Sep 12, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2018-09-12 5:00 PM

for Wednesday September 12th it is 5.03 we'll get started with the agenda the first items up for discussion would be a clarification of the agenda items Richard do you have anything to clarify yes just on on the consent item number 2 2c this is the final plat it's the woodlands edition they requested that this item be postponed to a later date there's some my understanding is there's some issues with a leasehold interest in the property that they want to get worked out prior prior to this moving forward we're good the only other about moving the yeah go for it moving item 3b to 3a just a suggestion since it's a 3b to become 3a prior to the rezoning request since it's fairly they will go to be a to go to be perfect yeah that'll help those people maybe not have to wait next is the consent agenda does anyone have any questions on either one it's probably worth pointing out that item 2a is being discussed in length in the public hearing so we want to if you have any questions on that be prudent to have that squared away yep Mr. Ellis thank you chair yeah I guess my question yeah is relevant to that because with the preliminary plat in the write-up that that is with the a esa it talks about two entries off of Country Club Road but I only saw one on the prelim plat am I missing one am I just not seeing it no you are correct the preliminary plat it's been through sorry that's the incorrect one it has been through a couple of renditions we've settled on this one point of access on Country Club the second point of access for emergency services will be this connection to Meadowlands okay so it's just one access off of correct okay understood thank you no there will be a temporary construction access I believe here where the existing driveway is for phase one construction this phase two is pending the ultimate alignment of a Country Club Road with which text on is coordinating at this point in time is the only question to see for that does anyone have any questions on to be as that's also under Haley perfect thank you very much Haley that gets us going to the public hearings we'll start with the updated version starting with the new 3a the final replat fr 18 0005 that is Cindy Jackson okay this is a request to replat a lot in into two lots the site is located in the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction or ETJ the purpose of the replat is to subdivide lot 1r into two lots this is one of the lots and the other one is the remainder of the site with this not connect this connects the two sides the site is located on the west side of Hilltop Road and it meets all the requirements of the subdivision plot subdivision requirements and we recommend approval any questions for Cindy perfect thank you very much Cindy that moves us to 3b the zoning item z 18 20a which is also Cindy Jackson okay this request is a city initiated zoning request I placed at your each of you received a copy of all the property owner responses that we received as a result of the notification one of them the very last one is not located within the 200 foot notification buffer it was not counted as a percentage against the request however I included it with your copies for information okay z 18 20 Creekside is a request to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding an initial zoning designation of neighborhood residential 3 and our three on approximately 47.466 acres which you can see right here the property is located between Ryan Road to the north and Creekdale view down here to the south this site was the subject of a pre annexation development agreement that was approved by the City Council in 2016 its ordinance 2016 - 215 this what I'm calling the Pata this govern the sequence of development for this site it contains in addition to containing a schedule for each each phase of entitlement it also contains land use and development standards the plot for the site was approved on March 21st 2018 and the site was recently annexed into the city just just a few weeks ago I think it was mr. Beck thank you chair Cindy it's just dawning on me we 've dealt with this already and in the opposition to it so we approved a plan before it was zone yep I'll get to that okay the site has 137 residential lots with the density of 2.9 dwelling units per acre which complies with the nr3 zoning that is requested the Pata complaint contains robust development standards that exceed what we have currently in our dent and development code and our requirements with regards to such things as traffic impact fees typically a traffic impact fee for something this this size would be three thousand four hundred and twenty three thousand four hundred and two dollars and you can see it right now I'm sorry and we have tree preservation standards typical right now we require 20% the as a result of the requirements of the Pata the applicant is actually preserving 76% is required to preserve 76% of the diameter inches and 82% of all trees is what is being preserved right now you can see the preservation areas right along here and along the southern boundary as well as this is not this is the boundary line and you can see that there's further tree preservation proposed for the remaining two tracts of land that are in included in the Pata however they are not the subject of tonight's discussion here is table showing the total trees that were required to be preserved trees preserved trees removed percent preserved is eighty one point nine percent total inches of trees on this side is ten thousand five hundred and twenty point eight they preserved eight thousand twenty seven point eight inches and removed twenty four hundred and ninety three percent preserved is seventy six point three percent now we'll get to your question the typical sequence of development is first we annex then we zone the property then we get site plan approval then we do preliminary and final plot per the Pata we did the pre annexation development agreement we did a concept plan a site plan a preliminary and final plot then annexation that were required to come in and apply for annexation within ten days after the approval of the final plot and the final step is zoning which is where we are tonight the current zoning is already 5x as you can see on this slide and the proposed zoning is nr3 the nr3 presents a effective transition and buffer between the nr4 to the south and west and the nr2 to the north staff sent legal notices has put a legal notice in the newspaper we sent out 96 notices via certified mail and 192 courtesy notices via regular mail we received six notices in response representing three percent of the property located within that the 200 foot boundary and you can see them in red here some of them are hard to see because they're just little slivers of land on the edge and we received one from outside the 200 foot boundary which I also included we posted three notification signs we recommend approval of this request as it is compatible with the surrounding property is consistent with the requirements set forth in and is consistent with the requirements set forth in the pre annexation agreement ordinance number 2016 - two one five and that concludes my presentation Chris are back make sure go back to the Google there the little extension that you called it a buffer this extent this right here yes there's no I've actually there's a buffer here and a buffer here you see the existing trees right this is if you if it has been planted as a street okay that's what I was and so there is going to be access out of that new subdivision to the south that will connect to okay not just on Ryan no yeah okay thank you any other questions so I have I have one question and maybe Richard or legal can help me process this the the reverse of procedures is that kind of neutering our ability to make a decision here is it a foregone conclusion that we have to approve this or what happens if we don't approve this if the Commission deems that it should be in our - not in our three as the neighboring neighborhood is directly to the West it's an inner to neighborhood at the north what happens here has there been a protection to the applicant of some sort of promise that they will get zoned this way or I'm just curious about our actual power and making a recommendation here yeah the only statement in the development agreement is that the city will pursue or initiate a rez oning for this particular zoning classification and that the applicant or the developer will not object to that as an initial zoning it doesn't say the the the city can't by contract establish any particular zoning classification it still has to go through the process it still has to receive a recommendation and it still has to go forward to counsel for approval just like any other zoning case and so that that I and I did have in here mark when it was referred to as a sequence of entitlements I you know I I don't think that a development agreement can properly create an entitlement to a particular zoning it promises that the city will initiate a case to rezone it to this particular zoning classification I appreciate that can you help me Cindy you might know or Richard might be shed light why they wouldn't go ahead and make sure his zoning gets approved before doing this was this an efficiency question it seems like they did a lot of work with a question still lingering that I'm not sure because it was it was 2016 the only the only thing I could venture to guess is the the plat happened to be approved prior to annexation so that even if the zoning I guess is denied they do have a plot that was approved prior to annexing into the city right I was not the planner that worked on this I wasn't involved in the least I think what Richard said is correct it could be that when they submitted an application for a plot it was discovered they had a non annexation agreement on the site which it did and for the non annexation agreement when you develop the site you have to annex into the city prior to development so they worked out this this agreement this way and and the the pre annexation development agreement that is a codified like pathway actually a non annexation agreement okay I'm sorry the the pre annexation agreement is not codified there there is in the Texas local government code a provision for a non annexation agreement which what I thought you were asking about but I guess to put a little bit sharper point on the question about the sequencing the city actually cannot initiate zoning until the property is annexed because it has no jurisdiction for zoning until or unless the properties within the city limits and this was the majority of work was done prior to the annexation that's correct I got you I think commissioner Ellis and then Commissioner Beck thank you sure well it's along the same line of what we're discussing so who decide how did we get to a final plat before we had an annex property and how to what who decides a pre annexation development agreement I mean is that just how you got out of it because we had a final plat I'm confused how we go out of the typical sequence of development I understand and I really I'm not sure my thinking is since they had already had the site designed and they had a a plat submitted this is theoretical if they already had submitted what they what staff and the applicant might have done was work out a situation where we can get the a bigger bigger bang for this by having them agree to standards that are above and beyond what we require in exchange for okay we'll approve this plot but you need to go through these steps too in order for us to approve this plot right but I mean it wasn't a surprise that it wasn't you know in the city limits at the time so well you'd be surprised the the the property that has pre annexation I mean non annexation agreements we've had several instances where the somebody a developer comes forward and offers to purchase it and and they come to us and we're like well no you've got a there there is this non annexation agreement on here this is what you're gonna have to do and in this instance and I'm not sure why because I wouldn't involved they decided to do this development agreement which resulted in higher standards of design standards have we done pre annexation development agreements in the past does anyone know my understanding this is the only one that I'm aware of that was done in 2016 I know the applicant you know will be at the meeting that could address some of the questions as to how how it sort of developed at that time prior to the prior to the the non annexation agreement expiring it just is odd because as chair said it's almost like we kind of have to we've gotten this far we've got a final plat the only way the final plaque can be done is if we have this zoning I mean otherwise it's not gonna work yeah in this in this instance because we do have we do still have authority within the ETJ for final plat approval and so that's that's what I'm again venturing to guess was the premise behind having it go having it go before this if I if I could reword that if I understand what you're saying correctly is there was a non-exation agreement that needed to be expired but they were able to get some work done leading up to that expiration so they were kind of able to burn the candle while waiting for that annexation to happen this annexation agreement the the the the PADA was approved in September that same month September of 2016 that same month the non annexation agreement was set to expire okay okay Chris you're back thank you chair kind of back to your question if what option do we have here if I mean they obviously the preliminary and final class was set up for an NR3 but if we say do we have the option to say no we'll agree to an NR2 then they'd have to go back and do preliminary and final plants do we have that option that's one question and if we do and agree to do that then they'd have to go back through the process is that correct well I know that if they have a plat that doesn't do what they intend to do you know or what they can legally do under whatever zoning they ultimately wind up with then they're not going to be allowed to build under that plat but and they're going to have to pursue some other option but I think the whole point of the pre annexation development agreement and I wasn't involved in it either I and I don't know the history of it I'm kind of in the same position that the planning staff is in but looking at it just kind of from the outside in it looks like it was an effort to legally do what the expectations were a lot of people are saying you know gee can we can we zone this at the time of annexation well technically you can't you can't you can't zone until after the property is annexed but you know with with the idea of pursuing this you know it's at least one way of going after this again the city's obligation with regard to zoning is not to guarantee any particular zoning goes in but to initiate the case and if that causes problem well at least the city kept this end of the bargain but you know clearly you know all non annexation agreements are pre annexation development agreements I mean that's that's that's their structure they're all pre annexation development groups they were just pre annexation development agreements that provide that any development that you do was going to be agricultural in nature and that if you do anything other than agricultural you come in to the city as a voluntary annexation that's part of the terms you could you could prescribe uses of land in a pre annexation development agreement which this did but that you cannot promise by contract you cannot promise you know a particular zoning classification you know as the city seems like for good reason to me too because I'm not saying I have a problem with the nr3 they 've got some good buffers here and everything but we've obviously got some concerns by the surrounding neighborhoods and I understand that but it's we come into this with our hands tied almost and that's unusual that's what bothers me you know so I don't want to go back and say no we're not gonna do anything in our two just to just to show them but hopefully we won't face this in the future I listen this is weird but I wanted to see what our options were there I said unless you said to that you know any non-accession agreement anticipates zoning and I agree but zoning first then plants you know and this has been reversed here so right yeah and I suspect that it was an effort to try to accommodate a desired development and use in a manner that that staff assumed would be non-controversial as proposed and so you know I doubt that there's any kind of intent to tying one's hands here again speaking from position of ignorance but it was it was an effort to put that into place it obviously was approved the City Council did approve the agreement and so you know by all appearances it appeared that the city had no problems with this Michelle's thank you chair well I guess I mean I guess just my final thought on that is I mean it does feel like our hands are tied with the typical order which is over there and the order we're dealing with over here and again I don't know that it's a terrible fit either it just feels wrong and it would be my hope that we don't do this again and we do an order that makes sense because this order doesn't make sense to me Christian back thank you sure one of the thing I guess too that the surrounding neighborhoods concerned about is the added traffic and we discussed that when we were dealing with the site plans and and understood their concerns so I could see why and I don't know if it would appease them but a less dense zoning district you know might all sit some of that traffic probably not enough to make a big difference but anyway that was just a thought I had out there throwing the mix I do want to point out that the applicant has actually anticipated that traffic is somewhat and the traffic impact fees that were paid for this property are forty three hundred dollars per unit this is greater than the twenty five hundred dollars per unit required by the DC and the impact fee ordinance the traffic engineering is in the process of conducting trip counts right now along Ryan Road because they are aware of the situation as well and we've got other developments coming in that will impact it and funding for the an update to the mobility plan so that we can pursue the improvements of Ryan Road was approved by council last night and they are actively working towards trying to alleviate the situation so senior final words from myself I'm glad you brought up traffic that's good to hear because I live in the general vicinity of the area and I got peppered with questions two of them namely one is when are we gonna get a light at Ryan Road in 1830 that seems to be a large concern of those residents and then traffic on on Ryan was concerned so hopefully the updated mobility plan can can allocate some resources there and then their impact fees can immediately go towards and I know the the light at 1830 has text dot implications so I get that but but hopefully you can get that going the other question I got over and over a dozen times was how did someone start construction before his own and so we're talking here about kind of having our hands tied which I do get I'm not necessarily opposed the inner three either but the sequence is like it's a foregone conclusion here but moreover to the citizens they were highly confused how it's happening in our city that construction started before a zoning happened so I had a lot of questions say hey why are you just not doing zoning if it's already been approved and then my narrative back to them was equally confusing to say well it 's it's already kind of predetermined that they will get a and so I didn't feel too confident in my response yeah so I kind of echo Commissioner Ellis's point that we should maybe not look to do these it seems rare but if we do maybe look to have special messaging or something because there's just a lot of confusion of how they could have excavators on property and then get a zoning notification you know three weeks later so that's just my two cents on that I can understand that and to my the best of my knowledge all they've got so far is a grading permit when that when a plot is improved approved they can they can grade the land sure and that's what they're working on right now Chris or back thank you sure one last question did we do a neighborhood meeting either for this or when they were doing that when the pre annexation development agreement was was going through the process the developer and and neighbors did meet the neighbors have actually contacted me and told me well they said this this and this so yeah there were aware of it so they didn't make an attempt to yes okay there is one other point I think that could be made that that might make it feel a little bit less like a hands-tieing situation is that if they are outside the city limits we have no zoning control of them at all period you know absent some kind of a development agreement and and so they can develop without any kind of annexation restrictions that are not placed on them by an agreement at least they had some restrictions that were placed on them that they voluntarily agreed to you know it 's not some other use that could be a lot more intense that that's the city would be obligated to accept as an existing use upon annexation and and so to a certain extent you know what you're getting here is not so much a hand tying as it is the ability to plan and to provide for orderly growth and and the city had this opportunity presented to them when this pattern was brought forward that look this is this is what's proposed at least we're putting some restrictions in place on this that gives the neighboring properties some comfort some assurance of what's going to go in and how it's going to go in and that it's not going to be beyond that and and so to a certain extent it does provide some order you know in the process that you would not otherwise have absent an annexation development agreement. One point to Larry's comment and I believe this was done prior to the traffic impact fee ordinance being adopted and so that's always a challenge right when we're approving final plats in the ETJ we don't have so even if they are right within the within the you know surrounded by it by the city we can't necessarily assess that traffic impact fee and so at least with this agreement while they are providing it you know creating an impact we were able to actually secure almost double than what what the impact fee would have required. Okay that makes sense if I may okay and again to Larry's statement yeah I can see the benefit of that that but how often when we do annex property there usually nothing on it is that correct have we how often have we annex property where there's already a development in there ? It varies even there's been some properties of the annex a long long time ago with with uses on them that are non-conforming and so we can tend now with you know tracing it all the way back so that they're actually able to continue that use we had one today in fact but but it does it does vary sometimes they're as simple as a single-family home. But it seems like the developer here at least was attempting to work with the city's 2030 plan you know the future land use and all that with the NR3. Correct and it wasn't like you know it wasn't a grab for NR4 NR6 which we see a lot so there is you know we actually look at it is compatible with with that area and serves as a buffer to the to the NR4 and NR6 just to the east. And I wanted to add that we did annex some property in 2010 when we did the big annexation in 2010 that was developed the one that I'm thinking in particular is off of Mosh Branch it was an industrial park and what they we had them do is provide us with an inventory of all the uses that were in that industrial park because the code states that when we have we annex uses they are non-conforming however they are allowed to continue with them so that way every time we got a CEO for that industrial park we had pull out that list and see okay yeah that that's on that list that you so they can go in there. Krishnapurna did you have a question? No. Okay. Thank you very much Cindy. Sure. That moves us to item 3C the AESA 16-3 and I'll call Haley to provide us some information on this one. All right good evening before I dive into this I wanted to point out a couple of things I left on the table some additional responses that were received for this case as well as a more clear ESA map that should replace exhibit 5 that was in your backup that map came contain some errone ous data regarding the boundary of the developed floodplain so we corrected that and provided you a hopefully a clearer picture of the various ESA types that are on the property and just so you also know Deborah Vera will be joining me in this presentation so we'll kind of tag team and hopefully get you the best information we can on this case. So the request before you is for an alternative environmentally sensitive area plan outlined on the map in yellow is the boundaries of the Country Club Road Estates which is the property there was a preliminary plat on your consent agenda for this for this property it is approximately 32 or 35 and a half acres you can see it's located on the west side of Country Club Road Regency Court is just to the north of this for reference the particular type of ESA that we'll be discussing tonight is the undeveloped floodplain ESA and I also wanted to point out to you you may remember last or yes last year we had new ESA regulations approved this development and this ESA up in 2016 so it predates those new ESA regulations so this was examined under the the purview of those original or the older ESA regulations that were replaced last year. A little bit more background on the property it's currently zoned in R3 some of you may remember a couple of years ago an application came in it was approved early in 2017 for a rezoning on this property so prior to 2017 it was a mixture of NR2 and NR4 zoning could have permitted a maximum of 111 lots at that time so with their application in 2017 they applied to consolidate the zoning all under NR3 so kind of split the difference with the NR4 and NR2 and give a consistent density throughout the property under NR3 they could develop a maximum of 124 lots the preliminary plat and the plans that you'll look at tonight show 73 lots so they are coming in significantly lower in density than what could be permitted so now to kind of look at the details of this preliminary plat. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Go back that one if what are what are they giving up from going up from 124 to 73 if they did 124 lots would they still negatively impacted that undeveloped floodplain? Yes that's due to the location of the flood plain kind of in the middle of the property it was likely no matter what they did they would have some impact on that just trying to get roads or lots or something in place on the property. But wouldn't our aren't there restrictions in place that would have prevented them from doing that kind of alteration to that? Well the the reason we're here tonight is to so you all can have a look at those alterations that they propose because you're correct there are limitations on what you can do within an ESA. Okay so they could have done 124 but they would have altered more significantly the undeveloped floodplain so by doing 73. That is potential I haven't seen what the plan would have looked like with that maximum number of lots but since they came in for this their plan has always been to develop somewhere between 73 78 lots to have a larger lot more estate style development. Thanks. So looking at some of the details here you can see two phases of development so as I mentioned earlier there's still some uncertainty as to what the ultimate right-of-way will be for Country Club Road when TxDOT widens that so phase two is it's kind of a distant future maybe in a couple of years once TxDOT has those plans finalized but this is this is their hope for what that would look like and then phase one will be the more more immediately pending development once they get through this process and then assuming this is approved final platting and construction plans would follow. So we do have a few key things to point out Meadowlands Drive will extend from the existing stub out here on the east side of the property it will come into a cul-de-sac so there's no direct connectivity where someone can make just a straight shot through the subdivision. There would be several turns involved on these streets to get out to Country Club Road so that could hopefully you know slow down traffic and cause a slower pace to travel through the neighborhood. As I mentioned it is a total of 73 lots there are a couple of gas wells in proximity to this so you can see in hatched lines here and then with these boundary lines the lots that fall within a thousand feet of that so they've followed all of our regulations for property owner notifications there and then you can see through the middle of the lot two lots called out as a 1x and 2x and that's the lots that would contain the floodplain and the ESA if this plan is approved. And at this point I'm gonna let Deborah kind of take over and walk you through the various types of ESA on the property and what the plan is. Thank you. Okay so they're not gonna do phase one or phase two for maybe another year or two. It's all possible it's depending on what text dots timing is on their plans. But they will go ahead and do the road completion as they're doing phase one. My understanding is they'd likely have a temporary access point here where that existing driveway is and then yeah this would be built later on once text dot sponsor finalized. Okay. Good evening Commission my name is Deborah Vieira I'm with Environmental Services and I'm going to walk you through the environmental sensitive areas component of it. On the screen we have a map that's showing the existing environmental sensitive area on site. I believe we have new members on the Commission so I'm going to walk them through what environmental sensitive areas are. So bear with me the rest of the Commission that you have got this training so many times. The city of Denton provides protection to four types of habitats. One of them being the floodplain, repair and buffers, water related habitats and cross timber open habitats. Those are habitats that we provide protections to it and require additional regulations when development comes in that has some some of that into their property. Tonight we're going to deal with undeveloped floodplain. An undeveloped flood plain pretty much is the boundaries are determined by what the FEMA determines to be the zone that have one percent chance of flood every year. It's also called the hundred year floodplain. So the two the two boundaries overlap they're the same. Even though FEMA the emphasis of FEMA protections is on the conveyance of water is making sure that the water is draining properly and that does not result in further flooding and hazard and damages to the property. The ESA floodplain deals more with the habitat that it has and the protection service the ecological services that they provide. So tonight we are going to deal mainly with the southern part of the property which is determined to be undeveloped flood plain. This is a point of clarification. The applicant have proposed all the impacts to be done along the flood fringes which is the outer edges of the floodplain and not to encroach into the repair and buffer which is the yellow area shown. So that's why we are not dealing with the repair and buffer at this point. The northern part of it it was determined through a field assessment done in 2015 that that area in purple seems to have characteristics of a developed floodplain meaning that that area have been heavily impacted that have been graded that have been filled and so on and there's and doesn't provide the habitat and the benefits that otherwise an undeveloped floodplain does. The same happened with the repair and buffer that area have been heavily graded. I suspect that that came as a part of the CLOMAR-LOHMAR process. CLOMAR stands for conditional letter of map revision. LOHMAR stands for letter of map revision. Then it was done as a part of Regency Oaks subdivision which is located on the north. Also here there is a long driveway that connects to Country Club. There is a culvert in that area to that provides the drainage in that area. Somebody have to put a culvert in and that and I suspect that some of the field and grading that was done in the past was also for the for the construction of that driveway. So there are multiple reasons why that area have been impacted in the past. So in 2015 the staff did a field assessment to determine the condition of the floodplain and the repair and buffer. The northern part of the existing subdivision it was found that it was heavily impacted and graded. We are suspecting it was the result of the letter of map revisions for Regency Oaks that was done in 1999. Just to for your information, Regency Oaks came before the Denton Development Code was in place or any of the subchapter 17 that provides protections to environmentally sensitive areas. Even though they did very similar to what this development is requesting to do tonight, they were not subject to the protection of the ESA at the time. On the repair and buffer pretty much one third of the of the repair and buffer the northern set have been heavily modified. There's not a defined channel anymore. It is more like a series of pools and that area is also been mowed, vegetated but have been mowed. So you don't have that typical repair and buffer. We also assess the vegetation present and they were not wetland related vegetation present either. It was more upland in character. The downstream two-thirds of the site it looks like I have not been touched and I will retain the characteristic of a more natural area and we maintain the repair and buffer designation for that segment. This table summarizes all the disturbances that are going to be done within the area and I did that just to give you a complete picture of it but I just wanted to bring to your attention that only the cells highlighted in yellow triggers an alternative ESA plan. The first the repair and buffer designation that was removed is no longer an ESA therefore a disturb in that area will not trigger an alternative ESA plan. The repair and buffer the applicant have agreed to keep all disturbances outside the repair and buffer therefore there are there's no encroachment no need to include that as a part of the alternative ESA plan. The developed flood plain there's no protection of the habitat when a floodplain have been heavily modified therefore will not trigger either the alternative ESA plan. Only the section that deals with the undeveloped floodplain matters for this application. This is a detail that the applicant provided to show where the field is going to be placed. The field area is right here okay and this is this seems to the purpose of this detail is just to show you what a crossing of that stream looks like. This is the center line of the stream and because it's a repair and buffer we provide protection 50 feet on both directions for a total of 100 feet. The applicant has also stated that they will put any fields any field outside any tree drip line so in case that there were a tree right at the edge of the repair and buffer they will push the field further out not to put any any hazard or stress on those trees so they are cognizant of the protection of the repair and buffer. So this is the area that we are considering which happens to be the fringes of the floodplain. This is an image of what the floodplain looks like in dark blue and if the reclamation work is done how the floodplain is going to looks like and it's pretty much is going to shrink in size. I have broken down the changes between the existing floodplain and what the proposed flood plan would be. Again the things that matter for the for the alternative ESA plan is highlighted in yellow and you see that they are going from almost 300,000 square feet of floodplain 229 okay which is a difference of hundred and seventy thousand square feet which is a little bit almost 3.9 acres that they will be able to reclaim and developed as a part of this development . The applicants have proposed multiple strategies as a mitigation for the for the encroachment that they are causing within the undeveloped floodplain. We have mentioned this already a fill material will be placed outside the drip lines of existing trees along the creek or the boundary of the repair and buffer whichever is wider. Grading will be concentrated on the northern portion of the side where there's the repair and buffer designation have already removed or where the debate of where the floodplain is considered to be developed and less and having less value from a habitat standpoint. The street layout minimizes disturbances of the repair and buffer because they are putting that street along the northern side of the project. They are proposing to remove all invasive species found in the repair and buffer and floodplain and re vegetated with native species. They have us secure the services of tree Sherport as their consultant to this this work. They are instead of putting a pilot channel throughout the floodplain they are going to actually leave it as an earth and channel which allows for the for vegetation to grow and be more natural and they they use the lower density that they have agree on as a way for mitigating for additional runoff. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. Deborah would suit our purposes here to ask you or wait later and ask the developers on their method of removing the invasive species. They mentioned the possibility of using herbicide should you want to discuss that now or I can I can raise the question with them at the public hearing so I'm going to do my best but if you don't get satisfied with my answer I would say follow up with the applicant. Well Chinese privet is a bit invasive species and is very aggressive to get rid of them is is hard to do and most of the time is done mechanically but also they actually go and this is what the applicant is contemplating to do that if the mechanical removal is not sufficient they will actually go and paint the the stats of the of the plan with herbicide so in that way heals the the invasive species and give an opportunity for native to actually flourish and and take and thrive. I believe your concern is the use of herbicides there are different type of herbicides that they can use the application is meant to be on a on the stump of the plan no it's not like you are going to spray that area that's how the application should be done. If you want to pick the applicant's brain about what type of herbicides or the selections of their contemplated I would suggest that you follow up with the applicant. Well, when you apply with a brush to the stump itself you are reducing the chances. One concern that I will have watch the weather you know if it's raining next day don't do it because probably the rain will wash out that so there are precautions that you can that you can do it or you can take to prevent and minimize that type of situation. Yes sir. Christopher Sanchez. One of the things that you know looking at and I guess that's where you would come in make sure it's it's either soil active or soil inactive because if you put a soil actives it'll move through the soil as opposed to an in active one. Yeah. And that's I mean if you put it with a paintbrush it won't go from that spot if it's in actives it's soil inactive. Yeah so they are a wide variety of herbicides out there in the market and they are suitable for some specific conditions so I'm sure that the applicant would be you know the consultant that they do this for living will hopefully look into it but again staff is always available if they ever have a question. Any other questions? And at this point I will transition to Haley for discussion about the opposition. All right so to kind of wrap up and conclude the presentation here notification of this case was sent this alternative ESA plans do follow our zoning process so we followed all the same notification procedures so as replaced in the newspaper the applicant posted the required signs on the property and then we did mail the 200 and 500 foot notifications. Prior to this meeting I've received one in opposition and two actually I believe it may be three that were in favor now I got one at the last minute and provided it to you this evening and the primary concerns that were expressed were regarding the trees on the property and concerns that drainage could be impacted in the north the neighborhood to the north. The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting and I believe they addressed quite a few of those concerns at that time they had a lengthy discussion with the neighbors about how they would be improving drainage conditions hopefully by kind of opening up the channel in places where it's been really narrowed down under that gravel driveway as well as alleviating some of their concerns about their plan to maintain as many trees on the side as possible. So with that a staff is recommending approval of the requests with four conditions the first being that disturbance of the ESA not exceed fill in excess of 190,000 450 square feet within the undeveloped floodplain the second being that invasive species within the ESA area shall be removed as was indicated in their plan the third being that plants installed as part of the proposed native flora revegetation be installed and maintained by the current property owner or a developer for a period of three years following that installation any plants that are removed destroyed or die within the three-year period would be required to be replaced by that current property owner and then the fourth be just to solidify that no encroachment into areas designated as riparian buffer ESA. I'd be happy to answer any questions or we can have Deborah back up if needed to address any other concerns. Thank you Chair. Yeah Deborah did have one question one other question for you. In the applicant's narrative they mentioned that it was determined on April 2017 that three threatened and endangered species could be present inside here and I assume they're talking animal species? Yes. Okay they never did say what those species were and it also says upon a field investigation by Jones and Ridenhauer they concluded that there do not appear to be any federally listed threatened or endangered species . I was just curious they didn't state when that field investigation was done. I gave that April 3rd. Correct and that information comes from the National Environmental Policy Act which is a federal law that requires any federal agency making a decision of a project to consider the environmental impacts that you will have. For for them to do this reclamation work they have to go through FEMA and submit a conditional letter of matte revision. Okay as a part of that that's what that tree is triggered and what they do they go to the site. Those three species that they're mentioned is because they are known to be in within this region and they have submitted they have contacted the Texas Park and Wildlife who pretty much oversee that part of information and they did a field assessment just to I'm sorry a field visit to determine if the habit that was present or if the species were there or they were nesting in that area and they provided that information to the Texas Park and Wildlife and they determined that that was sufficient. So we got a letter documentation from the Texas Park and Wildlife on that matter. There was a determination of no effect. Of no effect because they are not present. What just out of curiosity what three species are we talking about? Possum? No there's a crane one of them. Let me see if I can do it that research before the public hearing. Okay that's good thank you. You're welcome. It's talking it's also talking it talks about native floor vegetation is it is also and then but earlier on when I was reading through this information you know we're also talking about grasses and herbaceous vegetation. Correct. So that's also that'll also be under a three-year. Correct. Okay I just want to Is everything that will be installed. Okay. And as a part of the report that they put together they included the species that they're going to look from from the trees and from also the herbaceous material. Right. Any other questions? I think we're good. Thank you. Next on the agenda is Z 18 - 15 it's also Haley this is a zoning case. Alright so this is case Z 18 - 15 for Audreau Oaks. The request before you is a rezoning from neighborhood residential 2 to neighborhood residential 4 district. The subject property again is outlined in yellow on the map it is just over 13 acres and you can see here it is located on the south side of the east-west leg of Audreau Lane and is located just west of Barbara Street. So to look at what this rezoning would look like on our map you can see on the left the current zoning of NR 2 and then on the right the proposed zoning of NR 4. The applicant did provide a concept plan for your consideration. Due to the scale of it I couldn't get it to rotate the correct way so north is to the left on the screen but you can see here Audreau Lane so they would have one primary street connection through here that would tie into Oak Valley Street on the south side and then there is a proposed connection to a street that would be on the west side of the property. If you remember there were a couple of rezoning's in recent in the past year to NR 6 adjoining this. Those subdivisions are in the preliminary plotting process at this point so they know that that street connection would be a viable option for them. And then some of the key features to look at on this concept plan. The lots that are shown in orange here are where they would have a detached single-family homes proposed. In blue you can see areas where they would they've proposed duplexes and then this 5.3 acre parcel that I've outlined in green is proposed as either a dedication to the city in the form of a park or as an HOA maintained green space and they are in communications with our Parks Department to have those preliminary discussions about whether this would be a viable city park option. So as you were familiar with by now there are two criteria outlined in the DDC for a rezoning request. Does it conform to our future land use plan within the Denton Plan 2030 and is there adequate provision of infrastructure ? So the future land use designation for this area is low residential. This designation is applied to areas where we intend residential development to occur between one and four dwelling units per acre. The comp plan does encourage a mixture of housing types and prices within these areas. It also encourages that development be consistent and compatible with what's surrounding. So in looking at this we found the NR4 district is consistent with this. It permits a maximum of one dwelling unit or I'm sorry that should be four dwelling units per acre. It permits single-family homes by right and duplexes are permitted with limitations. So to look at that in a little more depth, NR4 is kind of surrounding the property on a couple of sides. So we have NR4 to the south and NR4 to the east. There's also NR2, NR6, and NR3 in this area. So it's kind of a mixed density area. So NR4 is consistent with this existing development pattern. The single-family use that's permitted by right would be directly compatible with other uses in the area. Duplexes as I mentioned are limited within the zoning district. So the code requires that duplexes be on lots that do not abut the perimeter of the subdivision. So you saw in their concept plan they have the park on one side, some single-family homes on the south side, and then some alleyways that would separate this from direct contact with the perimeter of the subdivision. It also requires that each unit within the du plex be on a separately platted lot that's designed to be individually sold. So as part of their preliminary plat they would be required to plait those duplexes on individual lots so that they could be owned as a traditional home. And then the limitation also requires compliance with subchapter 13, which specifically requires that duplexes within the city of Denton look like one single-family unit from the structures or from the street. So that would be, you know, only one front door could face the street for example. It would have to maintain the look and feel of a single-family home. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Let me ask something at this point. You've got two dwelling units in the duplex. So say one side doesn't sell for a while. The appearance of the other side, say the lawn, gets out of hand. How is that built with in this case? It would fall back on whoever owns the property at that time. So one side of the duplex could sell and say the developer or someone else could would still have the other half of that property and be responsible for it. And looking at the other criteria, there is infrastructure available to the site. So you can see Audre Lane is a collector at this point. So there would be access there as well as those other points of connectivity to the surrounding neighborhoods. Water and sewer service are also adequately available here to the site. Once again, notification was given about this case. The applicant did post the required signs on the property. Notifications were mailed to surrounding property owners and there was a neighborhood meeting held. So you can see here we did have a few responses in opposition, one of which was outside that 200-foot buffer. Those few additional responses were provided to you prior to this meeting. There were some responses in favor and I did attend the neighborhood meeting and there was some concern about traffic through the area, particularly on Oak Valley going up to Audre. But overall it seemed to be a rather positive field. The neighbors weren't not necessarily opposed to duplexes. They felt it was a new use that would be introduced to the area. But if those were owned, they seemed to be generally okay with the idea. Although some did have concerns about the high density. But with that, staff is recommending approval of the request. We found it to be consistent with our criteria for approval. I 'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you Chair. Haley, in the staff analysis it was mentioned that you had concern over the duplexes. You didn 't really say what that those concerns were or how they were alleviated. So can you enlighten me on that? Certainly. You know, kind of like some of the neighbors, we felt that it would be a new use for this particular area. They're always as concerned with duplexes over it being a rental property. But with the limitations that our code already imposes on that use, it can be made more compatible . They are designed to be individually sold and maintained as a single-family home. So that would help. And then in addition to that, there is on the concept plan you can see some significant separation between the duplexes and the surrounding neighborhoods. So you know the park for example would greatly separate them from those homes to the east. But that was our general thought process on this. We felt that the limitations that are already in the code kind of address the concern of this being a new use introduced to the area. Commissioner Sanchez. Being that they're gonna have a homeowners association here, is there anything that would, I know a while back I heard where a homeowner's association had a percentage of that they would allow only a percentage of those houses to be rentals. Would something like that work? Because a lot of times those duplexes end up in investment property. But being that this is a homeowners association associated with these duplexes, I mean is there anything that I just I guess I was just throwing that out. Could the homeowners association state a what only a 1% of these duplexes can be investments or rentals? I believe that's certainly something they could willingly impose but the city wouldn't be involved in that process. Those would be kind of private deed restrictions imposed by the developer but but that could be an option that they could look into. Commissioner Beck. Thank you chair. I have several concerns here. In regards to Commissioner Sanchez's concern about the HOA. The HOA is the developers responsibility until the all the developments done. Is that correct? And then once that's done then homeowners take it over. I believe there's typically a trigger point in there once so many homes have been sold that it would transition from the developer to those homeowners. Okay. One concern I have about the it was mentioned that they would like to see that green area either taken over by the city as a part or maintained by a homeowners association and a homeowner association with 47 dwellers units. I don't know your fees that have to be pretty high. I would think to maintain that as a part so I don't see that as a feasible option. Would love to see the city take it over but can we afford it as in the budget? So and I'm kind of throwing this out because I'm hoping the applicants in here now we can deal with it more detail when you get out in the public hearing. We're going from we want to go from an NR2 to an NR4 and there's NR4 surrounding it. The duplexes are a concern. I'm glad they're gonna be owned , sold and owned by individuals but my feeling and I discussed it with a couple commissioners earlier is that duplexes tend to have a higher turnover into rental property than single-family. So I think that concern is there. This whole area is surrounded by single-family residential dwellings bounded by Audra on the north and on the west, Mankenburg on the east and then as far down as Paisley on the south. What's the percentage of duplexes in those areas? Do we know? As far as a percentage I'm not certain I know. Just down Audra here there there is a street of duplexes I believe you all have seen a plat recently for a continuation of that neighborhood with more duplexes intended but you are correct that the majority of this area is single-family. I will say that the density of it if you look at it is not necessarily for example the neighborhood to the north exceeds three and a half dwelling units per acre as we kind of discussed with some of these cases there's an average of four to five units per acre in this area. And these duplexes they don't exceed the density requirement? No they would be within the density for NR4 as proposed. Now I will say there there is a you know potentially lot coverage issues and parking issues that could could impact the site design here the concept plan we've seen here is certainly not set in stone because NR4 does have a 60% lot coverage maximum that that may be hard to attain on some of these duplex lots as well as the required for parking spaces so the applicants aware of those challenges and still looking at it but this is kind of their their ultimate hope if they could achieve this number of lots. Okay and if you would go back to that site plan that shows right there okay now at the bottom there it indicates that proposed street by others I don't know what that means but when you look at the concept plan it looks like there is no street you can go into there so there's not at this time if there's a house actually there though isn't there? That so that the orientation of the concept plan had north to the left side of the screen so that would be this side the proposed street that it showed by others would be in this general area. Okay where does the east westbound proposed street in the conception plan leak up to the street in the adjoining subdivision then will it can you show us that? That proposed street. Correct I believe it would roughly align with this street like I said this this subdivision that was rezoned last year they do have a preliminary plot in and I believe there they would be continuing this roadway across. Okay but it wouldn't connect to the subdivision on the east. No the park would would kind of end the street in this area . Okay and then the only other thing I was concerned about was the idea that that green area is just with 47 residents is there an HOA fee to maintain that would be too high so the feasibility of that it's kind of out of the question for me and I would again I would be supportive of the city because that area could use a little park area over there. So yeah it is on the Parks Department 's radar they've the applicants had that discussion with them I called parks a few days ago just to ask where they're at and they said it is something that they're considering but they're kind of weighing some options for this area of town right now. Okay okay thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair so my concern is knowing this is a zoning change and that's a concept plan there's really no guarantee that the park space would be there so if this development doesn't happen we've got this whole area's NR4 it would certainly could develop differently right because we didn't put any kind of restriction that has to be a park. It could I will say there are some challenges with that side of the property I think the applicant will probably have some diagrams that can speak to it a little bit better but the hatched area here is a natural gas pipeline that they wouldn't be able to develop on top of there is also somewhere in this general area running north-south a siz able drainage easement that was put in place when the subdivision to the south developed so there would be very limited space on that side of the property that could be developed with residences regardless of the zoning on the property because of those easements. So there's no guarantee we could put in that it could must be a green space with whoever does it. You could probably you know I will defer to Jerry on whether that could be a condition of the zoning that that be a green space but I would say it's unlikely it would be anything else because of those easements that are there. Stranger things have happened so that's my concern. The only question I have is this is strictly a zoning case the concept plan was just given for our identification of what they think where to look at more if it's good for the neighborhood for it to be an NR4 full stop correct apart from what they're presenting here to Commissioner Ellsons point this entire block we need to look at is it good for to be an NR4 they might not develop duplexes that's yet to be seen correct correct yeah if NR4 were approved you know anything permitted within NR4 could go there the primary uses that would be permitted would be single-family or du plexes with that limitation. There's no more intensive housing type that could be developed under NR4. Any other questions for Haley? Thanks Haley. We 'll go ahead and take a five-minute break to get some food and be back and get a presentation on project types. And we are back at 621 in the work session for planning and zoning I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation. Julie if you could in the next nine minutes or so it's give us an overview of this boot camp it looks like. Then we might table to the next meeting but let's kick it off now and get started. All right my name is Julie Wyatt I'm a senior planner with the City of Denton. Tonight I was tasked to talk to you about project types in the approval body and and those processes of project types. We have some new P&Z Commissioners so we thought this might be a really good opportunity to to maybe take a take a step back and start a broader conversation regarding some planning topics how those relate to the City of Denton some some planning efforts that going that are going on with the City of Denton. So so tonight's the first step and and and so so we'll get started. Tonight we're just gonna bite off a little bit of the piece and that is the project types and the approving body. We're also going to talk about public hearing requirements just broadly and then if we probably won't have time we can we can fold this in at the next meeting land development development review process and then the development review turnaround some of the improvements that the department has made in terms of processing projects and getting in through the review process and approval process. So that being said we'll get we'll get we'll dive in. I've arranged the project types and kind of how they they work within the development process. So we'll start off with with typically the very first concept plan that we look at within the city. So when a developer or property owner has an idea of what they would like to do they they often contact the city and start what's called a pre-development meeting and what that meeting is is they they submit a concept plan maybe a narrative and some questions to us and then we sit down with them for about an hour and talk through the city processes associated with what they would need to do maybe some regulations that they want to be aware of talk about some challenges that they may face with their development and just go through that. So we often sit down with the developer property owner sometimes they have an engineer or architect and then the city departments that are often involved in these pre-development meetings are planning building inspections engineering fire so we try to work through some of those those items that they 're going to be faced with as they develop. There's no approval for it it really is just the beginning of a conversation with them so so it just it stops at the review process. The second project types type that we're gonna talk about is is the entitlement and and that's kind of the next step in the process. So if during the pre-development meeting we determine that the property is in the ETJ and they would like to come into the city then the next project type would be an annexation. This this Commission doesn't doesn't hear annex ation so it goes straight to City Council for approval. The the next project types comprehensive plan amendment zoning change master plan community specific use permit plan development amendment. If you've been on the planning and zoning Commission for a while you're very familiar with these and they follow a process of staff review public hearing P&Z as the recommending body will make a recommendation and then City Council will either approve deny or approve with conditions depending on the project type. There are a couple more slides and then we'll let y'all get get on to your next meeting. So once the entitlement is in place then you start looking at how the property is going to develop and so we look at things like platting and ESAs. So Deborah gave a really good overview of ESAs in this city and that we do have those environmentally sensitive areas. So if if a piece of property has what may be an environmentally sensitive area on it the applicant will put in a project to to the city and they can either hire a consultant or they can ask Deborah and her group to go out and and and do a field assessment of the property. Look at the biological markers to see if an ESA is present and what and then what the the limits of that ES A are. So that that ends with staff and it's either approved that or it's either determined that there's an ESA there and and what those limits are or it's or the ESA is removed if those biological markers aren't there. So y'all would never see that assessment. Items that you will see would be a subdivision variance those don't happen very often but if an applicant wants to vary from sub chapter 16 of the Denton Development Code y'all that would come before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Conveyance plats, general development plans and then preliminary plats. Amending and minor plots are approved at the staff level. They're typically either an amending plat it's a platted property that maybe they're either removing a lot line or they're or they're shifting a lot line or maybe they're correcting an error on the plat. That would be an amending plat that's administratively approved at the staff level. A minor plat is a plat that is fewer than four lots and no public improvements are required so because the impact is pretty low that is also a minor plat per the Texas Local Government Code and the Denton Development Code and once again that's approved at staff level. Do we wrap it up? Yes. Okay so I have several more slides but we'll finish that at an upcoming meeting. Sounds great. Thanks Julie for laying that down. At this time absolutely. I'm sorry I wanted to introduce Christy U pton. Kind of come up I guess and tell you a little bit about her. She's working with Debra. She's an environmental compliance coordinator specialist. So I think on a lot of the ESAs as all ESAs come in front of you I think we 'll be seeing her and maybe Debra less I don't know but at least wanted to put a name with the face. As I transition out of the DRC process Cindy has taken my position as an environmental compliance coordinator. Anything related to stone water, ESAs, municipal setting designations, anything that falls under the big umbrella of environmental that will be something that she will handle. She's coming from the airport and prior to that over 13 years of experience working with municipalities in the Metroplex. So she comes with a very strong reputation and let's see. We wish them the best. Thank you. Awesome welcome. So thank you again Julie for starting that discussion hopefully in either next meeting or a meeting soon to come we'll have the rest of this which is super helpful. Thank you. At this time we'll close work session at 629. We will meet in council chambers and start our public hearing at 635. Thanks. Good evening and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for September 12th. I'll call this to order at 640. I apologize for the delay we're wrapping up items and work sessions so thank you for being patient. The first order of business is to stand and give a pledge allegiance to the United States and Texas flag. First item on our agenda is the consent agenda. The chair will stand for any discussion or motion and as a point of order item 3C of the consent agenda item FP 18-0017 has been postponed will not be on the consent agenda vote for this evening. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair motion to approve consent agenda items A and B. Thank you and Commissioner Beck. Second. First and second any discussion. Seeing none I call for a vote on the board. Motion passes 6 -0 with one absent. Next is our public hearings. As a point of order we have moved agenda item 3B is in Bravo to 3A to hear the final replat first tonight so with that I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation on FR 18-005 and I'll open the public hearing for this item. Thank you. This is a request for approval of a final replat of lot 1R block A of the hilltop ranch addition. The 3.5 acre site is located on the west side of hilltop drive you can see it right here. It is located in the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction or ETJ. The site was originally plotted as lot one block A hilltop ranch addition in 2006. It was subdivided into two lots in 2007 and now here we are again subdividing one of the lots. One of the lots was developed with a single-family home and it is being subd ivided into two lots which you can see here is this lot and this lot that continues on over here. The plot as shown meets the requirements of the subdivision ordinance and staff recommends approval. That concludes my presentation. Thank you Cindy. I don't see any questions at this time. Okay. This is a public hearing if anyone wishes to speak on this issue may more than welcome to do so. Seeing no one to speak I will close this public hearing and open it for discussion or motion. Commissioner Beck. I move we approve FR 18005. Commissioner Sanchez. We have a first and a second. Is there any discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 6-0 with one absent. The next agenda item will be the new 3B which is Z 18-20A and Cindy Jackson will be presenting. I will open the public hearing for the item. Thank you. This is a request to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding our request for an initial zoning designation of neighborhood residential 3 and our 3 on approximately 47.466 acres. The site is generally located on the south side of Ryan Road you can see here north east of the intersection of Ryan and Andrew and north of Creekdale View. The site is the subject of a pre- annexation agreement or PADA ordinance number 2016-215. This site is referenced as track 1C in the PADA. Two other tracks are included but they are not the subject of this request. The PADA governs the sequence of development and contains land use and development standards. The site has been plotted it was approved in on March 21st 2018 with 137 residential lots and a density of 2.9 dwelling units per acre. The PADA has robust development standards and requirements which include the traffic impact fee. Typically for a development this size the city would require $342,500 in traffic impact fees. Instead the PADA required $589,100 in traffic impact fees which equates to $ 4,300 per unit. There's also stringent tree preservation requirements. The DDC requires 20% of the trees on the site to be preserved. The PADA requires 76 % of the diameter inches of the trees which equates to 82% of all trees being preserved. Here's a bit of a breakdown. There are 720 trees on the total site and 590 of them were preserved coming to 81.9% and then you can see a breakdown according to diameter inches which is 76.3% of the diameter inches being preserved. You can see on this particular exhibit that trees are being preserved mainly along the west and south side of the site. The sequence of development for this property was not typical. The typical sequence is annexation zoning site plan, preliminary plat and final plat. Per the requirements of the PADA, the pre-annexation agreement came first, the concept plan, then the site plan, preliminary and final plat, annexation which occurred just last month, and then zoning which we are here tonight. Current zoning is RD5X as seen on the zoning map and the proposed zoning is NR3. The NR3 provides an excellent transition and buffer of the NR4 and NR6 that is located to the south and east and to the NR2, a buffer to the NR2. Legal notices were sent out within 200 feet. We sent out 96 via certified mail and we sent 192 courtesy notices via regular mail. We received six responses back which you received today. Those six responses you can see on the map in red and they equate to 3% of the property located within the 200 foot buffer around the site. Three notification signs were also posted. Staff recommends approval of this request. It is compatible with the surrounding property and is consistent with the requirements set forth in the pre-annexation development agreement. That concludes my presentation. Thank you Cindy. For the edification of the commission and the audience, can you mention also the topic of road improvement that you mentioned in the work session please? Right now I know a lot of the residents surrounding residents are concerned about traffic, have traffic concerns for Ryan Road. The city staff is aware of the issue. They currently are doing traffic counts along Ryan Road to assess the situation. They are also, the City Council last night approved funding for an update of the mobility plan which is the first step in the road to getting Ryan Road improved. And then it is true that a light at Ryan Road and 1830 is a text on mutual issue. It's not a city. It's not a city issue. Okay. I don 't see any other questions for you at this time. Okay thank you. Oh excuse me, Commissioner Pernitta. With the development sequence being irregular right now, the preliminary plan and the final plan have already been approved. I know a lot of the people that are here probably going to be expressing opinions about traffic and things like that. At this point we're simply approving the zoning, right? So there's, as far as everything else goes, there's not much we can do at this point. Is that correct? That's correct. The applicant, that's true. As I explained, the city is aware of the issue. They are working on getting traffic counts from the area right now and they are going to update the mobility plan which is the first step in improving Ryan Road. Thank you. I do not see any questions. Thank you Cindy. Do you have a card to speak on this? It's Thomas Fletcher, the applicant, who's in support. If you would, when you come to the mic say your name and address for the record and as the applicant you're provided 10 minutes. Thank you. Good evening commissioners. My name is Thomas Fletcher with Kinley Horne 5750 Genesis Court, Frisco, Texas 75034. I am the engineer for the landowner. Actually because of the PADA, the applicant is the city as part of the process, but we are here to provide information and answer any questions. I did want to, I sat in, I walked into the work session, I believe probably a couple minutes late into the presentation, but I did hear a lot of the questions. What I wanted to do is really just kind of talk about some of the questions that I heard and hopefully I can answer kind of the process. There were a lot of questions about the process and how did we get to that process. I have been on this project since its inception. The original landowners of the property had put their property up for sale. They were marketing it. A developer put it under contract. We had pre-develop ment meetings with the city. The landowners were concerned. They did not want to annex the property because the concern was if we annexed into the city and then the developer was not able to get the zoning he needed in order to do the development, then he would not purchase the property and now they're within the city. So when we met with the city, we talked about, okay how can we work through this process to come to some resolution that works best for the city and for the developer that we can both agree to. So as part of that process, the city was , there were several things. I'll talk about several things. One, the traffic impact fees. The city was in the process of looking at traffic impact based on development, what those roadway impact fees should be. There wasn't an adopted ordinance at the time. I think the initial thing that was looked at was a $3,000 per lot when you look at single-family. I think $2,500 was what was adopted. That impact analysis actually had an analysis of what was the true impact. When we came through with this agreement, we said, okay well let 's negotiate this true impact. So instead of us paying $3,000, which was kind of being talked about at the time, or $2,500, which is where the city ended, it was a $43,000 or roughly $4,300 per lot. So this development, part of the agreement, was going to pay more in roadway impact fees. The other thing is, is we knew that it was going to be sensitive with the surrounding neighborhoods. The majority of the trees buffered the existing neighborhoods, so we decided, okay let's do a development that's internal to the main tree canopy. Let's preserve those trees. Let's create a high standard of tree preservation. So that was another item that was a part of that. And then one of the other items that I'll point out is the city has a lift station, the Granada lift station, that's just north of the track. So in the discussions with the city, one of the city's long-term goals was to get that lift station offline to save with the maintenance and development costs. So the developer agreed to extend a sanitary sewer line up north of Ryan Road so that the city could connect that system to that so that that would enable them to take that lift station offline, which would save on maintenance and operation costs long-term for the city. So we went through different planning iterations. We came up with different land plan layouts. City staff was a part of that. There's been a lot of changes in the city staff that from that time to now. So but you know we went through the iterations to come up with a land plan that tried to take advantage of the tree preservation, minimize the number of lots, minimize the impact, and just provide this natural development. The other thing it did is it created a preservation track 1B, which is the middle track, which is roughly 22 acres, which has about 11 to 12 acres of floodplain. It limited that in the future to no more than three residential units. So that was another thing that the city saw as a benefit and then there was the remainder that was became part of the Good Samaritan piece that would eventually develop with that. So really I've got a updated aerial. I don't know if... Yeah, can we turn the camera on? So here's the development. So you can see the side has been cleared. So we've gone through the preliminary plat's been approved, the final plat's been approved, the construction plans have been approved. We've done all our clearing and grading. We've had our pre-construction meeting. The sanitary sewer has been started. The utilities are in process. So just to kind of give you an update where we're at in the process, we did an ESA analysis and went through that process with the city and had that reviewed and met. There were parameters with impacts to the ESA and the PADA. So all of those items have been followed according to the PADA. The PADA stated that 10 days within the approval of the final plat, the owner shall submit for voluntary annexation. The owner has done that. I will say this, the current owner developer, Dickerson Development, they're not the one that actually negotiated the PADA with the city. That developer entitled the property and sold them this tract. They're developing this tract under the rules of the PADA. But with that, I know there was a lot of discussion in the work session. I wanted to get up and kind of provide a little bit of history, talk about a few items. Show the side. I mean, you can see from the updated aerial that the tree buffer along the south and the tree buffer along the west has been preserved as obligated and as negotiated as part of the PADA. Thank you, Mr. Fletcher. I do not see any questions for you at this time. This is a public hearing. Anyone is more than welcome to speak. I do have a card from a Jay Leak. There wasn't an