Oct 25, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2017-10-25 5:00 PM

This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 505. At this time I will turn the meeting over to Richard for clarification of our agenda items and presentations. >> Good evening, I just wanted to point out one item is going to be moving off of consent. That would be item 3C, which is a final plaque. This is the Duluth and Northern tool that is going to be moving to item 4, it will be item 4A, so it will go under items for individual consideration. And Haley, if you can just come up for a second and maybe explain why we're moving it from consent to under items under individual consideration. >> And I'm sorry, so that we're clear that's going to be a sub item of 4A? >> Are we taking that up before the alternative development plan? >> After the alternative. >> Okay, so it's a separate item? >> Separate item. >> So 4B. >> 4B. >> Okay. >> Did I say 4A? >> Yes. >> 4B, I'm sorry. >> I'm the only one that made it. >> Thank you. >> Okay, so this is a final plaque. It's fairly straightforward. The reasoning for pulling it from the consent agenda is that there is a drive location down here on the south side that is within text dot right of way. And the applicant was not able to get a hold harmless agreement executed prior to this meeting. Holding the city harmless if their text dot permit is not approved after the fact. So we're requesting that you will conditionally approve this pending that their text dot permit be approved after the final plat is approved. Or that they complete that hold harmless agreement after the fact. >> Commissioner Rizal. >> Does that mean they couldn't move forward until they get the text out of agreement? Once they get that, they don't have to come back to us? Or can they proceed with their work on a conditional approval from us? >> This would allow the plat to be approved and then they could get that text dot permit approved in the interim before their plat is filed. >> Okay, thanks. >> Commissioner Ellis. >> Thank you, Chair. So from what you're saying, our affirmative vote should have that condition behind it. Is that correct? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay, thanks. Okay. Seeing no more other questions, I'll turn it back over to Richard for continuing of clarification of our agenda items . >> 3A, actually Haley, can you mind just kind of going over a little bit of item 3A, the Mission Street offices? Yes. So this is a final plat of a property that you all have seen a couple of times before at the corner of Mission Street and Fort Worth Drive. This final plat is for the first phase of the office park development. We had an alternative development plan for this property a few months ago, and so they're now moving forward with phase one of their final plat to begin that project. >> I think you've got the next two as well if there are other questions for B or C. >> Not sure where the rotate button ran off to. >> Okay, so this is a final plat of Denton Commons. I believe we saw the preliminary plat for this site last week. So they're final platting these two lots at this time for the construction of a hotel on lot one. >> Any questions for Haley on this item? Thank you. I move us to C. You're next. >> That was the one we just discussed, actually. >> I'm sorry, you're correct. That's been moved to 4B, my bad. >> The next final plot that we have is for the Warshin addition. The property is in the ETJ and it is just a two acre lot to accommodate a single family dwelling. Be accessed by a private access easement. That's in conformance with subchapter 16 of the Denton Development Code. >> Why are we seeing this? Is it ETJ? >> The city of Denton still has platting authority within the ETJ. So in order to get a building permit through the county, we wouldn't do the building permit. But the plat is run through the city and the city reviews it. >> Okay, I thought it had to be five lots or something like that before we saw it. I may be out of step, so thank you. >> We don't see many of them, so. And then the final one, I did not pull up in this, so let me pull it up really quickly. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> The final plot we have is in Robeson Ranch. It's unit 18 one. And this plot is just to accommodate a single family residential neighborhood in their private street, in their open space lots. >> Does this have a certain kind of home that can go on? I remember we had a lot of discussion on that a number of months ago. >> It would not be one of the villas, it would just be one of their other products, just one of their, depending on the lot size and what they classify it as. >> Okay, thank you. Anybody else? That's our consent agenda. Looks like we'll have, Julie will be here for 4A, the Ross Law Office. >> All right. So I'm presenting ADP 17 to Ross Law Office. So request before you is to consider an alternative development plan to deviate from sub chapter 13 of the DDC, which requires permeable paving for excess parking. So the subject property is located off of Woodrow Lane, I'm sorry, south of McKinney, about 275 feet south of McKinney. It's about a half acre site and it is located in a CMG zoning district. Just to walk you through the site plan, the proposal is for a professional office about 4,300 square feet. The proposed lot coverage, which includes the building, the drive aisle, the parking spaces, all of the concrete, what rain can't get through, is about 58.3% of the lot. CMG actually allows 80% lot coverage, so it's less than what is permitted. Sub chapter 14 outlines the parking requirements. One space per 450 square feet is required for this use, so that's about ten spaces. The applicant felt like that wasn't sufficient in order to accommodate all of the parking that they needed, so they're proposing 15 spaces. Sub chapter 13 requires that any spaces over the required amount has to be constructed of a pervious surface. But sub chapter 13 also allows for a deviation from some of these site design requirements, provided that the request meets the criteria for approval and that the site plan's approved by the Planning and Z oning Commission. So that's why we're here. So you can see the proposed building here in blue. That's that 4,300 square foot building, or 4,350. And then here are the proposed 15 parking spaces. The landscape plan shows a grass channel to be constructed adjacent to the additional parking spaces. This is intended to be planted with dense grasses, and the reason for this is to allow storm water to run off into this channel. It's designed to remove pollutants, so as the water slowly drains through this channel, it would pull out some of those pollutants that would be suspended within runoff in rain events. Yes, sir? Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. So this is going to be, when they design this, this is designed to drain to that and then drain into an area that will carry it to where? Yes, sir. To probably, and Jim might be able to speak to that. I would assume to the street is where they might be draining to, but maybe he can- To our sewage system? Yeah. Either storm sewer or the street. Okay. So it's going to drain out towards Woodrow then, I assume? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And we'll go over the drainage- he's nodding, so yes, sir. Okay. We'll go over the drainage plan in just a minute. So the intent of this, and I guess I should back up, the intent of why we have these pervious surface requirements in subchapter 13 is to ensure that the parking areas have, that they don't overly impact the environment with the pollutants suspended in the runoff. Also to ensure that any visual impacts associated with the parking, the additional parking would be mitigated. So in this sense, it's just five spaces. It's a pretty small area. And so by putting in this channel here, it would address those environmental impacts of those additional parking spaces. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. I just- something struck me curious about this, it seems. And correct me if I'm wrong, and maybe you don't know if you don't, that's fine. But the cost of- wouldn't the cost of adding five more impervious parking spaces be a little bit more than not? In other words, if they just put gravel there, that would be pervious. Right. I got to always think about it. But if they- and the fact that they've got to condition this area now where the water is going to drain out, it seems like cost-wise, it would be cheaper to do the per vious. I don't know what the balance sheet would be on both of those. I know that gravel would not be a permitted surface for parking in this area due to the zoning classification. So it would have to be something- It would have to be like grass creed or a pervious concrete or brick or some sort of paver. Gotcha. Okay, thanks. Commissioner Smith. Questions be answered. Thank you, Commissioner. All right, and then here's the drainage plan. And as you can see, the purple, there's some arrows here showing that the runoff is intended to drain toward this grass channel. So the considerations that staff looked at when we analyzed the request is, first of all, what is the intent of the requirement? And that's to ensure that we reduce negative effects associated with extra parking like pollutants and dirt packs. We also looked at the proposal against the criteria for approval and staff has determined it meets the criteria for approval. We'll just go over those briefly. First, preserve existing neighborhoods. Because this is a commercial area, this request is not anticipated to negatively impact the area. To assure quality development, the request is not to lower design standards, but just to adequately park the property and make sure that they have enough spaces for their employees and clients. To focus new development to activity centers, the location of this proposal is on an undeveloped lot adjacent to an existing secondary arterial and existing commercial development. So this wouldn't produce sprawl. It's gonna stay localized in an existing commercial area. To ensure that infrastructure can accommodate the development, the necessary infrastructure is in place. You have adequate access. And then it results in a high quality development meeting the intent of the standards. So the intent of the standard is to make sure that we accommodate for that additional parking. The proposal exceeds the lot coverage requirements. And it also by proposing this grass channel will mitigate for any environmental impacts associated with that additional parking. Also staff- >> Commissioner Smith. >> Thank you, Chair. >> Just a quick question on this. So this is gonna be on their private property, correct? So the upkeep is gonna be left to the property owner, correct? It's not gonna be like the median of a street where it's gonna be the city's responsibility? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay, thank you. >> And then also because this is a secondary- >> Commissioner Sullivan. >> While we're there. Thank you, Chair. Is there a soil survey that's been done? I mean, the reason I'm asking is if it's clay, it's not gonna absorb much water. It's gonna go straight to the curb. So I don't see where pollutants are gonna be removed. If it's sandy loam, then obviously there's gonna be much more absorption going in. And if this is really designed to take the place of a simple retention area, where they just dig a hole, let the water go, and then eventually seep into the ground. I'm just wondering why that's not an alternative that would be less expensive, talking about the different types of materials to put on the ground and to do what they were really wanting to do, which is remove the pollutants from the cars or what have you. >> Well, and I don't know about what kind of retention or detention that they would need regarding the site. That's being reviewed with our engineering department. This really is just to accommodate for these additional parking spaces. This channel has been reviewed by our water administration and how they're proposing to design it. And so they feel that it meets the requirements in order to make sure that it's gonna do what they want it to do. And part of that was that they felt like the runoff was going to get to the channel and drain out too quickly. And so that's why the dense grass requirement was important to slow down that water and allow the water to percolate down so that it drains more slowly and it can capture those pollutants. And our final point of analysis was to look at the street classification of Woodrow and the fact that parking isn't permitted on there. So really they do need to accommodate that excess parking on their site to ensure that they have that sufficient capacity. So we feel like that was something that they needed to accommodate for. So based upon the criteria for approval and the considerations that we just discussed, staff does recommend approval of the request with the following conditions to construct the grass channel designed to treat approximately 972 square feet of drainage area during an event generating 1.5 inches of rain or less as depicted on the landscape plan and drainage area map. And align that channel with dense types of grasses to reduce the flow velocity and increase the treatment residence time as depicted on the landscape plan. So I'll stand for any questions. >> Commissioner Roselle. >> Thank you, Chair. Was the applicant already planning to put in this drainage control prior to needing the ADP? >> The applicant should be here tonight. I don't know if that's something that they were planning on doing prior to the alternate. >> Do you know if they're agreeable to such conditions? >> You might want to check with them, but it is something that we've worked with them and this was something that they submitted to us, so. >> And then the last question I have is if this is 810 square feet for the parking spaces, if they were to increase the size of their building by 810 square feet, that doesn't require an ADP? >> No, sir. >> And that would obviously be impermeable material. >> So because it's a parking space, that's what has the ADP ? