1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:08,440
 Good afternoon and welcome to the planning and zoning work session for January 23rd.

2
00:00:08,440 --> 00:00:12,040
 It is 5.04, we'll call the work session to order.

3
00:00:12,040 --> 00:00:16,040
 In terms of the meeting order,

4
00:00:16,040 --> 00:00:19,280
 what we'll do tonight like we did last time is switch

5
00:00:19,280 --> 00:00:21,720
 the work session reports and then look at the agenda.

6
00:00:21,720 --> 00:00:26,320
 So we'll start with item 2A for the work session,

7
00:00:26,320 --> 00:00:29,920
 then we'll go to 2B and then we'll come back to 1,

8
00:00:29,920 --> 00:00:33,040
 which will walk through the short agenda this evening.

9
00:00:33,040 --> 00:00:34,840
 So with that being said,

10
00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:36,920
 the first item that we'll look at tonight will

11
00:00:36,920 --> 00:00:40,480
 be a discussion regarding the historic preservation plan.

12
00:00:40,480 --> 00:00:43,040
 I believe Roman is here for presentation.

13
00:00:43,040 --> 00:00:44,140
 Thank you, Chair.

14
00:00:44,140 --> 00:00:44,720
 Good evening.

15
00:00:44,720 --> 00:00:47,040
 Good evening, everyone. Thank you.

16
00:00:47,040 --> 00:00:56,960
 I'm going to talk to you about the preservation plan that we're working on,

17
00:00:56,960 --> 00:01:00,720
 and then, Chair, you had asked in a previous meeting about incentives,

18
00:01:00,720 --> 00:01:02,240
 preservation tax incentives.

19
00:01:02,240 --> 00:01:03,840
 So it's two parts.

20
00:01:03,840 --> 00:01:06,840
 You guys haven't heard from Lakota Group before,

21
00:01:06,840 --> 00:01:08,480
 they're not here in town today,

22
00:01:08,480 --> 00:01:10,320
 but I'm going to present a little bit for them.

23
00:01:10,320 --> 00:01:16,160
 So we have just as an update to the City of Denton's preservation plan.

24
00:01:16,160 --> 00:01:19,440
 The original plan was adopted in 1985.

25
00:01:19,440 --> 00:01:22,360
 That's the cover of it on the right.

26
00:01:22,640 --> 00:01:28,440
 In the Denton plan 2030, we called for updating that existing plan.

27
00:01:28,440 --> 00:01:31,040
 In March of 2018, finally,

28
00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:34,200
 an RFP was issued which was directly mailed to

29
00:01:34,200 --> 00:01:41,100
 18 preservation planning firms across the country plus the normal channels.

30
00:01:41,100 --> 00:01:46,480
 Four teams submitted to do the plan,

31
00:01:46,480 --> 00:01:48,440
 Lakota Group was selected,

32
00:01:48,440 --> 00:01:53,600
 and then additionally, we did receive a $20,000 matching grant from

33
00:01:53,600 --> 00:01:57,880
 the Texas Historical Commission through our certified local government program,

34
00:01:57,880 --> 00:01:59,560
 which Denton is a member of.

35
00:01:59,560 --> 00:02:02,900
 So if we complete the plan by September 30th,

36
00:02:02,900 --> 00:02:07,800
 then we will be reimbursed $20,000 from the state in that grant.

37
00:02:07,800 --> 00:02:09,960
 So a little bit about Lakota.

38
00:02:09,960 --> 00:02:14,160
 Let me come down and pick up a PDF of theirs real quick.

39
00:02:14,160 --> 00:02:21,560
 Got it here. So the Lakota Group,

40
00:02:21,560 --> 00:02:23,440
 I'm really excited about the Lakota Group.

41
00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:28,520
 They really did a great job in their presentation and they're really well-rounded.

42
00:02:28,520 --> 00:02:30,640
 They're based in Chicago.

43
00:02:30,640 --> 00:02:35,600
 They have a three-group team that includes the regular preservation planners

44
00:02:35,600 --> 00:02:38,320
 and planning group which is there at the top.

45
00:02:38,320 --> 00:02:40,640
 The Clue Group, which is on the lower left,

46
00:02:40,640 --> 00:02:42,480
 which is about economic incentives.

47
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:47,700
 They're specialists in the relationship between preservation and economic incentives.

48
00:02:47,700 --> 00:02:50,640
 Then Mosley Architects,

49
00:02:50,640 --> 00:02:56,240
 their specialty is sustainability and green building in relation to preservation.

50
00:02:56,240 --> 00:02:59,120
 They were all brought in together and they're working as a team.

51
00:02:59,120 --> 00:03:00,480
 Just as a quick reference,

52
00:03:00,480 --> 00:03:02,640
 the Lakota Group does have experience in Texas.

53
00:03:02,640 --> 00:03:04,720
 They worked a lot in San Antonio, Texas.

54
00:03:04,720 --> 00:03:08,280
 They just finished a plan about two years ago in Tyler,

55
00:03:08,280 --> 00:03:13,880
 Texas which was really well-received and then they do work around the country in some other places.

56
00:03:13,880 --> 00:03:20,240
 Their approach is two phases and we're still in phase one right now.

57
00:03:20,240 --> 00:03:23,680
 We're working through your community and stakeholder engagement,

58
00:03:23,680 --> 00:03:27,000
 which they've been working on surveying the city.

59
00:03:27,000 --> 00:03:30,780
 We're right here at Mapping and Analysis and on February the 18th,

60
00:03:30,780 --> 00:03:33,280
 so it's a Tuesday that's coming up.

61
00:03:33,280 --> 00:03:36,040
 We're going to have a workshop on the square on

62
00:03:36,040 --> 00:03:45,200
 the southwest corner in the square at 207 West Hickory in the lobby of that two-story building there.

63
00:03:45,200 --> 00:03:48,720
 We're going to have a big presentation there with a lot of us to gather

64
00:03:48,720 --> 00:03:53,160
 more information from the community about all their ideas, including incentives.

65
00:03:53,160 --> 00:03:55,360
 A little bit more about their background,

66
00:03:55,360 --> 00:03:58,640
 they look at everything that we do.

67
00:03:58,640 --> 00:04:03,520
 They've been reading and digging and just looking at everything that city does.

68
00:04:03,520 --> 00:04:09,000
 They talk to all of our groups and the universities.

69
00:04:09,000 --> 00:04:11,960
 We met with the chair,

70
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:15,800
 we met in your office with other members of this group, Marjana, you were there.

71
00:04:15,800 --> 00:04:20,440
 We met with a really, really wide diverse group of the city of Denton.

72
00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:22,840
 This is a little bit about how they do community engagement,

73
00:04:22,840 --> 00:04:25,720
 including having a specialized website which is already up,

74
00:04:25,720 --> 00:04:28,560
 but we haven't actually broadcasted that fully.

75
00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:32,600
 As we put out the information about this upcoming community workshop,

76
00:04:32,600 --> 00:04:35,560
 we'll spread that information a little further.

77
00:04:35,560 --> 00:04:40,680
 Then they'll have an online survey that follows that.

78
00:04:40,680 --> 00:04:42,880
 The Landmark Commission, just as a note,

79
00:04:42,880 --> 00:04:48,240
 is the steering group over this contract, so to speak, and this project.

80
00:04:48,240 --> 00:04:51,520
 Because the current ordinance states that

81
00:04:51,520 --> 00:04:54,320
 the Landmark Commission actually brings this plan ultimately forward.

82
00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:56,680
 Phase 2 will be a draft plan,

83
00:04:56,680 --> 00:04:58,720
 another community workshops on that,

84
00:04:58,720 --> 00:05:02,840
 and then go to the city and then hopefully move for an approval.

85
00:05:02,840 --> 00:05:10,720
 They really have a really diverse wide-spectrum way of looking at preservation is why they stood out.

86
00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:12,880
 Preservation is evolving.

87
00:05:12,880 --> 00:05:17,720
 A lot of the house I grew up in was built in 1958, 60 years old.

88
00:05:17,720 --> 00:05:22,200
 It could be landmark today and it's a southwest suburb of Houston, Texas, according to the old standard.

89
00:05:22,200 --> 00:05:26,640
 But the fact is that the way we move and everything is changing and evolving,

90
00:05:26,640 --> 00:05:30,360
 so that's why they stood out because they get involved in all of these areas,

91
00:05:30,360 --> 00:05:33,920
 as well as neighborhood planning,

92
00:05:33,920 --> 00:05:40,920
 and they look at our organization's approach to preservation and possible partnerships, et cetera.

93
00:05:40,920 --> 00:05:46,640
 They get heavily into incentives, and here's a list of some types of incentives they would look at.

94
00:05:46,640 --> 00:05:52,200
 And then I'm going to talk about incentives in general here in just a minute.

95
00:05:52,200 --> 00:05:57,480
 So they also like for their plan to be easy to read and a joy to implement.

96
00:05:57,480 --> 00:06:03,320
 I mean, they don't want something that sits up on the shelf and is dusty and is full of words and no one looks at it.

97
00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:05,480
 So this is the project timeline.

98
00:06:05,480 --> 00:06:11,480
 We're in the upper portion here and heading towards a state of the city report.

99
00:06:11,480 --> 00:06:15,240
 But you see the February 18th, that's where we are now.

100
00:06:15,240 --> 00:06:19,440
 And then we'll go into phase two, which are the phases I talked about.

101
00:06:19,440 --> 00:06:22,200
 So that's what you would have heard from Lakota personally.

102
00:06:22,200 --> 00:06:30,440
 Let me get back to the PowerPoint here.

103
00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:34,760
 So I'll take questions on the whole topic at the end.

104
00:06:34,760 --> 00:06:38,040
 But what do we have here in Denton, Texas today?

105
00:06:38,040 --> 00:06:46,520
 So you guys probably know about this, but if you have a local landmark and within two years of that having property been landmarked,

106
00:06:46,520 --> 00:06:52,360
 if you spent $10,000, you can ask for up to 10 years,

107
00:06:52,360 --> 00:06:57,200
 or you get a 10 year exemption from half of your city of Denton property taxes.

108
00:06:57,200 --> 00:07:03,320
 At the end of that 10 year period, if you've also spent 10,000 over that period, you can ask for another 10 years.

109
00:07:03,320 --> 00:07:07,360
 So basically, you can go on and on with that under our current ordinance.

110
00:07:07,360 --> 00:07:12,880
 29 properties in the city of Denton presently take advantage of this incentive.

111
00:07:12,880 --> 00:07:20,920
 And it's kind of always evolving because buildings do roll off and people don't always do the work to ask for another 10 years.

112
00:07:20,920 --> 00:07:26,720
 The other thing we have is an incentive that hasn't been used in the three years I've been here, it hasn't been used yet.

113
00:07:26,720 --> 00:07:32,600
 And it's about the restoration or the rehabilitation of a historically significant site.

114
00:07:32,600 --> 00:07:36,880
 The way the ordinance was written, it originally applied only to our downtown area.

115
00:07:36,880 --> 00:07:46,840
 But recently, the economic development department in Caroline amended that ordinance so it could apply to anywhere at all in Denton.

116
00:07:46,840 --> 00:07:51,720
 So if you have a historically significant site anywhere in Denton, you can take advantage of that.

117
00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:57,920
 And if you rehabilitate that property, then you will freeze your,

118
00:07:57,920 --> 00:08:05,160
 that one is you'll freeze the assessed value to the prior valuation before the improvement was made.

119
00:08:05,160 --> 00:08:11,200
 And that's the one, so there is one project in town, it's the Fairhaven Project up on North Bell.

120
00:08:11,200 --> 00:08:19,000
 And that group that's doing that has the intention, I'm knocking on all the wood I can that that actually breaks ground and happens.

121
00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:23,960
 But they're moving forward very seriously on that.

122
00:08:23,960 --> 00:08:26,240
 Commissioner Sanchez, you have a question?

123
00:08:26,240 --> 00:08:27,560
 >> Commissioner Sanchez.

124
00:08:27,560 --> 00:08:33,520
 >> I was just curious, now it only applies, does it apply to say it like a cemetery or anything like that?

125
00:08:33,520 --> 00:08:40,080
 If you want to make that a historical site, or does it just apply, is this all just applied like to-

126
00:08:40,080 --> 00:08:43,480
 >> I think the key would be if it was somebody paying taxes.

127
00:08:43,480 --> 00:08:48,200
 So our look too local, or at least our I00F is we own, right?

128
00:08:48,200 --> 00:08:51,520
 And I think we own Oak, was it Oakwood?

129
00:08:51,520 --> 00:08:53,040
 Oakwood the other way?

130
00:08:53,040 --> 00:08:59,800
 And so if you had a privately held cemetery, I think you'd be entitled to paying taxes on it.

131
00:08:59,800 --> 00:09:03,600
 Oak would be my guess.

132
00:09:03,600 --> 00:09:09,360
 And then so, the cause for why we're looking at incentives today.

133
00:09:09,360 --> 00:09:11,880
 Commissioner Rizzo, Chair Rizzo, that's what you were really getting at.

134
00:09:11,880 --> 00:09:17,400
 So the cause really goes back to our Denton Plan 2030, which is just a snippet in the upper right hand corner.

135
00:09:17,400 --> 00:09:21,320
 But there were several places in the plan, including here,

136
00:09:21,320 --> 00:09:26,440
 where we talked about successful strategy needs to include incentives and

137
00:09:26,440 --> 00:09:33,200
 policy and then also policies to ensure compatible infill should be a part of our City of Denton program.

138
00:09:33,200 --> 00:09:43,400
 So this kind of came to me, I pulled this slide together really just in the last hour or two after extensive reading on all of the plans.

139
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:48,480
 And if anyone wants a list, there is a Texas Historic Commission list of about 20,

140
00:09:48,480 --> 00:09:52,520
 25 cities in Texas in all of their different plans.

141
00:09:52,520 --> 00:09:56,160
 But I think you can break these plans down into four categories.

142
00:09:56,160 --> 00:10:02,800
 This is sort of the standard incentives or the standard exemptions that have to do with rehabilitation.

143
00:10:02,800 --> 00:10:09,480
 And so they all read something like that second one that we had that I showed you that we presently have.

144
00:10:09,480 --> 00:10:15,440
 So that will freeze your property evaluation before your improvement for five to ten years.

145
00:10:15,440 --> 00:10:20,360
 Or we'll give you an exemption on some part of the property taxes.

146
00:10:20,360 --> 00:10:24,120
 So that's the typical exemption that you see in many cities.

147
00:10:24,120 --> 00:10:29,680
 I would probably put it at 30 to 40, if not higher, if I could look through all those ordinances.

148
00:10:29,680 --> 00:10:34,680
 Then you have, I noticed, exemptions that steer development.

149
00:10:34,680 --> 00:10:40,760
 And then I noticed that even Paris, Texas, Little Paris, Texas has a program.

150
00:10:40,760 --> 00:10:43,560
 And I'm quoting from one of their texts.

151
00:10:43,560 --> 00:10:51,680
 It says, "Historically compatible new construction shall be exempted for a period of three years of 100% increase in the assessed value."

152
00:10:51,680 --> 00:10:57,840
 This might come into play on our Denton Courthouse Square District where we had the fire, for example.

153
00:10:57,840 --> 00:11:04,080
 So if we lay an overlay over the Denton Courthouse Square District where we want to preserve what's there.

154
00:11:04,080 --> 00:11:10,720
 And for anything to go back to fit with some sort of design standards or guidelines, which we're going to hopefully adopt along with that.

155
00:11:10,720 --> 00:11:19,800
 It could be that we have an incentive in place to encourage the developer to follow those guidelines, which is what Paris, Texas has done there.

156
00:11:19,800 --> 00:11:27,240
 Houston, Texas has one, and I saw this, I believe, in Fort Worth as well, where there's an incentive to convert buildings.

157
00:11:27,240 --> 00:11:33,960
 So in Houston, there's one that says more, it basically is talking about, let's just read it through, more than four residential units.

158
00:11:33,960 --> 00:11:42,200
 If you add more than four residential units to a building that was built and used as a non-residential purpose, for a non-residential purpose,

159
00:11:42,200 --> 00:11:51,040
 then that building may be exempted from the city ad valorem taxes for both improvements and the land for up to $30,000 a year.

160
00:11:51,040 --> 00:12:00,520
 And so that's clearly an incentive where you've got an old warehouse, for example, and you want more density in your inner city and you just want to make your housing value go up.

161
00:12:00,520 --> 00:12:05,080
 Then I call, these are not in order of significance, but I call it just the Cadillac Plan.

