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