1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:10,960
 Good evening and thank you for holding a little bit.

2
00:00:10,960 --> 00:00:16,160
 We run a little behind but welcome to the plan and zoning work session meeting for November

3
00:00:16,160 --> 00:00:17,160
 14th.

4
00:00:17,160 --> 00:00:23,040
 We'll open the work session at 415 and work through the agenda.

5
00:00:23,040 --> 00:00:26,480
 First I'll ask if there's any clarification to the agenda from Richard that we need to

6
00:00:26,480 --> 00:00:28,480
 go over or highlight.

7
00:00:28,480 --> 00:00:30,800
 Perfect.

8
00:00:30,800 --> 00:00:33,920
 So first up we'll go to the consent agenda item.

9
00:00:33,920 --> 00:00:36,160
 There's four items, nope, three items there.

10
00:00:36,160 --> 00:00:39,200
 Is there any questions on any of those items that we need to bring up?

11
00:00:39,200 --> 00:00:40,200
 Commissioner Beck.

12
00:00:40,200 --> 00:00:41,200
 Thank you, Chair.

13
00:00:41,200 --> 00:00:47,320
 I do have one quick question about the FP-1805.

14
00:00:47,320 --> 00:00:54,840
 Can I invite Haley up?

15
00:00:54,840 --> 00:00:58,040
 Looking at, and you don't need to bring anything up, looking at the Google map there, there's

16
00:00:58,040 --> 00:00:59,600
 a big old natural water tank.

17
00:00:59,600 --> 00:01:04,080
 Is that, is that gone away or is that still there and if it's still there are they working

18
00:01:04,080 --> 00:01:05,080
 around it?

19
00:01:05,080 --> 00:01:07,480
 Are you referring to the pond that's on the property?

20
00:01:07,480 --> 00:01:08,480
 Yes.

21
00:01:08,480 --> 00:01:14,840
 That, the existing pond is slightly off site from where this project is, but it is kind

22
00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:19,760
 of being worked around for this project and another one and will be modified as they develop

23
00:01:19,760 --> 00:01:23,400
 when they'll be providing onsite detention to kind of replace that existing pond.

24
00:01:23,400 --> 00:01:26,280
 Okay, okay, but they're going to be building around it.

25
00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:27,280
 Yes, that's correct.

26
00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:28,280
 Thanks.

27
00:01:28,280 --> 00:01:29,280
 Thanks, Haley.

28
00:01:29,280 --> 00:01:32,560
 Is there any other questions about the consent agenda?

29
00:01:32,560 --> 00:01:37,940
 I think we're good.

30
00:01:37,940 --> 00:01:41,200
 With that, we'll go to individual consideration, which is the calendar.

31
00:01:41,200 --> 00:01:42,200
 We can talk about it briefly.

32
00:01:42,200 --> 00:01:49,360
 Is there any dates or any concerns from anyone regarding the calendar?

33
00:01:49,360 --> 00:01:54,320
 Yes, Commissioner Ellis, sorry.

34
00:01:54,320 --> 00:01:56,280
 Thank you, Chair.

35
00:01:56,280 --> 00:01:57,280
 Just an observation.

36
00:01:57,280 --> 00:01:59,240
 We only have one meeting scheduled in July.

37
00:01:59,240 --> 00:02:00,240
 Typically we have two.

38
00:02:00,240 --> 00:02:04,240
 Is that, was that on purpose?

39
00:02:04,240 --> 00:02:13,100
 Is that okay?

40
00:02:13,100 --> 00:02:18,360
 It was just with the holidays lining it up and then adjusting every other, so it was

41
00:02:18,360 --> 00:02:22,240
 almost going to play out that it was going to happen at one month or we were going to

42
00:02:22,240 --> 00:02:28,040
 have almost back-to-back meetings as we, you know, and so we just kind of kept it at kind

43
00:02:28,040 --> 00:02:30,080
 of with the normal schedule.

44
00:02:30,080 --> 00:02:31,960
 Okay, because it looked like it worked okay before.

45
00:02:31,960 --> 00:02:35,080
 It's just, it must be on the back end then of the calendar.

46
00:02:35,080 --> 00:02:36,080
 If I recall correctly.

47
00:02:36,080 --> 00:02:37,080
 Okay.

48
00:02:37,080 --> 00:02:38,080
 Just curious.

49
00:02:38,080 --> 00:02:39,080
 Mr. Beck.

50
00:02:39,080 --> 00:02:40,080
 Thank you, Chair.

51
00:02:40,080 --> 00:02:43,760
 I'm just curious why we went from the second and fourth Wednesday to the first and third

52
00:02:43,760 --> 00:02:52,760
 Wednesday, too.

53
00:02:52,760 --> 00:02:53,760
 Silence.

54
00:02:53,760 --> 00:02:56,560
 You know, when we first joined it was the first and third and then it switched to the

55
00:02:56,560 --> 00:02:59,600
 second and fourth and now it's, I think, back.

56
00:02:59,600 --> 00:03:03,800
 It's been a while, but is that what it's going to be now, first and third Wednesday?

57
00:03:03,800 --> 00:03:04,800
 Evidently.

58
00:03:04,800 --> 00:03:05,800
 Yeah, that's what we are.

59
00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:06,800
 Unless you want to.

60
00:03:06,800 --> 00:03:07,800
 Okay.

61
00:03:07,800 --> 00:03:08,800
 Looking at the council schedule.

62
00:03:08,800 --> 00:03:09,800
 It appears to be.

63
00:03:09,800 --> 00:03:10,800
 There wasn't any particular reason why we...

64
00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:11,800
 Okay.

65
00:03:11,800 --> 00:03:17,360
 I wonder if council changed something because we usually meet with council or the Wednesday

66
00:03:17,360 --> 00:03:18,360
 after council.

67
00:03:18,360 --> 00:03:19,360
 Okay.

68
00:03:19,360 --> 00:03:20,360
 Commissioner Ellis.

69
00:03:20,360 --> 00:03:21,360
 Thank you.

70
00:03:21,360 --> 00:03:24,480
 Actually, it looks like it jumps throughout, depending on the month.

71
00:03:24,480 --> 00:03:25,480
 Pardon me?

72
00:03:25,480 --> 00:03:26,480
 It looks like it jumps.

73
00:03:26,480 --> 00:03:28,880
 I mean, you got second and fourth, you know.

74
00:03:28,880 --> 00:03:29,880
 Because of the holidays.

75
00:03:29,880 --> 00:03:30,880
 Yeah.

76
00:03:30,880 --> 00:03:31,880
 You got to work around that.

77
00:03:31,880 --> 00:03:32,880
 Yeah.

78
00:03:32,880 --> 00:03:33,880
 I know spring break gets us in there.

79
00:03:33,880 --> 00:03:34,880
 Probably some holidays, so.

80
00:03:34,880 --> 00:03:38,240
 I was looking at May and I thought, okay, it's spring break, but then it continued on

81
00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:39,240
 after that.

82
00:03:39,240 --> 00:03:40,240
 Yeah.

83
00:03:40,240 --> 00:03:41,240
 January because it was the day after.

84
00:03:41,240 --> 00:03:42,240
 Yeah.

85
00:03:42,240 --> 00:03:43,240
 And I think that date had already been set.

86
00:03:43,240 --> 00:03:49,040
 And then it was essentially first and third with the exception of July.

87
00:03:49,040 --> 00:03:54,760
 I thought you guys were just trying to throw me off.

88
00:03:54,760 --> 00:03:58,360
 I've got to adjust to this now.

89
00:03:58,360 --> 00:03:59,760
 All right.

90
00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:00,760
 Thanks.

91
00:04:00,760 --> 00:04:01,760
 Perfect.

92
00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:09,720
 We'll consider the vote in public session, so if anything comes up between now and then,

93
00:04:09,720 --> 00:04:13,940
 we'll certainly make sure that I think Commissioner Smith will be here to weigh in if that needs

94
00:04:13,940 --> 00:04:16,000
 to be discussed further.

95
00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:22,200
 Moving on to public hearing, item A, that has been postponed once again.

96
00:04:22,200 --> 00:04:26,200
 So we hope to hear that later this month.

97
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:30,880
 Same with B, that's been withdrawn completely.

98
00:04:30,880 --> 00:04:36,920
 And then that'll move us to items C and then subsequently D. But the first one would be

99
00:04:36,920 --> 00:04:42,440
 the zoning 180022 and Ron can take it away.

100
00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:43,440
 Great.

101
00:04:43,440 --> 00:04:47,040
 Thank you, Chair, members of the commission.

102
00:04:47,040 --> 00:04:53,680
 Hold this up real quick.

103
00:04:53,680 --> 00:05:02,800
 This is the rezoning requests for a property located just south of Mingo, west of Mockingbird,

104
00:05:02,800 --> 00:05:05,320
 as shown on this exhibit, this slide.

105
00:05:05,320 --> 00:05:12,320
 The request is to go from a zoning district of NRMU 12 to NRMU.

106
00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:18,400
 The proposed zoning change is to allow for more density.

107
00:05:18,400 --> 00:05:26,120
 Back earlier this year, there was a submittal for a specific use permit, which staff reviewed.

108
00:05:26,120 --> 00:05:31,360
 Looking at the site plan, it was determined that the density would not fit or would not

109
00:05:31,360 --> 00:05:38,880
 be allowed under the NRMU 12, therefore the applicant has requested a zoning change to

110
00:05:38,880 --> 00:05:39,880
 NRMU.

111
00:05:39,880 --> 00:05:45,720
 The site is approximately 9.91 acres, and again, the general location is just south

112
00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:53,720
 of Mingo and east, I'm sorry, west of Mockingbird.

113
00:05:53,720 --> 00:06:01,280
 Looking at the future land use designation of the area, you see that there is moderate

114
00:06:01,280 --> 00:06:08,160
 residential along this swath of area, south of the railroad tracks.

115
00:06:08,160 --> 00:06:15,840
 You've got community mixed use to the north, and to the south of the area is N residential,

116
00:06:15,840 --> 00:06:19,800
 low residential, right here.

117
00:06:19,800 --> 00:06:27,160
 The intent for moderate residential is for four to 12 dwelling units per acre, small detached

118
00:06:27,160 --> 00:06:28,160
 houses.

119
00:06:28,160 --> 00:06:32,680
 Small homes and multi-family are permitted, but at a lower density.

120
00:06:32,680 --> 00:06:38,680
 The idea here is to maintain the scale and orientation of the area.

121
00:06:38,680 --> 00:06:45,960
 It serves as a transition to zoning from low to moderate to a little bit more intense uses,

122
00:06:45,960 --> 00:06:54,640
 so that's the intent as far as the future land use designation is presented.

123
00:06:54,640 --> 00:07:01,400
 So this slide here illustrates the comparison between what is existing NRMU 12 and what

124
00:07:01,400 --> 00:07:09,320
 it will be if it was to be approved, which is NRMU, so just a mapping slide that shows

125
00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:12,280
 the difference.

126
00:07:12,280 --> 00:07:16,840
 As you all know, there are two criteria in which the Planning Zoning Commission uses

127
00:07:16,840 --> 00:07:22,400
 per the development code that the proposed rezoning conforms with the future land use

128
00:07:22,400 --> 00:07:28,080
 element of the Den Plan 2030.

129
00:07:28,080 --> 00:07:34,720
 There is an analysis in your backup that kind of covers the intent, again, of the future

130
00:07:34,720 --> 00:07:38,280
 land use element, specifically the moderate residential.

131
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:46,240
 In addition, the zoning change request also should be reviewed against its ability or

132
00:07:46,240 --> 00:07:53,760
 the zoning ability to facilitate the adequate provision for infrastructure such as transportation,

133
00:07:53,760 --> 00:08:01,720
 water, sewer, schools, and other public requirements and convenience.

134
00:08:01,720 --> 00:08:08,320
 So we further, as the two criteria state, we looked at the future land use element and,

135
00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:10,160
 again, residential moderate.

136
00:08:10,160 --> 00:08:17,040
 We discussed earlier, four to 12 dwelling units, low-rise multifamilies are permitted,

137
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:22,120
 and again, the idea there is to complement the surrounding area, primarily in planning

138
00:08:22,120 --> 00:08:31,160
 terms is a way of providing a transition or buffer to more intense uses.

139
00:08:31,160 --> 00:08:37,340
 In cases where the land use or the zoning does not fit the future land use designation

140
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:44,720
 such as moderate residential, staff has the ability to look at a criteria of what do we

141
00:08:44,720 --> 00:08:49,320
 look at, and this is a list of what we look at.

142
00:08:49,320 --> 00:08:55,440
 In some instances, it was clear that it would not fit within the future land use designation

143
00:08:55,440 --> 00:08:56,440
 of moderate residential.

144
00:08:56,440 --> 00:09:00,800
 I'm not going to go through all of this, but this, again, is a list that we looked into

145
00:09:00,800 --> 00:09:07,320
 when we considered proposing a recommendation.

146
00:09:07,320 --> 00:09:12,780
 For the analysis, we also looked at off-street compatibility.

147
00:09:12,780 --> 00:09:18,360
 One of the things that we want to make sure is that this zoning district would be compatible

148
00:09:18,360 --> 00:09:22,820
 with the surrounding area and the uses that go with that zoning district.

149
00:09:22,820 --> 00:09:29,320
 So again, to orient you to the area, if you already know it, Mingo to the north, you've

150
00:09:29,320 --> 00:09:35,400
 got University to the further northeast, Loop 288 is to the east here, and then Audre is

151
00:09:35,400 --> 00:09:42,760
 the main street to the south, Mockingbird follows this line in this general area here.

152
00:09:42,760 --> 00:09:48,160
 We've got a number of residential subdivisions in the area, Bel Air North directly south,

153
00:09:48,160 --> 00:09:53,720
 Oak Ridge east of the property, further east is Audre Heights, further south is the East

154
00:09:53,720 --> 00:09:56,760
 Hampton Village subdivision.

155
00:09:56,760 --> 00:10:04,360
 Also to the west, we have the Shiloh Fields, and then Woodlands of Denton, which is a multifamily

156
00:10:04,360 --> 00:10:08,880
 development to the west, further west.

157
00:10:08,880 --> 00:10:14,000
 I concentrated this analysis or this review based just south of the railroad, just because

158
00:10:14,000 --> 00:10:18,800
 the railroad north is a little bit more intense, what we're trying to do is see how it's compatible

159
00:10:18,800 --> 00:10:19,800
 to the south.

160
00:10:19,800 --> 00:10:27,360
 And so that's why you see the names of these subdivisions just primarily to the south.

161
00:10:27,360 --> 00:10:34,320
 Understanding that the proposal is for multifamily and the rezoning is for NRMU, I pulled in

162
00:10:34,320 --> 00:10:41,000
 information for the Woodlands of Denton, this was a rezoning back in 2012.

163
00:10:41,000 --> 00:10:50,840
 It was approved from NR6 and NRMU 12 to NRMU, it's currently zoned NRMU.

164
00:10:50,840 --> 00:10:55,320
 Along with that was a specific use permit, which was approved with conditions following

165
00:10:55,320 --> 00:10:58,000
 that in February of 2013.

166
00:10:58,000 --> 00:11:02,920
 Again, the subdivision, or I'm sorry, the multifamily development, as you can see, is

167
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:11,640
 two to three stories, it's approximately 19.87 acres, and their general density is around

168
00:11:11,640 --> 00:11:15,200
 15.9 dwelling units per acre.

169
00:11:15,200 --> 00:11:21,200
 Just to give you some context of what's in the area, again, that's the Woodlands of Denton

170
00:11:21,200 --> 00:11:22,840
 to the west.

171
00:11:22,840 --> 00:11:29,640
 Outside of that, all of the areas to the south and east are primarily single family, approximately

172
00:11:29,640 --> 00:11:37,560
 four, maybe four and a half dwelling units per acre.

173
00:11:37,560 --> 00:11:44,840
 Mobility-wise, the area is shown here, is bordered to the east with a collector, which

174
00:11:44,840 --> 00:11:51,440
 is Mockingbird, Lane to the north is Mingo, and then further north is Old North as it

175
00:11:51,440 --> 00:11:55,760
 turns, and then University shown here in red.

176
00:11:55,760 --> 00:12:01,880
 It's important to note that all of the streets that surround this property or abut this property

177
00:12:01,880 --> 00:12:08,320
 are not to its roadway classification, which is Mockingbird is a collector.

178
00:12:08,320 --> 00:12:15,760
 It doesn't qualify as a collector right now because of the condition, it's a two-lane

179
00:12:15,760 --> 00:12:18,640
 collector is a little bit more wider.

180
00:12:18,640 --> 00:12:26,240
 The secondary arterial, which is Mingo Road, as you all know, it's still a two-lane, two-divided

181
00:12:26,240 --> 00:12:27,240
 roadway.

182
00:12:27,240 --> 00:12:33,700
 It will probably be a modified arterial because of the railroad, but again, it's not built

183
00:12:33,700 --> 00:12:39,600
 to what it's currently classified as.

184
00:12:39,600 --> 00:12:44,200
 So we further took an analysis of the area.

185
00:12:44,200 --> 00:12:49,680
 Traffic infrastructure improvements, this is typically done through platting, but we

186
00:12:49,680 --> 00:12:56,160
 did some analysis, and there is adequate services in the area as far as water and sewer.

187
00:12:56,160 --> 00:13:02,280
 Transportation, we asked the applicant to prepare a TIA in order to provide answers

188
00:13:02,280 --> 00:13:07,920
 as to what impacts this proposed development would be, or this zoning would be, and the

189
00:13:07,920 --> 00:13:16,320
 traffic mitigations that were identified by our traffic engineers to meet the need for

190
00:13:16,320 --> 00:13:23,640
 the area and not to create more impacts as far as level of services have been met, and

191
00:13:23,640 --> 00:13:28,600
 they, being the applicants, have incorporated those mitigation measures as part of their

192
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:35,260
 site plan, and you have a copy of their site plan and their landscape plan.

193
00:13:35,260 --> 00:13:41,880
 The other things that we looked at, of course, when you're going from an NRMU 12 to an NRMU

194
00:13:41,880 --> 00:13:49,200
 zoning district is the permitted uses, and of course, with NRMU, they're going to have,

195
00:13:49,200 --> 00:13:57,880
 if approved, more uses permitted, more intense uses, and these are just examples, bless you.

196
00:13:57,880 --> 00:14:04,000
 Bars, drive-through facilities, hotels, quick vehicle services, restaurants, bakeries, all

197
00:14:04,000 --> 00:14:08,280
 of which is not permitted currently in the NRMU 12.

198
00:14:08,280 --> 00:14:16,480
 Similarly, general regulations, the NRMU has a little bit more regulations that are not

199
00:14:16,480 --> 00:14:23,680
 as restrictive as the NRMU 12, as you can imagine, in terms of maximum density.

200
00:14:23,680 --> 00:14:30,300
 The density for NRMU 12 is 12, the density for NRMU is 30.

201
00:14:30,300 --> 00:14:36,080
 Maximum lot coverage, I believe it's 65, and its NRMU is 80.

202
00:14:36,080 --> 00:14:43,960
 Maximum height is 40, and NRMU is 65.

203
00:14:43,960 --> 00:14:47,280
 We kind of went over this briefly already.

204
00:14:47,280 --> 00:14:52,520
 It's staff's determination that the proposed zoning is not consistent or does not conform

205
00:14:52,520 --> 00:14:57,360
 with the future land use element in terms of dwelling use per acre.

206
00:14:57,360 --> 00:15:06,160
 They are proposing 26.7, where the moderate residential in our comp plan states 4 to 12,

207
00:15:06,160 --> 00:15:11,740
 thereby creating an outlet scale or character to the surrounding area.

208
00:15:11,740 --> 00:15:19,840
 There was a neighborhood meeting that the applicant held on October 30th.

209
00:15:19,840 --> 00:15:20,840
 There was not many people there.

210
00:15:20,840 --> 00:15:21,840
 There was one person there.

211
00:15:21,840 --> 00:15:23,280
 I attended the meeting.

212
00:15:23,280 --> 00:15:28,720
 You have a summary of the meeting notes that was provided by the applicant.

213
00:15:28,720 --> 00:15:30,860
 It's consistent.

214
00:15:30,860 --> 00:15:37,240
 We the consultants presented to this one member of the community and answered all their questions,

215
00:15:37,240 --> 00:15:38,240
 all his questions.

216
00:15:38,240 --> 00:15:39,240
 >> Commissioner Smith.

217
00:15:39,240 --> 00:15:40,240
 >> Thank you, Chair.

218
00:15:40,240 --> 00:15:42,320
 I saw that there was only one person there.

219
00:15:42,320 --> 00:15:48,200
 Did you talk to the one who was there and did -- what was the -- it was obviously sent

220
00:15:48,200 --> 00:15:49,200
 out.

221
00:15:49,200 --> 00:15:50,200
 It was over 500 feet.

222
00:15:50,200 --> 00:15:54,340
 Did he say when he got notification of it, why was it so poorly attended?

223
00:15:54,340 --> 00:15:55,340
 Could you get an idea?

224
00:15:55,340 --> 00:15:58,040
 Was there poor timing on the notification of it?

225
00:15:58,040 --> 00:16:00,120
 Was it not very clearly worded?

226
00:16:00,120 --> 00:16:02,400
 Did anybody say anything about that?

227
00:16:02,400 --> 00:16:08,000
 >> I didn't ask him directly, but I've received phone calls since this was published.

228
00:16:08,000 --> 00:16:13,880
 And the response that I received was that they received and they weren't prepared to

229
00:16:13,880 --> 00:16:14,880
 attend.

230
00:16:14,880 --> 00:16:21,120
 And so either it was poor timing and/or maybe they just weren't available.

231
00:16:21,120 --> 00:16:25,400
 I was obviously shocked when I walked in and there was just one person.

232
00:16:25,400 --> 00:16:28,080
 Actually I was there before that one person.

233
00:16:28,080 --> 00:16:31,920
 But you know, folks, you know, are busy.

234
00:16:31,920 --> 00:16:34,880
 But other than that, I believe they were notified in time.

235
00:16:34,880 --> 00:16:39,500
 I know that the applicant did try hard to set up the meeting and I don't think it was

236
00:16:39,500 --> 00:16:40,500
 poorly notified.

237
00:16:40,500 --> 00:16:42,880
 I think it was just -- people are just busy.

238
00:16:42,880 --> 00:16:45,200
 They were also maybe trick-or-treating.

239
00:16:45,200 --> 00:16:48,240
 >> Just one more, I'm sorry.

240
00:16:48,240 --> 00:16:52,160
 The notification, you know, it did go into, you know, the apartments across the way.

241
00:16:52,160 --> 00:16:55,800
 And you know, mainly we're -- I guess we're probably going to hear from citizens tonight

242
00:16:55,800 --> 00:16:58,240
 that are in the neighborhood that are just to the south of it.

243
00:16:58,240 --> 00:17:02,380
 But since it was only sent to property owners, I'm assuming that the residents of the tenants

244
00:17:02,380 --> 00:17:04,880
 of the apartments across the way didn't.

245
00:17:04,880 --> 00:17:05,880
 >> Which apartments were you talking about?

246
00:17:05,880 --> 00:17:07,760
 >> It's -- I think they're called Village East.

247
00:17:07,760 --> 00:17:08,760
 They're right there.

248
00:17:08,760 --> 00:17:09,760
 Right there.

249
00:17:09,760 --> 00:17:10,760
 You go right across the street.

250
00:17:10,760 --> 00:17:13,380
 >> Yes, they were also.

251
00:17:13,380 --> 00:17:16,080
 >> The property owners got the notification.

252
00:17:16,080 --> 00:17:17,080
 >> Not the residents.

253
00:17:17,080 --> 00:17:18,080
 Correct.

254
00:17:18,080 --> 00:17:19,520
 >> The property owner probably doesn't live there.

255
00:17:19,520 --> 00:17:20,520
 >> Sorry.

256
00:17:20,520 --> 00:17:23,360
 I was like, I don't remember typing Village East because it was to the north.

257
00:17:23,360 --> 00:17:24,360
 >> No, no, yeah.

258
00:17:24,360 --> 00:17:25,360
 Just to note that part.

259
00:17:25,360 --> 00:17:26,360
 >> Yeah, yeah, yeah.

260
00:17:26,360 --> 00:17:27,360
 >> Right there.

261
00:17:27,360 --> 00:17:28,360
 All right.

262
00:17:28,360 --> 00:17:29,360
 Well, thank you.

263
00:17:29,360 --> 00:17:30,360
 I appreciate it.

264
00:17:30,360 --> 00:17:31,360
 >> Commissioner Pernetta.

265
00:17:31,360 --> 00:17:32,360
 >> No.

266
00:17:32,360 --> 00:17:33,360
 My point was kind of what you're about to say.

267
00:17:33,360 --> 00:17:34,360
 I mean, I am noticing that this went out.

268
00:17:34,360 --> 00:17:36,480
 We had only one person attend.

269
00:17:36,480 --> 00:17:41,560
 This kind of butts up against several houses that I would assume have, you know, families

270
00:17:41,560 --> 00:17:46,320
 living in there and this seems to be timed exactly when everybody would be taking their

271
00:17:46,320 --> 00:17:47,320
 kids trick-or-treating.

272
00:17:47,320 --> 00:17:54,040
 >> Well, I think it was maybe in the notice or the meeting note, it said November -- October

273
00:17:54,040 --> 00:18:00,200
 31st, but it was actually the Tuesday, October 30th.

274
00:18:00,200 --> 00:18:01,640
 So it was not during Halloween.

275
00:18:01,640 --> 00:18:05,160
 I know that because I was trick-or-treating.

276
00:18:05,160 --> 00:18:06,160
 >> You personally?

277
00:18:06,160 --> 00:18:07,160
 >> Me personally.

278
00:18:07,160 --> 00:18:08,160
 >> Thank you for clarifying.

279
00:18:08,160 --> 00:18:09,160
 >> Commissioner Beck.

280
00:18:09,160 --> 00:18:16,360
 >> On the back of that, where is the courtyard, Mary, located at?

281
00:18:16,360 --> 00:18:20,760
 Is that the one over on my ropes?

282
00:18:20,760 --> 00:18:22,760
 >> By Brinker and I-35.

283
00:18:22,760 --> 00:18:23,760
 >> Okay.

284
00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:27,760
 >> Which is about ten minutes away from here.

285
00:18:27,760 --> 00:18:28,760
 >> Okay.

286
00:18:28,760 --> 00:18:35,840
 Yeah, the location probably wasn't ideal either, but -- okay, thanks.

287
00:18:35,840 --> 00:18:40,680
 >> As part of the notification requirements for a public hearing, the newspaper notice

288
00:18:40,680 --> 00:18:42,200
 was published.

289
00:18:42,200 --> 00:18:49,160
 There were 24 notices sent to property owners within 200 feet, 86 to residents within 500

290
00:18:49,160 --> 00:18:51,040
 feet of the subject site.

291
00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:57,120
 As you can see, two posted signs were posted by the applicant.

292
00:18:57,120 --> 00:19:02,480
 As of this afternoon, we did receive a lot of comments, emails, phone calls, emails that

293
00:19:02,480 --> 00:19:04,880
 you have in front of you.

294
00:19:04,880 --> 00:19:11,440
 However, our GIS folks, what they did was review the actual addresses and determined

295
00:19:11,440 --> 00:19:17,520
 that only two were within the 200 foot, and that only represents 2%.

296
00:19:17,520 --> 00:19:24,560
 The map here shows some of the responses that we receive, and they are outside of that 200

297
00:19:24,560 --> 00:19:29,360
 foot, therefore, they're not counted under the 200 foot buffer.

298
00:19:29,360 --> 00:19:36,000
 So, again, helps illustrate the one house here is in opposition, Kent and then over

299
00:19:36,000 --> 00:19:43,800
 here, Brian Cooley, I believe, also is in opposition.

300
00:19:43,800 --> 00:19:47,920
 Staff recommends denial of the zoning change requests based on the three considerations,

301
00:19:47,920 --> 00:19:53,040
 and that is the density and scale, the more intense uses permitted or allowed under the

302
00:19:53,040 --> 00:19:59,400
 NRMU, and then the more, less restrictive general regulations that is afforded under

303
00:19:59,400 --> 00:20:01,960
 the NRMU zoning district.

304
00:20:01,960 --> 00:20:02,960
 That completes my presentation.

305
00:20:02,960 --> 00:20:04,280
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

306
00:20:04,280 --> 00:20:08,160
 >> Yeah, before I go to Commissioner Smith, just as a point of order, tonight, unlike

307
00:20:08,160 --> 00:20:14,200
 two weeks ago, what we'll be doing is taking the zoning and SUP as two separate, so citizens

308
00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:18,960
 will be able to hear the presentation for zoning, they'll speak on that zoning, and

309
00:20:18,960 --> 00:20:22,920
 then we'll vote, and then we'll have the SUP come up, and then they'll have the opportunity

310
00:20:22,920 --> 00:20:29,240
 to re-speak, so we'll bifurcate those two out, so Ron will provide one presentation

311
00:20:29,240 --> 00:20:34,480
 in part A and then part B, just as a way of knowing what's going to go on in the public

312
00:20:34,480 --> 00:20:35,480
 hearing.

313
00:20:35,480 --> 00:20:36,480
 Commissioner Smith.

314
00:20:36,480 --> 00:20:37,480
 >> Thank you, Chair.

315
00:20:37,480 --> 00:20:40,460
 I guess something to add on to that, just to, I guess, as commissioners, we know what happened,

316
00:20:40,460 --> 00:20:44,640
 you know, two weeks ago was a long meeting, I think that was a lot of interaction with

317
00:20:44,640 --> 00:20:47,720
 every single citizen who came and brought things, I guess, maybe just a point if I can

318
00:20:47,720 --> 00:20:52,320
 make a recommendation, a reminder that maybe just let everyone talk, and then we'll slowly,

319
00:20:52,320 --> 00:20:56,380
 I guess, do the same thing we did last time, we just collect questions for applicant, collect

320
00:20:56,380 --> 00:21:01,760
 questions for city staff, and then ask them all at the very end so we don't bog things

321
00:21:01,760 --> 00:21:06,080
 down with people coming back and forth, but the question I had for Ron was, as you guys

322
00:21:06,080 --> 00:21:10,760
 were working through with the applicant, and he's looking at this project and he's bringing

323
00:21:10,760 --> 00:21:14,560
 it to you guys, he's working with the planning department, I mean, you guys are making a

324
00:21:14,560 --> 00:21:17,240
 denial, and so I always like to ask whenever you guys do recommend a denial, because it

325
00:21:17,240 --> 00:21:20,680
 is rare, but you guys are obviously telling me at this point in time, like, you're going

326
00:21:20,680 --> 00:21:24,960
 to have a really hard time with this project, right, and you're giving the applicant.

327
00:21:24,960 --> 00:21:29,600
 Well, we had some hard time thinking about the recommendation, we take it very seriously,

328
00:21:29,600 --> 00:21:34,600
 and so it was really towards the end, you know, when we were considering our recommendations,

329
00:21:34,600 --> 00:21:40,160
 and we just could not get past the more than 12 units per acre, and as you can see, they

330
00:21:40,160 --> 00:21:44,360
 did a lot of work with regards to the traffic and a lot of the site planning, which we did

331
00:21:44,360 --> 00:21:52,760
 work on, but I think opening it up to 30 units per acre was just something that we felt we

332
00:21:52,760 --> 00:21:54,360
 need to recommend a denial.

333
00:21:54,360 --> 00:21:55,360
 Okay.

334
00:21:55,360 --> 00:21:56,360
 Yeah.

335
00:21:56,360 --> 00:21:57,360
 All right, thank you.

336
00:21:57,360 --> 00:21:58,360
 Commissioner Beck.

337
00:21:58,360 --> 00:21:59,360
 Thank you, Chair.

338
00:21:59,360 --> 00:22:04,200
 Would I be right in assuming that if we don't pass the zone change, we don't need to vote

339
00:22:04,200 --> 00:22:05,200
 on an SUP?

340
00:22:05,200 --> 00:22:09,320
 We'd still vote on an SUP, because we have to provide a recommendation to Council.

341
00:22:09,320 --> 00:22:14,440
 I think that the vote of the SUP would be kind of a de facto vote, but it'd still be

342
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:17,200
 opportunity to be heard, and we'll vote on it.

343
00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:18,200
 Okay.

344
00:22:18,200 --> 00:22:19,200
 Thanks.

345
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,200
 Yeah.

346
00:22:20,200 --> 00:22:25,200
 Any other questions for the zoning portion of this?

347
00:22:25,200 --> 00:22:26,200
 Perfect.

348
00:22:26,200 --> 00:22:28,360
 We'll get into the SUP portion.

349
00:22:28,360 --> 00:22:29,360
 Okay.

350
00:22:29,360 --> 00:22:33,120
 So the SUP, same location, we haven't moved.

351
00:22:33,120 --> 00:22:39,000
 The purpose of the specific use permit is to allow for a multifamily dwelling use.

352
00:22:39,000 --> 00:22:48,280
 The applicant is proposing approximately 267 dwelling units on the 9.91 acres.

353
00:22:48,280 --> 00:22:56,400
 That will consist of 11 three-story buildings, a clubhouse, a pool, and 488 associated parking

354
00:22:56,400 --> 00:23:03,400
 spaces, again, complying with the parking requirements that we have in place.

355
00:23:03,400 --> 00:23:09,800
 This is a preliminary site plan of the multifamily.

356
00:23:09,800 --> 00:23:15,460
 You've got the clubhouse and pool north along the railroad tracks.

357
00:23:15,460 --> 00:23:17,680
 This is Mockingbird.

358
00:23:17,680 --> 00:23:25,080
 They'll have three accesses, one right in only on the northern portion, and then there'll

359
00:23:25,080 --> 00:23:32,920
 be one right in, right out, as well as a left turn, and then also a second or third access

360
00:23:32,920 --> 00:23:34,000
 further south.

361
00:23:34,000 --> 00:23:40,480
 As you can see, a lot of what's being proposed is improvements along Mockingbird to help

362
00:23:40,480 --> 00:23:46,840
 alleviate some of the traffic that this proposed multifamily will produce.

363
00:23:46,840 --> 00:23:53,960
 The 11 buildings you see here are shown throughout the site with the parking.

364
00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:54,960
 Commissioner Beck.

365
00:23:54,960 --> 00:23:55,960
 I'm sorry, Ron.

366
00:23:55,960 --> 00:23:56,960
 Thanks, Chair.

367
00:23:56,960 --> 00:23:59,080
 You said where was the third entrance?

368
00:23:59,080 --> 00:24:00,440
 So here's one entrance up here.

369
00:24:00,440 --> 00:24:01,440
 Right.

370
00:24:01,440 --> 00:24:02,440
 And then here's one here.

371
00:24:02,440 --> 00:24:03,440
 Right.

372
00:24:03,440 --> 00:24:04,440
 And then down here.

373
00:24:04,440 --> 00:24:05,440
 Further south.

374
00:24:05,440 --> 00:24:06,440
 Oh, okay.

375
00:24:06,440 --> 00:24:07,440
 What street is it?

376
00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:08,440
 Or is that just an entrance?

377
00:24:08,440 --> 00:24:09,440
 That's all along Mockingbird.

378
00:24:09,440 --> 00:24:10,440
 All three along Mockingbird.

379
00:24:10,440 --> 00:24:13,320
 Is that a streetcar, or is that just an entrance into the development?

380
00:24:13,320 --> 00:24:15,280
 That's just an entrance into the development.

381
00:24:15,280 --> 00:24:16,280
 Okay.

382
00:24:16,280 --> 00:24:17,280
 I didn't catch that on the plan.

383
00:24:17,280 --> 00:24:20,480
 And then just a budding that is the single-family residential.

384
00:24:20,480 --> 00:24:21,480
 Right.

385
00:24:21,480 --> 00:24:22,480
 Thanks.

386
00:24:22,480 --> 00:24:24,600
 In addition, it's really hard to see.

387
00:24:24,600 --> 00:24:26,880
 You have a copy of the landscape plan in front of you.

388
00:24:26,880 --> 00:24:29,120
 I apologize for the quality.

389
00:24:29,120 --> 00:24:30,600
 This is the landscape plan.

390
00:24:30,600 --> 00:24:36,560
 Again, they will meet the required landscape requirements, street canopy, and also buffering

391
00:24:36,560 --> 00:24:41,440
 requirements as shown here.

392
00:24:41,440 --> 00:24:47,520
 This is an elevation of what this development will look like from Mockingbird.

393
00:24:47,520 --> 00:24:48,520
 A portion of it.

394
00:24:48,520 --> 00:24:49,520
 Not all of it.

395
00:24:49,520 --> 00:24:51,880
 But you see the pool house or the clubhouse.

396
00:24:51,880 --> 00:24:59,760
 And then this is what will be seen again from Mockingbird.

397
00:24:59,760 --> 00:25:06,440
 Criteria for approval for a specific use permit is specified under subchapter six, which is

398
00:25:06,440 --> 00:25:12,020
 our specific use permit, as well as what is proposed, or I'm sorry, what is the purpose

399
00:25:12,020 --> 00:25:15,680
 and intent of the dam plan 2030.

400
00:25:15,680 --> 00:25:21,600
 Primarily the section 3564 criteria approval talks about conformance to all standards,

401
00:25:21,600 --> 00:25:26,280
 as well as compatible with the surrounding area.

402
00:25:26,280 --> 00:25:28,180
 We already talked about the surrounding area.

403
00:25:28,180 --> 00:25:30,440
 We don't need to go into that.

404
00:25:30,440 --> 00:25:35,920
 You can see that there's mainly single family to the south and southeast.

405
00:25:35,920 --> 00:25:38,460
 There is a multi-family to the west.

406
00:25:38,460 --> 00:25:45,720
 And we talked already about its density and its proposal or project.

407
00:25:45,720 --> 00:25:48,960
 Staff prepared a similar analysis.

408
00:25:48,960 --> 00:25:55,040
 That analysis is in your backup, but I just want to just highlight some of the high factors

409
00:25:55,040 --> 00:25:59,640
 in our decision of determining the recommendation.

410
00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:04,480
 We look at the future land use element, how it fits within the character of the area.

411
00:26:04,480 --> 00:26:07,840
 Does it provide adequate capacity for public infrastructure?

412
00:26:07,840 --> 00:26:16,480
 Again, the TIA, which in all instances with any rezoning that has a lot of traffic demand,

413
00:26:16,480 --> 00:26:19,960
 we always want to make sure we have a traffic impact analysis.

414
00:26:19,960 --> 00:26:27,000
 And then, of course, with the SGP, how can it be improved through the preliminary site

415
00:26:27,000 --> 00:26:34,320
 plan and landscape plan, all of which is reviewed with regards to the list that you see here.

416
00:26:34,320 --> 00:26:41,080
 Again, similarly, we noticed this or they held a meeting to not just talk about the

417
00:26:41,080 --> 00:26:45,580
 zoning, but to also talk about the specific use permit, and there was just one person

418
00:26:45,580 --> 00:26:47,840
 in attendance.

419
00:26:47,840 --> 00:26:51,440
 We noticed this together, similar results.

420
00:26:51,440 --> 00:26:57,720
 We only had two in opposition within the 200-foot buffer area.

421
00:26:57,720 --> 00:27:05,960
 Staff is recommending denial, again, based on the density and scale of the subject multifamily

422
00:27:05,960 --> 00:27:06,960
 proposed development.

423
00:27:06,960 --> 00:27:09,280
 And that concludes my presentation.

424
00:27:09,280 --> 00:27:10,280
 -Kris, you're back.

425
00:27:10,280 --> 00:27:11,280
 -Thank you, Chair.

426
00:27:11,280 --> 00:27:15,560
 Clear front again for me, what they're planning on doing for traffic mitigation, got that

427
00:27:15,560 --> 00:27:20,340
 right turn-only lane up near the railroad tracks.

428
00:27:20,340 --> 00:27:22,760
 Was there something about what they were going to do to Mockingbird?

429
00:27:22,760 --> 00:27:24,760
 Is there going to be a...

430
00:27:24,760 --> 00:27:25,760
 -Yeah.

431
00:27:25,760 --> 00:27:26,760
 Center left turn lane.

432
00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:27,760
 Yes, I apologize.

433
00:27:27,760 --> 00:27:28,760
 I did not mention that.

434
00:27:28,760 --> 00:27:29,760
 -Okay.

435
00:27:29,760 --> 00:27:30,760
 It's a lane.

436
00:27:30,760 --> 00:27:31,760
 It's not going to be...

437
00:27:31,760 --> 00:27:32,760
 -It's not going to be...

438
00:27:32,760 --> 00:27:33,760
 -Raised.

439
00:27:33,760 --> 00:27:34,760
 -Correct.

440
00:27:34,760 --> 00:27:35,760
 -Okay.

441
00:27:35,760 --> 00:27:36,760
 -It's going to be a center lane along Mockingbird.

442
00:27:36,760 --> 00:27:43,440
 And my understanding is that it's just going to start from here all the way to where their

443
00:27:43,440 --> 00:27:44,440
 property ends.

444
00:27:44,440 --> 00:27:45,440
 -Okay.

445
00:27:45,440 --> 00:27:46,440
 So it's not going to be a transition...

446
00:27:46,440 --> 00:27:47,440
 -Not back up there at Audra?

447
00:27:47,440 --> 00:27:48,440
 -No.

448
00:27:48,440 --> 00:27:49,440
 That is not the direction.

449
00:27:49,440 --> 00:27:50,440
 -Okay.

450
00:27:50,440 --> 00:27:51,440
 Thank you.

451
00:27:51,440 --> 00:27:52,440
 -Any other questions?

452
00:27:52,440 --> 00:27:53,440
 Thanks, Ron.

453
00:27:53,440 --> 00:27:54,440
 -Thank you.

454
00:27:54,440 --> 00:28:02,560
 -Chief, I just wanted to maybe clarify the point earlier.

455
00:28:02,560 --> 00:28:08,520
 If the zoning case, if it is a denial to city council, they could still vote to approve

456
00:28:08,520 --> 00:28:09,520
 it.

457
00:28:09,520 --> 00:28:11,540
 And if that's the case, they would still need the SGP recommendation.

458
00:28:11,540 --> 00:28:13,760
 So that's why we need to keep the vote.

459
00:28:13,760 --> 00:28:16,720
 -Thank you for that clarification.

460
00:28:16,720 --> 00:28:20,600
 -Next up is item E, S18-8C.

461
00:28:20,600 --> 00:28:27,600
 I'll invite Haley up to present.

462
00:28:27,600 --> 00:28:32,720
 -All right.

463
00:28:32,720 --> 00:28:36,320
 Good evening.

464
00:28:36,320 --> 00:28:41,360
 This is case S18-8, the Windsor Drive Apartments.

465
00:28:41,360 --> 00:28:45,340
 So the request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation

466
00:28:45,340 --> 00:28:51,520
 to city council regarding a specific use permit request to allow a multifamily use on a site

467
00:28:51,520 --> 00:28:55,720
 that is approximately 31 acres located at the intersection of Windsor Drive and the

468
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:59,800
 I-35 service road.

469
00:28:59,800 --> 00:29:03,360
 Looking at the zoning on the property, it is our neighborhood residential mixed use

470
00:29:03,360 --> 00:29:04,360
 district.

471
00:29:04,360 --> 00:29:10,240
 Within this district, multifamily is permitted either with an, actually with an SUP and with

472
00:29:10,240 --> 00:29:14,320
 limitation four, both of those are concurrent in this district.

473
00:29:14,320 --> 00:29:18,920
 Limitation four requires, as you're probably familiar with, that you either have an SUP

474
00:29:18,920 --> 00:29:23,320
 or be part of some sort of prior approval or a mixed use development.

475
00:29:23,320 --> 00:29:27,920
 So in this case, the ultimate goal is for a mixed use development, but they aren't necessarily

476
00:29:27,920 --> 00:29:30,240
 meeting the timing requirement of that.

477
00:29:30,240 --> 00:29:33,120
 They want the multifamily to come first and then the commercial.

478
00:29:33,120 --> 00:29:39,360
 So the SUP is required regardless in this instance.

479
00:29:39,360 --> 00:29:44,160
 As Ron just mentioned for an SUP or criteria for approval is essentially a compatibility

480
00:29:44,160 --> 00:29:48,280
 analysis between the surrounding properties and the requested use.

481
00:29:48,280 --> 00:29:52,520
 So Recharge was looking at things such as would this impede development of surrounding

482
00:29:52,520 --> 00:29:53,520
 properties?

483
00:29:53,520 --> 00:29:55,440
 Would it, will it have adequate parking?

484
00:29:55,440 --> 00:29:57,160
 Will it generate any traffic issues?

485
00:29:57,160 --> 00:30:01,560
 Are there any nuisances that need to be prevented on the site?

486
00:30:01,560 --> 00:30:05,480
 And then is there adequate compatibility in terms of buffering and as well as architectural

487
00:30:05,480 --> 00:30:08,880
 compatibility?

488
00:30:08,880 --> 00:30:13,040
 With this site, one of those initial pieces that we needed to look at in terms of compatibility

489
00:30:13,040 --> 00:30:17,080
 are the fact that there are two gas wells on the eastern adjoining property.

490
00:30:17,080 --> 00:30:21,420
 I've indicated the two sites here, you can see there's one well at each site.

491
00:30:21,420 --> 00:30:26,040
 The light purple color on the map is the boundaries of an existing gas well plot.

492
00:30:26,040 --> 00:30:30,320
 So when these wells were originally drilled back in the early 2000s, the operator plotted

493
00:30:30,320 --> 00:30:34,220
 the property at that time for gas well development.

494
00:30:34,220 --> 00:30:39,200
 So when surface development seeks to occur within a gas well plot, we look at whether

495
00:30:39,200 --> 00:30:43,900
 the operator has provided their consent for a surface development plot to be within the

496
00:30:43,900 --> 00:30:45,840
 boundaries of their gas well plot.

497
00:30:45,840 --> 00:30:50,160
 And then we also look at things like buffering and setbacks that are required by the code.

498
00:30:50,160 --> 00:30:56,060
 And we'll get into those a little bit more closely when we look at the site plan.

499
00:30:56,060 --> 00:30:59,720
 So this is the proposed site plan for the multifamily part of the development.

500
00:30:59,720 --> 00:31:04,240
 You can see that multifamilies intended to cover just under 17 acres of the site out

501
00:31:04,240 --> 00:31:05,800
 of the total 31.

502
00:31:05,800 --> 00:31:09,360
 So as I mentioned, they do intend for commercial development at some point along the frontage

503
00:31:09,360 --> 00:31:10,360
 road.

504
00:31:10,360 --> 00:31:12,480
 They're just not quite there yet.

505
00:31:12,480 --> 00:31:18,020
 The site as it's proposed would have a total of 336 dwelling units, a mix of one, two and

506
00:31:18,020 --> 00:31:19,840
 three bedroom units.

507
00:31:19,840 --> 00:31:24,080
 That would put them at a density of approximately 20.5 units per acre.

508
00:31:24,080 --> 00:31:27,920
 NRMU permits up to 30, so they're well within that.

509
00:31:27,920 --> 00:31:31,440
 You can see on the site there's a total of 16 buildings shown.

510
00:31:31,440 --> 00:31:39,000
 Each of those are a maximum of three stories, and it's just over 300,000 square feet total.

511
00:31:39,000 --> 00:31:40,640
 They are providing adequate parking.

512
00:31:40,640 --> 00:31:42,500
 They're meeting the surface parking requirements.

513
00:31:42,500 --> 00:31:45,680
 Some of the parking is provided in garages on the site.

514
00:31:45,680 --> 00:31:49,240
 And you can see there would be two primary access points, one from the frontage road,

515
00:31:49,240 --> 00:31:52,480
 and then another access point down here on Windsor.

516
00:31:52,480 --> 00:31:54,400
 And I mentioned earlier the gas well setbacks.

517
00:31:54,400 --> 00:31:59,680
 So these red outlines that you see on the map are the proposed setbacks that the surface

518
00:31:59,680 --> 00:32:02,360
 developer and the gas well operator have agreed to.

519
00:32:02,360 --> 00:32:03,360
 Mr. Beck.

520
00:32:03,360 --> 00:32:06,360
 Thank you, Chair.

521
00:32:06,360 --> 00:32:14,280
 That one well, I guess it's number two, the reverse setback is 250 feet if development

522
00:32:14,280 --> 00:32:16,840
 comes in after the well's there, right?

523
00:32:16,840 --> 00:32:17,840
 Correct.

524
00:32:17,840 --> 00:32:20,600
 Your circle on that looks like it's covering some houses there.

525
00:32:20,600 --> 00:32:22,040
 What's going on there?

526
00:32:22,040 --> 00:32:23,040
 That's correct.

527
00:32:23,040 --> 00:32:26,640
 So the gas well was originally platted in 2003.

528
00:32:26,640 --> 00:32:28,680
 At that time there were not reverse setbacks.

529
00:32:28,680 --> 00:32:34,880
 So when these homes came in shortly after that in 2004, 2005, there were no reverse

530
00:32:34,880 --> 00:32:37,080
 setbacks that could be imposed on those houses at that time.

531
00:32:37,080 --> 00:32:39,280
 So they had to go up to 2003 requirements.

532
00:32:39,280 --> 00:32:40,280
 Correct.

533
00:32:40,280 --> 00:32:41,280
 Yeah.

534
00:32:41,280 --> 00:32:44,920
 All of this well predates our existing code that has the 250 foot reverse setback.

535
00:32:44,920 --> 00:32:45,920
 Okay.

536
00:32:45,920 --> 00:32:46,920
 Then I guess is it well number one?

537
00:32:46,920 --> 00:32:48,920
 When was that?

538
00:32:48,920 --> 00:32:51,600
 Both of these gas wells came in at the same time in 2003.

539
00:32:51,600 --> 00:32:52,600
 Okay.

540
00:32:52,600 --> 00:33:01,400
 Haley, I would have expected well one to also have a circular diameter.

541
00:33:01,400 --> 00:33:03,760
 Can you tell me why it just straightens out?

542
00:33:03,760 --> 00:33:04,760
 Correct.

543
00:33:04,760 --> 00:33:10,400
 So what you see, if the mouse would work, this is the existing pad site.

544
00:33:10,400 --> 00:33:14,280
 I mentioned that in your backup that the developer and the gas well operator have been through

545
00:33:14,280 --> 00:33:17,380
 extensive negotiations over the past year on this.

546
00:33:17,380 --> 00:33:21,480
 The operator hopes that someday they could maybe expand that site and add additional

547
00:33:21,480 --> 00:33:22,720
 wells to it.

548
00:33:22,720 --> 00:33:28,840
 So the developer in this case agreed to honor the boundaries of the maximum pad site that

549
00:33:28,840 --> 00:33:31,640
 they could ever put there if they get that approved.

550
00:33:31,640 --> 00:33:34,960
 So what you see here, this red line is, and it's kind of cut off here.

551
00:33:34,960 --> 00:33:39,080
 This would be their hoped for future boundary of that pad site.

552
00:33:39,080 --> 00:33:44,440
 So they drew their 250 foot reverse setback from that ultimate goal that the gas well

553
00:33:44,440 --> 00:33:45,440
 operator has.

554
00:33:45,440 --> 00:33:49,640
 So from the meantime, they're well over 300 feet away from the existing pad site, which

555
00:33:49,640 --> 00:33:54,400
 is just this little gravel area that you could see here.

556
00:33:54,400 --> 00:33:57,400
 I got you.

557
00:33:57,400 --> 00:34:00,480
 Thank you.

558
00:34:00,480 --> 00:34:05,920
 So moving on to look at their landscape plan, the plan as they have it drawn shows approximately

559
00:34:05,920 --> 00:34:08,880
 50% lot coverage, 50% landscaping on the site.

560
00:34:08,880 --> 00:34:13,360
 So they're well within the 80% lot coverage maximum for NRMU.

561
00:34:13,360 --> 00:34:17,360
 You can see here they are intending to provide adequate buffers on all sides.

562
00:34:17,360 --> 00:34:23,200
 In particular, there is a type D buffer requirement here where they adjoin the gas well sites.

563
00:34:23,200 --> 00:34:31,080
 So that's required to be 30 feet wide with eight trees and 20 shrubs per 100 linear feet.

564
00:34:31,080 --> 00:34:36,060
 Their plans do indicate that they intend to follow our code provision to seek an alternative

565
00:34:36,060 --> 00:34:37,200
 buffer from the director.

566
00:34:37,200 --> 00:34:42,760
 They would like to, instead of just that landscaping, install a fence and a combination of trees

567
00:34:42,760 --> 00:34:49,200
 in this area, so that's something that you all can certainly weigh in on, but it is something

568
00:34:49,200 --> 00:34:54,000
 that the code allows the director to approve when they go through the full site plan process.

569
00:34:54,000 --> 00:34:58,920
 As you can see here, they would have adequate internal landscaping providing the required

570
00:34:58,920 --> 00:35:02,800
 parking lot trees as well as street trees along their internal street system.

