1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,679 Zoning Commission meeting for February 7th 2018. This 2 00:00:04,679 --> 00:00:05,759 meeting has been duly 3 00:00:05,759 --> 00:00:09,830 posted and we do have a quorum present and I will call us 4 00:00:09,830 --> 00:00:12,400 to order at 5 o 1. We 5 00:00:12,400 --> 00:00:15,039 are going to go into our work session and our first order 6 00:00:15,039 --> 00:00:16,039 of business will be 7 00:00:16,039 --> 00:00:21,530 to receive clarification of agenda items listed on our 8 00:00:21,530 --> 00:00:24,879 meeting this evening. Does 9 00:00:24,879 --> 00:00:28,109 anybody have I guess just to start kind of at the beginning 10 00:00:28,109 --> 00:00:29,079 and then we'll come back 11 00:00:29,079 --> 00:00:33,090 to our work session reports. Does anybody have any comments 12 00:00:33,090 --> 00:00:34,880 changes on our minutes 13 00:00:34,880 --> 00:00:45,679 of our last meeting? How about plats on the consent agenda? 14 00:00:48,079 --> 00:00:56,969 All right we're gonna make good time this evening. Public 15 00:00:56,969 --> 00:01:00,280 hearings item A. So 16 00:01:00,280 --> 00:01:03,729 Rayser investments by Shandrian. Anybody have questions on 17 00:01:03,729 --> 00:01:09,280 this item? This is a 18 00:01:09,280 --> 00:01:14,670 parcel up on I think on University for some restaurant pads 19 00:01:14,670 --> 00:01:14,680 . 20 00:01:18,120 --> 00:01:20,480 Questions? 21 00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:31,599 Nope? Okay. Then we've got 4B, Denture Search Care. It's 22 00:01:31,599 --> 00:01:34,879 the apartments. 23 00:01:36,480 --> 00:01:41,280 You have some questions on that? Okay. 24 00:01:48,359 --> 00:01:51,590 Do you all want to do let me back up do we want to to do 25 00:01:51,590 --> 00:01:54,239 like a small 26 00:01:54,239 --> 00:01:57,439 presentation on these items whether we have questions or 27 00:01:57,439 --> 00:01:58,640 not or just kind of go 28 00:01:58,640 --> 00:02:06,040 through? Do? Okay. Do y'all want to want to back up and 29 00:02:06,040 --> 00:02:08,680 then on 4A and have 30 00:02:08,680 --> 00:02:12,419 Shandrian just do an initial presentation on the the Rayser 31 00:02:12,419 --> 00:02:13,719 or are you okay with 32 00:02:13,719 --> 00:02:18,120 that being pretty straightforward and going on here to 4B? 33 00:02:18,120 --> 00:02:20,280 I am on that one. Okay. 34 00:02:20,280 --> 00:02:24,180 Well let's stay on 4B with Haley and we'll do presentation 35 00:02:24,180 --> 00:02:27,120 on on this one. 36 00:02:29,520 --> 00:02:33,120 Okay together. So we can go through both of those. Just for 37 00:02:33,120 --> 00:02:33,800 clarification we'll 38 00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:39,719 take those as two separate votes. So yes. Yeah one 39 00:02:39,719 --> 00:02:39,719 presentation with two votes. Okay. 40 00:02:39,879 --> 00:02:43,449 All right so there are two requests for this property. The 41 00:02:43,449 --> 00:02:44,840 rezoning is a request 42 00:02:44,840 --> 00:02:47,599 to change from community mixed-use general to neighborhood 43 00:02:47,599 --> 00:02:48,240 residential 44 00:02:48,240 --> 00:02:51,800 mixed-use and that is for the entire 11.4 acres that's 45 00:02:51,800 --> 00:02:53,280 outlined in red on the 46 00:02:53,280 --> 00:02:57,409 map. The SUP request is to allow for a multifamily use and 47 00:02:57,409 --> 00:02:59,080 it is only for 10.6 48 00:02:59,080 --> 00:03:01,750 8 out of that total acreage so that's the yellow boundary 49 00:03:01,750 --> 00:03:03,159 you see. It is 50 00:03:03,159 --> 00:03:06,150 excluding a medical office that is existing down in the 51 00:03:06,150 --> 00:03:07,280 southeast corner of 52 00:03:07,280 --> 00:03:10,539 the property. And just to give you a reference this is I-35 53 00:03:10,539 --> 00:03:11,360 here on the north, 54 00:03:11,360 --> 00:03:16,280 Sandbass Boulevard on the west, and Londonderry Drive on 55 00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:18,520 the south. So the 56 00:03:18,520 --> 00:03:21,500 rezoning as I mentioned would be from CMG to NRMU so here's 57 00:03:21,500 --> 00:03:22,319 a look of what 58 00:03:22,319 --> 00:03:25,819 that would look like on the zoning map. For rezoning as you 59 00:03:25,819 --> 00:03:26,780 know there's two 60 00:03:26,780 --> 00:03:29,599 criteria for approval. Consistency with the future land use 61 00:03:29,599 --> 00:03:31,199 plan and then the 62 00:03:31,199 --> 00:03:35,099 facilitation of public infrastructure. The future land use 63 00:03:35,099 --> 00:03:36,180 for this area is 64 00:03:36,180 --> 00:03:38,770 community mixed-use which is intended to provide a mixture 65 00:03:38,770 --> 00:03:39,479 of commercial 66 00:03:39,479 --> 00:03:42,969 residential and service uses. The NRMU district does fit 67 00:03:42,969 --> 00:03:44,120 within that. It 68 00:03:44,120 --> 00:03:47,969 provides for a variety of residential uses as well as 69 00:03:47,969 --> 00:03:49,639 commercial uses that 70 00:03:49,639 --> 00:03:52,229 are at a similar scale to CMG so lot coverage building 71 00:03:52,229 --> 00:03:53,120 height things like 72 00:03:53,120 --> 00:03:57,090 that are generally the same between the two districts. 73 00:03:57,090 --> 00:03:58,639 Looking at infrastructure 74 00:03:58,639 --> 00:04:01,680 in the area there are our water and sewer immediately 75 00:04:01,680 --> 00:04:02,280 available to the 76 00:04:02,280 --> 00:04:05,710 property. The red lines on the map being existing sewer and 77 00:04:05,710 --> 00:04:06,639 blue being the water 78 00:04:06,639 --> 00:04:10,599 lines. Both Sandbass and Londonderry are currently two lane 79 00:04:10,599 --> 00:04:12,000 undivided roads. 80 00:04:12,000 --> 00:04:14,969 They're both collector streets so they're intended to say 81 00:04:14,969 --> 00:04:16,680 two lane undivided with 82 00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:19,120 sidewalks. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. When you say 83 00:04:19,120 --> 00:04:21,560 two lane undivided it's 84 00:04:21,560 --> 00:04:24,990 designed just for one car each way? Yes sir yeah just one 85 00:04:24,990 --> 00:04:26,040 lane of traffic each 86 00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:29,720 way with no median in between. I went by there today but it 87 00:04:29,720 --> 00:04:30,680 seems like it's wide 88 00:04:30,680 --> 00:04:36,079 enough where you could actually create two lanes each way. 89 00:04:36,079 --> 00:04:37,600 Is that considering all the 90 00:04:37,600 --> 00:04:40,009 traffic we've got over there and are fixing to generate 91 00:04:40,009 --> 00:04:42,889 more. I'm just wondering if that's a...and this may not be 92 00:04:42,889 --> 00:04:46,600 the time to raise it but is that something to consider? 93 00:04:46,600 --> 00:04:48,480 These type of streets are typically designed wide enough to 94 00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:50,360 have one lane of traffic going each way with 95 00:04:50,360 --> 00:04:53,790 parking and sidewalks on each side would be the ultimate 96 00:04:53,790 --> 00:04:55,120 intent for that roadway. 97 00:04:55,120 --> 00:05:00,560 Okay okay thanks. Commissioner Sanchez. Yes I was looking 98 00:05:00,560 --> 00:05:01,240 at the what it says 99 00:05:01,240 --> 00:05:04,800 upland habitat area of minimum of 10 acres in size and 100 00:05:04,800 --> 00:05:06,160 contains remnants of 101 00:05:06,160 --> 00:05:09,879 cross timber habitat. How much when it says remnants is a 102 00:05:09,879 --> 00:05:13,639 percentage of upland 103 00:05:13,639 --> 00:05:16,319 habitat which I'm assuming because we're in cross timbers 104 00:05:16,319 --> 00:05:18,040 it would be a mixture 105 00:05:18,040 --> 00:05:23,019 of cross oak and blackjack oaks is that I was trying to 106 00:05:23,019 --> 00:05:24,040 figure that out. 107 00:05:24,040 --> 00:05:28,040 To my knowledge there's no upland habitat on this property. 108 00:05:28,040 --> 00:05:29,959 Okay because I went up 109 00:05:29,959 --> 00:05:32,850 there I drove by there and there's a little that whole top 110 00:05:32,850 --> 00:05:34,759 area is a lot of 111 00:05:34,759 --> 00:05:41,439 blackjack and post oaks and and that's to me upland habitat 112 00:05:41,439 --> 00:05:43,279 for the cross 113 00:05:43,279 --> 00:05:47,899 timbers. What do you all define upland habitat? For it to 114 00:05:47,899 --> 00:05:48,839 be upland habitat it 115 00:05:48,839 --> 00:05:52,519 has to be I believe that's 10 contiguous acres so this 116 00:05:52,519 --> 00:05:54,199 entire property would have 117 00:05:54,199 --> 00:05:56,449 had to been covered in that for it to even possibly be 118 00:05:56,449 --> 00:05:57,399 considered upland 119 00:05:57,399 --> 00:06:00,029 habitat so there are a large amount of trees and they will 120 00:06:00,029 --> 00:06:00,839 have to meet the 121 00:06:00,839 --> 00:06:03,860 city's tree preservation requirements but it doesn't meet 122 00:06:03,860 --> 00:06:04,759 that 10 acre 123 00:06:04,759 --> 00:06:10,060 contiguous lump of you know habitat to be qualified as up 124 00:06:10,060 --> 00:06:11,720 land. Okay because what 125 00:06:11,720 --> 00:06:15,279 it says a minimum of 10 acres in size that contains 126 00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:18,680 remnants so the whole 10 127 00:06:18,680 --> 00:06:25,490 acres or is it remnants within those 10 acres? Please come 128 00:06:25,490 --> 00:06:29,720 on up to the mic Bob. 129 00:06:29,720 --> 00:06:32,920 When it's talking about remnants it's talking about the 130 00:06:32,920 --> 00:06:34,120 whole eco region of 131 00:06:34,120 --> 00:06:37,810 the cross timbers region which goes up from Oklahoma down 132 00:06:37,810 --> 00:06:38,959 into Texas we have 133 00:06:38,959 --> 00:06:41,149 remnants of it in this area. Right right. It's not talking 134 00:06:41,149 --> 00:06:42,639 about remnants within 135 00:06:42,639 --> 00:06:46,889 that 10 acres it's got to be a 10 contiguous acre block of 136 00:06:46,889 --> 00:06:47,680 the post oak 137 00:06:47,680 --> 00:06:50,920 and blackjack. Correct. Okay that's and if you look at that 138 00:06:50,920 --> 00:06:52,600 area right there that 139 00:06:52,600 --> 00:06:56,920 north side from that's pretty contiguous and I mean it's 140 00:06:56,920 --> 00:06:59,279 not large oaks but they 141 00:06:59,279 --> 00:07:03,279 are post oak and blackjack oaks. I'm not disagreeing with 142 00:07:03,279 --> 00:07:04,439 you. No I'm a tree 143 00:07:04,439 --> 00:07:07,529 guy. I wish I was things were written a little different 144 00:07:07,529 --> 00:07:08,600 but the way our ESA 145 00:07:08,600 --> 00:07:12,089 regulations are written it's got to be a 10 contiguous acre 146 00:07:12,089 --> 00:07:13,240 block. Okay. So it 147 00:07:13,240 --> 00:07:15,519 doesn't fall on our map if we pull up our ESA map it won't 148 00:07:15,519 --> 00:07:16,879 fall in there. Okay 149 00:07:16,879 --> 00:07:19,160 okay. 150 00:07:25,480 --> 00:07:28,620 So looking at the compatibility of the request as I 151 00:07:28,620 --> 00:07:30,720 mentioned NRMU and CMG are 152 00:07:30,720 --> 00:07:33,480 very similar they're consistent in terms of lot coverage 153 00:07:33,480 --> 00:07:34,759 landscaping requirements 154 00:07:34,759 --> 00:07:36,800 and the lot dimensions and building height that would be 155 00:07:36,800 --> 00:07:37,560 permitted there so 156 00:07:37,560 --> 00:07:41,160 it's going to be a fairly comparable product in either 157 00:07:41,160 --> 00:07:42,560 zoning district. The 158 00:07:42,560 --> 00:07:45,509 proposed use is permitted under CMG but there is a 159 00:07:45,509 --> 00:07:47,240 limitation that would require 160 00:07:47,240 --> 00:07:50,670 ground floor commercial uses be developed on both Sam Bass 161 00:07:50,670 --> 00:07:52,000 and Londonderry. 162 00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:55,899 Given this area and how well established it is with multif 163 00:07:55,899 --> 00:07:56,879 amily and then the 164 00:07:56,879 --> 00:08:00,680 industrial use across Sam Bass we felt like commercials not 165 00:08:00,680 --> 00:08:01,639 likely to survive 166 00:08:01,639 --> 00:08:03,910 on the ground floor there it's not a very compact walkable 167 00:08:03,910 --> 00:08:04,759 environment where 168 00:08:04,759 --> 00:08:08,810 you would typically get that type of product. So staff is 169 00:08:08,810 --> 00:08:09,920 recommending 170 00:08:09,920 --> 00:08:12,079 approval of the request it is consistent with the goals and 171 00:08:12,079 --> 00:08:12,800 objectives of the 172 00:08:12,800 --> 00:08:17,250 Denton plan 2030 and then moving into the second aspect of 173 00:08:17,250 --> 00:08:17,920 their request and 174 00:08:17,920 --> 00:08:20,550 the reason for the rezoning would be to me Commissioner 175 00:08:20,550 --> 00:08:21,560 Roselle. Thank you chair 176 00:08:21,560 --> 00:08:26,360 real fast Haley. Yeah. And the backup it has that 177 00:08:26,360 --> 00:08:27,680 recommendation for the 178 00:08:27,680 --> 00:08:33,179 rezoning has a condition of the SUP being approved. Did my 179 00:08:33,179 --> 00:08:34,159 page print out 180 00:08:34,159 --> 00:08:39,039 weird or I don't think there's a condition on the rezoning 181 00:08:39,039 --> 00:08:39,360 but it does 182 00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:43,700 say staff recommends approval the SUP and I don't know if 183 00:08:43,700 --> 00:08:44,960 that was just a... It 184 00:08:44,960 --> 00:08:50,200 might be a trying to get to that page. 185 00:08:51,840 --> 00:08:54,090 Yeah so the recommendation is just kind of lumped together 186 00:08:54,090 --> 00:08:55,279 because we did it as 187 00:08:55,279 --> 00:08:57,379 one report so the rezoning recommendation is with no 188 00:08:57,379 --> 00:08:57,960 conditions 189 00:08:57,960 --> 00:09:00,879 and then the SUP is a recommendation with a condition. Okay 190 00:09:00,879 --> 00:09:03,639 gotcha thank you. 191 00:09:03,919 --> 00:09:07,450 Yeah so the SUP would be for a straight multifamily use 192 00:09:07,450 --> 00:09:08,840 with no associated 193 00:09:08,840 --> 00:09:12,360 commercial development. Our criteria for approval of an SUP 194 00:09:12,360 --> 00:09:13,039 is kind of a 195 00:09:13,039 --> 00:09:15,850 compatibility analysis between the requested use and the 196 00:09:15,850 --> 00:09:16,519 surrounding 197 00:09:16,519 --> 00:09:18,879 properties to ensure it wouldn't impede development of 198 00:09:18,879 --> 00:09:20,039 other properties, wouldn't 199 00:09:20,039 --> 00:09:23,789 generate any nuisances and would be generally compatible. 200 00:09:23,789 --> 00:09:25,820 So looking at the 201 00:09:25,820 --> 00:09:28,970 site plan for this what they've proposed here is kind of a 202 00:09:28,970 --> 00:09:30,080 second phase of the 203 00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:32,870 existing Coventry departments or apartments. They're 204 00:09:32,870 --> 00:09:33,679 currently accessible 205 00:09:33,679 --> 00:09:37,200 off of I-35. Here on this map they would be located just on 206 00:09:37,200 --> 00:09:38,360 the top side here so 207 00:09:38,360 --> 00:09:40,940 you can see there is a drive that would be connecting 208 00:09:40,940 --> 00:09:41,759 between the two 209 00:09:41,759 --> 00:09:44,120 developments so that amenities could be shared between them 210 00:09:44,120 --> 00:09:45,759 . They're proposing 211 00:09:45,759 --> 00:09:49,639 right now at 283 units that puts them at about 26 units per 212 00:09:49,639 --> 00:09:51,159 acre so below the 30 213 00:09:51,159 --> 00:09:54,440 maximum for NRMU. It would be a mixture of one two and 214 00:09:54,440 --> 00:09:55,799 three bedroom units. 215 00:09:55,799 --> 00:09:58,970 They're proposing a total of six buildings they'd be a 216 00:09:58,970 --> 00:09:59,899 mixture of three 217 00:09:59,899 --> 00:10:02,250 and four stories in height. I believe the four stories 218 00:10:02,250 --> 00:10:04,080 would be here along Sam Bass 219 00:10:04,080 --> 00:10:07,940 and the site would maintain a total of about 38% landsca 220 00:10:07,940 --> 00:10:09,559 ping. You can see the 221 00:10:09,559 --> 00:10:11,879 way they've configured them as L-shaped buildings that each 222 00:10:11,879 --> 00:10:12,519 have their own 223 00:10:12,519 --> 00:10:18,120 courtyard. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. You said the 224 00:10:18,120 --> 00:10:20,960 density was 30 per 225 00:10:20,960 --> 00:10:25,620 acre for residents for an NRMU but aren't we switching it 226 00:10:25,620 --> 00:10:26,720 to an NRMU? We want to go 227 00:10:26,720 --> 00:10:32,120 from a CMG to an NRMU 12 which would have a lower density. 228 00:10:32,120 --> 00:10:33,919 The request 229 00:10:33,919 --> 00:10:40,080 is for NRMU not NRMU 12. Okay then what's on here is wrong. 230 00:10:40,080 --> 00:10:42,360 Yeah the request is for NRMU. 231 00:10:42,360 --> 00:10:46,519 Okay okay. Yeah so CMG doesn't actually have a maximum 232 00:10:46,519 --> 00:10:47,960 density so they are 233 00:10:47,960 --> 00:10:51,629 imposing with this rezoning a maximum of 30 units per acre 234 00:10:51,629 --> 00:10:53,039 on the property. Now by 235 00:10:53,039 --> 00:10:55,799 unit excuse me just follow up by unit we're talking about 236 00:10:55,799 --> 00:10:57,440 each apartment? Yes. 237 00:10:57,440 --> 00:11:02,590 Okay thank you. So we found that the request for this use 238 00:11:02,590 --> 00:11:04,559 is consistent with the 239 00:11:04,559 --> 00:11:08,519 Benton plan 2030. It does call for the provision of higher 240 00:11:08,519 --> 00:11:09,440 density housing in 241 00:11:09,440 --> 00:11:12,019 areas that won't impact established single-family 242 00:11:12,019 --> 00:11:13,200 neighborhoods with this 243 00:11:13,200 --> 00:11:15,830 being an area that has a mixture of existing multifamily 244 00:11:15,830 --> 00:11:16,519 and even some 245 00:11:16,519 --> 00:11:18,570 industrial across the street there would be no 246 00:11:18,570 --> 00:11:20,600 neighborhoods affected by this 247 00:11:20,600 --> 00:11:24,049 higher density there. The development would be consistent 248 00:11:24,049 --> 00:11:24,860 with the existing 249 00:11:24,860 --> 00:11:27,649 land use pattern and it would be required to comply with 250 00:11:27,649 --> 00:11:28,200 all other 251 00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:31,169 provisions of the DDCs parking landscaping tree 252 00:11:31,169 --> 00:11:32,679 preservation and all of 253 00:11:32,679 --> 00:11:35,580 our site design requirements and the use would generally be 254 00:11:35,580 --> 00:11:37,120 unlikely to generate 255 00:11:37,120 --> 00:11:39,309 any nuisances that you know things that aren't already in 256 00:11:39,309 --> 00:11:40,039 the area with the 257 00:11:40,039 --> 00:11:44,059 existing multifamily development. We did send notification 258 00:11:44,059 --> 00:11:45,639 for the request before 259 00:11:45,639 --> 00:11:47,740 the meeting I passed out the one response that we'd 260 00:11:47,740 --> 00:11:48,600 received which was a 261 00:11:48,600 --> 00:11:51,830 favorable request from the former property owner here on 262 00:11:51,830 --> 00:11:52,679 the south side. 263 00:11:52,679 --> 00:11:56,110 I believe the transaction was recent so he received that 264 00:11:56,110 --> 00:11:57,279 notice and let us know 265 00:11:57,279 --> 00:11:59,860 that he was in support of it. The applicant did hold a 266 00:11:59,860 --> 00:12:00,480 neighborhood meeting 267 00:12:00,480 --> 00:12:03,240 this past Monday. I attended the meeting and there were 268 00:12:03,240 --> 00:12:04,240 representatives from two 269 00:12:04,240 --> 00:12:06,809 adjoining apartment complexes that came just to see what 270 00:12:06,809 --> 00:12:07,759 the proposal was they 271 00:12:07,759 --> 00:12:12,429 didn't voice any opinions either way about it. And staff is 272 00:12:12,429 --> 00:12:13,200 recommending 273 00:12:13,200 --> 00:12:17,059 approval of the SUP with the condition that this site plan 274 00:12:17,059 --> 00:12:17,799 we saw here tonight 275 00:12:17,799 --> 00:12:20,450 would be considered conditional so a full site plan submitt 276 00:12:20,450 --> 00:12:21,279 al would still be 277 00:12:21,279 --> 00:12:24,879 conceptual. They would still do the full site plan submitt 278 00:12:24,879 --> 00:12:25,919 al just to make 279 00:12:25,919 --> 00:12:28,500 sure they comply with all aspects of the DDC and that it's 280 00:12:28,500 --> 00:12:29,480 generally conforming 281 00:12:29,480 --> 00:12:33,269 to what was presented here tonight. And I can stand for any 282 00:12:33,269 --> 00:12:35,120 other questions. 283 00:12:35,519 --> 00:12:38,809 Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. I was just curious just 284 00:12:38,809 --> 00:12:39,960 as an item of interest 285 00:12:39,960 --> 00:12:43,480 I'm sure everybody noticed that this area was zoned this 286 00:12:43,480 --> 00:12:44,039 whole area is 287 00:12:44,039 --> 00:12:48,600 zoned CMG and I asked you about you know evidently these 288 00:12:48,600 --> 00:12:49,279 apartments that are 289 00:12:49,279 --> 00:12:51,710 there now don't have commercial properties underneath them 290 00:12:51,710 --> 00:12:52,639 because they 291 00:12:52,639 --> 00:12:55,960 were built prior to that but when I look at the future land 292 00:12:55,960 --> 00:12:56,960 use map and seeing 293 00:12:56,960 --> 00:13:00,200 what we had there why wasn't it considered to change it at 294 00:13:00,200 --> 00:13:01,000 that time from 295 00:13:01,000 --> 00:13:06,080 CMG to NRMU knowing that we had pretty much that condition 296 00:13:06,080 --> 00:13:07,639 there already? 297 00:13:07,639 --> 00:13:10,700 All the other zonings occurred at the with the citywide rez 298 00:13:10,700 --> 00:13:12,720 oning in 2002 and 299 00:13:12,720 --> 00:13:15,090 as you mentioned all those apartments that are there did 300 00:13:15,090 --> 00:13:16,480 predate that rezoning 301 00:13:16,480 --> 00:13:19,460 and CMG is generally considered the most directly 302 00:13:19,460 --> 00:13:20,960 compatible with community 303 00:13:20,960 --> 00:13:23,970 mixed-use but there are as with all of our future land use 304 00:13:23,970 --> 00:13:25,000 destinations there's 305 00:13:25,000 --> 00:13:27,639 multiple districts that could fall into that. I suspect 306 00:13:27,639 --> 00:13:29,120 just given the the close 307 00:13:29,120 --> 00:13:32,549 proximity to the highway and the mix of uses in that area 308 00:13:32,549 --> 00:13:33,879 that they felt CMG was 309 00:13:33,879 --> 00:13:40,769 probably appropriate for it. Okay thanks. Commissioner Ros 310 00:13:40,769 --> 00:13:43,879 sell. You sure? Go ahead. 311 00:13:43,879 --> 00:13:48,330 So if I understood you correctly apartments can be built in 312 00:13:48,330 --> 00:13:49,960 CMG and so 313 00:13:49,960 --> 00:13:53,899 I'm wondering if this agenda item is clear enough to 314 00:13:53,899 --> 00:13:56,240 understand what the 315 00:13:56,240 --> 00:13:59,539 SUP is for because the SUP just says to allow multifamily 316 00:13:59,539 --> 00:14:00,720 use but that's allowed 317 00:14:00,720 --> 00:14:05,840 in CMG correct? Yes so there are within CMG there are two 318 00:14:05,840 --> 00:14:07,659 limitations the L6 and 319 00:14:07,659 --> 00:14:11,799 L4 so it either has to be mixed use or have an SUP under L4 320 00:14:11,799 --> 00:14:12,919 and then L6 321 00:14:12,919 --> 00:14:16,350 requires specifically ground floor commercial so the rez 322 00:14:16,350 --> 00:14:17,000 oning is to 323 00:14:17,000 --> 00:14:21,639 eliminate L6 essentially because under NRMU L4 still 324 00:14:21,639 --> 00:14:22,639 applies so they still 325 00:14:22,639 --> 00:14:26,419 have to either do mixed use or obtain the SUP. It's just 326 00:14:26,419 --> 00:14:27,360 getting rid of that 327 00:14:27,360 --> 00:14:31,620 ground floor commercial requirement. I think I understand 328 00:14:31,620 --> 00:14:32,840 that I just I hope 329 00:14:32,840 --> 00:14:36,799 that the do we need to word that in our motion because it 330 00:14:36,799 --> 00:14:38,559 says staff recommends 331 00:14:38,559 --> 00:14:41,690 approval the rezoning request which I understand then it 332 00:14:41,690 --> 00:14:42,759 says staff recommends 333 00:14:42,759 --> 00:14:46,190 approval the SUP request the following conditions but that 334 00:14:46,190 --> 00:14:46,919 the condition 335 00:14:46,919 --> 00:14:51,480 doesn't necessarily address ground floor use or the L6 336 00:14:51,480 --> 00:14:52,840 requirement. I don't know 337 00:14:52,840 --> 00:14:55,600 if that's needed or not I'm just curious if I just read 338 00:14:55,600 --> 00:14:58,879 this I'm not sure that's 339 00:14:58,879 --> 00:15:03,539 stated as clearly as possible. The SUP could would only 340 00:15:03,539 --> 00:15:05,879 apply if the rezoning is 341 00:15:05,879 --> 00:15:08,460 obtained so once the rezoning is obtained L6 goes away and 342 00:15:08,460 --> 00:15:09,279 there would no longer 343 00:15:09,279 --> 00:15:11,929 be any requirement under the current zoning for ground 344 00:15:11,929 --> 00:15:13,039 floor commercial so we 345 00:15:13,039 --> 00:15:16,690 didn't feel the need to specify that. So any SUP regardless 346 00:15:16,690 --> 00:15:17,240 of what the 347 00:15:17,240 --> 00:15:20,700 SUP is for eliminates L6 on the property? Am I 348 00:15:20,700 --> 00:15:21,639 understanding that? The rezoning 349 00:15:21,639 --> 00:15:26,230 itself is what would eliminate limitation six because that 350 00:15:26,230 --> 00:15:26,879 only applies 351 00:15:26,879 --> 00:15:30,120 under CMG it doesn't apply under NRMU so if the first 352 00:15:30,120 --> 00:15:31,440 request is approved that 353 00:15:31,440 --> 00:15:38,389 limitation goes away. Gotcha thank you. That's along the 354 00:15:38,389 --> 00:15:39,759 lines of where my 355 00:15:39,759 --> 00:15:43,299 question was going and looking a little farther ahead on 356 00:15:43,299 --> 00:15:44,600 our agenda our agenda 357 00:15:44,600 --> 00:15:49,710 item E is going to be the repeal of the requirement of the 358 00:15:49,710 --> 00:15:52,519 L6 and so my question 359 00:15:52,519 --> 00:15:57,080 is do you still have to have an SUP and CMG to do multif 360 00:15:57,080 --> 00:15:59,480 amily or not? L4 would 361 00:15:59,480 --> 00:16:04,320 still be in place even if L6 is repealed so the it would 362 00:16:04,320 --> 00:16:05,039 either have to be a 363 00:16:05,039 --> 00:16:10,940 mixed-use development or obtain an SUP. Okay but then they 364 00:16:10,940 --> 00:16:12,080 are putting a 365 00:16:12,080 --> 00:16:15,509 limitation on themselves by essentially down zoning from CM 366 00:16:15,509 --> 00:16:16,960 G to NRMU as far as 367 00:16:16,960 --> 00:16:19,720 the number of units. Yes they're imposing that density 368 00:16:19,720 --> 00:16:20,799 limitation then. Where they 369 00:16:20,799 --> 00:16:24,950 don't have that in CMG. Yes. Are they aware that this item 370 00:16:24,950 --> 00:16:25,759 E is coming before 371 00:16:25,759 --> 00:16:28,980 us this evening on their zoning and they've decided just to 372 00:16:28,980 --> 00:16:30,039 continue forward? 373 00:16:30,039 --> 00:16:32,620 Yeah the timelines for the two requests we're gonna run 374 00:16:32,620 --> 00:16:33,759 concurrently so they 375 00:16:33,759 --> 00:16:36,379 decided just to go ahead and move forward with their 376 00:16:36,379 --> 00:16:37,679 request and see how it goes. 377 00:16:37,679 --> 00:16:46,110 Okay great thank you. Any other questions Commissioner Beck 378 00:16:46,110 --> 00:16:47,960 ? Thank you chair. Going 379 00:16:47,960 --> 00:16:54,100 back to the roads again it mentions in our material it 380 00:16:54,100 --> 00:16:54,759 doesn't have a page 381 00:16:54,759 --> 00:16:58,419 under site that it says commercial mixed-use collectors are 382 00:16:58,419 --> 00:16:59,200 intended to 383 00:16:59,200 --> 00:17:02,720 be two lane roadways with parking along each side and total 384 00:17:02,720 --> 00:17:04,279 73 be a driveway 385 00:17:04,279 --> 00:17:07,710 which is what you told me. This type of road is designed to 386 00:17:07,710 --> 00:17:09,319 handle between 1,000 387 00:17:09,319 --> 00:17:13,400 and 8,000 vehicles per day and it's full width. Do we know 388 00:17:13,400 --> 00:17:14,240 how close we are to 389 00:17:14,240 --> 00:17:18,480 that now? Again everything that's over there are we getting 390 00:17:18,480 --> 00:17:19,640 precariously close 391 00:17:19,640 --> 00:17:23,269 to that or we still got a long ways to go? I don't recall 392 00:17:23,269 --> 00:17:24,440 the exact width of that 393 00:17:24,440 --> 00:17:28,039 right away I could try to measure that. Well I'm just gonna 394 00:17:28,039 --> 00:17:29,799 know is with what's there 395 00:17:29,799 --> 00:17:34,059 can does it handle are we getting precariously close to 396 00:17:34,059 --> 00:17:37,680 that 8,000? Oh as far as the trips I 397 00:17:37,680 --> 00:17:41,109 haven't seen any trip calculations for this. To date I'm 398 00:17:41,109 --> 00:17:42,099 not sure what the 399 00:17:42,099 --> 00:17:46,680 current capacity or use of Londonderry or San Bas is. 400 00:17:46,680 --> 00:17:48,200 Should we be considering 401 00:17:48,200 --> 00:17:51,279 that considering that there's a lot of traffic over there 402 00:17:51,279 --> 00:17:52,460 these roads should be 403 00:17:52,460 --> 00:17:55,039 able to handle it but we're building some more would it be 404 00:17:55,039 --> 00:17:55,720 out of place to 405 00:17:55,720 --> 00:17:59,599 say let's take a look at it make sure we're not going over 406 00:17:59,599 --> 00:18:00,039 the limit you know how we 407 00:18:00,039 --> 00:18:02,960 run into these problems with people say there's too many 408 00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:04,400 cars on the road now 409 00:18:04,400 --> 00:18:09,799 and I wouldn't disagree with that but as a P&Z Commission 410 00:18:09,799 --> 00:18:11,000 could we could we ask 411 00:18:11,000 --> 00:18:15,140 for that to see where we're at with a traffic analysis on 412 00:18:15,140 --> 00:18:17,359 the existing roads now? 413 00:18:17,359 --> 00:18:24,380 I'll ask staff to address that. Yeah I don't think there's 414 00:18:24,380 --> 00:18:25,920 any just in our you know 415 00:18:25,920 --> 00:18:30,240 initial discussions there there in the near future there 416 00:18:30,240 --> 00:18:31,640 aren't any specific 417 00:18:31,640 --> 00:18:36,240 plans to widen it right now I know they are looking at the 418 00:18:36,240 --> 00:18:39,359 light on Teasley 419 00:18:39,359 --> 00:18:43,349 there's the light at Londonderry where traffic kind of gets 420 00:18:43,349 --> 00:18:44,640 congested with 421 00:18:44,640 --> 00:18:48,380 folks making the left in the morning school just to the 422 00:18:48,380 --> 00:18:50,160 school and then at 423 00:18:50,160 --> 00:18:53,589 before you get to Lillian for I guess when that transitions 424 00:18:53,589 --> 00:18:55,160 into right before 425 00:18:55,160 --> 00:18:58,160 35 in between the two apartment complexes there's another 426 00:18:58,160 --> 00:18:59,359 light so our 427 00:18:59,359 --> 00:19:02,890 engine engineering is is looking at the possibility of 428 00:19:02,890 --> 00:19:04,519 having that light taken 429 00:19:04,519 --> 00:19:09,140 out because of the timing issue because you have almost 430 00:19:09,140 --> 00:19:09,880 really three lights 431 00:19:09,880 --> 00:19:14,210 right in a row and and they net particularly in the morning 432 00:19:14,210 --> 00:19:14,799 and I go 433 00:19:14,799 --> 00:19:17,710 that way every morning it they're never timed correctly and 434 00:19:17,710 --> 00:19:18,819 so it really causes 435 00:19:18,819 --> 00:19:22,250 causes some some issues but in the very near future other 436 00:19:22,250 --> 00:19:24,039 than other than that 437 00:19:24,039 --> 00:19:27,759 it's if they're not at that at those levels yet and we don 438 00:19:27,759 --> 00:19:28,880 't think we need to 439 00:19:28,880 --> 00:19:32,930 do that now considering that we're fixing to add to that 440 00:19:32,930 --> 00:19:34,640 not at not at this 441 00:19:34,640 --> 00:19:38,630 time in a sense it's also it were also looking at it's sort 442 00:19:38,630 --> 00:19:40,640 of a down zone from 443 00:19:40,640 --> 00:19:44,690 from the most intense that they could do today by right 444 00:19:44,690 --> 00:19:46,640 okay again I just want to 445 00:19:46,640 --> 00:19:48,980 point out under the current zoning if they did develop they 446 00:19:48,980 --> 00:19:49,759 would be required 447 00:19:49,759 --> 00:19:51,839 to have that ground floor commercial which would further 448 00:19:51,839 --> 00:19:52,519 increase the traffic 449 00:19:52,519 --> 00:19:55,670 over what would be proposed here no no I you know I don't 450 00:19:55,670 --> 00:19:57,319 disagree going to an 451 00:19:57,319 --> 00:20:02,119 NRM you is okay I'm just saying the roads that are there 452 00:20:02,119 --> 00:20:02,839 are expected to 453 00:20:02,839 --> 00:20:05,140 handle between one and eight thousand vehicles per day at 454 00:20:05,140 --> 00:20:06,119 the full load and 455 00:20:06,119 --> 00:20:08,940 when you throw in the school traffic with people don't even 456 00:20:08,940 --> 00:20:09,839 live there you 457 00:20:09,839 --> 00:20:14,400 know or how how closer do we to that now and are we so 458 00:20:14,400 --> 00:20:17,440 close that by adding 30 459 00:20:17,440 --> 00:20:20,519 units per acre over there you know a few more with a lot 460 00:20:20,519 --> 00:20:21,720 more traffic are we 461 00:20:21,720 --> 00:20:25,859 gonna be bumping close to the limit are we still safe you 462 00:20:25,859 --> 00:20:26,640 need to worry about 463 00:20:26,640 --> 00:20:30,900 that in the future I guess is what I'm asking and you don't 464 00:20:30,900 --> 00:20:31,960 think we do rich 465 00:20:31,960 --> 00:20:36,910 no I think as we you know part of the problem we don't have 466 00:20:36,910 --> 00:20:38,079 a lot of traffic 467 00:20:38,079 --> 00:20:41,980 that unfortunately and I know that that pre-tem is working 468 00:20:41,980 --> 00:20:43,000 on getting that I 469 00:20:43,000 --> 00:20:46,559 was just trying to think just based on the current density 470 00:20:46,559 --> 00:20:47,519 whether or not we 471 00:20:47,519 --> 00:20:52,839 can determine just based on trips theoretically where they 472 00:20:52,839 --> 00:20:54,160 could be but we 473 00:20:54,160 --> 00:20:59,170 don't have any any current traffic traffic counts I'll step 474 00:20:59,170 --> 00:21:00,720 in here and kind 475 00:21:00,720 --> 00:21:04,839 of watch over me and help me under the current code the 476 00:21:04,839 --> 00:21:06,039 only thing that this 477 00:21:06,039 --> 00:21:10,029 development would be responsible for is where they actually 478 00:21:10,029 --> 00:21:11,440 attached to Sam Bass 479 00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:15,400 or Londonderry correct they don't have any responsibility 480 00:21:15,400 --> 00:21:16,119 from anything on 481 00:21:16,119 --> 00:21:18,170 Londonderry to the West and they don't have any 482 00:21:18,170 --> 00:21:19,759 responsibility on the Sam Bass 483 00:21:19,759 --> 00:21:24,319 southern portion correct so if to answer from my point of 484 00:21:24,319 --> 00:21:25,880 view your question the 485 00:21:25,880 --> 00:21:29,109 only thing that we have an ability to do something is in 486 00:21:29,109 --> 00:21:30,319 the width where they 487 00:21:30,319 --> 00:21:34,140 border Sam Bass or the width where they border London 488 00:21:34,140 --> 00:21:35,200 perimeter correct and it 489 00:21:35,200 --> 00:21:37,450 gets back to the same issue we've talked about the last 490 00:21:37,450 --> 00:21:39,079 several times is whose 491 00:21:39,079 --> 00:21:42,789 responsibility is to do that they'll have to do I assume a 492 00:21:42,789 --> 00:21:43,920 TIA based on the 493 00:21:43,920 --> 00:21:47,640 number of trips because of the number of units and then the 494 00:21:47,640 --> 00:21:48,799 city will decide 495 00:21:48,799 --> 00:21:52,619 whether they won't take the fees off of the number of units 496 00:21:52,619 --> 00:21:53,799 and whether we want 497 00:21:53,799 --> 00:21:56,359 to spend it and do improvements to Sam Bass and Londonderry 498 00:21:56,359 --> 00:21:57,079 or somewhere else 499 00:21:57,079 --> 00:22:01,079 within the area that this parcel those improvements have to 500 00:22:01,079 --> 00:22:02,079 be done in that 501 00:22:02,079 --> 00:22:04,900 area or where they're going to ask them to do perimeter 502 00:22:04,900 --> 00:22:06,200 improvements on their 503 00:22:06,200 --> 00:22:11,200 properties and that's my understanding of how that works 504 00:22:11,200 --> 00:22:14,619 correct and I don't disagree that I wasn't necessarily 505 00:22:14,619 --> 00:22:16,279 trying to dump this 506 00:22:16,279 --> 00:22:19,160 on the developer at all in fact I was kind of expecting the 507 00:22:19,160 --> 00:22:20,000 city to step in 508 00:22:20,000 --> 00:22:25,099 here and do this kind of analysis to see that if we're 509 00:22:25,099 --> 00:22:27,480 reaching the limit to what 510 00:22:27,480 --> 00:22:30,480 these roads can handle should we be building which I don't 511 00:22:30,480 --> 00:22:31,160 think we are but 512 00:22:31,160 --> 00:22:34,480 I just I'm curious to how close we are right now so I was 513 00:22:34,480 --> 00:22:35,720 really kind of 514 00:22:35,720 --> 00:22:38,299 expecting the city to take a look at this and not so much 515 00:22:38,299 --> 00:22:38,980 expecting the 516 00:22:38,980 --> 00:22:43,130 developer so that's that's that was where I was coming from 517 00:22:43,130 --> 00:22:43,759 my comment is 518 00:22:43,759 --> 00:22:47,279 there's a city will de facto they're going to require the 519 00:22:47,279 --> 00:22:48,000 developer to do a 520 00:22:48,000 --> 00:22:51,420 TIA and study the whole area and give the data to the city 521 00:22:51,420 --> 00:22:52,920 okay now we'll help 522 00:22:52,920 --> 00:22:56,069 or we'll pay for it now we'll help with the numbers to show 523 00:22:56,069 --> 00:22:57,440 where we're at that 524 00:22:57,440 --> 00:23:01,839 will give current traffic counts okay 525 00:23:03,920 --> 00:23:09,039 Commissioner yeah okay sure Commissioner Sullivan so let me 526 00:23:09,039 --> 00:23:10,720 get this straight 527 00:23:10,720 --> 00:23:15,519 we've got the numbers here is designed to handle a hundred 528 00:23:15,519 --> 00:23:16,480 a thousand eight 529 00:23:16,480 --> 00:23:20,549 thousand vehicles but we have no clue how many vehicles are 530 00:23:20,549 --> 00:23:21,819 there we have no 531 00:23:21,819 --> 00:23:26,839 clue who's going to be responsible if ever what's the point 532 00:23:26,839 --> 00:23:28,160 if we never have 533 00:23:28,160 --> 00:23:31,309 traffic surveys we never know how many cars are actually 534 00:23:31,309 --> 00:23:32,440 there we don't know 535 00:23:32,440 --> 00:23:36,490 how many cars are going to be added everybody's flying 536 00:23:36,490 --> 00:23:38,480 blind I guess I'm 537 00:23:38,480 --> 00:23:42,339 just baffled and bewildered over the fact that we even have 538 00:23:42,339 --> 00:23:43,519 the numbers in 539 00:23:43,519 --> 00:23:48,710 here because it makes no difference I think it kind of goes 540 00:23:48,710 --> 00:23:49,839 back to the fact 541 00:23:49,839 --> 00:23:55,529 that ironic right if they were to add more development to 542 00:23:55,529 --> 00:23:56,839 the site ie 543 00:23:56,839 --> 00:24:00,640 commercial which would be more even intensive than then 544 00:24:00,640 --> 00:24:01,759 additional 545 00:24:01,759 --> 00:24:05,509 residential units we wouldn't we wouldn't even be we wouldn 546 00:24:05,509 --> 00:24:06,440 't even be here today 547 00:24:06,440 --> 00:24:09,589 they would just be able to go in as of right and so that's 548 00:24:09,589 --> 00:24:10,519 sort of