1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:09,000
 Good afternoon and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

2
00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:13,080
 for Wednesday, November 16, 2022.

3
00:00:13,080 --> 00:00:18,480
 This is our work session and with the quorum present, I will call us to order at 5.04 p.m.

4
00:00:18,480 --> 00:00:24,280
 The first item on our work session agenda is citizen comments on consent agenda items.

5
00:00:24,280 --> 00:00:29,960
 And I do have a citizen here who has filled out a card to speak on that.

6
00:00:29,960 --> 00:00:33,240
 And I will ask Leah Todd to come up and join us.

7
00:00:33,240 --> 00:00:34,240
 Hello.

8
00:00:34,240 --> 00:00:35,240
 Good afternoon.

9
00:00:35,240 --> 00:00:36,240
 Hello.

10
00:00:36,240 --> 00:00:37,240
 I'm Leah Todd.

11
00:00:37,240 --> 00:00:43,080
 I live at 3316 Roseland Drive, a taxpaying citizen of Denton.

12
00:00:43,080 --> 00:00:52,080
 I'm up here in relation to PP 22-0014C, Kimley-Horn approved primary plat for the Hunter Ranch

13
00:00:52,080 --> 00:00:53,520
 Phase 1.

14
00:00:53,520 --> 00:00:59,720
 I know that there's also the four-star Eagle Creek development next to me on Roseland,

15
00:00:59,720 --> 00:01:03,560
 which was the architects of Kimley-Horn.

16
00:01:03,560 --> 00:01:09,280
 At that time, they weren't required to be under the tree ordinance and it has been a

17
00:01:09,280 --> 00:01:15,360
 devastating experience where 50 percent of historical landmark post oak trees have been

18
00:01:15,360 --> 00:01:18,320
 destroyed in the development of this.

19
00:01:18,320 --> 00:01:25,560
 And also, currently, the development code for lights is not being complied with.

20
00:01:25,560 --> 00:01:32,240
 What I'm requesting is that in relation to the lights and in relation to this Hunter

21
00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:42,920
 Ranch Phase 1 that these developers or these architects be responsible for the tree ordinance,

22
00:01:42,920 --> 00:01:52,920
 which is now in effect as of 2019 7.7.4, where removal permit is required, a tree survey

23
00:01:52,920 --> 00:02:02,200
 is required, an application with fees, trees that are marked need to be tagged with an

24
00:02:02,200 --> 00:02:11,520
 orange fence around it at drip line, and preservation of historical sites like Knobbs and Bass Hill.

25
00:02:11,520 --> 00:02:13,320
 Who knows what's going to be in the design?

26
00:02:13,320 --> 00:02:19,860
 I know that the Eagle Creek has been a tragedy when it could have been an incredible hike

27
00:02:19,860 --> 00:02:28,040
 bike trail, still with development, in relation to right next to Dena Parks and Recreation.

28
00:02:28,040 --> 00:02:30,560
 But instead, it's mowed down.

29
00:02:30,560 --> 00:02:37,000
 Also, it wasn't terraced, there was 15 to 20 foot drops, there's not a blade of grass.

30
00:02:37,000 --> 00:02:40,680
 It's just dirt until they do the development.

31
00:02:40,680 --> 00:02:47,320
 The other thing is the lights, the development code, Section 7.11.6, that all street lighting

32
00:02:47,320 --> 00:02:53,480
 shall have full cutoff and design to direct light below a 90 degree horizontal plane extending

33
00:02:53,480 --> 00:02:56,920
 from the lowest point of the light source.

34
00:02:56,920 --> 00:03:02,620
 This provision of the DGC is not enforced in the Eagle Creek development, and it needs

35
00:03:02,620 --> 00:03:06,360
 to be in the Hunter Ranch development.

36
00:03:06,360 --> 00:03:12,120
 I was informed of this by Tony Puente and Michael Ganje, I guess that's how you say

37
00:03:12,120 --> 00:03:13,560
 the last name.

38
00:03:13,560 --> 00:03:21,060
 So that's, I think as a city, we have to consider trying to maintain ecological, environmental,

39
00:03:21,060 --> 00:03:27,120
 and aesthetic values, and not just have architects, developers come in, get their money and leave,

40
00:03:27,120 --> 00:03:28,720
 and then what are we left with?

41
00:03:28,720 --> 00:03:35,080
 And I ask you as a planning and zoning committee to consider the environmental aspects of our

42
00:03:35,080 --> 00:03:42,040
 community, of our town, in relation to any future developments, Hunter Ranch in particular,

43
00:03:42,040 --> 00:03:49,240
 and the beauty of Knob Hill and Sandbass, the last of the Mesa's coming out west.

44
00:03:49,240 --> 00:03:54,840
 And also enforce that developmental light code in relation to Eagle Creek development.

45
00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:58,240
 I appreciate your time and your consideration.

46
00:03:58,240 --> 00:03:59,240
 This is where we live.

47
00:03:59,240 --> 00:04:01,080
 This is our home.

48
00:04:01,080 --> 00:04:06,680
 And we may need to consider other architects other than Kimberley Harn over and over again

49
00:04:06,680 --> 00:04:11,680
 because I don't feel like they've worked for the benefit of this city.

50
00:04:11,680 --> 00:04:12,680
 Thank you.

51
00:04:12,680 --> 00:04:18,760
 Thank you, Ms. Thom.

52
00:04:18,760 --> 00:04:22,040
 Is there anyone else here wishing to speak on the consent agenda tonight?

53
00:04:22,040 --> 00:04:23,040
 Jennifer, do you?

54
00:04:23,040 --> 00:04:24,040
 I'll just, I'll just go up.

55
00:04:24,040 --> 00:04:25,040
 Oh, you can come on up if you'd like.

56
00:04:25,040 --> 00:04:26,040
 Thanks.

57
00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:27,040
 Thanks very much.

58
00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:35,840
 I wasn't expecting to speak, but rather to support 100 percent what you just heard.

59
00:04:35,840 --> 00:04:42,240
 I live not far from where Leanne lives and it's just devastating to see trees of that

60
00:04:42,240 --> 00:04:50,400
 age just mowed down for no good reason when design changes could have been implemented.

61
00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:57,160
 I have noticed since protesting and speaking to Kimberley Harn during their meetings with

62
00:04:57,160 --> 00:05:00,280
 the public that they're on practically every other agenda here.

63
00:05:00,280 --> 00:05:08,240
 And I begin to wonder why the city is not asking them to consider why the city is allowing

64
00:05:08,240 --> 00:05:13,760
 them to have their cake and eat it too, to yes, they have every right to take on their

65
00:05:13,760 --> 00:05:17,720
 private contracts as they wish, but if they prioritize that over the public good, why

66
00:05:17,720 --> 00:05:21,680
 are we hiring them basically is my question.

67
00:05:21,680 --> 00:05:23,080
 Thank you.

68
00:05:23,080 --> 00:05:26,880
 Thank you.

69
00:05:26,880 --> 00:05:29,440
 Just checking if there was anyone else there who was wishing to speak.

70
00:05:29,440 --> 00:05:30,440
 OK.

71
00:05:30,440 --> 00:05:31,440
 Thank you very much, ladies.

72
00:05:31,440 --> 00:05:32,440
 OK.

73
00:05:32,440 --> 00:05:33,440
 I didn't know.

74
00:05:33,440 --> 00:05:34,440
 I want to ask questions.

75
00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:35,440
 Thank you very much.

76
00:05:35,440 --> 00:05:36,440
 Thank you, ladies.

77
00:05:36,440 --> 00:05:37,440
 Have a good evening.

78
00:05:37,440 --> 00:05:38,440
 OK.

79
00:05:38,440 --> 00:05:48,520
 Next item on our agenda is our work session reports.

80
00:05:48,520 --> 00:05:49,920
 We've got one this evening.

81
00:05:49,920 --> 00:05:53,560
 It's a receiver report, hold a discussion regarding regulations and procedures related

82
00:05:53,560 --> 00:05:56,400
 to SUPs and PDs.

83
00:05:56,400 --> 00:05:58,480
 That sounds like a fun boot camp topic.

84
00:05:58,480 --> 00:05:59,480
 Hi, Julie.

85
00:05:59,480 --> 00:06:00,480
 Good evening.

86
00:06:00,480 --> 00:06:04,080
 Let me pull up the presentation.

87
00:06:04,080 --> 00:06:08,040
 We've got two of us presenting this topic tonight.

88
00:06:08,040 --> 00:06:12,760
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and I have Angie Manglaris.

89
00:06:12,760 --> 00:06:15,840
 So we're going to team up on this.

90
00:06:15,840 --> 00:06:20,240
 I'm going to talk about PDs and she'll talk about SUPs and wrap it up.

91
00:06:20,240 --> 00:06:25,680
 So tonight in our boot camp series, we are continuing with a deeper dive discussion on

92
00:06:25,680 --> 00:06:31,300
 SUPs and plan developments.

93
00:06:31,300 --> 00:06:36,280
 Just to set the table and the development process, this graphic on your screen outlines

94
00:06:36,280 --> 00:06:37,280
 the development process.

95
00:06:37,280 --> 00:06:42,220
 And as you can see, each square contains a different project type.

96
00:06:42,220 --> 00:06:47,480
 So depending on the complexity of the project, quite a few applications or submittals would

97
00:06:47,480 --> 00:06:54,080
 be required in order to go from dirt all the way to a certificate of occupancy.

98
00:06:54,080 --> 00:06:57,640
 It generally starts with a pre-application conference.

99
00:06:57,640 --> 00:07:01,960
 For those of you who don't know, a pre-application conference is something where somebody has

100
00:07:01,960 --> 00:07:06,760
 a dream or an idea and a site, and they come to the city and say, "Hey, this is what I

101
00:07:06,760 --> 00:07:08,700
 would like to do."

102
00:07:08,700 --> 00:07:14,440
 City staff sits down with them and talks over the regulations that would be required or

103
00:07:14,440 --> 00:07:19,100
 that would apply to the project, maybe the processes that would apply to the project,

104
00:07:19,100 --> 00:07:25,640
 and talk about those regulations and identify areas where they might have public hearings.

105
00:07:25,640 --> 00:07:29,200
 So that's really the first step in a lot of projects.

106
00:07:29,200 --> 00:07:34,640
 But the first real application that we often see would be after the pre-application, and

107
00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:35,640
 that's entitlement.

108
00:07:35,640 --> 00:07:39,360
 And that is that second square on your screen, and that's got the little asterisk next to

109
00:07:39,360 --> 00:07:40,360
 it.

110
00:07:40,360 --> 00:07:45,580
 Entitlement is just kind of a plan or a word for zoning, an SUP or a PD.

111
00:07:45,580 --> 00:07:47,300
 Those are generally what we see.

112
00:07:47,300 --> 00:07:51,520
 And so that's what we're talking about tonight.

113
00:07:51,520 --> 00:07:55,920
 So within that entitlement, within that entitlement toolbox in the Denton Development Code, we

114
00:07:55,920 --> 00:07:57,800
 really have three options.

115
00:07:57,800 --> 00:08:01,720
 First we have straight zoning, then we have SUPs, and we have PDs.

116
00:08:01,720 --> 00:08:07,320
 So first, straight zoning, those are the zoning districts that we know and love in the Denton

117
00:08:07,320 --> 00:08:08,320
 Development Code.

118
00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:12,320
 We have our residential districts, our mixed-use districts, our corridor districts, and then

119
00:08:12,320 --> 00:08:15,160
 our other districts like industrial.

120
00:08:15,160 --> 00:08:22,880
 They establish those use and dimensional standards, and also any development standards associated

121
00:08:22,880 --> 00:08:27,800
 with the Denton Development Code would apply when you're looking at a straight zoning case.

122
00:08:27,800 --> 00:08:34,480
 And those standards were created through a lot of effort from a lot of policymakers and

123
00:08:34,480 --> 00:08:39,920
 decision makers within the city to create standards that would ensure compatibility,

124
00:08:39,920 --> 00:08:44,840
 not only among uses within a zoning district, but also when zoning districts abut each other.

125
00:08:44,840 --> 00:08:50,800
 So those are things like landscaping buffers and setbacks and screening, height standards.

126
00:08:50,800 --> 00:08:56,840
 So we have a lot of those provisions within the Denton Development Code to ensure compatibility.

127
00:08:56,840 --> 00:09:00,800
 And then the Denton Development Code within a straight zoning case also has deviations.

128
00:09:00,800 --> 00:09:04,760
 There are potential deviations that a developer could ask for.

129
00:09:04,760 --> 00:09:08,640
 They could request to go to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a variance.

130
00:09:08,640 --> 00:09:13,180
 Even the Planning and Zoning Commission has seen subdivision variances recently.

131
00:09:13,180 --> 00:09:17,080
 So we also have things like minor modifications, alternative landscape plans.

132
00:09:17,080 --> 00:09:23,640
 So there are some relief procedures within the Denton Development Code that applicants

133
00:09:23,640 --> 00:09:25,740
 could request.

134
00:09:25,740 --> 00:09:30,040
 And all of this follows Texas Local Government Code 211.

135
00:09:30,040 --> 00:09:35,720
 And what that states in zoning is that each district must be uniform, but it can vary

136
00:09:35,720 --> 00:09:37,000
 from district to district.

137
00:09:37,000 --> 00:09:42,160
 So for example, MN in the south part of town has to be MN in the north part of town.

138
00:09:42,160 --> 00:09:47,560
 So the uses and the development standards in MN are the same regardless of where it

139
00:09:47,560 --> 00:09:48,720
 is on the map.

140
00:09:48,720 --> 00:09:50,360
 MN is always the same.

141
00:09:50,360 --> 00:09:54,920
 Now MN and R7 may be different because we have different uses or development standards

142
00:09:54,920 --> 00:09:59,760
 associated with those, but they really should be standardized.

143
00:09:59,760 --> 00:10:02,880
 A specific use permit is nested inside of zoning.

144
00:10:02,880 --> 00:10:05,160
 It is something that's kind of a part of zoning.

145
00:10:05,160 --> 00:10:09,880
 And when you see a specific use permit, and Angie will talk about that more in depth,

146
00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:11,760
 but that doesn't change the underlying zoning.

147
00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:16,880
 It really is just related to a specific use on a specific site.

148
00:10:16,880 --> 00:10:17,880
 And then plan development.

149
00:10:17,880 --> 00:10:23,920
 So we'll talk about this more deeply, but just top line, it is a tool to address site-specific

150
00:10:23,920 --> 00:10:24,920
 situations.

151
00:10:24,920 --> 00:10:30,440
 I kind of think of it as customized zoning for a specific site.

152
00:10:30,440 --> 00:10:32,520
 And it would run with the land on that site.

153
00:10:32,520 --> 00:10:36,960
 When something is zoned to PD, that becomes the zoning of the property.

154
00:10:36,960 --> 00:10:42,040
 It does allow that greater flexibility because it does allow the deviations that are greater

155
00:10:42,040 --> 00:10:45,920
 than what those deviations are within the debt and development code.

156
00:10:45,920 --> 00:10:48,520
 But it should be used sparingly.

157
00:10:48,520 --> 00:10:52,400
 It should be for those sites that are kind of outside the box or uses outside of the

158
00:10:52,400 --> 00:10:53,660
 box.

159
00:10:53,660 --> 00:10:58,280
 So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Angie to talk about specific use permit.

160
00:10:58,280 --> 00:11:01,200
 Hi, everyone.

161
00:11:01,200 --> 00:11:02,200
 Good evening.

162
00:11:02,200 --> 00:11:03,200
 Angie Minglaris.

163
00:11:03,200 --> 00:11:08,240
 As Angie mentioned, I will be going over specific use permits a little bit more in depth.

164
00:11:08,240 --> 00:11:13,080
 So specific use permit is a permit for a use that is not allowed by right within a zoning

165
00:11:13,080 --> 00:11:18,760
 district but could be appropriate given the location that the proposed use is to go.

166
00:11:18,760 --> 00:11:24,000
 So it's a mechanism that we use to evaluate development of land specifically for uses

167
00:11:24,000 --> 00:11:27,760
 that are known to have a wide variety of operating characteristics.

168
00:11:27,760 --> 00:11:31,920
 The intent of the specific use permit is to ensure that where that land use is going is

169
00:11:31,920 --> 00:11:37,960
 compatible with adjacent existing uses and provides for adequate mitigation for any anticipated

170
00:11:37,960 --> 00:11:42,400
 impacts that could be expected from that use.

171
00:11:42,400 --> 00:11:47,720
 Specific use permits do have their own set of review criteria at the time of first submittal

172
00:11:47,720 --> 00:11:48,880
 of an SUP.

173
00:11:48,880 --> 00:11:53,820
 We expect a zoning compliance plan, a landscape plan, a tree preservation plan to be submitted.

174
00:11:53,820 --> 00:11:58,140
 And that is in part to ensure that they are adequately mitigating for any adverse impacts

175
00:11:58,140 --> 00:11:59,900
 the site may have.

176
00:11:59,900 --> 00:12:04,120
 Review timelines can vary greatly due to the need for a zoning compliance plan and the review

177
00:12:04,120 --> 00:12:07,960
 that goes behind that, but typically they run between three and six months.

178
00:12:07,960 --> 00:12:13,600
 When we review specific use permits, we review them against our general criteria for approval

179
00:12:13,600 --> 00:12:19,600
 as well as the criteria for approval for specific use permits as outlined in DDC 2.5.2.

180
00:12:19,600 --> 00:12:24,760
 So just a brief recap what our general criteria for approval is.

181
00:12:24,760 --> 00:12:28,420
 When we review an SUP, we're looking at is this consistent with the goals and objectives

182
00:12:28,420 --> 00:12:33,200
 of the comprehensive plan as well as the intent of the underlying zoning district.

183
00:12:33,200 --> 00:12:37,160
 More specifically when we're referencing that, is this use in the zoning district appropriate

184
00:12:37,160 --> 00:12:42,960
 given the surrounding uses and its compatibility with what's already in existence?

