1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,040
 good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to the planning and zoning work

2
00:00:04,040 --> 00:00:11,500
 session meeting for May 1st 2019 I'll call a meeting to order at 5 o 3 before

3
00:00:11,500 --> 00:00:14,700
 we jump into the consent agenda and public hearing is there any notes to the

4
00:00:14,700 --> 00:00:21,540
 minutes that we need to cover you won't have any changes to those and on the

5
00:00:21,540 --> 00:00:25,780
 consent agenda there was four different items is there any questions that we can

6
00:00:25,780 --> 00:00:32,720
 bring up staff to clarify yes Christian Ellis thank you mine has to do with

7
00:00:32,720 --> 00:00:42,720
 item B I guess B and C of the consent agenda I'll invite Karina is she here

8
00:00:51,840 --> 00:00:57,400
 you said both B and C well because they're related yeah so my question has

9
00:00:57,400 --> 00:01:07,200
 to do with the note in B about it being contingent and if it's contingent then

10
00:01:07,200 --> 00:01:27,480
 wouldn't see be contingent which note so it's it's note two talks about its

11
00:01:27,480 --> 00:01:33,180
 contingent and then it said it has to be the contingency has to be met before a

12
00:01:33,180 --> 00:01:37,680
 final plaque can be approved and yet we're got a final plaque for lot 10 so

13
00:01:37,680 --> 00:01:46,600
 yes it speaks specifically to lot 14 and 15 on the preliminary plat so when when

14
00:01:46,600 --> 00:01:50,560
 the developer would come into final plat those two lots they would need to make

15
00:01:50,560 --> 00:01:55,400
 sure that they comply with this note okay so the contingency is only for lot

16
00:01:55,400 --> 00:02:08,960
 lot 14 14 and 15 okay thanks okay sir back I just I think we've run into this

17
00:02:08,960 --> 00:02:13,720
 before but if you could clarify again while we're dealing with a final plan

18
00:02:13,720 --> 00:02:20,840
 this is on FP 19 oh hey where says preliminary plans being considered for

19
00:02:20,840 --> 00:02:26,720
 approval prior to action this on so we're dealing with a final plan but the

20
00:02:26,720 --> 00:02:32,080
 preliminary plats not been completed yet so the item B is the preliminary plat

21
00:02:32,080 --> 00:02:39,600
 and then item C is the final plat for only lot 10 okay that makes sense thank

22
00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:44,240
 you to sir all thank you can I go back to the other the contingency we talked

23
00:02:44,240 --> 00:02:50,120
 about is it noted on there and am I missing it that it's noted that the

24
00:02:50,120 --> 00:02:56,800
 sorry I mean the note reads preliminary plot is contingent I'm failing to see

25
00:02:56,800 --> 00:03:13,000
 where it specifies the lots so lot so you're correct on here on the specific

26
00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:19,140
 notes it doesn't indicate which specific lot however if you it's depicted on the

27
00:03:19,140 --> 00:03:24,080
 plat itself okay what are we looking at here because sorry this is not what I'm

28
00:03:24,080 --> 00:03:29,640
 looking at this is the preliminary plat and so the note that you indicated was

29
00:03:29,640 --> 00:03:35,000
 for the floodplain and so it's indicating that floodplain exists on lot

30
00:03:35,000 --> 00:03:41,840
 14 and 15 those notes don't yeah look like your notes are not the notes I'm

31
00:03:41,840 --> 00:03:46,400
 talking about I'm not sure what we've got pulled up here

32
00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:51,320
 Michelle she's looking at the last page sorry yes page 3 of the preliminary

33
00:03:51,320 --> 00:03:57,320
 plat shows all the notes unless we're talking about a different yeah I have

34
00:03:57,320 --> 00:04:20,560
 notes on page 1 so okay so this specific note is related to the need for an alt

35
00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:31,800
 ESA and that one should be specific to lot 14 on there they have a small

36
00:04:31,800 --> 00:04:36,880
 portion of ESA right here so it's indicating that at final plat for lot

37
00:04:36,880 --> 00:04:44,880
 14 they would need to do an assessment and then if it's needed they would have

38
00:04:44,880 --> 00:04:49,080
 to do an alternative ESA assessment or alternative ESA plan okay I guess my

39
00:04:49,080 --> 00:04:52,200
 question is does it need to be noted there that I know I understand that you

40
00:04:52,200 --> 00:04:56,960
 understand it yes I don't I don't know that I see that here okay and so that's

41
00:04:56,960 --> 00:05:02,720
 my question so not sure who needs to answer that or if there's something we

42
00:05:02,720 --> 00:05:06,700
 need to be that needs to be done about it but I didn't know what it was

43
00:05:06,700 --> 00:05:10,680
 referring to when I read it but that doesn't mean that would be everybody

44
00:05:10,680 --> 00:05:19,240
 we're talking note for the ESA note right I'm talking about yeah no two on page one

45
00:05:19,240 --> 00:05:31,640
 can you further clarify where you're not clear because on note two it says

46
00:05:31,640 --> 00:05:38,840
 specifically about the approval of an alt ESA plan and then the plan itself on

47
00:05:38,840 --> 00:05:45,560
 page two has the alt ESA okay there okay so what would no I mean I guess that's

48
00:05:45,560 --> 00:05:55,320
 okay that that would reference there okay

49
00:05:57,760 --> 00:06:12,040
 similar questions for item B or C thank you very much Karina is there any

50
00:06:12,040 --> 00:06:22,180
 questions regarding a or D great so we'll move on to the public hearings the

51
00:06:22,180 --> 00:06:42,600
 first item is for a I'll invite mark presenting fr 19 - 0 0 0 3 good evening

52
00:06:42,600 --> 00:06:45,800
 my name is Mark Laird I'm the associate planner city didn't not presented to you

53
00:06:45,800 --> 00:06:55,640
 case fr 19 - 0 0 3 the request is for the approval of lots 1r 1 2r 1 and 3r 1

54
00:06:55,640 --> 00:07:02,920
 block a hilltop branch edition it's a replat of lots 1r 2r the site is located

55
00:07:02,920 --> 00:07:08,680
 in the ET jail on Hilltop Road staff has reviewed the case and recommends

56
00:07:08,680 --> 00:07:13,720
 approval as it meets all the requirements of the development code this

57
00:07:13,720 --> 00:07:18,040
 concludes my presentation if you have any questions you don't have any

58
00:07:18,040 --> 00:07:25,880
 questions about this replat great thank you thank you next is item 4b it's

59
00:07:25,880 --> 00:07:32,000
 presented by Julie Wyatt FP 19 - 0 0 0 8

60
00:07:38,920 --> 00:07:46,640
 all right Julie Wyatt senior planner at the city and I am presenting a replat

61
00:07:46,640 --> 00:07:52,440
 not a residential replat it's just a replat of 12 acres approximately 12

62
00:07:52,440 --> 00:07:56,600
 acres it's actually replatting a previously platted lot and taking in

63
00:07:56,600 --> 00:08:01,040
 some unplatted property in order to facilitate a development for the city

64
00:08:01,040 --> 00:08:06,680
 of Denton I'll stand for any questions this is the utilities development or

65
00:08:06,680 --> 00:08:10,420
 what's going on offices I believe there's there's an existing office

66
00:08:10,420 --> 00:08:14,520
 building on this north side this this south side which is kind of the

67
00:08:14,520 --> 00:08:18,480
 unplatted property coming into the lot that's intended for some parking and

68
00:08:18,480 --> 00:08:22,080
 also some some outside storage that'll have to be screened in accordance with

69
00:08:22,080 --> 00:08:29,720
 the code great any questions for Julie thank you very much next item for

70
00:08:29,720 --> 00:08:38,560
 business is item 4c z 19 - 0 0 0 2 and Cindy Jackson had the item

71
00:08:38,560 --> 00:08:54,960
 I'll confirm and Cindy are you combining these two presentations or they'll be

72
00:08:54,960 --> 00:09:01,800
 separate okay yes so we'll also hear item 4d s 19 - 7 exactly Mike my

73
00:09:01,800 --> 00:09:08,000
 presentation actually it's like two for the price of one to request one

74
00:09:08,000 --> 00:09:14,200
 presentation 4c and 4d you must approve foresee the rezoning presentation in

75
00:09:14,200 --> 00:09:20,280
 order to consider the SUP application which is 4d and let me change the view

76
00:09:20,280 --> 00:09:35,440
 here okay first up we've got z 19 - 0 0 0 2 it's a request to rezone a site

77
00:09:35,440 --> 00:09:41,200
 from downtown commercial neighborhood DCN to downtown commercial general DCG

78
00:09:41,200 --> 00:09:46,680
 the request is pursuant to the redevelopment of the site for a bank

79
00:09:46,680 --> 00:09:53,680
 they are also requesting for an SUP to have a drive-thru associated with that

80
00:09:53,680 --> 00:10:02,360
 bank and that is s 19 - 0 0 0 7 banks are currently permitted in the DCN

81
00:10:02,360 --> 00:10:08,320
 designation however in order to have a drive-thru it has to be zoned DCG in

82
00:10:08,320 --> 00:10:15,960
 order to get the the opportunity to apply for the specific use permit the

83
00:10:15,960 --> 00:10:24,000
 proposed site has noted is zoned DCG excuse me DCN and the applicant is

84
00:10:24,000 --> 00:10:30,040
 requesting to rezone it to DCG which is a continuation of the DCG that is

85
00:10:30,040 --> 00:10:37,600
 located to the east of the site the Denton development code the 2002 Denton

86
00:10:37,600 --> 00:10:42,640
 development code contains a zoning criteria for approval of a zoning

87
00:10:42,640 --> 00:10:46,280
 request the proposed rezoning must conform to the future land use

88
00:10:46,280 --> 00:10:50,960
 designation and the proposed zoning facilitates the adequate provision of

89
00:10:50,960 --> 00:10:56,160
 transportation water sewer schools parks and other public requirements and public

90
00:10:56,160 --> 00:11:03,960
 convenience criteria one the conforming to the future land use designation this

91
00:11:03,960 --> 00:11:09,320
 site is unique in that it's on the edge of two future land use designations it

92
00:11:09,320 --> 00:11:17,400
 is as such it is zone it is designated as both downtown Denton and neighborhood

93
00:11:17,400 --> 00:11:22,760
 University compatibility the purpose of the downtown Denton is for moderate and

94
00:11:22,760 --> 00:11:28,200
 high density residential commercial office and entertainment uses tailored

95
00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:32,840
 to encourage greater levels of activity in the downtown area and the purpose of

96
00:11:32,840 --> 00:11:37,480
 the neighborhood University compatibility area is to create compatible form and

97
00:11:37,480 --> 00:11:42,440
 land uses for those areas both to serve both established neighborhoods and the

98
00:11:42,440 --> 00:11:49,400
 universities the proposed DCG district is consistent with the intent of both of

99
00:11:49,400 --> 00:11:54,720
 these designations as it permits office and residential service uses of the

100
00:11:54,720 --> 00:12:03,840
 types encouraged by both designations excuse me now the second criteria is

101
00:12:03,840 --> 00:12:08,360
 adequate public facilities since the site is currently developed with the

102
00:12:08,360 --> 00:12:15,600
 Denton funeral home and crematorium it already has access to water and sewer

103
00:12:15,600 --> 00:12:22,920
 the if this is approved that the funeral home is planning to just close and the

104
00:12:22,920 --> 00:12:29,240
 site will be redeveloped for the bank with the drive-through the site has

105
00:12:29,240 --> 00:12:36,120
 access to both West Carroll and to West Mulberry West Carroll is

106
00:12:36,120 --> 00:12:40,480
 designated as a primary arterial and Mulberry Street is designated as a

107
00:12:40,480 --> 00:12:47,560
 collector Street and both both streets are capable of handling the traffic

108
00:12:47,560 --> 00:12:54,160
 which would be generated by the proposed use other findings as noted previously

109
00:12:54,160 --> 00:13:00,440
 this is a logical continuation of the DCG zoning that is located across Carroll

110
00:13:00,440 --> 00:13:05,760
 Boulevard with regards to relationship to the residential area the proposed use

111
00:13:05,760 --> 00:13:12,120
 is less intrusive than the existing funeral home it doesn't generate the type

112
00:13:12,120 --> 00:13:17,680
 of traffic that funeral homes do particularly during services and the

113
00:13:17,680 --> 00:13:22,960
 design standards that we have today are much more protective adjacent

114
00:13:22,960 --> 00:13:28,160
 residential uses then were the design standards back when this the funeral

115
00:13:28,160 --> 00:13:33,280
 home was developed in the 70s specifically we have route we require

116
00:13:33,280 --> 00:13:37,600
 buffers and setbacks and landscaping from the residential where if you look

117
00:13:37,600 --> 00:13:42,840
 at it today you can see that the the parking is right up against the house

118
00:13:42,840 --> 00:13:47,240
 there's no screening there's there's nothing there's just a parking lot in a

119
00:13:47,240 --> 00:13:54,760
 house so we will be able to better adequately buffer the residential uses

120
00:13:54,760 --> 00:13:59,800
 staff recommends approval of this request as it is consistent with the

121
00:13:59,800 --> 00:14:04,680
 goals and objectives of didn't plan 2030 and complies with the zoning criteria

122
00:14:04,680 --> 00:14:11,360
 for approval now we'll move on to the SUP request the SUP is a request for

123
00:14:11,360 --> 00:14:16,080
 approval of a drive-through facility in association with the proposed bank

124
00:14:16,080 --> 00:14:22,680
 pressure back thank you correct me here if I'm wrong I'm looking at this table

125
00:14:22,680 --> 00:14:25,440
 of allowed uses or we got the conversion saying so I don't know if I've got a

126
00:14:25,440 --> 00:14:31,480
 good one here not but for banks or financial institution now DCN and DCG

127
00:14:31,480 --> 00:14:44,520
 will be MD is that right okay I mean okay then I probably got screwed up chart

128
00:14:44,520 --> 00:14:51,640
 here because it's showing it should be MD but under either the DCN and DCG right

129
00:14:51,640 --> 00:14:56,680
 now on this shows that these are not a bank is not allowed a bank is an office

130
00:14:56,680 --> 00:15:02,160
 use and it is permitted it's a professional office okay we don't have a

131
00:15:02,160 --> 00:15:08,120
 criteria specific category for bank in the 2002 code so we use professional

132
00:15:08,120 --> 00:15:17,480
 office for bank so and that that actually is going to be part of my

133
00:15:17,480 --> 00:15:24,740
 presentation as well we do have SUP criteria for approval in the 2002 DDC

134
00:15:24,740 --> 00:15:30,000
 section 3564 which requires it to conform to all standards within the

135
00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:34,960
 zoning district the Denton plan and to other applicable law and a compatibility

136
00:15:34,960 --> 00:15:38,660
 analysis between the surrounding properties the requested and the

137
00:15:38,660 --> 00:15:43,680
 requested use and I went into great detail in this compatibility in your

138
00:15:43,680 --> 00:15:52,700
 backup and in my presentation I'm just going to kind of touch the high points

139
00:15:52,700 --> 00:15:59,800
 now the applicant has submitted a site plan there we go the request is for a

140
00:15:59,800 --> 00:16:03,680
 drive through facility in association with the bank you can see the drive

141
00:16:03,680 --> 00:16:08,200
 through is located on the west side of the bank there will be three lanes a

142
00:16:08,200 --> 00:16:15,000
 pass-through ATM and drive-through window and ATM and drive-through window the

143
00:16:15,000 --> 00:16:24,000
 site actually conforms with the approval criteria in section 364 the applicant is

144
00:16:24,000 --> 00:16:29,840
 proposing to construct a 12,000 square foot two-story bank building on the site

145
00:16:29,840 --> 00:16:36,440
 currently on the site is a 13,000 square foot funeral home which has been located

146
00:16:36,440 --> 00:16:43,160
 on this site since 1970 so the the building is going to be smaller than it

147
00:16:43,160 --> 00:16:48,600
 currently is on the site the proposed scale of development in terms of lot

148
00:16:48,600 --> 00:16:53,480
 coverage for area ratio and building height will comply with the requirements

149
00:16:53,480 --> 00:16:59,480
 for the DCG district the DCG district permits a maximum lot coverage of 85%

150
00:16:59,480 --> 00:17:04,120
 and buildings up to 100 feet in height however the applicant is only proposing

151
00:17:04,120 --> 00:17:09,680
 a two-story building the property has approximately 228 feet of frontage along

152
00:17:09,680 --> 00:17:14,560
 West Mulberry Street and 181 feet of frontage along South Carroll Boulevard

153
00:17:14,560 --> 00:17:19,520
 and will have access to both the proposed drive-through use is consistent

154
00:17:19,520 --> 00:17:24,600
 with the mixture of commercial uses that are located along South Carroll Street

155
00:17:24,600 --> 00:17:32,440
 and also along West Mulberry on the east side of Carroll Street the proposed

156
00:17:32,440 --> 00:17:37,600
 drive-through is compatible with the future land use designation of the

157
00:17:37,600 --> 00:17:41,120
 downtown Denton and neighborhood University compatibility area and

158
00:17:41,120 --> 00:17:49,600
 complies with the SUP criteria as noted in your backup other findings the

159
00:17:49,600 --> 00:17:55,600
 proposed bank use is less intrusive than the existing funeral home particularly

160
00:17:55,600 --> 00:18:00,320
 if it's like most banks nowadays that are closed on Saturday and Sunday

161
00:18:00,320 --> 00:18:04,480
 whereas the funeral homes that's usually when they do their have their services

162
00:18:04,480 --> 00:18:10,640
 and such and you'll see a lot of on-street parking and for the services

163
00:18:10,640 --> 00:18:17,440
 the as I noted the bank is smaller than the existing funeral home the design

164
00:18:17,440 --> 00:18:21,800
 standards particularly required buffers adjacent to the residential use which is

165
00:18:21,800 --> 00:18:28,440
 located on this side and this portion of the site will help protect the property

166
00:18:28,440 --> 00:18:34,680
 and the provision of on-site parking the applicant will provide enough parking

167
00:18:34,680 --> 00:18:42,000
 such that their on-street parking should not be needed at all for this site now

168
00:18:42,000 --> 00:18:50,760
 for both note both applications we sent public notices to 17 within 200 feet of

169
00:18:50,760 --> 00:18:57,200
 the site and courtesy notices went to 88 people within 500 feet of the site and

170
00:18:57,200 --> 00:19:04,640
 we received one back in opposition which represents 2% of the area within the 200

171
00:19:04,640 --> 00:19:08,480
 feet two signs were posted on the site and the applicant did have a

172
00:19:08,480 --> 00:19:18,560
 neighborhood meeting to which one attendee was present staff recommends

173
00:19:18,560 --> 00:19:23,320
 approval of the SUP with the following conditions that one the landscaping in

174
00:19:23,320 --> 00:19:26,860
 the attached site plan reflects an intent to comply with the DD require

175
00:19:26,860 --> 00:19:31,880
 DDC requirements for parking street trees minimum landscape and canopy areas

176
00:19:31,880 --> 00:19:36,040
 and compatibility buffers with administrative approval of an

177
00:19:36,040 --> 00:19:41,560
 alternative buffer with elements that are permitted in accordance with DDC 35

178
00:19:41,560 --> 00:19:46,760
 13 8 minor alterations to the depicted locations of the individual plantings

179
00:19:46,760 --> 00:19:51,040
 may be approved by city staff provided that the final landscaping as planted

180
00:19:51,040 --> 00:19:55,480
 complies with the attached site plan in terms of buffer and open space locations

181
00:19:55,480 --> 00:20:00,840
 as well as all in elements of the DDC and number two notwithstanding the

182
00:20:00,840 --> 00:20:03,960
 limited administrative approvals authorized by condition one the city

183
00:20:03,960 --> 00:20:08,040
 reserves the right to require approval by ordinance of any amendments to the

