This is our work session and with a quorum present I will call us to order at 5 p.m.
First note I will make is the one item on our consent agenda today has been withdrawn by the applicant so we will not have anything on a consent agenda.
So therefore we will move through item one on the work session which is citizen comment on consent agenda.
Moving us to item two which is work session reports that is receive a report hold a discussion give staff direction regarding that 1020 40 comp plan.
And I'm not sure who's handling that Haley is.
I am Ron there you are. Hi, Ron. Yes. Sorry about that. No worries chairman and chair members that Commission Romney get up and plan with the city of Denton.
Happy to be here to present a continuation of our review of the conference of plan update the 2040 conference of plan.
So I'm going to go ahead and start my screen real quick.
Sorry screen that is and hopefully you all can see the title slide.
We can.
Trying to make a screen. Yep. That'd be great.
There we go.
Does that look good or let me change my setting.
All righty. That's even better. Hopefully it's full screen and I'll go ahead and turn it to the next slide. Just for a quick introduction.
Today's presentation is really just going to be focusing on what you see here on the agenda slide.
I just talked about a little bit of what happened with the city council work session yesterday.
There was a work session yesterday evening. I don't know if any of you were able to watch it.
We'll talk a little bit about that and then we'll get into what has changed specifically in the conference of plan included in your backup.
There are a number of documents showing what has changed in detail.
I'll do a high overview of what those are in particular on the key components listed there.
And then at the end of the presentation, we'll just talk briefly on next steps and what our hope is for the plan and after the plan.
So really quickly, I don't have a slide per se for item one here on the work session with city council.
I believe we were discussing the comp plan. It lasted about over two hours. So there's a lot of discussion.
A lot of the discussion involved the future land use map and specifically the areas along within the E.T.J.
There was a lot of discussions on that. There was also discussions on the future land use designations specifically with regards to rural low density.
And then we also talked a little bit about business innovation. And I actually have a slide on that particular designation that I'll go over with you.
Lastly, there was also a lot of discussion on implementation. So what what our next steps are, how do we make sure our goals policies are achieved and ultimately making sure that the vision that we have for the city is met.
There's there was a lot in my my plan. Our plan, that is, is to document all of that.
We are going to be putting that or have already started putting that into a database, a spreadsheet that includes the planning zoning commission's comments as well as emails that we received afterwards.
I know that Commissioner Pruitt has provided some comments through email. So those will all be included in a spreadsheet with staff's responses.
Those responses could be just a general response to the question, but it also could be where we make some changes and we'll note that in the actual draft plan.
So, again, we want to make sure that we hear from from you all and we want to make sure that we address those comments.
So those that spreadsheet will be something that will be presented to you all.
The hope is that it will be included in the backup for the next work session that we have scheduled with the PNC.
So we'll go ahead and get started with the first first key component of the conference plan, and that is the community vision statement.
I know that in our last meeting on the 12th, I did go over this specifically and described what it is for this presentation this afternoon.
It's really just to share with you the changes and in this case, for the community vision statement, there were minor changes.
The vision and aspirations for the community up to 2040 has and continues to be valid and relevant.
Most of the phrases in the community vision statement will continue and be carried forward in the draft 2040 plan.
So really, the minor changes will only reflect that the comments that we received or the input received is now reflecting 2040 and that most of the phrases remain the same.
And there is no major changes.
I also want to make a point that the draft vision statement was included in your backup as well as the existing vision statement, the 10, 20, 30 vision statement was also included in your backup for you to compare both vision statements.
The next key component is the goals and policies.
We have 35 goals and 123 policies, as I may mention the last time. Included in your backup this time, however, is a red line strikethrough version of the goals and policies.
And in that document, you will see that the majority of those goals and policies remain the same.
They have not changed, however, there were a number of them that did get revisions included, and that is really just to reflect the adoptions of certain plans in terms of the economic strategic plan, the housing assessment plan.
All of these plans that were approved since 2015 are now reflected in the goals and policies. So instead of saying, you know, the city should update said plan or create said plan, it is now more in implementing those plans.
So those are the sort of changes that were included. In addition, there were additional languages and key changes to phrases to make those key policies and goals more implementable.
So those are what we are proposing for the 2030, sorry, 2040 conference.
The next key component is the preferred growth scenario map. As you all heard already last time we met, this is the map that shows the intensity of where we envision the city being developed and growing in the future.
Again, the hope is that it's consistent with our community vision statement. It is consistent with what the community and our citizens want to see where growth occurs.
As you can see that most of the development or the intensity and development is in the core of the city, primarily within the loop of loop 288.
There are others on the fringe ropes and ranch specifically coal hunter ranch as well. We know that those are going to be coming.
This was this map was presented and included in the 10 2030 plan.
We don't have any need for any changes. So there were no changes on this preferred growth scenario map. It still remains valid. It still remains relevant in those areas that we've identified on this map will continue to be our focus and hoping to guide development.
This again, as I mentioned earlier, the City Council had a number of questions related to this map. I know in our presentation back in January 12 and boy, our consultant discussed and presented some of the key changes that we're proposing, specifically the area on the
northwest portion of the city, north of university and west of I-35 north. You see that there is now more of a pale blue, which was previously business innovation.
It is now the marker are shown as light industrial. So that is one key change. Other changes include the master plan communities. They are now under a one blanket designation of the MPC. Prior to that, it really just had what was what was shown on approved development plans.
Our reasoning for this one color is that they should be known as master plan communities and any further evaluation or needs for what is being proposed can be referred to in each of those development plans that were approved for each of those master plan communities.
On the east side of town, we did expand a little bit more of low residential on the periphery of the city. We know that as the city continues to grow, there's going to be a need for more residential areas to develop.
And so we feel that the areas that you see here along loop 288, north of loop 288 between Sherman and Locus is shaded yellow, also further east of town, more towards the Lake You Ranch area, you see that those areas are also shaded or designated as low residential as well.
Those are the major changes. We also see some minor changes along within the downtown area where the downtown designation has grown a little bit more than what it is or what is prior to the 2030 plan.
But other than that, all the other areas within the city that are designated as shown here have remained the same, other than what I've already discussed prior.
