WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.120 Welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday, 00:00:06.120 --> 00:00:08.500 June 12, 2024. 00:00:08.500 --> 00:00:10.480 This is our work session with a quorum present. 00:00:10.480 --> 00:00:15.440 I'll call us to order at 5.01 p.m. 00:00:15.440 --> 00:00:19.520 And our first item on agenda is citizen comments on consent agenda items. 00:00:19.520 --> 00:00:21.920 I do not see anyone here for that. 00:00:21.920 --> 00:00:26.800 So we'll move along to clarification of our agenda for this evening. 00:00:26.800 --> 00:00:30.160 The first item being our minutes from the 29th. 00:00:30.160 --> 00:00:33.360 Any questions, concerns on those? 00:00:33.360 --> 00:00:34.360 Okay. 00:00:34.360 --> 00:00:35.920 How about the consent agenda? 00:00:35.920 --> 00:00:39.680 We've got one plat on that. 00:00:39.680 --> 00:00:41.640 Okay. 00:00:41.640 --> 00:00:43.960 Items for individual consideration. 00:00:43.960 --> 00:00:48.680 There was an email that came through 4A, which was recommended for denial, is now recommended 00:00:48.680 --> 00:00:54.000 for approval, which Angie is going to tell us right now. 00:00:54.000 --> 00:01:04.400 This is a final plat for Stella Hills phase one. 00:01:04.400 --> 00:01:11.260 It is approximately 177 single family lots and four open space lots. 00:01:11.260 --> 00:01:14.080 This was recommended for denial in your packet. 00:01:14.080 --> 00:01:16.560 They have since met all of our criteria for approval. 00:01:16.560 --> 00:01:23.240 We are now comfortable with recommending approval of this final plat, lot 26X, which was originally 00:01:23.240 --> 00:01:27.960 slated to possibly be dedicated to the city via a development agreement. 00:01:27.960 --> 00:01:31.360 They went ahead and made that an open space lot with the understanding that parks would 00:01:31.360 --> 00:01:34.800 come back and acquire the trail they need through a separate easement. 00:01:34.800 --> 00:01:37.120 So they've satisfied all of our comments. 00:01:37.120 --> 00:01:38.120 Great. 00:01:38.120 --> 00:01:39.720 Any questions for Angie? 00:01:39.720 --> 00:01:40.720 Okay. 00:01:40.720 --> 00:01:41.720 Thank you very much. 00:01:41.720 --> 00:01:45.360 4B is FP 240020. 00:01:45.360 --> 00:01:47.800 I think Bryce is here to give us that summary. 00:01:47.800 --> 00:01:48.800 Hi. 00:01:48.800 --> 00:01:49.800 Good evening, commission. 00:01:49.800 --> 00:01:51.920 Bryce Farnarsdale, assistant planner. 00:01:51.920 --> 00:01:54.640 This is FP 240020. 00:01:54.640 --> 00:01:59.960 It is a final plat of approximately 15.98 acres, which will create a single lot in the 00:01:59.960 --> 00:02:01.720 city's ETJ division one. 00:02:01.720 --> 00:02:06.360 It is on the southeast corner of Copper Canyon Road and Old Alton Road. 00:02:06.360 --> 00:02:10.040 While they do not currently meet our criteria for approval, staff has no objections to the 00:02:10.040 --> 00:02:14.760 requests for their extension to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 00:02:14.760 --> 00:02:17.640 I'll stand for any questions. 00:02:17.640 --> 00:02:18.640 Questions? 00:02:18.640 --> 00:02:21.640 Commissioner Villarreal. 00:02:21.640 --> 00:02:23.400 Which extension number is this for them? 00:02:23.400 --> 00:02:24.400 The first extension. 00:02:24.400 --> 00:02:25.400 Thank you. 00:02:25.400 --> 00:02:26.400 Yeah. 00:02:26.400 --> 00:02:27.400 Anything else? 00:02:27.400 --> 00:02:28.400 Okay. 00:02:28.400 --> 00:02:29.400 Thanks, Bryce. 00:02:29.400 --> 00:02:30.400 Thank you. 00:02:30.400 --> 00:02:39.000 Commissioner Cole is recusing the next four items, C through F. And Cameron is here to 00:02:39.000 --> 00:02:40.000 tell us about those. 00:02:40.000 --> 00:02:41.000 Hi. 00:02:41.000 --> 00:02:42.000 Good evening, commission. 00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:44.720 Cameron Robertson, principal planner. 00:02:44.720 --> 00:02:48.760 The first final plat you all, that is in front of you all this evening, is Hunter Ranch phase 00:02:48.760 --> 00:02:49.760 1A. 00:02:49.760 --> 00:02:55.840 It is approximately a 53-acre site, located north of Robson Ranch, just west of Interstate 00:02:55.840 --> 00:02:56.840 35 West. 00:02:56.840 --> 00:03:02.640 It is going to consist of 95 single-family residential lots and 10 HOA lots. 00:03:02.640 --> 00:03:07.280 At this time, staff is recommending denial of the final plat, as it does not meet our 00:03:07.280 --> 00:03:08.280 criteria for approval. 00:03:08.280 --> 00:03:12.560 But staff has no objection to the second extension to a date certain of June 26th, and I can 00:03:12.560 --> 00:03:13.560 stand for any questions. 00:03:13.560 --> 00:03:14.560 Thanks. 00:03:14.560 --> 00:03:18.000 Are we still waiting on the same thing we've been waiting on? 00:03:18.000 --> 00:03:19.000 Yeah. 00:03:19.000 --> 00:03:20.000 Okay. 00:03:20.000 --> 00:03:25.400 You've got the floor for the next, I'll just let you continue for the next three. 00:03:25.400 --> 00:03:26.400 Sounds good. 00:03:26.400 --> 00:03:27.960 This is for Hunter Ranch phase 1B. 00:03:27.960 --> 00:03:31.080 It's approximately a 53-acre site as well. 00:03:31.080 --> 00:03:36.060 It would consist of 180 single-family residential lots and eight HOA lots. 00:03:36.060 --> 00:03:40.200 At this time, staff is recommending denial, as it does not meet our criteria for approval. 00:03:40.200 --> 00:03:43.920 But staff has no objection to the second extension request to June 26th. 00:03:43.920 --> 00:03:45.400 Questions there? 00:03:45.400 --> 00:03:46.400 Okay. 00:03:46.400 --> 00:03:51.320 Go ahead to the E. 00:03:51.320 --> 00:03:54.720 So this is for Hunter Ranch phase 1C. 00:03:54.720 --> 00:03:58.480 It's approximately a 68-acre site. 00:03:58.480 --> 00:04:04.160 It would consist of 287 single-family residential lots and 10 HOA lots. 00:04:04.160 --> 00:04:09.320 Staff recommends denial at this time, as it does not meet our criteria for approval. 00:04:09.320 --> 00:04:17.120 But staff has no objection to the second extension to a date certain of June 26th. 00:04:17.120 --> 00:04:18.240 Questions? 00:04:18.240 --> 00:04:19.240 Thank you very much. 00:04:19.240 --> 00:04:22.560 I think I have one more. 00:04:22.560 --> 00:04:23.560 I think yes, you do. 00:04:23.560 --> 00:04:24.560 You have that. 00:04:24.560 --> 00:04:25.560 I'm sorry. 00:04:25.560 --> 00:04:26.560 You sure do. 00:04:26.560 --> 00:04:28.400 It was on the next page. 00:04:28.400 --> 00:04:31.640 This is for the Hunter Ranch phase 1D final plot. 00:04:31.640 --> 00:04:34.800 It is approximately a 56-acre site. 00:04:34.800 --> 00:04:39.780 It's for 185 single-family residential lots and 8 HOA lots. 00:04:39.780 --> 00:04:43.680 Staff is recommending denial at this time, but we have no objection to the second extension 00:04:43.680 --> 00:04:46.220 request to a date certain of June 26th. 00:04:46.220 --> 00:04:47.220 Okay. 00:04:47.220 --> 00:04:48.220 No questions. 00:04:48.220 --> 00:04:52.240 Thank you very much for that. 00:04:52.240 --> 00:04:53.920 Let's bring Commissioner Cole back in. 00:04:53.920 --> 00:04:54.920 Thanks, Jordan. 00:04:54.920 --> 00:05:03.080 And we will go into our public hearings for today. 00:05:03.080 --> 00:05:07.720 First is 5A PD 240005. 00:05:07.720 --> 00:05:13.520 There is some material on your desk, and Mia is going to let us know what's happening. 00:05:13.520 --> 00:05:14.520 Hi. 00:05:14.520 --> 00:05:15.520 Hello. 00:05:15.520 --> 00:05:16.520 Good evening, Chair. 00:05:16.520 --> 00:05:19.520 Should I wait a little second? 00:05:19.520 --> 00:05:22.440 We should probably wait for one second. 00:05:22.440 --> 00:05:25.760 He's further away than we thought. 00:05:25.760 --> 00:05:26.760 There we go. 00:05:26.760 --> 00:05:27.760 Thank you. 00:05:27.760 --> 00:05:30.320 Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission. 00:05:30.320 --> 00:05:39.920 So this item, PD 240005, is a request to rezone approximately 53 acres, or 52 and a half acres, 00:05:39.920 --> 00:05:41.680 from R62 PDLI. 00:05:41.680 --> 00:05:45.200 That's an overlay within Light Industrial Base Zoning. 00:05:45.200 --> 00:05:51.240 The property is located just north of Black Road, approximately 800 feet east of Giesling 00:05:51.240 --> 00:05:56.240 Road, and it's part of a larger, approximately 86-acre tract. 00:05:56.240 --> 00:06:03.200 The PD request would establish a Light Industrial Zoning, whereas it is R6 today, but also establish 00:06:03.200 --> 00:06:09.380 some additional conditions, specifically require ESA compliance at ZCP review. 00:06:09.380 --> 00:06:14.440 It also requires a 250-foot building setback from the existing residential properties, 00:06:14.440 --> 00:06:22.240 as well as Black Road, and then it also requires a 50-foot wide buffer with 50 buffer points 00:06:22.240 --> 00:06:25.760 adjacent to the residential properties, as well as Black Road. 00:06:25.760 --> 00:06:32.040 That is recommending approval, as the request does meet our criteria for approval, and since 00:06:32.040 --> 00:06:34.120 the packet went out, there were a few updates. 00:06:34.120 --> 00:06:39.520 One, I've already mentioned that the extension of the 250-foot building setback and the 50-foot 00:06:39.520 --> 00:06:45.160 wide landscape buffer is now adjacent to, or applied to, Black Road also, whereas I 00:06:45.160 --> 00:06:48.960 think in your backup, it was just shown to be adjacent to the residential properties. 00:06:48.960 --> 00:06:55.440 Additionally, we have also received two responses in opposition of the request, and another 00:06:55.440 --> 00:07:00.460 one update that I wanted to mention that's not on this slide is that they have added 00:07:00.460 --> 00:07:08.600 additional restrictions to Black Road's access that is limiting the ability for trucks to 00:07:08.600 --> 00:07:16.560 travel from any proposed driveway on Black Road, and then they have also added a prohibition 00:07:16.560 --> 00:07:24.120 against auto fuel cells and major automotive repair within this PD. 00:07:24.120 --> 00:07:28.280 So again, staff is recommending approval, and I have the more detailed presentation 00:07:28.280 --> 00:07:32.060 in prepared for the regular session, but at this time, I'll take any questions or comments 00:07:32.060 --> 00:07:33.060 you have. 00:07:33.060 --> 00:07:34.060 Sounds good. 00:07:34.060 --> 00:07:35.060 Commissioner Thacker. 00:07:35.060 --> 00:07:36.060 Thank you, Chair. 00:07:36.060 --> 00:07:42.600 What qualifies major auto repair? 00:07:42.600 --> 00:07:48.680 I can pull that definition up exactly, but I think when we get into, I don't know the 00:07:48.680 --> 00:07:52.720 distinguish, but I think minor is more the quick lubes, the oil change places, whereas 00:07:52.720 --> 00:07:56.600 major works on transmissions and stuff like that, but I could have the definition ready 00:07:56.600 --> 00:07:58.760 for you in the regular session if you'd like. 00:07:58.760 --> 00:08:03.400 I'm just trying to distinguish between like a parking lot of stagnant cars and cars kind 00:08:03.400 --> 00:08:10.360 of coming and going, and a garage shutting every night, you know what I'm saying? 00:08:10.360 --> 00:08:11.360 Gotcha. 00:08:11.360 --> 00:08:12.360 Yeah. 00:08:12.360 --> 00:08:13.360 Thank you. 00:08:13.360 --> 00:08:15.560 Any other questions at the moment? 00:08:15.560 --> 00:08:16.560 Commissioner Cole. 00:08:16.560 --> 00:08:17.560 Thank you, Chair. 00:08:17.560 --> 00:08:23.880 I don't know what Commissioner Thacker said, I'd like to know kind of the uses and what 00:08:23.880 --> 00:08:26.280 that definition is going to be. 00:08:26.280 --> 00:08:27.280 Yeah. 00:08:27.280 --> 00:08:28.280 Okay. 00:08:28.280 --> 00:08:32.960 Yeah, my thoughts were to honestly eliminate both of them when I had it on my notes, my 00:08:32.960 --> 00:08:39.040 personal notes that I can't find at the moment, that I will find. 00:08:39.040 --> 00:08:44.920 Yeah, I was hoping to not have an auto wash fuel sales major or minor. 00:08:44.920 --> 00:08:49.600 And the applicant will be here also. 00:08:49.600 --> 00:08:53.960 I do like that they added those, yeah, that's helpful. 00:08:53.960 --> 00:08:59.120 I'm trying to get my, you don't have this up, do you? 00:08:59.120 --> 00:09:01.920 I can, yes, I can. 00:09:01.920 --> 00:09:04.400 I'm trying to read the access verbiage. 00:09:04.400 --> 00:09:08.280 Oh, I do not, no, I do not have the verbiage up there. 00:09:08.280 --> 00:09:10.200 That change came much later in the day. 00:09:10.200 --> 00:09:11.640 Okay, are you planning to have it in this? 00:09:11.640 --> 00:09:12.640 Yes. 00:09:12.640 --> 00:09:13.640 Okay, okay, excellent. 00:09:13.640 --> 00:09:18.440 Okay, then I'll wrap my head around it between now and then and we can, if I end up with 00:09:18.440 --> 00:09:20.720 a question on it, I can ask it there. 00:09:20.720 --> 00:09:21.720 Okay. 00:09:21.720 --> 00:09:22.720 Yeah. 00:09:22.720 --> 00:09:23.720 Okay. 00:09:23.720 --> 00:09:24.720 Anybody else? 00:09:24.720 --> 00:09:25.720 Commissioner Villareal. 00:09:25.720 --> 00:09:26.720 Thank you, Chair. 00:09:26.720 --> 00:09:33.040 So I read it in the backup material that during the meeting with neighboring folks in the 00:09:33.040 --> 00:09:37.720 area, they mentioned they didn't have any pending development plans or proposed development 00:09:37.720 --> 00:09:43.080 plans, but they mentioned as well that they're hoping to put a warehouse here, but they're 00:09:43.080 --> 00:09:45.840 not precluded from putting something other than a warehouse. 00:09:45.840 --> 00:09:51.720 What was the last, I guess, what is our understanding of what they're planning on putting on this? 00:09:51.720 --> 00:09:54.340 So they truly do not know. 00:09:54.340 --> 00:09:57.920 The interest that the applicant has expressed that they've received has been leaning towards 00:09:57.920 --> 00:10:01.280 warehouse uses, but right now they do not know. 00:10:01.280 --> 00:10:08.720 Do you have, excuse me, just a second, do you have a picture where you've got outlined 00:10:08.720 --> 00:10:12.160 the parent tract in case people need reference for that? 00:10:12.160 --> 00:10:14.480 Yes, I can clarify that in the slides, yeah. 00:10:14.480 --> 00:10:20.680 Because there is several other pieces involved, I mean, with the same owner that possibly 00:10:20.680 --> 00:10:22.480 might develop everything as one. 00:10:22.480 --> 00:10:26.640 So it's not just this little thing that we're looking at today, but I just wanted to make 00:10:26.640 --> 00:10:28.640 sure you had that clarity as well. 00:10:28.640 --> 00:10:29.640 Okay. 00:10:29.640 --> 00:10:30.640 And yes, Tina, go ahead. 00:10:30.640 --> 00:10:31.640 Thank you. 00:10:31.640 --> 00:10:36.920 In the past, it's my understanding that this property had been considered for residential 00:10:36.920 --> 00:10:40.520 development, but because of some of the encumbrances that are associated with the property, particularly 00:10:40.520 --> 00:10:44.880 there's overhead transmission lines as well as a gas line, which you can see is evident 00:10:44.880 --> 00:10:50.720 on this aerial here, precluded it from being successfully laid out for residential purposes. 00:10:50.720 --> 00:10:55.240 So over time, when we updated the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan, we also made some revisions 00:10:55.240 --> 00:10:58.980 in this area to reflect the industrial designations. 00:10:58.980 --> 00:11:02.280 We've seen properties in this area a handful of times, at least in the time period that 00:11:02.280 --> 00:11:07.600 I've been here, where we've rezoned properties to light industrial from this property owner. 00:11:07.600 --> 00:11:11.080 There was at one point in time, I believe an Amazon distribution facility that was looking 00:11:11.080 --> 00:11:15.680 to occupy the west side of Gisling road, and then having some parking operations on the 00:11:15.680 --> 00:11:19.080 east side that did not come to fruition. 00:11:19.080 --> 00:11:23.840 And to Mia's point, there's been conversations with respect to warehouse development, obviously 00:11:23.840 --> 00:11:26.400 with the light industrial zoning district is the base zoning. 00:11:26.400 --> 00:11:30.680 You have to take into consideration all the uses that are allowed, but from what we're 00:11:30.680 --> 00:11:35.240 seeing in this area, it's typically in that format of warehouse distribution type uses. 00:11:35.240 --> 00:11:41.240 And so with the ownership that they have also here in the area, this is just one more parcel 00:11:41.240 --> 00:11:47.960 that allows them to be able to probably develop the larger ownership as either a single user 00:11:47.960 --> 00:11:51.000 or multiple buildings that are being constructed there. 00:11:51.000 --> 00:11:56.760 - And just following up on that, that staff perhaps discuss with them, since it is gonna 00:11:56.760 --> 00:12:00.720 be a PD restricting it to just warehouse uses, is that a conversation that came up with the 00:12:00.720 --> 00:12:02.160 applicant at all? 00:12:02.160 --> 00:12:08.720 - No, they wanted the flexibility since they are marketing it at this time to not, but 00:12:08.720 --> 00:12:13.080 they were okay with, like I said, limiting certain uses like the auto fuel cells and 00:12:13.080 --> 00:12:15.040 the major auto repair there. 00:12:15.040 --> 00:12:16.680 - Got it, thank you. 00:12:16.680 --> 00:12:20.600 - And I guess just to correct, they're not proposing a restricted to just warehouse. 00:12:20.600 --> 00:12:23.640 So it would be all the uses that are allowed in the light industrial, okay, I just wanna 00:12:23.640 --> 00:12:24.640 make sure you understand. 00:12:24.640 --> 00:12:25.640 Okay, perfect. 00:12:25.640 --> 00:12:27.520 - Yeah, I think his question was, would they? 00:12:27.520 --> 00:12:29.320 - Would they be willing to? 00:12:29.320 --> 00:12:30.320 - Oh, yeah. 00:12:30.320 --> 00:12:35.800 Okay, and you said the applicant will be here anyway to have further discussion about neighborhood 00:12:35.800 --> 00:12:37.240 meetings and whatnot. 00:12:37.240 --> 00:12:38.240 - Correct. 00:12:38.240 --> 00:12:40.720 - Okay, anything else at the moment for Mia? 00:12:40.720 --> 00:12:41.720 - No. 00:12:41.720 --> 00:12:44.720 - Okay, thank you very much. 00:12:44.720 --> 00:12:52.080 So our next to 5B and C, you probably saw that email come through where that item is 00:12:52.080 --> 00:12:56.960 being requested to be postponed until July 24th. 00:12:56.960 --> 00:13:01.440 Angie, I'll just let you give that formal. 00:13:01.440 --> 00:13:06.760 - Yeah, thank you, Chair, members of the commission, Angie Manglars, Development Review Manager. 00:13:06.760 --> 00:13:11.800 Yes, as stated, some infrastructure challenges have come to light that we do need to work 00:13:11.800 --> 00:13:14.080 through. 00:13:14.080 --> 00:13:19.240 Staff as well as the applicant are requesting to postpone this case to a date certain of 00:13:19.240 --> 00:13:21.240 July 24th, 2024. 00:13:21.240 --> 00:13:29.800 I say this case, but I mean both Z220018, as well as PD230001. 00:13:29.800 --> 00:13:33.720 - And from my understanding is we're going to open the public hearing, right? 00:13:33.720 --> 00:13:37.520 Leave it open and then continue to that date certain, correct? 00:13:37.520 --> 00:13:39.040 - Yes, ma'am. 00:13:39.040 --> 00:13:40.040 - Okay. 00:13:40.040 --> 00:13:42.400 Go ahead, Commissioner Villarreal. 00:13:42.400 --> 00:13:43.400 - Thank you, Chair. 00:13:43.400 --> 00:13:44.480 Just a quick question on process. 00:13:44.480 --> 00:13:49.080 The folks who reached out via email about these two projects, were we able to email 00:13:49.080 --> 00:13:52.840 them letting them know it was going to be postponed to a date certain? 00:13:52.840 --> 00:13:53.840 - Sure. 00:13:53.840 --> 00:13:58.720 So I did not go back and respond to each and every individual email I got, but I was in 00:13:58.720 --> 00:14:03.960 contact with several very plugged-in neighbors and did let them know this morning of the 00:14:03.960 --> 00:14:08.000 request and told them to feel free to forward and share with whoever they felt possible. 00:14:08.000 --> 00:14:11.080 I also received probably about five or six phone calls throughout the course of the day 00:14:11.080 --> 00:14:15.320 from other people just asking to confirm that, so I do feel like word was gotten out. 00:14:15.320 --> 00:14:18.800 I did also make it clear that individuals could still come if they wished, but that 00:14:18.800 --> 00:14:19.800 was going to be the request. 00:14:19.800 --> 00:14:20.800 - Got it. 00:14:20.800 --> 00:14:21.800 Thank you. 00:14:21.800 --> 00:14:22.800 - Yes. 00:14:22.800 --> 00:14:23.800 - Yes. 00:14:23.800 --> 00:14:26.720 And I did as well reach out to anyone who had emailed regarding that to let them know 00:14:26.720 --> 00:14:28.520 of that plan as well. 00:14:28.520 --> 00:14:29.520 Okay. 00:14:29.520 --> 00:14:30.520 Okay. 00:14:30.520 --> 00:14:47.000 Let's go to, let's see, 5D, S240003, which goes in tandem with D, I'm sorry, E as well. 00:14:47.000 --> 00:14:51.920 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission. 00:14:51.920 --> 00:14:57.800 So this is S240003 and S240004 for advanced microbial solutions, and these are similar 00:14:57.800 --> 00:15:03.960 applications from the same applicant, so I will be presenting them together. 00:15:03.960 --> 00:15:07.780 In summary, this is a request for a specific use permit for a high-impact manufacturing 00:15:07.780 --> 00:15:10.280 use on approximately eight acres of land. 00:15:10.280 --> 00:15:15.080 The eight acres is outlined on the screen in red, that's S240003, and then an additional 00:15:15.080 --> 00:15:20.680 9.5 acres of land, which is S240004, and outlined on your screen in blue. 00:15:20.680 --> 00:15:24.160 These sites are generally located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Shelby Lane 00:15:24.160 --> 00:15:29.080 and Dakota Lane, and on the west side of Dakota Lane, 800 feet south of Shelby Lane. 00:15:29.080 --> 00:15:33.000 The existing zoning is heavy industrial, which is shown on the maps on the left, and the 00:15:33.000 --> 00:15:36.560 future land use is industrial commerce, shown on the maps on the right. 00:15:36.560 --> 00:15:40.340 And staff does recommend approval as it complies with the criteria for approval, and I'm happy 00:15:40.340 --> 00:15:44.240 to answer any questions. 00:15:44.240 --> 00:15:45.240 Can you enlighten me? 00:15:45.240 --> 00:15:48.040 I think you had a talk with the fire chief yesterday, right? 00:15:48.040 --> 00:15:51.800 We have been discussing this with fire and building safety. 00:15:51.800 --> 00:15:55.840 They both have a table in their codes about maximum amounts of chemicals, so we were trying 00:15:55.840 --> 00:16:00.240 to work through some of that with them, and we did work through that with building safety. 00:16:00.240 --> 00:16:05.560 So they will, if the SUP is approved, they will submit with their CO all of the chemicals 00:16:05.560 --> 00:16:09.600 that they're storing to building safety, and building safety will approve that. 00:16:09.600 --> 00:16:13.920 And they'll also submit that to fire for their hazardous materials permits, and fire will 00:16:13.920 --> 00:16:14.920 review that. 00:16:14.920 --> 00:16:18.160 And that's where they would also review any needed secondary containment that was not 00:16:18.160 --> 00:16:21.640 already there, anything like that. 00:16:21.640 --> 00:16:25.160 Thank you. 00:16:25.160 --> 00:16:31.920 On that note, the backup material talked about requiring additional permitting that you described 00:16:31.920 --> 00:16:35.380 if additional types of chemicals would be stored in the future. 00:16:35.380 --> 00:16:46.320 Is there any vehicle for those permits having a cap of the amount as far as, you know, hazardous 00:16:46.320 --> 00:16:51.920 materials, once you get over a certain amount of the fire safety becomes a different question, 00:16:51.920 --> 00:16:54.100 or is it really just the type of material? 00:16:54.100 --> 00:16:58.040 So the way that the table is written, there's each type of chemical and then what type of 00:16:58.040 --> 00:17:02.120 that kind of chemical it is, and then they have a certain maximum amount they can have 00:17:02.120 --> 00:17:05.520 per their control area, so if they have more than that amount per their control area, they 00:17:05.520 --> 00:17:07.200 need to create a new control area. 00:17:07.200 --> 00:17:09.400 Okay, and then that would require a new permit? 00:17:09.400 --> 00:17:10.400 Yes. 00:17:10.400 --> 00:17:11.400 Got it. 00:17:11.400 --> 00:17:12.400 Thank you. 00:17:12.400 --> 00:17:13.400 Anything else? 00:17:13.400 --> 00:17:16.400 Thank you very much. 00:17:16.400 --> 00:17:18.200 Thank you. 00:17:18.200 --> 00:17:30.080 Let's see, okay, and then we've got final public hearing, and that's item F, DCA 240003. 00:17:30.080 --> 00:17:39.760 Hello, Angie Manglars, Development Review Manager. 00:17:39.760 --> 00:17:43.200 This is DCA 240003. 00:17:43.200 --> 00:17:46.560 This is amendment to the Denton Development Code as it relates to conflicts with other 00:17:46.560 --> 00:17:49.400 ordinances and criteria manuals. 00:17:49.400 --> 00:17:55.400 So the purpose of this code amendment is to update the DDC subsection 1.3.4 as it relates 00:17:55.400 --> 00:17:58.640 to conflicts with other ordinances and criteria manuals. 00:17:58.640 --> 00:18:04.840 Specifically, this code amendment is to address the recent adoption of the Denton Design Criteria 00:18:04.840 --> 00:18:11.920 Manual, which was adopted by City Council on June 4th, and removing potential conflicts. 00:18:11.920 --> 00:18:17.080 The Denton Design Criteria Manual specifies that in the event of a conflict, the DDC shall 00:18:17.080 --> 00:18:18.080 control. 00:18:18.080 --> 00:18:22.560 As it is today, the DDC says that in the event of a conflict, the Criteria Manual shall control. 00:18:22.560 --> 00:18:26.280 So we are going to make sure that those are consistent, so it's not creating any conflicts. 00:18:26.280 --> 00:18:31.320 Removing a potential conflict, it's needed to help clarify the Denton Development Code 00:18:31.320 --> 00:18:36.800 and who shall govern, as well as we made some name updates to make sure we were referring 00:18:36.800 --> 00:18:41.200 to all the right manuals and removing those that we no longer use. 00:18:41.200 --> 00:18:45.240 And so for those reasons, we are recommending approval of the code amendments tonight. 00:18:45.240 --> 00:18:48.560 I'm happy to talk through any more if you need that. 00:18:48.560 --> 00:18:50.560 Any questions? 00:18:50.560 --> 00:18:53.520 No, it was presented perfectly in the backup, yes. 00:18:53.520 --> 00:18:54.520 Great. 00:18:54.520 --> 00:18:55.520 Exactly what we're looking at. 00:18:55.520 --> 00:18:56.520 Okay. 00:18:56.520 --> 00:18:57.520 Awesome. 00:18:57.520 --> 00:18:58.520 Thank you very much, Angie. 00:18:58.520 --> 00:18:59.520 Okay. 00:18:59.520 --> 00:19:00.520 That is it for our agenda tonight. 00:19:00.520 --> 00:19:03.280 We've got two work session reports. 00:19:03.280 --> 00:19:07.280 First one being 3A, PZ24089. 00:19:07.280 --> 00:19:10.360 That's receive a report, hold a discussion related to amending the Denton Development 00:19:10.360 --> 00:19:14.400 Code to establish community engagement agreement participation process. 00:19:14.400 --> 00:19:15.400 Hello. 00:19:15.400 --> 00:19:18.120 Nice to see you, Chair Ellis, if I could. 00:19:18.120 --> 00:19:21.640 So I know some of you had the opportunity to meet Keisha at a previous meeting where 00:19:21.640 --> 00:19:25.800 we introduced her at the end of the meeting, but I'm happy to have her join our team because 00:19:25.800 --> 00:19:29.560 she's been with us month and a half, two months, almost two months. 00:19:29.560 --> 00:19:35.320 So Keisha has nearly 20 years of experience working in local government in a variety of 00:19:35.320 --> 00:19:36.320 capacities. 00:19:36.320 --> 00:19:39.760 Her most recent employment was with the city of Plano, where she was over their neighborhood 00:19:39.760 --> 00:19:42.840 engagement team, as well as some of their housing programs. 00:19:42.840 --> 00:19:46.840 And so she has an extensive amount of experience when it comes to public engagement. 00:19:46.840 --> 00:19:51.080 So we're excited to tap into her skills and resources that we can employ those here in 00:19:51.080 --> 00:19:52.080 Denton. 00:19:52.080 --> 00:19:53.080 But she's been a great addition so far. 00:19:53.080 --> 00:19:54.680 So I'm going to turn it over to her. 00:19:54.680 --> 00:19:55.680 Thank you. 00:19:55.680 --> 00:19:56.680 Hi, Keisha. 00:19:56.680 --> 00:19:57.680 Good evening, Chair and Commissioner. 00:19:57.680 --> 00:20:02.560 I'm Keisha Siriano, Assistant Planning Director, here to speak with you tonight about the possibility 00:20:02.560 --> 00:20:07.840 of adding community engagement agreement incentives as an opportunity for our developers to increase 00:20:07.840 --> 00:20:09.640 their public engagement. 00:20:09.640 --> 00:20:14.800 We understand that City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as staff, like 00:20:14.800 --> 00:20:18.800 to see developers to interact and engage with the community. 00:20:18.800 --> 00:20:23.960 So this is an option that we want to present to you today and get your thoughts on. 00:20:23.960 --> 00:20:29.640 So the current code does recommend citizen participation, but it's a recommendation, 00:20:29.640 --> 00:20:31.640 so it's optional. 00:20:31.640 --> 00:20:37.800 There is a citizen participation plan noted in there, as well as a participation report. 00:20:37.800 --> 00:20:44.360 The staff provides mailing addresses for those developers who would like to have neighborhood 00:20:44.360 --> 00:20:45.360 meetings. 