Aug 09, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2017-08-09 4:30 PM

Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission work session meeting for August the 9th. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 433 and our first order of business will be to receive clarification of agenda items and I will turn it over to Shandrian for presentation. Good evening. The first item that I wanted to go through to see if we had any comments or discussion was the minutes from July 12th and July 26th. Okay we'll run through the public hearing items and then we'll come back to the work session items just for clarification. We have two final replats on the agenda. The first up is Haley Zagurski regarding the quick trip. So this is a replat for the quick trip that's located out at the corner of University and the I-35 service road intersection and the purpose of their replat is just to take in some unplatted land on the south side of the property here in hopes of future expansion of the facility I believe . Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Do you do they have any plans at the moment or? They had presented some plans and then they decided that they might want to rework things so I'm not sure what their goals are at this point. And then I guess I was just curious how so was it platted differently when they built their building or was it never platted? Well no it had to be pl atted to build it. Yes it was platted and this line here is the previous lot line. Okay. There was this little remainder of land that was never platted. Understood. Okay thank you. Thank you Haley. Next up we have a final replat for property located at normal in Scripture and I'll invite Julie Wyatt up. Good evening. All right so this property is located at the corner of Normal Street and Scripture Street and they are replatting a previously pl atted lot and taking in some unplatted property and I'll answer any questions. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you Chair. Do we have any preliminary designs or thoughts what they're doing with this yet? We don't have any site plan applications so they haven't made any submittals. You know they they have communicated to us that they would like to build a multif amily development on the site but we don't have anything specific. They're taking in those two southern plots making it one. Yes sir. Thank you. Commissioner Beck. That answered my question. Okay. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair and I know we've discussed this a little bit Julie so nothing changes with the zoning. It's a replat of the entire thing. Yes ma'am. The split zoning remains in place. Yes ma 'am. They can't ask for a rezone again for a year from whenever it was denied. Yes ma 'am that's in the DENT Development Code. So with the special things that or whatever that little verbiage is, special changes that they can come back, would a replat as such as this be one of those that would be considered? Let me get my code so I can quote that correctly. I want to make sure. Okay. Thanks. Jennifer, will you help with that question because I think she's asking for clarification on what substantiates a zoning change. How substantial does the request need to change for a zoning request in order for it to be reconsidered? Thank you Shander and that's a good point. Well it has to be substantially different or a change of circumstances so whatever the if the if we decide that it has been an adequate change of circumstances then we could review it. We as the Commission. So I guess my question was does this substantiate it? I'm curious. And I'm sorry I thought that this was withdrawn after PNZ for the last time. Was it taken to council? Yeah this isn't the zoning. This is a question. I know but the last zoning application that she was asking about, it was taken to council at tonight. Okay okay. Yeah and I'm sorry what was your question? So I know that a special circumstance can be where they can come back within the 12 months. Sooner than the 12 months. Right. And so these lots that were on the re zone are now being kind of taken into this final. So would that be something that the city would consider as a special circumstance? It could be and it would be up to the Commission to decide. It's a discretionary. So that comes back through the chain again or does that just go? It'll come back through the chain. So it would start with you all and then it would go out to council. Okay and just to point out the boundaries of the zoning request have not changed and they didn't change with this replat request. So the reconfiguration of the lot boundaries is not really, doesn't translate to the zoning request necessarily. So if there's a boundary change and there's no change that would be adequate. They haven't submitted the request to change the boundaries of the rezoning request yet. Okay. But so would that we have to be the same request on a special circumstance? I'm just confused at the process. The special circumstance would be if it were different. If the zoning request was different. Oh the zoning request was different not if something's changed within the ? The plat boundaries. Okay. Okay. Thank you Julie. Sure. And then next up we have a zoning case for the Duluth Trading Center and I'll invite Jose Riaza. Good evening. This is a zoning change request for the project is Duluth Trading Company in Northern Tools Plus Equipment. The site is located west of I-35 Southbound Service Road and approximately a thousand feet south of West University Drive and the applicant has requested to re zone approximately five acres of site from Industrial Center Employment District to Regional Center Commercial Downtown District. This is the area within approximately 200 feet of the subject property. The property north of the subject property is currently zoned RCCD. It fronts on I-35 Southbound Frontage Road and the back of the subject property is adjacent to the Kansas City Southern Railroad line and most of the subject property as well as the properties on the set to the south and to the west are ICE. This is approximately within 500 feet of the subject property. The property here this one it is zoned ICE but the use is commercial with an accessory storage building and there is razor range development east of the subject property. This is area within 1500 feet of the subject property. You can see razor range development and Southern School right here. It also shows the zoning districts within a 1500 feet of the subject property which include CNG here north east of West University and 35 and there's ICE north of West University Drive and then RCCD east of 35 and ICE and there is ICG as well to the far southwest. The future land use for this area is regional mixed use. The regional mixed use promotes development with an urban corrector and it applies to areas that serve as regional destinations within Denton. It promotes moderate to high density residential commercial office entertainment uses and it is utilized for highly trafficked areas primarily along major corridors like I-35. The mobility plan shows site will be accessed through West University two major roadways which is West University which is a primary arterial and then the Interstate 35. The I-35 frontage is currently under construction and the future plans show that it will have two to three lanes in the future. And we did send out public notifications within 500 feet and 200 feet as well as in the newspaper on July 23rd and we received one response in favor and it was from the property owner which is off the property which is highlighted in green and we didn't receive any response in opposition. And staff recommends approval based on the future land use plan which is the Denton plan 2030 and it is compatible with the surrounding land uses as well as surrounding zoning to the major north. If you have any questions I'll stand for any questions. Thank you. Okay the next item we have is a development code amendment and I will invite Haley Guczakowski up to present. This is related to medical land uses and how they are permitted in the city. So as Shandrian said this is a code amendment related to our medical uses as they're listed in the DDC. So the request before you is to consider proposed revisions to the development code specifically amending sub chapters 5 and 23 as it pertains to the medical land use categories and the definitions. Staff is recommending these amendments to the code specifically to the definitions in permitted zoning districts there as it relates to medical uses in advance of the overall DDC update because of the number of applications we see for specific medical uses that aren't well addressed in the code. As I'm sure you're all aware the medical field covers a very broad spectrum of things from doctors offices up through hospitals and our current code just doesn't have categories and definitions that fit well with that evolving medical industry. Currently the code has three definitions and land use categories that can apply to medical services. Professional services and offices are any office used for the conduct of business related activities as long as it excludes the storage and sale of merchandise. So that category does is where we permit any sort of medical office so dentist, psychiatrist, any general doctor's office would fit in that category. We have a definition for a medical center which is defined as a walk-in facility for medical, obstetrical, or surgical care limited to day use and then we have a definition for hospitals which specifies establishments providing sleeping and eating facilities for persons receiving any sort of medical care on a continuous basis. So these existing categories really aren't sufficient to describe a lot of the more specialized and newly evolved medical uses. An example would be the freestanding emergency rooms. We have very frequent requests for these over the past year and they really don't fit comfortably within any of those three definitions we just described because some of them can operate 24 hours a day. They may be able to accept emergency vehicles but they don't fit the threshold to be a hospital because they don't provide the sleeping and eating facilities. So we permit them under either of the other two categories which as you see with the definitions neither really fit with the specific use here. So the intent of these proposed amendments is to add some new definitions to the code and make sure that those definitions are aligned with existing medical uses already defined in the state code. Along with that we would kind of tweak the three land use categories that we have and make sure that each of those new definitions aligns specifically with one of those three categories. So this table offers a summary of that. We have here a list of all the new definitions that we'll be adding. Some of these are just tweaks to our existing definitions but most of them would be new and those as you can see in the code red line that we provided refer you directly to the state code so that those are constantly updated with what the state regulations have. And then we have three land use categories. Medical centers and we're renaming medical clinic. Medical office is a new category we're breaking that out from the general office category and then what we previously just called hospital will become hospital services so that it can encompass this wider range of hospital uses. These can be differentiated between because medical clinics and medical offices are typically outpatient services and then hospitals would be your more inpatient services. So along with this in the permitted use tables in subchapter 5 there would be a few adjustments made. Medical offices we are proposing that would be permitted in any of the districts where professional services and offices are currently permitted. Hospital services would maintain the same permissions within the code as hospitals currently have and then with medical clinics we 're making a few tweaks because we've now specified that that category encompasses a wider variety of uses. So in the NRMU district we're proposing that this use would require an SUP. Medical centers were previously permitted by right but as we saw with the freestanding ERs if they offer those more intensive services such as ambulance drive-thrus and things like that we might want an SUP to make sure that there are compatible buffers and things put in place with the site design to make it more compatible with adjoining residential neighborhoods. And within the DR2 district which is in one of our lower density downtown areas we felt that this use it just doesn't fit so we're proposing to no longer permit that use within the DR2 district. So in summary our objectives are to provide consistency by aligning the definitions in our code with those in the state code. We're proposing to restructure those land medical service land use categories into the three new categories we discussed and we're proposing to assign some more appropriate zoning districts to some of these land use categories as we just saw with the medical clinics. We did publish notification in the newspaper we received no responses and staff is recommending approval of these amendments to sub chapters 5 and 23 of the DDC and I can stand for any questions. