WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.740
 >> Good afternoon and welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning commission

00:00:07.740 --> 00:00:11.040
 meeting for Wednesday, August 10th.

00:00:11.040 --> 00:00:16.520
 With the quorum present, I will call our work session to order at 5 p.m.

00:00:16.520 --> 00:00:22.480
 For the record, commissioners Cole, Anderson and Smith are absent at this time.

00:00:22.480 --> 00:00:28.040
 Let's see, our first item on our work session agenda is citizen comment on consent agenda

00:00:28.040 --> 00:00:29.040
 items.

00:00:29.040 --> 00:00:33.200
 I don't know that I have anyone in here for that.

00:00:33.200 --> 00:00:35.640
 Waiting a moment.

00:00:35.640 --> 00:00:37.040
 Okay.

00:00:37.040 --> 00:00:40.120
 Seeing none, we'll move to our work session reports.

00:00:40.120 --> 00:00:41.480
 This printed a little bit odd.

00:00:41.480 --> 00:00:47.240
 So we've got agenda item two, work session reports, then under agenda item three, clarification

00:00:47.240 --> 00:00:52.660
 of agenda items, we've got our work session, which is under 3A.

00:00:52.660 --> 00:00:53.660
 So I'll call that.

00:00:53.660 --> 00:00:58.040
 It's receiver report, hold a discussion regarding drainage and floodplain development requirements.

00:00:58.040 --> 00:00:59.440
 Hello, Sean.

00:00:59.440 --> 00:01:03.440
 >> Good evening, members of the commission.

00:01:03.440 --> 00:01:04.440
 All right.

00:01:04.440 --> 00:01:05.440
 >> Okay.

00:01:05.440 --> 00:01:06.440
 >> Yes.

00:01:06.440 --> 00:01:09.080
 >> We'll just pull up the presentation here.

00:01:09.080 --> 00:01:10.080
 That started.

00:01:10.080 --> 00:01:11.080
 All right.

00:01:11.080 --> 00:01:15.360
 So yes, my name is Sean Jacobson, associate planner, and I'm here to give you a boot camp

00:01:15.360 --> 00:01:18.000
 on drainage.

00:01:18.000 --> 00:01:22.160
 So real quickly, we're going to touch on the standards that we hold our private development

00:01:22.160 --> 00:01:23.160
 to.

00:01:23.160 --> 00:01:27.880
 We're also going to look at the public side, how we review our public projects, as well

00:01:27.880 --> 00:01:32.000
 as how we invest in continuous improvement resources, and then possibly most importantly

00:01:32.000 --> 00:01:36.600
 we'll discuss, who do I call if I have a flood or drainage problem?

00:01:36.600 --> 00:01:43.040
 So taking a step back, what are our drainage and floodplain goals with our regulations?

00:01:43.040 --> 00:01:47.520
 On the private side, we're reviewing those projects to make sure that they comply with

00:01:47.520 --> 00:01:48.520
 a number of things.

00:01:48.520 --> 00:01:52.720
 We want to make sure that we're minimizing that risk of flooding properties around you,

00:01:52.720 --> 00:01:54.100
 downstream of your property.

00:01:54.100 --> 00:01:58.680
 We also are reviewing to make sure that we're limiting the cumulative impact of development

00:01:58.680 --> 00:02:02.140
 over time, so that as more and more properties develop, we don't end up with a situation

00:02:02.140 --> 00:02:06.680
 where each one of them didn't cause a problem, but think of mind, impact causes a problem.

00:02:06.680 --> 00:02:08.920
 We're prepared for that with our regulations.

00:02:08.920 --> 00:02:12.160
 We're also looking to minimize the risk that you'll flood the building you're building.

00:02:12.160 --> 00:02:14.840
 So we're making sure that you're actually building it high enough above any surrounding

00:02:14.840 --> 00:02:15.840
 floodplain.

00:02:15.840 --> 00:02:19.000
 We're making sure that there's a maintenance plan for any private detention that you're

00:02:19.000 --> 00:02:24.680
 proposing, and we're making sure that we're preserving those areas of FEMA floodplain,

00:02:24.680 --> 00:02:28.880
 and that where it is getting modified, that we're doing those through the proper processes.

00:02:28.880 --> 00:02:34.600
 On the public side, we're making sure that our projects are designed to manage and minimize

00:02:34.600 --> 00:02:38.840
 drainage impacts, and also that we're investing in continuous improvement, so continuing to

00:02:38.840 --> 00:02:43.760
 update our criteria manuals, our design details to make sure that we have the best resources

00:02:43.760 --> 00:02:45.960
 and regulations available.

00:02:45.960 --> 00:02:46.960
 So let's jump into that.

00:02:46.960 --> 00:02:50.800
 First of all, in development review, don't flood thy neighbor.

00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:55.040
 So for any project we're submitting, whether that's your civil engineering plans, your

00:02:55.040 --> 00:02:59.160
 flats, a building permit for a building that's within the floodplain, we're going to require

00:02:59.160 --> 00:03:03.920
 you to submit some type of drainage study, and there's two broad categories of that.

00:03:03.920 --> 00:03:06.760
 One of them is the downstream assessment, and that's what you do when you're wanting

00:03:06.760 --> 00:03:10.000
 to prove that you don't need to have a detention pond.

00:03:10.000 --> 00:03:13.520
 And so it's a very detailed study, and essentially what you're needing to prove is that you're

00:03:13.520 --> 00:03:17.840
 not going to have an adverse impact on properties downstream of you.

00:03:17.840 --> 00:03:23.200
 So you have to model all the way down to the point where no further impact from floodwater

00:03:23.200 --> 00:03:26.080
 in your development is being seen in the model.

00:03:26.080 --> 00:03:30.120
 And it's not enough to just model what your impact would be now, because what if everything

00:03:30.120 --> 00:03:32.040
 south of you is farmland right now?

00:03:32.040 --> 00:03:36.880
 We actually require that you model all of that area within, you know, where you may

00:03:36.880 --> 00:03:39.880
 have an impact, based on fully developed conditions.

00:03:39.880 --> 00:03:43.720
 So you actually have to look at the future land use map and model every one of those

00:03:43.720 --> 00:03:47.240
 properties based on how the future land use map says that will develop.

00:03:47.240 --> 00:03:51.760
 So that's one of the ways we account for those potential cumulative impacts over time.

00:03:51.760 --> 00:03:55.340
 We're making sure that if you're proving you're not going to have a negative impact, that's

00:03:55.340 --> 00:03:59.680
 not having a negative impact when everyone else develops, to the best that that can be

00:03:59.680 --> 00:04:00.680
 modeled.

00:04:00.680 --> 00:04:05.000
 The other major type of drainage study is if you are proposing detention on your sites.

00:04:05.000 --> 00:04:08.760
 You're proposing a detention pond, the goal of that being to slow or control the flow

00:04:08.760 --> 00:04:10.760
 of water off your site.

00:04:10.760 --> 00:04:12.280
 You still have to do a study.

00:04:12.280 --> 00:04:15.280
 It's not a downstream assessment, but you still have to show that that detention pond

00:04:15.280 --> 00:04:20.200
 will actually do what it's supposed to do, which is basically make sure that the flow

00:04:20.200 --> 00:04:25.420
 off your site matches the pre-development flow, where if it changes, it's only within

00:04:25.420 --> 00:04:28.080
 a very minimal permitted amount of change.

00:04:28.080 --> 00:04:32.080
 So either way, we're making sure that you're submitting a study that shows you're not having

00:04:32.080 --> 00:04:33.600
 an adverse impact.

00:04:33.600 --> 00:04:37.320
 The second step is don't flood thyself.

00:04:37.320 --> 00:04:42.380
 So we're looking at your drainage plans on your site to make sure, one, that we're minimizing

00:04:42.380 --> 00:04:46.760
 rerouting of drainage so that where water comes onto your site and leaves it, as much

00:04:46.760 --> 00:04:48.160
 as possible, that's staying the same.

00:04:48.160 --> 00:04:51.960
 We're not having water suddenly leaving your site in a wildly different location.

00:04:51.960 --> 00:04:55.320
 And that we're making sure that drainage is routed to the appropriate point, so it's getting

00:04:55.320 --> 00:04:59.080
 to the right culvert, the right inlet, et cetera.

00:04:59.080 --> 00:05:02.940
 And then we're also making sure that any proposed detention is adequate to the site needs.

00:05:02.940 --> 00:05:06.960
 Is that detention pond deep enough, wide enough, constructed to do what it's supposed to do

00:05:06.960 --> 00:05:10.040
 to handle the drainage for your site?

00:05:10.040 --> 00:05:12.240
 The other crucial area is floodplain.

00:05:12.240 --> 00:05:14.440
 The question is, can you build there?

00:05:14.440 --> 00:05:19.000
 And it depends on the type of floodplain and the size of the floodplain that the floodplain

00:05:19.000 --> 00:05:20.800
 on your property is a part of.

00:05:20.800 --> 00:05:25.440
 And I will note here, the city of Denton holds higher standards than federal standards.

00:05:25.440 --> 00:05:27.160
 We actually go above and beyond.

00:05:27.160 --> 00:05:31.880
 And the benefit of that is that it lowers flood insurance costs for our residents, 10%

00:05:31.880 --> 00:05:35.160
 for those that may have a building in the floodplain, 5% for buildings that are outside

00:05:35.160 --> 00:05:36.160
 the floodplain.

00:05:36.160 --> 00:05:39.680
 So it's important that we have those high above and beyond standards.

00:05:39.680 --> 00:05:44.200
 So just going through those types of floodplain, floodway is no-build.

00:05:44.200 --> 00:05:45.200
 You do not build there.

00:05:45.200 --> 00:05:46.200
 You don't mess with that.

00:05:46.200 --> 00:05:47.200
 You don't touch it.

00:05:47.200 --> 00:05:51.940
 Then there's a group of floodplain types, AAE, shaded zone X, it depends.

00:05:51.940 --> 00:05:56.800
 You may be able to modify some of those areas, but that has to go through a conditional letter

00:05:56.800 --> 00:05:58.200
 of map revision process.

00:05:58.200 --> 00:05:59.200
 That's reviewed by us.

00:05:59.200 --> 00:06:00.740
 That's reviewed by FEMA.

00:06:00.740 --> 00:06:02.840
 If that's approved, we're saying you can do some work.

00:06:02.840 --> 00:06:05.280
 You can move some dirt to move where the floodplain is.

00:06:05.280 --> 00:06:08.560
 When you've done it, you submit a letter of map revision, FEMA approves that.

00:06:08.560 --> 00:06:12.840
 They actually change the FEMA floodplain map, and now you have more space that you can develop

00:06:12.840 --> 00:06:13.840
 in.

00:06:13.840 --> 00:06:14.840
 Yes, ma'am?

00:06:14.840 --> 00:06:16.640
 Shawn, on that note, what is the time frame?

00:06:16.640 --> 00:06:21.880
 I know it doesn't fall into a perfect time frame, but on average, what is...

00:06:21.880 --> 00:06:23.800
 For a letter of map revision?

00:06:23.800 --> 00:06:28.920
 I am not going to try to answer that because that's well outside my area.

00:06:28.920 --> 00:06:33.400
 However, we do have some folks here with much more expertise than that, and I'll be happy

00:06:33.400 --> 00:06:35.720
 when we get through that to bring them up to address that question.

00:06:35.720 --> 00:06:36.720
 Very good.

00:06:36.720 --> 00:06:37.720
 Thank you very much.

00:06:37.720 --> 00:06:38.720
 We can...

00:06:38.720 --> 00:06:39.720
 Or we can do that.

00:06:39.720 --> 00:06:40.720
 Yeah.

00:06:40.720 --> 00:06:41.720
 So Mike Linder is here.

00:06:41.720 --> 00:06:42.720
 He is our floodplain guy.

00:06:42.720 --> 00:06:43.720
 Hello.

00:06:43.720 --> 00:06:44.720
 Yeah.

00:06:44.720 --> 00:06:49.480
 After a letter of map revision is submitted to FEMA, it generally takes three months

00:06:49.480 --> 00:06:57.080
 for that to get reviewed and approved, and it varies on whether it's very closely aligned

00:06:57.080 --> 00:07:00.800
 with the conditional letter of map revision that preceded it, or if there were significant

00:07:00.800 --> 00:07:04.040
 changes between those two, so it could take considerably longer.

00:07:04.040 --> 00:07:07.840
 Before it's going to FEMA, it's coming through a review here first?

00:07:07.840 --> 00:07:08.840
 Correct.

00:07:08.840 --> 00:07:09.840
 Okay.

00:07:09.840 --> 00:07:10.840
 And how...

00:07:10.840 --> 00:07:11.840
 What's that process?

00:07:11.840 --> 00:07:17.800
 That's reviewed by HR Green, our development consultants that do the majority of our heavy

00:07:17.800 --> 00:07:21.280
 lifting review for floodplain modeling.

00:07:21.280 --> 00:07:24.040
 So month, two months before it would...

00:07:24.040 --> 00:07:26.040
 I'm trying to get cumulative.

00:07:26.040 --> 00:07:27.840
 What would that look like?

00:07:27.840 --> 00:07:32.080
 Yes, sorry, I can't give you exact certainty on that timeline.

00:07:32.080 --> 00:07:36.360
 I imagine it's generally within a few weeks, and they work through that process, so it's

00:07:36.360 --> 00:07:38.320
 not just one big data dump.

00:07:38.320 --> 00:07:39.920
 They're working side by side through that.

00:07:39.920 --> 00:07:40.920
 Got it.

00:07:40.920 --> 00:07:41.920
 Okay.

00:07:41.920 --> 00:07:42.920
 Thank you for answering my question.

00:07:42.920 --> 00:07:43.920
 Absolutely.

00:07:43.920 --> 00:07:45.680
 I was going to say, if anything, what they would do is...

00:07:45.680 --> 00:07:48.760
 Our partners at HR Green that assist us with that review, they would bring that to the

00:07:48.760 --> 00:07:52.760
 applicant's attention, letting them know that the conditional letter of map revision would

00:07:52.760 --> 00:07:55.480
 be necessary as part of their review.

00:07:55.480 --> 00:07:59.680
 So with the civil engineering plans, we are bound by a certain number of days under the

00:07:59.680 --> 00:08:01.400
 state statute, in which we have to respond.

00:08:01.400 --> 00:08:05.040
 So it's presumably included in all of that review, but we would bring it to the applicant's

00:08:05.040 --> 00:08:06.040
 attention.

00:08:06.040 --> 00:08:07.040
 Got it.

00:08:07.040 --> 00:08:08.040
 Okay.

00:08:08.040 --> 00:08:09.040
 Thanks.

00:08:09.040 --> 00:08:10.040
 All right.

00:08:10.040 --> 00:08:14.520
 The last category is our 200-foot permit buffer, and I've actually provided an example of that

00:08:14.520 --> 00:08:15.520
 on the screen there.

00:08:15.520 --> 00:08:18.080
 You can see the area that's shaded in purple.

00:08:18.080 --> 00:08:21.440
 That is an area, and it's what it sounds like, outside of our floodplain.

00:08:21.440 --> 00:08:26.000
 There's a 200-foot area within which you can build, but when you build with your building

00:08:26.000 --> 00:08:31.520
 permit, you need to have a certification provided that you have built the finished floor of

00:08:31.520 --> 00:08:33.600
 that building high enough above the floodplain.

00:08:33.600 --> 00:08:38.720
 There's actual certificates saying you built it high enough to minimize that flood risk.

00:08:38.720 --> 00:08:42.240
 And as part of that, you may actually be required to do a study to determine what the base flood

00:08:42.240 --> 00:08:44.000
 elevation there is.

00:08:44.000 --> 00:08:47.360
 So just as an example, I've shown, provided an example of a plat there, and you can see

00:08:47.360 --> 00:08:50.240
 on some of those, it says MINFF.

00:08:50.240 --> 00:08:54.920
 What that's saying is for that particular lot, what does the minimum finished floor

00:08:54.920 --> 00:08:57.240
 elevation above sea level have to be?

00:08:57.240 --> 00:09:00.360
 Others don't have that because they're outside of that permit buffer area.

00:09:00.360 --> 00:09:04.320
 So that's one of the many things we review in this realm before it gets to y'all.

00:09:04.320 --> 00:09:09.160
 And lastly, we do make sure that we have an easement requirement around any floodplain

00:09:09.160 --> 00:09:13.000
 or floodway that's not being modified in order to make sure, you know, there's no building

00:09:13.000 --> 00:09:16.320
 in there and that there's actually the ability to access that in case maintenance ever needs

00:09:16.320 --> 00:09:18.680
 to be done.

00:09:18.680 --> 00:09:22.760
 And just as a brief kind of a resource and education item, if you're aware of our interactive

00:09:22.760 --> 00:09:27.720
 GIS map, there's actually a way you can go on if you click on the FEMA checkbox and then

00:09:27.720 --> 00:09:31.600
 click the little black arrow next to it and go down and turn on permit buffer.

00:09:31.600 --> 00:09:35.440
 You can actually see in a general sense where these various types of floodplain are on a

00:09:35.440 --> 00:09:36.440
 property.

00:09:36.440 --> 00:09:38.640
 Now, I'll caution you, this is not the official FEMA map.

00:09:38.640 --> 00:09:42.760
 It's not going to be perfect, but it is a good resource for being generally aware.

00:09:42.760 --> 00:09:47.000
 You can see there the dark blue of the floodway, the lighter blue of some of the other zones,

00:09:47.000 --> 00:09:53.360
 and then the permit buffer, which is the purple slashes, so just a useful resource.

00:09:53.360 --> 00:09:57.560
 The third part of development review is so maintenance and making sure that we're providing

00:09:57.560 --> 00:09:58.560
 for maintenance.

00:09:58.560 --> 00:10:01.640
 So private detention, and that's where you have a detention pond on your property that's

00:10:01.640 --> 00:10:04.200
 just handling ground off from your side alone.

00:10:04.200 --> 00:10:08.600
 We require you to provide maintenance documents so that if someone buys that in the future

00:10:08.600 --> 00:10:11.600
 and we need to provide that to tell them, hey, here's what your responsibility is for

00:10:11.600 --> 00:10:14.420
 maintaining this detention pond, we have that on file.

00:10:14.420 --> 00:10:19.520
 We also require an access easement so that if the city ever needed to go in and resolve

00:10:19.520 --> 00:10:22.160
 a problem, we do have the legal ability to do that.

00:10:22.160 --> 00:10:25.960
 There's also public detention and drainage, and that's where you may have a drainage pond

00:10:25.960 --> 00:10:31.400
 that's taking water from multiple lots or a drainage feature that is taking water from

00:10:31.400 --> 00:10:33.000
 one lot to another.

00:10:33.000 --> 00:10:34.440
 And I've provided an example there.

00:10:34.440 --> 00:10:37.760
 The dark blue is a drainage pond that's serving multiple lots.

00:10:37.760 --> 00:10:42.520
 The light blue is a drainage easement that is allowing water to go from one lot to another.

00:10:42.520 --> 00:10:46.440
 Those are input then easements that permit both public access and public maintenance

00:10:46.440 --> 00:10:50.920
 so that, again, if we ever needed to address that, we have the legal ability to do that.

00:10:50.920 --> 00:10:55.480
 Overall, the intent of all of this is to ensure that the responsibility for access to and

00:10:55.480 --> 00:10:58.920
 permission to maintain is clearly stated and documented.

00:10:58.920 --> 00:11:04.780
 We know what everyone is responsible to do, and we have the ability to remedy if necessary.

00:11:04.780 --> 00:11:06.680
 So that sums up the private side.

00:11:06.680 --> 00:11:11.880
 I want to go now and look at the public side of drainage and floodplain.

00:11:11.880 --> 00:11:16.320
 With all of our capital improvement projects, we hold ourselves, with roads, bridges, et

00:11:16.320 --> 00:11:18.880
 cetera, to the same standards that we hold private development.

00:11:18.880 --> 00:11:22.560
 If a study is required on the private side, it's required on the public side.

00:11:22.560 --> 00:11:26.080
 Drainage studies, flood studies, if you're modifying a floodplain to put in a road, which

00:11:26.080 --> 00:11:30.080
 we did recently, it requires the Clomar and Lomar, exactly the same standards.

00:11:30.080 --> 00:11:33.960
 And at the end of that, we have our public works inspection folks going in and inspecting

00:11:33.960 --> 00:11:34.960
 that.

00:11:34.960 --> 00:11:36.880
 If there's something that's not been done correctly, they'll require that it's fixed

00:11:36.880 --> 00:11:38.880
 before it's allowed to go from there.

00:11:38.880 --> 00:11:43.560
 So holding ourselves to the same high standards that we do on the private side.

00:11:43.560 --> 00:11:47.320
 We also invest specifically in drainage infrastructure and continuous improvement.

00:11:47.320 --> 00:11:53.240
 Now, like we said, our private review is designed to avoid those cumulative impacts over time,

00:11:53.240 --> 00:11:56.840
 but there are also historic problem areas, issues of the past that need to be solved,

00:11:56.840 --> 00:12:00.840
 and that's where you may see us investing in major infrastructure problems related,

00:12:00.840 --> 00:12:03.320
 projects related to drainage.

00:12:03.320 --> 00:12:07.560
 Also sometimes if we're doing a project, road bridge, et cetera, there is drainage, work

00:12:07.560 --> 00:12:10.080
 drainage infrastructure that is required as a part of that.

00:12:10.080 --> 00:12:14.080
 So again, in those cases, we as the city would be investing in specific drainage infrastructure

00:12:14.080 --> 00:12:16.240
 or floodplain modification.

00:12:16.240 --> 00:12:19.640
 Another key thing here is ongoing process and improvement.

00:12:19.640 --> 00:12:22.880
 So we are actually developing a stormwater master plan right now.

00:12:22.880 --> 00:12:26.920
 When that's completed, that'll give us a much clearer picture of what all of our infrastructure

00:12:26.920 --> 00:12:31.240
 is for drainage and stormwater citywide, and it'll enable us to do the best possible job

00:12:31.240 --> 00:12:34.120
 of investing in future drainage infrastructure.

00:12:34.120 --> 00:12:40.440
 We're also a part of the National Flood Insurance Program Rating System, which Mike puts a lot

00:12:40.440 --> 00:12:44.280
 of effort into updating, and the benefit of that is we're letting the federal government

00:12:44.280 --> 00:12:47.880
 know here's everything the City of Denton is doing to protect floodplain, and when we

00:12:47.880 --> 00:12:52.120
 update that regularly, that also helps to keep those flood insurance costs as low as

00:12:52.120 --> 00:12:54.440
 possible for our citizens.

00:12:54.440 --> 00:12:58.360
 And then as you may be aware, we're also now updating our criteria manuals on an annual

00:12:58.360 --> 00:13:02.720
 basis to make sure that we are keeping up with the best possible regulations, keeping

00:13:02.720 --> 00:13:03.720
 that updated.

00:13:03.720 --> 00:13:07.360
 And we also do have some new resources available for citizens and for the development community,

00:13:07.360 --> 00:13:09.680
 and I'll touch on that another slide.

00:13:09.680 --> 00:13:14.000
 Again, just briefly noting here that process now we're going through annually to keep those

00:13:14.000 --> 00:13:17.240
 criteria manuals updated.

00:13:17.240 --> 00:13:21.200
 Those resources I mentioned, one of them, I love this site, Discuss Denton, all of our

00:13:21.200 --> 00:13:23.880
 major capital improvements are listed on there.

00:13:23.880 --> 00:13:28.560
 It lists the contact information for the project manager, lists the general timeline, a lot

00:13:28.560 --> 00:13:32.320
 of great information there, and if you wanted to learn more, you have the contact information

00:13:32.320 --> 00:13:36.560
 for the person that will know more, so definitely recommend using that, I use it when questions

00:13:36.560 --> 00:13:40.080
 come in, and it's also something you can share with folks that have questions for you.

00:13:40.080 --> 00:13:44.760
 The other is our capital improvement projects GIS map, and that's basically a map of the

00:13:44.760 --> 00:13:48.360
 city that shows all the major capital improvement projects, so if you're wondering what's going

00:13:48.360 --> 00:13:51.680
 on on that road there, you can pull that up, zoom in on it, click on it, find out what

00:13:51.680 --> 00:13:57.360
 that project is, have more information, so again, just a useful resource.

00:13:57.360 --> 00:14:03.840
 Finally we want to touch on who do we call in case of a flooding emergency, a flooding

00:14:03.840 --> 00:14:08.720
 issue, a question about drainage, et cetera, and the answer is that the Engage Denton app

00:14:08.720 --> 00:14:12.760
 and website is the best response, because that is a clearing house, rather than trying

00:14:12.760 --> 00:14:15.920
 to reach out to one department or another, there's a team there that makes sure that

00:14:15.920 --> 00:14:20.560
 that question is targeted to the best department or departments to address the issue, that

00:14:20.560 --> 00:14:24.920
 it's tracked and that it's resolved effectively, so highly recommend that, whether it's downloading

00:14:24.920 --> 00:14:29.520
 the app or whether that's going to the website, that's the best way to resolve those questions

00:14:29.520 --> 00:14:30.520
 and issues.

00:14:30.520 --> 00:14:34.680
 The one exception is during rain, if you're observing a flash flooding event, there is

00:14:34.680 --> 00:14:38.720
 a dedicated phone number for that, and I put that on the screen there, but in general,

00:14:38.720 --> 00:14:40.960
 Engage Denton app is the way to go.

00:14:40.960 --> 00:14:44.960
 So with that, that is the presentation, but I'm happy to stand for any questions.

00:14:44.960 --> 00:14:46.440
 That's great, Sean, thanks.

00:14:46.440 --> 00:14:49.640
 Hey, when's that master plan going to be done, do you know?

00:14:49.640 --> 00:14:50.640
 That's a great idea.

00:14:50.640 --> 00:14:51.640
 I do not, it is in progress.

00:14:51.640 --> 00:14:52.640
 Yeah, that's awesome.

00:14:52.640 --> 00:14:53.640
 That's really, really great.

00:14:53.640 --> 00:14:56.020
 I'm happy to hear that.

00:14:56.020 --> 00:14:59.520
 Any questions for Sean?

00:14:59.520 --> 00:15:00.520
 Commissioner Pruitt.

00:15:00.520 --> 00:15:04.120
 Thank you, Chair.

00:15:04.120 --> 00:15:07.540
 Thank you for the great presentation and the information.

00:15:07.540 --> 00:15:12.920
 Just a couple of things I'm curious about, and if they're wrapped up in that master drainage

00:15:12.920 --> 00:15:16.960
 plan, then just tell me to read it when it comes out and that's fine.

00:15:16.960 --> 00:15:24.240
 You mentioned that the private development has to do a downstream assessment or has that

00:15:24.240 --> 00:15:32.840
 option in option one, I guess it was, to evaluate what the outflow of their property after the

00:15:32.840 --> 00:15:38.440
 development will be impacting downstream areas, assuming the future land use.

00:15:38.440 --> 00:15:42.880
 So I think that my question is there's two things that we do as a city, I think, and

00:15:42.880 --> 00:15:46.920
 I'm wondering whether we do that same downstream assessment during those processes.

00:15:46.920 --> 00:15:52.960
 One of those would be CIP projects that would increase runoff, like building a new road

00:15:52.960 --> 00:15:58.220
 or widening lanes or something like that, and then the second would be when we choose

00:15:58.220 --> 00:16:03.700
 to make a revision to the future land use map that would change the assumptions that

00:16:03.700 --> 00:16:06.160
 are used by private development at that time.

00:16:06.160 --> 00:16:08.000
 Does that make sense?

00:16:08.000 --> 00:16:09.000
 I believe so.

00:16:09.000 --> 00:16:14.200
 So as I said, my understanding is that we require the same standards for our projects

00:16:14.200 --> 00:16:20.120
 as we do for any project on the private side, so if a project required a downstream assessment,

00:16:20.120 --> 00:16:24.840
 then my expectation is we would be requiring that on the public side as well, if that's

00:16:24.840 --> 00:16:25.840
 helpful.

00:16:25.840 --> 00:16:30.560
 The expectation is that we're doing that same work and that same forward-looking progress,

00:16:30.560 --> 00:16:33.320
 if that's helpful.

00:16:33.320 --> 00:16:37.480
 And when we amend the future land use map, most of the times we don't have large changes

00:16:37.480 --> 00:16:42.600
 to it, but I think with the comp plan change, there were some areas that had significant

00:16:42.600 --> 00:16:44.160
 changes.

00:16:44.160 --> 00:16:52.100
 I'm just wondering whether we take a look during that process at how that impacts the,

00:16:52.100 --> 00:16:56.440
 if you would say, the unused capacity within the system.

00:16:56.440 --> 00:16:57.440
 Does that make sense?

00:16:57.440 --> 00:16:58.440
 Yeah.

00:16:58.440 --> 00:17:01.080
 So Brett Poujois, Capital Projects Engineering.

00:17:01.080 --> 00:17:04.760
 So in situations like that, when those projects come in, they are changing the land use, it's

00:17:04.760 --> 00:17:08.680
 their obligation to look at how their impact is, so when they do their modeling, they look

00:17:08.680 --> 00:17:13.000
 at what was done upstream of them, and then they do their analysis of what their land

00:17:13.000 --> 00:17:15.440
 use changes and how the impacts are downstream.

00:17:15.440 --> 00:17:19.320
 So it's also part of the downstream assessment, it's just because they're changing their land

00:17:19.320 --> 00:17:23.000
 use, that means that their flows on that land use will change and it'll affect the downstream

00:17:23.000 --> 00:17:24.360
 part of their assessment.

00:17:24.360 --> 00:17:25.360
 Completely understand that.

00:17:25.360 --> 00:17:29.080
 I must be misspeaking here.

00:17:29.080 --> 00:17:35.920
 So prior to the 2040 comprehensive plan update, we had a future land use map that is used

00:17:35.920 --> 00:17:39.960
 for the assumptions within that downstream assessment.

00:17:39.960 --> 00:17:49.280
 Then we passed the 2040 comprehensive plan that had some modifications to that map.

00:17:49.280 --> 00:17:54.200
 So presumably after that, now private development, when they come in, they have to use those

00:17:54.200 --> 00:17:58.120
 new assumptions on the future land use.

00:17:58.120 --> 00:18:04.380
 I guess my question is, maybe we haven't done it yet and it's part of the drainage study

00:18:04.380 --> 00:18:11.560
 is at what point do, when we're changing large future land use designations, independent

00:18:11.560 --> 00:18:18.360
 of a particular development application, do we look at whether, how much we're raising

00:18:18.360 --> 00:18:25.800
 the bar of the assumed future impact because of our land use, future land use designations?

00:18:25.800 --> 00:18:27.520
 Does that make sense?

00:18:27.520 --> 00:18:33.400
 Yeah, and so I think the answer is that when you're looking at it from a fully developed,

00:18:33.400 --> 00:18:40.440
 fully built out scenario, anything from farmland to a developed site is going to have a significant

00:18:40.440 --> 00:18:41.440
 increase in runoff.

00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:46.880
 And so if you're changing from a situation where you're looking at a housing development

00:18:46.880 --> 00:18:51.560
 versus a retail center, there's going to be some small changes, but you look at the full

00:18:51.560 --> 00:18:53.520
 built out situation of that.

00:18:53.520 --> 00:18:57.400
 And when you're looking at the analysis of that, you're assuming that that development

00:18:57.400 --> 00:19:00.040
 essentially hasn't mitigated their own flooding.

00:19:00.040 --> 00:19:05.680
 And so when they look at the analysis of it, most sites choose to do the onsite detention

00:19:05.680 --> 00:19:10.940
 because the cost of doing the downstream assessment is pretty complicated and pretty expensive.

00:19:10.940 --> 00:19:14.960
 And so they do the onsite detention, the requirement is that they cannot have any change in the

00:19:14.960 --> 00:19:17.040
 peak flow off of their site.

00:19:17.040 --> 00:19:21.200
 And so because of those unknowns and the cost associated with that, it's easier for most

00:19:21.200 --> 00:19:25.520
 developers and most projects to say, "Hey, let's just detain the water on site because

00:19:25.520 --> 00:19:28.360
 all we have to do is just make sure we don't change anything."

00:19:28.360 --> 00:19:32.220
 And so even if the land use changes, you're not changing the outflow off that site then.

00:19:32.220 --> 00:19:35.960
 - Just because the majority of the development applications we see do their own internal

00:19:35.960 --> 00:19:36.960
 detention.

00:19:36.960 --> 00:19:37.960
 - Yeah, correct.

00:19:37.960 --> 00:19:38.960
 - Okay.

00:19:38.960 --> 00:19:39.960
 Thank you very much.

00:19:39.960 --> 00:19:40.960
 That answers that.

00:19:40.960 --> 00:19:41.960
 - You're welcome.

00:19:41.960 --> 00:19:42.960
 - Thank you.

00:19:42.960 --> 00:19:43.960
 Commissioner Dade?

00:19:43.960 --> 00:19:44.960
 - Thank you, Chair.

00:19:44.960 --> 00:19:45.960
 Hey, Sean.

00:19:45.960 --> 00:19:51.840
 I think on one of your earlier slides, you had the little caption, "Can you build there?"

00:19:51.840 --> 00:19:57.320
 And I'm just curious because you say there is a way if it's in a floodplain, there is

00:19:57.320 --> 00:20:01.440
 permanent things you can do to actually take it out of the floodplain?

00:20:01.440 --> 00:20:05.040
 - In some cases, yes, and that's where you'd submit that conditional letter of map revision

00:20:05.040 --> 00:20:08.880
 that would have to be reviewed by our folks in engineering as well as FEMA to determine

00:20:08.880 --> 00:20:12.040
 whether that would be an acceptable change to the floodplain or not.

00:20:12.040 --> 00:20:13.040
 - Okay.

00:20:13.040 --> 00:20:19.000
 The reason I'm asking, I know a few years back, there was probably a dozen lots over

00:20:19.000 --> 00:20:25.540
 in Southeast Denton that the neighbors were told they would never be able to build on.

00:20:25.540 --> 00:20:27.760
 So they just gave up trying to buy it.

00:20:27.760 --> 00:20:34.120
 And then one individual came through and bought all 12 and now there's houses on them.

00:20:34.120 --> 00:20:40.440
 And they were trying to figure out, so what did he do that we couldn't do?

00:20:40.440 --> 00:20:44.960
 - So because this is kind of a broad-based topic, I'm not gonna be able to address a

00:20:44.960 --> 00:20:45.960
 specific situation.

00:20:45.960 --> 00:20:46.960
 - I understand.

00:20:46.960 --> 00:20:51.160
 - We're happy to come back to that later today, but I don't wanna touch on something that

00:20:51.160 --> 00:20:53.160
 I haven't had a chance to work at fully.

00:20:53.160 --> 00:20:54.160
 - Right, right, right.

00:20:54.160 --> 00:20:55.160
 Okay.

00:20:55.160 --> 00:20:59.440
 - So it's hard for us to be able to address those site-specific questions just because

00:20:59.440 --> 00:21:01.120
 we're not prepared for it.

00:21:01.120 --> 00:21:07.920
 But the only thing I would put out there though is that the subsequent owner may have done

00:21:07.920 --> 00:21:13.480
 some additional improvements that allowed for them to be able to do the improvement

00:21:13.480 --> 00:21:17.560
 that the previous landowners were either one, not aware that that was an available option

00:21:17.560 --> 00:21:24.480
 to them, or it's possible that some conditions may have changed in the area that helped facilitate

00:21:24.480 --> 00:21:26.040
 building on those properties.

00:21:26.040 --> 00:21:31.000
 But that's usually at a high level, that's potentially what you're going to see is that

00:21:31.000 --> 00:21:34.720
 there was some other major improvement done within the area that other properties have

00:21:34.720 --> 00:21:40.740
 managed to benefit from when in the past they had their unfortunate situation of being encumbered

00:21:40.740 --> 00:21:41.740
 by the floodplain.

00:21:41.740 --> 00:21:42.740
 - All right, thank you.

00:21:42.740 --> 00:21:47.800
 - Yeah, and I would think that he could, Commissioner McDade could get with you offline and then

00:21:47.800 --> 00:21:49.520
 talk more specific about that.

00:21:49.520 --> 00:21:52.440
 If you want like a past history or something like that, they would have that.

00:21:52.440 --> 00:21:53.440
 - Okay.

00:21:53.440 --> 00:21:54.440
 - Absolutely.

00:21:54.440 --> 00:21:55.440
 - Yes.

00:21:55.440 --> 00:21:56.440
 - Sean, excellent.

00:21:56.440 --> 00:21:57.440
 Thank you very much.

00:21:57.440 --> 00:21:58.440
 - Thank you.

00:21:58.440 --> 00:22:05.120
 - Okay, we will continue with clarification on our agenda.

00:22:05.120 --> 00:22:08.960
 So that will take us to the minutes for July 13th.

00:22:08.960 --> 00:22:14.640
 Any discussion on the minutes?

00:22:14.640 --> 00:22:15.640
 Okay.

00:22:15.640 --> 00:22:17.680
 Then let's move on to our consent agenda.

00:22:17.680 --> 00:22:23.240
 Is there anything to discuss or pull from the consent agenda this evening?

00:22:23.240 --> 00:22:25.400
 Okay.

00:22:25.400 --> 00:22:29.060
 Then we will move to our items for individual consideration.

00:22:29.060 --> 00:22:32.040
 For A, that is being withdrawn.

00:22:32.040 --> 00:22:34.960
 The applicant made a late call, so they are withdrawing that.

00:22:34.960 --> 00:22:46.680
 We will not be taking any action on for A. For B, PE 220001, I will invite Julie up

00:22:46.680 --> 00:22:47.680
 for this one.

00:22:47.680 --> 00:22:48.680
 - Good evening.

00:22:48.680 --> 00:22:49.680
 - Hi.

