Commission meeting for March 21st 2018. This meeting has
been duly posted and we
do have a quorum present and I will call us to order at 532
. Our first order of
business will be to receive clarification of agenda items.
So I'll
start with does anybody have any corrections on the minutes
? Mr. Sanchez?
Yeah. Okay. I'll move us to our consent agenda. Any
questions on the consent agenda?
Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. I do have just one
quick question. It's the
same... Which item? I'm sorry. PP 17.02A the fireside
addition and that... Okay.
Okay. That's... We dealt with that a couple years ago. So
evidently the
preliminary plat expired. I was just curious, is this the
same applicant or is this a
different applicant? They decided not to proceed with the
previous prelim and
final because they wanted to redesign the subdivision
layout. Okay. So that's
what this is coming to be. That's all I have. I just
thought maybe they got to have it all
together and somebody knew it was coming. Okay. Thank you.
Thanks, Andrea.
Any other questions on the consent agenda? Okay. I will
move us to items for
individual consideration and I'll call on Haley for
presentation of FP 17-0028.
All right. Good evening. This is the final plat for Creeks
ide. So we saw the
preliminary plat for this a few weeks ago. So same layout
as we saw with the
preliminary, the final plat containing 137 residential lots
and the four HOA
lots. If you remember, Creekside is the subdivision on
south side of Ryan Road
that's part of a pre-annexation development agreement. So
pending
approval of the final plat, they will then voluntarily
annex into the city and
proceed with their development. And this is an item for
individual consideration
because we do have one condition on the approval. That
being that the civil
engineering construction plans for all public
infrastructure necessary to serve
the development must be approved before the plat is filed.
If any utility
easements or other minor changes need to occur as a result
of that final CEP
review, we would ask that that be approval by staff rather
than having to
bring the plat back forward to the Planning and Zoning
Commission. Okay.
Commissioner Rozelle. Thank you, Chair. The condition, I
take it that's done
because of the annexation into the city? No, it is actually
a standard procedure
that CEPs are typically approved prior to a final plat
being approved. In this
case, they were kind of running neck-and-neck. The CEPs
just weren't quite
there yet and the applicant asked that we go ahead and move
the final plat
forward and let them continue working on those civil plans.
So those will
now just be approved before the plat is filed. Is there any
other processes that
the city goes through to make sure that what once was
County land or ETJ is
now city? Is there any other requirements that they have to
abide by?
I don't know if that question makes sense. I'm just curious
about what changes to their
requirements in a city? Do they have to file anything
additional to come up to speed with
city rules? This one's kind of unique because it does have
that pre-annexation
development agreement. So their entire process, they've
essentially been following
the city rules while in the county. The plat is what will
ultimately trigger
their annexation and so from that point forward they'll go
through the standard
city processes for permitting and everything else with
their development.
Gotcha, so they were following basic? Yes. Okay, thank you.
Any question I'd have is on
the CEP, have they done at least one or two reviews on that
? Yes, in this case
the CEP it's at the very tail end. It's been through three
reviews with staff
and is ultimately approvable. Just a few minor tweaks. I
know how that works. Great,
thank you. Any other questions on this item? Commissioner
Beck. I do have some
questions, just some concerns and again just some curios
ities here if I may. Sure.
Thank you, Chair. The dirt road that's coming off Orion
currently runs behind
that first house on Andrew. So looking at this obviously
that entrance to that
dirt road that's there now is gonna go away and it'll be
part of that HOA area?
Yes, the dirt road that they're currently is the access for
the gas well pad
site. The gas well has been plugged and ever all the
equipment removed from
the site so that road will be integrated into the
development and should
fall within this HOA lot. Okay, okay. Also the plat also
shows what looks like a
right-of-way where Thistle Ridge down there from the
development to the east
whatever that whatever that is will connect eventually to
Mallard Avenue.
It looks like in the Creekside development. Yes, yeah, see
is that what
that is? Thistle Ridge will not actually be a through
street in this case. This
this is an HOA lot they are tying in here for a waterline
extension. Okay. But
Thistle Ridge Road won't continue. It'll stay a dead end
there. Okay and block A1 which is the HOA area.
What limitations will be established for this track that
separates Creekside
from its neighbors? Will it remain kind of a green space or
will there be any
construction allowed on it? So the HOA lot is designed to
be a it's mostly their
tree preservation area. It will have a walking trail that
meanders through the
trees. Okay. But that is going to primarily be landscaped
area with most of those
trees left in place the trail kind of winding through them.
