Aug 07, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission on 2019-08-07 4:30 PM

Good evening ladies and gentlemen this is the planning and zoning work session meeting for Wednesday August 7th 2019. It is 437. I'll call the meeting to order seeing that we have a quorum and let the record show at the opening Commissioner Pernetta is absent. The first thing on our agenda this evening is to get an update from the Parks Master Plan and Urban Forestry Master Plan. I invite Gary Packin for presentation. Thank you for the opportunity to come and speak with you. I've been with the city since I guess was March of last year so I'm still kind of learning a lot of things. It's the first time I've been the planning and zoning so I appreciate the opportunity to come and speak. I was just gonna I just have a couple brief slides that I wanted to share with you on some of the things that we're doing as an organization in 2009 the department completed a new Parks and Recreation Master Plan and typically every 10 years those are done every five years there's an update. We did not have a five-year update done so we were really due for a complete overhaul. So really starting last December but officially January at the state of the city we kicked off our master plan redevelopment. We are doing it a hundred percent in-house for the most part. We are hiring we did hire some subject matter experts instead of hiring one consultant that kind of does a little bit of everything we went and found about 15 different groups that could evaluate what we do from state associations that are in our industry to private consultants to give us feedback on a specific area. So we're taking all that information and getting that feedback as well as we've conducted approximately 30 public meetings so far with the community focus groups everything from a mountain bike group to we're having a rec center meeting at the end of this month to talk about people that use our rec centers to get feedback on those facilities. So it's been a it's been a pretty long process so far and we're trying to collect as much data as we can and get a lot of feedback from everybody on every aspect of the organization and we may have missed a place or two but we'll find that out and get that solved as well. We had a public survey needs assessment that started on January 17th we just closed it on July 31st so we're waiting for all that data to come back. We do have some online pick-and-click type surveys that we're pushing out right now to additional focus groups to get some additional information from them and then we are also concurrently with this working on our urban forest master plan and we had our public meeting our first one on August 1st last Thursday evening here at City Hall we had a little over 40 people attend that meeting and we had really good conversation about where we need to plant trees how we need to spend the tree mitigation fund what the priorities are in the community and really just gathering that feedback and using it as a sounding board for the residents to to give their input on what we should be doing with our urban forest forest as part of the master plan process. Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair. Gary you mentioned that focus group earlier in that where did you get that the for which how did you pick it the focus group well the the for the one that's coming up in August 22nd for the rec centers they're reaching out to specific users to come in and then they're also opening it to the public too so it's a little bit of kind of a hybrid type of earlier in a few statements ago you said something about surveys going out to just certain oh yeah where did you just where'd you get so we had our community survey went out to everybody that was a general we we did a mailer to every household so you should have gotten a postcard last spring and then we also did email blasts and social media campaigns for an online versions of that and then we have specific users so city staff is getting one baseball groups softball groups all those sports are also getting ones that give specific information from them those are more of a pick click and choose type thing where there's options you can pick and say hey here's some priorities that we're interested in and then also here's some general boxes you can just fill in open comments yeah so we have structured surveys and then we have open-ended surveys as well that we're that we're working from the mobility plan just had two public meetings last week as well we were there collecting information in regards to trails so we're trying to plan out an entire trail system throughout Denton you know retroactively obviously since those weren't in place years ago would have been the best time to do it but we're trying to identify whether they're floodplain areas along creeks we might be able to get easements or purchase some of that floodplain working with developments as they occur in the city and trying to get some ways through their process whether it's through the land dedication and development ordinance or it's just an outright purchase or a lease agreement where we could get a right-of-way through there and eventually put a trail that would connect city assets as well as you know from downtown to the lake or from downtown all the way down to Argyle or across 35 and working with developments as they occur and trying to get some access through and connecting their property and their development to our neighborhood parks so that's been a major process and then last spring we put together a land acquisition process we really didn't have a way to identify what land was available for purchase that we could look to buy in the future as Denton continues to grow and trying to buy that land or property now for residents 20 years from now how we could go about doing that and prioritizing evaluating that land based on considerations whether it's topography unique amenities a lake those types of things unique tree species a percentage of tree canopy its connectivity to other city assets or schools so we looked at all those types things and put together kind of an almost an evaluation form that we could fill out and score so we could kind of prioritize in some form or fashion so we created that last spring and we had a presentation to City Council an executive session to talk about that so we're using that to try to prioritize and look and see where we buy future parkland we have a million dollars in the 2014 bond program that we're looking to utilize and then we have a little over two million dollars in the tree mitigation fund that could be used for land purchase or tree planting as well so we're looking at where we need to buy land in regards to future development what large parcels are available for larger city parks and then also neighborhood parks we're looking at but we're kind of considering that the developments that are happening through the city through the land vacation we can work with them to identify those smaller parcels that are more geared towards that specific neighborhood so all of those are kind of being laid out in a GIS process right now with with city staff so how we can look at those different layers and the connectivity opportunities the developments that are happening through development services relationship to other city land that's available that could be used for park spaces so that's it's really a dynamic process that we're working through with all the exciting things that are happening in the city and making sure that we try to cover all aspects of today's recreational needs and then anticipate recreational needs for 10-20 years from now we also have a department strategic plan that was started back in 2017 those are all being rolled into the master plan as well as well as the city's strategic plan and then jumping back to the urban forestry plan we anticipate that concluding probably by the end of this year that will also be a component of our parks master plan as well because that's all connected to our park spaces obviously and then an additional plan that we're working on is our cost recovery plan just from an operating standpoint for the department so we can identify our revenues and expenses for all of our programs and anticipate how we can improve where areas we may need to eliminate programs and where we're maybe not charging the right amount or we're charging too much so we're going through that process right now is in cooperation with the city's budget some up from a park project standpoint just a couple projects we're working on right now North Lakes dog park this project started back in really in 2014 is when the thought process originally started and some of the planning efforts it really didn't start until about last May we put together internally we designed this we put together seven different options for the park board and City Council to consider and we came in City Council and Park Board both decided on option three this is immediately adjacent to the Animal Services Center on 77 so it has a really good neighbor where they can bring their dogs over and volunteers could take them for a walk families could test run the dog to see if it's compatible with their family and see how it interacts with other dogs in this park this this development is really utilizing the existing airfield parking lot so that allowed us to save some initial funding for construction but we did leave space right in this area that we could add a parking lot if it's a very popular location Commissioner Beck thanks chair passed by this almost today I do that bike ride that brings that drill around there so I'm watching it is this going to be accessible only from the facility or is the public going to be able to access it outside of that well another trails run along there but is there going to be a fence where that trail is well there's my trail so what you see right now out there are just some square kind of areas and those are the entry gates so we're going to be putting in the concrete circles in the fencing around each one of these areas so each each one of these is a dog run so there's three large dog runs and then a smaller one here and they will be closed at various times select because the dogs I mean they tear the turf apart so we'll be shutting ones down periodically especially in the larger dog area to give that area an opportunity to rest we'll aerate fertilize it so that grass can only accessible from no no actually the parking lot is down here from the airfield yeah off of Windsor okay technically you can walk in here if you want if parking if a lot of people park up here that might be a challenge for us because we don't want we don't want people to overtake their parking lot that's why we left some space here if we need to we can come in back in and put a parking lot in here so we've actually designed a parking lot to accommodate that if needed and we're hoping a lot of people walk to the facility as well we just put a long trail that goes all the way up along 77 and goes north of 77 that connects up the North Park 10 foot 10 foot trail goes to North Point and then all the way over to Evers Park so we're trying to enhance connectability and then also provide for opportunities for people who want to drive there as well great and that's expected to be completed we're there's going to be a lot of activity over the next three weeks and then we're gonna probably let it sit for a little bit and let the turf mature because we're gonna saw it let that grow in and then looking to have it open probably in mid-october okay great thanks original projection was by the end of the end of the calendar year but we're gonna be ahead of that and adjacent to the dog park just to the southeast is gonna be a new North Lakes tennis center we had funding in the 2014 bond program to redevelop and relocate the existing tennis center that's over next to North Lake Trek Center so we're getting really close to getting that out to bid we're splitting the project up into one of our cost savings initiative is to try to bundle some projects so we're gonna bundle the pro shop which is that the old YMCA building is going to be the main entry point to the facility with American Legion Hall which will be