00:20:45.360 --> 00:20:49.680 The staff does attend those when they're available, but in the last five years, what we found 00:20:49.680 --> 00:20:56.400 is we haven't had anyone submit a citizen participation report or a plan. 00:20:56.400 --> 00:21:02.880 So we thought, what can we do to possibly entice our development community to have more 00:21:02.880 --> 00:21:08.120 engagement with the community, which brings us to our why. 00:21:08.120 --> 00:21:13.560 So this is a staff-initiated amendment, again, just wanting to increase engagement between 00:21:13.560 --> 00:21:15.920 developers and residents as well. 00:21:15.920 --> 00:21:19.840 And we know neighborhood engagement is important, and as I mentioned, it's very important to 00:21:19.840 --> 00:21:23.520 our decision-making bodies, as well as staff. 00:21:23.520 --> 00:21:28.200 And when developers have the opportunity to speak with residents up front, that kind of 00:21:28.200 --> 00:21:32.460 minimizes some of the issues that may come up during a public hearing. 00:21:32.460 --> 00:21:36.240 They can hear the concerns that community may have and be able to work some of those 00:21:36.240 --> 00:21:43.400 things out beforehand and hopefully minimize any delays they may have with their projects. 00:21:43.400 --> 00:21:48.640 So how do we incentivize our applicants to engage with the community? 00:21:48.640 --> 00:21:52.580 That's a question we're going to discuss tonight. 00:21:52.580 --> 00:21:59.520 So we are considering to offer incentives for developers that move into creating, establishing 00:21:59.520 --> 00:22:02.940 a community engagement agreement with neighborhood representatives. 00:22:02.940 --> 00:22:09.480 So a community engagement agreement is a document between an applicant, so it'll be with a developer, 00:22:09.480 --> 00:22:14.760 an applicant and neighborhoods, and they will work together to try to figure out what does 00:22:14.760 --> 00:22:20.640 the neighborhood want and what could the developer possibly provide, whether it's on-site or 00:22:20.640 --> 00:22:26.560 off-site, and then in exchange for the developer, the applicant saying, "We'll take care of 00:22:26.560 --> 00:22:31.480 these things you're in need of," residents will say, "We'll give their support on your 00:22:31.480 --> 00:22:32.480 project." 00:22:32.480 --> 00:22:39.480 So here's just a list of examples of some things that they may could discuss such as 00:22:39.480 --> 00:22:45.760 providing job training classes, employment opportunities, affordable housing units, providing 00:22:45.760 --> 00:22:51.680 open space within their site that the public could use, doing some screening and buffering 00:22:51.680 --> 00:22:57.000 adjacent to the neighborhood, architectural designs, a number of different things that 00:22:57.000 --> 00:23:02.680 the neighborhood could negotiate with the applicant to provide in exchange for them 00:23:02.680 --> 00:23:04.880 supporting their project. 00:23:04.880 --> 00:23:07.120 Here's just a couple of local examples. 00:23:07.120 --> 00:23:10.960 You all may remember I wasn't here, but some of you may have been here when there was a 00:23:10.960 --> 00:23:13.000 380 multifamily project. 00:23:13.000 --> 00:23:19.680 The applicant did submit a memorandum of understanding with the neighborhood, the neighborhood was 00:23:19.680 --> 00:23:25.840 requesting more architectural design to do more farmhouse design, and in exchange, they 00:23:25.840 --> 00:23:27.920 did do that to developer. 00:23:27.920 --> 00:23:31.960 They did come to agreement to be able to do those things, and then you also may also remember 00:23:31.960 --> 00:23:37.760 the Woodrow multifamily project where they offered the community scholarships in support 00:23:37.760 --> 00:23:42.880 of their development. 00:23:42.880 --> 00:23:46.260 So this is just a starting list. 00:23:46.260 --> 00:23:50.220 There may be other incentives we may, if this gets approved later down the line when we 00:23:50.220 --> 00:23:56.680 come back, we may add more incentives, but just to start we were thinking that they could, 00:23:56.680 --> 00:24:03.680 if they submit an executed agreement between the neighborhood and the applicant concurrent 00:24:03.680 --> 00:24:09.520 submittal of zoning compliance plan as well as a civil engineering plan, and then also 00:24:09.520 --> 00:24:15.240 insure, excuse me, of the clearing grade permit after the final plan has been approved. 00:24:15.240 --> 00:24:20.800 So what were they, so the items that we have here that they will need in order for them 00:24:20.800 --> 00:24:26.080 to receive the incentives, they need to submit that executed agreement, and the agreement 00:24:26.080 --> 00:24:32.120 would be with 51%, we're going to require that they reach out to 51% of the property 00:24:32.120 --> 00:24:38.280 owners within 500 feet of the project site, and then we're going to also ask them to get 00:24:38.280 --> 00:24:44.440 unique signatures from 51% of property owners within the project site. 00:24:44.440 --> 00:24:51.840 If there is an HOA within the neighborhood, they can choose to have the HOA represent 00:24:51.840 --> 00:24:54.920 them when their negotiations with the applicant. 00:24:54.920 --> 00:24:58.760 Can I stop you there? 00:24:58.760 --> 00:25:05.400 I'm a little confused on the, like the neighborhood representative and who that would be and how 00:25:05.400 --> 00:25:09.040 you would vet signatures and whatnot. 00:25:09.040 --> 00:25:10.040 Can you help me there? 00:25:10.040 --> 00:25:13.760 I mean, especially if they're, like a neighborhood doesn't have an HOA, then there's not really 00:25:13.760 --> 00:25:19.880 a designated body running something in representation of the neighborhood. 00:25:19.880 --> 00:25:24.160 We haven't discussed that part, but I'd imagine those addresses that we would send out the 00:25:24.160 --> 00:25:28.840 notifications that we would still be responsible for helping the developer do that piece. 00:25:28.840 --> 00:25:32.680 And on that sign-in sheet where they will sign and say, "We agree to this project. 00:25:32.680 --> 00:25:36.160 We agree to the needs that we've negotiated." 00:25:36.160 --> 00:25:40.640 There would need to be, that's why I was saying, unique signature and address tied to those 00:25:40.640 --> 00:25:45.080 that list, that's what I'm thinking that'll do, I don't know if Tina has any other thoughts 00:25:45.080 --> 00:25:46.600 on how we would verify. 00:25:46.600 --> 00:25:51.880 Yes, just like we do on any zoning cases that you all receive, when we receive letters in 00:25:51.880 --> 00:25:56.600 opposition or in support, we look to see, okay, are they within the 200 foot notification 00:25:56.600 --> 00:26:00.160 that we do in addition to the 500 foot postcards that we send out. 00:26:00.160 --> 00:26:04.240 So this process really is no different than what we do on our zoning cases. 00:26:04.240 --> 00:26:08.880 The other thing I want to make mention is, and it's on the slide, but Tisha didn't mention 00:26:08.880 --> 00:26:13.520 in her words that this agreement option would be submitted concurrently only with zoning 00:26:13.520 --> 00:26:16.760 changes or specific use permit applications. 00:26:16.760 --> 00:26:22.800 Once properties are already entitled, there's no incentive for the developer to further 00:26:22.800 --> 00:26:25.300 meet because they already have their zoning entitlement rights. 00:26:25.300 --> 00:26:31.480 So we're trying to further strengthen our engagement process and help provide some incentive 00:26:31.480 --> 00:26:36.560 for the development community to be able to engage with those neighborhoods. 00:26:36.560 --> 00:26:40.440 And so we're limiting this to zoning change requests or specific use permits. 00:26:40.440 --> 00:26:44.000 So those zoning change requests are like plan development district requests that we get, 00:26:44.000 --> 00:26:48.920 straight zoning requests, PD overlays that sometimes come through, specific use permits. 00:26:48.920 --> 00:26:54.400 Those are all forms of a zoning action where the developer has to go through that entitlement 00:26:54.400 --> 00:27:00.400 process because they're ultimately trying to get to approval, right? 00:27:00.400 --> 00:27:03.640 And we'd always encourage them to engage with the neighborhoods. 00:27:03.640 --> 00:27:08.920 So we were like, okay, what could we do to help with incentivizing them to engage with 00:27:08.920 --> 00:27:11.040 those neighborhoods just a little bit more? 00:27:11.040 --> 00:27:15.720 And so the other thing we've decided to focus on those items where we can control that process 00:27:15.720 --> 00:27:16.720 in terms of those incentives. 00:27:16.720 --> 00:27:21.040 And that's why we've linked it to our zoning compliance plan being processed simultaneously 00:27:21.040 --> 00:27:22.560 with civil engineering plans. 00:27:22.560 --> 00:27:27.720 Our preference normally is that those are kept apart and someone does their zoning compliance 00:27:27.720 --> 00:27:28.720 plan first. 00:27:28.720 --> 00:27:33.600 And then once they get that step approved, then they come in with their civils. 00:27:33.600 --> 00:27:34.600 That's our preference. 00:27:34.600 --> 00:27:38.440 However, we find that if someone's going to go through the effort of truly engaging with 00:27:38.440 --> 00:27:43.720 the neighborhood and in helping come into a better design project and having agreement, 00:27:43.720 --> 00:27:48.080 then what can we do to be able to help on the development side of it to maybe gain a 00:27:48.080 --> 00:27:49.640 little bit of that time back. 00:27:49.640 --> 00:27:53.040 The other that we think will really be popular with the development community is the issuance 00:27:53.040 --> 00:27:57.880 of the clearing grade permit prior to final plan approval, but provided that the civil 00:27:57.880 --> 00:28:02.280 engineering plans have been approved. 00:28:02.280 --> 00:28:06.560 We will not issue a clearing grade permit today until those CEPs have been approved. 00:28:06.560 --> 00:28:11.280 And we typically require the final plat to be recorded, but we feel like we have other 00:28:11.280 --> 00:28:15.760 safeguards in place where this is something that we can offer up to be able to allow someone 00:28:15.760 --> 00:28:23.120 to start moving dirt on property in exchange for them taking that extra time to make sure 00:28:23.120 --> 00:28:25.920 they engage with the community. 00:28:25.920 --> 00:28:33.680 It seems slightly scary to allow a clearing grade permit without a final plat and okay. 00:28:33.680 --> 00:28:34.680 Right. 00:28:34.680 --> 00:28:40.480 So it is, we believe that we have enough other checks and balances in place to be able to 00:28:40.480 --> 00:28:41.480 address it. 00:28:41.480 --> 00:28:45.120 And the key thing is the civil engineering plans have to be approved because if the civil 00:28:45.120 --> 00:28:48.600 engineering plans are not approved, then we're not going to turn anybody loose to start moving 00:28:48.600 --> 00:28:49.600 any dirt. 00:28:49.600 --> 00:28:51.200 I mean, that's what it comes down to. 00:28:51.200 --> 00:28:52.200 Okay. 00:28:52.200 --> 00:28:53.200 Questions? 00:28:53.200 --> 00:28:54.200 Commissioner Pruitt. 00:28:54.200 --> 00:28:55.200 Thank you, Chair. 00:28:55.200 --> 00:28:58.640 Just a few things. 00:28:58.640 --> 00:29:05.480 So one on the clearing grade permit question, it says, you know, erosion control and tree 00:29:05.480 --> 00:29:10.560 protection fencing have been installed and expected. 00:29:10.560 --> 00:29:15.860 I believe final plat, one of the requirements is the tree preservation plan, and that flows 00:29:15.860 --> 00:29:18.000 into which trees get protected. 00:29:18.000 --> 00:29:25.960 So is the proposal that we could allow that clearing grade permit after the tree preservation 00:29:25.960 --> 00:29:32.960 plan has been submitted and that fencing is erected, but before the final plat is filed? 00:29:32.960 --> 00:29:38.360 So the, in order for us to approve the civil engineering plans, we make sure, and Haley, 00:29:38.360 --> 00:29:42.560 correct me if I'm wrong, but before we approve those civil engineering plans, we make sure 00:29:42.560 --> 00:29:47.920 that the tree preservation has also been approved because we realize that those go hand in hand, 00:29:47.920 --> 00:29:53.800 so as we review civil engineering plans, if there are grading changes that are being made 00:29:53.800 --> 00:29:57.840 or utility easements that are being shifted that are gonna impact trees that were originally 00:29:57.840 --> 00:30:01.600 designated for preservation, then we have the applicant update their tree preservation 00:30:01.600 --> 00:30:03.980 plan because they still have that responsibility. 00:30:03.980 --> 00:30:07.640 So that's why we make sure that the tree preservation, that will still be addressed. 00:30:07.640 --> 00:30:11.400 It still has to be approved before those CEPs are approved. 00:30:11.400 --> 00:30:15.360 The other thing we do is we also make sure that that tree protection fencing is in place 00:30:15.360 --> 00:30:20.760 and has been inspected because we're, and that's part of our process today. 00:30:20.760 --> 00:30:25.720 So we're just making sure that you don't get to go pass go and start moving dirt unless 00:30:25.720 --> 00:30:28.720 you've got your tree protection fencing installed. 00:30:28.720 --> 00:30:30.880 So that's just a reaffirmation of what we do today. 00:30:30.880 --> 00:30:31.880 - Okay. 00:30:31.880 --> 00:30:37.200 And then I guess two questions about sort of the thresholds of engagement. 00:30:37.200 --> 00:30:44.480 Can you explain what the thought is to focus on property owners instead of residents or 00:30:44.480 --> 00:30:48.440 business proprietors within that area? 00:30:48.440 --> 00:30:55.080 - We did, initially we were thinking what she mentioned earlier was HOAs, but understanding 00:30:55.080 --> 00:31:00.880 that some neighborhoods don't have one, they don't even have a organized group. 00:31:00.880 --> 00:31:05.320 So then we switched and said maybe we just focus on the property owners. 00:31:05.320 --> 00:31:06.320 - Okay. 00:31:06.320 --> 00:31:13.440 There's a lot of times we get proposals that are nearby to many residents that are not 00:31:13.440 --> 00:31:14.600 property owners. 00:31:14.600 --> 00:31:19.840 So I'm not saying that that should be changed, I was just curious whether that had come up. 00:31:19.840 --> 00:31:28.360 And then can you explain the threshold of 51%, the way it reads it looks like 51% of 00:31:28.360 --> 00:31:35.140 the number of property owners, which is a little different than the 20% of land area 00:31:35.140 --> 00:31:39.880 within the perimeter, and then the 51% is different than the 20%, right? 00:31:39.880 --> 00:31:45.880 So I'm just trying to understand what the thought is, where we came up with that proposal. 00:31:45.880 --> 00:31:50.720 - Do you want me to address that or do you want... 00:31:50.720 --> 00:31:53.720 - I almost get right to you, but... 00:31:53.720 --> 00:31:54.720 - Go right ahead. 00:31:54.720 --> 00:31:55.720 Go right ahead. 00:31:55.720 --> 00:31:59.920 - 51%, that's the energy, I mean energy, that's the industry standard, it's the majority. 00:31:59.920 --> 00:32:02.440 And then what was that a part of your question? 00:32:02.440 --> 00:32:10.720 Is the fact that this language seems like it's the majority of the people who own property 00:32:10.720 --> 00:32:17.440 within that border, as opposed to the people who represent the majority of the land within 00:32:17.440 --> 00:32:25.360 the border, which is the way the triggering language in state law requires super majority 00:32:25.360 --> 00:32:29.160 vote at council, for instance, if they're above a 20% denial, right? 00:32:29.160 --> 00:32:30.680 - Do you want to... 00:32:30.680 --> 00:32:31.680 - Sure thing. 00:32:31.680 --> 00:32:33.040 - That's a great question. 00:32:33.040 --> 00:32:39.800 So we were focusing on the residents themselves that had the ownership, but you make a good 00:32:39.800 --> 00:32:46.160 point that right now on the 200 foot notification, for example, what triggers the super majority 00:32:46.160 --> 00:32:51.040 vote at city council is based upon 20% of the ownership within the notification area. 00:32:51.040 --> 00:32:59.800 So if that's something that the commission is interested in us modifying, we can do that. 00:32:59.800 --> 00:33:01.020 Just need that direction from you. 00:33:01.020 --> 00:33:09.960 So if you believe that the property owners that represent 51% or more of the area within 00:33:09.960 --> 00:33:19.280 the 500 foot boundary need to be the ones that are carrying heavier weight, I guess, 00:33:19.280 --> 00:33:24.040 in the decision-making process, that's something that we can definitely look into. 00:33:24.040 --> 00:33:29.080 Our challenge is we have the 200 foot rule that we have to abide by state law, but we 00:33:29.080 --> 00:33:35.560 also send out the courtesy postcards to all residents or I guess their utility bill holders 00:33:35.560 --> 00:33:39.960 within 500 feet, because we recognize that we have some folks that are not owners of 00:33:39.960 --> 00:33:40.960 the land, right? 00:33:40.960 --> 00:33:41.960 They're renters. 00:33:41.960 --> 00:33:44.220 They don't own the unit that they live within. 00:33:44.220 --> 00:33:48.520 So we were trying to draw some parallels there, hence why we laid it on the 500 feet, trying 00:33:48.520 --> 00:33:51.840 to go further out to be able to engage the neighborhood. 00:33:51.840 --> 00:33:55.800 But happy to receive, if there's concurrence from the commission for us to change that 00:33:55.800 --> 00:34:03.920 to be focused on 51% of ownership representative of the land area within the 500 foot zone, 00:34:03.920 --> 00:34:05.480 then we're happy to do that. 00:34:05.480 --> 00:34:07.400 And that's why we're having this discussion with you. 00:34:07.400 --> 00:34:08.400 Sure. 00:34:08.400 --> 00:34:09.400 Yeah. 00:34:09.400 --> 00:34:15.240 I mean, I was just curious where the proposal came from primarily. 00:34:15.240 --> 00:34:22.740 I think the land ownership rule, while it's codified in state law, is limiting and confusing 00:34:22.740 --> 00:34:28.480 and gets us into situations where there's a large number of people that don't have 00:34:28.480 --> 00:34:34.880 control over very much of the perimeter of the land or the opposite, right? 00:34:34.880 --> 00:34:41.120 So my preference, I guess, from a community engagement perspective would be the number 00:34:41.120 --> 00:34:51.000 of residents or business operators within that area and not to be land. 00:34:51.000 --> 00:34:58.040 But I want to be sensitive that part of the reason for doing this is to make sure they 00:34:58.040 --> 00:35:06.000 have an increased success rate, if you will, that there's general agreement once it comes 00:35:06.000 --> 00:35:08.540 to planning and zoning and then council. 00:35:08.540 --> 00:35:14.640 So I don't want to suggest that we do something that then gives you less of a confidence in 00:35:14.640 --> 00:35:15.640 that manner. 00:35:15.640 --> 00:35:16.640 Does that make sense? 00:35:16.640 --> 00:35:17.640 I think so. 00:35:17.640 --> 00:35:18.640 So yeah. 00:35:18.640 --> 00:35:25.960 And then the last thing, it just flew out of my head, oh, yes. 00:35:25.960 --> 00:35:32.320 In drafting these rules, were there current or previous developers that we reached out 00:35:32.320 --> 00:35:40.960 to to try to understand whether the thresholds and the incentives were a package that would 00:35:40.960 --> 00:35:42.760 be enticing to them? 00:35:42.760 --> 00:35:50.040 We haven't spoken to anyone specifically about this specific but what kind of prompt this 00:35:50.040 --> 00:35:54.360 was a member of an understanding I mentioned previously from that developer that actually 00:35:54.360 --> 00:36:00.320 was successfully worked out a deal with the community to change their architectural standards. 00:36:00.320 --> 00:36:05.880 So that was a question that we thought was going to be asked and we haven't yet, but 00:36:05.880 --> 00:36:06.880 we can. 00:36:06.880 --> 00:36:07.880 Yeah. 00:36:07.880 --> 00:36:10.040 Keshia, this is kind of in brainstorming stage still, isn't it? 00:36:10.040 --> 00:36:11.040 Right? 00:36:11.040 --> 00:36:12.040 Yes. 00:36:12.040 --> 00:36:16.720 So I guess one correction, we did reach out to Amy Bassett because she's done a fair amount 00:36:16.720 --> 00:36:20.640 of engagement, particularly because in Keshia's side of this on, I think it was her previous 00:36:20.640 --> 00:36:26.560 slide, when we had that multifamily request, I believe it was Mia's zoning case, the 380 00:36:26.560 --> 00:36:27.560 multifamily project. 00:36:27.560 --> 00:36:32.320 If you recall, Amy mentioned we had a memorandum of understanding. 00:36:32.320 --> 00:36:38.960 And in that particular example, I believe it was the HOA representatives were negotiating 00:36:38.960 --> 00:36:42.020 on behalf of the neighborhood, but that's the project that started out where they were 00:36:42.020 --> 00:36:46.000 trying to rezone a portion of property at MN so they could get the access and then council 00:36:46.000 --> 00:36:49.160 sent it back and was interested in more of a planned development district. 00:36:49.160 --> 00:36:52.880 And so they pulled all of the property in and then they were able to work with the nearby 00:36:52.880 --> 00:36:56.920 neighborhood and Amy had come forth with that memorandum of understanding. 00:36:56.920 --> 00:37:00.440 And so we were like, okay, how can we build upon that? 00:37:00.440 --> 00:37:03.800 If that seemed to be very well received from the Planning and Zoning Commission as well 00:37:03.800 --> 00:37:08.560 as particularly council, so we're like, okay, maybe she's onto something here and how can 00:37:08.560 --> 00:37:15.000 we build upon that and be able to put something in our development code that would possibly 00:37:15.000 --> 00:37:17.040 entice others to do something similar? 00:37:17.040 --> 00:37:18.040 Okay. 00:37:18.040 --> 00:37:23.800 Yeah, I think it looks like a good first start. 00:37:23.800 --> 00:37:34.640 My only real comment that doesn't seem incorporated is a way to make sure that this is feasible 00:37:34.640 --> 00:37:38.960 for smaller developments and smaller zoning changes, if you will. 00:37:38.960 --> 00:37:44.440 For instance, if you're talking about a 500 foot border, that's 10 neighbors on either 00:37:44.440 --> 00:37:49.440 side, that's like 100 neighbors that you have to talk to. 00:37:49.440 --> 00:37:56.080 And if you're just doing a single or a two lot rezoning, that seems burdensome, a little 00:37:56.080 --> 00:38:03.080 bit more than what the area might be, but just a thought, so thank you. 00:38:03.080 --> 00:38:06.880 Okay, before we move on, do you have more of your presentation? 00:38:06.880 --> 00:38:07.880 Yes. 00:38:07.880 --> 00:38:12.120 Why don't I let you continue and then just write your questions down just so we don't 00:38:12.120 --> 00:38:15.920 get too bogged down before she has told us everything, because a lot of things might 00:38:15.920 --> 00:38:17.400 be answered on the next slide. 00:38:17.400 --> 00:38:23.520 So just want to discuss briefly the limitations. 00:38:23.520 --> 00:38:28.000 So agreements, when they're submitted to us, they must clearly state the terms and conditions 00:38:28.000 --> 00:38:32.400 for the timeframe, but when those performance commitments are going to be made, they cannot 00:38:32.400 --> 00:38:36.200 conflict with any other regulatory documents within the city. 00:38:36.200 --> 00:38:44.200 The city will not be enforcing them, however, if we do hear that the developer has failed 00:38:44.200 --> 00:38:49.040 to perform or defaulted on what they promised the neighborhood, that may impact their ability 00:38:49.040 --> 00:38:55.480 to apply for eligible for centers in the future. 00:38:55.480 --> 00:38:59.280 So neighbor engagement, so we mentioned earlier in our conversation, and we know it's very 00:38:59.280 --> 00:39:05.000 important in our community, so we will continue to, citizen participation that's already in 00:39:05.000 --> 00:39:10.480 the code, we will still follow those and still encourage our developers to have those neighborhood 00:39:10.480 --> 00:39:11.480 meetings. 00:39:11.480 --> 00:39:17.040 But one thing we've done recently is we've created a flyer to help developers when they're 00:39:17.040 --> 00:39:21.240 communicating with neighborhood residents about their projects. 00:39:21.240 --> 00:39:25.720 And so we're planning to get this posted on our website as well as be available at our 00:39:25.720 --> 00:39:30.680 front desk and during pre-application meetings and wherever else we find that it could be 00:39:30.680 --> 00:39:38.800 a resource for our developer community. 00:39:38.800 --> 00:39:42.440 That concludes my presentation, I'm open for questions. 00:39:42.440 --> 00:39:49.760 So knowing this is just in like brainstorming capacity and all that, do you have a timeline 00:39:49.760 --> 00:39:52.040 of other, like what you want to do from here? 00:39:52.040 --> 00:39:55.920 I mean, we're just talking about it now, okay, so here we go. 00:39:55.920 --> 00:39:56.920 Yes. 00:39:56.920 --> 00:40:01.880 So tonight we want to get your feedback, we'll go back and discuss some of the comments and 00:40:01.880 --> 00:40:06.400 items that you've asked us to look into, but we're planning to bring it back to you for 00:40:06.400 --> 00:40:11.480 a public hearing July 17 and council August 6th. 00:40:11.480 --> 00:40:12.480 For action then? 00:40:12.480 --> 00:40:13.480 Yes. 00:40:13.480 --> 00:40:14.480 Understood. 00:40:14.480 --> 00:40:15.480 Okay. 00:40:15.480 --> 00:40:16.480 Question, Commissioner Thacker. 00:40:16.480 --> 00:40:21.300 So I've got a few questions, sorry. 00:40:21.300 --> 00:40:26.000 So what happens in the event that the HOA representative isn't actually living within 00:40:26.000 --> 00:40:30.080 500 feet of the change, right? 00:40:30.080 --> 00:40:33.360 So if you have a neighborhood and you have a representative that lives on the other side 00:40:33.360 --> 00:40:37.960 of the neighborhood and they're the acting decision maker, but they don't have to look 00:40:37.960 --> 00:40:43.680 at it, I think that's something maybe to be considered, right? 00:40:43.680 --> 00:40:47.280 The other thing I wanted to ask is who determines what the greatest need of the neighborhood 00:40:47.280 --> 00:40:48.280 is? 00:40:48.280 --> 00:40:49.280 And that's a twofold issue. 00:40:49.280 --> 00:40:56.560 Number one, you want to make sure that, you know, it's whatever is going to benefit the 00:40:56.560 --> 00:40:58.240 neighborhood the most, right? 00:40:58.240 --> 00:41:01.840 And sorry, something just flew out of my head. 00:41:01.840 --> 00:41:07.200 I think it could also, the other part was I think it could also further delay development. 00:41:07.200 --> 00:41:10.380 So if you're trying to get consensus with everybody in the neighborhood and everybody 00:41:10.380 --> 00:41:14.620 starts out thinking, "Oh, well, I think we should really press for an architectural facade 00:41:14.620 --> 00:41:18.880 of a certain building," and then another group is like, "Yeah, we thought about that, but 00:41:18.880 --> 00:41:22.520 maybe we should also do this," meanwhile the developer is sitting there waiting to decide 00:41:22.520 --> 00:41:25.680 whether or not he's even going to be able to break ground. 00:41:25.680 --> 00:41:28.680 And I think in an attempt to make something go faster, we could actually be making it 00:41:28.680 --> 00:41:31.480 go much slower. 00:41:31.480 --> 00:41:39.240 And then finally, you know, getting 51% of a group of people to agree to something, you 00:41:39.240 --> 00:41:43.320 hope that the other 49% are just, you know, don't care, right? 00:41:43.320 --> 00:41:48.620 But if they do care and you're setting 51% of a group of people against 49% of a group 00:41:48.620 --> 00:41:54.400 of people that live right across the street from each other, then you have an issue. 00:41:54.400 --> 00:41:57.720 So those are just things I think maybe we need to consider. 00:41:57.720 --> 00:42:02.080 It's one thing for, I don't know, you know, a council to be divided. 00:42:02.080 --> 00:42:06.960 It's another thing for a neighborhood that lives right across the street from each other 00:42:06.960 --> 00:42:11.540 to not get along because they decided to take a different approach and vote a different 00:42:11.540 --> 00:42:13.520 way on how this is organized. 00:42:13.520 --> 00:42:20.400 >> If I could offer a response to that, so this really isn't any different than present 00:42:20.400 --> 00:42:28.000 day, right, from a standpoint of developer goes and engages with neighborhood and is 00:42:28.000 --> 00:42:33.440 dealing with a group of folks that may have differing opinions. 00:42:33.440 --> 00:42:34.440 And we saw that. 00:42:34.440 --> 00:42:36.520 The St. Mark's zoning case is a good example of that. 00:42:36.520 --> 00:42:41.280 We had some folks who, you know, some people were saying, well, you know, the neighborhood 00:42:41.280 --> 00:42:45.400 park is used heavily and others were saying, well, no, it's not really. 00:42:45.400 --> 00:42:49.400 And yes, we've got these concerns in the neighborhood but others are saying, you know, no, it might. 00:42:49.400 --> 00:42:56.200 So any neighborhood engagement potentially has differing viewpoints being expressed. 00:42:56.200 --> 00:43:03.520 So you know, the HOA representative, to your point, if they don't live within the 500 feet, 00:43:03.520 --> 00:43:08.380 that's up to the neighborhood residents themselves to decide if they want the HOA to represent 00:43:08.380 --> 00:43:10.680 them or who from their HOA. 00:43:10.680 --> 00:43:15.320 You know, not all neighborhoods in Denton have HOA representation. 