1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:09,520
 Hello and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for

2
00:00:09,520 --> 00:00:13,240
 Wednesday, February 6, 2019.

3
00:00:13,240 --> 00:00:21,380
 This is our work session, and with the quorum present, I will call us to order at 5.03 p.m.

4
00:00:21,380 --> 00:00:27,620
 Working down our agenda, we're going to go to our work session reports, and A is introduce

5
00:00:27,620 --> 00:00:32,080
 new staff.

6
00:00:32,080 --> 00:00:33,080
 Good afternoon.

7
00:00:33,080 --> 00:00:34,080
 I guess good afternoon.

8
00:00:34,080 --> 00:00:35,080
 Good evening.

9
00:00:35,080 --> 00:00:39,440
 I just wanted to introduce, I know we've had some new faces, and just wanted to properly

10
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:42,840
 introduce I guess some of our new staff members.

11
00:00:42,840 --> 00:00:49,000
 We have a new planner that started with us last week, Corina Maldonado.

12
00:00:49,000 --> 00:00:59,840
 Corina is a planner, came from the North Texas cog.

13
00:00:59,840 --> 00:01:10,280
 So you'll probably be seeing her sooner than later, so she's already been assigned a number

14
00:01:10,280 --> 00:01:15,680
 of projects, and so we kind of threw her in the deep end of the pool, but she's keeping

15
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:20,860
 her head above water, so.

16
00:01:20,860 --> 00:01:24,360
 This was just a position that we had on field.

17
00:01:24,360 --> 00:01:35,720
 And then we also have Mark Laird.

18
00:01:35,720 --> 00:01:37,520
 Mark is now a senior planner with us.

19
00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:43,400
 Mark was previously in real estate, so now he's moved over to development services, and

20
00:01:43,400 --> 00:01:48,040
 so he's helping really more on the real estate end as well as with a lot of the platting,

21
00:01:48,040 --> 00:01:54,880
 and so you'll probably eventually start seeing Mark present some items as it relates to platting.

22
00:01:54,880 --> 00:02:01,840
 Charlie, you probably met Charlie, but I figure I'll give a proper introduction.

23
00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:07,080
 Charlie Rosendahl, Charlie is our business, I always get, business services manager, and

24
00:02:07,080 --> 00:02:11,920
 he came over from I guess the city manager's office, and so he's now in development services,

25
00:02:11,920 --> 00:02:16,000
 so he's handling a lot of our business services and management stuff.

26
00:02:16,000 --> 00:02:19,120
 I'm going to introduce Christy Wells.

27
00:02:19,120 --> 00:02:22,280
 She's not a development services employee.

28
00:02:22,280 --> 00:02:26,720
 She is our environmental services coordinator, and so I think she might have been introduced

29
00:02:26,720 --> 00:02:32,000
 maybe six months, eight months, but she'll be presenting tonight, and I think that's

30
00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:34,600
 it with the exception of Ron.

31
00:02:34,600 --> 00:02:45,640
 Make sure everyone knows Ron, just give Ron a hard time.

32
00:02:45,640 --> 00:02:46,640
 And that's it.

33
00:02:46,640 --> 00:02:47,640
 Okay.

34
00:02:47,640 --> 00:02:50,880
 Well, welcome new staff.

35
00:02:50,880 --> 00:02:58,360
 Next item is hold a discussion on annexation process regarding city services.

36
00:02:58,360 --> 00:03:05,840
 That would be Cindy Jackson.

37
00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:20,700
 I handed out a lot of three handouts that are pertinent to this presentation.

38
00:03:20,700 --> 00:03:27,040
 We thought since Julie's been doing the boot camp with you that we would go ahead and give

39
00:03:27,040 --> 00:03:34,320
 you a little short course on annexation as well.

40
00:03:34,320 --> 00:03:38,440
 Now when you're thinking of annexation, what comes to mind first, there's three questions

41
00:03:38,440 --> 00:03:40,260
 with regard to annexation.

42
00:03:40,260 --> 00:03:42,760
 One is why does the city want to annex?

43
00:03:42,760 --> 00:03:48,820
 Two is by what authority does the city have to annex?

44
00:03:48,820 --> 00:03:55,280
 And three is what procedures must the city follow to annex?

45
00:03:55,280 --> 00:03:56,280
 Why annex?

46
00:03:56,280 --> 00:04:03,520
 As you know, we have no authority in the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, or ETJ, over land use and design

47
00:04:03,520 --> 00:04:04,520
 standards.

48
00:04:04,520 --> 00:04:09,880
 All we have really is platting authority out there, and of course if there's our water

49
00:04:09,880 --> 00:04:13,840
 and sewer out there, we have authority over the design.

50
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:16,480
 So the why annex?

51
00:04:16,480 --> 00:04:22,760
 Want to gain more control over the land use and development in the areas that are in the

52
00:04:22,760 --> 00:04:23,760
 ETJ.

53
00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:28,800
 To ensure that residents and businesses outside the city's corporate limits who benefit from

54
00:04:28,800 --> 00:04:35,300
 access of city facilities or services share the tax burden associated with constructing

55
00:04:35,300 --> 00:04:37,080
 and maintaining those facilities.

56
00:04:37,080 --> 00:04:41,700
 Because when you're in the ETJ but you're on city water and sewer, you don't pay the

57
00:04:41,700 --> 00:04:51,240
 taxes to support the maintenance and upkeep of that city water and sewer.

58
00:04:51,240 --> 00:04:56,100
 Now with regards to authority to annex, Denton is a home rule city.

59
00:04:56,100 --> 00:05:00,720
 That means we have a population over 5,000, and we are allowed to do what is authorized

60
00:05:00,720 --> 00:05:10,000
 by our city charter, and we are not specifically prohibited or preempted by the Texas Constitution

61
00:05:10,000 --> 00:05:14,680
 or state or federal law.

62
00:05:14,680 --> 00:05:15,680
 Annexation procedures.

63
00:05:15,680 --> 00:05:18,000
 Now here's where it gets interesting.

64
00:05:18,000 --> 00:05:25,240
 Last year, SB 6, Senate Bill 6, was approved by the state legislature in August, and well

65
00:05:25,240 --> 00:05:31,240
 actually it was in 2017, and it went into effect December 1, 2017.

66
00:05:31,240 --> 00:05:39,540
 The legislation provides revised procedures for voluntary and involuntary annexations

67
00:05:39,540 --> 00:05:41,520
 depending on what tier you're in.

68
00:05:41,520 --> 00:05:46,120
 The bill divides cities and counties into tiers.

69
00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:51,560
 Now tier one counties are those counties with a population of less than 500,000, and tier

70
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:56,960
 two counties are those counties with a population over 5,000.

71
00:05:56,960 --> 00:06:00,840
 Now Denton County is a tier two city.

72
00:06:00,840 --> 00:06:08,280
 A tier two municipality is a city that is wholly or partly located in a tier two county.

73
00:06:08,280 --> 00:06:13,520
 Since Denton is a tier two county, the city of Denton is a tier two city by virtue of

74
00:06:13,520 --> 00:06:17,920
 being located in Denton County.

75
00:06:17,920 --> 00:06:21,940
 There's also additional regulations that must be considered.

76
00:06:21,940 --> 00:06:26,520
 A city may only annex an area that is contiguous to the current city limits.

77
00:06:26,520 --> 00:06:31,800
 So for example, if we have a development that's two and a half miles away from city limits,

78
00:06:31,800 --> 00:06:38,240
 and they want to annex into the city to make use of our water and sewer, we can't do it

79
00:06:38,240 --> 00:06:42,080
 unless they can convince all the property owners between them and the city limits that

80
00:06:42,080 --> 00:06:49,440
 they want to annex into so that we can connect, and that really, that doesn't happen too often.

81
00:06:49,440 --> 00:06:56,560
 A city can only annex property that is located in the city ETJ, and a city cannot annex an

82
00:06:56,560 --> 00:07:02,640
 area that has an agricultural, wildlife management, or timber management exemption unless we first

83
00:07:02,640 --> 00:07:08,160
 offer a pre-annexation development agreement to the landowner.

84
00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:09,160
 Commissioner Beck?

85
00:07:09,160 --> 00:07:10,160
 Quick question.

86
00:07:10,160 --> 00:07:11,160
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

87
00:07:11,160 --> 00:07:14,880
 The ETJ, is that, if it's not city, is it county?

88
00:07:14,880 --> 00:07:15,880
 Mm-hmm.

89
00:07:15,880 --> 00:07:16,880
 Okay.

90
00:07:16,880 --> 00:07:17,880
 That's right.

91
00:07:17,880 --> 00:07:22,720
 So we're taking from the county, we have the authority to do that, I guess you're saying.

92
00:07:22,720 --> 00:07:23,720
 Okay.

93
00:07:23,720 --> 00:07:24,720
 Okay.

94
00:07:24,720 --> 00:07:25,720
 All right.

95
00:07:25,720 --> 00:07:26,720
 It's still in the county.

96
00:07:26,720 --> 00:07:27,720
 We're not taking it away from the county.

97
00:07:27,720 --> 00:07:28,720
 But it becomes part of the...

98
00:07:28,720 --> 00:07:29,720
 What we're doing is annexing it into the city.

99
00:07:29,720 --> 00:07:30,720
 Right.

100
00:07:30,720 --> 00:07:32,880
 The county does not have zoning authority.

101
00:07:32,880 --> 00:07:37,360
 So the county would issue permits, but the city plaits.

102
00:07:37,360 --> 00:07:43,220
 So the county, if somebody wants to build something in the ETJ, and it's on our ETJ,

103
00:07:43,220 --> 00:07:47,400
 we would first require, the county would send them over to the city and tell them, "You

104
00:07:47,400 --> 00:07:52,280
 have to plait through the city first, have it recorded, then come back to us, and then

105
00:07:52,280 --> 00:07:53,280
 you can get your building permit."

106
00:07:53,280 --> 00:07:54,280
 Okay.

107
00:07:54,280 --> 00:07:56,280
 We're going to have legal say a few words here, too.

108
00:07:56,280 --> 00:07:57,280
 Yeah.

109
00:07:57,280 --> 00:08:00,160
 I was just going to point out, and I don't mean to steal any of Cindy's thunder here

110
00:08:00,160 --> 00:08:07,520
 or anything like that, but I like to think about the ETJ as under the children's game

111
00:08:07,520 --> 00:08:08,520
 dibs.

112
00:08:08,520 --> 00:08:12,000
 If it's in our ETJ, we've got dibs on it for annexation.

113
00:08:12,000 --> 00:08:14,600
 No other city can grab it.

114
00:08:14,600 --> 00:08:20,560
 And so by statute, because of the size of the city of Denton, we've got an ETJ of five

115
00:08:20,560 --> 00:08:27,600
 miles, but we can't get any of the ETJ that some other city has already claimed within

116
00:08:27,600 --> 00:08:29,200
 that five miles.

117
00:08:29,200 --> 00:08:34,200
 And so that's why you sometimes see kind of a strange looking ETJ with some cities having

118
00:08:34,200 --> 00:08:35,760
 their own little bubbles.

119
00:08:35,760 --> 00:08:40,280
 There's lots of little cities that we've kind of, our ETJ has gone out around it and

120
00:08:40,280 --> 00:08:41,560
 what have you.

121
00:08:41,560 --> 00:08:48,520
 So once it's in our ETJ, it's ours to decide whether to annex or not, and not in other

122
00:08:48,520 --> 00:08:49,520
 cities.

123
00:08:49,520 --> 00:08:56,360
 And if I'm correct, if there's some sort of conflict over which city has the ETJ, what

124
00:08:56,360 --> 00:09:04,000
 we do is we look and see when the extension was approved and whoever was first gets the

125
00:09:04,000 --> 00:09:05,000
 ETJ.

126
00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:15,160
 Procedures for a tier two municipality are divided into three categories, petitioned

127
00:09:15,160 --> 00:09:20,440
 by landowner, which is a voluntary annexation, annexation of areas with a population of less

128
00:09:20,440 --> 00:09:26,000
 than 200, and annexation of areas with a population of more than 200.

129
00:09:26,000 --> 00:09:33,240
 I'm going to go into specifics about the voluntary annexations, that's what we see most.

130
00:09:33,240 --> 00:09:38,480
 We haven't yet seen a voluntary annexation under this new law.

131
00:09:38,480 --> 00:09:43,280
 I don't expect to, to be honest with you and you'll understand why when I go through it.

132
00:09:43,280 --> 00:09:49,160
 Voluntary annexations, the process for voluntary annexation is we receive a petition for annexation

133
00:09:49,160 --> 00:09:55,340
 and we negotiate and execute the written service agreement.

134
00:09:55,340 --> 00:10:01,400
 We schedule two public hearings with the city council to be held at least 10 days apart.

135
00:10:01,400 --> 00:10:07,720
 We provide written notice to school districts, public entities, railroads, et cetera, before

136
00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:12,120
 the publication requirement that is below for publishing notice in the newspaper for

137
00:10:12,120 --> 00:10:13,620
 each public hearing.

138
00:10:13,620 --> 00:10:18,360
 We have to publish it at least once and the notice posted on the city's website, leaving

139
00:10:18,360 --> 00:10:23,120
 it up until the date of the hearing, and then we conduct a second public hearing.

140
00:10:23,120 --> 00:10:30,560
 Now the Texas local government code has a lot of specific requirements for the timing

141
00:10:30,560 --> 00:10:36,640
 of all of this, and typically it takes sitting down with a counter, a calendar and counting

142
00:10:36,640 --> 00:10:43,080
 out days to figure out which public hearings it's going to go to, when to send out the

143
00:10:43,080 --> 00:10:46,520
 notices and all.

144
00:10:46,520 --> 00:10:56,640
 After the state requirements -- Thank you, Chair.

145
00:10:56,640 --> 00:11:04,560
 On the school districts, just written notification doesn't have to be any actual negotiation

146
00:11:04,560 --> 00:11:09,560
 with the school districts to say that, hey, this part of the ETJ is annexed in.

147
00:11:09,560 --> 00:11:12,480
 Do you guys have the capacity to take this in?

148
00:11:12,480 --> 00:11:13,480
 There's nothing like that.

149
00:11:13,480 --> 00:11:14,480
 We do deal with the school districts.

150
00:11:14,480 --> 00:11:15,480
 I'm getting to that.

151
00:11:15,480 --> 00:11:16,480
 I'll shut up.

152
00:11:16,480 --> 00:11:19,640
 We've had all the notification requirements have been met.

153
00:11:19,640 --> 00:11:21,320
 The two public hearings have been held.

154
00:11:21,320 --> 00:11:28,440
 The city charter, section 103 also has requirements, and we have two additional meetings that are

155
00:11:28,440 --> 00:11:30,920
 required after the public hearings.

156
00:11:30,920 --> 00:11:34,560
 After the second public hearing, we have what's called the first reading of the ordinance

157
00:11:34,560 --> 00:11:40,280
 before council, in which we just go before council, read the caption of the ordinance.

158
00:11:40,280 --> 00:11:46,120
 Then we have to publish the entire annexation ordinance in the newspaper, and then 30 days

159
00:11:46,120 --> 00:11:50,320
 after that was published in the newspaper, we have the second reading and adoption of

160
00:11:50,320 --> 00:11:53,120
 the annexation ordinance by the council.

161
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,280
 Now, the service plan process.

162
00:11:57,280 --> 00:12:01,840
 Each annexation provides a service plan, which details the schedule for when certain services

163
00:12:01,840 --> 00:12:10,040
 will be provided, and when they'll be provided immediately upon annexation, and if they're

164
00:12:10,040 --> 00:12:15,720
 not available immediately upon annexation, we detail when they will be provided.

165
00:12:15,720 --> 00:12:26,480
 If there are services that are not listed in the service plan, then after it's approved,

166
00:12:26,480 --> 00:12:28,320
 we are not required to provide them.

167
00:12:28,320 --> 00:12:34,520
 We're pretty comprehensive in our services, though, as you'll see.

168
00:12:34,520 --> 00:12:38,480
 Prior to the writing of a service plan, this is an actual form that was sent out for Lake

169
00:12:38,480 --> 00:12:39,480
 View Estates.

170
00:12:39,480 --> 00:12:40,920
 This is the front page.

171
00:12:40,920 --> 00:12:47,240
 We sent out a questionnaire to the service providers asking for input regarding the provision

172
00:12:47,240 --> 00:12:49,080
 of service to each site.

173
00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:55,720
 It's typically based on location and proposed use, and we also give the size of the area.

174
00:12:55,720 --> 00:13:01,480
 The following service providers received this form, Water and Wastewater, Engineering and

175
00:13:01,480 --> 00:13:12,680
 Construction, Police and Fire EMS, Parks and Recreation, Denton ISD, and Electric DME.

176
00:13:12,680 --> 00:13:16,280
 What they do is they return ... I typically give them a deadline.

177
00:13:16,280 --> 00:13:18,880
 I need to have these within an excellent amount of days.

178
00:13:18,880 --> 00:13:21,400
 Typically, I try to give them two weeks.

179
00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:27,320
 They then send them back to me, and the information that is sent back to me is compiled into the

180
00:13:27,320 --> 00:13:29,800
 service plan document.

181
00:13:29,800 --> 00:13:34,080
 The service plan document is then sent to the applicant, and it becomes part of the

182
00:13:34,080 --> 00:13:36,080
 annexation ordinance.

183
00:13:36,080 --> 00:13:42,000
 Now, the annexation schedule, this is an actual annexation schedule for Creekside.

184
00:13:42,000 --> 00:13:47,600
 The Texas Local Government Code specifies an annexation schedule for each type of annexation.

185
00:13:47,600 --> 00:13:53,160
 Now, voluntary annexations are governed by subchapter C3 of the Local Government Code.

186
00:13:53,160 --> 00:13:58,320
 The schedule includes annexation ... This schedule that I'm showing you includes annexation

187
00:13:58,320 --> 00:14:01,960
 procedures required by the city as well.

188
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:09,920
 Typically, what I do is I list all of the city council meetings that are within the

189
00:14:09,920 --> 00:14:12,880
 next four months.

190
00:14:12,880 --> 00:14:19,560
 From that, I figure out when the notices have to go out, which has to be the 30th day before

191
00:14:19,560 --> 00:14:25,960
 the first hearing, the deadline to post the council agenda.

192
00:14:25,960 --> 00:14:30,800
 When the city council adopts the ordinance setting the dates, we have to have a separate

193
00:14:30,800 --> 00:14:33,580
 meeting ... Oh, well, thank you.

194
00:14:33,580 --> 00:14:40,760
 We have to have a separate meeting to set the dates for the annexations.

195
00:14:40,760 --> 00:14:45,240
 Once we have an actual ordinance that states we are going to have the first public hearing

196
00:14:45,240 --> 00:14:50,280
 on this date and the second public hearing on this date ... I'm not going to read the

197
00:14:50,280 --> 00:14:51,280
 whole thing.

198
00:14:51,280 --> 00:14:52,280
 You can see it.

199
00:14:52,280 --> 00:14:56,520
 That's typically how we work the annexation schedule.

200
00:14:56,520 --> 00:15:04,040
 Here, I provided for you a table which shows a comparison between the different types of

201
00:15:04,040 --> 00:15:05,040
 annexations.

202
00:15:05,040 --> 00:15:09,740
 Now, we've got voluntary, which I just went through, and then we've got involuntary annexation

203
00:15:09,740 --> 00:15:12,480
 of areas of less than 200 people.

204
00:15:12,480 --> 00:15:17,600
 Again, the service plan and schedule will be approved with the resolution to pursue

205
00:15:17,600 --> 00:15:20,600
 the annexation.

206
00:15:20,600 --> 00:15:27,120
 A petition of registered voters in the subject property has to go out into the annexation

207
00:15:27,120 --> 00:15:34,840
 area, has to be signed by 50 percent of the voters within that required area.

208
00:15:34,840 --> 00:15:50,080
 If there are not that many registered voters in the area, 50 percent of the landowners

209
00:15:50,080 --> 00:15:54,440
 shall be given the petition and they have to approve the annexation.

210
00:15:54,440 --> 00:16:04,480
 If, after we send out this petition, we receive a petition protesting the annexation, it is

211
00:16:04,480 --> 00:16:09,600
 received and validated by the city secretary, an election will have to be held, and the

212
00:16:09,600 --> 00:16:19,760
 election will only be held in that area of the annexation.

213
00:16:19,760 --> 00:16:24,160
 The voters that live in that area will then have the opportunity to vote on whether or

214
00:16:24,160 --> 00:16:27,280
 not they want to annex into the city.

215
00:16:27,280 --> 00:16:34,800
 The same is for annexation of areas of at least 200 people, however, the petition is

216
00:16:34,800 --> 00:16:39,720
 only required if the registered voters of the subject area do not own more than 50 percent

217
00:16:39,720 --> 00:16:41,360
 of the land.

218
00:16:41,360 --> 00:16:49,120
 Consent to annex must be then obtained by petition.

219
00:16:49,120 --> 00:16:57,440
 It is a pretty involved process and an election is required, regardless, for an involuntary

220
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,000
 annexation of more than 200 people.

221
00:17:01,000 --> 00:17:07,640
 And the notices, you can see there, are the same as for the voluntary annexation as far

222
00:17:07,640 --> 00:17:14,960
 as the timing, written notices to school districts, service providers, railroads, notices public

223
00:17:14,960 --> 00:17:15,960
 in the newspaper.

224
00:17:15,960 --> 00:17:20,320
 >>Cindy, I think Commissioner Smith has a question.

225
00:17:20,320 --> 00:17:21,760
 >>Thank you, Chair.

226
00:17:21,760 --> 00:17:27,240
 On the involuntary of less than 200 people, the petition of protest, does it -- there's

227
00:17:27,240 --> 00:17:29,960
 not a percentage or a population amount?

228
00:17:29,960 --> 00:17:34,360
 Is it just one person signing a petition counts as a petition of protest?

229
00:17:34,360 --> 00:17:37,280
 >>Could you answer that for me, Jerry, because I'm not certain to be off the top of my head.

230
00:17:37,280 --> 00:17:40,120
 I would have to -- I think I'll have to look that up and I'll get back to you on that.

231
00:17:40,120 --> 00:17:41,120
 >>Right.

232
00:17:41,120 --> 00:17:42,120
 >>Yeah, I'm sorry.

233
00:17:42,120 --> 00:17:43,120
 I didn't look into that before the meeting.

234
00:17:43,120 --> 00:17:46,760
 >>I've got the Texas local government code with me, so I can look that up real quick

235
00:17:46,760 --> 00:17:47,760
 for you.

236
00:17:47,760 --> 00:17:48,760
 >>Thanks.

237
00:17:48,760 --> 00:17:50,080
 >>Now, as you can see --

238
00:17:50,080 --> 00:17:51,080
 >>Commissioner Beck.

239
00:17:51,080 --> 00:17:53,080
 >>Thank you, Vice Chair.

240
00:17:53,080 --> 00:17:54,080
 Okay.

241
00:17:54,080 --> 00:17:59,400
 At the beginning, you said that we would annex into the residents and businesses outside the

242
00:17:59,400 --> 00:18:03,600
 city's corporate limits who benefit from access to the city facility of service.

243
00:18:03,600 --> 00:18:08,080
 So obviously, they're able to utilize some of our services now.

244
00:18:08,080 --> 00:18:10,240
 So if they vote not to be annexed --

245
00:18:10,240 --> 00:18:11,240
 >>Then they --

246
00:18:11,240 --> 00:18:13,240
 >>Then we'll get our services in?

247
00:18:13,240 --> 00:18:14,240
 >>Yep.

248
00:18:14,240 --> 00:18:15,240
 >>We can cut them off?

249
00:18:15,240 --> 00:18:16,640
 >>If the services are already there, that's --

250
00:18:16,640 --> 00:18:19,880
 >>But they will continue to use them or we cut them off?

251
00:18:19,880 --> 00:18:22,680
 >>Well, we haven't come up with that situation.

252
00:18:22,680 --> 00:18:23,680
 >>Oh, okay.

253
00:18:23,680 --> 00:18:24,680
 >>I don't imagine that we --

254
00:18:24,680 --> 00:18:25,680
 >>We cut them off.

255
00:18:25,680 --> 00:18:29,720
 >>If they're lawfully receiving services, there'd be no reason to cut them off.

256
00:18:29,720 --> 00:18:30,720
 >>Okay.

257
00:18:30,720 --> 00:18:31,720
 Okay.

258
00:18:31,720 --> 00:18:32,720
 Thank you.

259
00:18:32,720 --> 00:18:33,720
 >>Really, the SB6 --

260
00:18:33,720 --> 00:18:34,720
 >>Commissioner Coles.

261
00:18:34,720 --> 00:18:35,720
 >>I have a question for you.

262
00:18:35,720 --> 00:18:37,160
 >>Put restrictions on involuntary annexation?

263
00:18:37,160 --> 00:18:38,160
 I'm sorry?

264
00:18:38,160 --> 00:18:39,160
 >>I have a question.

265
00:18:39,160 --> 00:18:40,160
 >>Mm-hmm.

266
00:18:40,160 --> 00:18:47,080
 >>Okay, let's say some of the areas that were annexed the last decade or so, they're on

267
00:18:47,080 --> 00:18:49,680
 septic and a water well.

268
00:18:49,680 --> 00:18:50,680
 >>Mm-hmm.

269
00:18:50,680 --> 00:18:55,000
 >>Do we give them the opportunity to tap into the city services?

270
00:18:55,000 --> 00:18:56,680
 Who pays for that?

271
00:18:56,680 --> 00:18:57,680
 You know, I mean --

272
00:18:57,680 --> 00:19:02,760
 >>If they're in the city, once the city extends services out there, yes, they are given the

273
00:19:02,760 --> 00:19:04,960
 opportunity to tap into that.

274
00:19:04,960 --> 00:19:07,840
 >>And that's not the property owner's cost?

275
00:19:07,840 --> 00:19:08,840
 Or is it?

276
00:19:08,840 --> 00:19:09,840
 >>That I don't know.

277
00:19:09,840 --> 00:19:10,840
 >>Yeah.

278
00:19:10,840 --> 00:19:11,840
 Do you know that, Jerry?

279
00:19:11,840 --> 00:19:12,840
 >>Yes.

280
00:19:12,840 --> 00:19:16,200
 If they're not currently city services and somebody wants to tap in, then they would

281
00:19:16,200 --> 00:19:21,040
 have to pay for the extension of the lines out to their property.

282
00:19:21,040 --> 00:19:27,180
 And then there would be also, you know, the fee for tying onto it as well.

283
00:19:27,180 --> 00:19:33,840
 But if it's already there, then obviously they don't have to pay for the extension.

284
00:19:33,840 --> 00:19:39,200
 >>I wanted to say that, really, the changes with SB6 are the limitations that it puts

285
00:19:39,200 --> 00:19:40,560
 on involuntary annexation.

286
00:19:40,560 --> 00:19:47,360
 We did not have these limitations on involuntary annexation before, and now it -- we can only

287
00:19:47,360 --> 00:19:56,480
 involuntary annex unless -- when the property owners in the area approve it.

288
00:19:56,480 --> 00:20:00,000
 Additional regulations with regards to annexation -- I already covered the first one -- has

289
00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:02,480
 to be contiguous to the city limits.

290
00:20:02,480 --> 00:20:05,200
 A city can only annex property that is in the city ETJ.

291
00:20:05,200 --> 00:20:08,160
 I think we already covered that one as well.

292
00:20:08,160 --> 00:20:12,520
 And the city cannot annex an area that has agricultural, wildlife management, or timber

293
00:20:12,520 --> 00:20:16,240
 management exemption unless the city offers a pre-annexation development agreement.

294
00:20:16,240 --> 00:20:19,240
 And we covered that as well.

295
00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:29,280
 Now Ordinance 2017-071, approved by the city in February 2017, established specific criteria

296
00:20:29,280 --> 00:20:34,960
 determining the annexation of areas in the ETJ when significant development is proposed.

297
00:20:34,960 --> 00:20:43,860
 So for example, we have a property that wants to put in a multifamily development.

298
00:20:43,860 --> 00:20:46,400
 It's located in our ETJ.

299
00:20:46,400 --> 00:20:48,840
 It's not located in the city.

300
00:20:48,840 --> 00:20:51,040
 It is contiguous to city limits.

301
00:20:51,040 --> 00:20:56,620
 It wants to use city water and sewer, and it is located within the city -- what we call

302
00:20:56,620 --> 00:21:08,240
 city CCN, which is certificate of -- oh, I had that -- certificate of -- I can't remember.

303
00:21:08,240 --> 00:21:11,120
 Do you remember what it is, Jerry, the CCN?

304
00:21:11,120 --> 00:21:14,080
 Oh, certificate of convenience and necessity.

305
00:21:14,080 --> 00:21:15,920
 Thank you.

306
00:21:15,920 --> 00:21:21,200
 I was just talking about it an hour ago now.

307
00:21:21,200 --> 00:21:26,240
 These are some of the criteria that were established for when we would involuntarily annex.

308
00:21:26,240 --> 00:21:30,260
 All we did was we would first go to the property owner and explain to them because you're going

309
00:21:30,260 --> 00:21:38,580
 to be using city services, you're in our CCN, and you are also adjacent to our city limits.

310
00:21:38,580 --> 00:21:44,320
 We are going to request that you voluntarily annex into the city to access the services.

311
00:21:44,320 --> 00:21:50,620
 If they said, "No, I don't want to do that," we actually did involuntarily annex a property

312
00:21:50,620 --> 00:21:51,620
 owner.

313
00:21:51,620 --> 00:21:58,040
 It's the only one that we did under that law, isn't it, Ron?

314
00:21:58,040 --> 00:21:59,040
 Yeah.

315
00:21:59,040 --> 00:22:09,280
 Once SB6 was approved a few months later, that amendment pretty much became defunct,

316
00:22:09,280 --> 00:22:13,920
 and we have to follow the state regulations with regards to involuntary annexation.

317
00:22:13,920 --> 00:22:15,880
 Okay.

318
00:22:15,880 --> 00:22:22,840
 This is the ETJ map of the city of Denton, and you'll see the limits of the ETJ and how

319
00:22:22,840 --> 00:22:24,840
 they follow the city limit line.

320
00:22:24,840 --> 00:22:27,600
 It's not a straight line.

321
00:22:27,600 --> 00:22:32,280
 As was mentioned previously, for a city of 100,000 or more, the ETJ will extend five

322
00:22:32,280 --> 00:22:34,680
 miles from the city limit line.

323
00:22:34,680 --> 00:22:40,520
 Now we have been annexing properties for the past couple of years, and we are expected

324
00:22:40,520 --> 00:22:47,540
 that we are going to adjust the ETJ limits to reflect the new city limit lines and move

325
00:22:47,540 --> 00:22:53,760
 it five miles out from the new city limit line sometime this year.

326
00:22:53,760 --> 00:23:02,400
 The pre-annexation development agreement that we offer people, this would typically include

327
00:23:02,400 --> 00:23:03,560
 the following.

328
00:23:03,560 --> 00:23:08,560
 The agreed upon zoning designation of the site, development standards such as lot size

329
00:23:08,560 --> 00:23:12,320
 and dimensions, permitted uses, open space, tree preservations.

330
00:23:12,320 --> 00:23:17,640
 I actually gave you a copy of the pre-annexation development agreement for Creekside, which

331
00:23:17,640 --> 00:23:28,840
 is the most recent one, and it's very extensive, 76 pages long, and it sets timing of development,

332
00:23:28,840 --> 00:23:36,160
 timing of permits, street standards, what plants can be planted.

333
00:23:36,160 --> 00:23:41,160
 You can take a look through it and you'll see how extensive it is.

334
00:23:41,160 --> 00:23:48,320
 It really is like a plan development.

335
00:23:48,320 --> 00:23:53,400
 As I said, Creekside is the most recently approved plan development amendment, and you

336
00:23:53,400 --> 00:23:59,860
 can see here is the land use concept plan for Creekside.

337
00:23:59,860 --> 00:24:04,320
 It was approved by council on August 23, 2016.

338
00:24:04,320 --> 00:24:10,080
 We did learn some lessons with this particular pre-annexation development agreement.

339
00:24:10,080 --> 00:24:16,200
 I don't know if you'll recall, some of you may recall the zoning that came through for

340
00:24:16,200 --> 00:24:20,680
 Creekside that was after the plotting had been approved.

341
00:24:20,680 --> 00:24:25,600
 We have since what we're going to do now, we've got three pre-annexation agreements

342
00:24:25,600 --> 00:24:27,280
 that we're working on right now.

343
00:24:27,280 --> 00:24:33,000
 We are going to bring them before the Planning and Zoning Commission for comment, before

344
00:24:33,000 --> 00:24:38,160
 they move forward to City Council for approval, so we can incorporate any comments, get the

345
00:24:38,160 --> 00:24:41,440
 approval from the applicant and move forward.

346
00:24:41,440 --> 00:24:43,940
 We want to make sure that you're involved in the process.

347
00:24:43,940 --> 00:24:50,360
 We don't want anybody to be blindsided this time.

348
00:24:50,360 --> 00:24:55,600
 Once the agreement is, oh, I already covered that, and that's just the Creekside agreement,

349
00:24:55,600 --> 00:24:58,720
 the cover page.

350
00:24:58,720 --> 00:25:02,920
 The agreement is approved by the City Council as an ordinance, as you'll see.

351
00:25:02,920 --> 00:25:06,320
 After pre-annexation development agreements will be brought to the Planning and Zoning

352
00:25:06,320 --> 00:25:07,320
 Commission.

353
00:25:07,320 --> 00:25:10,200
 I've already covered that, got ahead of myself.

354
00:25:10,200 --> 00:25:14,520
 We've also got what we call NAA, a non-annexation development agreement.

355
00:25:14,520 --> 00:25:21,080
 Now, this is the agreement that we were talking about where if we cannot annex areas that

356
00:25:21,080 --> 00:25:27,320
 are used for agricultural, wildlife preservation, et cetera, if the people who own the property

357
00:25:27,320 --> 00:25:35,040
 do not want to be annexed, we can negotiate an NAA with them and guarantee the site won't

358
00:25:35,040 --> 00:25:40,680
 be annexed for a certain number of years, providing following conditions.

359
00:25:40,680 --> 00:25:45,920
 Property will not be used for any purpose other than agricultural, wildlife management

360
00:25:45,920 --> 00:25:51,680
 or timber management and incidental activities, and the owner agrees not to plot the property

361
00:25:51,680 --> 00:25:54,640
 or commence with any development on the site.

362
00:25:54,640 --> 00:25:59,200
 We have had a few through the years since this went through in 2010.

363
00:25:59,200 --> 00:26:07,160
 The ones that we've got right now were approved in 2010, and we have had a few instances where

364
00:26:07,160 --> 00:26:12,840
 the owners have sold the property and the new owners want to develop the property, and

365
00:26:12,840 --> 00:26:15,360
 that's when we institute annexation.

366
00:26:15,360 --> 00:26:16,360
 Yes?

367
00:26:16,360 --> 00:26:17,360
 Commissioner Smith.

368
00:26:17,360 --> 00:26:19,720
 Thank you, Chair.

369
00:26:19,720 --> 00:26:24,960
 On the NAA, if there is currently, so I'm assuming that when you say you limit it to

370
00:26:24,960 --> 00:26:32,920
 just those purposes, any type of like home ranch style thing, whether it's out the ETJ,

371
00:26:32,920 --> 00:26:35,080
 those don't count if someone's living on the land?

372
00:26:35,080 --> 00:26:36,080
 Oh, no.

373
00:26:36,080 --> 00:26:37,080
 Okay.

374
00:26:37,080 --> 00:26:38,080
 Doesn't preclude it for me.

375
00:26:38,080 --> 00:26:39,080
 That's incidental activities.

376
00:26:39,080 --> 00:26:40,080
 Incidental.

377
00:26:40,080 --> 00:26:41,080
 Got it.

378
00:26:41,080 --> 00:26:42,080
 Okay.

379
00:26:42,080 --> 00:26:43,080
 Understood.

380
00:26:43,080 --> 00:26:44,080
 Didn't know that.

381
00:26:44,080 --> 00:26:45,080
 All right.

382
00:26:45,080 --> 00:26:46,080
 Thank you.

383
00:26:46,080 --> 00:26:53,200
 If they have this non-annexation development agreement in place, and they do commence some

384
00:26:53,200 --> 00:26:58,360
 kind of development, what does the City do?

385
00:26:58,360 --> 00:27:05,720
 Should the property owner commence development on the subject side?

386
00:27:05,720 --> 00:27:11,600
 The City considers it to be a petition for voluntary annexation per the agreement, and

387
00:27:11,600 --> 00:27:16,740
 we begin annexation proceedings.

388
00:27:16,740 --> 00:27:25,400
 We have the approved non-annexation development agreements come from 2009, 2010.

389
00:27:25,400 --> 00:27:32,400
 In the previous Denton plan, there was an ambitious plan for annexation and growth,

390
00:27:32,400 --> 00:27:37,840
 and the goals of the annexation were to protect the North I-35 corridor, protect the future

391
00:27:37,840 --> 00:27:46,120
 West Loop 288 corridor, manage the growth in the CCN area, manage land uses and types

392
00:27:46,120 --> 00:27:52,760
 of development in the areas, create a logical, contiguous City of Denton boundary, and provide

393
00:27:52,760 --> 00:28:00,240
 future growth areas as recommended by the Denton plan.

394
00:28:00,240 --> 00:28:10,320
 What we did, the City did, is create a map showing what we call PAAs, which are potential

395
00:28:10,320 --> 00:28:16,140
 annexation areas, and DHs, and you'll see the DHs right here.

396
00:28:16,140 --> 00:28:17,760
 We call them donut holes.

397
00:28:17,760 --> 00:28:20,900
 Very technical with our terms.

398
00:28:20,900 --> 00:28:24,860
 Donut holes are areas that are surrounded by the City, but they're not annexed into

399
00:28:24,860 --> 00:28:26,320
 the City.

400
00:28:26,320 --> 00:28:32,160
 This map actually shows the pink areas here are the areas that have NAAs in effect right

401
00:28:32,160 --> 00:28:37,840
 now, and all the hatched areas are areas which have been annexed into the City as a result

402
00:28:37,840 --> 00:28:39,620
 of this program.

403
00:28:39,620 --> 00:28:48,420
 The NAAs that were originally approved in 2010 and 2016 were extended to 2020.

404
00:28:48,420 --> 00:28:53,280
 That means they are due to expire next year, and about this time next year, we will be

405
00:28:53,280 --> 00:28:58,820
 going to the City Council for direction on whether they want to annex these areas into

406
00:28:58,820 --> 00:29:05,080
 the City, or if they want to extend the NAA further.

407
00:29:05,080 --> 00:29:10,880
 Per local government code, the NAA can be extended for up to 45 years.

408
00:29:10,880 --> 00:29:11,880
 Commissioner Smith.

409
00:29:11,880 --> 00:29:12,880
 Thank you, Chair.

410
00:29:12,880 --> 00:29:16,240
 Per the rules you said earlier where you cannot have annexation unless you are contiguous

411
00:29:16,240 --> 00:29:22,600
 with the City limits, so like if you look at PAA 3, it doesn't look like, because there's

412
00:29:22,600 --> 00:29:29,440
 NAA in between PAA 3 and that NAA there, does that mean that if they're touching a land

413
00:29:29,440 --> 00:29:34,200
 that has NAA, does the contiguous ability skip the NAA?

414
00:29:34,200 --> 00:29:40,920
 Because it looks like that PAA 13 isn't touching, it got annexed in, but it's not touching City

415
00:29:40,920 --> 00:29:41,920
 limits.