a new senior center renovated facility we're bundling both of those projects together because they're very similar in size to see if we can't achieve some savings from that aspect and then from the the grounds of the tennis courts the tennis center those we bundled with another 2014 bond program which was South Lakes Park tennis court so there's two new courts there and lights being added to that park and if we have enough funding we'll put lights on the existing courts that don't have lights so we're trying to bundle that together because it's similar construction with tennis court companies so we're hoping to get that out to bid probably early fall and start construction you know probably no later than early 2020 and then the playgrounds we did three playgrounds last year were slated to do another five to six this year as well we are those a lot of that was again 2014 bond program so we're trying to get a lot of the 2014 bond programs completed and a number of those playgrounds were outdated a typical lifespan of a playground a play structure is about 15 years there are some variations if it's if it's under shade or if it's under trees that does extend the life span of a play structure as well as vandalism obviously shortens play structure lifespans so we have a number of play structures that are outdated that are 20 20 years old so we're trying to get that caught up so we can get into a regular rotation to make sure that we have play structures that are safe we do inspect them on a regular basis to assure that if there's issues we'll take things out of Commission or order replacement parts as needed as well and then from a beautification standpoint we have a number of meeting improvement initiatives that we're doing the islands at Eagle and Elm and Dallas Teasley and Dallas and Teasley are very similar there's old right away that was going through that's been abandoned and just kind of sitting there used for parking lots used for recycling centers and we're trying to clean that up and add more beautification to that so Dallas and Teasley you'll see some activity here as soon as the concrete company leaves the dog park so we're kind of having a multiple places they're gonna put some curbing in there and we're gonna do some beautification efforts there plant some additional trees and landscaping and then the same thing with the Eagle and Elm and we're looking to put maybe even like a welcome to downtown Denton type of signage there and then last year last summer we received a 650,000 plus or minus grant from tex dot a green ribbon grant for University from Elm to Mosh Branch will be improving those medians there are some trees and some of that right now but we're gonna be running irrigation all the way down to Mosh Branch and adding trees and landscaping on though on that thoroughfare and then this summer we applied for another green ribbon grant for 2499 and we haven't heard from that yet so our fingers are crossed on that to run trees all the way up from the border all the way up north so we're looking at how we can improve our affairs from beautification as well as help the environment as well at the same time American Legion Hall I talked a little bit about as part of our bundling project we have two buildings at that location they are detached from each other and they're just basically open free span buildings there's not a really a lot of structure and process to the inside of how that's used the oldest structure has some integrity issues with settling in the foundation that's going to be cleared and wiped off and then a new structure will be built in this place and actually be connected to the the newer structure is built in I think the early 90s so that'll be one entire facility when that's done and that'll serve primarily for our senior citizens and industrial park was a small project that we completed just a few we did a lot of the work last year or earlier this year and we did some additional work with cooperation of some Boy Scouts came in and helped us put down some new sod and we put some plague some concrete pads for picnic tables so that's that's kind of done at this point in time and that's just a little asset for downtown so that's kind of real brief summary of what's going on from a planning standpoint as well as for a park construction Chris Ross thank you Jim Gary it seems I remember a week or two ago there was a South Lakes Park meeting or something can you tell me about that so the reason we had that was primarily for a couple things one was a master plan just to get some feedback from the community itself and then for two construction projects that are going on there one is the South Lakes Park tennis courts we wanted to let them know hey this is a bond program initiative and this is going to be starting up pretty soon do you have any concerns you know any lighting issues or concerns that the neighborhood might have as well as we're looking at putting in a small parking lot of probably 10 to 15 spaces in the northeast corner off Teasley there's a playground right there kind of behind the chiropractor office we put that playground in 2017 and it's created some challenges for those businesses people park in their parking lot and they don't have a lot of parking spaces to begin with and it's created some challenges for them so we're trying to leave that issue by putting in a small kind of trailhead parking lot that people that want to go use that could use that the discussion at the meeting we did talk about that and they wanted to make sure that we had the ability to expand that lot if it was a popular location for people just come and use for the trail itself which is popular that we don't take up all the spaces and then we still kind of just have the same problem so we're going to design it so it can be expanded if needed what where's access for that then that would be off Teasley we had a traffic study engineering helped us get that process going through and they want an additional turning lane heading north so we're gonna have to cut back that median a little bit I'm not real excited about that because that meetings beautiful so we're gonna need a hundred foot stacking opportunity there for people to make that left turn into the park that's the downside of it we're hoping that it could be just a heading south right turn in right turn out and you have to kind of do the loop that but based on the analysis that they want that turning lane Chris you're back thank you chair there was talk it's been a couple years ago there's a little green belt a little but there's a green area that exists between Moore Street where it connects with Luke 288 to the south and then Dutchess Parkway and then that extends across Luke 288 and connects that's an area East McKinney and all that we're starting to develop that is there any plans for any parks over there because it really isn't anything there's a small park over off Mockenburg but other than that there's not much Parkland over in that general area great question so what we've what we've done is with the assistance of our GIS team in tech tech services we've gone through the city adopted in February a philosophy a 10 minute walk so what that means is a 10 minute walk for every resident in the city and that's a half mile radius so we've gone through all of our park spaces and plotted basically circles around the edges of all of our parks and that's given us a quick snapshot that how we can see where we're not achieving that goal we could see where the houses are and we could see where the schools are and where we're deficient in parkland so we're using that as our primary opportunity to identify where parklanding to go that doesn't mean that we won't look at parkland that's within that five that ten minute walk radius but that just gives us a higher priority to make sure that we're meeting that so the goal was a hundred percent connectivity right now we're at 41% the national average is 55% there are cities that are 100% but like New York City or something like that's a very dense it can do that but we're being spread out and 90 square miles it's tough to achieve that pretty quickly so it's a long-term objective we also use that GIS to layer where the developments are happening in the city so we could see where we potential may have neighborhood parks that will be in the future by working with developments so that's another way for us to look at land that's coming down the road for future park space well that area seems like it'd be prime for something like that because the connectivity would take you all the way up to Woodrow and beyond into that whole area and then getting across 288 is they could probably work a little underpass for that connectivity too but there's a lot of trees in there so there's room for developing that as parkland I believe it's a floodplain too so good use of that land would be be a part but so there's nothing specific for that right now you're just we have identified a number of parcels that are kind of various sizes more or less the larger pieces as part of the master plan we're looking at you know currently we have you know two or three city parks at North Lakes South Lakes City parks and eventually Southwest Park those larger parcels that can be more of a destination location with more amenities we need to have so many of those when we're at 207,000 people so we're using that standard and NRPA or national standards to determine how many parks we need and what size those parks need to be to give us some direction as well as a 10-minute walk so we know we need an East Lakes Park we know we need a West Lakes Park and maybe even a Northeast Lakes Park somewhere in that aspect so that helps us identify where these parcels need to go and it gives us some direction thank you I did not see any other questions thanks Gary thank you appreciate it next item for business is to receive a report and hold a discussion about the 2019 Denton development code I'll invite Ron Manguita for presentation thank you chair members of the Commission just an update it's been a busy couple weeks trying to figure out what we're going to be doing with regards to the house bills that were passed 2439 3167 just want to let you know that the code amendments that we were hoping to bring forward we are going to be postponing that to a later date no date yet has been identified in our attempt to get it all done before September 1st we sent out notices for the public hearing so one of those items was to change the effective date of the 2019 code which obviously we're not going to do now so we're going to withdraw that the actual 2019 development code amendments which includes identifying the materials provisions and amending those to comply with the house bills as well as any cleanups and corrections that we had identified through the review process between April and today we are going to continue to collect those continue to prepare those and bring those forward again at a later time so those those items will be withdrawn and we will not be hearing those on August 14th what we will be hearing is two items and they are items related to the code amendments in that these items are ordinances we're calling them the stopgap ordinances which basically allows staff to comply with the house bills while still working on the code amendments after September 1st so legal has been preparing those in the last week and we hope to get those prepared ready to send out next or this Friday so that we can consider those for recommending to the council on Wednesday August 14th so those again refer to the two house bills and again the purpose is to allow staff the appropriate time to draft and prepare the code amendments that address those two house bills but also those code amendments that we've been working on since April to again to help clarify to add corrections to the 2019 code what that looks like is a quick one for the house bill ordinances is what we're referring to them we will again on August 14th bring that to the Planning Zoning Commission for Council I mean for your consideration and then ultimately August 20th for City Council of course August 20th is important because in order for that to take an effect by September 1st we need to have that in advance