I guess what I'm
asking though is sometime down the future down the road
will that can that
change where they can do things beyond this? That is their
approved tree
preservation area so it would it would be unlikely that
they would ever. Would
they have to come before us or some other Commissioner
Board? Since it's
planted as an HOA lot if they ever tried to subdivide yet
that would would come
back. Okay. The eastern edge of this track it's running
along an established ESA is
that correct? From Ryan Road to Creekdale? Yes there is ESA
floodplain and riparian
buffer. And as it stands now we're not going to be encro
aching in that area.
There's a very minimal overlap kind of up here. This is
where the amenity center
will eventually be. There is some overlap here. Their pre
annexation
development agreement allowed 10% of that area to be encro
ached upon to allow
for some retaining walls to be put in for the amenity
center but that will
primarily be left intact. Okay no ESA will be required then
? No. Okay.
And lastly there's two means of egresses into Creekside.
There's the Creekside
Drive on the north end south north end yeah and then on the
south end.
Creekdale I'm sorry let me read my notes here. Creekside
Drive off of Ryan Road and the
new road meandering way that will connect to Creekdale
Drive on the south.
Is that correct? Yes. Okay now Creekdale dead ends at Th
istle Way on the west and
dead ends into the ESA that area on the east. So any plans
on I mean do we have
any idea if that's gonna be the Creekdale is gonna be
extended one way
or the other because it seems like we talked about at one
time where that
would reach out the country club road. Is that something
you can address here?
I'm not familiar with any specific plans to extend Creek
dale at this time. None of
it would be done as a part of this subdivision so if you
know if another
subdivision comes in in this area I suspect they would be
requested to to tie
into Creekdale and extend that. So people coming down the
entering way can hit
Creekdale and then go back out Andrew if they wanted to but
I believe so.
Okay that's it thank you. I'll have one follow-up question
and
Commissioner Beck's comment about the HOA. Who actually
owns that property the
HOA property? Is there a mechanism with the city as to when
that interest
transfers over because I know that's been some issues in
the past? The current
owner for all of it would be this DD Creekside partnership
as to when the HOA
would take that over I'm not sure that would be written
into their restrictions
and covenants for the subdivision as to when the HOA would
actually take over
ownership versus the developer. I mean it's usually once a
certain percentage of
homes have been developed but I'm not sure what that
specific would be in this
case. Okay thank you. Any other questions on this item?
Okay Haley I think you've
got the next one too. This will be FP 17-0026.
Yes so this is the final plat for CarMax off of I-35. I
think you've seen this a
couple of times before you now with their detailed plan for
the PD amendment
and then the preliminary plat. So this is a 34 acre tract
roughly a large portion
of it as you see here in the hatched area is various degree
of floodplain and
ESA. They're actually only developing approximately seven
acres here on the
northern or I'm sorry yeah that'd be the north end of the
property along I-35
for the CarMax and once again in this case we have a
similar condition where
civil engineering plans will need to be approved prior to
the plat being filed
and then if any minor changes such as utility easements
arise from that review
we would ask that those be approval by staff rather than
coming back before the
PNC for approval. I can answer any other questions on this
one. Commissioner Beck.
Thank you Chair. Yeah I was concerned that are they buying
the whole 34 acres?
Is that going to technically be their property? Yes yeah it
will it will all be
under the same ownership because of the confines with the
floodplain and
everything there's really about seven acres that they're
seeking to use for
for their car lot at this point. So they're gonna be
confined pretty much at seven
acres and they really can't extend any further unless they
get special
permission from... Yeah it would take some work at that
point you're working through
FEMA and potentially with our team for alternative ESAs to
be able to do any
work in the floodplain area. Very good thank you. Any other
questions on this
item? Okay thank you Haley. We'll move us to our public
hearing section for this
evening. We'll call on Chandrian for presentation of FR 17-
0026A.
Okay this item is the Owens Ranch replat. It's a
residential replat for about two
acres located at the corner of Lake You and Rodeo Drive.
The applicant is
intending to replat two lots into three lots for
residential purposes. It meets
all of the established criteria and if you remember this
was posted for the
February 21st agenda and it's been continued to this
meeting. Any questions?
That's an easy one for you. Yeah. You got the next one too.