416
00:29:41,920 --> 00:29:44,100
 So I just didn't know what the rules were there.

417
00:29:44,100 --> 00:29:49,960
 The rules were there is that with the NAAs, it's going to be in the City.

418
00:29:49,960 --> 00:29:55,840
 We consider it to be in the City, but not annexed if that makes any sense to you.

419
00:29:55,840 --> 00:30:02,680
 Basically the NAA is kind of saying it doesn't exist, that if your land is up against another

420
00:30:02,680 --> 00:30:09,400
 parcel of land that has NAA on it and that parcel of land is in or against City limits,

421
00:30:09,400 --> 00:30:12,800
 then you can gain annexation.

422
00:30:12,800 --> 00:30:18,920
 What you need to understand is each PAA was one piece at one time, contiguous to the City

423
00:30:18,920 --> 00:30:24,200
 limits, the property owners, some of them agreed to annexation, some of them did not,

424
00:30:24,200 --> 00:30:29,960
 and that's why we ended up with the hop, skip and a jump type of thing.

425
00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:31,720
 And Jerry, did you want to weigh in on that?

426
00:30:31,720 --> 00:30:37,960
 Yeah, I think that's basically the point is that each of these, when they were initially

427
00:30:37,960 --> 00:30:44,820
 proposed, there was no annex land in there, that's the whole point, but they met the eligibility

428
00:30:44,820 --> 00:30:51,120
 criteria when they were proposed for annexation, it's just that our annexation was suspended

429
00:30:51,120 --> 00:30:57,120
 because of the operation of this law that required us to extend the NAAs.

430
00:30:57,120 --> 00:31:00,360
 Thank you.

431
00:31:00,360 --> 00:31:01,360
 That concludes my presentation.

432
00:31:01,360 --> 00:31:02,360
 Are there any other questions?

433
00:31:02,360 --> 00:31:03,360
 Great, I don't see any.

434
00:31:03,360 --> 00:31:16,760
 Yeah, if I can add one point, we didn't really go into the fact that we've got within our

435
00:31:16,760 --> 00:31:23,320
 ETJ Division 1 and Division 2, and for annexation it's irrelevant for the most part.

436
00:31:23,320 --> 00:31:29,680
 It's just that there were a couple of maps there where, you know, you see the ETJ listed

437
00:31:29,680 --> 00:31:33,700
 out there and it was Division 1 only.

438
00:31:33,700 --> 00:31:38,600
 Division 1 is kind of an inner layer with Division 2 being the outer layer of it.

439
00:31:38,600 --> 00:31:45,680
 Division 2 was the one that has the 5-mile radius from the city limits by virtue of the

440
00:31:45,680 --> 00:31:48,040
 size of the city of Denton.

441
00:31:48,040 --> 00:31:54,240
 Division 1 is established by an agreement with the county that we entered into a couple

442
00:31:54,240 --> 00:31:58,480
 of decades back and does not expand every time the city grows.

443
00:31:58,480 --> 00:32:03,840
 In fact, there are parts of the city that are even outside of Division 1.

444
00:32:03,840 --> 00:32:11,400
 Division 1 is set by where we have the CCNs for providing water service and what have

445
00:32:11,400 --> 00:32:12,400
 you.

446
00:32:12,400 --> 00:32:17,720
 And, you know, as our water service grows and our weightless water service grows, that's

447
00:32:17,720 --> 00:32:24,280
 when we should be going to the county and extending the Division 1 annexation.

448
00:32:24,280 --> 00:32:29,840
 That's where we have control over, as he was saying, platting and some of our development

449
00:32:29,840 --> 00:32:32,840
 standards only.

450
00:32:32,840 --> 00:32:35,000
 Division 2, we don't have any control over it.

451
00:32:35,000 --> 00:32:42,360
 It's just an area that's possibly -- that could possibly be annexed and it will expand

452
00:32:42,360 --> 00:32:43,360
 with the city.

453
00:32:43,360 --> 00:32:48,600
 In fact, over to the west, we're probably one annexation away from being over in Wise

454
00:32:48,600 --> 00:32:52,520
 County as far as our Division 2 ETJ is concerned.

455
00:32:52,520 --> 00:32:58,080
 Jerry, can you answer this question when -- we have a volunteer annexation and we do a service

456
00:32:58,080 --> 00:32:59,080
 agreement.

457
00:32:59,080 --> 00:33:06,920
 Is there a time limit on that as far as when we would execute services with them?

458
00:33:06,920 --> 00:33:13,000
 It could be provided in there and, in fact, there's a provision of state law and one of

459
00:33:13,000 --> 00:33:20,000
 these annexation areas took advantage of it where they could challenge our service agreement

460
00:33:20,000 --> 00:33:26,920
 and suggest that it's inadequate for providing services and doesn't meet the standards imposed

461
00:33:26,920 --> 00:33:32,280
 by state law and they could have an arbitration over it.

462
00:33:32,280 --> 00:33:41,900
 There was this one area, DH-12, where we had one of those arbitrations and I'm one of about

463
00:33:41,900 --> 00:33:49,240
 two people who's participated, one to my knowledge, and so the -- that area was saying that our

464
00:33:49,240 --> 00:34:01,400
 water tie-in policies were unfair and we persuaded the arbitrator that it's consistent with services

465
00:34:01,400 --> 00:34:08,200
 throughout the city that even if you're in the city limits, if you don't have a waterline

466
00:34:08,200 --> 00:34:13,480
 near you, you may have to pay to extend it to tie into it whether you're inside the city

467
00:34:13,480 --> 00:34:14,480
 limits or not.

468
00:34:14,480 --> 00:34:22,720
 And, in fact, if you're inside the city limits and, you know, you have a big enough lot,

469
00:34:22,720 --> 00:34:26,920
 you may be able to build a septic system or have a well.

470
00:34:26,920 --> 00:34:32,200
 So there are opportunities to challenge the sufficiency of that.

471
00:34:32,200 --> 00:34:37,200
 We also entered into negotiations with the area pursuant to some requirements of state

472
00:34:37,200 --> 00:34:38,320
 law as well.

473
00:34:38,320 --> 00:34:42,600
 Is there a typical rule of thumb on a -- on timing on that?

474
00:34:42,600 --> 00:34:48,280
 I don't know many of the planners, but no, but that's really not a legal issue as far

475
00:34:48,280 --> 00:34:56,200
 as what kind of timing would be there, but it's something that could be put in, I suppose.

476
00:34:56,200 --> 00:34:57,200
 Okay.

477
00:34:57,200 --> 00:34:58,200
 Okay.

478
00:34:58,200 --> 00:34:59,200
 Thank you, Cindy.

479
00:34:59,200 --> 00:35:00,200
 And Jerry.

480
00:35:00,200 --> 00:35:01,200
 Okay.

481
00:35:01,200 --> 00:35:08,280
 Moving down our agenda, we are to clarification of agenda items.

482
00:35:08,280 --> 00:35:12,840
 So we will move to our minutes.

483
00:35:12,840 --> 00:35:21,720
 Does anyone have any concerns, questions, thoughts on the minutes?

484
00:35:21,720 --> 00:35:22,720
 Okay.

485
00:35:22,720 --> 00:35:25,720
 How about the consent agenda?

486
00:35:25,720 --> 00:35:28,960
 Easy, easy.

487
00:35:28,960 --> 00:35:30,440
 Okay.

488
00:35:30,440 --> 00:35:32,880
 No questions there.

489
00:35:32,880 --> 00:35:41,400
 With regard to public hearings, A, B, and C, Andy -- no, A, B, and C have all been postponed

490
00:35:41,400 --> 00:35:44,980
 to February 20th.

491
00:35:44,980 --> 00:35:50,680
 So that will bring us to public hearing D, and I will invite Sean Jacobson up for that

492
00:35:50,680 --> 00:36:09,800
 discussion.

493
00:36:09,800 --> 00:36:13,080
 Thank you, Chair, and members of the committee.

494
00:36:13,080 --> 00:36:22,160
 Tonight we're looking at a residential replat of the fire station D addition.

495
00:36:22,160 --> 00:36:25,800
 And to start off, I want to briefly explain to you this is going to be a little different

496
00:36:25,800 --> 00:36:28,320
 than a final plat or a preliminary plat.

497
00:36:28,320 --> 00:36:31,240
 It can be a little bit confusing, so I just want to lay out why this is coming to you

498
00:36:31,240 --> 00:36:33,240
 as a public hearing.

499
00:36:33,240 --> 00:36:42,480
 Texas local government code, you can see there, 212.0146, states that in cases of a replat

500
00:36:42,480 --> 00:36:46,640
 without vacation, which basically means we've got a plat there, we're putting a new one

501
00:36:46,640 --> 00:36:51,400
 on top of it to redraw the lines, and we're not vacating the old plat, you'd have to have

502
00:36:51,400 --> 00:36:52,400
 a public hearing.

503
00:36:52,400 --> 00:36:57,560
 It has to be noticed, so similar to what we would do with the rezoning, we send out letters

504
00:36:57,560 --> 00:37:04,160
 to anyone who has -- any property owner within that subdivision, as well as within 200 feet

505
00:37:04,160 --> 00:37:05,920
 of that property.

506
00:37:05,920 --> 00:37:08,160
 And that's specifically with a residential replat.

507
00:37:08,160 --> 00:37:10,620
 So the public hearing is required for any replat.

508
00:37:10,620 --> 00:37:14,880
 For a residential replat, you have to notice it, just to give anyone living in that area

509
00:37:14,880 --> 00:37:20,200
 the chance to, if they have some concern, ask a question, express if they have a problem

510
00:37:20,200 --> 00:37:23,920
 with that, and, you know, express, you know, let us know.

511
00:37:23,920 --> 00:37:26,640
 So that's why you're going to see a little bit of a difference here, rather than it being

512
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:32,480
 on consent agenda, we actually do have a public hearing in this case.

513
00:37:32,480 --> 00:37:37,760
 So as you can see here, this was the original subdivision, this is the original plat.

514
00:37:37,760 --> 00:37:44,680
 We had two lots, and what we're looking at is specifically lot two tonight.

515
00:37:44,680 --> 00:37:55,120
 So see there, we're now -- the property owner is now looking to split that into two lots,

516
00:37:55,120 --> 00:37:58,260
 R1 and R2.

517
00:37:58,260 --> 00:38:00,900
 This area is zoned NR3.

518
00:38:00,900 --> 00:38:06,000
 Both of these lots meet the minimum lot size requirements, as noted, within this zoning

519
00:38:06,000 --> 00:38:11,060
 district meets all the technical requirements, and for that reason, staff is recommending

520
00:38:11,060 --> 00:38:13,840
 approval of this residential replat.

521
00:38:13,840 --> 00:38:18,000
 With that, if you have any questions, let me know.

522
00:38:18,000 --> 00:38:20,200
 >> Anybody have questions?

523
00:38:20,200 --> 00:38:21,200
 Okay.

524
00:38:21,200 --> 00:38:25,680
 Thank you, Sean.

525
00:38:25,680 --> 00:38:30,920
 Next public hearing item E, good Samaritan East tract.

526
00:38:30,920 --> 00:38:36,840
 That is Ron.

527
00:38:36,840 --> 00:38:39,160
 >> Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the commission.

528
00:38:39,160 --> 00:38:46,560
 This is going to be a tag team effort between myself and Kristi Upton.

529
00:38:46,560 --> 00:38:54,360
 The request for you tonight is to consider making a recommendation to city council on

530
00:38:54,360 --> 00:38:57,440
 an alternative ESA plan.

531
00:38:57,440 --> 00:39:03,600
 The ESA plan is to cross a riparian stream buffer, and I won't go into the details of

532
00:39:03,600 --> 00:39:09,040
 that riparian stream buffer, Kristi will make that presentation, is to eventually develop

533
00:39:09,040 --> 00:39:16,080
 a single family development of approximately 140 lots on this tract that is approximately

534
00:39:16,080 --> 00:39:19,320
 45 acres.

535
00:39:19,320 --> 00:39:26,800
 You can see on this map here, generally located to south of Ryan and west of Roxbury Street,

536
00:39:26,800 --> 00:39:31,600
 which is here in Teasley, it's just not too far east of this subject property.

537
00:39:31,600 --> 00:39:38,480
 I just want to make the commission note that this right here is the Lake Forest Park, and

538
00:39:38,480 --> 00:39:43,240
 then this is the good Samaritan development to the west.

539
00:39:43,240 --> 00:39:51,480
 And again, as if when this develop happens, they will be looking at accessing sewer and

540
00:39:51,480 --> 00:39:56,000
 water and all the different utilities as part of the platting.

541
00:39:56,000 --> 00:39:59,280
 I know that you all didn't have any questions on the preliminary plat.

542
00:39:59,280 --> 00:40:04,080
 There is a preliminary plat on the consent agenda that's related to this alternative

543
00:40:04,080 --> 00:40:05,940
 ESA.

544
00:40:05,940 --> 00:40:11,480
 When you consider the preliminary plat, it will be approved, however, there is a note

545
00:40:11,480 --> 00:40:18,000
 on that preliminary plat that if the alternative ESA through city council is altered or not

546
00:40:18,000 --> 00:40:22,280
 approved, that preliminary plat will need to be revised.

547
00:40:22,280 --> 00:40:24,560
 So just a point of clarification.

548
00:40:24,560 --> 00:40:30,120
 With that, I'm going to ask Christy to come up and make her presentation.

549
00:40:30,120 --> 00:40:33,120
 Thank you, Ron.

550
00:40:33,120 --> 00:40:34,120
 Good evening.

551
00:40:34,120 --> 00:40:39,400
 Christy Upton, Environmental Compliance Coordinator for the City of Denton.

552
00:40:39,400 --> 00:40:45,200
 And the first thing I wanted to do was to give you a little background on why there

553
00:40:45,200 --> 00:40:48,680
 is an ESA on this property.

554
00:40:48,680 --> 00:40:56,920
 The city identified riparian buffers and upland habitat on this property during the preliminary

555
00:40:56,920 --> 00:41:07,520
 review of the information from geographical information that was made available to us

556
00:41:07,520 --> 00:41:16,280
 in years past and created a map and these habitats were existent on this property.

557
00:41:16,280 --> 00:41:21,600
 The first one, the riparian buffers, there was an unnamed tributary.

558
00:41:21,600 --> 00:41:29,880
 It runs along the upper portion of this northeast corner, northwest corner of the property and

559
00:41:29,880 --> 00:41:36,040
 it is an ephemeral stream and there was a 100 foot riparian buffer that was put across

560
00:41:36,040 --> 00:41:43,080
 around the stream and during the assessment it was rated in fair condition and that was

561
00:41:43,080 --> 00:41:48,880
 using the rapid stream assessment tool that the city of Denton uses.

562
00:41:48,880 --> 00:41:55,320
 And then there was a second riparian buffer identified and it's an intermittent stream

563
00:41:55,320 --> 00:41:58,600
 that bisects that northern part of the property.

564
00:41:58,600 --> 00:42:04,880
 It's also a 100 foot riparian buffer and again rated in fair condition.

565
00:42:04,880 --> 00:42:11,200
 The cross timbers upland habitat that was identified originally was 10.9 acres that

566
00:42:11,200 --> 00:42:14,400
 the city had identified on that.

567
00:42:14,400 --> 00:42:18,520
 The assessment found that some of that upland habitat no longer exists.

568
00:42:18,520 --> 00:42:26,880
 For example, this finger here and that's because it's isolated from the rest of the upland

569
00:42:26,880 --> 00:42:34,280
 habitat and it was removed but during the assessment it was found that there was other

570
00:42:34,280 --> 00:42:41,760
 parts of the property where upland habitat had established and that was added for an

571
00:42:41,760 --> 00:42:49,360
 increase in the overall upland habitat to 20.6 acres.

572
00:42:49,360 --> 00:42:56,280
 And I also want to point out on that upland habitat, I know you had a classification on

573
00:42:56,280 --> 00:42:59,800
 the habitat along the riparian areas.

574
00:42:59,800 --> 00:43:05,560
 What kind of classification, is this a fair habitat or is it poor condition or is that

575
00:43:05,560 --> 00:43:06,560
 important?

576
00:43:06,560 --> 00:43:14,120
 I'm sorry, I'll have to defer to Debra on this.

577
00:43:14,120 --> 00:43:28,080
 Good evening, Commission, my name is Debra Villara, Environmental Services.

578
00:43:28,080 --> 00:43:34,680
 Isafil assessment for upland habitat does not provide a rating system for upland habitat.

579
00:43:34,680 --> 00:43:38,800
 The only one that we have a rating system is for riparian buffers.

580
00:43:38,800 --> 00:43:44,840
 So pretty much we use the size of the tree area, more than 10 acres, and the presence

581
00:43:44,840 --> 00:43:52,040
 of the species, indicative species of the cross timber habitat to determine the existence

582
00:43:52,040 --> 00:43:53,040
 of it.

583
00:43:53,040 --> 00:43:55,920
 But we don't have a rating system for upland habitat.

584
00:43:55,920 --> 00:44:03,440
 Okay, because, I mean, going in there, there's a lot of eastern cedar, and eastern cedar

585
00:44:03,440 --> 00:44:08,680
 is considered a very invasive species in upland habitat.

586
00:44:08,680 --> 00:44:12,980
 So looking at what you have there, 5, 10 years from now, eastern cedar is going to pretty

587
00:44:12,980 --> 00:44:18,520
 much be the dominant species or 10, 15 years from now, that will be the dominant species.

588
00:44:18,520 --> 00:44:27,800
 So what's being considered, as far as for future, keeping that as upland habitat?

589
00:44:27,800 --> 00:44:32,840
 Because from what you look at, it's a very poor condition.

590
00:44:32,840 --> 00:44:35,840
 So that would be my question.

591
00:44:35,840 --> 00:44:42,680
 Yes, the red cedar intrusion into cross timber habitat have been documented for many years,

592
00:44:42,680 --> 00:44:47,760
 especially when we transition from one ecosystem to the other.

593
00:44:47,760 --> 00:44:55,400
 Right now, the regulations does not establish eradication of that species, as a part of

594
00:44:55,400 --> 00:44:57,200
 the management.

595
00:44:57,200 --> 00:45:06,640
 So we will, unfortunately, we will have to rely on the cross timber to be able to, you

596
00:45:06,640 --> 00:45:10,160
 know, stay where it is.

597
00:45:10,160 --> 00:45:16,560
 We have provisions in the code that allows the property owner or the developer to actually

598
00:45:16,560 --> 00:45:24,680
 do and remove some of invasive species, or to trim the canopy to allow for the improvement

599
00:45:24,680 --> 00:45:28,740
 of the health and success of the cross timber habitat.

600
00:45:28,740 --> 00:45:32,640
 If that's something that the developer or property owner would like to pursue, those

601
00:45:32,640 --> 00:45:36,880
 are permitted uses and they will be able to do it right.

602
00:45:36,880 --> 00:45:43,000
 So there's nothing that we can interject there to maintain that as cross timbers habitat

603
00:45:43,000 --> 00:45:46,920
 other than okay, you preserve it and that's it.

604
00:45:46,920 --> 00:45:47,920
 Correct.

605
00:45:47,920 --> 00:45:55,340
 If you want to trim or to remove invasive species, you are allowed to do it.

606
00:45:55,340 --> 00:46:05,260
 But there is not a mandate to actually go and remove any red cedars.

607
00:46:05,260 --> 00:46:06,260
 Commissioner Beck.

608
00:46:06,260 --> 00:46:07,260
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

609
00:46:07,260 --> 00:46:13,200
 Deborah, let me ask you this, it points out the assessment found that some of the upland

610
00:46:13,200 --> 00:46:15,000
 habitat no longer met the criteria and were removed.

611
00:46:15,000 --> 00:46:16,000
 You talked about that little finger.

612
00:46:16,000 --> 00:46:21,480
 I think it was mentioned that it was on one of the exhibits here, Exhibit 4, explains

613
00:46:21,480 --> 00:46:29,360
 how the area depicted as non-contiguous upland, because what criteria did it not meet?

614
00:46:29,360 --> 00:46:36,900
 When they actually go to the site and GPS the boundaries of the upland habitat, it was

615
00:46:36,900 --> 00:46:45,360
 found to be a gap, a physical gap between the area that met the criteria of upland habitat.

616
00:46:45,360 --> 00:46:50,880
 Because of that gap, that small tree area was removed.

617
00:46:50,880 --> 00:46:56,520
 However, after further field assessment, we gained pretty much 10 acres of upland habitat

618
00:46:56,520 --> 00:46:57,520
 to the south.

619
00:46:57,520 --> 00:46:59,240
 But we're losing that little finger, right?

620
00:46:59,240 --> 00:47:00,240
 Correct.

621
00:47:00,240 --> 00:47:01,240
 Okay.

622
00:47:01,240 --> 00:47:02,240
 The gap, what created the gap?

623
00:47:02,240 --> 00:47:03,240
 Was it manmade or natural?

624
00:47:03,240 --> 00:47:05,340
 It could be manmade.

625
00:47:05,340 --> 00:47:14,660
 Many of our upland habitat is a second generation forest, so it could have been removed by previous

626
00:47:14,660 --> 00:47:16,520
 activities on site.

627
00:47:16,520 --> 00:47:20,880
 So we don't have a lot of history of how that area was actually impacted.

628
00:47:20,880 --> 00:47:24,560
 But upon field verification, we found the gap.

629
00:47:24,560 --> 00:47:32,640
 And one of the conditions to define an upland habitat is to maintain that continuity between

630
00:47:32,640 --> 00:47:35,540
 one tree area to the other.

631
00:47:35,540 --> 00:47:40,120
 And I'm not trying to be difficult here, but it seems like this gap, if it was manmade

632
00:47:40,120 --> 00:47:43,880
 or whatever, in time, I mean, how big is the gap?

633
00:47:43,880 --> 00:47:44,880
 How wide is it?

634
00:47:44,880 --> 00:47:46,600
 It doesn't look that big.

635
00:47:46,600 --> 00:47:55,080
 Well, I think that when you -- the green polygon on top of it doesn't allow you to clearly

636
00:47:55,080 --> 00:47:56,080
 see it.

637
00:47:56,080 --> 00:47:57,080
 Right.

638
00:47:57,080 --> 00:48:01,760
 But I think that if you see -- I don't have my pointer yet.

639
00:48:01,760 --> 00:48:05,160
 My pointer is showing.

640
00:48:05,160 --> 00:48:06,160
 Okay.

641
00:48:06,160 --> 00:48:09,640
 So right here, that's a pond, right here.

642
00:48:09,640 --> 00:48:18,640
 So pretty much -- I don't know the specific distance between the edge of what we still

643
00:48:18,640 --> 00:48:21,200
 consider upland habitat and this area.

644
00:48:21,200 --> 00:48:26,640
 But yeah, there was a physical break into it.

645
00:48:26,640 --> 00:48:27,640
 Okay.

646
00:48:27,640 --> 00:48:33,240
 So that's an area where they're going to be building houses, and it just seems convenient

647
00:48:33,240 --> 00:48:40,840
 that that was -- has that break in it, yet it seems like over time, you know, as growth

648
00:48:40,840 --> 00:48:43,440
 goes, that gap could disappear, too.

649
00:48:43,440 --> 00:48:44,440
 Correct.

650
00:48:44,440 --> 00:48:46,240
 So we're looking at this like a snapshot.

651
00:48:46,240 --> 00:48:47,240
 Correct.

652
00:48:47,240 --> 00:48:51,680
 There's a gap now, so we can discount it as a result of that?

653
00:48:51,680 --> 00:48:52,680
 Yes.

654
00:48:52,680 --> 00:48:57,440
 That's why we are -- we recommend to do the field assessment right before development happens

655
00:48:57,440 --> 00:49:02,820
 and not a year ahead because we want to have the most current conditions upon development.

656
00:49:02,820 --> 00:49:08,440
 So if development is happening right now or in the next six months or so, I think that

657
00:49:08,440 --> 00:49:12,320
 we have to honor whatever existing conditions are.

658
00:49:12,320 --> 00:49:13,320
 Okay.

659
00:49:13,320 --> 00:49:15,280
 Thank you.

660
00:49:15,280 --> 00:49:16,280
 Commissioner Sanchez?

661
00:49:16,280 --> 00:49:23,680
 I just wanted to mention, from my experience working as a biologist on the grasslands,

662
00:49:23,680 --> 00:49:28,840
 in looking at upland habitat, upland habitat is not necessarily contiguous -- you're not

663
00:49:28,840 --> 00:49:31,920
 going to find the trees contiguous through the whole area.

664
00:49:31,920 --> 00:49:35,560
 Soils make a big difference, and so you're going to find a lot of areas where even though

665
00:49:35,560 --> 00:49:40,680
 the trees adjacent -- there may be an opening, but adjacent to that, you have trees, and

666
00:49:40,680 --> 00:49:45,240
 you'll have areas that are just open and nothing will grow there, and it's basically based

667
00:49:45,240 --> 00:49:47,840
 on the soil type.

668
00:49:47,840 --> 00:49:52,920
 So you may have -- even though you see trees growing adjacent to that and you have this

669
00:49:52,920 --> 00:49:57,340
 area there, the soil type makes a difference too.

670
00:49:57,340 --> 00:49:58,340
 You're correct.

671
00:49:58,340 --> 00:50:04,600
 The cross timber habitat is almost a combination of a forest with a savanna.

672
00:50:04,600 --> 00:50:11,240
 So therefore, there are some gaps throughout, but in this case, unfortunately, that gap

673
00:50:11,240 --> 00:50:12,940
 is in the outer edge.

674
00:50:12,940 --> 00:50:21,360
 For example, if this area were to be -- if there were other upland habitat right here,

675
00:50:21,360 --> 00:50:28,200
 then I will say, well, that gap may be part of that typical gaps that we find, but unfortunately,

676
00:50:28,200 --> 00:50:35,960
 I don't have any -- we don't find any continuity with other upland habitats probably on the

677
00:50:35,960 --> 00:50:37,040
 south side.

678
00:50:37,040 --> 00:50:39,440
 So we look into it.

679
00:50:39,440 --> 00:50:43,240
 We try to preserve as much upland habitat as possible.

680
00:50:43,240 --> 00:50:50,280
 We were happy to be able to find out that our map were underestimated, the total amount

681
00:50:50,280 --> 00:50:57,400
 of the upland habitat, and we were able to increase it to 20.6 of total upland habitat

682
00:50:57,400 --> 00:50:58,400
 on the side.

683
00:50:58,400 --> 00:51:04,240
 So even though we may have messed that polygon right there, I think that we gained substantial

684
00:51:04,240 --> 00:51:11,720
 upland habitat to this area right here, which is now subject to ESA preservation.

685
00:51:11,720 --> 00:51:14,400
 Thanks, Deborah.

686
00:51:14,400 --> 00:51:24,840
 So to continue the presentation, much of the riparian buffer also meets the criteria of

687
00:51:24,840 --> 00:51:33,000
 the upland habitat, and that's because of the way that this waterway has been cut through

688
00:51:33,000 --> 00:51:43,520
 some of what was that upland habitat before, and thus creates an overlap in the habitats.

689
00:51:43,520 --> 00:51:50,840
 The proposed encroachment that we bring to you today, and that's the reason for the alternative

690
00:51:50,840 --> 00:51:57,560
 ESA plan is for the applicant is proposing to build a roadway improvement to connect

691
00:51:57,560 --> 00:52:03,720
 the northern and southern tracks, which you have the preliminary platform so you can get

692
00:52:03,720 --> 00:52:10,800
 a feel for what they're proposing to develop, and the installation of the utilities that

693
00:52:10,800 --> 00:52:12,440
 would go along with that roadway.

694
00:52:12,440 --> 00:52:19,840
 They would be removing a 100-foot segment along the 100-foot width of that riparian

695
00:52:19,840 --> 00:52:24,640
 buffer equating to 10,000 square feet.

696
00:52:24,640 --> 00:52:30,280
 It's notable that the understory is dominantly Chinese privet at this time.

697
00:52:30,280 --> 00:52:36,680
 About 75 to 100 percent of that area is Chinese privet understory, and then there's 72 trees

698
00:52:36,680 --> 00:52:41,840
 that are located within that 10,000 square feet, and I've given you a summary of those

699
00:52:41,840 --> 00:52:47,640
 trees here.

700
00:52:47,640 --> 00:52:55,680
 For this deviation from the ESA regulations, there is criteria for approval for an alternative

701
00:52:55,680 --> 00:53:02,240
 ESA plan, and the mitigation analysis for in-kind replacement of the functions offered

702
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:11,880
 by the ESA to be removed is what must be met, and that's in subchapter 17 of the Denton

703
00:53:11,880 --> 00:53:21,760
 Development Code, and to summarize it, the applicant must provide some type of mitigation

704
00:53:21,760 --> 00:53:27,720
 for what they are removing, and I've tried to provide you some summary of what those

705
00:53:27,720 --> 00:53:31,920
 mitigation requirements are.

706
00:53:31,920 --> 00:53:37,880
 The first mitigation strategy that the applicant is proposing is to preserve cross timbers,

707
00:53:37,880 --> 00:53:44,440
 upland habitat, and tree canopy beyond the minimum City of Denton requirements.

708
00:53:44,440 --> 00:53:55,000
 The upland habitat proposal is, or the requirement, is 10.25 acres, and they are proposing to

709
00:53:55,000 --> 00:54:01,840
 preserve 11.5 acres, and the tree canopy requirements per preservation is 6.16 acres

710
00:54:01,840 --> 00:54:04,320
 and they are proposing 11.7 acres.

711
00:54:04,320 --> 00:54:05,320
 Yes.

712
00:54:05,320 --> 00:54:06,320
 Commissioner Beck.

713
00:54:06,320 --> 00:54:09,320
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

714
00:54:09,320 --> 00:54:15,960
 We're losing, with this, I realize that what they're leaving is above the minimum, but

715
00:54:15,960 --> 00:54:21,080
 we're losing about nine acres, too, so they don't have to mitigate any of that?

716
00:54:21,080 --> 00:54:28,760
 No, because the, by rights, they can remove 50%, up to 50% of the upland habitat.

717
00:54:28,760 --> 00:54:29,760
 Okay.

718
00:54:29,760 --> 00:54:30,760
 Nice.

719
00:54:30,760 --> 00:54:31,760
 Thank you.

720
00:54:31,760 --> 00:54:37,200
 The second mitigation strategy that they are offering is to remove the Chinese privet and

721
00:54:37,200 --> 00:54:41,640
 calorie, there's a few calorie pear trees also within that riparian buffer, and both

722
00:54:41,640 --> 00:54:49,160
 of these are highly invasive species, and they will be removing those Chinese privet

723
00:54:49,160 --> 00:54:58,080
 and calorie pear using mechanical and chemical removal methods, and the strategy will improve

724
00:54:58,080 --> 00:55:04,040
 the chances for a thriving native and adaptive understory.

725
00:55:04,040 --> 00:55:05,040
 Commissioner Beck.

726
00:55:05,040 --> 00:55:06,040
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

727
00:55:06,040 --> 00:55:07,440
 Deborah may need your help.

728
00:55:07,440 --> 00:55:12,040
 This was my email to you, the method they're going to use, I understand the mechanical

729
00:55:12,040 --> 00:55:16,920
 is probably the best method to get rid of, but they're going to come in with a herbicide

730
00:55:16,920 --> 00:55:22,760
 to do the rest, so my question was, what is that herbicide, and how do we assure that

731
00:55:22,760 --> 00:55:26,560
 it doesn't get into the system?

732
00:55:26,560 --> 00:55:32,560
 So for now, the applicant has proposed to use, it's okay, for now the applicant has

733
00:55:32,560 --> 00:55:40,040
 proposed to defer that to the landscaping company that they hired to determine that

734
00:55:40,040 --> 00:55:41,040
 information.

735
00:55:41,040 --> 00:55:42,040
 Okay.

736
00:55:42,040 --> 00:55:47,120
 But does the city have standards of what they can and can't use, I mean, I'm concerned

737
00:55:47,120 --> 00:55:53,600
 about the glyphosate that's typically used in situation, that's a chemical in roundup

738
00:55:53,600 --> 00:55:54,600
 that creates problems.

739
00:55:54,600 --> 00:56:00,480
 Now, according to the EPA, if it's applied properly, there's not a lot of problem, no

740
00:56:00,480 --> 00:56:06,000
 need to be concerned, but independent studies are not as amenable to that perception as

741
00:56:06,000 --> 00:56:07,760
 the EPA is.

742
00:56:07,760 --> 00:56:14,720
 So how do we, there was a, part of it says they're going to do a report each year for

743
00:56:14,720 --> 00:56:15,720
 three years.

744
00:56:15,720 --> 00:56:19,520
 Now, that'll be the developer that does that, and they'll report each year to the city,

745
00:56:19,520 --> 00:56:20,600
 is that correct?

746
00:56:20,600 --> 00:56:21,600
 Correct.

747
00:56:21,600 --> 00:56:22,600
 Okay.

748
00:56:22,600 --> 00:56:33,160
 And will they, part of that report, monitor the herbicide they use to make sure that it's

749
00:56:33,160 --> 00:56:38,280
 been applied properly, it's not spreading, it's not getting into the ecosystem in any

750
00:56:38,280 --> 00:56:39,280
 way?

751
00:56:39,280 --> 00:56:45,920
 So at this time, our reporting wouldn't include monitoring specifically for the application

752
00:56:45,920 --> 00:56:51,840
 of a pesticide, because that's not a typical procedure.

753
00:56:51,840 --> 00:57:02,080
 And this concern with the glyphosate is understandable, but at this time, because the federal government

754
00:57:02,080 --> 00:57:08,080
 hasn't imposed regulations on this, and the city doesn't have the authority either to

755
00:57:08,080 --> 00:57:09,680
 impose regulations on it.

756
00:57:09,680 --> 00:57:11,560
 I would add to that.

757
00:57:11,560 --> 00:57:16,800
 I would like to add that at this point, what the applicant is trying to accomplish here

758
00:57:16,800 --> 00:57:23,360
 is just to use different approaches to give a better head start to the planting of native

759
00:57:23,360 --> 00:57:24,800
 species, okay?

760
00:57:24,800 --> 00:57:25,800
 That's what we're doing.

761
00:57:25,800 --> 00:57:31,800
 Most of the time, this type of, the removal of Chinese privet, the best way to do it is

762
00:57:31,800 --> 00:57:32,800
 by burning.

763
00:57:32,800 --> 00:57:37,680
 However, this is an organized area, so that option is not on the table.

764
00:57:37,680 --> 00:57:42,360
 So the other options available are mechanical or chemical.

765
00:57:42,360 --> 00:57:47,680
 But they're plus replanting native species after they remove those invasive.

766
00:57:47,680 --> 00:57:53,560
 What they're doing is just to see which combination of methods will give the better chance.

767
00:57:53,560 --> 00:58:00,080
 The three-year review of field assessment that they have to provide to us, I think that

768
00:58:00,080 --> 00:58:05,080
 will give us the chance to look at how the mechanical is doing and performing.

769
00:58:05,080 --> 00:58:09,600
 And if that is not doing well, then at least to consider.

770
00:58:09,600 --> 00:58:19,340
 The applicant have show the desire and the willingness to bring all those selection to

771
00:58:19,340 --> 00:58:22,200
 us and that way we have a conversation.

772
00:58:22,200 --> 00:58:28,560
 Just keep in mind that all type of herbicide needs to be applied by a licensed applicator,

773
00:58:28,560 --> 00:58:34,280
 which they have to abide by what the manufacturer have determined to be the right way to do

774
00:58:34,280 --> 00:58:35,520
 it, okay?

775
00:58:35,520 --> 00:58:42,760
 Any conditions that allows for what is called drift, which is actually the chemical relieving

776
00:58:42,760 --> 00:58:49,160
 the site, they need to consider that before applying the chemical.

777
00:58:49,160 --> 00:58:53,880
 So I think that the applicant is aware and willing to do that.

778
00:58:53,880 --> 00:58:58,800
 We don't have standards to able to determine, but I just wanted to bring to your attention

779
00:58:58,800 --> 00:59:04,360
 that herbicides also comes what is called in aquatic grade, okay?

780
00:59:04,360 --> 00:59:11,160
 And this being a repair and buffer subject to flooding conditions and so on, that will

781
00:59:11,160 --> 00:59:18,720
 be an option that the applicant has to instead of the regular roundup, which is for more

782
00:59:18,720 --> 00:59:24,120
 terrestrial application, they can actually go the aquatic version of it.

783
00:59:24,120 --> 00:59:29,280
 What the aquatic version is, they have different type of surfactants that will make the chemical

784
00:59:29,280 --> 00:59:32,560
 less available to the aquatic organism.

785
00:59:32,560 --> 00:59:38,480
 So those options are available to the applicant at this point, and we will be looking into

786
00:59:38,480 --> 00:59:46,160
 that closely when they are, if they choose to go chemical application to do that.

787
00:59:46,160 --> 00:59:50,000
 Will these reports be available to the public on the city's website?

788
00:59:50,000 --> 00:59:58,720
 Well, all information on the public website, most of the time the development applications

789
00:59:58,720 --> 01:00:03,920
 have a case number and people can actually log in and be able to pull that information.

790
01:00:03,920 --> 01:00:10,320
 However, any type of information submitted to the city is subject to open record request.

791
01:00:10,320 --> 01:00:16,240
 So if somebody is interested to actually get that information, that will be made available.

792
01:00:16,240 --> 01:00:17,240
 Okay.

793
01:00:17,240 --> 01:00:18,240
 Okay.

794
01:00:18,240 --> 01:00:19,240
 One last thing.

795
01:00:19,240 --> 01:00:22,680
 The area that they're going to go in and remove the invasive plant, now they're talking just

796
01:00:22,680 --> 01:00:27,320
 about that 10,000 square feet, are they going to do the whole repair and buffer, that whole

797
01:00:27,320 --> 01:00:28,320
 thing?

798
01:00:28,320 --> 01:00:29,320
 Yes.

799
01:00:29,320 --> 01:00:30,320
 Okay.

800
01:00:30,320 --> 01:00:31,320
 Great.

801
01:00:31,320 --> 01:00:32,320
 Thank you.

802
01:00:32,320 --> 01:00:33,320
 Thank you, Deborah.

803
01:00:33,320 --> 01:00:34,320
 Commissioner Sanchos.

804
01:00:34,320 --> 01:00:35,320
 Yes.

805
01:00:35,320 --> 01:00:38,680
 When you're talking about the 100 foot buffer, is that from the center, 100 foot, or are

806
01:00:38,680 --> 01:00:41,120
 you saying 50 on either side?

807
01:00:41,120 --> 01:00:44,120
 It's 50 on each side.

808
01:00:44,120 --> 01:00:47,120
 50 on each side.

809
01:00:47,120 --> 01:00:48,120
 Okay.

810
01:00:48,120 --> 01:00:54,680
 The other strategy for this is that they will be installing temporary erosion control measures.

811
01:00:54,680 --> 01:00:58,200
 During the removal of that Chinese privet, there will be some disturbances.

812
01:00:58,200 --> 01:01:03,920
 They will have a rock check dam at the crossing that they're proposing, and they will be using

813
01:01:03,920 --> 01:01:12,720
 straw waddles or other mitigation type strategies to keep erosion from occurring along that

814
01:01:12,720 --> 01:01:19,600
 riparian buffer as it's exposed after they remove those invasive species.