agenda item posted. Is this item something you would like to speak on? Perfect. Got it. Thank you. Happy to answer any other questions or concerns. I'm going to come forward and state your name and address for the record. My name is Eric Clark . I live at 3913 Andrew Avenue. It's just a general question. I appreciate the thoughtfulness that's went into this development and the tree preservation. But as a home that backs up to that, I've noticed several of the trees have died due to the excavation and the road work that's been done. Is there a plan to go back and reassess those big mature trees that have died? It's a good question, Mr. Clark. And we actually received other input from residents about this concern. Cindy, could you speak to the oversight that happens on a project like this? I'm not sure where these trees are, but apparently they tried to save more trees, as many trees as possible. And what happened is the road cut through the drip line of some of the trees, cut off the roots. So any trees that are lost will have to be replaced. And I was also told that a lot of the trees were responding to drought conditions. And the urban forester, Haywood Morgan, went out just last week and he noticed that a lot of the trees that he thought were dead are actually relieving now. So he thinks that a lot of that was due to the drought. And going forward, is there a point of contact within the city that residents could communicate with regarding the project and the trees going forward? Well, they can contact me about the project. The trees specifically would be our urban forester, Haywood Morgan. Okay, perfect. Mr. Clark, are you good? Okay. Question? Oh, Commissioner Beck. Wait a minute, Cindy. Quick question for you. You mentioned that the trees that have died as a result of the street going through, they'll be replaced. Will they be replaced there or will there be room to do that? That I don't know. They're going to be replaced on the site. On the site somewhere. Okay, thank you. Sir, if you could state your name and address. One quick question for her. What size are these trees you talking about? I mean, we're talking about 100 year old trees. Are we going to put a two foot tree in? That I don't know. They have to replace any dead trees. They have to place two to one for inches. My name is Billy Carraway and I live on Andrew Avenue. Our concern is, what are the quality of these homes? We have not seen any sketches from the two meetings we've had. I mean, express homes is down the road and are $ 200,000. Our house is on Andrew Avenue. You can't touch them for under $400,000. So what kind of quality are we getting right next door to us? That's our concern. Could you speak to that developer? You can come in if you have an answer, Mr. Fletcher. So with the development cost and the cost of land, all that factors into really what a marketable home or what you can start a house . The house prices for this development will start no less than $350,000. They estimate that the houses will be $350,000 to $450,000. The two home builders that will be in this development are Perry Homes and Rendition Homes. So it's, we are, I mean, it's going to be a very high quality development, very high quality product, and it's going to be pricing in line with the adjacent subdivision. Thank you. If you can just explain the, maybe it might help give an idea of the lot sizes. So the lot sizes are, there's variable lot sizes. There's 60 by 130 is a minimum, 7,800 square feet. There are lots within the development that are extra wide. As part of the pre-annexation development agreement, one of the things that we heard from city staff is that there's not many homes or many lots within these newer neighborhoods that accommodate three-car garages. So what we try to do is provide some wider lots through the development. There's actually, I think it's a, I'd have to go back and look, but I believe there's 25 lots that have to be provided with the third-car garage. Now, you know, that can be a accomplished through a J swing front entry. It can be a traditional three-car front entry or it could be a tandem. So there's options from the builder, but what we try to do is build in lot sizes that would accommodate and allow for someone that wants to come in and be able to purchase and have that third-car garage and still have a nice lot, nice size house in the development. Christian Beck. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Fletcher, thanks for that information. Can you give us an idea of what exterior materials will be in use? So the, I mean, the exterior materials will have to meet all the requirements of the City of Denton's Code. Which are? I am not, I don't work a lot with the house plans themselves. I'm more on the horizontal infrastructure, doing the layout. So I don't know that. I'd hate to try and take a guess because I... You couldn't tell us if they were all brick and we had 40-year warranty roof shingles? Well, most builders have certain warranties that they, you know, that are standard in the industry. So I mean, all the homes will come with some type of warranty. I think usually the foundation is 10 years. I think there's a general one year. You know, I haven't seen what these two particular builders, what their warranties are. So I really, I wouldn't want to speak to that, but I know for them to be competitive in the market, they have to provide warranties on their product. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Fletcher, just so I can remember the plat, is the in and out just Ryan Road or Creekdale? That is correct. Is that, that's the only two connections? Yeah, there's the main entry is a divided entry off Ryan Road and then the secondary entry is off Creekdale. There's actually Thistle Hill, the development, if you were to pull their plat, they anticipated when they develop that there would be access from their development to this development and we... Thistle Ridge, right? Thistle Ridge, yeah. That street, Thistle Ridge, right? Oh yeah, it may be, yeah, absolutely. So when we went with city staff, initially we were looking at, okay, we need to make this connection. It was planned for and then as it was looked at because of the impacts to the development there, wanting to try and minimize that, create that buffer, that 's when then it was decided between staff and the developer and based on feedback and input that let's do the two points connection because the the city of Denton has the remote access requirement for fire. You have to have two access points and they have to be a minimum separation of half the distance of the longest diagonal across the property. So with the two accesses provided that met that requirement, that additional connection to the adjacent neighborhood wasn't required and then we didn't have to go through the process of really interrupting them anymore or impacting them with that connection. I answer, Mr. Pletcher, thank you. Thank you. I could in response to the question regarding exterior materials, on page 22 of the PADA, that's in your backup, exterior sheathing materials that are permitted are brickstone, smooth stucco, and wood, hardy and equivalent siding. Mason ry, brickstone, or smooth stucco shall account for 90% of the exterior sheat hing materials. Can I play that last part again? Which part? The last part. Where 90%? Masonry, brickstone, or smooth stucco shall account for 90% of the exterior sheathing materials. Great, thank you. This is a public hearing if anyone wishes to speak on the item you know if I can do so. So I'm going to walk down. After you speak we just need you to fill out a blue card right outside the door. But if you could state your name and address for the record. I'm Bob Highly and I live at 3855 Leisure Lane which is a private road directly across the street from the development. And I've got two concerns. One is they keep building these large developments over Ryan Road and there really is no way to get from Ryan Road to any place else other than using Ryan Road. And they're dumping hundreds and hundreds of cars a day on Ryan Road and why are there no roads being put horizontally with these properties or something so people can get get places. I can't get out of my development in the morning when schools you know we're in between three elementary schools and it's you just can't get out. That's one concern and when they do make an in and then out they may make it so difficult to get through that development that you had to have a GPS to even find the in and the out. And so that's a major concern. The other concern is I couldn't tell from I've got a couple more concerns. I couldn't tell from the plant are there larger lots in the front of this development than there are in the back which is consistent with Hisohil Estates which was part of the agreement and also with Shadowbrook Estates which was part of the agreement of our surrounding developers that they would keep the lots similar to the size of our lots. So that's concern . And my last concern is we were fortunate enough to be annexed into the city of 10 years ago with all these promises of you know getting services from the city. Today we still have wells, we have septic systems, we cannot get cable, we cannot get TXU electric and are there any utility advancements that's going to come down Ryan Road to help us out? Sure I appreciate your questions. The city, Cindy spoke to some road improvements going on so that's at the council level now to hopefully get the mobility plan moving towards the roads. I can ask Mr. Fletcher to come down and answer the question about is there gradi ating lot sizes from north to south or are they uniform lot size? They're relatively uniform lot sizes but what we did do if you look, so we we set the development off from Ryan Road so that there's buffers all around the development. So you've got approximately a 200 foot buffer so you will not have any homes in close proximity to Ryan Road. Then the buffer on the western edge I think down near the south I think it is as wide as a hundred feet or 120 and up towards the north I think it narrows up to about 80 feet . So the lot sizes are relatively uniform like I said there's some mixed in there that are 10 feet wider to accommodate a third car garage but for the most part they're they're of relative same size. Thank you Mr. Fletcher. Your first homes will be located right there. Right to answer the comment about the entrance and the road so the city it was actually a discussion that they don't like straight through roads because what it does is it promotes cut through it promotes speeding and then when you have these residential neighborhoods where you have families and you have kids that are going to be crossing the street and playing you want to make them safe so you want to make it harder for people to use that as a speedway. So that was intentionally done and that was that was worked through when we went through the process of working out this land plan with the with the city. Can you set to the mic so make sure everyone hears? I like the fact that they're buffering the front of the development and I have no problem with the way the development is built but I think the city needs to take into consideration that people need to get from point A to point B without going you know three miles away and normally you have access routes and they need to take that consideration because the original plot I saw when they were going to develop Thistlehoe States is there was a road straight through Thistlehoe States all the way over to Hickory Creek and somewhere along the line that disappeared and I presume that this out in the back of this development is part of what was originally planned because that basically would go straight through but now they've turned the road into that's where all the trees are. Well your concerns have certainly been noted by city to make sure we look at the roads and the utilities. Commissioner Beck. Thank you Chair. Was it Hyrick? Hyatt? Hyatt? Hyatt-Lynk. Hyatt-Lynk. Okay thank you. I empathize with your concern about the traffic and then when we discuss the preliminary and the final plan that was a big issue with a lot of people how unfortunately sometimes we seem to put the horse before the carriage when it comes to developing and then put the roads in so I do empathize with you I wish it wasn't that way but what we're hearing now is there is some movement on expanding Bryan Road it'll be four lanes two lanes each way and I believe we'll have a medium in it as far as north-south roads go that depends on what's developed I understand if you go further on up you you get that kind of access going through Forest Ridge so those streets connect you to a northerly route as opposed to going all the way to the east for Teasley and all the way to the west so but we do empathize with you and I think every time these kind of developments come up most of some P&Z if not all of us are always kind of you know encouraging staff to be aware of the traffic conditions that they create when we do these kind of developments so and like I said I have no problem with developing developments like that but I think the city needs to take into consideration that they need to provide for some roads in the future I agree you're going they put all these drones side by side it's never gonna happen and that's on records on public record thanks and also where is the land going to come to why to widen Ryan River is it going to come off of our side of the street or the other side of it couldn't for you specifically but it's there it's there thank you sir is there anyone else who'd like to speak on this item more welcome to step on down once you're done speaking if you just fill out a blue card and then when he gets the mic state your name and mail-in address for the record my name is Betsy Casante I'm at 3933 Andrew Avenue regarding the P& Z agreement can you have explanation of what was previously approved versus what the discussions are today when it comes to the EDU's the lot size the home square footage for that particular area and then also regarding the trees so I am my house is to the back of the development that's going on orange temporary fences is kind of going to where it looks like maybe sidewalk material might be put down so I just would like to know what the orange temporary fence is meant for and then regarding the RD 5x current versus the NR3 proposed that was up on the screen earlier a little explanation behind what those two mean from current to proposed and how that is affecting any changes that are going on right now yeah we can definitely get those answers the first one can I invite Cindy back up she mentioned an original approved to any changes was there anything previously approved on this property that was altered or changed coming forth today no this this property was not in the city previously when this before this started in 2016 the property actually had a non annexation agreement on it and there there were no previous agreements for what would be on there it had no zoning quite frankly until this is approved by council it still technically has no zoning the record the request about the RD 5x that's what we call a holding zoning we put the X after it to indicate that this is not it's a holding zoning it's not what the property is zoned it just if the property owner decides they want to develop without the benefit of zoning that they are restricted to whatever is permitted in the RD 5 district and then are you aware or maybe mr. Fletcher be aware of any temporary fencing put up is there a sidewalk being constructed or can you speak to what those fences are glen orange the orange fencing that's protective fencing around trees and I can speak to that but the rest I can't yeah the the existing orange orange fencing is tree protection fencing but as part of the concept plan and part of what's been approved there will be a sidewalk that meanders through the trees one of the discussions during the early stages of the project was hey how can we how can we kind of incorporate this nice open areas let's do a nice meandering trail there's a lot of topography we've got open spaces that have trails that come up into those treat areas though there will be a sidewalk a concrete sidewalk that's constructed that will meander through there to the north and then it'll come down and and tie into the sidewalk that's on the street right there at the entry where the entry tees the sidewalk that's in the open space is is let me so right here through the middle there is a open space lot and that open space lot is there because there used to be a gas well on the site and as part of this development we coordinated and negotiated with the gas well operator purchased the the rights to the gas well had them cap it so that's another thing that was within the agreement I didn't mention early earlier but from this point here to the north that is where the sidewalk meanders through the trees from that point to the south it goes along it goes along the the curb or it's within the parkway in the normal location adjacent to the right of way and that had to do more with topography and width it's a little bit more reduced width and you had a little more topography but there will be a sidewalk through that portion of the open space perfect thank you Mr. Preneta to her question about the lot sizes so we have a two just to the north of this and a four to the south of this so these lot sizes will be kind of an intermediary size between what's above and below correct say that again I'm sorry she was asking about the lot sizes so based on what we're seeing there's a in our two to the north and our four to the south so these lot sizes for her visual would be kind of somewhere between kind of a that's correct I mean I would say that the southern part of Thistle Hill is the size of the lots themselves if you look at Thistle Hill as a whole on an aerial there's really no open space everything is put into the lots there's an open lot that's on the south end that's utilized for detention so our lots are more consistent probably in size or more similar in size with the southern portion of Thistle Hill but what we did is we took all that additional area and we preserved it in our open space so we have a much larger preservation area but the lots to the north there's if there are lots that are currently on sept ic generally that's a one acre lot or larger so that's going to be larger than what we've got here the lots that are just to our west that are the in our two section of Thistle Hill those are going to be larger the lots to the south that are in our four they're probably a little bit smaller but they're more comparable and then Ryan ranch that's to our south those are those lots are smaller than what we're proposing in the development so we're probably if you looked at the surrounding developments we're probably a mid-size lot compared to what's around us thank you very much thank you and miss Casante just as a follow-up you had a couple questions about specifics about was approved and then the RDX RD 5x those can be really confusing and so if you have any more questions happy answer or Cindy can certainly offline talk to you about all the requirements that the new zoning would have on the property what about the minimum square footage of the homes being built let me look in the PADA it's it's it 's within the PADA I think there's a I think the minimum is 18,000 and then we have to order I'm sorry 1800 the home price would not be 350 I had another just keep you on your toes and then 45% are 2400 square feet and on the minimum lot size the the PDA specifies 7200 square feet okay yeah that would be 60 by 120 I think I may have must spoke then if I think I said 60 by 130 thank you for the correction wouldn't yes please step forward again if you just fill out a blue card state your name and address for the record my name is Ken Benjamin I live at 1009 Stoneway Drive on the south side of the deal I need to ask him about the he was putting a walkway around the property and he was showing one side I wanted to know about on the south side I live down here in this far corner down here there's there gonna be a walkway coming through this set of trees so is there gonna be fence line or a stuff fence going through there to block off a property or is it gonna be open no there so each individual lot will have the builder fence on the backside of the lot so with the open spaces I believe in the PDA all the lots that back to the open space have a wrought iron or tubular steel fence so that that because you've got that nice 80-foot buffer along that south end with those trees there will be fences but they're gonna be offset from the development to the south along the builder lots so that the views of those existing trees enjoyed hate to interrupt can you raise that sheet just a little bit and point to where you're specifically speaking of so down here in Ryan wrench he's asking if there's going to be a fence so if you look at the clearing area so basically what we did you can see the lots superimposed on the aerial and you can see that there's probably about 10 feet of clearing just past the lot line and that was for building retaining walls drainage wells and so forth to make everything work from an engineering standpoint these lots will have fences on them I believe in the PDA because they're backing to in the PDA was done back in 2016 so it's been a while since I've looked at it real closely in the exhibit but we had exhibits that showed where wrought iron or tubular steel fencing would have to be provided because of the open space and I believe all the open space lots if you back to an open space it's a it's a tubular steel fence so that you enjoy and get to to you know it's kind of creating that open space bring it into your backyard so there'll be a fence it's I believe it's likely to be a tubular steel fence that allows the view of the open space but this this separation along here with those trees there 's not going to be any sidewalk and that is just going to remain a preservation area okay that's what I'm the sanitary sewer does come down and connect on this corner right but there's nothing along this back perimeter area yeah I was I was concerned with that so we wouldn't have to build a bigger fence in our backyard so we could enjoy these trees too right so okay what's the deal with the they gonna do anything with the pond the pond is to remain and there's a budget to put a fountain in it so they'll they'll once the development gets finished and they come in and start doing the the landscape and hardscape and amenity package there will be a fountain placed in the in the pod to aerate it and have it as a amenity to the development okay thanks thank you of course thank you mr. Fletcher more than welcome to come forward if you could just fill out a card set your name and address for the record Tracy Jenkins I lit 801 day spring and I have a question about the road that's coming through connecting to creak down so the track when Ryan ranch and when this will hill develop there was a 80 foot wide spike strip through there kind of created a flag lot and so the roadway that's going to be constructed it'll be the to the city standard it'll be a typical concrete curb and gutter road way if you so close we can turn the mic walking down where is Creekdale Creek dale is just here it's running across here east-west yeah I because it comes out do you have on your presentation so it's gonna come out here correct and dead end so you're gonna have all those people cutting through to a dead end and then they're gonna take a left and then be taken right all going down there well the traffic impact analysis has been done and we've looked at the traffic patterns most traffic will actually go to Ryan and then go east with a small percentage going west so even though the connections there because of the access because of the route to get I mean you may have you you certainly can't have traffic people are gonna typically choose the quickest route but you it does have connectivity to Creekdale where they can turn right and or turn left and then do a right and then go down to is it Hickory Creek or I think I'm trying right in Creekdale or that Creekdale area specifically no so Creekdale across our frontage is already improved Creekdale on the city's mobility plan is a collector roadway which is a 65 foot right of way at the time it was a 37 foot back-to-back roadway the city's updated their standards so new collectors would be I believe 39 or 41 foot back-to-back but because it's improved in front of our frontage there's this tract has no obligation there's no improvements to the to the to Creek dale down here as these other tracks develop or if there is a city initiated project then Creekdale would eventually extend to the east and connect to where it's currently stopped with the I believe it's forest Meadows project but it may be a different subdivision but there is a gap currently right now that is undeveloped a portion of Creekdale and generally that would occur with development of those of those tracks of land I mean all the people that cut through thistle hills now you have all of them coming down where it dead ends around the corner 90 degrees and then you're gonna have all these people come into a T basically trying to cut around and sneak around and take a right down I don't know what the name of that road is down River Pass yeah down River Pass and I'm not sure if River Pass is a collector or not it looks it appears to be a big road I mean it's it can handle it but that that little intersection right there is gonna be well Creekdale should be constructed as a collector so it should be 37 foot back-to-back which which generally a collector allows about typically 10,000 to 12,000 vehicles per day so both Creekdale and River Pass are currently collectors I'm worried about that intersection and everyone trying to cut through there and then be trying to take that corner I'm gonna interject here Ms. Jenkins I think all your your points are valid for the sake of the audience I would ask if there's a sidebar conversation Mr. Fletcher if you could hang out right after the item that'd be helpful I want to remind everyone here that this the plat is actually finalized that the road structure