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you chair thank you Haley. I have a question about the upcoming DDC rewrite are we potentially not knowing what that language will be making an interim step that would be then changed again I'm just wondering for developers if we change it then they fall under these new use categories and permanent uses and then next summer we roll out something different I'm just wondering the implications or what the staff has thought about this. Whatever gets adopted with the new code will be folded into the work that Clarion is doing so we're in constant communication with the consultant and whatever ordinance comes out if one does come out it'll be folded into the DDC the new DDC. Okay thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair thanks Haley. So this seems like a really complicated way to address the 24-hour emergency centers because I think that's what this this is the catalyst for this. Is there no way to just make a category for for this land use and just make a category titled 24- hour emergency center or something? We did you know consider that but we felt that our overall our code is lacking in a lot of these potential categories of medical uses you know people come in all the time with a proposal and it's like well is it really an office or is it more of a medical center we don't have clear definition on that so we thought this would be an opportunity to wrap up more defined uses as well as those freestanding emergency use emergency centers. And I'm sorry just to add to that what we want to avoid as well is being interpretive of what a use is because really the medical uses are regulated by the state and so all we can really do is look at it from a land use perspective and see you know which basically categories they fit within. If we start getting into the details of 24 hour versus you know closes at 8 or whatever other criteria the state requires for the each particular use it could just become unwielding and we wouldn't really necessarily have any mechanisms to enforce that so that's why we chose to do the umbrella categories so that if anything new pops up in the next few years that falls within one of those categories we have history and we have a process to determine where it fits best. Okay then I guess my next question was coming up with medical clinic some somehow that term bothers me and I'll just tell you why because my doctor's office has medical clinic before their name their medical clinic of so as a medical clinic in their name they don't fit I mean they're a medical office that's what they are. So I guess I'm how did we come up with that term? And we wouldn't necessarily base the use on what they call themselves we base the use on what how they intend to operate and then match that with the definitions that we have identified in the code and the ones that are identified with the state but we do want to minimize as much as possible being the ones that are going in and class ifying these uses because it's really outside of our purview as a local entity. We have the land use controls but as far as the way they do business we can't really monitor or regulate that. Okay and I guess I and I did read through this and I looked through the state I didn't really see medical clinic as a definition is it state defined and it fits in okay and that's what I couldn 't find. It will be well defined in the new DDC we can go through that definition if you would like but we do offer a definition for it in the code. Okay excellent yeah and I guess we'll have to just make sure it's in the because I know it's not in our hospital stuff with the new DDC stuff. Yeah it's nowhere in there plus we only have hospital and medical offices in there as as right and that you know health care facilities. Yes and that draft pre-sees this work so we'll have to make sure that whatever you guys decide on this proposal gets folded into what the consultants are working on. Yeah and I mean it all makes sense I'm only stuck on medical clinic because to me I don't think of a 24 -hour emergency room as a medical clinic but that's just how my brain works so if it's defined somehow where it's it is this then okay. Commissioner Beck. Thank You Chair the definition that she was asking about would that be in that subsection five that you put in our material? It would be in sub chapter 23 . 23? Mm-hmm yeah all the definitions are in 23. That was definition okay thank you. My concern is do we have anything in place now with one of these clinics that will now require an SUP? Is there anything in one of these medical clinics where they have 24-hour emergency service in an NRMU now that would create a conflict since we're not allowing it without an SUP where they used to be there by right do they still get to stay there that's not going to create any qualms? Yes. Okay so I think the information said y'all had four requests for these type of clinics are they forthcoming and are they going to be in conflict with the land use requirement? If I remember correctly we had two that were already permitted one is current well three that are currently permitted I believe and one was just a PDM application and that one was actually within razor ranch so it would also have their overlay district requirements to contend with. Okay but none of them are going to be in conflict with the new land use requirements that are required in SUP. They're not going in thinking they can go there by right? One that's already has its permit is in an NRMU district yes. Okay thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Okay so one more question so the definition that's in here which I read is that something that we came up with within the city or did? For medical clinic? Yeah. Yes that is our definition. Okay so my question earlier was is there a state definition for it that's what I couldn't find and I know we were saying we're trying to align you know with our you know with with state definition so that was my. No I don't believe there is a state definition for medical clinic but we're using medical clinic kind of as an umbrella term to catch all of these more specific ones. And by defining it the way we have that helps to make decisions with the with the developments? Yes that was our intent. Understood thank you. Well I'll ask a question about the SUP requirement and then also I guess it's now going to be prohibited I think you said in DR2 so downtown. Any thought as to all of the living as far as apartments and all those types of centers that are being proposed and being done downtown that there might be a need for that at some point within that amount of people that are choosing to live downtown? We're only proposing that it be prohibited in the DR2 district so just in the residential district within our downtown core the DCG districts that use could still be permitted. Okay. I guess get my usual not a fan of the SUP thing out that's a lot of work for people to have to go through a lot of money to spend to have no. Is there any other way to address that without SUP or is that just kind of the way we're going to choose to move forward with it? Well that would just be for the NRMU district and we pick that specifically just because it is a mixed- use district that still permits some residential uses it abuts a lot of single-family neighborhoods and because that category would permit things such as surgical centers or freestanding ERs that are more intensive in nature and the way they function and the amount of traffic that would be generated by them we felt the SUP was the best mechanism to offer some control over how the site is designed to ensure the proper buffers and screening and various things like that are in place to prevent nuisance situations. Okay great thank you. Okay thank you Hayden. Going back to our work session items the first item on that agenda is small cell network nodes we have a presentation by Manal Malade. Thank you Chandran. Good evening Chairperson Strange, Commissioners. It's odd to be on this side today but I wanted to take the opportunity this evening to give you an update on a Senate bill, Senate bill 1004 and it's what we call small cell deployment or small cellular antennas and the impact or the potential impact of these as it relates to our city's right-of-way so everything that is dedicated as right-of- way or is currently paved as right-of-way and through my presentation I'm going to give you a synopsis of what this bill is the highlights of it and what our implementation plan is it and what our parameters are and where the restrictions lie within those as it relates to what a city can or cannot do. Basically if this is passed this bill well basically this bill I beg your pardon would allow the cellular industry to install small antenna antennas or nodes within the city's right-of-way so what they would use is they would use existing pole fixtures and on top of that or alongside it would install these nodes and I have some pictures to give you some semblance of what we're talking about. So its purpose was to increase cellular network coverage across the state and of course there are new technologies there so it was deemed easier as an easier rollout for the new 5g technology and also to meet customer demand these days as it relates to these networks. It will require cities to comply so all cities will be required to comply with this and as a result I've put there it says one size fits all approach so basically these this use would be permitted and there are specific parameters associated with that. It identifies your timelines as it relates to reviewing the application it to review it has attached timelines as it relates to reviewing the package and what is being proposed which could include your design elements. These are some of the examples if you look at these these pictures in front of you it gives you an idea of what the equipment looks like and of course it varies from company to company that is that is using this equipment and then of course you can see that we have this attachment here and then of course they usually try and go above the fixture itself that existing utility feature. Here's another example that they've tried to show on what is happening here and here and along here as well and up here. So we are going to see an increased level of activity within our right-of-way as it relates to these uses in the very near future and they will have the ability to then install their fixtures and relocate or locate upon these utility posts. Here are a few more examples that gives you an idea of a small cell node. Right now these are the players that we're dealing with as it relates to applications that will be coming forward to conduct this use. What are the key provisions of this Senate bill? It mandates that small cell nodes and poles to be installed in the city's right-of-way. It includes use of existing utility and traffic poles so all of our DME structures that we do have in form of poles would be they could be used as co-location elements and they also have the ability to install new poles too as long as they're in the right-of-way