162
00:12:05,080 --> 00:12:12,480
 Plano, Texas has one, and it's really a Cadillac Plan that's specific to really lifting up preservation.

163
00:12:12,480 --> 00:12:24,880
 So if you have a local landmark in Plano, you can get 100% of your real property taxes taken away, and everyone participates.

164
00:12:24,880 --> 00:12:32,640
 The city of Plano, Plano ISD, Collin County, they're all participating in that program, and Brownsville, Texas has that.

165
00:12:32,640 --> 00:12:43,720
 So if you have a national or state registered landmark that you live in or you own in Brownsville, Texas, you'll have 100% of your property taxes exempted.

166
00:12:43,720 --> 00:12:48,400
 And then if you have a local landmark there, 50% of your property taxes are exempted.

167
00:12:48,400 --> 00:12:57,760
 And then finally, there's sort of the category that it just encourages creating historic landmarks, or I'm sorry, districts, the district creation.

168
00:12:57,760 --> 00:13:05,680
 San Antonio, when you create a new district, owners in that district can have 20% off of their San Antonio property taxes.

169
00:13:05,680 --> 00:13:14,360
 And in Tyler, Texas, they offer 50% of the assessed value of any building listed on their local landmark registry.

170
00:13:14,360 --> 00:13:20,080
 So you see there's this sort of diverse thing, and I wanted to just stimulate a conversation, or at least plant these seeds in you now.

171
00:13:20,080 --> 00:13:28,600
 Because on November, I mean, on February the 18th, when we have this community input, it's an opportunity for us to think about what we could do,

172
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:36,040
 and how these tools might be used, or be a part of the plan, and then possibly adopted as the only part of the plan in the beginning.

173
00:13:36,040 --> 00:13:38,240
 So I'll take any questions that you have on that.

174
00:13:38,240 --> 00:13:42,720
 >> Have you presented this to council?

175
00:13:42,720 --> 00:13:43,000
 >> No.

176
00:13:44,160 --> 00:13:54,520
 >> Okay, I'd be interested to hear their thoughts on around the incentive structures for historical preservation, just curious.

177
00:13:54,520 --> 00:13:55,600
 Commissioner Beck.

178
00:13:55,600 --> 00:13:56,120
 >> Thank you, Chair.

179
00:13:56,120 --> 00:14:09,360
 So how would we encourage people who feel like they have property or something of historical value to connect with you, or whatever, to take advantage of these incentives?

180
00:14:09,360 --> 00:14:14,720
 >> I think I need to do a better job of helping us promote that these are out there.

181
00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:23,040
 Although the preservation program we do on the municipal channel, which includes the historic property of the month, has done a great job.

182
00:14:23,040 --> 00:14:30,360
 And we list properties that aren't in a particular district, we've shown properties that are not local landmarks.

183
00:14:30,360 --> 00:14:33,720
 And I think quite a few of those have come back and said, hey, I want to be a local landmark.

184
00:14:33,720 --> 00:14:35,680
 And so it's a way to get that conversation going.

185
00:14:35,680 --> 00:14:38,440
 But I think we can promote it on the website.

186
00:14:38,440 --> 00:14:43,240
 And I think doing the preservation plan, which will happen over this next nine months,

187
00:14:43,240 --> 00:14:47,280
 at least a lot of people should hear then about what we have to offer.

188
00:14:47,280 --> 00:14:49,240
 Is that what you mean, how we publicize what we have?

189
00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:51,160
 >> Yeah, that would be one way.

190
00:14:51,160 --> 00:14:56,880
 I was thinking too, we send out, the city sends out information mailers once a month or whatever.

191
00:14:56,880 --> 00:15:01,000
 And that would be a good source, especially if it's on the front page.

192
00:15:01,000 --> 00:15:04,320
 People who are interested would see historical incentives, that type of thing.

193
00:15:04,320 --> 00:15:09,560
 So if we haven't done that, that would be, I think, one way to promote it.

194
00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:12,920
 >> Yeah, we definitely should look at that.

195
00:15:12,920 --> 00:15:14,280
 >> Okay, thanks.

196
00:15:14,280 --> 00:15:15,400
 >> Commissioner Cole.

197
00:15:15,400 --> 00:15:19,720
 >> Yeah, would that go on top of, like I say, an ag exempt property?

198
00:15:19,720 --> 00:15:23,520
 So- >> I don't know how they mesh, Mr. Cole.

199
00:15:23,520 --> 00:15:28,960
 I don't know, I don't have experience with the overlay.

200
00:15:28,960 --> 00:15:33,200
 I mean, if you're already exempt, then there's nothing to gain from it.

201
00:15:35,120 --> 00:15:39,800
 And I think I have seen situations where there were two things happening.

202
00:15:39,800 --> 00:15:42,840
 And so one is benefit, doesn't do the other, so.

203
00:15:42,840 --> 00:15:48,120
 Because there is a little bit, each of these that I've listed, there is an application process.

204
00:15:48,120 --> 00:15:53,640
 You are going to have to go before that local commission, it's just not a check box thing.

205
00:15:53,640 --> 00:15:58,080
 So there's a little bit of work to it, you present your receipts and the work.

206
00:15:58,080 --> 00:16:03,800
 Usually in every case here, the landmark commission or whatever the board is called,

207
00:16:03,800 --> 00:16:13,020
 they have to sort of agree that the work that was done allows that building to continue on.

208
00:16:13,020 --> 00:16:19,700
 So it has to be substantive in nature to the longevity of the building, if it's a kind of process.

209
00:16:19,700 --> 00:16:30,720
 >> Just sort of another, I always caution to, because it sounds good, not that it's bad.

210
00:16:30,720 --> 00:16:36,640
 But there is an additional layer of, I'll call it scrutiny, if you will.

211
00:16:36,640 --> 00:16:39,280
 Any changes or updates that you would want to make to your property.

212
00:16:39,280 --> 00:16:42,480
 There is certificate of appropriateness then that is required.

213
00:16:42,480 --> 00:16:45,720
 So I always make sure we remind people of that.

214
00:16:45,720 --> 00:16:51,580
 >> Yes, having an historic landmark does require that any exterior alterations to your building,

215
00:16:51,580 --> 00:16:54,560
 substantive alterations need to go before the landmark commission.

216
00:16:54,560 --> 00:17:00,440
 On staff, we can approve a lot of things, but that's really not been burdensome.

217
00:17:00,440 --> 00:17:05,200
 I think for most people, but it does require that.

218
00:17:05,200 --> 00:17:11,720
 It's astounding to me that Plano's program, I didn't get a list of how many people participate.

219
00:17:11,720 --> 00:17:18,000
 But I've been to several of their commission meetings and they have, it's a strongly supported program.

220
00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:22,360
 And kind of one of those great little secrets, and I talked to their historic preservation officer,

221
00:17:22,360 --> 00:17:28,480
 you got all your county, your taxi entities involved, and they're, yeah, we're real happy about that.

222
00:17:28,480 --> 00:17:36,420
 And in Brownsville, I had the responsibility of going every year to those taxing authorities and asking them to continue to participate.

223
00:17:36,420 --> 00:17:43,600
 And the ISD there, I think in their last cycle, may have decided not to participate around.

224
00:17:43,600 --> 00:17:51,040
 It just took some convincing, because there's been a lot of charter schools opening up in South Texas putting a little bit more of a financial burden on the ISD.

225
00:17:51,040 --> 00:17:55,600
 Because every student goes to charter schools, one less, like $5,000 going to the ISD.

226
00:17:55,600 --> 00:18:04,760
 But I think it's, as you know, it's extremely expensive to care well for a historic building.

227
00:18:04,760 --> 00:18:07,800
 If it's a little smaller, it goes up in relation to the size of it.

228
00:18:07,800 --> 00:18:15,640
 These homes out here on West Oak, they're wooden and you can paint them, but they need a lot of upkeep.

229
00:18:15,640 --> 00:18:17,800
 And yet, they're part of our identity.

230
00:18:17,800 --> 00:18:21,080
 They're very significant to who the city is.

231
00:18:21,080 --> 00:18:26,280
 People don't come to see that brown brick buildings with brown roof,

232
00:18:26,280 --> 00:18:31,240
 houses with brown roof exactly like you see along the freeway when you're going in any direction.

233
00:18:31,240 --> 00:18:33,760
 So they really do give our city our identity.

234
00:18:33,760 --> 00:18:37,240
 And so these programs, I think, they're worthwhile.

235
00:18:37,240 --> 00:18:38,560
 They're worthwhile.

236
00:18:38,560 --> 00:18:48,000
 The way they play, I don't think we have a problem, coming from Brownsville, which is the 10th poorest county in Texas, to Denton, which is the 7th wealthiest county in Texas.

237
00:18:48,000 --> 00:18:56,720
 One thing that I argued for there, for example, with the ISD is that having preservation or historic districts,

238
00:18:56,720 --> 00:19:06,000
 it encouraged people of higher means to move into these inner city neighborhoods that were often blighted or in rougher condition.

239
00:19:06,000 --> 00:19:09,400
 And you encourage them to rehabilitate and move into these old homes.

240
00:19:09,400 --> 00:19:12,040
 They bring with them their family and their kids.

241
00:19:12,040 --> 00:19:18,400
 And many times, in my experience in Brownsville, they're going to school in that local school in an otherwise,

242
00:19:18,400 --> 00:19:26,560
 I would say, a neighborhood that's probably in the bottom 15 percentile of economic standard of living.

243
00:19:26,560 --> 00:19:30,680
 So you're creating diversity in that school system and you're promoting that diversity.

244
00:19:30,680 --> 00:19:33,760
 And here in Denton, we don't particularly have that problem.

245
00:19:33,760 --> 00:19:48,240
 But I think Denton has some unique conditions that we might need to look at in order to possibly use some of these tools to protect the city's identity and how it grows.

246
00:19:48,240 --> 00:19:49,800
 >> Commissioner Sanchez.

247
00:19:49,800 --> 00:19:55,880
 >> Okay. My question a while ago was when I looked at the word local landmark and when I asked about cemeteries,

248
00:19:55,880 --> 00:20:04,680
 I know there's, the reason I was asking about that was is there funding available for, there's a cemetery located,

249
00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:10,000
 and I can't remember exactly where, but I was told where Hispanic community,

250
00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:14,520
 Hispanics used to be buried, just primarily Hispanics in that area.

251
00:20:14,520 --> 00:20:20,840
 And to bring recognition to that area as far as, so that's why I was asking about that.

252
00:20:20,840 --> 00:20:27,720
 My other question is what about some, I live in a house that basically belongs to,

253
00:20:27,720 --> 00:20:32,400
 you used to live, Ms. Alexander, who was the daughter of Fred Moore.

254
00:20:32,400 --> 00:20:39,840
 I've been told that would be a landmark because of her importance in the community.

255
00:20:39,840 --> 00:20:48,200
 But we've done a lot of renovations to that house, and so, and is something like that available?

256
00:20:48,200 --> 00:20:52,600
 And I'm not asking for myself, but I'm just trying to understand, in Southeast Denton,

257
00:20:52,600 --> 00:20:57,640
 there's other homes that belong to prominent black community.

258
00:20:57,640 --> 00:21:00,040
 >> That's a really good question, Commissioner Sanchez.

259
00:21:00,040 --> 00:21:05,160
 And really, starting at the top of the national trust about eight years ago,

260
00:21:05,160 --> 00:21:11,400
 they realized that a lot of neighborhoods and homes and structures, people that were,

261
00:21:11,400 --> 00:21:17,560
 let's just say less prominent in the city for whatever reason, haven't been recognized.

262
00:21:17,560 --> 00:21:22,240
 So there's been a real, actually, there are grants for

263
00:21:22,240 --> 00:21:27,240
 underrepresented communities and things like that, but just, so that's one.

264
00:21:27,240 --> 00:21:32,360
 The thing about landmarking it, who lived there is as important as the structure.

265
00:21:32,360 --> 00:21:39,640
 The structure doesn't have to be, have all the architectural integrity of a house built in 1930 or whenever a home was built.

266
00:21:39,640 --> 00:21:45,480
 I mean, I think we as a city need to recognize our leaders, whoever they were.

267
00:21:45,480 --> 00:21:51,680
 And if that's where the person lived, and if there's a marker there, and an app, in this case, these days, it's an app.

268
00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:55,640
 The registered Texas landmark put the history on the marker, usually.

269
00:21:55,640 --> 00:21:58,160
 Locally, we just have the medallion.

270
00:21:58,160 --> 00:22:03,680
 But if there's some way for that, and I remember that school teacher was a very well respected school teacher.

271
00:22:03,680 --> 00:22:05,560
 >> Right, right, she just had a school named after her.

272
00:22:05,560 --> 00:22:11,040
 >> Yeah, the school, so I think it's an excellent place to have a landmark.

273
00:22:11,040 --> 00:22:16,460
 And so then your structure will then fall still under the, if you make significant

274
00:22:16,460 --> 00:22:21,000
 exterior alterations to your structure, you would have to go before the Landmark Commission.

275
00:22:21,000 --> 00:22:27,320
 But if the Landmark Commission is well trained and doing a good job, that just should give you just good advice.

276
00:22:27,320 --> 00:22:34,480
 And so it could be definitely, there are definitely places in Denton that we need to look at,

277
00:22:34,480 --> 00:22:39,880
 I think, and recognize the people that are the backstory to where we are now.

278
00:22:41,040 --> 00:22:45,440
 >> I do not see any other questions.

279
00:22:45,440 --> 00:22:48,400
 >> Okay, thank you.

280
00:22:48,400 --> 00:22:49,440
 >> Thank you very much.

281
00:22:49,440 --> 00:22:51,400
 >> Okay, so hopefully I'll see you all.

282
00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:55,960
 You all will get an invitation for February the 18th, and then the following day,

283
00:22:55,960 --> 00:23:01,400
 we'll have a little smaller workshop, so if you need to come by then, so please, please come and bring your ideas.

284
00:23:01,400 --> 00:23:05,400
 And we will post that as a meeting, so don't worry about a quorum, thanks.

285
00:23:08,800 --> 00:23:16,200
 >> The next item on our agenda is to discuss the Denton Development Code update, and Ron Minguinta is here.

286
00:23:16,200 --> 00:23:18,600
 >> Thank you, Chair and members of the commission.

287
00:23:18,600 --> 00:23:20,960
 Thank you for this opportunity while I pull this up.

288
00:23:20,960 --> 00:23:31,320
 We are excited to bring you an update on the DVC update.

289
00:23:31,320 --> 00:23:33,320
 We've got a lot going on.

290
00:23:33,320 --> 00:23:42,280
 There's been a lot of work being done outside of the Piling and Zoning Commission, and we're really ready to bring it forward to you all.

291
00:23:42,280 --> 00:23:50,400
 So this is an opportunity to share with you some dates that are upcoming to get some feedback from you all on the process,

292
00:23:50,400 --> 00:24:03,040
 also to get some confirmation on certain times that we're going to have to have you guys consider these changes that we're proposing as part of the DVC update.

293
00:24:03,040 --> 00:24:10,360
 So I've got the presentation that I shared with the commission several months ago.

294
00:24:10,360 --> 00:24:17,480
 I'm going to go through this fairly quickly, but just to give the Piling and Zoning Commission a little bit of background where we are.

295
00:24:17,480 --> 00:24:22,280
 The agenda, again, we're going to talk about why we're doing this, where we are as far as the status,

296
00:24:22,280 --> 00:24:29,360
 the policies that the DCRC, the Development Code Review Committee, has been discussing over the past several months.

297
00:24:29,360 --> 00:24:35,400
 We'll also talk about some notification in the sub-chapters, particularly, I kind of skipped that.

298
00:24:35,400 --> 00:24:39,400
 The notification, which is going to be important as we move forward with adoption.

299
00:24:39,400 --> 00:24:49,600
 And then the next steps, and this is, again, where I'm going to be talking to you all about the dates and how you guys are going to be involved in that process.

300
00:24:49,600 --> 00:24:55,440
 So for the purpose, you know, we hear about the Den Plan 2030 a lot, which is great in that plan.

301
00:24:55,440 --> 00:24:59,920
 There's a action that talks about updating the DVC, so that's where we are.

302
00:24:59,920 --> 00:25:06,560
 We're updating it to be consistent with the Den Plan 2030, not only for the land use element,

303
00:25:06,560 --> 00:25:13,960
 but also the other actions that go along with development in terms of flexibility,

304
00:25:13,960 --> 00:25:19,280
 developability, and areas of growth of the area.

305
00:25:19,280 --> 00:25:21,840
 So this covers all of that.

306
00:25:21,840 --> 00:25:29,480
 And we hope that with the DVC update, it addresses all of what is stated in the Den Plan 2030.