185
00:12:42,960 --> 00:12:46,760
 Also when this is reviewed, you look at are there adequate public facilities available

186
00:12:46,760 --> 00:12:52,600
 in the area to serve this and have potential impacts to neighboring properties been adequately

187
00:12:52,600 --> 00:12:53,960
 mitigated for.

188
00:12:53,960 --> 00:12:58,440
 This is the general review criteria that we review every application against.

189
00:12:58,440 --> 00:13:03,040
 And then specific use permits come with their own set of review criteria that staff reviews

190
00:13:03,040 --> 00:13:08,460
 when these come in that is the use compatible with existing developments?

191
00:13:08,460 --> 00:13:13,980
 Does this adversely impact the potential future development in the area and have any impacts

192
00:13:13,980 --> 00:13:20,340
 that are expected such as traffic, access, noise been adequately mitigated for this use?

193
00:13:20,340 --> 00:13:24,940
 So those are the standards that staff uses to review an SUP against.

194
00:13:24,940 --> 00:13:30,260
 And we're going to go over just two examples to kind of illustrate how this works in practice.

195
00:13:30,260 --> 00:13:35,020
 So the first example we have is Quincy Court, which is a multifamily development that was

196
00:13:35,020 --> 00:13:39,140
 seeking an SUP for additional height on their building.

197
00:13:39,140 --> 00:13:45,060
 So this is zoned MN multifamily buildings between 41 feet and 65 feet in this zoning

198
00:13:45,060 --> 00:13:48,280
 district did require an SUP permit.

199
00:13:48,280 --> 00:13:52,100
 So if you can see on this graphic where the blue line is, it's 40 feet where they could

200
00:13:52,100 --> 00:13:56,820
 build by right and where that green line is in that top graphic there is where the additional

201
00:13:56,820 --> 00:14:00,960
 height they were requesting would fall with their SUP.

202
00:14:00,960 --> 00:14:04,740
 So in this case, SUP was used to evaluate the additional height on the building and

203
00:14:04,740 --> 00:14:07,540
 its appropriateness in the area.

204
00:14:07,540 --> 00:14:13,660
 As stated, this was on loop 288 and it's Stewart Road, 288 is a major thoroughfare.

205
00:14:13,660 --> 00:14:18,420
 The development was adjacent to the south and to the east to existing single family

206
00:14:18,420 --> 00:14:19,420
 homes.

207
00:14:19,420 --> 00:14:22,540
 So it was reviewed for its compatibility against that.

208
00:14:22,540 --> 00:14:28,220
 The proposed complex was set back approximately 100 feet for many adjacent residential uses

209
00:14:28,220 --> 00:14:33,060
 and within those setbacks, there was adequate landscape buffering and screening that were

210
00:14:33,060 --> 00:14:36,940
 provided that would be expected with any multifamily development.

211
00:14:36,940 --> 00:14:40,820
 When this application was reviewed, it was determined that the additional height was

212
00:14:40,820 --> 00:14:43,660
 not expected to cause any adverse impacts.

213
00:14:43,660 --> 00:14:49,500
 Additionally, with this being on loop 288 and there being existing undeveloped MN zoning

214
00:14:49,500 --> 00:14:53,060
 and similar zoning that you would see along a major thoroughfare was determined that this

215
00:14:53,060 --> 00:14:58,540
 would be compatible with any future development as loop 288 continues to expand and develop

216
00:14:58,540 --> 00:15:02,260
 in that area.

217
00:15:02,260 --> 00:15:05,600
 This next example is an SUP that you guys saw relatively recent.

218
00:15:05,600 --> 00:15:11,340
 This was for U-Haul of East Denton where there was the request for an SUP for the equipment,

219
00:15:11,340 --> 00:15:12,700
 sales and rental.

220
00:15:12,700 --> 00:15:18,180
 The site did have a underlying zoning of light industrial which allowed for warehouse uses

221
00:15:18,180 --> 00:15:19,180
 as well as self-storage.

222
00:15:19,180 --> 00:15:24,520
 However, the equipment, sales and rental component of this did require an SUP.

223
00:15:24,520 --> 00:15:28,260
 When looking at the future land use designation, you can see that it was split between light

224
00:15:28,260 --> 00:15:32,340
 industrial and community mixed use and it was determined that the use could be appropriate

225
00:15:32,340 --> 00:15:39,820
 given the location along 380 and that community mixed use is a transitional zoning district.

226
00:15:39,820 --> 00:15:43,780
 When reviewing where the sales and rental equipment would be, you can see it kind of

227
00:15:43,780 --> 00:15:45,260
 notated here on your map.

228
00:15:45,260 --> 00:15:50,060
 The site did provide adequate landscape buffering and screening to the residential development

229
00:15:50,060 --> 00:15:54,780
 that was located immediately to the west and overall the development was not anticipated

230
00:15:54,780 --> 00:15:59,780
 to generate any noise, odor or other adverse impacts that would affect the single family

231
00:15:59,780 --> 00:16:05,940
 development to the west and this SUP was deemed appropriate for the area for the use of equipment,

232
00:16:05,940 --> 00:16:06,940
 sales and rental.

233
00:16:06,940 --> 00:16:13,100
 So those are kind of two examples that how we review SUPs in real time against the criteria

234
00:16:13,100 --> 00:16:20,780
 that we have and the different components that are looked at during the review process.

235
00:16:20,780 --> 00:16:25,700
 When you're approving an SUP, you're also adopting that zoning compliance plan.

236
00:16:25,700 --> 00:16:30,120
 There are minor modifications that are allowed to a site plan.

237
00:16:30,120 --> 00:16:35,340
 Those are minor decreases in buffering and screening requirements, possibly parking alterations

238
00:16:35,340 --> 00:16:37,620
 as well as locations of buildings.

239
00:16:37,620 --> 00:16:41,160
 Really the reasons these come up is after the zoning compliance plan you're going to

240
00:16:41,160 --> 00:16:42,660
 civil engineering.

241
00:16:42,660 --> 00:16:46,060
 At that time there may be some minor modifications that are needed.

242
00:16:46,060 --> 00:16:51,180
 Those are written into the adopting ordinance that usually plus or minus 5% is the language

243
00:16:51,180 --> 00:16:56,180
 that we go with for like an increase or decrease in an element that was provided.

244
00:16:56,180 --> 00:17:00,940
 Anything above and beyond that, a major expansion or a site redesign is what we consider a major

245
00:17:00,940 --> 00:17:04,540
 amendment and that requires that the applicant go back through the process.

246
00:17:04,540 --> 00:17:07,740
 It would come back before you all as the planning and zoning commission and then ultimately

247
00:17:07,740 --> 00:17:10,780
 city council to review those changes.

248
00:17:10,780 --> 00:17:15,060
 SUPs can also be denied or revoked.

249
00:17:15,060 --> 00:17:20,300
 That usually happens in instances where the plan has changed substantially or a condition

250
00:17:20,300 --> 00:17:25,460
 of approval has been violated if the site plan or the development is not substantially

251
00:17:25,460 --> 00:17:32,900
 underway 24 months after the approval or if the SUP was obtained by fraud or deception.

252
00:17:32,900 --> 00:17:34,620
 That's a high level overview of SUPs.

253
00:17:34,620 --> 00:17:38,180
 I'm going to give it back to Julie for some plan developments.

254
00:17:38,180 --> 00:17:44,420
 All right, now we'll talk PDs.

255
00:17:44,420 --> 00:17:49,260
 I may have Tina jump in if she hears me say something.

256
00:17:49,260 --> 00:17:50,260
 I shouldn't.

257
00:17:50,260 --> 00:17:51,260
 All right.

258
00:17:51,260 --> 00:17:54,900
 So the Denton Development Code has two areas that we really talk about PDs.

259
00:17:54,900 --> 00:17:59,180
 We have SUP Chapter 2, which is our processes and administration SUP Chapter.

260
00:17:59,180 --> 00:18:05,620
 It was recently amended for some processes as well as for PDs and we're going to talk

261
00:18:05,620 --> 00:18:06,940
 about that briefly.

262
00:18:06,940 --> 00:18:11,080
 And then SUP Chapter 3 and that SUP Chapter 3 outlines our zoning districts, PD being

263
00:18:11,080 --> 00:18:13,080
 one of them.

264
00:18:13,080 --> 00:18:16,020
 So it's addressed in SUP Chapter 3.

265
00:18:16,020 --> 00:18:20,620
 Both of those areas really talk about what the intent of a PD is and that is to provide

266
00:18:20,620 --> 00:18:28,300
 that flexibility that if their proposed uses or the site really doesn't fit within the

267
00:18:28,300 --> 00:18:33,620
 strictures of the DDC that they would request a PD for that flexibility.

268
00:18:33,620 --> 00:18:35,580
 It's that alternative zoning district.

269
00:18:35,580 --> 00:18:39,900
 But what we do want to see is a greater benefit to the community with a PD.

270
00:18:39,900 --> 00:18:45,760
 We want to see how that really fits within the Denton community.

271
00:18:45,760 --> 00:18:51,820
 So as I mentioned, we have recently updated SUP Chapter 2 in the Denton Development Code.

272
00:18:51,820 --> 00:18:54,780
 And as part of that, we have updated our PD regulations.

273
00:18:54,780 --> 00:18:57,500
 So we actually have two types of PDs now.

274
00:18:57,500 --> 00:18:59,560
 You haven't seen the first one yet.

275
00:18:59,560 --> 00:19:01,660
 You might see one soon.

276
00:19:01,660 --> 00:19:03,160
 It's an overlay PD.

277
00:19:03,160 --> 00:19:08,740
 I've called it PD Lite, but the Denton Development Code calls it an overlay PD.

278
00:19:08,740 --> 00:19:16,780
 And that really is intended to address concerns of compatibility, and with an overlay PD,

279
00:19:16,780 --> 00:19:23,160
 an applicant would choose a base zoning district, and then on top of that, could restrict or

280
00:19:23,160 --> 00:19:29,220
 expand the permitted uses, impose you specific standards, modify the setbacks, landscaping,

281
00:19:29,220 --> 00:19:30,780
 screening, or buffering.

282
00:19:30,780 --> 00:19:36,500
 Typically, when you're going to see an overlay PD, it will have a list of conditions, overlay

283
00:19:36,500 --> 00:19:37,500
 conditions.

284
00:19:37,500 --> 00:19:39,620
 You wouldn't see necessarily a map with that.

285
00:19:39,620 --> 00:19:43,500
 It really just would be more that text-based overlay.

286
00:19:43,500 --> 00:19:50,220
 If some of you remember the 2002 Denton Development Code, we had a similar type of provision in

287
00:19:50,220 --> 00:19:55,020
 the 2002 Denton Development Code, and we would see those from time to time.

288
00:19:55,020 --> 00:19:58,500
 That is different from the standard PD, and that really gets to that PD that we've seen

289
00:19:58,500 --> 00:19:59,940
 in the last couple of years.

290
00:19:59,940 --> 00:20:02,060
 And a standard PD includes two parts.

291
00:20:02,060 --> 00:20:06,540
 It includes the text, and that includes a base zoning district.

292
00:20:06,540 --> 00:20:11,260
 They always base it on an existing district that we have in the Denton Development Code.

293
00:20:11,260 --> 00:20:14,260
 And then that text should also include the things like the purpose statement.

294
00:20:14,260 --> 00:20:15,900
 Why are they doing it?

295
00:20:15,900 --> 00:20:17,260
 What is that public benefit?

296
00:20:17,260 --> 00:20:21,180
 We want to see how it fits within the fabric of Denton.

297
00:20:21,180 --> 00:20:23,780
 And then those deviations from the Denton Development Code.

298
00:20:23,780 --> 00:20:29,340
 Really, that's why they're doing that PD, is to build in those deviations.

299
00:20:29,340 --> 00:20:30,340
 So that's the first part.

300
00:20:30,340 --> 00:20:33,720
 The second part of a standard PD is the map.

301
00:20:33,720 --> 00:20:37,660
 That's really where we see that site plan coordinating structures, access, where the

302
00:20:37,660 --> 00:20:42,860
 parking is, where the lots are, where the variety of uses would be.

303
00:20:42,860 --> 00:20:47,900
 If there are any parks or trails, that's where we would see that come into play.

304
00:20:47,900 --> 00:20:54,500
 The standard PD can be phased, so it can have maybe parts of that map that aren't fully

305
00:20:54,500 --> 00:20:58,060
 fleshed out at the time of adoption.

306
00:20:58,060 --> 00:21:03,060
 But when they come back for a subsequent phase, it would still have to follow the text that

307
00:21:03,060 --> 00:21:06,320
 they establish with their PD.

308
00:21:06,320 --> 00:21:10,100
 And then the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council would have to approve any

309
00:21:10,100 --> 00:21:14,700
 subsequent phases through the public hearing process.

310
00:21:14,700 --> 00:21:18,500
 The site must be developed in accordance with the PD, regardless of ownership.

311
00:21:18,500 --> 00:21:27,420
 And that's something to think about, that if the zoning is changed to PD, that remains

312
00:21:27,420 --> 00:21:28,420
 on the property.

313
00:21:28,420 --> 00:21:30,080
 They couldn't develop another use.

314
00:21:30,080 --> 00:21:36,980
 They would have to rezone in order to develop with a different use.

315
00:21:36,980 --> 00:21:41,060
 So using plan developments, what are the rules of the road for that?

316
00:21:41,060 --> 00:21:44,740
 So if you recall at the beginning of this discussion, we talked about the Texas Local

317
00:21:44,740 --> 00:21:50,140
 Government Code and how the zoning must be applied consistently throughout the city.

318
00:21:50,140 --> 00:21:52,460
 That MN should be the same everywhere, right?

319
00:21:52,460 --> 00:22:01,460
 But if you get too many PDs, if you get too many individualized zoning districts, you're

320
00:22:01,460 --> 00:22:03,280
 really running afoul of that, right?

321
00:22:03,280 --> 00:22:07,900
 Because now you've got separate zoning for every single parcel.

322
00:22:07,900 --> 00:22:10,540
 So therefore, PDs should be used sparingly.

323
00:22:10,540 --> 00:22:12,700
 They should not be used for every project.

324
00:22:12,700 --> 00:22:17,180
 We really should be relying on our Debt and Development Code to guide our development

325
00:22:17,180 --> 00:22:18,580
 in the city.

326
00:22:18,580 --> 00:22:19,580
 They can be useful.

327
00:22:19,580 --> 00:22:22,300
 They can be useful in challenging situations.

328
00:22:22,300 --> 00:22:27,460
 Where straight zoning just doesn't work, maybe small redevelopment lots, some unlisted uses,

329
00:22:27,460 --> 00:22:29,020
 or coordinating those diverse uses.

330
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:33,180
 So it really does have a place within that toolbox, but it should not be our primary

331
00:22:33,180 --> 00:22:34,180
 tool.

332
00:22:34,180 --> 00:22:38,780
 But it should not be used just to vary a couple of standards or uses.

333
00:22:38,780 --> 00:22:39,780
 Anything?

334
00:22:39,780 --> 00:22:42,820
 Is that -- any questions on that?

335
00:22:42,820 --> 00:22:44,660
 All right.

336
00:22:44,660 --> 00:22:52,780
 Now, in an instance where we've had multiple requests for a similar issue, think horizontal

337
00:22:52,780 --> 00:22:53,780
 multifamily.

338
00:22:53,780 --> 00:22:54,780
 You saw what?

339
00:22:54,780 --> 00:22:57,180
 Three or four of those come through.

340
00:22:57,180 --> 00:23:01,340
 In that instance, maybe that was a sign we need to add that use to the Debt and Development

341
00:23:01,340 --> 00:23:02,340
 Code.

342
00:23:02,340 --> 00:23:08,340
 So if we're seeing a lot of PDs for the same thing, that's when we probably need to talk

343
00:23:08,340 --> 00:23:13,380
 to DCRC and maybe think of ways that we could incorporate that in our Debt and Development

344
00:23:13,380 --> 00:23:14,380
 Code.

345
00:23:14,380 --> 00:23:18,820
 So, okay, let's talk about -- we talked about SUPs, kind of the process with that.

346
00:23:18,820 --> 00:23:22,540
 We're going to go over this just briefly in PDs.

347
00:23:22,540 --> 00:23:24,420
 So an applicant comes to us.

348
00:23:24,420 --> 00:23:26,060
 They've had a pre-application conference.

349
00:23:26,060 --> 00:23:30,100
 They realize they have one of those unique sites or uses where they really do need a

350
00:23:30,100 --> 00:23:31,100
 PD.

351
00:23:31,100 --> 00:23:32,740
 What happens next?

352
00:23:32,740 --> 00:23:34,100
 These are complex documents.

353
00:23:34,100 --> 00:23:37,180
 They have the text and the map.

354
00:23:37,180 --> 00:23:42,740
 So they can take, you know, sometimes six to nine months to go through that review process,

355
00:23:42,740 --> 00:23:43,740
 because they can be challenging.

356
00:23:43,740 --> 00:23:46,620
 It's a lot of back and forth with staff.

357
00:23:46,620 --> 00:23:51,620
 The approval criteria is in subchapter two of the Debt and Development Code.

358
00:23:51,620 --> 00:23:52,940
 I won't go over all of those.

359
00:23:52,940 --> 00:23:53,940
 Y'all can read those.

360
00:23:53,940 --> 00:23:58,820
 But just in summary, the things that we think about when they first come to us with the

361
00:23:58,820 --> 00:24:04,420
 pre-application all the way through the public hearing process, we really try to keep that

362
00:24:04,420 --> 00:24:06,460
 approval criteria in mind.

363
00:24:06,460 --> 00:24:09,220
 So the first thing we always think about is the comprehensive plan.

364
00:24:09,220 --> 00:24:11,340
 What does the future land use map say?

365
00:24:11,340 --> 00:24:17,540
 Are there other goals or objectives in the comprehensive plan which would be served by

366
00:24:17,540 --> 00:24:19,260
 this proposal?

367
00:24:19,260 --> 00:24:22,920
 Are there area plans that affect the subject property?

368
00:24:22,920 --> 00:24:24,940
 We also look at the context.

