WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.760
 >> Good afternoon and welcome to the city of Denton's planning and zoning commission

00:00:06.760 --> 00:00:11.080
 meeting for Wednesday, February 14th, 2024.

00:00:11.080 --> 00:00:16.320
 This is our work session and with a quorum present I will call us to order at 5.04 p.m.

00:00:16.320 --> 00:00:21.080
 Let the record show that commissioners Thaggard and Cole are absent at this time.

00:00:21.080 --> 00:00:25.840
 First item on our work session is citizen comments on consent agenda.

00:00:25.840 --> 00:00:31.040
 Is there anyone here to speak on consent agenda?

00:00:31.040 --> 00:00:37.480
 Then we'll go to our next item, which is clarification on tonight's regular meeting agenda.

00:00:37.480 --> 00:00:40.040
 First being our minutes from January 24th.

00:00:40.040 --> 00:00:45.560
 Any questions on those minutes?

00:00:45.560 --> 00:00:48.360
 That takes us then to consent agenda.

00:00:48.360 --> 00:00:49.760
 Any questions on the consent agenda?

00:00:49.760 --> 00:00:54.520
 We've got two items there today.

00:00:54.520 --> 00:01:00.280
 Objections for individual consideration, 4A, I'll have Erin come up for that one.

00:01:00.280 --> 00:01:04.880
 We did get an email on that that changed from our backup.

00:01:04.880 --> 00:01:12.000
 I think they were just waiting on civil engineering things to be completed.

00:01:12.000 --> 00:01:26.520
 Good evening, Chair and members of the commission, Erin Stanley, assistant planner.

00:01:26.520 --> 00:01:28.760
 Yes, you did receive an email for this.

00:01:28.760 --> 00:01:33.200
 So this is the final plot for Denton Shady Shores edition.

00:01:33.200 --> 00:01:35.440
 We were previously recommending denial.

00:01:35.440 --> 00:01:40.240
 They had a few more engineering comments to work out in their civil plans, and that is

00:01:40.240 --> 00:01:42.880
 the condition for approval for final plots.

00:01:42.880 --> 00:01:44.640
 They've since worked all those out.

00:01:44.640 --> 00:01:46.760
 So now we are recommending approval.

00:01:46.760 --> 00:01:47.760
 Great.

00:01:47.760 --> 00:01:50.600
 Any questions for Erin?

00:01:50.600 --> 00:01:52.480
 Appreciate it.

00:01:52.480 --> 00:01:53.480
 Thank you.

00:01:53.480 --> 00:02:01.400
 4B on items for individual consideration is V23-0008.

00:02:01.400 --> 00:02:05.040
 Matt's on his way up to give us a summary of that item.

00:02:05.040 --> 00:02:06.040
 Hi.

00:02:06.040 --> 00:02:07.040
 Hello.

00:02:07.040 --> 00:02:08.040
 First time.

00:02:08.040 --> 00:02:09.040
 Welcome.

00:02:09.040 --> 00:02:10.040
 Thank you.

00:02:10.040 --> 00:02:11.040
 All right.

00:02:11.040 --> 00:02:12.040
 All right.

00:02:12.040 --> 00:02:28.040
 Matt Burdine, good evening, members of the commission, Matt Burdine, assistant planner,

00:02:28.040 --> 00:02:34.040
 today presenting a subdivision variance request, V23-008, Hoke edition variance.

00:02:34.040 --> 00:02:40.840
 So I'm going to show a few slides from the presentation just to show where this is.

00:02:40.840 --> 00:02:44.320
 So it's associated with a minor plat that came in.

00:02:44.320 --> 00:02:48.000
 Here we see northeast side of Denton.

00:02:48.000 --> 00:02:54.240
 This variance is for a property more on the east side in ETJ1.

00:02:54.240 --> 00:02:56.280
 Here's a site a little more zoomed in.

00:02:56.280 --> 00:03:03.720
 As you can see, it's about a half a mile north of US 380 off of North Trinity Road.

00:03:03.720 --> 00:03:08.040
 And then this is just a picture of the subject property itself.

00:03:08.040 --> 00:03:10.720
 All right.

00:03:10.720 --> 00:03:17.520
 So the minor plat that came in, the purpose was to create two lots, one of which is a

00:03:17.520 --> 00:03:19.280
 flag lot.

00:03:19.280 --> 00:03:25.080
 And there are two subdivision variance requests, both associated with that flag lot.

00:03:25.080 --> 00:03:32.800
 One is to increase the max flag pole length from our standard of 300 feet to 521 feet

00:03:32.800 --> 00:03:36.280
 for the proposed lot one that you see.

00:03:36.280 --> 00:03:43.280
 And then also the second subdivision variance request for that same proposed lot one was

00:03:43.280 --> 00:03:52.320
 an exemption from the permanent turnaround requirement in DDC chapter subsection eight.

00:03:52.320 --> 00:04:02.680
 Some considerations that when analyzing this variance was the -- in regards to the turnaround,

00:04:02.680 --> 00:04:09.400
 the fire department did review the proposed plat in the event that they had to visit this

00:04:09.400 --> 00:04:17.920
 site and they determined they could safely enter and exit the proposed lot one safely.

00:04:17.920 --> 00:04:23.400
 And in regards to the maximum flag pole length and increase in that, as you can see, 300

00:04:23.400 --> 00:04:30.360
 feet is marked out and then up to 521 is what they're requesting.

00:04:30.360 --> 00:04:40.400
 In analysis noted, the challenging site topography of this property, there is quite a large pond

00:04:40.400 --> 00:04:47.760
 in the front of the lot and so any development on this lot is forced more towards the back,

00:04:47.760 --> 00:04:53.200
 which staff determined would likely create irregularly shaped lots regardless of how

00:04:53.200 --> 00:04:56.920
 it's subdivided.

00:04:56.920 --> 00:05:03.480
 Another consideration was when these improvements such as the home and pond were put in place

00:05:03.480 --> 00:05:10.440
 and according to the applicant, the pond and homes have been on this property since the

00:05:10.440 --> 00:05:20.520
 early 1980s, which is well before the DDC regulations came into effect in 2019.

00:05:20.520 --> 00:05:27.480
 And overall, do not expect this subdivision variance to be detrimental to the public safety,

00:05:27.480 --> 00:05:34.480
 health and welfare and staff is recommending approval of this subdivision variance.

00:05:34.480 --> 00:05:35.480
 Any questions?

00:05:35.480 --> 00:05:37.480
 Thank you, Matt.

00:05:37.480 --> 00:05:39.480
 Any questions?

00:05:39.480 --> 00:05:42.080
 Okay.

00:05:42.080 --> 00:05:43.080
 Thank you very much.

00:05:43.080 --> 00:05:46.080
 We'll see you at the regular meeting.

00:05:46.080 --> 00:05:52.240
 Next item for individual consideration is 4CFP240004.

00:05:52.240 --> 00:05:55.280
 Hello Julie.

00:05:55.280 --> 00:06:07.280
 Good evening, Julie Wyatt.

00:06:07.280 --> 00:06:28.680
 Sorry, ah here we go, sorry about that.

00:06:28.680 --> 00:06:36.520
 All right, Julie Wyatt and this is a final plat for Audreau Oaks Phase 2B.

00:06:36.520 --> 00:06:42.320
 This is a single family residential neighborhood located on the south side of Audreau Oaks east

00:06:42.320 --> 00:06:44.320
 of Nottingham.

00:06:44.320 --> 00:06:48.480
 It is consistent with the preliminary plat, however they do have a couple of items that

00:06:48.480 --> 00:06:53.520
 they do need to work through in order to meet all of the technical requirements and so staff

00:06:53.520 --> 00:06:54.720
 is recommending denial.

00:06:54.720 --> 00:06:58.680
 They have requested an extension to the February 28th meeting.

00:06:58.680 --> 00:07:00.480
 We do not have any objection to that.

00:07:00.480 --> 00:07:02.600
 I'll be happy to answer any questions.

00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:03.640
 Thank you, Julie.

00:07:03.640 --> 00:07:04.640
 Any questions there?

00:07:04.640 --> 00:07:07.120
 Is that their first request for extension?

00:07:07.120 --> 00:07:08.120
 Yes, it is.

00:07:08.120 --> 00:07:09.120
 Thank you.

00:07:09.120 --> 00:07:10.120
 Okay.

00:07:10.120 --> 00:07:11.840
 Thank you very much.

00:07:11.840 --> 00:07:13.480
 See you later.

00:07:13.480 --> 00:07:16.080
 We've got two public hearings this evening.

00:07:16.080 --> 00:07:21.200
 The first being 5A PD 230003.

00:07:21.200 --> 00:07:26.320
 Let Mia come up and give us a summary of that item and we can take any questions.

00:07:26.320 --> 00:07:28.480
 Hi Mia.

00:07:28.480 --> 00:07:33.760
 Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission.

00:07:33.760 --> 00:07:35.960
 Mia Hines, senior planner.

00:07:35.960 --> 00:07:41.480
 This item, or I have a detailed presentation to go over during the regular session, walking

00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:47.640
 us through the PD development standards and proposed development plan, but just a brief

00:07:47.640 --> 00:07:48.640
 summary.

00:07:48.640 --> 00:07:57.920
 This item is a request to rezone approximately 12.24 acres from MNSC and R3 to a new PD.

00:07:57.920 --> 00:08:03.120
 The site itself is located at the northwest corner of US 380 and Old North Road.

00:08:03.120 --> 00:08:08.840
 The, or if approved, the required, or the development would be required to be developed

00:08:08.840 --> 00:08:14.840
 according to the PD development standards and PD development plan that has been provided

00:08:14.840 --> 00:08:16.440
 to you in your backup.

00:08:16.440 --> 00:08:22.480
 The Denton 2040 future land use map designation for this area consists of community mixed

00:08:22.480 --> 00:08:30.400
 use closer to the university, East University Road and Old North Road and then moderate

00:08:30.400 --> 00:08:37.200
 residential to the north of that as we push further into some existing single family residential

00:08:37.200 --> 00:08:38.200
 development.

00:08:38.200 --> 00:08:41.400
 Just some background of the applicant and this project.

00:08:41.400 --> 00:08:49.520
 You may recall seeing this site, Z22-0003 came before this body in summer of 2022.

00:08:49.520 --> 00:08:55.480
 At that time, the request was simply to rezone a portion of the frontage from SC to MN to

00:08:55.480 --> 00:08:59.000
 facilitate a multifamily development.

00:08:59.000 --> 00:09:05.040
 Some of the residents from the neighboring community showed out and had concerns about

00:09:05.040 --> 00:09:10.160
 construction or development taking place on that site and being close to their rear property

00:09:10.160 --> 00:09:18.240
 lines and some additional concerns about height that would be permitted under straight MN

00:09:18.240 --> 00:09:19.240
 zoning.

00:09:19.240 --> 00:09:23.920
 At that time, the council sort of postponed the item and directed the applicant to come

00:09:23.920 --> 00:09:30.240
 back with a PD to show a more comprehensively planned site and to codify some of the concessions

00:09:30.240 --> 00:09:36.860
 that they agreed that they would do with that straight zoning case.

00:09:36.860 --> 00:09:38.280
 This is their way of doing that.

00:09:38.280 --> 00:09:43.920
 They have a PD with a full development plan and also included the commercial piece along

00:09:43.920 --> 00:09:46.000
 East University Road.

00:09:46.000 --> 00:09:51.880
 Of course, we did review this PD pursuant to our criteria for approval and staff is

00:09:51.880 --> 00:09:56.800
 recommending approval of this request this evening.

00:09:56.800 --> 00:09:59.240
 With that, I will take any questions or comments you have.

00:09:59.240 --> 00:10:00.240
 Thanks, Mia.

00:10:00.240 --> 00:10:01.240
 Commissioner Smith.

00:10:01.240 --> 00:10:02.240
 Thank you, Chair.

00:10:02.240 --> 00:10:03.240
 Mia, I know you said the council, it got postponed.

00:10:03.240 --> 00:10:06.840
 I can't remember what happened at PNZ with that one.

00:10:06.840 --> 00:10:07.840
 Did we approve it?

00:10:07.840 --> 00:10:08.840
 Yes.

00:10:08.840 --> 00:10:09.840
 That was a recommendation of approval.

00:10:09.840 --> 00:10:10.840
 Okay.

00:10:10.840 --> 00:10:11.840
 Do you remember if the vote was by chance at all?

00:10:11.840 --> 00:10:14.280
 I do not, but I can look that up and get that for you in the regular session.

00:10:14.280 --> 00:10:15.280
 Okay.

00:10:15.280 --> 00:10:16.280
 Gotcha.

00:10:16.280 --> 00:10:17.280
 Thank you.

00:10:17.280 --> 00:10:18.280
 Anything else?

00:10:18.280 --> 00:10:19.280
 Commissioner Prout.

00:10:19.280 --> 00:10:20.280
 Thank you, Chair.

00:10:20.280 --> 00:10:21.280
 I believe it was 6-0.

00:10:21.280 --> 00:10:25.440
 The last one meeting I missed in the last three years.

00:10:25.440 --> 00:10:39.200
 Anyway, I don't want to go at length because we got a full work session here.

00:10:39.200 --> 00:10:43.800
 I'm confused by the nature.

00:10:43.800 --> 00:10:46.400
 I understand why this happens.

00:10:46.400 --> 00:10:50.640
 Council pushes it back, et cetera.

00:10:50.640 --> 00:10:56.480
 But in our review back up, it says there's no competing goals, policies, or strategies

00:10:56.480 --> 00:10:59.400
 with this proposal, et cetera.

00:10:59.400 --> 00:11:04.440
 And that's sort of the same language that was used when it first came before us under

00:11:04.440 --> 00:11:12.320
 the MN zoning of a smaller portion of this land.

00:11:12.320 --> 00:11:18.960
 Was there really no discussion amongst staff about whether straight zoning or a PD is better

00:11:18.960 --> 00:11:23.400
 from a planning perspective because that's what it sounds like is when it came in the

00:11:23.400 --> 00:11:26.600
 first time the applicant asked for straight zoning and that's what we gave them and we

00:11:26.600 --> 00:11:27.600
 supported that.

00:11:27.600 --> 00:11:32.760
 Then when they came back with the PD, we supported that and we're just not talking about the

00:11:32.760 --> 00:11:33.760
 elephant in the room.

00:11:33.760 --> 00:11:34.760
 Yes.

00:11:34.760 --> 00:11:38.080
 And Tina may have something to add here, but I can add a little bit.

00:11:38.080 --> 00:11:41.400
 When we do get applications in, of course, we look at the application.

00:11:41.400 --> 00:11:45.720
 We take in their application, what they're trying to do, and we work with them and review

00:11:45.720 --> 00:11:47.160
 it and stuff.

00:11:47.160 --> 00:11:52.800
 We base whatever their request is, we look at our criteria for approval on that specific

00:11:52.800 --> 00:11:55.600
 type of request, and we go from there.

00:11:55.600 --> 00:12:00.560
 In the same way we did with the PD, we weigh it up against the specific general criteria

00:12:00.560 --> 00:12:03.800
 for approval for a PD, and then we go from there and work with the applicant.

00:12:03.800 --> 00:12:06.800
 But Tina may have something to add to that.

00:12:06.800 --> 00:12:10.800
 Just to add, so when the original request came through, obviously, as Mia pointed out,

00:12:10.800 --> 00:12:13.280
 we recommended approval because it met our criteria.

00:12:13.280 --> 00:12:18.920
 Ideally, we would like to rely upon our development standards as provided for within the straight

00:12:18.920 --> 00:12:19.920
 zoning districts.

00:12:19.920 --> 00:12:26.200
 However, in this case, given there were neighborhood concerns expressed, particularly at the city

00:12:26.200 --> 00:12:32.000
 council meeting, and I can't recall if we had anybody at the PNZ meeting, but I do know

00:12:32.000 --> 00:12:36.760
 we had folks at the council meeting, and then combined with the direction that we received

00:12:36.760 --> 00:12:41.520
 from council, the council was interested in all of the concessions that the applicant

00:12:41.520 --> 00:12:45.840
 was offering up to be provided for at a plan development district.

00:12:45.840 --> 00:12:50.440
 In this case, the fact that the applicant has expanded their subject property has included

00:12:50.440 --> 00:12:51.960
 the commercial property.

00:12:51.960 --> 00:12:57.080
 We believe that this is a really good design for this property and actually results in

00:12:57.080 --> 00:13:02.940
 a better project than what we potentially could get under straight zoning.

00:13:02.940 --> 00:13:06.180
 Hence why we're recommending approval of this project.

00:13:06.180 --> 00:13:07.320
 Is it a plan development district?

00:13:07.320 --> 00:13:13.000
 Yes, in this case, the PD process was used to ensure that there is a better development

00:13:13.000 --> 00:13:16.240
 plan that prevails.

00:13:16.240 --> 00:13:19.700
 If the applicant ever wants to deviate from this plan in the future, then it's going to

00:13:19.700 --> 00:13:23.720
 require an amendment to the plan development district.

00:13:23.720 --> 00:13:30.640
 I guess just to follow up, I think it's been almost a year and a half, like 15 or 16 months

00:13:30.640 --> 00:13:35.200
 since that came before us originally.

00:13:35.200 --> 00:13:37.240
 Is that a typical timeline?

00:13:37.240 --> 00:13:38.840
 That seems like a very long time.

00:13:38.840 --> 00:13:43.920
 When interest rates are going up, I'm trying to understand why that takes so long.

00:13:43.920 --> 00:13:48.680
 Is it because they had to get all the way through CEP to get the confidence that all

00:13:48.680 --> 00:13:52.880
 the criteria will be meetable?

00:13:52.880 --> 00:13:58.720
 When it comes to working on plan development districts, they do have a tendency to take

00:13:58.720 --> 00:14:03.800
 more time compared to an applicant coming in with a zoning compliance plan that would

00:14:03.800 --> 00:14:06.840
 comply under the existing zoning.

00:14:06.840 --> 00:14:09.640
 In this case, the applicant still needed a zoning entitlement in order to be able to

00:14:09.640 --> 00:14:12.160
 make the multifamily component of the project work.

00:14:12.160 --> 00:14:16.120
 But I don't recall, Mia, when did they re-submit this project?

00:14:16.120 --> 00:14:21.320
 I believe under the PD that was submitted in maybe April of last year and between the

00:14:21.320 --> 00:14:26.080
 back and forth to get this to a point where staff is reviewing their full zoning compliance

00:14:26.080 --> 00:14:27.080
 plan.

00:14:27.080 --> 00:14:29.840
 We're making sure utilities are preliminarily placed in the right place.

00:14:29.840 --> 00:14:33.340
 All of those things, making sure they're meeting the DDC in areas that they're supposed to

00:14:33.340 --> 00:14:39.180
 or specifically requesting the deviations or alternatives from areas that they're not.

00:14:39.180 --> 00:14:44.800
 That whole review process, working with staff, of course, we posted our submittal calendar

00:14:44.800 --> 00:14:49.920
 online and then it's up to the applicant to re-submit and get that into us when they're

00:14:49.920 --> 00:14:50.920
 ready for it.

00:14:50.920 --> 00:14:56.160
 Yeah, so from April to now in January, for a site like this, that's a reasonable time

00:14:56.160 --> 00:15:01.560
 period associated with it because of the complexities that are involved with the project.

00:15:01.560 --> 00:15:05.600
 If the applicant is engaging the community during that time frame, then that just adds

00:15:05.600 --> 00:15:11.400
 to the time length compared to if they were not.

00:15:11.400 --> 00:15:15.940
 It's not uncommon for plan development districts to take a longer time to bring forth because

00:15:15.940 --> 00:15:21.600
 also the complexity of the review associated with the development plan that is being required

00:15:21.600 --> 00:15:24.800
 for this particular type of plan development district.

00:15:24.800 --> 00:15:30.000
 If it was just a PD overlay where we were varying a handful of standards, then it's

00:15:30.000 --> 00:15:33.960
 a different situation, but in this case, being that the type of plan development district

00:15:33.960 --> 00:15:38.960
 they applied for, the fact that we've got to review all of their development plans associated

00:15:38.960 --> 00:15:43.400
 with it because we want to make sure it works.

00:15:43.400 --> 00:15:47.040
 If this gets approved, we don't want to have a plan that doesn't work where we're having

00:15:47.040 --> 00:15:52.960
 to come back and amend it, so it does take time and effort associated with it.

00:15:52.960 --> 00:15:53.960
 Thank you.

00:15:53.960 --> 00:15:54.960
 That helps.

00:15:54.960 --> 00:15:55.960
 Thank you.

00:15:55.960 --> 00:15:58.860
 Yeah, I definitely have a couple of questions.

00:15:58.860 --> 00:16:02.420
 I didn't see anything in the back up with regard to neighborhood engagement, but was

00:16:02.420 --> 00:16:03.420
 that done?

00:16:03.420 --> 00:16:04.420
 Do you know?

00:16:04.420 --> 00:16:05.420
 Yes.

00:16:05.420 --> 00:16:07.000
 Yeah, and I believe the applicant will be here this evening to speak to that a little

00:16:07.000 --> 00:16:08.000
 bit more.

00:16:08.000 --> 00:16:09.000
 Okay.

00:16:09.000 --> 00:16:10.720
 I know there was a neighborhood meeting a few weeks ago.

00:16:10.720 --> 00:16:15.680
 The HOA representatives from the HOA showed up to that meeting and were generally in support

00:16:15.680 --> 00:16:17.160
 of what the applicant's proposing.

00:16:17.160 --> 00:16:18.160
 Okay.

00:16:18.160 --> 00:16:22.960
 Then just some specific things because I was just confused.

00:16:22.960 --> 00:16:30.400
 With this subdivision that this is in front of, there's like a vacant lot that maybe has

00:16:30.400 --> 00:16:36.240
 a crash gate or something in front of it off Paxton Way.

00:16:36.240 --> 00:16:42.400
 I'm trying to understand what is happening with that, and I couldn't really get that

00:16:42.400 --> 00:16:44.680
 off the plan.

00:16:44.680 --> 00:16:50.640
 The only vacant lot that I know of has a gas line easement running through it, and it also

00:16:50.640 --> 00:16:53.240
 runs through this property as well.

00:16:53.240 --> 00:16:54.240
 Okay.

00:16:54.240 --> 00:16:58.720
 Okay, so then that makes sense of why that is there, and that they've got wrought iron

00:16:58.720 --> 00:17:00.520
 fence there.

00:17:00.520 --> 00:17:04.880
 I believe that's ... I might have to confirm and get back to you on that.

00:17:04.880 --> 00:17:10.480
 Yeah, I'm just wondering what's happening with like ... Is that staying like it is,

00:17:10.480 --> 00:17:13.880
 and then is it impeding someone's access?

00:17:13.880 --> 00:17:16.880
 If they're having access to it now, it just ...

00:17:16.880 --> 00:17:20.520
 Is it one of the ones in the ... Can you see my mouse?

00:17:20.520 --> 00:17:23.440
 One of the ones in the center here, or is it this one over here to the ...

00:17:23.440 --> 00:17:24.440
 No, it's in the center.

00:17:24.440 --> 00:17:25.440
 In the center.

00:17:25.440 --> 00:17:26.440
 Okay, yes, yes.

00:17:26.440 --> 00:17:32.640
 Yeah, that is most likely vacant because there's a gas line easement that runs through it.

00:17:32.640 --> 00:17:38.640
 This development is proposing a pedestrian connection to that, and agreed with the applicant

00:17:38.640 --> 00:17:43.200
 and the HOA, worked that out, and agreed to make a pedestrian connection at a gate where

00:17:43.200 --> 00:17:46.360
 the HOA would have direct access from therein.

00:17:46.360 --> 00:17:48.320
 So they're going to open that up?

00:17:48.320 --> 00:17:49.320
 Yes.

00:17:49.320 --> 00:17:50.320
 Okay.

00:17:50.320 --> 00:17:54.720
 That's one question.

00:17:54.720 --> 00:17:58.200
 Next one is the existing multifamily that's there.

00:17:58.200 --> 00:18:00.240
 They will not connect, correct?

00:18:00.240 --> 00:18:02.480
 My understanding, the applicant has reached out to them, and they are not ...

00:18:02.480 --> 00:18:10.060
 They are just going to stay locked like they are, okay.

00:18:10.060 --> 00:18:16.080
 One thing ... There's a point in there about certificate of occupancy.

00:18:16.080 --> 00:18:22.440
 Prior to getting that, the developer has to replace the six-foot fence with an eight-foot

00:18:22.440 --> 00:18:28.920
 fence, and then it says ... Well, on specific lots, four through 10.

00:18:28.920 --> 00:18:32.880
 But then it also says, "Or reimburse the owner."

00:18:32.880 --> 00:18:38.120
 So tell me how we came to that, and that seems like a really bad idea to have either or.

00:18:38.120 --> 00:18:41.440
 Who's going to decide that?