815
01:01:19,600 --> 01:01:26,240
 The last mitigation strategy is to revegetate the area of the calorie pair and Chinese privet

816
01:01:26,240 --> 01:01:32,080
 that they have removed with a mix of native and adaptive trees and shrubs, and a riparian

817
01:01:32,080 --> 01:01:42,080
 restoration seed mix that will provide a protective ground cover.

818
01:01:42,080 --> 01:01:46,640
 As Deborah has already touched on, there will be a long-term maintenance and monitoring

819
01:01:46,640 --> 01:01:47,640
 program.

820
01:01:47,640 --> 01:02:02,800
 For three years, they will be monitoring the area, and the developer will be replacing

821
01:02:02,800 --> 01:02:11,280
 any dead material, and they will be repairing any eroded land and removing any trash found

822
01:02:11,280 --> 01:02:16,080
 in the area, and producing the annual report to environmental services.

823
01:02:16,080 --> 01:02:20,160
 After that three-year period, there will be a final acceptance of this alternative ESA

824
01:02:20,160 --> 01:02:31,040
 plan, and environmental services will be inspecting for conformance and issuing that final acceptance.

825
01:02:31,040 --> 01:02:37,200
 Our recommendation is to approve the request with the following conditions, that the 11.5

826
01:02:37,200 --> 01:02:45,040
 acres of existing cross-timbers upland habitat and the 11.7 acres of the tree canopy be preserved,

827
01:02:45,040 --> 01:02:50,360
 the encroachment into the riparian buffer ESA will be limited to 10,000 square feet,

828
01:02:50,360 --> 01:02:55,560
 the invasive species within the Fletcher branch, tributary number four riparian buffer ESA,

829
01:02:55,560 --> 01:03:02,960
 specifically the Chinese privet and the calorie pair will be removed, the revegetation of

830
01:03:02,960 --> 01:03:09,920
 the area disturbed by invasive species, removal with native plants that are provided in table

831
01:03:09,920 --> 01:03:15,120
 three of the alternative ESA plan and ground cover seeding of riparian restoration mix

832
01:03:15,120 --> 01:03:20,960
 will commence prior to the first building permit, and annual reporting during the first

833
01:03:20,960 --> 01:03:27,200
 three years describing the cumulative mitigation work performed, and the survivability of the

834
01:03:27,200 --> 01:03:32,600
 plant shall be submitted to staff for review and inspection, and the plants installed as

835
01:03:32,600 --> 01:03:38,840
 part of the proposed native flora revegetation are to be installed and maintained by the current

836
01:03:38,840 --> 01:03:44,080
 property owner and developer for a period of three years following in the installation,

837
01:03:44,080 --> 01:03:48,080
 and any plants that are removed, destroyed, or die within that three-year period are required

838
01:03:48,080 --> 01:03:52,680
 to be replaced by the current property owner developer.

839
01:03:52,680 --> 01:03:55,800
 Christy has the applicant seen all of these recommendations?

840
01:03:55,800 --> 01:03:56,800
 Yes.

841
01:03:56,800 --> 01:03:59,920
 And they're fine with your suggestions?

842
01:03:59,920 --> 01:04:00,920
 I believe so.

843
01:04:00,920 --> 01:04:01,920
 Okay.

844
01:04:01,920 --> 01:04:02,920
 Yes.

845
01:04:02,920 --> 01:04:09,040
 Commissioner Sanchez?

846
01:04:09,040 --> 01:04:10,040
 You go back one.

847
01:04:10,040 --> 01:04:11,040
 Sure.

848
01:04:11,040 --> 01:04:16,340
 Well, you have your, and I guess I have a real heartache with, you know, with looking

849
01:04:16,340 --> 01:04:22,040
 at the area and looking at the condition and us putting this area aside and saying, okay,

850
01:04:22,040 --> 01:04:28,780
 we're maintaining upland habitat, but it's a very poor condition.

851
01:04:28,780 --> 01:04:35,760
 It seems to me, I mean, if we're talking about cross timbers upland habitat, the whole

852
01:04:35,760 --> 01:04:39,680
 purpose of putting it aside is to maintain it.

853
01:04:39,680 --> 01:04:45,200
 But if we're going to lose it over time, what's the purpose?

854
01:04:45,200 --> 01:04:53,080
 And to me, it's either, it's almost like taking land from somebody and saying, okay, we wanted

855
01:04:53,080 --> 01:04:58,480
 to preserve it for this reason, but it's not going to happen 10 years, 15 years from

856
01:04:58,480 --> 01:05:01,520
 now, it's going to be a mess.

857
01:05:01,520 --> 01:05:07,440
 And there's no long-term vision as to maintaining that cross timbers habitat.

858
01:05:07,440 --> 01:05:09,040
 Because it's all cross timbers habitat.

859
01:05:09,040 --> 01:05:11,280
 It just happens that there's some open areas.

860
01:05:11,280 --> 01:05:12,680
 That's what cross timbers habitat is.

861
01:05:12,680 --> 01:05:17,200
 When we say cross timbers habitat, the whole area is cross timbers habitat, not just where

862
01:05:17,200 --> 01:05:18,680
 there's trees.

863
01:05:18,680 --> 01:05:19,760
 Okay.

864
01:05:19,760 --> 01:05:26,720
 So I have a real heartache with this not maintaining it long-term.

865
01:05:26,720 --> 01:05:30,600
 Conservation does not necessarily mean it's going to be there 10 years from now.

866
01:05:30,600 --> 01:05:33,400
 Because habitat changes.

867
01:05:33,400 --> 01:05:38,040
 And it has, I mean, nature in itself created this habitat.

868
01:05:38,040 --> 01:05:41,200
 Like she said, fire was an integral part of it.

869
01:05:41,200 --> 01:05:46,040
 And if we don't do nothing with it, the cedars are going to encroach there, and pretty soon

870
01:05:46,040 --> 01:05:48,640
 you're going to have a fire problem in there.

871
01:05:48,640 --> 01:05:56,640
 Because cedar is very, you know, if there's a fire, cedar is going to take off.

872
01:05:56,640 --> 01:06:09,780
 And so if you did have a fire, then the trees there would be probably destroyed, would be

873
01:06:09,780 --> 01:06:10,780
 burned.

874
01:06:10,780 --> 01:06:11,780
 Because cedar burns very hot.

875
01:06:11,780 --> 01:06:17,620
 I mean, we've seen it as part of our management on the cross, on the LBJ grasslands.

876
01:06:17,620 --> 01:06:23,400
 So and you see this also at Ray Roberts.

877
01:06:23,400 --> 01:06:26,720
 They burn on an yearly basis to maintain that habitat.

878
01:06:26,720 --> 01:06:29,620
 We're saying we're preserving it, but we're not doing anything long-term.

879
01:06:29,620 --> 01:06:31,420
 I guess I'm just saying this.

880
01:06:31,420 --> 01:06:36,200
 We need to look at it long-term and not just say, this is what we're doing.

881
01:06:36,200 --> 01:06:41,800
 Because I think it would be a very educational piece of property there if we went in there

882
01:06:41,800 --> 01:06:47,720
 and did, you know, you can do it with mechanical means and also with herbicides.

883
01:06:47,720 --> 01:06:54,440
 And long-term, it would be an area where people could go and see and say, this is what cross-timbers

884
01:06:54,440 --> 01:07:02,040
 habitat, this is what it used to look like, rather than, you know, a mess.

885
01:07:02,040 --> 01:07:03,040
 That's my two cents.

886
01:07:03,040 --> 01:07:04,720
 Commissioner Beck?

887
01:07:04,720 --> 01:07:06,720
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

888
01:07:06,720 --> 01:07:11,520
 Commissioner Sanchez, in all due respect, I'm curious, and not to diminish your expertise

889
01:07:11,520 --> 01:07:16,760
 in this area, but you keep referring to this area as poor, the environmental services is

890
01:07:16,760 --> 01:07:17,880
 rated at fair.

891
01:07:17,880 --> 01:07:23,960
 So I'm wondering where this different definition is coming from.

892
01:07:23,960 --> 01:07:31,920
 Being fair, it seems, in my opinion, means if we maintain it properly, it could develop

893
01:07:31,920 --> 01:07:32,920
 into more than fair.

894
01:07:32,920 --> 01:07:33,920
 Maybe good.

895
01:07:33,920 --> 01:07:34,920
 We're going to go in.

896
01:07:34,920 --> 01:07:37,160
 We're going to cut back the invasive species.

897
01:07:37,160 --> 01:07:39,760
 We're going to do some pruning and cleaning up.

898
01:07:39,760 --> 01:07:42,960
 Commissioner Beck, I think Christy is going to --

899
01:07:42,960 --> 01:07:49,080
 I'm sorry to correct you on that, but the fairness rating was for the riparian buffer

900
01:07:49,080 --> 01:07:50,080
 alone.

901
01:07:50,080 --> 01:07:51,080
 Yeah.

902
01:07:51,080 --> 01:07:54,680
 And the upland habitat, we do not have a rating at this time.

903
01:07:54,680 --> 01:07:55,680
 Okay.

904
01:07:55,680 --> 01:07:56,680
 So --

905
01:07:56,680 --> 01:07:59,120
 But Commissioner Sanchez is rating it as poor.

906
01:07:59,120 --> 01:08:01,520
 So is that a fair assessment?

907
01:08:01,520 --> 01:08:02,520
 There is no rating.

908
01:08:02,520 --> 01:08:06,720
 Environmental services does not have a rating for upland habitat at this time.

909
01:08:06,720 --> 01:08:07,720
 Okay.

910
01:08:07,720 --> 01:08:12,720
 So I guess the point I'm trying to make, and again, no offense, Commissioner Sanchez, but

911
01:08:12,720 --> 01:08:20,840
 since there is no rating on it, calling it poor is kind of throwing a monkey wrench into

912
01:08:20,840 --> 01:08:21,840
 this whole thing.

913
01:08:21,840 --> 01:08:25,480
 It may -- if it's poor, what's that rating based on?

914
01:08:25,480 --> 01:08:26,480
 Okay.

915
01:08:26,480 --> 01:08:31,120
 And I'm going to say we're going to stay on task with this, and does anyone have any more

916
01:08:31,120 --> 01:08:33,680
 questions for the presentation?

917
01:08:33,680 --> 01:08:38,920
 And I think Ron has a few more items of information to provide to you.

918
01:08:38,920 --> 01:08:43,920
 So I'll turn it back over to Ron.

919
01:08:43,920 --> 01:08:44,920
 Okay.

920
01:08:44,920 --> 01:08:45,920
 Thanks, Christy.

921
01:08:45,920 --> 01:08:47,920
 Just a couple more slides just to wrap up this presentation.

922
01:08:47,920 --> 01:08:52,640
 I just want to inform the Commission that there were two neighborhood meetings held,

923
01:08:52,640 --> 01:08:56,480
 one in December and one just recently last week.

924
01:08:56,480 --> 01:09:02,760
 You should have a copy of a summary report of the second meeting that I passed out this

925
01:09:02,760 --> 01:09:05,040
 afternoon.

926
01:09:05,040 --> 01:09:10,360
 So first meeting summary is including your packet.

927
01:09:10,360 --> 01:09:15,400
 Notifications were sent out because this is a public hearing, and we received one in opposition,

928
01:09:15,400 --> 01:09:20,160
 and that response is also included or passed out this afternoon.

929
01:09:20,160 --> 01:09:26,360
 That opposition just represents one percent, so -- and it's shown across Ryan in this general

930
01:09:26,360 --> 01:09:30,160
 area here where it's shown in red.

931
01:09:30,160 --> 01:09:31,160
 And that's it.

932
01:09:31,160 --> 01:09:35,000
 I'd be happy to answer any other questions.

933
01:09:35,000 --> 01:09:36,000
 Senator Beck.

934
01:09:36,000 --> 01:09:37,000
 Thank you, Dr. Chair.

935
01:09:37,000 --> 01:09:45,320
 It was mentioned that there was going to be a walkway from this developed area to the

936
01:09:45,320 --> 01:09:46,320
 part next to it.

937
01:09:46,320 --> 01:09:52,480
 I don't see it on the -- Yeah, that is part of the future development,

938
01:09:52,480 --> 01:09:55,680
 and that will be part of any development.

939
01:09:55,680 --> 01:09:58,680
 Preliminary plat is shown.

940
01:09:58,680 --> 01:10:02,040
 We'll come back with the final plat to the Commission, and you'll see that connection.

941
01:10:02,040 --> 01:10:03,040
 Okay.

942
01:10:03,040 --> 01:10:04,040
 And we'll see it then.

943
01:10:04,040 --> 01:10:05,040
 Yes.

944
01:10:05,040 --> 01:10:06,040
 Good.

945
01:10:06,040 --> 01:10:07,040
 And then we're talking about like a sidewalk.

946
01:10:07,040 --> 01:10:08,040
 Right.

947
01:10:08,040 --> 01:10:12,040
 There's connection between the two subdivisions to the east.

948
01:10:12,040 --> 01:10:13,040
 Great.

949
01:10:13,040 --> 01:10:14,040
 Thanks.

950
01:10:14,040 --> 01:10:16,040
 Yes, Mr. Sanchez.

951
01:10:16,040 --> 01:10:17,040
 Okay.

952
01:10:17,040 --> 01:10:18,040
 Commissioner Sanchez.

953
01:10:18,040 --> 01:10:23,280
 As I was reading through this, and I'm not sure if I got that right, what's that, Hollister?

954
01:10:23,280 --> 01:10:24,280
 Hollister?

955
01:10:24,280 --> 01:10:25,280
 Hollister, yes.

956
01:10:25,280 --> 01:10:26,280
 Yeah.

957
01:10:26,280 --> 01:10:29,400
 That's going to be opened up, right, or is it going to be --

958
01:10:29,400 --> 01:10:31,200
 It's not going to open up.

959
01:10:31,200 --> 01:10:35,840
 It's going to close where it is, and it's going to create more of an open area, an open

960
01:10:35,840 --> 01:10:39,280
 space, with pedestrian access between the two subdivisions.

961
01:10:39,280 --> 01:10:40,280
 Okay.

962
01:10:40,280 --> 01:10:47,640
 Because I drove out there, and there's a sign that says, "This is going to be opened once

963
01:10:47,640 --> 01:10:48,960
 the area is developed."

964
01:10:48,960 --> 01:10:49,960
 Sorry.

965
01:10:49,960 --> 01:10:50,960
 Okay.

966
01:10:50,960 --> 01:10:59,360
 And my question is, long-term, it was planned to open it and bring some connectivity to

967
01:10:59,360 --> 01:11:04,840
 the different, what do you call it, little enclaves or little subdivisions that are coming

968
01:11:04,840 --> 01:11:05,840
 up.

969
01:11:05,840 --> 01:11:12,040
 And it seems like now we're changing our mind, and everybody -- you know, instead of -- you're

970
01:11:12,040 --> 01:11:17,480
 going to have to either go north or south to move out of there, I guess, rather than

971
01:11:17,480 --> 01:11:22,920
 giving you some connectivity to the other subdivision or the other phases and maybe

972
01:11:22,920 --> 01:11:24,120
 move.

973
01:11:24,120 --> 01:11:33,400
 It just seems like we create these little enclaves and we give them two exits, but yet if there's

974
01:11:33,400 --> 01:11:34,400
 a --

975
01:11:34,400 --> 01:11:35,400
 Right here.

976
01:11:35,400 --> 01:11:36,400
 Yeah.

977
01:11:36,400 --> 01:11:44,160
 It seems like there should be some connectivity there so that we don't -- we stop creating

978
01:11:44,160 --> 01:11:46,640
 these little enclaves.

979
01:11:46,640 --> 01:11:54,240
 I think we may be potentially getting into an open meetings issue because connectivity

980
01:11:54,240 --> 01:11:58,600
 isn't part of the matter that's placed on the agenda for today.

981
01:11:58,600 --> 01:12:07,040
 This is more of a platting issue, and as far as policy is concerned, the policy is properly

982
01:12:07,040 --> 01:12:10,040
 addressed to the city council.

983
01:12:10,040 --> 01:12:18,840
 The post-it matter on the agenda is to consider the environmentally sensitive area only and

984
01:12:18,840 --> 01:12:23,280
 not to consider any future development.

985
01:12:23,280 --> 01:12:32,440
 Commissioner, just really quickly, and I know we're kind of going off, but it was presented

986
01:12:32,440 --> 01:12:40,000
 during the neighborhood meetings -- yes, you're correct, that street was to provide connectivity

987
01:12:40,000 --> 01:12:47,200
 -- however, there is two entrances or two accesses that meet the fire requirements as

988
01:12:47,200 --> 01:12:51,960
 well as the engineer requirements.

989
01:12:51,960 --> 01:12:56,800
 I guess I'm just basing it on reading the information here, and it talks about that

990
01:12:56,800 --> 01:13:02,880
 was closed, but when I went up there, it says that was a long-term decision, I guess, when

991
01:13:02,880 --> 01:13:08,680
 all that was being planned, and why all of a sudden you plan something five, ten years

992
01:13:08,680 --> 01:13:12,720
 back, and all of a sudden, okay, we're not going to do it, and there should be some reasoning

993
01:13:12,720 --> 01:13:16,560
 why we're changing it and not just we're going to close it because maybe somebody doesn't

994
01:13:16,560 --> 01:13:19,040
 like traffic through there.

995
01:13:19,040 --> 01:13:25,600
 There should be -- you know, one of the big issues we have is roads and/or people --

996
01:13:25,600 --> 01:13:28,680
 Okay, Commissioner Sanchez, we're getting off topic again.

997
01:13:28,680 --> 01:13:32,560
 I think the applicant will be there tonight, and maybe it's a -- I know it came from the

998
01:13:32,560 --> 01:13:37,200
 neighborhood meeting that's in our backup, that discussion.

999
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:45,480
 And so, we can address it at the meeting.

1000
01:13:45,480 --> 01:13:50,560
 I think at this time, we're going to break for food before we head to our final item,

1001
01:13:50,560 --> 01:14:01,600
 so I will take a recess at 617.

1002
01:14:01,600 --> 01:14:06,400
 Welcome back to the City of Dutton planning and zoning meeting on February 6, continuing

1003
01:14:06,400 --> 01:14:07,400
 our work session.

1004
01:14:07,400 --> 01:14:15,720
 I call us back to order at 621, and Ron is going to present our final agenda item.

1005
01:14:15,720 --> 01:14:17,520
 Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the commission.

1006
01:14:17,520 --> 01:14:23,480
 I'm going to try to be as quickly as possible, but I want to cover some of the highlights

1007
01:14:23,480 --> 01:14:25,720
 of this important code amendment.

1008
01:14:25,720 --> 01:14:32,400
 As you all know, we are discussing -- we have been discussing the student -- I'm sorry,

1009
01:14:32,400 --> 01:14:40,480
 not student, but rather SRO, single room occupancy, also referred to as collegiate housing.

1010
01:14:40,480 --> 01:14:47,360
 The purpose for this item, or this item for your consideration today, is to determine

1011
01:14:47,360 --> 01:14:51,620
 the classification of this type of development.

1012
01:14:51,620 --> 01:14:58,920
 Is it multifamily, or is it considered collegiate housing, also referred to as dormitory?

1013
01:14:58,920 --> 01:15:04,920
 So we've got a lot of different uses that we can go with, and then also talk about if

1014
01:15:04,920 --> 01:15:11,980
 it is a separate use, how do we locate them, where do we locate them, and how do we approve

1015
01:15:11,980 --> 01:15:14,120
 them for new developments?

1016
01:15:14,120 --> 01:15:19,440
 So those are the items that we want to get from the commission as far as recommendations

1017
01:15:19,440 --> 01:15:20,440
 moving forward.

1018
01:15:20,440 --> 01:15:21,440
 Excuse me.

1019
01:15:21,440 --> 01:15:32,440
 We hope to take this to City Council for their consideration, of course, after your recommendation.

1020
01:15:32,440 --> 01:15:38,600
 Staff is proposing if, again, if this is a separate use, to use the term dormitory.

1021
01:15:38,600 --> 01:15:40,960
 We currently have this use in our development code.

1022
01:15:40,960 --> 01:15:46,600
 We currently have a definition, but in order to meet this development type, we are proposing

1023
01:15:46,600 --> 01:15:51,720
 an amendment to that definition, and that definition here is shown here and is going

1024
01:15:51,720 --> 01:15:57,600
 to be defined, and I'll read it for the record, a structure with three or more dwelling units

1025
01:15:57,600 --> 01:16:05,200
 in which individual bedrooms are individually rented for periods in excess of 30 days and

1026
01:16:05,200 --> 01:16:09,600
 in which each bedroom lacks the exclusive use of a full kitchen.

1027
01:16:09,600 --> 01:16:14,840
 And again, that is what we're trying to describe in this floor plan.

1028
01:16:14,840 --> 01:16:15,840
 Commissioner Sanchez?

1029
01:16:15,840 --> 01:16:21,800
 Can you go back to your definition of dormitories?

1030
01:16:21,800 --> 01:16:27,320
 I guess I'm old school, so when I think of dormitories, I think of universities, okay?

1031
01:16:27,320 --> 01:16:28,600
 That's what they have.

1032
01:16:28,600 --> 01:16:35,920
 And when you use that term, especially in the context of universities or colleges, I

1033
01:16:35,920 --> 01:16:44,120
 think most parents think of a dormitory as a place where there's some supervision.

1034
01:16:44,120 --> 01:16:49,440
 When you use this term dormitory in this other context, there's no supervision, and I think

1035
01:16:49,440 --> 01:16:55,240
 people -- this is an older definition, at least it is for me, older definition, and

1036
01:16:55,240 --> 01:17:02,320
 I think when you're dealing with students, there should be a different name for dormitories,

1037
01:17:02,320 --> 01:17:08,280
 universities or colleges, and the new, what we're talking, SROs, and have those.

1038
01:17:08,280 --> 01:17:10,880
 That's a totally different animal, I think.

1039
01:17:10,880 --> 01:17:14,800
 It's not multi-family, but it's not -- I don't think it's a dormitory.

1040
01:17:14,800 --> 01:17:16,640
 So the term dormitory is --

1041
01:17:16,640 --> 01:17:21,400
 I don't think it fits, especially when parents -- I'm going to put my son in a dormitory.

1042
01:17:21,400 --> 01:17:27,200
 They usually think there's supervision here, there's this, as opposed to, like I said,

1043
01:17:27,200 --> 01:17:34,480
 SROs are a totally different animal, okay?

1044
01:17:34,480 --> 01:17:36,600
 I could try to address some of that.

1045
01:17:36,600 --> 01:17:42,000
 I actually recommended that they use dormitory, and part of the reason for it is that it's

1046
01:17:42,000 --> 01:17:44,640
 not just students that we're talking about.

1047
01:17:44,640 --> 01:17:53,640
 We're talking about situations where you have a group of people that are living in a common

1048
01:17:53,640 --> 01:18:00,920
 area with some shared facilities, and you have a situation like that.

1049
01:18:00,920 --> 01:18:07,080
 You know, the yuppies in the 1980s liked having that kind of a lifestyle.

1050
01:18:07,080 --> 01:18:10,760
 They didn't particularly want to cook, they didn't particularly want to keep house, they

1051
01:18:10,760 --> 01:18:17,000
 didn't want to mow grass, and sort of having a situation where they could live in an urban

1052
01:18:17,000 --> 01:18:23,720
 environment is attractive to them, and there's nothing that -- at least in this definition,

1053
01:18:23,720 --> 01:18:29,840
 and part of the reason why we have the definition is to explain exactly what we mean here, even

1054
01:18:29,840 --> 01:18:34,240
 if it's different from what you typically might use.

1055
01:18:34,240 --> 01:18:39,880
 The other thing is that, as far as supervision is concerned, there are lots of private dormitories

1056
01:18:39,880 --> 01:18:45,800
 that are not under the control of the university at UNT and other universities, and so for

1057
01:18:45,800 --> 01:18:55,640
 that reason, dormitories seem to express this sort of combined living arrangement.

1058
01:18:55,640 --> 01:18:57,200
 Is it the only way to express it?

1059
01:18:57,200 --> 01:19:06,760
 No, not at all, but it's not intended to apply only to students.

1060
01:19:06,760 --> 01:19:10,560
 And I think that's probably what we're going to get hung up, is a lot of people think like

1061
01:19:10,560 --> 01:19:15,280
 what Commissioner Sanchez brought up, which is dormitory means something at a college

1062
01:19:15,280 --> 01:19:16,920
 or university.

1063
01:19:16,920 --> 01:19:18,160
 We are getting short on time.

1064
01:19:18,160 --> 01:19:22,000
 Why don't we let you finish your presentation, and we're going to end up having to have discussion,

1065
01:19:22,000 --> 01:19:23,800
 I think, in the meeting.

1066
01:19:23,800 --> 01:19:24,800
 Okay.

1067
01:19:24,800 --> 01:19:25,800
 Okay.

1068
01:19:25,800 --> 01:19:34,480
 So I'm going to go ahead and jump through the background and really get to the meat of

1069
01:19:34,480 --> 01:19:46,200
 the subject matter, and so again, the discussion is, is this a separate use?

1070
01:19:46,200 --> 01:19:50,520
 If it is a separate use, where would they be located as far as a zoning district, and

1071
01:19:50,520 --> 01:19:53,100
 what type of approval would they be required?

1072
01:19:53,100 --> 01:19:56,800
 Is it an SUP or is it by right?

1073
01:19:56,800 --> 01:20:02,720
 And then we've got also some other considerations to consider when we look at dormitories or

1074
01:20:02,720 --> 01:20:05,840
 whatever we decide to call this.

1075
01:20:05,840 --> 01:20:12,840
 Currently dormitory, as I said earlier, is already in the DEN Development Code.

1076
01:20:12,840 --> 01:20:18,080
 It is permitted in these zoning districts by SUP or permitted by right.

1077
01:20:18,080 --> 01:20:25,680
 Staff is recommending that the dormitory be permitted with a new definition as shown here

1078
01:20:25,680 --> 01:20:33,960
 with SUPs in the NRMU, I'm sorry, NRMU-12, NRMU-DR-1 be permitted in the DR-2 and then

1079
01:20:33,960 --> 01:20:40,640
 with a limitation in the DCN and DCG, and that limitation is that if that proposed dormitory

1080
01:20:40,640 --> 01:20:45,800
 is above 45 feet, they would be required to obtain a specific use permit.

1081
01:20:45,800 --> 01:20:50,920
 Now I want to also tell you that council has discussed this item and we presented to them

1082
01:20:50,920 --> 01:20:55,900
 during a work session, two work sessions to be specific, and their recommendation or their

1083
01:20:55,900 --> 01:21:02,800
 direction is that the dormitory is the use, is a separate use for multifamily and that

1084
01:21:02,800 --> 01:21:10,760
 it should be permitted through an SUP in all of the zoning districts shown here.

1085
01:21:10,760 --> 01:21:16,720
 Skip these.

1086
01:21:16,720 --> 01:21:17,720
 That's really it.

1087
01:21:17,720 --> 01:21:21,840
 So staff's recommendation, as you saw, is what you see here and then council has their

1088
01:21:21,840 --> 01:21:27,720
 recommendation and what we're looking for the commission is to get your recommendation

1089
01:21:27,720 --> 01:21:32,280
 for this item as well and we'll cover more during the public hearing.

1090
01:21:32,280 --> 01:21:33,280
 Okay.

1091
01:21:33,280 --> 01:21:34,280
 All right.

1092
01:21:34,280 --> 01:21:41,480
 And with that, thank you, Ron, I'm going to go ahead and close our work session at 629

1093
01:21:41,480 --> 01:21:46,020
 and we will reconvene in council chambers as soon as possible for the public meeting.

1094
01:21:46,020 --> 01:21:53,600
 Thank you.

1095
01:21:53,600 --> 01:21:58,400
 Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Planning and Zoning Commission for Wednesday,

1096
01:21:58,400 --> 01:22:01,040
 February 6, 2019.

1097
01:22:01,040 --> 01:22:07,440
 I will call us with the quorum present, call us to order at 639 PM.

1098
01:22:07,440 --> 01:22:12,920
 If you are able, please stand and recite the pledge to the U.S. and Texas flag.

1099
01:22:12,920 --> 01:22:21,160
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which

1100
01:22:21,160 --> 01:22:28,960
 it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

1101
01:22:28,960 --> 01:22:35,260
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which

1102
01:22:35,260 --> 01:22:43,920
 it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

1103
01:22:43,920 --> 01:22:44,920
 Okay.

1104
01:22:44,920 --> 01:22:46,120
 Moving to our agenda.

1105
01:22:46,120 --> 01:22:57,120
 Our first item of business is approval of the minutes from our meeting on January 23rd.

1106
01:22:57,120 --> 01:22:58,120
 Commissioner Smith.

1107
01:22:58,120 --> 01:22:59,460
 Move to approve.

1108
01:22:59,460 --> 01:23:00,460
 Commissioner Preneta.

1109
01:23:00,460 --> 01:23:01,460
 I second the motion.

1110
01:23:01,460 --> 01:23:06,080
 We've got a first and a second to approve the minutes for January 23rd.

1111
01:23:06,080 --> 01:23:17,200
 Let's take a vote.

1112
01:23:17,200 --> 01:23:22,320
 That motion carries 6-0.

1113
01:23:22,320 --> 01:23:26,460
 That moves us to the consent agenda.

1114
01:23:26,460 --> 01:23:27,460
 Commissioner Smith.

1115
01:23:27,460 --> 01:23:28,460
 Move to approve.

1116
01:23:28,460 --> 01:23:31,000
 I give the motion to approve.

1117
01:23:31,000 --> 01:23:32,000
 Commissioner Beck.

1118
01:23:32,000 --> 01:23:33,000
 Second.

1119
01:23:33,000 --> 01:23:34,000
 Okay.

1120
01:23:34,000 --> 01:23:35,840
 Is there any discussion on the consent agenda?

1121
01:23:35,840 --> 01:23:38,040
 We've got a first and a second to approve.

1122
01:23:38,040 --> 01:23:39,040
 Okay.

1123
01:23:39,040 --> 01:23:49,360
 Let's call for a vote on the board.

1124
01:23:49,360 --> 01:23:53,120
 That will carry 6-0.

1125
01:23:53,120 --> 01:23:57,320
 That moves us to our public hearings tonight.

1126
01:23:57,320 --> 01:24:05,960
 Our public hearings, A, B, and C, have all been postponed to the February 20th planning

1127
01:24:05,960 --> 01:24:09,280
 and zoning meeting.

1128
01:24:09,280 --> 01:24:23,880
 That will take us to our item D. I will call up Shawn Jacobson for that presentation.

1129
01:24:23,880 --> 01:24:40,360
 Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the commission.

1130
01:24:40,360 --> 01:24:41,800
 My name is Shawn Jacobson.

1131
01:24:41,800 --> 01:24:51,480
 Tonight I'm presenting FR180018, which is a residential replat of lots 2R1 and 2R2,

1132
01:24:51,480 --> 01:24:55,200
 the fire station number 3 addition.

1133
01:24:55,200 --> 01:24:59,800
 As we discussed in work session, this is a little bit different than the plats we normally

1134
01:24:59,800 --> 01:25:02,760
 see for a replat without vacation.

1135
01:25:02,760 --> 01:25:08,280
 We're required to hold a public hearing, and because this is a residential replat, we are

1136
01:25:08,280 --> 01:25:15,320
 required to notice within 200 feet and within the subdivision, which we have done.

1137
01:25:15,320 --> 01:25:20,680
 This specific replat, the original plat shown here, the addition, we're looking at lot number

1138
01:25:20,680 --> 01:25:30,400
 2, and the request is to split lot number 2 into 2R1 and 2R2.

1139
01:25:30,400 --> 01:25:37,880
 This is located in the NR3 zoning district, and both lots meet the minimum lot size within

1140
01:25:37,880 --> 01:25:40,960
 that zoning district.

1141
01:25:40,960 --> 01:25:45,860
 Just a note, we did receive two letters in response.

1142
01:25:45,860 --> 01:25:52,080
 Both were in support and within the 200-foot radius.

1143
01:25:52,080 --> 01:25:56,240
 Staff recommends approval because this replat meets all the technical requirements.

1144
01:25:56,240 --> 01:25:59,000
 With that, if you have any questions, I'll stand for them.

1145
01:25:59,000 --> 01:26:00,000
 We do.

1146
01:26:00,000 --> 01:26:01,000
 Commissioner Beck.

1147
01:26:01,000 --> 01:26:02,000
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

1148
01:26:02,000 --> 01:26:03,000
 Thanks, Shawn.

1149
01:26:03,000 --> 01:26:06,680
 Currently, there's no dwelling units on this lot, right?

1150
01:26:06,680 --> 01:26:11,560
 There is a dwelling unit on one of them, yes, on 2R1.

1151
01:26:11,560 --> 01:26:17,160
 Okay, and the intent for splitting this is to build another house on that?

1152
01:26:17,160 --> 01:26:20,200
 That would certainly be something that the owner of that lot could do.

1153
01:26:20,200 --> 01:26:21,200
 Okay.

1154
01:26:21,200 --> 01:26:24,200
 That was an expresso in the way of doing it.

1155
01:26:24,200 --> 01:26:25,200
 Okay, great.

1156
01:26:25,200 --> 01:26:26,200
 Thank you.

1157
01:26:26,200 --> 01:26:27,200
 Any other questions for staff?

1158
01:26:27,200 --> 01:26:28,200
 I don't see any.

1159
01:26:28,200 --> 01:26:29,200
 Thank you, Shawn.

1160
01:26:29,200 --> 01:26:30,200
 Thank you.

1161
01:26:30,200 --> 01:26:39,240
 Is there any discussion or I can entertain a motion?

1162
01:26:39,240 --> 01:26:41,020
 I did not open the public hearing.

1163
01:26:41,020 --> 01:26:42,020
 Thank you, Jerry.

1164
01:26:42,020 --> 01:26:46,860
 I will open the public hearing.

1165
01:26:46,860 --> 01:26:50,920
 Is there anyone wishing to speak on this item?

1166
01:26:50,920 --> 01:26:57,280
 Okay, seeing none, I will close the public hearing for this item and I can entertain

1167
01:26:57,280 --> 01:27:00,880
 discussion or a motion.

1168
01:27:00,880 --> 01:27:01,880
 Commissioner Smith.

1169
01:27:01,880 --> 01:27:02,880
 Move to approve.

1170
01:27:02,880 --> 01:27:03,880
 Commissioner Beck.

1171
01:27:03,880 --> 01:27:04,880
 Second.

1172
01:27:04,880 --> 01:27:08,000
 Okay, we have a first and a second to approve.

1173
01:27:08,000 --> 01:27:09,000
 Any discussion?

1174
01:27:09,000 --> 01:27:20,640
 Okay, let's call for a vote.

1175
01:27:20,640 --> 01:27:25,120
 That motion carries 6-0.

1176
01:27:25,120 --> 01:27:31,600
 That will move us to our item E and I will open the public hearing and invite Ron up

1177
01:27:31,600 --> 01:27:32,600
 for presentation.

1178
01:27:32,600 --> 01:27:37,240
 Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the commission.

1179
01:27:37,240 --> 01:27:43,640
 This will be a tag team effort between myself and Christy Upton regarding this subject item.

1180
01:27:43,640 --> 01:27:49,400
 This item for you for consideration is for an alternative ESA, environmental sensitive

1181
01:27:49,400 --> 01:27:58,840
 area plan, to allow the development of crossing a stream buffer, again, to allow for a single

1182
01:27:58,840 --> 01:28:07,480
 family subdivision, approximately 140 residential lots on 45 acres, generally located just south

1183
01:28:07,480 --> 01:28:13,680
 of Ryan Road and approximately 600 feet just west of Roxbury Street.

1184
01:28:13,680 --> 01:28:24,880
 As shown on this aerial here, it is just east of the Lakeside Park as well as the Good Samaritan

1185
01:28:24,880 --> 01:28:28,200
 development as shown on this aerial.

1186
01:28:28,200 --> 01:28:35,080
 With that, I'm going to ask Christy Upton to continue with the presentation.

1187
01:28:35,080 --> 01:28:38,280
 Thank you, Ron.

1188
01:28:38,280 --> 01:28:45,200
 To give you an overview of this plan, I'm going to start with a little bit of the history

1189
01:28:45,200 --> 01:28:50,480
 of how this ESA came to be.

1190
01:28:50,480 --> 01:29:02,960
 The ESA regulations were established with a map that provided locations of ESAs within

1191
01:29:02,960 --> 01:29:12,720
 the city of Denton, and we confirm the presence of those ESAs through field assessments.

1192
01:29:12,720 --> 01:29:20,760
 This field assessment was done in 2018 and identified two tributaries, an unnamed tributary

1193
01:29:20,760 --> 01:29:28,600
 that is an ephemeral stream, and the riparian buffer around it is 100 feet in width.

1194
01:29:28,600 --> 01:29:34,320
 It was rated in fair condition using the City of Denton Rapid Stream Assessment Tool.

1195
01:29:34,320 --> 01:29:41,920
 The Fletcher branch, the one in blue and the one that we will be discussing today, is an

1196
01:29:41,920 --> 01:29:45,920
 intermittent stream that bisects the northern part of the property.

1197
01:29:45,920 --> 01:29:53,560
 It is also 100 foot width, riparian buffer, and was also rated in fair condition.

1198
01:29:53,560 --> 01:29:57,360
 In addition to that, there was upland habitat that was identified.

1199
01:29:57,360 --> 01:30:04,240
 This cross-timbers upland habitat during the original assessment using the original tools

1200
01:30:04,240 --> 01:30:10,680
 that we had available to us had identified 10.9 acres of that habitat.

1201
01:30:10,680 --> 01:30:16,440
 During the assessment, some of that upland habitat was found to no longer meet the criteria,

1202
01:30:16,440 --> 01:30:25,400
 namely that it was isolated from the rest of the upland habitat, and thus the isolation

1203
01:30:25,400 --> 01:30:27,840
 keeps it from continuing.

1204
01:30:27,840 --> 01:30:38,280
 That lack of continuity is where we lose that designation of up to and over 10 acres of

1205
01:30:38,280 --> 01:30:41,640
 the upland habitat in continuity.

1206
01:30:41,640 --> 01:30:47,360
 The assessment found that other areas did meet the criteria and were added, so it increased

1207
01:30:47,360 --> 01:30:51,040
 the overall habitat to 20.6 acres.

1208
01:30:51,040 --> 01:30:56,520
 I also want to point out that much of the riparian buffer within both the Fletcher branch

1209
01:30:56,520 --> 01:31:03,040
 and the unnamed tributary meet also the criteria of upland habitat creating an overlap in those

1210
01:31:03,040 --> 01:31:06,280
 two habitats.

1211
01:31:06,280 --> 01:31:13,040
 The proposed encroachment is a roadway improvement to connect both the northern and southern

1212
01:31:13,040 --> 01:31:20,000
 tracks and the installation of utilities throughout that roadway.

1213
01:31:20,000 --> 01:31:25,280
 The encroachment, in order for them to establish that roadway, would require that they remove

1214
01:31:25,280 --> 01:31:30,800
 a 100-foot long segment of the riparian buffer, and again, it being 100 feet in width, that

1215
01:31:30,800 --> 01:31:35,960
 means that they'll be removing 10,000 square feet of total area.

1216
01:31:35,960 --> 01:31:43,280
 The understory of this riparian buffer right now is predominantly Chinese privet, an invasive

1217
01:31:43,280 --> 01:31:51,240
 species, and when I say predominantly, it's up to 75 to 100% of the coverage of that 10,000

1218
01:31:51,240 --> 01:31:54,080
 square feet is Chinese privet.