We'll move on to item B Z 18-0005
and Chandrian will present this as well. Okay this is a rez
oning request for the
property the Denton Baptist Temple property located off of
35 just west of
sorry just west of Fort Worth. So the request is to rezone
approximately five
acres from DR 1 to DR from DR 1 and DR 2 to a DCG district.
The property here, let
me just give you some context. This is the subject property
. I-35 is on the
south here. Bernard Street is the border on the west and
then Lindsay's to the
north. The property currently is divided into three zoning
districts and so the
applicant is intending to rezone into one district to allow
for a more
cohesive development in the future. And this property was
also... Commissioner back.
Thank you Chair. With that in mind do they have something
particular in mind or is this
just to so it all be one thing when it comes to them? There
's nothing in the
works right now as far as... Correct. As far as I know and
as far as they've
communicated to the city they don't have any plans just yet
to develop the
property. But when they do they want this nice neat little
page. Correct. Okay thanks. And then I will note that this
property was subject to some tech start right away
acquisition and so they lost
about almost two acres along the frontage. So. Other
parking. I won't go into
everything because we'll have the presentation in regular
session. But
when we do the future land use analysis we find that the
subject property
is designated as community mixed use. The intent of that
zoning, that land use
category is to promote a mix of uses which include
commercial residential and
service uses. And so when you look at this area this zoning
... this the
requested zoning designation matches what's on the ground
already. You have
the church property here. There's some single-family here
along just west of
Bernard. And then to the north there's some multi-family
uses here. And then
along Fort Worth Drive and then as you get closer to Fort
Worth there's some
more commercial uses. The Motel 6 is here. Water Burger,
gas stations. So what we
found was that the request is consistent with the future
land use plan. And in
terms of public facilities water and wastewater would be
available pretty
much along all of the street frontages. Bernard here,
Lindsay to the north.
There's an easement here but I'm not sure if that serves
the properties that
front Fort Worth but that analysis will be done when we get
into planning and
site development. I don't anticipate any other dedications
or street
improvements just because the property is already served.
According to... in
accordance with the local government code we issued 11
notices to properties
within 200 feet of the subject property. We haven't
received any letters of
opposition or in favor basically no responses yet. We
issued 68 courtesy
notices to the property within 500 feet and then the
neighbor... the
applicant opted not to do the neighborhood meeting. He just
went and
contacted the six homeowners that are in that little enc
lave here. So with that
because this is consistent with the future land use plan
and it's compatible
with the existing area staff is recommending approval.
Commissioner
Roseau. You mentioned that he went directly to the six
houses to the west.
Yeah this neighborhood here. Do we know what that feedback
was from those six?
I don't have that in my notes but I can ask before we get
to regular session.
And if I understand it correctly those are the only single
detached family
within the 500 feet right? Correct. Well within the 200
feet and 500. Right. Most
of everything is either commercial or it's multifamily.
Okay thank you.
Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. It seems odd to me that
looking at the
future land use map it's set up to be CMG yet he decided to
go with DCG. What kind of was...
do you have any idea why he chose that particular zoning
district as opposed to
something that's obviously you know the city has future
plans for? Okay. I mean
would it not meet his needs or did he point out why DCG is
opposed to CMG? Yes.
DCG was the logical choice just because there's already
existing DCG zoning to
the east and so they would extend that into the property.
Anything else with it
could possibly meet the future land use plan but I think it
's just it was just
safer to go with what was adjacent so that it doesn't
create the case of spot
zoning. Okay. Thanks.
Any other questions on this item? Okay. Thank you, Shandrin
.
Okay. Well we got through that pretty quick so there are no
work session
reports so at 550 we'll close our work session and we'll
reconvene in council
chambers at 630.
Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and
Zoning Commission
meeting for March the 21st 2018. This meeting has been duly
posted and we do
have a quorum present. We'll call us to order at 637. Our
first order of business
will be to stand and give the pledge the US and Texas flag.
Under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the Texas, one
state, under God, one and indivisible.
Next item on our agenda will be to consider our minutes for
our March 7th
meeting. Commissioner Roselle. I move for approval.
Commissioner Beck. Second. Okay.
We have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion?
Seeing none, call
for a vote on the board. Motion is going to carry five to
zero. That will move us
to our consent agenda. Commissioner Beck. I move to approve
the consent agenda.
Okay. Commissioner Smith. I second this motion. Okay. We
have a first and a
second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none, I will
call for a vote on the board.
The motion will carry five to zero. We'll move us to our
items for individual
consideration. This time I will call on Haley for
presentation of FP 17-002.
