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