369
00:24:24,940 --> 00:24:27,760
 What are the nearby uses and development patterns?

370
00:24:27,760 --> 00:24:29,860
 What is the nearby zoning?

371
00:24:29,860 --> 00:24:32,180
 Are there parks or schools near?

372
00:24:32,180 --> 00:24:34,540
 Are there potential incompatibilities?

373
00:24:34,540 --> 00:24:36,000
 What are the physical site conditions?

374
00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:37,000
 We look at that.

375
00:24:37,000 --> 00:24:39,220
 Eases, topography, floodplain.

376
00:24:39,220 --> 00:24:40,580
 What is the tree canopy on site?

377
00:24:40,580 --> 00:24:43,140
 And how does that affect the layout?

378
00:24:43,140 --> 00:24:45,180
 And then connectivity.

379
00:24:45,180 --> 00:24:50,360
 Not just cars, but also trail systems and bike and ped.

380
00:24:50,360 --> 00:24:52,700
 We want to think about all of those things as we're reviewing.

381
00:24:52,700 --> 00:24:55,060
 So we put all of that together.

382
00:24:55,060 --> 00:24:58,260
 And permeating the entire process should be community outreach.

383
00:24:58,260 --> 00:25:03,460
 We recommend to all applicants that they reach out to the community early in the process

384
00:25:03,460 --> 00:25:07,300
 and let that community outreach inform their process.

385
00:25:07,300 --> 00:25:12,020
 And then that comes together with the proposed development regulations and the proposed map.

386
00:25:12,020 --> 00:25:18,060
 And once again, that should have that increased development quality or community benefit.

387
00:25:18,060 --> 00:25:20,780
 So we're going to take a look in practice.

388
00:25:20,780 --> 00:25:24,580
 I've chosen a couple of examples that you've seen in the last couple of years just to kind

389
00:25:24,580 --> 00:25:29,100
 of show you how a project started and then how it got and then what it looked like when

390
00:25:29,100 --> 00:25:31,180
 it got in front of you.

391
00:25:31,180 --> 00:25:36,520
 So I don't know if this will be easy to see, but this was a multifamily project that recently

392
00:25:36,520 --> 00:25:38,340
 came in front of you.

393
00:25:38,340 --> 00:25:44,740
 They submitted in February of this year and it came before you in August, so it was about

394
00:25:44,740 --> 00:25:48,140
 six months that it took through the review process.

395
00:25:48,140 --> 00:25:53,260
 You can see on your screen this right here, those are the markups that planning had and

396
00:25:53,260 --> 00:26:00,460
 then other departments had other markups, lots of access and engineering and tree preservation.

397
00:26:00,460 --> 00:26:05,980
 We all mark up these plans and we give them guidance and tell them where they're meeting

398
00:26:05,980 --> 00:26:10,700
 the code requirements and where they are and where they should think more thoroughly about

399
00:26:10,700 --> 00:26:11,700
 a project.

400
00:26:11,700 --> 00:26:16,740
 For instance, at the beginning, their building was pulled up near I-35 and we talked to them

401
00:26:16,740 --> 00:26:17,740
 about that.

402
00:26:17,740 --> 00:26:19,420
 There's a really big tree stand there.

403
00:26:19,420 --> 00:26:22,260
 Maybe you should pull the building back and get that buffer.

404
00:26:22,260 --> 00:26:25,160
 So they also provided the text.

405
00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:26,500
 You can see the area in pink.

406
00:26:26,500 --> 00:26:27,500
 Those were our markups.

407
00:26:27,500 --> 00:26:31,460
 So we went -- we go through these iterations with the applicant and that's why it could

408
00:26:31,460 --> 00:26:33,260
 take a long time.

409
00:26:33,260 --> 00:26:38,020
 And then you could see how it ended, where it ended up in front of you and those changes

410
00:26:38,020 --> 00:26:39,020
 that were made.

411
00:26:39,020 --> 00:26:41,940
 You know, they moved the building away from I-35.

412
00:26:41,940 --> 00:26:46,140
 They moved that trapped open space out of the parking lot to more meaningful open space

413
00:26:46,140 --> 00:26:50,020
 either in that tree area or with a dog park.

414
00:26:50,020 --> 00:26:56,620
 They modified their access to make sure it was safe for vehicles entering and leaving

415
00:26:56,620 --> 00:26:57,620
 the site.

416
00:26:57,620 --> 00:27:01,140
 So those are all things that we look at when we're looking at these PDs.

417
00:27:01,140 --> 00:27:08,060
 And then keep in mind the conditions or provisions that we discuss with the applicant and that

418
00:27:08,060 --> 00:27:13,020
 we work through with the review should all have a reasonable connection to the development

419
00:27:13,020 --> 00:27:14,020
 impact.

420
00:27:14,020 --> 00:27:19,500
 So, for example, an additional tree buffer would be used to minimize noise or light to

421
00:27:19,500 --> 00:27:20,540
 adjacent properties.

422
00:27:20,540 --> 00:27:23,460
 So there's always got to be that connection.

423
00:27:23,460 --> 00:27:28,220
 In planning, we call it a rational nexus, but really it's just -- they just have to

424
00:27:28,220 --> 00:27:30,560
 make sense and it has to be connected.

425
00:27:30,560 --> 00:27:34,900
 And then those requested improvements also have to be proportionate to the proposed impact.

426
00:27:34,900 --> 00:27:38,060
 So for example, in this, it was 60 dwelling units.

427
00:27:38,060 --> 00:27:42,380
 A signalized intersection there when they leave the property really wasn't proportionate

428
00:27:42,380 --> 00:27:44,620
 to the impact, right?

429
00:27:44,620 --> 00:27:50,740
 60 dwellings would not generate the amount of traffic that would require a signal in

430
00:27:50,740 --> 00:27:51,740
 this location.

431
00:27:51,740 --> 00:27:58,300
 But in other instances, there have been situations where there could have been a larger proportionate

432
00:27:58,300 --> 00:27:59,300
 impact.

433
00:27:59,300 --> 00:28:02,640
 So those are the things we look at on this one.

434
00:28:02,640 --> 00:28:04,780
 On this one, this is another one you saw.

435
00:28:04,780 --> 00:28:07,200
 This one actually didn't end up getting approved.

436
00:28:07,200 --> 00:28:12,580
 But just to let you know, this was a different type of plan development, how it started.

437
00:28:12,580 --> 00:28:18,660
 They had, for example, they had detention ponds at the entrance to the property.

438
00:28:18,660 --> 00:28:22,260
 They had a lot of lots on a really treed area.

439
00:28:22,260 --> 00:28:25,920
 There wasn't really a buffer or screening at Loop 288.

440
00:28:25,920 --> 00:28:32,340
 So we worked through that with them to modify that plan, to change that detention pond to

441
00:28:32,340 --> 00:28:37,060
 a retention pond with a five-acre park at the entrance.

442
00:28:37,060 --> 00:28:44,900
 We asked them to move those lots out of that treed area to have that substantial tree stand

443
00:28:44,900 --> 00:28:47,600
 that would be preserved.

444
00:28:47,600 --> 00:28:54,340
 We went through and talked about getting buffers along Loop 288 to ensure that, for the comfort

445
00:28:54,340 --> 00:28:58,740
 of those residents and to ensure that that had adequate screening.

446
00:28:58,740 --> 00:29:03,840
 And then with their public outreach, they heard from the community that there were transportation

447
00:29:03,840 --> 00:29:06,260
 challenges within the area.

448
00:29:06,260 --> 00:29:09,700
 And so the developer offered to make offsite transportation improvements.

449
00:29:09,700 --> 00:29:13,060
 Now, those weren't necessarily proportional to their impact.

450
00:29:13,060 --> 00:29:16,540
 But as part of the review, that was something that the applicant offered up.

451
00:29:16,540 --> 00:29:22,760
 So that was all during that review timeline from our first look in January all the way

452
00:29:22,760 --> 00:29:25,100
 to when it got to P&Z in June.

453
00:29:25,100 --> 00:29:30,660
 So there were substantial changes to that project, once again, keeping in mind the review

454
00:29:30,660 --> 00:29:39,540
 criteria in the Denton Development Code, as well as that rational nexus and that proportionality.

455
00:29:39,540 --> 00:29:43,540
 So once a PD is approved, they do have to develop in accordance with that PD.

456
00:29:43,540 --> 00:29:47,940
 But the DDC does have provisions where you can make changes.

457
00:29:47,940 --> 00:29:50,900
 There's a major change provision, a major amendment.

458
00:29:50,900 --> 00:29:54,200
 And essentially that, it would have to go back through public hearing again.

459
00:29:54,200 --> 00:29:59,540
 So if they are making a-- if they're increasing the number of dwelling units by more than 10%,

460
00:29:59,540 --> 00:30:02,780
 increasing the square footage by more than 10%, essentially, they're going to have to

461
00:30:02,780 --> 00:30:03,780
 go back to public hearing.

462
00:30:03,780 --> 00:30:08,300
 If they're going to do something to increase the intensity that could potentially impact

463
00:30:08,300 --> 00:30:13,100
 the area surrounding it, it really does need to go back for public hearing and approval--

464
00:30:13,100 --> 00:30:16,460
 a recommendation from P&Z and an approval from council.

465
00:30:16,460 --> 00:30:21,580
 If it's not one of those things, if it's a minor change within it, and it really wouldn't

466
00:30:21,580 --> 00:30:26,540
 impact the surrounding area, that could be staff level approved as a minor amendment,

467
00:30:26,540 --> 00:30:31,020
 would just be reviewed and approved at the staff level.

468
00:30:31,020 --> 00:30:35,020
 So Angie's going to come up for a wrap up.

469
00:30:35,020 --> 00:30:37,460
 OK.

470
00:30:37,460 --> 00:30:41,580
 So just to kind of review everything we've talked about and sum it up a little bit, as

471
00:30:41,580 --> 00:30:46,360
 a reminder, everything we talked about today, SUPs and plane developments, they fall within

472
00:30:46,360 --> 00:30:51,700
 the entitlement portion of our development phase, and SUPs, along with straight zoning

473
00:30:51,700 --> 00:30:56,820
 and plane developments, are all critical tools that we have in our entitlement toolbox.

474
00:30:56,820 --> 00:31:00,580
 We went over a lot about specific use permits and plan developments, so to kind of sum it

475
00:31:00,580 --> 00:31:06,620
 up, some of the key differences-- SUPs, you're not changing the underlying zoning district.

476
00:31:06,620 --> 00:31:10,980
 It's used to evaluate certain uses within a district to ensure that they're compatible

477
00:31:10,980 --> 00:31:12,780
 with what's in existence.

478
00:31:12,780 --> 00:31:19,820
 Those zoning compliance plans need to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the DDC.

479
00:31:19,820 --> 00:31:24,100
 Plan developments, more specifically, the standard plan developments that you would see with this.

480
00:31:24,100 --> 00:31:27,220
 You're modifying setbacks or landscape buffering.

481
00:31:27,220 --> 00:31:32,380
 These are not uses or site design standards that are typically allowed within the DDC.

482
00:31:32,380 --> 00:31:37,060
 However, these deviations are intended to provide a benefit to the community.

483
00:31:37,060 --> 00:31:42,020
 With these, you're adopting zoning regulations along with a development plan.

484
00:31:42,020 --> 00:31:45,620
 And then while these are two very different things, there are some similarities that kind

485
00:31:45,620 --> 00:31:46,620
 of fall within them.

486
00:31:46,620 --> 00:31:50,660
 These are critical tools within our zoning toolbox that help us to evaluate uses and

487
00:31:50,660 --> 00:31:53,620
 their appropriateness in any given location.

488
00:31:53,620 --> 00:31:57,060
 With these plans, we're adopting a zoning compliance plan that should be adhered to

489
00:31:57,060 --> 00:31:58,620
 as they move forward.

490
00:31:58,620 --> 00:32:03,340
 We evaluate the appropriateness of an SUP or a plan development based on the comprehensive

491
00:32:03,340 --> 00:32:10,740
 plan, access, landscape requirements, any incompatibilities that may exist, and any

492
00:32:10,740 --> 00:32:15,820
 significant deviation that may occur from an SUP or a plan development does require

493
00:32:15,820 --> 00:32:21,620
 both of these types of plans to go back through the Planning and Zoning Commission and City

494
00:32:21,620 --> 00:32:27,860
 Council in order to determine if that's appropriate and if that amendment is acceptable.

495
00:32:27,860 --> 00:32:32,580
 Those are kind of some of the ways that plan developments and SUPs are similar.

496
00:32:32,580 --> 00:32:35,620
 And with that, we're happy to answer any questions you guys may have.

497
00:32:35,620 --> 00:32:36,660
 Excellent.

498
00:32:36,660 --> 00:32:37,660
 Thank you.

499
00:32:37,660 --> 00:32:38,660
 Commissioner Villareal.

500
00:32:38,660 --> 00:32:39,660
 Thank you.

501
00:32:39,660 --> 00:32:41,060
 I think this was very enlightening.

502
00:32:41,060 --> 00:32:45,860
 Could you describe the tipping point between going straight zoning versus deciding to go

503
00:32:45,860 --> 00:32:49,460
 towards that plan development?

504
00:32:49,460 --> 00:32:53,020
 If there is a tipping point, I'm not sure if it's just case by case.

505
00:32:53,020 --> 00:32:54,020
 I don't know if it's best to answer that, but I'll look.

506
00:32:54,020 --> 00:32:55,020
 Definitely site-specific, I would say.

507
00:32:55,020 --> 00:32:56,020
 Yeah.

508
00:32:56,020 --> 00:32:57,020
 Definitely site-specific.

509
00:32:57,020 --> 00:33:00,580
 Tina, do you want to weigh in on that?

510
00:33:00,580 --> 00:33:01,580
 Sure.

511
00:33:01,580 --> 00:33:04,580
 Happy to do so.

512
00:33:04,580 --> 00:33:05,580
 That's a really good question.

513
00:33:05,580 --> 00:33:11,620
 So typically we try to stay with our straight zoning districts if the development can be

514
00:33:11,620 --> 00:33:16,660
 achieved as Julie did a really good job of laying out.

515
00:33:16,660 --> 00:33:24,140
 When there are challenges associated with how the property may develop, we ask ourselves

516
00:33:24,140 --> 00:33:29,140
 whether or not, okay, can this be accomplished under the straight zoning districts, or is

517
00:33:29,140 --> 00:33:34,900
 this something that really needs to seek relief from our development standards and then we

518
00:33:34,900 --> 00:33:43,040
 evaluate that to see if it's appropriate to go the plan development route.

519
00:33:43,040 --> 00:33:46,100
 There's no mathematical equation or anything like that that comes into play.

520
00:33:46,100 --> 00:33:51,220
 Unfortunately, it's not that easy sometimes, but it's really based upon our professional

521
00:33:51,220 --> 00:33:55,860
 judgment and training, our understanding of our ordinance.

522
00:33:55,860 --> 00:34:00,340
 There are developments that are really good developments to have, but that cannot be achieved

523
00:34:00,340 --> 00:34:04,860
 under our Denton Development Code, and so that's when it's appropriate to utilize the plan

524
00:34:04,860 --> 00:34:06,700
 development district tool.

525
00:34:06,700 --> 00:34:09,140
 I know neighborhood input.

526
00:34:09,140 --> 00:34:13,020
 Sometimes if there's a lot of neighborhood opposition or concerns, there could be neighborhood

527
00:34:13,020 --> 00:34:19,740
 support for development if certain aspects were achieved, wanting more affirmed outcomes

528
00:34:19,740 --> 00:34:24,460
 or predictable outcomes associated with it, then it might be appropriate to engage in

529
00:34:24,460 --> 00:34:29,260
 a plan development district process to be able to meet not only the needs of the residents

530
00:34:29,260 --> 00:34:33,460
 in their neighborhood, but also the proposed project.

531
00:34:33,460 --> 00:34:36,460
 Anything else to add, ladies?

532
00:34:36,460 --> 00:34:42,100
 Just to follow up, is there a reason why we prefer straight zoning as opposed to having

533
00:34:42,100 --> 00:34:45,580
 a more, I guess, patchwork plan development model?

534
00:34:45,580 --> 00:34:46,580
 Yes.

535
00:34:46,580 --> 00:34:51,140
 This goes back to one of the comments that Julie included early in the onset of our presentation.

536
00:34:51,140 --> 00:34:52,300
 One is state law.

537
00:34:52,300 --> 00:34:56,380
 State law says that if we're going to enforce zoning, then we need to have zoning districts

538
00:34:56,380 --> 00:35:00,200
 provided for throughout the city, and the standards and uses within the zoning districts

539
00:35:00,200 --> 00:35:02,540
 need to be the same regardless of where it's located.

540
00:35:02,540 --> 00:35:06,420
 For example, I'll use Commissioner Pruitt's favorite zoning district, MN.

541
00:35:06,420 --> 00:35:10,740
 MN has a variety of uses and standards that are within it.

542
00:35:10,740 --> 00:35:16,340
 The uses and standards in MN need to be appropriate if MN was situated in the north side of town

543
00:35:16,340 --> 00:35:19,940
 versus the south side of town, the east side of town, the west side of town.

544
00:35:19,940 --> 00:35:23,760
 If MN zoning is appropriate for a piece of property, then its uses and standards must

545
00:35:23,760 --> 00:35:25,760
 be consistent.

546
00:35:25,760 --> 00:35:27,940
 That's the first aspect associated with state law.

547
00:35:27,940 --> 00:35:30,740
 I had a second item, and I just do a blank on it.

548
00:35:30,740 --> 00:35:32,740
 My apologies.

549
00:35:32,740 --> 00:35:33,740
 Your question again?

550
00:35:33,740 --> 00:35:34,740
 I think that's part of it.

551
00:35:34,740 --> 00:35:35,740
 My apologies.

552
00:35:35,740 --> 00:35:36,740
 Ask your question again.

553
00:35:36,740 --> 00:35:42,140
 The question was, why do we go with straight zoning as opposed to north side?