571
00:35:02,800 --> 00:35:06,040
 And they do also intend to provide open space amenities throughout this area.

572
00:35:06,040 --> 00:35:12,440
 They indicated that could be picnic areas, grills, and sports facilities.

573
00:35:12,440 --> 00:35:16,720
 These are some sample elevations that have been provided to you, kind of a neutral color

574
00:35:16,720 --> 00:35:21,880
 palette with a mixture of stucco and other masonry materials such as hardy board and

575
00:35:21,880 --> 00:35:22,880
 hardy plank.

576
00:35:22,880 --> 00:35:25,920
 Just another example of some of the elevations.

577
00:35:25,920 --> 00:35:31,280
 There were several more included in your backup that are very similar in style.

578
00:35:31,280 --> 00:35:35,520
 So the future land use for this area is business innovation.

579
00:35:35,520 --> 00:35:41,920
 Within that area, we look for a mixture of office and employment type uses as well as

580
00:35:41,920 --> 00:35:44,480
 supporting commercial and residential uses.

581
00:35:44,480 --> 00:35:48,640
 As you can see here, this area is kind of a transition between the larger business innovation

582
00:35:48,640 --> 00:35:54,520
 area west of 35 and the low density residential and moderate residential that we see existing

583
00:35:54,520 --> 00:35:57,640
 and intended on the eastern side of 35.

584
00:35:57,640 --> 00:36:03,040
 So this site is kind of in a transitional zone and NRMU would fit well within that, or NRMU

585
00:36:03,040 --> 00:36:06,760
 does fit well within that, and the multifamily use would kind of provide that transition

586
00:36:06,760 --> 00:36:11,280
 from perhaps more intensive industrial uses on one side of the highway to commercial along

587
00:36:11,280 --> 00:36:16,880
 the frontage road and then into those single family homes.

588
00:36:16,880 --> 00:36:22,000
 Some of the other analysis that we did for the site, we did note that it doesn't immediately

589
00:36:22,000 --> 00:36:25,440
 adjoin single family, so the buffers that they're providing are more intensive than

590
00:36:25,440 --> 00:36:29,880
 what would be required if this were to back up immediately to those single family uses

591
00:36:29,880 --> 00:36:32,200
 because of the gas wells there.

592
00:36:32,200 --> 00:36:37,240
 The multifamily use is unlikely to generate any nuisances in terms of odors, fumes, noise

593
00:36:37,240 --> 00:36:39,160
 or glare on the neighboring property.

594
00:36:39,160 --> 00:36:43,400
 They are providing adequate parking and access and then the scale of development is well

595
00:36:43,400 --> 00:36:46,920
 within what we would expect to see in NRMU and actually what they've proposed is less

596
00:36:46,920 --> 00:36:53,040
 intensive than the maximum that could be built on the site.

597
00:36:53,040 --> 00:36:56,520
 Notification was sent out in all of the required forms for this project.

598
00:36:56,520 --> 00:36:59,440
 I received no written opposition to date.

599
00:36:59,440 --> 00:37:02,700
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting back in September.

600
00:37:02,700 --> 00:37:06,780
 There were approximately 20 people at that meeting I attended and there was some general

601
00:37:06,780 --> 00:37:10,840
 discussion of the type of product that would be built there and the future plans for commercial

602
00:37:10,840 --> 00:37:19,960
 development on the site, but overall no significant concerns were expressed at that time.

603
00:37:19,960 --> 00:37:25,900
 So outlined here as well as in your backup are kind of the requirements of this SUP based

604
00:37:25,900 --> 00:37:28,600
 on that site plan as submitted.

605
00:37:28,600 --> 00:37:32,840
 We thought it important in working with legal that we memorialize the details of that site

606
00:37:32,840 --> 00:37:37,000
 plan in the SUP ordinance itself so that those are part of the text and the requirements

607
00:37:37,000 --> 00:37:38,560
 of the SUP moving forward.

608
00:37:38,560 --> 00:37:43,720
 So you can see here we called out things such as the maximum acreage of the site being 17

609
00:37:43,720 --> 00:37:50,080
 out of the 31 acres, 16 buildings being indicated with the building footprint of just over 100,000

610
00:37:50,080 --> 00:37:57,680
 square feet, the 336 dwelling units with the density approximately 20.48, the required

611
00:37:57,680 --> 00:38:03,400
 number of parking spaces should be no less than the 629, they do have 632 as I mentioned

612
00:38:03,400 --> 00:38:08,160
 but some of those are within garages so they don't count against that maximum under our

613
00:38:08,160 --> 00:38:09,160
 code.

614
00:38:09,160 --> 00:38:14,360
 The lot coverage of 49% landscape area, 51% as well as calling out the required type D

615
00:38:14,360 --> 00:38:16,640
 buffer for the gas wells.

616
00:38:16,640 --> 00:38:21,960
 And then the sample elevations, because those are just a sample and the applicant may deviate

617
00:38:21,960 --> 00:38:26,260
 somewhat from those or seek to, we wanted to leave them some flexibility there but generally

618
00:38:26,260 --> 00:38:31,120
 meet the color palette and materials that were presented.

619
00:38:31,120 --> 00:38:37,120
 So with that, staff's recommendation is for approval of this SUP with four conditions.

620
00:38:37,120 --> 00:38:41,180
 The first being that the council ultimately recognize that driveway access locations from

621
00:38:41,180 --> 00:38:44,800
 state highways have to be approved by TxDOT so as they go through this process they will

622
00:38:44,800 --> 00:38:51,300
 be seeking a TxDOT permit so we felt it important to call it here that any access locations

623
00:38:51,300 --> 00:38:55,960
 from the I-35 frontage road that must be altered in response to changing TxDOT requirements

624
00:38:55,960 --> 00:39:00,320
 during the permitting process could be administratively approved by staff providing that they still

625
00:39:00,320 --> 00:39:05,200
 comply with all components of the DDC and our criteria manuals and all remaining elements

626
00:39:05,200 --> 00:39:08,240
 of the site plan are satisfied.

627
00:39:08,240 --> 00:39:12,560
 The second condition being that landscaping on the attached plan does reflect an intent

628
00:39:12,560 --> 00:39:17,000
 to meet all of the DDC requirements for parking street trees as well as minimum landscaping

629
00:39:17,000 --> 00:39:22,800
 canopy areas and buffers with administrative approval sought for an alternative buffer.

630
00:39:22,800 --> 00:39:26,260
 We would request that minor alterations to those depicted locations of those individual

631
00:39:26,260 --> 00:39:31,800
 trees be allowed to be approved by staff provided that their final landscaping complies with

632
00:39:31,800 --> 00:39:36,600
 the attached site plan in terms of buffers and open space.

633
00:39:36,600 --> 00:39:40,720
 The third criteria is in reference to the Gaswell Agreement that I mentioned.

634
00:39:40,720 --> 00:39:44,480
 That agreement has been drawn up, assigned by both parties and reviewed by our legal

635
00:39:44,480 --> 00:39:49,560
 department so we request that the agreement entered into and executed by these two parties

636
00:39:49,560 --> 00:39:55,360
 that sets forth the setback shown on this plan must be filed in the records of Denton

637
00:39:55,360 --> 00:40:00,680
 County prior to the approval of the plat for the subject property which is typical when

638
00:40:00,680 --> 00:40:04,000
 we have a gas well plat and a surface plat that would be running concurrently at that

639
00:40:04,000 --> 00:40:05,840
 point in time.

640
00:40:05,840 --> 00:40:10,840
 And then finally, notwithstanding the limited approvals authorized in these conditions,

641
00:40:10,840 --> 00:40:14,680
 the city would reserve the rights to require that the SUP go back before council for any

642
00:40:14,680 --> 00:40:15,680
 larger modifications.

643
00:40:15,680 --> 00:40:19,160
 With that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

644
00:40:19,160 --> 00:40:21,080
 Commissioner Ellis.

645
00:40:21,080 --> 00:40:22,080
 Thank you, Chair.

646
00:40:22,080 --> 00:40:26,280
 Haley, back one slide when you've got your staff recommendation for what's going to

647
00:40:26,280 --> 00:40:27,280
 be embedded in there.

648
00:40:27,280 --> 00:40:32,280
 In our backup, it mentions something about staff's ability to increase, decrease 5%.

649
00:40:32,280 --> 00:40:34,880
 I did not see that on your slide.

650
00:40:34,880 --> 00:40:35,880
 Correct.

651
00:40:35,880 --> 00:40:36,880
 Do you want to elaborate on that?

652
00:40:36,880 --> 00:40:38,440
 Yeah, I just noticed that as you mentioned it.

653
00:40:38,440 --> 00:40:40,080
 Yeah, that is correct.

654
00:40:40,080 --> 00:40:45,760
 In working with legal, we did try to work some flexibility into these requirements that

655
00:40:45,760 --> 00:40:51,760
 would allow a 5% increase or decrease from any of these numbers.

656
00:40:51,760 --> 00:40:55,440
 You may be familiar with in the past with SUPs, we've kind of been more flexible and

657
00:40:55,440 --> 00:41:01,160
 allowed them to generally comply with the site plan and kind of left it at that.

658
00:41:01,160 --> 00:41:04,640
 Like I said, in speaking with legal over the past couple of SUPs, we've been trying to

659
00:41:04,640 --> 00:41:08,960
 work in more specifics so that there's some guarantee for you all in council that what

660
00:41:08,960 --> 00:41:11,520
 you see is what you'll get when it's built.

661
00:41:11,520 --> 00:41:15,280
 But because this is kind of preliminary and they haven't gone through the full site engineering,

662
00:41:15,280 --> 00:41:20,000
 we thought that 5% buffer would be adequate to allow for some minor deviations as they

663
00:41:20,000 --> 00:41:21,980
 engineer and design the site fully.

664
00:41:21,980 --> 00:41:24,960
 So that is still something that's being written into it?

665
00:41:24,960 --> 00:41:25,960
 Correct.

666
00:41:25,960 --> 00:41:28,880
 And I noticed here that is actually mentioned here in the first sentence on this slide, but

667
00:41:28,880 --> 00:41:30,160
 it is in your backup as well.

668
00:41:30,160 --> 00:41:31,560
 I did not see that.

669
00:41:31,560 --> 00:41:32,560
 Okay.

670
00:41:32,560 --> 00:41:40,880
 There's a lot of text on the side.

671
00:41:40,880 --> 00:41:41,880
 Fisher back.

672
00:41:41,880 --> 00:41:42,880
 Thank you, Chair.

673
00:41:42,880 --> 00:41:47,000
 While we're on this page, and then I want to flip to the next one, one of the concerns

674
00:41:47,000 --> 00:41:53,200
 I had is, do we have something locked in place that assures us we're going to have a mixture

675
00:41:53,200 --> 00:41:55,400
 of apartments and commercial?

676
00:41:55,400 --> 00:42:00,000
 And it seems like number one saying that they can't build any more apartments beyond the

677
00:42:00,000 --> 00:42:01,000
 17 acres.

678
00:42:01,000 --> 00:42:02,000
 Is that correct?

679
00:42:02,000 --> 00:42:03,000
 Is that going to?

680
00:42:03,000 --> 00:42:04,000
 Correct.

681
00:42:04,000 --> 00:42:09,520
 So the remaining part of the 31 acres pretty much has to be commercial then, right?

682
00:42:09,520 --> 00:42:13,800
 Yeah, the NRMU district would permit a variety of commercial uses that would be typical along

683
00:42:13,800 --> 00:42:17,600
 the highways of hotels, restaurants, offices.

684
00:42:17,600 --> 00:42:21,480
 But with this, the multifamily would be limited to no more than 17 acres.

685
00:42:21,480 --> 00:42:25,400
 They couldn't change that on down the road if they want reconsideration?

686
00:42:25,400 --> 00:42:28,520
 They would have to apply for a new SUP or to amend this SUP.

687
00:42:28,520 --> 00:42:29,520
 Okay.

688
00:42:29,520 --> 00:42:35,640
 Now, and because this is all NRMU as part of the mixed youth, what kind of separation

689
00:42:35,640 --> 00:42:41,120
 or barriers are going to be between the commercial and the apartments?

690
00:42:41,120 --> 00:42:44,600
 It's not distinct like it's a residential neighborhood in commercial.

691
00:42:44,600 --> 00:42:45,600
 This is all NRMU.

692
00:42:45,600 --> 00:42:47,600
 Is there going to be some?

693
00:42:47,600 --> 00:42:48,600
 Correct.

694
00:42:48,600 --> 00:42:52,400
 So as you see on their site plan, their intent is to have this kind of access drive that

695
00:42:52,400 --> 00:42:54,440
 would be separating the two.

696
00:42:54,440 --> 00:42:58,960
 They do show some buffering in between there that would be typical between multifamily and

697
00:42:58,960 --> 00:42:59,960
 commercial.

698
00:42:59,960 --> 00:43:00,960
 Okay.

699
00:43:00,960 --> 00:43:03,640
 But it would be integrated in the sense that they would all kind of share these common access

700
00:43:03,640 --> 00:43:07,840
 points on the freeway in this kind of central courtyard element as they have it intended.

701
00:43:07,840 --> 00:43:08,840
 Okay.

702
00:43:08,840 --> 00:43:11,760
 Go back to your recommendation page.

703
00:43:11,760 --> 00:43:14,680
 This one?

704
00:43:14,680 --> 00:43:15,680
 Number one.

705
00:43:15,680 --> 00:43:22,600
 I was under the impression, and it sounds like this number one dispute set, that if

706
00:43:22,600 --> 00:43:29,960
 you had a residential development on a primary arterial and it also accessed like a collector

707
00:43:29,960 --> 00:43:34,560
 road that any ingress and egress would not be on the primary arterial.

708
00:43:34,560 --> 00:43:38,480
 It would have to be accessed through the collector yet.

709
00:43:38,480 --> 00:43:42,720
 This seems to indicate that there's going to be a means of ingress and egress off the

710
00:43:42,720 --> 00:43:43,720
 frontage road.

711
00:43:43,720 --> 00:43:44,720
 Yes.

712
00:43:44,720 --> 00:43:45,720
 So you are correct in that.

713
00:43:45,720 --> 00:43:50,200
 The code does require that if you have adequate access, you take it off of the lesser roadway.

714
00:43:50,200 --> 00:43:53,360
 But we also have the competing interest of the fire code needing two points of remote

715
00:43:53,360 --> 00:43:58,360
 access for developments of this size, and there's no way for them to reasonably attain

716
00:43:58,360 --> 00:44:00,440
 those two points of access off of Windsor.

717
00:44:00,440 --> 00:44:03,200
 So access off of the textile road is expected as well.

718
00:44:03,200 --> 00:44:06,400
 And just one last thing since you mentioned fire exit.

719
00:44:06,400 --> 00:44:14,400
 The road currently to the wells, is that an easy access for the fire department first

720
00:44:14,400 --> 00:44:15,400
 responders?

721
00:44:15,400 --> 00:44:18,480
 We had that blow up there back in 2015, I think.

722
00:44:18,480 --> 00:44:24,960
 Is there going to be a problem accessing those wells in the event we have another?

723
00:44:24,960 --> 00:44:31,580
 So currently the gas well access road runs, if you're on the frontage road, you go right

724
00:44:31,580 --> 00:44:34,480
 past Windsor and then have to make an immediate turn into the gas well side.

725
00:44:34,480 --> 00:44:38,160
 It's just north of Windsor, actually within what would be the future Windsor right of

726
00:44:38,160 --> 00:44:40,200
 way when this property plathes.

727
00:44:40,200 --> 00:44:46,080
 So that point of access has been renegotiated to be moved over here so that it will be provided

728
00:44:46,080 --> 00:44:50,260
 further down on Windsor, and it'll actually be a more direct shot for the fire department

729
00:44:50,260 --> 00:44:54,000
 trying to get to those wells in the future because currently they have a long gravel

730
00:44:54,000 --> 00:44:56,000
 road here kind of crosses a creek.

731
00:44:56,000 --> 00:44:59,280
 I've been out there, there's usually cows standing in the middle of it when you're trying

732
00:44:59,280 --> 00:45:00,680
 to drive down it.

733
00:45:00,680 --> 00:45:03,960
 So this will be a more direct means of access to those gas well sides.

734
00:45:03,960 --> 00:45:07,360
 And it'll what remain an impervious road?

735
00:45:07,360 --> 00:45:08,360
 It has to be all weather access.

736
00:45:08,360 --> 00:45:12,440
 So it can be gravel, but it does have to be an all weather surface that can accommodate

737
00:45:12,440 --> 00:45:13,440
 a fire truck.

738
00:45:13,440 --> 00:45:14,440
 Okay.

739
00:45:14,440 --> 00:45:18,600
 Isn't there another access up north of this development where they can come in that way

740
00:45:18,600 --> 00:45:19,600
 too?

741
00:45:19,600 --> 00:45:22,560
 Currently there is only one means of access to both pad sides.

742
00:45:22,560 --> 00:45:27,720
 So at the southern end there, it's right here just north of the yellow line, this winding

743
00:45:27,720 --> 00:45:30,320
 gravel road is the means of access to both well sides.

744
00:45:30,320 --> 00:45:31,320
 Okay.

745
00:45:31,320 --> 00:45:40,280
 And if you can, again, the concern for a more developed road, what are the plans for Windsor?

746
00:45:40,280 --> 00:45:46,080
 I know there was a problem with that one stretch of land where a property owner wasn't willing

747
00:45:46,080 --> 00:45:47,080
 at the time.

748
00:45:47,080 --> 00:45:50,900
 Has that conflict been resolved then is the expansion of Windsor?

749
00:45:50,900 --> 00:45:57,400
 It hasn't been fully resolved in conversations with the applicant and internal staff.

750
00:45:57,400 --> 00:46:01,080
 The intent is to get this entire stretch of Windsor constructed at one point in time.

751
00:46:01,080 --> 00:46:06,520
 So the city will be talking to that landowner as necessary to see what we can do there as

752
00:46:06,520 --> 00:46:11,360
 the surface developers also indicated that they will initiate some of those conversations

753
00:46:11,360 --> 00:46:14,720
 as well as being willing to drop those plans all at one time so that we have a complete

754
00:46:14,720 --> 00:46:20,680
 section for Windsor, at least from this point onward where it is existing divided roadway

755
00:46:20,680 --> 00:46:22,280
 to continue that to the frontage road.

756
00:46:22,280 --> 00:46:26,400
 But conceivably that could get tied up for a while.

757
00:46:26,400 --> 00:46:27,400
 Potentially.

758
00:46:27,400 --> 00:46:28,400
 Okay.

759
00:46:28,400 --> 00:46:29,400
 Thank you.

760
00:46:29,400 --> 00:46:32,480
 Any other questions for Haley?

761
00:46:32,480 --> 00:46:33,480
 Christopher?

762
00:46:33,480 --> 00:46:34,480
 Yes.

763
00:46:34,480 --> 00:46:40,080
 So having a look at the preliminary site plan and everything, if we could go back to the

764
00:46:40,080 --> 00:46:42,840
 slide, I think a couple back.

765
00:46:42,840 --> 00:46:44,880
 The site plan slide?

766
00:46:44,880 --> 00:46:45,880
 Yes.

767
00:46:45,880 --> 00:46:46,880
 Okay.

768
00:46:46,880 --> 00:46:53,840
 So looking at I guess that's what well one over there where we have the flat line.

769
00:46:53,840 --> 00:47:00,640
 And knowing -- so we have reverse setback for like 250 feet, right, for Wells.

770
00:47:00,640 --> 00:47:03,880
 And I know we're not supposed to have any dwellings right in that.

771
00:47:03,880 --> 00:47:08,920
 Those apartment buildings look like they are almost exactly at 250 feet.

772
00:47:08,920 --> 00:47:12,040
 Is that -- are they pretty much right up against that?

773
00:47:12,040 --> 00:47:13,040
 Yes.

774
00:47:13,040 --> 00:47:18,200
 The apartments are intended -- they will have to be 250 feet between the closest exterior

775
00:47:18,200 --> 00:47:21,440
 point of the building and the pad site boundary.

776
00:47:21,440 --> 00:47:26,020
 So for the time being that will be well over 250 feet.

777
00:47:26,020 --> 00:47:32,240
 This 250 would still have to be met when and if this operator seeks to expand the site

778
00:47:32,240 --> 00:47:35,080
 to these ultimate boundaries that they would hope to attain.

779
00:47:35,080 --> 00:47:36,080
 Okay.

780
00:47:36,080 --> 00:47:39,560
 But this being the existing site, they are well over 250 feet.

781
00:47:39,560 --> 00:47:40,560
 Okay.

782
00:47:40,560 --> 00:47:44,160
 But the red line is where they were talking about they would ostensibly want to --

783
00:47:44,160 --> 00:47:45,160
 Correct.

784
00:47:45,160 --> 00:47:46,160
 Yes.

785
00:47:46,160 --> 00:47:50,480
 So at the time, assuming this gets built prior to the well site being expanded, they will

786
00:47:50,480 --> 00:47:53,280
 be held to that 250 foot boundary.

787
00:47:53,280 --> 00:47:57,040
 It is specifically called out in this agreement that they will be filing with the county as

788
00:47:57,040 --> 00:47:58,040
 well.

789
00:47:58,040 --> 00:48:02,120
 So both parties are aware that no matter what, 250 feet has to exist between the building

790
00:48:02,120 --> 00:48:03,120
 and the well site.

791
00:48:03,120 --> 00:48:04,120
 Okay.

792
00:48:04,120 --> 00:48:07,200
 And the understanding based on what you're saying is that that's most likely of when

793
00:48:07,200 --> 00:48:10,080
 as opposed to an if.

794
00:48:10,080 --> 00:48:12,280
 The operator said they intend to seek that.

795
00:48:12,280 --> 00:48:17,840
 They would have -- it would be a long process for them because of the existing setbacks

796
00:48:17,840 --> 00:48:21,480
 between here and these existing homes, they would have to seek waivers from all of these

797
00:48:21,480 --> 00:48:28,400
 adjoining property owners that are within the 500 foot setback from the site that currently

798
00:48:28,400 --> 00:48:32,120
 would have to be there under the current code as well as they would have to seek a watershed

799
00:48:32,120 --> 00:48:34,600
 protection permit which would require a specific use permit.

800
00:48:34,600 --> 00:48:35,600
 Okay.

801
00:48:35,600 --> 00:48:36,600
 It would be a multi-step process.

802
00:48:36,600 --> 00:48:39,480
 So it's a when, and if, I would say.

803
00:48:39,480 --> 00:48:43,920
 So and my question on this, Richard, I don't know if you would know this or who.

804
00:48:43,920 --> 00:48:49,400
 So I know the question of distance on setbacks has been something that's come up recently

805
00:48:49,400 --> 00:48:52,520
 in city council meetings.

806
00:48:52,520 --> 00:48:57,960
 As the parent of a child with asthma, you know, I'm always concerned about these things.

807
00:48:57,960 --> 00:49:03,680
 What obligations do the developers have to people who would possibly be renting these

808
00:49:03,680 --> 00:49:09,640
 properties that are butted right up against that order to basically let them know that

809
00:49:09,640 --> 00:49:14,680
 there may or may not be these kinds of issues that might affect health?

810
00:49:14,680 --> 00:49:17,920
 I can speak to that if you'd like.

811
00:49:17,920 --> 00:49:21,600
 The current code requires the setbacks be met.

812
00:49:21,600 --> 00:49:25,480
 In addition to that for residential plats, there are certain notices that have to be

813
00:49:25,480 --> 00:49:28,680
 put on the plat as well as filed with the county.

814
00:49:28,680 --> 00:49:33,640
 With this being a rental property, it's tricky to say that those residents would ever

815
00:49:33,640 --> 00:49:38,760
 see those notifications because they would be affecting people buying the property.

816
00:49:38,760 --> 00:49:42,320
 As you mentioned, council is interested in perhaps creating some sort of annual notification

817
00:49:42,320 --> 00:49:46,920
 that would go out to all residents, so it could be targeted towards renters as well.

818
00:49:46,920 --> 00:49:52,720
 But currently, there is no obligation that our code would require for them to notify

819
00:49:52,720 --> 00:49:55,240
 future residents.

820
00:49:55,240 --> 00:49:56,240
 For rental property.

821
00:49:56,240 --> 00:49:57,240
 Okay.

822
00:49:57,240 --> 00:49:58,240
 Thank you.

823
00:49:58,240 --> 00:49:59,240
 Commissioner Beck.

824
00:49:59,240 --> 00:50:00,240
 Thank you, Chair.

825
00:50:00,240 --> 00:50:07,800
 One last clarification, I'll probably address this on down the road, but correct me on this

826
00:50:07,800 --> 00:50:08,800
 if I'm wrong.

827
00:50:08,800 --> 00:50:17,520
 But according to ordinance 210-181, a protected use is any dwelling, church, hospital, pre-kinder.

828
00:50:17,520 --> 00:50:21,600
 Dwelling is, would an apartment be considered a dwelling?

829
00:50:21,600 --> 00:50:22,600
 Correct.

830
00:50:22,600 --> 00:50:23,600
 Okay.

831
00:50:23,600 --> 00:50:24,600
 Thank you.

832
00:50:24,600 --> 00:50:25,600
 Commissioner Smith.

833
00:50:25,600 --> 00:50:26,600
 Thank you, Chair.

834
00:50:26,600 --> 00:50:29,480
 So the applicant is a religious institution.

835
00:50:29,480 --> 00:50:33,840
 Do you happen to have any reason why the religious institution is seeking to build a multifamily

836
00:50:33,840 --> 00:50:36,000
 and then eventually commercial mixed use?

837
00:50:36,000 --> 00:50:39,360
 So the current owner of the property is a religious institution.

838
00:50:39,360 --> 00:50:43,200
 It's my understanding they are in the process of selling this to a group called dimension

839
00:50:43,200 --> 00:50:46,840
 companies that would be the ultimate developer of the site.

840
00:50:46,840 --> 00:50:47,840
 Okay.

841
00:50:47,840 --> 00:50:55,480
 So is the applicant themselves, is the religious institution, is the eventual developer also

842
00:50:55,480 --> 00:50:59,040
 going to be here tonight then, I'm assuming, to answer questions, or is that?

843
00:50:59,040 --> 00:51:00,040
 Correct.

844
00:51:00,040 --> 00:51:02,920
 So the owner is the glory of Zion group that's referenced in your backup.

845
00:51:02,920 --> 00:51:06,160
 Allison Engineering was actually the applicant, so they are here tonight as well as their

846
00:51:06,160 --> 00:51:07,480
 client who would be the developer.

847
00:51:07,480 --> 00:51:08,480
 Got it.

848
00:51:08,480 --> 00:51:09,480
 That's what I was.

849
00:51:09,480 --> 00:51:10,480
 Correct.

850
00:51:10,480 --> 00:51:11,480
 That's right.

851
00:51:11,480 --> 00:51:12,480
 Thank you.

852
00:51:12,480 --> 00:51:13,480
 Yeah.

853
00:51:13,480 --> 00:51:14,480
 Many players, but.

854
00:51:14,480 --> 00:51:17,480
 I do not see any other questions.

855
00:51:17,480 --> 00:51:19,120
 Thanks, Haley.

856
00:51:19,120 --> 00:51:25,720
 Next up and to conclude the public hearing is the discussion regarding the proposed revision

857
00:51:25,720 --> 00:51:31,320
 of the DDC, specifically updating the planning and zoning commission operational procedures

858
00:51:31,320 --> 00:51:36,600
 for voting, and Julie, you have updated language, I presume.

859
00:51:36,600 --> 00:51:37,600
 I do.

860
00:51:37,600 --> 00:51:38,600
 All right.

861
00:51:38,600 --> 00:51:39,600
 Good evening.

862
00:51:39,600 --> 00:51:48,120
 I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the city, and I am presenting DCA 18.5 to you, which

863
00:51:48,120 --> 00:51:51,560
 is the procedure for tie votes.

864
00:51:51,560 --> 00:51:56,920
 We talked about this at the last meeting, but we'll just go over what we talked about

865
00:51:56,920 --> 00:51:59,760
 last time briefly, and then we'll talk about the revisions.

866
00:51:59,760 --> 00:52:04,740
 So the request is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation to council

867
00:52:04,740 --> 00:52:11,680
 regarding a text amendment to the development code to update the planning and zoning procedures

868
00:52:11,680 --> 00:52:14,560
 as they relate to tie votes.

869
00:52:14,560 --> 00:52:18,900
 So just a little bit of background, as you're all aware, there was a recent rezoning case

870
00:52:18,900 --> 00:52:24,580
 that resulted in a tie vote of three to three, and in those instances, the city council rules

871
00:52:24,580 --> 00:52:29,520
 of procedure applied to all boards and commissions, and it would apply to the planning and zoning

872
00:52:29,520 --> 00:52:35,760
 commission, and that is in the code of ordinances that if there is a tie vote, that item would

873
00:52:35,760 --> 00:52:44,340
 automatically be placed upon the subsequent meeting until a majority decision is made,

874
00:52:44,340 --> 00:52:48,000
 and that happened in the planning and zoning commission where that item went to the next

875
00:52:48,000 --> 00:52:50,160
 meeting and several meetings.

876
00:52:50,160 --> 00:52:56,800
 However, due to a recusal, the planning and zoning commission could not come to a majority

877
00:52:56,800 --> 00:52:57,800
 decision.

878
00:52:57,800 --> 00:53:00,080
 So that case was essentially in limbo.

879
00:53:00,080 --> 00:53:01,080
 It couldn't move forward.

880
00:53:01,080 --> 00:53:02,080
 It couldn't move backward.

881
00:53:02,080 --> 00:53:06,400
 It was kind of stuck.

882
00:53:06,400 --> 00:53:13,520
 So based upon that, the council had a work session in September, and at that work session,

883
00:53:13,520 --> 00:53:17,720
 four options were presented to them about how they wanted to address this issue.

884
00:53:17,720 --> 00:53:19,800
 First was to take no action.

885
00:53:19,800 --> 00:53:23,440
 Second was to remove the tie vote provision for all boards and commissions, and that would

886
00:53:23,440 --> 00:53:27,640
 be to update or to amend the code of ordinances.

887
00:53:27,640 --> 00:53:31,840
 The third option would be to remove the tie vote for all boards and commissions excluding

888
00:53:31,840 --> 00:53:38,080
 the city council, and then the fourth one would be to just amend the planning and zoning

889
00:53:38,080 --> 00:53:44,720
 commission rules to address the tie vote, and that was the most limited option that

890
00:53:44,720 --> 00:53:53,160
 they had, and that was the decision they ultimately made, was to amend the DDC to address only

891
00:53:53,160 --> 00:53:57,400
 the planning and zoning commission and allow cases to move forward as a denial.

892
00:53:57,400 --> 00:54:04,200
 Now, as you're aware, when a recommendation of denial is made by the planning and zoning

893
00:54:04,200 --> 00:54:09,600
 commission, it typically then requires a supermajority to approve it at city council.

894
00:54:09,600 --> 00:54:16,280
 However, in this instance, council directed staff to remove that supermajority requirement

895
00:54:16,280 --> 00:54:22,120
 since there wasn't a majority opinion from the planning and zoning commission.

896
00:54:22,120 --> 00:54:28,400
 So council had a discussion about it at that work session and proposed that tie vote provision

897
00:54:28,400 --> 00:54:34,140
 would remove that supermajority requirement.

898
00:54:34,140 --> 00:54:39,440
 So then we got to October 24th when we presented this to planning and zoning commission, and

899
00:54:39,440 --> 00:54:45,320
 we brought forward that language that any motion resulting in a tie vote would be deemed

900
00:54:45,320 --> 00:54:50,280
 as a denial recommendation, would move forward to city council for a final decision, but

901
00:54:50,280 --> 00:54:52,600
 it would remove that supermajority requirement.

902
00:54:52,600 --> 00:54:57,800
 However, after our discussion with planning and zoning commission, y'all directed staff

903
00:54:57,800 --> 00:55:03,680
 that y'all felt like that that was too broad, that really it should be looking at only cases

904
00:55:03,680 --> 00:55:13,080
 with recusal or long-term absence, and that maybe that was maybe not targeted enough language.

905
00:55:13,080 --> 00:55:17,880
 So based upon that feedback, staff went back and we revised the language and we talked

906
00:55:17,880 --> 00:55:24,720
 to legal, and our first stab at it was to craft the language to kind of define what

907
00:55:24,720 --> 00:55:30,960
 is a long-term absence, and then also add in that recusal language.

908
00:55:30,960 --> 00:55:35,200
 And as we kind of went through the thought exercises and how that would play out in real

909
00:55:35,200 --> 00:55:41,600
 life, we realized that it was that long-term absence was so vague, it was really hard to

910
00:55:41,600 --> 00:55:46,880
 determine, and then what if a PNZ member was out for three meetings and then they came

911
00:55:46,880 --> 00:55:51,320
 back, but then another PNZ member was out, and it got where we were kind of back in the

912
00:55:51,320 --> 00:55:53,920
 same spot, and we couldn't really nail that down.

913
00:55:53,920 --> 00:56:04,120
 So we looked at a change that would apply to zoning cases, to specific use permits,

914
00:56:04,120 --> 00:56:09,840
 to special exceptions, alternative ESAs, zoning text amendments, and then criteria manual

915
00:56:09,840 --> 00:56:17,720
 amendments where they're needed a little more scrutiny that PNZ needed to weigh in on it.

916
00:56:17,720 --> 00:56:22,440
 The language we also looked at was not applicable, though, to final plots.

917
00:56:22,440 --> 00:56:25,440
 Those things that the PNZ decides.

918
00:56:25,440 --> 00:56:33,640
 So and our final language came up with the process where if there are six voting members,

919
00:56:33,640 --> 00:56:40,160
 so if somebody is-- we only have six members voting on any case, and there's a tie vote,

920
00:56:40,160 --> 00:56:41,960
 that would just be scheduled for the next meeting.

921
00:56:41,960 --> 00:56:46,280
 It would automatically go to the next meeting, regardless of why we have six voting members,

922
00:56:46,280 --> 00:56:49,860
 whether there's a recusal or somebody's out.

923
00:56:49,860 --> 00:56:54,600
 At that next meeting, if there's only six members and there's a tie vote, it would just

924
00:56:54,600 --> 00:56:56,060
 go to city council.

925
00:56:56,060 --> 00:57:01,000
 Now it could-- it would allow you all to still-- if you felt like you wanted to have another

926
00:57:01,000 --> 00:57:07,040
 stab at it, that you could table the item, you could vote to table the item so that it

927
00:57:07,040 --> 00:57:13,600
 could delay that vote further, but this kind of focused more on the process of the voting

928
00:57:13,600 --> 00:57:17,540
 and less as to why somebody would be out.

929
00:57:17,540 --> 00:57:22,800
 So regardless, if there is a tie vote, it would go to PNZ twice before it would go to

930
00:57:22,800 --> 00:57:24,680
 city council.

931
00:57:24,680 --> 00:57:29,560
 So the final language, and I know it's long, but we'll go over it and it's in your backup.

932
00:57:29,560 --> 00:57:34,560
 There was one change to that language after talking with legal today.

933
00:57:34,560 --> 00:57:41,020
 The original language in your backup referenced a qualified commissioner.

934
00:57:41,020 --> 00:57:43,720
 That was changed to voting commissioner.

935
00:57:43,720 --> 00:57:47,100
 So we thought that was a little more clear language.

936
00:57:47,100 --> 00:57:52,600
 So that-- the proposal is after closing the public hearing, should a majority of voting

937
00:57:52,600 --> 00:57:57,760
 commissioners fail to recommend either approval or denial of a proposed amendment or approval

938
00:57:57,760 --> 00:58:03,280
 of a modified amendment, staff is directed to place the matter for vote on the next available

939
00:58:03,280 --> 00:58:09,920
 planning and zoning commission meeting-- commission agenda as an item for individual consideration.

940
00:58:09,920 --> 00:58:15,200
 A second failure of a majority of voting commissioners to recommend either approval or denial of

941
00:58:15,200 --> 00:58:20,840
 a proposed amendment or approval of a modified amendment shall be deemed a recommendation

942
00:58:20,840 --> 00:58:23,240
 to deny approval of any amendment.

943
00:58:23,240 --> 00:58:28,840
 Such failure is not subject to the requirements for that super majority in city code section

944
00:58:28,840 --> 00:58:35,440
 2-29 and shall not require the 3/4 vote of all members of the city council qualified

945
00:58:35,440 --> 00:58:36,440
 to vote.

946
00:58:36,440 --> 00:58:38,600
 So we felt like that kind of tightened it up.

947
00:58:38,600 --> 00:58:43,160
 It still gave a little more opportunity for PNZ to fully weigh in on it.

948
00:58:43,160 --> 00:58:45,280
 >> Thank you, Chair.

949
00:58:45,280 --> 00:58:47,440
 I'll just finish your thought now.

950
00:58:47,440 --> 00:58:48,440
 >> No, that's all right.

951
00:58:48,440 --> 00:58:49,440
 No, go ahead.

952
00:58:49,440 --> 00:58:50,440
 >> Okay.

953
00:58:50,440 --> 00:58:54,000
 The-- first of all, it comes back as an individual consideration.

954
00:58:54,000 --> 00:58:58,320
 So while it was originally a public hearing, it comes back as an individual consideration.

955
00:58:58,320 --> 00:59:03,920
 And so why was that process is-- yeah, what was the thought process behind that?

956
00:59:03,920 --> 00:59:04,920
 Maybe I'll answer that question.

957
00:59:04,920 --> 00:59:05,920
 >> That is a great question.

958
00:59:05,920 --> 00:59:06,920
 >> I know.

959
00:59:06,920 --> 00:59:07,920
 Thank you, Julie.

960
00:59:07,920 --> 00:59:08,920
 >> Typically, once you have--

961
00:59:08,920 --> 00:59:09,920
 >> I'll get my cookie now.

962
00:59:09,920 --> 00:59:15,760
 >> Typically, once you have voted or not typically, always, once you-- when you vote, the public

963
00:59:15,760 --> 00:59:17,360
 hearing is closed.

964
00:59:17,360 --> 00:59:22,340
 So once the public hearing is closed, it can't be reopened for that item unless it is re-noticed.

965
00:59:22,340 --> 00:59:24,000
 >> Got it.

966
00:59:24,000 --> 00:59:27,000
 >> So that's why it would then come back as an individual consideration.

967
00:59:27,000 --> 00:59:30,360
 >> And public still has-- I guess it's up to the chair's discretion, but public still

968
00:59:30,360 --> 00:59:35,640
 has usually the ability to speak publicly on individual considerations, usually.

969
00:59:35,640 --> 00:59:38,160
 >> I think it would--

970
00:59:38,160 --> 00:59:44,520
 >> That's up to the chair, certainly, but there's no legal requirement to have a second

971
00:59:44,520 --> 00:59:46,760
 public hearing for this.

972
00:59:46,760 --> 00:59:52,880
 The legal requirement satisfied with the first public hearing, and at that point, once you've

973
00:59:52,880 --> 01:00:00,520
 closed the public hearing and taken a vote on it, it risks muddying the waters to reopen

974
01:00:00,520 --> 01:00:01,520
 at that point.

975
01:00:01,520 --> 01:00:02,520
 >> Sure.

976
01:00:02,520 --> 01:00:03,520
 No, of course.

977
01:00:03,520 --> 01:00:04,520
 Second question.

978
01:00:04,520 --> 01:00:09,640
 If you go back a couple slides to the applicable-- there you go, I guess, back up, I mean one.

979
01:00:09,640 --> 01:00:11,360
 The applicable versus non-applicable.

980
01:00:11,360 --> 01:00:18,120
 So in the event that of, you know, we're dealing with an ADP and there's a tie vote, this proposed

981
01:00:18,120 --> 01:00:24,000
 change would mean the non-applicable, so it reverts back to the original tie vote regulations,

982
01:00:24,000 --> 01:00:28,200
 which is that it's still catches us in limbo for forever then?

983
01:00:28,200 --> 01:00:29,200
 >> Yes.

984
01:00:29,200 --> 01:00:32,160
 And that was something we actually talked about today.

985
01:00:32,160 --> 01:00:35,280
 But yes, that would be--

986
01:00:35,280 --> 01:00:37,880
 >> I guess two things.

987
01:00:37,880 --> 01:00:43,920
 One, how do we get around that, but we'll come back to that one, but two, why do those

988
01:00:43,920 --> 01:00:44,920
 become not applicable?

989
01:00:44,920 --> 01:00:48,440
 I think you mentioned it, but just expand upon it for me.

990
01:00:48,440 --> 01:00:55,680
 >> I think this was due to-- it really was in response to that one case, and city council's

991
01:00:55,680 --> 01:01:03,320
 discussion on the item was based upon how do these cases that are stuck in limbo go

992
01:01:03,320 --> 01:01:06,840
 to the next level for a final decision?

993
01:01:06,840 --> 01:01:17,680
 So that was the idea behind that targeted fix for it, that these are items that would

994
01:01:17,680 --> 01:01:21,160
 go on into city council for final decision.

995
01:01:21,160 --> 01:01:28,440
 So legal may want to weigh in on how we would address those items that are a final decision

996
01:01:28,440 --> 01:01:34,880
 within P&Z, but this was really to target those items that the P&Z was a recommending

997
01:01:34,880 --> 01:01:39,240
 body and not the decision-making body, if that makes sense.

998
01:01:39,240 --> 01:01:45,400
 >> I think that's very well stated that in those situations where P&Z is the final decision

999
01:01:45,400 --> 01:01:48,080
 body, there's nothing council could do about it anyway.

1000
01:01:48,080 --> 01:01:49,080
 >> Yeah.

1001
01:01:49,080 --> 01:01:55,680
 >> So what would be the resolution then if it is a perpetual tie at that point?

1002
01:01:55,680 --> 01:01:58,400
 >> That's up to P&Z to make through that resolution.

1003
01:01:58,400 --> 01:02:03,840
 If P&Z is going to have to solve that issue.

1004
01:02:03,840 --> 01:02:10,840
 >> That's a 0.1% of our already 0.1% problem, so we don't-- we'll wait and cross that bridge

1005
01:02:10,840 --> 01:02:11,840
 when we get there.

1006
01:02:11,840 --> 01:02:14,040
 We'll let the future P&Z come across it.

1007
01:02:14,040 --> 01:02:19,040
 Hopefully, I think your P&Z is not us.

1008
01:02:19,040 --> 01:02:25,000
 >> Oh, Commissioner Ellis.

1009
01:02:25,000 --> 01:02:26,280
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1010
01:02:26,280 --> 01:02:29,160
 Thank you for working on this and re-wording this, you guys.

1011
01:02:29,160 --> 01:02:32,000
 It's-- makes much more sense.

1012
01:02:32,000 --> 01:02:35,480
 It's fixing the problem that's actually the problem and not rewriting something that we

1013
01:02:35,480 --> 01:02:36,480
 already have code for.

1014
01:02:36,480 --> 01:02:40,320
 So thanks for taking the time to re-look at it, I appreciate it.

1015
01:02:40,320 --> 01:02:41,320
 >> Thank you.

1016
01:02:41,320 --> 01:02:47,600
 Based upon that and also our discussion at the last meeting, we just-- some of the considerations

1017
01:02:47,600 --> 01:02:51,280
 we looked at in crafting this language is we wanted to maintain the integrity of the

1018
01:02:51,280 --> 01:02:55,160
 public hearing process and I think we heard that from this group and that's something

1019
01:02:55,160 --> 01:02:59,840
 that's really important with any public hearing item.

1020
01:02:59,840 --> 01:03:04,800
 This revised language does allow this body to-- an additional opportunity to reach a

1021
01:03:04,800 --> 01:03:05,800
 decision.

1022
01:03:05,800 --> 01:03:11,160
 But then finally, we want to make sure that there is a clear path for not only applicants

1023
01:03:11,160 --> 01:03:17,720
 but for residents who would have a concern or stakeholder, that they would be able to

1024
01:03:17,720 --> 01:03:20,640
 make plans and know when a final decision would be made.

1025
01:03:20,640 --> 01:03:26,360
 You know, if a case is in limbo, you know, if you-- that they would have to keep coming

1026
01:03:26,360 --> 01:03:31,800
 to P&Z possibly for several meetings and then who knows to city council.

1027
01:03:31,800 --> 01:03:37,520
 So this just allows some real certainty within the process.

1028
01:03:37,520 --> 01:03:41,520
 And then as we still discussed last time, the intent of this is to prevent projects

1029
01:03:41,520 --> 01:03:45,040
 from being left in an indeterminate state.

1030
01:03:45,040 --> 01:03:52,040
 That we still left that item in there to remove that super majority requirement since it wasn't

1031
01:03:52,040 --> 01:03:54,400
 a majority decision by P&Z.

1032
01:03:54,400 --> 01:04:00,200
 But as always, we make sure that council is informed of the matters that are discussed

1033
01:04:00,200 --> 01:04:06,320
 during planning and zoning so that they can consider that as they make their decisions.

1034
01:04:06,320 --> 01:04:13,480
 So based upon the considerations, staff recommends approval of this request and it was placed

1035
01:04:13,480 --> 01:04:16,360
 in the newspaper for that notification.

1036
01:04:16,360 --> 01:04:20,160
 So I'll stand for any questions.

1037
01:04:20,160 --> 01:04:21,160
 I do not see any.

1038
01:04:21,160 --> 01:04:22,640
 Thanks, Julie, for working on that.

1039
01:04:22,640 --> 01:04:23,640
 Thank you.

1040
01:04:23,640 --> 01:04:24,640
 Sure.

1041
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,640
 That's the end of our agenda.

1042
01:04:25,640 --> 01:04:32,440
 So we have some work session reports and I think we were flipping the order to have--

1043
01:04:32,440 --> 01:04:38,160
 Preet Sim have plenty of time for his presentation, so we're actually going to invite Preet Sim

1044
01:04:38,160 --> 01:04:39,160
 up first.

1045
01:04:39,160 --> 01:04:42,480
 Sorry for the short notice on that one.

1046
01:04:42,480 --> 01:04:49,440
 But if you'd lead us, then we'll, as time permits, get an update on the DDC code update.

1047
01:04:49,440 --> 01:04:56,320
 He's-- yeah, if time permits, we'll get to the DDC update.

1048
01:04:56,320 --> 01:04:57,520
 Yeah, sorry.

1049
01:04:57,520 --> 01:04:59,120
 Good evening.

1050
01:04:59,120 --> 01:05:02,160
 My name is Preet Sim Deshmukh, traffic engineer for the city.

1051
01:05:02,160 --> 01:05:09,720
 Let me pull up my presentation, it's somewhere on the desktop.

1052
01:05:09,720 --> 01:05:18,160
 All right, so initially it was a short and sweet presentation until I had to talk to

1053
01:05:18,160 --> 01:05:22,280
 Richard and he said, "No, that's not what they want to hear."

1054
01:05:22,280 --> 01:05:25,640
 So let's start with something familiar.

1055
01:05:25,640 --> 01:05:30,000
 This is criteria manual update.

1056
01:05:30,000 --> 01:05:35,880
 I was here a few months ago about the traffic and transportation criteria manual update.

1057
01:05:35,880 --> 01:05:41,160
 I'm starting at this point because I wanted to show what we've already done as far as

1058
01:05:41,160 --> 01:05:44,040
 addressing some of the issues related to traffic.

1059
01:05:44,040 --> 01:05:49,400
 We've already tightened up our guidelines, making sure that we have a set of rules that

1060
01:05:49,400 --> 01:05:55,640
 they follow if you're-- for example, if you're generating anywhere between 100 and 500 trips,

1061
01:05:55,640 --> 01:06:00,280
 you look at five years after the opening year, not just what's happening tomorrow if I put

1062
01:06:00,280 --> 01:06:02,040
 the units down on the ground.

1063
01:06:02,040 --> 01:06:08,240
 So that was first thing to look at 0.5 to a mile radius and look at a bigger picture.

1064
01:06:08,240 --> 01:06:13,120
 If you're more than 500 trips, which some of these developments are, then you look at

1065
01:06:13,120 --> 01:06:16,520
 20 years in the future, not just when things are coming in.

1066
01:06:16,520 --> 01:06:22,200
 So these are the things that we already put in place that we're looking at and one of

1067
01:06:22,200 --> 01:06:27,280
 the things here also is when they're going for zoning cases, they bring up and they look

1068
01:06:27,280 --> 01:06:28,720
 at traffic impact analysis.

1069
01:06:28,720 --> 01:06:34,120
 That's something that staff has started asking for, implementing, making sure that you have

1070
01:06:34,120 --> 01:06:38,720
 a better picture of what's happening to make that decision is the zoning right or wrong

1071
01:06:38,720 --> 01:06:44,680
 or what kind of intensity does-- what kind of traffic demand does this intensity create.

1072
01:06:44,680 --> 01:06:47,600
 So that's the first step.

1073
01:06:47,600 --> 01:06:52,540
 Our long-term is develop different master plans, starting with the master thoroughfare

1074
01:06:52,540 --> 01:06:56,440
 plan, bicycle, pedestrian, and the overall mobility plan.

1075
01:06:56,440 --> 01:07:01,960
 Right now, the plan we have, the land use information that went in the background.

1076
01:07:01,960 --> 01:07:06,520
 So typically what happens is the land use is hand-in-hand with transportation circulation

1077
01:07:06,520 --> 01:07:10,680
 network and one has to feed off of the other.

1078
01:07:10,680 --> 01:07:16,640
 If the land use is not right, then the amount of capacity or the demand that's generated

1079
01:07:16,640 --> 01:07:21,120
 is pretty low and the network doesn't come out right for the transportation system.

1080
01:07:21,120 --> 01:07:25,960
 So what we found out, the original-- the previous mobility plan, some of the assumptions that

1081
01:07:25,960 --> 01:07:31,760
 went back in the land use especially the green field area which is pretty much on the fringes

1082
01:07:31,760 --> 01:07:39,400
 north and then southern side too, that was not really updated, that was not thought through.

1083
01:07:39,400 --> 01:07:43,480
 It was the, oh yeah, these green fields are going to remain green fields for the next

1084
01:07:43,480 --> 01:07:45,520
 5, 10, 15, 20 years.

1085
01:07:45,520 --> 01:07:48,440
 So we'll come back whenever they get developed.

1086
01:07:48,440 --> 01:07:53,020
 So moving forward and we've been working close with-- engineering has been working close

1087
01:07:53,020 --> 01:07:58,920
 with planning to understand, OK, this is really happening right now.

1088
01:07:58,920 --> 01:08:05,520
 There are parcels and there are different areas that are developing at a much faster

1089
01:08:05,520 --> 01:08:06,840
 place, pace.

1090
01:08:06,840 --> 01:08:14,020
 So what we do-- what do we want to do and we have started to form an interim step in

1091
01:08:14,020 --> 01:08:19,000
 between, these master plans most likely will be ready by the end of next year.

1092
01:08:19,000 --> 01:08:23,200
 So what do we do from now until the end of next year?

1093
01:08:23,200 --> 01:08:28,160
 We've focused on a couple of areas that seem to be started gaining a lot of attention,

1094
01:08:28,160 --> 01:08:31,120
 a lot of new development coming in that area.

1095
01:08:31,120 --> 01:08:37,360
 So if you look at this area, this is FM 428 Sherman, that comes into the city.

1096
01:08:37,360 --> 01:08:40,760
 This is that loop 288 interchange at the bottom.

1097
01:08:40,760 --> 01:08:46,120
 We've seen a lot of development in this particular area, south of loop as well as just north.

1098
01:08:46,120 --> 01:08:49,600
 There are big parcels that are coming off of 428.

1099
01:08:49,600 --> 01:08:53,640
 So what we did is in interim, let's start studying this.

1100
01:08:53,640 --> 01:08:58,480
 Look at the demand, look at the land uses, get some better assumptions at the background

1101
01:08:58,480 --> 01:08:59,480
 land uses.

1102
01:08:59,480 --> 01:09:07,480
 What is-- what are we looking at when these PDM-- parcels coming for PDM or any discussion

1103
01:09:07,480 --> 01:09:12,000
 about oh, we want to develop this type of land use, so we set out on planning, got the

1104
01:09:12,000 --> 01:09:18,960
 basic assumptions done, so updated land uses, developed the transportation network and currently

1105
01:09:18,960 --> 01:09:22,000
 we're awaiting the report which is due this week.

1106
01:09:22,000 --> 01:09:27,400
 So we'll get a report that identifies what our needs transportation-wise and then it

1107
01:09:27,400 --> 01:09:31,400
 also incorporates some of the densities that are already coming in.

1108
01:09:31,400 --> 01:09:35,320
 People are coming-- developers are coming in with some densities and that's the background

1109
01:09:35,320 --> 01:09:37,600
 assumption that went in there.

1110
01:09:37,600 --> 01:09:44,720
 The other area is-- this is a pretty large area but this is something between hops and--

1111
01:09:44,720 --> 01:09:49,160
 this is 1830 Country Club and then FM 2181.

1112
01:09:49,160 --> 01:09:54,680
 This is one of the other booming areas in the cities outside with a lot of construction

1113
01:09:54,680 --> 01:09:56,040
 associated with it.