what we 549 00:24:10,519 --> 00:24:13,170 looked at it's really sort of a down zone of what they 550 00:24:13,170 --> 00:24:14,240 could potentially 551 00:24:14,240 --> 00:24:18,500 build it at the max I can't I mean we just don't have 552 00:24:18,500 --> 00:24:19,240 unfortunately we don't 553 00:24:19,240 --> 00:24:21,880 have that data to say you know right now the road is at a 554 00:24:21,880 --> 00:24:24,480 level of service C by 555 00:24:24,480 --> 00:24:29,039 adding X number of trips it's going to degrade it to you 556 00:24:29,039 --> 00:24:31,160 know whatever a D or 557 00:24:31,160 --> 00:24:36,349 it's going to maintain it at a C right now we don't we're 558 00:24:36,349 --> 00:24:37,480 in the process of 559 00:24:37,480 --> 00:24:42,049 putting all of that together I'm just confused where the 560 00:24:42,049 --> 00:24:43,559 planning comes into 561 00:24:43,559 --> 00:24:47,309 play we got planning and zoning we zone but we don't plan 562 00:24:47,309 --> 00:24:49,119 we're getting there 563 00:24:49,119 --> 00:24:53,029 don't play it because nobody does any studies to tell us 564 00:24:53,029 --> 00:24:54,480 where we are to find 565 00:24:54,480 --> 00:24:57,119 out whether or not all these apartments are going to add 566 00:24:57,119 --> 00:24:58,359 anything to the traffic 567 00:24:58,359 --> 00:25:00,940 load which we know they will and at the same time they're 568 00:25:00,940 --> 00:25:01,759 going to take away a 569 00:25:01,759 --> 00:25:05,609 light which is the only thing that controls it coming in 570 00:25:05,609 --> 00:25:06,240 and off of 571 00:25:06,240 --> 00:25:10,539 streets you know all of that together makes I have a hard 572 00:25:10,539 --> 00:25:11,119 time where the 573 00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:17,109 planning is involved if I might mr. chair sure Scott 574 00:25:17,109 --> 00:25:19,319 McDonald I'm just to 575 00:25:19,319 --> 00:25:21,440 touch on that we absolutely have been having the 576 00:25:21,440 --> 00:25:22,799 conversations about doing a 577 00:25:22,799 --> 00:25:26,890 traffic study and looking at the entire city we haven't we 578 00:25:26,890 --> 00:25:28,079 haven't taken a 579 00:25:28,079 --> 00:25:32,059 comprehensive approach to traffic management we're working 580 00:25:32,059 --> 00:25:32,839 site by site 581 00:25:32,839 --> 00:25:35,599 the numbers that you have before you ultimately are set up 582 00:25:35,599 --> 00:25:36,400 for what the road 583 00:25:36,400 --> 00:25:41,490 will handle as we propose this or the applicants proposing 584 00:25:41,490 --> 00:25:42,599 this it's a less 585 00:25:42,599 --> 00:25:46,619 intense use than what is eligible by right that's why staff 586 00:25:46,619 --> 00:25:47,359 s confident in the 587 00:25:47,359 --> 00:25:50,509 fact that this isn't going to create a burden it actually 588 00:25:50,509 --> 00:25:51,680 would lessen some 589 00:25:51,680 --> 00:25:55,250 potential burden and we will we will and have already had 590 00:25:55,250 --> 00:25:56,640 the conversations about 591 00:25:56,640 --> 00:26:00,069 how it is to take the approach to traffic management across 592 00:26:00,069 --> 00:26:00,759 the city so 593 00:26:00,759 --> 00:26:04,579 we've got some some steps that we need to take and some 594 00:26:04,579 --> 00:26:06,359 actions that we intend 595 00:26:06,359 --> 00:26:09,789 to take to look at that more comprehensively we recognize 596 00:26:09,789 --> 00:26:10,359 there's a 597 00:26:10,359 --> 00:26:14,089 deficiency in our traffic management it's just the steps to 598 00:26:14,089 --> 00:26:15,119 get there and as 599 00:26:15,119 --> 00:26:18,549 we take the steps and really trying to look at the overall 600 00:26:18,549 --> 00:26:19,660 zoning of the city 601 00:26:19,660 --> 00:26:23,130 and the planning and and tying it to the dent in 2030 that 602 00:26:23,130 --> 00:26:24,160 's a component of that 603 00:26:24,160 --> 00:26:27,119 that we will be looking at in the very very near future 604 00:26:27,119 --> 00:26:30,240 hope that helps 605 00:26:30,759 --> 00:26:49,480 any other questions on B or C for Haley on this item thank 606 00:26:49,480 --> 00:26:53,000 you Haley item D just 607 00:26:53,000 --> 00:26:58,849 for my clarification I assume we'll open this item and then 608 00:26:58,849 --> 00:27:00,119 we will do a vote to 609 00:27:00,119 --> 00:27:05,180 postpone to date certain of February 21st okay and leave 610 00:27:05,180 --> 00:27:07,359 open okay 611 00:27:14,680 --> 00:27:21,099 that will take us to E and Haley all right so very closely 612 00:27:21,099 --> 00:27:22,240 related to what we 613 00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:28,559 just talked about staff is proposing an amendment to the 614 00:27:28,559 --> 00:27:29,079 Denton Development 615 00:27:29,079 --> 00:27:32,869 Code to kind of provide some immediate relief for some some 616 00:27:32,869 --> 00:27:34,160 projects going on 617 00:27:34,160 --> 00:27:38,720 in here in town so the request is to consider making a 618 00:27:38,720 --> 00:27:39,519 recommendation to City 619 00:27:39,519 --> 00:27:42,640 Council regarding a proposed revision to subchapter 5 620 00:27:42,640 --> 00:27:43,640 specifically to our 621 00:27:43,640 --> 00:27:46,400 limitations that apply to mixed-use development 622 00:27:46,400 --> 00:27:47,079 requirements for 623 00:27:47,079 --> 00:27:50,509 multifamily so just a little bit of background that we kind 624 00:27:50,509 --> 00:27:50,960 of touched on 625 00:27:50,960 --> 00:27:53,839 with the last project we currently have two limitations 626 00:27:53,839 --> 00:27:55,000 that can apply to the 627 00:27:55,000 --> 00:27:59,140 multifamily use that impose mixed-use restrictions on them 628 00:27:59,140 --> 00:28:01,160 L4 requires in 629 00:28:01,160 --> 00:28:03,940 certain districts that multifamilies only permitted either 630 00:28:03,940 --> 00:28:04,720 with an SUP as we 631 00:28:04,720 --> 00:28:08,150 just saw or as part of a mixed-use development unless it 632 00:28:08,150 --> 00:28:08,720 can meet one of 633 00:28:08,720 --> 00:28:12,150 these other criteria that it very rarely can being part of 634 00:28:12,150 --> 00:28:12,839 a master plan 635 00:28:12,839 --> 00:28:17,140 development or if it received approval prior to 2005 or as 636 00:28:17,140 --> 00:28:18,400 part of a small area 637 00:28:18,400 --> 00:28:21,920 plan so really those top two are what is most often seen 638 00:28:21,920 --> 00:28:22,960 then the other 639 00:28:22,960 --> 00:28:26,920 limitation is limitation 6 that permits multifamily only on 640 00:28:26,920 --> 00:28:27,920 the second story and 641 00:28:27,920 --> 00:28:31,369 above when it has an office retail or other commercial use 642 00:28:31,369 --> 00:28:32,400 on the ground floor 643 00:28:32,400 --> 00:28:36,369 along any Avenue collector or arterial Street so other than 644 00:28:36,369 --> 00:28:37,200 neighborhood 645 00:28:37,200 --> 00:28:40,319 residential streets though that pretty much covers every 646 00:28:40,319 --> 00:28:41,400 street type that we 647 00:28:41,400 --> 00:28:45,990 would see in here in the city so just to look at how these 648 00:28:45,990 --> 00:28:47,160 apply across the code 649 00:28:47,160 --> 00:28:50,200 you can see L4 applies in all of our mixed-use districts 650 00:28:50,200 --> 00:28:50,720 from the 651 00:28:50,720 --> 00:28:53,480 neighborhood residential through the community mixed use 652 00:28:53,480 --> 00:28:54,240 and the regional 653 00:28:54,240 --> 00:29:00,250 mixed-use districts L6 supplies only in CMG CME RCCN and R 654 00:29:00,250 --> 00:29:02,079 CCD and then the only 655 00:29:02,079 --> 00:29:06,720 other limitation we have is within NRMU and SUP is required 656 00:29:06,720 --> 00:29:08,039 so regardless of 657 00:29:08,039 --> 00:29:11,809 the whether they did mixed use the SUP is required in that 658 00:29:11,809 --> 00:29:13,960 district so staff is 659 00:29:13,960 --> 00:29:16,720 proposing to remove L6 from all of those districts where it 660 00:29:16,720 --> 00:29:18,480 applies just within 661 00:29:18,480 --> 00:29:22,150 the past two years 2016 and 2017 we had five rezoning cases 662 00:29:22,150 --> 00:29:23,079 that were applied 663 00:29:23,079 --> 00:29:26,509 for we've had countless other projects that have come in as 664 00:29:26,509 --> 00:29:27,079 pre-development 665 00:29:27,079 --> 00:29:29,769 meetings or just as people calling and asking about 666 00:29:29,769 --> 00:29:31,079 property that have been 667 00:29:31,079 --> 00:29:34,160 squashed because of that ground floor commercial 668 00:29:34,160 --> 00:29:36,160 requirement looking at how 669 00:29:36,160 --> 00:29:39,019 this requirement applies across the city remember it 670 00:29:39,019 --> 00:29:40,160 applied in the community 671 00:29:40,160 --> 00:29:43,210 mixed use in the regional districts so essentially all of 672 00:29:43,210 --> 00:29:44,160 the the purple the 673 00:29:44,160 --> 00:29:46,240 kind of fuchsia color and then the light pink that you see 674 00:29:46,240 --> 00:29:47,000 on the map is where 675 00:29:47,000 --> 00:29:51,130 that L6 would apply just keeping in mind that our 676 00:29:51,130 --> 00:29:52,240 comprehensive plan does call 677 00:29:52,240 --> 00:29:54,640 for a mixture of housing types because we are a city with 678 00:29:54,640 --> 00:29:56,680 diverse housing needs 679 00:29:56,680 --> 00:30:00,789 and then looking at where this limitation applies on mostly 680 00:30:00,789 --> 00:30:01,279 on the 681 00:30:01,279 --> 00:30:04,759 outskirts of the city it doesn't make the most sense 682 00:30:04,759 --> 00:30:05,720 potentially for ground 683 00:30:05,720 --> 00:30:09,160 floor commercial to be in these areas. Commissioner Ellis. 684 00:30:09,160 --> 00:30:10,119 Thank you Chair. 685 00:30:10,119 --> 00:30:13,650 So on that note when was this put into place because I was 686 00:30:13,650 --> 00:30:14,440 trying to get a 687 00:30:14,440 --> 00:30:17,660 context on you know when you look at that zoning map this 688 00:30:17,660 --> 00:30:18,920 limitation doesn't 689 00:30:18,920 --> 00:30:22,119 make any sense at all. It has been there since the code was 690 00:30:22,119 --> 00:30:24,240 adopted in 2002. 691 00:30:24,240 --> 00:30:28,630 Trying to get what was the intent because it just when you 692 00:30:28,630 --> 00:30:29,079 it just doesn't 693 00:30:29,079 --> 00:30:31,710 makes it makes great sense downtown when you when you you 694 00:30:31,710 --> 00:30:32,720 know when you've got 695 00:30:32,720 --> 00:30:36,019 those compact places but yeah boy that doesn't make any 696 00:30:36,019 --> 00:30:37,480 sense so yeah this is a 697 00:30:37,480 --> 00:30:41,859 good thing. So yeah now that you have an idea of where that 698 00:30:41,859 --> 00:30:42,920 applies looking a 699 00:30:42,920 --> 00:30:45,500 little more specifically like you just said we see this 700 00:30:45,500 --> 00:30:46,400 type of development 701 00:30:46,400 --> 00:30:50,960 where it is not required in downtown and compact walkable 702 00:30:50,960 --> 00:30:52,519 environments. So just 703 00:30:52,519 --> 00:30:55,089 some examples you know we have several of these downtown 704 00:30:55,089 --> 00:30:55,680 but you know on 705 00:30:55,680 --> 00:30:58,940 Hickory and Locust the two that are doing very well. It 706 00:30:58,940 --> 00:30:59,799 makes sense in those 707 00:30:59,799 --> 00:31:03,450 areas where people are out walking to get to these things 708 00:31:03,450 --> 00:31:04,640 and you see here on 709 00:31:04,640 --> 00:31:06,990 the bottom examples of where properties where this is 710 00:31:06,990 --> 00:31:08,519 specifically required on 711 00:31:08,519 --> 00:31:12,509 Brinker and then out on loop 288. Ground floor commercial 712 00:31:12,509 --> 00:31:13,359 isn't necessarily 713 00:31:13,359 --> 00:31:16,559 feasible in those places. The intent of that limitation 714 00:31:16,559 --> 00:31:17,680 wouldn't really be 715 00:31:17,680 --> 00:31:21,940 served well in those areas. Commissioner Beck. Thank you 716 00:31:21,940 --> 00:31:24,480 chair. Kind of pulling in 717 00:31:24,480 --> 00:31:29,779 on Commissioner Elst's comment and I agree that L6 is a 718 00:31:29,779 --> 00:31:31,359 pain in the butt you know 719 00:31:31,359 --> 00:31:35,970 in some areas but if we remove this the downtown area is a 720 00:31:35,970 --> 00:31:37,440 good area to use this. 721 00:31:37,440 --> 00:31:40,559 Do we lose it there too and they can just go ahead and 722 00:31:40,559 --> 00:31:42,000 build apartments in 723 00:31:42,000 --> 00:31:44,759 without the commercial development? That limitation does 724 00:31:44,759 --> 00:31:45,480 not apply in the 725 00:31:45,480 --> 00:31:48,319 downtown districts at all. So there's nothing requiring 726 00:31:48,319 --> 00:31:49,039 that that type of 727 00:31:49,039 --> 00:31:51,619 development occur there it just naturally does because of 728 00:31:51,619 --> 00:31:52,319 the environment. 729 00:31:52,319 --> 00:31:54,900 Okay so we don't have to worry about that. Yeah multi- 730 00:31:54,900 --> 00:31:56,400 family can go in with or without 731 00:31:56,400 --> 00:32:00,259 ground floor commercial in downtown. Can go in with or 732 00:32:00,259 --> 00:32:01,839 without? Yes. Ground floor? 733 00:32:01,839 --> 00:32:06,400 Okay. Yeah the use is permitted by right in our downtown 734 00:32:06,400 --> 00:32:08,279 districts. It just so 735 00:32:08,279 --> 00:32:11,839 happens that because of the nature of downtown we do see 736 00:32:11,839 --> 00:32:12,279 the ground floor commercial. 737 00:32:12,279 --> 00:32:17,240 Okay okay thank you. Haley if I make it's market driven the 738 00:32:17,240 --> 00:32:18,200 property owner decides 739 00:32:18,200 --> 00:32:20,440 whether they want to include that in their project or say 740 00:32:20,440 --> 00:32:21,079 you know what I 741 00:32:21,079 --> 00:32:23,119 don't think it's a viable option and we're just gonna do 742 00:32:23,119 --> 00:32:24,240 straight multi-family. 743 00:32:24,240 --> 00:32:28,559 Certainly. That correct? Certainly. Yeah and just to give 744 00:32:28,559 --> 00:32:29,359 you a little peace of 745 00:32:29,359 --> 00:32:32,019 mind if you remember back to the table L4 would still apply 746 00:32:32,019 --> 00:32:32,759 in all of these 747 00:32:32,759 --> 00:32:36,190 districts so the multi-family use itself would still either 748 00:32:36,190 --> 00:32:37,160 come before you and 749 00:32:37,160 --> 00:32:40,150 City Council as an SUP or it would be part of a larger 750 00:32:40,150 --> 00:32:41,799 mixed use development 751 00:32:41,799 --> 00:32:44,680 providing that it meets the definition of mixed use which 752 00:32:44,680 --> 00:32:45,599 is simply three or 753 00:32:45,599 --> 00:32:49,250 more interrelated and compatible uses on a property but it 754 00:32:49,250 --> 00:32:50,359 can be vertically or 755 00:32:50,359 --> 00:32:54,220 horizontally mixed. Commissioner Rossell. Thank you chair. 756 00:32:54,220 --> 00:32:55,759 I know you have listed 757 00:32:55,759 --> 00:32:58,839 here in the back of the different zones but remember serves 758 00:32:58,839 --> 00:32:59,680 me correctly multi- 759 00:32:59,680 --> 00:33:02,819 family is not allowed by right in any zoning classification 760 00:33:02,819 --> 00:33:03,440 in the city 761 00:33:03,440 --> 00:33:08,039 correct? All multi-family has to be SUP? No in the downtown 762 00:33:08,039 --> 00:33:09,119 districts it has a 763 00:33:09,119 --> 00:33:11,700 limitation but it's just a limitation related to density 764 00:33:11,700 --> 00:33:13,519 calculation. Okay. So it 765 00:33:13,519 --> 00:33:17,539 could occur in like the DCG district or in the DR2. All 766 00:33:17,539 --> 00:33:20,359 other areas has to come 767 00:33:20,359 --> 00:33:23,400 before us for the SUP or mixed use development. That is 768 00:33:23,400 --> 00:33:24,599 correct. Or the others. 769 00:33:24,599 --> 00:33:26,720 That is correct yeah. The downtown districts would be the 770 00:33:26,720 --> 00:33:27,720 only ones really 771 00:33:27,720 --> 00:33:33,569 excluded from this. Thanks. So yeah as I was saying you L4 772 00:33:33,569 --> 00:33:34,200 would still apply in 773 00:33:34,200 --> 00:33:36,029 all of these districts so there's still that extra level of 774 00:33:36,029 --> 00:33:36,680 scrutiny it either 775 00:33:36,680 --> 00:33:39,609 has to be meet the definition of mixed use which is very 776 00:33:39,609 --> 00:33:41,160 specific or it would 777 00:33:41,160 --> 00:33:45,210 have to come before you as an SUP. We did publish 778 00:33:45,210 --> 00:33:46,880 notification about the requests 779 00:33:46,880 --> 00:33:49,710 didn't receive any responses to it and we are recommending 780 00:33:49,710 --> 00:33:51,359 approval so can 781 00:33:51,359 --> 00:33:53,970 answer any questions. Commissioner Beck. Okay well I was 782 00:33:53,970 --> 00:33:54,920 confused and I was under 783 00:33:54,920 --> 00:33:57,680 the impression we were gonna get rid of L4 and L6 you're 784 00:33:57,680 --> 00:33:58,759 just wanting to remove 785 00:33:58,759 --> 00:34:11,760 L6. Just L6. Gotcha. Just on density NRMU allows 12 units 786 00:34:11,760 --> 00:34:15,639 per acre NRMU allows 30 787 00:34:15,639 --> 00:34:21,909 units per acre. So CMG what's the density on that? There is 788 00:34:21,909 --> 00:34:22,880 no maximum density in 789 00:34:22,880 --> 00:34:25,719 the community mixed use district so multifamily could 790 00:34:25,719 --> 00:34:26,800 develop on a site at 791 00:34:26,800 --> 00:34:29,619 whatever density it wanted so long as they could provide 792 00:34:29,619 --> 00:34:30,760 adequate parking for 793 00:34:30,760 --> 00:34:34,869 it. Parking would be the kind of natural limit. Yeah okay 794 00:34:34,869 --> 00:34:37,679 all right thanks. 795 00:34:39,719 --> 00:34:45,940 Any other questions for Haley on this item? Okay with that 796 00:34:45,940 --> 00:34:47,559 our item F is going 797 00:34:47,559 --> 00:34:55,639 to tie into the work session that we have on sub chapter 17 798 00:34:55,639 --> 00:34:57,480 and I'll just ask 799 00:34:57,480 --> 00:35:01,579 Deborah if you're getting ready I don't know how long you 800 00:35:01,579 --> 00:35:03,480 think your presentation 801 00:35:03,480 --> 00:35:06,309 will be if we should go ahead and break and get food and 802 00:35:06,309 --> 00:35:07,480 get started if you have 803 00:35:07,480 --> 00:35:12,199 quite a bit or if we... I have like two or three more 804 00:35:12,199 --> 00:35:15,760 slides to go. We left at the upland 805 00:35:15,760 --> 00:35:18,889 habitat discussion this time that's where we're going to 806 00:35:18,889 --> 00:35:19,639 retake the the 807 00:35:19,639 --> 00:35:23,500 discussion and then after that I believe will be the 808 00:35:23,500 --> 00:35:25,440 criteria for approval of 809 00:35:25,440 --> 00:35:30,489 alternative ESA plans. So you I can wait until you are you 810 00:35:30,489 --> 00:35:33,360 know ready to eat is 811 00:35:33,360 --> 00:35:38,280 completely up to you. I just want to take a break to eat or 812 00:35:38,280 --> 00:35:39,119 you want to press on 813 00:35:39,119 --> 00:35:41,730 through and see where we go and then we have to we may have 814 00:35:41,730 --> 00:35:43,480 to stop you at 615 815 00:35:43,480 --> 00:35:48,969 or something if we're running long and do a quick eat. Okay 816 00:35:48,969 --> 00:35:49,559 let's go and get 817 00:35:49,559 --> 00:35:52,639 started if you got don't mind. 818 00:36:03,360 --> 00:36:21,940 Good evening Commission my name is Deborah Vera I'm with 819 00:36:21,940 --> 00:36:22,519 the Environmental 820 00:36:22,519 --> 00:36:27,559 Services Department. Last time two weeks ago we started 821 00:36:27,559 --> 00:36:28,400 going over the 822 00:36:28,400 --> 00:36:33,510 changes made to or proposed changes to sub chapter 17. We 823 00:36:33,510 --> 00:36:34,719 stopped at the 824 00:36:34,719 --> 00:36:38,019 discussion of upland habitat and I'm going to resume with a 825 00:36:38,019 --> 00:36:38,800 definition 826 00:36:38,800 --> 00:36:42,300 because I believe there was some concerns about the changes 827 00:36:42,300 --> 00:36:42,960 and why would 828 00:36:42,960 --> 00:36:48,869 apply. Currently the definition of a of upland habitat is 829 00:36:48,869 --> 00:36:49,920 areas of minimum of 830 00:36:49,920 --> 00:36:53,449 10 acres in size that contain remnants of the Easter cross 831 00:36:53,449 --> 00:36:54,960 timber habitat. We 832 00:36:54,960 --> 00:36:58,920 have revised the definition just a little bit just to take 833 00:36:58,920 --> 00:36:59,880 out the eastern 834 00:36:59,880 --> 00:37:03,639 part of it and just have the entire cross timber habitat. 835 00:37:03,639 --> 00:37:05,280 However in 836 00:37:05,280 --> 00:37:10,260 practicality what you will see present in Denton would 837 00:37:10,260 --> 00:37:12,000 pretty much correspond to 838 00:37:12,000 --> 00:37:15,070 what is considered Easter cross timber. So we have not 839 00:37:15,070 --> 00:37:17,139 changed the species we 840 00:37:17,139 --> 00:37:21,079 have not changed the minimum area that is required so in 841 00:37:21,079 --> 00:37:22,360 that regard the 842 00:37:22,360 --> 00:37:25,909 definition stays the same. I believe Commissioner Sanchez 843 00:37:25,909 --> 00:37:26,719 was concerned about 844 00:37:26,719 --> 00:37:31,869 providing definition if you look into 17.5 we'll see all 845 00:37:31,869 --> 00:37:32,840 the four type of 846 00:37:32,840 --> 00:37:37,710 eases defined in that section including upland habitat. Yes 847 00:37:37,710 --> 00:37:37,920 sir. 848 00:37:37,920 --> 00:37:41,519 Commissioner Sanchez. Still reading that it says areas of 849 00:37:41,519 --> 00:37:43,039 minimum 10 acres in 850 00:37:43,039 --> 00:37:47,090 size okay you're talking about 10 acres that contain 851 00:37:47,090 --> 00:37:49,920 remnants so it's referring 852 00:37:49,920 --> 00:37:53,519 to the 10 acres the way I read it that refers to the 10 853 00:37:53,519 --> 00:37:54,480 acres it doesn't 854 00:37:54,480 --> 00:37:58,730 refer to as we were told earlier that a 10 acre remnant is 855 00:37:58,730 --> 00:38:00,119 we're looking at the 856 00:38:00,119 --> 00:38:05,079 whole cross timbers area we're looking at just these 10 857 00:38:05,079 --> 00:38:06,519 acres and it's kind of 858 00:38:06,519 --> 00:38:09,559 confusing the way it's at least for me it is okay because 859 00:38:09,559 --> 00:38:10,559 it's referring to the 860 00:38:10,559 --> 00:38:13,349 10 acres and the remnants are referring to the 10 acres it 861 00:38:13,349 --> 00:38:14,039 's not referring to 862 00:38:14,039 --> 00:38:17,559 the whole cross timbers okay so it should be clarified a 863 00:38:17,559 --> 00:38:18,079 little bit better. 864 00:38:18,079 --> 00:38:24,559 Sure we can we can rework that definition such as areas 865 00:38:24,559 --> 00:38:26,239 typically found or 866 00:38:26,239 --> 00:38:30,900 habitats are typically found in areas of the Easter cross 867 00:38:30,900 --> 00:38:32,960 timber habitat of a 10 868 00:38:32,960 --> 00:38:37,119 acres in size you want that definition to be reworks in 869 00:38:37,119 --> 00:38:38,079 that way will be clear. 870 00:38:38,079 --> 00:38:41,510 I think it'd be it helped to be a little bit clearer I mean 871 00:38:41,510 --> 00:38:42,920 I may be just 872 00:38:42,920 --> 00:38:45,679 as far as you know I may just not be understanding it but 873 00:38:45,679 --> 00:38:46,679 that's it seems to 874 00:38:46,679 --> 00:38:48,679 me it refers to the 10 acres when you're talking about 875 00:38:48,679 --> 00:38:49,679 remnants. 876 00:38:49,679 --> 00:38:54,829 Okay what we can do is I can rework the ordinance and when 877 00:38:54,829 --> 00:38:56,760 if you decide to make a 878 00:38:56,760 --> 00:39:00,760 recommendation we can add that amendment as a part of the 879 00:39:00,760 --> 00:39:01,719 of the motion is that 880 00:39:01,719 --> 00:39:07,119 something that you would like? Sure Commissioner Ellis. 881 00:39:07,119 --> 00:39:08,039 Thank You Chair I 882 00:39:08,039 --> 00:39:11,159 don't know that it has to be reworked that much but maybe I 883 00:39:11,159 --> 00:39:12,179 think Bob used the 884 00:39:12,179 --> 00:39:15,980 word contiguous I mean maybe you just need to add just a 885 00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,400 little bit clearer 886 00:39:17,400 --> 00:39:19,750 definition so that when someone reads it they have a 887 00:39:19,750 --> 00:39:21,000 picture in their mind that 888 00:39:21,000 --> 00:39:28,409 it's 10 acres of contiguous. Okay okay we can do that let 889 00:39:28,409 --> 00:39:29,719 us work out during the 890 00:39:29,719 --> 00:39:35,309 now on a hearing and we will provide some new language for 891 00:39:35,309 --> 00:39:40,400 you. So what one of 892 00:39:40,400 --> 00:39:44,039 the substantial changes is right now currently we require 893 00:39:44,039 --> 00:39:45,400 the preservation of 894 00:39:45,400 --> 00:39:48,980 upland habitat if you were to develop residential 895 00:39:48,980 --> 00:39:50,599 development meaning 896 00:39:50,599 --> 00:39:55,800 multifamily 2f single-family homes. Any non-residential 897 00:39:55,800 --> 00:39:57,480 development that will 898 00:39:57,480 --> 00:40:03,329 encroach into a upland area designated upland habitat they 899 00:40:03,329 --> 00:40:04,360 don't have to 900 00:40:04,360 --> 00:40:08,260 preserve the 50%. When we talk about the preservation of 901 00:40:08,260 --> 00:40:09,719 the upland habitat we 902 00:40:09,719 --> 00:40:12,480 not only look in the preservation of the tree canopy but we 903 00:40:12,480 --> 00:40:13,480 also look into the 904 00:40:13,480 --> 00:40:17,449 preservation of the habitat on the understory because 905 00:40:17,449 --> 00:40:19,079 ultimately we are 906 00:40:19,079 --> 00:40:22,719 looking to the preservation of the viability of the entire 907 00:40:22,719 --> 00:40:24,280 habitat ecosystem 908 00:40:24,280 --> 00:40:29,800 present. The proposed changes would maintain the 50% 909 00:40:29,800 --> 00:40:30,699 preservation of the 910 00:40:30,699 --> 00:40:35,559 residential as is currently stated in the code however we 911 00:40:35,559 --> 00:40:38,639 have staff and the 912 00:40:38,639 --> 00:40:43,239 COE have given the the direction to actually require the 913 00:40:43,239 --> 00:40:44,360 preservation the 914 00:40:44,360 --> 00:40:48,920 30% preservation of upland habitat for non-residential 915 00:40:48,920 --> 00:40:52,440 development. The 30% we 916 00:40:52,440 --> 00:40:57,000 kind of landed on the 30% because we were looking at what 917 00:40:57,000 --> 00:40:58,719 the new tree code 918 00:40:58,719 --> 00:41:02,789 was looking as a preservation and they agree and they were 919 00:41:02,789 --> 00:41:04,440 having the 30%. 920 00:41:04,440 --> 00:41:10,760 Previously two weeks ago we discussed the changes to the 921 00:41:10,760 --> 00:41:13,320 credit section and 922 00:41:13,320 --> 00:41:18,969 let's say that you have a non-residential development encro 923 00:41:18,969 --> 00:41:19,480 aching 924 00:41:19,480 --> 00:41:23,519 into an upland habitat if they were to preserve the 30% 925 00:41:23,519 --> 00:41:25,199 that will actually make 926 00:41:25,199 --> 00:41:28,949 them comply with the tree code anyway so the two will 927 00:41:28,949 --> 00:41:33,000 actually match. But 928 00:41:33,000 --> 00:41:36,510 definitely this is one of the major changes policy wise 929 00:41:36,510 --> 00:41:37,719 that the proposed 930 00:41:37,719 --> 00:41:44,530 changes are you know showing. Commissioner Roselle. Thank 931 00:41:44,530 --> 00:41:45,679 you chair if I 932 00:41:45,679 --> 00:41:49,280 understand this correctly a non-residential development 933 00:41:49,280 --> 00:41:50,960 there is no 934 00:41:50,960 --> 00:41:54,449 increased measure to protect upland habitat apart from any 935 00:41:54,449 --> 00:41:55,400 other standard 936 00:41:55,400 --> 00:41:59,650 trees on the property. Correct if right now somebody were 937 00:41:59,650 --> 00:42:00,679 to develop a 938 00:42:00,679 --> 00:42:04,619 non-residential development what they have to preserve is 939 00:42:04,619 --> 00:42:06,239 the tree based on 940 00:42:06,239 --> 00:42:09,760 the tree code okay and they can't they have a minimum 941 00:42:09,760 --> 00:42:11,519 percentage of preservation 942 00:42:11,519 --> 00:42:14,739 that could be further reduced if they pay into the tree 943 00:42:14,739 --> 00:42:17,599 fund okay but the 944 00:42:17,599 --> 00:42:21,929 habitat per se is not protected. What you are protecting 945 00:42:21,929 --> 00:42:23,159 under the tree code is 946 00:42:23,159 --> 00:42:28,760 actually the tree canopy not the habitat. So if I 947 00:42:28,760 --> 00:42:29,719 understand correctly if a 948 00:42:29,719 --> 00:42:33,039 residential element goes in they have to maintain 50% cont 949 00:42:33,039 --> 00:42:34,280 iguous. Correct they 950 00:42:34,280 --> 00:42:38,840 pick which part is contiguous we don't designate that. Well 951 00:42:38,840 --> 00:42:39,719 part is strongly 952 00:42:39,719 --> 00:42:44,679 encouraged. Correct. And then the non-residential upland 953 00:42:44,679 --> 00:42:45,079 habitat really 954 00:42:45,079 --> 00:42:48,360 doesn't even matter. Correct. Can you help me understand 955 00:42:48,360 --> 00:42:49,639 why a more intensive use 956 00:42:49,639 --> 00:42:53,800 of the property there's not a stronger inclination to 957 00:42:53,800 --> 00:42:55,199 protect the habitat? Yeah 958 00:42:55,199 --> 00:42:59,000 in 2002 when the code was first draft the City Council at 959 00:42:59,000 --> 00:43:00,280 the moment understood 960 00:43:00,280 --> 00:43:05,699 that when you buy a tree lot in a residential lot you most 961 00:43:05,699 --> 00:43:06,599 of the time you 962 00:43:06,599 --> 00:43:11,559 are paying a premium for it therefore they saw a direct 963 00:43:11,559 --> 00:43:13,199 compensation for the 964 00:43:13,199 --> 00:43:17,219 making the developer to preserve those areas because they 965 00:43:17,219 --> 00:43:19,639 will be somehow 966 00:43:19,639 --> 00:43:24,199 compensated economically because they will be paid a 967 00:43:24,199 --> 00:43:25,639 premium for it. In 968 00:43:25,639 --> 00:43:28,510 residential in commercial development that is a little bit 969 00:43:28,510 --> 00:43:29,320 different that 970 00:43:29,320 --> 00:43:35,599 doesn't play out differently. The other aspects that I 971 00:43:35,599 --> 00:43:37,320 remember be part of the 972 00:43:37,320 --> 00:43:41,880 conversation at that time was that sometimes developers 973 00:43:41,880 --> 00:43:43,159 come with a preset 974 00:43:43,159 --> 00:43:49,639 site plan that they would like to to to develop and not 975 00:43:49,639 --> 00:43:51,920 everybody it seems or 976 00:43:51,920 --> 00:43:56,480 what seem to be open to tweak those site plans to actually 977 00:43:56,480 --> 00:43:58,559 incorporate the ESA in 978 00:43:58,559 --> 00:44:03,880 it. So for those two factors the City Council at the time 979 00:44:03,880 --> 00:44:04,880 decided to 980 00:44:04,880 --> 00:44:08,699 only require the preservation the mandatory preservation to 981 00:44:08,699 --> 00:44:09,559 residential 982 00:44:09,559 --> 00:44:14,119 development. However I think that we all have seen 983 00:44:14,119 --> 00:44:16,920 successful commercial 984 00:44:16,920 --> 00:44:20,400 developers who have actually incorporated the trees as a 985 00:44:20,400 --> 00:44:21,039 part of the 986 00:44:21,039 --> 00:44:26,750 plan those side seems to be more aesthetically pleasing. I 987 00:44:26,750 --> 00:44:27,679 think that it 988 00:44:27,679 --> 00:44:32,239 adds value to it when you are working with a existing 989 00:44:32,239 --> 00:44:34,760 established area. So 990 00:44:34,760 --> 00:44:40,610 that's that's one of the reasons that I think we decided to 991 00:44:40,610 --> 00:44:42,559 just to take an 992 00:44:42,559 --> 00:44:46,280 approach. However in the same spirit to not to tax 993 00:44:46,280 --> 00:44:48,880 developers or tag them twice 994 00:44:48,880 --> 00:44:53,440 three tree code and upland habitat then we we are 995 00:44:53,440 --> 00:44:55,079 consistent on the percentage. 996 00:44:55,079 --> 00:44:59,719 By meeting the 30% of upland habitat they will also meet 997 00:44:59,719 --> 00:45:01,519 what the tree code 998 00:45:01,519 --> 00:45:07,369 is looking to to have to require. So personally have have 999 00:45:07,369 --> 00:45:08,760 some friction with 1000 00:45:08,760 --> 00:45:12,780 that thought process but that that friction would probably 1001 00:45:12,780 --> 00:45:13,519 be helped 1002 00:45:13,519 --> 00:45:17,420 defined a little bit to know what is the overlay of upland 1003 00:45:17,420 --> 00:45:19,199 habitat in our city to 1004 00:45:19,199 --> 00:45:22,119 commercial uses. If there's not a lot of upland habitat in 1005 00:45:22,119 --> 00:45:23,360 zoned commercial areas 1006 00:45:23,360 --> 00:45:26,789 then this issue kind of solves itself and it might be an 1007 00:45:26,789 --> 00:45:28,039 uphill battle I don't 1008 00:45:28,039 --> 00:45:33,710 need to fight but it does create a little bit of concern in 1009 00:45:33,710 --> 00:45:34,679 my mind that 1010 00:45:34,679 --> 00:45:40,719 there's economic reasons for our developers remarketing or 1011 00:45:40,719 --> 00:45:41,199 or whatever it 1012 00:45:41,199 --> 00:45:43,449 is rather than actually protecting the environment. It 1013 00:45:43,449 --> 00:45:44,320 seems like the upland 1014 00:45:44,320 --> 00:45:50,460 habitat the the retention of that percentage of upland 1015 00:45:50,460 --> 00:45:51,320 habitat should be 1016 00:45:51,320 --> 00:45:54,519 for the purpose of maintaining the habitat not if a 1017 00:45:54,519 --> 00:45:56,039 developer can market it 1018 00:45:56,039 --> 00:45:58,480 at an increased price or if a commercial developer doesn't 1019 00:45:58,480 --> 00:46:00,800 care about trees. 1020 00:46:00,800 --> 00:46:03,670 It sounds like that was a motivating factor historically I 1021 00:46:03,670 --> 00:46:04,519 don't think it 1022 00:46:04,519 --> 00:46:07,090 should be going forward but again it might be a non-issue 1023 00:46:07,090 --> 00:46:07,840 and so it might be 1024 00:46:07,840 --> 00:46:12,880 helpful if there's a way to present or if you could tell me 1025 00:46:12,880 --> 00:46:14,920 offline how many 1026 00:46:14,920 --> 00:46:18,619 commercial properties have upland habitat to know if this 1027 00:46:18,619 --> 00:46:19,639 is even an issue. 1028 00:46:19,639 --> 00:46:24,730 Well the issue would be it we one thing is develop 1029 00:46:24,730 --> 00:46:27,480 commercial okay and other 1030 00:46:27,480 --> 00:46:33,329 thing is vacant land that is zoned for zoning district or 1031 00:46:33,329 --> 00:46:34,480 category that allows 1032 00:46:34,480 --> 00:46:39,989 some sort of commercial district so those are two separate. 1033 00:46:39,989 --> 00:46:41,159 I will have to 1034 00:46:41,159 --> 00:46:45,719 probably go back and try to overlay the two to give you a 1035 00:46:45,719 --> 00:46:47,000 estimate of how much 1036 00:46:47,000 --> 00:46:54,059 is that. I will tell you that most of the upland habitat it 1037 00:46:54,059 --> 00:46:55,599 will be on the eastern 1038 00:46:55,599 --> 00:47:00,960 part if you take I-35W corridor most of the cross timbers 1039 00:47:00,960 --> 00:47:02,480 are in the east part 1040 00:47:02,480 --> 00:47:07,039 of town when you move across the western part of it the 1041 00:47:07,039 --> 00:47:09,440 actually acreage and art 1042 00:47:09,440 --> 00:47:14,840 prairies so you don't see a lot of trees in that area for 1043 00:47:14,840 --> 00:47:16,719 that reason so and 1044 00:47:16,719 --> 00:47:20,739 that's the areas of town that are more ripe for development 1045 00:47:20,739 --> 00:47:21,719 at this point 1046 00:47:21,719 --> 00:47:24,909 especially industrial and things like that so it will be 1047 00:47:24,909 --> 00:47:26,599 zoning districts that 1048 00:47:26,599 --> 00:47:31,639 allow some sort of commercial use that we have a whole slew 1049 00:47:31,639 --> 00:47:33,199 of those that are 1050 00:47:33,199 --> 00:47:40,980 pretty much east of I-35 corridor. And I can look as well 1051 00:47:40,980 --> 00:47:41,599 it seems like the 1052 00:47:41,599 --> 00:47:46,719 Mayhill reconstruction east of Mayhill is where we've seen 1053 00:47:46,719 --> 00:47:47,400 historically there's 1054 00:47:47,400 --> 00:47:50,190 the neighborhood behind the Ford dealership that had an up 1055 00:47:50,190 --> 00:47:51,639 land habitat in 1056 00:47:51,639 --> 00:47:55,920 that neighborhood I just and maybe between meetings I can 1057 00:47:55,920 --> 00:47:56,559 look to see what 1058 00:47:56,559 --> 00:48:02,409 the upland habitat is over on that side so those are my 1059 00:48:02,409 --> 00:48:02,679 thoughts. 1060 00:48:02,679 --> 00:48:06,969 Yeah I can probably look into the interactive map and turn 1061 00:48:06,969 --> 00:48:07,840 the ESA layer 1062 00:48:07,840 --> 00:48:12,400 for you and then see if in that way you have an idea of 1063 00:48:12,400 --> 00:48:14,159 where they are. Thank you. 1064 00:48:14,159 --> 00:48:18,280 Commissioner Beck. Yeah thank you chair and this is 1065 00:48:18,280 --> 00:48:19,840 probably kind of self evident but 1066 00:48:19,840 --> 00:48:23,659 when you say that non-residential development when it encro 1067 00:48:23,659 --> 00:48:24,679 aches upland 1068 00:48:24,679 --> 00:48:30,199 habitat it has to preserve 30%. 50%? Non-residential. 1069 00:48:30,199 --> 00:48:36,679 Okay. Yes. It would be great if it was. Okay. So we're 1070 00:48:36,679 --> 00:48:39,519 talking about just say you've got a 10 1071 00:48:39,519 --> 00:48:42,300 acre track of upland habitat but they're only going to 1072 00:48:42,300 --> 00:48:43,800 affect a thousand square 1073 00:48:43,800 --> 00:48:48,360 feet so the 30% they're expected is going to be brought 1074 00:48:48,360 --> 00:48:50,079 roughly 300 square feet 1075 00:48:50,079 --> 00:48:54,190 in or are we taking in to consideration that whole 10 acre 1076 00:48:54,190 --> 00:48:55,880 track? No you're 1077 00:48:55,880 --> 00:48:59,900 assuming that the entire 10 acres is in their site and that 1078 00:48:59,900 --> 00:49:01,000 's something that we 1079 00:49:01,000 --> 00:49:04,860 have to clarify. The 10 acres doesn't have to be in one 1080 00:49:04,860 --> 00:49:06,139 parcel owned by one 1081 00:49:06,139 --> 00:49:10,039 owner. Those are tree stands that might be spread out about 1082 00:49:10,039 --> 00:49:11,719 multiple land owners. 1083 00:49:11,719 --> 00:49:17,159 Okay let's say that they are 10 acres for owners equally 1084 00:49:17,159 --> 00:49:19,559 distributed 2.5 okay 1085 00:49:19,559 --> 00:49:22,719 let's say that I'm owner number one I'm going in and I'm 1086 00:49:22,719 --> 00:49:24,719 going to do 1087 00:49:24,719 --> 00:49:29,329 resident non-residential. So what what are the calculation 1088 00:49:29,329 --> 00:49:30,880 is going to be based 1089 00:49:30,880 --> 00:49:36,059 on how much of the upland habitat is in my parcel? That 1090 00:49:36,059 --> 00:49:38,940 will be 2.5 and then the 1091 00:49:38,940 --> 00:49:46,639 2. it will be 30% out of that 2.5 acres. So that's what you 1092 00:49:46,639 --> 00:49:49,599 will be required to do. 1093 00:49:49,599 --> 00:49:55,019 So hopefully the theory behind it is if everyone develops 1094 00:49:55,019 --> 00:49:56,280 at the same 1095 00:49:56,280 --> 00:50:00,199 type of development residential and all are subject to 30% 1096 00:50:00,199 --> 00:50:01,840 after everybody 1097 00:50:01,840 --> 00:50:06,960 preserve their 30% overall we will have three acres of up 1098 00:50:06,960 --> 00:50:08,440 land habitat left from 1099 00:50:08,440 --> 00:50:12,280 the original 10. So it's only 30% of the trees that you're 1100 00:50:12,280 --> 00:50:13,719 directly going to 1101 00:50:13,719 --> 00:50:19,800 impact. Correct. Of what is on your property. Right right 1102 00:50:19,800 --> 00:50:20,199 thank you. 1103 00:50:20,199 --> 00:50:24,579 Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. I actually wanted to 1104 00:50:24,579 --> 00:50:25,320 ask Commissioner 1105 00:50:25,320 --> 00:50:28,280 Rozelle a question with regard to what we were just 1106 00:50:28,280 --> 00:50:29,719 discussing. What's the 1107 00:50:29,719 --> 00:50:33,440 percentage that you have in your mind when you ask the 1108 00:50:33,440 --> 00:50:35,320 question that you do? I 1109 00:50:35,320 --> 00:50:40,400 mean if we're non-residential I would think you'd be equal. 