554
00:35:42,140 --> 00:35:43,140
 Yes.

555
00:35:43,140 --> 00:35:44,140
 Okay.

556
00:35:44,140 --> 00:35:45,140
 Thank you.

557
00:35:45,140 --> 00:35:46,140
 One is the state law aspect.

558
00:35:46,140 --> 00:35:51,540
 The second thing is being able to effectively administer our debt and development code,

559
00:35:51,540 --> 00:35:53,940
 especially given a city of our size.

560
00:35:53,940 --> 00:35:57,780
 The third thing would be is that we want to be able to rely upon our zoning districts

561
00:35:57,780 --> 00:36:02,020
 that we provided for in the debt and development code, because it provides more predictable

562
00:36:02,020 --> 00:36:07,040
 expectations and outcomes in people's understanding of the zoning and how the community may develop.

563
00:36:07,040 --> 00:36:12,120
 If we were to negotiate every single zoning action that took place within the community,

564
00:36:12,120 --> 00:36:18,380
 then we have a very much patchwork, is the word to use it, provided throughout our community.

565
00:36:18,380 --> 00:36:21,060
 That becomes very challenging for us to administer.

566
00:36:21,060 --> 00:36:23,240
 I came from a city that was 12 square miles.

567
00:36:23,240 --> 00:36:25,420
 We were a PD factory like you wouldn't believe.

568
00:36:25,420 --> 00:36:30,660
 We had used planned development districts for generations, and it was really very challenging

569
00:36:30,660 --> 00:36:36,820
 to be able to administer it because of the fact that, because of just how we used planned

570
00:36:36,820 --> 00:36:38,560
 development districts at that time.

571
00:36:38,560 --> 00:36:41,200
 We were modifying development processes.

572
00:36:41,200 --> 00:36:45,700
 You could sort of see the wave of what we kind of latched to it on a particular time,

573
00:36:45,700 --> 00:36:48,460
 and you'd see kind of the cluster of planned development districts that were adopted around

574
00:36:48,460 --> 00:36:49,460
 the same time.

575
00:36:49,460 --> 00:36:52,780
 It's like, wow, we liked that particular process.

576
00:36:52,780 --> 00:36:56,460
 Or we would address, you know, work through certain challenges, but nonetheless, it became

577
00:36:56,460 --> 00:37:00,980
 very difficult for us to be able to administer our zoning within that community.

578
00:37:00,980 --> 00:37:02,820
 It creates a lot of gotchas, right?

579
00:37:02,820 --> 00:37:05,180
 We got tripped up on procedural aspects, right?

580
00:37:05,180 --> 00:37:12,340
 We also had zoning that was just, was not appropriate for the policies that we have

581
00:37:12,340 --> 00:37:13,340
 put in place.

582
00:37:13,340 --> 00:37:18,780
 So, you know, in a city of Denton, given that we're 98 square miles and we continue to grow,

583
00:37:18,780 --> 00:37:23,820
 and we have a really good DDC to work from, it's really important that we utilize those

584
00:37:23,820 --> 00:37:26,060
 tools and stick with our zoning.

585
00:37:26,060 --> 00:37:32,860
 If we find that variances are having to be requested for our standards on a regular basis,

586
00:37:32,860 --> 00:37:37,100
 or requests are being made for certain types of uses or that are not accommodated within

587
00:37:37,100 --> 00:37:42,500
 the district, then it's most appropriate to amend your, in this case, our Denton development

588
00:37:42,500 --> 00:37:44,540
 code to be able to provide for that development.

589
00:37:44,540 --> 00:37:47,340
 So hopefully that helps address some of your questions.

590
00:37:47,340 --> 00:37:52,380
 Well, and I think, I'll just add to that if I could, is just, I think now that we've kind

591
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:58,420
 of differentiated the PDs, because, you know, a PD, because there's constraints on the land,

592
00:37:58,420 --> 00:38:02,620
 is very different than an overlay PD, where it's an infill property and you've got all

593
00:38:02,620 --> 00:38:06,980
 this existing stuff around, and you're really trying to protect what's around there.

594
00:38:06,980 --> 00:38:11,980
 And so it's definitely a case by case basis, and I think they're certainly great tools

595
00:38:11,980 --> 00:38:17,820
 to have, and they're very different for the reasons that you would use one or the other.

596
00:38:17,820 --> 00:38:21,860
 You know, and another thing I'll add is that, you know, in terms of why using our Denton

597
00:38:21,860 --> 00:38:25,300
 development code versus doing the planned development district, you know, when we adopted

598
00:38:25,300 --> 00:38:29,580
 the Denton development code, we said, this is the bar of the standards for development

599
00:38:29,580 --> 00:38:30,860
 within our community, right?

600
00:38:30,860 --> 00:38:34,420
 We set the high standards within our community that we are expecting to achieve.

601
00:38:34,420 --> 00:38:36,540
 So therefore, we've set that bar.

602
00:38:36,540 --> 00:38:40,520
 We shouldn't be achieving that with every form of development that comes through.

603
00:38:40,520 --> 00:38:45,300
 If we find that our development is not achieving that, and people are seeking planned development

604
00:38:45,300 --> 00:38:48,540
 districts to get around that bar, whether they're trying to, you know, elevate it, most

605
00:38:48,540 --> 00:38:50,980
 of the time they're trying to drop that bar a little bit, right there.

606
00:38:50,980 --> 00:38:55,980
 But if they're wanting to try and get around that, then to me that raises the question

607
00:38:55,980 --> 00:39:01,220
 of, okay, are standards still relevant with how we're wanting development to occur?

608
00:39:01,220 --> 00:39:05,620
 The other thing we have to keep in mind also is, are our standards within the Denton development

609
00:39:05,620 --> 00:39:09,700
 code consistent with our long range policies that the city has adopted?

610
00:39:09,700 --> 00:39:14,260
 So we're typically looking to our comprehensive plan, because zoning is the tool that we utilize

611
00:39:14,260 --> 00:39:16,060
 to implement the comprehensive plan.

612
00:39:16,060 --> 00:39:20,240
 But for example, council adopts a policy on affordable housing, right?

613
00:39:20,240 --> 00:39:25,140
 So then do we have tools within our zoning ordinance that help with implementing that

614
00:39:25,140 --> 00:39:29,100
 affordable housing policy that council's adopted, or do we have tools in the zoning ordinance

615
00:39:29,100 --> 00:39:31,520
 that are prohibiting that plan from being adopted?

616
00:39:31,520 --> 00:39:37,040
 And so it's important for us to look at our zoning ordinance to see, is it consistent

617
00:39:37,040 --> 00:39:38,040
 with those policies?

618
00:39:38,040 --> 00:39:42,740
 So that's why you'll find that we're continuously looking to update it, but also why we look

619
00:39:42,740 --> 00:39:46,980
 to keep our Denton development code in the top-knop shape that is needed for development

620
00:39:46,980 --> 00:39:50,740
 within our community, so we can provide for that expected quality form of development

621
00:39:50,740 --> 00:39:51,740
 happening.

622
00:39:51,740 --> 00:39:52,740
 Other questions?

623
00:39:52,740 --> 00:39:53,740
 Commissioner McDade.

624
00:39:53,740 --> 00:39:54,740
 Thank you, Chair.

625
00:39:54,740 --> 00:40:02,140
 I just have a question, when you were talking about the SUP and the fraud and deception,

626
00:40:02,140 --> 00:40:07,100
 if a applicant is being deceptive, what are the ramifications of that?

627
00:40:07,100 --> 00:40:10,340
 Do they have to start over from ground zero, or do they just have to correct?

628
00:40:10,340 --> 00:40:11,340
 Sure.

629
00:40:11,340 --> 00:40:18,020
 So I've never run into somebody being accused of fraud or deception, but that is a way that

630
00:40:18,020 --> 00:40:19,020
 you could lose it.

631
00:40:19,020 --> 00:40:24,420
 Correct me if I'm wrong, if you lose your SUP by fraud or deception, or if that's determined

632
00:40:24,420 --> 00:40:28,460
 to be the case, your SUP is not valid.

633
00:40:28,460 --> 00:40:29,460
 It does not exist.

634
00:40:29,460 --> 00:40:34,660
 So it's still straight zoning, however, that conditional approval for the use or the added

635
00:40:34,660 --> 00:40:37,340
 height, that's not valid at that time.

636
00:40:37,340 --> 00:40:41,220
 Okay, so they're not allowed to come back?

637
00:40:41,220 --> 00:40:46,140
 They lose it one time, and that's it, they're not allowed to come back, and so I made a

638
00:40:46,140 --> 00:40:47,140
 mistake.

639
00:40:47,140 --> 00:40:48,660
 That I'm going to look to smarter people than I.

640
00:40:48,660 --> 00:40:49,660
 Okay.

641
00:40:49,660 --> 00:40:56,500
 I was going to say, yeah, I don't think I've ever had any experiences zoning that resulted

642
00:40:56,500 --> 00:41:00,700
 in fraud and deception, but yeah, if for whatever reason there were conditions that were put

643
00:41:00,700 --> 00:41:04,280
 in there and they did not satisfy them, they would have to come back with a modified form

644
00:41:04,280 --> 00:41:10,780
 of the zoning, whether that was a specific use permit or probably a most likely case

645
00:41:10,780 --> 00:41:13,860
 of a planned development district I can think of because if there's conditions included

646
00:41:13,860 --> 00:41:17,900
 within it, they would have to come back with a modified request on their zoning.

647
00:41:17,900 --> 00:41:18,900
 You're welcome.

648
00:41:18,900 --> 00:41:19,900
 Anybody else?

649
00:41:19,900 --> 00:41:20,900
 Commissioner Perot.

650
00:41:20,900 --> 00:41:21,900
 Thank you, Chair.

651
00:41:21,900 --> 00:41:27,340
 A couple things on PDs.

652
00:41:27,340 --> 00:41:28,340
 So first, the easy one.

653
00:41:28,340 --> 00:41:29,860
 I think this is the easy one.

654
00:41:29,860 --> 00:41:37,940
 I recall some past discussions about split zoning and intricacies of how that could happen.

655
00:41:37,940 --> 00:41:45,440
 Do we have a preferred plan for instances where someone owns a parcel that has PD zoning

656
00:41:45,440 --> 00:41:49,740
 on it, and for whatever reason, part of it is not fully developed and they would like

657
00:41:49,740 --> 00:41:54,500
 to subdivide and get straight zoning for that parcel?

658
00:41:54,500 --> 00:41:59,080
 It seems like, for instance, we recently had one where the entire parcel hadn't been developed

659
00:41:59,080 --> 00:42:02,140
 under the PD, and so it was requested to be rezoned.

660
00:42:02,140 --> 00:42:03,900
 So that's fairly straightforward.

661
00:42:03,900 --> 00:42:11,340
 I'm just wondering whether our DDC speaks to what the process is in that case.

662
00:42:11,340 --> 00:42:16,700
 It sounds like, and forgive me, that you made a modification to the PD, or?

663
00:42:16,700 --> 00:42:23,500
 Well, I was going to say, an example comes to mind, and correct me if I'm wrong on this,

664
00:42:23,500 --> 00:42:27,620
 so a planned development district is adopted for a parcel of land.

665
00:42:27,620 --> 00:42:35,260
 Let's say it's a 50-acre tribe, but for whatever reason, they don't develop 20 acres of that,

666
00:42:35,260 --> 00:42:39,820
 and they want to rezone that 20 acres to a straight zoning district.

667
00:42:39,820 --> 00:42:44,340
 They could come in and request to rezone that 20 acres to a straight zoning district.

668
00:42:44,340 --> 00:42:47,740
 One of the things that we would have to do, though, is look at the original planned development

669
00:42:47,740 --> 00:42:53,640
 district and see how the development rights were provided for in that PD, because it may

670
00:42:53,640 --> 00:42:58,860
 be where the remaining 30 acres, in my example, can still have the planned development district

671
00:42:58,860 --> 00:43:04,540
 and that zoning remains fine, or it may be that we have to amend that planned development

672
00:43:04,540 --> 00:43:07,940
 district to adjust the development that was allowed for it.

673
00:43:07,940 --> 00:43:14,260
 Let's say 500 units of multifamily were granted, right, and now we've wiped out 20 acres out

674
00:43:14,260 --> 00:43:17,260
 of this original 50-acre PD.

675
00:43:17,260 --> 00:43:21,480
 Do those 500 units of multifamily get to be concentrated on that remainder 30-acre parcel,

676
00:43:21,480 --> 00:43:26,220
 or do we need to modify the standards accordingly to reduce the number of multifamily units

677
00:43:26,220 --> 00:43:27,220
 on that 30 acres?

678
00:43:27,220 --> 00:43:30,220
 So is that what you're asking about, or something similar?

679
00:43:30,220 --> 00:43:34,720
 Yeah, and I mean, that helps me kind of understand how it's processed through the application,

680
00:43:34,720 --> 00:43:36,820
 so that's fine.

681
00:43:36,820 --> 00:43:47,060
 Second thing, I heard lots of mentions of why PDs should be used as sparingly as possible.

682
00:43:47,060 --> 00:43:53,260
 I've heard that the overlay may be viewed as a PD light, at least by some staff.

683
00:43:53,260 --> 00:44:03,300
 And then at the same time, there was a mention of PDs should not be allowed to modify only

684
00:44:03,300 --> 00:44:06,460
 one or two uses, for instance.

685
00:44:06,460 --> 00:44:12,460
 So I'm trying to connect that with the history that I've seen of existing PDs that we see,

686
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:16,260
 and the future that I haven't seen yet of the overlay PDs.

687
00:44:16,260 --> 00:44:25,180
 I guess with that background, my question is, should we expect future overlay PDs, or

688
00:44:25,180 --> 00:44:32,300
 even regular PDs, to be less prescriptive about the uses that are allowed, and trying

689
00:44:32,300 --> 00:44:43,460
 to modify only the things that are necessary to make that development possible?

690
00:44:43,460 --> 00:44:51,820
 How do you determine how much a PD should restrict the use versus how much a PD should

691
00:44:51,820 --> 00:44:56,420
 just nibble at the edges, if you will?

692
00:44:56,420 --> 00:45:01,420
 I'm going to try to answer this, and Tina may kick me.

693
00:45:01,420 --> 00:45:04,500
 A standard PD should probably not be nibbling.

694
00:45:04,500 --> 00:45:10,420
 If you need to use a standard PD, it's probably because you can't make that...

695
00:45:10,420 --> 00:45:15,940
 The project is either so unique or challenging in terms of the site conditions or the mix

696
00:45:15,940 --> 00:45:25,220
 of uses on site that you really would need that kind of full planning effort at the outset.

697
00:45:25,220 --> 00:45:27,740
 I don't know if...

698
00:45:27,740 --> 00:45:35,560
 The overlay PD may be more of that nibbling at the edges, and I think of it in terms...

699
00:45:35,560 --> 00:45:42,880
 When we look at the review, when we're keeping in mind why we have PDs and what the criteria

700
00:45:42,880 --> 00:45:52,580
 for approval are and what we're trying to achieve with that, there may be not necessarily

701
00:45:52,580 --> 00:45:58,420
 challenges with the proposed use, but maybe the context that it's in, maybe it is a gateway

702
00:45:58,420 --> 00:46:02,580
 to a neighborhood, and so we want to make sure there are elevated landscape standards,

703
00:46:02,580 --> 00:46:09,220
 or maybe there are some uses that are incompatible in that area, or maybe we do want to expand

704
00:46:09,220 --> 00:46:13,660
 those uses for a different zoning district to ensure that there is compatibility, because

705
00:46:13,660 --> 00:46:19,380
 the development standards within a different district might be more appropriate.

706
00:46:19,380 --> 00:46:25,980
 It's going to be on a case-by-case basis, I would imagine, but did that answer your

707
00:46:25,980 --> 00:46:26,980
 question?

708
00:46:26,980 --> 00:46:27,980
 Yeah, I think so.

709
00:46:27,980 --> 00:46:31,860
 That helps me conceptualize what the difference is between the traditional PDs that we've

710
00:46:31,860 --> 00:46:37,460
 seen and what we are looking forward to in the future with some of those additional tools.

711
00:46:37,460 --> 00:46:39,220
 Last question, I hope this is a brief.

712
00:46:39,220 --> 00:46:47,140
 If it's not, I can just take it offline, but especially with the PD rezoning requests,

713
00:46:47,140 --> 00:46:53,620
 I think our public hearings have some sort of consistent statements, so I guess it's

714
00:46:53,620 --> 00:47:00,260
 somewhat legalese that the commission or the council, once it gets there, has the ability

715
00:47:00,260 --> 00:47:07,300
 to approve a zoning district equally or more restrictive than what is listed.

716
00:47:07,300 --> 00:47:15,340
 Can you help us understand how that legally is viewed when you're looking at a PD application?

717
00:47:15,340 --> 00:47:20,660
 As far as if council or a body was looking at a PD, and they say, "Okay, I like most

718
00:47:20,660 --> 00:47:26,500
 of it, but there's a couple things that we would recommend changing," how much could

719
00:47:26,500 --> 00:47:32,940
 we change before it would be not more restrictive from a public hearing perspective?

720
00:47:32,940 --> 00:47:33,940
 Does that make sense?

721
00:47:33,940 --> 00:47:34,940
 It does.

722
00:47:34,940 --> 00:47:35,940
 That's a good question.

723
00:47:35,940 --> 00:47:44,940
 I've got some thoughts if you want to go first.

724
00:47:44,940 --> 00:47:49,660
 Part of the things we have to watch for is our notification associated with it, so you're

725
00:47:49,660 --> 00:47:57,060
 accustomed to, we have a request for, as you mentioned, to let's say, rezone to light industrial,

726
00:47:57,060 --> 00:48:01,180
 but the commission feels that light industrial is not appropriate, that general offices can

727
00:48:01,180 --> 00:48:05,860
 achieve the same thing and has higher level of standards and is more appropriate.

728
00:48:05,860 --> 00:48:10,120
 That's within our notification restrictions to allow for that change.