307
00:25:29,480 --> 00:25:37,320
 We've been working on this since November 2017, I'm sorry, June of 2017 through the DCRC.

308
00:25:37,320 --> 00:25:44,640
 We've been holding several meetings almost on a weekly or bi-weekly set schedule,

309
00:25:44,640 --> 00:25:49,720
 discussing a number of different things, which we'll briefly go through in the next slide.

310
00:25:49,720 --> 00:25:54,000
 We've held open houses, I know some of you attended a few of those.

311
00:25:54,000 --> 00:26:01,400
 We've attended as many neighborhood meetings, development related organization meetings,

312
00:26:01,400 --> 00:26:06,000
 as well as being active out in the community markets.

313
00:26:06,000 --> 00:26:12,360
 Recently, we were at the state of the city, so we're trying to get as much input and feedback from the community as much as possible.

314
00:26:12,360 --> 00:26:17,360
 Ultimately, our goal is to have a consolidated public draft.

315
00:26:17,360 --> 00:26:20,480
 That is set to be published soon.

316
00:26:20,480 --> 00:26:26,760
 That is what we are currently working on, again, with the DCRC and with internal staff.

317
00:26:26,760 --> 00:26:32,680
 So the consultants, Clarion, has been working on putting that together.

318
00:26:32,680 --> 00:26:37,960
 They've received all our comments and are putting the revised version together.

319
00:26:37,960 --> 00:26:42,720
 Once they do, we will publish it online for the public to review.

320
00:26:42,720 --> 00:26:45,920
 So that's all upcoming.

321
00:26:45,920 --> 00:26:50,360
 So what is covered so far in the update?

322
00:26:50,360 --> 00:26:57,280
 You see this list here, it's an extensive list, but it's probably a small portion of what really has been discussed.

323
00:26:57,280 --> 00:27:03,240
 There's been a numerous amount of items that we have gone through, really high level policy,

324
00:27:03,240 --> 00:27:13,040
 but also we've gone to the level of zoning districts, where they should be as well as what type of uses are permitted and also some development standards.

325
00:27:13,040 --> 00:27:16,520
 So this is just a list, I'm not going to go through all of this.

326
00:27:16,520 --> 00:27:25,840
 But there has been a number of discussions and topics that have been discussed through, again, the DCRC, but also within the staff internally.

327
00:27:25,840 --> 00:27:33,640
 The main subchapters that we have proposed are here listed.

328
00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:35,080
 There's a total of eight.

329
00:27:35,080 --> 00:27:40,720
 As you all know, the current DDC has 24, so there's going to be a lot of consolidation,

330
00:27:40,720 --> 00:27:43,680
 mainly the development standards.

331
00:27:43,680 --> 00:27:53,160
 Most of the development standards that we have currently in the DDC is broken up into separate subchapters, water, transportation, and site design.

332
00:27:53,160 --> 00:27:57,720
 It all is going to be combined into subchapter six, which is development standard.

333
00:27:57,720 --> 00:28:07,840
 So not that it's going to be losing information, but it's going to be organized and outlined in a much organized way and user friendly way.

334
00:28:07,840 --> 00:28:16,480
 So that's the goal, and that's the hope that this DDC update will have as part of this update.

335
00:28:16,480 --> 00:28:25,240
 I wanted to show you this slide just to kind of present some of the zoning districts that we're considering.

336
00:28:25,240 --> 00:28:31,640
 And this is the far right there is the new zoning districts.

337
00:28:31,640 --> 00:28:34,880
 Many of you have already seen these zoning districts.

338
00:28:34,880 --> 00:28:42,920
 Hopefully, what we will do when we come to you in a longer work session is to go through each of those zoning districts,

339
00:28:42,920 --> 00:28:50,400
 explain it in more detail, and also show the associated zoning map that goes along with these zoning districts.

340
00:28:50,400 --> 00:28:55,160
 So just to give you an idea, we have approximately 28 zoning districts.

341
00:28:55,160 --> 00:28:59,040
 We're going to narrow that down to 15 to 16 zoning districts.

342
00:28:59,040 --> 00:29:03,520
 So we're combining a number of them, as you can see this right here.

343
00:29:03,520 --> 00:29:06,600
 There's five here, four in general.

344
00:29:06,600 --> 00:29:14,280
 That's going to go down to one, and you see there's numerous examples of two that will go into one zoning district.

345
00:29:14,280 --> 00:29:16,680
 So this is a first step.

346
00:29:16,680 --> 00:29:21,200
 This doesn't mean that this is what it's going to transfer to, but really it's just a first blush or

347
00:29:21,200 --> 00:29:28,120
 first step into identifying the new zoning districts for the new zoning map, for the up to date zoning map.

348
00:29:28,120 --> 00:29:34,660
 So anybody have any questions so far?

349
00:29:34,660 --> 00:29:39,360
 So another part of the DDC update will be notification.

350
00:29:39,360 --> 00:29:45,560
 Of course, there's going to be a lot of people that are going to want to know what's being done on their property.

351
00:29:45,560 --> 00:29:53,440
 So back when we first started the public open houses, we sent out a postcard to all property owners,

352
00:29:53,440 --> 00:29:58,120
 and that totaled up to approximately 30,000 postcards.

353
00:29:58,120 --> 00:30:05,400
 There are 30 plus thousand property owners that received this postcard, letting them know what's going on.

354
00:30:05,400 --> 00:30:14,280
 What is going to happen with their zoning map, and then also a link to the DDC, I'm sorry, the den code 2030.com, or they can get more information.

355
00:30:14,280 --> 00:30:21,400
 We had open houses and there were a lot of people that came, but we certainly can do better and get more people involved.

356
00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:24,960
 Moving forward, ultimately this DDC update and

357
00:30:24,960 --> 00:30:31,720
 zoning map will require a public hearing through the planning and zoning commission and ultimately the city council.

358
00:30:31,720 --> 00:30:35,080
 That is going to require notification requirements.

359
00:30:35,080 --> 00:30:45,080
 Therefore, the 30,000 plus will also be getting a letter through the mail letting them know of the public hearing.

360
00:30:45,080 --> 00:30:52,040
 And so I don't expect them all to show up at one time, but they will be there, I'm sure.

361
00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:58,240
 Based on my understanding of the past update in 2002, there were a number of people that came out,

362
00:30:58,240 --> 00:31:06,720
 don't have the exact numbers, but they will obviously show their support in opposition of whatever that is.

363
00:31:06,720 --> 00:31:12,120
 We will also make sure that it's advertised in the newspaper and posted on our website.

364
00:31:12,120 --> 00:31:18,400
 So again, we get as much of the public outreach as we can through this process.

365
00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:22,360
 >> Ron, what's the approximate timeline for the introduction postcards to go out?

366
00:31:22,360 --> 00:31:26,960
 >> So the top part, that went out already.

367
00:31:26,960 --> 00:31:33,160
 So it went out last year as we started the initial, wanting to get your feedback, your input.

368
00:31:33,160 --> 00:31:40,120
 The next step when we get into the public hearings, we'll have to start this process.

369
00:31:41,120 --> 00:31:47,440
 Like any public hearing notification, it will have to go out prior to state law.

370
00:31:47,440 --> 00:31:54,800
 We say 17 days, so that's going to be 17 days before the first public hearing, which is city planning zoning commission.

371
00:31:54,800 --> 00:32:01,120
 So what does that mean for you all?

372
00:32:01,120 --> 00:32:06,520
 And I don't mean to scare you, but it's going to be a busy couple months.

373
00:32:06,520 --> 00:32:16,600
 I wanted to give you this as a heads up, and really, there's going to be a couple of dates that we're going to require a special called meeting for the planning zoning commission.

374
00:32:16,600 --> 00:32:23,640
 And it will be on, a couple of them will be on certain times.

375
00:32:23,640 --> 00:32:29,880
 You don't necessarily have to write this, we'll make sure that we reach out to you and let you know.

376
00:32:29,880 --> 00:32:35,520
 But we will definitely make sure that you're well aware of when those dates are.

377
00:32:35,520 --> 00:32:43,320
 So that first P&Z work session is scheduled for February 13th.

378
00:32:43,320 --> 00:32:50,520
 That is a non-scheduled P&Z, so it will be a special called meeting.

379
00:32:50,520 --> 00:32:54,880
 We will make sure that that meeting agenda is posted.

380
00:32:54,880 --> 00:33:00,880
 We are looking at a time of four, between four and 530.

381
00:33:00,880 --> 00:33:04,560
 The idea here is Clarion will be in town.

382
00:33:04,560 --> 00:33:08,240
 They will be making a presentation to the city council on the 12th.

383
00:33:08,240 --> 00:33:14,120
 Really just going over highlights of the DVC update changes,

384
00:33:14,120 --> 00:33:23,040
 talk about some high level policy updates, also to go over the procedure, the schedule of the adoption.

385
00:33:23,040 --> 00:33:27,040
 So they'll be talking to city council on the 12th.

386
00:33:27,040 --> 00:33:33,480
 The next day, we have set meetings with internal technical staff committee members.

387
00:33:33,480 --> 00:33:36,200
 We will be meeting with stakeholders.

388
00:33:36,200 --> 00:33:41,920
 And then in between, we're going to be hopefully meeting with you all again between four and 530.

389
00:33:41,920 --> 00:33:47,280
 Later that evening, we're going to have a public meeting where we're going to be presenting to the public in general.

390
00:33:47,280 --> 00:33:52,000
 So be a busy Wednesday for Clarion and for staff.

391
00:33:52,000 --> 00:33:59,040
 But this is the time that we're looking for because we want to offer the public an opportunity after hours.

392
00:33:59,040 --> 00:34:02,000
 Again, about six o'clock is when we'll start that.

393
00:34:02,000 --> 00:34:10,800
 So that's why we're pushing our planning zoning commission special call meeting to start from four and hopefully in about 530.

394
00:34:10,800 --> 00:34:13,440
 And again, Clarion will be in town to make that presentation.

395
00:34:13,440 --> 00:34:18,880
 Does anybody have any conflicts on that date or that time?

396
00:34:18,880 --> 00:34:20,520
 Does that work for everybody?

397
00:34:20,520 --> 00:34:28,880
 I just want to make sure that you're aware of that, but we really need to know so that we can make accommodations if needed.

398
00:34:30,680 --> 00:34:31,800
 So that's the first work session.

399
00:34:31,800 --> 00:34:39,040
 Following that work sessions with city council and the planning zoning commission,

400
00:34:39,040 --> 00:34:46,200
 we will be publishing the consolidated draft, which is the draft that we were talked about earlier.

401
00:34:46,200 --> 00:34:53,600
 Where Clarion has revised it and taken into consideration the comments that they've received so far.

402
00:34:53,600 --> 00:34:56,200
 That is scheduled for February 15th.

403
00:34:56,200 --> 00:35:02,600
 Published that online following that publication, start hitting again the stakeholders,

404
00:35:02,600 --> 00:35:12,080
 the hosting meetings at our offices during business hours and then also having public meetings after hours.

405
00:35:12,080 --> 00:35:18,040
 The intent and the goal is to provide ample opportunity for the public to provide input.

406
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:21,640
 So that's coming in February.

407
00:35:24,080 --> 00:35:33,480
 More meetings in February, so here's where we're going to get into the details to a certain degree of each of the sub-chapters.

408
00:35:33,480 --> 00:35:38,880
 Like I went through fairly quickly what they are, but in these upcoming work sessions for

409
00:35:38,880 --> 00:35:44,640
 planning zoning commission scheduled for February 20th and 27th,

410
00:35:44,640 --> 00:35:49,560
 we will have work sessions to go over the sub-chapters.

411
00:35:50,680 --> 00:35:56,440
 The February 20th is a scheduled P and Z, so we'll try to fit it in there with that date.

412
00:35:56,440 --> 00:36:01,120
 The 27th, the following week, we will have to have a special call meeting.

413
00:36:01,120 --> 00:36:08,280
 The time has not yet been set, but most likely it will probably be sometime in the afternoon or evening hours.

414
00:36:08,280 --> 00:36:15,320
 We promise not to keep you here late, but we want to make sure we have an opportunity to go through the DDC update.

415
00:36:18,360 --> 00:36:25,560
 Those work sessions will include a discussion on the zoning map and the zoning districts as well, so another opportunity.

416
00:36:25,560 --> 00:36:33,160
 >> On the 20th, that's a normal call P and Z, do you have a start time for the 20th proposed?

417
00:36:33,160 --> 00:36:40,080
 >> I think we should probably look at, maybe look at our calendar, because we're probably, that agenda's starting to get full.

418
00:36:40,080 --> 00:36:41,640
 >> So we'll probably start earlier.

419
00:36:41,640 --> 00:36:46,400
 >> Earlier, maybe 3.30, maybe even 3, if that works.

420
00:36:46,400 --> 00:36:48,400
 >> Send us an email out, okay.

421
00:36:48,400 --> 00:36:50,320
 >> Maybe even two.

422
00:36:50,320 --> 00:36:56,000
 >> It's okay, we can commission her back.

423
00:36:56,000 --> 00:36:59,560
 >> 11, right?

424
00:36:59,560 --> 00:37:00,640
 >> Is that 2 AM?

425
00:37:00,640 --> 00:37:04,320
 >> 2 AM, yeah, Commissioner Beck's out.

426
00:37:15,040 --> 00:37:22,800
 >> Just, Scott just reminded me, again, there's been a lot of work with the DCRC, the Development Code Review Committee.

427
00:37:22,800 --> 00:37:25,760
 And three members of the Planning Zoning Commission are part of that.

428
00:37:25,760 --> 00:37:31,720
 And so, not to say that they're, we're going to start from scratch, there's been a lot of work already.

429
00:37:31,720 --> 00:37:40,080
 So we're going to try to cover some highlights, but still offer the rest of the commissioners the opportunity to ask questions and provide input.

430
00:37:40,080 --> 00:37:49,400
 I just want to make you all aware that the committee has been working on this for a long time, and so it's not like we're starting from scratch.

431
00:37:49,400 --> 00:37:50,120
 >> Commissioner Beck.

432
00:37:50,120 --> 00:37:51,440
 >> Thank you, Chair.

433
00:37:51,440 --> 00:37:57,400
 We've been trying to schedule a couple of DCRC meetings, and we got a quorum.

434
00:37:57,400 --> 00:38:02,840
 So in the last email, I think we got, they were going to shoot for this Friday.

435
00:38:02,840 --> 00:38:06,600
 Do we know if they're- >> There was not a quorum for this Friday.

436
00:38:06,600 --> 00:38:07,880
 >> Okay. >> Unfortunately.

437
00:38:09,280 --> 00:38:14,440
 >> I believe the consulting group- >> Clarion.

438
00:38:14,440 --> 00:38:17,480
 >> Clarion, they're coming in early February, aren't they?

439
00:38:17,480 --> 00:38:20,800
 >> They're scheduled for the 12th and 13th.

440
00:38:20,800 --> 00:38:25,880
 >> Okay, so are we going to try and have another DCRC?

441
00:38:25,880 --> 00:38:29,160
 >> We're going to try to have another DCRC.

442
00:38:29,160 --> 00:38:34,920
 The code discussions has kind of moved forward, but we still have a lot of zoning discussions,

443
00:38:34,920 --> 00:38:38,840
 zoning map discussions that we want to discuss with the DCRC.

444
00:38:38,840 --> 00:38:40,080
 >> You go forward, Clarion.

445
00:38:40,080 --> 00:38:40,720
 >> Yeah, right.

446
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:41,560
 >> Okay, thanks.

447
00:38:41,560 --> 00:38:54,240
 >> The version that we afforded to Clarion who is currently revising is essentially closed.

448
00:38:54,240 --> 00:39:02,720
 And so there's no more input under the staff, but the legal department is still looking it over as well.

449
00:39:02,720 --> 00:39:09,720
 So between now and the consolidated draft, which is, sorry, let me go back up.

450
00:39:09,720 --> 00:39:17,880
 February 15th, we will have input from our legal department,

451
00:39:17,880 --> 00:39:21,320
 and that is the draft that is going to be published online.

452
00:39:21,320 --> 00:39:29,080
 That is the draft that we will be presenting to you all at the work session again on February 20th.

453
00:39:29,080 --> 00:39:34,360
 So it's going to be quick, February 15th, as you know, is Friday, the 20th is the next Wednesday.

454
00:39:34,360 --> 00:39:41,120
 So we know it's an aggressive schedule, but we are really wanting to get this done.