at least 14 days so any questions I know this was supposed to cover a lot of code amendments but that will not happen today but it will come at a later time any questions thank you chair so the date for our new development code though is still October then at the correct that's going to remain over first Jerry if did you have me on the orange I know you guys been working on it do you want to add anything related to the two ordinances or not really it's a the I think it's fair to say that these two house bills took a lot of us by surprise all of a sudden we have them we've got them with an implementation date of September 1st and with these top cap ordinances all we're doing is having an order says don't do any of the things that the that the house bills say we can't do and that will give us time to make the the code a little bit more user-friendly where say for example it may call out building materials will ultimately remove building materials where we can to comply with the law but it's it doesn't need to happen any time real soon Christian back thank you let me go ahead and bring out something I communicate with Richard on this and we'd just like to get it out there in the open be a little bit more settled on this we've gonna bring this up when we got to that alternate Esau but evidently I was under I wasn't under the impression that since these laws are going into effect September 1st I was only the impression that anything that was already that had already been submitted was kind of locked in to the way we've been doing business but Richard explained to me that no that's not the case when we deal with the Fire Creek issue later you know we're not even consider building materials and that's that's part of the law the law that's correct if it's a building material that's allowed by any internet or what do they call it a nationally recognized code which the titles are international building code I think I think it's probably international because US and Canada but there they are nationally recognized codes and it's not only the current code that you have to consider if it's legal but for three code cycles and typically I believe a code cycles about two years three years okay three years so yeah you can go back to any material that was allowed at some prior time we can't prohibit it so we have to go through our building codes we're gonna have to go through our development code and and make some changes there okay I think what when we dealt with this last time the last P&Z that it were going to hopefully rely upon staff to see if there was anything in the ordinances that could help us work around that I'm assuming that dealing with this alternate ESOL that we're not going to be able to have anything that's on the books that allows us to work around as far as concerning building materials it's like Scott might want to weigh in on this okay so I'm hearing you say alt ESA well it's the fire Creek okay so and and so what first I think going overly okay so there are there are certain components within that that may still be at play so ie fences right anything that is not part of that primary structure and accessory structure wouldn't be regulated by about co limiters where we were requiring 70% brick or stone correct elevations correct and now that's not even that is a moot that is a moot point okay okay yes well you're up there I have two questions that maybe you can provide insight on one's more speculative one's more internal policy driven one has there been any potential momentum towards anyone taking advantage of either of these rules that you've seen or is that so we just have to wait so it's effective and see who who comes in it's like for like a better term like a shady operator I mean do we is there a legitimate fear of this being taken advantage of and is there any early momentum in that direction that you've seen no and no okay so I think I think what you'll see I don't think the residential market will really change and I think so for that concern of what that might look like the markets going to drive that so people people have an expectation of having brick on their homes and the quality that they're gonna that they expect so I don't think one and two family dwellings will be affected greatly I think you'll see more of it probably on the commercial sector and I would think probably on our highways our corridors those buildings that could be built out of a reflective metal you may see more of that rather than having a requirement for where we want some stone or non reflective and some some difference in that so the second question I had is I know well it seems to to still be up in the air but what P&Z can arbitrarily decide I don't know if there's been any momentum in determining how us as fellow citizens can implement decisions based on our discretion when it comes to build material but what is the obligation of the city when you're going through the meeting process what's the obligation or the internal policy to bring up this freedom that they have are you as a city staff able to remain silent and only answer questions when it's brought forth or is there an obligation that when then someone comes through with a plan you have said you can build out of anything that meets an international standard what what's the internal policy and discussing these two bills I don't know that there's an internal policy per say I would say that your your professional planning staff has a great desire for quality community so I don't think that they're going to be carrying a banner saying build as inexpensively as you can so I don't think you'll see that I think that as my personal opinion is we have to be as transparent as possible on both sides of this so whether that's that's pro or con to whomever's position it is when asked will provide the information I think that's going to be one of the very challenges for us because effective October 1st we have an updated development code that has standards that we will not be enforcing so we'll have some confusion right in that and and so we'll have to articulate that we're we're gonna take submittals as they come in and and we'll make certain that they meet our minimum standards so if somebody comes in with 25 percent brick and a residential structure and our requirement is 40% brick we'll accept the 25 percent brick and that'll be the end of the conversation okay now if somebody comes in and you know ask the question about what those requirements are we'll go there and we'll be providing the the draft ordinances on our website and I mean we'll make that abundantly clear that you know there's been changes in law that we really have to disclaim that there are certain provisions of our code that are not enforceable gotcha if that makes sense that's very helpful thank you Christian Ellis thank you chair I'm going back to earlier conversation so any overlays in place are out if it calls out regulating building material is that what I heard that would be that would be accurate okay so the only but let me let me let me know let me retract that so if we use razor ranch as an example right there's an approval process for anybody that's going to do any development within there they enforce those rules so if they're enforcing the rules it's a non-issue it is the municipality the city may not enforce a rule law ordinance it's really right so it's really a privately so basically with an HOA okay so it's just a zoning overlay and we have many correct and a lot of them regulate building materials that correct do we have to repeal those or they're just not enforceable I think our ordinance I think our ordinance will address the fact that we won't be enforcing anything that is going to violate that house bill okay thank you Christian back thank you chair regarding a choice I discussed this with Jerry a couple weeks ago HOA is again have some control the problem with HOA is is they don't come into existence where the homeowners actually are in charge pretty much until that developments through so is there anything is there anything the city can do to initiate and I don't see how but I'm gonna ask it anyway where HOA can get involved a lot earlier before the developments completely through is that is that thought process cross jaws line because otherwise HOA is being able to affect what materials are used are just not going to be existed because the development will be through time we are absolutely going to encourage that that folks take that into consideration and then that's going to be the best planning tool going forward to maintain the integrity of what that community character might look like when I say community whether it's a neighborhood or whatever that the scale of the development is that's going to be their primary planning tool so we're going to encourage that as a best practice to your point is that the HOA is created the HOA board of directors is typically the builder developer the property owner whomever it is and they'll do as they see fit again I think for the most part and maybe to the chairs question I don't know that we're gonna have anybody that's going to come in deliberately and be deceitful or devious I think that most of the people that develop when they're within our community choose to develop in our community because they see the opportunity and I think that they want to come back and have credibility within our community so I I don't know that we're gonna see anything malicious I think it'll be pretty much straightforward somebody come in and say I'm not I'm not required to do that I'm not going to do that I don't think they'll go through the efforts of creating an HOA I'm creating those HOA rules and then turn around and changing the bylaws the next day so I think there's some fear to that that may not be real I think the real piece to this is and you know I've said it before and I'll continue to say it is is that we really need to speak to our state legislators to say you know I live in a community which I really choose to what it is it that I live next to or I don't and and that may be the case but from a legislative level level is just needs to be corrected so that we don't have to be concerned with whether it's a song and dance and people are able to be deceitful or not but I don't think we have that fear it's just the ability for people to do what it is that maybe the community to direction isn't any other questions great thank you for the opportunity thank you Scott the next item of business is to hop into our agenda and I just wanted to let the record and minutes show that Commissioner Pernetta has joined us so we can move on to the consent agenda item 3b has been pulled this evening so that won't be considered and the vote will not include item 3b so if there's a motion for approval if we could just call out it'll be AC D&E that'd be helpful for the record in the vote is there any questions on any of these that we need to pull up fantastic that'll move us to individual consideration first item is for a and I just want to have Richard speak to the context and what will happen in the public session regarding this which is a first for this commission yeah we really don't have any presentation prepared for this item this is this is something that that Commissioner Ellis had requested if you recall we had discussed this I want to say I don't remember his last meeting or the meeting before regarding excused absences the under the city code section 2 - 8 3 there is the ability for the Commission to excuse any matter that they they didn't fit if you will and so really that's that's all this is is whether or not that that her absence on June 5th qualified as a excused absence and then in public session is just a matter of someone motioning for a vote to reconsider the classification of the absence okay Koshelis thank you and to do I leave while you discuss this I mean what is the protocol for this I would recommend probably that you should because it's a matter that that that concerns and interest that you have apart from the city as a whole and so I think that your discretion leaving would be consistent with our rules and try to see if somebody could prepare a recusal form for you okay to that end what is the obligation of Christian Ellis to disclose