00:22:49.680 --> 00:22:50.680
 - Hi.

00:22:50.680 --> 00:22:55.840
 Let me open my presentation.

00:22:55.840 --> 00:22:58.800
 All right.

00:22:58.800 --> 00:22:59.800
 Good evening.

00:22:59.800 --> 00:23:04.280
 I'm Julie Wyatt, Senior Planner with the City of Denton, and I am presenting PE 220001,

00:23:04.280 --> 00:23:07.720
 Agave Ranch.

00:23:07.720 --> 00:23:10.960
 So the request before you is for an extension of a preliminary plat.

00:23:10.960 --> 00:23:13.760
 It was approved in August of 2020.

00:23:13.760 --> 00:23:18.120
 The Denton Development Code talks about the expiration of preliminary plots in that they

00:23:18.120 --> 00:23:24.400
 have 24 months from the date of approval to get a final plat approved or it expires.

00:23:24.400 --> 00:23:29.240
 But the DDC does allow for the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve an extension

00:23:29.240 --> 00:23:31.280
 for up to one year.

00:23:31.280 --> 00:23:34.480
 And the Planning and Zoning Commission can impose conditions to ensure that the land

00:23:34.480 --> 00:23:39.000
 will be developed in a timely fashion and that the public interest is served, including

00:23:39.000 --> 00:23:44.480
 compliance with one or more of the new adopted standards.

00:23:44.480 --> 00:23:48.160
 Before we get too far into this particular request, I want to talk a little bit about

00:23:48.160 --> 00:23:49.160
 the background.

00:23:49.160 --> 00:23:53.600
 I know some of you are here when this was originally approved, but it's been a while.

00:23:53.600 --> 00:23:58.380
 So the zoning for the property was approved in July of 2019.

00:23:58.380 --> 00:24:05.040
 The City Council approved a rezoning to NR2 and NR3 with overlay conditions, and those

00:24:05.040 --> 00:24:10.320
 were related to the use, open space, landscaping, screening.

00:24:10.320 --> 00:24:17.640
 The map shown on your screen shows that the area in yellow is the NR2 and the area in

00:24:17.640 --> 00:24:20.760
 a little bit darker shade is the NR3.

00:24:20.760 --> 00:24:25.200
 Those names may sound a little different, the NR, because that was a previous code.

00:24:25.200 --> 00:24:31.240
 It was actually approved under our 2002 Denton Development Code.

00:24:31.240 --> 00:24:37.760
 And within that code, we had different regulations regarding single-family residential subdivision

00:24:37.760 --> 00:24:38.760
 development.

00:24:38.760 --> 00:24:44.980
 So this project was reviewed and approved under that 2002 Denton Development Code.

00:24:44.980 --> 00:24:51.240
 And within that, any subdivision over two acres had a maximum density, not a minimum

00:24:51.240 --> 00:24:54.560
 lot size, which is a little different than what we see today.

00:24:54.560 --> 00:25:03.720
 So in this instance, NR2 allowed for two dwelling units per gross acre, and NR3 allowed 3.5

00:25:03.720 --> 00:25:05.320
 dwelling units per gross acre.

00:25:05.320 --> 00:25:11.280
 Now when I talk about that acreage, that includes all open space, roadways, drainage areas,

00:25:11.280 --> 00:25:14.720
 so that's that gross total acreage.

00:25:14.720 --> 00:25:21.140
 And that resulted in 252 single-family residential lots, and they ranged in size from about 5,800

00:25:21.140 --> 00:25:26.700
 square feet to about 15,000 square feet, depending on where they were.

00:25:26.700 --> 00:25:31.040
 This does comply with the maximum density, and this preliminary plot also complied with

00:25:31.040 --> 00:25:35.240
 the overlay conditions that were established with that zoning.

00:25:35.240 --> 00:25:40.880
 Then came the 2019 Denton Development Code, and that was implemented shortly thereafter.

00:25:40.880 --> 00:25:45.320
 And that's where this then transitioned to a planned development.

00:25:45.320 --> 00:25:49.960
 So now the zoning is PDR2 and PDR3.

00:25:49.960 --> 00:25:53.480
 Is that kind of clear?

00:25:53.480 --> 00:25:54.900
 It gets kind of confusing.

00:25:54.900 --> 00:25:59.160
 This is one of the weird between-the-codes projects.

00:25:59.160 --> 00:26:01.200
 Julie, can I interrupt?

00:26:01.200 --> 00:26:02.200
 Absolutely.

00:26:02.200 --> 00:26:06.200
 So it really just changed by name.

00:26:06.200 --> 00:26:07.200
 Nothing else changed.

00:26:07.200 --> 00:26:08.920
 So it didn't change to a planned development.

00:26:08.920 --> 00:26:13.120
 It just changed names to PDR2, right?

00:26:13.120 --> 00:26:14.120
 I mean…

00:26:14.120 --> 00:26:15.120
 Yes.

00:26:15.120 --> 00:26:17.000
 So we're not changing, like…

00:26:17.000 --> 00:26:18.000
 Correct.

00:26:18.000 --> 00:26:20.880
 That is a little misleading, so I just wanted to clarify that.

00:26:20.880 --> 00:26:21.880
 No, that's very good.

00:26:21.880 --> 00:26:22.880
 Yes.

00:26:22.880 --> 00:26:25.280
 We're just changing the label on the map, because we didn't have a way with the new

00:26:25.280 --> 00:26:29.280
 development code to talk about overlay conditions in zoning.

00:26:29.280 --> 00:26:30.440
 There was no way to do that.

00:26:30.440 --> 00:26:38.000
 So any zoning, any lot that had zoning overlay conditions became PD, blah, blah, blah.

00:26:38.000 --> 00:26:39.000
 You're exactly correct.

00:26:39.000 --> 00:26:40.000
 Okay.

00:26:40.000 --> 00:26:41.000
 Yes.

00:26:41.000 --> 00:26:42.000
 Thank you.

00:26:42.000 --> 00:26:43.000
 Yeah.

00:26:43.000 --> 00:26:44.000
 It was just a name change.

00:26:44.000 --> 00:26:45.000
 Correct.

00:26:45.000 --> 00:26:47.600
 So all of the remaining standards that the Council approved at that given time still

00:26:47.600 --> 00:26:49.040
 remain in effect.

00:26:49.040 --> 00:26:51.120
 So none of that has been modified.

00:26:51.120 --> 00:26:52.120
 Okay.

00:26:52.120 --> 00:26:53.120
 Commissioner Cole.

00:26:53.120 --> 00:26:54.600
 Thank you, Chair.

00:26:54.600 --> 00:26:55.600
 Sure.

00:26:55.600 --> 00:27:04.000
 So, Julie, the 252 number has never changed, right?

00:27:04.000 --> 00:27:05.000
 Correct.

00:27:05.000 --> 00:27:07.480
 I mean, that's what we settled on during the hard fought.

00:27:07.480 --> 00:27:14.080
 I mean, it was, I mean, in my opinion, some of the best work we've done as a board.

00:27:14.080 --> 00:27:19.440
 I mean, they originally wanted, what, 460-something lots?

00:27:19.440 --> 00:27:20.440
 I don't remember the exact number, but it was…

00:27:20.440 --> 00:27:23.180
 I mean, it was over 400.

00:27:23.180 --> 00:27:27.040
 And so we got them down to about half that density, right?

00:27:27.040 --> 00:27:30.240
 So I mean, really, it's still the same amount of homes.

00:27:30.240 --> 00:27:31.240
 Yes.

00:27:31.240 --> 00:27:34.480
 It's the same project that was contemplated at that time.

00:27:34.480 --> 00:27:36.520
 Yes, sir.

00:27:36.520 --> 00:27:37.520
 Okay.

00:27:37.520 --> 00:27:38.520
 Okay.

00:27:38.520 --> 00:27:39.520
 Thanks, Julie.

00:27:39.520 --> 00:27:40.520
 Yep.

00:27:40.520 --> 00:27:42.800
 So we don't see these plat extensions very often.

00:27:42.800 --> 00:27:45.500
 They're kind of, they're pretty rare.

00:27:45.500 --> 00:27:50.240
 So we thought it would be best to talk about the criteria for approval to just take a little

00:27:50.240 --> 00:27:51.240
 more time on this.

00:27:51.240 --> 00:27:57.260
 So the criteria for approval for a plat extension are in sub-chapter two of the Denton Development

00:27:57.260 --> 00:27:59.320
 Code, and there are four of them.

00:27:59.320 --> 00:28:04.160
 The first one, the reasons for the requested extension, the applicant's narrative was

00:28:04.160 --> 00:28:10.000
 included in your backup material, but according to that narrative, they have remained active.

00:28:10.000 --> 00:28:16.160
 They have continued progress toward completion of the project, but there was an interruption.

00:28:16.160 --> 00:28:22.200
 They did change engineering firms midstream, so it has created some delays for them.

00:28:22.200 --> 00:28:25.880
 The applicant will be here tonight to answer any follow-up questions you may have related

00:28:25.880 --> 00:28:27.000
 to that.

00:28:27.000 --> 00:28:31.480
 The second criterion is the ability of the applicant to comply with any conditions attached

00:28:31.480 --> 00:28:32.960
 to the original approval.

00:28:32.960 --> 00:28:38.520
 The preliminary plat was approved without conditions, so that one doesn't apply.

00:28:38.520 --> 00:28:42.320
 Criterion three, whether the extension is likely to result in the timely completion

00:28:42.320 --> 00:28:47.040
 of the project, since it was approved, they have made progress.

00:28:47.040 --> 00:28:48.680
 There are three projects.

00:28:48.680 --> 00:28:53.840
 There was an alternative development plan that was approved in November of 2020.

00:28:53.840 --> 00:28:55.480
 Some of you may remember it.

00:28:55.480 --> 00:29:01.040
 The 2002 Denton Development Code had a special process and application associated with it

00:29:01.040 --> 00:29:05.760
 called an alternative development plan, and that allowed the Planning and Zoning Commission

00:29:05.760 --> 00:29:14.440
 to approve deviations to the design standards within subchapter 13 of the 2002 DDC.

00:29:14.440 --> 00:29:22.240
 That was related to those individual houses or buildings on those lots.

00:29:22.240 --> 00:29:25.760
 There's a civil engineering plan for one phase of the development.

00:29:25.760 --> 00:29:27.480
 That would be 92 lots.

00:29:27.480 --> 00:29:32.720
 It was submitted in December of 2020, and it is still under review.

00:29:32.720 --> 00:29:37.180
 The comments were sent out on the most recent review in July of this year.

00:29:37.180 --> 00:29:42.720
 And then CEP 2240, that is related to a force main lift station.

00:29:42.720 --> 00:29:47.120
 It was submitted in June of this year, and it is currently under review.

00:29:47.120 --> 00:29:52.520
 According to the applicant, they're anticipating approval of their CEPs, and so they're hoping

00:29:52.520 --> 00:29:57.280
 to submit the final plat this month.

00:29:57.280 --> 00:30:01.880
 The fourth criterion is the extent to which newly adopted regulations should be applied

00:30:01.880 --> 00:30:03.280
 to the proposed development.

00:30:03.280 --> 00:30:08.520
 And we thought it would be best to talk about this as a table and kind of just break it

00:30:08.520 --> 00:30:13.680
 down by kind of elements.

00:30:13.680 --> 00:30:16.900
 So your first row is lot size.

00:30:16.900 --> 00:30:22.360
 If the plat extension is approved, then it could remain under its current configuration

00:30:22.360 --> 00:30:29.900
 with the 252 lots with those varied lot sizes that I mentioned at the top of the presentation.

00:30:29.900 --> 00:30:34.800
 So that design of the project would remain the same.

00:30:34.800 --> 00:30:39.680
 If the plat expired, then they may have to redesign the site.

00:30:39.680 --> 00:30:46.240
 And under current code, the DDC would require lot sizes in that R2 of 16,000 square feet

00:30:46.240 --> 00:30:49.080
 and in the R3, 10,000 square feet.

00:30:49.080 --> 00:30:52.840
 There is an asterisk on that column, and we're going to talk about that in the next slide,

00:30:52.840 --> 00:30:54.800
 so keep that in mind.

00:30:54.800 --> 00:31:00.080
 The engineering standards, I know you had a question regarding engineering standards.

00:31:00.080 --> 00:31:06.200
 The civil engineering plans for each type, so the civil engineering plans for that phase

00:31:06.200 --> 00:31:11.120
 one or the lift station are reviewed under the criteria regulations that are in place

00:31:11.120 --> 00:31:15.720
 at the time that they were submitted.

00:31:15.720 --> 00:31:23.560
 So for example, the lift station is being reviewed under the 2021 criteria for approval.

00:31:23.560 --> 00:31:28.520
 And then planning and design standards, the 2002 Denton Development Code regulations were

00:31:28.520 --> 00:31:34.560
 a little bit different related to tree preservation, street trees, and then they had that ADP.

00:31:34.560 --> 00:31:38.080
 Tree preservation was a little different than what we have today.

00:31:38.080 --> 00:31:41.720
 They were required to preserve a little bit less.

00:31:41.720 --> 00:31:45.460
 And then we also required fewer street trees to be planted.

00:31:45.460 --> 00:31:48.300
 At that time, we required one every 45 feet.

00:31:48.300 --> 00:31:54.920
 That ADP, as I mentioned, was related to design standards for the individual homes, but even

00:31:54.920 --> 00:31:59.320
 with the plat extended, they would still have to comply with all of the overlay conditions

00:31:59.320 --> 00:32:02.600
 associated with the zoning.

00:32:02.600 --> 00:32:09.120
 If the plat did expire, then the 2019 DDC regulations may apply, and that would include current tree

00:32:09.120 --> 00:32:15.480
 preservation, landscaping, those updated street tree requirements, lot tree requirements.

00:32:15.480 --> 00:32:19.080
 That ADP would still be in place, so they would still follow that, but they would still

00:32:19.080 --> 00:32:24.960
 have to comply with those PD conditions, those overlay conditions associated with the zoning.

00:32:24.960 --> 00:32:29.880
 So now I want to talk about that asterisk unless you all had any questions.

00:32:29.880 --> 00:32:31.240
 Okay.

00:32:31.240 --> 00:32:36.640
 So if the extension is not approved, I want to take a minute to talk about that.

00:32:36.640 --> 00:32:38.940
 The applicant does have another option.

00:32:38.940 --> 00:32:43.840
 They could seek relief through the vested rights regulations within the Denton Development

00:32:43.840 --> 00:32:47.160
 Code and with Texas Local Government Code.

00:32:47.160 --> 00:32:53.560
 So this isn't something we talk about very often, but Texas Local Government Code 245,

00:32:53.560 --> 00:32:59.680
 it establishes rules upon which property owners and developers can rely once they have submitted

00:32:59.680 --> 00:33:04.760
 the first permit in a series of permits on a project.

00:33:04.760 --> 00:33:09.960
 So it essentially kind of freezes some rules for them once they submit.

00:33:09.960 --> 00:33:14.600
 A preliminary plat, because it is a required application, is considered a permit.

00:33:14.600 --> 00:33:22.420
 So a preliminary plat could be a vesting act that would establish those rules.

00:33:22.420 --> 00:33:28.160
 So rules or regulations that could vest, that could potentially be frozen under Texas Local

00:33:28.160 --> 00:33:33.000
 Government Code, that could be landscaping or tree preservation, open space, property

00:33:33.000 --> 00:33:37.000
 classification, and in this instance, lot size and lot dimensions, because that's one

00:33:37.000 --> 00:33:41.120
 of the issues related to the plat extension.

00:33:41.120 --> 00:33:47.360
 The Denton Development Code also has procedures related to vesting within sub-chapter two.

00:33:47.360 --> 00:33:52.180
 And if the plat extension was not approved tonight, the process for this would be to

00:33:52.180 --> 00:33:54.760
 submit for a vested rights petition.

00:33:54.760 --> 00:33:59.260
 We would review that, and then they would potentially submit a preliminary plat consistent

00:33:59.260 --> 00:34:02.040
 with that vested rights determination.

00:34:02.040 --> 00:34:07.200
 So even if the plat did not, even if the plat extension was not approved tonight, they could

00:34:07.200 --> 00:34:13.560
 potentially get a determinant of a vested rights that would maintain the lot sizes that

00:34:13.560 --> 00:34:15.800
 you see in the plat today.

00:34:15.800 --> 00:34:18.160
 Did I make, did that, that make sense?

00:34:18.160 --> 00:34:19.720
 Did I say that right?

00:34:19.720 --> 00:34:21.760
 Yeah, and who makes that decision, Julie?

00:34:21.760 --> 00:34:22.760
 I'm sorry?

00:34:22.760 --> 00:34:23.760
 Who makes that decision?

00:34:23.760 --> 00:34:30.240
 That, under the, it's the city manager ultimately, so staff would analyze that request based

00:34:30.240 --> 00:34:35.120
 upon the state law, and then we would talk to our legal department about it, and then

00:34:35.120 --> 00:34:37.560
 ultimately it goes to the city manager's office.

00:34:37.560 --> 00:34:38.560
 Commissioner Villarreal?

00:34:38.560 --> 00:34:39.560
 I'm sorry.

00:34:39.560 --> 00:34:43.920
 It's appealable to the Board of Zoning Adjustment.

00:34:43.920 --> 00:34:44.920
 Okay.

00:34:44.920 --> 00:34:51.040
 So I'm just trying to clarify, so we are not as restricted when it comes to voting on this

00:34:51.040 --> 00:34:54.720
 plat extension as we are when it comes to other plats, correct?

00:34:54.720 --> 00:35:02.760
 Because I know we are strict restricted under state law when it comes to a traditional plat

00:35:02.760 --> 00:35:05.800
 approval denial or extension, but.

00:35:05.800 --> 00:35:08.800
 I'm looking to Tina.

00:35:08.800 --> 00:35:13.640
 And I was, I'm also looking at Hillary.

00:35:13.640 --> 00:35:14.920
 Back up here.

00:35:14.920 --> 00:35:17.040
 So you raise a good question.

00:35:17.040 --> 00:35:20.640
 Typically on plats, it is a very ministerial function.

00:35:20.640 --> 00:35:25.880
 In this case, you have four criteria of consideration that are provided for in the DDC, so you should

00:35:25.880 --> 00:35:31.360
 be evaluating the request based upon those four criteria.

00:35:31.360 --> 00:35:36.520
 Is there a level of subjectivity that might be able to be applied?

00:35:36.520 --> 00:35:38.480
 Possibly.

00:35:38.480 --> 00:35:43.480
 But again, it's, you know, we're evaluating the request based upon the four criteria,

00:35:43.480 --> 00:35:52.320
 and so it's, it is, it may have maybe a little more flexibility to it compared to when we

00:35:52.320 --> 00:35:57.080
 consider plats from a ministerial standpoint, and I'm going to look to my city attorney

00:35:57.080 --> 00:35:58.080
 to see if she concurs.

00:35:58.080 --> 00:36:03.760
 So I'll concur with what you're saying, and what I would further add is that it's important

00:36:03.760 --> 00:36:08.160
 to keep the nature of the request in mind, because what you're being asked to consider

00:36:08.160 --> 00:36:09.160
 is very narrow.

00:36:09.160 --> 00:36:14.720
 It doesn't relate to whether we like the project or agree with the decisions in 2019, it relates

00:36:14.720 --> 00:36:19.160
 to whether we should give them another year, and if so, if there are any conditions, we

00:36:19.160 --> 00:36:21.400
 would attach to that.

00:36:21.400 --> 00:36:26.040
 And I would concur, and that's why the conversation also earlier about the zoning, that the zoning

00:36:26.040 --> 00:36:27.560
 has not changed.

00:36:27.560 --> 00:36:31.880
 So we're not here to, again, discuss whether or not we like the outcome of what the zoning

00:36:31.880 --> 00:36:35.400
 was that was proved, and I know you all have received quite a bit of correspondence from

00:36:35.400 --> 00:36:38.720
 folks that have been interested in this project all along.

00:36:38.720 --> 00:36:41.040
 And so the zoning has not changed.

00:36:41.040 --> 00:36:46.640
 The name has changed, but the zoning hasn't, and the applicant has a preliminary plat that

00:36:46.640 --> 00:36:52.480
 was submitted that is consistent with the zoning regulations that are in effect.

00:36:52.480 --> 00:36:56.640
 And so to me, that's why we have a little bit more narrow focus on this as a result

00:36:56.640 --> 00:37:00.400
 of the four conditions that are established for evaluation, but also because of the nature

00:37:00.400 --> 00:37:01.520
 of this being a plat.

00:37:01.520 --> 00:37:06.160
 So I think we do need to be careful from that perspective, because we're evaluating now

00:37:06.160 --> 00:37:10.560
 whether it's a plat was submitted, it was reviewed and approved, it met all of the requirements

00:37:10.560 --> 00:37:12.720
 of city ordinances at that time.

00:37:12.720 --> 00:37:18.320
 Now we have a situation where time has transpired, and the applicant is seeking an extension,

00:37:18.320 --> 00:37:20.640
 and now we're having to evaluate it based upon these four conditions.

00:37:20.640 --> 00:37:21.640
 - Gotcha.

00:37:21.640 --> 00:37:26.240
 So even though our legal liability is lessened, there's still a pretty narrow decision we're

00:37:26.240 --> 00:37:27.240
 making today.

00:37:27.240 --> 00:37:32.160
 - There is a narrow decision in my opinion, and given what Hillary mentioned in evaluating

00:37:32.160 --> 00:37:37.680
 this request, because you have four items in which to evaluate it on, and that's what

00:37:37.680 --> 00:37:40.720
 Julie had laid out in her presentation.

00:37:40.720 --> 00:37:42.200
 - Thank you.

00:37:42.200 --> 00:37:47.400
 - So based upon that discussion, staff does recommend approval.

00:37:47.400 --> 00:37:52.160
 The applicant has continued to make progress towards completion since that preliminary

00:37:52.160 --> 00:37:53.280
 plat has been approved.

00:37:53.280 --> 00:37:57.800
 So we do recommend approval, and I'll be happy to answer any other questions.

00:37:57.800 --> 00:38:00.440
 - Question I have is, do we have to extend it for a year?

00:38:00.440 --> 00:38:04.000
 Do we have any kind of?

00:38:04.000 --> 00:38:08.080
 - I believe the code says up to one year.

00:38:08.080 --> 00:38:10.080
 - Okay.

00:38:10.080 --> 00:38:15.280
 And then secondly, you had mentioned placing conditions.

00:38:15.280 --> 00:38:19.120
 So could it be some kind of condition like the civil engineering plans have got to be

00:38:19.120 --> 00:38:20.120
 approved?

00:38:20.120 --> 00:38:24.800
 I mean, that's gonna be my question, and I know the applicant's gonna be here, right?

00:38:24.800 --> 00:38:25.800
 - Right.

00:38:25.800 --> 00:38:28.760
 - Yeah, I mean, 'cause it's like, what is going on?

00:38:28.760 --> 00:38:34.160
 What is taking so long that it is August of '22?

00:38:34.160 --> 00:38:39.320
 So would that be something that we could play, like you have to do that within a, I don't

00:38:39.320 --> 00:38:42.480
 know, four months, six months, something like that, by the end of the year?

00:38:42.480 --> 00:38:46.880
 - My interpretation would be that a time-based condition would be appropriate, because one

00:38:46.880 --> 00:38:52.040
 of the rationale for imposing conditions is to ensure timely development.

00:38:52.040 --> 00:38:58.560
 - Yeah, 'cause I mean, I guess what I'm trying to avoid here is like, you can't just have

00:38:58.560 --> 00:39:03.560
 another year locked up in this 2002 development code while you try to think of other things

00:39:03.560 --> 00:39:10.480
 that, you know, what I wanna do is make sure that things are moving along, you know, well,

00:39:10.480 --> 00:39:14.880
 and as they're supposed to, and that it's not some kind of like, here, let's give you

00:39:14.880 --> 00:39:22.720
 another year under this old code, very old code at this point in 2022, you know?

00:39:22.720 --> 00:39:26.320
 - And that's also, I mean, that's something that we talked about extensively amongst staff

00:39:26.320 --> 00:39:31.680
 is if the commission wanted to impose conditions, what types of conditions would be appropriate

00:39:31.680 --> 00:39:33.440
 as it relates to this.

00:39:33.440 --> 00:39:40.240
 So here are some suggestions that we came up with as it relates to this, if you're wanting

00:39:40.240 --> 00:39:44.940
 to try and consider keeping this moving along and nudging the applicant.

00:39:44.940 --> 00:39:50.360
 So one of them was that the two civil engineering plan submissions that we have in-house right

00:39:50.360 --> 00:39:53.080
 now would be approved within six months.

00:39:53.080 --> 00:39:57.360
 We feel that that's a reasonable timeframe to be able to finish up the engineering.

00:39:57.360 --> 00:40:01.440
 We know they had to change engineers midway through this project, but given where we are

00:40:01.440 --> 00:40:04.400
 in the review, we think that that could be reasonably accomplished.

00:40:04.400 --> 00:40:08.440
 Hopefully that would be accomplished much sooner than that, but we wanna also ensure

00:40:08.440 --> 00:40:10.720
 that we have quality engineering happening, right?

00:40:10.720 --> 00:40:14.280
 And sometimes the state statute doesn't lend towards that with the shot clock provisions.

00:40:14.280 --> 00:40:18.920
 So the second condition then we have would be that the final plot for the phase one would

00:40:18.920 --> 00:40:22.260
 be approved within one year of the preliminary plot extension.

00:40:22.260 --> 00:40:26.960
 That is already in the debt and development code, but we feel like in this case, it's

00:40:26.960 --> 00:40:31.080
 always good to go back and point out the obvious of what's in the code so that the applicant

00:40:31.080 --> 00:40:32.080
 knows very much.

00:40:32.080 --> 00:40:36.120
 We feel that this is the belt and suspenders condition, if you will.

00:40:36.120 --> 00:40:42.480
 The third one then is, I think as Julia explained it earlier, is the Velcro, and that is, if

00:40:42.480 --> 00:40:46.920
 the applicant fails to perform the two conditions above, then that preliminary plot would immediately

00:40:46.920 --> 00:40:47.920
 expire.

00:40:47.920 --> 00:40:53.200
 So it puts the, really two and three are putting the applicant on notice, 'cause the key thing

00:40:53.200 --> 00:40:57.560
 is obviously gonna be getting number one accomplished, and then it's already in the DDC that you'd

00:40:57.560 --> 00:41:03.880
 have to get a final plot approved for the initial phase within a year's time of that

00:41:03.880 --> 00:41:05.400
 preliminary plot extension.

00:41:05.400 --> 00:41:11.200
 So if the commission is interested in establishing conditions, we would think that these would

00:41:11.200 --> 00:41:15.600
 be appropriate conditions to include, and if you feel that the timeframes need to be

00:41:15.600 --> 00:41:19.320
 different, then you're welcome to modify those as well.

00:41:19.320 --> 00:41:23.600
 However, I would recommend that as it relates to the final plot, that you not extend it

00:41:23.600 --> 00:41:28.960
 beyond one year, because then you're trying to modify existing DDC regulations that you

00:41:28.960 --> 00:41:30.920
 don't have the ability to in this case.

00:41:30.920 --> 00:41:31.920
 - Right.

00:41:31.920 --> 00:41:32.920
 Yep.

00:41:32.920 --> 00:41:33.920
 Okay.

00:41:33.920 --> 00:41:34.920
 Questions?

00:41:34.920 --> 00:41:35.920
 Commissioner Pruitt?

00:41:35.920 --> 00:41:37.580
 - Thank you, Chair.

00:41:37.580 --> 00:41:38.800
 Just a couple things.

00:41:38.800 --> 00:41:43.400
 One, you mentioned in your presentation that, and I'm gonna get the words wrong, but I'm

00:41:43.400 --> 00:41:52.720
 gonna try, the preliminary plat was required, and therefore it enacted the potential vested

00:41:52.720 --> 00:41:55.600
 rights statute.

00:41:55.600 --> 00:42:02.440
 Is my understanding correct that if that preliminary plat had been filed under the 2019 DDC, it

00:42:02.440 --> 00:42:06.600
 would not have been required, and therefore it would not trigger that, or am I misinterpreting

00:42:06.600 --> 00:42:07.600
 that?

00:42:07.600 --> 00:42:13.160
 - No, it's still required under the 2019 DDC for properties within the city of Denton.

00:42:13.160 --> 00:42:19.360
 So it would still be potentially a vesting act if it's a requirement.

00:42:19.360 --> 00:42:20.360
 - Thank you.

00:42:20.360 --> 00:42:21.400
 I just gotta keep up.

00:42:21.400 --> 00:42:25.360
 I thought there were certain projects where preliminary plat was no longer required, I

00:42:25.360 --> 00:42:26.360
 guess not in larger subdivisions.

00:42:26.360 --> 00:42:27.360
 - You're exactly right.

00:42:27.360 --> 00:42:32.040
 In the ETJ, we no longer require or permit preliminary plat.

00:42:32.040 --> 00:42:33.040
 - Thank you.

00:42:33.040 --> 00:42:38.720
 And then number two, I guess it gets back to Tina's comments about how you drew up those

00:42:38.720 --> 00:42:41.320
 three things.

00:42:41.320 --> 00:42:51.840
 I'd like to understand better how staff arrived at the proposal of the six-month and one-year

00:42:51.840 --> 00:43:00.720
 timelines, because I don't have a real good feel for what is the distribution of the time

00:43:00.720 --> 00:43:05.560
 that it should take for a subdivision of this size, so I have a hard time knowing what is

00:43:05.560 --> 00:43:06.560
 appropriate, right?

00:43:06.560 --> 00:43:11.080
 I mean, just to be honest, when my five-year-old does something wrong and I tell him, "Don't

00:43:11.080 --> 00:43:16.720
 do that," and then he comes back five minutes later and he does it again, the expectation

00:43:16.720 --> 00:43:19.360
 and punishment is harder that second time, right?

00:43:19.360 --> 00:43:26.160
 And so I tried to scale back my permissiveness, right, so that I catch him early as opposed

00:43:26.160 --> 00:43:32.960
 to giving him typical or longer than that expectations, if that makes sense.

00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:37.400
 - So again, as I mentioned earlier, we believe that as it relates to the civil engineering

00:43:37.400 --> 00:43:41.720
 plans because there are two sets of plans that they're having to get finalized, that

00:43:41.720 --> 00:43:44.520
 we believe that that can be accomplished within six months.

00:43:44.520 --> 00:43:48.400
 And you're more than welcome to ask the applicant this evening when they're here if this is

00:43:48.400 --> 00:43:51.120
 a path that you're interested in going down with respect to these conditions as to whether

00:43:51.120 --> 00:43:55.360
 or not they believe that they can get that achieved.

00:43:55.360 --> 00:43:59.540
 At the end of the day, we want to ensure that we have quality engineering design that meets

00:43:59.540 --> 00:44:01.960
 all of our development standards.

00:44:01.960 --> 00:44:05.280
 They are, I was looking at the summary sheet that the applicant provided, I believe they're

00:44:05.280 --> 00:44:08.000
 on their seventh submittal on their civil engineering plans.

00:44:08.000 --> 00:44:10.240
 I would hope we'd be able to get them completed.

00:44:10.240 --> 00:44:13.280
 I do understand that we had an engineering change midway through.

00:44:13.280 --> 00:44:17.800
 So presumably with the new engineer, we're maybe on the third or fourth review with them.

00:44:17.800 --> 00:44:22.240
 That's not uncommon at times associated with civil engineering plans, especially on a single

00:44:22.240 --> 00:44:24.220
 family residential subdivision.

00:44:24.220 --> 00:44:29.040
 And so, but again, we believe that the timeframe within six months is appropriate.

00:44:29.040 --> 00:44:33.320
 If the commission wants to shorten that timeframe, then I would strongly encourage you to ask

00:44:33.320 --> 00:44:39.380
 the applicant if the shortened timeframe that you have in mind is reasonably achievable.

00:44:39.380 --> 00:44:44.800
 But we believe six months would be, and then that gives them also then basically a following

00:44:44.800 --> 00:44:52.000
 six months to get that final plat submitted into us for review and approval because that

00:44:52.000 --> 00:44:55.620
 final plat for the first phase of development would have to be approved.

00:44:55.620 --> 00:45:00.440
 So we're factoring in them getting their plat submitted into us, being able to get that

00:45:00.440 --> 00:45:05.880
 under review, getting all the corrections that are made associated with it.

00:45:05.880 --> 00:45:09.520
 Obviously, we're having to perform in accordance with the shot clock provisions, but they would

00:45:09.520 --> 00:45:12.280
 need to then get that approved by the commission.

00:45:12.280 --> 00:45:16.780
 Then we would take that and get that filed of record at the county.

00:45:16.780 --> 00:45:20.680
 So we feel like it's six months is reasonable to finish civil engineering plans on both

00:45:20.680 --> 00:45:24.040
 of those two projects again, because we're doing civil engineering plans for the subdivision

00:45:24.040 --> 00:45:26.920
 plus civil engineering plans on the lift station.

00:45:26.920 --> 00:45:30.040
 And then once they get that accomplished, then they should be able to get a final plat

00:45:30.040 --> 00:45:39.160
 submitted into us and have that reviewed and approved within a six month timeframe.

00:45:39.160 --> 00:45:40.160
 Anything else?

00:45:40.160 --> 00:45:41.160
 Commissioner Cole?

00:45:41.160 --> 00:45:49.960
 Just real quick, Tina, in your opinion, all this engineering, if we had in-house engineers

00:45:49.960 --> 00:45:59.280
 versus consult, you know, shipping it out, would that make any difference in time because

00:45:59.280 --> 00:46:04.400
 these firms, these engineering firms, were, you know, shipping these out to, they got

00:46:04.400 --> 00:46:06.160
 other clients?

00:46:06.160 --> 00:46:12.360
 So if we had in-house engineering, would that make a difference in time and efficiency?

00:46:12.360 --> 00:46:13.360
 In my opinion, no.

00:46:13.360 --> 00:46:14.360
 No.

00:46:14.360 --> 00:46:18.480
 And I want to be careful that we're not deviating too far from the posting related to this.

00:46:18.480 --> 00:46:22.440
 But the short answer is, in my opinion, no.

00:46:22.440 --> 00:46:25.960
 Okay, thanks, Julie.

00:46:25.960 --> 00:46:33.200
 Sorry, just one very small thing so that I read your table correctly, that table of comparisons.

00:46:33.200 --> 00:46:42.760
 You mentioned that, again, if they had to resubmit a preliminary plat, my understanding

00:46:42.760 --> 00:46:47.520
 is they would still be bound to the overlay conditions which were then translated to the

00:46:47.520 --> 00:46:48.520
 PD.

00:46:48.520 --> 00:46:49.520
 Correct.

00:46:49.520 --> 00:46:50.520
 Is that correct?

00:46:50.520 --> 00:46:51.520
 Yes.

00:46:51.520 --> 00:46:52.520
 Okay, thank you.

00:46:52.520 --> 00:46:56.040
 Good on this one, okay.

00:46:56.040 --> 00:46:57.040
 Thank you, Julie.

00:46:57.040 --> 00:46:58.040
 All right.

00:46:58.040 --> 00:47:02.860
 Given time and what we still have, what I'm going to do with the rest of these, which

00:47:02.860 --> 00:47:08.520
 all seem to be plats, I'm going to ask the commission if they need any clarification,

00:47:08.520 --> 00:47:09.520
 okay?

00:47:09.520 --> 00:47:13.140
 Because we're going to run out of time when we discuss our public hearing.

00:47:13.140 --> 00:47:16.280
 So we'll go to 4C.

00:47:16.280 --> 00:47:18.520
 That was a very late email.

00:47:18.520 --> 00:47:25.000
 I don't know if you all saw it, but that has changed from an extension request to approval.

00:47:25.000 --> 00:47:26.000
 Correct, Julie?

00:47:26.000 --> 00:47:27.000
 Correct.

00:47:27.000 --> 00:47:28.000
 Yeah.

00:47:28.000 --> 00:47:30.640
 Are we good questions?

00:47:30.640 --> 00:47:33.520
 That was emailed like right before our meeting started.

00:47:33.520 --> 00:47:34.520
 Yeah.

00:47:34.520 --> 00:47:38.440
 Okay, then 4D is an extension request.

00:47:38.440 --> 00:47:41.960
 Any questions needing clarified there?

00:47:41.960 --> 00:47:45.240
 Okay, 4E is also an extension request.

00:47:45.240 --> 00:47:48.600
 The date certain on those is 8/24.

00:47:48.600 --> 00:47:53.820
 Okay, that is the same with 4F.

00:47:53.820 --> 00:48:00.960
 And anybody on staff, if I have this wrong, please run up to the podium for me.

00:48:00.960 --> 00:48:07.800
 For G, Commissioner Cole, you'll be recused on that.

00:48:07.800 --> 00:48:10.320
 That is recommended for approval.

00:48:10.320 --> 00:48:16.520
 4H is an extension request to 8/24.

00:48:16.520 --> 00:48:27.320
 4I, I have denial, is recommended for denial, it's already had an extension, I believe.

00:48:27.320 --> 00:48:34.520
 No, for that one we did receive a request.

00:48:34.520 --> 00:48:35.520
 Sorry.

00:48:35.520 --> 00:48:36.520
 Sorry, Mia.

00:48:36.520 --> 00:48:37.520
 Yes, for that one we did receive a request.

00:48:37.520 --> 00:48:38.520
 4I.

00:48:38.520 --> 00:48:39.520
 An extension request, yes.

00:48:39.520 --> 00:48:40.520
 An extension request to 8/24.

00:48:40.520 --> 00:48:43.680
 Okay, thank you for clarifying that.

00:48:43.680 --> 00:48:52.280
 All right, 4J is an extension request to 8/24.

00:48:52.280 --> 00:48:59.200
 Commissioner Cole, you are recused on 4K, correct?