1110 00:50:40,400 --> 00:50:41,960 It's hard for me 1111 00:50:41,960 --> 00:50:49,099 to see why a non-invasive neighborhood that's homes that 1112 00:50:49,099 --> 00:50:50,199 they're gonna put bird 1113 00:50:50,199 --> 00:50:52,619 feeders up and they actually would probably help with the 1114 00:50:52,619 --> 00:50:53,639 underlying habitat 1115 00:50:53,639 --> 00:50:57,170 more than commercial would have a steeper regulation than 1116 00:50:57,170 --> 00:50:58,760 commercial that 1117 00:50:58,760 --> 00:51:02,530 might not be as inclined to keep the habitat intact apart 1118 00:51:02,530 --> 00:51:03,679 from the canopy. 1119 00:51:03,679 --> 00:51:07,110 Because it seems residential has to be contiguous has to be 1120 00:51:07,110 --> 00:51:08,559 50% and they're 1121 00:51:08,559 --> 00:51:10,989 they have the same encouragement but on the non-residential 1122 00:51:10,989 --> 00:51:12,000 it's 30% is that to 1123 00:51:12,000 --> 00:51:15,199 be contiguous it just keep the tree canopy and so I'm just 1124 00:51:15,199 --> 00:51:15,840 curious about 1125 00:51:15,840 --> 00:51:19,320 what are we trying to protect and why the different 1126 00:51:19,320 --> 00:51:20,719 standards based on 1127 00:51:20,719 --> 00:51:24,019 development if if we're worried about the the birds and the 1128 00:51:24,019 --> 00:51:25,519 critters I think 1129 00:51:25,519 --> 00:51:28,099 it should be zoned the agnostic in terms of protecting that 1130 00:51:28,099 --> 00:51:29,760 that habitat. I guess 1131 00:51:29,760 --> 00:51:33,039 I understand then but it's probably because a commercial 1132 00:51:33,039 --> 00:51:33,559 development is 1133 00:51:33,559 --> 00:51:37,380 gonna have a bigger footprint overall it might impede the 1134 00:51:37,380 --> 00:51:38,000 development all 1135 00:51:38,000 --> 00:51:41,860 together if you require the same just because residential 1136 00:51:41,860 --> 00:51:42,719 and commercial 1137 00:51:42,719 --> 00:51:46,050 they're just not the same type of development so. Totally 1138 00:51:46,050 --> 00:51:46,880 understand it it 1139 00:51:46,880 --> 00:51:51,440 just seems to me that I don't want to use language 1140 00:51:51,440 --> 00:51:52,400 inappropriate but it's a 1141 00:51:52,400 --> 00:51:56,190 it's a it's a weak protection of the upland habitat if 1142 00:51:56,190 --> 00:51:57,400 depending on what the 1143 00:51:57,400 --> 00:52:00,090 use is if you want to put an office park in don't worry 1144 00:52:00,090 --> 00:52:00,960 about the habitat we don't 1145 00:52:00,960 --> 00:52:02,960 we don't care about if you want an office park if you want 1146 00:52:02,960 --> 00:52:03,880 houses we do care 1147 00:52:03,880 --> 00:52:06,989 about the habitat that's what it's it's communicating to me 1148 00:52:06,989 --> 00:52:08,039 and again it might 1149 00:52:08,039 --> 00:52:11,599 be inconsequential to the amount of development that overl 1150 00:52:11,599 --> 00:52:12,559 aps non-residential 1151 00:52:12,559 --> 00:52:16,460 and upland but it doesn't it doesn't seem to be speaking 1152 00:52:16,460 --> 00:52:17,400 the same voice from 1153 00:52:17,400 --> 00:52:19,980 the city's perspective of what we want to protect if there 1154 00:52:19,980 --> 00:52:21,000 's a dual standard 1155 00:52:21,000 --> 00:52:27,239 based on use. Commissioner Sullivan. Thank you. What is the 1156 00:52:27,239 --> 00:52:28,360 what definition are we 1157 00:52:28,360 --> 00:52:32,179 using for residential development in other words is this 1158 00:52:32,179 --> 00:52:33,840 more than ten houses 1159 00:52:33,840 --> 00:52:38,469 more than 20 houses or a single house? It could be a single 1160 00:52:38,469 --> 00:52:39,900 house the use is 1161 00:52:39,900 --> 00:52:43,329 residential so it could be single-family it could be multi- 1162 00:52:43,329 --> 00:52:44,599 family or it could be 1163 00:52:44,599 --> 00:52:47,400 two-f. Those are pretty much. What I'm saying is if an 1164 00:52:47,400 --> 00:52:50,880 individual comes in and buys a lot in a 1165 00:52:50,880 --> 00:52:54,400 neighborhood that's pretty well built out they're gonna be 1166 00:52:54,400 --> 00:52:55,159 treated as a 1167 00:52:55,159 --> 00:52:59,119 developer rather than the fact that they bought the lot 1168 00:52:59,119 --> 00:53:00,360 they bought the trees 1169 00:53:00,360 --> 00:53:03,840 there way too many trees because the lot's not big enough 1170 00:53:03,840 --> 00:53:04,960 to hold the house 1171 00:53:04,960 --> 00:53:09,139 they want and so they're gonna be held to this 50% cont 1172 00:53:09,139 --> 00:53:10,880 iguous as a developer 1173 00:53:10,880 --> 00:53:14,420 was which I'm sure was intended to not come in and clear- 1174 00:53:14,420 --> 00:53:16,559 cut 20 acres of trees 1175 00:53:16,559 --> 00:53:22,480 to put in the houses. I'm curious as to where does the home 1176 00:53:22,480 --> 00:53:23,440 owner you know the 1177 00:53:23,440 --> 00:53:28,840 landowner rights come into play versus again this are 1178 00:53:28,840 --> 00:53:30,239 arbitrary contiguous 1179 00:53:30,239 --> 00:53:34,840 50% number. Okay well in this scenario that you that you 1180 00:53:34,840 --> 00:53:36,199 are playing you are 1181 00:53:36,199 --> 00:53:41,320 it there's an existing neighborhood so we are talking a inf 1182 00:53:41,320 --> 00:53:42,199 ield almost an 1183 00:53:42,199 --> 00:53:45,619 infield situation okay where they have been one big tract 1184 00:53:45,619 --> 00:53:46,679 skipped from 1185 00:53:46,679 --> 00:53:51,309 development. The chances are that there's a tree that there 1186 00:53:51,309 --> 00:53:53,280 's a large parcel ten 1187 00:53:53,280 --> 00:54:00,679 acres or more who is covered you know inch for inch of tree 1188 00:54:00,679 --> 00:54:02,639 it is not very 1189 00:54:02,639 --> 00:54:08,800 often I will not rule out the possibility but it is very 1190 00:54:08,800 --> 00:54:10,519 unlikely. If 1191 00:54:10,519 --> 00:54:16,119 you are just building one house for example you can clear 1192 00:54:16,119 --> 00:54:18,559 50% of that 1193 00:54:18,559 --> 00:54:25,980 habitat by right that should give you enough if you have a 1194 00:54:25,980 --> 00:54:28,039 ten acre tract 1195 00:54:28,039 --> 00:54:31,500 cover with trees and you are in time. I'm not talking about 1196 00:54:31,500 --> 00:54:32,960 ten acre I'm talking about a quarter acre or 1197 00:54:32,960 --> 00:54:36,110 half acre. Well I'm talking about it in you know in a 1198 00:54:36,110 --> 00:54:38,199 residential area in a 1199 00:54:38,199 --> 00:54:41,840 development that's already been developed for several years 1200 00:54:41,840 --> 00:54:42,800 but there's 1201 00:54:42,800 --> 00:54:45,760 three or four scattered lots and they happen to have a 1202 00:54:45,760 --> 00:54:46,920 bunch of trees on it 1203 00:54:46,920 --> 00:54:50,820 people like to have a bunch of trees around their house. 1204 00:54:50,820 --> 00:54:53,119 Yeah I see that the 1205 00:54:53,119 --> 00:54:58,090 possibility however I think that if you are on a quarter 1206 00:54:58,090 --> 00:55:00,440 lot and you are entitled 1207 00:55:00,440 --> 00:55:06,440 to clear 50% of the upland habitat by right that chances 1208 00:55:06,440 --> 00:55:06,880 are that 1209 00:55:06,880 --> 00:55:10,559 will be enough for you to be able to accommodate your 1210 00:55:10,559 --> 00:55:13,039 building footprint, your 1211 00:55:13,039 --> 00:55:16,679 driveway, your sidewalk. You may have some upland habitat 1212 00:55:16,679 --> 00:55:18,719 on your backyard that 1213 00:55:18,719 --> 00:55:25,039 possibility exists but because the 50% that you have to 1214 00:55:25,039 --> 00:55:26,840 clear that should give 1215 00:55:26,840 --> 00:55:36,199 you enough area for a house. So basically the city owns 50% 1216 00:55:36,199 --> 00:55:36,679 of my lot 1217 00:55:36,679 --> 00:55:41,860 when I buy this single quarter acre lot to put in the 3,000 1218 00:55:41,860 --> 00:55:43,320 square foot house 1219 00:55:43,320 --> 00:55:52,929 and a pool I am I've got to keep 50% contiguous canopy 1220 00:55:52,929 --> 00:55:55,039 coverage trees on my 1221 00:55:55,039 --> 00:55:59,889 lot even though I want to put in a pool. You're gonna tell 1222 00:55:59,889 --> 00:56:00,840 me oh sorry Mr. 1223 00:56:00,840 --> 00:56:05,119 Salvin you're you know you've taken down 60% you can't do 1224 00:56:05,119 --> 00:56:07,320 that. Yeah well the 1225 00:56:07,320 --> 00:56:11,579 city will not own it because that is not the the upland 1226 00:56:11,579 --> 00:56:13,000 habitat is not dedicated 1227 00:56:13,000 --> 00:56:18,360 to the city or given a fee simple so you still own the up 1228 00:56:18,360 --> 00:56:21,119 land habitat is yours. 1229 00:56:21,119 --> 00:56:27,090 The option let's say that you would like to clear more than 1230 00:56:27,090 --> 00:56:28,239 the 50%. 1231 00:56:28,239 --> 00:56:31,190 There's a mechanism that you that you could go and it's 1232 00:56:31,190 --> 00:56:32,360 called the alternative 1233 00:56:32,360 --> 00:56:36,099 ASA plan. The alternative ASA plan you can look at it 1234 00:56:36,099 --> 00:56:37,079 almost like a variance 1235 00:56:37,079 --> 00:56:42,079 process. Then look at the facts you know what it is this is 1236 00:56:42,079 --> 00:56:43,519 the last remainder 1237 00:56:43,519 --> 00:56:49,010 making lot so on and so forth and then you can provide some 1238 00:56:49,010 --> 00:56:51,280 mitigation if for 1239 00:56:51,280 --> 00:56:55,119 the to it in exchange of the encroachment. So there is a 1240 00:56:55,119 --> 00:56:56,000 mechanism 1241 00:56:56,000 --> 00:57:00,559 where developers who actually find themselves as or 1242 00:57:00,559 --> 00:57:01,400 consider the 1243 00:57:01,400 --> 00:57:04,369 preservation of the upland habitat as a hardship they can 1244 00:57:04,369 --> 00:57:06,400 pursue that option. 1245 00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:10,300 And we will discuss the next item is the is the criteria 1246 00:57:10,300 --> 00:57:11,840 for the alternative ASA 1247 00:57:11,840 --> 00:57:15,309 plan so we will you will be able to see what we are looking 1248 00:57:15,309 --> 00:57:16,400 . I just have a 1249 00:57:16,400 --> 00:57:19,179 problem with an individual landowner being treated as a 1250 00:57:19,179 --> 00:57:20,199 developer that's 1251 00:57:20,199 --> 00:57:26,440 that's my concern. They're all being treated the same and 1252 00:57:26,440 --> 00:57:28,199 they're not the same. 1253 00:57:28,199 --> 00:57:34,440 Thank you. I think staff want to make a clarification. Just 1254 00:57:34,440 --> 00:57:35,199 for clarification 1255 00:57:35,199 --> 00:57:37,889 this would not apply to anything under 10 acres right 1256 00:57:37,889 --> 00:57:39,360 because it would in order 1257 00:57:39,360 --> 00:57:41,610 to you would need to have that 10 contiguous acres for it 1258 00:57:41,610 --> 00:57:42,199 to qualify as 1259 00:57:42,199 --> 00:57:45,630 cross timbers. The possible scenario is that you have an 1260 00:57:45,630 --> 00:57:46,960 existing subdivision 1261 00:57:46,960 --> 00:57:50,449 that had that preserved the tempers that had some of the up 1262 00:57:50,449 --> 00:57:51,960 land habitat that 1263 00:57:51,960 --> 00:57:57,920 preserved the 50% that they were responsible for and then 1264 00:57:57,920 --> 00:57:58,800 you have this 1265 00:57:58,800 --> 00:58:03,500 additional and let's let's let's say that they end up 1266 00:58:03,500 --> 00:58:05,320 having to preserve 1267 00:58:05,320 --> 00:58:11,309 9.75 acres. Okay you have this small owner to have one 1268 00:58:11,309 --> 00:58:12,719 quarter of an 1269 00:58:12,719 --> 00:58:18,570 acre and all together makes the 10 acre tree stand minimum 1270 00:58:18,570 --> 00:58:20,079 size. That that would 1271 00:58:20,079 --> 00:58:26,039 be the situations. Most of the time that's when I see that 1272 00:58:26,039 --> 00:58:26,639 as scenario 1273 00:58:26,639 --> 00:58:31,679 playing out. It's just somebody already preserved 9.75 1274 00:58:31,679 --> 00:58:32,840 acres of upland 1275 00:58:32,840 --> 00:58:36,739 habitat and then this is adjacent to a part of the tree 1276 00:58:36,739 --> 00:58:38,320 stand and it still 1277 00:58:38,320 --> 00:58:50,079 makes the 10 acre cut out. I see it differently. Kind of 1278 00:58:50,079 --> 00:58:51,280 tying into the tree 1279 00:58:51,280 --> 00:58:55,250 code since that's not before us but I know it's coming. My 1280 00:58:55,250 --> 00:58:56,679 understanding of how 1281 00:58:56,679 --> 00:58:58,789 the tree code has been written is once you make the 1282 00:58:58,789 --> 00:59:00,840 preservation those trees 1283 00:59:00,840 --> 00:59:03,440 whether they're in upland or any other those are 1284 00:59:03,440 --> 00:59:05,480 permanently identified that 1285 00:59:05,480 --> 00:59:09,929 those have to be preserved. So to Commissioner Sullivan's 1286 00:59:09,929 --> 00:59:10,559 point which is 1287 00:59:10,559 --> 00:59:14,260 I know he and I have been having sharing some of the same 1288 00:59:14,260 --> 00:59:15,320 concerns about this is 1289 00:59:15,320 --> 00:59:18,349 once that designation is put there the individual property 1290 00:59:18,349 --> 00:59:19,800 owner can't remove 1291 00:59:19,800 --> 00:59:26,750 those. Am I correct in my understanding of that? There are 1292 00:59:26,750 --> 00:59:27,679 provisions on 1293 00:59:27,679 --> 00:59:32,480 on nine oh I'm sorry on 17 for the removal of trees within 1294 00:59:32,480 --> 00:59:33,679 upland habitat 1295 00:59:33,679 --> 00:59:39,400 for this for this health of the trees okay but beyond any 1296 00:59:39,400 --> 00:59:41,559 clearing that is 1297 00:59:41,559 --> 00:59:45,380 advisable to preserve the health of the trees and habitat 1298 00:59:45,380 --> 00:59:47,519 then yes that would be 1299 00:59:47,519 --> 00:59:50,949 they would have to go through some sort of alternative ASA 1300 00:59:50,949 --> 00:59:53,199 plan. Correct. Sure. 1301 00:59:53,199 --> 00:59:57,760 You wanna call legal for clarification. I just want the 1302 00:59:57,760 --> 00:59:59,360 Commission to 1303 00:59:59,360 --> 01:00:04,079 understand and and I'm sure you guys are but just for just 1304 01:00:04,079 --> 01:00:05,400 reminding the 1305 01:00:05,400 --> 01:00:10,480 Commission again is you have the ESSA ordinance and then 1306 01:00:10,480 --> 01:00:11,199 you have the 1307 01:00:11,199 --> 01:00:15,460 tree code ordinance and so what I think there was reminding 1308 01:00:15,460 --> 01:00:16,400 us are these 1309 01:00:16,400 --> 01:00:21,039 regulations for ESSAs and I think a lot of the comments 1310 01:00:21,039 --> 01:00:23,599 will be addressed today 1311 01:00:23,599 --> 01:00:28,159 will be addressed under the tree code revisions but my 1312 01:00:28,159 --> 01:00:29,519 question maybe to Deborah 1313 01:00:29,519 --> 01:00:33,510 is these requirements mirror those requirements in the tree 1314 01:00:33,510 --> 01:00:34,199 code is that 1315 01:00:34,199 --> 01:00:38,760 correct? The proposed tree code so what we are we have been 1316 01:00:38,760 --> 01:00:39,840 talking about be 1317 01:00:39,840 --> 01:00:43,380 consistent making the regulation consistent throughout last 1318 01:00:43,380 --> 01:00:44,360 time that I 1319 01:00:44,360 --> 01:00:48,179 checked the tree code that was the 30% let's put that 1320 01:00:48,179 --> 01:00:51,079 caveat out there and what 1321 01:00:51,079 --> 01:00:56,190 we are trying to do is just to be consistent throughout and 1322 01:00:56,190 --> 01:00:57,239 to provide 1323 01:00:57,239 --> 01:01:01,880 opportunities for developers to meet multiple requirements 1324 01:01:01,880 --> 01:01:03,000 at once and not 1325 01:01:03,000 --> 01:01:09,480 double tag the developers with multiple preservations of 1326 01:01:09,480 --> 01:01:11,280 things so that's what 1327 01:01:11,280 --> 01:01:17,159 staff was trying to attain when we crafted the language. So 1328 01:01:17,159 --> 01:01:17,840 just one more 1329 01:01:17,840 --> 01:01:22,679 time that these revisions would make the ESSA ordinance 1330 01:01:22,679 --> 01:01:24,019 consistent with a tree 1331 01:01:24,019 --> 01:01:28,320 ordinance. Correct. I'm gonna backtrack because we're 1332 01:01:28,320 --> 01:01:29,119 getting kind of down in the 1333 01:01:29,119 --> 01:01:33,909 weeds and I want to come back to the substantive changes 1334 01:01:33,909 --> 01:01:35,519 that we're making 1335 01:01:35,519 --> 01:01:38,190 and I just want to make sure I'm correct on what we 1336 01:01:38,190 --> 01:01:39,800 currently have and what we're 1337 01:01:39,800 --> 01:01:44,360 proposing to do. Currently my understanding on residential 1338 01:01:44,360 --> 01:01:44,840 development 1339 01:01:44,840 --> 01:01:49,940 and upland habitat if you have the 10 acre site you have to 1340 01:01:49,940 --> 01:01:52,079 preserve 50% of it 1341 01:01:52,079 --> 01:01:55,900 but you also then have the option if you need to to make 1342 01:01:55,900 --> 01:01:57,960 your project work design 1343 01:01:57,960 --> 01:02:01,269 whatever that is you have the opportunity to mitigate up to 1344 01:02:01,269 --> 01:02:03,000 50% or 1345 01:02:03,000 --> 01:02:07,050 half of that five acres is that correct you end up 1346 01:02:07,050 --> 01:02:09,519 preserving 25% and 1347 01:02:09,519 --> 01:02:13,309 mitigating paying into the tree fund or planting trees that 1348 01:02:13,309 --> 01:02:14,320 25% you need to 1349 01:02:14,320 --> 01:02:18,960 remove yeah you are talking about the tree code you are 1350 01:02:18,960 --> 01:02:20,440 preserving the 1351 01:02:20,440 --> 01:02:25,960 individual trees okay now the habitat now the understory 1352 01:02:25,960 --> 01:02:27,719 okay so if you were 1353 01:02:27,719 --> 01:02:33,920 to have 10 acres on the upland habitat okay let's play this 1354 01:02:33,920 --> 01:02:34,559 now that is not 1355 01:02:34,559 --> 01:02:38,320 upland okay you can go in you preserve your percentage your 1356 01:02:38,320 --> 01:02:39,480 minimum percentage 1357 01:02:39,480 --> 01:02:43,280 and you can go in and you can clear the understory okay 1358 01:02:43,280 --> 01:02:44,300 because the tree code 1359 01:02:44,300 --> 01:02:48,860 what is the preservation of it is the tree canopy okay let 1360 01:02:48,860 --> 01:02:51,079 's add a wrinkle to 1361 01:02:51,079 --> 01:02:55,639 it and let's call that 10 acres in upland habitat okay the 1362 01:02:55,639 --> 01:02:57,320 50% preservation 1363 01:02:57,320 --> 01:03:02,510 is not only the trees the canopy itself but also the under 1364 01:03:02,510 --> 01:03:04,480 story that comes with 1365 01:03:04,480 --> 01:03:09,889 it that's the major difference between tree code and upland 1366 01:03:09,889 --> 01:03:12,480 habitat and the 1367 01:03:12,480 --> 01:03:15,630 other thing is a tree code allows you to further reduce 1368 01:03:15,630 --> 01:03:17,079 your percentage by 1369 01:03:17,079 --> 01:03:22,000 paying into the tree fund the ESA the only mechanism that 1370 01:03:22,000 --> 01:03:23,239 will allow you to 1371 01:03:23,239 --> 01:03:26,969 reduce your preservation would be going through an 1372 01:03:26,969 --> 01:03:29,639 alternative ESA plan okay so 1373 01:03:29,639 --> 01:03:34,690 back to my my question and forgive me whether I'm back and 1374 01:03:34,690 --> 01:03:35,760 forth between the 1375 01:03:35,760 --> 01:03:39,619 tree code or the upland habitat if you've got upland 1376 01:03:39,619 --> 01:03:41,480 habitat 10 acres on 1377 01:03:41,480 --> 01:03:46,360 your parcel contiguous currently you can take up to half of 1378 01:03:46,360 --> 01:03:46,880 it out in a 1379 01:03:46,880 --> 01:03:50,630 residential use and then if you need to take out more than 1380 01:03:50,630 --> 01:03:51,719 that you can take 1381 01:03:51,719 --> 01:03:55,769 another half of that but you have to mitigate it and then 1382 01:03:55,769 --> 01:03:57,519 if I can finish my 1383 01:03:57,519 --> 01:04:01,969 point under this you can just go to the 50% now you can't 1384 01:04:01,969 --> 01:04:02,960 mitigate the other 1385 01:04:02,960 --> 01:04:08,690 portion if you needed to I think the current language doesn 1386 01:04:08,690 --> 01:04:10,280 't tell you that 1387 01:04:10,280 --> 01:04:16,320 you cannot reduce below the 50% it tells you that you will 1388 01:04:16,320 --> 01:04:17,360 have to do that 1389 01:04:17,360 --> 01:04:21,920 through a alternative ESA mechanism let's say that you have 1390 01:04:21,920 --> 01:04:23,039 you preserve your 1391 01:04:23,039 --> 01:04:27,889 50 but you want to actually reduce it to 10% get rid of the 1392 01:04:27,889 --> 01:04:29,079 40% that you are 1393 01:04:29,079 --> 01:04:32,829 required to do if you go through there through the 1394 01:04:32,829 --> 01:04:34,519 alternative ESA plan and 1395 01:04:34,519 --> 01:04:39,440 then you get a final approval from City Council you are 1396 01:04:39,440 --> 01:04:41,559 entitled to clear that 1397 01:04:41,559 --> 01:04:46,940 40% because you have vetted that request through planning 1398 01:04:46,940 --> 01:04:47,800 and sorting Commission 1399 01:04:47,800 --> 01:04:54,489 and City Council so there's no cap on on how much encro 1400 01:04:54,489 --> 01:04:56,519 achment you can have as 1401 01:04:56,519 --> 01:05:01,079 long as if you go below the 50% you do it through an 1402 01:05:01,079 --> 01:05:04,440 alternative ESA plan 1403 01:05:04,760 --> 01:05:09,320 currently or with this correct you can do it currently or 1404 01:05:09,320 --> 01:05:11,039 with this mechanism 1405 01:05:11,039 --> 01:05:14,550 correct so we are not changing we are not changing that the 1406 01:05:14,550 --> 01:05:15,599 only thing that 1407 01:05:15,599 --> 01:05:23,000 we are changing is we are adding non-residential 1408 01:05:23,000 --> 01:05:26,639 development be subject 1409 01:05:26,639 --> 01:05:29,860 to preservation of Oakland habitat that's the only process 1410 01:05:29,860 --> 01:05:30,480 that we are 1411 01:05:30,480 --> 01:05:35,159 changing okay well I'm gonna call on Commissioner Sullivan 1412 01:05:35,159 --> 01:05:36,000 and he's being 1413 01:05:36,000 --> 01:05:41,599 patient I have this similar concern with the direction that 1414 01:05:41,599 --> 01:05:42,400 this is going the 1415 01:05:42,400 --> 01:05:47,460 same concern that we've talked about with the tree cone the 1416 01:05:47,460 --> 01:05:49,159 concern I have is 1417 01:05:49,159 --> 01:05:52,309 we all throw the term developer out but that's that guy 1418 01:05:52,309 --> 01:05:53,719 over here that's going 1419 01:05:53,719 --> 01:05:57,110 to take care of that and really it's the individual 1420 01:05:57,110 --> 01:05:58,639 property owners that own 1421 01:05:58,639 --> 01:06:02,150 these properties that are the ones that bear the burden of 1422 01:06:02,150 --> 01:06:03,400 these code changes 1423 01:06:03,400 --> 01:06:07,219 that we make and we are making city policy for the good of 1424 01:06:07,219 --> 01:06:08,320 the public and 1425 01:06:08,320 --> 01:06:12,179 private individuals are bearing the burden of the cost of 1426 01:06:12,179 --> 01:06:14,679 these and that's 1427 01:06:14,679 --> 01:06:17,250 just the fact of the way that works and so people can say 1428 01:06:17,250 --> 01:06:18,079 it's a developer 1429 01:06:18,079 --> 01:06:20,840 that's not how that really works the developer says it's 1430 01:06:20,840 --> 01:06:21,880 got 10 acres of 1431 01:06:21,880 --> 01:06:25,309 upland habitat on it that they can't do anything with or I 1432 01:06:25,309 --> 01:06:27,440 can only use half not 1433 01:06:27,440 --> 01:06:31,159 going to offer to pay for that portion your property is now 1434 01:06:31,159 --> 01:06:32,239 worth X because 1435 01:06:32,239 --> 01:06:38,239 that property is not usable it's for the good of the public 1436 01:06:38,239 --> 01:06:39,920 the person that owns 1437 01:06:39,920 --> 01:06:42,940 that property that has a designation on there suffers a 1438 01:06:42,940 --> 01:06:44,360 financial loss because 1439 01:06:44,360 --> 01:06:47,500 it has a designation that's put on their property for the 1440 01:06:47,500 --> 01:06:48,840 good of the public that 1441 01:06:48,840 --> 01:06:51,860 they're going to bear privately and I have a concern about 1442 01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,639 that I don't think 1443 01:06:52,639 --> 01:06:56,929 it's fair to people to ask them for the good of the public 1444 01:06:56,929 --> 01:06:58,719 and the community and 1445 01:06:58,719 --> 01:07:01,320 all of these things and the benefits and the reasons why we 1446 01:07:01,320 --> 01:07:02,320 're preserving them 1447 01:07:02,320 --> 01:07:06,900 for individual people to bear those burdens and cost I don 1448 01:07:06,900 --> 01:07:08,199 't know what the 1449 01:07:08,199 --> 01:07:12,809 right mechanism is to preserve these things and to be fair 1450 01:07:12,809 --> 01:07:14,480 to private property 1451 01:07:14,480 --> 01:07:17,909 owners and the city of Denton benefits I don't know how to 1452 01:07:17,909 --> 01:07:19,119 solve that problem I 1453 01:07:19,119 --> 01:07:22,889 get to serve for a few hours every two weeks and a few 1454 01:07:22,889 --> 01:07:24,599 hours before to try to 1455 01:07:24,599 --> 01:07:27,420 read and prepare all you know for a meeting and have a 1456 01:07:27,420 --> 01:07:28,599 hopefully a logical 1457 01:07:28,599 --> 01:07:32,329 discussion and bring up some points and then look to city 1458 01:07:32,329 --> 01:07:33,800 staff with the 13 1459 01:07:33,800 --> 01:07:36,239 months of however long y'all have worked on it to go 1460 01:07:36,239 --> 01:07:37,440 through all of those 1461 01:07:37,440 --> 01:07:41,400 discussions to say how do we equitably solve this problem 1462 01:07:41,400 --> 01:07:43,039 and to go a step 1463 01:07:43,039 --> 01:07:47,599 further there's no consideration to what the values are so 1464 01:07:47,599 --> 01:07:48,679 if you have a 1465 01:07:48,679 --> 01:07:54,530 commercial corner maybe it's worth $30 a square foot I don 1466 01:07:54,530 --> 01:07:56,760 't know a million to 1467 01:07:56,760 --> 01:08:00,909 maybe there's 10 acres it's on a corner just like this that 1468 01:08:00,909 --> 01:08:01,880 's the same value 1469 01:08:01,880 --> 01:08:05,900 there's no consideration to how much money does our city 1470 01:08:05,900 --> 01:08:08,199 lose in potential 1471 01:08:08,199 --> 01:08:11,630 property taxes and all the revenues that come off of that 1472 01:08:11,630 --> 01:08:13,239 site versus if it's in 1473 01:08:13,239 --> 01:08:16,279 the very back corner and it's worth a dollar a square foot 1474 01:08:16,279 --> 01:08:17,159 there's no 1475 01:08:17,159 --> 01:08:21,960 mechanism for there to be flexibility to say well we have a 1476 01:08:21,960 --> 01:08:23,359 track right here in 1477 01:08:23,359 --> 01:08:27,109 our city that our city could have a million dollars in 1478 01:08:27,109 --> 01:08:28,840 property taxes off of 1479 01:08:28,840 --> 01:08:32,579 but the one back here in the back that we get twenty twenty 1480 01:08:32,579 --> 01:08:33,279 thousand dollars 1481 01:08:33,279 --> 01:08:37,260 off of there's no consideration of what does this really 1482 01:08:37,260 --> 01:08:38,239 cost us how do we 1483 01:08:38,239 --> 01:08:41,119 figure out well gosh the property owners should be able to 1484 01:08:41,119 --> 01:08:42,560 be able to make a 1485 01:08:42,560 --> 01:08:46,239 decision and say I want to pay into the tree fund or I want 1486 01:08:46,239 --> 01:08:47,640 to go buy a site and 1487 01:08:47,640 --> 01:08:52,720 give you a we don't call it a tree bank or an upland cavity 1488 01:08:52,720 --> 01:08:54,920 habitat bank and I 1489 01:08:54,920 --> 01:08:57,489 can buy that piece of property for a much different price 1490 01:08:57,489 --> 01:08:58,239 and preserve that 1491 01:08:58,239 --> 01:09:01,529 and here's a prime piece of property those are the concerns 1492 01:09:01,529 --> 01:09:02,479 that I have when 1493 01:09:02,479 --> 01:09:05,760 we bring these things up we don't spend any time on this 1494 01:09:05,760 --> 01:09:06,680 commission talking 1495 01:09:06,680 --> 01:09:09,850 about those we talk about go through this right quick and 1496 01:09:09,850 --> 01:09:10,880 put it into place 1497 01:09:10,880 --> 01:09:13,949 and there's not a conversation of what does this really 1498 01:09:13,949 --> 01:09:15,159 mean when we put this 1499 01:09:15,159 --> 01:09:18,159 in place how does it affect our city how does it affect 1500 01:09:18,159 --> 01:09:19,199 individual property 1501 01:09:19,199 --> 01:09:24,500 owners and those are the concerns that I have that I'd like 1502 01:09:24,500 --> 01:09:26,359 to have some further 1503 01:09:26,359 --> 01:09:31,149 discussion about how we address those things and what's 1504 01:09:31,149 --> 01:09:32,520 what's reasonable and 1505 01:09:32,520 --> 01:09:36,130 fair to individual property owners and what's in the best 1506 01:09:36,130 --> 01:09:37,000 interest of the city 1507 01:09:37,000 --> 01:09:42,600 and how do those two things equitably get put into place 1508 01:09:42,600 --> 01:09:44,039 commissioner Sullivan 1509 01:09:44,039 --> 01:09:48,600 and then I'll tell you commissioner Sanchez this is if I 1510 01:09:48,600 --> 01:09:49,119 understand this 1511 01:09:49,119 --> 01:09:54,800 this is for 10 acres or more is that the intent of this how 1512 01:09:54,800 --> 01:09:57,079 many how many 1513 01:09:57,079 --> 01:10:02,399 parcels of land within the city of Denton are undeveloped 1514 01:10:02,399 --> 01:10:04,279 that comprise 10 1515 01:10:04,279 --> 01:10:07,279 acres or more 1516 01:10:34,279 --> 01:10:40,260 and so are we making much to do about nothing I mean is 1517 01:10:40,260 --> 01:10:42,159 that if we're talking 1518 01:10:42,159 --> 01:10:47,020 about you know 10 acres you know is the the big you know 1519 01:10:47,020 --> 01:10:48,760 the cutoff point you 1520 01:10:48,760 --> 01:10:51,550 know anything over 10 acres or more I believe you just 1521 01:10:51,550 --> 01:10:52,079 nailed it I think 1522 01:10:52,079 --> 01:10:54,659 we're beating a horse here that doesn't need to be beat 1523 01:10:54,659 --> 01:10:55,640 because there's not a 1524 01:10:55,640 --> 01:10:58,210 lot left in the city now when you get to the tree code that 1525 01:10:58,210 --> 01:10:59,119 's a different issue 1526 01:10:59,119 --> 01:11:01,460 okay because the tree code is going to be concerned with 1527 01:11:01,460 --> 01:11:02,520 individual trees we're 1528 01:11:02,520 --> 01:11:06,010 talking about contiguous stand of trees 10 acres that are 1529 01:11:06,010 --> 01:11:07,359 together there's very 1530 01:11:07,359 --> 01:11:10,430 few left on there and there is a mechanism it's called an 1531 01:11:10,430 --> 01:11:11,239 alternative 1532 01:11:11,239 --> 01:11:14,920 visa you can put in it for an alternative environmental and 1533 01:11:14,920 --> 01:11:15,399 it'll go 1534 01:11:15,399 --> 01:11:18,010 through the process just like through a zoning change 1535 01:11:18,010 --> 01:11:19,239 whereas if you want to go 1536 01:11:19,239 --> 01:11:22,989 in there develop it we had a project that came in today it 1537 01:11:22,989 --> 01:11:24,600 had every ESA that 1538 01:11:24,600 --> 01:11:27,359 the city has it on the piece property we did not tell that 1539 01:11:27,359 --> 01:11:28,399 developer he couldn't 1540 01:11:28,399 --> 01:11:31,090 do it he's just got extra hurdles he's got a run through to 1541 01:11:31,090 --> 01:11:31,960 make his project 1542 01:11:31,960 --> 01:11:36,079 happen this is not going to stop a developer okay it may 1543 01:11:36,079 --> 01:11:37,039 cause him part to 1544 01:11:37,039 --> 01:11:40,500 pause for a little bit and rethink his plan but it's not 1545 01:11:40,500 --> 01:11:41,520 going to stop him I'd 1546 01:11:41,520 --> 01:11:45,970 like to stop right there and if you let me just kind of 1547 01:11:45,970 --> 01:11:48,359 thought those parcels 1548 01:11:48,359 --> 01:11:53,020 of land how is all this going to be conveyed to them as to 1549 01:11:53,020 --> 01:11:54,439 what they're now 1550 01:11:54,439 --> 01:11:57,409 what the property has been designated how it's going to 1551 01:11:57,409 --> 01:11:58,520 affect them what's 1552 01:11:58,520 --> 01:12:02,119 going to happen who's going to talk to these people about 1553 01:12:02,119 --> 01:12:03,319 that or is all you're 1554 01:12:03,319 --> 01:12:08,359 just gonna kind of get it done and sneak away in the middle 1555 01:12:08,359 --> 01:12:09,920 of the night the 1556 01:12:09,920 --> 01:12:13,560 designation of upland habitat we are not changing okay 1557 01:12:13,560 --> 01:12:14,920 whatever is showing on the 1558 01:12:14,920 --> 01:12:18,119 map as upland habitat have been shown on the map since 2002 1559 01:12:18,119 --> 01:12:19,399 when the ESA map was 1560 01:12:19,399 --> 01:12:23,470 created so this is not a new information why would it be 1561 01:12:23,470 --> 01:12:26,079 new information if this 1562 01:12:26,079 --> 01:12:31,000 changes were to be approved okay it is that if they were 1563 01:12:31,000 --> 01:12:32,399 marketing their site 1564 01:12:32,399 --> 01:12:36,300 for commercial development they may have that and I may 1565 01:12:36,300 --> 01:12:37,760 have a potential solution 1566 01:12:37,760 --> 01:12:41,199 for the mechanism that we can discuss when we talk about 1567 01:12:41,199 --> 01:12:42,720 the alternative ESA 1568 01:12:42,720 --> 01:12:48,869 plan let me allow me to entertain that that idea so right 1569 01:12:48,869 --> 01:12:52,560 now we are not putting 1570 01:12:52,560 --> 01:12:56,890 or designated new areas of upland habitat we are not what 1571 01:12:56,890 --> 01:12:58,039 we are doing is 1572 01:12:58,039 --> 01:13:03,149 that if those areas were to be developed for non-resident 1573 01:13:03,149 --> 01:13:05,800 ial purposes then they 1574 01:13:05,800 --> 01:13:09,819 will be subject to 30% preservation of but the designation 1575 01:13:09,819 --> 01:13:10,359 we are not 1576 01:13:10,359 --> 01:13:15,920 designated new upland habitats on people's property is not 1577 01:13:15,920 --> 01:13:17,359 the other issue 1578 01:13:17,359 --> 01:13:22,750 that is another wrinkle to it is the tempers the 10 acre 1579 01:13:22,750 --> 01:13:24,920 tree stand could be 1580 01:13:24,920 --> 01:13:30,960 spread among multiple parcels okay so for for us to do an 1581 01:13:30,960 --> 01:13:32,439 analysis to say 1582 01:13:32,439 --> 01:13:37,869 which parcels include at least 10 acres of open habitat on 1583 01:13:37,869 --> 01:13:40,279 it we will be further 1584 01:13:40,279 --> 01:13:43,520 reducing that because that's not very common chances are 1585 01:13:43,520 --> 01:13:44,920 those are tree stand 1586 01:13:44,920 --> 01:13:49,720 that they don't they don't stop a property property lines 1587 01:13:49,720 --> 01:13:50,359 they they can 1588 01:13:50,359 --> 01:13:54,550 they continue and spread out among so the analysis is a 1589 01:13:54,550 --> 01:13:56,520 little bit challenging 1590 01:13:56,520 --> 01:14:01,079 in that regard because we are not talking about three ten 1591 01:14:01,079 --> 01:14:02,319 acres on one 1592 01:14:02,319 --> 01:14:08,170 single parcel because then we will be further reducing the 1593 01:14:08,170 --> 01:14:09,680 amount of areas 1594 01:14:09,680 --> 01:14:14,239 that have good habitat good upland habitat that should be 1595 01:14:14,239 --> 01:14:15,319 preserved just 1596 01:14:15,319 --> 01:14:22,199 because we are limited to one ownership 10 acres come back 1597 01:14:22,199 --> 01:14:23,119 I know there's a 1598 01:14:23,119 --> 01:14:25,909 number of parcels that have more than that I've looked at 1599 01:14:25,909 --> 01:14:27,100 them familiar with 1600 01:14:27,100 --> 01:14:29,960 it and I guess the other point I want to bring up and kind 1601 01:14:29,960 --> 01:14:31,279 of respond to Bob is 1602 01:14:31,279 --> 01:14:34,369 that what you what you do when you do an alternative visa 1603 01:14:34,369 --> 01:14:35,800 plan it becomes a 1604 01:14:35,800 --> 01:14:38,979 political issue then it comes before this Commission it 1605 01:14:38,979 --> 01:14:40,159 becomes before City 1606 01:14:40,159 --> 01:14:43,170 Council and I've sat on this Council or Commission before 1607 01:14:43,170 --> 01:14:44,319 and those things are 1608 01:14:44,319 --> 01:14:46,899 voted down we're not going to allow an alternative visa for 1609 01:14:46,899 --> 01:14:47,760 this particular 1610 01:14:47,760 --> 01:14:51,579 site in a discussion so there's all kinds of great ways to 1611 01:14:51,579 --> 01:14:52,119 talk about will 1612 01:14:52,119 --> 01:14:56,449 you have a process well if it works that's great but I've 1613 01:14:56,449 --> 01:14:57,359 seen on countless 1614 01:14:57,359 --> 01:15:00,670 occasions where it comes before us and so we want to do an 1615 01:15:00,670 --> 01:15:02,720 alternative no we're 1616 01:15:02,720 --> 01:15:06,680 not gonna allow you to go do that that property there's not 1617 01:15:06,680 --> 01:15:07,640 a mechanism there 1618 01:15:07,640 --> 01:15:10,659 that mechanism although it sounds like it's an option may 1619 01:15:10,659 --> 01:15:11,800 not work and it 1620 01:15:11,800 --> 01:15:14,770 doesn't provide any relief and that's the concern I have 1621 01:15:14,770 --> 01:15:15,800 when we talk about 1622 01:15:15,800 --> 01:15:18,380 changing these things and say well you can go through that 1623 01:15:18,380 --> 01:15:19,359 process well when it 1624 01:15:19,359 --> 01:15:24,279 comes back no well okay you're gonna preserve 30% or 50% 1625 01:15:24,279 --> 01:15:25,720 into question we're 1626 01:15:25,720 --> 01:15:31,380 not going to approve that so those are the concerns that I 1627 01:15:31,380 --> 01:15:33,159 have in in moving 1628 01:15:33,159 --> 01:15:36,840 these forward I want you to get through your presentation 1629 01:15:36,840 --> 01:15:38,560 we're out of time and 1630 01:15:38,560 --> 01:15:41,520 one of the other things that I have a concern and what's 1631 01:15:41,520 --> 01:15:42,600 going to get to the 1632 01:15:42,600 --> 01:15:47,609 very end is the application when you go back at 35-17-2 it 1633 01:15:47,609 --> 01:15:48,699 says within the 1634 01:15:48,699 --> 01:15:52,960 corporate limits of the city but then further on when you 1635 01:15:52,960 --> 01:15:55,319 read through this 1636 01:15:55,319 --> 01:16:02,090 it says the official maps and 35-17-6 it says the official 1637 01:16:02,090 --> 01:16:03,319 map that identifies 1638 01:16:03,319 --> 01:16:10,340 areas designated as ESA I don't know where that map is but 1639 01:16:10,340 --> 01:16:11,840 when it me for my 1640 01:16:11,840 --> 01:16:15,060 purview and preparing for the meeting I just went to the 1641 01:16:15,060 --> 01:16:16,279 city website pull up 1642 01:16:16,279 --> 01:16:20,350 the interactive map and turn on ESA's and not only is it in 1643 01:16:20,350 --> 01:16:21,560 the city a limit 1644 01:16:21,560 --> 01:16:26,199 city limits of Denton it's all out in the ETJ so my 1645 01:16:26,199 --> 01:16:28,800 question is when we do 1646 01:16:28,800 --> 01:16:33,399 this and it says see limits limits but then it's on the map 1647 01:16:33,399 --> 01:16:34,039 does this also 1648 01:16:34,039 --> 01:16:39,760 apply out in the ETJ also because it shows on our map the 1649 01:16:39,760 --> 01:16:42,220 only ESA that we 1650 01:16:42,220 --> 01:16:45,970 have jurisdiction outside the ETJ and that is granted