the reason for absence I don't feel compelled to have her personal or her matter necessarily be publicly aired but we also are as Commission trying to determine if it is excused or not if she recuses she wouldn't be there to disclose is that someone the staff can present she could certainly come to the Dyson you know we've had situations before where we've had a member of P&Z who had a project that came before the Commission they could come to the to the lectern and present the evidence in support of other requests and then leave during the deliberation Koshelis thank you on the agenda information sheet it does explain exactly the situation so I don't know that I have more to add to that I guess I'll leave that up to you if you would like you know talk more about it but Richard are you presenting this is what I assume to to the rest of the Commission very I mean I wasn't planning on getting into too much too much detail other than what's in in in the AIS and really whether we we discussed it in full detail or just say for a family commitment perfect so if it's okay with the Commission if there's no objection I think in public hearing we'll just have Koshelis recuse yourself and be available if a commissioner would like to ask you questions at the lectern if it's agreeable we'll vote and then welcome you back is there any objections to that Christian back just so I'm clear though she was absent one time and it was considered unexcused so we're trying to okay yes sir Koshelis thank you sir and I'm happy to answer any questions right now if anyone would like to know anything see see or foresee questions but I appreciate you availing yourself to that next item of business is item 4b presented by Haley it's item sp 19 - 13 a good evening this is a site plan within razor ranch specifically for a senior living facility so the request before you is to consider approval of the site plan for an age-restricted multifamily use on just over seven acres of land this property will be bordered by future extension of Linden Street west of where it currently is as well as a future a road within razor that's called East Park Boulevard that will run north and south and then on the south side it's word by panhandle Street as most of you should be aware I think any development within razor ranch is typically required a site plan everything within the south campus requires the site plan come before PNZ on the north side there are some parcels left to develop may not have to come to PNZ for approval it did allow for some staff approval of site plans on the north side the site plans that come before you all are to include on three essential elements the site plan the landscape plan and the building elevations and just before the meeting I did pass out a full-size copy of their landscape plan the one that got uploaded was only for part of the property so my apologies on that the razor range overlay district does outline four criteria for approval of a site plan the first is that it substantially comply with the concept and schematic plan that was approved by City Council and we'll look at that momentarily the second is that the site plan provide for a compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that wouldn't adversely affect adjoining neighborhoods or properties third is that the site plan provide for adequate and safe vehicular circulation and then finally that the plan comply with all other sections of the overlay district so this is the the concept or schematic zoning plan included in the razor ranch overlay this property is in what's called the south mixed-use district so it's essentially everything south of 380 that's not yellow or red on the map is the south mixed-use district the areas here in purple and blue permit multifamily so the overlay district defines senior living and age-restricted multifamily as being part of that broader category of multifamily and if you all remember earlier this year I believe in May the development standards for multifamily uses within this district came before you all and those were approved by council in May of 2019 so looking at their site plan so the the building it's or the site plan itself it looks like the building is divided here but this is all one large C shape building I apologize things have shifted on the map we'll fix that before the regular meeting but the building itself is just under five hundred and twenty thousand square feet it does have a drive under lane here on the first story that allows for ingress and egress here near the office portion of the building it would have two hundred and twelve dwelling units and the there are multiple amenities on site so there's a pool area that would be here at the corner there are three dog parks a larger one in the center and then two at either end of the building and then also in the central portion of the site they have amenities such as a bachi ball pickleball there's raised garden beds as well as a pavilion area for the residents as you can see in the table it does meet all of the standards in terms of lot coverage open space building height and parking it does exceed the maximum parking fairly substantially but that is allowed within the razor overlay district then looking at their landscape plan they again meet the minimum requirements so they exceed the minimum 10% landscaping and 20% tree canopy they are planting in excess of the minimum number of street trees on all of their street frontages there are providing a buffer here on the east side of the property because on the concept plan the land adjacent to them to the east is called for single-family development and then in the yellow or orange color here is the perimeter fencing that would surround this so it does have a wrought iron fence there is a retaining wall that will that the fence will be on top of here at the hard corner because the site does have some some grade differences here but the pool area would be screened with enhanced landscaping here at this corner so the the rock residents will be able to see in and out but it will still have some element of privacy there as well and one minor correction in your AIS it mentioned a six-foot sidewalk on Linden that's actually a five-foot sidewalk this was postponed from the previous meeting because there were some negotiations that had to be made with Denton municipal electric about their electric line coinciding in this small area with the sidewalk and the landscaping as well as that retaining wall and fence so that was all worked out and resulted in a semi meandering five-foot sidewalk along along Linden Street so looking out the building elevations this does meet the standards for razor-wrench in terms of architecture and building materials so this on the top is what you would see from Linden and there's that drive-through that I mentioned here where the ingress and egress primary point would be this is the side along East Park Boulevard - Charles thank you Jim Haley with regard to that in and out on Linden that is the only main entrance right it's the primary there would be a gated controlled kind of primarily residents only entrance here on yeah any any other traffic deliveries of visitors and things like that would come through this entry thanks so again just looking from the south here along Panhandle Street this would be the view and then this is kind of what it would look like from the inside so those amenities would be here within the central area of the parking there's a an awning here for a drop-offs and then the materials again as I mentioned brick stone fiber cement siding are all within the permitted materials for the razor-wrench overlay so staff is recommending approval of the site plan request we found it to be compliant with all of the elements of the razor-wrench overlay district and to meet the four criteria for approval so mr. Beck thank you chair just curious that this one large really they have elevators I believe they do considering with it being four stories I believe it's required by five elevators yeah yeah five elevators is been confirmed allow that any other questions for Haley thank you Haley the next item for business is item 4c it is ADP 19 - 0 0 0 2 and I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation good evening evening alright I'm presenting I'm Julie Wyatt I'm presenting ADP 19 to forest crossing the request before you is for an alternative development plan for a multifamily development on about 15 acres the purpose is to deviate from the multifamily standards within sub chapter 13 of the 2002 Denton development code the subject property is located north of McKinney and adjacent to Mayhill just west of it a little bit of background on this site you probably you might remember the zoning that the property was rezoned to CMG in 2017 and there was a specific use permit that recently came before you it came before you in June of this year and it was approved by City Council in July that approval included a site plan landscape plan and elevations as part of that part of that presentation and backup material we talked about that ADP would be coming forward after that SUP was approved so so that's why we're here today so this this chart outlines what those thank you chair Julie that said 2016 is that I was yes it's 2019 I'm sorry I was time travel back in time when I did this presentation yes 2019 thank you so this is an outline of those deviations that they're requesting from sub chapter 13 so they're requesting three the first that at least 50% of the front yard frontage shall have buildings within 20 feet of the front property line due to the to due to the the unique property boundary where this this site is located on a larger tract it's surrounded by undeveloped commercial property which is two narrow strips that that connect it to the right of way so really this requirement would be almost impossible to meet given the property boundaries and then the next one is that parking areas are not permitted between buildings in the street they have to be located in the rear of the side once again due to the site's configuration and those undeveloped commercial tracks between the subject property and and the right of way this part the parking areas will be screened you know once those areas are developed and then there's additional six faces on the south access point that are for guest parking and those will be screened with landscaping so so they'll meet the intent of that requirement with the screening and then finally that adjacent building should have different elevations the applicant is proposing consistent architectural details among the among the buildings but with a variety of color schemes in order to differentiate them so I know you've seen the site being planned before we'll go over it briefly the part in the blue is that is that donut area those commercial out parcels that will eventually be developed that are adjacent to the to the right of way the the purple areas those are the 12 multifamily buildings the orange area is the are the parking areas that are between the buildings and and the right of way so they do this proposal does meet all zoning requirements landscaping tree preservation so it does meet those requirements they're just asking for those three deviations and then also as part of the SUP deliberation at City Council they did request that the applicant try to preserve more existing trees the the didn't development code sub chapter 13 does allow applicants who can preserve more trees to to reduce their parking requirements so staff is actually recommending a condition as part of this ADP to allow them to try to explore those possibilities to preserve more trees on site and then this is a portion of the landscape plan that really has to deal with where you see generally that parking and then though that access you see there's going to be trees they'll be screening from the you know that parking from the right of way and then eventually from that that come or those commercial pieces Mr. Beck thank you chair screening though in landscape only we're not putting fences there there will be a a wooden fence so there will be additional screening from the fence but yes there will also be from the McKinney side in the Mayhill side I'm on that between