00:48:59.200 --> 00:49:04.120
 Do we have questions on that from anybody else?

00:49:04.120 --> 00:49:06.040
 Okay.

00:49:06.040 --> 00:49:13.200
 Okay, before then we move to discussing through our public hearings tonight, do you all want

00:49:13.200 --> 00:49:16.800
 a break for food and come back?

00:49:16.800 --> 00:49:21.120
 Being that it's 549, I'm going to take a vote, it's a yes, it's a yes.

00:49:21.120 --> 00:49:26.200
 Okay, so I need you to do it quickly because we do have several items to discuss.

00:49:26.200 --> 00:49:31.480
 So I will adjourn us at 550, grab your food when we're back here, I will call us back

00:49:31.480 --> 00:49:32.480
 to order.

00:49:32.480 --> 00:49:33.480
 Okay, thanks.

00:49:33.480 --> 00:49:38.080
 Commissioner Cole.

00:49:38.080 --> 00:49:39.080
 Thank you for your patience.

00:49:39.080 --> 00:49:44.720
 I will call our work session back to order at 559 p.m., and we will begin discussion

00:49:44.720 --> 00:49:54.880
 on our clarification of agenda items, calling up public hearings, 5A is AESA22-000.

00:49:54.880 --> 00:49:58.920
 I'll invite Christy up for this discussion.

00:49:58.920 --> 00:50:04.560
 Commissioner Cole is recusing on this item, and for the commissioners who will be voting

00:50:04.560 --> 00:50:07.960
 on those items, Cole is recused.

00:50:07.960 --> 00:50:13.160
 In order for the item to pass, it would have to pass with four affirmative votes.

00:50:13.160 --> 00:50:17.480
 So if we do have a 3-1, even though that's a majority, that would still be a denial just

00:50:17.480 --> 00:50:20.380
 because we need four.

00:50:20.380 --> 00:50:25.960
 So just putting that there, and Christy, I'll give it to you.

00:50:25.960 --> 00:50:26.960
 Okay, thank you.

00:50:26.960 --> 00:50:27.960
 Thank you.

00:50:27.960 --> 00:50:32.720
 And then make it like the short presentation, only because we've got four others.

00:50:32.720 --> 00:50:33.720
 Absolutely.

00:50:33.720 --> 00:50:34.720
 Thank you.

00:50:34.720 --> 00:50:35.720
 Two slides for you.

00:50:35.720 --> 00:50:36.720
 Perfect.

00:50:36.720 --> 00:50:37.720
 Thank you very much.

00:50:37.720 --> 00:50:43.480
 Christy Upton, Environmental Compliance Coordinator, and I will be presenting Alternative ESA Plan

00:50:43.480 --> 00:50:50.480
 22-2, Ditten Exeter, West Park Edition Number 3.

00:50:50.480 --> 00:50:57.680
 And the purpose of this request is for the deviation from Section 7.4 of the Ditten Development

00:50:57.680 --> 00:51:02.280
 Code, which requires the protection of certain environmentally sensitive areas.

00:51:02.280 --> 00:51:08.040
 And I'll get into more detail about those particular protection requirements during the

00:51:08.040 --> 00:51:12.920
 public hearing, but for right now, I wanted to let you know that the request is for the

00:51:12.920 --> 00:51:19.760
 construction of these two stormwater outfalls, and I wanted to point out that the placement

00:51:19.760 --> 00:51:29.160
 of the utility in the undeveloped floodplain ESA is permitted, is the riparian buffer that's

00:51:29.160 --> 00:51:34.520
 within that undeveloped floodplain that is not permitted any land disturbances.

00:51:34.520 --> 00:51:39.300
 So this request is strictly for those land disturbances.

00:51:39.300 --> 00:51:45.240
 The applicant is proposing to revegetate the impacted areas and extending that impacts

00:51:45.240 --> 00:51:51.280
 beyond that to all those areas shown in green, and that the staff is recommending approval

00:51:51.280 --> 00:51:56.520
 with conditions that were in your backup material, and we'll go over that at the public hearing.

00:51:56.520 --> 00:51:59.280
 And with that, I'll take any questions right now.

00:51:59.280 --> 00:52:02.480
 Great, Christy, do we have questions on this?

00:52:02.480 --> 00:52:08.280
 It was a nice detailed backup for us, so appreciate that.

00:52:08.280 --> 00:52:09.280
 Okay.

00:52:09.280 --> 00:52:12.200
 Thank you very much.

00:52:12.200 --> 00:52:20.760
 So then we would go to 5B is Z220008, Julie, sorry to interrupt your dinner.

00:52:20.760 --> 00:52:22.760
 That is all right.

00:52:22.760 --> 00:52:23.760
 Okay.

00:52:23.760 --> 00:52:27.560
 I will be much shorter on this one for the work session.

00:52:27.560 --> 00:52:30.320
 Hi, Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton.

00:52:30.320 --> 00:52:38.600
 This is Z22-0008, Asbury UMC rezoning.

00:52:38.600 --> 00:52:40.680
 I just want to summarize the project.

00:52:40.680 --> 00:52:45.440
 The request is to rezone the subject property from R2 district to SC district.

00:52:45.440 --> 00:52:47.520
 It's about 13 acres.

00:52:47.520 --> 00:52:52.120
 The property is located at the intersection of Locust and Hercules outlined in yellow

00:52:52.120 --> 00:52:54.520
 on the screen.

00:52:54.520 --> 00:52:59.000
 The purpose of the rezoning is to, the applicant has indicated they would like to install a

00:52:59.000 --> 00:53:04.040
 telecommunications facility, which is necessitating that rezoning.

00:53:04.040 --> 00:53:10.600
 The subject property is, or the Denton 2040 plan indicates the area is community mixed

00:53:10.600 --> 00:53:16.920
 use, and the proposed SC zoning is consistent with the future land use map, and it complies

00:53:16.920 --> 00:53:21.360
 with the criteria for approval, so staff is recommending approval of the request.

00:53:21.360 --> 00:53:23.480
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

00:53:23.480 --> 00:53:27.960
 The applicant is here, and we'll be making a presentation, and we'll be able to answer

00:53:27.960 --> 00:53:28.960
 your questions tonight.

00:53:28.960 --> 00:53:31.880
 Julie, I do have one question for you.

00:53:31.880 --> 00:53:42.360
 Did staff consider a lesser zoning, or, my concern is this is, I know it looks pretty

00:53:42.360 --> 00:53:47.240
 on the map, like when we do that, and we make that whole like rectangular, you know, SC,

00:53:47.240 --> 00:53:51.200
 but to me this little corner doesn't speak SC to me.

00:53:51.200 --> 00:53:56.520
 You know, SC is supposed to be this high traffic corridor.

00:53:56.520 --> 00:53:57.520
 It's not.

00:53:57.520 --> 00:54:03.640
 I mean, it is surrounded on three sides by pretty dense residential, so I'm confused

00:54:03.640 --> 00:54:08.280
 as to maybe why maybe an MN, which they could still do the poll.

00:54:08.280 --> 00:54:09.280
 Yes.

00:54:09.280 --> 00:54:12.000
 So, did we have that discussion, or not?

00:54:12.000 --> 00:54:13.680
 We looked at it internally.

00:54:13.680 --> 00:54:19.080
 SC was consistent with the future land use map, and when we analyzed the project, we

00:54:19.080 --> 00:54:23.400
 really looked at the permitted uses in SC and kind of the need for commercial development

00:54:23.400 --> 00:54:26.240
 in the area, and we felt like it was consistent with it.

00:54:26.240 --> 00:54:32.880
 MN is kind of a different district, you know, and we looked at them, and I have a comparison

00:54:32.880 --> 00:54:37.680
 slide of those two districts that if you want to, actually if you want to talk about it,

00:54:37.680 --> 00:54:39.880
 we could do that now.

00:54:39.880 --> 00:54:45.240
 Let me get there.

00:54:45.240 --> 00:54:51.040
 Unhide, okay.

00:54:51.040 --> 00:54:55.520
 So we looked at it, we looked at the development standards, the permitted uses, and how that

00:54:55.520 --> 00:55:03.040
 would impact the existing development on the site, and given the SC and the MN, so SC does

00:55:03.040 --> 00:55:10.820
 have a larger front setback, so it would pull any development, any buildings away from Hercules,

00:55:10.820 --> 00:55:15.600
 as opposed to MN, which has a closer front setback of 10 feet.

00:55:15.600 --> 00:55:20.840
 MN also has design standards where front parking is not permitted, so buildings would be built

00:55:20.840 --> 00:55:25.760
 right up into, would be required to be built right up against the street of Hercules for

00:55:25.760 --> 00:55:30.200
 that property adjacent to Hercules, so we felt like those development standards associated

00:55:30.200 --> 00:55:37.320
 with MN may not be necessarily appropriate in terms of impacts to the adjacent property.

00:55:37.320 --> 00:55:41.000
 We also looked at the permitted uses.

00:55:41.000 --> 00:55:45.880
 Multifamily is permitted by right in MN, it requires a specific use permit in SC.

00:55:45.880 --> 00:55:52.300
 SC does have some additional automotive uses that do require additional approvals in MN,

00:55:52.300 --> 00:55:57.120
 so it's kind of trading one for the other, but both of them allow for a lot of commercial

00:55:57.120 --> 00:56:02.640
 uses intended for that neighborhood serving, so we felt like while MN could have potentially

00:56:02.640 --> 00:56:06.400
 been appropriate in the area, we also felt like SC was appropriate.

00:56:06.400 --> 00:56:11.000
 Additionally, one other thing to think about, there is an existing religious facility on

00:56:11.000 --> 00:56:16.520
 the property, and it is designed in a more suburban development pattern with the parking

00:56:16.520 --> 00:56:19.080
 up front, the building setback.

00:56:19.080 --> 00:56:24.760
 MN, if it were approved on the property, would potentially make that one non-conforming in

00:56:24.760 --> 00:56:30.040
 terms of site design and site features, and so just to keep it consistent with what the

00:56:30.040 --> 00:56:36.480
 existing property was developed as, and that existing zoning to the north of the property,

00:56:36.480 --> 00:56:43.160
 we felt like SC was a better fit.

00:56:43.160 --> 00:56:45.960
 We don't know how it would develop in the future, you're correct.

00:56:45.960 --> 00:56:49.800
 My problem is the way we describe SC, which I wrote down here, which is intended to provide

00:56:49.800 --> 00:56:55.040
 moderate to high intensity commercial office and retail uses along high traffic corridors.

00:56:55.040 --> 00:56:57.120
 That's the definition of SC.

00:56:57.120 --> 00:57:03.760
 To me, when you've got it there, plugged into basically in front of three residential neighborhoods,

00:57:03.760 --> 00:57:09.480
 it's a little bit, I guess it's two, because that's one right there, but I'm not sure if

00:57:09.480 --> 00:57:12.360
 it's the description, so that's why I have had my question.

00:57:12.360 --> 00:57:13.360
 Okay.

00:57:13.360 --> 00:57:14.360
 Commissioner, approve it.

00:57:14.360 --> 00:57:18.200
 Yeah, I don't want to drag this on, I know we're limited on time, but just real quickly,

00:57:18.200 --> 00:57:25.040
 did staff inquire as to whether a replatting into two separate parcels and only rezoning

00:57:25.040 --> 00:57:29.600
 one of those parcels was a possibility, and if so, what was the reasoning for not doing

00:57:29.600 --> 00:57:30.600
 that?

00:57:30.600 --> 00:57:36.200
 And it's funny you say that, because their original request was just for the undeveloped

00:57:36.200 --> 00:57:40.720
 area surrounding the religious facility use on site.

00:57:40.720 --> 00:57:49.040
 We do have a determination that a driveway is part of the use, and therefore you cannot

00:57:49.040 --> 00:57:57.760
 take access through a property where the zoning on that property does not permit the use.

00:57:57.760 --> 00:58:05.060
 So given the R2 that is existing for that religious facility, the intent is for the

00:58:05.060 --> 00:58:10.560
 telecommunications tower to take access through the existing driveway, so as not to add any

00:58:10.560 --> 00:58:15.600
 additional driveways on Hercules to minimize the impacts.

00:58:15.600 --> 00:58:22.080
 I lost my train of thought.

00:58:22.080 --> 00:58:28.200
 They actually ended up adding in that religious facility tract to the request to allow for

00:58:28.200 --> 00:58:34.520
 that driveway to go through that church property to get to that future telecommunications use.

00:58:34.520 --> 00:58:40.480
 Sorry, I know that was convoluted, but hopefully I answered your question.

00:58:40.480 --> 00:58:41.480
 Okay.

00:58:41.480 --> 00:58:44.120
 Everybody good?

00:58:44.120 --> 00:58:45.120
 Thank you, Julie.

00:58:45.120 --> 00:58:46.120
 Thank you.

00:58:46.120 --> 00:58:52.960
 Okay, so that will bring us to 5CZ220004, which has been postponed, so we will not be

00:58:52.960 --> 00:58:55.040
 taking action on that tonight.

00:58:55.040 --> 00:59:00.720
 5DZ210019, Mia, this is your item.

00:59:00.720 --> 00:59:01.720
 How are you?

00:59:01.720 --> 00:59:02.720
 I am good.

00:59:02.720 --> 00:59:03.720
 Good.

00:59:03.720 --> 00:59:04.720
 How are you all?

00:59:04.720 --> 00:59:05.720
 Good.

00:59:05.720 --> 00:59:06.720
 Eating?

00:59:06.720 --> 00:59:07.720
 Okay.

00:59:07.720 --> 00:59:33.880
 Okay, Mia Hines, Associate Planner, just a brief summary, this is a rezoning request

00:59:33.880 --> 00:59:40.480
 for about 3.8 acres in the Razor Ranch overlay district, from the Razor Ranch overlay district

00:59:40.480 --> 00:59:45.220
 to the straight mixed use neighborhood MN zoning district.

00:59:45.220 --> 00:59:51.480
 The request would also ultimately or effectively amend the Razor Ranch overlay zoning exhibit

00:59:51.480 --> 00:59:57.160
 and concept exhibit as those two parcels would be removed from the overlay district.

00:59:57.160 --> 01:00:01.240
 It does comply with the future land use designation of regional mixed use.

01:00:01.240 --> 01:00:08.560
 We do have a mixed use regional district, but given the proximity to existing residential

01:00:08.560 --> 01:00:14.920
 on the other side of Bonnie Bray, the MN district would serve as sort of a more natural and

01:00:14.920 --> 01:00:20.640
 a cohesive land use transition from the higher density and commercial uses permitted within

01:00:20.640 --> 01:00:26.940
 the RRO district to the low density residential across the street from Bonnie Bray.

01:00:26.940 --> 01:00:31.500
 So with that, staff is recommending approval of this request, and of course your options

01:00:31.500 --> 01:00:37.460
 are to recommend approval, denial, or postpone the request to a specific date.

01:00:37.460 --> 01:00:43.360
 And this is basically because what they want to develop there is not within the overlay,

01:00:43.360 --> 01:00:44.360
 right?

01:00:44.360 --> 01:00:45.360
 Correct, yeah.

01:00:45.360 --> 01:00:47.840
 They need to pull it out to be able to develop what they would like.

01:00:47.840 --> 01:00:48.840
 Yes, ma'am.

01:00:48.840 --> 01:00:55.600
 The applicant intended to, once these discussions started, they intended to do a medical facility

01:00:55.600 --> 01:00:59.780
 with a drive-through or a pharmacy use with a drive-through facility, and the Razor Ranch

01:00:59.780 --> 01:01:03.560
 overlay does not permit drive-through facilities on this particular sub-area.

01:01:03.560 --> 01:01:05.040
 I see.

01:01:05.040 --> 01:01:06.040
 Okay.

01:01:06.040 --> 01:01:07.040
 Okay.

01:01:07.040 --> 01:01:10.320
 Any questions on this?

01:01:10.320 --> 01:01:11.320
 Thank you very much.

01:01:11.320 --> 01:01:12.320
 Excuse me.

01:01:12.320 --> 01:01:15.080
 Also, the applicant will be here if you guys have any questions for them.

01:01:15.080 --> 01:01:16.080
 Great.

01:01:16.080 --> 01:01:17.080
 Okay.

01:01:17.080 --> 01:01:23.080
 Then that will take us to, let's see, 5EZ-22-0009.

01:01:23.080 --> 01:01:25.080
 Whose item is this?

01:01:25.080 --> 01:01:26.080
 Angie's.

01:01:26.080 --> 01:01:27.400
 That's right.

01:01:27.400 --> 01:01:29.360
 Hi, Angie.

01:01:29.360 --> 01:01:32.000
 Hi, everyone.

01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:34.800
 Good evening.

01:01:34.800 --> 01:01:39.240
 Just a second.

01:01:39.240 --> 01:01:40.240
 Okay.

01:01:40.240 --> 01:01:44.840
 Angie Mingler, Senior Planner with the City of Denton.

01:01:44.840 --> 01:01:47.960
 This is Project Z-22-009.

01:01:47.960 --> 01:01:51.600
 It is a rezoning case for Project Cowboy.

01:01:51.600 --> 01:01:56.200
 Brief summary of this case, the purpose of this request is to rezone approximately 10

01:01:56.200 --> 01:02:02.280
 acres of land situated roughly 400 feet east of Northwestern Boulevard and 1,400 feet north

01:02:02.280 --> 01:02:07.160
 of Jim Crystal Road from Residential 2 to Heavy Industrial.

01:02:07.160 --> 01:02:12.600
 The purpose of the zoning request is to align this 10-acre tract of land with existing Heavy

01:02:12.600 --> 01:02:17.520
 Industrial to the southeast and west of the site that's owned by the same owner for future

01:02:17.520 --> 01:02:22.620
 development at the northeast intersection of Western Boulevard and Jim Crystal Road.

01:02:22.620 --> 01:02:26.600
 The Denton Comprehensive Plan does call for this area and the future land use plan to

01:02:26.600 --> 01:02:28.920
 be industrial commerce.

01:02:28.920 --> 01:02:32.900
 Staff is recommending approval of this request as it is consistent with the future land use

01:02:32.900 --> 01:02:39.320
 plan and complies with criteria for approval in DDC Section 2.

01:02:39.320 --> 01:02:43.480
 The applicant will be here this evening to answer any questions.

01:02:43.480 --> 01:02:47.800
 Any questions on this one?

01:02:47.800 --> 01:02:48.800
 That's pretty straightforward.

01:02:48.800 --> 01:02:49.800
 Okay.

01:02:49.800 --> 01:02:50.800
 Thanks, Angie.

01:02:50.800 --> 01:02:51.800
 I don't see any questions.

01:02:51.800 --> 01:02:52.800
 Okay.

01:02:52.800 --> 01:02:55.240
 Then we've got, where are we?

01:02:55.240 --> 01:03:01.200
 We are on 5F, DCA-22-0003.

01:03:01.200 --> 01:03:02.200
 Hello, Ron.

01:03:02.200 --> 01:03:11.720
 >> Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission.

01:03:11.720 --> 01:03:12.720
 Good evening again.

01:03:12.720 --> 01:03:15.480
 I'm Ron Degida, principal planner with Development Services.

01:03:15.480 --> 01:03:21.000
 This particular code amendment item, some of you are familiar with it.

01:03:21.000 --> 01:03:23.780
 Some of you are more familiar with it.

01:03:23.780 --> 01:03:28.880
 Those members of the DCRC that have recently reviewed this code amendment as part of our

01:03:28.880 --> 01:03:29.880
 discussions.

01:03:29.880 --> 01:03:32.120
 So, data centers.

01:03:32.120 --> 01:03:38.480
 Data centers, back in 2019 when we updated our development code, we didn't really contemplate

01:03:38.480 --> 01:03:39.480
 this use.

01:03:39.480 --> 01:03:46.040
 However, August, roughly the summer of 2021, there was a lot of interest of this type of

01:03:46.040 --> 01:03:47.040
 use.

01:03:47.040 --> 01:03:51.560
 And so, we brought this to the Planning Zoning Commission around October of 2021.

01:03:51.560 --> 01:03:57.840
 And at that meeting, there was a request by the Commission to bring this to the DCRC,

01:03:57.840 --> 01:03:58.840
 which we did.

01:03:58.840 --> 01:04:02.520
 So, there was a lot of discussion with the DCRC.

01:04:02.520 --> 01:04:08.080
 As you can see, there was meetings held in April, excuse me, as well as in May.

01:04:08.080 --> 01:04:14.120
 A lot of the discussion was related to the two types of uses, both the modular data center

01:04:14.120 --> 01:04:20.800
 as well as the warehouse module center, I'm sorry, data center.

01:04:20.800 --> 01:04:25.360
 Also the use-specific standards that were discussed, and that I will be presenting to

01:04:25.360 --> 01:04:28.120
 you here in a little bit.

01:04:28.120 --> 01:04:32.680
 That was a lot of discussion through the DCRC, a lot of going back and forth, and we believe

01:04:32.680 --> 01:04:39.880
 we have a draft here or proposal that is something that is going to be a good one and it will

01:04:39.880 --> 01:04:43.520
 address the issues that were brought up.

01:04:43.520 --> 01:04:46.880
 Just quickly on the right is a summary of those code amendments that we are going to

01:04:46.880 --> 01:04:49.480
 specifically talk about.

01:04:49.480 --> 01:04:54.840
 We're amending Table 5.2-A, which is the Table of Allowed Uses.

01:04:54.840 --> 01:05:01.160
 And again, we are proposing to add two of the uses, which again is the data center modular

01:05:01.160 --> 01:05:04.440
 and the data center warehouse.

01:05:04.440 --> 01:05:09.040
 We are also proposing use-specific standards for each of those uses, and again, I'll go

01:05:09.040 --> 01:05:11.320
 through that with my presentation.

01:05:11.320 --> 01:05:15.680
 We're also adding minimum parking requirements for these uses, and then lastly, we're amending

01:05:15.680 --> 01:05:21.320
 the definitions of the three that you see here, again, the two uses as well as electric

01:05:21.320 --> 01:05:24.400
 substation.

01:05:24.400 --> 01:05:28.580
 So the first use is the data center modular.

01:05:28.580 --> 01:05:36.400
 This modular use is, as you can see here on the right, are these containers that serve

01:05:36.400 --> 01:05:41.480
 the purpose primarily to have remote storing.

01:05:41.480 --> 01:05:46.840
 It's gathering and processing and analyzing large amount of data and information.

01:05:46.840 --> 01:05:48.440
 That's what they do.

01:05:48.440 --> 01:05:53.880
 The setup is, as you see here, and that's why it's referred to as a modular data center.

01:05:53.880 --> 01:06:00.120
 They can be constructed or could be structures that are pods, shipping containers, cargo

01:06:00.120 --> 01:06:04.320
 containers, as well as any similar storage containers.

01:06:04.320 --> 01:06:13.440
 Again, the photos there illustrate those containers and how they can be situated on a property.

01:06:13.440 --> 01:06:20.900
 Below the definition is a table that illustrates where these uses are proposed to be located.

01:06:20.900 --> 01:06:26.120
 You're looking at the LI, the HI, and the PF zoning districts.

01:06:26.120 --> 01:06:30.320
 The requirement there would be a specific use permit, so if someone wanted to propose

01:06:30.320 --> 01:06:34.800
 a modular data center, they would have to apply for a specific use permit.

01:06:34.800 --> 01:06:42.320
 As far as parking requirements, it's one space per employee at the largest shift.

01:06:42.320 --> 01:06:46.080
 I won't spend too much time on this, but I just want to highlight a couple of the use-specific

01:06:46.080 --> 01:06:47.080
 standards.

01:06:47.080 --> 01:06:53.320
 Firstly, the modular data center shall be opaquely screened from the public right-of-way.

01:06:53.320 --> 01:06:58.160
 Adjacent residential use and zoning districts shall be set back from an adjacent zoning

01:06:58.160 --> 01:07:05.280
 district about no less than 100 feet measured from the property line.

01:07:05.280 --> 01:07:12.400
 The landscape area point system, we're requiring two elements where it is currently one.

01:07:12.400 --> 01:07:17.880
 An environmental noise and vibration assessment be provided as part of their submittal.

01:07:17.880 --> 01:07:24.380
 This is to identify any noise impact or vibration impacts and how that could be mitigated as

01:07:24.380 --> 01:07:28.320
 part of their project.

01:07:28.320 --> 01:07:33.440
 Also the noise maximum for this type of use measured from the property line is going to

01:07:33.440 --> 01:07:37.040
 be no more than 60 dBA.

01:07:37.040 --> 01:07:42.520
 And lastly, if there is an onsite electric substation proposed as part of this use, they

01:07:42.520 --> 01:07:47.360
 must comply with a section that's in our development code that specifically addresses the design

01:07:47.360 --> 01:07:50.880
 of an electric substation.

01:07:50.880 --> 01:07:54.000
 The second type of use is data center warehouse.

01:07:54.000 --> 01:07:58.800
 This is a little bit more what you see around the Metroplex.

01:07:58.800 --> 01:08:02.480
 I've got two examples that shows what they look like.

01:08:02.480 --> 01:08:08.880
 This specifically is for buildings or building that houses the same use or purpose that we

01:08:08.880 --> 01:08:12.600
 already discussed as part of the data center.

01:08:12.600 --> 01:08:23.520
 Where staff is proposing the use is in the GOLI, HI, and PF by right for the MR, SC,

01:08:23.520 --> 01:08:27.960
 and HC with a specific use permit.

01:08:27.960 --> 01:08:32.920
 As far as the parking requirement, it's one space per 3,500 square feet of gross floor

01:08:32.920 --> 01:08:33.920
 area.

01:08:33.920 --> 01:08:39.900
 Or they can submit a parking study and have it determined by the director if that parking

01:08:39.900 --> 01:08:44.920
 amount is appropriate.

01:08:44.920 --> 01:08:49.520
 So the two examples I have here is the Facebook Hub located at Fort Worth, Texas.

01:08:49.520 --> 01:08:53.380
 You can see that particular data center is made up of multiple buildings.

01:08:53.380 --> 01:08:55.940
 They're fairly large in size.

01:08:55.940 --> 01:09:01.000
 The Equinox data center in Plano is made up of one building, a very large building, and

01:09:01.000 --> 01:09:06.640
 again a very large as far as their square footage.

01:09:06.640 --> 01:09:11.240
 With that, because they could be large, we are proposing use specific standards in the

01:09:11.240 --> 01:09:17.120
 MR and the SC zoning districts with a maximum of 55,000 square feet.

01:09:17.120 --> 01:09:22.900
 The buildings themselves will be designed in compliance with Section 710-5, which is

01:09:22.900 --> 01:09:26.080
 in our development code on development standards.

01:09:26.080 --> 01:09:31.320
 Similarly, any outdoor storage or electric equipment shall be all vaguely screened from

01:09:31.320 --> 01:09:36.360
 the public right of way, adjacent land, residential, and zoning district.

01:09:36.360 --> 01:09:41.580
 Again, similar as the modular, we are also requiring an environmental noise and vibration

01:09:41.580 --> 01:09:47.920
 assessment as part of any development of these uses.

01:09:47.920 --> 01:09:53.920
 The noise maximum is 60 dBA, measured at the property line, set back again 100 feet if

01:09:53.920 --> 01:09:58.160
 it's adjacent to a residential zoning district or existing residential use.

01:09:58.160 --> 01:10:04.520
 And again, if there is an on-site electric substation proposed, they must comply with

01:10:04.520 --> 01:10:08.120
 that section of the code.

01:10:08.120 --> 01:10:11.320
 Last is the definition of electric substation.

01:10:11.320 --> 01:10:15.160
 As mentioned earlier, it is being proposed to be amended.

01:10:15.160 --> 01:10:21.960
 The existing definition you see here struck through was just not enough clear clarity

01:10:21.960 --> 01:10:25.040
 as far as what an electric substation is.

01:10:25.040 --> 01:10:30.680
 So working with our DME staff members, they were able to submit or provide with us to

01:10:30.680 --> 01:10:36.880
 us a proposed definition that you see here presented.

01:10:36.880 --> 01:10:41.440
 The main thing that you want to get out of this one is that there is actually a level

01:10:41.440 --> 01:10:49.360
 of which the transition from a higher to a lower is provided, and that's 60 kilovolts

01:10:49.360 --> 01:10:51.120
 that's provided there you see here.

01:10:51.120 --> 01:10:57.520
 So that's really the defining difference between what would be considered just a regular equipment

01:10:57.520 --> 01:11:00.740
 and versus an electric substation.

01:11:00.740 --> 01:11:04.320
 With that, that concludes my presentation, and I'll stand for any questions.

01:11:04.320 --> 01:11:08.560
 We also have Terry Nolte here with DME if you have any questions for him.

01:11:08.560 --> 01:11:09.560
 >> Excellent.

01:11:09.560 --> 01:11:10.560
 Thank you, Ron.

01:11:10.560 --> 01:11:14.600
 Any questions here?

01:11:14.600 --> 01:11:15.600
 This is great.

01:11:15.600 --> 01:11:21.280
 I mean, we had such great discussion at DCRC on this, so it's nice to see it come forward.

01:11:21.280 --> 01:11:22.280
 Okay.

01:11:22.280 --> 01:11:23.280
 Thank you very much.

01:11:23.280 --> 01:11:25.480
 We'll see you in the public meeting and city hall.

01:11:25.480 --> 01:11:32.680
 With that, I will close our work session at 621, and we will be in council chambers as

01:11:32.680 --> 01:11:42.880
 close to 630 as possible for our regular meeting.

01:11:42.880 --> 01:11:46.000
 >> Good evening, and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

01:11:46.000 --> 01:11:49.520
 for Wednesday, August 10th, 2022.

01:11:49.520 --> 01:11:54.280
 With a quorum present, I will call us to order at 634 p.m.

01:11:54.280 --> 01:11:58.600
 Let the record show commissioners Anderson and Smith are absent from our meeting this

01:11:58.600 --> 01:12:00.280
 evening.

01:12:00.280 --> 01:12:05.120
 First item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags.

01:12:05.120 --> 01:12:12.760
 >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic

01:12:12.760 --> 01:12:21.040
 for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for

01:12:21.040 --> 01:12:22.040
 all.

01:12:22.040 --> 01:12:34.200
 In the honor of the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one indivisible.

01:12:34.200 --> 01:12:35.200
 >> Thank you.

01:12:35.200 --> 01:12:41.960
 Our next first item for vote on today's agenda is the consideration of the approval of the

01:12:41.960 --> 01:12:45.200
 minutes from our meeting on July 13th.

01:12:45.200 --> 01:12:53.720
 The Chair can entertain discussion or a motion on this item.

01:12:53.720 --> 01:12:57.160
 It is possible that -- >> Point of order, there's no button to click

01:12:57.160 --> 01:12:58.160
 on the screen.

01:12:58.160 --> 01:12:59.160
 >> There is -- okay.

01:12:59.160 --> 01:13:03.280
 Apparently there was a software update, and so this may not be working.

01:13:03.280 --> 01:13:08.320
 So why don't we go by hand, Commissioner Villarreal.

01:13:08.320 --> 01:13:10.320
 >> I move to approve the minutes.

01:13:10.320 --> 01:13:11.640
 >> Okay.

01:13:11.640 --> 01:13:12.640
 Commissioner Cole?

01:13:12.640 --> 01:13:13.640
 >> Second.

01:13:13.640 --> 01:13:16.960
 >> A second for approval.

01:13:16.960 --> 01:13:19.360
 Any discussion?

01:13:19.360 --> 01:13:21.200
 Commissioner Villarreal, how say you?

01:13:21.200 --> 01:13:22.200
 >> Aye.

01:13:22.200 --> 01:13:23.200
 >> Commissioner Cole?

01:13:23.200 --> 01:13:24.200
 >> Aye.

01:13:24.200 --> 01:13:25.200
 >> Commissioner McDade?

01:13:25.200 --> 01:13:26.200
 >> Aye.

01:13:26.200 --> 01:13:27.200
 >> Commissioner Pruitt?

01:13:27.200 --> 01:13:28.200
 >> Aye.

01:13:28.200 --> 01:13:29.200
 >> Chair is also an aye.

01:13:29.200 --> 01:13:30.400
 That motion will carry 5-0.

01:13:30.400 --> 01:13:34.040
 That will take us to our consent agenda this evening.

01:13:34.040 --> 01:13:37.080
 All right.

01:13:37.080 --> 01:13:40.200
 Chair will move approval of the consent agenda.

01:13:40.200 --> 01:13:41.200
 Commissioner Villarreal?

01:13:41.200 --> 01:13:43.960
 >> I move to approve the consent agenda as presented.

01:13:43.960 --> 01:13:44.960
 >> Okay.

01:13:44.960 --> 01:13:45.960
 >> Second.

01:13:45.960 --> 01:13:46.960
 >> All right.

01:13:46.960 --> 01:13:53.240
 We have a first and a second for approval of the consent agenda.

01:13:53.240 --> 01:13:55.840
 Any discussion?

01:13:55.840 --> 01:13:56.840
 Commissioner Villarreal?

01:13:56.840 --> 01:13:57.840
 >> Aye.

01:13:57.840 --> 01:13:58.840
 >> Commissioner Cole?

01:13:58.840 --> 01:13:59.840
 >> Aye.

01:13:59.840 --> 01:14:00.840
 >> Commissioner McDade?

01:14:00.840 --> 01:14:01.840
 >> Aye.

01:14:01.840 --> 01:14:02.840
 >> Commissioner Pruitt?

01:14:02.840 --> 01:14:03.840
 >> Aye.

01:14:03.840 --> 01:14:04.840
 >> Chair is an aye.

01:14:04.840 --> 01:14:08.520
 That consent agenda carries 5-0.

01:14:08.520 --> 01:14:11.920
 Moving us to items for individual consideration.

01:14:11.920 --> 01:14:17.000
 Item 4A, PP 220016 has been withdrawn for the applicant.

01:14:17.000 --> 01:14:20.940
 We will not be taking action on that item.

01:14:20.940 --> 01:14:27.160
 For B, PE 220001, call up Julie Wyatt for presentation.

01:14:27.160 --> 01:14:28.160
 Hi, Julie.

01:14:28.160 --> 01:14:29.160
 >> Good evening.

01:14:29.160 --> 01:14:43.680
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and I am presenting PE 22-0001,

01:14:43.680 --> 01:14:46.320
 Agave Ranch.

01:14:46.320 --> 01:14:50.280
 The request before you tonight is for an extension of a preliminary plat that was approved in

01:14:50.280 --> 01:14:52.800
 August of 2020.

01:14:52.800 --> 01:14:57.660
 Preliminary plots expire after two years if a final plat is not approved for that property.

01:14:57.660 --> 01:15:02.880
 So at this point, it would expire as of August 19th of this year.

01:15:02.880 --> 01:15:07.200
 However, the Planning and Zoning Commission does have the option to approve extensions

01:15:07.200 --> 01:15:10.520
 for preliminary plots for up to one year.

01:15:10.520 --> 01:15:15.040
 And they can also impose conditions to assure the land will be developed in a timely fashion

01:15:15.040 --> 01:15:20.120
 and the public interest would be served, including compliance with one or more of the new adopted

01:15:20.120 --> 01:15:21.120
 standards.

01:15:21.120 --> 01:15:24.640
 The subject property is the Agave Ranch development.

01:15:24.640 --> 01:15:34.320
 It is located and kind of situated in the northeast side of town, just east of FM 428.

01:15:34.320 --> 01:15:38.520
 Some background before we get into the specific request.

01:15:38.520 --> 01:15:42.840
 The zoning for the property was approved in July of 2019.

01:15:42.840 --> 01:15:50.040
 City Council approved a rezoning from or to NR2 and NR3 with overlay conditions, and those

01:15:50.040 --> 01:15:56.720
 overlay conditions were related to use in open space and landscaping.

01:15:56.720 --> 01:16:04.600
 This project was originally reviewed and developed under our previous code, the 2002 Denton Development

01:16:04.600 --> 01:16:05.600
 Code.

01:16:05.600 --> 01:16:10.520
 And that code was a little different in terms of residential development in that for subdivisions

01:16:10.520 --> 01:16:15.400
 over two acres, there wasn't a minimum lot size for residential lots.

01:16:15.400 --> 01:16:17.800
 They just had to comply with the maximum density.

01:16:17.800 --> 01:16:25.400
 So in this instance, NR2 allowed two dwelling units per gross acre and NR3 allowed three

01:16:25.400 --> 01:16:27.920
 and a half dwelling units per gross acre.

01:16:27.920 --> 01:16:34.040
 And you could see that zoning pattern on your screen that was approved in 2019.

01:16:34.040 --> 01:16:38.560
 That resulted in 252 single family residential lots.

01:16:38.560 --> 01:16:43.080
 They ranged in size from 5,800 square feet to about 15,000 square feet.

01:16:43.080 --> 01:16:47.360
 And that preliminary plot was consistent with the overlay conditions that were placed upon

01:16:47.360 --> 01:16:54.280
 the property during the zoning and also complied with the maximum density in the provisions

01:16:54.280 --> 01:16:56.760
 within the 2002 Denton Development Code.

01:16:56.760 --> 01:16:59.840
 So it was consistent with that zoning.

01:16:59.840 --> 01:17:06.040
 With the implementation of our current regulations, the 2019 code, that zoning with the overlay

01:17:06.040 --> 01:17:08.360
 conditions converted to PDs.

01:17:08.360 --> 01:17:11.480
 So that's PDR2 and PDR3.

01:17:11.480 --> 01:17:14.360
 It didn't change the development standards for the property.

01:17:14.360 --> 01:17:18.880
 It really was just a name change in terms of that implementation of the 2019 Denton

01:17:18.880 --> 01:17:20.160
 Development Code.

01:17:20.160 --> 01:17:26.040
 So now they're referred to as that PDR2 and PDR3.