00:43:15.320 --> 00:43:19.240 So it's really the neighbors themselves, we're trying to put the power in the neighborhoods 00:43:19.240 --> 00:43:24.200 for them to decide who is going to speak and represent them. 00:43:24.200 --> 00:43:29.040 It's also, you know, but that's no different today when developer comes and is trying to 00:43:29.040 --> 00:43:34.920 engage with the neighborhood and, you know, who's going to lead the discussions with the 00:43:34.920 --> 00:43:35.920 developer. 00:43:35.920 --> 00:43:41.920 So, you know, for us to try and put forth an opportunity for an agreement, you know, 00:43:41.920 --> 00:43:46.160 we had to establish some sort of parameters and we had a fair amount of conversation on 00:43:46.160 --> 00:43:52.200 this last week also because previously we didn't set a geographic area to it. 00:43:52.200 --> 00:43:55.360 But to your point, it's like, okay, well, then who all gets to participate, right? 00:43:55.360 --> 00:44:03.720 So we decided, all right, we need to define a geographic area to represent who is in support 00:44:03.720 --> 00:44:08.000 or not at least for when it comes to this agreement. 00:44:08.000 --> 00:44:11.360 Doing all of this neighborhood engagement, yes, it does lengthen process. 00:44:11.360 --> 00:44:13.600 I mean, we've seen that with projects. 00:44:13.600 --> 00:44:17.320 This had spoken to that as well when she did the memorandum of understanding. 00:44:17.320 --> 00:44:23.160 I think they did 14 months worth of public engagement that, you know, she was -- their 00:44:23.160 --> 00:44:26.120 team was going to be doing that public engagement regardless, right? 00:44:26.120 --> 00:44:31.960 So, you know, they're -- in talking with her, and I'm not trying to put words in her mouth, 00:44:31.960 --> 00:44:35.960 but the way that we understood it from our conversations with her is that there is an 00:44:35.960 --> 00:44:40.520 opportunity then if we're going to go through this extensive public engagement process and 00:44:40.520 --> 00:44:45.360 really try to be responsive to the neighborhood, is there something that we could potentially 00:44:45.360 --> 00:44:51.880 get in return to offset the length of time that might have been spent? 00:44:51.880 --> 00:44:55.360 So for us, that's why we looked at from a process standpoint, what can we offer from 00:44:55.360 --> 00:44:56.360 a process? 00:44:56.360 --> 00:45:00.360 And so, you know, hence the clearing grade, we get requests all the time on a regular 00:45:00.360 --> 00:45:01.360 basis. 00:45:01.360 --> 00:45:02.360 Can we get under construction sooner? 00:45:02.360 --> 00:45:04.000 Can we move dirt sooner? 00:45:04.000 --> 00:45:09.480 So we're like, okay, maybe we leverage that clearing grade permit to encourage folks to 00:45:09.480 --> 00:45:14.080 -- or to encourage the development community to do the public engagement. 00:45:14.080 --> 00:45:18.680 And we tell them on a regular basis, and I bet, you know, my -- the peanut gallery in 00:45:18.680 --> 00:45:20.600 the back there would all shake their heads, yes. 00:45:20.600 --> 00:45:24.440 You know, when we do pre-application conferences with people, we tell them, look, it's imperative 00:45:24.440 --> 00:45:28.320 you engage the neighborhood or, you know, especially anything near ranch estates. 00:45:28.320 --> 00:45:31.960 We know some of the challenges there, the Denia neighborhood, right? 00:45:31.960 --> 00:45:36.280 But all the neighborhoods, we tell folks, make sure you engage the neighborhoods. 00:45:36.280 --> 00:45:41.400 Do your public engagement efforts, and, you know, we've seen some applicants come before 00:45:41.400 --> 00:45:45.620 the Planning and Zoning Commission who did not do any engagement despite what we told 00:45:45.620 --> 00:45:49.440 them to, and you all sent them packing and said, go back and go do the neighborhood engagement 00:45:49.440 --> 00:45:51.320 before you come back with your request. 00:45:51.320 --> 00:45:55.800 So we're -- you know, we continue to push on that front, but our thought was, what can 00:45:55.800 --> 00:46:02.760 we do to help better support in -- and encourage that development community to do the neighborhood 00:46:02.760 --> 00:46:03.760 engagement? 00:46:03.760 --> 00:46:07.240 And so that's why we thought, you know, there might be some value to putting this in there. 00:46:07.240 --> 00:46:11.160 You know, right now we have in the code the Citizen Participation Plan, but nobody utilizes 00:46:11.160 --> 00:46:12.160 it. 00:46:12.160 --> 00:46:14.440 It's all encouraged and recommendations, right? 00:46:14.440 --> 00:46:17.960 So it was like, okay, what can we do just to help entice the development community to 00:46:17.960 --> 00:46:22.280 give them something in exchange for doing the neighborhood engagement? 00:46:22.280 --> 00:46:27.880 Just as a follow up -- Sure. 00:46:27.880 --> 00:46:33.320 -- what happens in the event that they go so far as to entertain this idea until they 00:46:33.320 --> 00:46:36.680 get the permit, and then, you know, they're left in the dust, the neighborhoods left in 00:46:36.680 --> 00:46:38.040 the dust? 00:46:38.040 --> 00:46:39.040 So that's a great question. 00:46:39.040 --> 00:46:42.040 Keisha, do you want to take a first attempt at that, or do you want me to? 00:46:42.040 --> 00:46:44.080 I think that was on the previous slide where they would -- 00:46:44.080 --> 00:46:45.080 Yeah, it was on the slide. 00:46:45.080 --> 00:46:46.080 Yeah, where they would not be entitled. 00:46:46.080 --> 00:46:51.160 We're not going to enforce, but we do -- we are proposing to add in here. 00:46:51.160 --> 00:46:57.680 If we hear that the developer did not do what they said they were going to do, that that 00:46:57.680 --> 00:47:01.200 would impact their ability to apply for incentives in the future. 00:47:01.200 --> 00:47:02.200 Okay. 00:47:02.200 --> 00:47:07.320 Is there -- to anyone else, is there just the mildest hint that we're trying to like 00:47:07.320 --> 00:47:09.360 legislate behavior here? 00:47:09.360 --> 00:47:12.480 Sorry, I just didn't -- No, you're good. 00:47:12.480 --> 00:47:13.480 Okay. 00:47:13.480 --> 00:47:14.480 I'm going to let somebody else speak. 00:47:14.480 --> 00:47:15.480 Commissioner Cole. 00:47:15.480 --> 00:47:16.480 Thank you, Chair. 00:47:16.480 --> 00:47:21.140 I mean, this, in my mind, is a solution looking for a problem. 00:47:21.140 --> 00:47:23.200 We already go through this. 00:47:23.200 --> 00:47:31.040 I mean, this is just adding a process -- we are already the most process-heavy municipality 00:47:31.040 --> 00:47:38.120 in development in the Metroplex, if not the state, of our size. 00:47:38.120 --> 00:47:41.920 And this is adding another hurdle. 00:47:41.920 --> 00:47:48.640 And I mean, if we let neighborhoods veto development, it would still be like we were in 1963. 00:47:48.640 --> 00:47:54.680 Well, I don't think this necessarily -- I realize that, but I'm getting extraordinary 00:47:54.680 --> 00:48:01.800 a little bit on my -- but I just think this is a redundancy that's unnecessary. 00:48:01.800 --> 00:48:06.760 Why would we make it more difficult for someone to develop? 00:48:06.760 --> 00:48:10.040 I mean, we already are difficult. 00:48:10.040 --> 00:48:13.600 We already have this long process. 00:48:13.600 --> 00:48:15.360 Why would we add onto it? 00:48:15.360 --> 00:48:19.180 We already take these things into consideration; there's just no teeth in it. 00:48:19.180 --> 00:48:24.200 I guess maybe this adds teeth to that. 00:48:24.200 --> 00:48:27.000 But we already do it. 00:48:27.000 --> 00:48:36.560 And I'm just worried that we're just sitting here just going to wake up a year from now 00:48:36.560 --> 00:48:40.560 and who's going to come in here and do a project? 00:48:40.560 --> 00:48:47.800 I mean, some will, but we're -- I mean, we got Dinton-centric -- we got Dinton, small 00:48:47.800 --> 00:48:52.200 business owners, that are construction companies that will not take a Dinton project. 00:48:52.200 --> 00:48:53.200 Okay. 00:48:53.200 --> 00:48:54.200 I don't want to get off-topic. 00:48:54.200 --> 00:48:55.200 Okay. 00:48:55.200 --> 00:48:56.200 Let's see. 00:48:56.200 --> 00:48:57.200 Yeah, I agree. 00:48:57.200 --> 00:48:58.200 Okay. 00:48:58.200 --> 00:48:59.320 But I just think this is a solution looking for a problem. 00:48:59.320 --> 00:49:07.760 I don't think this forces anybody to do anything, but what I didn't hear answered, and maybe 00:49:07.760 --> 00:49:12.620 I missed it at the beginning, is why are we doing this? 00:49:12.620 --> 00:49:20.800 Because we do -- I think since we have started to kind of press a little bit more to have 00:49:20.800 --> 00:49:26.140 neighborhood engagement, I think we have had more neighborhood engagement. 00:49:26.140 --> 00:49:34.320 So I'm trying to understand exactly, I mean, do we really think that we don't have enough 00:49:34.320 --> 00:49:39.660 so that offering incentives is going to get more engagement? 00:49:39.660 --> 00:49:44.320 Is that why we would be doing this? 00:49:44.320 --> 00:49:46.380 So great question. 00:49:46.380 --> 00:49:52.720 We are trying to help incentivize developers to make sure that they're going and engaging 00:49:52.720 --> 00:49:53.720 the community. 00:49:53.720 --> 00:49:57.340 At the end of the day, I mean, they don't have to. 00:49:57.340 --> 00:50:01.800 This agreement would not prevent somebody from submitting a zoning application. 00:50:01.800 --> 00:50:06.240 If they can still move forward with the zoning application, they could still come forth to 00:50:06.240 --> 00:50:10.320 the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council without an agreement, right? 00:50:10.320 --> 00:50:16.500 So it's just like today, you've had zoning cases in the past where you've taken action 00:50:16.500 --> 00:50:19.600 on them and haven't had neighborhood agreement. 00:50:19.600 --> 00:50:25.800 So it's not preventing anybody, to your point, with concerns about delaying somebody further. 00:50:25.800 --> 00:50:31.560 So we were trying to offer an incentive that we know it's important from the Planning and 00:50:31.560 --> 00:50:34.600 Zoning Commission, City Council, to engage the community. 00:50:34.600 --> 00:50:41.000 So what can we offer to the development community that might help save them a little bit of 00:50:41.000 --> 00:50:44.320 time on the backside for the engagement efforts that they've done? 00:50:44.320 --> 00:50:50.440 So it is to get, you're thinking it's to get more engagement that you think we're not getting 00:50:50.440 --> 00:50:51.440 currently? 00:50:51.440 --> 00:50:52.440 Yes? 00:50:52.440 --> 00:50:53.440 Correct. 00:50:53.440 --> 00:50:59.840 Because, you know, and I think the other thing you have is people that are, people that want 00:50:59.840 --> 00:51:02.080 to be engaged will be engaged, right? 00:51:02.080 --> 00:51:06.480 If someone's truly concerned about a project, then they're the ones that are going to be 00:51:06.480 --> 00:51:07.480 involved. 00:51:07.480 --> 00:51:12.760 A lot of times we have projects that come forth where people don't care, right? 00:51:12.760 --> 00:51:17.120 They're apathetic or they have no issue associated with it. 00:51:17.120 --> 00:51:23.000 I would say we are a well-engaged community in that our residents are very interested 00:51:23.000 --> 00:51:24.000 in what happens. 00:51:24.000 --> 00:51:28.520 I mean, we've put forth a variety of different notification tools that we utilize to be able 00:51:28.520 --> 00:51:32.320 to help the community understand what's happening near them. 00:51:32.320 --> 00:51:36.800 I mean, we've done the website, right, where people can go in and put their information 00:51:36.800 --> 00:51:41.560 and select a distance to get updates regarding any projects within a certain distance of 00:51:41.560 --> 00:51:42.560 them, right? 00:51:42.560 --> 00:51:51.040 So it's a means of, again, what can we do to possibly encourage the developer to do 00:51:51.040 --> 00:51:57.320 more public engagement and in exchange for doing public engagement, then how can we help 00:51:57.320 --> 00:51:59.440 you on the backside a little bit? 00:51:59.440 --> 00:52:03.440 And about like being able to issue that clearing grade permit and then also processing those 00:52:03.440 --> 00:52:10.720 zoning compliance plans and the CEPs concurrently might be an opportunity that helps extend 00:52:10.720 --> 00:52:14.080 an olive branch to them for the troubles of their engagement, if you want to look at it 00:52:14.080 --> 00:52:15.080 from that perspective. 00:52:15.080 --> 00:52:20.160 Honestly, with the zoning compliance plan and CEPs, you're more savvy developers. 00:52:20.160 --> 00:52:24.720 They will be the ones that will try to utilize that process. 00:52:24.720 --> 00:52:29.920 I think for more complex sites, they'll probably split those apart, but where it really helps 00:52:29.920 --> 00:52:35.240 them gain a little bit of time in our development approval process is by issuing that clearing 00:52:35.240 --> 00:52:40.840 grade permit following the approval of the CEPs and I believe we need to correct our 00:52:40.840 --> 00:52:45.280 slide because it said prior to final plan approval, I believe our intention was we were 00:52:45.280 --> 00:52:49.600 going to have final plan approval, but prior to filing because right now we require that 00:52:49.600 --> 00:52:54.500 plat to be filed before someone can go move dirt. 00:52:54.500 --> 00:53:00.480 Many other communities allow for the final plat to be filed of record after all the public 00:53:00.480 --> 00:53:02.760 improvements have been constructed. 00:53:02.760 --> 00:53:05.480 That's where we are different from other communities. 00:53:05.480 --> 00:53:08.680 The state statute does now allow for that. 00:53:08.680 --> 00:53:12.720 We're trying to also work on making some updates to sub chapter two as a result of House Bill 00:53:12.720 --> 00:53:14.760 3699. 00:53:14.760 --> 00:53:19.040 That's taken us longer to be able to get through that process, but one of the things that came 00:53:19.040 --> 00:53:23.920 out of the last legislative session is more flexibility on the platting side of things 00:53:23.920 --> 00:53:29.720 where we can approve them administratively, also being able to approve extensions administratively 00:53:29.720 --> 00:53:32.840 without having to put them on your agenda. 00:53:32.840 --> 00:53:40.360 We're trying to utilize tools that we have that state law allows that might be an opportunity 00:53:40.360 --> 00:53:44.600 to save someone time on their development process with us and using that. 00:53:44.600 --> 00:53:52.360 I have to figure out like weighing the time of what are they really saving with those 00:53:52.360 --> 00:53:59.280 incentives and what is it costing them to get these signatures and go through that part, 00:53:59.280 --> 00:54:07.080 which makes it a little more complicated than we even have now, just engaging with the community. 00:54:07.080 --> 00:54:10.600 >> Considering the presentation that was presented, is there any data that shows which pockets 00:54:10.600 --> 00:54:14.640 of the community are more engaged than the other areas? 00:54:14.640 --> 00:54:17.840 So more engaged versus more less engaged? 00:54:17.840 --> 00:54:22.840 >> I don't think she had that on this slide. 00:54:22.840 --> 00:54:24.360 >> We didn't present that information. 00:54:24.360 --> 00:54:28.160 I'm not sure we can look and see if we have something and bring it back. 00:54:28.160 --> 00:54:32.800 >> We know from experience certain things, which we could certainly share with you, just 00:54:32.800 --> 00:54:38.120 from years of being here and seeing communities, but certainly can share with you. 00:54:38.120 --> 00:54:40.440 Does anyone else have anything for Keisha right now? 00:54:40.440 --> 00:54:43.800 >> I have a couple. 00:54:43.800 --> 00:54:48.000 Going back to the best practices that were presented, was there any data that was used 00:54:48.000 --> 00:54:50.480 or sourced to develop those best practices? 00:54:50.480 --> 00:54:51.480 >> Yes. 00:54:51.480 --> 00:54:52.480 Yes. 00:54:52.480 --> 00:54:58.520 I can't call them off the top of my head, but yes, we did look at best practices, also 00:54:58.520 --> 00:55:03.760 looked at various different what other cities have done to encourage development and just 00:55:03.760 --> 00:55:08.400 their own personal experience interacting with the community and public engagement. 00:55:08.400 --> 00:55:11.760 That's what we used to create that flyer. 00:55:11.760 --> 00:55:16.280 >> Could you go back to the flyer if possible? 00:55:16.280 --> 00:55:21.040 With that, if you do have data that demonstrates neighborhoods or pockets of the community 00:55:21.040 --> 00:55:29.600 that are more highly engaged, it may be a point to explore if the recommendations could 00:55:29.600 --> 00:55:34.560 include best practices for those neighborhoods that are more highly engaged and best practices 00:55:34.560 --> 00:55:39.360 that are listed for those neighborhoods that aren't as highly engaged to determine, again, 00:55:39.360 --> 00:55:45.280 if the point is to increase engagement, how can we better target those areas of the community 00:55:45.280 --> 00:55:47.160 that aren't as engaged? 00:55:47.160 --> 00:55:48.680 Is there something that we haven't considered? 00:55:48.680 --> 00:55:52.200 Is there something that seems to work a little bit more? 00:55:52.200 --> 00:55:59.680 On the best practices list, is there anything that suggests any written materials in different 00:55:59.680 --> 00:56:03.400 languages that are reflective of the demographics of the communities? 00:56:03.400 --> 00:56:04.400 >> Yes. 00:56:04.400 --> 00:56:05.400 Yes, there is. 00:56:05.400 --> 00:56:11.920 And even mentioned having a translator at meetings, if possible, if need be. 00:56:11.920 --> 00:56:12.920 Yes. 00:56:12.920 --> 00:56:13.920 >> Okay. 00:56:13.920 --> 00:56:17.960 I'm just checking my list. 00:56:17.960 --> 00:56:22.320 One of the other things I just want to state is while I recognize that there might be specific 00:56:22.320 --> 00:56:28.000 challenges to what's being presented, I think that for me, what I see is education. 00:56:28.000 --> 00:56:31.880 I think there is a comment that was made that those who want to engage will engage, but 00:56:31.880 --> 00:56:35.760 we also have to consider that there may be those that don't know how to engage, and so 00:56:35.760 --> 00:56:41.160 this could be the first type of possibility in which they can engage just by looking at 00:56:41.160 --> 00:56:42.160 things a little bit differently. 00:56:42.160 --> 00:56:48.120 And so I do think that their experiences are important to consider, and so I would stress 00:56:48.120 --> 00:56:53.200 to kind of take the lens of this could be a possibility for education to increase that 00:56:53.200 --> 00:56:54.200 civic engagement. 00:56:54.200 --> 00:56:55.200 >> Thank you. 00:56:55.200 --> 00:56:56.200 Thanks. 00:56:56.200 --> 00:56:57.200 Commissioner Villareal. 00:56:57.200 --> 00:56:59.900 >> Thank you, Chair, and thank you for the presentation. 00:56:59.900 --> 00:57:05.160 I'm in favor of anything that improves and pushes for additional community engagement, 00:57:05.160 --> 00:57:07.240 so thank you for putting this forward. 00:57:07.240 --> 00:57:13.160 I do want to just -- I know this was mentioned briefly during the conversation with Vice 00:57:13.160 --> 00:57:21.840 Chair Pruitt, but if we could perhaps change it from property owners to residents/business 00:57:21.840 --> 00:57:25.440 proprietors, I would be in favor of that change. 00:57:25.440 --> 00:57:29.400 I just wanted to go on the record and say I'm in favor of changing it to that. 00:57:29.400 --> 00:57:30.400 Thank you. 00:57:30.400 --> 00:57:31.400 >> Thank you. 00:57:31.400 --> 00:57:33.160 >> And I'm not sure you can do residents, because I don't know that they would have 00:57:33.160 --> 00:57:41.520 a legal stake in a signature, because a resident could be a tenant, and I don't know if a tenant 00:57:41.520 --> 00:57:42.520 -- 00:57:42.520 --> 00:57:43.520 >> Okay. 00:57:43.520 --> 00:57:44.520 >> Right. 00:57:44.520 --> 00:57:45.520 Yeah. 00:57:45.520 --> 00:57:46.760 >> That makes sense. 00:57:46.760 --> 00:57:50.260 >> That's what comes off the top of my head when we're talking about like validating signatures, 00:57:50.260 --> 00:57:51.260 you know? 00:57:51.260 --> 00:57:55.080 I don't know exactly where that fits. 00:57:55.080 --> 00:58:03.560 I think since none of us saw any of this until like right now, between now and when you want 00:58:03.560 --> 00:58:14.320 us to actually take action, can we get this delivered to our email when you think it's 00:58:14.320 --> 00:58:20.320 ready for us to look at so that we can maybe offer more comments and get a little bit better 00:58:20.320 --> 00:58:27.280 hand, you know, it's kind of a lot in a very short amount of time, and, you know, everybody's 00:58:27.280 --> 00:58:33.800 kind of putting things together in their head, and helpful to -- you know, it's hard for 00:58:33.800 --> 00:58:36.880 us to give you direction on something that we're seeing for the first time. 00:58:36.880 --> 00:58:43.320 I mean, that's how I feel, and from the varying questions and concerns, I'm not sure anybody's 00:58:43.320 --> 00:58:50.320 ready to say, oh, we'll change this and do this because we just haven't wrapped our brains 00:58:50.320 --> 00:58:51.320 around it. 00:58:51.320 --> 00:58:52.320 >> Absolutely. 00:58:52.320 --> 00:58:53.320 No, I see what you're saying. 00:58:53.320 --> 00:58:57.400 And I know originally we thought we were -- let's see. 00:58:57.400 --> 00:59:02.920 We might be able to have a draft ordinance to have in a work session discussion at the 00:59:02.920 --> 00:59:07.600 next planning and zoning commission meeting to give you -- let us look at that. 00:59:07.600 --> 00:59:10.280 But if we can do that, we'll try and do so. 00:59:10.280 --> 00:59:15.320 Because we were trying to bring this for a public hearing in July, but it may be that 00:59:15.320 --> 00:59:20.360 since we've got our second June meeting, maybe we can put it -- if our draft is in good shape, 00:59:20.360 --> 00:59:27.640 we can put that on your agenda for a work session conversation, and so that way you 00:59:27.640 --> 00:59:31.880 all can start looking at the language and seeing if there's anything that we need to 00:59:31.880 --> 00:59:36.480 modify that might be of interest, and -- but, yeah, we'll definitely look into it. 00:59:36.480 --> 00:59:40.880 >> And probably even just even the presentation, just having this again in front of us to be 00:59:40.880 --> 00:59:46.120 able to read and reread, you know, where we can get with our thoughts and whatnot. 00:59:46.120 --> 00:59:47.120 >> Sure. 00:59:47.120 --> 00:59:48.120 >> Okay. 00:59:48.120 --> 00:59:49.120 Commissioner Pruitt. 00:59:49.120 --> 00:59:54.720 >> Briefly, I just want to summarize because I've rambled before. 00:59:54.720 --> 01:00:01.200 Generally in favor, I hear the concerns and I share them about let's not slow things down. 01:00:01.200 --> 01:00:05.580 The way I see this going is you're either going to have it onerous enough that nobody 01:00:05.580 --> 01:00:10.000 still takes advantage of it and so it doesn't matter, right? 01:00:10.000 --> 01:00:17.800 Or enticing enough that the projects where it makes financial sense to go through this 01:00:17.800 --> 01:00:21.440 step will do it, right? 01:00:21.440 --> 01:00:30.880 The concern I have along the line of are we creating a system where you kind of have to 01:00:30.880 --> 01:00:39.160 do this to get it through council is that we already just by nature of how projects 01:00:39.160 --> 01:00:50.360 go and the scale of financing incentivize larger projects that have a bigger impact 01:00:50.360 --> 01:00:53.400 to the community. 01:00:53.400 --> 01:01:02.420 And I'd like to make sure that as we do this, we make it a more equitable process from a 01:01:02.420 --> 01:01:10.160 big giant $800 million development down to the, hey, I've got a building south of downtown 01:01:10.160 --> 01:01:16.680 and I need so and so and I have $50,000, right? 01:01:16.680 --> 01:01:18.120 So I'm sensitive to that. 01:01:18.120 --> 01:01:19.120 So thank you. 01:01:19.120 --> 01:01:20.120 >> Thank you. 01:01:20.120 --> 01:01:21.120 >> Thank you. 01:01:21.120 --> 01:01:22.120 >> Thank you. 01:01:22.120 --> 01:01:23.960 >> Thank you very much. 01:01:23.960 --> 01:01:28.720 I know we've got one more work session report. 01:01:28.720 --> 01:01:32.220 Do you want to continue or break for food and then continue? 01:01:32.220 --> 01:01:33.720 I'm going to get a consensus. 01:01:33.720 --> 01:01:35.720 How is everybody doing? 01:01:35.720 --> 01:01:36.720 Everybody okay? 01:01:36.720 --> 01:01:39.960 Because I think Keisha, this is yours, yes? 01:01:39.960 --> 01:01:40.960 >> Yes. 01:01:40.960 --> 01:01:41.960 >> Okay. 01:01:41.960 --> 01:01:42.960 Then you've got it ready to go. 01:01:42.960 --> 01:01:49.320 Let's go ahead and call 3B, PZ24090, receive a report, hold a discussion regarding the 01:01:49.320 --> 01:01:54.800 process of PNZ commission operational procedures as it relates to reconsideration. 01:01:54.800 --> 01:01:58.320 >> Good evening again, Chair and commissioners. 01:01:58.320 --> 01:02:07.000 I'm here before you to discuss possibility of adding a procedure in our code for planning 01:02:07.000 --> 01:02:10.800 a zoning commission to have a reconsideration process. 01:02:10.800 --> 01:02:16.840 This is again is a staff initiated request due to challenges with the prior reconsideration 01:02:16.840 --> 01:02:23.240 last summer and confirm the need that you all need your own codified process. 01:02:23.240 --> 01:02:29.240 I think currently right now you're following City Council's reconsideration process which 01:02:29.240 --> 01:02:34.160 allows for you to request from the director that an item be reconsidered prior to your 01:02:34.160 --> 01:02:38.840 next meeting date and if the item is already -- but if the item is already presented to 01:02:38.840 --> 01:02:44.280 City Council agenda, excuse me, then you have to appear before City Council and make that 01:02:44.280 --> 01:02:50.720 request at the public hearing and City Council would have to then agree to send the item 01:02:50.720 --> 01:02:53.080 back to planning a zoning commission. 01:02:53.080 --> 01:03:00.440 So we want to create a process for you all to be able to reconsider items and have that 01:03:00.440 --> 01:03:03.520 code -- and have that, excuse me, codified in our code. 01:03:03.520 --> 01:03:06.800 So here is the process that we are recommending. 01:03:06.800 --> 01:03:09.080 So the first item, there's no change, right? 01:03:09.080 --> 01:03:13.320 So you will still make the request of someone that's on the prevailing side of a vote will 01:03:13.320 --> 01:03:15.760 make a request to the director. 01:03:15.760 --> 01:03:18.360 The only thing that's going to change is the timeframe. 01:03:18.360 --> 01:03:23.840 So currently you can make that request and you have up to a week and a half prior to 01:03:23.840 --> 01:03:26.440 your next meeting to make the request. 01:03:26.440 --> 01:03:33.040 Due to sometimes items are fast-tracked and staff needs time to alert the city secretary's 01:03:33.040 --> 01:03:38.440 office that an item needs to be pulled from the council agenda if there's been an item 01:03:38.440 --> 01:03:41.400 pulled that you've requested to be reconsidered. 01:03:41.400 --> 01:03:46.200 We need that request by 10 a.m. on Friday after your meeting. 01:03:46.200 --> 01:03:58.080 So that is changing from a week and a half down to one and a half days. 01:03:58.080 --> 01:04:01.920 So just to continue with the process, I'm sure you're all familiar. 01:04:01.920 --> 01:04:08.440 So items presented to you and if it is voted -- excuse me, if we receive it, we will put 01:04:08.440 --> 01:04:12.920 it back on the agenda as an item for consideration, the commission will have the opportunity to 01:04:12.920 --> 01:04:15.560 vote to reconsider the item or not. 01:04:15.560 --> 01:04:22.280 If it is, then we'll go through the proper protocols to get the item publicly noticed 01:04:22.280 --> 01:04:24.600 and then back on for public hearing. 01:04:24.600 --> 01:04:28.640 If it fails, then staff will work through the processes to get it back on city council's 01:04:28.640 --> 01:04:33.280 agenda for their public hearing. 01:04:33.280 --> 01:04:35.520 This is just a calendar so you can visually see. 01:04:35.520 --> 01:04:40.640 I know I'm a visual person so you can visually see what this change would do. 01:04:40.640 --> 01:04:41.640 So let's look at August. 01:04:41.640 --> 01:04:45.600 So you look at August 14, you make an original vote. 01:04:45.600 --> 01:04:50.120 Someone on the prevailing side requests to reconsider to the director and that would 01:04:50.120 --> 01:04:54.880 have to be submitted by that Friday on the 16th at 10 a.m. 01:04:54.880 --> 01:04:59.680 So previously you would have had until the 28th, but with this change it will be the 01:04:59.680 --> 01:05:00.680 16th. 01:05:00.680 --> 01:05:08.360 So it's all items, whether it's fast-tracked or not. 01:05:08.360 --> 01:05:09.360 That's the end of my presentation. 01:05:09.360 --> 01:05:11.360 I'm open for questions or comments. 01:05:11.360 --> 01:05:12.360 >> Okay. 01:05:12.360 --> 01:05:14.680 So let's go back to that visual. 01:05:14.680 --> 01:05:15.680 >> Okay. 01:05:15.680 --> 01:05:21.840 >> So what you're saying is the reconsideration any time has to be done on the Friday after 01:05:21.840 --> 01:05:22.840 the meeting. 