Good evening. This is the final plat for the Creekside
addition. It's
approximately 47 acres on the south side of Ryan Road. The
plat is for 137
residential lots and three common area lots. This is being
brought forward as
an item for individual consideration because staff has
requested a condition
on the approval. That condition would be that civil
engineering construction
plans for all public infrastructure necessary to serve the
proposed
development must be approved before the plat is filed. If
any utility easement
locations need to be modified as a result of the final
civil engineering
construction plans, the development review committee
approval would be
required for those prior to filing. And with that I could
stand for any
questions.
I think you did a great job in the presentation at work
session. It doesn't
look like we have any questions. And the applicant is here
if you had any
questions of him as well. Okay. I do have a request to
speak on this item. Thomas
Fletcher. Good evening Commissioners. My name is Thomas F
letcher, 5750 Genesis
Court, Frisco, Texas 75034. I am the applicant for the
owner and developer of
this tract. Just wanted to say a brief word and then be
available to answer any
questions you may have. At the preliminary plat hearing I
know one of
the questions one of the Commissioners had asked was
regarding the tree
preservation. At that time I made the comment that I
believe it was 60 to 65%
was going to be the estimated tree preservation. We've done
the the
construction plans, the tree survey, we're actually
preserving 81.9% of trees, 76.3%
based off caliper inches. So we've well exceeded what we
had
estimated for the tree preservation. So going through the
construction drawing
process we've been very conscious of preservation of trees
to make this a
really special development and just wanted to mention that
and I'll be glad
to answer any questions that you may have. Do you have one
so far? Commissioner
Smith. Thank you Chair. Since we went through approve the
preliminary plat, have you had any more
conversations with the citizens over in Thistle Hills
development? The evening,
yes sir, the evening after the preliminary plat or that
same evening we
met with the owner and I met with several of the residents
afterwards and
just talked in general about the project and the feedback
we got from them is
that really they just wanted to know more about the project
. They didn't have
because it was under a pre-annexation development agreement
, they really didn't
have a good idea of what was what was being proposed but
when they came to the
the hearing on the preliminary plat, learned about the
buffer, learned about
the tree preservation, that set their mind at ease and they
were actually
excited for the project because they they knew that
something other than what
we're doing could have come in that would have taken out a
lot much larger
percentage of the trees. Great, thank you. Commissioner
Beck. Thank you Chair. Mr.
Fletcher, thank you for that bit of good news and to the
owner too for the
preservation of trees. I usually fuss about that more than
others but that is
important. I'm glad you're taking steps you are to preserve
that extra bit so
thank you so much. You're welcome, thank you. Any other
questions for the
applicant? Thank you. This item is on our individual
consideration. It's not a
public hearing but if anybody would like to speak on this
item you're welcome to
do so. Okay seeing none we will continue on. Commissioner
Rozelle. I motion for
approval with the staff recommendation of the CEP being
finalized. Okay.
Commissioner Smith. Second that motion. Okay we have a
first and a second for
approval. Any further discussion?
With that I'll call for a vote on the board.
That motion is going to carry five to zero. We'll move us
to our next item for
individual consideration which will be FP 17-0026. We'll
call for on
Haley for that presentation.
Okay this is the final plat for the Carmax site. It will be
located on the
that would be the southeast or southwest side of Interstate
35 on the south side
of town. The total area of the plat is approximately 34
acres. As you can see
here in the gray hatched area there is a substantial amount
of floodplain on the
property so the developable portion which does have an
approved detail plan
within the PD is for about seven acres that would be
located here on the north
corner of the property. Similarly to the last plat this is
an item for individual
consideration because of a condition that staff is
recommending that the
civil engineering construction plans for all infrastructure
to serve the proposed
development be submitted and approved prior to the filing
of the plat. If any
utility easement locations need to be modified as a result
of these final
civil engineering plans DRC approval shall be required
prior to filing.
However more extensive changes required as a result of the
civil plan review may
consider or may require the final plat come back before the
Planning and Zoning
Commission. And with that I'd be happy to answer any
questions about this. Any
questions for Haley? Thank you. See none. I don't know if
the applicants here if they
would like to speak. You don't have to but you're welcome
to.
Good evening Chris Biggers with Dunaway Associates 550
Bailey in Fort Worth.
Don't have anything to add but we'd be happy to answer any
questions should
there be any. Okay any questions for the applicant? Thank
you sir.