01:17:26.040 --> 01:17:29.620
 We don't do plot extensions very often, so we're going to go over the criteria for approval,

01:17:29.620 --> 01:17:33.120
 but I'll try to be as brief as possible.

01:17:33.120 --> 01:17:36.400
 The first criterion is the reasons for the requested extension.

01:17:36.400 --> 01:17:40.360
 The applicant submitted a narrative, which was provided in your backup.

01:17:40.360 --> 01:17:46.040
 And within that, the developer indicated that they had remained active in the project.

01:17:46.040 --> 01:17:50.860
 They have submitted applications and had meetings with staff as well as coordination for the

01:17:50.860 --> 01:17:52.960
 civil engineering plans.

01:17:52.960 --> 01:17:56.560
 And the project was interrupted by a change in engineering firms midway.

01:17:56.560 --> 01:17:59.760
 So that did create some delays for the project.

01:17:59.760 --> 01:18:04.000
 The applicant is here and we'll be able to speak further to that tonight.

01:18:04.000 --> 01:18:08.560
 The second criterion is the ability of the applicant to comply with any conditions attached

01:18:08.560 --> 01:18:10.280
 to the original approval.

01:18:10.280 --> 01:18:14.480
 The preliminary plat didn't have any conditions, so that one doesn't apply.

01:18:14.480 --> 01:18:18.520
 The third criterion is whether the extension is likely to result in a timely completion

01:18:18.520 --> 01:18:19.520
 of the project.

01:18:19.520 --> 01:18:23.080
 As I mentioned before, they have continued to make progress.

01:18:23.080 --> 01:18:28.440
 In fact, they've got three projects that have either been approved or ongoing, one being

01:18:28.440 --> 01:18:30.420
 Alternative Development Plan.

01:18:30.420 --> 01:18:35.720
 That was approved in November of 2020, and that was related to site design considerations

01:18:35.720 --> 01:18:40.840
 for the eventual homes on the property, so related to the structures.

01:18:40.840 --> 01:18:47.840
 Civil Engineering Plan CEP 2076, that's related to 92 lots on the development, so that first

01:18:47.840 --> 01:18:48.840
 phase.

01:18:48.840 --> 01:18:52.200
 And that's currently under review and has continued to be under review since it was

01:18:52.200 --> 01:18:54.920
 submitted in December of 2020.

01:18:54.920 --> 01:19:00.000
 And it's CEP 2240, and that is related to a force main and lift station.

01:19:00.000 --> 01:19:04.840
 It was submitted in June of this year, and it is under review now.

01:19:04.840 --> 01:19:07.640
 According to the applicant, as soon as those Civil Engineering Plans are approved, they

01:19:07.640 --> 01:19:12.400
 intend to submit their final plat, hopefully within the month.

01:19:12.400 --> 01:19:17.700
 The fourth criterion for approval is the extent which any newly adopted regulations should

01:19:17.700 --> 01:19:19.720
 be applied to the proposed development.

01:19:19.720 --> 01:19:23.160
 And to illustrate this, we thought maybe a graph would be, or I'm sorry, a table would

01:19:23.160 --> 01:19:25.960
 be the best way to talk through this.

01:19:25.960 --> 01:19:31.320
 So we have columns related to elements in our development standards, and then I'm sorry,

01:19:31.320 --> 01:19:37.760
 the rows dedicated to our development standards, and then the columns are related to whether

01:19:37.760 --> 01:19:40.520
 the plat is extended or whether the plat expires.

01:19:40.520 --> 01:19:47.160
 So when it comes to lot size, if that plat is extended, then they could remain under

01:19:47.160 --> 01:19:52.800
 the current development that they currently have proposed, so that 252 lots with those

01:19:52.800 --> 01:20:00.920
 lot sizes that were approved with that preliminary plat and consistent with the overlay conditions

01:20:00.920 --> 01:20:04.920
 and the 2002 Denton Development Code.

01:20:04.920 --> 01:20:11.560
 If the plat expired, they may have to redesign to accommodate current lot sizes in the 2019

01:20:11.560 --> 01:20:15.680
 Denton Development Code, but there is an asterisk on that column, and we're going to talk about

01:20:15.680 --> 01:20:18.880
 that a little more in the next slide.

01:20:18.880 --> 01:20:23.520
 Engineering standards, the Civil Engineering Plans that are submitted at any given time

01:20:23.520 --> 01:20:28.420
 would be reviewed under those standards that are in place when they're submitted.

01:20:28.420 --> 01:20:34.000
 So that's how they've been reviewed thus far and how they would continue to be reviewed.

01:20:34.000 --> 01:20:39.960
 And then finally, planning development standards, the 2002 Denton Development Regulations for

01:20:39.960 --> 01:20:44.840
 tree preservation, street trees, and that alternative development plan plus the overlay

01:20:44.840 --> 01:20:50.800
 conditions, those are in place for that existing preliminary plat and would remain under the

01:20:50.800 --> 01:20:54.600
 2002 regulations if the plat is extended.

01:20:54.600 --> 01:21:03.080
 If the plat expires, then they may have to comply with current regulations for tree preservation,

01:21:03.080 --> 01:21:07.040
 landscaping, that ADP would still stay in place, but they would still have to comply

01:21:07.040 --> 01:21:11.540
 with the PD conditions that were established in 2019.

01:21:11.540 --> 01:21:15.800
 So it would depend on whether that plat was extended or expired.

01:21:15.800 --> 01:21:19.280
 And now let's talk about that asterisk briefly.

01:21:19.280 --> 01:21:29.080
 So if the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight chose to not extend the plat and it did expire,

01:21:29.080 --> 01:21:35.180
 the applicant could also seek relief through something called our vested rights regulations.

01:21:35.180 --> 01:21:39.480
 Within the Denton Development Code as well as the Texas Local Government Code, there

01:21:39.480 --> 01:21:44.880
 are rules upon which a property owner and developer can rely once they have submitted

01:21:44.880 --> 01:21:50.100
 the first required permit for a project.

01:21:50.100 --> 01:21:54.440
 So what those do, those vested rights laws, is they sort of freeze certain regulations

01:21:54.440 --> 01:22:00.200
 for developments when they submit that first permit that would be required to develop a

01:22:00.200 --> 01:22:01.380
 project.

01:22:01.380 --> 01:22:07.040
 In this instance, because a preliminary plat is a requirement for development, that would

01:22:07.040 --> 01:22:11.660
 be considered that permit under Texas Local Government Code 245.

01:22:11.660 --> 01:22:17.840
 So that could be a vesting act, which would potentially freeze those regulations that

01:22:17.840 --> 01:22:21.880
 could be vested under that regulation.

01:22:21.880 --> 01:22:25.240
 So there are certain rules that can vest or can be frozen.

01:22:25.240 --> 01:22:31.160
 That would be landscaping or tree preservation, open space or park deck dedication, lot size

01:22:31.160 --> 01:22:32.160
 or dimensions.

01:22:32.160 --> 01:22:38.360
 So those lot sizes that were a lot different in the 2002 code versus the 2019 code, those

01:22:38.360 --> 01:22:40.360
 could vest.

01:22:40.360 --> 01:22:46.480
 And the 2019 Denton Development Code has procedures related to vested rights, so if the plat was

01:22:46.480 --> 01:22:52.840
 not extended and the applicant wanted to seek a vested rights petition, they would submit

01:22:52.840 --> 01:22:57.000
 under that process and procedure in the Denton Development Code.

01:22:57.000 --> 01:23:02.720
 And if tonight it was not approved, that would likely be their next step is to submit a vested

01:23:02.720 --> 01:23:08.360
 rights petition, and then based upon those findings, they would submit a preliminary

01:23:08.360 --> 01:23:09.960
 plat.

01:23:09.960 --> 01:23:15.140
 So just wanted to discuss that to let you know that even if the plat is not extended,

01:23:15.140 --> 01:23:20.720
 the property could potentially still develop with the lot sizes and those lot counts that

01:23:20.720 --> 01:23:22.960
 were approved with that preliminary plat.

01:23:22.960 --> 01:23:27.480
 So just to make, I want to make that clear.

01:23:27.480 --> 01:23:32.720
 So based upon the criteria for approval, staff recommends approval of the requested extension.

01:23:32.720 --> 01:23:37.560
 Since the applicant has continued to make that progress, we talked about potential conditions

01:23:37.560 --> 01:23:38.560
 in the work session.

01:23:38.560 --> 01:23:41.480
 I didn't know if that's something that you wanted me to bring up, because it is something

01:23:41.480 --> 01:23:44.600
 that the PNZ could impose.

01:23:44.600 --> 01:23:48.720
 But I'll be happy to answer any questions, and the applicant is also here with a presentation.

01:23:48.720 --> 01:23:49.720
 Great.

01:23:49.720 --> 01:23:51.080
 Thank you, Julie.

01:23:51.080 --> 01:23:53.200
 Any questions for Julie at this time?

01:23:53.200 --> 01:23:54.200
 Commissioner Pruitt?

01:23:54.200 --> 01:23:55.200
 Thank you, Chair.

01:23:55.200 --> 01:23:56.200
 Just one.

01:23:56.200 --> 01:23:59.480
 I'm trying to work my way through this.

01:23:59.480 --> 01:24:05.200
 So I understand that if a vested rights application was filed, the developer would have the right

01:24:05.200 --> 01:24:11.840
 to develop lot sizes as shown on the preliminary plat.

01:24:11.840 --> 01:24:17.520
 If you fast forward two years later, now the homes are built, sold, occupied by residents.

01:24:17.520 --> 01:24:27.480
 Would those homes be considered a non-conforming home per our code?

01:24:27.480 --> 01:24:28.480
 Thank you, Chair.

01:24:28.480 --> 01:24:29.480
 Sure.

01:24:29.480 --> 01:24:33.200
 Commissioner Pruitt, I'd first like to pipe in and state that if a vested rights petition

01:24:33.200 --> 01:24:37.880
 is filed, there's still a decision that needs to be made by the city, so it's not an automatic

01:24:37.880 --> 01:24:38.880
 thing.

01:24:38.880 --> 01:24:39.880
 Sure.

01:24:39.880 --> 01:24:40.880
 Sorry.

01:24:40.880 --> 01:24:41.880
 I should phrase my question differently.

01:24:41.880 --> 01:24:42.880
 No worries.

01:24:42.880 --> 01:24:43.880
 I just wanted to be clear.

01:24:43.880 --> 01:24:44.880
 This is independent of how we get there.

01:24:44.880 --> 01:24:50.080
 Just assuming the area develops as shown on the preliminary plat, whether that's extended

01:24:50.080 --> 01:24:57.080
 or petitioned, would those homes then be viewed as non-conforming for changes or alterations

01:24:57.080 --> 01:25:00.020
 and future applications from those homeowners?

01:25:00.020 --> 01:25:06.600
 Well, the use would be permitted regardless.

01:25:06.600 --> 01:25:12.040
 In my opinion, no, they would not be non-conforming because they were approved in accordance with

01:25:12.040 --> 01:25:15.440
 the preliminary plat and the zoning in effect at that time.

01:25:15.440 --> 01:25:20.440
 Later on, if the zoning is changed, then that could potentially bring them into non-conformity,

01:25:20.440 --> 01:25:29.000
 but with the regulations as they are today, and all the PD conditions that were in place,

01:25:29.000 --> 01:25:35.440
 then in the preliminary plat, if it were continued to be approved as is, then they would still

01:25:35.440 --> 01:25:36.840
 be conforming.

01:25:36.840 --> 01:25:37.840
 Okay.

01:25:37.840 --> 01:25:46.280
 So essentially, the PD regulations that came from the transferred overlay conditions would

01:25:46.280 --> 01:25:51.800
 give them all legal rights of that zoning district with those conditions, independent

01:25:51.800 --> 01:25:57.160
 of the fact that their lot size is smaller than the DDC lot sizes.

01:25:57.160 --> 01:26:03.900
 Because the conditions that were in place basically froze the regulations, and Julie

01:26:03.900 --> 01:26:08.680
 Haley, correct me if I'm wrong, but the PD regulations essentially froze the standards

01:26:08.680 --> 01:26:14.940
 that would apply, and so as long as those standards don't change, then those lots should

01:26:14.940 --> 01:26:16.760
 be remaining in a conforming status.

01:26:16.760 --> 01:26:17.760
 Okay.

01:26:17.760 --> 01:26:18.760
 Thank you.

01:26:18.760 --> 01:26:23.480
 I just wanted to check because I know with some of our PDs, the way we refer to a base

01:26:23.480 --> 01:26:27.800
 zoning district, I just didn't know if that was all thought through essentially, so thank

01:26:27.800 --> 01:26:28.800
 you.

01:26:28.800 --> 01:26:29.800
 Well, and presumably, it was.

01:26:29.800 --> 01:26:36.480
 I mean, when it was changed from, I'll probably get these wrong, and tell me the two zoning

01:26:36.480 --> 01:26:37.480
 districts again.

01:26:37.480 --> 01:26:38.480
 I'm sorry, Julie.

01:26:38.480 --> 01:26:41.720
 I went from NR2 and NR3 to R2 and R3.

01:26:41.720 --> 01:26:44.720
 Right, to R2 and R3.

01:26:44.720 --> 01:26:49.040
 Because of the conditions that were in place of the plan development district, the conditions

01:26:49.040 --> 01:26:55.240
 in my opinion, I believe, are more restrictive in this nature because it's capping it at

01:26:55.240 --> 01:26:57.480
 the 252 lots.

01:26:57.480 --> 01:27:01.960
 It has provisions in there regarding the amount of open space that was provided.

01:27:01.960 --> 01:27:02.960
 There's the buffering requirements.

01:27:02.960 --> 01:27:08.720
 I believe that Julie had listed out there, so those are the rules that the developer

01:27:08.720 --> 01:27:16.080
 is playing by as it relates to platting the subdivision, so those lots should be in conformity.

01:27:16.080 --> 01:27:20.940
 Later on, if the city came through and there was a zoning change that affected those, then

01:27:20.940 --> 01:27:25.920
 it's possible it could affect the zoning at that time, but they should still remain in

01:27:25.920 --> 01:27:28.840
 conformance as long as the zoning remains as is.

01:27:28.840 --> 01:27:29.840
 Anything else?

01:27:29.840 --> 01:27:30.840
 Yeah, I do.

01:27:30.840 --> 01:27:37.000
 I believe we have in our development code where a residential property cannot be nonconforming.

01:27:37.000 --> 01:27:42.640
 We did, with the implementation of the 2019 code, add a provision.

01:27:42.640 --> 01:27:44.360
 I believe it's in subchapter one.

01:27:44.360 --> 01:27:48.000
 Haley's nodding at me.

01:27:48.000 --> 01:27:52.840
 Because we had this previous provision in the 2002 code that we didn't necessarily have

01:27:52.840 --> 01:27:59.720
 these minimum lot sizes, that no residential, I think it's single family and duplex lot

01:27:59.720 --> 01:28:08.600
 could be considered nonconforming, so I don't know if that helps as well.

01:28:08.600 --> 01:28:10.120
 Any other questions for Julie?

01:28:10.120 --> 01:28:12.920
 You'll have to raise your hand if you do.

01:28:12.920 --> 01:28:14.640
 Is that really real?

01:28:14.640 --> 01:28:20.240
 Could you go over the potential restrictions you mentioned in the work session?

01:28:20.240 --> 01:28:21.240
 Absolutely.

01:28:21.240 --> 01:28:22.240
 The conditions?

01:28:22.240 --> 01:28:23.240
 Sorry.

01:28:23.240 --> 01:28:26.240
 Something with my throat.

01:28:26.240 --> 01:28:37.080
 All right, so the DIN development code does give the P&Z the ability to impose conditions,

01:28:37.080 --> 01:28:41.720
 particularly to keep these projects moving forward as quickly as possible.

01:28:41.720 --> 01:28:48.600
 And so staff looked at that and has some suggestions regarding those, particularly to make sure

01:28:48.600 --> 01:28:53.520
 those civil engineering plans get approved as quickly as possible within following up

01:28:53.520 --> 01:28:58.120
 with that final plat within a year.

01:28:58.120 --> 01:29:06.120
 I did ask this in the work session, but just to clarify for the folks here in the room,

01:29:06.120 --> 01:29:08.360
 what we're voting on is very narrow today.

01:29:08.360 --> 01:29:11.280
 We're not taking a look at the entire project.

01:29:11.280 --> 01:29:16.440
 We're just voting on the application extension, and it's a very ministerial act, correct?

01:29:16.440 --> 01:29:17.440
 You are correct.

01:29:17.440 --> 01:29:22.560
 The zoning was approved in 2019, so we're really not discussing the merits of the zoning

01:29:22.560 --> 01:29:23.560
 at this time.

01:29:23.560 --> 01:29:34.600
 It really is just related to this preliminary plat and the extension thereof.

01:29:34.600 --> 01:29:38.160
 Any other questions for Julie?

01:29:38.160 --> 01:29:42.480
 This is an individual consideration item, and anyone can speak on that.

01:29:42.480 --> 01:29:50.880
 I do have a card to speak on this item, and it is Amy Bissett, to the applicant.

01:29:50.880 --> 01:29:51.880
 Good evening.

01:29:51.880 --> 01:29:52.880
 Good evening, commissioners.

01:29:52.880 --> 01:29:53.880
 Hello.

01:29:53.880 --> 01:29:57.840
 It's been a long time that we've been having this conversation.

01:29:57.840 --> 01:30:02.920
 I hope we're getting to the end, maybe just one more after this, which would be the final

01:30:02.920 --> 01:30:09.960
 plat, so for the benefit of the commissioners who were not here when the zoning was changed

01:30:09.960 --> 01:30:17.160
 and to the neighbors who may be watching or present tonight, I do want to have a brief

01:30:17.160 --> 01:30:22.960
 just kind of like recap of where we've been, where we came from, the assumptions that we've

01:30:22.960 --> 01:30:30.680
 been operating under as the developer and the engineer, and just kind of get through

01:30:30.680 --> 01:30:31.680
 the history.

01:30:31.680 --> 01:30:39.480
 I promised to do that briefly, so there are three of you, one of whom is absent tonight,

01:30:39.480 --> 01:30:44.440
 who were here when the zoning change took place, and for those of you who were not,

01:30:44.440 --> 01:30:49.100
 we were here three times at PNZ, and the first two times we were denied.

01:30:49.100 --> 01:30:56.360
 We started out with an NR4 zoning request, reduced that to a split zoning of NR4 and

01:30:56.360 --> 01:31:04.200
 NR3, and ultimately, between four neighborhood meetings and three meetings with the Planning

01:31:04.200 --> 01:31:11.680
 and Zoning Commission, reached an agreement that we believe will one day be a very beautiful

01:31:11.680 --> 01:31:17.920
 development if it does not get killed tonight.

01:31:17.920 --> 01:31:28.160
 That agreement that we reached was the 252 lots, a blend of NR2 and NR3, and we feel

01:31:28.160 --> 01:31:34.680
 like we have held true to what we presented in 2019 that was approved in 2019.

01:31:34.680 --> 01:31:39.800
 We came back in 2020 with a general development plan and a preliminary plat that were approved.

01:31:39.800 --> 01:31:46.000
 What you're seeing tonight has not changed one bit from either of those cases.

01:31:46.000 --> 01:31:50.000
 So I hope that will help a little bit, and I think I have identified a couple of places

01:31:50.000 --> 01:31:55.200
 that maybe there was some misunderstandings that took place that I hope maybe we can clear

01:31:55.200 --> 01:31:56.200
 up tonight.

01:31:56.200 --> 01:31:59.640
 I'm going to come back to that slide.

01:31:59.640 --> 01:32:05.560
 What I did is I went back to my slides from 2019 when the zoning was approved.

01:32:05.560 --> 01:32:06.720
 This is my slide tonight.

01:32:06.720 --> 01:32:10.860
 This shows the approved general development plan, which was approved at the same time

01:32:10.860 --> 01:32:15.000
 as the preliminary plat that you're considering an extension on tonight.

01:32:15.000 --> 01:32:22.640
 It was 252 lots as shown here with a mix of NR2 and NR3 with the amazing overlay conditions

01:32:22.640 --> 01:32:27.920
 that I really hope we get to see come to fruition one day because they will make a really superior

01:32:27.920 --> 01:32:28.920
 development.

01:32:28.920 --> 01:32:31.440
 I'm going to scroll back a slide.

01:32:31.440 --> 01:32:34.600
 This is the slide in the 2019 zoning case that we presented.

01:32:34.600 --> 01:32:43.280
 We said 92 acres, a maximum of 252 lots, three ponds, nine pocket parks, all the overlay

01:32:43.280 --> 01:32:48.180
 conditions with the net number of units per acre as well as the gross number of units

01:32:48.180 --> 01:32:50.320
 per acre here.

01:32:50.320 --> 01:32:54.040
 All the lots are not defined in this exhibit because we hadn't done that level of engineering

01:32:54.040 --> 01:33:02.240
 yet, but we had defined the street locations and we knew based on the overall acreage of

01:33:02.240 --> 01:33:10.000
 each zoning district what our maximum cap would be in terms of the number of lots that

01:33:10.000 --> 01:33:12.320
 we would eventually be able to yield.

01:33:12.320 --> 01:33:19.160
 So this slide is directly out of the recording of the public hearing with city council.

01:33:19.160 --> 01:33:25.360
 It looks identical other than the lots being very clearly drawn out here to the GDP that

01:33:25.360 --> 01:33:30.000
 we presented in 2020 as well as the preliminary plat.

01:33:30.000 --> 01:33:32.200
 So here's a couple of things that I think happened.

01:33:32.200 --> 01:33:39.520
 First of all, in the 2002 code, I'm going to scroll down here for a minute.

01:33:39.520 --> 01:33:44.680
 This is an actual screenshot from the 2002 code.

01:33:44.680 --> 01:33:50.360
 There are a number of lot minimums, lot minimums associated, dimensional standards associated

01:33:50.360 --> 01:33:56.280
 with NR2 and NR3, and then in a very small print right under all of those is a statement

01:33:56.280 --> 01:34:03.840
 that says the only ones that apply to subdivisions of more than two acres are the number of dwelling

01:34:03.840 --> 01:34:07.160
 units per gross acre and the side yards.

01:34:07.160 --> 01:34:14.080
 So we knew from the beginning that in order to accommodate the 15 percent open space,

01:34:14.080 --> 01:34:20.320
 the 30 foot landscape buffer, the nine pocket parks, four ponds, that we would have smaller

01:34:20.320 --> 01:34:21.320
 lot sizes.

01:34:21.320 --> 01:34:26.440
 That was never intended to be something that was not communicated or clear.

01:34:26.440 --> 01:34:30.960
 It was just that the constraints of the site itself and the overlay conditions meant that

01:34:30.960 --> 01:34:38.620
 under the 2002 code, we could still develop, but we would be maxed out at 252 lots.

01:34:38.620 --> 01:34:46.840
 So if you look at the 2002 code and the 2019 code side by side, they are almost identical,

01:34:46.840 --> 01:34:52.280
 with the exception of the 2002 code, that one sentence that says that you can also calculate

01:34:52.280 --> 01:34:59.200
 it by gross number of units per acre, which is what we had done from the very beginning.

01:34:59.200 --> 01:35:03.520
 So I think that was maybe the first miscommunication, was how is that actually calculated?

01:35:03.520 --> 01:35:09.280
 So it's not a half an acre per residential lot.

01:35:09.280 --> 01:35:12.560
 It's two units per acre or three and a half units per acre.

01:35:12.560 --> 01:35:13.560
 That includes the ponds.

01:35:13.560 --> 01:35:14.560
 It includes the parks.

01:35:14.560 --> 01:35:18.640
 It includes the streets, all of those additional elements.

01:35:18.640 --> 01:35:25.040
 And so there may have been some misunderstanding that occurred during that time associated

01:35:25.040 --> 01:35:28.640
 with that, but that was never our intent by any stretch.

01:35:28.640 --> 01:35:32.480
 And then when we came forward with the general development plan and the preliminary plat,

01:35:32.480 --> 01:35:34.920
 that was in the summer of 2020.

01:35:34.920 --> 01:35:37.360
 You all may recall that it was an entirely virtual meeting.

01:35:37.360 --> 01:35:41.640
 I was sitting at my kitchen counter and was flying blind.

01:35:41.640 --> 01:35:46.320
 I didn't get to make a presentation and could not see or interact with you all.

01:35:46.320 --> 01:35:48.160
 I was just on the phone.

01:35:48.160 --> 01:35:52.160
 And what I can tell you that I heard on the phone that night was that the primary concern

01:35:52.160 --> 01:35:57.360
 from the neighborhood was whether or not Hartley Field would be connected through our subdivision

01:35:57.360 --> 01:35:58.800
 to 428.

01:35:58.800 --> 01:36:03.280
 That was the entire focus and whether or not we were required to make that connection or

01:36:03.280 --> 01:36:05.540
 how we could prevent that connection.

01:36:05.540 --> 01:36:11.120
 And so maybe just the actual lot dimensions associated with that discussion where they

01:36:11.120 --> 01:36:17.680
 just weren't as relevant at that point in time, but the preliminary plat that was approved

01:36:17.680 --> 01:36:23.520
 then has not changed one bit from what we're being asked to consider an extension of tonight.

01:36:23.520 --> 01:36:28.780
 So I hope that helps a little bit just clear up some of, you know, three years have passed.

01:36:28.780 --> 01:36:29.920
 The code has changed.

01:36:29.920 --> 01:36:34.400
 I had to go back and refresh my own memory and watch the presentations and go back and

01:36:34.400 --> 01:36:36.640
 look through the minutes.

01:36:36.640 --> 01:36:42.520
 But we spent a lot of time with the neighbors and a lot of time with you all trying to present

01:36:42.520 --> 01:36:45.680
 and create a development that everybody could be proud of.

01:36:45.680 --> 01:36:46.720
 We are still proud of it.

01:36:46.720 --> 01:36:52.420
 We still intend to hold to every bit of the criteria that was a condition of our zoning

01:36:52.420 --> 01:36:55.240
 approval at that time.

01:36:55.240 --> 01:37:00.000
 So on to the extension of the preliminary plat, the criteria for approval, Julie did

01:37:00.000 --> 01:37:01.000
 go through all of those.

01:37:01.000 --> 01:37:06.240
 I'm going to give you my answers to those four criteria as well.

01:37:06.240 --> 01:37:09.320
 Consideration number one, what is the reason for our request?

01:37:09.320 --> 01:37:13.160
 We have been actively pursuing permits throughout the entire two years.

01:37:13.160 --> 01:37:17.020
 If you look at the right side of your screen, that gives you the review timeframe from our

01:37:17.020 --> 01:37:23.080
 first submittal to our approval of everything since June of 2018 when we first submitted

01:37:23.080 --> 01:37:25.540
 our zoning application.

01:37:25.540 --> 01:37:31.640
 We have been in constant communication with the city on these reviews since that time.

01:37:31.640 --> 01:37:37.260
 There was a brief period during that time that the city stopped accepting development

01:37:37.260 --> 01:37:39.280
 applications and stopped reviewing those.

01:37:39.280 --> 01:37:43.960
 And while that's not necessarily a reason that we need an extension tonight, it is I

01:37:43.960 --> 01:37:48.880
 think it's valid in terms of how long it has taken us to get this done.

01:37:48.880 --> 01:37:53.240
 The engineering plans have gone through multiple reviews at the same time that criteria manuals

01:37:53.240 --> 01:37:57.880
 were being updated and standard details for the city were being updated.

01:37:57.880 --> 01:38:04.080
 And so as staff members reviewed the plans, they would give us feedback that was related

01:38:04.080 --> 01:38:06.880
 to new criteria manuals versus old ones.

01:38:06.880 --> 01:38:11.520
 And so there was a lot of just conflicting and updating information that took place over

01:38:11.520 --> 01:38:16.640
 that timeframe that also just has taken some time for us to work through.

01:38:16.640 --> 01:38:23.680
 We just submitted our CEPs yesterday, in fact, for our eighth review, and I personally QC'd

01:38:23.680 --> 01:38:29.520
 them before they went in and I have high confidence that they will be approved with this review.

01:38:29.520 --> 01:38:33.360
 Maybe conditionally while we work out just a tiny couple little details, but we are at

01:38:33.360 --> 01:38:36.360
 the very, very end of this process.

01:38:36.360 --> 01:38:40.720
 I'll tell you that maybe two months ago, the city asked us to split out the lift station

01:38:40.720 --> 01:38:42.560
 plans into a separate review.

01:38:42.560 --> 01:38:48.600
 They've been as a part of the process the entire time, but they are a little more complicated

01:38:48.600 --> 01:38:53.960
 and the city asked us to split them out because they felt like we could get the rest of the

01:38:53.960 --> 01:38:58.680
 civil plans reviewed, approved, and our final plat submitted and reviewed and approved while

01:38:58.680 --> 01:39:01.480
 we're working through the lift station details.

01:39:01.480 --> 01:39:05.800
 Last I heard, we would be able to file our final plat and start construction while the

01:39:05.800 --> 01:39:11.360
 lift station was still being finalized and that the burden would be on us to make sure

01:39:11.360 --> 01:39:15.440
 that lift station was operational before we were ready to occupy homes.

01:39:15.440 --> 01:39:19.640
 We do intend to submit the final plat next Tuesday, August 16th, and we expect to see

01:39:19.640 --> 01:39:24.280
 you here on October 12th asking for an approval at that time.

01:39:24.280 --> 01:39:27.440
 So we are at the very end.

01:39:27.440 --> 01:39:31.960
 Consideration number two is can we comply to conditions?

01:39:31.960 --> 01:39:36.000
 The plat had no conditions, but it has certainly demonstrated our zoning conditions.

01:39:36.000 --> 01:39:38.240
 Is that my timer?

01:39:38.240 --> 01:39:39.240
 Okay.

01:39:39.240 --> 01:39:46.120
 We've demonstrated that we've adhered to the zoning conditions and that we can get

01:39:46.120 --> 01:39:51.480
 this done in a timely completion of the project.

01:39:51.480 --> 01:39:56.840
 Last I just want to very, very quickly say that the implications of this for us are huge.

01:39:56.840 --> 01:40:01.880
 We have been in review for two years now, three years, four if you count zoning, and

01:40:01.880 --> 01:40:08.300
 the developer has spent over $1.2 million on design and review fees.

01:40:08.300 --> 01:40:13.840
 And while that is not your problem, I understand that, it is a loss, a time loss, and a money

01:40:13.840 --> 01:40:19.800
 loss that you're sending us back to the beginning when we are literally right at the very end,

01:40:19.800 --> 01:40:24.720
 and we would be redesigning everything if we started over.

01:40:24.720 --> 01:40:28.240
 And with that, I will wrap up since I'm over time.

01:40:28.240 --> 01:40:29.240
 Thank you.

01:40:29.240 --> 01:40:32.080
 Thank you, Amy.

01:40:32.080 --> 01:40:37.880
 A question for you, with the conditions that we discussed briefly, do you think you could

01:40:37.880 --> 01:40:39.520
 be in agreement with those?

01:40:39.520 --> 01:40:40.520
 We do.

01:40:40.520 --> 01:40:47.160
 I guess maybe the one thing I would ask is, I think the condition of a preliminary plat

01:40:47.160 --> 01:40:50.580
 is that the final plat has to be filed within two years.

01:40:50.580 --> 01:40:54.000
 If you give us six months to get that final plat filed, I think that is more than enough

01:40:54.000 --> 01:40:55.000
 time.

01:40:55.000 --> 01:40:59.320
 The lift station plans, not being an engineer, although I think ours might be sitting behind

01:40:59.320 --> 01:41:05.160
 me, may take a little bit longer than that, depending on the complexity of those reviews.

01:41:05.160 --> 01:41:09.200
 But I am certain that we can get a final plat for Phase 1 filed and be under construction

01:41:09.200 --> 01:41:10.200
 in six months.

01:41:10.200 --> 01:41:11.200
 I guess just clarification.

01:41:11.200 --> 01:41:12.200
 Yeah.

01:41:12.200 --> 01:41:16.640
 What was included in the proposed condition was that the final plat be approved.

01:41:16.640 --> 01:41:20.560
 So it was not specific to filing, but it was just that it's approved.

01:41:20.560 --> 01:41:21.560
 Absolutely.

01:41:21.560 --> 01:41:22.560
 We're comfortable with that.

01:41:22.560 --> 01:41:23.560
 And that was, I think, within a year.

01:41:23.560 --> 01:41:27.920
 So that is being approved within six months is the one that I would look to our engineer

01:41:27.920 --> 01:41:31.640
 for a little more direction on, but I would imagine that's reasonable as well.

01:41:31.640 --> 01:41:32.640
 Okay.

01:41:32.640 --> 01:41:34.720
 So just to make sure I understand what you said.

01:41:34.720 --> 01:41:40.220
 So on the civil engineering package that's more specific to the design of the residential

01:41:40.220 --> 01:41:44.920
 subdivision, I know you commented you're on your eighths, but I'm hoping to have that

01:41:44.920 --> 01:41:48.480
 approval here, hopefully next week, if not sooner.

01:41:48.480 --> 01:41:51.440
 So that obviously could be achieved within the six-month timeframe.

01:41:51.440 --> 01:41:55.800
 With respect to the lift station, you were wanting to confer with your engineer on that?

01:41:55.800 --> 01:41:56.800
 Yes.

01:41:56.800 --> 01:41:57.800
 Okay.

01:41:57.800 --> 01:42:01.320
 And then the condition with respect to final plat approval number two, that is consistent

01:42:01.320 --> 01:42:04.140
 with what is already in our Denton development code.

01:42:04.140 --> 01:42:08.920
 And so we felt like it was reasonable that a final plat could be submitted following

01:42:08.920 --> 01:42:15.120
 your CEP approvals and be approved, not recorded, but approved within that six-month timeframe.

01:42:15.120 --> 01:42:20.380
 So like I said, it's just condition number two is more informative and belt and suspenders

01:42:20.380 --> 01:42:22.720
 of what's already in the Denton development code.

01:42:22.720 --> 01:42:26.920
 So the lift station plans specifically, from what I understand, they're going to be their

01:42:26.920 --> 01:42:27.920
 own lot.

01:42:27.920 --> 01:42:32.940
 I don't know if they'll be plotted with the final plat for phase one or not.

01:42:32.940 --> 01:42:38.200
 I would look to our engineer for a little more detail on that, but we can have the final

01:42:38.200 --> 01:42:42.940
 plat for phase one approved within six months and the CEPs for phase one approved within

01:42:42.940 --> 01:42:44.600
 six months easily.

01:42:44.600 --> 01:42:45.600
 Okay.

01:42:45.600 --> 01:42:46.600
 Very good.

01:42:46.600 --> 01:42:51.040
 Very good, thank you very much.

01:42:51.040 --> 01:42:52.040
 Thank you.

01:42:52.040 --> 01:42:54.160
 Appreciate you.

01:42:54.160 --> 01:42:56.440
 This is an individual consideration item.

01:42:56.440 --> 01:42:59.040
 Is there anyone wishing to speak on the item?

01:42:59.040 --> 01:43:05.600
 Okay, I'm going to turn it back to the dais.

01:43:05.600 --> 01:43:12.880
 Do we have questions, discussion?

01:43:12.880 --> 01:43:17.040
 Questions for staff, Commissioner Pruitt?

01:43:17.040 --> 01:43:19.520
 Thank you, Chair.

01:43:19.520 --> 01:43:21.080
 I'm sorry to belabor this point.

01:43:21.080 --> 01:43:25.360
 I just, I read from time to time and I really want to make sure I'm understanding.

01:43:25.360 --> 01:43:33.600
 So to the question of non-conforming lot and use, when I look in the, sorry, in the DDC

01:43:33.600 --> 01:43:41.920
 section 155A says, "A structure situated in a non-conforming lot shall be considered a

01:43:41.920 --> 01:43:46.360
 non-conforming structure subject to provisions of the section 1.5."

01:43:46.360 --> 01:43:52.460
 And then I think the exception that you pointed out, Chair, was B, which says, "A non-conforming

01:43:52.460 --> 01:43:59.360
 lot that was made non-conforming by virtue of enactment of this DDC may be used for construction

01:43:59.360 --> 01:44:01.200
 of a building allowed," et cetera.

01:44:01.200 --> 01:44:05.420
 So you can go ahead and build the building there.

01:44:05.420 --> 01:44:13.200
 And so my question, I guess, is approving this plot, does that make the enactment of

01:44:13.200 --> 01:44:21.120
 the DDC a retroactive thing that 155B then applies to these lots?

01:44:21.120 --> 01:44:29.180
 Or are we setting up a potential issue when somebody wants to build another accessory

01:44:29.180 --> 01:44:34.120
 structure on their land, essentially?

01:44:34.120 --> 01:44:42.200
 I've looked to Hillary for that, but, I mean, again, we're dealing, this project is being

01:44:42.200 --> 01:44:45.880
 considered under the 2002 development code.

01:44:45.880 --> 01:44:46.920
 Understood, yeah.

01:44:46.920 --> 01:44:54.320
 So yes, any provisions that then come from a new development code, are you saying because

01:44:54.320 --> 01:44:55.320
 they're not built yet?

01:44:55.320 --> 01:44:57.360
 Is that what you're saying?

01:44:57.360 --> 01:44:58.960
 Is that where your question is coming from?

01:44:58.960 --> 01:44:59.960
 Yeah.

01:44:59.960 --> 01:45:02.680
 I mean, if they were already built before the passing of the code, they would obviously

01:45:02.680 --> 01:45:07.280
 be considered conforming due to that 155B.

01:45:07.280 --> 01:45:08.500
 In this case, they're not.

01:45:08.500 --> 01:45:14.160
 And so I just want to clarify whether, I just want to make sure we're not setting ourselves

01:45:14.160 --> 01:45:21.560
 up for a situation where neighbors in this new community want to build a chicken coop

01:45:21.560 --> 01:45:23.240
 or whatever it is, right?