729
00:48:10,120 --> 00:48:14,860
 When it comes to a planned development district, an example I'll use is one that we had here

730
00:48:14,860 --> 00:48:19,060
 recently that the Planning and Zoning Commission actually saw as a request to rezone to light

731
00:48:19,060 --> 00:48:20,060
 industrial.

732
00:48:20,060 --> 00:48:26,440
 It was the Orson Holdings property north of Hampton Road, north of the Ranch Estates development.

733
00:48:26,440 --> 00:48:29,220
 When it came to the Planning and Zoning Commission, they were advocating for wanting straight

734
00:48:29,220 --> 00:48:31,100
 LI zoning.

735
00:48:31,100 --> 00:48:35,680
 After the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the request, the applicant made some modifications

736
00:48:35,680 --> 00:48:43,980
 and agreed to some concessions that essentially increased their landscaping buffering requirements.

737
00:48:43,980 --> 00:48:47,460
 They did some height reduction limitations.

738
00:48:47,460 --> 00:48:51,140
 They restricted, I believe, some access, and I was thinking there was another one, I'm

739
00:48:51,140 --> 00:48:54,500
 drawing a blank, but they made it more tight than what they would otherwise get under straight

740
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,140
 LI.

741
00:48:56,140 --> 00:48:59,940
 We were able to make that shift to the planned development district following the Planning

742
00:48:59,940 --> 00:49:04,900
 and Zoning Commission going into council because the requirements are much more restrictive,

743
00:49:04,900 --> 00:49:09,540
 so they were giving up items instead of, so that allowed us to comply with our public

744
00:49:09,540 --> 00:49:11,220
 notice requirements.

745
00:49:11,220 --> 00:49:16,580
 If they would have wanted to say, "So we're willing to do all of those things, but we

746
00:49:16,580 --> 00:49:20,820
 want to add these additional uses that are not allowed in the light industrial zoning

747
00:49:20,820 --> 00:49:25,140
 district," then that's when we say time out, call foul, and we have to re-notice and go

748
00:49:25,140 --> 00:49:26,740
 back to the beginning.

749
00:49:26,740 --> 00:49:31,660
 We have to really watch our notifications when it comes to a planned development district.

750
00:49:31,660 --> 00:49:36,020
 Normally when we notice a re-zoning to a planned development district, our noticing is somewhat

751
00:49:36,020 --> 00:49:37,020
 broad.

752
00:49:37,020 --> 00:49:40,900
 It acknowledges it's a re-zoning request to a planned development district.

753
00:49:40,900 --> 00:49:47,340
 It doesn't go into all the nuances associated with the request, but at least it puts the

754
00:49:47,340 --> 00:49:52,140
 community on notice that they're seeking a request to a planned development district.

755
00:49:52,140 --> 00:49:57,420
 Then as we work through the standards and uses associated with it, our notification

756
00:49:57,420 --> 00:49:58,780
 still gives us that flexibility.

757
00:49:58,780 --> 00:50:03,260
 It gives the Planning and Zoning Commission flexibility to, as you're having conversations

758
00:50:03,260 --> 00:50:08,700
 with the developer, taking into consideration public comment, that if you're wanting to

759
00:50:08,700 --> 00:50:16,700
 restrict some of the uses or give them something else in return, or maybe restrict them on

760
00:50:16,700 --> 00:50:23,380
 their height, but give them a reduced setback option that would work to their benefit.

761
00:50:23,380 --> 00:50:28,500
 Because of our noticing being flexible, it gives you the ability to work through that.

762
00:50:28,500 --> 00:50:31,940
 In my opinion, that's one of the key things that we always have to watch, and especially

763
00:50:31,940 --> 00:50:37,240
 on the RM squared zoning, the one from Orson Holden, we really had to watch is what was

764
00:50:37,240 --> 00:50:41,900
 in our noticing, and even as we were going through with council.

765
00:50:41,900 --> 00:50:44,900
 Hillary, I don't know if you have any other thoughts that come to mind.

766
00:50:44,900 --> 00:50:55,380
 I think the element of the question was probably related to PD mark one and then PD mark two.

767
00:50:55,380 --> 00:50:56,380
 Yeah.

768
00:50:56,380 --> 00:51:02,820
 The PDs that I've seen in Denton usually have a base zoning of what have you.

769
00:51:02,820 --> 00:51:09,500
 I think in the analysis that Tina talked about, we would wonder and inquire very critically

770
00:51:09,500 --> 00:51:19,180
 whether we think the base zoning has fundamentally changed so far that it doesn't meet that criteria

771
00:51:19,180 --> 00:51:26,020
 of being more restrictive, or if the give and take has gotten to such a horse trading

772
00:51:26,020 --> 00:51:35,740
 level that we feel like it needs to be discussed in greater detail, or the concept of the deal

773
00:51:35,740 --> 00:51:41,460
 that you guys saw is so different than what council might be seeing, it may be appropriate

774
00:51:41,460 --> 00:51:42,460
 to re-notice then.

775
00:51:42,460 --> 00:51:48,540
 It is ultimately a case-by-case analysis, and I think that as Tina discussed, a real

776
00:51:48,540 --> 00:51:54,820
 commitment to making sure that notifications are accurate and give the public everything

777
00:51:54,820 --> 00:51:55,820
 they need to know.

778
00:51:55,820 --> 00:52:00,960
 We probably err a little bit on the side of re-noticing more than we might technically

779
00:52:00,960 --> 00:52:04,220
 need to, just in the interest of public information.

780
00:52:04,220 --> 00:52:06,500
 I appreciate that, and I appreciate that it's case-by-case.

781
00:52:06,500 --> 00:52:11,560
 I think that really helps me going forward.

782
00:52:11,560 --> 00:52:16,540
 What I'm hearing is basically if we see a PDR 6, then adjustments that might change

783
00:52:16,540 --> 00:52:24,340
 that to a PDR 7 would be out, but smaller things we can talk about and see, and I trust

784
00:52:24,340 --> 00:52:31,120
 you to give us feedback real time as those things happen, so thank you.

785
00:52:31,120 --> 00:52:36,740
 We take very seriously, especially when we start negotiating on the fly at the dias.

786
00:52:36,740 --> 00:52:40,880
 Not that that has happened a whole lot here, but at least in my tenure here, but in any

787
00:52:40,880 --> 00:52:44,940
 community I've worked in, always being cognizant of what was our notice that we sent to the

788
00:52:44,940 --> 00:52:49,180
 public, because in the interest of transparency, we want to make sure that we've provided adequate

789
00:52:49,180 --> 00:52:51,420
 public notice to meet the state statute.

790
00:52:51,420 --> 00:52:56,300
 The other aspect that we're always concerned about is the way zoning can get overturned

791
00:52:56,300 --> 00:53:01,620
 or thrown out in a court of law is from a technicality standpoint, and so that's the

792
00:53:01,620 --> 00:53:05,620
 last thing we also want to have happen, so hence why we're very cognizant and watch for

793
00:53:05,620 --> 00:53:09,620
 that.

794
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,620
 Any other questions?

795
00:53:10,620 --> 00:53:17,740
 Clearly, we could talk about this for a lot more time, but the bad thing is it's getting

796
00:53:17,740 --> 00:53:22,620
 a little late, and I think we're going to have to call the discussion.

797
00:53:22,620 --> 00:53:25,340
 Great presentation, both of you.

798
00:53:25,340 --> 00:53:28,220
 Thank you very much.

799
00:53:28,220 --> 00:53:33,020
 Why don't we take a pause, get food really fast so that we can come here and go through

800
00:53:33,020 --> 00:53:34,020
 the rest of our agenda.

801
00:53:34,020 --> 00:53:35,940
 Otherwise, I'm afraid we're going to have like a five-minute dinner.

802
00:53:35,940 --> 00:53:42,460
 I don't want anybody to have to do that, so let's pause here at 5.58, and please let's

803
00:53:42,460 --> 00:53:52,580
 get back here less than 5 if we can, thanks.

804
00:53:52,580 --> 00:53:56,100
 Okay thank you, and welcome back to our planning and zoning work session.

805
00:53:56,100 --> 00:54:02,420
 I'll call us back at 6.07 p.m., and we will continue with our work session agenda, which

806
00:54:02,420 --> 00:54:06,980
 is clarification for our public meeting tonight.

807
00:54:06,980 --> 00:54:11,280
 First item on that agenda are minutes.

808
00:54:11,280 --> 00:54:13,740
 Any questions on the minutes?

809
00:54:13,740 --> 00:54:20,140
 And Hillary, we can take those as a group, or do we have to take them individually?

810
00:54:20,140 --> 00:54:25,500
 They're posted under 2A, all together as a group, as one.

811
00:54:25,500 --> 00:54:26,500
 Okay.

812
00:54:26,500 --> 00:54:28,540
 If we don't have questions or concerns.

813
00:54:28,540 --> 00:54:29,540
 Okay.

814
00:54:29,540 --> 00:54:30,540
 Everybody all right with that?

815
00:54:30,540 --> 00:54:31,540
 Okay.

816
00:54:31,540 --> 00:54:37,020
 With regard to our consent agenda, I am going to ask one question.

817
00:54:37,020 --> 00:54:38,020
 You're okay to stay?

818
00:54:38,020 --> 00:54:46,140
 I already checked with legal on that, just don't – Shawn, is that you?

819
00:54:46,140 --> 00:54:48,620
 No, who is that?

820
00:54:48,620 --> 00:54:49,620
 That's you.

821
00:54:49,620 --> 00:54:50,620
 Hello.

822
00:54:50,620 --> 00:54:51,620
 It is me.

823
00:54:51,620 --> 00:54:52,620
 I'm filling in for Cameron today.

824
00:54:52,620 --> 00:54:53,620
 I'm sorry.

825
00:54:53,620 --> 00:54:54,620
 Oh, very good.

826
00:54:54,620 --> 00:54:55,620
 You know what?

827
00:54:55,620 --> 00:54:58,700
 I just had a quick question with regard to our person who spoke, so I was a little bit

828
00:54:58,700 --> 00:55:00,540
 confused on what she said about lighting.

829
00:55:00,540 --> 00:55:02,540
 Can you enlighten me?

830
00:55:02,540 --> 00:55:05,100
 Did you hear it or not?

831
00:55:05,100 --> 00:55:07,900
 Yes, I did hear her talk about the lighting.

832
00:55:07,900 --> 00:55:13,580
 I would assume that everything would have been to our DDC standards.

833
00:55:13,580 --> 00:55:18,020
 So are we dealing with a different code with this development?

834
00:55:18,020 --> 00:55:19,020
 Slightly.

835
00:55:19,020 --> 00:55:20,020
 Okay, we are.

836
00:55:20,020 --> 00:55:21,020
 We are.

837
00:55:21,020 --> 00:55:22,980
 Which has a master plan community agreement.

838
00:55:22,980 --> 00:55:27,660
 Okay, which just – yeah, so it is their own unit that they're working within.

839
00:55:27,660 --> 00:55:33,100
 They're special DDC with various – Okay, and that plays into everything basically

840
00:55:33,100 --> 00:55:34,100
 about the development?

841
00:55:34,100 --> 00:55:36,140
 That's the document that the planner would have reviewed it under.

842
00:55:36,140 --> 00:55:37,140
 Okay.

843
00:55:37,140 --> 00:55:38,140
 So that's it.

844
00:55:38,140 --> 00:55:39,140
 That's it for this and answers my question.

845
00:55:39,140 --> 00:55:40,140
 Thank you very much.

846
00:55:40,140 --> 00:55:41,140
 Anybody else on this one?

847
00:55:41,140 --> 00:55:42,140
 No?

848
00:55:42,140 --> 00:55:43,140
 Okay.

849
00:55:43,140 --> 00:55:46,420
 I feel like you were – okay, you're just chewing.

850
00:55:46,420 --> 00:55:47,860
 Very good.

851
00:55:47,860 --> 00:55:48,860
 Okay.

852
00:55:48,860 --> 00:55:55,580
 Individual consideration, 4A, any questions on that?

853
00:55:55,580 --> 00:56:02,020
 That is a request for an extension to a date certain of 12/14, okay?

854
00:56:02,020 --> 00:56:05,100
 And then 4B has been withdrawn.

855
00:56:05,100 --> 00:56:09,420
 We did get an email late on that, but that item is withdrawn, so we will not be taking

856
00:56:09,420 --> 00:56:11,840
 action on that one.

857
00:56:11,840 --> 00:56:16,980
 Public hearings for tonight, so 5A, that's Z220017.

858
00:56:16,980 --> 00:56:20,140
 Sean, that is you.

859
00:56:20,140 --> 00:56:23,980
 Do you want to just give us kind of a – We'll keep it quick.

860
00:56:23,980 --> 00:56:28,460
 Yeah, just an overview and we'll see if anybody has any questions on that.

861
00:56:28,460 --> 00:56:29,460
 Okay.

862
00:56:29,460 --> 00:56:46,940
 Okay, so this is Z220017.

863
00:56:46,940 --> 00:56:53,220
 This is a request for a zoning change from rural residential to a light industrial zoning

864
00:56:53,220 --> 00:56:58,820
 district, two tracks totaling approximately 29 acres, mostly undeveloped or agricultural

865
00:56:58,820 --> 00:56:59,820
 uses.

866
00:56:59,820 --> 00:57:05,520
 There is a gas well on the south track, and if it is approved, of course, all uses within

867
00:57:05,520 --> 00:57:07,980
 the LI zoning would be permitted.

868
00:57:07,980 --> 00:57:13,060
 The applicant has indicated interest in industrial use development, but that's what we're

869
00:57:13,060 --> 00:57:14,060
 proposing.

870
00:57:14,060 --> 00:57:15,060
 Happy to answer any questions.

871
00:57:15,060 --> 00:57:16,060
 Any questions?

872
00:57:16,060 --> 00:57:23,500
 And I know the only question I had posted earlier to Sean on this one was, because it's

873
00:57:23,500 --> 00:57:27,740
 adjacent to that track that we approved that – actually, you mentioned when we had the

874
00:57:27,740 --> 00:57:30,700
 discussion about PDs.

875
00:57:30,700 --> 00:57:37,020
 I was wondering why we were not looking at it like that again, and perhaps – and I'm

876
00:57:37,020 --> 00:57:46,140
 assuming it is because of the way, I guess, that it fronts lovers, and I'm trying to

877
00:57:46,140 --> 00:57:51,140
 wrap my head around this because we had so much discussion with that tract, and then

878
00:57:51,140 --> 00:57:56,340
 – let's see, one to the third tract to the south of it is actually embedded, I believe,

879
00:57:56,340 --> 00:57:58,140
 in that PD, correct?

880
00:57:58,140 --> 00:57:59,140
 Yes, ma'am.

881
00:57:59,140 --> 00:58:04,220
 So, as I'm looking at it, we just seem a little bit inconsistent because it is like

882
00:58:04,220 --> 00:58:11,280
 right there, and we didn't say you could have straight light industrial on those tracts,

883
00:58:11,280 --> 00:58:17,620
 but we're saying you can on here, so I've got some reservations with this one just because

884
00:58:17,620 --> 00:58:22,500
 it seems inconsistent, and it is the same developer, so I know that they're aware

885
00:58:22,500 --> 00:58:27,940
 of all the discussion we had on that adjacent property, so anyway, I'm going to just throw

886
00:58:27,940 --> 00:58:31,660
 that out there because I'll probably say it again in public hearing.

887
00:58:31,660 --> 00:58:35,860
 Well, and Sean, feel free to add to this, but the reason why we did not consider the

888
00:58:35,860 --> 00:58:41,060
 plan development district for this property is it still has the same base zoning, light

889
00:58:41,060 --> 00:58:46,540
 industrial, as the larger tract to the east that did have it, but also so many of the

890
00:58:46,540 --> 00:58:51,940
 conditions or restrictions that were put in the zoning or the plan development district

891
00:58:51,940 --> 00:58:56,020
 for the property to the east really dealt with restrictions in proximity to Hampton

892
00:58:56,020 --> 00:59:01,180
 Road and not appear on the north end of the property, so when we looked at this request

893
00:59:01,180 --> 00:59:06,180
 and we did not feel that a plan development district was warranted for this area because

894
00:59:06,180 --> 00:59:10,340
 essentially the uses and standards that would be occurring on this property are comparable

895
00:59:10,340 --> 00:59:15,660
 to what's happening immediately to the east because the portion of the property where

896
00:59:15,660 --> 00:59:20,900
 it's adjacent to the east is not subject to any of those conditions that were really restricted

897
00:59:20,900 --> 00:59:22,880
 to the southern portion of that tract.

898
00:59:22,880 --> 00:59:30,060
 Yeah, and I hear that and that's what I'm still trying to grasp it and hope, okay, they're

899
00:59:30,060 --> 00:59:33,940
 just going to come 1173, they're going to come that way, because that is my concern

900
00:59:33,940 --> 00:59:37,540
 is like, well, Hampton Road is right there too for them and we had all that concern for

901
00:59:37,540 --> 00:59:39,660
 those other tracts and so.

902
00:59:39,660 --> 00:59:45,540
 Yeah, and I definitely would add in addition to that, not only would it be not simple to

903
00:59:45,540 --> 00:59:52,060
 get to Hampton Road from this, you could actually more easily reach the Mosh Branch and 380

904
00:59:52,060 --> 00:59:59,020
 Light from this site versus the PDLI where it was fronting directly on Hampton.

905
00:59:59,020 --> 01:00:04,180
 Yeah, right, right, yeah, yeah, I agree and that helps me greatly to kind of study that

906
01:00:04,180 --> 01:00:05,540
 map again too.

907
01:00:05,540 --> 01:00:06,540
 Thank you.

908
01:00:06,540 --> 01:00:07,540
 Anybody else?

909
01:00:07,540 --> 01:00:08,540
 Okay.

910
01:00:08,540 --> 01:00:18,940
 Yeah, you have the next one, so I will call 5B then and let you give your little, oh.

911
01:00:18,940 --> 01:00:32,780
 Okay, so yes, this is S22-0003, speed of light and I'll just make sure we start that there.