455
00:39:41,120 --> 00:39:47,800
 And of course, it's not that we don't want to make sure we get it to everybody,

456
00:39:47,800 --> 00:39:53,960
 but we've been working on this for some time, so we have to really move forward on this DDC update.

457
00:39:55,240 --> 00:40:02,040
 So following the planning zoning commission work session is going to be planning zoning commission one week and then city council.

458
00:40:02,040 --> 00:40:03,960
 We're going to be talking about the same topics.

459
00:40:03,960 --> 00:40:08,320
 And then again, planning zoning commission on the 27th, followed by city council on the 5th.

460
00:40:08,320 --> 00:40:13,160
 So a lot of stuff going on in the next couple months.

461
00:40:13,160 --> 00:40:17,880
 We will continue to have stakeholder meetings, open houses,

462
00:40:17,880 --> 00:40:22,160
 open hour office hours that is, public meetings.

463
00:40:22,160 --> 00:40:30,680
 The final adoption draft is the result of those work sessions that we have scheduled with you all.

464
00:40:30,680 --> 00:40:34,800
 We're going to take your input, package it up, send it back to Clarion.

465
00:40:34,800 --> 00:40:38,760
 They're going to send it back to us so that we can review and publish.

466
00:40:38,760 --> 00:40:42,080
 And that is scheduled for March 29th.

467
00:40:42,080 --> 00:40:48,080
 So we'll be online, published on March 29th with the hope.

468
00:40:48,080 --> 00:40:49,840
 And here's the big slide.

469
00:40:49,840 --> 00:40:51,200
 When is this going to be done?

470
00:40:51,200 --> 00:40:55,960
 So this is our attempt of identifying dates.

471
00:40:55,960 --> 00:40:59,720
 So again, this is all, I want to say the dates.

472
00:40:59,720 --> 00:41:06,640
 But of course, it's going to be subject to how soon we can get through plane z and city council.

473
00:41:06,640 --> 00:41:15,440
 The scheduled planning and zoning public hearing to consider the DDC update is April 10th.

474
00:41:15,440 --> 00:41:20,480
 And that is a special called meeting, it's not one of your scheduled meetings.

475
00:41:20,480 --> 00:41:29,960
 So we will schedule that again, and of course, we'll need to talk to you all about what times you are all available for that time.

476
00:41:29,960 --> 00:41:32,080
 And Scott has something to say.

477
00:41:32,080 --> 00:41:34,000
 >> Scott always has something to say.

478
00:41:34,000 --> 00:41:37,960
 I want to say that this is an incredibly aggressive timeline, and as Ron indicated,

479
00:41:37,960 --> 00:41:45,760
 whatever time it takes to get this completed, in order to keep the momentum that we have going, that's why we're trying to pursue this.

480
00:41:45,760 --> 00:41:53,520
 And if we need to drag this through this building season into next year, we can do that.

481
00:41:53,520 --> 00:42:03,240
 It's ultimately getting that level of comfort that this commission needs as well as council needs.

482
00:42:03,240 --> 00:42:10,160
 So this work group has been working all summer, virtually every Friday, meeting after meeting.

483
00:42:10,160 --> 00:42:18,600
 We've went through a great deal of detail, and so we're going to try to put as much of that as we can in front of you,

484
00:42:18,600 --> 00:42:22,680
 not expecting you to get into the same level of detail that the committee did.

485
00:42:22,680 --> 00:42:28,520
 But if you feel that you need more, we'll schedule additional meetings, if warranted, if wanted,

486
00:42:28,520 --> 00:42:33,480
 if desired, whatever the will of the commission is, or we'll take the time that we need.

487
00:42:33,480 --> 00:42:40,480
 So again, I've been pushing staff and Clarion to get this done for the sake that we really, really need it done.

488
00:42:40,480 --> 00:42:42,600
 We've got an old development code.

489
00:42:42,600 --> 00:42:45,120
 We've got fundamentally two development codes out there.

490
00:42:45,120 --> 00:42:49,080
 This is a vast improvement that's many years in the making.

491
00:42:49,080 --> 00:42:56,760
 To go from 2002 to today, I mean, we're almost at that 20-year marker, getting close enough that it's just time.

492
00:42:56,760 --> 00:43:03,880
 So again, having that level of comfort from you, the commission, as well as from council, we'll do what we need to do.

493
00:43:03,880 --> 00:43:08,200
 But we're taking a very aggressive approach and we're asking for your help in doing this.

494
00:43:08,200 --> 00:43:13,960
 And hopefully, your committee members can help support the work that's being done.

495
00:43:13,960 --> 00:43:19,800
 This is not really staff-driven as much as it is staff has a mission to facilitate what's being done.

496
00:43:19,800 --> 00:43:23,640
 So I have a quick question.

497
00:43:23,640 --> 00:43:28,520
 I don't know if Ron or Scott can answer this. It's more of a brainstorming thought.

498
00:43:28,520 --> 00:43:36,640
 Would it be appropriate during this kind of February review cycle to have the committee meet?

499
00:43:36,640 --> 00:43:41,720
 Because it seems like you're going to go P&Z council, P&Z council.

500
00:43:41,720 --> 00:43:50,440
 Would it be beneficial to have a joint meeting or rely on our subcommittee so that there is a cross talk during this?

501
00:43:50,440 --> 00:43:55,400
 So it's not, well, council said this Tuesday, well, let's ask them and there's another delay.

502
00:43:55,400 --> 00:44:03,320
 Is there any benefit to maybe organizing some sort of joint meeting either at the DRDC subcommittee or

503
00:44:03,320 --> 00:44:10,440
 collectively during this kind of busy February to make sure that conversation is as productive as possible?

504
00:44:10,440 --> 00:44:12,000
 >> Twofold, I think, to that.

505
00:44:12,000 --> 00:44:17,800
 That is the purpose in the development review committee, is to be that cross-pollinated committee.

506
00:44:17,800 --> 00:44:22,080
 Rather than having those two independent bodies meeting together.

507
00:44:22,080 --> 00:44:31,160
 So again, the ability for people to get in front of a commission and have that conversation and/or council if they don't get that resolution, we keep that intact.

508
00:44:31,160 --> 00:44:36,920
 We do intend on meeting with that subcommittee in between during this period.

509
00:44:36,920 --> 00:44:40,080
 What isn't here is we have a calendar.

510
00:44:40,080 --> 00:44:41,720
 We intend to be everywhere.

511
00:44:41,720 --> 00:44:43,920
 So we're going to go to HOAs.

512
00:44:43,920 --> 00:44:45,880
 We're going to have meetings in our building.

513
00:44:45,880 --> 00:44:47,920
 We're going to have meetings at the chamber.

514
00:44:47,920 --> 00:44:51,840
 We're going to be anywhere that we can to get out in front of people and hear what it is they have to say.

515
00:44:51,840 --> 00:44:59,600
 Ultimately, we need to make sure that the legal bodies have their opportunity to hear,

516
00:44:59,600 --> 00:45:02,760
 be heard, and to voice their concerns.

517
00:45:02,760 --> 00:45:06,200
 It's staff's responsibility to echo what that is.

518
00:45:06,200 --> 00:45:12,480
 So if there is a recommendation that comes from the Planning and Zoning Commission, then we intend to do that.

519
00:45:12,480 --> 00:45:16,680
 So we have this conversation today, and today you say this is garbage, we want to get rid of it.

520
00:45:16,680 --> 00:45:22,120
 It is our obligation, responsibility to go to council and say P&Z said start over.

521
00:45:22,120 --> 00:45:24,920
 Whatever that may be, that's what we're obligated to do.

522
00:45:24,920 --> 00:45:30,520
 That's why we're having the meeting with P&Z prior to council on each of these all the way up and through the adoption process.

523
00:45:30,520 --> 00:45:31,480
 >> Makes perfect sense.

524
00:45:31,480 --> 00:45:32,520
 Thanks.

525
00:45:32,520 --> 00:45:34,160
 >> Can you back up one slide?

526
00:45:34,160 --> 00:45:37,320
 I think I saw something there.

527
00:45:37,320 --> 00:45:38,320
 Yeah, March 20th.

528
00:45:38,320 --> 00:45:39,360
 Oh, March 29th.

529
00:45:39,360 --> 00:45:41,080
 I thought that was February 29th.

530
00:45:41,080 --> 00:45:45,640
 Okay, March 29th is valuable.

531
00:45:45,640 --> 00:45:47,520
 >> Valuable for who?

532
00:45:47,520 --> 00:45:54,520
 >> No, I was just pointing out this is not a leap year, you know, because I thought it said February 29th.

533
00:45:54,520 --> 00:45:57,480
 >> So that is the end of the presentation.

534
00:45:57,480 --> 00:46:03,080
 It's really just to give you a future look at what's coming.

535
00:46:03,080 --> 00:46:11,600
 And really the date for you all to remember is February 13th when Clarion will be in town,

536
00:46:11,600 --> 00:46:16,800
 special called meeting looking to start at four to about 530.

537
00:46:16,800 --> 00:46:22,880
 And we'll make sure we send out meeting invites, and of course we'll post it accordingly.

538
00:46:22,880 --> 00:46:24,200
 And it will be here in the work session.

539
00:46:24,200 --> 00:46:26,880
 Any other questions?

540
00:46:26,880 --> 00:46:29,440
 >> No, thanks Ron.

541
00:46:29,440 --> 00:46:30,320
 >> All right. >> Appreciate it.

542
00:46:30,320 --> 00:46:30,820
 >> Thank you.

543
00:46:33,320 --> 00:46:39,960
 With that, we'll go back to work session item number one, which is the clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda.

544
00:46:39,960 --> 00:46:44,800
 Tonight, the public hearing 5A, that item is being pulled.

545
00:46:44,800 --> 00:46:52,600
 It might be coming back to us in February, but it'll be fully re-noticed, so we're just removing that from tonight's agenda.

546
00:46:52,600 --> 00:46:57,000
 And then I'll ask Richard if there's any clarification for consent or individual items this evening.

547
00:46:57,000 --> 00:47:00,560
 >> No, just the one public hearing item.

548
00:47:00,560 --> 00:47:01,600
 >> Perfect.

549
00:47:01,600 --> 00:47:05,000
 With that, does anyone have any questions on the consent agenda?

550
00:47:05,000 --> 00:47:09,240
 There's two items, looks like they're both Haley, if there's any questions for Haley.

551
00:47:09,240 --> 00:47:19,160
 Perfect, and on the individual items, can we just get a brief overview of those two items?

552
00:47:19,160 --> 00:47:23,680
 The first one is PZ 19-9, Charlie.

553
00:47:23,680 --> 00:47:30,640
 >> Good evening, everybody.

554
00:47:30,640 --> 00:47:33,160
 I'm Charlie Rosendahl, business services manager.

555
00:47:33,160 --> 00:47:50,480
 So I'm for you today, seeking a recommendation from the planning zoning commission on a developer engagement policy.

556
00:47:50,480 --> 00:47:57,800
 City council held a work session on October 23rd of last year to discuss this matter and

557
00:47:57,800 --> 00:48:01,400
 ultimately approved a policy on November 13th.

558
00:48:01,400 --> 00:48:07,000
 What that policy does is it prohibits council members from

559
00:48:07,000 --> 00:48:12,040
 interacting with developers on not only development cases but

560
00:48:12,040 --> 00:48:18,160
 also economic development cases when the item is on

561
00:48:18,160 --> 00:48:23,880
 the agenda because of a tie vote or is subject to reconsideration.

562
00:48:23,880 --> 00:48:29,280
 And this policy also allows for a voluntary disclosure of any meetings

563
00:48:29,280 --> 00:48:34,120
 that council members have with developers on the upcoming cases.

564
00:48:34,120 --> 00:48:40,920
 So after that, on December 18th, they requested that the PNZ adopt a similar policy.

565
00:48:40,920 --> 00:48:44,600
 So that's what I'm bringing forward today.

566
00:48:44,600 --> 00:48:51,440
 And then we have planned to take that to city council on February 5th for adoption of a resolution.

567
00:48:54,240 --> 00:49:02,520
 So the policy here before you is very similar to the city council's that removes the language regarding economic development.

568
00:49:02,520 --> 00:49:08,520
 But what it would do is prohibit PNZ commission members

569
00:49:08,520 --> 00:49:14,160
 from having discussions with developers or interested parties on any item

570
00:49:14,160 --> 00:49:19,080
 that's on the agenda due to a tie vote or an item that's subject to reconsideration.

571
00:49:21,080 --> 00:49:26,520
 The tie vote here is an item fails passed by a majority and it goes on the next agenda.

572
00:49:26,520 --> 00:49:35,280
 And then is subject to reconsideration is that any time a recommendation is made by PNZ until the next meeting,

573
00:49:35,280 --> 00:49:38,840
 you'd be prohibited to speak with developers during that time.

574
00:49:38,840 --> 00:49:47,680
 >> So we wouldn't necessarily know if an item is being up for reconsideration since commissioners would have to bring that forward.

575
00:49:47,680 --> 00:49:55,760
 So you're saying, just so I understand the policy, going forward after an item has been voted on and closed,

576
00:49:55,760 --> 00:50:03,040
 we basically have a no discussion with developer for two weeks to ensure no commissioner brings up a reconsideration motion.

577
00:50:03,040 --> 00:50:09,880
 >> The reconsideration, once it's, it's typically done before the meeting.

578
00:50:09,880 --> 00:50:13,320
 And so for example, if you were on the prevailing side,

579
00:50:13,320 --> 00:50:17,440
 you would request that a reconsideration be placed on the agenda for discussion.

580
00:50:17,440 --> 00:50:21,800
 And at that time, everyone would know that that item would be scheduled and there would sort of,

581
00:50:21,800 --> 00:50:25,360
 at that time, it would kick in.

582
00:50:25,360 --> 00:50:32,320
 >> Because if the item has not been posted or given to us for

583
00:50:32,320 --> 00:50:39,320
 reconsideration, are we able to talk to the developer before having that knowledge?

584
00:50:39,320 --> 00:50:43,640
 >> Yeah, let me correct it, because first we would have to have the vote on reconsidering the item.

585
00:50:45,040 --> 00:50:50,040
 And so if there's any affirmative to reconsider, it then would be placed on the next agenda.

586
00:50:50,040 --> 00:50:55,920
 So from that point in time until it comes on to the next agenda is when that time period would hit.

587
00:50:55,920 --> 00:51:01,760
 >> So I guess more specifically, if we vote on an item, item passes,

588
00:51:01,760 --> 00:51:08,960
 the next day the developer calls me and wants to talk about the project, I have no knowledge it's being up for reconsideration.

589
00:51:08,960 --> 00:51:14,600
 I am not to engage in that conversation until the next meeting passes and

590
00:51:14,600 --> 00:51:16,680
 the reconsideration is off the table.

591
00:51:16,680 --> 00:51:17,240
 >> That's correct.

592
00:51:17,240 --> 00:51:21,160
 It's while it's subject to a motion for reconsideration.

593
00:51:21,160 --> 00:51:24,960
 So that motion, you can't reconsider after the next official meeting.

594
00:51:24,960 --> 00:51:31,760
 So from the end of your meeting, once you've made your decision, until the next official meeting,

595
00:51:31,760 --> 00:51:35,640
 during that, while it's subject to a motion for reconsideration,

596
00:51:35,640 --> 00:51:39,240
 then you wouldn't be allowed to speak with that developer about that development.

597
00:51:40,800 --> 00:51:48,280
 >> Perfect, and I guess for clarification, P&Z holds a different tie vote procedure than council.

598
00:51:48,280 --> 00:51:54,480
 So in this situation, after the second tie vote, it goes to council as a denial.

599
00:51:54,480 --> 00:51:56,800
 So it wouldn't be possible to reconsider.

600
00:51:56,800 --> 00:52:01,080
 So after the second tie vote, this policy kind of goes away.

601
00:52:01,080 --> 00:52:02,240
 It wouldn't be enactable.

602
00:52:02,240 --> 00:52:08,200
 >> Well, it's a separate standard for a zoning recommendation, if it's a tie vote.

603
00:52:08,200 --> 00:52:13,400
 And so that's not a final decision of the P&Z.

604
00:52:13,400 --> 00:52:18,320
 So I think that what we're really talking about is reconsideration of a plan or

605
00:52:18,320 --> 00:52:21,560
 something where P&Z has a final approval of it.

606
00:52:21,560 --> 00:52:26,000
 >> Like the ADP item, for example, if it were to be approved for

607
00:52:26,000 --> 00:52:31,200
 whatever reason tomorrow, you want to recall that item or ask for reconsideration.

608
00:52:32,800 --> 00:52:39,640
 >> So we could have a tie zoning vote, and we're prohibited from discussing developer

609
00:52:39,640 --> 00:52:44,480
 during that process too, correct?