1114
01:09:56,040 --> 01:10:01,000
 Teasley's under construction, there are other roads that are under construction in this

1115
01:10:01,000 --> 01:10:04,080
 area but it's developing pretty fast.

1116
01:10:04,080 --> 01:10:07,120
 Some of these subdivisions are already in place.

1117
01:10:07,120 --> 01:10:11,960
 So we're having to do a lot of catch up in this particular area but we're studying this.

1118
01:10:11,960 --> 01:10:14,280
 This is next on our list.

1119
01:10:14,280 --> 01:10:19,300
 The boundary of this area would be hops and Hickory Creek to the south and then Country

1120
01:10:19,300 --> 01:10:21,060
 Club and 2181.

1121
01:10:21,060 --> 01:10:25,160
 So what we're going to do is go through the same exercise, understand what is already

1122
01:10:25,160 --> 01:10:29,920
 been built, what's coming in and how does this traffic impact.

1123
01:10:29,920 --> 01:10:36,160
 In line with this since this area is already half sort of, I would say about 30%, 40% developed

1124
01:10:36,160 --> 01:10:39,680
 a lot of developments are coming in at a much faster pace.

1125
01:10:39,680 --> 01:10:46,000
 We've already started looking at can we trigger some of the design components for Ryan Road.

1126
01:10:46,000 --> 01:10:53,440
 So we've already engaged a firm to start the design of Ryan Road as a four-lane divided.

1127
01:10:53,440 --> 01:10:59,760
 So we're trying to get ahead of the curve and trying to address some of these needs.

1128
01:10:59,760 --> 01:11:04,160
 So these are two-- these are the interim steps that we're taking.

1129
01:11:04,160 --> 01:11:12,400
 So this is the main thing that Richard wanted me to talk about is roadway impact fees.

1130
01:11:12,400 --> 01:11:13,800
 What are we doing with it?

1131
01:11:13,800 --> 01:11:19,360
 The purpose is to partially or fully fund some of these transportation projects.

1132
01:11:19,360 --> 01:11:25,840
 And just wanted to give you more of a 30,000 foot level view, not getting into details

1133
01:11:25,840 --> 01:11:29,920
 how exactly every number is calculated, but just an idea.

1134
01:11:29,920 --> 01:11:39,560
 So when this fee was proposed, city was divided into about five blocks, you can see ABCD.

1135
01:11:39,560 --> 01:11:45,160
 And over 150 transportation projects were identified.

1136
01:11:45,160 --> 01:11:47,320
 I can get to the next slide.

1137
01:11:47,320 --> 01:11:54,560
 You can see these are different areas starting here with area A. You can see all this red

1138
01:11:54,560 --> 01:11:58,400
 is all those are transportation projects that were identified.

1139
01:11:58,400 --> 01:12:01,120
 Some of them require widening, some of them are brand new streets.

1140
01:12:01,120 --> 01:12:05,840
 So it's more of what kind of arterial network do we need.

1141
01:12:05,840 --> 01:12:10,660
 And once these were identified, the total cost for construction was identified.

1142
01:12:10,660 --> 01:12:16,600
 And then based on that cost, it was tied down to how much development we have, what kind

1143
01:12:16,600 --> 01:12:19,120
 of land use we have in this whole area.

1144
01:12:19,120 --> 01:12:25,440
 And then every area has a maximum accessible fee associated with it.

1145
01:12:25,440 --> 01:12:29,440
 Just based on the size of the area, the amount of infrastructure needed in the area, and

1146
01:12:29,440 --> 01:12:32,520
 then the amount of development that's coming in the area.

1147
01:12:32,520 --> 01:12:36,360
 So just to give you a quick overview.

1148
01:12:36,360 --> 01:12:39,200
 And then how are these fees calculated?

1149
01:12:39,200 --> 01:12:40,200
 This is a sample.

1150
01:12:40,200 --> 01:12:44,000
 I have one for residential and one for commercial.

1151
01:12:44,000 --> 01:12:49,000
 I don't want to go through all the details, but quickly the maximum accessible for area

1152
01:12:49,000 --> 01:12:53,320
 A is $2,200 for a single family dwelling unit.

1153
01:12:53,320 --> 01:12:59,480
 And then this is a vehicle mile per -- this is a constant that was developed by the consultant.

1154
01:12:59,480 --> 01:13:05,880
 So all you do is multiply the number of units times that number times this vehicle mile.

1155
01:13:05,880 --> 01:13:11,640
 There you have a maximum accessible impact fee per household.

1156
01:13:11,640 --> 01:13:17,440
 Another calculation for commercial or say for home improvement stores, same thing.

1157
01:13:17,440 --> 01:13:19,880
 There's a number here.

1158
01:13:19,880 --> 01:13:23,560
 For service area, maximum accessible is $1,945.

1159
01:13:23,560 --> 01:13:28,800
 And then say $125,000 square foot of home improvement store is going in.

1160
01:13:28,800 --> 01:13:31,320
 So that's their fee.

1161
01:13:31,320 --> 01:13:36,120
 So that's a very simplified version of how the calculation is based.

1162
01:13:36,120 --> 01:13:37,840
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

1163
01:13:37,840 --> 01:13:39,720
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1164
01:13:39,720 --> 01:13:40,720
 Excuse me.

1165
01:13:40,720 --> 01:13:45,720
 So does each service area have its own calculation, its own equation?

1166
01:13:45,720 --> 01:13:49,880
 >> Each service area has its own maximum accessible fee.

1167
01:13:49,880 --> 01:13:56,760
 So the way it was defined, if I have 10 projects in one area and it's going to cost me $100,000,

1168
01:13:56,760 --> 01:14:02,600
 and there are 50,000 homes remaining in that area, that's how it was split.

1169
01:14:02,600 --> 01:14:07,040
 For each area, there's a unique -- there's a transportation requirement or need.

1170
01:14:07,040 --> 01:14:09,640
 And then how much is remaining that development will support.

1171
01:14:09,640 --> 01:14:11,080
 So that's the calculation.

1172
01:14:11,080 --> 01:14:13,280
 That's the background information that went in.

1173
01:14:13,280 --> 01:14:14,280
 >> Right.

1174
01:14:14,280 --> 01:14:16,560
 So is that number always changing then?

1175
01:14:16,560 --> 01:14:17,920
 >> It's different for each area.

1176
01:14:17,920 --> 01:14:19,720
 So each area has its unique number.

1177
01:14:19,720 --> 01:14:20,720
 >> Right.

1178
01:14:20,720 --> 01:14:21,720
 And it's constant though.

1179
01:14:21,720 --> 01:14:22,720
 >> It's constant.

1180
01:14:22,720 --> 01:14:23,720
 >> In the service area.

1181
01:14:23,720 --> 01:14:24,720
 >> In the service area.

1182
01:14:24,720 --> 01:14:25,720
 >> Okay.

1183
01:14:25,720 --> 01:14:26,720
 >> Correct.

1184
01:14:26,720 --> 01:14:30,320
 >> And how often is that fee updated per service area?

1185
01:14:30,320 --> 01:14:33,040
 >> It hasn't been since 2015.

1186
01:14:33,040 --> 01:14:39,320
 And we are looking at this whole equation and looking at the whole impact fee based on the

1187
01:14:39,320 --> 01:14:41,200
 new master thoroughfare plan.

1188
01:14:41,200 --> 01:14:42,920
 So some of the elements would change.

1189
01:14:42,920 --> 01:14:46,680
 It was based on the original master thoroughfare plan or mobility plan.

1190
01:14:46,680 --> 01:14:49,960
 So yes, we'll go back and reassess once we get there.

1191
01:14:49,960 --> 01:14:50,960
 >> Gotcha.

1192
01:14:50,960 --> 01:14:51,960
 Commissioner Smith.

1193
01:14:51,960 --> 01:14:56,680
 >> Traditionally, do we see it being -- is that the impact fee a significant amount towards

1194
01:14:56,680 --> 01:15:00,200
 the project and towards the development of the roads in that area?

1195
01:15:00,200 --> 01:15:06,240
 Is it a lion's share of the subsidy or is it only a small piece of what's needed to

1196
01:15:06,240 --> 01:15:09,600
 -- what are we traditionally seeing as a city?

1197
01:15:09,600 --> 01:15:14,400
 10,780 per unit making that big of an impact or is it a --

1198
01:15:14,400 --> 01:15:20,520
 >> So as I understand it, and I don't quote me on this, but I think the calculation had

1199
01:15:20,520 --> 01:15:26,400
 come up to $4,000 to $5,000 a dwelling unit when it was first presented that that was

1200
01:15:26,400 --> 01:15:32,680
 the requirement for fixing all the infrastructure in the area.

1201
01:15:32,680 --> 01:15:36,560
 When it was presented to council, I think they settled down with the 2,200 number.

1202
01:15:36,560 --> 01:15:39,280
 So we're already half ways there, so 50%.

1203
01:15:39,280 --> 01:15:44,200
 And then given the inflation and construction costs, I would peg the inflation as about

1204
01:15:44,200 --> 01:15:47,520
 a percent a month in the DFW Metroplex.

1205
01:15:47,520 --> 01:15:51,320
 So it's about 12% a year inflating.

1206
01:15:51,320 --> 01:15:53,600
 So from 2015, it's about three years now.

1207
01:15:53,600 --> 01:15:55,640
 >> And that's a compounding effect too.

1208
01:15:55,640 --> 01:15:56,640
 >> Exactly.

1209
01:15:56,640 --> 01:15:57,800
 So right now, we're really holding --

1210
01:15:57,800 --> 01:16:03,520
 >> So really that impact fees will subsidize maybe roughly 20, 25% of the cost right now.

1211
01:16:03,520 --> 01:16:04,520
 >> Right.

1212
01:16:04,520 --> 01:16:05,520
 Around that number.

1213
01:16:05,520 --> 01:16:09,880
 >> How do we compare to other cities of our size?

1214
01:16:09,880 --> 01:16:17,440
 >> I think the number is fairly close, but cities of the -- other cities are also finding

1215
01:16:17,440 --> 01:16:18,440
 sources like us.

1216
01:16:18,440 --> 01:16:23,340
 We're really hunting down for funding through cog.

1217
01:16:23,340 --> 01:16:30,520
 Most of our bigger projects is partially bond money, but Bonnie Brahe has a lot of cog funding.

1218
01:16:30,520 --> 01:16:35,400
 Most of our large projects we're pretty much trying to get external funding.

1219
01:16:35,400 --> 01:16:37,400
 >> Okay.

1220
01:16:37,400 --> 01:16:40,280
 >> Commissioner Beck?

1221
01:16:40,280 --> 01:16:44,920
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1222
01:16:44,920 --> 01:16:50,360
 Of the 150 transportation projects, are they prioritized?

1223
01:16:50,360 --> 01:16:52,360
 >> They are not prioritized in the area.

1224
01:16:52,360 --> 01:16:58,080
 So typically what happens is so these are the projects, and they're just numbered and

1225
01:16:58,080 --> 01:17:02,000
 a value is assigned, okay, this much is going to take to build it.

1226
01:17:02,000 --> 01:17:09,080
 They are not prioritized, but the way it prioritizes, depending on, for example, Ryan Road, depending

1227
01:17:09,080 --> 01:17:14,400
 on the amount of development that's happening and taking access off of that particular street,

1228
01:17:14,400 --> 01:17:19,920
 that has risen in priority as compared to Hobson or any other parallel streets in that

1229
01:17:19,920 --> 01:17:20,920
 particular zone.

1230
01:17:20,920 --> 01:17:27,360
 >> Well, surely we don't have construction crews working simultaneously on 150 projects

1231
01:17:27,360 --> 01:17:28,360
 right now, do we?

1232
01:17:28,360 --> 01:17:29,360
 >> No.

1233
01:17:29,360 --> 01:17:30,360
 >> Okay.

1234
01:17:30,360 --> 01:17:31,360
 >> No, no.

1235
01:17:31,360 --> 01:17:32,360
 This is just a list.

1236
01:17:32,360 --> 01:17:33,360
 This is --

1237
01:17:33,360 --> 01:17:34,360
 >> Okay.

1238
01:17:34,360 --> 01:17:35,360
 So what do we roughly have?

1239
01:17:35,360 --> 01:17:39,840
 Six or seven crews working on some of these projects around the city?

1240
01:17:39,840 --> 01:17:42,760
 >> So that's getting into the CIP projects.

1241
01:17:42,760 --> 01:17:49,440
 I don't know exactly how many number of crews we have, but we are currently most likely every

1242
01:17:49,440 --> 01:17:55,120
 two to three months spilling out about $30 million worth of projects, CIP projects.

1243
01:17:55,120 --> 01:18:00,440
 And that could range not just transportation, but drainage and water and sewer and combined,

1244
01:18:00,440 --> 01:18:01,440
 but --

1245
01:18:01,440 --> 01:18:02,440
 >> Throughout the city.

1246
01:18:02,440 --> 01:18:03,440
 >> Throughout the city.

1247
01:18:03,440 --> 01:18:04,440
 >> Okay.

1248
01:18:04,440 --> 01:18:07,080
 >> And there are a lot of street bond funded projects still going in.

1249
01:18:07,080 --> 01:18:13,000
 So I did presenting yesterday at the mobility committee and you could see that map, maybe

1250
01:18:13,000 --> 01:18:16,800
 I have that map, but that shows how many projects are going on in the city.

1251
01:18:16,800 --> 01:18:19,200
 Let me see if I can find it.

1252
01:18:19,200 --> 01:18:24,160
 >> This kind of information is online on our website, right, the city's website?

1253
01:18:24,160 --> 01:18:25,160
 >> Similar to that.

1254
01:18:25,160 --> 01:18:26,160
 >> Okay.

1255
01:18:26,160 --> 01:18:27,160
 >> But let me --

1256
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:30,160
 >> How difficult would it be to find?

1257
01:18:30,160 --> 01:18:33,240
 What kind of maze would I have to go through to get there?

1258
01:18:33,240 --> 01:18:35,960
 >> No, we are trying to make it much more simpler.

1259
01:18:35,960 --> 01:18:41,400
 That's what we presented the mobility committee is we're trying to put that map online.

1260
01:18:41,400 --> 01:18:45,560
 There are several different software systems that track it for streets and other departments.

1261
01:18:45,560 --> 01:18:48,480
 We have to just combine them and bring under one platform.

1262
01:18:48,480 --> 01:18:50,720
 That's what we're trying to work with.

1263
01:18:50,720 --> 01:18:51,720
 >> Okay.

1264
01:18:51,720 --> 01:18:52,720
 Thank you.

1265
01:18:52,720 --> 01:18:56,360
 >> Do you have one more slide left?

1266
01:18:56,360 --> 01:18:57,360
 Did we catch the short or --

1267
01:18:57,360 --> 01:19:00,360
 >> Yeah, I think that was just questions.

1268
01:19:00,360 --> 01:19:01,360
 >> Okay.

1269
01:19:01,360 --> 01:19:02,360
 >> Any questions?

1270
01:19:02,360 --> 01:19:03,360
 >> Jumped you.

1271
01:19:03,360 --> 01:19:14,040
 >> So on that last -- you had the A, B, C. So what are the hot areas right now?

1272
01:19:14,040 --> 01:19:15,040
 Is it --

1273
01:19:15,040 --> 01:19:16,040
 >> It's --

1274
01:19:16,040 --> 01:19:17,040
 >> D and B, right?

1275
01:19:17,040 --> 01:19:19,000
 >> It's area D and B, correct.

1276
01:19:19,000 --> 01:19:20,000
 >> Okay.

1277
01:19:20,000 --> 01:19:21,000
 So that's going to be right now.

1278
01:19:21,000 --> 01:19:22,000
 >> Absolutely.

1279
01:19:22,000 --> 01:19:23,000
 Those are our focus areas currently.

1280
01:19:23,000 --> 01:19:24,000
 >> The cruiser is going to be --

1281
01:19:24,000 --> 01:19:25,000
 >> Correct.

1282
01:19:25,000 --> 01:19:26,000
 >> The construction is going to be.

1283
01:19:26,000 --> 01:19:27,000
 >> Okay.

1284
01:19:27,000 --> 01:19:31,760
 >> So we are working on -- particularly focusing on this Sherman and this area and then particularly

1285
01:19:31,760 --> 01:19:36,320
 focusing in this area between Hobson and Hickory Creek.

1286
01:19:36,320 --> 01:19:37,720
 So those are two.

1287
01:19:37,720 --> 01:19:44,400
 Ryan, I know it's under -- yeah, we've already started design on the home.

1288
01:19:44,400 --> 01:19:47,320
 >> Any other questions for Preetam?

1289
01:19:47,320 --> 01:19:48,660
 Christopher Ellis.

1290
01:19:48,660 --> 01:19:49,660
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1291
01:19:49,660 --> 01:19:55,800
 While we've got you here, you mentioned that the TIA is being done.

1292
01:19:55,800 --> 01:19:56,800
 Okay.

1293
01:19:56,800 --> 01:19:59,320
 So tell me, who is doing these studies?

1294
01:19:59,320 --> 01:20:00,320
 >> A consultant.

1295
01:20:00,320 --> 01:20:01,320
 >> Is it --

1296
01:20:01,320 --> 01:20:02,320
 >> Developers hire.

1297
01:20:02,320 --> 01:20:03,320
 >> Right.

1298
01:20:03,320 --> 01:20:06,200
 Do they hire whoever they want?

1299
01:20:06,200 --> 01:20:07,200
 >> Typically, yes.

1300
01:20:07,200 --> 01:20:10,760
 There are just a handful of firms out there for traffic engineering.

1301
01:20:10,760 --> 01:20:11,760
 >> That does it.

1302
01:20:11,760 --> 01:20:12,760
 Okay.

1303
01:20:12,760 --> 01:20:13,760
 And is everybody using the same criteria?

1304
01:20:13,760 --> 01:20:14,760
 >> Yes.

1305
01:20:14,760 --> 01:20:16,520
 It's the transportation criteria manual.

1306
01:20:16,520 --> 01:20:17,520
 >> Okay.

1307
01:20:17,520 --> 01:20:19,640
 >> So they're following the manual.

1308
01:20:19,640 --> 01:20:20,640
 Everything lays it out.

1309
01:20:20,640 --> 01:20:21,640
 This is what we want to see.

1310
01:20:21,640 --> 01:20:24,440
 This is what we're looking for.

1311
01:20:24,440 --> 01:20:30,640
 And if you don't provide it, we're going to have comments and reject it at some point.

1312
01:20:30,640 --> 01:20:31,640
 >> Okay.

1313
01:20:31,640 --> 01:20:33,680
 Thank you.

1314
01:20:33,680 --> 01:20:35,680
 >> Fantastic.

1315
01:20:35,680 --> 01:20:41,280
 So at this time, before Ron presents, then we're going to break and get some food.

1316
01:20:41,280 --> 01:20:53,440
 So we'll pause the work session at 535, and reconvene at 545.

1317
01:20:53,440 --> 01:20:56,040
 Thank you, and welcome back to the Planning and Zoning Commission work session.

1318
01:20:56,040 --> 01:20:59,120
 It is 550.

1319
01:20:59,120 --> 01:21:01,600
 I'll invite Ron for presentation.

1320
01:21:01,600 --> 01:21:08,680
 >> Thank you, Chair, members of the commission.

1321
01:21:08,680 --> 01:21:13,760
 Matt's presentation is just to give you all an update of where we are on the Denton Development

1322
01:21:13,760 --> 01:21:14,760
 Code update.

1323
01:21:14,760 --> 01:21:18,400
 I know it's been some time since we first met.

1324
01:21:18,400 --> 01:21:25,360
 Earlier this year, the staff and the DCRC Development Code Review Committee has been

1325
01:21:25,360 --> 01:21:30,880
 meeting almost weekly to go over this document.

1326
01:21:30,880 --> 01:21:33,560
 It's obviously an important document.

1327
01:21:33,560 --> 01:21:39,100
 Just to remind the commission and those that are viewing, three members of the Planning

1328
01:21:39,100 --> 01:21:41,680
 and Zoning Commission serve on that DCRC.

1329
01:21:41,680 --> 01:21:45,520
 Margie, Andrew, and Larry serve on that commission.

1330
01:21:45,520 --> 01:21:46,520
 >> Kind of.

1331
01:21:46,520 --> 01:21:47,520
 >> Kind of.

1332
01:21:47,520 --> 01:21:48,520
 Sort of.

1333
01:21:48,520 --> 01:21:51,720
 >> It's like two and a half members.

1334
01:21:51,720 --> 01:21:57,080
 >> So the agenda, real quickly, is to just -- why are we doing this?

1335
01:21:57,080 --> 01:21:58,560
 Where we are?

1336
01:21:58,560 --> 01:22:02,280
 What has the DCRC been discussing?

1337
01:22:02,280 --> 01:22:06,680
 Going to go over the subchapters that we're proposing and then notification in the draft

1338
01:22:06,680 --> 01:22:11,120
 zoning map, which is a big component of the DCRC update, and then what our next steps

1339
01:22:11,120 --> 01:22:12,800
 are.

1340
01:22:12,800 --> 01:22:20,080
 So the purpose really is to be consistent with the Dent Plan 2030, have responsible

1341
01:22:20,080 --> 01:22:22,480
 and quality development.

1342
01:22:22,480 --> 01:22:28,440
 There are common themes throughout the update, and that is be more customer-friendly, build

1343
01:22:28,440 --> 01:22:32,800
 a stronger foundation, and be consistent with Texas Local Government Code, but also to look

1344
01:22:32,800 --> 01:22:39,760
 at our neighborhoods and make sure that we protect them as well.

1345
01:22:39,760 --> 01:22:45,400
 So the status is we started this effort back in June through November 2017.

1346
01:22:45,400 --> 01:22:50,000
 We started meeting with the DCRC earlier this year, March, to be exact, and continue to

1347
01:22:50,000 --> 01:22:51,380
 meet with them.

1348
01:22:51,380 --> 01:22:57,240
 We've held public open houses when we first published our public draft.

1349
01:22:57,240 --> 01:23:04,800
 During that, we've held numerous stakeholder meetings with the Development Committee, neighborhood

1350
01:23:04,800 --> 01:23:11,960
 meetings, Sedna, Deena, and some other neighborhoods, continued to meet with other stakeholders,

1351
01:23:11,960 --> 01:23:16,280
 and attended a lot of the community market over the summer just to get, again, the word

1352
01:23:16,280 --> 01:23:18,160
 out on the DDC update.

1353
01:23:18,160 --> 01:23:21,760
 So a lot of stuff going on.

1354
01:23:21,760 --> 01:23:28,520
 The DCRC, as you can imagine, has been busy looking at the code and focusing on the following

1355
01:23:28,520 --> 01:23:33,640
 here, and I won't go through all of this, but from allowed land uses all the way down

1356
01:23:33,640 --> 01:23:38,360
 to the zoning map, and I think we're getting to a point where they're getting comfortable

1357
01:23:38,360 --> 01:23:39,920
 with what they're seeing.

1358
01:23:39,920 --> 01:23:42,520
 We have a meeting again this Friday.

1359
01:23:42,520 --> 01:23:44,080
 We hope that we get more comments.

1360
01:23:44,080 --> 01:23:48,160
 What we'll do is then take those comments and provide it to our consultants, who will

1361
01:23:48,160 --> 01:23:52,480
 then redraft a new version of the updated draft.

1362
01:23:52,480 --> 01:24:01,440
 So a lot of what is being reviewed is, again, listed here, and there's a lot between the

1363
01:24:01,440 --> 01:24:04,680
 two that I mentioned.

1364
01:24:04,680 --> 01:24:11,240
 The big part of the update is really looking at how we can make our Dunn Development Code

1365
01:24:11,240 --> 01:24:16,280
 more user-friendly, and one of the efforts there is to reduce the number of subchapters

1366
01:24:16,280 --> 01:24:25,440
 where there are similar ideas or purposes, and we're combining them into one or two

1367
01:24:25,440 --> 01:24:26,440
 subchapters.

1368
01:24:26,440 --> 01:24:31,200
 Our current Denton Development Code has 24 subchapters.

1369
01:24:31,200 --> 01:24:36,800
 We're looking at narrowing that down to eight, and the eight that you see here represent

1370
01:24:36,800 --> 01:24:38,000
 those eight.

1371
01:24:38,000 --> 01:24:46,000
 From general provisions, which is your administrative and general understanding of the code, non-conforming

1372
01:24:46,000 --> 01:24:48,800
 is under that chapter.

1373
01:24:48,800 --> 01:24:51,680
 Next one is administration procedures.

1374
01:24:51,680 --> 01:24:56,120
 Zoning district is where we lay out the new zoning districts.

1375
01:24:56,120 --> 01:24:59,200
 That again is associated with the zoning map.

1376
01:24:59,200 --> 01:25:01,080
 Overlay districts and historic districts.

1377
01:25:01,080 --> 01:25:06,200
 That is primarily a carryover from what is currently subchapter seven.

1378
01:25:06,200 --> 01:25:09,080
 It will be part of this number four.

1379
01:25:09,080 --> 01:25:14,800
 Use regulations, identify the land uses, the allowed land uses, where they're permitted,

1380
01:25:14,800 --> 01:25:19,720
 and if they're required, a specific use permit or other design standards.

1381
01:25:19,720 --> 01:25:20,720
 Development standards.

1382
01:25:20,720 --> 01:25:25,440
 That's probably the biggest one, because that includes most of what we have now as separate

1383
01:25:25,440 --> 01:25:31,640
 subchapters are going to be funneled into one development standard chapter.

1384
01:25:31,640 --> 01:25:37,240
 And then subchapter seven, as shown here, is our subdivision, which deals with platting

1385
01:25:37,240 --> 01:25:42,440
 and other dedication and other requirements for public improvements.

1386
01:25:42,440 --> 01:25:46,440
 And then lastly, there's the subchapter eight, which is our definition.

1387
01:25:46,440 --> 01:25:51,760
 So that is also an important subchapter, because it houses all of our definitions.

1388
01:25:51,760 --> 01:25:57,800
 And when we look at what does this mean, we go to that subchapter.

1389
01:25:57,800 --> 01:26:02,240
 I wanted to share this slide just to show you where we are.

1390
01:26:02,240 --> 01:26:07,760
 The one here on your left is the future land use designation.

1391
01:26:07,760 --> 01:26:14,680
 As you heard earlier, one of them is residential moderate, four to 12 dwelling units.

1392
01:26:14,680 --> 01:26:15,720
 So what does that mean?

1393
01:26:15,720 --> 01:26:22,760
 And just going across the column here, that's roughly between NR4 and NR6, and that's what

1394
01:26:22,760 --> 01:26:26,400
 should be in that general vicinity or general area.

1395
01:26:26,400 --> 01:26:31,600
 What we're proposing is we're continuing those zoning districts you see here and just renaming

1396
01:26:31,600 --> 01:26:36,400
 them where they are currently in R1.

1397
01:26:36,400 --> 01:26:40,000
 It would simply be R1 and so on and so forth.

1398
01:26:40,000 --> 01:26:44,480
 But there are examples where we're going to be consolidating a number of zoning districts

1399
01:26:44,480 --> 01:26:48,060
 that you see here under the downtown compatibility area.

1400
01:26:48,060 --> 01:26:55,840
 Your DR1, DR2, RCR1, and RCR2, we are proposing that it be R7 rather than have all these other

1401
01:26:55,840 --> 01:26:56,840
 zoning districts.

1402
01:26:56,840 --> 01:27:02,520
 And you see that under the DCN and DCG, also with the RCCN and RCCD.

1403
01:27:02,520 --> 01:27:09,600
 So the number of zoning district we have currently about 28 plus.

1404
01:27:09,600 --> 01:27:15,080
 We are proposing close to about 14 or 15 zoning districts.

1405
01:27:15,080 --> 01:27:21,080
 A big part of the update is the opportunity for the development community to consider

1406
01:27:21,080 --> 01:27:24,120
 or the city that is PDs.

1407
01:27:24,120 --> 01:27:31,840
 Now those that aren't familiar back in prior to 2002, we used to offer PDs.

1408
01:27:31,840 --> 01:27:33,800
 Since then we have not.

1409
01:27:33,800 --> 01:27:34,800
 That's something coming back.

1410
01:27:34,800 --> 01:27:42,120
 And I think that is a key tool that we will see as we see development come in.

1411
01:27:42,120 --> 01:27:47,160
 Specifically, say in the rezoning, if they can't meet the zoning requirements and rather

1412
01:27:47,160 --> 01:27:52,680
 than rezone the property, maybe an opportunity there is to do a PD where you can get a little

1413
01:27:52,680 --> 01:27:57,960
 bit more specific and get the development standards that really is needed.

1414
01:27:57,960 --> 01:28:04,240
 For both the city's perspective as well as the development's perspective.

1415
01:28:04,240 --> 01:28:05,560
 So we talked about the zoning map.

1416
01:28:05,560 --> 01:28:09,840
 Again, this is going to be one of those big efforts that we will be pushing along with

1417
01:28:09,840 --> 01:28:12,000
 the DDC code.

1418
01:28:12,000 --> 01:28:25,040
 We have reached out to over 30,000 people with postcards, and we are going to be doing

1419
01:28:25,040 --> 01:28:29,520
 that again in the next coming months, and then when we get to the public hearing, we

1420
01:28:29,520 --> 01:28:36,560
 are going to be noticing same property owners, but through a mailing letter so that they

1421
01:28:36,560 --> 01:28:42,080
 are notified in advance of a public hearing or of the public hearing.

1422
01:28:42,080 --> 01:28:48,840
 All this information that I have discussed in draft form is available through our website,

1423
01:28:48,840 --> 01:28:53,000
 which is dencode2030.com.

1424
01:28:53,000 --> 01:28:59,360
 In addition to mailing postcards, we have done all we can through social media, press

1425
01:28:59,360 --> 01:29:04,480
 releases, newspaper, and again, there is going to be another big push as we get closer to

1426
01:29:04,480 --> 01:29:07,720
 the final draft.

1427
01:29:07,720 --> 01:29:15,080
 We have the website, again, I mentioned earlier, has all the drafts as well as the zoning map

1428
01:29:15,080 --> 01:29:16,080
 link.

1429
01:29:16,080 --> 01:29:20,400
 So someone that wants to know what their current zoning is and what their proposed zoning is,

1430
01:29:20,400 --> 01:29:25,840
 they can find that out and find out what has changed or will change if and when this code

1431
01:29:25,840 --> 01:29:29,560
 gets updated and this map gets updated.

1432
01:29:29,560 --> 01:29:32,320
 So we are doing that as well.

1433
01:29:32,320 --> 01:29:36,360
 Hopefully they are able to review it, and if they have any comments, we welcome and

1434
01:29:36,360 --> 01:29:41,080
 we encourage that they submit a comment card, either hard copy, which we have available,

1435
01:29:41,080 --> 01:29:44,160
 or through the website.

1436
01:29:44,160 --> 01:29:47,320
 So what is coming up next?

1437
01:29:47,320 --> 01:29:53,400
 The consolidated draft, which is all of the stuff that we have heard to date from citizens,

1438
01:29:53,400 --> 01:29:58,800
 from certain departments, but the DCRC and from you all as well, we are going to combine

1439
01:29:58,800 --> 01:30:03,760
 all of that, present this to our consultants, they are going to take all of that comment,

1440
01:30:03,760 --> 01:30:07,760
 those comments, and draft a consolidated draft.

1441
01:30:07,760 --> 01:30:13,200
 On December 12th is the publish date of when we will publish that online.

1442
01:30:13,200 --> 01:30:18,840
 In addition, we will also publish a new zoning map that reflects some of the changes that

1443
01:30:18,840 --> 01:30:21,720
 were provided to us as direction.

1444
01:30:21,720 --> 01:30:23,240
 Commissioner Beck.

1445
01:30:23,240 --> 01:30:25,120
 Thank you, Chair.

1446
01:30:25,120 --> 01:30:29,440
 At December 12th, the date is certain, because it seemed like at our last meeting, we came

1447
01:30:29,440 --> 01:30:33,160
 to conclusion, hey, we may have some more work to do here.

1448
01:30:33,160 --> 01:30:34,160
 Correct.

1449
01:30:34,160 --> 01:30:40,400
 The original, this is change, this has been updated, Larry, we had proposed late November.

1450
01:30:40,400 --> 01:30:46,240
 We know that the DCRC still has some comments and questions, so we've pushed that back to

1451
01:30:46,240 --> 01:30:47,240
 December 12th.

1452
01:30:47,240 --> 01:30:49,560
 So that's the date to date.

1453
01:30:49,560 --> 01:30:50,560
 Okay.

1454
01:30:50,560 --> 01:30:51,560
 It's not locked in.

1455
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:56,880
 It's not, but we want to get this going and get it to the public hearing.

1456
01:30:56,880 --> 01:31:00,960
 I hope it is, too, to be honest with you, but I just wanted to check on that.

1457
01:31:00,960 --> 01:31:01,960
 Thank you.

1458
01:31:01,960 --> 01:31:08,440
 So once that's published, we are going to also follow that up with a work session with

1459
01:31:08,440 --> 01:31:13,600
 City Council on December 18th, that's obviously a Tuesday.

1460
01:31:13,600 --> 01:31:18,880
 The consultants will be here in town, and we would like to have a work session with

1461
01:31:18,880 --> 01:31:22,680
 the Planning Zoning Commission, the whole Planning Zoning Commission.

1462
01:31:22,680 --> 01:31:33,980
 So the 19th is what we are proposing, it is a Wednesday, and we're looking for your input.

1463
01:31:33,980 --> 01:31:39,160
 We can do it now, or we can continue with the presentation, but December 19th, if we

1464
01:31:39,160 --> 01:31:43,680
 can have a work session, a special called work session with the Planning Zoning Commission,

1465
01:31:43,680 --> 01:31:48,960
 we would like that to share with you what we have as far as a consolidated draft, and

1466
01:31:48,960 --> 01:31:55,320
 again, our consultants will be here so that they can provide their input or their expertise

1467
01:31:55,320 --> 01:31:56,320
 as well.

1468
01:31:56,320 --> 01:32:02,780
 And we'll come back to that at the end of this presentation so we can figure what time

1469
01:32:02,780 --> 01:32:05,720
 or if that's even a possibility.

1470
01:32:05,720 --> 01:32:09,440
 Stakeholder meetings we talked about, public open houses will be coming forward, and then

1471
01:32:09,440 --> 01:32:15,080
 we hope by late February, early March, we will be at public hearings with the Planning

1472
01:32:15,080 --> 01:32:18,480
 Zoning Commission and City Council.

1473
01:32:18,480 --> 01:32:19,840
 I'm going to go through these slides.

1474
01:32:19,840 --> 01:32:24,680
 This is just to show you that we've been meeting with a number of different stakeholders.

1475
01:32:24,680 --> 01:32:31,720
 As you can see, the DCRC has been meeting at minimum weekly.

1476
01:32:31,720 --> 01:32:35,360
 We're currently here on November 14th.

1477
01:32:35,360 --> 01:32:43,600
 We've got some public outreach efforts following that, but December 19th is when we would like

1478
01:32:43,600 --> 01:32:48,560
 to have a special called meeting with the Planning Zoning Commission.

1479
01:32:48,560 --> 01:32:52,800
 So I think that concludes my presentation.

1480
01:32:52,800 --> 01:32:55,480
 Any discussion or comments?

1481
01:32:55,480 --> 01:32:56,480
 - Chris, you're back.

1482
01:32:56,480 --> 01:33:00,280
 - Go back to the slide that showed the difference between the old zoning districts and the new.

1483
01:33:00,280 --> 01:33:01,280
 - Sure.

1484
01:33:01,280 --> 01:33:02,840
 - I had one question.

1485
01:33:02,840 --> 01:33:08,520
 We got a zone in there that, where'd it go?

1486
01:33:08,520 --> 01:33:09,520
 - Which one?

1487
01:33:09,520 --> 01:33:10,520
 - No, go.

1488
01:33:10,520 --> 01:33:11,520
 There was one where it was various.

1489
01:33:11,520 --> 01:33:12,520
 - There it is.

1490
01:33:12,520 --> 01:33:13,520
 - It's right in the middle.

1491
01:33:13,520 --> 01:33:14,520
 - Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

1492
01:33:14,520 --> 01:33:15,520
 Okay.

1493
01:33:15,520 --> 01:33:19,200
 We didn't really, I don't remember us touching too much on that in our subcommittee meeting,

1494
01:33:19,200 --> 01:33:21,440
 and you've got various down there in Neighborhood University.

1495
01:33:21,440 --> 01:33:23,520
 Can you elaborate on that a little bit more?

1496
01:33:23,520 --> 01:33:29,920
 - Yeah, because those have so many different zoning districts currently in the, say, the

1497
01:33:29,920 --> 01:33:32,560
 neighborhood compatibility year around the university.

1498
01:33:32,560 --> 01:33:37,400
 It's got DCG, it's got some NR4s, that sort of thing.

1499
01:33:37,400 --> 01:33:42,760
 We have to look at the map in various means that it could be an MN, it could be an R7,

1500
01:33:42,760 --> 01:33:46,200
 it could be any of the zoning districts that fits that area.

1501
01:33:46,200 --> 01:33:47,960
 - So we're not locked into a new...

1502
01:33:47,960 --> 01:33:55,320
 - No, no, this is just a first step into trying to get to a zoning map that's workable.

1503
01:33:55,320 --> 01:34:02,640
 - And these would probably be areas that right now aren't necessarily zoned on the way or

1504
01:34:02,640 --> 01:34:04,520
 the other, or no?

1505
01:34:04,520 --> 01:34:08,920
 - They will, I mean, every parcel in the city will have a zoning district.

1506
01:34:08,920 --> 01:34:09,920
 - Okay.

1507
01:34:09,920 --> 01:34:10,920
 - Yeah.

1508
01:34:10,920 --> 01:34:11,920
 - Okay.

1509
01:34:11,920 --> 01:34:14,200
 - There's, if I clarify, there's not a zoning called variant.

1510
01:34:14,200 --> 01:34:18,520
 - No, no, it's just, it could be a number of different zoning districts.

1511
01:34:18,520 --> 01:34:22,600
 - Do you have any examples of these kind of areas now?

1512
01:34:22,600 --> 01:34:28,840
 - NR6, for example, could be within that neighborhood university compatibility, it's just not a

1513
01:34:28,840 --> 01:34:29,840
 clean alignment.

1514
01:34:29,840 --> 01:34:30,840
 - Okay.

1515
01:34:30,840 --> 01:34:33,720
 - Not as clean as, say, on the south side of town.

1516
01:34:33,720 --> 01:34:34,720
 - Okay.

1517
01:34:34,720 --> 01:34:37,520
 - So that's a quick update.

1518
01:34:37,520 --> 01:34:41,440
 We're working towards a consolidated draft.

1519
01:34:41,440 --> 01:34:47,880
 You guys will see that hopefully on November, I'm sorry, December 19th.

1520
01:34:47,880 --> 01:34:52,400
 - To that point, Ron, is there any initial, if anyone has a calendar, is there any initial

1521
01:34:52,400 --> 01:34:56,520
 issue of getting a quorum for the 19th?

1522
01:34:56,520 --> 01:34:57,520
 Time to be determined?

1523
01:34:57,520 --> 01:34:59,040
 - That is up to y'all.

1524
01:34:59,040 --> 01:35:04,600
 Our consultants are here Tuesday and Wednesday, and so any time during Wednesday, share.

1525
01:35:04,600 --> 01:35:10,000
 - Too early, too early, Commissioner.

1526
01:35:10,000 --> 01:35:11,000
 - Morning's preferable.

1527
01:35:11,000 --> 01:35:12,600
 I know I can do that.

1528
01:35:12,600 --> 01:35:13,600
 It's not easy.

1529
01:35:13,600 --> 01:35:14,600
 - Yeah, rub it in.

1530
01:35:14,600 --> 01:35:15,600
 - Yeah.

1531
01:35:15,600 --> 01:35:16,600
 No, no, no, no, no.

1532
01:35:16,600 --> 01:35:18,280
 But I mean, just for my...

1533
01:35:18,280 --> 01:35:21,760
 - When's convenient for you, Commissioner Beck, we'll work around here.

1534
01:35:21,760 --> 01:35:27,840
 - I would prefer mornings, 'cause I started lagging about one, two hours.

1535
01:35:27,840 --> 01:35:29,640
 No, I just...

1536
01:35:29,640 --> 01:35:30,640
 - We can work out a time later.

1537
01:35:30,640 --> 01:35:32,840
 I just want to make sure that if there's any travel or...

1538
01:35:32,840 --> 01:35:33,840
 - Yes, and...

1539
01:35:33,840 --> 01:35:37,640
 - It's my dad's birthday, and it's mine or something, okay?

1540
01:35:37,640 --> 01:35:38,640
 - Okay.

1541
01:35:38,640 --> 01:35:42,400
 - We can, through Kathy, we can reach out and get it, if there's actually something

1542
01:35:42,400 --> 01:35:48,640
 that wasn't provided earlier, and if we had known, we would've said something, but we'll

1543
01:35:48,640 --> 01:35:49,640
 follow up.

1544
01:35:49,640 --> 01:35:55,800
 Again, keep December 19th sort of open, and we'll reach out and find a time, preferably

1545
01:35:55,800 --> 01:35:58,480
 two hours, hour and a half to two hours.

1546
01:35:58,480 --> 01:35:59,480
 - Okay.

1547
01:35:59,480 --> 01:36:00,480
 - Commissioner Smith?

1548
01:36:00,480 --> 01:36:03,480
 - We do have a planning and zoning on the 12th, correct?

1549
01:36:03,480 --> 01:36:04,480
 - Yeah.

1550
01:36:04,480 --> 01:36:05,480
 - We have scheduled it on the 12th.

1551
01:36:05,480 --> 01:36:06,480
 - Correct.

1552
01:36:06,480 --> 01:36:07,480
 - And then we don't have anything else again until the...

1553
01:36:07,480 --> 01:36:08,480
 - The next...

1554
01:36:08,480 --> 01:36:09,480
 - Nine, basically.

1555
01:36:09,480 --> 01:36:10,480
 - Right.

1556
01:36:10,480 --> 01:36:11,480
 - Yeah.

1557
01:36:11,480 --> 01:36:12,480
 - So...

1558
01:36:12,480 --> 01:36:13,480
 - Okay.

1559
01:36:13,480 --> 01:36:14,480
 - All right.

1560
01:36:14,480 --> 01:36:15,480
 - Cool.

1561
01:36:15,480 --> 01:36:16,480
 - Okay.

1562
01:36:16,480 --> 01:36:17,480
 - Thank you.

1563
01:36:17,480 --> 01:36:18,480
 - Thank you.

1564
01:36:18,480 --> 01:36:19,480
 - That brings us to the conclusion of our work session.

1565
01:36:19,480 --> 01:36:26,440
 We'll close work session at 6.05, and we'll reconvene at 6.30 in the work session room

1566
01:36:26,440 --> 01:36:30,160
 for the public hearing.

1567
01:36:30,160 --> 01:36:33,600
 Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting

1568
01:36:33,600 --> 01:36:35,660
 for November 14th.

1569
01:36:35,660 --> 01:36:40,000
 We'll open the public meeting at 6.34.

1570
01:36:40,000 --> 01:36:43,400
 The first order of business is stand and give the Pledge of Allegiance to the US and Texas

1571
01:36:43,400 --> 01:36:44,400
 flag.

1572
01:36:44,400 --> 01:36:53,360
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for

1573
01:36:53,360 --> 01:37:02,400
 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

1574
01:37:02,400 --> 01:37:16,840
 On our Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one, indivisible.

1575
01:37:16,840 --> 01:37:21,560
 - Next item on the agenda is consider approval of the planning and zoning minutes for October

1576
01:37:21,560 --> 01:37:22,560
 24th.

1577
01:37:22,560 --> 01:37:25,560
 Commissioner Ellis.

1578
01:37:25,560 --> 01:37:28,560
 - I move approval of those minutes.

1579
01:37:28,560 --> 01:37:29,760
 - Thank you.

1580
01:37:29,760 --> 01:37:30,760
 We have a first.

1581
01:37:30,760 --> 01:37:31,760
 Commissioner Pernetta.

1582
01:37:31,760 --> 01:37:32,760
 - I second.

1583
01:37:32,760 --> 01:37:33,760
 - We have a first and a second.

1584
01:37:33,760 --> 01:37:34,760
 Any discussion?

1585
01:37:34,760 --> 01:37:38,440
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote by show of hands.

1586
01:37:38,440 --> 01:37:41,440
 All in favor?

1587
01:37:41,440 --> 01:37:43,120
 All opposed?

1588
01:37:43,120 --> 01:37:46,560
 Motion carries 6-0.

1589
01:37:46,560 --> 01:37:48,360
 Next agenda item is the Consent Agenda.

1590
01:37:48,360 --> 01:37:52,100
 The Chair will entertain discussion for a motion.

1591
01:37:52,100 --> 01:37:53,100
 Commissioner Beck.

1592
01:37:53,100 --> 01:37:55,680
 - I move we approve Consent Agenda.

1593
01:37:55,680 --> 01:37:56,680
 - Commissioner Smith.

1594
01:37:56,680 --> 01:37:57,680
 - I second that motion.

1595
01:37:57,680 --> 01:37:59,160
 - We have a first and a second.

1596
01:37:59,160 --> 01:38:00,160
 Any discussion?

1597
01:38:00,160 --> 01:38:01,160
 Seeing none.

1598
01:38:01,160 --> 01:38:02,160
 Any discussion?

1599
01:38:02,160 --> 01:38:03,160
 Seeing none.

1600
01:38:03,160 --> 01:38:04,160
 I'll call for a vote by show of hands.

1601
01:38:04,160 --> 01:38:05,160
 All in favor?

1602
01:38:05,160 --> 01:38:07,480
 All opposed?

1603
01:38:07,480 --> 01:38:10,680
 Motion carries 6-0.

1604
01:38:10,680 --> 01:38:13,480
 Next item is our one item for individual consideration.

1605
01:38:13,480 --> 01:38:19,440
 It's the consideration of the 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Calendar.

1606
01:38:19,440 --> 01:38:20,680
 We had talked about this in work session.

1607
01:38:20,680 --> 01:38:23,600
 Commissioner Smith, do you have an opportunity to see if there's any conflicts?

1608
01:38:23,600 --> 01:38:25,200
 - There are none.

1609
01:38:25,200 --> 01:38:26,200
 - Okay.

1610
01:38:26,200 --> 01:38:29,880
 Any discussion on the calendar for 2019?

1611
01:38:29,880 --> 01:38:34,960
 - The Chair will consider a motion.

1612
01:38:34,960 --> 01:38:35,960
 Commissioner Ellis.

1613
01:38:35,960 --> 01:38:38,920
 - I move approval of 2019 P&Z Calendar.

1614
01:38:38,920 --> 01:38:39,920
 - Perfect.

1615
01:38:39,920 --> 01:38:40,920
 Commissioner Burnett.

1616
01:38:40,920 --> 01:38:41,920
 - I second the motion to approve.

1617
01:38:41,920 --> 01:38:44,240
 - We have a first and a second.

1618
01:38:44,240 --> 01:38:45,240
 Any discussion?

1619
01:38:45,240 --> 01:38:48,080
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote by show of hands.

1620
01:38:48,080 --> 01:38:49,680
 All in favor?

1621
01:38:49,680 --> 01:38:51,400
 All opposed?

1622
01:38:51,400 --> 01:38:56,280
 Motion carries 6-0.

1623
01:38:56,280 --> 01:39:04,160
 As a point of order, the public hearing item 5A has been moved to the November 28th meeting.

1624
01:39:04,160 --> 01:39:06,000
 It will not be heard tonight.

1625
01:39:06,000 --> 01:39:11,040
 As well as item 5B, that has been withdrawn from the agenda.

1626
01:39:11,040 --> 01:39:17,400
 So that brings us to item 5C, Z18-0022.

1627
01:39:17,400 --> 01:39:36,640
 I'll open the public hearing and call Ron for a presentation.

1628
01:39:36,640 --> 01:39:39,400
 - Thank you, Chair, members of the commission, members of staff.

1629
01:39:39,400 --> 01:39:46,800
 This item for you for consideration this evening is for a zoning change request from NRMU-12

1630
01:39:46,800 --> 01:39:49,880
 to NRMU Zoning District.

1631
01:39:49,880 --> 01:39:57,440
 The purpose of the zoning change is to allow for more density.

1632
01:39:57,440 --> 01:40:03,240
 Prior to the zoning request application, there was a specific use permit application.

1633
01:40:03,240 --> 01:40:07,920
 Through the review of the site plan as part of that specific use permit, it was determined

1634
01:40:07,920 --> 01:40:13,120
 that the proposed number of dwelling units would not comply with the NRMU-12 maximum

1635
01:40:13,120 --> 01:40:14,120
 density.

1636
01:40:14,120 --> 01:40:19,160
 Therefore, the applicant submitted this rezoning request, again, going from NRMU-12, which

1637
01:40:19,160 --> 01:40:24,800
 is 12 units per acre, to NRMU, which allows up to 30 units per acre.

1638
01:40:24,800 --> 01:40:30,600
 The property is approximately 9.91 acres, generally located west of Mockingbird and

1639
01:40:30,600 --> 01:40:35,160
 south of Mingo Road, as shown on this slide.

1640
01:40:35,160 --> 01:40:43,160
 The future land use designation for this property is designated as moderate density, which is

1641
01:40:43,160 --> 01:40:49,080
 described as four to 12 dwelling units per acre, where you would see single-family detached

1642
01:40:49,080 --> 01:40:54,280
 housing, low-rise multi-family dwellings, and town homes.

1643
01:40:54,280 --> 01:41:00,640
 The idea is to maintain the scale and orientation of the building, similarly with the surrounding

1644
01:41:00,640 --> 01:41:01,880
 area.

1645
01:41:01,880 --> 01:41:08,600
 It also serves as a transitional zoning district, where you see low density to the south, and

1646
01:41:08,600 --> 01:41:13,200
 you get a little higher as far as intensity as you get past the moderate density into

1647
01:41:13,200 --> 01:41:20,200
 the community mixed-use designation.

1648
01:41:20,200 --> 01:41:25,280
 This slide here illustrates what is being proposed, starting off with the existing.

1649
01:41:25,280 --> 01:41:28,680
 Again, the zoning is NRMU-12.

1650
01:41:28,680 --> 01:41:38,160
 The applicant is requesting a NRMU zoning district, and that's shown here.

1651
01:41:38,160 --> 01:41:42,620
 Part of the staff's analysis is looking at the criteria for approval.

1652
01:41:42,620 --> 01:41:47,300
 There are two main criteria, and that is that the proposed rezoning conforms with the future

1653
01:41:47,300 --> 01:41:52,640
 land use element of the Den Plan, as well as that the proposed rezoning facilitates

1654
01:41:52,640 --> 01:41:58,520
 the adequate public infrastructure in terms of transportation, water, wastewater, school

1655
01:41:58,520 --> 01:42:01,840
 parks, and other public requirements.

1656
01:42:01,840 --> 01:42:09,520
 Further, the staff looked at the future land use element, and again, the future land use

1657
01:42:09,520 --> 01:42:15,280
 designation for this area is residential moderate, which again, is described 4 to 12 dwelling

1658
01:42:15,280 --> 01:42:17,280
 units per acre.

1659
01:42:17,280 --> 01:42:21,680
 Said it earlier, low-rise multi-family is permitted with 10 town homes.

1660
01:42:21,680 --> 01:42:32,320
 Again, the intent is that this area is developed in scale and style with the surrounding area.

1661
01:42:32,320 --> 01:42:38,080
 In cases where the proposed zoning does not fit or match the future land use, staff has

1662
01:42:38,080 --> 01:42:43,480
 the ability to review a number of criteria for approval.

1663
01:42:43,480 --> 01:42:48,680
 The list that you see here are some of what we look at, and based on our analysis, we

1664
01:42:48,680 --> 01:42:53,360
 have determined that, based on the density, it does not meet this criteria.

1665
01:42:53,360 --> 01:43:01,760
 Therefore, it is still being considered not conforming with the future land use designation.

1666
01:43:01,760 --> 01:43:06,320
 For our purposes, we also looked at what was in the surrounding area, again, to address

1667
01:43:06,320 --> 01:43:08,700
 the compatibility matter.

1668
01:43:08,700 --> 01:43:14,280
 The site shown here in red is where we are.

1669
01:43:14,280 --> 01:43:19,760
 For your orientation, Mingo is just to the north, University is further northeast, Loop

1670
01:43:19,760 --> 01:43:28,560
 288 is to the east, and Audra to the south, Nottingham is to the west.

1671
01:43:28,560 --> 01:43:30,560
 We looked at what's currently on the ground.

1672
01:43:30,560 --> 01:43:36,240
 We've got a number of single-family residential, the Bel Air North addition directly south,

1673
01:43:36,240 --> 01:43:40,840
 the Oak Ridge Estates immediately to the east, Audra Heights as well.