00:18:41.440 --> 00:18:47.200
 Yeah, so I think that agreement, that's one of those items that the applicant has put

00:18:47.200 --> 00:18:53.600
 in there based on an agreement between them and the HOA as well.

00:18:53.600 --> 00:18:57.480
 They might be able to speak to the timeline of that as well.

00:18:57.480 --> 00:19:00.520
 Yeah, because it would be very strange to me, we're going to have some going to get

00:19:00.520 --> 00:19:05.680
 replaced with an eight-foot, and then others are not, and how's that going to look?

00:19:05.680 --> 00:19:06.680
 Okay.

00:19:06.680 --> 00:19:16.040
 Yeah, I can pose that question to them as well.

00:19:16.040 --> 00:19:22.880
 I think that is all the questions I had written down, so I will defer to anyone else.

00:19:22.880 --> 00:19:25.880
 Anybody else?

00:19:25.880 --> 00:19:32.280
 Okay, we'll just talk to you further at the regular meeting.

00:19:32.280 --> 00:19:34.000
 Thank you very much.

00:19:34.000 --> 00:19:42.240
 Our other public hearing item for tonight is 5B SD 23-0002, Ashley's item.

00:19:42.240 --> 00:19:43.240
 Hello.

00:19:43.240 --> 00:19:47.560
 Good evening, Ashley Eckstead, assistant planner.

00:19:47.560 --> 00:19:49.480
 This is SD 23-2.

00:19:49.480 --> 00:19:54.360
 This is the special sign district for James Wood Auto Park.

00:19:54.360 --> 00:19:58.280
 The purpose of this request is that some of their proposed ground sign designs and locations

00:19:58.280 --> 00:20:03.160
 do not meet the code of ordinances regulations, and these are the height, the number, and

00:20:03.160 --> 00:20:04.720
 the setbacks.

00:20:04.720 --> 00:20:09.000
 These signs were previously installed on this property, and they were removed by TxDOT in

00:20:09.000 --> 00:20:14.440
 the acquisition for the 35E widening project, so they are just requesting to reinstall the

00:20:14.440 --> 00:20:16.480
 old signs.

00:20:16.480 --> 00:20:20.480
 The Denton side code does allow for special sign districts to deviate from the regulations

00:20:20.480 --> 00:20:23.080
 with an alternative comprehensive plan.

00:20:23.080 --> 00:20:24.800
 This is a large complex site.

00:20:24.800 --> 00:20:26.480
 It's 54 acres.

00:20:26.480 --> 00:20:30.880
 They have eight driveway connections and eight structures, so it is a complex site that we

00:20:30.880 --> 00:20:35.640
 do believe meets the alternative comprehensive sign plan requirements, so we will be recommending

00:20:35.640 --> 00:20:36.640
 approval.

00:20:36.640 --> 00:20:40.480
 The next step after this will be city council on March 5th.

00:20:40.480 --> 00:20:44.160
 I have a longer presentation for the public hearing, but happy to go into any more detail

00:20:44.160 --> 00:20:45.160
 or answer any questions.

00:20:45.160 --> 00:20:46.160
 Thanks, Ashley.

00:20:46.160 --> 00:20:47.160
 Anybody else?

00:20:47.160 --> 00:20:48.160
 Commissioner Cole.

00:20:48.160 --> 00:20:49.160
 Thank you, Chair.

00:20:49.160 --> 00:20:57.640
 Just wondering, usually these sign issues have been a ZBA thing.

00:20:57.640 --> 00:21:01.000
 Why is that not ... I'm just curious.

00:21:01.000 --> 00:21:05.000
 I just wonder why this is coming to us and not the ZBA.

00:21:05.000 --> 00:21:08.560
 The sign code allows for ... In order to create the special sign district, it is kind of a

00:21:08.560 --> 00:21:12.360
 zoning action, so it goes to planning and zoning first and then city council, so it's

00:21:12.360 --> 00:21:15.560
 more like that than just a variance for one sign for the height.

00:21:15.560 --> 00:21:17.960
 It's a whole comprehensive plan for this site.

00:21:17.960 --> 00:21:18.960
 Thank you.

00:21:18.960 --> 00:21:21.880
 Yeah, I think you're thinking of when somebody wants one sign bigger than another, but this

00:21:21.880 --> 00:21:28.680
 actually creates an actual district on the site.

00:21:28.680 --> 00:21:31.080
 Anybody else on this one?

00:21:31.080 --> 00:21:32.080
 Thank you.

00:21:32.080 --> 00:21:33.080
 Thanks.

00:21:33.080 --> 00:21:34.580
 Look forward to your presentation later.

00:21:34.580 --> 00:21:40.040
 Okay, that is it for our agenda this evening.

00:21:40.040 --> 00:21:47.760
 We do have one work session report, and that is 3A, PZ24021.

00:21:47.760 --> 00:21:48.760
 Receive a report.

00:21:48.760 --> 00:21:52.680
 Discussion regarding the City of Denton's affordable housing strategy toolkit.

00:21:52.680 --> 00:21:53.680
 Hello.

00:21:53.680 --> 00:21:54.680
 Hi.

00:21:54.680 --> 00:21:55.680
 Welcome back.

00:21:55.680 --> 00:21:56.680
 Good evening, commissioners.

00:21:56.680 --> 00:21:57.680
 Good to see you.

00:21:57.680 --> 00:21:58.680
 You know what?

00:21:58.680 --> 00:21:59.680
 I've already put this open.

00:21:59.680 --> 00:22:02.680
 Here we go.

00:22:02.680 --> 00:22:10.880
 Well, good evening, Leah Atkinson, Community Services.

00:22:10.880 --> 00:22:16.840
 You may remember last time we spoke, we went over some demographic and housing stock data

00:22:16.840 --> 00:22:19.320
 regarding City of Denton and its affordable housing needs.

00:22:19.320 --> 00:22:26.840
 So this time we're back to talk about our affordable housing strategic toolkit.

00:22:26.840 --> 00:22:29.960
 So as our community continues to grow, the City of Denton is committed to ensuring a

00:22:29.960 --> 00:22:35.000
 balanced mix of housing types and opportunities available to community members at different

00:22:35.000 --> 00:22:36.000
 income levels.

00:22:36.000 --> 00:22:42.800
 Therefore, city council adopted the affordable housing strategic toolkit in February of 2022.

00:22:42.800 --> 00:22:53.380
 This outlines five strategies with 18 targeted activities to deliver these housing interventions.

00:22:53.380 --> 00:22:56.200
 I'm going to just touch on this briefly.

00:22:56.200 --> 00:23:01.240
 As part of the affordable housing needs assessment and market value analysis reinvestment fund,

00:23:01.240 --> 00:23:07.560
 did break Denton down into seven categories, seven markets based on general characteristics.

00:23:07.560 --> 00:23:12.520
 I only bring this up to say that none of our strategies are one size fits all.

00:23:12.520 --> 00:23:17.440
 We don't intend to put the same kind of a development in every part of Denton.

00:23:17.440 --> 00:23:21.800
 We want to have specific strategies that are good for specific neighborhoods and communities

00:23:21.800 --> 00:23:22.920
 within Denton.

00:23:22.920 --> 00:23:29.120
 So for example, you might see Southeast Denton there, that yellow in district E has some

00:23:29.120 --> 00:23:32.160
 of the lowest homeownership rates.

00:23:32.160 --> 00:23:37.160
 And also 36% of renters are receiving some kind of subsidy.

00:23:37.160 --> 00:23:43.280
 So the plan there is not necessarily to build a large subsidized rental development, but

00:23:43.280 --> 00:23:49.520
 more so to work on increasing homeownership and affordable opportunities to own homes

00:23:49.520 --> 00:23:51.920
 and decrease displacement in that area.

00:23:51.920 --> 00:23:57.560
 Whereas we might focus more rental developments and subsidy opportunities in strong markets

00:23:57.560 --> 00:24:08.960
 such as B, C, and D, so that low income folks can get to be part of those succeeding neighborhoods.

00:24:08.960 --> 00:24:14.200
 The five strategies of the toolkit are infill development, first of all.

00:24:14.200 --> 00:24:17.840
 I'm sure you're familiar with that, using our land effectively, building smarter, often

00:24:17.840 --> 00:24:18.840
 smaller.

00:24:18.840 --> 00:24:22.120
 I'll talk a good bit about that later on, since it's of course very relevant to your

00:24:22.120 --> 00:24:23.120
 work.

00:24:23.120 --> 00:24:27.640
 The zoning relief and variances also might have something to do with your commission,

00:24:27.640 --> 00:24:32.040
 so we will also be coming forward to you with strategies related to zoning relief.

00:24:32.040 --> 00:24:37.560
 The big takeaway there is that we want to use slight zoning relief to incentivize affordable

00:24:37.560 --> 00:24:40.280
 housing development in the city of Denton.

00:24:40.280 --> 00:24:43.680
 Third, we want to increase capacity and resources.

00:24:43.680 --> 00:24:49.560
 So primarily we want to empower non-profit developers and bring more developers into Denton

00:24:49.560 --> 00:24:55.280
 doing affordable housing work, so incentivizing and empowering at the same time.

00:24:55.280 --> 00:24:59.360
 Fourth, we want to focus on preservation and expansion.

00:24:59.360 --> 00:25:03.160
 We have a lot of great housing in Denton, and we also have a lot of great affordable

00:25:03.160 --> 00:25:07.080
 housing programs, so we want to make sure that those are sustainable, and we want to

00:25:07.080 --> 00:25:09.600
 expand them to serve more folks.

00:25:09.600 --> 00:25:16.600
 Finally, we want to increase access to information, so talking about tenants' rights and housing

00:25:16.600 --> 00:25:21.600
 choice vouchers and making sure everyone is as informed as possible about how to be a

00:25:21.600 --> 00:25:22.600
 good neighbor.

00:25:22.600 --> 00:25:31.360
 I'm going to get a little bit deeper into each of those activities.

00:25:31.360 --> 00:25:35.040
 I'm actually going to start on accessory dwelling units.

00:25:35.040 --> 00:25:41.220
 So as you may know, we do have a pretty good accessory dwelling unit ADU program to allow

00:25:41.220 --> 00:25:44.100
 for homeowners to build backyard rental cottages.

00:25:44.100 --> 00:25:48.640
 We actually want to expand this program and make it even easier and really incentivize

00:25:48.640 --> 00:25:53.440
 homeowners to build these cottages and rent to low-income households.

00:25:53.440 --> 00:25:56.840
 So we're going to do that by having prototype housing models.

00:25:56.840 --> 00:26:00.660
 This is something a lot of cities have had success with, partnering with an architect

00:26:00.660 --> 00:26:07.360
 and having pre-approved plans for an ADU that homeowners can take and run in exchange for

00:26:07.360 --> 00:26:14.000
 streamlined permitting, expedited processes, also partnering with participating lenders

00:26:14.000 --> 00:26:17.480
 who want to empower homeowners to do this.

00:26:17.480 --> 00:26:21.600
 So this is one great strategy, especially when we consider our seniors who are experiencing

00:26:21.600 --> 00:26:25.080
 housing instability.

00:26:25.080 --> 00:26:28.360
 We additionally want to work on a small home community program.

00:26:28.360 --> 00:26:31.300
 You may know tiny homes are already in the DDC.

00:26:31.300 --> 00:26:36.640
 We want to take this a step further and make this something that we can do with tiny homes

00:26:36.640 --> 00:26:42.040
 and cluster cottages, like you see in this picture here, duplexes, townhomes to allow

00:26:42.040 --> 00:26:47.520
 for staggered density, right, not necessarily going strictly straight from single-family

00:26:47.520 --> 00:26:53.720
 homes to apartment complexes, but easing in and out with small home communities that can

00:26:53.720 --> 00:26:58.600
 make homeownership or rentals, right, more affordable for folks.

00:26:58.600 --> 00:27:03.280
 So this is something that you can expect us to come forward with projects and proposals

00:27:03.280 --> 00:27:04.280
 for you soon.

00:27:04.280 --> 00:27:06.280
 Do I have any questions here?

00:27:06.280 --> 00:27:07.280
 Cool.

00:27:07.280 --> 00:27:09.920
 All right, thanks.

00:27:09.920 --> 00:27:17.600
 Next, zoning relief, and I'll be brief on this one specifically because this is just

00:27:17.600 --> 00:27:19.440
 about an affordable housing overlay.

00:27:19.440 --> 00:27:23.000
 This is something we see as kind of a future project in a few years, but we do want to

00:27:23.000 --> 00:27:28.560
 explore the option of, in our stronger markets, finding small spots for an overlay district

00:27:28.560 --> 00:27:32.080
 to incentivize affordable housing in a high-opportunity neighborhood.

00:27:32.080 --> 00:27:35.400
 Do I have questions about that?

00:27:35.400 --> 00:27:36.400
 Yeah.

00:27:36.400 --> 00:27:37.400
 Cool.

00:27:37.400 --> 00:27:38.400
 Commissioner Smith?

00:27:38.400 --> 00:27:39.400
 What would those look like?

00:27:39.400 --> 00:27:46.280
 When you say an overlay, obviously you have specific ... Usually, an overlay is specific

00:27:46.280 --> 00:27:47.280
 restrictions.

00:27:47.280 --> 00:27:51.400
 So with an affordable housing overlay, then it's not necessarily restrictions.

00:27:51.400 --> 00:27:54.720
 It's then specific reliefs.

00:27:54.720 --> 00:27:59.760
 How does that get implemented without affecting underlying zoning elsewhere and maybe having

00:27:59.760 --> 00:28:00.760
 some negatives?

00:28:00.760 --> 00:28:05.440
 I can't necessarily think ... Okay, maybe setbacks or units per acre.

00:28:05.440 --> 00:28:08.040
 You throw a housing overlay on small areas.

00:28:08.040 --> 00:28:13.320
 I don't know what maybe small areas is, but you kind of gave that A through G ranking

00:28:13.320 --> 00:28:14.320
 within there.

00:28:14.320 --> 00:28:19.880
 If it's that D and below section that we want to be able to do that in or something else,

00:28:19.880 --> 00:28:20.880
 I don't know.

00:28:20.880 --> 00:28:25.080
 How do you do that without affecting other underlying zonings without having negative

00:28:25.080 --> 00:28:26.080
 consequences?

00:28:26.080 --> 00:28:28.080
 I'm going to let Danny take that one.

00:28:28.080 --> 00:28:29.080
 Cool.

00:28:29.080 --> 00:28:30.080
 Yeah.

00:28:30.080 --> 00:28:37.480
 Danny Shaw, Community Services.

00:28:37.480 --> 00:28:43.600
 I might let Tina help me out here specifically, but what we're looking at is it would affect

00:28:43.600 --> 00:28:49.760
 the underlying zoning if it had specific reliefs that were available or it might not.

00:28:49.760 --> 00:28:54.720
 It just depends on what we're looking at for the viability of the property that we're looking

00:28:54.720 --> 00:28:58.200
 at or the properties in plural.

00:28:58.200 --> 00:28:59.200
 So it could or it couldn't.

00:28:59.200 --> 00:29:03.440
 I think it would just depend on the different areas we'd be looking at for these overlays.

00:29:03.440 --> 00:29:06.920
 I don't know if you can help me with the better language.

00:29:06.920 --> 00:29:13.880
 When you have a zoning overlay district, it can provide relief to certain standards that

00:29:13.880 --> 00:29:18.240
 are otherwise in the base zoning district and the overlay district would have to call

00:29:18.240 --> 00:29:22.360
 that out or it could be more restrictive.

00:29:22.360 --> 00:29:29.760
 If we're trying to encourage more opportunities for housing in certain areas and we apply

00:29:29.760 --> 00:29:36.040
 an overlay, then one way to encourage those additional housing types may be to grant some

00:29:36.040 --> 00:29:42.200
 relief whether it's on setbacks or density or if height were appropriate, that could

00:29:42.200 --> 00:29:48.040
 be one, but I would anticipate it's more of how that structure is placed on the property

00:29:48.040 --> 00:29:55.000
 and then the mass or scale associated with it.

00:29:55.000 --> 00:30:00.120
 It would still be something that would be a reviewable process per project, right?

00:30:00.120 --> 00:30:02.080
 That's absolutely what we would expect.

00:30:02.080 --> 00:30:06.360
 It wouldn't be by right changes due to the overlay the same way like the razor ranch

00:30:06.360 --> 00:30:10.160
 overlay district has its own restrictions and those items don't have to come here.

00:30:10.160 --> 00:30:14.600
 I'm not saying every overlay district has those, but there would be some oversight on

00:30:14.600 --> 00:30:21.280
 it so it wouldn't just give Joe Blow property owner the chance to say, "Well, I want to

00:30:21.280 --> 00:30:25.400
 do something else that's not an affordable housing project specifically, but I want my

00:30:25.400 --> 00:30:26.400
 setback to be different.

00:30:26.400 --> 00:30:31.360
 I want my density to be different on my land without having some sort of ties to specifically

00:30:31.360 --> 00:30:33.280
 what the overlay district is designed for."

00:30:33.280 --> 00:30:34.280
 Yes.

00:30:34.280 --> 00:30:39.000
 If the goal is specifically to address additional affordable housing options, then we would

00:30:39.000 --> 00:30:47.400
 write the overlay as such so it's specific to incentivizing the affordable housing, not

00:30:47.400 --> 00:30:51.220
 all of the other uses that are allowed in that base zoning district.

00:30:51.220 --> 00:30:58.840
 We would be very careful in working with Danny's team on how we would write that overlay and

00:30:58.840 --> 00:31:05.480
 be specific to, in all likelihood, probably incentivizing or making it easier for housing

00:31:05.480 --> 00:31:11.840
 options to be constructed within a neighborhood, so since it's a zoning action, there will

00:31:11.840 --> 00:31:14.280
 still be the public hearing process.

00:31:14.280 --> 00:31:18.480
 I would anticipate when we get to this timeframe that there would probably be significant public

00:31:18.480 --> 00:31:22.160
 engagement associated with it because I would anticipate people would have questions about

00:31:22.160 --> 00:31:28.560
 how it works, and then we could be able to address better specifics at that time once

00:31:28.560 --> 00:31:32.520
 we have regulations crafted and a better understanding of what we're seeking to achieve.

00:31:32.520 --> 00:31:37.280
 Right, and I 100% agree because the goal here is everything that we're doing is to incentivize

00:31:37.280 --> 00:31:41.840
 it but in exchange for, so we will want those things built in that mean you're not just

00:31:41.840 --> 00:31:45.240
 getting it, you're getting it in exchange for an affordability for a certain period

00:31:45.240 --> 00:31:46.240
 of time.

00:31:46.240 --> 00:31:47.240
 Gotcha.

00:31:47.240 --> 00:31:49.040
 I want to throw a bunch of answers on my next question here because I don't want to make

00:31:49.040 --> 00:31:57.400
 it sound like I'm against affordable housing or anything whatsoever within that, but I see

00:31:57.400 --> 00:32:03.160
 two concerns here and I really want to frame the question and more of where did the idea

00:32:03.160 --> 00:32:07.720
 come from and how did other communities work through these two concerns, because one, I

00:32:07.720 --> 00:32:14.000
 could see this concern being, I could see an overlay being something that could be weaponized

00:32:14.000 --> 00:32:20.360
 to a degree of targeting a certain development in certain communities being in certain areas,

00:32:20.360 --> 00:32:24.520
 right, that if we want affordable housing in our city, we don't want it here, we want

00:32:24.520 --> 00:32:29.840
 it over there for one, and then two, I could see it being a concern of a citizen that if

00:32:29.840 --> 00:32:34.120
 I have a property in an area that an overlay district comes in that's affordable housing,

00:32:34.120 --> 00:32:38.280
 I say, "Well, I could sit there and say, 'Well, you're then deeming my home and my

00:32:38.280 --> 00:32:44.680
 property as being an affordable housing neighborhood which may impact my property values.'"

00:32:44.680 --> 00:32:48.760
 All of those things are asinine and I want that to be on the record that I think that

00:32:48.760 --> 00:32:51.600
 we shouldn't be viewing it that way or thinking about affordable housing that way.

00:32:51.600 --> 00:32:56.200
 I'm just more of getting ahead of the neighborhood folks that will come in and speak out against

00:32:56.200 --> 00:32:59.960
 it when this happens, and I want to know how other communities worked through those problems

00:32:59.960 --> 00:33:00.960
 in the past.

00:33:00.960 --> 00:33:04.160
 We'll give you some overview on that later if that's all right, because it would be a

00:33:04.160 --> 00:33:08.800
 long conversation about which ones we reviewed within the assessment process, but we did

00:33:08.800 --> 00:33:11.800
 and our consultant reviewed a couple of them to give us some good examples, but we can

00:33:11.800 --> 00:33:12.800
 provide that to you.

00:33:12.800 --> 00:33:13.800
 I'll take that answer.

00:33:13.800 --> 00:33:14.800
 Thank you.

00:33:14.800 --> 00:33:15.800
 Okay.

00:33:15.800 --> 00:33:16.800
 Thanks.

00:33:16.800 --> 00:33:17.800
 Mr. Perot.

00:33:17.800 --> 00:33:18.800
 Thank you, Chair.

00:33:18.800 --> 00:33:26.240
 I'll give you an overview on that note, are we at a point yet where we know whether we

00:33:26.240 --> 00:33:33.800
 envision an overlay being used as a bag of tools that applicants could come in and say,

00:33:33.800 --> 00:33:39.760
 "I want that one to apply to my property," as opposed to the city has the bag of tools

00:33:39.760 --> 00:33:49.480
 and goes out to actively incentivize the type of development in the regions that it's warranted?

00:33:49.480 --> 00:33:50.480
 Does that make sense?

00:33:50.480 --> 00:33:51.480
 It does.

00:33:51.480 --> 00:33:56.440
 This is actually, I will call this a tool in the bag of tools, so we're working towards

00:33:56.440 --> 00:34:03.920
 that right now, a development incentive package that will have the screwdriver, the knife,

00:34:03.920 --> 00:34:09.040
 the hammer, all types of different tools as our goal so that each property is unique in

00:34:09.040 --> 00:34:12.120
 how it looks and what it's able to do.

00:34:12.120 --> 00:34:15.680
 One developer looking at one property may need the hammer, one other property might

00:34:15.680 --> 00:34:19.080
 need the wrench, and so we want to be able to give that flexibility to the developer

00:34:19.080 --> 00:34:25.440
 to look at what's the best tool to help them with this kind of product in exchange for

00:34:25.440 --> 00:34:26.440
 that affordability.

00:34:26.440 --> 00:34:28.320
 I'll continue to say that repeatedly.

00:34:28.320 --> 00:34:30.120
 We're not giving anything away.

00:34:30.120 --> 00:34:34.460
 It's always going to be with the conditions of you will create that affordability over

00:34:34.460 --> 00:34:40.160
 a period of time.

00:34:40.160 --> 00:34:46.240
 Nobody's getting things for free on our watch.

00:34:46.240 --> 00:34:51.000
 Next we are wanting to build capacity and resources, so part of that is our capacity

00:34:51.000 --> 00:34:52.220
 building match grant.

00:34:52.220 --> 00:34:57.560
 We actually did already run this with ARPA funds, I believe, yes, and that was a more

00:34:57.560 --> 00:34:59.480
 general project with bond funds.

00:34:59.480 --> 00:35:05.480
 We're hoping to do this with affordable housing developers, specifically nonprofits.

00:35:05.480 --> 00:35:10.120
 So this is just an example of some of our major nonprofit affordable housing developers

00:35:10.120 --> 00:35:15.480
 in the city of Denton, and also pointing out that we really want to incentivize new affordable

00:35:15.480 --> 00:35:22.560
 housing developers to come and be in our community, and so yes.

00:35:22.560 --> 00:35:24.520
 So we'll be implementing that match grant.

00:35:24.520 --> 00:35:28.920
 Additionally, we do want to implement a low-income home ownership program.

00:35:28.920 --> 00:35:32.840
 It's actually a little known fact that housing choice vouchers can be used to pay towards

00:35:32.840 --> 00:35:33.840
 a mortgage.

00:35:33.840 --> 00:35:38.440
 A housing choice voucher, for those who don't know, was formerly called a Section 8 voucher.

00:35:38.440 --> 00:35:43.080
 Those are administered by the Denton Housing Authority and paid towards a portion of one's

00:35:43.080 --> 00:35:46.480
 rent, or in this case, a mortgage.

00:35:46.480 --> 00:35:51.400
 So this is a great way for low-income households to find a little bit more housing stability

00:35:51.400 --> 00:35:56.240
 and generate some generational equity as well.

00:35:56.240 --> 00:36:02.760
 So we're hoping to combine low-cost construction methods and favorable lending terms with down-payment

00:36:02.760 --> 00:36:08.040
 assistance in collaboration with the Housing Authority for tenants with these vouchers.

00:36:08.040 --> 00:36:10.360
 Do I have any questions here?