Chair I'll open the floor for discussion or motion on this
item.
Commissioner Smith. Motion to approve with the condition of
the CEP be
approved before this is approved. Okay Commissioner Rossell
. I second. Okay we
have a first and a second for approval with the one
condition as presented in
the backup. Any further discussion? Seeing none we'll call
for a vote on board.
Motion is going to carry five to zero. That will move us to
our public hearings
for this evening. I'm going to open the public hearing for
FR 17-0026A.
We'll call on Chandrian for presentation.
Good evening. Good evening. Chandrian Jarvis with the
development services department. The first item is FR 17-26
.
This is a replat request for the Owens Ranch subdivision.
This is a two acre
site located at the southeast corner of Owens Ranch in Lake
view Boulevard. The
request is to go from two lots to three lots. The plat
meets all of the
established criteria. There is a public hearing requirement
for replats which
we've just opened. When we issued the staff report we had
received four
letters of support and tonight six more letters of
opposition have come in. I
just wanted to state that for the record and I will stand
for any questions.
Commissioner Smith. Do the opposition notices that came in,
does that, do we have a
percentage yet that doesn't bump us into needing supermajor
ity? And we're not even
doing supermajority. This is a final replat. Correct. And
since there is no variance
associated with the case it doesn't do anything. With that
plat on there
we were talking between what's actually now. What is the
current platting right now?
Or is the current plat not a current replatting? What
division is being made within the current property?
That is a good question and I didn't bring that in my, I
didn't include that
in my backup. Okay. Could you? I can. Is the applicant here
? If I could possibly? Okay.
We'll get to that in a minute. I'll ask that question when
we get to that point. Okay.
I can probably get to it on GIS but it'll take a second. We
'll ask the applicant when it comes up here.
Okay. Thanks, Adrian. I see no other questions. Thank you.
This is a public hearing and if the
applicants here, if you would like, please come forward at
this time.
Please give us your name and address and then we'll have 10
minutes. David Snow with Snow
Investments addresses 325 North Trinity Road, 76208. Okay.
Thank you.
Do you have any presentation or just to stand for questions
? I didn't actually, I didn't know
it was going to be put on the spot but I'll answer any
questions I can. Okay. I'll call on
Commissioner Smith. I think he had a question of how the
plat is currently. Sure. Thank you, Chair.
So you live at the house that's right there on Trinity?
That's the? Yes, sir. To the east,
directly to the east. So what's being divided off and why?
To, the zoning is NR2, two houses per acre. Sure. So there
was a dogleg parcel of land that was
bought off the neighbor. Okay. To expand the footage to
make a single lot. Okay. I guess I'm
looking at your property on an aerial view. Is that new
line that's being drawn? Are you just,
are you drawing a line in your backyard? What exactly are
you? The new line is further to the
east which will make 325 a smaller lot but still within a
half acre. If that answers your question.
Not quite. Give me one second here. Maybe Shandrian can
help. We have it up on the board
for you now and you can maybe show where the current lot
lines are. Sometimes there's a
pointer there with. Yeah, Shandrian, we might need to see
the GIS then or if we can. Okay.
It just, the reason why I'm asking is because we've had
small positions come in between
work session and now that we thought this was going to be
the easy one tonight. Right.
Okay.
[inaudible]
I'm trying to find the intersection.
Yeah.
There we go.
See what we have. Lakeview.
Yeah.
Perfect. All right. There we go. So you guys are, you and
your neighbor, so the neighbor that's
there in the corner of Rodeo and Lakeview, you guys are,
you're combining basically two pieces
of your property into one new track, one new plat there I
should say. I'm sorry. I'm sorry
to repeat that. So you're see what you're doing right now.
There's two, right? And your neighbor
has that little dog leg that drops down behind your
property. You're shaving off a part of your
property. Shaving off his property, buying a purchase of
the dog leg and then the property
line will get some shifted further to the east. Okay. But
there's still, but you're still creating
a new line there, the difference between your, basically
your land is going to stop at your
fence and then there's going to be a new lot behind it.
Yes sir.
Okay. What are your intentions with that?
Just put a single family residence.
So you are going to build a single family residence there.
Yes sir.
Okay. That's what I was trying to get to. Okay. Great.
Thank you.
All right. Thank you very much.
I think we've got a, hold on just a second. I think we've
got a better exhibit now to kind of
show what it is currently and what it's being proposed.