Next on the key component list is our future land use designations. And as I mentioned earlier, business innovation is one that we discussed in the past and have had needs for reassessment on this particular designation.
And I'll cover that in my next slide. But I just wanted to share with you all that other than agriculture, massive plant community, and light industrial, which are new designation, the remaining designations have not changed much.
There were some minor changes to them, again, just for implementable phrases to make sure that they were clear. So that's what we did.
And then focusing on business innovation, I know that there was a lot of discussion on this particular designation, and we did a revision or revised this designation from beginning to end.
So my next slide here shows the description that we have drafted. So I'm just going to read it so that it helps you all understand where we're going and you can correct this or provide some input on the direction that we are, if we're heading in the right direction or if we need to make some changes.
Business innovation is designated as an envision that is to be the city's employment center. It is intended for a range of businesses, both in terms of size and types.
So we can see large tracks where there could be large corporate offices and employment parks included in those developments. But we also see that this business innovation can also be smaller tracks where research and technology business and startup businesses can be located as well.
In addition to the employment component supporting uses, such as commercial in terms of retail, hotel, and restaurants are also allowed as supportive uses.
We also see that residential can also be a supportive use in business innovation. However, we don't want to see or we don't envision a standalone residential use.
The idea there is that this innovation business innovation is more targeting our employment homes and our employment centers, and we want to make sure that there's space and room for that type of development.
That doesn't mean that residential does not cannot be there, but it just has to be part of the development, hopefully part of a mixed use development.
In addition to those uses, we feel that open space and just having that visual quality compatibility is important so that when they're introduced into an area, it is compatible with the surrounding area.
We see that business innovation is not just in one side or one area of the city. It's throughout the city in close proximity to commercial and other employment hubs so that in the future, when those areas expand, there's opportunity for success.
And that is what we're hoping for, for the city.
This is should be the last key component to what we discussed earlier, and this is the focus area concept map. Also, a map that illustrates where our key centers are located, where our key corridor or major corridors are located.
We also identify special districts such as the downtown and other areas that razor range is located. This map is what we hope to use this map as is when we start to talk about area plans or corridor plans.
Hopefully this map will further our discussion and help prioritize where we want to start to tackle some of those needs for those special studies, as we start to look at implementing the comprehensive plan but also to focus on the goals and policy that's included in the plan.
That being said, the next step in the process or next steps that is, we have of course we are now on January 26 the planning zoning work session.
We hope that in the next coming weeks, we will continue to receive input, not just from the planning zoning commission but also from the public. We will then have a work session with the city council on February 8 to continue that discussion, receive input, provide them with responses to those comments as we receive them.
In a similar manner, we will be meeting with the planning zoning commission you all on February 9. So that is the schedule, the next work session scheduled for the planning zoning commission is February 9.
If everything goes well, and we're able to address all the comments, we will then schedule or have a public hearing with the planning zoning commission on February 23, and then ultimately city council on March 1.
We did built in a city council PNC joint work session on February 14, if necessary, to give us the opportunity to touch on some of the other things that we may not have addressed in the previous work session.
With that being said, our hope is that through our conversation this afternoon, we will get more input from the planning zoning commission. If there is some more comments that we did not touch on today, we welcome your comments.
You can please email them to us by February 1 so that we can prepare in advance for that work session again on February 9 with the planning and zoning commission.
This is my last slide. This here is just to talk about a little bit about what we are hoping to do after the adoption of the comprehensive plan.
Of course, we will then start the process of implementing the goals and policies, and a lot of that is covered under the action plan listed in the last element of the comprehensive plan.
What it does, it shows, it provides what those key actions are, when they should be achieved, and who is responsible, which party is responsible for those specific actions. We hope to continue to evaluate those actions annually so that we make sure that we are moving in the right direction, moving those actions forward, and hopefully achieving those actions.
One of those actions that we hope to start immediately and hoping to get this in our next planning and zoning commission following adoption of the comprehensive plan is a discussion on area plans.
As you all know, area plans are a little bit more detailed in terms of what their goals and policies are or their needs assessments are included in this area plan so that we can focus on a specific area.
What we have planned is on March 9th, a week after hopefully the adoption of the comprehensive plan, we will have a work session with the planning and zoning commission to start to prioritize where those area plans are going to be or should be.
As part of that discussion, we will also draft a scope and timeline for those area plans, and then ultimately, if needed, we will prepare a budget for our plans, and hopefully Council will see that as well.
We have planned for April 5th to have a discussion with the City Council. The hope is that we hear from the planning and zoning commission first, hear what you will have to say, and then take your recommendations to the City Council again on April 5th.
So that is where we are today, and again, I wanted to take this opportunity to have this work session with the planning and zoning commission as I shared with you all in the very high level of what we have proposed as changes.
You all have in your backup those marked up versions, and again, here to answer any questions, receive any input, and again, what we're trying to do here is start to finalize some of the key areas of the comprehensive plan so that we can get it teed up for the public hearing scheduled for later in February and March for City Council.
With that, that concludes my presentation, and I'll be happy to stand for any questions.
Thank you, Ron. We do have a question. One thing I wanted to clarify before we get to that is when you talk about emailing comments, do you want those direct to you, or is it a separate email?
You can send it to me, to me and Tina. Okay, that'll be fine. Okay, excellent. Commissioner Smith.
Thank you, Chair. Hey, Ron, how are you? Good, how are you? Good.
Couple things. On the small area plans, you answer a lot of that there at the end. The, I guess, have you guys given what consideration have you guys given in the scope and timeline for those so far, as you've been going through it and then seems like the future land use map and the preferred growth concept map and small area plans all kind of run together as being
that they not necessarily need to be decided and conceptualize all the same time, but they kind of run into each other. Does that make sense that, you know, an improved comprehensive plan that has a preferred growth map, has a future land use map, and then we come back in with a small area plan after the fact.
We kind of locked ourselves into it. Does that make sense? Have you guys given much consideration to that as being a concern?
I'll take that question. So, Tina Fargan planning director, with respect to the future land use map, and then the preferred growth map, and even the area plans, Commissioner Smith, you make a really good observation that they will all work together collectively.
So, the comprehensive plan, again, is that high level policy document that sets the direction that we're interested in seeing, whether it be related to growth, infill development, housing options, whatever the subject matter might be that the plan addresses.