but there are distance parameters or distance requirements from those. It enables us to establish city permit requirements what that means is we would have to have a specific ordinance that would have to be adopted that would outline the application procedure that would have also the design criteria manual in terms of what limited ability we have associated with these and I'll dive into that in a second too and it also has a provision just as any other development code that once you submit your application it is deemed approved if it is not reviewed and addressed at that time and there is a maximum fee structure as well that is associated with this. I won't dive into this table to integrate detail but it basically gives you the the shot clock requirements as it relates to the node the transport facility that you see there that's relating to the cabling and then a new pole installation and then it gives you what the city's deadlines are in terms of complet eness review. When we talk about the fee structure it's $500 for up to five network nodes those were the nodes that I showed you in the earlier photographs and then $250 for each additional node and there is an annual node rental fee and that is $250 per node and then it is a thousand dollars for a new pole and a $250 annual pole rental fee. There is a monthly rental and that 's $28 for each network transfer facility. Commissioner Ellis. Thank You Chair. Menal did I read correctly that if the city doesn't I guess respond in those 30 days it's automatically approved? Correct. And then would there be fees associated at that point or? So yeah the fees would apply because there's several functions that are happening one is there's an application procedure and that's one of the shot clocks that we're talking about that the application has to be reviewed for completeness and if you remember I also prefaced with that we have to have an ordinance that then outlines the application requirements you know the basic check boxes and then also has to be reviewed within a certain period of time and then from there the full submittal package is reviewed in terms of the co-location elements associated with that so each component of it has a deadline associated with it. It's very similar to any development application it's just rather stringent. Is it doable? This process and these types of functions will not be addressed by the Department of Development Services it's indeed a function that our right-of-way team and our engineering team will manage however there are some touch points which I'll discuss in a second. Commissioner Roselle. Thank You Chair. A couple questions in my ignorance can multiple companies share the same node? It's my understanding they can as long as it functions but that's something that I'm not the expert in but I think I've overheard that being said yes. Sure and then the fees that's the company paying the city of Denton. Correct. But these fees are ca pped by this Senate bill. At what level? Those are the fees that can be assessed. But they can have unlimited additional nodes. But you still have a rental fee for each node. Right but theoretically they could put in a hundred if they want to pay for those. On one utility structure or within the right-of-way? Yes. Within the right-of-way? Unlimited. And so as long as it's in the city of Denton, the city of Denton will get those fees. Correct. And who will manage the administration of those fees? It wouldn't be the Department of Engineering would it? I believe they would be coming into the engineering department but the fund I don't know what fund they would be and then be credited to for the city. Thank you. Okay so some of the touch points that I wanted to mention Commissioner Ellis and commissioners was what ability do we have in terms of a in terms of the planning division as it relates to are there any restrictions or can we place any restrictions. I'm going to work a little backwards here . The first semblance of design control that we do have is related to our historical districts or our overlay districts. And what we have the ability to do is once we create this design criteria manual and the associated ordinances to state in there that indeed we can create specific design elements that for instance the poles cannot be taller than a certain height. That the color is used on the poles or are we going to use some kind of as we call camouflage type pole structure to enable it in historic districts or to allow the use in the right of ways within those historic districts or any other overlay or corridor districts. Residential areas can also be restricted and then municipal parks in terms of no new utility poles can be installed to accommodate. Again we're all learning as we deal with this Senate bill it is very new to most of our communities within the metroplex so we're all putting our heads together and trying to come up with some semblance of an ordinance that would be applicable. I wanted to give you some design elements and show some design elements to use for instance we have you could consider this and this as a design feature and not your typical poles that you see and I've got some other pictures there for you as well various concealment solutions that are possible but then again this is only in specific areas within based on their zoning. What is our implementation plan? We are meeting with our cell providers to understand and better or rather to better understand what their plans are what their future plans are and what their expansion plans are and what new technologies we're dealing with and how we need to accommodate those. We are in the process of also drafting a new ordinance and we're drafting design standards we're drafting application forms and we're also attending information sessions with the cog and receiving and sharing information with other communities. Lots of communities are trying to discern what to do some communities have already seen installation of these poles as well of these utility poles to these utility poles or co-location. So bringing this to your attention because one this will be a separate ordinance in itself however it is an interesting bill that you know that it needed to come before you to give you some idea of what's going on with it and the implications in as as far as historic districts and corridor districts are concerned. I've provided some data for you to review again we are going to go to the public utility board on August 14th you meaning the city is and then historical landmark Commission we will be making a similar presentation to them on the 14th and we will be seeking approval of the City Council on the 22nd and from there on we'll begin receiving applications on September 1 which is our deadline and I will try and answer any questions that should you have any. Commissioner Beck. Just out of curiosity why did telecommunications industry feel like they need to circum vent cities and towns and go straight to the state? Any idea on that? Honestly I don't know. Not a question but I would like to make some concerns. Sure. I don't have a problem with telecommunications coming in wanting to expand their wireless facilities obviously as they say it is expanding and it tends to be migrating towards solar a solely using cellular communication in their homes and land lines are obviously going out so I would be for that in any of the elements and infrastructure that they need but as I mentioned and I think all of us should be bothered a little bit that the state feels compelled to make this unfund unfunded mandate upon the cities primarily because it seems like another overreach from the state. We have like nearly a dozen bills and the special session alone that try to mitigate local control and this just seems like another effort at it so for that reason I'd kind of be opposed to it just because once these guys put their foot in the door they keep pushing it open and we keep losing that local control. I'm concerned about that but the other aspect of this that bothers me is what I think we're all familiar with this is crony capitalism and I'll explain that. Let me just ask my quick raise of hands here is anybody familiar with the American Legislative Exchange Council better known from its acronym ALEC. No? Okay let me give you a real brief definition. ALEC is a corporate funded bill mill where global corporations state politicians vote behind closed doors to try and rewrite state laws that governor writes. Through ALEC corporations hand state legislators to the wish list to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces or corporate lobbyists and special interests representatives vote with the elected officials to approve model bills. Now the guy who sponsored this bill is Kelly Hancock out of Rich land Hills, District 9. Which sits just below us. He sponsored it in this bill his SB 1004 has a striking similarity to an ALEC model bill entitled Wireless Telecommunications Towers Siding Act and Senator Kelly actually is the chair for ALEC in the state of Texas. That should be troubling to all of us because it kind of diminishes democracy where our local representatives get overridden by corporate special interests. So I would be thoroughly for us signing up with I believe it's McAllen, Texas and a few other cities to challenge the constitutionality of this law just for the two reasons I've given here. So that's my two cents worth. We'll turn to legal. Looks like we have a comment. Well just so that you're all aware there is going to be pending litigation that's spearheaded by McAllen and several cities are actually joining them. I think the deadline to join it for the initial filing is August 18th which is prior to the time that we're taking this to counsel but we would have an opportunity at a later time to intervene in the lawsuit if we wanted to become a party. So we'll be speaking with counsel about that as well so that we can provide all opportunities to them. Commissioner Roselle. Thank You Chair. Can you speak to Commissioner Bex that this is unf unded? I didn't gather besides the human capital to set this up with the drafts of ordinance and application that there would be funds required from the City of Denton to facilitate the installation or upkeep or maintenance of any of this. No. So apart from the manpower to draft ordinances and the applications that you listed there's no other mandated funding that would go into continue this. At this time there is none we're still learning this industry ourselves so once we I know that they will have to be license agreements with these operators who are co-locating on these polls. There is discussion on who would be the contractor so to speak that would work with existing utility polls and those are things we're still earning out. Like we said this is relatively new to us too. We're bringing this forward as a work session to bring you to basically apprise you that this is moving forward and as details unfold we will bring them to your attention too. Thank you. Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you Chair. I would take the opposite view of Commissioner Bex and that is I think it's a great idea for a simple reason and that is how long have we been talking about getting cellular service downtown that's usable on a regular basis and in certain parts of the city you don't have good cellular coverage for whatever reason and so I think that this is really pushing the city to get into the 20th century or 21st century at least with the cellular coverage and along with Commissioner Rozelle I found it interesting the unfunded mandate language in here because all I see is a whole lot of cash coming to the city that the polls are already there for the most part and so I see this as a cash cow not necessarily an unfunded mandate and the fact that people would be able to get coverage that they normally that they don't have now I think is positive because again a lot of people are going away from landlines. We don't have any more wires going across the streets. When if bad weather hits and pulls down the pole there's going to be another pole somewhere close by that has the module on it that will be able to pick up the signal so that we don't have any phone outages so I see this as a big positive and it's too bad the city didn't or cities in Texas didn't act fast enough to put it in themselves and to give the opportunity for the companies to do this to begin with I mean you snooze you lose in this you know in this world and so I think that's I think what this what the state is doing is it's it's time to up your game so to speak. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Just for clarification for Commissioner Shulman I wasn't opposed to the improvement of cellular in fact I agree that it is going forward landlines are dying out I just didn't understand why telecommunications company felt like they needed to circumvent cities and go straight to the state and a lot of the stuff in here looks good you know that where they want to put them how they want to put them the restrictions that they allow but there are going to be nuances within each area that we don't get to deal with now we've got to follow this strict line but I don't know that the cities would be opposed to this I know if they brought it to us as a body I wouldn't be opposed to it I just I see this is one more effort to just kind of you know get state overreach into local communities and diminish what local control we have left. Commissioner Sullivan. Again my point is is that when the city goes through contracting services and they go through the process of which city which company is going to be allowed to provide the service then we start getting into areas that can cause all kinds of conflict as we know a former council member who had a single wire run to his business for high-speed internet that nobody in that area had and I think there was a conflict that should have been looked at at the time so this takes that off the table because now it's not up to the city to determine what provider is going to do what you just got all you know you got to let whoever comes in put up the the nodes in and go with it so I think it solves a lot of those political issues that sometimes get in the way of the commercial side of it and it's now out of the hands of the City Council and it 's a state law and City Council people don't have to deal with it that's my opinion. It's my turn. I see kind of both sides and I understand the concern I see it as a revenue or potential revenue for the city and also just kind of in the presentation we've just talked about is if every city can dictate how they want the node to look and what kind of features it is and have to go through every single municipality over the state as to whether it's silver or black or brown and whether what size it is what feature it is whether it's an historical district or not the nightmare that that would be in the amount of time at every single Commission meeting throughout our state I'm sure everybody sits here and goes well the state overreach but AT&T is a national company they got to do this in 50 states much less how many thousands hundreds of thousands of every single community designing how they want to do their nodes. I understand there's areas in our city we would have a very specific requirement of what we'd like to see and yet where are you gonna get coverage some people don't have land lines safety issues you know you have emergency you don't have cell coverage you're just out of luck so it's it's a complicated issue and I think sometimes you know you just have to look at it that sometimes you've got to get some things done and maybe it doesn't fit everybody's purview of how you'd like to see it done but also on the flip side it would require a tremendous amount of time to roll this out through every single city in state of Texas much less nationwide to come up with a program for each municipality that met their criteria through all the different committees that they have to go through we're going to go through two or three committees looks like before it goes to City Council so that would just be my two cents on this as well so I don't just we have much of a voice other than we've got a presentation and it moves on to do the process so with that I guess that will end our presentation on this item and move us on to what other work session items we have the next item is a discussion on small area plans and I will invite Ron Ming ida to the podium thank you sir Shannon presentation on here chair members of the Commission thank you for the opportunity this is a response to a request from a past commissioner I believe regarding small your plans basically the question is how does a smaller plan get created how do we start a smaller plan and also what we have done so far to date so just as a way of background we have the den plan 2030 which again as you all know was adopted in 2015 February 2015 and in the plan it establishes the actions in which smaller your plans smaller planning is started in the plan there are chapters that speak to smaller your planning and actually identifies focus areas where the plan identifies areas within the city that could turn into smaller plans that would benefit and can start that initial analysis so a smaller your plan our smaller plans is really an extension of the den plan 2030 and implementing its vision for the for the citizens in the vision community vision statement it involves community input develops a context specific action for that area it involves collecting and analyzing existing conditions data evaluating the area and then developing the actions and recommendations that could benefit and help that that area address the issues and offer the opportunities that it needs so why a way of example I've brought the small air plans that we have currently adopted in the city we've got four the first one is the fry Street area plan smaller plan which was adopted in 1999 and of course this area is right in there north of University on Hickory and fry Street the second one is the Dina small area plan and that was adopted in 2001 and this is for the Dini area just south of I-35 in the area right next to UNT and just west of 377 the next one is the downtown master plan and this was adopted in 2003 this covers the area primarily along the downtown area by South the University Eagle Carroll as well as Bell Street and again I don't have a map for each one of these but again the examples that I've passed out there are the smaller plans that again were adopted in the past years the more recent one is the downtown implementation plan and this was adopted in 2010 and this just takes the downtown master plan further and offers implementation strategies and recommendations to move forward out of this implementation plan we are in the midst of implementing and installing wayfinding signage in the downtown it also was directed to work on Hickory Street which you see is doing fairly well and this came out of the downtown implementation plan so there are other plans and actions covered in that plan that the city is currently working on again these are just again examples I wanted to share some real documentations that have been adopted so far so where we go from here we got four currently some of them are fairly older in the sense that the first one was in 1999 something that we probably need to be updating as well as the Dina but we also have other areas and these focus areas that you should see here I apologize they're really hard to see again the goal of these focus area is to turn them into future smaller plans they cover centers corridors as well as branding stations and travel centers as well they're important community identifiers for the city and their primary purpose and our charge is to see how we can increase development and infill redevelopment opportunities in these areas we're trying to hear thank you chair what is the branding station I didn't see it it's it's it's an area where as people drive into the city it's it's a gateway center essentially where it's a an entrance into the city branding the city can you give us an example probably to from the north coming south you know we've got 77 that will probably be a branding center as you as you come into the city you're entering the city now it's not fully developed that's that's the reason why we want to do maybe a small airplane to identify what we can do to improve that area and create more of a gateway and entry into the city branding it as the as the city of Den okay thank you actually there's examples in here if I'm not mistaken I didn't see one branding stations would be the stars and right here on University and 35 as you come into the city the future the loop and and 35w gateway or Golden Triangle Mall so these stars would be our branding stations so you can see we've got a number of focus areas throughout the city and the big one that you see here of course is the downtown area we 've got Frye Street Den Center some of the the ones that are more visible to to most folks actually the Golden Triangle Mall area and all the areas you see here all represent an opportunity for future small area plans so as you saw there were many opportunities for smaller plans how do we prioritize ones that we want to focus on these lists the list there you see comes from the dim plan 2030 and the priority is is a major development opportunity that sees change in land use imminent change areas that are experiencing land use changes where it's deteriorating or being abandoned an area that expressed has a expressed interest by the community where there are partnership and funding opportunities and last a need for the introduction of the specific desire of land use such as a mixed-use development or a employment hub that sort of thing could benefit from a smaller plan so taking these in this in consideration the staff was looking at what area we needed to focus on in one of those areas that we felt would need that need is the small area plan area that surrounds the University North Texas and as you know this body has seen several applications come through in the area just north of UNT but we've also seen some zoning changes and applications south of UNT and potential areas for development east as well as west of the University so we started off looking at just the fry street area and again this is the first smaller plan that we have again doctor 1999 it's obviously outdated there are new challenges and there are some opportunities as well we started looking at this area but we felt that that area should grow or should be expanded to cover the years that we saw development pressure occurring and so we started off again looking at this red boundary which was our first attempt at identifying a expanded boundary for the small area plan while we're doing this we realized that there was actually development pressure throughout the area around the University and again as I indicated some down here opportunities for development in this area to the to the west as well as east we've got pressures along here north of the historic districts so what we did is we drew a radius a walking radius I believe of a half mile a mile and just drew this line and we came up with this boundary that you see here in illustrating the dark line here so this is our first smaller plan and I am excited to announce that the City Council last Tuesday awarded a contract for a consultant to work on this smaller plan with staff to develop this small area plan and the scope will include an outreach plan a parcel by parcel assessment of the area an alternative land use to look at options for development in the area as I indicated earlier there's there's opportunities for change in land use an urban design site analysis something that we would like this area to improve is its public realm and so we want to make sure that we address that but of course transportation parking and housing has also been discussed with this board and we hope to address those concerns through the parking analysis the consultants will be working on housing analysis and transportation analysis and I want to emphasize that the transportation and parking is a larger area so we wanted to look at the area at a larger study area comprehensively so parking is not just to the north it's also to the east the south as well as the west so this is why the boundary is larger than what we initially