184
00:20:08,040 --> 00:20:14,200
 SUP the attached site plan and the elements described in section 3 below

185
00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:20,240
 including those referenced in condition 1 while section 3 below was in your staff

186
00:20:20,240 --> 00:20:25,080
 report and that concludes my presentation

187
00:20:25,080 --> 00:20:31,960
 Cindy I'm kind of cloudy on something that can you clarify they're not required

188
00:20:31,960 --> 00:20:37,480
 to have front parking parking in front of the building no they're not required

189
00:20:37,480 --> 00:20:50,160
 their parking can be behind or to the side this is in our our downtown CBD area

190
00:20:50,160 --> 00:20:54,200
 and that is considered in addition to the in our districts those are

191
00:20:54,200 --> 00:20:59,000
 pedestrian oriented areas because I think in a medical city they all have

192
00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:05,520
 front parking that's a different that's different yes okay great any other

193
00:21:05,520 --> 00:21:09,560
 questions for Cindy Chris Ellis thank you chair Cindy I assume they're gonna be

194
00:21:09,560 --> 00:21:14,200
 developing this from the old code yes they are discussed at all they are when

195
00:21:14,200 --> 00:21:17,280
 when the new code was approach was approved last week the applicant

196
00:21:17,280 --> 00:21:26,720
 requested to come in under the new code and since and we advised him since we've

197
00:21:26,720 --> 00:21:29,560
 already been working on this for months we'll just go ahead and go through with

198
00:21:29,560 --> 00:21:39,840
 it and was it discussed at all with the drive off a mulberry I mean it's high

199
00:21:39,840 --> 00:21:45,120
 pedestrian there high bicycle I mean because I mean it's just constant

200
00:21:45,120 --> 00:21:49,560
 especially when when UNT is in session exactly at that intersection there and

201
00:21:49,560 --> 00:21:55,800
 well maybe it's less if the funeral home you know I mean the funeral home has a

202
00:21:55,800 --> 00:21:59,880
 service it's kind of one and done and not sure when it's gonna happen again a

203
00:21:59,880 --> 00:22:03,640
 bank's gonna have a little bit more consistent traffic would be my opinion

204
00:22:03,640 --> 00:22:09,560
 was that discussed at all with that well driveway off a mulberry no at this point

205
00:22:09,560 --> 00:22:14,120
 no because the we will discuss that further when the site plan comes in for

206
00:22:14,120 --> 00:22:21,360
 approval when the site plan comes in for approval we will discuss access more

207
00:22:21,360 --> 00:22:28,800
 thoroughly and ensure that the safety of the pedestrians but at this point we did

208
00:22:28,800 --> 00:22:36,880
 not this property required two entrances to curb cuts I mean it already has it's

209
00:22:36,880 --> 00:22:41,080
 already there but take Michelle's point is it is it legal for them just to have

210
00:22:41,080 --> 00:22:46,520
 one turning off Carol or do they have to have two entrances you know that I'm not

211
00:22:46,520 --> 00:22:50,840
 sure if to be honest with you I can check on that and get back to you in the

212
00:22:50,840 --> 00:22:57,480
 morning that would be enforced or considered at site planning though that

213
00:22:57,480 --> 00:23:00,680
 yes that would be considered during the site plan it's at that point that

214
00:23:00,680 --> 00:23:03,640
 transportation will look at all the entrances because they actually have

215
00:23:03,640 --> 00:23:08,440
 more than two entrances and and make a determination there's two on Carol I

216
00:23:08,440 --> 00:23:17,320
 believe okay any other questions for Cindy hey Richard has some yeah I did

217
00:23:17,320 --> 00:23:20,760
 want to mention we did have traffic look at this and I believe these are the

218
00:23:20,760 --> 00:23:26,360
 existing ingress and acres points that are that are there today so that they

219
00:23:26,360 --> 00:23:29,760
 are existing and I think it's it's it's even a less the square footage of the

220
00:23:29,760 --> 00:23:34,200
 building is about a thousand square feet less it is what's there right and it's

221
00:23:34,200 --> 00:23:42,120
 only right in right out mm-hmm off Carol thank you right and it's always out on

222
00:23:42,120 --> 00:23:53,000
 it's both ways out on Mulberry correct correct I believe so I'm good I just I

223
00:23:53,000 --> 00:23:56,280
 just have a lot of concern has anyone ever been on Mulberry Street when when

224
00:23:56,280 --> 00:24:05,280
 the light is backed up at certain times I mean it's a nightmare and Commissioner

225
00:24:05,280 --> 00:24:09,320
 let's just maybe one other piece to that that we were discussing Mulberry in

226
00:24:09,320 --> 00:24:13,920
 particular and we were talking about as we work through the mobility plan and

227
00:24:13,920 --> 00:24:18,920
 looking at how it is that we can redevelop Mulberry and as part of that

228
00:24:18,920 --> 00:24:23,280
 was really what that right of way was there and ultimately some grander

229
00:24:23,280 --> 00:24:27,560
 changes so when we took we took that into consideration as well and how it is

230
00:24:27,560 --> 00:24:34,040
 that we would take care of pedestrian and bicycle traffic so just keep in mind

231
00:24:34,040 --> 00:24:37,600
 that we we did have an extensive conversation with traffic engineer to

232
00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:42,800
 make sure what we were doing is most appropriate and I think there is a code

233
00:24:42,800 --> 00:24:47,240
 requirement also where you've got two streets you take access off of the less

234
00:24:47,240 --> 00:24:54,240
 lesser the two minimize the traffic off of Carol and then Carol was a right in

235
00:24:54,240 --> 00:25:03,280
 right out because primary arterial and then I guess then my only other concern

236
00:25:03,280 --> 00:25:10,800
 was in changing the zoning in the bank doesn't decide to build was it discussed

237
00:25:10,800 --> 00:25:14,760
 about other things we're opening this corner up to if we make that zoning

238
00:25:14,760 --> 00:25:22,080
 change well that there would be they would still have to follow the uses with

239
00:25:22,080 --> 00:25:28,920
 would still have to follow the design standards with regards to protection of

240
00:25:28,920 --> 00:25:37,440
 the residential areas and so I from my understanding the bank is just about

241
00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:43,160
 chopping at the bit to get started if I'm correctly I understand that nod yes

242
00:25:43,160 --> 00:25:47,400
 or no we've kind of all been there before and things haven't so so yeah we

243
00:25:47,400 --> 00:25:52,240
 appreciate that my understand that but it's happened before yeah well I

244
00:25:52,240 --> 00:25:56,880
 understand that and anything that goes in there besides the bank would have to

245
00:25:56,880 --> 00:26:00,880
 comply with all of our design regulations which would to protect the

246
00:26:00,880 --> 00:26:11,960
 existing residential the transition for this property would be MN and I guess

247
00:26:11,960 --> 00:26:15,840
 that was going to be my next question so it's going to automatically switch to MN

248
00:26:15,840 --> 00:26:21,280
 if regardless whether it's whether the zoning changes or not it's going to go

249
00:26:21,280 --> 00:26:27,720
 to MN so by the time our meeting can I didn't see any I saw the comparative

250
00:26:27,720 --> 00:26:36,280
 chart with DC and DCG in there maybe do we have a slide for MN the work

251
00:26:36,280 --> 00:26:40,120
 session might provide a little bit more clarity to this so when we talked a

252
00:26:40,120 --> 00:26:43,920
 little bit about the transition table I saw Commissioner Beck trying to get to

253
00:26:43,920 --> 00:26:49,920
 his sheet so in short answer this use will be allowed with the transition

254
00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:55,360
 table so the action whether you took it or not they ultimately be entitled to do

255
00:26:55,360 --> 00:27:00,560
 the same at some point in the future correct yeah correct so inevitably it's

256
00:27:00,560 --> 00:27:08,720
 going that way okay and I understand what you're saying there because it's

257
00:27:08,720 --> 00:27:13,080
 allowed a bank used to be allowed drive-thru within a CP just like what

258
00:27:13,080 --> 00:27:21,080
 we're requesting correct my thing is is DCG is all of DCG MN no MD and MN

259
00:27:21,080 --> 00:27:26,800
 correct depending on the D tip or not and it is not in the D tip so it will

260
00:27:26,800 --> 00:27:37,480
 not be MD it'll be MN okay so if we change it and it's DCG it's still going

261
00:27:37,480 --> 00:27:43,840
 to go to MN. Thank you. Commissioner Smith. Thank you Chair. Senator can you go back to the

262
00:27:43,840 --> 00:27:51,000
 preliminary outlook of what the I guess the site plan it's not final it's

263
00:27:51,000 --> 00:27:57,720
 not it's not nothing binding here it is final that right there to us to that

264
00:27:57,720 --> 00:28:04,120
 way I mean there might be some minor adjustments specifically the flow of

265
00:28:04,120 --> 00:28:07,920
 the drive-thru away from Mulberry cycling back towards Carroll essentially

266
00:28:07,920 --> 00:28:14,800
 mm-hmm is that that is final. One of the conditions seem like that it

267
00:28:14,800 --> 00:28:19,480
 has to be has coordinates with this it has to be in accordance gotcha I just

268
00:28:19,480 --> 00:28:22,360
 wanted to I could remember which way I was flowing I saw one to confirm that it

269
00:28:22,360 --> 00:28:25,600
 is flowing away from there so it wouldn't be you would you wouldn't see as

270
00:28:25,600 --> 00:28:29,720
 much you'd see entrances off of Mulberry but you wouldn't see as much exits

271
00:28:29,720 --> 00:28:33,480
 because the drive-thru doesn't right the drive-thru traffic wouldn't it'd be

272
00:28:33,480 --> 00:28:36,480
 unnatural if turn back around and come back to the parking lot rather than

273
00:28:36,480 --> 00:28:39,760
 going back out there not saying they can't do it but just that it's it's

274
00:28:39,760 --> 00:28:43,840
 pointing it away it's pointing it out away from Mulberry rather than towards

275
00:28:43,840 --> 00:28:46,520
 the easiest way to exit from the drive-thru is just go back to Carroll.

276
00:28:46,520 --> 00:28:51,200
 Thank you. Commissioner Beck. Thank You Chair. You mentioned a while ago that there were

277
00:28:51,200 --> 00:28:56,680
 three means of ingress and egress but looking at your diagram. That's

278
00:28:56,680 --> 00:29:03,560
 currently what they've got. Okay. If you look at the aerial. This is the site plan

279
00:29:03,560 --> 00:29:08,040
 that the. This is the site plan that is proposed for the site. Okay but it's only

280
00:29:08,040 --> 00:29:15,480
 showing two. That's right. Right. I said as it stands now but this is the

281
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:19,760
 site plan that is proposed. Site plan has two. Okay gotcha so you're saying there's

282
00:29:19,760 --> 00:29:32,080
 three now. Yes. Okay thank you. Any other questions for Cindy? Thank you very much

283
00:29:32,080 --> 00:29:39,360
 Cindy. That concludes the agenda for tonight's plan and zoning commission. We

284
00:29:39,360 --> 00:29:45,520
 will end the meeting at 532 and oh we do have a work session report. I was just

285
00:29:45,520 --> 00:29:53,520
 gonna skip right over that. Darn. Thank you Richard. Yes we'll go to work session

286
00:29:53,520 --> 00:29:59,880
 report 1A. Good try Mr. Chair. Scott McDonald director of development

287
00:29:59,880 --> 00:30:06,800
 services. Of course one more time we need to talk about what we have for the

288
00:30:06,800 --> 00:30:11,560
 Denton development code or the development code 2019 edition. So for

289
00:30:11,560 --> 00:30:15,480
 clarity we're gonna try to reference as the development code 2019 rather than

290
00:30:15,480 --> 00:30:21,500
 saying old proposed new or anything else. So for clarity we have a current code

291
00:30:21,500 --> 00:30:26,520
 which is our existing code or we have the 2019 edition of the development code.

292
00:30:26,520 --> 00:30:33,760
 Great. A couple things have occurred since we came before the commission. One

293
00:30:33,760 --> 00:30:39,720
 is is that we have the council has adopted. When they adopted they adopted a

294
00:30:39,720 --> 00:30:45,360
 transition table. The transition table is slightly different. Through DCR

295
00:30:45,360 --> 00:30:51,320
 C that and Ron's gonna pass that out here directly. We made some changes to

296
00:30:51,320 --> 00:30:59,680
 minimize the some of the what was an error when we made the transition from

297
00:30:59,680 --> 00:31:14,680
 DCG our dr1 dr2 NRMU and NRM never mind 12 and so what we did is we found that

298
00:31:14,680 --> 00:31:21,400
 that we had some r7s that shouldn't have been and and so we just cleaned clean

299
00:31:21,400 --> 00:31:26,800
 that up. So that transition chart is part of the code. It is an appendix of the

300
00:31:26,800 --> 00:31:32,520
 code and that is really going to guide as we move forward and bring the city

301
00:31:32,520 --> 00:31:39,360
 initiated rezonings. So we we most closely followed what was in context on

302
00:31:39,360 --> 00:31:48,400
 the ground and and made that transition. We will be coming forward with a series

303
00:31:48,400 --> 00:31:54,960
 of city initiated rezonings. We're gonna focus on highway corridor. We're gonna

304
00:31:54,960 --> 00:32:00,720
 focus on some of the split zonings and then as we look at really some of the r7

305
00:32:00,720 --> 00:32:08,480
 MD MR MN some of those areas as well as some of the residential areas. So we're

306
00:32:08,480 --> 00:32:14,840
 gonna bring those in I think Richard I don't know that Richards ready to speak.

307
00:32:14,840 --> 00:32:20,200
 I guess I can ask the question not that I'm looking for an answer of course is

308
00:32:20,200 --> 00:32:25,040
 we're considering calling special meetings of the planning and zoning

309
00:32:25,040 --> 00:32:29,600
 commission to try to do this weekly instead of running the meetings

310
00:32:29,600 --> 00:32:36,320
 incredibly late every other week. I visited with the agenda committee today

311
00:32:36,320 --> 00:32:40,080
 to talk about council and doing a similar function with council. We're

312
00:32:40,080 --> 00:32:44,700
 gonna go to a work session in May to discuss what the options are with

313
00:32:44,700 --> 00:32:48,600
 council whether we want to have some special called meetings whether we're

314
00:32:48,600 --> 00:32:51,560
 gonna do those every week or whether we'll just run them long and what times

315
00:32:51,560 --> 00:32:55,440
 those will be. But I think first and foremost all of those items are gonna

316
00:32:55,440 --> 00:33:01,800
 come before this body and so then it would be really a request of meeting

317
00:33:01,800 --> 00:33:06,960
 weekly so that we can try to minimize the amount of time. We're looking at

318
00:33:06,960 --> 00:33:11,920
 trying to do these geographically so we'll take IE highway corridor we may

319
00:33:11,920 --> 00:33:17,160
 take as a lump sum so we can talk about highway corridor overall or we might

320
00:33:17,160 --> 00:33:22,860
 talk about 35 East and 35 North and just treat those two separately and then

321
00:33:22,860 --> 00:33:28,280
 we'll look at maybe quadrants of town or particular zoning districts that we can

322
00:33:28,280 --> 00:33:32,960
 have some sort of relationship with. We intend on bringing these presentations

323
00:33:32,960 --> 00:33:38,480
 forward in groups so when we talk about a rezoning it's not going to be an

324
00:33:38,480 --> 00:33:43,240
 individual parcel some may be an individual parcel but we'll bring them

325
00:33:43,240 --> 00:33:49,440
 in groups each of the actions will come as an individual item or we're

326
00:33:49,440 --> 00:33:52,920
 discussing whether that's going to be meets and bounds if we were to take

327
00:33:52,920 --> 00:33:58,660
 something like Lakeview they have I think a request in there NR 2 want to go

328
00:33:58,660 --> 00:34:03,780
 to NR 1 and so if that's the case and by meets and bounds we could take all of

329
00:34:03,780 --> 00:34:07,040
 those parcels rather than individual parcels and each of those have an

330
00:34:07,040 --> 00:34:11,920
 individual ordinance so we're vetting that out currently. Just trying to

331
00:34:11,920 --> 00:34:15,360
 simplify for the public trying to simplify for the Commission and

332
00:34:15,360 --> 00:34:19,680
 simplify for council the best way to do this we are going to provide notice to

333
00:34:19,680 --> 00:34:25,000
 everyone within 200 feet of any affected property that we're proposing these

334
00:34:25,000 --> 00:34:30,400
 rezonings I don't know if we have an actual number of parcels as of yet an

335
00:34:30,400 --> 00:34:37,320
 estimate number of parcels I have to venture it's less than 300 I don't know

336
00:34:37,320 --> 00:34:43,320
 that but that's a lot so as we work through that the other change on the

337
00:34:43,320 --> 00:34:48,800
 development code when it was adopted of course we came before P&Z then we met

338
00:34:48,800 --> 00:34:57,120
 with DCRC we had made the change to NR 3 to R3 and we had the component in there

339
00:34:57,120 --> 00:35:04,840
 of single-family duplex triplex fourplex town homes and we removed the

340
00:35:04,840 --> 00:35:11,320
 opportunity for anything other than single-family residential and our four

341
00:35:11,320 --> 00:35:19,480
 we removed the component of triplex fourplex in NR 4 so that was done with

342
00:35:19,480 --> 00:35:24,720
 council there was an errata which I think Ron has passed out as well the

343
00:35:24,720 --> 00:35:30,040
 errata went with council as far as a part of what the draft code was and that

344
00:35:30,040 --> 00:35:36,000
 was any and all changes that that we had made as we were discussing those with P&Z

345
00:35:36,000 --> 00:35:40,240
 and council and beyond that I don't believe there are any substantive

346
00:35:40,240 --> 00:35:46,840
 changes that had occurred part of the ordinance also included the fact that we

347
00:35:46,840 --> 00:35:53,040
 will continue to work on the code if there are errors that are non-

348
00:35:53,040 --> 00:35:56,200
 substantive they will be approved by the city attorney's office as

349
00:35:56,200 --> 00:36:00,160
 non-substantive anything that's a substantive change will come before P&Z

350
00:36:00,160 --> 00:36:05,360
 is a text amendment and council as any other text amendment would come forward

351
00:36:05,360 --> 00:36:09,920
 Ron has an entirety of a presentation I just want to kind of give it a brief

352
00:36:09,920 --> 00:36:15,080
 background on where we're at and how we got there and thank you

353
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:20,860
 Commissioner Smith make sure about one with those weekly meetings start I think

354
00:36:20,860 --> 00:36:33,940
 that we determined it would be May 29th okay thank you okay no further ado Ron

355
00:36:33,940 --> 00:36:38,480
 has his favorite slide

356
00:36:38,480 --> 00:36:50,120
 thank you chair members of the Commission I apologize that we were a

357
00:36:50,120 --> 00:36:55,320
 little late but wanted to share with you as Scott already mentioned I'm gonna

358
00:36:55,320 --> 00:36:58,960
 highlight a couple things and if I repeat a couple of them I apologize but

359
00:36:58,960 --> 00:37:02,560
 just want to go through this this is my favorite slide and it shows that then

360
00:37:02,560 --> 00:37:07,880
 plan 2030 very proud of the plan and really why we're here in updating our

361
00:37:07,880 --> 00:37:15,040
 development code in our zoning map so Scott mentioned a number of them among a

362
00:37:15,040 --> 00:37:19,520
 number of what I was going to discuss already but just to kind of reiterate

363
00:37:19,520 --> 00:37:23,720
 some of that the cleanup edits the errata sheet that you have in front of

364
00:37:23,720 --> 00:37:27,800
 you as Scott mentioned was presented to City Council and that was part of their

365
00:37:27,800 --> 00:37:37,000
 motion for approval or adoption of the 2019 DDC the adoption was April 23rd