01:45:23.240 --> 01:45:27.680
 And all of a sudden they can't because their lot is less than 10,000 square feet, which

01:45:27.680 --> 01:45:30.160
 is the minimum for an R3, right?

01:45:30.160 --> 01:45:37.680
 So I mean, obviously we would need a more legal interpretation of that, but.

01:45:37.680 --> 01:45:38.680
 Right.

01:45:38.680 --> 01:45:39.680
 Thank you, Chair.

01:45:39.680 --> 01:45:40.680
 Sure, sure.

01:45:40.680 --> 01:45:46.240
 So it looks like Tina and Haley are conferring, and they're very much the experts on the nitty-gritty

01:45:46.240 --> 01:45:50.440
 of code comparison, but my initial thought is that this project is being approved under

01:45:50.440 --> 01:45:56.500
 the 2002 code, and so I think subsequent projects probably also would be, but I look forward

01:45:56.500 --> 01:45:59.840
 to being corrected, Haley.

01:45:59.840 --> 01:46:00.840
 Nothing to correct there.

01:46:00.840 --> 01:46:03.400
 I'm Haley Zygurski, Assistant Planning Director.

01:46:03.400 --> 01:46:07.120
 There is a provision that Chair Ellis was referring to in the code.

01:46:07.120 --> 01:46:14.640
 It's 1.5.2(i), and that provision allows that any lot that was legally created prior to

01:46:14.640 --> 01:46:20.300
 the adoption of the code cannot be made nonconforming by this code.

01:46:20.300 --> 01:46:24.200
 So because they were preliminary plotted and vested, they're covered under that provision.

01:46:24.200 --> 01:46:25.200
 Thank you very much.

01:46:25.200 --> 01:46:26.200
 Perfection.

01:46:26.200 --> 01:46:27.200
 Thank you.

01:46:27.200 --> 01:46:40.200
 Any other questions, discussion, emotion?

01:46:40.200 --> 01:46:44.920
 I know we've had a considerable amount of online e-comments that we all got that will

01:46:44.920 --> 01:46:47.240
 be recorded for this item.

01:46:47.240 --> 01:46:49.720
 I so appreciate the community staying involved.

01:46:49.720 --> 01:46:55.440
 This truly was one of the best collaborative efforts that I have been a part of in the

01:46:55.440 --> 01:46:59.320
 six years that I've been sitting on planning and zoning, because it did go back and forth

01:46:59.320 --> 01:47:04.520
 so many times, and it did get tweaked along the way between our input and the community

01:47:04.520 --> 01:47:07.960
 involvement and the community input.

01:47:07.960 --> 01:47:15.280
 So one thing I did want to clarify, we talked about it at work session, but I'm going to

01:47:15.280 --> 01:47:19.680
 say it here, and I know it was in Julie's presentation too, but when we refer to it

01:47:19.680 --> 01:47:29.640
 now as PD, that is just by name, because when the new code was adopted, there was no overlay

01:47:29.640 --> 01:47:30.640
 anymore.

01:47:30.640 --> 01:47:31.640
 That wasn't a part of it.

01:47:31.640 --> 01:47:39.680
 So any zoning that had overlay conditions on it just were named PD- whatever their base

01:47:39.680 --> 01:47:40.680
 zoning was.

01:47:40.680 --> 01:47:45.840
 So it's not that it suddenly changed in any form into some planned development.

01:47:45.840 --> 01:47:54.160
 It just changed name on our map, because that's what the new development code offered.

01:47:54.160 --> 01:48:01.160
 The other clarification is, you know, this request before us tonight is not a review

01:48:01.160 --> 01:48:02.160
 of the project again.

01:48:02.160 --> 01:48:04.520
 I mean, we've done that.

01:48:04.520 --> 01:48:10.200
 Staff's done their due diligence in making sure that the overlay conditions are being

01:48:10.200 --> 01:48:11.840
 met and upheld.

01:48:11.840 --> 01:48:17.080
 I'm sorry for all the stalls, I mean, I certainly- I'm sure everybody involved in the project

01:48:17.080 --> 01:48:22.320
 would have thought they would be further ahead by now.

01:48:22.320 --> 01:48:30.440
 That all being said, if we can impose these conditions that are here, I would move approval

01:48:30.440 --> 01:48:37.940
 of the extension request with said conditions.

01:48:37.940 --> 01:48:39.440
 That is my motion on the floor.

01:48:39.440 --> 01:48:42.200
 I will- Commissioner Villarreal?

01:48:42.200 --> 01:48:43.200
 Second.

01:48:43.200 --> 01:48:44.200
 Okay.

01:48:44.200 --> 01:48:48.560
 So there is a first and a second on the floor right now.

01:48:48.560 --> 01:48:51.760
 Do we have any discussion on that?

01:48:51.760 --> 01:48:52.760
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:48:52.760 --> 01:48:58.920
 It sounds like the applicant is okay with us shortening the time in point two.

01:48:58.920 --> 01:49:04.560
 She says she could get- that the application could be finished within six months.

01:49:04.560 --> 01:49:08.440
 So I'd be fine if we amended and offering this as a friendly amendment from one year

01:49:08.440 --> 01:49:10.960
 to six months for point number two.

01:49:10.960 --> 01:49:18.400
 Well, I think point number two is taken right out of our development code now.

01:49:18.400 --> 01:49:20.480
 I don't think I want to do anything with that.

01:49:20.480 --> 01:49:22.600
 I mean, I don't want to accept that amendment.

01:49:22.600 --> 01:49:27.520
 I'm good with the six month on the CEP.

01:49:27.520 --> 01:49:28.680
 I think that's been the holdup.

01:49:28.680 --> 01:49:30.560
 I really- I mean, we need to get that done.

01:49:30.560 --> 01:49:34.680
 We need to light some fires and get that taken care of so we can get everything else moving,

01:49:34.680 --> 01:49:36.440
 because it will move after that.

01:49:36.440 --> 01:49:38.560
 So I would not want to take that.

01:49:38.560 --> 01:49:39.560
 Sure thing.

01:49:39.560 --> 01:49:40.560
 I retract the amendment.

01:49:40.560 --> 01:49:41.560
 Okay.

01:49:41.560 --> 01:49:42.560
 All right.

01:49:42.560 --> 01:49:45.560
 So we have a first and a second, as stated earlier.

01:49:45.560 --> 01:49:47.600
 If I could ask a question.

01:49:47.600 --> 01:49:52.400
 I know the applicant had mentioned would like to confer with their engineer on the civil

01:49:52.400 --> 01:49:54.520
 engineering plans with respect to the lift station.

01:49:54.520 --> 01:49:57.920
 I didn't know if she had a chance to ask them or not.

01:49:57.920 --> 01:50:01.880
 Do I need to fill out a form for anything?

01:50:01.880 --> 01:50:03.160
 We can do that after the fact.

01:50:03.160 --> 01:50:06.960
 If you want to come up here and state who you are and your address, then you can answer

01:50:06.960 --> 01:50:07.960
 our question.

01:50:07.960 --> 01:50:08.960
 Sure.

01:50:08.960 --> 01:50:16.960
 Will Gladbach, represent- DEC engineering representing a Goffey Ranch.

01:50:16.960 --> 01:50:20.440
 Address 2501 Parkview, Fort Worth.

01:50:20.440 --> 01:50:21.440
 Thank you.

01:50:21.440 --> 01:50:22.440
 All right.

01:50:22.440 --> 01:50:30.360
 So the six months, we're at a point where- so we've gone through eight reviews and you

01:50:30.360 --> 01:50:34.920
 guys probably know the city has a third party review that actually that company sends it

01:50:34.920 --> 01:50:37.360
 up to Wisconsin, the kind of review.

01:50:37.360 --> 01:50:43.920
 And so we're going through a lot of our comments are, I don't know, they're not succinct and

01:50:43.920 --> 01:50:47.360
 they're not very linear with the previous reviews.

01:50:47.360 --> 01:50:52.240
 So the six months we should, we should, as Amy mentioned, we have confidence we should

01:50:52.240 --> 01:50:57.440
 be getting performance approval with this last review.

01:50:57.440 --> 01:51:04.600
 The Lyft station is kind of unique because what they wanted was not what the city standards

01:51:04.600 --> 01:51:05.600
 require.

01:51:05.600 --> 01:51:09.780
 They wanted us to mirror what they've done across the street in Starks Farms.

01:51:09.780 --> 01:51:17.680
 So we took those plans and made it to our, made it right sides for our development.

01:51:17.680 --> 01:51:22.340
 But now as we're going through and the re-reviewing those plans, they're making changes.

01:51:22.340 --> 01:51:29.880
 So now this is going to be a hybrid of the city standards with Starks Farms plus other

01:51:29.880 --> 01:51:35.500
 things that they've learned or you have new engineers and new staff going for their preferences.

01:51:35.500 --> 01:51:40.520
 So we're kind of collecting all this stuff, what the city is looking for, for this Lyft

01:51:40.520 --> 01:51:41.520
 station.

01:51:41.520 --> 01:51:44.840
 But other than that, as soon as we get kind of that feedback from the city of what they're

01:51:44.840 --> 01:51:49.680
 asking for or what they're going to require for this Lyft station, we're ready to go.

01:51:49.680 --> 01:51:52.360
 So everything is 95% complete.

01:51:52.360 --> 01:51:56.940
 So it's just this last part of the city's tweaks they're looking for.

01:51:56.940 --> 01:52:02.240
 The overall civil engineering plans have been pretty much conformance for the, since the

01:52:02.240 --> 01:52:07.880
 sixth review and it's just kind of chasing comments for like a better way of saying that.

01:52:07.880 --> 01:52:11.240
 I want to go back to the question with the six month.

01:52:11.240 --> 01:52:12.640
 I mean, are you comfortable?

01:52:12.640 --> 01:52:16.440
 So my thing, six months as far as we're concerned, we can do that.

01:52:16.440 --> 01:52:17.440
 Okay.

01:52:17.440 --> 01:52:22.920
 I don't know how do we address if the city is continually going, well, I want this now

01:52:22.920 --> 01:52:24.820
 or I want that now.

01:52:24.820 --> 01:52:29.400
 So what helps us from that standpoint is because your civil engineering plans are subject to

01:52:29.400 --> 01:52:32.120
 the shot clock provisions, we will be performing on our end.

01:52:32.120 --> 01:52:34.880
 So we'll make sure we get our reviews completed and comments to you.

01:52:34.880 --> 01:52:40.260
 I would like to think if we're at 95% on the design of the Lyft station, that to achieve

01:52:40.260 --> 01:52:44.880
 the remaining 5% that we could get that accomplished within six months from today, if the commission

01:52:44.880 --> 01:52:46.880
 were to approve the extension.

01:52:46.880 --> 01:52:47.880
 I believe so.

01:52:47.880 --> 01:52:53.420
 Like I said, the last thing, instead of a concrete, they wanted a fiber class wet well

01:52:53.420 --> 01:52:59.160
 and now they want a concrete one, or a different pump manufacturers.

01:52:59.160 --> 01:53:05.200
 So all of this stuff is not necessarily driven by our design, it's by the city's request.

01:53:05.200 --> 01:53:10.520
 And so my thing on six months, it should be, it should be the next submittal and everything,

01:53:10.520 --> 01:53:17.680
 that if a new reviewer at the city goes, well, I want this and we're going back three submittals

01:53:17.680 --> 01:53:19.200
 to do stuff.

01:53:19.200 --> 01:53:26.920
 And that's in the do loop right now that's making it a little bit frustrating.

01:53:26.920 --> 01:53:31.360
 But overall, six months should be doable, but I haven't been able to predict the city

01:53:31.360 --> 01:53:32.360
 yet.

01:53:32.360 --> 01:53:34.920
 I guess is where my comments come from.

01:53:34.920 --> 01:53:35.920
 Okay.

01:53:35.920 --> 01:53:39.480
 So, I mean, I would like to think six months is reasonable, I'll be honest with you.

01:53:39.480 --> 01:53:42.720
 I don't have PEF in my name, I've never designed a lift station.

01:53:42.720 --> 01:53:48.040
 But what I can help in the reviewing is making sure that the city's commitment is that we

01:53:48.040 --> 01:53:53.440
 keep our reviews moving forward and to try to minimize some of the back and forth.

01:53:53.440 --> 01:53:57.080
 But it's, I would like to think those six months would be acceptable.

01:53:57.080 --> 01:54:00.520
 The other option, I guess, is that if the commission wanted to consider an alternate

01:54:00.520 --> 01:54:05.300
 time period for the lift station, then I mean, that's up to you.

01:54:05.300 --> 01:54:08.240
 But I would like to think that this could all be achieved within six months.

01:54:08.240 --> 01:54:15.200
 If we're being told what is truthful, where we are, there would be zero reason in my mind.

01:54:15.200 --> 01:54:20.560
 And again, I'm not an engineer either, but we can't keep this moving and get this approved

01:54:20.560 --> 01:54:21.560
 within six months.

01:54:21.560 --> 01:54:22.560
 So, okay.

01:54:22.560 --> 01:54:26.560
 Thank you very much.

01:54:26.560 --> 01:54:28.120
 Any other discussion?

01:54:28.120 --> 01:54:30.200
 We do have a motion on the floor.

01:54:30.200 --> 01:54:31.200
 Commissioner Pruitt.

01:54:31.200 --> 01:54:32.200
 Thank you, Chair.

01:54:32.200 --> 01:54:33.200
 I'll try to be brief here.

01:54:33.200 --> 01:54:39.200
 I have to say a couple things because I am new to this commission since the zoning change

01:54:39.200 --> 01:54:48.400
 and the original change with the overlays were, was approved.

01:54:48.400 --> 01:54:55.800
 You know, I think it's kind of been summed up well tonight is that this is an unfortunate

01:54:55.800 --> 01:55:02.280
 situation because the applicant hasn't completed all their engineering and platting within

01:55:02.280 --> 01:55:04.600
 the two year time period.

01:55:04.600 --> 01:55:07.640
 But here we are today, right?

01:55:07.640 --> 01:55:16.360
 In my opinion, this project and the zoning is a big problem, but we're not here for that,

01:55:16.360 --> 01:55:17.360
 right?

01:55:17.360 --> 01:55:21.720
 Also, in my opinion, the fact that we even need a lift station suggests that maybe we

01:55:21.720 --> 01:55:26.000
 shouldn't be building homes here so that we have to build a huge pump to lift people's

01:55:26.000 --> 01:55:29.080
 poo so that it can go down to the treatment place.

01:55:29.080 --> 01:55:34.000
 I mean, it's, it's physically irresponsible in my view.

01:55:34.000 --> 01:55:39.400
 At the same time, yeah, there's a lot of problems.

01:55:39.400 --> 01:55:46.080
 But I have to separate myself from those previous decisions and hope that future decisions will

01:55:46.080 --> 01:55:54.480
 be more responsible to our taxpayers and our rate payers and you know, that's, that's

01:55:54.480 --> 01:55:55.480
 where I am.

01:55:55.480 --> 01:55:56.480
 So thank you.

01:55:56.480 --> 01:55:59.560
 Any other discussion?

01:55:59.560 --> 01:56:05.000
 Okay, we will go ahead and vote by roll call.

01:56:05.000 --> 01:56:06.000
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:56:06.000 --> 01:56:07.000
 Aye.

01:56:07.000 --> 01:56:08.000
 Commissioner Cole.

01:56:08.000 --> 01:56:09.000
 Aye.

01:56:09.000 --> 01:56:10.000
 Commissioner McDade.

01:56:10.000 --> 01:56:11.000
 Aye.

01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:12.000
 Commissioner Pruitt.

01:56:12.000 --> 01:56:13.000
 Aye.

01:56:13.000 --> 01:56:15.800
 Did I get everybody?

01:56:15.800 --> 01:56:17.360
 One, two, three, four.

01:56:17.360 --> 01:56:18.760
 Chair is an aye.

01:56:18.760 --> 01:56:23.320
 That motion will carry five, zero.

01:56:23.320 --> 01:56:30.400
 Okay, that will move us to 4C, FP22-0023.

01:56:30.400 --> 01:56:38.160
 Julie, I believe you are on again.

01:56:38.160 --> 01:56:52.800
 Good evening, let me pull up the plat presentations and get to the right spot.

01:56:52.800 --> 01:56:53.800
 All right.

01:56:53.800 --> 01:56:54.800
 Sorry about that.

01:56:54.800 --> 01:56:57.480
 Good evening, Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton.

01:56:57.480 --> 01:57:02.960
 I am presenting FP22-0023.

01:57:02.960 --> 01:57:06.320
 This property is within the ropes and ranch plan development.

01:57:06.320 --> 01:57:12.680
 It is a single family development with some open space lots or single family unit with

01:57:12.680 --> 01:57:14.740
 the open space lots.

01:57:14.740 --> 01:57:21.680
 Your original agenda and backup material indicated a recommendation of denial with an extension

01:57:21.680 --> 01:57:23.360
 to August 24th.

01:57:23.360 --> 01:57:29.620
 In the interim period, they have addressed all staff's comments and so we can recommend

01:57:29.620 --> 01:57:30.620
 approval.

01:57:30.620 --> 01:57:34.000
 So that revised plat was sent over to you.

01:57:34.000 --> 01:57:39.400
 So staff does recommend approval of this final plat as it does meet all of our standards.

01:57:39.400 --> 01:57:41.400
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

01:57:41.400 --> 01:57:42.880
 Thank you, Julie.

01:57:42.880 --> 01:57:43.880
 Questions for Julie?

01:57:43.880 --> 01:57:44.880
 Okay.

01:57:44.880 --> 01:57:45.880
 Thank you.

01:57:45.880 --> 01:57:46.880
 Thank you.

01:57:46.880 --> 01:57:51.760
 Chair can entertain discussion or motion.

01:57:51.760 --> 01:57:52.760
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:57:52.760 --> 01:57:54.320
 I move approval of the plat.

01:57:54.320 --> 01:57:55.320
 Okay.

01:57:55.320 --> 01:57:56.320
 Commissioner McDade?

01:57:56.320 --> 01:57:57.320
 Second.

01:57:57.320 --> 01:57:58.320
 Okay.

01:57:58.320 --> 01:57:59.920
 We've got a first and a second for approval.

01:57:59.920 --> 01:58:00.920
 Any discussion?

01:58:00.920 --> 01:58:01.920
 Okay.

01:58:01.920 --> 01:58:02.920
 Commissioner Cole?

01:58:02.920 --> 01:58:03.920
 Yeah.

01:58:03.920 --> 01:58:16.320
 I'm looking at this site location map and I just want to be sure that this isn't touching

01:58:16.320 --> 01:58:30.640
 any of Cole Ranch because it looks like where this is located, I don't know if I can vote

01:58:30.640 --> 01:58:31.640
 on this.

01:58:31.640 --> 01:58:33.760
 I just want to be sure.

01:58:33.760 --> 01:58:34.760
 So just-

01:58:34.760 --> 01:58:35.980
 Are we adjacent owners right there?

01:58:35.980 --> 01:58:40.560
 I believe Cole Ranch is that along this property line here.

01:58:40.560 --> 01:58:43.120
 Is that we're line else?

01:58:43.120 --> 01:58:45.160
 Am I right on that?

01:58:45.160 --> 01:58:46.160
 Yes.

01:58:46.160 --> 01:58:53.280
 It's kind of- It is within the interior of Robeson.

01:58:53.280 --> 01:58:54.280
 I don't know if that-

01:58:54.280 --> 01:58:55.280
 Okay.

01:58:55.280 --> 01:58:56.280
 Is that adjoining?

01:58:56.280 --> 01:58:57.280
 I mean, that's a big deal.

01:58:57.280 --> 01:58:58.920
 It's Hunter Ranch that's adjacent to this property.

01:58:58.920 --> 01:59:00.320
 Which is adjacent to us?

01:59:00.320 --> 01:59:02.240
 To Julie's point, it would be located over-

01:59:02.240 --> 01:59:03.240
 Okay.

01:59:03.240 --> 01:59:04.240
 Okay.

01:59:04.240 --> 01:59:05.240
 So-

01:59:05.240 --> 01:59:06.240
 This would be the closest point.

01:59:06.240 --> 01:59:07.240
 In your view, I'm good.

01:59:07.240 --> 01:59:08.240
 I believe so.

01:59:08.240 --> 01:59:09.240
 Okay.

01:59:09.240 --> 01:59:10.240
 Okay.

01:59:10.240 --> 01:59:11.240
 Okay.

01:59:11.240 --> 01:59:14.840
 Got a first and a second for approval.

01:59:14.840 --> 01:59:15.840
 Commissioner Villarreal?

01:59:15.840 --> 01:59:16.840
 Aye.

01:59:16.840 --> 01:59:17.840
 Commissioner McDade?

01:59:17.840 --> 01:59:18.840
 Aye.

01:59:18.840 --> 01:59:19.840
 Commissioner Pruitt?

01:59:19.840 --> 01:59:20.840
 Aye.

01:59:20.840 --> 01:59:21.840
 Commissioner Cole?

01:59:21.840 --> 01:59:22.840
 Aye.

01:59:22.840 --> 01:59:23.840
 Chair has an aye.

01:59:23.840 --> 01:59:25.920
 That motion carries five at zero.

01:59:25.920 --> 01:59:31.080
 Taking us to 4D FP220024.

01:59:31.080 --> 01:59:32.080
 Julie it's your show.

01:59:32.080 --> 01:59:35.240
 Good evening, Julie Wyatt.

01:59:35.240 --> 01:59:42.600
 This is a final plat, FP22-0024 for rail yard phase one.

01:59:42.600 --> 01:59:44.380
 You might remember the preliminary plat.

01:59:44.380 --> 01:59:46.440
 It's come before you recently.

01:59:46.440 --> 01:59:50.200
 This is for a multi-family development near downtown.

01:59:50.200 --> 01:59:53.960
 They still have some comments they need to address, so staff recommends a denial of the

01:59:53.960 --> 01:59:54.960
 request.

01:59:54.960 --> 01:59:58.800
 However, we have no objection to the requested extension to August 24th.

01:59:58.800 --> 02:00:00.840
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

02:00:00.840 --> 02:00:02.240
 Thank you, Julie.

02:00:02.240 --> 02:00:03.240
 Questions for Julie?

02:00:03.240 --> 02:00:04.240
 Okay.

02:00:04.240 --> 02:00:05.240
 Thank you.

02:00:05.240 --> 02:00:06.240
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:00:06.240 --> 02:00:14.920
 I move approval of the extension to a date certain of August 24th, 2022.

02:00:14.920 --> 02:00:15.920
 Okay.

02:00:15.920 --> 02:00:16.920
 We've got a first.

02:00:16.920 --> 02:00:17.920
 Second.

02:00:17.920 --> 02:00:22.920
 Commissioner Pruitt is a second, first and a second for approval of the extension request

02:00:22.920 --> 02:00:25.880
 to a date certain of August 24th.

02:00:25.880 --> 02:00:26.880
 Any discussion?

02:00:26.880 --> 02:00:27.880
 Okay.

02:00:27.880 --> 02:00:28.880
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:00:28.880 --> 02:00:29.880
 Aye.

02:00:29.880 --> 02:00:30.880
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:00:30.880 --> 02:00:31.880
 Aye.

02:00:31.880 --> 02:00:32.880
 Commissioner McDade?

02:00:32.880 --> 02:00:33.880
 Aye.

02:00:33.880 --> 02:00:34.880
 Commissioner Cole?

02:00:34.880 --> 02:00:35.880
 Aye.

02:00:35.880 --> 02:00:42.680
 The motion carries 5-0, taking us to 4EPP22-0020.

02:00:42.680 --> 02:00:49.400
 I invite Angie up for presentation of this item.

02:00:49.400 --> 02:00:50.400
 Good evening.

02:00:50.400 --> 02:00:51.400
 Hi.

02:00:51.400 --> 02:00:52.400
 Good evening, all.

02:00:52.400 --> 02:00:55.060
 Angie Mangler, Senior Planner at the City of Denton.

02:00:55.060 --> 02:01:00.320
 This is a proposed preliminary plat for Elon Denton, Phase 2B.

02:01:00.320 --> 02:01:03.520
 It is located west of Mayhill Road, south of Spencer Road.

02:01:03.520 --> 02:01:06.560
 It's approximately 14.4 acres.

02:01:06.560 --> 02:01:10.260
 The purpose of this preliminary plat is to establish the boundaries and easements for

02:01:10.260 --> 02:01:12.960
 a one-lot multifamily development.

02:01:12.960 --> 02:01:16.920
 At this time, the plat does not meet all of our criteria for approval, and staff is recommending

02:01:16.920 --> 02:01:17.920
 denial.

02:01:17.920 --> 02:01:21.520
 However, we have no objections to approval of the one-time extension, which could be

02:01:21.520 --> 02:01:24.760
 granted to a date certain of August 24th.

02:01:24.760 --> 02:01:26.600
 That I'm happy to answer any questions.

02:01:26.600 --> 02:01:27.780
 Thank you very much, Angie.

02:01:27.780 --> 02:01:31.000
 Any questions on this one?

02:01:31.000 --> 02:01:32.480
 Okay.

02:01:32.480 --> 02:01:34.080
 Thank you.

02:01:34.080 --> 02:01:36.400
 Chair can entertain discussion or motion.

02:01:36.400 --> 02:01:37.400
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:01:37.400 --> 02:01:41.640
 Move approval of the applicant requested extension to the date certain of August 24th.

02:01:41.640 --> 02:01:42.640
 Okay.

02:01:42.640 --> 02:01:44.960
 We've got a first for approval.

02:01:44.960 --> 02:01:45.960
 Commissioner Cole?

02:01:45.960 --> 02:01:46.960
 Second.

02:01:46.960 --> 02:01:47.960
 Okay.

02:01:47.960 --> 02:01:50.360
 We've got a first and a second for approval of the extension request to a date certain

02:01:50.360 --> 02:01:52.120
 of August 24th.

02:01:52.120 --> 02:01:55.320
 Any discussion?

02:01:55.320 --> 02:01:56.320
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:01:56.320 --> 02:01:57.320
 Aye.

02:01:57.320 --> 02:01:58.320
 Commissioner Cole?

02:01:58.320 --> 02:01:59.320
 Aye.

02:01:59.320 --> 02:02:00.320
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:02:00.320 --> 02:02:01.320
 Aye.

02:02:01.320 --> 02:02:02.320
 Commissioner McDade?

02:02:02.320 --> 02:02:03.320
 Aye.

02:02:03.320 --> 02:02:04.320
 Chair has an aye.

02:02:04.320 --> 02:02:10.000
 That motion carries 5-0, taking us to 4-F, PP22-0018.

02:02:10.000 --> 02:02:13.080
 Angie, you're back up.

02:02:13.080 --> 02:02:14.080
 Hi.

02:02:14.080 --> 02:02:16.920
 Angie Manglars, Senior Planner.

02:02:16.920 --> 02:02:20.200
 This is a preliminary plat for cowboy distribution.

02:02:20.200 --> 02:02:24.280
 It is located at the intersection of Northwestern Boulevard and Jim Crystal Road.

02:02:24.280 --> 02:02:28.640
 It is a preliminary plat to establish the boundaries, right-of-way, and easements for

02:02:28.640 --> 02:02:32.760
 proposed future industrial development to be located at this intersection.

02:02:32.760 --> 02:02:36.820
 At this time, staff is recommending denial as the preliminary plat fails to meet our

02:02:36.820 --> 02:02:38.480
 established criteria for approval.

02:02:38.480 --> 02:02:42.500
 However, we have no objection to the one-time extension that could be granted to a date

02:02:42.500 --> 02:02:45.440
 certain of August 24th.

02:02:45.440 --> 02:02:46.640
 Thank you very much.

02:02:46.640 --> 02:02:48.600
 Questions for Angie on this one?

02:02:48.600 --> 02:02:49.600
 Okay.

02:02:49.600 --> 02:02:50.600
 Thank you.

02:02:50.600 --> 02:02:56.560
 Chair can entertain discussion or a motion.

02:02:56.560 --> 02:02:57.560
 Okay.

02:02:57.560 --> 02:03:03.480
 I will move approval of the extension request to a date certain of August 24th.

02:03:03.480 --> 02:03:04.480
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:03:04.480 --> 02:03:05.480
 Second.

02:03:05.480 --> 02:03:11.400
 We've got a first and a second on the floor for approval of the extension request.

02:03:11.400 --> 02:03:13.880
 Any discussion?

02:03:13.880 --> 02:03:14.880
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:03:14.880 --> 02:03:15.880
 Aye.

02:03:15.880 --> 02:03:16.880
 Commissioner Cole?

02:03:16.880 --> 02:03:17.880
 Aye.

02:03:17.880 --> 02:03:18.880
 Commissioner McDade?

02:03:18.880 --> 02:03:19.880
 Aye.

02:03:19.880 --> 02:03:20.880
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:03:20.880 --> 02:03:21.880
 Aye.

02:03:21.880 --> 02:03:22.880
 Chair has an aye.

02:03:22.880 --> 02:03:30.600
 Page 50, taking us to 4G, PP210034.

02:03:30.600 --> 02:03:34.240
 Commissioner Cole, I believe you are recusing from this item, so I will give you a moment

02:03:34.240 --> 02:03:37.080
 to leave the dais.

02:03:37.080 --> 02:03:40.160
 Okay.

02:03:40.160 --> 02:03:42.560
 And Angie, you are back up for presentation.

02:03:42.560 --> 02:03:43.560
 Hey.

02:03:43.560 --> 02:03:45.440
 Angie Mangleris.

02:03:45.440 --> 02:03:51.000
 This is a preliminary plat for phase one of the Cole Ranch development.

02:03:51.000 --> 02:03:53.680
 It's in the Cole Ranch master plan community.

02:03:53.680 --> 02:04:01.040
 This proposed phase is approximately 720 acres and includes single family residential, town

02:04:01.040 --> 02:04:06.240
 home development, mixed use lots, as well as multi-family lot and two industrial lots

02:04:06.240 --> 02:04:09.200
 on 720 acres.

02:04:09.200 --> 02:04:13.960
 Since the time the packet went out and this afternoon, the plat has met all of our criteria

02:04:13.960 --> 02:04:18.280
 for approval and we are affording this to you this evening with a recommendation of

02:04:18.280 --> 02:04:19.280
 approval.

02:04:19.280 --> 02:04:21.840
 We may answer any questions you may have.

02:04:21.840 --> 02:04:22.840
 Excellent.

02:04:22.840 --> 02:04:23.840
 Thank you.

02:04:23.840 --> 02:04:24.840
 Questions?

02:04:24.840 --> 02:04:28.080
 I do not see any.

02:04:28.080 --> 02:04:29.760
 Thank you.

02:04:29.760 --> 02:04:30.760
 Commissioner Villarreal.

02:04:30.760 --> 02:04:33.080
 I move approval of the plat.

02:04:33.080 --> 02:04:34.080
 We've got a first.

02:04:34.080 --> 02:04:35.080
 Second.

02:04:35.080 --> 02:04:38.320
 Commissioner McDade, we've got a first and a second for approval.

02:04:38.320 --> 02:04:39.320
 Any discussion?

02:04:39.320 --> 02:04:40.320
 Okay.

02:04:40.320 --> 02:04:41.320
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:04:41.320 --> 02:04:42.320
 Aye.

02:04:42.320 --> 02:04:43.320
 Commissioner McDade?

02:04:43.320 --> 02:04:44.320
 Aye.

02:04:44.320 --> 02:04:45.320
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:04:45.320 --> 02:04:46.320
 Aye.

02:04:46.320 --> 02:04:47.320
 Chair has also an aye.

02:04:47.320 --> 02:04:51.440
 The motion carries 4-0, one recused.

02:04:51.440 --> 02:05:02.760
 Let's let Commissioner Cole head back in and I will call item 4HPP22-0017 and Mia is here

02:05:02.760 --> 02:05:05.760
 for presentation.

02:05:05.760 --> 02:05:16.200
 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Mia Hines, Associate Planner.

02:05:16.200 --> 02:05:21.680
 This is a preliminary plat for Legends Ranch, which is actually located within the city's

02:05:21.680 --> 02:05:25.880
 ETJ, just north of West University Drive.

02:05:25.880 --> 02:05:29.840
 Under the current development code, we do not review preliminary plats within our ETJ.

02:05:29.840 --> 02:05:35.560
 However, this particular community is within a municipal utility district, excuse me, and

02:05:35.560 --> 02:05:40.640
 so as a part of the development agreement established with that district, we do require

02:05:40.640 --> 02:05:45.080
 the review and approval process of a preliminary plat.

02:05:45.080 --> 02:05:49.400
 At this time, though, that preliminary plat does not meet all of our criteria for approval,

02:05:49.400 --> 02:05:50.960
 and so staff is recommending the denial.

02:05:50.960 --> 02:05:56.600
 However, the applicant has submitted a request for a 30-day extension and we do not have

02:05:56.600 --> 02:05:58.840
 an objection to that request.

02:05:58.840 --> 02:06:03.000
 I'll take any questions or answer any questions that you have at this time.

02:06:03.000 --> 02:06:04.260
 Thank you, Mia.

02:06:04.260 --> 02:06:07.440
 Any questions for me on this?

02:06:07.440 --> 02:06:08.440
 Thank you very much.

02:06:08.440 --> 02:06:09.440
 Thank you.

02:06:09.440 --> 02:06:10.440
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:06:10.440 --> 02:06:14.200
 I move approval of the extension to a date certain of August 24, 2022.

02:06:14.200 --> 02:06:15.200
 Thank you.

02:06:15.200 --> 02:06:18.280
 We've got a first for approval.

02:06:18.280 --> 02:06:19.280
 Commissioner Cole?

02:06:19.280 --> 02:06:20.280
 Second.

02:06:20.280 --> 02:06:26.680
 Got a first and a second to approve the extension request to a date certain of August 24 discussion.

02:06:26.680 --> 02:06:27.680
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:06:27.680 --> 02:06:28.680
 Aye.

02:06:28.680 --> 02:06:29.680
 Commissioner Cole?

02:06:29.680 --> 02:06:30.680
 Aye.

02:06:30.680 --> 02:06:31.680
 Commissioner McDade?

02:06:31.680 --> 02:06:32.680
 Aye.

02:06:32.680 --> 02:06:33.680
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:06:33.680 --> 02:06:34.680
 Aye.

02:06:34.680 --> 02:06:35.680
 Chair is an aye.

02:06:35.680 --> 02:06:40.680
 That motion carries 5-0, taking us to 4-I, FR22-0007.

02:06:40.680 --> 02:06:44.720
 Hello again, Mia.

02:06:44.720 --> 02:06:48.240
 Hello again, Mia Hines, Associate Planner.

02:06:48.240 --> 02:06:56.680
 This is a final replat for Razor Ranch East, lot 4R1, Block A. The property is located

02:06:56.680 --> 02:07:02.400
 within the Razor Ranch Overlay District, just north of Crescent.

02:07:02.400 --> 02:07:07.360
 Staff is recommending denial at this time as the application does not meet all of our

02:07:07.360 --> 02:07:11.380
 criteria for approval, however, the applicant has requested a 30-day extension and we do

02:07:11.380 --> 02:07:13.040
 not have an objection to that request.

02:07:13.040 --> 02:07:14.040
 Great.

02:07:14.040 --> 02:07:15.040
 I'll take any questions you have.

02:07:15.040 --> 02:07:16.040
 Thank you, Mia.

02:07:16.040 --> 02:07:19.240
 I do not see any questions.

02:07:19.240 --> 02:07:23.240
 Thank you very much.

02:07:23.240 --> 02:07:24.520
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:07:24.520 --> 02:07:29.080
 Move approval of the extension to a date certain of August 24, 2022.

02:07:29.080 --> 02:07:30.080
 Commissioner Cole?

02:07:30.080 --> 02:07:31.080
 Second.

02:07:31.080 --> 02:07:37.880
 I second to approve the extension request to a date certain of August 24.

02:07:37.880 --> 02:07:38.880
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:07:38.880 --> 02:07:39.880
 Aye.

02:07:39.880 --> 02:07:40.880
 Commissioner Cole?

02:07:40.880 --> 02:07:41.880
 Aye.

02:07:41.880 --> 02:07:42.880
 Commissioner McDade?

02:07:42.880 --> 02:07:43.880
 Aye.

02:07:43.880 --> 02:07:44.880
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:07:44.880 --> 02:07:45.880
 Aye.

02:07:45.880 --> 02:07:46.880
 Chair is an aye.

02:07:46.880 --> 02:07:47.880
 That motion carries 5-0.

02:07:47.880 --> 02:07:54.220
 We are now on 4-J, FP22-0022.

02:07:54.220 --> 02:07:55.220
 Ashley's item.

02:07:55.220 --> 02:07:56.220
 Hi, Ashley.

02:07:56.220 --> 02:07:57.220
 Good evening.

02:07:57.220 --> 02:08:02.400
 Ashley Hickok, assistant planner, City of Denton.

02:08:02.400 --> 02:08:05.340
 This item is for a final plat.

02:08:05.340 --> 02:08:08.540
 It is on Airport Road, east of Precision Drive.

02:08:08.540 --> 02:08:10.740
 At this time, staff is recommending denial.

02:08:10.740 --> 02:08:15.020
 They have not met all the criteria for approval, but we have no objection to the requested

02:08:15.020 --> 02:08:16.500
 extension to August 24.

02:08:16.500 --> 02:08:18.420
 I'm happy to answer any questions.

02:08:18.420 --> 02:08:19.420
 Thank you very much.

02:08:19.420 --> 02:08:20.420
 Questions for Ashley?

02:08:20.420 --> 02:08:21.420
 I'm not seeing any.

02:08:21.420 --> 02:08:22.420
 Thank you very much.

02:08:22.420 --> 02:08:30.740
 Discussion or motion?