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay, I'd be interested to know their willingness to do all this, not all this, but these two extra steps. But I can talk to them at meeting, thanks. >> Sure. >> Commissioner Sanchez. >> Yeah, I was looking at that. What he just mentioned is as far as why give them an extra, it seems like they have extra work to do simply because they're adding five parking lots, parking spaces when they have, they've only met what is it, 53% without it, the way it stands. And so they haven't met the 80%. So it seems like we're giving them more work or giving them , like he just said, it doesn't seem right. I mean, we should make things easier. If they haven't met the 80%, then they should be, because, okay, because they haven't met that 80%, then they should still be able to build enough parking spots until they cover that . So it just doesn't make sense to me why we would enforce something based on, because we also have not looked at the soil that was previously mentioned on the periphery of a parking. Area. And so we're just throwing an arbitrary, seems like an arbitrary number, say 80%. Okay, this is what we're going to give you based on what, what if you have clay on the outskirts, on the perimeter of the parking lot, or what if you have soil, would that make it increase the permeability or the area that can be covered? So there's a lot of stuff there that, you know, has a little bit of concern. So I throw more work on the individual when our job, it seems like, is to not necessarily give them a pass, but not to add additional cost to the project based on just because they have five extra parking spots. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. My question is probably really for either Richard or Jennifer. I've noticed in options down here, it says approved submitted or approved subject to conditions. Seems like it's submitted with the conditions, so I would, it seems redundant. So, I mean, I don't see this being a problem and approved. I would like to make sure the conditions are applied. But so if I did one, would I be negating the conditions if we approved it? I think that's approved as submitted by the applicant originally, which did not include those conditions, but they were developed over time through negotiation. Okay, okay. Got you. All right. So that's something to keep in mind when we cast a vote. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you, Chair. With regard to what Commissioner Sanchez said, which makes total sense, but doesn't the code limit us from saying because you're only developing 53%, we can negate this? I'm assuming we're somewhat handcuffed here with... We still have to come to you with a... With the parking. And ensure that it meets the criteria for approval. So, yes, it's something that is put into the code that we have to follow. Right. And there's nothing that would allow us to say we don't have to do this because you're 30% under lot coverage . I mean, is there any way we can... Staff doesn't have the authority to do that in Richard. I mean, with respect to this kind of item, we're sort of... Our hands are sort of... We're locked in. Obviously, it would be much better if there were some thresholds and some de minimis where if you were only... If you were less than 60% coverage, you can go... You can add additional parking up to a certain percentage. Unfortunately, it wasn't... I think the intention was good, but that sort of one size fits all doesn't fit all. We are putting together an item, just food for thought, with respect to parking and parking maximums, which this kind of situation is very similar to City Council. I believe it's November 14th. So we will sort of be bringing this up under that item. Just... And if we're going forward with our code rewrite, then this is certainly something to take into consideration that we can write in there. So that we can perhaps alleviate them from having to do this and have that kind of power. Okay. Thank you. Just as a legal matter, and before the Chair takes over, I just... And I'm not sure about the percentages or whatever, but whenever we do an alternative development plan, we're allowing them to do something they would normally be allowed to do in exchange for something that benefits the city. So if you don't have an exchange of benefit, then there's really no alternative development plan. It's more like a variance of sorts. So it wouldn't go in front of this body. But what they're doing is saying, we'll give you this in order to get this. And so that's why the requirement... So, you know, something that they've negotiated. And I think I'm going to step in here now, right? I could feel the vibe of all the conversation. I know one of the things that we've tried to do as this commission during work session is get a general background of the items. And then when we're going to have more detailed discussions and things, we would prefer to have those in our public session in front of folks. And so I think if there's something that's a very straightforward clarification on this item, we'll take that . And if we're going to get into some of these other, let's finish it up in council. Commissioner Smith. Thank you, Chair. We are going to see this as a consent agenda item before final plotting, correct? After this? No, this is the individual consideration for this. And then it will. And in fact, it's a plotted lot. It was a minor plot because the public improvements weren't required in association with it. So this will be the last time you see it. Yes, sir. Any other clarifications on this item? Okay. And we've Haley will be back for 4B. I'm glad I'm not the only one trying to keep up with musical chairs here on the agenda. All right. 4B we discussed briefly earlier. This is the plot where they did not get their whole harmless agreement put in place before it came to you. For this outstanding text up permit that they're seeking. If you have any other questions about the plot, I'd be glad to answer them at this time. Thank you, Haley. That's going to move us to our public hearing section. And I believe A and B are both going to be postponed. We're not going to have a presentation on those and skip on the C, correct? So Julie. All right. This is a replat. I don't know how to turn it either. So this property is situated east of downtown. It is currently two lots that they are replatting into one. And that it's current, I'm sorry, it's one lot they're plotting into two lots with an access easement. It's developed with an industrial use. Any question? I think if everybody looks like we're searching, make sure everybody has an opportunity to ask a question if they have one on this item. No? Okay. All right. And then next one. And D. All right. And this property is adjacent to Highway 380, south of 380. It is partially in the ETJ and partially within the city. The portion that's within the city has an NR2 zoning designation. They are requesting, it is currently plotted as all one lot . They're requesting a replat to subdivide it into two lots with an access easement in the back for residential development. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. This area looks like it's going to benefit from our mobility plan when I guess what is it, post oak road, the six lane road comes through there. So is this in anticipation of that? I am not sure what their intent is other than just to subdivide the lot for residential development. So I'm not sure. That will be up. Right now they're not zoned for a commercial use. So if they did have an anticipation for some sort of rede velopment that would include some something of a more intensity than two dwelling units per acre, then you would of course see it again. All right. That is going to be a primary arterial that's coming through there. Yes, sir. Okay. Yes, sir. All right. Thanks. Sure. Commissioner Sanchez. So I was looking at that. I kind of made the sense that maybe this lane that you did that front side because it's right next to 380. Yes, sir. Do you have your microphone on? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. As I was looking at that. You got the glowing globe here. As I was looking at that, it kind of made sense to me to divide it because that close the front part belongs is on 3 80. And if you wanted to sell it, I mean that would bring in I mean as an investor, that's probably what he's looking at. I mean I'm just thinking about that. Sure. And the backside, if you want to sell it altogether, probably bring the price down. So he's probably looking at that front end of it as a much more expensive piece of property. It does have that frontage. Yes, sir. Yes, that frontage is very important. Any other questions on this item? Thank you, Julie. Thank you. Move us to item E and looks like Haley will present that. All right. So this is a replat of a single lot at the time located on the south side, I'm sorry, on the east side of Dakota Lane, that's south of Airport Road. And the intent of the plot is to split this existing single lot into two lots. What's seen here as lot two is currently developed with an industrial use and then lot one is undeveloped at this time . Can answer any questions. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. Okay, so those lots are up against Dakota, is that right? Yes, sir. The orientation is a little strange. North is off here on the right side of the page, Dakota Lane. Do you have the Google map showing the physical character? No. I can get to that if you'd like me to. Well, isn't there a building on one of those lots now? Yes, sir. Lot two has an existing industrial development on it. I believe it's here in this portion of the lot. Okay, and that's not going to be impacted by this change? No, I believe that's staying the same. They're just subdividing off the property next to them. Okay, thanks. Any other questions on this item? Okay, we'll stay with Haley for item F. All right, so this is case Z1723 for the COPE addition. This request is to hold a public hearing and consider a request for an initial zoning of neighborhood residential six on a property that is approximately 16.39 acres. It's located here at this northeast corner of Mayhill and Mills Road. Looking at what's in the area, you can see there's a mixture of things going on in this area. So we have the subject property and some other properties to the east are zoned RD5X. That's our placeholder zoning designation after a property has been annexed into the city. Within that, we have a variety of residential uses. There's some commercial uses and auto repair here north of the property. There's also some property in this immediate vicinity that 's still within the ETJ, so it hasn't yet been annexed into the city. Much of that is undeveloped, but there are some existing residences to the east of the subject property. Across Mayhill and to the south on Mills, we have our ECI district, so Employment Center Industrial. This is again developed with a variety of things. We have a Denton ISD facility here to the south and then a variety of industrial uses across May hill and there are even some single-family residences along Mayhill as well. Also to the south, we have our neighborhood residential 2 district. That's our lowest intensity residential district and that's actually developed right now with Ryan High School and some other Denton ISD has a bus facility here to the south that you can see. And then there's a small parcel of NR6 in this area as well that's actually developed with an industrial use at this time. Looking at the future land use map for this area, you can see the subject property and everything to the north of it along Mayhill Road is designated for moderate residential. So that's a designation that's intended to promote a little bit more compact single-family development primarily between 4 and 12 dwelling units per acre. And it's often intended to serve as a transition, which we see in this case here because we have business innovation and community mixed use to the west along Mayhill Road. And then this moderate residential would serve as a transition to lower density residential development to the east. Just looking at the mobility and what we have going on in the area, Mayhill Road is a primary arterial that adjoins the property on the west side. There are currently plans for the expansion of realignment of Mayhill. On the south side we have Mills Road, which is designated as a collector. Right now it's a relatively unimproved road, a two lanes undivided. And the requirements for this development making improvements on Mills Road would be assessed at the time of platting. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Does the City see any problem with that? Needs an assessment depending on an ultimate development proposal. Does the City see any problems with this? Not at this time. We haven't seen you know what their final plans would be in terms of density. I know their intent is for single- family homes. But once they get to that preliminary platting stage we would look more closely at what they're proposing and what infrastructure improvements are needed on Mills. Okay, but I mean knowing what's probably going to go on there. Do we not anticipate any problems? At this time I don't think we've looked at it that closely yet. That's not typically a consideration with zoning. But we do know that that infrastructure assessment will be done and that that will have to be addressed when the property is plotted. And this may be for you. But what's the timeline? I know we're widening Mayhill but what's the timeline like on it for that area? Do we know? Hello. Yes sir. The overall project is actually under construction now. Okay. Some utility relocations and some portions of the road I believe. And it's currently anticipated that that overall may hill project construction will be completed for around summer of 2019. Okay. Very good. Thanks. Commissioner Smith. Thank you Chair. Jim, stay up there. In regards to the alignment and the expansion of Mayhill, has there already been discussion about what effects it's going to have on the collector and the secondary arterials that connect into Mayhill? In this instance, this collector of Mills Road, is that going to have to be expanded along some future conversation because we're going to be expanding Mayhill? They have, on our mobility plan, it shows Mills to remain as a collector ultimately. That's how it's currently designated now even though it's a very narrow road. The intersection right of way dedication acquisition that was acquired as part of the May hill Road project is shown accurately on the applicant's initial submittal that they came in. But there's, to my knowledge, and I did check on this internally, I don't believe the city has any plans for any capital improvements projects to Mills Road. What's the traditional standard whenever we do an expansion of a primary arterial road? Is it going to be a stoplight for collectors ? Is it just a stop sign for collectors to turn on to the primary arterial? It's really site specific. Is it? Yes. We have made the comment to the applicant here already that we're going to need to see their trip generation numbers and we're going to have to look at that when we get into preliminary planning. Their initial written submittal to us a few months ago had a certain number of lots and then I think they've talked since about increasing that a bit. So we will look at that closely. I don't really have a pat answer for that. It's kind of site specific. So that site specific, that conversation happens after you see those trip gen numbers to say, hey, we think there's going to be a lot of movements. We're going to require you to expand and to help pay for stop sign or stoplight. There can actually be an intersection there rather than a stop sign turn on to a very busy, about to be a very busy primary arterial. All right. Thank you. Commissioner San chez, again, this is just a zoning case. So we're kind of getting off into platting but zoning only on this item at this time. All right. My concern was Mills Road and the way if it's not going to be widened or any work is going to be done to it because the school is just down from there, right? And some of those students are going to be walking up and down that street and that can be dangerous. McKinney right now has, there's been several accidents, a couple of students being hit right on McKinney Street because they walk along the side of the road. Well, we have not said that there won 't be any improvements to Mills Road. Okay. Mills Road is one of them. That is something we have identified as a possibility. Again, and we would look at that more thoroughly at the at the at the planning stage. In actual fact, just last night there was a presentation made to city council public hearing and it was approved for incorporation to our transportation design criteria manual clarifying what the perimeter street improvement policy is as part of our new roadway impact fee ordinance. We will definitely be looking at that here in this case and just on every project going forward. Any other questions for Jim on this and if not we'll get back to Haley on the zoning portion of this item. All right, almost to the end here. Notification was sent about this case. We sent 13 notices to the properties within 200 feet and 20 to those within 500. One came in just this afternoon and I placed that on your table for you. It was in opposition and that property owner is located here just to the northeast of the property . Thank you for doing that. That helps. And based on the discussion that we've had here and the the compatibility with the future land use and the mixture of uses in this area, staff is recommending approval of this request and you can answer any other questions at this time. Great, thank you Haley. Good presentation. I believe that will end our public hearing item. So with that, unless Simone has anything else, I will close our work session at 5 45 and we will reconvene in council chambers at 6 30. Thank you everyone. Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for October the 25th 2017. This meeting has been duly posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 6 30. Our first order of business will be to stand and give the pledge to the U.S. and the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. I, the Texas flag, pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under God, one indivisible. This will take us to our next item on our agenda will be to consider approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission minutes and I'll take these in two separate motions in case we have any changes. Commissioner Smith. A motion to approve. For the 27th? For the 27th, yes sir. Okay. Commissioner Back. Second. Okay we have a first and a second for approval. Is there any discussion or changes need to be made to the minutes? Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on board. Okay so we just have an error on the read. It should be seven yes and no opposed. Motion passes. I move us to our second item on our minutes. Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair. A motion to approve October 11th minutes. Okay. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you. I will second that. Okay we have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion or changes that need to be made to the minutes? Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on board. The motion is going to carry six to zero with one recuse. That will move us to our consent agenda and before announce that we do have one item, item C FP 17- 0021 that is going to be moved to our individual consideration agenda and it will become item 4B. So we will be considering A, B, D, and E for our consent agenda. Chair would enter. Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair. A motion to approve our consent agenda as written. Okay. Commissioner Rossell. I second. Okay we have a first and a second. Any discussion? Just for the record, you mean not as written but as modified by the chair. Modified by the chair. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Any other discussion on this item? Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board for approval of the consent agenda as modified. That motion is going to carry seven zero. That will move us to item four, our items for individual consideration and I will call on Julie White for presentation of item A ADP 17-0021. Item number 002. Good evening. I'm Julie Wyatt and I am presenting ADP 17-2 Ross Law Office. The request before you is to consider an alternative development plan to DVA from subchapter 13 regarding the requirement for permeable paving for excess parking. The subject property is located on the east side of Woodrow . It's south of McKinney, approximately 275 feet and it is located in a CMG zoning district and this CMG zoning district permits an 80% lot coverage. So that's something you'll want to know for later in the presentation. So here's the site plan. The proposal is a professional office about 4, 300 square feet. They're actually proposing with their office, their parking, their drive aisle, all of the impervious surface. They're proposing a 53.8% lot coverage. Subchapter 14 outlines the parking requirements for development in the city of Denton and professional services and offices require one space per 450 square feet of gross floor area. So that equals to 10 spaces for this use. The applicant, however, would like to provide 15 spaces in order to accommodate their development. Subch apter 13 requires that all parking spaces over the required number be constructed of a pervious surface. However, subchapter 13 also allows an alternative development plan if they want to vary or deviate from those site design requirements provided that the development meets the criteria for approval and is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. As part of the proposal, there is a landscape plan and that includes a grass channel adjacent to the additional parking spaces. It is to be planted or is proposed to be planted with dense grasses and the intent is to be designed to remove pollutants that would be suspended in the runoff produced by that excess pavement . This is intended to reduce the environmental impact of those additional parking spaces. And here's their drainage plan and that depicts how this water is going to drain. As you can see by the purple arrows, the drainage is intended to go toward that grass channel. So the considerations that staff looked at when we analyzed the request was first what is the intent of the pervious parking requirement. We typically look at that the intent is to minimize any environmental impacts associated with additional parking and then also any visual impacts. In this case, five spaces is pretty small so the visual impacts weren't as germane as maybe the environmental impacts. So we looked at the criteria for approval and we felt that it met the criteria for approval what they were proposing and we'll just go over those quickly. First, preserve existing neighborhoods. This proposal is not anticipated to negatively impact the area. It's already a commercial area with lots of offices and retail uses. Assure quality development. The proposed five extra spaces are not intended to design to lower design standards but just to accommodate the additional parking. Focus new development on activity centers. The site location is on an undeveloped lot in an existing commercial area and adjacent to an already constructed arterial. So this is focusing that development toward an existing commercial area. Ensure infrastructure can accommodate development. There is adequate infrastructure in the area to accommodate it and there results in a high quality development that meets the intent of the requirement and based on what we've talked about the lot coverage, what they're proposing, the 53% lot coverage that exceeds the requirement for or the standard for the CMG zoning district and then also that grass channel that we discussed that meets the intent of why we have these parking maximums or these pervious surfaces to ensure that we minimize the amount of pollutants. And then also we looked at just why they would need the parking and this property is located adjacent to an arterial which doesn't allow for parking on the street. So they really do need to accommodate their parking on site. They need to have sufficient parking to ensure the safety of the visitors and the employees. So with that being said, staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions. First that they construct the grass channel as we discussed to treat approximately 97 2 square feet of drainage area in an event generating one and a half inches of rain or less as depicted on the landscape plan and drainage map. And then also align that channel with some dense grasses to slow the velocity of the water and ensure that there's a proper amount of time that that water stays in the channel so the pollutants can be removed from that water. So I'll stand for any questions. Commissioner Smith. Thank you, Chair. Julie, in regards to the construction of these grass channels, usually is there a retaining wall that holds this grass? Like it's not going to be the grass up against other undeveloped land that it's being built next to, correct? Let's look at that. Because on that very top line there that's against other undeveloped land, is there a retaining wall? What is, how does that look? They're not proposing a retaining wall. It would just be... Is it curved off? Is it just grass and then it's undeveloped land next to it? It would be. There will be a depression