366
00:37:37,000 --> 00:37:42,560
 with an effective date of October 1st I think everyone it's kind of clear on how

367
00:37:42,560 --> 00:37:51,120
 that's gonna work that the 2019 won't be effective until October 1st however a

368
00:37:51,120 --> 00:37:55,000
 development that comes in a developer or property owner that comes in can choose

369
00:37:55,000 --> 00:38:00,760
 between the 2002 or the 2019 development code but they have to pick one they

370
00:38:00,760 --> 00:38:07,600
 can't pick and choose between one or the other or pieces of one or the other we

371
00:38:07,600 --> 00:38:11,460
 as Scott mentioned we are in the process of doing additional review as we go

372
00:38:11,460 --> 00:38:16,120
 through this process between now and October 1st we'll have an opportunity to

373
00:38:16,120 --> 00:38:23,240
 see how it's working and if there are any substantive changes or any changes

374
00:38:23,240 --> 00:38:26,200
 to the code of ordinances that we're working on we'll have to bring that part

375
00:38:26,200 --> 00:38:33,000
 of a public hearing in ordinance but that again we're making sure that we

376
00:38:33,000 --> 00:38:38,200
 address everything in the DDC moving forward and that's why we still have more

377
00:38:38,200 --> 00:38:45,200
 time to review the the code itself okay so the transition chart you have a copy

378
00:38:45,200 --> 00:38:50,360
 of that in front of you Scott mentioned it earlier I'm gonna skip to the next

379
00:38:50,360 --> 00:38:57,320
 slide this really here illustrates the changed of what happened between PNZ and

380
00:38:57,320 --> 00:39:06,040
 City Council you see that in the green we've moved NRMU 12 up to the R7 we

381
00:39:06,040 --> 00:39:16,860
 clarified that any DCN DCG within the D tip is now an MD any that are outside

382
00:39:16,860 --> 00:39:20,480
 the D tip boundary and I apologize I don't have a map of the D tip it's

383
00:39:20,480 --> 00:39:26,120
 primarily Carroll to the west Parkway to the north

384
00:39:26,120 --> 00:39:32,640
 Sycamore to the south and exposition across the tracks to the east so that's

385
00:39:32,640 --> 00:39:36,960
 the boundary of the detail the core of the area I think we have seen it

386
00:39:36,960 --> 00:39:41,840
 probably it's hard to see on that map but it's the one that's shown there in I

387
00:39:41,840 --> 00:39:48,360
 believe dark purple those that are outside the detail are going to

388
00:39:48,360 --> 00:39:53,400
 transition or have transition to MN so the case that you heard earlier it's

389
00:39:53,400 --> 00:39:58,120
 just outside it's on the west side of Carol would or has been transitioned to

390
00:39:58,120 --> 00:40:08,840
 MN going further the dr2 RC 1 RCR 1 and RCR 2 those were originally going to

391
00:40:08,840 --> 00:40:14,240
 transition to R7 they have now moved down and are going to or are sorry

392
00:40:14,240 --> 00:40:26,960
 transition to MN so that is the changes that happened after PNZ and then PF yes

393
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:33,720
 thank you Scott PF we made sure that any publicly owned property is now a PF and

394
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,720
 you can see from the map over there those are represented in blue so there's

395
00:40:38,720 --> 00:40:44,520
 a lot of them that includes the city's property own city own property unit UNT

396
00:40:44,520 --> 00:40:52,480
 TW and any other public property such as the state and federal so you see that

397
00:40:52,480 --> 00:40:58,720
 most of the city that are in blue are represented there as PFs any question on

398
00:40:58,720 --> 00:41:06,940
 the transition chart and this was again a chart that was presented to the City

399
00:41:06,940 --> 00:41:09,540
 Council and that was part of their motion for approval

400
00:41:09,540 --> 00:41:14,280
 Chris Ross thank you chair with PS run did that does that mean all parks went

401
00:41:14,280 --> 00:41:20,560
 to PF or not all parks yes any see own property went to parks fire stations and

402
00:41:20,560 --> 00:41:29,240
 like mr. Beck thank you chair well ago you mentioned the pick-and-choose

403
00:41:29,240 --> 00:41:34,040
 developers could still do but that stops effect at the effective date of October

404
00:41:34,040 --> 00:41:38,600
 1st right correct they have to make that pick and choose prior to that correct

405
00:41:38,600 --> 00:41:43,400
 any completed submittal prior to October 1st they can still pick and choose

406
00:41:43,400 --> 00:41:53,000
 however after that they would have to comply with a 2019 okay so as we are as

407
00:41:53,000 --> 00:42:00,000
 Scott mentioned again earlier we are in the process of our efforts in conducting

408
00:42:00,000 --> 00:42:05,680
 research for our city initiated rezoning and those are represented on this map

409
00:42:05,680 --> 00:42:13,960
 over here to my on my right these are areas that were transitioned per the

410
00:42:13,960 --> 00:42:20,000
 transition chart but don't necessarily fit the area or don't fit the context

411
00:42:20,000 --> 00:42:24,440
 of the area that is Scott mentioned highway corridor and those are shown in

412
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:30,440
 the red alone I 35 most of those areas that are shown in red were transitioned

413
00:42:30,440 --> 00:42:37,760
 to either mr. R7 or something lesser than a highway corridor and so staff's

414
00:42:37,760 --> 00:42:43,160
 bringing forward those as part of a public hearing process which will be

415
00:42:43,160 --> 00:42:51,560
 coming forward to you as early as May 29th as public hearing items in addition

416
00:42:51,560 --> 00:42:56,920
 to staff recommendations push Alice thank you chair Ron the transition chart

417
00:42:56,920 --> 00:43:02,360
 is that adopted or is that proposed it was adopted it is actually part of the

418
00:43:02,360 --> 00:43:11,320
 cleanup edits and I believe it is number two number two on the edits it's a it's

419
00:43:11,320 --> 00:43:19,720
 added as appendix B yes so that was added as part of the motion so the

420
00:43:19,720 --> 00:43:25,640
 example as I showed earlier spoke of earlier the HC along the highway makes

421
00:43:25,640 --> 00:43:31,080
 sense that if that each that is HC and that will actually help make some of the

422
00:43:31,080 --> 00:43:36,480
 uses along the corridor along I 35 quarter such as the car dealerships

423
00:43:36,480 --> 00:43:43,640
 conforming because under the MR they're not conforming and that the HC would

424
00:43:43,640 --> 00:43:49,520
 clean that up and make them conforming again that is just the first of many we

425
00:43:49,520 --> 00:43:54,560
 will be also taking other areas around town on the west side and north of

426
00:43:54,560 --> 00:43:58,760
 University is another area that we're going to be looking at I know we've

427
00:43:58,760 --> 00:44:05,600
 heard some comments we've we've this slide over here shows we've noted 194

428
00:44:05,600 --> 00:44:12,400
 comments regarding the zoning map through emails calls and walk-in visits

429
00:44:12,400 --> 00:44:21,760
 we've also received 294 response forms of that 294 37 referred to they don't want

430
00:44:21,760 --> 00:44:26,880
 the zoning that they were given or want a different zoning district so we're

431
00:44:26,880 --> 00:44:31,600
 going through that as part of our research we receive a total of 99

432
00:44:31,600 --> 00:44:35,080
 speaker cards between the Planning Zoning Commission and City Council we're

433
00:44:35,080 --> 00:44:39,760
 going through that as well a number of the speakers that spoke the majority of

434
00:44:39,760 --> 00:44:44,440
 them I believe there were 22 speakers the majority of them did not speak so

435
00:44:44,440 --> 00:44:48,080
 we want to make sure we go through the through those speaker cards and document

436
00:44:48,080 --> 00:44:54,460
 any ones that mentioned a zoning that they didn't agree with in if it fits

437
00:44:54,460 --> 00:44:59,480
 within what we felt is a city initiated we will move those forward if not we

438
00:44:59,480 --> 00:45:03,320
 will direct them to submit an application for a rezoning to serve

439
00:45:03,320 --> 00:45:06,120
 back thank you chair I thank you answered what was going through my mind

440
00:45:06,120 --> 00:45:11,900
 here if I'm looking at this right the areas in red are the ones that you're

441
00:45:11,900 --> 00:45:15,920
 currently considering for city initiated correct right because there was

442
00:45:15,920 --> 00:45:20,480
 some areas out on 380 I believe and there was a gentleman who owns some

443
00:45:20,480 --> 00:45:24,600
 property off Austin just south of the downtown square area and I didn't see

444
00:45:24,600 --> 00:45:29,440
 that in red so those will probably be a couple of areas that correct this was

445
00:45:29,440 --> 00:45:33,520
 our first staff's recommendation obviously we still have to go through

446
00:45:33,520 --> 00:45:38,520
 this has not been updated to reflect of those others that we have are currently

447
00:45:38,520 --> 00:45:44,840
 researching okay great thanks yes just clarify because I think it's all of the

448
00:45:44,840 --> 00:45:48,480
 colors I don't want you to just so all of the colors represent a change not

449
00:45:48,480 --> 00:45:55,360
 just the red red is the color for highway quarter suburban quarter is the

450
00:45:55,360 --> 00:46:00,920
 pink which I think includes that that's why I was confused no no no I apologize

451
00:46:00,920 --> 00:46:04,400
 so all that are called that is color is staff's recommendation that we should

452
00:46:04,400 --> 00:46:10,160
 look into city initiate rezoning the one that you're referring to Larry we

453
00:46:10,160 --> 00:46:16,800
 haven't updated yet the one near downtown or the one out on 38 yeah just

454
00:46:16,800 --> 00:46:21,480
 because we we printed this before the public hearings we will update it to

455
00:46:21,480 --> 00:46:26,360
 reflect but generally that's the area that we're looking at yes okay thanks

456
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:34,840
 as part of the motion so that was a separate motion on the zoning map it was

457
00:46:34,840 --> 00:46:39,680
 a separate item so similar to the P and Z you all recommended separately on the

458
00:46:39,680 --> 00:46:44,640
 development code and the zoning map the City Council did the same they

459
00:46:44,640 --> 00:46:51,720
 recommended I'm sorry they adopted the 2019 development code however the zoning

460
00:46:51,720 --> 00:47:00,080
 map they continued to August 6 and the idea here is that we will work on these

461
00:47:00,080 --> 00:47:06,960
 zoning citywide city initiate rezoning's through a public hearing process where

462
00:47:06,960 --> 00:47:10,720
 we'll notify the property owner we'll we'll send out notices to properties

463
00:47:10,720 --> 00:47:15,240
 within 200 feet of the subject properties and bringing forward to the

464
00:47:15,240 --> 00:47:17,840
 planning zoning Commission as we had talked to earlier trying to get those

465
00:47:17,840 --> 00:47:22,920
 going quickly as possible because again we have an August 6 deadline the hope is

466
00:47:22,920 --> 00:47:28,360
 that we get those through P and Z and City Council once we have completed all

467
00:47:28,360 --> 00:47:32,960
 of those public hearings we will then bring forward to City Council the zoning

468
00:47:32,960 --> 00:47:37,640
 map and because those prior public hearings hopefully were considered and

469
00:47:37,640 --> 00:47:45,400
 were approved we can just fold those in as part of the citywide zoning map update

470
00:47:45,400 --> 00:47:59,120
 amendment any questions on the process that is really yeah I have some other

471
00:47:59,120 --> 00:48:03,600
 items here that I was just going to share with the planning zoning Commission we

472
00:48:03,600 --> 00:48:12,720
 obviously adopted the 2019 DDC in it there is the administrative in process

473
00:48:12,720 --> 00:48:18,120
 chapter subchapter we are in the process we the staff are in the process of

474
00:48:18,120 --> 00:48:21,600
 updating our checklist and our applications because we have added a

475
00:48:21,600 --> 00:48:26,160
 couple of new applications we're in the process of updating our administrative

476
00:48:26,160 --> 00:48:32,360
 criteria manual which will have new fees a process intake procedure

477
00:48:32,360 --> 00:48:38,280
 development review process as well and site plan checklists and other criteria

478
00:48:38,280 --> 00:48:44,280
 manuals that will be reflected because of the new DDC our water wastewater our

479
00:48:44,280 --> 00:48:48,400
 environmental folks are also working on criteria manuals so just to let you know

480
00:48:48,400 --> 00:48:53,800
 that just that we are finished with the DDC update but there is more that has to

481
00:48:53,800 --> 00:49:01,480
 be done to follow up what was approved or adopted that concludes my

482
00:49:01,480 --> 00:49:09,080
 presentation I'll be happy to answer any questions further questions if I may

483
00:49:09,080 --> 00:49:16,320
 does the does May 29th work for everyone I know that that Monday is Memorial Day

484
00:49:16,320 --> 00:49:20,840
 it's a holiday and so I wasn't sure if anyone was planning a vacation that week

485
00:49:20,840 --> 00:49:29,320
 of I'll be gone on work travel on the 29th so I will not be in town I have a

486
00:49:29,320 --> 00:49:35,420
 currently scheduled event that to be at that night and and I don't know if it

487
00:49:35,420 --> 00:49:43,240
 would be simpler if maybe we send out a zoom ring with a series of dates so then

488
00:49:43,240 --> 00:49:50,820
 we could perhaps have staff then have each individual respond to staff with

489
00:49:50,820 --> 00:49:55,000
 particular dates of availability to see if we'll have a quorum on those dates

490
00:49:55,000 --> 00:49:59,760
 and then really we wouldn't set the dates by we could use that as a guide to

491
00:49:59,760 --> 00:50:07,200
 what we would be able to set dates by if that would be acceptable and then for

492
00:50:07,200 --> 00:50:10,680
 start time does any do we want to keep it at 630 do we want to move it up a

493
00:50:10,680 --> 00:50:22,960
 little bit if we're if we're talking I think it's the special call but you have

494
00:50:22,960 --> 00:50:31,060
 a standing meeting that's a 630 which we could change I mean it's the code

495
00:50:31,060 --> 00:50:34,320
 doesn't prescribe it in the charter because you're back thanks chair so

496
00:50:34,320 --> 00:50:38,480
 we're trying to set a date that's not a planning and zoning date correct you'll

497
00:50:38,480 --> 00:50:45,080
 be a special special meeting correct okay it and I will say one other

498
00:50:45,080 --> 00:50:49,920
 consideration would be even if it were beneficial don't shoot the messenger if

499
00:50:49,920 --> 00:50:55,840
 if a Saturday might even be one of those that you might want to entertain just

500
00:50:55,840 --> 00:51:02,200
 saying yeah I think sending out the option to for us to give feedback will

501
00:51:02,200 --> 00:51:07,960
 be a great next step okay fine a date we'll do that mr. chair thank you any

502
00:51:07,960 --> 00:51:19,700
 questions for this presentation great okay with a little bit of hesitation I

503
00:51:19,700 --> 00:51:28,080
 think it's we're ready to close the meeting for work session so at 654 we'll

504
00:51:28,080 --> 00:51:33,880
 close the work session will reconvene in council chambers at 630 good evening

505
00:51:33,880 --> 00:51:36,520
 ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the planning and zoning Commission meeting

506
00:51:36,520 --> 00:51:42,440
 for May 1st 2019 I'll call the meeting to order seen that we have a quorum at 631

507
00:51:42,440 --> 00:51:46,000
 the first item of business is to stand and give the pledge allegiance to the

508
00:51:46,000 --> 00:52:14,440
 u.s. flag and Texas flag

509
00:52:16,840 --> 00:52:22,480
 the next item for business is item 2 consideration of the minutes we'll take

510
00:52:22,480 --> 00:52:28,200
 these in two different votes the first one is for April 3rd 2019 to mr. Smith

511
00:52:28,200 --> 00:52:32,760
 moved to approve we have a first for approval to mr. Beck second we have a

512
00:52:32,760 --> 00:52:36,880
 first and a second for approval any discussion on the minutes seeing none a

513
00:52:36,880 --> 00:52:50,040
 call for vote of the board motion carries 6-0 with one recuse next we'll

514
00:52:50,040 --> 00:52:55,080
 consider the minutes for April 10th 2019 to mr. Smith moved to approve we have a

515
00:52:55,080 --> 00:52:59,560
 first for approval to mr. Ellis second we have a first and a second for approval

516
00:52:59,560 --> 00:53:12,600
 any discussion seeing none a call for a vote on the board motion carries 7-0 the

517
00:53:12,600 --> 00:53:18,440
 next item for consideration is the consent agenda item 3 commissioner back

518
00:53:18,440 --> 00:53:23,800
 moved to approve consent agenda we have a first for approving the consent agenda

519
00:53:23,800 --> 00:53:28,560
 mr. Pernetta a second we have a first and a second for approval of the consent

520
00:53:28,560 --> 00:53:41,280
 agenda any discussion seeing not a call for vote on the board motion carries 7-0

521
00:53:41,280 --> 00:53:44,760
 this will bring us to our public hearings the first item is 4a we'll take

522
00:53:44,760 --> 00:53:56,920
 a minute let Commissioner Smith step out this item is fr 19 - 0 0 0 3 I'll call

523
00:53:56,920 --> 00:54:00,960
 mark for presentation and open the public hearing

524
00:54:00,960 --> 00:54:21,320
 good evening my name is Mark Laird I'm with the associate planner with the city

525
00:54:21,320 --> 00:54:28,080
 didn't to not present case fr 19 - 0 0 3 and is the request for approval for

526
00:54:28,080 --> 00:54:35,920
 hilltop additions lots 1r 2r 3r blockade it's a replat of lot 1r 2r hilltop

527
00:54:35,920 --> 00:54:41,680
 addition properties located within the ETJ along a hilltop road staff has

528
00:54:41,680 --> 00:54:46,080
 approved staff has reviewed and recommends approval of the case since it

529
00:54:46,080 --> 00:54:52,200
 meets didn't development code this includes my presentation if you have any

530
00:54:52,200 --> 00:54:57,440
 questions be happy to answer I don't see any questions this is a public hearing

531
00:54:57,440 --> 00:55:00,600
 anyone wish to speak may do so

532
00:55:00,600 --> 00:55:06,320
 seeing none I will close the public hearing and turn to the dais for

533
00:55:06,320 --> 00:55:14,400
 discussion or motion customer back I move to approve fr 19 0 0 0 3 we have a

534
00:55:14,400 --> 00:55:19,160
 first for approval Commissioner pernetta I second we have first and a second for

535
00:55:19,160 --> 00:55:25,040
 approval any discussion seeing none I call for a vote on the board

536
00:55:25,040 --> 00:55:41,120
 motion carries 6-0 with one recusal the next item of business is item 4b fp 19

537
00:55:41,120 --> 00:55:47,440
 - 8 I'll invite Julie wife presentation and open the public hearing

538
00:55:47,440 --> 00:55:57,560
 good evening I'm Julie Wyatt senior planner with the city of Denton and I am

539
00:55:57,560 --> 00:56:05,560
 presenting to you a replat of the Mayhill Road addition the total acreage

540
00:56:05,560 --> 00:56:11,640
 is a little over 12 acres and the purpose of this replat is to add previously

541
00:56:11,640 --> 00:56:15,520
 unplatted property to a platted lot in order to facilitate city of Denton

542
00:56:15,520 --> 00:56:20,880
 offices and some storage facilities and I'll stand for any questions

543
00:56:20,880 --> 00:56:33,280
 this is a public hearing anyone wish to speak we do so seeing none I'll close

544
00:56:33,280 --> 00:56:36,360
 the public hearing and turn to the dais for a motion or discussion kisser Smith

545
00:56:36,360 --> 00:56:39,480
 vote for approved we have a first for approval

546
00:56:39,480 --> 00:56:46,200
 Mr. Ellis second we have a first and a second for approval any discussion seeing

547
00:56:46,200 --> 00:57:03,440
 not a call for a vote on the board motion carries 7-0