912
01:00:32,780 --> 01:00:36,900
 This is a request for a specific use permit for a broadband communication tower not to

913
01:00:36,900 --> 01:00:43,180
 exceed 150 feet above ground level and 871 feet above median sea level.

914
01:00:43,180 --> 01:00:50,900
 We'll note that this is a site that is currently approved for a broadband communication tower.

915
01:00:50,900 --> 01:00:56,940
 It has an SUP but it is not permitted to go more than 88 feet, so this is an increase

916
01:00:56,940 --> 01:00:58,460
 over the previous approval.

917
01:00:58,460 --> 01:01:04,060
 The site is located south of Barcelona Street and the tower is proposed at the southwest

918
01:01:04,060 --> 01:01:08,020
 corner of the existing building on the site.

919
01:01:08,020 --> 01:01:13,380
 It is important to note that part of what you are determining primarily is within the

920
01:01:13,380 --> 01:01:19,740
 MR district, an SUP is required for a monopole tower that exceeds 85 feet in height.

921
01:01:19,740 --> 01:01:23,740
 So that's, you're primarily looking at the land use impacts of a tower that goes above

922
01:01:23,740 --> 01:01:25,660
 85 feet in height.

923
01:01:25,660 --> 01:01:30,700
 Now in this case, it's permitted to go about three feet higher by the current SUP.

924
01:01:30,700 --> 01:01:36,780
 The SUP brought to you allows a significantly higher height and so you're looking at that.

925
01:01:36,780 --> 01:01:42,820
 However, this site is also within the airport height hazard district which has a separate

926
01:01:42,820 --> 01:01:49,900
 set of restrictions which is that a tower cannot exceed, a structure cannot exceed 810

927
01:01:49,900 --> 01:01:52,820
 feet above sea level.

928
01:01:52,820 --> 01:01:58,580
 Therefore, if this was recommended for approval by P&Z and approved by city council, the applicant

929
01:01:58,580 --> 01:02:03,060
 would then need to go to the zoning board of adjustment and request a variance which

930
01:02:03,060 --> 01:02:06,380
 is permitted within the airport height hazard district if they can bring a letter from the

931
01:02:06,380 --> 01:02:12,620
 FAA that says there's no, we've determined that this structure will not cause damage

932
01:02:12,620 --> 01:02:17,660
 to our, will not cause an issue with our airport operations and the zoning board of adjustments

933
01:02:17,660 --> 01:02:23,700
 is permitted by the DDC to say we will permit a variance to have a height exceeding 810

934
01:02:23,700 --> 01:02:28,660
 feet above sea level because we have this FAA letter stating that that structure and

935
01:02:28,660 --> 01:02:34,260
 that height going above our normal restriction will not have a negative impact on the operations

936
01:02:34,260 --> 01:02:35,420
 of our airport.

937
01:02:35,420 --> 01:02:41,860
 So it comes to you, it comes to city council and then based on the conditions we recommend

938
01:02:41,860 --> 01:02:46,060
 then it can go to zoning board of adjustments and only after that would the tower be fully

939
01:02:46,060 --> 01:02:50,820
 approved and I'm happy to answer any questions because I realize that maybe it is complicated.

940
01:02:50,820 --> 01:02:59,820
 Yeah this one made my brain hurt and I get it, here's my question, it might be Hillary's

941
01:02:59,820 --> 01:03:09,060
 question, the AAHD which I am not an expert in at all, so is that treated as like an overlay,

942
01:03:09,060 --> 01:03:10,060
 what is that treated as?

943
01:03:10,060 --> 01:03:17,540
 Yeah functionally it's an overlay district relating to advanced safety concerns related

944
01:03:17,540 --> 01:03:19,040
 to airport problems.

945
01:03:19,040 --> 01:03:25,020
 So my whole problem with this request is that we have a piece of property that has an overlay,

946
01:03:25,020 --> 01:03:29,140
 that's in the overlay, says can't be above a certain height and we're being asked to

947
01:03:29,140 --> 01:03:34,820
 approve an SUP that has a certain height and that's where I'm getting tripped up.

948
01:03:34,820 --> 01:03:39,380
 Even though I understand it's got to go to ZBA but then I don't understand why we're

949
01:03:39,380 --> 01:03:46,620
 saying yes we can approve this SUP even though the AAHD clearly says you can't do that and

950
01:03:46,620 --> 01:03:54,180
 so I feel like we're doing this and it doesn't make any sense to me to recommend to city

951
01:03:54,180 --> 01:03:59,180
 council which they didn't do the first time that we recommended it and it's because we

952
01:03:59,180 --> 01:04:05,860
 didn't know that the AAHD said the height restriction and so they set the SUP currently

953
01:04:05,860 --> 01:04:17,900
 at what is allowed under the AAHD and so I'm trying to understand how to reconcile that.

954
01:04:17,900 --> 01:04:22,740
 So there's a little bit of do you want to and you know feel free to pop in but there's

955
01:04:22,740 --> 01:04:27,700
 a bit of a you know which board should we start with and I think we just.

956
01:04:27,700 --> 01:04:32,700
 Well it's how do we treat the overlay because it's not like if somebody came to us in other

957
01:04:32,700 --> 01:04:37,140
 overlays in our city and said we want to do this and the overlay clearly says you can't

958
01:04:37,140 --> 01:04:38,980
 do that.

959
01:04:38,980 --> 01:04:44,500
 We're not going to do that and so what we've tried to do and I don't want to speak for

960
01:04:44,500 --> 01:04:50,660
 you Sean is to state that is to kind of limit the scope of the approval here to the base

961
01:04:50,660 --> 01:05:00,100
 zoning district and to state that for the AAHD wow that's hard to say it is that's

962
01:05:00,100 --> 01:05:05,180
 outside of the scope of the present approval it needs to go before the ZBA.

963
01:05:05,180 --> 01:05:11,460
 So it may feel a bit like we're saying sure go ahead and violate that overlay right but

964
01:05:11,460 --> 01:05:18,740
 in effect and what we've tried to draft is yes for as much as what we can approve this

965
01:05:18,740 --> 01:05:23,460
 is fine but this is not completely approved right and I and you have the condition on

966
01:05:23,460 --> 01:05:26,260
 it that they have to get the approval from ZBA.

967
01:05:26,260 --> 01:05:32,380
 I guess it's just it just feels very strange and I feel bad that they're coming before

968
01:05:32,380 --> 01:05:37,380
 us in the first place for something that we really can't say yes to because the overlay

969
01:05:37,380 --> 01:05:38,860
 says we can't.

970
01:05:38,860 --> 01:05:45,420
 So anyway it's a little confusing it might be easier I guess with the conditions but

971
01:05:45,420 --> 01:05:51,460
 again I'm it's just it doesn't there's something that just doesn't make sense about it in my

972
01:05:51,460 --> 01:05:57,140
 brain. Anyway anybody else have questions is it just it's just my brain yes Commissioner

973
01:05:57,140 --> 01:05:58,140
 Anderson.

974
01:05:58,140 --> 01:06:06,780
 Thank you Sean so they are asking to be 61 feet above the AAHD height limit?

975
01:06:06,780 --> 01:06:07,780
 That is correct.

976
01:06:07,780 --> 01:06:16,620
 So they do have FAA letter that states it's okay they do they do and so I guess they did

977
01:06:16,620 --> 01:06:18,500
 not have that the first go around?

978
01:06:18,500 --> 01:06:19,500
 They did not.

979
01:06:19,500 --> 01:06:24,180
 So so the FAA is saying it's okay for them to build this tower?

980
01:06:24,180 --> 01:06:25,180
 That is correct.

981
01:06:25,180 --> 01:06:26,180
 Okay that's all I mean thanks.

982
01:06:26,180 --> 01:06:32,420
 Yeah but you know then we've got the FAA FAA like managing our code maybe we need to

983
01:06:32,420 --> 01:06:40,060
 look at the AAHD I'll bring that up in the matrix anyway I was just saying to me that

984
01:06:40,060 --> 01:06:44,620
 does and then trust me we Sean and I struggled working through this and I think Hillary was

985
01:06:44,620 --> 01:06:49,580
 involved in a call when we were working on this as well you know what what I don't have

986
01:06:49,580 --> 01:06:54,020
 a good appreciation I'll be honest with the Commission is whether or not you know conditions

987
01:06:54,020 --> 01:07:01,620
 have changed with respect to that AAHD area or let's say let's set aside that for a moment

988
01:07:01,620 --> 01:07:08,020
 just the overall operational aspects associated with the airport that would warrant a re-review

989
01:07:08,020 --> 01:07:13,860
 of that AAHD overlay district right because for whatever reason you know that was put

990
01:07:13,860 --> 01:07:19,740
 in place to protect the airspace around the airport right and if operational conditions

991
01:07:19,740 --> 01:07:25,780
 have changed that allow for you know like this project that we have on your agenda this

992
01:07:25,780 --> 01:07:33,380
 evening to encroach that overlay area or I view it kind of as a cap right so then then

993
01:07:33,380 --> 01:07:42,740
 it would be appropriate to go back and re-review that AAHD to see if it does need to be modified

994
01:07:42,740 --> 01:07:49,660
 because it to me it comes back to have conditions change for airport operations that or we were

995
01:07:49,660 --> 01:07:58,900
 just very conservative with whatever provisions were put forth in place for the AAHD at that

996
01:07:58,900 --> 01:08:05,140
 time and wanted to include a relief valve in the code in the event that it would be

997
01:08:05,140 --> 01:08:11,540
 appropriate to have structures or or it even references permit the natural growth of an

998
01:08:11,540 --> 01:08:16,260
 or permit the growth of any natural object or buildings to be able to encroach within

999
01:08:16,260 --> 01:08:17,260
 that area.

1000
01:08:17,260 --> 01:08:22,020
 Yeah and I mean I'm not going to FAA obviously knows more than I do what I'm trying to work

1001
01:08:22,020 --> 01:08:26,220
 is kind of within our code and the fact that it just seems like they should be able to

1002
01:08:26,220 --> 01:08:32,540
 take this existing SUP and go to ZBA and get their height restrictions so that's weird

1003
01:08:32,540 --> 01:08:38,540
 too to me that we're kind of doing this again twice just from their perspective but anyway

1004
01:08:38,540 --> 01:08:42,740
 the and I think the challenge we have is that the Zoning Board of Adjustment is not the

1005
01:08:42,740 --> 01:08:47,740
 decision-making authority with respect to specific use that lies with you and I do yeah

1006
01:08:47,740 --> 01:08:53,100
 and I understand that but it just seems like we already kind of have an SUP that that we

1007
01:08:53,100 --> 01:08:59,540
 can approve within the parameters of the overlay which then the adjustment would go to ZBA

1008
01:08:59,540 --> 01:09:04,460
 because you know what I mean it's so it's it's just we're doing this that's that's

1009
01:09:04,460 --> 01:09:09,020
 all I'm saying so that and that's nobody's fault other than we need to look at why we're

1010
01:09:09,020 --> 01:09:13,860
 doing that and what needs to be rewritten to me.

1011
01:09:13,860 --> 01:09:15,900
 Anybody else on this one?

1012
01:09:15,900 --> 01:09:16,900
 Commissioner Prout.

1013
01:09:16,900 --> 01:09:17,900
 Thank you Chair.

1014
01:09:17,900 --> 01:09:20,340
 Just real briefly.

1015
01:09:20,340 --> 01:09:28,380
 Did we check into whether there are proximity slash height concerns near the railroad right

1016
01:09:28,380 --> 01:09:30,580
 of way?

1017
01:09:30,580 --> 01:09:40,140
 It was not raised it is outside both of the railroad right of way as well there is a significant

1018
01:09:40,140 --> 01:09:46,220
 drainage area in which development is not possible between the side of this tower and

1019
01:09:46,220 --> 01:09:48,260
 the railroad right of way.

1020
01:09:48,260 --> 01:09:54,740
 Sure that's fine I'm not super concerned but it looks like it's about 300-ish feet away

1021
01:09:54,740 --> 01:10:04,100
 from the railroad bed and it's 150 feet tall what happens with the guy wires I'm not all

1022
01:10:04,100 --> 01:10:07,540
 that concerned about it I'm just I'm more concerned with maintaining good relationships

1023
01:10:07,540 --> 01:10:13,460
 with our railroad partners honestly with everything we need from them so yeah.

1024
01:10:13,460 --> 01:10:20,820
 Certainly and the actual area in which even this any obstruct any land impact development

1025
01:10:20,820 --> 01:10:29,340
 impact from this is very limited in fact I can show you the box right here northeast

1026
01:10:29,340 --> 01:10:33,060
 corner yeah okay right there that's fine that's where they're allowed to develop thank you

1027
01:10:33,060 --> 01:10:40,020
 is the applicant going to be here I would expect the applicant will be here excellent

1028
01:10:40,020 --> 01:10:47,900
 any other questions on this one okay thank you very much well Ron we've got we got six

1029
01:10:47,900 --> 01:10:53,980
 minutes so let's bring you up for the last one all right we got 20 slides to go through

1030
01:10:53,980 --> 01:11:04,380
 so I promise I won't take too long I'll just share one slide to kind of summarize what

1031
01:11:04,380 --> 01:11:09,660
 the purpose is for this city initiated code amendment is related to access requirements

1032
01:11:09,660 --> 01:11:16,500
 and based on some of the recent applications that you all have seen either a PD or an SUP

1033
01:11:16,500 --> 01:11:22,160
 related to a multifamily development the question about accesses has come up and so we looked

1034
01:11:22,160 --> 01:11:28,360
 at the code and there is a requirement that to access be provided and it also includes

1035
01:11:28,360 --> 01:11:33,980
 where feasible well what is where feasible mean so what we've done is prepared a code

1036
01:11:33,980 --> 01:11:39,680
 amendment that we met with the DCRC several times and we've got a proposal to share with

1037
01:11:39,680 --> 01:11:44,220
 you all I can go through that now or we can do it during the public hearing but basically

1038
01:11:44,220 --> 01:11:51,820
 it's providing more parameters and also establishing when that two points of access is required

1039
01:11:51,820 --> 01:11:57,740
 establishing when it can be waived or it can be varied from it also includes exceptions

1040
01:11:57,740 --> 01:12:02,820
 exemptions that is so all of that will be part of the the code amendment moving forward

1041
01:12:02,820 --> 01:12:08,100
 we also have other sections of the code as we were looking at access to to see where

1042
01:12:08,100 --> 01:12:15,620
 we can also clarify some some issues or concerns and so those are also included in this set

1043
01:12:15,620 --> 01:12:22,620
 of code amendments so with that I stand for any questions any questions at the moment

1044
01:12:22,620 --> 01:12:29,820
 look forward to the full presentation thank you very much that is the end of our agenda

1045
01:12:29,820 --> 01:12:37,920
 so with that I will close our work session at 625 and we will reconvene in council chambers

1046
01:12:37,920 --> 01:12:48,420
 as close to 630 as possible.

1047
01:12:48,420 --> 01:12:51,620
 Good evening and welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning Commission meeting for

1048
01:12:51,620 --> 01:13:00,340
 Wednesday November 16 2022 with a quorum present I will call us to order at 632 p.m. first

1049
01:13:00,340 --> 01:13:20,420
 item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas flags.

1050
01:13:20,420 --> 01:13:37,100
 Under the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to thee Texas one state under God one and indivisible.

1051
01:13:37,100 --> 01:13:43,540
 Next item on our agenda is the consideration for approval of the minutes for October 8th

1052
01:13:43,540 --> 01:13:50,940
 meeting the October October 18th is the PNC and City Council a joint meeting the minutes

1053
01:13:50,940 --> 01:14:01,860
 for the PNC meetings for October 26th CIAC and our regular PNC.

1054
01:14:01,860 --> 01:14:07,700
 Commissioner Smith make a motion to approve Commissioner Villarreal second thank you and

1055
01:14:07,700 --> 01:14:15,020
 commissioners that is to approve all of those minutes correct okay very good any discussion

1056
01:14:15,020 --> 01:14:25,860
 let's vote on the board please.

1057
01:14:25,860 --> 01:14:31,140
 That motion carries seven zero that will take us to item three on our agenda we've got one

1058
01:14:31,140 --> 01:14:35,380
 thing on our consent agenda I will give Commissioner Cole a moment to recuse himself from this

1059
01:14:35,380 --> 01:14:46,300
 item.

1060
01:14:46,300 --> 01:14:51,580
 Commissioner Smith make a motion to approve Commissioner Pruitt second we've got a first

1061
01:14:51,580 --> 01:14:57,620
 and a second for the consent agenda for this evening any discussion okay let's vote on

1062
01:14:57,620 --> 01:15:09,340
 the board please.

1063
01:15:09,340 --> 01:15:15,020
 That motion carries six zero that'll move us to individual consideration items I'll

1064
01:15:15,020 --> 01:15:23,540
 give Commissioner Cole a moment welcome back first item on the agenda for this section

1065
01:15:23,540 --> 01:15:47,220
 is 4a pp220025 I will invite Ashley up hi Ashley just closer to the mic there you go

1066
01:15:47,220 --> 01:15:52,980
 this is a preliminary plot for a warehouse use on approximately 20.3 acres at this time

1067
01:15:52,980 --> 01:15:57,220
 staff is recommending denial but we have no objection to the requested extension until

1068
01:15:57,220 --> 01:16:09,540
 December 14th 2022 okay great any questions for Ashley okay thank you very much.

1069
01:16:09,540 --> 01:16:15,000
 Chair can entertain a motion or discussion at this time.