610
00:52:44,480 --> 00:52:50,160
 >> It doesn't say that specifically in this language, but

611
00:52:50,160 --> 00:52:56,800
 I think that when the P&Z would be entitled to reconsider an item,

612
00:52:56,800 --> 00:52:58,960
 it would be on an item where they have final approval.

613
00:52:58,960 --> 00:53:02,400
 >> For reconsideration, but on a tie vote.

614
00:53:02,400 --> 00:53:04,520
 >> I got you, on a tie vote, right.

615
00:53:04,520 --> 00:53:05,020
 >> Okay.

616
00:53:05,020 --> 00:53:08,240
 >> Commissioner Smith.

617
00:53:08,240 --> 00:53:09,360
 >> Thank you, Chair.

618
00:53:09,360 --> 00:53:15,640
 So whenever the reconsideration is as a member as a part of the prevailing side of the vote, I make the motion.

619
00:53:15,640 --> 00:53:20,480
 So let's say that there's an item where it's a 5-2 and

620
00:53:20,480 --> 00:53:25,600
 me and Larry are the two who vote whether against the motion or whatever it is.

621
00:53:25,600 --> 00:53:30,440
 But the developer that approaches myself, that is pertaining to the entire council,

622
00:53:30,440 --> 00:53:34,360
 not just to, or the entire commission, not just to those who are on the prevailing side, correct?

623
00:53:34,360 --> 00:53:38,920
 Cuz the motion is only to the prevailing side, but it's to everybody on there.

624
00:53:38,920 --> 00:53:40,360
 >> Yeah. >> So, okay, all right.

625
00:53:40,360 --> 00:53:44,400
 >> Okay, oh, Commissioner Beck.

626
00:53:44,400 --> 00:53:50,400
 >> Okay, and we're talking about discussion between a commission member or council member and a developer.

627
00:53:50,400 --> 00:53:57,240
 Discussion between commission members or other, as long as it's a matter of public record, that's something.

628
00:53:57,240 --> 00:54:00,160
 >> Well, it says developers or interested persons.

629
00:54:01,400 --> 00:54:04,440
 >> Okay, that's pretty broad.

630
00:54:04,440 --> 00:54:10,680
 So maybe, I guess the whole commission would be interested persons then, right?

631
00:54:10,680 --> 00:54:13,160
 So it couldn't be discussed amongst us.

632
00:54:13,160 --> 00:54:17,320
 >> Well, it seems like a commissioner to commissioner can still have a discussion if it's not a walking quorum.

633
00:54:17,320 --> 00:54:28,440
 >> Right, so we're already blocked there by the, what's the, open meetings, right, okay, okay, okay, thanks.

634
00:54:28,440 --> 00:54:30,600
 So it wouldn't preclude talking to staff.

635
00:54:30,600 --> 00:54:36,160
 >> Okay, Commissioner Pernitta.

636
00:54:36,160 --> 00:54:38,520
 >> And I just want to clarify on the uninterested person.

637
00:54:38,520 --> 00:54:45,000
 So I know the first part discusses developers, that's pretty cut and dry, is an interested person,

638
00:54:45,000 --> 00:54:54,120
 someone who lives right by the development that has spoken at a meeting, that kind of thing?

639
00:54:54,120 --> 00:54:54,880
 >> Yeah, it would.

640
00:54:54,880 --> 00:54:56,120
 >> Okay, all right.

641
00:54:56,120 --> 00:55:03,080
 The thing is, I think that you could propose, if you wanted to limit it to, say, financially interested persons,

642
00:55:03,080 --> 00:55:14,040
 if you wanted to allow for speaking to neighbors, it's just a matter of clarifying what the council intends and what you intend by this.

643
00:55:14,040 --> 00:55:17,720
 What we wanted to do with interested persons was to create it out so

644
00:55:17,720 --> 00:55:22,120
 that you would still have the ability to talk to staff about the project.

645
00:55:22,120 --> 00:55:27,240
 Because staff is obviously disinterested in the whole issue.

646
00:55:27,240 --> 00:55:35,560
 But if you really want to get down to that fight of a point of differentiating

647
00:55:35,560 --> 00:55:44,360
 between somebody who has an interest that's pretty much like the general public or

648
00:55:44,360 --> 00:55:50,760
 somebody who's curious or somebody who lives next door, it could be refined.

649
00:55:50,760 --> 00:55:57,000
 But that was the intent of saying interested persons was to

650
00:55:57,000 --> 00:56:01,240
 enable you to speak with people who have no stake in the outcome.

651
00:56:01,240 --> 00:56:04,920
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

652
00:56:04,920 --> 00:56:06,040
 >> Thank you, Chair.

653
00:56:06,040 --> 00:56:12,200
 Well, are you considering crafting it like the city council policy, which states developers or

654
00:56:12,200 --> 00:56:18,200
 persons entities requesting incentives or special consideration, is that?

655
00:56:18,200 --> 00:56:22,280
 >> That's not in our draft policy, is it?

656
00:56:22,280 --> 00:56:23,240
 >> You know what?

657
00:56:23,240 --> 00:56:24,520
 That's a good question.

658
00:56:24,520 --> 00:56:28,360
 >> Yeah, we do have an individual draft.

659
00:56:28,360 --> 00:56:30,280
 >> So let's see how that's worded.

660
00:56:30,280 --> 00:56:37,480
 >> Yeah, since the economic development component of that was out of here, we really wouldn't be talking incentives.

661
00:56:37,480 --> 00:56:44,600
 >> I don't see any other questions.

662
00:56:44,600 --> 00:56:45,080
 >> Okay.

663
00:56:47,240 --> 00:56:54,840
 >> Just to add a little more clarification on how, assuming this passes, how sort of the operation, how it would function.

664
00:56:54,840 --> 00:56:56,600
 Just a simple email.

665
00:56:56,600 --> 00:56:58,760
 Again, that's more on the voluntary disclosure.

666
00:56:58,760 --> 00:57:02,920
 Again, you're not obligated, but if you did want to, it's a simple email.

667
00:57:02,920 --> 00:57:05,840
 We collect it and have it as backup.

668
00:57:05,840 --> 00:57:07,000
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

669
00:57:07,000 --> 00:57:07,520
 >> Thank you, Chair.

670
00:57:07,520 --> 00:57:09,200
 Richard, do you have that disclosure written yet?

671
00:57:09,200 --> 00:57:14,200
 >> It's not even, it's just, I had it, if you had a meeting with somebody.

672
00:57:14,200 --> 00:57:15,480
 >> It's not going to be a form or anything.

673
00:57:15,480 --> 00:57:18,920
 >> It's just a simple email.

674
00:57:18,920 --> 00:57:20,280
 >> I see, to you.

675
00:57:20,280 --> 00:57:27,680
 >> We are working on a formal process so that you guys have the opportunity to go and you see what type of information we're collecting.

676
00:57:27,680 --> 00:57:32,960
 We're actively trying to do that with city council and for this commission as well.

677
00:57:32,960 --> 00:57:38,960
 But at this point, like Richard said, if you just provide an email, date, time, location of meeting, who you met with.

678
00:57:38,960 --> 00:57:40,800
 >> Legal jump in here.

679
00:57:40,800 --> 00:57:46,080
 >> Well, and pardon me for fumbling a little bit because we don't

680
00:57:46,080 --> 00:57:50,240
 typically see motions for reconsideration out of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

681
00:57:50,240 --> 00:57:59,440
 And so I don't know that we've got kind of a well oiled process of how that would go forward.

682
00:57:59,440 --> 00:58:05,400
 But as Richard said, typically you could have the motion to reconsider on the next meeting and

683
00:58:05,400 --> 00:58:09,560
 then the actual reconsideration thereafter.

684
00:58:09,560 --> 00:58:17,200
 I've also seen situations in which, if you could get notice to staff early enough that they could,

685
00:58:17,200 --> 00:58:26,680
 that you're intending to do this, they could get it posted on the agenda with plenty of time to satisfy the public meetings act.

686
00:58:26,680 --> 00:58:31,800
 And so we could work the details as far as when it would come up.

687
00:58:31,800 --> 00:58:39,600
 But just in general, that doesn't really impact the wording of this.

688
00:58:39,600 --> 00:58:45,120
 It's something to refine for what the motion for reconsider process would be.

689
00:58:45,120 --> 00:58:54,400
 But certainly to the extent that you get your intention to ask for reconsideration to staff early,

690
00:58:54,400 --> 00:58:57,120
 we could shortcut that process as much as possible.

691
00:58:57,120 --> 00:59:00,480
 >> Thank you, Chair. >> Mr. Smith.

692
00:59:00,480 --> 00:59:06,080
 >> In the event, I guess a real world example.

693
00:59:06,080 --> 00:59:14,680
 So two weeks ago we had the rezoning case up on 428 near Hartley Field Road.

694
00:59:14,680 --> 00:59:22,240
 This past Saturday, I saw Lee Allison at an event and had a conversation with him about that project.

695
00:59:22,240 --> 00:59:28,560
 If that was to happen, once this resolution is passed, if we pass it, that then would be prohibited.

696
00:59:28,560 --> 00:59:34,920
 Well, let's just pretend that it was in effect as of last week or two weeks ago.

697
00:59:34,920 --> 00:59:39,840
 I would then have to disclose it, and then I would have to be recused from the reconsideration conversation.

698
00:59:39,840 --> 00:59:44,680
 What's the process if a conversation does happen, whether it's in passing and not a formal meeting.

699
00:59:44,680 --> 00:59:49,600
 It's something where you end up having a conversation about it, and you do break that what happened to that point in time.

700
00:59:49,600 --> 00:59:53,880
 >> Well, I don't believe this policy says anything about recusal, if I'm not mistaken.

701
00:59:53,880 --> 00:59:57,800
 I think what it talks about is that- >> It's prohibited, what happens if I break the rule?

702
00:59:57,800 --> 01:00:02,680
 >> Yeah, well, I don't know that that's really stated, what happens if you break the rule.

703
01:00:02,680 --> 01:00:07,960
 I don't know if it's really stated as far as what happens if a council member breaks a rule, for that matter.

704
01:00:07,960 --> 01:00:15,160
 I don't know that it gets into all those details, and I don't know how much can really be done about it, to be real honest with you.

705
01:00:15,160 --> 01:00:19,440
 >> What's the point of having a rule if there's no consequence for it being broken?

706
01:00:19,440 --> 01:00:27,520
 >> Well, I guess as an affirmation of ethical standards going forward-

707
01:00:27,520 --> 01:00:29,960
 >> Wow, man, I'm all in favor of ethical standards.

708
01:00:29,960 --> 01:00:34,720
 >> I'm certainly not in a position to judge and say whether that's worthy or unworthy.

709
01:00:34,720 --> 01:00:42,760
 That's simply the direction that council wanted to go with it, and council wanted the PNZ to go in that direction as well.

710
01:00:42,760 --> 01:00:48,160
 I think that what this is saying is that if you encounter lials and

711
01:00:48,160 --> 01:00:54,400
 you exchange pleasantries, you say, we can't discuss that prior issue.

712
01:00:54,400 --> 01:00:58,880
 >> Well, let's say I break the rule, let's say I'm a bad commissioner, I break the rule, what happens?

713
01:00:58,880 --> 01:01:06,000
 >> And in order to protect yourself, do a disclosure on that.

714
01:01:06,000 --> 01:01:10,160
 >> I get my cookie, I'll let the Chair address somebody else.

715
01:01:10,160 --> 01:01:12,160
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

716
01:01:12,160 --> 01:01:13,640
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

717
01:01:13,640 --> 01:01:18,960
 >> I'm going to guess what could happen, that's why we have the new ethics board.

718
01:01:18,960 --> 01:01:23,120
 So what could happen is you could be brought under that, would be my guess.

719
01:01:23,120 --> 01:01:28,520
 >> Also, can I request a clarification just in something Commissioner Smith said?

720
01:01:28,520 --> 01:01:31,920
 The disclosure, I think, is not that you had the conversation and broke the rule.

721
01:01:31,920 --> 01:01:36,160
 The disclosure is any time, it's a voluntary disclosure, but

722
01:01:36,160 --> 01:01:40,080
 any time that we discuss something with a developer, correct?

723
01:01:40,080 --> 01:01:43,440
 >> Yeah, that's prior to an item being heard.

724
01:01:43,440 --> 01:01:47,920
 But I'm saying specifically in this scenario that I had on Saturday, that was after I was heard, I already voted.

725
01:01:47,920 --> 01:01:52,240
 Our recommendation made to PNZ, and I get it, it falls underneath the ethics deal.

726
01:01:52,240 --> 01:01:57,040
 I think it's not clearly stated that there's the consequence there.

727
01:01:57,040 --> 01:02:01,960
 So that might be a good thing, and that's the reason why I'm eating cookies right now, so.

728
01:02:01,960 --> 01:02:05,920
 >> Are you good?

729
01:02:05,920 --> 01:02:06,840
 >> Commissioner Fernanda.

730
01:02:06,840 --> 01:02:10,880
 >> No, I just wanted to point out, I think we've actually had an example of this already.

731
01:02:10,880 --> 01:02:16,720
 If I'm not mistaken, Council and Hudspeth met with one of the developers,

732
01:02:16,720 --> 01:02:23,720
 the property that's going up, I think about 250 houses on Bonnie Bray, right by where the school is going to be.

733
01:02:23,720 --> 01:02:31,600
 And we had a question about whether or not the road alongside it was going to be extended, and he disclosed that.

734
01:02:31,600 --> 01:02:38,720
 I don't know what came of that, but that is something that is on the record and has occurred in terms of this already, correct?

735
01:02:38,720 --> 01:02:39,760
 >> Yeah, that's correct.

736
01:02:39,760 --> 01:02:42,120
 So we've been talking about the voluntary disclosure a bit.

737
01:02:42,120 --> 01:02:47,000
 So anytime you have a meeting with the developer, you can disclose that.

738
01:02:47,000 --> 01:02:53,880
 And what will happen is we'll carry that disclosure forward on the upcoming PNC case as well as any city council cases.

739
01:02:53,880 --> 01:02:55,280
 So that's the same with city council.

740
01:02:55,280 --> 01:03:01,200
 We include that in the backup as an exhibit showing that there's disclosures to that.

741
01:03:01,200 --> 01:03:06,680
 >> So and then I guess regarding Commissioner Smith's question.

742
01:03:06,680 --> 01:03:11,680
 So there technically isn't no punitive action.

743
01:03:11,680 --> 01:03:15,960
 This is simply a policy to encourage transparency, right?

744
01:03:15,960 --> 01:03:16,480
 >> Yep.

745
01:03:16,480 --> 01:03:17,000
 >> Okay.

746
01:03:17,000 --> 01:03:25,040
 >> Question maybe that's not necessarily as important now that the policy's drafted.

747
01:03:25,040 --> 01:03:31,320
 But prior to this policy being approved, are commissioners not allowed to disclose?

748
01:03:31,320 --> 01:03:36,800
 >> No. >> Because the policy now permits us to do so.

749
01:03:36,800 --> 01:03:39,920
 Have we not been permitted to do that?

750
01:03:39,920 --> 01:03:47,160
 >> I think if you'd like to disclose, by all means disclose, it's going to be voluntary.

751
01:03:47,160 --> 01:03:52,400
 And so whether it's, I do know some council members, I mean even if there's an email communication,

752
01:03:52,400 --> 01:03:57,000
 some just disclose it just to be transparent about it.

753
01:03:57,000 --> 01:03:57,920
 >> Sure.

754
01:03:57,920 --> 01:03:58,600
 >> Commissioner Beck.

755
01:03:58,600 --> 01:04:00,160
 >> Okay, I may be a little confused here.

756
01:04:00,160 --> 01:04:07,440
 So we can't discuss anything with a developer, I can understand before it comes before us.

757
01:04:07,440 --> 01:04:11,280
 But once it comes before us, we voted on it, and we passed it on to city council.

758
01:04:11,280 --> 01:04:13,280
 We still can't discuss that with them until.

759
01:04:13,280 --> 01:04:14,800
 >> For one meeting.

760
01:04:14,800 --> 01:04:15,760
 >> For two weeks.

761
01:04:15,760 --> 01:04:16,720
 >> For two weeks.

762
01:04:16,720 --> 01:04:18,000
 >> Until the next meeting.

763
01:04:18,000 --> 01:04:21,120
 >> Even though we've already made our decision on it.

764
01:04:21,120 --> 01:04:22,400
 Okay, that helps, thank you.

765
01:04:22,400 --> 01:04:26,560
 >> All right, any other questions?