00:36:10.360 --> 00:36:11.360
 Cool.

00:36:11.360 --> 00:36:12.360
 Yes.

00:36:12.360 --> 00:36:13.360
 Commissioner Smith.

00:36:13.360 --> 00:36:20.520
 I know we've had some, like the Love First projects and those kinds of things.

00:36:20.520 --> 00:36:24.680
 I know we've had other nonprofits who started their capital fundraising towards these.

00:36:24.680 --> 00:36:29.520
 The only question I had is on the Capacity Building Match Grant.

00:36:29.520 --> 00:36:32.400
 How retroactive do we think those projects will be?

00:36:32.400 --> 00:36:35.920
 I know obviously it'd be to incentivize new developers and those kinds of things.

00:36:35.920 --> 00:36:39.940
 But if there are projects that have already been approved through zoning in the process

00:36:39.940 --> 00:36:44.480
 of capital fundraising, are there provisions within that match grant where we can kind

00:36:44.480 --> 00:36:48.240
 of go back to those that are already trying to do the work and saying, "Hey, we're sorry

00:36:48.240 --> 00:36:52.520
 this wasn't here whenever you came through, but we'd love to be able to open those tools

00:36:52.520 --> 00:36:54.880
 up for you to help you complete your project," right?

00:36:54.880 --> 00:36:55.880
 Right.

00:36:55.880 --> 00:36:58.280
 It's kind of a little bit easier to help someone who's 50% of the way there gets the finish

00:36:58.280 --> 00:37:01.720
 line rather than saying, "Well, this is only for those who are at step zero."

00:37:01.720 --> 00:37:02.720
 Right.

00:37:02.720 --> 00:37:03.720
 Exactly.

00:37:03.720 --> 00:37:04.720
 And trying to get them to get them going.

00:37:04.720 --> 00:37:05.720
 I want you to get the best answer.

00:37:05.720 --> 00:37:06.720
 Someone will let Danny take that one too.

00:37:06.720 --> 00:37:10.360
 I think you give great answers, but Danny might have a different one.

00:37:10.360 --> 00:37:11.360
 Yeah.

00:37:11.360 --> 00:37:14.520
 With the bond funds especially, we'll have opportunities to create different kinds of

00:37:14.520 --> 00:37:19.440
 grant programs that would benefit projects that have already been approved but are looking

00:37:19.440 --> 00:37:20.440
 for development.

00:37:20.440 --> 00:37:22.320
 That's the same with our existing programs.

00:37:22.320 --> 00:37:27.160
 Our CDBG and home funds that are already here annually, those projects can continue to ask

00:37:27.160 --> 00:37:31.040
 for funds throughout time to add additional resources.

00:37:31.040 --> 00:37:36.960
 So for example, '22, '23 we gave funding to Habitat for Humanity for four homes in

00:37:36.960 --> 00:37:38.720
 their project.

00:37:38.720 --> 00:37:40.760
 They're working on that right now.

00:37:40.760 --> 00:37:43.640
 An additional four homes in '23, '24 funding.

00:37:43.640 --> 00:37:47.440
 So that's one project example where we're continuing to support that project along the

00:37:47.440 --> 00:37:48.440
 way with funding.

00:37:48.440 --> 00:37:49.440
 Right.

00:37:49.440 --> 00:37:52.600
 So that would be no exception here.

00:37:52.600 --> 00:37:55.240
 Commissioner Cole.

00:37:55.240 --> 00:37:58.200
 Thank you, Chair.

00:37:58.200 --> 00:38:07.480
 We had a case a while back of an affordable housing development on Woodrow and McKinney.

00:38:07.480 --> 00:38:13.040
 And turns out it wasn't the Denton Housing Authority that was doing it, it was the Marble

00:38:13.040 --> 00:38:15.800
 Falls.

00:38:15.800 --> 00:38:23.760
 So I think it's imperative that this body knows who is involved, which housing authority

00:38:23.760 --> 00:38:24.760
 is involved.

00:38:24.760 --> 00:38:30.240
 Because I was really, I was like, why didn't Denton do it and why didn't Denton do it?

00:38:30.240 --> 00:38:34.000
 So could you kind of coach us through that process and?

00:38:34.000 --> 00:38:35.000
 Yeah.

00:38:35.000 --> 00:38:39.040
 The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program is a federal program that goes through the state.

00:38:39.040 --> 00:38:44.140
 So developers apply for that program and there are other tools that they can utilize.

00:38:44.140 --> 00:38:49.480
 So in that example, there is a 50% property tax exemption for Chodos, community housing

00:38:49.480 --> 00:38:51.280
 development organizations.

00:38:51.280 --> 00:38:56.520
 If a developer partners with that nonprofit, then they will be eligible for that 50% tax

00:38:56.520 --> 00:38:57.520
 exemption.

00:38:57.520 --> 00:39:03.700
 So when that developer came to the city, we encouraged them to work with our local partners,

00:39:03.700 --> 00:39:07.840
 go to the housing authority, see if they can partner with you in a PFC project.

00:39:07.840 --> 00:39:11.880
 Go to Denton Affordable Housing Corp and see if they can partner with you as a Chodo.

00:39:11.880 --> 00:39:16.000
 But at the time, they were unsuccessful in being able to make those connections and they

00:39:16.000 --> 00:39:21.400
 did utilize a Chodo that is a statewide Chodo, one of the only ones that exists, to partner

00:39:21.400 --> 00:39:24.240
 to get that 50% tax exemption.

00:39:24.240 --> 00:39:29.220
 So it is important for us, like you, that that money stay in this community as well.

00:39:29.220 --> 00:39:30.880
 So we do encourage that.

00:39:30.880 --> 00:39:32.920
 But they at the time don't have to, right?

00:39:32.920 --> 00:39:37.120
 They could partner with the partners that they're familiar with as well.

00:39:37.120 --> 00:39:42.600
 Can you let us know as a body who, which municipality is doing this?

00:39:42.600 --> 00:39:46.880
 Because I would have loved to have known it was Marble Falls instead of Denton.

00:39:46.880 --> 00:39:52.120
 It wasn't, just to be clear, that project is not Marble Falls, the city of, it was Marble

00:39:52.120 --> 00:39:53.520
 Falls, a Chodo there, right?

00:39:53.520 --> 00:39:54.520
 Right.

00:39:54.520 --> 00:39:55.520
 So that, yeah.

00:39:55.520 --> 00:40:00.140
 But yeah, we, I mean, if it comes up, that we can make sure that the team knows.

00:40:00.140 --> 00:40:02.520
 I think that's good information.

00:40:02.520 --> 00:40:04.920
 I can't promise we can always be able to do it.

00:40:04.920 --> 00:40:08.680
 So if the project is by right and it's not coming in front of you, that may not be information

00:40:08.680 --> 00:40:10.380
 that you're going to have access to.

00:40:10.380 --> 00:40:11.620
 Why is it not Denton?

00:40:11.620 --> 00:40:19.200
 You know, isn't it, is it Denton missing out or is it, why would someone make a decision

00:40:19.200 --> 00:40:24.320
 to disregard Denton Housing Authority and go with that one out of...

00:40:24.320 --> 00:40:25.320
 Why wouldn't use that language?

00:40:25.320 --> 00:40:26.320
 You know, I mean...

00:40:26.320 --> 00:40:30.160
 I would say the developers attempted to work with, and there were various reasons why they

00:40:30.160 --> 00:40:33.200
 were not unable to partner with those organizations.

00:40:33.200 --> 00:40:38.760
 So okay.

00:40:38.760 --> 00:40:46.480
 So the Denton Housing Authority had a problem with that or couldn't do that where Marble

00:40:46.480 --> 00:40:51.200
 Falls could, or whatever other entity could.

00:40:51.200 --> 00:40:57.380
 Just like any developer, they're going to work with a partner that has deal terms.

00:40:57.380 --> 00:41:02.000
 And so whatever the Housing Authority's deal terms may have been different than what the

00:41:02.000 --> 00:41:04.080
 Chodo was offering in there.

00:41:04.080 --> 00:41:05.640
 So it was a better deal.

00:41:05.640 --> 00:41:06.640
 Hmm.

00:41:06.640 --> 00:41:07.640
 Okay.

00:41:07.640 --> 00:41:12.280
 Commissioner Cole, if I could add, and I just want to make sure that we don't get too far

00:41:12.280 --> 00:41:18.480
 off our posting topic here, but when we evaluate requests, like in that case, it was a specific

00:41:18.480 --> 00:41:19.480
 use permit.

00:41:19.480 --> 00:41:23.560
 So keep in mind, you know, the city also looks at it from a land use standpoint in terms

00:41:23.560 --> 00:41:28.000
 of is the land use appropriate for this location?

00:41:28.000 --> 00:41:33.400
 We don't look at, at least from a planning perspective, we don't look at specific operators.

00:41:33.400 --> 00:41:37.040
 So I know in the past we might've talked about, you know, if I have a drive-through restaurant

00:41:37.040 --> 00:41:41.960
 that's being requested and it's a specific use permit, it shouldn't matter if it's Starbucks

00:41:41.960 --> 00:41:48.160
 or Tina's Coffee Shop or Haley's Coffee Drive-Thru, right?

00:41:48.160 --> 00:41:50.560
 We look at the appropriateness of the land use.

00:41:50.560 --> 00:41:56.080
 So the financing structure aspect of it from a land use standpoint and when we evaluate

00:41:56.080 --> 00:41:58.520
 those requests, that's what we're focused on.

00:41:58.520 --> 00:42:05.180
 We're not focused on the specific operator or owner because that is not land use space.

00:42:05.180 --> 00:42:07.320
 Maybe you should be.

00:42:07.320 --> 00:42:17.840
 I mean, I just don't see why didn't, I mean, we have this entity, it is here, I don't understand

00:42:17.840 --> 00:42:24.780
 what they can do that we can't do in terms or, I mean, it just, I don't know, it just

00:42:24.780 --> 00:42:25.780
 doesn't seem right.

00:42:25.780 --> 00:42:28.560
 I mean, somebody's benefiting, why aren't we benefiting?

00:42:28.560 --> 00:42:32.680
 Again, to clarify, they attempted to work with the Housing Authority and were not able

00:42:32.680 --> 00:42:36.600
 to come to an agreement on the deal.

00:42:36.600 --> 00:42:37.600
 So they went to another.

00:42:37.600 --> 00:42:40.240
 So what didn't they do that we wouldn't do?

00:42:40.240 --> 00:42:41.760
 That would not be something I'd be privy to.

00:42:41.760 --> 00:42:42.760
 Okay.

00:42:42.760 --> 00:42:43.760
 Well, I'm getting kind of off on this deal.

00:42:43.760 --> 00:42:44.760
 Yeah, I'm saying that's taking us off on what we're actually posting.

00:42:44.760 --> 00:42:52.040
 But I just think I would like as a body for us to know who is doing this and who is.

00:42:52.040 --> 00:42:55.680
 The Denton Housing Authority is a quasi-governmental group that you could reach out to.

00:42:55.680 --> 00:43:01.360
 They are required to meet open records and public information that, you know, you're

00:43:01.360 --> 00:43:03.480
 welcome to ask.

00:43:03.480 --> 00:43:07.400
 We don't have a relationship legally to be able to require that information.

00:43:07.400 --> 00:43:08.400
 Okay.

00:43:08.400 --> 00:43:10.520
 Commissioner Villarreal, did you have a question?

00:43:10.520 --> 00:43:15.680
 Yeah, not to get too further down this rabbit hole, but it sounds like they were operating

00:43:15.680 --> 00:43:16.680
 in good faith.

00:43:16.680 --> 00:43:19.780
 However, we did have the scandal come out of Cameron County and their Housing Authority

00:43:19.780 --> 00:43:24.720
 and pretty much helping developers just get off the tax rolls, you know, with the cut,

00:43:24.720 --> 00:43:28.140
 which is, you know, what the story is referring to.

00:43:28.140 --> 00:43:34.400
 Do we have any relief in that, you know, case in case there is a bad-faith actor that comes

00:43:34.400 --> 00:43:40.000
 in and comes with that approval from the Cameron County Housing Authority?

00:43:40.000 --> 00:43:45.400
 Yeah, not at this moment, and again, right now we're really talking about partnering

00:43:45.400 --> 00:43:50.720
 with developers to do things like down payment assistance and, you know, building capacity.

00:43:50.720 --> 00:43:55.480
 When we talk about LIHTC projects, that does become more of a conversation that we can

00:43:55.480 --> 00:44:01.840
 have, and those go through a very lengthy process that occasionally does have to do

00:44:01.840 --> 00:44:02.840
 with the partnerships.

00:44:02.840 --> 00:44:08.640
 But yes, I think -- Yeah, just to add a little more clarification there, too.

00:44:08.640 --> 00:44:13.920
 Those go through the state, so they are evaluated and monitored and file land use restriction

00:44:13.920 --> 00:44:17.240
 agreements through the state, through the Texas Department of Housing Community Affairs.

00:44:17.240 --> 00:44:22.120
 So, if there was something like that, then they would be the governing body over that.

00:44:22.120 --> 00:44:28.520
 Do we have any other questions here on the Capacity Building Match grant or the Low Income

00:44:28.520 --> 00:44:29.520
 Homeownership Program?

00:44:29.520 --> 00:44:30.520
 Okay.

00:44:30.520 --> 00:44:31.520
 Thanks.

00:44:31.520 --> 00:44:37.520
 Okay, this I actually do have quite a bit to say on.

00:44:37.520 --> 00:44:42.360
 We talked about that toolbox a little bit already, and so this is what we call the Developer

00:44:42.360 --> 00:44:43.360
 Incentive Toolbox.

00:44:43.360 --> 00:44:48.320
 This is kind of our bundle of things that we can offer a developer and say, hey, here's

00:44:48.320 --> 00:44:54.600
 what we can give you if you agree to set aside a certain portion of units as affordable.

00:44:54.600 --> 00:44:57.440
 And so it's a few things that we've talked about already and that we're going to talk

00:44:57.440 --> 00:44:58.440
 about shortly.

00:44:58.440 --> 00:45:00.840
 What is that affordable overlay district?

00:45:00.840 --> 00:45:07.640
 We've also discussed favorable funding opportunities, such as a pre-development loan and capacity

00:45:07.640 --> 00:45:10.200
 match building, things like that.

00:45:10.200 --> 00:45:14.900
 One that I really want to highlight is a zoning relief amendment.

00:45:14.900 --> 00:45:16.600
 This is actually currently being reviewed by legal.

00:45:16.600 --> 00:45:18.360
 This should be coming to you shortly.

00:45:18.360 --> 00:45:25.200
 We worked really closely with the planning team on this to come up with nine incentives

00:45:25.200 --> 00:45:30.840
 for a developer to say, hey, I will take a slight parking reduction or a slight setback

00:45:30.840 --> 00:45:37.380
 reduction or this and that and the other in exchange for setting aside 20% of my units

00:45:37.380 --> 00:45:42.480
 for households, 50% AMI and below, and so on and so forth.

00:45:42.480 --> 00:45:46.320
 And so that will be coming to your consideration soon, so we want to make sure that's on your

00:45:46.320 --> 00:45:47.320
 radar.

00:45:47.320 --> 00:45:51.400
 And then additionally, and we'll talk more about this in detail later, but land for affordable

00:45:51.400 --> 00:45:56.060
 housing development, which gives us a bigger seat at the table and a little bit more negotiating

00:45:56.060 --> 00:46:02.360
 power to say, hey, we really need you to be building what Denton needs most here.

00:46:02.360 --> 00:46:07.360
 Last thing I would like talking about on this slide, that's a affordable housing development

00:46:07.360 --> 00:46:12.900
 for seniors actually developed by the El Paso Housing Authority in El Paso.

00:46:12.900 --> 00:46:18.320
 Not every project that we're going to build is going to be a large multifamily development,

00:46:18.320 --> 00:46:19.320
 but I'd like to point out this one.

00:46:19.320 --> 00:46:20.320
 I think it's really beautiful.

00:46:20.320 --> 00:46:21.840
 It's got a lot of colors.

00:46:21.840 --> 00:46:23.560
 It's got some great architecture.

00:46:23.560 --> 00:46:27.840
 It's got solar panels, rooftop gardens, that little wind turbine, walking trails, community

00:46:27.840 --> 00:46:29.800
 space.

00:46:29.800 --> 00:46:35.120
 This is the sort of project that we want to be incentivizing development in Denton look

00:46:35.120 --> 00:46:36.120
 like.

00:46:36.120 --> 00:46:37.120
 And so I'd just like to talk about that.

00:46:37.120 --> 00:46:39.080
 Do I have any questions here?

00:46:39.080 --> 00:46:40.880
 Commissioner Smith?

00:46:40.880 --> 00:46:43.400
 Thank you, Chair.

00:46:43.400 --> 00:46:53.480
 There's a fine gray line here that I'm internally battling of we streamline permitting, and

00:46:53.480 --> 00:46:58.760
 the incentives of monetary and tax and land and all those kinds of things are great.

00:46:58.760 --> 00:47:05.880
 When it starts getting to the sausage making, that's where I get a little bit ... I start

00:47:05.880 --> 00:47:11.480
 getting a little bit of pain in the stomach of we make it easier for one group to come

00:47:11.480 --> 00:47:16.560
 through the city, but we make it not easier when we make it harder.

00:47:16.560 --> 00:47:21.440
 But we don't give another group the same speed, right?

00:47:21.440 --> 00:47:26.480
 And it seems a little inequitable and a little scary, so walk me through that.

00:47:26.480 --> 00:47:30.920
 Yeah, of course, we're getting something in exchange for that, because affordable housing

00:47:30.920 --> 00:47:33.300
 is a council priority.

00:47:33.300 --> 00:47:34.600
 This is part of our strategic plan.

00:47:34.600 --> 00:47:39.040
 This is something that we've been set as a goal since 2022, and we've been talking about

00:47:39.040 --> 00:47:40.240
 for longer.

00:47:40.240 --> 00:47:46.180
 And so that is why we're willing to say a little bit more, like we will prioritize this,

00:47:46.180 --> 00:47:50.800
 because we know that those budgets for affordable housing are incredibly difficult to make.

00:47:50.800 --> 00:47:55.800
 So the longer you sit on that land, the more costly it is to you, and you mess with the

00:47:55.800 --> 00:47:59.280
 feasibility of that affordable housing development, and it ultimately costs the tenants and the

00:47:59.280 --> 00:48:00.780
 residents that are going to live there.

00:48:00.780 --> 00:48:05.220
 So you and Danny have both referenced this, Leah, but whenever we talk about in exchange

00:48:05.220 --> 00:48:09.160
 for something, what are some of the common things that a developer would be giving up

00:48:09.160 --> 00:48:13.840
 in exchange for that maybe you've said it and I've heard it and I'm just not registering

00:48:13.840 --> 00:48:14.840
 it?

00:48:14.840 --> 00:48:15.840
 No, precisely.

00:48:15.840 --> 00:48:19.360
 So we're going to be entering into agreements with them, land use restrictive agreements.

00:48:19.360 --> 00:48:25.000
 I'm going to be monitoring on an annual basis the rents of the tenants in those projects.

00:48:25.000 --> 00:48:29.760
 And so they're agreeing to saying 20% of my units will not have a rent higher than this,

00:48:29.760 --> 00:48:33.440
 and I will not lease them to a household with income higher than this.

00:48:33.440 --> 00:48:37.640
 And we're going to be, we're going to have some pretty high expectations for those developers,

00:48:37.640 --> 00:48:38.640
 I'll say.

00:48:38.640 --> 00:48:39.640
 Gotcha.

00:48:39.640 --> 00:48:40.640
 Yeah.

00:48:40.640 --> 00:48:45.000
 If you find something that doesn't fall in line, what are the ramifications?

00:48:45.000 --> 00:48:46.280
 Yeah.

00:48:46.280 --> 00:48:47.280
 You want to answer that?

00:48:47.280 --> 00:48:48.280
 Sure.

00:48:48.280 --> 00:48:50.640
 We take their permit back and make them go back through the regular process.

00:48:50.640 --> 00:48:55.120
 Basically there are financial penalties for it, so we would get that money back.

00:48:55.120 --> 00:49:00.120
 It depends on what year it is in the project and how long we've extended the affordability

00:49:00.120 --> 00:49:01.120
 period for.

00:49:01.120 --> 00:49:02.600
 So that would be written down?

00:49:02.600 --> 00:49:03.600
 Yes.

00:49:03.600 --> 00:49:07.760
 Again, those land use restriction agreements would be very specific in those remedies if

00:49:07.760 --> 00:49:08.760
 they are not complying.

00:49:08.760 --> 00:49:09.760
 Understood.

00:49:09.760 --> 00:49:10.760
 Great.

00:49:10.760 --> 00:49:11.760
 Thank you.

00:49:11.760 --> 00:49:13.600
 And if I could add something in response to Commissioner Smith's question.

00:49:13.600 --> 00:49:20.320
 So when we talk about streamlining development permitting, keep in mind on the land development

00:49:20.320 --> 00:49:26.480
 side of things, we're already heavily regulated in terms of how we must perform in terms of

00:49:26.480 --> 00:49:31.680
 timelines associated with projects, particularly when it comes to plotting and civil engineering

00:49:31.680 --> 00:49:36.020
 plans and that's provided for by the state statute.

00:49:36.020 --> 00:49:40.880
 If there's opportunities for incentivizing to assist on the permitting side of things,

00:49:40.880 --> 00:49:45.760
 then I could see there may be some opportunities there for the permit review when they apply

00:49:45.760 --> 00:49:50.600
 for a building permit, but on the land development side, we would have to work closely with Danny's

00:49:50.600 --> 00:49:56.120
 team just because of the regulations that are in place currently that regulate how fast

00:49:56.120 --> 00:49:57.120
 we have to perform.

00:49:57.120 --> 00:49:58.120
 Right?

00:49:58.120 --> 00:50:01.280
 And at the end of the day, I mean, we meet the state statute requirements.

00:50:01.280 --> 00:50:05.560
 We look to ensure that we have quality development that's meeting all of our development requirements

00:50:05.560 --> 00:50:09.960
 and to ensure that that quality development is happening.

00:50:09.960 --> 00:50:16.280
 So we would need to work closely as we would craft any incentives, particularly if it is

00:50:16.280 --> 00:50:22.840
 addressing any faster permitting because we are sensitive to the fact of not having inequity

00:50:22.840 --> 00:50:29.680
 amongst project review as well because we realize everybody is subject to financing and having

00:50:29.680 --> 00:50:31.800
 to get through the city's review process.

00:50:31.800 --> 00:50:34.560
 So just know that we're sensitive to that.

00:50:34.560 --> 00:50:37.680
 And just as a reminder, like Leah gave you a good example, though, it doesn't necessarily

00:50:37.680 --> 00:50:39.000
 have to be in that process.

00:50:39.000 --> 00:50:44.680
 It could be the fact that we're going to do some sort of other bonus or incentive, like

00:50:44.680 --> 00:50:46.360
 the pre-approved designs, right?

00:50:46.360 --> 00:50:48.960
 That would then streamline the permitting process because then they just pick it, they

00:50:48.960 --> 00:50:50.760
 pay and they're done, right?

00:50:50.760 --> 00:50:54.320
 So that ultimately would streamline the process immediately just for something like that.

00:50:54.320 --> 00:50:58.160
 So we'll use other tools that aren't just in the permitting or the land use conversation.

00:50:58.160 --> 00:50:59.160
 Yeah.

00:50:59.160 --> 00:51:04.720
 That's a great example because if we've already have, in that case, if we already have a pre-approved

00:51:04.720 --> 00:51:11.120
 set of plans for the structure itself, then that makes it much easier on the review of

00:51:11.120 --> 00:51:14.720
 the structure just to confirm that, yes, okay, this does meet our standards.

00:51:14.720 --> 00:51:17.400
 They are using our standard package that we have on this.

00:51:17.400 --> 00:51:19.160
 They've not made any changes.

00:51:19.160 --> 00:51:24.160
 And so then their efforts are focused more on the land development side of it, right?

00:51:24.160 --> 00:51:29.280
 Getting their zoning compliance plans if needed, their civil engineering plans if needed, platting.

00:51:29.280 --> 00:51:34.000
 Then we can focus on that aspect and where it helps save time then is more on that building

00:51:34.000 --> 00:51:35.400
 permit review side aspect.

00:51:35.400 --> 00:51:37.040
 I think it's a great example, Danny.

00:51:37.040 --> 00:51:41.360
 I know that we kind of worry about things from like an extreme a lot of times, right?

00:51:41.360 --> 00:51:47.920
 When there's something new, like we talked about this with STRs on the DCRC, right?

00:51:47.920 --> 00:51:50.880
 We start putting a code in place for STRs and then we start thinking that there's going

00:51:50.880 --> 00:51:54.880
 to be massive international conglomerates that are buying up every single house that's

00:51:54.880 --> 00:51:57.440
 on the market and turning into an Airbnb.