1219
01:31:54,080 --> 01:32:03,160
 Then 72 trees will also be removed, and there's a summary here of the trees that will be removed.

1220
01:32:03,160 --> 01:32:10,920
 The criteria for approval of this alternative ESA plan for the proposed deviation from the

1221
01:32:10,920 --> 01:32:17,720
 ordinance in sub-chapter 17, it lists those criteria.

1222
01:32:17,720 --> 01:32:23,480
 There's more information about this in your documents that were provided to you.

1223
01:32:23,480 --> 01:32:31,320
 To summarize the criteria for approval, the applicant must provide an in-kind replacement

1224
01:32:31,320 --> 01:32:39,960
 of the functions that were offered by that ESA before the removal.

1225
01:32:39,960 --> 01:32:45,200
 The mitigation strategies that they have offered up includes the preservation of cross-timbers

1226
01:32:45,200 --> 01:32:50,280
 upland habitat in the tree canopy beyond the minimum city of Denton requirements.

1227
01:32:50,280 --> 01:32:55,280
 The upland habitat minimum preservation requirement is 10.25 acres.

1228
01:32:55,280 --> 01:33:06,300
 That would be the 20 acres, a little over 20 acres, 50% preservation equating to 10.25.

1229
01:33:06,300 --> 01:33:15,160
 The applicant is proposing to preserve 11.5 acres, or one and a quarter acres more than

1230
01:33:15,160 --> 01:33:18,840
 what is required by ordinance.

1231
01:33:18,840 --> 01:33:26,280
 The tree canopy preservation requires 6.16 acres, and they are proposing to preserve

1232
01:33:26,280 --> 01:33:33,040
 11.7 acres of tree canopy.

1233
01:33:33,040 --> 01:33:38,480
 The next mitigation strategy is to remove the Chinese privet and calorie pear that have

1234
01:33:38,480 --> 01:33:39,760
 invaded that area.

1235
01:33:39,760 --> 01:33:47,280
 They will be removing it along the 100-foot riparian buffer all the way along the Fletcher

1236
01:33:47,280 --> 01:33:50,160
 branch, tributary number four.

1237
01:33:50,160 --> 01:33:54,280
 They will be doing this using mechanical and chemical removal methods.

1238
01:33:54,280 --> 01:34:01,860
 The strategy will improve chances for a thriving native and adaptive understory.

1239
01:34:01,860 --> 01:34:05,360
 They will also be installing temporary erosion control measures.

1240
01:34:05,360 --> 01:34:12,760
 Specifically, they've proposed to use a rock-check dam at the crossing, and erosion control waddles

1241
01:34:12,760 --> 01:34:18,300
 and other measures to prevent erosion during that period of time when the soils are exposed

1242
01:34:18,300 --> 01:34:23,800
 after they have removed that Chinese privet and calorie pear.

1243
01:34:23,800 --> 01:34:30,080
 The last mitigation strategy specifically to this all-ESA plan is to revegetate the

1244
01:34:30,080 --> 01:34:32,040
 area cleared of the invasive species.

1245
01:34:32,040 --> 01:34:36,640
 They will be revegetating that with the native and adaptive trees and shrubs.

1246
01:34:36,640 --> 01:34:42,680
 Then they will also be using a riparian restoration seed mix to provide a protective ground cover.

1247
01:34:42,680 --> 01:34:51,480
 Long-term management and monitoring that they have offered up is to provide a three-year

1248
01:34:51,480 --> 01:34:57,080
 monitoring period to ensure the survivability of the mitigation plan that they have put

1249
01:34:57,080 --> 01:34:58,080
 forth.

1250
01:34:58,080 --> 01:35:05,080
 The developer will replace any dead material that is found during that annual inspection,

1251
01:35:05,080 --> 01:35:13,080
 and we'll be replacing that, and we'll repair any eroded land, and we'll remove trash, and

1252
01:35:13,080 --> 01:35:18,800
 we'll provide an annual report, a summary of what they found and what they have done

1253
01:35:18,800 --> 01:35:24,280
 to mitigate any of the problems that they have identified.

1254
01:35:24,280 --> 01:35:28,880
 Then, after three years, environmental services will inspect the area for conformists with

1255
01:35:28,880 --> 01:35:35,720
 the alternative ESA plan and will issue final acceptance based upon our findings of that

1256
01:35:35,720 --> 01:35:36,720
 inspection.

1257
01:35:36,720 --> 01:35:41,920
 Our recommendation is for approval of the request with following conditions.

1258
01:35:41,920 --> 01:35:50,320
 The 11.5 acres of existing cross-timbers upland habitat and 11.7 acres of tree canopy be preserved.

1259
01:35:50,320 --> 01:35:55,160
 The encroachment into the riparian buffer will be limited to 10,000 square feet.

1260
01:35:55,160 --> 01:36:00,240
 The invasive species within the Fletcher branch tributary number four riparian buffer ESA,

1261
01:36:00,240 --> 01:36:07,240
 and specifically Chinese privet and calorie pair, will be removed.

1262
01:36:07,240 --> 01:36:14,200
 Re-vegetation of areas disturbed by the invasive species, removal with the native plants and

1263
01:36:14,200 --> 01:36:19,480
 provided in table three of the alternative ESA plan, and ground cover seeding of riparian

1264
01:36:19,480 --> 01:36:25,680
 restoration mix will commence prior to the first building permit, and a reporting during

1265
01:36:25,680 --> 01:36:31,520
 the first three years describing the cumulative mitigation work performed and the survivability

1266
01:36:31,520 --> 01:36:36,760
 of the plants shall be submitted to staff for review and inspection.

1267
01:36:36,760 --> 01:36:42,320
 Plants installed as part of the proposed native floral re-vegetation are to be installed and

1268
01:36:42,320 --> 01:36:47,760
 maintained by the current property owner developer for a period of three years following installation.

1269
01:36:47,760 --> 01:36:51,840
 Any plants that are removed, destroyed, or die within that three year period are required

1270
01:36:51,840 --> 01:36:57,720
 to be replaced by the current property owner developer.

1271
01:36:57,720 --> 01:37:05,640
 And before I turn this back over to Ron, I'd be happy to take any questions.

1272
01:37:05,640 --> 01:37:06,640
 Thank you, Kristi.

1273
01:37:06,640 --> 01:37:07,640
 I don't see any right now.

1274
01:37:07,640 --> 01:37:08,640
 Okay.

1275
01:37:08,640 --> 01:37:09,640
 Thank you.

1276
01:37:09,640 --> 01:37:19,560
 I'll hand it over to Ron to provide you some more information about the neighborhood meetings.

1277
01:37:19,560 --> 01:37:20,560
 Thank you, Kristi.

1278
01:37:20,560 --> 01:37:26,800
 I just want to point out that the applicant did hold two neighborhood meetings, one in

1279
01:37:26,800 --> 01:37:32,120
 December and one just recently in January, and included in your backup as well as passed

1280
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:38,360
 out during this afternoon's work session as a summary of those neighborhood meetings.

1281
01:37:38,360 --> 01:37:43,680
 Questions were sent out to property owners within 200 feet as well as residents within

1282
01:37:43,680 --> 01:37:47,640
 500 feet of the subject site, as this is a public hearing.

1283
01:37:47,640 --> 01:37:54,080
 As of this afternoon, staff has received only one response, and that was in opposition,

1284
01:37:54,080 --> 01:37:58,400
 and that represents one percent, and that concludes our presentation.

1285
01:37:58,400 --> 01:38:02,080
 And if there's any questions for staff, we'll be happy to answer them.

1286
01:38:02,080 --> 01:38:05,720
 The applicant is here and has a presentation as well.

1287
01:38:09,040 --> 01:38:10,040
 Thank you, Ron.

1288
01:38:10,040 --> 01:38:14,600
 And Kristi, I think I do have a question for you from me.

1289
01:38:14,600 --> 01:38:19,080
 In work session, we discussed briefly the chemical use, and I know Deborah had mentioned

1290
01:38:19,080 --> 01:38:22,160
 something about a water-friendly version of a pesticide.

1291
01:38:22,160 --> 01:38:25,480
 Is that something that they'd be required to use, or is that just a suggestion that

1292
01:38:25,480 --> 01:38:26,480
 the city would give?

1293
01:38:26,480 --> 01:38:31,800
 Because they would be using this within the riparian buffer, they would have to use an

1294
01:38:31,800 --> 01:38:32,800
 aquatic-approved chemical.

1295
01:38:32,800 --> 01:38:33,800
 That would be required.

1296
01:38:33,800 --> 01:38:34,800
 Yes.

1297
01:38:34,800 --> 01:38:35,800
 Okay.

1298
01:38:35,800 --> 01:38:36,800
 Very good.

1299
01:38:36,800 --> 01:38:37,800
 Thank you.

1300
01:38:37,800 --> 01:38:40,040
 Any other questions for staff?

1301
01:38:40,040 --> 01:38:41,640
 Okay.

1302
01:38:41,640 --> 01:38:44,920
 We do have some cards wishing to speak.

1303
01:38:44,920 --> 01:38:49,600
 I'm going to call up the applicant, Thomas Fletcher.

1304
01:38:49,600 --> 01:38:53,320
 Please state your name and address.

1305
01:38:53,320 --> 01:38:54,320
 Good evening, commissioners.

1306
01:38:54,320 --> 01:39:00,520
 My name is Thomas Fletcher, 5750 Genesis Court, Frisco, Texas, 75034.

1307
01:39:00,520 --> 01:39:03,640
 I am the civil engineer for the applicant.

1308
01:39:03,640 --> 01:39:05,440
 With me tonight is Ciara Gibbons.

1309
01:39:05,440 --> 01:39:09,600
 She's our environmental scientist as well, so if there are questions that I am not able

1310
01:39:09,600 --> 01:39:12,840
 to answer, then I've got her here with me as well.

1311
01:39:12,840 --> 01:39:23,260
 I've got a quick PowerPoint presentation for you.

1312
01:39:23,260 --> 01:39:28,680
 Really the request before you today is the alternate ESA plan, which would allow us to

1313
01:39:28,680 --> 01:39:36,040
 cross the riparian stream buffer to access the southern portion of our track for development.

1314
01:39:36,040 --> 01:39:40,280
 Really some side information, it's a 44.97-acre site.

1315
01:39:40,280 --> 01:39:44,880
 It's currently zoned in R6, which allows for single-family development.

1316
01:39:44,880 --> 01:39:49,140
 We're proposing 140 single-family lots.

1317
01:39:49,140 --> 01:39:57,240
 Over that area, that's about a 3.1 density compared to the allowable use of six total.

1318
01:39:57,240 --> 01:40:03,400
 Just to give you an idea of what we're proposing, it is a less dense development than what we

1319
01:40:03,400 --> 01:40:06,280
 have the right by zoning to do.

1320
01:40:06,280 --> 01:40:11,360
 The overall, because the preliminary plat is before you or was approved on the consent

1321
01:40:11,360 --> 01:40:18,520
 agenda contingent upon the approval of the alternate ESA, the land plan has been established.

1322
01:40:18,520 --> 01:40:24,480
 It has the open spaces, it has the street patterns, it has all that information that's

1323
01:40:24,480 --> 01:40:31,480
 been reviewed by the city staff and found to be in conformance with as long as the alternate

1324
01:40:31,480 --> 01:40:33,120
 ESA is approved.

1325
01:40:33,120 --> 01:40:39,200
 The overall site has about 15.3 acres of open space.

1326
01:40:39,200 --> 01:40:45,320
 That's about 35%, just under 35% open space for the entire development, so it does have

1327
01:40:45,320 --> 01:40:48,680
 a significant amount of open space.

1328
01:40:48,680 --> 01:40:53,880
 There is, as Christy has gone over, there's ESA in the form of riparian stream buffer

1329
01:40:53,880 --> 01:40:56,320
 in upland habitat.

1330
01:40:56,320 --> 01:40:57,920
 Here's an aerial image of the site.

1331
01:40:57,920 --> 01:41:02,920
 To the north east of us is Teasley Trails, just directly north is Ridgemont.

1332
01:41:02,920 --> 01:41:04,960
 To our east is Forest Meadows.

1333
01:41:04,960 --> 01:41:08,200
 To our southeast is Lexington Park.

1334
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,360
 Directly to our west is Lake Forest Park and Good Samaritan Village, and you can see a

1335
01:41:13,360 --> 01:41:19,720
 little further to the east is the Creekside development, and to the south is an undeveloped

1336
01:41:19,720 --> 01:41:24,420
 track that's owned by Endeavour.

1337
01:41:24,420 --> 01:41:30,680
 The ESA stream buffer is what we're asking for you to approve impacts to.

1338
01:41:30,680 --> 01:41:34,140
 This shows the two stream buffers that are on the site.

1339
01:41:34,140 --> 01:41:37,520
 The one in the northwest is the unnamed tributary.

1340
01:41:37,520 --> 01:41:42,200
 The central one is Fletcher's Branch number four.

1341
01:41:42,200 --> 01:41:47,760
 The proposed encroachment is a 100 foot by 100 foot area, 10,000 square feet.

1342
01:41:47,760 --> 01:41:51,920
 The purpose of that encroachment is to build a residential street section to the south

1343
01:41:51,920 --> 01:41:58,240
 so that we can have a contiguous development between the north and south portion of the

1344
01:41:58,240 --> 01:41:59,240
 track.

1345
01:41:59,240 --> 01:42:04,280
 It also gives us the ability to market this residential development off Ryan Road as a

1346
01:42:04,280 --> 01:42:10,880
 contiguous neighborhood versus having residents or potential residents have to access it through

1347
01:42:10,880 --> 01:42:13,720
 adjacent neighborhoods.

1348
01:42:13,720 --> 01:42:18,680
 The reason or how we came up with 100 foot encroachment that we're requesting.

1349
01:42:18,680 --> 01:42:23,880
 The city's standard residential section is 55 foot right of way.

1350
01:42:23,880 --> 01:42:29,800
 DME requires an eight foot franchise utility easement in order to serve the development

1351
01:42:29,800 --> 01:42:32,040
 with franchise utilities.

1352
01:42:32,040 --> 01:42:37,320
 Because we are crossing a stream that has a large watershed, we will be utilizing box

1353
01:42:37,320 --> 01:42:39,640
 culverts, multiple boxes.

1354
01:42:39,640 --> 01:42:42,960
 Those will have concrete reinforced head walls.

1355
01:42:42,960 --> 01:42:47,920
 Those are structurally designed on past projects that has been the city's position that they

1356
01:42:47,920 --> 01:42:53,320
 want the structure itself outside the right of way so that it's not located up under the

1357
01:42:53,320 --> 01:42:55,960
 right of way or under any of the improvements.

1358
01:42:55,960 --> 01:42:58,240
 So it's just better for maintenance.

1359
01:42:58,240 --> 01:43:05,200
 So when you take into account the roadway section, the franchise utility requirements,

1360
01:43:05,200 --> 01:43:10,400
 the head walls for the drainage, and then rock riprap, typically when we have a drainage

1361
01:43:10,400 --> 01:43:14,720
 structure because we're funneling the water through this drainage structure, we end up

1362
01:43:14,720 --> 01:43:18,160
 having a lot of times a slight increase in velocity.

1363
01:43:18,160 --> 01:43:23,040
 So we'll utilize rock riprap upstream and downstream to protect the banks so that we're

1364
01:43:23,040 --> 01:43:27,500
 not getting erosion and undermining of that structure.

1365
01:43:27,500 --> 01:43:32,600
 So that's really just to kind of give you a background on where that 100 feet came from.

1366
01:43:32,600 --> 01:43:36,520
 That's how we derive the encroachment area.

1367
01:43:36,520 --> 01:43:41,200
 So our application process, so we've been working on this track now for probably about

1368
01:43:41,200 --> 01:43:43,520
 8 to 10 months.

1369
01:43:43,520 --> 01:43:47,080
 So we first started out with our ESA assessment.

1370
01:43:47,080 --> 01:43:54,240
 So our ESA assessment was project number ESA 18-0012, and that involved field assessment.

1371
01:43:54,240 --> 01:43:58,920
 As Christie mentioned, there was a field assessment to go out there and determine what ESA was

1372
01:43:58,920 --> 01:44:06,320
 present, where the limits were, so that we had a starting point or a basis for when we're

1373
01:44:06,320 --> 01:44:11,160
 laying out the site, what we're going to have to preserve versus where we can impact.

1374
01:44:11,160 --> 01:44:17,200
 So with the city standards, the upland habitat, you can impact up to 50%.

1375
01:44:17,200 --> 01:44:21,840
 The riparian stream buffer, if you impact any portion of the riparian stream buffer,

1376
01:44:21,840 --> 01:44:24,980
 it requires an alternate ESA plan.

1377
01:44:24,980 --> 01:44:30,360
 Because the Fletcher's Branch tributary number 4 bisects the property, we need the ability

1378
01:44:30,360 --> 01:44:31,920
 to impact that.

1379
01:44:31,920 --> 01:44:36,760
 So we put together a plan, we met with the city, we determined that we are going to have

1380
01:44:36,760 --> 01:44:39,360
 to do or request the alternate ESA plan.

1381
01:44:39,360 --> 01:44:43,200
 So we started putting that plan together, we looked at the encroachments, we started

1382
01:44:43,200 --> 01:44:45,500
 looking at mitigation measures.

1383
01:44:45,500 --> 01:44:48,080
 It was kind of a collaborative process with the city.

1384
01:44:48,080 --> 01:44:54,240
 We submitted our application, they worked with us on mitigation measures that we could

1385
01:44:54,240 --> 01:44:59,280
 propose to kind of offset and mitigate for that impact.

1386
01:44:59,280 --> 01:45:04,780
 As part of that process, we did submit our preliminary plat so that it could run concurrent

1387
01:45:04,780 --> 01:45:09,360
 because it needs to follow the requirements or what we're requesting with the alternate

1388
01:45:09,360 --> 01:45:10,720
 ESA plan.

1389
01:45:10,720 --> 01:45:16,880
 So the city was able to review the preliminary plat and the alternate ESA plan concurrently

1390
01:45:16,880 --> 01:45:21,080
 to make sure that those match up and are in alignment.

1391
01:45:21,080 --> 01:45:26,400
 As part of the process, the city said, "Okay, we want to, as part of our citizen outreach

1392
01:45:26,400 --> 01:45:30,600
 program, we want you to perform two neighborhood meetings."

1393
01:45:30,600 --> 01:45:36,380
 So we set those meetings up, the first meeting was held on December 18th, the second meeting

1394
01:45:36,380 --> 01:45:42,920
 was held on January 31st, and then we had a meeting with the city in between to discuss

1395
01:45:42,920 --> 01:45:45,120
 some of the items that came up.

1396
01:45:45,120 --> 01:45:51,800
 So really, in my presentation to you today, I'm going to talk to you about the ESA encroachment,

1397
01:45:51,800 --> 01:45:56,440
 but I'm also going to talk to you about the neighborhood meetings and a lot of the concerns

1398
01:45:56,440 --> 01:46:01,880
 or questions that came up in the neighborhood meetings and what we tried to do as the consultant

1399
01:46:01,880 --> 01:46:08,020
 to help address and alleviate the questions and the concerns from the neighbors on this

1400
01:46:08,020 --> 01:46:09,820
 proposed development.

1401
01:46:09,820 --> 01:46:12,560
 So prior to the meeting, we sent out an invitation.

1402
01:46:12,560 --> 01:46:17,640
 Within that invitation, it went to all the neighbors within 500 feet of the development.

1403
01:46:17,640 --> 01:46:25,360
 We included a vicinity map for the site, we included the ESA riparian buffer, and then

1404
01:46:25,360 --> 01:46:27,640
 we included two concept plans.

1405
01:46:27,640 --> 01:46:35,680
 The concept plans showed, one, what we were allowed to do without any encroachments into

1406
01:46:35,680 --> 01:46:42,120
 the ESA, and then what we would like to do as a developer.

1407
01:46:42,120 --> 01:46:46,240
 The meeting was held at the Emily Fowler Central Library.

1408
01:46:46,240 --> 01:46:48,120
 We had a sign-in sheet.

1409
01:46:48,120 --> 01:46:50,440
 There were 26 people that signed in.

1410
01:46:50,440 --> 01:46:55,360
 I do feel that everybody that attended probably didn't sign the sign-in sheet.

1411
01:46:55,360 --> 01:47:00,280
 It felt like we probably had around 50 people total in attendance.

1412
01:47:00,280 --> 01:47:03,080
 At the meeting, we put together an information sheet.

1413
01:47:03,080 --> 01:47:04,560
 What is an ESA?

1414
01:47:04,560 --> 01:47:06,880
 What types of ESAs are located on the site?

1415
01:47:06,880 --> 01:47:12,520
 So we wanted it to be an educational experience about the ESA, and then we also put information

1416
01:47:12,520 --> 01:47:16,760
 on there about our request to the residents.

1417
01:47:16,760 --> 01:47:18,680
 I gave an informal presentation.

1418
01:47:18,680 --> 01:47:21,400
 It was a Q&A.

1419
01:47:21,400 --> 01:47:22,560
 There were lots of questions.

1420
01:47:22,560 --> 01:47:25,720
 There was lots of back-and-forth discussion.

1421
01:47:25,720 --> 01:47:31,440
 There were city staff present at the meeting that was engaged in the meeting as well.

1422
01:47:31,440 --> 01:47:38,920
 At the residents' own discretion, we had sheets that they had the opportunity to sign, whether

1423
01:47:38,920 --> 01:47:42,960
 or not they were in support or in opposition of our request.

1424
01:47:42,960 --> 01:47:47,960
 We had two people sign in opposition, and we had 22 people sign in favor.

1425
01:47:47,960 --> 01:47:53,840
 So the residents, primarily the residents in favor were Forest Meadows that's adjacent

1426
01:47:53,840 --> 01:48:00,200
 to our east and had the potential to be impacted the most by our development.

1427
01:48:00,200 --> 01:48:03,240
 So here are the two concept plans.

1428
01:48:03,240 --> 01:48:08,700
 Exhibit C is what our preferred layout is, and this is what we shared with them at that

1429
01:48:08,700 --> 01:48:10,520
 initial meeting.

1430
01:48:10,520 --> 01:48:13,600
 Exhibit D is what we're allowed to do by right.

1431
01:48:13,600 --> 01:48:19,800
 As you notice on Exhibit D, it has a cul-de-sac street on the north end, so the development,

1432
01:48:19,800 --> 01:48:24,920
 the residential homes on the north would be bisected from the ones on the south.

1433
01:48:24,920 --> 01:48:28,160
 So there's really not any continuity there.

1434
01:48:28,160 --> 01:48:32,640
 The primary access from the southern portion of the development would either be through

1435
01:48:32,640 --> 01:48:39,680
 Forest Meadow or Lexington Park, and it doesn't really create a new neighborhood feel by having

1436
01:48:39,680 --> 01:48:45,120
 to go through an existing neighborhood to access the southern portion, which is important

1437
01:48:45,120 --> 01:48:46,120
 to our builder.

1438
01:48:46,120 --> 01:48:48,600
 We do have a home builder under contract for the lots.

1439
01:48:48,600 --> 01:48:57,280
 It's Toll Brothers, and the connection through the riparian buffer is important to them in

1440
01:48:57,280 --> 01:49:05,000
 order for them to effectively market and create a successful neighborhood here.

1441
01:49:05,000 --> 01:49:08,460
 So we had our neighborhood meeting number two.

1442
01:49:08,460 --> 01:49:11,640
 Prior to the second neighborhood meeting, we went and met with the city.

1443
01:49:11,640 --> 01:49:16,220
 In the neighborhood meeting, the first neighborhood meeting, the primary concern was traffic.

1444
01:49:16,220 --> 01:49:17,960
 It was Hollister Drive.

1445
01:49:17,960 --> 01:49:23,120
 It was the existing cut-through traffic through Forest Meadows and Lexington Park.

1446
01:49:23,120 --> 01:49:27,760
 I let the citizens know that the city has done some updates to their standards.

1447
01:49:27,760 --> 01:49:31,800
 The new standards, they were developed under the old standards, which was 50-foot right

1448
01:49:31,800 --> 01:49:34,760
 of way, 28-foot back-to-back streets.

1449
01:49:34,760 --> 01:49:40,880
 Our developments under the new standards, 55-foot right of way, 31 or 33-foot back-to-back

1450
01:49:40,880 --> 01:49:43,820
 streets, depending on the curb type that's used.

1451
01:49:43,820 --> 01:49:46,480
 We went through some of those factors.

1452
01:49:46,480 --> 01:49:50,760
 One of the biggest things that they requested is that they would like to see Hollister Lane

1453
01:49:50,760 --> 01:49:53,600
 not extended through our development.

1454
01:49:53,600 --> 01:49:55,860
 They already have a lot of cut-through traffic.

1455
01:49:55,860 --> 01:50:01,480
 They felt like the access should be primarily off Ryan Road and Creekdale.

1456
01:50:01,480 --> 01:50:03,600
 Ryan Road is a secondary arterial.

1457
01:50:03,600 --> 01:50:08,160
 That is, the city's already in the process of looking at and improving it.

1458
01:50:08,160 --> 01:50:10,640
 Creekdale Road is a collector.

1459
01:50:10,640 --> 01:50:13,320
 It's a 37-foot back-to-back street.

1460
01:50:13,320 --> 01:50:18,040
 The existing homes on Creekdale do not driveway off of Creekdale.

1461
01:50:18,040 --> 01:50:24,320
 They're served by alleys, so you don't have all the traffic in those homes that would

1462
01:50:24,320 --> 01:50:29,080
 back into Creekdale because they're served from the backside.

1463
01:50:29,080 --> 01:50:30,840
 We did meet with the city.

1464
01:50:30,840 --> 01:50:37,080
 The city was in agreement with access to Ryan Road and access to Creekdale.

1465
01:50:37,080 --> 01:50:40,280
 It would meet the fire department's remote access requirement.

1466
01:50:40,280 --> 01:50:49,520
 It's getting the residential drivers onto the collector and the arterial sooner, which

1467
01:50:49,520 --> 01:50:55,120
 is what you want, versus traffic accumulating on the residential streets, which have less

1468
01:50:55,120 --> 01:50:57,760
 capacity to serve.

1469
01:50:57,760 --> 01:51:02,280
 If you look on the left, exhibit C, we updated that.

1470
01:51:02,280 --> 01:51:07,080
 One of the things that was important in that meeting was that with removing that connection,

1471
01:51:07,080 --> 01:51:13,920
 we still wanted to provide pedestrian connectivity, even though that these are separate subdivisions.

1472
01:51:13,920 --> 01:51:19,600
 We've got Lake Forest Park to our west, which is an asset of the city in this area.

1473
01:51:19,600 --> 01:51:26,280
 We want to make sure that we create an opportunity for the residents located around that to utilize

1474
01:51:26,280 --> 01:51:29,720
 the sidewalk and trail system to access the park.

1475
01:51:29,720 --> 01:51:34,600
 We don't want to create a situation where the residents from Lexington Park or Forest

1476
01:51:34,600 --> 01:51:38,520
 Meadows would have to get in their car to drive over to Lake Forest.

1477
01:51:38,520 --> 01:51:39,520
 There's sidewalks.

1478
01:51:39,520 --> 01:51:40,520
 There's trails.

1479
01:51:40,520 --> 01:51:42,600
 They can access it through the development.

1480
01:51:42,600 --> 01:51:49,240
 This is the plan that we have before you with the preliminary plat and preliminary engineering.

1481
01:51:49,240 --> 01:51:52,120
 It does show the trail access.

1482
01:51:52,120 --> 01:51:55,920
 With this, we agreed that we would remove the stub.

1483
01:51:55,920 --> 01:52:00,440
 Right now, if you drive to the end of Hollister Lane, it says future extension.

1484
01:52:00,440 --> 01:52:06,440
 The city and we agreed that we didn't want that to look like it was going to be kind

1485
01:52:06,440 --> 01:52:10,640
 of an unfinished or incomplete project.

1486
01:52:10,640 --> 01:52:15,800
 What we agreed to do is that we would remove, and we have that shown in our preliminary

1487
01:52:15,800 --> 01:52:20,040
 engineering that's part of the preliminary plat, that we would remove that end portion

1488
01:52:20,040 --> 01:52:21,360
 of the street.

1489
01:52:21,360 --> 01:52:26,920
 I did want to go over that with you just because that was one of the biggest concerns from

1490
01:52:26,920 --> 01:52:32,360
 the residents, and this is what we did as far as meeting with the city to access and

1491
01:52:32,360 --> 01:52:34,920
 address it.

1492
01:52:34,920 --> 01:52:41,280
 Getting back to the ESA, the impacts and mitigation, Christy's kind of gone over that with you.

1493
01:52:41,280 --> 01:52:45,640
 We've got a total stream buffer impact of 0.2 acres.

1494
01:52:45,640 --> 01:52:52,940
 There's 3.4 acres of riparian stream buffer, so our request is to impact 6% of that.

1495
01:52:52,940 --> 01:52:58,700
 Our mitigation measures are removing of the invasive species, the Chinese privet, the

1496
01:52:58,700 --> 01:53:00,120
 calorie pear.

1497
01:53:00,120 --> 01:53:02,880
 It's replanting with native material.

1498
01:53:02,880 --> 01:53:05,320
 It's replanting with a seed mix.

1499
01:53:05,320 --> 01:53:11,760
 It's putting erosion control measures in place while we're doing this work for bank stabilization.

1500
01:53:11,760 --> 01:53:18,000
 It's preserving upland habitat and tree canopy that is above and beyond the minimum requirements.

1501
01:53:18,000 --> 01:53:26,520
 Then it's doing the three-year inspection, maintenance, and reporting period.

1502
01:53:26,520 --> 01:53:33,040
 Really kind of a summary through this, we're requesting this approval so that we can create

1503
01:53:33,040 --> 01:53:37,480
 a contiguous neighborhood, so that we can create a neighborhood feel.

1504
01:53:37,480 --> 01:53:39,760
 It would provide view corridors of the creek.

1505
01:53:39,760 --> 01:53:45,400
 When we do the creek crossing, it kind of engages the future residents in that upland

1506
01:53:45,400 --> 01:53:47,920
 habitat into that open space.

1507
01:53:47,920 --> 01:53:52,160
 It provides pedestrian access from forest meadows through this development.

1508
01:53:52,160 --> 01:53:56,480
 It would also provide pedestrian access for Lexington Park across Creekdale and through

1509
01:53:56,480 --> 01:53:57,480
 the development.

1510
01:53:57,480 --> 01:54:04,720
 Then it eliminates the concerns with traffic with the connection of Hollister because without

1511
01:54:04,720 --> 01:54:12,000
 the approval of this, the only plan we could move forward without would be the other option

1512
01:54:12,000 --> 01:54:14,760
 that you've seen before you as well.

1513
01:54:14,760 --> 01:54:20,360
 With that, I would be happy to answer any questions.

1514
01:54:20,360 --> 01:54:21,360
 - Thank you, Mr. Fletcher.

1515
01:54:21,360 --> 01:54:23,360
 We do have questions.

1516
01:54:23,360 --> 01:54:24,360
 Commissioner Perneto.

1517
01:54:24,360 --> 01:54:25,360
 - Thank you.

1518
01:54:25,360 --> 01:54:29,800
 I just wanted to clarify, and I don't know if this would be you or Christy that would

1519
01:54:29,800 --> 01:54:31,400
 clarify this.

1520
01:54:31,400 --> 01:54:38,200
 We discussed the removal of the invasive species either through mechanical or chemical means.

1521
01:54:38,200 --> 01:54:41,800
 Vice Chair a second ago mentioned the aquatic-based herbicides.

1522
01:54:41,800 --> 01:54:46,280
 I don't see that in the recommendation, so we make our vote.

1523
01:54:46,280 --> 01:54:50,520
 Is that part of our stipulation, and can we stipulate that that would be the method used

1524
01:54:50,520 --> 01:54:51,520
 for chemical?

1525
01:54:51,520 --> 01:54:56,840
 - I guess I'd have to defer to staff.

1526
01:54:56,840 --> 01:55:01,480
 - As a representative of the applicant, I would say that we're acceptable.

1527
01:55:01,480 --> 01:55:08,080
 If you want to put that in your recommendation so that it's clear, then we're acceptable

1528
01:55:08,080 --> 01:55:10,520
 to that being added to the recommendation.

1529
01:55:10,520 --> 01:55:14,160
 - All right, thank you very much.

1530
01:55:14,160 --> 01:55:15,160
 - Commissioner Beck.

1531
01:55:15,160 --> 01:55:16,160
 - Thank you, Vice Chair.

1532
01:55:16,160 --> 01:55:17,160
 Thanks, Mr. Fletcher.

1533
01:55:17,160 --> 01:55:18,160
 Good seeing you again.

1534
01:55:18,160 --> 01:55:29,960
 I think the only thing ... I think it's clear, pretty clear to me the 100-foot that you need.

1535
01:55:29,960 --> 01:55:35,120
 You've got 55-foot of right-of-way that you need, 8-foot for DME, and then the rest of

1536
01:55:35,120 --> 01:55:41,320
 it is to build up some barriers to prevent erosion down the road.

1537
01:55:41,320 --> 01:55:42,320
 Is that right?

1538
01:55:42,320 --> 01:55:43,320
 Am I saying that right?

1539
01:55:43,320 --> 01:55:49,080
 - Well, so when you do a box culvert, you have a structural headwall, and your structural

1540
01:55:49,080 --> 01:55:51,120
 headwall has a footing.

1541
01:55:51,120 --> 01:55:53,520
 The footing is usually much wider.

1542
01:55:53,520 --> 01:55:58,400
 If you see the concrete portion of the headwall up top, generally that's probably going to

1543
01:55:58,400 --> 01:56:04,640
 be 8 to 10 inches wide, but where that goes down and goes underground, generally that's

1544
01:56:04,640 --> 01:56:11,520
 probably going to be 6 to 12 feet wide, depending on the overall height of the headwall.

1545
01:56:11,520 --> 01:56:17,360
 We will have that headwall, the protrusion for the footing, and then we will put rock

1546
01:56:17,360 --> 01:56:22,800
 riprap in the stream to protect that from erosion, because what you don't want is you

1547
01:56:22,800 --> 01:56:29,280
 get turbulence and velocity, and you start getting erosion that starts eating out around

1548
01:56:29,280 --> 01:56:33,360
 the structure, and it creates a maintenance issue for the city.

1549
01:56:33,360 --> 01:56:40,040
 So the 55, the 8, we assumed, I think, 12 feet for the headwalls, and then generally

1550
01:56:40,040 --> 01:56:44,840
 the rock riprap is usually a minimum of 10 foot in width.

1551
01:56:44,840 --> 01:56:49,320
 That all adds up to around 95, but you have to be able to get in there with the equipment

1552
01:56:49,320 --> 01:56:55,200
 and the manpower to make the installation, so that's where we came up with the 100 foot.

1553
01:56:55,200 --> 01:56:56,200
 - Great.

1554
01:56:56,200 --> 01:56:57,200
 Got you.

1555
01:56:57,200 --> 01:57:04,840
 - I do have a question, I think I probably would like to have Ms. Givens come up and

1556
01:57:04,840 --> 01:57:08,280
 talk about the removal process a little bit.

1557
01:57:08,280 --> 01:57:14,640
 I think she was in the work session, I'd just like to have her allay my concerns about any

1558
01:57:14,640 --> 01:57:17,640
 herbicide they might use.

1559
01:57:17,640 --> 01:57:18,640
 - Okay.

1560
01:57:18,640 --> 01:57:22,920
 - And one other question I'll have that I think she's probably better suited to answer

1561
01:57:22,920 --> 01:57:23,920
 too.

1562
01:57:23,920 --> 01:57:27,400
 - If you give a name and address.

1563
01:57:27,400 --> 01:57:31,280
 - Sierra Givens, 13455 Noel Road.

1564
01:57:31,280 --> 01:57:33,320
 - Okay.

1565
01:57:33,320 --> 01:57:35,640
 You were in the workshop, okay.

1566
01:57:35,640 --> 01:57:40,080
 Could you allay my concerns about the herbicide that might be used?

1567
01:57:40,080 --> 01:57:46,640
 I'm assuming that there probably will be a herbicide used, is that a fair assessment?

1568
01:57:46,640 --> 01:57:53,440
 - Most potentially, we're going to set out bids for the contractors who do this often,

1569
01:57:53,440 --> 01:58:00,760
 and so we're going to rely on them to give us proposals of what they think is best to

1570
01:58:00,760 --> 01:58:03,200
 do a successful removal of the invasive species.

1571
01:58:03,200 --> 01:58:10,360
 - Okay, but if they use a chemical and it's glyphosate, which again seems to be the chemical

1572
01:58:10,360 --> 01:58:14,160
 of choice to help remove some of this.

1573
01:58:14,160 --> 01:58:15,160
 - Right.

1574
01:58:15,160 --> 01:58:20,040
 We would still have a say in what they use, and so we would definitely work with the city,

1575
01:58:20,040 --> 01:58:26,160
 work with their expertise, and just kind of put it together to what we think is best to

1576
01:58:26,160 --> 01:58:28,800
 be successful, but also do save practices.

1577
01:58:28,800 --> 01:58:29,800
 - Okay.

1578
01:58:29,800 --> 01:58:35,480
 I mentioned in the work session too that would this information on this chemical be included

1579
01:58:35,480 --> 01:58:39,800
 in the annual report?

1580
01:58:39,800 --> 01:58:45,880
 When you do your annual report, would you be assessing the chemical if it is used, and

1581
01:58:45,880 --> 01:58:53,760
 any problems with it as far as assimilating into the environment, the ecosystem?

1582
01:58:53,760 --> 01:58:59,480
 - In the annual report, we would write if that is the chosen method.

1583
01:58:59,480 --> 01:59:04,480
 The city would already be aware of that, but it would go into the report of what the method

1584
01:59:04,480 --> 01:59:12,800
 was, when it was applied, what the method was used to apply it, who the contractor was,

1585
01:59:12,800 --> 01:59:13,800
 all that information.

1586
01:59:13,800 --> 01:59:17,560
 - So it'd be pretty thorough, and I guess I think through the Freedom of Information

1587
01:59:17,560 --> 01:59:23,240
 Act, anybody could access that, and I think that was the only way we were going to get

1588
01:59:23,240 --> 01:59:24,240
 to it.

1589
01:59:24,240 --> 01:59:25,240
 Okay.

1590
01:59:25,240 --> 01:59:28,880
 The only other question concerning Avenue, you may not be able to, and I realize this

1591
01:59:28,880 --> 01:59:34,760
 may be a reach, but in your narrative, you mentioned that no increase in 100-year peak

1592
01:59:34,760 --> 01:59:40,720
 flows are anticipated downstream of the subject property.

1593
01:59:40,720 --> 01:59:41,720
 What's this based on?

1594
01:59:41,720 --> 01:59:49,480
 - The reason I raise this is because we know now that extreme climate conditions are kind

1595
01:59:49,480 --> 01:59:51,840
 of throwing these old models out.

1596
01:59:51,840 --> 01:59:57,960
 So when you took this into consideration, did you consider current conditions, extreme

1597
01:59:57,960 --> 01:59:58,960
 weather conditions?

1598
01:59:58,960 --> 01:59:59,960
 - We did.

1599
01:59:59,960 --> 02:00:00,960
 We did.

1600
02:00:00,960 --> 02:00:01,960
 So we've done a flood study.

1601
02:00:01,960 --> 02:00:02,960
 - Okay.

1602
02:00:02,960 --> 02:00:07,880
 - The flood study has been submitted to the city, and it was in process of review.