548
00:57:14,400 --> 00:57:20,040
 next item for business is item 4c and we'll combine this with item 4d so I'll

549
00:57:20,040 --> 00:57:24,800
 go ahead and open the public hearing for 4c z 19 - 2 as well as open the public

550
00:57:24,800 --> 00:57:37,160
 hearing for 4d s 19 - 7 and I'll invite Cindy Jackson for presentation Cindy

551
00:57:37,160 --> 00:57:46,920
 Jackson for the record with the planning division z 19 - 0 0 2 is a request to

552
00:57:46,920 --> 00:57:53,600
 rezone from downtown commercial neighborhood DCN to downtown commercial

553
00:57:53,600 --> 00:58:01,520
 general DCG and s 19 - 0 0 0 7 is a request for a specific use permit to

554
00:58:01,520 --> 00:58:09,160
 allow allow a drive-through facility in association with a bank the 0.9 6 for

555
00:58:09,160 --> 00:58:14,240
 acre site is located at 120 South Carroll Boulevard which you can see right

556
00:58:14,240 --> 00:58:18,640
 here is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Carroll and

557
00:58:18,640 --> 00:58:26,200
 Mulberry the applicant is requesting approval for the rezoning to permit the

558
00:58:26,200 --> 00:58:31,920
 redevelopment of the site with a bank and the applicant is requesting it

559
00:58:31,920 --> 00:58:36,360
 because the DCG district permits a drive-through upon approval of a

560
00:58:36,360 --> 00:58:40,280
 specific use permit whereas the drive-through is not permitted in the DC

561
00:58:40,280 --> 00:58:46,620
 and district as noted previously the current zoning is DC and as you can see

562
00:58:46,620 --> 00:58:53,800
 on the first picture the second slide picture shows how it would look if this

563
00:58:53,800 --> 00:58:58,360
 were approved it would be a logical extension of the existing DCG across the

564
00:58:58,360 --> 00:59:06,120
 street onto this site there are is zoning criteria for approval of a zoning

565
00:59:06,120 --> 00:59:11,920
 request in section 35 3 4 the proposed zoning must conform to the future land

566
00:59:11,920 --> 00:59:19,160
 use designation in the Denton plan 2030 and the proposed zoning must facilitate

567
00:59:19,160 --> 00:59:24,060
 the adequate provision of transportation water sewer parks and other public

568
00:59:24,060 --> 00:59:31,280
 requirements and public convenience first criteria is with regards to the

569
00:59:31,280 --> 00:59:36,920
 future land use designation the site is located on the edge of two future land

570
00:59:36,920 --> 00:59:42,080
 use areas neighborhood University compatibility and downtown Denton so the

571
00:59:42,080 --> 00:59:48,080
 site is a blend of both of them downtown commercial is intended for moderate and

572
00:59:48,080 --> 00:59:53,000
 high-density residential and commercial uses office entertainment and other uses

573
00:59:53,000 --> 00:59:57,760
 tailored to encourage a greater level of activity downtown and in Denton's

574
00:59:57,760 --> 01:00:02,080
 historic core the university neighborhood university compatibility

575
01:00:02,080 --> 01:00:07,920
 area is intended to create a compatible form and land uses which for the areas

576
01:00:07,920 --> 01:00:12,320
 that serve both the established neighborhoods and the universities the

577
01:00:12,320 --> 01:00:17,360
 proposed DCG district is consistent with the intent of both land use designations

578
01:00:17,360 --> 01:00:23,160
 that permits the office and residential service types of uses encouraged by

579
01:00:23,160 --> 01:00:30,520
 both designations the second criteria is with regard to the adequate provision of

580
01:00:30,520 --> 01:00:35,080
 public facilities the site is currently developed with a funeral home adequate

581
01:00:35,080 --> 01:00:40,200
 water and wastewater facilities are already available to the site the site

582
01:00:40,200 --> 01:00:44,920
 will have access to both South Carroll Boulevard which is a primary arterial and

583
01:00:44,920 --> 01:00:49,720
 West Mulberry which is designated as a collector Street both can accommodate

584
01:00:49,720 --> 01:00:57,000
 the anticipated transportation demands of a bank other findings this is the

585
01:00:57,000 --> 01:01:02,960
 logical continuation of the DCC CG zoning district as previously mentioned

586
01:01:02,960 --> 01:01:08,600
 additionally the zoning of the subject site will transition to the MN district

587
01:01:08,600 --> 01:01:13,240
 with the approval of the new zoning map a bank is permitted in the MN district

588
01:01:13,240 --> 01:01:18,520
 and a drive-through in the MN district would also require the approval of an

589
01:01:18,520 --> 01:01:27,480
 SUP the proposed use is less intrusive than the existing funeral home and the

590
01:01:27,480 --> 01:01:31,800
 design standards we have in place today particularly regarding buffers to

591
01:01:31,800 --> 01:01:37,960
 adjacent residential will help in protecting the adjacent property from any

592
01:01:37,960 --> 01:01:43,800
 incursions from the proposed bank and will provide the bank will provide

593
01:01:43,800 --> 01:01:50,480
 adequate on-site parking so that parking on the street will not be required

594
01:01:50,480 --> 01:01:55,080
 staff recommends approval of this request as it is consistent with the

595
01:01:55,080 --> 01:01:58,880
 goals and objectives of the Denton plan 2030 and compliance with the zoning

596
01:01:58,880 --> 01:02:06,000
 criteria for approval next up is the specific use permit this is as noted

597
01:02:06,000 --> 01:02:13,320
 previously this is specific use permit is for the provision of a drive-thru in

598
01:02:13,320 --> 01:02:23,160
 with the bank the section 3564 of the 2002 DDC contains the criteria for

599
01:02:23,160 --> 01:02:28,680
 approval that we are using it requires that use conform to all standards within

600
01:02:28,680 --> 01:02:33,120
 the zoning district to the Denton plan and to other applicable law and a

601
01:02:33,120 --> 01:02:37,020
 compatibility analysis between surrounding property and the requested

602
01:02:37,020 --> 01:02:45,360
 use including the following as you can see here is required that analysis was

603
01:02:45,360 --> 01:02:50,160
 done in detail in your backup and I will just kind of hit high points in my

604
01:02:50,160 --> 01:03:00,240
 presentation and this is the proposed site plan for the drive-thru as you can

605
01:03:00,240 --> 01:03:04,800
 see there are two lanes that are proposed there is a pass-through lane and

606
01:03:04,800 --> 01:03:14,440
 then two lanes that have ATM and drive-thru teller access there is currently

607
01:03:14,440 --> 01:03:19,160
 inside is a 13,000 foot one-story building the applicant is proposing a

608
01:03:19,160 --> 01:03:24,560
 two-story building which will have a 12,000 square foot footprint which is

609
01:03:24,560 --> 01:03:28,520
 smaller than the existing footprint I want to clarify that that is the

610
01:03:28,520 --> 01:03:33,420
 footprint the total will be 24,000 square feet in gross floor area because

611
01:03:33,420 --> 01:03:43,120
 it's two stories the the use is permitted in this in the DCG with SUP as

612
01:03:43,120 --> 01:03:49,240
 well as in the proposed MN district the property has approximately 228 feet of

613
01:03:49,240 --> 01:03:55,200
 frontage along West Mulberry Street and approximately 181 feet of fringe along

614
01:03:55,200 --> 01:04:00,920
 South Carroll Street the drop proposed drive-thru and bank are consistent with

615
01:04:00,920 --> 01:04:07,680
 the types of uses that you can see along Carroll Boulevard and also on the west

616
01:04:07,680 --> 01:04:13,720
 side of Carroll Boulevard along Mulberry Street the site complies with the

617
01:04:13,720 --> 01:04:21,560
 criteria for approval of an SUP as noted in your backup the proposed bank is as

618
01:04:21,560 --> 01:04:27,600
 noted less intrusive than the existing funeral home the proposed 12,000 square

619
01:04:27,600 --> 01:04:32,440
 foot bank footprint versus the existing 13,000 square foot funeral home

620
01:04:32,440 --> 01:04:38,040
 footprint so the footprint of the bank is is smaller and the bank is actually

621
01:04:38,040 --> 01:04:43,240
 moved to the front corner of the property the design standards

622
01:04:43,240 --> 01:04:49,700
 particularly required buffers adjacent to residential and the residential is

623
01:04:49,700 --> 01:04:56,800
 located along here and along here will protect the adjacent property and as I

624
01:04:56,800 --> 01:05:02,560
 noted previously the all parking will be on site no on-street parking will be

625
01:05:02,560 --> 01:05:10,160
 required for notification for both the zoning and for the SUP we sent out

626
01:05:10,160 --> 01:05:15,080
 notices within 200 and 500 feet we received one response in opposition

627
01:05:15,080 --> 01:05:20,940
 representing 2% of the land within the 200 foot boundary two signs were posted

628
01:05:20,940 --> 01:05:26,000
 on the site and the applicant held a neighborhood meeting to which one one

629
01:05:26,000 --> 01:05:31,880
 person attended staff recommends approval of the SUP with the following

630
01:05:31,880 --> 01:05:36,680
 conditions landscaping in the attached site plan reflects an intent to comply

631
01:05:36,680 --> 01:05:40,780
 with the DDC requirements for parking street trees minimum landscape and

632
01:05:40,780 --> 01:05:45,440
 canopy areas and compatibility buffers with administrative approval of

633
01:05:45,440 --> 01:05:52,120
 alternative buffer elements permitted in accordance with DDC 35 13 8 minor

634
01:05:52,120 --> 01:05:56,920
 alterations to the depicted locations of individual plantings may be approved by

635
01:05:56,920 --> 01:06:01,080
 city staff provided that the final landscaping as planted complies with the

636
01:06:01,080 --> 01:06:04,880
 attached site plan in terms of buffer and open space locations as well as all

637
01:06:04,880 --> 01:06:11,160
 elements of the DDC number two notwithstanding the limited administrative

638
01:06:11,160 --> 01:06:15,800
 approvals authorized in condition one the city reserves the right to require

639
01:06:15,800 --> 01:06:20,040
 approval by ordinance of any amendments to the SUP the attached site plan and

640
01:06:20,040 --> 01:06:24,200
 the elements described in section three below including those referenced in

641
01:06:24,200 --> 01:06:28,320
 condition one and that concludes my presentation and the applicant is

642
01:06:28,320 --> 01:06:31,760
 present to answer questions thank you Cindy commissioner back as a question

643
01:06:31,760 --> 01:06:37,400
 thanks chair Cindy the landscape requirement are they on the point system

644
01:06:37,400 --> 01:06:42,920
 for that applicant said that he intends when he goes through site plan approval

645
01:06:42,920 --> 01:06:48,880
 to go underneath go go with the MN requirements okay that would be under the

646
01:06:48,880 --> 01:06:56,040
 point system okay so I'll talk to him then about what we can do thank you see

647
01:06:56,040 --> 01:07:00,680
 other questions thank you very much this is a public hearing anyone wishing to

648
01:07:00,680 --> 01:07:04,200
 speak may do so we do have a card representing the group Lee Allison we be

649
01:07:04,200 --> 01:07:12,920
 presenting and since this is two different topics technically we'll give

650
01:07:12,920 --> 01:07:19,160
 you 20 minutes if you need it I gotta find my slides first that's a how do I

651
01:07:19,160 --> 01:07:22,680
 get out of here I'm sorry

652
01:07:30,800 --> 01:07:37,120
 there you go

653
01:07:37,120 --> 01:07:46,880
 it's in the red bar

654
01:07:46,880 --> 01:07:57,120
 no no to your right one more nope nope there we go

655
01:07:57,120 --> 01:08:01,120
 good evening I'm Lee Allison with Allison engineering group I'm obviously

656
01:08:01,120 --> 01:08:08,600
 not an IT person 2415 North Elm Street with Allison engineering group Marty

657
01:08:08,600 --> 01:08:13,040
 Rivers is with me this evening but before we begin or get into this I'd

658
01:08:13,040 --> 01:08:17,160
 like to make an apology and a correction during the workshop I

659
01:08:17,160 --> 01:08:22,800
 misunderstood our own drawings the bank is a 6,000 square foot two stories for

660
01:08:22,800 --> 01:08:27,440
 12,000 Cindy had presented the 12,000 square foot building in there and I was

661
01:08:27,440 --> 01:08:32,680
 thinking oh wait times two is 24 so I got messed up mentioned it to Cindy she

662
01:08:32,680 --> 01:08:36,360
 came in here and corrected slides made a correction to you and I'm the one that's

663
01:08:36,360 --> 01:08:42,880
 wrong so it is a 6,000 square foot building two stories and 12,000 square

664
01:08:42,880 --> 01:08:46,720
 foot total with that I'd like to turn it over to Marty and let him discuss some

665
01:08:46,720 --> 01:08:52,920
 of the changes in the banking industry today good evening Marty Rivers 120

666
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:56,520
 industrial Street I'm the Denton market president for American National Bank we

667
01:08:56,520 --> 01:09:00,800
 are new to Denton I'm not new to Denton this is the fourth time I've been in

668
01:09:00,800 --> 01:09:05,320
 front of this Commission for SUP for a drive-through at the bank over the years

669
01:09:05,320 --> 01:09:11,560
 and they're getting smaller our intention is to comply with any and all

670
01:09:11,560 --> 01:09:17,280
 rules that are in the development code and we want a landscape correctly we

671
01:09:17,280 --> 01:09:22,320
 have designed the site plan that you're going to see today specifically with the

672
01:09:22,320 --> 01:09:27,960
 neighborhood in mind I live downtown I've worked downtown and in Denton for

673
01:09:27,960 --> 01:09:32,880
 25 years and we want to be good neighbors you'll notice that the the two

674
01:09:32,880 --> 01:09:39,280
 drive-through lanes are really large looking ATMs we have the lanes going

675
01:09:39,280 --> 01:09:44,960
 north so that any light or sound will move away from the neighbors to protect

676
01:09:44,960 --> 01:09:51,280
 them these will actually be ITMs you may not have heard of that that's an

677
01:09:51,280 --> 01:09:56,440
 interactive teller machine it's basically an ATM with a video screen

678
01:09:56,440 --> 01:10:00,760
 that where you can talk to somebody inside the bank via video our intention

679
01:10:00,760 --> 01:10:05,800
 is not to have tubes if because that's going out of style if we end up doing

680
01:10:05,800 --> 01:10:12,840
 that those will go underground and not be noisy it won't be overhead so I'll be

681
01:10:12,840 --> 01:10:20,000
 similar to the two ITMs that are out in front of Wells Fargo they have a two

682
01:10:20,000 --> 01:10:24,000
 lane drive-through right there although they won't be bright yellow they'll

683
01:10:24,000 --> 01:10:32,040
 match the building to work with that so we need two lanes primarily because if

684
01:10:32,040 --> 01:10:35,400
 one of those goes down we need to make sure we have one that works so it's

685
01:10:35,400 --> 01:10:40,000
 really more of a backup plan I can't imagine a scenario and you probably

686
01:10:40,000 --> 01:10:43,560
 haven't seen a scenario where you have people stacked up in drive-through lanes

687
01:10:43,560 --> 01:10:48,560
 at banks anymore that's a thing of the past if we had four cars all at once out

688
01:10:48,560 --> 01:10:54,200
 there I'd be shocked and happy at the same time I guess but the drive-throughs

689
01:10:54,200 --> 01:10:58,200
 are kind of a thing of the past you've seen several or a couple of banks in

690
01:10:58,200 --> 01:11:05,880
 downtown that have torn down or left their large ATMs or drive-throughs so

691
01:11:05,880 --> 01:11:11,800
 I'll let I'll be here for any questions anybody has we want to comply with

692
01:11:11,800 --> 01:11:19,240
 everything we can and I'll let Lee do the rest of the presentation very good

693
01:11:19,240 --> 01:11:23,280
 as always staff has made an excellent presentation regarding the technicalities

694
01:11:23,280 --> 01:11:27,800
 and planning considerations I'd like to try and put this in context maybe a

695
01:11:27,800 --> 01:11:33,920
 little more the current zoning is DC in which allows for a bank but it doesn't

696
01:11:33,920 --> 01:11:38,360
 even allow for a drive-through with an SUP so in order to move forward with an

697
01:11:38,360 --> 01:11:47,000
 SUP we asking for the rezoning to DCG DCG allows a bank but it allows a

698
01:11:47,000 --> 01:11:55,280
 drive-through only with a specific use permit however the new zoning code has

699
01:11:55,280 --> 01:12:03,880
 been adopted there is a transition table with it and in reality either DCG or DCN

700
01:12:03,880 --> 01:12:11,440
 goes to MN which allows a bank and allows a drive-through with an SUP the

701
01:12:11,440 --> 01:12:15,440
 question we had asked staff previously was not which code to work under but if

702
01:12:15,440 --> 01:12:19,800
 we even needed to move the zoning process forward tonight I would just soon

703
01:12:19,800 --> 01:12:22,960
 move the zoning forward and hopefully get it approved and have belts and

704
01:12:22,960 --> 01:12:27,080
 suspenders let's make sure we got it covered and not out here coming back

705
01:12:27,080 --> 01:12:32,000
 later because we didn't get that done we did have a neighbor neighborhood meeting

706
01:12:32,000 --> 01:12:37,200
 on February 20th it was a come and go from 6 to 8 we felt like that would give

707
01:12:37,200 --> 01:12:42,960
 more people time to attend really no one attended except family and friends I

708
01:12:42,960 --> 01:12:47,000
 think one person did sign the deal that they attended but they weren't one of

709
01:12:47,000 --> 01:12:52,200
 the neighbors with interest Marty did run into not run in that's not if came

710
01:12:52,200 --> 01:12:58,400
 across the person who turned in the one in opposition we have some question it

711
01:12:58,400 --> 01:13:02,720
 sounds like that was really a person who lives there and rents the property and

712
01:13:02,720 --> 01:13:06,800
 doesn't own it so I'm not sure that there truly is one property owner in

713
01:13:06,800 --> 01:13:13,560
 opposition but it doesn't matter too much because it doesn't drive the 20%

714
01:13:13,560 --> 01:13:17,820
 rule it could affect your decisions but I don't know that matters much if it's a

715
01:13:17,820 --> 01:13:22,800
 property owner a resident they did not turn in an opposition to the SUP the

716
01:13:22,800 --> 01:13:26,120
 only submitted an opposition to the zoning but I think in all fairness there

717
01:13:26,120 --> 01:13:31,640
 is opposed to the SUP as well so we'll move forward that way there's our site

718
01:13:31,640 --> 01:13:36,600
 plan and you can see on there I've got written a 6,000 square foot floors by

719
01:13:36,600 --> 01:13:42,320
 footprint with two stories 12,000 square feet it has the two ATMs it only has two

720
01:13:42,320 --> 01:13:47,200
 drives the building is moved to the southeast corner the parkings in the

721
01:13:47,200 --> 01:13:52,000
 back if you have parking in front of buildings along these streets by the time

722
01:13:52,000 --> 01:13:57,160
 you deal with the 20 foot public utilities and the 15 foot parking lot

723
01:13:57,160 --> 01:14:01,440
 screening buffer etc it puts our building in the northwest corner and that

724
01:14:01,440 --> 01:14:07,880
 doesn't work this is the existing site what's there today it's an older building

725
01:14:07,880 --> 01:14:14,000
 built around 1970 I'm sure it was a great facility in its day it has lots of

726
01:14:14,000 --> 01:14:21,240
 parking and pavement three drives one of those drives is here front-end parking

727
01:14:21,240 --> 01:14:26,960
 off the street we had extensive discussions with transportation actually

728
01:14:26,960 --> 01:14:31,920
 this was the drive we had to argue for the most this one they wanted but they

729
01:14:31,920 --> 01:14:35,240
 wanted us to move it over here and line it up with the other which we have done

