WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.000 Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton Planning 00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:05.940 and Zoning Commission 00:00:05.940 --> 00:00:11.199 meeting for September 13th. This meeting has been duly 00:00:11.199 --> 00:00:12.000 posted and we do 00:00:12.000 --> 00:00:16.809 barely have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 00:00:16.809 --> 00:00:18.679 435. This will be our 00:00:18.679 --> 00:00:22.449 work session and our first order of business will be to 00:00:22.449 --> 00:00:23.600 welcome two new 00:00:23.600 --> 00:00:26.920 members Mr. Alfred Sanchez thank you for joining us. Thank 00:00:26.920 --> 00:00:28.739 you. And Mr. Timothy 00:00:28.739 --> 00:00:32.640 Smith thank you. Welcome aboard and both of you all. And 00:00:32.640 --> 00:00:35.439 with that I will turn the 00:00:35.439 --> 00:00:39.380 meeting over to Shandria Shandrian for presentation of our 00:00:39.380 --> 00:00:40.399 agenda this evening. 00:00:40.399 --> 00:00:43.920 Okay good evening. The first item on the agenda is the 00:00:43.920 --> 00:00:45.399 consent agenda and I wanted 00:00:45.399 --> 00:00:49.630 to see if there was any discussion on the the items that we 00:00:49.630 --> 00:00:50.840 have here. We have 00:00:50.840 --> 00:00:57.219 six plats. There's some two prelims a final plat two plat 00:00:57.219 --> 00:00:58.299 vacations and then 00:00:58.299 --> 00:01:01.500 another prelim for this associated with the plant vacations 00:01:01.500 --> 00:01:02.439 . Are there any 00:01:02.439 --> 00:01:08.019 questions about those or any discussion? Commissioner Rose 00:01:08.019 --> 00:01:09.359 ll. Thank you chair. This 00:01:09.359 --> 00:01:13.840 is why I believe my first plat vacation that I've seen and 00:01:13.840 --> 00:01:15.319 I guess it's standard 00:01:15.319 --> 00:01:18.950 to vacate the plat and then do a preliminary plat at the 00:01:18.950 --> 00:01:20.000 same time because 00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:22.680 it looks like is that what that's what's happening here 00:01:22.680 --> 00:01:23.840 with the Carmel villas 00:01:23.840 --> 00:01:27.269 they're vacating and then preliminary plat in the new one. 00:01:27.269 --> 00:01:28.599 Do they usually happen 00:01:28.599 --> 00:01:34.519 in tandem like that? Well typically the ultimate goal is to 00:01:34.519 --> 00:01:35.680 replat and so in 00:01:35.680 --> 00:01:39.310 order to do that they'll have to vacate the original plat 00:01:39.310 --> 00:01:40.519 do the prelim and then 00:01:40.519 --> 00:01:43.469 do the replat. So this is just the first step in that 00:01:43.469 --> 00:01:47.640 process. Okay thank you. 00:01:54.000 --> 00:02:04.170 Any other questions on the consent agenda? Okay we have one 00:02:04.170 --> 00:02:06.200 item for 00:02:06.200 --> 00:02:09.900 individual consideration which is to consider and appoint a 00:02:09.900 --> 00:02:11.039 member for the P&Z 00:02:11.039 --> 00:02:17.159 subcommittee I mean this P&Z vice chair wrong meeting. 00:02:18.039 --> 00:02:18.039 We're gonna do that right now we're gonna do that in our 00:02:18.039 --> 00:02:22.840 public session. So 00:02:22.840 --> 00:02:25.789 no discussion we'll do all of that in the main the regular 00:02:25.789 --> 00:02:27.319 meeting? Council 00:02:27.319 --> 00:02:32.400 chambers. Okay and then we have five public hearing items 00:02:32.400 --> 00:02:33.199 and I'll invite 00:02:33.199 --> 00:02:37.280 Haley Zagorski up for our first item which is a replat for 00:02:37.280 --> 00:02:37.759 the Brinker 00:02:37.759 --> 00:02:40.360 substation. 00:02:50.840 --> 00:02:54.599 All right good evening. Let me see if I can get this 00:02:54.599 --> 00:02:57.280 rotated for us. 00:03:05.280 --> 00:03:10.159 Okay so this is a replat for the DME substation on Brinker 00:03:10.159 --> 00:03:12.240 Road. The purpose 00:03:12.240 --> 00:03:17.750 of the replat is to replat an existing lot as well as take 00:03:17.750 --> 00:03:18.400 in acreage 00:03:18.400 --> 00:03:21.430 that was previously unplatted and with this replat they're 00:03:21.430 --> 00:03:23.919 also abandoning some 00:03:23.919 --> 00:03:26.900 old right of way that you can see here for Morish Road. So 00:03:26.900 --> 00:03:28.400 it's got multiple 00:03:28.400 --> 00:03:31.900 components going on but in essence they're creating one 00:03:31.900 --> 00:03:32.860 larger lot and 00:03:32.860 --> 00:03:35.860 abandoning right of way. Do you have any questions on the 00:03:35.860 --> 00:03:37.960 plot? I don't have a 00:03:37.960 --> 00:03:40.939 question on the plat but do have a question in general. Are 00:03:40.939 --> 00:03:41.479 they currently 00:03:41.479 --> 00:03:43.750 over there doing site work on that? Is that what's being 00:03:43.750 --> 00:03:44.919 done there on this area 00:03:44.919 --> 00:03:48.919 now? I believe they do have a minor site plan for some 00:03:48.919 --> 00:03:49.879 ground work 00:03:49.879 --> 00:03:52.400 over there. I'm not aware of the specifics of that work 00:03:52.400 --> 00:03:53.199 though. Well I knew 00:03:53.199 --> 00:03:56.020 there's work being done and it looks like it was that area 00:03:56.020 --> 00:03:56.639 so I just was 00:03:56.639 --> 00:04:01.449 curious if that's what the work is in regards to this site 00:04:01.449 --> 00:04:01.960 here. I 00:04:01.960 --> 00:04:05.360 believe it is. Okay thank you. 00:04:09.719 --> 00:04:12.689 The next item is a zoning request for property located at 00:04:12.689 --> 00:04:14.639 the southwest 00:04:14.639 --> 00:04:21.300 corner of Teasley and Old Alton. All right so this is case 00:04:21.300 --> 00:04:23.639 Z1717. It's for 00:04:23.639 --> 00:04:27.939 the relocation of Pioneer Automotive. So the request is to 00:04:27.939 --> 00:04:29.279 hold a public hearing 00:04:29.279 --> 00:04:32.680 and consider this request to rezone approximately a half 00:04:32.680 --> 00:04:33.399 acre from a 00:04:33.399 --> 00:04:36.589 neighborhood residential mixed-use zoning district to a 00:04:36.589 --> 00:04:37.680 community mixed-use 00:04:37.680 --> 00:04:41.079 general district and this property as you see outlined here 00:04:41.079 --> 00:04:41.839 in yellow is 00:04:41.839 --> 00:04:45.180 located roughly at the southeast corner of Teasley Lane and 00:04:45.180 --> 00:04:48.360 Old Alton Road. So 00:04:48.360 --> 00:04:51.360 looking at what immediately surrounds the property you can 00:04:51.360 --> 00:04:52.279 see it and land to 00:04:52.279 --> 00:04:56.480 the west are currently zoned NRMU. Just to the west here we 00:04:56.480 --> 00:04:57.639 have an electrical 00:04:57.639 --> 00:05:00.389 transfer station and some other land that just has a dry v 00:05:00.389 --> 00:05:01.279 ial on it currently. 00:05:01.279 --> 00:05:05.110 To the south of the property you can see the hatched area 00:05:05.110 --> 00:05:06.160 is all part of the 00:05:06.160 --> 00:05:09.680 city's ETJ so that hasn't yet been annexed into the city. 00:05:09.680 --> 00:05:10.920 There's multiple 00:05:10.920 --> 00:05:13.720 facilities in this area though we have an athletic training 00:05:13.720 --> 00:05:14.519 facility to the 00:05:14.519 --> 00:05:17.779 south. This is a self storage facility over here to the 00:05:17.779 --> 00:05:20.399 southeast. We have ICE 00:05:20.399 --> 00:05:24.240 district so industrial center employment to the east of the 00:05:24.240 --> 00:05:25.839 property and that is 00:05:25.839 --> 00:05:29.029 along the frontage of Teasley Road and it consists of some 00:05:29.029 --> 00:05:30.040 offices and some 00:05:30.040 --> 00:05:33.560 access points for this industrial park that's to the south. 00:05:33.560 --> 00:05:35.720 We have CMG 00:05:35.720 --> 00:05:38.569 district directly across Teasley that's the Geyer High 00:05:38.569 --> 00:05:40.800 School property and then 00:05:40.800 --> 00:05:43.689 we also have NR2 district in this area and I want to take a 00:05:43.689 --> 00:05:44.519 second on that 00:05:44.519 --> 00:05:48.009 because it at first glance when you look at the map you see 00:05:48.009 --> 00:05:49.160 what appears to be a 00:05:49.160 --> 00:05:52.290 distinct parcel of land here just to the north of the 00:05:52.290 --> 00:05:54.480 subject property. That's 00:05:54.480 --> 00:05:57.529 just I guess an error in our map we don't have those layers 00:05:57.529 --> 00:05:58.519 updated yet from 00:05:58.519 --> 00:06:01.540 the county. All of this area if you look at the most recent 00:06:01.540 --> 00:06:02.680 tax maps is dedicated 00:06:02.680 --> 00:06:05.959 right of way for Teasley Lane so that NR2 district isn't 00:06:05.959 --> 00:06:07.120 necessarily associated 00:06:07.120 --> 00:06:09.540 with a particular parcel that will all be incorporated into 00:06:09.540 --> 00:06:10.459 Teasley at some 00:06:10.459 --> 00:06:15.870 point. If we look a little bit further out you can see some 00:06:15.870 --> 00:06:16.800 more it's going on 00:06:16.800 --> 00:06:18.810 in the area as I mentioned we have this office and 00:06:18.810 --> 00:06:20.000 industrial park here that's 00:06:20.000 --> 00:06:24.420 in a mixture of ICE and ETJ. This property here has 00:06:24.420 --> 00:06:26.120 recently been developed 00:06:26.120 --> 00:06:30.009 with an auto repair shop and here you can see DM I believe 00:06:30.009 --> 00:06:30.839 that's actually a 00:06:30.839 --> 00:06:33.370 TXU electric transfer station and then Geyer High School's 00:06:33.370 --> 00:06:34.279 property across the 00:06:34.279 --> 00:06:38.759 street. So just to give you an idea of this general area of 00:06:38.759 --> 00:06:39.399 town I'm sure 00:06:39.399 --> 00:06:42.379 you're all familiar we have Old Alton Road coming up from 00:06:42.379 --> 00:06:43.360 the south Teasley 00:06:43.360 --> 00:06:46.810 Lane this is very close to the current city limits. You can 00:06:46.810 --> 00:06:47.439 see Geyer High 00:06:47.439 --> 00:06:51.290 School here to the north these two parcels just closest to 00:06:51.290 --> 00:06:51.879 the subject 00:06:51.879 --> 00:06:55.879 property were recently rezoned for Geyer to expand and then 00:06:55.879 --> 00:06:56.600 we have a lot of 00:06:56.600 --> 00:07:01.100 unincorporated area out here that hasn't been annexed into 00:07:01.100 --> 00:07:03.279 the city yet. So 00:07:03.279 --> 00:07:06.120 looking at the future land use for this area because of 00:07:06.120 --> 00:07:07.360 this major intersection 00:07:07.360 --> 00:07:09.889 we have here at Teasley and Old Alton this area serves as a 00:07:09.889 --> 00:07:10.600 primary gateway to 00:07:10.600 --> 00:07:13.129 the city for people coming from the east and from the south 00:07:13.129 --> 00:07:14.639 . So this area was 00:07:14.639 --> 00:07:18.240 designated in the Denton Plan 2030 for community mixed use 00:07:18.240 --> 00:07:19.199 and that designation 00:07:19.199 --> 00:07:22.680 is for areas where we want to promote a mixture of uses 00:07:22.680 --> 00:07:23.360 predominantly 00:07:23.360 --> 00:07:26.100 commercial but with other supporting services and some 00:07:26.100 --> 00:07:27.319 residential uses mixed 00:07:27.319 --> 00:07:29.839 in as well to kind of create a sense of place in a 00:07:29.839 --> 00:07:30.759 community center for the 00:07:30.759 --> 00:07:34.750 surrounding neighborhoods. And the goal over time with this 00:07:34.750 --> 00:07:35.959 area is to promote 00:07:35.959 --> 00:07:38.639 that mixture of land uses that can serve we have 00:07:38.639 --> 00:07:40.240 surrounding neighborhoods to the 00:07:40.240 --> 00:07:43.740 north much of Corinth is residential here and so the goal 00:07:43.740 --> 00:07:44.920 would be to create 00:07:44.920 --> 00:07:47.449 kind of a gateway to the city here with high design 00:07:47.449 --> 00:07:48.639 standards that can welcome 00:07:48.639 --> 00:07:52.139 people in from either direction and support those existing 00:07:52.139 --> 00:07:53.319 neighborhoods. 00:07:53.319 --> 00:07:56.990 Just to give you an idea of how these districts compare 00:07:56.990 --> 00:07:58.439 they are very similar 00:07:58.439 --> 00:08:01.589 in terms of the regulations for these areas you know 00:08:01.589 --> 00:08:03.040 similar lot area lot 00:08:03.040 --> 00:08:06.670 coverage permitted building height being the same. So the 00:08:06.670 --> 00:08:08.240 primary intent with this 00:08:08.240 --> 00:08:11.560 rezoning is just to get to CMG because it matches the 00:08:11.560 --> 00:08:12.160 future land use 00:08:12.160 --> 00:08:15.449 designation and it permits the use that the applicant is 00:08:15.449 --> 00:08:16.839 ultimately wanting to 00:08:16.839 --> 00:08:21.259 develop on the site which is auto repair. Just looking at 00:08:21.259 --> 00:08:22.439 the mobility in this 00:08:22.439 --> 00:08:25.870 area and how the site would be accessed it currently has 00:08:25.870 --> 00:08:27.279 frontage on Old Alton 00:08:27.279 --> 00:08:30.810 at some point when Teasley is expanded there would be lanes 00:08:30.810 --> 00:08:31.600 for Teasley much 00:08:31.600 --> 00:08:34.129 closer to the subject property. Teasley is under 00:08:34.129 --> 00:08:35.440 improvement by text audit this 00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:38.870 time its intent is to ultimately be a six lane divided road 00:08:38.870 --> 00:08:40.720 way. Old Alton is 00:08:40.720 --> 00:08:43.250 intended to be a four lane divided roadway at some point 00:08:43.250 --> 00:08:43.600 there's no 00:08:43.600 --> 00:08:47.279 immediate plans for that expansion but this immediate 00:08:47.279 --> 00:08:49.700 intersection is being improved with a signal being added 00:08:49.700 --> 00:08:50.440 there and some turn 00:08:50.440 --> 00:08:53.120 lanes because Geyer High School will have a drive aisle 00:08:53.120 --> 00:08:54.000 that punches through 00:08:54.000 --> 00:08:59.259 straight across from Old Alton at some point. Notifications 00:08:59.259 --> 00:09:00.399 were sent about this 00:09:00.399 --> 00:09:04.429 case we received two favorable notices back from the 00:09:04.429 --> 00:09:06.559 property owner and from 00:09:06.559 --> 00:09:09.279 the owner that has the self storage facility immediately to 00:09:09.279 --> 00:09:09.879 the east of this. 00:09:09.879 --> 00:09:14.850 And staff is recommending approval of this request based 00:09:14.850 --> 00:09:15.679 upon it being 00:09:15.679 --> 00:09:18.519 compatible with the surrounding zoning and land uses. The 00:09:18.519 --> 00:09:19.320 district is 00:09:19.320 --> 00:09:22.000 appropriate at a prominent gateway to the city because it 00:09:22.000 --> 00:09:22.679 does allow for those 00:09:22.679 --> 00:09:25.679 high commercial standards and it also consistent with the 00:09:25.679 --> 00:09:26.960 Denton Plan 2030. 00:09:26.960 --> 00:09:32.830 And I can stand for any questions. Commissioner Smith. So 00:09:32.830 --> 00:09:33.759 the applicant is of 00:09:33.759 --> 00:09:36.870 course aware that the expansion of Teasley is going to be 00:09:36.870 --> 00:09:37.799 happening so any 00:09:37.799 --> 00:09:40.779 building they put onto it if we do rezone it that they will 00:09:40.779 --> 00:09:42.000 be ready to 00:09:42.000 --> 00:09:44.820 make sure all accommodations are can allow for the right of 00:09:44.820 --> 00:09:45.519 way to come up 00:09:45.519 --> 00:09:48.169 closer to them correct? Yes sir the property's already been 00:09:48.169 --> 00:09:48.600 platted and that 00:09:48.600 --> 00:09:52.159 right of way has been dedicated. 00:09:52.360 --> 00:10:01.519 Anything else? Thank you Hailey. The next two items C and D 00:10:01.519 --> 00:10:02.960 have been postponed to 00:10:02.960 --> 00:10:06.649 the September 27th meeting at the request of both of the 00:10:06.649 --> 00:10:07.679 applicants and 00:10:07.679 --> 00:10:11.960 that leaves us with E which is a DDC amendment related to 00:10:11.960 --> 00:10:12.519 development 00:10:12.519 --> 00:10:16.600 agreements and I'll invite Jim Jinx up for a presentation. 