1603
02:00:07,880 --> 02:00:14,680
 So our flood study follows the City of Denton's code requirements for flood studies as far

1604
02:00:14,680 --> 02:00:17,440
 as delineation of the drainage basin.

1605
02:00:17,440 --> 02:00:20,400
 Most of this drainage basin is a developed basin.

1606
02:00:20,400 --> 02:00:25,960
 So when we look at the contributing area, we go through and look at, okay, when we have

1607
02:00:25,960 --> 02:00:30,120
 a rain event, what area contributes to this point?

1608
02:00:30,120 --> 02:00:31,640
 Is that an undeveloped basin?

1609
02:00:31,640 --> 02:00:33,600
 Is it a developed basin?

1610
02:00:33,600 --> 02:00:39,120
 If it's developed, what type of development, is it commercial, is it residential?

1611
02:00:39,120 --> 02:00:42,340
 That all impacts the runoff rates.

1612
02:00:42,340 --> 02:00:44,720
 Are there detention ponds in the basin?

1613
02:00:44,720 --> 02:00:48,920
 There are a couple of developments that do have detention ponds in the basin, so that

1614
02:00:48,920 --> 02:00:50,560
 all gets factored in.

1615
02:00:50,560 --> 02:00:56,000
 So when we say that we're not gonna increase, we've already done the study to show that

1616
02:00:56,000 --> 02:01:02,640
 as part of our final platen construction plans, the city will confirm final design that it

1617
02:01:02,640 --> 02:01:08,800
 does in fact meet the flood study and does not increase runoff downstream.

1618
02:01:08,800 --> 02:01:09,800
 Okay.

1619
02:01:09,800 --> 02:01:10,800
 I'm sorry.

1620
02:01:10,800 --> 02:01:11,800
 Go ahead.

1621
02:01:11,800 --> 02:01:17,880
 I guess what I'm asking is, is part of this based on rates of rainfall historically?

1622
02:01:17,880 --> 02:01:24,960
 Or are we looking at something a little bit different that suits what we're actually seeing

1623
02:01:24,960 --> 02:01:27,000
 today with heavier rainfalls?

1624
02:01:27,000 --> 02:01:29,640
 Is that taken into consideration?

1625
02:01:29,640 --> 02:01:35,220
 The current rainfall requirements in the code is what's taken into consideration.

1626
02:01:35,220 --> 02:01:40,280
 The code says that we have to look at certain rainfall events, whether it's the two, the

1627
02:01:40,280 --> 02:01:41,360
 five, the ten.

1628
02:01:41,360 --> 02:01:47,400
 We have to analyze each rainfall event and make sure that in each case, because you can

1629
02:01:47,400 --> 02:01:53,040
 have a situation where you do development and you may be increasing runoff in one of

1630
02:01:53,040 --> 02:01:58,560
 the rain events, but not necessarily another one of the rain events, but we have to look

1631
02:01:58,560 --> 02:02:04,080
 at each one of those individually because you don't want to increase flows, but you

1632
02:02:04,080 --> 02:02:09,920
 don't want to also increase velocity, which could create erosion problems.

1633
02:02:09,920 --> 02:02:13,920
 Maybe the 100 year, there's not an issue, but in the 25, you've increased velocities

1634
02:02:13,920 --> 02:02:16,680
 and erosion downstream, which creates an issue.

1635
02:02:16,680 --> 02:02:17,680
 We have.

1636
02:02:17,680 --> 02:02:19,480
 We're following the city's code.

1637
02:02:19,480 --> 02:02:26,400
 We look at the different storm events that are required, and we model the basin upstream

1638
02:02:26,400 --> 02:02:33,720
 and downstream of our site so that we've got an accurate model and picture of what is occurring

1639
02:02:33,720 --> 02:02:34,720
 within the basin.

1640
02:02:34,720 --> 02:02:35,720
 Okay.

1641
02:02:35,720 --> 02:02:36,720
 Very good.

1642
02:02:36,720 --> 02:02:38,680
 Thank you, Mr. Fletcher.

1643
02:02:38,680 --> 02:02:41,720
 Commissioner Sanchez.

1644
02:02:41,720 --> 02:02:48,260
 Looking at force metal, they have a bridge as you go into that subdivision.

1645
02:02:48,260 --> 02:02:51,000
 Is that also crossing Fletcher?

1646
02:02:51,000 --> 02:02:52,000
 That is.

1647
02:02:52,000 --> 02:02:53,760
 I'm not sure how far.

1648
02:02:53,760 --> 02:02:54,760
 It's the same tributary.

1649
02:02:54,760 --> 02:02:55,760
 It's the same tributary, right?

1650
02:02:55,760 --> 02:03:01,120
 I don't know if the usually a lot of times on some of the tributaries, once they get

1651
02:03:01,120 --> 02:03:06,880
 to a certain point in the basin, they become unnamed, but that would be Fletcher's Branch

1652
02:03:06,880 --> 02:03:13,600
 tributary number four at that culvert crossing just south of Ryan Road at the entry into

1653
02:03:13,600 --> 02:03:14,600
 force meadows.

1654
02:03:14,600 --> 02:03:15,600
 Correct?

1655
02:03:15,600 --> 02:03:16,600
 Yeah.

1656
02:03:16,600 --> 02:03:17,600
 Right.

1657
02:03:17,600 --> 02:03:18,600
 Right.

1658
02:03:18,600 --> 02:03:22,520
 I would guess my answer was that it's already been crossed before, you know, along right

1659
02:03:22,520 --> 02:03:23,520
 there.

1660
02:03:23,520 --> 02:03:24,520
 Correct.

1661
02:03:24,520 --> 02:03:29,180
 And Duffy's Way crosses it as well for the access to the park.

1662
02:03:29,180 --> 02:03:30,180
 Okay.

1663
02:03:30,180 --> 02:03:33,360
 I don't see any other questions.

1664
02:03:33,360 --> 02:03:34,360
 Thank you, Mr. Fletcher.

1665
02:03:34,360 --> 02:03:35,360
 Thank you.

1666
02:03:35,360 --> 02:03:36,360
 Okay.

1667
02:03:36,360 --> 02:03:37,920
 I do have other cards to speak.

1668
02:03:37,920 --> 02:03:46,600
 Carol Ackerman, please state your name and address and you'll have four minutes.

1669
02:03:46,600 --> 02:03:54,280
 I'm the President of Force Meadows Homeowners Association and we'd like to present 132 signatures

1670
02:03:54,280 --> 02:03:57,240
 in favor of this proposal and also that-

1671
02:03:57,240 --> 02:03:59,200
 Can you state your name and address for me first, please?

1672
02:03:59,200 --> 02:04:00,200
 Oh, I'm sorry.

1673
02:04:00,200 --> 02:04:01,200
 Thank you.

1674
02:04:01,200 --> 02:04:04,680
 Carol Ackerman, 1913 Knob Hill Court, Denton, Texas.

1675
02:04:04,680 --> 02:04:05,680
 Thank you very much.

1676
02:04:05,680 --> 02:04:06,680
 Carry on.

1677
02:04:06,680 --> 02:04:07,680
 Okay.

1678
02:04:07,680 --> 02:04:11,520
 Anyway, we'd like to present these to the commission.

1679
02:04:11,520 --> 02:04:17,960
 We are in favor of them crossing the stream and the entrance off Ryan Road due to safety

1680
02:04:17,960 --> 02:04:20,880
 issues in our community.

1681
02:04:20,880 --> 02:04:31,940
 Thank you.

1682
02:04:31,940 --> 02:04:38,120
 The next card I have is Joe Kratz.

1683
02:04:38,120 --> 02:04:49,480
 If you'll state your name and address for the record, you'll have four minutes to speak.

1684
02:04:49,480 --> 02:04:59,720
 My name is Joe, last name Kratz, address is 4109 Roxbury Street, R-O-X-B-U-R-Y Street.

1685
02:04:59,720 --> 02:05:02,360
 Thank you.

1686
02:05:02,360 --> 02:05:04,520
 I work with Carol.

1687
02:05:04,520 --> 02:05:07,560
 I'm a resident of Force Meadows.

1688
02:05:07,560 --> 02:05:17,840
 Naturally, we would like to see the area remain undeveloped, but we know that's not practical.

1689
02:05:17,840 --> 02:05:33,220
 But the proposed change to encroach the 6% of Wetland to us seems preferred to changing

1690
02:05:33,220 --> 02:05:41,760
 the character of Hollister and the surrounding roadways of Hilawaya and Roxbury.

1691
02:05:41,760 --> 02:05:52,880
 I don't know if the gentleman with the engineering firm could pull up the map and I could make

1692
02:05:52,880 --> 02:05:56,840
 references that would be maybe more meaningful.

1693
02:05:56,840 --> 02:06:03,600
 But the signatures that Carol just presented to you are signatures that I helped gather,

1694
02:06:03,600 --> 02:06:11,800
 and it represents darn near every resident on the affected roadways of Hollister, Roxbury.

1695
02:06:11,800 --> 02:06:17,000
 In fact, there's only about six addresses on Roxbury that did not weigh in with the

1696
02:06:17,000 --> 02:06:20,920
 signature, and mostly because they just weren't home when we knocked on their door.

1697
02:06:20,920 --> 02:06:29,920
 So they're pretty motivated to the proposed change simply because of, okay, I don't know

1698
02:06:29,920 --> 02:06:39,680
 if you can see my mouse, but Ryan heads up to Teasley Road, and that light short cycles,

1699
02:06:39,680 --> 02:06:48,160
 and the traffic on Teasley is severely backed up at peak time, and that's morning and evening.

1700
02:06:48,160 --> 02:07:06,240
 What that does, along with Robinson and Teasley and another road, another intersection, I

1701
02:07:06,240 --> 02:07:14,680
 had it in my notes, but the surrounding light short cycle, and so what that encourages traffic

1702
02:07:14,680 --> 02:07:19,480
 to do is to cut down Roxbury Street and Hillalaya.

1703
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:28,000
 So we already are suffering from the increased development in the area, the load being heavy

1704
02:07:28,000 --> 02:07:34,080
 on the roads, and with the short cycling lights at Robinson Road and Teasley and Ryan, and

1705
02:07:34,080 --> 02:07:40,760
 I think it's Wheeler Ridge, because those lights short cycle, people will use our neighborhood

1706
02:07:40,760 --> 02:07:44,240
 already to cut through.

1707
02:07:44,240 --> 02:07:54,880
 So when we see the additional Hollister as an additional source of traffic into our neighborhood,

1708
02:07:54,880 --> 02:08:05,440
 I think that's what motivated the residents to really speak up and endorse the change.

1709
02:08:05,440 --> 02:08:13,880
 So that's really where, having knocked on doors and spoken to residents, Roxbury is

1710
02:08:13,880 --> 02:08:23,600
 a very long road, and for that, people can work up a pretty good head of steam and get

1711
02:08:23,600 --> 02:08:27,800
 above 30 miles an hour in a residential road.

1712
02:08:27,800 --> 02:08:42,160
 So Hollister, the residents there, and Hillalaya, and I forget the, I'm going to use my mouse.

1713
02:08:42,160 --> 02:08:43,160
 What's that road?

1714
02:08:43,160 --> 02:08:44,160
 Hillalaya.

1715
02:08:44,160 --> 02:08:52,600
 Well, Hillalaya, but the other one behind, the one that's, anyways, the road that comes,

1716
02:08:52,600 --> 02:09:00,720
 this is Hollister, if you can see my mouse, and then you go behind it, that road, yeah,

1717
02:09:00,720 --> 02:09:06,880
 the character of those roads would change to increase traffic and increase a change

1718
02:09:06,880 --> 02:09:17,920
 in the quality of life, noise, increased car exhaust, and so we would ask council to consider

1719
02:09:17,920 --> 02:09:24,200
 this being in favor of this change to keep Hollister from going through, give them their

1720
02:09:24,200 --> 02:09:29,440
 encroachment of the wetlands, to give them their bridge so they can connect up.

1721
02:09:29,440 --> 02:09:37,480
 The alternative to that, for us, we would like to see Duffy's Way, which is a road exclusively

1722
02:09:37,480 --> 02:09:44,920
 servicing the dog park, to be changed to provide access to their development from the west

1723
02:09:44,920 --> 02:09:48,400
 side and not the east side with Hollister.

1724
02:09:48,400 --> 02:09:50,720
 Thank you very much.

1725
02:09:50,720 --> 02:09:54,000
 Thank you.

1726
02:09:54,000 --> 02:10:03,600
 Our next person to speak is Judy Reel.

1727
02:10:03,600 --> 02:10:04,600
 Thank you.

1728
02:10:04,600 --> 02:10:05,600
 Hi.

1729
02:10:05,600 --> 02:10:07,640
 I'm Judy Reel, 1424 Monte Cristo Court.

1730
02:10:07,640 --> 02:10:08,640
 Thank you.

1731
02:10:08,640 --> 02:10:11,160
 I did in Texas, 76210.

1732
02:10:11,160 --> 02:10:16,360
 I live in the Ridgemont Adrition, north of their new front door.

1733
02:10:16,360 --> 02:10:24,760
 So we are within the 200-foot area of the property, and so we are one of the residents

1734
02:10:24,760 --> 02:10:27,180
 in opposition.

1735
02:10:27,180 --> 02:10:31,000
 Our main reason for that is we're directly across the street from where they're going

1736
02:10:31,000 --> 02:10:33,280
 to enter that street.

1737
02:10:33,280 --> 02:10:39,560
 Already we experience large water pooling coming down through the neighborhood, and

1738
02:10:39,560 --> 02:10:41,680
 the water flow in that area.

1739
02:10:41,680 --> 02:10:45,880
 We're very concerned about the disruption that's going to happen there.

1740
02:10:45,880 --> 02:10:52,600
 The current infrastructure there on certain downpours is inadequate.

1741
02:10:52,600 --> 02:10:54,240
 I live on the corner.

1742
02:10:54,240 --> 02:10:56,160
 All that water rushes by me.

1743
02:10:56,160 --> 02:11:00,920
 I have a number of easements underneath my property to support these tributaries and

1744
02:11:00,920 --> 02:11:05,440
 the feeding of water through that area to get it down there and into where it needs

1745
02:11:05,440 --> 02:11:06,440
 to be.

1746
02:11:06,440 --> 02:11:11,880
 So it's one of those things that are first concerned.

1747
02:11:11,880 --> 02:11:15,880
 My neighbors here don't want the traffic routed through them.

1748
02:11:15,880 --> 02:11:19,400
 I can tell you I don't want the traffic increase on Ryan Road.

1749
02:11:19,400 --> 02:11:23,480
 We are in favor of leaving the easement.

1750
02:11:23,480 --> 02:11:28,280
 Not doing the easement, leaving the ESA and keeping the water natural, mainly because

1751
02:11:28,280 --> 02:11:29,280
 it splits the traffic.

1752
02:11:29,280 --> 02:11:34,360
 At least all of us can endure the increase a little more instead of dumping it all on

1753
02:11:34,360 --> 02:11:39,520
 Ryan Road and their large marketing effort that's going to be to sell the neighborhood

1754
02:11:39,520 --> 02:11:41,800
 and all the increased traffic that's going to be there.

1755
02:11:41,800 --> 02:11:46,160
 It's hard enough to get out of my neighborhood in the morning just to get out and on to Ryan

1756
02:11:46,160 --> 02:11:47,160
 Road.

1757
02:11:47,160 --> 02:11:50,600
 When we talked with the developer who happened to be at one of the meetings that we were

1758
02:11:50,600 --> 02:11:54,200
 at, even he recognized Ryan Road is a problem for the city.

1759
02:11:54,200 --> 02:11:55,200
 It needs to grow.

1760
02:11:55,200 --> 02:11:56,520
 You guys know it.

1761
02:11:56,520 --> 02:11:58,920
 It's been on the books for years that it was going to grow.

1762
02:11:58,920 --> 02:12:01,240
 It still hasn't been grown since we've been there.

1763
02:12:01,240 --> 02:12:03,200
 Been there four years.

1764
02:12:03,200 --> 02:12:10,160
 The traffic noise increase on Ryan Road has been a problem for us living in the house,

1765
02:12:10,160 --> 02:12:11,160
 literally.

1766
02:12:11,160 --> 02:12:16,640
 And between Good Samaritan, sending the fire trucks down every morning and the amount of

1767
02:12:16,640 --> 02:12:21,440
 traffic that goes through that intersection, it's really quite busy.

1768
02:12:21,440 --> 02:12:27,560
 And to add yet another major property entrance right into that intersection is of concern

1769
02:12:27,560 --> 02:12:28,560
 to us.

1770
02:12:28,560 --> 02:12:32,600
 Of course, we love our trees and the wild flask.

1771
02:12:32,600 --> 02:12:39,120
 I swear one summer we ran the possum relocation plan out of our home for quite a number of

1772
02:12:39,120 --> 02:12:42,980
 wildlife that came to visit our property.

1773
02:12:42,980 --> 02:12:47,360
 We would like to recommend that they consider a light there if we're going to really go

1774
02:12:47,360 --> 02:12:53,920
 forward with the ESA approval, then we need to look at not only the water situation, but

1775
02:12:53,920 --> 02:12:59,680
 also the traffic there and so forth in the increase.

1776
02:12:59,680 --> 02:13:05,960
 So while I know I'm in the minority here, I did attend the meetings and our neighborhood

1777
02:13:05,960 --> 02:13:07,040
 is concerned.

1778
02:13:07,040 --> 02:13:13,120
 We don't have a homeowners association per se to go rally around and garner up a bunch

1779
02:13:13,120 --> 02:13:18,160
 of signatures, but the neighborhood is concerned about it and we just finished with another

1780
02:13:18,160 --> 02:13:21,680
 new development right down the road and now we're going to plop another one right next

1781
02:13:21,680 --> 02:13:25,560
 door across the street, so that's our main concern.

1782
02:13:25,560 --> 02:13:26,560
 Thank you.

1783
02:13:26,560 --> 02:13:27,560
 >> Thank you.

1784
02:13:27,560 --> 02:13:32,800
 And I'm going to have Richard speak just a minute about Ryan Road, just because I know

1785
02:13:32,800 --> 02:13:37,680
 yes, it has been a problem and we've brought it up as a commission and city council has

1786
02:13:37,680 --> 02:13:43,680
 as well and it has gotten traction and moved up and I'm going to let him speak.

1787
02:13:43,680 --> 02:13:49,120
 >> Just to give a brief update, this actually was discussed, I think, even with the last

1788
02:13:49,120 --> 02:13:54,280
 development down the road that was recently approved.

1789
02:13:54,280 --> 02:13:59,560
 What the city did is they undertook two different studies, one along Sherman, one and that one

1790
02:13:59,560 --> 02:14:04,600
 has recently been completed, they're gearing up to start one on Ryan Road to specifically

1791
02:14:04,600 --> 02:14:11,560
 look at what can be done in the near term as well as come up with some preliminary designs

1792
02:14:11,560 --> 02:14:14,360
 and then what that will cost.

1793
02:14:14,360 --> 02:14:19,760
 I think we have your information, what I will do is tomorrow I will send you the information,

1794
02:14:19,760 --> 02:14:24,000
 I do know that that will be brought up at a city council work session in the very near

1795
02:14:24,000 --> 02:14:29,360
 future just to keep you informed and updated on what's going on.

1796
02:14:29,360 --> 02:14:30,360
 >> Commissioner Beck.

1797
02:14:30,360 --> 02:14:31,480
 >> Thank you, vice chair.

1798
02:14:31,480 --> 02:14:35,880
 Can I get Christy to come back up to respond to something that I think would address her

1799
02:14:35,880 --> 02:14:41,520
 concern about water, if you don't mind.

1800
02:14:41,520 --> 02:14:47,520
 She was giving us the impression that water is going to flow in their direction from this

1801
02:14:47,520 --> 02:14:48,520
 development.

1802
02:14:48,520 --> 02:14:49,520
 Is that?

1803
02:14:49,520 --> 02:14:55,040
 That doesn't sound correct and when I'm looking at topography maps here, it looks like it's

1804
02:14:55,040 --> 02:15:01,600
 going to be flowing the other direction.

1805
02:15:01,600 --> 02:15:02,600
 >> Exactly.

1806
02:15:02,600 --> 02:15:13,840
 Right, it also flows to the southwest towards that tributary that leads into Lake Forest

1807
02:15:13,840 --> 02:15:14,840
 pond.

1808
02:15:14,840 --> 02:15:15,840
 >> Right.

1809
02:15:15,840 --> 02:15:21,200
 Does this development negatively impact that where it would make conditions worse for them

1810
02:15:21,200 --> 02:15:22,200
 north of it?

1811
02:15:22,200 --> 02:15:23,200
 >> I'm sorry, can you say it?

1812
02:15:23,200 --> 02:15:30,400
 >> Does this development, this alternative VESAW negatively impact their drainage north

1813
02:15:30,400 --> 02:15:31,480
 of it?

1814
02:15:31,480 --> 02:15:35,480
 >> I can't speak to that as I don't have any hearing.

1815
02:15:35,480 --> 02:15:36,480
 >> Okay.

1816
02:15:36,480 --> 02:15:37,480
 Thanks, Christy.

1817
02:15:37,480 --> 02:15:44,760
 >> Commissioner Beck, our development is downstream of that existing development so it would not

1818
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,760
 negatively impact.

1819
02:15:45,760 --> 02:15:46,760
 >> Okay.

1820
02:15:46,760 --> 02:15:51,640
 >> There wouldn't be a tail water created from our development that would have any impact.

1821
02:15:51,640 --> 02:15:57,280
 >> We're actually receiving their water, sending it through our site in Lake Forest Park.

1822
02:15:57,280 --> 02:15:58,280
 >> Okay.

1823
02:15:58,280 --> 02:16:01,800
 Well, that's what I thought I wanted to be sure just to alight any concerns I had.

1824
02:16:01,800 --> 02:16:03,480
 So thank you, Mr. Fletcher.

1825
02:16:03,480 --> 02:16:04,480
 >> Commissioner Sanchez?

1826
02:16:04,480 --> 02:16:05,480
 >> I had a question.

1827
02:16:05,480 --> 02:16:06,480
 >> Oh, Mr. Fletcher.

1828
02:16:06,480 --> 02:16:10,680
 >> I have a question.

1829
02:16:10,680 --> 02:16:18,280
 Looking at exhibit C, you have Hollister, you won't be using Hollister but there'll be a

1830
02:16:18,280 --> 02:16:19,280
 trail, right?

1831
02:16:19,280 --> 02:16:22,080
 They'll connect both subdivisions.

1832
02:16:22,080 --> 02:16:23,080
 >> That's correct.

1833
02:16:23,080 --> 02:16:29,120
 >> And then you also have a little area there where you'll be able to access the park.

1834
02:16:29,120 --> 02:16:30,120
 >> That's correct.

1835
02:16:30,120 --> 02:16:36,760
 >> My question is you're going to have families, a lot of people like to drive the kids to

1836
02:16:36,760 --> 02:16:40,800
 the park, not necessarily walk them to the park.

1837
02:16:40,800 --> 02:16:49,560
 So to me it's like you're taking that away from families that want to drive to the park.

1838
02:16:49,560 --> 02:16:55,360
 Instead of having to get on Ryan Road to come all the way to the park or come up Creekdale

1839
02:16:55,360 --> 02:16:58,800
 Road, and those are pretty busy roads.

1840
02:16:58,800 --> 02:17:04,400
 So you want to go through a neighborhood where there's not a whole lot of traffic that's

1841
02:17:04,400 --> 02:17:08,400
 a lot safer than jumping on a main road to get to the park.

1842
02:17:08,400 --> 02:17:15,440
 So when we first started looking at this project and the site, we did a traffic impact analysis,

1843
02:17:15,440 --> 02:17:21,500
 we had meetings with the parks department, we looked at connecting to Duffy's Way.

1844
02:17:21,500 --> 02:17:27,040
 The issue there is that you would get cut through traffic, that people were trying to

1845
02:17:27,040 --> 02:17:32,520
 bypass Ryan Road or the intersection with Teasley and then you get cut through traffic

1846
02:17:32,520 --> 02:17:37,680
 on Duffy's Way, which makes the park road, which is a private road, it's not a public

1847
02:17:37,680 --> 02:17:44,800
 right of way, it makes the park road more congested and also potentially a safety issue.

1848
02:17:44,800 --> 02:17:50,920
 So we did, we've been working through this process for several months now, had many meetings

1849
02:17:50,920 --> 02:17:52,060
 with the city.

1850
02:17:52,060 --> 02:17:58,000
 We did explore that because Duffy's Way is private, it's maintained by the parks department,

1851
02:17:58,000 --> 02:18:02,760
 so we couldn't connect to it without it becoming a public road.

1852
02:18:02,760 --> 02:18:07,240
 It was determined by city staff that they did not want to see Duffy's Way as a public

1853
02:18:07,240 --> 02:18:13,940
 right of way, and that they felt that it would be a safety issue to the residents that are

1854
02:18:13,940 --> 02:18:16,000
 using and enjoying the park.

1855
02:18:16,000 --> 02:18:22,160
 So that's why it's pedestrian connectivity and not vehicular connectivity shown.

1856
02:18:22,160 --> 02:18:23,160
 >> Okay.

1857
02:18:23,160 --> 02:18:25,160
 >> Thank you.

1858
02:18:25,160 --> 02:18:32,000
 I do have one more card on this item, David Bouchour.

1859
02:18:32,000 --> 02:18:43,840
 >> He's got opposition marked on his card, so we'll just file that into the record.

1860
02:18:43,840 --> 02:18:46,600
 This is a public hearing.

1861
02:18:46,600 --> 02:18:50,760
 Anyone wishing to speak on this item can still do so, whether they have a card filled out

1862
02:18:50,760 --> 02:18:53,080
 in front of me or not.

1863
02:18:53,080 --> 02:18:55,400
 Anyone else wishing to speak on this item?

1864
02:18:55,400 --> 02:19:03,960
 Okay, with that, I will close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or a discussion.

1865
02:19:03,960 --> 02:19:04,960
 Commissioner Pernetto.

1866
02:19:04,960 --> 02:19:11,580
 >> Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to approve with an amendment to limit the chemical herbicides

1867
02:19:11,580 --> 02:19:14,080
 to an aquatic-based product.

1868
02:19:14,080 --> 02:19:16,120
 >> And with staff's recommendations, is that right?

1869
02:19:16,120 --> 02:19:17,960
 >> With staff's recommendations, yeah.

1870
02:19:17,960 --> 02:19:18,960
 >> Okay.

1871
02:19:18,960 --> 02:19:19,960
 Commissioner Smith?

1872
02:19:19,960 --> 02:19:20,960
 >> Second.

1873
02:19:20,960 --> 02:19:28,080
 >> We have a first and a second to approve with staff recommendations in adding that

1874
02:19:28,080 --> 02:19:29,080
 a --

1875
02:19:29,080 --> 02:19:30,080
 >> Aquatic herbicides.

1876
02:19:30,080 --> 02:19:35,040
 >> -- aquatic herbicide be used in the chemical removal of invasive species.

1877
02:19:35,040 --> 02:19:36,920
 Is there a discussion?

1878
02:19:36,920 --> 02:19:37,920
 Commissioner Sanchez?

1879
02:19:37,920 --> 02:19:44,200
 >> Yeah, I'd like to talk about the herbicide.

1880
02:19:44,200 --> 02:19:48,440
 I don't think we have enough information to say limit herbicides.

1881
02:19:48,440 --> 02:19:55,800
 You know, herbicides can be -- actually can actually do more good than going there and

1882
02:19:55,800 --> 02:19:56,800
 using --

1883
02:19:56,800 --> 02:19:59,360
 >> Commissioner Sanchez, they're not limiting the herbicides.

1884
02:19:59,360 --> 02:20:02,400
 It's -- they're requiring it be aquatic-based herbicides.

1885
02:20:02,400 --> 02:20:06,080
 >> Well, I'm just saying any kind of herbicide.

1886
02:20:06,080 --> 02:20:09,480
 When you're going to apply herbicide, you're going to apply -- if you're in a riparian

1887
02:20:09,480 --> 02:20:11,480
 area, that's what you're going to apply.

1888
02:20:11,480 --> 02:20:17,080
 You're not going to apply an upland herbicide in a buffer area.

1889
02:20:17,080 --> 02:20:22,080
 I'm just saying leave that herbicide to the people that are doing it.

1890
02:20:22,080 --> 02:20:27,680
 I don't think none of us know enough about herbicide to make any kind of statement that

1891
02:20:27,680 --> 02:20:29,680
 just use aquatic herbicide.

1892
02:20:29,680 --> 02:20:36,600
 Of course, they're going to use aquatic herbicides because that's the only thing that would be

1893
02:20:36,600 --> 02:20:43,520
 licensed to be used in a buffer.

1894
02:20:43,520 --> 02:20:44,520
 >> Commissioner Smith?

1895
02:20:44,520 --> 02:20:51,600
 >> I think just to hopefully make this discussion short, because it's in a riparian area, riparian

1896
02:20:51,600 --> 02:20:59,760
 buffer, it has to be aquatic, has to be aquatic herbicide, no matter what, Kristi, correct?

1897
02:20:59,760 --> 02:21:00,760
 So --

1898
02:21:00,760 --> 02:21:09,280
 >> In order for this application to comply with federal regulations, it would have to

1899
02:21:09,280 --> 02:21:14,480
 be aquatic in order for -- you know, otherwise they would be out of compliance with federal

1900
02:21:14,480 --> 02:21:15,480
 regulations.

1901
02:21:15,480 --> 02:21:22,000
 >> So no offense even to the amendment or to the added recommendation by Commissioner

1902
02:21:22,000 --> 02:21:27,800
 Pornetta, even that -- really that recommendation isn't really even needed because by federal

1903
02:21:27,800 --> 02:21:29,720
 law it has to be aquatic.

1904
02:21:29,720 --> 02:21:34,440
 It can be included in there for safe measure, but really the -- it's going to have to be

1905
02:21:34,440 --> 02:21:36,880
 aquatic herbicide no matter what.

1906
02:21:36,880 --> 02:21:41,760
 >> That was my question earlier to verify whether or not we had any stipulations on

1907
02:21:41,760 --> 02:21:42,760
 that.

1908
02:21:42,760 --> 02:21:46,380
 >> I apologize if I wasn't clear, but yes, that would be --

1909
02:21:46,380 --> 02:21:50,880
 >> I can retract the amendment we came before with just staff recommendations if that's

1910
02:21:50,880 --> 02:21:51,880
 more amenable.

1911
02:21:51,880 --> 02:21:52,880
 >> We're safe once, we're safe twice, right?

1912
02:21:52,880 --> 02:21:57,200
 >> Well, let's -- Commissioner Beck is on the board to speak, so let's let him speak

1913
02:21:57,200 --> 02:21:58,200
 and --

1914
02:21:58,200 --> 02:21:59,200
 >> That's okay.

1915
02:21:59,200 --> 02:22:01,800
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

1916
02:22:01,800 --> 02:22:02,800
 Just some general comments.

1917
02:22:02,800 --> 02:22:05,000
 I want to thank everybody for coming out and speaking.

1918
02:22:05,000 --> 02:22:10,920
 I'm always glad to hear you and appreciate the project that Mr. Fletcher has put together.

1919
02:22:10,920 --> 02:22:16,800
 I'm always nervous when we alter environmentally sensitive areas, but this looks like a good

1920
02:22:16,800 --> 02:22:17,800
 one.

1921
02:22:17,800 --> 02:22:22,240
 I think it's the right thing to do as opposed to hooking up to the adjoining neighborhood

1922
02:22:22,240 --> 02:22:31,160
 and the fact that he's designing this in a way that preserves a lot of upland habitat

1923
02:22:31,160 --> 02:22:34,560
 is always a delight to me.

1924
02:22:34,560 --> 02:22:41,000
 So again, thanks for coming out, and I'm definitely going to vote for this approval for it, too.

1925
02:22:41,000 --> 02:22:42,000
 Thank you.

1926
02:22:42,000 --> 02:22:43,000
 >> Okay.

1927
02:22:43,000 --> 02:22:51,760
 So Commissioner Pernetta, did you want to amend your motion?

1928
02:22:51,760 --> 02:22:58,560
 >> I will withdraw the amendment and move to approve with staff recommendations.

1929
02:22:58,560 --> 02:22:59,560
 >> Commissioner Smith?

1930
02:22:59,560 --> 02:23:00,560
 >> I'll second.

1931
02:23:00,560 --> 02:23:01,560
 >> Okay.

1932
02:23:01,560 --> 02:23:07,320
 Let's call for a vote in a second amended motion to approve with staff recommendation.

1933
02:23:07,320 --> 02:23:08,320
 Any discussion?

1934
02:23:08,320 --> 02:23:09,320
 Okay.

1935
02:23:09,320 --> 02:23:14,680
 Let's call for a vote on the board.

1936
02:23:14,680 --> 02:23:15,680
 I'm sorry.

1937
02:23:15,680 --> 02:23:16,680
 Commissioner Sanchez?

1938
02:23:16,680 --> 02:23:19,080
 >> Oh, I was just going to -- I want to -- I'm going to vote for it.

1939
02:23:19,080 --> 02:23:28,120
 I think it's a good idea, and I think the idea that it's already been -- the Fletcher

1940
02:23:28,120 --> 02:23:33,640
 stretch has already been crossed before, previously, and all the precautions are taking as far

1941
02:23:33,640 --> 02:23:39,000
 as being able to cross it again is no issue.

1942
02:23:39,000 --> 02:23:44,720
 I think basically having two exits, one on -- even though, like somebody mentioned, Ryan

1943
02:23:44,720 --> 02:23:51,320
 Road is a very busy road, and I'd like -- we get this complaint all the time, all the development

1944
02:23:51,320 --> 02:23:53,640
 that's going on on Ryan Road.

1945
02:23:53,640 --> 02:23:58,980
 We hear this time and time again how that road does not provide enough.

1946
02:23:58,980 --> 02:24:04,700
 It's not sufficient for the amount of traffic, and that's all we can say.

1947
02:24:04,700 --> 02:24:11,040
 But as far as I'm concerned about crossing, I think the developer is doing everything

1948
02:24:11,040 --> 02:24:16,880
 he can to protect that branch, and so I'm going to vote for it.

1949
02:24:16,880 --> 02:24:21,280
 >> Is there any further discussion?

1950
02:24:21,280 --> 02:24:22,280
 Okay.

1951
02:24:22,280 --> 02:24:31,280
 We will call for a vote on the board.

1952
02:24:31,280 --> 02:24:33,920
 Motion carries 6-0.

1953
02:24:33,920 --> 02:24:38,480
 Thank you, everyone, for coming out.

1954
02:24:38,480 --> 02:24:43,900
 That will move us to our next agenda item.

1955
02:24:43,900 --> 02:24:52,840
 I will open the public hearing for DCA190001 and invite Ron up to present.

1956
02:24:52,840 --> 02:24:53,840
 >> Thank you, Madam Chair.

1957
02:24:53,840 --> 02:25:14,600
 I'm going to give you a few minutes to pull up the presentation.

1958
02:25:14,600 --> 02:25:15,600
 >> Good evening.

1959
02:25:15,600 --> 02:25:16,600
 I'm Chair, members of the commission.

1960
02:25:16,600 --> 02:25:24,320
 This item for your consideration is a proposed code amendment to address the question regarding

1961
02:25:24,320 --> 02:25:32,580
 multifamily dwellings, collegiate housing, and the possible use of dormitory as a use.

1962
02:25:32,580 --> 02:25:39,580
 For the presentation, for our agenda, is really to go over the purpose of the code amendment,

1963
02:25:39,580 --> 02:25:44,780
 a little bit of background of how we got here, present a little bit of the research and survey

1964
02:25:44,780 --> 02:25:49,460
 that the city has done, and discuss a couple things related to development standards and

1965
02:25:49,460 --> 02:25:55,780
 other consideration as you guys considered this code amendment, and ultimately a recommendation

1966
02:25:55,780 --> 02:26:00,860
 is what staff is seeking to bring forward to city council.

1967
02:26:00,860 --> 02:26:12,160
 So as we discuss at work session, the question is, is this particular use a different use

1968
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:19,180
 than multifamily, or is it a separate use, it can be called collegiate housing or the

1969
02:26:19,180 --> 02:26:20,940
 word dormitory.

1970
02:26:20,940 --> 02:26:26,460
 The subject item that we're talking about, development type, is where the development

1971
02:26:26,460 --> 02:26:31,460
 is rented by the bedroom.

1972
02:26:31,460 --> 02:26:37,400
 We also, if we decide that it is a separate use, we would like to get Payne's recommendation

1973
02:26:37,400 --> 02:26:43,100
 on where they should be permitted and what approval type would be in place for those

1974
02:26:43,100 --> 02:26:45,800
 locations.

1975
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:52,220
 So staff has drafted a definition using an existing use that's in the development code

1976
02:26:52,220 --> 02:26:58,820
 called dormitory, and the definition proposed is stated as follows, a structure with three

1977
02:26:58,820 --> 02:27:05,780
 or more dwelling units in which individual bedrooms are individually rented for periods

1978
02:27:05,780 --> 02:27:12,700
 in excess of 30 days in which each bedroom lacks exclusive use of a full kitchen.

1979
02:27:12,700 --> 02:27:19,580
 And the box to the right identifies some of the potential uses that could fall on this,

1980
02:27:19,580 --> 02:27:23,100
 but we've clarified that by stating facts.

1981
02:27:23,100 --> 02:27:29,540
 One, it's not considered multifamily because multifamily is rented by the unit, while dormitory

1982
02:27:29,540 --> 02:27:33,380
 or collegiate housing is rented by the bedrooms.

1983
02:27:33,380 --> 02:27:38,840
 The hotel/motel is short-term rentals, they're typically rented for less than 30 days, while

1984
02:27:38,840 --> 02:27:44,540
 this definition expresses that it is rented for more than 30 days.

1985
02:27:44,540 --> 02:27:49,940
 Elderly housing, group homes, and those types of developments would not qualify under this

1986
02:27:49,940 --> 02:27:54,220
 definition because those require special state licenses.

1987
02:27:54,220 --> 02:28:01,820
 A boarding or rooming house would not be considered for this definition, primarily because of

1988
02:28:01,820 --> 02:28:08,500
 it requires a owner of that dwelling unit to permanently reside in that house, and part

1989
02:28:08,500 --> 02:28:14,580
 of this code amendment is to redefine or amend the definition of boarding and rooming house

1990
02:28:14,580 --> 02:28:17,420
 to add that clarification.

1991
02:28:17,420 --> 02:28:25,180
 And lastly, a full kitchen, just for discussion purposes, it contains plumbing and electrical

1992
02:28:25,180 --> 02:28:33,780
 work for typical kitchen appliances, dishwashers, refrigerators, stoves, and the like.

1993
02:28:33,780 --> 02:28:39,140
 By way of background and how we got here, this started back as far as 2016, there was

1994
02:28:39,140 --> 02:28:45,540
 a work session by council, during council, and at that time the council that heard this

1995
02:28:45,540 --> 02:28:52,300
 item directed staff not to regulate this as a separate use.

1996
02:28:52,300 --> 02:28:59,340
 During that work session, staff brought forward a code amendment to require SUPs for multi-family

1997
02:28:59,340 --> 02:29:01,860
 and specific zoning districts.

1998
02:29:01,860 --> 02:29:07,900
 At that work session, council directed staff to move forward with that specific use permit.

1999
02:29:07,900 --> 02:29:12,980
 We then brought that forward to the Planning Zoning Commission, commission recommended

2000
02:29:12,980 --> 02:29:17,720
 denial, I believe it was 5-1 or 4-1.