1070
01:16:15,000 --> 01:16:18,180
 Commissioner Smith make a motion to approve the extension to date certain of December

1071
01:16:18,180 --> 01:16:24,940
 14 2022 Commissioner Pruitt second we've got a first and a second for approval of the extension

1072
01:16:24,940 --> 01:16:33,740
 request to a date certain of December 14th 2022 any discussion let's vote on the board

1073
01:16:33,740 --> 01:17:02,660
 please interesting okay do we want to just can you rerun it so

1074
01:17:02,660 --> 01:17:22,340
 she can't go back it didn't record my vote oh it is letting us now let's do that again

1075
01:17:22,340 --> 01:17:28,020
 there we go okay that motion carries some zero thank you our item 4b that was listed

1076
01:17:28,020 --> 01:17:33,340
 on our agenda has been withdrawn so we will not be taking action tonight on that item

1077
01:17:33,340 --> 01:17:39,940
 which will take us to our public hearing portion of the evening first one our agenda is 5a

1078
01:17:39,940 --> 01:17:47,860
 z22-0017 Shawn is here to present I will go ahead and open the public hearing hi Shawn

1079
01:17:47,860 --> 01:17:53,820
 good evening chair members of the commission just gonna open the presentation here there

1080
01:17:53,820 --> 01:18:02,100
 you go all right good evening this is z22-17 the Johns Rood Ranch proposed rezoning this

1081
01:18:02,100 --> 01:18:05,900
 is a request for a zoning change from a rural residential district to a light industrial

1082
01:18:05,900 --> 01:18:12,220
 district on two tracks totaling about 29 acres these tracks are mostly undeveloped there is

1083
01:18:12,220 --> 01:18:18,100
 there are some agricultural uses and there is a gas well on the south tract of course

1084
01:18:18,100 --> 01:18:21,220
 one of the most important things we look at is consistency with our comprehensive plan

1085
01:18:21,220 --> 01:18:27,100
 and future land use map the future land use designation for this property is light industrial

1086
01:18:27,100 --> 01:18:32,600
 and that is intended for a range of uses like manufacturing assembling warehousing it's

1087
01:18:32,600 --> 01:18:40,380
 also in a comprehensive plan that it should have adequate infrastructure and overall it's

1088
01:18:40,380 --> 01:18:45,700
 intended for those uses that the light industrial zoning is intended to align with so therefore

1089
01:18:45,700 --> 01:18:51,220
 the intent of the LI zoning is to provide those uses that the light industrial future

1090
01:18:51,220 --> 01:18:55,700
 land use designation calls for and therefore this proposed rezoning would be consistent

1091
01:18:55,700 --> 01:19:02,860
 with our comprehensive plan it does also help to achieve our comprehensive plan action 3.1.1

1092
01:19:02,860 --> 01:19:07,620
 which is to ensure that we have adequate land for future economic development activity and

1093
01:19:07,620 --> 01:19:16,540
 particularly non-residential land available so aligning with that comprehensive plan goal

1094
01:19:16,540 --> 01:19:20,380
 it's also important as we're looking at zoning changes to see if there are significant changes

1095
01:19:20,380 --> 01:19:25,100
 in area that warrant a rezoning one thing to be aware of is at the time of the annexation

1096
01:19:25,100 --> 01:19:29,620
 interim zoning of this site there was minimal light industrial development or zoning in

1097
01:19:29,620 --> 01:19:34,540
 this area we've seen increasing industrial development and light industrial zoning in

1098
01:19:34,540 --> 01:19:42,300
 this area since then and as you're aware we had a recent zoning change from RR to PDLI

1099
01:19:42,300 --> 01:19:45,420
 just to the south and west of this site so we're seeing a change in the development

1100
01:19:45,420 --> 01:19:50,900
 pattern here in addition our mobility plan and tech stop plans indicate that loop 288

1101
01:19:50,900 --> 01:19:56,420
 will be extended through this area and that will significantly impact the future development

1102
01:19:56,420 --> 01:20:01,060
 patterns in this area including helping to support a potential development of those uses

1103
01:20:01,060 --> 01:20:05,580
 like light industrial commercial uses that benefit from access to a transportation network

1104
01:20:05,580 --> 01:20:11,540
 so the zoning change aligns with the changes we have seen and are expecting to see oh I'm

1105
01:20:11,540 --> 01:20:15,140
 sorry I had two slides there my bad but as you can see there that does show you the difference

1106
01:20:15,140 --> 01:20:21,700
 between what the zoning will look like even in 2019 versus the increased LI zoning in the

1107
01:20:21,700 --> 01:20:32,060
 area so overall this does meet our criteria for approval we did notice out to the 200

1108
01:20:32,060 --> 01:20:37,780
 and 500 foot limits and did receive two responses in favor and the applicant did also hold a

1109
01:20:37,780 --> 01:20:44,220
 neighborhood meeting and there are notes about that in your backup so with that staff does

1110
01:20:44,220 --> 01:20:49,980
 recommend approval of this zoning change as it does align with our approval criteria both

1111
01:20:49,980 --> 01:20:56,140
 for zoning changes and for applications in general that is my presentation happy to stand

1112
01:20:56,140 --> 01:21:03,620
 for any questions and the applicant is present and does have this card right thank you Sean

1113
01:21:03,620 --> 01:21:12,880
 any questions at this time for Sean okay thank you very much so with that I will invite Mr.

1114
01:21:12,880 --> 01:21:26,220
 Fletcher up here as I have his card in front of me

1115
01:21:26,220 --> 01:21:30,740
 good evening good evening commissioners my name is Thomas Fletcher with Kimmy Horne 6160

1116
01:21:30,740 --> 01:21:36,180
 Warren Parkway Frisco Texas appreciate the opportunity to be here before you tonight

1117
01:21:36,180 --> 01:21:43,900
 I am the engineer for the Johns Rudd Ranch properties LLC for this zoning request I think

1118
01:21:43,900 --> 01:21:48,860
 that Sean's presentation we've been working with staff on this application was pretty

1119
01:21:48,860 --> 01:21:52,780
 thorough I'll go I have a quick presentation I'll go through and then happy to stand for

1120
01:21:52,780 --> 01:21:58,900
 questions again here's a picture of the site it's kind of on a larger aerial that kind

1121
01:21:58,900 --> 01:22:03,540
 of shows the location the properties on the east side of Lover's Lane Lover's Lane is

1122
01:22:03,540 --> 01:22:10,660
 the north-south road 1173 is the east-west road to the north interstate highway 35 is

1123
01:22:10,660 --> 01:22:17,220
 just to the east and then US 380 is to the south as Sean mentioned on the comp plan this

1124
01:22:17,220 --> 01:22:22,220
 area is intended in the future to develop as light industrial and a lot of those properties

1125
01:22:22,220 --> 01:22:28,900
 have been starting to transition from existing zoning categories to the light industrial

1126
01:22:28,900 --> 01:22:36,620
 or PD light industrial zoning this is the site this shows the existing zoning that's

1127
01:22:36,620 --> 01:22:42,540
 around the property the properties that don't have a color to the background are still located

1128
01:22:42,540 --> 01:22:47,180
 within the city's ETJ it's my understanding that some of these properties may have not

1129
01:22:47,180 --> 01:22:54,660
 in annexation agreements attached to them this is an exhibit just showing what the proposed

1130
01:22:54,660 --> 01:22:59,860
 zoning would look like and then this is showing the comprehensive plan that shows that the

1131
01:22:59,860 --> 01:23:06,380
 properties all around surrounding the property subject track tonight in the future comp plan

1132
01:23:06,380 --> 01:23:15,500
 would be eventually light industrial if they're to be rezoned per that comp plan we did put

1133
01:23:15,500 --> 01:23:20,300
 together a conceptual plan at this time there's no plans for development in the immediate

1134
01:23:20,300 --> 01:23:26,180
 future just looking to get the zoning in place for when the property is ready to develop

1135
01:23:26,180 --> 01:23:33,060
 you can also see we've put in there from the schematic loop 288 plans the actual right

1136
01:23:33,060 --> 01:23:39,420
 away width so you can see that the loop 288 extension is taking up a large portion of

1137
01:23:39,420 --> 01:23:47,380
 this property there's a gas well that's located it'll be adjacent to loop 288 we anticipate

1138
01:23:47,380 --> 01:23:54,060
 that there would be detention with increased impervious cover through development detention

1139
01:23:54,060 --> 01:23:59,740
 is pretty much a standard practice on all development so that we can maintain the existing

1140
01:23:59,740 --> 01:24:06,860
 runoff rates for the property this is just kind of an overall kind of of the western

1141
01:24:06,860 --> 01:24:13,040
 area of the city just kind of showing the overall loop 288 and how the city is going

1142
01:24:13,040 --> 01:24:18,920
 to change in this area in the future once loop 288 is constructed with the airport and

1143
01:24:18,920 --> 01:24:26,020
 the industrial uses in this in this area and that's the presentation I have for you tonight

1144
01:24:26,020 --> 01:24:30,940
 this is the mobility plan which does show that lovers will eventually be a secondary

1145
01:24:30,940 --> 01:24:36,900
 arterial so at some point in the future it will be improved to a four lane divided roadway

1146
01:24:36,900 --> 01:24:43,820
 and then 1173 will also be a secondary arterial as well so as development occurs the thoroughfares

1147
01:24:43,820 --> 01:24:52,020
 within this area will be transformed from small two lane roadways to major thoroughfares

1148
01:24:52,020 --> 01:24:58,620
 with the designation of secondary arterial that's my presentation I'm happy to stand

1149
01:24:58,620 --> 01:25:03,140
 for any questions appreciate your time great thank you Mr. any questions

1150
01:25:03,140 --> 01:25:13,180
 I do not see any thank you very much you presentation was very thorough appreciate that this is

1151
01:25:13,180 --> 01:25:17,900
 a public hearing I don't have any other cards to speak but you are welcome to speak on this

1152
01:25:17,900 --> 01:25:26,380
 item and you can fill out a card later is there anyone else wishing to speak okay seeing

1153
01:25:26,380 --> 01:25:33,600
 none I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing and open the dice for discussion or

1154
01:25:33,600 --> 01:25:41,220
 motion Commissioner Smith make a motion to approve Commissioner McDade second we've

1155
01:25:41,220 --> 01:25:49,340
 got a first and a second for approval any discussion okay let's vote on the board please

1156
01:25:49,340 --> 01:26:06,260
 that motion carries seven zero that will take us to our next item 5b s two two zero zero

1157
01:26:06,260 --> 01:26:13,780
 zero three invite Sean back up here and open the public hearing thank you I'll get my presentation

1158
01:26:13,780 --> 01:26:21,340
 opened here all right good evening chair and members of planning his own Commission Sean

1159
01:26:21,340 --> 01:26:27,900
 Jacobson associate planner presenting s 22 - three the speed of light this is a request

1160
01:26:27,900 --> 01:26:33,140
 for a specific use permit for a broadband communication tower not to exceed 150 feet

1161
01:26:33,140 --> 01:26:39,460
 of ground level or 871 feet above mean sea level site is located south of Barcelona Street

1162
01:26:39,460 --> 01:26:43,860
 near the intersection of Barcelona and Mesa and the tower is proposed as you can see the

1163
01:26:43,860 --> 01:26:50,620
 red star there at the southwest corner of the existing building currently there is an

1164
01:26:50,620 --> 01:26:56,340
 SUP that approves a monopole tower on this site not to exceed 88 feet in height so the

1165
01:26:56,340 --> 01:27:01,940
 question the SUP come for you now is for that increase in height from not to exceed 88 to

1166
01:27:01,940 --> 01:27:09,380
 a tower not to exceed 150 and the land use consideration here is that our code states

1167
01:27:09,380 --> 01:27:15,380
 that a monopole tower exceeding 85 feet does require an SUP it's also important to be aware

1168
01:27:15,380 --> 01:27:19,820
 that we have the airport height hazard district as well which sets a limit of eight hundred

1169
01:27:19,820 --> 01:27:26,580
 and ten feet above mean sea level for any structure and in order to surpass that a variance

1170
01:27:26,580 --> 01:27:31,420
 is required from the zoning board of adjustment if the applicant can provide a letter of determination

1171
01:27:31,420 --> 01:27:37,540
 from the FAA indicating that a tower exceeding the airport height hazard district height limitation

1172
01:27:37,540 --> 01:27:42,900
 will not negatively impact airport operations the applicant does have such a letter and

1173
01:27:42,900 --> 01:27:47,900
 if they are approved recommended for approval and approved by PNZ and city council they

1174
01:27:47,900 --> 01:27:52,600
 would have to proceed to ZBA in order to get that variance approved before they could proceed

1175
01:27:52,600 --> 01:27:59,380
 so just keep me in mind that would be a subsequent approval should this be approved and just

1176
01:27:59,380 --> 01:28:04,660
 providing a little background here the original approval of the tower planning and zoning

1177
01:28:04,660 --> 01:28:11,820
 commission city council approved the SUP but set that 88 height level in order to comply

1178
01:28:11,820 --> 01:28:16,700
 with the airport height hazard district the applicant then went to the FAA in order to

1179
01:28:16,700 --> 01:28:21,580
 get a determination letter and is now returned with a request for an SUP for the additional

1180
01:28:21,580 --> 01:28:28,780
 height here is the site plan just showing the area in yellow is the only area intended

1181
01:28:28,780 --> 01:28:32,980
 for development through this SUP and that would be where the tower would be constructed

1182
01:28:32,980 --> 01:28:39,140
 with a six foot high wooden fence around it in compliance with our standards showing the

1183
01:28:39,140 --> 01:28:46,060
 tower elevations here monopole tower and just noting the light at the top would be omnidirectional

1184
01:28:46,060 --> 01:28:50,440
 per FAA standards it would be a white strobe during the day switching to a red blinking

1185
01:28:50,440 --> 01:28:56,560
 light at night it's the lighting that is required and designed to have minimum impact while

1186
01:28:56,560 --> 01:29:02,440
 still meeting legal standards of course it's always important to consider our comprehensive

1187
01:29:02,440 --> 01:29:08,660
 plan and alignment with it the future land use designation here is again for light industrial

1188
01:29:08,660 --> 01:29:12,740
 and one of the things that is discussed in that is the importance of providing adequate

1189
01:29:12,740 --> 01:29:18,140
 infrastructure and as communication infrastructure is one part of adequate infrastructure providing

1190
01:29:18,140 --> 01:29:24,820
 this in an LI future land use area would align with the intent of that future land use in

1191
01:29:24,820 --> 01:29:29,780
 addition the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan has a goal to coordinate with service providers

1192
01:29:29,780 --> 01:29:33,980
 to ensure the availability of communication infrastructure throughout the city so what's

1193
01:29:33,980 --> 01:29:39,460
 been provided by the applicant there you can see on the left hand side is the coverage

1194
01:29:39,460 --> 01:29:43,480
 that could be provided with the currently approved tower on the right hand side is the

1195
01:29:43,480 --> 01:29:47,900
 greater amount of coverage that would be available if this increased height is approved so the

1196
01:29:47,900 --> 01:29:51,780
 expanded broadband coverage would help to contribute to our comprehensive plan goal

1197
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:57,100
 of increased communications infrastructure compatibility with the surrounding area so

1198
01:29:57,100 --> 01:30:01,900
 this is surrounded by some industrial some commercial significant amount of undeveloped

1199
01:30:01,900 --> 01:30:08,700
 land the near single-family residential property is about point two miles away near single-family

1200
01:30:08,700 --> 01:30:13,220
 residential neighborhood you can see in green there about point three miles away the topography

1201
01:30:13,220 --> 01:30:19,540
 would somewhat limit the visible amount of the tower but the tower would be visible and

1202
01:30:19,540 --> 01:30:24,700
 so we look at mitigation through design so again they own the only lighting they will

1203
01:30:24,700 --> 01:30:29,880
 have is FAA required lighting as discussed no additional this is a monopole tower rather

1204
01:30:29,880 --> 01:30:35,580
 than a lattice tower limiting the visual impact it would be three feet wide at the lowest

1205
01:30:35,580 --> 01:30:40,260
 point it would be visible narrowing to about one foot wide and in addition at the proposed

1206
01:30:40,260 --> 01:30:43,700
 tower complies with many of the voluntary guidelines from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

1207
01:30:43,700 --> 01:30:49,060
 Service for minimizing impact on migratory birds because it does allow co-location not

1208
01:30:49,060 --> 01:30:52,620
 only will this be a broadband tower but it will also permit self-service providers to

1209
01:30:52,620 --> 01:30:56,300
 use the tower as well which limits the overall number of towers we're approving within our

1210
01:30:56,300 --> 01:31:02,740
 city minimizing the environmental impact and the land use impact so overall this does meet

1211
01:31:02,740 --> 01:31:11,220
 our criteria for approval we did do our standard notifications receive no responses so staff

1212
01:31:11,220 --> 01:31:16,500
 is recommending approval with conditions and one of the very important conditions in there

1213
01:31:16,500 --> 01:31:20,940
 is that the applicant if approved will know you need to go to the ZBA with that letter

1214
01:31:20,940 --> 01:31:25,560
 from the FAA and receive approval of a variance for the additional height and that will have

1215
01:31:25,560 --> 01:31:29,820
 to be approved before any building permit can be released for height above what's currently

1216
01:31:29,820 --> 01:31:34,020
 permitted and then there are additional conditions related to flexibility to have a lower tower

1217
01:31:34,020 --> 01:31:37,980
 if staff were to approve and just making that site plan and structure elevations part of

1218
01:31:37,980 --> 01:31:43,860
 the ordinance with that that is my presentation happy to stand for any questions great Shawn

1219
01:31:43,860 --> 01:31:54,260
 thank you any questions for Shawn at this time thank you very much this is a public

1220
01:31:54,260 --> 01:31:59,460
 hearing I don't have any cards in front of me on this item but you are welcome to speak

1221
01:31:59,460 --> 01:32:08,820
 on this item if you wish to do so okay seeing none I will go ahead and close the public

1222
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:16,720
 hearing and open the floor for discussion or emotion commissioner Smith make a motion

1223
01:32:16,720 --> 01:32:23,260
 to approve with staff conditions with staff conditions Commissioner Cole second okay we've

1224
01:32:23,260 --> 01:32:33,020
 got a first and a second for approval as presented with staff conditions Shawn I appreciate your

1225
01:32:33,020 --> 01:32:38,140
 thorough presentation and answering my multiple questions that I posed to you over the last

1226
01:32:38,140 --> 01:32:45,080
 day and a half or so yeah you answered my questions greatly I still feel like we've