But also the preferred growth map works in tandem with the future land use map in terms of where we would like to focus certain types of development, if you will.
The small area plans or area plans, as we've been referring to them as, they take a deeper dive, a more granular look, if you will, at land use conditions and possibly further refining a vision for a given area.
The comprehensive plan will provide the overarching vision of what we want the community to be, but then the area plan hones in and refines that vision even more specifically for the given area that's being analyzed.
So, the area plans basically supplement anything that is provided for in the comprehensive plan.
Presumably the direction is provided in the comprehensive plan to help us shape the area plan discussion further, but it could be that after a deeper dive analysis, like I said, that more granular look, it may have more refined recommendations
specific to that area that will either add additional clarification to anything provided for the comprehensive plan or may acknowledge that we have to retool certain action items in that given area and identify which would take precedence.
So, typically that area plan is going to take precedence, but, again, comprehensive plan, high level, that area plan allows us to drill in deeper and do that much more refined analysis, because, again, when we're at this high level of the comprehensive plan, we're not looking at properties on a parcel-by-parcel basis, right, because it is a comprehensive plan and in its policy level.
Zoning looks at land on a parcel-by-parcel basis, because that's the tool for implementing comprehensive plan. But in between zoning and comprehensive planning is that area plan, that middle level, which allows us that little bit more deeper dive, allows a little more parcel-specific analysis if necessary, dependent upon the nature of where we are in town studying the area, right, and we can provide for that in the scope.
And I know you asked about scope and timeline. So, hopefully that gives some initial direction.
Yeah, can I ask a question real quick on that, Tina, before you get in the scope and timeline? Thank you for all the information and background. And I think that the piece that I heard from you and then there that I would want to lean heavily on just as advice would be, if the comprehensive plan is going to give direction to how these area plans are then pursued, developed, the stakeholders that are approached, obviously the comprehensive plan.
Obviously the comprehensive plan is looking at those small area plans being developed from a 30,000-foot level. It would be nice to have in the comprehensive plan as we start building those area plans into it, the procedures for how to go about and develop those plans into it, to have teeth.
Because the biggest complaint that we always get whenever we have developments that come in is always, this doesn't agree with the future land use map. It doesn't agree with the flume.
And then all of us here on the dais know that by looking at what's happening up here, like take the 428 corridor, for example. We know the residential expansion within high school coming in over there off 77 makes that more residential.
The flume, the 2030 plan flume, had that as being rural. We know that it's changed.
Whenever we get locked into, we want to develop an area plan for this. We need to create a vision for this small area here, be more granular. It'd be nice to have those area plans and have it described in the comprehensive plan, that that area plan has teeth to then go back and retroactively change the flume or override it.
And so you saying that earlier, I just want to reiterate, I would appreciate that from a commissioner standpoint, that that area plan, once it's put in place and voted upon by the PNZ and by city council, that takes precedence over the flume.
And we can't have, hey, this doesn't agree with the flume anymore. Well, we developed an area plan that got stakeholder input and city council and planning and zoning vote on it to then make it to where this development, this proposed area, this change that makes sense in this area is congruent because of how the comprehensive plan is built.
So that's good on that piece, or you just say on scope and timeline.
And I was gonna say excellent point, and we can include language into the the comprehensive plan that addresses that relationship between the two and the one thing I would tack on to that before I address your scope and timeline question is that, keep in mind the comprehensive plan.
If we stay the course like we have in the past, we update the comprehensive plan every five to 10 years. So any area plans that we've done in between the comp plan update intervals right that when we do those updates, they will circle back and take into consideration, any additional direction that came about as the small area plan so we can make sure that we're continuously closing the loop on that.
And, and as we move forward, great scope and timeline, a lot of that will be driven by council and our discussion with them, and especially because it'll have budgetary implications associated with it. So the scope of the project, we will.
And all likelihood put together an RFQ or an RFP that would for the area and lay out what we're interested in having developed and created for that area. Obviously, the scope for an area plan in southeast end would be very different compared to an area plan that's developed in northeast end, just because the nature of the existing conditions are significantly different.
So the scope would be tailored to the area that's being analyzed. And then the timeline is all provided for based upon whether or not we get the additional financial assistance through the budgetary process.
So if if any of the area plans are funded with the upcoming budget, then presumably we could start work on on getting those projects ready come October one.
Gotcha. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thanks, Tina. Any other questions Commissioner Perot.
Yeah.
Ron, could you pull up the future land use map in that presentation that you had.
Second here.
Yeah, that's great. I guess I look forward to the future discussions that we'll have in the coming weeks about sort of how the ETJ and the changes in the low residential versus rural were thought about and what the thinking is there, you know, I understand we're growing.
I just want to make sure that as as we're doing that, we are expanding low residential marked areas at a rate that is compatible with the goals that we have in our comprehensive plan.
I think in in previous plans, you know, the, the population growth estimates have exceeded what we've actually seen over the 15 or 20 years after those plans and nobody really knows whether our projections now are good or not.
So anyways, those will be some of the discussions I'm looking forward to in the future, but specifically on the map here in that area kind of between the UNT stadium and athletics area.
Yes, and the vintage Boulevard that shown as medium residential and orange right there, kind of southwest of the Kansas City Southern Railroad. I'm the mother residential specifically. Yes. Thank you for correcting me.
I guess I just have a question to staff as far as I believe that is a change from the 2030 flume. And I'm wondering whether given the discussions we've had about, you know, different contexts for urban design and that sort of thing, whether it makes
sense to put another pin on the focus areas map into that general location, because I'm not really sure what the vision for that spot is with that map change, personally.
So just a thought there. Right. And if I can just address that really quickly, as we went through the entire city, the staff, the team went through, you know what should this area be in terms of the future language designation or future language
designation. And I think that's one of the things that we're looking at right now, is that this is an area that we see I 35 W growing and whitening on the activity that we see. There is lending itself more towards the modern residential. I do know that you're right.
I certainly look at that in more detail. The loop 288 as it traverses across 35. We know that towards the coal side on the west side of 35. We've identified a key center, but that could also expand further and maybe be part of the east side of 35 W.