the the residential portion in the commercial portion they are intending some fencing there I'm not sure how much that's needed anyway especially that commercial development gets up there it's gonna block the whole thing anyway but right okay thanks and then here are the elevations that you've seen once again the architectural details are consistent throughout the buildings but what they do have are the those pops of color you've got the burgundy the yellow and then the orange Julie on the ADP do they if they're presenting those different colors they're required to actually have a different colors like we can hold them to the different color scheme because one of the it seems like the consideration is instead of varying height they're gonna vary color is that something that's even like so within our purview and not even enlightened of HP 2439 just in general well it could be you know previous without the House bill yes that could be something that you could regulate as part of an ADP or an SUP but I'm thinking it's not a material that we're talking about and this is you know aesthetic elements of of their design their site plan that they're laying out here and so it's they're doing it with eyes open okay okay thanks for the clarification it's a question else thank you chair a real quick on that is it part of the SUP that was approved anyway didn't we approve the yes yes those elevations were approved as part of the yeah so I think it would have to be it's already part of that so the criteria for approval are in sub chapter 13 there were five criteria first is it preserve existing neighborhoods does the request this is a multifamily development in an emergent and an emerging mixed use area multifamily as a use is essential in these types of areas because you want that critical mass of people to support the commercial and employment uses with the request assure quality development it's not to this request is not to lower design standards but it would facilitate development of the site particularly in light of the the the the property boundaries and how how that building that site is oriented and additionally there was a there was more scrutiny on this project because it wasn't it was an SUP so it had to go through that SUP process and it has been before you before as well as City Council and focus new development to activity centers there you know we've got two roads in that area McKinney and Mayhill are either under construction or about to be under construction so there's been a lot of investment in these corridors and so this really is that natural conclusion that logical conclusion to that investment that the development would come here ensure infrastructure can accommodate the development that necessary infrastructure is is under construction and is moving forward and the results in a high quality development meeting the intent of the standards once again that doughnut configuration restricts the ability to meet requirements but it does result in an appropriate design for a mixed-use area because it does separate that residential piece from what are going to be higher traffic roads so it provides that buffer in that transition area parking areas as as proposed or dispersed throughout the development so you don't have large parking areas and those visual impacts for large surface parking they're sort of interspersed and it allows that those drive aisles and and the buildings to create a grid really adding more connectivity to the site and then the consistent architectural design throughout the subject site one sure a cohesive appearance for this single use so as this area develops with all the commercial pieces and employment pieces there will potentially be additional architectural styles and building materials and so this will just allow this one use to to be more cohesive as as it moves forward with development so based upon the criteria for approval staff recommends approval of the request because it does meet the criteria with that caveat and that that recommendation for to encourage additional tree preservation in accordance with sub chapter 13 requirements and I will stand for any questions mr. Beck will the owner applicant be here tonight she is supposed to be here she okay thank you Kirsten Sanchez okay as far as the so how many parking areas are we looking to reduce and I guess my concern is your each apartment has a requirement of so many parking spots I would I would imagine so what you will be will be doing is reducing the number or because you do have a requirement right the code does allow for a I believe up to 15 percent reduction if they can preserve a certain amount of quality trees so it would have to be 12 inches of quality trees and that could reduce each 12 inches reduces one parking space so it's it's a pretty high bar that they have to meet it really does sort of you know try to get more trees to be preserved in order to allow for that that parking reduction I guess my concern is yeah I mean I can see that but then in in in a apartment situation where you have people coming in parking places are very important you know I mean I see that I have some sure and I see that parking spots are always full are we sacrificing I mean I have a real issue with where they're gonna park if you're reducing those parking places where are those people gonna park well and and remember we upped our parking standards for multifamily last year so in addition to parking for each unit they also have to provide 10 percent of the required parking for guest parking so so there is some flexibility there is additional parking that the city of Denton does require for multifamily and then and and it really depends on what kind of trees that they could that they could preserve to get there any other questions thank you very much I was just gonna add a little clarification to that if you look at just sort of playing with the maximum so if the maximum decrease is 15% I think that 515 spaces is just kind of using the total number of units I think it would it would equate to about 1.5 1.5 spaces per bedroom or per unit I think I want to check the math but okay I can do it I can also see how many inches of trees they would have to preserve in order to max that out it would be a pretty substantial amount of trees great thank you the next time a business is 5a there's not a presentation for this but just to prize you we will open the public hearing for this and then call for a motion to have this postponed to a date certain of August 21st but that'll leave the public hearing open for the two weeks until we meet so the next presenting item is 5b and it is Julie again for z 19 - 0 0 0 6a so this is z 19 0 0 0 6a fireside park so the request before you is to amend ordinance 2015 2 1 7 to revise the overlay conditions on about 30 30 acres the property is zoned in our three and it is located at the corner of West Windsor and Hinkle it's the properties they're outlined in yellow so some background there's been quite a few zoning cases that affected this property so in 2002 it was zoned in our two through the citywide rezoning in 2007 a an applicant a developer came in and requested a rezoning from NR 2 to NR 3 he had a very specific site plan associated with that and so as part of that there were there were quite a few overlay conditions put on the property to design considerations that didn't develop so a new developer came in in 2015 and he wanted he was hoping to develop a age-restricted single-family neighborhood once again with a pretty specific site plan which included some smaller lots with more open space and included sort of in a perimeter common area he plotted but but the the plots expired and it never it didn't develop and so a new property owner came in and and plotted the property a final plot was approved in 2018 and they're actually under construction they're they're laying the streets out there and and putting in all of the public facilities but some of those overlay conditions are really because of those specific designs that were that were approved or that were associated with those previous approvals he's he's feeling they don't meet the the current design so one of those is a perimeter fence with a wrought iron appearance a 50-foot setback from the existing curb and then 100% masonry there are additional a 100% masonry on on the homes there are two other additional conditions that three-car garages shall not face the public street and that any ingress or egress would not remove the on-street bike lane on Hankel Drive he is not requesting any changes to those conditions the only changes he is requesting are to the areas in that are in bold Krister back chair let me ask something at this point the previous developer that sold it to the current developer where he was gonna have the wrought iron fence where it was he gonna have houses the backside of the houses facing Windsor or no sir there was going to be a a sort of walking trail around there okay that would conceal the houses except that okay I see okay so now he's the new developers gonna be building houses that will expose the backside of the houses unless we put the privacy fix in there correct correct so yes the plot in 2018 really was more of a typical single-family neighborhood development where you have the the rear yards adjacent to those arterial roads and so because of that because of his concerns about privacy for future homeowners um he's requesting some changes to those overlay so the same would apply to Hinkle to the back of the houses are gonna be exposed there yes yes if it if it develops as proposed then then Windsor and Hinkle would require that wrought iron fence so but he is requesting to put an opaque fence in to reduce that that 50 foot setback to 40 feet and then also to provide more varied building materials his request would not modify the underlying zoning wouldn't increase the density or introduce new uses so here's his request he's he's proposing a six foot tall board on board cedar fence with a top rail and cap a taller stone and brick columns topped with a cast stone column every 100 feet and at any corners and any terminus also a vertical landscape element would be placed at the midpoint between those columns as well as street trees would be planted if approved along Hinkle Drive and Windsor Drive and the design of those street trees would be one planted every 20 feet but they would be alternating shade and ornamental he is also requesting to reduce the building materials from the 100% masonry to 70% masonry and I've added what his request is in but I've also marked it out because due to the due to the new house bill because it's not something that we can enforce we're recommending that it just be removed from from the overlay conditions we've added here though that the proposed setback would be 40 feet from the existing curb on Windsor and Hinkle and then once again those two other conditions would remain in place so here is a thank you chair Julie can you go back to that for a minute so with the first the first detail there can we put something you have maintenance and irrigation of all open spaces and site amenities can you make sure that includes fence I know we we had some of the responses includes they don't want the fence not looking so good after a while so maybe if we can take an effort and make sure that's included in that thank you correct right right and I think that was the intent of probably the developer later HOA taking responsibility for this you probably mean for them to take care of that particular fence but maybe we need to call yep I agree I'll add that and so here here's a diagram of what they're proposing you see the fence here you've got your vertical landscape element in between the posts and then and then the the ornamental trees and and shade trees alternating and then here's a little diagram of what the the setbacks look like and what they're proposing and then versus what the Denton development code requires so this is Hinkle and then here is the fireside park development the the box in in yellow that is the 50 foot setback from the curb in red it is 40 feet and then this is this little greenish is is what the Denton development code requires so the Denton development code requires a 10-foot