02:08:30.740 --> 02:08:31.740
 Commissioner Villarreal.

02:08:31.740 --> 02:08:36.940
 I move approval of the extension to a date certain of August 24, 2022.

02:08:36.940 --> 02:08:37.940
 Commissioner Cole?

02:08:37.940 --> 02:08:38.940
 Second.

02:08:38.940 --> 02:08:42.420
 You've got a first and a second to approve the extension request to a date certain of

02:08:42.420 --> 02:08:44.260
 August 24.

02:08:44.260 --> 02:08:46.140
 No discussion.

02:08:46.140 --> 02:08:47.140
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:08:47.140 --> 02:08:48.140
 Aye.

02:08:48.140 --> 02:08:49.140
 Commissioner Cole?

02:08:49.140 --> 02:08:50.140
 Aye.

02:08:50.140 --> 02:08:51.140
 Commissioner McDade?

02:08:51.140 --> 02:08:52.140
 Aye.

02:08:52.140 --> 02:08:53.140
 Commissioner Prudt?

02:08:53.140 --> 02:08:54.140
 Aye.

02:08:54.140 --> 02:08:57.260
 Chair is an aye.

02:08:57.260 --> 02:08:59.420
 Motion carries 5-0.

02:08:59.420 --> 02:09:01.620
 I will call item 4K.

02:09:01.620 --> 02:09:04.980
 Commissioner Cole, I believe you are recusing yourself on this item.

02:09:04.980 --> 02:09:08.180
 Give you a moment.

02:09:08.180 --> 02:09:09.180
 Calling 4K FP22-0020A.

02:09:09.180 --> 02:09:10.180
 Hello, Ron.

02:09:10.180 --> 02:09:17.180
 Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the commission, Ron Minguida, principal planner

02:09:17.180 --> 02:09:18.720
 of development services.

02:09:18.720 --> 02:09:24.540
 This item is a final plat for a property located just south of Jim Crystal.

02:09:24.540 --> 02:09:26.860
 It is a one-lot plat.

02:09:26.860 --> 02:09:31.300
 As of today, staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets the established

02:09:31.300 --> 02:09:32.940
 criteria for final plots.

02:09:32.940 --> 02:09:39.020
 However, there is a condition that staff is placing on this item that is because of two

02:09:39.020 --> 02:09:44.620
 stormwater drainage channels that are being proposed within an ESA, environmental sensitive

02:09:44.620 --> 02:09:46.020
 area.

02:09:46.020 --> 02:09:52.580
 That alternative ESA is scheduled for actually discussion for you all this evening, later

02:09:52.580 --> 02:09:57.620
 during the public hearing, and then if forwarded to City Council, it would be on their August

02:09:57.620 --> 02:10:00.260
 16th City Council date.

02:10:00.260 --> 02:10:05.140
 But again, staff recommends approval with the following conditions, that the ALT ESA

02:10:05.140 --> 02:10:09.700
 is approved at the council meeting on August 16th.

02:10:09.700 --> 02:10:10.700
 Great.

02:10:10.700 --> 02:10:11.700
 Thank you, Ron.

02:10:11.700 --> 02:10:12.700
 Any discussion?

02:10:12.700 --> 02:10:13.700
 Questions?

02:10:13.700 --> 02:10:17.220
 Okay.

02:10:17.220 --> 02:10:18.220
 Thank you very much.

02:10:18.220 --> 02:10:19.220
 Commissioner Villareal.

02:10:19.220 --> 02:10:23.380
 I move approval with the conditions set forth by staff.

02:10:23.380 --> 02:10:25.260
 Commissioner McDade.

02:10:25.260 --> 02:10:26.260
 Second.

02:10:26.260 --> 02:10:27.260
 Okay.

02:10:27.260 --> 02:10:31.580
 We've got a first and a second for approval of the plat with conditions noted.

02:10:31.580 --> 02:10:33.460
 Discussion?

02:10:33.460 --> 02:10:34.460
 Commissioner Villareal.

02:10:34.460 --> 02:10:35.460
 Aye.

02:10:35.460 --> 02:10:36.460
 Commissioner McDade.

02:10:36.460 --> 02:10:37.460
 Aye.

02:10:37.460 --> 02:10:38.460
 Commissioner Pruitt.

02:10:38.460 --> 02:10:39.460
 Aye.

02:10:39.460 --> 02:10:40.460
 Chair has an aye.

02:10:40.460 --> 02:10:42.820
 That motion carries 4-0.

02:10:42.820 --> 02:10:47.060
 That will move us to our public hearing items for this evening.

02:10:47.060 --> 02:10:52.980
 But Commissioner Cole, you're not back for that item because you need to recruit.

02:10:52.980 --> 02:10:55.540
 Thank you for your return, but we'll see you in the next one.

02:10:55.540 --> 02:10:56.540
 Okay.

02:10:56.540 --> 02:11:06.140
 I will call item 5A, AESA 22-000, bring up Christy Upton for presentation, and I will

02:11:06.140 --> 02:11:08.260
 open the public hearing.

02:11:08.260 --> 02:11:12.540
 There you go.

02:11:12.540 --> 02:11:15.780
 There you are.

02:11:15.780 --> 02:11:17.860
 Sorry.

02:11:17.860 --> 02:11:26.480
 Christy Upton, Environmental Compliance Coordinator, and I will be presenting the Alternative

02:11:26.480 --> 02:11:31.700
 ESA Plan that was just mentioned in the last presentation.

02:11:31.700 --> 02:11:37.100
 This is an Alternative ESA Plan for DIT and EXTER Edition Number 3.

02:11:37.100 --> 02:11:44.420
 The purpose of these Alternative ESA Plans is a request to deviate from the DIT and Development

02:11:44.420 --> 02:11:50.180
 Code's requirement to protect and preserve our environmentally sensitive areas.

02:11:50.180 --> 02:11:55.460
 And I'll go into more detail about some of those areas that this property is proposing

02:11:55.460 --> 02:12:00.080
 to deviate from that requirement.

02:12:00.080 --> 02:12:09.380
 First of all, just to reiterate what Ron was just discussing, which is that this is a property

02:12:09.380 --> 02:12:12.740
 at the intersection of Western Boulevard and Jim Crystal Road.

02:12:12.740 --> 02:12:22.900
 The proposal is for this warehouse, and in order for the warehouse to drain properly

02:12:22.900 --> 02:12:29.860
 and meet the drainage criteria of the DIT and Development Code, the applicant is proposing

02:12:29.860 --> 02:12:35.420
 to take two stormwater drainage channels to the creek.

02:12:35.420 --> 02:12:42.300
 This will cause for a temporary disturbance of .47 acres of a riparian buffer ESA.

02:12:42.300 --> 02:12:46.220
 And let's go into a little bit more detail about what these riparian buffers are.

02:12:46.220 --> 02:12:52.300
 They are, in this particular case, this one is part of the tributary of Dry Fork of Hickory

02:12:52.300 --> 02:12:53.300
 Creek.

02:12:53.300 --> 02:12:57.260
 It's an intermittent stream with a habitat in fair condition.

02:12:57.260 --> 02:13:01.380
 We determine that when we perform these ESA field assessments.

02:13:01.380 --> 02:13:09.340
 In other words, we go out to the field and a scientist evaluates whether this area has

02:13:09.340 --> 02:13:17.860
 a riparian buffer or a vegetative buffer that supports and protects the waterway.

02:13:17.860 --> 02:13:28.740
 The undeveloped floodplain is when it reflects the FEMA floodplain and is areas, those FEMA

02:13:28.740 --> 02:13:31.540
 floodplains that are remaining in its natural state.

02:13:31.540 --> 02:13:36.820
 In other words, it hasn't been filled in the past.

02:13:36.820 --> 02:13:43.620
 So the purpose of this is to, again, to construct those two stormwater outfall structures.

02:13:43.620 --> 02:13:50.300
 And by placing those outfall structures, the developer will have to clear the land in order

02:13:50.300 --> 02:13:55.660
 for it to direct the flow to the channel.

02:13:55.660 --> 02:14:04.220
 Once they are completed, the grading is completed, the applicant is proposing to revegetate those

02:14:04.220 --> 02:14:07.540
 areas with native seed mixes.

02:14:07.540 --> 02:14:19.820
 And these native seed mixes are grasses and herbaceous plants that have the ability to

02:14:19.820 --> 02:14:23.860
 survive in these moist or wet conditions.

02:14:23.860 --> 02:14:30.940
 And in order to improve the overall condition of the land, the applicant is proposing to

02:14:30.940 --> 02:14:39.340
 expand that seeding area to 3.81 acres, we'll get back to that.

02:14:39.340 --> 02:14:46.300
 And then I would like to let you know that we, the applicant did meet all the notification

02:14:46.300 --> 02:14:52.140
 requirements and that the staff received no responses.

02:14:52.140 --> 02:14:58.940
 The recommendation is for approval of this plan with the following conditions, that the

02:14:58.940 --> 02:15:07.300
 land disturbances be limited to the 0.47 acres as described in the plan, and that the area

02:15:07.300 --> 02:15:15.220
 be vegetated across that 3.81 acres as described in the plan, and that that be done within

02:15:15.220 --> 02:15:19.340
 the 14 days of the construction of that infrastructure.

02:15:19.340 --> 02:15:28.020
 And then following that seeding of that area to perform three years of inspections and

02:15:28.020 --> 02:15:35.540
 provide staff a report as a follow-up, and after the three-year period, staff will accept

02:15:35.540 --> 02:15:36.540
 the project.

02:15:36.540 --> 02:15:39.900
 And with that, I will stand for any questions.

02:15:39.900 --> 02:15:42.660
 Thank you, Christy.

02:15:42.660 --> 02:15:46.860
 Questions for Christy on this?

02:15:46.860 --> 02:15:52.060
 Thanks and thanks for the great backup, yeah, was perfectly laid out in detail, appreciate

02:15:52.060 --> 02:15:53.060
 that very much.

02:15:53.060 --> 02:15:54.060
 Thanks.

02:15:54.060 --> 02:15:55.060
 Tina?

02:15:55.060 --> 02:16:00.800
 Just for the commission's benefit, given the length of the conditions that are included

02:16:00.800 --> 02:16:06.140
 in their specificity, if the commission is inclined to approve this request, my recommendation

02:16:06.140 --> 02:16:10.420
 to you would be that you make a motion for approval with the conditions as presented

02:16:10.420 --> 02:16:11.420
 in the AIS.

02:16:11.420 --> 02:16:12.420
 Okay.

02:16:12.420 --> 02:16:13.420
 Please and thank you.

02:16:13.420 --> 02:16:16.660
 Instead of like, yeah, we're trying to restate them for sure.

02:16:16.660 --> 02:16:17.660
 Right.

02:16:17.660 --> 02:16:18.660
 Yeah.

02:16:18.660 --> 02:16:19.660
 Or even summarizing, so.

02:16:19.660 --> 02:16:20.660
 Right, right.

02:16:20.660 --> 02:16:21.660
 Very well.

02:16:21.660 --> 02:16:25.240
 Thank you for that.

02:16:25.240 --> 02:16:28.100
 Any discussion from the dais?

02:16:28.100 --> 02:16:29.100
 Okay.

02:16:29.100 --> 02:16:32.220
 Is there a motion from the dais?

02:16:32.220 --> 02:16:33.220
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:16:33.220 --> 02:16:34.220
 Thank you, Chair.

02:16:34.220 --> 02:16:41.740
 I'll move approval with the staff recommended conditions within the agenda information sheet.

02:16:41.740 --> 02:16:43.060
 Thank you.

02:16:43.060 --> 02:16:45.620
 Got a first for approval.

02:16:45.620 --> 02:16:46.620
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:16:46.620 --> 02:16:47.620
 Second.

02:16:47.620 --> 02:16:52.380
 Okay, we've got a first and a second for approval.

02:16:52.380 --> 02:16:57.500
 Let me hold on that for one moment, because I did not close the public hearing.

02:16:57.500 --> 02:16:59.020
 So I will.

02:16:59.020 --> 02:17:00.380
 I don't have cards to speak.

02:17:00.380 --> 02:17:06.220
 Is there anyone wishing to speak who's here on this item?

02:17:06.220 --> 02:17:08.280
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

02:17:08.280 --> 02:17:09.280
 Let's get back to that.

02:17:09.280 --> 02:17:19.420
 Okay, first and a second on the floor to approve the AESA with the conditions laid out in the

02:17:19.420 --> 02:17:20.420
 AIS.

02:17:20.420 --> 02:17:21.420
 Okay.

02:17:21.420 --> 02:17:22.420
 Let's vote.

02:17:22.420 --> 02:17:23.420
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:17:23.420 --> 02:17:24.420
 Aye.

02:17:24.420 --> 02:17:25.420
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:17:25.420 --> 02:17:26.420
 Aye.

02:17:26.420 --> 02:17:27.420
 Commissioner McDade?

02:17:27.420 --> 02:17:28.420
 Aye.

02:17:28.420 --> 02:17:34.740
 Chair, as an aye, that motion carries 4-0.

02:17:34.740 --> 02:17:42.060
 That will take us to Public Hearing 5B, Z220008B.

02:17:42.060 --> 02:17:45.780
 I will call Commissioner Cole back in.

02:17:45.780 --> 02:17:47.380
 Welcome back.

02:17:47.380 --> 02:17:51.840
 I will open the public hearing and invite Julie up for her presentation.

02:17:51.840 --> 02:17:53.580
 Good evening.

02:17:53.580 --> 02:17:59.620
 Let me pull up my presentation.

02:17:59.620 --> 02:18:07.580
 Good evening, Julie Wyatt, Senior Planner.

02:18:07.580 --> 02:18:15.580
 I am presenting Z220008, that's the Asbury UMC rezoning to you this evening.

02:18:15.580 --> 02:18:22.780
 So the request before you is to rezone approximately 13 acres from R2 District to SC District,

02:18:22.780 --> 02:18:25.860
 SC being Suburban Corridor District.

02:18:25.860 --> 02:18:30.740
 The subject property, as I mentioned, is a total of 13 acres.

02:18:30.740 --> 02:18:36.540
 That breaks down to about 4 acres that's currently developed with a religious facility use, and

02:18:36.540 --> 02:18:39.660
 then 9 acres that is currently undeveloped.

02:18:39.660 --> 02:18:45.340
 The purpose of the rezoning is the applicant would like to construct a telecommunications

02:18:45.340 --> 02:18:49.980
 tower or alternative mounting structure on the subject site.

02:18:49.980 --> 02:18:55.260
 However, if approved, any use within the SC District could be developed on the site.

02:18:55.260 --> 02:19:02.500
 So just want to let you know, this is a rezoning to a base zoning district, so any use could

02:19:02.500 --> 02:19:07.060
 be developed to the development standards within the Denton Development Code.

02:19:07.060 --> 02:19:13.780
 The subject property is located at the intersection of Locust and Hercules, situated in the north

02:19:13.780 --> 02:19:18.380
 side of town, outlined here in yellow on your screen.

02:19:18.380 --> 02:19:23.620
 And we also have on your screen two zoning maps, one being the existing zoning showing

02:19:23.620 --> 02:19:32.860
 the existing R2, and then the proposed rezoning, extending that existing SC to the north to

02:19:32.860 --> 02:19:38.580
 the subject property shown here.

02:19:38.580 --> 02:19:41.540
 The approval criteria are in subchapter 2.

02:19:41.540 --> 02:19:43.060
 I'm not going to read all of them.

02:19:43.060 --> 02:19:47.300
 We're just going to hit some highlights today, but I just want to let you know staff has

02:19:47.300 --> 02:19:57.500
 analyzed the project and has concluded that it does conform to the criteria for approval

02:19:57.500 --> 02:20:02.020
 and the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan.

02:20:02.020 --> 02:20:04.900
 So first we're going to talk about the comprehensive plan.

02:20:04.900 --> 02:20:10.420
 The subject property is predominantly designated community mixed use, so the subject property

02:20:10.420 --> 02:20:12.220
 is outlined here in black.

02:20:12.220 --> 02:20:18.060
 I did give kind of a fuller picture of the north side of town and that comprehensive

02:20:18.060 --> 02:20:24.580
 plan just to show you how that community mixed use sort of works within the broader area.

02:20:24.580 --> 02:20:28.940
 Community mixed use is a mixed use future land use designation.

02:20:28.940 --> 02:20:35.420
 The intent is to encourage commercial uses, retail, office, restaurant, some residential

02:20:35.420 --> 02:20:41.580
 moderate to higher densities could be appropriate to support those commercial uses.

02:20:41.580 --> 02:20:46.940
 Community mixed use, if you look at our future land use map, is typically found on arterial

02:20:46.940 --> 02:20:49.660
 roadways, often at intersections.

02:20:49.660 --> 02:20:54.120
 So think of Loop 288, think of University, think of Teasley.

02:20:54.120 --> 02:20:58.100
 That's where we often find that community mixed use, kind of where we've got that suburban

02:20:58.100 --> 02:21:01.900
 commercial development pattern.

02:21:01.900 --> 02:21:08.100
 And the permitted uses in SC district are consistent with community mixed use.

02:21:08.100 --> 02:21:11.500
 But we don't just look at the future land use map, we want to look at the entire comprehensive

02:21:11.500 --> 02:21:13.220
 plan when we're analyzing projects.

02:21:13.220 --> 02:21:18.500
 And in this instance, since we know that they would like to develop communications infrastructure,

02:21:18.500 --> 02:21:21.900
 we looked at that piece of the comprehensive plan.

02:21:21.900 --> 02:21:23.420
 And that is something we want to encourage.

02:21:23.420 --> 02:21:29.140
 It is definitely a part of our infrastructure nowadays with kids being online and all of

02:21:29.140 --> 02:21:30.620
 us on Zoom meetings.

02:21:30.620 --> 02:21:36.260
 So it is something that we need to make sure that we have adequate access to and capacity

02:21:36.260 --> 02:21:37.260
 within our city.

02:21:37.260 --> 02:21:43.860
 So this request is consistent with our communications infrastructure goals.

02:21:43.860 --> 02:21:49.180
 So just to talk a little bit more about the map, you see the subject property nested within

02:21:49.180 --> 02:21:54.500
 that community mixed use, which includes the subject site extending all the way to Loop

02:21:54.500 --> 02:21:56.260
 288.

02:21:56.260 --> 02:22:00.300
 We've got adjacent properties, we've got low residential neighborhoods to the south and

02:22:00.300 --> 02:22:04.380
 to the east of the site, moderate residential to the west.

02:22:04.380 --> 02:22:12.620
 And then as you can see along Loop 288, we have a variety of future land use designations.

02:22:12.620 --> 02:22:17.260
 The next we want to look at is minimizes adverse impacts to surrounding property.

02:22:17.260 --> 02:22:21.500
 It's something we always want to look at when we're looking at rezoning cases.

02:22:21.500 --> 02:22:24.020
 How will it impact the surrounding area?

02:22:24.020 --> 02:22:29.780
 So this subject property, and I think we talked about it at work session, is kind of an undeveloped

02:22:29.780 --> 02:22:34.400
 piece of property, but it is surrounded by residential areas.

02:22:34.400 --> 02:22:40.380
 And so what we want to do is look at how a rezoning would impact those residential areas.

02:22:40.380 --> 02:22:45.960
 SC has a lot of different commercial type uses at a development intensity that is greater

02:22:45.960 --> 02:22:49.060
 than what we typically find in our residential areas.

02:22:49.060 --> 02:22:55.500
 So if and when this property develops, how will it develop and what will that look like?

02:22:55.500 --> 02:23:00.620
 So the Denton Development Code addresses that, and it has elements within it to make sure

02:23:00.620 --> 02:23:06.860
 that our commercial areas are compatible and are complementary to our residential areas.

02:23:06.860 --> 02:23:08.760
 We require things like street trees.

02:23:08.760 --> 02:23:13.340
 So along all public rights of way, so Locust and Hercules, they would be required to plant

02:23:13.340 --> 02:23:15.700
 a street tree every 30 feet.

02:23:15.700 --> 02:23:18.280
 And that's required of all development within the city of Denton.

02:23:18.280 --> 02:23:20.300
 We also require parking lot landscaping.

02:23:20.300 --> 02:23:24.860
 Our landscaping code has a menu of items that applicants can choose from, but what we want

02:23:24.860 --> 02:23:28.580
 to make sure is our parking lots are adequately landscaped and that there's adequate tree

02:23:28.580 --> 02:23:31.980
 canopy so that they look nice.

02:23:31.980 --> 02:23:33.740
 We have setbacks.

02:23:33.740 --> 02:23:41.360
 SC District has a 20-foot front setback from the right of way.

02:23:41.360 --> 02:23:48.160
 So if you're looking how that impacts Hercules, for example, if and when this property develops,

02:23:48.160 --> 02:23:49.820
 they will have to plant the property.

02:23:49.820 --> 02:23:51.540
 Right of way dedication will be required.

02:23:51.540 --> 02:23:57.060
 Hercules is a collector roadway, so it's a 65 feet of right of way, 32 and a half feet

02:23:57.060 --> 02:23:58.060
 from the center line.

02:23:58.060 --> 02:24:02.700
 So there will be right of way dedication that they'll have to provide with planting.

02:24:02.700 --> 02:24:06.300
 And then beyond that will be that 20-foot setback.

02:24:06.300 --> 02:24:14.740
 So we're looking at approximately about 95 feet from the residential property lines to

02:24:14.740 --> 02:24:18.300
 the south that any building could be built on this property.

02:24:18.300 --> 02:24:23.500
 So if that SC were approved, any building on the property would have to be set back

02:24:23.500 --> 02:24:28.900
 at least 95 feet or would likely be set back at least 95 feet from the property line of

02:24:28.900 --> 02:24:32.900
 those residential lots to the south.

02:24:32.900 --> 02:24:34.580
 Lighting we do have standards for our lighting.

02:24:34.580 --> 02:24:38.340
 We want to make sure we have adequate lighting in our parking lots, but we want to make sure

02:24:38.340 --> 02:24:44.100
 that they're downcast and so that they shine where they need to shine and they don't spill

02:24:44.100 --> 02:24:46.420
 over to residential properties.

02:24:46.420 --> 02:24:53.780
 We have overall minimum tree canopy SC district, 30% of the lot would have to be covered in

02:24:53.780 --> 02:24:58.180
 mature tree canopy, so that would be something we would look at at the time of development.

02:24:58.180 --> 02:25:00.620
 And then driveway spacing and limitations.

02:25:00.620 --> 02:25:05.740
 We want to make sure access is appropriate and is safe on the property and so that would

02:25:05.740 --> 02:25:08.140
 be reviewed as part of the development.

02:25:08.140 --> 02:25:13.260
 When we look at the site, it is kind of a different shaped site and there is existing

02:25:13.260 --> 02:25:14.580
 development on the property.

02:25:14.580 --> 02:25:16.420
 So we just did a measurement.

02:25:16.420 --> 02:25:20.340
 There is an unconfirmed ESA potentially.

02:25:20.340 --> 02:25:24.340
 When the property develops, they will have to go through the analysis of that ESA like

02:25:24.340 --> 02:25:26.660
 Christy just went through.

02:25:26.660 --> 02:25:32.500
 But there is about three acres that could be developed potentially in this area and

02:25:32.500 --> 02:25:38.100
 then about three and a half acres that could be developed adjacent to Locust.

02:25:38.100 --> 02:25:42.940
 Just know that does not include any right of way dedication, so it would likely be squeezed

02:25:42.940 --> 02:25:49.580
 a little more, but that is potentially what their development area would be.

02:25:49.580 --> 02:25:52.420
 We also want to talk about significant changes to the area.

02:25:52.420 --> 02:25:58.620
 That is one of our criterion for approval and I think that really applies to this project

02:25:58.620 --> 02:26:00.340
 in particular.

02:26:00.340 --> 02:26:05.900
 So the aerial view on your screen, the top one is from 2017.

02:26:05.900 --> 02:26:09.820
 It is from our GIS maps online.

02:26:09.820 --> 02:26:13.060
 And you could see the north side of town had not quite developed yet.

02:26:13.060 --> 02:26:19.780
 There were still a lot of open spaces remaining and the subject property has a star on it.

02:26:19.780 --> 02:26:24.420
 And then look at the most recent aerials that we have on our GIS maps and just how much

02:26:24.420 --> 02:26:27.860
 development we have seen in the north side of town.

02:26:27.860 --> 02:26:31.940
 So everything outlined in yellow, that is a single family residential neighborhood.

02:26:31.940 --> 02:26:34.140
 So Beaver Creek, that has already been developed.

02:26:34.140 --> 02:26:35.140
 People live there.

02:26:35.140 --> 02:26:38.220
 Stark Farms is currently under development now.

02:26:38.220 --> 02:26:41.180
 Some houses are on the ground, some are still being constructed.

02:26:41.180 --> 02:26:47.340
 We have got a development here at Hercules near FM 428, a multi-family project just north

02:26:47.340 --> 02:26:48.340
 of that.

02:26:48.340 --> 02:26:51.900
 We got multi-family projects, you may remember, some of you may remember the specific use

02:26:51.900 --> 02:26:57.200
 permits that came forward with that, those along the loop and FM 428, as well as single

02:26:57.200 --> 02:27:01.060
 family residential just to the southeast of that.

02:27:01.060 --> 02:27:07.660
 West of the subject property, those neighborhoods have filled out since 2017 and new residents

02:27:07.660 --> 02:27:09.460
 are moving in.

02:27:09.460 --> 02:27:15.860
 And then further west, we have a horizontal multi-family that just came forward to you

02:27:15.860 --> 02:27:20.340
 that is currently under development, single family residential and then some town home

02:27:20.340 --> 02:27:22.500
 developments as well as other multi-families.

02:27:22.500 --> 02:27:29.420
 So we have added about 1,500 homes, dwellings to this area in the last five years, which

02:27:29.420 --> 02:27:33.780
 is a tremendous amount of growth in this area.

02:27:33.780 --> 02:27:39.620
 In the nearest retail centers like where we have got a collection of retail, we are looking

02:27:39.620 --> 02:27:43.700
 at somebody would have to travel to university or down the loop.

02:27:43.700 --> 02:27:48.500
 So we don't have a lot of retail in this area, but we are adding a lot of rooftops.

02:27:48.500 --> 02:27:53.180
 And so commercial development would be appropriate and so when we analyze this, the types of

02:27:53.180 --> 02:27:58.960
 uses in SC District would provide that necessary shopping and services that these residents

02:27:58.960 --> 02:28:01.180
 would need close to their homes.

02:28:01.180 --> 02:28:04.800
 So in that respect, it is consistent with that significant change.

02:28:04.800 --> 02:28:09.900
 It's serving those new residents.

02:28:09.900 --> 02:28:13.580
 Public outreach was sent out.

02:28:13.580 --> 02:28:20.100
 We had to do it a couple of times in order to make sure that we captured all of the residents

02:28:20.100 --> 02:28:25.500
 within that 200-foot boundary, but we have got all of the residents that were notified.

02:28:25.500 --> 02:28:27.260
 We have received four in opposition.

02:28:27.260 --> 02:28:28.660
 I believe your staff report said five.

02:28:28.660 --> 02:28:33.820
 I think I double counted someone who had sent an email and a letter.

02:28:33.820 --> 02:28:36.020
 And those are shown on your screen.

02:28:36.020 --> 02:28:37.420
 They are kind of difficult to see.

02:28:37.420 --> 02:28:38.420
 Sorry.

02:28:38.420 --> 02:28:39.420
 It is not a very good map.

02:28:39.420 --> 02:28:44.360
 The applicant also held a neighborhood meeting with about 12 attendees.

02:28:44.360 --> 02:28:48.620
 So based upon the criteria for approval and the future land use designated, the comprehensive

02:28:48.620 --> 02:28:51.660
 plan, staff recommends approval of the request.

02:28:51.660 --> 02:28:53.220
 And I will be happy to answer any questions.

02:28:53.220 --> 02:28:58.380
 The applicant is here and he has a presentation as well as he provided binders to you and

02:28:58.380 --> 02:29:02.320
 you should have had that on your desk when you got there.

02:29:02.320 --> 02:29:03.320
 Thank you.

02:29:03.320 --> 02:29:05.460
 Julie, I have a quick question for you.

02:29:05.460 --> 02:29:10.060
 Is there any development happening to the north in the SC that's just north of that?

02:29:10.060 --> 02:29:11.060
 What's happening there?

02:29:11.060 --> 02:29:12.060
 I don't recall.

02:29:12.060 --> 02:29:13.060
 Yes.

02:29:13.060 --> 02:29:17.340
 We do have an application that will probably be coming forward to you soon.

02:29:17.340 --> 02:29:23.820
 I believe it does have, and Tina may correct me because it's not mine, but some multifamily

02:29:23.820 --> 02:29:27.900
 with some commercial out parcels, the property to the north.

02:29:27.900 --> 02:29:28.900
 That is correct.

02:29:28.900 --> 02:29:29.900
 Okay.

02:29:29.900 --> 02:29:33.780
 I don't know much about it, but it will be forward soon.

02:29:33.780 --> 02:29:34.780
 Right.

02:29:34.780 --> 02:29:38.900
 Because the multifamily requires approval of a specific use permit.

02:29:38.900 --> 02:29:40.660
 Thank you.

02:29:40.660 --> 02:29:42.260
 Any questions for Julie?

02:29:42.260 --> 02:29:43.260
 Commissioner Pruitt.

02:29:43.260 --> 02:29:44.260
 Thank you, chair.

02:29:44.260 --> 02:29:46.260
 Just two quick things.

02:29:46.260 --> 02:30:01.420
 Is it accurate to say that our code requirement to have accessibility through adjacent properties

02:30:01.420 --> 02:30:08.940
 requires that the use be allowed within the adjacent property is forcing this change of

02:30:08.940 --> 02:30:10.220
 the entire parcel?

02:30:10.220 --> 02:30:11.860
 You summarized that very well.

02:30:11.860 --> 02:30:12.860
 Okay.

02:30:12.860 --> 02:30:13.860
 Yes.

02:30:13.860 --> 02:30:21.300
 We do have a determination that, and the applicant, as I mentioned, will make a presentation.

02:30:21.300 --> 02:30:28.820
 I believe their intended area for that telecommunications facility is to the north of the existing building.

02:30:28.820 --> 02:30:33.740
 They have not made application for that, so there's no approvals for that at this time.

02:30:33.740 --> 02:30:39.940
 It is their intent to potentially take access through that existing parking lot.

02:30:39.940 --> 02:30:46.060
 In order to take access through that existing parking lot, that does require that rezoning

02:30:46.060 --> 02:30:52.820
 to suburban corridor because the telecommunications tower is not permitted in the R2 district.

02:30:52.820 --> 02:30:53.820
 Okay.

02:30:53.820 --> 02:30:58.340
 Secondly, can you give me an idea of scale here?

02:30:58.340 --> 02:31:04.500
 I think, I don't want to get too much into discussion, but the presence of the potential

02:31:04.500 --> 02:31:12.160
 ESA on the north side, there's a boundary there between the proposed zoning map of the

02:31:12.160 --> 02:31:15.220
 really large pink blob.

02:31:15.220 --> 02:31:20.860
 What I want to understand is the potential future development in the long term of this

02:31:20.860 --> 02:31:26.840
 parcel, assuming that is an ESA.

02:31:26.840 --> 02:31:33.260
 What kind of areas in our town have a commercial development that would be on the order of,

02:31:33.260 --> 02:31:38.380
 I'm just going to spitball it here and say 10 acres, does that make sense?

02:31:38.380 --> 02:31:45.060
 They're limited within either adjacent parcels or something that's limiting them to not having

02:31:45.060 --> 02:31:46.380
 more than 10 acres.

02:31:46.380 --> 02:31:52.140
 What's the largest impact type of commercial development that we would expect in that size

02:31:52.140 --> 02:31:55.540
 of a plot?

02:31:55.540 --> 02:32:01.420
 We do see SC or suburban corridor district along university where you've got that residential

02:32:01.420 --> 02:32:07.620
 backing up to it, and those lots are typically maybe not, some of them are smaller scale

02:32:07.620 --> 02:32:09.540
 development.

02:32:09.540 --> 02:32:13.760
 Some of them are larger scale development, but there are some parcels along university

02:32:13.760 --> 02:32:18.940
 that might be consistent with that development scale.

02:32:18.940 --> 02:32:19.940
 Okay.

02:32:19.940 --> 02:32:22.740
 Thank you.

02:32:22.740 --> 02:32:24.740
 Any other questions for Julie?

02:32:24.740 --> 02:32:25.740
 Okay.

02:32:25.740 --> 02:32:26.740
 Thanks, Julie.

02:32:26.740 --> 02:32:27.740
 Sure.

02:32:27.740 --> 02:32:33.380
 I don't have a card from the applicant, but I will invite them up now, and you can give

02:32:33.380 --> 02:32:43.900
 your name and address and we'll worry about the card later.

02:32:43.900 --> 02:32:44.900
 Thank you.

02:32:44.900 --> 02:32:45.900
 Thank you, Julie.

02:32:45.900 --> 02:32:46.900
 Good evening.

02:32:46.900 --> 02:32:47.900
 Good evening, Chair.

02:32:47.900 --> 02:32:51.900
 Members of the commission, I'm Bev Francis, 112 East Beacon, San Antonio.

02:32:51.900 --> 02:32:56.780
 I'm the attorney for Diamond Communications, which is a national developer telecommunication

02:32:56.780 --> 02:32:57.780
 facilities.

02:32:57.780 --> 02:33:04.100
 Diamond has been working very closely with Asbury United Methodist Church for over two

02:33:04.100 --> 02:33:09.140
 years on this site, and I want to thank Julie for, I think our first call we filled at each

02:33:09.140 --> 02:33:12.620
 other was back in April, 2020.

02:33:12.620 --> 02:33:19.260
 So your staff has done an incredible job working with us, thinking through why and what can

02:33:19.260 --> 02:33:23.500
 be done to accomplish the goals that we're trying to accomplish today.

02:33:23.500 --> 02:33:29.660
 With us this evening, we have representative members of the congregation, along with Pastor

02:33:29.660 --> 02:33:36.460
 Rick Warts, who will address you briefly, if that's okay, after my presentation.

02:33:36.460 --> 02:33:45.180
 The reason that we are excited about this opportunity is because, oops, let's see here.

02:33:45.180 --> 02:33:47.900
 What am I doing wrong, Julie?

02:33:47.900 --> 02:33:52.060
 It's not moving on me.

02:33:52.060 --> 02:33:57.780
 There we go.

02:33:57.780 --> 02:34:03.380
 It's because there's a critical need for infrastructure, and we'll talk about that momentarily.

02:34:03.380 --> 02:34:10.060
 But to kind of highlight a couple of points that Julie made in her discussion presentation.

02:34:10.060 --> 02:34:16.100
 This is another view of Google Earth, very similar to your GIS that she presented.

02:34:16.100 --> 02:34:20.620
 But it highlighted, we want to kind of show you the features that are around surrounding

02:34:20.620 --> 02:34:22.060
 the property.

02:34:22.060 --> 02:34:24.500
 You have the church facility at the bottom.

02:34:24.500 --> 02:34:31.820
 The star represents the site of the proposed alternative site, alternative feature, I should

02:34:31.820 --> 02:34:34.660
 say structure, tower.

02:34:34.660 --> 02:34:41.440
 You have the, if you would, the from right to left at an angle, that growth area of trees

02:34:41.440 --> 02:34:43.180
 and vegetation.

02:34:43.180 --> 02:34:49.300
 Just north of that, you have high tension electric transmission towers that move on

02:34:49.300 --> 02:34:55.180
 to feed the Texas Municipal Power Agency, which is directly across the street locus

02:34:55.180 --> 02:34:59.340
 to the west.

02:34:59.340 --> 02:35:04.580
 The current zoning, as Julie indicated, and we don't need to rehash it, but to the north

02:35:04.580 --> 02:35:09.020
 is SC, to the south, the property we're talking about is R2.

02:35:09.020 --> 02:35:15.660
 After many discussions with your team, it was decided that because the suburban courier

02:35:15.660 --> 02:35:22.360
 district specifically provides that alternative mounting structures, those are structures

02:35:22.360 --> 02:35:26.020
 in which the antennas are concealed within the tower.

02:35:26.020 --> 02:35:28.340
 You don't have the triangular array.

02:35:28.340 --> 02:35:33.180
 You don't have the multi Christmas tree effect, as it's often called.

02:35:33.180 --> 02:35:37.460
 They're permitted up to a height of 100 feet.

02:35:37.460 --> 02:35:42.540
 Now the reason this tower is so critical, and Julie just made this story, there's a

02:35:42.540 --> 02:35:46.300
 significant demand for wireless right now.

02:35:46.300 --> 02:35:51.620
 And in fact, the Pew Institute, a company and institute we're all familiar with, of

02:35:51.620 --> 02:35:54.740
 the last decade has done exhaustive research.

02:35:54.740 --> 02:36:01.100
 And they've concluded that by next year, there will be over 283 million smartphones.

02:36:01.100 --> 02:36:03.180
 Not cell phones, but just smartphones.

02:36:03.180 --> 02:36:09.660
 The cell phones, for the first time ever, there are more cell phones in the United States

02:36:09.660 --> 02:36:11.980
 than there are men, women, and children.

02:36:11.980 --> 02:36:16.100
 25 cell phones for every man, woman, and child.

02:36:16.100 --> 02:36:22.220
 And on top of that, in light of the residential development, that this will greatly improve,

02:36:22.220 --> 02:36:27.020
 62% of the houses and residences have cut the cord.

02:36:27.020 --> 02:36:30.700
 They're almost entirely wireless dependent.

02:36:30.700 --> 02:36:35.220
 And just to point this out, I thought this was always kind of refreshing, because it's

02:36:35.220 --> 02:36:36.220
 so honest.

02:36:36.220 --> 02:36:42.020
 About three in ten of us admitted that we're virtually online all the time.