I believe that's what you're referring to. Yeah, that's sort of that triangle between 35 W north of vintage and and southwest of the Kansas City Southern line there. Right.
So yeah, and in right. And just to lastly point out that we are, as you all know, working on Bonnie bright on the widening project as well. So that is just really what's driving some of that change that we were proposing. Thanks for that. That clarity. And I guess just as a matter of kind of some more thoughts as I read and understand more of this update, I'll offer that one of the things that I
am challenged with when I see our comprehensive plan and then how it's applied is that there are certain goals that sometimes seem in contention. And I think we've had discussions in the past about how application of those goals may differ in different areas of the town.
And I understand the small area plan is is a tool to do that. But sometimes these particular sort of issues where there are trade offs. I feel like we haven't delved deeply in the past about what those trade offs are.
So one example would be sort of road network designs. Right. So we have a goal that says we want connected road networks and connected development. And then a few pages later, we have a goal that says we want a hierarchical road system that that's kind of funnels higher traffic areas onto larger roads.
And and I really just don't understand how in what world those both are fully achieved and what that looks like. You know, I was I was looking and Jeff Boeing did from USC did some some analysis of network systems and didn't actually ranks 44th of the 49 cities in Texas that are greater
than 100 kilometers squared of the percentage or prevalence of four way intersections. So it sort of seems like we've become a city of the three way intersection subdivision. And I'm not saying necessarily that's a bad thing. I'm just saying I don't understand what the trade offs are there.
A couple other trade offs I see are, you know, we have we talk about a desire for closer proximity of neighborhood services to residential areas. But then when I look at the flume, I see large sections as, you know, a low residential or a medium residential mix or designation.
And, you know, I understand we have some language in the comp plan to say that there are other compatible uses that are appropriate in some of those areas. But in practice, I can't think of a time in recent past where we've seen a proposal come to us for a larger call it one or 200 acre development that has asked for those things that our comp plan speaks to.
So that's kind of a conflict that I see. And are we really achieving that? And then lastly, I'll just say, I look forward to the small area plans. I think in that discussion, it may behoove us to think carefully about what types of goals are best achieved by that method versus methods.
Versus methods that might make broader changes citywide. Specifically, I think it's come up several times before the commission about it seeming like a lot of low income housing right now is being concentrated in district one. Right.
And so that's a concern. And I think there are other concerns that might be similar in how things develop insofar as they might be geographically isolated or or located co located.
And so what I want to make sure that we think through as those discussions progress is are are we doing things in a way that won't have some unintended consequences that that result in us turning around 10 years from now saying, oh, we thought we were doing this good to to encourage affordable housing here.
And then all of a sudden we had a situation where we realized we forced all of it into this small area again. So so just some things I'm looking forward to in those future discussions about about the small area plans and other things.
Well, Commissioner, if I could and Chairman Ellis, just real quick, Commissioner Pruitt, you do make some interesting observations and in terms of goals and action items that might seem like they're they're competing with each other.
I know you cited the the roadway examples with the more of arterial road planning nature and funneling traffic versus connected neighborhoods and then our street cross section design what that looks like. But even the types of development that we have happening within the city where we may have action items that are supporting one type of development, but other action items that are supporting a different type of development that may seem like they're in conflict with each other.
And what I would charge the commission with is remember that that this document is policy that is trying to address all different areas of our community. There may be certain action items that are more geared towards one location of the city compared to the other.
And I think that's the one of the challenges we have is when we're doing a comprehensive plan update like this, that remember that this document is setting out goals, policies and action items that are applying to a land area that's 90 square miles and will continue to grow in some form or fashion, presumably, right, because of the development that we're seeing today we anticipate that we may have some of that development continuing in the future and I think that's inevitable.
So the document has to be flexible enough to be able to address the 20 year horizon. Granted, you know, if we stay the course and continue to update it every five to 10 years and monitor it on a more frequent basis, then we can see how well we're doing.
But we have to this document has to be flexible enough to accommodate the different types of development that could potentially occur within the city. And also if we're interested in preserving land and not having development occur within certain areas.
So, if you feel that there are certain action items that are included in the plan right now that really need to be tailored towards a certain area of the community would welcome receiving that feedback, especially if you find that that action item may be in conflict with say something that we're trying to achieve more
interior to the city, especially if it's, you know, if we have an action item that would be more appropriate in the more suburban fringe of our city, compared to what we might have fine with an action item that would be more appropriate for the interior and info area
of the city say like closer to downtown or closer to one of our dark station or excuse me, DCT a stations, or whatever the situation may be so if there's something that that that just really sticks out to you that you feel like needs to be maybe further tightened, you know, welcome receiving that
feedback as well.
Thank you that that helps and I think we're really on the right track.
I just trying to share some thoughts about how sometimes when we see a proposal.
We see sort of a subset of action items in the comp plan that it is supported by, and we don't always see some of the other action items in the comp plan that may not directly support it and some explanation of why those don't apply in that particular zone or area of interest for a
sort of thing.
Thank you.
Any other questions.
Commissioner Cole.
Thank you.
Yeah, I just want to point out another area that is not congruent with the flume.
It's the future land use map. And it's that northwest part of town. That's close to crumb.
And if you could put that map back up Ron.
Yes. Okay, so correct me if I'm wrong. McCart is the old crime highway that is crime right to the north.
This area here. No, next to it in the blue that we have in blue.
That is ETJ, that's ETJ. It's our ETJ correct.
Our ETJ city. Okay, so next to it.
Crumb is building a massive residential development.
I mean, it has a lot of industrial compatible to a residential area and also take ranch estates out of the equation.
In this blue to the south are another 6070 homes up along lovers Lane and Moss branch in the blue.
Well, there's already a land use there.
I can see it's it's large acre homes, but you got it shaded in blue.
And you know how these people in chrome feel when you have next to their new development residential development lot industrial.
It doesn't seem we're being good neighbors to chrome.
I think this floom is the floom is great, but it's not the end all be all. I mean, you have to take the present in consideration.
And there's already a string of land use of different land use from all the way up this west blue boundary.
And, you know, is there some shops and some the beer warehouse and all that stuff over there?
Yeah, but still, I mean, you're coloring in blue.