rear setback so that's just to let you see how kind of what those look like in real life that's on Hinkle on Windsor it's a little different because the curb is so far away from the residential property lines that it doesn't have as much of an effect so the criteria for approval in any rezoning case is in sub chapter 3 of the Denton development code does it comply with the future land use and then does it does it provide for adequate public facilities so first dent plan 2030 the future land use it is low residential and this includes single family neighborhoods up to four dwelling units per acre the the existing zoning of nr3 which isn't proposed to be changed is consistent with the future land use map because it it permits three and a half dwelling units per acre we also looked at element four of the Denton plan just because that addresses more of that site design and and and urban design community community character our findings when we looked at that is that the opaque cedar fence would provide backyard privacy and screening for future homeowners adjacent to the street the brick columns landscaping and street trees would provide visual consistency and rhythm along the rights of way it would create a sense of arrival for those future homeowners as well as enhance those existing corridors of Hinkle and Windsor fence that fence line as well as the street trees would provide that that well-defined neighborhood edge and also add that that landscaping at the right of way which is something that the that this part of our community vision and and and how we're moving forward with development what they're proposing exceeds the 2002 and 2019 didn't of development code requirements and once again that seventy percent masonry exceeds the requirements but it's it's it's not something that we can enforce criterion to adequate public improvements transportation because this request didn't increase any density or intensity on the site a TIA was not required and as a result of the development of five-foot sidewalk must be constructed on Hinkle and an eight-foot on Windsor and that's the developer has to has to construct that capital improvement projects if you've been near Hinkle recently it's a little hard to get down these days and that's because they're doing the Magnolia Drive drainage project they're installing new box culverts that's going to carry that storm water south to pecan Creek once those are installed the asphalt will be re rebuilt it just between those existing curb lines on Hinkle it's not going to expand Hinkle and those bike lanes will also be restored due to resident safety concerns that we heard at the neighborhood meeting earlier this year two stop signs were installed on West Windsor it creates that three-way stop and it gives it gives drivers coming turning on to Windsor a little more surety that that those driving on on Windsor actually see them and then also allows pedestrians a little safer route into the park that's a pretty big park right there and there's a lot of residential so we want to make sure those pedestrians were safe there will be roadway impact fees paid when this when the building permits are pulled about $2,000 per dwelling unit is a good shorthand and then there's also the park dedication fee that happened with the plat last year and then the park development fee of 291 for each house that will be paid with each building permit there's water and wastewater not only taken to the site but also being constructed throughout the site I'm in accordance with this schematic right here and then schools there per the 107 houses on the side it's expected to generate 24 elementary students 12 middle school students and 16 high school students and then there's a fire station within that eight eight minute or less time boundary that they like to me so public notices were sent out we've received foreign opposition that there's only one however within that 200 foot boundary so we get that 1.29 percent five signs were posted on the site and they did have a neighborhood meeting so staff does recommend approval of the modified overlay conditions with the with the addition of the oh okay so yes the HOA will maintain that that fence if approved so and that includes that board-on-board cedar with the masonry columns and and that landscaping at the right-of-way the reduced setback of 40 feet and then those those garages and and then that that bike lane to remain on Hinkle and I will stand for any question mr. Beck thank you chair Julie do you know what the frontage is for this development on Hinkle land Windsor it looks like Windsor's got a little bit less than ankle but do we know the actual in terms of footage maybe this in between the right-of-way and or just the frontage for the development on Hinkle what is the my concern and I think it's probably gonna be brought up by the public a little bit is Windsor is a secondary arterial right yes Hinkle say connector don't have a problem with and a board on board with cedar fence with a cap on it's a nice sense but Windsor being a secondary arterial I think we had a conversation in one of our DC RC meetings and Richard might want to jump in here about how major arterial secondary arterials how those and we were talking about Teasley specifically how those fences look over time yes if we can get the HOA to stay on top of this and keep it looking nice but wouldn't fences will look raggedy and on a major arterial that's always a little bit it's an embarrassment for the city so what is the possibility of discussing with the applicant at least on the Windsor side doing something a little bit more expensive but be looking at a stonewall a masonry wall is that that was not something that they were prepared to do during our discussions but it is certainly something that you could bring up as part of the as part of the public hearing okay would it be if I wanted to could I make an amendment to this approving it with the exception that masonry fence would be preferred on the Windsor elevation I believe you can do that in public hearing you can certainly put that in your motion okay okay I guess my concern is putting all these requirements on builders I mean the city has a responsibility when they see bad fences to to have them fix them so that's court enforcement is that what we're talking about if the fence looks kind of bad okay let's go ahead and have it who's responsible for that the city could cite them cities not responsible for repairing them no no the city's responsible for going over and talking to the HOA and saying code enforcement saying hey these fences don't look you know are falling apart or need to be repaired so for us to start making your promise make it a break a brick wall it seems to me where we're putting a lot of requirements just our personal opinion when the builder has already agreed to something or he's willing to do some now we're saying okay we want you to do this just because am I off somewhere that's certainly your opinion I mean so you're not off and your beliefs about that but my question is the city already yeah I mean that's what they do they go out and if your fences aren't looking good and the HOA it's also has a responsibility to do that for us he's all of a sudden okay because in five or ten years his fence because it's what it's gonna get carried faster than a brick it seems like we're putting requirements on people just because code enforcement doesn't typically enforce aesthetics if it's falling down or it's dilapidated or something of that nature they can certainly enforce by citation against whoever's responsible for maintaining the fence but in terms of you know going over and having a conversation with members of the HOA or the adjacent property owner that's not something that's charged to the city as a duty and push back real fast I just want to note for the commission part of this work sessions to gather information if there's discussion to be had about the merits of a wood over a brick I think that would be best had in a public session and work out once there's a motion on the table I think it's just a matter of convincing or putting forth your position yeah yeah I just want to utilize this time appropriately kushel us thank you and if I could just add a little bit to that I know what we're considering there's an overlay right now that requires a wrought iron fence to be on this property so that is what he is requesting be removed and by removing the wrought iron requirement which is already in place he's offering what Julie presented right just to clarify Richard correct I was just gonna add the the landscaping or that they are including is beyond the so Julie I have a couple questions for you if you are pulling out your measuring tool for Christian back can I ask for two measurements you bet can I have you look at the setbacks of the homes on Windsor west of this property there's a half a dozen or so that back up the rear property backs up to Windsor to the west and then can you look at the setbacks to the east of Hinkle on Windsor there's some homes there that front face Windsor and I don't know how far they're back so does that make sense absolutely I just like to know when you're just driving on Windsor what do the houses look like the second question I have is could you go back is there a hundred and seven perspective units being built yes sir this might be a question for DISD or maybe my poor speculation a hundred and seven houses and 52 kids it seems low it seems like a lot of families would live here so it seems like the number would be a hundred kids what they have like an algorithm for this they have a formula yes okay and it's a reliable one I assume yeah it's I don't know how they base that on I don't know what research they've based it on but it's a formula they've shared with us that they get that that's how they sort of plan for their schools okay any other questions Krishna Alice thank you chair just real quick Julie it's just one way in and one way out on right in this development no ma'am it's okay it's actually there there's one time here okay some remote will be tied in okay and then fireside gotcha correct yes there's a previous applicant those age-restricted this one is not an age-restricted this one is not okay I misunderstood Mr. Pernetta yeah I just wanted to clarify so the entrance on from Windsor is that for emergency vehicles or is that is that it's full access yes okay and just to again to clarify this has been approved they're under plats approved they're grading they're under construction good point any other questions for Julie seen none thank you Julie I will close the work session at 6 p.m. we will meet again in council chambers at 630 good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to the planning and zoning Commission meeting for Wednesday August 7th 2019 I'll call the meeting to order at 634 seeing that we do have a quorum the first item of business is to stand and provide the alleged allegiance to the US and Texas flag if able. The next item of business is to consider the planning and zoning Commission minutes for July 17th 2019. Commissioner Ellis. I move approval. We have a first Commissioner Pernetta. Second. We have a first and a second for approval of the minutes any discussion? Seeing none I'll call for a vote on the board. Motion carries six zero with one recuse. Next item of business is the consent agenda consent agenda it's item three and noted that item three B is being pulled so the consent agenda only includes A C D and E. Commissioner Beck. Move to approve consent agenda. Yes we do have a first and just for clarification it's not being pulled from the consent to individual it's being pulled from the agenda completely it's not gonna be heard this evening. Commissioner Smith. Second the motion. We have a first and a second for the consent for a item A C D and E not B. Any discussion? Seeing none I call for a vote on the board. Motion carries seven zero that brings us to our items for individual consideration the first item for a consider request by Commissioner Ellis to reclassify her absence on June 5th 2019. Commissioner Smith. Motion to approve. For clarification. Motion to approve to reclassify her absence as an excused absence. Perfect. Commissioner