00:51:57.440 --> 00:51:59.000
 And we know that's not the case, right?

00:51:59.000 --> 00:52:01.040
 That's a far extreme for it.

00:52:01.040 --> 00:52:03.680
 Still it's kind of where that question comes from.

00:52:03.680 --> 00:52:07.320
 I don't think we're going to get to a point where we have so many affordable housing projects

00:52:07.320 --> 00:52:13.240
 that are in queue that non-affordable housing projects, and I'm not even saving residential

00:52:13.240 --> 00:52:17.600
 projects, I mean commercial projects, are just kind of getting pushed off on the permitting

00:52:17.600 --> 00:52:18.600
 side.

00:52:18.600 --> 00:52:23.280
 I get on the land use side, regulatorily we have to move things through, but in a permitting

00:52:23.280 --> 00:52:25.640
 side it's like, we'll get to you, but we're just so overflowing.

00:52:25.640 --> 00:52:30.320
 I think my brain's going to that extreme there, but the only reason why I voice that is because

00:52:30.320 --> 00:52:31.800
 I would really hate for that to happen.

00:52:31.800 --> 00:52:32.800
 That would be good.

00:52:32.800 --> 00:52:33.800
 I understand.

00:52:33.800 --> 00:52:39.700
 Any other comments, questions, concerns here?

00:52:39.700 --> 00:52:45.200
 The one thing I might mention is, I know Leah mentioned this, that when she was referring

00:52:45.200 --> 00:52:51.520
 to the section 2.12 DDC amendment that that would be coming soon.

00:52:51.520 --> 00:52:56.240
 So one of the things is, I know Danny's team is going to be making a presentation to council

00:52:56.240 --> 00:53:01.960
 later this summer to prioritize their projects as a result of the bond monies.

00:53:01.960 --> 00:53:08.720
 And so any ordinance amendments that this group would normally see, once she gets that

00:53:08.720 --> 00:53:14.000
 prioritization on where they're going to focus their program efforts, then we can update

00:53:14.000 --> 00:53:18.140
 you from a calendar standpoint and give you an idea of when some of these amendments might

00:53:18.140 --> 00:53:19.140
 be coming through.

00:53:19.140 --> 00:53:21.600
 Or I shouldn't say might, but when they come through.

00:53:21.600 --> 00:53:22.600
 Right.

00:53:22.600 --> 00:53:23.600
 Yes.

00:53:23.600 --> 00:53:27.520
 I only say soon because this is currently in review with legal.

00:53:27.520 --> 00:53:33.800
 And then moving on to preservation and expansion, there's quite a bit here.

00:53:33.800 --> 00:53:39.720
 So I promise to talk slow or and keep it brief really quickly.

00:53:39.720 --> 00:53:43.920
 We do have a landlord rental maintenance grants that's currently online.

00:53:43.920 --> 00:53:50.000
 So essentially we can help assist with the rehab of a vacant rental unit in exchange

00:53:50.000 --> 00:53:53.880
 for that property owner leasing it at an affordable rate for a period of time.

00:53:53.880 --> 00:53:54.880
 That's something that we already have.

00:53:54.880 --> 00:53:58.480
 We were able to accomplish that very quickly.

00:53:58.480 --> 00:54:02.520
 Additionally, we also already have a down payment assistance program at the city of

00:54:02.520 --> 00:54:03.920
 Denton.

00:54:03.920 --> 00:54:09.280
 We plan to expand that and make it more accessible and more frequently used.

00:54:09.280 --> 00:54:12.160
 And so that's one other strategy.

00:54:12.160 --> 00:54:16.600
 In association with that, we are also hoping to establish an employee homeownership program

00:54:16.600 --> 00:54:20.440
 in partnership with major employers in the city of Denton, one of which being the city

00:54:20.440 --> 00:54:27.800
 of Denton itself, but also our major universities, Peterbilt, Denton ISD, essentially teaming

00:54:27.800 --> 00:54:33.560
 up and talking about providing down payment assistance and again, that low cost construction

00:54:33.560 --> 00:54:39.040
 and infill in order to give folks who work in Denton the opportunity to own a home in

00:54:39.040 --> 00:54:40.040
 Denton.

00:54:40.040 --> 00:54:45.920
 I'll talk briefly on the housing trust incentive program.

00:54:45.920 --> 00:54:50.400
 One thing that we do want to do is help nonprofits establish something called a community loan

00:54:50.400 --> 00:54:51.400
 trust.

00:54:51.400 --> 00:54:58.760
 So, essentially, that's where the land is owned by that nonprofit and held in a trust

00:54:58.760 --> 00:55:04.720
 essentially at to always only be sold at an affordable rate while the homeowner will own

00:55:04.720 --> 00:55:06.680
 the home itself.

00:55:06.680 --> 00:55:11.280
 This is a more long-term project that we're looking at, but just as we talk about sustainability

00:55:11.280 --> 00:55:13.520
 and long-term affordability.

00:55:13.520 --> 00:55:15.560
 And then lastly, land banking.

00:55:15.560 --> 00:55:22.560
 This is actually where 75% of the bond funds we are proposing go.

00:55:22.560 --> 00:55:28.000
 This is just a map of land banks that currently exist in the United States just to show what

00:55:28.000 --> 00:55:30.720
 a common practice this actually is.

00:55:30.720 --> 00:55:33.120
 You can see Dallas right there.

00:55:33.120 --> 00:55:38.560
 Dallas land blanks has been in operation since I believe 2002.

00:55:38.560 --> 00:55:44.280
 And so our hope is to purchase vacant lots so that we have a seat at that negotiating

00:55:44.280 --> 00:55:50.160
 table and say we think that this can be a fantastic homeownership development for low

00:55:50.160 --> 00:55:51.560
 income households.

00:55:51.560 --> 00:55:55.480
 Here's what we expect if we're going to enter an agreement with you for this land.

00:55:55.480 --> 00:55:58.400
 Do I have any questions here?

00:55:58.400 --> 00:56:00.400
 There's a good bit.

00:56:00.400 --> 00:56:01.400
 Okay.

00:56:01.400 --> 00:56:03.240
 Commissioner Cole.

00:56:03.240 --> 00:56:04.240
 Thank you, Chair.

00:56:04.240 --> 00:56:09.920
 The landlord rental maintenance grant, Dallas implemented that several years ago and apparently

00:56:09.920 --> 00:56:15.840
 it's been a success.

00:56:15.840 --> 00:56:27.880
 So that's me as a homeowner maybe putting in an ADU and getting favorable terms on the

00:56:27.880 --> 00:56:30.560
 loan for that ADU.

00:56:30.560 --> 00:56:38.400
 Dallas really likes this program and apparently it's had a lot of success.

00:56:38.400 --> 00:56:43.560
 Yeah, of course, so separately earlier on we talked about that ADU program, so making

00:56:43.560 --> 00:56:50.280
 it easier for homeowners to build an ADU in exchange for leasing for a low income or moderate

00:56:50.280 --> 00:56:51.960
 income household.

00:56:51.960 --> 00:56:53.960
 This is a slightly different program.

00:56:53.960 --> 00:57:00.920
 This is for a homeowner or a property owner who owns a house or something or maybe a duplex

00:57:00.920 --> 00:57:07.620
 that they're leasing out and say it's in poor condition and they don't feel that it's habitable.

00:57:07.620 --> 00:57:11.240
 So they need it rehabbed but they don't have the cash on hand to do that or they just want

00:57:11.240 --> 00:57:13.080
 help for whatever reason.

00:57:13.080 --> 00:57:15.600
 We can assist with rehabbing that project.

00:57:15.600 --> 00:57:21.320
 While it is vacant, we are not relocating anybody in exchange for them agreeing to lease

00:57:21.320 --> 00:57:23.040
 it at an affordable rate.

00:57:23.040 --> 00:57:29.280
 So an ADU would not be covered under that because I know Dallas does and it's been...

00:57:29.280 --> 00:57:30.280
 Yeah, no.

00:57:30.280 --> 00:57:31.280
 Sorry, really quickly.

00:57:31.280 --> 00:57:35.680
 No, but we plan to have that program too.

00:57:35.680 --> 00:57:39.760
 Any other questions here?

00:57:39.760 --> 00:57:42.880
 Commissioner Smith.

00:57:42.880 --> 00:57:46.160
 That grant, the way that that description reads, I'm just trying to contemplate it because

00:57:46.160 --> 00:57:49.280
 I've heard of it but I never really dug super deep in it.

00:57:49.280 --> 00:57:54.760
 The way it's worded, it makes it sound like it's more of a loan rather than a grant.

00:57:54.760 --> 00:57:59.260
 It's a period of affordability in exchange for repayment from future rents or loan forgiveness.

00:57:59.260 --> 00:58:02.600
 So it's really more of a landlord rental maintenance loan.

00:58:02.600 --> 00:58:05.840
 It's a forgivable loan, which is similar to a grant.

00:58:05.840 --> 00:58:09.520
 Essentially it's so that if they don't do what we say, we can take the money back.

00:58:09.520 --> 00:58:10.520
 Gotcha.

00:58:10.520 --> 00:58:14.800
 But how the project runs right now, here's $10,000, I'm just making up numbers, $10,000

00:58:14.800 --> 00:58:20.800
 to do a rehab and as long as you rent it out at an affordable rate for five years and you

00:58:20.800 --> 00:58:24.080
 hold it there, at the end of that five years, we're going to forgive your 10 grand.

00:58:24.080 --> 00:58:25.080
 Correct.

00:58:25.080 --> 00:58:26.080
 Yes, essentially, yeah.

00:58:26.080 --> 00:58:28.800
 What are the size of most of those grants that we're seeing now as they come through

00:58:28.800 --> 00:58:29.800
 as the project operates?

00:58:29.800 --> 00:58:32.740
 Have we done many, I know that the project's online now, but-

00:58:32.740 --> 00:58:35.320
 This one's new enough and you can forgive me if I make a mistake, but this one's new

00:58:35.320 --> 00:58:38.520
 enough that we actually have not seen any projects come through with this just yet.

00:58:38.520 --> 00:58:39.520
 25.

00:58:39.520 --> 00:58:40.520
 25?

00:58:40.520 --> 00:58:41.520
 Oh.

00:58:41.520 --> 00:58:42.520
 Yes, 25,000, yes.

00:58:42.520 --> 00:58:45.400
 And there's like a minimum on the property value, like it needs to be like three units

00:58:45.400 --> 00:58:46.920
 or something like that.

00:58:46.920 --> 00:58:47.920
 No.

00:58:47.920 --> 00:58:48.920
 Gotcha.

00:58:48.920 --> 00:58:53.000
 So one little tiny house would give me 25 grand, huh?

00:58:53.000 --> 00:58:55.760
 Just kidding, I'm joking.

00:58:55.760 --> 00:58:56.760
 I'm joking.

00:58:56.760 --> 00:58:57.760
 I'm joking.

00:58:57.760 --> 00:58:58.760
 All right.

00:58:58.760 --> 00:58:59.760
 Commissioner Villarreal.

00:58:59.760 --> 00:59:02.320
 Does this only pertain to long-term rentals?

00:59:02.320 --> 00:59:04.320
 Correct, not short-term rentals.

00:59:04.320 --> 00:59:05.320
 Yes.

00:59:05.320 --> 00:59:06.320
 Thank you.

00:59:06.320 --> 00:59:07.320
 Commissioner Perot.

00:59:07.320 --> 00:59:08.320
 Thank you, Chair.

00:59:08.320 --> 00:59:14.840
 Just a thought occurs to me and I may be answering my own question in my mind, so if you'll forgive

00:59:14.840 --> 00:59:23.440
 me, but bag of tools, there's landlord maintenance, there are other programs to be able to take

00:59:23.440 --> 00:59:28.880
 existing properties and allow them to continue being used if there was fear of them dilapidating

00:59:28.880 --> 00:59:31.040
 and not being able to be habitable.

00:59:31.040 --> 00:59:32.720
 Understand that.

00:59:32.720 --> 00:59:36.820
 Land banking, another tool.

00:59:36.820 --> 00:59:46.160
 I guess is the idea that if the city has more control over those programs that we can make

00:59:46.160 --> 00:59:53.800
 an active decision as far as for particular property F, is it more beneficial as far as

00:59:53.800 --> 00:59:58.140
 the number of units you get, that sort of thing, to rehab this structure or just buy

00:59:58.140 --> 01:00:00.280
 it and land bank it and redevelop it?

01:00:00.280 --> 01:00:01.280
 Does that make sense?

01:00:01.280 --> 01:00:02.280
 Yes.

01:00:02.280 --> 01:00:03.280
 Yeah.

01:00:03.280 --> 01:00:04.280
 I think you're on the right track there.

01:00:04.280 --> 01:00:05.280
 Yeah.

01:00:05.280 --> 01:00:06.960
 We do have that toolbox for different types of projects like Denton Affordable Housing

01:00:06.960 --> 01:00:11.080
 Corporation right now does a lot of rehabs and that's historically what they've done

01:00:11.080 --> 01:00:13.080
 for I think the past 20 years.

01:00:13.080 --> 01:00:15.280
 I know that they'd love to get into the development space.

01:00:15.280 --> 01:00:23.600
 So what we're looking at is trying to make it possible for any new development that comes

01:00:23.600 --> 01:00:32.800
 into Denton to have at least some affordability, whether that's I'm building a neighborhood

01:00:32.800 --> 01:00:37.720
 and I want this setback reduction or whatever it's going to be and so I'm going to take,

01:00:37.720 --> 01:00:42.560
 I'm going to set aside 10 of these for low income potential homeowners, right?

01:00:42.560 --> 01:00:48.120
 Or if it's a development like this or if it's a rehab, whatever it's going to be, we want

01:00:48.120 --> 01:00:53.120
 to seat at that table and for some cases it's going to be really small, like a setback reduction.

01:00:53.120 --> 01:00:59.160
 In some cases, if we want to build say supportive housing or housing for really low income folks,

01:00:59.160 --> 01:01:02.640
 that project might need more support and so that's when we talk about things like land

01:01:02.640 --> 01:01:03.640
 banking.

01:01:03.640 --> 01:01:04.640
 Okay.

01:01:04.640 --> 01:01:05.640
 Thank you.

01:01:05.640 --> 01:01:06.640
 Yeah.

01:01:06.640 --> 01:01:09.640
 Do I have any other questions here?

01:01:09.640 --> 01:01:10.840
 Cool.

01:01:10.840 --> 01:01:17.280
 Lastly here, access to information, we do want to start an eviction prevention and education

01:01:17.280 --> 01:01:23.840
 program so this will be guidance documents, outreach, training assistance, possibly some

01:01:23.840 --> 01:01:30.440
 grant funding to deter eviction right now or not right now, in the future.

01:01:30.440 --> 01:01:33.240
 Additionally, interactive online mapping, this is already complete.

01:01:33.240 --> 01:01:37.200
 This is our map or at least one version of it.

01:01:37.200 --> 01:01:43.240
 This is a map that was conducted previously or assembled previously of those vacant or

01:01:43.240 --> 01:01:46.280
 underutilized lots for potential development.

01:01:46.280 --> 01:01:48.400
 Yes.

01:01:48.400 --> 01:01:51.280
 And then the landlord education program.

01:01:51.280 --> 01:01:55.520
 This is really just partnering with that, with Denton Housing Authority to talk to landlords

01:01:55.520 --> 01:02:01.760
 and explain what an amazing opportunity accepting a housing choice voucher can be and how that

01:02:01.760 --> 01:02:07.460
 can impact the tenant using that voucher and your community in a really positive way.

01:02:07.460 --> 01:02:10.080
 And so that's our last strategy there.

01:02:10.080 --> 01:02:14.840
 Do I have any questions here?

01:02:14.840 --> 01:02:17.160
 Yes.

01:02:17.160 --> 01:02:20.520
 So everyone has about 10 seconds to look at this and then I'm going to ask everyone to

01:02:20.520 --> 01:02:22.600
 close their eyes and write it from memory.

01:02:22.600 --> 01:02:28.080
 Sorry, I really like making that joke.

01:02:28.080 --> 01:02:32.240
 This is just a brief overview to give you a little bit of scope.

01:02:32.240 --> 01:02:39.500
 So you can see here at the top, we estimated the need at about 2,300 units of rental housing

01:02:39.500 --> 01:02:48.080
 by 2030 and then about 1,900 affordable homeownership opportunities by 2030.

01:02:48.080 --> 01:02:53.120
 Our goal estimates we are trying to meet about 1,200 of those units on the rental side and

01:02:53.120 --> 01:02:56.440
 then about 500 units on the homeownership side.

01:02:56.440 --> 01:03:00.120
 Now, of course, these estimates were made pre the bond funding.

01:03:00.120 --> 01:03:03.680
 So we're hoping to go a little bit above and beyond.

01:03:03.680 --> 01:03:05.360
 But this is how we currently have it set up.

01:03:05.360 --> 01:03:10.760
 This is how it was estimated with the remaining being up to the market to meet.

01:03:10.760 --> 01:03:14.380
 Do I have any questions here?

01:03:14.380 --> 01:03:16.080
 Cool.

01:03:16.080 --> 01:03:19.760
 This is a projected timeline.

01:03:19.760 --> 01:03:23.120
 If it is a bit small, I promise it will be sent out.

01:03:23.120 --> 01:03:28.400
 But I'll just kind of go over quickly the things that we see most upcoming.

01:03:28.400 --> 01:03:32.220
 Fiscal year 24 is when we will start actually seeing our bond funding.

01:03:32.220 --> 01:03:37.960
 And so right now, we're trying to get as much set up prior to that as possible.

01:03:37.960 --> 01:03:42.920
 So we're focusing on those infill projects, small home communities and ADUs, we're working

01:03:42.920 --> 01:03:45.160
 on those.

01:03:45.160 --> 01:03:49.720
 We are also always and forever working on marketing and outreach, but that's a little

01:03:49.720 --> 01:03:52.520
 bit less to do with you.

01:03:52.520 --> 01:03:56.080
 And then right now, we are working on that developer incentive toolbox, one project of

01:03:56.080 --> 01:04:01.880
 which being that DDC amendment with procedures for incentives for affordable housing.

01:04:01.880 --> 01:04:05.720
 And then I think that's most of the things I wanted to talk about.

01:04:05.720 --> 01:04:10.520
 We do also have a housing trust fund, which is essentially just the mechanism for which

01:04:10.520 --> 01:04:13.240
 we will be doing all of these activities right now.

01:04:13.240 --> 01:04:17.400
 We're drafting our policies and procedures, which will likely eventually come to you for

01:04:17.400 --> 01:04:18.400
 review as well.

01:04:18.400 --> 01:04:22.280
 Do I have any questions here?

01:04:22.280 --> 01:04:23.280
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:04:23.280 --> 01:04:28.800
 Just really quick, and this is going back to the strat number one.

01:04:28.800 --> 01:04:33.520
 Other communities that have embraced small home communities and ADUs, do they have mechanisms

01:04:33.520 --> 01:04:38.920
 in place to keep or to attempt to keep as much as they can within the long-term rental

01:04:38.920 --> 01:04:39.920
 stock?

01:04:39.920 --> 01:04:43.000
 That's a very good question.

01:04:43.000 --> 01:04:47.360
 I don't have an answer off the top of my head, Danny, do you?

01:04:47.360 --> 01:04:51.320
 I can do that research and get back to you on how those maintain it.

01:04:51.320 --> 01:04:56.720
 One thing I will say is a lot of times smaller homes are going to be what we call naturally

01:04:56.720 --> 01:04:59.440
 occurring affordable housing.

01:04:59.440 --> 01:05:05.000
 So they might be subsidized at the start, but a smaller home is almost in most cases

01:05:05.000 --> 01:05:09.120
 going to be more affordable than a big home, especially for a household that doesn't need

01:05:09.120 --> 01:05:10.200
 a big home.

01:05:10.200 --> 01:05:15.200
 And so in terms of legal mechanisms to keep those affordable, I'll do further research.

01:05:15.200 --> 01:05:20.160
 But part of what we like about small homes is that over time they're sustainably naturally

01:05:20.160 --> 01:05:23.040
 occurring affordable housing, how that helps.

01:05:23.040 --> 01:05:27.480
 I know it does, and I bring that up just because I had a conversation with folks at the city

01:05:27.480 --> 01:05:33.080
 of Hurst and the city of Ulysses, and their concerns around ADUs were are those just going

01:05:33.080 --> 01:05:39.240
 to slip immediately into STR territory?

01:05:39.240 --> 01:05:43.400
 And I think that's where we're encouraging the incentive process overall, because that

01:05:43.400 --> 01:05:47.800
 incentive process gives us that mechanism to require affordability for a period of time

01:05:47.800 --> 01:05:51.960
 by agreement, whatever that agreement is, and for however long it might be.

01:05:51.960 --> 01:05:57.160
 So for the ADU program, for example, the more subsidy we might put in to help that ADU get

01:05:57.160 --> 01:06:04.240
 created and be affordable, the longer we would make that affordability requirement.

01:06:04.240 --> 01:06:08.160
 I would just add, the key thing that Danny is mentioning is it's an agreement, it's like

01:06:08.160 --> 01:06:09.600
 a development agreement, right?

01:06:09.600 --> 01:06:14.940
 So it's a contract and has enforceable provisions associated with it to ensure that it's meeting

01:06:14.940 --> 01:06:21.200
 the projected goals that Danny's team has for that particular program that's being implemented.

01:06:21.200 --> 01:06:25.280
 And just to be clear, that's what we already do within our minor repair and our home renovation

01:06:25.280 --> 01:06:26.560
 and restructuring program.

01:06:26.560 --> 01:06:32.960
 So we are confident that we have the tools that would make that requirement enforceable.

01:06:32.960 --> 01:06:36.160
 And on that note, that's always negotiable then, that term length.

01:06:36.160 --> 01:06:38.600
 Is there a minimum?

01:06:38.600 --> 01:06:41.120
 So these are programs that we're still building out.

01:06:41.120 --> 01:06:44.000
 Like I said, we're actively working on those policies and procedures for how this will

01:06:44.000 --> 01:06:45.600
 work in practice.

01:06:45.600 --> 01:06:46.600
 We will have minimums.

01:06:46.600 --> 01:06:50.560
 Neither of us are in the business of giving things away for free.

01:06:50.560 --> 01:06:53.040
 But yes, of course, we are trying to meet people where they are and see, well, what

01:06:53.040 --> 01:06:54.040
 do you need for the project?

01:06:54.040 --> 01:06:56.200
 What are we going to ask from that?

01:06:56.200 --> 01:06:59.640
 And so it will be customizable, but we're going to have minimums.

01:06:59.640 --> 01:07:02.200
 Did I answer that?

01:07:02.200 --> 01:07:03.760
 Yes, you did.

01:07:03.760 --> 01:07:04.760
 Okay.

01:07:04.760 --> 01:07:05.760
 All right.

01:07:05.760 --> 01:07:06.760
 Thank you.

01:07:06.760 --> 01:07:07.760
 All right.

01:07:07.760 --> 01:07:08.760
 Any other questions here?

01:07:08.760 --> 01:07:09.760
 Okay.

01:07:09.760 --> 01:07:12.320
 Well, that was it.

01:07:12.320 --> 01:07:13.320
 You can learn more.

01:07:13.320 --> 01:07:14.320
 You can visit our website.

01:07:14.320 --> 01:07:16.880
 You can read the entire Affordable Housing Strategic Toolkit.

01:07:16.880 --> 01:07:22.000
 I think that's probably the best way to spend your Valentine's Day evening.

01:07:22.000 --> 01:07:25.520
 And if you have additional questions, you can always email me.

01:07:25.520 --> 01:07:26.520
 My email's right there.

01:07:26.520 --> 01:07:28.520
 Thank you very much for your time.

01:07:28.520 --> 01:07:29.520
 Yes.

01:07:29.520 --> 01:07:30.520
 Sorry.

01:07:30.520 --> 01:07:31.520
 I know we want to eat dinner too.

01:07:31.520 --> 01:07:32.520
 Sorry.

01:07:32.520 --> 01:07:37.600
 Have you guys done much outreach to the nonprofits in the community that would be addressing

01:07:37.600 --> 01:07:40.880
 these and having conversations with them, making sure that they're so...

01:07:40.880 --> 01:07:41.880
 Yes.

01:07:41.880 --> 01:07:43.560
 We speak on a daily basis, I would say.

01:07:43.560 --> 01:07:44.560
 Awesome.

01:07:44.560 --> 01:07:45.560
 Perfect.

01:07:45.560 --> 01:07:46.560
 Thank you.

01:07:46.560 --> 01:07:47.560
 Thank you.

01:07:47.560 --> 01:07:48.560
 Thank you, Chair.

01:07:48.560 --> 01:07:49.560
 A couple things.

01:07:49.560 --> 01:07:52.960
 One, I think on the slide that you had with...