It's like you're wiping off the map about 60 homes and then not being good neighbors to chrome and their new nice residential area where we're going to put light industrial.
I just think you all might need to take another look at that.
That's all I have.
So, Commissioner Cole, if I could add to that.
So we did reach out to the town of chrome to understand what their land use plans are in talking with their planning director that's there.
He did advise that their comprehensive plan is is significantly out of date.
But, you know, I guess it's the direction that we would look to from the commission in the council is that, you know,
do you want us to be sensitive to what's happening in other communities and have that dictate our land development that would potentially happen within our city?
You're right. We do have a variety of uses that are over in that northwest sector of the town.
And so much of what we've seen tends to leads towards the employment type uses within that area in commercial businesses.
So if our goal is to provide employment opportunities for people within Denton, then we need to identify where those areas are.
And in this case, given the existing development and what we're seeing in that area combined with, I believe we have some gas wells that will help dictate our land use patterns.
Hence why we've made the decisions that we have with respect to the light blue shading in that area.
But, you know, if the commission and council are wanting us to be sensitive to the town of Crum and the residential development happening there, then we would look to that direction from you all as to whether or not we need to change the land use designations within those areas.
But still, there are those number of homes that stretch up Lover's Lane and Moss Branch that are colored in blue that aren't going anywhere.
Right. And they would continue to remain. And keep in mind, again, remember, this is a policy-level document.
And just like you've acted on some zoning cases in the past where the zoning that's being requested, for example, we had a zoning request on Miller Road just to the east of Moss Branch Road, where there are, I think, about 15 lots, plus or minus, on that street.
And the future land use map recommended Business Innovation District. But we had a request to rezone that property to, I believe it was R1.
And we were able to justify allowing for that residential zoning change to occur there because the likelihood of some developer coming in and acquiring all 15 homes and redeveloping that for employment uses was extremely small.
And so that's where the comprehensive plan as a whole gives us the flexibility to look at those case-by-case situations to consider the deviation from the plan where appropriate.
So in this case, even though that whole northwest quadrant in that area is shaded, allowing for employment uses and commercial development in that area, if we have existing single-family homes that are scattered throughout the area, they will be allowed to remain.
But, you know, if they ever decide to sell their property at some point in the future, it could be that other commercial development is looking at acquiring their property, particularly if they have a larger tract of land.
So this goes back to the high-level policy document. It's not granular where we're doing a lot-by-lot, parcel-by-parcel analysis in the comprehensive plan, but we're trying to determine what is the most appropriate land use growth and development and policies that are put in place to help shape the future of our city.
Thank you, Tina. I appreciate it.
You're welcome. And I appreciate your sensitivity to those existing land uses in that area.
Commissioner Smith.
Thank you, Chair. Tina, just on to Commissioner Cole's point, why couldn't that area be business innovation and still accomplish the intent of putting LI there?
Being employment centers, being an area for job growth, but business innovation as a future land use designation still has the definition as it's currently written as single-use standalone residential use developments. Well, that's not allowed. Sorry, I misread that. So that would make me look like an idiot.
Even something like a grading within there. And that was really a question that I was going to ask was, whenever we choose those big tracts and parcels of land, we obviously understand within 288, within the boundaries of 35, it's pretty easy to put the flume designations within there and the areas that are already developed.
But places like that, out there on Mosh Branch and Lubbers, that section of town, how do we draw those lines that are coming in to say this is an area in which this should be designated as X? Are we going in and looking at property lines in the city?
I know we're obviously looking at state limits lines and we're looking at ETJ lines for that, but in those areas, like even on the south, like the flume haves on that south side of 380 there, it has that section along 380 where you would be in the right of way of 380 that's shaded in blue.
How do we go through and do that designation and then could we come back and look at the flume for that area, because I think Commissioner Cole is right, it probably should have some sort of split grading or some other consideration there with the rail line obviously running through there.
It probably shouldn't be a big residential development there either, but it probably could be some sort of compromise for that intended use over there to be more business innovation rather than just slapping LI on top of it and still get the same intent.
Those are all great comments and you're right.
As we as a team, our consultant and our planning team, evaluate our future land use map and the rest of the conference plan and how it all works together and what our objectives that we're trying to achieve for the community, all of that comes into consideration and discussion.
In some cases, we start to look more parcel specific and in a little more granular, even though this is still a high level policy document.
We take in consideration what are the existing roadway networks that are planned or are proposed to be expanded in that area.
We're taking into consideration what are the existing land uses, what are our development interests that are happening within that area.
Are there gas wells that are existing within that area or proximity to the airport, knowing that we have planes that are going to be coming and going that will impact development on that west side of the city.
Those are all things that we have to take into consideration and we are trying to put forth our best professional recommendations as to what we believe the appropriate land use development should be for a given area.
Hence, why we came up with the determination on the land industrial, blue shading in that particular area.
Business innovation, that's always one we've always struggled with, so we've tried to further hone in on what we mean by business innovation.
I heard the conversation with council last night that there was even discussion about maybe that particular land use designation needs to be renamed something else because even innovation doesn't really maybe ascribe to how we have it defined.
Maybe what it becomes is something more like an employment center designation.
I don't know if that helps answer your question other than we take all of that into consideration as we make our best professional recommendations and put forth for the area when we're trying to balance all of the objectives that we're trying to meet for the city.
The last thing I know we got other things we gotta get to tonight, but just as a recommendation, as you guys as staff start looking at that area, because I think we definitely should. Everything, everything south of where the 288 stub out is, the 288 extension is going to be.
Everything south of that probably should be some sort of form of residential within there, and everything north, everything north and you know, east of the 1173 or even further south than that.
But, but east of the railroad should probably be could be light industrial that makes a lot of sense so trying to give you kind of some really loose parameters everything north of the 288 stub out and east of the railroad being light industrial everything being.
South of the 288 stub out and west of the railroad probably should stay something in the form of rural residential or or some sort of single family residential land use so that's just my opinion from from the outside looking at it, but.
Appreciate that feedback and direction.
