:41:12.750
back to 35 well from I believe from Wilshire there's a Wil

01:41:12.750 --> 01:41:13.439
shire there's a

01:41:13.439 --> 01:41:18.239
median cut that you like that you turn

01:41:24.119 --> 01:41:30.020
my understanding is as Greg alluded to is that yes Kindle

01:41:30.020 --> 01:41:32.600
will be closed at

01:41:32.600 --> 01:41:38.720
there at the service road but I believe there has been

01:41:38.720 --> 01:41:39.439
correct me if I'm wrong

01:41:39.439 --> 01:41:43.109
you all have had some correspondence with text dot in which

01:41:43.109 --> 01:41:43.800
they have

01:41:43.800 --> 01:41:46.869
indicated that being that can also be closed they would be

01:41:46.869 --> 01:41:48.279
okay with their your

01:41:48.279 --> 01:41:53.279
drive being preserved there that is correct

01:41:55.800 --> 01:42:04.119
the ultimate text dot schematic shows a median that goes

01:42:04.119 --> 01:42:06.079
across the Wilshire

01:42:06.079 --> 01:42:13.279
intersection but as far as their the current condition I

01:42:13.279 --> 01:42:15.000
have an aerial at

01:42:15.000 --> 01:42:19.960
least showing that there is not one currently

01:42:24.119 --> 01:42:27.970
and Greg correct me if I'm wrong I think that the thought

01:42:27.970 --> 01:42:30.319
is that even in this

01:42:30.319 --> 01:42:37.390
ultimate condition to get back on to 35 they would take the

01:42:37.390 --> 01:42:39.520
they would use the

01:42:39.520 --> 01:42:45.039
drive approach on the service road directly that is correct

01:42:50.640 --> 01:42:54.880
any other questions for the applicant

01:42:57.199 --> 01:43:04.359
thank you and this is a public hearing have a card

01:43:04.359 --> 01:43:06.000
requesting to speak Amy

01:43:06.000 --> 01:43:11.319
Armstrong from UNT in opposition

01:43:15.000 --> 01:43:19.159
good evening I am Amy Armstrong I'm the interim news

01:43:19.159 --> 01:43:20.359
manager at the University

01:43:20.359 --> 01:43:25.159
of North Texas the address is 2310 North Interstate 35 East

01:43:25.159 --> 01:43:26.720
the University of

01:43:26.720 --> 01:43:30.479
North Texas and University of North Texas systems as the

01:43:30.479 --> 01:43:31.479
sole owner of all

01:43:31.479 --> 01:43:34.640
adjacent property is opposed to a request for a specific

01:43:34.640 --> 01:43:35.600
use permit for a

01:43:35.600 --> 01:43:38.829
drive-through facility at this location we have reviewed

01:43:38.829 --> 01:43:39.840
the criteria for

01:43:39.840 --> 01:43:42.989
approval for a specific use permit the proposed project

01:43:42.989 --> 01:43:44.239
plan does not meet the

01:43:44.239 --> 01:43:48.279
criteria a criteria B conditions four and seven and

01:43:48.279 --> 01:43:50.000
criteria D conditions one

01:43:50.000 --> 01:43:54.119
two three and six criteria a requires that the proposed

01:43:54.119 --> 01:43:55.159
project must be in

01:43:55.159 --> 01:43:57.710
conformance with all standards within the zoning district

01:43:57.710 --> 01:43:58.600
in which the use is

01:43:58.600 --> 01:44:02.970
proposed as noted in the application materials on sheet C 6

01:44:02.970 --> 01:44:05.359
.0 49 parking

01:44:05.359 --> 01:44:09.369
spaces are required one per 100 square feet of leasable

01:44:09.369 --> 01:44:11.079
area however only 40

01:44:11.079 --> 01:44:14.159
spaces are provided failure to meet the zoning requirement

01:44:14.159 --> 01:44:14.760
means that the

01:44:14.760 --> 01:44:17.699
proposed project plan cannot be found in compliance with

01:44:17.699 --> 01:44:18.920
all current standards

01:44:18.920 --> 01:44:22.119
and therefore cannot be approved in its current form

01:44:22.119 --> 01:44:23.979
criteria be identify

01:44:23.979 --> 01:44:26.130
several conditions that must be met in order for the

01:44:26.130 --> 01:44:27.239
Commission to recommend

01:44:27.239 --> 01:44:29.810
approval the proposed development does not meet two of

01:44:29.810 --> 01:44:30.960
these conditions numbers

01:44:30.960 --> 01:44:35.640
four and seven condition before requires that the proposed

01:44:35.640 --> 01:44:36.399
arrangement of

01:44:36.399 --> 01:44:39.470
vehicular and pedestrian traffic not adversely affect the

01:44:39.470 --> 01:44:40.359
general public or

01:44:40.359 --> 01:44:43.890
adjacent uses the work by the Texas Department of

01:44:43.890 --> 01:44:46.399
Transportation on I-35 and

01:44:46.399 --> 01:44:49.600
associated intersections has caused changes to the traffic

01:44:49.600 --> 01:44:50.239
conditions in

01:44:50.239 --> 01:44:52.850
this area that make a drive-through in this location

01:44:52.850 --> 01:44:54.079
harmful to surrounding

01:44:54.079 --> 01:44:57.680
property owners the proposed layout of driveways is also

01:44:57.680 --> 01:44:58.399
fundamentally

01:44:58.399 --> 01:45:01.119
different than the earlier development with the addition of

01:45:01.119 --> 01:45:01.800
the North Texas

01:45:01.800 --> 01:45:04.600
Boulevard median second drive-through lane and an

01:45:04.600 --> 01:45:05.920
additional driveway on

01:45:05.920 --> 01:45:09.000
Wilshire vehicular and pedestrian traffic will be impacted

01:45:09.000 --> 01:45:09.479
in three

01:45:09.479 --> 01:45:13.920
specific ways I-35 frontage road traffic traveling north on

01:45:13.920 --> 01:45:15.159
I-35 frontage road

01:45:15.159 --> 01:45:17.960
will be negatively impacted by peak hour trips to the

01:45:17.960 --> 01:45:18.960
restaurant for both

01:45:18.960 --> 01:45:22.090
entering and exiting traffic at this driveway location if

01:45:22.090 --> 01:45:23.359
entering traffic

01:45:23.359 --> 01:45:26.069
is backed up into the frontage road access to the right

01:45:26.069 --> 01:45:27.119
turn stacking lane

01:45:27.119 --> 01:45:30.310
will be negatively impacted additionally exiting traffic

01:45:30.310 --> 01:45:31.359
from the same drive-through

01:45:31.359 --> 01:45:34.859
has no restrictions on unsafe lane changes to reach the

01:45:34.859 --> 01:45:35.840
left turn or you

01:45:35.840 --> 01:45:39.560
turn lanes to return south on I-35 adversely affecting the

01:45:39.560 --> 01:45:40.239
general public

01:45:40.239 --> 01:45:43.569
as well as access to the University especially during peak

01:45:43.569 --> 01:45:45.239
hours North Texas

01:45:45.239 --> 01:45:48.310
Boulevard due to the installation of the median on North

01:45:48.310 --> 01:45:49.880
Texas Boulevard exiting

01:45:49.880 --> 01:45:52.949
traffic will be forced to turn right on Wilshire Eagle or

01:45:52.949 --> 01:45:54.239
further into UNT

01:45:54.239 --> 01:45:57.180
campus which will have a negative impact on pedestrian and

01:45:57.180 --> 01:45:58.760
vehicular movements on

01:45:58.760 --> 01:46:02.960
these streets Wilshire Drive new access on Wilshire Drive

01:46:02.960 --> 01:46:03.640
will introduce

01:46:03.640 --> 01:46:07.000
significant increased traffic to UNT property adversely

01:46:07.000 --> 01:46:08.479
affecting University

01:46:08.479 --> 01:46:12.149
uses these new traffic patterns exasperate existing

01:46:12.149 --> 01:46:13.199
difficult conditions

01:46:13.199 --> 01:46:16.949
for pedestrian crossings on North Texas Boulevard and Eagle

01:46:16.949 --> 01:46:18.119
Drive and traffic

01:46:18.119 --> 01:46:21.579
circulation in the southern end of campus a traffic impact

01:46:21.579 --> 01:46:22.560
analysis by the

01:46:22.560 --> 01:46:25.699
developer is needed to fully evaluate these adverse impacts

01:46:25.699 --> 01:46:26.760
and understand how

01:46:26.760 --> 01:46:29.840
this new traffic circulation will impact the surrounding

01:46:29.840 --> 01:46:31.720
property owners however

01:46:31.720 --> 01:46:34.029
it is clear that as currently presented the proposed

01:46:34.029 --> 01:46:35.199
project does not meet this

01:46:35.199 --> 01:46:40.359
criteria condition B7 requires that landscaping and

01:46:40.359 --> 01:46:42.319
screening be harmonious

01:46:42.319 --> 01:46:45.630
and compatible with adjacent uses the proposed landscaping

01:46:45.630 --> 01:46:46.600
and screening is

01:46:46.600 --> 01:46:49.210
not compatible with its location as adjacent to the

01:46:49.210 --> 01:46:50.439
University's primary

01:46:50.439 --> 01:46:53.789
vehicular entry point the property is located directly

01:46:53.789 --> 01:46:55.000
across from the North

01:46:55.000 --> 01:46:58.100
Texas Boulevard from a site on which the University has

01:46:58.100 --> 01:46:59.239
recently invested

01:46:59.239 --> 01:47:02.100
approximately five hundred and forty thousand dollars in

01:47:02.100 --> 01:47:02.800
landscaping

01:47:02.800 --> 01:47:06.630
improvements and a relocated monument sign the code minimum

01:47:06.630 --> 01:47:07.800
approach taken in

01:47:07.800 --> 01:47:10.869
the proposed project is not compatible with this adjacent

01:47:10.869 --> 01:47:12.000
use significant

01:47:12.000 --> 01:47:14.739
improvements would be needed to address this criteria and

01:47:14.739 --> 01:47:15.800
more compatible with

01:47:15.800 --> 01:47:19.800
the city's comprehensive plan specifically the community

01:47:19.800 --> 01:47:19.800
community

01:47:19.800 --> 01:47:26.600
character chapter as proposed we do have your letter thank

01:47:26.600 --> 01:47:27.479
you for reading some

01:47:27.479 --> 01:47:29.869
of it and we'll make sure that the rest of it gets into our

01:47:29.869 --> 01:47:30.800
record okay thank

01:47:30.800 --> 01:47:34.619
you have some questions for you Commissioner back thank you

01:47:34.619 --> 01:47:35.239
chair thank

01:47:35.239 --> 01:47:38.270
you miss Armstrong for your presentation let me pick at you

01:47:38.270 --> 01:47:39.039
a little bit here

01:47:39.039 --> 01:47:43.840
you've heard comments about the parking situation how it

01:47:43.840 --> 01:47:45.399
can be rated in a couple

01:47:45.399 --> 01:47:49.060
different ways and we've obviously used the city's looked

01:47:49.060 --> 01:47:50.159
at it from one way

01:47:50.159 --> 01:47:56.109
where 40 parking spaces is allowed so does that eliminate

01:47:56.109 --> 01:47:57.159
that argument in

01:47:57.159 --> 01:48:01.199
your in your opinion I would have to run that by people at

01:48:01.199 --> 01:48:02.640
campus and get get you

01:48:02.640 --> 01:48:07.720
I'm happy to get you an answer for that okay and some of

01:48:07.720 --> 01:48:09.520
your comments are

01:48:09.520 --> 01:48:13.270
understandably concerned but they're not really backed up

01:48:13.270 --> 01:48:15.000
by facts you say it's

01:48:15.000 --> 01:48:17.520
clear that it's currently presented proposed project does

01:48:17.520 --> 01:48:18.119
not meet this

01:48:18.119 --> 01:48:22.729
criteria and that it it's going to create excessive traffic

01:48:22.729 --> 01:48:23.960
but you don't

01:48:23.960 --> 01:48:27.199
have any information to back that up now I don't disagree

01:48:27.199 --> 01:48:29.520
that maybe we do need a

01:48:29.520 --> 01:48:34.699
TIA here and I guess I could ask staff is that forthcoming

01:48:34.699 --> 01:48:35.640
are we going to be

01:48:35.640 --> 01:48:45.000
doing that can anybody know I guess we wait on Jim to come