everything is has been approved by the city and so any impact to traffic is being assessed now and road improvements will be made from a city perspective on Ryan or Creekdale or however it's being impacted by the city what we're looking at specifically tonight is to go ahead and approve the actual zoning to go forward the project we're unable to look at a redirection of roads or or the actual platting that's been finalized by the city at this point with that said if anyone has anything about the zoning or density be happy to answer those those inquiries sir typically we have one allocation to speak if you'd like to come down that's one more question I'll allow it I just didn't get one of my questions answered from earlier is what happened to the road that was originally shown cutting all the way through which is what they were just talking about and they left they left that part on the back of the property and originally there was a road going all the way through on some plats I saw along not plats but I think they were just city projection drawings or something I can't speak to any concept plans what I know is the plenary plat that went through this Commission as well as the final plat had the the mazing of the road so I'm not sure if there's a concept planned in the past that certainly wasn't brought forward to the plotting stage and if Cindy you have any context to that I just like to say I think you need to take into consideration that it is going to be dangerous because people will be cutting through there everybody I know cuts through this all of the states now and it's it's a maze to get through there but everybody does it because otherwise you drive three or four miles out of your way understood so I think it's a problem needs to be the applicant in his presentation stated that the city asked him not to put a straight through because it could turn into a raceway to be honest with you we we asked to have it meander so that it couldn't gotcha thank you Cindy is this going to be an HOA and who's going to maintain these green belt areas and also the gas line running down is it still live or is it not the gas well they can't about the big major gas line that runs down along the west side over there I lost the applicant answer the first question there will be an HOA and the HOA will be responsible for maintaining all the open spaces second question the gas line is that is a gathering line that my understanding is that line is servicing several wells in the area and that line is active and it will remain so it runs along the western edge of the property and then turns back to the east on the on the north end just south of the of the right of way of Ryan Road thank you anyone else like to speak on this item well thank you everyone who was able to speak I'll go ahead and close the public session and open it to the commission for discussion or motion Commissioner Beck thank you chair and thank every one of you for coming out and speaking on this tonight we know this is important to you and as I mentioned to mr. highly I hope I said that right earlier we empathize with the impact that more homes in the area more cars and like you we wish that they would put the car before the horse but this is a development that that fits this area it's the city's growing it needs homes and needs homes of this nature so it's hard to negate what what's being provided here the thing is when you move into an area the first ones there it's always rough when new people come in and it changes and alters the patterns that you're used to so but I think in time you'll get used to it the roads hopefully will get fixed a lot quicker than we all would like to see them get fixed so I think in the long run this will be a positive development for you and with that said I 'd like to make a motion to approve is the 18 oh oh 208 mr. Cole second perfect thank you we have a first and second is there any discussion pressure Alice thank you chair I just I think this development as Commissioner Beck said does fit the area it's also brought about great discussion and thank you all for sharing your your thoughts and concerns and and and all along the way there's was an atypical development process for all of us but it has brought forth some discussion within staff it's brought about new process for looking at roads so all of that is is a definite positive thing thank you mr. Ellis before I call for but I just want to say and echo commissioner Ellis's points this is a very unique situation in which the order was kind of reversed and so I appreciate everyone's patience and trying to understand that as well as understand the the applicants property and agenda coming through I can see personally my younger brother lives in the neighborhood to the west just off Maggie's Meadow I live in Forest Ridge I take Ryan Road all the time and I understand the the impact that it potentially has and I certainly am an advocate to get Ryan Road more efficient in terms of managing traffic that being said the concessions made by the applicant to be annexed to come under the city to pay substantially more impact fees than would have been required as well as try to make the project as nice as possible I think is a good thing for the area and so I'm going ahead and vote for approval with this knowing and letting you know that I'm going to follow up on the the traffic impact in the roads going forward to make sure that congestion doesn 't overtake that south part of town see another discussion I will call for a vote on the board motion carries six zero with one absent I'll move us to agenda item 3c which is a ESA 16 - 3 I'll call Haley for presentation and open the item for public hearing all right good evening this is item a ESA 16 - 3 for Country Club road estates so the request before you tonight is to hold this public hearing consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding an alternative environmentally sensitive area plan the property in question is outlined in yellow on the map it's just over 35 acres total as you can see here it's located on the west side of country club I'm sorry the east side of Country Club Road south of Regency Court the particular type of ESA that is up for discussion tonight is the undeveloped floodplain ESA on this property there is also riparian buffer but as you'll see as we go through these slides that is not proposed to be impacted at this time it's also important to note that although we do have newly adopted ESA standards as of 2017 this particular application has been in the work since 2016 so it predates that and would fall under the previous ESA regulations looking at the zoning for this property to give you a little bit of history prior to 2017 the property did have a split zoning of NR 2 and NR 4 some of you may remember when this case came forward there was discussion over kind of balancing out the zoning to give a uniform density across the property so they did request a rezoning to NR 3 that was approved and although they they could have a maximum of 124 lots under this zoning the preliminary plot that was on your agenda earlier this evening reflected only 73 lots so looking at that preliminary plot you can see kind of two phases of development proposed here the phase that's on the east side of the floodplain would be the first phase the second phase is kind of on hold if you will it's intended to occur but they're waiting to see how wide text dot intends to make Country Club Road eventually so with phase one we would have the extension of Meadowlands Drive into this property you can see the roads as we just discussed kind of meander to limit that direct cut through traffic from the subdivision to Country Club so the road would meander and at first there would be a temporary access point here on the north side where there's already an existing driveway over time as phase two develops that that would move further south to have one primary entrance off of Country Club Road as you can see here the E SA and the stream that runs through the property are contained entirely within lots 1x and 2x that you see here kind of in the central portion and I will call Deborah Vieira down to kind of walk you through the various types of ESA on the property and what these specific impacts would be good evening Commission my name is Deborah Vieira I'm with the Environmental Services before you tonight it is a consideration of an alternative ESA to encroach into the undeveloped floodplain which is color on the map as a blue just as a point of clarification even though there's a repair and buffing going through the middle of the floodplain no encroachment is proposed therefore that area is not included as a part of this alternative ESA plan in 2015 staff make a field assessment to assess the conditions of the repair and buffer and the floodplain on site it was found that the northern portion of the property have been heavily impacted by grading fill and removal of vegetation so due to that assessment we reclassify the northern portion of it as a developed and then we also remove the repair and buffer within that section the southern section stays as an undeveloped with a true repair and buffer the table here in front of you represents the different square footage of the areas and the disturbances that will be made to that area I just want to highlight that only the rows highlighted in yellow pertains to the scope of the alternative ESA plan the other information is additional information for you to understand the extent of the overall improvement in front of you is a detail that the applicant put together to explain where the field is going to be placed in relationship to the repair and buffer this area is where the field is going to be just to your attention the field is outside of the stream buffer maximum width which stops right here and what they're showing here that if by any chance there are trees would happen to be at the edge of the repair and buffer that proposed field will be pushed further out so in that way the root zone of the of those trees are protected here we are showing what the floodplain currently is based on FEMA maps and how the map is the floodplain is going to be after the after the reclamation work currently the unde veloped floodplain which is the southern half of the property is approximately 300,000 square feet after the reclamation is done that footprints going to be reduced to hundred thirty nine thousand which is a different of approximately three point nine acres all together the applicant have proposed a series of mitigation to offset for the encroachment that they will be making on the undeveloped floodplain one of them is as we discussed is just to locate all feel outside the repair and buffer and on the outer edges of the existing drip lines for existing three sorry trees grading will be concentrated on the northern section of the lot where the floodplain is considered to be developed and having reduced ecological value and habitat value as well as where the repair and buffer has already been removed so they are trying to impact the less amount on the habitat that is further located further south the street layout minimizes the disturbances as that main corridor would be actually placed on the north side they are proposing to go in and remove invasive species present within the floodplain and repair and buffer and re vegetate we need a species we're not only talking about trees but we're also looking into herv aceous material and the channel that would be run through that spine will actually be kept earthen as Haley mentioned the amount of lots that they will be building is considerably less than what the maximum zoning allows them to do therefore reducing the amount of potential runoff coming through those a lot and at this point if you don't have any questions for me on the ESA matter I will transition back to Haley about the notification process and the percentage of opposition I think we're good things ever all right so to kind of wrap up here I wanted to review notifications for this did follow our zoning procedure so we did all the same notices that we would for a rezoning case which included the ad in the newspaper sign posting on the property as well as mailed notices with the 200 and 500 foot buffer we did receive a few responses in writing to that you received some of those right before the work session this evening so there has been some opposition to the case primarily the concerns I've heard expressed related to the preservation of trees and concerns about drainage and some concerns that drainage could be backed up into the Regency Court area the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting however and discussed a lot of this extensively and so they could speak a little bit more to how that meeting went but those were some of the primary concerns that I heard at that meeting so staff is recommending approval of the request with a few conditions the first condition being that disturbance of the ESA not exceed fill in excess of 190 thousand 450 square feet within the undeveloped floodplain second that invasive species within the ES areas be removed as the applicant is proposed third being that plants installed as part of the proposed native flora revegetation be installed and maintained by the current property owner and developer for a period of three years following their installation any time any plants that are removed destroyed or die within that three-year period should be required to be replaced by that current property owner and developer and then finally that following what the applicant has proposed no encroachment shall occur in the areas designated as riparian buffer ESA and with that I'd be happy to address any other questions you might have Christopher thank you chair Haley earlier I asked you if you would there was a 48 inch storm drain would you show where that is it's gonna come out certainly so as part of this development to the east there was a storm drain stub to this point so that 48 inch pipe would be extended across the property under Meadow lands drive out falling here you can see there is a eas ement here for that to outfall into the floodplain and into the creek where it is intended and required by code to outfall okay so it'll remain a 48 inch concrete correct they'll be extending that existing 48 inch line okay I have a question for the app you know when comes out about the outlet I won't ask you about that though so thank you yes yes and the applicant is here and able to address any other concerns you may have I think that's it speaking of the applicant we do have a card for the applicant Lee Allison mr. Austin you have ten minutes or if you in Lance wanted to speak you would have a combined 20 minutes one clarification is I understood it if we have two people to speak we have a full 20 minutes and we can divide it between ourselves any way we like that's fine mistaken that is that that is correct Haley's got me up but I got to figure out how to maximize this group that wasn't it pardon just like this one that's a funny looking icon good evening my name is Lee Allison with Allison engineering group once me this evening is Lance Holdorf our project manager Kent Key is the primary representative he extends his apologies but he had another engagement and thought we could handle this this evening the site generally the staff gave a good site location map what I'd like to point out on this while I'm here is that we are trying to transition from a very nice development here of good size lots of a state type development here very large lots into an nr3 zoning over here which has your typical lots that you see in the city so part of our idea was to work with that that stream as you can see comes through here where this tree line is and the stream buffer is there's a gravel road that goes to the back now already crossing the stream with culverts and goes to an existing home as mentioned before we rezoned this a couple of years ago at that time we were looking at going to an alternative the essay this particular zoning is backwards because you've got the high density zoning close to the larger lots and the low density zoning against where the nr3 was so we wanted to you know make this more uniform and we did that with the rezoning process trying to work the essay we had the essay going at the same time but we got caught into the chicken or egg to have an ESA you also have to have a plat already approved but how do you know how you're going to plant a property if you don't know if you're going to get the ESA or not and then to get the plat we had to have a clomer so we've spent a lot longer on this than we should have to help identify the ESA's we've prepared this exhibit the dark green lines on the outer side that's where the mapped floodplain is today this is a zone a floodplain it has not been studied therefore those are a bit subjective as to where those lines really are the blue air lines are where we're shrinking it to through the studies and the activities and the pink is showing where the stream buffer ESA is this is one ESA we have promised and all of our plans show we are absolutely not getting into except for this one little area right here this line on here is from the preliminary plat it's not a line we put on there this was established when this drainage was created in this storm sewer was established to bring this drainage all the way to the center of the stream and beyond so there's already an easement for that purpose there we are stopping our physical pipe here and transitioning from here into the channel so that when this does hit full force we're able to avoid the erosion issues with tearing that channel out but this shows the 50 foot stream buffer it takes up 52,000 square feet then we have the undeveloped flood plain which is all the green area 298,800 but that's inclusive of the stream buffer and yes we are encroaching upon this then we have the developed floodplain which is the blue area another 85,000 square feet and to answer one of your questions previously mr. Beck we're allowed to cross streams with roads and utilities at a reasonable number of locations doesn't matter if it's developed or undeveloped course FEMA doesn't recognize develop or undeveloped floodplain it 's just flood plain and that's just part of the development development allowances that that we're capable of doing there was already a crossing here and we purposely brought the route up here to be within the developed floodplain for our crossing that was one of our considerations plus there 's already a gravel road there this is all the combined existing ESA's on top of the map then we have the proposed ESA's with these gray areas the dark gray the floodplain develop undeveloped floodplain area we're recovering and the lighter gray above it the developed floodplain interestingly enough and again mr. Beck a discussion we've had in the past per the city code and not FEMA but per the Denton Development Code if you were to imagine this whole floodplain was a lake only 15% of the storage of that lake is in the area we're recovering 85% of the storage is in the area that's there in the blue and the green and the pink and really that's only used up during the hundred-year storm our water quality storms are not much wider than the red line that goes down the middle of this area so for water quality purposes we're not having an impact for flood control purposes we're really not having an impact because by recon figuring the stream we're able to make it more efficient more effective and put that land into productive use linger on this for just a second we've tried to provide some dimensions just to give perspective for example this portion of the stream existing map is 474 feet wide at this location it's 411 and 260 it varies we are coming down to 183 here 176 at this location and looks like I can't read 117 at that location another thing well I'll go on to these other signs we did have a neighborhood meeting we use the same notification limits that the city does the 500 foot distance the first thing we're asked is you put in apartments or condominiums no it's single-family only I see there's probably another number of neighbors out here this evening they may have some concerns that were not mentioned at the meeting one discussion was traffic this was at the corner lot of metal lines in Belmont let me go back to this slide this lot in particular where am I this lot in particular because metals comes through in dead ends understand they didn't want more traffic coming through there but at the same time we are going with a much lower density so the traffic through here going from this direction out would be less yes there's people in this neighborhood that would come through but in accordance with the mobility plan and the fact this road is stubbed out in the drainage it was stubbed out to provide that connectivity so while I appreciate their dilemma that's just unfortunate misunderstood part of the development of the city but it's lower density and planned Street extension concerns about drainage the primary concern was are we backing water up into the Royal Oaks addition and the answer is both the Denton Development Code and FEMA guidelines do not allow us to do that we've done extensive studies and modeling to show we're not doing that and not only that we're actually opening up the area immediately downstream and removing some of the inundations in the stream that would cause it to back up so we're avoiding that we're opening it up tree preservation particularly along the north and east perimeter we're exceeding the city requirements for tree preservation I'll show you our tree mitigation plan later there's very few trees identified against there we think they're really on if you look at a map an aerial you can see them but we think they're on the neighbors properties not ours the surveyor didn't pick them up and at the same time we're matching great at those locations so we don't have any reason to go in there and tear them out the developer is actually importing eighty thousand cubic yards of dirt in here to help minimize the impact on trees in fact I got embarrassed in front of my staff because they had a grading plan with all this grading in it I said there's no way he 'll ever pay that they show it to Kent and he says no I got 80,000 yards coming in let's see what we can do to save those trees so he's not going to go in there and arbitrarily take trees out after he's spending this kind of money to do what he can to help save trees generally a lower lot density the original zoning we could have a hundred and eleven lots the zoning that we got in place allows a hundred and twenty four lots but because we were looking at this ESA from the very beginning we suggested with P&Z and council a maximum of 78 I don't know if staff has record of it but that was what was agreed to and we understand as part of the ordinance we're coming in at 73 if I were to convert that to a zoning category to be something like an NR 2.1 we could take two lots off and develop this under an NR 2 zoning and be fine we're larger lots ranging in size from 10,000 to 24,000 an average of about 15,000 square feet continuation of the surrounding neighborhoods to the north and east transitioning to the west as I mentioned earlier we're removing invasive species and honestly that was not our idea Deborah brought that to our attention and said can you get in there and pull them out and we say whatever you say so we're getting in there to accomplish that we're going to revegetate with native flora and that's in the undeveloped flood plain we're doing an earth and channel in the under in the developed flood plain which the drainage department would rather we do concrete because it's easier for them to maintain so but we have chosen to do the earth and channel for those reasons and in there we're gonna go back with a native floor instead of Bermuda grass or something of that nature the proposed development be high quality development it wasn't 20 minutes you can continue I'm gonna make it quick I can improve the drainage area no adverse in strength impacts upstream or downstream not allowed by code or modeling this shows our two phases and how the roads will come together that help shows how the first phase is going to be done we will have a sewer line in this easement which we hope lines up with what we're gonna do in the future when we call this a temporary road it's gonna be an asphalt road we're gonna need to be able to get emergency vehicles construction vehicles for the subdivision and construction vehicles for the home this way instead of going all through this neighborhood all the time so we are doing that in fact we've got plans for a text on permit back to this one this line right here that is where we anticipate the text on is gonna ask for right away in that case we're gonna lose six lots through here and shift all this over that direction that's why we're waiting on this area for phase two to get all that worked out with the text on there's the tree mitigation plan the ones in green we're keeping the ones in red will go again I think there's trees up here that have been questioned about because there may be under six inches they weren't picked up on our survey or on the neighbors property line but again with us matching grade along here and here whoops here and here there's no real reason to expect that we would take any trees out and I hope you can see what the developers intentions he's not gonna go in there and arbitrarily take a tree out I cannot say answer your questions mr. Beck that were brought up during workshop I don't do invasive species removal on a daily basis but we have we are working with tree shepherds of Denton we want an expert in there and somebody who's local and local accountable accountability to help us find the right methods we're gonna have to balance the concerns between whatever materials are used to remove the privet with leaving the privet itself there I mean the city wants the privet out because it's its own issue privets do affect the flood carrying capability you block the channel with them so we think removing the privets will be a great thing to do but at the same time there are considerations we need to work on as we move forward as far as the endangered species we checked the