00:10:16.600 --> 00:10:18.200 Before we get started 00:10:18.200 --> 00:10:21.240 on that item I'd like to get a clarification from legal 00:10:21.240 --> 00:10:22.240 being that I'm 00:10:22.240 --> 00:10:25.909 engaged in the development business and residential and 00:10:25.909 --> 00:10:27.240 commercial construction 00:10:27.240 --> 00:10:29.909 on building permits that I can participate in this item and 00:10:29.909 --> 00:10:30.279 it's not a 00:10:30.279 --> 00:10:35.090 conflict of interest. We did look at that I know originally 00:10:35.090 --> 00:10:37.440 we thought it was 2E 00:10:37.440 --> 00:10:41.600 but in regards to item 4E I do not think that you have a 00:10:41.600 --> 00:10:42.600 conflict of interest in 00:10:42.600 --> 00:10:47.000 this item. I will participate in this item thank you. 00:10:52.440 --> 00:10:59.570 Good evening everyone I'm Jim Jinx with the development 00:10:59.570 --> 00:11:04.200 review engineering 00:11:04.200 --> 00:11:09.850 division and I've got a presentation here for the 00:11:09.850 --> 00:11:13.519 developments improvements to 00:11:13.519 --> 00:11:13.519 our development agreements and basically we are trying to 00:11:13.519 --> 00:11:19.200 achieve a few different 00:11:19.200 --> 00:11:27.179 objectives here. We frequently get requests from developers 00:11:27.179 --> 00:11:28.440 to file a plat 00:11:28.440 --> 00:11:34.720 shortly after a P&Z approval and prior to their hiring of a 00:11:34.720 --> 00:11:36.399 contractor and 00:11:36.399 --> 00:11:39.970 they're entering into the three-way development contracts 00:11:39.970 --> 00:11:40.840 that are required 00:11:40.840 --> 00:11:45.250 to get the project into construction. We're trying to as 00:11:45.250 --> 00:11:46.519 our code is currently 00:11:46.519 --> 00:11:51.970 written it doesn't allow us to do that until those three- 00:11:51.970 --> 00:11:54.519 way contracts between 00:11:54.519 --> 00:11:57.799 the city contractor and developer have been fully executed. 00:11:57.799 --> 00:11:59.080 We're trying to find 00:11:59.080 --> 00:12:05.600 a way to facilitate filing the platts at a sooner time 00:12:05.600 --> 00:12:07.519 while still protecting the 00:12:07.519 --> 00:12:10.750 city's interest and then as with a lot of our recent 00:12:10.750 --> 00:12:12.480 initiatives and ongoing 00:12:12.480 --> 00:12:16.549 initiatives we are trying to also help streamline the pre- 00:12:16.549 --> 00:12:18.600 construction process 00:12:18.600 --> 00:12:22.389 eliminate some inefficiencies and we can we'll talk about 00:12:22.389 --> 00:12:23.679 specifically how we 00:12:23.679 --> 00:12:30.039 will be doing that but this is one that's those are the two 00:12:30.039 --> 00:12:31.200 main aims of 00:12:31.200 --> 00:12:38.240 this initiative. If you can see that this is an outline of 00:12:38.240 --> 00:12:40.679 our current process. The 00:12:40.679 --> 00:12:46.240 process from starting at final plan approval at the P&Z 00:12:46.240 --> 00:12:49.360 meeting until a 00:12:49.360 --> 00:12:52.210 project gets into construction both on the public 00:12:52.210 --> 00:12:53.960 improvements and the private 00:12:53.960 --> 00:12:58.019 improvements. To kind of walk you through this what our 00:12:58.019 --> 00:13:00.559 practice has been is that 00:13:00.559 --> 00:13:04.159 you can see after the final plan is approved by P&Z. Jim I 00:13:04.159 --> 00:13:04.919 need to interrupt. 00:13:04.919 --> 00:13:10.120 Will you put the PowerPoint in presentation mode for the 00:13:10.120 --> 00:13:13.000 team? I may need a hand on that. 00:13:13.000 --> 00:13:20.389 Okay. Katie's coming to help. Glad to. Thank you. Yes much 00:13:20.389 --> 00:13:23.240 better. Thank you. 00:13:25.840 --> 00:13:29.090 Basically after the final plan is approved by planning and 00:13:29.090 --> 00:13:30.639 zoning see the 00:13:30.639 --> 00:13:35.909 next step is the three-way contract execution and again as 00:13:35.909 --> 00:13:37.120 I said that is a 00:13:37.120 --> 00:13:43.100 that is a standard form that the city has been using for I 00:13:43.100 --> 00:13:44.679 understand we 00:13:44.679 --> 00:13:51.070 started using it it's something like 1987 and basically it 00:13:51.070 --> 00:13:52.919 is between the 00:13:52.919 --> 00:13:57.340 city the developer and the contractor it requires the 00:13:57.340 --> 00:13:58.879 developer and the 00:13:58.879 --> 00:14:02.250 contractor to build the public improvements associated with 00:14:02.250 --> 00:14:02.799 the private 00:14:02.799 --> 00:14:05.549 development project by public improvements I mean public 00:14:05.549 --> 00:14:06.159 water mains 00:14:06.159 --> 00:14:10.970 sewer mains public streets public drainage facilities 00:14:10.970 --> 00:14:12.480 requires that they 00:14:12.480 --> 00:14:18.289 build those to the requirements of the approved plans it 00:14:18.289 --> 00:14:19.759 gives us the right to 00:14:19.759 --> 00:14:24.570 inspect that construction it requires that the work to be 00:14:24.570 --> 00:14:26.120 bonded performance 00:14:26.120 --> 00:14:31.090 bond and typically if it meets a certain threshold payment 00:14:31.090 --> 00:14:33.480 bond as well and it 00:14:33.480 --> 00:14:38.129 also establishes the two-year warranty period the city has 00:14:38.129 --> 00:14:39.600 that begins at the 00:14:39.600 --> 00:14:45.899 point at which we accept the public improvements typically 00:14:45.899 --> 00:14:48.159 the process 00:14:48.159 --> 00:14:53.769 between a plant getting approved and the developer entering 00:14:53.769 --> 00:14:55.279 into this contract 00:14:55.279 --> 00:15:00.649 with a contractor getting it submitted to the city with all 00:15:00.649 --> 00:15:01.840 the required bonding 00:15:01.840 --> 00:15:05.600 and insurance requirements and getting it reviewed and 00:15:05.600 --> 00:15:07.000 approved by the city 00:15:07.000 --> 00:15:12.200 fully executed by the parties here at the city who have to 00:15:12.200 --> 00:15:14.080 sign off we find at 00:15:14.080 --> 00:15:18.370 a minimum that typically takes six weeks we unfortunately 00:15:18.370 --> 00:15:19.679 had many examples in 00:15:19.679 --> 00:15:27.629 which that six weeks has been exceeded and that's typically 00:15:27.629 --> 00:15:28.559 a point of 00:15:28.559 --> 00:15:32.570 consternation on a project for a developer who's anxious to 00:15:32.570 --> 00:15:33.440 get going on 00:15:33.440 --> 00:15:36.639 the project or at the very least get their final plat filed 00:15:36.639 --> 00:15:38.220 oftentimes we 00:15:38.220 --> 00:15:42.799 understand that they're the filing of the final plat is a 00:15:42.799 --> 00:15:43.879 is a significant or 00:15:43.879 --> 00:15:49.000 required milestone to be reached in order to get financing 00:15:49.000 --> 00:15:50.639 for their project 00:15:50.639 --> 00:15:55.450 so basically we face this long step right now as you can 00:15:55.450 --> 00:15:56.840 see on here from 00:15:56.840 --> 00:16:01.159 approval to execution of the three-way contracts after that 00:16:01.159 --> 00:16:02.679 you can see in the 00:16:02.679 --> 00:16:08.399 the steps below that once those are executed we can have 00:16:08.399 --> 00:16:09.720 our pre-construction 00:16:09.720 --> 00:16:17.129 meeting the plat can be filed parallel to that we've got 00:16:17.129 --> 00:16:18.919 the HHA listed here 00:16:18.919 --> 00:16:24.480 that's the hold harmless agreement for projects other than 00:16:24.480 --> 00:16:25.240 single-family 00:16:25.240 --> 00:16:31.799 residential let me back up our code stipulates that no 00:16:31.799 --> 00:16:33.000 private improvements 00:16:33.000 --> 00:16:37.230 may be started in terms of construction until the public 00:16:37.230 --> 00:16:39.080 improvements have been 00:16:39.080 --> 00:16:42.600 constructed and accepted now that's no big deal for a 00:16:42.600 --> 00:16:44.399 residential subdivision 00:16:44.399 --> 00:16:47.240 for single-family but for anything else multifamily 00:16:47.240 --> 00:16:48.879 commercial industrial 00:16:48.879 --> 00:16:53.690 that's almost always the applicants will seek a way in 00:16:53.690 --> 00:16:55.919 which they can run those 00:16:55.919 --> 00:17:02.240 two construction tasks concurrently our code does allow for 00:17:02.240 --> 00:17:03.480 that provided that 00:17:03.480 --> 00:17:09.039 the applicant enters into a hold harmless agreement we 00:17:09.039 --> 00:17:10.200 issue that 00:17:10.200 --> 00:17:13.440 following the execution of the three-way contract and then 00:17:13.440 --> 00:17:14.559 the applicant will 00:17:14.559 --> 00:17:17.589 sign that and record it at the county so the bottom line 00:17:17.589 --> 00:17:18.920 here is after we've had 00:17:18.920 --> 00:17:22.160 the pre-construction meeting the plaque can be filed which 00:17:22.160 --> 00:17:23.279 handles the public 00:17:23.279 --> 00:17:26.240 improvements the hold harmless is executed which would 00:17:26.240 --> 00:17:27.839 address the private 00:17:27.839 --> 00:17:32.420 improvements the building permit can be issued the site 00:17:32.420 --> 00:17:34.039 permit to building 00:17:34.039 --> 00:17:38.559 permit whatever pertains to the public private improvements 00:17:38.559 --> 00:17:39.960 what we're trying 00:17:39.960 --> 00:17:46.029 to do what we're proposing after much discussion internally 00:17:46.029 --> 00:17:46.799 and a lot of 00:17:46.799 --> 00:17:51.170 thought and energy put into it and research we're trying to 00:17:51.170 --> 00:17:52.079 get it to where 00:17:52.079 --> 00:17:56.890 we can break out the filing of the final plat much sooner 00:17:56.890 --> 00:17:58.599 and what we thought 00:17:58.599 --> 00:18:02.089 might help facilitate that is basically breaking the 00:18:02.089 --> 00:18:03.400 agreement into two 00:18:03.400 --> 00:18:06.529 agreements so now instead of a three-way agreement we've 00:18:06.529 --> 00:18:07.480 got two two-way 00:18:07.480 --> 00:18:11.849 agreements the first being between the city and the 00:18:11.849 --> 00:18:14.519 developer I'll get into the 00:18:14.519 --> 00:18:18.809 particulars of the major terms of these here next but 00:18:18.809 --> 00:18:20.599 basically once that 00:18:20.599 --> 00:18:24.009 agreement was signed that would facilitate the plant being 00:18:24.009 --> 00:18:24.400 filed 00:18:24.400 --> 00:18:29.279 following that which I brought my pointer I'm sorry but 00:18:29.279 --> 00:18:32.960 following that the 00:18:32.960 --> 00:18:37.920 two-way agreement between the city and the contractor could 00:18:37.920 --> 00:18:39.240 be executed and 00:18:39.240 --> 00:18:44.069 that's unlike our current process that can be done at the 00:18:44.069 --> 00:18:45.400 leisure of the 00:18:45.400 --> 00:18:48.829 developer really sometimes they are not in a hurry 00:18:48.829 --> 00:18:50.000 necessarily to get the 00:18:50.000 --> 00:18:52.950 project under construction or enter a contract with a 00:18:52.950 --> 00:18:54.319 contractor but they are 00:18:54.319 --> 00:18:57.000 in a hurry to get the plat filed this separates the two and 00:18:57.000 --> 00:18:57.640 gives them some 00:18:57.640 --> 00:19:03.210 flexibility following that we would we would have the pre- 00:19:03.210 --> 00:19:04.279 construction meeting 00:19:04.279 --> 00:19:07.440 and the permit could be issued because I should have 00:19:07.440 --> 00:19:09.000 mentioned in that first 00:19:09.000 --> 00:19:12.500 two-way agreement we would fold in the current hold 00:19:12.500 --> 00:19:17.240 harmless language and I'll 00:19:17.240 --> 00:19:22.789 explain more about the whole harmless agreement basically 00:19:22.789 --> 00:19:26.400 that states that the 00:19:26.400 --> 00:19:30.529 developer signs the whole harmless agreement and in that 00:19:30.529 --> 00:19:31.519 they acknowledge 00:19:31.519 --> 00:19:36.950 that they are allowed by the city to commence their private 00:19:36.950 --> 00:19:38.359 improvements 00:19:38.359 --> 00:19:43.240 before their public improvements are complete but that they 00:19:43.240 --> 00:19:44.160 will not be 00:19:44.160 --> 00:19:47.480 issued a certificate occupancy until the public 00:19:47.480 --> 00:19:49.599 improvements are complete and 00:19:49.599 --> 00:19:56.369 they will hold us harmless if we put a stop on them in that 00:19:56.369 --> 00:19:58.240 way. One thing I 00:19:58.240 --> 00:20:01.759 should mention is this would be we would also propose 00:20:01.759 --> 00:20:03.359 adding a standard note to 00:20:03.359 --> 00:20:07.440 plats going forward in conjunction with this. It'd be on 00:20:07.440 --> 00:20:09.000 the face of the plat and 00:20:09.000 --> 00:20:14.509 we would clarify that no lots shall be sold no construction 00:20:14.509 --> 00:20:15.559 of private 00:20:15.559 --> 00:20:18.269 improvements shall be authorized to begin until a two-way 00:20:18.269 --> 00:20:19.200 agreement between 00:20:19.200 --> 00:20:21.730 the contractor in the city that's the latter two-way 00:20:21.730 --> 00:20:22.599 agreement is fully 00:20:22.599 --> 00:20:25.549 executed which would legally bind the contractor to 00:20:25.549 --> 00:20:27.079 construction of all public 00:20:27.079 --> 00:20:34.009 improvements associated with the plat. That way no one 00:20:34.009 --> 00:20:36.160 would that way it would 00:20:36.160 --> 00:20:41.140 be made clear that there may be public improvements that 00:20:41.140 --> 00:20:42.359 have yet to be 00:20:42.359 --> 00:20:47.250 constructed despite the plat being filed so everyone is 00:20:47.250 --> 00:20:49.759 sort of on notice. Getting 00:20:49.759 --> 00:20:52.930 into the first of the two-way agreements that I mentioned 00:20:52.930 --> 00:20:55.839 the major terms there 00:20:55.839 --> 00:21:00.150 would be a performance bond included as an attachment that 00:21:00.150 --> 00:21:01.480 would be a performance 00:21:01.480 --> 00:21:06.720 bond between the developer and or in the name of the 00:21:06.720 --> 00:21:11.400 developer. In practice it 00:21:11.400 --> 00:21:15.420 would basically bind in the performance bond it requires 00:21:15.420 --> 00:21:17.039 that they have to get a 00:21:17.039 --> 00:21:22.380 surety bond that they will construct the work in the three- 00:21:22.380 --> 00:21:23.079 way contract or the 00:21:23.079 --> 00:21:29.710 development contracts. It binds them to performing that. In 00:21:29.710 --> 00:21:32.279 the past we have been 00:21:32.279 --> 00:21:37.480 it's the typically the contractor that acquires those bonds 00:21:37.480 --> 00:21:39.400 but you know 00:21:39.400 --> 00:21:45.960 interestingly we found in the Texas local government code 00:21:45.960 --> 00:21:48.200 it does state 00:21:48.200 --> 00:21:55.160 actually section 212.073 it says the developer must execute 00:21:55.160 --> 00:21:56.079 a performance bond 00:21:56.079 --> 00:21:58.609 for the construction of the improvements to ensure 00:21:58.609 --> 00:22:04.440 completion of the project. A 00:22:04.440 --> 00:22:08.680 weakness of the current three-way contract document form is 00:22:08.680 --> 00:22:09.559 that it binds 00:22:09.559 --> 00:22:14.210 the contractor to completing the work but it does not bind 00:22:14.210 --> 00:22:16.039 the developer so if 00:22:16.039 --> 00:22:19.839 you have the case of a contractor who's installing say a 00:22:19.839 --> 00:22:21.160 new street or a new 00:22:21.160 --> 00:22:26.759 turn lane or something and halfway through halfway through 00:22:26.759 --> 00:22:28.279 the job his 00:22:28.279 --> 00:22:33.930 developer his his client stops paying him we have we 00:22:33.930 --> 00:22:36.519 currently don't have a 00:22:36.519 --> 00:22:40.539 recourse to go after the developer. This change would 00:22:40.539 --> 00:22:45.880 address that. Now also 00:22:45.880 --> 00:22:51.319 we would also require a three-way or excuse me a 00:22:51.319 --> 00:22:55.160 performance bond sorry. 00:22:59.279 --> 00:23:03.240 I think you can use the up and down arrows. 00:23:06.799 --> 00:23:11.519 We would also require a performance bond. 00:23:16.720 --> 00:23:21.480 With the city and contractor agreement. 00:23:31.799 --> 00:23:31.930 So there would still be a performance bond on the 00:23:31.930 --> 00:23:35.920 contractor in this in this 00:23:35.920 --> 00:23:39.470 latter agreement and all the other terms of our current 00:23:39.470 --> 00:23:41.160 through a contract would 00:23:41.160 --> 00:23:41.160 apply payment bonds insurance certificate conformance to 00:23:41.160 --> 00:23:45.160 the plans 00:23:45.160 --> 00:23:48.230 our right to inspect the warranty period and so forth. Main 00:23:48.230 --> 00:23:49.200 difference is the 00:23:49.200 --> 00:23:54.990 developer would no longer be named in this agreement. We 00:23:54.990 --> 00:23:57.920 believe this would 00:23:57.920 --> 00:24:01.349 help improve the process just kind of to summarize again it 00:24:01.349 --> 00:24:02.720 would allow the plat 00:24:02.720 --> 00:24:07.019 to be filed several weeks earlier which I think would be 00:24:07.019 --> 00:24:08.559 from what we hear would 00:24:08.559 --> 00:24:11.980 be beneficial to a lot of developers. It would also allow 00:24:11.980 --> 00:24:13.119 the plat to be filed 00:24:13.119 --> 00:24:16.099 without the developer having to enter into a contract with 00:24:16.099 --> 00:24:17.160 the contractor. I 00:24:17.160 --> 00:24:22.720 believe plat's expire two years after plat a P&Z approval 00:24:22.720 --> 00:24:23.279 if there's no 00:24:23.279 --> 00:24:27.069 three-way contract so there would still be that provision 00:24:27.069 --> 00:24:28.240 but if the developer 00:24:28.240 --> 00:24:34.390 wanted some time between plat filing and entering a 00:24:34.390 --> 00:24:35.680 contract with a 00:24:35.680 --> 00:24:38.630 contractor this would facilitate that. This would also 00:24:38.630 --> 00:24:39.839 eliminate the separate 00:24:39.839 --> 00:24:42.789 whole harmless agreement being that again that language 00:24:42.789 --> 00:24:44.160 would be folded into the 00:24:44.160 --> 00:24:46.869 first of the two-way agreements here the thought being it 00:24:46.869 --> 00:24:47.839 would simplify the 00:24:47.839 --> 00:24:56.730 process. I would be happy to answer any questions at this 00:24:56.730 --> 00:24:57.440 time. 00:24:59.319 --> 00:25:04.130 Commissioner Roselle. Thanks chair. Thank you for the 00:25:04.130 --> 00:25:05.000 presentation. I have a couple 00:25:05.000 --> 00:25:08.680 questions. You mentioned that y'all the staff had spoke 00:25:08.680 --> 00:25:09.680 internally about this 00:25:09.680 --> 00:25:14.799 was there outside council brought in from like developers 00:25:14.799 --> 00:25:16.559 about this process? 