01:48:45.000 --> 01:48:45.840
down or if it's

01:48:45.840 --> 01:48:49.600
required by just to see if we're gonna have that TIA but I

01:48:49.600 --> 01:48:51.760
just if miss

01:48:51.760 --> 01:48:56.239
Armstrong can hang on to we have not we have not stated

01:48:56.239 --> 01:48:58.359
that our TIA is required

01:48:58.359 --> 01:49:02.550
given that there was a McDonald's there already as well as

01:49:02.550 --> 01:49:03.720
a gas station which

01:49:03.720 --> 01:49:09.500
has gone away and an IHOP which is going away okay okay

01:49:09.500 --> 01:49:14.560
again are you still

01:49:14.560 --> 01:49:19.109
concerned that with the analysis that we've done here that

01:49:19.109 --> 01:49:20.199
it's going to

01:49:20.199 --> 01:49:25.199
create a problem for traffic flow for North Texas and when

01:49:25.199 --> 01:49:25.920
you talk about

01:49:25.920 --> 01:49:31.300
surrounding property owners who's there really besides the

01:49:31.300 --> 01:49:32.520
universe you've got

01:49:32.520 --> 01:49:36.369
other businesses over off of Avenue C I'm not sure how they

01:49:36.369 --> 01:49:37.399
're adversely

01:49:37.399 --> 01:49:42.880
affected by it and the houses are on the other side of I-35

01:49:42.880 --> 01:49:43.600
I don't see them

01:49:43.600 --> 01:49:47.109
impacted being impacted at all well the statement is the

01:49:47.109 --> 01:49:47.960
information that I have

01:49:47.960 --> 01:49:52.039
tonight as I said I'm happy to get answers in your convey

01:49:52.039 --> 01:49:52.680
ance okay I got

01:49:52.680 --> 01:49:57.279
you thank you sorry I didn't put you in this thank you

01:49:57.279 --> 01:50:00.760
Commissioner Roselle I

01:50:00.760 --> 01:50:04.109
have several questions with this letter but I fear that

01:50:04.109 --> 01:50:05.560
there's not going to be

01:50:05.560 --> 01:50:10.560
many responses to it so I don't know how to handle my

01:50:10.560 --> 01:50:12.479
concerns except just ask

01:50:12.479 --> 01:50:17.529
them and we'll see what responses we get the section under

01:50:17.529 --> 01:50:19.479
condition before where

01:50:19.479 --> 01:50:23.270
it says it's negatively impacting the traffic way three

01:50:23.270 --> 01:50:24.640
ways the first one is

01:50:24.640 --> 01:50:28.029
stated as the I-35 fronted road frontage road and you talk

01:50:28.029 --> 01:50:29.479
about stacking onto

01:50:29.479 --> 01:50:33.939
the front of the road and then the exiting issues and so I

01:50:33.939 --> 01:50:35.399
'm wondering how

01:50:35.399 --> 01:50:37.949
that is any different than the McDonald's that was there

01:50:37.949 --> 01:50:39.760
for 40 years so

01:50:39.760 --> 01:50:42.199
not to be a broken record but the statement is the

01:50:42.199 --> 01:50:43.279
information I have

01:50:43.279 --> 01:50:46.350
yeah I'm happy to to get answers to yeah that might that

01:50:46.350 --> 01:50:47.720
might be the answer to a

01:50:47.720 --> 01:50:50.199
couple more questions let's just get the questions on the

01:50:50.199 --> 01:50:51.279
record then we can get

01:50:51.279 --> 01:50:56.229
them back I guess my other question is maybe it's maybe it

01:50:56.229 --> 01:50:56.920
's just a statement

01:50:56.920 --> 01:51:02.039
so this is better I find it interesting that based on a

01:51:02.039 --> 01:51:03.840
investment that North

01:51:03.840 --> 01:51:06.909
Texas voluntarily put into redoing landscaping and the

01:51:06.909 --> 01:51:07.680
relocation of a

01:51:07.680 --> 01:51:10.239
monument sign that they're holding their neighbors to a

01:51:10.239 --> 01:51:11.399
higher standard than the

01:51:11.399 --> 01:51:14.539
landscaping requirement by the city which is noted here

01:51:14.539 --> 01:51:15.600
that it's implied

01:51:15.600 --> 01:51:18.670
that University of North Texas spent half a million dollars

01:51:18.670 --> 01:51:19.640
on a sign which I

01:51:19.640 --> 01:51:23.939
have other concerns about that but that doesn't necessarily

01:51:23.939 --> 01:51:25.039
necessitate the

01:51:25.039 --> 01:51:28.189
neighbors to it's implied that they should spend five

01:51:28.189 --> 01:51:29.439
hundred forty thousand

01:51:29.439 --> 01:51:31.829
dollars on landscaping I'm not sure the implication here

01:51:31.829 --> 01:51:32.680
but I'm necessarily

01:51:32.680 --> 01:51:37.970
agree with what I'm inferring it and it seems as though if

01:51:37.970 --> 01:51:38.920
I could just

01:51:38.920 --> 01:51:42.640
understand this the McDonald's was not torn down by choice

01:51:42.640 --> 01:51:43.359
can someone confirm

01:51:43.359 --> 01:51:48.399
this they didn't have a choice who can confirm this for me

01:51:48.399 --> 01:51:49.920
they made their owner

01:51:49.920 --> 01:51:53.470
can can I get confirmation could did you have a choice to

01:51:53.470 --> 01:51:55.960
tear down your building

01:51:55.960 --> 01:51:59.270
yes my name is Sajan Brooks I'm from the law firm in baron

01:51:59.270 --> 01:52:00.960
other cloth and Odo I

01:52:00.960 --> 01:52:05.329
represented of address 808 new aces Austin Texas seven

01:52:05.329 --> 01:52:06.800
eight seven zero one I

01:52:06.800 --> 01:52:09.869
represent McDonald's corporation and our operator in the

01:52:09.869 --> 01:52:11.039
condemnation of this

01:52:11.039 --> 01:52:14.250
matter this combination was a bisection by the Texas

01:52:14.250 --> 01:52:15.399
Department of Transportation

01:52:15.399 --> 01:52:18.470
meaning the Texas Department of Transportation as you heard

01:52:18.470 --> 01:52:18.960
actually

01:52:18.960 --> 01:52:21.350
performed the demolition which means the property line was

01:52:21.350 --> 01:52:22.239
cutting the building

01:52:22.239 --> 01:52:25.069
back and textile went on and on its own volition to cut the

01:52:25.069 --> 01:52:26.119
building back from

01:52:26.119 --> 01:52:29.199
every move to suck was it possible for McDonald's to

01:52:29.199 --> 01:52:30.359
continue operations after

01:52:30.359 --> 01:52:33.939
that was done no no text department transportation went in

01:52:33.939 --> 01:52:34.920
and demolished

01:52:34.920 --> 01:52:36.829
the building on their own okay I appreciate that

01:52:36.829 --> 01:52:37.840
clarification thank you

01:52:37.840 --> 01:52:44.970
back to miss Armstrong I it seems as though you know Texas

01:52:44.970 --> 01:52:46.079
is taking advantage

01:52:46.079 --> 01:52:51.039
of a situation that McDonald's had no control over there I

01:52:51.039 --> 01:52:52.239
'd love to see the

01:52:52.239 --> 01:52:55.310
traffic study but it's reducing there's not a gas station

01:52:55.310 --> 01:52:56.399
there any longer so

01:52:56.399 --> 01:53:00.149
I'm I'm curious as the actual traffic increasing with this

01:53:00.149 --> 01:53:01.359
McDonald's to the

01:53:01.359 --> 01:53:04.449
extent which you're saying if you reduce the exon traffic

01:53:04.449 --> 01:53:05.680
and anecdotally that

01:53:05.680 --> 01:53:08.199
seemed to have more traffic continually than McDonald's

01:53:08.199 --> 01:53:09.279
when I when I saw it and

01:53:09.279 --> 01:53:13.109
so I just take a little bit of issue that North Texas based

01:53:13.109 --> 01:53:14.239
on nothing that

01:53:14.239 --> 01:53:18.220
this company did or the property owners did is now coming

01:53:18.220 --> 01:53:19.479
in and denying or

01:53:19.479 --> 01:53:22.659
wanting to deny the rebuilding of a building that's been

01:53:22.659 --> 01:53:24.039
there for 40 years

01:53:24.039 --> 01:53:27.329
and so though I appreciate the the diligence and this

01:53:27.329 --> 01:53:29.199
letter being drafted I

01:53:29.199 --> 01:53:32.560
just have a lot of issues with with the position that North

01:53:32.560 --> 01:53:33.720
Texas has decided to

01:53:33.720 --> 01:53:35.810
take on this and again I understand I appreciate you coming

01:53:35.810 --> 01:53:36.159
here and

01:53:36.159 --> 01:53:40.720
presenting this to you but those are my concerns with this

01:53:40.720 --> 01:53:42.439
letter commissioner

01:53:42.439 --> 01:53:46.039
Ellis thank you chair I'm sure you may not have an answer

01:53:46.039 --> 01:53:47.159
to this without your

01:53:47.159 --> 01:53:51.520
group but maybe you do ideally what would the owners

01:53:51.520 --> 01:53:53.439
surrounding UNT as the

01:53:53.439 --> 01:53:57.750
sole owner in opposition here what would you like to see

01:53:57.750 --> 01:54:00.079
developed on this site

01:54:00.079 --> 01:54:03.899
the same information I have tonight I'm happy to you can

01:54:03.899 --> 01:54:05.079
answer us for you to

01:54:05.079 --> 01:54:10.680
that I would yeah for an existing McDonald's that was by no

01:54:10.680 --> 01:54:11.239
fault of their

01:54:11.239 --> 01:54:14.310
own torn down I mean you could have a great relationship

01:54:14.310 --> 01:54:14.840
McDonald's does a

01:54:14.840 --> 01:54:18.500
great job at community building UNT and McDonald's it could

01:54:18.500 --> 01:54:19.439
I mean could do

01:54:19.439 --> 01:54:24.399
great things together and it's I'm just curious as to you

01:54:24.399 --> 01:54:25.939
know with this two

01:54:25.939 --> 01:54:29.369
page letter where you're going and what would be the ideal

01:54:29.369 --> 01:54:30.760
development for this

01:54:30.760 --> 01:54:40.119
site if it can't be this commissioner Taylor thank you

01:54:40.119 --> 01:54:42.359
chair I believe my

01:54:42.359 --> 01:54:44.449
questions are going to be along the same lines I I

01:54:44.449 --> 01:54:46.760
appreciate the detail in the

01:54:46.760 --> 01:54:51.520
letter we often have extremely vague concerns so you you

01:54:51.520 --> 01:54:52.399
are extremely

01:54:52.399 --> 01:54:56.130
detailed and you do tight even tie it back to criteria for

01:54:56.130 --> 01:54:58.760
SUP approval I I do

01:54:58.760 --> 01:55:03.810
have a concern that many of these items are very narrowly

01:55:03.810 --> 01:55:06.600
cherry-picked the the

01:55:06.600 --> 01:55:10.569
traffic conditions two years ago there was a McDonald's a

01:55:10.569 --> 01:55:12.119
gas station in IHOP

01:55:12.119 --> 01:55:16.189
you had there were seven I think driveways total now we're

01:55:16.189 --> 01:55:16.960
going to four

01:55:16.960 --> 01:55:20.130
driveways total one restaurant instead of two restaurants

01:55:20.130 --> 01:55:21.640
in a gas station so

01:55:21.640 --> 01:55:25.119
to say that traffic will be adversely impacted once the

01:55:25.119 --> 01:55:27.600
constructions done the

01:55:27.600 --> 01:55:30.989
this area will have much lower traffic than it used to it

01:55:30.989 --> 01:55:31.720
'll have better

01:55:31.720 --> 01:55:34.569
circulation that McDonald's was a kind of a pain to get to

01:55:34.569 --> 01:55:35.640
before especially

01:55:35.640 --> 01:55:38.180
with Kindle often that really sharp exit ramp all of those

01:55:38.180 --> 01:55:39.000
issues have been

01:55:39.000 --> 01:55:42.619
alleviated because of text dots improvements die 35 just

01:55:42.619 --> 01:55:43.359
moving down the

01:55:43.359 --> 01:55:49.409
list on the condition D criteria floor area ratio is