2001
02:29:17,720 --> 02:29:24,900
 During that, city council also heard that amendment, and they also denied it after their

2002
02:29:24,900 --> 02:29:27,540
 consideration.

2003
02:29:27,540 --> 02:29:35,740
 Following that series of meetings, there was request by council at a meeting for more information

2004
02:29:35,740 --> 02:29:37,500
 on multi-family and collegiate housing.

2005
02:29:37,500 --> 02:29:43,820
 They had a little discussion during that request, and again, at that meeting, there was direction

2006
02:29:43,820 --> 02:29:51,660
 from that council that it is not a separate use and it should just continue as multi-family.

2007
02:29:51,660 --> 02:29:56,980
 A series of other amendments came forward to address the concerns and issues raised

2008
02:29:56,980 --> 02:30:03,380
 by the neighborhoods that are affected or were affected by these types of developments.

2009
02:30:03,380 --> 02:30:10,060
 We worked on a parking standard amendment code requirement, and through a number of

2010
02:30:10,060 --> 02:30:14,620
 work sessions and public hearing, including the Planning Zoning Commission, that parking

2011
02:30:14,620 --> 02:30:18,740
 standard was approved in March of 2018.

2012
02:30:18,740 --> 02:30:23,860
 Following that, later that year, there was another request by council for more information

2013
02:30:23,860 --> 02:30:26,900
 on multi-family and collegiate housing.

2014
02:30:26,900 --> 02:30:31,340
 That really then brought up more discussion in how we should address this particular item.

2015
02:30:31,340 --> 02:30:38,380
 I wanted to note that also as part of the Development Code Review Committee, who's directed

2016
02:30:38,380 --> 02:30:44,180
 to work on the Development Code update, also has been looking at this issue through ongoing

2017
02:30:44,180 --> 02:30:48,620
 discussions and research from our consultants.

2018
02:30:48,620 --> 02:30:57,020
 They ultimately decided to have the full council provide direction, and they left it at that.

2019
02:30:57,020 --> 02:31:06,220
 So we did bring it to the full council back in December, and again, we discussed it further.

2020
02:31:06,220 --> 02:31:09,140
 This is an incorrect date.

2021
02:31:09,140 --> 02:31:14,980
 We did follow that work session with another work session with city council, and at that

2022
02:31:14,980 --> 02:31:21,340
 particular city council work session, they did direct staff to work on the definition,

2023
02:31:21,340 --> 02:31:28,780
 which we did, and also to allow the dormitory use as a use for this particular development

2024
02:31:28,780 --> 02:31:34,440
 type, and allow it only with a specific use permit, and I'll share with you what those

2025
02:31:34,440 --> 02:31:40,160
 zoning districts are in a few slides further.

2026
02:31:40,160 --> 02:31:45,860
 I wanted to share with you some of the presentation that we did provide the city council.

2027
02:31:45,860 --> 02:31:50,820
 We did look at what is existing as far as these types of development, and when I say

2028
02:31:50,820 --> 02:31:57,980
 these types of development, the developments that are specifically marketed for rent by

2029
02:31:57,980 --> 02:31:59,580
 the bedroom.

2030
02:31:59,580 --> 02:32:05,460
 We identified thirty-three developments in the city existing, I'm sorry, twenty-six existing,

2031
02:32:05,460 --> 02:32:09,740
 and seven that are in either proposed or in under construction.

2032
02:32:09,740 --> 02:32:15,380
 As you can see on this map, they are located primarily surrounding the University of North

2033
02:32:15,380 --> 02:32:16,380
 Texas.

2034
02:32:16,380 --> 02:32:22,760
 There's a few around T.W., and then a majority of the others are south of downtown.

2035
02:32:22,760 --> 02:32:28,540
 We know that these areas that are further from the universities are served by DCTA,

2036
02:32:28,540 --> 02:32:35,100
 and they are also increasing in number.

2037
02:32:35,100 --> 02:32:40,980
 The increase in number is associated with the increase in enrollment in our universities.

2038
02:32:40,980 --> 02:32:47,020
 We anticipate that by 2030, approximately seven or eight thousand more students are

2039
02:32:47,020 --> 02:32:50,460
 going to be enrolled in the universities.

2040
02:32:50,460 --> 02:32:59,340
 That means 8,000 more students, 8,000 more needs of housing, and 8,000 more traffic and

2041
02:32:59,340 --> 02:33:05,660
 other related items that come with these type of developments.

2042
02:33:05,660 --> 02:33:08,260
 So how do we address this?

2043
02:33:08,260 --> 02:33:15,340
 We looked at the zoning districts where these thirty-three developments are either existing

2044
02:33:15,340 --> 02:33:24,820
 or will be placed, and we found that in the DR2 zoning district, fourteen of them exist

2045
02:33:24,820 --> 02:33:35,160
 or are proposed, and DCG came in second, and the rest have one of these types of developments.

2046
02:33:35,160 --> 02:33:42,100
 We also looked at the composite or how they're put together, and the numbers that came out

2047
02:33:42,100 --> 02:33:51,660
 of that research is that approximately 6,153 units are rented by the bedroom.

2048
02:33:51,660 --> 02:34:01,460
 That equates to approximately 18,000 bedrooms total, if you were to add all of the bedrooms.

2049
02:34:01,460 --> 02:34:10,540
 Those that are currently rented by the bedrooms, approximately 2,992 units were converted.

2050
02:34:10,540 --> 02:34:19,580
 They were once multifamily, by the units, they converted into rented by the bedrooms.

2051
02:34:19,580 --> 02:34:24,620
 That represents about 34 percent of that 6,153.

2052
02:34:24,620 --> 02:34:36,420
 I also want to note that the city, as of December, has approximately 21,899 multifamily units.

2053
02:34:36,420 --> 02:34:44,300
 The 6,153, the rented by the bedrooms, represent 28 percent of that.

2054
02:34:44,300 --> 02:34:51,740
 So about a third of our multifamily are rented by the bedrooms.

2055
02:34:51,740 --> 02:34:58,180
 We also researched other cities, approximately 29 cities in Denton, I'm sorry, in Texas.

2056
02:34:58,180 --> 02:35:00,380
 Seventeen responded.

2057
02:35:00,380 --> 02:35:03,260
 They all address this separately and differently.

2058
02:35:03,260 --> 02:35:08,220
 The majority of them don't do anything.

2059
02:35:08,220 --> 02:35:10,300
 Some of them have overlay districts.

2060
02:35:10,300 --> 02:35:16,220
 Some of them have definitions and listed as a separate use.

2061
02:35:16,220 --> 02:35:22,500
 Those three specifically are San Marcos, who calls these type of developments purpose built

2062
02:35:22,500 --> 02:35:30,340
 student housing, College Station for a particular area calls them Northgate high density dwelling,

2063
02:35:30,340 --> 02:35:36,340
 and then San Antonio has a use called school dormitory or housing off campus.

2064
02:35:36,340 --> 02:35:42,460
 That's the three that we were able to find that are examples of addressing this as a

2065
02:35:42,460 --> 02:35:45,580
 separate use.

2066
02:35:45,580 --> 02:35:53,020
 Back to the purpose and really the reason why we're here is for your consideration

2067
02:35:53,020 --> 02:35:58,820
 and your recommendation on this particular development type, again, units that are rented

2068
02:35:58,820 --> 02:36:00,700
 by the bedrooms.

2069
02:36:00,700 --> 02:36:02,740
 Is it a separate use?

2070
02:36:02,740 --> 02:36:10,660
 If so, staff is recommending that we call it dormitory and have the definition revised

2071
02:36:10,660 --> 02:36:17,400
 to be revised and amended to read as shown on this screen.

2072
02:36:17,400 --> 02:36:22,860
 If that is the direction or the recommendation from the Planning Zoning Commission, we also

2073
02:36:22,860 --> 02:36:26,180
 would like to talk about the location.

2074
02:36:26,180 --> 02:36:31,580
 Before we do that, I just want to share with you dormitory is currently, again, in the

2075
02:36:31,580 --> 02:36:32,580
 development code.

2076
02:36:32,580 --> 02:36:43,460
 It is permitted in the following zoning districts, three with an SUP and three permitted by right.

2077
02:36:43,460 --> 02:36:50,220
 Staff is recommending that along with the definitions that will be amended, that the

2078
02:36:50,220 --> 02:36:57,060
 land use or the allowed uses be amended as well to allow dormitories by right in the

2079
02:36:57,060 --> 02:37:07,940
 DR2, SUP in the NRMU12, NRMU, and DR1, and then with a limitation of L39 in the DCN and

2080
02:37:07,940 --> 02:37:08,940
 DCG.

2081
02:37:08,940 --> 02:37:16,860
 That limitation is if a dormitory is proposed to be over 45 feet, that we require a specific

2082
02:37:16,860 --> 02:37:19,060
 use permit.

2083
02:37:19,060 --> 02:37:25,620
 As I mentioned earlier, the Council did discuss this item and directed staff that they also

2084
02:37:25,620 --> 02:37:31,920
 would like to see the definition amendment and also to amend the allowed uses table as

2085
02:37:31,920 --> 02:37:43,140
 you see here and allow dormitories as shown here with SUP throughout the zoning districts.

2086
02:37:43,140 --> 02:37:48,300
 Looking forward to the development code update, we want to make sure that we are consistent.

2087
02:37:48,300 --> 02:37:54,780
 Again, if whatever the decision is by the City Council, we will make sure that the future

2088
02:37:54,780 --> 02:37:59,100
 code update reflects that change so we're not back here discussing this.

2089
02:37:59,100 --> 02:38:07,420
 Hopefully we do get a decision by Council along with your recommendation and when that

2090
02:38:07,420 --> 02:38:13,540
 is, we will make sure that the code update reflects that amendment.

2091
02:38:13,540 --> 02:38:16,020
 I won't spend too much time on these next few slides.

2092
02:38:16,020 --> 02:38:22,820
 These are just other considerations for the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider.

2093
02:38:22,820 --> 02:38:29,380
 As I mentioned earlier, the Council or the City recently adopted back in March of 2018

2094
02:38:29,380 --> 02:38:36,220
 parking standards that required parking one per bedroom for multifamily and added the

2095
02:38:36,220 --> 02:38:38,900
 visitor parking requirement.

2096
02:38:38,900 --> 02:38:43,980
 Traffic impact analysis will always be required as part of a site plan review process if it

2097
02:38:43,980 --> 02:38:49,140
 triggers a traffic impact analysis and we're constantly looking at how we can do better

2098
02:38:49,140 --> 02:38:53,500
 on neighborhood compatibility either through setbacks and buffers.

2099
02:38:53,500 --> 02:38:56,620
 Special purpose overlay districts is another tool we can use.

2100
02:38:56,620 --> 02:39:02,180
 Of course, there's a specific use permit as you know where if there is one proposed, we

2101
02:39:02,180 --> 02:39:04,900
 have that opportunity to discuss further.

2102
02:39:04,900 --> 02:39:11,460
 And then our neighborhood meetings, you saw that with this recent one, they had two and

2103
02:39:11,460 --> 02:39:18,020
 it was evident from the property owners that had that petition, it was in favor so that

2104
02:39:18,020 --> 02:39:19,060
 seems to work as well.

2105
02:39:19,060 --> 02:39:27,140
 So there's room to work on making sure that we have neighborhood compatibility as we work

2106
02:39:27,140 --> 02:39:32,220
 through these decisions.

2107
02:39:32,220 --> 02:39:37,700
 One of the things that we want to keep in mind as well is the enforcement of these types

2108
02:39:37,700 --> 02:39:39,020
 of development.

2109
02:39:39,020 --> 02:39:46,740
 As you know, there's the opportunity to convert a multifamily into a rented by the bedroom,

2110
02:39:46,740 --> 02:39:53,780
 dormitory, collegiate housing, whatever we call it, after the fact and your consideration

2111
02:39:53,780 --> 02:39:56,260
 is that that is a possibility.

2112
02:39:56,260 --> 02:40:00,900
 So how do we make sure that we address that moving forward?

2113
02:40:00,900 --> 02:40:07,660
 The other consideration is that this definition does not include single family, duplex or

2114
02:40:07,660 --> 02:40:13,340
 townhomes, those that rent by the bedroom in these types of development would not be

2115
02:40:13,340 --> 02:40:15,140
 subject to the SUP.

2116
02:40:15,140 --> 02:40:17,020
 This is a different discussion.

2117
02:40:17,020 --> 02:40:19,900
 This is something that we would bring back at a later time.

2118
02:40:19,900 --> 02:40:25,180
 What we're trying to address is the larger developments, the more than three units per

2119
02:40:25,180 --> 02:40:26,620
 acre.

2120
02:40:26,620 --> 02:40:30,740
 That's what's being proposed tonight.

2121
02:40:30,740 --> 02:40:38,180
 And again, this is my last slide, just to restate staff's recommendation that we amend

2122
02:40:38,180 --> 02:40:47,860
 the definition of dormitory and allow it by SUP as shown here, permitted as well as permitted

2123
02:40:47,860 --> 02:40:49,780
 with limitation.

2124
02:40:49,780 --> 02:40:55,420
 We would also seek your recommendation on the definition of boarding and rooming house.

2125
02:40:55,420 --> 02:41:01,100
 As I mentioned earlier, we like to add the clarification that the owner of the dwelling

2126
02:41:01,100 --> 02:41:04,900
 reside permanently at that location.

2127
02:41:04,900 --> 02:41:06,820
 That concludes my presentation.

2128
02:41:06,820 --> 02:41:09,580
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

2129
02:41:09,580 --> 02:41:10,580
 Thank you, Ron.

2130
02:41:10,580 --> 02:41:11,580
 We have several.

2131
02:41:11,580 --> 02:41:12,580
 Commissioner Brunetto.

2132
02:41:12,580 --> 02:41:14,700
 Yeah, I've got a few.

2133
02:41:14,700 --> 02:41:20,020
 So right now, they're currently counted as just a multifamily unit, right?

2134
02:41:20,020 --> 02:41:21,420
 That's how they are classified, yes.

2135
02:41:21,420 --> 02:41:28,340
 So a third of our multifamily units are dormitory, SRO.

2136
02:41:28,340 --> 02:41:35,380
 And out of that, a third of those were converted, they were previously rented as a unit, not

2137
02:41:35,380 --> 02:41:36,820
 by the room, right?

2138
02:41:36,820 --> 02:41:37,820
 Correct.

2139
02:41:37,820 --> 02:41:49,260
 They started out as regular multifamily and of the 6,153 that we know of were multifamily

2140
02:41:49,260 --> 02:41:52,820
 and converted to rented by the bedroom.

2141
02:41:52,820 --> 02:41:53,820
 Excellent.

2142
02:41:53,820 --> 02:42:01,380
 So with that in mind, I guess my question is, is there a reason that we are limiting

2143
02:42:01,380 --> 02:42:05,140
 this SUP to three or more dwelling units?

2144
02:42:05,140 --> 02:42:09,380
 Because one of the things that we have seen around campus is things that were previously

2145
02:42:09,380 --> 02:42:14,860
 two bedrooms are now rented in an SRO fashion.

2146
02:42:14,860 --> 02:42:20,820
 You know, is there a reason we do that instead of just going from like more than one to two?

2147
02:42:20,820 --> 02:42:25,700
 Any type of unit where they can break out that lease agreement would be qualifying as

2148
02:42:25,700 --> 02:42:26,700
 this.

2149
02:42:26,700 --> 02:42:32,640
 So just to clarify your question, are you referring to a single family or a duplex that

2150
02:42:32,640 --> 02:42:35,900
 is rented by the bedroom, is that what you're referring to?

2151
02:42:35,900 --> 02:42:40,180
 Yeah, well, by the definition of dormitory in your slide, you say a structure with three

2152
02:42:40,180 --> 02:42:46,380
 or more dwelling units in which the individual - I'm sorry, you know what, I guess we're

2153
02:42:46,380 --> 02:42:48,860
 talking about the units and I'm sorry, not the bedrooms.

2154
02:42:48,860 --> 02:42:52,780
 So it's not limited to the bedroom, it is anything that's broken out.

2155
02:42:52,780 --> 02:42:53,780
 Correct.

2156
02:42:53,780 --> 02:42:56,900
 Okay, I'm sorry, I just realized I was off reading it.

2157
02:42:56,900 --> 02:43:05,660
 So the next thing I had was the height of 45 feet, is that an either/or or are we saying

2158
02:43:05,660 --> 02:43:13,340
 that if there's some - would they require an additional approval to be not just a dormitory

2159
02:43:13,340 --> 02:43:16,140
 but a dormitory that's over 45 feet?

2160
02:43:16,140 --> 02:43:23,260
 It's a proposed dormitory over 45 feet would require a specific use per - and that's staff's

2161
02:43:23,260 --> 02:43:24,260
 recommendation.

2162
02:43:24,260 --> 02:43:25,260
 Okay.

2163
02:43:25,260 --> 02:43:33,340
 And as I presented, Council doesn't want to see that, but again, we're here to hear

2164
02:43:33,340 --> 02:43:38,860
 what the Commission wants to see and we can bring that forward to City Council.

2165
02:43:38,860 --> 02:43:39,860
 Okay.

2166
02:43:39,860 --> 02:43:46,180
 So as that's written right now, what we're saying is that if it is over 45 feet, basically

2167
02:43:46,180 --> 02:43:52,260
 in addition to this rental structure, it would have to be over 45 feet in addition.

2168
02:43:52,260 --> 02:43:58,860
 So we could recommend that the 45 feet is not, you know, a stipulation that requires

2169
02:43:58,860 --> 02:44:03,780
 us, it could just be anything that's rented by the bedroom.

2170
02:44:03,780 --> 02:44:06,900
 I'm sorry, I didn't just repeat that all the time.

2171
02:44:06,900 --> 02:44:13,540
 So as I look at this right now, per this, it would have to be an SRO type rental.

2172
02:44:13,540 --> 02:44:14,540
 Correct.

2173
02:44:14,540 --> 02:44:15,540
 Meet that definition.

2174
02:44:15,540 --> 02:44:16,540
 And be over 45.

2175
02:44:16,540 --> 02:44:17,540
 Correct.

2176
02:44:17,540 --> 02:44:21,820
 And it would be only applied to the DCN and the DCG.

2177
02:44:21,820 --> 02:44:23,820
 That's the limitation L39.

2178
02:44:23,820 --> 02:44:30,140
 If you're proposing a dormitory by definition, you meet that definition within the DCN or

2179
02:44:30,140 --> 02:44:31,140
 DCG.

2180
02:44:31,140 --> 02:44:39,220
 Staff's recommending that we adopt a code that requires the specific use permit for

2181
02:44:39,220 --> 02:44:40,220
 those developments.

2182
02:44:40,220 --> 02:44:41,220
 Okay.

2183
02:44:41,220 --> 02:44:47,900
 And I guess my last question for now is, we're not proposing any kind of grandfathering in

2184
02:44:47,900 --> 02:44:49,460
 right now, are we?

2185
02:44:49,460 --> 02:44:50,460
 So if...

2186
02:44:50,460 --> 02:44:53,500
 If they're existing, they're existing.

2187
02:44:53,500 --> 02:44:56,100
 We can't do anything about that.

2188
02:44:56,100 --> 02:44:58,220
 We're talking about future developments.

2189
02:44:58,220 --> 02:44:59,220
 Okay.

2190
02:44:59,220 --> 02:45:00,220
 So...

2191
02:45:00,220 --> 02:45:06,580
 And when we say existing, I mean, in terms of an existing building that decides to start

2192
02:45:06,580 --> 02:45:10,420
 renting by the, you know, renting its units by the room.

2193
02:45:10,420 --> 02:45:13,180
 If and when we, and that's the difficult part, right?

2194
02:45:13,180 --> 02:45:14,180
 Right.

2195
02:45:14,180 --> 02:45:21,900
 If and when we adopt this, and at that date moving forward, if we learn that a development

2196
02:45:21,900 --> 02:45:30,460
 was a multi-family rented by the unit, converted to a rented by the bedroom, we would actually

2197
02:45:30,460 --> 02:45:36,820
 take action in that regard because they were not existing as a dormitory.

2198
02:45:36,820 --> 02:45:38,420
 So they don't have that qualification.

2199
02:45:38,420 --> 02:45:39,420
 Okay.

2200
02:45:39,420 --> 02:45:44,180
 So it wouldn't be the age of the building or when the building was built, it would be

2201
02:45:44,180 --> 02:45:46,260
 when they actually moved to that particular practice?

2202
02:45:46,260 --> 02:45:47,260
 That type of, right.

2203
02:45:47,260 --> 02:45:48,260
 That type of rental.

2204
02:45:48,260 --> 02:45:49,260
 Okay.

2205
02:45:49,260 --> 02:45:50,260
 All right.

2206
02:45:50,260 --> 02:45:51,260
 That's all I have for now.

2207
02:45:51,260 --> 02:45:52,260
 Commissioner Smith.

2208
02:45:52,260 --> 02:45:53,260
 Thank you, Chair.

2209
02:45:53,260 --> 02:45:56,740
 Ron, just a couple of things on the definition.

2210
02:45:56,740 --> 02:45:59,860
 Just help me define some of the words that are in there.

2211
02:45:59,860 --> 02:46:05,940
 Dwelling unit, is that specifically referring to it having to be a self-sustainable, has

2212
02:46:05,940 --> 02:46:10,900
 its own bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, that defines a quote unquote dwelling unit there?

2213
02:46:10,900 --> 02:46:11,900
 Correct.

2214
02:46:11,900 --> 02:46:12,900
 Okay.

2215
02:46:12,900 --> 02:46:13,900
 Understood.

2216
02:46:13,900 --> 02:46:16,060
 Whenever we are looking at this, I know we said we're going to address town homes and

2217
02:46:16,060 --> 02:46:18,460
 single family later.

2218
02:46:18,460 --> 02:46:25,140
 In the event that there's a fourplex or a three-level town home that then can be rented

2219
02:46:25,140 --> 02:46:29,020
 out by the, you know, the flats can be rented out by the rooms there, do you see that there

2220
02:46:29,020 --> 02:46:33,620
 might be a gray area there where there might be a couple properties that could fall that

2221
02:46:33,620 --> 02:46:38,060
 are not multifamily, but they're also not single family?

2222
02:46:38,060 --> 02:46:39,060
 Yeah.

2223
02:46:39,060 --> 02:46:44,140
 Specifically, the duplexes are probably going to be the ones that are going to cause more

2224
02:46:44,140 --> 02:46:45,500
 than anything else.

2225
02:46:45,500 --> 02:46:50,580
 Because we know the single family, you know, they're obviously one per lot.

2226
02:46:50,580 --> 02:46:51,580
 Town homes, one per lot.

2227
02:46:51,580 --> 02:46:54,740
 The duplexes, because you're adding two units, it makes it a little bit more.

2228
02:46:54,740 --> 02:46:57,940
 And the three and fourplexes, they currently right now in the code fall into a multifamily?

2229
02:46:57,940 --> 02:46:58,940
 Multifamily, correct.

2230
02:46:58,940 --> 02:46:59,940
 Okay.

2231
02:46:59,940 --> 02:47:00,940
 So duplex is the word.

2232
02:47:00,940 --> 02:47:01,940
 Duplex is where the line is drawn.

2233
02:47:01,940 --> 02:47:02,940
 Correct.

2234
02:47:02,940 --> 02:47:03,940
 That's what I needed to know.

2235
02:47:03,940 --> 02:47:04,940
 So, okay.

2236
02:47:04,940 --> 02:47:12,380
 Why did, I guess two things on your recommendation and on City Council's recommendation.

2237
02:47:12,380 --> 02:47:16,180
 Why did council suggest an SUP across the board?

2238
02:47:16,180 --> 02:47:25,500
 I think it's just more of an opportunity to address any concerns from the community is

2239
02:47:25,500 --> 02:47:27,220
 what I got out of it.

2240
02:47:27,220 --> 02:47:30,860
 So that's primarily it.

2241
02:47:30,860 --> 02:47:35,180
 Our proposal is that we know that a lot of the developments that we've seen recently,

2242
02:47:35,180 --> 02:47:37,420
 of course, parking is a big deal.

2243
02:47:37,420 --> 02:47:39,420
 We have a new parking requirement.

2244
02:47:39,420 --> 02:47:43,420
 You know, traffic, we have TIAs that address that.

2245
02:47:43,420 --> 02:47:46,580
 You know, adjacency, we have buffers and screening.

2246
02:47:46,580 --> 02:47:51,540
 But when it comes to height, you know, maybe there's things that we can use or can do to

2247
02:47:51,540 --> 02:47:55,260
 eliminate or not eliminate, but limit the impact.

2248
02:47:55,260 --> 02:47:58,660
 And so that's why we propose a specific use permit over 45 feet.

2249
02:47:58,660 --> 02:48:04,580
 And the SUP could kick in a TIA, that's correct, you're, that's, if there's an SUP required

2250
02:48:04,580 --> 02:48:09,100
 in that project, then underneath the definition of the SUP could kick in the need to be able

2251
02:48:09,100 --> 02:48:11,940
 to assess parking and traffic impact analysis.

2252
02:48:11,940 --> 02:48:12,940
 Right.

2253
02:48:12,940 --> 02:48:17,420
 I mean, even without an SUP, you know, analysis would be required again through the site plan

2254
02:48:17,420 --> 02:48:18,420
 process.

2255
02:48:18,420 --> 02:48:19,420
 Got it.

2256
02:48:19,420 --> 02:48:20,420
 Okay.

2257
02:48:20,420 --> 02:48:27,820
 The L39, that's still, that's, it's not an SUP, it's just, it's an SUP as long as it's

2258
02:48:27,820 --> 02:48:28,820
 over 45.

2259
02:48:28,820 --> 02:48:29,820
 Correct.

2260
02:48:29,820 --> 02:48:30,820
 If you're below, you're 44.

2261
02:48:30,820 --> 02:48:31,820
 You're good to go.

2262
02:48:31,820 --> 02:48:32,820
 You're good to go.

2263
02:48:32,820 --> 02:48:37,700
 Why, so why, why is the staff recommendation, the height, why is the height requirement

2264
02:48:37,700 --> 02:48:38,700
 in there?

2265
02:48:38,700 --> 02:48:39,700
 Better question.

2266
02:48:39,700 --> 02:48:44,540
 Why did you guys not just go right to SUP for everybody, for all, for all, for all zoning

2267
02:48:44,540 --> 02:48:45,540
 districts?

2268
02:48:45,540 --> 02:48:47,500
 Why didn't, why didn't you guys, the staff recommend that?

2269
02:48:47,500 --> 02:48:48,500
 I think, I think.

2270
02:48:48,500 --> 02:48:49,500
 Knowing your thought process.

2271
02:48:49,500 --> 02:48:50,500
 Right.

2272
02:48:50,500 --> 02:48:56,180
 I think it's, back to what I said earlier, is that, you know, we have development standards

2273
02:48:56,180 --> 02:49:02,460
 already in place, forgets parking and traffic, as well as buffering and screening.

2274
02:49:02,460 --> 02:49:07,300
 We felt that when it comes to height, there's, there's a possibility of ways to address that

2275
02:49:07,300 --> 02:49:16,100
 through an SUP process, so, so 45 feet is the, the max height from DR2 down this way,

2276
02:49:16,100 --> 02:49:17,420
 they can't go over 45 feet.

2277
02:49:17,420 --> 02:49:18,420
 Yeah.

2278
02:49:18,420 --> 02:49:19,780
 It's just when you get to DCN and DCG.

2279
02:49:19,780 --> 02:49:24,340
 So it was, it was kind of more of the staff was trying to be as, as least restrictive

2280
02:49:24,340 --> 02:49:27,940
 as possible, essentially, the thing that, look, there's, there's already, there's already

2281
02:49:27,940 --> 02:49:32,380
 imposed restrictions on, within these zoning districts already, adding an SUP on top of

2282
02:49:32,380 --> 02:49:35,460
 that would be somewhat overkill in a way.

2283
02:49:35,460 --> 02:49:36,460
 Right.

2284
02:49:36,460 --> 02:49:40,420
 There's already restrictions in place that are, that are kind of helping mitigate some

2285
02:49:40,420 --> 02:49:41,980
 of the issues that we're seeing.

2286
02:49:41,980 --> 02:49:45,820
 And we see them being developed in the DCN and DCG.

2287
02:49:45,820 --> 02:49:46,820
 Gotcha.

2288
02:49:46,820 --> 02:49:50,300
 And so, again, it's just that opportunity, like you said, to, to address any concerns

2289
02:49:50,300 --> 02:49:51,300
 that the city has.

2290
02:49:51,300 --> 02:49:52,300
 Okay.

2291
02:49:52,300 --> 02:49:55,580
 So that, that, so with the City Council, that means anybody who has the SRO form whatsoever,

2292
02:49:55,580 --> 02:50:02,340
 if it's, it's a single, it's a single story, but it's a, you know, a 10, 10 unit single

2293
02:50:02,340 --> 02:50:06,780
 story, it's a really weird looking building, don't, don't, don't ask me why it's constructed

2294
02:50:06,780 --> 02:50:07,780
 that way.

2295
02:50:07,780 --> 02:50:08,780
 But, but it doesn't matter.

2296
02:50:08,780 --> 02:50:09,780
 It's, it's boom, SCP.

2297
02:50:09,780 --> 02:50:10,780
 Correct.

2298
02:50:10,780 --> 02:50:12,980
 Doesn't matter because it's, it's tied directly to that leasing model there.

2299
02:50:12,980 --> 02:50:16,740
 That, that is the, the discussion that they had at the work session.

2300
02:50:16,740 --> 02:50:17,740
 Okay.

2301
02:50:17,740 --> 02:50:22,620
 We, and at that, that work session, they were, they directed staff to, to bring this forward

2302
02:50:22,620 --> 02:50:25,300
 and we obviously want to hear from you all as well.

2303
02:50:25,300 --> 02:50:26,300
 Okay.

2304
02:50:26,300 --> 02:50:28,900
 Ron, I think Richard wanted to add just a little bit to the, to your question.

2305
02:50:28,900 --> 02:50:30,460
 Yeah, then I have a couple more things to say.

2306
02:50:30,460 --> 02:50:35,100
 I was just going to add a little bit more on, on that, on that 45 foot.

2307
02:50:35,100 --> 02:50:40,460
 A lot of, a lot of the, as part of the deliberations and just discussion with council and other

2308
02:50:40,460 --> 02:50:45,980
 members of the public, the big concern was compatibility and adjacency with single family.

2309
02:50:45,980 --> 02:50:50,100
 And really that max height in, I think in all of our single family districts is 45 feet.

2310
02:50:50,100 --> 02:50:54,620
 And so when looking at it in, in that context, as well as factoring in the parking that would

2311
02:50:54,620 --> 02:50:58,840
 be required and everything else, you're really not going to get that high level of intensity

2312
02:50:58,840 --> 02:51:01,220
 at that, at that, at that height.

2313
02:51:01,220 --> 02:51:04,820
 And that, that's part of the, part of the, the reason for that.

2314
02:51:04,820 --> 02:51:08,460
 So within that mind, could you go through those zoning districts real quick and just

2315
02:51:08,460 --> 02:51:12,500
 say what they are exactly and what the typical use is there just so it kind of, I can't,

2316
02:51:12,500 --> 02:51:15,500
 I don't have my, I don't, I should probably be about to pull that out.

2317
02:51:15,500 --> 02:51:16,500
 Sure.

2318
02:51:16,500 --> 02:51:23,140
 Well, NRMU is 12 units per acre, primarily in between your neighborhood residential to

2319
02:51:23,140 --> 02:51:24,180
 your commercial uses.

2320
02:51:24,180 --> 02:51:29,560
 So it's kind of like the in between NRMU is a little bit more intense with more commercial

2321
02:51:29,560 --> 02:51:33,980
 type uses, DR1, downtown residential one.

2322
02:51:33,980 --> 02:51:39,980
 So it doesn't have a, I don't know exactly things, eight units per acre, DR2 is, I want

2323
02:51:39,980 --> 02:51:46,420
 to say 30 and it increases from there, DCG is 150 units per acre.

2324
02:51:46,420 --> 02:51:52,580
 So you can see an increase in the density with the DR1, DR2, DCN, DCG.

2325
02:51:52,580 --> 02:51:58,900
 As you get in, go to that direction, the amount of commercial uses increases as well.

2326
02:51:58,900 --> 02:52:05,140
 So, so that, that's primarily what you see and when you look at the map, the zoning map,

2327
02:52:05,140 --> 02:52:09,620
 those are what you see these types of developments are located.

2328
02:52:09,620 --> 02:52:10,620
 Or in DCG.

2329
02:52:10,620 --> 02:52:11,620
 DCG, right.

2330
02:52:11,620 --> 02:52:17,180
 DCG, DR2 is a lighter green, DCN is, is one of the, a little bit less, they're not as

2331
02:52:17,180 --> 02:52:23,340
 many and then the NRMU are the red and then the NRMU-12 is the red with the hatches.

2332
02:52:23,340 --> 02:52:28,820
 So there are, developers are already primarily focusing on DCG already for the, for development

2333
02:52:28,820 --> 02:52:32,540
 and that's not because of anything else other than just that makes sense compatibility wise

2334
02:52:32,540 --> 02:52:33,540
 down that area.

2335
02:52:33,540 --> 02:52:34,540
 Correct.

2336
02:52:34,540 --> 02:52:36,940
 And then that's how the, the area is currently zoned.

2337
02:52:36,940 --> 02:52:37,940
 Got it.

2338
02:52:37,940 --> 02:52:41,060
 Really no more questions, just, I guess, more statement or recommendation to you as you

2339
02:52:41,060 --> 02:52:42,060
 go forward.

2340
02:52:42,060 --> 02:52:48,260
 I personally, having done a lot of research on student housing and the impact on low income

2341
02:52:48,260 --> 02:52:56,180
 housing in the city of Denton, I actually would, would strongly encourage SROs in, in

2342
02:52:56,180 --> 02:53:00,540
 the best way possible though, trying to have growth but with mitigation to neighborhood

2343
02:53:00,540 --> 02:53:01,540
 integrity.

2344
02:53:01,540 --> 02:53:06,380
 The, the biggest thing is for, for me and from what I understand and from my research

2345
02:53:06,380 --> 02:53:11,620
 has been if we promote SROs, promoting it in areas that are non, non-neighborhood centric

2346
02:53:11,620 --> 02:53:17,460
 like the, the development that we saw 18 months ago or so that was across 35, that's still

2347
02:53:17,460 --> 02:53:21,740
 close enough to the university, that still has DCTA access, that's out there on Oak Street,

2348
02:53:21,740 --> 02:53:27,180
 the other side of 30, on the west side of 35, an area that's not impeding upon a neighborhood

2349
02:53:27,180 --> 02:53:31,940
 where you can stack units and put students in there because in my mind and it seems counterintuitive

2350
02:53:31,940 --> 02:53:37,460
 to encourage SROs to be able to help low income housing but in reality the develop, the development

2351
02:53:37,460 --> 02:53:44,700
 of new SROs means that those existing multifamily stay low income multifamily and the existence

2352
02:53:44,700 --> 02:53:48,540
 of single, we're gonna get to single family and duplex later on but the existence of low

2353
02:53:48,540 --> 02:53:53,220
 income single family and duplex stay away from being utility for students.

2354
02:53:53,220 --> 02:53:57,300
 It allows for a new development to be geared directly and marketed directly to students

2355
02:53:57,300 --> 02:54:02,760
 rather than developers looking at the, the cheap alternative of conversion and the conversions

2356
02:54:02,760 --> 02:54:05,340
 where we're really getting hurt right now in the city of Denton.

2357
02:54:05,340 --> 02:54:09,540
 It's not the new development in our SROs, it's the converting of current multifamily

2358
02:54:09,540 --> 02:54:12,860
 that could be used for low income housing, that's where we're really getting hurt and

2359
02:54:12,860 --> 02:54:16,900
 so that's my recommendation and so I would just try to, I don't know what the rules exactly

2360
02:54:16,900 --> 02:54:22,340
 would be but rules that would discourage conversions in neighborhoods and rather encourage new

2361
02:54:22,340 --> 02:54:28,620
 development would be the direction I would wanna see this SRO ordinance or ruling go

2362
02:54:28,620 --> 02:54:35,320
 and so I like the idea of the SUP, I'd actually probably side further with the staff recommendation

2363
02:54:35,320 --> 02:54:39,900
 of using the L39 rather than SUP across the board, I feel like the SUP across the board

2364
02:54:39,900 --> 02:54:44,180
 would be a little restrictive once the, especially once you get to higher density areas where

2365
02:54:44,180 --> 02:54:51,180
 it kind of makes sense to have a high density development like that but as long as it kicks

2366
02:54:51,180 --> 02:54:56,780
 in that SUP at some point in time, I think that'd be important, so.

2367
02:54:56,780 --> 02:54:58,260
 - Great.

2368
02:54:58,260 --> 02:54:59,780
 - Commissioner Beck.

2369
02:54:59,780 --> 02:55:01,100
 - Thank you vice chair.

2370
02:55:01,100 --> 02:55:06,420
 Thank you Tron for a most excellent and informative presentation, appreciate it.

2371
02:55:06,420 --> 02:55:17,220
 Let me first ask an overarching question, a concept here in your information material,

2372
02:55:17,220 --> 02:55:24,340
 you stated as Denton University student enrollment continues to grow, so does the need to provide

2373
02:55:24,340 --> 02:55:30,180
 housing for students, okay, one of the arguments I and others have made when developers come

2374
02:55:30,180 --> 02:55:39,460
 to us and wanna do SRO type developments is I didn't think it was Denton's focus to provide

2375
02:55:39,460 --> 02:55:43,780
 student housing, that should be up to the university, so are you kind of indicating

2376
02:55:43,780 --> 02:55:47,060
 here that we are in that business of, no?

2377
02:55:47,060 --> 02:55:51,340
 - No, just following the trends right, as you know, obviously we're seeing a lot of

2378
02:55:51,340 --> 02:55:57,940
 these type developments and the reason is the universities are growing and we should

2379
02:55:57,940 --> 02:56:02,140
 see some of that reflected as well in these types of developments.

2380
02:56:02,140 --> 02:56:06,940
 - Okay, but for the most part we still expect the universities to provide housing for their

2381
02:56:06,940 --> 02:56:07,940
 students.

2382
02:56:07,940 --> 02:56:12,660
 - Yeah, I mean, I believe they have certain requirements, I think their freshman class

2383
02:56:12,660 --> 02:56:19,900
 has to be on campus while that's all they require, the other class has to find other

2384
02:56:19,900 --> 02:56:20,900
 living quarters.

2385
02:56:20,900 --> 02:56:25,220
 - Yeah, we can't control them what they do anyway, so I understand, okay.

2386
02:56:25,220 --> 02:56:31,020
 - What essentially we're talking about here is SROs, the dormitory nomenclature, that's

2387
02:56:31,020 --> 02:56:36,620
 fine and it's definition, I'm okay with that, but I'm glad you brought up that we're not

2388
02:56:36,620 --> 02:56:41,540
 dealing with single family homes and duplexes and everything and need to be later 'cause

2389
02:56:41,540 --> 02:56:46,460
 my question was before you raised that is what's to stop a developer from going into

2390
02:56:46,460 --> 02:56:52,420
 an area where it allows single family homes and duplexes and just build a row in there

2391
02:56:52,420 --> 02:56:56,460
 and then rent 'em out as SROs, so is that--

2392
02:56:56,460 --> 02:57:03,180
 - Right, that is a concern and we are seeing that we actually have some of those currently

2393
02:57:03,180 --> 02:57:11,020
 now in the city, some on Prairie Street and then some on, I believe it's Nev Street, not

2394
02:57:11,020 --> 02:57:18,740
 too far from the university, where they removed or redeveloped a single family detached home,

2395
02:57:18,740 --> 02:57:26,060
 built a duplex and built it up to four, maybe five bedrooms and that's changing the streetscape

2396
02:57:26,060 --> 02:57:31,260
 or the character of the neighborhood and we certainly want to address that as well, but

2397
02:57:31,260 --> 02:57:35,260
 when we first started this effort it was really to deal with the larger complexes.