Okay. Mr. Pryce, that help?
Yeah, that does. I think just knowing what it currently is
and then knowing that you're
going to build a single family there is, that's all I
needed to know.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I think we have a couple more questions for you.
Commissioner Beck.
Thank you, Chair. Mr. Snow, thank you for coming tonight.
Access to this new track where you're
going to build a new home, is that going to be off Lakeview
or is it coming?
It will be off Lakeview.
Okay.
And there'll be no reverse onto Lakeview. It'll be a Hamma
driveway.
Okay. So your property, which will be behind it or to the
west, I believe it is.
That has access through, through, on Trinity.
Okay. Okay. You've got Lakeview and then Rodeo. Where's
Trinity at?
It's where Trinity is to the east.
This is Trinity Road right there. That's the front of his
property.
Okay. Thank you, sir.
Okay. I don't have any other questions. Thank you, sir, for
coming up.
Thank you very much.
This is a public hearing. I don't have any cards. I do have
a number of
letters that were given to us. This is a public hearing. So
anyone who would like to speak on
this item is welcome to come forward at this time. And then
I'll, at the end,
I will read these comments into the record.
Anyone else? Okay. With that, I will close the public
hearing.
And we've got a letter in opposition from Ronald Basher, 11
08 Lakeview Drive.
We have a letter in favor from Dan Cody, 8201 Rodeo Drive.
We have opposed is Gary Mann's 7608 Rodeo Drive.
We have opposed Norman Glower, 8017 Stallion Street.
And then we have in favor is Jerry Istep at 1300 Lakeview
Boulevard.
And one more opposed, Hubert Gramling, 1309 Lakeview Boule
vard.
And those are all of the comments that we have that we
received in our backup here right before
the meeting to read into the record. So with that, I will
call on Commissioner Beck.
Thank you, Chair. I'm curious why nobody's come down who's
in opposition to speak because I
don't really understand what the opposition is here. Based
on what I've seen, I'm not sure
it poses any problem. So is anybody willing that's in the
audience that is opposed to this can come
down and clarify this for me? No. Okay. We don't have
anybody. Okay. They're here for another reason.
Thank you. Another item. I did close the public hearing.
And public hearing is closed. And Commissioner Smith.
Motion to approve.
Commissioner Roselle. Second. Okay. We have a first and a
second for approval. Any further discussion?
Seeing none, we'll call for a vote on the board.
That motion is going to carry five to zero.
We'll move us to item B. We'll open the public hearing for
Z18-0005.
And I will call on Shandrian for presentation. Okay.
Okay. This item is a rezoning request for the Denton
Baptist Temple site.
It's located at 610 I-35E. The subject property, just to
give you a point of reference, is located
here. I-35E is on the south. Bernard Street is here on the
west. And then Lindsay is the border
to the north. The applicant has requested to rezone this
property, which is about five acres,
from a downtown residential one district and downtown
residential two, to a DCN or downtown
commercial general district. The intent of the rezoning
request is to basically allow for more
cohesive development in the future. Currently the property
is divided into three different
zoning districts. And so, but they're wanting to just go
ahead and package that in a more
cohesive manner for future development. Just another point
of note. This property was
subject to the text dot acquisition, right away acquisition
. And so they ended up giving
about two acres of frontage for the I-35 expansion project.
When we consider rezoning requests, we have two criteria
that we tend to look at.
The first is, does it meet the future land use plan, or the
Denton 2030 plan? And then two,
would there be adequate provision of transportation, water,
sewer, public infrastructure,
and public services, if the request is granted? So looking
at the future land use plan,
the subject property is designated as commercial community
mixed use. And the intent of community
mixed use is to promote a mix of uses, including
residential, commercial, and service uses.
As you look at the existing zoning and development around
this site, we find that it is consistent
with the future land use plan. To the east, we have some
single family residential, well to the
west, I keep saying my other east. To the west, there's
some single family homes here. To the
north, there's some multifamily development. The church
property is here. And then along Fort Worth
Drive, there's some commercial uses, hotel, restaurants,
some auto body shops. So just to
sum up, I guess, the requested zoning district, DCN, DCG,
is consistent with the future land use
plan. And it will be a logical extension of the DCG that's
located here along Fort Worth Drive.
When we look at public facilities, this is an existing site
. So it's adequately served with
water and wastewater. There's extensions of lines available
on Bernard Street and then Lindsay.