01:55:49.409 --> 01:55:52.319
referenced to a single lot

01:55:52.319 --> 01:55:55.890
to the north which just happens to be the densest thing in

01:55:55.890 --> 01:55:56.960
probably half a

01:55:56.960 --> 01:56:00.560
mile and saying that this is this lot's gonna be less dense

01:56:00.560 --> 01:56:01.640
but then if you just

01:56:01.640 --> 01:56:04.840
go west there's an open field of 20 or 30 acres of open

01:56:04.840 --> 01:56:06.000
field if you go east

01:56:06.000 --> 01:56:10.199
there's the what used to be the second save which is now I

01:56:10.199 --> 01:56:11.579
believe a UNT office

01:56:11.579 --> 01:56:15.699
space which is a very low floor area ratio you go northeast

01:56:15.699 --> 01:56:17.640
you hit an impound

01:56:17.640 --> 01:56:22.159
lot that's zero for area ratio so to critique the floor

01:56:22.159 --> 01:56:23.359
area ratio based on

01:56:23.359 --> 01:56:27.039
one single parcel out of ten surrounding parcels isn't

01:56:27.039 --> 01:56:29.439
really representative the

01:56:29.439 --> 01:56:33.170
the same thing on the pedestrian requirements this might

01:56:33.170 --> 01:56:33.899
not be the

01:56:33.899 --> 01:56:37.010
perfect pedestrian pathway across the North Texas bridge

01:56:37.010 --> 01:56:37.800
and I know especially

01:56:37.800 --> 01:56:40.869
with apogee stadium this is going to become a major

01:56:40.869 --> 01:56:42.439
pedestrian thoroughfare

01:56:42.439 --> 01:56:46.960
the design does accommodate pedestrian use UNT's own

01:56:46.960 --> 01:56:49.039
property at Wilshire and

01:56:49.039 --> 01:56:51.329
Kindle that they've owned for at least 15 years they've

01:56:51.329 --> 01:56:52.520
never bothered to put a

01:56:52.520 --> 01:56:56.229
sidewalk in on the south side of Wilshire or on either side

01:56:56.229 --> 01:56:57.960
of Kindle the

01:56:57.960 --> 01:57:01.069
north side of Wilshire they don't have ADA curb cuts in the

01:57:01.069 --> 01:57:02.520
sidewalk it also

01:57:02.520 --> 01:57:06.720
that doesn't continue the entire length of Wilshire so if

01:57:06.720 --> 01:57:08.399
they really wanted to

01:57:08.399 --> 01:57:11.310
increase the pedestrian access to the for this area say

01:57:11.310 --> 01:57:12.199
from Avenue C to

01:57:12.199 --> 01:57:15.539
apogee stadium they would have built sidewalks on their own

01:57:15.539 --> 01:57:16.560
property so to

01:57:16.560 --> 01:57:20.789
to criticize a five-foot sidewalk and a couple of crosswalk

01:57:20.789 --> 01:57:22.079
s at McDonald's when

01:57:22.079 --> 01:57:24.789
you don't even have a sidewalk like the McDonald's sidewalk

01:57:24.789 --> 01:57:25.960
is going to end when

01:57:25.960 --> 01:57:29.510
the UNT property starts so that's it's not a fair criticism

01:57:29.510 --> 01:57:30.420
to say that they're

01:57:30.420 --> 01:57:33.840
not doing enough when you haven't done anything so

01:57:33.840 --> 01:57:35.039
unfortunately you you

01:57:35.039 --> 01:57:39.100
undermine your own your own arguments by by your own

01:57:39.100 --> 01:57:41.760
behavior in the area those

01:57:41.760 --> 01:57:46.319
are my comments okay any other questions for this

01:57:46.319 --> 01:57:50.319
particular speaker thank you

01:57:50.319 --> 01:57:52.710
for your comments and your letter we'll make sure that the

01:57:52.710 --> 01:57:53.479
rest of it's in the

01:57:53.479 --> 01:58:00.720
record I did have one other sheet from James McGuire

01:58:00.720 --> 01:58:03.199
representing UNT systems

01:58:03.199 --> 01:58:07.850
1901 Main Street in Dallas Texas he is also opposed the

01:58:07.850 --> 01:58:09.880
request again this is a

01:58:09.880 --> 01:58:12.680
public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item

01:58:12.680 --> 01:58:13.560
please come forward

01:58:13.560 --> 01:58:16.000
at this time

01:58:19.439 --> 01:58:22.510
seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the

01:58:22.510 --> 01:58:23.640
floor for discussion

01:58:23.640 --> 01:58:28.239
and emotion Commissioner Sullivan can I ask you a question

01:58:28.239 --> 01:58:29.079
of the applicant

01:58:29.079 --> 01:58:34.939
absolutely could y'all answer or give me an idea of how

01:58:34.939 --> 01:58:37.159
many she be how many UNT

01:58:37.159 --> 01:58:40.260
students were employed at the old restaurant and how many

01:58:40.260 --> 01:58:41.159
you anticipate

01:58:41.159 --> 01:59:00.510
employing at the new restaurant so bear with us we're

01:59:00.510 --> 01:59:01.079
giving you a little bit

01:59:01.079 --> 01:59:05.390
state your name again so we'll have Jimmy Lopez 2020 Laurel

01:59:05.390 --> 01:59:06.520
Valley, Keller, Texas

01:59:06.520 --> 01:59:10.579
76248 the data we have is a couple of years old we've been

01:59:10.579 --> 01:59:12.199
shut down a bit as

01:59:12.199 --> 01:59:15.520
I was talking to the franchisee miss Sandy Phillips has

01:59:15.520 --> 01:59:16.439
actually owned this

01:59:16.439 --> 01:59:21.199
restaurant 43 of the 44 years that it's been there she said

01:59:21.199 --> 01:59:22.159
any we would have

01:59:22.159 --> 01:59:25.579
anywhere between 50 and 60 employees at the restaurant and

01:59:25.579 --> 01:59:26.800
half of them would be

01:59:26.800 --> 01:59:30.479
UNT students roughly half of them 45 50 percent she said so

01:59:30.479 --> 01:59:33.439
roughly 20 25 of the

01:59:33.439 --> 01:59:36.529
folks working in the McDonald's restaurants were students

01:59:36.529 --> 01:59:37.800
at UNT again

01:59:37.800 --> 01:59:42.479
that's a couple of years old understand thank you very much

01:59:42.960 --> 01:59:48.239
Commissioner back thank you chair just for the record I'd

01:59:48.239 --> 01:59:49.000
like to state I'm

01:59:49.000 --> 01:59:52.920
sorely disappointed in UNT throwing miss Armstrong in the

01:59:52.920 --> 01:59:53.880
phrase sending

01:59:53.880 --> 01:59:58.060
somebody that isn't prepared to answer a lot of questions

01:59:58.060 --> 01:59:59.800
we had here that being

01:59:59.800 --> 02:00:04.279
said I make a motion that we recommend approval of this SAP

02:00:04.279 --> 02:00:05.399
subject to the

02:00:05.399 --> 02:00:11.880
condition stated okay Commissioner Roselle thank you chair

02:00:11.880 --> 02:00:13.760
I too would like

02:00:13.760 --> 02:00:16.960
to approve this but I would like to see the motion not

02:00:16.960 --> 02:00:18.159
include a signage

02:00:18.159 --> 02:00:23.130
restriction I just I don't understand why in all reality

02:00:23.130 --> 02:00:24.920
this should just be a

02:00:24.920 --> 02:00:27.750
simple rebuild of something that's been there for 43 years

02:00:27.750 --> 02:00:28.640
but yet because of

02:00:28.640 --> 02:00:31.460
some weird nuances forced upon the applicant by text dot

02:00:31.460 --> 02:00:32.359
they're having to

02:00:32.359 --> 02:00:35.840
come to the SAP and like we've seen very many times before

02:00:35.840 --> 02:00:37.039
it often feels like

02:00:37.039 --> 02:00:40.109
when there's an SAP on the floor the city feels like there

02:00:40.109 --> 02:00:41.079
's it's like that's

02:00:41.079 --> 02:00:43.560
the start of a negotiation and I don't know if that always

02:00:43.560 --> 02:00:44.399
has to be the case

02:00:44.399 --> 02:00:46.789
that if they asked for an SAP then we get to ask for

02:00:46.789 --> 02:00:48.399
something and it's a

02:00:48.399 --> 02:00:52.449
matter of a foot less in height and it just feels like we

02:00:52.449 --> 02:00:54.359
're fighting for a win

02:00:54.359 --> 02:00:57.520
or something on our end and so I would prefer to see this

02:00:57.520 --> 02:00:58.600
motion carry force

02:00:58.600 --> 02:01:02.189
to council with just condition one that it would remain in

02:01:02.189 --> 02:01:03.520
compliance with the

02:01:03.520 --> 02:01:06.800
attached site plan landscape plan and building elevations

02:01:06.800 --> 02:01:08.439
and not include the

02:01:08.439 --> 02:01:12.960
sign restriction set up friendly amendment the motioner

02:01:12.960 --> 02:01:13.439
would like to

02:01:13.439 --> 02:01:18.000
entertain no I just wanted to make comment to the

02:01:18.000 --> 02:01:18.880
Commissioner Roselle's

02:01:18.880 --> 02:01:25.000
concern about the sign and I understand the wish to let the

02:01:25.000 --> 02:01:28.479
party builder

02:01:28.600 --> 02:01:32.079
McDonald's the way it was before I'm not sure I see a need

02:01:32.079 --> 02:01:33.279
for two pull signs

02:01:33.279 --> 02:01:36.430
that's the only thing I'm not sure they're gonna lose out

02:01:36.430 --> 02:01:37.119
by having a

02:01:37.119 --> 02:01:40.829
monarch sign on one side and their pull sign on the other

02:01:40.829 --> 02:01:42.479
so that was reason I

02:01:42.479 --> 02:01:47.430
just the idea of pull signs are distracted anyway in my

02:01:47.430 --> 02:01:49.640
opinion so if I

02:01:49.640 --> 02:01:54.050
can't get a second emotion then I'll make a comment I think

02:01:54.050 --> 02:01:54.640
we clarified that

02:01:54.640 --> 02:01:57.739
there's not going to be a pole sign regardless on North

02:01:57.739 --> 02:01:58.840
Texas Boulevard I

02:01:58.840 --> 02:02:01.550
think there were some misunderstandings in our original

02:02:01.550 --> 02:02:03.680
work session okay and due

02:02:03.680 --> 02:02:06.470
to the street classification the only thing that's allowed

02:02:06.470 --> 02:02:07.359
over on North Texas

02:02:07.359 --> 02:02:09.750
Boulevard is going to be a monument sign and the question

02:02:09.750 --> 02:02:10.680
is going to be whether

02:02:10.680 --> 02:02:15.079
it's a six foot height or a five and I think that's the

02:02:15.079 --> 02:02:17.199
issue that is before so

02:02:17.199 --> 02:02:19.560
there will not be a pole sign regardless because of our

02:02:19.560 --> 02:02:20.199
city code and

02:02:20.199 --> 02:02:22.119
the applicant has stated that they're going to follow our

02:02:22.119 --> 02:02:23.000
code okay so the

02:02:23.000 --> 02:02:26.470
only condition then is that they abide by the site plans

02:02:26.470 --> 02:02:27.439
and everything like

02:02:27.439 --> 02:02:33.359
that and I'm okay with that okay so we want to do we need

02:02:33.359 --> 02:02:34.560
to restate our motion

02:02:34.560 --> 02:02:39.039
or just go with that staff I believe you agree to the

02:02:39.039 --> 02:02:40.039
friendly amendment did you

02:02:40.039 --> 02:02:43.319
not so just condition more yes just condition just

02:02:43.319 --> 02:02:44.279
condition one can we have

02:02:44.279 --> 02:02:48.909
a first and second for approval with only the first

02:02:48.909 --> 02:02:51.319
condition being required

02:02:51.319 --> 02:02:59.460
okay any further discussion I'm sorry Commissioner Roselle

02:02:59.460 --> 02:03:00.119
was a second on

02:03:00.119 --> 02:03:04.079
that I apologize yes I do second the motion by Commissioner

02:03:04.079 --> 02:03:06.319
Beck okay now we

02:03:06.319 --> 02:03:10.760
have a first and a second for approval with only the first