Thank you, Chair, just real quick. I want to echo Commissioner Cole's comments. I think, to me, the area closest to crumb there north of 1173 is actually ETJ, so that I appreciate staff reaching out to crumbs planning department, because to me the bigger question is not, what do we put on our flume, it's how do we coordinate with crumb, so that we don't run into a situation where we have one thing in our flume crumb has something else.
And then a developer with a land interest in that area decides, well, I'm just going to pick whichever one I want to do and ask to be annexed by that city. And then what we have is a very strange border with incompatible uses that doesn't help either city, essentially.
And then I guess that that reminded me. I think there were some comments at Council last night about potentially along the lines of of the flume being a much longer term kind of future growth or redevelopment concept of the heavy industrial area that is currently occupied by Acme brick down south of 35 E.
And I think, you know, I have no idea what timeline those things would happen at. But I would be open to thoughts of what that area could become in the future, if it ever went away from a heavy industrial use.
I think there are some better opportunities if that did go away to sort of stitch some of those neighborhoods together instead of going in and plopping a new dirty factory essentially in that area. So thank you.
Any other questions for staff.
I do not see any Ron thanks for the presentation Tina all the information.
This is great progress forward so it's wonderful to see it happening. And I think we have to stay, stay on the regular on this, that area that Commissioner Cole brought up and that we've just been discussing.
It was probably five years ago that I brought up that area. When I first came on as far as making a plan for it, and it kind of well developed into industrial effectively because we didn't have a plan so taking Commissioner Smith and
Commissioner Pruitt's comments today about small area plans moving forward. Really important I can't stress that enough about how we've got to do more planning, so that we don't end up coming behind what's already in place.
And oh that's what we have to designate it because we've got so much of that already there. And, and then we end up with potential problems as this part of our city is seemingly.
Anyway, thank you commissioners I would urge you to email questions comments suggestions so that we can keep this moving forward and on track because I know we've got a tight timeline which is great.
Let's move on then to our clarification of agenda items. First one being the minutes for January 12, are there any need for discussion on that.
Okay, don't see anything. As I mentioned before, if you did not see that email, the applicant on our consent agenda the one item we had there, they have withdrawn that plat for the time being.
So we will not have a consent agenda. This evening, so we will move on to individual consideration items for a is fr 21 0011.
That is Ron's item, I don't know that there's much of a presentation at this point.
I do know that the applicant has asked for an extension to date certain of to 23.
Does anyone have anything on that.
Okay, moving on to for be fr 21 0039 any questions there that's another one where the applicant has requested an extension to 223.
Okay, moving on to for see fr 21 0042 any questions for Sean on that one.
And that is more of the same as we're going to see here a lot of that request for extension to 223 seems like we're gonna be really busy on 223.
Sean I don't see any questions there for D fp 22 0003.
Okay, and that's another request for extension.
Okay, then we've got pp 21 0029 B.
That is being recommended for denial.
They've already received an extension correct Julie.
That is correct. Okay, thanks. Any questions for Julie.
Okay, next item is for FPP 21 0033.
Another requested extension. Any questions there.
Okay, then we've got for G is Fp 21 0041.
Anything for Haley there. That's another requested extension.
Okay, and then we've got, let's see, for hfr 21 0012.
Another requested extension.
For I pp 21 0032.
Ditto on that one requested extension.
And then our final item pp 21 0034.
Anything there. Commissioner Pruitt.
Thank you, Chair. Just, I know this is recommended with an extension I believe.
I just have a question or comment to staff.
Okay, let's can you hold up. This is Lisa's item. I'm not sure she's sure.
There you are. Hi. Okay.
I think I completely understand we just talked about the flume how these areas have an MPC designation because they're completely different.
But I thought that when when the coal hunter revision came through, they had been sort of aligned to the zoning designations within the rest of the city.
And right now on our GIS map online, it just shows the fact that it's an MPC. It doesn't show the more granular zoning designations in these areas.
So one I guess I make reference of that map to understand what the zoning is in each little area as I review these plots.
And so if there's a way in the future to to better understand what the zoning is of each of these places that would that would help me review these.
Okay, so not specific to this, but you're talking about. Yeah, I mean, it happens to be specific to this in so far as I'm not I don't know what the zoning is. So that would be the first question. But then just more broadly as as we start to see more plots come in.
It would just be helpful to have that answered more readily on the map, I guess.
Okay, not almost. Is that if. Yeah, go ahead, Tina. So, Commissioner Pruitt, if I'm understanding your question, or your request in the future is that, particularly in these master plan communities instead of just telling you it's master plan community zoning or in this case, the, the, the coal ranch master plan community, you're interested in knowing the more refined zoning designations.
So, for example, within that MPC, if it divided the, the, the property up into our six or our four or SC or GO, knowing what that designation is in addition to so basically like the sub district designation, correct.
Exactly. Yes. Okay.
Yeah, we can we can do that in the future. So Lisa, you want to address, but the current zoning designation is within our sub district within the MPC for this particular property.
I'm not able to hear you.
Doesn't show that she's muted.
It's okay since we're moving granting extension it's it's not germane for this week, but just for the future. Thank you.
Okay, thanks. Okay, that was our final item so I will adjourn our work session at 6pm we'll be back here at 630 for our regular meeting.
Welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning commission meeting for Wednesday, January 26 2022 with a quorum present I will call our meeting to order at 631pm. Our first item on the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the US and Texas flags.
To the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Honor the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one indivisible.
Okay, next item on our agenda is the approval of the planning and zoning commission meeting minutes for January 12.
Commissioner Smith, make a motion to approve.
Motion to approve.
Commissioner Villarreal.
Second, we've got a first and a second for approval any discussion.
Okay, we will take a vote viral call Commissioner Cole.
Okay.
Commissioner Mcdabe, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Pruitt, Commissioner Villarreal.
Our consent agenda. That one item we had the applicant has withdrawn that item so we will not have a consent agenda today and we'll move on to our items for individual consideration starting with for a fr 21 0011.
And Ron, I will give you the floor.
Thank you Madam Chair, Ron Megiddo, principal planner with development services.
Give me a second here to share my screen.
Hopefully you all can see the presentation.
Give me a second.
There we go.
All right, full screen.
All right.
In front of you is the proposed final replat application.
The subject plat or replat is part of a multi phase development, which is known as Eagle Creek.