01:05:22.840 --> 01:05:23.840 Is that? 01:05:23.840 --> 01:05:24.840 >> Yes, ma'am. 01:05:24.840 --> 01:05:30.560 >> That's what -- and so if it would be fast-tracked to the city council meeting the next week, 01:05:30.560 --> 01:05:33.140 that wouldn't even work. 01:05:33.140 --> 01:05:38.120 >> If we're able to receive it by 10 a.m., that gives us time to let the secretary office 01:05:38.120 --> 01:05:39.120 know. 01:05:39.120 --> 01:05:40.120 >> Oh, you would pull it? 01:05:40.120 --> 01:05:41.120 >> Yes. 01:05:41.120 --> 01:05:42.120 >> You would pull it. 01:05:42.120 --> 01:05:43.120 I see. 01:05:43.120 --> 01:05:44.120 Okay. 01:05:44.120 --> 01:05:46.720 >> That fast-track thing is really what we were hoping to balance, but keep going. 01:05:46.720 --> 01:05:47.720 >> Right. 01:05:47.720 --> 01:05:52.320 And so the knowledge of it being a fast-track item, we would know about on that day that 01:05:52.320 --> 01:05:54.360 we would take a vote? 01:05:54.360 --> 01:05:55.360 >> Yes. 01:05:55.360 --> 01:05:56.360 >> Okay. 01:05:56.360 --> 01:05:58.680 Commissioner Villarreal, I think you had your hand up. 01:05:58.680 --> 01:06:00.320 >> Thank you, Chair. 01:06:00.320 --> 01:06:07.160 So I'm a little confused as to why items that aren't fast-tracked also have to be submitted 01:06:07.160 --> 01:06:11.920 on this fast-track basis. 01:06:11.920 --> 01:06:16.000 If they're not considering it at the next council meeting, why do we have to submit 01:06:16.000 --> 01:06:19.800 our reconsideration request a day and a half later? 01:06:19.800 --> 01:06:24.400 I mean, sometimes there are things that come up the week after, there are conversations 01:06:24.400 --> 01:06:30.160 that are had, you know, additional information rises to the surface. 01:06:30.160 --> 01:06:34.280 I'm not sure I'm in favor of having every single reconsideration have to be done by 01:06:34.280 --> 01:06:36.480 the fast-track date and time. 01:06:36.480 --> 01:06:38.760 I understand for fast-track items, of course. 01:06:38.760 --> 01:06:39.760 Thank you. 01:06:39.760 --> 01:06:45.320 >> We were trying to just be consistent and not have two separate calendars of information. 01:06:45.320 --> 01:06:49.200 So that was the reason why we were proposing just to have the one process. 01:06:49.200 --> 01:06:50.200 >> Yeah. 01:06:50.200 --> 01:06:53.320 I mean, Keisha's right. 01:06:53.320 --> 01:06:57.600 We were trying to have a standardized process because also there are some factors that come 01:06:57.600 --> 01:07:02.360 into play, like for example, depending upon when the meetings are scheduled. 01:07:02.360 --> 01:07:08.920 I mean, most of the time we've got a fair amount of advance notice, but it's on our 01:07:08.920 --> 01:07:09.920 meeting dates. 01:07:09.920 --> 01:07:13.800 But we're just -- we struggled through this -- or not, I shouldn't say struggled. 01:07:13.800 --> 01:07:19.540 We discussed this extensively on how best to -- you know, do we have two separate processes 01:07:19.540 --> 01:07:21.080 versus just one? 01:07:21.080 --> 01:07:26.040 We were concerned that trying to come up with two separate processes was -- would be more 01:07:26.040 --> 01:07:27.220 confusing. 01:07:27.220 --> 01:07:34.320 And so hence why we landed on the -- a streamlined process of -- we figured if you had an issue 01:07:34.320 --> 01:07:38.640 with the vote, particularly those that might have been on the prevailing side where you 01:07:38.640 --> 01:07:42.880 believe a reconsideration is necessary, that your gut's probably going to tell you sooner 01:07:42.880 --> 01:07:46.960 than later and that it's going to be on the sooner side. 01:07:46.960 --> 01:07:52.120 Because keep in mind when an item is also being reconsidered, then we're having to process 01:07:52.120 --> 01:07:57.680 it and getting it back on the Planning and Zoning Commission's agenda as soon as we can. 01:07:57.680 --> 01:08:03.480 But the one factor that was challenging for us to be able to work through and hence why 01:08:03.480 --> 01:08:08.600 we landed on where we did was in particular those items that have to be fast-tracked to 01:08:08.600 --> 01:08:09.600 city council. 01:08:09.600 --> 01:08:17.360 And, you know, we even discussed -- you know, the reason why we need to be able to preserve 01:08:17.360 --> 01:08:22.840 being able to move an item to city council faster than the normal three weeks in between 01:08:22.840 --> 01:08:28.440 when it goes to P&Z and council is let's say, for example, we had an error on our part. 01:08:28.440 --> 01:08:33.480 You know, an applicant shouldn't be penalized for an error that staff made. 01:08:33.480 --> 01:08:38.320 We tried to make sure that we don't make those errors, but when it does happen, then we tried 01:08:38.320 --> 01:08:44.440 to be able to make it right by the applicant to be able to get it moved forward. 01:08:44.440 --> 01:08:49.120 You know, if you all feel -- if the concurrence of the commission -- yeah, if the concurrence 01:08:49.120 --> 01:08:53.220 of the commission is that we need to have two separate processes, then we can go back 01:08:53.220 --> 01:08:57.680 and explore that further and see what we can come up with and hopefully not -- and hopefully 01:08:57.680 --> 01:09:02.560 have it a streamlined language that we can put in a proposed draft for your consideration. 01:09:02.560 --> 01:09:05.080 But, you know, open to your thoughts on it. 01:09:05.080 --> 01:09:06.760 That's why we're having this conversation. 01:09:06.760 --> 01:09:07.760 >> Okay. 01:09:07.760 --> 01:09:10.400 Is there anybody else with -- yep. 01:09:10.400 --> 01:09:11.400 Mr. Pruitt. 01:09:11.400 --> 01:09:15.840 >> Thank you, Chair. 01:09:15.840 --> 01:09:22.840 Just a couple of factual questions so I'm not spewing. 01:09:22.840 --> 01:09:33.920 Is there a legal problem to notice a public hearing if a motion to reconsider causes 01:09:33.920 --> 01:09:37.200 that public hearing to not occur? 01:09:37.200 --> 01:09:47.000 >> So we've had some jurisdictional conversation in this -- and, Hillary, feel free to add 01:09:47.000 --> 01:09:51.880 to this, but this was part of the challenge, I think, we ran into last August, right, when 01:09:51.880 --> 01:09:56.760 we had this, is once the commission takes action on an item, you lose jurisdiction on 01:09:56.760 --> 01:09:59.120 it because you've already made a decision. 01:09:59.120 --> 01:10:05.080 So we've -- if we've noticed and we're trying to put it on council's agenda, then we got 01:10:05.080 --> 01:10:10.060 caught in this somewhat of a quandary gray area, whatever you want to call it, in terms 01:10:10.060 --> 01:10:16.280 of who's court is the ball in, right? 01:10:16.280 --> 01:10:19.680 You know, who has the jurisdiction now to consider the item? 01:10:19.680 --> 01:10:23.520 You know, in that particular case, I believe we had already posted it on the council's 01:10:23.520 --> 01:10:26.280 agenda, so it was clearly in the council's court. 01:10:26.280 --> 01:10:31.840 We had also already noticed for the public hearing, so felt it was in council's court 01:10:31.840 --> 01:10:39.660 on that as well, but the fact that the commission had already taken action on the item means 01:10:39.660 --> 01:10:45.800 that your jurisdiction or your ability to act on the item has now -- that window has 01:10:45.800 --> 01:10:46.800 closed. 01:10:46.800 --> 01:10:50.800 But, Hillary, any additional insight to add? 01:10:50.800 --> 01:10:55.480 >> If I may, just add some color so that you're not like, what is he talking about? 01:10:55.480 --> 01:11:01.520 I'm trying to think through Commissioner Villarreal's comment of, hey, that seems kind of short, 01:11:01.520 --> 01:11:06.840 and I'm also thinking in my context of, while I think this is a tool that should be used 01:11:06.840 --> 01:11:19.000 sparingly, I hate the idea of, you know, us causing a minimum of a one-month delay, right? 01:11:19.000 --> 01:11:24.040 Because two weeks later, we vote to reconsider, and then two or three weeks after that, we 01:11:24.040 --> 01:11:25.840 have the original vote, and then it moves forward. 01:11:25.840 --> 01:11:27.760 >> Right, because we have to re-notice. 01:11:27.760 --> 01:11:33.480 And so I'm wondering whether if we have a shortened timeline to reconsider, whether 01:11:33.480 --> 01:11:38.040 that would give us the opportunity to say, hey, look, let's just go ahead and re-notice 01:11:38.040 --> 01:11:43.720 so that in this example, we can vote to reconsider on the 28th and then hold the public hearing 01:11:43.720 --> 01:11:47.680 on the 28th so that it's not as much of a delay that's incurred in that case. 01:11:47.680 --> 01:11:48.680 Does that make sense? 01:11:48.680 --> 01:11:49.680 >> Oh, yeah. 01:11:49.680 --> 01:11:55.220 I think we won't be able to meet our notification requirements. 01:11:55.220 --> 01:11:59.760 So because of when -- >> Because it's more than 12 days. 01:11:59.760 --> 01:12:05.080 >> Right, because it's -- we have to send out notices the day before the 10th day preceding 01:12:05.080 --> 01:12:06.760 the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. 01:12:06.760 --> 01:12:11.680 So we would not be able to get the noticing accomplished because we've got to be able 01:12:11.680 --> 01:12:17.520 to process our mail notices, you know, one, make sure we can meet the calendar, but then 01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:21.280 two, be able to get our administrative tasks accomplished behind the scenes so we can get 01:12:21.280 --> 01:12:24.000 that all taken care of. 01:12:24.000 --> 01:12:29.920 Next amendments also require noticing to be published in the newspaper. 01:12:29.920 --> 01:12:32.360 So we have lead time that we have to factor in on that. 01:12:32.360 --> 01:12:39.360 So while I appreciate your creativity, we just can't meet the other legal obligations 01:12:39.360 --> 01:12:41.080 that we have to address. 01:12:41.080 --> 01:12:42.080 >> Okay. 01:12:42.080 --> 01:12:43.080 Thank you. 01:12:43.080 --> 01:12:50.200 >> But to your point, reconsideration, when an item is reconsidered, we -- when you vote 01:12:50.200 --> 01:12:58.000 to reconsider an item and if the motion is passed, then we have to go back through the 01:12:58.000 --> 01:13:02.680 public notification process and meet the state statute requirements in order to put it back 01:13:02.680 --> 01:13:04.860 on your agenda for action. 01:13:04.860 --> 01:13:09.320 Because again, you've already taken a preceding action, so you've lost jurisdiction, so we 01:13:09.320 --> 01:13:14.760 have to do the re-noticing to put it legally back in your camp for consideration, if that 01:13:14.760 --> 01:13:15.760 makes sense. 01:13:15.760 --> 01:13:16.760 >> Yeah. 01:13:16.760 --> 01:13:17.760 Thank you. 01:13:17.760 --> 01:13:19.920 >> And that state statute is just -- we have no choice. 01:13:19.920 --> 01:13:20.920 Mr. Cole. 01:13:20.920 --> 01:13:21.920 >> Thank you, Chair. 01:13:21.920 --> 01:13:27.960 Yeah, I was just going through my memory banks of six years and how many reconsiderations 01:13:27.960 --> 01:13:30.120 we've had and I can only think of two. 01:13:30.120 --> 01:13:31.120 >> Two. 01:13:31.120 --> 01:13:32.120 In eight years. 01:13:32.120 --> 01:13:33.120 >> Yeah. 01:13:33.120 --> 01:13:34.120 Right? 01:13:34.120 --> 01:13:40.520 So -- and a day and a half is kind of -- I mean, we do have a right to reconsider and 01:13:40.520 --> 01:13:43.000 it shouldn't just be a day and a half. 01:13:43.000 --> 01:13:44.000 You know what I mean? 01:13:44.000 --> 01:13:51.520 I mean, because if that would have been -- then both the ones -- Chair and I wanted to reconsider 01:13:51.520 --> 01:13:55.440 wouldn't have been done because it was after a day and a half. 01:13:55.440 --> 01:14:07.040 I know mine was, so I -- you know, I don't know, it just -- a day and a half just doesn't 01:14:07.040 --> 01:14:12.720 seem very thorough or -- I mean, because facts on the ground can change and you learn new 01:14:12.720 --> 01:14:19.560 things, you know, it just -- I think it needs to be a little more flexible than that. 01:14:19.560 --> 01:14:29.040 >> Yeah, maybe we need to look at having a true fast track item, you know, date and having 01:14:29.040 --> 01:14:34.040 what the true procedure is because we don't really have -- fast track is not a regular 01:14:34.040 --> 01:14:37.200 thing that we do. 01:14:37.200 --> 01:14:41.120 So it seems like that wouldn't happen as often, so it's almost like we should have what the 01:14:41.120 --> 01:14:48.760 procedure is and then asterisk, if it's a fast track item, this is what it is. 01:14:48.760 --> 01:14:49.760 >> Okay. 01:14:49.760 --> 01:14:50.760 We can definitely look into that. 01:14:50.760 --> 01:14:52.440 That's the concurrence of the group, absolutely. 01:14:52.440 --> 01:14:54.240 >> And then this -- you're bringing this back. 01:14:54.240 --> 01:14:58.360 Is this something we would have to -- >> This is a code amendment, so -- 01:14:58.360 --> 01:15:03.560 >> So this would require public hearing, yeah, that's what I figured. 01:15:03.560 --> 01:15:04.560 Okay. 01:15:04.560 --> 01:15:05.560 Yeah. 01:15:05.560 --> 01:15:11.080 Yeah, so maybe look at that and maybe, yeah, send it out again or press the look at or 01:15:11.080 --> 01:15:12.080 -- 01:15:12.080 --> 01:15:13.080 >> Sure thing. 01:15:13.080 --> 01:15:14.080 >> Well, I mean, I guess it would be -- it would be in the backup. 01:15:14.080 --> 01:15:15.080 >> It will be in the backup material. 01:15:15.080 --> 01:15:16.080 >> Yeah, sorry. 01:15:16.080 --> 01:15:17.080 >> So it would be in your normal packet. 01:15:17.080 --> 01:15:18.080 >> Yeah. 01:15:18.080 --> 01:15:20.840 >> I know the other item is a little more complicated, but if we have the ability to 01:15:20.840 --> 01:15:23.360 get you something in advance, we'll try. 01:15:23.360 --> 01:15:25.440 >> Is that good direction? 01:15:25.440 --> 01:15:27.800 Is that anything -- okay. 01:15:27.800 --> 01:15:30.880 Kiesha, thank you. 01:15:30.880 --> 01:15:32.280 Okay. 01:15:32.280 --> 01:15:38.640 That concludes our work session, so we'll go ahead and adjourn at 616 and reconvene as 01:15:38.640 --> 01:15:46.120 close to 630 as possible in Council Chambers. 01:15:46.120 --> 01:15:49.400 >> Good evening, and welcome to the City of Denton's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting 01:15:49.400 --> 01:15:53.000 for Wednesday, June 12, 2024. 01:15:53.000 --> 01:15:58.000 With the quorum present, I will call us to order at 642 p.m. 01:15:58.000 --> 01:16:00.120 Thank you for your patience. 01:16:00.120 --> 01:16:15.200 Our first item on our agenda is Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. and Texas Flags. 01:16:15.200 --> 01:16:32.260 Thank you. 01:16:32.260 --> 01:16:37.960 Our next item is to consider the approval of our Planning and Zoning minutes from May 01:16:37.960 --> 01:16:39.320 29th. 01:16:39.320 --> 01:16:40.320 Commissioner Villarreal. 01:16:40.320 --> 01:16:41.800 >> Move approval. 01:16:41.800 --> 01:16:42.800 >> Commissioner Thaggard. 01:16:42.800 --> 01:16:43.800 >> Second. 01:16:43.800 --> 01:16:45.620 >> Got a first and a second for approval. 01:16:45.620 --> 01:16:46.620 Any discussion? 01:16:46.620 --> 01:16:47.620 Okay. 01:16:47.620 --> 01:16:56.720 Let's go ahead and vote on the board, please. 01:16:56.720 --> 01:16:58.200 That motion carries 6-0. 01:16:58.200 --> 01:17:02.280 That'll take us to our Consent Agenda this evening. 01:17:02.280 --> 01:17:03.280 Commissioner Villarreal. 01:17:03.280 --> 01:17:04.680 >> Move approval. 01:17:04.680 --> 01:17:05.680 >> Commissioner Thaggard. 01:17:05.680 --> 01:17:06.680 >> Second. 01:17:06.680 --> 01:17:10.400 >> Got a first and a second for approval of the Consent Agenda discussion. 01:17:10.400 --> 01:17:18.860 Let's vote, please. 01:17:18.860 --> 01:17:20.960 That motion carries 6-0. 01:17:20.960 --> 01:17:24.860 That will move us into our items for individual consideration. 01:17:24.860 --> 01:17:31.180 And let me pause here just for a moment in case there's anyone in the audience or listening 01:17:31.180 --> 01:17:38.960 that are here for public hearing items 5B and C. That is the zoning change with regard 01:17:38.960 --> 01:17:41.040 to Corbin Road. 01:17:41.040 --> 01:17:46.440 That is going to be postponed and we won't be taking action on that item today. 01:17:46.440 --> 01:17:50.840 So I just wanted to make sure everybody has a heads up ahead of time, 5B and 5C will not 01:17:50.840 --> 01:17:53.360 be heard today. 01:17:53.360 --> 01:17:58.200 So our first item for individual consideration is 4A, FP240011. 01:17:58.200 --> 01:18:01.600 Angie is here for presentation. 01:18:01.600 --> 01:18:02.600 Hi. 01:18:02.600 --> 01:18:06.120 >> Good evening, Chair, members of the Commission. 01:18:06.120 --> 01:18:08.940 Angie Mangleris, Development Review Manager. 01:18:08.940 --> 01:18:12.040 This is FP240011B. 01:18:12.040 --> 01:18:14.400 This is a final plan for Stella Hills Phase 1. 01:18:14.400 --> 01:18:19.640 It is located just south of McKinney Street where McKinney Street and Laney Circle intersect. 01:18:19.640 --> 01:18:24.760 There's approximately 177 single family lots and four open space lots. 01:18:24.760 --> 01:18:26.520 The zoning is R6. 01:18:26.520 --> 01:18:29.480 At the time the packet went out, they did not meet all the criteria for approval. 01:18:29.480 --> 01:18:33.240 However, the plot does now satisfy all of our criteria and staff as recommending approval 01:18:33.240 --> 01:18:34.360 of the plot as presented. 01:18:34.360 --> 01:18:36.000 Happy to answer any questions. 01:18:36.000 --> 01:18:37.000 >> Thank you, Angie. 01:18:37.000 --> 01:18:40.160 >> Any questions for Angie? 01:18:40.160 --> 01:18:45.160 Thank you. 01:18:45.160 --> 01:18:52.160 Chair can entertain a motion or discussion at this time. 01:18:52.160 --> 01:18:56.440 I will move approval of that item. 01:18:56.440 --> 01:18:57.440 Vice Chair approve it. 01:18:57.440 --> 01:18:58.440 >> Second. 01:18:58.440 --> 01:18:59.440 >> Okay. 01:18:59.440 --> 01:19:00.440 We've got a first and a second for approval. 01:19:00.440 --> 01:19:01.440 Is there any discussion? 01:19:01.440 --> 01:19:02.440 Okay. 01:19:02.440 --> 01:19:08.520 Let's vote, please. 01:19:08.520 --> 01:19:10.400 That motion carries 6-0. 01:19:10.400 --> 01:19:15.720 That takes us to 4B, FP240020. 01:19:15.720 --> 01:19:17.120 Bryce is here for that item. 01:19:17.120 --> 01:19:18.120 Hello. 01:19:18.120 --> 01:19:21.440 >> Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Bryce Van Arsdale, Assistant Planner. 01:19:21.440 --> 01:19:27.680 This is a final plot for approximately 15.98 acres on the southeast corner of the intersection 01:19:27.680 --> 01:19:30.820 of Copper Canyon Road and Old Alton Road. 01:19:30.820 --> 01:19:34.360 This plot will create one single lot, and while it does not meet our current criteria 01:19:34.360 --> 01:19:38.880 for approval, staff has no objection to the requested extension date certain to a date 01:19:38.880 --> 01:19:40.720 certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:19:40.720 --> 01:19:42.920 I'll stand for any questions. 01:19:42.920 --> 01:19:43.920 >> Thank you, Bryce. 01:19:43.920 --> 01:19:45.920 I do not see any questions. 01:19:45.920 --> 01:19:47.280 Appreciate it. 01:19:47.280 --> 01:19:48.280 Commissioner Villarreal. 01:19:48.280 --> 01:19:53.840 >> Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:19:53.840 --> 01:19:54.840 >> Thank you. 01:19:54.840 --> 01:19:55.840 Commissioner Thaggard? 01:19:55.840 --> 01:19:56.840 >> Second. 01:19:56.840 --> 01:20:03.720 >> Second to grant the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:20:03.720 --> 01:20:04.720 Any discussion? 01:20:04.720 --> 01:20:05.720 Okay. 01:20:05.720 --> 01:20:14.000 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 01:20:14.000 --> 01:20:17.160 That motion carries 6-0. 01:20:17.160 --> 01:20:21.680 The next four items, Commissioner Cole is going to recuse himself, so I'm going to let 01:20:21.680 --> 01:20:24.120 him leave the dais. 01:20:24.120 --> 01:20:31.020 And then Cameron is here for the first one of 4CFP240012. 01:20:31.020 --> 01:20:34.620 >> Thank you, Chair and Commission, Cameron Robertson, principal planner. 01:20:34.620 --> 01:20:38.480 This is a final plot for Hunter Ranch Phase 1A. 01:20:38.480 --> 01:20:45.120 It's for approximately 53 acres, located just north of Robeson Ranch Road and west of Interstate 01:20:45.120 --> 01:20:46.800 35 West. 01:20:46.800 --> 01:20:53.080 It is to consist of 95 single-family residential lots as well as 10 HOA lots. 01:20:53.080 --> 01:20:57.440 Staff is recommending denial at this time, but staff has no objection to the second extension 01:20:57.440 --> 01:21:03.600 request date certain of June 26th, 2024, and I can stand for any questions. 01:21:03.600 --> 01:21:04.600 >> Thank you. 01:21:04.600 --> 01:21:06.200 I do not see any questions. 01:21:06.200 --> 01:21:07.200 Commissioner Villarreal? 01:21:07.200 --> 01:21:11.320 >> Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:21:11.320 --> 01:21:12.320 >> Okay. 01:21:12.320 --> 01:21:13.320 Thank you. 01:21:13.320 --> 01:21:14.320 Commissioner Thaggard? 01:21:14.320 --> 01:21:15.320 >> Second. 01:21:15.320 --> 01:21:18.080 >> We've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of 01:21:18.080 --> 01:21:21.640 June 26th, 2024. 01:21:21.640 --> 01:21:32.800 Seeing no discussion, let's vote, please. 01:21:32.800 --> 01:21:37.200 That motion carries 5-0. 01:21:37.200 --> 01:21:43.600 Next item is 4DFP240013. 01:21:43.600 --> 01:21:45.320 >> Thank you so much, Chair and Commission. 01:21:45.320 --> 01:21:47.600 This is for Hunter Ranch Phase 1B. 01:21:47.600 --> 01:21:53.480 It's approximately 50-acre site, it would consist of 180 single-family residential lots 01:21:53.480 --> 01:21:55.640 and 8 HOA lots. 01:21:55.640 --> 01:21:59.480 Staff is recommending denial at this time, but staff has no objection to the second extension 01:21:59.480 --> 01:22:03.600 request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024, and I can stand for any questions. 01:22:03.600 --> 01:22:05.640 >> Thanks, Cameron. 01:22:05.640 --> 01:22:06.960 I do not see any questions. 01:22:06.960 --> 01:22:08.440 Thank you very much. 01:22:08.440 --> 01:22:09.440 Commissioner Villarreal? 01:22:09.440 --> 01:22:13.880 >> Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:22:13.880 --> 01:22:14.880 >> Thank you. 01:22:14.880 --> 01:22:15.880 Commissioner Perot? 01:22:15.880 --> 01:22:16.880 >> Second. 01:22:16.880 --> 01:22:20.160 >> Okay, we've got a first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain 01:22:20.160 --> 01:22:23.600 of June 26th, 2024. 01:22:23.600 --> 01:22:32.800 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 01:22:32.800 --> 01:22:34.280 That motion carries 5-0. 01:22:34.280 --> 01:22:40.600 That'll take us to 4EFP240014. 01:22:40.600 --> 01:22:41.600 >> Thank you so much. 01:22:41.600 --> 01:22:44.120 This is for our final plot for Hunter Ranch Phase 1C. 01:22:44.120 --> 01:22:51.120 It's for approximately 68-acre site to consist of 287 single-family residential lots and 10 01:22:51.120 --> 01:22:52.240 HOA lots. 01:22:52.240 --> 01:22:56.200 Staff is recommending denial at this time, but staff has no objection to the second extension 01:22:56.200 --> 01:23:00.160 request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024, and I can stand for any questions. 01:23:00.160 --> 01:23:01.160 >> Thanks, Cameron. 01:23:01.160 --> 01:23:03.820 I do not see any questions. 01:23:03.820 --> 01:23:04.820 Thank you. 01:23:04.820 --> 01:23:05.820 Commissioner Villarreal? 01:23:05.820 --> 01:23:10.440 >> Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:23:10.440 --> 01:23:11.440 >> Commissioner Thaggard? 01:23:11.440 --> 01:23:12.440 >> Second. 01:23:12.440 --> 01:23:18.280 >> Okay, first and a second to grant the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:23:18.280 --> 01:23:26.000 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 01:23:26.000 --> 01:23:27.760 That motion carries 5-0. 01:23:27.760 --> 01:23:32.920 That will take us to 4FFP240015. 01:23:32.920 --> 01:23:33.920 >> Thank you. 01:23:33.920 --> 01:23:36.080 This is a final plot for Hunter Ranch Phase 1D. 01:23:36.080 --> 01:23:37.960 It's approximately 50-acre site. 01:23:37.960 --> 01:23:43.400 I'm consisting of 185 single-family residential lots and 8 HOA lots. 01:23:43.400 --> 01:23:47.600 Staff is recommending denial at this time, but staff has no objection to the second extension 01:23:47.600 --> 01:23:53.600 request date to a date certain of June 26th, 2024, and I can stand for any questions. 01:23:53.600 --> 01:23:54.600 >> Thank you. 01:23:54.600 --> 01:24:01.860 I do not see any -- thank you so much, Cameron. 01:24:01.860 --> 01:24:02.860 Commissioner Villarreal? 01:24:02.860 --> 01:24:07.320 >> Move approval of the extension request to a date certain of June 26th, 2024. 01:24:07.320 --> 01:24:08.320 >> Thank you. 01:24:08.320 --> 01:24:09.320 Commissioner Thaggard? 01:24:09.320 --> 01:24:10.320 >> Second. 01:24:10.320 --> 01:24:13.160 >> We've got a first and a second to approve the extension request to a date certain of 01:24:13.160 --> 01:24:16.840 June 26th, 2024. 01:24:16.840 --> 01:24:24.240 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 01:24:24.240 --> 01:24:26.880 That motion carries 5-0. 01:24:26.880 --> 01:24:34.120 We'll let Commissioner Cole enter back in, and I will call Item 5A of our public hearings 01:24:34.120 --> 01:24:37.120 as PD240005. 01:24:37.120 --> 01:24:41.560 I'll open the public hearing, and Mia is here for presentation. 01:24:41.560 --> 01:24:50.080 >> Good evening, Chair, members of the commission. 01:24:50.080 --> 01:24:56.760 Mia Hines, senior planner, and this item is a PD24-0005. 01:24:56.760 --> 01:25:03.760 The request is to rezone approximately 52 1/2 acres from R6 to PDLI, which is an overlay 01:25:03.760 --> 01:25:06.520 PD with a light industrial-based zoning. 01:25:06.520 --> 01:25:12.640 The request or the subject site is a part of a larger 86-acre site, and I've highlighted 01:25:12.640 --> 01:25:17.640 that here in yellow on your screen, so you can see that that site is -- or the subject 01:25:17.640 --> 01:25:22.840 property is a part of that larger site, which has access off of Black, Geesling, and also 01:25:22.840 --> 01:25:24.680 touches US380. 01:25:24.680 --> 01:25:27.440 The request would establish a light industrial zoning. 01:25:27.440 --> 01:25:31.680 It would require ESA compliance at zoning compliance plan review. 01:25:31.680 --> 01:25:36.060 It would also require a 250-foot building setback from residential properties and Black 01:25:36.060 --> 01:25:37.060 Road. 01:25:37.060 --> 01:25:42.960 It would require a 50-foot wide landscape buffer from -- with 50 buffer points from 01:25:42.960 --> 01:25:46.200 -- adjacent to the residential properties and Black Road. 01:25:46.200 --> 01:25:52.440 It would also restrict truck traffic access onto Black Road from any driveways that are 01:25:52.440 --> 01:25:54.840 proposed as a part of future developments. 01:25:54.840 --> 01:25:59.200 It also would prohibit automotive fuel cells and major auto repair, and I do apologize, 01:25:59.200 --> 01:26:00.200 there is one more. 01:26:00.200 --> 01:26:05.200 It limits the building height for structures within this PD to 55 feet as opposed to the 01:26:05.200 --> 01:26:10.840 75 feet that is allowed in our -- or currently permitted in our light industrial zoning district. 01:26:10.840 --> 01:26:16.680 So just to give you a broad overview, this is a PD overlay, and our code does allow for 01:26:16.680 --> 01:26:20.080 applicants to apply for an overlay PD and a standard PD. 01:26:20.080 --> 01:26:24.480 The standard PD usually comes with a development plan, and it's usually utilized when an applicant 01:26:24.480 --> 01:26:28.960 or property owner has a more fleshed-out idea of their development. 01:26:28.960 --> 01:26:34.280 In this case, they are wanting to get their zoning title to be consistent with the rest 01:26:34.280 --> 01:26:38.800 of the property and be able to develop and come forward through our development processes 01:26:38.800 --> 01:26:40.680 at a later time. 01:26:40.680 --> 01:26:44.160 So this is an overlay PD as opposed to a standard PD. 01:26:44.160 --> 01:26:47.960 So we did, of course, put this up against our criteria for approval, and I'll get into 01:26:47.960 --> 01:26:49.800 those points here in a second. 01:26:49.800 --> 01:26:54.400 Just highlights, the new PD would be -- is compliant with our criteria for approval. 01:26:54.400 --> 01:26:59.520 It would be subject to the LI development standards of our current development code, 01:26:59.520 --> 01:27:04.960 and as amended, it would require ESA compliance at zoning compliance plan, whereas we're most 01:27:04.960 --> 01:27:11.800 usually flexible with that for -- sometimes it's deferred to CEPs or later in the process, 01:27:11.800 --> 01:27:16.080 but this requires them to have those answers ahead of time. 01:27:16.080 --> 01:27:21.080 The proposed PD builds in additional buffers to minimize adverse impacts on the surrounding 01:27:21.080 --> 01:27:22.640 less intense uses. 01:27:22.640 --> 01:27:27.560 Additionally, light industrial flume designation is intended to allow for development of light 01:27:27.560 --> 01:27:32.320 manufacturing and assembling in warehouses on these tracks, and that is the future land 01:27:32.320 --> 01:27:34.440 use designation on this property. 01:27:34.440 --> 01:27:38.880 There's also an overlay or an overlap of a little bit of low residential future land use 01:27:38.880 --> 01:27:44.080 that map designation on this property, and this PD does take that into consideration. 01:27:44.080 --> 01:27:47.600 Specifically in those areas, like I said, adjacent to the residential zoning district, and this 01:27:47.600 --> 01:27:54.000 is just that future land use map that shows that light industrial future land use on the 01:27:54.000 --> 01:27:59.840 majority of the property with a low residential overlap along the fringes there, and again, 01:27:59.840 --> 01:28:06.160 where the applicant is proposing those overlay buffers, that is within that area. 01:28:06.160 --> 01:28:12.280 So the proposed PD development standards, like I said, include a minimum side yard setback 01:28:12.280 --> 01:28:16.720 compared to the existing light industrial zoning district, where we would only require 01:28:16.720 --> 01:28:20.760 a minimum five foot building setback under LI. 01:28:20.760 --> 01:28:25.800 The proposed ... This development would ... Or any subsequent developments would have to respect 01:28:25.800 --> 01:28:32.720 the 250 foot residential ... I'm sorry, building setback from those residential properties. 