00:25:16.559 --> 00:25:21.250 We've had some input from one. Okay. We've also talked to a 00:25:21.250 --> 00:25:23.599 shorty. Okay. And 00:25:23.599 --> 00:25:30.779 they we've but the the party who who did give input we made 00:25:30.779 --> 00:25:31.880 aware of the public 00:25:31.880 --> 00:25:35.000 hearing tonight and at the upcoming City Council meeting 00:25:35.000 --> 00:25:37.079 and invited them to give 00:25:37.079 --> 00:25:39.950 input. Oftentimes when there's changes like this we hear 00:25:39.950 --> 00:25:40.880 comparisons to other 00:25:40.880 --> 00:25:43.680 municipalities local to our area. I consider a lot of 00:25:43.680 --> 00:25:44.920 developers cross city 00:25:44.920 --> 00:25:47.930 lines it seems to make sense to align the process so that 00:25:47.930 --> 00:25:48.759 developers in 00:25:48.759 --> 00:25:52.309 Louisville could come to Denton and have similar kind of 00:25:52.309 --> 00:25:54.200 processes. Are other 00:25:54.200 --> 00:25:57.890 cities doing a double two-way agreement with contractors 00:25:57.890 --> 00:25:58.839 and developers is this 00:25:58.839 --> 00:26:01.829 kind of standard or how does this compare to other 00:26:01.829 --> 00:26:05.599 processes? Sure. 00:26:07.079 --> 00:26:12.119 Hi how are you? Good. Good evening commissioners. Wanted to 00:26:12.119 --> 00:26:13.039 give you some 00:26:13.039 --> 00:26:16.130 background or the history behind these three ways and why 00:26:16.130 --> 00:26:17.160 we are where we are 00:26:17.160 --> 00:26:19.839 this evening. It's actually a very exciting moment for us. 00:26:19.839 --> 00:26:21.279 We have been 00:26:21.279 --> 00:26:24.789 analyzing for a couple of years now where the discrepancies 00:26:24.789 --> 00:26:25.200 or the 00:26:25.200 --> 00:26:29.059 deficiencies do lie in our development code where it hind 00:26:29.059 --> 00:26:30.440 ers the ability for 00:26:30.440 --> 00:26:33.619 applicants to continue to proceed with their processes. So 00:26:33.619 --> 00:26:34.359 when I talk about 00:26:34.359 --> 00:26:37.039 processes I'm referring to their applications or their 00:26:37.039 --> 00:26:37.480 specific 00:26:37.480 --> 00:26:40.680 applications. We have a myriad of applications in the 00:26:40.680 --> 00:26:41.839 system from planning 00:26:41.839 --> 00:26:45.230 to site plan approval to civil engineering or construction 00:26:45.230 --> 00:26:46.039 engineering 00:26:46.039 --> 00:26:49.230 plans and what have you. One of the things that we 00:26:49.230 --> 00:26:51.200 highlighted in March was 00:26:51.200 --> 00:26:56.599 the fact that there was a lot of redundancy and time wasted 00:26:56.599 --> 00:26:56.720 or a 00:26:56.720 --> 00:27:02.230 time wastage component associated with requiring the three- 00:27:02.230 --> 00:27:03.319 way agreement to be 00:27:03.319 --> 00:27:06.000 clumped together the way it is because what was happening 00:27:06.000 --> 00:27:06.880 is when you have an 00:27:06.880 --> 00:27:09.289 applicant who says I think this is what I'm going to do so 00:27:09.289 --> 00:27:10.240 I'm going to put all 00:27:10.240 --> 00:27:13.519 my paper in order right I'm going to have all my drawings 00:27:13.519 --> 00:27:15.079 in order but I'm 00:27:15.079 --> 00:27:18.220 not ready to execute and actually go to the to the next 00:27:18.220 --> 00:27:19.759 level of actually doing 00:27:19.759 --> 00:27:23.230 flat work perhaps or going vertical but I am ready to start 00:27:23.230 --> 00:27:24.119 looking at my 00:27:24.119 --> 00:27:27.849 opportunities and start project planning my program this 00:27:27.849 --> 00:27:29.119 gives them the ability 00:27:29.119 --> 00:27:32.150 to say we will allow you to move forward because they might 00:27:32.150 --> 00:27:32.880 not have that 00:27:32.880 --> 00:27:36.109 contractor in line at that time so the burden of the onus 00:27:36.109 --> 00:27:37.039 falls upon the 00:27:37.039 --> 00:27:40.049 applicant or developer rather in this case to go ahead and 00:27:40.049 --> 00:27:41.039 say I need to find 00:27:41.039 --> 00:27:43.720 a contractor I need to make sure all the bonding is in 00:27:43.720 --> 00:27:45.759 place at that time. In the 00:27:45.759 --> 00:27:48.289 meantime while that developer is doing that guess what we 00:27:48.289 --> 00:27:48.960 still haven't 00:27:48.960 --> 00:27:51.480 executed their plat and nor have we filed their plat for 00:27:51.480 --> 00:27:52.480 record for them so 00:27:52.480 --> 00:27:55.160 they're just sitting there so this could impact their 00:27:55.160 --> 00:27:56.599 financial obligations 00:27:56.599 --> 00:27:59.400 would they be still paying for this property as they're 00:27:59.400 --> 00:28:01.079 moving forward so 00:28:01.079 --> 00:28:04.720 that's one disconnect secondly that glut of the three-way 00:28:04.720 --> 00:28:05.559 agreement and the 00:28:05.559 --> 00:28:08.740 review of it falls on the DRC engineering reviewers at that 00:28:08.740 --> 00:28:09.039 time 00:28:09.039 --> 00:28:12.119 however it's actually a two-part step where you have the 00:28:12.119 --> 00:28:13.240 initial agreement 00:28:13.240 --> 00:28:15.759 which is the first two way that Jim was trying to explain 00:28:15.759 --> 00:28:16.400 and he was very 00:28:16.400 --> 00:28:19.450 eloquent in that and the second step is when it comes to I 00:28:19.450 --> 00:28:21.039 'm ready to actually do 00:28:21.039 --> 00:28:24.160 something so I have my contractors in place let's move on 00:28:24.160 --> 00:28:25.079 it now and that's 00:28:25.079 --> 00:28:27.759 more of a public works function and that's where that 00:28:27.759 --> 00:28:28.799 review would occur so 00:28:28.799 --> 00:28:31.490 what have we done we've actually saved in essence to some 00:28:31.490 --> 00:28:32.759 degree weeks of timing 00:28:32.759 --> 00:28:35.710 or you've actually saved financial obligation on the 00:28:35.710 --> 00:28:37.400 developer that is the 00:28:37.400 --> 00:28:40.930 intent so when you talk about why did did we then benchmark 00:28:40.930 --> 00:28:42.039 this process did 00:28:42.039 --> 00:28:44.920 we look at other communities absolutely we did we sat with 00:28:44.920 --> 00:28:45.759 the city manager's 00:28:45.759 --> 00:28:48.440 office and looked at these examples and ideas to see what 00:28:48.440 --> 00:28:49.440 other communities do 00:28:49.440 --> 00:28:52.410 some are more like some are more strict we use the larger 00:28:52.410 --> 00:28:53.480 communities we looked 00:28:53.480 --> 00:28:55.549 at the smaller communities as well and try to figure out 00:28:55.549 --> 00:28:56.319 what is best for us 00:28:56.319 --> 00:28:58.839 how do we address this but again we also have to stay in 00:28:58.839 --> 00:28:59.799 the parameters of the 00:28:59.799 --> 00:29:03.009 local government code which provides that that burden of 00:29:03.009 --> 00:29:03.880 proof on on the 00:29:03.880 --> 00:29:09.079 developer as it relates to is this a large DDC amendment 00:29:09.079 --> 00:29:10.799 and does it warrant 00:29:10.799 --> 00:29:14.049 us to go and pull the community I wouldn't disagree with 00:29:14.049 --> 00:29:14.680 you or the 00:29:14.680 --> 00:29:17.200 development community I wouldn't disagree with you it would 00:29:17.200 --> 00:29:17.799 not but we 00:29:17.799 --> 00:29:20.319 also find that this is one of the quick fixes that we can 00:29:20.319 --> 00:29:21.079 implement quickly and 00:29:21.079 --> 00:29:23.769 keep moving so that we don't have further redundancy and 00:29:23.769 --> 00:29:24.519 how in what we're 00:29:24.519 --> 00:29:28.150 doing so it's actually a process improvement and it should 00:29:28.150 --> 00:29:29.319 not cause undue 00:29:29.319 --> 00:29:33.339 burden I will use a name here Lee Allison has been 00:29:33.339 --> 00:29:35.279 instrumental not just as 00:29:35.279 --> 00:29:38.269 representative of DCDA but also you know he's provided some 00:29:38.269 --> 00:29:39.200 insight and he may 00:29:39.200 --> 00:29:41.430 have comment today I'm sure he will have comment today at 00:29:41.430 --> 00:29:42.480 the public hearing and 00:29:42.480 --> 00:29:45.549 I'd like to take that in but I really don't want to pause 00:29:45.549 --> 00:29:46.759 this process unless 00:29:46.759 --> 00:29:49.509 it's absolutely necessary it is scheduled for council on 00:29:49.509 --> 00:29:51.140 October 17th if 00:29:51.140 --> 00:29:53.960 I'm not mistaken and that will give us a good opportunity 00:29:53.960 --> 00:29:54.960 in a window to maybe 00:29:54.960 --> 00:29:57.910 take in more comments if we need to or maybe tweak or 00:29:57.910 --> 00:29:59.640 adjust but this this 00:29:59.640 --> 00:30:03.740 basic framework that we're proposing to you really does add 00:30:03.740 --> 00:30:04.640 value to our 00:30:04.640 --> 00:30:08.319 development community both large and small thank you Manal 00:30:08.319 --> 00:30:09.079 and one more 00:30:09.079 --> 00:30:12.910 question maybe for legal is what is PNC's responsibility to 00:30:12.910 --> 00:30:13.559 understand these 00:30:13.559 --> 00:30:17.079 agreements are we just approving that the function is going 00:30:17.079 --> 00:30:17.779 from a three-way to a 00:30:17.779 --> 00:30:22.480 two-way or should we as a body be looking at this agreement 00:30:22.480 --> 00:30:24.019 more in detail 00:30:24.019 --> 00:30:26.980 because we looked over the major terms but is it our 00:30:26.980 --> 00:30:28.839 responsibility to approve 00:30:28.839 --> 00:30:32.400 the minutiae as well no which you're approving is actually 00:30:32.400 --> 00:30:32.799 in front of you 00:30:32.799 --> 00:30:35.839 tonight it was handed out to you and it's just going to be 00:30:35.839 --> 00:30:36.319 a couple of 00:30:36.319 --> 00:30:40.859 surgical changes within the DDC as to what agreements are 00:30:40.859 --> 00:30:43.160 required where there 00:30:43.160 --> 00:30:46.450 will be more detail probably in the construction criteria 00:30:46.450 --> 00:30:47.359 manual which is 00:30:47.359 --> 00:30:51.960 currently as you know being amended right so you'll get 00:30:51.960 --> 00:30:53.759 some more information 00:30:53.759 --> 00:30:57.049 that way but the actual agreements themselves you really 00:30:57.049 --> 00:30:57.359 have no 00:30:57.359 --> 00:31:00.519 jurisdiction over but you have jurisdiction over the DDC so 00:31:00.519 --> 00:31:01.180 that's why 00:31:01.180 --> 00:31:03.849 we have to have a public hearing today in order because it 00:31:03.849 --> 00:31:04.519 's a dual public 00:31:04.519 --> 00:31:08.250 hearing process in order to amend the DDC for our new 00:31:08.250 --> 00:31:10.220 people so that's why 00:31:10.220 --> 00:31:12.990 we're here today but it also in response to what you were 00:31:12.990 --> 00:31:13.880 saying when we were 00:31:13.880 --> 00:31:16.720 looking at other communities and we sort of did do a 00:31:16.720 --> 00:31:19.240 benchmark process and 00:31:19.240 --> 00:31:22.920 Manal is correct a lot of them were either more strict or 00:31:22.920 --> 00:31:24.599 more relaxed but 00:31:24.599 --> 00:31:28.519 this was a way in order for us to comply with both the 00:31:28.519 --> 00:31:30.680 local government code for 00:31:30.680 --> 00:31:34.000 the subdivision regulations and also the government code 00:31:34.000 --> 00:31:35.160 which is for public 00:31:35.160 --> 00:31:38.589 infrastructure and that requires the performance and 00:31:38.589 --> 00:31:39.460 payment bonds with the 00:31:39.460 --> 00:31:43.130 contractor and whereas the local government code requires 00:31:43.130 --> 00:31:43.839 the performance 00:31:43.839 --> 00:31:46.650 bond with the developer and so we just came up with this 00:31:46.650 --> 00:31:47.759 process in order to 00:31:47.759 --> 00:31:51.789 streamline it so we think this is the best that we could do 00:31:51.789 --> 00:31:53.279 for Denton given 00:31:53.279 --> 00:31:56.039 the background that we have in the current codes we have in 00:31:56.039 --> 00:31:56.799 place and the 00:31:56.799 --> 00:32:00.920 state of the law and clearly we were missing that in our 00:32:00.920 --> 00:32:01.920 three-way agreement 00:32:01.920 --> 00:32:06.519 it wasn't in compliance with statute so I think this is a 00:32:06.519 --> 00:32:08.759 good fix in my opinion 00:32:08.759 --> 00:32:12.730 it's on the heels of we want to actually be in line or in 00:32:12.730 --> 00:32:14.680 line with the criteria 00:32:14.680 --> 00:32:16.640 manuals that Jennifer is talking about so that we can 00:32:16.640 --> 00:32:17.759 incorporate everything in 00:32:17.759 --> 00:32:20.710 one time so timing is of the essence and we do not want to 00:32:20.710 --> 00:32:22.079 compromise anybody's 00:32:22.079 --> 00:32:24.609 ability to respond to any this we do have about a month 00:32:24.609 --> 00:32:25.759 window now perfect 00:32:25.759 --> 00:32:30.039 thank you Commissioner Smith Commissioner Roselle asked a 00:32:30.039 --> 00:32:30.640 lot of the questions 00:32:30.640 --> 00:32:33.420 that I was going to ask but just a clarification I think I 00:32:33.420 --> 00:32:34.160 was writing a 00:32:34.160 --> 00:32:38.190 note when you said it the there is a failsafe for timing 00:32:38.190 --> 00:32:39.480 out process correct 00:32:39.480 --> 00:32:42.009 if they get if they get their plotting and the time between 00:32:42.009 --> 00:32:42.480 getting the 00:32:42.480 --> 00:32:44.430 plotting and then having the contractor get the second two- 00:32:44.430 --> 00:32:45.559 way agreement if that 00:32:45.559 --> 00:32:47.839 goes too long the plot will fall apart correct is that what 00:32:47.839 --> 00:32:48.519 I've there is a 00:32:48.519 --> 00:32:50.730 plat note so they wouldn't be able to proceed they wouldn't 00:32:50.730 --> 00:32:51.359 even get their 00:32:51.359 --> 00:32:55.049 building permits to move forward okay so I want to know 00:32:55.049 --> 00:32:58.000 thank you thank you I have 00:32:58.000 --> 00:33:01.109 a couple questions I may have missed it I think I was 00:33:01.109 --> 00:33:02.819 reading when the 00:33:02.819 --> 00:33:07.089 contractor signs their two-way whose bonding takes over at 00:33:07.089 --> 00:33:08.400 that as a time as 00:33:08.400 --> 00:33:11.599 the contractors bonding or is the developer bonding still 00:33:11.599 --> 00:33:12.920 in place I 00:33:12.920 --> 00:33:16.339 believe if I'm not mistaken it would be contractor bonding 00:33:16.339 --> 00:33:17.480 but you would have a 00:33:17.480 --> 00:33:20.009 signature block for the developer for the contractor to 00:33:20.009 --> 00:33:20.920 maintain his contract 00:33:20.920 --> 00:33:25.000 with the developer but that two-way with the part with that 00:33:25.000 --> 00:33:26.279 that two-way agreement 00:33:26.279 --> 00:33:31.240 would be contractor plus city okay because I see that as a 00:33:31.240 --> 00:33:32.359 possible issues 00:33:32.359 --> 00:33:35.119 during the construction really the contractors their 00:33:35.119 --> 00:33:36.119 bonding is one that 00:33:36.119 --> 00:33:42.400 needs to stand behind the performance and payment typically 00:33:42.400 --> 00:33:44.279 and then just 00:33:44.279 --> 00:33:46.809 thinking out loud again just kind of get my hands around 00:33:46.809 --> 00:33:49.279 this I don't know how 00:33:49.279 --> 00:33:52.490 difficult it may or may not be for developers to get 00:33:52.490 --> 00:33:53.599 bonding because 00:33:53.599 --> 00:33:56.759 typically every time we've done these in the past it's the 00:33:56.759 --> 00:33:57.779 contractors the 00:33:57.779 --> 00:34:01.690 bonding is based on their work experience their performance 00:34:01.690 --> 00:34:02.359 and those 00:34:02.359 --> 00:34:05.680 types of things and so I don't I'm not familiar with that 00:34:05.680 --> 00:34:07.119 versus the other 00:34:07.119 --> 00:34:09.650 problem actually Jim Jenks did his research in due 00:34:09.650 --> 00:34:10.760 diligence on that and I 00:34:10.760 --> 00:34:13.280 think you research that with if you want to elaborate on 00:34:13.280 --> 00:34:14.599 that because the expert 00:34:14.599 --> 00:34:20.039 on this communicate with a local surety about that and we 