730
01:14:35,240 --> 01:14:39,760
 in our planning process and of course the building will be more in the corner

731
01:14:39,760 --> 01:14:46,840
 and a lot more landscaping than this has there's a view from Carroll this tree is

732
01:14:46,840 --> 01:14:51,560
 dead and I hope gone by now it's dangerous and the parking right up

733
01:14:51,560 --> 01:14:57,280
 against the parkway here's looking at the other lane here as well as the four

734
01:14:57,280 --> 01:15:02,400
 parking spaces one of the cons for conversations with transportation had to

735
01:15:02,400 --> 01:15:06,920
 do with the future improvements to Mulberry and keeping our building set

736
01:15:06,920 --> 01:15:09,880
 far enough back that there would be enough room for right away and

737
01:15:09,880 --> 01:15:13,640
 improvements and we made sure we did that so we're working to deal with those

738
01:15:13,640 --> 01:15:18,480
 issues as well these are some photographs and some similar buildings

739
01:15:18,480 --> 01:15:21,440
 no I take it back these are the renderings of the building we're

740
01:15:21,440 --> 01:15:27,880
 proposing and Fates Martin locally is the architect you can see in this lower

741
01:15:27,880 --> 01:15:36,720
 corner a very different looking drive-through type facility again back

742
01:15:36,720 --> 01:15:42,920
 to the site plan and the landscaping buffers there's been discussion about a

743
01:15:42,920 --> 01:15:49,080
 possible fence along here which we'd like to do we don't have any cars facing

744
01:15:49,080 --> 01:15:56,760
 that direction for lights etc but still a fence I'm pretty much along here I

745
01:15:56,760 --> 01:15:59,720
 don't know that I'd want to go all the way to the front I think our landscaping

746
01:15:59,720 --> 01:16:03,800
 would be good but if that's something somebody's interested in we may put a

747
01:16:03,800 --> 01:16:07,560
 fence in there anyway we just haven't made a final decision yet but are

748
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:14,960
 leaning that way just of interest if you go on Carroll Boulevard from University

749
01:16:14,960 --> 01:16:22,960
 Drive to Eagle Drive there are four existing banks point bank 9400 square

750
01:16:22,960 --> 01:16:27,640
 feet seven lanes drive through three different buildings independent bank two

751
01:16:27,640 --> 01:16:32,480
 story one building 10,000 square feet five lane drive through first state bank

752
01:16:32,480 --> 01:16:38,320
 three stories 10,000 footprint no drive-throughs our proposed bank we're

753
01:16:38,320 --> 01:16:42,160
 the only ones on the west side too if that makes any difference and then

754
01:16:42,160 --> 01:16:48,280
 another bank here two stories much larger five drive-throughs here's point

755
01:16:48,280 --> 01:16:52,240
 bank and their facilities there's their drive-through again you can see an empty

756
01:16:52,240 --> 01:16:56,760
 parking lot now I got these off of I should say I got them Sue got them off

757
01:16:56,760 --> 01:17:01,880
 of Google Earth I don't know if she picked particular times when they were

758
01:17:01,880 --> 01:17:06,920
 empty or what but we had a hard time finding even the bays full much less any

759
01:17:06,920 --> 01:17:11,880
 lines backed up independent bank same thing they have a drive-through that's

760
01:17:11,880 --> 01:17:16,640
 also detached I think there might be a motorcycle in one of those the lanes

761
01:17:16,640 --> 01:17:25,320
 come out this direction first state bank no drive-through taller building access

762
01:17:25,320 --> 01:17:29,360
 bank five drive-through lanes now you can't see it through the tree but one

763
01:17:29,360 --> 01:17:32,720
 of their trucks is parked in the bay here and they've actually got an access

764
01:17:32,720 --> 01:17:37,240
 bank vehicle parked over here which normally you would want it full of

765
01:17:37,240 --> 01:17:41,000
 drive-through customers but they're just not they're just not there anymore and

766
01:17:41,000 --> 01:17:45,520
 they do have a remote ATM that's out on Carroll Boulevard and that's what it

767
01:17:45,520 --> 01:17:51,800
 looks like this is the building in Fort Worth so those renderings that Bates

768
01:17:51,800 --> 01:17:54,840
 Martin drew up are not far off of anything they've really done that's

769
01:17:54,840 --> 01:18:02,400
 specific these are Wells Fargo ATMs in downtown matching their colors but just

770
01:18:02,400 --> 01:18:09,040
 I say ATMs they're ITMs I got to get used to that interactive teller machines

771
01:18:09,040 --> 01:18:13,240
 the teller they interact with could be in Timbuktu they don't even have to be

772
01:18:13,240 --> 01:18:16,480
 on site or in the building so you're not going to see the drive-through windows

773
01:18:16,480 --> 01:18:22,680
 and things on a building like you typically would why an SUP well first

774
01:18:22,680 --> 01:18:26,440
 of all is to allow a drive-through facility that's really the only reason

775
01:18:26,440 --> 01:18:30,080
 not for a lot of other reasons it's gonna be two lanes behind the building

776
01:18:30,080 --> 01:18:34,160
 it's gonna be separate from the building but the building in the southeast corner

777
01:18:34,160 --> 01:18:39,120
 we'd like to meet either of the DDCs either the current or the earlier one we

778
01:18:39,120 --> 01:18:43,520
 have not had a this got passed after we had already submitted and we haven't had

779
01:18:43,520 --> 01:18:49,560
 a chance to work through to see which makes for the better site but we would

780
01:18:49,560 --> 01:18:53,720
 like to be able to do that and under the option allowed at the time of site plan

781
01:18:53,720 --> 01:18:58,120
 determine which code rules we actually develop under we're here tonight

782
01:18:58,120 --> 01:19:04,320
 primarily for the zoning and the SUP not to pick which code the DDC requires

783
01:19:04,320 --> 01:19:09,480
 that a plan be submitted with an SUP it doesn't specifically say what kind of

784
01:19:09,480 --> 01:19:12,880
 plan and it makes sense how can you approve any kind of an SUP if you don't

785
01:19:12,880 --> 01:19:17,960
 have some idea what the site's going to look like but it doesn't require a site

786
01:19:17,960 --> 01:19:23,400
 plan not by definition or specifically the checklist requires a site layout

787
01:19:23,400 --> 01:19:28,360
 exhibit and we provided that with all the check items on there and a landscape

788
01:19:28,360 --> 01:19:33,600
 plan they have a checklist for each one of those and we we comply with those

789
01:19:33,600 --> 01:19:39,360
 we are recommending some different conditions than what staff is

790
01:19:39,360 --> 01:19:47,080
 recommending again based in context and what's going on here we feel like for

791
01:19:47,080 --> 01:19:51,280
 this site and for an SUP for a drive-through these would be a little

792
01:19:51,280 --> 01:19:56,640
 better the site plans will be in general conformance with the site layout exhibit

793
01:19:56,640 --> 01:20:01,000
 and the landscape plan these typically get attached to in reference with the

794
01:20:01,000 --> 01:20:05,680
 ordinance I realize that on small pieces of paper these can be hard to read but

795
01:20:05,680 --> 01:20:11,140
 with today's electronic technology maybe we can pull up to an ITM and pull up the

796
01:20:11,140 --> 01:20:14,620
 site plans for this in the future but there's no reason not to be able to get

797
01:20:14,620 --> 01:20:18,380
 a clear understanding of what on those plans we submitted and I think they

798
01:20:18,380 --> 01:20:22,720
 provide a clear intention one of the difficulties is when we look at the

799
01:20:22,720 --> 01:20:29,680
 plus or minus five percent take building coverage we're at 72 percent plus or

800
01:20:29,680 --> 01:20:36,340
 minus five percent of 72 might get us to about 75 on the other hand it only lets

801
01:20:36,340 --> 01:20:42,000
 us go down to about 70 percent what if we wanted to take say we found a good

802
01:20:42,000 --> 01:20:46,400
 reason to get rid of the bypass lane because the second lanes extra and it's

803
01:20:46,400 --> 01:20:50,320
 not really needed we can't get rid we got to have pavement there just so we

804
01:20:50,320 --> 01:20:55,960
 stay above the 70 percent the minus five percent so we're not sure that kind of

805
01:20:55,960 --> 01:21:02,000
 criteria is is the most effective we have no problem with specifying that the

806
01:21:02,000 --> 01:21:06,160
 building be in the southeast corner that the drive-through facilities are on the

807
01:21:06,160 --> 01:21:11,360
 west side of the building we're limited to two a two-story building maximum a

808
01:21:11,360 --> 01:21:19,000
 lot coverage of 80 percent DCG that we're going for allows 85 percent MN is

809
01:21:19,000 --> 01:21:23,740
 at 80 percent so we don't mind limit it to the 80 and allow the applicant to

810
01:21:23,740 --> 01:21:27,960
 develop under either DDC to be determined at the time of site plan

811
01:21:27,960 --> 01:21:33,040
 application based on the responses we've had the neighborhood meetings etc we

812
01:21:33,040 --> 01:21:38,120
 don't believe that this additional level of control is necessary we think that

813
01:21:38,120 --> 01:21:42,960
 the intent is obvious I think there's no question that we're going to be tearing

814
01:21:42,960 --> 01:21:48,000
 down the the existing building and demolishing the site just not sure that

815
01:21:48,000 --> 01:21:55,360
 that level of of minute control is necessary we did a comparison to look at

816
01:21:55,360 --> 01:22:04,520
 MN versus DCG MN has a minimum square footage of 2,500 we're at 41 it has lot

817
01:22:04,520 --> 01:22:09,240
 widths of 20 and 50 we far exceed those front yard setback is 10 we're at ten

818
01:22:09,240 --> 01:22:14,520
 point four and eight point eight the eight point eight is pencil which one's

819
01:22:14,520 --> 01:22:18,880
 the front yard Carol and Mulberry we do have the ability on this site plan to

820
01:22:18,880 --> 01:22:24,520
 move it back to 10 feet again I'd hate to be stuck to a five percent of eight

821
01:22:24,520 --> 01:22:29,520
 point eight feet allowable without coming back for an SUP side yard we put

822
01:22:29,520 --> 01:22:34,760
 a question mark because we're not sure which is the side rear or back maximum

823
01:22:34,760 --> 01:22:41,320
 FAR we're well below the max lot coverage I said 72 we're at 73.6 versus

824
01:22:41,320 --> 01:22:48,480
 an 85 or 80 no problem with an 80 limit landscape area we're at 26.4 it's not

825
01:22:48,480 --> 01:22:55,320
 applicable in the new code because it's got to be 20 that's no reason to put all

826
01:22:55,320 --> 01:23:04,120
 that on there building height new code is 65 DCG is 100 we're proposing 48 I

827
01:23:04,120 --> 01:23:08,040
 wouldn't have any problem if we wanted to add another limitation to say a 65

828
01:23:08,040 --> 01:23:14,240
 foot building height max we feel like the primary reasons for the conditions

829
01:23:14,240 --> 01:23:18,360
 associated with an SUP is first is to address the concerns and impact of the

830
01:23:18,360 --> 01:23:22,480
 surrounding community we think we're making a very positive impact to the

831
01:23:22,480 --> 01:23:26,800
 sound surrounding community and we haven't had any feedback other than one

832
01:23:26,800 --> 01:23:31,000
 individual who doesn't want a bank there even though it's already allowed their

833
01:23:31,000 --> 01:23:36,640
 primary concern has to do with parking because right now with parking an issue

834
01:23:36,640 --> 01:23:41,080
 there there's a lot of people parking in the funeral home parking lot that may

835
01:23:41,080 --> 01:23:46,240
 not be allowed to if the funeral home is very busy there's not gonna be parking

836
01:23:46,240 --> 01:23:49,880
 there the city's planning street improvements so we think we're in good

837
01:23:49,880 --> 01:23:54,400
 shape with the surrounding community but at the same time we need your approval

838
01:23:54,400 --> 01:23:57,920
 so you may have some things you want to put on there as conditions such as

839
01:23:57,920 --> 01:24:02,520
 having a fence on the west side or putting a maximum building height of 65

840
01:24:02,520 --> 01:24:07,920
 feet so as appropriate we'd like to open up and discuss those with you as well

841
01:24:07,920 --> 01:24:13,680
 but we've been honor any questions you have and would appreciate any feedback

842
01:24:13,680 --> 01:24:18,000
 that's ends my presentation thank you for the presentation we do have some

843
01:24:18,000 --> 01:24:22,280
 questions Christian Smith thank you chair mr. Allison where was the

844
01:24:22,280 --> 01:24:29,840
 neighborhood meeting held it was at axis realty group on South Elm Street okay

845
01:24:29,840 --> 01:24:34,160
 when was notification sent for that just asking there's only one person who

846
01:24:34,160 --> 01:24:40,720
 showed up just wanted to see what we at least two weeks in advance of the meeting we make

847
01:24:40,720 --> 01:24:49,040
 sure that happens I don't have dates but that's ours so in regards to your

848
01:24:49,040 --> 01:24:51,960
 recommendations what you wouldn't have changed the biggest sticking point is

849
01:24:51,960 --> 01:24:55,720
 that 5% alteration there that's your issue is that is because they're

850
01:24:55,720 --> 01:24:58,520
 certain that you mentioned something about that the setbacks being all 8.8

851
01:24:58,520 --> 01:25:02,480
 depending upon which to be looking at whether it's Carol or Mockingbird you

852
01:25:02,480 --> 01:25:05,240
 had an issue with that saying that you know when I have to come back in front

853
01:25:05,240 --> 01:25:11,160
 of us if only given yeah I mean wiggle room there that's primarily it I mean I

854
01:25:11,160 --> 01:25:15,720
 don't care if you put on there that the funeral home has to be demolished or not

855
01:25:15,720 --> 01:25:20,240
 that's going to happen but I think sometimes we get a little bit too

856
01:25:20,240 --> 01:25:25,280
 minute in trying to control a site and I can see that more when you have a real

857
01:25:25,280 --> 01:25:31,080
 tall a big difference between the two uses and scale and different things and

858
01:25:31,080 --> 01:25:33,800
 you're trying to make up for it the neighbors say oh I don't want to look at

859
01:25:33,800 --> 01:25:37,480
 this ugly thing so you agree to put something special there but we're not

860
01:25:37,480 --> 01:25:40,480
 dealing with those kind of things on this site and this evening and I guess

861
01:25:40,480 --> 01:25:43,520
 my biggest thing is that I'm trying to get clarification from you because from

862
01:25:43,520 --> 01:25:46,800
 your recommendations didn't seem really clear what you had an issue with staff

863
01:25:46,800 --> 01:25:50,040
 recommendations what additions and subtractions you wanted to make it in

864
01:25:50,040 --> 01:26:03,920
 all to be real simple I'd like to eliminate all the staff recommendations and put ours in there we think ours are more we don't feel like the staff recommendations were based so much on the

865
01:26:03,920 --> 01:26:07,720
 context and the nature of the project and where it is and how it works with the

866
01:26:07,720 --> 01:26:12,040
 neighborhood as it was maybe more of a standard way to try and deal with SUPs

867
01:26:12,040 --> 01:26:17,240
 but the reason you have an SUP is one of the reasons is kind of like an ADP or a

868
01:26:17,240 --> 01:26:21,480
 future PD because every sites different unique and has special things so let's

869
01:26:21,480 --> 01:26:26,240
 address the special things associated with that site not not some general

870
01:26:26,240 --> 01:26:29,040
 conditions can you put your recommendations back up there then for

871
01:26:29,040 --> 01:26:38,840
 presentation just for us to discuss as we kind of go through all right thank

872
01:26:38,840 --> 01:26:44,920
 you mr. Ellis thank you chair thank you mr. Allison I guess a couple questions

873
01:26:44,920 --> 01:26:49,280
 with the proposed site plan what is the current height that you've got it at 48

874
01:26:49,280 --> 01:26:55,040
 feet 48 feet okay okay because that you know for me my concern on this side of

875
01:26:55,040 --> 01:26:58,760
 Mulberry is I mean this side of Mulberry is residential I appreciate all the

876
01:26:58,760 --> 01:27:03,160
 examples with the banks up and down Carol totally true but this particular

877
01:27:03,160 --> 01:27:06,960
 side you know of Carol Boulevard on Mulberry Street is definitely

878
01:27:06,960 --> 01:27:12,080
 residential mainly tenants but the entire street is residential and and

879
01:27:12,080 --> 01:27:15,800
 that's my concern that's what I want to protect you know putting the building in

880
01:27:15,800 --> 01:27:19,880
 that front corner I think is a great idea you know putting buffers on the

881
01:27:19,880 --> 01:27:26,240
 back making it look prettier than the cement that is out there now is ideal

882
01:27:26,240 --> 01:27:32,720
 because I don't think it's an X a normal extension of DCG DCG is on the other

883
01:27:32,720 --> 01:27:39,320
 side of a divided roadway so to me it's it's DCN because it is DCN I mean it's

884
01:27:39,320 --> 01:27:45,360
 it's it's a residential street on that side so that's my main concern the other

885
01:27:45,360 --> 01:27:49,120
 the other concern I have is and I've passed mr. Rivers walking in the

886
01:27:49,120 --> 01:27:53,360
 neighborhood so I know he's well aware of how difficult Mulberry Street can be

887
01:27:53,360 --> 01:27:59,120
 what's the time frame on building has that been looked at at all because

888
01:27:59,120 --> 01:28:04,480
 there's gonna be some impact when you know with a tear down and a rebuild and

889
01:28:04,480 --> 01:28:08,560
 all of that and obviously when you and teasing session it's a lot busier on

890
01:28:08,560 --> 01:28:14,400
 that area so I just I didn't know if you had a time frame yet if I would say by

891
01:28:14,400 --> 01:28:17,680
 next fall we'd like to be under construction if not sooner there's a

892
01:28:17,680 --> 01:28:22,680
 major drainage analysis that has to be done and of course the site symbols and

893
01:28:22,680 --> 01:28:26,400
 the architectural so there could be four to six months right there we're trying

894
01:28:26,400 --> 01:28:31,400
 to Marty doesn't like me saying that he wants three or four weeks but that's how

895
01:28:31,400 --> 01:28:35,240
 the process is generally work and I'd like to suggest and I understand where

896
01:28:35,240 --> 01:28:40,160
 you're coming from and we looked almost put some slides in here on Google Earth

897
01:28:40,160 --> 01:28:45,000
 from Mulberry and how it's creating that taller corridor I suggest with this site

898
01:28:45,000 --> 01:28:50,200
 plan we could specifically call that some of the buffer trees be large trees

899
01:28:50,200 --> 01:28:55,040
 with mature heights of 20 30 feet or taller and that would break that that

900
01:28:55,040 --> 01:29:00,200
 line of sight to a larger building on the edge there if that needed to be put

901
01:29:00,200 --> 01:29:03,920
 as a condition I don't see an issue with that I'm not going to turn around and

902
01:29:03,920 --> 01:29:11,160
 check Marty he might stare me down I'm not what has staff seen these

903
01:29:11,160 --> 01:29:16,000
 recommendations yet or is this the first time for them to we didn't get they

904
01:29:16,000 --> 01:29:20,520
 weren't available till Friday and contrary to what Marty thinks I did not

905
01:29:20,520 --> 01:29:23,800
 look at this over the weekend and we just got into this money and trying to

906
01:29:23,800 --> 01:29:27,160
 develop our whole presentation so you didn't get staff's recommendations till

907
01:29:27,160 --> 01:29:33,720
 Friday no well Friday night right yeah okay I think that's all I have at the

908
01:29:33,720 --> 01:29:42,200
 moment thank you chair Lee I have a comment for you we discussed her and I

909
01:29:42,200 --> 01:29:45,600
 may have something that maybe Marty's better suited to answer because I'm not

910
01:29:45,600 --> 01:29:51,000
 familiar with the ITM sorry the ITMs a 24/7 operation are they the fact that