01:07:52.960 --> 01:07:56.440
 It's not related to the slide, it just occurred to me then when you had the pretty picture

01:07:56.440 --> 01:07:57.440
 of the...

01:07:57.440 --> 01:07:58.440
 I like pretty pictures.

01:07:58.440 --> 01:07:59.440
 Yeah.

01:07:59.440 --> 01:08:02.400
 The one, the newer development that was somewhere in the Metroplex.

01:08:02.400 --> 01:08:03.400
 In El Paso, yes.

01:08:03.400 --> 01:08:04.400
 Thank you.

01:08:04.400 --> 01:08:05.400
 El Paso.

01:08:05.400 --> 01:08:06.400
 That's very Southwest Metroplex.

01:08:06.400 --> 01:08:07.400
 Yes.

01:08:07.400 --> 01:08:15.520
 You mentioned that there's significant costs that are incurred for in the pre-development

01:08:15.520 --> 01:08:17.600
 timeframe.

01:08:17.600 --> 01:08:23.760
 Can you help us understand how much impact that timeline has on sort of the cost to build

01:08:23.760 --> 01:08:24.760
 the housing?

01:08:24.760 --> 01:08:27.080
 Dana's going to be able to give you a better answer there.

01:08:27.080 --> 01:08:28.080
 Yeah.

01:08:28.080 --> 01:08:29.080
 Yeah, absolutely.

01:08:29.080 --> 01:08:32.240
 I mean, everything that we're doing within the Affordable Housing Strategic Toolkit is

01:08:32.240 --> 01:08:36.280
 about bringing that development cost down in the variety of ways.

01:08:36.280 --> 01:08:39.720
 So the goal is to reduce the cost.

01:08:39.720 --> 01:08:44.320
 So when you're talking about the pre-development timeframe, it's the length of time that someone's

01:08:44.320 --> 01:08:49.960
 holding on to property, has those costs along the way until it's developed, right?

01:08:49.960 --> 01:08:54.080
 Whether it's opportunity costs, meaning they're not using it yet and so they're losing out

01:08:54.080 --> 01:08:56.800
 on the revenue that the property could be producing.

01:08:56.800 --> 01:09:01.840
 And then so many other impacts from the design phase all the way through that, those costs

01:09:01.840 --> 01:09:04.360
 are being incurred without incurring revenue and exchange.

01:09:04.360 --> 01:09:07.840
 So any way that we can shorten that process is helpful, right?

01:09:07.840 --> 01:09:10.640
 And that's certainly what we're looking to incentivize.

01:09:10.640 --> 01:09:11.640
 Okay.

01:09:11.640 --> 01:09:19.280
 And then on the subject of ... I guess I'm trying to combine the previous presentation

01:09:19.280 --> 01:09:26.720
 with this presentation of we have lots of needs for housing and that sort of thing.

01:09:26.720 --> 01:09:33.320
 You mentioned that that affordability need you were hoping would be met, some with subsidized

01:09:33.320 --> 01:09:39.560
 units that the city would have control over, some with market action, LITEX and that sort

01:09:39.560 --> 01:09:47.840
 of thing, is help me understand how development that occurs at market rate within the city

01:09:47.840 --> 01:09:52.000
 affects what our needs are for affordability and that sort of thing.

01:09:52.000 --> 01:09:53.000
 Yeah.

01:09:53.000 --> 01:09:56.100
 It's a bit like every tool we can throw at it and that is one tool that we need.

01:09:56.100 --> 01:09:59.240
 So development in general is beneficial, right?

01:09:59.240 --> 01:10:05.960
 Even if it's higher cost or luxury housing, one, it will reduce the demand on the lower

01:10:05.960 --> 01:10:10.120
 cost housing because people have access who can afford to pay for it with more housing

01:10:10.120 --> 01:10:11.440
 that they're interested in.

01:10:11.440 --> 01:10:17.360
 Over time that housing also becomes naturally occurring affordable as it ages, right?

01:10:17.360 --> 01:10:22.000
 So it's not a bad thing for any development to help with just generally the supply and

01:10:22.000 --> 01:10:23.000
 demand, right?

01:10:23.000 --> 01:10:26.760
 The higher the supply, the better we can affect the demand in general.

01:10:26.760 --> 01:10:29.600
 So it's great we're looking for that issue.

01:10:29.600 --> 01:10:33.280
 And you mentioned it and we mentioned it the last time.

01:10:33.280 --> 01:10:38.960
 Everything we want to do is to make sure that any housing development comes in has an opportunity

01:10:38.960 --> 01:10:41.200
 for us to create affordability within it.

01:10:41.200 --> 01:10:44.880
 It is exactly how this tool is designed to incentivize the private market so that we're

01:10:44.880 --> 01:10:49.320
 not having to invest a huge amount of city funds to make these things happen that we

01:10:49.320 --> 01:10:54.480
 can just incentivize to then balance out and then we create opportunity across the city

01:10:54.480 --> 01:10:56.480
 and not just concentrate in another area.

01:10:56.480 --> 01:10:58.960
 So it's a very important part of the conversation.

01:10:58.960 --> 01:10:59.960
 Thank you.

01:10:59.960 --> 01:11:01.280
 I'm really looking forward to this.

01:11:01.280 --> 01:11:06.320
 I think we've got the crack team here and I think we'll look back 15 years from now

01:11:06.320 --> 01:11:09.200
 and say, wow, look what we've done.

01:11:09.200 --> 01:11:17.360
 I will say the thought that, you know, there'll be amendments and that sort of thing coming.

01:11:17.360 --> 01:11:26.280
 My preference is for relief to be granted in cases where that relief quite honestly

01:11:26.280 --> 01:11:30.840
 is just not politically palatable unless it's affordable housing, right?

01:11:30.840 --> 01:11:37.760
 Whereas if it's relief that we all agree is reasonable to allow market raised housing

01:11:37.760 --> 01:11:46.240
 to also have, then all that does is reduce the cost to build all of our housing, right?

01:11:46.240 --> 01:11:47.240
 To a certain extent.

01:11:47.240 --> 01:11:51.800
 So I'll be looking forward to seeing what those things are and seeing that come forward.

01:11:51.800 --> 01:11:52.800
 Thank you.

01:11:52.800 --> 01:12:00.000
 Do I have any other questions before folks get to eat?

01:12:00.000 --> 01:12:01.000
 Okay.

01:12:01.000 --> 01:12:02.000
 Thank you very much for your time.

01:12:02.000 --> 01:12:03.000
 Thank you for the wealth of information.

01:12:03.000 --> 01:12:04.000
 Of course.

01:12:04.000 --> 01:12:06.600
 Will you be sending us this presentation as well just like the other?

01:12:06.600 --> 01:12:07.600
 Absolutely.

01:12:07.600 --> 01:12:08.600
 Excellent.

01:12:08.600 --> 01:12:09.600
 Thank you.

01:12:09.600 --> 01:12:10.600
 Thank you.

01:12:10.600 --> 01:12:11.600
 Appreciate it.

01:12:11.600 --> 01:12:12.600
 With that concludes our work session.

01:12:12.600 --> 01:12:17.920
 I will adjourn us at 616 and we will reconvene in council chambers as close to 630 as we

01:12:17.920 --> 01:12:24.360
 can.

01:12:24.360 --> 01:12:27.840
 Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for

01:12:27.840 --> 01:12:32.240
 Wednesday, February 14th, 2024.

01:12:32.240 --> 01:12:33.240
 Thanks for your patience.

01:12:33.240 --> 01:12:37.240
 With the quorum present, I will call us to order at 639 p.m.

01:12:37.240 --> 01:12:41.700
 Let the record show that Commissioner Thaggart is absent from today's meeting.

01:12:41.700 --> 01:12:46.040
 First order on business on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas

01:12:46.040 --> 01:12:47.040
 Flags.

01:12:47.040 --> 01:12:54.520
 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for

01:12:54.520 --> 01:13:00.960
 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

01:13:00.960 --> 01:13:14.240
 On the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to the Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible.

01:13:14.240 --> 01:13:17.240
 Thank you.

01:13:17.240 --> 01:13:23.300
 Next item on our agenda is the consider approval of our minutes from January 24th.

01:13:23.300 --> 01:13:24.300
 Commissioner Smith.

01:13:24.300 --> 01:13:26.960
 I make a motion to approve.

01:13:26.960 --> 01:13:27.960
 Commissioner Cole.

01:13:27.960 --> 01:13:28.960
 Second.

01:13:28.960 --> 01:13:31.680
 You've got a first and a second for approval and discussion.

01:13:31.680 --> 01:13:32.680
 Okay.

01:13:32.680 --> 01:13:40.740
 Let's vote on the board, please.

01:13:40.740 --> 01:13:45.340
 That motion will carry 5-0.

01:13:45.340 --> 01:13:48.120
 That will take us to our consent agenda for this evening.

01:13:48.120 --> 01:13:49.120
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:13:49.120 --> 01:13:51.080
 I move approval.

01:13:51.080 --> 01:13:52.080
 Commissioner Cole.

01:13:52.080 --> 01:13:53.080
 Second.

01:13:53.080 --> 01:13:55.000
 You've got a second to approve the consent agenda.

01:13:55.000 --> 01:13:56.000
 Okay.

01:13:56.000 --> 01:14:05.960
 Let's vote on the board, please.

01:14:05.960 --> 01:14:08.560
 That motion carries 5-0.

01:14:08.560 --> 01:14:16.120
 That moves us to our items for individual consideration, first being 4A, FP240002.

01:14:16.120 --> 01:14:18.720
 Erin is here for presentation.

01:14:18.720 --> 01:14:26.000
 Good evening, Erin Stanley, assistant planner.

01:14:26.000 --> 01:14:30.000
 This is FP240002.

01:14:30.000 --> 01:14:37.600
 This is a final plot for the Denton Shady Shores edition, just north of North I-35E.

01:14:37.600 --> 01:14:42.160
 We previously recommended this for denial in your agendas.

01:14:42.160 --> 01:14:49.920
 We've satisfied all of their remaining comments, so now we are recommending approval.

01:14:49.920 --> 01:14:50.920
 Thank you, Erin.

01:14:50.920 --> 01:14:52.200
 Any questions for Erin?

01:14:52.200 --> 01:14:53.200
 Okay.

01:14:53.200 --> 01:14:54.200
 Thank you.

01:14:54.200 --> 01:14:55.200
 Commissioner Smith.

01:14:55.200 --> 01:14:56.200
 Make a motion to approve.

01:14:56.200 --> 01:14:57.200
 Commissioner Pruitt.

01:14:57.200 --> 01:14:58.200
 Second.

01:14:58.200 --> 01:14:59.200
 Okay.

01:14:59.200 --> 01:15:02.000
 There's a first and a second for approval, Ms. Platt.

01:15:02.000 --> 01:15:03.000
 Any discussion?

01:15:03.000 --> 01:15:04.000
 Okay.

01:15:04.000 --> 01:15:11.620
 Let's vote on the board, please.

01:15:11.620 --> 01:15:13.120
 That motion carries 5-0.

01:15:13.120 --> 01:15:18.580
 That will take us to 4B, V230008.

01:15:18.580 --> 01:15:20.160
 And Matt is here for presentation.

01:15:20.160 --> 01:15:25.160
 Good evening.

01:15:25.160 --> 01:15:35.520
 Good evening, commission.

01:15:35.520 --> 01:15:45.000
 I'm here to consider a subdivision variance request for a property, sorry, for a minor

01:15:45.000 --> 01:15:49.240
 plot that was brought into the city.

01:15:49.240 --> 01:15:56.720
 So here we see a map of the subject's property within northeast Denton as located in ETJ1,

01:15:56.720 --> 01:16:01.040
 about half a mile north of US 380.

01:16:01.040 --> 01:16:05.200
 Here we see the subject property zoomed a little more.

01:16:05.200 --> 01:16:11.880
 As you can see, it takes public access from North Trinity Road with state parkland just

01:16:11.880 --> 01:16:14.280
 to the north of it.

01:16:14.280 --> 01:16:22.480
 And then here is a brief glance at the aerial of the subject property.

01:16:22.480 --> 01:16:30.560
 So this variance request is for a property in the city of Denton's ETJ Division 1.

01:16:30.560 --> 01:16:35.880
 The minor plot associated with it was to create two lots.

01:16:35.880 --> 01:16:44.800
 One of these lots is sort of flag lot, which is the subject of the variance being requested.

01:16:44.800 --> 01:16:50.200
 The subject property is, according to the applicant, used for residential and some agricultural

01:16:50.200 --> 01:16:56.000
 purposes with the surrounding properties also being residential and then a state park to

01:16:56.000 --> 01:16:59.720
 the north.

01:16:59.720 --> 01:17:07.080
 As mentioned, the minor plot associated was to create two lots from the plot of land,

01:17:07.080 --> 01:17:10.920
 one of which is a flag lot, which is the variance of our four.

01:17:10.920 --> 01:17:14.080
 These lots both have direct access to a public street.

01:17:14.080 --> 01:17:20.760
 And then the homes and pond have been present on the property since the early 1980s according

01:17:20.760 --> 01:17:24.240
 to the applicant.

01:17:24.240 --> 01:17:31.600
 So the first request is in regard to the flagpole portion of the flag lot, proposed lot 1 in

01:17:31.600 --> 01:17:32.600
 the graphic.

01:17:32.600 --> 01:17:39.480
 The request is to increase the max flagpole length from our DDC requirement of 300 feet

01:17:39.480 --> 01:17:42.440
 to a proposed length of 521 feet.

01:17:42.440 --> 01:17:49.600
 And as you can see on the graphic, it shows where that 300 feet would be if it was to meet

01:17:49.600 --> 01:17:51.720
 our requirement.

01:17:51.720 --> 01:17:54.800
 And the second request is associated with the first.

01:17:54.800 --> 01:18:01.880
 We have a requirement that for any flagpole portion greater than 150 feet is to have a

01:18:01.880 --> 01:18:04.240
 permanent turnaround.

01:18:04.240 --> 01:18:09.960
 And so their second subdivision variance request is an exemption or relief from that permanent

01:18:09.960 --> 01:18:12.760
 turnaround requirement.

01:18:12.760 --> 01:18:19.400
 And we did want to make a note that the proposed lot configuration has been reviewed by the

01:18:19.400 --> 01:18:24.080
 Sea of Denton Fire Department, and they did find it satisfactory for them to be able to

01:18:24.080 --> 01:18:26.760
 enter and exit in a forward manner.

01:18:26.760 --> 01:18:35.880
 Now I'm going to transition to the considerations and staff analysis for planning, zones, and

01:18:35.880 --> 01:18:36.880
 conditions evaluation.

01:18:36.880 --> 01:18:46.000
 There are four general requirements considered, the public safety, the particular hardship

01:18:46.000 --> 01:18:52.600
 due to physical conditions, whether or not it will vary from provisions of the comprehensive

01:18:52.600 --> 01:19:02.000
 plan and other city documents, and when the actions of the request took place.

01:19:02.000 --> 01:19:05.720
 And I'll go through each of those individually.

01:19:05.720 --> 01:19:14.040
 So first consideration is that the request invariance is not anticipated to be detrimental

01:19:14.040 --> 01:19:16.440
 to public safety.

01:19:16.440 --> 01:19:22.820
 As mentioned, Denton Fire Department reviewed it, and they would be able to access and leave

01:19:22.820 --> 01:19:31.240
 in a safe manner with the current lot configuration, that there is enough space.

01:19:31.240 --> 01:19:42.680
 Also the land uses of the minor plot in question are not detrimental to the surrounding properties.

01:19:42.680 --> 01:19:50.520
 As for the physical conditions of the site, it is noted that the large pond near the front

01:19:50.520 --> 01:19:57.600
 of the proposed lot two does create a challenge for subsequent development and subdivision

01:19:57.600 --> 01:19:59.280
 of the lot.

01:19:59.280 --> 01:20:03.760
 Any development on it, as you can see in the graph, has been pushed towards the back of

01:20:03.760 --> 01:20:05.080
 the lot.

01:20:05.080 --> 01:20:13.520
 Therefore, this likely creates irregular-shaped lots in the case of subdivision.

01:20:13.520 --> 01:20:19.920
 And then finally, the topography of the pond and the slope does create limited space for

01:20:19.920 --> 01:20:25.960
 that turnaround requirement.

01:20:25.960 --> 01:20:33.600
 Third condition, if the subdivision variants are approved, they will not introduce design

01:20:33.600 --> 01:20:40.840
 standards that are incompatible with the goals of the comprehensive plan, or the DDC.

01:20:40.840 --> 01:20:46.600
 And then finally, the conditions on the property that are leading to the subdivariance requests,

01:20:46.600 --> 01:20:52.880
 such as that pond and homes, have been present on the site since the early 1980s, according

01:20:52.880 --> 01:20:59.360
 to the applicant, and so these are conditions in place prior to the DDC regulations that

01:20:59.360 --> 01:21:03.640
 they're seeking the subdivision variants from.

01:21:03.640 --> 01:21:11.880
 Therefore, staff recommends approval of those subdivision requests as they comply with the

01:21:11.880 --> 01:21:13.840
 Denton Development Code.

01:21:13.840 --> 01:21:15.400
 Any questions?

01:21:15.400 --> 01:21:18.440
 >> Thank you, ma'am.

01:21:18.440 --> 01:21:19.440
 Any questions?

01:21:19.440 --> 01:21:22.000
 I do not see any.

01:21:22.000 --> 01:21:23.000
 Thank you very much.

01:21:23.000 --> 01:21:24.000
 >> No.

01:21:24.000 --> 01:21:25.000
 >> Commissioner Smith.

01:21:25.000 --> 01:21:26.000
 >> Make a motion to approve.

01:21:26.000 --> 01:21:27.000
 >> Commissioner Villarreal.

01:21:27.000 --> 01:21:28.000
 >> Second.

01:21:28.000 --> 01:21:31.400
 >> Okay, we've got a first and a second for approval.

01:21:31.400 --> 01:21:32.400
 Any discussion?

01:21:32.400 --> 01:21:33.400
 Okay.

01:21:33.400 --> 01:21:41.560
 Let's go ahead and vote, please.

01:21:41.560 --> 01:21:43.560
 That motion carries 5-0.

01:21:43.560 --> 01:21:48.840
 That will take us to 4C FP 24-0004.

01:21:48.840 --> 01:21:49.840
 Hello Julie.

01:21:49.840 --> 01:21:51.120
 >> Good evening.

01:21:51.120 --> 01:22:00.400
 Julie Wyatt, principal planner.

01:22:00.400 --> 01:22:04.480
 This is a final plat for the Audreauke subdivision.

01:22:04.480 --> 01:22:09.240
 It's a single-family residential subdivision located on the south side of Audreau, just

01:22:09.240 --> 01:22:11.360
 east of Nottingham.

01:22:11.360 --> 01:22:14.840
 They do have some items that they do need to correct in order for it to meet the technical

01:22:14.840 --> 01:22:20.080
 requirements of the Denton Development Code, and therefore staff is recommending denial.

01:22:20.080 --> 01:22:25.280
 However, we have no objection to the requested extension to February 28th, and I'll be happy

01:22:25.280 --> 01:22:27.040
 to answer any questions.

01:22:27.040 --> 01:22:28.840
 >> Thank you, Julie.

01:22:28.840 --> 01:22:29.840
 Questions for Julie?

01:22:29.840 --> 01:22:32.320
 I do not see any.

01:22:32.320 --> 01:22:33.320
 Thank you.

01:22:33.320 --> 01:22:34.320
 Commissioner Villarreal.

01:22:34.320 --> 01:22:39.360
 >> I move approval of the extension request to a date certain of February 28th, 2024.

01:22:39.360 --> 01:22:40.360
 >> Great.

01:22:40.360 --> 01:22:41.360
 Commissioner Cole.

01:22:41.360 --> 01:22:42.360
 >> Second.

01:22:42.360 --> 01:22:46.040
 >> We have a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of February

01:22:46.040 --> 01:22:49.040
 28th, 2024.

01:22:49.040 --> 01:22:51.280
 Any discussion?

01:22:51.280 --> 01:22:59.000
 Let's go ahead and vote, please.

01:22:59.000 --> 01:23:01.320
 That motion carries 5-0.

01:23:01.320 --> 01:23:04.440
 That will take us to our public hearings for the evening.

01:23:04.440 --> 01:23:09.920
 Our first is 5A, PD 23-0003.

01:23:09.920 --> 01:23:11.640
 Mia's making her way up for presentation.

01:23:11.640 --> 01:23:13.320
 I'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

01:23:13.320 --> 01:23:14.320
 Hi.

01:23:14.320 --> 01:23:17.440
 >> Good evening, Chair, members of the commission.

01:23:17.440 --> 01:23:22.880
 Mia Hines, senior planner, presentation pulled up.

01:23:22.880 --> 01:23:30.080
 This item is a request to rezone approximately 18.3 acres from MN, SC, and R3 to a new plan

01:23:30.080 --> 01:23:31.360
 development.

01:23:31.360 --> 01:23:37.600
 The applicant has proposed to subdivide those 18.3 acres into two sub-districts, one with

01:23:37.600 --> 01:23:43.760
 basically a base zoning of MN that only permits multifamily land uses and sub-district B with

01:23:43.760 --> 01:23:49.960
 a base zoning of SC that permits a variety of commercial land uses, specifically some

01:23:49.960 --> 01:23:53.760
 restaurant, retail, and potentially a bank facility.

01:23:53.760 --> 01:23:59.280
 The site itself is located at the northwest corner of US 380 East University Drive and

01:23:59.280 --> 01:24:00.620
 Old North Road.

01:24:00.620 --> 01:24:05.240
 The future land use map designation for this site consists of both community mixed use

01:24:05.240 --> 01:24:11.360
 along the frontage of East University Road and moderate residential to the north of that.

01:24:11.360 --> 01:24:18.480
 Preventing land uses include single family residential to the north, existing multifamily

01:24:18.480 --> 01:24:24.600
 residential land use to the east, northeast, to the further to the east across from Old

01:24:24.600 --> 01:24:29.640
 North Road are some office developments, professional office developments.

01:24:29.640 --> 01:24:35.760
 To the south across East University Road, US 380 is a religious assembly.

01:24:35.760 --> 01:24:42.080
 To the west southwest is an existing drive-through restaurant and another religious assembly

01:24:42.080 --> 01:24:43.080
 facility.

01:24:43.080 --> 01:24:48.520
 As far as roadways surrounding the property, US 380 is a six-lane divided primary arterial,

01:24:48.520 --> 01:24:54.440
 and Old North Road to the east is a two-lane collector with on-street bike lanes.

01:24:54.440 --> 01:24:59.240
 Just a brief walkthrough of the development plan, again, we have the sub-district A with

01:24:59.240 --> 01:25:01.860
 a base zoning of MN.

01:25:01.860 --> 01:25:06.480
 Within that sub-district A, the applicant is proposing a total of 279 residences.

01:25:06.480 --> 01:25:13.240
 Within sub-district B, again, that base zoning of SC, and within those commercial uses proposed

01:25:13.240 --> 01:25:18.000
 within that sub-district, the applicant is proposing restaurant, retail, and bank, totaling

01:25:18.000 --> 01:25:21.200
 approximately 33,000 square feet.

01:25:21.200 --> 01:25:25.280
 There are several points of access for ingress and egress onto this site.

01:25:25.280 --> 01:25:31.200
 The green circles represent vehicular access points and the blue circles represent pedestrian

01:25:31.200 --> 01:25:33.360
 connections and stubs.

01:25:33.360 --> 01:25:40.400
 The main point of access is here along East University Drive where are aligned with an

01:25:40.400 --> 01:25:46.920
 existing median cut, and then there are secondary access points to along East University Drive

01:25:46.920 --> 01:25:49.060
 and one along Old North Road.

01:25:49.060 --> 01:25:56.400
 As far as pedestrian connectivity, they proposed to connect to a stub in front of the existing

01:25:56.400 --> 01:25:58.560
 restaurant to the east.

01:25:58.560 --> 01:26:08.120
 They are proposing to stub to the north along East University Drive and of course extend

01:26:08.120 --> 01:26:14.000
 the sidewalk across their frontage of East University and connect their extension to

01:26:14.000 --> 01:26:16.680
 the Old North piece as well.

01:26:16.680 --> 01:26:21.200
 Additionally, they are proposing an internal pedestrian connection or off-street pedestrian

01:26:21.200 --> 01:26:29.760
 connection to the north here directly tying to a HOA lot that is owned by the Old North

01:26:29.760 --> 01:26:35.720
 HOA residential, single-family residential subdivision.

01:26:35.720 --> 01:26:40.280
 Specifically regarding the sub-district A, the applicant is proposing four buildings

01:26:40.280 --> 01:26:44.440
 within that sub-district, again, 279 residences.

01:26:44.440 --> 01:26:46.160
 Vehicular parking space is appropriate.