It is the area they're shown as dashed in red.
It is phase to be again, part of a larger residential development.
This phase is being proposed.
However, unfortunately, the applicant was not able to address all of the comments from the staff.
Therefore, staff is recommending denial of this request.
We do have a staff, I'm sorry, a request by the applicant to extend this review for 30 days, and that is to a date certain of February 23 2022.
That concludes my presentation. I'll stand for any questions. Thank you, Ron.
I do not see any questions. Commissioner Smith, make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of February 23rd.
Okay, we've got a first to grant the request extension Commissioner Villarreal.
Thank you.
We've got a first and a second for approval of the extension request. Any discussion.
All right, let's take a vote. Commissioner Cole. Aye. Commissioner Mcdade. Aye. Commissioner Smith. Aye. Commissioner Pruitt. Aye.
Commissioner Villarreal. Aye. Commissioner Anderson.
Chair is an aye. Motion carries 7-0, taking us to 4B FP 210039 and Cameron Robertson. Hi.
Hello. Good evening Chair and Commissioners. Cameron Robertson, Principal Planner and Historic Preservation Officer.
Let me share my screen real quick.
Can everyone see my screen?
Yes.
Great. So this is FP 210039. This is a proposed approximately 155 acre final plot for the Luxe edition, which is located within the ETJ.
Staff is recommending denial of this request as it does not meet the criteria for approval, but staff does not have any objection to the request and extension date of February 23rd.
This is the conclusion of my presentation and I can stand for any questions.
Thank you, Cameron. Any questions?
I do not see any. Commissioner Smith. Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of February 23rd, 2022.
Okay we've got a first for extension approval. Commissioner Pruitt? Second. First and a second
to approve the extension. Any questions? Okay let's vote. Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner
McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal? Aye.
Commissioner Anderson? Aye. And the chair is an aye. That motion carries seven zero taking us to
4C FP 210042 and Sean Jacobson. Hi Sean.
Hi sorry I remembered everything except unmuting. No worries thanks. Chair and members of the
commission good evening thank you Sean Jacobson associate planner. I'm just going to pull up
the plat here so you can see it and should be coming on. Hopefully you're seeing that now.
The plat is the plat for a proposed plat for the pros prominence edition FP 210042.
This is located just north of prominence parkway and west of south loop 288. At this time it has
not met the criteria for approval therefore staff is recommending denial but we have no objection to
the requested extension to a date certain of February 23rd 2022. With that I'm happy to answer
any questions. Thank you Sean. Any questions for Sean? I do not see any thanks Sean. Commissioner
Smith? Make a motion to approve the request to extend to date certain of February 23rd 2022.
Okay we've got a first to approve the extension request. Commissioner Pruitt? Second. First and a
second to approve the extension request to a date certain of 2/23/22. Any discussion? Commissioner
Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner
Villarreal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. Chair is an aye. That motion carries seven zero taking
us to 4D FP 220003 and that is also Sean's item. You have the floor. Excellent. Good evening again
chair members of the commission. I'll just pull up the plat again here. That's shared so you can see it.
All right so this is a requested plat FP 220003 for the PLR edition which is in our ETJ
east of Locust Street. Again at this time staff is recommended now because it does not meet the
approval criteria for approval but staff has no objection to the requested extension to a date
certain of February 22nd or 23rd 2022. That I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you Sean.
I do not see any questions but I do have a motion from Commissioner Smith. Make a motion to approve
the extension date certain of February 23rd 2022. Okay we have a first for approval of extension.
Commissioner McDade? Second. Got a first and a second to approve the extension request.
Any discussion? All right let's vote. Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner
Smith? Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye.
The chair is an aye as well. That carries seven zero taking us to a 4E PP 21 0029
and that is Julie Wyatt. Hi Julie. Good evening I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the City of
Clinton. This is PP 21 0029B. This is Holland edition. Let me share my screen.
All right can y'all see my screen? Yes ma'am. All right so this may look familiar to you. You
have seen this plat. It has actually received an extension prior to tonight's meeting and it has
actually been denied at a previous meeting. They do still have some additional comments they need
to work through so staff is recommending denial of this of this plat. I'll be happy to answer
any questions. Thank you Julie. Any questions for Julie? I do not see any questions. Thanks Julie.
Commissioner Smith? Make a motion to deny. Okay we've got a motion on the floor to deny.
Commissioner Pruitt? Second. First and a second for denial. Any discussion?
Okay let's vote. Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye.
The chair is also an aye. That motion carries 7-0. Taking us to 4F, PP 21 0033.
I will give the floor back to Julie. Okay so this is PP 21-0033. This is a preliminary plat for two
commercial lots on the south side of the university. They do have some items they still need to work
through and so staff is recommending denial of the request. However, we have no objection to their
requested extension to the February 23rd meeting and I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you Julie. Questions for Julie?
I do not see any. Thank you. Commissioner Smith? Make a motion to approve the extension of date
certain to February 23rd 2022. All right we've got a motion on the floor to approve the extension
request to a date certain of 223. Commissioner Cole? Second. All right first and a second
to approve the requested extension. Any discussion? Seeing none let's vote. Commissioner Cole?
Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal?
Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. And the chair is an aye. That motion carries 7-0.
Moving us to 4G FP21-0041 and Haley I will give the floor to you.
All right I believe Julie is going to pull that slide up for me or
someone at the office. This is a final plat for the Primaris edition. It's a single industrial
lot that is located on the north side of the city just off of I-35 north of Barthold Road.
At this time staff is recommending denial as the plat does not meet the established criteria
outlined in your backup. However we have no opposition to the requested extension to February 23rd.
And there's the plat. Are there any questions for Haley on this?
All right. Commissioner Smith? Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of February
23rd 2022. Okay we've got a motion on the floor to approve the requested extension. Commissioner Cole?
Second. First and a second to approve the extension to a date certain of 223. Any discussion?
Okay let's vote please. Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith?
Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson?
Aye. And chair is also an aye. That motion carries seven zero. That will take us to 4HFR 210012
and I will turn that over to Lisa. Hi Lisa. Hi good evening. I apologize for my my headset not
working earlier but we're good now. Thanks. Lisa Payne, principal planner for the city of Denton.