02:36:42.020 --> 02:36:48.080
 Now as a result of this, your residents are demanding what is called seamless wireless

02:36:48.080 --> 02:36:49.820
 connectivity.

02:36:49.820 --> 02:36:55.020
 And what that means is the average residence, like in the area that will be served by this

02:36:55.020 --> 02:36:59.340
 capacity, has a minimum of five wireless devices.

02:36:59.340 --> 02:37:04.660
 And if you think about your own households, you probably exceed that number, because you

02:37:04.660 --> 02:37:11.700
 have iPhones, iPads, you have Samsung, you have other smart devices, ring doorbell systems,

02:37:11.700 --> 02:37:16.180
 and all of those are solely dependent on the ability to have that connectivity.

02:37:16.180 --> 02:37:22.860
 Again, 60% of those households have cut the cord and are wirelessly dependent.

02:37:22.860 --> 02:37:30.180
 And you have such new things that the new residents moving in are requiring, smart utilities,

02:37:30.180 --> 02:37:34.340
 ring doorbell systems, security systems, and medical devices.

02:37:34.340 --> 02:37:39.100
 All of us have seen the ubiquitous ad for the cardio where you put two fingers on the

02:37:39.100 --> 02:37:45.660
 device and it wirelessly sends your EKG to your handheld smartphone.

02:37:45.660 --> 02:37:50.220
 If there's one good thing that came from the pandemic, and it's hard to find one, is that

02:37:50.220 --> 02:37:56.000
 for the first time as a result of the stay at home, work at home, insurance companies

02:37:56.000 --> 02:38:03.500
 are now recognizing telemedicine visits with your doctors are now insured visits.

02:38:03.500 --> 02:38:06.340
 Before 2019, it was almost impossible to get that.

02:38:06.340 --> 02:38:09.860
 You had to prove you're bedridden and so forth.

02:38:09.860 --> 02:38:14.380
 And I have had certainly many of them, and I would hazard guess the majority of the people

02:38:14.380 --> 02:38:19.060
 viewing this and you all tonight have had at least one telemedicine.

02:38:19.060 --> 02:38:25.280
 It's incredible convenience to be able to have your phone or your iPad connected and

02:38:25.280 --> 02:38:27.420
 talk to the doctor.

02:38:27.420 --> 02:38:31.100
 But we can't forget E911 safety.

02:38:31.100 --> 02:38:37.340
 Eighty-five percent of all E911 calls are now made by wireless devices.

02:38:37.340 --> 02:38:43.280
 And having grown up in North Texas decades ago, I know how weather changes here.

02:38:43.280 --> 02:38:50.740
 And we all nowadays live by the reverse E911 calls, waking you up in the middle of the

02:38:50.740 --> 02:38:59.700
 night saying, telling you take cover, manmade event, a weather event, a child abduction.

02:38:59.700 --> 02:39:04.380
 The residents we're talking about tonight won't have that ability and are not having

02:39:04.380 --> 02:39:09.760
 that ability that T-Mobile can provide them through their system to receive those critical

02:39:09.760 --> 02:39:11.820
 public safety alerts.

02:39:11.820 --> 02:39:15.020
 Your city is way ahead of the ballgame.

02:39:15.020 --> 02:39:20.260
 You all have your alert Denton program where you're encouraging your residents to do exactly

02:39:20.260 --> 02:39:25.900
 what this tower will assist your residents to do, and that is sign up with you.

02:39:25.900 --> 02:39:30.540
 Sign up and so to receive notifications and alerts.

02:39:30.540 --> 02:39:38.300
 Now before Hurricane Harvey, social media for municipalities were really used as what's

02:39:38.300 --> 02:39:39.980
 going on in the city.

02:39:39.980 --> 02:39:42.940
 What is, who's been promoted, what's the upcoming events.

02:39:42.940 --> 02:39:47.900
 But after Hurricane Harvey, the program has changed across the country.

02:39:47.900 --> 02:39:55.560
 Now in the event of a natural disaster, manmade event, what happens is residents are encouraged

02:39:55.560 --> 02:40:02.280
 and do use the direct messaging platform of Twitter that you're on, Instagram you're on,

02:40:02.280 --> 02:40:03.740
 Facebook you're on.

02:40:03.740 --> 02:40:08.660
 And the reason is the E911 systems are overloaded.

02:40:08.660 --> 02:40:12.060
 They're working, they do not fail, but they're overloaded.

02:40:12.060 --> 02:40:19.620
 So again, in situations, particularly let's say a weather event, where they cannot get

02:40:19.620 --> 02:40:26.020
 through E911 to alert you where they are, encourage your citizens to do like many cities

02:40:26.020 --> 02:40:31.780
 across the nation and use the social media platforms very quickly and I appreciate the

02:40:31.780 --> 02:40:33.260
 opportunity to address this.

02:40:33.260 --> 02:40:39.820
 I just wanted to walk through with you the steps that were taken to determine why the

02:40:39.820 --> 02:40:46.540
 needs exist, create a search ring, and then show you the propagation maps.

02:40:46.540 --> 02:40:51.700
 The first step, T-Mobile identifies that there is an issue.

02:40:51.700 --> 02:40:54.900
 The residents are not receiving service in certain areas.

02:40:54.900 --> 02:40:58.060
 There's what's called a gap in the service.

02:40:58.060 --> 02:40:59.860
 They issue a search ring.

02:40:59.860 --> 02:41:05.980
 This case is so tight because of the residential and the demands of the residential.

02:41:05.980 --> 02:41:11.940
 As Julie indicated, it was only a quarter mile search ring, a quarter mile that a facility

02:41:11.940 --> 02:41:15.060
 had to be located within.

02:41:15.060 --> 02:41:21.380
 Diamond then, communication then takes that search ring, looks for obviously the ideal

02:41:21.380 --> 02:41:27.580
 situation is to find a structure tall enough in which to co-locate.

02:41:27.580 --> 02:41:33.980
 There were no structures available as T-Mobile also confirmed as I'll show you, and then

02:41:33.980 --> 02:41:39.340
 they started looking for available leaseable, developable space as the courts have said.

02:41:39.340 --> 02:41:43.860
 It's got to be able for a location where a tower has to be under the ables.

02:41:43.860 --> 02:41:49.860
 It's got to be buildable, developable, and utilities available.

02:41:49.860 --> 02:41:55.120
 Step two, Diamond selects a tower and designs a site.

02:41:55.120 --> 02:42:00.340
 As Julie already went through the design, but I wanted to focus on the actual layout

02:42:00.340 --> 02:42:03.140
 if I may under the concept plan.

02:42:03.140 --> 02:42:09.980
 This is the, as Julie indicated, there are basically two lots that the church owns that

02:42:09.980 --> 02:42:12.920
 combine to make the 13 acres.

02:42:12.920 --> 02:42:20.180
 The location of the compound and the tower are at the most northern end away from Hercules,

02:42:20.180 --> 02:42:28.740
 but yet connected in sight to the church facility being an alternative concealment structure.

02:42:28.740 --> 02:42:35.340
 It's going to made to be looking at part of and to be placed behind the church as part

02:42:35.340 --> 02:42:37.920
 of the compound structure.

02:42:37.920 --> 02:42:44.240
 The wall itself will be an eight foot CMU wall painted to match the church, and it's

02:42:44.240 --> 02:42:49.580
 being designed at the compound to accommodate multiple carriers.

02:42:49.580 --> 02:42:54.860
 This is just a depiction of a 100 foot alternative tower.

02:42:54.860 --> 02:43:01.580
 Again, we'll go through your development process with Julie and your team on the design and

02:43:01.580 --> 02:43:06.420
 going through the permitting process, but to accomplish the goals that I'll show you

02:43:06.420 --> 02:43:10.880
 momentarily, T-Mobile needs to have what's called a rad center.

02:43:10.880 --> 02:43:17.500
 The center of their antennas need to be slightly under 100 feet, so the antennas inside the

02:43:17.500 --> 02:43:23.340
 concealment feature, so the top of the tower will not exceed 100 feet, which is the height

02:43:23.340 --> 02:43:26.820
 permitted in an SC district.

02:43:26.820 --> 02:43:32.620
 Step three, after the site selected, the site design, then the T-Mobile engineers go to

02:43:32.620 --> 02:43:33.900
 work.

02:43:33.900 --> 02:43:39.660
 They prepare what are called a justification letter, and important is I'll show you why

02:43:39.660 --> 02:43:43.340
 this site is so important, the propagation maps.

02:43:43.340 --> 02:43:47.420
 In your booklet is the T-Mobile justification letter.

02:43:47.420 --> 02:43:52.520
 It confirms what I told you about the 0.25 mile search ring.

02:43:52.520 --> 02:44:00.220
 It confirms the areas that match the search ring shown on Tom Mineski's alternative site,

02:44:00.220 --> 02:44:07.700
 alternative site document I've previously displayed for you, and they confirm also what

02:44:07.700 --> 02:44:08.700
 I said.

02:44:08.700 --> 02:44:12.580
 There are no structures tall enough in which to meet.

02:44:12.580 --> 02:44:13.580
 Yes, ma'am?

02:44:13.580 --> 02:44:14.580
 That was your timer.

02:44:14.580 --> 02:44:16.620
 Just you can keep talking, but if you will.

02:44:16.620 --> 02:44:17.620
 Oh, thank you.

02:44:17.620 --> 02:44:18.620
 Yeah.

02:44:18.620 --> 02:44:19.620
 I'm almost there.

02:44:19.620 --> 02:44:20.620
 Start concluding.

02:44:20.620 --> 02:44:21.620
 Okay.

02:44:21.620 --> 02:44:22.620
 Thank you very much.

02:44:22.620 --> 02:44:23.620
 Thank you.

02:44:23.620 --> 02:44:26.140
 And there are no structures in which they can co-locate.

02:44:26.140 --> 02:44:28.700
 Now this is the important part.

02:44:28.700 --> 02:44:31.620
 These are the propagation maps.

02:44:31.620 --> 02:44:36.380
 What I'm showing you right now is the existing coverage.

02:44:36.380 --> 02:44:43.040
 The gray is outdoor coverage, basically only, cars, yards, if you're in a park.

02:44:43.040 --> 02:44:49.420
 The green is indoor, where you have the ability to reap the benefits that I've been talking

02:44:49.420 --> 02:44:50.420
 about.

02:44:50.420 --> 02:44:56.100
 If you would, look generally in a moment, you'll pop out and see what I'm talking about.

02:44:56.100 --> 02:45:01.240
 The tower will be located about the center north of the gray area.

02:45:01.240 --> 02:45:08.420
 The three red triangular circles are sites where T-Mobile had their existing antennas.

02:45:08.420 --> 02:45:11.860
 That's why you see the good infill green coverage.

02:45:11.860 --> 02:45:14.580
 So this is exciting and why we're here tonight.

02:45:14.580 --> 02:45:18.940
 You'll look at this and then see the improvement.

02:45:18.940 --> 02:45:25.000
 The areas that Julie is talking about, the growth of residential.

02:45:25.000 --> 02:45:31.420
 This is why we're asking you to take this into consideration and make your recommendation.

02:45:31.420 --> 02:45:39.620
 Also, as you all have probably heard on other presentations, E9 carriers have to produce

02:45:39.620 --> 02:45:43.760
 and transmit collected E9-1-1 calls.

02:45:43.760 --> 02:45:52.660
 As noted by T-Mobile, the particular site that you see in one month handled 371 E9-1-1

02:45:52.660 --> 02:45:53.660
 calls.

02:45:53.660 --> 02:46:01.140
 As the RF engineers indicate, their particular existing site, that is, would be relieved

02:46:01.140 --> 02:46:07.820
 of a lot of those pressures with the completion and the lighting up, if you would, of this

02:46:07.820 --> 02:46:09.780
 new tower.

02:46:09.780 --> 02:46:15.100
 Chair, members of the commission, just one final point.

02:46:15.100 --> 02:46:19.940
 As you all know and has been shared with you, the Telecommunications Act says in making

02:46:19.940 --> 02:46:26.900
 decisions such as we're asking you to consider tonight, municipalities, governmental entities

02:46:26.900 --> 02:46:34.220
 are not allowed to take into consideration the basis, if any, of environmental effects

02:46:34.220 --> 02:46:36.340
 of radio frequency.

02:46:36.340 --> 02:46:41.660
 For people in the audience and your benefit and people watching this online, I always

02:46:41.660 --> 02:46:48.300
 like to give about three, let's say, backup, worldly recognized organizations takes on

02:46:48.300 --> 02:46:49.560
 this.

02:46:49.560 --> 02:46:54.940
 There are the World Health Organization has studied it, there are no convincing scientific

02:46:54.940 --> 02:47:00.300
 effects that weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health

02:47:00.300 --> 02:47:01.300
 effects.

02:47:01.300 --> 02:47:07.380
 Excuse me, the American Cancer Society has written volumes on this and researched it

02:47:07.380 --> 02:47:11.900
 and have come to the conclusion that most scientists worry that their cell phone antennas

02:47:11.900 --> 02:47:17.380
 are unlikely to cause cancer, as did the USDA.

02:47:17.380 --> 02:47:24.180
 One conclusion before I introduce the pastor, just would like to recap.

02:47:24.180 --> 02:47:31.020
 We believe the presentation, the application, the presentation tonight, the written materials

02:47:31.020 --> 02:47:36.380
 show there's a significant gap that exists in T-Mobile's wireless system.

02:47:36.380 --> 02:47:42.220
 We believe we have shown there are no alternative site that would remedy that gap and therefore

02:47:42.220 --> 02:47:49.380
 a denial will essentially result in a material inhibition of T-Mobile's ability to resolve

02:47:49.380 --> 02:47:52.820
 this significant gap and improve its service capability.

02:47:52.820 --> 02:47:59.300
 So we're respectfully requesting your recommendation to the council to approve this, resigning

02:47:59.300 --> 02:48:05.380
 to facilitate all the incredible benefits to an extremely growing community.

02:48:05.380 --> 02:48:09.380
 And with that, I'd like to introduce the pastor.

02:48:09.380 --> 02:48:10.380
 Thank you very much.

02:48:10.380 --> 02:48:14.220
 Thank you for allowing me extra time.

02:48:14.220 --> 02:48:20.740
 So we're going to start as a new speaker, if you'll state your name and address.

02:48:20.740 --> 02:48:21.740
 Sure.

02:48:21.740 --> 02:48:23.880
 We will have four minutes to speak on the item.

02:48:23.880 --> 02:48:25.580
 My name is Chris Rickwards.

02:48:25.580 --> 02:48:30.460
 My address is 2106 Fair Oaks Circle in Corinth, Texas.

02:48:30.460 --> 02:48:31.460
 Thank you.

02:48:31.460 --> 02:48:34.220
 I've been at this church for a little over a year.

02:48:34.220 --> 02:48:39.020
 Asbury Nine Methods Church is a vibrant congregation that started in the '50s.

02:48:39.020 --> 02:48:44.780
 It was located at University in Elm, more in the center of Denton in early 2000.

02:48:44.780 --> 02:48:52.020
 They moved out north, anticipating the growth that was forecasted to happen out there.

02:48:52.020 --> 02:48:58.020
 A couple housing crises later and unforeseen circumstances and that growth is now really

02:48:58.020 --> 02:49:00.460
 accelerating as staff pointed out.

02:49:00.460 --> 02:49:03.420
 We're excited to be there, to be a part of that community.

02:49:03.420 --> 02:49:09.700
 We believe we have the mandate to be good neighbors and we will continue to do so.

02:49:09.700 --> 02:49:14.940
 We respectfully ask you to approve this zoning change so that we can continue our ministry,

02:49:14.940 --> 02:49:19.740
 build this tower, which will bring revenue to the church and help us to expand our ministry

02:49:19.740 --> 02:49:21.820
 out on the north side of Denton.

02:49:21.820 --> 02:49:28.020
 Thank you for your time and thank you for your consideration.

02:49:28.020 --> 02:49:29.020
 Thank you.

02:49:29.020 --> 02:49:30.940
 This is a public hearing.

02:49:30.940 --> 02:49:33.260
 Is there anyone else wishing to come up and speak?

02:49:33.260 --> 02:49:39.140
 I don't have any other cards for this item, but anyone who has not yet spoken may do so

02:49:39.140 --> 02:49:43.400
 at this time.

02:49:43.400 --> 02:49:46.780
 I do not see any, so I will close the public hearing.

02:49:46.780 --> 02:49:49.620
 I will open the dais for discussion or motion.

02:49:49.620 --> 02:49:53.900
 Do we have discussion questions ahead of us?

02:49:53.900 --> 02:49:54.900
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:49:54.900 --> 02:49:55.900
 Thank you, Chair.

02:49:55.900 --> 02:50:03.140
 I have a question for the representative of T-Mobile with the applicant, actually.

02:50:03.140 --> 02:50:04.140
 Thank you.

02:50:04.140 --> 02:50:11.340
 Sorry to make you walk back and forth so quickly.

02:50:11.340 --> 02:50:13.180
 I just wanted to inquire.

02:50:13.180 --> 02:50:19.420
 I understand no need to get into specifics because of contractual obligations, but it

02:50:19.420 --> 02:50:23.620
 strikes me that both the property just to the north of this as well as the property

02:50:23.620 --> 02:50:28.300
 just to the west of this on the other side of Locust Street, if it is still Locust Street

02:50:28.300 --> 02:50:36.440
 at that point, welcome to Denton, both have zoning that would allow this by right.

02:50:36.440 --> 02:50:41.820
 Did you explore those other possibilities that are very near when we're looking at transmission

02:50:41.820 --> 02:50:47.500
 distances and were they just not an option either technically or business relationship

02:50:47.500 --> 02:50:48.500
 wise?

02:50:48.500 --> 02:50:49.500
 No, great question.

02:50:49.500 --> 02:50:50.500
 Thank you, Commissioner.

02:50:50.500 --> 02:50:58.140
 As pointed out in the alternative site analysis that Diamond prepared and presented to you,

02:50:58.140 --> 02:51:00.440
 they scrub the sites.

02:51:00.440 --> 02:51:05.180
 That means they first look for towers that they can co-locate on.

02:51:05.180 --> 02:51:08.340
 Second then, they go and do exactly what you're talking about.

02:51:08.340 --> 02:51:11.940
 They have people with site acquisitions on the team.

02:51:11.940 --> 02:51:20.380
 They meet, they contact, but again, the issue is access to property and to be able to place

02:51:20.380 --> 02:51:26.980
 the tower away from arterial and conductive street, if I'm pronouncing it correctly, which

02:51:26.980 --> 02:51:31.620
 means it's got to go through various developments for the access road.

02:51:31.620 --> 02:51:40.820
 Again, as the court said, it's got to be accessible, able, developable, and not interfere with

02:51:40.820 --> 02:51:46.620
 property owners' future plans for development, utilities available.

02:51:46.620 --> 02:51:49.620
 That's during the two year process.

02:51:49.620 --> 02:51:54.260
 This and we're fortunate to be able to work this closely with such an incredible team at

02:51:54.260 --> 02:51:55.260
 the church.

02:51:55.260 --> 02:52:02.460
 Okay, so it's a combination of available infrastructure on site as well as minimum required distance

02:52:02.460 --> 02:52:04.820
 from an arterial roadway, essentially?

02:52:04.820 --> 02:52:05.820
 Absolutely.

02:52:05.820 --> 02:52:06.820
 Okay.

02:52:06.820 --> 02:52:09.980
 So many projects, like the one to the north, are in their own development stage.

02:52:09.980 --> 02:52:10.980
 Right.

02:52:10.980 --> 02:52:11.980
 Okay.

02:52:11.980 --> 02:52:15.900
 They've already laid out plans in certain cases, starting construction or submitted

02:52:15.900 --> 02:52:16.900
 plans.

02:52:16.900 --> 02:52:17.900
 Okay.

02:52:17.900 --> 02:52:18.900
 Thank you very much.

02:52:18.900 --> 02:52:19.900
 Thank you.

02:52:19.900 --> 02:52:20.900
 Any other questions?

02:52:20.900 --> 02:52:21.900
 Discussion?

02:52:21.900 --> 02:52:22.900
 Okay.

02:52:22.900 --> 02:52:34.660
 Well, Chair, can entertain a motion or further discussion or questions?

02:52:34.660 --> 02:52:35.660
 Commissioner Cole?

02:52:35.660 --> 02:52:36.660
 I'll make a motion to approve.

02:52:36.660 --> 02:52:37.660
 Okay.

02:52:37.660 --> 02:52:40.540
 We've got a motion on the floor for approval.

02:52:40.540 --> 02:52:41.540
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:52:41.540 --> 02:52:42.540
 Second.

02:52:42.540 --> 02:52:43.540
 Okay.

02:52:43.540 --> 02:52:47.140
 We've got a first and a second discussion.

02:52:47.140 --> 02:52:48.140
 Commissioner Pruitt?

02:52:48.140 --> 02:52:50.840
 Thank you, Chair.

02:52:50.840 --> 02:52:58.420
 So I don't think anybody is against a tower here.

02:52:58.420 --> 02:53:01.660
 Maybe I shouldn't speak for too many people.

02:53:01.660 --> 02:53:05.260
 Actually, before I launch into this, let me ask staff.

02:53:05.260 --> 02:53:11.620
 There were a few properties just to the south that signified opposition to this request.

02:53:11.620 --> 02:53:17.060
 Was there any common theme of what their concern was, since we didn't see any of them here

02:53:17.060 --> 02:53:18.060
 tonight?

02:53:18.060 --> 02:53:21.620
 I think it's related to the intensity of SC District.

02:53:21.620 --> 02:53:27.060
 Not necessarily this particular use, but potential uses within the SC District and just that

02:53:27.060 --> 02:53:28.060
 commercial development.

02:53:28.060 --> 02:53:29.060
 Okay.

02:53:29.060 --> 02:53:30.060
 Thank you.

02:53:30.060 --> 02:53:31.060
 Sure.

02:53:31.060 --> 02:53:32.060
 Sorry.

02:53:32.060 --> 02:53:33.060
 One more, Julie.

02:53:33.060 --> 02:53:44.260
 I've got a record today going for people walking back and forth.

02:53:44.260 --> 02:53:51.180
 So I think we heard in the work session earlier a question from Chair about the potential

02:53:51.180 --> 02:53:56.940
 for an MN instead of an SC.

02:53:56.940 --> 02:54:00.180
 Can you explain what staff's thought process was there?

02:54:00.180 --> 02:54:05.180
 Just because I'm looking for something to grasp onto to follow and I'm having a hard

02:54:05.180 --> 02:54:14.980
 time, specifically for both the allowed uses concept of what would be more intense by MN

02:54:14.980 --> 02:54:22.980
 instead of SC, as well as the, I'm not going to remember the right term, the site design

02:54:22.980 --> 02:54:30.180
 requirements that go along with uses and that particular zoning designation, if you will.

02:54:30.180 --> 02:54:31.180
 Absolutely.

02:54:31.180 --> 02:54:32.180
 Sure.

02:54:32.180 --> 02:54:39.420
 So I guess top line, the future land use is community mixed use, and SC fits right in

02:54:39.420 --> 02:54:43.540
 that slot and it's kind of designed for that SC.

02:54:43.540 --> 02:54:50.180
 So from that standpoint, it met that future land use designation top line.

02:54:50.180 --> 02:54:55.180
 But you do like to drill down in what the permitted uses and how that development would

02:54:55.180 --> 02:54:56.180
 impact.

02:54:56.180 --> 02:55:01.300
 So we have a lot of mixed use districts within the City of Denton and Tina and I were talking

02:55:01.300 --> 02:55:02.960
 about that before this meeting.

02:55:02.960 --> 02:55:08.420
 So we have a lot of mixed use districts and it's not necessarily that maybe SC or MN is

02:55:08.420 --> 02:55:14.620
 more intensive than the other, it's just they're different.

02:55:14.620 --> 02:55:16.980
 And so you look at those development standards.

02:55:16.980 --> 02:55:24.580
 So SC, as it would develop, would potentially push any buildings that would be constructed

02:55:24.580 --> 02:55:30.260
 on, especially along Hercules, because that is probably the less intensive road.

02:55:30.260 --> 02:55:35.060
 It would be pushed back a little further from those residential areas.

02:55:35.060 --> 02:55:39.860
 It would, it has the similar building coverage and building height, this MN, so those are

02:55:39.860 --> 02:55:42.860
 pretty consistent across the board from that.

02:55:42.860 --> 02:55:45.000
 Minimum tree canopy is also pretty consistent.

02:55:45.000 --> 02:55:48.540
 The landscaping standards would remain consistent.

02:55:48.540 --> 02:55:53.060
 I think where it does change is some of those design standards and the uses.

02:55:53.060 --> 02:55:55.220
 So we'll talk about uses first.

02:55:55.220 --> 02:56:02.480
 MN is more of a, probably closer to the residential type zoning district and that has a variety

02:56:02.480 --> 02:56:04.900
 of residential uses.

02:56:04.900 --> 02:56:07.660
 Multifamily is a use permitted by right.

02:56:07.660 --> 02:56:15.420
 So it could be if MN were zone there, multifamily could go there without any SUP.

02:56:15.420 --> 02:56:18.980
 Multifamily does require a specific use permit in SC.

02:56:18.980 --> 02:56:23.420
 And so what a specific use permit does is that it just allows that additional scrutiny

02:56:23.420 --> 02:56:28.300
 for that project for us to look at it a little closely and make sure it is compatible with

02:56:28.300 --> 02:56:29.300
 the surrounding area.

02:56:29.300 --> 02:56:33.780
 So it does add that layer within SC district.

02:56:33.780 --> 02:56:39.460
 Both of them do allow for a lot of commercial uses, a lot of retail uses.

02:56:39.460 --> 02:56:42.700
 SC does allow some larger retail uses.

02:56:42.700 --> 02:56:47.380
 However, given the site constraints, it's probably unlikely that a big box target would

02:56:47.380 --> 02:56:48.380
 go on this site.

02:56:48.380 --> 02:56:51.060
 It just doesn't have the room for it.

02:56:51.060 --> 02:56:54.980
 But MN district also allows retail uses.

02:56:54.980 --> 02:57:02.180
 SC district does allow more automotive uses, at least by right.

02:57:02.180 --> 02:57:08.500
 MN does allow some automotive uses, but there are some additional, the SUP additional protections

02:57:08.500 --> 02:57:10.540
 related to that.

02:57:10.540 --> 02:57:15.700
 And then SC district does allow some industrial, some employment uses, light industrial.

02:57:15.700 --> 02:57:19.260
 Once again, given the constraints of the site, it may be challenging to develop that, but

02:57:19.260 --> 02:57:20.260
 it is permitted.

02:57:20.260 --> 02:57:25.880
 MN district does allow a limited manufacturing, that artisan manufacturing that we included

02:57:25.880 --> 02:57:28.940
 within the 2019 debt and development code.

02:57:28.940 --> 02:57:34.980
 So they are comparable, but there are some differences to them.

02:57:34.980 --> 02:57:42.220
 We also looked at the existing property and how those design standards affected the existing

02:57:42.220 --> 02:57:43.540
 development on the site.

02:57:43.540 --> 02:57:54.060
 So MN district is intended to be designed in a manner to activate the street more.

02:57:54.060 --> 02:57:57.820
 So we require those buildings to be pulled up to the front property line.

02:57:57.820 --> 02:58:04.340
 So in MN district, a commercial development, 60% of the frontage of a lot has to have a

02:58:04.340 --> 02:58:10.460
 building within 10 feet of the front property line, really to pull those buildings to the

02:58:10.460 --> 02:58:11.460
 front.

02:58:11.460 --> 02:58:14.100
 So MN doesn't allow front parking.

02:58:14.100 --> 02:58:18.260
 In some contexts, we don't want front parking, but in other contexts, front parking might

02:58:18.260 --> 02:58:21.820
 make sense because it pushes the building back a little bit, gives a little more space

02:58:21.820 --> 02:58:26.660
 between any commercial uses and nearby residential uses.

02:58:26.660 --> 02:58:33.860
 And then when we're looking at the existing development, MN district would create a nonconforming

02:58:33.860 --> 02:58:37.980
 site feature on that site, and Haley and I were looking this up earlier to see how that

02:58:37.980 --> 02:58:42.980
 would potentially impact that church facility in their potential expansion plans.

02:58:42.980 --> 02:58:48.580
 And while the use would be permitted, because that use is permitted in all zoning districts,

02:58:48.580 --> 02:58:52.860
 we do have site considerations, and one of those is that no front parking and pulling

02:58:52.860 --> 02:58:54.280
 those buildings up.

02:58:54.280 --> 02:58:58.140
 So if that church did want to expand, they could not increase that nonconformity.

02:58:58.140 --> 02:59:02.900
 So it would require, potentially when they lay out any site, to build a building in front

02:59:02.900 --> 02:59:07.180
 of their existing building to put parking in some other places, which could limit their

02:59:07.180 --> 02:59:10.900
 ability to expand or to make any changes to their site.

02:59:10.900 --> 02:59:15.660
 So we looked at those, and we felt like SC was consistent with the future land use.

02:59:15.660 --> 02:59:19.700
 It was consistent with the adjacent zoning, and it would potentially allow this area to

02:59:19.700 --> 02:59:22.780
 develop in a more cohesive way.

02:59:22.780 --> 02:59:25.140
 So that's kind of what our thought process was.

02:59:25.140 --> 02:59:26.140
 - Thank you.

02:59:26.140 --> 02:59:27.140
 I really appreciate that.

02:59:27.140 --> 02:59:28.140
 Thank you for that.

02:59:28.140 --> 02:59:29.140
 - Sure.

02:59:29.140 --> 02:59:32.820
 - Commissioner Pruitt and Chairwoman Ellis, if I could.

02:59:32.820 --> 02:59:36.900
 I see you struggling down there, and I might have some information that may benefit the

02:59:36.900 --> 02:59:37.900
 commission.

02:59:37.900 --> 02:59:42.460
 And I was looking at, Julie, I'm going to ask you to pull up this slide that shows this

02:59:42.460 --> 02:59:43.460
 up.

02:59:43.460 --> 02:59:44.460
 Yes, this one.

02:59:44.460 --> 02:59:49.780
 So the graphic on the far right side that shows the parcels that are surrounding the

02:59:49.780 --> 02:59:51.220
 worship facility.

02:59:51.220 --> 02:59:55.420
 So you see, we've got three acres to the east, about three and a half acres to the west.

02:59:55.420 --> 03:00:00.260
 And so a couple of things that I've been working through and looking at this, and we've had,

03:00:00.260 --> 03:00:04.020
 I think, some discussion internally amongst staff.

03:00:04.020 --> 03:00:11.020
 If this property were to be rezoned to SC, while it allows for a variety of different

03:00:11.020 --> 03:00:14.620
 commercial uses that could provide services within the neighborhood, you know, I think

03:00:14.620 --> 03:00:19.160
 about the reality of the kind of uses that might locate on the property.

03:00:19.160 --> 03:00:23.020
 We know we have ESA to the north, so really, that's a boundary, right, that we're not going

03:00:23.020 --> 03:00:24.860
 to potentially cross.

03:00:24.860 --> 03:00:29.460
 So then if I've got a three-acre tract to the east, in all likelihood, a retailer is

03:00:29.460 --> 03:00:34.160
 not going to locate there, because it does not afford them the type of visibility that

03:00:34.160 --> 03:00:35.820
 retailers are looking for today.

03:00:35.820 --> 03:00:40.500
 So then it's kind of like, what else might go on that property if it were to develop?

03:00:40.500 --> 03:00:46.820
 A good, to me, a potentially good use of that location might be smaller scale office business

03:00:46.820 --> 03:00:47.820
 locating on that.

03:00:47.820 --> 03:00:51.220
 When I think about the property that's labeled the three and a half acres that has the front

03:00:51.220 --> 03:00:56.300
 of John Locus and on the west side of the church, knowing that there is also an electrical

03:00:56.300 --> 03:01:00.380
 substation that is across the street, you know, I think about, okay, what uses might

03:01:00.380 --> 03:01:02.420
 be able to locate there?

03:01:02.420 --> 03:01:07.100
 From a commercial standpoint, we're probably looking at two buildings, maybe.

03:01:07.100 --> 03:01:11.220
 Might be able to squeeze in a third one if they were smaller drive-through sites in that

03:01:11.220 --> 03:01:17.140
 area, especially given some of them, how they've scaled back on their building sizes, but realistically,

03:01:17.140 --> 03:01:21.220
 I think probably about two buildings would be in there.

03:01:21.220 --> 03:01:23.980
 A McDonald's is generally sited on one acre.

03:01:23.980 --> 03:01:28.820
 A Starbucks-sized building will squeeze in on definitely less than an acre.

03:01:28.820 --> 03:01:33.140
 And so that's kind of the mindset I'm applying of, okay, how would buildings locate here?

03:01:33.140 --> 03:01:37.940
 If that were to be some sort of maybe a retail pharmacy-type use, then you're probably looking

03:01:37.940 --> 03:01:39.900
 at them locating on about an acre and a half.

03:01:39.900 --> 03:01:44.300
 So that's kind of the madness of how I came up with roughly two buildings there.

03:01:44.300 --> 03:01:48.500
 To me, I think one of the challenges with our zoning district or with our DDC is we

03:01:48.500 --> 03:01:54.220
 do not have a true neighborhood office-type zoning district that where I think a neighborhood

03:01:54.220 --> 03:01:58.620
 office zoning district might be actually a great type of transitioning district between

03:01:58.620 --> 03:02:03.660
 where you've got residential uses to the south, knowing that you've got the worship facility

03:02:03.660 --> 03:02:04.660
 there.

03:02:04.660 --> 03:02:07.700
 We have a general office zoning district, but I would not encourage you to go down the

03:02:07.700 --> 03:02:11.380
 general office zoning district path because I call that the light industrial and disguised

03:02:11.380 --> 03:02:12.380
 district.

03:02:12.380 --> 03:02:16.620
 Our general office district is truly not an office district, my name, when you think about

03:02:16.620 --> 03:02:18.180
 all of the uses that are allowed in there.

03:02:18.180 --> 03:02:20.700
 It allows much larger scale development.

03:02:20.700 --> 03:02:26.860
 So absent a neighborhood office zoning district, then it's kind of what other zoning districts

03:02:26.860 --> 03:02:28.240
 are available.

03:02:28.240 --> 03:02:33.740
 And I know a lot of times we do look to MN to see if it can kind of help fill that gap.

03:02:33.740 --> 03:02:38.100
 But given the way the development standards are in the MN district, I'm not convinced

03:02:38.100 --> 03:02:40.260
 that that would be the right zoning for this area.

03:02:40.260 --> 03:02:42.580
 So I share that with you.

03:02:42.580 --> 03:02:47.500
 I don't know if that helps you in your decision-making process with the request that's before you

03:02:47.500 --> 03:02:48.500
 this evening.

03:02:48.500 --> 03:02:52.860
 But I felt like it was important that you have some of that insight.

03:02:52.860 --> 03:02:53.860
 Thank you.

03:02:53.860 --> 03:02:54.860
 I do appreciate that.

03:02:54.860 --> 03:02:57.900
 Chair, if I just have a few words, and then we can continue our discussion.

03:02:57.900 --> 03:03:00.980
 Thank you very much.

03:03:00.980 --> 03:03:02.180
 And I really do appreciate that.

03:03:02.180 --> 03:03:10.300
 I mean, as I'm looking, you know, I share your concern for how do we deal with neighborhood

03:03:10.300 --> 03:03:16.740
 compatibility in areas where some uses that are not homes might be appropriate, and how

03:03:16.740 --> 03:03:22.180
 do we ensure that as those things hopefully go into more neighborhoods in our town, they

03:03:22.180 --> 03:03:28.960
 are done tastefully so that the reaction is thankfulness instead of, oh, my gosh, I don't

03:03:28.960 --> 03:03:37.620
 like hearing big trucks in a three-acre parking lot across from my house, right?

03:03:37.620 --> 03:03:45.500
 You know, if I'm thinking purely about sort of the general zoning district long-term future,

03:03:45.500 --> 03:03:51.660
 you know, in some ways, the R7 kind of is my understanding of that neighborhood office

03:03:51.660 --> 03:03:52.660
 thing.

03:03:52.660 --> 03:03:58.620
 It allows certain office uses by right, it rounds retail with an SUP, et cetera.

03:03:58.620 --> 03:04:04.740
 But it's just on the other side of the cut line from allowing a transmission tower, right?

03:04:04.740 --> 03:04:12.740
 So I can't help but feel like this application is like one of those, you know, you take one

03:04:12.740 --> 03:04:16.660
 step that seems reasonable and then another one and then you see there's a wall there

03:04:16.660 --> 03:04:19.180
 and then you turn right and you just take one more step.

03:04:19.180 --> 03:04:24.980
 And after six months or a year, you turn around and you say, wait, where did I start?

03:04:24.980 --> 03:04:32.460
 Because the impression I get is the first hurdle is the use of the transmission tower.

03:04:32.460 --> 03:04:37.300
 Okay, where do we have to fit that in order to make that work, right?

03:04:37.300 --> 03:04:43.780
 And then the next hurdle is oh, well, we can't just carve out one parcel because we have

03:04:43.780 --> 03:04:50.340
 part of the code that says access needs to be taken through a site where that same use

03:04:50.340 --> 03:04:51.740
 is permitted.

03:04:51.740 --> 03:04:59.380
 Well, to me, what that's expressing or the true concern that that piece of code is trying

03:04:59.380 --> 03:05:07.740
 to guard against is a crazy difference in intensity of use or type of traffic or noise

03:05:07.740 --> 03:05:13.940
 or something, right, where you've got, you know, 100 cars at 7 a.m. lining up to get

03:05:13.940 --> 03:05:20.060
 into your Starbucks, right, where you didn't really count on that, right, and then they're

03:05:20.060 --> 03:05:25.820
 taking access off of a smaller collector street instead of an arterial, et cetera, et cetera.