02:03:10.760 --> 02:03:12.039
item as a condition

02:03:12.039 --> 02:03:20.640
on this any other comments or discussion I'll make a

02:03:20.640 --> 02:03:23.079
comment I'm gonna support

02:03:23.079 --> 02:03:27.529
the motion as it is proposed and I'm too I'm a little

02:03:27.529 --> 02:03:29.479
surprised by the response

02:03:29.479 --> 02:03:32.989
from North Texas I'm sure the amount of money that's been

02:03:32.989 --> 02:03:34.159
spent on the monument

02:03:34.159 --> 02:03:38.579
sign you may not want a McDonald's they're sharing the

02:03:38.579 --> 02:03:39.520
entrance on North

02:03:39.520 --> 02:03:46.109
Texas Boulevard and I'm hopeful that if that's something

02:03:46.109 --> 02:03:47.199
that's that important

02:03:47.199 --> 02:03:50.109
to North Texas they can reach some type of an arrangement

02:03:50.109 --> 02:03:51.319
with the owner of

02:03:51.319 --> 02:03:55.170
McDonald's to rectify that but I don't think it's in at

02:03:55.170 --> 02:03:56.640
least in my opinion

02:03:56.640 --> 02:04:02.930
this purview of my vote to help North Texas accomplish that

02:04:02.930 --> 02:04:03.680
at the expense of

02:04:03.680 --> 02:04:05.880
the owner I think the owner should be able to rebuild their

02:04:05.880 --> 02:04:06.600
business they

02:04:06.600 --> 02:04:09.779
didn't have an option to do that text dot tore it down they

02:04:09.779 --> 02:04:11.159
did not and I

02:04:11.159 --> 02:04:13.989
think it's at least from my vote is going to give them the

02:04:13.989 --> 02:04:14.760
option to put

02:04:14.760 --> 02:04:18.560
back their business and if North Texas wants to purchase it

02:04:18.560 --> 02:04:19.520
they certainly can

02:04:19.520 --> 02:04:22.659
do it as a business versus a piece of property that can't

02:04:22.659 --> 02:04:23.479
have a McDonald's

02:04:23.479 --> 02:04:27.090
back on it and the financial implications that that might

02:04:27.090 --> 02:04:28.159
have so I'm

02:04:28.159 --> 02:04:32.069
going to support the motion and with no other comments or

02:04:32.069 --> 02:04:33.640
discussion I will call

02:04:33.640 --> 02:04:37.039
for a vote on the board

02:04:47.520 --> 02:04:54.909
that motion is going to carry six to zero is everybody okay

02:04:54.909 --> 02:04:56.920
to continue do

02:04:56.920 --> 02:05:02.520
need to take a break before we start our next item okay and

02:05:02.520 --> 02:05:03.319
we'll move us to our

02:05:03.319 --> 02:05:08.800
item C thank you all best luck on your project

02:05:14.439 --> 02:05:18.390
at this time I'm going to open the public hearing for item

02:05:18.390 --> 02:05:22.239
s 16 - 0 0 0 7 B

02:05:22.239 --> 02:05:27.119
we'll call on Haley for presentation

02:05:33.319 --> 02:05:55.369
give us a minute to warm up okay all right so my name is H

02:05:55.369 --> 02:05:56.000
aley's aggressive

02:05:56.000 --> 02:05:59.119
with the planning division and this is case s 16 7 for the

02:05:59.119 --> 02:05:59.680
rainy road

02:05:59.680 --> 02:06:02.630
apartments and I'll run through this pretty quickly since

02:06:02.630 --> 02:06:03.199
we do have a few

02:06:03.199 --> 02:06:07.520
people in the audience so the request was to hold a public

02:06:07.520 --> 02:06:08.039
hearing and

02:06:08.039 --> 02:06:11.239
consider a request for a specific use permit to allow a

02:06:11.239 --> 02:06:12.520
multifamily use on a

02:06:12.520 --> 02:06:15.659
property that's approximately point nine acres the property

02:06:15.659 --> 02:06:16.840
is located at the

02:06:16.840 --> 02:06:19.909
rainy road and rainy court intersection and is uniquely

02:06:19.909 --> 02:06:20.840
configured having

02:06:20.840 --> 02:06:26.529
frontage on Elm Street rainy road and rainy court a look at

02:06:26.529 --> 02:06:27.680
what the proposal

02:06:27.680 --> 02:06:30.869
is our site plan shows that this would be two apartment

02:06:30.869 --> 02:06:31.920
buildings each one

02:06:31.920 --> 02:06:34.319
would be comprised of five units the units are each

02:06:34.319 --> 02:06:35.359
proposed as the three

02:06:35.359 --> 02:06:39.659
bedroom two and a half bathroom configuration and as you

02:06:39.659 --> 02:06:40.199
can see

02:06:40.199 --> 02:06:42.489
outlined in green each of these units would feature a rear

02:06:42.489 --> 02:06:43.239
yard that would be

02:06:43.239 --> 02:06:48.329
fenced there's also a storage building proposed on the site

02:06:48.329 --> 02:06:49.199
it is shown here in

02:06:49.199 --> 02:06:51.989
red and buildings a little over 700 square feet would

02:06:51.989 --> 02:06:53.079
feature a storage unit

02:06:53.079 --> 02:06:56.289
for each of the apartments and the site is required to have

02:06:56.289 --> 02:06:58.119
20 parking spaces by

02:06:58.119 --> 02:07:01.470
code they're proposing 23 spaces and the three spaces that

02:07:01.470 --> 02:07:02.399
are shown in gray

02:07:02.399 --> 02:07:05.640
would be pervy's make constructed a pervious papers to

02:07:05.640 --> 02:07:06.359
comply with the

02:07:06.359 --> 02:07:10.800
development code their landscape plan as you can see here

02:07:10.800 --> 02:07:11.520
shows that they are

02:07:11.520 --> 02:07:14.319
complying with the provisions of our development code for

02:07:14.319 --> 02:07:15.159
landscaping they

02:07:15.159 --> 02:07:19.000
exceed the required 40% by approximately 8% extra landscape

02:07:19.000 --> 02:07:20.539
area some of the key

02:07:20.539 --> 02:07:23.430
features of the site would be the type B buffer that's

02:07:23.430 --> 02:07:24.840
required to the adjoining

02:07:24.840 --> 02:07:28.310
single-family residence this buffer requires five trees and

02:07:28.310 --> 02:07:29.239
30 shrubs for

02:07:29.239 --> 02:07:32.310
every 100 linear feet in addition to that the applicants

02:07:32.310 --> 02:07:33.159
also proposing an

02:07:33.159 --> 02:07:36.699
eight-foot tall cedar fence along that property line they

02:07:36.699 --> 02:07:38.079
are proposing to

02:07:38.079 --> 02:07:41.220
maintain the existing tree line along reiney court it's

02:07:41.220 --> 02:07:42.159
outlined in green on

02:07:42.159 --> 02:07:44.680
the site plan and then in orange you can see one of their

02:07:44.680 --> 02:07:45.800
other features will be

02:07:45.800 --> 02:07:48.699
a patio and trellis area that also features some landsca

02:07:48.699 --> 02:07:49.680
ping that would be

02:07:49.680 --> 02:07:54.390
open space for the residents the building elevations this

02:07:54.390 --> 02:07:55.600
is building one

02:07:55.600 --> 02:07:57.800
which would be on the southern side of the property this

02:07:57.800 --> 02:07:58.680
building would have

02:07:58.680 --> 02:08:01.750
five units as I mentioned they would each have an exterior

02:08:01.750 --> 02:08:02.479
front and rear

02:08:02.479 --> 02:08:07.640
entrance and the materials are primarily brick and stucco

02:08:07.640 --> 02:08:09.199
building two would be

02:08:09.199 --> 02:08:11.720
located on the northern side you can see a very similar

02:08:11.720 --> 02:08:13.079
configuration here with

02:08:13.079 --> 02:08:17.720
five units each with the exterior front and rear entrances

02:08:17.720 --> 02:08:18.960
also brick and stucco

02:08:18.960 --> 02:08:23.770
materials here is the proposed elevation for the storage

02:08:23.770 --> 02:08:24.680
building you can see it

02:08:24.680 --> 02:08:26.960
has one exterior entrance point that would open to a

02:08:26.960 --> 02:08:28.119
hallway that would then

02:08:28.119 --> 02:08:31.340
have the ten separate storage areas off of that and this

02:08:31.340 --> 02:08:32.840
building is proposed as

02:08:32.840 --> 02:08:37.630
brick construction as well our criteria for approval for an

02:08:37.630 --> 02:08:38.720
issue peer outlined

02:08:38.720 --> 02:08:41.510
in detail in subchapter 6 of the Denton Development Code

02:08:41.510 --> 02:08:43.439
just in summary they

02:08:43.439 --> 02:08:46.510
generally provide considerations that would require

02:08:46.510 --> 02:08:47.720
consistency with the

02:08:47.720 --> 02:08:50.949
zoning regulations conformity with the goals of the Denton

02:08:50.949 --> 02:08:52.640
plan 2030 as well as

02:08:52.640 --> 02:08:55.560
consistency and compatibility with the surrounding area in

02:08:55.560 --> 02:08:56.479
terms of the scale

02:08:56.479 --> 02:09:00.970
of the development so to look at each of those in turn at

02:09:00.970 --> 02:09:02.239
the existing zoning for

02:09:02.239 --> 02:09:04.479
the property is in our MU 12 that's neighborhood

02:09:04.479 --> 02:09:06.439
residential mixed use this

02:09:06.439 --> 02:09:09.680
zoning district allows for a variety of residential uses

02:09:09.680 --> 02:09:11.000
the multifamily use is

02:09:11.000 --> 02:09:13.939
required to either have an SUP or be part of an approved

02:09:13.939 --> 02:09:15.000
small area plan or

02:09:15.000 --> 02:09:18.560
as part of a mixed use development some of the general

02:09:18.560 --> 02:09:20.119
regulations as I mentioned

02:09:20.119 --> 02:09:23.239
they had a 40% minimum landscaping that they are complying

02:09:23.239 --> 02:09:24.199
with which then in

02:09:24.199 --> 02:09:26.329
turn means they're in compliance with their maximum lot

02:09:26.329 --> 02:09:27.600
coverage the maximum

02:09:27.600 --> 02:09:29.970
density they could reach is 12 units with this being

02:09:29.970 --> 02:09:31.079
approximately one acre

02:09:31.079 --> 02:09:35.409
with 10 units they're just under that to look at the

02:09:35.409 --> 02:09:36.880
surrounding area within

02:09:36.880 --> 02:09:40.539
approximately 200 feet we have some single-family homes

02:09:40.539 --> 02:09:41.039
within a

02:09:41.039 --> 02:09:44.149
neighborhood residential to zoning district and then the

02:09:44.149 --> 02:09:45.359
subject property as

02:09:45.359 --> 02:09:47.449
well as some of the surrounding residences and vacant

02:09:47.449 --> 02:09:48.319
property are within

02:09:48.319 --> 02:09:53.270
the NRMU 12 district zooming out a little bit further we

02:09:53.270 --> 02:09:54.520
see across Elm

02:09:54.520 --> 02:09:57.340
Street more single-family residences we do start to get

02:09:57.340 --> 02:09:58.199
into a mixture of higher

02:09:58.199 --> 02:10:01.800
densities with some duplexes here North Lakes Park is

02:10:01.800 --> 02:10:03.159
located just to the south

02:10:03.159 --> 02:10:07.720
of the property within an NRMU 12 district and then this

02:10:07.720 --> 02:10:08.399
general area of

02:10:08.399 --> 02:10:11.819
town you see as a wide array of uses on North Elm Street on

02:10:11.819 --> 02:10:12.920
the north side as

02:10:12.920 --> 02:10:15.439
well as the south there's a mixture of residential uses

02:10:15.439 --> 02:10:17.039
single-family duplexes

02:10:17.039 --> 02:10:21.369
apartments we also have North Lakes Park to the south UNT's

02:10:21.369 --> 02:10:22.560
Discovery Park you

02:10:22.560 --> 02:10:25.449
can see in purple there on the north side so they are near

02:10:25.449 --> 02:10:26.399
a UNT property as

02:10:26.399 --> 02:10:31.420
well the future land use designation for this property is