766
01:04:26,560 --> 01:04:28,160
 >> Maybe, Commissioner Ellis?

767
01:04:28,160 --> 01:04:28,680
 >> Thank you.

768
01:04:28,680 --> 01:04:32,960
 I'm going to just maybe throw it out to legal.

769
01:04:32,960 --> 01:04:36,680
 Do you understand what, it's for reconsideration, right?

770
01:04:36,680 --> 01:04:38,360
 So, I want to make sure that you want-

771
01:04:38,360 --> 01:04:43,680
 >> I can use some clarification on reconsideration because as you said, we don't do that much, so.

772
01:04:43,680 --> 01:04:44,280
 >> But we can.

773
01:04:44,280 --> 01:04:46,560
 >> Maybe if you can elaborate on that.

774
01:04:46,560 --> 01:04:51,280
 >> Yeah, and I didn't bring the copy 2-29 with me today.

775
01:04:51,280 --> 01:05:02,840
 But I could try to get on that before a regular meeting and see if I could get you a better answer on that.

776
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:05,480
 >> What would help me if you could give an example?

777
01:05:05,480 --> 01:05:07,840
 >> I'll try to find one.

778
01:05:07,840 --> 01:05:10,360
 >> Okay, instead of quoting the law-

779
01:05:10,360 --> 01:05:23,320
 >> Because I haven't seen one either, you know, and so it's, I just have to be very candid with you that I've been dealing with P&Z off and on for 20 some odd years, and I haven't seen a motion to reconsider.

780
01:05:23,320 --> 01:05:25,400
 >> Well, I've been here for three and a half years and I don't recall anything.

781
01:05:25,400 --> 01:05:31,760
 >> Yeah, so it's, don't judge me too harshly if I can't easily come up with an example.

782
01:05:31,760 --> 01:05:33,280
 >> Okay, if you can, that'd be great.

783
01:05:33,280 --> 01:05:34,440
 I'm a visual person that helps.

784
01:05:34,440 --> 01:05:36,760
 >> Okay.

785
01:05:36,760 --> 01:05:37,720
 >> Commissioner Burnetta.

786
01:05:37,720 --> 01:05:54,120
 >> And I just want to clarify, because before we get too comfortable with reciting two weeks, in an instance where, say, end of the year, December, where we might have a month before the next P&Z meeting, it would be a month in that case, because we are actually holding until the next meeting.

787
01:05:54,120 --> 01:05:55,000
 >> Right, until the next meeting.

788
01:05:55,000 --> 01:05:56,000
 >> Okay.

789
01:05:56,000 --> 01:05:56,920
 >> Typically two weeks.

790
01:05:56,920 --> 01:06:00,840
 >> Or in February where the next meeting might be a week later, right?

791
01:06:00,840 --> 01:06:05,880
 >> That's correct, we can send something out, too, that may be helpful on when that time period is.

792
01:06:05,880 --> 01:06:14,680
 So just for an example, anything leading up to this point tonight, you can have discussions, you can disclose it, you can choose not to disclose it, it's voluntary.

793
01:06:14,680 --> 01:06:26,040
 After you've made a vote, if we had a, well, I guess we still do have some items, but after you've made your vote tonight, then you wouldn't discuss that until February 6th.

794
01:06:26,040 --> 01:06:35,280
 You wouldn't discuss that development with that developer or any interested party until February 6th, and then you could discuss it after that.

795
01:06:35,280 --> 01:06:37,880
 >> Thank you.

796
01:06:37,880 --> 01:06:40,680
 >> Any other questions?

797
01:06:40,680 --> 01:06:43,400
 Thank you very much, Charlie, for the presentation.

798
01:06:43,400 --> 01:06:50,520
 The next and last item for our work session is 4B, and Haley, I'll ask you to present this item.

799
01:06:56,040 --> 01:07:09,920
 All right, so this case is an alternative development plan request for Blue Beacon.

800
01:07:09,920 --> 01:07:17,680
 So you can see the site outlined in black on the map, it's located at the intersection of I-35 and Barthold Road.

801
01:07:17,680 --> 01:07:23,960
 So the request before you is to consider approval of an ADP to deviate from two sections of sub-chapter 13.

802
01:07:23,960 --> 01:07:30,040
 That is the landscape and tree canopy requirements, and then the access parking and circulation requirements.

803
01:07:30,040 --> 01:07:33,920
 This property is just under 11 and a half acres.

804
01:07:33,920 --> 01:07:38,160
 It's located in an employment center commercial zoning district.

805
01:07:38,160 --> 01:07:46,080
 Some of you may remember over the past couple of years we've gone through a voluntary annexation for part of the property and then rezoning to ECC.

806
01:07:46,080 --> 01:07:50,520
 I believe that was last year, and then you've recently seen a preliminary plat for this site as well.

807
01:07:50,520 --> 01:07:53,640
 So they've been working on this consistently for a couple of years now.

808
01:07:53,640 --> 01:07:56,680
 And the proposed use is a Blue Beacon truck wash facility.

809
01:07:56,680 --> 01:08:03,520
 So to kind of show you the reason for this request, as they've gone through platting and

810
01:08:03,520 --> 01:08:12,960
 site planning for this location, they've come to realize that meeting the landscaping standards of our code is very difficult given the number of easements on the site.

811
01:08:12,960 --> 01:08:19,880
 So what you can see here is kind of their proposed site plan layout, and then they've highlighted the easements that are encumbering the site.

812
01:08:19,880 --> 01:08:25,680
 So this blue color is a drainage easements, there is a detention facility here in a lighter shade of blue.

813
01:08:25,680 --> 01:08:29,960
 There's an existing pipeline easement in yellow going around the perimeter of the site.

814
01:08:29,960 --> 01:08:35,240
 There is a water line easement here, and also a sanitary sewer easement and an electrical easement.

815
01:08:35,240 --> 01:08:41,120
 So of that 11 and a half acres, a very limited portion of the site can actually be developed.

816
01:08:44,320 --> 01:08:50,800
 So looking in detail at what they've proposed, the minimum for the zoning district is 20% landscaping.

817
01:08:50,800 --> 01:08:55,360
 Since all of these easements are grass, they have no trouble meeting that requirement.

818
01:08:55,360 --> 01:08:57,560
 They're at over 80% landscaping.

819
01:08:57,560 --> 01:09:00,920
 The code also requires for ECC 30% tree canopy.

820
01:09:00,920 --> 01:09:04,000
 On this site, that would be just over three acres worth of tree canopy.

821
01:09:04,000 --> 01:09:11,360
 What they've done is work extensively with planning staff in our engineering department to figure out where within these

822
01:09:11,360 --> 01:09:15,640
 numerous encumbrances they could feasibly plant trees and not interfere with something.

823
01:09:15,640 --> 01:09:24,320
 And what they've come up with is this plan for 45 new trees on the site as one tree is being preserved and then one tree is being relocated.

824
01:09:24,320 --> 01:09:28,720
 And that gets them to right around 11.6% tree canopy coverage.

825
01:09:28,720 --> 01:09:36,120
 So far short of the 30%, but definitely fitting things in where they can given the numerous encumbrances here.

826
01:09:36,120 --> 01:09:42,960
 Within the site design itself, the parking lot is really the only other place we have specific landscaping and tree canopy requirements.

827
01:09:42,960 --> 01:09:45,120
 And they are able to meet those within their parking lot.

828
01:09:45,120 --> 01:09:54,640
 So looking at the exact deviations they're asking for, the 30% tree canopy, as I mentioned, is probably their biggest challenge.

829
01:09:54,640 --> 01:09:59,080
 So they're falling short of that at just over 11%.

830
01:09:59,080 --> 01:10:06,680
 The street trees, you'll notice because of those easements, unable to plant trees along both of their street frontages as the code would require.

831
01:10:06,680 --> 01:10:11,960
 And then the code also requires when you have parking or vehicle maneuvering areas between your building and the street,

832
01:10:11,960 --> 01:10:19,020
 that you have that very specific 15 foot wide planted area that includes the berm, trees, and then either a wall or shrubs.

833
01:10:19,020 --> 01:10:24,800
 So again, given the easements, they were unable to provide that exact configuration that the code requires.

834
01:10:24,800 --> 01:10:33,280
 So while they don't have that specific planting area, and they don't have the berm, they have accommodated what they could, which is in the area in orange.

835
01:10:33,280 --> 01:10:37,160
 They intend to provide a minimum three foot high screening wall.

836
01:10:37,160 --> 01:10:42,600
 And then in front of the parking lot itself, they are providing small landscape islands planted with shrubs and trees.

837
01:10:42,600 --> 01:10:45,320
 So again, doing their best to meet the intent of that code requirement.

838
01:10:45,320 --> 01:10:52,240
 So looking at the criteria for approval of an ADP, preservation of existing neighborhoods.

839
01:10:52,240 --> 01:10:56,640
 And while there's not any residential neighborhoods in this area, we did look at the character of the area.

840
01:10:56,640 --> 01:11:00,880
 And this being a prominent highway intersection with other auto oriented uses,

841
01:11:00,880 --> 01:11:05,880
 this use fits well within that development pattern here.

842
01:11:05,880 --> 01:11:11,280
 Assuring quality development, again, over the last two years we've worked extensively with this developer.

843
01:11:11,280 --> 01:11:19,880
 And they're not trying to lower the design standards, they're just battling a high number of encumbrances on this site with drainage easements and utility easements.

844
01:11:19,880 --> 01:11:23,040
 And then focusing new development to activity centers.

845
01:11:23,040 --> 01:11:29,280
 This intersection's kind of already established itself as really that travel center kind of corridor here.

846
01:11:29,280 --> 01:11:31,520
 This whole area is intended for business innovation.

847
01:11:31,520 --> 01:11:38,280
 So someday we hope to see, based on our comp plan, those large campus style developments, light industrial and things of that nature.

848
01:11:38,280 --> 01:11:42,120
 So these auto uses like we see there with the truck stops at this location and

849
01:11:42,120 --> 01:11:45,680
 this truck wash would be supporting uses for that at some point in the future.

850
01:11:48,000 --> 01:11:52,760
 The last two criteria to ensure that infrastructure can accommodate the development.

851
01:11:52,760 --> 01:11:55,280
 The road frontages are already in place here.

852
01:11:55,280 --> 01:11:59,880
 Other developments such as the Loves here just south of them have brought utilities to this far north part of Denton.

853
01:11:59,880 --> 01:12:02,880
 So those are available for extension to this site.

854
01:12:02,880 --> 01:12:07,840
 And then again, resulting in a high quality development that meets the intent of our standards.

855
01:12:07,840 --> 01:12:12,640
 As you've seen here, they are trying their best to accommodate what the code requires of them.

856
01:12:12,640 --> 01:12:18,720
 Providing as many trees and as much landscaping as is possible within the constraints of the site.

857
01:12:18,720 --> 01:12:23,400
 So with that, staff is recommending approval of their request as we found it to meet those criteria.

858
01:12:23,400 --> 01:12:24,600
 >> Mr. Beck.

859
01:12:24,600 --> 01:12:26,440
 >> Thank you, Chair.

860
01:12:26,440 --> 01:12:34,320
 I'm assuming because they can't meet the 30% canopy is because they can't build because of all their strengths.

861
01:12:34,320 --> 01:12:39,400
 And that eliminates them from putting into the tree fund too, is that correct?

862
01:12:39,400 --> 01:12:44,960
 In other words, to make up for it, you know, we'd say it won't kick into the tree fund, but it's not their fault.

863
01:12:44,960 --> 01:12:48,040
 Am I saying that right?

864
01:12:48,040 --> 01:12:53,480
 >> Well, the code currently only allows tree fund payment when you're mitigating for existing trees that you're removing.

865
01:12:53,480 --> 01:12:54,120
 >> Okay.

866
01:12:54,120 --> 01:12:58,160
 >> So they are meeting the tree preservation standards for the site.

867
01:12:58,160 --> 01:13:00,120
 Because there's not a whole lot of trees on this lot.

868
01:13:00,120 --> 01:13:01,640
 So those two trees that I mentioned-

869
01:13:01,640 --> 01:13:05,200
 >> And they're not actually removing, they're relocating one.

870
01:13:05,200 --> 01:13:07,360
 >> Relocating one, preserving one.

871
01:13:07,360 --> 01:13:13,560
 There are a couple of other secondary trees that they will be removing, and then there's some dead trees on the site that they'll be removing.

872
01:13:13,560 --> 01:13:20,000
 So they are meeting the tree preservation, so that payment to the tree fund for mitigation doesn't apply to this situation.

873
01:13:20,000 --> 01:13:21,600
 >> Okay, thank you.

874
01:13:21,600 --> 01:13:26,680
 >> That is something we're looking at, if you remember, with the draft landscape code, but we don't have that yet.

875
01:13:26,680 --> 01:13:30,080
 >> Any other questions?

876
01:13:30,080 --> 01:13:33,600
 All right, thanks, Hayley.

877
01:13:33,600 --> 01:13:34,800
 >> Thank you.

878
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:40,120
 With the public hearing item being pulled, that concludes our work session.

879
01:13:40,120 --> 01:13:43,600
 I'll close this work session at 618.

880
01:13:43,600 --> 01:13:49,400
 We will have the public hearing and the full P&Z commission at 630 in council chambers.

881
01:13:49,400 --> 01:13:58,800
 >> Good evening and welcome to the January 23rd Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

882
01:13:58,800 --> 01:14:04,080
 This meeting will commence at 631.

883
01:14:04,080 --> 01:14:09,560
 The first item on the agenda is to stand and give the pledge of allegiance to the US and Texas flag.

884
01:14:09,560 --> 01:14:19,600
 >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands,

885
01:14:19,600 --> 01:14:24,480
 one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

886
01:14:24,480 --> 01:14:33,880
 On this Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to the United States, Texas, one state under God, one university.

887
01:14:34,080 --> 01:14:41,120
 >> The next item of business is to consider the approval of our planning and zoning commission minutes.

888
01:14:41,120 --> 01:14:43,720
 The chair will entertain any discussion or a motion.

889
01:14:43,720 --> 01:14:48,480
 >> Commissioner Ellis.

890
01:14:48,480 --> 01:14:49,080
 >> Thank you, Chair.

891
01:14:49,080 --> 01:14:50,200
 I have motion approval.

892
01:14:50,200 --> 01:14:54,040
 >> We have a first, Commissioner Pernitta.

893
01:14:54,040 --> 01:14:55,480
 >> I second the motion.

894
01:14:55,480 --> 01:14:59,640
 >> We have a first and a second to approve the planning and zoning minutes for January 9th.

895
01:14:59,640 --> 01:15:00,720
 Is there any discussion on the item?

896
01:15:02,320 --> 01:15:04,120
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

897
01:15:04,120 --> 01:15:13,640
 Motion carries 7-0.

898
01:15:13,640 --> 01:15:16,760
 The next item for business is our consent agenda.

899
01:15:16,760 --> 01:15:19,400
 Chair will entertain any motion or discussion on the items.

900
01:15:19,400 --> 01:15:20,520
 Commissioner Smith.

901
01:15:20,520 --> 01:15:21,120
 >> Move to approve.

902
01:15:21,120 --> 01:15:23,520
 >> Commissioner Beck.

903
01:15:23,520 --> 01:15:24,560
 >> Second.

904
01:15:24,560 --> 01:15:28,320
 >> We have a first and a second to approve the consent agenda.

905
01:15:28,320 --> 01:15:29,520
 Is there any discussion on the matter?

906
01:15:31,240 --> 01:15:33,280
 Seeing none, I'll call for a vote on the board.

907
01:15:33,280 --> 01:15:42,920
 Motion carries 7-0.

908
01:15:42,920 --> 01:15:47,000
 That brings us to the next items on the agenda.

909
01:15:47,000 --> 01:15:52,960
 And I want to make sure we at least announce that the public hearing item 5A,

910
01:15:52,960 --> 01:15:58,440
 there's a rezone case for the Hills of Argyle, has been pulled from tonight's agenda.

911
01:15:58,440 --> 01:16:02,800
 It will not be heard, so if anyone's watching on TV or here, that item has been pulled.

912
01:16:02,800 --> 01:16:05,560
 It'll be re-noticed for a future meeting.

913
01:16:05,560 --> 01:16:14,160
 With that, we'll go back to individual consideration, item 4A, PZ19-9.

914
01:16:14,160 --> 01:16:16,240
 And I will invite Charlie for presentation.

915
01:16:16,240 --> 01:16:27,080
 >> Good evening, commission members.

916
01:16:27,080 --> 01:16:31,960
 My name is Charlie Rosendahl, business services manager for the development services department.