911
01:29:51,000 --> 01:29:57,680
 they got an individual on the screen there does that mean there's limited to

912
01:29:57,680 --> 01:30:07,200
 when people can access those well the ATM part of it would be 24/7 just like any

913
01:30:07,200 --> 01:30:12,200
 ATM anywhere else and whether you're talking to a person we don't have the

914
01:30:12,200 --> 01:30:16,960
 staff to talk to people 24/7 okay so it's a combination of ATM and ITM then

915
01:30:16,960 --> 01:30:20,720
 yes you can do both you can press literally it's an ATM you can press a

916
01:30:20,720 --> 01:30:24,600
 button it says I want to talk to somebody and see them on a computer

917
01:30:24,600 --> 01:30:33,720
 screen those people can be in the bank or not okay okay but the operation can be

918
01:30:33,720 --> 01:30:39,600
 24/7 then without the individual on the screen right okay that being so as we

919
01:30:39,600 --> 01:30:45,920
 discussed earlier briefly Lee the fact that we've got the drive-through next to

920
01:30:45,920 --> 01:30:50,640
 the neighborhood there I would encourage a fence or a wall or something like that

921
01:30:50,640 --> 01:30:56,080
 if you could just to create that greater privacy between the two so that would be

922
01:30:56,080 --> 01:31:02,720
 my recommendation to you too and then I think I have one for Cindy if I may while

923
01:31:02,720 --> 01:31:05,360
 she's coming up we have no problem with that even if you want to make it a

924
01:31:05,360 --> 01:31:11,480
 condition that's okay well I may do that then looking at his recommendations do

925
01:31:11,480 --> 01:31:16,840
 you have if we were to agree to these conditions do you have any problem you

926
01:31:16,840 --> 01:31:19,920
 think the city would have any problem with these if you had a chance to

927
01:31:19,920 --> 01:31:24,200
 consider I haven't really had much of a chance to consider them it just looks

928
01:31:24,200 --> 01:31:30,720
 like they are trying to ensure that they the building and the block coverage and

929
01:31:30,720 --> 01:31:36,240
 such will be as they are showing the minimum requirements it okay then you

930
01:31:36,240 --> 01:31:41,520
 have no real concern that if we well I can't say that because I really haven't

931
01:31:41,520 --> 01:31:53,640
 looked at them thank you I'm gonna call mr. Drake for his points yeah this is a

932
01:31:53,640 --> 01:32:00,920
 little bit awkward for me to kind of deal with stump the lawyer because there

933
01:32:00,920 --> 01:32:06,160
 was no indication that I received that mr. Allison was going to be making

934
01:32:06,160 --> 01:32:11,400
 recommendations different from what was written in the staff report or are

935
01:32:11,400 --> 01:32:15,440
 suggesting different interpretations of code requirements than what was written

936
01:32:15,440 --> 01:32:21,160
 in the staff report and I haven't had a chance to look at those and it's it's

937
01:32:21,160 --> 01:32:28,280
 contrary to what my understanding has been with SUPs so for whatever that's

938
01:32:28,280 --> 01:32:34,440
 worth an answer to Commissioner Ellis's question it's it's certainly news to me

939
01:32:34,440 --> 01:32:40,800
 that that these items are being proposed and that the interpretation of a

940
01:32:40,800 --> 01:32:46,880
 different requirement from the typical SUP site plan was being proposed and I'm

941
01:32:46,880 --> 01:32:52,360
 not in a position to advise the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight on mr.

942
01:32:52,360 --> 01:32:55,360
 Allison's proposals

943
01:32:58,800 --> 01:33:07,080
 Christopher and I yeah so I just had a question because I was you know with the

944
01:33:07,080 --> 01:33:11,600
 fact that it's butting up right against residential and unlike a funeral home

945
01:33:11,600 --> 01:33:16,800
 which isn't which isn't a 24-hour a day thing I imagine that we're gonna have to

946
01:33:16,800 --> 01:33:21,000
 maybe some lighting considerations because people are gonna be having money

947
01:33:21,000 --> 01:33:25,880
 around on there is there what's the design gonna be like in terms of making

948
01:33:25,880 --> 01:33:30,200
 sure that you're not bleeding out light to the neighbors in accordance with the

949
01:33:30,200 --> 01:33:34,160
 city codes we're limited to one half candle power at the property line and

950
01:33:34,160 --> 01:33:39,480
 we would make again with the buffers and the trees along the west side that would

951
01:33:39,480 --> 01:33:46,280
 help stop some of the light and we can make some extra efforts to minimize the

952
01:33:46,280 --> 01:33:49,280
 amount of light needed there even have I don't know Marty I don't know why we

953
01:33:49,280 --> 01:33:59,360
 couldn't put motion sensitive so maybe the lights were very very low okay well

954
01:33:59,360 --> 01:34:03,080
 the reasons we don't have a six lane drive through is that very thing we

955
01:34:03,080 --> 01:34:06,200
 don't have to have all those lights we do have to have lighting underneath the

956
01:34:06,200 --> 01:34:11,000
 canopy of those two eight items and we're required by law to have it bright

957
01:34:11,000 --> 01:34:17,120
 enough where it's accessible so we the city may have codes around the perimeter

958
01:34:17,120 --> 01:34:21,040
 which we'll comply with but we're required to have enough light so that if

959
01:34:21,040 --> 01:34:24,760
 you walk to go up there you can see the buttons to do that and we get tested on

960
01:34:24,760 --> 01:34:30,120
 that so that's the same of every bank that's in town and we haven't talked

961
01:34:30,120 --> 01:34:34,760
 about the number of banks that back up to residential's with drive-throughs

962
01:34:34,760 --> 01:34:39,720
 larger than this all over town you guys just did an SUV for Dacu over on Emory

963
01:34:39,720 --> 01:34:44,320
 Drive that is right across the street and it's six lane ish drive through so

964
01:34:44,320 --> 01:34:49,000
 their independent bank over in Unicorn Lake backs up to those there's a credit

965
01:34:49,000 --> 01:34:54,640
 union that backs up in Unicorn Lake there's there are banks with drive

966
01:34:54,640 --> 01:34:58,440
 throughs a little way larger than this all over town that that are next to

967
01:34:58,440 --> 01:35:04,000
 houses yeah I just wanted to ask is uh you know with regard to the ITMs versus

968
01:35:04,000 --> 01:35:07,240
 you know a traditional drive through where there's a big canopy so so these

969
01:35:07,240 --> 01:35:11,240
 will have a canopy over the draw over the ATMs so it's kind of yeah there's a

970
01:35:11,240 --> 01:35:16,360
 picture there's a can we show the picture of our Fort Worth branch there's

971
01:35:16,360 --> 01:35:24,800
 the rendering and shows what it'll look like we go the right way that's that is

972
01:35:24,800 --> 01:35:29,640
 our that is our Fort Worth branch on West 7th Street and that is what we did

973
01:35:29,640 --> 01:35:37,560
 there on the lower right hand corner that's that's the that's actually not an

974
01:35:37,560 --> 01:35:40,640
 ITM that has a tube that goes down underground and goes back into the

975
01:35:40,640 --> 01:35:47,960
 building that was built two years ago okay thank you very much Chris Sanchez

976
01:35:47,960 --> 01:35:53,520
 during the work session I know the question was brought up as to why didn't

977
01:35:53,520 --> 01:36:03,700
 wait for the MN being classified as an MN rather than see see DCG at that time

978
01:36:03,700 --> 01:36:10,080
 we were told that basically you you were fine with instead of waiting for for the

979
01:36:10,080 --> 01:36:17,080
 MN and go ahead and go with this the DCG are you fine with that or because you

980
01:36:17,080 --> 01:36:22,200
 were making a comparison in your chart you were talking about the MN but yet

981
01:36:22,200 --> 01:36:27,800
 it's it I have almost felt like you really wanted the MN rather than the the

982
01:36:27,800 --> 01:36:37,840
 what is it DCG are you comfortable with the DCG somehow we need to separate the

983
01:36:37,840 --> 01:36:45,200
 zoning from the development code for all practical purposes since the development

984
01:36:45,200 --> 01:36:52,640
 code has been approved and with the transition table as far as zoning goes

985
01:36:52,640 --> 01:37:00,160
 we should be the same as in the end right now that allows for a drive-through

986
01:37:00,160 --> 01:37:07,600
 bank and a drive-through facility with an SUP then the question is

987
01:37:07,600 --> 01:37:13,680
 which set of rules do we finish the site by when we developed this site plan we

988
01:37:13,680 --> 01:37:18,720
 were working under the DCG rules and we're fine with working with those but

989
01:37:18,720 --> 01:37:24,160
 there may be some things in the new code that would make it better to use those

990
01:37:24,160 --> 01:37:29,360
 rules for the site not necessarily for us for example the idea of putting a

991
01:37:29,360 --> 01:37:38,040
 fence in that's a lot easier to do under the new development code zoning

992
01:37:38,040 --> 01:37:42,240
 related but under the development code 2019 instead of under the current

993
01:37:42,240 --> 01:37:47,040
 development code okay but at my understanding is you choose one or the

994
01:37:47,040 --> 01:37:52,440
 other and it seems like you're wanting to use a little bit of both no we're not

995
01:37:52,440 --> 01:37:58,320
 wanting to use both and typically you would find which which set of codes you

996
01:37:58,320 --> 01:38:02,340
 picked was usually done at the time of the site plan itself not with zoning or

997
01:38:02,340 --> 01:38:09,760
 with an SUP if it needs to be picked tonight we'll pick one and live with it

998
01:38:09,760 --> 01:38:15,320
 but I don't know that that's necessary tonight

999
01:38:24,240 --> 01:38:29,760
 so maybe a clarification from staff the recommendation actually references the

1000
01:38:29,760 --> 01:38:36,680
 2002 DDC so to mr. Allison's point we are selecting the DDC that would be

1001
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:42,840
 controlling this SUP this evening because if the condition is referencing

1002
01:38:42,840 --> 01:38:48,880
 the 2002 DDC they would not have an option to use the 2019 DDC is that

1003
01:38:48,880 --> 01:39:10,320
 correct let me pull up my presentation again well in my recommendation I said

1004
01:39:10,320 --> 01:39:14,520
 it's that it's consistent with the goals and objectives oh that's the zoning

1005
01:39:14,520 --> 01:39:30,600
 where's SUP permitted in accordance with DDC 35 13 8 that does reference the 2002

1006
01:39:30,600 --> 01:39:36,480
 DDC so if you follow my recommendation then the landscaping would be in

1007
01:39:36,480 --> 01:39:44,280
 accordance with the 2002 DDC right just verification if we agree to the staff's

1008
01:39:44,280 --> 01:39:49,080
 conditions placed upon them they do not have an option to use the 2019 DDC

1009
01:39:49,080 --> 01:39:53,800
 now if you wish you can change my recommendation to state whichever code

1010
01:39:53,800 --> 01:40:00,360
 that the applicant desires to develop under or you can state that the 2019 MN

1011
01:40:00,360 --> 01:40:06,520
 code we'll have the same results it's also possible just to state in

1012
01:40:06,520 --> 01:40:14,440
 accordance with a selected that's correct okay great that's all the

1013
01:40:14,440 --> 01:40:18,820
 question I had to push Alice thank you thank you chair Cindy Mike my question

1014
01:40:18,820 --> 01:40:26,600
 follows I guess the same with the adoption of this 2019 code that we now

1015
01:40:26,600 --> 01:40:32,960
 have yes what does staff do with developments coming in when is it

1016
01:40:32,960 --> 01:40:43,800
 decided typically we haven't had an opportunity to really do that yet we did

1017
01:40:43,800 --> 01:40:49,240
 have a pre-development meeting actually today where the applicant has said they

1018
01:40:49,240 --> 01:40:53,000
 they were specifically waiting for the new code to develop so we knew they were

1019
01:40:53,000 --> 01:41:00,320
 going waiting for that the new code requirements we are right now we are in

1020
01:41:00,320 --> 01:41:06,240
 the process of revising our forms and applications so that when the applicant

1021
01:41:06,240 --> 01:41:12,400
 comes in with a pre-development meeting request they will check which code they

1022
01:41:12,400 --> 01:41:17,560
 want to come in under this particular site is kind of in the middle of

1023
01:41:17,560 --> 01:41:25,120
 everything so we reviewed it under the requirements of the DCG district

1024
01:41:25,120 --> 01:41:36,480
 because at the time the MN district was not approved however the applicant if the

1025
01:41:36,480 --> 01:41:40,680
 Commission and Council decide that the applicant may have that choice that the

1026
01:41:40,680 --> 01:41:46,160
 other people are having then you you can specify to change the requirement to

1027
01:41:46,160 --> 01:41:51,680
 just specified code requirements and the applicant when they submit their site

1028
01:41:51,680 --> 01:42:00,160
 plan application can indicate which code they want to go under mr. Allison can

1029
01:42:00,160 --> 01:42:05,880
 answer your question I know Commissioner Smith kind of alluded to this but I want

1030
01:42:05,880 --> 01:42:10,800
 to make you a little pointed where is the contradictions between the staff's

1031
01:42:10,800 --> 01:42:14,080
 recommendation and your condition I know the idea would be take your

1032
01:42:14,080 --> 01:42:19,000
 recommendation but I'm trying to pinpoint where there is a disagreement

1033
01:42:19,000 --> 01:42:24,640
 in your potential project and how the conditions are currently written as far

1034
01:42:24,640 --> 01:42:29,620
 as I can tell the only one I can see is the 80% lot coverage but I maybe have a

1035
01:42:29,620 --> 01:42:38,160
 different insight let me walk through staff presentation and discuss it

1036
01:42:38,160 --> 01:42:47,440
 briefly when it comes to the landscaping that code was actually adopted landscape

1037
01:42:47,440 --> 01:42:53,560
 tree ESA etc several couple of months ago and it's the same under either code

1038
01:42:53,560 --> 01:42:59,720
 right now we don't have vesting into a code prior to the one that this

1039
01:42:59,720 --> 01:43:07,400
 landscape code is there in this though one thing now is we have opportunities

1040
01:43:07,400 --> 01:43:18,240
 for using a point system versus a specified buffer of 15 feet with so

1041
01:43:18,240 --> 01:43:22,960
 many trees and bushes every hundred feet the point system one thing we could put

1042
01:43:22,960 --> 01:43:27,920
 in a fence that presides provides a more opaque barrier but it also allows us to

1043
01:43:27,920 --> 01:43:41,360
 put in I could have done that now sorry you know so as far as the landscape

1044
01:43:41,360 --> 01:43:46,000
 that's the difference may be that we may be visiting with staff about an

1045
01:43:46,000 --> 01:43:50,320
 alternative buffer plan instead of using a point system to deal with adding a

1046
01:43:50,320 --> 01:43:55,200
 fence when we don't have to have one and adjusting for that expense again you can

1047
01:43:55,200 --> 01:44:01,480
 look at the site if anything we'd want to be going less coverage not more

1048
01:44:01,480 --> 01:44:07,600
 coverage so that buffer on the west side would tend to get larger not smaller

1049
01:44:07,600 --> 01:44:21,160
 to me with this one with the site plan we have now being part of the ordinance

1050
01:44:21,160 --> 01:44:26,560
 and attached to it I think that very clearly gives the intent here and if we

1051
01:44:26,560 --> 01:44:30,120
 were to try and come in and say we wanted to remodel the existing building

1052
01:44:30,120 --> 01:44:36,360
 and add drive-thrus that wouldn't be in content of what's on the site plan the

1053
01:44:36,360 --> 01:44:41,480
 staff would be telling us to come back for another SUP and I'm going the wrong

1054
01:44:41,480 --> 01:44:55,760
 am I out that's it there's two well there was oh there was more than oh for

1055
01:44:55,760 --> 01:45:04,080
 the SUP okay the bigger deal I think had more to do with the zoning then and so I

1056
01:45:04,080 --> 01:45:08,200
 was looking at the two together and the idea about the five percent difference on

1057
01:45:08,200 --> 01:45:14,320
 stated square footages etc. I mean if you got a 12,000 square foot building to add

1058
01:45:14,320 --> 01:45:21,840
 subtract 600 square feet that's not much to have any flexibility at this

1059
01:45:21,840 --> 01:45:27,160
 stage of the design and we're comfortable enough I think that we could

1060
01:45:27,160 --> 01:45:31,520
 go with the staff recommendation and run with it we just had some items in here

1061
01:45:31,520 --> 01:45:36,360
 that we felt would be more appropriate with this site than the way it's stated

1062
01:45:36,360 --> 01:45:41,680
 gotcha that helps clarify my thinking on it so I appreciate that

1063
01:45:41,680 --> 01:45:46,160
 Cindy there's no conditions on the zoning

1064
01:45:46,160 --> 01:45:55,440
 it's consistent with the goals and objectives of the Denton plan and

1065
01:45:55,440 --> 01:46:01,840
 complies with the zoning criteria we did not add it add any other conditions

1066
01:46:07,200 --> 01:46:11,280
 I think I was on the bottom of the first page of the EIS there's a recommendation

1067
01:46:11,280 --> 01:46:16,720
 section that was off of mr. Allison's referencing yeah under I'm sorry under

1068
01:46:16,720 --> 01:46:22,040
 recommendation staff should have the ability to approve an increase or

1069
01:46:22,040 --> 01:46:29,920
 decrease up to five percent that's the SUP yeah that is the SUP but that wasn't

1070
01:46:29,920 --> 01:46:41,560
 up there right here this is what I put right here what it how does this apply

1071
01:46:41,560 --> 01:46:49,000
 that should have been added in on my slide I did not add that in one of my

1072
01:46:49,000 --> 01:46:56,040
 slide if you look at your staff report if you look at your staff report under

1073
01:46:56,040 --> 01:47:01,960
 recommendation I have the attached site plan and landscape plan provided in

1074
01:47:01,960 --> 01:47:07,000
 exhibit six and seven specify the attack the following which will be incorporated

1075
01:47:07,000 --> 01:47:12,280
 as part of the SUP ordinance and staff will have the ability to increase or

1076
01:47:12,280 --> 01:47:16,280
 decrease up to five percent of any of the amounts specified in item

1077
01:47:16,280 --> 01:47:20,920
 requirements two through six provided the applicable requirements of the DDC are

1078
01:47:20,920 --> 01:47:25,600
 met and the first one is the existing thirteen thousand square foot funeral

1079
01:47:25,600 --> 01:47:30,560
 home shall be demolished the approved site use of the site shall be the

1080
01:47:30,560 --> 01:47:34,120
 twelve thousand square foot two-story bank with a drive-through facility

1081
01:47:34,120 --> 01:47:39,880
 consisting of one drive-up ATM lane and one drive-up ATM teller lane but now I

1082
01:47:39,880 --> 01:47:47,160
 know that they're ITM so 33 parking spaces with the additional space being

1083
01:47:47,160 --> 01:47:51,200
 pervious shall be provided on the site and any additional parking spaces shall

1084
01:47:51,200 --> 01:47:56,960
 be of pervious paving material and the site plan specifies the total of 71% lot

1085
01:47:56,960 --> 01:48:01,600
 coverage and 29% landscape area which includes the type C landscape buffer

1086
01:48:01,600 --> 01:48:06,400
 along the western and northern property lines the plan reflects an alternative

1087
01:48:06,400 --> 01:48:12,520
 buffer along with the proposed ten point five foot wide buffer the DDC grants the

1088
01:48:12,520 --> 01:48:16,960
 director the ability to approve the alternate buffer the director may

1089
01:48:16,960 --> 01:48:20,240
 approve an alternate buffer that is equivalent to or more restrictive than

1090
01:48:20,240 --> 01:48:24,880
 the buffer specified in exhibit six through eight and then it goes on to list

1091
01:48:24,880 --> 01:48:30,960
 the other recommendations that was my error I just put part of it onto my