02:10:31.420 --> 02:10:32.319
it's kind of on the

02:10:32.319 --> 02:10:35.239
buffer between two designations that are neighborhood mixed

02:10:35.239 --> 02:10:36.039
use and moderate

02:10:36.039 --> 02:10:39.130
residential the proposed use is in conformity with both of

02:10:39.130 --> 02:10:39.520
those

02:10:39.520 --> 02:10:43.380
designations neighborhood mixed use allows for a mixture of

02:10:43.380 --> 02:10:43.960
housing types

02:10:43.960 --> 02:10:47.220
with supporting retail services and moderate residential

02:10:47.220 --> 02:10:48.119
encourages the

02:10:48.119 --> 02:10:51.350
protection of existing neighborhoods as well as development

02:10:51.350 --> 02:10:52.279
with a density in

02:10:52.279 --> 02:10:56.270
the range of 4 to 12 units per acre so this fits within

02:10:56.270 --> 02:10:58.880
that range the mobility

02:10:58.880 --> 02:11:01.300
for this area as I mentioned it has frontage on three

02:11:01.300 --> 02:11:02.439
different roads North

02:11:02.439 --> 02:11:05.920
Elm Street is a text out roadway and a primary arterial Re

02:11:05.920 --> 02:11:07.159
iny Road is a

02:11:07.159 --> 02:11:11.720
collector Street and Reiny Court is a neighborhood Street

02:11:11.720 --> 02:11:13.279
subject property as

02:11:13.279 --> 02:11:16.439
you can see is primarily vacant there is the existing tree

02:11:16.439 --> 02:11:17.680
line along Reiny Court

02:11:17.680 --> 02:11:22.069
that they intend to preserve notifications were sent for

02:11:22.069 --> 02:11:22.720
this request

02:11:22.720 --> 02:11:25.979
we received four opposition letters that are in your backup

02:11:25.979 --> 02:11:27.119
and our GIS team did

02:11:27.119 --> 02:11:30.359
run the calculations and within the 200 foot buffer they

02:11:30.359 --> 02:11:31.119
were at approximately

02:11:31.119 --> 02:11:34.720
33% of the land area expressing opposition so that would

02:11:34.720 --> 02:11:35.239
require the

02:11:35.239 --> 02:11:38.359
super majority vote at council a neighborhood meeting was

02:11:38.359 --> 02:11:39.039
held back in

02:11:39.039 --> 02:11:43.680
May and there were 11 people in attendance at that meeting

02:11:43.680 --> 02:11:44.920
given all

02:11:44.920 --> 02:11:47.039
these criteria we've discussed staff is staff is

02:11:47.039 --> 02:11:48.399
recommending approval of the

02:11:48.399 --> 02:11:51.140
request it's generally compatible with the surrounding land

02:11:51.140 --> 02:11:52.000
use pattern and is

02:11:52.000 --> 02:11:54.220
consistent with the goals and objectives of our Denton plan

02:11:54.220 --> 02:11:55.920
2030 we do recommend

02:11:55.920 --> 02:11:59.260
one condition and that be that the use substantially comply

02:11:59.260 --> 02:12:00.319
with the site plan

02:12:00.319 --> 02:12:03.109
landscape plan and building elevations that were included

02:12:03.109 --> 02:12:04.640
here and with that I

02:12:04.640 --> 02:12:11.020
can stand for any questions Commissioner Tyler thank you

02:12:11.020 --> 02:12:12.880
chair could you return

02:12:12.880 --> 02:12:17.560
to the site plan certainly so I'm assuming rental property

02:12:17.560 --> 02:12:18.880
this close to

02:12:18.880 --> 02:12:23.680
research park is probably aiming at students to some degree

02:12:23.680 --> 02:12:24.600
I'm not sure

02:12:24.600 --> 02:12:26.529
what their target audience is I know they're designed a

02:12:26.529 --> 02:12:27.319
little bit more like

02:12:27.319 --> 02:12:30.390
townhomes that could encourage you know family use but I

02:12:30.390 --> 02:12:31.560
believe the applicant

02:12:31.560 --> 02:12:33.649
is here and he could speak more to what their target

02:12:33.649 --> 02:12:35.239
audience would be okay my

02:12:35.239 --> 02:12:39.899
question is I don't notice any bike parking here and I do

02:12:39.899 --> 02:12:40.920
know that the

02:12:40.920 --> 02:12:44.979
city is just put in an 8-foot multi-use path maybe a couple

02:12:44.979 --> 02:12:46.039
hundred yards from

02:12:46.039 --> 02:12:48.840
here and again I there's going to be some amount of

02:12:48.840 --> 02:12:49.760
students probably in this

02:12:49.760 --> 02:12:53.680
so I was wondering am I missing it or is it not on the plan

02:12:53.680 --> 02:12:55.439
as far as I can tell

02:12:55.439 --> 02:12:57.800
I don't believe there is bike parking incorporated like

02:12:57.800 --> 02:12:59.279
something most of the

02:12:59.279 --> 02:13:06.000
applicant perhaps thank you any other questions for staff

02:13:06.000 --> 02:13:08.600
there's one

02:13:08.600 --> 02:13:13.630
Commissioner Ellis like camera thank you chair Haley that

02:13:13.630 --> 02:13:14.680
that parking lot I

02:13:14.680 --> 02:13:18.430
notice on the site plan it looks really tight I assume that

02:13:18.430 --> 02:13:20.520
where the dumpster

02:13:20.520 --> 02:13:23.989
is located on this site plan that that waste management can

02:13:23.989 --> 02:13:25.000
get in there and

02:13:25.000 --> 02:13:28.520
empty and turn out appropriately or back up appropriately I

02:13:28.520 --> 02:13:29.199
mean I assume that's

02:13:29.199 --> 02:13:32.550
been looked at or will be looked at yes it was looked at

02:13:32.550 --> 02:13:33.800
with this request it

02:13:33.800 --> 02:13:35.949
will be looked at in further detail with their site plan

02:13:35.949 --> 02:13:37.199
submittal but I believe

02:13:37.199 --> 02:13:39.439
they did have a proper stacking distance and the width of

02:13:39.439 --> 02:13:40.239
the dry bottle was

02:13:40.239 --> 02:13:43.159
appropriate for fire access as well as solid waste okay

02:13:43.159 --> 02:13:45.560
thank you

02:13:46.520 --> 02:13:51.779
thank you Jim is coming up to add something yes

02:13:51.779 --> 02:13:53.359
Commissioner we did look

02:13:53.359 --> 02:14:00.930
at that on on sites with a short a dry vial is this one we

02:14:00.930 --> 02:14:02.000
don't require

02:14:02.000 --> 02:14:07.899
turnaround provisions for the trucks they can they can back

02:14:07.899 --> 02:14:11.680
up any other

02:14:11.680 --> 02:14:14.319
questions for him

02:14:15.279 --> 02:14:20.239
thank you thank you can this is a public hearing anyone who

02:14:20.239 --> 02:14:21.000
would like to speak

02:14:21.000 --> 02:14:24.359
please come forward at this time

02:14:27.399 --> 02:14:30.199
you'll state your name and address and then I don't have a

02:14:30.199 --> 02:14:31.800
card for me so if

02:14:31.800 --> 02:14:34.189
you'll fill out a card for us when you before you leave

02:14:34.189 --> 02:14:35.560
okay well I got here

02:14:35.560 --> 02:14:42.180
so my name is Brad Andrus I'm with the applicant I live at

02:14:42.180 --> 02:14:44.640
8855 FM 1173 in

02:14:44.640 --> 02:14:50.420
crumb appreciate your consideration this item this evening

02:14:50.420 --> 02:14:52.039
the as I know is in

02:14:52.039 --> 02:14:55.529
your background material my brother and I purchased this

02:14:55.529 --> 02:14:56.560
lot a couple of years

02:14:56.560 --> 02:15:00.739
ago with a different use in mind and and after really an

02:15:00.739 --> 02:15:03.560
unfortunate event of our

02:15:03.560 --> 02:15:06.890
business partner that we were going to do an assisted

02:15:06.890 --> 02:15:08.479
living project with she

02:15:08.479 --> 02:15:14.920
suddenly passed away of cancer and so we kind of had to

02:15:14.920 --> 02:15:15.920
Brock and I looked at

02:15:15.920 --> 02:15:18.489
each other like we don't know how to run assisted living

02:15:18.489 --> 02:15:20.000
facility this is she was

02:15:20.000 --> 02:15:22.880
going to do that for us we looked at other options on doing

02:15:22.880 --> 02:15:24.939
that and in the

02:15:24.939 --> 02:15:28.720
end we just became uncomfortable with that particular use

02:15:28.720 --> 02:15:30.140
so started to

02:15:30.140 --> 02:15:33.010
explore other options and what what other uses could be

02:15:33.010 --> 02:15:33.979
done in that that

02:15:33.979 --> 02:15:40.569
property and the I'm I do commercial real estate for a

02:15:40.569 --> 02:15:42.600
living and develop

02:15:42.600 --> 02:15:48.520
office buildings and some other small retail type projects

02:15:48.520 --> 02:15:49.680
as well as lease a

02:15:49.680 --> 02:15:53.300
variety of commercial properties and as I considered based

02:15:53.300 --> 02:15:54.359
on my experience

02:15:54.359 --> 02:15:58.039
what type of properties would work there I really didn't

02:15:58.039 --> 02:15:59.119
see a good fit other

02:15:59.119 --> 02:16:03.880
than some sort of residential use and so the we started

02:16:03.880 --> 02:16:05.760
looking at okay well

02:16:05.760 --> 02:16:08.149
within the zoning what's allowed we looked at

02:16:08.149 --> 02:16:10.000
configurations for duplexes

02:16:10.000 --> 02:16:13.180
or townhomes which are allowed within the zoning and based

02:16:13.180 --> 02:16:14.479
on this very odd

02:16:14.479 --> 02:16:18.789
site configuration this triangular lot with streets on on

02:16:18.789 --> 02:16:20.399
three sides we just

02:16:20.399 --> 02:16:23.529
were having a heck of a time coming up with a layout and it

02:16:23.529 --> 02:16:25.000
really initially

02:16:25.000 --> 02:16:28.470
was working with Julie on this and it was kind of at her

02:16:28.470 --> 02:16:29.800
suggestion that we

02:16:29.800 --> 02:16:33.479
look at an SUP and so that's why we're presenting that that

02:16:33.479 --> 02:16:34.440
's kind of the

02:16:34.440 --> 02:16:39.559
history of it and what I've really tried to do is is focus

02:16:39.559 --> 02:16:41.079
design this in a way

02:16:41.079 --> 02:16:44.959
that would look similar to a townhome development and so

02:16:44.959 --> 02:16:46.280
while there's not

02:16:46.280 --> 02:16:49.479
garages on the buildings everything short of that I think

02:16:49.479 --> 02:16:50.440
it looks and feels

02:16:50.440 --> 02:16:53.610
very much like a townhome project which is what is a use

02:16:53.610 --> 02:16:55.000
that would be allowed

02:16:55.000 --> 02:16:58.659
without an SUP and so the reason we couldn't really

02:16:58.659 --> 02:17:00.000
consider the SU or the

02:17:00.000 --> 02:17:03.879
townhome use in and of itself is the way again the lot was

02:17:03.879 --> 02:17:05.000
configured and with the

02:17:05.000 --> 02:17:08.139
lot the platting of the lots and the way that would have to

02:17:08.139 --> 02:17:09.000
be set up it just

02:17:09.000 --> 02:17:12.760
wasn't working and so trying to do something that

02:17:12.760 --> 02:17:14.000
essentially would look

02:17:14.000 --> 02:17:18.690
like something that would be already approved we've we've

02:17:18.690 --> 02:17:19.719
gone we've tried to

02:17:19.719 --> 02:17:23.879
go above and beyond on our landscape not only are we 8%

02:17:23.879 --> 02:17:25.879
more in landscape area

02:17:25.879 --> 02:17:31.440
but we're we've we're actually 78% have a 78% tree canopy

02:17:31.440 --> 02:17:33.719
versus a 45% canopy

02:17:33.719 --> 02:17:37.739
that's required per code so and of course done that that

02:17:37.739 --> 02:17:39.200
trellis and that

02:17:39.200 --> 02:17:42.549
kind of park area over there trying to add and to the

02:17:42.549 --> 02:17:44.280
aesthetics of the project

02:17:44.280 --> 02:17:48.159
as well I would like to address your question Mr. Taylor