by 1651 01:16:45,970 --> 01:16:47,199 the ETJ or city 1652 01:16:47,199 --> 01:16:52,159 limits outside the city limits in the ETJ okay so in the ET 1653 01:16:52,159 --> 01:16:54,119 J okay so the only type 1654 01:16:54,119 --> 01:16:57,039 of ESA that the city have jurisdiction for the protection 1655 01:16:57,039 --> 01:16:58,079 and that protection 1656 01:16:58,079 --> 01:17:00,979 is granted to the city by the Texas Local Government Code 1657 01:17:00,979 --> 01:17:01,960 is for floodplain 1658 01:17:01,960 --> 01:17:07,270 ESAS the riparian buffer the water related and the upland 1659 01:17:07,270 --> 01:17:08,640 habitat outside 1660 01:17:08,640 --> 01:17:14,489 the city limits we don't have a make it out if they were to 1661 01:17:14,489 --> 01:17:16,159 be encroached clear 1662 01:17:16,159 --> 01:17:21,649 we cannot protect those the only ESA that we have some say 1663 01:17:21,649 --> 01:17:23,720 to it is for 1664 01:17:23,720 --> 01:17:27,149 floodplain and the reason why is a protect as a protection 1665 01:17:27,149 --> 01:17:27,720 of water 1666 01:17:27,720 --> 01:17:31,470 resources and that is granted by the state of Texas to the 1667 01:17:31,470 --> 01:17:33,000 cities so to 1668 01:17:33,000 --> 01:17:35,649 answer the question I assess for clarification not only 1669 01:17:35,649 --> 01:17:36,760 does this apply in 1670 01:17:36,760 --> 01:17:40,579 the city limits of Denton it also is going to apply in the 1671 01:17:40,579 --> 01:17:41,920 ETJ for those 1672 01:17:41,920 --> 01:17:49,039 particular items correct and that is outlined in I'm sorry 1673 01:17:49,039 --> 01:17:53,039 17.2 B floodplain 1674 01:17:53,039 --> 01:17:55,869 standard of this sub chapter shall apply to all land and 1675 01:17:55,869 --> 01:17:57,359 all development with the 1676 01:17:57,359 --> 01:18:00,560 extra territorial jurisdiction of the city that's the only 1677 01:18:00,560 --> 01:18:01,680 one that we would 1678 01:18:01,680 --> 01:18:05,760 have a say I'll have some more questions about that I know 1679 01:18:05,760 --> 01:18:07,119 we're out of time and 1680 01:18:07,119 --> 01:18:11,300 everybody probably wants to get a quick bite I'm gonna call 1681 01:18:11,300 --> 01:18:13,119 a recess at 620 and 1682 01:18:13,119 --> 01:18:16,069 let's get something to eat and then we'll start again at 6 1683 01:18:16,069 --> 01:18:17,079 30 in council 1684 01:18:17,079 --> 01:18:21,640 chambers and I guess we'll have to continue this at our 1685 01:18:21,640 --> 01:18:22,680 next meeting 1686 01:18:37,680 --> 01:18:39,159 are we voting on this tonight supposed to be it's on our 1687 01:18:39,159 --> 01:18:45,119 agenda as a vote for 1688 01:18:45,119 --> 01:18:50,479 City Council as is okay so based 1689 01:19:07,119 --> 01:19:09,119 on the 1690 01:19:24,960 --> 01:19:26,329 good evening and welcome to the city of Denton planning and 1691 01:19:26,329 --> 01:19:29,039 zoning Commission 1692 01:19:29,039 --> 01:19:34,189 meeting for February 7th 2018 this meeting has been duly 1693 01:19:34,189 --> 01:19:35,199 posted and we do 1694 01:19:35,199 --> 01:19:40,250 have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 643 I 1695 01:19:40,250 --> 01:19:41,000 'm sorry we ran a 1696 01:19:41,000 --> 01:19:43,819 little long and work session our first order of business 1697 01:19:43,819 --> 01:19:44,840 will be to stand and 1698 01:19:44,840 --> 01:19:48,720 give the pledge the US and the Texas flags 1699 01:20:05,199 --> 01:20:12,279 Texas flag I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state under 1700 01:20:12,279 --> 01:20:13,640 God one 1701 01:20:24,520 --> 01:20:26,930 our next item on our agenda will be to consider approval of 1702 01:20:26,930 --> 01:20:29,800 our minutes 1703 01:20:29,800 --> 01:20:34,359 Commissioner Roselle I move to approve the minutes from 1704 01:20:34,359 --> 01:20:35,840 January 24th okay 1705 01:20:35,840 --> 01:20:38,840 thank you chair I second we have a first and a second for 1706 01:20:38,840 --> 01:20:40,239 approval any further 1707 01:20:40,239 --> 01:20:46,760 discussion seeing none call for a vote on the board 1708 01:20:51,800 --> 01:21:00,050 motion carries six to zero will take us to our consent 1709 01:21:00,050 --> 01:21:01,239 agenda 1710 01:21:02,960 --> 01:21:08,560 Commissioner Beck I move we approve consent agenda okay 1711 01:21:08,880 --> 01:21:12,899 Commissioner Rizel second okay we have a first and a second 1712 01:21:12,899 --> 01:21:14,720 for approval any 1713 01:21:14,720 --> 01:21:21,680 further discussion seeing none will call for a vote on the 1714 01:21:21,680 --> 01:21:28,640 board and we'll move 1715 01:21:28,640 --> 01:21:32,289 us to our public hearing section this evening our first 1716 01:21:32,289 --> 01:21:34,520 item will be item a 1717 01:21:34,520 --> 01:21:40,069 and I will open the public hearing to Z 17 - 0 0 2 7 a and 1718 01:21:40,069 --> 01:21:41,279 I will call on 1719 01:21:41,279 --> 01:21:52,810 Shandrin for presentation good evening commissioners Shand 1720 01:21:52,810 --> 01:21:53,640 rin Jarvis with 1721 01:21:53,640 --> 01:21:59,489 development services the next item is Z 1727 is a rezoning 1722 01:21:59,489 --> 01:22:00,479 request for property 1723 01:22:00,479 --> 01:22:05,779 located along University Boulevard the request is to resign 1724 01:22:05,779 --> 01:22:06,560 approximately two 1725 01:22:06,560 --> 01:22:10,840 acres from a neighborhood residential mixed use 12 district 1726 01:22:10,840 --> 01:22:11,840 to a community 1727 01:22:11,840 --> 01:22:15,460 mixed use general district the property is located here 1728 01:22:15,460 --> 01:22:17,560 along West University 1729 01:22:17,560 --> 01:22:22,350 razor elementary is here on this tract and then just to 1730 01:22:22,350 --> 01:22:23,560 give you some 1731 01:22:23,560 --> 01:22:27,489 reference Malone Street is here and then Fulton Street is 1732 01:22:27,489 --> 01:22:29,720 here the property is 1733 01:22:29,720 --> 01:22:35,750 currently undeveloped and it's not platted again when we 1734 01:22:35,750 --> 01:22:37,399 look at rezoning 1735 01:22:37,399 --> 01:22:41,850 requests we typically consider two criteria does it meet 1736 01:22:41,850 --> 01:22:42,680 the future land 1737 01:22:42,680 --> 01:22:47,399 use plan and does it facilitate the provision of public 1738 01:22:47,399 --> 01:22:50,039 infrastructure when 1739 01:22:50,039 --> 01:22:55,090 we looked at the future land use plan we noticed that this 1740 01:22:55,090 --> 01:22:56,600 request does is 1741 01:22:56,600 --> 01:23:00,539 consistent with the future land use plan for this area it's 1742 01:23:00,539 --> 01:23:01,800 designated for 1743 01:23:01,800 --> 01:23:05,399 commercial use which is intended to promote regional 1744 01:23:05,399 --> 01:23:06,800 community and neighbor 1745 01:23:06,800 --> 01:23:11,359 neighborhood shopping centers CMG which is what the 1746 01:23:11,359 --> 01:23:12,840 applicant is requesting 1747 01:23:12,840 --> 01:23:16,319 would be a logical extension of the existing CMG districts 1748 01:23:16,319 --> 01:23:17,640 that are located 1749 01:23:17,640 --> 01:23:22,510 along the north side of University and also to the east of 1750 01:23:22,510 --> 01:23:24,600 the property and it 1751 01:23:24,600 --> 01:23:31,149 would promote a cohesive development pattern and then just 1752 01:23:31,149 --> 01:23:32,960 to take another 1753 01:23:32,960 --> 01:23:37,520 look at the existing zoning districts again you see the CMG 1754 01:23:37,520 --> 01:23:38,800 along the north 1755 01:23:38,800 --> 01:23:43,920 side of University on the south there's some inner in our 1756 01:23:43,920 --> 01:23:45,239 three neighborhood 1757 01:23:45,239 --> 01:23:50,539 residential three on the south this area and I intended to 1758 01:23:50,539 --> 01:23:52,479 update the map this is 1759 01:23:52,479 --> 01:23:58,760 primarily flat plane and so it's not really developable 1760 01:23:58,760 --> 01:23:59,760 with developable at 1761 01:23:59,760 --> 01:24:04,800 this point there's some NRMU 12 here on the east and this 1762 01:24:04,800 --> 01:24:06,000 is mostly developed 1763 01:24:06,000 --> 01:24:10,829 with offices so basically the area the this area is 1764 01:24:10,829 --> 01:24:14,319 primarily commercial in in 1765 01:24:14,319 --> 01:24:17,930 use and the applicant is actually requesting this zoning 1766 01:24:17,930 --> 01:24:18,920 change in order 1767 01:24:18,920 --> 01:24:23,880 to facilitate retail and restaurant development on the site 1768 01:24:23,880 --> 01:24:25,760 when we look at 1769 01:24:25,760 --> 01:24:29,270 the available public infrastructure there's water and 1770 01:24:29,270 --> 01:24:30,840 wastewater utility in 1771 01:24:30,840 --> 01:24:36,989 the right away of West University and obviously if when 1772 01:24:36,989 --> 01:24:38,960 this does develop the 1773 01:24:38,960 --> 01:24:42,130 property would need to do some extensions into the site but 1774 01:24:42,130 --> 01:24:42,560 that is 1775 01:24:42,560 --> 01:24:48,229 available as far as access West University is currently a 1776 01:24:48,229 --> 01:24:49,119 six lane 1777 01:24:49,119 --> 01:24:52,869 divided in the mobility plan calls for a six lane divided 1778 01:24:52,869 --> 01:24:54,239 with bike lanes and 1779 01:24:54,239 --> 01:24:57,840 sidewalks so any dedication or perimeter street 1780 01:24:57,840 --> 01:25:00,840 improvements would be collected 1781 01:25:00,840 --> 01:25:07,390 at the subdivision stage as I mentioned there's floodplain 1782 01:25:07,390 --> 01:25:08,760 easter on the 1783 01:25:08,760 --> 01:25:14,789 southwest corner of the site but there's no existing tree 1784 01:25:14,789 --> 01:25:15,600 canopy 1785 01:25:17,479 --> 01:25:22,039 according in accordance with the local government code we 1786 01:25:22,039 --> 01:25:25,359 issued 11 letters to 1787 01:25:25,359 --> 01:25:29,920 property owners within 200 feet of the subject property we 1788 01:25:29,920 --> 01:25:32,199 received one and we 1789 01:25:32,199 --> 01:25:37,649 actually issued 26 courtesy notices to properties within 1790 01:25:37,649 --> 01:25:39,560 500 feet and we 1791 01:25:39,560 --> 01:25:44,859 received one response in favor of the of the request which 1792 01:25:44,859 --> 01:25:46,800 that fell in the 500 1793 01:25:46,800 --> 01:25:50,939 foot buffer the applicant didn't did not hold the 1794 01:25:50,939 --> 01:25:51,960 neighborhood meeting but they 1795 01:25:51,960 --> 01:25:58,310 did contact the area HOA's who had no objections to the 1796 01:25:58,310 --> 01:26:01,439 request so in summary 1797 01:26:01,439 --> 01:26:05,239 CMG we filled CMG is consistent with the goals and 1798 01:26:05,239 --> 01:26:07,439 objectives of the den 20 2030 1799 01:26:07,439 --> 01:26:11,550 plan it's compatible with the surrounding property in terms 1800 01:26:11,550 --> 01:26:11,840 of 1801 01:26:11,840 --> 01:26:15,020 permitted density in the uses that would be allowed and 1802 01:26:15,020 --> 01:26:16,000 therefore we recommend 1803 01:26:16,000 --> 01:26:19,170 approval so that concludes my presentation and I will stand 1804 01:26:19,170 --> 01:26:19,319 for 1805 01:26:19,319 --> 01:26:21,600 questions 1806 01:26:23,319 --> 01:26:27,920 I don't see any questions thank you okay this is a public 1807 01:26:27,920 --> 01:26:29,279 hearing anyone who would 1808 01:26:29,279 --> 01:26:31,869 like to speak on this item please come forward at this time 1809 01:26:31,869 --> 01:26:34,079 I do not have any 1810 01:26:34,079 --> 01:26:36,899 cards wishing to speak but again this is a public hearing 1811 01:26:36,899 --> 01:26:38,039 anyone who would like 1812 01:26:38,039 --> 01:26:42,670 to speak on this item please come forward seeing none will 1813 01:26:42,670 --> 01:26:43,399 close the 1814 01:26:43,399 --> 01:26:47,960 public hearing and open the floor for discussion or emotion 1815 01:26:47,960 --> 01:26:48,880 Commissioner Ellis 1816 01:26:48,880 --> 01:26:55,510 thank you chair I move approval of a z 1727 a Commissioner 1817 01:26:55,510 --> 01:26:57,199 Sanchez okay I have 1818 01:26:57,199 --> 01:27:02,560 a first and a second for approval any further discussion 1819 01:27:02,560 --> 01:27:04,600 seeing none I'll call 1820 01:27:04,600 --> 01:27:07,359 for a vote on the board 1821 01:27:12,359 --> 01:27:14,939 that motion will carry six to zero we'll move us to our 1822 01:27:14,939 --> 01:27:17,760 next item on our agenda 1823 01:27:17,760 --> 01:27:24,319 I'm going to open the public hearing for z 17 - 0 0 0 3 a 1824 01:27:24,319 --> 01:27:26,439 we'll call on Haley for 1825 01:27:26,439 --> 01:27:29,159 presentation 1826 01:27:41,119 --> 01:27:41,260 good evening and as we did at work session I'll do one 1827 01:27:41,260 --> 01:27:45,119 presentation for 1828 01:27:45,119 --> 01:27:48,039 both the rezoning and the SUP request but it would require 1829 01:27:48,039 --> 01:27:49,159 two separate motions 1830 01:27:49,159 --> 01:27:55,010 and votes all right so this is case z 17 3 and s 17 11 for 1831 01:27:55,010 --> 01:27:55,699 the Coventry two 1832 01:27:55,699 --> 01:27:59,720 apartments as I mentioned there are two separate requests 1833 01:27:59,720 --> 01:28:00,640 the first being a 1834 01:28:00,640 --> 01:28:03,649 rezoning from community mixed-use general to neighborhood 1835 01:28:03,649 --> 01:28:04,359 residential 1836 01:28:04,359 --> 01:28:07,579 mixed-use district and the second aspect of the request if 1837 01:28:07,579 --> 01:28:08,239 the rezoning is 1838 01:28:08,239 --> 01:28:10,819 approved would be for a specific use permit to allow for 1839 01:28:10,819 --> 01:28:11,520 multifamily 1840 01:28:11,520 --> 01:28:14,770 residential use on the property you can see two boundaries 1841 01:28:14,770 --> 01:28:15,920 outlined here on the 1842 01:28:15,920 --> 01:28:18,609 map the red boundary is the boundary of the rezoning so it 1843 01:28:18,609 --> 01:28:20,239 's 11.42 acres and 1844 01:28:20,239 --> 01:28:24,689 then the yellow boundary within that is the 10.68 acres for 1845 01:28:24,689 --> 01:28:25,760 the SUP requests 1846 01:28:25,760 --> 01:28:27,989 which excludes an existing office building on the south 1847 01:28:27,989 --> 01:28:28,479 side of the 1848 01:28:28,479 --> 01:28:33,039 property and for reference we have I 35 to the north of the 1849 01:28:33,039 --> 01:28:34,000 property Sam bass 1850 01:28:34,000 --> 01:28:38,560 forms the western boundary and Londonderry Lane is on the 1851 01:28:38,560 --> 01:28:40,340 south side to 1852 01:28:40,340 --> 01:28:42,920 look at the rezoning request first we have the existing 1853 01:28:42,920 --> 01:28:43,920 zoning map on the left 1854 01:28:43,920 --> 01:28:47,430 you see it's the whole area is primarily zone CMG and then 1855 01:28:47,430 --> 01:28:48,319 on the right would be 1856 01:28:48,319 --> 01:28:52,880 the proposed zoning map if this request for NRM you is 1857 01:28:52,880 --> 01:28:54,760 approved there are two 1858 01:28:54,760 --> 01:28:56,859 criteria for approval isn't of an SUP as Shandrian 1859 01:28:56,859 --> 01:28:58,039 mentioned the first being 1860 01:28:58,039 --> 01:29:00,279 conformance with the future land use plan and the second 1861 01:29:00,279 --> 01:29:00,760 being the 1862 01:29:00,760 --> 01:29:05,140 facilitation of public infrastructure looking at the first 1863 01:29:05,140 --> 01:29:05,800 of those two 1864 01:29:05,800 --> 01:29:08,560 components the future land use for this area is community 1865 01:29:08,560 --> 01:29:09,520 mixed-use which is 1866 01:29:09,520 --> 01:29:12,369 intended to promote a mixture of commercial residential and 1867 01:29:12,369 --> 01:29:13,039 service uses 1868 01:29:13,039 --> 01:29:16,470 NRM you we found to be generally consistent with this it's 1869 01:29:16,470 --> 01:29:16,739 very 1870 01:29:16,739 --> 01:29:19,560 comparable to CMG in terms of the scale of development as 1871 01:29:19,560 --> 01:29:20,520 well as the type of 1872 01:29:20,520 --> 01:29:22,750 development there it allows for a wide mixture of 1873 01:29:22,750 --> 01:29:24,119 residential and commercial 1874 01:29:24,119 --> 01:29:29,430 uses looking at the existing public infrastructure there 1875 01:29:29,430 --> 01:29:30,920 there are existing 1876 01:29:30,920 --> 01:29:32,880 water and sewer lines in the area that would be available 1877 01:29:32,880 --> 01:29:33,680 for the development 1878 01:29:33,680 --> 01:29:37,819 with possibly some internal extensions required Sam bass 1879 01:29:37,819 --> 01:29:39,159 and Londonderry are 1880 01:29:39,159 --> 01:29:42,729 both currently two lane undivided roads they are commercial 1881 01:29:42,729 --> 01:29:44,000 mixed-use collectors 1882 01:29:44,000 --> 01:29:47,310 which means that they're intended to stay two lane undivid 1883 01:29:47,310 --> 01:29:48,220 ed but with the 1884 01:29:48,220 --> 01:29:50,899 availability for parking and sidewalks on the side of the 1885 01:29:50,899 --> 01:29:51,560 roads and any 1886 01:29:51,560 --> 01:29:54,449 dedications or improvements for this development would be 1887 01:29:54,449 --> 01:29:55,399 done either at the 1888 01:29:55,399 --> 01:29:57,979 time that they replat that if they replat the property or 1889 01:29:57,979 --> 01:29:58,680 when they get to 1890 01:29:58,680 --> 01:30:04,340 site plan looking at some other compatibility factors here 1891 01:30:04,340 --> 01:30:04,619 as I 1892 01:30:04,619 --> 01:30:07,289 mentioned we did find NRM you to be consistent with the 1893 01:30:07,289 --> 01:30:08,279 existing zoning in 1894 01:30:08,279 --> 01:30:11,039 many ways a lot coverage building height landscaping 1895 01:30:11,039 --> 01:30:12,399 requirements are all the 1896 01:30:12,399 --> 01:30:15,720 same between these two districts and I also wanted to point 1897 01:30:15,720 --> 01:30:16,479 out that the 1898 01:30:16,479 --> 01:30:19,439 proposed use for multifamily is permitted under the current 1899 01:30:19,439 --> 01:30:20,039 zoning the 1900 01:30:20,039 --> 01:30:23,029 intent of the request is to get rid of a limitation that 1901 01:30:23,029 --> 01:30:24,279 exists within CMG that 1902 01:30:24,279 --> 01:30:27,300 requires ground floor commercial development ground floor 1903 01:30:27,300 --> 01:30:27,939 commercial 1904 01:30:27,939 --> 01:30:30,630 would probably be tricky in this location given how far it 1905 01:30:30,630 --> 01:30:31,119 is off the 1906 01:30:31,119 --> 01:30:34,189 freeway and the existing development pattern because we 1907 01:30:34,189 --> 01:30:35,199 have multifamily on 1908 01:30:35,199 --> 01:30:38,359 almost all sides and then industrial with the Acme brick 1909 01:30:38,359 --> 01:30:39,420 plant on the 1910 01:30:39,420 --> 01:30:44,319 opposite side of Sam Bass with that staff is recommending 1911 01:30:44,319 --> 01:30:45,239 approval of the 1912 01:30:45,239 --> 01:30:47,670 rezoning request because of this consistency with the goals 1913 01:30:47,670 --> 01:30:47,880 and 1914 01:30:47,880 --> 01:30:52,439 objectives of the Denton plan 2030 the second aspect of the 1915 01:30:52,439 --> 01:30:53,039 request then 1916 01:30:53,039 --> 01:30:55,609 pending approval of the rezoning would be for the specific 1917 01:30:55,609 --> 01:30:56,359 use permit for the 1918 01:30:56,359 --> 01:31:00,329 multifamily use when we look at an SUP request we look for 1919 01:31:00,329 --> 01:31:00,960 general 1920 01:31:00,960 --> 01:31:03,619 compatibility between the use that's proposed and the 1921 01:31:03,619 --> 01:31:04,960 surrounding property in 1922 01:31:04,960 --> 01:31:08,569 terms of no impediments to development of other properties 1923 01:31:08,569 --> 01:31:09,520 in the area and 1924 01:31:09,520 --> 01:31:14,079 nuisance generation potential and things of that nature so 1925 01:31:14,079 --> 01:31:15,960 this is the concept 1926 01:31:15,960 --> 01:31:18,529 plan that's been proposed for this development this would 1927 01:31:18,529 --> 01:31:19,119 be the second 1928 01:31:19,119 --> 01:31:22,210 phase of an existing apartment complex it's to the east of 1929 01:31:22,210 --> 01:31:23,159 the property for 1930 01:31:23,159 --> 01:31:26,659 reference on this map it would be here on the the top side 1931 01:31:26,659 --> 01:31:27,880 so you can see this 1932 01:31:27,880 --> 01:31:30,939 existing driveway would allow connectivity between the two 1933 01:31:30,939 --> 01:31:31,439 phases of 1934 01:31:31,439 --> 01:31:36,390 the apartment complex this plan shows 283 units a mixture 1935 01:31:36,390 --> 01:31:37,439 of one two and three 1936 01:31:37,439 --> 01:31:41,550 bedrooms that puts it at around 26 dwelling units per acre 1937 01:31:41,550 --> 01:31:42,399 for density 1938 01:31:42,399 --> 01:31:45,239 which is well below that maximum of 30 that they would have 1939 01:31:45,239 --> 01:31:46,399 under NRM you if 1940 01:31:46,399 --> 01:31:49,520 the rezoning is approved you can see six buildings laid out 1941 01:31:49,520 --> 01:31:50,760 here mixture of three 1942 01:31:50,760 --> 01:31:53,649 and four stories in height one of the key features of the 1943 01:31:53,649 --> 01:31:54,840 site being that each 1944 01:31:54,840 --> 01:31:58,800 one of these buildings is designed in an L shape with a 1945 01:31:58,800 --> 01:32:00,119 common area with 1946 01:32:00,119 --> 01:32:02,399 landscaping and a kind of a courtyard effect for each 1947 01:32:02,399 --> 01:32:03,520 building so they do have 1948 01:32:03,520 --> 01:32:09,159 about 38% landscaping overall as it's proposed we found 1949 01:32:09,159 --> 01:32:09,800 this request to be 1950 01:32:09,800 --> 01:32:12,739 consistent with the Denton plan 2030 both for that future 1951 01:32:12,739 --> 01:32:13,760 land use designation 1952 01:32:13,760 --> 01:32:17,479 and for the fact that our our comprehensive plan calls for 1953 01:32:17,479 --> 01:32:17,840 higher 1954 01:32:17,840 --> 01:32:21,270 density housing to be provided in areas that don't impact 1955 01:32:21,270 --> 01:32:22,399 existing single-family 1956 01:32:22,399 --> 01:32:24,720 neighborhoods and as we saw with this one that it's 1957 01:32:24,720 --> 01:32:26,239 surrounded by like uses 1958 01:32:26,239 --> 01:32:28,819 there wouldn't be any direct connectivity with single- 1959 01:32:28,819 --> 01:32:29,720 family so it 1960 01:32:29,720 --> 01:32:32,869 would limit any impacts that could occur there the use is 1961 01:32:32,869 --> 01:32:34,319 consistent with the 1962 01:32:34,319 --> 01:32:37,319 existing development pattern in the area and the site would 1963 01:32:37,319 --> 01:32:38,399 be required to comply 1964 01:32:38,399 --> 01:32:40,979 with all other components of the DDC in terms of tree 1965 01:32:40,979 --> 01:32:42,279 preservation landscaping 1966 01:32:42,279 --> 01:32:45,039 parking site lighting and those types of things and it 1967 01:32:45,039 --> 01:32:46,079 would be generally 1968 01:32:46,079 --> 01:32:48,840 unlikely to generate any nuisances because of its 1969 01:32:48,840 --> 01:32:50,000 consistency with the 1970 01:32:50,000 --> 01:32:54,560 surrounding development pattern notices were sent for this 1971 01:32:54,560 --> 01:32:55,520 request for the local 1972 01:32:55,520 --> 01:32:58,699 government code we received one response in favor from the 1973 01:32:58,699 --> 01:32:59,960 former property owner 1974 01:32:59,960 --> 01:33:02,859 for the southern portion of the tract and the applicant did 1975 01:33:02,859 --> 01:33:03,199 hold a 1976 01:33:03,199 --> 01:33:05,350 neighborhood meeting this past Monday and they had 1977 01:33:05,350 --> 01:33:06,479 representatives from two 1978 01:33:06,479 --> 01:33:11,079 nearby complexes that attended to see what the proposal was 1979 01:33:11,079 --> 01:33:12,239 staff is 1980 01:33:12,239 --> 01:33:15,430 recommending approval of the SUP with the condition that 1981 01:33:15,430 --> 01:33:16,479 the site plan we saw 1982 01:33:16,479 --> 01:33:19,409 tonight be considered conceptual in nature so they would 1983 01:33:19,409 --> 01:33:19,760 still go through 1984 01:33:19,760 --> 01:33:22,649 the full site plan submittal where all of the specifics of 1985 01:33:22,649 --> 01:33:23,600 the site would be 1986 01:33:23,600 --> 01:33:26,359 be nailed down to ensure compliance with the net and 1987 01:33:26,359 --> 01:33:27,800 development code and with 1988 01:33:27,800 --> 01:33:34,279 that I can stand for any questions any questions for having 1989 01:33:34,279 --> 01:33:36,840 there you go 1990 01:33:36,840 --> 01:33:41,989 Commissioner back thank you just as the owner here the 1991 01:33:41,989 --> 01:33:43,600 applicant here and gonna 1992 01:33:43,600 --> 01:33:47,720 speak to us tonight yes the applicant is here thank you 1993 01:33:47,720 --> 01:33:52,279 have any other questions thank you having this is a public 1994 01:33:52,279 --> 01:33:53,760 hearing so anyone 1995 01:33:53,760 --> 01:33:56,119 who would like to speak on this item please come forward at 1996 01:33:56,119 --> 01:33:56,760 this time I do 1997 01:33:56,760 --> 01:34:02,609 not have any cards currently so believe it was stay the 1998 01:34:02,609 --> 01:34:03,720 applicants here if the 1999 01:34:03,720 --> 01:34:07,319 applicants here would you like to speak on this item 2000 01:34:16,479 --> 01:34:21,199 I'm Josh I'm with Western Securities we've been here in 2001 01:34:21,199 --> 01:34:23,439 Denton for since 2001 2002 01:34:23,439 --> 01:34:28,000 we actually did a project called Coventry we love that 2003 01:34:28,000 --> 01:34:29,079 project we really 2004 01:34:29,079 --> 01:34:31,739 want to improve Denton as well it's we feel like this 2005 01:34:31,739 --> 01:34:32,920 projects is going to 2006 01:34:32,920 --> 01:34:36,500 improve the neighborhood around the existing project and we 2007 01:34:36,500 --> 01:34:37,399 feel like this 2008 01:34:37,399 --> 01:34:41,960 is a catalyst for us to be able to help develop the entire 2009 01:34:41,960 --> 01:34:43,680 area as well do you 2010 01:34:43,680 --> 01:34:47,199 have one question for you Commissioner Beck hey you chair 2011 01:34:47,199 --> 01:34:48,159 Josh thanks for coming 2012 01:34:48,159 --> 01:34:50,920 down and speaking and I like what I'm seeing pretty much 2013 01:34:50,920 --> 01:34:52,319 too I'm one of those 2014 01:34:52,319 --> 01:34:54,930 though that always hates to see trees go and I noticed in 2015 01:34:54,930 --> 01:34:56,039 your conceptual plan 2016 01:34:56,039 --> 01:34:59,779 you've got some big courtyards there so I'm just kind of 2017 01:34:59,779 --> 01:35:01,279 hoping that when you 2018 01:35:01,279 --> 01:35:04,539 come back with a site plans final that we'll see a lot a 2019 01:35:04,539 --> 01:35:05,720 lot of areas there 2020 01:35:05,720 --> 01:35:07,659 that you can salvage a lot of those trees I went over and 2021 01:35:07,659 --> 01:35:08,439 looked at them today 2022 01:35:08,439 --> 01:35:11,520 most of them are post oak they're native trees so what's 2023 01:35:11,520 --> 01:35:12,840 your sentiment on that 2024 01:35:12,840 --> 01:35:16,539 if you don't mind asking this this is not our first entry 2025 01:35:16,539 --> 01:35:18,520 into a large tree 2026 01:35:18,520 --> 01:35:22,270 saving community we actually believe in saving as many 2027 01:35:22,270 --> 01:35:23,479 trees as possible I want 2028 01:35:23,479 --> 01:35:28,579 to try and create a feeling of being in a park and not 2029 01:35:28,579 --> 01:35:30,800 having where you can see 2030 01:35:30,800 --> 01:35:34,390 from one unit to another across the street I want to 2031 01:35:34,390 --> 01:35:35,439 actually create that 2032 01:35:35,439 --> 01:35:40,869 that feeling of seeing life so that's something that I 2033 01:35:40,869 --> 01:35:43,119 really try and strive 2034 01:35:43,119 --> 01:35:49,479 to protect ultimately that's not really viable in every 2035 01:35:49,479 --> 01:35:50,520 situation but I want to 2036 01:35:50,520 --> 01:35:54,020 try and do as best I can for that yes good luck to you on 2037 01:35:54,020 --> 01:35:56,199 that thank you I 2038 01:35:56,199 --> 01:35:59,880 don't see any other questions thank you sir appreciate you 2039 01:35:59,880 --> 01:36:01,479 again this is a public 2040 01:36:01,479 --> 01:36:03,689 hearing anyone who would like to speak on this item please 2041 01:36:03,689 --> 01:36:04,479 come forward at this 2042 01:36:04,479 --> 01:36:10,520 time seeing none I'll close the public hearing and open the 2043 01:36:10,520 --> 01:36:11,640 floor for discussion 2044 01:36:11,640 --> 01:36:14,159 or emotion 2045 01:36:16,479 --> 01:36:20,810 Commissioner Roselle I motion to approve the zoning agenda 2046 01:36:20,810 --> 01:36:25,199 item Z 17 - 0 0 3 a 2047 01:36:25,199 --> 01:36:29,239 Commissioner Beck second okay the first and the second for 2048 01:36:29,239 --> 01:36:30,479 approval any other 2049 01:36:30,479 --> 01:36:37,520 discussion seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board 2050 01:36:45,800 --> 01:36:51,939 motions going to carry six to zero that item passes and we 2051 01:36:51,939 --> 01:36:54,000 have a Richard at 2052 01:36:54,000 --> 01:36:56,569 staff would like to make an announcement on C before I open 2053 01:36:56,569 --> 01:36:57,119 it and make some 2054 01:36:57,119 --> 01:37:00,939 clarifications if there is a recommendation to approve this 2055 01:37:00,939 --> 01:37:01,880 item based 2056 01:37:01,880 --> 01:37:04,829 on the condition I just wanted to add a sentence at the end 2057 01:37:04,829 --> 01:37:06,600 just so there's it's 2058 01:37:06,600 --> 01:37:10,829 clear moving forward and that would be but shall be in 2059 01:37:10,829 --> 01:37:11,760 conformance with the 2060 01:37:11,760 --> 01:37:14,029 concept plan as presented I think there was a there's a 2061 01:37:14,029 --> 01:37:15,159 discussion last night at 2062 01:37:15,159 --> 01:37:17,789 City Council as as to whether or not they're required to 2063 01:37:17,789 --> 01:37:18,800 comply with with the 2064 01:37:18,800 --> 01:37:21,050 concept plan that was always our intent but we just wanted 2065 01:37:21,050 --> 01:37:21,680 to get it on the 2066 01:37:21,680 --> 01:37:27,859 record so so it's clear that's all thank you for that 2067 01:37:27,859 --> 01:37:30,920 clarification condition if 2068 01:37:30,920 --> 01:37:34,189 we get to that point and with that I'm going to open the 2069 01:37:34,189 --> 01:37:35,560 public hearing for s 2070 01:37:35,560 --> 01:37:42,319 17 - 0 0 11 a we'll call on Haley for if we do a 2071 01:37:42,319 --> 01:37:43,760 presentation or if we just take 2072 01:37:43,760 --> 01:37:50,539 a vote on the SUP portion if there's anything you'd like me 2073 01:37:50,539 --> 01:37:50,880 to run back 2074 01:37:50,880 --> 01:37:56,539 through on the presentation I can okay all right well thank 2075 01:37:56,539 --> 01:37:58,279 you for that and I 2076 01:37:58,279 --> 01:38:01,710 will ask if there's any additional comments this is a 2077 01:38:01,710 --> 01:38:02,760 public hearing I 2078 01:38:02,760 --> 01:38:05,840 don't have any cards on this item so if there's anyone who 2079 01:38:05,840 --> 01:38:07,000 would like to speak 2080 01:38:07,000 --> 01:38:10,659 or if the applicant would like to address the additional 2081 01:38:10,659 --> 01:38:11,920 clarification on 2082 01:38:11,920 --> 01:38:15,060 the condition if there's any questions about that we happy 2083 01:38:15,060 --> 01:38:15,840 to entertain that 2084 01:38:15,840 --> 01:38:19,590 with you no okay with that I'm gonna close the public 2085 01:38:19,590 --> 01:38:21,159 hearing and I will open 2086 01:38:21,159 --> 01:38:25,279 the floor for discussion or motion 2087 01:38:26,720 --> 01:38:30,149 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I move approval of s 17 2088 01:38:30,149 --> 01:38:31,800 11 a with staff's 2089 01:38:31,800 --> 01:38:36,720 condition as stated so the condition we have in our agenda 2090 01:38:36,720 --> 01:38:37,560 along with the 2091 01:38:37,560 --> 01:38:41,399 clarification by Richard okay great Commissioner Sullivan 2092 01:38:41,399 --> 01:38:42,760 okay we have a 2093 01:38:42,760 --> 01:38:48,359 first and a second for approval any further discussion 2094 01:38:48,359 --> 01:38:50,479 seeing now call for a 2095 01:38:50,479 --> 01:38:53,079 vote on board 2096 01:38:58,840 --> 01:39:05,369 motions going to carry six to zero that will move us to our 2097 01:39:05,369 --> 01:39:07,800 item D and I'm 2098 01:39:07,800 --> 01:39:13,649 going to open the public hearing for z 18 - 0 0 0 1 and 2099 01:39:13,649 --> 01:39:15,800 this is the item that we 2100 01:39:15,800 --> 01:39:20,159 will need a motion to continue and leave open 2101 01:39:23,279 --> 01:39:28,680 Commissioner Roselle I motion to move agenda z 1 8 - 0 0 0 2102 01:39:28,680 --> 01:39:30,039 1 postponed to a 2103 01:39:30,039 --> 01:39:33,899 date certain of February 21st 2018 okay Commissioner Ellis 2104 01:39:33,899 --> 01:39:34,680 thank you chair 2105 01:39:34,680 --> 01:39:38,539 second we have a first and a second on this item and we are 2106 01:39:38,539 --> 01:39:39,319 going to leave it 2107 01:39:39,319 --> 01:39:44,119 open and I will call for a vote on board 2108 01:39:48,840 --> 01:39:54,689 this motion is going to carry six to zero move us to item E 2109 01:39:54,689 --> 01:39:56,159 we'll open the 2110 01:39:56,159 --> 01:40:03,939 public hearing for DCA 18 - 0 0 0 1 we'll call on Haley for 2111 01:40:03,939 --> 01:40:06,239 this presentation 2112 01:40:15,479 --> 01:40:20,920 good evening this is case DCA 18 1 it's a proposed code 2113 01:40:20,920 --> 01:40:22,880 update so the request 2114 01:40:22,880 --> 01:40:25,020 before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making 2115 01:40:25,020 --> 01:40:25,760 a recommendation 2116 01:40:25,760 --> 01:40:28,659 to the City Council regarding a proposed revision to the 2117 01:40:28,659 --> 01:40:29,760 Denton development code 2118 01:40:29,760 --> 01:40:33,279 specifically to amend the limitations in subchapter 5 as it 2119 01:40:33,279 --> 01:40:34,479 relates to mixed use 2120 01:40:34,479 --> 01:40:38,590 development requirements for multifamily uses to give you a 2121 01:40:38,590 --> 01:40:39,119 little 2122 01:40:39,119 --> 01:40:42,300 background there are two limitations in the development 2123 01:40:42,300 --> 01:40:43,520 code today that would 2124 01:40:43,520 --> 01:40:46,439 apply to multifamily uses within our mixed use districts 2125 01:40:46,439 --> 01:40:47,439 the first of those 2126 01:40:47,439 --> 01:40:51,890 is limitation 4 which allows multifamily with either a 2127 01:40:51,890 --> 01:40:53,199 specific use permit as 2128 01:40:53,199 --> 01:40:55,779 part of a mixed use development or if it meets one of the 2129 01:40:55,779 --> 01:40:57,000 other three criteria 2130 01:40:57,000 --> 01:41:00,149 being part of a master plan development or previously 2131 01:41:00,149 --> 01:41:01,399 approved as part of a 2132 01:41:01,399 --> 01:41:05,779 small area plan the second limitation that applies along 2133 01:41:05,779 --> 01:41:07,079 with L4 and several 2134 01:41:07,079 --> 01:41:10,810 districts is limitation 6 that permits multifamily uses 2135 01:41:10,810 --> 01:41:11,840 only on the second 2136 01:41:11,840 --> 01:41:14,989 story and above when office retail or other permitted 2137 01:41:14,989 --> 01:41:16,239 commercial uses are 2138 01:41:16,239 --> 01:41:19,140 provided on the ground floor along any Avenue collector or 2139 01:41:19,140 --> 01:41:21,439 arterial street if 2140 01:41:21,439 --> 01:41:24,340 you have looked at our mobility plan those are our primary 2141 01:41:24,340 --> 01:41:25,159 street types other 2142 01:41:25,159 --> 01:41:28,270 than you know residential streets within subdivisions so 2143 01:41:28,270 --> 01:41:30,239 this would apply in many 2144 01:41:30,239 --> 01:41:35,600 locations so looking at how these two often apply together 2145 01:41:35,600 --> 01:41:36,760 you'd see here that 2146 01:41:36,760 --> 01:41:39,670 L4 applies in all of the mixed use districts so anywhere 2147 01:41:39,670 --> 01:41:40,520 multifamily is 2148 01:41:40,520 --> 01:41:45,079 permitted outside of the downtown districts L4 applies 2149 01:41:45,079 --> 01:41:46,399 limitation 6 is 2150 01:41:46,399 --> 01:41:49,239 added in four of the districts the community mixed use 2151 01:41:49,239 --> 01:41:50,319 districts and then 2152 01:41:50,319 --> 01:41:55,109 our regional center neighborhood and downtown districts as 2153 01:41:55,109 --> 01:41:56,920 well what staff is 2154 01:41:56,920 --> 01:42:00,350 proposing is to remove L6 from all four of those districts 2155 01:42:00,350 --> 01:42:01,119 we're not proposing 2156 01:42:01,119 --> 01:42:04,270 any changes to L4 it would remain in place L6 we would like 2157 01:42:04,270 --> 01:42:05,000 to strike from 2158 01:42:05,000 --> 01:42:08,609 all four districts where it currently applies in the past 2159 01:42:08,609 --> 01:42:10,119 two years in 2016 and 2160 01:42:10,119 --> 01:42:13,050 2017 we had five rezoning request as a result of this 2161 01:42:13,050 --> 01:42:14,479 limitation we saw one of 2162 01:42:14,479 --> 01:42:17,239 them here tonight but there have been countless other 2163 01:42:17,239 --> 01:42:18,159 projects that haven't 2164 01:42:18,159 --> 01:42:21,279 moved forward because of the requirement for ground floor 2165 01:42:21,279 --> 01:42:23,239 commercial just to look 2166 01:42:23,239 --> 01:42:25,819 at how this applies across the city it applies in our 2167 01:42:25,819 --> 01:42:27,039 community mixed use in our 2168 01:42:27,039 --> 01:42:30,350 regional center districts on the map here that would be the 2169 01:42:30,350 --> 01:42:31,439 purple colors the 2170 01:42:31,439 --> 01:42:34,550 kind of fuchsia colors and then the areas of light pink so 2171 01:42:34,550 --> 01:42:35,800 you can see here 2172 01:42:35,800 --> 01:42:39,090 out on the freeway and the loop we have a large area of 2173 01:42:39,090 --> 01:42:40,439 this we have CMG along 2174 01:42:40,439 --> 01:42:43,270 McKinney and University and then other pockets of the 2175 01:42:43,270 --> 01:42:44,680 regional district here on 2176 01:42:44,680 --> 01:42:47,699 the north side of the city primarily along the loop in the 2177 01:42:47,699 --> 01:42:49,359 interstate our 2178 01:42:49,359 --> 01:42:51,979 comprehensive plans and notes that we have a strong need 2179 01:42:51,979 --> 01:42:52,880 for a diversity of 2180 01:42:52,880 --> 01:42:55,850 housing types in Denton multifamily being a key one of 2181 01:42:55,850 --> 01:42:56,880 those especially with 2182 01:42:56,880 --> 01:43:00,939 our universities here and requiring ground floor commercial 2183 01:43:00,939 --> 01:43:02,039 that would work 2184 01:43:02,039 --> 01:43:05,079 best in walkable compact environments and areas out on the 2185 01:43:05,079 --> 01:43:05,680 loop or on the 2186 01:43:05,680 --> 01:43:10,239 freeway is a bit onerous and not always feasible for these 2187 01:43:10,239 --> 01:43:12,079 developments so 2188 01:43:12,079 --> 01:43:15,079 looking at how these apply I mentioned in the downtown 2189 01:43:15,079 --> 01:43:16,119 multifamilies permitted by 2190 01:43:16,119 --> 01:43:19,000 right but we do often see the type of development that L6 2191 01:43:19,000 --> 01:43:19,640 is trying to 2192 01:43:19,640 --> 01:43:23,390 achieve ground floor commercial as a market decision works 2193 01:43:23,390 --> 01:43:24,000 well in the 2194 01:43:24,000 --> 01:43:27,500 downtown where you have that compact urban environment so 2195 01:43:27,500 --> 01:43:28,840 you see a couple of 2196 01:43:28,840 --> 01:43:31,739 examples here on the right of how we have that development 2197 01:43:31,739 --> 01:43:32,720 in downtown today 2198 01:43:32,720 --> 01:43:35,350 on the bottom of the screen just to give you an example or 2199 01:43:35,350 --> 01:43:37,199 a couple of sites one 2200 01:43:37,199 --> 01:43:40,279 zone CMG that's on the loop and another one's own RC CD out 2201 01:43:40,279 --> 01:43:41,279 on Brinker where 2202 01:43:41,279 --> 01:43:44,039 the ground floor commercial would be required you can tell 