1092
01:48:30,960 --> 01:48:35,080
 slide instead of all of it so for clarification Cindy this should be

1093
01:48:35,080 --> 01:48:39,760
 numbered one through six not one through four than one and two there's six

1094
01:48:39,760 --> 01:48:51,040
 continuous it should actually be re-numbered one through six okay this is

1095
01:48:51,040 --> 01:48:55,360
 putting the pieces of this puzzle together quickly Mr. Smith so I

1096
01:48:55,360 --> 01:48:59,320
 apologize what why are we why would why was the recommendations to be so

1097
01:48:59,320 --> 01:49:03,080
 restrictive on that then I'm sorry why was why are the recommendations so

1098
01:49:03,080 --> 01:49:08,160
 restrictive rather than just going with what was provided in the SCP drawings

1099
01:49:08,160 --> 01:49:12,720
 and everything else before was there a reason behind this is language that the

1100
01:49:12,720 --> 01:49:18,120
 legal department has devised for SUVs and we've used it previously in two other

1101
01:49:18,120 --> 01:49:22,640
 SUVs one was from McDonald's and I'm sorry I don't remember which the other

1102
01:49:22,640 --> 01:49:32,040
 one was razor Windsor the Windsor apartments and so we're using it with

1103
01:49:32,040 --> 01:49:37,120
 this one as well this is something that legal is it was and Jerry possibly get

1104
01:49:37,120 --> 01:49:39,680
 you put in there but just ask you a question before you respond so you're

1105
01:49:39,680 --> 01:49:42,880
 saying that in the past SCPs which I don't think I remember from these past

1106
01:49:42,880 --> 01:49:47,440
 us SCPs that being that restrictive of saying exactly how you've presented is

1107
01:49:47,440 --> 01:49:51,040
 exactly how it needs to be held to rather than just it just seems like we're not

1108
01:49:51,040 --> 01:49:54,480
 giving anybody any wiggle room whatsoever at this point in the process

1109
01:49:54,480 --> 01:49:57,720
 whenever they're asking for an SCP at the zoning plan it seems like this should be

1110
01:49:57,720 --> 01:50:00,880
 more of a conversation happens at site plan I know this is an SCP and it's

1111
01:50:00,880 --> 01:50:03,880
 different I get that part but it seems like some of these things that we're

1112
01:50:03,880 --> 01:50:10,840
 addressing here you know the number of parking spaces the evening I guess even

1113
01:50:10,840 --> 01:50:14,760
 lot lot coverage setbacks what the buffer is landscaping those all seem

1114
01:50:14,760 --> 01:50:17,520
 more like site plan issues rather than SCP issues why are we being so

1115
01:50:17,520 --> 01:50:21,880
 restrictive on the SCP side well I can't say as far as why I mean that's that's a

1116
01:50:21,880 --> 01:50:29,760
 policy issue but you know I a couple of things first of all you know I really

1117
01:50:29,760 --> 01:50:34,960
 wish that I could have been confronted with this issue of how to interpret this

1118
01:50:34,960 --> 01:50:39,960
 before tonight and and and having it kind of dropped in my lap but it but it

1119
01:50:39,960 --> 01:50:49,040
 wasn't you got that come on I do my best but it's completely unnecessary I could

1120
01:50:49,040 --> 01:50:53,840
 have easily looked into this but I guess the second issue is like with the

1121
01:50:53,840 --> 01:51:00,880
 McDonald's drive-thru SUP that went forward it did go to City Council a

1122
01:51:00,880 --> 01:51:06,840
 couple of times and the the City Council as I recall did want to see some detail

1123
01:51:06,840 --> 01:51:14,520
 on that SUP and so with the direction that we received about what the City

1124
01:51:14,520 --> 01:51:20,160
 Council expected and wanted on that then we did work with the planning staff to

1125
01:51:20,160 --> 01:51:25,720
 come up with some language that would clarify exactly what the expectations

1126
01:51:25,720 --> 01:51:32,000
 were and so whether that's you know restrictive or not restrictive I guess

1127
01:51:32,000 --> 01:51:39,360
 is a matter of judgment and opinion I it's not for me to say which way to go

1128
01:51:39,360 --> 01:51:45,480
 all I can say is that in the past it has traditionally been the requirement for

1129
01:51:45,480 --> 01:51:50,760
 an SUP to bring forward a site plan so that the City Council can know how each

1130
01:51:50,760 --> 01:51:57,680
 of these issues is going to bear upon such concerns as traffic mobility how

1131
01:51:57,680 --> 01:52:02,640
 the how the sites go to perform with respect to customers coming in and and

1132
01:52:02,640 --> 01:52:10,720
 leaving how traffic may possibly stack thanks to that nature okay well well I

1133
01:52:10,720 --> 01:52:20,080
 wanted to let Richard speak about maybe some clarification questions similar to

1134
01:52:20,080 --> 01:52:24,080
 what Jerry had added that as we presented these a council there's been

1135
01:52:24,080 --> 01:52:28,120
 times where for lack of a better way to put it they were afraid of a bait and

1136
01:52:28,120 --> 01:52:31,560
 switch not that necessarily this is what's going to happen but they want to

1137
01:52:31,560 --> 01:52:34,320
 make sure what they see is what what's going to get built so that's why this

1138
01:52:34,320 --> 01:52:39,440
 this specificity has been added items one through four really are representative

1139
01:52:39,440 --> 01:52:43,440
 of what's on what's on the plan that that's provided I don't think we would

1140
01:52:43,440 --> 01:52:48,320
 be opposed of whether it gets approved with this recommendation under the

1141
01:52:48,320 --> 01:52:53,100
 current code if it's decided to go with an alternative code I don't think it

1142
01:52:53,100 --> 01:52:56,240
 would change the layout of the building I don't think it would reflect the

1143
01:52:56,240 --> 01:52:59,320
 change in the parking perhaps the only thing that would change would be the

1144
01:52:59,320 --> 01:53:03,740
 landscape area so whether or not we have some alternative language with respect

1145
01:53:03,740 --> 01:53:07,940
 to that I think that's something sort of on the spot that that we could we could

1146
01:53:07,940 --> 01:53:12,560
 live with so something along the lines of letting maybe even letting landscape be

1147
01:53:12,560 --> 01:53:16,280
 decided between now and council because I was gonna say and thank you Richard

1148
01:53:16,280 --> 01:53:19,360
 for your comments I was gonna say is even though I'm probably the first and

1149
01:53:19,360 --> 01:53:23,240
 loudest commissioner say I hate taking this commission saying let's let's kick

1150
01:53:23,240 --> 01:53:27,480
 the can to council at council decided because our job is to be a little more

1151
01:53:27,480 --> 01:53:31,360
 interactive than that and I don't want council to usurp us and what we were

1152
01:53:31,360 --> 01:53:34,000
 able to do and be able to get some things figured out before it goes to them

1153
01:53:34,000 --> 01:53:39,120
 it doesn't seem like staff and and applicant have had long discussions yet

1154
01:53:39,120 --> 01:53:42,720
 about these types of specificity and the details that we're gonna be putting in

1155
01:53:42,720 --> 01:53:46,360
 there and so I would hate to put restrictions on something that the

1156
01:53:46,360 --> 01:53:49,800
 applicant hasn't had much time whenever we could move it through without any of

1157
01:53:49,800 --> 01:53:53,320
 these details and let council put those on after staff and applicant and visit a

1158
01:53:53,320 --> 01:53:56,760
 little bit more and staff can make a more thorough recommendation before

1159
01:53:56,760 --> 01:53:59,960
 council sees it and votes for it so well I'd hate to kick the can down the road

1160
01:53:59,960 --> 01:54:15,560
 that way that that kind of seems to be a smarter play in this area but there you

1161
01:54:15,560 --> 01:54:29,800
 go in appreciation of what mr. Drake said about last minute it would help us a lot

1162
01:54:29,800 --> 01:54:33,880
 to have staff recommendations a week before this gets published so that we

1163
01:54:33,880 --> 01:54:37,080
 could sit down and have these discussions now we're at the last second

1164
01:54:37,080 --> 01:54:43,080
 trying to figure out how do we adjust all of that related to that McDonald's I

1165
01:54:43,080 --> 01:54:46,880
 don't know what the issues were on that but SUPs are different they're almost

1166
01:54:46,880 --> 01:54:53,720
 like a PD or an ADP and they're site specific and use specific and we feel

1167
01:54:53,720 --> 01:54:59,040
 like that the site plan that we submitted as well as the landscape plan

1168
01:54:59,040 --> 01:55:04,960
 is a good basis for determining if anything in the future is reasonably in

1169
01:55:04,960 --> 01:55:09,960
 conformance with that or not and doesn't need to be given a 5% limitation it's

1170
01:55:09,960 --> 01:55:15,000
 definitely limited to whatever the code allows we also feel like building

1171
01:55:15,000 --> 01:55:21,280
 coverage is better limited to 80% like MN requires than it is to what we've

1172
01:55:21,280 --> 01:55:26,640
 shown plus or minus 5% we've not shown anything on our site plan that was

1173
01:55:26,640 --> 01:55:31,200
 intended to be a mitigation or an adaptation to any concerns that have

1174
01:55:31,200 --> 01:55:34,960
 been brought forward because none have been brought further forward other than

1175
01:55:34,960 --> 01:55:39,840
 what you have brought this evening and we have expressed a willingness to put

1176
01:55:39,840 --> 01:55:47,240
 those on our own conditions on our zoning and SUP request as on the previous slide

1177
01:55:47,240 --> 01:55:51,680
 I had to that effect at the same time once it gets to council with this

1178
01:55:51,680 --> 01:55:56,400
 particular site council may have some things I'll change that last side to

1179
01:55:56,400 --> 01:56:01,200
 provide the City Council sufficient comfort to approve the SUP they may have

1180
01:56:01,200 --> 01:56:05,320
 conditions and concerns with this specific site that are not generic to

1181
01:56:05,320 --> 01:56:09,680
 every site in the town that seeks an SUP and we can discuss adding those at

1182
01:56:09,680 --> 01:56:16,660
 that time so again for tonight we could go either way but we made our

1183
01:56:16,660 --> 01:56:20,360
 recommendation and mr. Beck you had asked me to put those up earlier and

1184
01:56:20,360 --> 01:56:24,280
 there they are and we think those with a couple other items that give you concern

1185
01:56:24,280 --> 01:56:32,200
 related to this specific site would be certainly well accepted by the bank

1186
01:56:32,200 --> 01:56:36,120
 mr. Austin we have a couple more questions real fast has your team done

1187
01:56:36,120 --> 01:56:38,920
 all the work necessary to do a preliminary plot have you done engineering

1188
01:56:38,920 --> 01:56:43,640
 traffic drainage has all that been taking place no so at this point there

1189
01:56:43,640 --> 01:56:48,360
 are some extra steps to understand exactly what that footprint would look

1190
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:52,040
 like is that correct yes and that's pretty common I look at site development and

1191
01:56:52,040 --> 01:56:56,920
 planning in the form of a pyramid where you start with with a dream to a

1192
01:56:56,920 --> 01:57:02,400
 feasibility to do diligence to entitlements to planning to designs and

1193
01:57:02,400 --> 01:57:06,820
 you never know what the final detail is until you do the record drawings after

1194
01:57:06,820 --> 01:57:11,000
 it's built there's always something that comes up something's underground

1195
01:57:11,000 --> 01:57:17,040
 somebody's here a neighbor speaks up you try to accommodate them and we feel like

1196
01:57:17,040 --> 01:57:21,320
 at this stage of the game yes we need to dare it down to a point but or further

1197
01:57:21,320 --> 01:57:24,320
 but not we can't get to a point yet that's it

1198
01:57:24,320 --> 01:57:29,320
 Christian Beck thank you chair I guess my question is probably for staff here I

1199
01:57:29,320 --> 01:57:36,760
 hate to sound like a squeaky wheel on this fence but moving forward if we to

1200
01:57:36,760 --> 01:57:40,640
 get that fence if they're willing to do it I recommend that they do it for the

1201
01:57:40,640 --> 01:57:47,160
 privacy sake is the current code not gonna allow that to happen or does it

1202
01:57:47,160 --> 01:57:54,360
 need to be part of the 2019 code before a fence can even be considered a privacy

1203
01:57:54,360 --> 01:57:58,680
 fence on the west side it's either or with the new code if you recall it was

1204
01:57:58,680 --> 01:58:03,280
 based on based on a point system right they certainly could right do that

1205
01:58:03,280 --> 01:58:06,760
 depending on on how they wanted to structure that but if we didn't go forward

1206
01:58:06,760 --> 01:58:12,880
 with that we went forward with the odc the fence is not part of the landscape

1207
01:58:12,880 --> 01:58:20,860
 is not included in a landscape package is that right I've got to confirm the

1208
01:58:20,860 --> 01:58:26,680
 type C I've been working so much on the new code I don't recall the the current

1209
01:58:26,680 --> 01:58:36,320
 the existing okay so offense is not in the works on for a type-c buffer no it's

1210
01:58:36,320 --> 01:58:45,280
 not required but they could put one in okay okay there you go okay so I'll deal

1211
01:58:45,280 --> 01:58:50,360
 with that when we decide just for clarification the type-c buffer is a

1212
01:58:50,360 --> 01:58:55,000
 15-foot landscape area with six trees every hundred feet a mixture of

1213
01:58:55,000 --> 01:58:59,600
 deciduous and evergreen and twenty-five shrubs very good

1214
01:58:59,600 --> 01:59:07,200
 kiss your Sanchez I guess I'm still wondering sometimes I'm getting I'm

1215
01:59:07,200 --> 01:59:13,160
 getting a feeling that you you want to see you want us to wait on this and move

1216
01:59:13,160 --> 01:59:19,240
 it forward or nothing you know not move forward with this because there's there

1217
01:59:19,240 --> 01:59:25,480
 hasn't been some good communication between you and staff or would you be

1218
01:59:25,480 --> 01:59:29,200
 happy with what staff has recommended I'm still kind of confused as to where

1219
01:59:29,200 --> 01:59:34,280
 you're coming from and the discussions you and staff had based on what we were

1220
01:59:34,280 --> 01:59:39,840
 told at the work session that everything had been pretty much discussed and you

1221
01:59:39,840 --> 01:59:46,820
 were fine with going with the 22 2002 recommendations and so that's what they

1222
01:59:46,820 --> 01:59:51,000
 were giving us right and that was a misunderstanding because the only thing

1223
01:59:51,000 --> 01:59:56,560
 we had asked staff was do we need to move forward with the zoning request or

1224
01:59:56,560 --> 02:00:03,880
 not since the transition table renders it in me and either way we weren't

1225
02:00:03,880 --> 02:00:09,600
 having any discussions about which code to operate under now we did have a

1226
02:00:09,600 --> 02:00:16,080
 landscape plan and a site plan and obviously they were developed using the

1227
02:00:16,080 --> 02:00:22,000
 2003 code I'm gonna get my numbers wrong here but we also feel like the site

1228
02:00:22,000 --> 02:00:29,280
 plans we presented can work very well under the 2019 DDC with there'd be some

1229
02:00:29,280 --> 02:00:33,880
 fairly minor differences we showed you some of the site restriction limitations

1230
02:00:33,880 --> 02:00:40,080
 there but some things with the landscape but I feel like that we can probably go

1231
02:00:40,080 --> 02:00:48,520
 tonight with staff recommendation with an understanding that we might want to

1232
02:00:48,520 --> 02:00:52,320
 discuss this more before it gets to council and staff may or may not have

1233
02:00:52,320 --> 02:00:56,240
 reason to revise it but they've also got to put in there what your

1234
02:00:56,240 --> 02:01:10,400
 recommendation is as well there's no other questions yes Cindy based on what

1235
02:01:10,400 --> 02:01:14,960
 he just said I mean do you think there's that there's some wiggle room on based

1236
02:01:14,960 --> 02:01:20,600
 on what you your recommendation and what and what they're they'd like to see is

1237
02:01:20,600 --> 02:01:26,280
 there some there's still some room it's a word where you can still compromise in

1238
02:01:26,280 --> 02:01:35,960
 there okay I guess I guess this is the first I've seen this counter proposal

1239
02:01:35,960 --> 02:01:44,720
 right and I I'd rather take a look at it thoroughly before I say yes or no we

1240
02:01:44,720 --> 02:01:53,000
 can kind of put together a hybrid of both if you if you wish as a

1241
02:01:53,000 --> 02:02:06,240
 recommendation as a as a recommendation if you if you wish that what but yeah you

1242
02:02:06,240 --> 02:02:10,400
 know we're going to have to just make this is one of those odd cases where it's

1243
02:02:10,400 --> 02:02:15,160
 come it came in before the code was approved and we didn't review it with

1244
02:02:15,160 --> 02:02:18,680
 the new code because we didn't know how much it was going to change before it

1245
02:02:18,680 --> 02:02:24,960
 was approved and so the applicant asked after the code was approved if they

1246
02:02:24,960 --> 02:02:29,200
 still needed to move forward with the zoning case because it's going to go to

1247
02:02:29,200 --> 02:02:33,160
 the MN district and the decision was made yes we're just going to go ahead

1248
02:02:33,160 --> 02:02:36,800
 and go through with the zoning case because of the fact that you're ready to

1249
02:02:36,800 --> 02:02:45,240
 go we've scheduled you we've sent out notices you're ready to go and the

1250
02:02:45,240 --> 02:02:50,460
 applicant can if he wishes he can he can make the determination which code he

1251
02:02:50,460 --> 02:02:55,000
 wants to do the site plan under when we go through with the site plan and we

1252
02:02:55,000 --> 02:02:58,960
 can revise the code to just say the recommendation to take out code sections

1253
02:02:58,960 --> 02:03:08,760
 and just say needs to comply with with the landscape requirements are and so on

1254
02:03:08,760 --> 02:03:16,520
 thank you okay so we have a couple more questions here

1255
02:03:16,520 --> 02:03:21,680
 Commissioner Pernetta my questions are more procedural right because we have

1256
02:03:21,680 --> 02:03:26,520
 kind of some vagueness between between staff and you know what mr. Allison's

1257
02:03:26,520 --> 02:03:35,120
 proposing is there an issue or based based on the disconnect or the divide

1258
02:03:35,120 --> 02:03:40,720
 that we have between the two of them if we were to push this out you know for to

1259
02:03:40,720 --> 02:03:45,400
 give everybody like an extra two weeks is this are the differences that they

1260
02:03:45,400 --> 02:03:47,880
 have right now something that would have to be renoticed or anything like that

1261
02:03:47,880 --> 02:03:52,280
 would or could we just you know have them confer come back in two weeks and

1262
02:03:52,280 --> 02:03:55,320
 based on everything that we've established right now be able to devote

1263
02:03:55,320 --> 02:04:01,600
 without having to put anything else to the public would it be like simply an

1264
02:04:01,600 --> 02:04:08,880
 extension of this public hearing right now or motion to postpone before you

1265
02:04:08,880 --> 02:04:14,960
 close the public hearing and and then just bring it back up at a date certain

1266
02:04:14,960 --> 02:04:20,640
 and reconsider at that time without having to read notice would that be

1267
02:04:20,640 --> 02:04:28,600
 would that be some would that be something amenable to you or or okay

1268
02:04:28,600 --> 02:04:33,680
 another discussion and mr. Kanon may have some items here that'll help take

1269
02:04:33,680 --> 02:04:38,280
 care of all this it might be really beneficial at this point if there's no

1270
02:04:38,280 --> 02:04:42,320
 opposition from the dais to call brief recess because there is some side

1271
02:04:42,320 --> 02:04:47,520
 discussion happening if there's in a way to have the sidebar wrapped up and we

1272
02:04:47,520 --> 02:04:50,640
 can figure out what the next step could be whether it be a postpone for the