02:17:48.159 --> 02:17:49.639
about the bike or

02:17:49.639 --> 02:17:52.440
really kind of wanted to get back to the what our

02:17:52.440 --> 02:17:54.159
intentions are as far as our

02:17:54.159 --> 02:17:58.459
demographic or target market we really see it as more

02:17:58.459 --> 02:18:00.680
family could students

02:18:00.680 --> 02:18:04.069
live there certainly but the the the three bedroom two and

02:18:04.069 --> 02:18:04.840
a half bath was

02:18:04.840 --> 02:18:10.120
really more kind of designed with with families in mind so

02:18:10.120 --> 02:18:11.360
hadn't even thought

02:18:11.360 --> 02:18:14.870
about a park bike rack to be honest with wide open to

02:18:14.870 --> 02:18:15.879
putting one on there we've

02:18:15.879 --> 02:18:19.350
got no problem with doing that we'd welcome that if that

02:18:19.350 --> 02:18:20.559
were become a part

02:18:20.559 --> 02:18:26.250
of the the SUP provision so and with the storage you know

02:18:26.250 --> 02:18:28.000
when we when we met

02:18:28.000 --> 02:18:31.600
with the neighbors a couple of months ago and discussed you

02:18:31.600 --> 02:18:32.479
know primary

02:18:32.479 --> 02:18:36.360
concerns for them that I heard were well generally we don't

02:18:36.360 --> 02:18:37.639
want this use here

02:18:37.639 --> 02:18:41.149
and that's something I don't have other than saying well we

02:18:41.149 --> 02:18:42.360
'll just leave it as

02:18:42.360 --> 02:18:45.870
an empty lot I didn't have a lot to kind of come back with

02:18:45.870 --> 02:18:47.559
on that but parking

02:18:47.559 --> 02:18:51.159
was an overall concern so we went back to the drawing board

02:18:51.159 --> 02:18:51.959
added three

02:18:51.959 --> 02:18:55.280
additional parking spaces that of course those three will

02:18:55.280 --> 02:18:58.479
be pervious spaces we

02:18:58.479 --> 02:19:02.370
talked about whether they prefer you know a wall all the

02:19:02.370 --> 02:19:03.799
way around you know

02:19:03.799 --> 02:19:07.819
a screening wall all the way around or leave this natural

02:19:07.819 --> 02:19:09.000
barrier here on

02:19:09.000 --> 02:19:12.709
Riney Court and it was kind of mixed but I heard more of

02:19:12.709 --> 02:19:14.280
let's leave it as much

02:19:14.280 --> 02:19:17.430
like it is as possible and so that's kind of why we don't

02:19:17.430 --> 02:19:18.399
have you know we

02:19:18.399 --> 02:19:21.319
only have that screen 8-foot screening wall on that west

02:19:21.319 --> 02:19:22.440
west side we did

02:19:22.440 --> 02:19:25.870
consider that on the Riney Court side as well so tried to

02:19:25.870 --> 02:19:27.399
be you know work with

02:19:27.399 --> 02:19:29.979
the neighbors as much as possible and addressing some of

02:19:29.979 --> 02:19:30.760
their concerns

02:19:30.760 --> 02:19:34.549
throughout the project so that if you have any questions

02:19:34.549 --> 02:19:35.719
for me I'd love to

02:19:35.719 --> 02:19:39.200
address them. Commissioner Back. Thank you Chair and thank

02:19:39.200 --> 02:19:39.920
you Brad for your

02:19:39.920 --> 02:19:43.879
presentation I personally I like the design I think you've

02:19:43.879 --> 02:19:44.360
done well in

02:19:44.360 --> 02:19:46.729
trying to accommodate the neighbors I like the fact that

02:19:46.729 --> 02:19:47.440
you've kept all

02:19:47.440 --> 02:19:53.399
those trees on the Riney Court side and with ten units to

02:19:53.399 --> 02:19:55.000
direct attention to

02:19:55.000 --> 02:19:58.799
some of the concerns of local residents I'm not sure

02:19:58.799 --> 02:20:00.959
traffic is going to be

02:20:00.959 --> 02:20:07.889
anything of an increased traffic flow because I mean we're

02:20:07.889 --> 02:20:08.360
dealing with ten

02:20:08.360 --> 02:20:13.680
units here Riney is a connector road between 35 and Windsor

02:20:13.680 --> 02:20:14.399
I believe it is

02:20:14.399 --> 02:20:18.059
so the fact that apartments are coming in to residential

02:20:18.059 --> 02:20:19.280
neighborhood that's

02:20:19.280 --> 02:20:22.079
not a good thing that's that's an argument that I don't

02:20:22.079 --> 02:20:23.079
always buy into

02:20:23.079 --> 02:20:28.680
because that's not an automatic one concern was mentioned

02:20:28.680 --> 02:20:29.520
about drainage

02:20:29.520 --> 02:20:34.780
though so can you tell us share with us on grading this lot

02:20:34.780 --> 02:20:36.360
how is it going to

02:20:36.360 --> 02:20:39.430
be graded is most of it going to go out towards Riney Road

02:20:39.430 --> 02:20:40.719
and Elmer's are we

02:20:40.719 --> 02:20:45.239
going to get a considerable amount back on Riney Court? I

02:20:45.239 --> 02:20:46.360
appreciate the question

02:20:46.360 --> 02:20:49.079
unfortunately I don't have a good answer for you because I

02:20:49.079 --> 02:20:50.200
have not gone to the

02:20:50.200 --> 02:20:55.629
point of having a topo survey done to know exactly what the

02:20:55.629 --> 02:20:57.559
fall is that some

02:20:57.559 --> 02:21:00.350
of the neighbors concerned is mine too I want as much as

02:21:00.350 --> 02:21:01.559
the neighbors wanted I

02:21:01.559 --> 02:21:05.870
want to keep that that natural tree barrier there on on R

02:21:05.870 --> 02:21:07.159
iney Court there is

02:21:07.159 --> 02:21:11.030
some concern that that maybe the drainage will have to be

02:21:11.030 --> 02:21:12.319
worked in such a way

02:21:12.319 --> 02:21:17.280
that some of that would have to be removed there's Jim

02:21:17.280 --> 02:21:18.360
probably could

02:21:18.360 --> 02:21:23.440
answer better where where the inlets are for that side I

02:21:23.440 --> 02:21:25.360
think it goes towards

02:21:25.360 --> 02:21:29.399
Riney Road doesn't it or will it go towards Elm but again

02:21:29.399 --> 02:21:30.520
don't know the

02:21:30.520 --> 02:21:33.799
exact topography of it so probably gonna struggle answering

02:21:33.799 --> 02:21:34.920
that.

02:21:34.920 --> 02:21:41.850
It goes towards Riney Court. Can I put this down here for

02:21:41.850 --> 02:21:42.719
display?

02:21:42.719 --> 02:21:46.000
Eye in the sky.

02:21:48.000 --> 02:21:59.360
Okay. Thank you. I've got the topographic map here and I've

02:21:59.360 --> 02:22:00.239
added some flow

02:22:00.239 --> 02:22:04.420
arrows where you can see the site itself and this is all

02:22:04.420 --> 02:22:05.840
current topography and

02:22:05.840 --> 02:22:08.770
this is with our GIS so it's sort of high level it's not

02:22:08.770 --> 02:22:11.879
topo survey but it

02:22:11.879 --> 02:22:18.719
it basically drains right now towards Riney Court and

02:22:18.719 --> 02:22:21.719
towards the park really

02:22:21.719 --> 02:22:27.600
there's an existing swale along the east side of Riney Road

02:22:27.600 --> 02:22:29.079
that appears to

02:22:29.079 --> 02:22:32.409
collect the area I've shown in red the runoff from that

02:22:32.409 --> 02:22:33.879
area and then there's a

02:22:33.879 --> 02:22:37.110
couple of culverts crossing Riney Road and the first

02:22:37.110 --> 02:22:38.600
driveway there in that

02:22:38.600 --> 02:22:43.549
first house going on a ditch along the south or west side

02:22:43.549 --> 02:22:44.360
of Riney Court

02:22:44.360 --> 02:22:48.680
towards the park. Jim let me ask you this in your opinion

02:22:48.680 --> 02:22:51.159
if the applicant is able

02:22:51.159 --> 02:22:55.149
to develop this with altering that flow at least on that

02:22:55.149 --> 02:22:56.760
lot back out the other

02:22:56.760 --> 02:22:59.559
way is that going to create some negative impact just

02:22:59.559 --> 02:23:00.440
outside the

02:23:00.440 --> 02:23:04.920
property? Well we would not allow development that creates

02:23:04.920 --> 02:23:05.620
negative

02:23:05.620 --> 02:23:10.000
development negative drainage impact on neighboring

02:23:10.000 --> 02:23:13.000
property. I mean there would

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

02:23:16.959 --> 02:23:18.920
so even when they

02:23:18.920 --> 02:23:22.959
develop it there will be some increased runoff but not much

02:23:22.959 --> 02:23:24.719
we we still have yet

02:23:24.719 --> 02:23:29.079
to I think receive and review the site plan cemental that

02:23:29.079 --> 02:23:29.319
will have a

02:23:29.319 --> 02:23:32.719
grading plan to have the drainage calculations and routing

02:23:32.719 --> 02:23:33.920
we will check it

02:23:33.920 --> 02:23:41.309
all for that one this is just an idea I have this is

02:23:41.309 --> 02:23:42.399
subject to change but

02:23:42.399 --> 02:23:46.879
looking at seeing how the drainage currently runs I'm

02:23:46.879 --> 02:23:48.440
wondering if it would

02:23:48.440 --> 02:23:51.579
make sense it almost seems like it wants to go towards that

02:23:51.579 --> 02:23:52.680
green area which is

02:23:52.680 --> 02:23:57.799
actually a sort of a finger of the park property one thing

02:23:57.799 --> 02:23:59.639
I mean you can always

02:23:59.639 --> 02:24:02.709
detain we're not talking about much in the way of

02:24:02.709 --> 02:24:04.479
additional runoff here on

02:24:04.479 --> 02:24:08.790
this site one thing we have allowed in certain situations

02:24:08.790 --> 02:24:10.159
is if you have like a

02:24:10.159 --> 02:24:13.469
pipe you may have I don't know if there's a culvert across

02:24:13.469 --> 02:24:14.360
for any court

02:24:14.360 --> 02:24:19.049
there if not you may have to put one in if you have a sort

02:24:19.049 --> 02:24:20.680
of concentrated

02:24:20.680 --> 02:24:23.750
discharge there under the park property we require you to

02:24:23.750 --> 02:24:25.239
get a little easement

02:24:25.239 --> 02:24:28.549
at that discharge point and a letter from them

02:24:28.549 --> 02:24:30.879
acknowledging the additional

02:24:30.879 --> 02:24:34.209
runoff that's just a thought to me that's looking at this

02:24:34.209 --> 02:24:34.920
that seems to be

02:24:34.920 --> 02:24:38.159
what how it wants to work okay well we can look at it down

02:24:38.159 --> 02:24:38.920
the road been when

02:24:38.920 --> 02:24:43.319
the site plan comes in and discuss it then thank you any

02:24:43.319 --> 02:24:44.120
other questions for

02:24:44.120 --> 02:24:46.479
the applicant

02:24:48.840 --> 02:24:53.799
strange may I just make one comment the of course as Jim

02:24:53.799 --> 02:24:55.600
says you know we'll

02:24:55.600 --> 02:24:58.870
have to get full civil and approved by the by the city and

02:24:58.870 --> 02:25:00.360
in that drainage

02:25:00.360 --> 02:25:03.430
concern would exist whether we're an office building or any

02:25:03.430 --> 02:25:04.200
you know any other

02:25:04.200 --> 02:25:08.090
type of use that were allowed in in the in the current

02:25:08.090 --> 02:25:14.120
zoning we I this is not

02:25:14.120 --> 02:25:16.579
soft story but I've thought about going to that point

02:25:16.579 --> 02:25:17.680
because I knew it was a

02:25:17.680 --> 02:25:21.909
concern some of the neighbors were about 10,000 into just

02:25:21.909 --> 02:25:23.479
getting to this point on

02:25:23.479 --> 02:25:26.549
what we've done and so I feel like well until I get it know