00:34:20.039 --> 00:34:21.519 we understand that in 00:34:21.519 --> 00:34:24.699 practice it more often it is the contractor that gets the 00:34:24.699 --> 00:34:25.559 bond but it's 00:34:25.559 --> 00:34:30.159 not uncommon for the developer to get the performance bond 00:34:30.159 --> 00:34:33.159 okay and like I said 00:34:33.159 --> 00:34:36.260 interestingly that the local government code names the 00:34:36.260 --> 00:34:37.559 developer as the party 00:34:37.559 --> 00:34:40.909 that must execute the performance bond so we've apparently 00:34:40.909 --> 00:34:41.559 been out of 00:34:41.559 --> 00:34:46.059 compliance and we're trying to rectify that and then one 00:34:46.059 --> 00:34:48.480 other question is I 00:34:48.480 --> 00:34:51.840 remember reading through when you were talking about lots 00:34:51.840 --> 00:34:53.639 there was a clause 00:34:53.639 --> 00:34:58.889 about you can't sell lots until you have I want to say the 00:34:58.889 --> 00:35:00.000 second the 00:35:00.000 --> 00:35:08.610 contractor bonding in place correct so the only question I 00:35:08.610 --> 00:35:09.960 would have and I 00:35:09.960 --> 00:35:12.639 know you all are in the early stages and this is kind of 00:35:12.639 --> 00:35:14.400 our first time how is 00:35:14.400 --> 00:35:17.880 that going to impact what we call paper lots the ability to 00:35:17.880 --> 00:35:18.760 sell paper lots 00:35:18.760 --> 00:35:22.829 where we get a piece of property get it preliminary platted 00:35:22.829 --> 00:35:24.159 and ready to go and 00:35:24.159 --> 00:35:29.079 then a third party buys that property quote-unquote 00:35:29.079 --> 00:35:31.800 entitled and I don't know 00:35:31.800 --> 00:35:37.000 how this language may or may not impact that business 00:35:37.000 --> 00:35:39.400 transaction so that may be 00:35:39.400 --> 00:35:44.329 something that needs to be discussed a little bit more and 00:35:44.329 --> 00:35:46.079 talk through how that 00:35:46.079 --> 00:35:51.840 may or may not impact that possibility and that's something 00:35:51.840 --> 00:35:52.679 that we can review 00:35:52.679 --> 00:35:55.480 that's independent of the language that's included in the 00:35:55.480 --> 00:35:56.079 change for 00:35:56.079 --> 00:36:03.400 tonight okay okay and then that and I may have missed it at 00:36:03.400 --> 00:36:04.760 the beginning there 00:36:04.760 --> 00:36:08.269 was talk about no private improvements in residential but 00:36:08.269 --> 00:36:09.199 you can do it in 00:36:09.199 --> 00:36:16.340 commercial is that changing that you can do now residential 00:36:16.340 --> 00:36:18.360 prior to substantial 00:36:18.360 --> 00:36:21.519 completion or not not for single-family residential and 00:36:21.519 --> 00:36:22.880 just one multifamily and 00:36:22.880 --> 00:36:27.239 why is that not the case why is it excluded in the others 00:36:27.239 --> 00:36:29.880 are permitted 00:36:31.000 --> 00:36:34.150 trying to recall if it's I believe we just kept it as it 00:36:34.150 --> 00:36:36.559 was yes yeah I believe 00:36:36.559 --> 00:36:39.760 it's worded that way currently in our code and there would 00:36:39.760 --> 00:36:40.639 be no change to 00:36:40.639 --> 00:36:43.360 that proposed here I understand and that's why I'm asking 00:36:43.360 --> 00:36:44.079 the question is I 00:36:44.079 --> 00:36:49.659 know in commercial and in multifamily we do phasing as to 00:36:49.659 --> 00:36:51.840 why there's not some 00:36:51.840 --> 00:36:55.750 type of a provision for that to be done in single-family 00:36:55.750 --> 00:36:56.840 residential that it may 00:36:56.840 --> 00:37:01.800 take four to six months or whatever to get a home built and 00:37:01.800 --> 00:37:03.239 it would be nice 00:37:03.239 --> 00:37:05.659 once the streets are paved and you have fire access while 00:37:05.659 --> 00:37:06.599 you're doing all your 00:37:06.599 --> 00:37:09.719 franchise utilities and other things if you can go in and 00:37:09.719 --> 00:37:10.960 begin building those 00:37:10.960 --> 00:37:14.650 homes and you have marketable homes available at 00:37:14.650 --> 00:37:16.599 substantial completion 00:37:16.599 --> 00:37:20.239 versus you have substantial completion everything's 00:37:20.239 --> 00:37:22.440 completely finished and then 00:37:22.440 --> 00:37:25.110 you're able to begin building homes but it takes four to 00:37:25.110 --> 00:37:26.000 six months to be able 00:37:26.000 --> 00:37:29.409 to get product finishes up four to six month drag there 00:37:29.409 --> 00:37:31.639 that's just a kind of a 00:37:31.639 --> 00:37:34.869 dead time and not very productive for the parties that are 00:37:34.869 --> 00:37:36.199 involved financially 00:37:36.199 --> 00:37:40.599 and maybe an opportunity for us to look at that as well 00:37:40.599 --> 00:37:42.039 just so that I'm clear 00:37:42.039 --> 00:37:46.909 and the records clear the suggestion that you're making is 00:37:46.909 --> 00:37:48.440 to separate the 00:37:48.440 --> 00:37:52.219 type of improvement like the roads have to go in but then 00:37:52.219 --> 00:37:53.800 while you're waiting 00:37:53.800 --> 00:37:58.219 for the other franchise things to go in you can start well 00:37:58.219 --> 00:37:59.599 it'd be similar to I 00:37:59.599 --> 00:38:01.559 think what you're doing in the commercial that you'd have 00:38:01.559 --> 00:38:02.079 to do a whole 00:38:02.079 --> 00:38:08.380 harmless and and then once you sign the whole harmless and 00:38:08.380 --> 00:38:09.559 I would assume it'd be 00:38:09.559 --> 00:38:13.730 similar to what we get into with commercial that you can't 00:38:13.730 --> 00:38:14.639 go vertical 00:38:14.639 --> 00:38:19.280 until you've met your fire marshal requirements of being 00:38:19.280 --> 00:38:19.760 able to have 00:38:19.760 --> 00:38:22.820 access 150 feet each way and all those types of things that 00:38:22.820 --> 00:38:23.679 then you would be 00:38:23.679 --> 00:38:29.289 allowed to begin building homes while you're in there doing 00:38:29.289 --> 00:38:30.519 DME at all your 00:38:30.519 --> 00:38:33.989 franchise utilities all your fences entryways and all those 00:38:33.989 --> 00:38:34.719 types of things 00:38:34.719 --> 00:38:37.250 it just is would be a an efficiency thing while we're 00:38:37.250 --> 00:38:37.719 talking about 00:38:37.719 --> 00:38:42.059 efficiencies that would help as well that would actually 00:38:42.059 --> 00:38:43.079 require a change in 00:38:43.079 --> 00:38:45.760 the version that you have before you tonight so you would 00:38:45.760 --> 00:38:46.400 have to make a 00:38:46.400 --> 00:38:49.780 motion to provide for that so that we can change it 00:38:49.780 --> 00:38:51.119 accordingly and bring it 00:38:51.119 --> 00:38:53.650 to council okay I was just going to point out the current 00:38:53.650 --> 00:38:54.760 code and and that 00:38:54.760 --> 00:38:59.119 we haven't changed that wording allows as many as four 00:38:59.119 --> 00:39:01.199 model homes to be to be 00:39:01.199 --> 00:39:04.989 constructed before the public improvements are accepted 00:39:04.989 --> 00:39:06.960 right I 00:39:06.960 --> 00:39:09.750 understand that that's why I was wondering if there's a way 00:39:09.750 --> 00:39:10.320 to look at 00:39:10.320 --> 00:39:13.159 because again you're you have a four to six month lag on 00:39:13.159 --> 00:39:14.480 marketable they're not 00:39:14.480 --> 00:39:17.340 going to sell the models look they're gonna keep those so 00:39:17.340 --> 00:39:18.239 there's a four to 00:39:18.239 --> 00:39:20.909 six month lag between substantial completion and then you 00:39:20.909 --> 00:39:21.320 're able to 00:39:21.320 --> 00:39:24.949 actually have a marketable product that you can sell and 00:39:24.949 --> 00:39:26.119 close so there's a four 00:39:26.119 --> 00:39:29.210 to six month lag in there that would be an opportunity to 00:39:29.210 --> 00:39:30.360 take a look at and see 00:39:30.360 --> 00:39:33.840 if there's a way to do that incorporated so those would be 00:39:33.840 --> 00:39:36.719 my comments I'm open 00:39:36.719 --> 00:39:40.440 to the idea I think it's time to update and I see a 00:39:40.440 --> 00:39:42.539 positive with it and a few 00:39:42.539 --> 00:39:46.260 questions that just are outside of my realm of expertise or 00:39:46.260 --> 00:39:47.320 knowledge that 00:39:47.320 --> 00:39:50.300 would like to get some more information on but I think it's 00:39:50.300 --> 00:39:51.320 on the surface it's 00:39:51.320 --> 00:39:57.480 a it's an improvement and a good idea thank you 00:39:57.480 --> 00:40:01.730 any else questions on this item I just wanted to mention as 00:40:01.730 --> 00:40:02.480 I was Commissioner 00:40:02.480 --> 00:40:08.039 Sanchez sorry I'm sorry okay just so I can say timeout for 00:40:08.039 --> 00:40:08.760 for those of you 00:40:08.760 --> 00:40:10.769 that are new on the Commission the only reason that we try 00:40:10.769 --> 00:40:11.599 to do introductions 00:40:11.599 --> 00:40:15.280 is so in the back we have these meetings are recorded and 00:40:15.280 --> 00:40:16.599 they do the minutes and 00:40:16.599 --> 00:40:19.550 so it's very helpful for staff that is recording our 00:40:19.550 --> 00:40:20.840 meetings to be able to 00:40:20.840 --> 00:40:24.559 know who says what when they're doing all the minutes back 00:40:24.559 --> 00:40:25.840 there so that's why I 00:40:25.840 --> 00:40:29.159 like to try to recognize you and if we get into crosstalk 00:40:29.159 --> 00:40:30.599 help me with giving 00:40:30.599 --> 00:40:33.599 you an opportunity to introduce so the guys in the back 00:40:33.599 --> 00:40:34.880 know who's talking so 00:40:34.880 --> 00:40:39.679 Commissioner Sanchez yes as I was listening to it and some 00:40:39.679 --> 00:40:39.760 of the 00:40:39.760 --> 00:40:43.400 experience I've seen and heard from contractors is the 00:40:43.400 --> 00:40:45.119 process is very time 00:40:45.119 --> 00:40:48.550 consuming and the idea of something like this seems to 00:40:48.550 --> 00:40:50.800 bring out that you are 00:40:50.800 --> 00:40:54.369 working towards making the process simpler and it does look 00:40:54.369 --> 00:40:55.239 like it's you 00:40:55.239 --> 00:40:59.420 know it's something to try I agree with it thank you yes 00:40:59.420 --> 00:41:01.039 that is a major point 00:41:01.039 --> 00:41:09.760 of focus for staff for sure okay thank you Jim thank you 00:41:09.760 --> 00:41:11.960 all 00:41:16.000 --> 00:41:19.900 okay with that we've kind of gone through things fairly 00:41:19.900 --> 00:41:21.880 quickly this 00:41:21.880 --> 00:41:25.090 evening that's our work session and so I will close our 00:41:25.090 --> 00:41:26.960 work session at 515 and 00:41:26.960 --> 00:41:32.179 we will reconvene in council chambers at 630 thank you 00:41:32.179 --> 00:41:33.079 everyone 00:41:45.119 --> 00:41:47.119 , thank you. 00:42:16.119 --> 00:42:16.219 Good evening and welcome to the city of Denton planning and 00:42:16.219 --> 00:42:21.559 zoning commission 00:42:21.559 --> 00:42:24.989 meeting for September 13th this meeting has been duly 00:42:24.989 --> 00:42:26.320 posted and we do have a 00:42:26.320 --> 00:42:30.559 quorum present and I will call us to order at 630 our first 00:42:30.559 --> 00:42:31.199 order of 00:42:31.199 --> 00:42:35.099 business will be to stand and give the pledge the US and 00:42:35.099 --> 00:42:36.199 the Texas flag 00:42:45.119 --> 00:42:50.989 one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice 00:42:50.989 --> 00:42:52.119 for all. 00:42:52.119 --> 00:42:57.119 Honor the Texas flag and pledge allegiance to thee Texas 00:42:57.119 --> 00:43:02.119 one state under God one indivisible. 00:43:11.119 --> 00:43:15.489 As chair I'm going to take a moment and go off agenda we 00:43:15.489 --> 00:43:16.559 have two new 00:43:16.559 --> 00:43:20.349 commissioners with us tonight and I would like to welcome 00:43:20.349 --> 00:43:21.719 mr. Alfred Sanchez 00:43:21.719 --> 00:43:25.920 to our Commission thank you for agreeing to serve and also 00:43:25.920 --> 00:43:27.519 mr. Tim Smith and 00:43:27.519 --> 00:43:30.670 appreciate you being willing to service well Tim welcome to 00:43:30.670 --> 00:43:33.639 our Commission the 00:43:33.639 --> 00:43:38.039 next item on our agenda will be our consent agenda 00:43:38.559 --> 00:43:42.559 Commissioner Roselle I motion to approve the consent agenda 00:43:42.559 --> 00:43:44.000 okay the chair would 00:43:44.000 --> 00:43:46.840 entertain a second 00:43:48.519 --> 00:43:53.719 Commissioner Smith a second to accept okay we have a first 00:43:53.719 --> 00:43:54.960 and a second for 00:43:54.960 --> 00:44:01.989 approval any discussion seeing none we will call for a vote 00:44:01.989 --> 00:44:04.480 on the board 00:44:08.559 --> 00:44:27.739 motion carries four to zero we'll make an announcement for 00:44:27.739 --> 00:44:29.519 some of you all we'll 00:44:29.519 --> 00:44:33.369 draw your attention that we do have two items on our public 00:44:33.369 --> 00:44:35.519 hearing tonight that 00:44:35.519 --> 00:44:42.320 have been postponed that is item C that is going to be the 00:44:42.320 --> 00:44:44.880 3.2 acres that there 00:44:44.880 --> 00:44:49.329 are in our six to NRM you which is Z 17 - zero zero one 00:44:49.329 --> 00:44:51.599 three and then the second 00:44:51.599 --> 00:44:57.150 item that has been postponed is item D which is Z 17 - zero 00:44:57.150 --> 00:44:59.159 zero one five it is 00:44:59.159 --> 00:45:05.019 the 73 acres over on the corner of loop 288 and McKinney 00:45:05.019 --> 00:45:07.239 Street and those are 00:45:07.239 --> 00:45:10.420 both being postponed to September the 27th want to make 00:45:10.420 --> 00:45:11.719 that announcement for 00:45:11.719 --> 00:45:14.250 anybody who's here so you don't have to wait as we go 00:45:14.250 --> 00:45:15.280 through the rest of our 00:45:15.280 --> 00:45:18.849 agenda those but both of those will be back September 27 00:45:18.849 --> 00:45:20.719 two weeks thank you 00:45:20.719 --> 00:45:29.519 for coming out tonight sorry give just a second to let the 00:45:29.519 --> 00:45:33.599 room clear okay back 00:45:33.599 --> 00:45:37.519 to our agenda we have approved our consent agenda and we 00:45:37.519 --> 00:45:38.280 will now move on 00:45:38.280 --> 00:45:42.869 to our items for individual consideration that item will be 00:45:42.869 --> 00:45:43.119 to 00:45:43.119 --> 00:45:46.010 consider and appoint a member of the planning and zoning 00:45:46.010 --> 00:45:47.800 Commission for vice 00:45:47.800 --> 00:45:53.969 chair and the chair will make a motion for Commissioner 00:45:53.969 --> 00:45:56.440 Roselle and I make that 00:45:56.440 --> 00:45:59.679 motion based on your experience and tenure here on a board 00:45:59.679 --> 00:46:01.239 and so I would 00:46:01.239 --> 00:46:05.820 put that motion forward for consideration Commissioner 00:46:05.820 --> 00:46:06.280 Smith I 00:46:06.280 --> 00:46:09.780 second that motion to accept Commissioner Roselle as a vice 00:46:09.780 --> 00:46:10.440 chair okay 00:46:10.440 --> 00:46:18.579 we have a first and a second any discussion okay that I 00:46:18.579 --> 00:46:19.880 will call for a 00:46:19.880 --> 00:46:22.559 vote on the board 00:46:33.159 --> 00:46:35.690 that motion carries four to zero congratulations and thank 00:46:35.690 --> 00:46:38.159 you for being 00:46:38.159 --> 00:46:43.619 willing to serve you that will move us to our public 00:46:43.619 --> 00:46:45.239 hearing section this 00:46:45.239 --> 00:46:49.650 evening and at this time I will open a public hearing for 00:46:49.650 --> 00:46:52.239 fr 17 - zero zero one 00:46:52.239 --> 00:46:58.400 zero and I will call on Haley's aversely for presentation 00:47:08.559 --> 00:47:18.730 good evening this is a replat of property that is used as a 00:47:18.730 --> 00:47:19.800 DME 00:47:19.800 --> 00:47:25.349 substation out on Brinker Road and let me get it rotated 00:47:25.349 --> 00:47:27.480 here so this plat the 00:47:27.480 --> 00:47:30.349 purpose of it is to combine some previously plotted 00:47:30.349 --> 00:47:31.199 property with 00:47:31.199 --> 00:47:31.199 unplatted property and make one larger lot for the subst 00:47:31.199 --> 00:47:36.159 ation there is also a 00:47:36.159 --> 00:47:39.239 right-of-way for Morse Road that is no longer used and is 00:47:39.239 --> 00:47:40.239 being abandoned by 00:47:40.239 --> 00:47:46.659 this plot and I can answer any questions any questions for 00:47:46.659 --> 00:47:47.639 staff 00:47:50.400 --> 00:47:55.840 thank you Haley this is a public hearing anyone who would 00:47:55.840 --> 00:47:56.679 like to speak on this 00:47:56.679 --> 00:48:04.500 item please come forward at this time anyone to speak on 00:48:04.500 --> 00:48:06.960 this item seeing 00:48:06.960 --> 00:48:10.340 none I will close the public hearing and open the floor for 00:48:10.340 --> 00:48:11.079 discussion or a 00:48:11.079 --> 00:48:13.440 motion 