1273
02:04:50,640 --> 02:04:55,240
 record before we go into this recess what I would like to see is something

1274
02:04:55,240 --> 02:04:59,960
 made sense tonight the the idea of someone working really hard to get caught

1275
02:04:59,960 --> 02:05:05,260
 in the postponement due to code confusion seems a little unsettling to me

1276
02:05:05,260 --> 02:05:11,760
 that that confusion of what code to apply when MN is is eminent I would like

1277
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:15,640
 to see a resolution that's not a postponement but perhaps if the board

1278
02:05:15,640 --> 02:05:19,560
 votes to actually progress this forward but let's have the recess if there's an

1279
02:05:19,560 --> 02:05:23,320
 opposition to that Commissioner Ellis you want to speak real fast go for it thank

1280
02:05:23,320 --> 02:05:28,440
 you chair just a couple words before recess some of staff recommendations to

1281
02:05:28,440 --> 02:05:34,480
 me are just reiterating the proposed site and landscape plan that that we have

1282
02:05:34,480 --> 02:05:40,120
 here in the SUP discussion we've gotten burned in the past by general conformance

1283
02:05:40,120 --> 02:05:45,760
 are significantly conformant significantly similar to what is

1284
02:05:45,760 --> 02:05:50,960
 proposed and we've I think staff is trying to get away from that because I

1285
02:05:50,960 --> 02:05:56,240
 asked very early on in my appointment four years ago what does general

1286
02:05:56,240 --> 02:06:01,320
 conformance mean and no one has an answer to that and so while I understand

1287
02:06:01,320 --> 02:06:06,800
 what you're saying I think when staff gives some of those recommendations it's

1288
02:06:06,800 --> 02:06:12,800
 to pull in that site and landscape plan that's been presented so that we

1289
02:06:12,800 --> 02:06:18,000
 understand going forward what general conformance means so that's kind of my

1290
02:06:18,000 --> 02:06:23,160
 interpretation of a couple of those so I just wanted to throw out that and I

1291
02:06:23,160 --> 02:06:28,040
 think better after the break there'll be some comments that might address that

1292
02:06:28,040 --> 02:06:32,480
 but related to that one of our concerns is what if the bank wanted to come in

1293
02:06:32,480 --> 02:06:36,240
 and through their budgeting and different things said well we want to go

1294
02:06:36,240 --> 02:06:42,120
 to a 10,000 square foot building with a 5,000 square foot footprint and that

1295
02:06:42,120 --> 02:06:45,520
 would add a thousand square feet to landscape but we can't do that because

1296
02:06:45,520 --> 02:06:53,800
 of the plus or minus 5% so that's the other side of that but I think after the

1297
02:06:53,800 --> 02:06:58,080
 break we may have a solution all right thank you at this time I'll call recess

1298
02:06:58,080 --> 02:07:07,240
 for 15 minutes at 746 thank you for your patience we will reconvene this meeting

1299
02:07:07,240 --> 02:07:16,040
 at 812 first thing I'd like to do as we saw in the public session is it seems

1300
02:07:16,040 --> 02:07:21,240
 like we have some revised staff suggested conditions so I'd like to put

1301
02:07:21,240 --> 02:07:25,920
 those on record for the Commission to listen to and consider so I'll have

1302
02:07:25,920 --> 02:07:32,240
 Richard can only can you present those on the magic I sir

1303
02:07:56,760 --> 02:08:05,200
 able to see those yes a little too dark and so that the first sentence is really

1304
02:08:05,200 --> 02:08:12,480
 just a modification it's essentially that same if you if you look at if you

1305
02:08:12,480 --> 02:08:20,080
 look at the heading it's essentially that that same language and then

1306
02:08:20,080 --> 02:08:28,120
 condition one remains the same condition two is modified slightly it references

1307
02:08:28,120 --> 02:08:31,560
 the 12,000 square foot building two-story bank with drive-through

1308
02:08:31,560 --> 02:08:35,840
 facility consisting of a maximum of two lanes quite honestly whether it's a

1309
02:08:35,840 --> 02:08:40,560
 teller or an ATM ITM at the end of the day it's still drive-through lanes that's

1310
02:08:40,560 --> 02:08:44,480
 really what we're what we're here for so the site plan has three lanes or can we

1311
02:08:44,480 --> 02:08:47,600
 specify two drive-through lanes there I think it was two in the bypass lane

1312
02:08:47,600 --> 02:08:53,600
 that's excluded from the drive-through the language here is specific enough

1313
02:08:53,600 --> 02:09:00,320
 that's drive-through of two lanes right okay correct and then what we what we

1314
02:09:00,320 --> 02:09:04,280
 added in there is that if they wanted to reduce the building square footage

1315
02:09:04,280 --> 02:09:08,600
 beyond the 5% that that would be permitted so if they wanted to reduce it

1316
02:09:08,600 --> 02:09:14,600
 10% 20% as long as it was a decrease in intensity we were comfortable with that

1317
02:09:14,600 --> 02:09:21,520
 condition number three essentially remained the same what we did is we took

1318
02:09:21,520 --> 02:09:25,700
 out that reference to previous paving material right now I think there were one

1319
02:09:25,700 --> 02:09:33,320
 space over if they decide to go under the new DDC if you will if you recall

1320
02:09:33,320 --> 02:09:38,960
 the parking permits up to 125% of the of the of the required parking and so we

1321
02:09:38,960 --> 02:09:46,120
 didn't so we just did in accordance with the DDC want whichever they choose the

1322
02:09:46,120 --> 02:09:52,080
 maximum lot coverage this one is what probably changed significantly but not

1323
02:09:52,080 --> 02:10:00,040
 really maximum lot coverage of 80% and 20% landscape area the lot coverage may

1324
02:10:00,040 --> 02:10:05,200
 be reduced beyond 5% in landscape area increased by any amount and so that way

1325
02:10:05,200 --> 02:10:09,600
 again it's it's in increasing the landscape and open space decreasing the

1326
02:10:09,600 --> 02:10:15,360
 intense intensity not having a limitation with respect to that just to

1327
02:10:15,360 --> 02:10:20,440
 give you an idea of the of those numbers if they do decide to go under the DCG

1328
02:10:20,440 --> 02:10:30,240
 that 20% is actually greater than the 15% required the MN if you recall with

1329
02:10:30,240 --> 02:10:33,880
 the MN we don't regulate in the new DDC by a lot coverage which only by building

1330
02:10:33,880 --> 02:10:37,920
 coverage but it does have a minimum landscape area of 20% which that would

1331
02:10:37,920 --> 02:10:42,920
 which that would meet and then we just sort of modified five and six just to

1332
02:10:42,920 --> 02:10:49,040
 rather than specify a certain section we referenced just in accordance with the

1333
02:10:49,040 --> 02:10:56,200
 DDC and then of course there are some administrative approvals like the

1334
02:10:56,200 --> 02:11:01,520
 alternative buffer that was previously mentioned depending which which route

1335
02:11:01,520 --> 02:11:09,240
 they go but but we referenced the the I think initially was referencing one and

1336
02:11:09,240 --> 02:11:15,280
 four this just referenced those modifications of two and two and four I'm

1337
02:11:15,280 --> 02:11:17,560
 sorry

1338
02:11:17,560 --> 02:11:24,360
 the best your knowledge is agreeable by by both city staff and the applicant yes

1339
02:11:24,360 --> 02:11:28,760
 okay commissioners do you have any questions or clarifications needed for

1340
02:11:28,760 --> 02:11:43,240
 these conditions Chris you're back I think I'm gonna stay with the fence okay

1341
02:11:43,240 --> 02:11:49,400
 I think I'd still like to see your fence I feel obliged based on that

1342
02:11:49,400 --> 02:11:54,760
 announcement for the record if the tornado sirens do go off the protocol is

1343
02:11:54,760 --> 02:12:02,440
 to go downstairs in the basement so below this chamber you'd go out take a

1344
02:12:02,440 --> 02:12:09,080
 U-turn there's a staircase there anyway squisher back continue thank you chair

1345
02:12:09,080 --> 02:12:14,480
 I'm still leaning towards a privacy fence on that one side I was looking at

1346
02:12:14,480 --> 02:12:17,880
 the site and there was a concern that maybe the fence would be too close to

1347
02:12:17,880 --> 02:12:22,680
 the residential driveway but I didn't quite see it looks like there's plenty

1348
02:12:22,680 --> 02:12:28,080
 of room there so I'd still like to if we could insert that into this we could

1349
02:12:28,080 --> 02:12:31,520
 certainly require that that fence and I believe they they gave the thumbs up

1350
02:12:31,520 --> 02:12:34,480
 that they have no problem providing that fence so we can incorporate that into

1351
02:12:34,480 --> 02:12:37,720
 the condition

1352
02:12:37,720 --> 02:12:43,840
 Mr. Ellis thank you chair and I'd just like to entertain mr. Allison about his

1353
02:12:43,840 --> 02:12:48,840
 the tree discussion we had a little bit ago where you talked about planning some

1354
02:12:48,840 --> 02:12:55,000
 higher trees for neighborhood protection you mentioned that earlier in your when

1355
02:12:55,000 --> 02:13:00,640
 you were up here yes the buffer trees on the west side we

1356
02:13:00,640 --> 02:13:06,160
 could require that those be the larger trees I would like that incorporated I

1357
02:13:06,160 --> 02:13:11,360
 mean that's I don't have a problem with this development at all my my issue is

1358
02:13:11,360 --> 02:13:17,640
 that that side of Mulberry remains what it is it's a neighborhood and and we

1359
02:13:17,640 --> 02:13:22,000
 just need the development compatible with a neighborhood and it protected as

1360
02:13:22,000 --> 02:13:24,440
 such

1361
02:13:24,440 --> 02:13:30,040
 Christian back you know concur with Commissioner Ellis - I think though what

1362
02:13:30,040 --> 02:13:35,440
 we're gonna have to do is fight this battle one development at a time and we

1363
02:13:35,440 --> 02:13:39,280
 ought to be willing to do that but this this particular development it could be

1364
02:13:39,280 --> 02:13:42,600
 worse it could be a you know a drive-through hamburger place and we

1365
02:13:42,600 --> 02:13:47,560
 know how those go so this this particular development in my opinion is

1366
02:13:47,560 --> 02:13:52,480
 compatible shouldn't all set the neighborhood area there but by rezoning

1367
02:13:52,480 --> 02:13:56,680
 this yeah we're gonna have to each development down the road if these come

1368
02:13:56,680 --> 02:14:00,160
 in along that strip there we're gonna have to deal with it development by

1369
02:14:00,160 --> 02:14:07,680
 development so at this time I feel obligated to say this is a public

1370
02:14:07,680 --> 02:14:12,840
 hearing so if anyone does want to speak it is open to the floor but there's no

1371
02:14:12,840 --> 02:14:18,400
 one else to speak which I do not see any movement I'm gonna go ahead and close

1372
02:14:18,400 --> 02:14:23,520
 the public hearing for both items that we've been discussing both for C and for

1373
02:14:23,520 --> 02:14:29,900
 D at this time we have the ability to have further discussion or a motion can

1374
02:14:29,900 --> 02:14:39,640
 we clear the first and second off the board okay I don't know if that's

1375
02:14:39,640 --> 02:14:46,320
 accurate Chris you're back okay so we're clear I thought before before they came

1376
02:14:46,320 --> 02:14:51,120
 back and presented this I was under the I was feeling like we needed to postpone

1377
02:14:51,120 --> 02:14:55,120
 this and let them hammer this out but it appears like they've got this both sides

1378
02:14:55,120 --> 02:15:01,840
 seem satisfactory and at this point I don't see a problem with it I'm not

1379
02:15:01,840 --> 02:15:06,480
 gonna make a motion on it but my first inclination was to postpone this to a

1380
02:15:06,480 --> 02:15:13,520
 date certain which would be the next B and Z but all the issues I think they

1381
02:15:13,520 --> 02:15:17,760
 were bothering both sides or concerned both sides have been worked out so we

1382
02:15:17,760 --> 02:15:21,040
 can move forward as far as I'm concerned

1383
02:15:21,040 --> 02:15:27,240
 Christopher Sanchez I just want to comment that yeah I also thought I was

1384
02:15:27,240 --> 02:15:33,160
 kind of confused and on on the feeling of other developers and and I was

1385
02:15:33,160 --> 02:15:37,680
 thinking well maybe we have to postpone it but at the same time I think it's one

1386
02:15:37,680 --> 02:15:42,320
 of the things that has we understand is we have the old code and the new code

1387
02:15:42,320 --> 02:15:46,680
 and there's things there that I think they're still somewhat confusing but I

1388
02:15:46,680 --> 02:15:51,560
 think it's just an example of these things can be worked out and I think

1389
02:15:51,560 --> 02:15:57,040
 getting together figuring out going and talking about it shows that these things

1390
02:15:57,040 --> 02:16:04,320
 can be worked out and so I'm glad it happened but one of the things you

1391
02:16:04,320 --> 02:16:08,240
 mentioned was that you got to pay the information I think on Friday or

1392
02:16:08,240 --> 02:16:11,280
 something I think it's important to start getting that information a little

1393
02:16:11,280 --> 02:16:16,040
 bit give you a little bit more leeway so that developers can make those

1394
02:16:16,040 --> 02:16:21,840
 decisions and discuss with you prior to this meeting

1395
02:16:24,040 --> 02:16:28,920
 Mr. Smith I'm assuming we still need to make we still need a motion to adopt

1396
02:16:28,920 --> 02:16:34,680
 these separately correct correct so at this point we'd take a motion for the

1397
02:16:34,680 --> 02:16:38,800
 zoning request yeah I'll move I'll move to approve the zoning case Z 19 - zero

1398
02:16:38,800 --> 02:16:43,360
 zero zero two no staff recommendations for this this item so no no

1399
02:16:43,360 --> 02:16:47,080
 recommendations on that we have a first for approval of the zoning request

1400
02:16:47,080 --> 02:16:54,560
 Mr. Cole second we have first and second for the zoning request any discussion see

1401
02:16:54,560 --> 02:16:57,760
 not a call for a vote on the board

1402
02:16:57,760 --> 02:17:08,520
 motion carries seven zero next will be the SUP Mr. Smith motion to approve the

1403
02:17:08,520 --> 02:17:13,000
 SUP with the revised staff recommendations that were not in the

1404
02:17:13,000 --> 02:17:17,560
 back up and Mr. Smith for clarification are you including a condition for a

1405
02:17:17,560 --> 02:17:27,560
 fence yes I am and the trees from in the trees yes okay so we have a first with

1406
02:17:27,560 --> 02:17:33,840
 the revised conditions with the addition of two for the West fence and the trees

1407
02:17:33,840 --> 02:17:39,280
 of mr. Ellis noted commissioner Cole second but a first and a second with the

1408
02:17:39,280 --> 02:17:43,640
 revised conditions and additional any discussion Christian Pernetta I just

1409
02:17:43,640 --> 02:17:46,800
 wanted to verify someone we say the trees we're ensuring that they are the

1410
02:17:46,800 --> 02:17:57,720
 larger trees right in this as far as they say okay correct so without any

1411
02:17:57,720 --> 02:18:00,580
 discussion I was gonna make one note thanks for the patience for the

1412
02:18:00,580 --> 02:18:05,520
 applicant I know we are as a as a commission and as a council and as staff

1413
02:18:05,520 --> 02:18:10,000
 trying to get used to new development codes and so I appreciate the

1414
02:18:10,000 --> 02:18:14,920
 applicants patience as well as see staff working to be nimble and appreciate

1415
02:18:14,920 --> 02:18:17,840
 both sides of the discussion and find common ground I certainly appreciate

1416
02:18:17,840 --> 02:18:22,200
 that I think in the future if it's the city staff's prerogative and City

1417
02:18:22,200 --> 02:18:26,400
 Council's prerogative to be more specific on SUPs I think that might be a

1418
02:18:26,400 --> 02:18:31,000
 good move away from general conformity or substantially conforms but with that

1419
02:18:31,000 --> 02:18:36,400
 if we're going to hold the applicants on any SUP with more rigor you provided

1420
02:18:36,400 --> 02:18:41,120
 them a heads up so they know exactly what their concept plan is actually be

1421
02:18:41,120 --> 02:18:44,160
 holding them to I think would be important because I think historically

1422
02:18:44,160 --> 02:18:48,720
 that hasn't been the case and if we're making a shift be cognizant of the

1423
02:18:48,720 --> 02:18:54,080
 timing for applicants I think would be appreciative so with that we have a

1424
02:18:54,080 --> 02:18:58,320
 first and a second call for a vote on the board

1425
02:19:01,920 --> 02:19:09,240
 motion carries 7-0 congratulations next item on the agenda is our matrix and I

1426
02:19:09,240 --> 02:19:15,000
 will have Richard begin and then we'll have discussion just I'll be brief on

1427
02:19:15,000 --> 02:19:20,200
 this item a couple things I wanted to highlight the discussion on the upland

1428
02:19:20,200 --> 02:19:24,760
 habitats maintaining those long-term if you recall we talked about bringing that

1429
02:19:24,760 --> 02:19:29,240
 at the same time at a work session at the same time that we would discuss the

1430
02:19:29,240 --> 02:19:34,320
 criteria manual for ESA they're currently in the process of going through this

1431
02:19:34,320 --> 02:19:38,440
 month to the committee on the environment and so will my most likely

1432
02:19:38,440 --> 02:19:46,080
 move that date to 619 what I will do on the on 515 what I'd like to do I know we

1433
02:19:46,080 --> 02:19:51,880
 all got any Kathy had sent an email out earlier today on the attendance and while

1434
02:19:51,880 --> 02:19:56,880
 that wasn't on the agenda unfortunately weren't really able to discuss that what

1435
02:19:56,880 --> 02:20:01,000
 I'd like to do is if it's if it's okay with with the Commission include that as

1436
02:20:01,000 --> 02:20:05,000
 part of the work session discussion under our draft policies and procedures

1437
02:20:05,000 --> 02:20:09,920
 just to have that so I'll include that on the agenda for 515 the only other

1438
02:20:09,920 --> 02:20:15,680
 item that I'll just mention the 515 meeting as it stands right now we're

1439
02:20:15,680 --> 02:20:20,720
 looking at and again this may this may change within the next week or so but

1440
02:20:20,720 --> 02:20:23,360
 right now we're looking at at approximately eight public hearing items

1441
02:20:23,360 --> 02:20:27,920
 and two consent items and that's the result of unfortunately the meeting we

1442
02:20:27,920 --> 02:20:35,400
 had to cancel as a result of the weather any discussion

1443
02:20:35,400 --> 02:20:43,600
 just a comment from what we experienced tonight can we ensure that on our

1444
02:20:43,600 --> 02:20:49,080
 presentation what goes on the monitor is all of the recommendations because that

1445
02:20:49,080 --> 02:20:54,760
 definitely got confusing today and that's just that's we need that in the

1446
02:20:54,760 --> 02:20:58,560
 public needs that so that we know exactly what we're voting on because

1447
02:20:58,560 --> 02:21:05,080
 that definitely was a source of confusion and then on the record as I've

1448
02:21:05,080 --> 02:21:10,280
 said this off the record too but whatever you can do as part of staff to

1449
02:21:10,280 --> 02:21:15,480
 get Mulberry Street on some kind of somebody's radar this development is

1450
02:21:15,480 --> 02:21:19,880
 going to add problems to that corner especially if it's going to get started

1451
02:21:19,880 --> 02:21:25,560
 in the fall if nothing is done right now at that intersection so if there's

1452
02:21:25,560 --> 02:21:30,560
 anything we can do to move that up somebody's priority list it definitely

1453
02:21:30,560 --> 02:21:33,320
 needs to be done

1454
02:21:33,320 --> 02:21:41,040
 seeing no other discussion items I will close this meeting at 826