started because we wanted to make sure when we address parking we address parking comprehensively also included will be before and after the visualizations as well as implementation strategies those implementation strategies are those actions and recommendations that I was referring to earlier and each of those plans that you see in front of you have those implementation strategies it's important to not just develop the plan but have the strategies in order to implement what recommendations come out of the plan so this smaller plan kicked off or will be kicked off in August and the kickoff will include a public outreach inventory and development of database will follow following that will be community assessment analysis and this is probably most important part of this exercise is because this is where the data is going to be collected we are going to be working with the University of North Texas of course having the students in class is going to help us collect data that's more accurate so September through December is going to be key we hope to start the visioning process and alternative scenarios in in around the turn of the year so between October and March will have several activities that will include different stakeholders. Commissioner Roselle. Thank you. Quick question about the parking and assessing that there's been an ongoing conversation it seems anytime we have parking requirements on new development about the current multifamily developments parking capacity and inventory maybe this is an encouragement or maybe a question or both is it going to be possible to get accurate numbers of the amount of parking spaces that are actually being used by these facilities so we know that when students are in school how many parking spaces are being used because we've talked about students don't drive anymore they get dropped off it'd be really helpful during this process to talk to the private stakeholders in this and see if they're over building garages or if they're under building to help understand the parking. Yes I think that's that's that's part of the scope that that will be included and again the timing is is critical and when we do the assessment we will include the parking counts while school is in session and look at those existing multifamilies to get a better accurate data of what is being used what parking space are being used and and what the utilization of those parking spaces are. So the goal is to start working on after we've done the visioning and finalize our analysis to develop this Mario plan in the March timeframe hopefully to bring it forward to you all and to City Council for consideration in the summer of 2018. Next step briefly went through we will kick off this soon again we are just last week we just got our adoption or award of the ordinance to move forward with the consultants we are currently establishing a steering committee that is that will include representation from the various stakeholders within the area residents business owners property owners students bicyclists everyone that has a stake in that area are going to be considered for the steering committee. We also will be having stakeholder interviews and forming our technical advisory committee these are the folks that have the technical data and input so we're not working in a vacuum it includes all the departments within the city and so we're hoping to put that team together and then lastly again to re-emphasize the community assessment is key we want to get that started so that we have data to work from to start drafting some recommendations and implementations for this area so that we can get ahead at least of the curve to develop whatever standards and policies that we need to address those concerns that we've heard recently with this board and I believe that was my last excuse me that was my last line I'd be happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Beck. Just curious we know how this steering committee is going to be selected what's the process and we've we've we've consulted with our consultants and they said that we should have at least 20 to 25 people in this steering committee seems a lot to me but we're gonna reach out to as many people as possible we've internally with staff have identified a list of steering committee members but we're also going to be seeking nominations from our council to also get their input so it will be a wide range of representation once we receive a complete list we'll be able to make sure we've got a wide array of representation so that not only will they be representing their group or their state but they will be hopefully objective to proposing and guiding this this process objectively. What's that public outreach look like? Are we going to put something on our website, the city's website? Will there be something in the newspaper? It's gonna be all the above. Okay. We're gonna we're gonna try to get as much input as possible have community meetings at the small area plan area and again involve as many stakeholders as possible. Good thank you. All right thank you Ron. So the final presentation for work session we left you almost an hour is a discussion on our construction criteria manual by John Davis. I think while John's getting ready it's a good time for us let's break and grab our food and then we won't have to interrupt you and you can just have the full remainder. So at 537 we'll take a short break and get some food and get back as quick as we can. Good evening and welcome back to the Planning and Zoning Work Session Commission meeting. Call us back to order at 545. Thank you Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. I'm here to talk with you about the small cell no that was a previous talk. I'm sorry. Bad joke. Actually you have to blame Jennifer and Chandria and for me for me being back here tonight and all they didn't think you they thought I talked too slow last time. Jennifer thinks I short-changed you by not going over the construction manual and Chandria worked the your agenda around so I could be here tonight. So you've got to blame both of them. But here I'm really I'm here to go over the proposed changes in the construction manual with you. There have been a couple of little changes since then. Commissioner Beck and Commissioner Ellis pointed out a couple of things that we corrected up there and all. This is not nearly as long as last time. It's less than half the length of it so I hope that I can get through it and not hold you up any tonight this evening. The major changes that are in your agenda have been updated a little more definition there a little more identification of some more minor detailed changes there. The construction manual has three sections public works construction building construction and parking lot construction. The section one and three are engineering items and section two is building inspection items there. It's a general instruction book to developers and engineers and architects on how to prepare plans and what the general process is in preparing and getting your plans approved there. Page four well here on page one three the overview just some cleanup and update there referencing the current codes and some of the names here. We've encouraged new and innovative products and construction methods there but we indicate that review of an evaluation of those things may take longer than the normal process. Under public works construction the responsibility just identifying that the design engineer or the architect is responsible or liable for all of those and the city is not assuming any design responsibility with its review there. We've changed from street plan and profile requiring grades at 50 foot intervals instead of at 100 foot intervals previously and there was no oversight before now we ask for thickness of the pavement as well as the type of pavement. Topography there asking in addition to the 100 year flood limits the elevations of those limits also in those areas. At identification of the when a development contract is required is required before a final plaque can be submitted for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission by your commission here. Exhibits the previously we had only exhibit A and we have exhibit B for the developer contract. Exhibit A denotes the public infrastructure that will be constructed and gives a cost estimate for those. Exhibit B provides the private infrastructure that will be provided there. Site infrastructure there's the difference in how our fees are computed there for the inspection fees on it. We inspect our inspectors inspect private parking lots for BJs , other fast food places and restaurants around town commercial places as well as the public roadways that are being constructed and the water and sewer that are being constructed for public acceptance there. And a clarification of the how the inspection fee is computed here at three and a half percent of both the public improvements and the private improvements that are to be inspected by the Public Works Inspection Group. Here's some word smithing and we require now eight sets of plans instead of four sets to be submitted hardcopy plans to be submitted for signing and stamping as accepted by the city for construction. The city keeps two of those sets for itself and returns six sets to the developer and the contractor there and if they want more sets they can bring more and have those but they usually distribute them of course to the design engineer the contractor and subs on the project there. You may have a roadway contractor, a pipeline contractor that does sanitary sewer and storm drainage and another contractor who does water lines. Some topics that are covered in the pre-construction meeting and just some word smithing there indicating that the people who are noted below in the required attendance section or need to attend the pre-const ruction meeting there. Material submittals we require a submittal of materials that are going to be used on the job so we can check to make sure that they are acceptable materials by the city before they're ordered and delivered to the job. Here in this case we used to require three sets we require one set now preferably electronically. Adding that the traffic control plan should be in compliance with the Texas manual of uniform traffic control devices there. Street closure indicating that contractor needs to contact the inspector 48 hours prior to closure that's two hours or less and a minimum of one week ahead of time for closures that exceed two hours there. If you're going to have it closed more than two hours we've got a lot more people that need to be notified. Emergency services need to be notified in those areas there. Abbrevi ation of the North Central Texas cog. Field changes change orders in the field how to process those simply that they've got to be reviewed and approved by the design engineer prior to submitting to the city and then routed through the city and to the inspectors there. And section 2 building construction is basically a general process that is required by building inspection. Adding the energy code and the property maintenance code that the city has. It's really the primary purpose of most of the changes in this section are to update the section to fit the new codes there and the city's requirements. Here we list each of the city's adopted codes for the electrical code, the building code, and fire code, and plumbing code, and so forth. New location for the building inspection department or division there. Change in nomenclature from new single to one and two family residential and that we now submit require submittal plans electronically via the city 's e-track it system and project dock system. And then goes through and shows what we currently require for those plans. General requirements of the plans and what are generally required on the plans there. Energy code requirement. Previously, Mr. Beck noted that even a simple engineer like I could tell that joists are not part of the wall section there and that ra fter sizes aren't part of wall section. But he happily pointed out that hey those don't seem to fit in the wall section. So we set up a new framing section and included the roofing