1674
01:43:40,840 --> 01:43:48,040
 We've got East Hampton village further south, Shiloh Fields directly west, and Woodlands

1675
01:43:48,040 --> 01:43:57,440
 of Denton, an apartment complex, a newer apartment complex that was constructed after 2013.

1676
01:43:57,440 --> 01:44:03,720
 Just to give the commission and the audience some information on the Woodlands, again,

1677
01:44:03,720 --> 01:44:09,880
 it is a multi-family dwelling unit development, approximately 19.87 is dedicated for the multi-family

1678
01:44:09,880 --> 01:44:11,400
 dwelling.

1679
01:44:11,400 --> 01:44:17,560
 You can see based on this photo that it's two to three stories tall in certain areas,

1680
01:44:17,560 --> 01:44:19,040
 there's three stories.

1681
01:44:19,040 --> 01:44:26,680
 The density calculated for this area as proposed is 15.9 dwelling units per acre.

1682
01:44:26,680 --> 01:44:36,640
 Back in 2012, there was a rezoning to zone this property from NR6 and NRMU 12 to NRMU.

1683
01:44:36,640 --> 01:44:42,880
 Apologize, they're all-- also associated with that was a specific use permit approved

1684
01:44:42,880 --> 01:44:49,440
 in 2013 with conditions that was to allow for the multi-family use.

1685
01:44:49,440 --> 01:44:52,640
 Staff also looked at the mobility of the area.

1686
01:44:52,640 --> 01:45:00,760
 We have the site here to the east is Mockingbird, it is classified as a collector, to the north

1687
01:45:00,760 --> 01:45:07,440
 is Mingo, it is classified as a arterial, secondary arterial.

1688
01:45:07,440 --> 01:45:15,160
 As of today, both roads are not built to the roadway classification as proposed.

1689
01:45:15,160 --> 01:45:25,480
 They are both two-lane, two-way roadways and not, again, built to the roadway classification.

1690
01:45:25,480 --> 01:45:31,200
 Staff also looked at other things, again, associated with the criteria, public infrastructure.

1691
01:45:31,200 --> 01:45:38,540
 We looked at some of the requirements staff did and they will meet the transportation.

1692
01:45:38,540 --> 01:45:44,000
 There are water and wastewater services in the area, so they will meet those public requirements.

1693
01:45:44,000 --> 01:45:51,780
 A TIA was done for this particular site and the traffic mitigation measures that was identified

1694
01:45:51,780 --> 01:45:57,720
 and reviewed and approved by staff has been incorporated by the applicants as part of

1695
01:45:57,720 --> 01:46:00,560
 their proposal.

1696
01:46:00,560 --> 01:46:05,360
 One of the things that staff also looked at is the permitted uses.

1697
01:46:05,360 --> 01:46:13,400
 Under the NRMU, there are more intense uses that are being-- that will be, if approved,

1698
01:46:13,400 --> 01:46:14,400
 permitted.

1699
01:46:14,400 --> 01:46:20,800
 Drive-through facilities, hotels, quick vehicle services, restaurant and so on would be permitted

1700
01:46:20,800 --> 01:46:26,720
 in the NRMU, but are not currently permitted in the NRMU-12.

1701
01:46:26,720 --> 01:46:35,200
 Also general regulations, the NRMU would allow more than the NRMU-12 in terms of building

1702
01:46:35,200 --> 01:46:39,280
 height, where in the NRMU, it's 40.

1703
01:46:39,280 --> 01:46:45,360
 The NRMU will allow up to 65 feet.

1704
01:46:45,360 --> 01:46:53,880
 Again, going over, just making sure we address the future land use element, it does not conform.

1705
01:46:53,880 --> 01:46:57,360
 Staff determination is that it does not conform with the future land use element in terms

1706
01:46:57,360 --> 01:46:59,040
 of dwelling units.

1707
01:46:59,040 --> 01:47:07,040
 The proposed project is proposing 26.7 dwelling units per acre, which is out of scale and

1708
01:47:07,040 --> 01:47:11,000
 not in character with the surrounding area.

1709
01:47:11,000 --> 01:47:17,760
 There was a neighborhood meeting held on October 30th at the Courtyard Marriott, where the

1710
01:47:17,760 --> 01:47:22,840
 property owners within-- property owners and residents within 500 feet were notified of

1711
01:47:22,840 --> 01:47:27,840
 this neighborhood meeting, and one person was in attendance.

1712
01:47:27,840 --> 01:47:33,400
 Two notices were published-- I'm sorry, two signs were posted by the applicant.

1713
01:47:33,400 --> 01:47:38,480
 Newspaper notices was also published in the dinner record chronicle on October 28th.

1714
01:47:38,480 --> 01:47:45,560
 24 notices were sent to property owners, and 86 courtesy notices were sent to property

1715
01:47:45,560 --> 01:47:49,440
 residents within 500 feet.

1716
01:47:49,440 --> 01:47:55,800
 As of this afternoon-- and I know that we've received more comments or more notices.

1717
01:47:55,800 --> 01:48:01,560
 We've received, again, only as of this afternoon, two in opposition, and that you see here in

1718
01:48:01,560 --> 01:48:08,400
 this map or this illustration, the two that we have are from-- I can't read the address,

1719
01:48:08,400 --> 01:48:14,120
 but it looks like it's Brian Coakley, and then another property first named Kent.

1720
01:48:14,120 --> 01:48:22,600
 So that represents 2% of the property within 200 feet of the buffer of the site.

1721
01:48:22,600 --> 01:48:30,660
 With the analysis and with the review of staff is recommending denial under the following

1722
01:48:30,660 --> 01:48:38,120
 consideration that the density is not in conformance with the Den Plan 2030, that the NRMU will

1723
01:48:38,120 --> 01:48:43,760
 allow for more intense uses, and that the general regulations under the NRMU is less

1724
01:48:43,760 --> 01:48:48,600
 restrictive than compared to the NRMU-12.

1725
01:48:48,600 --> 01:48:50,680
 That concludes my presentation on the zoning.

1726
01:48:50,680 --> 01:48:52,720
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

1727
01:48:52,720 --> 01:48:56,720
 Commissioner Smith was first, and we'll get to the rest.

1728
01:48:56,720 --> 01:48:57,720
 Thank you, Chair.

1729
01:48:57,720 --> 01:49:04,080
 Can you go back to the Woodlands slide, the wood bridge, whatever it was called?

1730
01:49:04,080 --> 01:49:06,120
 What was the conditions that are on the SUP?

1731
01:49:06,120 --> 01:49:07,880
 Do you have to remember?

1732
01:49:07,880 --> 01:49:08,880
 What was SUP?

1733
01:49:08,880 --> 01:49:09,880
 SUP.

1734
01:49:09,880 --> 01:49:14,640
 I think you said, "What's up?"

1735
01:49:14,640 --> 01:49:17,320
 What's up, Brian, how are you?

1736
01:49:17,320 --> 01:49:31,920
 There were one, two, three, nine, plus four ESA conditions, let me correct that, six.

1737
01:49:31,920 --> 01:49:35,000
 So over 13 conditions, 12 conditions.

1738
01:49:35,000 --> 01:49:40,040
 And it was mainly protecting ESA and some of those problems, removing permitted uses,

1739
01:49:40,040 --> 01:49:43,200
 those kinds of things, and limiting height at some point.

1740
01:49:43,200 --> 01:49:47,320
 So if the commission would like, I can go over those conditions?

1741
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:48,320
 No.

1742
01:49:48,320 --> 01:49:52,360
 I just wanted a general idea of what type of...

1743
01:49:52,360 --> 01:49:57,040
 There was a project that was in the area that was approved, but it had conditions on it.

1744
01:49:57,040 --> 01:50:00,200
 If for some reason we did want to approve it, we'd like to know what those conditions

1745
01:50:00,200 --> 01:50:01,200
 were, I guess.

1746
01:50:01,200 --> 01:50:02,200
 Sure.

1747
01:50:02,200 --> 01:50:03,200
 See if we can make it somewhat...

1748
01:50:03,200 --> 01:50:04,200
 Right.

1749
01:50:04,200 --> 01:50:12,880
 So there's nine SUP conditions and then there were also six conditions related to ESA.

1750
01:50:12,880 --> 01:50:13,880
 Okay.

1751
01:50:13,880 --> 01:50:14,880
 Thank you.

1752
01:50:14,880 --> 01:50:17,560
 Commissioner Fernetta, I believe you were next.

1753
01:50:17,560 --> 01:50:27,920
 And relative to this slide, so if I'm not mistaken, this complex is actually right on

1754
01:50:27,920 --> 01:50:31,000
 like, what, Audra, where it turns into Nottingham, right?

1755
01:50:31,000 --> 01:50:32,000
 Correct.

1756
01:50:32,000 --> 01:50:33,000
 Okay.

1757
01:50:33,000 --> 01:50:39,200
 So comparing the impact that this proposal would have versus that one, my understanding

1758
01:50:39,200 --> 01:50:43,680
 is like the Audra and Nottingham section over there is what, four lanes?

1759
01:50:43,680 --> 01:50:49,400
 There's additional lanes and Mockingbird's only two, is that correct?

1760
01:50:49,400 --> 01:50:50,400
 I believe so.

1761
01:50:50,400 --> 01:50:52,240
 I mean, I drove there earlier this week.

1762
01:50:52,240 --> 01:50:57,280
 I don't remember the number of lanes, but it was a little wider than, say, Mockingbird.

1763
01:50:57,280 --> 01:50:58,280
 Okay.

1764
01:50:58,280 --> 01:51:02,360
 So technically, they're similar properties, the impact on traffic in the area would probably

1765
01:51:02,360 --> 01:51:07,040
 be significantly higher on the new one in Mockingbird than that one would have been,

1766
01:51:07,040 --> 01:51:08,040
 correct?

1767
01:51:08,040 --> 01:51:09,040
 Right.

1768
01:51:09,040 --> 01:51:13,300
 And I just want to just state that there was a TIA done and the mitigation measures that

1769
01:51:13,300 --> 01:51:15,880
 were requested have been provided by the applicant.

1770
01:51:15,880 --> 01:51:16,880
 Okay.

1771
01:51:16,880 --> 01:51:17,880
 All right.

1772
01:51:17,880 --> 01:51:18,880
 Thank you.

1773
01:51:18,880 --> 01:51:19,880
 Commissioner Beck.

1774
01:51:19,880 --> 01:51:26,180
 Thank you, Chair.

1775
01:51:26,180 --> 01:51:32,880
 To get to the 20% of people opposed to this, I've got 14 letters of opposition.

1776
01:51:32,880 --> 01:51:36,200
 Would that put them over the 20% that would require a supermajority?

1777
01:51:36,200 --> 01:51:41,560
 It would only be from property owners that are within the 200 foot buffer, correct?

1778
01:51:41,560 --> 01:51:42,560
 Okay.

1779
01:51:42,560 --> 01:51:47,760
 And we've kind of shown it here where some of the responses that we receive may have

1780
01:51:47,760 --> 01:51:54,000
 come from folks within 500 or did come from property owners within 500 feet, but they

1781
01:51:54,000 --> 01:51:57,120
 would not be counted towards that 20%.

1782
01:51:57,120 --> 01:51:58,120
 Okay.

1783
01:51:58,120 --> 01:51:59,120
 Thank you.

1784
01:51:59,120 --> 01:52:00,120
 Yes or no?

1785
01:52:00,120 --> 01:52:03,600
 Can you just maybe give a little clarification for the audience?

1786
01:52:03,600 --> 01:52:07,760
 They may not understand the 200 feet and 20% and what that means.

1787
01:52:07,760 --> 01:52:08,760
 Sure.

1788
01:52:08,760 --> 01:52:12,920
 The notices that were sent out to property owners within 200 feet, they are given the

1789
01:52:12,920 --> 01:52:18,440
 opportunity to provide their response in favor, in neutral, or in opposition.

1790
01:52:18,440 --> 01:52:27,560
 If there are 20% of the land area within this 200 foot buffer, the City Council will have

1791
01:52:27,560 --> 01:52:36,240
 to vote, need a supermajority, a six vote in order to pass or approve this zoning request.

1792
01:52:36,240 --> 01:52:37,240
 Thank you, Ron.

1793
01:52:37,240 --> 01:52:38,240
 Commissioner Smith.

1794
01:52:38,240 --> 01:52:39,240
 Thank you, Chair.

1795
01:52:39,240 --> 01:52:44,080
 I don't think it looked, I don't know if you've done the calculation, but just the homes along

1796
01:52:44,080 --> 01:52:50,160
 the southern edge there, that probably doesn't equate to 20%, I'm assuming, just from the

1797
01:52:50,160 --> 01:52:52,200
 way the property is designed, I don't think it--

1798
01:52:52,200 --> 01:52:56,400
 Yeah, I haven't looked at it, but it could be close.

1799
01:52:56,400 --> 01:52:59,160
 Just those who didn't write in, but we do have folks who come up and they say they were

1800
01:52:59,160 --> 01:53:02,400
 in opposition when we start getting the calculation and everything else.

1801
01:53:02,400 --> 01:53:05,320
 Those properties there, just make sure that we don't ever hit it.

1802
01:53:05,320 --> 01:53:08,360
 People who didn't write it in but brought in blue cards or brought in yellow cards and

1803
01:53:08,360 --> 01:53:10,960
 is there in opposition, but it'll make sure we're calculating and have to make sure if

1804
01:53:10,960 --> 01:53:11,960
 we hit it.

1805
01:53:11,960 --> 01:53:12,960
 Right.

1806
01:53:12,960 --> 01:53:17,240
 And then when we get to City Council, we'll be able to calculate all of those comments

1807
01:53:17,240 --> 01:53:20,240
 that we've received tonight.

1808
01:53:20,240 --> 01:53:21,240
 Any other questions?

1809
01:53:21,240 --> 01:53:24,920
 We'll have an opportunity for the public to speak if you have a card, you can certainly

1810
01:53:24,920 --> 01:53:25,920
 complete that.

1811
01:53:25,920 --> 01:53:27,960
 Is there any other questions for Ron?

1812
01:53:27,960 --> 01:53:28,960
 No.

1813
01:53:28,960 --> 01:53:29,960
 Perfect.

1814
01:53:29,960 --> 01:53:33,400
 The applicant is here and they have a presentation as well.

1815
01:53:33,400 --> 01:53:34,400
 Perfect.

1816
01:53:34,400 --> 01:53:35,400
 That's the next one up.

1817
01:53:35,400 --> 01:53:39,140
 This is a public hearing for anyone, individuals who want to speak or ask questions.

1818
01:53:39,140 --> 01:53:42,580
 You may do so by filling out a card and we'll go through them one by one, but the first

1819
01:53:42,580 --> 01:53:49,400
 individual I'd like to call is Alena Tuley.

1820
01:53:49,400 --> 01:53:50,400
 Way off.

1821
01:53:50,400 --> 01:53:51,400
 I apologize.

1822
01:53:51,400 --> 01:53:52,400
 Okay.

1823
01:53:52,400 --> 01:53:54,320
 Certainly you have the floor.

1824
01:53:54,320 --> 01:53:58,480
 As the applicant, you're given 10 minutes.

1825
01:53:58,480 --> 01:54:01,560
 Okay.

1826
01:54:01,560 --> 01:54:04,680
 So like Ron explained, well, I guess my name is Alena Tuley.

1827
01:54:04,680 --> 01:54:06,480
 I'm the applicant on this request.

1828
01:54:06,480 --> 01:54:11,560
 My address for the record is 4821 Merlot Avenue, Grapevine, Texas.

1829
01:54:11,560 --> 01:54:18,220
 As Ron explained to you earlier, we are requesting to rezone approximately 10 acres from NMRU

1830
01:54:18,220 --> 01:54:20,900
 12 to NMRU.

1831
01:54:20,900 --> 01:54:25,760
 The main difference between those two districts are the density that it allows.

1832
01:54:25,760 --> 01:54:28,080
 Current zoning is 12 units to the acre.

1833
01:54:28,080 --> 01:54:32,200
 The zoning we are requesting is 30 units to the acre.

1834
01:54:32,200 --> 01:54:37,160
 With the site plan that has been provided to you this evening, we are currently showing

1835
01:54:37,160 --> 01:54:40,240
 27 units to the acre.

1836
01:54:40,240 --> 01:54:45,440
 Given staff's recommendation, we would like to table the request this evening.

1837
01:54:45,440 --> 01:54:49,360
 But we have come before you this evening because we'd like to have an open dialogue, kind of

1838
01:54:49,360 --> 01:54:52,520
 figure out what is that halfway point.

1839
01:54:52,520 --> 01:54:58,440
 We don't need 30 units to the acre, but also to make this project financially feasible,

1840
01:54:58,440 --> 01:55:00,680
 we do need more than 12.

1841
01:55:00,680 --> 01:55:06,840
 So we would like to discuss where that middle ground might be and also some additional site

1842
01:55:06,840 --> 01:55:13,720
 enhancements that we can provide on the property to make this a more acceptable product for

1843
01:55:13,720 --> 01:55:17,200
 staff and the commission.

1844
01:55:17,200 --> 01:55:22,080
 So when we first submitted this zoning request, one of the things we evaluated is we looked

1845
01:55:22,080 --> 01:55:28,260
 at the zoning in this area comprehensively, including the area to the north of Mingo Road.

1846
01:55:28,260 --> 01:55:32,840
 As you could tell, you have your more intense non-residential land uses to the north, and

1847
01:55:32,840 --> 01:55:36,760
 then it goes down to single family, which is just south of us.

1848
01:55:36,760 --> 01:55:40,760
 When we first considered this zoning request, we thought that it would be a compatible zoning

1849
01:55:40,760 --> 01:55:45,040
 district because it would provide an additional buffer to the single family houses to the

1850
01:55:45,040 --> 01:55:50,280
 south, and it would provide an additional buffer from the railroad to the single family

1851
01:55:50,280 --> 01:55:55,760
 houses to the south, and we thought it would be an appropriate transition from the commercial

1852
01:55:55,760 --> 01:56:02,720
 north of Mingo down to the low density residential.

1853
01:56:02,720 --> 01:56:07,480
 As you can tell, this is what it would look like if the zoning was accepted.

1854
01:56:07,480 --> 01:56:11,760
 We have an understanding that staff is a little bit concerned with the density that we have

1855
01:56:11,760 --> 01:56:14,760
 now, which is 27 units of the acre.

1856
01:56:14,760 --> 01:56:19,280
 So one of the alternative options that we want to propose this evening is maybe considering

1857
01:56:19,280 --> 01:56:21,280
 an overlay.

1858
01:56:21,280 --> 01:56:26,800
 With that overlay, we could limit that density to whatever the commission finds is more appropriate

1859
01:56:26,800 --> 01:56:28,940
 for this area.

1860
01:56:28,940 --> 01:56:35,600
 With that overlay, we could also exclude those non-residential land uses that are allowed

1861
01:56:35,600 --> 01:56:38,720
 by NMRU that are not desirable.

1862
01:56:38,720 --> 01:56:42,440
 And then as well, if there are any additional site enhancements that you would see would

1863
01:56:42,440 --> 01:56:47,800
 improve the quality of this product, we are also willing to consider those.

1864
01:56:47,800 --> 01:56:53,120
 So Mikesh Parna is the developer on this project, and he's going to step up in just a little

1865
01:56:53,120 --> 01:56:59,440
 bit and kind of tell you why we need that extra density and kind of go through some

1866
01:56:59,440 --> 01:57:04,560
 of the factors that we are taking consideration that require that extra multifamily density.

1867
01:57:04,560 --> 01:57:10,640
 But before I do so, it's easy to kind of disregard some of the site enhancements that we have

1868
01:57:10,640 --> 01:57:12,400
 now on the site.

1869
01:57:12,400 --> 01:57:18,280
 So in the blue line, that is a six-foot screening wall.

1870
01:57:18,280 --> 01:57:21,040
 And then in the blue, those are landscape buffers.

1871
01:57:21,040 --> 01:57:24,160
 So to the north and the south, you have a 10-foot landscape buffer.

1872
01:57:24,160 --> 01:57:26,960
 On the west, you have a 15-foot landscape buffer.

1873
01:57:26,960 --> 01:57:30,080
 In those buffers, you have bushes.

1874
01:57:30,080 --> 01:57:37,960
 In addition to that, we were very careful in picking the plant materials.

1875
01:57:37,960 --> 01:57:40,460
 We did choose to provide eastern red cedars.

1876
01:57:40,460 --> 01:57:45,240
 For those of you who are not familiar with those, there's a picture of them right there.

1877
01:57:45,240 --> 01:57:52,560
 They grow to be taller than six feet, sometimes up to 12, really more than that.

1878
01:57:52,560 --> 01:57:58,280
 But they have a lot of foliage, and they provide a really great screening and buffering.

1879
01:57:58,280 --> 01:58:03,400
 So that's going to be provided every 30 feet along the perimeter of the property.

1880
01:58:03,400 --> 01:58:07,240
 This is an example of an eastern red cedar that we've done for another project here in

1881
01:58:07,240 --> 01:58:09,080
 the DFW area.

1882
01:58:09,080 --> 01:58:10,080
 This is six feet.

1883
01:58:10,080 --> 01:58:14,080
 What we are proposing is eight feet, so it's going to be even taller than that.

1884
01:58:14,080 --> 01:58:18,300
 So I wanted to just take the opportunity to just point those two items out, because I

1885
01:58:18,300 --> 01:58:23,920
 think those really do help further screen and buffer and mitigate the impacts of the

1886
01:58:23,920 --> 01:58:29,360
 multi-family land uses or multi-family from the surrounding land uses.

1887
01:58:29,360 --> 01:58:32,920
 And also just one more item, I don't know if you had noticed this on the site plan,

1888
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:37,980
 we also have a 40-foot building setback on the south of us from the single family.

1889
01:58:37,980 --> 01:58:41,920
 So it's going to provide a little bit of distance there from the single family.

1890
01:58:41,920 --> 01:58:47,020
 And our building height is being restricted to 40 feet, which is currently what is required

1891
01:58:47,020 --> 01:58:50,200
 by NMRU 12.

1892
01:58:50,200 --> 01:58:55,820
 So at this time, I'm going to let Mikesh kind of walk through some of the points of why we

1893
01:58:55,820 --> 01:58:58,920
 are requesting that higher density.

1894
01:58:58,920 --> 01:59:03,200
 Before you leave, if we can ask questions now, it might be helpful than going back and

1895
01:59:03,200 --> 01:59:04,200
 forth.

1896
01:59:04,200 --> 01:59:05,200
 Okay.

1897
01:59:05,200 --> 01:59:09,800
 And I would encourage the commission at this point to try to gain facts, but not open any

1898
01:59:09,800 --> 01:59:10,800
 negotiations.

1899
01:59:10,800 --> 01:59:15,440
 I think it's prudent to listen to public feedback and help us inform any discussion that we

1900
01:59:15,440 --> 01:59:16,640
 might have with the applicant.

1901
01:59:16,640 --> 01:59:21,380
 So if this is fact-finding, I think it's a good time, but if we're opening negotiations,

1902
01:59:21,380 --> 01:59:23,480
 let's hold off on that right now.

1903
01:59:23,480 --> 01:59:24,480
 With that said, Commissioner Smith.

1904
01:59:24,480 --> 01:59:25,480
 Thank you.

1905
01:59:25,480 --> 01:59:29,920
 I'm not sure if you, as the engineer, the one who was in charge of the notification

1906
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:31,920
 to the residents, was that you or was that?

1907
01:59:31,920 --> 01:59:32,920
 Yes.

1908
01:59:32,920 --> 01:59:33,920
 That was us.

1909
01:59:33,920 --> 01:59:34,920
 Okay.

1910
01:59:34,920 --> 01:59:35,920
 When was that?

1911
01:59:35,920 --> 01:59:36,920
 When were those sent?

1912
01:59:36,920 --> 01:59:37,920
 Those were sent and were postmarked on the 22nd.

1913
01:59:37,920 --> 01:59:38,920
 22nd.

1914
01:59:38,920 --> 01:59:39,920
 Okay.

1915
01:59:39,920 --> 01:59:40,920
 So that was it.

1916
01:59:40,920 --> 01:59:41,920
 Okay.

1917
01:59:41,920 --> 01:59:42,920
 Great.

1918
01:59:42,920 --> 01:59:47,880
 And then you said at the very, very beginning of this, you said you were seeking a table.

1919
01:59:47,880 --> 01:59:49,920
 You're not seeking approval tonight.

1920
01:59:49,920 --> 01:59:51,680
 You're seeking a table.

1921
01:59:51,680 --> 01:59:52,680
 Yes.

1922
01:59:52,680 --> 01:59:53,680
 Okay.

1923
01:59:53,680 --> 01:59:58,720
 If they were to be given a table, would it be come back as an item of consideration or

1924
01:59:58,720 --> 01:59:59,980
 would it come out as a public hearing?

1925
01:59:59,980 --> 02:00:00,980
 It would be re-noticed.

1926
02:00:00,980 --> 02:00:01,980
 Re-noticed.

1927
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:02,980
 Yeah.

1928
02:00:02,980 --> 02:00:09,880
 My understanding is that the staff would be re-noticing it, in which case, you know, you

1929
02:00:09,880 --> 02:00:11,520
 would have a public hearing at that time.

1930
02:00:11,520 --> 02:00:16,520
 Now, certainly, there are a number of people came out to be heard tonight and they could

1931
02:00:16,520 --> 02:00:21,680
 be heard, but you could really do both if you wanted to.

1932
02:00:21,680 --> 02:00:24,760
 You could leave the public hearing open and re-notice it.

1933
02:00:24,760 --> 02:00:26,320
 There's certainly nothing wrong with that either.

1934
02:00:26,320 --> 02:00:29,320
 I just wanted to make clarification.

1935
02:00:29,320 --> 02:00:30,320
 Okay.

1936
02:00:30,320 --> 02:00:31,320
 Thank you.

1937
02:00:31,320 --> 02:00:32,320
 Mr. Pernetta?

1938
02:00:32,320 --> 02:00:37,560
 Yeah, and I just wanted to clarify because, as the Chair mentioned, this wouldn't really

1939
02:00:37,560 --> 02:00:39,800
 normally be an appropriate setting for negotiations.

1940
02:00:39,800 --> 02:00:48,920
 I just wanted to ask, knowing that the initial recommendation was a denial and knowing that

1941
02:00:48,920 --> 02:00:52,280
 you're trying to find middle ground, I was wondering if you had already engaged with

1942
02:00:52,280 --> 02:00:58,680
 the city staff in terms of what they deemed maybe a sweet spot number for an overlay.

1943
02:00:58,680 --> 02:00:59,680
 Yeah.

1944
02:00:59,680 --> 02:01:04,480
 I think I'll let Mikesh kind of speak to that a little bit more, but since we have submitted

1945
02:01:04,480 --> 02:01:12,000
 this application, we've worked extensively with staff on the TIA, revising the site as

1946
02:01:12,000 --> 02:01:24,680
 necessary to bring it up to the city standards and satisfy all of staff's comments.

1947
02:01:24,680 --> 02:01:30,640
 Staff's recommendation, we found out about it as the staff report was issued.

1948
02:01:30,640 --> 02:01:34,080
 I think there's a lot of things that they take into consideration as well before they

1949
02:01:34,080 --> 02:01:41,920
 formulate that recommendation, so since the time we submitted until now, we've just been

1950
02:01:41,920 --> 02:01:47,320
 working very hard to try to address all those comments and mitigate all those impacts as

1951
02:01:47,320 --> 02:01:48,320
 much as possible.

1952
02:01:48,320 --> 02:01:49,320
 Okay.

1953
02:01:49,320 --> 02:01:50,320
 Thank you.

1954
02:01:50,320 --> 02:01:55,800
 I don't see other questions at this time, so we can have your engineer.

1955
02:01:55,800 --> 02:01:56,800
 Okay.

1956
02:01:56,800 --> 02:02:05,320
 Did you just state your name and address for the record?

1957
02:02:05,320 --> 02:02:07,280
 Sure.

1958
02:02:07,280 --> 02:02:10,520
 Hello, commission.

1959
02:02:10,520 --> 02:02:12,400
 My name is Mikesh Parna.

1960
02:02:12,400 --> 02:02:23,760
 My address is 5811 Carey Drive, Frisco, Texas, and I'm here to, again, as our Ileana staff

1961
02:02:23,760 --> 02:02:27,480
 from engineering has mentioned, we would like to table the case today.

1962
02:02:27,480 --> 02:02:36,960
 The real intent behind coming here today is to just understand the situation and want

1963
02:02:36,960 --> 02:02:40,000
 to make sure that we are all in a happy mode.

1964
02:02:40,000 --> 02:02:47,040
 I don't want to go and do any extreme on any side for anything or any property that we

1965
02:02:47,040 --> 02:02:48,040
 have.

1966
02:02:48,040 --> 02:02:57,280
 So, addressing back to your question, Matt, since the time we got the denial, that was

1967
02:02:57,280 --> 02:03:02,400
 Friday evening, I believe, when we got the report, that was when we realized that it

1968
02:03:02,400 --> 02:03:04,440
 is a denial.

1969
02:03:04,440 --> 02:03:10,360
 On Monday, we had a conversation, and the city staff has been excellent and very helpful

1970
02:03:10,360 --> 02:03:12,520
 in understanding all aspects of the project.

1971
02:03:12,520 --> 02:03:14,880
 This is our first project we are doing in Denton.

1972
02:03:14,880 --> 02:03:21,240
 We are done in other cities, Frisco, Mckinney, Carrollton, all over, but it has been very,

1973
02:03:21,240 --> 02:03:25,080
 very good ride in the last six months we have been working with them.

1974
02:03:25,080 --> 02:03:32,360
 So we have submitted another proposal where we have reduced the density, but obviously

1975
02:03:32,360 --> 02:03:34,280
 this was within a day.

1976
02:03:34,280 --> 02:03:37,120
 So Monday we had the discussion, Tuesday we submitted it.

1977
02:03:37,120 --> 02:03:40,280
 So not enough time for them to review and submit feedback today.

1978
02:03:40,280 --> 02:03:44,160
 That is where we are on that thing.

1979
02:03:44,160 --> 02:03:50,840
 So just to step back over here, I would like to just mention where we came from.

1980
02:03:50,840 --> 02:03:55,920
 When we came to Denton, what was our thought process, and when we saw this property.

1981
02:03:55,920 --> 02:04:03,200
 We saw this property back in December 2017, it's almost a year now.

1982
02:04:03,200 --> 02:04:09,720
 And we looked at the zoning, we looked at the surroundings of the property, and we saw

1983
02:04:09,720 --> 02:04:20,680
 very clearly, if I can go back, the existing zoning around it.

1984
02:04:20,680 --> 02:04:22,040
 So I don't have that.

1985
02:04:22,040 --> 02:04:25,880
 But when we drove around the property, and we drove around the entire neighborhood, we

1986
02:04:25,880 --> 02:04:32,160
 saw homes, we saw commercial, we saw the, I think there is a roof master on the west

1987
02:04:32,160 --> 02:04:33,160
 side of the property.

1988
02:04:33,160 --> 02:04:38,000
 There is a railroad, and then there is the apartments on the north side of the property,

1989
02:04:38,000 --> 02:04:44,080
 and then there is a big tech commercial on the east side of the property.

1990
02:04:44,080 --> 02:04:48,600
 And when we looked at this property, the reason why we selected this property was because

1991
02:04:48,600 --> 02:04:53,400
 it was a, we thought, at least it was a very good transition.

1992
02:04:53,400 --> 02:04:56,460
 And this property has three sides.

1993
02:04:56,460 --> 02:05:02,580
 One side is the railroad, and then the other side is the commercial, the roof master.

1994
02:05:02,580 --> 02:05:08,040
 And then on the south, you have the drainage cement, which is a big buffer between any

1995
02:05:08,040 --> 02:05:11,240
 of the south properties, the residential.

1996
02:05:11,240 --> 02:05:15,160
 And we thought, when we look at it, and when you look at the transition of the zoning,

1997
02:05:15,160 --> 02:05:18,480
 it has low density, moderate, and you have high.

1998
02:05:18,480 --> 02:05:25,700
 And when we looked at the future land use back in spring of this year, we thought it

1999
02:05:25,700 --> 02:05:30,960
 was going to be NRMU, I know it's draft, there are a lot of discussions around it.

2000
02:05:30,960 --> 02:05:36,200
 And that was the reason why we thought, this is perfect, this is the best use of the land

2001
02:05:36,200 --> 02:05:37,200
 we can get over there.

2002
02:05:37,200 --> 02:05:42,320
 We are not disturbing the homes in the south, and we are not asking for very high density

2003
02:05:42,320 --> 02:05:43,320
 NRMU.

2004
02:05:43,320 --> 02:05:51,240
 But then we realized, the zoning is NRMU 12, and there is nothing in between from 12.

2005
02:05:51,240 --> 02:05:53,440
 The next zoning up is 30.

2006
02:05:53,440 --> 02:05:54,440
 We don't need 30.

2007
02:05:54,440 --> 02:06:01,480
 We are looking for, because of the construction cost, and we are adding a significant amount

2008
02:06:01,480 --> 02:06:07,080
 of mockingbird road, expansion, turn lanes, widening path, diesel lanes, three driveways

2009
02:06:07,080 --> 02:06:11,080
 to enter into the property to mitigate the traffic.

2010
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:16,360
 So looking at all those costs and for the project feasibility, we thought this is the

2011
02:06:16,360 --> 02:06:20,120
 number of units that you will need to be above.

2012
02:06:20,120 --> 02:06:27,320
 That was the part of the reason why we requested 20, 27 per acre.

2013
02:06:27,320 --> 02:06:30,680
 That is the average between both the lots over there.

2014
02:06:30,680 --> 02:06:35,280
 So we thought, okay, if we are going to increase the density, it's going to hurt someone,

2015
02:06:35,280 --> 02:06:36,280
 right?

2016
02:06:36,280 --> 02:06:40,000
 Either the traffic or the residents on some, so we said, let's do a TIA report, right?

2017
02:06:40,000 --> 02:06:43,360
 Let's do a complete traffic analysis report of the location.

2018
02:06:43,360 --> 02:06:44,360
 And that was done.

2019
02:06:44,360 --> 02:06:45,360
 It was submitted.

2020
02:06:45,360 --> 02:06:46,360
 It was reviewed.

2021
02:06:46,360 --> 02:06:47,360
 We got the feedback.

2022
02:06:47,360 --> 02:06:53,480
 There were a couple of suggestions to make the north driveway either close it or keep

2023
02:06:53,480 --> 02:06:56,640
 it one way, which is only turn only so people don't have to see left.

2024
02:06:56,640 --> 02:06:58,000
 We said, okay, that's fine.

2025
02:06:58,000 --> 02:06:59,000
 We have three driveways.

2026
02:06:59,000 --> 02:07:03,920
 We can make the other two as in and out, and the top one only as turn in.

2027
02:07:03,920 --> 02:07:08,240
 So a lot of changes were made, good feedback from the city traffic engineer.

2028
02:07:08,240 --> 02:07:09,920
 All those changes were made.

2029
02:07:09,920 --> 02:07:12,600
 And then we thought, okay, let's listen to the neighborhood, right?

2030
02:07:12,600 --> 02:07:14,400
 Let's go and have a neighborhood meeting.

2031
02:07:14,400 --> 02:07:18,160
 Let's listen to what they have, what we can do in advance.

2032
02:07:18,160 --> 02:07:26,880
 We had, I think one, we had one person show up and he was in favor of the project at that

2033
02:07:26,880 --> 02:07:27,880
 point of time.

2034
02:07:27,880 --> 02:07:30,200
 So we said, okay, let's go to the PNZ.

2035
02:07:30,200 --> 02:07:32,400
 And that's when we said, okay, we are ready to go to the PNZ.

2036
02:07:32,400 --> 02:07:35,520
 We think, we thought we had done our homework.

2037
02:07:35,520 --> 02:07:43,440
 And then we got this on Friday and we thought, okay, let's step back here, right?

2038
02:07:43,440 --> 02:07:49,320
 So that's the reason why we came today, to really get everyone's feedback here.

2039
02:07:49,320 --> 02:07:53,560
 And I would like to table the case, as Ileana mentioned.

2040
02:07:53,560 --> 02:07:59,720
 Just get the feedback on where we need to be in terms of the project, in terms of making

2041
02:07:59,720 --> 02:08:03,800
 the best use of the land, and in terms of doing the best thing for the neighborhood

2042
02:08:03,800 --> 02:08:05,240
 over here.

2043
02:08:05,240 --> 02:08:06,240
 That's our intent.

2044
02:08:06,240 --> 02:08:08,680
 That's all I have to say.

2045
02:08:08,680 --> 02:08:13,640
 In regards to what Ileana mentioned, what we would like to propose from since Friday,

2046
02:08:13,640 --> 02:08:19,000
 that we have had the discussions, we would like to go back and is it, do you have the

2047
02:08:19,000 --> 02:08:20,000
 site plan here?

2048
02:08:20,000 --> 02:08:21,000
 Yeah.

2049
02:08:21,000 --> 02:08:32,000
 So we are proposing to remove, yeah, so we are proposing to remove this building over

2050
02:08:32,000 --> 02:08:35,000
 here and also this building over here.

2051
02:08:35,000 --> 02:08:39,440
 So this one building, this one space will be open space, this one space will be open

2052
02:08:39,440 --> 02:08:40,440
 space.

2053
02:08:40,440 --> 02:08:45,240
 And I think we are potentially looking at another building, maybe also we could remove

2054
02:08:45,240 --> 02:08:46,240
 one of these.

2055
02:08:46,240 --> 02:08:47,240
 If you could talk into the mic.

2056
02:08:47,240 --> 02:08:48,240
 We are broadcasting.

2057
02:08:48,240 --> 02:08:49,240
 Oh, sorry.

2058
02:08:49,240 --> 02:08:50,240
 Yeah.

2059
02:08:50,240 --> 02:08:51,240
 It's okay.

2060
02:08:51,240 --> 02:08:55,320
 So what we are proposing is to remove this building over here on the entrance side and

2061
02:08:55,320 --> 02:08:57,920
 also this building over here on the entrance side.

2062
02:08:57,920 --> 02:09:00,560
 And potentially one more building, which we don't know which one.

2063
02:09:00,560 --> 02:09:02,680
 So we are going to remove three buildings from here.

2064
02:09:02,680 --> 02:09:08,800
 So that reduces, that brings down the lot coverage to less than 50 percentage, I believe

2065
02:09:08,800 --> 02:09:15,120
 roughly less than 50 percentage, which is well within our NRMU 12 limits.

2066
02:09:15,120 --> 02:09:19,040
 It also, we are going to restrict with the overlay suggestion that we received from the

2067
02:09:19,040 --> 02:09:23,040
 city, which I believe that is exactly what I was looking for, right?

2068
02:09:23,040 --> 02:09:24,040
 We don't want 30.

2069
02:09:24,040 --> 02:09:26,160
 So why am I asking for 30, right?

2070
02:09:26,160 --> 02:09:31,000
 I think the overlay and the PD gives us that restriction to put on ourselves to say we

2071
02:09:31,000 --> 02:09:33,200
 don't need to go about it.

2072
02:09:33,200 --> 02:09:37,200
 So I think that covers the building height, 40, I think we are currently at 40, we plan

2073
02:09:37,200 --> 02:09:38,200
 to stay at 40.

2074
02:09:38,200 --> 02:09:43,520
 We don't have any intention to go above beyond, we are right now at less than 50 percentage

2075
02:09:43,520 --> 02:09:45,000
 for lot coverage.

2076
02:09:45,000 --> 02:09:49,640
 So then the only other reason left on the denial is the density, right?

2077
02:09:49,640 --> 02:09:55,000
 So we are bringing that density down to close to around less than 20 units per acre.

2078
02:09:55,000 --> 02:09:58,420
 Yeah, it will be somewhere between it into 20 acres.

2079
02:09:58,420 --> 02:10:02,360
 So that's all I have to say right now.

2080
02:10:02,360 --> 02:10:07,280
 Thank you very much, do we have any questions?

2081
02:10:07,280 --> 02:10:16,440
 I'm sorry, so that was about 18 to 20, is what you said you were tabling right now,

2082
02:10:16,440 --> 02:10:18,840
 but hoping to come back in the future for?

2083
02:10:18,840 --> 02:10:19,840
 Correct, yeah.

2084
02:10:19,840 --> 02:10:22,840
 Thank you.

2085
02:10:22,840 --> 02:10:26,840
 I don't see any other questions, I appreciate you being here for the presentation.

2086
02:10:26,840 --> 02:10:27,840
 Thank you, Commissioner.

2087
02:10:27,840 --> 02:10:33,800
 This is a public hearing and so anyone who is wanting to speak on this item can certainly

2088
02:10:33,800 --> 02:10:34,800
 do so.

2089
02:10:34,800 --> 02:10:40,320
 Just for clarification, the applicant has requested the commission to consider tabling

2090
02:10:40,320 --> 02:10:41,320
 this item.

2091
02:10:41,320 --> 02:10:47,760
 If that was to be approved, then they would come back to planning and zoning and we would

2092
02:10:47,760 --> 02:10:53,240
 have the same process again, probably in a different room, but it would be able to be

2093
02:10:53,240 --> 02:10:55,480
 providing you another opportunity to speak.

2094
02:10:55,480 --> 02:10:59,920
 So tonight is a public hearing, it is open, happy to have any and all speak tonight.

2095
02:10:59,920 --> 02:11:06,560
 If a table request is approved for the negotiations to continue, this process will happen again

2096
02:11:06,560 --> 02:11:12,400
 either on November 28th or December 12th, I imagine if we're going to do it this year.

2097
02:11:12,400 --> 02:11:16,560
 With that said, I only have one card to speak, I have several other cards to read in the

2098
02:11:16,560 --> 02:11:21,000
 record of an opposition, but I only have one person to speak and that's Nancy Carson, is

2099
02:11:21,000 --> 02:11:22,000
 she here?

2100
02:11:22,000 --> 02:11:24,320
 Are you still wishing to speak?

2101
02:11:24,320 --> 02:11:25,320
 Yes.

2102
02:11:25,320 --> 02:11:40,400
 Would you certainly come to the podium?

2103
02:11:40,400 --> 02:11:44,200
 And when you get to the microphone, you can just state your name and address for the record

2104
02:11:44,200 --> 02:11:47,520
 and you'll be provided three minutes to speak.

2105
02:11:47,520 --> 02:11:52,280
 Is there any way I can put up pictures on the screen?

2106
02:11:52,280 --> 02:11:54,120
 I do not believe so in this room.

2107
02:11:54,120 --> 02:11:56,560
 Okay, I brought some, I thought we could do that.

2108
02:11:56,560 --> 02:12:00,160
 Unfortunately, we don't have that option tonight.

2109
02:12:00,160 --> 02:12:03,560
 If you would like to pass them around, we'd be happy to take a look at them if that would

2110
02:12:03,560 --> 02:12:04,560
 be helpful.

2111
02:12:04,560 --> 02:12:05,560
 Okay.

2112
02:12:05,560 --> 02:12:09,840
 Well, I'll just start off with showing what we've sort of looked at already.

2113
02:12:09,840 --> 02:12:14,840
 And I want to point out that all of these buildings are three stories.

2114
02:12:14,840 --> 02:12:21,560
 Personally, I'm not interested in compromising with this situation.

2115
02:12:21,560 --> 02:12:25,160
 I think we should stick to our guns.

2116
02:12:25,160 --> 02:12:32,320
 Honestly, I think 12 units per acre is too many and if we're going to negotiate, we should

2117
02:12:32,320 --> 02:12:38,040
 negotiate down.

2118
02:12:38,040 --> 02:12:46,000
 There's a number of reasons for that.

2119
02:12:46,000 --> 02:12:55,800
 I'm going to show you some apartments and how we are really overloaded in apartments.

2120
02:12:55,800 --> 02:13:12,880
 This is Audra, this is Mockingbird, this is McKinney and this is Mingo.

2121
02:13:12,880 --> 02:13:17,160
 And all of those roads in red are two lanes.

2122
02:13:17,160 --> 02:13:21,840
 We don't have any place to put traffic out there.

2123
02:13:21,840 --> 02:13:27,360
 These are two lanes and I don't expect that the city is going to come out and make them

2124
02:13:27,360 --> 02:13:29,320
 larger.

2125
02:13:29,320 --> 02:13:39,240
 But in this one approximately square mile, these are the apartments that we have and

2126
02:13:39,240 --> 02:13:52,720
 I've numbered them up to 13 and there are a total of 2068 units in a square mile and

2127
02:13:52,720 --> 02:14:00,460
 that doesn't count some that are already approved that aren't built.

2128
02:14:00,460 --> 02:14:06,600
 So we are overpopulated already in apartments.

2129
02:14:06,600 --> 02:14:12,160
 Here I'm showing you a map that we've looked at, but this is their 10 acres they're talking

2130
02:14:12,160 --> 02:14:13,160
 about.

2131
02:14:13,160 --> 02:14:19,360
 Okay, I duplicated that and put it here on Bel Air North where I live.

2132
02:14:19,360 --> 02:14:23,900
 And Bel Air North is pretty much like the other neighborhoods around.

2133
02:14:23,900 --> 02:14:32,880
 And so I'm estimating as close as I can that here in Bel Air North we have 25 acres.

2134
02:14:32,880 --> 02:14:37,880
 You know how many houses we have on those 25 acres?

2135
02:14:37,880 --> 02:14:41,240
 127.

2136
02:14:41,240 --> 02:14:50,160
 Do you know what it's going to look like when they put this 10 acres here of 267?

2137
02:14:50,160 --> 02:14:53,120
 Picture that.

2138
02:14:53,120 --> 02:14:56,640
 These are apartments that are going up now.

2139
02:14:56,640 --> 02:15:01,400
 These are three stories over on McKinney and you look at all the different units.

2140
02:15:01,400 --> 02:15:03,040
 These are townhouses.

2141
02:15:03,040 --> 02:15:07,120
 They just opened up the first of October.

2142
02:15:07,120 --> 02:15:09,360
 These are building built.

2143
02:15:09,360 --> 02:15:11,840
 Just slews and slews.

2144
02:15:11,840 --> 02:15:22,320
 If you go down to McKinney, you'll see tons of apartments.

2145
02:15:22,320 --> 02:15:30,560
 These are duplexes over in our area.

2146
02:15:30,560 --> 02:15:37,400
 Can you see how unattractive they are?

2147
02:15:37,400 --> 02:15:43,440
 Here is what renters do a lot of times.

2148
02:15:43,440 --> 02:15:50,040
 And so to overload us with that, and here's another picture of what some renters did,

2149
02:15:50,040 --> 02:15:56,520
 to overload us with that degrades our neighborhoods.

2150
02:15:56,520 --> 02:15:58,200
 Did that mean that my time is up?

2151
02:15:58,200 --> 02:15:59,200
 Okay.

2152
02:15:59,200 --> 02:16:04,880
 I just want to say one thing about schools and families and children.

2153
02:16:04,880 --> 02:16:13,160
 The school that these children in that area would go to is 1.3 miles from the area.

2154
02:16:13,160 --> 02:16:17,560
 And there are no buses.

2155
02:16:17,560 --> 02:16:22,040
 The middle school is 3 miles, .4.

2156
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:24,440
 I don't know if they have a bus.

2157
02:16:24,440 --> 02:16:29,600
 The high school is over 2 miles and they do have a bus.

2158
02:16:29,600 --> 02:16:31,280
 But there are a lot of things.

2159
02:16:31,280 --> 02:16:37,560
 I could talk to you for 30 minutes, but I'll wait until my next turn.

2160
02:16:37,560 --> 02:16:40,240
 Well, I certainly appreciate you being here in your presentation.

2161
02:16:40,240 --> 02:16:41,640
 Commissioner Beck has a question for you.

2162
02:16:41,640 --> 02:16:42,720
 Hey, Ms. Carson.

2163
02:16:42,720 --> 02:16:44,760
 Thank you for your presentation.

2164
02:16:44,760 --> 02:16:48,840
 And I think a lot of us empathize with you and everybody else here about a higher density

2165
02:16:48,840 --> 02:16:49,840
 development there.

2166
02:16:49,840 --> 02:16:58,680
 But just for the record, by right, as it stands zone now as NRMU 12, the 40-foot height is

2167
02:16:58,680 --> 02:16:59,680
 loud.

2168
02:16:59,680 --> 02:17:04,640
 And that's what they're suggesting, which would give you still three stories if they

2169
02:17:04,640 --> 02:17:07,640
 stayed with the NRMU 12.

2170
02:17:07,640 --> 02:17:12,840
 There was one other point I wanted to make.

2171
02:17:12,840 --> 02:17:17,160
 Well, yeah, 12 units.

2172
02:17:17,160 --> 02:17:22,000
 I guess the other point I wanted to make, and it's kind of a little empathetic towards

2173
02:17:22,000 --> 02:17:24,160
 the owner of the property.

2174
02:17:24,160 --> 02:17:28,200
 This area isn't going to be developed with a housing development, not that close to the

2175
02:17:28,200 --> 02:17:29,200
 railroad track.

2176
02:17:29,200 --> 02:17:33,400
 It more than likely has been taken off many people's lists.

2177
02:17:33,400 --> 02:17:42,320
 So a development that would allow up to 12 units per acre would be still a good transition.

2178
02:17:42,320 --> 02:17:49,480
 But to the point that there's an NRMU across the street, I think doesn't necessarily beg

2179
02:17:49,480 --> 02:17:53,840
 the question that it should allow one on the other side of it because mingle and the railroad

2180
02:17:53,840 --> 02:17:59,600
 track serve as a good buffer and distinguishing point, and it shouldn't be brought across anymore.

2181
02:17:59,600 --> 02:18:03,840
 But just for the record, by right, they wouldn't even have to come to us.

2182
02:18:03,840 --> 02:18:07,200
 They could go ahead and build apartments 12 units per acre.

2183
02:18:07,200 --> 02:18:09,280
 I'm not really objecting to that.

2184
02:18:09,280 --> 02:18:13,800
 My comment was because they want to negotiate down to 27.

2185
02:18:13,800 --> 02:18:16,580
 What a joke.

2186
02:18:16,580 --> 02:18:19,400
 Also here I wanted to show you this.

2187
02:18:19,400 --> 02:18:27,360
 This is between their property and the houses on Stockton.

2188
02:18:27,360 --> 02:18:37,800
 This is a 42, I measured it yesterday, a 42 foot concrete drainage ditch.

2189
02:18:37,800 --> 02:18:40,360
 That closes them in completely.

2190
02:18:40,360 --> 02:18:45,880
 And here is where the water goes under Mockingbird there.

2191
02:18:45,880 --> 02:18:52,880
 There's a lot more things that we have time to talk about that are really against that

2192
02:18:52,880 --> 02:18:58,040
 property doing more density than it's already zoned for.

2193
02:18:58,040 --> 02:18:59,040
 >> Okay.

2194
02:18:59,040 --> 02:19:00,040
 >> Commissioner Granada, do you have a question?

2195
02:19:00,040 --> 02:19:04,480
 >> No, I just wanted to make the distinction, I believe the last thing that we heard was

2196
02:19:04,480 --> 02:19:11,680
 that it wasn't 27 units per acre, it's more like 18, which should knock off about 80 units

2197
02:19:11,680 --> 02:19:12,680
 altogether.

2198
02:19:12,680 --> 02:19:13,680
 >> I think we should stick with 12.

2199
02:19:13,680 --> 02:19:21,760
 That's what our people here want, and why do we have to give up something we already

2200
02:19:21,760 --> 02:19:22,760
 have?

2201
02:19:22,760 --> 02:19:28,120
 >> I'm not saying you have to, I just wanted to clarify that point for the record.

2202
02:19:28,120 --> 02:19:32,660
 Thank you.

2203
02:19:32,660 --> 02:19:33,920
 >> This is a public hearing.

2204
02:19:33,920 --> 02:19:37,000
 I don't have any other requests to speak.

2205
02:19:37,000 --> 02:19:42,560
 Is there anyone in the room for an overflow, I'm not sure who is in the building.

2206
02:19:42,560 --> 02:19:46,120
 If I wish to speak, you're more than welcome to do so.

2207
02:19:46,120 --> 02:19:52,200
 All righty, can you just walk up to the podium, sir?

2208
02:19:52,200 --> 02:19:59,720
 And if you could state your name and address for the record.

2209
02:19:59,720 --> 02:20:02,680
 >> Stephen Johnson at 1412 Briarwood.

2210
02:20:02,680 --> 02:20:08,000
 I had one question earlier when you were showing the 200 foot notification area.

2211
02:20:08,000 --> 02:20:13,000
 For Stockton street, does it reach the city right away on the south side or the south

2212
02:20:13,000 --> 02:20:14,000
 boundary?

2213
02:20:14,000 --> 02:20:16,760
 Or does it touch any of those properties?

2214
02:20:16,760 --> 02:20:22,800
 And what requirement is there, if it barely touches the property, do they have standing

2215
02:20:22,800 --> 02:20:28,080
 within the 200 foot notification or does it have to have a certain percentage of the property

2216
02:20:28,080 --> 02:20:29,080
 within that?