2203 01:43:44,039 --> 01:43:44,600 these are 2204 01:43:44,600 --> 01:43:47,539 primarily auto oriented areas where people are not likely 2205 01:43:47,539 --> 01:43:48,399 to be walking along 2206 01:43:48,399 --> 01:43:52,850 the sidewalk going shopping at their neighborhood stores 2207 01:43:52,850 --> 01:43:54,039 further wanted to 2208 01:43:54,039 --> 01:43:57,039 point out as I mentioned earlier that L4 would still apply 2209 01:43:57,039 --> 01:43:57,800 in all of these 2210 01:43:57,800 --> 01:44:00,149 districts in any of our mixed-use districts there would 2211 01:44:00,149 --> 01:44:00,840 still either be 2212 01:44:00,840 --> 01:44:04,289 the requirement for multifamily to be part of mixed use so 2213 01:44:04,289 --> 01:44:05,039 to be part of a 2214 01:44:05,039 --> 01:44:07,800 larger development with three or more uses of which multif 2215 01:44:07,800 --> 01:44:08,600 amily can only be 2216 01:44:08,600 --> 01:44:12,710 one so commercial would be a requirement there or it would 2217 01:44:12,710 --> 01:44:13,800 be required to have an 2218 01:44:13,800 --> 01:44:16,239 SUP is like the case we saw before this so there would 2219 01:44:16,239 --> 01:44:17,479 still be that high level 2220 01:44:17,479 --> 01:44:21,380 of scrutiny on multifamily development in most of the city 2221 01:44:21,380 --> 01:44:22,760 we did publish 2222 01:44:22,760 --> 01:44:25,689 notification in the newspaper for this request and received 2223 01:44:25,689 --> 01:44:26,560 no responses and 2224 01:44:26,560 --> 01:44:30,810 staff is recommending approval and with that I can stand 2225 01:44:30,810 --> 01:44:33,720 for any questions any 2226 01:44:33,720 --> 01:44:38,609 questions for having I'll make a comment I'm glad to see 2227 01:44:38,609 --> 01:44:39,960 this come before us 2228 01:44:39,960 --> 01:44:43,229 because to your point we've had a lot of instances over the 2229 01:44:43,229 --> 01:44:44,359 only the last year 2230 01:44:44,359 --> 01:44:47,319 but prior to this on this item and I think it's a good 2231 01:44:47,319 --> 01:44:48,720 change and I'm glad to 2232 01:44:48,720 --> 01:44:52,979 see us clean this up and make life easier for everybody on 2233 01:44:52,979 --> 01:44:53,720 this particular 2234 01:44:53,720 --> 01:44:57,680 item so thank you for bringing this to us 2235 01:44:59,199 --> 01:45:04,350 no more questions thank you Haley this is a public hearing 2236 01:45:04,350 --> 01:45:05,199 so anyone who would 2237 01:45:05,199 --> 01:45:07,789 like to speak on this item please come forward at this time 2238 01:45:07,789 --> 01:45:09,439 I do not have any 2239 01:45:09,439 --> 01:45:14,590 carts here before me to call on someone so again this is a 2240 01:45:14,590 --> 01:45:16,159 public hearing 2241 01:45:16,960 --> 01:45:20,479 seeing none I'll close the public hearing and open the 2242 01:45:20,479 --> 01:45:21,520 floor for discussion 2243 01:45:21,520 --> 01:45:26,560 or emotion Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I will 2244 01:45:26,560 --> 01:45:28,680 happily move approval of DCA 2245 01:45:28,680 --> 01:45:33,829 18 1 Commissioner back I agree this is a good move I second 2246 01:45:33,829 --> 01:45:35,159 the motion we have a 2247 01:45:35,159 --> 01:45:40,460 first and a second for approval any further discussion 2248 01:45:40,460 --> 01:45:42,800 seeing none we'll call 2249 01:45:42,800 --> 01:45:45,600 for a vet on the board 2250 01:45:49,840 --> 01:45:54,630 motions going to carry six to zero that will take us to 2251 01:45:54,630 --> 01:45:57,319 item F at this time I'm 2252 01:45:57,319 --> 01:46:03,300 going to open the public hearing for DCA 17 - 0 0 1 1 and 2253 01:46:03,300 --> 01:46:05,399 we'll call on Deborah 2254 01:46:05,399 --> 01:46:08,600 here for presentation 2255 01:46:17,359 --> 01:46:19,750 good evening Commission my name is Deborah beer and with 2256 01:46:19,750 --> 01:46:20,920 the environmental 2257 01:46:20,920 --> 01:46:24,619 services tonight we are bringing forward as a public 2258 01:46:24,619 --> 01:46:25,640 hearing the proposed 2259 01:46:25,640 --> 01:46:30,199 revisions to sub chapter 17 and for the past two pence 2260 01:46:30,199 --> 01:46:31,520 meetings we have been 2261 01:46:31,520 --> 01:46:35,350 having a discussion in details about what they are my 2262 01:46:35,350 --> 01:46:36,760 presentation tonight is 2263 01:46:36,760 --> 01:46:40,859 going to be you know that the general concepts behind and 2264 01:46:40,859 --> 01:46:42,159 then we will zoom 2265 01:46:42,159 --> 01:46:46,720 in into the proposed changes to the alternative ESA plan 2266 01:46:46,720 --> 01:46:47,960 approval criteria 2267 01:46:47,960 --> 01:46:50,920 if that's okay with the Commission sure just a question are 2268 01:46:50,920 --> 01:46:51,880 we going to do like 2269 01:46:51,880 --> 01:46:55,590 a page turn of the actual ordinance is that part of your 2270 01:46:55,590 --> 01:46:57,840 presentation no no 2271 01:46:57,840 --> 01:47:01,500 well what I was planning and just to go over the why the 2272 01:47:01,500 --> 01:47:02,720 changes are needed and 2273 01:47:02,720 --> 01:47:06,239 so forth then highlights the substantial changes and naming 2274 01:47:06,239 --> 01:47:07,399 one by one and then 2275 01:47:07,399 --> 01:47:15,239 discuss in detail the last one perfect okay sure thank you 2276 01:47:20,520 --> 01:47:25,460 so if you excuse me sometimes I would kind of skip between 2277 01:47:25,460 --> 01:47:26,720 slides but 2278 01:47:26,720 --> 01:47:30,439 hopefully you can bear with me currently the development 2279 01:47:30,439 --> 01:47:31,800 code provides protection 2280 01:47:31,800 --> 01:47:35,020 for four type of environmental sensitivities area those are 2281 01:47:35,020 --> 01:47:35,399 flood 2282 01:47:35,399 --> 01:47:38,939 plains which are further classifying to develop and unde 2283 01:47:38,939 --> 01:47:40,840 veloped riparian buffers 2284 01:47:40,840 --> 01:47:44,689 a water-related habitats and upland habitats the first 2285 01:47:44,689 --> 01:47:45,880 three type of ESAs 2286 01:47:45,880 --> 01:47:48,819 they tend to co-locate or be nested inside each other 2287 01:47:48,819 --> 01:47:50,199 because the three are 2288 01:47:50,199 --> 01:47:53,720 dependent on the presence for some period of time of water 2289 01:47:53,720 --> 01:47:55,039 upland habitat 2290 01:47:55,039 --> 01:48:04,720 those are more dry land driven habitat so why do we protect 2291 01:48:04,720 --> 01:48:07,359 the ESAs first it 2292 01:48:07,359 --> 01:48:12,039 really helps the city to actually meet the where MS4 permit 2293 01:48:12,039 --> 01:48:13,239 MS4 stands for 2294 01:48:13,239 --> 01:48:17,800 municipal separate storm sewer system that deals with the 2295 01:48:17,800 --> 01:48:19,439 management of runoff 2296 01:48:19,439 --> 01:48:22,989 and some water into the city having those areas that 2297 01:48:22,989 --> 01:48:25,760 actually protects the 2298 01:48:25,760 --> 01:48:30,319 the water bodies that filter all that pollution it is 2299 01:48:30,319 --> 01:48:31,920 actually part of our MS 2300 01:48:31,920 --> 01:48:38,319 MS4 permit with TCEQ that also allow us to meet our 2301 01:48:38,319 --> 01:48:39,680 construction general permit 2302 01:48:39,680 --> 01:48:43,739 with TCEQ when you have ESAs in your construction site and 2303 01:48:43,739 --> 01:48:44,319 you preserve 2304 01:48:44,319 --> 01:48:48,909 those you can actually use them as a best management 2305 01:48:48,909 --> 01:48:51,399 practices the protection 2306 01:48:51,399 --> 01:48:55,380 of ESAs especially the floodplain ESAs actually give us 2307 01:48:55,380 --> 01:48:56,960 some points in the 2308 01:48:56,960 --> 01:49:00,390 national floodplain insurance program those are program 2309 01:49:00,390 --> 01:49:01,720 that based on how well 2310 01:49:01,720 --> 01:49:06,279 the city managed the floodplain we can provide discounts 2311 01:49:06,279 --> 01:49:07,720 towards the floodplain 2312 01:49:07,720 --> 01:49:13,220 insurance owner so the better we do managing our floodplain 2313 01:49:13,220 --> 01:49:14,239 the better 2314 01:49:14,239 --> 01:49:17,630 insurance rate they can get so it is something that 2315 01:49:17,630 --> 01:49:20,199 everybody benefits and 2316 01:49:20,199 --> 01:49:26,720 the protection of ESAs is important for obtaining the sewer 2317 01:49:26,720 --> 01:49:28,640 level ice wind city 2318 01:49:28,640 --> 01:49:35,659 designation that we obtained in 2016 why are we proposing 2319 01:49:35,659 --> 01:49:38,039 the revisions to sub 2320 01:49:38,039 --> 01:49:42,600 chapter 17 first of all when the development code was 2321 01:49:42,600 --> 01:49:43,920 written originally 2322 01:49:43,920 --> 01:49:50,159 in 2002 many of the sub chapters had some sort of overlap 2323 01:49:50,159 --> 01:49:51,119 and or hinges on 2324 01:49:51,119 --> 01:49:54,029 the environmental sensitive area many of those chapters 2325 01:49:54,029 --> 01:49:55,520 have been already revised 2326 01:49:55,520 --> 01:50:00,310 however the correspond the citations and references were 2327 01:50:00,310 --> 01:50:01,600 not carried through so 2328 01:50:01,600 --> 01:50:05,779 right now we have some inconsistencies between sub chapter 2329 01:50:05,779 --> 01:50:07,319 17 and other sections 2330 01:50:07,319 --> 01:50:13,520 of the development code the development community have 2331 01:50:13,520 --> 01:50:16,760 indicated to us that the 2332 01:50:16,760 --> 01:50:20,189 code could benefit from improving the wording and phrasing 2333 01:50:20,189 --> 01:50:21,079 so in that way is 2334 01:50:21,079 --> 01:50:27,039 more understandable understandable is lacking clarity in 2335 01:50:27,039 --> 01:50:29,680 some instances with 2336 01:50:29,680 --> 01:50:34,539 that with the implementation of with the approval of the D 2337 01:50:34,539 --> 01:50:39,439 DC back in 2002 the ESA 2338 01:50:39,439 --> 01:50:43,239 were the first attempt policy wise to the protection of 2339 01:50:43,239 --> 01:50:44,920 those areas many of 2340 01:50:44,920 --> 01:50:48,989 those policies that were written at the time were not given 2341 01:50:48,989 --> 01:50:49,479 clear 2342 01:50:49,479 --> 01:50:54,039 implementation of it so one one example is the clustering 2343 01:50:54,039 --> 01:50:54,960 development it is 2344 01:50:54,960 --> 01:51:00,000 permitted but there's so much guidance on how to go by it 2345 01:51:00,000 --> 01:51:04,239 have been over 15 16 2346 01:51:04,239 --> 01:51:08,689 years since the adoption of the DDC it's time for all for 2347 01:51:08,689 --> 01:51:09,960 us to revaluate those 2348 01:51:09,960 --> 01:51:13,500 policies are they are they making sense do we need to 2349 01:51:13,500 --> 01:51:15,239 change them or do we need 2350 01:51:15,239 --> 01:51:19,010 to keep them and definitely we need to start considering 2351 01:51:19,010 --> 01:51:20,159 new policies if 2352 01:51:20,159 --> 01:51:24,470 necessary so it have been you know we have a fair try and 2353 01:51:24,470 --> 01:51:25,720 if they are not 2354 01:51:25,720 --> 01:51:30,529 working or their new things why not to consider those so 2355 01:51:30,529 --> 01:51:33,479 this process of 2356 01:51:33,479 --> 01:51:38,039 writing changes was better through the committee on the 2357 01:51:38,039 --> 01:51:39,000 environment which is a 2358 01:51:39,000 --> 01:51:42,989 subcommittee from the City Council we spent approximately 2359 01:51:42,989 --> 01:51:44,560 13 months with the 2360 01:51:44,560 --> 01:51:50,100 committee going step-by-step changes changes changes we 2361 01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,119 organize all the 2362 01:51:52,119 --> 01:51:57,640 co-revisions in four different categories corrections those 2363 01:51:57,640 --> 01:51:58,420 were typos 2364 01:51:58,420 --> 01:52:04,960 grammatical errors or simple references that were outdated 2365 01:52:04,960 --> 01:52:06,640 the second was 2366 01:52:06,640 --> 01:52:10,699 language clarification and the third was language addition 2367 01:52:10,699 --> 01:52:11,640 the difference between 2368 01:52:11,640 --> 01:52:15,069 the two is language clarification is the policies there we 2369 01:52:15,069 --> 01:52:15,960 are not making changes 2370 01:52:15,960 --> 01:52:19,460 to the policy whatsoever we are adding to what is out there 2371 01:52:19,460 --> 01:52:20,079 to make it more 2372 01:52:20,079 --> 01:52:23,979 clear code language additions we are not changing policy 2373 01:52:23,979 --> 01:52:26,000 either but the initial 2374 01:52:26,000 --> 01:52:30,880 wording have no go-by whatsoever so we are adding new 2375 01:52:30,880 --> 01:52:32,279 language however the 2376 01:52:32,279 --> 01:52:40,970 policy is intact and voices changes during this time we 2377 01:52:40,970 --> 01:52:43,399 have vetted these 2378 01:52:43,399 --> 01:52:49,359 changes through different platform medias we have sent 2379 01:52:49,359 --> 01:52:51,279 emails to the 2380 01:52:51,279 --> 01:52:56,239 development code through the web page we I did 2381 01:52:56,239 --> 01:52:58,199 presentations when Clarion was 2382 01:52:58,199 --> 01:53:03,600 doing the open house meetings about the rewrite of the DDC 2383 01:53:03,600 --> 01:53:04,720 I partnered with 2384 01:53:04,720 --> 01:53:08,399 them so in that way everybody had the opportunity to to see 2385 01:53:08,399 --> 01:53:09,479 the two going 2386 01:53:09,479 --> 01:53:15,840 together we also sent a email through the project doc so 2387 01:53:15,840 --> 01:53:17,119 anybody who has been an 2388 01:53:17,119 --> 01:53:20,590 applicant through the development process should have gone 2389 01:53:20,590 --> 01:53:21,560 an email about 2390 01:53:21,560 --> 01:53:26,979 the changes and inviting them to provide comments and we I 2391 01:53:26,979 --> 01:53:28,920 have solicited input 2392 01:53:28,920 --> 01:53:33,479 from local and out-of-town developers consultants and so 2393 01:53:33,479 --> 01:53:35,319 forth at this point we 2394 01:53:35,319 --> 01:53:40,680 have got up I believe 61 comments total from the different 2395 01:53:40,680 --> 01:53:43,000 different people so 2396 01:53:43,000 --> 01:53:49,579 and this public hearing was also advertised through the 2397 01:53:49,579 --> 01:53:51,720 newspaper so what 2398 01:53:51,720 --> 01:53:56,520 what I have done is highlight what are the most substantial 2399 01:53:56,520 --> 01:53:57,399 changes and I'm 2400 01:53:57,399 --> 01:54:01,300 going quickly through them so stop me if you need to go 2401 01:54:01,300 --> 01:54:03,680 over those we are 2402 01:54:03,680 --> 01:54:07,840 proposing to create a new ESA criteria manual the ESA 2403 01:54:07,840 --> 01:54:08,800 criteria manual is a 2404 01:54:08,800 --> 01:54:12,880 hopefully will provide guidance to the homeowner who 2405 01:54:12,880 --> 01:54:14,800 happens to have an ESA on 2406 01:54:14,800 --> 01:54:19,359 site but doesn't know how to manage them and also it will 2407 01:54:19,359 --> 01:54:20,680 provide some technical 2408 01:54:20,680 --> 01:54:24,640 guidance for the scientists and the biologists and the one 2409 01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,199 put in a 2410 01:54:25,199 --> 01:54:30,289 restoration program for ESA so we are trying to see to to 2411 01:54:30,289 --> 01:54:31,560 try to provide some 2412 01:54:31,560 --> 01:54:36,600 some guidance those are common questions that we have come 2413 01:54:36,600 --> 01:54:37,800 across over and over 2414 01:54:37,800 --> 01:54:41,039 you know we have the homeowner that doesn't have not not 2415 01:54:41,039 --> 01:54:42,520 much or really 2416 01:54:42,520 --> 01:54:46,510 interested in doing the right thing and we have the more 2417 01:54:46,510 --> 01:54:48,920 technical people we 2418 01:54:48,920 --> 01:54:51,869 have increased and expanded the credits given by 2419 01:54:51,869 --> 01:54:54,039 preservation of ESAs currently 2420 01:54:54,039 --> 01:54:57,720 the code talks about giving you credits for the landscape 2421 01:54:57,720 --> 01:54:58,920 and tree ordinance 2422 01:54:58,920 --> 01:55:02,180 however we have expanded those credits to also give you 2423 01:55:02,180 --> 01:55:03,119 credit for the 2424 01:55:03,119 --> 01:55:07,180 preservation of trees we have increased the ratio on those 2425 01:55:07,180 --> 01:55:08,920 and also because we 2426 01:55:08,920 --> 01:55:12,739 acknowledge that Denton is within two ecoregions one on the 2427 01:55:12,739 --> 01:55:13,640 eastern side is 2428 01:55:13,640 --> 01:55:16,609 where you see the crust timbers on the western side is the 2429 01:55:16,609 --> 01:55:17,600 prairie which are 2430 01:55:17,600 --> 01:55:21,189 dominated for more herbaceous plant we also want to 2431 01:55:21,189 --> 01:55:23,079 acknowledge that and give 2432 01:55:23,079 --> 01:55:27,880 them credit if you are preserving those habitats as well 2433 01:55:27,880 --> 01:55:28,920 establish an appeal 2434 01:55:28,920 --> 01:55:32,819 process for the ESA staff determination in the past 15 2435 01:55:32,819 --> 01:55:35,960 years we have not have a 2436 01:55:35,960 --> 01:55:40,529 process for which a applicant can challenge the staff 2437 01:55:40,529 --> 01:55:42,279 determination about 2438 01:55:42,279 --> 01:55:46,920 the presence or absence of ESA these process these new 2439 01:55:46,920 --> 01:55:47,920 mechanism would allow 2440 01:55:47,920 --> 01:55:54,210 that the designation and depiction of developed and unde 2441 01:55:54,210 --> 01:55:55,039 veloped floodplain 2442 01:55:55,039 --> 01:56:00,409 habitats and this is one of the major concern when the ESA 2443 01:56:00,409 --> 01:56:02,000 map map was created 2444 01:56:02,000 --> 01:56:07,100 back I would say in 2000 the designation the floodplain 2445 01:56:07,100 --> 01:56:08,880 were designated and when 2446 01:56:08,880 --> 01:56:12,699 we go back and see those especially in the western part of 2447 01:56:12,699 --> 01:56:13,960 town you see a lot 2448 01:56:13,960 --> 01:56:17,390 of switch between developed undeveloped and there's no 2449 01:56:17,390 --> 01:56:19,000 inconsistency throughout 2450 01:56:19,000 --> 01:56:24,460 and when you see that from an aerial standpoint the 2451 01:56:24,460 --> 01:56:26,279 developed designation 2452 01:56:26,279 --> 01:56:29,079 doesn't correspond to what is in the ground so we are 2453 01:56:29,079 --> 01:56:30,680 proposing to maintain 2454 01:56:30,680 --> 01:56:34,579 the designation what we are doing is changing the map are 2455 01:56:34,579 --> 01:56:35,239 calling it 2456 01:56:35,239 --> 01:56:39,800 everything floodplain ESA when the development is ready to 2457 01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:40,800 happen we have a 2458 01:56:40,800 --> 01:56:44,270 development proposal in our hands a staff will go out and 2459 01:56:44,270 --> 01:56:44,840 make the 2460 01:56:44,840 --> 01:56:48,060 determination of what is currently out there the applicant 2461 01:56:48,060 --> 01:56:49,199 will always have the 2462 01:56:49,199 --> 01:56:52,630 options to hire the own consultant to do it that is up to 2463 01:56:52,630 --> 01:56:53,840 them however what we 2464 01:56:53,840 --> 01:57:00,550 are trying to do is just to be consistent throughout the 2465 01:57:00,550 --> 01:57:03,319 exception of 2466 01:57:03,319 --> 01:57:06,750 roadways identified in the city thoroughfare plan from the 2467 01:57:06,750 --> 01:57:07,319 limits of 2468 01:57:07,319 --> 01:57:12,960 unfilled and vegetation disturbance something that comes to 2469 01:57:12,960 --> 01:57:14,119 to your mind 2470 01:57:14,119 --> 01:57:19,560 probably is the Ryan Meadows development where they were 2471 01:57:19,560 --> 01:57:20,760 required to extend 2472 01:57:20,760 --> 01:57:24,409 Creekdale through the floodplain on the southern part of 2473 01:57:24,409 --> 01:57:25,560 the development 2474 01:57:25,560 --> 01:57:31,430 unfortunately they we didn't have a provision to allow that 2475 01:57:31,430 --> 01:57:32,119 to happen 2476 01:57:32,119 --> 01:57:35,550 without them going through an alternative ESA plan this 2477 01:57:35,550 --> 01:57:36,439 Commission 2478 01:57:36,439 --> 01:57:41,000 have spoken and have shown interest in for that to be 2479 01:57:41,000 --> 01:57:42,840 changed and we have 2480 01:57:42,840 --> 01:57:47,399 incorporated what we have done is we have floodplain and 2481 01:57:47,399 --> 01:57:48,119 repair and buffers 2482 01:57:48,119 --> 01:57:51,159 most of the time the repair and buffer are nested inside 2483 01:57:51,159 --> 01:57:52,760 the floodplain so we 2484 01:57:52,760 --> 01:57:56,510 have make sure that is considered that that allowance is 2485 01:57:56,510 --> 01:57:57,720 not only consistent 2486 01:57:57,720 --> 01:58:00,890 through the floodplain but also within the repair and 2487 01:58:00,890 --> 01:58:02,319 buffer and water related 2488 01:58:02,319 --> 01:58:07,770 so that there should be a smooth pathway mitigation will be 2489 01:58:07,770 --> 01:58:09,520 required they will 2490 01:58:09,520 --> 01:58:12,100 have to restore that area that have been the vegetation 2491 01:58:12,100 --> 01:58:13,039 have been removed and 2492 01:58:13,039 --> 01:58:18,640 make sure that the slopes are consistent and they're not 2493 01:58:18,640 --> 01:58:20,199 will not end up or 2494 01:58:20,199 --> 01:58:22,779 resulting in erosion so but that mitigation will be 2495 01:58:22,779 --> 01:58:23,680 approved at staff 2496 01:58:23,680 --> 01:58:28,739 level so that will expedite it would make the process run 2497 01:58:28,739 --> 01:58:30,079 smoothly and faster 2498 01:58:30,079 --> 01:58:35,960 for the applicant the non-residential development to 2499 01:58:35,960 --> 01:58:37,279 preserve 30% of 2500 01:58:37,279 --> 01:58:40,710 cross timber upland habitat this is a change this is a 2501 01:58:40,710 --> 01:58:42,560 major change in policy 2502 01:58:42,560 --> 01:58:46,720 currently the DDC requires the preservation of 50% of the 2503 01:58:46,720 --> 01:58:47,239 upland 2504 01:58:47,239 --> 01:58:50,670 habitat for residential uses that includes multi-family 2505 01:58:50,670 --> 01:58:51,680 single-family and 2506 01:58:51,680 --> 01:58:57,720 do bless it however if you were to develop any non-resident 2507 01:58:57,720 --> 01:58:58,840 ial use you don't 2508 01:58:58,840 --> 01:59:03,399 have to preserve the upland habitat upland habitat 2509 01:59:03,399 --> 01:59:04,199 preservation is a little 2510 01:59:04,199 --> 01:59:08,479 bit different from tree code preservation mainly because 2511 01:59:08,479 --> 01:59:09,119 what we're 2512 01:59:09,119 --> 01:59:12,390 looking is the preservation of the of the habitat as a 2513 01:59:12,390 --> 01:59:13,960 entire as a unit we are 2514 01:59:13,960 --> 01:59:16,960 interested in in the trees but we're also interested in the 2515 01:59:16,960 --> 01:59:17,840 understory and 2516 01:59:17,840 --> 01:59:21,859 everything that goes with it why because for preserving 2517 01:59:21,859 --> 01:59:23,079 that if you remove the 2518 01:59:23,079 --> 01:59:27,640 understory from a habitat the chances are that the vi 2519 01:59:27,640 --> 01:59:29,560 ability of the habitat to to 2520 01:59:29,560 --> 01:59:34,359 last longer the benches so that's the reason why we while 2521 01:59:34,359 --> 01:59:35,000 we are moving and 2522 01:59:35,000 --> 01:59:38,079 again you have species that they don't climb up to the to 2523 01:59:38,079 --> 01:59:39,039 the to the tree 2524 01:59:39,039 --> 01:59:42,079 canopy they live on the bottom of that area so we are 2525 01:59:42,079 --> 01:59:43,760 providing how the 2526 01:59:43,760 --> 01:59:49,289 protection of the habitat as a whole and finally we are 2527 01:59:49,289 --> 01:59:51,600 providing a criteria for 2528 01:59:51,600 --> 01:59:55,130 approving an alternative ASAP and this is where I want to 2529 01:59:55,130 --> 01:59:56,159 delve into more 2530 01:59:56,159 --> 02:00:08,470 detail if you allow me back in when the DDC was first 2531 02:00:08,470 --> 02:00:12,840 drafted the alternative ESA 2532 02:00:12,840 --> 02:00:17,289 plan were envisioned to run parallel on the same process as 2533 02:00:17,289 --> 02:00:18,079 an alternative 2534 02:00:18,079 --> 02:00:21,939 development plan nowadays the development the alternative 2535 02:00:21,939 --> 02:00:22,439 development 2536 02:00:22,439 --> 02:00:26,050 plan comes to the planning and zoning Commission and gets 2537 02:00:26,050 --> 02:00:27,159 the final approval 2538 02:00:27,159 --> 02:00:30,979 before that and I will say approximately eight years ago AD 2539 02:00:30,979 --> 02:00:32,000 Ps required the 2540 02:00:32,000 --> 02:00:34,689 approval of a planning and zoning Commission and the 2541 02:00:34,689 --> 02:00:35,600 approval of City 2542 02:00:35,600 --> 02:00:39,460 Council very similar to a zoning change request that have 2543 02:00:39,460 --> 02:00:42,439 changed and the city 2544 02:00:42,439 --> 02:00:47,090 decide to keep to change the process for alternative ESA 2545 02:00:47,090 --> 02:00:49,399 plan but to maintain 2546 02:00:49,399 --> 02:00:53,960 the process for the alternative ESA plan meaning that 2547 02:00:53,960 --> 02:00:55,439 alternative ESA plan have 2548 02:00:55,439 --> 02:00:57,380 to go through the planning and zoning Commission get a 2549 02:00:57,380 --> 02:00:58,319 recommendation and then 2550 02:00:58,319 --> 02:01:00,899 move forward for final approval through the City Council 2551 02:01:00,899 --> 02:01:02,560 however when you 2552 02:01:02,560 --> 02:01:07,119 separated the two there was no criteria for alternative ESA 2553 02:01:07,119 --> 02:01:08,920 plan so at this point 2554 02:01:08,920 --> 02:01:12,350 even though a staff provide some guidance to applicant and 2555 02:01:12,350 --> 02:01:13,039 to this body 2556 02:01:13,039 --> 02:01:17,640 and City Council on the merits of the alternative ESA plan 2557 02:01:17,640 --> 02:01:18,520 we want to 2558 02:01:18,520 --> 02:01:22,180 officialize to formalize that process in that way you have 2559 02:01:22,180 --> 02:01:23,479 a clear guidance to 2560 02:01:23,479 --> 02:01:31,840 judge a proposal by so this is a complete new new change so 2561 02:01:31,840 --> 02:01:34,000 this is the 2562 02:01:34,000 --> 02:01:37,489 approval process the alternative ESA plan provides an 2563 02:01:37,489 --> 02:01:39,100 option to address the 2564 02:01:39,100 --> 02:01:41,680 regulations were in a flexible discretionary process 2565 02:01:41,680 --> 02:01:42,359 utilizing the 2566 02:01:42,359 --> 02:01:47,279 zoning amendment procedure outlines of chapter 3.4 that 2567 02:01:47,279 --> 02:01:48,239 language have no 2568 02:01:48,239 --> 02:01:51,449 change is the same that we currently have what is different 2569 02:01:51,449 --> 02:01:52,239 is the criteria 2570 02:01:52,239 --> 02:01:57,239 for approval you have heard me multiple times when I come 2571 02:01:57,239 --> 02:01:58,359 and present before you 2572 02:01:58,359 --> 02:02:04,239 about how staff the preferences for staff on mitigation I 2573 02:02:04,239 --> 02:02:05,279 have always tell 2574 02:02:05,279 --> 02:02:09,010 you that you work with what you have if you have a repair 2575 02:02:09,010 --> 02:02:10,279 and buffer that you 2576 02:02:10,279 --> 02:02:13,520 going to partially encroach on but you have more of that 2577 02:02:13,520 --> 02:02:14,960 habitat go and take a 2578 02:02:14,960 --> 02:02:18,779 look and see if you can make that habitat better it might 2579 02:02:18,779 --> 02:02:20,039 be chances are 2580 02:02:20,039 --> 02:02:23,000 that they will be so invasive species that could be removed 2581 02:02:23,000 --> 02:02:24,479 that you can plant 2582 02:02:24,479 --> 02:02:28,119 more native on it maybe that channel is already eroding if 2583 02:02:28,119 --> 02:02:29,119 you stabilize the 2584 02:02:29,119 --> 02:02:33,020 channel you are you are improving the chat the the habitat 2585 02:02:33,020 --> 02:02:34,520 as a whole so my 2586 02:02:34,520 --> 02:02:39,170 own what my first approach is work what you have and that's 2587 02:02:39,170 --> 02:02:40,560 number two 2588 02:02:40,560 --> 02:02:43,319 mitigation goals are obtained by preserving environmental 2589 02:02:43,319 --> 02:02:44,119 sensitive area 2590 02:02:44,119 --> 02:02:47,689 above the minimum requirement exchanges between different 2591 02:02:47,689 --> 02:02:49,479 type of ESO installing 2592 02:02:49,479 --> 02:02:53,130 pollution prevention controls and implementing best 2593 02:02:53,130 --> 02:02:54,399 management practices 2594 02:02:54,399 --> 02:02:57,510 or any other approaches that result in the improvement of 2595 02:02:57,510 --> 02:02:58,720 the environment being 2596 02:02:58,720 --> 02:03:02,819 impacted so before this I don't know if you remember Magn 2597 02:03:02,819 --> 02:03:03,680 olia an apartment 2598 02:03:03,680 --> 02:03:08,239 complex on Nottingham and mingle they exchange they 2599 02:03:08,239 --> 02:03:09,500 impacted a repair and 2600 02:03:09,500 --> 02:03:13,489 buffer in exchange they mitigated with preserving more open 2601 02:03:13,489 --> 02:03:14,640 habitat that one 2602 02:03:14,640 --> 02:03:18,829 they needed even though we are not talking apples to apples 2603 02:03:18,829 --> 02:03:20,399 we try to what 2604 02:03:20,399 --> 02:03:23,390 I call to find a common currency between the two type of 2605 02:03:23,390 --> 02:03:24,840 habitat in that case we 2606 02:03:24,840 --> 02:03:27,710 use the amount of trees preserve how many trees were 2607 02:03:27,710 --> 02:03:30,239 removed by encroaching 2608 02:03:30,239 --> 02:03:32,909 into the repair and buffer how much additional trees you 2609 02:03:32,909 --> 02:03:34,039 are preserving so 2610 02:03:34,039 --> 02:03:37,939 as long as we have some nexus between the two I think that 2611 02:03:37,939 --> 02:03:38,600 that's a viable 2612 02:03:38,600 --> 02:03:44,189 option sometimes you don't have that the only ESA that you 2613 02:03:44,189 --> 02:03:45,199 have on site is the 2614 02:03:45,199 --> 02:03:51,050 one that you are encroaching so in those instances because 2615 02:03:51,050 --> 02:03:52,479 all those eases they 2616 02:03:52,479 --> 02:03:58,640 provide a pollution control mechanism sometimes those 2617 02:03:58,640 --> 02:04:01,479 pollution benefits could 2618 02:04:01,479 --> 02:04:06,779 be obtained by the implementation of best management 2619 02:04:06,779 --> 02:04:07,840 practices or some water 2620 02:04:07,840 --> 02:04:12,560 controls so those are the we wanted to provide as much 2621 02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:14,880 possibility as we could 2622 02:04:14,880 --> 02:04:21,109 for applicants to provide mitigation and the last areas 2623 02:04:21,109 --> 02:04:22,840 offer as a mitigation are 2624 02:04:22,840 --> 02:04:26,810 linked to existing or plan open space of conserved area to 2625 02:04:26,810 --> 02:04:28,239 provide an overall 2626 02:04:28,239 --> 02:04:32,800 open space that language is already in the code it is under 2627 02:04:32,800 --> 02:04:35,840 section 17.10 so 2628 02:04:35,840 --> 02:04:39,390 what we have done many any many of that language that was 2629 02:04:39,390 --> 02:04:40,680 in that section have 2630 02:04:40,680 --> 02:04:45,880 been moved into this new section and made a criteria for 2631 02:04:45,880 --> 02:04:46,560 approving an 2632 02:04:46,560 --> 02:04:49,979 alternative ESA plan so that language is it we're just 2633 02:04:49,979 --> 02:04:51,479 changing the position 2634 02:04:51,479 --> 02:04:56,270 where it is in the code development is arranged for maxim 2635 02:04:56,270 --> 02:04:57,560 izing access and 2636 02:04:57,560 --> 02:05:01,470 utilization of the environments sensitive area by citizen 2637 02:05:01,470 --> 02:05:03,239 that code that 2638 02:05:03,239 --> 02:05:06,680 language is already in our code areas offers a mitigation 2639 02:05:06,680 --> 02:05:07,800 or place either on a 2640 02:05:07,800 --> 02:05:10,880 lot lots that incorporate permanent conservation in that 2641 02:05:10,880 --> 02:05:12,600 language is already 2642 02:05:12,600 --> 02:05:15,760 in the code we're just using it as a criteria for approval 2643 02:05:15,760 --> 02:05:16,680 and the 2644 02:05:16,680 --> 02:05:21,239 alternative ESA plan shall demonstrate that the developers 2645 02:05:21,239 --> 02:05:21,920 alternative proposal 2646 02:05:21,920 --> 02:05:25,470 results in a high quality development meeting the intent of 2647 02:05:25,470 --> 02:05:26,520 the standard of 2648 02:05:26,520 --> 02:05:29,960 the development code that is the only language that you 2649 02:05:29,960 --> 02:05:31,439 currently have for the 2650 02:05:31,439 --> 02:05:35,409 approval of alternative ESA plan so as you say it was a 2651 02:05:35,409 --> 02:05:37,720 combination of options 2652 02:05:37,720 --> 02:05:43,159 that we are wanting to provide the developers when they're 2653 02:05:43,159 --> 02:05:44,560 contemplating 2654 02:05:44,560 --> 02:05:49,119 applying for a alternative ESA plus you just using current 2655 02:05:49,119 --> 02:05:50,199 language that is 2656 02:05:50,199 --> 02:05:54,020 already in the code I just use it as a criteria so with 2657 02:05:54,020 --> 02:05:57,279 that said we are in the 2658 02:05:57,279 --> 02:06:03,439 process of making of actually creating the a criteria 2659 02:06:03,439 --> 02:06:04,960 mental for ESA is not 2660 02:06:04,960 --> 02:06:10,000 finished yet many of the comments that we have received 2661 02:06:10,000 --> 02:06:11,319 from the development 2662 02:06:11,319 --> 02:06:16,920 community could go into that or could guide the cut that to 2663 02:06:16,920 --> 02:06:17,880 to finalize the 2664 02:06:17,880 --> 02:06:26,239 content of the criteria manual so at this point the staff 2665 02:06:26,239 --> 02:06:27,000 you have received 2666 02:06:27,000 --> 02:06:31,560 copy of the compilation of the of the public input received 2667 02:06:31,560 --> 02:06:32,800 I'm very happy 2668 02:06:32,800 --> 02:06:38,220 with the with the active participation of the public there 2669 02:06:38,220 --> 02:06:40,880 's good good comments 2670 02:06:40,880 --> 02:06:44,000 that I would like to incorporate some of them could go 2671 02:06:44,000 --> 02:06:45,960 straight to the criteria 2672 02:06:45,960 --> 02:06:51,090 manual one comment that struck me and I wish I would have 2673 02:06:51,090 --> 02:06:52,399 thought about it when 2674 02:06:52,399 --> 02:06:55,319 when I was drafting the comment was to actually the 2675 02:06:55,319 --> 02:06:56,800 definition of a water 2676 02:06:56,800 --> 02:07:01,359 related habitat I think that the water related habitat 2677 02:07:01,359 --> 02:07:02,640 definition is not clear 2678 02:07:02,640 --> 02:07:08,319 enough and this new definition I think will help the the 2679 02:07:08,319 --> 02:07:09,119 applicants and 2680 02:07:09,119 --> 02:07:14,649 professionals when assessing those if you were interested 2681 02:07:14,649 --> 02:07:17,119 that would be if you 2682 02:07:17,119 --> 02:07:29,920 bear with me common number 28 on the list so it's pretty 2683 02:07:29,920 --> 02:07:32,159 much saying that we 2684 02:07:32,159 --> 02:07:37,479 need to include clearly stated that bottomland hardwoods 2685 02:07:37,479 --> 02:07:40,840 should be are 2686 02:07:40,840 --> 02:07:44,300 considered water related and I think that that addition it 2687 02:07:44,300 --> 02:07:45,520 really clarifies 2688 02:07:45,520 --> 02:07:50,079 for everybody this is not something new we are not 2689 02:07:50,079 --> 02:07:52,199 expanding this is currently 2690 02:07:52,199 --> 02:07:56,760 when somebody does a is a field assessment or when staff 2691 02:07:56,760 --> 02:07:57,600 perform those 2692 02:07:57,600 --> 02:08:00,720 assessment bottomlands that meet that criteria would also 2693 02:08:00,720 --> 02:08:01,600 be considered so 2694 02:08:01,600 --> 02:08:06,170 this is just putting it right in something that we are 2695 02:08:06,170 --> 02:08:07,680 currently doing 2696 02:08:09,159 --> 02:08:13,800 with that that concludes my presentation I'm available to 2697 02:08:13,800 --> 02:08:15,560 answer any questions 2698 02:08:15,560 --> 02:08:18,680 that you might have Commissioner bed thank you chair 2699 02:08:18,680 --> 02:08:20,199 Deborah can you go back 2700 02:08:20,199 --> 02:08:25,500 one slide with the writing in red just once like now okay 2701 02:08:25,500 --> 02:08:26,600 number five it says 2702 02:08:26,600 --> 02:08:30,100 there is offered as a mitigation or placed either in a lot 2703 02:08:30,100 --> 02:08:30,800 or lots that 2704 02:08:30,800 --> 02:08:34,250 incorporate a permanent conservation easement restricted co 2705 02:08:34,250 --> 02:08:35,319 venants so on so 2706 02:08:35,319 --> 02:08:41,699 is this suggesting that if we can't preserve enough trees 2707 02:08:41,699 --> 02:08:42,880 in the developed 2708 02:08:42,880 --> 02:08:47,800 area that we can find another parcel of land either nearby 2709 02:08:47,800 --> 02:08:48,920 or maybe in some other 2710 02:08:48,920 --> 02:08:54,119 parts of the city so we can conserve a certain percentage 2711 02:08:54,119 --> 02:08:56,319 of tree canopy and 2712 02:08:56,319 --> 02:09:01,840 upland habitat is that what that's suggesting that leave 2713 02:09:01,840 --> 02:09:03,359 the door open for 2714 02:09:03,359 --> 02:09:08,039 that option to happen I have been doing development review 2715 02:09:08,039 --> 02:09:09,439 for 18 years and 2716 02:09:09,439 --> 02:09:14,000 doing is as for over 10 and we have had a couple of 2717 02:09:14,000 --> 02:09:16,079 instances where developer 2718 02:09:16,079 --> 02:09:21,279 have tried that this the size of the preservation area 2719 02:09:21,279 --> 02:09:22,680 matters especially 2720 02:09:22,680 --> 02:09:25,319 because you wanted to put some sort of in some sort of 2721 02:09:25,319 --> 02:09:26,880 conservation easement so 2722 02:09:26,880 --> 02:09:30,960 if you are talking about less than one acre chances are 2723 02:09:30,960 --> 02:09:31,880 that you will find 2724 02:09:31,880 --> 02:09:35,510 somebody who might be interested in do a conservation area 2725 02:09:35,510 --> 02:09:36,760 for one acre will be 2726 02:09:36,760 --> 02:09:42,920 hard so what I'm saying is given that the right conditions 2727 02:09:42,920 --> 02:09:44,720 given the right 2728 02:09:44,720 --> 02:09:49,689 layers it is a possibility have not been done however I 2729 02:09:49,689 --> 02:09:52,920 will not try to exclude 2730 02:09:52,920 --> 02:09:56,579 that option because have not happened yet but that 2731 02:09:56,579 --> 02:09:58,800 provision leave the door 2732 02:09:58,800 --> 02:10:02,619 open for that to happen and that would probably suggest 2733 02:10:02,619 --> 02:10:03,520 that the city get 2734 02:10:03,520 --> 02:10:09,380 involved financially to cover that causes that probably 2735 02:10:09,380 --> 02:10:10,640 true to or are 2736 02:10:10,640 --> 02:10:13,220 there other ways in other words if we're gonna you know 2737 02:10:13,220 --> 02:10:14,760 well no I take that back 2738 02:10:14,760 --> 02:10:18,579 the developer would come in to play their own part of that 2739 02:10:18,579 --> 02:10:19,720 but we'd have to 2740 02:10:19,720 --> 02:10:24,670 set some kind of areas aside that within the city that I 2741 02:10:24,670 --> 02:10:26,279 guess this Commission 2742 02:10:26,279 --> 02:10:31,310 City Council could agree on well if you're referring as a 2743 02:10:31,310 --> 02:10:32,359 creating a 2744 02:10:32,359 --> 02:10:38,000 mitigation bank where developers can go and purchase that 2745 02:10:38,000 --> 02:10:40,079 right now if we use 2746 02:10:40,079 --> 02:10:43,560 the example that the Court of Engineer uses for wetland 2747 02:10:43,560 --> 02:10:45,319 mitigation those are 2748 02:10:45,319 --> 02:10:49,880 actually probably owned by entities okay and they have 2749 02:10:49,880 --> 02:10:51,399 aside those areas that 2750 02:10:51,399 --> 02:10:55,319 provide the half wetlands and things like that and then the 2751 02:10:55,319 --> 02:10:56,439 developer goes 2752 02:10:56,439 --> 02:11:00,489 like they