portions in that framing section there. Thank you for pointing that out. Going on through electrical stormwater construction site surveys, the utility site plan, the construction plan submittal for commercial. The first part that I went through was for residential one and two family residential structures. Now these are for the commercial. Again using submit them through project docs using the trac it tool and then updating the requirements for plans and sections of plans there for those areas. On site permit requirements updating that section. You will recall that this this document was last updated in February of 2002 I believe it was. So it's a lot of updating over 15 years there. We don't call it clearing and grading and landscaping anymore it's a site plan permit. New hours are current hours for the inspection requests. John pause on that. I think that's changed I think. I think now permit requests have to be turned in by 4 p.m. Okay. All right thank you. Next day. I think that's just changing the last couple weeks. Can't keep up with those planners. Always sending memos. I'm glad they send the memos we just try hard to keep up with all of them sometimes. That's just been a few. Glad to get home. We don't want to do that. You don't want to hear me drone on and on. Yes sir. Thank you chair. Commissioner Beck. On final inspection Jay it says third-party tester must provide forms to verify energy co-compliance prior to release of final inspection. Can you tell us what a third-party integer tester is and what exactly do they do and is it mandated by the city? No. No sir I can't. I'm sorry. Nobody can. I can. Can you? Sure. Okay what is a third- party? They may be can as well. City requires third-party energy testers to be registered with the city and they're the ones that do the initial analysis of our plans that it'll meet the proposed energy code and then they will come out at the end of the job on residential structures and do a what's called a blower door test and a blaster test and certify that the structure is in compliance with the pre-designed type fitting in other words. It meets the requirements and they will certify that on a city of Denton has been a city of Denton form and you hand that to your building inspector for your part of your final . Okay. Thank you. About at least $500 a house. Money will spend. It's just money. It's another another fee. For the homeowner I'm sure. Thank you Mr. Chair. Yeah. I had no idea. Glad to help. I have a question there on your plumbing rough. In this we no longer allow air tests on on plumbing anymore. That's my understanding from the building inspection. Okay that's great as long as you've got water service there sometimes you run a delay from when you initially request your utilities to be able to get a water meter set but just a question. We've done that in a number of instances before to put an air test on things to keep a project moving while we're waiting for utilities to be connected especially if you've got to move a tap or something like that that it's going to be in a approach or the sidewalk or whatever and it needs to be relocated before they'll set up a water meter but just an observation. I'm sorry I'm a slow writer also. And their foundation are pier hole inspections, exterior sheathing and wind bracing inspections. Would you go back as was the minimum finished floor up there at the beginning too? Did I miss that? I remember reading it the other night. It was just a question as to what is required for that. I'm sorry what section is that in now? Right there on foundation right here. See on foundation where it says a form board survey. It doesn't specifically require what's called an elevation certificate and sometimes we have a requirement that we've got to have an elevation certificate and I don't know if that needs to be clarified so it's clear as to what is actually going to be required there versus just a what's called an FFE where they just put the elevation on there versus the actual elevation certificate paperwork. It's a FEMA form that has to be filled out on how that's going to be implemented in regards to being close to drainage. I think there's a requirement if it's been 200 feet or something like that of floodplain or next to drainage easement but I don't believe the new and when I read it the other night in the new requirements it talks anywhere in there about an elevation certificate which is I think what's currently required. It's more expensive it'd be nice just to get an FFE but that may not meet the requirement so I think it needs to be clear because I've had a run into that before at the end is you think you're getting a final and then you're required to get a elevation certificate and have to wait a week to get one. I know in other areas basically the elevation certificate is required when you're in a flood zone or immediately adjacent that's a very good point about making a clarification and covering that in this section here. Thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank You Chair. On 23 here I wrote a note. It says on certificates of occupancy D2 a written request shall be submitted including a list of remaining items with a completion date for each item. Who submits the written request for temporary certificate of occupancy? The builder or the home owner? Contractor. Okay. I'm sorry where was that? It was on 23 D2 under temporary certificate of occupancy. I was just clear on who had to submit that. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I think up above there before you move on I think there was a question I had on insulation inspection. It's not in that. There was another section somewhere. That one's fine. You may be correct in the one that I had last time for you I think it actually said before sheetrock drywall is installed and before roof ing is installed. I said wait a second that's not quite. That's what it was. I remember when I read it I thought that's not an exact definition so that one is correct. The one that was in the backup was not. So thank you for the catch on that already. Sure. I think it was someone's fingers were a little faster than their thoughts. On the landscape is there still a do you all still allow delays on those for weather? Okay. And then clarifying what the current requirement for temporary certificate of occupancy is. And since your last since I brought it to you last we've changed the building inspection has changed the paragraph title from interpretations to code amendments and I think we may still need to work a little bit on that wording for the title. Basically it identifies a number of situations not all situations but a number of situations where the city requires a permit or does not require a permit. And Commissioner Ellis last time I was with you appropriately pointed out that she gets a lot of questions. Do I need a permit for a fence? Yes and so we've added that section here. Probably need to reword that a little bit more to make it something like you do need to apply for a permit application fencing fence permit application is required for this or something like that. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair and on that we're talking about new fencing, repairs to fencing, replacement of fencing or all fencing. Right I mean is it all fencing anything regarding fencing or? I don't believe repairs to fencing are required basically what the city is looking for is to ensure that you're not about to fence over an eas ement or in a flood zone area there and if you are then we need to make you aware of that easement that flood zone and you can't have certain types of fencing you can't have any fencing in a flood zone or a floodway that impedes the flow of water there. If you fence across the floodway with a or adjacent to a floodway with a chain link fence chances are the next really severe rain we get that debris is going to collect against that chain link fence and knock it down. It's also going to back the water up and flood either your dwelling or someone else's property and adjacent to it. Okay. Commissioner Sullivan. You have another one? I'm sorry. Thank you chair. Well on that same note because we've mentioned like repairs to roofing do not require I mean I think that's where the confusion is is can we can we clarify something in there if somebody's repairing a fence or if they're using same fence posts and they're just replacing you know I think there's a lot of confusion out there with homeowners about who needs to do what when it comes to fencing and there's been code violations written questionably in my opinion on some so clarifying it here would certainly help a great deal. Sure. I'll step in because I think maybe there's a little miscommunication you can do very minimal repairs to fence before you have to get a permit and I think it is one section or something like that but I think when you have to replace post you have to get a fence permit I believe I mean it it is not like you can replace half the fence and because it was there before it is and I may be speaking out of turn but it's very minor of what repairs can be done before you go get a permit. I mean a lot of people are not replacing posts though necessarily I mean but yeah I guess that there's a lot of confusion out there right? I read through this and was thinking a lot of the same questions as to what's a permit and what's not. Commissioner Ellis just as we're talking about this and we're talking about fences and leaving the diluted language in here may behoove us at this time for a couple of reasons one is we are improving our ability to actually provide over-the-counter permits eventually so we've started off by doing over-the-counter plan review and what that facilitates is your accessory buildings and your fence permits and what have you with the DDC amendment we're also modifying the language as it relates to parameter fencing and requirements of parameter fencing versus and materials and all that information is actually being overhauled right now. We also have a caveat with our fence ordinance and that's the property maintenance code the DPMC because they have specificity related to what you can and cannot do with legally non-conforming fence materials for example too so our goal is to clean that up and eventually this will whatever we adopt will that this will dovetail into that. Do you get all your questions? Commissioner Sullivan. Regarding the fences if if a permits required and the purpose of the permit is to make sure you're not in a floodplain or anything of that nature does that mean that you're gonna be required to have a survey done in order to know where the boundary lines are and what's there or will you be able to use the DCAD you know lines or I mean to get a survey of your property just to put in a fence seems kind of overkill and expensive. Most of them that I've seen commissioner utilize the survey that they've had already done so possibly when they purchase the house or something to show that the fence is going to be along the property to make sure they know where the property line is and to make sure they know where any encroachment easements are on their property. So if they have an old survey they're not required to get an updated survey or anything of that nature. You have to submit a copy of a site plan to get a permit. It's pretty detailed of what you have to fill out to get one. What side the pickets go on, where it goes, types of materials, all those things. And that brings up another point if I could at this point is and I know this is gonna sound weird but I'll ask it anyway does all the people who work in the department know all the requirements and know what's required up front so when they talk to a home builder everybody's saying the same thing at the same time for the same project. And the reason I ask that is obviously I've had experience where it hasn't happened that way. I know a couple of builders because they work with my wife who draws the plans and they said okay now they're asking for this now they're asking for that and a couple of people say you know every time I call up there I get somebody different and they tell me I need something different than the last time I did the very same