2217
02:20:29,080 --> 02:20:33,120
 >> If the 200 foot boundary hits the property, they would be notified, but their opposition

2218
02:20:33,120 --> 02:20:37,760
 would be measured by the square footage of their property within the 200.

2219
02:20:37,760 --> 02:20:41,280
 So if they get noticed that the entire property doesn't count towards that supermajority,

2220
02:20:41,280 --> 02:20:45,960
 it would just be the sliver or portion that falls within.

2221
02:20:45,960 --> 02:20:53,680
 >> And then are there, I assume that in the planning that's gone on prior to the meeting

2222
02:20:53,680 --> 02:21:03,200
 here, is any detention required or necessary for the storm water drainage on this property?

2223
02:21:03,200 --> 02:21:07,360
 >> It wasn't covered in the work session as this is just the zoning case.

2224
02:21:07,360 --> 02:21:11,320
 When we look at detention, it would be through the engineering process later down kind of

2225
02:21:11,320 --> 02:21:13,920
 the trail of progress.

2226
02:21:13,920 --> 02:21:17,920
 Any construction of the property would have to meet any of those drainage requirements

2227
02:21:17,920 --> 02:21:21,880
 that the city would have by code.

2228
02:21:21,880 --> 02:21:27,880
 >> And then I heard mention that the improvements to Mockingbird, I assume the developer would

2229
02:21:27,880 --> 02:21:33,320
 be required to make those in conformance with the future collector needs of that street,

2230
02:21:33,320 --> 02:21:39,400
 but what is the projected improvements for Mockingbird further south?

2231
02:21:39,400 --> 02:21:40,400
 How long?

2232
02:21:40,400 --> 02:21:45,960
 Because there's still a lot of cars coming north to get to Mingor University and if you

2233
02:21:45,960 --> 02:21:50,480
 got just this one section of Mockingbird that's improved with this development, it may not

2234
02:21:50,480 --> 02:21:53,480
 be enough.

2235
02:21:53,480 --> 02:21:57,200
 >> Timeline or resource to provide?

2236
02:21:57,200 --> 02:22:00,760
 >> On the full length of Mockingbird at this time, no.

2237
02:22:00,760 --> 02:22:06,040
 Only because it's still unsure whether or not the zoning would be approved.

2238
02:22:06,040 --> 02:22:09,560
 As Ron had mentioned, there was a TIA that was complete.

2239
02:22:09,560 --> 02:22:17,160
 I don't recall that it called for full improvement along Mockingbird other than the perimeter

2240
02:22:17,160 --> 02:22:22,800
 of their property, but right now, there's nothing planned in the near future.

2241
02:22:22,800 --> 02:22:27,800
 >> Traffic volume would still be there with just a small section of Mockingbird improved.

2242
02:22:27,800 --> 02:22:35,980
 And those are some of the questions I had, and I guess I'm within the 500 foot notification

2243
02:22:35,980 --> 02:22:41,360
 area and I am in opposition to the increased density, but I would hope that some of those

2244
02:22:41,360 --> 02:22:42,720
 issues could be addressed.

2245
02:22:42,720 --> 02:22:43,720
 >> Absolutely.

2246
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:45,880
 We appreciate you being here.

2247
02:22:45,880 --> 02:22:51,100
 And for what it's worth, for you and the rest of the audience, regardless of what happens

2248
02:22:51,100 --> 02:22:55,800
 at the commission, we are a recommending body to city council, so there will be another

2249
02:22:55,800 --> 02:23:01,000
 opportunity to speak for or against this when or if it gets to the city council, so you'll

2250
02:23:01,000 --> 02:23:07,800
 have hopefully multiple opportunities to express your concerns and find remedies to those,

2251
02:23:07,800 --> 02:23:08,800
 hopefully.

2252
02:23:08,800 --> 02:23:09,800
 >> Thank you.

2253
02:23:09,800 --> 02:23:11,560
 >> Can I speak?

2254
02:23:11,560 --> 02:23:12,560
 >> Absolutely.

2255
02:23:12,560 --> 02:23:22,400
 >> If you get us, when he gets the mic, say your name and address.

2256
02:23:22,400 --> 02:23:23,400
 >> Good evening.

2257
02:23:23,400 --> 02:23:29,440
 My name is Linda Godoy, and I live at 3001 Oakshire Street, which is at the corner at

2258
02:23:29,440 --> 02:23:31,320
 Mockingbird.

2259
02:23:31,320 --> 02:23:36,440
 I am a homeowner within the 500 square foot radius.

2260
02:23:36,440 --> 02:23:41,920
 I'm also a parent of two children who attend Alexander Elementary School, which is not

2261
02:23:41,920 --> 02:23:44,000
 walking distance.

2262
02:23:44,000 --> 02:23:49,040
 You cannot imagine the car line in the morning for us trying to get our kids dropped off.

2263
02:23:49,040 --> 02:23:52,960
 Alexander Elementary School is a title one school.

2264
02:23:52,960 --> 02:23:56,080
 It is already very taxed.

2265
02:23:56,080 --> 02:24:01,880
 I'm worried about the additional strain on our schools, not to mention the rest of the

2266
02:24:01,880 --> 02:24:03,680
 infrastructure.

2267
02:24:03,680 --> 02:24:09,720
 Mockingbird does flood when we have rain, despite that improvement on Cooper Creek.

2268
02:24:09,720 --> 02:24:16,200
 Part of that parcel of land at the proposed project is zoned floodplain, even though it

2269
02:24:16,200 --> 02:24:18,360
 is close to Cooper Creek.

2270
02:24:18,360 --> 02:24:21,760
 So I am also worried about that.

2271
02:24:21,760 --> 02:24:28,800
 My subdivision has one entrance and one exit, and that's in front of my house.

2272
02:24:28,800 --> 02:24:33,600
 If traffic backs up on Mockingbird, we wouldn't be able to evacuate.

2273
02:24:33,600 --> 02:24:38,280
 So let's say something happens at Feral Glass, let's say something happens on the railroad

2274
02:24:38,280 --> 02:24:39,280
 tracks.

2275
02:24:39,280 --> 02:24:40,280
 What if a train derails?

2276
02:24:40,280 --> 02:24:41,440
 Or how about when?

2277
02:24:41,440 --> 02:24:43,200
 Not if, when?

2278
02:24:43,200 --> 02:24:46,160
 You know, I worry about those things.

2279
02:24:46,160 --> 02:24:55,400
 So I am in opposition of having any higher density than what is currently zoned for those

2280
02:24:55,400 --> 02:24:56,400
 reasons.

2281
02:24:56,400 --> 02:24:59,560
 I can tell you that people park on the street.

2282
02:24:59,560 --> 02:25:01,560
 Our streets are narrow.

2283
02:25:01,560 --> 02:25:06,480
 I've seen times when I didn't think a fire truck or an ambulance was going to make it

2284
02:25:06,480 --> 02:25:11,280
 down my street to respond to an emergency because cars were parked on either side of

2285
02:25:11,280 --> 02:25:13,560
 the street.

2286
02:25:13,560 --> 02:25:19,520
 I just cannot see our community building up any more than it already has.

2287
02:25:19,520 --> 02:25:24,720
 I feel like our quality of life in Denton has diminished because of the building that

2288
02:25:24,720 --> 02:25:26,200
 we're doing.

2289
02:25:26,200 --> 02:25:30,080
 I would love to see that parcel be a park.

2290
02:25:30,080 --> 02:25:33,680
 You know, my kids have no shared space to play in.

2291
02:25:33,680 --> 02:25:36,600
 We don't have a sense of community.

2292
02:25:36,600 --> 02:25:38,480
 We have a bedroom community.

2293
02:25:38,480 --> 02:25:40,800
 We have homes that we commute to.

2294
02:25:40,800 --> 02:25:44,320
 We don't have a place to come together and be neighbors.

2295
02:25:44,320 --> 02:25:47,680
 We don't have a way to beautify Denton in that neighborhood.

2296
02:25:47,680 --> 02:25:51,800
 I literally feel like I'm on the wrong side of the tracks.

2297
02:25:51,800 --> 02:25:53,920
 So thank you for hearing me out.

2298
02:25:53,920 --> 02:25:54,920
 Of course.

2299
02:25:54,920 --> 02:25:55,920
 Thanks for being here.

2300
02:25:55,920 --> 02:25:56,920
 Thank you.

2301
02:25:56,920 --> 02:25:58,480
 Any questions?

2302
02:25:58,480 --> 02:26:04,600
 Thank you very much.

2303
02:26:04,600 --> 02:26:07,800
 So I have several cards that I'm going to read into the record.

2304
02:26:07,800 --> 02:26:08,800
 These are individuals.

2305
02:26:08,800 --> 02:26:15,760
 The following individuals have selected an opposition position for the item wishing not

2306
02:26:15,760 --> 02:26:18,080
 to speak.

2307
02:26:18,080 --> 02:26:19,080
 It's unclear.

2308
02:26:19,080 --> 02:26:24,880
 There's some that are marked for this agenda item and some for the next.

2309
02:26:24,880 --> 02:26:29,080
 So I'm going to read them all for this agenda item, because they're tied.

2310
02:26:29,080 --> 02:26:34,160
 There are a couple that are specific to the SUP, which is a different item.

2311
02:26:34,160 --> 02:26:39,200
 So I'll do my best to partition these out, I think.

2312
02:26:39,200 --> 02:26:41,120
 Kathy Smith is an opposition.

2313
02:26:41,120 --> 02:26:44,120
 Hudson and Sandra Williams, opposition.

2314
02:26:44,120 --> 02:26:47,120
 Sharon Stewart, opposition.

2315
02:26:47,120 --> 02:26:51,680
 Ellen Reichl, thank you, opposition.

2316
02:26:51,680 --> 02:26:54,120
 Brian Hurt, opposition.

2317
02:26:54,120 --> 02:26:57,320
 Michelle Hurt, opposition.

2318
02:26:57,320 --> 02:26:59,680
 Linda just spoke.

2319
02:26:59,680 --> 02:27:01,720
 And Judy DeLay, opposition.

2320
02:27:01,720 --> 02:27:07,160
 Steven Johnson, opposition.

2321
02:27:07,160 --> 02:27:15,920
 With the cards and oppositions, we also submitted a petition of neighbors that have come out

2322
02:27:15,920 --> 02:27:17,560
 in opposition for this.

2323
02:27:17,560 --> 02:27:20,520
 Rather than reading this into the record, I want to note that there's 38 signatures

2324
02:27:20,520 --> 02:27:23,420
 on the petition and opposition.

2325
02:27:23,420 --> 02:27:29,560
 This will be forwarded to city council for their records to review.

2326
02:27:29,560 --> 02:27:33,520
 Also these addresses will be looked at and looking at the 20%.

2327
02:27:33,520 --> 02:27:39,080
 City will go through every address on here and map them out.

2328
02:27:39,080 --> 02:27:48,800
 Okay, additionally, we have seven response forms in opposition and nine total emails

2329
02:27:48,800 --> 02:27:54,760
 in opposition, all of which will go into the record as such, the ones that I've stated

2330
02:27:54,760 --> 02:27:58,240
 and the ones submitted in writing plus the petition.

2331
02:27:58,240 --> 02:28:01,320
 Again, this is a public hearing.

2332
02:28:01,320 --> 02:28:05,800
 If there's anyone wishing to speak, you're more than welcome to do so.

2333
02:28:05,800 --> 02:28:10,720
 We'd love to hear from you if you want to.

2334
02:28:10,720 --> 02:28:12,080
 Okay.

2335
02:28:12,080 --> 02:28:18,160
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and we will turn this over to discussion questions

2336
02:28:18,160 --> 02:28:21,800
 and motion on the dice.

2337
02:28:21,800 --> 02:28:22,800
 >> Thank you, chair.

2338
02:28:22,800 --> 02:28:28,240
 I just want to thank everybody for being here tonight and speaking up.

2339
02:28:28,240 --> 02:28:32,560
 If we decide to table this, we may see you back here and discuss this again.

2340
02:28:32,560 --> 02:28:40,600
 My personal view at this time is that anything above NRMU 12 is really too much.

2341
02:28:40,600 --> 02:28:49,240
 I understand the property owner's concern that for it to pay off well, you may need

2342
02:28:49,240 --> 02:28:55,880
 something a little bit more dense, but I'm not sure that an NRMU is the good transition

2343
02:28:55,880 --> 02:29:00,560
 that you say it is because mainly of the traffic issue, if nothing else, we've got two roads

2344
02:29:00,560 --> 02:29:04,360
 here that simply won't handle much more than they already do.

2345
02:29:04,360 --> 02:29:09,760
 I just live across the way off Old North Road, so I'm up and down that area plenty and I

2346
02:29:09,760 --> 02:29:13,200
 can see that it's tough to handle and this would add to it.

2347
02:29:13,200 --> 02:29:20,360
 So for what it's worth down the road, you know, if you're looking for a sweet spot

2348
02:29:20,360 --> 02:29:27,960
 between NRMU 12 and the NRMU, I'm going to have a hard time with that personally myself.

2349
02:29:27,960 --> 02:29:37,240
 Just to share that with you now, unless I think even, you know, if somebody does come

2350
02:29:37,240 --> 02:29:43,880
 forward with say a multifamily unit for this, it still requires an SUP and I'd probably

2351
02:29:43,880 --> 02:29:47,880
 even want to put a few limitations on that, just considering the nature of the roads right

2352
02:29:47,880 --> 02:29:50,920
 now and the fact that it does back up to this area.

2353
02:29:50,920 --> 02:29:52,600
 I think the idea of a park is a good idea.

2354
02:29:52,600 --> 02:29:57,720
 I wish we could get the city involved in that, but that's always easier said than done, but

2355
02:29:57,720 --> 02:30:02,160
 I think that would probably be a good place to have something like that, an open green

2356
02:30:02,160 --> 02:30:05,440
 space for the people that live in that neighborhood.

2357
02:30:05,440 --> 02:30:11,480
 I just wanted to say that for her.

2358
02:30:11,480 --> 02:30:15,320
 Yeah, Commissioner Ellis.

2359
02:30:15,320 --> 02:30:16,320
 Thank you, Chair.

2360
02:30:16,320 --> 02:30:17,960
 I'll just say a few comments too.

2361
02:30:17,960 --> 02:30:21,720
 I mean, clearly infrastructure is a problem in this area, namely the roads.

2362
02:30:21,720 --> 02:30:29,080
 I mean, this is an intensely populated area of our city with some future approved projects

2363
02:30:29,080 --> 02:30:30,760
 already in the area.

2364
02:30:30,760 --> 02:30:33,520
 The roads are terribly inferior.

2365
02:30:33,520 --> 02:30:37,600
 It would be very difficult for me to get on board to support any kind of zoning change

2366
02:30:37,600 --> 02:30:42,880
 that would intensify the density there.

2367
02:30:42,880 --> 02:30:46,120
 So I'll weigh in on my opinion on this matter.

2368
02:30:46,120 --> 02:30:50,240
 It seems before us we either have the approval or denial or table.

2369
02:30:50,240 --> 02:30:57,760
 I am of the mindset to provide the applicant an opportunity to be creative.

2370
02:30:57,760 --> 02:31:01,960
 Maybe should they come back at 13 and it's all two stories and looks like garden homes

2371
02:31:01,960 --> 02:31:03,520
 and it is above the 12.

2372
02:31:03,520 --> 02:31:06,960
 I'm not sure what potentially could happen from this.

2373
02:31:06,960 --> 02:31:10,880
 I think by tabling it, it gives the conversation some room.

2374
02:31:10,880 --> 02:31:13,640
 They've had an opportunity to listen to the citizen feedback.

2375
02:31:13,640 --> 02:31:18,480
 The overwhelming opposition hopefully is communicating a message to them.

2376
02:31:18,480 --> 02:31:20,680
 But maybe they come back and say, you know what, we'll just do the SUP.

2377
02:31:20,680 --> 02:31:21,680
 We don't need to rezone.

2378
02:31:21,680 --> 02:31:26,240
 We just need the SUP and we can have that conversation then, but I generally historically

2379
02:31:26,240 --> 02:31:30,280
 on this commission have been in favor of applicants asking for a table just to give them the

2380
02:31:30,280 --> 02:31:32,920
 opportunity to see what can be created.

2381
02:31:32,920 --> 02:31:38,480
 I certainly understand the perspective of the citizens as well as fellow commissioners

2382
02:31:38,480 --> 02:31:41,760
 on density and infrastructure and everything else.

2383
02:31:41,760 --> 02:31:46,680
 My inclination would be to see a motion and support a motion to table this item.

2384
02:31:46,680 --> 02:31:49,360
 >> Thank you, chair.

2385
02:31:49,360 --> 02:31:51,560
 And I would support a motion to table as well.

2386
02:31:51,560 --> 02:31:57,560
 I was giving my opinion so when the applicant does come back, which I will gladly listen

2387
02:31:57,560 --> 02:32:01,400
 and look at another presentation, but I definitely wanted my feedback heard there.

2388
02:32:01,400 --> 02:32:05,800
 But I would support a table.

2389
02:32:05,800 --> 02:32:08,440
 >> If I have not done so already, the public hearing is closed.

2390
02:32:08,440 --> 02:32:10,400
 I think I did.

2391
02:32:10,400 --> 02:32:12,360
 Oh, Commissioner Fernanda.

2392
02:32:12,360 --> 02:32:13,360
 I'm sorry.

2393
02:32:13,360 --> 02:32:15,720
 >> And I'll second that motion to table.

2394
02:32:15,720 --> 02:32:16,720
 >> Clarification.

2395
02:32:16,720 --> 02:32:19,360
 Commissioner Ellis, did you make the motion?

2396
02:32:19,360 --> 02:32:20,360
 >> I did not at this time.

2397
02:32:20,360 --> 02:32:21,360
 >> I'm sorry.

2398
02:32:21,360 --> 02:32:22,360
 >> That's okay.

2399
02:32:22,360 --> 02:32:24,000
 >> Do you want to make a motion or?

2400
02:32:24,000 --> 02:32:26,080
 >> I will make a motion to table.

2401
02:32:26,080 --> 02:32:27,080
 >> Okay.

2402
02:32:27,080 --> 02:32:31,000
 To table it, we have to a date uncertain or to a date certain.

2403
02:32:31,000 --> 02:32:36,360
 I'll turn to the city about timeline if the 28th is possible or the 12th is more realistic

2404
02:32:36,360 --> 02:32:40,960
 or should we do uncertain?

2405
02:32:40,960 --> 02:32:41,960
 >> Perhaps uncertain.

2406
02:32:41,960 --> 02:32:48,400
 It probably at this point would be more prudent to advertise to make sure that folks are aware

2407
02:32:48,400 --> 02:32:50,240
 of when that's back.

2408
02:32:50,240 --> 02:32:54,560
 Also give us some time to look at it because obviously whatever's reduced, you know, there's

2409
02:32:54,560 --> 02:33:00,120
 always a cause and effect with the SGP, so I suspect if it is tabled, that SGP would

2410
02:33:00,120 --> 02:33:05,800
 sort of automatically tie on to that, so you'll be looking at a different request as well

2411
02:33:05,800 --> 02:33:07,080
 as associated with that.

2412
02:33:07,080 --> 02:33:10,080
 >> Commissioner Pernanda, are you okay with tabling this to a date uncertain?

2413
02:33:10,080 --> 02:33:12,120
 >> Yes, to a date uncertain.

2414
02:33:12,120 --> 02:33:13,120
 >> Commissioner Beck.

2415
02:33:13,120 --> 02:33:15,240
 >> And I'll second that motion.

2416
02:33:15,240 --> 02:33:20,920
 I would like to add to that between now and the time that we meet again on this that another

2417
02:33:20,920 --> 02:33:27,040
 neighborhood meeting be held at a time that's convenient for everybody and perhaps a venue

2418
02:33:27,040 --> 02:33:33,720
 that's a little bit closer, if that's possible, where all these concerns can be heard and

2419
02:33:33,720 --> 02:33:39,000
 help you make a decision that might make us think otherwise, okay?

2420
02:33:39,000 --> 02:33:40,000
 So I second that motion.

2421
02:33:40,000 --> 02:33:42,000
 >> We have a first and a second.

2422
02:33:42,000 --> 02:33:46,960
 Do we have any discussion on the motion?

2423
02:33:46,960 --> 02:33:50,720
 Seeing none, we'll call for a vote by show of hands for the motion to table this to a

2424
02:33:50,720 --> 02:33:51,820
 date uncertain.

2425
02:33:51,820 --> 02:33:54,120
 All in favor?

2426
02:33:54,120 --> 02:33:55,520
 All against?

2427
02:33:55,520 --> 02:34:00,520
 Motion carries 6-0.

2428
02:34:00,520 --> 02:34:07,280
 So now we're in this odd spot of hearing a presentation for an SUP tied to a zoning case

2429
02:34:07,280 --> 02:34:11,240
 that's been postponed or tabled.

2430
02:34:11,240 --> 02:34:16,400
 I guess I'll turn it over to Ron for presentation, and then we will go through this.

2431
02:34:16,400 --> 02:34:21,320
 >> Yeah, I might want to just have an abbreviated.

2432
02:34:21,320 --> 02:34:27,120
 >> Ron, could you provide us a brief of your presentation?

2433
02:34:27,120 --> 02:34:28,120
 >> Yes, will do.

2434
02:34:28,120 --> 02:34:29,120
 Got the message.

2435
02:34:29,120 --> 02:34:35,200
 This SUP- >> I just want to make sure I open the public

2436
02:34:35,200 --> 02:34:37,280
 hearing for this agenda item.

2437
02:34:37,280 --> 02:34:38,280
 >> Okay.

2438
02:34:38,280 --> 02:34:39,280
 >> Sorry.

2439
02:34:39,280 --> 02:34:42,960
 >> This SUP request is the same site that we just heard.

2440
02:34:42,960 --> 02:34:51,840
 It's to allow for a multi-family use, approximately 267 dwellings per acre on the subject site.

2441
02:34:51,840 --> 02:34:57,480
 Here is the proposed site plan, as we heard earlier, it will most likely change, as well

2442
02:34:57,480 --> 02:35:03,640
 as the landscape plan, elevations as proposed.

2443
02:35:03,640 --> 02:35:08,960
 Staff went through the approval criteria as shown here, conformance with all standards

2444
02:35:08,960 --> 02:35:12,120
 and compatible with surrounding area.

2445
02:35:12,120 --> 02:35:14,920
 We've already discussed compatibility.

2446
02:35:14,920 --> 02:35:20,720
 We did a full analysis of the specific use permit, covered all of these that you see

2447
02:35:20,720 --> 02:35:29,420
 up here, neighborhood meeting was held, notices were presented as required.

2448
02:35:29,420 --> 02:35:35,880
 Staff recommends denial of the subject SUP, primarily due to the density of the proposed

2449
02:35:35,880 --> 02:35:36,880
 development.

2450
02:35:36,880 --> 02:35:42,840
 Any questions for Ron?

2451
02:35:42,840 --> 02:35:45,000
 Thank you, Ron, for the presentation.

2452
02:35:45,000 --> 02:35:46,000
 This is a public hearing.

2453
02:35:46,000 --> 02:35:50,480
 I have cards of individuals not wishing to speak.

2454
02:35:50,480 --> 02:35:55,040
 Again, this is a public hearing, so we welcome anyone wishing to speak.

2455
02:35:55,040 --> 02:35:56,040
 Perfect.

2456
02:35:56,040 --> 02:35:59,800
 You're more than welcome to go to the podium.

2457
02:35:59,800 --> 02:36:00,800
 You're up.

2458
02:36:00,800 --> 02:36:08,440
 Again, if you could speak your name and address for the record.

2459
02:36:08,440 --> 02:36:11,360
 Steven Johnson, 1412 Briarwood.

2460
02:36:11,360 --> 02:36:20,280
 In terms of negotiations upcoming and any sort of neighborhood meeting that the developer

2461
02:36:20,280 --> 02:36:27,120
 may want to have, and I'm not sure if I missed the last one or the first one, rather, when

2462
02:36:27,120 --> 02:36:33,340
 we received the notice, it was in an unmarked envelope, if I remember correctly, and just

2463
02:36:33,340 --> 02:36:34,560
 looked like a piece of junk mail.

2464
02:36:34,560 --> 02:36:39,320
 So I don't know if there was a return address on the envelope that you sent to property

2465
02:36:39,320 --> 02:36:44,640
 owners, and if that could be, maybe even referring to Mockingbird multifamily, which would draw

2466
02:36:44,640 --> 02:36:50,320
 attention, and I don't know if at that meeting, if you had any site elevation plans of what

2467
02:36:50,320 --> 02:36:54,920
 type of architecture you were proposing, that would be helpful.

2468
02:36:54,920 --> 02:37:02,320
 Things like that, and I guess that was the main suggestions I had for upcoming meetings.

2469
02:37:02,320 --> 02:37:03,320
 Absolutely.

2470
02:37:03,320 --> 02:37:06,880
 And as much as the applicant's willing, I would encourage a sidebar conversation to

2471
02:37:06,880 --> 02:37:11,040
 make sure they have your contact information and make sure you all can align to have that

2472
02:37:11,040 --> 02:37:12,040
 discussion.

2473
02:37:12,040 --> 02:37:13,040
 All right.

2474
02:37:13,040 --> 02:37:14,040
 Thank you.

2475
02:37:14,040 --> 02:37:15,040
 Thank you.

2476
02:37:15,040 --> 02:37:18,040
 Anyone else wishing to speak?

2477
02:37:18,040 --> 02:37:19,040
 Yes, ma'am.

2478
02:37:19,040 --> 02:37:20,040
 I still have more.

2479
02:37:20,040 --> 02:37:21,840
 You're more than welcome to come down.

2480
02:37:21,840 --> 02:37:29,240
 I'll give you another three minutes.

2481
02:37:29,240 --> 02:37:42,560
 I want to talk about a safety issue, and that's there on Mockingbird where it comes into-

2482
02:37:42,560 --> 02:37:45,760
 Hey, Senator, if you could just say your name and address for the record.

2483
02:37:45,760 --> 02:37:46,760
 Oh, I'm sorry.

2484
02:37:46,760 --> 02:37:47,760
 Yeah, it's fine.

2485
02:37:47,760 --> 02:37:48,760
 Nancy Cores.

2486
02:37:48,760 --> 02:37:49,760
 Senate 2908, Oakshire.

2487
02:37:49,760 --> 02:37:50,760
 Thank you.

2488
02:37:50,760 --> 02:37:59,560
 I'd like to talk about a safety issue that we have with this situation, and it's not

2489
02:37:59,560 --> 02:38:08,000
 really to do with consideration of what goes on the property, although it would make a

2490
02:38:08,000 --> 02:38:12,600
 difference because of the additional traffic.

2491
02:38:12,600 --> 02:38:27,440
 And that is where Mockingbird comes down and Mingo goes across here and Old North goes

2492
02:38:27,440 --> 02:38:29,340
 down here.

2493
02:38:29,340 --> 02:38:33,040
 Have any of y'all ever made that intersection?

2494
02:38:33,040 --> 02:38:36,460
 It's very complicated.

2495
02:38:36,460 --> 02:38:44,960
 And I made my little pink rectangles about the size of cars, so what I think they would

2496
02:38:44,960 --> 02:38:50,040
 be, so I'm trying to show a situation here.

2497
02:38:50,040 --> 02:38:56,080
 In fact, when I have someone come into my house that's never came before, I never let

2498
02:38:56,080 --> 02:38:57,080
 them go that way.

2499
02:38:57,080 --> 02:39:00,000
 I always direct them a different way.

2500
02:39:00,000 --> 02:39:11,160
 I said, "There's a quicker way, but you don't want to go there."

2501
02:39:11,160 --> 02:39:21,880
 Now I've just got 2, 4, 6, 8, 9 little cars here.

2502
02:39:21,880 --> 02:39:32,040
 I was crossing the railroad tracks there in front of the wood lawns, wood lakes, apartments.

2503
02:39:32,040 --> 02:39:41,000
 And I was the 11th car waiting on the train to get past.

2504
02:39:41,000 --> 02:39:47,160
 And before the train passed, there were about 16 cars, best I could count.

2505
02:39:47,160 --> 02:39:50,480
 Okay, and that's a four-lane road there.

2506
02:39:50,480 --> 02:39:56,080
 So there was two lanes with 16 cars and I'm waiting on the train to get by.

2507
02:39:56,080 --> 02:40:00,000
 I couldn't see how many cars on the other side because you can't see the other side

2508
02:40:00,000 --> 02:40:11,840
 of the train, but I think we'll have a real problem here when we don't have this situation

2509
02:40:11,840 --> 02:40:20,920
 with 8 cars, but we've got all of this mess here and a lot more cars.

2510
02:40:20,920 --> 02:40:29,840
 A couple years ago, before they -- when we were discussing the woodlands, I did a study

2511
02:40:29,840 --> 02:40:32,680
 on the trains there.

2512
02:40:32,680 --> 02:40:38,400
 I stayed up 24 hours so I could count every train that came through.

2513
02:40:38,400 --> 02:40:42,720
 And there is approximately -- because they're not consistent, the same number every day

2514
02:40:42,720 --> 02:40:47,520
 -- 25 to 30 trains a day.

2515
02:40:47,520 --> 02:40:50,080
 They are extremely loud.

2516
02:40:50,080 --> 02:40:54,520
 And I'm about a half a mile from the tracks myself.

2517
02:40:54,520 --> 02:41:03,280
 I don't think I could stand to live right next to them.

2518
02:41:03,280 --> 02:41:05,320
 So I'll just stop there.

2519
02:41:05,320 --> 02:41:14,080
 Thank you again for your thoughtful presentation.

2520
02:41:14,080 --> 02:41:21,720
 We do have cards that's noted this agenda item or both, so I want to read these into

2521
02:41:21,720 --> 02:41:26,680
 the record in opposition.

2522
02:41:26,680 --> 02:41:28,200
 Forgive me if I've mispronounced anything.

2523
02:41:28,200 --> 02:41:37,320
 Linda Godoy, who spoke on the previous item, Brian Hurtz, Michelle Hurtz, Judy Delay,

2524
02:41:37,320 --> 02:41:43,280
 Stephen Johnson, and Ellen Reifel.

2525
02:41:43,280 --> 02:41:44,280
 This is a public hearing.

2526
02:41:44,280 --> 02:41:51,560
 If there's anyone who wishes to speak, we're welcome to do so.

2527
02:41:51,560 --> 02:41:55,720
 Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and turn it to the dais for discussion, motion,

2528
02:41:55,720 --> 02:41:56,720
 or questions.

2529
02:41:56,720 --> 02:42:03,160
 I'll make a motion to table, but before I complete that, I'd say that I felt my comments

2530
02:42:03,160 --> 02:42:06,360
 were probably best waited until here.

2531
02:42:06,360 --> 02:42:11,280
 Make a recommendation to the applicant that we find some way that this doesn't need a

2532
02:42:11,280 --> 02:42:14,520
 zoning change, but just an SCP.

2533
02:42:14,520 --> 02:42:20,760
 I think I've always been in support, and my voting record will reflect that the city of

2534
02:42:20,760 --> 02:42:25,000
 Denton and Denton County in general is growing, and there's nothing we can do about it other

2535
02:42:25,000 --> 02:42:27,000
 than accommodate.

2536
02:42:27,000 --> 02:42:32,720
 It doesn't mean we have to necessarily go overboard, but multi-family developments are

2537
02:42:32,720 --> 02:42:33,720
 going to have to happen.

2538
02:42:33,720 --> 02:42:39,040
 We're going to be growing in the city, that's just what happens.

2539
02:42:39,040 --> 02:42:41,120
 Multi-family development is going to have to happen somewhere, this is already zoned

2540
02:42:41,120 --> 02:42:42,120
 for it.

2541
02:42:42,120 --> 02:42:45,120
 I think that it possibly could be a good spot for it.

2542
02:42:45,120 --> 02:42:50,200
 There definitely are some huge concerns about the traffic, and especially, I guess it's

2543
02:42:50,200 --> 02:42:54,880
 called Alexander now, when I grew up in Denton ISD, it was called Lee, but someone said Alexander

2544
02:42:54,880 --> 02:43:02,840
 Elementary, so what happened to Lee, but I know what happened to Lee.

2545
02:43:02,840 --> 02:43:10,480
 That being a Title I school as it is, adding a big 267 unit development would be extremely

2546
02:43:10,480 --> 02:43:16,080
 detrimental to the teachers and the facility down that way, as well as those who live in

2547
02:43:16,080 --> 02:43:17,080
 the neighborhood.

2548
02:43:17,080 --> 02:43:22,360
 I do want to see a motion to table, make a motion to table, and extremely encourage the

2549
02:43:22,360 --> 02:43:27,200
 applicant to find some way to make this profitable for you, but to play within the parameters

2550
02:43:27,200 --> 02:43:28,200
 of 12 units an acre.

2551
02:43:28,200 --> 02:43:29,200
 That would be my recommendation.

2552
02:43:29,200 --> 02:43:34,960
 If I see anything more than that, I might be flexible two or three units above it, but

2553
02:43:34,960 --> 02:43:40,160
 even an 18 to 20 unit an acre, I'm probably going to vote to deny.

2554
02:43:40,160 --> 02:43:41,600
 We have a first.

2555
02:43:41,600 --> 02:43:43,320
 Commissioner Cole?

2556
02:43:43,320 --> 02:43:45,000
 I second.

2557
02:43:45,000 --> 02:43:46,760
 We have a first and a second.

2558
02:43:46,760 --> 02:43:47,760
 Any discussion?

2559
02:43:47,760 --> 02:43:50,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2560
02:43:50,280 --> 02:43:51,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2561
02:43:51,280 --> 02:43:52,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2562
02:43:52,280 --> 02:43:53,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2563
02:43:53,280 --> 02:43:54,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2564
02:43:54,280 --> 02:43:55,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2565
02:43:55,280 --> 02:43:56,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2566
02:43:56,280 --> 02:43:57,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2567
02:43:57,280 --> 02:43:58,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2568
02:43:58,280 --> 02:43:59,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2569
02:43:59,280 --> 02:44:00,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2570
02:44:00,280 --> 02:44:01,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2571
02:44:01,280 --> 02:44:02,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2572
02:44:02,280 --> 02:44:03,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2573
02:44:03,280 --> 02:44:04,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2574
02:44:04,280 --> 02:44:05,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2575
02:44:05,280 --> 02:44:06,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2576
02:44:06,280 --> 02:44:07,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2577
02:44:07,280 --> 02:44:08,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2578
02:44:08,280 --> 02:44:09,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2579
02:44:09,280 --> 02:44:10,280
 And you're okay with that motion?

2580
02:44:10,280 --> 02:44:11,280
 I'll just clarify my motion to table for date on certain.

2581
02:44:11,280 --> 02:44:12,280
 Perfect, thank you.

2582
02:44:12,280 --> 02:44:31,280
 And you're okay with that motion to table for date on certain.

2583
02:44:31,280 --> 02:44:44,280
 And you're okay with that motion to table for date on certain.

2584
02:44:44,280 --> 02:44:45,280
 All right, good evening.

2585
02:44:45,280 --> 02:44:48,280
 This is case S 18 eight for the Windsor drive apartments.

2586
02:44:48,280 --> 02:44:53,280
 The request before you is to hold a public hearing and consider making a recommendation

2587
02:44:53,280 --> 02:44:58,020
 to city council regarding a request for a specific use permit to allow a multifamily

2588
02:44:58,020 --> 02:45:02,560
 use on a parcel that you can see outlined in yellow on the map, which is approximately

2589
02:45:02,560 --> 02:45:10,680
 31 acres in total located on the north side of Windsor drive along the I 35 frontage road.

2590
02:45:10,680 --> 02:45:15,320
 This particular property is zoned in our MU that's neighborhood residential mixed use

2591
02:45:15,320 --> 02:45:21,240
 within this district multifamily is permitted with an SUV required as well as with the stipulations

2592
02:45:21,240 --> 02:45:26,240
 of limitation for limitation for says that multifamily is only permitted either with

2593
02:45:26,240 --> 02:45:31,640
 a specific use permit as part of a mixed use development or as part of a preexisting approval

2594
02:45:31,640 --> 02:45:36,140
 such as for a master plan community or a small area plan.

2595
02:45:36,140 --> 02:45:40,640
 In this particular instance, although they do intend to ultimately have a mixed use development,

2596
02:45:40,640 --> 02:45:43,560
 they are seeking to develop the multifamily portion first.

2597
02:45:43,560 --> 02:45:49,520
 So the SUP is really the only of those criteria that would fit in this situation.

2598
02:45:49,520 --> 02:45:53,680
 With a specific use permit, there are multiple criteria for approval that are outlined in

2599
02:45:53,680 --> 02:45:59,360
 your backup and in full, but the generality there is that you're looking for compatibility

2600
02:45:59,360 --> 02:46:02,360
 between the proposed use and surrounding property.

2601
02:46:02,360 --> 02:46:08,080
 There's multiple means of compatibility such as the SUP or the use that's proposed not impeding

2602
02:46:08,080 --> 02:46:12,360
 orderly development on surrounding property that it have adequate parking and access and

2603
02:46:12,360 --> 02:46:17,720
 not generate any traffic issues that there is adequate nuisance prevention in place and

2604
02:46:17,720 --> 02:46:22,560
 that adequate landscaping, screening, buffering, as well as general compatibility in terms

2605
02:46:22,560 --> 02:46:25,860
 of scale and architecture.

2606
02:46:25,860 --> 02:46:29,440
 One of the key features of this site that affects that compatibility is the fact that

2607
02:46:29,440 --> 02:46:32,880
 there are two gas wells present on the adjacent property.

2608
02:46:32,880 --> 02:46:34,600
 You can see those indicated here on the map.

2609
02:46:34,600 --> 02:46:38,240
 We have the pain number two and pain number one wells.

2610
02:46:38,240 --> 02:46:42,320
 You'll notice the light purple color and that is the boundaries of an existing gas well

2611
02:46:42,320 --> 02:46:43,980
 plat.

2612
02:46:43,980 --> 02:46:48,600
 So one of the features that comes into play on this site is that with this gas well plat

2613
02:46:48,600 --> 02:46:53,960
 covering the property, for this property to be plotted and developed concurrently with

2614
02:46:53,960 --> 02:46:57,600
 that gas well plat, they did have to negotiate with the operator and work with them to get

2615
02:46:57,600 --> 02:47:01,640
 kind of their consent, if you will, to let the property be plotted and developed concurrent

2616
02:47:01,640 --> 02:47:04,160
 with that existing gas well plat.

2617
02:47:04,160 --> 02:47:07,800
 So as indicated in your backup, there have been extensive negotiations with the surface

2618
02:47:07,800 --> 02:47:11,760
 developer and that gas well operator over the past year and the site plan that you'll

2619
02:47:11,760 --> 02:47:17,360
 see tonight reflects the terms that they've come to agree upon.

2620
02:47:17,360 --> 02:47:22,320
 So looking at that site plan, you can see, as I mentioned here, the multifamily use is

2621
02:47:22,320 --> 02:47:25,720
 only on about 17 out of those 31 acres.

2622
02:47:25,720 --> 02:47:31,600
 This plan reflects 336 units, a mixture of one, two and three bedroom apartments.

2623
02:47:31,600 --> 02:47:35,480
 There is a density with this plan of about 20.5 dwelling units per acre.

2624
02:47:35,480 --> 02:47:39,800
 NRMU would allow up to 30, so they're well within that parameter.

2625
02:47:39,800 --> 02:47:42,640
 The plan that you see here has a total of 16 buildings.

2626
02:47:42,640 --> 02:47:47,200
 The maximum height on those would be three stories and that is a total of just over 300,000

2627
02:47:47,200 --> 02:47:50,200
 square feet of buildings shown on the plan.

2628
02:47:50,200 --> 02:47:55,920
 They are proposing a total of 632 parking spaces, which meets and exceeds our requirement.

2629
02:47:55,920 --> 02:48:00,640
 The spaces that are in excess of the required 629 are within garages, so those are allowed

2630
02:48:00,640 --> 02:48:03,000
 per our parking code.

2631
02:48:03,000 --> 02:48:07,400
 This plan reflects two points of access, one from the I-35 frontage road, one from Windsor

2632
02:48:07,400 --> 02:48:11,880
 Drive, you can see here on the south, and then as I mentioned, this plan also reflects

2633
02:48:11,880 --> 02:48:15,520
 the terms of that negotiation that they have with the gas well operator.

2634
02:48:15,520 --> 02:48:20,960
 So our code requires a 250 foot reverse setback from the boundary of the pad site to a protected

2635
02:48:20,960 --> 02:48:25,080
 use structure, which in this case would be the multi-family buildings.

2636
02:48:25,080 --> 02:48:30,120
 Here with the southern well site, you can see that full 250 foot radius, and part of

2637
02:48:30,120 --> 02:48:34,480
 their agreement was that the operator, due to their limited space on that southern site,

2638
02:48:34,480 --> 02:48:39,000
 didn't want anything within that 250 feet, so you'll notice there's no parking or any

2639
02:48:39,000 --> 02:48:42,700
 development planned within that radius.

2640
02:48:42,700 --> 02:48:47,240
 For the northern site, this smaller outline you see here is roughly the existing pad site

2641
02:48:47,240 --> 02:48:48,240
 boundaries.

2642
02:48:48,240 --> 02:48:54,200
 Normally, the 250 foot reverse setback would be measured from there, but the operator indicated

2643
02:48:54,200 --> 02:48:58,480
 that they would like to someday be able to expand that site, so you'll see here kind

2644
02:48:58,480 --> 02:49:02,800
 of the boundaries of what would ultimately be their expanded site if they're able to

2645
02:49:02,800 --> 02:49:06,800
 get through the numerous hurdles that would be in place for them to do so.

2646
02:49:06,800 --> 02:49:11,840
 And part of the agreement was that the reverse setback be measured from that proposed pad

2647
02:49:11,840 --> 02:49:14,500
 site boundary rather than the existing boundary.

2648
02:49:14,500 --> 02:49:20,480
 So for today, we would have well over 250 feet between the building and the pad site,

2649
02:49:20,480 --> 02:49:24,080
 but if and when the operator is able to expand, they would still be able to meet that reverse

2650
02:49:24,080 --> 02:49:27,920
 setback requirement.

2651
02:49:27,920 --> 02:49:31,280
 We wait until the end of the presentation for questions.

2652
02:49:31,280 --> 02:49:33,280
 All right.

2653
02:49:33,280 --> 02:49:41,000
 Looking at the landscape plan, what you see here for this site is roughly 50/50, lot coverage

2654
02:49:41,000 --> 02:49:46,640
 being well below the 80% maximum landscape area while exceeding the 20% minimum.

2655
02:49:46,640 --> 02:49:50,560
 One of the key features is the type D buffer that is required between the multifamily use

2656
02:49:50,560 --> 02:49:55,160
 and the gas well use, which is considered industrial per our code.

2657
02:49:55,160 --> 02:49:59,960
 So this by code would be a 30 foot wide area with eight trees and 20 shrubs per 100 linear

2658
02:49:59,960 --> 02:50:01,120
 feet.

2659
02:50:01,120 --> 02:50:05,620
 The applicant is seeking an alternative buffer, which is allowed by our code to be approved

2660
02:50:05,620 --> 02:50:08,800
 by the director if it meets or exceeds the requirements.

2661
02:50:08,800 --> 02:50:13,840
 And what they would propose is at least a six foot high opaque fence with trees along

2662
02:50:13,840 --> 02:50:15,320
 that.

2663
02:50:15,320 --> 02:50:19,880
 So that is something that unless you all choose to weigh in and provide some specific guidelines

2664
02:50:19,880 --> 02:50:24,480
 there, the director could look at approving that with their full site plan submittal.

2665
02:50:24,480 --> 02:50:27,520
 Internal to the site, you'll see numerous trees reflected on the plan.

2666
02:50:27,520 --> 02:50:31,200
 They have expressed an intent to meet all of the requirements for parking lot landscaping

2667
02:50:31,200 --> 02:50:34,560
 and street trees even along their internal streets.

2668
02:50:34,560 --> 02:50:38,600
 And then they've also indicated that intent to provide open space per our code that could

2669
02:50:38,600 --> 02:50:44,640
 include things such as picnic areas, grills, or sports facilities in a dog park.

2670
02:50:44,640 --> 02:50:46,440
 These are some sample building elevations.

2671
02:50:46,440 --> 02:50:49,720
 There were numerous provided that were included in your backup, so I just picked a couple

2672
02:50:49,720 --> 02:50:50,720
 of those examples.

2673
02:50:50,720 --> 02:50:55,560
 But you can see generally a neutral color palette, earth tones and gray tones with masonry

2674
02:50:55,560 --> 02:50:59,800
 materials that would include hardy board and stucco.

2675
02:50:59,800 --> 02:51:02,880
 Again just another example.

2676
02:51:02,880 --> 02:51:06,440
 So part of our additional analysis here was looking at our future land use map.

2677
02:51:06,440 --> 02:51:09,760
 So this area is designated for business innovation.

2678
02:51:09,760 --> 02:51:14,400
 And you can see on the map here that the business innovation area is primarily located on the

2679
02:51:14,400 --> 02:51:19,200
 west side of I-35, but it does kind of transition over the highway.

2680
02:51:19,200 --> 02:51:24,360
 And then you very quickly get into low intensity residential development there.

2681
02:51:24,360 --> 02:51:28,840
 So this site is kind of located in that transitional zone where we would look to see perhaps not

2682
02:51:28,840 --> 02:51:32,640
 the employment center districts that would fit well within there, but some of the transitional

2683
02:51:32,640 --> 02:51:35,800
 districts such as our regional and neighborhood mixed use districts.

2684
02:51:35,800 --> 02:51:39,720
 So NRMU fits comfortably in there and provides that transition where we could have offices

2685
02:51:39,720 --> 02:51:44,840
 or higher density residential that would transition from industrial uses and office complexes

2686
02:51:44,840 --> 02:51:46,640
 into single family.

2687
02:51:46,640 --> 02:51:50,680
 So this proposal would fit well within that.

2688
02:51:50,680 --> 02:51:55,600
 Some additional analysis, we did consider that this site doesn't directly join single

2689
02:51:55,600 --> 02:51:59,920
 family, so there would be not only their required landscape buffer, but also still this vacant

2690
02:51:59,920 --> 02:52:04,040
 property left in between them in the nearest single family homes, but the applicant is

2691
02:52:04,040 --> 02:52:07,760
 proposing to meet our buffering requirements there.

2692
02:52:07,760 --> 02:52:12,080
 The multi-family use would be unlikely to generate any substantial nuisances in terms

2693
02:52:12,080 --> 02:52:16,680
 of odor, fumes, noise and glare, and they are proposing to provide adequate parking

2694
02:52:16,680 --> 02:52:21,200
 and access to the site to alleviate any traffic concerns there.

2695
02:52:21,200 --> 02:52:27,720
 And the scale of development is also well within the parameters of NRMU.

2696
02:52:27,720 --> 02:52:30,960
 Notification was published regarding this request as well as sent to adjoining property

2697
02:52:30,960 --> 02:52:31,960
 owners.

2698
02:52:31,960 --> 02:52:34,560
 I've received no written opposition to date.

2699
02:52:34,560 --> 02:52:38,160
 The applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting in September and had approximately 20 people

2700
02:52:38,160 --> 02:52:45,000
 in attendance at that time, and that full list of attendees was provided in your backup.

2701
02:52:45,000 --> 02:52:49,800
 So as part of the ordinance for this SUP, staff is choosing to memorialize what was

2702
02:52:49,800 --> 02:52:52,480
 reflected on the site plan.

2703
02:52:52,480 --> 02:52:57,720
 So staff is enumerating the details of the site plan and also indicating with that that

2704
02:52:57,720 --> 02:53:02,160
 we would request the ability to approve increases or decreases to any of these numbers of less

2705
02:53:02,160 --> 02:53:04,160
 than or equal to 5%.

2706
02:53:04,160 --> 02:53:09,080
 So those numbers and details would include that the multi-family be limited to a maximum

2707
02:53:09,080 --> 02:53:14,560
 of 17 out of the total 31 acres on site, that it would be limited to the 16 buildings as

2708
02:53:14,560 --> 02:53:22,840
 indicated with a footprint at around 112 square feet, or 112,000 square feet, my apologies,

2709
02:53:22,840 --> 02:53:29,400
 that their 336 parking spaces be provided as specified, or I'm sorry, 336 dwelling units,

2710
02:53:29,400 --> 02:53:32,320
 density of 20.5 dwelling units per acre.

2711
02:53:32,320 --> 02:53:37,600
 With that 629 parking spaces, which would meet our code's requirement, they do specify

2712
02:53:37,600 --> 02:53:39,480
 632, as I mentioned.

2713
02:53:39,480 --> 02:53:42,760
 The difference there are not provided impervious as you'd be used to seeing because they're

2714
02:53:42,760 --> 02:53:45,240
 within garage spaces.

2715
02:53:45,240 --> 02:53:50,360
 The site plan also reflects 49% lot coverage, 51% landscape area that we would memorialize

2716
02:53:50,360 --> 02:53:55,320
 here, that does include the required type D buffer to the industrial use adjoining the

2717
02:53:55,320 --> 02:53:56,320
 site.

2718
02:53:56,320 --> 02:53:59,640
 And as I indicated, we would request that the director be able to consider and approve

2719
02:53:59,640 --> 02:54:03,280
 alternative buffers that meet the code requirements.

2720
02:54:03,280 --> 02:54:07,760
 And then finally, because those building elevations were kind of conceptual and just ideas of what

2721
02:54:07,760 --> 02:54:11,560
 they might like to do on site, rather than holding them specifically to that, we request

2722
02:54:11,560 --> 02:54:15,760
 that they be allowed to just meet the general facades that were provided there in terms

2723
02:54:15,760 --> 02:54:20,780
 of color palette being earth and gray tone, and then the materials being similar to what's

2724
02:54:20,780 --> 02:54:25,560
 provided with the stucco and hardy board materials.

2725
02:54:25,560 --> 02:54:30,640
 So with that, along with those requirements, staff does have four recommended conditions

2726
02:54:30,640 --> 02:54:31,640
 with our approval.

2727
02:54:31,640 --> 02:54:35,960
 The first being that the City Council recognize that driveway access locations from state

2728
02:54:35,960 --> 02:54:40,760
 highways must be approved by TxDOT, that alternative location or that alterations in

2729
02:54:40,760 --> 02:54:45,920
 the configuration of I-35 are currently under planning as they look at expanding the highway.

2730
02:54:45,920 --> 02:54:50,640
 So any driveway access locations from northbound I-35 frontage road which must be altered in

2731
02:54:50,640 --> 02:54:55,100
 response to those changing TxDOT requirements throughout the permitting process could be

2732
02:54:55,100 --> 02:54:59,240
 approved administratively by staff, provided that the alterations comply with the DDC,

2733
02:54:59,240 --> 02:55:04,120
 our criteria manuals, and that the site plan elements be satisfied.

2734
02:55:04,120 --> 02:55:08,040
 Second condition would be that landscaping in the attached plan reflects an intent to

2735
02:55:08,040 --> 02:55:12,920
 comply with all DDC requirements for parking street trees, minimum landscape areas, and

2736
02:55:12,920 --> 02:55:17,520
 compatibility buffers, with allowing for the administrative approval of that alternative

2737
02:55:17,520 --> 02:55:19,480
 type D buffer.

2738
02:55:19,480 --> 02:55:23,340
 Minor alterations to the locations of the individual planting shown on that plan could

2739
02:55:23,340 --> 02:55:27,560
 be approved by staff, provided that final landscaping complies with the site plan in

2740
02:55:27,560 --> 02:55:31,840
 terms of all of the buffer and open space locations.

2741
02:55:31,840 --> 02:55:34,740
 Third is in reference to the gas well agreement that I mentioned earlier.

2742
02:55:34,740 --> 02:55:39,200
 So that agreement that was entered into and executed by both parties that sets forth these

2743
02:55:39,200 --> 02:55:44,640
 250 foot reverse setbacks as shown must be filed in the records of Denton County prior

2744
02:55:44,640 --> 02:55:48,520
 to approval of a plat for the subject property, and a note on the plat shall reference this

2745
02:55:48,520 --> 02:55:51,480
 agreement and the setbacks as shown.

2746
02:55:51,480 --> 02:55:55,480
 And then finally, notwithstanding the limited administrative approval we requested in these

2747
02:55:55,480 --> 02:55:59,360
 conditions that the city would reserve the right to require approval by ordinance of

2748
02:55:59,360 --> 02:56:02,560
 any amendments to the SUP or the plans.

2749
02:56:02,560 --> 02:56:05,400
 And with that, I'm happy to stand for any questions.

2750
02:56:05,400 --> 02:56:06,780
 Commissioner back.