01:26:46.160 --> 01:26:51.720
 Here you see asterisks within these notes on this presentation mark areas where the

01:26:51.720 --> 01:26:56.440
 applicant is requesting either a deviation or an alternative from the DDC.

01:26:56.440 --> 01:27:04.520
 In this case, I've flagged vehicular parking as the applicant has requested a parking ratio

01:27:04.520 --> 01:27:12.600
 of 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit as opposed to what our DDC permits, which has actually

01:27:12.600 --> 01:27:18.640
 reduced the amount of surface parking that would be required for this site, again, really

01:27:18.640 --> 01:27:25.200
 promoting the pedestrian connectivity and access on this property.

01:27:25.200 --> 01:27:31.400
 They are, like I said before, proposing a 10-foot wide side path along Use 380, proposing

01:27:31.400 --> 01:27:38.140
 a total of 32% landscape coverage and 62% tree canopy coverage within this sub-district.

01:27:38.140 --> 01:27:44.600
 They are imposing on themselves an 80-foot building setback to account for the context

01:27:44.600 --> 01:27:49.920
 sensitivity and to respect the distance and spacing to the existing single-family residential

01:27:49.920 --> 01:27:54.960
 subdivision to the north, whereas under the straight MN zoning district, there is no rear

01:27:54.960 --> 01:27:56.760
 yard setback that would be required.

01:27:56.760 --> 01:28:01.720
 There's some distance spacing that would be required based on the building height, but

01:28:01.720 --> 01:28:05.960
 in general there is, and based on the compatibility buffer that would be needed, but in general

01:28:05.960 --> 01:28:11.520
 there is no rear yard building setback, so that is an additional setback that they are

01:28:11.520 --> 01:28:13.480
 imposing as a part of this PD.

01:28:13.480 --> 01:28:19.040
 Additionally, they are limiting their building height within this portion of the development

01:28:19.040 --> 01:28:24.160
 to 40 feet, whereas the max building height in the straight MN zoning district is 65 feet.

01:28:24.160 --> 01:28:29.240
 Again, that's to account for the context sensitivity, the surrounding or existing single-family

01:28:29.240 --> 01:28:32.320
 residential neighborhood to the north.

01:28:32.320 --> 01:28:37.160
 Sub-district amenities include an indoor clubhouse, outdoor pool, bocce ball court, and outdoor

01:28:37.160 --> 01:28:40.000
 seating.

01:28:40.000 --> 01:28:46.060
 Speaking to that compatibility buffer variation again, there is a minimum, they are proposing

01:28:46.060 --> 01:28:52.120
 some alternatives again to account for context sensitivity as well as an existing easement

01:28:52.120 --> 01:28:58.200
 that is along the property lines that they share with the existing developments to the

01:28:58.200 --> 01:28:59.200
 east.

01:28:59.200 --> 01:29:06.280
 In general, what they are providing is either substantially greater than what we require

01:29:06.280 --> 01:29:13.080
 per our base zoning compatibility buffer, or it's to again account for the trees not

01:29:13.080 --> 01:29:18.400
 being able to be planted within easements and work with the space that they have.

01:29:18.400 --> 01:29:23.720
 As far as use-specific standards, the applicant is requesting to be exempted from the minimum

01:29:23.720 --> 01:29:27.720
 12-foot wall height of the ground floor of the multifamily building facing the public

01:29:27.720 --> 01:29:28.720
 street.

01:29:28.720 --> 01:29:35.040
 They are still maintaining the pedestrian basically connections to those units facing

01:29:35.040 --> 01:29:41.240
 the street, but that overall 12-foot ceiling height would ultimately lead to an overall

01:29:41.240 --> 01:29:46.920
 higher building height, which again, respecting the context sensitivity, they are trying to

01:29:46.920 --> 01:29:48.600
 limit to 40 feet.

01:29:48.600 --> 01:29:54.260
 Again, the only permitted use within the sub-district is multifamily, and the elevations that they

01:29:54.260 --> 01:29:59.480
 have provided is what they would have to adhere to under this existing plan development, which

01:29:59.480 --> 01:30:03.680
 from the south, the top images from the south is the view that we would see as we drive

01:30:03.680 --> 01:30:11.880
 along East University US 380, and then the image below that is the view from the north

01:30:11.880 --> 01:30:20.200
 that the old north residential subdivision would see, and those designs, and I think

01:30:20.200 --> 01:30:24.580
 the applicant may speak to this a little bit more, but those buildings are architecturally

01:30:24.580 --> 01:30:32.080
 designed to limit the view point from the proposed multifamily buildings into the backyards

01:30:32.080 --> 01:30:37.440
 of the existing single-family building, so whether that be through balconies that aren't

01:30:37.440 --> 01:30:41.840
 truly balconies to where you can't step out, or they're balconies that are sort of recessed

01:30:41.840 --> 01:30:48.680
 tucked in to where you can't really view over into those single-family yards.

01:30:48.680 --> 01:30:53.900
 As far as sub-district B, again, the base zoning of SC, seven buildings are proposed

01:30:53.900 --> 01:30:59.520
 within this sub-district.

01:30:59.520 --> 01:31:04.520
 The development plan shows waterfront dining, whereas in the DDC, we require buildings within

01:31:04.520 --> 01:31:09.880
 the commercial district to be oriented around a plaza or framing a corner.

01:31:09.880 --> 01:31:17.080
 This essentially, they are wanting to count their waterfront feature as their plaza area

01:31:17.080 --> 01:31:21.240
 to, again, allow for the orientation of those buildings, and there are some renderings here

01:31:21.240 --> 01:31:27.960
 to provide any backup to sort of give you a better idea of what that might look like.

01:31:27.960 --> 01:31:35.960
 Landscape coverage is 67% tree canopy coverage as opposed to the 20% landscape coverage and

01:31:35.960 --> 01:31:42.400
 the 30% tree canopy coverage that is required under the base SC zoning district, a max building

01:31:42.400 --> 01:31:49.000
 height of 50 feet as opposed to the max building height of 55 feet that is required or that

01:31:49.000 --> 01:31:53.980
 would be permitted under the base zoning district of the SC, and again, a 10-foot wide side

01:31:53.980 --> 01:32:00.000
 path is being provided along Old North Road and continuing into this sub-district along

01:32:00.000 --> 01:32:02.400
 US 380 as well.

01:32:02.400 --> 01:32:08.680
 So the images at the top here are the sort of architectural style of what the applicant

01:32:08.680 --> 01:32:13.460
 is proposing, that modern farmhouse design is what they would be tied to.

01:32:13.460 --> 01:32:19.840
 The city can't regulate specific building material, but we can regulate architectural

01:32:19.840 --> 01:32:24.680
 compatibility, and so that's what we would look for when those building permits come

01:32:24.680 --> 01:32:28.880
 in and those elevations are finalized, we would look for something similar to these

01:32:28.880 --> 01:32:29.880
 images here.

01:32:29.880 --> 01:32:35.360
 As far as compatibility buffers, again, there is an easement where this property is adjacent

01:32:35.360 --> 01:32:37.640
 to the existing multifamily property.

01:32:37.640 --> 01:32:44.440
 So a 10-foot wide buffer with no trees south of that is what they are requesting, is what

01:32:44.440 --> 01:32:45.640
 staff is supporting.

01:32:45.640 --> 01:32:53.760
 And then the minimum lot size for the SC district is 10,000 square feet.

01:32:53.760 --> 01:32:58.640
 Within this sub-district, we are permitting that to drop down to 5,000 square feet.

01:32:58.640 --> 01:33:05.440
 And then further uses with higher intensity such as larger scale general retail facilities

01:33:05.440 --> 01:33:10.320
 would not be permitted within this sub-district, again, accounting for the context sensitivity

01:33:10.320 --> 01:33:12.440
 of this area.

01:33:12.440 --> 01:33:16.320
 So we did weigh this request up against our general criteria for approval.

01:33:16.320 --> 01:33:20.440
 Specifically, I wanted to mention that the PD would allow for the development of the

01:33:20.440 --> 01:33:26.080
 property as I've walked through those components, with land use as consistent with both the moderate

01:33:26.080 --> 01:33:30.160
 residential and community mixed use future land use map designations.

01:33:30.160 --> 01:33:34.600
 The property or the proposed deviations and alternatives to the DDC are, again, intended

01:33:34.600 --> 01:33:40.240
 to minimize adverse impacts to surrounding properties and require a complementary character.

01:33:40.240 --> 01:33:44.560
 And the proposed PD development standards and PD development plans provides for, ultimately

01:33:44.560 --> 01:33:48.720
 provides for a greater level of building design quality community amenities and connectivity

01:33:48.720 --> 01:33:54.360
 that would otherwise be required, wouldn't otherwise be required of the project if it

01:33:54.360 --> 01:33:56.360
 were not developed under this PD.

01:33:56.360 --> 01:34:01.240
 And just to show you a bit of that context sensitivity, the architectural style that

01:34:01.240 --> 01:34:05.600
 you see in the existing single family or adjacent single family residential neighborhood, as

01:34:05.600 --> 01:34:11.440
 well as that top image up there to the left is one of the office buildings that is across

01:34:11.440 --> 01:34:18.640
 Old North, are all sort of in line with that modern farmhouse design, the pitched roof,

01:34:18.640 --> 01:34:21.680
 the type of building material used and so forth.

01:34:21.680 --> 01:34:25.660
 So this is complementary to that existing surrounding context.

01:34:25.660 --> 01:34:31.120
 And then again, speaking to the components of the Denton Flume community mixed use designation

01:34:31.120 --> 01:34:35.640
 is intended to promote a mix of uses, commercial uses remaining predominant, which they are

01:34:35.640 --> 01:34:43.520
 along US 380, economically viable uses, higher density without impacting nearby single family

01:34:43.520 --> 01:34:44.520
 neighborhoods.

01:34:44.520 --> 01:34:49.760
 Again, this whole PD takes into account that context and then also raising the standard

01:34:49.760 --> 01:34:57.040
 of design that would otherwise be permitted under base.

01:34:57.040 --> 01:35:01.840
 The moderate residential is intended to apply to transition areas between existing single

01:35:01.840 --> 01:35:07.680
 family and mixed use or commercial areas, which the moderate residential or the residential

01:35:07.680 --> 01:35:10.600
 piece of the PD would.

01:35:10.600 --> 01:35:15.720
 Additionally, the moderate residential is intended to maintain a scale style and building

01:35:15.720 --> 01:35:19.440
 orientation to complement the prevailing character of its surroundings.

01:35:19.440 --> 01:35:22.980
 Again, that is the intent of this plan development.

01:35:22.980 --> 01:35:29.360
 So we did perform public outreach via newspaper ads, property postings and mailed notices.

01:35:29.360 --> 01:35:34.140
 We did as of the writing or preparation of this presentation and writing of the report,

01:35:34.140 --> 01:35:40.960
 we did receive one response in opposition, accounting for a total of 0.57% for the total

01:35:40.960 --> 01:35:47.820
 200 foot buffer and one response in favor, as well as an e-comment that came in later

01:35:47.820 --> 01:35:55.440
 this afternoon supporting the project from, I believe, a member of the HOA, of that old

01:35:55.440 --> 01:35:57.760
 North community to the North.

01:35:57.760 --> 01:36:02.480
 So with that, staff is recommending approval of this request as it complies with the criteria

01:36:02.480 --> 01:36:04.160
 of the DDC.

01:36:04.160 --> 01:36:07.320
 And at this time, I will take any questions or comments that you have.

01:36:07.320 --> 01:36:11.080
 The applicant is also here this evening to answer any comments or questions you have.

01:36:11.080 --> 01:36:14.960
 Before I take comments, I wanted to make a couple of corrections.

01:36:14.960 --> 01:36:18.880
 I'd said that the application was submitted in April 2023.

01:36:18.880 --> 01:36:23.780
 It was May of 2023, so just a month later, the timeline and the reason behind it is generally

01:36:23.780 --> 01:36:24.780
 the same.

01:36:24.780 --> 01:36:31.080
 Also, the applicant may speak to their choice to replace certain parts of the fence as opposed

01:36:31.080 --> 01:36:32.080
 to others.

01:36:32.080 --> 01:36:34.840
 I did look at the existing fence line.

01:36:34.840 --> 01:36:40.880
 Basically, east of that gas pipeline easement, the height is already at eight feet.

01:36:40.880 --> 01:36:43.240
 And then west of it, the height is at six feet.

01:36:43.240 --> 01:36:49.720
 So as far as the replacing the six feet that's on that east side with an eight foot, it would

01:36:49.720 --> 01:36:53.160
 just be matching the fence line that's on that side, and then the other side would be

01:36:53.160 --> 01:36:54.160
 six feet.

01:36:54.160 --> 01:36:55.160
 Okay.

01:36:55.160 --> 01:36:59.880
 I think we do have a question.

01:36:59.880 --> 01:37:00.880
 Commissioner Perot?

01:37:00.880 --> 01:37:01.880
 Thank you, Chair.

01:37:01.880 --> 01:37:02.880
 A couple of things.

01:37:02.880 --> 01:37:13.160
 One, I just noticed that the street trees along US 380 appear to be give or take 35

01:37:13.160 --> 01:37:16.760
 feet back from the curb.

01:37:16.760 --> 01:37:18.900
 Is that because it's a textile right of way?

01:37:18.900 --> 01:37:22.920
 Why would the trees not be planted between the side path and the street?

01:37:22.920 --> 01:37:28.040
 So yeah, textile will not allow street trees to be planted in their right of way.

01:37:28.040 --> 01:37:33.440
 So the alternative is to still allow it to serve as the street tree, the function of

01:37:33.440 --> 01:37:37.080
 the street tree, but it can't be planted in the right of way.

01:37:37.080 --> 01:37:38.080
 Okay.

01:37:38.080 --> 01:37:42.160
 So it's a street tree, not at the street.

01:37:42.160 --> 01:37:46.960
 And then just a couple of questions for clarification on the property to the north of this.

01:37:46.960 --> 01:37:50.440
 That's zoned R6, I believe.

01:37:50.440 --> 01:37:57.400
 Can you remind us both what the height limitations are and what residential uses are permitted

01:37:57.400 --> 01:37:59.720
 by right in R6?

01:37:59.720 --> 01:38:05.120
 Primarily single family residential uses are permitted in R6.

01:38:05.120 --> 01:38:09.440
 I do believe there are some permissions for that middle housing.

01:38:09.440 --> 01:38:13.520
 So the duplexes and triplexes and maybe some SUPs are required for those.

01:38:13.520 --> 01:38:15.160
 I'd have to double check.

01:38:15.160 --> 01:38:18.600
 If you wouldn't, if you don't mind, I can double check that and get that answered back

01:38:18.600 --> 01:38:19.600
 to you.

01:38:19.600 --> 01:38:24.000
 And then the maximum building height, I believe is 40 feet within that R6.

01:38:24.000 --> 01:38:27.960
 Thank you.

01:38:27.960 --> 01:38:29.320
 Getting back to the fence thing.

01:38:29.320 --> 01:38:32.080
 So I think my thing was with the wording.

01:38:32.080 --> 01:38:37.840
 So it talks about the developer shall replace the six foot fence with regard to these, these

01:38:37.840 --> 01:38:41.520
 specific lots, or reimburse the property owner.

01:38:41.520 --> 01:38:44.040
 So that's where I was confused.

01:38:44.040 --> 01:38:47.680
 Is it an either or, and maybe the applicant can speak better to that, but that language

01:38:47.680 --> 01:38:49.080
 is very strange to me.

01:38:49.080 --> 01:38:52.940
 They can, and we can adjust the language also, but they can speak to that.

01:38:52.940 --> 01:38:57.680
 The, the, from what we would be looking at from staff's point of view is that the fence

01:38:57.680 --> 01:39:02.080
 is replaced with an eight foot fence, but the applicant can speak to that.

01:39:02.080 --> 01:39:03.080
 Okay.

01:39:03.080 --> 01:39:04.080
 Thank you.

01:39:04.080 --> 01:39:06.800
 Any other questions for me at this time?

01:39:06.800 --> 01:39:07.800
 Sure.

01:39:07.800 --> 01:39:08.800
 Tina, go ahead.

01:39:08.800 --> 01:39:13.520
 And Mia, correct me if I'm wrong, but I was looking at the language in the PD.

01:39:13.520 --> 01:39:17.160
 The, the other reason why we've structured it the way it is in the plan development district

01:39:17.160 --> 01:39:20.280
 is to ensure that that happens by tying it to the CEO.

01:39:20.280 --> 01:39:25.160
 So it allows for either development to get under construction, but before it's completed,

01:39:25.160 --> 01:39:26.760
 the fence issue has to be addressed.

01:39:26.760 --> 01:39:30.760
 And since that was something that I believe the applicant negotiated with the neighborhood,

01:39:30.760 --> 01:39:34.000
 hence why we wanted to ensure that there was an enforcement mechanism provided within the

01:39:34.000 --> 01:39:35.000
 plan development district.

01:39:35.000 --> 01:39:38.320
 So I know that's not something that you all normally see, but we at least wanted to make

01:39:38.320 --> 01:39:41.040
 sure that there was an enforceable provision within there.

01:39:41.040 --> 01:39:42.040
 Right.

01:39:42.040 --> 01:39:47.280
 So my question remains that who, who are you enforcing it upon the property owner?

01:39:47.280 --> 01:39:52.320
 If the applicant ends up reimbursing that, I'm just confused again by the language of

01:39:52.320 --> 01:39:53.720
 who's responsible.

01:39:53.720 --> 01:39:55.480
 It's the responsibility of the developer.

01:39:55.480 --> 01:39:59.280
 So the developer either needs to replace the fence or reimburse the property owners for

01:39:59.280 --> 01:40:03.400
 their fence, reimburse the property owners for their fence.

01:40:03.400 --> 01:40:04.400
 Is that correct Mia?

01:40:04.400 --> 01:40:05.400
 Yeah.

01:40:05.400 --> 01:40:06.400
 Okay.

01:40:06.400 --> 01:40:07.400
 That's how I was interpreting the provision and the language.

01:40:07.400 --> 01:40:08.400
 Yeah.

01:40:08.400 --> 01:40:13.000
 It would seem like we should have like a congruent, congruent fence, not different people being

01:40:13.000 --> 01:40:14.960
 in charge of replacing their fence.

01:40:14.960 --> 01:40:18.360
 Anyway, we can talk about that further.

01:40:18.360 --> 01:40:20.200
 Thank you very much.

01:40:20.200 --> 01:40:21.680
 I do have a couple of cards in front of me.

01:40:21.680 --> 01:40:22.840
 The first one being the applicant.

01:40:22.840 --> 01:40:29.040
 I will have Amy Bissett come up here and give us presentation.

01:40:29.040 --> 01:40:30.040
 Good evening.

01:40:30.040 --> 01:40:31.040
 Good evening.

01:40:31.040 --> 01:40:32.040
 I got it.

01:40:32.040 --> 01:40:33.040
 I can find it.

01:40:33.040 --> 01:40:34.040
 Thank you.

01:40:34.040 --> 01:40:35.040
 Good evening commissioners.

01:40:35.040 --> 01:40:40.760
 Amy Bissett, 97 Land Company, 109 North Elm, Denton 76201.

01:40:40.760 --> 01:40:42.120
 I'm glad to see you this evening.

01:40:42.120 --> 01:40:49.720
 If you'll give me just a moment, I'll pull up my presentation.

01:40:49.720 --> 01:40:50.720
 All right.

01:40:50.720 --> 01:40:54.160
 So I did watch the work session this evening and want to start by addressing a few of the

01:40:54.160 --> 01:40:58.840
 questions and comments that were brought up during that work session.

01:40:58.840 --> 01:41:02.860
 Since Commissioner Ellis, you started with the question related to the fence.

01:41:02.860 --> 01:41:04.900
 Let's go there first.

01:41:04.900 --> 01:41:08.400
 So the majority of the fences today are eight foot fences.

01:41:08.400 --> 01:41:11.700
 There are a handful that are six foot.

01:41:11.700 --> 01:41:17.920
 The reason that we originally wrote that flexibility in there is because there are some trees along

01:41:17.920 --> 01:41:23.960
 those fence lines and we didn't want to force a tree or force a fence replacement in a scenario

01:41:23.960 --> 01:41:29.240
 where perhaps a homeowner would rather keep a tree than replace their fence.

01:41:29.240 --> 01:41:31.680
 And so we were trying to build in some flexibility.

01:41:31.680 --> 01:41:36.880
 However, I do tend to agree with you that that language could be tweaked a little bit

01:41:36.880 --> 01:41:41.720
 to clean it up from a land use and zoning standpoint.

01:41:41.720 --> 01:41:45.320
 That's the way that it's written in our memorandum of understanding with the neighborhood, which

01:41:45.320 --> 01:41:47.400
 I'll talk more about here in a little bit.

01:41:47.400 --> 01:41:53.280
 So there's a commitment that's been made either way, whether or how it's codified in the PD

01:41:53.280 --> 01:41:54.280
 standards.

01:41:54.280 --> 01:41:58.640
 Commissioner Pruitt, or the question of what the vote was originally when we were here

01:41:58.640 --> 01:42:01.240
 in September of 2022, you were correct.

01:42:01.240 --> 01:42:02.600
 It was six zero.

01:42:02.600 --> 01:42:09.000
 I will walk through that chronology of what has occurred since then in just a moment.

01:42:09.000 --> 01:42:16.280
 I will say that had we gone to city council shortly after we had, then the option of doing

01:42:16.280 --> 01:42:23.200
 the PD light or the text amended PD would have been available to us and we might have

01:42:23.200 --> 01:42:26.880
 shortened the length of time before coming back before you all.

01:42:26.880 --> 01:42:34.680
 But by the time that changed, we were deep into design and into commitments with the

01:42:34.680 --> 01:42:40.160
 neighbors that we felt like needed to be honored in terms of just making sure that they got

01:42:40.160 --> 01:42:46.120
 exactly what they were seeing when we got back here today.

01:42:46.120 --> 01:42:49.120
 Chair Ellis, your question about was neighborhood engagement done?

01:42:49.120 --> 01:42:50.120
 Yes.

01:42:50.120 --> 01:42:53.880
 And I'm going to go into that in some more detail here in a little bit.

01:42:53.880 --> 01:42:58.280
 And I think that covers pretty much everything.

01:42:58.280 --> 01:43:00.900
 If I haven't covered it, I'm going to here in just a moment.

01:43:00.900 --> 01:43:04.440
 So before I get started, I do want to let you all know that I brought me a bunch of

01:43:04.440 --> 01:43:07.880
 Valentine's dates for everyone with me tonight.

01:43:07.880 --> 01:43:10.800
 I have Matt Swedenberg with Stonehawk in the audience.

01:43:10.800 --> 01:43:14.120
 He's going to come up and speak alongside me here in a moment.

01:43:14.120 --> 01:43:15.800
 I have Eric Earnshaw.

01:43:15.800 --> 01:43:17.440
 He is our architect.

01:43:17.440 --> 01:43:24.400
 Mac McKee is our civil engineer and Michael Plasky is our landscape architect and Steve

01:43:24.400 --> 01:43:27.620
 Shatner is representing the development on the commercial side.

01:43:27.620 --> 01:43:32.200
 So if you have any questions for any of them, they're here available.

01:43:32.200 --> 01:43:37.120
 So I do want to walk through the overall timeline very briefly, just so you have a feel for

01:43:37.120 --> 01:43:41.280
 what we have been doing since you saw us almost a year and a half ago.

01:43:41.280 --> 01:43:46.320
 Our initial zoning submittal was in March of 2022, so almost two years ago.

01:43:46.320 --> 01:43:48.680
 We held our first neighborhood meeting in June of 2022.

01:43:48.680 --> 01:43:50.520
 It was a virtual meeting.

01:43:50.520 --> 01:43:57.000
 We mailed out to everyone within 500 feet and we reached out to the HOA.

01:43:57.000 --> 01:44:03.420
 Between that virtual first neighborhood meeting and when we saw you all in September of 2022,

01:44:03.420 --> 01:44:09.080
 we had some ongoing conversations with the HOA, but generally we weren't sensing opposition.

01:44:09.080 --> 01:44:14.640
 It was, can you help us with this gas pipeline easement issue with our fence and a couple

01:44:14.640 --> 01:44:17.580
 of other specific things.

01:44:17.580 --> 01:44:21.960
 After the planning and zoning commission meeting in September, there were some of the neighbors

01:44:21.960 --> 01:44:28.340
 who had not been involved in some of the previous discussions with the HOA that were particularly

01:44:28.340 --> 01:44:33.520
 affected by the closeness of one of the buildings.

01:44:33.520 --> 01:44:38.840
 So we held a second neighborhood meeting between PNZ and city council and that was opened up

01:44:38.840 --> 01:44:41.560
 to everybody within the HOA.

01:44:41.560 --> 01:44:45.500
 And then we went to city council like the following week.