there. So it'll channel the water there. But yes , it would just then be adjacent to that property. Thanks. Commissioner Rossell. Thank you, Chair. I had some questions about this in work session about the requirements and we might be tied here with the code when it comes to ADPs. Maybe a question, I'm not sure, Julie, if it's for you or maybe it's for legal. Is it possible to have an ADP without conditions placed on it? I am going to let legal answer that. Generally the conditions are part of the plan. That's why it's an alternative plan. My understanding is this was submitted without any conditions. And then the city added the conditions. I think it's because in our code it actually states that if you want to vary from the parking standards, it requires an ADP and it only provides the criteria by which you're supposed to review those requests. But we have to have some, a stricter standard or a heightened level of design in order for it to qualify. And to do that, we had to add the conditions. So it's almost like it goes hand in hand. When you see most ADPs, they have designs that aren't normally required by our code and this is just one of those. So here we've listed as conditions. I'm not, you know, I'm not sure how they originally submitted it. So. And in terms of planning staff, when we look at these, we do look at the intent of why that requirement is there. So why you would need pervious parking for spaces that were in excess of what was required. And so we work with the applicant to try to come up with a site plan and a design that will meet the intent of that requirement while still, you know, if approved by city count or by the planning and zoning commission would allow them to move forward with their development in a way that they need to develop it. But to have type interventions that allow it to meet that requirement. Sure. That makes sense. My take on this is they're substantially under the lot coverage to begin with and under code they could build a larger building without any ADP requirement. They could have a lot more impervious structures on their lot without requiring an ADP. But because it's fallen under this parking, it seems to be this kind of nuance of the code in which if they want additional parking, they'd have to do an ADP. I think it'd be most productive rather than me trying to think about these conditions as required or not. Is the applicant here who can speak to the willingness? Yes, please. Good afternoon. Please state your name and address and step over here for the mic for us. John A. Ross Jr. Mr. Ross, I appreciate you being here. Can you tell me about the conditions and your willingness for these conditions? Specifically as to what? Constructing a grass channel storm water of 972 square feet. Are you okay with that? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Okay. Then I guess my point here is mute, but it might be worth something to consider down the road about the requirements for an ADP for parking when lot coverage is underneath the 80%. That's more for staff, though. I can tell you right now with this parking, if this is approved, we don't intend on doing any additional parking and we'd obviously know that we'd have to resubmit anything to the commission. Out of curiosity, is it more expensive for you to plan a channel of those dense grasses in terms of construction? I would assume, yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Is that everything? Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Beck. Thank you, Chair. Julie, the drainage you showed us a while ago, it showed those, I guess it's five parking places, shoots towards that grass area, but the whole parking lot area, is it all, is it drained to in that same direction or are we going to get? In looking at this, it looks like there are other parts of the parking lot that drain in other ways to get the water to Woodrow. Okay. So the intent really was just to get this part. Okay. So that right, that grassy area there is not intended to incorporate all the drainage off the parking lot. No, sir. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Commissioner Sanchez. You mentioned several times that the channel is to pick up pollutants or to stop pollutants over time. You know, if you have pollutants going into that grass area, I would think that that would have an effect on the vegetation. And so what I'm thinking is how are you going to monitor? We're implementing something that we probably can't even monitor over time. We don't really have a mechanism to monitor that after the fact. So yes, you're correct. So if something did happen where it got clogged or there was something that would impact adjacent properties where it wasn't functioning correctly, then the city may need to get in with our community development in order to ensure that it's working properly. But you're right. There's no mechanism to verify, to do soil samples or anything regarding the pollutants. It would just be if it's not functioning and it would impact the drainage on adjacent properties. It's when the city may get involved in ensuring that it's maintained. I guess I was just looking at the vegetation. That, you know, it's going into the vegetation and over time, I mean, you would think that pollutants would affect the vegetation. And that's all I was thinking about. Our water administration department looks at these and they presented this or they formulated this based upon I-swim. So some interventions or some best practices that were developed by our North Texas Council of Governments. So these are some best practices that have been developed with the environmental community and with in order to ensure that it does what it's supposed to do and it can be allowed to thrive and those plants would stay there. I have a question for you. Since they're so far under their lot coverage and there's one parking space for 450, if their building had been, they wanted five spaces, 2250 square feet larger, they would have still been under the coverage percentage and they could have done their spaces without doing any of the ADP at all. Correct. So they could have built a larger building, had the same parking lot and not have to do any of that. Yes, sir. That's correct. Okay. I'd have a question for the applicant then and then we'll move on. Yes, sir. About how long has it taken you to go through this process? About a year and a half now. Just on the ADP? Not on the AD P. I started the ADP about three months ago. About three months ago? Yes, sir. Three, four months ago. About how much does it cost to go through that process engineering wise? Approximately? I'd say probably 10 to 15,000 so far. Okay. Just for the AD P before you even do any of the work? I'm guessing because I haven't got the civil engineers bill yet. I know that will be high. I just want to bring that to attention. I know they have a DDC rewrite that we're working on and this seems to be one of those areas where you're under what you're allowed lot coverage wise, 80 percent, but yet you've spent at least three months and a considerable amount of money to do something that if you built a larger building you could cover more than the lot than what you are at this stage. So I just want to bring that up here for us to consider as we're talking about DDC changes. So thank you for sharing that information with us. Thanks, sir. You bet. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you. This isn't a public hearing but if there's someone who would like to speak you may. You would have to fill out a card. It is an individual consideration item. In seeing none, I will go ahead and open the floor here amongst us for discussion or a motion. Commissioner Rossello. Thank you, chair. I'm going to go ahead and motion approval of this with the conditions stipulated by staff. But I also wanted to use my time here to reiterate chair's thoughts on the process here. If there's an ability to address this in the DIN development code then we should. It seems quite obvious that there's been a lot more added to the applicant than needed for five parking spaces when again the lot coverage is exceptionally lower than what was required. And he has rights to build other things. It's just this parking has created a lot more effort from the applicant. So I'd like to see this project move forward and not delay on this anything past that he has since the 1st of August it looks like. So I'll go ahead and motion this. But with the hope that this is addressed in the DDC or some other conversation. Commissioner Smith. Thank you, chair. Motion to or second motion to accept. We have a first and a second for approval. Commissioner San chez. Yes. I just want to mention the same thing that Andrew talked about. I think we put a larger burden on the applicant and it's something we have to look at. And also the other concern I have is even this idea of having a channel there that we can't monitor over time. I just feel this is an additional burden that we put on him that really is not going to that we can't prove it's going to help over time even though we talk about best practices. You know those are things we implement in trying to mitigate environmental issues. But at the same time those best practices have to be monitored and looked at over time. It's just not implementing it and then we'll see 20 years from now. So. Okay. Any other comments or questions before I call for a vote on board? Seeing none I will call for a vote on the board. We have a first and a second for approval with conditions by staff. That motion is going to carry seven zero. Good luck with your project. That will move us to our individual consideration. Item B which is going to be FP 17-0021 and I will call on Haley for a presentation. All right good evening. This is a final plat for two lots located on the west side of the I-35 service road. The lots are intended to be developed with retail sites. The reason this plat was pulled from the consent agenda is because there is a driveway proposed to the south of the property that requires approval of a permit from the Texas Department of Transportation because it is in their right of way. The permit for that is not yet approved. So the typical practice would be to have a hold harmless agreement signed and put in place before the plat is approved by you all. That was not done in this case so we've brought the plat forward with the condition that that text up permit be approved or the hold harmless agreement be filed before this plat gets filed after you all approve it. And can answer any questions. Commissioner Beck. And again I think it was stated that if we do approve this and all moves forward like it's supposed to they don't have to come back to the PNC is that correct? Yes sir if you approve it with that condition it wouldn't have to come back before you. Okay thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you Chair. Do we have any reason to believe that the permit would not be approved it's just is it just pending status? Yes yeah it's in review with text up at this time. Okay so we would need approval pending the permit as well as a hold harmless agreement signed by the applicant? Either of those options. Either of those. If the permit is approved before it's filed the hold harmless agreement wouldn't be required. That hold harmless agreement was intended to and Jennifer could probably speak to that but my understanding is it's provided in case the permit's not approved the city wouldn't be liable. The hold harmless agreement only comes into play if we're substituting it for no permit. So they either have the permit or they have the hold harmless agreement just saying well we didn't get the permit but we're not going to hold you responsible for it if we can't get it later. And so if we don't have either one of those you can condition your approval on that. We won't file any plans with the county until we receive that. Any other questions for Haley? Thank you. Okay this is an individual consideration item. It's not a public hearing but you're welcome to speak on this item if you'd like. You would need to fill out a card to do so. Seeing none I will have a motion from Commissioner Smith. Motion to accept this with staff's conditions also added onto it. Okay the two conditions okay Commissioner Sullivan. Second the motion. Okay we have a first and a second for approval with conditions. Any further discussion or comment? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. The motion is going to carry seven to zero. That will move us to our public hearing section this evening. At this time I'm going to open the public hearing for item A DCA 17-0010B. Actually that has been postponed. My mistake. That's the one that's postponed definitely. Okay I didn't do it right then. I know how that is. Keeping up with it. Okay so this item is open. It is a public hearing. It is open and the chair would entertain a motion for continuance indefinitely. Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair. Mr. Jenks you can just say it if you want to come to the mic go ahead. I know it's postponed definitely. Do you have a time frame when we're going to see this again or is this just postponed because we're busy in the office or what's what's the time frame of seeing this come back before our commission? Yes sir that's a that's a good question and basically what 's driving the postponement I would say more than anything is that since the item was initiated we've had a lot of changes in management in the development services department. The new management that's come in has brought in some perspectives of their own and experiences from other cities that I think are valuable and that we're considering. I think we're still we 're still going along the similar path but the details of how the new agreements would be structured and the bonds the financial guarantees that we talked about we may we may tweak somewhat as far as when we will be coming back to you. I would say very soon by I would I would say probably next month sometime or possibly December at the latest but very soon we're we're we're not stopping the item we're just hitting pause as we have some new faces and new experience come in and try to get a better product. Thank you Mr. Jinks. You bet. Commissioner Roselle. I move to postpone this agenda item indefinitely. Okay. Commissioner Smith. I second. Okay we have a first and a second for postponement indefinitely. Yes. Okay so we will leave the public hearing open and then we'll call for a vote on the board. I'm sorry it was an indefinite postponement so the public hearing really needs to be closed because I think they're going to republish notice for it so okay on this one we will close the public hearing. Okay well we'll back up a step then and I'm going to close the public hearing on this item and I will call for a vote on the board. Do we need a re- motion or can we leave the motions as stated earlier? We can leave the motions as stated. Okay I 'll call for a vote on the board. Same motion. Motion is going to carry seven zero. We'll move us to item B and I will open our public hearing for Z 17-0022. Actually well I'm having a hard time tonight I can't read. Do we have to open it? This one we will leave open the public hearing because so that we don't have to republish I think that the applicant actually wanted to amend the request and it's going to be postponed to a date certain so we would entertain a motion. Okay so we're going to lay the public hearing open not close it and then we will take a ask for a motion and take a vote. Okay so this item is open and then Commissioner Smith. A motion to postp one this item until November 8th planning is on a commission meeting. Okay for a date certain. Commissioner Beck. Second. Okay we have a first and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. Motion carries seven zero and this item is still open. We 'll move us to item C and I will open the public hearing for FR 17-0021. We'll call on Julie Wyatt for presentation. All right. Now I've completely messed it up. All right this is a replat. Let's try again. View. Rotate. There we go. All right this is a replat for a previously pl atted lot. One lot they're they're dividing into two lots. It's situated on the east side of kind of downtown on Duncan Street. It is developed with industrial uses and they're just splitting it into two lots with some access agreements to ensure access on the site and I'll answer any questions. Any questions for Julie? Thank you Julie. This is a public hearing so if there's anyone who would like to speak on this item please come down at this time. And this is a public hearing. Please come down if you'd like to speak on this item. Seeing none I'll close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Beck? I move we approve FR 17-0021. Okay. Commissioner Ellis? Second. Okay. We have a first and a second for approval. Any other discussion or questions? Seeing none we'll call for a vote on the board. The motion is going to carry 7-0. We'll move us to item D and I will open the public hearing for FR 17-0013 and call on Julie for presentation of this item as well. All right this is also a replat. Subject property is located south of 380. It has a part of the property is in the city of Denton and it has a zoning designation of NR2 and part of it is in the ETJ. They are splitting one pl atted lot into two lots with an access easement and I'll stand for any questions. Commissioner Ellis? Thank you chair. Julie as I was looking at this I'm curious is there not a commercial site already in use on the property? I think there is. If any redevelopment happened and they if any redevelopment was proposed or contemplated they would they would have to comply with any zoning regulations that are on the property. So this replat does not negate their use currently? No ma'am. But if redevelopment happens it would have to fall in the part within the city. Correct. Correct. Okay thanks. Just for clarification on that that's just going to be on the city portion the portion that's going to be in the county or ETJ would be governed by the county. They would they would all permits would be through the county. Okay any other questions for Julie? Thank you Julie. This is a public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Please state your name and address for the record and I believe you have four minutes. If you haven't filled out a card for us before you leave this even there's cards right outside the door and please fill out a card for us. My name is M ignon Laughlin I am the mother of one of the applicants and he didn't tell me I was need to talk. I was just supposed to say nothing's changing except there was a divorce and so they're dividing stuff up so they had it resurveyed and replatted. Okay sorry to hear that. Will you give your address for us please? Oh I'm sorry I live at 630 Lakeshore Boulevard in Oak Point. Okay thank you and please fill out a card for us. This is a public hearing anyone else who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Okay seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Rozelle. Thank you chair I move approval of FR 17-0013. Okay commissioner Smith. I second that motion. Okay we have a first and a second for approval any other discussion or questions? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. Motion is going to carry seven to zero. We'll take us to item E. We'll open the public hearing for FR 17-0018 and we'll call on Hattie Lee for presentation. This is a replant of lot one of the Ryan Company's addition . The property is located on the east side of Dakota Lane that's over in the west part of town near the airport. It is zoned for industrial development and currently lot two you've seen here is developed with an existing industrial use. My understanding is that will stay in place they are simply subdividing off the southern portion of the property. I can answer any other questions you might have. Any questions for Haley? Thank you Haley. This is a public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Beck. I move we approve FR 17-0018. Okay commissioner Smith. I second that motion. Okay we have a first and a second for approval any discussion or comments or questions? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on board. That motion carries seven zero. That will take us to item F . I will open the public hearing for Z 17-0023 and call on Haley for presentation of this item as well. Good evening this is case Z 17-23 for the co-pedition. The request is to hold a public hearing and consider a request to establish an initial zoning designation of neighborhood residential six on a property you see outlined here in yellow. It's approximately 16.39 acres located at the northeast corner of Mayhill Road and Mills Road. If we look at what is around the area in terms of zoning and land use you'll see a mixture of things. The property itself and several other properties in this area currently have our placeholder zoning designation of RD 5X. I said that's a placeholder when a property is annexed into the city it's assigned that designation until such time as an initial zoning application is made. Currently we have a mixture of uses residential some commercial there's an auto repair shop immediately north of the property. Then if we look to the other districts you'll see in the blue hatched area that's outlined in green all of those parcels are still in the ETJ so not yet annexed into the city. Again there's some undeveloped land and some residential uses in that area. Looking across Mayhill Road we have the ECI district so one of our employment center districts and in this area we have a mixture of uses we have facilities for Denton ISD to the south of the property a mixture of commercial and industrial uses and then even some single-family residences. To the south we have NR 2 district that's immediately south of the property is developed again by Denton ISD we have the Ryan High School as well as a bus facility in this area. And then there's also a small patch of NR 6 zoning in this area. When you look at the future land use map this parcel and much of the property to the north of it is designated as moderate residential. That's a designation that promotes more compact single family development a little bit higher density generally between four and twelve units per acre is what's encouraged in that designation. And this designation often serves as a transition between a commercial or mixed use areas and lower density residential and we see that in play here along Mayhill Road we have business innovation and community mixed use designations that would be commercial maybe some light industrial employment uses and then the moderate residential area would be a transition between those commercial uses and lower density residential that's intended to the east. Looking at the roadways and access to this site it does have frontage on both Mayhill and Mills. Mayhill Road is a primary arterial it's currently under expansion and realignment at this time and the Mills Road is designated as a collector and all of the requirements for improvement that would come as part of this development will be further examined and determined during the preliminary and final platting of the property. Not ification was sent about this case we sent 13 notices to those properties within 200 feet 20 to those within 500. We received one written opposition that was provided to you at the work session and that property is outlined here in red. Staff is recommending approval of this request because it is generally compatible with the surrounding properties in terms of use and zoning and is also consistent with the goals and objectives of the Denton Plan 2030 and I can stand for any questions. Commissioner Smith. Thank you Chair. We talked about in work session but just to make clear to hopefully clear up anything that might be brought during the public hearing portion of this the mobility specifically on mobility that will be handled the expansion of Mills Road in regards to population density due to this rezoning and possibly the development of the single-family residential use that mobility will be decided upon at platting. Yes sir when they go through the preliminary plat process the applicant will have to provide trip generation calculations based on the lot and density that they're proposing and at that time it would be determined what perimeter street improvements are required for this development. So during this zoning process we're not going to be needing to worry about mobility issues right now. Yes sir. Thank you ma'am. Any other questions for Haley? Thank you Haley. Again this is a public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Please come forward. Please give us your name and address and thank you for filling out a card for us. Thank you Commissioner. Appreciate it. It's William Butler actually Bill. Okay. I live at 4923 Mills Road. If the map was still up I could show you where our property is but it is adjacent to this proposed development. I'm kind of new at this so. Sure. I 'll ask Haley to. If I'm wrong you'll help me keep my thoughts straight. I'll ask Haley to come up and make sure and help you if we need to do the eye in the sky on something or. Yeah I mean I had some. You have some things you'd like to show us. Well I had stuff I'm taking off the Google map. I know you sent. I know she sent proposals out like 13 you said or so. Yes sir. We never got one. I found out about this yesterday. Okay. So I'm not nearly as prepared as I would with a. I also was a commercial. Please come forward. I'm sorry. That's okay sweet. I want to make sure we can hear you. Okay and I'm also was a commercial estate broker and was involved in some development in Houston Texas which zoning is a lot different there. So some of my concerns is that the the density will significantly increase the traffic at that intersection which at times especially during school year already has substantial amount of traffic. I don't know this for sure because I didn't get a chance to verify this but my understanding is that Ingrass and egress is only on Mills Road and not on Mayo. Well at this time we're just doing zoning and. Okay so that's not part. Okay. Whenever they do come forward for preliminary plot they will have to address all those issues. Okay. My feeling is that the this type of housing is quote unquote considered low income housing and I think it might have a negative impact on the existing properties and even more importantly on future development. This is like a gateway Mills dead ends in the May Hill Road. So what you see when you turn the corner says the tone I believe for the rest of the property. My wife and I we own a 6,500 square foot house under roof at 43 4923 Mills Road. My wife and her siblings own they actually have to address wrong on the wrong house but 4921 Mills Road is adjacent to the property as well and they are also concerned about the density of the property being developed or proposed along with her family. My wife and I own a total of 40 acres along Mills Road which includes the two residences and two more residents as well. High density residential development will negatively impact the values of the acre age for future residential development. The area would better be better served if the property be z oned density of nr2 and certainly no more than nr3. And one last thing if you drive up and down Black Road and you see the development that's going on there that's a quality higher end type development. I'm not saying that Mills Road will ever reach that level but I think we ought to strive for that and can raise the whole feeling of that area and as time goes by. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Smith. Thank you Chair. Yeah if you could real quick. What I mentioned Haley before we opened up the public hearing to the floor to folks. Mobility issues I feel like it was I didn't know until you brought it up that you know you're really worried about low income and kind of what's going to be used for this. At this point with zoning just deciding the zoning of it it's going to be really hard for us as commissioners to vote against it because it does fit with the future land use map that's already been decided within the Denton 2030 plan. Now your objections and your concerns are extremely valid and things that should be definitely brought back up whenever it gets the preliminary prating plotting process that's going to come in front of this commission. I'd love to see you back in here again to talk about it and bring that up then because that's something that we can vote down based off that evidence that yes the what their plats but they're asking for us to approve here to be you to actually use this land for. Yeah that doesn't seem like something we want to see within our community then we can make a stand. It's really hard for us as commissioners to say hey you're just wanting to rezone it to fit with what we already said as a city we want to see there. It's hard for us to say no to it so thank you for coming out. Thank you. Any other questions? Can I say one more thing? Sure. I am not opposed personally to the residential development. In some ways it's preferred over possibly over industrial which is what I thought might be how it would be zoned considering its location. The only thing I'm opposed to is the density. Okay. Commissioner Schmidt. Thank you chair. Haley could you he did bring up two different two different zones NR2 NR3. Can you give us a quick rundown of the difference between the NR we're looking at NR6 versus NR2 NR3 in regards to population density you know I'm saying density sorry. Yes sir so under the proposed zoning of NR6 that would allow up to six dwelling units per acre. NR2 and NR3 same thing with the numbers two dwelling units per acre or three dwelling units per acre so less than half of what they would be able to achieve with the proposal. Thank you. Commissioner Begg. Thank you chair. Haley. Don't go. Can you put the proposed zoning map up? Okay. That's it. Right. Don't have present it would be the same as there. Yes NR6. Okay and I wanted Mr. Butler to see that that there is an NR6 across the street from you already and I was curious and if you want to you can come back up to the microphone and inform us if there's been a been a problem with this. It is. Okay but it is zoned as such. I understand. Okay. But at this point had that had you be had you asked me if that should be NR6. A little closer to the mic. I'm sorry had you asked me if that should be NR6 if it wasn't already I would have also been opposed to it. Okay okay so it's I guess in your thinking NR6 is just not appropriate for that area. Well we were talking earlier and I'm not saying that NR6 is inappropriate everywhere and there may be areas further where the tone has already been set. If you go further east there are trailer parks a nice trailer park where you already have density. All I'm trying to do is upgrade the area and I feel like it's for personal personal reasons but I also have 40 acres from possible development. I'm not going to develop it if I can keep from it at high density levels. Okay all right thank you sir. Have some more questions possibly. Commissioner Rosell . Thank you chair. Mr. Butler I appreciate you you coming in and providing insight and I'd love to see 40 acres in that area be developed NR2 if that was your pleasure. My question to you is you've been in real estate. Mayhill is being expanded to a six lane divided street and NR2 neighborhoods generally are like you said they're nicer or higher income generally to build out an NR2 neighborhood and the houses that those invite. I'm wondering your perspective on the likelihood of a successful project like that happening next to a six lane road because I'm thinking if if 16 acres was to be developed that bordered loop 288 I'm not sure there's going to be a lot of developments for you know half acre homes right next to a main arterial which is why to me an NR6 makes sense because it backs up to that but I'd love to hear your perspective on that. Well like I said I would rather be residential if it were NR2 or NR3. If it has to be NR6 then I'd rather see it developed as industrial. The density I think is too great for that intersection even though we are expanding it I don't know what the plans are for Mills Road and I know that's not apparently part of the discussion at this time. I see pretty nice homes and flower mounds and other high-end developments that have homes right on major thoroughfares. Some of them have retaining walls they have blocked the sound but I can show you many many locations where there are plenty of examples where there's a higher end home development NR2 or NR3 on high traffic roads. Thank you appreciate it. Any other questions Mr. Bellewally is at the mic. Thank you sir for your comments and answering our questions . This is a public hearing so please come down give your name and address and thank you for filling out a card for us. My name is Kenneth Stout and I live on Mills Road right off of Mayhill where the school property splits our place on both sides. They have five acres on the corner and this property they're talking about rezoning it. It is going to anything east of it the rainwater and everything's going to have to be pumped all the way down to a creek that'll run down to Cooper Creek Road which is about two miles down east where we're at. On the north end on the west end of it we got a hill that's in there that it's very difficult to navigate when it gets water on the rain freeze. We have about a thousand buses on that street. We also have about a thousand buses going over right by my within 30 foot of my back door. So I 'm concerned about the amount of traffic and us getting out on the street and I'm also concerned about how we're going to get water and sewer down through there to where we might be able in the future go ahead and attach into it. Now they y'all's chart says 16 point something acres. Well if that includes half the road they don't own all the they own it but they pay taxes on it but they won't get to build on the road except they wrote. So we're concerned we're not against the project. It's this simple fact we see we need to know what's going on whether very much of us can go south or north on Mayhill Road. They won't put very many red lights down the thing and there may be some I don't even know there's red light going in it mills that Mayhill because if the street comes clear across over and hooks into the development on the west side we need some relief in there either some traffic control or something and I'll be happy to try to share something else if you know in the future. We appreciate y'all listening to us. I don't know how to run a computer don't intend to learn to run one. I'm old enough that I don't have to so but I am concerned about all of our neighbors out there and if you don't like to wake up about five o'clock in the mornings with that many buses you got a problem. Now I will mention somebody in the city years ago built Ashley Oaks. They've turned water down across some of this property we're talking about east of there about two miles just washed the thunder out of the road and now we have a one lane bridge down there at the end of it where it hooks up to Trinity. Now that's not progress that's loading us up down to where we cannot even get out of the place if we want to go east. I would like for y'all to consider it. I'm not totally against the project it's just that we need to know what's going on and how long the sixth school district may want to develop the corner up there. Appreciate y'all. I have a question for you Commissioner Roselle. Thank you Chair. Did you say your last name was Scott? Mr. Stout. I appreciate you being here. How long have you lived in your current home? Well my wife has lived on there since 1946. It sounds like you're an expert in the area which I think is valuable. I had some property the city obtained on Mayhill Road about two years ago. So in terms of Commissioner Smith might have mentioned this earlier but I wanted to encourage you if this passes tonight and it goes to NR6 I think your testimony will be invaluable during the platting process to encourage a stoplight to encourage the improvement of Mills Road and so if this passes tonight once the vote happens I would like to see you come back during the platting process to hear more about your expertise in the area. One more question I'd like to ask. When was this thing changed from agriculture to this other? We got no information when that change was made and it's probably made within the past two years. So that makes it a problem for us not even being notified to want to change it from agriculture because I was acquainted with the people that lived there for 40 years. I think the staff could speak to this but it was originally brought into the city under a zoning called RD5X which is a temporary zoning that we're trying to update today. It's still agricultural. It's still agriculture today. RD5X is just a placeholder designation it doesn't mean anything as in regards to the agriculture. Well I was just kind of concerned because I didn't get a letter during that time. I found it in the newspaper and then that's when I got interested in the past couple weeks you know kind of checking things out a little bit because I'm not trying to run the country out that way I'm just trying to live in that country out there. Another question for Commissioner Smith. Thank you Chair. We got we saw earlier tonight on a different autumn that it took a you know a strip of grass took about three months to come before us. Pretty sure they said that the Mayhill expansion is going to be 2019 so I think your I think the development that happens out there if it does passes tonight it'll take a little it'll take a little while for it to come becomes up here so there'll be some time to bring up any any type of issues you may have so just sit tight and and come on back whenever preliminary plotting comes to comes to before us okay. Thank you very much. Thank you sir. One more question to come up. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. I do appreciate y'all pointing out that you didn't get any notices either. That's been a big concern for us and as a commission and the city staff we have set plans aside to address it so it's so disappointing to hear these things have been set in motion so it's disappointing to hear that still you're just hearing about this today or the day before yesterday so there's obviously some kinks in the system that we've tried to improve here but we did want you to know that we are aware of the informing residents when changes are made and hopefully those kinks will get worked out in the future where you're not left in the blind so thank you for coming down speaking to it tonight. Thank you sir. This is a public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. David Shelton. I live in a 5050 Mills Road which is I guess in our six already and I have no intentions of ever developing it that I'm just it's my house that's where it's going to stay. What worries me is we're kind of limited on our road down through Mills Road and then we have all the school buses. Can I get you to step over closer to the mic so we can make sure to hear you well? We have all the school buses and all the school traffic and it's hard to get in and out of there and now is it 84 houses or 94 houses that they're going to build? We don't know at that at this point with the zoning allows six homes per acre for whatever their acreage is. I think there's going to be a whole lot of houses and you know two or three cars for house and it's just going to squeeze us. Do they have any plans on expanding Mills Road or anything making it wider so we can? Well we don't have any of that at this time when whenever the property comes back before us for what's called platting they will have to address all those questions sewer, water, stormwater, detention. I don't have any of that you know when we got drafted into the city we didn't get any kind of sewer or anything so we don't get any benefits other than tax and that's just taken from us so that's just that's I'm not against building the expansion just that I'm just against the so many houses right there in that area and there's not enough road to handle it all so so anyway that's it. Okay thank you for your comments any questions for the speaker? Thank you sir. Hi my name is George Carroll I live in 5200 Mills Road. You 'll have to pardon my voice the army gave it to me but I live in 5200. I back up to the Detroit Parks. I have lived out there 12 years now and the Detroit Parks for a while was pretty wild. They had to put a police substation in there. I'm here just to back up what Peter and the other folks said. In my area there's multi-million dollar houses and the landscape is beautiful. Now in the end, our six, I would like to see the place stay halfway. I'm just an old man or getting there and our six would just bring in more. I mean I know it's always but let's have some class. And that's really nice. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. This is a public hearing anyone else who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Please give us your name and address and you 'll have four minutes. Tina Crawford 520 Fox Creek Court in Texas. I got three notices by the way just had me covered and actually we have the property next door to this. We have the back five acres next to it and then the tent in front of it my in-laws on. And when they went to the tax office they said they got yellow slips saying that it was a zoned commercial . So I don't know what the difference is there but I would be against the NR6 just for the reasons that the gentleman outlined here. Just it's low lower scale too many houses and to address the question about nice houses on big roads four lane highways. I mean I work in Frisco everything's a huge road and everything's a nice house. So I mean it works very well and that's what it's what the rich folks want they want to get someplace fast. So I you know we're all about developing we've had the land for a long time we want to make as much as we can on our land and putting something like that right there on the corner is just something I would be against. Okay I see no questions thank you ma'am. This is a public hearing so please come forward this time. Hi I'm Sandy Butler and 4923 Mills Road is our address. I represent several family members and we have a house up there that was my husband that spoke before and none of us got any notice whatsoever of any of this and our house is right there you can see the picture of it on there. So it's very disappointing that this major of a of a plan would happen and nobody has any notice and we've lived there for a lot of years. My parents moved there in the 60s so you know it says that it was sent to the street address you know of the property and we have a PO box but it would be nice if you sent the notice to the same people who pay the taxes you know because obviously the city knows who pays the taxes and who lives there so that would be nice in the future to get notices that way. Can you show us where your property is maybe Haley can get the pointer up on the maps. The big white spot see that big white spot that just that looks north from here but anyway the big white house that's my house. This one where the cursor is or this one. Just up yeah that one the big one yep and the and the smaller one that's beneath that is my mom's house so. We only send notices to property within the city limits. Well I mean those those parcels are in the ETJ so they're technically still in the county. I believe our address list only sends notices to properties within the city limits. But we're I mean that's my that's my road you see that little line that comes down to Mills road and it's within spitting distance of that property you're talking about we're right there. Yes ma'am. Yeah we'll talk about that in a minute. This this is a public hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. This is a public hearing anyone else who would like to speak on this item please come forward at this time. Okay at this time I will close the public hearing for a discussion. Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair. Haley just a clarification on the mailing. So we only we do only send of course to people in the city and then if we're looking at who's paying the property taxes that's not even held at the city that's held at the county level correct. From the county so it's about one year behind because it is the certified roll and then all properties within 200 feet that are on that certified tax roll we send a notice to the property owner at their home address and then as a courtesy we extend a postcard notification to properties within the city that are within 500 feet and that just goes to the address not necessarily correct. Yeah so if there's not if there's not a if there's not an actual mail receptacle at the physical address what happens to that mail? I'm assuming it comes back to us because it does it just goes to current resident at that address. Okay all right. More questions. Commissioner Roselle. Haley. I I I very much hesitate to beat the drum about the notifications but we got a response from the property in the northeast that is also ETJ. Yes sir he called me today so I forwarded him and I emailed him the notification form so he could respond . Thank you for that clarification. Any other questions for Haley? Why is she set the mic? I'll ask one. We've had a number of people here tonight that have come up and obviously spoken in opposition. I don't know exactly where they are located in regards to the property and if that's changed the percentage that may be opposed for what is was presented earlier in our work session. I know we had one property that it was adjacent and I don't know exactly where all of these other properties are and if that's going to change the percentage as far as opposition for the vote here this evening. I don't know if we need to take some time to gather that or I'll leave the legal to give us some guidance on that item. Thank you chair. Obviously we we won't be affected for the purposes of our vote here tonight but if in fact that does go toward the 20 percent and they are in the city limits which is what the law requires then that would trigger a super majority vote in front of council when it goes to council. Okay so just a council. Just a council not a PNC. Okay all right thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. For clarification I think of the property owners that spoke here can we maybe get Haley to describe what that 20 percent is? Sure. I think she was out of the room if you'd like to Commissioner Ellis restate your question. Thank you. For the benefit of the property owners who spoke there and what was just conversed on the dais regarding the 20 percent can you explain that? Yes so I believe the requirement is if more than 20 percent of the property owners of the land area within 200 feet that is within the city are opposed to the request it triggers a super majority vote at city council so they could only have one opposing vote at council and the motion still carry. Okay any other questions for Haley? Thank you. You might want to stay close to the mic here. Okay so the floor is open for discussion or a motion. I don't know if we have or not. Okay you sure didn't? Well if I haven't already I will close the public hearing since no one else is coming forward and I will open the the floor for discussion or motion. Commissioner Sanchez. It seems like everybody that came up and talked is concerned about Mills Road and that's probably the unknown is the fact that. And I've been at Mills Road and yeah it is it is a pretty narrow road and I've also heard that some students coming off Mills Road have gotten hurt from because the school is there and people coming off the back road. So I think we're bas ing all our information on what we currently see at Mills Road but I think long term that area is going to develop and the fact that it's close to the school is to me a positive thing about having homes you know affordable housing close to the school long term as a city but I think our biggest fear is what we see at Mills Road. I mean I drove up there today and I went down Mayhill Road and I've been Mayhill Road to me has always been an accident waiting to happen and Mills Road is just about just about the same thing but I think if we can guarantee or not guarantee but if the city we have to talk to the city and those that are in charge of those two roads make sure that they get developed correctly so that the congestion won't be there but we can't do that today but I think long term that should have been taken care of a long time ago because that road has been a disaster Mill Road has been a disaster for years and so it 's something that should have been taken care long time ago and I don't know probably we're trying to work with the school and with the city and trying to get those those two roads those that particular road taken care of and I think it would alleviate a lot of the anxiety that most of you feel. Okay Commissioner Smith. Thank you chair. Sometimes we have to pick and choose our battles of course when we want to have knockdown drag out fights till 1 a.m here P and Z. Zoning is not going to be that that time when we get to preliminary plotting it will be that time. I went to Ryan High School I 've had a drive up and down Mills Road I've lived out in Oak Point Texas and I drive up down Mills Road more times than I ever probably want to probably just just a little bit less than you guys of course so I will agree with you that Mills Road is a mess and it's definitely something that will need to be fixed and will be addressed but it won't be addressed at zoning it's got to be addressed at at that point in time when we get to plotting and in regards to zoning then if we 're saying you know NR2 and NR3 then you know what about why are we going to do NR6 I think it'd be be in the best interest of the city if we if we allowed the most amount per per acre that we can and then back down during preliminary plotting to say well we think you should only have four per acre to have quarter acre lots or maybe we should think you have third acre lots we can back down from the NR6 just because the maximum density of six doesn't mean we have to approve it for six and so I think allowing those we can and then fighting down from there instead of having say NR2 and then having to come back and rezone it for NR3 or rezone up to NR6 if there's that need for it so rather shoot high than have to come down have to shoot low and have to go through a whole new rezoning process and then honestly just lastly when it comes to construction costs nowadays we've discussed this in past planning and zoning commissions and meetings that when it comes to construction costs nowadays there's not a whole lot of new builds they're going to be counted to quote-unquote affordable housing just because of the the cost of the time it has to be put into developing a piece of land so I think that the preliminary planning process is where we're going to need y'all's input and I would greatly like to see you guys come back and bring up your your issues and your concerns at that point in time and we will most certainly take them into consideration. I'm going to call on legal just to pause for just a second and clarify once we zone property and how it comes before us back as platting and the density and what our abilities once something is zoned if the criteria met on the plat what our ability is to approve or not approve those. First in addressing the zoning issue we do advertise in our notices that we can take a lesser zoning category at the time of the zoning request into consideration but we can't take a greater amount of zoning category so that's going to be something a little bit more intensive like the nr6 so if we were to approve the nr6 tonight we wouldn't necessarily be able to come back and lower the zoning category because that would be a down zoning and it would be up to the property owner whether or not they would be amenable to something like that we can't do it unilaterally or we shouldn't and when the the platting stage comes you will not receive a public notification you only receive a public notification for the zoning piece so you're going to have to watch the agendas to see when that preliminary plat is going to come and really the final plat is the most important sometimes they come together sometimes they come separately but the the zoning commission can only look at the technical requirements and make sure that they are met on a plat they have no discretion as to whether or not they 're going to approve a plat so long as the technical requirements are requirements are met so in this case you won't get notice of a preliminary plat you're going to have to look at the agenda number one number two you're going to have to look at the