03:05:25.820 --> 03:05:29.980
 And I don't think anybody is going to drive or walk to a transmission tower except when

03:05:29.980 --> 03:05:32.140
 they set them up, right?

03:05:32.140 --> 03:05:37.940
 So I understand that piece of code is there and I understand we need to abide by it, but

03:05:37.940 --> 03:05:46.780
 it seems like its intention is something completely separate from what's forcing us into this

03:05:46.780 --> 03:05:49.500
 box, right?

03:05:49.500 --> 03:05:56.700
 You know, I mean, MN, I could get behind, I understand there might be some concerns

03:05:56.700 --> 03:06:05.500
 of use compatibility there, you know, respectfully I would say the design of these sites that

03:06:05.500 --> 03:06:15.540
 are site-specific design requirements are in place for is more important to people's

03:06:15.540 --> 03:06:22.980
 everyday lives than whether what's going on inside the building is somebody making leather

03:06:22.980 --> 03:06:30.880
 goods for, you know, small-scale production thing or somebody having a doctor's office

03:06:30.880 --> 03:06:33.740
 or something, right?

03:06:33.740 --> 03:06:41.060
 Yeah, I feel like this is a much longer project and timeline than I would have expected to

03:06:41.060 --> 03:06:49.500
 put up a transmission tower, I want to find a solution and I'll tell you what my biggest

03:06:49.500 --> 03:06:57.580
 concern is, is that if this goes in as C, functionally at the level that we are considering

03:06:57.580 --> 03:07:04.860
 this, right, it's somewhat obvious that we're not going to get a Kroger there, okay?

03:07:04.860 --> 03:07:07.740
 But we might get a Starbucks, right?

03:07:07.740 --> 03:07:12.500
 No, it's great to have coffee, but I'd much rather that Starbucks be 10 feet from the

03:07:12.500 --> 03:07:17.780
 street so that people can walk to it and get their coffee or ride their bike over there.

03:07:17.780 --> 03:07:20.980
 And if it's a drive-through, you're not going to want to do that anyway because there's

03:07:20.980 --> 03:07:23.860
 going to be 100 cars lined up on the road.

03:07:23.860 --> 03:07:25.780
 So let me get back to my concern.

03:07:25.780 --> 03:07:32.800
 My concern for the future is this portion of Locust, as we've mentioned before, is not

03:07:32.800 --> 03:07:37.580
 a city street, it's not even on the list for potential take-back.

03:07:37.580 --> 03:07:39.260
 It's a TxDOT roadway.

03:07:39.260 --> 03:07:46.500
 I really don't want, and I don't think people in the church want, the development of this

03:07:46.500 --> 03:07:50.900
 area to turn around and then four years from now, TxDOT says, "Okay, we've got to pave

03:07:50.900 --> 03:07:56.740
 six lanes, Locust, all the way down from Elm up to 288," right?

03:07:56.740 --> 03:08:05.100
 And so I'm very cautious in land use decisions that would sort of encourage more investment

03:08:05.100 --> 03:08:12.780
 in intensive automobile traffic uses that could turn into that.

03:08:12.780 --> 03:08:17.020
 So that's where I am, so thank you.

03:08:17.020 --> 03:08:23.300
 Well, and I guess in response to that, I mean, we kind of already have done that in that

03:08:23.300 --> 03:08:24.300
 area, right?

03:08:24.300 --> 03:08:29.900
 I mean, right to the north of that is SC, and we're dealing with, what are we dealing

03:08:29.900 --> 03:08:35.300
 with, 13 acres total?

03:08:35.300 --> 03:08:36.820
 Yeah, 13 acres total.

03:08:36.820 --> 03:08:45.860
 Yeah, I mean, I share similar concerns as to why it had to go SC.

03:08:45.860 --> 03:08:51.140
 My best guess for how staff worked through this was to protect what's already existing

03:08:51.140 --> 03:08:58.420
 there with the church, because we're going to make them non-conforming if we go MN, which

03:08:58.420 --> 03:09:04.420
 makes a little bit more sense with how we describe what an MN district is versus what

03:09:04.420 --> 03:09:11.940
 an SC district is, but at the same time, having the good neighbor that they are and trying

03:09:11.940 --> 03:09:15.660
 to mitigate that from happening.

03:09:15.660 --> 03:09:22.380
 So for me, what alleviates my concern a little bit is, I mean, this is a need in our community

03:09:22.380 --> 03:09:30.340
 for sure, and I've got to trust staff on how they did their due diligence on trying to

03:09:30.340 --> 03:09:32.060
 direct this application.

03:09:32.060 --> 03:09:38.380
 Well, I share your concerns, and I would like to see something there that the neighborhood

03:09:38.380 --> 03:09:44.860
 as a whole could use, but as Tina pointed out, when you look at the weird configuration

03:09:44.860 --> 03:09:51.540
 of that lot to the west, which is looking at the substation, I mean, that's not where

03:09:51.540 --> 03:09:52.540
 people are walking to.

03:09:52.540 --> 03:09:56.120
 They'd walk the other way maybe.

03:09:56.120 --> 03:09:59.980
 Maybe potentially there could be some kind of neighborhood service in those three acres.

03:09:59.980 --> 03:10:09.780
 I mean, I guess time will tell on that, but yeah, for this, I'm going to go with the way

03:10:09.780 --> 03:10:18.140
 staff looked at this, looked at who's already there on the lot versus the need in the community

03:10:18.140 --> 03:10:23.700
 and the due diligence by I think everyone collectively is why I can get behind and support

03:10:23.700 --> 03:10:24.700
 that.

03:10:24.700 --> 03:10:28.100
 So if that helps at all with your decision-making process.

03:10:28.100 --> 03:10:30.820
 Is there any other discussion?

03:10:30.820 --> 03:10:33.220
 I know we do have a first and a second at this point.

03:10:33.220 --> 03:10:37.220
 I think it was you, Commissioner Villarreal with the first, Commissioner Cole with the

03:10:37.220 --> 03:10:38.980
 first, Commissioner Villarreal with the second.

03:10:38.980 --> 03:10:39.980
 Thank you very much.

03:10:39.980 --> 03:10:40.980
 Okay.

03:10:40.980 --> 03:10:45.380
 If there were no discussion, I'm going to go ahead and call for a vote.

03:10:45.380 --> 03:10:46.380
 Commissioner Cole?

03:10:46.380 --> 03:10:47.380
 Aye.

03:10:47.380 --> 03:10:48.380
 Commissioner Villarreal?

03:10:48.380 --> 03:10:49.380
 Aye.

03:10:49.380 --> 03:10:50.380
 Commissioner McDade?

03:10:50.380 --> 03:10:51.380
 Aye.

03:10:51.380 --> 03:10:52.380
 Commissioner Pruitt?

03:10:52.380 --> 03:10:53.380
 Aye.

03:10:53.380 --> 03:10:54.380
 Okay.

03:10:54.380 --> 03:10:56.940
 And the chair is an aye.

03:10:56.940 --> 03:11:03.220
 So that will carry 4-1.

03:11:03.220 --> 03:11:04.220
 Thank you.

03:11:04.220 --> 03:11:06.700
 Appreciate the questions and the time that you gave to us.

03:11:06.700 --> 03:11:07.740
 Thank you as well.

03:11:07.740 --> 03:11:12.380
 And for these binders, which we should collect probably and share with city council.

03:11:12.380 --> 03:11:13.380
 Right?

03:11:13.380 --> 03:11:17.460
 I was going to say, Chairman Ellis was asking, do you want your-

03:11:17.460 --> 03:11:19.460
 We should probably share these with city council because you've got to move-

03:11:19.460 --> 03:11:20.460
 Oh absolutely.

03:11:20.460 --> 03:11:21.460
 We'll have.

03:11:21.460 --> 03:11:24.460
 It's for the council to go through where you want to take.

03:11:24.460 --> 03:11:25.460
 Okay.

03:11:25.460 --> 03:11:26.460
 Absolutely.

03:11:26.460 --> 03:11:27.460
 Very good.

03:11:27.460 --> 03:11:28.460
 Thank you.

03:11:28.460 --> 03:11:29.460
 Thank you again.

03:11:29.460 --> 03:11:30.460
 Thank you very much.

03:11:30.460 --> 03:11:31.460
 Thank you.

03:11:31.460 --> 03:11:32.460
 Thank you.

03:11:32.460 --> 03:11:33.460
 Thank you.

03:11:33.460 --> 03:11:34.460
 Okay.

03:11:34.460 --> 03:11:39.460
 5CZ220004 has been postponed.

03:11:39.460 --> 03:11:41.580
 So we will not take action there.

03:11:41.580 --> 03:11:46.540
 I'm going to ask the commission, do you all need a break?

03:11:46.540 --> 03:11:48.780
 Can we keep going or do we need to take five?

03:11:48.780 --> 03:11:50.780
 I'm looking to all of you.

03:11:50.780 --> 03:11:51.780
 Yeah.

03:11:51.780 --> 03:11:52.780
 Thank you.

03:11:52.780 --> 03:11:53.780
 You need to take five?

03:11:53.780 --> 03:11:54.780
 Okay.

03:11:54.780 --> 03:11:55.780
 You got it.

03:11:55.780 --> 03:12:02.300
 Let's recess at 834 and let's try our best to get back here at 845.

03:12:02.300 --> 03:12:06.460
 Oh yeah.

03:12:06.460 --> 03:12:08.060
 Thank you everyone for your patience.

03:12:08.060 --> 03:12:16.740
 I will call us back to order at 843 PM and call item 5DZ210019.

03:12:16.740 --> 03:12:18.580
 Mia will come up for presentation.

03:12:18.580 --> 03:12:20.660
 I will open the public hearing.

03:12:20.660 --> 03:12:34.500
 Good evening again chair, members of the commission.

03:12:34.500 --> 03:12:42.740
 I am Mia Hines, Associate Planner for the City of Denton and this item is zoning case

03:12:42.740 --> 03:12:51.660
 21-0019 for rezoning request for 2500 Panhandle Street.

03:12:51.660 --> 03:12:59.220
 The property is approximately 3.8 acre property located within the Razor Ranch overlay district.

03:12:59.220 --> 03:13:05.100
 The request is to change the zoning for this particular tract from the RRO district to

03:13:05.100 --> 03:13:08.660
 the straight mixed use neighborhood district.

03:13:08.660 --> 03:13:14.100
 The request would also effectively amend the Razor Ranch overlay district zoning exhibit

03:13:14.100 --> 03:13:20.380
 and the concept exhibit as it would pull this tract, which has been subdivided into two

03:13:20.380 --> 03:13:25.420
 parcels since this application was submitted, it would pull this tract away from or out

03:13:25.420 --> 03:13:32.180
 of the Razor Ranch overlay district and this property would be subject to the standards

03:13:32.180 --> 03:13:37.660
 of the current development code MN district if he chooses to recommend approval and council

03:13:37.660 --> 03:13:39.820
 ultimately approves this rezoning.

03:13:39.820 --> 03:13:44.500
 The property is generally located west of Bonnie Bray Street, which is a secondary arterial

03:13:44.500 --> 03:13:50.020
 between Panhandle Street there to the south, which is a collector and Linden Drive residential

03:13:50.020 --> 03:13:52.580
 street there to the north.

03:13:52.580 --> 03:13:58.020
 Obviously the property is undeveloped, but the applicant has expressed the intent to

03:13:58.020 --> 03:14:07.640
 develop multiple medical office facilities as well as a pharmacy with a drive thru.

03:14:07.640 --> 03:14:16.680
 It is also surrounded to the north, south and west with the RRO district and to the

03:14:16.680 --> 03:14:22.500
 east across Bonnie Bray Street is an existing single family residential subdivision zoned

03:14:22.500 --> 03:14:23.500
 R3.

03:14:23.500 --> 03:14:28.820
 I also wanted to note that right there on the northeast corner of Bonnie Bray Street

03:14:28.820 --> 03:14:36.720
 and Panhandle Drive is a property zoned PDMN and is currently developed with multiple professional

03:14:36.720 --> 03:14:44.360
 office buildings, similar to what the applicant is proposing for this site.

03:14:44.360 --> 03:14:51.340
 So pursuant to subchapter 2 of the DDC, the staff did review this rezoning request pursuant

03:14:51.340 --> 03:14:57.540
 to that approval criteria of notes, I wanted to mention that the proposed MN zoning district

03:14:57.540 --> 03:15:02.780
 is consistent with the Denton 2040 comprehensive future land use designation of regional mixed

03:15:02.780 --> 03:15:08.980
 use, which if you look in our comprehensive plan is a designation intended for promoting

03:15:08.980 --> 03:15:14.720
 a mix of low impact development while complementing and embracing existing viable uses and raising

03:15:14.720 --> 03:15:16.500
 the standard of design.

03:15:16.500 --> 03:15:23.060
 We do within our Denton development code have a mixed use regional zoning district, however

03:15:23.060 --> 03:15:29.420
 given the proximity to the existing low density single family subdivision to the east as well

03:15:29.420 --> 03:15:36.260
 as the higher density and commercial uses permitted within the Razor Ranch overlay district,

03:15:36.260 --> 03:15:43.060
 the MN provides for a more cohesive transition between those two across Bonnie Bray Street

03:15:43.060 --> 03:15:50.300
 into the Razor Ranch overlay district and I have a table to sort of show how the development

03:15:50.300 --> 03:15:54.500
 standards differ from what's existing within the RRO as well as what would be proposed

03:15:54.500 --> 03:16:01.960
 within the MN and a little bit of points of how the MN is a bit more of a cohesive transition

03:16:01.960 --> 03:16:07.460
 from as opposed to the MR which is that mixed use regional.

03:16:07.460 --> 03:16:10.720
 Additionally I wanted to note that the development would be subject to the development standards

03:16:10.720 --> 03:16:15.780
 and processes of the current Denton development code as they exist right now and as may be

03:16:15.780 --> 03:16:16.780
 amended.

03:16:16.780 --> 03:16:20.660
 So if you all recall or familiar with the Razor Ranch overlay district that was established

03:16:20.660 --> 03:16:25.940
 under the 2002 Denton development code and so whatever is not mentioned within the overlay

03:16:25.940 --> 03:16:31.700
 standards for the Razor Ranch district is subject to those now outdated development

03:16:31.700 --> 03:16:37.780
 standards of the 2002 code so by changing the zoning from our Razor Ranch overlay district

03:16:37.780 --> 03:16:43.540
 to MN they would be subject to the existing processes and the existing development standards

03:16:43.540 --> 03:16:49.540
 within our existing Denton development code.

03:16:49.540 --> 03:16:55.300
 Specifically again here's that table for comparison.

03:16:55.300 --> 03:16:59.780
 The minimum landscape area within this particular sub area of the Razor Ranch overlay district

03:16:59.780 --> 03:17:07.340
 is 10% of the total lot area with 7% of the total parking lot area requiring or being

03:17:07.340 --> 03:17:12.580
 required to be landscaped under the mixed use district we bumped that up to 20% of the

03:17:12.580 --> 03:17:15.660
 total lot area so they would be subject to that.

03:17:15.660 --> 03:17:22.180
 Additionally tree canopy coverage within RRO is 20% mixed use district is 40% so again

03:17:22.180 --> 03:17:28.100
 a higher standard higher landscape standards compared to what is currently permitted.

03:17:28.100 --> 03:17:33.980
 minimum buffer adjacent to residential for single family districts within the sub area

03:17:33.980 --> 03:17:39.700
 Razor Ranch overlay district requires a 10 foot wide landscape buffer and specifies six

03:17:39.700 --> 03:17:47.220
 trees plus 25 shrubs per 100 linear feet adjacent to a single family zone district and it does

03:17:47.220 --> 03:17:53.060
 not have a buffer requirement standards for multi-family district which this property

03:17:53.060 --> 03:18:00.820
 does currently abut to the west our MN standards however requires a 15 foot wide landscape

03:18:00.820 --> 03:18:07.500
 buffer and we have a table 7 point G within our DDC which sort of allows for options and

03:18:07.500 --> 03:18:12.220
 allows for the applicant and developers to be creative with their design within that

03:18:12.220 --> 03:18:17.500
 landscape buffer to assure the compatibility of land uses there.

03:18:17.500 --> 03:18:22.340
 Similarly street trees under the Razor Ranch overlay district requirement were one street

03:18:22.340 --> 03:18:28.300
 tree per 45 feet of street frontage within our mixed use district we would get more street

03:18:28.300 --> 03:18:32.780
 trees that would be one per 30 feet of street frontage maximum building height for this

03:18:32.780 --> 03:18:38.900
 particular sub area is 200 feet for hotels and offices and 100 feet for other uses permitted

03:18:38.900 --> 03:18:46.060
 within this sub area under the MN it would be 65 feet but actually anything between 41

03:18:46.060 --> 03:18:52.520
 and 65 foot will require an SUP so they are again sort of helping to mitigate the impacts

03:18:52.520 --> 03:18:59.300
 on surrounding properties you're looking at a lower maximum building height as well.

03:18:59.300 --> 03:19:07.020
 Maximum coverage for existing RRO standards is 90 percent with a maximum floor area ratio

03:19:07.020 --> 03:19:11.860
 of 4.0 under the current standards you're looking at a maximum coverage of 80 percent

03:19:11.860 --> 03:19:18.020
 so that decreases the amount of impermeable surfaces and building coverage permitted within

03:19:18.020 --> 03:19:19.900
 this district.

03:19:19.900 --> 03:19:26.520
 Permitted uses in total transparency it isn't less intensive or anything like that but we

03:19:26.520 --> 03:19:33.060
 do have those additional design and development standards within the MN district namely I

03:19:33.060 --> 03:19:40.300
 wanted to point out that as stated in the Razor Ranch overlay district only single family

03:19:40.300 --> 03:19:45.580
 detached attached community home professional services and offices and parking open space

03:19:45.580 --> 03:19:52.260
 are permitted on this particular lot with the transition to mixed use district they

03:19:52.260 --> 03:19:58.320
 would be open to permit or develop any of the permitted uses within the MN district

03:19:58.320 --> 03:20:04.040
 however it would be again subject to the increased development standards within our current development

03:20:04.040 --> 03:20:11.540
 code specific I also wanted to point out that for multifamily and single family developments

03:20:11.540 --> 03:20:16.980
 on this particular lot because there is a gas well to the south of this property they

03:20:16.980 --> 03:20:22.260
 they are limited to approximately I believe I calculated at about 1.8 acres so if they

03:20:22.260 --> 03:20:26.940
 were to the applicant were to change their development plan from what they've expressed

03:20:26.940 --> 03:20:31.580
 to the city thus far and want to do some type of multifamily or higher density residential

03:20:31.580 --> 03:20:35.500
 or something like that they're limited to a small portion where that can go on this

03:20:35.500 --> 03:20:40.180
 lot because of the gas well setbacks that we have under our current DDC.

03:20:40.180 --> 03:20:46.100
 Additionally higher intensity uses industrial uses vehicle services will require an SUP

03:20:46.100 --> 03:20:50.380
 and so that would of course have to come back before this body before that those uses those

03:20:50.380 --> 03:20:55.900
 types of uses would be permitted.

03:20:55.900 --> 03:21:03.260
 So pursuant to state requirement and our DDC we did do public outreach we posted in the

03:21:03.260 --> 03:21:07.980
 newspaper on July 24th there was a website posting on July 20th and property signs were

03:21:07.980 --> 03:21:14.380
 posted by July 19th additionally we mailed out notices and have not received as of today

03:21:14.380 --> 03:21:19.540
 have not received any in response a neighborhood meeting was not held but the applicant contacted

03:21:19.540 --> 03:21:23.580
 the neighbors directly and they are here with a brief presentation and can go over those

03:21:23.580 --> 03:21:27.540
 efforts if you have any questions about that.

03:21:27.540 --> 03:21:32.180
 So with that staff is recommending approval of the request as it complies with the applicable

03:21:32.180 --> 03:21:37.940
 sections of the DDC should this body move forward with a recommendation of approval

03:21:37.940 --> 03:21:44.020
 or denial it's going to go scheduled to go before city council on September 20th of 2022.

03:21:44.020 --> 03:21:48.060
 At this time I will answer any questions you may have for me and the applicant is here

03:21:48.060 --> 03:21:51.220
 with a brief presentation and available to answer questions.

03:21:51.220 --> 03:21:59.740
 Great ma'am thank you very much questions at this time for staff okay nice presentation

03:21:59.740 --> 03:22:01.460
 thank you very much.

03:22:01.460 --> 03:22:11.300
 I do have a card wishing to speak I will invite Amy Bissett back up to the podium welcome

03:22:11.300 --> 03:22:16.780
 back Amy Bissett 109 North Elm Denton 76201 I'm not going to make a presentation I think

03:22:16.780 --> 03:22:21.980
 you heard enough from me tonight I just want to say a couple of very brief things the pharmacy

03:22:21.980 --> 03:22:27.340
 use is intended to be a small scale community pharmacy we're not talking about a national

03:22:27.340 --> 03:22:33.260
 retail pharmacy and we originally applied to amend the razor ranch overlay district rather

03:22:33.260 --> 03:22:38.060
 than accepting ourselves out of it and after conversations with staff thought it would

03:22:38.060 --> 03:22:43.620
 just be cleaner to come into the 2019 code currently my client Mr. Strange is sitting

03:22:43.620 --> 03:22:47.940
 behind me and he plans to de-restrict the property to medical and professional offices

03:22:47.940 --> 03:22:53.180
 and related medical retail so some of those uses that you may be concerned about will

03:22:53.180 --> 03:22:58.740
 not likely occur in the future the property will be still be subject to the razor ranch

03:22:58.740 --> 03:23:04.580
 architectural control committee so it will still look have the same look and feel similar

03:23:04.580 --> 03:23:13.700
 materials and will still have to be applied in this particular case for consistency and

03:23:13.700 --> 03:23:18.540
 we did met do a mailer to the neighborhood to just invite them to come to reach out with

03:23:18.540 --> 03:23:23.740
 any questions and provide more detail and we did not hear from anybody thank you thank

03:23:23.740 --> 03:23:33.660
 you for clarification any questions for okay thank you this is a public hearing I don't

03:23:33.660 --> 03:23:37.980
 have any other cards in front of me is there anyone else who would wish to speak on this

03:23:37.980 --> 03:23:47.540
 item okay seeing none I will close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or

03:23:47.540 --> 03:23:55.420
 discussion commissioner Villarreal move approval second okay we've got a first and a second

03:23:55.420 --> 03:24:04.300
 for approval of the request any discussion okay commissioner Villarreal I commissioner

03:24:04.300 --> 03:24:12.100
 Cole I commissioner McDade I commissioner Pruitt I chairs also an I that motion carries

03:24:12.100 --> 03:24:19.900
 five zero that will move us to our next public hearing item that is five easy to two zero

03:24:19.900 --> 03:24:26.700
 zero zero zero nine I will invite Angie up for presentation and open the public hearing

03:24:26.700 --> 03:24:43.420
 hello just a moment thank you Angie mingler senior planner at the city of Denton this

03:24:43.420 --> 03:24:51.860
 is project Z 22009 it is a rezoning case for cowboy distribution the rezoning case is for

03:24:51.860 --> 03:24:58.060
 a 10 acre tract of land currently zoned residential to the request is to rezone this particular

03:24:58.060 --> 03:25:03.780
 tract of land to heavy industrial the subject tract is located approximately 400 feet east

03:25:03.780 --> 03:25:09.020
 of Northwestern Boulevard and 1400 feet north of Jim Crystal Road the future land use plan

03:25:09.020 --> 03:25:15.660
 for this area calls for this part of Denton to be in dust industrial commerce the subject

03:25:15.660 --> 03:25:20.760
 property is currently vacant and has not been previously developed it is surrounded to the

03:25:20.760 --> 03:25:26.700
 southwest and east by additionally zoned heavy industrial property that is also currently

03:25:26.700 --> 03:25:31.980
 vacant and undeveloped and then to the north there is general office zoning this property

03:25:31.980 --> 03:25:36.220
 is currently vacant however there are two industrial warehouse buildings that are currently

03:25:36.220 --> 03:25:42.140
 under building permit in civil engineering review by Denton City staff the future land

03:25:42.140 --> 03:25:48.940
 use plan and the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan call for this area to be industrial commerce

03:25:48.940 --> 03:25:54.740
 the industrial commerce land use designation is predominantly located to the west of I-35W

03:25:54.740 --> 03:26:00.140
 near the Denton municipal airport it does contemplate uses such as manufacturing assembly

03:26:00.140 --> 03:26:04.980
 fabrication and wholesaling uses the uses that are permitted in the heavy industrial

03:26:04.980 --> 03:26:09.860
 zoning district are consistent with what the future land use plan calls for further the

03:26:09.860 --> 03:26:14.920
 Denton comprehensive plan realizes that a diverse economy is fundamental to achieving

03:26:14.920 --> 03:26:19.860
 the goals of the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan specifically ensuring that there is adequate

03:26:19.860 --> 03:26:25.180
 land use for future economic growth particularly in non-residential land use categories this

03:26:25.180 --> 03:26:29.640
 proposed use is consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan and providing a

03:26:29.640 --> 03:26:37.340
 robust and diverse economy the proposed application does meet all criteria for approval as outlined

03:26:37.340 --> 03:26:42.980
 in the Denton development codes of chapter 2 specifically this heavy industrial zoning

03:26:42.980 --> 03:26:47.520
 request is consistent with the future land use plan as the property is designated as

03:26:47.520 --> 03:26:53.300
 industrial commerce the rezoning is also consistent with adjacent developments and land uses within

03:26:53.300 --> 03:26:58.620
 this area the intent of the rezoning of this 10 acre tract of land is to align the zoning

03:26:58.620 --> 03:27:04.140
 of the site with adjacently zoned heavy industrial property that's situated to the southeast

03:27:04.140 --> 03:27:08.780
 and west which is owned by the same entity for the eventual future development of an

03:27:08.780 --> 03:27:13.580
 industrial site to be located at the northeast corner of Western Boulevard and Jim Crystal

03:27:13.580 --> 03:27:23.580
 Road this proposed development is approximately 860,000 square feet in size as this area continues

03:27:23.580 --> 03:27:28.780
 to develop west of 35 and near the airport the proposed future industrial use would be

03:27:28.780 --> 03:27:33.860
 consistent area and compatible with the desire that this remain an industrial manufacturing

03:27:33.860 --> 03:27:39.900
 region in the city of Denton should this request be approved the development shall comply with

03:27:39.900 --> 03:27:44.340
 all DDC requirements which would include screening and landscaping requirements site and building

03:27:44.340 --> 03:27:49.980
 design requirements and exterior lighting requirements by code public outreach was done

03:27:49.980 --> 03:27:55.540
 in accordance with Texas state laws was the DDC notices were mailed to residents with

03:27:55.540 --> 03:28:00.800
 the in 200 feet of the property and then courtesy notices were sent out to properties within

03:28:00.800 --> 03:28:06.460
 500 feet of the subject tract at this time we've received one response in favor of the

03:28:06.460 --> 03:28:13.020
 application there was not a neighborhood meeting held for this particular request staff is

03:28:13.020 --> 03:28:17.060
 forwarding this to you this evening with a recommendation of approval as it does comply

03:28:17.060 --> 03:28:22.260
 with the criteria as specified in the Denton development code the next step in this process

03:28:22.260 --> 03:28:26.400
 would be a public hearing and consideration by City Council at their meeting to be held

03:28:26.400 --> 03:28:31.980
 on September 20th 2022 I'm happy to answer any questions and the applicant is also here

03:28:31.980 --> 03:28:41.060
 available to answer any questions you may have any questions right now for staff I don't

03:28:41.060 --> 03:28:46.820
 have any cards filled I don't know if the applicant wants to say anything if not do

03:28:46.820 --> 03:28:53.180
 we have any questions for the applicant okay then I will go ahead and close the public

03:28:53.180 --> 03:28:59.620
 hearing and open the floor for discussion or a motion Commissioner Cole I'll make a

03:28:59.620 --> 03:29:05.340
 motion to approve got a first Commissioner McDade a second got a first and a second

03:29:05.340 --> 03:29:12.820
 for approval of the request any discussion okay Commissioner Cole I Commissioner McDade

03:29:12.820 --> 03:29:19.900
 I Commissioner Pruitt I Commissioner Villarreal I shares also an I that motion carries five

03:29:19.900 --> 03:29:28.020
 zero that will take us to five F DCA two two dash zero zero zero three invite run up for

03:29:28.020 --> 03:29:32.940
 his presentation and open the public hearing thank you madam chair members of Commission

03:29:32.940 --> 03:29:38.580
 Romney get a principal planner with development services this item is a development code amendment

03:29:38.580 --> 03:29:43.140
 regarding data centers in which we've spoken about during our work sessions so much of

03:29:43.140 --> 03:29:48.820
 what I'll be presenting will be as quick summary the purpose of the code amendment is really

03:29:48.820 --> 03:29:54.580
 to introduce two uses data center modular and data center warehouse two uses that were

03:29:54.580 --> 03:30:01.240
 not contemplated back in 2019 and as of interest of recent months or recent years that is this

03:30:01.240 --> 03:30:08.780
 uses something that the city is intending to have the proposed code amendment is in

03:30:08.780 --> 03:30:14.740
 concert with working with the DME folks staff that staff members that is and also this item

03:30:14.740 --> 03:30:19.680
 was presented and discussed thoroughly with the DC RC development code review committee

03:30:19.680 --> 03:30:26.900
 on April or in April as well as in May of this year the code amendments will specifically

03:30:26.900 --> 03:30:33.700
 amend table five to a of development code amend sub chapter five three six regarding

03:30:33.700 --> 03:30:39.380
 you specific standards as well as parking requirements and also adding definitions for

03:30:39.380 --> 03:30:45.580
 the two uses and amending the definition of electric substation I won't read the definition

03:30:45.580 --> 03:30:50.620
 for modular data center you can see it is primarily modular structures as you can see

03:30:50.620 --> 03:30:56.500
 some examples to the right shown here on the slide what staff is proposing is the data

03:30:56.500 --> 03:31:02.900
 center modulars be proposed in the ally HI and PF zoning district with specific use permit

03:31:02.900 --> 03:31:09.800
 requirements parking would be one space per employee at its largest shift these specific

03:31:09.800 --> 03:31:14.860
 standards I'll highlight quickly any associate equipment and outdoor storage shall be opaquely

03:31:14.860 --> 03:31:21.580
 screen of a public right away adjacent residential use and zoning district the outside storage

03:31:21.580 --> 03:31:26.260
 and social electric equipment shall not be less than 100 feet from an adjacent residential

03:31:26.260 --> 03:31:31.540
 zoning district measured from the property line and the number of elements with regards

03:31:31.540 --> 03:31:40.020
 to table 7e landscape area points area point system is to rather than one environmental

03:31:40.020 --> 03:31:45.100
 noise assessment as well as a vibration assessment will be required as part of the application

03:31:45.100 --> 03:31:54.220
 for a data center both modular and for warehouse the noise maximum for these types of uses

03:31:54.220 --> 03:32:00.700
 will be at 60 DBA maximum and again if there are any on site electric substation they will

03:32:00.700 --> 03:32:06.100
 be required to comply with the development code the data center warehouse that you see

03:32:06.100 --> 03:32:11.540
 here again is defined as a building or buildings and standard intended that is for the same

03:32:11.540 --> 03:32:17.660
 type of use in terms of storage of specialized computer systems hardware and so forth the

03:32:17.660 --> 03:32:25.140
 data center warehouse is proposed to be located in the G.O.L.I.H.I.P.F. by right with these

03:32:25.140 --> 03:32:31.380
 specific standards in the M.R.S.C.N.H.C. they would require a specific use permit the

03:32:31.380 --> 03:32:36.340
 data center warehouse parking requirement will be one space per 3,500 square feet gross

03:32:36.340 --> 03:32:43.540
 floor area that is excuse me or a director determination based on a parking study some

03:32:43.540 --> 03:32:48.740
 examples of a data center warehouse you can see examples from Fort Worth as well as in

03:32:48.740 --> 03:32:57.620
 Plano the warehouse maximum square footage for the M.R.N.S.C. is a maximum of 55,000

03:32:57.620 --> 03:33:02.420
 square feet building design standards will comply with the section of the development

03:33:02.420 --> 03:33:08.340
 code again similar with the warehouse sorry the modular data center a pigly screen for

03:33:08.340 --> 03:33:14.420
 any outdoor and associated equipment similar with the environmental noise I'm sorry yes

03:33:14.420 --> 03:33:22.040
 environmental noise and vibration assessments will be required noise maximum be 60 DBA there

03:33:22.040 --> 03:33:26.700
 will be a setback requirement for any associate outdoor and equipment as well as any on-site

03:33:26.700 --> 03:33:31.220
 electric substation will be required to supply will be subject to comply with sub chapter

03:33:31.220 --> 03:33:38.300
 7 of the D.D.C. and the last slide here is really to illustrate the amendment to the

03:33:38.300 --> 03:33:44.740
 electric substation definition the definition was added here to provide more clarity as

03:33:44.740 --> 03:33:51.980
 to where that transition would occur and the added 60 kilovolts has been added to the definition

03:33:51.980 --> 03:34:00.460
 for that purpose with that staff is ready for any questions that you may have thank

03:34:00.460 --> 03:34:08.740
 you ron questions for ron here Mr. Villarreal do you believe the passage of this development

03:34:08.740 --> 03:34:15.540
 code amendment would increase decrease or keep the same the amount of data data centers

03:34:15.540 --> 03:34:20.380
 coming into debt I think it would it would increase I know based on some of the discussions

03:34:20.380 --> 03:34:26.020
 with the DME staff members there are a few already asking about coming into the city

03:34:26.020 --> 03:34:31.140
 and this would allow that to happen gotcha thank you and I felt to mention that Terry

03:34:31.140 --> 03:34:43.740
 Nolte is also here with DME if you have any questions for him yeah any other questions

03:34:43.740 --> 03:34:52.180
 for ron at this time okay thanks ron well this is a public hearing I don't see anyone

03:34:52.180 --> 03:34:59.980
 here in city or council chambers to speak so I will go ahead and close the public hearing

03:34:59.980 --> 03:35:07.100
 and I will open the floor for discussion or a motion commissioner Pruitt thank you chair

03:35:07.100 --> 03:35:12.740
 I'll move approval as presented by staff I think I'd just like to say a couple words

03:35:12.740 --> 03:35:19.240
 of thanks to Terry Nolte and DME through this whole process the the DCRC really was is becoming

03:35:19.240 --> 03:35:23.900
 known as a body who tries to dig into the details and I may be one of the people to

03:35:23.900 --> 03:35:30.860
 blame to that that end but I think that in this case we came up with something that is

03:35:30.860 --> 03:35:37.800
 really really good to be consistent and straightforward so that we can be responsible to our residents

03:35:37.800 --> 03:35:46.620
 as well as you know clear to potential future development efforts okay all right we've got

03:35:46.620 --> 03:35:51.660
 a first on the floor commissioner Cole second all right we've got a first and a second for

03:35:51.660 --> 03:35:57.620
 approval discussion I'll just say a couple words like I said in work session yeah it

03:35:57.620 --> 03:36:03.860
 was a great discussion I think we had at DCRC with development staff DME being there answering

03:36:03.860 --> 03:36:09.460
 all of our questions which we had lots of this is a needed thing that we needed just

03:36:09.460 --> 03:36:16.420
 in where we are in the world today so I think yeah I think it was a good collaborative effort

03:36:16.420 --> 03:36:22.620
 yes Ron as well as we're talking about thank you folks I just I felt mentioned Karina Maldonado

03:36:22.620 --> 03:36:26.860
 who did a lot of the work you know before I got involved so I didn't want to miss that

03:36:26.860 --> 03:36:34.740
 opportunity to thank her as well agreed yes okay that being said let's go ahead and vote

03:36:34.740 --> 03:36:41.740
 Commissioner Pruitt I Commissioner Cole I Commissioner McDade I Commissioner Villarreal

03:36:41.740 --> 03:36:49.020
 I chair is also an I that motion carries a 5-0 that will take us to our planning and

03:36:49.020 --> 03:36:56.100
 zoning Commission matrix and Tina I will give the floor to you if you are ready I was just

03:36:56.100 --> 03:37:04.280
 realizing you know I'm trying to go electronic tonight given the packet right the we've really

03:37:04.280 --> 03:37:07.340
 had no additions to the matrix coming out of the last planning and zoning Commission

03:37:07.340 --> 03:37:11.460
 meeting so if anything what we will do is we will remove the drainage discussion item

03:37:11.460 --> 03:37:18.420
 off of it since we check the box on that this evening and then also with respect to activity

03:37:18.420 --> 03:37:22.660
 that has happened or projects being approved at City Council since the planning and zoning

03:37:22.660 --> 03:37:27.860
 Commission last met in July thanks to Ron's effort I know just over there you are thanks

03:37:27.860 --> 03:37:32.340
 to Ron's effort he shepherded through the subchapter two amendments under the DCRC worked

03:37:32.340 --> 03:37:38.340
 on that as well but that those code amendments were approved by Council as recommended by

03:37:38.340 --> 03:37:43.060
 the planning and zoning Commission and in DCRC so those amendments have now gone into

03:37:43.060 --> 03:37:48.460
 effect and so we'll be making sure that those are incorporated and applied but other than

03:37:48.460 --> 03:37:51.940
 that I have nothing else unless the Commission has anything else that they'd like to add

03:37:51.940 --> 03:38:02.420
 to the matrix or any other item anything for the matrix no any concluding items okay thank

03:38:02.420 --> 03:38:07.980
 you everybody it was a good long meeting thank you for your patience and your efforts and

03:38:07.980 --> 03:38:11.940
 your thoughtful discussion I will adjourn us at 9.09 p.m. thanks