01:28:32.720 --> 01:28:38.400 Additionally, as far as land use compatibility buffers, we do require in our current DDC 01:28:38.400 --> 01:28:44.080 a minimum of 30 feet landscape buffer with 50 points from DDC table 7.E, and this of 01:28:44.080 --> 01:28:48.800 course increases that requirement to a minimum of 50 feet. 01:28:48.800 --> 01:28:54.480 Again, ESA compliance plan review comes at the zoning compliance plan stage, and permitted 01:28:54.480 --> 01:28:59.000 uses where the LI district does permit ... I'm sorry, the base LI zoning district would of 01:28:59.000 --> 01:29:03.240 course permit all of those permitted uses that are listed in our table of allowed uses 01:29:03.240 --> 01:29:05.480 under LI. 01:29:05.480 --> 01:29:12.520 This overlay district does prohibit automotive fuel sales and major auto repair. 01:29:12.520 --> 01:29:17.820 So those uses, whereas they would be allowed under regular LI, would not be allowed within 01:29:17.820 --> 01:29:21.880 this portion of the PD. 01:29:21.880 --> 01:29:25.440 Since it was discussed in work session, I did add the definition of those prohibited 01:29:25.440 --> 01:29:26.440 uses. 01:29:26.440 --> 01:29:32.080 Automotive repair major is an establishment engaged in providing major automotive repair 01:29:32.080 --> 01:29:37.360 services such as engine and drive train repair, body work, mechanical services, and painting. 01:29:37.360 --> 01:29:42.440 So when those items that are highlighted there, the engine, drive train, repair, body work, 01:29:42.440 --> 01:29:46.760 mechanical servicing, and/or painting, when those come into the equation, it's considered 01:29:46.760 --> 01:29:48.920 major auto repair. 01:29:48.920 --> 01:29:56.160 As far as access and circulation, that stipulation is written there, and again, the purpose or 01:29:56.160 --> 01:30:02.920 the intent behind this requirement or this addition to the PD is to restrict truck traffic 01:30:02.920 --> 01:30:07.280 from Black Road given the existing residences, the existing condition of that road. 01:30:07.280 --> 01:30:12.400 We felt that if that was possible, we could limit some potential conflicts in vehicular 01:30:12.400 --> 01:30:14.400 traffic there. 01:30:14.400 --> 01:30:18.800 We did perform public outreach per our development code. 01:30:18.800 --> 01:30:24.960 We did receive two letters in opposition expressing concerns of drainage and land use compatibility. 01:30:24.960 --> 01:30:26.880 Sorry about that. 01:30:26.880 --> 01:30:32.920 That equates to just over 11% in opposition for those curious about the supermajority 01:30:32.920 --> 01:30:35.920 requirement at council. 01:30:35.920 --> 01:30:41.840 The applicant did perform a few neighborhood meetings which they are here and could potentially 01:30:41.840 --> 01:30:44.720 speak to as well. 01:30:44.720 --> 01:30:48.800 So with that, staff is recommending approval of this request as it complies with the criteria 01:30:48.800 --> 01:30:54.480 for approval in our DDC, and I will take any questions or comments that you have at this 01:30:54.480 --> 01:30:55.480 time. 01:30:55.480 --> 01:30:56.480 Thank you very much, Mia. 01:30:56.480 --> 01:30:58.520 Anybody have any questions? 01:30:58.520 --> 01:31:04.120 Mia, my question that I couldn't come up with in work session with regarding to that verbiage, 01:31:04.120 --> 01:31:12.540 which I like, but it talks about having signage on the property, like do not exit. 01:31:12.540 --> 01:31:15.240 What about entering the driveway on Black? 01:31:15.240 --> 01:31:22.880 I mean, ideally we don't want truck -- I mean, prefer not to have truck traffic on Black. 01:31:22.880 --> 01:31:29.640 So if we've got an internal sign saying, okay, do not exit, what's keeping them from entering? 01:31:29.640 --> 01:31:30.920 So we could add that restriction. 01:31:30.920 --> 01:31:35.740 I think the goal here was tried -- because this is the use or the warehouse use would 01:31:35.740 --> 01:31:43.800 be on this property, the goal was to try to permit -- prevent, rather, the truck traffic 01:31:43.800 --> 01:31:49.000 that would be using this property from going on to Black Road, but I think that that could 01:31:49.000 --> 01:31:53.680 be a condition that we could add also to add that signage outside so that trucks traveling 01:31:53.680 --> 01:31:58.360 from outside into the property would know not to use that also, but at that point they 01:31:58.360 --> 01:31:59.840 would already be on Black Road. 01:31:59.840 --> 01:32:00.840 That's true. 01:32:00.840 --> 01:32:01.840 Yeah. 01:32:01.840 --> 01:32:02.840 I'm not sure the best way to do that. 01:32:02.840 --> 01:32:03.840 Okay. 01:32:03.840 --> 01:32:04.840 That's just my brain working. 01:32:04.840 --> 01:32:05.840 Go ahead, Tina. 01:32:05.840 --> 01:32:06.840 Yeah. 01:32:06.840 --> 01:32:07.840 Thank you. 01:32:07.840 --> 01:32:12.080 One of the things that we could look at, if that's desired by the commission, we could 01:32:12.080 --> 01:32:15.880 -- between the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, if you were to approve this this evening 01:32:15.880 --> 01:32:20.880 or recommend approval, excuse me, between now and when it goes to council next week, 01:32:20.880 --> 01:32:26.560 we could talk to our transportation services team to see if there is any value to possibly 01:32:26.560 --> 01:32:32.320 limiting truck traffic on that portion of Black Road, if that's a concern of the commission. 01:32:32.320 --> 01:32:34.320 If not, you know, just tell us. 01:32:34.320 --> 01:32:36.320 With just, like, signage, you mean? 01:32:36.320 --> 01:32:41.200 Well, we'd have to look at probably from intersection to intersection, and in all likelihood it's 01:32:41.200 --> 01:32:45.560 from a major, you know, a more prominent intersection to a more prominent intersection to be able 01:32:45.560 --> 01:32:50.880 to look at whether or not prohibiting -- in order for us to prevent trucks from entering 01:32:50.880 --> 01:32:51.880 the site. 01:32:51.880 --> 01:32:55.040 I mean, we could have them post a sign, but if the truck is already on Black Road, it's 01:32:55.040 --> 01:32:56.440 already on Black Road, right? 01:32:56.440 --> 01:33:03.480 So that's why I said, yeah, we'd have to evaluate a larger section of it, but again, just whatever 01:33:03.480 --> 01:33:04.480 the commission's desire is. 01:33:04.480 --> 01:33:05.480 I keep thinking about that. 01:33:05.480 --> 01:33:06.480 Okay. 01:33:06.480 --> 01:33:07.480 And thank you, Tina. 01:33:07.480 --> 01:33:09.360 I did fail to mention that this is one of those cases that is being fast-tracked. 01:33:09.360 --> 01:33:13.520 It will be on City Council agenda or plans for City Council agenda next week. 01:33:13.520 --> 01:33:14.520 Okay. 01:33:14.520 --> 01:33:15.520 Thank you for that. 01:33:15.520 --> 01:33:16.520 Okay. 01:33:16.520 --> 01:33:18.280 Appreciate it. 01:33:18.280 --> 01:33:19.280 This is a public hearing. 01:33:19.280 --> 01:33:23.920 I have one card at the moment to speak, and it is the applicant, and it is Amy Bissett. 01:33:23.920 --> 01:33:26.960 I will invite her up to speak. 01:33:26.960 --> 01:33:27.960 Hello. 01:33:27.960 --> 01:33:28.960 Hello. 01:33:28.960 --> 01:33:29.960 Thank you. 01:33:29.960 --> 01:33:30.960 Thank you, Mia. 01:33:30.960 --> 01:33:34.600 Good evening, Commissioners and Chair Ellis. 01:33:34.600 --> 01:33:37.360 I appreciate the opportunity to be in front of you this evening. 01:33:37.360 --> 01:33:40.480 If I can get my slides to work, that would be great. 01:33:40.480 --> 01:33:41.480 There we go. 01:33:41.480 --> 01:33:46.480 I do want to start by saying that I did watch the work session, and I'm going to address 01:33:46.480 --> 01:33:49.120 some of those questions in my presentation tonight. 01:33:49.120 --> 01:33:56.440 And in a little bit of irony, the property owner, my client, is going to be here tonight, 01:33:56.440 --> 01:34:02.760 but he's currently stuck in traffic on 380, so he should be walking in any minute now. 01:34:02.760 --> 01:34:08.400 But speaking of the property owner, I do want to share anecdotally that Mr. Walker and Mr. 01:34:08.400 --> 01:34:12.520 Martin, who own this property today, have owned it for nearly 40 years now. 01:34:12.520 --> 01:34:18.500 They bought it in 1986 with the intent to develop it residentially, and have had a tremendous 01:34:18.500 --> 01:34:25.200 number of problems with the site, with the number of utilities that bisect the site. 01:34:25.200 --> 01:34:32.500 And it's just over the course of the years, the nature of 380 and the location have changed 01:34:32.500 --> 01:34:39.760 to where the suitability for residential has not improved during their time of ownership. 01:34:39.760 --> 01:34:41.200 And just thought I would share that. 01:34:41.200 --> 01:34:47.360 So this is the entire property you can see here, a portion of the property. 01:34:47.360 --> 01:34:49.040 This is the zoning map today. 01:34:49.040 --> 01:34:53.000 The northwest portion of the property was actually rezoned in 2021, some of you may 01:34:53.000 --> 01:34:59.440 remember that, to facilitate a project that ultimately did not materialize. 01:34:59.440 --> 01:35:04.560 The current property owners, Mr. Walker and Mr. Martin, are seeking to market the property 01:35:04.560 --> 01:35:05.760 for sale. 01:35:05.760 --> 01:35:12.640 They've had multiple developers interested since 2021, but just the number of challenges 01:35:12.640 --> 01:35:19.160 associated with it, and the fact that it's split zoning today, has caused them to seek 01:35:19.160 --> 01:35:23.160 out an attempt to rezone it ahead of a sale. 01:35:23.160 --> 01:35:28.680 The site does include electric transmission lines, an Atmos gas pipeline, and is adjacent 01:35:28.680 --> 01:35:34.080 to a substation, which are some of the challenges associated with it. 01:35:34.080 --> 01:35:39.960 I won't capture this again, but it is, future land use is mostly light industrial, but we 01:35:39.960 --> 01:35:45.920 are attempting to be respectful of the adjacency of low residential as well. 01:35:45.920 --> 01:35:49.640 The initial conditions that we proposed when we submitted the zoning application were an 01:35:49.640 --> 01:35:55.160 increased building setback along the eastern property line specifically, and then the ESA 01:35:55.160 --> 01:35:57.600 field assessment requirement. 01:35:57.600 --> 01:36:00.600 We then went into neighborhood engagement. 01:36:00.600 --> 01:36:06.120 We held two virtual meetings in May, and the neighbors indicated that they wanted to meet 01:36:06.120 --> 01:36:10.140 amongst themselves, and many of them are here tonight, which I very much appreciate. 01:36:10.140 --> 01:36:13.080 They've been a pleasure to work with. 01:36:13.080 --> 01:36:17.320 And then they followed up with us and asked for some additional conversation. 01:36:17.320 --> 01:36:21.800 We had a follow-up meeting on June 7th with a couple of the neighbors specifically related 01:36:21.800 --> 01:36:23.600 to issues on Black Road. 01:36:23.600 --> 01:36:28.840 And then I had an additional discussion last night with a neighborhood representative making 01:36:28.840 --> 01:36:33.940 some additional requests, so we'll kind of walk through what some of those are that we've 01:36:33.940 --> 01:36:38.680 addressed within the conditions today, and some that you could potentially put additional 01:36:38.680 --> 01:36:41.600 conditions on tonight. 01:36:41.600 --> 01:36:46.340 So here's a highlighted map of the property owners that I know I've personally spoken 01:36:46.340 --> 01:36:47.340 with. 01:36:47.340 --> 01:36:50.080 I know there's some here this evening that are not highlighted here, but I just wanted 01:36:50.080 --> 01:36:54.640 you to see that we have really tried to have a good representation of the residential property 01:36:54.640 --> 01:36:57.640 owners in the area. 01:36:57.640 --> 01:37:05.040 So the neighborhood requests and the additional conditions that we've agreed to, as Mia mentioned, 01:37:05.040 --> 01:37:11.880 now the setback and the landscape buffer encompass the entire area highlighted in yellow here. 01:37:11.880 --> 01:37:16.440 We've reduced the maximum building height from 75 feet to 55 feet. 01:37:16.440 --> 01:37:18.360 We had originally agreed to 60 feet. 01:37:18.360 --> 01:37:20.220 The neighborhood was asking for 50. 01:37:20.220 --> 01:37:27.440 I did a quick analysis on recent industrial project heights, and 55 seemed to be the max, 01:37:27.440 --> 01:37:37.200 and without putting a limitation on a potential buyer, we felt like 55 was reasonable to kind 01:37:37.200 --> 01:37:41.700 of meet in the middle and still not limit potential developers. 01:37:41.700 --> 01:37:45.960 We have also agreed to restrict Black Road to no truck traffic and employee entrance 01:37:45.960 --> 01:37:52.080 only to your question, Chair Ellis, about how do you keep them from coming onto Black Road. 01:37:52.080 --> 01:37:56.920 We've handled this in a couple of different cases in the past on zoning cases where we 01:37:56.920 --> 01:38:02.440 wanted truck traffic to go into a particular location and not others, and depending on 01:38:02.440 --> 01:38:07.720 the developer, they can certainly configure the site to discourage that. 01:38:07.720 --> 01:38:10.840 Trucks really want the easiest way in and out to start with, and so if they make it 01:38:10.840 --> 01:38:15.780 more difficult, that helps with that, but I agree that a conversation with transportation 01:38:15.780 --> 01:38:19.280 would be helpful between now and when we go to city council. 01:38:19.280 --> 01:38:23.600 We have agreed to prohibit major auto repair and fueling stations. 01:38:23.600 --> 01:38:28.400 I did listen to the work session, and there were some conversations about some additional 01:38:28.400 --> 01:38:34.460 prohibitions, and so I want to cover those options as well this evening. 01:38:34.460 --> 01:38:38.400 Before I get to that, though, I want to talk about a couple of specific requests from the 01:38:38.400 --> 01:38:42.280 neighbors that we are not opposed to, but might be a little challenging from a wording 01:38:42.280 --> 01:38:44.800 standpoint in the zoning ordinance. 01:38:44.800 --> 01:38:51.800 The neighbors prefer to have a 25-foot wide natural buffer area from their property where 01:38:51.800 --> 01:38:56.440 we basically don't touch what's there today, and then a screening wall, and then another 01:38:56.440 --> 01:39:03.080 25 feet, so it still meets the 50-foot width and all of the elements associated with it. 01:39:03.080 --> 01:39:08.120 We are fine with that being codified in the ordinance, if that's the wish of the council. 01:39:08.120 --> 01:39:13.960 I did speak with the neighbor about how that may create some vermin-type situations or 01:39:13.960 --> 01:39:16.920 something where there's a little bit of a no man's land where something might not get 01:39:16.920 --> 01:39:22.440 maintained well, and their preference was that that's how it is today, and they would 01:39:22.440 --> 01:39:26.040 like for it to stay that way because it's a natural buffer. 01:39:26.040 --> 01:39:34.200 We've also heard considerable conversation about a drainage, and specifically there is 01:39:34.200 --> 01:39:42.240 a potential ESA that comes through the northeast side of the property here, and there's really 01:39:42.240 --> 01:39:46.160 not a whole lot we can do from a zoning standpoint to address drainage. 01:39:46.160 --> 01:39:52.840 I think it's well addressed in the design criteria manual for drainage design in that 01:39:52.840 --> 01:39:58.280 we're not permitted to increase runoff from what it is today, and we have to detain for 01:39:58.280 --> 01:40:01.000 water quality volume as well. 01:40:01.000 --> 01:40:08.760 However, there are some existing drainage issues across Black Road draining to the south, 01:40:08.760 --> 01:40:12.460 and there's some concerns about contamination of water runoff. 01:40:12.460 --> 01:40:15.320 I just want to acknowledge those here in front of you all today. 01:40:15.320 --> 01:40:21.160 I don't know that we have a solution other than following the criteria manual when the 01:40:21.160 --> 01:40:26.920 property does develop, and hopefully we would be involved with that developer at that time 01:40:26.920 --> 01:40:31.760 and can help encourage them to work with the neighbors to solve some of those issues. 01:40:31.760 --> 01:40:37.640 There's also concern about landscaping being irrigated and maintained, and we've covered 01:40:37.640 --> 01:40:44.040 the requirement that the landscape buffer would require irrigation and that any landscaping 01:40:44.040 --> 01:40:50.800 that did not survive within the first couple of years would be required to be replaced. 01:40:50.800 --> 01:40:57.000 As it relates to allowable land uses, these are the industrial category allowable land 01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:00.480 uses that would be permitted under LI. 01:41:00.480 --> 01:41:03.880 Just the highlighted ones are the only ones that are permitted by right. 01:41:03.880 --> 01:41:08.800 Those that have an S beside them would require a specific use permit, which would require 01:41:08.800 --> 01:41:11.100 us to come back before you again. 01:41:11.100 --> 01:41:15.040 Those with an X are not permitted in light industrial. 01:41:15.040 --> 01:41:18.520 I personally don't see anything on this list that would be objectionable. 01:41:18.520 --> 01:41:23.000 However, if any of you do, we are open to discussion on those. 01:41:23.000 --> 01:41:27.880 I think what I heard from the work session is really more of a concern of the auto or 01:41:27.880 --> 01:41:35.880 the vehicle related uses that are highlighted here, auto wash, fuel sales, auto repair shop, 01:41:35.880 --> 01:41:37.560 minor and major. 01:41:37.560 --> 01:41:44.880 We have no issue eliminating all of those as land uses on this property, and just highlighted 01:41:44.880 --> 01:41:53.640 a few others here that you may want to point out or seek further prohibitions on. 01:41:53.640 --> 01:41:57.360 My client is open to any of those. 01:41:57.360 --> 01:42:04.720 He's basically seeking true light industrial warehousing uses on this site. 01:42:04.720 --> 01:42:05.720 That concludes my presentation. 01:42:05.720 --> 01:42:08.080 I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. 01:42:08.080 --> 01:42:09.080 Thank you. 01:42:09.080 --> 01:42:10.920 Thank you very much. 01:42:10.920 --> 01:42:15.920 I'm waiting for my screen to come up here to see if we've got any questions. 01:42:15.920 --> 01:42:16.920 Vice Chair Perot. 01:42:16.920 --> 01:42:17.920 Thank you, Chair. 01:42:17.920 --> 01:42:19.920 Just a couple of things. 01:42:19.920 --> 01:42:30.640 I wasn't able to pull up the topo information quickly with the desire of the 25 foot natural 01:42:30.640 --> 01:42:37.640 barrier and then the further 25 feet being where the buffer points are spent essentially 01:42:37.640 --> 01:42:45.960 to create the natural buffer or the landscape buffer. 01:42:45.960 --> 01:42:52.120 Is there a considerable rise or fall from the adjacent properties inland or inward to 01:42:52.120 --> 01:43:02.400 the site that would cause a buffer to be more height guarding, if you will, if it were closer 01:43:02.400 --> 01:43:04.600 than further away? 01:43:04.600 --> 01:43:13.920 The low points on this site are near the east, southeast corner, and then south along Black. 01:43:13.920 --> 01:43:16.680 Anything falls to the southeast. 01:43:16.680 --> 01:43:22.080 I don't know that having it closer or further away is necessarily going to affect the visual 01:43:22.080 --> 01:43:23.080 buffer. 01:43:23.080 --> 01:43:24.080 Okay. 01:43:24.080 --> 01:43:30.440 Then secondly, I appreciate you looking into the typical heights of developments and that 01:43:30.440 --> 01:43:31.440 sort of thing. 01:43:31.440 --> 01:43:40.920 I'm really not very familiar with the economic cost jumps, if you will, in industrial type 01:43:40.920 --> 01:43:44.200 large building construction. 01:43:44.200 --> 01:43:51.320 What I'm wondering is, does setting 55 feet for the entire, I mean, not the entire highlighted 01:43:51.320 --> 01:43:57.240 parcel you're there, but the parcel that we're talking about in this rezoning, it's fairly 01:43:57.240 --> 01:43:59.280 tall and wide, right? 01:43:59.280 --> 01:44:06.500 There's some places there that are more than 1,000 feet from the adjacent properties. 01:44:06.500 --> 01:44:14.400 I wouldn't want a 55 foot height limit carte blanche in that region to cause the development 01:44:14.400 --> 01:44:22.880 to move closer to the adjacent residential sites if allowing 65 feet or something else, 01:44:22.880 --> 01:44:28.360 if it made more sense from a construction dollars perspective on the northern and western 01:44:28.360 --> 01:44:35.800 side of the site would allow them the flexibility, if you would, to not encroach as close as 01:44:35.800 --> 01:44:36.800 possible. 01:44:36.800 --> 01:44:37.800 Does that make sense? 01:44:37.800 --> 01:44:38.800 Sure. 01:44:38.800 --> 01:44:40.080 I'll do my best to address that question. 01:44:40.080 --> 01:44:45.520 The height that we arrived at, 55 feet, is really driven by clearance heights for the 01:44:45.520 --> 01:44:49.160 various uses that warehouses typically have. 01:44:49.160 --> 01:44:54.160 You're going to have dock doors and bays where you may have equipment moving in and out, 01:44:54.160 --> 01:45:00.120 open span areas for storage and maneuvering of equipment inside the building. 01:45:00.120 --> 01:45:02.600 That's really where the 55 feet came from. 01:45:02.600 --> 01:45:08.280 I don't know that there's a direct correlation between square footage versus height. 01:45:08.280 --> 01:45:13.460 It's more about what's functioning in the building and how much clearance span they 01:45:13.460 --> 01:45:20.000 need to be able to maneuver inside the building and in and out of the building. 01:45:20.000 --> 01:45:26.480 The 55 feet seem to be of the projects that I looked at in the recent year that have been 01:45:26.480 --> 01:45:36.080 permitted 55 feet seem to be the highest that I found, and so most are right at 50 feet. 01:45:36.080 --> 01:45:37.080 Okay. 01:45:37.080 --> 01:45:38.080 Thanks. 01:45:38.080 --> 01:45:39.080 That does help. 01:45:39.080 --> 01:45:40.080 Thank you. 01:45:40.080 --> 01:45:41.080 Thank you. 01:45:41.080 --> 01:45:42.080 Any other questions at the moment? 01:45:42.080 --> 01:45:43.080 Thank you very much. 01:45:43.080 --> 01:45:44.080 Thank you. 01:45:44.080 --> 01:45:45.080 Appreciate it. 01:45:45.080 --> 01:45:48.640 I don't have any cards in front of me, but this is a public hearing. 01:45:48.640 --> 01:45:51.680 Is there anyone wishing to come speak on this item? 01:45:51.680 --> 01:46:01.800 Yep, come on down. 01:46:01.800 --> 01:46:04.480 If you will state your name and address, your time will begin. 01:46:04.480 --> 01:46:05.960 Yes, I'm Debbie Brooks. 01:46:05.960 --> 01:46:09.680 I live at 5585 Black Road. 01:46:09.680 --> 01:46:12.560 My concern is about the barrier structure. 01:46:12.560 --> 01:46:21.360 It needs to be substantial enough to last years, decades, five, 10 decades, because 01:46:21.360 --> 01:46:26.240 the sum of structures as we know, they look substantial initially, and yet they deteriorate 01:46:26.240 --> 01:46:27.240 in attrition. 01:46:27.240 --> 01:46:31.120 It looks horrible after just a few years. 01:46:31.120 --> 01:46:37.160 So if that can be addressed about the quality and the sustainability of that barrier, I 01:46:37.160 --> 01:46:38.520 would appreciate it. 01:46:38.520 --> 01:46:39.800 Thank you. 01:46:39.800 --> 01:46:40.800 Let me ask you a question. 01:46:40.800 --> 01:46:41.800 Yes. 01:46:41.800 --> 01:46:42.800 If I could, please. 01:46:42.800 --> 01:46:44.600 You're talking about the buffering, like that 250 foot buffer. 01:46:44.600 --> 01:46:45.600 Is that what you're referring to? 01:46:45.600 --> 01:46:50.280 Well, there's a 25 foot, and then a barrier is my understanding, and then another 25 feet. 01:46:50.280 --> 01:46:52.960 In what Ms. Bissett just presented. 01:46:52.960 --> 01:46:56.760 Yes, so that barrier, a physical barrier is my understanding. 01:46:56.760 --> 01:46:58.480 Is that yours as well? 01:46:58.480 --> 01:47:03.640 I think that was a little bit different than the material that we had right in front of 01:47:03.640 --> 01:47:04.640 us. 01:47:04.640 --> 01:47:08.720 So I'll probably ask her to bring that back up, and we can discuss that a little bit further. 01:47:08.720 --> 01:47:10.320 Thank you for sharing your concerns. 01:47:10.320 --> 01:47:11.920 Appreciate it. 01:47:11.920 --> 01:47:15.780 Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item? 01:47:15.780 --> 01:47:23.400 Come on down, if you'll state your name and address, your time will begin. 01:47:23.400 --> 01:47:24.400 Thank you. 01:47:24.400 --> 01:47:25.400 Jonathan Brooks. 01:47:25.400 --> 01:47:28.760 I'm at 5579 Black Road. 01:47:28.760 --> 01:47:32.760 There were several things that I discussed with Amy about the property. 01:47:32.760 --> 01:47:35.120 It seems that most of those have been addressed here. 01:47:35.120 --> 01:47:39.120 I'm happy with what she came up with. 01:47:39.120 --> 01:47:44.360 I think there is some concern, I'll reiterate, mostly just for the records you hear from 01:47:44.360 --> 01:47:45.360 me. 01:47:45.360 --> 01:47:46.360 There's a concern about drainage. 01:47:46.360 --> 01:47:49.400 I've done a bit of research on it, asked some friends who are in the know about it. 01:47:49.400 --> 01:47:57.080 And it seems as though the natural drainage will drain off the southwest of the property 01:47:57.080 --> 01:48:08.640 towards Blag and into some county land that's owned by Gary, who's not here today. 01:48:08.640 --> 01:48:10.600 How is draining addressed? 01:48:10.600 --> 01:48:12.800 That's the first question when it comes to planning and zoning. 01:48:12.800 --> 01:48:16.520 If anybody could fill me in on how that will be addressed as a whole. 01:48:16.520 --> 01:48:19.920 And then the only other question I had was on the ESA itself. 01:48:19.920 --> 01:48:28.160 What are the regulatory bodies who will make sure that that ESA doesn't get polluted? 01:48:28.160 --> 01:48:33.520 Because many of our homes, either when that ESA floods or if there's rain, it comes into 01:48:33.520 --> 01:48:34.520 our properties. 01:48:34.520 --> 01:48:37.720 Those are the only two that I had, at least right now. 01:48:37.720 --> 01:48:42.200 Thank you very much for sharing your concerns. 01:48:42.200 --> 01:48:50.520 I might ask Mia to come up, just so those questions is fresh in the mind. 01:48:50.520 --> 01:48:54.560 Can you address either of those concerns publicly for us, please? 01:48:54.560 --> 01:48:58.920 So drainage review will be done when we review their civil engineering plans. 01:48:58.920 --> 01:49:03.960 Of course, we'll make sure that they are meeting our criteria, manuals, and code, and also 01:49:03.960 --> 01:49:10.200 state law, which I think Amy stated, prohibits properties from creating a drainage flow that 01:49:10.200 --> 01:49:16.160 is, or a rate that is greater than what was existing with any development. 01:49:16.160 --> 01:49:20.320 And then as far as the ESA review, that is, again, another review that staff does. 01:49:20.320 --> 01:49:25.780 The alternative ESA plans do come before this body, if it comes to that. 01:49:25.780 --> 01:49:32.960 But ESA compliance is a staff review, and I don't know... 01:49:32.960 --> 01:49:40.320 As far as, I think, maybe Tina could speak to what happens after the ESA review, but 01:49:40.320 --> 01:49:48.640 I know that that's also done at civil engineering plan review, end zone compliance plan review. 01:49:48.640 --> 01:49:49.640 We have one... 01:49:49.640 --> 01:49:50.640 Christy is here. 01:49:50.640 --> 01:49:51.640 Excellent. 01:49:51.640 --> 01:49:52.640 Awesome. 01:49:52.640 --> 01:49:53.640 Yeah. 01:49:53.640 --> 01:49:54.640 Awesome. 01:49:54.640 --> 01:49:55.640 Hello, Christy. 01:49:55.640 --> 01:49:58.440 Hi, Christy Upton, environmental compliance coordinator, and I am the main staff who reviews 01:49:58.440 --> 01:50:05.120 environmentally sensitive areas when there is a property where there's environmentally 01:50:05.120 --> 01:50:09.880 sensitive areas, I'm heavily involved in that process. 01:50:09.880 --> 01:50:17.120 So in this case of this property, there was a field assessment in the past where we confirmed 01:50:17.120 --> 01:50:24.640 that there is a riparian buffer or a zone of vegetation that spans 50 feet on either 01:50:24.640 --> 01:50:28.360 side of the waterway itself. 01:50:28.360 --> 01:50:36.440 The regulatory protection is just focused on the vegetation and is not a part of drainage 01:50:36.440 --> 01:50:38.540 and drainage control. 01:50:38.540 --> 01:50:45.960 So that distinction needs to be in the minds of the reviewers and the applicant. 01:50:45.960 --> 01:50:53.040 And then in addition to that, any drainage issues should be addressed through the civil 01:50:53.040 --> 01:50:56.120 plans or through drainage reviews. 01:50:56.120 --> 01:50:57.120 Okay. 01:50:57.120 --> 01:50:58.120 Thank you. 01:50:58.120 --> 01:50:59.120 That does help. 01:50:59.120 --> 01:51:00.120 I appreciate it, Christy. 01:51:00.120 --> 01:51:01.120 Thank you. 01:51:01.120 --> 01:51:02.120 Okay. 01:51:02.120 --> 01:51:03.480 This is a public hearing. 