2751
02:56:06,780 --> 02:56:11,400
 Thank you, Chair, just if you know, and if not, maybe the developer tell me what is the

2752
02:56:11,400 --> 02:56:15,960
 current setback distance now for that northern most well number one I think it is from the

2753
02:56:15,960 --> 02:56:22,360
 proposed protected use building that will come into play.

2754
02:56:22,360 --> 02:56:27,640
 I don't have the exact number handy, I believe, Mr. Allison would have that I want to say

2755
02:56:27,640 --> 02:56:34,360
 it's in the ballpark of 300 to 350 feet, okay, okay, all right, get him to confirm that.

2756
02:56:34,360 --> 02:56:35,360
 Yeah, certainly.

2757
02:56:35,360 --> 02:56:36,360
 Thanks.

2758
02:56:36,360 --> 02:56:37,360
 Commissioner Burnetto.

2759
02:56:37,360 --> 02:56:46,360
 Yeah, so with regard to hang number two, you know, I see the 250 foot, you know, radius

2760
02:56:46,360 --> 02:56:56,560
 and, you know, per code, we have no habitable structures there.

2761
02:56:56,560 --> 02:57:02,160
 I guess the question is, I see the note in there that there's no parking improvements

2762
02:57:02,160 --> 02:57:09,440
 or other flat work that were allowed in that per the well owner, is that correct?

2763
02:57:09,440 --> 02:57:10,440
 Correct.

2764
02:57:10,440 --> 02:57:14,840
 For the southern site, because the operator is very constrained there with the existing

2765
02:57:14,840 --> 02:57:19,880
 single family homes on one side, they negotiated with the developer to allow them more space

2766
02:57:19,880 --> 02:57:24,000
 if and when they may need to get in there and do workovers, so they requested that nothing

2767
02:57:24,000 --> 02:57:27,160
 be within that 250 foot buffer on the southern well.

2768
02:57:27,160 --> 02:57:31,760
 And that would be to accommodate future construction work, blah, blah, blah.

2769
02:57:31,760 --> 02:57:35,320
 To my knowledge, they have no plans of ever expanding that site, it'd be very unlikely

2770
02:57:35,320 --> 02:57:39,520
 that they'd ever be able to, so that would just be for workovers or something similar

2771
02:57:39,520 --> 02:57:40,520
 on the existing well.

2772
02:57:40,520 --> 02:57:41,520
 All right, thank you.

2773
02:57:41,520 --> 02:57:42,520
 Commissioner Smith.

2774
02:57:42,520 --> 02:57:43,520
 Thank you, Chair.

2775
02:57:43,520 --> 02:57:51,080
 That will continue on whenever they come back for the commercial uses, whatever that is,

2776
02:57:51,080 --> 02:57:55,920
 a couple years, that 250 buffer will dip down on there, and so the exact same thing will

2777
02:57:55,920 --> 02:57:56,920
 be there.

2778
02:57:56,920 --> 02:58:00,240
 Then they won't be able to use commercial uses in that same section as well, Haley?

2779
02:58:00,240 --> 02:58:05,160
 I don't believe their agreement at this time speaks to the future commercial development.

2780
02:58:05,160 --> 02:58:09,240
 It would depend on the use, rather, or the city code would require that 250 foot reverse

2781
02:58:09,240 --> 02:58:10,520
 setback.

2782
02:58:10,520 --> 02:58:14,760
 That's typically only to things such as residential uses, schools, public parks.

2783
02:58:14,760 --> 02:58:17,600
 So the commercial can go all the way into the 250.

2784
02:58:17,600 --> 02:58:18,600
 Our code would allow it.

2785
02:58:18,600 --> 02:58:23,440
 Now, I'm not sure if there may be some future negotiation with the operator to allow that

2786
02:58:23,440 --> 02:58:25,800
 continued empty space around their well site.

2787
02:58:25,800 --> 02:58:30,600
 When you say nothing, does that mean it's also going to block off access to that area?

2788
02:58:30,600 --> 02:58:38,920
 If it's a green space, do citizens still have the ability to go there if they're staying

2789
02:58:38,920 --> 02:58:40,640
 there, residents?

2790
02:58:40,640 --> 02:58:44,240
 It's my understanding that they wanted no additional landscaping in that area, no fencing

2791
02:58:44,240 --> 02:58:48,060
 or anything of that nature that would restrict them being able to move equipment in and out

2792
02:58:48,060 --> 02:58:49,060
 in that area.

2793
02:58:49,060 --> 02:58:52,140
 So it wouldn't restrict anybody from going in, but also wouldn't restrict anybody from

2794
02:58:52,140 --> 02:58:53,140
 going out there.

2795
02:58:53,140 --> 02:58:54,140
 Correct.

2796
02:58:54,140 --> 02:58:56,040
 Yeah, it would just be kind of a vacant green space.

2797
02:58:56,040 --> 02:58:57,040
 Be there.

2798
02:58:57,040 --> 02:58:58,040
 Yeah.

2799
02:58:58,040 --> 02:58:59,040
 Thank you.

2800
02:58:59,040 --> 02:59:00,040
 Mr. Beck?

2801
02:59:00,040 --> 02:59:01,040
 Thank you, Chair.

2802
02:59:01,040 --> 02:59:02,040
 I think you answered that.

2803
02:59:02,040 --> 02:59:07,480
 So that tight D buffer won't come down into that little stretch right there, is that correct?

2804
02:59:07,480 --> 02:59:08,680
 And I'll let Lee verify.

2805
02:59:08,680 --> 02:59:10,160
 I don't believe it will.

2806
02:59:10,160 --> 02:59:14,680
 This plan reflects that, but I think the agreement was that there be no trees or additional landscaping

2807
02:59:14,680 --> 02:59:15,680
 in there.

2808
02:59:15,680 --> 02:59:16,680
 Okay.

2809
02:59:16,680 --> 02:59:17,680
 Thanks.

2810
02:59:17,680 --> 02:59:18,680
 Any other questions?

2811
02:59:18,680 --> 02:59:19,680
 Yep.

2812
02:59:19,680 --> 02:59:20,680
 Commissioner Smith?

2813
02:59:20,680 --> 02:59:21,680
 Thank you, Chair.

2814
02:59:21,680 --> 02:59:26,960
 The tight D buffer, it's just shrubs, it's not walls, nothing else like that?

2815
02:59:26,960 --> 02:59:31,320
 What they've proposed is a six-foot opaque fence of some sort as well as trees.

2816
02:59:31,320 --> 02:59:34,120
 What does that mean by, like a brick?

2817
02:59:34,120 --> 02:59:36,160
 It could be wood masonry or something like that.

2818
02:59:36,160 --> 02:59:37,160
 I'm slow.

2819
02:59:37,160 --> 02:59:38,640
 It's in late.

2820
02:59:38,640 --> 02:59:43,880
 Haley, I do not see any other questions for you.

2821
02:59:43,880 --> 02:59:47,000
 Thank you for your presentation.

2822
02:59:47,000 --> 02:59:48,160
 This is a public hearing.

2823
02:59:48,160 --> 02:59:51,720
 I believe I opened it.

2824
02:59:51,720 --> 02:59:55,160
 So anyone who wishes to speak on this item may certainly do so, but at this time, I'll

2825
02:59:55,160 --> 03:00:01,020
 invite Lee Allison for presentation.

2826
03:00:01,020 --> 03:00:04,960
 And Lee, you have another speaker here, so are you wanting your 20 minutes?

2827
03:00:04,960 --> 03:00:11,240
 I hope not, but let's don't negotiate that one tonight.

2828
03:00:11,240 --> 03:00:13,280
 The floor is yours.

2829
03:00:13,280 --> 03:00:14,280
 I'll try and go quickly.

2830
03:00:14,280 --> 03:00:15,280
 Good evening.

2831
03:00:15,280 --> 03:00:20,160
 I'm Lee Allison with Allison Engineering Group, 2415 North Elm Street, Denton, Texas, with

2832
03:00:20,160 --> 03:00:24,040
 me this evening is a developer, Tom Neary.

2833
03:00:24,040 --> 03:00:27,560
 I'll go through some of this quickly.

2834
03:00:27,560 --> 03:00:33,800
 The purpose of a specific use permit is to demonstrate that the DDC is being observed,

2835
03:00:33,800 --> 03:00:37,240
 and that's where we developed this concept plan, was under those kind of conditions and

2836
03:00:37,240 --> 03:00:39,280
 that thought.

2837
03:00:39,280 --> 03:00:43,520
 And it's to coordinate with neighbors regarding concerns or issues so the possibility of maybe

2838
03:00:43,520 --> 03:00:47,640
 adding some restrictions based upon what they came up with and our interest in working with

2839
03:00:47,640 --> 03:00:49,760
 them and negotiating.

2840
03:00:49,760 --> 03:00:53,600
 We developed it under that intention.

2841
03:00:53,600 --> 03:00:58,360
 When we first submitted this, it was supposed to come to P&Z in September, however, I did

2842
03:00:58,360 --> 03:01:04,600
 not get the signs out on time, so we had to continue it for a little while.

2843
03:01:04,600 --> 03:01:06,560
 That's all my fault.

2844
03:01:06,560 --> 03:01:10,800
 Then we came back, and the eve before, we had been working on this agreement with the

2845
03:01:10,800 --> 03:01:15,760
 Gaswell operator, and then it was determined instead of being a plat on plat issue, it

2846
03:01:15,760 --> 03:01:19,800
 was going to be a plat on zoning issue, and we had to have that agreement signed before

2847
03:01:19,800 --> 03:01:24,760
 we could go forward with the zoning, even though we were negotiating it at the time,

2848
03:01:24,760 --> 03:01:28,000
 instead of bringing forward platting, which we normally would do.

2849
03:01:28,000 --> 03:01:33,960
 So it got continued again, this time to a time uncertain, and that allowed for a re-notification,

2850
03:01:33,960 --> 03:01:35,300
 which was fine.

2851
03:01:35,300 --> 03:01:40,040
 And then last Wednesday we found out, instead of just simply demonstrating that the DDC is

2852
03:01:40,040 --> 03:01:44,920
 being observed, there was going to be limitations put upon us based upon the site plan.

2853
03:01:44,920 --> 03:01:49,400
 If we had known that, we had done the site plan a little bit different, but we did work

2854
03:01:49,400 --> 03:01:53,640
 that with the neighbors, we presented it to the neighborhood meeting in this way, and

2855
03:01:53,640 --> 03:01:58,480
 we are going to propose an applicant recommendation.

2856
03:01:58,480 --> 03:02:05,520
 The staff had presented six items to be added to it as far as limitations.

2857
03:02:05,520 --> 03:02:10,280
 We are going to ask instead of a maximum of 16 buildings as we have shown with a 5% plus

2858
03:02:10,280 --> 03:02:13,840
 or minus, we have a maximum of 20 buildings.

2859
03:02:13,840 --> 03:02:18,400
 We are also going to ask that we have a maximum density of 24 units per acre.

2860
03:02:18,400 --> 03:02:22,320
 We're showing around 20, the code allows 30.

2861
03:02:22,320 --> 03:02:26,720
 We certainly realize there needs to be some limitation on what we do here based on our

2862
03:02:26,720 --> 03:02:28,240
 meetings with the neighbors.

2863
03:02:28,240 --> 03:02:32,160
 We're also asking that the parking shall meet the code, garage spacious will count toward

2864
03:02:32,160 --> 03:02:35,640
 about provided as normally required.

2865
03:02:35,640 --> 03:02:42,800
 The maximum block coverage of 65%, we're at 50%, 49, 50% right now, the code allows 80.

2866
03:02:42,800 --> 03:02:46,960
 We'd like to just set it at 65, give us some flexibility as we work through all the design

2867
03:02:46,960 --> 03:02:49,200
 issues and possibilities.

2868
03:02:49,200 --> 03:02:55,200
 A minimum landscape area of 35% inclusive of landscape recreational amenities.

2869
03:02:55,200 --> 03:03:00,320
 A basketball court may be concrete, but instead of being grass, we want that to count towards

2870
03:03:00,320 --> 03:03:04,680
 the landscaping requirement, not towards a paving requirement.

2871
03:03:04,680 --> 03:03:08,200
 Building elevation shall reasonably conform to the examples and shall comply with the

2872
03:03:08,200 --> 03:03:14,080
 DDC, essentially the same thing as what staff had recommended there, and that no change

2873
03:03:14,080 --> 03:03:17,920
 to the recommended conditions, there were four or five conditions that were put on this

2874
03:03:17,920 --> 03:03:24,560
 as well as the staff limitations on density and other things.

2875
03:03:24,560 --> 03:03:34,800
 As far as the neighbors, adjacent residential developments are there, they're a little bit

2876
03:03:34,800 --> 03:03:39,720
 away from us, there's some separation, there's some vacant property around us, Interstate

2877
03:03:39,720 --> 03:03:44,320
 35, gas well site, platted gas well.

2878
03:03:44,320 --> 03:03:50,520
 Neighborhood concerns, completion of Windsor Drive, that was discussed during the workshop.

2879
03:03:50,520 --> 03:03:55,520
 Basically we have responsibilities for that portion of Windsor Drive adjacent to our site.

2880
03:03:55,520 --> 03:04:03,360
 I do not anticipate that area not being constructed by us and doing roadway impact fees, but there's

2881
03:04:03,360 --> 03:04:07,440
 a little piece right next to us that needs to be filled in and there's another section

2882
03:04:07,440 --> 03:04:08,680
 over the way.

2883
03:04:08,680 --> 03:04:12,200
 We have expressed with the neighborhood, we would present that to the city, we'll work

2884
03:04:12,200 --> 03:04:17,120
 with the city staff, if we can design it as we go along and of course get it built at

2885
03:04:17,120 --> 03:04:22,200
 the same time in cooperation with the city, we would be more glad to do that.

2886
03:04:22,200 --> 03:04:26,200
 There's some drainage behind the lots on the west end of the West Glen addition.

2887
03:04:26,200 --> 03:04:30,040
 Of course we'll be looking at that all over again, that drainage was done by subdivision

2888
03:04:30,040 --> 03:04:32,680
 to the south and extended through there.

2889
03:04:32,680 --> 03:04:34,040
 Here's the Windsor Drive concerns.

2890
03:04:34,040 --> 03:04:38,760
 The red is what we're going to build, the yellow is in front of the gas well access,

2891
03:04:38,760 --> 03:04:41,760
 we think it would be good to go ahead and fill that in, at least connect this all the

2892
03:04:41,760 --> 03:04:46,120
 way through, and if it could be worked out to connect that so you would have the divided

2893
03:04:46,120 --> 03:04:50,720
 four lanes all the way from Bonnie Bray to 35.

2894
03:04:50,720 --> 03:04:54,400
 We're in favor of it, but that's not all under our control.

2895
03:04:54,400 --> 03:04:59,040
 Oops, anyway, I already said that.

2896
03:04:59,040 --> 03:05:03,560
 Gas well operator concerns, reverse setbacks.

2897
03:05:03,560 --> 03:05:08,560
 Future well development, the gas well operator would like to revise the wells on number two,

2898
03:05:08,560 --> 03:05:12,960
 number one, gas well number one, they might abandon it in the future, but it's still there

2899
03:05:12,960 --> 03:05:16,120
 for the time being.

2900
03:05:16,120 --> 03:05:19,000
 We get reverse setbacks, pain number one is to the north.

2901
03:05:19,000 --> 03:05:23,040
 It's existing 333 feet to the property line.

2902
03:05:23,040 --> 03:05:30,360
 Our building's another 100 feet behind that, so we're 433 feet today from the current pain

2903
03:05:30,360 --> 03:05:33,200
 number one to the buildings.

2904
03:05:33,200 --> 03:05:35,880
 That was the question I believe you asked earlier.

2905
03:05:35,880 --> 03:05:39,720
 There it is, 433 feet to the habitable structure.

2906
03:05:39,720 --> 03:05:44,600
 Pain number two to the south, it's existing 110 feet to the property line.

2907
03:05:44,600 --> 03:05:52,960
 We propose 250 feet to the multifamily property, 300 feet to habitable structures, and also

2908
03:05:52,960 --> 03:05:57,600
 within that pain number two as mentioned, we're agreeing to do absolutely nothing.

2909
03:05:57,600 --> 03:06:01,600
 It does apply to the commercial property as well as the multifamily.

2910
03:06:01,600 --> 03:06:05,880
 There's no way, according to that agreement, that any improvements can be done.

2911
03:06:05,880 --> 03:06:09,240
 We are hoping that someday they'll abandon that well.

2912
03:06:09,240 --> 03:06:14,240
 Another reason for that is not just for their equipment to get in for working or whatever,

2913
03:06:14,240 --> 03:06:16,080
 it's for emergency vehicles.

2914
03:06:16,080 --> 03:06:19,840
 Many of you may be aware of the fire that was there in the past.

2915
03:06:19,840 --> 03:06:23,960
 You want to be able to get in there and get around the well and work on it or do whatever

2916
03:06:23,960 --> 03:06:26,520
 is needed with emergency vehicles.

2917
03:06:26,520 --> 03:06:30,720
 Future well development, again, pain number one to the north.

2918
03:06:30,720 --> 03:06:38,600
 We've agreed not to oppose a 250 foot reverse setback, so when they come in for an application

2919
03:06:38,600 --> 03:06:42,680
 to revise their gas well plat, we're not going to oppose it.

2920
03:06:42,680 --> 03:06:44,160
 We're not pre-approving anything.

2921
03:06:44,160 --> 03:06:46,320
 P&Z is not pre-improving anything.

2922
03:06:46,320 --> 03:06:48,360
 City Council is not pre-approving.

2923
03:06:48,360 --> 03:06:50,440
 They have to go through the process.

2924
03:06:50,440 --> 03:06:55,680
 They have an existing gas well plat that has very specific gas well locations on it, and

2925
03:06:55,680 --> 03:06:59,200
 they're going to have to come back to P&Z and City Council to get those adjusted if

2926
03:06:59,200 --> 03:07:04,920
 they want to revise their pads as they've indicated to us they wanted to.

2927
03:07:04,920 --> 03:07:11,440
 Pain number two to the south, no improvements within the 250 feet area needed for possible

2928
03:07:11,440 --> 03:07:13,160
 emergency vehicles.

2929
03:07:13,160 --> 03:07:18,240
 On this slide, as was pointed out earlier, you can see the existing pad site.

2930
03:07:18,240 --> 03:07:19,800
 There's their future pad site.

2931
03:07:19,800 --> 03:07:26,160
 There's the 250 from the future, and there's their pain number two and the 250 from it.

2932
03:07:26,160 --> 03:07:33,160
 That's where the property line is that we're 333 feet away from the existing well.

2933
03:07:33,160 --> 03:07:34,840
 That's the existing pad site line.

2934
03:07:34,840 --> 03:07:36,860
 There's the 333.

2935
03:07:36,860 --> 03:07:39,980
 There's the proposed reverse setback lines.

2936
03:07:39,980 --> 03:07:42,840
 There's the 433 feet.

2937
03:07:42,840 --> 03:07:47,680
 There's the future pad site line, and there's the 250 feet that we've agreed to be from,

2938
03:07:47,680 --> 03:07:50,520
 assuming they are awarded the future pad site line.

2939
03:07:50,520 --> 03:07:52,720
 We don't know they're going to get it.

2940
03:07:52,720 --> 03:07:56,120
 And there's the existing pad site, and there's the 250 feet.

2941
03:07:56,120 --> 03:07:58,920
 100 feet there.

2942
03:07:58,920 --> 03:08:04,240
 Then landscape considerations, type B buffers required next to an industrial site.

2943
03:08:04,240 --> 03:08:09,040
 However, we're not the offending party, but as the offended party, we get the burden of

2944
03:08:09,040 --> 03:08:12,200
 giving our land and building the landscape buffer.

2945
03:08:12,200 --> 03:08:17,320
 So that's why we're asking for some director alternative buffer approval in there.

2946
03:08:17,320 --> 03:08:21,360
 Putting in an opaque fence with a type D does not require.

2947
03:08:21,360 --> 03:08:25,720
 So why do we want to put shrubs on our side of the fence to protect us from the view from

2948
03:08:25,720 --> 03:08:26,720
 the gas well?

2949
03:08:26,720 --> 03:08:29,400
 Anyway, we just need a little relief there.

2950
03:08:29,400 --> 03:08:31,800
 The gas well is the intense use.

2951
03:08:31,800 --> 03:08:35,240
 Buffers should be optional for the less intense use.

2952
03:08:35,240 --> 03:08:37,480
 Landscape proposal required.

2953
03:08:37,480 --> 03:08:40,760
 Type D, we want to modify it, as mentioned earlier.

2954
03:08:40,760 --> 03:08:43,320
 We want one tree per 40 linear feet.

2955
03:08:43,320 --> 03:08:45,520
 We're proposing one per 40.

2956
03:08:45,520 --> 03:08:47,640
 20 shrubs, no shrubs.

2957
03:08:47,640 --> 03:08:51,960
 We're putting up an opaque fence, so why do we need to put shrubs there?

2958
03:08:51,960 --> 03:08:55,360
 As far as the requirement, doesn't mean we won't put any, but we don't want to be required

2959
03:08:55,360 --> 03:08:56,360
 to.

2960
03:08:56,360 --> 03:09:01,400
 A 30-foot buffer, we're giving a 30-foot buffer, but on the south end it narrows down

2961
03:09:01,400 --> 03:09:05,000
 some just because of some encroachment restraints.

2962
03:09:05,000 --> 03:09:06,000
 No fence.

2963
03:09:06,000 --> 03:09:09,800
 We're putting up a wooden fence with metal post.

2964
03:09:09,800 --> 03:09:13,640
 Continued requires 40% canopy.

2965
03:09:13,640 --> 03:09:19,840
 We're asking that 100% of the canopy in that buffer be counted towards our site canopy.

2966
03:09:19,840 --> 03:09:25,080
 Since we're putting up a buffer, we're having to put one up to protect ourselves from somebody

2967
03:09:25,080 --> 03:09:29,400
 who should be putting up a buffer to protect us.

2968
03:09:29,400 --> 03:09:32,960
 So buffer, we go back to the site plan.

2969
03:09:32,960 --> 03:09:39,240
 We got our 30-foot buffer, then we still got that 70 feet of parking lot with parking lot

2970
03:09:39,240 --> 03:09:42,360
 trees and street trees before we get to the buildings.

2971
03:09:42,360 --> 03:09:47,160
 We've already got a bunch of buffer there in addition to the 30-foot that's being provided.

2972
03:09:47,160 --> 03:09:52,440
 Not only that, we feel like we are a buffer to the neighbors from the higher intensity

2973
03:09:52,440 --> 03:09:55,120
 that could go on the commercial property.

2974
03:09:55,120 --> 03:09:59,840
 Another one of the anomalies of the current code is here we are asking for an SUP for

2975
03:09:59,840 --> 03:10:04,160
 apartments in the zoning district that allows us to put hotels up by right.

2976
03:10:04,160 --> 03:10:06,400
 We don't have to come here for hotels.

2977
03:10:06,400 --> 03:10:10,920
 That normally doesn't come into play, but with this location and the changes to 35,

2978
03:10:10,920 --> 03:10:16,200
 we're already getting inquiries from hotel companies that want to put up in there.

2979
03:10:16,200 --> 03:10:22,160
 Additional buffer street trees, administrative, we're asking for the director's approval.

2980
03:10:22,160 --> 03:10:29,520
 You can kind of see here, there's the opaque fence, multi-use open space, 25% plus landscape

2981
03:10:29,520 --> 03:10:32,760
 area, 340 total trees shown.

2982
03:10:32,760 --> 03:10:36,400
 We actually tried to show the number of trees, if we do 3-inch diameter trees, we're going

2983
03:10:36,400 --> 03:10:38,880
 to have to plant on this site.

2984
03:10:38,880 --> 03:10:41,640
 We're actually concerned if we can grow grass under them.

2985
03:10:41,640 --> 03:10:48,760
 226 large trees, 116 medium trees, and 105 buffer trees that only counted 40% of our

2986
03:10:48,760 --> 03:10:50,720
 canopy cover.

2987
03:10:50,720 --> 03:10:56,000
 IPD buffers due to the gas well industrial use, we're having to protect ourselves from

2988
03:10:56,000 --> 03:10:58,800
 them instead of them providing a buffer for us.

2989
03:10:58,800 --> 03:11:02,640
 We are asking for that alternate landscape buffer, but only on the side between us and

2990
03:11:02,640 --> 03:11:04,800
 the wells, not in the other areas.

2991
03:11:04,800 --> 03:11:10,080
 Gas wells, the offender, parking lot trees, et cetera, provide additional buffer and requires

2992
03:11:10,080 --> 03:11:12,400
 director's approval.

2993
03:11:12,400 --> 03:11:13,560
 This is the entry road.

2994
03:11:13,560 --> 03:11:19,240
 The black line is the road from the frontage road over to the wells.

2995
03:11:19,240 --> 03:11:23,720
 We're looking at getting rid of this piece, hopefully get all that built, and then their

2996
03:11:23,720 --> 03:11:29,400
 entry would be at this point, so that would -- right now, their existing gas well enters

2997
03:11:29,400 --> 03:11:35,560
 right in the middle of where that future part of Windsor needs to go.

2998
03:11:35,560 --> 03:11:41,640
 This is what I presented earlier in summary of what our recommendations are, and I'm available

2999
03:11:41,640 --> 03:11:42,640
 for questions.

3000
03:11:42,640 --> 03:11:46,080
 Sorry for the length of time, but appreciate your indulgence.

3001
03:11:46,080 --> 03:11:47,080
 >> Super helpful.

3002
03:11:47,080 --> 03:11:49,520
 >> Thank you, Chair.

3003
03:11:49,520 --> 03:11:54,520
 Can you go back, Lee, to your recommendations for a second?

3004
03:11:54,520 --> 03:11:56,560
 So staff recommendation was 16.

3005
03:11:56,560 --> 03:11:58,840
 You want a max of 16 buildings.

3006
03:11:58,840 --> 03:11:59,840
 You want a max of 20.

3007
03:11:59,840 --> 03:12:03,880
 I'm just restating it just for the record to make sure everyone is clear.

3008
03:12:03,880 --> 03:12:07,240
 Staff recommendation was 20.488 units per acre.

3009
03:12:07,240 --> 03:12:11,440
 You're requesting 24 units per acre.

3010
03:12:11,440 --> 03:12:16,840
 Question about the garages was that I could not tell from staff -- or I guess -- you want

3011
03:12:16,840 --> 03:12:20,880
 -- you want the garage spaces to count towards the total amount maximum, is what you're asking

3012
03:12:20,880 --> 03:12:21,880
 correct?

3013
03:12:21,880 --> 03:12:22,880
 >> They already do anyway.

3014
03:12:22,880 --> 03:12:23,880
 >> Yeah, that's what I thought.

3015
03:12:23,880 --> 03:12:27,840
 >> But because there was a comment like that on the staff recommendation, we put a counter

3016
03:12:27,840 --> 03:12:28,840
 comment.

3017
03:12:28,840 --> 03:12:31,080
 >> I just want to make sure you're clear.

3018
03:12:31,080 --> 03:12:36,640
 Staff right now is saying that they want max lot coverage of 49%, max landscape 51%.

3019
03:12:36,640 --> 03:12:42,800
 You're wanting 65% lot coverage, 35% landscape, and you want -- they want all recreational

3020
03:12:42,800 --> 03:12:45,680
 amenities and landscape amenities to count towards that 35%.

3021
03:12:45,680 --> 03:12:46,680
 >> Yes.

3022
03:12:46,680 --> 03:12:48,240
 >> As right now they do.

3023
03:12:48,240 --> 03:12:50,040
 So -- and then keep that.

3024
03:12:50,040 --> 03:12:56,080
 So your last statement is the no change, the recommended conditions.

3025
03:12:56,080 --> 03:12:57,080
 There is -- there is change.

3026
03:12:57,080 --> 03:13:01,160
 That's what the -- I guess that's -- >> You'd have to go -- I don't have the staff

3027
03:13:01,160 --> 03:13:02,160
 report in front of me.

3028
03:13:02,160 --> 03:13:03,160
 >> Sure.

3029
03:13:03,160 --> 03:13:04,160
 >> But there's one section.

3030
03:13:04,160 --> 03:13:07,240
 Actually on their slides -- >> I'm talking about the second section of

3031
03:13:07,240 --> 03:13:08,240
 the text dot.

3032
03:13:08,240 --> 03:13:10,040
 >> Yeah, there's conditions and recommendations.

3033
03:13:10,040 --> 03:13:11,040
 >> Okay.

3034
03:13:11,040 --> 03:13:12,040
 Gotcha.

3035
03:13:12,040 --> 03:13:13,040
 That works.

3036
03:13:13,040 --> 03:13:14,040
 Yeah.

3037
03:13:14,040 --> 03:13:15,040
 >> The staff presentation slides said site plan requirements.

3038
03:13:15,040 --> 03:13:18,040
 >> You're changing the conditions -- >> The site plan requirements.

3039
03:13:18,040 --> 03:13:19,040
 >> Okay.

3040
03:13:19,040 --> 03:13:20,040
 Understood.

3041
03:13:20,040 --> 03:13:21,040
 >> Yeah.

3042
03:13:21,040 --> 03:13:23,080
 >> These are a lot of -- a lot of big changes to what the staff recommended.

3043
03:13:23,080 --> 03:13:26,440
 Could you -- you said it quickly early in the very beginning.

3044
03:13:26,440 --> 03:13:30,840
 Could you remind me or maybe flush it out a little bit more why the big changes from

3045
03:13:30,840 --> 03:13:35,500
 what staff recommendations were, why that's needed for this project?

3046
03:13:35,500 --> 03:13:40,920
 >> Because staff had not made such recommendations until a week ago today.

3047
03:13:40,920 --> 03:13:41,920
 >> Okay.

3048
03:13:41,920 --> 03:13:46,960
 >> They were under the understanding that for an SUP, we just needed to demonstrate

3049
03:13:46,960 --> 03:13:51,960
 that we meet the zoning restrictions for that zoning category and that we've worked well

3050
03:13:51,960 --> 03:13:56,940
 with the neighbors to address their concerns, et cetera.

3051
03:13:56,940 --> 03:14:02,040
 So we had a concept plan and we showed that, hey, if we're going to meet it at 50%, you

3052
03:14:02,040 --> 03:14:04,460
 know, we'd easily meet the 80.

3053
03:14:04,460 --> 03:14:05,840
 And now we don't have any flexibility.

3054
03:14:05,840 --> 03:14:10,840
 We could probably use something a little tighter than these, but I just haven't -- if I had

3055
03:14:10,840 --> 03:14:15,440
 to come to P&Z with a concept plan before, I'd have probably pushed these limits knowing

3056
03:14:15,440 --> 03:14:19,960
 that, hey, we could easily come under them instead of bringing in a concept plan that

3057
03:14:19,960 --> 03:14:24,200
 showed closely what this current apartment builder intends to do.

3058
03:14:24,200 --> 03:14:28,560
 And we've done limitations like this on SUPs in the past in the city, so I don't think

3059
03:14:28,560 --> 03:14:29,560
 it's unusual or unprecedented.

3060
03:14:29,560 --> 03:14:33,280
 >> Just wanted to hear the thought process behind it.

3061
03:14:33,280 --> 03:14:34,280
 Last thing.

3062
03:14:34,280 --> 03:14:38,520
 >> And I didn't have time to -- I couldn't continue again because of negotiations and

3063
03:14:38,520 --> 03:14:39,520
 contracts.

3064
03:14:39,520 --> 03:14:42,360
 >> It's only a couple of times you've continued.

3065
03:14:42,360 --> 03:14:47,280
 Two or three months in that big of a deal, right?

3066
03:14:47,280 --> 03:14:49,280
 >> No, no.

3067
03:14:49,280 --> 03:14:54,000
 >> The site plan that has been shown to us in the staff presentation, to your presentation,

3068
03:14:54,000 --> 03:15:01,160
 that is at 16 buildings, that's at 20.48 units, so that site plan, the conceptual plan, I

3069
03:15:01,160 --> 03:15:06,160
 shouldn't say site plan, the conceptual plan is not conforming to your own personal recommendations

3070
03:15:06,160 --> 03:15:07,160
 as of right now.

3071
03:15:07,160 --> 03:15:08,160
 >> No.

3072
03:15:08,160 --> 03:15:14,760
 >> What staff did is we came up with a concept plan to show how we'd meet it in this current

3073
03:15:14,760 --> 03:15:16,760
 apartment developer, Wolf Corporation.

3074
03:15:16,760 --> 03:15:18,800
 That was the plan they came up with.

3075
03:15:18,800 --> 03:15:23,440
 And I think that with a plus or minus 5% they can probably live with, but this has been

3076
03:15:23,440 --> 03:15:29,000
 gone on so long, they're not obligated under contract anymore, and we needed a little flexibility

3077
03:15:29,000 --> 03:15:31,600
 to work with others if we needed to.

3078
03:15:31,600 --> 03:15:37,120
 And what staff did was took a concept plan we prepared and put limitations based on it

3079
03:15:37,120 --> 03:15:43,160
 instead of coming to us and asking us what kind of flexibility do we need to put limitations

3080
03:15:43,160 --> 03:15:44,160
 on this site.

3081
03:15:44,160 --> 03:15:49,320
 And I mean we're, again, we're looking, the code says nothing about the number of buildings,

3082
03:15:49,320 --> 03:15:50,320
 we're working at the 20.

3083
03:15:50,320 --> 03:15:56,120
 The code says 30 units break or 24 is what we're suggesting.

3084
03:15:56,120 --> 03:16:00,920
 The code says 80% coverage, we're suggesting a max of 65.

3085
03:16:00,920 --> 03:16:05,200
 We expect to have some give and take here, and we're trying to give some, but not so

3086
03:16:05,200 --> 03:16:07,240
 tightly that we can't wiggle.

3087
03:16:07,240 --> 03:16:11,760
 Can I ask Haley a question?

3088
03:16:11,760 --> 03:16:25,160
 Are these type of recommendations, is this asking a lot for the project?

3089
03:16:25,160 --> 03:16:29,680
 I won't put you on the spot, but I mean these recommendations, if we were to take the applicant's

3090
03:16:29,680 --> 03:16:34,920
 recommendations and improve it, would that be giving too much leeway to the project without

3091
03:16:34,920 --> 03:16:38,880
 really giving some parameters for someone to make sure they don't go too crazy with,

3092
03:16:38,880 --> 03:16:43,280
 someone else, some other developer in there that takes it and runs it in a direction that

3093
03:16:43,280 --> 03:16:44,280
 could be dangerous?

3094
03:16:44,280 --> 03:16:45,280
 Certainly.

3095
03:16:45,280 --> 03:16:46,280
 I would say it's not unreasonable.

3096
03:16:46,280 --> 03:16:49,920
 I mean everything he's requested is within the zoning limitation.

3097
03:16:49,920 --> 03:16:56,000
 The intent with kind of memorializing all of the concept plan details in the ordinance

3098
03:16:56,000 --> 03:16:57,880
 was originally purely for legibility purposes.

3099
03:16:57,880 --> 03:17:01,760
 I don't know if you've looked at any of our ordinances, but by the time you take a 24

3100
03:17:01,760 --> 03:17:06,960
 36 and shrink it and then duplicate it for 20 years, no one can tell what's on it.

3101
03:17:06,960 --> 03:17:11,040
 So the intent was to memorialize those details, but allow a limited amount of flexibility

3102
03:17:11,040 --> 03:17:14,960
 based on what council has been comfortable with in the past in allowing variations on

3103
03:17:14,960 --> 03:17:20,360
 a site plan, because the code does require a plan be attached to the SUP.

3104
03:17:20,360 --> 03:17:25,560
 So the intent was just to memorialize the details as presented, but then allow a little

3105
03:17:25,560 --> 03:17:26,560
 bit of wiggle room.

3106
03:17:26,560 --> 03:17:33,320
 So I wouldn't say that this is too far beyond the scope of what we could be comfortable

3107
03:17:33,320 --> 03:17:34,320
 with.

3108
03:17:34,320 --> 03:17:36,360
 There's just not a plan that supports these details at this time.

3109
03:17:36,360 --> 03:17:40,240
 And that brings up one thing, and I'm sorry, commissioners for dominating the conversation

3110
03:17:40,240 --> 03:17:46,960
 here, but I guess the only thing that's missing then from your recommendations applicant would

3111
03:17:46,960 --> 03:17:50,760
 be the facade requirements.

3112
03:17:50,760 --> 03:17:55,280
 That's one thing that I know that you wanted to memorialize was the earth tones, gray tone

3113
03:17:55,280 --> 03:17:59,320
 color palette, all those kinds of things with those.

3114
03:17:59,320 --> 03:18:03,640
 Our last bullet here, the building elevations is intended to say essentially the same thing

3115
03:18:03,640 --> 03:18:04,640
 as that.

3116
03:18:04,640 --> 03:18:10,140
 So building elevations and the facade, okay, gotcha, all right, gotcha.

3117
03:18:10,140 --> 03:18:11,140
 That's it.

3118
03:18:11,140 --> 03:18:12,140
 I'm really just a four.

3119
03:18:12,140 --> 03:18:13,140
 Christopher Beck.

3120
03:18:13,140 --> 03:18:14,140
 Okay.

3121
03:18:14,140 --> 03:18:15,140
 Thank you, chair.

3122
03:18:15,140 --> 03:18:16,140
 Lee, you're up.

3123
03:18:16,140 --> 03:18:17,140
 Okay.

3124
03:18:17,140 --> 03:18:18,140
 Thanks, Haley.

3125
03:18:18,140 --> 03:18:23,640
 You know, I agree with you that you're putting a hard spot here because of the gas wells,

3126
03:18:23,640 --> 03:18:29,880
 if I had my way and HB40 had never been passed, we would never be dealing with this, would

3127
03:18:29,880 --> 03:18:30,880
 we?

3128
03:18:30,880 --> 03:18:31,880
 But we are.

3129
03:18:31,880 --> 03:18:33,960
 You mentioned the type D buffer that you wanted to modify.

3130
03:18:33,960 --> 03:18:44,380
 Can you explain what's going to be taken away there if you get this change?

3131
03:18:44,380 --> 03:18:47,320
 This is the required type D buffer.

3132
03:18:47,320 --> 03:18:49,000
 We're wanting to modify it.

3133
03:18:49,000 --> 03:18:51,600
 We're keeping the 40 trees, one tree for 40 feet.

3134
03:18:51,600 --> 03:18:52,600
 Okay.

3135
03:18:52,600 --> 03:18:57,440
 But instead of shrubs, we're saying no shrubs.

3136
03:18:57,440 --> 03:19:01,440
 We're still staying a 30 foot buffer, but on the very south end, it does get narrower.

3137
03:19:01,440 --> 03:19:07,480
 We don't keep the full 30 feet, but we got parking lot and other things in between there.

3138
03:19:07,480 --> 03:19:12,240
 With no shrubs, there's no fences required, but we're recommending a wooden fence.

3139
03:19:12,240 --> 03:19:16,280
 That provides the visibility barrier that you would have otherwise.

3140
03:19:16,280 --> 03:19:17,280
 Okay.

3141
03:19:17,280 --> 03:19:18,280
 No opaque fence.

3142
03:19:18,280 --> 03:19:19,280
 No opaque fence.

3143
03:19:19,280 --> 03:19:20,280
 No opaque fence.

3144
03:19:20,280 --> 03:19:29,760
 Right now, in a buffer, only 40% of the trees count towards canopy, and we're talking about

3145
03:19:29,760 --> 03:19:34,980
 the type D buffer on the east side only, we're asking that 100% of the trees count towards

3146
03:19:34,980 --> 03:19:35,980
 the canopy.

3147
03:19:35,980 --> 03:19:39,920
 There's a lot of trees going on this site, and this is a buffer that we don't feel like

3148
03:19:39,920 --> 03:19:40,920
 we should, I don't.

3149
03:19:40,920 --> 03:19:42,920
 To me, it's an equity issue.

3150
03:19:42,920 --> 03:19:49,480
 Why is the offender the one required to put up a buffer against somebody that's offending

3151
03:19:49,480 --> 03:19:50,480
 them?

3152
03:19:50,480 --> 03:19:53,720
 Voluntarily, you should, but why are we being required to?

3153
03:19:53,720 --> 03:19:55,700
 We're just asking for 100%.

3154
03:19:55,700 --> 03:20:02,280
 One of the reasons is, well, I'll go to it in a minute.

3155
03:20:02,280 --> 03:20:07,720
 This is not part of the buffer, but I wanted to stress that we have a parking lot in between

3156
03:20:07,720 --> 03:20:11,480
 us and the buildings, and that parking lot has parking lot trees as well, so there'll

3157
03:20:11,480 --> 03:20:15,000
 be additional trees in there acting as a buffer.

3158
03:20:15,000 --> 03:20:18,600
 And the street trees along the street in front of the building, so between the buildings

3159
03:20:18,600 --> 03:20:22,280
 and the gas well, there's going to be a type D buffer modified.

3160
03:20:22,280 --> 03:20:26,460
 There's going to be a parking lot with parking lot trees and a private street with street

3161
03:20:26,460 --> 03:20:27,460
 trees.

3162
03:20:27,460 --> 03:20:29,720
 The private street being?

3163
03:20:29,720 --> 03:20:34,400
 Being the street that -- the access all the way around the buildings, not --

3164
03:20:34,400 --> 03:20:35,400
 Okay.

3165
03:20:35,400 --> 03:20:36,400
 Okay.

3166
03:20:36,400 --> 03:20:37,400
 Yeah.

3167
03:20:37,400 --> 03:20:41,240
 And in order to do this, my understanding is you can't really approve it tonight, so

3168
03:20:41,240 --> 03:20:47,400
 to speak, but the director can, and one of the conditions that's on here is the director

3169
03:20:47,400 --> 03:20:53,440
 can approve this with the understanding he can't go anything less than what we proposed.

3170
03:20:53,440 --> 03:20:56,600
 We can't come back later and do a bait and switch here.

3171
03:20:56,600 --> 03:21:00,520
 Within 5%, was that what I heard?

3172
03:21:00,520 --> 03:21:04,280
 I don't think on the landscape, but I think the other things were 5%, but I don't think

3173
03:21:04,280 --> 03:21:05,280
 this was.

3174
03:21:05,280 --> 03:21:06,280
 It was just on kind of those --

3175
03:21:06,280 --> 03:21:07,280
 Conditions.

3176
03:21:07,280 --> 03:21:08,280
 Right.

3177
03:21:08,280 --> 03:21:09,280
 Okay.

3178
03:21:09,280 --> 03:21:13,120
 So really all you're essentially changing on that type D buffer that I can see is that

3179
03:21:13,120 --> 03:21:15,160
 you're just removing the shrubs.

3180
03:21:15,160 --> 03:21:17,640
 And you're adding a fence.

3181
03:21:17,640 --> 03:21:18,640
 Yeah.

3182
03:21:18,640 --> 03:21:19,640
 Okay.

3183
03:21:19,640 --> 03:21:20,640
 Gotcha.

3184
03:21:20,640 --> 03:21:23,500
 And this gray line, dark gray, that's the private street that's going to have to have

3185
03:21:23,500 --> 03:21:25,800
 street trees along it as well.

3186
03:21:25,800 --> 03:21:26,800
 Gotcha.

3187
03:21:26,800 --> 03:21:27,800
 All right.

3188
03:21:27,800 --> 03:21:28,800
 One last question here.

3189
03:21:28,800 --> 03:21:29,800
 Sure.

3190
03:21:29,800 --> 03:21:31,920
 You mentioned -- and that's the gray area for us here.

3191
03:21:31,920 --> 03:21:35,000
 It's something I got to contend with, and I'm going to address later, too.

3192
03:21:35,000 --> 03:21:41,800
 Just the gas well issue is a downer for me, but say they don't develop those gas sites.

3193
03:21:41,800 --> 03:21:49,000
 The one on the south, pain number two, if they wound up shutting that down, do you have

3194
03:21:49,000 --> 03:21:52,520
 any plans to extend that type D buffer then, or are you just --

3195
03:21:52,520 --> 03:21:53,760
 Well, what will happen then is --

3196
03:21:53,760 --> 03:21:57,400
 That may be a year or two or longer from now.

3197
03:21:57,400 --> 03:22:03,080
 This area right here, which is the area you're talking about, the apartments are -- that

3198
03:22:03,080 --> 03:22:07,200
 discussion negotiation was underway while these plants were being developed.

3199
03:22:07,200 --> 03:22:10,800
 The agreement says we won't even put the landscape in here.

3200
03:22:10,800 --> 03:22:12,760
 The apartments aren't even going to buy that now.

3201
03:22:12,760 --> 03:22:14,560
 That will go away.

3202
03:22:14,560 --> 03:22:18,440
 They may expand a little bit over here, some slight variation.

3203
03:22:18,440 --> 03:22:22,280
 And what will happen is that will probably end up being commercial along with this.

3204
03:22:22,280 --> 03:22:25,560
 That well goes away, and then that becomes a developable area.

3205
03:22:25,560 --> 03:22:26,560
 Okay.

3206
03:22:26,560 --> 03:22:27,560
 All right.

3207
03:22:27,560 --> 03:22:28,560
 Thank you, sir.

3208
03:22:28,560 --> 03:22:35,680
 If I could jump in here and just get clarification on the specific ask of what the applicant

3209
03:22:35,680 --> 03:22:37,560
 recommendation is that might be helpful.

3210
03:22:37,560 --> 03:22:42,280
 On the staff recommendation condition one, you're not wanting to change the maximum

3211
03:22:42,280 --> 03:22:43,720
 of 17 acres to the 33.

3212
03:22:43,720 --> 03:22:44,720
 Correct.

3213
03:22:44,720 --> 03:22:45,720
 Okay.

3214
03:22:45,720 --> 03:22:46,800
 So one, we're good.

3215
03:22:46,800 --> 03:22:50,320
 Item two, you're wanting to change the 16 to a 20.

3216
03:22:50,320 --> 03:22:51,320
 Basically yes.

3217
03:22:51,320 --> 03:22:55,440
 Item three, change the total number of dwelling units that essentially would allow for a maximum

3218
03:22:55,440 --> 03:22:58,480
 of 24, not 20 and a half.

3219
03:22:58,480 --> 03:23:00,160
 The density yes.

3220
03:23:00,160 --> 03:23:02,280
 Number four, the parking you're okay with.

3221
03:23:02,280 --> 03:23:03,280
 Yes.

3222
03:23:03,280 --> 03:23:07,760
 Number five, you want to change the percent to 65.35, not 49.51.

3223
03:23:07,760 --> 03:23:08,760
 Correct.

3224
03:23:08,760 --> 03:23:10,560
 And number six, you're okay with.

3225
03:23:10,560 --> 03:23:11,560
 Yes.

3226
03:23:11,560 --> 03:23:17,560
 So we're changing three of these in essence of the conditions plus the type D amendments

3227
03:23:17,560 --> 03:23:18,560
 to the buffer.

3228
03:23:18,560 --> 03:23:20,760
 Those are the requests of the applicant.

3229
03:23:20,760 --> 03:23:22,400
 The type D already in there.

3230
03:23:22,400 --> 03:23:27,040
 So the type D amendments to the buffer are already in the, it's under the conditions

3231
03:23:27,040 --> 03:23:29,800
 that follow that set, if I remember correctly.

3232
03:23:29,800 --> 03:23:38,160
 Well the type, I think the question is the 100% of the landscape trees being counted.

3233
03:23:38,160 --> 03:23:43,760
 That's something in addition that you were coming tonight with, correct?

3234
03:23:43,760 --> 03:23:44,760
 I'm not sure.

3235
03:23:44,760 --> 03:23:47,320
 I thought that was in our request for an alternate landscape buffer.

3236
03:23:47,320 --> 03:23:48,320
 Okay.

3237
03:23:48,320 --> 03:23:49,320
 Maybe we can get that verified.

3238
03:23:49,320 --> 03:23:50,320
 Maybe we can clarify that.

3239
03:23:50,320 --> 03:23:56,920
 I guess my position is, of the three requests the applicant's making, maybe this is for

3240
03:23:56,920 --> 03:24:01,720
 discussion, it doesn't seem like a massive ask, especially when you consider that there's

3241
03:24:01,720 --> 03:24:08,440
 a 5% discretion to go up anyways, but I think it's good to clarify exactly what you're asking

3242
03:24:08,440 --> 03:24:09,440
 for.

3243
03:24:09,440 --> 03:24:11,220
 That's helpful.

3244
03:24:11,220 --> 03:24:16,920
 From the sidebar discussions here, I would like to get clarification from the city about

3245
03:24:16,920 --> 03:24:23,800
 using 100% of the trees in the landscape buffer towards the canopy requirement.

3246
03:24:23,800 --> 03:24:25,480
 Is that permissible?

3247
03:24:25,480 --> 03:24:34,660
 Or is that even a change to what's being asked in this?

3248
03:24:34,660 --> 03:24:37,340
 That is not enumerated in the language of our recommendation.

3249
03:24:37,340 --> 03:24:41,720
 It is reflected on Lee's concept plan.

3250
03:24:41,720 --> 03:24:47,180
 I think the question that I would have that we may need to discuss more is rather that

3251
03:24:47,180 --> 03:24:50,680
 is permissible as part of an alternative buffer.

3252
03:24:50,680 --> 03:24:54,800
 I'm not sure that's within the range of what staff or what the director can approve as

3253
03:24:54,800 --> 03:24:56,440
 an alternative in the DDC.

3254
03:24:56,440 --> 03:25:01,400
 That's not on the agenda tonight, is it, an alternative buffer design?

3255
03:25:01,400 --> 03:25:05,720
 No, the intent was that that would be approvable by the director at a later time with the site

3256
03:25:05,720 --> 03:25:06,720
 plan.

3257
03:25:06,720 --> 03:25:07,720
 Perfect.

3258
03:25:07,720 --> 03:25:08,720
 But I'm not sure that...

3259
03:25:08,720 --> 03:25:10,720
 This is not an issue for the commission.

3260
03:25:10,720 --> 03:25:15,180
 So the ADP that's being proposed that Commissioner Beck just walked through, that's not relevant

3261
03:25:15,180 --> 03:25:19,320
 to the case as is tonight, that will go to the city director for a decision.

3262
03:25:19,320 --> 03:25:20,800
 Am I understanding that correctly?

3263
03:25:20,800 --> 03:25:21,800
 Correct.

3264
03:25:21,800 --> 03:25:25,840
 That the buffer is permitted within the DDC to be approved by the director as part of

3265
03:25:25,840 --> 03:25:26,840
 the site plan.

3266
03:25:26,840 --> 03:25:27,840
 Perfect.

3267
03:25:27,840 --> 03:25:32,320
 So that's what's listed in our condition and recommendation is that you all just agree

3268
03:25:32,320 --> 03:25:36,160
 that he has the right to approve that at a later date, so long as it's not less than

3269
03:25:36,160 --> 03:25:37,720
 what's shown on the plans here.

3270
03:25:37,720 --> 03:25:38,720
 I gotcha.

3271
03:25:38,720 --> 03:25:39,720
 Okay.

3272
03:25:39,720 --> 03:25:42,720
 So that's super helpful, if I understand it correctly.

3273
03:25:42,720 --> 03:25:43,720
 Clarify?

3274
03:25:43,720 --> 03:25:44,720
 Yeah.

3275
03:25:44,720 --> 03:25:45,720
 Commissioner Ellis.

3276
03:25:45,720 --> 03:25:46,720
 Thank you, Chair.

3277
03:25:46,720 --> 03:25:48,560
 But to go back to that, but I think what she said is she doesn't know if the director can

3278
03:25:48,560 --> 03:25:52,840
 approve 100% of the canopy being used in that effort.

3279
03:25:52,840 --> 03:25:53,840
 True.

3280
03:25:53,840 --> 03:25:55,160
 But that doesn't matter to our approval of what the...

3281
03:25:55,160 --> 03:25:58,080
 I didn't know if it mattered to Mr. Howelson.

3282
03:25:58,080 --> 03:26:00,080
 I don't have a choice.

3283
03:26:00,080 --> 03:26:06,080
 If it's something he doesn't have the authority to do, an illegal part of the contract's still

3284
03:26:06,080 --> 03:26:09,080
 illegal, so we wouldn't be able to do it.

3285
03:26:09,080 --> 03:26:10,080
 Yeah, the mic.

3286
03:26:10,080 --> 03:26:11,080
 I don't have a choice.

3287
03:26:11,080 --> 03:26:15,920
 If that's something he doesn't have the authority to do, just because we've asked for it here

3288
03:26:15,920 --> 03:26:20,320
 doesn't mean that you can give him permissions to do something he doesn't have permission

3289
03:26:20,320 --> 03:26:21,320
 to do.

3290
03:26:21,320 --> 03:26:22,320
 Authority to do.

3291
03:26:22,320 --> 03:26:25,840
 Perhaps to Commissioner Ellis's point, is the project still feasible if you can only

3292
03:26:25,840 --> 03:26:27,800
 use 40% of landscape buffering?

3293
03:26:27,800 --> 03:26:29,960
 Can you still get to your 35% landscape?