will go to any other bank and say I'm interesting 2753 02:11:00,489 --> 02:11:01,920 on purchasing from 2754 02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:05,649 you X number of credit the number of credits are determined 2755 02:11:05,649 --> 02:11:06,479 by the Court of 2756 02:11:06,479 --> 02:11:13,060 Engineers based on the proposed meeting impact so and have 2757 02:11:13,060 --> 02:11:15,399 worked so far is a 2758 02:11:15,399 --> 02:11:19,960 private driven market to be honest with you where they 2759 02:11:19,960 --> 02:11:21,800 establish the the price 2760 02:11:21,800 --> 02:11:26,859 for those units and so far so at this point I don't know if 2761 02:11:26,859 --> 02:11:27,840 the city will 2762 02:11:27,840 --> 02:11:33,130 entertain the idea to actually create a bank like that but 2763 02:11:33,130 --> 02:11:34,840 I would say I will 2764 02:11:34,840 --> 02:11:38,470 not say that it's not possible but the that option if 2765 02:11:38,470 --> 02:11:40,199 somebody happens to have 2766 02:11:40,199 --> 02:11:45,600 to see that as a more credible idea somebody can pursue it 2767 02:11:45,600 --> 02:11:46,760 they could be a 2768 02:11:46,760 --> 02:11:51,319 part of future discussion definitely okay okay thank you 2769 02:11:51,319 --> 02:11:52,199 Commissioner Rizzo 2770 02:11:52,199 --> 02:11:54,779 thank you chair thank you Deborah for the presentation I 2771 02:11:54,779 --> 02:11:56,720 need to hopefully get 2772 02:11:56,720 --> 02:11:58,750 some clarification before I ask a question can you go back 2773 02:11:58,750 --> 02:11:59,199 to your very 2774 02:11:59,199 --> 02:12:03,039 first slide where it talked about the reasons or the 2775 02:12:03,039 --> 02:12:06,560 motives for this 2776 02:12:08,720 --> 02:12:20,039 no no no one more it talked about MS4 okay so these four 2777 02:12:20,039 --> 02:12:21,319 items listed here are 2778 02:12:21,319 --> 02:12:26,960 all economic benefits to the city I'm wondering is the sole 2779 02:12:26,960 --> 02:12:29,119 intent and motive 2780 02:12:29,119 --> 02:12:33,699 behind this manual to protect the economics of the city or 2781 02:12:33,699 --> 02:12:35,039 to protect the 2782 02:12:35,039 --> 02:12:39,090 actual habitats found in S to the B because as you 2783 02:12:39,090 --> 02:12:42,000 mentioned the four items that are 2784 02:12:42,000 --> 02:12:45,079 adding value to the city you're not mentioning tree canopy 2785 02:12:45,079 --> 02:12:46,359 critters birds 2786 02:12:46,359 --> 02:12:49,460 any of that listed here it's all economic value so I'm 2787 02:12:49,460 --> 02:12:50,520 wondering if you 2788 02:12:50,520 --> 02:12:54,569 can clarify the city's motive in all of this and I 2789 02:12:54,569 --> 02:12:57,159 apologize that one of the 2790 02:12:57,159 --> 02:13:01,210 slides that I that I skipped was actually the six basic 2791 02:13:01,210 --> 02:13:02,199 functions of 2792 02:13:02,199 --> 02:13:06,000 environmental sensitive area first is to provide habitat 2793 02:13:06,000 --> 02:13:07,720 and most of the time is 2794 02:13:07,720 --> 02:13:13,020 is their methods to quantify that in a monotonous way to 2795 02:13:13,020 --> 02:13:14,760 provide some because 2796 02:13:14,760 --> 02:13:17,979 most of the time what they they do is how much it will take 2797 02:13:17,979 --> 02:13:18,880 for us to mimic 2798 02:13:18,880 --> 02:13:23,439 that habitat and we can make those those numbers but 2799 02:13:23,439 --> 02:13:24,640 sometimes it is hard to 2800 02:13:24,640 --> 02:13:29,479 quantify that so by preserving is as we are preserving 2801 02:13:29,479 --> 02:13:30,399 habitat which is a 2802 02:13:30,399 --> 02:13:35,279 benefit not only for the wildlife but for for for for us 2803 02:13:35,279 --> 02:13:37,239 surface as a conduit 2804 02:13:37,239 --> 02:13:41,689 all those these are allows that the the wildlife the plants 2805 02:13:41,689 --> 02:13:43,119 the material to move 2806 02:13:43,119 --> 02:13:47,760 from point A to point B it works as a barrier for example 2807 02:13:47,760 --> 02:13:48,479 sedimentation 2808 02:13:48,479 --> 02:13:52,189 pollutants it stops that even hydrocarbons when we have a 2809 02:13:52,189 --> 02:13:52,880 spill and 2810 02:13:52,880 --> 02:13:56,439 that hydrocarbons is allowed to go through some sort of 2811 02:13:56,439 --> 02:13:57,840 grassy area all of 2812 02:13:57,840 --> 02:14:02,720 that hydrocarbons are captured by the by the vegetation 2813 02:14:02,720 --> 02:14:04,279 filter pollutants 2814 02:14:04,279 --> 02:14:09,640 sediments is a pollutant source of resources and provide 2815 02:14:09,640 --> 02:14:10,760 supply like 2816 02:14:10,760 --> 02:14:15,319 organic matter nutrients and aquifer recharge all the 2817 02:14:15,319 --> 02:14:16,359 vegetation that you see 2818 02:14:16,359 --> 02:14:20,920 a lone Creek all the foliage that falls into the water 2819 02:14:20,920 --> 02:14:23,520 those are actually the 2820 02:14:23,520 --> 02:14:27,340 food that the creature downstream are going to use to feed 2821 02:14:27,340 --> 02:14:28,359 from and those 2822 02:14:28,359 --> 02:14:33,409 creatures are the food of fish and then you can see how how 2823 02:14:33,409 --> 02:14:35,079 the chain progresses 2824 02:14:35,079 --> 02:14:41,899 all the way to to us and it's a source of resources we have 2825 02:14:41,899 --> 02:14:44,520 our one of the one 2826 02:14:44,520 --> 02:14:48,260 of our sort of portable water is Lake Lewisville so the 2827 02:14:48,260 --> 02:14:50,460 cleaner we we keep the 2828 02:14:50,460 --> 02:14:54,029 water going to discharge into the lake the less treatment 2829 02:14:54,029 --> 02:14:55,640 that we are having to 2830 02:14:55,640 --> 02:14:59,899 provide to make that water portable and sink and sequest 2831 02:14:59,899 --> 02:15:01,399 ration of pollutant 2832 02:15:01,399 --> 02:15:05,579 carbon would be one of those that have been linked to the 2833 02:15:05,579 --> 02:15:07,720 climate change so 2834 02:15:07,720 --> 02:15:12,840 those are the more environmental functions that we get out 2835 02:15:12,840 --> 02:15:13,319 of it 2836 02:15:13,319 --> 02:15:19,810 interesting enough is approximately over 50% of the tree 2837 02:15:19,810 --> 02:15:22,000 canopy in the in the 2838 02:15:22,000 --> 02:15:31,109 city is within some sort of ESA so just by 50% of the tree 2839 02:15:31,109 --> 02:15:32,800 canopy is within some 2840 02:15:32,800 --> 02:15:37,800 sort of ESA so just by preserving the ESA we also 2841 02:15:37,800 --> 02:15:40,279 maintaining our tree canopy 2842 02:15:40,279 --> 02:15:43,710 for the city which is something that the community have 2843 02:15:43,710 --> 02:15:45,239 rated highly important 2844 02:15:45,239 --> 02:15:49,689 for them so those are the the the environmentally more 2845 02:15:49,689 --> 02:15:50,760 driven reasons to 2846 02:15:50,760 --> 02:15:55,319 why to maintain but there are more pragmatic uses to also 2847 02:15:55,319 --> 02:15:56,359 preserve ESAs and 2848 02:15:56,359 --> 02:16:01,159 those are for compliance with permitting improving our 2849 02:16:01,159 --> 02:16:02,840 score in the floodplain 2850 02:16:02,840 --> 02:16:07,659 management so forth so a little bit of more less 2851 02:16:07,659 --> 02:16:10,159 quantitative and the other 2852 02:16:10,159 --> 02:16:13,710 sides more quantitative so thank you very much I really 2853 02:16:13,710 --> 02:16:14,840 appreciate that and 2854 02:16:14,840 --> 02:16:18,270 and based on on those six things just to bring back what I 2855 02:16:18,270 --> 02:16:19,520 talked about in work 2856 02:16:19,520 --> 02:16:22,680 session it seems like we would want to protect these six 2857 02:16:22,680 --> 02:16:23,800 things regardless of 2858 02:16:23,800 --> 02:16:28,920 the use going into the property in the new rules it's 50% 2859 02:16:28,920 --> 02:16:29,720 for residential and 2860 02:16:29,720 --> 02:16:33,200 30% for non-residential and talking to staff I understand 2861 02:16:33,200 --> 02:16:34,399 that non-residential 2862 02:16:34,399 --> 02:16:37,290 does have landscape requirements and barriers that they do 2863 02:16:37,290 --> 02:16:37,959 add but those 2864 02:16:37,959 --> 02:16:42,520 aren't creating SS those are function of some beaut 2865 02:16:42,520 --> 02:16:44,760 ification of the property and 2866 02:16:44,760 --> 02:16:47,520 I would say residential property owners want to put trees 2867 02:16:47,520 --> 02:16:48,559 in their front yards 2868 02:16:48,559 --> 02:16:50,500 and they have landscaping around there in front of the 2869 02:16:50,500 --> 02:16:51,239 house and in their 2870 02:16:51,239 --> 02:16:56,930 backyard and so I I think those should be equal I think 2871 02:16:56,930 --> 02:16:59,280 especially if one of 2872 02:16:59,280 --> 02:17:02,450 the reasons why their residential use is 50% is because 2873 02:17:02,450 --> 02:17:03,719 developers can charge 2874 02:17:03,719 --> 02:17:06,520 more for treating property I think that is not an 2875 02:17:06,520 --> 02:17:08,879 appropriate reason to have an 2876 02:17:08,879 --> 02:17:13,329 increased amount of upland habitat specifically on the 2877 02:17:13,329 --> 02:17:14,159 property just 2878 02:17:14,159 --> 02:17:17,809 because we assume that developers gonna make more money off 2879 02:17:17,809 --> 02:17:20,159 of it and so I don't 2880 02:17:20,159 --> 02:17:24,209 want to belabor the point but I do feel that I have yet to 2881 02:17:24,209 --> 02:17:26,159 be convinced why the 2882 02:17:26,159 --> 02:17:31,809 city is proposing two different percentages based on use 2883 02:17:31,809 --> 02:17:33,040 when I think if 2884 02:17:33,040 --> 02:17:35,620 we are about protecting upland habitat then it shouldn't 2885 02:17:35,620 --> 02:17:36,840 matter who's destroying 2886 02:17:36,840 --> 02:17:42,350 it we want to protect it so I think either non-residential 2887 02:17:42,350 --> 02:17:42,959 you should go to 2888 02:17:42,959 --> 02:17:46,409 50% or seemingly because of the other points brought up in 2889 02:17:46,409 --> 02:17:47,440 work session about 2890 02:17:47,440 --> 02:17:50,430 the issues with residential property owners not having 2891 02:17:50,430 --> 02:17:51,319 access to their 2892 02:17:51,319 --> 02:17:54,440 property I'd be more of opponent proponent of dropping the 2893 02:17:54,440 --> 02:17:55,360 residential 2894 02:17:55,360 --> 02:18:00,659 use down to 30% but I just think it and maybe I'm missing 2895 02:18:00,659 --> 02:18:01,360 something you can help 2896 02:18:01,360 --> 02:18:07,030 me understand I don't understand why non-residential are 2897 02:18:07,030 --> 02:18:07,959 allowed to tear down 2898 02:18:07,959 --> 02:18:12,409 more upland habitat and not keep it contiguous and that 2899 02:18:12,409 --> 02:18:13,879 they can just keep 2900 02:18:13,879 --> 02:18:16,579 the tree canopy in line with the potential tree code 2901 02:18:16,579 --> 02:18:18,159 provisions okay well 2902 02:18:18,159 --> 02:18:22,440 we are starting from right now that we preserving zero on 2903 02:18:22,440 --> 02:18:23,479 non-residential 2904 02:18:23,479 --> 02:18:27,420 development for upland habitat to a 30% which is is an 2905 02:18:27,420 --> 02:18:29,840 improvement okay 2906 02:18:29,840 --> 02:18:33,739 non-residential development they have parking areas loading 2907 02:18:33,739 --> 02:18:35,200 docks maneuvering 2908 02:18:35,200 --> 02:18:40,040 geometry that they have to maintain to make their site plan 2909 02:18:40,040 --> 02:18:42,319 workable okay they 2910 02:18:42,319 --> 02:18:46,500 also are some of them they will come to the city with a 2911 02:18:46,500 --> 02:18:48,520 preconceived site plan 2912 02:18:48,520 --> 02:18:51,950 which it worked for them in other locations and would like 2913 02:18:51,950 --> 02:18:53,040 to implement the 2914 02:18:53,040 --> 02:19:00,530 same here so I see why that the 30% to the to the non- 2915 02:19:00,530 --> 02:19:02,399 residential is given 2916 02:19:02,399 --> 02:19:08,280 that the other side was when I was reviewing this the tree 2917 02:19:08,280 --> 02:19:09,120 code was also 2918 02:19:09,120 --> 02:19:16,399 being redrafted okay and the 30% was something that is 2919 02:19:16,399 --> 02:19:18,319 where the language 2920 02:19:18,319 --> 02:19:26,799 which I believe still there it was trying to attain so in 2921 02:19:26,799 --> 02:19:28,479 we want to make 2922 02:19:28,479 --> 02:19:35,379 development in that and feasible okay so we try to by 2923 02:19:35,379 --> 02:19:37,479 maintaining that 30% 2924 02:19:37,479 --> 02:19:41,930 consistency if they were to have to preserve 30% for tree 2925 02:19:41,930 --> 02:19:43,159 canopy they can use 2926 02:19:43,159 --> 02:19:48,219 the open habitat to meet that code as well so it was a way 2927 02:19:48,219 --> 02:19:50,040 to improve of what 2928 02:19:50,040 --> 02:19:55,159 we currently have from 0 to 30 and also to provide some 2929 02:19:55,159 --> 02:19:57,040 place flexibility to 2930 02:19:57,040 --> 02:20:04,059 non-residential developer and to actually trying to pass 2931 02:20:04,059 --> 02:20:05,600 the benefit of 2932 02:20:05,600 --> 02:20:09,399 preserving our plan and make them count towards other 2933 02:20:09,399 --> 02:20:10,799 requirements so that was 2934 02:20:10,799 --> 02:20:15,520 the intent behind that however if this Commissioner would 2935 02:20:15,520 --> 02:20:16,600 like to change that 2936 02:20:16,600 --> 02:20:19,469 percentage and make and make that part of your 2937 02:20:19,469 --> 02:20:21,680 recommendation a staff would 2938 02:20:21,680 --> 02:20:27,129 pass that recommendation to City Council as well so just if 2939 02:20:27,129 --> 02:20:28,799 there's something in 2940 02:20:28,799 --> 02:20:32,229 the code right now that you are not hundred percent if the 2941 02:20:32,229 --> 02:20:32,760 Commission as a 2942 02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:36,440 whole is not hundred percent what it either want to 2943 02:20:36,440 --> 02:20:38,319 increase or actually want 2944 02:20:38,319 --> 02:20:43,500 to make the requirements lesser let us know and make that 2945 02:20:43,500 --> 02:20:44,399 part of your 2946 02:20:44,399 --> 02:20:49,479 recommendation and we will pass that so I don't want to 2947 02:20:49,479 --> 02:20:51,639 because we have not you 2948 02:20:51,639 --> 02:20:54,799 are not agreeing with every single word of that is just 2949 02:20:54,799 --> 02:20:56,760 prevent you to actually 2950 02:20:56,760 --> 02:21:00,079 move forward with it with the proposed changes that some of 2951 02:21:00,079 --> 02:21:01,040 them are really 2952 02:21:01,040 --> 02:21:06,989 needed I appreciate the context thank you Commissioner 2953 02:21:06,989 --> 02:21:10,399 Sullivan yes has I 2954 02:21:10,399 --> 02:21:14,049 haven't heard anything so I'm just curious you know to 2955 02:21:14,049 --> 02:21:15,399 state and national 2956 02:21:15,399 --> 02:21:20,110 level there is a process whereby you can turn land over to 2957 02:21:20,110 --> 02:21:21,879 the state into the 2958 02:21:21,879 --> 02:21:26,120 national federal government in return you get tax benefits 2959 02:21:26,120 --> 02:21:27,040 and so forth 2960 02:21:27,040 --> 02:21:31,760 conservation easements and is there any provision whereby 2961 02:21:31,760 --> 02:21:33,479 the changes to the 2962 02:21:33,479 --> 02:21:39,840 code renders either all or a portion of somebody's property 2963 02:21:39,840 --> 02:21:42,159 unusable in other 2964 02:21:42,159 --> 02:21:44,959 words they can't make any changes it's a certain 2965 02:21:44,959 --> 02:21:49,559 designation ESA whatever and it 2966 02:21:49,559 --> 02:21:54,860 basically renders it unusable is there any thought to 2967 02:21:54,860 --> 02:21:57,200 saying you know what you 2968 02:21:57,200 --> 02:21:59,780 deed this over to the city because the city is telling you 2969 02:21:59,780 --> 02:22:00,520 you can't do anything 2970 02:22:00,520 --> 02:22:03,959 within this area you deed it over to the city the city 2971 02:22:03,959 --> 02:22:05,440 takes it over in an 2972 02:22:05,440 --> 02:22:10,000 exchange whether for cash or for tax benefit making a 2973 02:22:10,000 --> 02:22:11,120 charitable contribution 2974 02:22:11,120 --> 02:22:15,569 to the city or something of that effect whereby the land 2975 02:22:15,569 --> 02:22:17,360 owner gets some benefit 2976 02:22:17,360 --> 02:22:22,659 by the city effectively taking that land from them well the 2977 02:22:22,659 --> 02:22:23,760 conservation easement 2978 02:22:23,760 --> 02:22:26,129 most of the time they are not driven by the city they are 2979 02:22:26,129 --> 02:22:27,319 actually institution 2980 02:22:27,319 --> 02:22:31,700 that manage them and how they work this let's say that you 2981 02:22:31,700 --> 02:22:33,479 have hundred acres of 2982 02:22:33,479 --> 02:22:37,340 development you can actually restrict the development 2983 02:22:37,340 --> 02:22:39,319 rights on your property 2984 02:22:39,319 --> 02:22:44,680 let's say that is a farm right now with potential to be rez 2985 02:22:44,680 --> 02:22:46,260 oned into single 2986 02:22:46,260 --> 02:22:51,700 family and being a subdivision you can actually put a 2987 02:22:51,700 --> 02:22:52,879 conservation easement 2988 02:22:52,879 --> 02:22:58,799 where you say this area will not be developed more than 2989 02:22:58,799 --> 02:23:01,159 this amount of units 2990 02:23:01,159 --> 02:23:06,149 okay even though I'm capping that and then you're trading 2991 02:23:06,149 --> 02:23:07,559 your development 2992 02:23:07,559 --> 02:23:14,340 rights and by doing that you can get some tax reduction 2993 02:23:14,340 --> 02:23:16,559 because you are your 2994 02:23:16,559 --> 02:23:21,190 the property the value of the property no longer allows for 2995 02:23:21,190 --> 02:23:22,840 maximizing hundred 2996 02:23:22,840 --> 02:23:27,510 units per acre now is limited to 30 so the value of your 2997 02:23:27,510 --> 02:23:29,120 property changes 2998 02:23:29,120 --> 02:23:32,920 according to it and you get the benefits through some sort 2999 02:23:32,920 --> 02:23:33,840 of tax but those 3000 02:23:33,840 --> 02:23:37,739 conservations easements are not provided by the city they 3001 02:23:37,739 --> 02:23:39,239 're usually run by 3002 02:23:39,239 --> 02:23:44,280 institution we have some in the state of Texas we have some 3003 02:23:44,280 --> 02:23:46,399 landowners most of 3004 02:23:46,399 --> 02:23:50,399 time big ranches that actually pursue that but it's not 3005 02:23:50,399 --> 02:23:51,399 through city 3006 02:23:51,399 --> 02:23:54,239 government through conservation easement and those 3007 02:23:54,239 --> 02:23:56,159 organizations who manage them 3008 02:23:56,159 --> 02:24:00,149 but the effect of the property owner is the same and that 3009 02:24:00,149 --> 02:24:01,360 is that they are 3010 02:24:01,360 --> 02:24:05,379 giving up a portion of their land not necessarily because 3011 02:24:05,379 --> 02:24:06,959 they want to but 3012 02:24:06,959 --> 02:24:10,389 because of these changes being made to the code require 3013 02:24:10,389 --> 02:24:12,799 them to give up some of 3014 02:24:12,799 --> 02:24:17,920 the land so in effect the city really is taking that land 3015 02:24:17,920 --> 02:24:19,159 and now you have all 3016 02:24:19,159 --> 02:24:24,110 kinds of issues going on and so you know I think there's 3017 02:24:24,110 --> 02:24:26,079 needs to be some talk as 3018 02:24:26,079 --> 02:24:28,969 Commissioner Roselle is talking it seems like it's sort of 3019 02:24:28,969 --> 02:24:30,000 all faith in the favor 3020 02:24:30,000 --> 02:24:32,920 of the city well I think the city needs to give some of 3021 02:24:32,920 --> 02:24:34,079 that back to the homeowner 3022 02:24:34,079 --> 02:24:38,799 to the landowner so that if they're willing to abide by 3023 02:24:38,799 --> 02:24:40,520 these rules then 3024 02:24:40,520 --> 02:24:44,159 deed it to the city let the city take it over and get some 3025 02:24:44,159 --> 02:24:45,920 tax benefit for the 3026 02:24:45,920 --> 02:24:52,350 landowner for example the flood plain is the is that number 3027 02:24:52,350 --> 02:24:53,719 one type of visa that 3028 02:24:53,719 --> 02:24:56,819 is larger in acreage you know because it's a floodplain if 3029 02:24:56,819 --> 02:24:58,000 you were to 3030 02:24:58,000 --> 02:25:00,579 developed if you were to develop property who has a flood 3031 02:25:00,579 --> 02:25:02,879 penny a floodplain FEMA 3032 02:25:02,879 --> 02:25:07,440 hundred-year floodplain most of that area the city would 3033 02:25:07,440 --> 02:25:09,600 not allow you to do to 3034 02:25:09,600 --> 02:25:13,799 put any structures to it why because when you do that you 3035 02:25:13,799 --> 02:25:14,319 are actually 3036 02:25:14,319 --> 02:25:18,000 reducing the the value storage you are increasing the water 3037 02:25:18,000 --> 02:25:18,959 surface elevation 3038 02:25:18,959 --> 02:25:21,659 and you are making condition the flooding conditions 3039 02:25:21,659 --> 02:25:22,600 downstream of you 3040 02:25:22,600 --> 02:25:27,299 worst okay so in those instances the city is required you 3041 02:25:27,299 --> 02:25:28,760 to put a drainage 3042 02:25:28,760 --> 02:25:33,399 easement on it what it means is you own the land is yours 3043 02:25:33,399 --> 02:25:34,559 what you are doing is 3044 02:25:34,559 --> 02:25:38,090 restricting they use the development of that of that 3045 02:25:38,090 --> 02:25:39,840 section of your property 3046 02:25:39,840 --> 02:25:44,649 because it is within a essay we have three type of ESA that 3047 02:25:44,649 --> 02:25:45,639 most of the time 3048 02:25:45,639 --> 02:25:49,299 are nested in floodplaining essay so when you put a 3049 02:25:49,299 --> 02:25:51,200 drainage easement on your 3050 02:25:51,200 --> 02:25:55,899 property just to meet the floodplain requirements nothing 3051 02:25:55,899 --> 02:25:57,239 else just to you 3052 02:25:57,239 --> 02:26:02,639 are preserving for the most time those three both of ESA so 3053 02:26:02,639 --> 02:26:04,520 in those and that's 3054 02:26:04,520 --> 02:26:09,610 why some of our definitions are crafted very carefully to 3055 02:26:09,610 --> 02:26:11,479 make sure that when 3056 02:26:11,479 --> 02:26:15,299 development happens if they're already having to provide a 3057 02:26:15,299 --> 02:26:16,360 drainage easement 3058 02:26:16,360 --> 02:26:19,459 because floodplain conditions then you already meeting the 3059 02:26:19,459 --> 02:26:20,680 ESA floodplain so 3060 02:26:20,680 --> 02:26:25,469 use us in the way that have been it doesn't work in every 3061 02:26:25,469 --> 02:26:26,040 in every instance 3062 02:26:26,040 --> 02:26:29,000 hundred percent but most of the time we have crafted the 3063 02:26:29,000 --> 02:26:31,120 language to allow the 3064 02:26:31,120 --> 02:26:36,969 developers and homeowners to actually meet multiple 3065 02:26:36,969 --> 02:26:39,520 requirements drainage 3066 02:26:40,120 --> 02:26:45,680 landscape opens minimum open space and so on by preserving 3067 02:26:45,680 --> 02:26:49,079 the essay so we are 3068 02:26:49,079 --> 02:26:53,639 look we are open to to other options but the condition that 3069 02:26:53,639 --> 02:26:54,920 the code have been 3070 02:26:54,920 --> 02:27:02,129 drafted with that mentality already I've got a couple more 3071 02:27:02,129 --> 02:27:03,840 questions that we 3072 02:27:03,840 --> 02:27:08,879 didn't get to in work session I've got a question on in 3073 02:27:08,879 --> 02:27:10,760 regards to the page turn 3074 02:27:10,760 --> 02:27:23,319 I guess this would be section 17.7 be section 3 standard 3075 02:27:23,319 --> 02:27:24,120 for fill and 3076 02:27:24,120 --> 02:27:31,600 undeveloped floodplains okay yes and as I read this it says 3077 02:27:31,600 --> 02:27:33,719 filling of any flood 3078 02:27:33,719 --> 02:27:37,680 plane of a stream that drains more 3079 02:27:37,920 --> 02:27:42,479 and one square miles per unless the fill on any lot is less 3080 02:27:42,479 --> 02:27:44,280 than 50 cubic yards 3081 02:27:44,280 --> 02:27:49,479 or 300 cubic feet per acre whichever is greater and further 3082 02:27:49,479 --> 02:27:50,879 on in E it talks 3083 02:27:50,879 --> 02:27:54,600 about fill being concrete or aggregate and there's a 3084 02:27:54,600 --> 02:27:56,040 description of what is 3085 02:27:56,040 --> 02:28:02,649 Phil my question is thinking like I think is that if you 3086 02:28:02,649 --> 02:28:03,520 have a lot or a 3087 02:28:03,520 --> 02:28:06,639 piece of property that has undeveloped floodplain on it and 3088 02:28:06,639 --> 02:28:07,840 it's considered a 3089 02:28:07,840 --> 02:28:12,760 lot or an acre you can't come do in excess of 50 cubic 3090 02:28:12,760 --> 02:28:14,680 yards of material on 3091 02:28:14,680 --> 02:28:18,479 that lot anywhere the way that this is written it doesn't 3092 02:28:18,479 --> 02:28:19,239 say it's in the flood 3093 02:28:19,239 --> 02:28:23,229 plane it just says unless the fill on any lot is less than 3094 02:28:23,229 --> 02:28:24,959 50 cubic yards so if 3095 02:28:24,959 --> 02:28:28,780 you have a lot that has undeveloped floodplain on it you 3096 02:28:28,780 --> 02:28:30,479 can't put 50 cubic 3097 02:28:30,479 --> 02:28:36,000 yards of material on it well this is meant they the ESA is 3098 02:28:36,000 --> 02:28:36,799 the floodplain 3099 02:28:36,799 --> 02:28:43,079 itself okay so this call deals with with those ESA the 3100 02:28:43,079 --> 02:28:44,600 limitation on the field is 3101 02:28:44,600 --> 02:28:50,489 is intended to to be within the floodplain so if your lot 3102 02:28:50,489 --> 02:28:52,159 is partially 3103 02:28:52,159 --> 02:28:56,610 outside of the floodplain and you are willing to put a fill 3104 02:28:56,610 --> 02:28:57,799 on that lot but 3105 02:28:57,799 --> 02:29:00,930 not encumber into the floodplain you are allowed the 3106 02:29:00,930 --> 02:29:03,120 problem is when you want you 3107 02:29:03,120 --> 02:29:08,159 decide is to go over that threshold within the floodplain 3108 02:29:08,159 --> 02:29:10,600 this is it have 3109 02:29:10,600 --> 02:29:15,959 two connections first by the I understand that part I'm 3110 02:29:15,959 --> 02:29:16,719 just reading 3111 02:29:16,719 --> 02:29:23,520 what it says okay is that if you have floodplain on there 3112 02:29:23,520 --> 02:29:25,260 it's prohibited 3113 02:29:25,260 --> 02:29:29,170 unless the fill is on any lot less than 50 cubic yards it 3114 02:29:29,170 --> 02:29:30,559 doesn't say that if 3115 02:29:30,559 --> 02:29:34,010 it's in the floodplain it just says if it's on the lot so 3116 02:29:34,010 --> 02:29:35,360 for clarification 3117 02:29:35,360 --> 02:29:39,319 purposes I think it needs to be clarified kind of what you 3118 02:29:39,319 --> 02:29:39,639 're describing 3119 02:29:39,639 --> 02:29:42,729 is that it can't be in the floodplain because the way I 3120 02:29:42,729 --> 02:29:44,040 read it now is that it 3121 02:29:44,040 --> 02:29:46,889 can't be on the lot if a piece of the lot is in the flood 3122 02:29:46,889 --> 02:29:47,760 plain does that make 3123 02:29:47,760 --> 02:29:51,700 sense yeah I can definitely rework that lot language to 3124 02:29:51,700 --> 02:29:53,200 make it clear okay 3125 02:29:53,200 --> 02:29:55,969 because you at that point if you have a lot that has any 3126 02:29:55,969 --> 02:29:57,200 floodplain on it it's 3127 02:29:57,200 --> 02:30:03,760 an unbuildable lot essentially yes so that was one just 3128 02:30:03,760 --> 02:30:05,399 item that was pretty 3129 02:30:05,399 --> 02:30:10,549 straightforward I had some questions in work session I want 3130 02:30:10,549 --> 02:30:11,680 to revisit a couple 3131 02:30:11,680 --> 02:30:16,239 of them really quickly just since we're in public session 3132 02:30:16,239 --> 02:30:16,879 for those that may 3133 02:30:16,879 --> 02:30:20,309 have not been watching work session one of the things that 3134 02:30:20,309 --> 02:30:21,399 I would like for us 3135 02:30:21,399 --> 02:30:25,959 to take a look at and get some clarification on is back in 3136 02:30:25,959 --> 02:30:28,799 35 17.2 a it 3137 02:30:28,799 --> 02:30:32,229 says within the corporate limits of the city of Denton 3138 02:30:32,229 --> 02:30:33,600 except is otherwise 3139 02:30:33,600 --> 02:30:37,139 specifically provided for in this subsection when you go 3140 02:30:37,139 --> 02:30:39,559 farther into this 3141 02:30:39,559 --> 02:30:45,700 subsection and go to 35 17 6 it says official maps it says 3142 02:30:45,700 --> 02:30:47,040 the official map 3143 02:30:47,040 --> 02:30:52,340 that identifies areas designated as ESA's and my question 3144 02:30:52,340 --> 02:30:53,760 at work session was 3145 02:30:53,760 --> 02:30:57,190 when you first read this it sounds like it just applies to 3146 02:30:57,190 --> 02:30:58,120 the corporate limits 3147 02:30:58,120 --> 02:31:02,680 city limits of Denton but when you go to this provision 3148 02:31:02,680 --> 02:31:03,879 that I just brought up 3149 02:31:03,879 --> 02:31:08,959 about applicable or official maps it actually some of this 3150 02:31:08,959 --> 02:31:10,319 applies to the ETJ 3151 02:31:10,319 --> 02:31:13,510 and I think you clarified in work session that it's not the 3152 02:31:13,510 --> 02:31:14,319 open habitat 3153 02:31:14,319 --> 02:31:19,620 but it has to do with wet yeah with a plane so cleaners 3154 02:31:19,620 --> 02:31:23,360 yeah the item 17 point 3155 02:31:23,360 --> 02:31:26,840 two point B it says the floodplain standard of this sub 3156 02:31:26,840 --> 02:31:28,120 chapter shall apply 3157 02:31:28,120 --> 02:31:31,120 to all land and all development within the extra-territory 3158 02:31:31,120 --> 02:31:32,120 jurisdiction of the 3159 02:31:32,120 --> 02:31:37,780 city and that is granted to the city by the state based on 3160 02:31:37,780 --> 02:31:38,959 the protection of 3161 02:31:38,959 --> 02:31:44,590 water resources that's the reason behind it so that's why 3162 02:31:44,590 --> 02:31:45,479 we made the 3163 02:31:45,479 --> 02:31:51,329 clarification upland habitat water related habitat or 3164 02:31:51,329 --> 02:31:53,680 repairing buffer that 3165 02:31:53,680 --> 02:31:57,520 is located outside the city limits a we have no 3166 02:31:57,520 --> 02:32:00,639 jurisdiction over those okay the 3167 02:32:00,639 --> 02:32:05,790 ESA regulations does not apply to those the only ESA that 3168 02:32:05,790 --> 02:32:07,000 we have jurisdiction 3169 02:32:07,000 --> 02:32:12,639 in the ETJ is floodplain and most of the time when 3170 02:32:12,639 --> 02:32:14,520 development happens in the ETJ 3171 02:32:14,520 --> 02:32:18,100 because it's floodplain that area will be set aside through 3172 02:32:18,100 --> 02:32:19,360 some sort of drainage 3173 02:32:19,360 --> 02:32:23,979 easement so through that through providing that mechanism 3174 02:32:23,979 --> 02:32:24,879 on the plot 3175 02:32:24,879 --> 02:32:28,520 itself they are providing they are meeting the protection 3176 02:32:28,520 --> 02:32:29,360 of the floodplain 3177 02:32:29,360 --> 02:32:34,489 ESA if you don't mind would you pull up the interactive map 3178 02:32:34,489 --> 02:32:35,319 for the city of 3179 02:32:35,319 --> 02:32:40,620 Denton and then go on the links where it says ESA just bear 3180 02:32:40,620 --> 02:32:46,520 with me sure so 3181 02:33:06,319 --> 02:33:07,319 , thank you. 3182 02:33:35,319 --> 02:33:37,319 , thank you. 3183 02:34:06,319 --> 02:34:06,459 So when you go over on the ESA's and hit the button to 3184 02:34:06,459 --> 02:34:14,040 expand it the little 3185 02:34:14,040 --> 02:34:14,040 triangle to the left would you just click on the bottom 3186 02:34:14,040 --> 02:34:18,479 where it says ESA 3187 02:34:18,479 --> 02:34:18,479 floodplain designations and let's light up what that 3188 02:34:18,479 --> 02:34:29,799 entails there you go so 3189 02:34:29,799 --> 02:34:29,799 that's everything that's floodplain okay and if you'll 3190 02:34:29,799 --> 02:34:35,040 click on then the 3191 02:34:35,040 --> 02:34:40,000 skip the ESA habitats but click on the one that says ESA 3192 02:34:40,000 --> 02:34:41,520 stream buffers 3193 02:34:49,040 --> 02:34:55,180 it is shown in pale yellow very skinny line inside the 3194 02:34:55,180 --> 02:34:59,399 floodplain you might zoom in a little 3195 02:35:02,440 --> 02:35:06,629 if you'll click it back off the last button we just put on 3196 02:35:06,629 --> 02:35:08,399 there the ESA 3197 02:35:08,399 --> 02:35:15,110 stream buffers yes that's what we're talking about that you 3198 02:35:15,110 --> 02:35:15,959 all do regulate 3199 02:35:15,959 --> 02:35:19,420 so not only the floodplain within all of these stream buff 3200 02:35:19,420 --> 02:35:20,799 ers are the areas that 3201 02:35:20,799 --> 02:35:23,370 you regulate not only in the city of Denton but then also 3202 02:35:23,370 --> 02:35:24,319 out in the ETJ is 3203 02:35:24,319 --> 02:35:31,620 it correct well if there is a riparian buffer okay and if 3204 02:35:31,620 --> 02:35:33,760 you read what the 3205 02:35:33,760 --> 02:35:37,250 regulations are between floodplain and riparian buffers and 3206 02:35:37,250 --> 02:35:38,280 water related you 3207 02:35:38,280 --> 02:35:41,180 will find that the regulations of water related and rip 3208 02:35:41,180 --> 02:35:42,440 arian buffers are more 3209 02:35:42,440 --> 02:35:46,819 stringent the reason why is because that's the last line of 3210 02:35:46,819 --> 02:35:47,920 defense before a 3211 02:35:47,920 --> 02:35:52,600 pollutant can get waterborne okay so you will see that the 3212 02:35:52,600 --> 02:35:53,360 requirements are a 3213 02:35:53,360 --> 02:35:59,209 little bit more stringent in those so if you are in the ETJ 3214 02:35:59,209 --> 02:36:02,799 for example we will 3215 02:36:02,799 --> 02:36:09,020 be able to regulate within the floodplain okay but we will 3216 02:36:09,020 --> 02:36:10,360 not be able 3217 02:36:10,360 --> 02:36:16,819 to regulate the riparian buffer okay so in some extent you 3218 02:36:16,819 --> 02:36:18,879 would be entitled to 3219 02:36:18,879 --> 02:36:26,399 do the requirements in the ETJ because it's just limited to 3220 02:36:26,399 --> 02:36:27,040 the floodplain 3221 02:36:27,040 --> 02:36:30,280 and not the riparian buffer and not the water related in 3222 02:36:30,280 --> 02:36:31,719 some extent are a little 3223 02:36:31,719 --> 02:36:37,299 bit lesser than what will be in the city limits okay so I 3224 02:36:37,299 --> 02:36:39,879 could not tell them for 3225 02:36:39,879 --> 02:36:44,940 example that they will have to work under the riparian 3226 02:36:44,940 --> 02:36:46,360 buffer for the 3227 02:36:46,360 --> 02:36:52,350 installation of something because if it is a permitted use 3228 02:36:52,350 --> 02:36:54,719 within the floodplain 3229 02:36:54,719 --> 02:36:59,290 for example installation of a utility line by open trench 3230 02:36:59,290 --> 02:37:01,760 ing so if you were to 3231 02:37:01,760 --> 02:37:06,809 do that in the ETJ you can probably open trench all through 3232 02:37:06,809 --> 02:37:08,959 it okay because the 3233 02:37:08,959 --> 02:37:12,049 only thing that I have regulations on is the floodplain not 3234 02:37:12,049 --> 02:37:13,680 the riparian buffer or 3235 02:37:13,680 --> 02:37:19,530 the water related I may have misunderstood what you said 3236 02:37:19,530 --> 02:37:20,360 when you were 3237 02:37:20,360 --> 02:37:23,639 stating that the only thing that you could do in the ETJ 3238 02:37:23,639 --> 02:37:24,680 where the water 3239 02:37:24,680 --> 02:37:30,079 related I'm sorry is floodplain floodplain so when you 3240 02:37:30,079 --> 02:37:30,479 click on the 3241 02:37:30,479 --> 02:37:35,209 button back again where it says stream buffers all those 3242 02:37:35,209 --> 02:37:36,659 that pop up in the 3243 02:37:36,659 --> 02:37:40,319 city limits and when you go outside into the ETJ they're 3244 02:37:40,319 --> 02:37:41,639 nice to be on the map 3245 02:37:41,639 --> 02:37:44,219 but you don't have any regulation of those or you do 3246 02:37:44,219 --> 02:37:45,959 correct no I don't have 3247 02:37:45,959 --> 02:37:50,030 and they one of the reason is the the ESA map is also a 3248 02:37:50,030 --> 02:37:51,639 tool for us when we 3249 02:37:51,639 --> 02:37:54,709 are considering annexations for example those are lands 3250 02:37:54,709 --> 02:37:55,879 that are currently in 3251 02:37:55,879 --> 02:38:00,440 the ETJ and when they are they come in they will be subject 3252 02:38:00,440 --> 02:38:01,040 to all city 3253 02:38:01,040 --> 02:38:04,469 regulations so in those instances when we do the evaluation 3254 02:38:04,469 --> 02:38:05,200 it helps them 3255 02:38:05,200 --> 02:38:12,000 understand what is it is very typical of me then when I 3256 02:38:12,000 --> 02:38:14,680 review a proposal in the 3257 02:38:14,680 --> 02:38:19,540 ETJ I I acknowledge the presence of all the type of ESS I 3258 02:38:19,540 --> 02:38:20,959 made me very clear 3259 02:38:20,959 --> 02:38:24,760 which one we have jurisdiction on however we always for 3260 02:38:24,760 --> 02:38:25,760 example if there's 3261 02:38:25,760 --> 02:38:29,510 open habitat even though I cannot require preservation of 3262 02:38:29,510 --> 02:38:31,040 it I said you 3263 02:38:31,040 --> 02:38:34,510 know if you could consider the preservation of the of the 3264 02:38:34,510 --> 02:38:35,159 existing 3265 02:38:35,159 --> 02:38:38,159 habitat on your property so some of them are many 3266 02:38:38,159 --> 02:38:40,479 developers they see that as a 3267 02:38:40,479 --> 02:38:43,870 added value to the property and they already have 3268 02:38:43,870 --> 02:38:45,180 incorporated the 3269 02:38:45,180 --> 02:38:50,719 preservation into it so it is a suggestion at that point 3270 02:38:50,719 --> 02:38:52,000 but we try to 3271 02:38:52,000 --> 02:38:56,329 at least educate the applicant of the value of the habitat 3272 02:38:56,329 --> 02:38:57,739 that they have on 3273 02:38:57,739 --> 02:39:02,299 site okay so when you when you turn those back off and it's 3274 02:39:02,299 --> 02:39:02,920 just a purple 3275 02:39:02,920 --> 02:39:04,579 those are the things they're in floodplain and then 3276 02:39:04,579 --> 02:39:05,360 everything else that's 3277 02:39:05,360 --> 02:39:09,409 in brown that's there in the city limits is what you're 3278 02:39:09,409 --> 02:39:11,239 talking about as far as 3279 02:39:11,239 --> 02:39:15,110 the authority and possibly going on into ETJ on some of 3280 02:39:15,110 --> 02:39:16,959 those correct and for 3281 02:39:16,959 --> 02:39:22,639 this map for example all that red stuff means that those 3282 02:39:22,639 --> 02:39:23,659 are repairing buffer 3283 02:39:23,659 --> 02:39:26,889 designation that have been removed why it because that is 3284 02:39:26,889 --> 02:39:28,040 the pecan Creek going 3285 02:39:28,040 --> 02:39:32,010 through the middle of town who have been heavily harnessed 3286 02:39:32,010 --> 02:39:34,280 concreted in so we have 3287 02:39:34,280 --> 02:39:37,829 removed those designation we still show them on the map but 3288 02:39:37,829 --> 02:39:38,760 if you click on 3289 02:39:38,760 --> 02:39:41,379 information it will tell you that there was an ESAP field 3290 02:39:41,379 --> 02:39:43,040 assessment done and so 3291 02:39:43,040 --> 02:39:50,139 on so you kind of have all that paper trail created so we 3292 02:39:50,139 --> 02:39:52,459 provide sometimes 3293 02:39:52,459 --> 02:39:56,040 we provide more information and that you know create some 3294 02:39:56,040 --> 02:39:57,959 confusion but 3295 02:39:57,959 --> 02:40:01,350 sometimes the more we provide the better so in that way 3296 02:40:01,350 --> 02:40:03,280 developers can make a 3297 02:40:03,280 --> 02:40:07,139 educated decision so is this the official map essentially 3298 02:40:07,139 --> 02:40:07,520 or is there 3299 02:40:07,520 --> 02:40:10,950 someplace else that you can get a copy this is this is just 3300 02:40:10,950 --> 02:40:11,760 the interactive 3301 02:40:11,760 --> 02:40:16,799 map if we have a paper copy it