2398
02:57:35,260 --> 02:57:41,660
 - And I agree, I agree, I'm glad though that you are gonna realize that that is something

2399
02:57:41,660 --> 02:57:47,500
 we do need to look at as far as single family homes and duplexes.

2400
02:57:47,500 --> 02:57:54,680
 - What is the area zoned where we do have a single family houses that's just south of

2401
02:57:54,680 --> 02:58:01,140
 downtown, we brought this up when that bank wanted to encroach in there, is that DR2,

2402
02:58:01,140 --> 02:58:02,140
 what is that?

2403
02:58:02,140 --> 02:58:03,140
 - That's DCG.

2404
02:58:03,140 --> 02:58:04,140
 - Is it DCG?

2405
02:58:04,140 --> 02:58:05,140
 - I believe.

2406
02:58:05,140 --> 02:58:11,940
 - And that's one of the areas where they could build up to 45 feet, anything over it would

2407
02:58:11,940 --> 02:58:12,940
 require--

2408
02:58:12,940 --> 02:58:16,380
 - Yeah, I think it's just generally right here and it looks like it's DCG.

2409
02:58:16,380 --> 02:58:24,060
 - Okay, and that's the one that you wanna allow, that's your recommendation.

2410
02:58:24,060 --> 02:58:25,060
 - Right with the--

2411
02:58:25,060 --> 02:58:27,940
 - That they could build up to 45 feet, anything higher than that would--

2412
02:58:27,940 --> 02:58:29,980
 - And over, would require a specific use permit.

2413
02:58:29,980 --> 02:58:34,700
 - Yeah, see I have a problem with that, I think 45 feet is just way too much, depending

2414
02:58:34,700 --> 02:58:38,540
 on where they put it, if it's on the periphery I probably wouldn't have a problem, but you

2415
02:58:38,540 --> 02:58:41,780
 know when somebody sells a couple of lots then and then they wanna go right in the middle

2416
02:58:41,780 --> 02:58:49,660
 of that neighborhood, so I'm kind of in line with the City Council, probably just going

2417
02:58:49,660 --> 02:58:53,980
 across the board with the SUPs, I know it sounds restrictive and everything like that,

2418
02:58:53,980 --> 02:59:01,380
 but to me the SUP is the one element that the public has to control development just

2419
02:59:01,380 --> 02:59:06,140
 a little bit, it's not that we're always gonna rule in favor of the public or the developer,

2420
02:59:06,140 --> 02:59:11,500
 but it gives that public that sense of control, so I wouldn't be opposed to that.

2421
02:59:11,500 --> 02:59:19,020
 - And just lastly, your definition for boarding rooms, I think is spot on, so I don't see

2422
02:59:19,020 --> 02:59:22,900
 any need to change that, I think you hit all the points there, if somebody else on the

2423
02:59:22,900 --> 02:59:27,900
 commission has something to add, I'd be glad to hear it, but I think you're fine with that.

2424
02:59:27,900 --> 02:59:28,900
 - Thank you.

2425
02:59:28,900 --> 02:59:29,900
 - Thank you.

2426
02:59:29,900 --> 02:59:30,900
 - Commissioner Sanchez.

2427
02:59:30,900 --> 02:59:37,940
 - Again, I wanted to talk a little bit about, I was looking at the definition in the back

2428
02:59:37,940 --> 02:59:43,060
 of this book, they're using the definition of what a dormitory was, and it's somewhat

2429
02:59:43,060 --> 02:59:48,180
 different from what we're looking at here, and so to me that's an established definition

2430
02:59:48,180 --> 02:59:53,700
 that people use when they look at dormitories, when we're looking at SROs that's an entirely

2431
02:59:53,700 --> 02:59:59,620
 different animal, and to me that should have its own definition, something that's specific

2432
02:59:59,620 --> 03:00:09,740
 to that issue, to that type of construction, now, for example, I don't know, SROs or students

2433
03:00:09,740 --> 03:00:17,340
 sometimes say semester over or they graduate or whatever, some students continue living

2434
03:00:17,340 --> 03:00:26,580
 in those SROs as opposed to a dormitory where the university usually, if you're out that

2435
03:00:26,580 --> 03:00:32,380
 semester, you're out, but in these SROs, some students continue to live there as I understand,

2436
03:00:32,380 --> 03:00:39,260
 because I've heard of students living in those SROs even after, say, whether they fail or

2437
03:00:39,260 --> 03:00:44,300
 whatever happens, they'll continue living there, so I think we need to define, leave

2438
03:00:44,300 --> 03:00:51,940
 the definition for dormitories alone and just start anew with it, I like that definition

2439
03:00:51,940 --> 03:00:58,420
 for, but call it collegiate housing or something different, because what we're looking at is

2440
03:00:58,420 --> 03:01:04,700
 we want to look, we want to separate that from multifamily, okay, so let's start anew

2441
03:01:04,700 --> 03:01:10,420
 and just leave it, yeah, dormitory alone, because that's established, we've been with

2442
03:01:10,420 --> 03:01:13,580
 that for years, let's just keep it there and start anew.

2443
03:01:13,580 --> 03:01:20,620
 The other question I had is, you mentioned something about location, so I think it's

2444
03:01:20,620 --> 03:01:28,660
 important to look at that when we talk about SROs is the location, it's almost, they should

2445
03:01:28,660 --> 03:01:35,780
 be close to the university, we should at least push that, because a lot of these students,

2446
03:01:35,780 --> 03:01:41,660
 even though you said the buses are available, I don't know if you've ever taken the bus

2447
03:01:41,660 --> 03:01:47,180
 in the city of Dent, it's nothing, if you have a choice between walking, riding a bike,

2448
03:01:47,180 --> 03:01:52,500
 you probably prefer that, you know, so I'm just saying is we need to look at trying to

2449
03:01:52,500 --> 03:01:58,380
 keep those as close to the university as possible, as far as your definition, as you said you

2450
03:01:58,380 --> 03:02:06,420
 also wanted to look at the definition for boarding and boarding house, I have a real

2451
03:02:06,420 --> 03:02:15,740
 issue where it says where the owner of the dwelling permanently resides, why would we

2452
03:02:15,740 --> 03:02:23,660
 require that, if you're renting a room, why do you have to live with your tenant?

2453
03:02:23,660 --> 03:02:30,300
 Because again, we wanted to differentiate that versus the dormitory or whatever collegiate

2454
03:02:30,300 --> 03:02:34,980
 housing that we're calling, because otherwise they would fall under that definition, so

2455
03:02:34,980 --> 03:02:40,540
 if you're proposing to have a home, or not home, because we're not looking at single

2456
03:02:40,540 --> 03:02:47,580
 family or duplexes, but if you're proposing to lease out a multi-family, or three bedrooms

2457
03:02:47,580 --> 03:02:55,000
 or more, whatever it may be, you want to be able to differentiate between the dormitory

2458
03:02:55,000 --> 03:03:02,900
 and the boarding and rooming house, and that's the only way we were able to determine that

2459
03:03:02,900 --> 03:03:05,540
 that's the difference between the two.

2460
03:03:05,540 --> 03:03:12,900
 That's the only thing, I had a real issue with that, because a lot of people, it may

2461
03:03:12,900 --> 03:03:21,620
 be a boarding house, it may be a business, especially if you're talking about up to 20

2462
03:03:21,620 --> 03:03:30,780
 persons, that allows a business to have 20 people living there, it doesn't make sense

2463
03:03:30,780 --> 03:03:42,580
 why you have to live with them.

2464
03:03:42,580 --> 03:03:48,460
 I think we need to look at that, and I just have an issue with that, that was added on

2465
03:03:48,460 --> 03:03:49,460
 afterwards, I guess.

2466
03:03:49,460 --> 03:03:52,460
 That's part of the clarification.

2467
03:03:52,460 --> 03:03:55,980
 Yeah, that was added on afterwards.

2468
03:03:55,980 --> 03:03:59,860
 The bold that you see here, yes that is added on to there.

2469
03:03:59,860 --> 03:04:04,220
 So my question, I'm just saying this, you shouldn't, just because you have a boarding

2470
03:04:04,220 --> 03:04:11,740
 house or a rooming house, I don't mind the rest of it, but I just see that you shouldn't

2471
03:04:11,740 --> 03:04:14,420
 make that a requirement.

2472
03:04:14,420 --> 03:04:20,140
 Yeah, I see that in Commissioner Sanchez, I just realized that it says a dwelling, so

2473
03:04:20,140 --> 03:04:24,620
 by our definition of a dormitory, if it's three or more, this wouldn't fall under that.

2474
03:04:24,620 --> 03:04:30,060
 So we can look into maybe not requiring that, and maybe that doesn't fall under the definition

2475
03:04:30,060 --> 03:04:36,180
 of a dormitory, because it does say a dwelling, and by definition, because this says three

2476
03:04:36,180 --> 03:04:40,780
 or more, the boarding house may not qualify as a dormitory, just for that reason alone.

2477
03:04:40,780 --> 03:04:47,340
 So we can see potentially removing that requirement, again, and not be considered a dormitory.

2478
03:04:47,340 --> 03:04:53,320
 And that was the intent of adding that, but I can see that there's a way to work it without

2479
03:04:53,320 --> 03:04:56,020
 adding that requirement.

2480
03:04:56,020 --> 03:04:57,020
 Okay.

2481
03:04:57,020 --> 03:05:00,660
 Commissioner Pernitto.

2482
03:05:00,660 --> 03:05:06,220
 To Commissioner Sanchez's question real quick, before I go into my thoughts and concerns,

2483
03:05:06,220 --> 03:05:11,860
 I'm fine with this definition, because really, if you live in a house and you're renting

2484
03:05:11,860 --> 03:05:19,260
 out to 20 strangers and charging them all separate rents, that's probably not going

2485
03:05:19,260 --> 03:05:20,260
 to happen, right?

2486
03:05:20,260 --> 03:05:22,340
 You're probably not going to want to live there, and you're probably not going to want

2487
03:05:22,340 --> 03:05:27,160
 to live there, because it's all 20 strangers all paying separate rents, and if we take

2488
03:05:27,160 --> 03:05:33,420
 that out, that's just basically giving somebody a loophole, you know?

2489
03:05:33,420 --> 03:05:38,160
 I mean, you wouldn't want 20 strangers in your house paying separate rent just to stay

2490
03:05:38,160 --> 03:05:39,160
 in there, right?

2491
03:05:39,160 --> 03:05:42,900
 You know, if you did that, you would basically be doing what is, in essence, the definition

2492
03:05:42,900 --> 03:05:47,260
 of what we're calling an SRO, right?

2493
03:05:47,260 --> 03:05:53,060
 I think what you're doing, a boarding house and an SRO are two different animals.

2494
03:05:53,060 --> 03:05:57,340
 SROs are geared for students that are going to college.

2495
03:05:57,340 --> 03:05:58,340
 Okay.

2496
03:05:58,340 --> 03:05:59,340
 Okay?

2497
03:05:59,340 --> 03:06:07,460
 A boarding house is primarily geared to people of low income and people that can afford maybe,

2498
03:06:07,460 --> 03:06:12,540
 you know, an apartment, so the clients are two different clients.

2499
03:06:12,540 --> 03:06:16,820
 Well, and the problem is, and that's kind of where I'm going to go with this, is technically

2500
03:06:16,820 --> 03:06:19,260
 we don't have those two different clients in Denton.

2501
03:06:19,260 --> 03:06:23,420
 Whenever we hear about what we're calling dormitory, but what is essentially SRO, the

2502
03:06:23,420 --> 03:06:27,780
 main concern that I've gotten from anyone who's talked to me about this over the last

2503
03:06:27,780 --> 03:06:33,820
 couple of years is the impact that it has on affordable housing, right?

2504
03:06:33,820 --> 03:06:38,340
 Basically this model is, particularly the conversions, are impacting people's ability

2505
03:06:38,340 --> 03:06:44,500
 to find, you know, basically units for their family.

2506
03:06:44,500 --> 03:06:50,060
 And to that end, I think if we're, you know, making a recommendation, I would prefer to

2507
03:06:50,060 --> 03:06:55,580
 take out the 45-foot stipulation on there because, you know, at that point we're saying,

2508
03:06:55,580 --> 03:06:59,340
 well, if it's over 45 feet, well, there's not a lot of buildings that are 45 feet around

2509
03:06:59,340 --> 03:07:00,340
 here.

2510
03:07:00,340 --> 03:07:05,060
 And the main problem that we're having is that we have a lot of, you know, property

2511
03:07:05,060 --> 03:07:11,060
 managers moving toward this model, which in effect lets them increase their profits without

2512
03:07:11,060 --> 03:07:14,420
 making any structural changes to the housing, right?

2513
03:07:14,420 --> 03:07:20,020
 And thereby driving up the prices of the properties around them and making it seem more lucrative.

2514
03:07:20,020 --> 03:07:25,180
 You're going to wind up seeing more and more people go, hey, I'm renting out this apartment

2515
03:07:25,180 --> 03:07:30,580
 for $1,000, but if I, you know, rented it to two students for $700 apiece, I could get

2516
03:07:30,580 --> 03:07:34,780
 an extra $400 a month without having to do anything.

2517
03:07:34,780 --> 03:07:38,180
 And I think that's kind of one of the concerns, and I think that's probably why City Council

2518
03:07:38,180 --> 03:07:42,380
 kind of removed it, and it's one of the, you know, it's the primary drive I think we have

2519
03:07:42,380 --> 03:07:49,300
 behind what we're doing, because if we remove that, you know, there's no real reason to

2520
03:07:49,300 --> 03:07:54,860
 differentiate from one building to another, and I understand why it's happening.

2521
03:07:54,860 --> 03:07:58,660
 In effect, what we're doing right now is having to address the fact that UNT hasn't kept up

2522
03:07:58,660 --> 03:08:03,740
 with its own demand for housing its students, much less giving them parking.

2523
03:08:03,740 --> 03:08:10,060
 So my goal, my hope is that we approve this, because I do understand that we have too many

2524
03:08:10,060 --> 03:08:14,060
 students to house, and there is a purpose for this.

2525
03:08:14,060 --> 03:08:20,460
 But right now, I think the 45-foot is too much of a loophole to let people, you know,

2526
03:08:20,460 --> 03:08:21,460
 take advantage.

2527
03:08:21,460 --> 03:08:24,980
 Like Commissioner Beck said, you know, what's the stop somebody from taking a row of houses,

2528
03:08:24,980 --> 03:08:26,900
 or as you've described, this has already happened.

2529
03:08:26,900 --> 03:08:30,900
 So I like what we've got here.

2530
03:08:30,900 --> 03:08:33,180
 I would hope that we remove the 45-foot.

2531
03:08:33,180 --> 03:08:37,900
 I'm actually fine with the definitions of, you know what, if you're going to rent this

2532
03:08:37,900 --> 03:08:41,700
 out to that many people, chances are you need to live in there, or else that's one more

2533
03:08:41,700 --> 03:08:45,740
 loophole that we have in there to keep people from, you know, adhering to what we're hoping

2534
03:08:45,740 --> 03:08:46,740
 to do.

2535
03:08:46,740 --> 03:08:47,740
 I think that's all I've got.

2536
03:08:47,740 --> 03:08:48,740
 I think that was my rant.

2537
03:08:48,740 --> 03:08:49,740
 Thank you.

2538
03:08:49,740 --> 03:08:50,740
 >> Thank you.

2539
03:08:50,740 --> 03:08:51,740
 Okay.

2540
03:08:51,740 --> 03:08:57,860
 I'm just going to chime in on a few things here, because I think we're getting a couple

2541
03:08:57,860 --> 03:09:04,460
 of different discussions going, because I think SRO is kind of a separate discussion

2542
03:09:04,460 --> 03:09:10,180
 in and of itself in the sense that you can have an SRO in a single-family home, and that's

2543
03:09:10,180 --> 03:09:13,220
 just for another time and another discussion.

2544
03:09:13,220 --> 03:09:17,540
 I think what we've got to drill down, and that's what I think we're trying to do here,

2545
03:09:17,540 --> 03:09:25,100
 but I think we've missed it, is what is the definition of these high-density rent-by-the-bedroom

2546
03:09:25,100 --> 03:09:30,980
 developments that are going to continue to show their face, because it's a very popular

2547
03:09:30,980 --> 03:09:34,420
 development concept.

2548
03:09:34,420 --> 03:09:35,420
 We are a college town.

2549
03:09:35,420 --> 03:09:37,700
 It's going to happen, and there's a need for it.

2550
03:09:37,700 --> 03:09:40,620
 There's absolutely a need for it.

2551
03:09:40,620 --> 03:09:44,220
 We can't regulate it because we don't know what to call it, because we don't have any

2552
03:09:44,220 --> 03:09:46,920
 use restrictions for it.

2553
03:09:46,920 --> 03:09:50,640
 To Commissioner Sanchez's point, we do have a definition for dormitory.

2554
03:09:50,640 --> 03:09:52,620
 This is not a dormitory.

2555
03:09:52,620 --> 03:09:53,620
 It really isn't.

2556
03:09:53,620 --> 03:10:00,020
 I understand maybe how you got there, but I don't, because it's a very specific use.

2557
03:10:00,020 --> 03:10:02,540
 I like what San Marcos did.

2558
03:10:02,540 --> 03:10:04,180
 It's student-specific housing.

2559
03:10:04,180 --> 03:10:05,340
 That is what it is.

2560
03:10:05,340 --> 03:10:07,100
 That's what these developments are.

2561
03:10:07,100 --> 03:10:15,260
 That's what has gotten us to this circle for the last three years.

2562
03:10:15,260 --> 03:10:22,440
 Those developments are what keeps us here in this circle, but we've got to define it.

2563
03:10:22,440 --> 03:10:24,180
 We have to figure this out.

2564
03:10:24,180 --> 03:10:28,100
 I don't know if it's going to be tonight, because I don't know that we got to where

2565
03:10:28,100 --> 03:10:29,380
 we need to be going.

2566
03:10:29,380 --> 03:10:34,960
 I absolutely am on board with needing an SUP across the board with whatever the zoning

2567
03:10:34,960 --> 03:10:36,260
 districts are.

2568
03:10:36,260 --> 03:10:41,340
 We need to regulate where we're going to put these, because where we put these affects

2569
03:10:41,340 --> 03:10:44,540
 our community.

2570
03:10:44,540 --> 03:10:47,540
 One of the biggest things is the scripture development.

2571
03:10:47,540 --> 03:10:52,620
 That's kind of what got all this started well, and the one on Hickory as well.

2572
03:10:52,620 --> 03:10:57,580
 We have got to figure this out as a city, because this is not going to go away.

2573
03:10:57,580 --> 03:11:01,840
 For me, I'd love more time with this.

2574
03:11:01,840 --> 03:11:06,820
 I don't like dormitory, because it means something to most people.

2575
03:11:06,820 --> 03:11:10,300
 It doesn't mean these high-density developments that run by the bedroom.

2576
03:11:10,300 --> 03:11:12,860
 That is not what people think of when they think dormitory.

2577
03:11:12,860 --> 03:11:18,340
 I just didn't want to interrupt, but we're not stuck.

2578
03:11:18,340 --> 03:11:23,720
 We can move forward with some other term, but does the definition at least get us there?

2579
03:11:23,720 --> 03:11:26,620
 Not using the word dormitory, but the definition that we've proposed?

2580
03:11:26,620 --> 03:11:30,500
 Yeah, I think the definition is okay.

2581
03:11:30,500 --> 03:11:31,500
 It's the term.

2582
03:11:31,500 --> 03:11:35,820
 It's what are we going to call these?

2583
03:11:35,820 --> 03:11:39,220
 That I think needs further discussion.

2584
03:11:39,220 --> 03:11:44,820
 I'm okay with boarding house, and actually the traditional definition of a boarding house

2585
03:11:44,820 --> 03:11:49,380
 is someone who lives in their home and rents out a bedroom in their house.

2586
03:11:49,380 --> 03:11:55,540
 If you go way back to when it's what my parents did, my grandparents did, that's just what

2587
03:11:55,540 --> 03:11:56,540
 happened.

2588
03:11:56,540 --> 03:12:05,860
 That's actually a more correct definition, in my opinion, on that.

2589
03:12:05,860 --> 03:12:10,580
 To me, I think this needs further tweaking, and I don't know that we're going to be able

2590
03:12:10,580 --> 03:12:15,420
 to figure that out today, so I'll just throw that out there to my fellow commissioners

2591
03:12:15,420 --> 03:12:24,720
 and to staff that we may need more time with this and more time to actually discuss it.

2592
03:12:24,720 --> 03:12:29,900
 We weren't afforded a work session discussion on this, and that's really too bad, in my

2593
03:12:29,900 --> 03:12:30,900
 opinion.

2594
03:12:30,900 --> 03:12:34,500
 Anyway, I'm going to stop speaking because there's more commissioners who want to say

2595
03:12:34,500 --> 03:12:35,500
 something.

2596
03:12:35,500 --> 03:12:36,500
 Sure.

2597
03:12:36,500 --> 03:12:37,500
 Commissioner Cole.

2598
03:12:37,500 --> 03:12:38,500
 Thank you, Chair.

2599
03:12:38,500 --> 03:12:41,220
 I guess the question is, which way do we go on this?

2600
03:12:41,220 --> 03:12:47,740
 SUP straight across, that's what I prefer, but I also have a problem with dormitory.

2601
03:12:47,740 --> 03:12:55,580
 It should be student-specific housing instead, or whatever San Marcos does, but this all

2602
03:12:55,580 --> 03:13:03,580
 comes back to scripture normal, putting a five-story building next to a historical neighborhood.

2603
03:13:03,580 --> 03:13:10,920
 That's what triggered most of this, but I'm for SUPs across the board, but maybe we need

2604
03:13:10,920 --> 03:13:15,780
 further discussion on this.

2605
03:13:15,780 --> 03:13:16,780
 Commissioner Sanchez.

2606
03:13:16,780 --> 03:13:22,360
 Yeah, I agree with you.

2607
03:13:22,360 --> 03:13:32,540
 I guess the only thing I have about boarding houses is that boarding houses can go from

2608
03:13:32,540 --> 03:13:40,740
 four individuals to 20 individuals, so we have to allow for somebody who wants to develop

2609
03:13:40,740 --> 03:13:47,500
 a 20-people boarding house, so that doesn't really allow you to ... The old boarding houses,

2610
03:13:47,500 --> 03:13:55,980
 I think, were five, six ... I know years ago, my parents used to rent a room in their house,

2611
03:13:55,980 --> 03:13:58,120
 but those were years ago.

2612
03:13:58,120 --> 03:14:00,820
 I'm just saying this.

2613
03:14:00,820 --> 03:14:06,940
 We have to allow for expansion of the idea of boarding houses, and when you have 20 people,

2614
03:14:06,940 --> 03:14:12,700
 that's good, to me, it's kind of like you're going to hire somebody to help you overlook

2615
03:14:12,700 --> 03:14:19,700
 it, because it'd be a lot of work to manage 20 people living in your house, and nobody

2616
03:14:19,700 --> 03:14:23,020
 has a house that big, I don't think.

2617
03:14:23,020 --> 03:14:29,160
 You would actually have kind of like an old hotel or something that you could convert

2618
03:14:29,160 --> 03:14:34,460
 to a boarding house, and then you would have somebody available there, but you wouldn't

2619
03:14:34,460 --> 03:14:36,060
 want to live there either.

2620
03:14:36,060 --> 03:14:37,660
 I'm just saying this.

2621
03:14:37,660 --> 03:14:39,780
 Give us a window.

2622
03:14:39,780 --> 03:14:44,060
 Make it more ... Expand the definition, I mean, expand the definition.

2623
03:14:44,060 --> 03:14:49,260
 Remove that so a person can expand the boarding house without having to have that restriction

2624
03:14:49,260 --> 03:14:50,260
 there.

2625
03:14:50,260 --> 03:14:51,260
 Okay.

2626
03:14:51,260 --> 03:14:52,260
 Commissioner Prenama.

2627
03:14:52,260 --> 03:14:59,740
 I guess my question is where we are right now, because obviously, we're not in a position

2628
03:14:59,740 --> 03:15:04,980
 to vote to recommend, and I think that's what we were initially tasked to do, to vote to

2629
03:15:04,980 --> 03:15:07,060
 recommend.

2630
03:15:07,060 --> 03:15:11,340
 So I know we've tossed out a few things, recommendations for staff to take back and

2631
03:15:11,340 --> 03:15:13,820
 come back with something.

2632
03:15:13,820 --> 03:15:15,060
 What is the next appropriate action?

2633
03:15:15,060 --> 03:15:32,020
 Would it be to table to a date certain, or open up a public hearing, by the way, I guess?

2634
03:15:32,020 --> 03:15:47,980
 First, I know Richard has something that he wanted to say, and then we can continue that.

2635
03:15:47,980 --> 03:15:53,180
 Just wanted to provide a little bit ... I know we've had quite a, almost a confusing

2636
03:15:53,180 --> 03:15:58,020
 conversation, I think, on this item, and that was one of the suggestions I was going to

2637
03:15:58,020 --> 03:16:01,940
 make is that we really kind of look at how we define this.

2638
03:16:01,940 --> 03:16:07,500
 I think we would be a little remiss if we ... I know we talk about, let's come back

2639
03:16:07,500 --> 03:16:14,020
 with single family and duplex, but I can't tell you, we get a number of complaints from

2640
03:16:14,020 --> 03:16:18,740
 residents with concerns within their single family neighborhood.

2641
03:16:18,740 --> 03:16:23,580
 Part of the concern, I think, at least from staff, putting it with SUPs across the board,

2642
03:16:23,580 --> 03:16:31,100
 not saying it's not needed, but it almost forces someone ... If you have the opportunity,

2643
03:16:31,100 --> 03:16:37,540
 why would you go through the SUP if you can buy a house that's much cheaper, put a six-bedroom

2644
03:16:37,540 --> 03:16:39,940
 single family house, rent by the bedroom?

2645
03:16:39,940 --> 03:16:44,260
 It might be worth ... because we're seeing it.

2646
03:16:44,260 --> 03:16:47,900
 The concern I have is, all of a sudden, you're going to have blocks.

2647
03:16:47,900 --> 03:16:52,260
 We see it already in some of the neighborhoods that have completely changed.

2648
03:16:52,260 --> 03:16:56,540
 Bryan, Texas has gone through that now, they were calling them stealth dorms is the term

2649
03:16:56,540 --> 03:16:58,360
 they were using.

2650
03:16:58,360 --> 03:17:06,540
 I think it's a much bigger issue, but I think we still need to, as we continue to move this

2651
03:17:06,540 --> 03:17:12,460
 larger issue, I think we still need to not necessarily push the single family and duplex

2652
03:17:12,460 --> 03:17:16,700
 for later, but also still think about that now.

2653
03:17:16,700 --> 03:17:21,300
 Just looking at trends, just running quick numbers.

2654
03:17:21,300 --> 03:17:29,140
 Of the total bedrooms, 18% of the 18,000, 3,251, are being proposed within the last

2655
03:17:29,140 --> 03:17:30,140
 two years.

2656
03:17:30,140 --> 03:17:34,660
 That's pretty substantial over two years.

2657
03:17:34,660 --> 03:17:35,940
 It's a lot.

2658
03:17:35,940 --> 03:17:43,900
 Just looking at overall, just to give you how this fits in, if you look at the undergraduate

2659
03:17:43,900 --> 03:17:48,860
 admission for both UNT and TWU, again, these aren't exact numbers, just what I was able

2660
03:17:48,860 --> 03:17:49,860
 to dig up.

2661
03:17:49,860 --> 03:17:54,480
 If you look at the number of commuters, I think UNT estimated there at around 8,000.

2662
03:17:54,480 --> 03:17:59,980
 The 18,000 represents 50% of the undergraduate students.

2663
03:17:59,980 --> 03:18:08,180
 50% of those bedrooms represent 50% of the undergraduate students, which is pretty substantial.

2664
03:18:08,180 --> 03:18:13,620
 If 18% of that was just in the last two years, it's here and it's going to continue to come.

2665
03:18:13,620 --> 03:18:17,980
 Obviously, we need to address it, but what I don't want to do is also ignore it to a

2666
03:18:17,980 --> 03:18:24,780
 certain extent, where we're going to push the problem into our single-family neighborhoods.

2667
03:18:24,780 --> 03:18:35,380
 With that, one thing that we didn't do, because this is still your presentation and we've

2668
03:18:35,380 --> 03:18:40,780
 just had discussion, is find out if there's anyone who wants to speak at this public hearing.

2669
03:18:40,780 --> 03:18:44,980
 Is there anyone wishing to speak at this public hearing?

2670
03:18:44,980 --> 03:18:51,300
 Would you like to?

2671
03:18:51,300 --> 03:18:52,300
 There is no pressure.

2672
03:18:52,300 --> 03:18:53,300
 I'm simply...

2673
03:18:53,300 --> 03:19:05,260
 Do you live in an SRO?

2674
03:19:05,260 --> 03:19:06,260
 Come on down.

2675
03:19:06,260 --> 03:19:22,060
 My name is Tamsen Price, I live at 707 Bernard Street, apartment number 12, Denton, TX 7601.

2676
03:19:22,060 --> 03:19:25,420
 I was not planning on speaking tonight, I just kind of wanted to come and hear what

2677
03:19:25,420 --> 03:19:30,560
 you guys had to say, but a couple of comments that I had.

2678
03:19:30,560 --> 03:19:34,460
 So the thing about SROs, I know you guys are saying that they're particularly for collegiate

2679
03:19:34,460 --> 03:19:38,060
 use, but there's actually no stipulation that it has to just be college students that live

2680
03:19:38,060 --> 03:19:39,060
 in them.

2681
03:19:39,060 --> 03:19:44,300
 I know a lot of people who live, particularly in the one that I live in, which is the metro

2682
03:19:44,300 --> 03:19:49,380
 apartments, they're not college students, it's just one of the more cheaper options

2683
03:19:49,380 --> 03:19:50,380
 to live in.

2684
03:19:50,380 --> 03:19:59,300
 But also, the apartment that I live in is a two-bedroom, it's like 750 square feet,

2685
03:19:59,300 --> 03:20:03,500
 and we get charged $640 for each bedroom.

2686
03:20:03,500 --> 03:20:06,340
 It's a really crappy apartment.

2687
03:20:06,340 --> 03:20:10,520
 Like really crappy.

2688
03:20:10,520 --> 03:20:24,860
 But also, yeah, I don't know what the heck I'm saying.

2689
03:20:24,860 --> 03:20:33,100
 Also I used to live at 3317 Cooper Ranch East, which was a four-bedroom, what you guys are

2690
03:20:33,100 --> 03:20:35,660
 assuming is a single-family home.

2691
03:20:35,660 --> 03:20:40,420
 Our landlord lived out of state, and it was rented out by the room.

2692
03:20:40,420 --> 03:20:44,220
 A lot of people in the neighborhood did not like having us there, and there were a couple

2693
03:20:44,220 --> 03:20:49,180
 of other houses that were rented out like that, because there wasn't enough parking

2694
03:20:49,180 --> 03:20:50,180
 on the street.

2695
03:20:50,180 --> 03:20:53,660
 And that's one of the biggest issues that I have, is that there's just not enough parking

2696
03:20:53,660 --> 03:20:55,220
 for all the people who live there.

2697
03:20:55,220 --> 03:21:00,540
 So we had four cars that were parked on our street and in our driveway, and it was always

2698
03:21:00,540 --> 03:21:03,420
 an issue with the neighbors trying to get in and out, and we were parking on their side

2699
03:21:03,420 --> 03:21:08,080
 of the street and blocking their driveway.

2700
03:21:08,080 --> 03:21:13,860
 So in the apartment that I currently live in, there's two people in each apartment,

2701
03:21:13,860 --> 03:21:17,780
 so there's 24 apartments total.

2702
03:21:17,780 --> 03:21:23,140
 And we don't have enough parking for all of the residents and additional visitors.

2703
03:21:23,140 --> 03:21:28,220
 And I know that there's a lot right next to our apartment that actually went up before

2704
03:21:28,220 --> 03:21:33,540
 this board in the fall for replatting.

2705
03:21:33,540 --> 03:21:38,580
 That they're going to put two duplexes on, possibly, is what I've heard.

2706
03:21:38,580 --> 03:21:41,940
 And from the size of the lot, I just don't understand how it's going to be able to fit

2707
03:21:41,940 --> 03:21:47,460
 as many people as they're going to try and push in there with the parking spaces.

2708
03:21:47,460 --> 03:21:51,340
 So yeah, that's all I have to say.

2709
03:21:51,340 --> 03:21:54,820
 >> Looks like we have a couple questions for you.

2710
03:21:54,820 --> 03:21:55,820
 [ Laughter ]

2711
03:21:55,820 --> 03:21:56,820
 >> Oh, no.

2712
03:21:56,820 --> 03:21:57,820
 >> Commissioner Beck.

2713
03:21:57,820 --> 03:21:58,820
 >> Thank you, Vice Chair.

2714
03:21:58,820 --> 03:22:02,300
 Actually, when I put my name up there, I still had a comment I wanted to make in our discussion,

2715
03:22:02,300 --> 03:22:05,340
 but she mentioned something that raises a question.

2716
03:22:05,340 --> 03:22:12,580
 You said the apartments you live in don't necessarily have students, and that SROs don't

2717
03:22:12,580 --> 03:22:16,300
 necessarily, you know, fit the need of just students.

2718
03:22:16,300 --> 03:22:23,100
 But they do fit the needs of single people, or maybe couples, but not families with children.

2719
03:22:23,100 --> 03:22:25,300
 You don't have -- do you have families with children in this?

2720
03:22:25,300 --> 03:22:32,700
 >> Yeah, down the street, there's a family that lives in one, but it's multiple families.

2721
03:22:32,700 --> 03:22:33,940
 >> Okay, right.

2722
03:22:33,940 --> 03:22:38,140
 But in yours, what you're saying is pretty much an SRO.

2723
03:22:38,140 --> 03:22:42,520
 There's not families with children in that?

2724
03:22:42,520 --> 03:22:44,060
 >> Not that I know of in my particular --

2725
03:22:44,060 --> 03:22:45,060
 >> Okay.

2726
03:22:45,060 --> 03:22:51,260
 And I agree that SROs aren't strictly for students, so that's one of the targeted populations.

2727
03:22:51,260 --> 03:22:56,100
 But it does meet a need for single people, couples, young couples who have yet to have

2728
03:22:56,100 --> 03:22:57,100
 a family.

2729
03:22:57,100 --> 03:23:02,300
 Once they're ready to establish a family, I think they do want to move into a family

2730
03:23:02,300 --> 03:23:06,340
 unit, multi-family apartment, or single-family residential.

2731
03:23:06,340 --> 03:23:08,980
 But thank you for your input, too, Ms. Price.

2732
03:23:08,980 --> 03:23:14,060
 And I'll come back later, because I think, Tim, Commissioner Smith wants to ask you something,

2733
03:23:14,060 --> 03:23:15,060
 but I --

2734
03:23:15,060 --> 03:23:16,060
 >> Commissioner Smith.

2735
03:23:16,060 --> 03:23:17,060
 >> Thank you, Chair.

2736
03:23:17,060 --> 03:23:18,060
 Let me go last down.

2737
03:23:18,060 --> 03:23:19,060
 I'm sorry.

2738
03:23:19,060 --> 03:23:20,060
 >> Price?

2739
03:23:20,060 --> 03:23:23,860
 >> Price, Ms. Price.

2740
03:23:23,860 --> 03:23:31,020
 Is there -- in the single-family residence you lived in, was the landlord in town?

2741
03:23:31,020 --> 03:23:32,020
 >> No.

2742
03:23:32,020 --> 03:23:37,260
 So in the single-family residence that I lived in before, the landlord lived in Washington.

2743
03:23:37,260 --> 03:23:38,260
 >> Okay.

2744
03:23:38,260 --> 03:23:43,660
 And the homes that were -- I'm sorry, the rooms, did you move in there -- it was rented

2745
03:23:43,660 --> 03:23:47,780
 out specifically by the room that you didn't know the other three people that lived in

2746
03:23:47,780 --> 03:23:48,780
 that whatsoever?

2747
03:23:48,780 --> 03:23:49,780
 >> No.

2748
03:23:49,780 --> 03:23:50,780
 >> Okay.

2749
03:23:50,780 --> 03:23:54,540
 Did you ever feel unsafe at all at any point in time, because you didn't know the other

2750
03:23:54,540 --> 03:23:55,540
 three people that are in that?

2751
03:23:55,540 --> 03:23:56,540
 >> Oh, yeah.

2752
03:23:56,540 --> 03:23:57,540
 >> Okay.

2753
03:23:57,540 --> 03:23:58,540
 Awesome.

2754
03:23:58,540 --> 03:23:59,540
 You've answered my questions.

2755
03:23:59,540 --> 03:24:00,540
 Thank you.

2756
03:24:00,540 --> 03:24:01,540
 Staff, you know what?

2757
03:24:01,540 --> 03:24:02,540
 I'll put it on my motion.

2758
03:24:02,540 --> 03:24:03,540
 You're good.

2759
03:24:03,540 --> 03:24:04,540
 Thank you very much, Ms. Price.

2760
03:24:04,540 --> 03:24:05,540
 I appreciate it.

2761
03:24:05,540 --> 03:24:08,540
 >> Can I actually say something to his comment?

2762
03:24:08,540 --> 03:24:15,380
 So that's one of the things that, like, SROs are marketed as being more -- better for students,

2763
03:24:15,380 --> 03:24:17,540
 because you're able to have your own lease.

2764
03:24:17,540 --> 03:24:22,740
 And so if your roommate violates the lease at any point or doesn't pay their rent, it

2765
03:24:22,740 --> 03:24:23,740
 doesn't affect you.

2766
03:24:23,740 --> 03:24:24,740
 You won't get evicted.

2767
03:24:24,740 --> 03:24:30,100
 But at the same time, once someone's lease is up, the landlords can move in whoever they

2768
03:24:30,100 --> 03:24:31,100
 want.

2769
03:24:31,100 --> 03:24:36,860
 And you have no real options besides filing a complaint or filing a request for a roommate

2770
03:24:36,860 --> 03:24:43,700
 change or an apartment change, which oftentimes don't happen.

2771
03:24:43,700 --> 03:24:47,860
 I have a friend, actually, that's going through an issue right now with Denton PD, where she

2772
03:24:47,860 --> 03:24:54,420
 was assaulted by her roommate, and her apartment complex won't move the roommate out of the

2773
03:24:54,420 --> 03:24:58,020
 apartment and won't let her move out as well.

2774
03:24:58,020 --> 03:25:02,940
 And so she's stuck in a room where she can't go and use any of the common spaces.

2775
03:25:02,940 --> 03:25:04,940
 >> Is that a -- I'm sorry to interrupt you.

2776
03:25:04,940 --> 03:25:09,140
 Is that a single-family residence or is that an apartment complex?