00:48:16.159 --> 00:48:23.280 Commissioner Roselle I motion to approve fr 17 - 10 okay 00:48:23.280 --> 00:48:27.869 Commissioner Smith I second the motion to approve fr 17 - 00:48:27.869 --> 00:48:29.800 10 okay we have a 00:48:29.800 --> 00:48:35.679 first and a second for approval any discussion seeing none 00:48:35.679 --> 00:48:37.360 we will call for 00:48:37.360 --> 00:48:39.960 a vote on the board 00:48:47.800 --> 00:48:55.349 that motion carries four to zero we'll move us to public 00:48:55.349 --> 00:48:57.400 hearing item B this 00:48:57.400 --> 00:49:01.639 time I will open the public hearing for Z 17 - zero zero 00:49:01.639 --> 00:49:03.079 one seven and I will call 00:49:03.079 --> 00:49:07.159 on Haley for presentation of this item as well 00:49:13.480 --> 00:49:21.090 this is case Z 17 17 it's for pioneer automotive so the 00:49:21.090 --> 00:49:22.199 request is to hold a 00:49:22.199 --> 00:49:24.730 public hearing and consider a request to rezone 00:49:24.730 --> 00:49:27.039 approximately a half acre from 00:49:27.039 --> 00:49:29.920 neighborhood residential mixed-use district to community 00:49:29.920 --> 00:49:30.880 mixed-use general 00:49:30.880 --> 00:49:33.849 district and you can see outlined here the property is 00:49:33.849 --> 00:49:35.079 located on the southeast 00:49:35.079 --> 00:49:39.360 corner of the Teasley and old Alton Road intersection 00:49:39.360 --> 00:49:40.960 looking at what's 00:49:40.960 --> 00:49:43.639 surrounding the property you can see we have a mix of 00:49:43.639 --> 00:49:45.360 zoning districts here the 00:49:45.360 --> 00:49:48.869 subject property and property to the west are zoned in our 00:49:48.869 --> 00:49:49.840 MU to the south 00:49:49.840 --> 00:49:53.570 you have in the hatched area area that's in our extra 00:49:53.570 --> 00:49:55.159 territorial jurisdiction so 00:49:55.159 --> 00:49:58.309 that property hasn't yet been annexed into the city we have 00:49:58.309 --> 00:49:59.840 ICE district to the 00:49:59.840 --> 00:50:02.900 east that is along Teasley Lane and features some 00:50:02.900 --> 00:50:04.440 industrial office park 00:50:04.440 --> 00:50:08.389 uses across Teasley we have CMG our community mixed-use 00:50:08.389 --> 00:50:09.159 general district 00:50:09.159 --> 00:50:12.539 that property is associated with Geyer High School and then 00:50:12.539 --> 00:50:13.519 we have some in our 00:50:13.519 --> 00:50:17.650 two districts here to the northeast and on the map you also 00:50:17.650 --> 00:50:18.800 see NR two district 00:50:18.800 --> 00:50:22.159 immediately north of the property these are no longer 00:50:22.159 --> 00:50:23.679 separate parcels all of 00:50:23.679 --> 00:50:26.760 this area has been platted and this is actually all 00:50:26.760 --> 00:50:28.039 dedicated right of way for 00:50:28.039 --> 00:50:30.570 Teasley Lane so in the future this will look much just 00:50:30.570 --> 00:50:31.760 different when the road 00:50:31.760 --> 00:50:36.280 is expanded to its full width if we zoom a little bit 00:50:36.280 --> 00:50:37.679 further out you can see 00:50:37.679 --> 00:50:40.960 here there's an electrical transfer station nearby you get 00:50:40.960 --> 00:50:41.920 a better idea of 00:50:41.920 --> 00:50:44.900 the mix of uses here in this office an industrial park that 00:50:44.900 --> 00:50:45.880 's partially in the 00:50:45.880 --> 00:50:50.260 city partially still in the ETJ there's a sporting facility 00:50:50.260 --> 00:50:51.559 directly south of the 00:50:51.559 --> 00:50:55.349 subject property and then you can see a mix of commercial 00:50:55.349 --> 00:50:58.920 uses across Teasley to 00:50:58.920 --> 00:51:01.400 give you a better idea of this general area you can see the 00:51:01.400 --> 00:51:02.280 Geyer High School 00:51:02.280 --> 00:51:05.309 campus is just north of the subject property we are very 00:51:05.309 --> 00:51:06.320 close to the city 00:51:06.320 --> 00:51:09.559 limits here so there's Corinth is just a little ways over 00:51:09.559 --> 00:51:11.239 to the east and then we 00:51:11.239 --> 00:51:13.769 have a lot of land that's still here in the ETJ to the 00:51:13.769 --> 00:51:14.880 south and west of the 00:51:14.880 --> 00:51:20.429 property looking at the future land use that was designated 00:51:20.429 --> 00:51:21.199 for this area under 00:51:21.199 --> 00:51:24.679 the Denton plan 2030 it's designated as community mixed use 00:51:24.679 --> 00:51:27.039 and that designation 00:51:27.039 --> 00:51:29.570 applies to areas where we're trying to promote a mixture of 00:51:29.570 --> 00:51:29.800 uses 00:51:29.800 --> 00:51:33.070 predominantly commercial but with a mixture of other 00:51:33.070 --> 00:51:34.199 services and some 00:51:34.199 --> 00:51:37.880 residential uses as well this particular area was 00:51:37.880 --> 00:51:39.480 designated with this because 00:51:39.480 --> 00:51:43.159 you can see here old Alton Road from the south and Teasley 00:51:43.159 --> 00:51:44.239 that combination 00:51:44.239 --> 00:51:47.110 creates a pretty prominent gateway into the city for people 00:51:47.110 --> 00:51:48.119 coming from the south 00:51:48.119 --> 00:51:52.179 or the east so the goal with this designation for this area 00:51:52.179 --> 00:51:52.920 is to over 00:51:52.920 --> 00:51:56.159 time promote a wide mixture of land uses primarily 00:51:56.159 --> 00:51:57.840 commercial uses that can 00:51:57.840 --> 00:52:00.260 support the existing neighborhoods in the area as well as 00:52:00.260 --> 00:52:01.039 new neighborhoods 00:52:01.039 --> 00:52:03.719 that may develop in the future and help create kind of a 00:52:03.719 --> 00:52:04.719 sense of place and a 00:52:04.719 --> 00:52:10.369 prominent entry point to the city of Denton just to give 00:52:10.369 --> 00:52:11.360 you a brief 00:52:11.360 --> 00:52:14.039 comparison of the two zoning districts here you can see 00:52:14.039 --> 00:52:15.079 based on the general 00:52:15.079 --> 00:52:18.489 regulations that NRMU and CMG are fairly comparable the 00:52:18.489 --> 00:52:20.079 goal with this rezoning 00:52:20.079 --> 00:52:23.920 is to obtain CMG because it matches that future land use it 00:52:23.920 --> 00:52:25.000 gets the area where 00:52:25.000 --> 00:52:27.679 we're wanting to go with it and that district also allows 00:52:27.679 --> 00:52:28.400 the applicants 00:52:28.400 --> 00:52:31.789 intended use of auto repair which is not permitted in NRMU 00:52:31.789 --> 00:52:33.840 but other than that as 00:52:33.840 --> 00:52:36.929 you can see here the districts create fairly comparable 00:52:36.929 --> 00:52:38.039 design based on lot 00:52:38.039 --> 00:52:42.389 coverage and landscape area requirements if we look at our 00:52:42.389 --> 00:52:43.840 mobility plan we have 00:52:43.840 --> 00:52:47.010 Teasley which is a primary arterial and old Alton which is 00:52:47.010 --> 00:52:48.320 a secondary arterial 00:52:48.320 --> 00:52:51.659 that adjoin the property Teasley is ultimately intended to 00:52:51.659 --> 00:52:52.440 be built out as a 00:52:52.440 --> 00:52:55.119 six-lane divided roadway it's under improvement by tech 00:52:55.119 --> 00:52:56.719 stock currently old 00:52:56.719 --> 00:52:59.889 Alton is intended to be a four-lane divided roadway there's 00:52:59.889 --> 00:53:00.360 no immediate 00:53:00.360 --> 00:53:03.230 plans for those improvements there but this intersection is 00:53:03.230 --> 00:53:05.000 being improved with 00:53:05.000 --> 00:53:07.530 some turn lanes and a signal is being placed there as Geyer 00:53:07.530 --> 00:53:08.159 High School 00:53:08.159 --> 00:53:12.210 expands to the south and creates a new driveway for the 00:53:12.210 --> 00:53:13.719 school notifications 00:53:13.719 --> 00:53:16.670 were sent about the request before the meeting we had 00:53:16.670 --> 00:53:18.639 received two in favor the 00:53:18.639 --> 00:53:21.960 owners of the subject property as well as the owners 00:53:21.960 --> 00:53:23.599 immediately to the east 00:53:23.599 --> 00:53:27.159 staff is recommending approval for this request based on it 00:53:27.159 --> 00:53:28.280 being compatible 00:53:28.280 --> 00:53:31.139 with the surrounding zoning and mixture of land uses the 00:53:31.139 --> 00:53:32.440 district is appropriate 00:53:32.440 --> 00:53:34.539 at a prominent gateway because it allows us to have the 00:53:34.539 --> 00:53:35.239 commercial design 00:53:35.239 --> 00:53:38.599 standards in place and it's also consistent with the Denton 00:53:38.599 --> 00:53:39.519 plan 2030s 00:53:39.519 --> 00:53:44.599 designation for this area and with that I can stand for any 00:53:44.599 --> 00:53:49.480 questions any 00:53:49.480 --> 00:53:57.519 questions for staff thank you Haley again this is a public 00:53:57.519 --> 00:53:58.119 hearing anyone 00:53:58.119 --> 00:54:00.400 who would like to speak on this item please come forward at 00:54:00.400 --> 00:54:02.119 this time I have 00:54:02.119 --> 00:54:09.880 no cards from anyone seeing none we will close the public 00:54:09.880 --> 00:54:11.480 hearing and we'll open 00:54:11.480 --> 00:54:15.000 the floor for discussion or motion 00:54:19.519 --> 00:54:24.039 Commissioner Rizzo I'll just keep going here I move 00:54:24.039 --> 00:54:30.000 approval of Z 17 - 17 okay 00:54:30.000 --> 00:54:35.210 Commissioner Smith second the motion to accept Z 17 - 0 17 00:54:35.210 --> 00:54:36.719 okay we have a first 00:54:36.719 --> 00:54:42.619 and a second for approval any discussion seeing none I'll 00:54:42.619 --> 00:54:44.760 call for a vote on the 00:54:44.760 --> 00:55:00.800 board motion is going to carry four to zero as I announced 00:55:00.800 --> 00:55:02.840 earlier items C and 00:55:02.840 --> 00:55:06.619 D have both been postponed until September the 27th so if 00:55:06.619 --> 00:55:07.519 you're here for 00:55:07.519 --> 00:55:11.039 either one of those items or watching online those will be 00:55:11.039 --> 00:55:11.960 back before us 00:55:11.960 --> 00:55:16.980 currently on the 27th item C and D both that will move us 00:55:16.980 --> 00:55:18.760 to item E on our 00:55:18.760 --> 00:55:25.320 public hearing at this time I will open DCA 17 - 0 0 1 0 00:55:25.320 --> 00:55:27.159 and I will call on Jim 00:55:27.159 --> 00:55:32.320 Jinx for presentation congratulations and best wishes on 00:55:32.320 --> 00:55:34.800 your project 00:55:41.960 --> 00:55:58.880 good evening as one of the many process improvements that 00:55:58.880 --> 00:56:01.199 the city is looking at 00:56:01.199 --> 00:56:05.599 doing on the development review side I've got here for 00:56:05.599 --> 00:56:07.360 presentation to you 00:56:07.360 --> 00:56:14.039 tonight some agree revisions to development agreements 00:56:14.039 --> 00:56:28.400 sorry what one 00:56:28.400 --> 00:56:34.170 particular area focus has been streamlining the the pre- 00:56:34.170 --> 00:56:34.840 construction 00:56:34.840 --> 00:56:39.280 phase of a development project from the period from 00:56:39.280 --> 00:56:42.440 approval by the P&Z to the 00:56:42.440 --> 00:56:45.250 kickoff of construction both private improvement 00:56:45.250 --> 00:56:46.679 construction and public 00:56:46.679 --> 00:56:50.809 improvement construction and this is that's what this 00:56:50.809 --> 00:56:52.400 effort is focused on 00:56:52.400 --> 00:56:58.340 and I'll explain how as we go through it basically the the 00:56:58.340 --> 00:57:00.719 objectives here are to 00:57:00.719 --> 00:57:05.309 facilitate an expedited plat filing for the benefit benefit 00:57:05.309 --> 00:57:06.639 of the developer 00:57:06.639 --> 00:57:13.559 it's a request that we frequently get to to file the plat 00:57:13.559 --> 00:57:15.400 early we have to make 00:57:15.400 --> 00:57:17.539 sure of course that it's done in a way in which the city's 00:57:17.539 --> 00:57:18.199 interests are 00:57:18.199 --> 00:57:22.699 protected and as I mentioned we also want to just with this 00:57:22.699 --> 00:57:23.639 and other 00:57:23.639 --> 00:57:26.369 initiatives we're working on help streamline the pre-const 00:57:26.369 --> 00:57:27.199 ruction process 00:57:27.199 --> 00:57:36.780 to shorten the timeline this diagram here represents a 00:57:36.780 --> 00:57:38.239 simplified version of our 00:57:38.239 --> 00:57:41.659 current process basically starting at the top you see the 00:57:41.659 --> 00:57:42.559 the final plat 00:57:42.559 --> 00:57:48.440 approved by the P&Z and then the next step is our current 00:57:48.440 --> 00:57:50.000 three-way development 00:57:50.000 --> 00:57:55.690 agreements those are forms that we have in place and have 00:57:55.690 --> 00:57:56.400 been using for many 00:57:56.400 --> 00:58:01.030 years the three parties involved are the city the developer 00:58:01.030 --> 00:58:03.599 and the contractor you 00:58:03.599 --> 00:58:06.550 can see on the far right I've got a I've got a timeline 00:58:06.550 --> 00:58:09.559 listed here this is this 00:58:09.559 --> 00:58:13.030 is what we are accustomed to seeing in engineering 00:58:13.030 --> 00:58:14.719 development review we're 00:58:14.719 --> 00:58:17.880 we're sort of the main party that processes these 00:58:17.880 --> 00:58:19.519 agreements for the city 00:58:19.519 --> 00:58:24.440 and typically as far as the time for the developer to get 00:58:24.440 --> 00:58:26.239 the agreements to 00:58:26.239 --> 00:58:30.659 together and submit them and have them executable and have 00:58:30.659 --> 00:58:32.519 them executed we see 00:58:32.519 --> 00:58:37.329 a timeline of about six weeks sometimes we can it's shorter 00:58:37.329 --> 00:58:38.679 than that sometimes 00:58:38.679 --> 00:58:43.519 it's longer than that but that's sort of a more or less a 00:58:43.519 --> 00:58:44.920 reasonable best-case 00:58:44.920 --> 00:58:50.610 expectation and you can see fault it was not till following 00:58:50.610 --> 00:58:52.079 that that we can have 00:58:52.079 --> 00:58:54.900 the pre-construction meeting and the filing of the plat 00:58:54.900 --> 00:58:55.880 there in the lower 00:58:55.880 --> 00:59:02.030 left so that and that is how that's a function of how our 00:59:02.030 --> 00:59:02.840 development code is 00:59:02.840 --> 00:59:09.119 currently written it requires that sequence so and then 00:59:09.119 --> 00:59:10.400 following that also 00:59:10.400 --> 00:59:16.320 if for for anything other than single-family residential 00:59:16.320 --> 00:59:18.480 development 00:59:18.480 --> 00:59:23.519 well let me back up our code stipulates that no private 00:59:23.519 --> 00:59:25.159 construction improvements 00:59:25.159 --> 00:59:28.320 may begin until all the public improvements have been 00:59:28.320 --> 00:59:29.239 installed and 00:59:29.239 --> 00:59:35.210 accepted unless a hold harmless agreement which is the HHA 00:59:35.210 --> 00:59:36.320 that's listed 00:59:36.320 --> 00:59:41.860 here is executed by the developer basically that involves 00:59:41.860 --> 00:59:42.599 in that 00:59:42.599 --> 00:59:46.750 agreement the developer says acknowledges that he has been 00:59:46.750 --> 00:59:47.559 allowed to 00:59:47.559 --> 00:59:51.130 proceed forward with his private improvements but he will 00:59:51.130 --> 00:59:52.079 not be issued a 00:59:52.079 --> 00:59:56.400 CEO by the city until his public improvements are complete 00:59:56.400 --> 00:59:57.199 and in the 00:59:57.199 --> 01:00:03.360 event that his CEO his CEO is held up because of that issue 01:00:03.360 --> 01:00:04.039 he will hold the 01:00:04.039 --> 01:00:07.989 city harmless so that has to be executed that's a separate 01:00:07.989 --> 01:00:09.280 step currently in a 01:00:09.280 --> 01:00:12.639 precursor to the issuance of any sort of private building 01:00:12.639 --> 01:00:13.840 permit there at the 01:00:13.840 --> 01:00:22.010 bottom the next slide is the proposed change we have before 01:00:22.010 --> 01:00:23.800 you starting again 01:00:23.800 --> 01:00:28.469 at approval by P&Z of the final plat we go on what we've 01:00:28.469 --> 01:00:29.480 done here is 01:00:29.480 --> 01:00:33.309 essentially break up the existing three-way development 01:00:33.309 --> 01:00:34.679 agreement into two 01:00:34.679 --> 01:00:39.519 two-way agreements the first would be simply between the 01:00:39.519 --> 01:00:40.179 city and the 01:00:40.179 --> 01:00:46.469 developer and I will in my next slide to go through the 01:00:46.469 --> 01:00:49.360 major terms of what that 01:00:49.360 --> 01:00:55.079 agreement will have but basically once that is signed the 01:00:55.079 --> 01:00:56.360 plaque can be filed 01:00:56.360 --> 01:01:02.230 and as you can see on the far right we're anticipating that 01:01:02.230 --> 01:01:03.400 can be done 01:01:03.400 --> 01:01:07.070 realistically within a couple weeks of the plat being 01:01:07.070 --> 01:01:09.360 approved by P&Z so that's 01:01:09.360 --> 01:01:12.829 a big improvement on the six weeks plus that we are 01:01:12.829 --> 01:01:15.639 currently