01:51:03.480 --> 01:51:05.840 Is there anyone else wishing to come and speak? 01:51:05.840 --> 01:51:11.200 Who has not? 01:51:11.200 --> 01:51:12.200 Hello there. 01:51:12.200 --> 01:51:13.200 Hi. 01:51:13.200 --> 01:51:19.800 My name's Tom Brooks, not related to the other Brookses, but I'm on 6801 Appaloosa Court. 01:51:19.800 --> 01:51:28.480 And so my property is adjacent on the east side of this new proposed piece of property, 01:51:28.480 --> 01:51:34.400 and that ESA that we're all talking about runs through a part of my property and the 01:51:34.400 --> 01:51:36.280 rest of my neighborhood. 01:51:36.280 --> 01:51:43.880 So I have serious concerns about drainage off that land, into that creek, into my property, 01:51:43.880 --> 01:51:46.600 and through the rest of my neighborhood. 01:51:46.600 --> 01:51:49.360 I think she briefly mentioned a detention pond. 01:51:49.360 --> 01:51:53.480 I don't know if it was specifically stated, but I'm not even sure that a detention pond 01:51:53.480 --> 01:51:54.480 is going to be enough. 01:51:54.480 --> 01:52:01.320 Depending on what type of structure is being built on that, I heard me say that a study 01:52:01.320 --> 01:52:06.360 would be done after a decision was made on what type of structure would be built. 01:52:06.360 --> 01:52:10.200 I think a study needs to be done now. 01:52:10.200 --> 01:52:15.800 There's serious drainage concerns into that creek, into that ESA currently. 01:52:15.800 --> 01:52:21.360 And there's two properties that haven't been built in Lakeview Ranch, and it's because 01:52:21.360 --> 01:52:26.240 of the issues of that creek and the drainage from that property. 01:52:26.240 --> 01:52:30.600 They've talked about the drainage being southwest or south towards Blag, but a good portion 01:52:30.600 --> 01:52:37.680 of this newly rezoned proposed land drains eastward towards that creek. 01:52:37.680 --> 01:52:42.320 So any significant structure that gets built there is going to cause significant drainage 01:52:42.320 --> 01:52:45.720 into that creek, which already floods. 01:52:45.720 --> 01:52:50.000 And it's on my property, a good portion of that, you'll see that property line, a good 01:52:50.000 --> 01:52:52.520 portion of that property is my property. 01:52:52.520 --> 01:52:56.560 And so I have serious concerns if anything gets built there, and no study being done 01:52:56.560 --> 01:53:01.160 until after a decision has been made of what's being built there. 01:53:01.160 --> 01:53:02.160 That's a serious problem. 01:53:02.160 --> 01:53:04.800 And I don't know if a detention pond is enough. 01:53:04.800 --> 01:53:09.040 I think a retention pond at the minimum has to be built. 01:53:09.040 --> 01:53:12.720 And you don't even know what size a retention pond needs to be built if you don't know what 01:53:12.720 --> 01:53:15.600 structure is going to be built there. 01:53:15.600 --> 01:53:24.680 So I'd like that to be seriously considered by this committee before anything's decided. 01:53:24.680 --> 01:53:30.820 The other concern I think has been addressed here as far as the traffic on Blag Road. 01:53:30.820 --> 01:53:33.360 I'm not sure how familiar you guys are with Blag Road. 01:53:33.360 --> 01:53:36.200 It's a narrow two-lane road currently. 01:53:36.200 --> 01:53:41.420 It cannot support any kind of trucks driving on that currently. 01:53:41.420 --> 01:53:45.840 You get driven off the road if any significant vehicle comes down that road the opposite 01:53:45.840 --> 01:53:46.840 direction. 01:53:46.840 --> 01:53:50.680 So I'm not sure how you're going to propose to prevent any trucks coming down Blag. 01:53:50.680 --> 01:53:59.520 I mean, even if you're preventing entrance or exit from that property onto Blag, they 01:53:59.520 --> 01:54:03.280 can still exit via Geesling and get to Blag. 01:54:03.280 --> 01:54:10.040 So I mean, if you're familiar with 380 now and how this property is structured, the only 01:54:10.040 --> 01:54:14.280 way you can get out of there is to go east on 380. 01:54:14.280 --> 01:54:19.160 What's the proposed solution for any truck wanting to go the other direction? 01:54:19.160 --> 01:54:25.720 They're going to go down Geesling onto Blag and it's going to cause more issues. 01:54:25.720 --> 01:54:29.360 I'm surprised there's not more people that live on Blag that aren't complaining about 01:54:29.360 --> 01:54:30.520 this. 01:54:30.520 --> 01:54:35.280 That's a significant issue that needs to be addressed before anything is built, before 01:54:35.280 --> 01:54:38.240 zoning is changed. 01:54:38.240 --> 01:54:42.520 And I'm not sure what type of structures can be built underneath those power lines and 01:54:42.520 --> 01:54:49.520 over that gas line underground, but you know, I'm not sure why we're even having a discussion 01:54:49.520 --> 01:54:55.160 of rezoning that piece of property at this point in time. 01:54:55.160 --> 01:54:58.160 Any questions for me? 01:54:58.160 --> 01:55:03.880 I do not see any, but thank you for sharing your concern. 01:55:03.880 --> 01:55:07.000 When will anything be addressed about that ESA, because it's been brought up a number 01:55:07.000 --> 01:55:13.400 of times, but nothing's been said about what would be addressed. 01:55:13.400 --> 01:55:17.440 That 50 foot buffer that she talked about on each side of the creek, it's actually larger 01:55:17.440 --> 01:55:24.720 than that, the tree canopy, so I would like that to not be disturbed at all. 01:55:24.720 --> 01:55:25.720 Is that my time? 01:55:25.720 --> 01:55:26.720 It is. 01:55:26.720 --> 01:55:27.720 Thank you very much. 01:55:27.720 --> 01:55:28.720 Appreciate it. 01:55:28.720 --> 01:55:31.600 All right. 01:55:31.600 --> 01:55:37.360 This is a public hearing, come on down. 01:55:37.360 --> 01:55:39.680 Good evening. 01:55:39.680 --> 01:55:41.520 My name is Cynthia Porter. 01:55:41.520 --> 01:55:47.800 I live at 5511 Black Road with my husband and my daughter and my four-year-old granddaughter. 01:55:47.800 --> 01:55:53.760 I ask for your consideration to protect the interests of my family and our neighbors. 01:55:53.760 --> 01:55:54.760 I love Denton. 01:55:54.760 --> 01:56:00.200 I've earned two degrees at the University of North Texas, bachelor's in education and 01:56:00.200 --> 01:56:01.960 educational administration. 01:56:01.960 --> 01:56:09.880 I retired from public education just two years ago, after 32 years, 18 of which I was a campus 01:56:09.880 --> 01:56:17.480 administrator, so I understand how difficult it is to be in your position to make decisions. 01:56:17.480 --> 01:56:21.840 Each day when I go home at night, to know that I made those decisions based upon what 01:56:21.840 --> 01:56:26.880 was on the best interest of my kids made me sleep well at night, and to know I did the 01:56:26.880 --> 01:56:34.080 wrong thing, the right thing, no matter how difficult that it was, putting the kids first. 01:56:34.080 --> 01:56:40.160 And so I ask that you also put yourself in that shoes in putting our neighborhood and 01:56:40.160 --> 01:56:46.200 our neighbors first above businesses that haven't even developed an ownership and plans 01:56:46.200 --> 01:56:55.640 that haven't even come to fruition after decades, decades of being a residentially zoned area. 01:56:55.640 --> 01:57:00.200 We purchased our home in March of 2007. 01:57:00.200 --> 01:57:04.920 I believe I'm one of the longest residents that have lived on Black Road adjacent to 01:57:04.920 --> 01:57:09.280 that property. 01:57:09.280 --> 01:57:14.400 My daughter grew up and went to school here for 13 years, attends Texas Women's University. 01:57:14.400 --> 01:57:18.020 We are vested citizens in this community. 01:57:18.020 --> 01:57:26.480 We may not be business owners, but we pay our taxes and we love our neighborhood. 01:57:26.480 --> 01:57:30.860 It's part of the American dream to come out here and to build and own property. 01:57:30.860 --> 01:57:36.720 As you look at a map, the smallest acreage in that neighborhood is three acres. 01:57:36.720 --> 01:57:39.380 We're on the outskirts of Denton. 01:57:39.380 --> 01:57:47.360 We chose to live in a nice community where we had space, we had breathing room. 01:57:47.360 --> 01:57:51.520 Out of the seven homes that are on Black Road, five of them have been built within the past 01:57:51.520 --> 01:57:53.720 10 years. 01:57:53.720 --> 01:57:54.920 They're newer homes. 01:57:54.920 --> 01:58:00.920 People have invested themselves into coming and living and being a part of this area and 01:58:00.920 --> 01:58:05.080 to have a little breathing space and a little breathing room. 01:58:05.080 --> 01:58:09.720 You've looked at maps probably from above and seen plots and drawings, but if you've 01:58:09.720 --> 01:58:13.700 never driven the neighborhood, it is very unique. 01:58:13.700 --> 01:58:15.640 There are no cookie cutter homes. 01:58:15.640 --> 01:58:16.640 They're all custom. 01:58:16.640 --> 01:58:17.640 They're all different. 01:58:17.640 --> 01:58:19.180 There's no comps. 01:58:19.180 --> 01:58:23.800 Real estate experts will tell you there's no comps for my home in the area. 01:58:23.800 --> 01:58:26.820 It's different and it's special. 01:58:26.820 --> 01:58:33.640 I love looking out my back patio onto this adjacent property that is currently trees 01:58:33.640 --> 01:58:40.340 and canopies and have lots of wildlife, wild boars, deer, coyotes, all that comes with 01:58:40.340 --> 01:58:42.460 that. 01:58:42.460 --> 01:58:48.400 Why would we move our families and invest in this area that has been residentially zoned 01:58:48.400 --> 01:58:54.720 for decades to have it now be changed to light industrial? 01:58:54.720 --> 01:58:57.760 We've invested our time and our family. 01:58:57.760 --> 01:59:07.160 I understand the staff analysts, they have all of the electrical work, the gas pipelines. 01:59:07.160 --> 01:59:12.960 It can't be built residential on that adjacent property, but that's not our burden to bear. 01:59:12.960 --> 01:59:18.840 That's not our fault to have to compromise our property values, our tax values, my well 01:59:18.840 --> 01:59:20.440 water, my well system. 01:59:20.440 --> 01:59:23.280 We're all on well water out there. 01:59:23.280 --> 01:59:25.640 That's not our burden to bear. 01:59:25.640 --> 01:59:29.480 It's not our burden to bear to have to tie those plots up with a nice little bow and 01:59:29.480 --> 01:59:35.320 make them all unanimous zoning because some are light industrial and some are residential. 01:59:35.320 --> 01:59:37.280 That's not my burden to bear. 01:59:37.280 --> 01:59:43.520 My burden to bear is to raise my family and to enjoy my investment in the city of Den. 01:59:43.520 --> 01:59:48.240 I know it's a difficult decision when they're looking at fiscal investments and $8 billion, 01:59:48.240 --> 01:59:49.240 million dollars. 01:59:49.240 --> 01:59:56.360 I can't compete with that, but I do ask that you do consider that we have our own investment 01:59:56.360 --> 01:59:59.980 in our own families and the being good community citizens. 01:59:59.980 --> 02:00:00.980 Thank you. 02:00:00.980 --> 02:00:01.980 Thank you. 02:00:01.980 --> 02:00:02.980 Appreciate it. 02:00:02.980 --> 02:00:10.680 Commissioner Pruitt, I know I had seen your name and I did not call on you before that 02:00:10.680 --> 02:00:11.680 speaker. 02:00:11.680 --> 02:00:12.680 Did you have something to add? 02:00:12.680 --> 02:00:13.680 Yeah. 02:00:13.680 --> 02:00:14.680 I had a late question for the previous speaker. 02:00:14.680 --> 02:00:15.680 Okay. 02:00:15.680 --> 02:00:16.680 If it's possible for them to come back. 02:00:16.680 --> 02:00:17.680 Of course. 02:00:17.680 --> 02:00:18.680 Yes. 02:00:18.680 --> 02:00:19.680 Yes. 02:00:19.680 --> 02:00:22.680 Yes, please. 02:00:22.680 --> 02:00:28.480 Thank you for coming and speaking to give clarity of the types of things you're concerned 02:00:28.480 --> 02:00:30.800 about. 02:00:30.800 --> 02:00:38.240 It strikes me that sometimes when we have ESAs and we do the ESA plans for that, the 02:00:38.240 --> 02:00:44.360 type of buffering that we do, whether it's natural plantings or a wall or that sort of 02:00:44.360 --> 02:00:52.040 thing is limited for the reasons of maintaining the natural order of that ESA buffer. 02:00:52.040 --> 02:00:58.680 I'm wondering is ... I'm anticipating that we may talk a little bit about what that buffer 02:00:58.680 --> 02:01:04.500 and fence and wall might look like, and I want to make sure that your perspective is 02:01:04.500 --> 02:01:16.140 heard from a stance of is a wall or fence preferred, and if so, what does that look 02:01:16.140 --> 02:01:22.680 like or is it really just let's keep the natural order the way things are and focus on giving 02:01:22.680 --> 02:01:26.400 flexibility to provide a buffer visually there. 02:01:26.400 --> 02:01:27.400 Does that make sense? 02:01:27.400 --> 02:01:36.360 Yes, so luckily for me, the tree canopy that surrounds the creek, that ESA, kind of runs 02:01:36.360 --> 02:01:42.560 down my property line, but there's two properties next to me that are exposed directly to the 02:01:42.560 --> 02:01:54.160 lots, to this property that we're speaking about, and so they will have more of an impact. 02:01:54.160 --> 02:02:01.280 For me, the existing canopy, if it's not changed harm or damaged in any way, is enough of a 02:02:01.280 --> 02:02:08.400 buffer that I won't see anything beyond that, but the bigger concern for me is obviously 02:02:08.400 --> 02:02:14.600 the drainage and anything that comes towards that creek. 02:02:14.600 --> 02:02:16.800 Amy had mentioned a detention pond. 02:02:16.800 --> 02:02:22.440 I'm not sure ... There's been no discussion about where that would even be located, how 02:02:22.440 --> 02:02:27.360 large it would be, making sure ... I mean, if no study's been done on the type of drainage, 02:02:27.360 --> 02:02:34.040 how much drainage, what direction the drainage, nobody knows where and how large that would 02:02:34.040 --> 02:02:35.760 be, right? 02:02:35.760 --> 02:02:36.800 I don't even know if it's enough. 02:02:36.800 --> 02:02:43.440 Like I mentioned, I think a retention pond would probably be more appropriate, but I 02:02:43.440 --> 02:02:44.440 don't even know that. 02:02:44.440 --> 02:02:49.540 I would love for whoever's responsible for this ESA and any drainage towards it to do 02:02:49.540 --> 02:02:52.000 a study and understand that prior to. 02:02:52.000 --> 02:02:53.000 Thank you. 02:02:53.000 --> 02:02:54.000 Yeah. 02:02:54.000 --> 02:03:01.000 I mean, as far as the buffer, I think it would be obviously the folks on the black side of 02:03:01.000 --> 02:03:05.320 the property and the other two next to me that would have more of an idea of what would 02:03:05.320 --> 02:03:08.200 be better to obscure that view. 02:03:08.200 --> 02:03:09.200 Okay. 02:03:09.200 --> 02:03:10.200 Thank you. 02:03:10.200 --> 02:03:11.200 Thank you very much. 02:03:11.200 --> 02:03:12.200 Okay. 02:03:12.200 --> 02:03:13.200 This is a public hearing. 02:03:13.200 --> 02:03:22.480 Is there anyone else wishing to speak who has not already? 02:03:22.480 --> 02:03:25.480 Hello. 02:03:25.480 --> 02:03:26.480 Hi. 02:03:26.480 --> 02:03:27.480 Do I need to state my name again? 02:03:27.480 --> 02:03:28.480 You do. 02:03:28.480 --> 02:03:29.480 All right. 02:03:29.480 --> 02:03:30.480 I'm Deborah Brooks. 02:03:30.480 --> 02:03:31.480 I live at 5585 Black Brook. 02:03:31.480 --> 02:03:32.840 And you did speak once, right? 02:03:32.840 --> 02:03:33.840 Yes. 02:03:33.840 --> 02:03:34.840 Okay. 02:03:34.840 --> 02:03:35.840 May I speak twice? 02:03:35.840 --> 02:03:38.440 I was under four minutes. 02:03:38.440 --> 02:03:40.640 I will go ahead and let you have the floor for ... 02:03:40.640 --> 02:03:41.640 Thank you. 02:03:41.640 --> 02:03:42.640 Yes. 02:03:42.640 --> 02:03:43.640 Thank you. 02:03:43.640 --> 02:03:44.640 Just cross my mind as we were sitting here. 02:03:44.640 --> 02:03:48.040 You know how sometimes light industrial areas or industrial areas do have these lights that 02:03:48.040 --> 02:03:52.760 just glow like something from outer space. 02:03:52.760 --> 02:04:00.600 I would think light pollution might be something that needs to be addressed as well so that 02:04:00.600 --> 02:04:03.280 it's more pleasant in our neighborhood. 02:04:03.280 --> 02:04:07.160 That's all I have to say. 02:04:07.160 --> 02:04:08.160 Commissioner Thacker. 02:04:08.160 --> 02:04:09.160 Thank you, Chair. 02:04:09.160 --> 02:04:10.160 Quick question. 02:04:10.160 --> 02:04:15.520 I'm looking at some of those of you that gave public comment and thank you for participating 02:04:15.520 --> 02:04:19.840 in your community and coming and speaking for your area. 02:04:19.840 --> 02:04:27.160 I'm looking at some of your addresses in relation to where the Black Road and Giesling Road 02:04:27.160 --> 02:04:28.160 are at. 02:04:28.160 --> 02:04:32.560 And it looks like there's already some industrial areas that are established there. 02:04:32.560 --> 02:04:39.760 And in addition, speaking to the lighting, those electric units, are those not already 02:04:39.760 --> 02:04:41.520 highly lit at night? 02:04:41.520 --> 02:04:44.480 Are you talking about the electric area? 02:04:44.480 --> 02:04:45.480 Yeah. 02:04:45.480 --> 02:04:46.480 The grids there? 02:04:46.480 --> 02:04:47.480 Yes. 02:04:47.480 --> 02:04:53.600 And they were quite invasive, and I believe, Johnna, called the city or whoever it is, 02:04:53.600 --> 02:04:54.600 is in charge of those. 02:04:54.600 --> 02:04:56.560 And they asked them to redirect those lights. 02:04:56.560 --> 02:05:03.240 But there are some lights that even glow more than that, where if they're on really high 02:05:03.240 --> 02:05:11.680 poles, that it's just illuminated tremendously at 24/7. 02:05:11.680 --> 02:05:18.360 And I understand for security purposes why that might exist, but in keeping with neighborhoods 02:05:18.360 --> 02:05:21.400 being right there, too, that something might want to be considered. 02:05:21.400 --> 02:05:22.400 Right. 02:05:22.400 --> 02:05:23.400 Okay. 02:05:23.400 --> 02:05:24.400 One other quick question. 02:05:24.400 --> 02:05:25.400 Yes. 02:05:25.400 --> 02:05:31.720 So while the owners may have issues selling it as a residential area to investors, that 02:05:31.720 --> 02:05:36.200 doesn't mean if we were to keep it zoned residential that they might not eventually 02:05:36.200 --> 02:05:38.400 sell it as a residential area. 02:05:38.400 --> 02:05:41.000 I'm not certain what you're saying. 02:05:41.000 --> 02:05:45.200 Well, it's zoned for residential, and if we're wanting to rezone it. 02:05:45.200 --> 02:05:49.480 So I think about some of the issues that were discussed tonight, everything ranging from 02:05:49.480 --> 02:05:58.920 the lighting to runoff to pollution to traffic, if in fact it remains residential and we don't 02:05:58.920 --> 02:06:06.520 rezone it, and eventually it's sold to a large developer, my concern is that things like 02:06:06.520 --> 02:06:12.680 lighting and traffic and runoff would be even more prevalent if you had lots of families 02:06:12.680 --> 02:06:13.680 in that area. 02:06:13.680 --> 02:06:16.160 So those are just kind of my feedback there. 02:06:16.160 --> 02:06:17.640 I didn't know if you had thought about that. 02:06:17.640 --> 02:06:20.200 I'm not totally opposed to what's being proposed. 02:06:20.200 --> 02:06:21.200 Okay. 02:06:21.200 --> 02:06:22.200 All right. 02:06:22.200 --> 02:06:26.800 I'm just saying that these maybe need to be a consideration that buffer wall, and this 02:06:26.800 --> 02:06:37.120 is what's being presented tonight, and that considering those would eliminate future problems 02:06:37.120 --> 02:06:45.560 and expense on the part of the developer if our considerations are taken into account. 02:06:45.560 --> 02:06:46.560 Fair enough? 02:06:46.560 --> 02:06:47.560 Okay. 02:06:47.560 --> 02:06:48.560 Fair enough. 02:06:48.560 --> 02:06:49.560 Thank you. 02:06:49.560 --> 02:06:50.560 Thank you. 02:06:50.560 --> 02:06:52.280 Thank you very much. 02:06:52.280 --> 02:06:53.800 This is a public hearing. 02:06:53.800 --> 02:06:58.640 Is there anyone else wishing to speak who has not already done so? 02:06:58.640 --> 02:07:05.400 Yep, come on down. 02:07:05.400 --> 02:07:11.120 Hello. 02:07:11.120 --> 02:07:12.720 My name is Eric Janssen. 02:07:12.720 --> 02:07:19.880 I live at 3617 Falcon Court in South Denton, but I do own 46 and 47 and a half acres of 02:07:19.880 --> 02:07:23.080 land on the south side of Black. 02:07:23.080 --> 02:07:29.840 My northwest little stick piece of 15-foot gravel lane connects to Black Road, and that's 02:07:29.840 --> 02:07:34.600 why I'm within 200 feet, 15 feet wide connecting to the subject property. 02:07:34.600 --> 02:07:40.240 But to my immediate west is Gary Castro, and he regrets not being able to be here tonight. 02:07:40.240 --> 02:07:44.560 So I just want to speak on his behalf in regards to the runoff. 02:07:44.560 --> 02:07:50.560 He gave Mia, and we appreciate the time that Mia Hines has given us in preparation, but 02:07:50.560 --> 02:07:57.840 he showed her some pictures of the culvert that he has that he had to put lots of money 02:07:57.840 --> 02:08:06.600 into for rock because of the drainage that already comes off of the native land of this 02:08:06.600 --> 02:08:09.240 subject property on the north side of Black. 02:08:09.240 --> 02:08:14.640 That water comes through a culvert and spouts directly onto his property and runs down through 02:08:14.640 --> 02:08:18.880 the heart of his property down to the creek, down to Cooper Creek. 02:08:18.880 --> 02:08:24.400 And so he was very, very concerned, just as the other Mr. Brooks mentioned about runoff. 02:08:24.400 --> 02:08:29.920 If there's streets, warehouses, parking lots, etc., then that really is going to be a major 02:08:29.920 --> 02:08:37.720 concern of water being shed underneath Black and directly onto Mr. Castro's property. 02:08:37.720 --> 02:08:41.840 Second thing is, I want to commend Amy of Land 97. 02:08:41.840 --> 02:08:47.360 It seems like she's engaged the neighbors considerably, and there have been modifications 02:08:47.360 --> 02:08:56.320 to that 250-foot setback buffer and where it was, and so that's good to see. 02:08:56.320 --> 02:09:00.160 Light industrial seems to be coming to this area more. 02:09:00.160 --> 02:09:02.340 There's more warehouses being built. 02:09:02.340 --> 02:09:08.360 Geesling is supposed to be a major north-south connector based off of Denton's mobility plan, 02:09:08.360 --> 02:09:13.800 and so I would presume that vehicular traffic leaving the site would go onto Geesling, and 02:09:13.800 --> 02:09:17.280 Geesling at 380 will have to have a traffic light. 02:09:17.280 --> 02:09:22.320 So vehicular traffic going west will want to go to Geesling and then up to the traffic 02:09:22.320 --> 02:09:23.880 light on 380. 02:09:23.880 --> 02:09:31.360 Truck traffic going east would end up going the university exit to go east, would make 02:09:31.360 --> 02:09:34.360 the most sense. 02:09:34.360 --> 02:09:40.840 Sewer drainage, I don't even know where they're planning on sewer exactly. 02:09:40.840 --> 02:09:46.720 Sewage drainage has always been a difficult problem for this part of the city, but that's 02:09:46.720 --> 02:09:49.280 not part of the zoning. 02:09:49.280 --> 02:09:50.880 Storm drainage. 02:09:50.880 --> 02:09:58.600 The lighting issue that Ms. Brooks mentioned, I don't know whether there's a way to restrict 02:09:58.600 --> 02:10:04.400 lighting so that the shields around the light do not permit the light to go beyond the property 02:10:04.400 --> 02:10:11.200 line, but it seems to me that something like that might be addressed or considered. 02:10:11.200 --> 02:10:14.640 That's about it, really. 02:10:14.640 --> 02:10:15.640 Appreciate the time. 02:10:15.640 --> 02:10:16.640 Appreciate the interest. 02:10:16.640 --> 02:10:26.840 I know Mr. Martin for 22 years, just acquaintance-wise, and he supported me in my rezoning when the 02:10:26.840 --> 02:10:33.200 city was trying to involuntarily rezone my property many years ago, and they were considerate 02:10:33.200 --> 02:10:34.800 and respectful. 02:10:34.800 --> 02:10:38.620 He was in that process, and I know they have worked for a long time trying to figure out 02:10:38.620 --> 02:10:43.040 exactly what the best utilization of this property is with the power lines across it, 02:10:43.040 --> 02:10:45.420 the gaseous underneath it, et cetera. 02:10:45.420 --> 02:10:49.360 So I know it's a tough nut to crack, and I wish you the best, but I really encourage 02:10:49.360 --> 02:10:55.600 you to give consideration to each of these neighbors because they do cherish the rural 02:10:55.600 --> 02:10:58.440 atmosphere out there in East Denton. 02:10:58.440 --> 02:11:01.960 They cherish that, and they want to preserve that as best they can. 02:11:01.960 --> 02:11:08.880 So managing the PD in such a way as to make sure you line up in the industrial site right 02:11:08.880 --> 02:11:15.560 next to these rural residential areas would be most appreciated by all the neighbors. 02:11:15.560 --> 02:11:16.560 Thank you. 02:11:16.560 --> 02:11:17.560 Any questions? 02:11:17.560 --> 02:11:18.560 Thank you. 02:11:18.560 --> 02:11:19.560 Thank you. 02:11:19.560 --> 02:11:20.560 I do not see any. 02:11:20.560 --> 02:11:21.680 Thank you very much. 02:11:21.680 --> 02:11:28.920 Is there anyone else wishing to speak who has not done so already? 02:11:28.920 --> 02:11:32.640 Okay. 02:11:32.640 --> 02:11:36.880 Seeing none, I will go ahead and close the public hearing, and I will open up the dais 02:11:36.880 --> 02:11:38.960 for more discussion or motion. 02:11:38.960 --> 02:11:39.960 Commissioner Villareal. 02:11:39.960 --> 02:11:40.960 Thank you, Chair. 02:11:40.960 --> 02:11:43.920 I just had a quick question for Amy. 02:11:43.920 --> 02:11:48.640 I know you mentioned earlier during the presentation y'all would be willing to restrict the PD further 02:11:48.640 --> 02:11:50.960 to exclude all auto uses. 02:11:50.960 --> 02:11:58.480 I believe you put travel plaza as well as parking lot and hotel motel. 02:11:58.480 --> 02:12:03.640 Would that be included in the PD if this is passed today going to council? 02:12:03.640 --> 02:12:10.600 That would be up to you all in terms of what conditions you put on the PD. 02:12:10.600 --> 02:12:17.360 I was specifically highlighting and pointing out that the vehicle uses, we really have 02:12:17.360 --> 02:12:21.880 no interest in those uses, so eliminating all of those would be fine. 02:12:21.880 --> 02:12:26.240 I don't know that a hotel or motel would be appropriately located here regardless, so 02:12:26.240 --> 02:12:30.880 I think that's probably a relevant conversation, but if you wanted to exclude them, you all 02:12:30.880 --> 02:12:32.040 have an issue with that? 02:12:32.040 --> 02:12:33.040 There you go. 02:12:33.040 --> 02:12:38.160 You can exclude everything that's highlighted on this page if you would like. 02:12:38.160 --> 02:12:42.280 Just a question for Chair, is there a way we could have that included as a friendly 02:12:42.280 --> 02:12:43.280 amendment too? 02:12:43.280 --> 02:12:49.880 Yeah, so in any kind of motion, that could be tacked on to already what staff has on 02:12:49.880 --> 02:12:50.880 for condition. 02:12:50.880 --> 02:12:51.880 Got it. 02:12:51.880 --> 02:12:52.880 Thank you. 02:12:52.880 --> 02:12:58.440 And we actually have a couple of potential amendments based on what we've heard tonight 02:12:58.440 --> 02:13:01.920 if now would be an okay time to propose those. 02:13:01.920 --> 02:13:05.720 In a moment, if you could, well, and maybe, no, maybe, I will let you do that because 02:13:05.720 --> 02:13:09.160 it might address my question actually, so yeah, go ahead. 02:13:09.160 --> 02:13:12.800 So I would propose the following additional conditions. 02:13:12.800 --> 02:13:16.920 One, that an alternative ESA plan would not be permitted. 02:13:16.920 --> 02:13:25.360 In other words, we could not come to you all and request encroachment into that ESA buffer. 02:13:25.360 --> 02:13:31.640 And two, that the 50 points for the landscape buffer include an eight-foot masonry wall 02:13:31.640 --> 02:13:38.560 that is structurally designed so that it's sound and has footings. 02:13:38.560 --> 02:13:44.680 I don't necessarily, I don't know that it's a good idea to locate it at exactly 25 feet 02:13:44.680 --> 02:13:50.080 from the property line just for a number of reasons, tree preservation being one, encroachment 02:13:50.080 --> 02:13:56.040 into the ESA being another, and potential maintenance issues, but if we could have that 02:13:56.040 --> 02:14:01.080 be a part of the 50-point requirement, at least the neighborhood would have the assurance 02:14:01.080 --> 02:14:08.200 that the wall would be there and that it would be structurally engineered to last as Ms. 02:14:08.200 --> 02:14:10.640 Brooks was requesting. 02:14:10.640 --> 02:14:19.520 And then the other thing that I just wanted to say is that, and I think that maybe you 02:14:19.520 --> 02:14:27.800 know this, if I was coming up here representing a Hillwood or an Amazon or a large industrial 02:14:27.800 --> 02:14:34.760 developer, these conditions would be well above and beyond what I think they would propose. 02:14:34.760 --> 02:14:40.680 And so I know it's hard for you all and the neighborhood to not have a concept plan and 02:14:40.680 --> 02:14:43.680 know exactly what's going here. 02:14:43.680 --> 02:14:49.080 My hope is that these conditions are great enough that it protects the neighborhood in 02:14:49.080 --> 02:14:55.400 a way that if a developer was standing right here right now trying to do this, they would 02:14:55.400 --> 02:15:00.600 push harder on this. 02:15:00.600 --> 02:15:01.600 Go ahead, Tina. 02:15:01.600 --> 02:15:02.680 I think Tina's got a question. 02:15:02.680 --> 02:15:07.600 So I just want to make sure we understand the conditions that you're proposing. 