2777
03:25:09,140 --> 03:25:12,140
 >> No, that's what we're terming as an SRO.

2778
03:25:12,140 --> 03:25:18,020
 >> Okay, but I guess what I mean by that is, is it an SRO but inside of a single-family

2779
03:25:18,020 --> 03:25:19,020
 complex?

2780
03:25:19,020 --> 03:25:23,460
 Like, it's an actual home, the same structure you had previously, or is it like what you

2781
03:25:23,460 --> 03:25:28,140
 live in now, which is a "apartment complex" where it's multiple dwellings but each room

2782
03:25:28,140 --> 03:25:29,140
 is --

2783
03:25:29,140 --> 03:25:30,140
 >> It's what I live in now.

2784
03:25:30,140 --> 03:25:31,140
 >> Okay, what you live in now.

2785
03:25:31,140 --> 03:25:32,140
 Okay.

2786
03:25:32,140 --> 03:25:33,940
 Well, actually, what you're bringing up, I was going to -- I was wanting to bring it

2787
03:25:33,940 --> 03:25:38,940
 up whenever I made my motion in a minute, but I think the point that I wanted to make

2788
03:25:38,940 --> 03:25:42,660
 and why I wanted to ask you those questions and why I asked where your owner, the owner

2789
03:25:42,660 --> 03:25:48,060
 of that single-family residence was, who was renting out by room -- by single-resident

2790
03:25:48,060 --> 03:25:55,220
 or single-room occupancy lease model was because at least if the very -- at least if there's

2791
03:25:55,220 --> 03:25:59,580
 something like the university courtyards or there's something like the Grove or those

2792
03:25:59,580 --> 03:26:05,620
 other, you know, SRO-type models that already exist, at least there is a management staff

2793
03:26:05,620 --> 03:26:10,260
 that is required to be there at all times, and so there could be -- and there's -- and

2794
03:26:10,260 --> 03:26:13,340
 you probably -- hopefully the place you live in now, but I've -- you know, I grew up in

2795
03:26:13,340 --> 03:26:14,340
 Denton.

2796
03:26:14,340 --> 03:26:17,580
 I've been in these SROs before where there are the -- there's the red button in every

2797
03:26:17,580 --> 03:26:18,740
 single room now.

2798
03:26:18,740 --> 03:26:21,740
 Almost every single one of the new SROs that's going up now, there has to be a red button

2799
03:26:21,740 --> 03:26:26,100
 in every single room in the event that an assault or something like that occurs that

2800
03:26:26,100 --> 03:26:30,300
 immediately calls emergency services, and so I think the motion I was going to make was

2801
03:26:30,300 --> 03:26:37,620
 to be able to get staff to see that we need to talk about single-family duplex along with

2802
03:26:37,620 --> 03:26:39,260
 the multi-family together.

2803
03:26:39,260 --> 03:26:40,860
 We can't separate them.

2804
03:26:40,860 --> 03:26:41,860
 We have to do it together.

2805
03:26:41,860 --> 03:26:45,420
 We have to -- we have to try to address it as soon as possible because if we address

2806
03:26:45,420 --> 03:26:50,100
 them separately, in my mind, we're going to end up forcing people to go and do this -- well,

2807
03:26:50,100 --> 03:26:55,180
 let's go buy up blocks of single-family residences and try to turn these into SROs now because

2808
03:26:55,180 --> 03:26:58,500
 we're getting basically pushed out of doing conversions in multi-family residences.

2809
03:26:58,500 --> 03:27:00,740
 So I actually really appreciate you being here tonight.

2810
03:27:00,740 --> 03:27:01,740
 So thank you.

2811
03:27:01,740 --> 03:27:02,740
 Thank you for speaking.

2812
03:27:02,740 --> 03:27:05,500
 Commissioner Beck, did you have a question for the staff?

2813
03:27:05,500 --> 03:27:09,700
 Yeah, what I was going to say, and it'll probably -- I'm not sure what Commissioner Smith is

2814
03:27:09,700 --> 03:27:10,700
 going to motion.

2815
03:27:10,700 --> 03:27:16,660
 I just -- it seems like we are stuck on the word dormitory, so I'm okay with the definition.

2816
03:27:16,660 --> 03:27:21,140
 You know, if we could move the definition forward, I'm okay with that, and then we can

2817
03:27:21,140 --> 03:27:23,340
 come -- I always like the term collegiate housing.

2818
03:27:23,340 --> 03:27:28,140
 I thought that encompassed more what we're looking for here, but then we get to the part

2819
03:27:28,140 --> 03:27:38,340
 about SUPs, so I don't know -- we probably need to do a vote on who stands -- I'm personally

2820
03:27:38,340 --> 03:27:43,380
 okay with SUPs across the board, but I get the feeling there's a few that aren't.

2821
03:27:43,380 --> 03:27:44,380
 Okay.

2822
03:27:44,380 --> 03:27:48,580
 So I'll just say that, and then we'll see what's offered up in Commissioner Smith's

2823
03:27:48,580 --> 03:27:49,580
 motion.

2824
03:27:49,580 --> 03:27:50,580
 Thank you.

2825
03:27:50,580 --> 03:27:51,580
 Okay.

2826
03:27:51,580 --> 03:27:54,540
 Well, before I entertain that, I'm going to find out if there's anyone else wishing to

2827
03:27:54,540 --> 03:27:58,420
 speak at this public hearing.

2828
03:27:58,420 --> 03:28:02,820
 And seeing none, I will close the public hearing, and Commissioner Smith.

2829
03:28:02,820 --> 03:28:03,820
 Thank you.

2830
03:28:03,820 --> 03:28:10,620
 I'd like to make a motion to table this discussion to date certain of March 6th, 2019, and I

2831
03:28:10,620 --> 03:28:17,780
 would like to give -- while we table the discussion, I'd like to give staff direction to, one,

2832
03:28:17,780 --> 03:28:24,620
 I want to try to address this problem along with single-family and duplex.

2833
03:28:24,620 --> 03:28:32,480
 I think that if we don't, we could foreseeably open up a gap of time where there could be

2834
03:28:32,480 --> 03:28:36,100
 some shifts and changes that wouldn't be favorable, and so I'd rather address it all at one point

2835
03:28:36,100 --> 03:28:40,180
 in time, understanding the all-encompassing problem that we have.

2836
03:28:40,180 --> 03:28:43,460
 Commissioner Smith, let's state your motion, see if we get a second, and then we can have

2837
03:28:43,460 --> 03:28:44,460
 discussion, please.

2838
03:28:44,460 --> 03:28:45,460
 Sure.

2839
03:28:45,460 --> 03:28:49,820
 Okay, motion to table to date certain, March 6th, 2019.

2840
03:28:49,820 --> 03:28:50,820
 Commissioner Perneto.

2841
03:28:50,820 --> 03:28:52,300
 I second that motion.

2842
03:28:52,300 --> 03:29:09,660
 And then I guess I will ask Richard if that date is something that can be done.

2843
03:29:09,660 --> 03:29:12,020
 I would actually prefer to have a little more time.

2844
03:29:12,020 --> 03:29:20,420
 Because one thing, just to -- we will re-notice this, and so I want to make sure that we vetted

2845
03:29:20,420 --> 03:29:25,940
 enough internally along with legal, and then whatever we come up with, we're able to notice

2846
03:29:25,940 --> 03:29:26,940
 it properly.

2847
03:29:26,940 --> 03:29:37,500
 I do know the meetings in March right now are pretty heavy with agenda items.

2848
03:29:37,500 --> 03:29:44,980
 I'd like to move to amend my motion to date certain of April 9th, 2019.

2849
03:29:44,980 --> 03:29:52,980
 April 9th, I think that's a Tuesday.

2850
03:29:52,980 --> 03:29:56,580
 April 3rd, 2019.

2851
03:29:56,580 --> 03:29:59,580
 April 3rd.

2852
03:29:59,580 --> 03:30:04,200
 Development code, DDC update.

2853
03:30:04,200 --> 03:30:05,200
 Or further.

2854
03:30:05,200 --> 03:30:07,700
 Indefinitely.

2855
03:30:07,700 --> 03:30:09,580
 Yeah, definitely.

2856
03:30:09,580 --> 03:30:11,620
 We'll bring it back when we're ready.

2857
03:30:11,620 --> 03:30:14,500
 We do have, like Richard said, there's a lot of stuff going on.

2858
03:30:14,500 --> 03:30:23,460
 I'd like to amend my motion to table the discussion to date uncertain -- or to indefinitely.

2859
03:30:23,460 --> 03:30:27,980
 Jerry, don't kill me.

2860
03:30:27,980 --> 03:30:30,740
 I will second that.

2861
03:30:30,740 --> 03:30:31,740
 Okay.

2862
03:30:31,740 --> 03:30:35,780
 We have a first and a second to table indefinitely.

2863
03:30:35,780 --> 03:30:37,200
 I know there's some discussion.

2864
03:30:37,200 --> 03:30:42,500
 I'm going to ask Jerry to speak, because he's been wanting to say a few words, and then

2865
03:30:42,500 --> 03:30:45,500
 we can entertain more.

2866
03:30:45,500 --> 03:30:49,780
 Certainly if the commission is going to give any direction to staff, I want to make a few

2867
03:30:49,780 --> 03:30:55,020
 comments from a legal perspective before you give feedback, because if I don't, Ron's going

2868
03:30:55,020 --> 03:30:58,260
 to tell me you already gave him feedback, he doesn't want to listen to me.

2869
03:30:58,260 --> 03:31:06,480
 But the first thing I wanted to point out is that, as you do give consideration to this,

2870
03:31:06,480 --> 03:31:15,740
 try to avoid the temptation of assuming that SROs or rent by the bedroom is bad per se,

2871
03:31:15,740 --> 03:31:17,500
 if we do get any kind of a challenge of that.

2872
03:31:17,500 --> 03:31:25,780
 We're going to have to articulate zoning-based reasons why we're regulating these, and it's

2873
03:31:25,780 --> 03:31:33,380
 going to have to be something in terms of traffic or something along those lines that

2874
03:31:33,380 --> 03:31:38,940
 we're going to have to justify from a zoning perspective.

2875
03:31:38,940 --> 03:31:45,380
 Similarly with SUPs, I want to make sure that we're sensitive to the idea that SUPs, the

2876
03:31:45,380 --> 03:31:52,060
 intent is not to impede development with an SUP, the intent with the SUP is that if you

2877
03:31:52,060 --> 03:31:59,180
 allow something subject to an SUP, that means it's allowed use, and the SUP is only there

2878
03:31:59,180 --> 03:32:04,780
 to just look at the way in which you are implementing it.

2879
03:32:04,780 --> 03:32:07,020
 Are you allowing enough traffic access?

2880
03:32:07,020 --> 03:32:15,020
 Are you allowing enough protections in terms of access from the streets or what have you?

2881
03:32:15,020 --> 03:32:21,260
 Typically these are traffic type of situations, so be careful not to use SUPs as an impediment

2882
03:32:21,260 --> 03:32:23,900
 to development.

2883
03:32:23,900 --> 03:32:28,820
 Probably my biggest concern is on the definition of dormitories.

2884
03:32:28,820 --> 03:32:35,580
 This is something that I know I've brought up to staff before, and I think the council

2885
03:32:35,580 --> 03:32:39,060
 was a little bit reluctant on it.

2886
03:32:39,060 --> 03:32:48,660
 I was actually proposing that to have the definition be that it would be provided for

2887
03:32:48,660 --> 03:32:55,020
 consideration rather than for rent, and I know that's not a term that's typically used

2888
03:32:55,020 --> 03:33:00,100
 and that's one of the problems with dealing with the legal world is that sometimes legal

2889
03:33:00,100 --> 03:33:02,860
 words have meaning and they mean something for a reason.

2890
03:33:02,860 --> 03:33:11,300
 It's not that I love legalese, it's that if being someone who has prosecuted before, if

2891
03:33:11,300 --> 03:33:16,980
 we say for rent in this definition, that just means the prosecutor has to prove the existence

2892
03:33:16,980 --> 03:33:22,500
 of a lease and that the terms of the lease have that in there when the prosecution doesn't

2893
03:33:22,500 --> 03:33:25,460
 have any right of discovery from the defendant.

2894
03:33:25,460 --> 03:33:31,700
 I don't think that that's, trying to understand where the commission and the council is wanting

2895
03:33:31,700 --> 03:33:36,780
 to go with this, I don't think you necessarily care if it's a lease agreement, it could be

2896
03:33:36,780 --> 03:33:37,780
 a license.

2897
03:33:37,780 --> 03:33:43,460
 It could be something where you permit someone to live somewhere, but they pay something,

2898
03:33:43,460 --> 03:33:51,980
 or maybe it's in-kind services, you let me live there and I'll mow your yard for you.

2899
03:33:51,980 --> 03:34:00,740
 If you require it to be for rent, that just creates a proof issue that impedes our ability

2900
03:34:00,740 --> 03:34:03,860
 to enforce.

2901
03:34:03,860 --> 03:34:09,400
 Please give consideration to the idea of leaving more, kind of like what you have with boarding

2902
03:34:09,400 --> 03:34:15,180
 house, where you have the dissolver for consideration.

2903
03:34:15,180 --> 03:34:16,180
 What is a consideration?

2904
03:34:16,180 --> 03:34:21,160
 It doesn't have to be cash, it could be, again, I'll mow your yards, I'll be your maintenance

2905
03:34:21,160 --> 03:34:25,780
 man if you let me live there.

2906
03:34:25,780 --> 03:34:31,700
 And then finally, I think the point was made up about boarding houses being a separate

2907
03:34:31,700 --> 03:34:37,780
 category, and I think one of the reasons for that is to differentiate them from single-family

2908
03:34:37,780 --> 03:34:38,780
 homes.

2909
03:34:38,780 --> 03:34:45,420
 And I think the idea is that with single-family homes, you rely upon the definition of family,

2910
03:34:45,420 --> 03:34:49,620
 which talks about the number of unrelated persons that can live on site.

2911
03:34:49,620 --> 03:34:52,980
 With a boarding house, family is not an issue.

2912
03:34:52,980 --> 03:34:55,940
 The number of unrelated persons is not an issue.

2913
03:34:55,940 --> 03:34:58,380
 That's why you have a different standard.

2914
03:34:58,380 --> 03:35:04,980
 Just to answer that question, I wanted to provide that level of explanation.

2915
03:35:04,980 --> 03:35:10,740
 As I indicated earlier, dormitories were something I came up with just because trying to describe

2916
03:35:10,740 --> 03:35:12,860
 the living arrangement.

2917
03:35:12,860 --> 03:35:16,180
 What word we use to describe it is largely immaterial.

2918
03:35:16,180 --> 03:35:21,500
 But the concept with a dormitory is that it's a bunch of grown people that are living together.

2919
03:35:21,500 --> 03:35:25,300
 They may all have cars, they may have a lot of traffic impacts, they're all independently

2920
03:35:25,300 --> 03:35:26,300
 minded.

2921
03:35:26,300 --> 03:35:28,180
 They're not part of a family.

2922
03:35:28,180 --> 03:35:33,340
 They're people, and having that kind of relationship where you have a bunch of grown adults living

2923
03:35:33,340 --> 03:35:39,500
 together and all being independently minded, that can create some impacts that are different

2924
03:35:39,500 --> 03:35:46,360
 from, you know, situations with a single-family home or multi-family or what have you.

2925
03:35:46,360 --> 03:35:51,580
 So just in short, those were some considerations that I wanted to bring to the commission's

2926
03:35:51,580 --> 03:35:56,780
 attention with hopes that, you know, perhaps those might guide some of the recommendations

2927
03:35:56,780 --> 03:35:57,780
 going forward.

2928
03:35:57,780 --> 03:35:58,780
 Thank you, Chair.

2929
03:35:58,780 --> 03:35:59,780
 Commissioner Smith.

2930
03:35:59,780 --> 03:36:00,780
 Thank you, Chair.

2931
03:36:00,780 --> 03:36:08,320
 A couple of recommendations to staff.

2932
03:36:08,320 --> 03:36:15,380
 In light of what Jerry said, I think that we need to address the high-density areas

2933
03:36:15,380 --> 03:36:21,660
 at the same time as we address single-family and duplex areas with this.

2934
03:36:21,660 --> 03:36:24,740
 Primarily that is, I think there's some ulterior motives that I've already mentioned that's

2935
03:36:24,740 --> 03:36:33,600
 on the record already, but in the form of zoning issues, in all instances, the creation

2936
03:36:33,600 --> 03:36:39,740
 of a single-room occupancy-style leasing method creates a traffic and parking issue that needs

2937
03:36:39,740 --> 03:36:41,740
 to be discussed.

2938
03:36:41,740 --> 03:36:49,860
 That ruins the integrity of the single-family areas, for sure, but also congests and clogs

2939
03:36:49,860 --> 03:36:57,260
 up some of the already high-dense areas that are in the downtown areas or areas around

2940
03:36:57,260 --> 03:37:02,980
 the university that are right next to single-family areas.

2941
03:37:02,980 --> 03:37:07,460
 So I think that we need to address them at the same time.

2942
03:37:07,460 --> 03:37:15,020
 I hate to go through and say that on a single-family side, I think this still coincides with zoning

2943
03:37:15,020 --> 03:37:20,900
 and planning use, Jerry, but I hate to say that a single-family area, we need to have

2944
03:37:20,900 --> 03:37:24,540
 regulations and restrictions on private property owners and what they can do on their private

2945
03:37:24,540 --> 03:37:31,080
 property, but I think in this instance, by not regulating and having some sort of rules

2946
03:37:31,080 --> 03:37:36,820
 in force where we can make sure that traffic and parking and whatnot can be regulated correctly,

2947
03:37:36,820 --> 03:37:41,780
 we're allowing single-family residential owners, private property owners, to negatively affect

2948
03:37:41,780 --> 03:37:45,620
 the value and the quality of life of other private property owners surrounding them.

2949
03:37:45,620 --> 03:37:51,560
 And so I think it's important that we address this all at one time with essentially one

2950
03:37:51,560 --> 03:37:53,700
 simple common thread that can be used.

2951
03:37:53,700 --> 03:37:57,620
 I'd rather not have us be disjointed and say that just for these high-density areas, we

2952
03:37:57,620 --> 03:38:02,820
 want to have this mindset, and for these low-density residential areas, we have a different mindset.

2953
03:38:02,820 --> 03:38:07,220
 I think it'd be much more important if we have a common thread mindset across the entire

2954
03:38:07,220 --> 03:38:13,900
 city with what we want, and I think that we could agree that development of new SRO areas

2955
03:38:13,900 --> 03:38:19,260
 are fine in areas where it's not a conversion and it's not in existing neighborhoods.

2956
03:38:19,260 --> 03:38:23,940
 So I'd like that to come back and be seen before us.

2957
03:38:23,940 --> 03:38:24,940
 Commissioner Beck.

2958
03:38:24,940 --> 03:38:26,740
 Thank you, Vice Chair.

2959
03:38:26,740 --> 03:38:33,280
 So we're clear here when we're talking about single-family, we're just talking about those

2960
03:38:33,280 --> 03:38:35,980
 six zones you put up on the board, correct?

2961
03:38:35,980 --> 03:38:39,540
 We're not talking about NR1, NR2, NR3, NR4.

2962
03:38:39,540 --> 03:38:44,100
 Those SROs have been kind of forbidden there, and that's what kind of surprises me that

2963
03:38:44,100 --> 03:38:51,380
 she lived in one over in an NR3 district, I believe.

2964
03:38:51,380 --> 03:38:52,380
 Am I correct?

2965
03:38:52,380 --> 03:38:58,940
 Well, just as I'm hearing the recommendations, if we expand this study to be more comprehensive

2966
03:38:58,940 --> 03:39:07,780
 and identify and use our single-family duplexes, it's got to expand, the zoning district's

2967
03:39:07,780 --> 03:39:12,020
 got to expand, and we've got to look at every zoning district from this point forward.

2968
03:39:12,020 --> 03:39:18,980
 Well, I would think that we just simply wouldn't allow it in those four single-family districts,

2969
03:39:18,980 --> 03:39:19,980
 period.

2970
03:39:19,980 --> 03:39:24,860
 There would be no need for an SUP because SROs wouldn't be allowed there.

2971
03:39:24,860 --> 03:39:27,580
 That's something we'd have to look into.

2972
03:39:27,580 --> 03:39:34,100
 We haven't really studied the single-family duplexes component, and just for, again, as

2973
03:39:34,100 --> 03:39:39,620
 for your consideration, we know that there's a lot of those around town, and if we're going

2974
03:39:39,620 --> 03:39:43,580
 to move forward with some-- And they're not in violation?

2975
03:39:43,580 --> 03:39:44,580
 Recommendations.

2976
03:39:44,580 --> 03:39:45,580
 Of current codes?

2977
03:39:45,580 --> 03:39:50,180
 Anyone moving forward that wants to do this, if it's a specific use permit, you're going

2978
03:39:50,180 --> 03:39:56,380
 to have a lot of these types, and if that's the idea is to prevent them, then true, but--

2979
03:39:56,380 --> 03:40:01,060
 Okay, but correct me if I'm wrong, Ron, I mean, isn't it currently a violation to put

2980
03:40:01,060 --> 03:40:02,060
 an SRO?

2981
03:40:02,060 --> 03:40:03,060
 No.

2982
03:40:03,060 --> 03:40:08,580
 If they have four unrelated persons, they're legally allowed to rent.

2983
03:40:08,580 --> 03:40:10,740
 Okay, and that is an area we need to look at.

2984
03:40:10,740 --> 03:40:16,140
 I can see the issue with the six zones you put up there, they're there by right, but

2985
03:40:16,140 --> 03:40:24,140
 I didn't think they'd be allowed in-- So if we move this into single-family duplexes,

2986
03:40:24,140 --> 03:40:30,340
 then you're going to affect that type of development, or that type of rental option, whatever you

2987
03:40:30,340 --> 03:40:35,380
 want to call it, for those property owners that have homes that want to lease to four

2988
03:40:35,380 --> 03:40:36,380
 unrelated persons.

2989
03:40:36,380 --> 03:40:42,580
 Okay, the other thing I guess I wanted to mention, I'm a little reluctant to make this

2990
03:40:42,580 --> 03:40:43,580
 data uncertain.

2991
03:40:43,580 --> 03:40:51,540
 I mean, we're trying to get the Denton development code done soon, and if we put this thing in--

2992
03:40:51,540 --> 03:40:55,540
 and this is a definition, this is an area we need to address and needs to be in the

2993
03:40:55,540 --> 03:41:00,700
 new code, so if we make this indefinite, are we going to be cutting ourselves off at the

2994
03:41:00,700 --> 03:41:08,500
 knees for trying to get this code written without this definition in there?

2995
03:41:08,500 --> 03:41:13,660
 The code will move forward, and this would be something that we'd have to address--

2996
03:41:13,660 --> 03:41:14,660
 Later.

2997
03:41:14,660 --> 03:41:15,660
 Separately.

2998
03:41:15,660 --> 03:41:16,660
 Yeah.

2999
03:41:16,660 --> 03:41:21,180
 Unless we bring it forward with it, and that can be part of the discussion, but I don't

3000
03:41:21,180 --> 03:41:22,540
 see that happening.

3001
03:41:22,540 --> 03:41:23,540
 Okay.

3002
03:41:23,540 --> 03:41:24,540
 Okay.

3003
03:41:24,540 --> 03:41:25,540
 Thanks.

3004
03:41:25,540 --> 03:41:27,880
 Richard, did you want to--

3005
03:41:27,880 --> 03:41:34,300
 What I was going to say is, let us continue to dig into this a little bit more, particularly

3006
03:41:34,300 --> 03:41:39,820
 as we look at the single family and duplex issue, again, the definition as it was proposed

3007
03:41:39,820 --> 03:41:47,020
 only applied if it was three or more units, so let us just dig into it a little more.

3008
03:41:47,020 --> 03:41:52,380
 As we start to prepare information, I think we can easily provide that to you even in

3009
03:41:52,380 --> 03:41:54,740
 a work session setting.

3010
03:41:54,740 --> 03:41:58,760
 We are going to have DDC update as a discussion item.

3011
03:41:58,760 --> 03:42:02,500
 This falls right within it, so I wouldn't think that it would-- I mean, Jared, maybe

3012
03:42:02,500 --> 03:42:06,200
 I'm correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think it would preclude us from discussing that

3013
03:42:06,200 --> 03:42:12,740
 in the terms of the overall DDC update, which I think is on the next subsequent agendas.

3014
03:42:12,740 --> 03:42:13,740
 Three agendas here.

3015
03:42:13,740 --> 03:42:14,740
 Thank you, Richard.

3016
03:42:14,740 --> 03:42:20,540
 Okay, I'll just say a couple words and there's a couple more commissioners.

3017
03:42:20,540 --> 03:42:24,220
 I don't really want to postpone this indefinitely either, but I don't see at this point that

3018
03:42:24,220 --> 03:42:26,980
 we have much of a choice with where this discussion went.

3019
03:42:26,980 --> 03:42:32,460
 For me, I think we've got-- we're kind of combining two separate things.

3020
03:42:32,460 --> 03:42:40,820
 I think an SRO is a single room occupancy, rent by the bedroom.

3021
03:42:40,820 --> 03:42:43,980
 That's really what it is, and it can be a single family house, it could be a duplex,

3022
03:42:43,980 --> 03:42:49,860
 it could be a 500-unit building, but that's what an SRO is.

3023
03:42:49,860 --> 03:42:54,980
 I think a lot of people think SRO, they think massive density buildings.

3024
03:42:54,980 --> 03:43:00,140
 So for me, I think that's where we might have been trying to go to with this definition,

3025
03:43:00,140 --> 03:43:10,240
 but I think we desperately need a definition for these high-density, purpose-built student

3026
03:43:10,240 --> 03:43:12,000
 housing complexes.

3027
03:43:12,000 --> 03:43:13,620
 We need that.

3028
03:43:13,620 --> 03:43:19,580
 We need to be able to regulate where we want to put them.

3029
03:43:19,580 --> 03:43:23,660
 That's one fold of this discussion, in my opinion.

3030
03:43:23,660 --> 03:43:29,580
 Then there's the whole SRO discussion to be had.

3031
03:43:29,580 --> 03:43:32,220
 Do we want them in the city?

3032
03:43:32,220 --> 03:43:33,220
 How do we regulate it?

3033
03:43:33,220 --> 03:43:35,380
 What are the regulations for that?

3034
03:43:35,380 --> 03:43:38,180
 I think these are two separate discussions.

3035
03:43:38,180 --> 03:43:43,980
 I don't know going forward as a staff, that'll be up to you of how you want to chop things

3036
03:43:43,980 --> 03:43:51,660
 up, but to me, we need a high-density definition that's a hot button issue in this community.

3037
03:43:51,660 --> 03:43:57,940
 It's what gets people ired up, because these massive complexes with hundreds and hundreds

3038
03:43:57,940 --> 03:44:03,440
 of students come in to these existing neighborhoods, and we can't regulate them with the way we

3039
03:44:03,440 --> 03:44:05,940
 have our code written right now.

3040
03:44:05,940 --> 03:44:11,560
 I think that absolutely has got to be done, and we haven't done it.

3041
03:44:11,560 --> 03:44:19,700
 Then the discussion is another discussion to be had about renting bedrooms, whether that

3042
03:44:19,700 --> 03:44:23,400
 be single-family, a three-plex, a tri-plex, whatever.

3043
03:44:23,400 --> 03:44:27,300
 That's another issue.

3044
03:44:27,300 --> 03:44:32,020
 On related family members, however, we need to regulate that.

3045
03:44:32,020 --> 03:44:38,460
 I think that's a separate issue to what this discussion started as.

3046
03:44:38,460 --> 03:44:45,180
 Chair, if I can clarify, are we saying that those are two different discussions, but during

3047
03:44:45,180 --> 03:44:49,260
 our work session, future work session, we want to bring all that together?

3048
03:44:49,260 --> 03:44:58,260
 Well, they're certainly related, so I mean, I would defer to you guys about what needs

3049
03:44:58,260 --> 03:45:02,300
 to happen first and what, but I mean.

3050
03:45:02,300 --> 03:45:07,780
 I just want to make sure I understand what we're preparing for, and we'll definitely

3051
03:45:07,780 --> 03:45:15,260
 regroup and come up with a strategy, but I didn't want to miss anything.

3052
03:45:15,260 --> 03:45:17,980
 Commissioner Newpreneta.

3053
03:45:17,980 --> 03:45:23,820
 My original point was to remove the height, but based on what Vice Chair Ellis has said,

3054
03:45:23,820 --> 03:45:30,340
 in this, we have two different types of structures that are bound together by a rental agreement

3055
03:45:30,340 --> 03:45:39,340
 type, so I think maybe the solution is to come back with basically both, one that addresses

3056
03:45:39,340 --> 03:45:43,660
 the single-family residence and one that addresses that type of unit.

3057
03:45:43,660 --> 03:45:49,340
 That way, you could have the height restriction, but we could also put these in.

3058
03:45:49,340 --> 03:45:56,260
 I think we would have to move to counsel both things concurrently to avoid a situation where

3059
03:45:56,260 --> 03:46:04,260
 people might take advantage of a gap of time, but that would probably be my recommendation.

3060
03:46:04,260 --> 03:46:11,100
 Probably would be easier to present two different options, or basically two different cases

3061
03:46:11,100 --> 03:46:16,980
 that we approve concurrently.

3062
03:46:16,980 --> 03:46:20,080
 Commissioner Sanchez.

3063
03:46:20,080 --> 03:46:24,660
 We started with a conversation of student housing, and now we're finding out that these

3064
03:46:24,660 --> 03:46:30,620
 actually, people are changing using the same plan that was developed for student housing

3065
03:46:30,620 --> 03:46:32,020
 so they can make more money.

3066
03:46:32,020 --> 03:46:35,820
 I think what we need to do is concentrate on student housing, because that's what we

3067
03:46:35,820 --> 03:46:43,540
 started with, and figure out that, and then move on to what's happening, why these people

3068
03:46:43,540 --> 03:46:50,660
 that are changing regular residence into the same pattern, the same model that they're

3069
03:46:50,660 --> 03:46:58,340
 using on student housing, we need to find out what's going on with those.

3070
03:46:58,340 --> 03:47:01,380
 Our whole discussion was, first, student housing.

3071
03:47:01,380 --> 03:47:10,340
 I think we need to stick with that and work that out completely, because to me, student

3072
03:47:10,340 --> 03:47:17,380
 housing also has location, and just to say we're going to do an SRO in Timbuktu, for

3073
03:47:17,380 --> 03:47:24,780
 the fact that I can make more money, but it's not for students, then are you breaking the

3074
03:47:24,780 --> 03:47:27,980
 law based on how many people you have in there?

3075
03:47:27,980 --> 03:47:37,860
 We need to look at, just concentrate on SROs first, and fix that, and location, and how

3076
03:47:37,860 --> 03:47:43,140
 many students, if you're calling that you're going to create student housing, what percentage

3077
03:47:43,140 --> 03:47:47,920
 of those people living there are students?

3078
03:47:47,920 --> 03:47:53,140
 You have to have 80% or 90% of those people living there to call it student housing.

3079
03:47:53,140 --> 03:47:58,780
 If you call it an SRO, and everybody's just working, and no students, then you're not

3080
03:47:58,780 --> 03:48:02,780
 an SRO.

3081
03:48:02,780 --> 03:48:08,580
 I think what has happened is people figured out how to make more money, and are using

3082
03:48:08,580 --> 03:48:14,180
 that model to make it, but we need to define it, and say this is what a student housing

3083
03:48:14,180 --> 03:48:15,180
 is.

3084
03:48:15,180 --> 03:48:24,100
 It's 90%, 100% students, not working people.

3085
03:48:24,100 --> 03:48:32,700
 If that's all you're doing, then you have a different model that you have to follow.

3086
03:48:32,700 --> 03:48:38,180
 Okay, I don't see any other discussion, so we do have a motion on the table to table

3087
03:48:38,180 --> 03:48:56,940
 this indefinitely, and I will call for a vote on the board.

3088
03:48:56,940 --> 03:49:04,460
 Motion passes 5-2-1.

3089
03:49:04,460 --> 03:49:07,900
 That leads us to our final item.

3090
03:49:07,900 --> 03:49:24,580
 That's our matrix, and Richard, I'll let you bring up our matrix.

3091
03:49:24,580 --> 03:49:29,980
 Just wanted to touch on a couple of the items on the matrix.

3092
03:49:29,980 --> 03:49:36,740
 At our next meeting on 2/20, we will have representatives from DSID to talk about their

3093
03:49:36,740 --> 03:49:40,980
 student generation rates and capacity, and how they determine that.

3094
03:49:40,980 --> 03:49:46,380
 I believe the consultant that assists them with that will also be in attendance to give

3095
03:49:46,380 --> 03:49:55,180
 that presentation on March 6th regarding the roundabout in the special study areas.

3096
03:49:55,180 --> 03:50:01,460
 I spoke to Preetam earlier today about that item, and so he will be here on the 6th.

3097
03:50:01,460 --> 03:50:07,140
 We'll probably want to start that meeting also a little bit earlier, so it'll be a number

3098
03:50:07,140 --> 03:50:11,800
 of items discussed as part of that, one being obviously the roundabouts, but I also want

3099
03:50:11,800 --> 03:50:17,340
 to have him give an update on the study that was completed, the special area study for

3100
03:50:17,340 --> 03:50:25,620
 the Sherman Avenue or Sherman Road area, as well as both Ryan Road and Hickory Creek.

3101
03:50:25,620 --> 03:50:31,900
 That way we're all in the loop as these projects progress.

3102
03:50:31,900 --> 03:50:35,700
 The Master Thoroughfare Mobility Plan, that is still in the works, so I don't have a

3103
03:50:35,700 --> 03:50:40,620
 specific date as to when, but I do know it will be in the very near future as they get

3104
03:50:40,620 --> 03:50:44,460
 that RFP out and begin that selection.

3105
03:50:44,460 --> 03:50:51,340
 Just wanted to mention also, while not on the matrix, City Council did approve the resolution

3106
03:50:51,340 --> 03:50:57,100
 last night regarding the developer engagement policy, so it is in effect.

3107
03:50:57,100 --> 03:51:02,340
 What we will do is I'll make sure everyone gets a copy of that signed resolution.

3108
03:51:02,340 --> 03:51:09,380
 Nothing changed from what the commission recommended, and just wanted to update on a couple projects.

3109
03:51:09,380 --> 03:51:16,220
 We did deny two applications last night, one being the Windsor Avenue Apartments.

3110
03:51:16,220 --> 03:51:20,380
 That was denied, as well as the rezoning for the lakeside, if you recall.

3111
03:51:20,380 --> 03:51:23,380
 That was in front of you.

3112
03:51:23,380 --> 03:51:26,100
 The lakeside rezoning.

3113
03:51:26,100 --> 03:51:30,660
 I also wanted to give you an update briefly, I don't want to get into the conversation

3114
03:51:30,660 --> 03:51:34,820
 on the project, just want to let you know what's on the horizon.

3115
03:51:34,820 --> 03:51:38,340
 The Agave Ranch most likely will be brought back.

3116
03:51:38,340 --> 03:51:44,020
 They're looking at amending their application, potentially reducing, if they do ultimately

3117
03:51:44,020 --> 03:51:49,060
 amend it and reduce the density, it will be brought back in front of the commission for

3118
03:51:49,060 --> 03:51:51,140
 consideration.

3119
03:51:51,140 --> 03:51:56,840
 They are holding some meetings with the neighbors, so just wanted to keep everyone apprised of

3120
03:51:56,840 --> 03:52:02,180
 where that's at.

3121
03:52:02,180 --> 03:52:06,940
 Anybody need to add anything to the matrix?

3122
03:52:06,940 --> 03:52:15,100
 Just real quick, so the next meeting's on the 20th, on the 13th, there's a special

3123
03:52:15,100 --> 03:52:18,580
 call session regarding the DDC update with Clarion.

3124
03:52:18,580 --> 03:52:19,580
 So that is okay.

3125
03:52:19,580 --> 03:52:20,580
 Commissioner Sanchez.

3126
03:52:20,580 --> 03:52:28,740
 I just, on the matrix, I was wondering if we could add something on, when we were talking

3127
03:52:28,740 --> 03:52:40,580
 about the special areas, I wanted, when they talked about the buffer stream size management

3128
03:52:40,580 --> 03:52:49,060
 zones, or they defined it fair or whatever, but when they talk about uplands, they never

3129
03:52:49,060 --> 03:52:51,300
 define what condition it is.

3130
03:52:51,300 --> 03:52:58,620
 I'd like to talk a little bit or discuss that a little bit, and also as to how we can improve

3131
03:52:58,620 --> 03:53:04,580
 it to make it, if there's any kind of management that we can bring into that and say if it's

3132
03:53:04,580 --> 03:53:09,100
 in fair condition or in good condition, how do we maintain that?

3133
03:53:09,100 --> 03:53:10,100
 Okay.

3134
03:53:10,100 --> 03:53:16,620
 We'll do, what I'll try to do is, let me talk to Deborah to see when I can have something

3135
03:53:16,620 --> 03:53:17,940
 brought in front of you.

3136
03:53:17,940 --> 03:53:24,860
 We will be bringing the conservation and landscape code for formal consideration on the 20th.

3137
03:53:24,860 --> 03:53:31,580
 I'll see if she can at least maybe get something, even beforehand, just to, where their thoughts

3138
03:53:31,580 --> 03:53:34,580
 are on it.

3139
03:53:34,580 --> 03:53:37,660
 Then I'll just add one comment.

3140
03:53:37,660 --> 03:53:43,460
 I know back in the day we used to have someone at our meetings from engineering, namely traffic.

3141
03:53:43,460 --> 03:53:52,740
 I don't know when that ended or if that can be done or, I just thought I'd throw that

3142
03:53:52,740 --> 03:53:53,740
 out there.

3143
03:53:53,740 --> 03:53:56,940
 Sometimes we have so many questions and it would be nice if we could call them down like

3144
03:53:56,940 --> 03:54:01,820
 we used to be able to call them down and get a quick update.

3145
03:54:01,820 --> 03:54:04,860
 Just because it's so relevant when we've got these public hearings, when they're right

3146
03:54:04,860 --> 03:54:09,540
 in front of us and they've got these concerns and we can quickly get to an update.

3147
03:54:09,540 --> 03:54:13,460
 I don't know when that decision was made, and I don't know if it can be fixed, because

3148
03:54:13,460 --> 03:54:18,740
 I don't know what staff is like now, but I just thought I'd throw that out there for

3149
03:54:18,740 --> 03:54:19,740
 our thought.

3150
03:54:19,740 --> 03:54:20,740
 I don't have an answer.

3151
03:54:20,740 --> 03:54:21,740
 Okay.

3152
03:54:21,740 --> 03:54:22,740
 I'll get one.

3153
03:54:22,740 --> 03:54:24,120
 Yeah, I'd appreciate that.

3154
03:54:24,120 --> 03:54:29,500
 We just always had one in attendance as part of staff.

3155
03:54:29,500 --> 03:54:37,980
 It was helpful a lot, a lot of the time, in work session and in regular session.

3156
03:54:37,980 --> 03:54:41,220
 I don't see anything else, so thank you everybody.

3157
03:54:41,220 --> 03:54:46,460
 With that, I will close our meeting at 9.11.

3158
03:54:46,460 --> 03:54:47,460
 Thank you.

3159
03:54:47,460 --> 03:54:47,460
 Thank you.