seeing and we get 01:01:15.639 --> 01:01:20.550 these requests to file plat early from developers we hear 01:01:20.550 --> 01:01:21.679 and understand that 01:01:21.679 --> 01:01:27.079 often it's developers financing is tied to that milestone 01:01:27.079 --> 01:01:28.920 so in an effort to 01:01:28.920 --> 01:01:32.000 come help accommodate the development community we are 01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:33.239 again trying to break 01:01:33.239 --> 01:01:36.280 that out toward that milestone can be reached much sooner 01:01:36.280 --> 01:01:38.599 so going down on this 01:01:38.599 --> 01:01:42.550 chart the next step would be the two-way agreement between 01:01:42.550 --> 01:01:43.800 the city and the 01:01:43.800 --> 01:01:50.530 contractor that would other than subtracting the developer 01:01:50.530 --> 01:01:51.639 from that 01:01:51.639 --> 01:01:55.719 because he's already under agreement for the previous step 01:01:55.719 --> 01:01:56.960 that agreement would 01:01:56.960 --> 01:02:01.150 be very similar to how it is currently worded once that is 01:02:01.150 --> 01:02:02.780 done then we can 01:02:02.780 --> 01:02:07.309 proceed on to the pre-construction meeting and and I should 01:02:07.309 --> 01:02:08.559 have mentioned 01:02:08.559 --> 01:02:12.639 in the first agreement there we were also proposing to roll 01:02:12.639 --> 01:02:13.719 in the current 01:02:13.719 --> 01:02:16.440 hold harmless agreement language into that first two-way 01:02:16.440 --> 01:02:17.719 agreement between the 01:02:17.719 --> 01:02:22.119 city and developer our current whole harmless agreement is 01:02:22.119 --> 01:02:23.360 names the 01:02:23.360 --> 01:02:26.730 developer he's the one who has to sign it and record it so 01:02:26.730 --> 01:02:27.800 it makes sense that 01:02:27.800 --> 01:02:30.989 it could be folded into that agreement and that would 01:02:30.989 --> 01:02:32.599 eliminate that separate 01:02:32.599 --> 01:02:36.650 step which is usually not we usually can't initiate that 01:02:36.650 --> 01:02:37.760 until the full 01:02:37.760 --> 01:02:42.329 three-way agreement is signed so again that's six weeks 01:02:42.329 --> 01:02:47.880 plus out in in 01:02:47.880 --> 01:02:51.030 conjunction with this we would we propose requiring a 01:02:51.030 --> 01:02:52.280 standard note being 01:02:52.280 --> 01:02:55.460 added to the plant the plat the face of the plat very 01:02:55.460 --> 01:02:57.559 prominently clarifying that 01:02:57.559 --> 01:03:00.550 no lots shall be sold no construction of private 01:03:00.550 --> 01:03:02.159 improvements shall be authorized 01:03:02.159 --> 01:03:05.989 to begin until the two-way agreement between the contractor 01:03:05.989 --> 01:03:06.599 and the city is 01:03:06.599 --> 01:03:10.719 fully executed legally binding the contractor to 01:03:10.719 --> 01:03:11.920 construction of all public 01:03:11.920 --> 01:03:16.079 improvements associated with the plan 01:03:19.360 --> 01:03:24.170 that way it is the intent there is that it be made clear to 01:03:24.170 --> 01:03:26.840 anyone looking at 01:03:26.840 --> 01:03:33.000 the plat that there there may be public improvements that 01:03:33.000 --> 01:03:35.079 have to be installed 01:03:35.079 --> 01:03:40.300 and that none of the private improvements may be begun 01:03:40.300 --> 01:03:41.519 before that 01:03:41.519 --> 01:03:48.039 step the two-way agreement delving into that a little bit 01:03:48.039 --> 01:03:49.159 more this is the first 01:03:49.159 --> 01:03:52.380 of the two sequential agreements we're proposing it would 01:03:52.380 --> 01:03:53.559 include as an 01:03:53.559 --> 01:03:59.110 attachment a performance bond signed or issued to the 01:03:59.110 --> 01:04:01.360 developer a current 01:04:01.360 --> 01:04:05.389 three-way contract has a requires a performance bond be 01:04:05.389 --> 01:04:08.719 attached and it is 01:04:08.719 --> 01:04:16.389 it is issued to the contractor kind of a what we perceive 01:04:16.389 --> 01:04:18.239 as a weak point of that 01:04:18.239 --> 01:04:23.480 agreement is that there's nothing with the developer not 01:04:23.480 --> 01:04:24.880 named there's there's 01:04:24.880 --> 01:04:29.690 nothing binding the developer and I should point out that 01:04:29.690 --> 01:04:30.840 per the Texas 01:04:30.840 --> 01:04:40.360 local government code section 212.073 it states quote the 01:04:40.360 --> 01:04:42.519 developer must execute 01:04:42.519 --> 01:04:45.500 a performance bond for the construction of the improvements 01:04:45.500 --> 01:04:46.599 to ensure completion 01:04:46.599 --> 01:04:50.980 of the project so we are trying to make sure we are in 01:04:50.980 --> 01:04:53.159 compliance with that as 01:04:53.159 --> 01:05:00.920 part of this effort also it would as I mentioned they would 01:05:00.920 --> 01:05:01.840 incorporate language 01:05:01.840 --> 01:05:04.719 from our current cold harmless agreement documenting that 01:05:04.719 --> 01:05:06.039 we will not issue a 01:05:06.039 --> 01:05:10.170 certificate of occupancy until the developer has completed 01:05:10.170 --> 01:05:10.960 all public 01:05:10.960 --> 01:05:15.360 improvements associated with the plan and then also it has 01:05:15.360 --> 01:05:16.760 the language that 01:05:16.760 --> 01:05:20.829 is currently in the form that all construction will comply 01:05:20.829 --> 01:05:21.679 with the fire 01:05:21.679 --> 01:05:25.840 code as to emergency access and water for firefighting 01:05:25.840 --> 01:05:28.000 purposes being provided at 01:05:28.000 --> 01:05:33.239 all times during construction the next agreement the second 01:05:33.239 --> 01:05:34.480 of the two between 01:05:34.480 --> 01:05:39.639 the city and the contractor this one the the terms would be 01:05:39.639 --> 01:05:40.920 as I say that similar 01:05:40.920 --> 01:05:44.670 to those of the existing three-way contract except the 01:05:44.670 --> 01:05:45.760 developer is no 01:05:45.760 --> 01:05:50.210 longer a party them having been a party to the previous 01:05:50.210 --> 01:05:52.599 agreement so this would 01:05:52.599 --> 01:05:55.369 still as it currently does include his attachments 01:05:55.369 --> 01:05:57.280 performance and payment bonds 01:05:57.280 --> 01:06:02.920 insurance certificate so the contractor would still be 01:06:02.920 --> 01:06:04.679 bound and require 01:06:04.679 --> 01:06:07.760 construction be done in conformance with the approved plans 01:06:07.760 --> 01:06:09.119 you know document our 01:06:09.119 --> 01:06:12.409 right to inspect the public improvements and document the 01:06:12.409 --> 01:06:14.000 two-year warranty period 01:06:14.000 --> 01:06:20.679 following acceptance of the public improvements to kind of 01:06:20.679 --> 01:06:23.480 summarize what 01:06:23.480 --> 01:06:28.070 we what we anticipate these changes would achieve it would 01:06:28.070 --> 01:06:29.480 allow the plat to 01:06:29.480 --> 01:06:32.840 be filed several weeks earlier and again that is to 01:06:32.840 --> 01:06:34.480 accommodate a frequent 01:06:34.480 --> 01:06:39.079 request we received from developers but also certainly it 01:06:39.079 --> 01:06:40.639 will also allow the 01:06:40.639 --> 01:06:44.269 plat to be filed without the developer having in having to 01:06:44.269 --> 01:06:45.480 enter into in a 01:06:45.480 --> 01:06:49.510 contract with the contractor now the same requirement will 01:06:49.510 --> 01:06:50.719 still be in place 01:06:50.719 --> 01:06:56.110 they would still have to enter into that contract within 01:06:56.110 --> 01:06:57.480 two years of the plat 01:06:57.480 --> 01:07:03.329 approval which is our current requirement but again this 01:07:03.329 --> 01:07:04.800 way they could get their 01:07:04.800 --> 01:07:09.710 plat filed without entering with contract with a contractor 01:07:09.710 --> 01:07:10.679 in case they were not 01:07:10.679 --> 01:07:15.349 quite ready for that step and we do encounter that and then 01:07:15.349 --> 01:07:16.079 it would 01:07:16.079 --> 01:07:19.059 eliminate the separate whole harm's agreement again that 01:07:19.059 --> 01:07:20.039 that language would 01:07:20.039 --> 01:07:23.639 be incorporated into the first of these two two-way 01:07:23.639 --> 01:07:25.699 agreements and simplify the 01:07:25.699 --> 01:07:32.440 process and with that I'd be happy to answer any questions 01:07:44.280 --> 01:07:45.170 we talked about a couple of them in work session I'll just 01:07:45.170 --> 01:07:48.519 bring them up here 01:07:48.519 --> 01:07:53.570 again in public session I would like to go back to the 01:07:53.570 --> 01:07:55.920 slide I think we talked 01:07:55.920 --> 01:07:59.559 about it some at length about the residential the single- 01:07:59.559 --> 01:08:01.119 family to where 01:08:01.119 --> 01:08:03.650 it's prohibited to be able to sell any of those until 01:08:03.650 --> 01:08:05.000 substantial completion I 01:08:05.000 --> 01:08:10.510 believe or right until it's a two-way agreement could could 01:08:10.510 --> 01:08:10.920 that be 01:08:10.920 --> 01:08:14.869 substitute between contractor to where it says developer 01:08:14.869 --> 01:08:16.199 because if it has to 01:08:16.199 --> 01:08:20.029 be contractor there's not a way to do what are called paper 01:08:20.029 --> 01:08:21.119 lots to where you 01:08:21.119 --> 01:08:24.000 get all the entitlements done and be able to sell them that 01:08:24.000 --> 01:08:24.600 that would 01:08:24.600 --> 01:08:29.020 prohibit that business transaction so I would like to put 01:08:29.020 --> 01:08:30.399 that before us to 01:08:30.399 --> 01:08:36.760 consider obviously the building permits are only going to 01:08:36.760 --> 01:08:38.720 be available once the 01:08:38.720 --> 01:08:42.000 contractor agreement is in place so it might be that we 01:08:42.000 --> 01:08:43.359 need to separate those 01:08:43.359 --> 01:08:48.869 two but since it doesn't affect the language on the code 01:08:48.869 --> 01:08:50.119 tonight we can we 01:08:50.119 --> 01:08:53.880 can actually discuss that further I think there's two 01:08:53.880 --> 01:08:54.479 issues I think that 01:08:54.479 --> 01:08:58.760 would be one that would prohibit paper lots and then the 01:08:58.760 --> 01:09:00.239 second issue that I 01:09:00.239 --> 01:09:04.789 asked about in work session had to do with no single-family 01:09:04.789 --> 01:09:06.159 residential being 01:09:06.159 --> 01:09:09.680 able to begin except for the four models until substantial 01:09:09.680 --> 01:09:13.039 completion and is 01:09:13.039 --> 01:09:19.760 made and so I don't know where that language on your slides 01:09:19.760 --> 01:09:22.239 are but if there 01:09:22.239 --> 01:09:27.640 was it's it's not on the slide it's um that that policy or 01:09:27.640 --> 01:09:28.680 that requirement is 01:09:28.680 --> 01:09:31.659 the current requirement so there's no change currently 01:09:31.659 --> 01:09:33.079 being proposed to that 01:09:33.079 --> 01:09:36.399 unless we'd like to suggest that we can consider that we 01:09:36.399 --> 01:09:37.640 can discuss that we 01:09:37.640 --> 01:09:41.779 will okay well I'd like if we get further in into this and 01:09:41.779 --> 01:09:42.319 get around to 01:09:42.319 --> 01:09:47.310 making a motion that we would be able to do that if there's 01:09:47.310 --> 01:09:48.079 a hold harmless 01:09:48.079 --> 01:09:52.010 agreement put in place just like is done with multifamily 01:09:52.010 --> 01:09:53.439 and commercial I don't 01:09:53.439 --> 01:09:57.569 see a reason to exclude one type of construction when we 01:09:57.569 --> 01:09:58.600 allow it with 01:09:58.600 --> 01:10:02.300 commercial and multifamily because I think it's a four to 01:10:02.300 --> 01:10:04.159 six month waste of 01:10:04.159 --> 01:10:07.550 time at least for the development community to miss out on 01:10:07.550 --> 01:10:08.840 an opportunity 01:10:08.840 --> 01:10:11.819 there so we'll can talk about that further if there's not a 01:10:11.819 --> 01:10:12.680 slide for that 01:10:12.680 --> 01:10:20.279 those would be mine two initial suggestions otherwise I'm 01:10:20.279 --> 01:10:22.039 all for trying 01:10:22.039 --> 01:10:26.020 to continue to improve and streamline the processes with 01:10:26.020 --> 01:10:30.319 the city normally I 01:10:30.319 --> 01:10:32.420 like to see a little more detail and see all the things I 01:10:32.420 --> 01:10:33.439 understand that this is 01:10:33.439 --> 01:10:37.380 a process and there's a time frame and I think based on our 01:10:37.380 --> 01:10:38.680 work session that 01:10:38.680 --> 01:10:41.409 there's going to be some additional discussions I think 01:10:41.409 --> 01:10:42.399 there's going to be 01:10:42.399 --> 01:10:47.079 some reach out to stakeholders in the development community 01:10:47.079 --> 01:10:48.239 to actually go 01:10:48.239 --> 01:10:50.960 through this in a little greater detail and provide some 01:10:50.960 --> 01:10:52.000 actual copies of the 01:10:52.000 --> 01:10:54.680 two-way agreements and some other details that I'm 01:10:54.680 --> 01:10:56.020 comfortable moving this 01:10:56.020 --> 01:10:59.819 forward on to City Council when we get to that point this 01:10:59.819 --> 01:11:00.880 evening with the 01:11:00.880 --> 01:11:03.409 understanding that there is going to be some some 01:11:03.409 --> 01:11:04.760 engagement and some reach out 01:11:04.760 --> 01:11:08.000 to the development community and stakeholders to to make 01:11:08.000 --> 01:11:08.880 sure that this 01:11:08.880 --> 01:11:12.520 is definitely what's intended is a streamlining and to make 01:11:12.520 --> 01:11:13.439 this process 01:11:13.439 --> 01:11:17.069 more user-friendly so thank you and I've got a couple other 01:11:17.069 --> 01:11:18.319 questions or comments 01:11:18.319 --> 01:11:21.119 Commissioner Smith mr. jinx we talked about it in the 01:11:21.119 --> 01:11:22.920 public or in the the 01:11:22.920 --> 01:11:26.560 work session we asked about Commissioner Rozelle and then I 01:11:26.560 --> 01:11:28.279 echoed it we asked 01:11:28.279 --> 01:11:31.800 about contemporaries other cities and municipalities who 01:11:31.800 --> 01:11:32.960 have this type of 01:11:32.960 --> 01:11:35.979 this type of two-way agreement this sequential two-way 01:11:35.979 --> 01:11:37.319 agreement here can 01:11:37.319 --> 01:11:40.000 you for the public record can you guys name or does anybody 01:11:40.000 --> 01:11:40.720 in your office know 01:11:40.720 --> 01:11:43.239 the names of the other contemporaries we've looked at the 01:11:43.239 --> 01:11:43.920 other municipalities 01:11:43.920 --> 01:11:49.470 so we can use that as a reference I personally was not 01:11:49.470 --> 01:11:52.279 involved I may defer 01:11:52.279 --> 01:11:56.720 to other staff here if they can contribute but I know that 01:11:56.720 --> 01:11:57.520 this effort 01:11:57.520 --> 01:12:03.199 and that research has been ongoing since at least March 01:12:03.199 --> 01:12:05.279 myself was was been 01:12:05.279 --> 01:12:13.500 involved more recently and as she comes down the the reason 01:12:13.500 --> 01:12:14.279 why I asked is 01:12:14.279 --> 01:12:17.529 because if we're out of if we are out of compliance with 01:12:17.529 --> 01:12:19.239 the Texas Code how many 01:12:19.239 --> 01:12:21.920 other cities are like that are they facing the same issue 01:12:21.920 --> 01:12:23.399 and if we are 01:12:23.399 --> 01:12:25.159 going to be fixing it is this something that other cities 01:12:25.159 --> 01:12:26.439 have already fixed and 01:12:26.439 --> 01:12:29.170 we'd like to at least know what are the municipalities have 01:12:29.170 --> 01:12:30.119 done this just so we 01:12:30.119 --> 01:12:33.600 have an idea of a frame of reference sure 01:12:37.560 --> 01:12:40.090 mr. Smith to address your question in terms of the 01:12:40.090 --> 01:12:42.479 benchmarking study we 01:12:42.479 --> 01:12:45.689 conducted the team looked at a number of communities from 01:12:45.689 --> 01:12:47.000 Plano to McKinney to 01:12:47.000 --> 01:12:51.600 surrounding adjacent communities however when it comes to 01:12:51.600 --> 01:12:52.079 addressing the 01:12:52.079 --> 01:12:55.060 question are they out of compliance what we were looking at 01:12:55.060 --> 01:12:55.640 specifically is how 01:12:55.640 --> 01:12:59.850 do they do their their development agreement so to speak as 01:12:59.850 --> 01:13:00.880 it relates to 01:13:00.880 --> 01:13:03.560 for example Fort Worth how do they do it we're pretty 01:13:03.560 --> 01:13:05.439 similar to what they were 01:13:05.439 --> 01:13:08.119 proposing something very similar to what they're doing 01:13:08.119 --> 01:13:10.880 right now so in terms of 01:13:10.880 --> 01:13:13.029 looking at the legalities and seeing who was in or out of 01:13:13.029 --> 01:13:13.760 compliance as it 01:13:13.760 --> 01:13:17.470 relates to state requirements that that exercise obviously 01:13:17.470 --> 