01:44:45.500 --> 01:44:52.560
 So there was a considerable amount of opposition that rose between PNZ and city council.

01:44:52.560 --> 01:44:56.740
 And so at that point in time, council felt like it was best if we went back and looked

01:44:56.740 --> 01:45:00.400
 at this in a planned development perspective.

01:45:00.400 --> 01:45:05.200
 I do want to brag for a moment on both the buyer of this property and the seller, the

01:45:05.200 --> 01:45:10.400
 multifamily developer and the commercial developer for being here two years later and for making

01:45:10.400 --> 01:45:12.680
 a commitment to the neighborhood that they have.

01:45:12.680 --> 01:45:17.600
 It's been a pleasure to get to represent this project.

01:45:17.600 --> 01:45:22.480
 So our original plan really only was to rezone the piece of what you see here in yellow and

01:45:22.480 --> 01:45:25.700
 it was to rezone from SC to MN.

01:45:25.700 --> 01:45:29.240
 So it wasn't really bordering the existing single family homes.

01:45:29.240 --> 01:45:33.960
 And so the notification was not as broad as it might have otherwise been.

01:45:33.960 --> 01:45:39.600
 I just want to point out what was there before and while we knew the commercial would develop

01:45:39.600 --> 01:45:44.240
 and we knew essentially what it would look like, it was not included in our planned development

01:45:44.240 --> 01:45:48.160
 because it was intended to come at a later date.

01:45:48.160 --> 01:45:54.400
 And so we were just trying to facilitate the multifamily piece at that point in time.

01:45:54.400 --> 01:46:00.400
 After city council directed us to go back and basically create a planned development,

01:46:00.400 --> 01:46:05.000
 the HAOA took it upon themselves to appoint a steering committee.

01:46:05.000 --> 01:46:09.480
 They formed that steering committee in November and reached out to us and said we have a steering

01:46:09.480 --> 01:46:13.080
 committee that's ready to negotiate with the developer.

01:46:13.080 --> 01:46:18.840
 We held three neighborhood meetings with them between December and February and we entered

01:46:18.840 --> 01:46:24.800
 into a written memorandum of understanding with them February 15th of 2023, so a year

01:46:24.800 --> 01:46:25.800
 ago tomorrow.

01:46:25.800 --> 01:46:35.240
 And I'm going to pass around a copy of those with your permission just so you have that.

01:46:35.240 --> 01:46:40.000
 There are a number of terms outlined in that memorandum, but we essentially outlined those

01:46:40.000 --> 01:46:45.740
 prior to going into the full PD design so that we knew that we generally had an understanding

01:46:45.740 --> 01:46:52.640
 and a project that would work with the surrounding neighborhood before diving into the full PD

01:46:52.640 --> 01:46:56.840
 design because that is a lot of time and effort.

01:46:56.840 --> 01:47:00.540
 Three months later we made our PD submittal, that's the amount of time that it took us

01:47:00.540 --> 01:47:06.680
 to prepare the plans from there, and we entered into a staff review period.

01:47:06.680 --> 01:47:10.620
 We held a neighborhood meeting in June of this past year, and when I say neighborhood

01:47:10.620 --> 01:47:14.400
 meeting I mean with the steering committee, but then they would go back and report back

01:47:14.400 --> 01:47:17.600
 to the entire HOA.

01:47:17.600 --> 01:47:22.360
 After we got scheduled for public hearing we held one final meeting with them on February

01:47:22.360 --> 01:47:26.440
 1st and now here we are today.

01:47:26.440 --> 01:47:33.240
 So we do have a zoning plan that addresses both the multifamily and the commercial sides

01:47:33.240 --> 01:47:34.240
 of the project.

01:47:34.240 --> 01:47:39.440
 I will not go into any detail associated with it because Mia went into all of that detail,

01:47:39.440 --> 01:47:43.440
 but what I do want to do is point out a few of the elements that were committed to in

01:47:43.440 --> 01:47:45.560
 the MOU that you have before you.

01:47:45.560 --> 01:47:51.760
 There were 10 commitments that were made.

01:47:51.760 --> 01:47:57.200
 This aerial that you have in front of you, some of the main ones were the minimum setbacks.

01:47:57.200 --> 01:48:01.880
 We have written into the PD an 80-foot minimum setback, but buildings two and four are committed

01:48:01.880 --> 01:48:09.520
 to 90 feet actually, and then the buildings three and four, which are the closest two

01:48:09.520 --> 01:48:16.980
 to the neighborhood, have additional facade treatments to help with visual buffering.

01:48:16.980 --> 01:48:21.500
 The building four, we agreed on a building orientation that had the least amount of windows

01:48:21.500 --> 01:48:28.760
 facing north, and agreed to screen patios on the second and third floors and to put

01:48:28.760 --> 01:48:33.280
 Juliette balconies to false balconies on building three.

01:48:33.280 --> 01:48:39.480
 In addition, we do have enhanced landscaping in an area that has fewer trees than any place

01:48:39.480 --> 01:48:41.560
 else along that fence line.

01:48:41.560 --> 01:48:48.920
 So we've agreed to upsize the size of trees within that area and provide enhanced landscaping.

01:48:48.920 --> 01:48:56.360
 I shared with you the compatibility buffer and the additional width of that.

01:48:56.360 --> 01:49:02.680
 We've also agreed to some things such as the closest point of the building three only has

01:49:02.680 --> 01:49:07.240
 a single row of parking in front of it rather than a double row.

01:49:07.240 --> 01:49:11.560
 We've provided this pedestrian connectivity, so this is a gas pipeline easement, which

01:49:11.560 --> 01:49:14.440
 is why that wrought iron fence is there.

01:49:14.440 --> 01:49:19.520
 That's the only fence that the gas pipeline company would permit the HOA to put up.

01:49:19.520 --> 01:49:20.520
 They have a gate.

01:49:20.520 --> 01:49:27.120
 It's a gated access, and we've provided pedestrian connectivity from that gated access down into

01:49:27.120 --> 01:49:30.000
 the commercial development.

01:49:30.000 --> 01:49:35.000
 We also worked hard to provide architectural compatibility with the existing neighborhood,

01:49:35.000 --> 01:49:37.480
 which is adorable if you've ever driven over there.

01:49:37.480 --> 01:49:42.480
 It's one of the cutest neighborhoods in Denton, and we've committed to that architectural

01:49:42.480 --> 01:49:48.960
 compatibility both in the building elevations you see on the multifamily side as well as

01:49:48.960 --> 01:49:53.200
 the modern farmhouse style for the commercial side.

01:49:53.200 --> 01:49:55.240
 Here are a few project renderings here.

01:49:55.240 --> 01:49:59.920
 This one shows the commercial in front of the multifamily that wraps around it, just

01:49:59.920 --> 01:50:06.320
 so you get a feel for the scale and the architecture.

01:50:06.320 --> 01:50:11.520
 And I'm not going to go through this zoning comparison between what the first zoning change

01:50:11.520 --> 01:50:13.480
 included versus the new PD.

01:50:13.480 --> 01:50:17.960
 I think that we've covered that pretty well, but I do want to ask Matt Swedenberg to come

01:50:17.960 --> 01:50:25.640
 up here with Stonehawk and just speak a little bit about his company and their intentions

01:50:25.640 --> 01:50:27.080
 for the multifamily side.

01:50:27.080 --> 01:50:28.080
 Thank you.

01:50:28.080 --> 01:50:29.080
 Hey, everyone.

01:50:29.080 --> 01:50:37.600
 Matt Swedenberg, 7060 Arboreal Drive, Dallas, Texas, 75231.

01:50:37.600 --> 01:50:42.240
 I work for the developers, Stonehawk Capital Partners.

01:50:42.240 --> 01:50:47.880
 We are a multifamily developer, class A multifamily developer out of Dallas.

01:50:47.880 --> 01:50:56.460
 We do deals across the state and DFW, Austin, San Antonio, Midland.

01:50:56.460 --> 01:51:03.440
 We pride ourselves on the level of quality that we put into our product, specifically

01:51:03.440 --> 01:51:06.860
 in the amenities, the finish out.

01:51:06.860 --> 01:51:18.680
 We provide pool courtyard, gym, just a quality residence for our tenants.

01:51:18.680 --> 01:51:25.720
 And I just want to say it's been a long journey getting back here, but we've had the pleasure

01:51:25.720 --> 01:51:32.560
 of getting to know a lot of folks in the city, specifically the neighborhood behind us.

01:51:32.560 --> 01:51:40.000
 And I'm happy to say that we have come this far with them and excited to move forward

01:51:40.000 --> 01:51:41.560
 with the project.

01:51:41.560 --> 01:51:48.520
 So aside from that, here to answer any questions, and I think we have our whole team here as

01:51:48.520 --> 01:51:54.200
 well to answer any questions that you have, so that's all from my side.

01:51:54.200 --> 01:51:55.920
 Thank you.

01:51:55.920 --> 01:51:58.840
 Any questions thus far?

01:51:58.840 --> 01:51:59.840
 Commissioner Pruitt.

01:51:59.840 --> 01:52:04.120
 Thank you, Chair.

01:52:04.120 --> 01:52:08.000
 As you mentioned, it's taken a long time to get here.

01:52:08.000 --> 01:52:12.560
 Do you expect the total cost of this project to be greater now than it would have been

01:52:12.560 --> 01:52:20.040
 if you were able to move forward in winter of 2022?

01:52:20.040 --> 01:52:22.760
 I would say yes.

01:52:22.760 --> 01:52:31.880
 That's partly market-driven, partly the qualifications that we've kind of put on the site, so I'd

01:52:31.880 --> 01:52:34.720
 say in general, yes.

01:52:34.720 --> 01:52:41.540
 Not a crazy increase, but definitely more than what we initially thought.

01:52:41.540 --> 01:52:46.040
 Somebody had to pay DCAD last year, right?

01:52:46.040 --> 01:52:54.280
 I guess just because I'm curious, I like learning, from looking at the overall site plan, it

01:52:54.280 --> 01:53:00.080
 looks like basically the two most rear buildings were moved forward, parking was moved to the

01:53:00.080 --> 01:53:07.480
 rear, and most of the other changes were what appeared to be small things.

01:53:07.480 --> 01:53:17.720
 Can you help me understand what the biggest reason why it took so long, because I'm sure

01:53:17.720 --> 01:53:20.360
 you weren't wanting it to take this long, right?

01:53:20.360 --> 01:53:21.360
 Right.

01:53:21.360 --> 01:53:29.040
 I think it was mainly coming to an understanding and an agreement with the neighborhood to

01:53:29.040 --> 01:53:30.200
 the north.

01:53:30.200 --> 01:53:34.920
 A lot of that was through trial and error of coming up with new site plans, presenting

01:53:34.920 --> 01:53:44.440
 different solutions, and walking through that with them, and that takes time.

01:53:44.440 --> 01:53:50.240
 Eric produces all of our site plans, along with Mack and Michael and the folks over there,

01:53:50.240 --> 01:53:52.120
 and that's not an overnight process.

01:53:52.120 --> 01:53:59.320
 There's a lot of thought and intentionality that goes into that, so it's just time-consuming.

01:53:59.320 --> 01:54:00.320
 Okay.

01:54:00.320 --> 01:54:01.320
 Thank you.

01:54:01.320 --> 01:54:02.320
 Commissioner Smith.

01:54:02.320 --> 01:54:03.320
 Thank you, Chair.

01:54:03.320 --> 01:54:06.200
 I know you're the residential developer, correct?

01:54:06.200 --> 01:54:07.200
 Correct.

01:54:07.200 --> 01:54:08.200
 Gotcha.

01:54:08.200 --> 01:54:16.640
 Can I talk to the commercial developer real quick, whoever that is?

01:54:16.640 --> 01:54:17.640
 Good evening.

01:54:17.640 --> 01:54:21.800
 Steve Shatner with Imperium Holdings, the owner and developer for the commercial portion,

01:54:21.800 --> 01:54:25.120
 5051 Legacy Circle, Plano, Texas.

01:54:25.120 --> 01:54:26.120
 Gotcha.

01:54:26.120 --> 01:54:27.640
 Hi, Steve.

01:54:27.640 --> 01:54:31.600
 The commercial development there, how many of those are going to be built to suit?

01:54:31.600 --> 01:54:36.800
 How many of those are going to be intended for specific use, like a restaurant, anything

01:54:36.800 --> 01:54:38.720
 that you can give me insight on that?

01:54:38.720 --> 01:54:39.720
 Don't know.

01:54:39.720 --> 01:54:40.720
 Gotcha.

01:54:40.720 --> 01:54:41.720
 Market-driven.

01:54:41.720 --> 01:54:43.920
 So I guess that it's going to be built to suit then.

01:54:43.920 --> 01:54:47.360
 You're going to have market-driven by whatever tenant, whatever buyer comes along that wants

01:54:47.360 --> 01:54:48.360
 to build there.

01:54:48.360 --> 01:54:50.080
 You guys are just going to go by whatever they come in there.

01:54:50.080 --> 01:54:53.480
 There's not an intent to say, "Hey, there's going to be ..." I didn't see exactly how

01:54:53.480 --> 01:54:56.280
 many, but it looked like it was somewhere between six to eight commercial properties

01:54:56.280 --> 01:54:57.520
 in that entire mixed-use area.

01:54:57.520 --> 01:55:01.920
 It wasn't an intent to say, "Hey, we're going to try to make this all a restaurant.

01:55:01.920 --> 01:55:04.120
 We're going to try to make a portion of a restaurant."

01:55:04.120 --> 01:55:05.320
 There was no intent to it.

01:55:05.320 --> 01:55:06.520
 There's a good and bad thing.

01:55:06.520 --> 01:55:11.280
 It's more of just a clarification on a record of what the idea is.

01:55:11.280 --> 01:55:15.400
 Our design intent is to have lots four, five, six, and seven.

01:55:15.400 --> 01:55:18.760
 Can I go back a slide to pull up the rendering?

01:55:18.760 --> 01:55:23.040
 I'm not sure who's driving this.

01:55:23.040 --> 01:55:25.040
 You are.

01:55:25.040 --> 01:55:30.400
 I doubt that.

01:55:30.400 --> 01:55:33.040
 That's probably the best ... Yeah, that's fine.

01:55:33.040 --> 01:55:34.040
 There you go.

01:55:34.040 --> 01:55:35.320
 That's the one I'm looking for.

01:55:35.320 --> 01:55:36.320
 Okay.

01:55:36.320 --> 01:55:42.240
 If you can take a look in the center of right to the left of B, you see those four buildings

01:55:42.240 --> 01:55:48.320
 that are parked over the pond, which is a retention detention basin.

01:55:48.320 --> 01:55:51.440
 That's a focal point for the overall development.

01:55:51.440 --> 01:55:52.920
 Realistically, those will be restaurants.

01:55:52.920 --> 01:55:53.920
 Got you.

01:55:53.920 --> 01:55:56.160
 We don't really know what they're intended to use.

01:55:56.160 --> 01:55:59.560
 It would be underutilized to use it for any other type of place.

01:55:59.560 --> 01:56:01.120
 Dry cleaner or whatever else.

01:56:01.120 --> 01:56:02.120
 Yeah.

01:56:02.120 --> 01:56:03.120
 Exactly.

01:56:03.120 --> 01:56:08.320
 Then that restaurant space there ... By the buildings and how you have it lined out, from

01:56:08.320 --> 01:56:10.800
 your intent, I'm sure it's once again market driven.

01:56:10.800 --> 01:56:11.800
 I get that.

01:56:11.800 --> 01:56:16.040
 It sounds like, because that's the focal point, you're going to be looking in primarily marketing

01:56:16.040 --> 01:56:19.080
 those first before hitting those ones that are further east.

01:56:19.080 --> 01:56:21.720
 Obviously, whoever comes is going to come.

01:56:21.720 --> 01:56:28.720
 We have been negotiating multiple letters of intent, so at this point in time, we're

01:56:28.720 --> 01:56:34.880
 waiting for go time from BNZ and council to start those executions.

01:56:34.880 --> 01:56:40.900
 But for practical purposes discussion, lots one, two, three, I think they could go a lot

01:56:40.900 --> 01:56:46.960
 of different ways all, again, within the context of what we're trying to design here and then

01:56:46.960 --> 01:56:51.600
 also with the limitations of use of what we're allowed to do.

01:56:51.600 --> 01:56:53.000
 It will be within that box.

01:56:53.000 --> 01:56:54.000
 Got you.

01:56:54.000 --> 01:56:55.000
 Okay.

01:56:55.000 --> 01:56:56.000
 Thank you.

01:56:56.000 --> 01:56:57.000
 Yeah.

01:56:57.000 --> 01:56:58.000
 Any other questions?

01:56:58.000 --> 01:56:59.000
 Thank you.

01:56:59.000 --> 01:57:00.000
 Thank you.

01:57:00.000 --> 01:57:01.000
 Not at this moment.

01:57:01.000 --> 01:57:02.000
 Thank you.

01:57:02.000 --> 01:57:03.000
 Okay.

01:57:03.000 --> 01:57:05.160
 This is a public hearing.

01:57:05.160 --> 01:57:12.280
 I do have a card group request from the old North Park HOA.

01:57:12.280 --> 01:57:17.560
 Not sure exactly who that is, who we'll represent, but come on down, state your name and address

01:57:17.560 --> 01:57:23.600
 and your time will begin.

01:57:23.600 --> 01:57:24.600
 Good evening.

01:57:24.600 --> 01:57:25.600
 Good evening.

01:57:25.600 --> 01:57:32.000
 I'm Diana Sims, 2500 Rugby Lane, Denton, Texas, 76209.

01:57:32.000 --> 01:57:37.480
 And I'm Clark Perkins, 2209 Paxson Way, Denton, Texas, 76209.

01:57:37.480 --> 01:57:38.480
 Go ahead.

01:57:38.480 --> 01:57:44.600
 And we represent the HOA that's directly behind where this will be built, and we just want

01:57:44.600 --> 01:57:53.080
 to thank everyone this year, Stonehawk, Ralph Mason, Steven, thank you, Amy with 97 Land.

01:57:53.080 --> 01:58:01.680
 It's been a long journey, but we've come together and in the process of all of this, it was

01:58:01.680 --> 01:58:07.840
 a give and take, and it was something that we want you to know that we support this zoning

01:58:07.840 --> 01:58:08.840
 change.

01:58:08.840 --> 01:58:12.840
 So we're here to tell you that, and thank you for your consideration.

01:58:12.840 --> 01:58:16.200
 There was a lot of time put in.

01:58:16.200 --> 01:58:24.480
 With negotiations, there was even one meeting that Mr. Shatner came to and he was very helpful.

01:58:24.480 --> 01:58:28.060
 It's really been a pleasure to see things come out the way they have.

01:58:28.060 --> 01:58:33.240
 We had a lot of concerns at the beginning with those buildings so close to our backyards,

01:58:33.240 --> 01:58:41.680
 and we really are grateful to the city council for making this a planned development and from

01:58:41.680 --> 01:58:48.300
 something that went to, we thought was going to decrease our property values in a really

01:58:48.300 --> 01:58:53.160
 big way, that now we believe it's going to enhance our property values.

01:58:53.160 --> 01:58:59.680
 So we want to come and support them in this approval.

01:58:59.680 --> 01:59:01.360
 Thank you.

01:59:01.360 --> 01:59:06.480
 Can you answer my concern about the fence and how that wording came about?

01:59:06.480 --> 01:59:10.080
 Did you have homeowners that just wanted control?

01:59:10.080 --> 01:59:16.840
 Yeah, when we were in the meeting, there's about five homes down on that east end that

01:59:16.840 --> 01:59:23.480
 are going to be affected, and at the time, they really didn't know if they wanted to

01:59:23.480 --> 01:59:33.160
 have that reimbursed and there were just ideas thrown out there, but I think overall that

01:59:33.160 --> 01:59:38.320
 they would like it to be all built out so it's the same, and if there is a tree there

01:59:38.320 --> 01:59:42.480
 that's in the way, you know how they do cutouts?

01:59:42.480 --> 01:59:48.560
 So that's the preference, but we know that they're going to take care of it.

01:59:48.560 --> 01:59:53.720
 We know that Stonehawk's going to take care of all of that one way or another, but as

01:59:53.720 --> 01:59:57.120
 it stands right now, I just talked to a neighbor today, she said we'd really like it to be

01:59:57.120 --> 02:00:02.620
 all one fence, so it's uniform.

02:00:02.620 --> 02:00:09.500
 We trust that they're going to take care of it in the best way possible, so yeah.

02:00:09.500 --> 02:00:11.960
 Thank you for letting us know your opinion.

02:00:11.960 --> 02:00:12.960
 It's appreciated.

02:00:12.960 --> 02:00:13.960
 Thank you.

02:00:13.960 --> 02:00:16.800
 I don't have any other cards in front of me, but this is a public hearing.

02:00:16.800 --> 02:00:20.640
 Anyone else wishing to speak?

02:00:20.640 --> 02:00:33.480
 Okay, with that, I will close the public hearing and open the floor, motion or discussion.

02:00:33.480 --> 02:00:34.480
 Commissioner Smith?

02:00:34.480 --> 02:00:36.240
 Make a motion to approve.

02:00:36.240 --> 02:00:37.240
 Commissioner Villarreal?

02:00:37.240 --> 02:00:38.240
 Second.

02:00:38.240 --> 02:00:43.400
 Okay, we've got a first and a second discussion.

02:00:43.400 --> 02:00:44.400
 Commissioner Pruitt.

02:00:44.400 --> 02:00:45.400
 Thank you, Chair.

02:00:45.400 --> 02:00:51.000
 I just have a few thoughts about this.

02:00:51.000 --> 02:00:57.960
 I appreciate everybody's work over the last two and a half years or since February, so

02:00:57.960 --> 02:01:03.300
 I guess two years exactly since it went under contract according to statements at the council

02:01:03.300 --> 02:01:10.840
 meeting in October of '22.

02:01:10.840 --> 02:01:13.400
 I want this development to happen.

02:01:13.400 --> 02:01:18.740
 I think staff, I think the developer, I think the neighborhood association have done an

02:01:18.740 --> 02:01:26.440
 amazing job to come up with a great plan.

02:01:26.440 --> 02:01:38.000
 At the same time, I consider my duty here to consider what is best for the city long

02:01:38.000 --> 02:01:42.240
 term, what is best from a planning practice.

02:01:42.240 --> 02:01:50.860
 I have over one bookshelf of books, not a tall, just one line that I've read to try

02:01:50.860 --> 02:01:54.640
 to educate myself on that.

02:01:54.640 --> 02:02:01.680
 I just want to share a few quotes from some things that explain my reticence to making

02:02:01.680 --> 02:02:04.080
 this a PD.

02:02:04.080 --> 02:02:07.720
 One other thing, I did go back over the last two years and looked at the rezonings that

02:02:07.720 --> 02:02:14.320
 we have done to a zoning classification that would allow multi-family.

02:02:14.320 --> 02:02:20.560
 There had been four that we approved that were straight zonings, two of them were denied

02:02:20.560 --> 02:02:22.160
 by council.

02:02:22.160 --> 02:02:29.240
 There had been 10 SUPs, I believe, split between SC and R7.

02:02:29.240 --> 02:02:35.000
 There have been three PDs and four PD amendments, so that's kind of the data that I'm working

02:02:35.000 --> 02:02:36.000
 from.

02:02:36.000 --> 02:02:44.480
 APA Texas says, "Plan developments should be used for unique developments, not routinely."

02:02:44.480 --> 02:02:50.200
 As a senior fellow at the Mercatus Institute wrote, "A survey of Texas cities shows planned

02:02:50.200 --> 02:02:53.000
 development zoning is used frequently.

02:02:53.000 --> 02:02:56.440
 A number of forces have generated this demand.

02:02:56.440 --> 02:03:00.400
 Neighborhood organizations are becoming stronger participants in the development decision making

02:03:00.400 --> 02:03:01.640
 process.

02:03:01.640 --> 02:03:05.660
 Neighborhood associations are insisting that negotiated concessions be made enforceable

02:03:05.660 --> 02:03:09.160
 by recording them in the PD ordinance.

02:03:09.160 --> 02:03:14.180
 Developers have found planned development zoning a successful strategy for gaining approval.

02:03:14.180 --> 02:03:18.560
 Developers freely negotiate restrictions and concessions to win approval.

02:03:18.560 --> 02:03:22.440
 Planners have promoted the use of planned development districts as a means of adding

02:03:22.440 --> 02:03:28.120
 regulations that they have not been successful in getting approved as general ordinance amendments.

02:03:28.120 --> 02:03:34.600
 All of the forces have resulted in the growing ad hoc use of planned development zoning.

02:03:34.600 --> 02:03:39.040
 Overuse of planned development zoning should be guarded against.

02:03:39.040 --> 02:03:45.440
 PD zoning should not be used to correct deficiencies of a standard district, nor should PDs be used

02:03:45.440 --> 02:03:48.280
 as a means of legislatively granting a variance.