02:15:07.600 --> 02:15:14.520 So because we distributed an amended plan development district ordinance before the meeting, and 02:15:14.520 --> 02:15:18.800 you had presented some other options within your presentation. 02:15:18.800 --> 02:15:26.080 So are you, what you just spoke to regarding excluding the auto-related uses, eliminating 02:15:26.080 --> 02:15:32.160 hotel motel, I think also on that slide is parking lot as a principal use and travel 02:15:32.160 --> 02:15:33.160 plaza. 02:15:33.160 --> 02:15:36.720 So I heard you say those uses that are highlighted in yellow on that slide are what you were 02:15:36.720 --> 02:15:38.940 willing to restrict. 02:15:38.940 --> 02:15:39.940 So you add that. 02:15:39.940 --> 02:15:42.520 And then we have the alt ESA plan not being permitted. 02:15:42.520 --> 02:15:47.480 And then the 50 points for the landscape buffer, including an eight foot tall masonry wall, 02:15:47.480 --> 02:15:53.280 that no placement restrictions on that to give your client flexibility to be able to 02:15:53.280 --> 02:15:58.160 address tree preservation and other site conditions that might need to be addressed. 02:15:58.160 --> 02:16:00.720 So and that that wall be structurally engineered. 02:16:00.720 --> 02:16:05.620 But are those the only conditions that you're proposing to offer? 02:16:05.620 --> 02:16:09.600 In addition to the ones that were already within the ordinance, yes. 02:16:09.600 --> 02:16:13.400 I'm open to others if y'all have specific ones that you would like to discuss. 02:16:13.400 --> 02:16:14.400 Okay. 02:16:14.400 --> 02:16:18.760 But I just want to make sure that we understood on the record and then I summarize the conditions 02:16:18.760 --> 02:16:22.120 that you were offering up in addition to the document that we gave the commission this 02:16:22.120 --> 02:16:23.120 afternoon. 02:16:23.120 --> 02:16:24.120 Yes. 02:16:24.120 --> 02:16:25.120 Okay. 02:16:25.120 --> 02:16:26.120 Thank you. 02:16:26.120 --> 02:16:27.120 Thank you. 02:16:27.120 --> 02:16:29.100 So going back to the masonry wall. 02:16:29.100 --> 02:16:43.660 So earlier you had a where yes, I mean a big concern for those who spoke today and was 02:16:43.660 --> 02:16:49.400 one concern I had brought up to staff earlier this week was leaving as much of that natural 02:16:49.400 --> 02:16:53.160 buffer as could be. 02:16:53.160 --> 02:17:00.000 I don't really know exactly what can be left and how far of that 250 foot buffer it can 02:17:00.000 --> 02:17:06.320 be and I guess we won't know that answer, I assume. 02:17:06.320 --> 02:17:10.520 I know you have 25 foot up but is that just? 02:17:10.520 --> 02:17:14.320 So that was the request of the neighborhood representative that I spoke with. 02:17:14.320 --> 02:17:15.720 We're not opposed to it. 02:17:15.720 --> 02:17:22.240 I think that it could potentially create some unintended consequences specifically related 02:17:22.240 --> 02:17:26.360 to tree preservation and maintenance issues. 02:17:26.360 --> 02:17:33.480 And so we're open to that being the condition that a wall is placed 25 feet from the property 02:17:33.480 --> 02:17:38.100 line and left in a natural condition. 02:17:38.100 --> 02:17:42.680 There's a possibility that you've got a heritage tree right at that 25 foot mark that has to 02:17:42.680 --> 02:17:44.880 be preserved by code. 02:17:44.880 --> 02:17:50.700 And so then we would kind of be in a bit of a predicament there and so having some flexibility 02:17:50.700 --> 02:17:56.200 in where that wall is placed, maybe there's a statement in there that says leaving at 02:17:56.200 --> 02:18:01.440 least 50% natural in its natural state. 02:18:01.440 --> 02:18:05.560 Something along those lines I think gives a little more flexibility regarding the placement 02:18:05.560 --> 02:18:09.040 of the wall and tree preservation. 02:18:09.040 --> 02:18:17.320 I'm just trying to not box us into an issue where we can't comply in the future. 02:18:17.320 --> 02:18:22.440 And I'll also point out that the ESA on the northeast corner is going to be wider than 02:18:22.440 --> 02:18:27.880 that 50 foot landscape buffer so any wall will have to be outside of that in that location 02:18:27.880 --> 02:18:35.960 as well, so I'm hesitant to box us in so much that it creates a problem down the road. 02:18:35.960 --> 02:18:43.800 But however you all want to word that condition, we don't have a problem with. 02:18:43.800 --> 02:18:46.240 I think we, Commissioner Villarreal, do you still have a question? 02:18:46.240 --> 02:18:50.880 Yeah, just one more and you've answered a lot of the concerns the neighborhood folks 02:18:50.880 --> 02:18:52.760 from the neighborhood brought today. 02:18:52.760 --> 02:18:57.080 Just one concern that wasn't addressed regarding light pollution. 02:18:57.080 --> 02:19:02.880 Have you all considered ways to negate light pollution or reduce it to assist the neighbors 02:19:02.880 --> 02:19:03.880 with this change? 02:19:03.880 --> 02:19:04.880 Sure, absolutely. 02:19:04.880 --> 02:19:05.880 That's a great question. 02:19:05.880 --> 02:19:08.560 So it's a conversation that we had during the neighborhood meetings. 02:19:08.560 --> 02:19:14.160 There's specific requirements within the development code regarding lighting for both parking lots 02:19:14.160 --> 02:19:20.960 and building that prevent the light from crossing the property line by more than half a foot 02:19:20.960 --> 02:19:27.360 candle, if I recall correctly, so the actual light is measured at the property line and 02:19:27.360 --> 02:19:32.680 the direction of parking lot lighting must be aimed down and cannot be taller than 25 02:19:32.680 --> 02:19:37.760 feet, I believe, and then all building lighting must be aimed at the building or towards the 02:19:37.760 --> 02:19:44.800 ground and so the light pollution issue is really addressed within the code already. 02:19:44.800 --> 02:19:49.680 One of the neighbors brought up Ryan High School and when the stadium lights are on, 02:19:49.680 --> 02:19:54.960 which stadium lighting is a whole separate animal, this development would have to comply 02:19:54.960 --> 02:20:01.800 with lighting standards for just the development standards in subchapter 7, which would prevent 02:20:01.800 --> 02:20:06.440 light pollution automatically. 02:20:06.440 --> 02:20:07.440 Commissioner Pritt. 02:20:07.440 --> 02:20:08.440 Thank you, Chair. 02:20:08.440 --> 02:20:12.480 One question for you, Amy, and then one for staff. 02:20:12.480 --> 02:20:21.240 Can you help me understand in the discussions that you've had with the community just the 02:20:21.240 --> 02:20:31.600 general concern that a wall or opaque fence alleviates versus the vegetation barrier? 02:20:31.600 --> 02:20:42.760 Yes, so the conversation was had with Mr. Jonathan Brooks yesterday evening and he explained 02:20:42.760 --> 02:20:47.240 that right now everything is already in its natural state and the preference of the neighbors 02:20:47.240 --> 02:20:52.560 is that it remain in its natural state, so in terms of creating a maintenance issue, 02:20:52.560 --> 02:20:58.400 they were not concerned with a wall basically creating a barrier where the developer could 02:20:58.400 --> 02:21:02.380 not get in there and maintain necessarily. 02:21:02.380 --> 02:21:05.920 Their preference was that there would be no maintenance within that area. 02:21:05.920 --> 02:21:11.960 I do want to clarify that that would not apply to the property along Black Road. 02:21:11.960 --> 02:21:17.080 Obviously, Black Road itself needs to be landscaped and doesn't need to have a big masonry wall 02:21:17.080 --> 02:21:25.340 in front of it, but all the rest of the buffer, we would not be opposed to maintaining as 02:21:25.340 --> 02:21:28.580 much of it in its natural state as possible. 02:21:28.580 --> 02:21:33.440 I just brought up with him at the time that I've seen it create maintenance issues and 02:21:33.440 --> 02:21:38.480 other development projects in similar situations. 02:21:38.480 --> 02:21:39.480 That helps. 02:21:39.480 --> 02:21:46.820 I'm just trying to understand whether it would alleviate more of the concerns if it is placed 02:21:46.820 --> 02:21:54.680 closer to the existing residential properties or further away in respect to the vegetation 02:21:54.680 --> 02:21:55.680 barrier. 02:21:55.680 --> 02:21:58.200 Does that make sense? 02:21:58.200 --> 02:22:04.840 Maybe there's a condition that the masonry wall is required, but it has to be at least 02:22:04.840 --> 02:22:10.680 25 feet away from the property line and what's left in between is natural vegetative state. 02:22:10.680 --> 02:22:15.480 That way it can move a little bit based upon tree preservation and other conditions that 02:22:15.480 --> 02:22:17.000 might require it. 02:22:17.000 --> 02:22:18.000 Thank you. 02:22:18.000 --> 02:22:22.320 Then for staff, as always, we get questions about drainage. 02:22:22.320 --> 02:22:25.600 I'm not sure if this is Christy or somebody else. 02:22:25.600 --> 02:22:33.240 I'm specifically wondering, in our code I know that we require the outflow to not exceed 02:22:33.240 --> 02:22:35.240 the outflow before development. 02:22:35.240 --> 02:22:41.120 However, I'm not certain what happens when there are two separate outflow locations on 02:22:41.120 --> 02:22:42.120 a single property. 02:22:42.120 --> 02:22:48.560 In other words, is it the cumulative outflow that gets regulated or at each outflow location 02:22:48.560 --> 02:22:53.000 may it not exceed what it was pre-development? 02:22:53.000 --> 02:22:57.320 I may defer to Christy on this if she knows anything that I don't. 02:22:57.320 --> 02:23:02.080 In general, the requirement is no negative impacts to adjacent properties. 02:23:02.080 --> 02:23:06.720 Whatever existing drainage conditions are on site, they cannot worsen that on any of 02:23:06.720 --> 02:23:10.000 those adjacent properties. 02:23:10.000 --> 02:23:15.240 If they could engineer the two different drainage areas to all flow one direction versus another, 02:23:15.240 --> 02:23:20.600 that's something that we could work with them on through the civil engineering plan process. 02:23:20.600 --> 02:23:25.320 My understanding is, at the end of the day, the rule is no negative impact whatsoever. 02:23:25.320 --> 02:23:30.400 What's leaving the site today in terms of the amount of water, the velocity of the water, 02:23:30.400 --> 02:23:34.000 can't be increased to negatively impact the neighboring properties. 02:23:34.000 --> 02:23:39.200 They would have to hold it all on site and release it into the storm source system or 02:23:39.200 --> 02:23:42.520 into a natural ... Sometimes we're allowed to release into the floodplain if they can 02:23:42.520 --> 02:23:46.800 manage to do so at a rate that would not negatively impact other properties. 02:23:46.800 --> 02:23:47.800 Okay. 02:23:47.800 --> 02:23:48.800 Thank you. 02:23:48.800 --> 02:23:49.800 Thanks, Haley. 02:23:49.800 --> 02:24:15.520 I don't see any questions in front of me at the moment from the dance. 02:24:15.520 --> 02:24:23.540 I'm trying to wrap my head around exactly what we have just discussed to make sure we've 02:24:23.540 --> 02:24:27.000 got it all. 02:24:27.000 --> 02:24:33.040 You gave the synopsis of what Amy proposed. 02:24:33.040 --> 02:24:42.240 We just had discussion about the masonry wall language of it possibly being at least 25 02:24:42.240 --> 02:24:47.560 feet from the buffer line. 02:24:47.560 --> 02:24:49.560 Staff would like to be able to address that. 02:24:49.560 --> 02:24:52.520 I was going to say, Mia, I didn't know if you were doing that, or Haley, so if you've 02:24:52.520 --> 02:24:57.600 got that suggestion regarding the issue with the tree preservation, the natural buffer, 02:24:57.600 --> 02:25:00.680 the placement of the wall, did you want to address that? 02:25:00.680 --> 02:25:02.480 I'll bring Haley out to answer that one. 02:25:02.480 --> 02:25:07.200 I didn't know if we were ready for conditions, and I'm welcome to add anything to the screen. 02:25:07.200 --> 02:25:08.200 Thank you. 02:25:08.200 --> 02:25:09.200 Okay. 02:25:09.200 --> 02:25:13.660 I don't know that we could wordsmith anything appropriate here, so I'd like to have some 02:25:13.660 --> 02:25:17.640 flexibility if we could to continue crafting this before it goes to council. 02:25:17.640 --> 02:25:21.440 If the commission does wish to require a wall, which is always an option in a buffer, but 02:25:21.440 --> 02:25:25.160 it's not required, so if the commission wanted to impose a requirement, I would ask that 02:25:25.160 --> 02:25:29.960 we be left the flexibility to also address tree preservation and ESA preservation within 02:25:29.960 --> 02:25:36.000 that buffer area so that we're not requiring inadvertently removal of trees and impact to 02:25:36.000 --> 02:25:40.440 the natural buffer that already exists along those property lines, just to add a masonry 02:25:40.440 --> 02:25:41.440 wall. 02:25:41.440 --> 02:25:42.440 Completely agree. 02:25:42.440 --> 02:25:45.920 Because any eight-foot wall, and I'm not an engineer, don't play one on TV, but any 02:25:45.920 --> 02:25:49.720 eight-foot wall would require some sort of footing be dug into the ground that would 02:25:49.720 --> 02:25:53.960 impact the roots of adjacent trees, and my understanding from our experts on staff is 02:25:53.960 --> 02:25:58.200 that really any impact to the roots within the drip line of the tree, so within the canopy 02:25:58.200 --> 02:26:03.520 area going straight down, could potentially do long-term damage to those trees, especially 02:26:03.520 --> 02:26:09.160 if they're post oaks or pecan or other more sensitive native species. 02:26:09.160 --> 02:26:14.800 We'd like to avoid that potential impact by imposing a strict location for any wall that 02:26:14.800 --> 02:26:18.760 the commission may wish to see on-site. 02:26:18.760 --> 02:26:31.020 What you're saying is incorporated as it would be on-site as part of the buffer in some placement? 02:26:31.020 --> 02:26:33.560 I would say dictating a location would be hard. 02:26:33.560 --> 02:26:37.520 If we could craft something, and I don't know, Amy, we can talk about this more. 02:26:37.520 --> 02:26:42.480 My thought was if we say that the goal is tree preservation of everything that's within 02:26:42.480 --> 02:26:49.440 the 50-foot buffer and a wall is required around the south and east perimeters so that 02:26:49.440 --> 02:26:52.840 it does not affect those trees, something in that nature, I think, was really the intent 02:26:52.840 --> 02:26:54.120 of what everyone's wanting. 02:26:54.120 --> 02:26:57.520 I'm just not quite sure how we would word that at this time. 02:26:57.520 --> 02:26:58.520 Right. 02:26:58.520 --> 02:26:59.520 I agree. 02:26:59.520 --> 02:27:04.040 That's where we're not going to be able to do it up here at this time. 02:27:04.040 --> 02:27:09.480 If the commission wishes, though, that is something you could direct us to work on and 02:27:09.480 --> 02:27:12.800 come up with wording, obviously, before it gets to council next week if you wanted to 02:27:12.800 --> 02:27:14.760 keep this moving forward. 02:27:14.760 --> 02:27:22.520 I'd have to ask Haley how we would actually make that. 02:27:22.520 --> 02:27:23.520 Sure. 02:27:23.520 --> 02:27:25.440 How we would do that. 02:27:25.440 --> 02:27:36.320 My suggestion might be to consider tabling this, hearing the next public hearing item. 02:27:36.320 --> 02:27:41.800 In that intervening time, perhaps staff can put something together, and then coming back 02:27:41.800 --> 02:27:49.160 to this item so that we're not considering speculative conditions. 02:27:49.160 --> 02:27:50.160 Right. 02:27:50.160 --> 02:27:55.480 If we're missing something that we've taught, there's been so many things, and even on top 02:27:55.480 --> 02:28:01.340 of what we were presented with at work session, that, yeah, it would be great if somebody 02:28:01.340 --> 02:28:05.520 could have the time to type it all up of what was discussed. 02:28:05.520 --> 02:28:13.560 Alternatively, we could come back at a subsequent meeting, but I think there's an appetite to 02:28:13.560 --> 02:28:15.400 try and avoid that if possible. 02:28:15.400 --> 02:28:20.000 It has been noticed for council, so Tina, I don't know if you know anything additional. 02:28:20.000 --> 02:28:25.260 I was just talking with the applicant's representative, so Amy, you can confirm her if you want to 02:28:25.260 --> 02:28:29.960 come to the podium or shake your head, but I had asked her about a continuance, and I 02:28:29.960 --> 02:28:30.960 think we're to the point. 02:28:30.960 --> 02:28:35.880 We're given the way we're crafting conditions that we do need to continue this item. 02:28:35.880 --> 02:28:38.920 I would ask Mia, Haley, do you think this is something that we could continue to the 02:28:38.920 --> 02:28:43.240 next planning and zoning commission meeting to give us a chance to work on that language, 02:28:43.240 --> 02:28:48.840 and then being that your council date is scheduled for next week, we would have council then continue 02:28:48.840 --> 02:28:53.280 to the next appropriate council meeting to allow the commission to take action. 02:28:53.280 --> 02:28:54.840 I think we're fine with that. 02:28:54.840 --> 02:28:55.840 Okay. 02:28:55.840 --> 02:28:56.840 Thank you. 02:28:56.840 --> 02:28:57.840 Thank you. 02:28:57.840 --> 02:29:04.840 Appreciate that. 02:29:04.840 --> 02:29:05.840 Commissioner Peruzza. 02:29:05.840 --> 02:29:12.000 Thank you, Chair, and thanks for that direction and clarification on what the preferred option 02:29:12.000 --> 02:29:14.520 is. 02:29:14.520 --> 02:29:22.160 You know, with that, I'll move to table to the date certain of the next planning and 02:29:22.160 --> 02:29:28.240 zoning commission with the following recommendations, and I invite my colleagues to add anything 02:29:28.240 --> 02:29:30.640 else I've forgotten. 02:29:30.640 --> 02:29:36.080 One is to restrict the automotive major and minor uses instead of just the major uses, 02:29:36.080 --> 02:29:40.960 hotel, motel, and parking lot as primary use. 02:29:40.960 --> 02:29:47.360 On the fence and the buffer area, my proposal, which may not be the will of the rest of the 02:29:47.360 --> 02:29:55.920 commission, would be to stipulate that any fence erected along these borders to the residential 02:29:55.920 --> 02:30:05.360 areas be compliant with table 7.H in our development code for the fences listed for front yard 02:30:05.360 --> 02:30:12.480 fences in industrial areas, that it lists masonry wall in there, it also lists some 02:30:12.480 --> 02:30:20.320 other types of fences that would be long standing and kind of alleviates the problem of having 02:30:20.320 --> 02:30:23.400 a chain link fence or something like that. 02:30:23.400 --> 02:30:30.720 And then as far as placement, my proposal would be that we give wide latitude as to 02:30:30.720 --> 02:30:31.720 where it's placed. 02:30:31.720 --> 02:30:35.440 I think the applicant and the community have worked really well together and I don't want 02:30:35.440 --> 02:30:43.360 to hamstring them from working out these final details, such that any position from 25 feet 02:30:43.360 --> 02:30:49.800 away all the way up to 200, 250 feet away at the edge of the setback would be permissible 02:30:49.800 --> 02:30:55.480 for a fence if they wish to place one there. 02:30:55.480 --> 02:31:00.840 And if it's further than the 50 foot standard buffer area, it would still count toward the 02:31:00.840 --> 02:31:04.120 buffer points. 02:31:04.120 --> 02:31:07.840 Is that clear, Tina? 02:31:07.840 --> 02:31:10.640 I don't think it's necessarily part of your motion, correct? 02:31:10.640 --> 02:31:11.640 Your motion? 02:31:11.640 --> 02:31:12.640 No. 02:31:12.640 --> 02:31:13.640 You're giving a recommendation. 02:31:13.640 --> 02:31:14.640 Okay. 02:31:14.640 --> 02:31:15.640 Exactly. 02:31:15.640 --> 02:31:16.640 Yeah. 02:31:16.640 --> 02:31:20.000 Motion is simply to continue and I wanted to kind of capture my thoughts and invite 02:31:20.000 --> 02:31:21.000 others to you as well. 02:31:21.000 --> 02:31:23.000 Was that the end of your thoughts? 02:31:23.000 --> 02:31:24.000 Yes. 02:31:24.000 --> 02:31:25.000 Okay. 02:31:25.000 --> 02:31:26.000 Thank you. 02:31:26.000 --> 02:31:27.000 All right. 02:31:27.000 --> 02:31:28.000 Can I have some clarification? 02:31:28.000 --> 02:31:29.000 You can. 02:31:29.000 --> 02:31:30.000 Commissioner Pruitt. 02:31:30.000 --> 02:31:37.760 If the fence or wall is beyond a 50 foot setback from what the residential properties and the 02:31:37.760 --> 02:31:43.720 ETJ properties, then that fence or wall would be still allowed to count towards the 50 points 02:31:43.720 --> 02:31:44.720 within the buffer? 02:31:44.720 --> 02:31:45.720 Exactly. 02:31:45.720 --> 02:31:46.720 Okay. 02:31:46.720 --> 02:31:47.720 Thank you. 02:31:47.720 --> 02:31:48.720 Okay. 02:31:48.720 --> 02:31:54.200 So the motion on the floor is to table the item to a date certain of? 02:31:54.200 --> 02:31:56.020 The next planning and zoning meeting? 02:31:56.020 --> 02:31:57.020 That would be June 26. 02:31:57.020 --> 02:31:58.020 Thank you. 02:31:58.020 --> 02:31:59.020 June 26. 02:31:59.020 --> 02:32:00.020 Good. 02:32:00.020 --> 02:32:01.020 Okay. 02:32:01.020 --> 02:32:02.020 Commissioner Thaggard. 02:32:02.020 --> 02:32:03.020 I second tabling the item. 02:32:03.020 --> 02:32:04.020 Okay. 02:32:04.020 --> 02:32:07.880 We've got a first and a second to table the item to a date certain of June 26. 02:32:07.880 --> 02:32:11.040 Is there any other discussion? 02:32:11.040 --> 02:32:19.480 If we could get possibly the transportation talk a little bit, like can we get signage 02:32:19.480 --> 02:32:20.480 somewhere? 02:32:20.480 --> 02:32:26.840 I don't know if we can have an answer by then, but if we can, that would be super helpful. 02:32:26.840 --> 02:32:32.200 And then yeah, just basically getting, it's a great discussion we had tonight. 02:32:32.200 --> 02:32:37.840 Obviously I want to commend you on engaging the neighborhood and listening and hearing. 02:32:37.840 --> 02:32:40.320 All of this is difficult, I know, for everyone. 02:32:40.320 --> 02:32:47.600 So I feel comfortable that we are tabling because we changed so much tonight, I think 02:32:47.600 --> 02:32:50.520 for the better, exactly what we're looking at. 02:32:50.520 --> 02:32:57.480 I know this would be a lot easier if we had an actual plan in place and I know you're 02:32:57.480 --> 02:33:03.080 working your best to work all around that except to have that. 02:33:03.080 --> 02:33:04.080 And yeah, thank you staff. 02:33:04.080 --> 02:33:08.560 Yeah, so if you'll be able to the next time have all of these things written down so we 02:33:08.560 --> 02:33:13.000 know exactly what we're looking at and what we're voting on and going from there. 02:33:13.000 --> 02:33:14.000 Okay. 02:33:14.000 --> 02:33:15.000 Commissioner Pruitt, I think you have another point. 02:33:15.000 --> 02:33:16.600 I apologize for double speaking here. 02:33:16.600 --> 02:33:17.600 That's okay. 02:33:17.600 --> 02:33:25.600 I brought up the transportation issues that were raised by some of the residents. 02:33:25.600 --> 02:33:32.280 It's not entirely clear to me what the plan, if there is a plan yet for the bypass that 02:33:32.280 --> 02:33:37.040 starts right around Geesling Road from TxDOT's perspective. 02:33:37.040 --> 02:33:46.160 I'd like to understand whether northbound traffic from Geesling will be navigable toward 02:33:46.160 --> 02:33:55.920 Loop 288 Northwest around town or not, just when we come back after the continuance. 02:33:55.920 --> 02:33:57.360 Thank you. 02:33:57.360 --> 02:33:58.360 Anything else? 02:33:58.360 --> 02:33:59.360 Okay. 02:33:59.360 --> 02:34:07.360 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 02:34:07.360 --> 02:34:09.080 That motion carries 6-0. 02:34:09.080 --> 02:34:13.000 See you at the next meeting. 02:34:13.000 --> 02:34:24.860 Our next item is 5BZ220018, which is in tandem with 5CPD230001. 02:34:24.860 --> 02:34:30.120 I'm going to go ahead and open both of those public hearings and invite Angie up to clarify 02:34:30.120 --> 02:34:33.840 discussion on that item. 02:34:33.840 --> 02:34:34.840 Hi. 02:34:34.840 --> 02:34:35.840 Hi. 02:34:35.840 --> 02:34:36.840 Good evening. 02:34:36.840 --> 02:34:47.120 I'm Angie, review manager, both Z220018 and PD230001 are being requested to be continued 02:34:47.120 --> 02:34:53.360 to the planning and zoning commission meeting on July 24th, 2024, as there have been some 02:34:53.360 --> 02:34:57.680 infrastructure issues that have come to light in the last couple of days that the additional 02:34:57.680 --> 02:34:59.680 time is needed to work those out. 02:34:59.680 --> 02:35:07.920 The request is for July 24, 2024, for both Z220018 and PD230001. 02:35:07.920 --> 02:35:09.160 Happy to answer any questions. 02:35:09.160 --> 02:35:10.160 Thank you, Angie. 02:35:10.160 --> 02:35:11.160 Appreciate that. 02:35:11.160 --> 02:35:12.160 Any questions? 02:35:12.160 --> 02:35:13.160 Okay. 02:35:13.160 --> 02:35:18.880 Chair can entertain a motion or discussion. 02:35:18.880 --> 02:35:34.680 I will go ahead and make a motion to postpone item 5BZ220018 and 5CPD230001 to a date certain 02:35:34.680 --> 02:35:42.520 of July 24th, 2024, with the public hearing being left open on both of those items. 02:35:42.520 --> 02:35:43.520 Commissioner Pedro? 02:35:43.520 --> 02:35:44.520 I second. 02:35:44.520 --> 02:35:45.520 Okay. 02:35:45.520 --> 02:35:46.520 We've got a first and a second. 02:35:46.520 --> 02:35:49.040 Is there any discussion? 02:35:49.040 --> 02:35:50.320 Okay. 02:35:50.320 --> 02:35:53.200 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 02:35:53.200 --> 02:36:01.240 And with this, the vote would be for both of those items together. 02:36:01.240 --> 02:36:03.280 Motion carries 6-0. 02:36:03.280 --> 02:36:04.840 Okay. 02:36:04.840 --> 02:36:16.400 That will then take us to 5D-S240003, which is in tandem with 5E-S240004. 02:36:16.400 --> 02:36:21.400 I will open both of those public hearings, and Ashley is here for presentation. 02:36:21.400 --> 02:36:26.000 Good evening, Chair, members of the commission, Ashley Eckstead, Associate Planner. 02:36:26.000 --> 02:36:31.320 This is S24-3 and S24-4, Advanced Microbial Solutions, and I will be presenting both of 02:36:31.320 --> 02:36:33.900 these cases together. 02:36:33.900 --> 02:36:37.720 This request is for a specific use permit to allow a high-impact manufacturing use 02:36:37.720 --> 02:36:43.160 on approximately 8 acres of land, and that is S24-3, which is outlined in red, and an 02:36:43.160 --> 02:36:46.920 additional 9 1/2 acres of land, S24-4. 02:36:46.920 --> 02:36:50.280 They are generally located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Shelby Lane 02:36:50.280 --> 02:36:54.800 and Dakota Lane, and on the west side of Dakota Lane, 800 feet south of Shelby. 02:36:54.800 --> 02:36:58.520 The existing zoning is the HI, which is shown in light purple, and the future land use is 02:36:58.520 --> 02:37:02.320 industrial commerce, which is shown in dark purple. 02:37:02.320 --> 02:37:06.600 Just to briefly go over the site history, in 2011, they applied for a certificate of 02:37:06.600 --> 02:37:12.720 occupancy for 4951 Dakota, which is the southernmost building outlined in blue. 02:37:12.720 --> 02:37:16.760 They have that certificate of occupancy that was issued for a heavy manufacturing use. 02:37:16.760 --> 02:37:21.880 In 2016, they applied for a certificate of occupancy at 5001 Dakota, which is the middle 02:37:21.880 --> 02:37:26.200 building outlined in blue, and they have that as a warehouse use. 02:37:26.200 --> 02:37:31.960 In 2002, they applied for a certificate of occupancy for 5071, which is the northernmost 02:37:31.960 --> 02:37:36.720 building outlined in blue, and that has been issued as a warehouse use as well. 02:37:36.720 --> 02:37:41.480 Earlier this year, they requested a certificate of occupancy for 3650 Shelby, which is outlined 02:37:41.480 --> 02:37:46.500 in red, and staff realized the intensive nature of this use, and we notified the applicant 02:37:46.500 --> 02:37:50.840 that a specific use permit would be required to continue operations and to begin operations 02:37:50.840 --> 02:37:54.560 at the building on Shelby. 02:37:54.560 --> 02:37:58.100 To briefly go over their business operations, high-impact manufacturing, which is why we're 02:37:58.100 --> 02:38:03.280 having this conversation today, the definition includes businesses that use hazardous inputs 02:38:03.280 --> 02:38:07.280 in the course of their manufacturing, and it also includes fertilizer manufacturing 02:38:07.280 --> 02:38:11.880 from organic matter, which both of those apply to this use. 02:38:11.880 --> 02:38:15.520 Manufacturing and outdoor storage of finished product do occur in the southernmost building 02:38:15.520 --> 02:38:17.940 and the middle building outlined in blue. 02:38:17.940 --> 02:38:22.840 That is also proposed to occur in the northernmost building, the single lot outlined in red, and 02:38:22.840 --> 02:38:27.400 the finished product is a non-hazardous that is stored outside. 02:38:27.400 --> 02:38:31.640 The majority of the inputs are stored in the northernmost building on the three-lot site, 02:38:31.640 --> 02:38:35.440 but they do have additional storage in the other buildings as well. 02:38:35.440 --> 02:38:39.540 They do have operational controls in place, which include trenches to contain spills inside 02:38:39.540 --> 02:38:42.320 the buildings, secondary containment where necessary. 02:38:42.320 --> 02:38:47.200 They have a safety plan, an emergency response plan, and the outdoor storage tanks are appropriately 02:38:47.200 --> 02:38:51.440 constructed for the product and the hazard rating. 