Let me pull up my presentation for you.
Okay this item before you is a final replat for a multi-family development on London Dairy Lane.
Staff is recommending denial as it does not meet the established criteria for approval.
However the applicant has requested a 30-day extension to allow for more review and addressing
comments. Staff has no objection to this extension to February 23rd 2022 and I'm available for
questions. Thank you Lisa. Any questions? I do not see any. Thank you. Commissioner Smith? Make a
motion to approve the extension to date certain of February 23rd 2022. Commissioner Cole? Second.
We've got a first and a second to approve the extension request. Any questions? Discussion?
Okay let's vote. Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villareal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. And chair is also
an aye. That motion carries seven zero. That takes us to 4IPP 210032 and I'll give that back to Lisa.
Okay this item is a preliminary plat for industrial development at 35 and 1173.
Let me share my screen real quick with y'all so you can see the flat.
Okay this one hopefully it's working for you. This applicant well staff is recommending denial
for this one as it does not meet the criteria for approval and so the applicant has requested a
30-day extension to address staff comments. Staff has no objection with this going to the
February 23rd P&Z meeting and I'm available for questions. Thank you Lisa. Any questions?
I do not see any. Commissioner Smith? Make a motion to approve the extension to date certain
of February 23rd 2022. Commissioner McDade? Second. We've got a first and a second to approve the
extended the extension of request to a date certain of 223. Any discussion? Let's vote please.
Commissioner Cole? Aye. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye. Commissioner Pruitt? Aye.
Commissioner Villareal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. And chair is also an aye so that
motion carries 7-0. That will take us to 4 JPP 21-0034 and Commissioner Cole has recused himself
from this item and I will turn the floor over to Lisa Payne. Okay the item before you is a preliminary
plaque for phase one of Cole Ranch. The overall zoning is MPC but the underlying zoning is mixed
use neighborhood for most of phase one including where all that residential is with some mixed use
regional and some light industrial to the west along the future loop 288 right of way. Staff is
recommending denial as this does not meet the established criteria for approval however the
applicant has requested a 30-day extension to allow additional time to address comments
so staff has no objection to this extension to February 23rd and is available for questions.
Thank you Lisa. Any questions for Lisa?
I do not see any Lisa thank you very much. Commissioner Smith? Make a motion to approve
the extension to date certain of February 23rd 2022. Okay we've got a first and Commissioner
Anderson? I second. Got a first and a second to approve the extension request to a date certain
of 223. Any discussion? Okay let's vote please. Commissioner McDade? Aye. Commissioner Smith? Aye.
Commissioner Pruitt? Aye. Commissioner Villarreal? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. Chair is also
an aye that motion carries six zero with one recused and we'll give Commissioner Cole a minute
to get back and we will move on then to our planning and zoning commission matrix and
I will give that over to Tina. Thank you Commissioner Cole or Chairman excuse me Chairman Ellis sorry
about that. Commissioner Cole got promoted just briefly moments early. I didn't even think we
looked alike. You don't I'm so sorry trust me I wish I was at the dais with you. So with respect
to the matrix so a couple items I wanted to point out and make note of so the first item on the
matrix is the opt-in system that would allow citizens within 200 feet or 500 feet to receive
notifications. Let's see council member Beck made a two minute pitch last night at the city council
meeting with respect to this. This is going to be brought back for a work session discussion.
It's currently slated for some time in April and so I know some of the commissioners with the planning
and zoning commission are interested in this particular item so that item there is discussion
moving forward on that so I thought you would be interested in knowing that. Also as we mentioned
in the discussion with respect to the comprehensive plan I know Ron mentioned numerous times that we
have on our work horizon area plan discussion our goal would be to bring that to the planning and
zoning commission for March. I'm presuming that we're able to get the comprehensive plan completed
and adopted on March 1st and then having your recommendations included for city council and
right now as Ron mentioned earlier we have that slated for April 5th. Now chairman Ellis I know
you had some homework since the last meeting of this item the e-commit feature on the website.
I know you had brought this up and had some concern previously that it was not very
noticeable for residents to be able to find the e-commit feature so I was curious to see
if you had a chance to look at this and if whether or not this has been addressed. I
definitely did my homework and it absolutely has it is incredibly well done thank you very much
to whoever worked on that yes it's it's easy to understand how to comment. It's easy to see how
many comments are there per item. It yeah it's well done so thank you thank you for addressing it.
Excellent I think Selena that takes some of the credit on on helping get that item resolved for
you so I'm glad we were able to address that. Excellent. From a development perspective and
zoning cases we have no items to report on with respect to city council where they've taken action
recently as you know we really haven't had much on your agenda lately in regards to that with
extended with exception of a zoning case that was considered on your meeting agenda previously and
that's moving forward to city council with their next meeting on February 1st and that was the one
that was off of I believe it's vintage road and just east of I-35W. Also in addition to the
conference of plan discussion that we had last night with council the the mobility plan was also
discussed so the mobility plan we will be bringing that forward for your discussion as well at your
meeting on or the work session meeting that we have slated on February 9th for the commission.
So if you have any additional questions or comments as it relates to the mobility plan
if you could also please get those to our team by February 1st we would greatly appreciate it.
Becky Devaney and her team are trying to be able to address as many comments leading into the
February 8th conversation with council as well as the February 9th conversation with the Planning
and Zoning Commission and you can either send those comments to myself or to Ron or directly
to Ms. Devaney. We've been working closely with our team and in sharing of information resources
that we received from the commission. And then lastly the only other zoning case update that I'd
like to bring to your attention is on February 15th the Kingsway rezoning case the applicant has
requested to have that item brought back forth to the city council that item was continued
indefinitely previously so we have initiated the public hearing notification process that's required
for zoning cases for city council so that will be be that is currently slated for February 15th so
thought you might be interested in knowing that. Other than that that concludes my report and happy
to entertain any questions that the commission may have. Thank you Tina. Any questions or
anything to be added to the matrix? I do not see anything. Any concluding items?
I'm just going to give a happy birthday shout out to our Mayor Pro Tem. I know it's his birthday
today so happy birthday Paul Munser. Any other concluding items? All right seeing none I will
adjourn us at 6 54 p.m. Thank you everyone.