And then the site would still have access to Bernard,
Lindsay, and the I-35 East Runners Road
for transportation. So in accordance with the local
government code, we issued, or we sent out 11
notices to properties within 200 feet of the subject
property. And then we haven't received
any responses back. And then we sent 68 notices to the
properties within 500 feet. And the applicant
opted not to do the neighborhood meeting. And I did follow
up with him. He hasn't received any
responses. And so that, well, almost. In summary, DCG is
consistent with the future land use plan
and is compatible with the surrounding properties. And
therefore, we recommend approval.
Any questions? Great job. No questions. Thank you.
This is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to speak on
this item,
please come forward at this time. And I do have one card,
Rick Bariam, in support.
Thank you. I'm the applicant. And I do have a five slide
presentation.
If I can find it. Let's see. Escape. All right. And then,
let's see. Close this one.
Oh, there it is. Right there. Okay. They were nice enough
to provide that for me.
I think it's, ah, there we go. Well, naturally, we know why
we're here. I just put that as a
formality. But I want to thank staff for the work they did.
That was a really nice report.
And I definitely like the conclusion. Hope you do too.
In the Highway 35 expansion, most of us benefited. You know
, more lanes, we can go faster. And we
were real happy about that. And it didn't really cost us
much, we figure. But some people sacrificed
quite a bit more than others. And even if you make a
sacrifice and you are given monetary
compensation, that doesn't really provide for everything
that you're now missing. Especially
if you lost two buildings. Churches need more than just a
sanctuary. All the programs that they have,
it's hard to have a volleyball game if you don't have a
volleyball court. Or if you
want to give a seminar on financial planning or something
like that. It's difficult to do that.
This is a little graphic that I put together. The bright
pink line, of course, shows the extent of
the text dot taking and the buildings with the stripes.
They're no longer there.
This is, of course, the zoning. That's what was there. And
you can see that the one little
DR1 is kind of small. If you were wanting to develop the
property, you would have to go
through this. And some people who might look at it would
prefer not to. So we're asking
for an all green. All green for DCG. And basically this is
all about better possibilities.
Better possibilities for the church in the future. And
definitely better possibilities for the city
because it could become a productive use if it was sold and
the church moved elsewhere.
So please vote for approval. And I guess that's all I want
to say unless you have questions,
which I don't stand for. >> We're going to go light on you.
No questions.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Rick.
This is a public hearing. Anyone who would like to speak on
this item,
you're welcome to come down at this time. Okay. Seeing no
one else, we will close the
public hearing and open the floor for discussion or a
motion. Commissioner Smith.
>> Thank you, Chair. I didn't know that building was lost.
I was an Eagle Scout for a true 366
that met in there for all those years. So that's sad. That
top floor room had a lot of memories
for me. So I'm really sorry to hear it but I'm looking
forward to seeing what you guys can do
out there at the DBT. So a motion for approval. >>
Commissioner Beck.
>> Yeah, I want to echo Commissioner Smith's feelings too
and thank you for your sacrifice.
So I second his motion. >> Okay. We have a first and second
for
approval. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll call
for a vote on the board.
Motion is going to carry 5 to 0.
You're welcome. Congratulations and good luck.
That will move us on to our project matrix this evening.
No request? >> I have one.
>> Commissioner Sanchez. >> I was wondering, one of the
things
that concerns me is when we look at these glimmering flats
and final flats, I always see this kind of
building. Is there any way of having a discussion on that
kind of thing as opposed to what we had
in the past on the streets of both north, south, east, west
? It seems like we're losing
a lot of alternatives to get from one side of town to the
other. I mean, I lived on the north side
of town and I had a discussion with a person the other day
about the way they're building
these new subdivisions. And I believe that we used to be
able to cut through a neighborhood
and get to the other side. Now you can't cut through these
neighborhoods. So it puts all the
traffic onto these main arterials. And long term, I think
if we continue doing that, we're going to
see a lot more traffic problems. We need to visit that and
see is that the best way to continue
developing our neighborhoods. And so I'd like to see us
have a discussion on that.
>> Okay. Got it down. Any other items to add to the project
matrix? Any updates?
>> We have the meetings coming up next week on the DDC. I
think everyone got the notification. So
we're getting ready to get the full gear here for the next
month or so. >> Okay. We'll prepare.
>> All right. With that, I will close our meeting this
evening at 7.08. Thank you, everyone.
[ Applause ]