3294
03:26:29,960 --> 03:26:31,960
 Oh, it's not percent of coverage.

3295
03:26:31,960 --> 03:26:32,960
 It's tree canopy.

3296
03:26:32,960 --> 03:26:33,960
 Gotcha.

3297
03:26:33,960 --> 03:26:34,960
 Okay.

3298
03:26:34,960 --> 03:26:37,400
 So what it means is we just plant a few more trees.

3299
03:26:37,400 --> 03:26:38,400
 Gotcha.

3300
03:26:38,400 --> 03:26:39,400
 Commissioner Ellis.

3301
03:26:39,400 --> 03:26:40,400
 Yes.

3302
03:26:40,400 --> 03:26:41,400
 Thank you.

3303
03:26:41,400 --> 03:26:44,680
 Just to continue there, I'm not sure I'd want to write it into our recommendation today

3304
03:26:44,680 --> 03:26:50,400
 with that, not knowing if that's something the director can do.

3305
03:26:50,400 --> 03:26:53,560
 Can we not deal with that, as we're rewriting?

3306
03:26:53,560 --> 03:26:58,000
 Yeah, because I think the whole point of, I think what staff was trying to present here

3307
03:26:58,000 --> 03:27:04,880
 was something in a bit more concrete than we typically will do and say, sort of like

3308
03:27:04,880 --> 03:27:09,120
 the plan that's in front of us, and I think they wrote out these conditions so that we're

3309
03:27:09,120 --> 03:27:13,200
 kind of all on the same page and we all know we're approving.

3310
03:27:13,200 --> 03:27:19,640
 And now we're kind of rewriting that, and I think the whole point was to get clarity,

3311
03:27:19,640 --> 03:27:27,680
 and now things seem a bit unclear, so anyway, let's continue the discussion to see if we

3312
03:27:27,680 --> 03:27:28,680
 can clear them up.

3313
03:27:28,680 --> 03:27:29,680
 Yeah.

3314
03:27:29,680 --> 03:27:32,840
 Unfortunately, y'all were getting clarity, but we were getting confused after last Wednesday.

3315
03:27:32,840 --> 03:27:34,640
 And now we're confused.

3316
03:27:34,640 --> 03:27:35,640
 Ellis.

3317
03:27:35,640 --> 03:27:37,480
 Ellis, Jared interject here.

3318
03:27:37,480 --> 03:27:39,280
 Well, you know, there's a couple things.

3319
03:27:39,280 --> 03:27:44,280
 First of all, I disagree with what Mr. Allison was saying about the purpose of the SUP.

3320
03:27:44,280 --> 03:27:46,520
 It's not to enable negotiations.

3321
03:27:46,520 --> 03:27:57,480
 The purpose of the SUP is to start with a baseline of code compliance.

3322
03:27:57,480 --> 03:28:03,640
 That by itself is not sufficient to, otherwise there would be no need for an SUP.

3323
03:28:03,640 --> 03:28:06,600
 The SUP is supposed to go above and beyond that.

3324
03:28:06,600 --> 03:28:15,880
 The SUP is the opportunity for the city council to verify that certain impacts are being dealt

3325
03:28:15,880 --> 03:28:20,280
 with in this kind of proposal here.

3326
03:28:20,280 --> 03:28:25,120
 So for example, are traffic issues being dealt with in an appropriate fashion?

3327
03:28:25,120 --> 03:28:32,680
 Is there sufficient mitigation of impacts associated with this kind of development in

3328
03:28:32,680 --> 03:28:34,400
 this zoning district?

3329
03:28:34,400 --> 03:28:43,840
 So and moreover, the council in the past has expected, and I think that that is the nature

3330
03:28:43,840 --> 03:28:52,080
 of an SUP, is that the exhibit to the SUP should reflect what the SUP allows.

3331
03:28:52,080 --> 03:28:58,760
 And so that's what staff was doing, and it was largely my suggestion to preserve legibility

3332
03:28:58,760 --> 03:29:03,580
 because sometimes you can't read what's on this site plan.

3333
03:29:03,580 --> 03:29:11,280
 So the point was to take what's written, what was submitted by Mr. Allison himself and write

3334
03:29:11,280 --> 03:29:16,760
 that in there just to preserve it so that people can have a chance to read it and know

3335
03:29:16,760 --> 03:29:20,520
 what it says so that it can be enforced at a later time.

3336
03:29:20,520 --> 03:29:23,920
 It wasn't intended to be a negotiation point or what have you.

3337
03:29:23,920 --> 03:29:31,960
 It was intended to reproduce in legible type what was written in Mr. Allison's own submittal.

3338
03:29:31,960 --> 03:29:40,160
 So if there's confusion that's caused by this, probably the proper course of action

3339
03:29:40,160 --> 03:29:46,320
 is to let the submittal stand on its own merits and take out the staff recommendations, including

3340
03:29:46,320 --> 03:29:53,040
 the plus or minus 5%, and let it go up to city council to approve or deny the site plan

3341
03:29:53,040 --> 03:29:54,420
 as submitted.

3342
03:29:54,420 --> 03:30:02,200
 I think that's what the SUP approval process contemplates, and so if there's confusion

3343
03:30:02,200 --> 03:30:07,600
 associated with that, then perhaps that may be the right way to go.

3344
03:30:07,600 --> 03:30:11,200
 I would just respectfully disagree.

3345
03:30:11,200 --> 03:30:15,860
 I can't find anything in the code that says there's any reason to negotiate or not negotiate

3346
03:30:15,860 --> 03:30:19,580
 or to have to put additional constraints on there.

3347
03:30:19,580 --> 03:30:23,480
 There is certainly a very interest in dealing with working with neighbors so that we meet

3348
03:30:23,480 --> 03:30:26,320
 with them and address their concerns.

3349
03:30:26,320 --> 03:30:32,200
 We visited with staff extensively about this, with our pre-design meeting, et cetera, regarding

3350
03:30:32,200 --> 03:30:36,320
 how things were changing and how the approach to SUPs was going to be different than it

3351
03:30:36,320 --> 03:30:40,840
 had been in the past, and that's how we came up with this concept plan, and then we got

3352
03:30:40,840 --> 03:30:43,200
 surprised by this change.

3353
03:30:43,200 --> 03:30:48,920
 We'd already been scheduled for BNC twice and delayed twice, and this never came up,

3354
03:30:48,920 --> 03:30:50,840
 and then on the third one this comes up.

3355
03:30:50,840 --> 03:30:57,720
 So yes, it was prepared in part by us and in part by the Wolf Corporation.

3356
03:30:57,720 --> 03:31:02,000
 And again, we're willing to live with this going forward if that's what we have to do,

3357
03:31:02,000 --> 03:31:08,520
 but at the same time, I've not heard anything from the code that says it is a process of

3358
03:31:08,520 --> 03:31:12,440
 negotiation or it is a process to put something more stringent.

3359
03:31:12,440 --> 03:31:18,640
 When we look at the intensity and we look at the impact on the surrounding area, the

3360
03:31:18,640 --> 03:31:20,040
 zoning is already in place.

3361
03:31:20,040 --> 03:31:26,360
 In fact, if anything, the multifamily and particularly even at 24 units per acre is

3362
03:31:26,360 --> 03:31:30,220
 a medium intensity for what's already allowed in that zoning.

3363
03:31:30,220 --> 03:31:34,800
 So now it's the city has a due diligence and responsibility to provide the infrastructure

3364
03:31:34,800 --> 03:31:39,840
 and the planning to accommodate the zoning that it's put in place, and we're on the

3365
03:31:39,840 --> 03:31:40,840
 lower end.

3366
03:31:40,840 --> 03:31:44,480
 I say the lower, the middle end with this part of the improvements.

3367
03:31:44,480 --> 03:31:48,560
 We could not come in and we could go to hotels and restaurants all over the site without

3368
03:31:48,560 --> 03:31:52,980
 having to come for something like this, and there would be more intensity than what we're

3369
03:31:52,980 --> 03:31:55,240
 bringing forward with this proposal this evening.

3370
03:31:55,240 --> 03:32:00,280
 So I think those things have been discussed and thought about, mentioned with staff, talked

3371
03:32:00,280 --> 03:32:05,080
 with planning staff, talked with engineering staff, talked with the neighbors, and I think

3372
03:32:05,080 --> 03:32:07,360
 we've been appropriate in that.

3373
03:32:07,360 --> 03:32:12,100
 We just had one understanding of how SUPs were now being applied, and in fact, we did

3374
03:32:12,100 --> 03:32:21,680
 an SUP not long ago under that similar, so similar parameters, so we just appreciate

3375
03:32:21,680 --> 03:32:22,680
 that.

3376
03:32:22,680 --> 03:32:23,680
 I appreciate the context.

3377
03:32:23,680 --> 03:32:28,480
 Can you help me put a puzzle piece together here?

3378
03:32:28,480 --> 03:32:34,840
 There was a concept plan submitted to the city that has 16 buildings and has a 24 density,

3379
03:32:34,840 --> 03:32:40,920
 and you said there was a change that precipitated your applicant recommendation.

3380
03:32:40,920 --> 03:32:44,280
 So can you walk me through, you submitted a concept plan.

3381
03:32:44,280 --> 03:32:51,000
 What was the precipice for you to now make some changes?

3382
03:32:51,000 --> 03:33:01,600
 The precipice was that us having this understanding, I'm going to come back to this, demonstrate

3383
03:33:01,600 --> 03:33:06,320
 that the DVC has observed that we're able to meet the zoning requirements, and because

3384
03:33:06,320 --> 03:33:11,760
 it's apartments and those have a particular concern in the community, also that we go

3385
03:33:11,760 --> 03:33:15,960
 in front of neighbors and visit with them and see if there's things we need to concede

3386
03:33:15,960 --> 03:33:20,940
 in order to satisfy their issues and conditions.

3387
03:33:20,940 --> 03:33:26,320
 We had a plan that demonstrates that we meet them, demonstrates that we very easily meet

3388
03:33:26,320 --> 03:33:30,600
 all the code requirements, and we had plenty of room to wiggle with if we needed to as

3389
03:33:30,600 --> 03:33:31,600
 we came forward.

3390
03:33:31,600 --> 03:33:39,560
 Then, all of a sudden, as of last Wednesday, after twice being pulled from P&Z, one time

3391
03:33:39,560 --> 03:33:44,200
 my fault, but twice being pulled from P&Z, we're being told now that there's going to

3392
03:33:44,200 --> 03:33:51,920
 be limitations put into the ordinance that keep us very highly limited to what we put

3393
03:33:51,920 --> 03:33:53,640
 on that concept plan.

3394
03:33:53,640 --> 03:33:58,640
 Five percent, maybe we made it 15 percent but not exceed the code, but five percent

3395
03:33:58,640 --> 03:34:03,800
 on a 50 percent coverage, I think this is up to 52 and a half compared to 80.

3396
03:34:03,800 --> 03:34:09,640
 That's not much wiggle room at all, and when we got to go through detailed design later

3397
03:34:09,640 --> 03:34:16,680
 and look at drainage and detention, that'd be nice to have a little wiggle room to work

3398
03:34:16,680 --> 03:34:17,680
 with all of that.

3399
03:34:17,680 --> 03:34:18,680
 Got you.

3400
03:34:18,680 --> 03:34:19,680
 That makes sense.

3401
03:34:19,680 --> 03:34:24,400
 There was an abundance of questions, and now it seems like they all are gone.

3402
03:34:24,400 --> 03:34:25,400
 Commissioner Ellis.

3403
03:34:25,400 --> 03:34:26,400
 Thank you, Chair.

3404
03:34:26,400 --> 03:34:33,720
 I think the reason, again, for these is so the site plan doesn't drastically change,

3405
03:34:33,720 --> 03:34:37,280
 so you don't submit this and then suddenly it becomes something else.

3406
03:34:37,280 --> 03:34:41,600
 I understand that you're observing the DDC and you're within the restrictions of what

3407
03:34:41,600 --> 03:34:47,720
 the code is, but I think part of the SUP process is making sure we all understand what's going

3408
03:34:47,720 --> 03:34:50,720
 on at site with regard to multifamily.

3409
03:34:50,720 --> 03:34:54,440
 Like the code or not, the way it's written, that's how it's written, you need an SUP

3410
03:34:54,440 --> 03:34:55,440
 for multifamily.

3411
03:34:55,440 --> 03:34:57,840
 I mean, that's where we are today.

3412
03:34:57,840 --> 03:35:03,720
 So yeah, I don't like that we got to this point because they're just using your site

3413
03:35:03,720 --> 03:35:07,640
 plan as part of their recommendation.

3414
03:35:07,640 --> 03:35:08,640
 They didn't really make it up.

3415
03:35:08,640 --> 03:35:10,000
 They just went off your site plan.

3416
03:35:10,000 --> 03:35:14,780
 So I guess that's what we need to make sure we get to understand.

3417
03:35:14,780 --> 03:35:19,040
 What happened in the past is we would come in with a site plan like we did for the Woodlands

3418
03:35:19,040 --> 03:35:24,400
 Apartments, but then we were detailed site planning and we knew it, and that was the

3419
03:35:24,400 --> 03:35:27,400
 site plan we were going to actually live with.

3420
03:35:27,400 --> 03:35:31,500
 Now the idea was to demonstrate, this time around we were under the understanding that

3421
03:35:31,500 --> 03:35:36,800
 the idea is to demonstrate we can meet the code and determine if we need to put any special

3422
03:35:36,800 --> 03:35:43,160
 limitations on it, and no special limitations had been identified until a week ago today.

3423
03:35:43,160 --> 03:35:44,960
 And that's what really surprised us.

3424
03:35:44,960 --> 03:35:49,120
 I wish we were in a better situation.

3425
03:35:49,120 --> 03:35:56,400
 I mean, our backs against the wall, you know, we can take our 65% down to 60.

3426
03:35:56,400 --> 03:36:03,560
 We can take our 24 units per acre down to say 22 or 23, but at the same time, that 5%

3427
03:36:03,560 --> 03:36:08,440
 was just too little of a wiggle room tube under these conditions.

3428
03:36:08,440 --> 03:36:17,480
 And unfortunately, because of contract situations, if you all accept the thing as staff recommends,

3429
03:36:17,480 --> 03:36:22,480
 we kind of have to go that way just because now that's where we are.

3430
03:36:22,480 --> 03:36:27,280
 We're kind of late in the game to make those changes, but we feel like we're presenting

3431
03:36:27,280 --> 03:36:33,520
 as responsible, and it is something that, as Mr. Drake has indicated, can be written

3432
03:36:33,520 --> 03:36:38,200
 into the ordinance and understood, and you don't have to pull out a map and look at it

3433
03:36:38,200 --> 03:36:41,200
 and see if you can still read it in the future.

3434
03:36:41,200 --> 03:36:43,560
 Jared, let's see, speaking then, Commissioner Sebelius.

3435
03:36:43,560 --> 03:36:44,560
 Thank you.

3436
03:36:44,560 --> 03:36:49,520
 Well, let me just be real clear because I hope I didn't come across the wrong way.

3437
03:36:49,520 --> 03:36:55,120
 You know, from the legal standpoint, we don't care what the numbers are.

3438
03:36:55,120 --> 03:37:00,560
 What we care about is that we have a determinate standard, that we have a determinate standard

3439
03:37:00,560 --> 03:37:05,000
 that can be enforced, that can be applied, that's consistent.

3440
03:37:05,000 --> 03:37:11,900
 If the numbers that we're recommending for putting in the conditions of the ordinance

3441
03:37:11,900 --> 03:37:15,920
 or the recommendations of the ordinance or whatever you want to call it, if the numbers

3442
03:37:15,920 --> 03:37:21,160
 that we're putting in there don't match the site plan, then the site plan needs to change

3443
03:37:21,160 --> 03:37:22,640
 to agree with it.

3444
03:37:22,640 --> 03:37:29,440
 If you want the site plan to govern, then the numbers need to conform to what's in the

3445
03:37:29,440 --> 03:37:31,880
 site plan.

3446
03:37:31,880 --> 03:37:40,100
 The idea of being close or, you know, having wiggle room, it makes it difficult to enforce

3447
03:37:40,100 --> 03:37:44,000
 the site plan and for people to know what the requirements are.

3448
03:37:44,000 --> 03:37:51,640
 And so our recommendation, ultimately, this is a council decision of what conditions to

3449
03:37:51,640 --> 03:37:54,280
 put on the SUP approval.

3450
03:37:54,280 --> 03:37:55,280
 It's their permit.

3451
03:37:55,280 --> 03:37:57,000
 They are the ones who grant it.

3452
03:37:57,000 --> 03:38:03,640
 They are the ones who have the authority to impose conditions if they think are appropriate

3453
03:38:03,640 --> 03:38:07,160
 and whatever conditions they think are appropriate are fine.

3454
03:38:07,160 --> 03:38:13,400
 The only thing that we would recommend as from a legal perspective is that they need

3455
03:38:13,400 --> 03:38:14,400
 to be clear.

3456
03:38:14,400 --> 03:38:15,400
 They need to be determinate.

3457
03:38:15,400 --> 03:38:26,880
 They need to be written down and the submitted site plan needs to match what the restrictions

3458
03:38:26,880 --> 03:38:27,880
 are.

3459
03:38:27,880 --> 03:38:30,720
 >> Commissioner Smith, real fast and then I think staff will --

3460
03:38:30,720 --> 03:38:31,720
 >> Thank you, Chair.

3461
03:38:31,720 --> 03:38:34,180
 I think I'll just make this spiral out of control a little bit.

3462
03:38:34,180 --> 03:38:35,880
 I think this will make it a lot easier.

3463
03:38:35,880 --> 03:38:40,880
 It looks like from my understanding is that staff took a conceptual plan, not a site plan,

3464
03:38:40,880 --> 03:38:46,480
 but a conceptual plan and tried to exactly what Jerry just said and exactly what Haley

3465
03:38:46,480 --> 03:38:50,840
 had said is they tried to put it in writing that the applicant or whoever was going to

3466
03:38:50,840 --> 03:38:54,440
 build on this site with this SUP had to follow those guidelines.

3467
03:38:54,440 --> 03:38:59,800
 They used a conceptual plan that was given to them at the time to create these parameters.

3468
03:38:59,800 --> 03:39:02,960
 All we're trying to do at the end of the day is just create the parameters to make sure

3469
03:39:02,960 --> 03:39:07,760
 that no matter what happens and what development is built there doesn't go outside and build

3470
03:39:07,760 --> 03:39:12,520
 a site plan that's incongruent with what the intent of this is.

3471
03:39:12,520 --> 03:39:13,760
 We don't have a site plan to look at.

3472
03:39:13,760 --> 03:39:16,520
 This is a zoning -- this is an SCP case.

3473
03:39:16,520 --> 03:39:21,960
 So really all we're trying to say is these parameters, they play within the code.

3474
03:39:21,960 --> 03:39:24,200
 There's nothing wrong with them.

3475
03:39:24,200 --> 03:39:29,260
 All we need to do is just agree as a commission that these are parameters that the applicant's

3476
03:39:29,260 --> 03:39:30,680
 willing to play within.

3477
03:39:30,680 --> 03:39:34,120
 The city has no problem with them because they are within the code, so why would the

3478
03:39:34,120 --> 03:39:36,780
 city have a problem with it if it's within the law?

3479
03:39:36,780 --> 03:39:41,560
 So let's just move on forward as a commission and say, okay, well, if the applicant likes

3480
03:39:41,560 --> 03:39:45,920
 it, it's not against city code, and the applicant's willing to play within those parameters that

3481
03:39:45,920 --> 03:39:50,440
 we're going to draw on the sandbox here, then everyone should be hunky-dory happy, right?

3482
03:39:50,440 --> 03:39:53,280
 Hopefully that makes it clearer.

3483
03:39:53,280 --> 03:39:54,280
 Clear as mud.

3484
03:39:54,280 --> 03:39:55,280
 [ Laughter ]

3485
03:39:55,280 --> 03:39:59,800
 I'm going to ask Richard to start and then we'll go to Commissioner Pernetta.

3486
03:39:59,800 --> 03:40:03,440
 Just wanted to provide sort of a little more background on this.

3487
03:40:03,440 --> 03:40:09,080
 When we first started looking at these SGPs about a year ago, actually perfect case in

3488
03:40:09,080 --> 03:40:14,720
 point, the item previously that was tabled, when SGPs were being looked at, they were

3489
03:40:14,720 --> 03:40:19,440
 being looked at as full site plan construction drawings, and so we had one case where we

3490
03:40:19,440 --> 03:40:24,800
 were actually recommending denial of the SGP, and so it's a little odd to put someone through

3491
03:40:24,800 --> 03:40:29,920
 full design site plan review spending thousands and thousands of dollars to say, okay, yes,

3492
03:40:29,920 --> 03:40:34,280
 you meet the code, but you know what, we're recommending against your SGP, and so when

3493
03:40:34,280 --> 03:40:37,240
 we looked at that, to me, it wasn't really fair on the applicant.

3494
03:40:37,240 --> 03:40:40,600
 We looked at the code and how it's worded and what's really required, and it's as a

3495
03:40:40,600 --> 03:40:46,800
 plan, and so when we first brought it forward to city council, you know, even there, I think

3496
03:40:46,800 --> 03:40:50,960
 it was the mayor that first said, well, you know, this is different, you know, we're not

3497
03:40:50,960 --> 03:40:54,520
 used to seeing it in sort of a conceptual fashion.

3498
03:40:54,520 --> 03:40:59,600
 And so we've been trying to kind of fashion it in a way that still provides some certainty

3499
03:40:59,600 --> 03:41:03,520
 so they kind of know what they're buying, and I think, Margie, you had brought it up,

3500
03:41:03,520 --> 03:41:09,160
 I think it was the McDonald's item that when it was approved here, it seemed very different

3501
03:41:09,160 --> 03:41:14,000
 when it went to council, and what that did is it really just memorialized that plan into

3502
03:41:14,000 --> 03:41:16,000
 the ordinance.

3503
03:41:16,000 --> 03:41:21,240
 So now moving forward, that was the attempt to say, okay, as we bring it forward to P&Z,

3504
03:41:21,240 --> 03:41:25,680
 let's make sure they're looking at the same thing to avoid any sort of confusion in the

3505
03:41:25,680 --> 03:41:26,680
 future.

3506
03:41:26,680 --> 03:41:31,680
 Now, one thing, and I don't know if this is even an option for Mr. Allison, if we do decide

3507
03:41:31,680 --> 03:41:39,280
 to go with, if it's voted to go with those alternative numbers, could that plan, that

3508
03:41:39,280 --> 03:41:43,000
 preliminary site plan be updated prior to going to council that reflects it?

3509
03:41:43,000 --> 03:41:47,680
 I don't know if that's something that is possible.

3510
03:41:47,680 --> 03:41:54,000
 Just thinking to what Jerry said, one or the other should match.

3511
03:41:54,000 --> 03:41:59,960
 Just a thought, and a little more perspective kind of on the background of how we got here.

3512
03:41:59,960 --> 03:42:00,960
 >> Mr. Pernetta.

3513
03:42:00,960 --> 03:42:01,960
 Thank you.

3514
03:42:01,960 --> 03:42:02,960
 >> Okay.

3515
03:42:02,960 --> 03:42:06,720
 Just a couple of things, and the first one's going to jump back before all the confusion

3516
03:42:06,720 --> 03:42:13,520
 just tangentially, and I guess this is probably more for Richard or Jerry to answer.

3517
03:42:13,520 --> 03:42:23,200
 So I think Larry and I both kind of had questions or concerns about the wells and the setbacks,

3518
03:42:23,200 --> 03:42:25,480
 and you answered that question right now.

3519
03:42:25,480 --> 03:42:27,920
 Currently, as it stands, the setback, you know.

3520
03:42:27,920 --> 03:42:28,920
 >> Can you turn your mic on?

3521
03:42:28,920 --> 03:42:29,920
 >> Is it on?

3522
03:42:29,920 --> 03:42:30,920
 >> Okay, I'm sorry.

3523
03:42:30,920 --> 03:42:37,520
 Where we are right now, basically, those wells are about 433 feet, which is an extra what,

3524
03:42:37,520 --> 03:42:38,520
 100?

3525
03:42:38,520 --> 03:42:39,520
 The north one?

3526
03:42:39,520 --> 03:42:40,520
 >> Yeah, only the north well.

3527
03:42:40,520 --> 03:42:45,520
 >> The south well is going to be more than the 250 to 300 feet.

3528
03:42:45,520 --> 03:42:49,920
 >> But the south one is farther away from like, you know, what we have is habitable structure,

3529
03:42:49,920 --> 03:42:50,920
 right?

3530
03:42:50,920 --> 03:42:51,920
 Right?

3531
03:42:51,920 --> 03:42:52,920
 Is that correct?

3532
03:42:52,920 --> 03:42:58,840
 >> No, let me find that exhibit, I apologize.

3533
03:42:58,840 --> 03:43:09,480
 Pitcher's worth a thousand words.

3534
03:43:09,480 --> 03:43:15,040
 The habitable structures here, there's the 250, the habitable structure is probably another

3535
03:43:15,040 --> 03:43:16,040
 50.

3536
03:43:16,040 --> 03:43:21,560
 In this case, well, I didn't show it, but there's the 250.

3537
03:43:21,560 --> 03:43:27,800
 We're closer to 275, 280 for the habitable structures down here.

3538
03:43:27,800 --> 03:43:28,800
 >> That's great.

3539
03:43:28,800 --> 03:43:33,720
 I can see the ones on the bottom are farther outside of that setback.

3540
03:43:33,720 --> 03:43:40,880
 My original question in the work session was the idea of the well moving out.

3541
03:43:40,880 --> 03:43:47,400
 Now, when we're voting tonight, what we're talking about is a setback of 433.

3542
03:43:47,400 --> 03:43:53,580
 In the event that the well operator ever wanted to expand that, that would be a separate thing

3543
03:43:53,580 --> 03:43:58,080
 that would come before us, and we would vote on their motion at that time.

3544
03:43:58,080 --> 03:44:02,880
 So what we're doing is completely separate on that one, right?

3545
03:44:02,880 --> 03:44:03,880
 >> Correct.

3546
03:44:03,880 --> 03:44:04,880
 >> Okay.

3547
03:44:04,880 --> 03:44:05,880
 All right.

3548
03:44:05,880 --> 03:44:08,280
 >> Haley, do you want to provide maybe a little more on a gas well site plan?

3549
03:44:08,280 --> 03:44:12,000
 >> Yes, if and when the well site seeks to expand, they would also have to come forward

3550
03:44:12,000 --> 03:44:16,520
 with an SUP as part of their watershed protection permit because their site is located within

3551
03:44:16,520 --> 03:44:17,520
 a floodplain boundary.

3552
03:44:17,520 --> 03:44:18,520
 >> Okay.

3553
03:44:18,520 --> 03:44:21,920
 >> So you would have a separate SUP to consider for the gas well site plan.

3554
03:44:21,920 --> 03:44:22,920
 >> Okay.

3555
03:44:22,920 --> 03:44:23,920
 Excellent.

3556
03:44:23,920 --> 03:44:28,360
 >> Wouldn't they also have to come back with another gas well site plan because this is

3557
03:44:28,360 --> 03:44:32,160
 the site plan they have or the gas well plan is very specific on the number of wells and

3558
03:44:32,160 --> 03:44:33,160
 where they are.

3559
03:44:33,160 --> 03:44:34,160
 >> Correct.

3560
03:44:34,160 --> 03:44:37,620
 That would be after they -- they would have to first get an SUP approved before they could

3561
03:44:37,620 --> 03:44:39,240
 apply for a gas well site plan.

3562
03:44:39,240 --> 03:44:40,240
 >> Okay.

3563
03:44:40,240 --> 03:44:41,240
 >> They could come back twice.

3564
03:44:41,240 --> 03:44:42,240
 >> Okay.

3565
03:44:42,240 --> 03:44:44,720
 >> The gas well site plan is administratively approved, but the SUP, which would have to

3566
03:44:44,720 --> 03:44:50,080
 contain a plan, as this one does, would come before you all as well as council.

3567
03:44:50,080 --> 03:44:51,080
 >> Okay.

3568
03:44:51,080 --> 03:44:52,080
 That helps a lot.

3569
03:44:52,080 --> 03:44:53,080
 Yeah.

3570
03:44:53,080 --> 03:44:54,080
 >> Christopher Beck?

3571
03:44:54,080 --> 03:44:57,080
 >> I was under the microphone.

3572
03:44:57,080 --> 03:44:59,880
 >> Can you turn the mic on?

3573
03:44:59,880 --> 03:45:05,560
 >> I'd like to clarify something here because I was under the impression and I think you

3574
03:45:05,560 --> 03:45:11,160
 addressed it because it's in a flood plan and then it would require coming back before

3575
03:45:11,160 --> 03:45:12,160
 the PDC.

3576
03:45:12,160 --> 03:45:21,760
 But that if they wanted to go to a smaller setback, a less setback, that all they need

3577
03:45:21,760 --> 03:45:26,360
 is CBA approval, where does that come into play?

3578
03:45:26,360 --> 03:45:30,480
 >> So there are multiple setbacks outlined in the code.

3579
03:45:30,480 --> 03:45:35,600
 The reverse setback only applies when a protected use is approaching a gas well.

3580
03:45:35,600 --> 03:45:39,400
 If the gas well operator seeks to expand, they're then expanding the existing gas well

3581
03:45:39,400 --> 03:45:42,820
 site and have a 500-foot setback required.

3582
03:45:42,820 --> 03:45:46,440
 They can't feasibly meet that because they're already well within 500 feet of several existing

3583
03:45:46,440 --> 03:45:49,040
 protected uses in that neighborhood.

3584
03:45:49,040 --> 03:45:54,400
 So to even be allowed to amend their site in any way, they would have to get that 500-foot

3585
03:45:54,400 --> 03:45:59,480
 setback reduced either by going to ZBA, in which case it could potentially go down to

3586
03:45:59,480 --> 03:46:00,480
 250 feet.

3587
03:46:00,480 --> 03:46:02,880
 >> Could it go below 250 feet?

3588
03:46:02,880 --> 03:46:04,920
 >> Never below 250 feet.

3589
03:46:04,920 --> 03:46:08,880
 Or they could seek a written waiver from all of the neighbors that are within that 500

3590
03:46:08,880 --> 03:46:09,880
 feet.

3591
03:46:09,880 --> 03:46:12,960
 So they would have to do one of those two things and then go through the watershed protection

3592
03:46:12,960 --> 03:46:16,400
 permit, which requires the SUP, then apply for a site plan.

3593
03:46:16,400 --> 03:46:20,920
 So they have a very long multi-step process to ever get to that future pad site boundary.

3594
03:46:20,920 --> 03:46:21,920
 >> Okay.

3595
03:46:21,920 --> 03:46:22,920
 Thank you.

3596
03:46:22,920 --> 03:46:23,920
 >> Thank you.

3597
03:46:23,920 --> 03:46:24,920
 Thank you very much.

3598
03:46:24,920 --> 03:46:25,920
 That helps a lot.

3599
03:46:25,920 --> 03:46:30,440
 So then back into the mock.

3600
03:46:30,440 --> 03:46:39,200
 So when we're voting, we will be voting with conditions just based on what's being asked

3601
03:46:39,200 --> 03:46:45,400
 for and at that point, those conditions are entered into the record into our minutes and

3602
03:46:45,400 --> 03:46:53,720
 would then be taken specifically before city council so that way they're -- what gets sent

3603
03:46:53,720 --> 03:46:55,320
 to them is enumerated specifically?

3604
03:46:55,320 --> 03:47:07,080
 >> Somebody is going to be making a motion to recommend approval of a proposal with certain

3605
03:47:07,080 --> 03:47:12,480
 conditions on it and they could be the staff conditions, you could make a motion to approve

3606
03:47:12,480 --> 03:47:20,200
 with the conditions that Mr. Allison brought forward today, something in between.

3607
03:47:20,200 --> 03:47:22,480
 It's just a matter of what that motion is.

3608
03:47:22,480 --> 03:47:29,280
 Will it get a second and will it be approved by a vote for recommendation?

3609
03:47:29,280 --> 03:47:32,640
 And that's basically what it's going to come down to.

3610
03:47:32,640 --> 03:47:33,640
 >> All right.

3611
03:47:33,640 --> 03:47:36,880
 Thank you very much.

3612
03:47:36,880 --> 03:47:44,280
 >> Clarification, Mr. Allison, if you could maybe bend an ear for this question.

3613
03:47:44,280 --> 03:47:52,440
 If we move forward with a recommendation that is not explicitly in line with the preliminary

3614
03:47:52,440 --> 03:47:58,440
 site plan submitted to us this evening, can it go before council without an updated preliminary

3615
03:47:58,440 --> 03:48:03,940
 site plan based just on the conditions that we enumerate this evening?

3616
03:48:03,940 --> 03:48:07,600
 >> Are you asking Mr. Allison or me?

3617
03:48:07,600 --> 03:48:12,320
 >> Well, I think it's two -- one, is it possible for city council to approve without an updated

3618
03:48:12,320 --> 03:48:13,440
 preliminary site plan?

3619
03:48:13,440 --> 03:48:17,520
 If not, is it possible for Mr. Allison to have an updated preliminary site plan prior

3620
03:48:17,520 --> 03:48:18,520
 to going to council?

3621
03:48:18,520 --> 03:48:23,080
 >> Tom just said, yes, I will.

3622
03:48:23,080 --> 03:48:24,840
 I think we answered that.

3623
03:48:24,840 --> 03:48:26,880
 >> Question A is now null and void.

3624
03:48:26,880 --> 03:48:31,360
 >> I kind of like question A myself.

3625
03:48:31,360 --> 03:48:35,800
 >> I think it's worth clarifying to know -- >> I didn't have anything to do next Thursday

3626
03:48:35,800 --> 03:48:36,800
 anyway.

3627
03:48:36,800 --> 03:48:43,840
 >> It would be helpful to know if an update -- if we change the staff recommendation conditions,

3628
03:48:43,840 --> 03:48:51,300
 if an updated preliminary site plan would need to display and graphically represent

3629
03:48:51,300 --> 03:48:53,880
 what we put in writing this evening.

3630
03:48:53,880 --> 03:48:56,560
 >> I would certainly recommend that.

3631
03:48:56,560 --> 03:49:01,360
 And I think that in bringing it forward to the council, to the extent that they want

3632
03:49:01,360 --> 03:49:05,360
 a recommendation from the legal department, our recommendation would be that the site

3633
03:49:05,360 --> 03:49:13,800
 plan match the conditions that are ultimately approved by city council.

3634
03:49:13,800 --> 03:49:20,200
 City council may adopt the recommendations made by the planning and zoning commission.

3635
03:49:20,200 --> 03:49:23,360
 They may choose their own conditions.

3636
03:49:23,360 --> 03:49:29,040
 Again, this is the city council's permit approval.

3637
03:49:29,040 --> 03:49:35,840
 PNZ is making a recommendation here, regardless of what you recommend, the council is going

3638
03:49:35,840 --> 03:49:39,960
 to approve the conditions that they think are appropriate.

3639
03:49:39,960 --> 03:49:48,480
 And so it's -- I guess what's brought forward to the city council is not nearly as important

3640
03:49:48,480 --> 03:49:53,880
 that it match your recommendations as that it match the recommendations that council

3641
03:49:53,880 --> 03:49:55,880
 ultimately approves.

3642
03:49:55,880 --> 03:49:59,280
 >> Mr. Fernanda.

3643
03:49:59,280 --> 03:50:04,920
 >> And just one more time to make sure that we're clear.

3644
03:50:04,920 --> 03:50:11,040
 Based on what was presented by staff recommendations, that was -- the staff recommendations are

3645
03:50:11,040 --> 03:50:14,520
 based on the original site plan, right?

3646
03:50:14,520 --> 03:50:20,900
 So what we are possibly recommending based on Mr. Allison's request is not outside of

3647
03:50:20,900 --> 03:50:22,640
 code.

3648
03:50:22,640 --> 03:50:24,600
 It's just different than the site plan.

3649
03:50:24,600 --> 03:50:26,080
 Is that accurate?

3650
03:50:26,080 --> 03:50:27,080
 With the exception of the treatment.

3651
03:50:27,080 --> 03:50:28,080
 >> That is accurate.

3652
03:50:28,080 --> 03:50:29,080
 >> Okay.

3653
03:50:29,080 --> 03:50:30,080
 All right.

3654
03:50:30,080 --> 03:50:31,080
 Thank you.

3655
03:50:31,080 --> 03:50:32,080
 >> Excuse me.

3656
03:50:32,080 --> 03:50:33,080
 Mr. Neary is here this evening.

3657
03:50:33,080 --> 03:50:34,080
 He would like to ask a question if that's okay.

3658
03:50:34,080 --> 03:50:35,080
 >> Yes.

3659
03:50:35,080 --> 03:50:36,080
 If you could just step forward.

3660
03:50:36,080 --> 03:50:37,720
 This is a public hearing.

3661
03:50:37,720 --> 03:50:42,160
 And your name is actually on the card already, but if you could state your full name and

3662
03:50:42,160 --> 03:50:43,760
 address for the record.

3663
03:50:43,760 --> 03:50:44,760
 >> Sure.

3664
03:50:44,760 --> 03:50:47,960
 My name is Tom Neary.

3665
03:50:47,960 --> 03:50:54,400
 My address is 1700 Pacific Avenue, Dallas, Texas, 75201.

3666
03:50:54,400 --> 03:50:58,720
 So just make sure that I understand and I'm going to --

3667
03:50:58,720 --> 03:50:59,880
 >> If you could try to say yes.

3668
03:50:59,880 --> 03:51:00,880
 There you go.

3669
03:51:00,880 --> 03:51:01,880
 >> I'll try to speak loud.

3670
03:51:01,880 --> 03:51:17,440
 So what your request is is that we got this multifamily component of the SUP with 17 specific

3671
03:51:17,440 --> 03:51:22,120
 apartment units, apartment pods, is that right, 17?

3672
03:51:22,120 --> 03:51:23,120
 >> If we could try to stay --

3673
03:51:23,120 --> 03:51:24,120
 >> 16?

3674
03:51:24,120 --> 03:51:25,120
 Okay.

3675
03:51:25,120 --> 03:51:26,120
 So --

3676
03:51:26,120 --> 03:51:27,120
 >> Mr. Neary, if you could stay close to the mic.

3677
03:51:27,120 --> 03:51:36,720
 So we've got 16 components, 16 pods of apartments, and the recommendation is, and we've got in

3678
03:51:36,720 --> 03:51:43,400
 this particular rendering, 20.4 units per acre.

3679
03:51:43,400 --> 03:51:47,360
 We're looking to take that to 24 units per acre.

3680
03:51:47,360 --> 03:51:55,740
 So potentially putting in two more pods in what is a conceptual plan, not a site plan

3681
03:51:55,740 --> 03:51:58,240
 that's being approved for construction.

3682
03:51:58,240 --> 03:52:01,800
 Is that what I'm hearing?

3683
03:52:01,800 --> 03:52:08,160
 >> Again, I don't think that from a legal standpoint that we care what the numbers are.

3684
03:52:08,160 --> 03:52:11,040
 That's a staff recommendation.

3685
03:52:11,040 --> 03:52:13,520
 That's a staff review.

3686
03:52:13,520 --> 03:52:20,240
 What we are recommending is that any SUP that the City Council approves, you know, whatever

3687
03:52:20,240 --> 03:52:26,640
 conditions are associated with it, that it match the site plan.

3688
03:52:26,640 --> 03:52:31,080
 That's going to be what our recommendation is, and that it be written in determinate

3689
03:52:31,080 --> 03:52:36,920
 language and set forth what the standards are so that they're clear, they're understandable,

3690
03:52:36,920 --> 03:52:38,920
 and they're enforceable.

3691
03:52:38,920 --> 03:52:53,040
 It's not a document for negotiation, it's not a document for maneuvering about.

3692
03:52:53,040 --> 03:53:00,200
 Part of the whole point is to prevent that, is to get a determinate standard of what is

3693
03:53:00,200 --> 03:53:06,360
 permitted associated with this zoning approval.

3694
03:53:06,360 --> 03:53:15,320
 >> So if you could use the cursor, there's a point that would help the mic.

3695
03:53:15,320 --> 03:53:18,920
 Mr. Alston, can you spin the mic back around?

3696
03:53:18,920 --> 03:53:19,920
 >> Sorry.

3697
03:53:19,920 --> 03:53:22,360
 >> There we go.

3698
03:53:22,360 --> 03:53:34,480
 >> So if we just made this 17 acres at 24 units per acre, that would be acceptable?

3699
03:53:34,480 --> 03:53:41,200
 >> Not from the council's perspective but from this group's perspective.

3700
03:53:41,200 --> 03:53:47,120
 So if we just ask for a 24 unit versus a 20.4 unit.

3701
03:53:47,120 --> 03:53:49,640
 >> It does not exceed the requirements of the DDC.

3702
03:53:49,640 --> 03:53:50,640
 >> Okay.

3703
03:53:50,640 --> 03:53:59,820
 >> So it's within the allowable -- >> Tom, I think what they're -- what Mr. Drake's

3704
03:53:59,820 --> 03:54:07,920
 trying to communicate is when we go before the council and if it all comes down to a

3705
03:54:07,920 --> 03:54:13,400
 maximum of 20 buildings on the site, we need to have a concept plan that shows 20 buildings

3706
03:54:13,400 --> 03:54:15,060
 on the site.

3707
03:54:15,060 --> 03:54:22,200
 We can come down from there with our final plans and if it shows that we're asking for

3708
03:54:22,200 --> 03:54:32,960
 65% maximum coverage and our buildings are at 62 or 63 or 64%, then we could put a limit

3709
03:54:32,960 --> 03:54:33,960
 of 65%.

3710
03:54:33,960 --> 03:54:39,240
 But if we come in with 50% coverage and ask for 65, that doesn't match up.

3711
03:54:39,240 --> 03:54:43,080
 And I'm talking about the documentation that we finally end up with not --

3712
03:54:43,080 --> 03:54:44,080
 >> Yeah.

3713
03:54:44,080 --> 03:54:48,200
 But I guess my question, are we talking about the math or are we talking about the number

3714
03:54:48,200 --> 03:54:49,200
 of units?

3715
03:54:49,200 --> 03:54:50,200
 >> Both.

3716
03:54:50,200 --> 03:54:51,200
 >> Both.

3717
03:54:51,200 --> 03:54:56,160
 >> So both graphically exhibit the math that goes with it.

3718
03:54:56,160 --> 03:54:59,680
 >> And what you propose to council may not be what council approves.

3719
03:54:59,680 --> 03:55:00,680
 >> Exactly.

3720
03:55:00,680 --> 03:55:05,800
 >> They may approve something different in which case they will need to match what the

3721
03:55:05,800 --> 03:55:07,280
 council ultimately approves.

3722
03:55:07,280 --> 03:55:14,720
 >> I think Tom's is trying to come to an understanding of what we finally need to mesh together.

3723
03:55:14,720 --> 03:55:19,120
 >> I'd always envision this as a conceptual plan and not a site plan per site.

3724
03:55:19,120 --> 03:55:25,520
 >> I think that's where we've kind of changed horses now.

3725
03:55:25,520 --> 03:55:27,400
 >> That's how we'll.

3726
03:55:27,400 --> 03:55:28,400
 >> Okay.

3727
03:55:28,400 --> 03:55:29,400
 >> All right.

3728
03:55:29,400 --> 03:55:32,160
 So trying to get us a little bit back on track.

3729
03:55:32,160 --> 03:55:35,520
 The applicant has given his presentation and it is a public hearing.

3730
03:55:35,520 --> 03:55:41,280
 Do we have any more questions for Mr. Allison at this point?

3731
03:55:41,280 --> 03:55:44,460
 Perfect.

3732
03:55:44,460 --> 03:55:45,520
 This is a public hearing.

3733
03:55:45,520 --> 03:55:48,920
 If anyone's wishing to speak on the item, you're more than welcome to do so.

3734
03:55:48,920 --> 03:55:49,920
 Okay.

3735
03:55:49,920 --> 03:56:02,080
 Seeing no more discussion, I will close the public hearing and open the floor for discussion,

3736
03:56:02,080 --> 03:56:03,080
 motion questions.

3737
03:56:03,080 --> 03:56:04,080
 Commissioner Smith.

3738
03:56:04,080 --> 03:56:05,080
 >> Thank you, Chair.

3739
03:56:05,080 --> 03:56:14,120
 I want a motion for approval based off of applicants requested recommendations of 20,

3740
03:56:14,120 --> 03:56:20,200
 maximum of 20 buildings, maximum of 24 units per acre.

3741
03:56:20,200 --> 03:56:23,360
 The garages as mentioned that were already in staff, and I guess the only other thing

3742
03:56:23,360 --> 03:56:30,400
 that was different from staff recommendations was max lot coverage of 65% and landscape

3743
03:56:30,400 --> 03:56:31,400
 of 35%.

3744
03:56:31,400 --> 03:56:43,000
 And then all other conditions that included the text dot, the landscaping, the elevations

3745
03:56:43,000 --> 03:56:50,360
 as well as the façade and everything else that's in the backup for the staff's recommendations

3746
03:56:50,360 --> 03:57:00,000
 and conditions to be in my motion in a matching site plan whenever it goes to city council.

3747
03:57:00,000 --> 03:57:01,000
 >> Preliminary site plan.

3748
03:57:01,000 --> 03:57:02,000
 >> Preliminary site plan.

3749
03:57:02,000 --> 03:57:03,000
 >> Gosh dang.

3750
03:57:03,000 --> 03:57:04,000
 >> We'll perfect it.

3751
03:57:04,000 --> 03:57:05,000
 We have a motion.

3752
03:57:05,000 --> 03:57:09,320
 Do we have a second on the motion?

3753
03:57:09,320 --> 03:57:11,680
 We'll need a second before we go to discussion.

3754
03:57:11,680 --> 03:57:20,520
 >> Let me ask for just a clarification, that the parking also follow the number of units

3755
03:57:20,520 --> 03:57:21,520
 that will be increased.

3756
03:57:21,520 --> 03:57:28,520
 >> Yes, correct, as is stated in the staff's recommendations, yeah.

3757
03:57:28,520 --> 03:57:29,520
 >> Commissioner Pernetta.

3758
03:57:29,520 --> 03:57:30,520
 >> Second.

3759
03:57:30,520 --> 03:57:31,520
 [ Laughter ]

3760
03:57:31,520 --> 03:57:32,520
 >> The confidence is overwhelming.

3761
03:57:32,520 --> 03:57:33,520
 [ Laughter ]

3762
03:57:33,520 --> 03:57:34,520
 >> Do we have to repeat the vote?

3763
03:57:34,520 --> 03:57:35,520
 >> No, you do not.

3764
03:57:35,520 --> 03:57:36,520
 >> Okay, thank you.

3765
03:57:36,520 --> 03:57:37,520
 >> So we have a first and a second.

3766
03:57:37,520 --> 03:57:44,960
 Any discussion, Commissioner Beck?

3767
03:57:44,960 --> 03:57:45,960
 >> Thank you, Chair.

3768
03:57:45,960 --> 03:57:48,880
 And I've had to change my notes around here a little bit.

3769
03:57:48,880 --> 03:57:53,800
 If this was really nothing more than we're changing a few numbers and everything, I wouldn't

3770
03:57:53,800 --> 03:57:54,800
 have any problem.

3771
03:57:54,800 --> 03:57:58,400
 If we're dealing strictly with commercial property here, I wouldn't have any problem

3772
03:57:58,400 --> 03:57:59,400
 with it.

3773
03:57:59,400 --> 03:58:03,160
 But we're talking about living units where people are going to live and in close proximity

3774
03:58:03,160 --> 03:58:04,160
 to gas wells.

3775
03:58:04,160 --> 03:58:06,160
 So I'm having a problem with it.

3776
03:58:06,160 --> 03:58:10,560
 And what's being proposed does indeed serve -- and I'm going to read from my notes here

3777
03:58:10,560 --> 03:58:14,200
 so I can articulate better, so bear with me.

3778
03:58:14,200 --> 03:58:18,720
 What's being proposed here does serve as an ideal transitional develop between the single

3779
03:58:18,720 --> 03:58:23,080
 family residents on the south and east side and the commercial development north of it.

3780
03:58:23,080 --> 03:58:27,920
 This area along the I-35 front roads is well suited for commercial interests as our comprehensive

3781
03:58:27,920 --> 03:58:30,080
 plan and future land use map indicate.

3782
03:58:30,080 --> 03:58:34,240
 However, I'm troubled once again we're building developments that will draw greater traffic

3783
03:58:34,240 --> 03:58:38,920
 there before the city has made accommodations to widen the streets that this traffic will

3784
03:58:38,920 --> 03:58:39,920
 flow through.

3785
03:58:39,920 --> 03:58:43,360
 Even though city staff have indicated that perimeter street improvements along Winter

3786
03:58:43,360 --> 03:58:47,960
 Drive are expected, our experience too often has shown this process moves at a much slower

3787
03:58:47,960 --> 03:58:51,520
 rate than residential development does.

3788
03:58:51,520 --> 03:58:56,840
 But I am most concerned that the current design of this development poses a problem for people

3789
03:58:56,840 --> 03:59:02,680
 like me who believe any residential dwelling in close proximity to active gas and oil wells

3790
03:59:02,680 --> 03:59:07,780
 poses greater health and safety risk than official estimates from industry friendly local and

3791
03:59:07,780 --> 03:59:10,000
 state governments that will let us believe.

3792
03:59:10,000 --> 03:59:15,120
 Though current and future setbacks will stay at the 250 reverse setback limit, that's fine,

3793
03:59:15,120 --> 03:59:19,960
 but to me that's still too close for comfort to the proposed development with its numerous

3794
03:59:19,960 --> 03:59:22,080
 multifamily units.

3795
03:59:22,080 --> 03:59:27,760
 It should be our greatest concern as public servants that allows any gas well being closer

3796
03:59:27,760 --> 03:59:34,320
 than 1,000 feet to a dwelling where children in their early formative years, the elderly

3797
03:59:34,320 --> 03:59:39,760
 with their weaker immune system, and pregnant women could reside, and I'll explain why.

3798
03:59:39,760 --> 03:59:43,780
 Since the state took Denton's right of way to ban fracking within the city limits back

3799
03:59:43,780 --> 03:59:51,080
 in 2015 with HB40 and established some minimum setback distances, new studies have shown

3800
03:59:51,080 --> 03:59:56,760
 that those distances are likely inadequate to prevent health risks that affect neurological,

3801
03:59:56,760 --> 04:00:00,440
 hematological, and developmental health.

3802
04:00:00,440 --> 04:00:04,080
 Researchers at the Colorado School of Public Health, Boulder County Public Health, the University

3803
04:00:04,080 --> 04:00:08,920
 of Colorado Boulder, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the University

3804
04:00:08,920 --> 04:00:14,680
 of California Irvine have found that populations living within 500 feet of an oil and gas facility

3805
04:00:14,680 --> 04:00:20,720
 could experience these health effects from inhalation exposures to benzene and alkanes.

3806
04:00:20,720 --> 04:00:24,880
 According to a study published recently in the journal Environmental Science and Technology,

3807
04:00:24,880 --> 04:00:31,200
 the cancer risk estimate of 8.3 per 10,000 people for populations living within 500 feet

3808
04:00:31,200 --> 04:00:38,160
 of an oil and gas facility exceeded the U.S. EPA's 1 in 10,000 upper threshold.

3809
04:00:38,160 --> 04:00:42,880
 And heading closer to home, studies in Pennsylvania and Texas found associations between proximity

3810
04:00:42,880 --> 04:00:49,800
 to oil and gas wells with fetal death, low birth weight, preterm birth, chronic rhinosinusitis,

3811
04:00:49,800 --> 04:00:55,240
 asthma, fatigue, and migraines, and though the researchers also noted that air pollutants

3812
04:00:55,240 --> 04:00:59,560
 from other sources can contribute to these elevated risks, they stress that because risk

3813
04:00:59,560 --> 04:01:04,320
 increases in proximity to wells, mitigation strategies should focus on controlling emissions

3814
04:01:04,320 --> 04:01:06,440
 from oil and gas facilities.

3815
04:01:06,440 --> 04:01:10,500
 So regardless of how this agenda item moves forward, I think before any of us decide to

3816
04:01:10,500 --> 04:01:14,920
 allow any dwelling units to be built that house children, the elderly, and pregnant

3817
04:01:14,920 --> 04:01:19,600
 women, we should know and understand what mitigation strategies are in place that focus

3818
04:01:19,600 --> 04:01:22,720
 on controlling emissions from oil and gas facilities.

3819
04:01:22,720 --> 04:01:27,800
 It should also be required that a more easily -- never mind, let me submit that because

3820
04:01:27,800 --> 04:01:32,480
 we do have a good road that accesses wells for first responders.

3821
04:01:32,480 --> 04:01:38,160
 But I'm hesitant, therefore, at this time to approve this SUP because these variables

3822
04:01:38,160 --> 04:01:43,200
 make conditions uncertain to those people who will reside in the 336 apartments.