02:25:26.549 --> 02:25:27.200
whether I've got

02:25:27.200 --> 02:25:29.489
something approved here what will cross that bridge when we

02:25:29.489 --> 02:25:30.840
need to we know we

02:25:30.840 --> 02:25:38.090
recognize we'll need to address that so thank you thank you

02:25:38.090 --> 02:25:39.520
again this is a

02:25:39.520 --> 02:25:41.989
public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item

02:25:41.989 --> 02:25:42.840
please come forward

02:25:42.840 --> 02:25:50.659
at this time please give us your name and your address and

02:25:50.659 --> 02:25:51.360
then before you go

02:25:51.360 --> 02:25:53.739
if you'll fill out a card for us I see no appreciate it my

02:25:53.739 --> 02:25:56.280
name is Janice JAN I

02:25:56.280 --> 02:26:01.540
S Cunningham 3501 Northam didn't Texas thank you and we

02:26:01.540 --> 02:26:04.079
live on that north side

02:26:04.079 --> 02:26:12.569
if you can pull up where there's the one house is there

02:26:12.569 --> 02:26:14.920
okay and if you pull it

02:26:14.920 --> 02:26:23.239
up can we get a little bit closer okay that's our house

02:26:23.239 --> 02:26:24.840
right there at the top

02:26:24.840 --> 02:26:31.889
that long white thing is our travel trailer and we have it

02:26:31.889 --> 02:26:34.040
behind the fence

02:26:34.040 --> 02:26:39.819
what we're concerned with is parking if there's ten

02:26:39.819 --> 02:26:43.159
apartments and everybody has

02:26:43.159 --> 02:26:48.879
two cars that's 20 okay now you've got three extra places

02:26:48.879 --> 02:26:50.399
the Christmas

02:26:50.399 --> 02:26:56.760
birthdays for kids when grandma grandpa come what where

02:26:56.760 --> 02:26:59.719
they gonna park well they

02:26:59.719 --> 02:27:05.500
on the other side of Ronnie Road there that belongs to Tom

02:27:05.500 --> 02:27:07.879
Nelson and you can't

02:27:07.879 --> 02:27:12.040
get down in there between those houses on on Ronnie Court

02:27:12.040 --> 02:27:12.920
then you've got the

02:27:12.920 --> 02:27:19.139
cul-de-sac which is where people aren't parking now but if

02:27:19.139 --> 02:27:20.159
you let people

02:27:20.159 --> 02:27:24.870
park along the back of our fence and we want out to go

02:27:24.870 --> 02:27:27.280
camping I'm afraid we

02:27:27.280 --> 02:27:30.639
can't and when we come in that's when we worry because my

02:27:30.639 --> 02:27:32.159
husband and I have

02:27:32.159 --> 02:27:37.360
enough trouble getting in there anyway so the parking is

02:27:37.360 --> 02:27:39.760
the main thing and the

02:27:39.760 --> 02:27:45.280
water now there is a little drainage that goes under there

02:27:45.280 --> 02:27:46.520
and they put that

02:27:46.520 --> 02:27:51.850
in for us because we had so much water in our backyard at

02:27:51.850 --> 02:27:54.799
one time several years

02:27:54.799 --> 02:28:00.760
ago they put that drainage in but we still have water okay

02:28:00.760 --> 02:28:02.840
thank you I have a

02:28:02.840 --> 02:28:05.719
question for you Commissioner Roselle thank you miss C

02:28:05.719 --> 02:28:06.959
unningham for for being

02:28:06.959 --> 02:28:10.879
here and providing your perspective on that I have a

02:28:10.879 --> 02:28:13.079
question you enter your

02:28:13.079 --> 02:28:16.389
house off Elm correct so Ronnie Court is in your backyard

02:28:16.389 --> 02:28:18.079
right and you have two

02:28:18.079 --> 02:28:21.270
neighbors across your back fence yes has Christmas or

02:28:21.270 --> 02:28:22.559
birthday party at their

02:28:22.559 --> 02:28:28.079
house ever blocked your trailer in no okay but when they

02:28:28.079 --> 02:28:30.239
the YMCA was down

02:28:30.239 --> 02:28:35.190
there on Ronnie Road yes they blocked in our trailer that's

02:28:35.190 --> 02:28:36.159
where they parked is

02:28:36.159 --> 02:28:44.639
YMCA still there no okay thank you thank you ma'am again

02:28:44.639 --> 02:28:45.680
this is a public hearing

02:28:45.680 --> 02:28:48.069
anyone else with wishing to speak on this item please come

02:28:48.069 --> 02:28:48.760
forward at this

02:28:48.760 --> 02:28:56.469
time seeing none or close the public hearing and

02:28:56.469 --> 02:28:58.799
Commissioner Taylor thank

02:28:58.799 --> 02:29:01.290
you chair I was curious if I don't know if this would be a

02:29:01.290 --> 02:29:02.440
question for for staff

02:29:02.440 --> 02:29:07.920
or engineering what would it take to get parking

02:29:07.920 --> 02:29:11.360
limitations on Ronnie Court

02:29:13.120 --> 02:29:18.110
yeah I think this was discussed earlier typical is a

02:29:18.110 --> 02:29:20.920
petition and goes through

02:29:20.920 --> 02:29:23.629
the Traffic Safety Commission and ultimately City Council

02:29:23.629 --> 02:29:24.200
would have to

02:29:24.200 --> 02:29:29.889
prove a no parking zone by ordinance and that's something

02:29:29.889 --> 02:29:32.159
that we can afford but

02:29:32.159 --> 02:29:36.239
it goes through that process okay I and so that would have

02:29:36.239 --> 02:29:37.319
to be I guess

02:29:37.319 --> 02:29:40.110
neighborhood initiated like the residents of the street

02:29:40.110 --> 02:29:40.920
would probably

02:29:40.920 --> 02:29:45.079
have to request it is that typically yes and there has to

02:29:45.079 --> 02:29:47.079
be some sort of reason

02:29:47.079 --> 02:29:52.559
of course to back that petition up okay

02:30:00.879 --> 02:30:04.309
review of these development projects one of the parties I

02:30:04.309 --> 02:30:05.840
meet with every week is

02:30:05.840 --> 02:30:10.899
our traffic engineer and I will make a point of relaying

02:30:10.899 --> 02:30:12.920
these concerns to him

02:30:12.920 --> 02:30:18.629
and also seek his his guidance or suggestions about the

02:30:18.629 --> 02:30:19.799
process of

02:30:19.799 --> 02:30:27.049
applying for and possibly having agreed to no parking sign

02:30:27.049 --> 02:30:28.120
age I'll see what the

02:30:28.120 --> 02:30:31.030
process is I'll make him aware of the concern for sure we

02:30:31.030 --> 02:30:32.760
will still see the

02:30:32.760 --> 02:30:35.979
I mean I'll do it next week when I see him but also we

02:30:35.979 --> 02:30:37.479
still have yet to see we

02:30:37.479 --> 02:30:41.659
will receive a site plan permit application for this site

02:30:41.659 --> 02:30:42.559
which we can

02:30:42.559 --> 02:30:50.379
revisit it thank you so I there's a lot of opposition in

02:30:50.379 --> 02:30:51.040
the neighborhood there's

02:30:51.040 --> 02:30:56.149
surprising amount actually it's rare to get a large block

02:30:56.149 --> 02:30:57.079
of neighbors to all

02:30:57.079 --> 02:31:00.700
come out opposed to a project and I and I definitely

02:31:00.700 --> 02:31:02.360
understand the concern of

02:31:02.360 --> 02:31:06.559
you know apartments in a residential area there's a

02:31:06.559 --> 02:31:08.920
challenge along Elm Elm

02:31:08.920 --> 02:31:12.790
has a mix of some residences there are quite a few directly

02:31:12.790 --> 02:31:14.760
north of here and

02:31:14.760 --> 02:31:20.030
then it has a bunch of maybe two to five acre lots of many

02:31:20.030 --> 02:31:21.920
triangular some are

02:31:21.920 --> 02:31:25.020
already developed commercially and many and most of them

02:31:25.020 --> 02:31:25.959
are zoned to some

02:31:25.959 --> 02:31:29.120
commercial development either NRM you NRM you 12 or

02:31:29.120 --> 02:31:31.719
something more intense and

02:31:31.719 --> 02:31:38.979
there isn't really a feasible way to develop the the three

02:31:38.979 --> 02:31:40.120
acre lot that's

02:31:40.120 --> 02:31:44.930
500 or 800 feet further south on Elm here or the you know

02:31:44.930 --> 02:31:46.239
the the eight acre

02:31:46.239 --> 02:31:50.739
triangle up near Reini or Reini goes east west or you know

02:31:50.739 --> 02:31:52.120
the one across from

02:31:52.120 --> 02:31:55.879
that were behind the Jehovah's Witness Hall or the funny

02:31:55.879 --> 02:31:57.360
trapezoidal one down

02:31:57.360 --> 02:32:01.340
by the dollar general in the residential pattern you know

02:32:01.340 --> 02:32:02.680
that doesn't like just

02:32:02.680 --> 02:32:06.860
having single-family homes there doesn't work and so I look

02:32:06.860 --> 02:32:08.860
at this and I'm in my

02:32:08.860 --> 02:32:12.040
initial concern was is this going to be like dramatically

02:32:12.040 --> 02:32:12.840
altering the

02:32:12.840 --> 02:32:15.639
neighborhood are we going to be bringing a you know multif

02:32:15.639 --> 02:32:17.319
amily in across on the

02:32:17.319 --> 02:32:22.770
side of the street and you know frankly low density multif

02:32:22.770 --> 02:32:25.879
amily or small

02:32:25.879 --> 02:32:29.219
neighborhood commercial strip centers which would be

02:32:29.219 --> 02:32:30.760
challenging to make work

02:32:30.760 --> 02:32:34.100
here are are the only things that can go on about ten of

02:32:34.100 --> 02:32:36.000
these lots along Elm and

02:32:36.000 --> 02:32:39.709
so then we come to mitigating the concerns in the

02:32:39.709 --> 02:32:42.799
neighborhood this is ten

02:32:42.799 --> 02:32:46.239
units it you know if it was in duplexes you might get four

02:32:46.239 --> 02:32:47.680
duplexes about eight

02:32:47.680 --> 02:32:51.399
units in there and so it's not dramatically more dense it's

02:32:51.399 --> 02:32:51.760
not a

02:32:51.760 --> 02:32:57.010
three-story student housing project and so and with the

02:32:57.010 --> 02:32:58.959
with the vegetative

02:32:58.959 --> 02:33:02.030
buffers and I think especially with the parking concerns

02:33:02.030 --> 02:33:03.440
there's maybe a 24 foot

02:33:03.440 --> 02:33:09.360
wide Reini Road and then Reini Court with with no curbs and

02:33:09.360 --> 02:33:10.959
maybe 20 feet of

02:33:10.959 --> 02:33:14.079
pavement that's not an appropriate place to park you know

02:33:14.079 --> 02:33:15.200
if you had six or eight

02:33:15.200 --> 02:33:18.149
cars lined up they'd be kind of in the ditch or blocking

02:33:18.149 --> 02:33:20.120
driveways and so I

02:33:20.120 --> 02:33:22.639
think if we can if we can alleviate those parking concerns

02:33:22.639 --> 02:33:25.799
and just realize

02:33:25.799 --> 02:33:30.440
that there isn't much other option for this or the several

02:33:30.440 --> 02:33:32.040
other small kind of

02:33:32.040 --> 02:33:36.649
irregular lots along Elm except for NRM you type uses kind

02:33:36.649 --> 02:33:37.440
of low density

02:33:37.440 --> 02:33:44.159
apartments or commercial strip so with all that I am going

02:33:44.159 --> 02:33:46.200
to move we recommend

02:33:46.200 --> 02:33:53.409
approval to City Council with staffs recommendation and

02:33:53.409 --> 02:33:55.079
with the added

02:33:55.079 --> 02:34:01.200
requirement that there be secure bike parking provided for

02:34:01.200 --> 02:34:02.760
at a one bike to

02:34:02.760 --> 02:34:09.319
ten car ratio so three three bike spots one small bike rack

02:34:09.319 --> 02:34:11.719
basically

02:34:13.159 --> 02:34:19.920
Commissioner Roselle I certainly echo what Commissioner

02:34:19.920 --> 02:34:21.239
Taylor saying about

02:34:21.239 --> 02:34:25.590
the obstacles in this property and I think I'm encouraged