02:38:51.440 --> 02:38:56.500 Land use-wise, the proposed and existing operations are located within an industrial park with 02:38:56.500 --> 02:39:03.440 similar types of uses, similar outdoor storage, similar types of vehicles, and similar operations. 02:39:03.440 --> 02:39:06.080 To briefly go over the site layouts, these are existing buildings. 02:39:06.080 --> 02:39:10.140 They are not proposing any changes to the buildings or the sites. 02:39:10.140 --> 02:39:15.120 The buildings range in size from approximately 40,000 to 61,000 square feet, and the outdoor 02:39:15.120 --> 02:39:18.820 storage tanks, which are highlighted on the plan in red. 02:39:18.820 --> 02:39:24.680 On the existing outdoor storage tanks, which is the southernmost lot in the middle building 02:39:24.680 --> 02:39:29.360 that was outlined in blue, it's the three-lot SUP, and then they are proposing additional 02:39:29.360 --> 02:39:34.720 outdoor storage, which is outlined in red on the left, and that is S243, the single 02:39:34.720 --> 02:39:37.760 building SUP. 02:39:37.760 --> 02:39:39.720 It does meet the criteria for approval. 02:39:39.720 --> 02:39:43.680 It's consistent with the goals and policies of the Denton 2040 comprehensive plan and 02:39:43.680 --> 02:39:45.080 the future land use map. 02:39:45.080 --> 02:39:49.280 It's compatible with the surrounding area, and approval of this SUP is not expected to 02:39:49.280 --> 02:39:53.800 generate significant adverse environmental or fiscal impacts. 02:39:53.800 --> 02:39:57.240 Public outreach was done, an ad was posted in the newspaper on the website, and a sign 02:39:57.240 --> 02:39:58.600 was posted on the property. 02:39:58.600 --> 02:40:01.280 We mailed out notices to everyone within 500 feet. 02:40:01.280 --> 02:40:04.660 We did not receive any responses in opposition or in favor. 02:40:04.660 --> 02:40:07.840 The applicant also discussed this project with the neighbors and delivered letters in 02:40:07.840 --> 02:40:08.840 person. 02:40:08.840 --> 02:40:15.400 The addresses is within 500 feet, and we performed notices for both individually. 02:40:15.400 --> 02:40:19.680 To go through the conditions, I'll go through S243 first, and this is the northernmost lot 02:40:19.680 --> 02:40:22.000 that is just the single lot. 02:40:22.000 --> 02:40:26.000 They'll need to maintain compliance with the Texas Multisector Stormwater General Permit 02:40:26.000 --> 02:40:28.680 and update their certification as required. 02:40:28.680 --> 02:40:32.520 They'll also need to maintain a spill response team that requires staff training at least 02:40:32.520 --> 02:40:33.960 once a year. 02:40:33.960 --> 02:40:37.720 The outdoor storage tanks, and these are the outdoor storage tanks that are proposed, they'll 02:40:37.720 --> 02:40:41.360 need to be screened from the right of way with an eight-foot wood fence and evergreen 02:40:41.360 --> 02:40:44.960 trees with a minimum 30-foot mature height. 02:40:44.960 --> 02:40:50.240 Additionally, all stored hazardous chemicals shall be located inside the building only, 02:40:50.240 --> 02:40:54.040 and they are currently doing that, so the outdoor storage tanks shown on the plans are 02:40:54.040 --> 02:40:56.720 not permitted to hold the hazardous materials. 02:40:56.720 --> 02:41:01.040 In condition six, this was added to your conditions that we sent out to you through email earlier 02:41:01.040 --> 02:41:04.720 today, and this was after discussions with building safety. 02:41:04.720 --> 02:41:08.840 They will need to obtain all necessary permits within 90 days to achieve the proper storage 02:41:08.840 --> 02:41:13.440 and placement of materials or chemicals within the control areas according to the building 02:41:13.440 --> 02:41:14.440 code. 02:41:14.440 --> 02:41:17.780 They'll also need to obtain the permits from the fire department for all the hazardous 02:41:17.780 --> 02:41:20.560 chemicals stored on site. 02:41:20.560 --> 02:41:24.320 Prior to any manufacturing, the wastewater discharge being connected to the city's wastewater 02:41:24.320 --> 02:41:27.880 collection system, they'll need building permits to hook up to the city's wastewater 02:41:27.880 --> 02:41:31.080 system on their manufacturing floor. 02:41:31.080 --> 02:41:35.400 So S24-3, this is the three lots, and some of these conditions are the same, so I won't 02:41:35.400 --> 02:41:36.560 reread those to you. 02:41:36.560 --> 02:41:40.080 There are a few conditions that are different. 02:41:40.080 --> 02:41:46.680 The southernmost lot, it does contain floodplain, so the chiller that is currently located there 02:41:46.680 --> 02:41:51.760 will need to be relocated outside of the floodway and the 100-year floodplain, and all mechanical 02:41:51.760 --> 02:41:55.760 equipment has to remain outside of the floodway and floodplain. 02:41:55.760 --> 02:42:01.880 No outdoor storage is permitted within the floodway or floodplain as well. 02:42:01.880 --> 02:42:05.560 Highlighted in red is additional changes to the conditions that we sent you earlier after 02:42:05.560 --> 02:42:06.840 talking with the fire department. 02:42:06.840 --> 02:42:12.520 We did add a 90-day timeframe to condition six to get the necessary permits for the storage 02:42:12.520 --> 02:42:17.160 of hazardous materials, and we do have the same condition from building safety to obtain 02:42:17.160 --> 02:42:23.040 any permits needed from them in accordance with the building code. 02:42:23.040 --> 02:42:28.160 Staff recommendations, we do recommend approval of S24-3, which is the northernmost lot, and 02:42:28.160 --> 02:42:30.760 S24-4, which is the three lots. 02:42:30.760 --> 02:42:34.680 I'm happy to answer any questions, and the applicant is also here with the presentation. 02:42:34.680 --> 02:42:35.680 Thank you very much, Ashley. 02:42:35.680 --> 02:42:36.680 Any questions? 02:42:36.680 --> 02:42:37.680 I do not see any. 02:42:37.680 --> 02:42:38.680 Thank you very much. 02:42:38.680 --> 02:42:46.420 Okay, I do not have a card for the applicant, but I'll go ahead and invite you up, and you 02:42:46.420 --> 02:42:47.880 can give us your name and address, and . . . 02:42:47.880 --> 02:43:08.640 All right. 02:43:08.640 --> 02:43:09.640 Good evening, commissioners, chair. 02:43:09.640 --> 02:43:16.400 My name is Jesse Copeland, 500 Winstead Building, 2728 North Harwood Street, Dallas, Texas, 02:43:16.400 --> 02:43:17.400 75201. 02:43:17.400 --> 02:43:21.800 I'm here representing the applicant in this request. 02:43:21.800 --> 02:43:28.000 So I want to quickly thank all of staff, specifically Ashley, for reviewing, communicating, and 02:43:28.000 --> 02:43:34.460 processing all this material for these two applications very quickly and efficiently. 02:43:34.460 --> 02:43:35.660 I'll be brief. 02:43:35.660 --> 02:43:40.640 A lot of our presentations are duplicative of Ashley's, but I just want to run through 02:43:40.640 --> 02:43:43.140 a couple things. 02:43:43.140 --> 02:43:44.600 Here's the site that you've seen. 02:43:44.600 --> 02:43:54.500 This is for S24-3, located at 3650 Shelby Lane, an aerial, it's outlined in yellow here. 02:43:54.500 --> 02:43:59.920 And here's a street view of the site facing southwest on the corner of Shelby and Dakota 02:43:59.920 --> 02:44:03.440 Lane. 02:44:03.440 --> 02:44:07.720 As you know, this request is for a specific use permit for high-impact manufacturing, 02:44:07.720 --> 02:44:13.880 specifically, the production of a non-hazardous agricultural fertilizer that's used as a soil 02:44:13.880 --> 02:44:18.980 amendment to assist with nitrogen use efficiency in row crops. 02:44:18.980 --> 02:44:24.720 This is probably a good time to mention that the applicant is here to help explain and 02:44:24.720 --> 02:44:32.080 answer any technical and operational questions that the commissioners may have. 02:44:32.080 --> 02:44:37.560 Going forward, I'd like to just briefly outline the existing site conditions and some of the 02:44:37.560 --> 02:44:39.240 background on this site. 02:44:39.240 --> 02:44:46.840 As mentioned before, in 2024, the applicant entered into a lease at the site, which is 02:44:46.840 --> 02:44:52.840 their fourth in the immediate area, and this site will be used to produce the applicant's 02:44:52.840 --> 02:44:55.440 newest bio-stimulant technology. 02:44:55.440 --> 02:44:59.200 It was during the CO process for this site that the city notified the applicant the proposed 02:44:59.200 --> 02:45:06.080 use will be considered a high-impact manufacturing and that the SUP would be required. 02:45:06.080 --> 02:45:12.920 It's also important to note that this use is consistent with the future land use element 02:45:12.920 --> 02:45:16.960 of the Denton 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 02:45:16.960 --> 02:45:22.440 As mentioned before, the site is surrounded entirely by land zone heavy industrial, and 02:45:22.440 --> 02:45:27.760 the uses of the site consist of the industrial uses like light manufacturing, distribution, 02:45:27.760 --> 02:45:37.000 warehousing, gas well production, as well as a trade school to the east. 02:45:37.000 --> 02:45:44.280 Lastly we did want to touch a little bit on our community outreach. 02:45:44.280 --> 02:45:50.840 The applicant and business owner personally delivered letters to the neighboring properties 02:45:50.840 --> 02:45:57.400 that we got from the list provided by staff. 02:45:57.400 --> 02:46:04.600 All but five of those addresses were made personal contact with, and the feedback was 02:46:04.600 --> 02:46:10.200 overwhelmingly positive, including a few folks that mentioned that they were happy to see 02:46:10.200 --> 02:46:14.480 that our business was expanding. 02:46:14.480 --> 02:46:33.880 I'll move on to S24-4. 02:46:33.880 --> 02:46:42.400 Again here's an aerial of the sites located within this request, 4951 here at the bottom, 02:46:42.400 --> 02:46:50.400 5001 in the middle, and 5071 at the top. 02:46:50.400 --> 02:47:04.840 More street views of the sites facing southwest, here's 4951, 5001, and 5071 to Codelane. 02:47:04.840 --> 02:47:10.120 There's no need for me to rehash a lot of this as it's very similar to the previous 02:47:10.120 --> 02:47:11.120 request. 02:47:11.120 --> 02:47:16.600 However, I will clarify for this request, the SCP will offer production of the fertilizers 02:47:16.600 --> 02:47:23.840 and bio-stimulant products at 4951 and 5001 Codelane, whereas 5071 Codelane will be utilized 02:47:23.840 --> 02:47:33.680 to store empty totes, raw materials, and other finished bio-stimulant products in totes containers. 02:47:33.680 --> 02:47:39.260 It is a part of this overall manufacturing and distribution process, which is why it's 02:47:39.260 --> 02:47:44.040 being considered in this request. 02:47:44.040 --> 02:47:50.960 I actually spoke to this and I'll just bring it back up. 02:47:50.960 --> 02:47:57.800 The history of 4951, the applicant initially leased 4951 to Codelane in 2011 with the plan 02:47:57.800 --> 02:48:01.440 to build a production system to produce its original bio-stimulant product. 02:48:01.440 --> 02:48:08.240 At this time, the building had a CEO for heavy manufacturing that related back to the buildings 02:48:08.240 --> 02:48:10.320 used prior to the annexation. 02:48:10.320 --> 02:48:16.560 In 2016, the applicant expanded and leased its second building at 5001 Dakota and followed 02:48:16.560 --> 02:48:19.120 the same CEO process that it had for the first building. 02:48:19.120 --> 02:48:24.080 The applicant initially uses property for storage, but starting in late 2017, it constructed 02:48:24.080 --> 02:48:28.320 production systems for its newer bio-stimulant technologies. 02:48:28.320 --> 02:48:32.600 These production systems are similar to the ones used in 4951. 02:48:32.600 --> 02:48:39.880 Finally, in 2022, the applicant expanded again and leased its third building at 5071 Dakota 02:48:39.880 --> 02:48:46.000 to use solely for storage of empty totes, which are material containers, raw materials 02:48:46.000 --> 02:48:52.720 used to produce the company's products, and final finished bio-stimulant products. 02:48:52.720 --> 02:48:59.880 Again, the uses in these sites are consistent with the future land use element of the comprehensive 02:48:59.880 --> 02:49:02.240 plan. 02:49:02.240 --> 02:49:06.920 Once again, these sites are surrounded by heavy industrial, with the exception of the 02:49:06.920 --> 02:49:13.520 ETJ to the south, as well as various industrial uses, including light manufacturing, distribution, 02:49:13.520 --> 02:49:21.040 warehousing, automotive repair, and that same trade school now to the northeast. 02:49:21.040 --> 02:49:28.000 Again, the neighborhood outreach was done for these sites in conjunction with the site 02:49:28.000 --> 02:49:34.040 for S24-3, and feedback was still positive. 02:49:34.040 --> 02:49:40.720 As I mentioned earlier, the applicant business owner is here to answer technical operational 02:49:40.720 --> 02:49:44.520 questions, and I'll be here as well. 02:49:44.520 --> 02:49:47.640 Thank you, Mr. Griffin. 02:49:47.640 --> 02:49:48.640 Questions at the moment? 02:49:48.640 --> 02:49:55.160 I think I've got a question just about this bio-stimulant, if I could ask one. 02:49:55.160 --> 02:49:56.160 Sure. 02:49:56.160 --> 02:50:04.040 You said it's newer, so I'm wondering what the difference is, and if it can be done in 02:50:04.040 --> 02:50:07.360 a not-super-technical way that we could understand. 02:50:07.360 --> 02:50:14.080 I don't know if that's a question that can be done like that or not. 02:50:14.080 --> 02:50:15.080 Hi. 02:50:15.080 --> 02:50:16.080 My name is John Wolfe. 02:50:16.080 --> 02:50:21.160 I'm the chief operating officer of Advanced Microbial Solutions. 02:50:21.160 --> 02:50:26.200 Basically the difference here is these are fermentation tanks that are serialized so 02:50:26.200 --> 02:50:31.240 that water flows from one tank to the next, and it consumes whatever organic feedstock 02:50:31.240 --> 02:50:32.400 you put in there. 02:50:32.400 --> 02:50:37.100 We direct these to make certain kinds of microbes that do different things. 02:50:37.100 --> 02:50:43.760 This newest one is just designed to help us get corn, primarily corn plants to fix nitrogen 02:50:43.760 --> 02:50:49.080 from the atmosphere, reduce the amount of nitrogen we apply to corn crops. 02:50:49.080 --> 02:50:50.080 I think you did very well. 02:50:50.080 --> 02:50:51.560 I actually understood that. 02:50:51.560 --> 02:50:52.560 All right. 02:50:52.560 --> 02:50:57.480 I have to explain it to my son a lot so that if I can do that, it helps. 02:50:57.480 --> 02:50:58.480 Any other questions? 02:50:58.480 --> 02:50:59.480 Yeah. 02:50:59.480 --> 02:51:00.480 I don't think so. 02:51:00.480 --> 02:51:01.480 Thank you very much for that. 02:51:01.480 --> 02:51:02.480 Appreciate that. 02:51:02.480 --> 02:51:06.160 I don't have any other cards in front of me. 02:51:06.160 --> 02:51:08.880 Is there anyone else wishing to speak who has not? 02:51:08.880 --> 02:51:12.400 There should be like one only person here, okay? 02:51:12.400 --> 02:51:13.400 Very good. 02:51:13.400 --> 02:51:14.400 Very good. 02:51:14.400 --> 02:51:28.360 Okay, with that, I will go ahead and close the public hearing for 5D S240003 and 5E S240004, 02:51:28.360 --> 02:51:31.600 and I will open the floor for a motion or discussion. 02:51:31.600 --> 02:51:32.600 Commissioner Cole. 02:51:32.600 --> 02:51:35.880 I'll make a motion to approve. 02:51:35.880 --> 02:51:36.880 Commissioner Pruitt? 02:51:36.880 --> 02:51:37.880 Second. 02:51:37.880 --> 02:51:38.880 Okay. 02:51:38.880 --> 02:51:49.840 I need to clarify, because these had differing conditions, I should have said that before 02:51:49.840 --> 02:51:50.840 that. 02:51:50.840 --> 02:51:52.880 We need to take these one motion at a time. 02:51:52.880 --> 02:51:56.280 So we're looking at 5D here. 02:51:56.280 --> 02:51:59.880 I will ask S240003. 02:51:59.880 --> 02:52:05.480 So Commissioner Cole, are you good with your to approve 5D? 02:52:05.480 --> 02:52:06.480 Commissioner Pruitt? 02:52:06.480 --> 02:52:07.480 Yes. 02:52:07.480 --> 02:52:08.480 So second. 02:52:08.480 --> 02:52:19.240 I will make a motion to approve 5D S240003 with staff's conditions as presented. 02:52:19.240 --> 02:52:21.000 Okay. 02:52:21.000 --> 02:52:23.120 Any discussion? 02:52:23.120 --> 02:52:25.440 Before we vote, can I just say thank you, Ashley. 02:52:25.440 --> 02:52:26.440 Thank you, Mr. Copeland. 02:52:26.440 --> 02:52:28.720 The backup material was fantastic on this. 02:52:28.720 --> 02:52:34.040 I will say when I first read just the AIS, I was like, oh, my gosh, you know, what is 02:52:34.040 --> 02:52:38.240 -- and as I delved into it, and it was still -- I mean, it took a minute. 02:52:38.240 --> 02:52:43.720 But you presented it so well, the narrative was great, so that we really could understand 02:52:43.720 --> 02:52:45.620 exactly what was being asked. 02:52:45.620 --> 02:52:46.620 So well done. 02:52:46.620 --> 02:52:47.880 Thank you very much. 02:52:47.880 --> 02:52:56.040 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 02:52:56.040 --> 02:52:57.640 That motion will carry 6-0. 02:52:57.640 --> 02:53:03.080 That will take us to then the vote on 5E, S240004. 02:53:03.080 --> 02:53:04.080 Commissioner Thaggard? 02:53:04.080 --> 02:53:05.080 I make a motion to approve. 02:53:05.080 --> 02:53:09.280 Is that with staff's conditions as presented? 02:53:09.280 --> 02:53:10.280 Commissioner Pergero? 02:53:10.280 --> 02:53:11.280 I second. 02:53:11.280 --> 02:53:12.280 Okay. 02:53:12.280 --> 02:53:18.320 We've got a first and a second for approval of item 5E, S240004. 02:53:18.320 --> 02:53:19.920 Any discussion? 02:53:19.920 --> 02:53:21.020 Okay. 02:53:21.020 --> 02:53:28.800 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 02:53:28.800 --> 02:53:31.960 That motion carries 6-0. 02:53:31.960 --> 02:53:39.920 And that will take us to our final public hearing item for the night, which is 5F, DCA240003. 02:53:39.920 --> 02:53:43.880 I will open the public hearing, and Angie is here for presentation. 02:53:43.880 --> 02:53:45.480 Thank you. 02:53:45.480 --> 02:53:48.480 Thank you, Chair. 02:53:48.480 --> 02:53:51.640 Just one second. 02:53:51.640 --> 02:53:52.640 Good evening. 02:53:52.640 --> 02:53:54.140 Angie Manglaris, Development Review Manager. 02:53:54.140 --> 02:54:01.560 This is DCA240003, amendments to the Debt and Development Code as it relates to conflicts 02:54:01.560 --> 02:54:04.660 with other ordinances and criteria manuals. 02:54:04.660 --> 02:54:06.560 So a little bit of background on this proposal. 02:54:06.560 --> 02:54:11.400 This is amendments to sections 1.3.4 of the DDC. 02:54:11.400 --> 02:54:15.760 This is the section that spells out really conflicts with other ordinances as well as 02:54:15.760 --> 02:54:19.040 criteria manuals in the Denton Development Code. 02:54:19.040 --> 02:54:24.440 On June 4th, 2024, the City Council adopted the new Denton Design Criteria Manual. 02:54:24.440 --> 02:54:29.640 The Denton Design Criteria Manual consolidates our existing criteria manuals into one comprehensive 02:54:29.640 --> 02:54:34.360 manual and also specifies that in the event of conflict between the Denton Design Criteria 02:54:34.360 --> 02:54:38.800 Manual and the Denton Development Code, the Denton Design Criteria Manual shall not supersede 02:54:38.800 --> 02:54:40.120 the DDC. 02:54:40.120 --> 02:54:42.640 As it is today, we do have some conflicting language. 02:54:42.640 --> 02:54:48.400 As section 1.3.4 specifies that in the event of conflict with the DDC and criteria manuals, 02:54:48.400 --> 02:54:50.800 the criteria manuals shall govern. 02:54:50.800 --> 02:54:55.560 And really the purpose of the DDC is to establish the subdivision and design standards for land 02:54:55.560 --> 02:54:59.200 regulations to carry out the goals of the comprehensive plan. 02:54:59.200 --> 02:55:03.080 The new manuals are intended to provide the supplemental technical detail that we need 02:55:03.080 --> 02:55:05.480 to carry out the provisions of the DDC. 02:55:05.480 --> 02:55:11.640 So we do really want the DDC and its regulations to control in the event of conflict. 02:55:11.640 --> 02:55:15.480 While we're in this section of the DDC, there are just some additional amendments that needed 02:55:15.480 --> 02:55:19.840 to be made to remove references to manuals that we no longer use as well as just clean 02:55:19.840 --> 02:55:21.060 up some names. 02:55:21.060 --> 02:55:24.080 So the proposed amendments are here before you. 02:55:24.080 --> 02:55:29.000 Again, correcting that the Denton Development Code shall govern in the event of conflict 02:55:29.000 --> 02:55:35.320 as well as calling out that our criteria manuals are now in one consolidated manual. 02:55:35.320 --> 02:55:38.720 Although I do apologize, this needs to be indented in a little bit further. 02:55:38.720 --> 02:55:42.460 But this does address the creation of the Denton Design Criteria Manual, which houses 02:55:42.460 --> 02:55:47.880 all of our existing criteria manuals and also moves to amending these criteria manuals as 02:55:47.880 --> 02:55:48.880 needed. 02:55:48.880 --> 02:55:52.000 I believe before it was called out as a yearly basis, so we're shifting that to when the 02:55:52.000 --> 02:55:55.760 need arises for criteria manual amendments. 02:55:55.760 --> 02:55:59.580 Having said all of that, this is consistent with our criteria for approval for text amendments 02:55:59.580 --> 02:56:03.840 and staff is recommending approval as the amendments as presented and the next step 02:56:03.840 --> 02:56:05.600 is City Council in July. 02:56:05.600 --> 02:56:10.200 I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. 02:56:10.200 --> 02:56:13.040 Questions for Angie? 02:56:13.040 --> 02:56:14.040 Thank you very much. 02:56:14.040 --> 02:56:15.040 Thank you. 02:56:15.040 --> 02:56:16.040 Okay. 02:56:16.040 --> 02:56:17.040 This is a public hearing. 02:56:17.040 --> 02:56:21.880 There is no one but staff left in front of me, so I'm going to go ahead and close the 02:56:21.880 --> 02:56:30.740 public hearing and open the floor for a motion or discussion on the item. 02:56:30.740 --> 02:56:31.740 Commissioner Villarreal. 02:56:31.740 --> 02:56:33.740 Move approval. 02:56:33.740 --> 02:56:34.740 Commissioner Cole? 02:56:34.740 --> 02:56:35.740 Second. 02:56:35.740 --> 02:56:36.740 Okay. 02:56:36.740 --> 02:56:38.600 Got a first and a second for approval discussion. 02:56:38.600 --> 02:56:39.600 Okay. 02:56:39.600 --> 02:56:46.920 Let's go ahead and vote, please. 02:56:46.920 --> 02:56:48.520 That motion carries 6-0. 02:56:48.520 --> 02:56:54.520 That will take us to our matrix, item 6-A, and I will turn it over to Tina. 02:56:54.520 --> 02:56:56.640 Thank you, Chair Ellis. 02:56:56.640 --> 02:57:00.600 So with respect to the matrix, there were no additional items added at your last meeting, 02:57:00.600 --> 02:57:05.920 so that remained as is given that we had the discussion regarding the P&Z reconsideration 02:57:05.920 --> 02:57:09.680 process and the matrix will go ahead and remove that as we continue to move that item forward 02:57:09.680 --> 02:57:12.360 from a public hearing perspective. 02:57:12.360 --> 02:57:14.080 Several updates for you. 02:57:14.080 --> 02:57:20.200 So the Southeast Denton area plan, we are in the final stretch of trying to wrap up 02:57:20.200 --> 02:57:21.200 that project. 02:57:21.200 --> 02:57:24.520 So a few items that you might be interested in. 02:57:24.520 --> 02:57:30.760 So we're trying to get our steering committee to be able to meet on June 20th, so we anticipate 02:57:30.760 --> 02:57:32.240 that occurring. 02:57:32.240 --> 02:57:36.220 The team is going to be doing additional engagement activities with the Juneteenth celebrations 02:57:36.220 --> 02:57:37.680 that are happening this weekend. 02:57:37.680 --> 02:57:42.700 Excuse me just a moment. 02:57:42.700 --> 02:57:48.740 We also have slated for July 17th a special called Planning and Zoning Commission meeting 02:57:48.740 --> 02:57:50.800 to be able to consider this item. 02:57:50.800 --> 02:57:59.680 So we're proposing to bring forth the draft plan for your consideration and we also have 02:57:59.680 --> 02:58:00.680 -- oh, I skipped a date. 02:58:00.680 --> 02:58:01.680 Hold on. 02:58:01.680 --> 02:58:02.680 Before we get to that. 02:58:02.680 --> 02:58:07.480 So we'll have a P&Z discussion on June 26th, because we promised you at our joint meeting 02:58:07.480 --> 02:58:10.920 that we would bring the action items before the commission for your consideration, so 02:58:10.920 --> 02:58:12.440 we'll be doing that in the work session. 02:58:12.440 --> 02:58:14.840 So I'm presuming all of that goes well. 02:58:14.840 --> 02:58:20.160 Then we're proposing to then bring the plan forward for the July 7th special called meeting. 02:58:20.160 --> 02:58:23.800 If you have not done so, if you could please let Kathy know your availability so we can 02:58:23.800 --> 02:58:25.720 ensure that we've got quorum. 02:58:25.720 --> 02:58:30.200 Also we may be scheduling some additional public hearings for that meeting as well since 02:58:30.200 --> 02:58:37.600 we've asked you to come in for that, but we'll start July 17th and that is a Wednesday. 02:58:37.600 --> 02:58:42.360 But anyway, so hopefully we'll be able to have that project before you on the 17th. 02:58:42.360 --> 02:58:47.020 With all of our intention, we're currently reviewing the final draft -- or the draft 02:58:47.020 --> 02:58:48.020 document. 02:58:48.020 --> 02:58:52.600 I'm looking at Mia, so she and Julia put so much hard work into this, but we anticipate 02:58:52.600 --> 02:58:53.880 being able to move forward with that. 02:58:53.880 --> 02:58:58.600 And then once we have -- if the commission is able to successfully recommend approval 02:58:58.600 --> 02:59:03.320 at your meeting on the 17th of July, then we would get that scheduled for council and 02:59:03.320 --> 02:59:08.920 I believe the date we're targeting for that is July 23rd for that project. 02:59:08.920 --> 02:59:13.120 It's kind of a race between Mia and Julia and Cameron and Sean, so with the two projects 02:59:13.120 --> 02:59:14.120 going on. 02:59:14.120 --> 02:59:17.720 Downtown, you know, we continue to work on that. 02:59:17.720 --> 02:59:23.400 That one -- we just received the draft document plan on that as well and so we've pretty much 02:59:23.400 --> 02:59:26.000 finished our work, I believe, with the steering committee. 02:59:26.000 --> 02:59:30.880 We will be looking forward to bringing that to the commission here in the very near future 02:59:30.880 --> 02:59:33.520 also for your consideration. 02:59:33.520 --> 02:59:39.600 And right now I believe we are targeting your July 24th meeting date for that. 02:59:39.600 --> 02:59:45.460 In terms of projects that you all took action on at your last meeting and their outcome 02:59:45.460 --> 02:59:49.920 at council, so if you recall, Mia worked on an amendment to the debt and development code 02:59:49.920 --> 02:59:52.360 to address donation boxes. 02:59:52.360 --> 02:59:56.840 Council did approve those ordinance amendments as presented, which was as recommended by 02:59:56.840 --> 02:59:57.840 the commission. 02:59:57.840 --> 03:00:02.480 Short-term rentals continues to live on. 03:00:02.480 --> 03:00:08.840 That went before council and they continued that to the July 23rd meeting date to allow 03:00:08.840 --> 03:00:12.240 staff to be able to meet with local realtors group. 03:00:12.240 --> 03:00:16.520 There's some concern amongst local realtors that the proposed registration requirement 03:00:16.520 --> 03:00:21.360 will lead to a rental registration program here within the city for all rental properties. 03:00:21.360 --> 03:00:29.480 So I believe we have that meeting scheduled for July 20th and so we'll be meeting with 03:00:29.480 --> 03:00:33.460 them and then going back to council on July 23rd. 03:00:33.460 --> 03:00:35.600 That concludes my report, so thank you. 03:00:35.600 --> 03:00:37.280 Thank you. 03:00:37.280 --> 03:00:39.040 Anything to add to the matrix? 03:00:39.040 --> 03:00:40.040 Commissioner Pruitt. 03:00:40.040 --> 03:00:44.600 So nothing specifically to add, but I know earlier in the work session today we had talked 03:00:44.600 --> 03:00:52.840 about the community engagement incentives policy and method of doing that. 03:00:52.840 --> 03:01:00.560 And we talked about pushing or bringing that back at the next meeting on June 26th. 03:01:00.560 --> 03:01:07.200 I think our agenda is stacking up to be pretty full with lots of public hearing on June 26th. 03:01:07.200 --> 03:01:12.540 So I was just going to offer a suggestion that if it makes more sense to hold that after 03:01:12.540 --> 03:01:22.340 the Southeast Denton discussion ... You're still not on. 03:01:22.340 --> 03:01:28.720 On our special call meeting on July 17th, if that gives staff more time to prepare and 03:01:28.720 --> 03:01:35.400 removes the schedule pressure of a full agenda, I think that's fine with me anyway. 03:01:35.400 --> 03:01:37.040 Yeah, I appreciate that suggestion. 03:01:37.040 --> 03:01:40.840 I think we're in a position where we could at least bring that item back for a work session 03:01:40.840 --> 03:01:46.100 discussion because I know we've got a good solid draft already assembled. 03:01:46.100 --> 03:01:49.960 We were not able to get it completed in time for this meeting, but I think we'll be in 03:01:49.960 --> 03:01:50.960 good shape. 03:01:50.960 --> 03:01:54.960 So it's good to know that that offer is out there. 03:01:54.960 --> 03:01:55.960 Thank you. 03:01:55.960 --> 03:01:56.960 Yes. 03:01:56.960 --> 03:01:58.600 Anything else for the matrix? 03:01:58.600 --> 03:01:59.600 Concluding items? 03:01:59.600 --> 03:02:00.600 Okay. 03:02:00.600 --> 03:02:09.120 Well, with that, I want to thank you all, thank staff for being awesome, and I will 03:02:09.120 --> 03:02:10.920 adjourn us at 8.28 PM. 03:02:10.920 --> 03:02:13.120 See you at the next one.