technical requirements of the plat which would include access it would include the traffic impact analysis to see if there's some way to focus your your comments on those things otherwise the commission is not going to be able to overturn it at that time either so we just wanted to give you that information so that you're fully aware of what our limitations are here at the commission just a second hold on let me let legal finish and then we 'll no i'm finished you can if you want him to come forward if you hold on just a second let us ask you a question because you've already come to the mic to speak and with that's under the rules so if you'll please come to the mic we'll be happy to ask you a question and give you an opportunity to hopefully engage with us here and get your concern addressed so we were going to ask a question you had a question in regards to legal on how the explanation was and the zoning and the planning so can you express what your concern is with that yes how do we know what when or where the agenda is reported do we go online or so the agenda is required to be posted 72 hours in advance of the meeting and you're going to be able to find it on the city's website under the open government section if you have access to a computer which i know you don't but if you do then it's on the website and you can actually click on it and pull it up it'll go by date and if you have problems finding that you can always call someone at the city maybe the city secretary ask her how to access that if you do not have access to a computer we do post the agenda in the hallway at city hall main which is this building and there is one posted at the end towards the legal department on the outside just interior to the door but outside of the hallway and it's posted where you can see every page and so if you just want to come up and look at that or you can call and you can check with the department of development services to see if or when it might be placed on the agenda occasionally so that you can make sure that you're up on whatever yes i think there's also an opportunity on the website i believe there are uh projects that are posted on the website as they have been applied for that are in progress and maybe we can speak to that as to how that shows on our maps so you can just go on the map and look at projects and it will actually highlight every single project that's currently being applied for or worked on through the process of the city didn't is that correct still okay so that's one more way that you can can do it if you have access to a computer thank you i was confused thank you commissioner back thank you chair and i want to thank everybody from the public came down and speak spoke to this subject tonight your input is very important and it does impact our decision i realize too that this little corner of the world that y'all been living in has been you know nice the way it's been for a long time and i understand that city of denton is growing though and it's going to reach all areas of the city and it looks like unfortunately it's starting to come into your area understand the concern about nr6 it's not going to be low price but it is compared to houses of more square footage yes they're not going to be as expensive denton's in dire need of affordable housing if we can call it that and for some it would be as opposed to a house that 's three or four thousand square feet we also i think everybody's mentioned here that we're going to look at the other factors that you're concerned about we talked about them in the work session briefly so they will be addressed the roads traffic stuff like that and other concerns but there will be when they when this nr6 area comes in they'll be putting barriers up to that that are next to different zoned areas so in that capacity you'll have some separation there and a little bit of privacy but there's a it's not going to be i know you're you've got the worst scene scenario here and i'm not going to say it's not going to be a little bit more of a headache than you're used to but it won't be designed such that it's going to have a negative effect on your property in my opinion i i've lived in those areas i've seen these areas build up and develop and do quite well and the fact that it is close to a school that this this is just an area that affords an opportunity for him at least to move closer to it than to travel the long distance that some of them do so but i do appreciate your input and i'll let go what everybody else has said here please come back when we clap that and uh like to hear uh more of what you have to say thank you commissioner rooseau thank you chair i appreciate everyone coming out and hearing your perspective some of you all have been there 70 plus years and so i certainly don't take that lightly looking at the overall area i do feel nr6 is an appropriate zoning classification for that land and so i'm going to go ahead and motion approval of this and i think um just based on this feedback i'll be highly interested to see how the plat looks to see how the traffic comes in from mayhill versus mills it could be that the majority of traffic can enter from from mayhill and not take uh too much traffic on mills i'm so i'm interested that i haven't seen any of that so i don't know but i think uh during that plotting phase we'll better understand what kind of uh left turn right turn is going to be happening at mayhill and mills and and the curb cuts needed to access the development there and so i encourage you all to be involved in that as legal said to look for technical requirements to make sure everything 's copacetic in terms of managing traffic appropriately in sewage and all those things rain water but i do feel that it's an appropriate designation for that area given the development that is persisting on mayhill commissioner smith i second the motion to accept okay we have a first and a second for approval of the zoning is there any other discussion or questions commissioner ellis thank you chair uh just want to take a couple moments i am going to support this um thank you all for sharing your concerns um i guess my thoughts are development has to start somewhere especially with property coming out of the etj so it's got us the first place of development is to start with zoning this zoning with what's been going on in the area what our future land use looks like what our 2030 plan looks like makes sense for this corner we can all agree that road infrastructure never seems to be ahead of the development but it will all happen eventually so to me this does make sense but do please pay attention look at the agenda come back and talk with us and share your concerns it is important to know your concerns especially as this moves forward to to platting site plan what what have you thank you commissioner sanchez i also appreciate you all coming out i think it's giving us a sense of what to look for in the future when this uh you know when uh other when we get some more information on on that area and what uh on the plat on the platting of that particular area i think you've get you've made us aware of what your concerns are and that's going to make us more uh push for for better improve improvements in that area based on your input so we do appreciate you coming out i mean that's the only way we know what's going on in those neighborhoods by you people by the neighbors coming out and telling us what their concerns are and so i think in the future anything associated with mills road will be better equipped to make better decisions thank you commissioner smith thank you chair i have one business card so if anybody over here would like to make it a little bit easier on you instead of having to keep checking the website uh feel free for one of you guys to grab it shoot me an email just saying hey this is so and so from the from the bnz meeting i'll put it somewhere and i'll make sure whenever i see it on the agenda i'll shoot you an email and let you know when it's coming up so i'll take that upon us as a commission to make sure you guys are notified and you guys aren't lost especially with the mailing issues that we've been taking on so thank you thank you tim any other questions or comments on this item before we call for a vote on the board thank you all for coming out this evening and giving us a lot of feedback and input um been a good discussion on this item and i will call for a vote on the board at this time we have a motion to approve on the floor that motion is going to carry seven to zero we'll move us to our final item on our agenda tonight our project uh matrix i've got one for sure i'd like to put on there give the room a minute to clear thank you for coming out this evening thank you all for coming out tonight Mr. Stout since you don't have access to a computer why don 't you get with Haley thank you it was a pretty good discussion so i have one item um i don 't want to put on our uh matrix we've been talking about notice and i know that's coming back to us um i guess i was unaware that we don't send notice to etj and i'd like for us to consider that as we look at that again um here that we might want to consider doing that to properties that are adjacent to things that are in the city in this particular instance where they're right next door but they don't get a notice because they're in the etj that may or may not be something that we can do but at least to put it on that list and then we can talk about whether that's appropriate or not at the time in the future unless you want to have some discussion about it now we could do it in the context of a potential ddc amendment if you i know that we're putting some notice provisions in the clarion updates um currently we go by state law that that 200 feet within the city limits is by state law they don't they don't require it out in the etj so that's why we have not been doing that we do have that 500 foot courtesy notice but we keep it in line with the state statute so that we just do it within the city tax rules but if you want a policy change to where that courtesy notice can go into the etj then that's something that we can propose we probably would want to brief council on that sure see where they want to go from a policy standpoint okay um i just know it was on i think it's supposed to be coming back on our agenda i think it's been on there for a while for notice and so while that's going to be coming before us i guess in a work session at some point again i think this would be an item that we would want to include in that discussion unless staff feels like it needs to move forward quicker than that and take it to city council but i think this is a great case to to bring that as an example of they will ultimately be in the city but they have no say at this time so anyway that's my one commissioner rozzelle thank you chair i have two for clarification the new mailing mailers posting requirements those are in place but for only new projects so projects that happened back in september wouldn't be under the new mailing is that correct can someone clarify those mailing when what projects get the new mailers that is correct so any that were submitted uh october one which was the start of the new fiscal year would be subject to the new the new requirements okay perfect so we'll hopefully start seeing that implemented in projects coming forward the next couple meetings uh the other thing i had was many moons ago there was talk about commission getting together with council more formally and i didn't know if there's been any traction with that in regards to some of the there's there's been a lot of things that we wanted to talk to council about so i didn't know if there's been any momentum in trying to have a joint meeting with the commission and council can i ask what subjects i knew you would i thought tree ordinance is one of them but there might have been a couple of their items in which there was discussion about getting together if that is needed information i don't have it perhaps we can discuss it offline sounds good okay commissioner solvent uh back to the uh mailing would it be possible to put the uh 200 and 500 feet you know outline where you have it on an actual map uh because the more i looked at what we get which is sort of a very basic map and you look at a google map it appeared to me that nobody lives within the 200 feet area and much you know much less than 500 feet but i couldn't really tell because the map doesn't appear you know it doesn't you know it doesn't match up and so i'm just wondering uh since we've got the uh the zoning future zoning maps and all those things uh that are on actual google map kind of things put that 200 and 500 radius on an actual map where we can see what houses so somebody can come up and use the pointer and say that's my house well they said that's my house and they're you know a thousand feet away from it just a thought in fact i made that exact same note on my on my map to to delineate it better to have to show an aerial but then to also delineate between city city property within the city and unincorporated properties anything else for our project matrix no okay then i will close us at eight o'clock this evening thank you everyone and thank you everyone for coming out tonight