Pernetta. Second. We have a first and a second for reclassification of the unexcused absence to an excused absence. Any discussion? Seeing none I call for a vote on the board. Motion carries six zero with one recuse and Commissioner Ellis is welcome to come back. The next item for business is item 4B SP 19-003 13A. I'll invite Haley Zygursky for presentation. Good evening this is a request for approval of a site plan within Razor Ranch. The request before you is to consider approval of a site plan for an age-restricted multifamily use on a property that is just over seven acres in size. The property is located south of the future extension of Linden Street east of East Park Boulevard which is a future north-south road through Razor Ranch and north of Panhandle Drive. It's outlined in yellow on the map. Within Razor Ranch all developments on the south campus so everything south of 380 does require that a site plan come through the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. That site plan is to contain the site plan itself as well as the landscape plan and the building elevations. There are four criteria for approval outlined within the Razor Ranch overlay district. The first being that the site plan substantially comply with the concept or schematic plan approved by the City Council. We'll look at that in just a moment. The second is that the site plan provide for compatible arrangement of buildings and land uses that wouldn't adversely affect any adjoining properties or neighborhoods. Third that the site plan provide for adequate and safe circulation of vehicular traffic and then fourth that the site plan fully comply with all other sections of the overlay district. The base zoning for this property is neighborhood residential mixed-use. It is a part of the Razor Ranch overlay as I mentioned and specifically it's part of what's called the south mixed-use district. So this is the concept plan within the Razor overlay district and everything south of 380 that is not either yellow or red on the map so all of the blues greens and purples are what makes up the south mixed-use district. Multifamily and even specifically age restricted multifamily is a permitted use in this area and if you all remember back in May the development standards for architecture and landscaping came before you all for multifamily uses within this district and those became exhibit C2A of the overlay. So looking at the site plan outline in blue is the rough location of the building. It is one large kind of L or C shaped building. It's just under 520,000 square feet total and would have 212 dwelling units. In the purple or dark blue color on the map are the on-site amenities that are offered. So there are three dog parks one here and then one at either end of the building. There is a large pool amenity here in the corner of the site and then also in the center of the site are things such as bocce ball, pickle ball and raised garden beds. The site is in compliance with all of the DDC requirements for lot coverage, open space, building height and parking. This is the landscape plan for the site. It does exceed the minimum requirements again exceeds the minimum 10% and 20% landscape and tree canopy. Also exceeds the minimum number of street tree plantings. Some of the specific features I wanted to point out or that they are providing a buffer here on the east side as is required between multifamily and single-family because the the portion of razor that's east of this is designated on that concept plan for single-family development. And then outlined in orange here is the perimeter screening fence. So the site will be surrounded by a wrought iron fence with masonry columns. Here at the corner of East Park and Linden that fence will be situated on top of a retaining wall because there is a gradual grade off in either direction on the site. The areas that are circled here on the map are the gates so there is controlled access to the site. This will be the primary entry point off of Linden Street for residential traffic as well as visitors or delivery trucks things of that nature. This would be a resident only gate. So the primary flow of traffic would be in off of Linden Street through the site and then residents could exit either north or south. So looking at the building elevations this would be the view on the top of your screen from Linden Street. What's shown on the bottom is what would be visible from East Park Boulevard. So you can see here that that drive-through feature on the ground floor here is the primary entry point. Looking at a different view of the site this would be the view from Panhandle and then on the bottom side is the view kind of an internal view from within the parking lot. The building materials that have been proposed are a mixture of brick stone and wood look fiber cement siding board as well as some stucco and metal accent elements. All of those are permitted within the razor overlay. So with that staff is recommending approval of the site plan request. It's compliant with all the applicable regulations of the razor range overlay district and meets the four criteria for approval. Happy to stand for any questions. Thank you Haley. I don't see any questions this time. Thank you. Since this isn't a public hearing there's there's not an open meeting or an open call for anyone who wants to speak but I'll open to anyone who wants to speak on the item. You'd have three minutes to speak if wanting and then commissioners yep nevermind. Commissioner Smith. Motion to approve the staff recommendations. We have a first. Commissioner Preneta. Second the motion. We have a first and a second for approval. Any discussion? Seeing none I call for a vote on the board. Motion carries 7-0. Next item for business is item 4C ADP 19-0002 and I'll invite Julie Wyatt for discussion. Good evening I'm Julie Wyatt and I am presenting ADP 19-2 forest crossing to you. So the request before you is an alternative development plan for a multifamily development on about 15 acres. The purpose of this alternative development plan is so that they can deviate from three provisions within subchapter 13 of the Denton Development Code. The subject property is located north of McKinney and west of Mayhill. Here the property is outlined in yellow. Some background on the site it was rezoned in 2017 to CMG and then I do have a wrong incorrect date on this. The SUP was approved last last month in 2019 a specific use permit for multifamily development. So this came before you a month before in June and that approval included the site plan, a landscape plan and elevations. So the provisions within or the the proposal within the ADP includes three three provisions. The first being at least 50% of the front yard frontage shall have buildings within 20 feet of the front property line or within 30 feet of the curb line of a private street. Due to the the unique property boundary of the site it's it's it's kind of within the middle of a doughnut where there's where there's undeveloped commercial property between the subject property and the rights of way and then it's accessed by some narrow strips of land where it's just really to accommodate a driveway. So based upon the site configuration it really is impossible for them to meet this requirement. The second would be the parking areas are not permitted between the buildings in the street that they would need to be toward the side or the rear. Once again due to the site configuration and they're going to be commercial properties or commercial development between the subject property and the right of way and so so once this mixed-use area has fully developed those parking areas will be screened from the right of way and in addition there's also landscaping in the area. There are also six faces near that south entrance that's for guest parking and that is screened with landscaping and then finally that adjacent building shall have different elevations. The applicant is proposing elevations or architectural details that are consistent among the among all of the buildings but with a variety of colors to differentiate the buildings. So the site plan is something you've seen before the the blue area being that that doughnut that that future commercial piece of that this mixed-use area. The subject property it doesn't have any any color on it but it does have the buildings outlined in purple. Those parking areas between the buildings and the right of way are are outlined in that orange color. There are 12 multifamily buildings and and as part of the SUP and as part of the deliberation by council council asked that the applicant look for opportunities to to increase the tree canopy on the site and to preserve some of those existing trees. So so as part of staff's recommendation we're just adding a condition that they could if they if they wanted to be able to comply with the provision in sub chapter 13 of the Denton Development Code that you can decrease parking if you increase your tree tree preservation. This is a portion of the landscape plan just showing kind of where those parking areas are in relation to the tree plantings that they're proposing. Here's that arm going out toward May Hill and then the arm going to McKinney and you can see those parking areas really are going to be pretty screened from that from the the landscaping. And then here are the elevations once again consistent architectural themes throughout but with those pops of color of the burgundy the yellow and then the orange. The criteria for approval for alternative development plans is in sub chapter 13 of the Denton Development Code. There's five. First is it preserve existing neighborhoods. This is an emerging multi or a mixed-use area and that multifamily is a component of that is essential because it does provide that critical mass of people for to support commercial and retail and employment uses. So it meets that criteria to assure quality development. The intent of this is not to lower design standards but just to facilitate the development of the site particularly with that unique property boundary. This property has also had additional scrutiny in that it went through that SUP process. So this site plan has been to you and it's also been approved by City Council to focus new development to activity center centers. May Hill is currently under construction and McKinney is about to be and and so there's been a lot of investment in the corridors in this area and so the development of the site really is a logical conclusion of that investment. Ensure infrastructure can accommodate development that those corridors are being constructed and will be able to handle any additional capacity. And then finally that results in a high quality development meeting the intent of the standards. Due to the doughnut configuration there is a restriction of the ability to meet the requirements but it actually does result in a design that's appropriate for mixed use because it does separate the residential portion from those high capacity roads and provides that buffer and transition area. The parking areas are dispersed throughout the site allowing the buildings in the parking areas and dry valves to really create a grid, create more connectivity within the site and then that consistent architectural design will will allow for a cohesive appearance as this area develops. So based upon the criteria for approval staff recommends approval of the request and I know there was a question regarding the trees and work session and I just wanted to follow up so if so the code allows for a 15% reduction if additional trees are saved. That would be 77 spaces out of the 515 and then which would require an additional 925 inches of quality trees be be saved on site. It's a pretty tall order. I've talked with the applicant and I think she can talk more to how many parking spaces they really could reduce in order to save additional trees. And I'll stand for any questions. Thank you Julie. I don't see any. I know the applicant is here and so I'll invite Amy Bissett. I think she has some clarifying points to make. Good evening Commissioners. Amy Bissett, 212 South Elm, Denton 76201 and I do have a couple of slides but I just want to start by addressing the there