kind of thing. So I think it's very frustrating you know for for the home builders and the homeowner trying to get things done. Absolutely I understand the frustration Commissioner Sullivan it's actually very frustrating for staff as well. What we are doing as I mentioned earlier is that we are in the process of implementing what we call a development assistance center. We're gonna cross train the team that sits up front and is the front face that's our front counter and they will have not you know they will have basic information as what do I need to fill out, what is required of me, what do I need to fill out, what are my next steps, I will get you in touch with the right people. So we're gonna increase the number the amount of face time we have with our clientele and try and take it to the next level. So yes it is frustrating I completely understand that our goal is to slowly strive and implement changes that that are lasting changes. We're slowing down on the quick changes we want to move slowly and make sure that we're instituting the right team and have the abilities should we have any type of turnover progression of our own team moving upwards then whoever does fill in their shoes that it's actually a very simple task and there will be continual training and audits of our processes as well. I want to echo I think that would be a great change to speed things up I know that has been a this big part a big frustration is two weeks to get a fence permit and sometimes it's like it takes 15 minutes to look at it but so I'm glad to hear that that 's a change that's coming I think it's gonna be very welcomed by the construction folks in the city of Denton. Right and just to piggyback on just one last statement we've actually started doing over-the-counter review and we 've had a lot of people that have come in and so this is what I want to do and we've been able to assist them so they've saved paying a fee and they've saved the two-week delay and realizing maybe they cannot do what they want to do so it's been successful we've you know the pilot program has worked and we're now going to implement it to four days a week. That's great. Don't go away. Yes Commissioner as Manal said it's frustrating to us also and to the staff that's giving those answers we encourage our employees to if you don't know for sure go look it up before you give an answer or particularly take the telephone name and name and telephone number of the person and call them back check with someone else but if you don't know for sure go check it out in the code or the criteria manual there and for me if I read it I remember it a lot better than if you tell me yes you're required to do this that and the other or something it sticks with me longer or something there so it's an educational process as we indicated before we can't write an ordinance or a criteria manual to cover every situation and no one can know all of the rules or regulations or policies that we have. Continue. I had a question on the siding I guess number eight there here just went past it back down that's now going to require a permit looks like to do that. Yes. What's the city's policy I guess I can speak for personal and you're accustomed to doing things a certain way for a long period of time and then we have a change where it's a cosmetic issue and now it requires a permit trying to keep up with we've never done that before now we've got to do it what is the policy of well hey you guys didn't pull a permit and we didn't know we've been doing it 30 years doing cosmetic repairs so just when we make a change on some of these things that seem like very simple for folks that have been out in the in the industry doing it a certain way for a long period of time sometimes unintentionally I think there's going to be some folks that didn't pull a permit for something that they're accustomed to not ever pulling a permit with that we've made a change in the rules so just want to point that out that there's some of those things in there too for to be communicated to people going forward. Yeah. I think you're I think you're right also I don't think it's intended to be just for cosmetic repairs and small replacement jobs there I think it's when you're going to replace the entire wall or section but I'll keep with building inspection we'll get clarification on that. John can I ask a question really quick I'm not sure if the construction manual is where we address this or not but is there any reason why we don't require gutters for homes? They're a great idea I don't sell guttering but I'm a simple engineer. If it's a road bridge utility or something like that or drainage I build it. Would it be? If it goes up in the air I don't build it. Okay because this sort of blends in building requirements with some of the public improvements so I was just wondering would this be the place where we would include that requirement if we should desire to make that a requirement for future construction? Well I think it would probably be a code requirement and this would be one way to communicate that that do you need a permit to install gutters or something like that. So okay I didn't mean to put you on the spot I was just I'm a homeowner. I'm dealing with gutter issues right now. So you like them or you don't like them? I like them and if they're going to be required for insurance purposes they should be built with the house just saying. And we don't cover swimming pools or food safety here. They are gutters. I like gutters. Over the entryway and the exit way of my house so I don't get wet coming in and out. Other than that? Gee wh iz. Let it go. What is the watering plan? If you want to have rain barrels you need gutters. Section three gets section three gets into our requirements our public works inspection requirements there and process for parking lot construction there. Very few changes here going from three sets of plans required to one electronic set of parking lot plans required. Just some wordsmithing here in this section. And I think that's it. It's up to your questions. Any other questions for Mr. Davis while he's here? And if you have any comments or questions later please feel free to contact me. Shandria knows how to get a hold of me if you don't. So just for those that are listening this this is going to complete the presentation for P&Z and over the next is it 30 days going forward or the 30 days started from our last meeting for public comment on all of these before it may come back to us? For the water and wastewater construction criteria manual those started I think the day after your last meeting. Let me see we posted the notice well here we go. For public comment July 27th through August 26th on the water and wastewater design criteria manual. We needed some cleanup and reformatting of the construction criteria manual and to incorporate these changes that the two commissioners said pointed out we really need to make. So that one the construction manual did not get posted until August the 1st . So it's 30 days runs through August 31st there. So if anyone has any comments on it they can email those to me. They're posted on our city website. We 've sent notices out to our development community through the e-tracket system there and trying to get that information out. So if you know of anyone in the construction development business please feel free to encourage them to look those up. Okay so just again for those who are watching the process is going to be it's been posted it goes out if their request or changes and it comes back to PNC one more time and if there aren't any changes and it moves on am I mistaken from the? It depends on how significant those changes are. Okay. If we can work them out in the furbage or something there I don't think it would require coming back to PNC. If it's a significant change it may come back to you. Okay great. Thank you for the clarification and for those who are watching I think that's our last item. So at 624 we will close our work session and we'll reconvene. Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for August the 9th 2017. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I'll call us to order at 635. Our first order of business will be to stand and give the pledge the US and the Texas flag. To the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, one indivisible. Honor the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to the Texas, one state under God, one indivisible. All right. Our next order of business will be our Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes and I believe there weren't any changes discussed in our work session so chair would entertain a motion with both sets of minutes. Commissioner Beck. I move we approve both sets of minutes. Okay. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. I'll second. Okay we have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none we will call for a vote on the board. The motion carries 5-0. That will move us on to our public hearing sections this evening. I'm going to open the public hearing at this time for item A, FR 17 - 0001 and I will call on Haley for presentation. All right. Good evening. This is a replat for the QT 912 edition. The property is located at the corner of University Drive and the I-35 service road and the purpose of the plat is to expand the boundaries of an existing lot by taking in some unplatted property on the southern side and I can answer any questions. Any questions for staff? We got off light tonight. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to come speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none we will close the public hearing and I'll open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Rozelle. Thank you chair. I move approval of FR 17 - 1. Commissioner Beck. I second that motion. I have a first and a second for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on board. That motion is going to carry five to zero. That will move us to our item B. I'm going to open the public hearing for FR 17 - 0014 and I'll call on Julie Wyatt for presentation. Good evening. The item before you is a plat of a Park 7 addition. The subject property is located at the corner of Scripture and Normal Street. The intent of the plat is to, if it will pull up, there we go, is to take a platted lot and bring in some un platted property in order to develop this site. And I will stand for any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Again this is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to come before us please come down at this time to speak on this item. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Would the developers representative care to take a question from me? I'm the Allison and Allison's Chair group. I represent the project and be glad to address any questions you might have at this time. Thank you Lee. Would you be willing to share any information on dimensions of what they plan on building there? I think we're all aware and a little sensitive to heights and stuff like that. Would you be willing to share any height dimensions? I can tell you what I know which isn't a lot at this time. We're in the process of platting the site into a single lot. They're working on designs for a facility, multifamily student housing, possibly some mixed use under the current zoning without making any zoning changes. So that's all I really know at this time. I know they're gonna keep it as low and compact as they possibly can and meet those standards. I really don't know more than that. Okay and I appreciate that. It's good to hear. You know as I mentioned this is an area that's sensitive to a lot of people, a lot of people on this commission, a lot of people that live in that area. So I would just ask that you share with the applicant that concern that you by right have the right to build things a certain way but just keep in mind to make money to make a profit off this. I understand that too. I don't disagree with that but do keep in mind that you are gonna be in an area that you've got to be a good neighbor to. I understand how people feel about that rather than be the neighbor that everybody wants to throw out. So just for what it's worth I want to share that. Very good. Thank you Lee. Okay anything else? Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone else that wants to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none we will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or motion. Chair will make a motion for approval because it meets the technical requirements of planning. Commissioner Rozelle. Second. Member first and a second for approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none we'll call for a vote on the board. The motion is going to carry 5-0. I will move us to item C and I will open the public hearing on Z 17-0014 and I will call on Muzzei for presentation. The request is for zoning change for the project Duluth Trading Company in Northern Tools and Plus Equipment. The site is located west of I-35 southbound service road and approximately a thousand feet south of West University Drive and applicant has requested to rezone approximately five acres from industrial center employment to a regional center commercial downtown and the zoning application meets the zoning criteria and it also meets the future land use and it is compatible with the existing land uses that are present as well as the existing zoning district that is present majorly to the north. If you want I can go into more detail. So within approximately 200 feet of the subject property we have RCCD district immediately to the north. It is currently under construction with retail commercial use. The property fronts on I-35 frontage road and it backs to the KC S railroad and there is the site is ICE currently and there is ICE district on the south and on the west of the property. Within approximately 500 feet of the subject property we have one more use that is also that is zone ICE district but as actually commercial use with an accessory storage building and there is a range development across the I-35 towards the east. Within approximately 1,500 feet of the subject property we have about six zoning districts which includes CMG to the northwest of University Drive and Interstate Northeast of University Drive and Interstate 35. Then we have ICE district north of West University Drive and we have NR2 district to the west with Selwyn School and we have ICG district to the far southwest. The future land use map shows the future land use map for this location is regional mixed use. It promotes mixed use development with the urban corrector and it applies to areas that serve as regional destinations within it promotes moderate to high density residential commercial entertainment uses with high level of scale and density within the city and it is primarily located along the major corridors such as the I-35. Mobility plan shows that the site will be accessed through two major roadways which are West University Drive and Interstate 35 Frontage Road. Public notification was sent out it was posted in the newspaper on July 23rd and we sent out public notices within 200 feet and courtesy notices within 500 feet of the subject property and we received one response in favor of the subject property subject a proposed rezoning which was from the property owner to the west of the subject property which is highlighted in green. Staff recommends approval based on the land use analysis it is compatible with surrounding land uses and immediate zoning to the north and the proposal is consistent with the Denton plan 2030. I 'll stand for any questions. Any questions for staff? Thank you. This is a public hearing anyone wish to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none we will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Beck. I move I approve this C-17-014. Commissioner Rosell. Thank you chair I will be seconding this I just wanted to maybe for the record state that this slip of property here in the west of I-35 just keeps coming out piecemeal to us we just had the one north of this earlier this year and now we have this one and I suppose it'll just continue going south and south and every time it's gonna come back I'm pretty confident that this is one property owner that owns most of this area and so I know that there was a subcommittee that was tasked to try to look for these areas and that hasn't really come to any fruition yet but maybe there's an opportunity for this specific parcel this this strip of land doesn't require so committee but maybe just reaching out to the property owner and saying can we just get this taken care of because we're gonna have a half dozen more of these and it feels like it's a pretty logical conclusion to rezone this RCCD so I 'll approve this but I'd encourage staff to get with the property owner and see if we can proactively align this zone into the future land use. We have a first and a second for approval any further discussion? Seeing none we will call for a vote on board. The motion is going to carry five to zero. That will move us to our item D and I will open the public hearing for DCA 17-0008 and call on Haley for a presentation of this item. All right run through this quickly this is DCA 17-8 code amendment related to medical uses. The request is to consider revisions to the Denton Development Code specifically for amendments to sub chapters 5 and 23 as they pertain to our medical land use categories and definitions. Staff is recommending these amendments to these two sub chapters to help clarify the definitions and permitted zoning districts for a variety of medical uses. We're proposing this in advance of our overall DDC update due to an increased number of requests for medical uses that don't currently fit within the zoning or the land use categories we have and as you know our medical service industry covers a wide spectrum it's ever evolving and our code currently just doesn't keep pace with that and provide appropriate land use designations. Currently we have three definitions and land use categories professional services and offices is pretty much any office open for business related activities that excludes the sale of merchandise. Medical centers are defined as walk-in facilities for medical obstetrical or surgical care that are limited to day use and then hospitals are any establishment providing eating and sleeping quarters for persons receiving longer-term medical care. This is an example of one of those uses we discussed that doesn't fit into those current categories. Freestanding emergency rooms and urgent care facilities are growing in popularity not just in Denton but around Texas. Many of these can be open for 24 hours a day some of them are equipped to handle emergency vehicles such as ambulances and looking at those three definitions we just went through they don't really fit perfectly within any of those categories they're precluded from being hospitals because they don't provide sleeping and eating quarters which leaves us to permit them as a one of our other two options either as an office or a medical center and they don't actually fit within those definitions either. So our intent is to provide some new definitions that are aligned with the state regulations related to these medical uses and then take each of those and align it with one of three land use categories. So that's outlined in this table you can see here on the left all of the medical services that we're defining the majority of these if you look in sub chapter 23 will refer to state definitions with the intent of keeping our definitions up to date with the state code and then you can see here that we 've grouped them into three categories what we previously called medical centers will be renamed medical clinic medical offices is a new category we're pulling that out of the professional office category we currently have to make that a separate land use and then the what was previously just called hospital will be brought into hospital services to now include a wider range of hospital types within this proposal we are making a cup proposing a couple of tweaks to how these facilities are permitted in our zoning districts medical offices we are proposing to align and keep those permitted in all of the same districts where professional services and offices are currently permitted hospital services the same thing we propose keeping those within the same districts where they're currently permitted but the medical clinic we're proposing two changes from our previous medical center category that would be within the NRM you district we require proposed requiring an SUP for this use with the intent being that NRM you often a but single-family residential neighborhoods this category is fairly broad and does include some uses that are more intensive and could generate more nuisance potential so the SUP would offer that ability to provide some site design criteria to abate nuisances and then within the DR to district that's our downtown residential district we propose to prohibit this use it was previously permitted with an SUP and seeing as the use is permitted in other downtown categories that are more commercialized we feel that it's no longer a good fit within the residential district so in summary we're proposing these amendments to provide consistency aligning definitions in our in our code with the state code since the state code offers far more regulations and oversight on these uses than the city can we propose to restructure our land use categories to provide three more well-defined service categories for medical uses and then we propose assigning more appropriate zoning districts to these newly defined categories notification was published on July 23rd we received no responses and staff is recommending approval of these proposed amendments to the DDC and I can stand for any questions any questions for staff thank you Haley this is a public hearing so anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time seeing none we will close the public hearing and we will open the floor for discussion or motion we have some of just joined we were just closing the public hearing on item D were you here to speak on that item 3b okay we've already done that one I'm sorry so we will keep item D closed and open the floor for discussion or a motion Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I make a motion that we do approve DCA 178 okay Commissioner Sullivan I'll second okay we have a first and a second for approval Commissioner Roselle thank you chair I brought this up in work session just wanted further clarification this work session was said that it was there was going to be working with Clary on the consultants make sure this is kind of done the lockstep but we're not getting another draft of phase one how are we ensuring or what mechanism is there in place to know that they have this information we just have to wait till phase one gets redrafted to us to remember that we wanted this to be included or can what's the mechanism to ensure that these three categories are being rolled over into the new DDC city council adopts an ordinance for the new medical land use amendments we will send that over to Clary on for incorporation into the overall D DC so the consultant work is on I guess a later timeline than this amendment so we should be able to enroll everything and you will be able to verify that what we approve here gets put into the DDC before it gets adopted because the DDC rewrite will come back to the PNC for review as we get into the public hearing process okay thank you any further discussion seeing none we will call for a vote on the board the motion is going to carry five to zero that will take us to our final agenda item this evening our project matrix okay Commissioner Oselle I brought this up on the previous item but I just wanted to maybe bring to the matrix in terms of revisiting aligning future land use map with rez oning I just want to reiterate or see if we can bring back to work session the that west of I-35 strip in between the railroad tracks and 35 what needs to happen to to kind of line that up so we can maybe not have these all piecemealed together anyone else Shandri you have an update or something you were going to give us I think I called on him rather you're getting ready to speak I apologize okay at 658 I will close our meeting this evening thank you everyone