report actually there was four not three might have been a number transfer because the study was done on four three two thousand and seventeen the four species are the least turn which is a bird not real common in this area but still it's been seen here occasionally and needed to be checked out the piping plover which is primarily a coastal or a beach bird when seen in these areas it's usually among lakes but because it's here they specifically looked at it the red knot which is another bird medium- sized another shore bird but again it's been here occasionally I mean we've seen bald Eagles up at Lake Ray Roberts so you got to watch for what 's out here in the whooping crane the study looked at each one of those specifically to look for evidence of their being there they found none and those reports were signed off on by the appropriate authorities at the federal level so hard to take so long I realize this is a public hearing somebody now may not be the time for questions but I'll take them now or later it's your pleasure we got at least one commissioner back thank you chair thank you Lee I do appreciate your presentation and I respect the fact that that this has been a hassle for you yet nonetheless I think we're coming up with a product that you know please everybody I think you and I you know we tend to be on opposite sides but for the most part we both have the general public's concern in mind and I appreciate what you're doing here thank you for let me know what the species are they're all birds so they can easily elope to some other area where we're not dealing with ground creatures so I appreciate that I had a pretty good email conversation with your engineer you calling Lance okay Lawrence is okay so it's okay to call him Lance he indicated said one way we 're trying to preserve the ecosystem is by relocating a part of the landscape to the yards now am I to take that that you're gonna take soil in the area and relocate it to for that filler you need up against the you mentioned 80,000 square feet of importing 80,000 square feet of film I thought no I can elaborate though okay is because we're going to larger lots we're not going to have near as much coverage on those lots as you would if we had the real small ones and packed everything in as a result the grass area that's on the edges of the floodplain that collects water coming from the sides does give it some amount of water quality treatment at the same time when we've got larger lots now that the rain falls off the roofs and goes into the yards etc it's gonna have more grass area there to accommodate the water quality so we'll be getting some water quality in the yards of these much larger lots that we would not happen if we went to your typical pack density subdivision okay okay you've got that big old pile of dirt over there that's probably about 20 feet wide about 12 15 feet high and about 30 yes sir so is that gonna be part of is that gonna be spread out over the development that is 20,000 yards of the 80,000 we need to bring in okay there's more to come okay can you put your tree mitigation okay now I don't see and I know a lot of those trees for the invasive trees we're gonna get rid of but the road that's coming in metal lands that right now is that stream we were talking about that's gonna feed into Hickory Creek that's bordered with you know some pretty healthy trees so you didn't count those trees as part of the tree mitigation plan our surveyor went out and we've only shown trees that are six inches in diameter and larger so a lot of times when you see trees in a long row like that they'll be smaller trunk trees so they didn't necessarily qualify but again pardon me by doing this one doesn't show it as well but there's our ESA that we're totally staying out of so other trees in that area will be avoided and again we're doing minimal grading in this area so I was out looking and I don't disagree that probably most of those are six inches or less but there was there was a few that never greater than six inches so I was just curious about that and lastly the drainage that comes out there at metal lands how far set back from the riparian stream is that it's gonna is it set up to hit well we have put our easement right here so we're we're bringing that pipe out at the end and battling it so that we can put some riprap in here so we're I don't think we're I know we're not getting into the stream buffer itself okay we will get into that floodplain good good one concern I had and I was gonna mention in some respect or another is and I think what you're doing here is gonna preserve what we want to preserve you know it's disappointing to see that we lost that northern section of the floodplain and the rip arian buffer up there you know from work that was done previously you know shame on us back then whoever it was we're not paying a little bit more attention so every time we come in and alter an ESA like you're doing here but for the good you know I always worry about the risk it's gonna have later down the road will it diminish it that much more and from what I can tell what you're doing I think you're making every effort to make sure it doesn't but I just I say this openly because you are a developer and any developer that might be listening in that how their development can impact these these hoes down the road if we're paying attention to them we can we can develop in a way that it won't negatively impact them so thank you Lee relative to that we also took into consideration that probably a hundred feet or more off of here I remember the name of the road earlier but there's an arterial road that will be extended through here it's on the city master thoroughfare plan also there's a gas well down here you saw the few lights lots that are within that distance so I don't know that much can no no that you know but I think north of Ryan there's a street called Sanders or something like that it's well south of your development there my map isn't big enough yeah it's Sanders it's it's it's south of there right and that doesn't go all the way through into Forest Ridge like Ryan does but is is that an area well this it's El Paso I remember down this street is our collector Street identified on the master thoroughfare played to come through so a lot of the traffic that may be winding through here initially in the future will come down that's El Paso yes that's El Paso okay of course that's going to impact this floodplain and stream as well is that on our is that on our mobility plan yes it is okay thank you I usually keep ahead of that didn't catch it okay great thanks Lee thank you I don't see any other questions mr. Allison thank you I do have one card to speak but it is a public hearing so others more welcome to the card I have is for Jim speck feed to state your name and address for the record hi I'm Jim speck 400 Regency Court I represent the Regency Corps Regency Oaks homeowners Association we're the homeowners Association that's just north of the proposed development as a whole well first I'd like to speak to the notices that was sent out only the homes that were along the south side of our community got any kind of notification nobody else within the 500 got any kind of communication so our reason why I even found out about it is because of one of the other neighbors spoke as a whole we're not opposed to the development what we are opposed to is the small opening that they have for the drainage we just don't feel that that's going to be enough it really needs to be at least half the size of the floodplain the one that is on our side is that way I have some pictures of it so ours is more open than what they have proposed and we're afraid it's gonna be a bottleneck if you look back on theirs you're gonna see that it's gonna basically right there we 're just gonna bottleneck that it's gonna back up everything upstream I understand what mr. Lee was saying about you know the studies they've done or whatever but I live next door to it so I see it it's not a fair stream when it rains all that torrential rain that we get that that stream will rise almost up to the top of the picture that I just showed you guys so it's almost like the around it in high school and everything you guys have seen those cement things fill up that's the way it is if they put that small opening in there it's just gonna back up into our neighborhood and you know back upstream and all the way up back up to Hobson so that's our biggest concern so I'll invite the applicant to speak but before that Mr. Beck do you have a question? I do. Mr. Beck can you as best you can kind of pinpoint where you're talking about where that culvert is on your side of this development? Basically where this and that's another reason where these two homes are right here the floodplain splits these two homes and our bridge is basically right up here and as mr. Lee showed you I don't have a thing but we have you know one acre two acre lots so it's a wide area on our side that all that water is going to come down and basically you look on theirs they're trying to shrink the floodplain a little bit which I don't have a problem with that as long as they make the water go but where that road is it's got to be a wide opening otherwise it's just gonna back up into us. Can we get Lee Allison to come back down and address that? Good evening we've actually got four or five foot by ten foot box culverts planned there. Scale of the drawing may look it's make it look smaller but we've actually got a larger cross- sectional opening in our culverts than is what is upstream. We have the designs and the model of those and we looked at them very closely and then of course did the analysis here to make sure that would not over top those. We've turned that into the city those models have been analyzed by the city they've also been analyzed by FEMA and they have asked us to turn in the sign seal drawings to FEMA. They've accepted that model as well so that culvert that gentleman's referring to is probably about 200 feet away because it's under the road up here at Regency Court and granted these are large homes and it's a pretty wide open channel and I'm very confident that we're... So you can leave Mr. Speck's concern about bottle making and also we sized our culverts per the city criteria to accommodate the 100 year storm when all of the drainage area upstream is fully developed per city zoning and requirements so we've got it much larger we believe than it needs to be there and our culvert types well they've got box cul verts as well. Also we put theirs in the model as long as ours. How wide? 410 foot that's at least 40 feet wide. It's just the scale of the drawings it's a understandable concern and without seeing our detailed drawings I could look at that and that probably come to the same conclusion. Thank you. Thank you both. This is a public hearing anyone wishing to speak on the item can certainly do so. Sir. If you just fill out a card after speaking and then state your name and address for the record. Rick Wisenhunt and my address is 3306 Belmont and I on the tree mitigation I just don't I don't understand I guess so I'm trying to figure out does that mean that the trees it looked like almost all the trees are coming out is that what's going on is that what we're talking about? Mr. Alston can you speak to the tree mitigation? Per the drawing and if I can get it back up the trees identified here both red and green are all the trees the survey are identified that are six inches in diameter and larger. The green trees will be preserved and the red trees are scheduled to come out. If for some reason during grading we can preserve one we certainly will but those are scheduled to come out and this I don't have the exact number but this significantly or notably exceeds the city's minimum requirements for tree preservation. We're not having to mitigate any trees we're able to meet the preservation requirements. It looks like they're all congested in one area I mean the ones that are not along this entire side and along the side that we're on all the trees are coming out it looks like and I'm concerned about that both from aesthet ically but I'm also concerned about it in terms of any kind of water direction. All the water is going to drain towards the stream from either side it's not going to go back towards the lots. This has to do with the grading some of these are coming out because they're gonna end up being in TexDOT right away and as these houses are moved in the future and this is regraded is we haven't upfront identified a way to preserve and save those particular trees. Obviously when you got some in the middle of the street we can't save those and and this is going to save more. I guess another thing back to your question Mr. Beck in the workshop. Oh I wasn't thinking about the TV sorry. You know if if we were to develop and not get the ESA one consideration would be to not grade bring in dirt to save trees to cut the lots in half so we could double the number of lots and get it all in there so I mean from economic and Mr. Key is not that type of person but from economic perspective he could jam lots in here and get rid of those trees and not touch the flood plain at all and meet the counts even with the old zoning. So you're saying the if I may chair that all the green trees that are staying meet the minimum tree per tree preservation requirement or the mitigation? Yes if I remember correctly we're required to save or mitigate 25% of the trees and we could mitigate 12 and a half percent but we're able to save I want to say 35- 40% we're above the 25%. These red ones you're removing are some of these heritage and native trees? Our tree preservation plans typically go in with their plants and I don't have that information. I mean there's always unfortunately some pecans and nouns and not just hackberries and mesquites. But they're all the red ones or six inches in diameter or bigger? Yes all of the trees on this side are six inches in diameter and larger. Okay now as you build the homes there will you be putting trees in? Oh definitely that's part of the city code requirement street trees and residential trees. How many trees would you say per lot would you be? Two to three including the street tree? I expect these lots are definitely gonna have two trees per lot for the street trees and I expect there'll be two trees or so planted on each yard. You need to get the house plans. One thing we're not doing is we're not overgrading a lot of the lots so that Kent can come in with a custom home or whoever builder comes in with a custom home instead of building a big square pad just build a pad that meets the house and if you can save a tree you have more opportunity to do that. I wonder if I could ask too and I was gonna mention this at the end of our meeting but when you put your tree protection fence up that orange fence yes any chance you could put that out at the drip line so you don't when you're when you're developing your lot you don't cut into the root systems like. For the code it is supposed to be put at the drip line. Okay I kind of thought it was. The Kent key is perfect and they will be put there but okay knows they're supposed to be and he wants them there. Good enough. If you could just step up to the microphone. The plant that was shown at the first that had more of this drawn out in phase one, phase two, is there a way we can get a copy of that? It's available online currently but we can certainly yeah okay you can get with Haley and she can provide that to you. Okay so we're basically all the trees behind us are gonna be cut down is what we're looking at. I 'm not able to I don't know what this the process is here we didn't fill out a plus or minus on whether to do it because we were coming to the meeting are we supposed to turn that in afterwards? On the blue card you can write support or opposition and be filed with us. Thanks. Christian Beck. Just to answer Mr. Weisenhut's concern about not getting a notice I don't think they sent notices out on it on this AESA right they would do that on the zoning but they all didn't send notices out for the you did okay my mistake. The same notification procedures followed for an alternative ESA plan. Okay I stand corrected thank you. Commissioner Ellis. Thank You Chair. Haley while you're up on on that topic can you address the gentleman's concern in the area to the north why perhaps that block did not get notification on regency? So the the 200 foot letter would have only hit these the homes on the south side all of these addresses would have had notices sent to them we use the county's current most recent you know tax roll to obtain our addresses so we have a receipt showing that all the postcards were sent. Okay. Is there anyone else who likes to speak on this item? Ma'am was first in the front and so forth. If you could state your name and address for the record. Okay I'm Stacey Beavers I'm at 121 Meadowlands Drive so I'm literally right next door to where all this is going to start. I missed the meeting on September 5th that I think the engineer addressed. I know some people said they got cards my card actually came on September 10th so I missed that meeting and so I wanted to address just real quickly a couple of questions that I might have been able to ask him at that time but didn't get an opportunity since I didn't get the card. I spoke with Kent Key last summer and asked him a little bit about this development because they started bringing in just trucks and trucks and trucks of dirt from 7 in the morning till 6 at night and they were literally every five minutes just coming in and out in and out in and out and everybody was in and up roars and then all of a sudden from what I heard they got a cease and desist I don't know if that's a fact or not but then I saw him one day and I asked him what was going on and he said he was working with the city to get that development going and I'm very curious because my husband and I are reaching a point where our kids are grown and we want to downsize so I asked him you know what the situation was and how soon that would be coming. He indicated that he would have was currently fighting with the city about making that an HOA so my first question is do you know if that subdivision is going to have an HOA? Yes, Mr. Allison. Because we currently do not and that is one really nice thing about our subdivision and it is a big attraction to people because so many of these subdivisions that are going in have HOAs and there are good things about them but there are also a lot of bad things about them so I'm curious. This development will not have an HOA. There are not any common lots. The drainage will be developed dedicated to the city for city maintenance. When Mr. Key was bringing in those loads of dirt that was about 20,000 yards. He had a stockpiling permit. He was doing some mowing in the ESA so we got stopped for that momentarily but it wasn't but he didn't really get a cease and desist but there was an issue there and no that's all understandable probably. There is a certain amount of truth to every rumor unfortunately but that's what occurred and primarily with construction one of the reasons we're putting this temporary road where this is so we can do more access from this direction and not need to come. Believe me he remembers all the calls he got from that delivery. Okay so and to that maybe you can just stay and answer. Do you know yet what the minimum square footage of the homes in that subdivision are going to be required to be? There's no minimum being placed upon them but just because of the cost and the size of the lots. I think we're looking Kent has told me in the 500,000 a million dollar range on the home prices, values. Okay and will you be able to bring your own builder? Use your own builder or is he going to be the primary builder in the subdivision or? These lots he'll build some of them they will be for sale. I don't know if he has enough commitments to take them all or not but I'm sure he would entertain an offer. Okay and do we have any idea based on the size of the lots the price ranges of the lots? Oh the lots themselves I would like a starting range for the smallest lot to the I'm guessing but I would say you're in the hundred and fifty to four hundred thousand dollar range. I mean there's a house up a lot up here in the corner is gonna be thirty thousand square feet so you know there's a three hundred four hundred thousand dollar lot right there. Particularly if he's able to save those trees as he plans. Do you know based on where we stand today when those lots might start being sold and therefore some of us get an idea of when construction is going to start so that we have an idea of when the commercial vehicles are going to be coming in and out of there and you mentioned also that you 're gonna be bringing in 60,000 yards of dirt. Yes. Is that going to come off of Country Club Road or is that gonna come through Meadowlands like that other dirt did or? Again he'll try and come down Country Club Road with it he 's actually getting this from a road construction project. I would expect all the improvements to be completed and the plats filed and lots for sale sometime next summer. In the meantime though I'd say by the first of the year he might be able to take pre-sales but he can't officially sell a lot until it's a real lot. Okay. Okay. I think that was all of my questions. Thank you so much. Fantastic thank you both. Thank you. This is a public hearing sir what are you wanting to speak? I do just fill a card afterwards and state your name and address for the record. Yes my name is Chris Beggs and I'm at 401 Regency Court right across the street from Jim. We have the property that aligns actually where the development is going on. You can't let me see. If you use the mouse we can see that. We are right here. So what I'm looking at and I guess the concern is is that we have trees all of these trees and I know that they're going to be taking some of these trees out. Well miss I lost my pointer but to the back of the property there on the south side we've got a beautiful tree line that runs along right through there and I know that developers they like taking this stuff out and you had mentioned the gentleman here had mentioned about trees being taken out that I guess the ones that are tagged are over six inches I guess in diameter. Well there's some of them back there that are under you know about six inches or so that they they offer quite a bit of buffer for it. I think I speak for everyone that's on that that property line there that I guess the concern is we have trees that will be right on that property line and I'm trying to figure out is that are they planning on taking those trees out I mean if or is there going to be like a you know they're going to come off of that property line before they start taking trees out because that could wipe out quite a bit of that vegetation. Mr. Austin could certainly answer that I'd imagine Mr. Key would want to keep those for property value but if there's plans to remove them. Again a lot of these trees we're not even sure if they're on our lot or on the neighbors lot they could be under six inches but we have graded matching grade here so we can stay out here and protect the trees along here save and accept those in the immediate area of the channel where we might have to do some extensive grading but particularly I guess is this your lot am I pointing correctly? Yes. I'll be hard-pressed to see why we'd have to take any of those trees out. Because our property line actually goes just on the other side of the creek actually on the west side extends just right over on the west side. Okay so you're close to the trees. Yeah. But still these trees in particular those are based on our grading plan I don't yeah I can't imagine those leading to come out. And that's that's been the most question I guess. Sure. Understood. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. You just fill out a blue card. Christian Ellis. Thank you Chair. Mr. Beggs. Excuse me sir. I'm just curious did you get a notification card in the mail? You did? No. Where are you in? I think we 're in the 200. Okay so you're in the within the red line? Oh within the red line yeah right there. So but as far as I know I think I did and Steve got one too. [inaudible] For what it's worth I'm in the 500 and I was I got notified . You did? By both the city and by Mr. Allison's. So I was I was caught. Is anyone else wanting to speak on this matter? Yes ma'am. Again if you could just fill out a card when you're done and just state your name and address for the record. Hi I am Stephanie Watley and I live at 801 Regency Court so this first lot here on the south side. I think my question probably for Mr. Allison is also about the tree line but I was concerned when you were saying there's gonna be a temporary entrance. Could you show me where that's gonna be ? Is that where the current that is that where that current like a little driveway is? Is that where the road is gonna be? Yes. Okay just pardon me for the microphone and for everybody's benefit. This road this gravel road that's existing it's probably a 150 feet or so off the property line is where the permanent road will go here and the temporary road here. Okay so when the permanent road is completed it will no longer go to Country Club from here it's gonna come down this direction is that correct? Yes it'll come down here and then line up with this street. Okay. We just don't know where along here because we don't know how much text on it's gonna take at this time. So once this road is complete there are plans to develop between Regency there will be a row of houses right here between the road and the tree line. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay so I know we're at risk you know some of our property is at risk with the easement through text on also so I was just interested to know what's your theory right now about where you may start developing. We've got about one I mean I don't know exactly how far the property is crossed. I have one I think they'll help show that. Oh that was easy. This shows our phase one and there's where the creek comes through there's Country Club Road it looks like there's probably three lots in here that we're not developing now but we will have a row of lots along here. Okay. And then in the future depending on text dot there could be two or three lots back here. Okay I gotcha and then again my concern is just for the tree line you know I know just because ever since this has become an issue I've gone to the back to try to look at where my trees end versus where the other ones begin you know and I can see that our tree line is nice and thick you know and there was so much talk before about the previous development about maintaining the buffers to help with the value of the homes. I mean you know we're really in this you know this neighborhood is bordering you know two nice neighborhoods obviously and it's in our best interest for everybody to keep as many trees as we can so I was just it makes me nervous that they don't show up on the map because then you know when we see the tree mitigation it doesn't address the south side of it at all so I was just curious is there any further information we'll get that maybe shows our tree line? To be honest no that's uh we are done this to meet city requirements and I'm trying to get back to another other than an aerial that shows these trees along here and the fact that Mr. Key is bringing in 80,000 and it costs money to remove a tree and we've graded so those wouldn't have to be removed that's about the best assur ances I can give you at this time. Okay so from this perspective when you were talking about two or three lots about where do you think is this is my lot right here so where are you thinking right now for the TexDOT allotment where do you think you'll begin? Well we're gonna stop here and we think TexDOT is probably trying to come through here I'm guessing they might do a little bit of geometrical creativity through here to avoid as much as possible but you know with here because of these homes and the big front yards there we think they 'll maximize their right-of-way taking in our area. Okay do you know a date on like phase one and phase two? Again phase one we hope to break ground right after the first of the year and be completed next summer sometime. You'll be completed with the lots will become available? With all the streets yes then they can start building homes I can't predict when the homes will be completed if the economy stays the way it is I wouldn't be surprised if it's built out in two years. And then is there a plan for the beginning of phase two? That's all up to TexDOT until that road gets taken care of so when you sell your right-of-way to TexDOT we're probably right behind you. Okay thank you both. Yes ma'am. State your name and address for the record. My name is Man al Omari I live in 201 Meduland which is here basically and we did not receive a card about anything. I don't know if we were exactly 200 or a little bit more but we didn't receive either 500 or 200 and I was worried about the traffic because where we our house is here so that big pile of dirt is right here and that means and there's nothing right now this is an empty space so you can imagine how it's gonna be from now on I'm just a little bit scared about the amount of traffic the amount of construction also all of a sudden the value of our house because our house is from those houses the big you know the bigger houses so how is that that new construction how is that gonna impact the value of our house in addition to the traffic and the construction some of course the trees all of them are gonna be gone and no empty space which is I mean I know I understand there will be no construction but is that gonna impact our the value of our houses because you know the value for all of those houses they have certain value so how is that gonna impact I can invite mr. Allison up to speak about the traffic flow for construction are they using metal lands to access construction and I don't know if you're an authority to speak on property values per se but if you have any insight to that when it comes to traffic for construction that traffic that's under Kent Keys control will be coming off Country Club Road primarily the traffic for the construction of the subdivision when it gets to the traffic for home construction these streets will be opened up so more likely they would come I keep pointing with my finger I'm sorry more likely they would come down Country Club Road because that's going to be a faster easier access instead of trying to be entered through this development but I can't say there wouldn't be a plumber or a roofer somebody that might come through here on the individual home constructions as far as home values we're looking at homes equal to or greater than these in values I think the comps would stay up if we were to go with an alternative development that could be allowed with the zoning with smaller homes the comps would tend to go down so I think what's being planned here will certainly not hurt if possibly help but that is the absolute limit of my expertise when it comes to appraisals thank you very much any other individuals want to speak on this item seeing none I will close the public hearing and open it for discussion or motion on the board commissioner Ellis I'm gonna make a motion to approve with just a couple comments thank you staff and Allison engineering group for doing great presentation it could have been a very complicated subject and you made it easy to assess and look into and understand exactly what we 're voting on here today so thank you very much and with that I will move to approve Commissioner Sanchez I'd like to say you made a great presentation I think it helped a lot of people understand what was going on and they're on the grounds I'm gonna vote for it we are first in a second any discussion yes Haley with the four conditions okay thank you thank you Haley we have a motion and a second to approve with the four conditions seeing no discussion we'll call for a vote on the board the motion carries six zero with one absent that 'll move us to our final hearing item for the evening thank you for everyone waiting on that item I know we have even a little kid waiting on us so we'll move on with haste to item 3d z 18 - 15 I'll open the public hearing and invite H aley for presentation all right good evening this is case as the 1815 for Audra O aks the request before you is to hold public hearing and consider making a recommendation to council regarding a request for a rezoning from neighborhood residential two districts to neighborhood residential for the site you can see outlined in yellow is just over 13 acres located on the south side of Audre Lane just west of Barbara Lane again the current zoning on the property you see here on the left is a neighborhood residential - so that would permit a maximum of two dwelling units per acre on the right you can see what the map would look like with the proposed zoning of NR for which would permit up to four units per acre the applicant did preside it provide a concept plan so although the zoning wouldn't be tied to this it does give you an idea of what they would hope to develop on the property should the rezoning be approved and I want to point out that north is oriented to the left side of the screen here the map didn't fit very well oriented the other way so what you can see here is Audre Lane on the north side of the property they do intend to extend Oak Valley Street through the property up to Audre as well as have a connection to another future neighborhood that is currently under preliminary platting adjoining them to the west they do have as you can see outlined in orange a number of single-family homes proposed the out lots outlined in blue would be proposed for duplexes and then there is a sizable portion of the property that would be that is proposed to our Parks Department currently to be a city park but could also be HOA maintained green space if for some reason the city is unable to accept that park property the code does outline two criteria for approval of a rezoning the first being does it conform to the future land use element of the Denton plan 2030 and second being is there adequate provision of infrastructure so looking at that first component the future land use designation for this area is low residential the intent of these areas is to have a maximum of four dwelling units per acre but to also accommodate a mixture of housing types and housing prices and to respect the you know the current development patterns in the area in our four we did find to be consistent with this it primarily permits single-family homes duplexes are permitted with a limitation that will look at a little more closely in the second and then it does fit within that maximum and I apologize this last line should say four dwelling units per acre within NR for so looking a little bit more about the zoning compatibility there is existing in our four both to the east and the south of this this development so this would be a continuation of that existing zoning pattern and our four as I mentioned is not only consistent with the future land use plan but also with the existing development pattern in this area in terms of use and the scale of use that's permitted so as I mentioned single-family is permitted by right duplexes do have a limitation that limitation has several criteria the first being that the lots containing those duplexes not immediately about the perimeter of the subdivision so as we saw in the concept plan the park the single-family homes on the south side and then the alleyway on the west side would prevent that immediate vicinity of duplexes abutting single-family it also requires that each duplex each half of the unit be on a separately platted lot so that they can be sold individually as a single-family residence and then it also requires conform ance with our single-family design standards in sub chapter 13 so each du plex is required to appear from the street as one unit the second criteria as I mentioned was the provision of infrastructure so there is access to the site provided off of Audre as well as the possibility of this connection at Oak Valley water and sewer which you can see here in a blue and red on the map respectively are available to the site off of Audre Lane notification was sent regarding this request through all of the required means in the newspaper signs were posted as well as the postcards and the 200-foot mailings we did receive several responses to this as you can see here and as provided to you in your backup the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting on September 4th at the Civic Center there were multiple neighbors in attendance at that meeting some of the primary concerns I heard were over traffic cutting through on Oak Valley up to Audre as well as a duplex as being a new use introduced to the area staff is recommending approval of this request because we found it to be consistent with our two criteria for approval and I'd be happy to stand for any questions I do not see any questions of us right now of you Haley thank you for the presentation I believe the applicant is here and also has a presentation perfect is the applicant Sean Faulkner correct if you just state your name and your address you have 10 minutes to present I won't need that long thank you very much my name is Sean Faulkner I reside here in Denton at 2713 Bissonnette Drive on the south side of town and I'm here to you know talk about our proper our project here in front of you you see the results of our neighborhood mean that we had most of the concerns that we had probably number one was you know parking along the street and bail would get fire access through and I believe the city back in March revised the standard roadway standards to widen out the street and we are planning to you know have those standards in our development to help that of course we also want you know fire protection and and and normal traffic to flow by and not feel crunched another concern of course with duplexes is rental property right now it's the intent that you know all the units will be owner occupied I know there's a development further down Audreau closer to 88 that is considered duplex but is 100% rental that is not what we're looking to do matter of fact you know for the duplex units we're looking at starting prices for each unit to be you know around 230 to 140 thousand dollars you know and that's per unit that's not for both of us that 's each side so we know we're looking for a little bit higher class you know development rather than just rental property and then a lot of people really can you know talk about the open space park you know as Haley mentioned you know we have approached the Parks Department about you know dedicating those to them they're currently evaluating at our site and I believe there's another site further down at the east that they're also looking at of course we're hoping that they'll take our site because I think it'll be a great addition to this side of town I know the neighbors around there would definitely love a park the trail master plan does call for you know widen sidewalks to go up and down Oak Valley and across Audreau so they'll be provide great access not only for our neighborhood but the neighbors that we're connecting to to get to it and then also minor concern was you know our duplexes were concerning actually we want them to be rear entry because you do duplex lots you know all you'll see is cars we want to keep that front area as nice and neat as we possibly can so we want to move you know the cars back into the back and in that case you know we'll have two car garages you know providing you know the four spaces that's required by the zoning ordinance is one of the concerns was you know putting a fence on the alley especially you know on the park and you know we want that to be oh feels open as possible you know you know not only for our residents but you know for other neighbors as well you know just kind of go through some of the you know requirements of in our four go a little bit a little bit further than what Haley mentioned you know it's typically so 20 foot setback you know we're planning on meeting that requirement lot coverage we're limited to 60% that includes the house and driveway so we're not going to be filling up a whole lot with with house and concrete so we'll be you know meeting that requirement again like Haley said you know duplex lots you know can't but the property lines we're gonna be separating either by an open space or an alley to provide that buffer and then you know more than four units right now we're looking at about three and a half units so we're not even maxing out you know what we can you know except parking you know required to have four spaces right now we're gonna have two car garages and provide two in a driveway and then propose var iances right now we have no variances that we're proposing in the pre meeting H aley mentioned that you know we had some side constraints and you know why weren't we developing the park area well one of the biggest reasons is there's an Explorer pipeline that goes through the site it's an eight-inch high-pressure line it's currently inactive so there's no product being moved through that right now but again in order to cross that property with road or any utility it's it's very difficult and so of course we can't build you know any houses or put lots across that so you know this kind of impediment to that another concern is along our West line there's a 54 foot electric easement that's been put in place there's overhead power lines along there as well so that's another constraint that you know we have to deal with and there's also underground drainage pipe coming from the subdivision to the south that cuts across our property and ties into the system in Audra and from there it goes north and up to an open channel so that's another constraint so as you can see on the East side there's quite a bit of constraints that are you know put impediments to developing you know residential lots and of course you know at the top we're gonna have to you know do our part to improve Audra that's not necessarily an impediment but it's still a cause that we have to you know bear with our project and you know this is something what Haley you know showed as well but you know here's our street extensions that we're planning on putting in our single-family detached houses that we're planning on putting in as well our duplex again it's we're buffered I guess the adjacent neighborhoods and again our rear entry alleys that we put in to keep the streets cars off the street and the rest of the property we're putting an open space again we hope that this you know Parks Department will we'll see this as a benefit and we'll be able to dedicate this to the city for for park development now these are some examples of other projects that are in Denton some of them are actually townhomes but you know this is the kind of feel that we're getting on the upper left this is up in Discovery Park you can see you know it's rear entry houses so the fronts are kept nice and clean this is actually a new build out there so that's why it's still the grass is still you know trying to grow in on the bottom and on the upper right corner those are along poinsettia Drive up up along at 288 a little bit further north you know these lawns are very well maintained you know we are going to have an HOA and we're even kicking the idea of having HOA maintain the front yards so they can stay as consistent and a picture up right that's a picture of the alley back on behind the po insettia development again kept nice and clean they even have power lines similar to what we're going to have going back there so with that I'm happy to answer any questions that you have we do have one question to mr. Beck thank you chair thank you miss Sean yes sir yeah thank you for your presentation so it appears that all the duplexes will have rear entry parking correct and single- family homes will have front entry park most of the single-family actually will have rear end I think we have one or two the way that the allies of work okay that will be front entry okay but it's you know we prefer to have them all rear entry but there's you know one or two out lots that may be difficult to serve with an out sure sure and I understand and I appreciate the fact that I guess because you're pricing these houses as high as you are that hopefully they will be owner occupied but you know once these are developed and on down the road I mean what's to prevent that duplex owner from renting out there is yeah it's you know it's it's you know I'm in my neighborhood myself you know my neighborhood I think right now it's about 15% of rental properties it was an old starter you know house community I was developed in the late 90s and you know I'm a 16 year 16 year resident of Denton so I've seen a lot of development come in you know there's not much that we can do you know once someone buys the property for them to turn into a rental I understand that my concern and just my feeling it's not an absolute but it seems like duplexes tend to convert easily more easily oh yes our property I did have one discussion with a lady a couple weeks ago she called up and she was a more mature and she was looking at buying one the units and having a younger relative you know have the other half so that way you know she could still have her independence and and freedom but still be close to family that would be ideal yeah you know typically what what we're predicting will happen is gonna be empty nesters or you know families just starting off let me going on to the subject with the park hopefully the city will pick it up correct me if I'm wrong here if you're gonna have essentially 47 residences will you be able to have an HOA with fees that can afford to sustain a park if you if that's forced upon you well if if the Park Department does not pick it up you'll be something you know it with the fees that are out there they'd be able to do made no minimum maintenance probably won't be you know any trails or anything like that put in just a green space yeah so you'll be mostly edge like it's a green space you know if you go out there now you'll see you know four wheeler tracks going through there right now you know that's stuff that you won't want in the future and hopefully an HOA will be able to enforce you know the non recreational vehicles going back through there okay one last thing the concern about traffic barre ling through there once you open up oak valley any chance I mean you're not obligated to but any chance to minimize that by maybe putting a couple of speed bumps in there near Audreau and down the word connects yes sir the transportation code requires us to put in traffic calming devices okay and so that was the sense that we definitely will be putting in okay good deal good deal thank you sir thank you mr. Faulkner we have no other questions right now thank you we do have a couple cards so we'll go through these but it isn't a public hearing it is a public hearing so anyone who wishes to be can the first card I have here is John Maxwell so you just state your name and address okay John Maxwell I live at 2807 Howard Court I am just to the east of the subject property I don't think there's a pointer okay so I'm in this lot right here so I'm opposed to the proposed zoning based on the increased density I know the zoning has been recently changed to the properties to the West and I'd like to see a better buffer a better better transition between the high density and our properties I think the duplexes would not fit in with the existing neighborhoods again you know traffic I know that's going to be a big concern with the higher density homes that are going to be or apartments or whatever is going to be going in along Audra on to the west of this subject property see I have a question regarding the fences that would be put up on the east side of the du plexes are they going to be on the alley side or are they going to be right up against the homes yeah I'm concerned to speak to this but I want to make note you want to provide him an answer but the concept plan presented here has will not be tied to the approval of the rezoning okay so if if he has some thoughts and then wants to let you know about those we definitely want to provide that opportunity but it we're not holding him to this concept plan okay it could change he could not put duplexes there's a lot of things that could happen once we approve just the zoning aspect of it right he can certainly talk about the duplexes but I just want to ensure that we're not believing that the concept plan is gonna it's not what's being approved this evening right I understand that okay that's one of my concerns also is that you know I understand this is just a concept so he could come back and have more duplexes that are shown on on this concept plan potentially be tough yeah miss Fonder can you talk about the fencing you know typically with the duplex lot we won't really have any fencing along the backside of those houses there's just tends to be not a whole lot of space back there now in regards to you know more duplexes you know that's we're pretty much maxed out with this plan considering where the gas line is and stuff like that so we're not going to be putting more in this you know with a single you know we're still going with some single families in there you know to fill not only to fill the fire fulfill the city requirements but to provide little variety and not necessarily have all du plexes you know that's that's not what we're that's not what we're looking to do you know I guess you know repeat you know this developer is on this land for over 10 years and now he built the houses along Barbara Street which is on the other side of this and you know as far as density we're looking about three and a half units to the acre you know other stuff you know and hey we could probably correct me if I'm wrong on this but the properties that recently got developed you know zone to the west of us there you know four to four and a half units to the acre and other developments there you know four to four and a half themselves so we're you know we're at three and a half maximum so we're you know we're not maxing out what we can do with it within our foreign district okay that's all the questions I have thank you thank you very much mr. Roswell the other card I have here is for Jay leak so you just state your name and address my name is Jay leak I live at 1216 Oak Valley which right around there so I was just gonna say simply I've lived in Denton for 23 years I own my home we've lived in the home for 21 years I don't own the field to the north of us I've enjoyed it I've enjoyed the blackberries I told mr. Johnson every spring there's frogs there because it's on a flood plain I knew when I moved in there we live we're moving into a hundred-year floodplain there's been issues with storm drainage I have a storm drain that runs along my property and then up this way that's not really a creek where the tree line is and I know we're talking we're not talking about drainage but if I had my choice I would say can you put put homes there versus duplexes I I travel around Dent a little bit and I know there's duplexes other places I would rather see homes it's going to devalue our property to the south they've recently it's not on this map but they've recently built successful homes to the south a whole new subdivision where there was a field when we moved there Bobcats have come and gone coyotes are leaving like I said I know it's it's only a matter of time before that's all developed the horses are gone but if I had my choice I would say leave it zoned like it originally was instead of switching it over and saying let's put one and a half times to two times as many and that's that's pretty much all I had so I appreciate I talked to mr. Johnson he talked about the park which is although that's nice that's a pig and a poke because number one I didn't sounds like you're not allowed to build homes on top of the gas line anyway so we can call it a park or we can call it a field the advantage for me is going to be there's not gonna be any meth heads camping to 200 yards or a hundred yards from my house which we've had problems with that some area named the motorcycle tracks and stuff like