01:13:18.600 was not conducted but 01:13:18.600 --> 01:13:21.720 the exercise that we did conduct was trying to understand 01:13:21.720 --> 01:13:22.439 how long for 01:13:22.439 --> 01:13:25.949 instance does a specific application stay in the process 01:13:25.949 --> 01:13:27.119 and now let's look 01:13:27.119 --> 01:13:29.909 at what we do in Denton and is it taking an extraordinary 01:13:29.909 --> 01:13:30.960 longer time than it 01:13:30.960 --> 01:13:35.159 should and in this case we felt that it was taking too long 01:13:35.159 --> 01:13:35.960 in terms of our 01:13:35.960 --> 01:13:39.359 parameters and our metrics and we wanted to understand what 01:13:39.359 --> 01:13:40.439 is the delay what is 01:13:40.439 --> 01:13:42.970 the trigger for the delay and it was realized it was the 01:13:42.970 --> 01:13:43.720 agreement or the 01:13:43.720 --> 01:13:47.819 length or the the onus or the owner or the requirements of 01:13:47.819 --> 01:13:48.720 the agreement that 01:13:48.720 --> 01:13:52.729 were causing a hardship earlier on in the development 01:13:52.729 --> 01:13:55.039 process so those are the 01:13:55.039 --> 01:13:58.060 that's the tangent we took in terms of our study and our 01:13:58.060 --> 01:13:59.439 benchmarking great 01:13:59.439 --> 01:14:02.260 and before I relinquish my chance to speak just want to 01:14:02.260 --> 01:14:03.119 agree with our 01:14:03.119 --> 01:14:06.220 commissioner as long as we do except with the new language 01:14:06.220 --> 01:14:06.960 to match both 01:14:06.960 --> 01:14:11.409 residential as well as commercial and multifamily 01:14:11.409 --> 01:14:12.960 commissioner real zone 01:14:12.960 --> 01:14:16.329 thank you chair I asked this in work session but I just 01:14:16.329 --> 01:14:16.640 want more 01:14:16.640 --> 01:14:23.079 clarification there by men all or by legal are is our vote 01:14:23.079 --> 01:14:25.119 tonight approving 01:14:25.119 --> 01:14:28.479 the framework of a sequential two-way agreement or are we 01:14:28.479 --> 01:14:29.680 actually approving 01:14:29.680 --> 01:14:34.489 the ordinance language that we were provided what we're 01:14:34.489 --> 01:14:35.680 doing tonight is 01:14:35.680 --> 01:14:41.560 actually approving the amendment to the DDC which can be 01:14:41.560 --> 01:14:42.840 substantially the 01:14:42.840 --> 01:14:46.850 ordinances in front of you if you want to make some minor 01:14:46.850 --> 01:14:48.039 changes to it that's 01:14:48.039 --> 01:14:52.460 fine and then we can bring that forward to council so to 01:14:52.460 --> 01:14:56.000 chairs concern earlier 01:14:56.000 --> 01:15:01.840 in section e2 is is changing this language something that 01:15:01.840 --> 01:15:02.520 needs to be done 01:15:02.520 --> 01:15:06.079 tonight or is approving this and moving it forward the 01:15:06.079 --> 01:15:07.960 language about the 01:15:07.960 --> 01:15:11.789 single-family residents can that be done after or does that 01:15:11.789 --> 01:15:13.119 need to be called out 01:15:13.119 --> 01:15:17.250 tonight I think that it would be fine if you wanted to make 01:15:17.250 --> 01:15:18.880 a motion to approve 01:15:18.880 --> 01:15:22.640 the ordinance subject to a change and give us what that 01:15:22.640 --> 01:15:24.600 change would be then I 01:15:24.600 --> 01:15:29.760 think that would be sufficient okay thank you 01:15:30.560 --> 01:15:34.760 any other questions for staff 01:15:38.000 --> 01:15:41.649 seeing none this is a public hearing I do have one card 01:15:41.649 --> 01:15:44.399 wishing to speak Lee 01:15:44.399 --> 01:15:52.479 Allison in support good evening I'm Lee Allison with 01:15:52.479 --> 01:15:56.760 Allison Engineering Group 01:15:56.760 --> 01:16:02.199 2415 North Elm Street Denton Texas first I'd like to 01:16:02.199 --> 01:16:04.560 express my admiration to 01:16:04.560 --> 01:16:08.670 staff for taking the risk and the effort to work on fixing 01:16:08.670 --> 01:16:09.720 our codes and 01:16:09.720 --> 01:16:12.739 ordinances and bring him forward for great scrutiny by a 01:16:12.739 --> 01:16:13.680 large number of 01:16:13.680 --> 01:16:17.050 people everybody who wants to pick on everything and nobody 01:16:17.050 --> 01:16:17.840 who wants to say 01:16:17.840 --> 01:16:21.640 anything good about it and yet this is a wonderful thing to 01:16:21.640 --> 01:16:22.439 see happening and I 01:16:22.439 --> 01:16:27.000 appreciate it I'm glad for it do have a few comments one 01:16:27.000 --> 01:16:30.039 developers they do ask 01:16:30.039 --> 01:16:33.989 for the plat to be filed but for two reasons one is to get 01:16:33.989 --> 01:16:35.239 financing and the 01:16:35.239 --> 01:16:39.119 others to sell lots with the note on the plat this doesn't 01:16:39.119 --> 01:16:40.079 accomplish the selling 01:16:40.079 --> 01:16:42.609 lots goal not to say that it shouldn't be done it just 01:16:42.609 --> 01:16:43.880 doesn't get that part of 01:16:43.880 --> 01:16:48.149 it there that much quicker when it comes to financing it'll 01:16:48.149 --> 01:16:49.199 be interesting to see 01:16:49.199 --> 01:16:51.619 what the financing companies say because a lot of times 01:16:51.619 --> 01:16:52.399 they don't want to 01:16:52.399 --> 01:16:56.310 release the financing until the contractor and all the 01:16:56.310 --> 01:16:57.399 people who are 01:16:57.399 --> 01:16:59.920 really going to make it happen are in place and they don't 01:16:59.920 --> 01:17:00.520 want to start 01:17:00.520 --> 01:17:03.880 making funds available before that's there so this might 01:17:03.880 --> 01:17:04.880 have a practical 01:17:04.880 --> 01:17:10.840 concern there I do have a suggestion in that between 01:17:10.840 --> 01:17:12.960 paragraphs a and B you 01:17:12.960 --> 01:17:16.460 might want to add a paragraph something like a development 01:17:16.460 --> 01:17:17.560 agreement required 01:17:17.560 --> 01:17:21.720 before constructing public improvements there's no explicit 01:17:21.720 --> 01:17:22.600 language in here 01:17:22.600 --> 01:17:25.989 saying that such an agreement is required it is implied in 01:17:25.989 --> 01:17:26.680 a couple of 01:17:26.680 --> 01:17:30.770 places by saying that such work cannot proceed until that's 01:17:30.770 --> 01:17:31.800 done but it doesn't 01:17:31.800 --> 01:17:35.949 say you have to go get one secondly in the current 01:17:35.949 --> 01:17:38.399 paragraph B it seems it'd be 01:17:38.399 --> 01:17:41.229 prudent to require the contractor to be at the pre-const 01:17:41.229 --> 01:17:42.439 ruction conference as 01:17:42.439 --> 01:17:46.270 well and not just the developer and the city organizations 01:17:46.270 --> 01:17:47.439 and you'd need to 01:17:47.439 --> 01:17:50.119 consider whether you want the developer to have his two-way 01:17:50.119 --> 01:17:50.920 agreement in place 01:17:50.920 --> 01:17:55.140 or not before having that pre-construction conference then 01:17:55.140 --> 01:17:56.760 as I listen tonight and 01:17:56.760 --> 01:18:00.079 I'm sorry for these last-minute comments I like to if I'd 01:18:00.079 --> 01:18:01.279 been able to see things 01:18:01.279 --> 01:18:04.279 in advance I really like to give staff comments and not say 01:18:04.279 --> 01:18:06.079 as much here but is 01:18:06.079 --> 01:18:09.439 a two-way developers agreement really required it's not 01:18:09.439 --> 01:18:11.159 required in the local 01:18:11.159 --> 01:18:14.640 government code it's something the city has come up with 01:18:14.640 --> 01:18:15.880 and why do we want to 01:18:15.880 --> 01:18:19.569 put a performance put a performance bond on the same 01:18:19.569 --> 01:18:21.199 project twice why didn't the 01:18:21.199 --> 01:18:24.930 developers performance bond sufficient and provide the city 01:18:24.930 --> 01:18:25.840 with adequate 01:18:25.840 --> 01:18:29.750 protection would it not be possible to consider having a 01:18:29.750 --> 01:18:31.600 construction permit to 01:18:31.600 --> 01:18:34.949 be issued after the developers agreement that has a 01:18:34.949 --> 01:18:37.439 checklist of items pardon me 01:18:37.439 --> 01:18:41.649 such as construction cost estimate payment of inspection 01:18:41.649 --> 01:18:42.840 fees liability 01:18:42.840 --> 01:18:45.920 insurance etc. that could be provided and not even have to 01:18:45.920 --> 01:18:46.960 go through a two-way 01:18:46.960 --> 01:18:50.270 developer agreement with with the city I mean I'm sorry a 01:18:50.270 --> 01:18:51.880 two-way contractors 01:18:51.880 --> 01:18:59.640 agreement with the city then I just curious and when I say 01:18:59.640 --> 01:19:00.560 that not asking of 01:19:00.560 --> 01:19:05.840 y'all but concerns would be the ability of developers to 01:19:05.840 --> 01:19:06.880 get the appropriate 01:19:06.880 --> 01:19:11.090 bonds I know that's been heard that it's been issued in the 01:19:11.090 --> 01:19:12.399 past but usually that 01:19:12.399 --> 01:19:16.239 requires a track record it requires substantial financial 01:19:16.239 --> 01:19:17.079 abilities and 01:19:17.079 --> 01:19:19.949 while large developers may be able to come in here and 01:19:19.949 --> 01:19:21.760 accomplish that can the 01:19:21.760 --> 01:19:24.909 person who's trying to develop a small one lot development 01:19:24.909 --> 01:19:25.880 or a small four or 01:19:25.880 --> 01:19:29.279 five lot development have the wherewithal to go and get 01:19:29.279 --> 01:19:30.079 that kind of 01:19:30.079 --> 01:19:33.300 bonding or financing I think there's a lot of practical 01:19:33.300 --> 01:19:34.399 elements that are 01:19:34.399 --> 01:19:37.579 beyond the scope of the local government code or our city 01:19:37.579 --> 01:19:39.199 ordinances that do or 01:19:39.199 --> 01:19:42.229 do not allow these kind of things to come into place and 01:19:42.229 --> 01:19:43.439 would encourage to 01:19:43.439 --> 01:19:48.250 have some kind of a backup plan in case we have a backlog 01:19:48.250 --> 01:19:49.119 of developments that 01:19:49.119 --> 01:19:53.520 can't happen because developers cannot accomplish this I 01:19:53.520 --> 01:19:55.079 was surprised to hear 01:19:55.079 --> 01:19:58.029 that the three-way agreement as we have it is not in 01:19:58.029 --> 01:19:59.600 compliant with the local 01:19:59.600 --> 01:20:03.029 government code my understanding was the reason three-way 01:20:03.029 --> 01:20:03.640 agreements were 01:20:03.640 --> 01:20:08.800 developed was so that the developer and the contractor were 01:20:08.800 --> 01:20:09.760 in an agreement 01:20:09.760 --> 01:20:13.050 together with the city and therefore the contractor was 01:20:13.050 --> 01:20:17.960 providing the bonds in 01:20:17.960 --> 01:20:20.939 accordance with the local government code but as it was 01:20:20.939 --> 01:20:21.880 read tonight it 01:20:21.880 --> 01:20:25.869 doesn't say provide the bonds it says execute the bond so I 01:20:25.869 --> 01:20:26.840 'm not sure exactly 01:20:26.840 --> 01:20:30.260 how that worked and I might suggest a little bit more look 01:20:30.260 --> 01:20:31.439 into that but I do 01:20:31.439 --> 01:20:35.359 appreciate the concern in the effort got the question sorry 01:20:35.359 --> 01:20:35.760 for you go 01:20:35.760 --> 01:20:38.739 commissioner thank you chair thank you mr. Allison for 01:20:38.739 --> 01:20:40.079 being here and helping 01:20:40.079 --> 01:20:43.930 provide some context from your perspective you said a 01:20:43.930 --> 01:20:44.880 couple things 01:20:44.880 --> 01:20:49.579 that I wanted to clarify specifically you brought up the 01:20:49.579 --> 01:20:51.359 idea of the the need 01:20:51.359 --> 01:20:55.670 for a contractor city agreement whether that needs to be 01:20:55.670 --> 01:20:57.399 there or not which I 01:20:57.399 --> 01:21:01.119 think is a valid question but you also said earlier the 01:21:01.119 --> 01:21:02.920 idea of duplicate bonds 01:21:02.920 --> 01:21:04.930 being issued of the developer performance bond and the 01:21:04.930 --> 01:21:05.399 contractor 01:21:05.399 --> 01:21:09.399 performance bond and then lastly you were talking about 01:21:09.399 --> 01:21:10.479 rightfully the 01:21:10.479 --> 01:21:15.510 difficulty a developer might have in getting a performance 01:21:15.510 --> 01:21:16.960 bond putting all 01:21:16.960 --> 01:21:19.380 those together if we don't have a contractor agreement and 01:21:19.380 --> 01:21:20.600 you don't in the 01:21:20.600 --> 01:21:23.829 performance bond on the developer is hard to get then that 01:21:23.829 --> 01:21:24.640 effectively 01:21:24.640 --> 01:21:28.380 removes any bonds does that make sense and how do we go 01:21:28.380 --> 01:21:30.039 about oh it wouldn't 01:21:30.039 --> 01:21:32.760 remove the bonds that kill the project right wouldn't have 01:21:32.760 --> 01:21:33.399 a project but you 01:21:33.399 --> 01:21:38.750 have the bond on the contractor well but you couldn't but 01:21:38.750 --> 01:21:39.680 your plat wouldn't be 01:21:39.680 --> 01:21:41.779 filed you couldn't go to work because you don't have your 01:21:41.779 --> 01:21:42.680 developer agreement 01:21:42.680 --> 01:21:46.020 with the developer and his bond is required by the local 01:21:46.020 --> 01:21:48.359 government code so 01:21:48.359 --> 01:21:51.479 to put the steps in place first you have to have a two-way 01:21:51.479 --> 01:21:52.359 agreement with the 01:21:52.359 --> 01:21:58.060 developer where you obtain the bond under that developers 01:21:58.060 --> 01:22:00.119 agreement with 01:22:00.119 --> 01:22:03.880 that bond in place why do you need another performance bond 01:22:03.880 --> 01:22:04.399 from the 01:22:04.399 --> 01:22:08.420 contractor to bond the same project that the developers 01:22:08.420 --> 01:22:10.960 already bonded I think I 01:22:10.960 --> 01:22:13.489 track with that but you also have a concern about the 01:22:13.489 --> 01:22:15.239 developer procuring 01:22:15.239 --> 01:22:18.319 the bond to begin with as well though correct in many cases 01:22:18.319 --> 01:22:19.319 yes and that's 01:22:19.319 --> 01:22:22.439 just a practical consideration sure sure that's where we 01:22:22.439 --> 01:22:23.720 would need input from 01:22:23.720 --> 01:22:30.920 both banks and or fine financers and bonding companies in 01:22:30.920 --> 01:22:33.279 detail is to it's 01:22:33.279 --> 01:22:36.130 easy to call up a bonding company surety and say would you 01:22:36.130 --> 01:22:37.119 bond oh yeah we do 01:22:37.119 --> 01:22:40.199 that all the time but what are their conditions what are 01:22:40.199 --> 01:22:41.000 their requirements 01:22:41.000 --> 01:22:45.119 and prerequisites may be very difficult for developers to 01:22:45.119 --> 01:22:46.079 comply with their 01:22:46.079 --> 01:22:49.800 qualification requirements I know staff talked to surety 01:22:49.800 --> 01:22:52.199 providers was there any 01:22:52.199 --> 01:22:55.380 explicit detail about how a bond is issued to a developer 01:22:55.380 --> 01:22:56.159 and what the 01:22:56.159 --> 01:22:59.760 requirements are for that type of surety performance bond 01:22:59.760 --> 01:23:00.680 is that a question for 01:23:00.680 --> 01:23:04.680 staff that is for a question for staff sure I think it's a 01:23:04.680 --> 01:23:07.800 valid point in my own 01:23:07.800 --> 01:23:12.869 personal discussion with a surety we did not get into that 01:23:12.869 --> 01:23:14.319 level of specific 01:23:14.319 --> 01:23:20.600 specificity others at the city may have I'm not sure okay 01:23:20.600 --> 01:23:22.880 but you know I will 01:23:22.880 --> 01:23:28.619 just say we appreciate Lee's input these are good points to 01:23:28.619 --> 01:23:29.479 consider and we will 01:23:29.479 --> 01:23:36.079 consider them we still have some some improvements and 01:23:36.079 --> 01:23:37.319 tweaks to make in this 01:23:37.319 --> 01:23:42.609 process in these forms and it's it's not too late to make 01:23:42.609 --> 01:23:44.520 them and and we will 01:23:44.520 --> 01:23:48.119 keep these concerns in mind as we finalize these I 01:23:48.119 --> 01:23:49.319 appreciate that and 01:23:49.319 --> 01:23:54.180 Manal said in work session the the priority to keep this 01:23:54.180 --> 01:23:55.199 going and the 01:23:55.199 --> 01:23:58.590 importance of this for projects but I don't want to 01:23:58.590 --> 01:24:01.359 sacrifice good developer 01:24:01.359 --> 01:24:05.289 and contractor language to get projects done at the risk of 01:24:05.289 --> 01:24:06.239 an urgency to 01:24:06.239 --> 01:24:09.800 process this so my concern would be if mr. Allison and 01:24:09.800 --> 01:24:11.319 other developers who 01:24:11.319 --> 01:24:14.300 hopefully will be talked to you have concerns goes back to 01:24:14.300 --> 01:24:14.840 my initial 01:24:14.840 --> 01:24:18.210 question can we approve the framework with those type of 01:24:18.210 --> 01:24:19.560 things being changed 01:24:19.560 --> 01:24:23.119 between now in council 01:24:28.560 --> 01:24:30.510 commissioners oh