1227
01:32:45,080 --> 01:32:50,460
 got a little bit of this going on as I talked about in work session with what our AHHD says

1228
01:32:50,460 --> 01:32:57,860
 we can do and and what we're doing I do feel comfortable with this recommendation knowing

1229
01:32:57,860 --> 01:33:06,060
 we've got the the letter that is needed but I'm gonna work on on staff trying to improve

1230
01:33:06,060 --> 01:33:10,500
 this whole situation here going forward but anyway thank you for being patient with my

1231
01:33:10,500 --> 01:33:15,620
 questions as well as you Tina appreciate it okay if there's no other discussion let's

1232
01:33:15,620 --> 01:33:29,340
 go ahead and vote on the board

1233
01:33:29,340 --> 01:33:34,060
 that motion carries seven zero that will take us to our final public hearing of the night

1234
01:33:34,060 --> 01:33:41,420
 on that is five cdca to two dash zero zero zero seven Ron is going to present this item

1235
01:33:41,420 --> 01:33:45,300
 and I will open the public hearing thank you chair members of the Commission raman get

1236
01:33:45,300 --> 01:33:51,940
 up and supply development services this request is a city initiated code amendment related

1237
01:33:51,940 --> 01:33:57,140
 to access requirements and as mentioned during the work session the reason for this code

1238
01:33:57,140 --> 01:34:04,780
 amendment was to address some of the questions and concerns raised in previous reviews of

1239
01:34:04,780 --> 01:34:11,780
 applications specifically as it relates to access there were a number of projects I won't

1240
01:34:11,780 --> 01:34:17,580
 name those projects but PD where there was a single family development multifamily where

1241
01:34:17,580 --> 01:34:23,100
 it required a specific use permit and again discussions related access were brought up

1242
01:34:23,100 --> 01:34:29,060
 we do have in the code a requirement that to access vehicle access be provided however

1243
01:34:29,060 --> 01:34:36,740
 it also provides the caveat that we're feasible so what staff went to work with the DC RC

1244
01:34:36,740 --> 01:34:42,180
 and as you can see here they've met four times on this particular item was to set a little

1245
01:34:42,180 --> 01:34:49,380
 bit more explanation clarification on what is required under the code so we've put that

1246
01:34:49,380 --> 01:34:53,740
 together and that's really that the summary of code amendments that you see here listed

1247
01:34:53,740 --> 01:35:00,580
 is that first item amending section eight three two c one requiring two full unrestricted

1248
01:35:00,580 --> 01:35:06,180
 access we also look worked on expanding the review criteria for waivers and I'll go I'll

1249
01:35:06,180 --> 01:35:12,260
 go into further on what those are on my next slide the next four are related to access

1250
01:35:12,260 --> 01:35:18,340
 as well primarily just making it more consistent with what we are proposing and what's currently

1251
01:35:18,340 --> 01:35:24,980
 our practice but also as it relates to double frontage lots where I currently allows are

1252
01:35:24,980 --> 01:35:31,860
 sorry we're only permits one access off of one frontage we're removing that requirement

1253
01:35:31,860 --> 01:35:37,380
 but also referencing different codes and criteria manuals of the of the code of the DC that

1254
01:35:37,380 --> 01:35:43,660
 is where that will be referenced access to a site across the property this has been a

1255
01:35:43,660 --> 01:35:49,540
 long time city policy it has not been codified what we're proposing is to include this in

1256
01:35:49,540 --> 01:35:55,500
 the into the DDC in those two particular sections sections five point two and as well as eight

1257
01:35:55,500 --> 01:36:01,900
 three two eight eleven and then lastly amend section eight three two eight six as it relates

1258
01:36:01,900 --> 01:36:06,860
 to driveway spacing just adding a little bit more language there to have the applicant

1259
01:36:06,860 --> 01:36:13,260
 and potential developer understand that they need to make more space or be cognizant of

1260
01:36:13,260 --> 01:36:17,900
 that spacing requirements so that when they develop or design their plan they're aware

1261
01:36:17,900 --> 01:36:24,260
 or they're they're incorporating those spacing requirements so we'll go with the first one

1262
01:36:24,260 --> 01:36:31,300
 this is a long code amendment here I wanted to spend some time here with the the commission

1263
01:36:31,300 --> 01:36:35,660
 but also with the viewing public as you can see here what's highlighted or what's in

1264
01:36:35,660 --> 01:36:42,980
 an orange it states at least two full points of access vehicle access into the proposed

1265
01:36:42,980 --> 01:36:48,780
 development shall be provided now we've broken that up into two different categories residential

1266
01:36:48,780 --> 01:36:53,300
 uses and non-residential uses I'll start with the non I'm sorry well start with the residential

1267
01:36:53,300 --> 01:36:58,420
 uses these are all residential uses that are listed in our development code under table

1268
01:36:58,420 --> 01:37:04,340
 five point two dash eight so any can any new construction where there are 30 dwelling units

1269
01:37:04,340 --> 01:37:11,860
 or more are required to provide that to full vehicle access ones that are 29 or less they

1270
01:37:11,860 --> 01:37:18,980
 do not they're just they can provide just one point of access B is that if there is

1271
01:37:18,980 --> 01:37:25,180
 a development that has 29 but decides to add on to that as part of another phase then that

1272
01:37:25,180 --> 01:37:30,500
 would then require that to full point of access at that point of their development we're also

1273
01:37:30,500 --> 01:37:36,300
 providing two exemptions one that if those properties are in the MD they are not required

1274
01:37:36,300 --> 01:37:42,460
 to provide that to full points of access and then D as well is an exemption of sites two

1275
01:37:42,460 --> 01:37:48,580
 acres or less and has a parking structure they are exempt from this requirement I want

1276
01:37:48,580 --> 01:37:53,260
 to point out as well while I'm here is that there are other code requirements related

1277
01:37:53,260 --> 01:37:59,420
 to the fire code as well as to the transportation criteria manual so if those are applicable

1278
01:37:59,420 --> 01:38:05,020
 they will still need to provide whatever is required for those particular codes now if

1279
01:38:05,020 --> 01:38:12,980
 a developer or our builder cannot or decides to not comply with this code or wants to vary

1280
01:38:12,980 --> 01:38:19,500
 from this particular section under residential uses they do have an option and that option

1281
01:38:19,500 --> 01:38:24,540
 is through a subdivision variance and that will come to this body or this commission

1282
01:38:24,540 --> 01:38:32,380
 for consideration switching on to non-residential uses any development that is 20,000 the lot

1283
01:38:32,380 --> 01:38:38,620
 that is square feet or higher would require that two points of access and again cumulatively

1284
01:38:38,620 --> 01:38:44,300
 if they exceed that on a large replating or another phase then that would need to be included

1285
01:38:44,300 --> 01:38:49,820
 in their plans we're also carrying forward those exemptions related to MD as well as

1286
01:38:49,820 --> 01:38:56,420
 the size of the property if it's two acres or less with a parking structure now the developer

1287
01:38:56,420 --> 01:39:01,540
 if they choose not to follow this requirement they have an option and that is which is listed

1288
01:39:01,540 --> 01:39:08,500
 in D and that is through our city engineer they can submit a request for a waiver and

1289
01:39:08,500 --> 01:39:13,980
 we've proposed the language that you see here add a little bit more parameters as to what

1290
01:39:13,980 --> 01:39:22,740
 would be what they would be able to for reasons for that waiver listed as shown again that

1291
01:39:22,740 --> 01:39:27,980
 is a will then be up to the city engineer to decide letter E as I mentioned earlier

1292
01:39:27,980 --> 01:39:33,380
 relates to the fire code and transportation criteria manual all of that will still be

1293
01:39:33,380 --> 01:39:40,540
 applicable for all the developments and lastly F is just to again illustrate that full access

1294
01:39:40,540 --> 01:39:49,100
 is an ingress and egress of that access and in order to be able to meet these requirements

1295
01:39:49,100 --> 01:39:54,420
 so I'm going to then go into the next slide the other items that I listed as far as code

1296
01:39:54,420 --> 01:39:59,620
 amendments you have in your backup so I won't go through them but based on the presentation

1297
01:39:59,620 --> 01:40:04,140
 staff recommends approval of this as it meets the criteria as listed in the development

1298
01:40:04,140 --> 01:40:13,440
 code section 2 7 4 D and with that I'll stand for any questions thank you Ron questions

1299
01:40:13,440 --> 01:40:25,320
 for Ron on this think everybody still had their screens going so are we taking these

1300
01:40:25,320 --> 01:40:29,660
 amendment at a time because there's other things that we're considering correct is that

1301
01:40:29,660 --> 01:40:34,260
 they're they're they're all part of this right yes and okay they're they were included

1302
01:40:34,260 --> 01:40:39,180
 in the back right yeah so you don't have further presentation on any of those okay so if you've

1303
01:40:39,180 --> 01:40:44,500
 got questions on any of the backup material with regard to the other now would be the

1304
01:40:44,500 --> 01:40:52,420
 time for that I do not see any thank you Ron this is a public hearing I don't have any

1305
01:40:52,420 --> 01:40:56,700
 cards here in front of me to speak but you are welcome to speak on this item if you would

1306
01:40:56,700 --> 01:41:05,220
 like okay seeing none I will go ahead and close the public hearing and I will open the

1307
01:41:05,220 --> 01:41:11,860
 floor for discussion or a motion Commissioner Smith I'll make a motion to approve as recommended

1308
01:41:11,860 --> 01:41:17,900
 Commissioner Villarreal second we've got a first and a second for approval any discussion

1309
01:41:17,900 --> 01:41:24,260
 well I'll just say I know I was at the beginning discussions of some of this on the DCRC and

1310
01:41:24,260 --> 01:41:29,060
 I know the rest of you furthered the way here and I know great thought and consideration

1311
01:41:29,060 --> 01:41:36,420
 and much work by staff and the committee were done in this so thank you very much with that

1312
01:41:36,420 --> 01:41:52,380
 let's go ahead and vote on the board that motion carries 7-0 that will take us to our

1313
01:41:52,380 --> 01:41:57,140
 planning and zoning matrix for this evening I'll go ahead and turn it over to Tina first

1314
01:41:57,140 --> 01:42:03,460
 thank you chairman Ellis with respect to the matrix there have been no changes made since

1315
01:42:03,460 --> 01:42:10,980
 the last meeting under there was some discussion chairman Ellis you had requested that staff

1316
01:42:10,980 --> 01:42:15,820
 as part of their zoning analysis considerations take a look at why conditions were put in

1317
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:19,580
 place previously but you did acknowledge that that did not need to be included on the matrix

1318
01:42:19,580 --> 01:42:25,220
 so we didn't we did not add it so but otherwise there have been no changes made to the matrix

1319
01:42:25,220 --> 01:42:30,340
 itself and then with respect to recent council action on items so we had a council meeting

1320
01:42:30,340 --> 01:42:35,720
 last night and we did have several items on the agenda for consideration so let me let

1321
01:42:35,720 --> 01:42:43,140
 me get to those so we do currently have an annexation that is tracking through council

1322
01:42:43,140 --> 01:42:48,620
 right now that Ron has been working on and and this is in relation to a zoning case that

1323
01:42:48,620 --> 01:42:55,300
 you have seen not too long ago north of 380 off of Thomas Egan Road and if you recall

1324
01:42:55,300 --> 01:42:59,420
 we had taken zoning action and taking care of the zoning on the portion of the property

1325
01:42:59,420 --> 01:43:04,060
 that was within the city limits and then they had a remaining track to the north and so

1326
01:43:04,060 --> 01:43:08,020
 that remaining track to the north is what is tracking through from an annexation request

1327
01:43:08,020 --> 01:43:12,580
 so eventually that property will come before the planning and zoning commission if it's

1328
01:43:12,580 --> 01:43:17,100
 successfully annexed so the the municipal services agreement associated that was approved

1329
01:43:17,100 --> 01:43:22,300
 last night also we had the first public hearing in the reading of the ordinance on that.

1330
01:43:22,300 --> 01:43:31,940
 Additionally we had a couple of zoning cases one of which was a rezoning request from mixed

1331
01:43:31,940 --> 01:43:37,620
 use regional to light industrial zoning district for about 53 acres of land located south of

1332
01:43:37,620 --> 01:43:45,180
 Barthol road north of FM 1173 and about 700 feet west of the intersection of FM 1173 and

1333
01:43:45,180 --> 01:43:52,280
 north I-35E so with that city council did vote to approve that rezoning and went by

1334
01:43:52,280 --> 01:43:57,940
 a vote of seven zero and then we also had the specific use permit request which was

1335
01:43:57,940 --> 01:44:02,420
 to allow for multifamily use on and on property that was located generally at the southeast

1336
01:44:02,420 --> 01:44:07,940
 corner of Locust Street and loop 288 just north of Hercules if you recall that zoning

1337
01:44:07,940 --> 01:44:13,180
 case and O'Shawn had worked with the applicant on that project and that was approved by council

1338
01:44:13,180 --> 01:44:16,920
 with the conditions that were included within the specific use permit ordinance as as recommended

1339
01:44:16,920 --> 01:44:22,220
 from the planning and zoning commission and that was approved seven zero so that takes

1340
01:44:22,220 --> 01:44:27,020
 care of the actions on items that we had with council but happy to entertain any additional

1341
01:44:27,020 --> 01:44:31,620
 requests additions being made to the matrix I know Commissioner Ellis you made mention

1342
01:44:31,620 --> 01:44:35,340
 in work session maybe we need to look at that AHHD and the provisions related to that.

1343
01:44:35,340 --> 01:44:40,780
 As a matter of fact yes that I am gonna so and I don't even know if it's for our matrix

1344
01:44:40,780 --> 01:44:48,600
 or just we have an airport advisory committee correct I'll be honest with you I don't know

1345
01:44:48,600 --> 01:44:54,380
 that I do believe that there is that okay so my thinking is maybe that's the body for

1346
01:44:54,380 --> 01:45:07,020
 the AHHD look at I guess what I would maybe want for us to maybe discuss further is if

1347
01:45:07,020 --> 01:45:15,500
 that if that particular thing is considered an overlay then how we look at things like

1348
01:45:15,500 --> 01:45:23,060
 what we did today is something that I would entertain further discussion on just because

1349
01:45:23,060 --> 01:45:27,660
 if we have an overlay in place it does seem like it it's something that should be respected

1350
01:45:27,660 --> 01:45:34,100
 in and not for us to just approve that if it goes outside of that overlay so that was

1351
01:45:34,100 --> 01:45:39,460
 kind of wordy and a lot of things there but if I need to clarify anything with you let

1352
01:45:39,460 --> 01:45:45,500
 me know well I think between all the discussion that we've had this evening we've got a pretty

1353
01:45:45,500 --> 01:45:48,380
 good idea of what we need to do but we can always follow up with you excellent great

1354
01:45:48,380 --> 01:45:53,860
 Commissioner Villarreal I'm sorry if you mentioned this already but do you know how council reacted

1355
01:45:53,860 --> 01:46:01,860
 to the CIA sees impact fee discussion so that presentation did occur yesterday I'll be honest

1356
01:46:01,860 --> 01:46:06,260
 with you I did not catch all of the action related to it so Commissioner Elizabeth do

1357
01:46:06,260 --> 01:46:10,780
 you have anything to add yeah I did watch it I thought that the discussion actually

1358
01:46:10,780 --> 01:46:16,340
 went a little bit awry from I think what needed to probably is probably what you want an answer

1359
01:46:16,340 --> 01:46:21,700
 to and that's what I was watching so I could get they honestly did not discuss the direction

1360
01:46:21,700 --> 01:46:29,060
 of where they might land on some kind of fee they were looking forward to the final report

1361
01:46:29,060 --> 01:46:36,960
 coming before them discussion got I think a little bit derailed on talking about infill

1362
01:46:36,960 --> 01:46:45,260
 development and how we're going to deal with that exemption and then adding other exemptions

1363
01:46:45,260 --> 01:46:52,160
 and so I almost feel like the discussion was going you know with what we actually kind

1364
01:46:52,160 --> 01:46:58,220
 of focused on which I think is what needs to be eventually decided by council I thought

1365
01:46:58,220 --> 01:47:04,780
 the discussion went a little bit off and went to more focus on what can be exempted which

1366
01:47:04,780 --> 01:47:13,540
 I think is separate in a much different discussion and a future discussion so that's how it went

1367
01:47:13,540 --> 01:47:18,100
 you'd have to probably get done with Becky well I think our timeline is the same they're

1368
01:47:18,100 --> 01:47:23,100
 going to have the full report we're going to do that meeting I believe before our next

1369
01:47:23,100 --> 01:47:29,140
 planning and zoning meeting but yeah so yeah yeah the portion I did see there was some

1370
01:47:29,140 --> 01:47:33,500
 discussion potentially is whether or not they were going to take further consideration on

1371
01:47:33,500 --> 01:47:37,780
 December 6th but I believe we're still staying the course with respect to the calendar and

1372
01:47:37,780 --> 01:47:41,700
 I saw the latter part of the conversation and Chairwoman Ellis is correct with respect

1373
01:47:41,700 --> 01:47:47,380
 to they did get in a fair amount of discussion especially regarding how we address infill

1374
01:47:47,380 --> 01:47:51,660
 development what does that look like the term greenfield development was being kicked around

1375
01:47:51,660 --> 01:47:55,620
 as well and whether or not they would be subject to that but which I do believe is is a much

1376
01:47:55,620 --> 01:48:02,300
 bigger conversation and so we will be interesting to see how it continues to move forward yeah

1377
01:48:02,300 --> 01:48:10,820
 anything else for the matrix any concluding items I think I'll just say happy Thanksgiving

1378
01:48:10,820 --> 01:48:14,320
 because we will not meet before then and it's very hard to believe that is Thanksgiving

1379
01:48:14,320 --> 01:48:20,540
 next week but it is so happy Thanksgiving you all have a wonderful holiday and with that

1380
01:48:20,540 --> 01:48:25,300
 I will adjourn us at seven oh eight p.m. thank you very much everybody.