would look like just keep in 3302 02:40:16,799 --> 02:40:18,239 mind the ESA map 3303 02:40:18,239 --> 02:40:23,329 is amended on a regular basis the map by no means is 3304 02:40:23,329 --> 02:40:26,559 hundred percent accurate but 3305 02:40:26,559 --> 02:40:31,120 it's a good it's a good start it's a good indication to 3306 02:40:31,120 --> 02:40:32,479 make us pause for a 3307 02:40:32,479 --> 02:40:36,420 moment and say we have to reassess few things if there are 3308 02:40:36,420 --> 02:40:38,159 questions about the 3309 02:40:38,159 --> 02:40:42,719 presence of the of the ESAS we can do a city field 3310 02:40:42,719 --> 02:40:44,959 assessment at no cost to the 3311 02:40:44,959 --> 02:40:48,610 applicant and we will go we have a specific criteria for 3312 02:40:48,610 --> 02:40:49,959 each type of ESA 3313 02:40:49,959 --> 02:40:56,399 if that criteria is not met then we will require we will 3314 02:40:56,399 --> 02:40:57,879 conclude that that 3315 02:40:57,879 --> 02:41:01,629 designation should be removed we notify the the planning 3316 02:41:01,629 --> 02:41:03,079 director about the need 3317 02:41:03,079 --> 02:41:07,639 of changing and what area needs to be changed so we the ESA 3318 02:41:07,639 --> 02:41:09,399 map is a living 3319 02:41:09,399 --> 02:41:13,959 document it changes all the changes that are from time to 3320 02:41:13,959 --> 02:41:15,440 time happen is when 3321 02:41:15,440 --> 02:41:19,569 FEMA reissue firms which is the floodplain insurance map 3322 02:41:19,569 --> 02:41:20,239 and they 3323 02:41:20,239 --> 02:41:25,799 sometimes they take ten years to change those when the 3324 02:41:25,799 --> 02:41:27,920 floodplain when the FEMA 3325 02:41:27,920 --> 02:41:32,569 floodplain changes our boundary changes as well because in 3326 02:41:32,569 --> 02:41:33,680 the way that we have 3327 02:41:33,680 --> 02:41:38,239 defined the floodplain ESA it matches that boundary when 3328 02:41:38,239 --> 02:41:39,600 somebody wants to do 3329 02:41:39,600 --> 02:41:43,510 a reclamation of the floodplain meaning that they will do 3330 02:41:43,510 --> 02:41:45,479 some type of exclamation 3331 02:41:45,479 --> 02:41:49,360 to reduce or to modify the change of it that goes through a 3332 02:41:49,360 --> 02:41:50,719 clomer which stands 3333 02:41:50,719 --> 02:41:53,879 for conditional letter of man revision and then goes 3334 02:41:53,879 --> 02:41:55,319 through a long more process 3335 02:41:55,319 --> 02:41:59,180 and that is approved by the city and by FEMA when FEMA 3336 02:41:59,180 --> 02:42:00,879 changes the boundary 3337 02:42:00,879 --> 02:42:04,930 through the long more process it changes the definition of 3338 02:42:04,930 --> 02:42:06,639 the floodplain with it 3339 02:42:06,639 --> 02:42:14,909 so the ESA map is a living document that changes just I 3340 02:42:14,909 --> 02:42:17,000 think I think you 3341 02:42:17,000 --> 02:42:21,559 addressed those changes amendments to the map correct in 3342 02:42:21,559 --> 02:42:22,540 there and I think it's 3343 02:42:22,540 --> 02:42:29,760 on there 35 17 6 B is that correct with those we all the 3344 02:42:29,760 --> 02:42:30,760 would that be the 3345 02:42:30,760 --> 02:42:33,600 process for amendments 3346 02:42:40,360 --> 02:42:49,969 okay I had one final question on 17.5 D water related 3347 02:42:49,969 --> 02:42:51,680 habitat it says areas 3348 02:42:51,680 --> 02:42:56,719 designated as wetland is there a definition for that or 3349 02:42:56,719 --> 02:42:57,799 where do we find 3350 02:42:57,799 --> 02:43:02,360 that and how is that determined what land those are 3351 02:43:02,360 --> 02:43:03,920 transitional have from 3352 02:43:03,920 --> 02:43:06,889 from my ecological I'm going to give you the ecological 3353 02:43:06,889 --> 02:43:08,719 definition of it okay the 3354 02:43:08,719 --> 02:43:11,309 ecological definition of a wetlands that they are 3355 02:43:11,309 --> 02:43:13,760 transitional habitat which 3356 02:43:13,760 --> 02:43:18,319 withstand some sort of flood condition for some period of 3357 02:43:18,319 --> 02:43:20,239 time okay because the 3358 02:43:20,239 --> 02:43:24,260 inundation conditions that they experience there's certain 3359 02:43:24,260 --> 02:43:25,959 type of plant 3360 02:43:25,959 --> 02:43:31,270 species that live there because they are they tolerate the 3361 02:43:31,270 --> 02:43:33,920 inundation process 3362 02:43:33,920 --> 02:43:38,979 the soils change characteristics and also they are 3363 02:43:38,979 --> 02:43:41,239 hydraulic characteristics so 3364 02:43:41,239 --> 02:43:48,950 you will see a watermark depicted and you see the oxidation 3365 02:43:48,950 --> 02:43:49,639 reduction of the 3366 02:43:49,639 --> 02:43:54,200 soil and that's where the watermark is or that so those are 3367 02:43:54,200 --> 02:43:55,040 characteristic those 3368 02:43:55,040 --> 02:44:00,450 are the scientific ecological definition of what a wetland 3369 02:44:00,450 --> 02:44:02,479 is many of the people 3370 02:44:02,479 --> 02:44:05,280 many of the comments have addressed or hinges upon the 3371 02:44:05,280 --> 02:44:06,200 definition of what 3372 02:44:06,200 --> 02:44:11,340 wetlands by the Court of Engineers is if you read the Court 3373 02:44:11,340 --> 02:44:12,600 of Engineers 3374 02:44:12,600 --> 02:44:17,159 definition all that is is tied to navigable waters to 3375 02:44:17,159 --> 02:44:18,319 commerce to be able 3376 02:44:18,319 --> 02:44:24,200 to promote commerce in your state comments okay so when 3377 02:44:24,200 --> 02:44:26,239 they were so the 3378 02:44:26,239 --> 02:44:31,239 wetlands that are protected by the core are those who are 3379 02:44:31,239 --> 02:44:32,399 hydrologically 3380 02:44:32,399 --> 02:44:41,000 connected to a water body that is deemed navigable okay so 3381 02:44:41,000 --> 02:44:43,719 if we take that limited 3382 02:44:43,719 --> 02:44:49,860 concept of it then if we go by the definition of the core 3383 02:44:49,860 --> 02:44:51,680 more it will be 3384 02:44:51,680 --> 02:44:56,280 less areas protected of wetlands wetlands are incredible 3385 02:44:56,280 --> 02:44:57,680 habitats they do 3386 02:44:57,680 --> 02:45:05,370 fantastic services as filtration devices okay so if we 3387 02:45:05,370 --> 02:45:07,120 limit that to what the 3388 02:45:07,120 --> 02:45:10,260 court in the way that the court defined wetlands or provide 3389 02:45:10,260 --> 02:45:11,319 protections to it 3390 02:45:11,319 --> 02:45:17,239 then many of the habitats that are good to maintain will be 3391 02:45:17,239 --> 02:45:18,520 our order of 3392 02:45:18,520 --> 02:45:25,649 protection so our definition as it is it is more broad than 3393 02:45:25,649 --> 02:45:28,079 what other state or 3394 02:45:28,079 --> 02:45:33,680 federal agencies define what is that in here somewhere no 3395 02:45:33,680 --> 02:45:35,079 that's the only 3396 02:45:35,079 --> 02:45:41,719 definition is that something that you would like to it's 3397 02:45:41,719 --> 02:45:42,680 stuff to expand 3398 02:45:42,680 --> 02:45:47,309 provide a definition on on wetlands I think it's necessary 3399 02:45:47,309 --> 02:45:48,319 to define the term 3400 02:45:48,319 --> 02:45:52,879 especially if for your discussion if city didn't has a 3401 02:45:52,879 --> 02:45:53,719 determination of what 3402 02:45:53,719 --> 02:45:56,290 what a wetland is which is different than what the state or 3403 02:45:56,290 --> 02:45:56,879 the federal 3404 02:45:56,879 --> 02:45:59,559 government says I think it needs to be spelled out here's 3405 02:45:59,559 --> 02:46:00,440 what the city of 3406 02:46:00,440 --> 02:46:04,090 Denton determines as a wetland for everybody to understand 3407 02:46:04,090 --> 02:46:05,120 if you have this 3408 02:46:05,120 --> 02:46:08,510 on your property you have for the city of Denton a wetland 3409 02:46:08,510 --> 02:46:10,879 okay okay so I'm 3410 02:46:10,879 --> 02:46:13,639 familiar with where your what you're defining because I see 3411 02:46:13,639 --> 02:46:15,079 them in phase one 3412 02:46:15,079 --> 02:46:17,979 reports it'll have a designation on it that this is on the 3413 02:46:17,979 --> 02:46:19,600 map and if it's not 3414 02:46:19,600 --> 02:46:24,520 on that map you proceed forward with it however the city 3415 02:46:24,520 --> 02:46:25,239 didn't may have a 3416 02:46:25,239 --> 02:46:30,729 different determination what a wetland is versus what's on 3417 02:46:30,729 --> 02:46:32,879 the maps that all 3418 02:46:32,879 --> 02:46:36,440 these people that do this for a living produce for us and 3419 02:46:36,440 --> 02:46:37,399 say yeah this 3420 02:46:37,399 --> 02:46:40,270 property's got a clean phase one on it and it's nothing on 3421 02:46:40,270 --> 02:46:41,680 it you say that's 3422 02:46:41,680 --> 02:46:47,680 wetland on it because we are creating the E-Secretary 3423 02:46:47,680 --> 02:46:49,239 manual where all the 3424 02:46:49,239 --> 02:46:52,860 more technical part would be would this be something that 3425 02:46:52,860 --> 02:46:54,159 you would like to see 3426 02:46:54,159 --> 02:46:58,959 in the DDC as a part of 17 or would you like to see that as 3427 02:46:58,959 --> 02:47:00,040 a part of the 3428 02:47:00,040 --> 02:47:04,219 criteria manual as I recall as I read this it says that if 3429 02:47:04,219 --> 02:47:05,760 it's more stringent 3430 02:47:05,760 --> 02:47:09,969 in the code and what's in the criteria manual then what's 3431 02:47:09,969 --> 02:47:11,920 in the code prevails 3432 02:47:11,920 --> 02:47:15,879 is that correct on how this is written so I think it should 3433 02:47:15,879 --> 02:47:16,959 be in the actual 3434 02:47:16,959 --> 02:47:23,610 code rather than in the criteria maybe put it in both you 3435 02:47:23,610 --> 02:47:24,239 know 3436 02:47:46,959 --> 02:47:58,520 thank you I got a couple more questions Commissioner Ellis 3437 02:47:58,520 --> 02:47:59,559 thank you chair 3438 02:47:59,559 --> 02:48:02,989 Deborah thanks for your work in this my question has to do 3439 02:48:02,989 --> 02:48:04,239 with the alternative 3440 02:48:04,239 --> 02:48:11,260 ESA plan so you can basically walk me through why we're 3441 02:48:11,260 --> 02:48:12,440 considering it a 3442 02:48:12,440 --> 02:48:17,229 zoning amendment procedure a zoning amendment procedure if 3443 02:48:17,229 --> 02:48:17,920 you go back to 3444 02:48:17,920 --> 02:48:22,200 sub chapter three three I believe on the DDC establishes a 3445 02:48:22,200 --> 02:48:23,000 different processes 3446 02:48:23,000 --> 02:48:26,069 and the is called the process the zoning amendment 3447 02:48:26,069 --> 02:48:27,559 procedure just because 3448 02:48:27,559 --> 02:48:30,239 requires the public hearing process before the planning and 3449 02:48:30,239 --> 02:48:31,079 zoning Commission 3450 02:48:31,079 --> 02:48:34,870 and City Council that's that's the reason why it's called a 3451 02:48:34,870 --> 02:48:35,559 zoning amendment 3452 02:48:35,559 --> 02:48:38,319 procedure because it really is nothing to do with zoning 3453 02:48:38,319 --> 02:48:39,319 this all has to do with 3454 02:48:39,319 --> 02:48:42,799 development yeah the zoning is not in question is just 3455 02:48:42,799 --> 02:48:44,000 followed the steps 3456 02:48:44,000 --> 02:48:51,040 require through a any zoning change which is planning and 3457 02:48:51,040 --> 02:48:51,520 zoning 3458 02:48:51,520 --> 02:48:55,709 notification newspaper public hearing before the planning 3459 02:48:55,709 --> 02:48:56,639 and zoning Commission 3460 02:48:56,639 --> 02:48:59,620 recommendation from the planning and zoning Commission and 3461 02:48:59,620 --> 02:49:00,159 the final 3462 02:49:00,159 --> 02:49:05,469 approval of City Council okay just so I understand so so 3463 02:49:05,469 --> 02:49:07,159 going this route so it 3464 02:49:07,159 --> 02:49:09,520 can be a public hearing is that what you're saying correct 3465 02:49:09,520 --> 02:49:11,959 okay thank you 3466 02:49:11,959 --> 02:49:18,100 Commissioner Sanchez yeah I worked as a biologist biologist 3467 02:49:18,100 --> 02:49:19,680 for 30 years and we 3468 02:49:19,680 --> 02:49:23,639 talked about habitat wetland habitat it was based primarily 3469 02:49:23,639 --> 02:49:25,120 on the vegetation and 3470 02:49:25,120 --> 02:49:28,579 the soils and that's what we would look at we go in there I 3471 02:49:28,579 --> 02:49:30,000 mean you just that's 3472 02:49:30,000 --> 02:49:34,450 the definition primarily you can't deviate from that yeah 3473 02:49:34,450 --> 02:49:35,520 and the other 3474 02:49:35,520 --> 02:49:40,590 question I had is when we talk we talked a lot a lot about 3475 02:49:40,590 --> 02:49:42,840 upland habitat and 3476 02:49:42,840 --> 02:49:48,690 preserving that you know Mother Nature did a good job here 3477 02:49:48,690 --> 02:49:49,520 in the cross timbers 3478 02:49:49,520 --> 02:49:55,799 fire was a big proponent of managing the cross-land timbers 3479 02:49:55,799 --> 02:49:57,079 we've taken that out 3480 02:49:57,079 --> 02:50:00,510 of there so a lot of these habitats that we have are very 3481 02:50:00,510 --> 02:50:02,600 deteriorated so I it's 3482 02:50:02,600 --> 02:50:06,829 hard for me when we start talking about little areas five 3483 02:50:06,829 --> 02:50:09,079 ten twenty acres they're 3484 02:50:09,079 --> 02:50:12,510 really going to be if without burning they're just going to 3485 02:50:12,510 --> 02:50:13,840 deteriorate so I'm 3486 02:50:13,840 --> 02:50:18,540 just wondering why are we maintaining these small areas 3487 02:50:18,540 --> 02:50:21,079 when they really don't 3488 02:50:21,079 --> 02:50:25,639 really see what's the word I want they're not they're not 3489 02:50:25,639 --> 02:50:26,479 going to do a 3490 02:50:26,479 --> 02:50:31,180 whole lot because they're over time they're just deterior 3491 02:50:31,180 --> 02:50:32,799 ating yeah because 3492 02:50:32,799 --> 02:50:35,479 fire is a big part of the understory I mean the grasses are 3493 02:50:35,479 --> 02:50:36,319 a big part of the 3494 02:50:36,319 --> 02:50:38,520 understory and that's what would carry through the fires 3495 02:50:38,520 --> 02:50:39,559 through the through 3496 02:50:39,559 --> 02:50:43,040 this habitat and as and as I see a lot of areas you don't 3497 02:50:43,040 --> 02:50:43,680 have a lot of 3498 02:50:43,680 --> 02:50:46,989 vegetation on the ground on the ground on the surface you 3499 02:50:46,989 --> 02:50:48,079 know a lot of has 3500 02:50:48,079 --> 02:50:51,139 just deteriorated you have just invade invasive grasses so 3501 02:50:51,139 --> 02:50:52,079 you're just 3502 02:50:52,079 --> 02:50:56,969 maintaining primarily you're maintaining the woodlands you 3503 02:50:56,969 --> 02:50:58,520 know but even those 3504 02:50:58,520 --> 02:51:02,209 it's hard for me to see how we're maintaining upland 3505 02:51:02,209 --> 02:51:03,840 habitat without 3506 02:51:03,840 --> 02:51:09,149 managing them somehow yeah well so and that that brings a 3507 02:51:09,149 --> 02:51:11,879 very good point in 3508 02:51:11,879 --> 02:51:16,600 nature if if this were not within the urban setting okay 3509 02:51:16,600 --> 02:51:18,920 fire is a big 3510 02:51:18,920 --> 02:51:22,360 management tool okay this is how habitats they renew 3511 02:51:22,360 --> 02:51:23,440 themselves that's 3512 02:51:23,440 --> 02:51:28,250 how invasive species are control and so on sometimes you 3513 02:51:28,250 --> 02:51:29,680 need to even open up 3514 02:51:29,680 --> 02:51:33,680 the canopy to allow the understory and the juvenile to be 3515 02:51:33,680 --> 02:51:34,479 able to reach out 3516 02:51:34,479 --> 02:51:39,530 enough sunlight to grow so these areas are should be 3517 02:51:39,530 --> 02:51:41,719 managed and I want to use 3518 02:51:41,719 --> 02:51:46,700 carefully the word managed okay if you see all the all the 3519 02:51:46,700 --> 02:51:48,079 permitted uses 3520 02:51:48,079 --> 02:51:51,559 within all the top of the four type of ESA some sort of 3521 02:51:51,559 --> 02:51:53,440 management provision is 3522 02:51:53,440 --> 02:52:00,489 allowed removal or of invasive planting of native pruning 3523 02:52:00,489 --> 02:52:02,280 up to 25% of the 3524 02:52:02,280 --> 02:52:08,129 canopy of upland habitat for the health of the habitat so 3525 02:52:08,129 --> 02:52:12,319 these eases are meant 3526 02:52:12,319 --> 02:52:19,959 to be managed that is different from manicuring the ESA 3527 02:52:19,959 --> 02:52:22,280 okay it's different 3528 02:52:22,280 --> 02:52:25,360 perspective so that's why I wanted to use the word 3529 02:52:25,360 --> 02:52:27,920 management carefully if you 3530 02:52:27,920 --> 02:52:32,579 if those are you needs to be intervene to actually restore 3531 02:52:32,579 --> 02:52:33,639 them make them 3532 02:52:33,639 --> 02:52:38,200 better you are allowed to do it by right okay because 3533 02:52:38,200 --> 02:52:39,799 sometimes you need it 3534 02:52:39,799 --> 02:52:46,530 repairing buffers if the if the watershed have been urban 3535 02:52:46,530 --> 02:52:47,159 ized for 3536 02:52:47,159 --> 02:52:50,239 example you are putting more runoff through those through 3537 02:52:50,239 --> 02:52:51,120 those channels 3538 02:52:51,120 --> 02:52:57,659 that if it's not been dealt or if it is a watershed that 3539 02:52:57,659 --> 02:52:58,680 have been developed 3540 02:52:58,680 --> 02:53:01,770 under you know long time ago where none of the floodplain 3541 02:53:01,770 --> 02:53:03,200 standards were in place 3542 02:53:03,200 --> 02:53:06,850 probably those those channels are eroding already and the 3543 02:53:06,850 --> 02:53:07,840 vegetation might 3544 02:53:07,840 --> 02:53:13,489 be gone because that's the way that the creek adjust the 3545 02:53:13,489 --> 02:53:14,520 channel adjust to the 3546 02:53:14,520 --> 02:53:20,780 changes so in those instances by all means go there and if 3547 02:53:20,780 --> 02:53:22,440 you can do it you 3548 02:53:22,440 --> 02:53:27,270 are entitled to do it so yeah those those eases are meant 3549 02:53:27,270 --> 02:53:29,600 to be in some level 3550 02:53:29,600 --> 02:53:36,309 managed if they need to thank you for answering all of our 3551 02:53:36,309 --> 02:53:38,000 questions I don't 3552 02:53:38,000 --> 02:53:43,399 have anymore this is a public hearing I don't have any 3553 02:53:43,399 --> 02:53:44,639 cards on this item but 3554 02:53:44,639 --> 02:53:46,780 anyone who would like to speak on this item please come 3555 02:53:46,780 --> 02:53:48,639 forward at this time if 3556 02:53:48,639 --> 02:53:55,579 you'll give us your name and address and please an old hand 3557 02:53:55,579 --> 02:53:56,559 at this he's already 3558 02:53:56,559 --> 02:54:00,360 got a card filled out thank you Lee certainly good evening 3559 02:54:00,360 --> 02:54:01,040 my name is Lee 3560 02:54:01,040 --> 02:54:04,299 Allison with Allison engineering group didn't in Texas I'm 3561 02:54:04,299 --> 02:54:05,319 here to speak on 3562 02:54:05,319 --> 02:54:08,129 behalf of the Denton Community Development Alliance as I 3563 02:54:08,129 --> 02:54:09,280 get into it 3564 02:54:09,280 --> 02:54:12,610 I'd like to put the emphasis on community development we're 3565 02:54:12,610 --> 02:54:13,180 not the 3566 02:54:13,180 --> 02:54:16,229 developers Alliance we're not here to try and get the city 3567 02:54:16,229 --> 02:54:17,200 to redact all its 3568 02:54:17,200 --> 02:54:20,069 rules so developers can come in and do what they want but 3569 02:54:20,069 --> 02:54:21,760 we're here working on 3570 02:54:21,760 --> 02:54:24,680 behalf of the community and the property owners and the 3571 02:54:24,680 --> 02:54:25,559 people who maintain 3572 02:54:25,559 --> 02:54:29,559 property and manage property and live in property and work 3573 02:54:29,559 --> 02:54:31,079 and play here to have a 3574 02:54:31,079 --> 02:54:37,299 community that develops providing opportunities similar for 3575 02:54:37,299 --> 02:54:37,639 the 3576 02:54:37,639 --> 02:54:40,590 undeveloped elements of the community that the development 3577 02:54:40,590 --> 02:54:41,680 commit elements had 3578 02:54:41,680 --> 02:54:46,299 when they came here and in general we not sure where we 3579 02:54:46,299 --> 02:54:47,520 stand on this 3580 02:54:47,520 --> 02:54:52,360 particular ordinance when it when I worked on ordinances or 3581 02:54:52,360 --> 02:54:53,319 items similar to 3582 02:54:53,319 --> 02:54:59,510 this we usually start with with before principles and 3583 02:54:59,510 --> 02:55:02,680 practices we we have I 3584 02:55:02,680 --> 02:55:05,670 had the word in the head top my head a minute ago and now I 3585 02:55:05,670 --> 02:55:06,760 forgot it but what 3586 02:55:06,760 --> 02:55:09,340 are the guiding things we know we want to keep the water 3587 02:55:09,340 --> 02:55:10,120 quality in Lake 3588 02:55:10,120 --> 02:55:13,200 Louisville it's a it's where our drinking water comes from 3589 02:55:13,200 --> 02:55:14,040 that's a fact 3590 02:55:14,040 --> 02:55:18,600 a principle a policy is that we don't want development to 3591 02:55:18,600 --> 02:55:20,159 degrade the water 3592 02:55:20,159 --> 02:55:23,770 quality in Lake Louisville is and then what are the 3593 02:55:23,770 --> 02:55:25,399 practices we provide 3594 02:55:25,399 --> 02:55:28,489 protections against what would degrade development 3595 02:55:28,489 --> 02:55:30,159 practices that would degrade 3596 02:55:30,159 --> 02:55:33,829 the water quality and maybe we provide incentives for those 3597 02:55:33,829 --> 02:55:34,840 practices that 3598 02:55:34,840 --> 02:55:38,270 might help improve the water quality above what it is today 3599 02:55:38,270 --> 02:55:39,120 certainly we don't 3600 02:55:39,120 --> 02:55:44,020 have a Boston Harbor issue or a Chicago issue where we got 3601 02:55:44,020 --> 02:55:45,399 meat fats floating on 3602 02:55:45,399 --> 02:55:48,420 top of the river allowing it to burn across town and and 3603 02:55:48,420 --> 02:55:49,600 destroy the rest of 3604 02:55:49,600 --> 02:55:59,280 the city the DCDA submitted 43 comments to staff those are 3605 02:55:59,280 --> 02:56:00,920 included in the 61 in 3606 02:56:00,920 --> 02:56:04,639 the list that you were given our concern is that in that 3607 02:56:04,639 --> 02:56:06,079 list what is missing is 3608 02:56:06,079 --> 02:56:10,069 a column there's not a column in there that shows the staff 3609 02:56:10,069 --> 02:56:11,239 comments related 3610 02:56:11,239 --> 02:56:13,510 to responses to our comments how they might have been 3611 02:56:13,510 --> 02:56:14,600 addressed or thought of 3612 02:56:14,600 --> 02:56:18,540 or whether they were good or not good or should be included 3613 02:56:18,540 --> 02:56:19,440 in the TCM or 3614 02:56:19,440 --> 02:56:22,059 whatever there's that's there's just nothing there related 3615 02:56:22,059 --> 02:56:22,680 to the staff's 3616 02:56:22,680 --> 02:56:27,260 position secondly related to that the draft ordinance you 3617 02:56:27,260 --> 02:56:28,280 have tonight is the 3618 02:56:28,280 --> 02:56:31,059 same draft ordinance that we were given the comment on a 3619 02:56:31,059 --> 02:56:33,159 couple of months ago so 3620 02:56:33,159 --> 02:56:35,750 apparently our comments were not very impressive because it 3621 02:56:35,750 --> 02:56:36,520 made absolutely 3622 02:56:36,520 --> 02:56:41,319 zero changes in the ordinance that's being presented 3623 02:56:41,319 --> 02:56:43,920 tonight again when it 3624 02:56:43,920 --> 02:56:48,479 comes to policy I believe Deborah stated there was only one 3625 02:56:48,479 --> 02:56:49,799 policy change in the 3626 02:56:49,799 --> 02:56:54,360 overall ordinance and that was increasing to require 3627 02:56:54,360 --> 02:56:54,959 commercial 3628 02:56:54,959 --> 02:56:57,920 properties to be subject to the upland habitat prepers 3629 02:56:57,920 --> 02:57:02,639 preservations and that's the only one that we saw that that 3630 02:57:02,639 --> 02:57:03,600 was addressed or 3631 02:57:03,600 --> 02:57:05,899 thought of in all the comments we had and I can't say that 3632 02:57:05,899 --> 02:57:06,680 's a movement in the 3633 02:57:06,680 --> 02:57:08,840 wrong direction just saying that's the only policy 3634 02:57:08,840 --> 02:57:10,000 statement that seems to have 3635 02:57:10,000 --> 02:57:12,950 been addressed in all this and when it comes to practices 3636 02:57:12,950 --> 02:57:13,920 we don't see that 3637 02:57:13,920 --> 02:57:17,079 there are any changes a couple of things that we have most 3638 02:57:17,079 --> 02:57:18,200 interest in and one of 3639 02:57:18,200 --> 02:57:21,159 them is the process the fact that has to go through a 3640 02:57:21,159 --> 02:57:23,559 zoning ordinance ESA's oh 3641 02:57:23,559 --> 02:57:27,360 man I'm going fast ESA's are land characteristics not land 3642 02:57:27,360 --> 02:57:29,239 uses the 3643 02:57:29,239 --> 02:57:33,819 council can hear a plat if it wants to it has the authority 3644 02:57:33,819 --> 02:57:35,079 to delegate plat 3645 02:57:35,079 --> 02:57:39,159 approvals to PNZ this could be kept going to council it 3646 02:57:39,159 --> 02:57:39,959 could have public 3647 02:57:39,959 --> 02:57:42,799 hearings but with the zoning ordinance is subject to the 3648 02:57:42,799 --> 02:57:43,959 supermajority rules 3649 02:57:43,959 --> 02:57:47,489 and the neighbors opposing and I've got a couple of 3650 02:57:47,489 --> 02:57:49,280 examples of ESA's I wouldn't 3651 02:57:49,280 --> 02:57:51,440 do one for a client unless I get paid in front because they 3652 02:57:51,440 --> 02:57:52,120 got very little 3653 02:57:52,120 --> 02:57:54,879 chance of getting through because of the zoning process and 3654 02:57:54,879 --> 02:57:55,799 I think there's other 3655 02:57:55,799 --> 02:57:59,520 processes that could do that when it comes to the 50 cubic 3656 02:57:59,520 --> 02:58:00,600 yards of fill on a 3657 02:58:00,600 --> 02:58:05,159 piece of land that's less than a half inch over an acre we 3658 02:58:05,159 --> 02:58:07,719 have meaningless 3659 02:58:07,719 --> 02:58:11,829 offers of how you can get into the developed floodplain 3660 02:58:11,829 --> 02:58:13,120 because it's not 3661 02:58:13,120 --> 02:58:16,639 worth getting into for that little mountain so could go on 3662 02:58:16,639 --> 02:58:18,799 and on but I'll obviously stop thank you 3663 02:58:18,799 --> 02:58:22,360 I have a question for you yes did you have any meetings 3664 02:58:22,360 --> 02:58:22,760 with city 3665 02:58:22,760 --> 02:58:26,200 staff on your 43 comments or did you submit the comments 3666 02:58:26,200 --> 02:58:27,920 and no follow-up 3667 02:58:27,920 --> 02:58:31,040 meetings to talk about them Deborah and I met on December 3668 02:58:31,040 --> 02:58:33,360 the 22nd and went over 3669 02:58:33,360 --> 02:58:36,149 them I hand my comments were mostly handwritten at that 3670 02:58:36,149 --> 02:58:37,159 time and we discussed 3671 02:58:37,159 --> 02:58:40,010 them and she explained to me the history of the why they're 3672 02:58:40,010 --> 02:58:40,879 using the zoning 3673 02:58:40,879 --> 02:58:44,610 ordinance and not another mechanism to bring those items 3674 02:58:44,610 --> 02:58:46,440 before counsel and then 3675 02:58:46,440 --> 02:58:51,000 I wrote up all of the comments and submitted to her on 3676 02:58:51,000 --> 02:58:52,579 behalf of DCDA after 3677 02:58:52,579 --> 02:58:56,010 that okay but did you have any follow-up conversations of 3678 02:58:56,010 --> 02:58:57,680 what have we done on 3679 02:58:57,680 --> 02:59:00,850 item for aid or whatever it's just these are the comments 3680 02:59:00,850 --> 02:59:02,040 and then there's no 3681 02:59:02,040 --> 02:59:05,719 follow-up of no Deborah did help me become aware when it 3682 02:59:05,719 --> 02:59:07,040 was going to come as 3683 02:59:07,040 --> 02:59:12,750 a workshop item but we had no real discussions back and 3684 02:59:12,750 --> 02:59:13,719 forth or with our 3685 02:59:13,719 --> 02:59:19,110 group regarding the merits of any any particular item that 3686 02:59:19,110 --> 02:59:21,840 was brought up okay 3687 02:59:21,840 --> 02:59:26,799 Commissioner Ellis thank you chair hi mr. Allison can you 3688 02:59:26,799 --> 02:59:27,799 share with me how you 3689 02:59:27,799 --> 02:59:29,950 would like to see the procedure would you like it to have 3690 02:59:29,950 --> 02:59:31,079 its own procedure as 3691 02:59:31,079 --> 02:59:37,520 far as an alternative ECA yes a the alternative ESA is fine 3692 02:59:37,520 --> 02:59:38,239 it's just that 3693 02:59:38,239 --> 02:59:44,459 instead of going forward as a zoning it could go forward as 3694 02:59:44,459 --> 02:59:46,120 either a subdivision 3695 02:59:46,120 --> 02:59:49,979 variance or just like an alternative development plan does 3696 02:59:49,979 --> 02:59:51,040 now it's just that 3697 02:59:51,040 --> 02:59:54,469 the council could say for I believe they can and I'm not 3698 02:59:54,469 --> 02:59:55,559 gonna ask you to chime in 3699 02:59:55,559 --> 02:59:59,260 now mr. Flores but you'll give the final say so I think the 3700 02:59:59,260 --> 03:00:00,239 council could say 3701 03:00:00,239 --> 03:00:03,959 we're not gonna delegate approval of alternative ESAs to PN 3702 03:00:03,959 --> 03:00:04,959 Z and it has to go 3703 03:00:04,959 --> 03:00:08,239 to City Council well I was just gonna make a comment after 3704 03:00:08,239 --> 03:00:09,639 after you finished 3705 03:00:09,639 --> 03:00:12,889 but maybe if I can have Deborah come up because I know we 3706 03:00:12,889 --> 03:00:14,879 discussed this because 3707 03:00:14,879 --> 03:00:17,459 there's been some talk about what the process or appeal 3708 03:00:17,459 --> 03:00:18,200 process would be 3709 03:00:18,200 --> 03:00:22,760 Deborah would you mind explaining the difference between 3710 03:00:22,760 --> 03:00:24,360 designation of an ESA 3711 03:00:24,360 --> 03:00:30,729 and then approval of an alternative plan the designation of 3712 03:00:30,729 --> 03:00:31,680 an ESA is 3713 03:00:31,680 --> 03:00:36,739 determined by a field assessment okay we have we have the E 3714 03:00:36,739 --> 03:00:38,120 SA map which is a 3715 03:00:38,120 --> 03:00:43,420 first chance to to to look into areas that should be 3716 03:00:43,420 --> 03:00:45,760 protected if the ESAs if 3717 03:00:45,760 --> 03:00:50,319 there is questions about the validity of the map as is 3718 03:00:50,319 --> 03:00:52,719 shown the applicant has 3719 03:00:52,719 --> 03:00:57,299 the right to request a field assessment either staff will 3720 03:00:57,299 --> 03:00:59,079 do it at the applicant 3721 03:00:59,079 --> 03:01:02,879 request or the applicant can hire a consultant a biologist 3722 03:01:02,879 --> 03:01:04,680 to do it and what 3723 03:01:04,680 --> 03:01:11,559 it does is go through a criteria of vegetation of soil and 3724 03:01:11,559 --> 03:01:13,440 hydrology okay and 3725 03:01:13,440 --> 03:01:16,770 we look into what is in the back what is about the bank and 3726 03:01:16,770 --> 03:01:19,479 so on so it is a the 3727 03:01:19,479 --> 03:01:22,059 criteria that we use is the same very similar to what the 3728 03:01:22,059 --> 03:01:22,920 Court of Engineers 3729 03:01:22,920 --> 03:01:27,979 have been used when we did our research we research not 3730 03:01:27,979 --> 03:01:30,159 only state of Texas but 3731 03:01:30,159 --> 03:01:34,319 nationwide and so on so this is the typical criteria that a 3732 03:01:34,319 --> 03:01:35,520 for example a 3733 03:01:35,520 --> 03:01:41,379 wetland delineator we use okay so after we go to this to 3734 03:01:41,379 --> 03:01:42,639 the side we do the 3735 03:01:42,639 --> 03:01:46,219 assessment or the applicants submit their assessment 3736 03:01:46,219 --> 03:01:47,680 through a third party 3737 03:01:47,680 --> 03:01:53,840 we review it if we concord with the with the conclusions 3738 03:01:53,840 --> 03:01:55,079 either the ESA is there 3739 03:01:55,079 --> 03:02:00,229 or the ESA is there but not as shown is moved around or the 3740 03:02:00,229 --> 03:02:01,559 type of ESA is 3741 03:02:01,559 --> 03:02:06,530 different then we will issue a memo to the planning 3742 03:02:06,530 --> 03:02:08,120 director to request the 3743 03:02:08,120 --> 03:02:11,700 change the officially change of the map I guess my question 3744 03:02:11,700 --> 03:02:12,440 is to be more 3745 03:02:12,440 --> 03:02:17,840 specific is the the appellate board or the board that would 3746 03:02:17,840 --> 03:02:18,680 that would hear the 3747 03:02:18,680 --> 03:02:24,879 the appeal for one for for ESA determinations and two for 3748 03:02:24,879 --> 03:02:25,319 alternative 3749 03:02:25,319 --> 03:02:29,180 plans okay the new process proposed for appealing and again 3750 03:02:29,180 --> 03:02:29,840 this is completely 3751 03:02:29,840 --> 03:02:34,510 new is it would be through the zoning board of adjustment 3752 03:02:34,510 --> 03:02:36,239 process meaning that 3753 03:02:36,239 --> 03:02:39,399 there will be a public hearing advertisement and all that 3754 03:02:39,399 --> 03:02:40,280 and it will 3755 03:02:40,280 --> 03:02:42,860 be the applicant will have a chance to make their case a 3756 03:02:42,860 --> 03:02:44,520 staff would provide a 3757 03:02:44,520 --> 03:02:50,569 recommendation and then that's how the appeal of a staff 3758 03:02:50,569 --> 03:02:52,520 determination of what 3759 03:02:52,520 --> 03:02:55,799 type of ESA or the president of the ESA is going to be okay 3760 03:02:55,799 --> 03:02:56,719 the difference 3761 03:02:56,719 --> 03:03:00,010 between that and the alternative ESA plan is that it goes 3762 03:03:00,010 --> 03:03:01,040 through the planning 3763 03:03:01,040 --> 03:03:04,729 and zoning Commission and City Council now is the 3764 03:03:04,729 --> 03:03:07,399 alternative is that process 3765 03:03:07,399 --> 03:03:13,659 any different than it is currently no no it is is is follow 3766 03:03:13,659 --> 03:03:14,719 the same so the only 3767 03:03:14,719 --> 03:03:19,319 difference the only change to the ESA ordinance is the 3768 03:03:19,319 --> 03:03:21,319 additional appellate 3769 03:03:21,319 --> 03:03:25,920 procedure before be zoning board of adjustment correct for 3770 03:03:25,920 --> 03:03:26,120 ESA 3771 03:03:26,120 --> 03:03:33,559 determinations at the outset correct okay and mr. Allison I 3772 03:03:33,559 --> 03:03:34,399 'm not sure that 3773 03:03:34,399 --> 03:03:39,700 helps or answers clarifies in any of the questions you had 3774 03:03:39,700 --> 03:03:41,920 not at all 3775 03:03:43,079 --> 03:03:47,639 he says they're still not in my mind still not a zoning 3776 03:03:47,639 --> 03:03:49,920 issue and when you're 3777 03:03:49,920 --> 03:03:53,819 looking at the presence of an ESA and staff determination 3778 03:03:53,819 --> 03:03:55,040 that can be appealed 3779 03:03:55,040 --> 03:03:58,059 via the zoning board of adjustments again you're back into 3780 03:03:58,059 --> 03:03:59,000 the zone but I've 3781 03:03:59,000 --> 03:04:01,649 never really had any issues with that then once it's 3782 03:04:01,649 --> 03:04:03,200 established that there is 3783 03:04:03,200 --> 03:04:06,959 an ESA and you want to modify that ESA then you have to go 3784 03:04:06,959 --> 03:04:07,879 through the 3785 03:04:07,879 --> 03:04:10,920 alternative ESA problem because the alternative ESA is not 3786 03:04:10,920 --> 03:04:11,760 addressed whether 3787 03:04:11,760 --> 03:04:14,520 it's there or not it's how do we deal with the one that is 3788 03:04:14,520 --> 03:04:15,559 there and then 3789 03:04:15,559 --> 03:04:19,290 that gets run through as a zoning process and the real 3790 03:04:19,290 --> 03:04:20,399 issue with the 3791 03:04:20,399 --> 03:04:25,399 zoning process is not rather P&Z and City Council hear it 3792 03:04:25,399 --> 03:04:26,239 not whether there's 3793 03:04:26,239 --> 03:04:31,239 a public hearing or not the real issue is driving the super 3794 03:04:31,239 --> 03:04:32,399 majority requirement 3795 03:04:32,399 --> 03:04:36,959 I've had instances where staff is recommended approval and 3796 03:04:36,959 --> 03:04:37,680 because of 3797 03:04:37,680 --> 03:04:41,479 neighbors public opinion that drove a super majority 3798 03:04:41,479 --> 03:04:43,040 council voted against it 3799 03:04:43,040 --> 03:04:45,920 I had a previous P&Z member come to me one time and say why 3800 03:04:45,920 --> 03:04:46,840 don't y'all put 3801 03:04:46,840 --> 03:04:49,420 that retaining wall there you should have moved it way up 3802 03:04:49,420 --> 03:04:50,079 closer I said 3803 03:04:50,079 --> 03:04:52,959 because you wouldn't let us you know you wouldn't approve 3804 03:04:52,959 --> 03:04:54,760 that alternate ESA and 3805 03:04:54,760 --> 03:05:00,979 I won't go further into that but that's the kind of things 3806 03:05:00,979 --> 03:05:02,760 we're dealing with 3807 03:05:02,760 --> 03:05:05,149 with that type of the process the alternative ESA in 3808 03:05:05,149 --> 03:05:06,319 general is not an 3809 03:05:06,319 --> 03:05:10,389 issue with it it's the actual process with the not even the 3810 03:05:10,389 --> 03:05:11,700 public hearing is 3811 03:05:11,700 --> 03:05:15,299 the potential of the super majority as you would for land 3812 03:05:15,299 --> 03:05:16,760 use versus modifying 3813 03:05:16,760 --> 03:05:21,319 land characteristics FEMA doesn't have to go through a 3814 03:05:21,319 --> 03:05:23,079 zoning process to change 3815 03:05:23,079 --> 03:05:26,709 the maps and yet we have to go through that to let us do 3816 03:05:26,709 --> 03:05:28,239 things that FEMA would 3817 03:05:28,239 --> 03:05:33,040 allow us to do that the city doesn't even allow us to do 3818 03:05:33,040 --> 03:05:34,559 and it's kind of 3819 03:05:34,559 --> 03:05:38,309 like well just like the National Flood Insurance Program do 3820 03:05:38,309 --> 03:05:39,559 our ordinances help 3821 03:05:39,559 --> 03:05:43,309 set a maximum insurance rate here yes what are the 3822 03:05:43,309 --> 03:05:45,360 insurance company charging 3823 03:05:45,360 --> 03:05:49,209 here should we relax our ordinances to let that maximum 3824 03:05:49,209 --> 03:05:50,280 come down I've seen 3825 03:05:50,280 --> 03:05:55,200 that with fire a good reason to have ordinances is to keep 3826 03:05:55,200 --> 03:05:56,639 your maximum rate 3827 03:05:56,639 --> 03:05:59,270 down but if the insurance companies aren't charging 3828 03:05:59,270 --> 03:06:00,280 anywhere near that rate 3829 03:06:00,280 --> 03:06:03,809 anyway are we realizing that economic benefit are we really 3830 03:06:03,809 --> 03:06:04,639 accomplishing our 3831 03:06:04,639 --> 03:06:12,629 goals maybe Deborah if you could explain the rationale 3832 03:06:12,629 --> 03:06:16,159 behind having it before 3833 03:06:16,159 --> 03:06:21,559 PNC versus MUE originally the alternative ESA plan and the 3834 03:06:21,559 --> 03:06:22,319 ADP follow 3835 03:06:22,319 --> 03:06:27,360 the same process it was meant for to go through PNC and 3836 03:06:27,360 --> 03:06:29,680 City Council the then 3837 03:06:29,680 --> 03:06:36,180 that the ADP were process change and ESA stand following 3838 03:06:36,180 --> 03:06:37,159 the the original 3839 03:06:37,159 --> 03:06:42,719 procedure the reason why PNC City Council of retain is they 3840 03:06:42,719 --> 03:06:46,000 feel that they 3841 03:06:46,000 --> 03:06:50,729 want to have the ability to hear those cases as a public 3842 03:06:50,729 --> 03:06:53,840 hearing I correct me 3843 03:06:53,840 --> 03:06:56,780 if around if there's any other procedures current 3844 03:06:56,780 --> 03:06:58,079 procedures outline in 3845 03:06:58,079 --> 03:07:01,879 subchapter 3 that go through public hearings without the 3846 03:07:01,879 --> 03:07:02,760 super majority 3847 03:07:02,760 --> 03:07:12,520 that's there's not so that would have been for for to take 3848 03:07:12,520 --> 03:07:15,360 the super majority 3849 03:07:15,360 --> 03:07:19,540 possibility out of the context of the hearing then a new 3850 03:07:19,540 --> 03:07:21,040 process will have to 3851 03:07:21,040 --> 03:07:28,139 be crafted