that but I you know I don't have any problems seeing developed but if I had a choice and I had say any say I would say please leave it zone for single residences so or and I don't know what all the codes are but I'm opposed to the new plan so yeah I appreciate you coming out and your family staying up late it's impactful I will say I'm hoping that this if this goes through the city takes it over so it's not a field it actually can be groomed and sidewalks and actually become a legit part about the development because we're not approving that tonight there's going to be other opportunities to speak into the plotting and the development process so we'd certainly hear it the developers obviously hearing your feedback but there is still iterations to come forward to see what's most economical for the developer it could be homes going forward so that that's not a dead end yet to see what what gets developed there so just I would say stay tuned in terms of the our agendas coming back and then come back and speak to those plans you're more than welcome to come down if able and I live at 2409 whispering Oaks and that street is parallel to what where you will be developing and right before the that your property is so how much distance will there be between my street my house and my fence and your development I've just wondered in what kind of division will there be a whether be a street there can Haley can you speak to that because we won't know what's being developed there but you can speak to any buff ering that would be required or if it just could be a house behind there can you speak to what potentially could border an NR for to an NR for neighborhood certainly so a whispering Oaks is here just south of the property so you would have this existing line of homes in between as well as there would be potentially a single-family home or an alley directly budding that property and there wouldn't be any landscape buffer requirements between single-family zoning so the park would be here on the east side of the property so the homes would be clustered in this area this is currently zoned for single-family and there's a flat under review by the city for single-family homes on that property Commissioner for netta and her concern based on what I'm looking at we're planning on zoning to match where her home actually is right now right going to enter for she's there only in it you're currently in an NR for so basically the the outline would potentially be you know pretty much matching what you already where you already living is there anyone else who wish to speak yes ma'am if you just state your name and address for the record my name is Nancy Carson I live at 2908 Oakshire I am within the 500 mile 500 feet neighborhood from this new development I'm very much against having duplexes in the area due to what we've seen with those that are already there although they are planning they say to put rear entry garages that's still not necessarily going to keep people from parking on the streets I mean I live on Oakshire cars are all up and down the street you don't stop that because you've got a garage or you've got a driveway also I would like to know what size these lots are going to be that the duplexes will be out right now yes we're still at the conceptual stage you know well you know for duplex so for one building well so the two lots combined we're looking you know between 60 to 70 feet wide typically some of them are will be wider some losses if you remember the concept plan you know on those on the south end they get extremely deep matter of fact you know we're even talking about having some detached garages from there just prevent you know the driveways from being so long and to provide those you know people with backyards that they'll be able to use well you must have figured something when you drew this out yeah they're typically I think I put them in about 120 feet deep you know yeah you know we're all going to be able to you know cover 60% of a lot so it's still gonna be a lot of green space you know on the lot you know from from what will be able to build out what do you mean you can only cover 60% of the lot are you talking the whole area on each lot each lot will only be able to cover 60% of a lot with either building or driveway so if you combine those together so you know 40% a lot will still be you know landscape area so there's still be you know good bit of landscape area on each lot well also thank you for answering that I would like to say that builders are going to have absolutely no control over whether the owner is an occupant or not I live in a over 1800 square foot home and each side of the houses on each side of me are rented in fact five houses on my side of the street out of the five three are rentals and one of them on one side of the street an investor came in from San Francisco and he bought that house and I heard many others here in the city and he never sees how those people live or they let their grass grow up knee-deep or you know just all kinds of things very undesirable so you really have no control over that so I understand and and just as a point because the concept plan is not something we're being tied to in our four allows for a density of up to four units per acre so if we look more holistically about what potentially could be done after a rezone it'd be up to four units per acre across the entire plot does anyone else want to speak on this item yes and if you just state your name and address for the record Linda Bleece I live at 2805 Howard Court Denton Texas I had no idea to speak but I am what we are trying to dis discern is to whether for to rezone it from a and and our two to a four yes ma'am I'm opposed to that I would not be opposed so much as to family single-family dwelling but I am concerned over them more in a smaller space and the I was told when we bought our house 14 15 years ago that we were in a floodplain and because of that pipeline or something that was behind us that they wouldn't be building there and now they're building or want to I our house is is very low and when it rains I have never we have never been flooded but it goes out our backyard and all the way down I'm sure where it goes I don 't know because I don't go and look for it but anyway I I really hope that you take into consideration to leave it at - thank you appreciate that we have one question for you Mr. Beck thank you chair and miss please is it thank you for coming up and speaking you were opposed to changing this from an NR two to an NR four but are you aware that Howard Court is an NR four district it is so it's gonna be similar in size what's the difference and the term concern everybody has is the duplex thing but the sizes are gonna be the same but I think I would I would not be opposed to it coming in the back single-family and I understand it as to the drainage and I can't speak to this with any great authority but any development and development come in that comes in you know the city they have to make sure that they're not negatively impacting your property so actually drainage could conceivably improve when they get through with their development or if you were experiencing some minor flooding thank you thank you the system I see okay thank you we had one here first and serve you to state your name and address good evening my name is Charlie Rosendahl live at 1001 Barbara Street I'm opposed to the rezoning I understand that the concept plan is has been presented and today we're just talking about the zoning but once the zoning is changed they would be allowed to build duplexes in that property and there wouldn't be anything we could do at that point I will say here there was a question earlier at the work session about are there any duplexes in the area there's one street of duplexes here and then there's a row of duplexes here and in the entire map that's the only duplexes that I believe are in this this whole area as far as the rental properties that one row of duplexes here is a majority rental properties so I think it's conceivable to to assume that that would happen once this the duplexes are allowed to be built here also there is the NR6 zoning that we've talked about that was approved to the West here I believe council set the precedent in December when they approved that in our six zoning by allowing only single families in there and I think that this this body should abide by that precedent said not even a year ago that if you do allow the increase in densities it should be under the condition that it only be single-family homes I appreciate that yes mr. Walker one thing I would like to point out doesn't quite reach up here but I just want to point out you know that you know there's other areas in the city like up here it's in our mixed use 12 this is you know currently apartments this is undeveloped is also in our you me you 12 these are you know properties in the area that currently could be developed as multif amily without any zoning change I appreciate that because you're all said you want to speak and then I was gonna recognize thank you chair mr. Faulkner my questions for you actually just wondering if you looked in the feasibility of developing this with all single-family homes or garden style homes even yes we have and you know the amount of loss that we were able to get does not meet our financial needs I hate to be talk about money but that's what it's all about the amount of loss that we will have does not make the project economically feasible sir if you just state your name and you need to fill out a new card for this agenda item again it's Bob highly and I live at 3855 Le isure Lane I live on the other side of town but I have a dear friend that lives on barber Street who can't get out and she asked me since I was coming to look out for it but Michael my question is if the city takes over a big chunk of that property as City Park that you were mentioning on the east side which is directly behind our house which would be great but how does that figure into the are the are for is the track then reduced by the park line from separated from the parkland which would then mean that the actual density would would be less one the remaining property I'll ask Haley for clarification but I assume they can use that as a density credit certainly since it would all be platted together the entire 13 and a half acres would count for their density but it would be subdivided in the park would be dedicated as a separate lot to the city after that point but they they could get credit for that density does that answer your question yes well it's not being proposed but it could happen is actually greater than four per acre that's Chris yeah it would it would be any ways when you take in road consideration so any property it varies once you take road any tree mitigation any of that that provides density credit so it's not typically once the project's done it's not four acre four houses per that individual acre it's across the entire plot okay I just anyone else like to speak on this item I appreciate you all coming out and staying up late with us oh yes ma'am thank you miss that one there you just state your name and address please Lynette leak and I live at 1216 Oak Valley and I just wanted to say I was I'm opposed to that change zoning to NR4 but what is NR6 what did what does that address to what's the inner six so the inner six on this is the orange directly to the west of the subject property and it was approved last year as a rezone and there's a plot on file if you if you wanted to see how those houses will be constructed there already in the platting stage so you can see it's publicly available to know the roads and housing that's going on in that orange block it's being constructed now yeah just I mean similar concerns I mean just the same thing just that there would be the multifamily homes and just the density that it would be an issue or just be a problem and changing the neighborhood so that's it thank you for your feedback ma'am if you could if you could come down for I'm sure there's thousands of people watching this on TV right now my wife is apparently so there's one no I just want to ask about the NR6 does that mean what does that mean I mean fundamentally it's just a higher density area than in our six they can they can go up to six units per acre that specific property we ca pped them so they're not going to be above I believe it's five per acre they had a provision on it but there are uses identified in each zoning category of what can be placed in each zone and so it's it's actually a pretty long list but it's just a higher density residential zone in classification yeah that's really high okay thank you if I may add just a little bit of the explanation between NR6 and our four NR6 permits duplex by right regardless of where they are NR4 restricts it to essentially interior lots so they can't a duplex could not a but a single-family lot property line to property line within NR4 and so this this this site is sort of unique given that that that pipeline and open space and so they're as a result they're able to to sort of arrange it in a way that internalizes the duplexes so that's how it's permitted in NR4 which is really the the distinction from from NR6 with those overlays if that helps thank you Richard mr. Beck thank you chair Haley did what was the opposition percentage here I just going forward if if if we do approve this does it meet the criteria for the super majority at City Council because this is not the final stop by the way folks we'd have to recalculate with that prior to the meeting I had our GIS team right and we were only at about 3% with with the ones reflected here on the map certainly these responses would also go into that but I'm not sure if it would hit that 20% because there there are these large tracks to the the west of the site that would make up a sizable amount okay thank you anyone else like to speak on this item seeing none I'll close the public hearing and open for discussion or motion Christian Beck thank you chair and thank all of you for coming down and staying as long as you have I know it's it's been a long night for you and I realize this is a frustrating development for you I empathize with you really I've stated my concerns I think duplexes turn to tend to turn over quicker as rental property but as rental property goes every neighborhood is going to have some I believe mr. Faulkner stated that at least the initial buyer had to be had to reside in the home what happens after somebody sells a house nobody has any control over that either so but what we're looking at here is a piece of property that's been here for a while mr. Faulkner feels that if it was all single-family that he wouldn't get the bang for his buck and I understand that you know money is an issue here that bothers some people bothers me some of the times but eventually this property will sit there for a long period of time we won't gain any tax revenue from it if we don't do something and this is this isn't a real is reasonable in the sense that it's he's willing to work with you on the traffic issue putting speed bumps in hopefully it'll occur the buffers seem adequate more than adequate and if you get a green zone there maybe even a city park you've got a little extra benefit that you didn't have so there is some reluctance on my part to to approve this but it does meet the criteria that the city establishes so that being said even reluctantly I 'm gonna make a motion to approve the 1815 with any conditions we had no okay thank you Commissioner Beck we have a motion Chris your Sanchez is that look look around in the neighborhood you know you have an R6 and quite a bit of NR for there you have a few areas that are NR to and I'm you know if you want to stay with with I don't think in our floor is contradictory what he's asking for for what it's in the area and that you know I guess we look at duplexes but that's not what we're here talking about we're here to talk about the zoning you know is there a good possibility of there being duplexes there there probably is that's probably the most feasible like you mentioned this what can you build there and still make a little bit of money that's somewhat it's a that's what it's all about people have to make a little bit a little bit of money they just can't leave that property vacant so you know I think looking at the area the whole area I'm gonna vote for it and Christians like chances are you are you second in the motion yes okay any other discussion yes Commissioner Ellis thank you chair I just a couple thoughts thank you all for coming out to share yours I struggle with this a little bit for for similar reasons that you mentioned when I saw a duplexes is going in here however with the limitations I think for what can be built on the lot with hopefully the the forward progress made with the city for the park as well as the limitations that the development code puts on where the duplexes can be on the lot I think this can be a very nice development going forward if if this concept plan actually makes it in their two hundred fifty thousand dollars a side that will speak to more owner occupants than it does to rentals because the money factor is not going to make any sense for the landlord if they spend that kind of money they're not going to make any money on a rent so those are my thoughts and I will support the motion Christian back thank you chair and this is for the people who live in the area mr. Faulkner don't take it personal but this isn't the last step this has to go to City Council it has to be approved I mentioned the 20% ratio that if you know there's strong enough opposition in the surrounding areas within the 200 feet if you can get them at City Council and amounts to 20% of the population they can only approve by a super majority vote which would be a six to one if so it means that it works in your favor if you get six to one no no we're talking about the area within 200 feet of the area you have to have I'm not sure it's 20% Haley can you help with that you need a few more yes yeah the the 20% is calculated based on the land area within this 200 foot buffer so within the red circle so it would be a large number of properties that would have to voice opposition either by submitting that in writing to us or attending one of the meetings to trigger that but even still yeah there's coming before the City Council again it would be the final now or approval of it denial of it so there is still one more opportunity so I wanted to before I call us to a vote is is again thank you all for staying late I wanted to echo Commissioner Becks points and what I said earlier there is more to this process and so stay active and even if the zoning goes through council has to approve it and then once that's approved then there has to be a platting stage that that people can articulate into it in terms of my opinion on the rezoning I think as it stands as an inner to that land is and has not been able to be developed and I'm for the infill development of this land and so I'm in support of it in our four because I think it does provide the residents in that inner four neighborhood a little bit of buffer going to that in our six to the west I would stay based on the feedback I heard I would encourage the applicant to see what economic feasibilities you have with the density credit from the east side property you could you could do to give single-family homes and hear the feedback of the residents to see if that if there is a breakeven point that makes sense there but I can appreciate the economic feasibility of the property in a whole with that said though I'd be interested to see if there's there's other projects that are feasible on that property that would fit more in line with what the residents have has a how articulated tonight but with that I don't see any other discussion so I will call for this vote on the board motion carries six zero with one absent next on the agenda is our planning zoning Commission project matrix and I will start off asking Richard if there's any updates wanted to provide just a quick update on on the tree code I know we originally talked about bringing it back earlier for this evening we're still working on those on those changes we're going back to the Committee on the Environment what had happened as a result of the holiday that meeting got got moved so we're going back this coming Monday and so we have made made some revisions some updates based upon the input but again we still are in the in the drafting stage and we're certainly open to open to discussion but we are we're moving as swiftly as we can on it I think part of it when we do come back we didn't get really a chance to talk about the landscape code and so as we look at canopy and talk about canopy there's there's multiple components to it that I want to make sure that we it doesn't just get lost in in with the preservation component Christopher Beck thank you chair question I guess first for I make a second what is the requirement for the orange fencing on trees is it supposed to be at the drip line tree drip line because if it's not I want I've got a pull I've got to pull it up but I'll give that I want to talk to Haywood but I will give that answer okay I'll send it to everybody tomorrow if it's not my suggestion would be that we push for that because that makes sense the loss of trees is needless if we get in some right and if it is identified on that approved tree preservation plan if it is lost they are required to right they are required to replace it I curse your Alice thank you chair bear with me I just have a couple here so recently I read an editorial I guess it was over the weekend about a small business owner who was impacted by some construction that was happening in front of her business and she got no notification of that I don't have specifics again it was just an editorial she didn't say exactly where this was but she mentioned the city and a certain developer who tore up the sidewalk in front of her business took up most of her parking and she did not know anything about it so can you get us info on what that process is for notifying I would hope that we have one and if a small business owner like that is gonna be impacted they certainly need to be able to make accommodations for their customers in there or even somebody to call right right another one is can we address the concerns about the notifications today I I don't understand why everybody in Regency wouldn't have received that doesn't make any sense to me but I also I saw a response I think it was on one of the creek side notifications that they didn't live there anymore and they hadn't for a year and we sent them a notice so I'm confused on that as well because we shouldn't have your own I mean they sold their property she said July of 17 this is August of 18 or September of 18 excuse me I'm thinking we should have more updated roles than that yeah because we're pulling right from the from from the crazy and I don't know if there's an easy answer to that but we've come across the past the county sends over their certified tax roll once a year in the past it's taken our GIS team a while to get our entire database updated with that new information so there typically is at least a year lag time in our addressing which which is an issue but it's my understanding and maybe Jerry could help with that that we are required to use the certified tax roll I believe that is a local government code requirement so so he's not necessarily aware rounded yeah and the 500 foot is based on the more updated addresses so I'm not sure what the issue was with those but we we did get the receipt from our mailing service that showed they were all mailed and it's supposed to go to every current residents not not to a certified property owner what it's worth Michelle's I this is the first time that I was in a 500 foot boundary and I don't want to project this as anyone else in the audience this is just me but when I went to the mail and I had two periodicals and a lot of junk mail it was very easy to have been slipped through and so that's not to say we send out a massive one or anything but I will say if you're not diligently going through your mail I mean it's it's possible especially if it's not certified I've just got one more and that is I don't know if the gentleman who he's not here anymore but he was annexed into the city said and promised services what what what is the what I want to know is yeah the process on that because he said that was quite quite a long time ago and I don't think anything's changed on his property and I have it I made a note to myself to check into that definitely like I'll just confirm what Haley said about the most recently approved tax roll it's in the section 211 007 C of the Texas local government code and for the purposes of tracking the super majority requirement and sending out notifications and counting the opposition for creating a super majority that's what's required but that can only be updated just once a year yeah well it's whenever they do it it says the most recently approved municipal tax roll of real property within 200 feet of the property and I don't I assume that they would do that once a year if I could just add one more I don't want to take Julie's thunder for her her boot camp slide when we when we get to it on notifications with it with the 200 foot notification we have again like a lot of things in our department we're continuing to evolve and we have changed those notices at least the information that's going out we're obviously still providing what's being done but also being a little bit more explicit about exactly what's being done not so so there's been a concern as you see saw with I think with the car wash where people are invited to come to a public hearing and in their mind they have an idea of what that what can be voted on but in turn it's something different and so we're in the process of that was something that that that was requested at council and it was a good idea so we are continually to adjust that and better inform the citizens just wanted to provide that update anyone else fantastic with that I will close the public hearing or the work session whatever this planning and zoning Commission meeting at 936 thank you