02:03:48.280 --> 02:03:55.080
 Instead, PDs should be reserved to accommodate innovation and to respond to unique site conditions

02:03:55.080 --> 02:03:58.560
 in accordance with the city's comprehensive plan."

02:03:58.560 --> 02:04:05.720
 A shorter one from Donald Elliott, who is actually the senior consultant at Clarion,

02:04:05.720 --> 02:04:12.000
 who incidentally was the office that consulted on our 2019 code.

02:04:12.000 --> 02:04:18.080
 It says, "PD zoning was originally created to address innovative developments where the

02:04:18.080 --> 02:04:22.440
 applicant would give increased quality in return for flexibility.

02:04:22.440 --> 02:04:27.560
 As PDs moved from being the exception for innovative development to a form of zoning

02:04:27.560 --> 02:04:33.920
 used regularly and for not so innovative projects, cities woke up to a problem.

02:04:33.920 --> 02:04:37.960
 If you are not careful, PDs can become a zoning narcotic.

02:04:37.960 --> 02:04:45.240
 I have worked with several cities that became addicted to negotiating zoning, negotiated

02:04:45.240 --> 02:04:48.040
 zoning and begged for the cure.

02:04:48.040 --> 02:04:53.000
 The problem is that once you start using PDs, you have trouble drawing the line between

02:04:53.000 --> 02:04:55.640
 what should and should not be negotiated.

02:04:55.640 --> 02:05:00.160
 At their worst, and this really happens, they are used because it is easier to negotiate

02:05:00.160 --> 02:05:05.800
 case-by-case deals than to fix problems with the underlining Euclidean zoning ordinance.

02:05:05.800 --> 02:05:09.400
 Planners may know that the setbacks are wrong or that the parking standards are too low

02:05:09.400 --> 02:05:15.600
 or too high, but there is no political will to fix the problems in the zoning ordinance."

02:05:15.600 --> 02:05:24.720
 Our DDC says simply, "The purpose of rezoning to a PD are to ensure compatibility between

02:05:24.720 --> 02:05:29.560
 development to achieve greater flexibility than allowed by the strict application of

02:05:29.560 --> 02:05:35.760
 the DDC and/or to encourage unique and innovative land use concepts while providing greater

02:05:35.760 --> 02:05:41.500
 benefit to the city and ensuring efficient provision of services and utilities."

02:05:41.500 --> 02:05:43.640
 So that's a mouthful.

02:05:43.640 --> 02:05:47.480
 I thank you for your patience.

02:05:47.480 --> 02:05:55.320
 It's just an uncomfortable situation for me because, again, I view my role here as doing

02:05:55.320 --> 02:06:02.960
 what I can to create the best city for my children.

02:06:02.960 --> 02:06:12.640
 Locking Denton in many, many PDs going forward because we feel the need to do that is not

02:06:12.640 --> 02:06:15.220
 a recipe for success in my view.

02:06:15.220 --> 02:06:23.280
 With that said, like I said, I fully appreciate the Neighborhood Association, the developer,

02:06:23.280 --> 02:06:26.600
 and staff because you've done a great job.

02:06:26.600 --> 02:06:28.900
 Thank you.

02:06:28.900 --> 02:06:32.400
 Thank you.

02:06:32.400 --> 02:06:39.320
 I guess with that I'll just say that, well, I agree with some of the things that you read.

02:06:39.320 --> 02:06:45.840
 In this situation, I think when we do have existing neighborhoods and they can come together

02:06:45.840 --> 02:06:52.080
 and create a development together, I think can be a unique and wonderful thing.

02:06:52.080 --> 02:06:55.720
 It doesn't just have to be some kind of unique piece of land, for instance.

02:06:55.720 --> 02:07:01.960
 It could be just the unique thing of an existing community that comes together and would like

02:07:01.960 --> 02:07:06.200
 some say in what they're going to be looking at.

02:07:06.200 --> 02:07:09.160
 I don't think that says that it's a problem in our development code.

02:07:09.160 --> 02:07:16.680
 I think we've worked really hard to create our current development code that does work.

02:07:16.680 --> 02:07:21.640
 While I appreciate the pause, I'm not sure I agree with it in this scenario, but I do

02:07:21.640 --> 02:07:24.440
 appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

02:07:24.440 --> 02:07:27.960
 Before we go ahead and vote, I do have just a quick question.

02:07:27.960 --> 02:07:32.260
 Amy, maybe you can answer this.

02:07:32.260 --> 02:07:33.400
 How is the gate going to work?

02:07:33.400 --> 02:07:34.920
 I just thought of the question.

02:07:34.920 --> 02:07:39.040
 I would have asked it earlier if it came to me.

02:07:39.040 --> 02:07:44.520
 That wrought iron fence section has a gate now.

02:07:44.520 --> 02:07:45.520
 Yes, it does.

02:07:45.520 --> 02:07:47.000
 That has a lock on it.

02:07:47.000 --> 02:07:48.000
 Yes.

02:07:48.000 --> 02:07:49.000
 Because I saw it.

02:07:49.000 --> 02:07:52.920
 I was at the property yesterday.

02:07:52.920 --> 02:07:59.400
 How is that working for, you're saying there's going to be pedestrian access so that neighborhood

02:07:59.400 --> 02:08:00.920
 could come into the development?

02:08:00.920 --> 02:08:01.920
 Yes.

02:08:01.920 --> 02:08:03.720
 Is that going to be a one-way working thing?

02:08:03.720 --> 02:08:04.720
 It is.

02:08:04.720 --> 02:08:10.820
 What we've talked about is them having some sort of key card access where they can come

02:08:10.820 --> 02:08:14.520
 through, but nobody can get back onto their side.

02:08:14.520 --> 02:08:20.600
 The way that we've situated the secured gates for the multifamily piece, they're just outside

02:08:20.600 --> 02:08:25.760
 of that so that they can come straight down into the commercial.

02:08:25.760 --> 02:08:31.440
 How does that work with, I guess, who accesses the gate now?

02:08:31.440 --> 02:08:33.920
 The HOA has complete control over that gate today.

02:08:33.920 --> 02:08:34.920
 We have none.

02:08:34.920 --> 02:08:35.920
 Or the developer has none.

02:08:35.920 --> 02:08:36.920
 Okay.

02:08:36.920 --> 02:08:37.920
 And it worked for it made that way.

02:08:37.920 --> 02:08:38.920
 Okay.

02:08:38.920 --> 02:08:39.920
 Good.

02:08:39.920 --> 02:08:40.920
 That was the answer I was looking for.

02:08:40.920 --> 02:08:41.920
 Thank you.

02:08:41.920 --> 02:08:42.920
 I figured you would have thought of that.

02:08:42.920 --> 02:08:43.920
 Thank you.

02:08:43.920 --> 02:08:44.920
 I appreciate it.

02:08:44.920 --> 02:08:45.920
 Yeah.

02:08:45.920 --> 02:08:47.320
 I certainly appreciate this getting reworked.

02:08:47.320 --> 02:08:50.800
 I didn't have a problem, obviously we on the commission didn't have a problem the first

02:08:50.800 --> 02:08:57.960
 time it came around, but obviously other things changed.

02:08:57.960 --> 02:09:03.900
 So I think coming together the way this has come together and getting the HOA support

02:09:03.900 --> 02:09:05.880
 I think is a terrific thing.

02:09:05.880 --> 02:09:07.920
 So thank you very much.

02:09:07.920 --> 02:09:09.720
 We've got a first and a second for approval.

02:09:09.720 --> 02:09:11.800
 Is there any further discussion?

02:09:11.800 --> 02:09:12.800
 Comments?

02:09:12.800 --> 02:09:13.800
 Okay.

02:09:13.800 --> 02:09:22.880
 Let's go ahead and vote, please.

02:09:22.880 --> 02:09:28.560
 That will pass 4-1.

02:09:28.560 --> 02:09:32.300
 That will take us to our next public hearing.

02:09:32.300 --> 02:09:35.720
 I'll go ahead and just pause a couple of seconds because I figure the room's going to clear

02:09:35.720 --> 02:09:36.720
 before our next one.

02:09:36.720 --> 02:09:46.600
 So I'll go ahead and let that happen and we'll make way for 5B which is SD 230002.

02:09:46.600 --> 02:09:47.600
 Ashley's here for presentation.

02:09:47.600 --> 02:09:54.880
 I'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

02:09:54.880 --> 02:09:58.760
 Good evening chair, members of the commission, Ashley Eckstead, assistant planner.

02:09:58.760 --> 02:10:00.680
 This is SD 230002.

02:10:00.680 --> 02:10:06.420
 This is the special sign district for James Wood Auto Park.

02:10:06.420 --> 02:10:09.960
 So just some history of the debt and sign code and why we have it.

02:10:09.960 --> 02:10:12.280
 Signs are needed as part of the urban built environment.

02:10:12.280 --> 02:10:16.440
 They provide directions for residents and visitors and communicate messages for commerce.

02:10:16.440 --> 02:10:20.560
 However, they can create nuisances such as visual clutter, glare for property owners

02:10:20.560 --> 02:10:22.400
 and distract drivers.

02:10:22.400 --> 02:10:27.400
 So our sign regulations do aim to balance a property owner's needs with the community's

02:10:27.400 --> 02:10:29.360
 aesthetic and safety goals.

02:10:29.360 --> 02:10:35.360
 However, not all situations can be anticipated so the sign code does allow for deviations

02:10:35.360 --> 02:10:40.300
 provided that the sign package is superior and comprehensive.

02:10:40.300 --> 02:10:45.020
 So some background on James Wood Auto Park, it is a 54 acre auto dealership with frontage

02:10:45.020 --> 02:10:51.560
 on two roadways that's 35E which is a freeway and state school which is a primary arterial.

02:10:51.560 --> 02:10:54.240
 They also have eight driveway connections throughout the site.

02:10:54.240 --> 02:10:58.480
 There's five along 35E which connects to the parts and service departments and their sales

02:10:58.480 --> 02:10:59.480
 buildings.

02:10:59.480 --> 02:11:03.120
 And then there's also three along state school which connects to the truck sales, body shop

02:11:03.120 --> 02:11:05.160
 and the pre-owned sales building.

02:11:05.160 --> 02:11:10.840
 They have eight structures, parking, covered and uncovered automotive sales display areas.

02:11:10.840 --> 02:11:14.440
 And due to the size of the campus and the arrangement of the facilities, they do rely

02:11:14.440 --> 02:11:18.920
 upon signage to effectively direct motorists to their locations.

02:11:18.920 --> 02:11:23.840
 TxDOT did acquire the front portion of this property for the I-35E widening project so

02:11:23.840 --> 02:11:27.840
 the applicant is asking to replace the signs.

02:11:27.840 --> 02:11:31.120
 So since these signs were installed in the past, we do know what they look like installed

02:11:31.120 --> 02:11:36.360
 and these are two photos of the signs installed previously before they were removed by TxDOT

02:11:36.360 --> 02:11:39.280
 and these signs did predate the sign code.

02:11:39.280 --> 02:11:49.080
 The applicant is not requesting to reinstall the large disco ball that you see in the photo

02:11:49.080 --> 02:11:50.080
 here.

02:11:50.080 --> 02:11:54.000
 So this is their sign plan and the signs are shown in the general location of where they're

02:11:54.000 --> 02:11:55.480
 being proposed.

02:11:55.480 --> 02:12:00.160
 There will be four new ground signs and then it also includes two existing signs.

02:12:00.160 --> 02:12:04.520
 And the brand signs, those are going to be 47 feet tall and then the traffic control

02:12:04.520 --> 02:12:10.360
 sign, the certified service sign will be eight feet tall.

02:12:10.360 --> 02:12:16.400
 So in summary of the sign district, for the maximum effective area for signs along 35E

02:12:16.400 --> 02:12:18.520
 is 250 square feet.

02:12:18.520 --> 02:12:24.920
 The three ground signs will be 226.3 square feet, so they will be 23.7 square feet less

02:12:24.920 --> 02:12:30.240
 than permitted and the traffic control will be 15.6 square feet, which is 234 square feet

02:12:30.240 --> 02:12:31.240
 less than permitted.

02:12:31.240 --> 02:12:36.000
 So the effective area of all four signs is less than would be permitted under our sign

02:12:36.000 --> 02:12:37.640
 code.

02:12:37.640 --> 02:12:41.120
 The height, so on 35E they can be 40 feet.

02:12:41.120 --> 02:12:45.400
 The three ground signs will be 47 feet, which is seven feet taller than permitted.

02:12:45.400 --> 02:12:51.140
 The traffic control sign will only be eight feet, so it is 32 feet shorter than permitted.

02:12:51.140 --> 02:12:56.480
 We are adjusting the way that the setbacks are calculated in the sign district.

02:12:56.480 --> 02:13:01.200
 So generally, they are calculated 20 feet from the curb line.

02:13:01.200 --> 02:13:06.280
 Since this property was acquired by TextDOT and we don't have the final plans for the

02:13:06.280 --> 02:13:10.920
 TextDOT expansion, we wanted to ensure that the signs would not become non-conforming

02:13:10.920 --> 02:13:13.560
 once TextDOT was finished doing their work.

02:13:13.560 --> 02:13:17.960
 So they do meet the 20 feet from the curb line, however, we are changing that requirement

02:13:17.960 --> 02:13:21.060
 so that it's measured from the property line in the future.

02:13:21.060 --> 02:13:25.800
 So they would need to be a minimum of 10 feet for ground sign one and three in the traffic

02:13:25.800 --> 02:13:30.880
 control one, and a minimum of 8.7 feet for ground sign two.

02:13:30.880 --> 02:13:36.560
 Lastly, the number of signs, that is based off the feet of frontage, and then they cannot

02:13:36.560 --> 02:13:38.780
 be more than 60 feet from one another.

02:13:38.780 --> 02:13:43.240
 So along 35E, they could have a maximum of three signs, and of State School Road they

02:13:43.240 --> 02:13:45.460
 could have a maximum of two.

02:13:45.460 --> 02:13:50.640
 So along 35E, they are proposing five signs, and then the ground sign three and the traffic

02:13:50.640 --> 02:13:55.720
 control sign would only be 22 feet apart instead of 60 feet apart, and along State School they

02:13:55.720 --> 02:13:59.800
 are only keeping the one existing sign, so they will have one less than they are permitted

02:13:59.800 --> 02:14:03.080
 along State School.

02:14:03.080 --> 02:14:06.640
 So the comprehensive sign package and the compatibility, they would not be able to install

02:14:06.640 --> 02:14:10.440
 any new ground signs without going through the public hearing process again.

02:14:10.440 --> 02:14:14.800
 They have presented a unified sign package, which reduces the visual clutter through consistency

02:14:14.800 --> 02:14:19.360
 and uniformity, and as discussed earlier, the signs all do have a smaller effective

02:14:19.360 --> 02:14:24.960
 area than would be permitted under the sign plan, and they would not obstruct the view

02:14:24.960 --> 02:14:27.320
 of the drivers.

02:14:27.320 --> 02:14:32.000
 The scale of the property is large and complex, so the numerous signs are needed to direct

02:14:32.000 --> 02:14:37.200
 traffic, and the colors of the signs in these photos, you can see the colors of the signs

02:14:37.200 --> 02:14:41.560
 do align with the colors of the buildings for each of the brands, so they are compatible

02:14:41.560 --> 02:14:47.120
 with the building architecture and provide clear directions throughout the site.

02:14:47.120 --> 02:14:51.320
 We did public outreach and newspaper ad, signs were posted on the property, and we mailed

02:14:51.320 --> 02:14:52.320
 out notices.

02:14:52.320 --> 02:14:57.040
 We did not receive any responses in opposition or in favor.

02:14:57.040 --> 02:15:00.600
 Staff does recommend approval of the CRUST, as it complies with the criteria for approval

02:15:00.600 --> 02:15:04.360
 of the Denton Code of Ordinances for the creation of a special sign district, and I'm happy

02:15:04.360 --> 02:15:06.600
 to answer any questions.

02:15:06.600 --> 02:15:07.600
 >> Thank you, Ashley.

02:15:07.600 --> 02:15:09.600
 Any questions at the moment?

02:15:09.600 --> 02:15:10.600
 Okay.

02:15:10.600 --> 02:15:16.500
 I don't have any cards in front of me, but this is a public hearing.

02:15:16.500 --> 02:15:17.500
 Come on up.

02:15:17.500 --> 02:15:18.500
 Thanks, Ashley.

02:15:18.500 --> 02:15:19.500
 Good evening.

02:15:19.500 --> 02:15:20.500
 >> Good evening.

02:15:20.500 --> 02:15:25.680
 I am Rick Ferraro with Ginza Architects representing the applicant, and I'll be happy to answer

02:15:25.680 --> 02:15:30.120
 any questions, but I think staff's done a really good job explaining this one.

02:15:30.120 --> 02:15:31.120
 >> Yeah, I think they have too.

02:15:31.120 --> 02:15:32.120
 Where's the disco ball?

02:15:32.120 --> 02:15:33.120
 Where is it going?

02:15:33.120 --> 02:15:34.120
 I've got to ask.

02:15:34.120 --> 02:15:35.120
 I won't lie.

02:15:35.120 --> 02:15:36.120
 I've missed it.

02:15:36.120 --> 02:15:41.640
 That corner has not looked right to me.

02:15:41.640 --> 02:15:49.040
 >> The owner had considered putting the disco ball back and ultimately decided that in the

02:15:49.040 --> 02:15:53.680
 best interest of getting this passed easily that it would be best to not bring it before

02:15:53.680 --> 02:15:54.680
 you.

02:15:54.680 --> 02:15:55.680
 >> So iconic.

02:15:55.680 --> 02:15:57.520
 But anyway, yes, I'm happy that signs are going back up.

02:15:57.520 --> 02:16:02.040
 That is a big piece of property that has not had signs for a very long time, so yeah, it

02:16:02.040 --> 02:16:03.040
 is difficult.

02:16:03.040 --> 02:16:05.080
 Is there any questions here?

02:16:05.080 --> 02:16:06.080
 Good.

02:16:06.080 --> 02:16:07.800
 Thank you for being here.

02:16:07.800 --> 02:16:08.960
 This is a public hearing.

02:16:08.960 --> 02:16:10.920
 Is there anyone else wishing to speak?

02:16:10.920 --> 02:16:11.920
 Okay.

02:16:11.920 --> 02:16:16.720
 With that, I will go ahead and close the public hearing and open the floor for a motion or

02:16:16.720 --> 02:16:17.720
 discussion.

02:16:17.720 --> 02:16:19.160
 Commissioner Villarreal.

02:16:19.160 --> 02:16:24.720
 >> I move approval and for the record, I would have supported this with the disco ball.

02:16:24.720 --> 02:16:25.720
 >> Commissioner Cole.

02:16:25.720 --> 02:16:26.720
 >> Second.

02:16:26.720 --> 02:16:30.920
 >> We've got a first and a second for approval.

02:16:30.920 --> 02:16:33.480
 Any discussion?

02:16:33.480 --> 02:16:42.000
 Let's go ahead and vote, please.

02:16:42.000 --> 02:16:45.080
 That motion carries 5-0.

02:16:45.080 --> 02:16:49.560
 That will take us to our planning and zoning matrix, and I will turn the floor over to

02:16:49.560 --> 02:16:50.560
 Tina.

02:16:50.560 --> 02:16:53.400
 Thank you.

02:16:53.400 --> 02:16:58.360
 >> Thank you, Chair Ellis.

02:16:58.360 --> 02:17:03.600
 For the matrix, so we get to remove two items off your matrix that we've completed, so that

02:17:03.600 --> 02:17:07.000
 is the discussion regarding the appropriate terminology for the different types of housing

02:17:07.000 --> 02:17:08.600
 units.

02:17:08.600 --> 02:17:12.960
 Since we addressed that at the commission's prior meeting, but since it was coupled with

02:17:12.960 --> 02:17:18.280
 the affordable housing toolkit presentation you received tonight, so hence why we left

02:17:18.280 --> 02:17:22.340
 that on there temporarily, but both of those items will come off.

02:17:22.340 --> 02:17:26.240
 There were no additional requests from the commission's last meeting, so we've not added

02:17:26.240 --> 02:17:29.240
 anything to the matrix.

02:17:29.240 --> 02:17:33.440
 Just for your benefit, since our last planning and zoning commission meeting, we did have

02:17:33.440 --> 02:17:40.080
 the 314 Marietta street historic landmark designation request that the commission had considered

02:17:40.080 --> 02:17:45.200
 previously and recommended approval of, so City Council did end up approving that item.

02:17:45.200 --> 02:17:49.440
 There was some discussion regarding whether or not the designation applied to just the

02:17:49.440 --> 02:17:55.900
 750 square foot structure versus the entire structure given the proposed building addition

02:17:55.900 --> 02:18:01.120
 that will eventually be made on the property, but otherwise that item was approved.

02:18:01.120 --> 02:18:06.000
 As it relates to our area plans, so just want to give a quick update on the southeast area

02:18:06.000 --> 02:18:07.280
 plan.

02:18:07.280 --> 02:18:13.040
 We have a steering committee meeting with that group that's this Thursday at five o'clock,

02:18:13.040 --> 02:18:18.560
 pending quorum is made, so fingers crossed on that one, but that is this Thursday, so

02:18:18.560 --> 02:18:21.640
 we'll be having that.

02:18:21.640 --> 02:18:26.960
 You also should have on your calendars next Wednesday, February 21st, is a special call

02:18:26.960 --> 02:18:31.320
 planning and zoning commission meeting that's at five o'clock.

02:18:31.320 --> 02:18:33.520
 Your packet, I believe, was sent out today.

02:18:33.520 --> 02:18:40.200
 I'm getting a favor or not from Kathy, so check your email for that, and included with

02:18:40.200 --> 02:18:45.960
 that is the existing conditions information that we will be presenting to you next week,

02:18:45.960 --> 02:18:49.800
 so in the event you want to be able to review that in advance, I know we made the commitment

02:18:49.800 --> 02:18:53.400
 to try and get you those materials a week in advance of when we do those meetings.

02:18:53.400 --> 02:18:59.920
 So again, looking forward to that conversation because the existing conditions conversation

02:18:59.920 --> 02:19:05.080
 that we have will help prepare and tee up our discussion that we have with council in

02:19:05.080 --> 02:19:09.880
 March when we do the joint meeting with them for this project, and that concludes my update.

02:19:09.880 --> 02:19:10.880
 Okay.

02:19:10.880 --> 02:19:11.880
 Commissioner Smith.

02:19:11.880 --> 02:19:12.880
 Thank you, Chair.

02:19:12.880 --> 02:19:19.640
 I hate to be the stickler on this for the last seven years, but once again, whenever

02:19:19.640 --> 02:19:25.760
 we have projects that we think could be possibly contentious or lengthy, if we can just be

02:19:25.760 --> 02:19:32.840
 mindful of other items that are on the agenda, just agenda organization, James Wood could

02:19:32.840 --> 02:19:37.880
 have easily gone as A, and then A could have been B. Don't think you need to sit there

02:19:37.880 --> 02:19:38.880
 for all of it.

02:19:38.880 --> 02:19:42.280
 Now, thankfully, it wasn't a very long item, but we have seen items that have gone very

02:19:42.280 --> 02:19:46.160
 long, and it may have, from a staff perspective, whenever the agenda was getting built, it

02:19:46.160 --> 02:19:50.040
 may have been, hey, everyone seems on board, it shouldn't be too big of a deal, and really,

02:19:50.040 --> 02:19:54.840
 I kind of feel weird by even picking the fight tonight because it wasn't that long of a deal,

02:19:54.840 --> 02:19:55.840
 but it was another example.

02:19:55.840 --> 02:19:59.040
 Just a quick reminder, let's be efficient in our agenda building.

02:19:59.040 --> 02:20:02.200
 If anybody can get in and out of here for the quick something quick, we don't think

02:20:02.200 --> 02:20:06.740
 signed ordinance is going to get really hotly picked on, and we know something in the past

02:20:06.740 --> 02:20:07.740
 has been.

02:20:07.740 --> 02:20:09.120
 Let's put that guy last.

02:20:09.120 --> 02:20:10.120
 Sure thing.

02:20:10.120 --> 02:20:11.120
 That's fair.

02:20:11.120 --> 02:20:12.120
 Thank you.

02:20:12.120 --> 02:20:16.880
 Is there anything to add to the matrix or any concluding items?

02:20:16.880 --> 02:20:17.880
 Okay.

02:20:17.880 --> 02:20:20.600
 Well, with that, I'll just say Happy Valentine's Day.

02:20:20.600 --> 02:20:24.320
 Thank you for being here and taking the time to do that.

02:20:24.320 --> 02:20:27.240
 And I will adjourn this at 747 p.m.

02:20:27.240 --> 02:20:28.240
 Thank you.

02:20:28.240 --> 02:20:28.240
 See you next week.