and spell out in subchapter 3 and then sub 3852 03:07:28,139 --> 03:07:29,959 chapter 17 will have to 3853 03:07:29,959 --> 03:07:35,149 say this process the alternative ESA plan will follow this 3854 03:07:35,149 --> 03:07:37,639 new process 3855 03:07:37,799 --> 03:07:41,229 well I'll just chime in and I'm a recognized Commissioner 3856 03:07:41,229 --> 03:07:42,120 back that was 3857 03:07:42,120 --> 03:07:45,200 one of the things I mentioned in work session that's a 3858 03:07:45,200 --> 03:07:46,799 concern of mine as well 3859 03:07:46,799 --> 03:07:50,620 is that it's it's great to offer that as an alternative 3860 03:07:50,620 --> 03:07:51,799 kind of a lot of the 3861 03:07:51,799 --> 03:07:54,450 discussion that we had but at the end of the day it becomes 3862 03:07:54,450 --> 03:07:55,479 a political decision 3863 03:07:55,479 --> 03:07:58,959 as to whether you're going to get an alternative ESA plan 3864 03:07:58,959 --> 03:08:00,280 granted or not it's 3865 03:08:00,280 --> 03:08:03,959 not a criteria if you do these four things it gets approved 3866 03:08:03,959 --> 03:08:05,239 it's you can do 3867 03:08:05,239 --> 03:08:08,670 all these things and we still may as a body not approve it 3868 03:08:08,670 --> 03:08:09,959 and so that's one of 3869 03:08:09,959 --> 03:08:12,620 the concerns that I shared at work session I want to just 3870 03:08:12,620 --> 03:08:13,479 bring back here 3871 03:08:13,479 --> 03:08:18,879 at this point to Commissioner back thank you chair Lee 3872 03:08:18,879 --> 03:08:20,680 first of all thanks for 3873 03:08:20,680 --> 03:08:23,520 coming up and making your presentation it makes me a little 3874 03:08:23,520 --> 03:08:24,440 bit more aware of 3875 03:08:24,440 --> 03:08:27,680 what's out there and you know you and I usually stand on 3876 03:08:27,680 --> 03:08:28,600 opposite sides of thing 3877 03:08:28,600 --> 03:08:31,770 but I have a lot of respect for you and as a result of that 3878 03:08:31,770 --> 03:08:32,479 I am kind of 3879 03:08:32,479 --> 03:08:35,520 disappointed here that how many of these suggestions that 3880 03:08:35,520 --> 03:08:36,559 are here did you say 3881 03:08:36,559 --> 03:08:43,459 were yours about 30 or 60 percent of them listed there now 3882 03:08:43,459 --> 03:08:44,840 other people may 3883 03:08:44,840 --> 03:08:48,260 have commented on the same thing but we submitted 43 3884 03:08:48,260 --> 03:08:49,920 comments that got included 3885 03:08:49,920 --> 03:08:54,000 in that full list of 61 by us and others and I think you 3886 03:08:54,000 --> 03:08:54,600 should have a fair 3887 03:08:54,600 --> 03:08:56,739 hearing on that I know in the past we've talked about the 3888 03:08:56,739 --> 03:08:57,520 tree code we talked 3889 03:08:57,520 --> 03:09:00,120 about doing workshops on that because there was a the devil 3890 03:09:00,120 --> 03:09:00,719 's are in the the 3891 03:09:00,719 --> 03:09:03,659 devil is in the details and we haven't had that yet either 3892 03:09:03,659 --> 03:09:04,760 and I hope we do 3893 03:09:04,760 --> 03:09:07,379 because I want to hear both sides the argument I don't want 3894 03:09:07,379 --> 03:09:08,200 anybody to be 3895 03:09:08,200 --> 03:09:12,989 railroaded so would workshops as much as I know staff would 3896 03:09:12,989 --> 03:09:14,239 like to see this go 3897 03:09:14,239 --> 03:09:18,350 forward I kind of like to see it go forward too but at the 3898 03:09:18,350 --> 03:09:18,920 same time I'd 3899 03:09:18,920 --> 03:09:22,909 like to make sure that everybody's had a fair hearing so 3900 03:09:22,909 --> 03:09:24,280 workshops with that 3901 03:09:24,280 --> 03:09:27,969 benefit you where we can all sit down and hear your griev 3902 03:09:27,969 --> 03:09:29,239 ances along with 3903 03:09:29,239 --> 03:09:33,389 staff that would be appreciated and I'd also like to say in 3904 03:09:33,389 --> 03:09:34,680 the last year the 3905 03:09:34,680 --> 03:09:37,870 staff across the board has been making noble efforts to try 3906 03:09:37,870 --> 03:09:38,840 and correct a lot 3907 03:09:38,840 --> 03:09:42,030 of things and fix a lot of things and thanks for saying I 3908 03:09:42,030 --> 03:09:43,159 get up talk about 3909 03:09:43,159 --> 03:09:46,000 the one or two things we have an issue with versus the 3910 03:09:46,000 --> 03:09:47,360 thousands of things that 3911 03:09:47,360 --> 03:09:50,790 are going great but yes that we have appreciated okay well 3912 03:09:50,790 --> 03:09:51,159 that'd be something 3913 03:09:51,159 --> 03:09:54,079 to consider them thank you 3914 03:09:55,360 --> 03:09:59,920 I see no other questions thank you this is a public hearing 3915 03:09:59,920 --> 03:10:00,680 anyone else who would 3916 03:10:00,680 --> 03:10:04,319 like to come speak on this island please come forward at 3917 03:10:04,319 --> 03:10:09,239 this time seeing none 3918 03:10:09,239 --> 03:10:12,440 will close the public hearing and I will open the floor for 3919 03:10:12,440 --> 03:10:13,319 discussion or a 3920 03:10:13,319 --> 03:10:27,159 motion Commissioner Beck thank you chair now as I mentioned 3921 03:10:27,159 --> 03:10:30,319 mr. Allison for the 3922 03:10:30,319 --> 03:10:32,750 most part I have no problem with this revision there's a 3923 03:10:32,750 --> 03:10:33,879 lot of good stuff to 3924 03:10:33,879 --> 03:10:37,920 it but on the other hand and I've heard expressed with 3925 03:10:37,920 --> 03:10:39,319 commissioners in the in 3926 03:10:39,319 --> 03:10:42,840 our work session too that some more discussion is probably 3927 03:10:42,840 --> 03:10:44,040 needed on this so 3928 03:10:44,040 --> 03:10:47,840 I wouldn't be reluctant to putting this off a little bit 3929 03:10:47,840 --> 03:10:49,319 longer I know it's been 3930 03:10:49,319 --> 03:10:52,549 13 months never know you're eager to but I want to make 3931 03:10:52,549 --> 03:10:53,959 sure that both sides are 3932 03:10:53,959 --> 03:10:57,549 heard and there is counter arguments to the concerns 3933 03:10:57,549 --> 03:10:59,239 everybody has here that I'd 3934 03:10:59,239 --> 03:11:02,030 like to present to and get them out there in the open and 3935 03:11:02,030 --> 03:11:02,440 have that 3936 03:11:02,440 --> 03:11:08,290 opportunity so you know if we consider this a motion to 3937 03:11:08,290 --> 03:11:09,760 move forward I wouldn't 3938 03:11:09,760 --> 03:11:12,340 be opposed to that I'm not gonna make a motion at this time 3939 03:11:12,340 --> 03:11:14,799 okay 3940 03:11:14,799 --> 03:11:17,719 you mean Commissioner Ellis thank you chair yeah I mean I 3941 03:11:17,719 --> 03:11:18,559 have some of those 3942 03:11:18,559 --> 03:11:22,889 same thoughts we we have too many unanswered questions I 3943 03:11:22,889 --> 03:11:23,760 think and too 3944 03:11:23,760 --> 03:11:26,340 many things that that I guess haven't been addressed 3945 03:11:26,340 --> 03:11:27,379 whether we haven't had 3946 03:11:27,379 --> 03:11:32,680 enough time together to to to address them or not but it 3947 03:11:32,680 --> 03:11:34,319 does seem like we 3948 03:11:34,319 --> 03:11:39,149 need more discussion just to get those things answered so 3949 03:11:39,149 --> 03:11:41,360 that that we can move 3950 03:11:41,360 --> 03:11:44,440 forward with a recommendation most of this I like there 3951 03:11:44,440 --> 03:11:46,399 just seems to be a few 3952 03:11:46,399 --> 03:11:49,520 questions out there and in concerns that that haven't been 3953 03:11:49,520 --> 03:11:51,139 answered yet and I 3954 03:11:51,139 --> 03:11:53,350 think it's been lack of time both of our work sessions the 3955 03:11:53,350 --> 03:11:54,159 last two meetings 3956 03:11:54,159 --> 03:11:57,360 we've literally run out of time in the middle of your 3957 03:11:57,360 --> 03:11:58,920 presentation so I don't 3958 03:11:58,920 --> 03:12:01,930 know how we can fix that if we can if we can move that to 3959 03:12:01,930 --> 03:12:03,319 another work session or 3960 03:12:03,319 --> 03:12:07,139 how we do that but we need some kind of uninterrupted time 3961 03:12:07,139 --> 03:12:08,360 to be able to I think 3962 03:12:08,360 --> 03:12:12,409 get to the bottom of some of these concerns so that we can 3963 03:12:12,409 --> 03:12:13,440 give a 3964 03:12:13,440 --> 03:12:16,520 recommendation I don't think we're there tonight 3965 03:12:16,520 --> 03:12:21,079 Commissioner Sanchez yeah I know we we spent a lot of time 3966 03:12:21,079 --> 03:12:22,159 discussing this and 3967 03:12:22,159 --> 03:12:25,069 I'm still kind of confused this whole thing since this is 3968 03:12:25,069 --> 03:12:26,799 the first time I you 3969 03:12:26,799 --> 03:12:30,430 know I'm relatively new again but I think we need more time 3970 03:12:30,430 --> 03:12:31,360 to discuss it 3971 03:12:31,360 --> 03:12:34,670 that was I think one of the things we said at our work 3972 03:12:34,670 --> 03:12:36,079 session is that we need 3973 03:12:36,079 --> 03:12:39,510 a little bit more time so I'd like to see this postponed 3974 03:12:39,510 --> 03:12:41,559 and have another run 3975 03:12:41,559 --> 03:12:47,479 at it and see what comes out of the more understanding 3976 03:12:50,399 --> 03:12:57,040 staff is willing to do a and another work session we can 3977 03:12:57,040 --> 03:12:58,239 either have a regular 3978 03:12:58,239 --> 03:13:02,200 work session of an hour just for ESA or we can have an 3979 03:13:02,200 --> 03:13:04,200 early work session or we 3980 03:13:04,200 --> 03:13:08,909 can have just a work session not right before the regular P 3981 03:13:08,909 --> 03:13:10,799 NC sessions in that 3982 03:13:10,799 --> 03:13:13,670 way there will be more time for discussion if that's 3983 03:13:13,670 --> 03:13:14,799 something that you 3984 03:13:14,799 --> 03:13:20,110 would like to to do this is a public hearing we already 3985 03:13:20,110 --> 03:13:21,879 notified so if you 3986 03:13:21,879 --> 03:13:27,430 can determine that a date to continue and then between now 3987 03:13:27,430 --> 03:13:28,879 and that day to 3988 03:13:28,879 --> 03:13:31,459 have the work session meeting with you the staff is 3989 03:13:31,459 --> 03:13:32,760 perfectly fine with that 3990 03:13:32,760 --> 03:13:41,000 and then I have the 61 comments I have answers for those 3991 03:13:41,000 --> 03:13:44,360 the the reason why that 3992 03:13:44,360 --> 03:13:48,350 those were not reflected on the draft that you were reading 3993 03:13:48,350 --> 03:13:49,399 is because those 3994 03:13:49,399 --> 03:13:56,010 were the changes that COE have heard and was vetted through 3995 03:13:56,010 --> 03:13:57,680 it however that 3996 03:13:57,680 --> 03:14:01,649 doesn't means that you can make a proposed change to the to 3997 03:14:01,649 --> 03:14:02,639 the language 3998 03:14:02,639 --> 03:14:05,520 and that as a part of your recommendation when the public 3999 03:14:05,520 --> 03:14:05,879 hearing 4000 03:14:05,879 --> 03:14:15,040 is done so we will provide answers for those for you 61 4001 03:14:15,040 --> 03:14:17,760 comments right now if 4002 03:14:17,760 --> 03:14:22,639 you have a specific questions please please please send it 4003 03:14:22,639 --> 03:14:24,239 to me and I will 4004 03:14:24,239 --> 03:14:30,590 make sure that those items are extensively discussed during 4005 03:14:30,590 --> 03:14:31,200 the work 4006 03:14:31,200 --> 03:14:35,440 session items some of you have sent me questions by email 4007 03:14:35,440 --> 03:14:36,959 and those have been 4008 03:14:36,959 --> 03:14:42,360 answered as well so please take the chance to send me those 4009 03:14:42,360 --> 03:14:43,079 emails in that 4010 03:14:43,079 --> 03:14:47,639 way I can really tailor the work session to address those 4011 03:14:47,639 --> 03:14:49,120 comments or those 4012 03:14:49,120 --> 03:14:53,260 questions to your question I guess I'll give some thoughts 4013 03:14:53,260 --> 03:14:56,360 and feedback so the 4014 03:14:56,360 --> 03:14:59,790 the backup that we had with all the comments the process 4015 03:14:59,790 --> 03:15:00,959 went those went to 4016 03:15:00,959 --> 03:15:10,290 the COE and they chose essentially to not from October of 4017 03:15:10,290 --> 03:15:15,200 2016 through I'm sorry 4018 03:15:15,200 --> 03:15:21,780 August of 2013 of 2016 through August of 2017 so those are 4019 03:15:21,780 --> 03:15:23,239 the the 13 month 4020 03:15:23,239 --> 03:15:26,319 abetting process that we did with the COE when we have 4021 03:15:26,319 --> 03:15:27,520 finished all those 4022 03:15:27,520 --> 03:15:32,829 comments those were the the draft posted online for public 4023 03:15:32,829 --> 03:15:35,920 input so the COE have 4024 03:15:35,920 --> 03:15:41,409 not seen those comments and we were hoping that after going 4025 03:15:41,409 --> 03:15:42,799 through PNC we 4026 03:15:42,799 --> 03:15:46,399 collect your input your recommendation whatever changes you 4027 03:15:46,399 --> 03:15:47,479 are proposing and 4028 03:15:47,479 --> 03:15:52,370 forward those to the the City Council as a whole and 4029 03:15:52,370 --> 03:15:54,719 showing what the COE have 4030 03:15:54,719 --> 03:16:00,149 proposed what the PNC is now proposing and then show the 4031 03:16:00,149 --> 03:16:02,319 list of public input 4032 03:16:02,319 --> 03:16:05,549 that we have received if necessary we will provide a 4033 03:16:05,549 --> 03:16:07,040 written a response for 4034 03:16:07,040 --> 03:16:11,639 every single of them I went through them I have responses 4035 03:16:11,639 --> 03:16:14,399 so we can do that so in 4036 03:16:14,399 --> 03:16:18,459 that way everybody who has been involved in the process 4037 03:16:18,459 --> 03:16:20,120 from the get-go can see 4038 03:16:20,120 --> 03:16:24,170 the changes throughout and City Council can make a final 4039 03:16:24,170 --> 03:16:25,120 recommendation or a 4040 03:16:25,120 --> 03:16:29,840 final decision well I think that would be a good step for 4041 03:16:29,840 --> 03:16:32,360 us to have I know for 4042 03:16:32,360 --> 03:16:34,450 this Commission and a lot of times we sit up here and one 4043 03:16:34,450 --> 03:16:35,000 of the first 4044 03:16:35,000 --> 03:16:37,629 questions we ask when it's a private have y'all had a 4045 03:16:37,629 --> 03:16:39,079 neighborhood meeting and 4046 03:16:39,079 --> 03:16:43,020 this is a neighborhood meeting comment to me and when we 4047 03:16:43,020 --> 03:16:44,159 have those come to us 4048 03:16:44,159 --> 03:16:46,399 the first thing we turn around to the developer of all 4049 03:16:46,399 --> 03:16:47,440 these things that were 4050 03:16:47,440 --> 03:16:50,479 brought up in your neighborhood meeting what you do about 4051 03:16:50,479 --> 03:16:52,159 them and usually the 4052 03:16:52,159 --> 03:16:55,760 reception is we didn't do anything with them is not 4053 03:16:55,760 --> 03:16:58,000 received well and I think 4054 03:16:58,000 --> 03:17:00,899 it's good just from the city standpoint when we ask people 4055 03:17:00,899 --> 03:17:01,719 to do that even 4056 03:17:01,719 --> 03:17:04,920 though it's not mandatory it's highly encouraged go have a 4057 03:17:04,920 --> 03:17:05,319 neighborhood 4058 03:17:05,319 --> 03:17:08,600 meeting hopefully there's some resolution there if there 4059 03:17:08,600 --> 03:17:09,040 can't be we 4060 03:17:09,040 --> 03:17:11,899 understand we want to hear both sides of it and then this 4061 03:17:11,899 --> 03:17:13,079 board or Commission can 4062 03:17:13,079 --> 03:17:16,059 make a determination and move it to City Council I think 4063 03:17:16,059 --> 03:17:17,399 that's an important step 4064 03:17:17,399 --> 03:17:22,120 for us as a city to lead by example that we ask other 4065 03:17:22,120 --> 03:17:23,719 people to do that and I 4066 03:17:23,719 --> 03:17:26,659 think we should do that too to be able to say hey we got 60 4067 03:17:26,659 --> 03:17:27,959 -something comments 4068 03:17:27,959 --> 03:17:31,860 20 of them we addressed 20 of them we didn't agree with and 4069 03:17:31,860 --> 03:17:32,959 20 of these we'd 4070 03:17:32,959 --> 03:17:35,319 like to throw up here and you guys can bat them around and 4071 03:17:35,319 --> 03:17:35,959 decide which 4072 03:17:35,959 --> 03:17:37,899 direction you want to go on them and I think that's 4073 03:17:37,899 --> 03:17:39,040 something that should be 4074 03:17:39,040 --> 03:17:42,290 incorporated to your point of kind of next steps how we 4075 03:17:42,290 --> 03:17:44,040 move this forward I'd 4076 03:17:44,040 --> 03:17:47,280 like to see it continued like to see these comments 4077 03:17:47,280 --> 03:17:48,319 addressed so that we can 4078 03:17:48,319 --> 03:17:52,879 come back and say okay we see the processes has moved 4079 03:17:52,879 --> 03:17:54,559 forward and I think 4080 03:17:54,559 --> 03:17:57,729 one of the other comments I would give the difficulty that 4081 03:17:57,729 --> 03:17:59,239 I have when at least 4082 03:17:59,239 --> 03:18:01,940 for me personally is I know there's a tremendous amount of 4083 03:18:01,940 --> 03:18:02,920 effort and work that 4084 03:18:02,920 --> 03:18:06,670 goes on behind the scenes to get the ordinance to place to 4085 03:18:06,670 --> 03:18:07,239 bring it here 4086 03:18:07,239 --> 03:18:09,940 before us and it always seemed like there's been a 4087 03:18:09,940 --> 03:18:11,399 tremendous amount of time 4088 03:18:11,399 --> 03:18:14,370 and then we see it and y'all vote on it and move it and I'm 4089 03:18:14,370 --> 03:18:15,879 like what's the 4090 03:18:15,879 --> 03:18:18,319 process for us to review it what's the process for us to 4091 03:18:18,319 --> 03:18:19,200 get to people that 4092 03:18:19,200 --> 03:18:23,110 send emails telephone calls add those things in there 4093 03:18:23,110 --> 03:18:24,639 versus you see it it 4094 03:18:24,639 --> 03:18:27,409 needs to move to the next level there doesn't that's an 4095 03:18:27,409 --> 03:18:28,680 issue that I personally 4096 03:18:28,680 --> 03:18:31,290 have when we have a lot of these changes I think a lot of 4097 03:18:31,290 --> 03:18:32,200 things clean up lives 4098 03:18:32,200 --> 03:18:35,120 are good in here there's some things as I pointed out 4099 03:18:35,120 --> 03:18:36,280 tonight that I read it I 4100 03:18:36,280 --> 03:18:40,000 go well the intention may be this but that's not what it 4101 03:18:40,000 --> 03:18:41,360 says it needs to be 4102 03:18:41,360 --> 03:18:45,219 cleaned up so that it is very clear you can fill or not 4103 03:18:45,219 --> 03:18:46,840 fill and how you do it 4104 03:18:46,840 --> 03:18:49,139 and some of the other things I brought up and don't want 4105 03:18:49,139 --> 03:18:50,879 rehash and I think 4106 03:18:50,879 --> 03:18:54,129 those are the things that need to happen when these things 4107 03:18:54,129 --> 03:18:54,959 come to us as a 4108 03:18:54,959 --> 03:19:00,520 commission is to have an opportunity to review them make 4109 03:19:00,520 --> 03:19:01,799 comments to their 4110 03:19:01,799 --> 03:19:04,579 suggestions and changes get it good and hopefully move it 4111 03:19:04,579 --> 03:19:05,559 to City Council but 4112 03:19:05,559 --> 03:19:08,200 when it does get the City Council hopefully it's been very 4113 03:19:08,200 --> 03:19:08,799 well vetted 4114 03:19:08,799 --> 03:19:11,889 very clean and they can look at and go you know this looks 4115 03:19:11,889 --> 03:19:12,959 great there's two 4116 03:19:12,959 --> 03:19:15,829 things on here we do different and let's vote on it versus 4117 03:19:15,829 --> 03:19:16,879 it gets to City 4118 03:19:16,879 --> 03:19:20,629 Council and there's 60 questions and people are coming and 4119 03:19:20,629 --> 03:19:21,719 going none of this 4120 03:19:21,719 --> 03:19:24,819 has been addressed and it turns into a bog and those City 4121 03:19:24,819 --> 03:19:26,079 Council spends a lot 4122 03:19:26,079 --> 03:19:29,399 more time on these things than we do and I think one of the 4123 03:19:29,399 --> 03:19:30,879 jobs is us as P&Z 4124 03:19:30,879 --> 03:19:34,020 Commissioners is hopefully to clean it up and do as best as 4125 03:19:34,020 --> 03:19:34,879 we can here and 4126 03:19:34,879 --> 03:19:37,200 move it to them that they can look at and go you know what 4127 03:19:37,200 --> 03:19:38,000 the folks that we 4128 03:19:38,000 --> 03:19:41,899 appointed that board did a good job and we know we're gonna 4129 03:19:41,899 --> 03:19:43,159 do our piece to it 4130 03:19:43,159 --> 03:19:46,729 and approve it not approve it change it or whatever and so 4131 03:19:46,729 --> 03:19:48,000 those would be some 4132 03:19:48,000 --> 03:19:50,760 of my thoughts I know you pose a question and we're still 4133 03:19:50,760 --> 03:19:51,399 open and so I'm 4134 03:19:51,399 --> 03:19:54,450 gonna recognize Commissioner Beck to throw out some other 4135 03:19:54,450 --> 03:19:55,159 things and hopefully 4136 03:19:55,159 --> 03:19:57,590 we can get something put together on next steps for us 4137 03:19:57,590 --> 03:19:58,360 thank you chair 4138 03:19:58,360 --> 03:20:00,680 actually you pretty much said it all what I wanted to do 4139 03:20:00,680 --> 03:20:01,200 was kind of 4140 03:20:01,200 --> 03:20:06,760 encapsulate what we probably should do is set a specific 4141 03:20:06,760 --> 03:20:08,639 work session either 4142 03:20:08,639 --> 03:20:11,409 prior to a regular work session P&Z or maybe even on a 4143 03:20:11,409 --> 03:20:13,760 different day I know I'm 4144 03:20:13,760 --> 03:20:17,200 retired here so I can pretty much do it anytime but it 4145 03:20:17,200 --> 03:20:18,200 makes it difficult for the 4146 03:20:18,200 --> 03:20:20,239 other ones work so that would have to be taking 4147 03:20:20,239 --> 03:20:23,680 consideration right Andrew so but 4148 03:20:23,680 --> 03:20:26,510 we it needs to be distinctive needs to be at least an hour 4149 03:20:26,510 --> 03:20:27,639 I would think you 4150 03:20:27,639 --> 03:20:31,829 know maybe a little bit longer and prior to that if you 4151 03:20:31,829 --> 03:20:33,239 would send us your 4152 03:20:33,239 --> 03:20:36,959 responses to the 60 questions so we can mull over them plus 4153 03:20:36,959 --> 03:20:38,920 we need to have Mr. 4154 03:20:38,920 --> 03:20:43,639 Allison and others in his area his field of expertise come 4155 03:20:43,639 --> 03:20:44,799 there and defend their 4156 03:20:44,799 --> 03:20:47,840 positions on that and I think that way we get a good 4157 03:20:47,840 --> 03:20:49,280 rounded deal so I think if 4158 03:20:49,280 --> 03:20:51,860 we just kind of if I can get a nod from everybody here if 4159 03:20:51,860 --> 03:20:52,840 that's okay I could 4160 03:20:52,840 --> 03:20:56,489 make that motion and we can move forward does anybody see 4161 03:20:56,489 --> 03:20:57,760 problem with that 4162 03:20:57,760 --> 03:21:02,450 process as I just line laid out I think the only point of 4163 03:21:02,450 --> 03:21:03,680 that is just a 4164 03:21:03,680 --> 03:21:08,969 timeframe right I would suggest we want to get it done as 4165 03:21:08,969 --> 03:21:09,319 soon as possible 4166 03:21:09,319 --> 03:21:17,000 probably 21st two weeks two weeks has had enough time for 4167 03:21:17,000 --> 03:21:18,680 everybody we've seen 4168 03:21:18,680 --> 03:21:25,700 a lot of it there's just just a smaller stuff now I'll call 4169 03:21:25,700 --> 03:21:26,360 on make sure that we 4170 03:21:26,360 --> 03:21:28,940 can we can get it done because that's about a week 4171 03:21:28,940 --> 03:21:33,680 turnaround okay okay so 4172 03:21:33,680 --> 03:21:37,870 maybe have a work session start like at 4 o'clock or even 3 4173 03:21:37,870 --> 03:21:43,440 o'clock okay and date 4174 03:21:43,440 --> 03:21:48,750 certain of the 21st with prior to that with the responses 4175 03:21:48,750 --> 03:21:51,280 from Deborah on the 4176 03:21:51,280 --> 03:21:56,920 60 questions and it includes Lee and other members of his 4177 03:21:56,920 --> 03:21:58,799 group that want to 4178 03:21:58,799 --> 03:22:07,760 have their inputs it from from Lee you wanted no actually I 4179 03:22:07,760 --> 03:22:08,639 want your response 4180 03:22:08,639 --> 03:22:12,729 you said you had responses for all that's all we want in an 4181 03:22:12,729 --> 03:22:14,239 email okay and 4182 03:22:14,239 --> 03:22:18,229 Lee just needs to be there to defend his own positions okay 4183 03:22:18,229 --> 03:22:19,319 but by the time he 4184 03:22:19,319 --> 03:22:21,899 gets there will have read your responses to it so we can 4185 03:22:21,899 --> 03:22:23,200 anticipate what he's 4186 03:22:23,200 --> 03:22:33,649 gonna say so that's my motion okay commissioner Ellis thank 4187 03:22:33,649 --> 03:22:34,319 you chair I 4188 03:22:34,319 --> 03:22:37,149 guess just to maybe clarify that you know you've got that 4189 03:22:37,149 --> 03:22:38,159 spreadsheet with 4190 03:22:38,159 --> 03:22:41,719 all the questions in it and if you just add another column 4191 03:22:41,719 --> 03:22:43,280 that just says why or 4192 03:22:43,280 --> 03:22:47,180 why not this is already addressed here you know that would 4193 03:22:47,180 --> 03:22:48,000 that would be really 4194 03:22:48,000 --> 03:22:51,819 helpful you know we want public comment and obviously you 4195 03:22:51,819 --> 03:22:53,040 know you're not going 4196 03:22:53,040 --> 03:22:56,469 to take all those suggestions and incorporate it I'm sure 4197 03:22:56,469 --> 03:22:58,399 but I think you 4198 03:22:58,399 --> 03:23:01,889 know whoever made the comment certainly should know why or 4199 03:23:01,889 --> 03:23:03,559 what your response is 4200 03:23:03,559 --> 03:23:06,739 to the comment and we certainly would love to see that you 4201 03:23:06,739 --> 03:23:07,760 know just it 4202 03:23:07,760 --> 03:23:10,459 doesn't have to be long and drawn out just this is why or 4203 03:23:10,459 --> 03:23:11,440 this is where it's 4204 03:23:11,440 --> 03:23:14,500 located or this is why we can't do that or this is how it's 4205 03:23:14,500 --> 03:23:15,399 addressed or or 4206 03:23:15,399 --> 03:23:19,799 what have you that would be really helpful thank you 4207 03:23:20,799 --> 03:23:27,239 do we need to continue the public hearing to a certain day 4208 03:23:27,239 --> 03:23:32,639 we will thank 4209 03:23:32,639 --> 03:23:37,200 you Commissioner Roselle so first I just wanted to second 4210 03:23:37,200 --> 03:23:38,280 or echo everything that 4211 03:23:38,280 --> 03:23:41,180 the chair said including the appreciation for the amount of 4212 03:23:41,180 --> 03:23:41,479 work 4213 03:23:41,479 --> 03:23:43,719 going into this I don't I know for me it's it's not 4214 03:23:43,719 --> 03:23:45,840 overlooked this seems like 4215 03:23:45,840 --> 03:23:49,649 a lot of work and certainly our my feedback and our 4216 03:23:49,649 --> 03:23:50,799 feedback hopefully is 4217 03:23:50,799 --> 03:23:53,379 not belittling of any of those efforts but I think there 4218 03:23:53,379 --> 03:23:54,360 might be opportunities 4219 03:23:54,360 --> 03:23:59,559 to as chair said strengthen the efficiency of this process 4220 03:23:59,559 --> 03:24:00,319 but with that 4221 03:24:00,319 --> 03:24:04,000 I will second the Commissioner Beck's motion to continue 4222 03:24:04,000 --> 03:24:05,079 this item to date 4223 03:24:05,079 --> 03:24:09,870 certain February 21st with a additional allocation of time 4224 03:24:09,870 --> 03:24:16,159 for work session okay 4225 03:24:16,159 --> 03:24:18,959 we have a first and a second do we have any further 4226 03:24:18,959 --> 03:24:20,120 discussion or is there 4227 03:24:20,120 --> 03:24:30,120 anything legal or staff needs to add to our motion okay 4228 03:24:30,120 --> 03:24:33,120 seeing no further 4229 03:24:33,120 --> 03:24:36,639 discussion I will call for a vote on the board to continue 4230 03:24:36,639 --> 03:24:37,760 to date certain of the 4231 03:24:37,760 --> 03:24:51,770 21st motion to continue carry six to zero that will take us 4232 03:24:51,770 --> 03:24:52,760 to our I think 4233 03:24:52,760 --> 03:25:00,440 our final agenda item this evening is going to be our 4234 03:25:00,440 --> 03:25:02,440 project matrix 4235 03:25:02,440 --> 03:25:06,340 Commissioner Roselle thank you chair I have two things that 4236 03:25:06,340 --> 03:25:07,799 I would like to bring 4237 03:25:07,799 --> 03:25:10,729 up for maybe action items in the future the first is 4238 03:25:10,729 --> 03:25:12,159 recently brought to my 4239 03:25:12,159 --> 03:25:16,719 attention that we have a downtown implementation plan of 4240 03:25:16,719 --> 03:25:19,319 2010 that speaks 4241 03:25:19,319 --> 03:25:23,700 of eight tenants for planning the downtown area one of 4242 03:25:23,700 --> 03:25:24,719 those eight tenants 4243 03:25:24,719 --> 03:25:28,579 is form-based zoning for the downtown development I would 4244 03:25:28,579 --> 03:25:30,079 like an update if 4245 03:25:30,079 --> 03:25:33,690 that is still in existence if that's been amended if the 4246 03:25:33,690 --> 03:25:35,840 overarching plan for 4247 03:25:35,840 --> 03:25:38,600 downtown is still the downtown implementation plan 2010 4248 03:25:38,600 --> 03:25:39,639 what do we as a 4249 03:25:39,639 --> 03:25:44,840 P&Z Commission need to do to fulfill the approved P&Z and 4250 03:25:44,840 --> 03:25:46,719 council plan for 4251 03:25:46,719 --> 03:25:51,840 form-based zoning downtown and maybe second to that what is 4252 03:25:51,840 --> 03:25:52,399 form-based 4253 03:25:52,399 --> 03:25:55,180 zoning and an education of that if we need to proceed 4254 03:25:55,180 --> 03:25:56,200 forward with that I 4255 03:25:56,200 --> 03:25:58,319 don't know the accuracy of that because that downtown 4256 03:25:58,319 --> 03:25:59,399 implementation plan also 4257 03:25:59,399 --> 03:26:02,280 talks about forward in parking and now we do reverse 4258 03:26:02,280 --> 03:26:03,760 parking downtown so I don't 4259 03:26:03,760 --> 03:26:06,879 I don't know the accuracy of that document but I would like 4260 03:26:06,879 --> 03:26:07,680 information 4261 03:26:07,680 --> 03:26:12,469 about that downtown implementation plan of 2010 that's the 4262 03:26:12,469 --> 03:26:14,600 first thing the 4263 03:26:14,600 --> 03:26:21,450 second thing is Scott McDonald talked earlier about traffic 4264 03:26:21,450 --> 03:26:22,760 planning and the 4265 03:26:22,760 --> 03:26:26,260 future of that and I think the Commission has all said kind 4266 03:26:26,260 --> 03:26:26,879 of today in 4267 03:26:26,879 --> 03:26:30,760 different ways that we do a whole lot of zoning here and I 4268 03:26:30,760 --> 03:26:32,639 think the planning 4269 03:26:32,639 --> 03:26:36,170 portion of our responsibilities could be strengthened and I 4270 03:26:36,170 --> 03:26:38,760 think one way to kind 4271 03:26:38,760 --> 03:26:42,000 of step into strengthening the planning is to really figure 4272 03:26:42,000 --> 03:26:43,079 out what's going on 4273 03:26:43,079 --> 03:26:47,370 from a traffic standpoint it seems as though that's always 4274 03:26:47,370 --> 03:26:48,000 a recurrent issue 4275 03:26:48,000 --> 03:26:50,780 and especially considering the council's momentum from 4276 03:26:50,780 --> 03:26:52,200 yesterday talking about 4277 03:26:52,200 --> 03:26:55,950 bike sharing I just think that as we as a commission try to 4278 03:26:55,950 --> 03:26:56,840 plan one of those 4279 03:26:56,840 --> 03:27:01,290 purviews is mobility plan and so I think to help maybe 4280 03:27:01,290 --> 03:27:03,200 guide council and come 4281 03:27:03,200 --> 03:27:06,379 together with them on that effort I'd be really interested 4282 03:27:06,379 --> 03:27:09,159 in figuring out that 4283 03:27:09,159 --> 03:27:12,250 piece of our planning responsibility in terms of traffic 4284 03:27:12,250 --> 03:27:14,239 and I think a broad 4285 03:27:14,239 --> 03:27:19,100 stroke would be good but I think it could include biking 4286 03:27:19,100 --> 03:27:20,680 and roads and 4287 03:27:20,680 --> 03:27:25,510 proactively what where are we able to proactively look at 4288 03:27:25,510 --> 03:27:26,959 road I know a lot of 4289 03:27:26,959 --> 03:27:30,760 roads and mobility plan have bond tie-ins and they're all 4290 03:27:30,760 --> 03:27:32,079 prioritized but 4291 03:27:32,079 --> 03:27:35,809 it's it's very rare that we ever proactively look to 4292 03:27:35,809 --> 03:27:37,159 increase a road 4293 03:27:37,159 --> 03:27:39,860 construction it's always retroactively and if that has to 4294 03:27:39,860 --> 03:27:40,760 happen why those 4295 03:27:40,760 --> 03:27:44,229 type of questions I'd love to know more about so that we 4296 03:27:44,229 --> 03:27:45,440 can as a commission be 4297 03:27:45,440 --> 03:27:50,799 more proactive in the planning aspect of this of this job 4298 03:27:50,799 --> 03:27:51,520 certainly in fact well 4299 03:27:51,520 --> 03:27:56,079 one thing that we've been starting to put together is just 4300 03:27:56,079 --> 03:27:57,079 the number of 4301 03:27:57,079 --> 03:28:00,819 applications that are pending platting site plan some that 4302 03:28:00,819 --> 03:28:01,680 may not come to 4303 03:28:01,680 --> 03:28:05,500 public hearing and just sort of generally looking at what's 4304 03:28:05,500 --> 03:28:06,280 I mean there's 4305 03:28:06,280 --> 03:28:08,860 all sorts of things that go into a TIA but broad picture 4306 03:28:08,860 --> 03:28:09,920 what are what are the 4307 03:28:09,920 --> 03:28:13,430 trips generating and then starting to look at that on a 4308 03:28:13,430 --> 03:28:14,840 citywide basis and 4309 03:28:14,840 --> 03:28:17,930 trying to really basically tie into what you're saying you 4310 03:28:17,930 --> 03:28:18,920 start to plan for 4311 03:28:18,920 --> 03:28:22,790 these types of things so I'll prepare an item and then have 4312 03:28:22,790 --> 03:28:23,600 some of that backup 4313 03:28:23,600 --> 03:28:29,739 so so so we can have that discussion that sounds great and 4314 03:28:29,739 --> 03:28:31,239 maybe it would be 4315 03:28:31,239 --> 03:28:35,180 also helpful to clarify our general role in guiding council 4316 03:28:35,180 --> 03:28:36,360 and some of these 4317 03:28:36,360 --> 03:28:41,719 things the the idea of the bike share decision that 4318 03:28:41,719 --> 03:28:42,440 happened at council 4319 03:28:42,440 --> 03:28:46,100 yesterday seems like it naturally should have come through 4320 03:28:46,100 --> 03:28:46,959 the commission 4321 03:28:46,959 --> 03:28:50,219 charged with working through mobility plans and so I don't 4322 03:28:50,219 --> 03:28:51,280 know if that is our 4323 03:28:51,280 --> 03:28:53,840 purview I know they had discussion about permitting which 4324 03:28:53,840 --> 03:28:55,500 is apart from us but we 4325 03:28:55,500 --> 03:28:58,260 didn't provide any kind of insight that I know of to 4326 03:28:58,260 --> 03:28:59,840 council about mobility as it 4327 03:28:59,840 --> 03:29:03,959 comes to to bikes maybe they were using old report or old 4328 03:29:03,959 --> 03:29:04,600 minutes but I don't 4329 03:29:04,600 --> 03:29:07,709 know where our responsibility falls from like an actual 4330 03:29:07,709 --> 03:29:08,920 legal perspective of 4331 03:29:08,920 --> 03:29:12,770 what's been charged to us to counsel them and direct them 4332 03:29:12,770 --> 03:29:13,719 for and so maybe 4333 03:29:13,719 --> 03:29:16,540 that would be helpful just to know like what what we can do 4334 03:29:16,540 --> 03:29:19,319 within those bounds 4335 03:29:23,319 --> 03:29:30,750 that sounds great thank you commissioner Sullivan yes seems 4336 03:29:30,750 --> 03:29:32,639 the last two meetings 4337 03:29:32,639 --> 03:29:38,229 or so we've spent a lot of time and looking at residential 4338 03:29:38,229 --> 03:29:40,399 zoning in our 1 2 4339 03:29:40,399 --> 03:29:47,549 3 4 6 in our MU 12 in our MU and that the one place that we 4340 03:29:47,549 --> 03:29:48,840 seem to be caught 4341 03:29:48,840 --> 03:29:56,049 up on a lot is why don't we have an NR 5 you know we've 4342 03:29:56,049 --> 03:29:57,959 spent last meeting I 4343 03:29:57,959 --> 03:30:01,709 don't know how much time cussing and discussing the uses 4344 03:30:01,709 --> 03:30:02,639 and abuses of 4345 03:30:02,639 --> 03:30:06,799 overlays and we come in here and we vote for an overlay and 4346 03:30:06,799 --> 03:30:08,559 so which could have 4347 03:30:08,559 --> 03:30:14,200 been avoided because of point 2 density and I'm just 4348 03:30:14,200 --> 03:30:15,440 thinking that you know 4349 03:30:15,440 --> 03:30:17,950 that's not the first time that that's happened there is one 4350 03:30:17,950 --> 03:30:18,680 I think one or two 4351 03:30:18,680 --> 03:30:21,879 meetings prior to that I'm just wondering why don't we have 4352 03:30:21,879 --> 03:30:23,840 an NR 5 that 4353 03:30:23,840 --> 03:30:29,149 would catch those that are kind of leaking over a little 4354 03:30:29,149 --> 03:30:30,760 bit that we don't 4355 03:30:30,760 --> 03:30:37,239 have to employ an overlay to accomplish the goal in the 4356 03:30:37,239 --> 03:30:39,319 very near future as part 4357 03:30:39,319 --> 03:30:44,700 of the DDC update you will see that in fact one of the one 4358 03:30:44,700 --> 03:30:45,959 of the the the ways 4359 03:30:45,959 --> 03:30:48,079 that we're going with this now is actually to kind of go 4360 03:30:48,079 --> 03:30:48,799 back to where we 4361 03:30:48,799 --> 03:30:53,170 were and not regulate by density but by lot size I had made 4362 03:30:53,170 --> 03:30:54,200 a statement 4363 03:30:54,200 --> 03:30:58,459 yesterday at City Council on those Audra projects where the 4364 03:30:58,459 --> 03:30:58,920 surroundings 4365 03:30:58,920 --> 03:31:02,510 subdivisions were at like a 4.3 or 4.4 density and the 4366 03:31:02,510 --> 03:31:04,399 reason is that it is 4367 03:31:04,399 --> 03:31:07,659 because the minimum lots at that time were 10,000 square 4368 03:31:07,659 --> 03:31:09,120 feet so divide 43 by 4369 03:31:09,120 --> 03:31:12,840 560 by 10 and you get 4.3 or depending how you around 4.4 4370 03:31:12,840 --> 03:31:14,120 and so it's really 4371 03:31:14,120 --> 03:31:19,760 caused a problem and now we have a multitude of overlay 4372 03:31:19,760 --> 03:31:20,440 districts that 4373 03:31:20,440 --> 03:31:23,870 aren't the best to to manage you know moving forward 10-20 4374 03:31:23,870 --> 03:31:24,920 years from now and 4375 03:31:24,920 --> 03:31:28,350 so that's where we're now looking at looking at those lot 4376 03:31:28,350 --> 03:31:29,200 sizes and then 4377 03:31:29,200 --> 03:31:31,780 trying to really fit everybody in and not make anybody 4378 03:31:31,780 --> 03:31:33,000 really non-conforming 4379 03:31:33,000 --> 03:31:38,200 over 0.2 density or anything like that with that if I just 4380 03:31:38,200 --> 03:31:40,799 may add at the next 4381 03:31:40,799 --> 03:31:44,969 work session what Ron is actually working on is sort of a 4382 03:31:44,969 --> 03:31:46,120 public engagement plan 4383 03:31:46,120 --> 03:31:49,709 we're going to be moving very swiftly in the very near 4384 03:31:49,709 --> 03:31:51,760 future with with the 4385 03:31:51,760 --> 03:31:55,989 modules for the DDC update and so within that plan will be 4386 03:31:55,989 --> 03:31:56,840 in that engagement 4387 03:31:56,840 --> 03:32:01,719 plan will be community meetings subcommittee meetings P&Z 4388 03:32:01,719 --> 03:32:02,479 and so that 4389 03:32:02,479 --> 03:32:05,049 way before we finalize that we can kind of get it out there 4390 03:32:05,049 --> 03:32:05,840 to everybody and 4391 03:32:05,840 --> 03:32:08,489 then have have a discussion of do we want to hold you know 4392 03:32:08,489 --> 03:32:09,280 separate meetings 4393 03:32:09,280 --> 03:32:11,860 or how do we want to proceed moving forward and so we 4394 03:32:11,860 --> 03:32:12,799 wanted to get that to 4395 03:32:12,799 --> 03:32:15,379 wanted to get that in front of you sooner than later and 4396 03:32:15,379 --> 03:32:15,920 have that 4397 03:32:15,920 --> 03:32:18,280 discussion 4398 03:32:23,280 --> 03:32:28,280 okay with that at 855 I will close us this evening and 4399 03:32:28,280 --> 03:32:29,360 thank you everybody for 4400 03:32:29,360 --> 03:32:32,280 all your time and efforts