917
01:16:31,960 --> 01:16:37,080
 I'm here today seeking a recommendation from P&Z regarding a developer engagement policy.

918
01:16:37,080 --> 01:16:41,040
 A little background on this, on October 23rd,

919
01:16:41,040 --> 01:16:48,120
 city council held a work session to discuss possible engagement policy for development.

920
01:16:48,120 --> 01:16:54,160
 On November 13th, they adopted a policy that prohibits discussions with developers or

921
01:16:54,160 --> 01:16:58,880
 persons regarding upcoming developments from the point in time that they've

922
01:16:58,880 --> 01:17:05,800
 made a motion and voted on an item until the next meeting,

923
01:17:05,800 --> 01:17:10,480
 which is the subject for reconsideration, and you're also prohibited during a tie vote.

924
01:17:10,480 --> 01:17:16,240
 On December 18th, they requested that P&Z adopt a similar policy.

925
01:17:16,240 --> 01:17:18,360
 So I'm here today seeking your recommendation, and

926
01:17:18,360 --> 01:17:20,880
 we'll take that forward to city council on February 5th.

927
01:17:24,240 --> 01:17:29,560
 So the draft policy you have in your backup would prohibit discussions with developers

928
01:17:29,560 --> 01:17:37,000
 or interested parties when an item is on a pending due to a tie vote,

929
01:17:37,000 --> 01:17:39,880
 or an item is subject to reconsideration.

930
01:17:39,880 --> 01:17:43,680
 So effectively, you would be prohibited from discussing with developers from the point

931
01:17:43,680 --> 01:17:49,480
 in time a recommendation is made at P&Z until the next official meeting,

932
01:17:49,480 --> 01:17:53,600
 or when an item is on the next agenda due to a tie vote.

933
01:17:54,160 --> 01:18:04,800
 The second part of the policy would be a voluntary disclosure of meetings with developers.

934
01:18:04,800 --> 01:18:09,000
 They must be submitted in writing to the director of development services.

935
01:18:09,000 --> 01:18:13,440
 We're currently working on a form that would be provided to you all so

936
01:18:13,440 --> 01:18:16,080
 that you can disclose those.

937
01:18:16,080 --> 01:18:21,920
 In the meantime, you can email staff and disclose that information, and

938
01:18:21,920 --> 01:18:26,560
 we'll include those disclosures in any future P&Z and city council backup.

939
01:18:26,560 --> 01:18:32,400
 And with that, I'm seeking your recommendation.

940
01:18:32,400 --> 01:18:36,880
 >> So we do have a question, Commissioner Beck.

941
01:18:36,880 --> 01:18:37,720
 >> Thank you, Chair.

942
01:18:37,720 --> 01:18:39,520
 With the help of my fellow commissioner Ellis,

943
01:18:39,520 --> 01:18:41,200
 I think I understand a little bit more what's going on here.

944
01:18:41,200 --> 01:18:45,440
 But the question did arise, and I don't know that this happens often.

945
01:18:45,440 --> 01:18:56,120
 But if we vote on an issue before the next P&Z, it makes it to city council.

946
01:18:56,120 --> 01:19:01,000
 Once it's on the city council's agenda, then that's something we can discuss,

947
01:19:01,000 --> 01:19:05,280
 because we're free and clear of it, or does that make sense?

948
01:19:05,280 --> 01:19:09,680
 I don't know that that happens that often, where it goes, we're in P&Z, and

949
01:19:09,680 --> 01:19:12,240
 then next week it's on the city council's agenda.

950
01:19:12,240 --> 01:19:17,560
 >> So it'll be our policy and development services to make a gap between those items.

951
01:19:17,560 --> 01:19:22,320
 In rare instances, there may be some items that would go to council prior to your next

952
01:19:22,320 --> 01:19:26,880
 P&Z meeting, but we're going to put enough space in there during that time frame.

953
01:19:26,880 --> 01:19:31,040
 >> So once it's on the city council's agenda, and they actually vote on it,

954
01:19:31,040 --> 01:19:36,320
 then we don't have to wait until the next P&Z, because it's a done deal then, right?

955
01:19:36,320 --> 01:19:41,560
 >> So we ideally wouldn't put another case on city council agenda until

956
01:19:41,560 --> 01:19:44,220
 at least the P&Z held their next meeting.

957
01:19:44,220 --> 01:19:46,400
 >> Okay, thank you.

958
01:19:46,400 --> 01:19:51,360
 >> If I could come in legal, do you have an add?

959
01:19:51,360 --> 01:19:53,480
 >> Yes, if I could.

960
01:19:53,480 --> 01:19:57,720
 Typically, that's not going to be an issue because, well, of course,

961
01:19:57,720 --> 01:20:04,560
 we're talking about a policy where reconsideration is only incidentally brought up.

962
01:20:04,560 --> 01:20:08,640
 But looking at the actual rule regarding reconsideration,

963
01:20:08,640 --> 01:20:13,400
 it's a rule that was drafted with council in mind.

964
01:20:13,400 --> 01:20:17,760
 And it talks about any action taken by the city council.

965
01:20:17,760 --> 01:20:25,480
 Now, there's another provision that says to the extent possible all of the various boards of commission should abide by these rules as well.

966
01:20:25,480 --> 01:20:35,520
 And so adapting that, I think that the real intent on the reconsideration issue is an action.

967
01:20:35,520 --> 01:20:40,720
 That's the word that's actually set forth in 2-29,

968
01:20:40,720 --> 01:20:45,600
 where it says emotionally reconsider any action of, in this case, the commission.

969
01:20:45,600 --> 01:20:51,840
 An action of the commission would be a plat approval, an ADP approval, something like that.

970
01:20:51,840 --> 01:20:57,800
 A vote to recommend approval or a vote to recommend denial is not an action.

971
01:20:57,800 --> 01:21:05,440
 It's a report that's made to the city council, pursuant to the rules in Chapter 211.

972
01:21:05,440 --> 01:21:09,400
 Or the local government code and our ordinances.

973
01:21:09,400 --> 01:21:16,280
 And so I don't think that the situation that you're talking about is going to be one that's going to be susceptible to a motion to reconsider anyway.

974
01:21:16,280 --> 01:21:25,240
 >> Okay, and I think you answered another question that popped up is that if I wanted to change my vote, that wouldn't be considered an action.

975
01:21:25,240 --> 01:21:26,720
 Is that what you're saying?

976
01:21:26,720 --> 01:21:31,120
 In other words, if I were part of the minority, say it was a 5-2 vote and I was part of the minority.

977
01:21:31,120 --> 01:21:34,440
 >> On what kind of item?

978
01:21:34,440 --> 01:21:35,880
 >> So that makes a difference, huh?

979
01:21:35,880 --> 01:21:37,360
 >> Yes.

980
01:21:37,360 --> 01:21:39,600
 >> Well, a zone change.

981
01:21:39,600 --> 01:21:40,200
 >> I'm sorry?

982
01:21:40,200 --> 01:21:41,080
 >> A zone change.

983
01:21:41,080 --> 01:21:43,400
 >> Okay, if it's a zoning change, that's not an action.

984
01:21:43,400 --> 01:21:46,440
 And so I don't believe that it's really subject to reconsideration.

985
01:21:46,440 --> 01:21:54,640
 >> Well, what I'm saying, yeah, if I changed it and I became, but I was still part of the minority, then that wouldn't be a matter of reconsider.

986
01:21:54,640 --> 01:21:58,120
 >> You'd have to be on the prevailing side to do a motion to reconsider anyway.

987
01:21:58,120 --> 01:22:00,640
 >> Okay, okay, got you, thanks.

988
01:22:03,600 --> 01:22:05,080
 >> I did not see any other questions.

989
01:22:05,080 --> 01:22:05,920
 Appreciate the presentation.

990
01:22:05,920 --> 01:22:07,080
 >> Mm-hm.

991
01:22:07,080 --> 01:22:10,560
 >> This is an individual consideration item, it's not a public hearing.

992
01:22:10,560 --> 01:22:14,400
 So the chair will certainly entertain any motion or discussion on the item.

993
01:22:14,400 --> 01:22:31,680
 I'll go ahead and make a motion to, or I move to approve the item with the condition that a word is inserted.

994
01:22:32,920 --> 01:22:38,720
 I would like to see the word financially inserted between or and interested to make

995
01:22:38,720 --> 01:22:44,160
 it more clear on who the interested persons and entities prohibited to speaking with would be.

996
01:22:44,160 --> 01:22:47,240
 That's my motion.

997
01:22:47,240 --> 01:22:53,720
 Commissioner Sanchez.

998
01:22:53,720 --> 01:22:55,000
 >> I second that.

999
01:22:55,000 --> 01:22:58,600
 >> We have a first and a second to approve as amended by the chair.

1000
01:22:58,600 --> 01:23:00,280
 Commissioner Smith.

1001
01:23:00,280 --> 01:23:04,880
 >> Thank you, Chair, I think that, I didn't want to mention it in work session, I thought if it was brought up then possibly.

1002
01:23:04,880 --> 01:23:10,720
 But the financially interested, I can give you any clarification of the chair first, if you're emotionally and financially interested.

1003
01:23:10,720 --> 01:23:17,680
 You're specifically trying to aim it towards anybody, whether it's a developer, it's an engineer, somebody who's involved in the project itself.

1004
01:23:17,680 --> 01:23:25,320
 I feel like this policy should extend to also those who are in the neighborhood who could be affected by the case itself.

1005
01:23:25,320 --> 01:23:29,560
 That's just my belief, that if there's, let's say there's a motion, we can't do it on a zoning case.

1006
01:23:29,560 --> 01:23:33,940
 Let's say it is a preliminary plotting is of course, is an action, correct, legal?

1007
01:23:33,940 --> 01:23:36,120
 >> I'm sorry.

1008
01:23:36,120 --> 01:23:38,000
 >> Preliminary plotting is an action, correct?

1009
01:23:38,000 --> 01:23:42,920
 Where we vote, we vote for preliminary plot, that is an action, we brought that up, the difference between those.

1010
01:23:42,920 --> 01:23:47,680
 But if there's something that happens that we do vote on, and there's a 5-2,

1011
01:23:47,680 --> 01:23:55,240
 that somebody who's in the majority then gets approached by somebody in the neighborhood saying, hey, you didn't see this and this and there, you need to change that.

1012
01:23:55,240 --> 01:23:58,920
 And they have a conversation with that person in the neighborhood, and then that person comes back and says, yeah, you know what?

1013
01:23:58,920 --> 01:24:00,560
 We do need to have reconsideration.

1014
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:07,000
 I feel like that's just as much of a violation of what we're trying to do as it is talking to the developer.

1015
01:24:07,000 --> 01:24:11,320
 And so I want to make sure that if there's financials added in there, great.

1016
01:24:11,320 --> 01:24:12,760
 I think that you'd have to extend that financial.

1017
01:24:12,760 --> 01:24:17,800
 It has to mean those who are financially also involved being the neighborhood person as well.

1018
01:24:17,800 --> 01:24:23,160
 If they say that, well, this development's going to hurt my property values, or not even have the financial in there at all.

1019
01:24:23,160 --> 01:24:28,160
 Because I feel like the neighborhood people should also be included in not being able to communicate with commissioners

1020
01:24:28,160 --> 01:24:34,400
 on an item that could be brought back up for reconsideration, much to my point.

1021
01:24:34,400 --> 01:24:35,120
 >> Yep, that's it.

1022
01:24:35,120 --> 01:24:36,160
 >> That's a good point.

1023
01:24:36,160 --> 01:24:36,880
 Mr. Sanchez?

1024
01:24:36,880 --> 01:24:42,400
 >> Well, I think anybody that's involved, even the neighbors, have a financial.

1025
01:24:42,400 --> 01:24:48,640
 We have that, a lot of people that come here and talk to us that it's going to lower the value of their homes.

1026
01:24:48,640 --> 01:24:51,680
 So they have a financial concern.

1027
01:24:51,680 --> 01:24:56,840
 So I think that's something we have to look at and say, hey, are you part of that neighborhood?

1028
01:24:56,840 --> 01:24:58,840
 And we have to consider that.

1029
01:24:58,840 --> 01:25:03,120
 But I think it clarifies it when you say financial.

1030
01:25:03,120 --> 01:25:08,680
 Now, if somebody's just asking you what kind of projects are you working on and have nothing to do with it,

1031
01:25:08,680 --> 01:25:11,360
 then it's a totally different animal, I think.

1032
01:25:11,360 --> 01:25:16,360
 But I think we have to be cognizant of asking them, where do you live?

1033
01:25:16,360 --> 01:25:17,760
 What's your concern?

1034
01:25:17,760 --> 01:25:20,480
 And then we make that determination.

1035
01:25:20,480 --> 01:25:24,920
 Is it financial that, well, you don't want it?

1036
01:25:24,920 --> 01:25:27,240
 You feel it's going to affect you financially.

1037
01:25:27,240 --> 01:25:35,960
 >> Yeah, to Commissioner Sanchez's point, the reason I would like to keep it as just financially interested is

1038
01:25:35,960 --> 01:25:42,480
 anyone who asks you a question about a project pertinent to this policy is showing interest.

1039
01:25:42,480 --> 01:25:48,880
 And so I feel that there needs to be some sort of division of defining that interest.

1040
01:25:48,880 --> 01:25:53,880
 And so I feel comfortable with financially interested, and Commissioner Sanchez brings up a good point about,

1041
01:25:53,880 --> 01:25:58,720
 that's our discretion of what the motive is, if it's financial or not, that I think legal wants to do.

1042
01:25:58,720 --> 01:26:02,440
 >> Yeah, if I could make a suggestion in there,

1043
01:26:02,440 --> 01:26:08,120
 if we could communicate the idea of interested beyond the public at large.

1044
01:26:08,120 --> 01:26:16,880
 Something along those lines, and if they have an interest that's different from the public at large.

1045
01:26:16,880 --> 01:26:22,200
 So for example, let's say you've got a residential replant,

1046
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:32,520
 where you have a public hearing and the people that live within the area of the replant have

1047
01:26:32,520 --> 01:26:39,640
 specific stake in the outcome that's different from the public at large.

1048
01:26:39,640 --> 01:26:47,480
 That's a final action, and so that might be a circumstance in which

1049
01:26:47,480 --> 01:26:54,160
 it might fit what Mr. Smith is concerned with.

1050
01:26:54,160 --> 01:26:58,840
 And sort of bridge the gap between someone

1051
01:26:58,840 --> 01:27:09,360
 who's poised to derive income from the development and someone who's merely curious about it.

1052
01:27:09,360 --> 01:27:13,360
 >> Commissioner Smith.

1053
01:27:13,360 --> 01:27:15,160
 >> Yeah, I think that's my big point there.

1054
01:27:15,160 --> 01:27:24,640
 In work session, it seemed like the financial piece that was being, the financial word that was meant to be added in there was to try to exclude the neighborhood.

1055
01:27:24,640 --> 01:27:30,960
 And I want to make sure that we don't try to write the neighborhood out from also having to play into this conversation.

1056
01:27:30,960 --> 01:27:37,040
 So I think at large, possibly you would be willing to reconsider your motion.

1057
01:27:37,040 --> 01:27:40,760
 >> Yeah, I'd be happy to amend my motion.

1058
01:27:40,760 --> 01:27:49,200
 So my motion would be, the amended motion would be to not include financially, but rather insert.

1059
01:27:49,200 --> 01:27:53,280
 >> Coming up with something right now.

1060
01:27:53,280 --> 01:27:55,840
 See if you like that.

1061
01:27:55,840 --> 01:28:05,120
 >> To insert the words beyond that of the public at large after the word entities.

1062
01:28:05,120 --> 01:28:11,400
 >> Or an interest beyond that of the public at large.

1063
01:28:11,400 --> 01:28:14,920
 >> And strike persons and entities.

1064
01:28:14,920 --> 01:28:21,520
 >> Well, yeah, with developers or maybe we relocate persons or

1065
01:28:21,520 --> 01:28:29,200
 entities over here, persons or entities holding an interest beyond that of the public at large regarding any matter related to the development.

1066
01:28:29,200 --> 01:28:42,200
 And I think that you could, if you wanted to discuss in this context whether that might even include people who might be within 200 feet of a zoning project or

1067
01:28:42,200 --> 01:28:47,800
 something like that that could possibly influence a super majority vote, that might be another example.

1068
01:28:47,800 --> 01:28:52,680
 >> So I'm comfortable with the friendly amendments add beyond that of the public at large.

1069
01:28:52,680 --> 01:28:56,880
 Mr. Sanchez, are you okay with that amended language?