3823
04:01:43,200 --> 04:01:48,560
 The DENT development code states that an SUP shall only be granted if all the following

3824
04:01:48,560 --> 04:01:55,000
 conditions have been met, and the first one that comes up states that "that the specific

3825
04:01:55,000 --> 04:01:59,400
 use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property

3826
04:01:59,400 --> 04:02:05,120
 nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity."

3827
04:02:05,120 --> 04:02:10,980
 It is my contention, based on the health and safety risks from gas wells, less than those

3828
04:02:10,980 --> 04:02:18,320
 distances that scientific research has suggested are inadequate, that this SUP should be denied

3829
04:02:18,320 --> 04:02:22,840
 because it will not be compatible with and could be injurious to the use and enjoyment

3830
04:02:22,840 --> 04:02:27,680
 of other property and could significantly diminish or impair property values within

3831
04:02:27,680 --> 04:02:30,400
 the immediate vicinity.

3832
04:02:30,400 --> 04:02:35,480
 Even with the more intense Type D buffer offered by the developer on the east side between

3833
04:02:35,480 --> 04:02:40,520
 gas wells and single-family homes, it does little to prevent the potential health and

3834
04:02:40,520 --> 04:02:42,400
 safety risks I mentioned here.

3835
04:02:42,400 --> 04:02:45,680
 Therefore, deny approval of this SUP.

3836
04:02:45,680 --> 04:02:46,680
 Thank you.

3837
04:02:46,680 --> 04:02:49,920
 Thank you, Commissioner Beck.

3838
04:02:49,920 --> 04:02:55,840
 We have a first and a second, is there any other discussion on the motion?

3839
04:02:55,840 --> 04:02:57,360
 Commissioner Ellis.

3840
04:02:57,360 --> 04:03:00,360
 Thank you, Chair.

3841
04:03:00,360 --> 04:03:06,640
 I really thought that this was not going to be as complicated as it got, and I really

3842
04:03:06,640 --> 04:03:11,640
 have a problem moving something along to council, recommending something to council that I don't

3843
04:03:11,640 --> 04:03:15,200
 really know what it looks like, and that was the whole reason for staff putting this in

3844
04:03:15,200 --> 04:03:21,840
 here in the first place, so something doesn't become something that we didn't mean to approve,

3845
04:03:21,840 --> 04:03:27,120
 and you know, it's okay, the plus or minus that they've got built in here, but now we're

3846
04:03:27,120 --> 04:03:31,920
 going plus or minus, I don't know, 20% maybe more of what the conceptual site plan shows.

3847
04:03:31,920 --> 04:03:37,080
 I mean, that could look considerably different than what we're attempting to move along here

3848
04:03:37,080 --> 04:03:39,920
 to council, and I have a real problem with that.

3849
04:03:39,920 --> 04:03:44,360
 As Richard mentioned, I don't like to see something that we recommended and then I sit

3850
04:03:44,360 --> 04:03:47,920
 in the city council meeting, it looks nothing like what we recommended.

3851
04:03:47,920 --> 04:03:53,400
 What are we even here for if things are changing as we move along?

3852
04:03:53,400 --> 04:03:56,280
 So I don't know.

3853
04:03:56,280 --> 04:04:01,440
 To me, a specific use permit, yes, is for the use, but it should also encompass what

3854
04:04:01,440 --> 04:04:03,520
 is going to be in that use.

3855
04:04:03,520 --> 04:04:10,160
 It should look something like that, and I don't know, I'm uncomfortable with now that

3856
04:04:10,160 --> 04:04:17,760
 we've changed these things around, and I'm certain staff is uncomfortable with it.

3857
04:04:17,760 --> 04:04:19,720
 I got a couple thoughts.

3858
04:04:19,720 --> 04:04:23,160
 I won't be as eloquent as Commissioner Beck, I'm sure.

3859
04:04:23,160 --> 04:04:30,920
 First, I think the direction the city's going in and memorializing things from the conceptual

3860
04:04:30,920 --> 04:04:34,440
 preliminary site plan is the right direction.

3861
04:04:34,440 --> 04:04:35,920
 I think that is a good thing.

3862
04:04:35,920 --> 04:04:42,240
 It's a new thing to the P and Z and to council, but I'm for it, like Commissioner Elf said.

3863
04:04:42,240 --> 04:04:51,160
 It helps us as a commission best understand in as large a picture as we can what's being

3864
04:04:51,160 --> 04:04:54,800
 put forth to city council, and when they look at it and they see our recommendation, it

3865
04:04:54,800 --> 04:04:59,200
 has some meat behind it because we know what we're actually recommending.

3866
04:04:59,200 --> 04:05:10,480
 That being said, this project is so under the rights that it would have, and I've expressed

3867
04:05:10,480 --> 04:05:15,240
 over and over again the fact that no one can build an apartment without an SUP in Denton.

3868
04:05:15,240 --> 04:05:19,200
 No zoning class that I think of, that might be one, but if someone wants to build an apartment

3869
04:05:19,200 --> 04:05:23,440
 complex in Denton, they have to go through the SUP process, and I've expressed my frustration

3870
04:05:23,440 --> 04:05:24,440
 with that.

3871
04:05:24,440 --> 04:05:29,160
 This is the only thing they can do, and it's not an opportunity for us to then say, well,

3872
04:05:29,160 --> 04:05:30,160
 now we can deny it.

3873
04:05:30,160 --> 04:05:33,800
 When Mr. Allison brought up a good point, you can go build a hotel on it right now, and

3874
04:05:33,800 --> 04:05:37,200
 it doesn't have to come to us, but because we want to put multi-family, it has to come

3875
04:05:37,200 --> 04:05:43,400
 to us, and now we have this unique opportunity to get in this odd negotiation and denial

3876
04:05:43,400 --> 04:05:49,280
 when all the code from 80% lot coverage to building height to density, they're under

3877
04:05:49,280 --> 04:05:55,960
 it by well over 10% to number of buildings, it just is so far under what they have the

3878
04:05:55,960 --> 04:05:58,000
 right to build if it wasn't an apartment.

3879
04:05:58,000 --> 04:06:05,960
 And so I think the right attitude was projected in saying, hey, this is what you think you're

3880
04:06:05,960 --> 04:06:06,960
 going to build.

3881
04:06:06,960 --> 04:06:07,960
 Let's build something very close to it.

3882
04:06:07,960 --> 04:06:09,020
 I get that.

3883
04:06:09,020 --> 04:06:14,240
 I think even if they put four more buildings on this property, which would in essence raise

3884
04:06:14,240 --> 04:06:18,440
 their density to the 24, it will look kind of the same.

3885
04:06:18,440 --> 04:06:22,480
 They're still limited to the 17 acres, so buildings get restructured.

3886
04:06:22,480 --> 04:06:23,840
 We know what the buildings are going to look like.

3887
04:06:23,840 --> 04:06:26,320
 It has to be agreed upon.

3888
04:06:26,320 --> 04:06:28,960
 It's already in there what they're going to look like.

3889
04:06:28,960 --> 04:06:33,200
 All that being said, I fully support this project going forward with the motion presented

3890
04:06:33,200 --> 04:06:40,280
 by Commissioner Smith and seconded, knowing that I feel comfortable with what I'm recommending

3891
04:06:40,280 --> 04:06:41,280
 to counsel.

3892
04:06:41,280 --> 04:06:47,680
 I've seen enough for me to feel comfortable moving forward with the knowledge that they

3893
04:06:47,680 --> 04:06:52,320
 have a lot of work to do before it gets to counsel to come up with -- it doesn't look

3894
04:06:52,320 --> 04:06:54,880
 like it's easy to do.

3895
04:06:54,880 --> 04:06:57,620
 So that's my two cents.

3896
04:06:57,620 --> 04:07:01,280
 Before I call to a vote, I definitely want to see if there's any other discussions to

3897
04:07:01,280 --> 04:07:02,280
 be had.

3898
04:07:02,280 --> 04:07:03,280
 Commissioner Ellis.

3899
04:07:03,280 --> 04:07:08,840
 Just a couple more thoughts, and I understand about adding a handful more units, and I can

3900
04:07:08,840 --> 04:07:09,840
 deal with that.

3901
04:07:09,840 --> 04:07:13,680
 Lot coverage is changing quite a bit, and we absolutely don't -- what is that going

3902
04:07:13,680 --> 04:07:15,560
 to look like on there?

3903
04:07:15,560 --> 04:07:19,080
 You don't really know what that's going to look like, going to 65 from 49?

3904
04:07:19,080 --> 04:07:24,640
 I know it's going to be less than the 80% code.

3905
04:07:24,640 --> 04:07:27,480
 But I do know that.

3906
04:07:27,480 --> 04:07:29,760
 Fair enough.

3907
04:07:29,760 --> 04:07:32,760
 Any other discussion?

3908
04:07:32,760 --> 04:07:33,760
 Commissioner Cole.

3909
04:07:33,760 --> 04:07:38,520
 I share Commissioner Beck's health concerns with the close proximity of those gas wells

3910
04:07:38,520 --> 04:07:48,680
 as well, but if -- there will be no development in West Denton if we're, you know, we're held

3911
04:07:48,680 --> 04:07:49,680
 to that.

3912
04:07:49,680 --> 04:07:52,040
 I mean, there will be none.

3913
04:07:52,040 --> 04:07:57,160
 Because that's where the majority of these wells are drilled.

3914
04:07:57,160 --> 04:08:00,980
 But you know, I mean, that's awfully close.

3915
04:08:00,980 --> 04:08:02,640
 It's awfully close.

3916
04:08:02,640 --> 04:08:11,160
 But I mean, there will be no development if we're held to that.

3917
04:08:11,160 --> 04:08:19,880
 And I mean, I live -- a football throw from a gas well, I have a water -- I'm on a water

3918
04:08:19,880 --> 04:08:23,240
 well, so I'm concerned.

3919
04:08:23,240 --> 04:08:35,080
 You know, if that thing goes, 250 is not enough, you know, if it's a severe blowout.

3920
04:08:35,080 --> 04:08:41,920
 But you know, this thing is so muddled up that I really don't understand what the hell

3921
04:08:41,920 --> 04:08:45,800
 we're voting for, to be honest with you.

3922
04:08:45,800 --> 04:08:53,560
 And so on that, I'm going to have -- I mean, I'm going to have to be a no.

3923
04:08:53,560 --> 04:09:02,280
 I mean, you know.

3924
04:09:02,280 --> 04:09:04,120
 Commissioner Beck.

3925
04:09:04,120 --> 04:09:10,040
 And I appreciate the sentiment expressed there, Commissioner Cole, and I'm not talking about

3926
04:09:10,040 --> 04:09:11,040
 all development.

3927
04:09:11,040 --> 04:09:14,960
 I'm just talking about where people have to live and raise their kids and may have health

3928
04:09:14,960 --> 04:09:15,960
 issues.

3929
04:09:15,960 --> 04:09:20,040
 We've already approved development close to gas wells that were commercial in nature.

3930
04:09:20,040 --> 04:09:23,720
 And if this was purely a commercial development, I wouldn't have any problem with it.

3931
04:09:23,720 --> 04:09:27,520
 I wouldn't have any problem with the fact that the number has changed because it stays

3932
04:09:27,520 --> 04:09:32,240
 within the parameters set within EDC, as Commissioner Smith pointed out.

3933
04:09:32,240 --> 04:09:38,240
 But my concern is always going to be if we're going to talk about living units coming in

3934
04:09:38,240 --> 04:09:44,920
 close proximity to these gas wells, that new information is showing that they are dangerous.

3935
04:09:44,920 --> 04:09:47,360
 They raise the potential of health and safety risks.

3936
04:09:47,360 --> 04:09:51,120
 Even when they're kept down the road, if these leak and these guys are out of business, who

3937
04:09:51,120 --> 04:09:52,120
 takes care of that?

3938
04:09:52,120 --> 04:09:53,120
 That comes back on us, too.

3939
04:09:53,120 --> 04:09:54,920
 So it's not all development.

3940
04:09:54,920 --> 04:10:03,060
 It's just living -- where people have got to live and raise their kids.

3941
04:10:03,060 --> 04:10:07,720
 Commissioner Smith, can I ask for a clarification of the motion?

3942
04:10:07,720 --> 04:10:13,060
 The staff recommendation is to limit their ability to variance it greater than or less

3943
04:10:13,060 --> 04:10:14,840
 than 5 percent.

3944
04:10:14,840 --> 04:10:20,880
 Are you wanting the applicant's recommendations to abide by that variance or to be a maximum

3945
04:10:20,880 --> 04:10:22,640
 limit on the project?

3946
04:10:22,640 --> 04:10:29,260
 My specific motion should have been phrased as I wanted to keep staff recommendation as

3947
04:10:29,260 --> 04:10:32,940
 is except for these three following things.

3948
04:10:32,940 --> 04:10:38,520
 The change on item 2 from 16 buildings is max to 20 buildings is max.

3949
04:10:38,520 --> 04:10:47,680
 The change in item 3 of the density of 20.48 units per acre to 24 units per acre and then

3950
04:10:47,680 --> 04:10:53,280
 the changes in item 5 saying that the site plan of a lot coverage can be moved from 49

3951
04:10:53,280 --> 04:10:57,640
 percent to 65 percent and landscape down to 35 percent.

3952
04:10:57,640 --> 04:11:02,440
 And then all other recommendations and conditions that have been made by staff to remain the

3953
04:11:02,440 --> 04:11:03,440
 same.

3954
04:11:03,440 --> 04:11:06,440
 Thank you for that clarification.

3955
04:11:06,440 --> 04:11:16,680
 So it's kind of funny that you said that with regard to -- I don't know what we're voting

3956
04:11:16,680 --> 04:11:17,680
 for.

3957
04:11:17,680 --> 04:11:24,760
 And when I say this, I don't know, this is probably more for people watching in posterity

3958
04:11:24,760 --> 04:11:26,560
 than the moment right now.

3959
04:11:26,560 --> 04:11:31,560
 I don't know if it was clear early on in the work session when I was asking questions about

3960
04:11:31,560 --> 04:11:38,920
 the gas wells and mentioning having a kid with a breathing condition, I was always going

3961
04:11:38,920 --> 04:11:43,600
 to have trouble voting on this one because the fact of the matter is I support development

3962
04:11:43,600 --> 04:11:54,000
 in Denton and I want more housing in Denton.

3963
04:11:54,000 --> 04:11:59,880
 I can't vote for this because as much as I asked questions about whether or not these

3964
04:11:59,880 --> 04:12:09,760
 wells would ever actually come back in to production, and there was some nice reassurance

3965
04:12:09,760 --> 04:12:19,560
 that it would take a lot to have that one come in, I have difficulty with this.

3966
04:12:19,560 --> 04:12:26,660
 And I think going forward as a board, as a commission, basically discussing how we develop

3967
04:12:26,660 --> 04:12:31,720
 Denton going forward, I don't know how we do, especially if we go west.

3968
04:12:31,720 --> 04:12:34,640
 Anyway, I just wanted to say that.

3969
04:12:34,640 --> 04:12:35,640
 Thank you.

3970
04:12:35,640 --> 04:12:38,600
 >> Clarification, you are withdrawing your second.

3971
04:12:38,600 --> 04:12:45,400
 >> Well, my second was to put this to a vote, really, not to -- my second was not let's

3972
04:12:45,400 --> 04:12:47,960
 approve it, it was just like let's move this to a vote.

3973
04:12:47,960 --> 04:12:48,960
 >> That stands.

3974
04:12:48,960 --> 04:12:49,960
 >> Yes.

3975
04:12:49,960 --> 04:12:50,960
 >> Okay.

3976
04:12:50,960 --> 04:12:51,960
 Commissioner Beck.

3977
04:12:51,960 --> 04:12:58,380
 >> I asked if Commissioner Perdida would consider removing his second for this.

3978
04:12:58,380 --> 04:13:00,000
 >> He can legally do that, correct?

3979
04:13:00,000 --> 04:13:01,000
 >> Yeah.

3980
04:13:01,000 --> 04:13:06,400
 So my understanding is that my second wasn't an approval, my second was to take this to

3981
04:13:06,400 --> 04:13:07,400
 a vote.

3982
04:13:07,400 --> 04:13:08,400
 >> That's right.

3983
04:13:08,400 --> 04:13:09,400
 >> Okay.

3984
04:13:09,400 --> 04:13:10,400
 >> Thank you.

3985
04:13:10,400 --> 04:13:11,400
 >> You can vote against it even though you motioned for it.

3986
04:13:11,400 --> 04:13:12,400
 >> Okay.

3987
04:13:12,400 --> 04:13:15,920
 >> We're going to stall here for a second.

3988
04:13:15,920 --> 04:13:18,040
 >> Chair, just a minute.

3989
04:13:18,040 --> 04:13:19,040
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

3990
04:13:19,040 --> 04:13:20,040
 >> Thank you.

3991
04:13:20,040 --> 04:13:24,640
 >> Do you clarify what you asked Commissioner Smith, is he removing the plus or minus 5

3992
04:13:24,640 --> 04:13:25,640
 in those numbers?

3993
04:13:25,640 --> 04:13:26,640
 >> He was --

3994
04:13:26,640 --> 04:13:37,680
 >> You're leaving the plus or minus 5 and adding the numbers from Mr. Allison, understood?

3995
04:13:37,680 --> 04:13:42,800
 >> Just to make sure, with the plus or minus 5, that would not be applied such a way that

3996
04:13:42,800 --> 04:13:45,160
 fall below the code requirements, correct?

3997
04:13:45,160 --> 04:13:46,160
 >> Correct.

3998
04:13:46,160 --> 04:13:47,160
 Absolutely.

3999
04:13:47,160 --> 04:13:48,160
 >> Okay.

4000
04:13:48,160 --> 04:13:53,360
 So if it's okay with the commission, and we can just do this by nodding, I trust we'll

4001
04:13:53,360 --> 04:13:56,600
 do an informal vote, would it be okay if we took a recess?

4002
04:13:56,600 --> 04:14:01,140
 I think there's some conversations being had to see if there's a solution to maybe better

4003
04:14:01,140 --> 04:14:03,760
 clarify what can happen tonight.

4004
04:14:03,760 --> 04:14:07,680
 Would be okay taking 5 to 10 minutes and just take a breather on this?

4005
04:14:07,680 --> 04:14:08,680
 Okay.

4006
04:14:08,680 --> 04:14:13,920
 Then with that, I'm going to close the regular session at 917 and we'll reconvene in 5 to

4007
04:14:13,920 --> 04:14:15,920
 10 minutes.

4008
04:14:15,920 --> 04:14:19,200
 >> Thank you for providing us that recess.

4009
04:14:19,200 --> 04:14:21,840
 It is now 927.

4010
04:14:21,840 --> 04:14:24,200
 We'll open the regular session back.

4011
04:14:24,200 --> 04:14:30,000
 And I'll invite Haley to provide an update of what -- where we stand right now with the

4012
04:14:30,000 --> 04:14:31,000
 applicant.

4013
04:14:31,000 --> 04:14:32,000
 >> Yes.

4014
04:14:32,000 --> 04:14:35,280
 So during the recess, I was able to speak with the applicant and they would like to

4015
04:14:35,280 --> 04:14:40,560
 request that this item be continued to November 28th so that they have the time in between

4016
04:14:40,560 --> 04:14:45,480
 to update their concept plan and bring back a plan that would be consistent with the conditions

4017
04:14:45,480 --> 04:14:51,520
 that they recommended tonight so that everyone knows what would be voted on.

4018
04:14:51,520 --> 04:14:52,520
 >> Commissioner Smith.

4019
04:14:52,520 --> 04:14:58,560
 >> I'd like to amend my motion to -- from approval to motion to table to date certain

4020
04:14:58,560 --> 04:14:59,560
 November 28th.

4021
04:14:59,560 --> 04:15:04,960
 >> Is that a motion amendment or is that a withdrawal and remotion?

4022
04:15:04,960 --> 04:15:09,580
 >> I think we know what he meant.

4023
04:15:09,580 --> 04:15:10,580
 >> Thanks, Jerry.

4024
04:15:10,580 --> 04:15:11,580
 [ Laughter ]

4025
04:15:11,580 --> 04:15:12,680
 >> I'm not sure.

4026
04:15:12,680 --> 04:15:16,600
 >> You would like to -- the motion is to table to the November 28th.

4027
04:15:16,600 --> 04:15:17,600
 >> Correct.

4028
04:15:17,600 --> 04:15:18,600
 Exactly.

4029
04:15:18,600 --> 04:15:19,600
 >> Okay.

4030
04:15:19,600 --> 04:15:20,600
 We have a first on the floor.

4031
04:15:20,600 --> 04:15:21,600
 Commissioner Ellis.

4032
04:15:21,600 --> 04:15:22,600
 >> Second.

4033
04:15:22,600 --> 04:15:23,600
 >> We have a first and a second.

4034
04:15:23,600 --> 04:15:24,600
 Is there any discussion?

4035
04:15:24,600 --> 04:15:26,680
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote by show of hands.

4036
04:15:26,680 --> 04:15:29,200
 All in favor for tabling?

4037
04:15:29,200 --> 04:15:30,960
 Opposed?

4038
04:15:30,960 --> 04:15:31,960
 Motion carries 6-0.

4039
04:15:31,960 --> 04:15:39,980
 >> Our next presentation will be a lot shorter than the other ones.

4040
04:15:39,980 --> 04:15:40,980
 >> All right.

4041
04:15:40,980 --> 04:15:41,980
 Guaranteed.

4042
04:15:41,980 --> 04:15:46,200
 [ Laughter ]

4043
04:15:46,200 --> 04:15:55,040
 Next item is item 5F, DCA 18-0005B.

4044
04:15:55,040 --> 04:15:57,840
 I'll open the public hearing and invite Julie for presentation.

4045
04:15:57,840 --> 04:16:00,960
 Julie, you got out early last time, so we kept you here tonight.

4046
04:16:00,960 --> 04:16:01,960
 >> I know.

4047
04:16:01,960 --> 04:16:02,960
 [ Inaudible ]

4048
04:16:02,960 --> 04:16:03,960
 >> That's true.

4049
04:16:03,960 --> 04:16:08,960
 I did get off easy.

4050
04:16:08,960 --> 04:16:17,400
 >> All right, I'm Julie Wyatt, senior planner with the City of Denton, and we'll go over

4051
04:16:17,400 --> 04:16:18,400
 this briefly.

4052
04:16:18,400 --> 04:16:19,600
 I know we talked about it at work session.

4053
04:16:19,600 --> 04:16:21,960
 This is DCA 18-5.

4054
04:16:21,960 --> 04:16:26,240
 The request is to consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding a text amendment

4055
04:16:26,240 --> 04:16:30,820
 to the Denton Development Code to address the Planning and Zoning Commission procedures

4056
04:16:30,820 --> 04:16:33,840
 as they relate to tie votes.

4057
04:16:33,840 --> 04:16:40,920
 As you're all aware, this is in response to a case that came forward earlier this year

4058
04:16:40,920 --> 04:16:45,460
 that resulted in a tie vote, which meant that that case could not move forward to the City

4059
04:16:45,460 --> 04:16:53,560
 Council per the current code of ordinances requirements.

4060
04:16:53,560 --> 04:17:01,920
 So in September, City Council looked at this issue and had four options that they could

4061
04:17:01,920 --> 04:17:06,560
 choose in order to address the issue, and the one that they chose was an amendment to

4062
04:17:06,560 --> 04:17:14,680
 the DDC to address only P&Z rules to allow cases to move forward as a denial in instances

4063
04:17:14,680 --> 04:17:15,680
 of tie votes.

4064
04:17:15,680 --> 04:17:23,360
 So they felt like that was the most conservative approach, most targeted approach to the situation.

4065
04:17:23,360 --> 04:17:27,120
 Denial recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission typically require a super

4066
04:17:27,120 --> 04:17:34,600
 majority vote at City Council in order to approve, and since the tie vote isn't a majority

4067
04:17:34,600 --> 04:17:39,740
 decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council felt that the super majority

4068
04:17:39,740 --> 04:17:47,720
 provision wasn't needed in this case, and so their direction to staff was to not include

4069
04:17:47,720 --> 04:17:51,220
 that super majority requirement.

4070
04:17:51,220 --> 04:17:57,360
 This was considered by this Planning and Zoning Commission in October, and the direction at

4071
04:17:57,360 --> 04:18:01,520
 that time was it was just too broad because this was really for instances when there was

4072
04:18:01,520 --> 04:18:06,200
 a long-term absence or a recusal, and that we wanted to make sure we really captured

4073
04:18:06,200 --> 04:18:16,660
 what that situation was instead of a broad application of the original language.

4074
04:18:16,660 --> 04:18:24,040
 So there is a revised language, and that would be applicable to those instances where there's

4075
04:18:24,040 --> 04:18:29,240
 either a rezoning or a zoning assignment, a specific use permit, a special exception

4076
04:18:29,240 --> 04:18:35,480
 expansion, an alternative ESA or zoning text amendment, or a criteria manual amendment.

4077
04:18:35,480 --> 04:18:40,700
 Not applicable in this would be things that the Planning and Zoning Commission approves,

4078
04:18:40,700 --> 04:18:46,800
 so that would be something like a plat in ADP or a subdivision variance, comprehensive

4079
04:18:46,800 --> 04:18:53,920
 plan text or map amendment, and then a new development code, wholesale new development

4080
04:18:53,920 --> 04:18:54,920
 code.

4081
04:18:54,920 --> 04:18:56,960
 So that wouldn't apply in those cases.

4082
04:18:56,960 --> 04:19:03,360
 The language essentially focuses on process due to Planning and Zoning Commission's concerns.

4083
04:19:03,360 --> 04:19:08,560
 Less about the actual reason for the recusal, but just to make sure that we have certainty

4084
04:19:08,560 --> 04:19:10,020
 in the process.

4085
04:19:10,020 --> 04:19:14,160
 So if, for instance, there are six voting members and there's a tie vote, that would

4086
04:19:14,160 --> 04:19:20,440
 be carried over to the next scheduled meeting to give PNZ another bite at the apple.

4087
04:19:20,440 --> 04:19:26,560
 And then if there's still six voting members remaining and of tie vote results, it could

4088
04:19:26,560 --> 04:19:32,180
 then move forward to City Council unless the Planning and Zoning Commission during their

4089
04:19:32,180 --> 04:19:40,520
 meeting votes to postpone that item for another hearing.

4090
04:19:40,520 --> 04:19:44,120
 So that language is in your backup and it's listed here.

4091
04:19:44,120 --> 04:19:51,520
 It essentially, if a majority voting, if the majority vote fails to either recommend the

4092
04:19:51,520 --> 04:19:59,000
 request or an amendment of that request, that request would go to the next meeting.

4093
04:19:59,000 --> 04:20:03,880
 If there was a second failure to recommend either approval or denial of the amendment

4094
04:20:03,880 --> 04:20:11,160
 or proposed amendment, then at that point it would go forward to City Council as a recommendation

4095
04:20:11,160 --> 04:20:15,280
 of denial, but without that super majority provision.

4096
04:20:15,280 --> 04:20:22,760
 Staff, in looking at this and considering the discussion that we had at the last PNZ,

4097
04:20:22,760 --> 04:20:27,400
 we felt like this revised language maintained the integrity of what the public hearing process

4098
04:20:27,400 --> 04:20:31,600
 is. It provided an additional opportunity embedded

4099
04:20:31,600 --> 04:20:37,040
 within that language for PNZ to reach a majority decision, but it also lays out a very clear

4100
04:20:37,040 --> 04:20:43,160
 path as to how these cases will proceed so that applicants as well as interested members

4101
04:20:43,160 --> 04:20:49,480
 of the public can be certain as to how, as to when the final decision will be made.

4102
04:20:49,480 --> 04:20:55,960
 This amendment would also prevent leaving projects in an indeterminate state and that since the

4103
04:20:55,960 --> 04:21:00,240
 tie vote is a failure to reach a majority decision, that super majority requirement

4104
04:21:00,240 --> 04:21:05,880
 has been removed, but that Council, City Council will be apprised of any discussion items or

4105
04:21:05,880 --> 04:21:09,880
 concerns that the Planning and Zoning Commission has so that they can make a fully informed

4106
04:21:09,880 --> 04:21:16,680
 decision considering all of those factors. So based upon those considerations, staff

4107
04:21:16,680 --> 04:21:21,720
 recommends approval of that revised language and I'll stand for any questions.

4108
04:21:21,720 --> 04:21:26,640
 - Mr. Smith? - Just to give clarification, I'm assuming

4109
04:21:26,640 --> 04:21:30,360
 that there's a, you know, that's simple for one. The second, the second time, so the,

4110
04:21:30,360 --> 04:21:36,040
 yeah, if you go back to that flow chart, go one more, flow chart. That second, that second

4111
04:21:36,040 --> 04:21:40,520
 tie vote, like technically that meeting, that next scheduled meeting, and there is six voting

4112
04:21:40,520 --> 04:21:44,360
 members, the discussion could happen of, hey, we as a commission, we know there's six voting

4113
04:21:44,360 --> 04:21:50,080
 members, the seventh will be here next time, we believe. Let's table, we can continue that.

4114
04:21:50,080 --> 04:21:54,440
 - One other thing I was gonna ask was, was on the tie votes to make that, you know, get

4115
04:21:54,440 --> 04:21:58,800
 all the way to the next meeting and then all the way to City Council, we need to go through

4116
04:21:58,800 --> 04:22:05,000
 all methods of someone makes a motion to approve, and then it goes to a tie, and then someone

4117
04:22:05,000 --> 04:22:08,360
 makes a motion to deny, and then it goes to a tie, and then that's correct. We're not

4118
04:22:08,360 --> 04:22:14,440
 gonna be seeing, it's not like once it's one tie, it automatically goes because that does,

4119
04:22:14,440 --> 04:22:18,640
 that second motion would allow for more discussion and possibly a discussion could lead to a

4120
04:22:18,640 --> 04:22:24,040
 sway to approval or to not, I guess, approval of the motion.

4121
04:22:24,040 --> 04:22:28,360
 - Yeah, it's a failure to make any kind of recommendation at all.

4122
04:22:28,360 --> 04:22:29,600
 - We'd be going through both.

4123
04:22:29,600 --> 04:22:36,320
 - And really, that's one of the reasons why I suggested inserting the language about as

4124
04:22:36,320 --> 04:22:47,080
 amended also, because maybe you can't come to a consensus on a particular motion, but

4125
04:22:47,080 --> 04:22:53,120
 even with an amendment to it of some kind, you know, or a modification to it, there should

4126
04:22:53,120 --> 04:23:05,960
 be some way to reach a majority, one way or another, on a motion by placing conditions

4127
04:23:05,960 --> 04:23:10,160
 or what have you on it to get somewhere.

4128
04:23:10,160 --> 04:23:12,400
 - Commissioner Burnetta.

4129
04:23:12,400 --> 04:23:19,840
 - So just to clarify, so upon the event of a second tie, it would automatically go through

4130
04:23:19,840 --> 04:23:24,320
 or we would have to agree to send it through as a tie vote?

4131
04:23:24,320 --> 04:23:31,540
 - As it's written, the second time the Planning and Zoning Commission fails to reach a majority

4132
04:23:31,540 --> 04:23:37,000
 decision, as this is written, just the structure of this, it would go to City Council, but

4133
04:23:37,000 --> 04:23:40,680
 it is up to the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission that if they feel like

4134
04:23:40,680 --> 04:23:46,480
 another try may get them to that majority decision, it is always at the discretion of

4135
04:23:46,480 --> 04:23:53,860
 the Planning and Zoning Commission to table the item until another meeting where maybe

4136
04:23:53,860 --> 04:24:02,800
 that member would be present or maybe some amendment to the project may change the vote,

4137
04:24:02,800 --> 04:24:03,800
 how it shakes out.

4138
04:24:03,800 --> 04:24:06,520
 - Well, let me try refining that a little bit, because what I thought I heard you say

4139
04:24:06,520 --> 04:24:11,000
 is automatically upon a particular tie vote.

4140
04:24:11,000 --> 04:24:15,560
 The way that this is written is upon the failure of the Planning and Zoning Commission to make

4141
04:24:15,560 --> 04:24:22,320
 a recommendation or to reach a majority, either way.

4142
04:24:22,320 --> 04:24:29,840
 And so if you had a, let's say you have the first P&Z meeting and you have a tie vote,

4143
04:24:29,840 --> 04:24:34,240
 you spin the motion around, it's still a tie vote, kind of similar to what we had the last

4144
04:24:34,240 --> 04:24:35,240
 time.

4145
04:24:35,240 --> 04:24:42,980
 And now you have the second P&Z meeting, you have a motion, say, to approve, and it winds

4146
04:24:42,980 --> 04:24:44,920
 up in a tie vote.

4147
04:24:44,920 --> 04:24:48,520
 That doesn't go to Council as a denial.

4148
04:24:48,520 --> 04:24:56,420
 You still spin it around and see if you can get a motion to deny or you could maybe motion

4149
04:24:56,420 --> 04:24:59,560
 to approve with a modification or something like that.

4150
04:24:59,560 --> 04:25:05,120
 It's just that if you wind up where you cannot make a recommendation twice in a row, you've

4151
04:25:05,120 --> 04:25:10,360
 had two bites at the apple, that's when it goes forward to City Council.

4152
04:25:10,360 --> 04:25:13,000
 It's not on a particular motion.

4153
04:25:13,000 --> 04:25:15,120
 Commissioner Smith?

4154
04:25:15,120 --> 04:25:22,920
 And legal would then jump in at that point in time and say, there's no resolution, it's

4155
04:25:22,920 --> 04:25:26,680
 now been by City Code code, it's now going to the next meeting, and then there's still

4156
04:25:26,680 --> 04:25:27,680
 no resolution.

4157
04:25:27,680 --> 04:25:33,440
 But now City Code is going to majority, it's going to City Council as a denial, no supermajority

4158
04:25:33,440 --> 04:25:34,440
 rider.

4159
04:25:34,440 --> 04:25:37,760
 I mean, well, I'm going to turn it back to the P&Z.

4160
04:25:37,760 --> 04:25:43,680
 So if somebody could come up with another motion to bring forward, you're welcome to

4161
04:25:43,680 --> 04:25:44,680
 do that.

4162
04:25:44,680 --> 04:25:50,640
 Once you tell me that you've run out of motions and there's no motions to be made, that's

4163
04:25:50,640 --> 04:25:51,640
 when it goes forward.

4164
04:25:51,640 --> 04:25:52,640
 Commissioner Beck?

4165
04:25:52,640 --> 04:25:59,080
 The only option I would see in a case like that is what Commissioner Smith said a while

4166
04:25:59,080 --> 04:26:04,760
 ago, is if we know for sure that the third meeting would have all seven here and we would

4167
04:26:04,760 --> 04:26:06,640
 have a majority vote, then that would be the only exception I could see.

4168
04:26:06,640 --> 04:26:10,560
 Well, and then a motion to table would certainly suffice.

4169
04:26:10,560 --> 04:26:11,560
 Okay.

4170
04:26:11,560 --> 04:26:19,000
 But other than that, I don't see any options.

4171
04:26:19,000 --> 04:26:22,480
 Maybe this is the elephant in the room, but I feel like it's probably worth noting.

4172
04:26:22,480 --> 04:26:27,760
 I wouldn't see any table actually passing, practically, because there wouldn't be an

4173
04:26:27,760 --> 04:26:32,160
 incentive for the individuals who are voting to deny it, to table it, because then they

4174
04:26:32,160 --> 04:26:38,620
 could potentially be ensuring a denial which would require a supermajority vote by council,

4175
04:26:38,620 --> 04:26:41,680
 where if you didn't table it, it wouldn't require the supermajority.

4176
04:26:41,680 --> 04:26:46,440
 So I get the intent of the rule, but I just don't foresee a table happening.

4177
04:26:46,440 --> 04:26:51,240
 Sorry if I mentioned it, but whatever.

4178
04:26:51,240 --> 04:26:52,240
 Hopefully this never happens, guys.

4179
04:26:52,240 --> 04:26:53,240
 Sorry.

4180
04:26:53,240 --> 04:26:57,000
 But if that works, that's really your second strike.

4181
04:26:57,000 --> 04:26:58,000
 At that point.

4182
04:26:58,000 --> 04:26:59,000
 You're right.

4183
04:26:59,000 --> 04:27:00,720
 And it should go forward to City Council.

4184
04:27:00,720 --> 04:27:04,760
 Yeah, I think the way it's been written, and I appreciate Commissioner Ellis's lead

4185
04:27:04,760 --> 04:27:10,360
 in kind of pushing this back, because what came here, like Commissioner Ellis has said,

4186
04:27:10,360 --> 04:27:11,720
 this addresses the problem.

4187
04:27:11,720 --> 04:27:18,040
 Previously, it wasn't as specific as it needed to be.

4188
04:27:18,040 --> 04:27:19,040
 Commissioner Ellis.

4189
04:27:19,040 --> 04:27:20,040
 Thank you.

4190
04:27:20,040 --> 04:27:23,440
 I move to approve, and thank you, staff, for what you've done.

4191
04:27:23,440 --> 04:27:24,440
 I appreciate it.

4192
04:27:24,440 --> 04:27:25,440
 I did open it.

4193
04:27:25,440 --> 04:27:26,440
 I haven't closed it.

4194
04:27:26,440 --> 04:27:28,400
 I'll see if anyone wants to speak on the matter.

4195
04:27:28,400 --> 04:27:29,400
 Understood.

4196
04:27:29,400 --> 04:27:30,400
 Thank you.

4197
04:27:30,400 --> 04:27:31,400
 Okay.

4198
04:27:31,400 --> 04:27:33,640
 Any other questions for Julie?

4199
04:27:33,640 --> 04:27:34,640
 Sorry.

4200
04:27:34,640 --> 04:27:35,640
 Perfect.

4201
04:27:35,640 --> 04:27:36,640
 Nice.

4202
04:27:36,640 --> 04:27:37,640
 Anyone wishing to speak?

4203
04:27:37,640 --> 04:27:39,640
 I don't see anybody.

4204
04:27:39,640 --> 04:27:43,280
 I will close the public hearing and open it for motion or discussion.

4205
04:27:43,280 --> 04:27:44,800
 Commissioner Ellis.

4206
04:27:44,800 --> 04:27:45,800
 Thank you, Chair.

4207
04:27:45,800 --> 04:27:46,800
 I motion to approve.

4208
04:27:46,800 --> 04:27:47,800
 We have a first.

4209
04:27:47,800 --> 04:27:48,800
 Commissioner Beck.

4210
04:27:48,800 --> 04:27:49,800
 Second.

4211
04:27:49,800 --> 04:27:50,800
 First and second.

4212
04:27:50,800 --> 04:27:51,800
 Any discussion?

4213
04:27:51,800 --> 04:27:54,720
 Seeing none, I'll vote by show of hands.

4214
04:27:54,720 --> 04:27:56,760
 All in favor?

4215
04:27:56,760 --> 04:27:57,940
 All opposed?

4216
04:27:57,940 --> 04:28:00,120
 Motion carries 6-0.

4217
04:28:00,120 --> 04:28:05,800
 That leads us to item six, plan and zoning project matrix, and I'll ask Richard for

4218
04:28:05,800 --> 04:28:06,800
 an update.

4219
04:28:06,800 --> 04:28:09,800
 I wanted to note a couple things.

4220
04:28:09,800 --> 04:28:24,080
 One that isn't on here but wanted to mention the microphone's not on.

4221
04:28:24,080 --> 04:28:29,800
 When the commission meets, if you recall, you met in the capacity of the capital improvement

4222
04:28:29,800 --> 04:28:31,360
 advisory committee.

4223
04:28:31,360 --> 04:28:36,600
 That will be coming back to you again on the 28th for a shorter meeting.

4224
04:28:36,600 --> 04:28:41,600
 They did go to city council yesterday for a work session, so they'll be bringing the

4225
04:28:41,600 --> 04:28:43,400
 final final everything.

4226
04:28:43,400 --> 04:28:48,600
 I'm told it will be about a half hour meeting they anticipate, but they need, I guess, that

4227
04:28:48,600 --> 04:28:54,960
 formal recommendation based on whatever changes prior to it going to council in December.

4228
04:28:54,960 --> 04:29:01,520
 So that will be on sort of whether we start at 3.30 or 4, I'm trying to get it for 4 so

4229
04:29:01,520 --> 04:29:05,640
 we make sure we have everyone here so it's not too terribly early.

4230
04:29:05,640 --> 04:29:10,080
 Also wanted to note the tree code, I'll be giving an update on the tree code, but in

4231
04:29:10,080 --> 04:29:17,920
 a public hearing setting, but sort of wanted to preface it in -- after the meeting, I don't

4232
04:29:17,920 --> 04:29:22,560
 anticipate it going to council the next -- you know, in a couple weeks.

4233
04:29:22,560 --> 04:29:28,040
 It's more of -- I know we've had the discussion sort of at a work session setting, and I know

4234
04:29:28,040 --> 04:29:32,680
 we've talked about having members of the public be able to provide comments or input, and

4235
04:29:32,680 --> 04:29:37,560
 so at this point we thought let's start to bring forward the discussion draft more into

4236
04:29:37,560 --> 04:29:43,840
 a public setting with the commission where we can get -- where we can start to get input.

4237
04:29:43,840 --> 04:29:47,260
 So that will be sort of the premise of that public hearing.

4238
04:29:47,260 --> 04:29:53,160
 It's not that we're asking for the recommendation to move to council within two or three weeks.

4239
04:29:53,160 --> 04:29:55,600
 We anticipate coming back again.

4240
04:29:55,600 --> 04:30:00,800
 It's just a form to sort of get it out there and have that discussion both with the commission

4241
04:30:00,800 --> 04:30:04,420
 and the public in that kind of setting.

4242
04:30:04,420 --> 04:30:11,040
 With that, we may end up moving the historic preservation incentives.

4243
04:30:11,040 --> 04:30:15,600
 And I do want to talk to Roman to see when the consultant is going to be around that's

4244
04:30:15,600 --> 04:30:19,840
 currently working on it, so maybe they can -- we can kind of tie that into -- tie that

4245
04:30:19,840 --> 04:30:21,840
 into an update as well.

4246
04:30:21,840 --> 04:30:24,920
 A couple other updates.

4247
04:30:24,920 --> 04:30:30,040
 Just to give you an idea of that agenda on the 28th, we've got four items now I think

4248
04:30:30,040 --> 04:30:33,640
 that will be coming back that had been tabled.

4249
04:30:33,640 --> 04:30:38,480
 So we have the -- we have Teasley.

4250
04:30:38,480 --> 04:30:45,560
 We have the request for the automotive garage from last meeting will be coming back.

4251
04:30:45,560 --> 04:30:49,920
 And then obviously the item -- the item tonight.

4252
04:30:49,920 --> 04:30:53,580
 And then I think we'll have one or two consent items that I know for sure.

4253
04:30:53,580 --> 04:30:56,960
 And then I think a couple other items.

4254
04:30:56,960 --> 04:31:01,400
 So it will probably be a pretty big agenda.

4255
04:31:01,400 --> 04:31:08,400
 In addition, the tree code will be part of that public hearing item.

4256
04:31:08,400 --> 04:31:12,720
 So we'll be there a little later, I anticipate.

4257
04:31:12,720 --> 04:31:20,960
 I know we're starting to clear -- kind of clear the backlog of items.

4258
04:31:20,960 --> 04:31:24,720
 I know there was the Robert rules of order as well as clarification on what can be discussed

4259
04:31:24,720 --> 04:31:27,160
 at a work session.

4260
04:31:27,160 --> 04:31:31,320
 I want to get together with Jerry and perhaps it may be more beneficial.

4261
04:31:31,320 --> 04:31:32,960
 We do it maybe the first meeting in January.

4262
04:31:32,960 --> 04:31:36,040
 I don't think we're going to have that many items on the agenda so it might be a good

4263
04:31:36,040 --> 04:31:40,280
 opportunity to kind of talk about that and go through that right at the first of the

4264
04:31:40,280 --> 04:31:41,280
 year.

4265
04:31:41,280 --> 04:31:49,960
 And then we'll be sort of bringing forward some of the other items as we firm that up.

4266
04:31:49,960 --> 04:31:54,240
 We did provide a little bit of an update on Lake View -- on Lake View Ranch.

4267
04:31:54,240 --> 04:31:57,120
 I know that was a big concern from the last meeting.

4268
04:31:57,120 --> 04:32:04,760
 We will be meeting weaving staff, development services, police, engineering and city manager's

4269
04:32:04,760 --> 04:32:10,880
 office will be meeting with that HOA group tomorrow night to kind of go over some of

4270
04:32:10,880 --> 04:32:11,880
 their concerns.

4271
04:32:11,880 --> 04:32:17,480
 My understanding is that very next day the police department, the new chief did have

4272
04:32:17,480 --> 04:32:21,600
 a speed monitors out there to try to address some of their concerns right away.

4273
04:32:21,600 --> 04:32:28,800
 So it is starting to be taken care of, but I can give you a report after -- at the next

4274
04:32:28,800 --> 04:32:35,480
 meeting sort of what transpired from that discussion.

4275
04:32:35,480 --> 04:32:42,260
 One more item to add, what I think I'm going to start doing is we put out a weekly project

4276
04:32:42,260 --> 04:32:43,260
 submission list.

4277
04:32:43,260 --> 04:32:47,600
 And I want to temper it because I don't want it to really get into a discussion about projects

4278
04:32:47,600 --> 04:32:51,120
 prior to them, especially if they're going to come in front of the board, but I think

4279
04:32:51,120 --> 04:32:54,920
 it's good just to see what's coming down the pike.

4280
04:32:54,920 --> 04:32:59,720
 Before we were sending it out in sort of a static spreadsheet, and I think I had mentioned

4281
04:32:59,720 --> 04:33:02,760
 that that's kind of one of the things that goes to the school board and a number of other

4282
04:33:02,760 --> 04:33:07,320
 folks that have kind of subscribed to this, how -- I don't know how we got that subscription

4283
04:33:07,320 --> 04:33:12,800
 list to begin with, but we have this big list that we send out, but I did see -- and I don't

4284
04:33:12,800 --> 04:33:19,720
 think anybody from PNZ is on that list, but what we've begun to do is turn that into more

4285
04:33:19,720 --> 04:33:21,480
 of an interactive map.

4286
04:33:21,480 --> 04:33:26,400
 And so every week now what we do is rather than send that static list, you still have

4287
04:33:26,400 --> 04:33:30,000
 kind of the spreadsheet on the bottom that tells you what the request, the application

4288
04:33:30,000 --> 04:33:34,640
 is, who's requesting it, who the planner is and the contact information, but then it puts

4289
04:33:34,640 --> 04:33:37,760
 it on the map so you actually see where it's located.

4290
04:33:37,760 --> 04:33:42,240
 And so that's kind of just the start of where we're wanting to head on with kind of just

4291
04:33:42,240 --> 04:33:44,680
 getting the word out there of what's going on in the city.

4292
04:33:44,680 --> 04:33:49,880
 We still have an overall interactive project map, but what we're trying to do is work within

4293
04:33:49,880 --> 04:33:51,880
 the confines of the software that we have now.

4294
04:33:51,880 --> 04:33:57,240
 We will be up, you know, going for an update on our software, but the idea behind that

4295
04:33:57,240 --> 04:34:02,800
 is at any point in time, anybody can go to that map, and if they have a general idea

4296
04:34:02,800 --> 04:34:07,120
 of where that property is or that they see something, they can click on it, get some

4297
04:34:07,120 --> 04:34:12,120
 general information on the property, when it's projected to come to PNZ for a hearing,

4298
04:34:12,120 --> 04:34:18,640
 that might move, but at least give some projections, but we also want to try to get when a neighborhood

4299
04:34:18,640 --> 04:34:23,240
 meeting will be scheduled to also have that information on, and again, just as a way to

4300
04:34:23,240 --> 04:34:24,240
 get that out.

4301
04:34:24,240 --> 04:34:30,920
 So it's going to take some time, but I just wanted to let you all know where we're headed

4302
04:34:30,920 --> 04:34:36,000
 with some of that, but then wanted to at least get you on the list so you start to see how

4303
04:34:36,000 --> 04:34:41,360
 it's coming, how it's being displayed, and also welcome feedback as you're, you know,

4304
04:34:41,360 --> 04:34:43,760
 we all look at things differently.

4305
04:34:43,760 --> 04:34:44,920
 Other than that, that's all I had.

4306
04:34:44,920 --> 04:34:45,920
 Thanks for the update.

4307
04:34:45,920 --> 04:34:46,920
 Commissioner Beck.

4308
04:34:46,920 --> 04:34:52,480
 Was there any consideration in my request for notification of PNZ members interested

4309
04:34:52,480 --> 04:34:55,600
 in going to neighborhood meetings, is there?

4310
04:34:55,600 --> 04:34:56,600
 Absolutely.

4311
04:34:56,600 --> 04:34:57,600
 Okay.

4312
04:34:57,600 --> 04:34:59,880
 When those are scheduled, we will send that out.

4313
04:34:59,880 --> 04:35:00,880
 Okay.

4314
04:35:00,880 --> 04:35:02,680
 And just anybody who feels up to it.

4315
04:35:02,680 --> 04:35:03,680
 Okay.

4316
04:35:03,680 --> 04:35:04,680
 Thanks.

4317
04:35:04,680 --> 04:35:05,680
 I'll make sure that happens.

4318
04:35:05,680 --> 04:35:06,680
 Any other requests?

4319
04:35:06,680 --> 04:35:14,440
 Robert's rules will not be the first in January if I do it, because I'm going to be in Austin,

4320
04:35:14,440 --> 04:35:19,320
 so we may be able to get another attorney to present that.

4321
04:35:19,320 --> 04:35:23,960
 The only thing I have to add is, what's the requirements on removing notices once the

4322
04:35:23,960 --> 04:35:24,960
 agenda's been held?

4323
04:35:24,960 --> 04:35:28,320
 I'm getting questions from people saying, "Hey, what's going on with that property?"

4324
04:35:28,320 --> 04:35:29,760
 I'm like, "That was a month ago."

4325
04:35:29,760 --> 04:35:33,680
 Does it stay up until council?

4326
04:35:33,680 --> 04:35:38,520
 Typically, it'll stay up until council, but they should be removed.

4327
04:35:38,520 --> 04:35:41,200
 I think it's prescribed within a week or two.

4328
04:35:41,200 --> 04:35:44,240
 I'm trying to recall off memory.

4329
04:35:44,240 --> 04:35:51,240
 I know we've reached out a couple of times when it gets bad, or when they're not listening,

4330
04:35:51,240 --> 04:35:55,240
 we send zoning enforcement out for having any legal sign.

4331
04:35:55,240 --> 04:35:56,240
 Okay.

4332
04:35:56,240 --> 04:35:59,240
 Well, good to know that's being monitored.

4333
04:35:59,240 --> 04:36:00,600
 Anything else?

4334
04:36:00,600 --> 04:36:01,600
 Yeah.

4335
04:36:01,600 --> 04:36:02,600
 Tricia Ellis.

4336
04:36:02,600 --> 04:36:03,600
 Thank you, Chair.

4337
04:36:03,600 --> 04:36:04,680
 Just real quick.

4338
04:36:04,680 --> 04:36:09,500
 Something an applicant said today, are they really getting a denial the Friday before

4339
04:36:09,500 --> 04:36:11,000
 the planning and zoning meeting?

4340
04:36:11,000 --> 04:36:19,440
 I mean, if they are, that's probably something we need to fix, because that's not probably

4341
04:36:19,440 --> 04:36:27,400
 enough time for them to prepare to come before P&Z, but I just thought I'd ask that question.

4342
04:36:27,400 --> 04:36:30,240
 No, and it's a good thing to add.

4343
04:36:30,240 --> 04:36:34,800
 That was one I know we've talked about early on over a year ago, is making sure that we're

4344
04:36:34,800 --> 04:36:37,840
 not doing this kind of surprise.

4345
04:36:37,840 --> 04:36:38,840
 Here it is.

4346
04:36:38,840 --> 04:36:44,640
 Well, I'll have to follow up with Ron, but the intent is, and I think kind of Lee hinted

4347
04:36:44,640 --> 04:36:49,680
 to that, as we started to work through, we wanted to let him know ahead of time, just

4348
04:36:49,680 --> 04:36:50,680
 so everyone's aware.

4349
04:36:50,680 --> 04:36:52,840
 Yeah, if I could just get an update from you.

4350
04:36:52,840 --> 04:36:54,000
 I'm just curious about that.

4351
04:36:54,000 --> 04:36:55,000
 Yeah, absolutely.

4352
04:36:55,000 --> 04:36:56,000
 Okay.

4353
04:36:56,000 --> 04:36:58,000
 Thank you.

4354
04:36:58,000 --> 04:36:59,200
 With that, great meeting.

4355
04:36:59,200 --> 04:37:00,600
 We'll close it at 950.