absolutely what we can do is we can use 01:24:30.510 --> 01:24:33.239 this next month to go 01:24:33.239 --> 01:24:37.239 ahead and start fine-tuning and incorporate or discuss with 01:24:37.239 --> 01:24:38.279 Lee Allison 01:24:38.279 --> 01:24:40.350 and other members of the development community we have 01:24:40.350 --> 01:24:41.119 reached out to a few 01:24:41.119 --> 01:24:44.989 who seemed amenable but it wasn't a detailed conversation 01:24:44.989 --> 01:24:46.000 at that time so 01:24:46.000 --> 01:24:48.680 our intent is to get the ball rolling on this move forward 01:24:48.680 --> 01:24:49.600 as a recommendation 01:24:49.600 --> 01:24:54.800 with the conditions that you're discussing if if those 01:24:54.800 --> 01:24:56.640 conditions are in 01:24:56.640 --> 01:24:59.319 fact void once we determine how we want to do that we can 01:24:59.319 --> 01:25:00.319 also iterate that at 01:25:00.319 --> 01:25:03.300 the council meeting then upon further review and evaluation 01:25:03.300 --> 01:25:03.960 with our legal 01:25:03.960 --> 01:25:06.979 team and our engineering team that this was the best way to 01:25:06.979 --> 01:25:07.880 approach it but 01:25:07.880 --> 01:25:10.970 definitely we'll revisit the plat note or revisit the the 01:25:10.970 --> 01:25:12.159 bonding requirements as 01:25:12.159 --> 01:25:15.590 well and make sure all our eyes are dotted and teased 01:25:15.590 --> 01:25:16.600 across and if we feel 01:25:16.600 --> 01:25:19.130 we're not ready at that time we will not proceed so a 01:25:19.130 --> 01:25:20.760 motion tonight could 01:25:20.760 --> 01:25:23.649 include language that would require the condition to speak 01:25:23.649 --> 01:25:24.520 to developers or 01:25:24.520 --> 01:25:27.789 without explicitly putting language in how do we make that 01:25:27.789 --> 01:25:28.880 motion so in terms 01:25:28.880 --> 01:25:31.029 of your motion if you think you want to add a condition 01:25:31.029 --> 01:25:31.880 that relates to the 01:25:31.880 --> 01:25:34.729 residential component or removing the plat note you know 01:25:34.729 --> 01:25:35.600 making sure that 01:25:35.600 --> 01:25:38.119 there is no plat note attached to something that you saw in 01:25:38.119 --> 01:25:38.239 your 01:25:38.239 --> 01:25:42.319 presentation in terms of reaching out to the community or 01:25:42.319 --> 01:25:43.720 or or as it relates to 01:25:43.720 --> 01:25:47.619 the due process we have notified the request per our local 01:25:47.619 --> 01:25:48.479 government code 01:25:48.479 --> 01:25:52.199 requirements and public hearing has been set and we will 01:25:52.199 --> 01:25:53.560 definitely reach out to 01:25:53.560 --> 01:25:57.430 to Lee as well and he has some valid points definitely we 01:25:57.430 --> 01:25:58.359 always seem to 01:25:58.359 --> 01:26:04.640 meet and discuss issues such as these anyway we also have 01:26:04.640 --> 01:26:06.000 the design criteria 01:26:06.000 --> 01:26:07.840 manual that's moving forward so we're hoping to tie 01:26:07.840 --> 01:26:09.560 everything in together if 01:26:09.560 --> 01:26:11.729 there are conditions that you're proposing I would limit 01:26:11.729 --> 01:26:12.199 them to the 01:26:12.199 --> 01:26:15.239 ordinance opposed to you know we know we should meet with 01:26:15.239 --> 01:26:16.399 the community if you 01:26:16.399 --> 01:26:18.060 want to add that you're more than welcome to but we will 01:26:18.060 --> 01:26:18.960 definitely reach 01:26:18.960 --> 01:26:25.279 out to Lee tonight after tonight's meeting thank you I have 01:26:25.279 --> 01:26:26.520 a couple of 01:26:26.520 --> 01:26:30.470 comments along that with some of the points that mr. 01:26:30.470 --> 01:26:33.960 Allison made is one of 01:26:33.960 --> 01:26:36.260 the concerns I haven't I think we spoke about it between 01:26:36.260 --> 01:26:36.920 work session is 01:26:36.920 --> 01:26:40.060 currently it's requiring two sets of bonds so you're gonna 01:26:40.060 --> 01:26:41.000 have double cost 01:26:41.000 --> 01:26:45.260 you have a cost of rich taming bonds as a developer and a 01:26:45.260 --> 01:26:47.199 cost of attaining the 01:26:47.199 --> 01:26:51.029 same bonds as a contractor and I bonded a number of 01:26:51.029 --> 01:26:52.760 projects and I can't recall 01:26:52.760 --> 01:26:56.310 if there's a way to hold the bonds without them actually 01:26:56.310 --> 01:26:57.439 going into full 01:26:57.439 --> 01:27:01.319 effect and if then you got a contractor bond in place you 01:27:01.319 --> 01:27:02.640 could just let the 01:27:02.640 --> 01:27:07.840 developer ones expire I can't recall when those go 01:27:07.840 --> 01:27:09.199 interactive I know we've 01:27:09.199 --> 01:27:12.350 done that with a multitude of projects where we bid and 01:27:12.350 --> 01:27:13.680 have to provide a bond 01:27:13.680 --> 01:27:18.319 or evidence of a bond but unless you're awarded the project 01:27:18.319 --> 01:27:19.880 you actually don't 01:27:19.880 --> 01:27:24.409 incur the bonding cost and so there may be some discussions 01:27:24.409 --> 01:27:25.760 with sureties on 01:27:25.760 --> 01:27:29.829 exactly how that process would work where you're not duplic 01:27:29.829 --> 01:27:30.920 ating bond costs 01:27:30.920 --> 01:27:34.489 because they are expensive and the second point is is 01:27:34.489 --> 01:27:36.479 accurate that it it 01:27:36.479 --> 01:27:40.760 does it is a process it's not like getting car insurance 01:27:40.760 --> 01:27:42.279 there is a pretty 01:27:42.279 --> 01:27:47.090 good process to get bonding it is based upon experience and 01:27:47.090 --> 01:27:48.399 a track record and 01:27:48.399 --> 01:27:55.960 it is a period of time typically that you are able to build 01:27:55.960 --> 01:27:57.199 up a history of 01:27:57.199 --> 01:28:01.050 performance that you do projects complete projects in a 01:28:01.050 --> 01:28:02.359 timely manner and 01:28:02.359 --> 01:28:05.359 all the other things to be able to get larger and larger 01:28:05.359 --> 01:28:06.600 and larger bonds and 01:28:06.600 --> 01:28:13.130 as part of that also having the financial backing to be 01:28:13.130 --> 01:28:14.800 able to stand 01:28:14.800 --> 01:28:17.899 behind and get those issued so I think those are valid 01:28:17.899 --> 01:28:19.119 points that are the 01:28:19.119 --> 01:28:23.939 details that are a very good idea I think it is again a 01:28:23.939 --> 01:28:25.520 good idea to go down 01:28:25.520 --> 01:28:28.829 this road to try to streamline it but I do think we need to 01:28:28.829 --> 01:28:29.880 look into those 01:28:29.880 --> 01:28:33.510 couple of areas specifically and make sure that this has 01:28:33.510 --> 01:28:35.119 the intended outcome 01:28:35.119 --> 01:28:39.199 at the back end that we intend on the front end of making 01:28:39.199 --> 01:28:40.479 it easier and more 01:28:40.479 --> 01:28:47.800 streamlined with that I don't know that we have anyone else 01:28:47.800 --> 01:28:49.060 that would like to 01:28:49.060 --> 01:28:51.939 speak I don't have anybody else here on the board but I 01:28:51.939 --> 01:28:53.119 will make one final call 01:28:53.119 --> 01:28:56.569 that this is a public hearing and if there's anyone who 01:28:56.569 --> 01:28:57.819 would like to come 01:28:57.819 --> 01:29:02.720 forward to please do so at this time and seeing none I will 01:29:02.720 --> 01:29:03.939 close the public 01:29:03.939 --> 01:29:07.390 hearing and I will open the floor for discussion or a 01:29:07.390 --> 01:29:08.420 motion Commissioner 01:29:08.420 --> 01:29:13.399 Roselle thank you chair I would love to see this go forward 01:29:13.399 --> 01:29:14.760 I am at a loss of 01:29:14.760 --> 01:29:22.229 how to word a motion and I I I worry about the motion not 01:29:22.229 --> 01:29:23.439 being right if it's 01:29:23.439 --> 01:29:31.479 done spot spontaneously so I'm wondering if it would it 01:29:31.479 --> 01:29:33.159 would make sense not to 01:29:33.159 --> 01:29:36.500 lag the process down but to continue the item to the next 01:29:36.500 --> 01:29:37.640 meeting so that we 01:29:37.640 --> 01:29:41.079 could have opportunities to talk to mr. Allison and kind of 01:29:41.079 --> 01:29:42.039 shore up some of 01:29:42.039 --> 01:29:45.310 these things about the residential language the chair had 01:29:45.310 --> 01:29:46.159 mentioned the 01:29:46.159 --> 01:29:51.670 plat language that prevents sales this double bonding issue 01:29:51.670 --> 01:29:53.119 and even the idea 01:29:53.119 --> 01:29:58.510 of a contract contractor city agreement and the need for 01:29:58.510 --> 01:30:00.159 that and so some of 01:30:00.159 --> 01:30:03.640 those concerns seem that's five right there just to put 01:30:03.640 --> 01:30:04.840 motion with those 01:30:04.840 --> 01:30:08.949 conditions to move it to council and this body not even be 01:30:08.949 --> 01:30:10.000 able to see it 01:30:10.000 --> 01:30:13.890 again it just go to council with the hope that that's tough 01:30:13.890 --> 01:30:15.000 for sure let's 01:30:15.000 --> 01:30:18.710 make an inquiry to staff if we continue this to our next 01:30:18.710 --> 01:30:20.720 meeting the 27th does 01:30:20.720 --> 01:30:24.409 that allow you all to continue on the timeline that you're 01:30:24.409 --> 01:30:25.239 working towards 01:30:25.239 --> 01:30:28.770 with council chair person strange if I'm not mistaken we 01:30:28.770 --> 01:30:31.520 are optimistic the 01:30:31.520 --> 01:30:34.890 we're optimistic that we can hit the October 17th council 01:30:34.890 --> 01:30:35.880 meeting for this 01:30:35.880 --> 01:30:39.180 item which means we could actually push this item to make 01:30:39.180 --> 01:30:40.199 sure we address 01:30:40.199 --> 01:30:43.399 Commissioner Roselle's mr. Allison's and of course your 01:30:43.399 --> 01:30:44.560 concerns and questions 01:30:44.560 --> 01:30:46.529 that did come up we want to make sure that we do have the 01:30:46.529 --> 01:30:47.239 right answers we 01:30:47.239 --> 01:30:50.279 believe we do but we want to be able to clearly articulate 01:30:50.279 --> 01:30:51.359 those to yourselves I 01:30:51.359 --> 01:30:54.479 would recommend we push to the first meeting on October 01:30:54.479 --> 01:30:55.840 which would still 01:30:55.840 --> 01:30:59.000 give us time to hit the council meeting if I'm not mistaken 01:30:59.000 --> 01:31:00.560 and I need our legal 01:31:00.560 --> 01:31:04.029 councils be available too so I'm looking at my calendar and 01:31:04.029 --> 01:31:04.720 I'm actually gonna 01:31:04.720 --> 01:31:08.970 look to Shandrin when is the first meeting in October do 01:31:08.970 --> 01:31:09.880 you know that's 01:31:09.880 --> 01:31:21.520 October 11th if if that would be cutting it close are you 01:31:21.520 --> 01:31:22.479 sure you want it the 01:31:22.479 --> 01:31:25.880 11th or the do you want the 27th which is the next meeting 01:31:25.880 --> 01:31:27.199 right but the 27th 01:31:27.199 --> 01:31:29.409 we might have some absences and I want to make sure that we 01:31:29.409 --> 01:31:30.039 have the right 01:31:30.039 --> 01:31:37.229 people at the table to have the conversation and you know 01:31:37.229 --> 01:31:41.079 hopefully we 01:31:41.079 --> 01:31:43.930 don't get to that point but we it gives us the three weeks 01:31:43.930 --> 01:31:44.640 to actually 01:31:44.640 --> 01:31:48.750 diligently pursue answers to these questions you would have 01:31:48.750 --> 01:31:49.800 to reopen the 01:31:49.800 --> 01:31:52.470 public hearing because I heard you close it so you'll have 01:31:52.470 --> 01:31:53.159 to reopen it to 01:31:53.159 --> 01:31:57.500 continue so we don't have to re-notice it just as kind of 01:31:57.500 --> 01:31:58.479 as we're brainstorming 01:31:58.479 --> 01:32:02.529 here if we did it to the 27th and we aren't able to get all 01:32:02.529 --> 01:32:03.399 of this addressed 01:32:03.399 --> 01:32:07.680 then it could possibly push on to October the 11th if we 01:32:07.680 --> 01:32:08.680 are able to do it 01:32:08.680 --> 01:32:12.689 it's done and if not we then get a little bit I think that 01:32:12.689 --> 01:32:13.359 's a fantastic idea 01:32:13.359 --> 01:32:17.760 yes absolutely okay and as a point of order since we are 01:32:17.760 --> 01:32:18.920 going to continue 01:32:18.920 --> 01:32:23.359 some here and I'd be my motion be a motion we'll can rest 01:32:23.359 --> 01:32:24.000 ate that here in a 01:32:24.000 --> 01:32:29.239 minute I'm going to reopen this item and I'm gonna give the 01:32:29.239 --> 01:32:31.319 number is item DCA 01:32:31.319 --> 01:32:36.760 17 - 0 0 1 0 I had closed it inadvertently before the 01:32:36.760 --> 01:32:37.520 discussion of 01:32:37.520 --> 01:32:42.350 continuation so we will reopen this item and it will be 01:32:42.350 --> 01:32:43.439 continued to a date 01:32:43.439 --> 01:32:47.960 certain and we will look for a motion here to set that date 01:32:47.960 --> 01:32:51.479 so I'd motion to 01:32:51.479 --> 01:32:59.039 continue item DCA 17 - 0 1 0 to date certain September 27th 01:32:59.039 --> 01:32:59.199 okay 01:32:59.199 --> 01:33:02.479 Commissioner Smith I second that motion okay we have a 01:33:02.479 --> 01:33:03.840 first and a second to 01:33:03.840 --> 01:33:10.760 continue to September the 27th of this item any discussion 01:33:10.760 --> 01:33:13.800 seeing none I'll call 01:33:13.800 --> 01:33:16.800 for a vote on the board 01:33:21.760 --> 01:33:24.529 the motion to continue passes and thank you everyone for a 01:33:24.529 --> 01:33:27.359 great presentation 01:33:27.359 --> 01:33:31.649 and I think a very good discussion with a number of good 01:33:31.649 --> 01:33:33.359 points for us to talk 01:33:33.359 --> 01:33:38.500 about when this comes back also we're going to have to go 01:33:38.500 --> 01:33:40.279 back in our agenda 01:33:40.279 --> 01:33:45.829 to item C and D and I'm going to we're going to need to do 01:33:45.829 --> 01:33:48.000 the same procedure 01:33:48.000 --> 01:33:52.500 here to continue both of those items so we will do those 01:33:52.500 --> 01:33:55.319 individually okay so at 01:33:55.319 --> 01:34:01.359 this time I'm going to open item C which is Z 17 - 0 0 1 3 01:34:01.359 --> 01:34:02.920 and the chair would 01:34:02.920 --> 01:34:06.819 entertain a motion to keep this item open and continue it 01:34:06.819 --> 01:34:08.079 to a date certain 01:34:08.079 --> 01:34:12.399 of September the 27th Commissioner Roselle I motion to 01:34:12.399 --> 01:34:14.479 continue items Z 17 - 01:34:14.479 --> 01:34:20.420 13 to date certain September 27th okay Commissioner Smith I 01:34:20.420 --> 01:34:21.439 second that motion 01:34:21.439 --> 01:34:24.939 okay we have a first and a second to continue to September 01:34:24.939 --> 01:34:26.159 27th any 01:34:26.159 --> 01:34:32.890 discussion seeing none we'll call for a vote on board that 01:34:32.890 --> 01:34:37.000 motion will carry 4 01:34:37.000 --> 01:34:41.979 to 0 and at this time we will do the same thing on item D I 01:34:41.979 --> 01:34:42.920 will open the 01:34:42.920 --> 01:34:49.359 item to open the public hearing for Z 17 - 0 0 1 5 and the 01:34:49.359 --> 01:34:50.720 chair would entertain 01:34:50.720 --> 01:34:53.880 a motion to continue that item to September the 27th 01:34:53.880 --> 01:34:54.800 Commissioner Roselle 01:34:54.800 --> 01:35:00.520 thank you chair I move that we continue items Z 17 - 0 0 1 01:35:00.520 --> 01:35:01.800 5 to a date certain of 01:35:01.800 --> 01:35:05.720 September 27th Commissioner Smith I second that motion okay 01:35:05.720 --> 01:35:06.359 we have a first 01:35:06.359 --> 01:35:10.989 and a second to continue to September the 27th any 01:35:10.989 --> 01:35:13.600 discussion seeing none we'll 01:35:13.600 --> 01:35:24.840 call for a vote on the board and that motion carries 4 to 0 01:35:24.840 --> 01:35:26.600 I'm just gonna 01:35:26.600 --> 01:35:31.220 turn to legal I believe that is all of the items that we 01:35:31.220 --> 01:35:32.319 had that's correct 01:35:32.319 --> 01:35:38.359 cleaned up okay that will bring to a close our public 01:35:38.359 --> 01:35:39.520 hearing section tonight 01:35:39.520 --> 01:35:42.670 and that will move us to our final item which is going to 01:35:42.670 --> 01:35:44.039 be our project matrix 01:35:44.039 --> 01:35:48.319 Commissioner Roselle thank you chair Commissioner Beck 01:35:48.319 --> 01:35:50.119 asked for a tree code 01:35:50.119 --> 01:35:52.359 status update we're waiting on a special session at the 01:35:52.359 --> 01:35:53.920 state to end since that's 01:35:53.920 --> 01:35:57.750 concluded can we get that back on our agenda to figure out 01:35:57.750 --> 01:35:58.720 what we're doing 01:35:58.720 --> 01:36:07.199 about the tree code yes thank you 01:36:13.640 --> 01:36:23.000 anybody else okay with that I will close our meeting at 725 01:36:23.000 --> 01:36:24.159 this evening thank you 01:36:24.159 --> 01:36:28.680 everyone and appreciate all the discussion tonight