02:34:25.590 --> 02:34:28.079
to see at least the

02:34:28.079 --> 02:34:32.049
design and site plan by the applicant when I first saw it I

02:34:32.049 --> 02:34:33.239
actually asked

02:34:33.239 --> 02:34:35.420
this in work session the difference between this in a town

02:34:35.420 --> 02:34:37.040
home because just

02:34:37.040 --> 02:34:41.069
looking at it looks like a townhome type development which

02:34:41.069 --> 02:34:42.479
I think not not just

02:34:42.479 --> 02:34:46.190
to pick lesser of evils but it's certainly a way to develop

02:34:46.190 --> 02:34:47.000
this in the

02:34:47.000 --> 02:34:51.110
least obtrusive way and so I actually hope that this sets

02:34:51.110 --> 02:34:53.000
the standard going

02:34:53.000 --> 02:34:56.170
south and those other areas in which we can kind of

02:34:56.170 --> 02:34:57.959
transition these residential

02:34:57.959 --> 02:35:03.399
areas without making super dense or maybe insignificant

02:35:03.399 --> 02:35:05.559
strip centers so with

02:35:05.559 --> 02:35:09.629
all that said if I if I could there's the button Devin hasn

02:35:09.629 --> 02:35:10.680
't motioned Devin

02:35:10.680 --> 02:35:14.639
can you click that I'll second this motion with the

02:35:14.639 --> 02:35:16.440
addition of the required

02:35:16.440 --> 02:35:23.079
one to ten ratio for bikes Commissioner Beck thank you

02:35:23.079 --> 02:35:24.120
chair I'm gonna go along

02:35:24.120 --> 02:35:27.190
as to just wanted to comment I don't want to seem unsympath

02:35:27.190 --> 02:35:28.079
etic to the local

02:35:28.079 --> 02:35:31.479
residents and additional traffic or anything like that but

02:35:31.479 --> 02:35:32.079
I think as

02:35:32.079 --> 02:35:36.399
mentioned here this is an NRMU 12 zone there it's not like

02:35:36.399 --> 02:35:37.440
we're rezoning it

02:35:37.440 --> 02:35:40.760
for this type of thing by right this can go there and this

02:35:40.760 --> 02:35:41.959
seems like a good fit

02:35:41.959 --> 02:35:46.459
as opposed to strip a little strip commercial area or

02:35:46.459 --> 02:35:47.879
something even

02:35:47.879 --> 02:35:55.129
heavier so on holidays I suspect half those apartments may

02:35:55.129 --> 02:35:56.280
be empty - they may

02:35:56.280 --> 02:35:59.530
be going to grandma's and grandpa's so not sure how big a

02:35:59.530 --> 02:36:00.840
problem that is but I

02:36:00.840 --> 02:36:03.979
don't I understand the concern there too but hopefully this

02:36:03.979 --> 02:36:05.920
will all work out so

02:36:05.920 --> 02:36:12.959
thank you yeah comments Commissioner Ellis thank you chair

02:36:12.959 --> 02:36:13.479
I'll just say a

02:36:13.479 --> 02:36:18.559
couple of words I do understand the neighborhood opposition

02:36:18.559 --> 02:36:20.280
but I but I will

02:36:20.280 --> 02:36:22.879
support this but I think it's an excellent design for a

02:36:22.879 --> 02:36:23.799
really tough lot

02:36:23.799 --> 02:36:30.280
and I think you know from what the applicant has shown us

02:36:30.280 --> 02:36:31.840
this site plan

02:36:31.840 --> 02:36:36.610
and I look forward to it going forward it is is great-

02:36:36.610 --> 02:36:38.440
looking I think it will

02:36:38.440 --> 02:36:44.079
actually add to that corner and I think if we can get

02:36:44.079 --> 02:36:45.440
engineering behind maybe

02:36:45.440 --> 02:36:48.790
posting no parking down the road in that court and as we

02:36:48.790 --> 02:36:50.280
move forward with what

02:36:50.280 --> 02:36:53.680
these roads are going to be in the future I think we

02:36:53.680 --> 02:36:56.280
alleviate parking

02:36:56.280 --> 02:37:02.500
issues I'm gonna echo as well I must support this this

02:37:02.500 --> 02:37:04.559
evening as well for a

02:37:04.559 --> 02:37:06.920
lot of the same reasons I felt commissioners have is by

02:37:06.920 --> 02:37:07.479
right they

02:37:07.479 --> 02:37:11.229
could do duplexes or town homes there and because they have

02:37:11.229 --> 02:37:12.639
designed a two-story

02:37:12.639 --> 02:37:16.459
design versus a very tall design and they are less dense

02:37:16.459 --> 02:37:17.799
what they could be

02:37:17.799 --> 02:37:20.600
and they provided additional parking I think it is a

02:37:20.600 --> 02:37:22.280
difficult site something

02:37:22.280 --> 02:37:25.750
ultimately will get built there that may be denser it may

02:37:25.750 --> 02:37:26.559
not have some of the

02:37:26.559 --> 02:37:30.879
extra amenities that this particular applicant is proposing

02:37:30.879 --> 02:37:32.360
and it's always

02:37:32.360 --> 02:37:35.309
difficult to try to balance existing neighbors and then

02:37:35.309 --> 02:37:36.440
also look at what can

02:37:36.440 --> 02:37:40.799
go there in the future I think it is a good use for the

02:37:40.799 --> 02:37:42.000
property and with that

02:37:42.000 --> 02:37:46.350
I'm going to support the SUP request there are no other

02:37:46.350 --> 02:37:48.079
comments and we will

02:37:48.079 --> 02:37:51.159
call for a vote on the board

02:37:58.040 --> 02:38:01.750
and motion is going to carry six to zero that will move us

02:38:01.750 --> 02:38:05.440
to our final item on

02:38:05.440 --> 02:38:08.510
our agenda this evening the project matrix Commissioner

02:38:08.510 --> 02:38:10.959
Roselle I have

02:38:10.959 --> 02:38:14.579
nothing to add us want to follow up on Commissioner Beck's

02:38:14.579 --> 02:38:15.760
request on the tree

02:38:15.760 --> 02:38:18.479
code it says staff waiting results of legislation scheduled

02:38:18.479 --> 02:38:19.000
for special

02:38:19.000 --> 02:38:21.719
session just a clarification that's the one that starts

02:38:21.719 --> 02:38:23.500
next week for 30 days so

02:38:23.500 --> 02:38:28.520
after mid-august we'll have more clarification when we can

02:38:28.520 --> 02:38:28.719
talk about

02:38:28.719 --> 02:38:32.579
tree code and it's maybe I should look up the agenda for

02:38:32.579 --> 02:38:33.920
the special session

02:38:33.920 --> 02:38:38.870
but what is the state talking about that would impact our

02:38:38.870 --> 02:38:39.760
tree code

02:38:43.840 --> 02:38:49.030
there was a bill that was introduced that restricts the

02:38:49.030 --> 02:38:52.319
ability to or how we

02:38:52.319 --> 02:38:56.280
issue credits basically and paying into the tree fund so it

02:38:56.280 --> 02:38:58.959
may or may not have

02:38:58.959 --> 02:39:03.510
an impact on the tree code as written and the proposed tree

02:39:03.510 --> 02:39:05.000
code we won't know

02:39:05.000 --> 02:39:07.090
into I believe it's in committee where they're trying to

02:39:07.090 --> 02:39:07.719
hammer out some

02:39:07.719 --> 02:39:11.840
differences between the houses is that right you guys have

02:39:11.840 --> 02:39:12.799
been following that

02:39:12.799 --> 02:39:15.920
well that's correct the special session has a lot of agenda

02:39:15.920 --> 02:39:16.879
items and one of it

02:39:16.879 --> 02:39:22.569
is the tree preservation requirements that the cities can

02:39:22.569 --> 02:39:24.239
apply and so that's

02:39:24.239 --> 02:39:28.010
going to be discussed in roughly 30 days starting next week

02:39:28.010 --> 02:39:29.879
on the 18th and after

02:39:29.879 --> 02:39:35.819
that we'll know better as to what the bills are okay thank

02:39:35.819 --> 02:39:36.760
you

02:39:36.760 --> 02:39:43.559
Commissioner Taylor okay

02:39:45.600 --> 02:39:55.520
I was trying not to drag you into it Bob there have been a

02:39:55.520 --> 02:39:56.440
couple bills that

02:39:56.440 --> 02:40:00.739
entered in this special session and two of them would

02:40:00.739 --> 02:40:02.879
basically wipe out local

02:40:02.879 --> 02:40:06.389
tree ordinances it would also take away the right of

02:40:06.389 --> 02:40:09.040
homeowners HOA's from being

02:40:09.040 --> 02:40:11.670
able to restrict people from cutting their own their trees

02:40:11.670 --> 02:40:12.719
down as well so

02:40:12.719 --> 02:40:17.670
it's not just reaching into cities but it's reaching into

02:40:17.670 --> 02:40:20.520
HOA's thank you

02:40:20.520 --> 02:40:25.780
Commissioner Taylor thank you chair I was curious if we

02:40:25.780 --> 02:40:27.280
could get our iPads

02:40:27.280 --> 02:40:32.379
updated I'm I don't have the password for the admin account

02:40:32.379 --> 02:40:33.520
so my I legislate

02:40:33.520 --> 02:40:37.559
is like two years old I know we've talked about this before

02:40:37.559 --> 02:40:37.920
I don't know if

02:40:37.920 --> 02:40:59.319
somebody knows the password the admin password okay any

02:40:59.319 --> 02:41:00.559
other updates on the

02:41:00.559 --> 02:41:07.639
project matrix what will be coming before same time soon or

02:41:07.639 --> 02:41:08.799
well there's a

02:41:08.799 --> 02:41:13.379
couple that I know what it here we noted here one hopefully

02:41:13.379 --> 02:41:14.799
we'll bring at our

02:41:14.799 --> 02:41:19.319
next meeting or at least in April I'm sorry August a small

02:41:19.319 --> 02:41:20.399
area plan that

02:41:20.399 --> 02:41:23.709
we're working on as well as the results of the notification

02:41:23.709 --> 02:41:24.920
discussion that we

02:41:24.920 --> 02:41:28.139
had several months ago we've had some direction from

02:41:28.139 --> 02:41:29.040
Council so I'll bring

02:41:29.040 --> 02:41:35.000
that up as a work session item in August question for that

02:41:35.000 --> 02:41:37.879
there's the the code

02:41:37.879 --> 02:41:41.670
rewrite that's going on the ongoing long project over the

02:41:41.670 --> 02:41:43.360
next year is going to

02:41:43.360 --> 02:41:46.299
address some small area plan issues as well as a lot of

02:41:46.299 --> 02:41:48.159
other things how do we

02:41:48.159 --> 02:41:52.950
as a commission best navigate we just we go with what is on

02:41:52.950 --> 02:41:54.600
books now and just

02:41:54.600 --> 02:41:58.520
know that it could be changing or do we do we start to have

02:41:58.520 --> 02:41:59.840
a little more vision

02:41:59.840 --> 02:42:03.719
going forward in terms of some of these things commission

02:42:03.719 --> 02:42:04.520
ers are you referring

02:42:04.520 --> 02:42:08.489
to as a the planning zoning Commission or as the sub

02:42:08.489 --> 02:42:10.399
committee no as the

02:42:10.399 --> 02:42:14.540
Commission Commission as as is as obviously what's in the

02:42:14.540 --> 02:42:15.840
books now okay

02:42:15.840 --> 02:42:20.440
so the small area plan discussion will be beneficial for

02:42:20.440 --> 02:42:22.120
the time in which it's

02:42:22.120 --> 02:42:27.159
current and then maybe we'll have to correct we're working

02:42:27.159 --> 02:42:27.799
with the

02:42:27.799 --> 02:42:32.219
consultants both consultants if when we get to that point

02:42:32.219 --> 02:42:33.479
we'll be coordinating

02:42:33.479 --> 02:42:36.299
those efforts so there hopefully won't be too much of the

02:42:36.299 --> 02:42:37.040
conflict the guys

02:42:37.040 --> 02:42:41.340
that make sense thank you okay thank you for the update and

02:42:41.340 --> 02:42:42.639
with that I will

02:42:42.639 --> 02:42:47.959
close this this evening at 814 thank you everyone