1070
01:28:56,880 --> 01:28:58,280
 >> Yes, I'm fine with it.

1071
01:28:58,280 --> 01:29:01,800
 >> Okay, we have a first and second for the amended language, Commissioner Pernetta.

1072
01:29:01,800 --> 01:29:08,200
 >> I just want to clarify, because right now when we go into interest beyond the public at large,

1073
01:29:08,200 --> 01:29:14,160
 ultimately this is all a judgment call on what we feel we should report.

1074
01:29:14,160 --> 01:29:21,720
 Because to basically qualify that requires a specific questioning and clarification.

1075
01:29:21,720 --> 01:29:22,240
 >> Microphone.

1076
01:29:22,240 --> 01:29:22,760
 >> I'm sorry.

1077
01:29:22,760 --> 01:29:28,800
 I just wanted to say, when we talk about the public at large, ultimately it's a judgment call, correct?

1078
01:29:28,800 --> 01:29:36,400
 Because in order to ascertain that, that's going to require qualifying questions that very obviously,

1079
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:42,360
 if someone starts discussing financials behind it, we can identify that person as having that interest.

1080
01:29:42,360 --> 01:29:51,080
 But beyond that, if someone just talks to us about something, ultimately that's not something that might normally be apparent, right?

1081
01:29:51,080 --> 01:29:59,360
 So when we're talking about this, ultimately, once again, this is our judgment call and this is strictly voluntary.

1082
01:29:59,360 --> 01:30:05,400
 This is not something that we'd be held responsible to with regard to ethics,

1083
01:30:05,400 --> 01:30:13,040
 if we did not judge that it was beyond the interest of the public at large, is that correct?

1084
01:30:13,040 --> 01:30:18,200
 >> That would be my understanding.

1085
01:30:18,200 --> 01:30:24,640
 If someone came with you and asked a question about a project, you'd have to ask a qualifying question to know if they're financially involved or not.

1086
01:30:24,640 --> 01:30:28,720
 So whether it's financially interested or beyond that of the public, there's still,

1087
01:30:28,720 --> 01:30:33,640
 if you're engaging in that conversation about an item that's been tied or up for reconsideration,

1088
01:30:33,640 --> 01:30:41,160
 there is an assumed dialogue happening for you to understand whether or not the conversation's appropriate or not.

1089
01:30:41,160 --> 01:30:41,660
 >> Okay.

1090
01:30:41,660 --> 01:30:46,640
 Are you good?

1091
01:30:46,640 --> 01:30:57,480
 >> That's it, I just wanted to kind of see where we were just to avoid any inadvertent lack of disclosure, I guess.

1092
01:30:57,480 --> 01:30:59,080
 >> I got you, Commissioner Ellis.

1093
01:30:59,080 --> 01:30:59,600
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1094
01:30:59,600 --> 01:31:03,520
 I'm going to ask for a restatement just so I can understand, please.

1095
01:31:03,520 --> 01:31:08,120
 >> Yeah, so my restatement would be that the sentence read,

1096
01:31:08,120 --> 01:31:13,280
 members of the Planning and Zoning Commission will not communicate outside of a public meeting with developers or

1097
01:31:13,280 --> 01:31:19,360
 parties, entities interested beyond that of the public at large regarding any matter related to the development.

1098
01:31:19,360 --> 01:31:26,680
 We have a first and a second for that amended motion.

1099
01:31:26,680 --> 01:31:28,720
 Seeing no other discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1100
01:31:28,720 --> 01:31:38,720
 Motion carries seven, zero.

1101
01:31:38,720 --> 01:31:45,600
 The next item and final item for the individual consideration is item 4B, and I'll invite Haley for presentation.

1102
01:31:45,600 --> 01:31:59,720
 >> All right, good evening.

1103
01:31:59,720 --> 01:32:04,560
 So this is a request for an alternative development plan for Blue Beacon.

1104
01:32:04,560 --> 01:32:10,520
 So the proposed truck wash facility would be located generally where you see the black outline on the map.

1105
01:32:10,520 --> 01:32:17,040
 This property is located at the intersection of the I-35 frontage road and Berthold road on the north side of town.

1106
01:32:17,040 --> 01:32:21,760
 It's just under 11 and a half acres, currently zoned employment center commercial.

1107
01:32:21,760 --> 01:32:26,480
 The requested ADP is to deviate from two specific sections of the code, the landscape and

1108
01:32:26,480 --> 01:32:30,280
 tree canopy requirements and then the access parking and circulation requirements.

1109
01:32:32,240 --> 01:32:38,080
 So to give you an idea of the layout of the site, their access would be from Berthold road.

1110
01:32:38,080 --> 01:32:40,600
 There is, as I mentioned, a truck wash facility.

1111
01:32:40,600 --> 01:32:46,960
 It contains two bays that would be located here with associated parking just to the west of that.

1112
01:32:46,960 --> 01:32:51,680
 And then there is a detention pond generally in the area shown in the lighter blue color.

1113
01:32:51,680 --> 01:32:56,560
 The brighter blue here surrounding this is drainage easement.

1114
01:32:56,560 --> 01:33:01,000
 And then the yellow shown on this map is an existing pipeline easement.

1115
01:33:01,000 --> 01:33:04,920
 There is a sanitary sewer easement that would go here in the green area.

1116
01:33:04,920 --> 01:33:07,920
 An electric easement and then also a water line easement.

1117
01:33:07,920 --> 01:33:13,040
 So the site is significantly encumbered with the necessary easements for this development.

1118
01:33:13,040 --> 01:33:20,000
 So looking specifically at their landscape plan where all of these deviations would occur,

1119
01:33:20,000 --> 01:33:25,880
 the overall site well exceeds the minimum 20% landscape area for the ECC district.

1120
01:33:25,880 --> 01:33:32,120
 All of these easements would remain basically grass or turf, so they would meet the definition of landscape area.

1121
01:33:32,120 --> 01:33:37,920
 The ECC district does require 30% tree canopy for the site, so that's based on the total lot area.

1122
01:33:37,920 --> 01:33:42,160
 So for a lot of this size, that would be over three acres of tree canopy required.

1123
01:33:42,160 --> 01:33:46,600
 Because of all those easements and the code restricting planting trees within easements and

1124
01:33:46,600 --> 01:33:52,520
 within certain distances of utility lines, it was very hard for them to accommodate those trees on the site.

1125
01:33:52,520 --> 01:33:57,320
 So in working with staff, they have formed a plan that would involve the planting of 45 new trees,

1126
01:33:57,320 --> 01:34:01,080
 as you can see, in these areas along with some trees in the parking lot.

1127
01:34:01,080 --> 01:34:04,280
 And that would get them to just over 11% tree canopy total.

1128
01:34:04,280 --> 01:34:13,560
 Within the site, our code really only has specific landscaping requirements for just your overall lot and then for your parking lot.

1129
01:34:13,560 --> 01:34:17,440
 So they are meeting those specific parking lot landscape requirements within the code.

1130
01:34:17,440 --> 01:34:20,440
 It's that overall tree canopy where they found some struggles.

1131
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:27,680
 And then beyond that, as I mentioned, they're at 11.6 compared to 30, which is required.

1132
01:34:27,680 --> 01:34:33,680
 They were also unable to plant the required street trees along their frontages on Barthold and I-35.

1133
01:34:33,680 --> 01:34:38,800
 So the code requires that one tree for every 45 feet, which would be about 20 trees on this site.

1134
01:34:38,800 --> 01:34:41,880
 They were unable to plant those in the easements.

1135
01:34:41,880 --> 01:34:48,600
 And then similarly, the code has specific requirements when there is parking or drive aisles located between a building and the street.

1136
01:34:48,600 --> 01:34:55,520
 It requires a specific 15 foot wide planting area in front of those drive aisles and parking that contains a berm,

1137
01:34:55,520 --> 01:35:04,560
 one tree for every 40 feet, or three small trees clustered once every 30 feet, and then either a row of shrubs or a continuous wall.

1138
01:35:04,560 --> 01:35:08,840
 Because of the easements, again, they were unable to provide that very specific combination of things.

1139
01:35:08,840 --> 01:35:15,880
 So what they have proposed in the area in orange is that three foot high screening wall for the drive aisles.

1140
01:35:15,880 --> 01:35:20,200
 And then directly in front of the parking lot, which you can see here,

1141
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:25,000
 they have proposed these landscape islands that would contain shrubs and trees to screen the parking lot itself.

1142
01:35:25,000 --> 01:35:35,040
 So in looking at the criteria for approval outlined in the code, the first is that the proposal would contribute to the preservation of existing neighborhoods.

1143
01:35:35,040 --> 01:35:40,920
 While there's not actually any neighborhood in this area, we did look to see if the development's consistent with the character of the area.

1144
01:35:40,920 --> 01:35:46,200
 And this intersection on the highway is, as I'm sure you're aware, is kind of a travel center, if you will.

1145
01:35:46,200 --> 01:35:51,920
 It has a couple of existing truck stops in this area, some other auto oriented uses.

1146
01:35:51,920 --> 01:35:54,320
 So this use would be consistent with that development pattern.

1147
01:35:54,320 --> 01:35:58,240
 Assuring quality development is the second criteria.

1148
01:35:58,240 --> 01:36:03,880
 So again, you can hopefully see through that landscape plan that they worked very hard to accommodate things where they could on the site.

1149
01:36:03,880 --> 01:36:10,200
 So they weren't attempting to lower the development standards, just trying to work within the many encumbrances and constraints on the site.

1150
01:36:10,200 --> 01:36:14,080
 The third criteria, focusing new development activity centers.

1151
01:36:14,080 --> 01:36:18,160
 This entire area is designated by our future land use map for business innovation.

1152
01:36:18,160 --> 01:36:25,760
 So that's those large office parks, employment center type uses, light industrial uses fit within that.

1153
01:36:25,760 --> 01:36:32,640
 So this use, we thought would be consistent with that and would be one of those many supporting uses that you would eventually need as this area develops.

1154
01:36:32,640 --> 01:36:39,680
 The last two criteria were whether there is infrastructure that can accommodate the development.

1155
01:36:39,680 --> 01:36:42,720
 So the roadway network is already in place here.

1156
01:36:42,720 --> 01:36:46,440
 As you can see on the map, the red and blue lines represent water and sewer lines in the area.

1157
01:36:46,440 --> 01:36:51,440
 So as development has traveled north on the interstate, that infrastructure has been in place.

1158
01:36:51,440 --> 01:36:54,320
 So it is there for them to extend to their site.

1159
01:36:54,320 --> 01:36:58,920
 And then finally, will it result in a high quality development that meets the intent of the standards.

1160
01:36:58,920 --> 01:37:04,560
 As I've mentioned, they've worked very extensively with staff over two years on this project.

1161
01:37:04,560 --> 01:37:09,320
 And what they've come up with is the best combination of things we could find that would meet the intent of the code.

1162
01:37:09,320 --> 01:37:11,400
 And work with the constraints on their side.

1163
01:37:11,400 --> 01:37:14,200
 So they are planting as many trees as planning and

1164
01:37:14,200 --> 01:37:18,600
 engineering staff found were feasible within the given easements on this property.

1165
01:37:18,600 --> 01:37:27,520
 So staff is recommending approval of this request as it meets our established requirements for the approval of an ADP, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

1166
01:37:27,520 --> 01:37:30,960
 And the developer is also here if you had any specific questions.

1167
01:37:30,960 --> 01:37:32,880
 >> Thank you, Haley, for the presentation.

1168
01:37:32,880 --> 01:37:36,040
 There are no questions for you at this time.

1169
01:37:36,040 --> 01:37:40,920
 This is an item for individual consideration, so the chair will entertain a motion or discussion at this time.

1170
01:37:40,920 --> 01:37:44,720
 Commissioner Beck.

1171
01:37:44,720 --> 01:37:49,600
 >> I just want to applaud the developer for wanting to build here.

1172
01:37:49,600 --> 01:37:53,120
 I don't think anybody else would want to build on this property, so this works out well for them.

1173
01:37:53,120 --> 01:37:59,520
 And I want to move to approve ADP 190001.

1174
01:37:59,520 --> 01:38:01,400
 >> We have a first, Commissioner Smith.

1175
01:38:01,400 --> 01:38:02,600
 >> Second.

1176
01:38:02,600 --> 01:38:04,120
 >> We have a first and a second.

1177
01:38:04,120 --> 01:38:05,240
 Is there any discussion on the item?

1178
01:38:07,040 --> 01:38:12,360
 >> I, too, with Commissioner Beck, I'm glad this is getting developed.

1179
01:38:12,360 --> 01:38:16,120
 So great job somehow figuring out what can go in that space.

1180
01:38:16,120 --> 01:38:21,360
 So I'll be supporting this for sure and wishing you the best on construction.

1181
01:38:21,360 --> 01:38:23,320
 Seeing no other discussion, I'll call for a vote on the board.

1182
01:38:23,320 --> 01:38:31,480
 Motion carries 7-0.

1183
01:38:31,480 --> 01:38:32,200
 Congratulations.

1184
01:38:34,360 --> 01:38:40,480
 >> Public hearing 5A has been pulled from tonight's meeting, so that will take us to the plan and zoning matrix.

1185
01:38:40,480 --> 01:38:42,400
 And I will ask Richard for any updates.

1186
01:38:42,400 --> 01:38:49,000
 >> As you can see, we've kind of whittled down the list quite a bit.

1187
01:38:49,000 --> 01:38:55,280
 I do have at our next meeting to talk a little bit about the annexation process.

1188
01:38:55,280 --> 01:39:02,360
 I know at one point I wanted to have that in conjunction with the RD5X and rural residential.

1189
01:39:02,360 --> 01:39:09,120
 I thought I would at least pull it out separate so we can at least have that discussion even before we get into that.

1190
01:39:09,120 --> 01:39:15,200
 Also wanted to note on 220, DISD will be here, along with their consultant,

1191
01:39:15,200 --> 01:39:24,080
 to give a presentation on kind of their future plans and how they, what and how they use student generation rates.

1192
01:39:24,080 --> 01:39:32,000
 And sort of even as a precursor, I thought it would be good for the annexation because they are part of that analysis.

1193
01:39:32,000 --> 01:39:34,240
 And so those are just some items coming up.

1194
01:39:34,240 --> 01:39:41,160
 One thing I wanted to kind of go back to our first item, what I'll start doing just so everyone,

1195
01:39:41,160 --> 01:39:47,400
 sometimes it's easy just to forget, when we have those actionable items being considered by the commission,

1196
01:39:47,400 --> 01:39:52,120
 I'll just put a note on the AIS, either part of the recommendation or part of the backup.

1197
01:39:52,120 --> 01:40:00,160
 Just so you have an idea that this is one of those actionable items and could be subject to recall just so it's kind of fresher in your mind.

1198
01:40:00,160 --> 01:40:01,520
 Other than that, that was all I had.

1199
01:40:01,520 --> 01:40:03,280
 >> That's a great point.

1200
01:40:03,280 --> 01:40:04,120
 Commissioner Beck.

1201
01:40:04,120 --> 01:40:06,000
 >> Thank you, Chair.

1202
01:40:06,000 --> 01:40:12,360
 Any consideration about an update on the mobility plan for them?

1203
01:40:12,360 --> 01:40:18,040
 Edification of, especially newer members on the commission?

1204
01:40:18,040 --> 01:40:20,200
 >> Yes.

1205
01:40:20,200 --> 01:40:29,240
 They are completely going to be redoing that mobility plan and really going to a thorough traffic thoroughfare plan.

1206
01:40:29,240 --> 01:40:30,800
 >> Okay.

1207
01:40:30,800 --> 01:40:39,560
 >> I think once that gets better vetted and they have an idea of when they're going to actually go out to that, that's when I'd like them to come here.

1208
01:40:39,560 --> 01:40:42,760
 >> Okay, is there going to be PSROR again?

1209
01:40:42,760 --> 01:40:47,120
 >> That will be through Todd Estes and Preetam.

1210
01:40:47,120 --> 01:40:48,360
 >> Okay.

1211
01:40:48,360 --> 01:40:50,480
 Thank you, sir.

1212
01:40:50,480 --> 01:40:57,400
 >> The only thing I would stay at a request is generally stopped, it's a great job on this, but February 20th looks like a busy day.

1213
01:40:57,400 --> 01:41:03,560
 So if we could just make sure there's plenty of time for a work session, it would be helpful.

1214
01:41:03,560 --> 01:41:06,720
 Any other items for the matrix?

1215
01:41:06,720 --> 01:41:11,600
 Seeing none, we will close this meeting at 6.58.