are a couple of questions in the work session about the building elevations and the proposed variation in colors and the applicants or the developers commitment to those colors and how the city will be able to hold them responsible for actually building what they have proposed. I can tell you that the building permit is in second review with the city and is consistent with the elevations that you see tonight. There are very few comments left to address before the building permit is ready for approval. However I would offer and and would be comfortable committing to the developer to this that and that building permit set can be routed for review back to Julie to make sure that it's consistent with what's being proposed here and and that the permit approval would be conditioned upon actually implementing what was proposed and approved as a part of the SUP. As it relates to tree preservation versus parking and I want to give you a little bit of history here when we first started the site plan for this project we had roughly 458 spaces and it was that site plan was originally created before the new parking code was adopted but it hadn't been submitted yet so we had to we had to scrounge together another 50 plus spaces to be able to comply with the new parking code so what I've done is I've broken out for you on a slide here how we've met that parking code so each one bedroom unit requires one and a quarter spaces each two bedroom unit requires two spaces and then above and beyond that is in another ten percent that's required for guest parking and we after the the City Council meeting and last month there were some some council members who specifically said we'd really like to see you go back and revisit the site plan and try to preserve more trees and you know trade-off parking for trees and so I had a conversation with the property developer and at that point in time we there's the time constraints with trying to close on the property and develop the property we couldn't amend the site plan and bring it to to you with an ADP there were just too many moving pieces from a design standpoint with the full civil set and the building plans and so so what we what we told the city that we would do is you know if we get through the approval process and we have building permits and there's an opportunity to have a conversation with the city about reducing parking and saving some trees we're open to that but I can tell you that it's it's gonna be challenging to reduce by very many and the reason for that is you know we're already if you look at our tree preservation and mitigation table we've really already gone through and counted every tree possible to preserve even those with within the construction envelope that are gonna be challenging to preserve is that is there an opportunity to have some conversation about you know five or six spaces may be that are in an area that's heavily treed absolutely but the developers gonna want to park to market demand and and not want to significantly change the site in such a way that it would affect drainage plans and civil plans that would take us back to the drawing board so we certainly want to make an effort for tree preservation and we appreciate it being added to the ADP and we've already made quite a bit of effort for tree preservation and leading up up to tonight but to Commissioner Prenada's concerns about eliminating too many parking spaces I there's no way that we could eliminate eliminate more than a handful so so and we appreciate you being here for clarification you said you created a plan under one parking requirement and then you had to come back with an additional 47 so it seems like you had a plan with 47 less parking spaces but now you're saying that only a handful can be removed we did sure so our original plan you know it was created early on but not submitted to the city because we were still in the process of getting all the building footprints solidified and by the time we got ready to submit to the city the parking code had changed requiring the additional ten percent guest parking so and we went in and added that in the reason that it would be challenging to eliminate all of that is it would significantly change the civil plans at this point which are about ninety nine percent of the way approved so we want to we want to certainly want to do what we can to to preserve more trees but we're gonna have to find a balance with also being able to meet the financing deadlines and timelines to get the project under construction so really significant changes to the civil plans at this point would be problematic sir I certainly appreciate it and for the record I I was against increasing the parking to begin with for multifamily so I totally understand this is one reason or evidence that by not increasing the parking when we did we wouldn't by nature we probably have more trees in this property we're requiring you to do more parking so I certainly appreciate and you being here to respond to that question and to clarify the where there's some question about whether or not we could actually reduce parking at all to preserve trees because I think the way that the that the relief for parking is written first we would have to eliminate the 774 inches that we're mitigating for and then reduce beyond that I'm not certain about that but that is a question as well where even if we made heroic efforts to read to preserve the trees that we're already having to mitigate for we'd have to go above and beyond that to decrease parking and the way the codes written today I believe Commissioner Sanchez so I guess my understanding is would you prefer not to reduce of parking spaces because of the current the way it's already been created the plants has been created is that your preference the preference and from a timing standpoint is we need to be under construction as quickly as possible and so the more significant changes that would be made the slower that would be so from from a from a we wanted we want to do the best for this project we'd love to preserve more trees but we have to balance that with speed to construction at this point and being this late in the game it would be difficult to eliminate more than just a handful of parking spaces that were very like low-hanging fruit easy we can do this without it changing the full set of civil plans so so you stated that just a handful of parking spaces and we're talking about trees over 12 inch inches in diameter right and you you've already surveyed the area and determined which trees you can save and have you have you any idea of how many trees over 12 inches are still out there that you would cut is there any kind of record I don't know I don't know that off the top of my head we do have a full comprehensive tree survey with every tree identified whether it's a quality tree what species it is and how big it is so overlaying that with you know the parking or the paving plan and being able to say okay there might be you know a handful here is a reasonable exercise but frankly it would be after we get building permit and get moving so it would not it would not we couldn't do it to the extent that we could cut out 50 spaces and have to to re-engineer the site plan does that adequately answer your question yeah I guess I have one more question is if is there any other you talked about eliminating parking spaces is there any kind of other discussion you had that you could do something in addition to to the area say removing some other kind of landscaping area that you could do to mitigate those if those trees are found in an area that you can do that without have you talked about that at all yes so we went through a lengthy and significant exercise where I can attest that I personally went through every tree by hand to look at where it is on the site plan and whether there's any opportunity to preserve it to increase our preservation to the maximum extent possible and without losing buildings or you having to alter the site plan to the point of starting over in the design process so we have looked at and literally I've gone with our landscape architect tree by tree to talk about whether or not there's a way to preserve it when it might have not originally been intended to be preserved and if you did that what did you come up with if you went if you already did that evaluation and came by tree to tree what did you come up with any kind of about you know not not just say okay it's there was 13 trees five trees that we can actually keep and that's going to eliminate for parking places well I'm sorry I think I misunderstood your question we did that leading up to the tree preservation table that's displayed right now as a part of our specific use permit where we wanted to demonstrate that we had preserved as many trees as we could and complied with code so and had we had this conversation several months ago when we had the site plan drawn at 400 and some odd spaces you bet the tree preservation would be higher today but at this point with the current site plan we've made a significant effort to try to preserve as many trees as we can and and while we're willing to have a conversation about a trade-off for some parking for trees if it doesn't significantly change plans it would be after building permit and it would not be a significant number we have not been through the exercise of how many could how many could we save versus how many parking spaces I can tell you that you know at 12 DB each per parking space that's a lot of trees to just for a handful of parking spaces you know so it's going to be challenging to to eliminate very many parking spaces even if we wanted to which we don't thank you a real fast just to clarify the the city has asked you to put new parking spaces in by code you did that brought it back to this city and they said reduce the number of parking spaces or try your best to reduce them after they voted for code that made you put more in I don't see any other questions so I appreciate you being here and oh Christian back thank you chair thank you Amy for your presentation I remembered what it was I was going to ask you I actually I'm excited about this development I'm not going to have any problem approving the ADP what I really like about this development is that it's bordered by primary and secondary arterial which accommodates public transportation and that's important because this is an area where you got a large contingent low and middle income working families over there so just a question for you based on that does the applicant have any intent of setting aside a certain percentage of the apartments that would accommodate low income families my understanding from the developer at this point in time is that it will be market rate okay all right thank you thank you thank you this is not a public hearing but if anyone is wanting to speak on this item we can certainly listen if you can just state your name and address for the record you have three minutes to speak my name is Rebecca Dick Stein I live at 2224 Northlake Trail in Denton 76201 and I want to point out that trees benefit everybody they mitigate air quality in our city and they also provide shade they lower costs for buildings and cooling and I would urge you to vote for the trees thank you thank you anyone else want to speak on this item I'll turn to the dais for discussion or motion Christopher Smith motion to prove ADP 19-0002 is there a condition there's a one condition with staff recommendations okay perfect okay Commissioner Beck second we have a first and a second for approval with staff recommendations any discussion see none I'll call for vote on the board okay so the recommendation is that we approve it with this consideration of the parking lots right okay I just wanted to say that listening to to the representative here I mean they've done everything that they were asked to do we all understand that trees are very important but they've already met that that minimum requirement or that requirement that the city has so it's my it's hard for me you know we give them standards to to how they should build and then we come back and say okay now we want you to do some more more work because we decided we want more trees I'm not against trees I'm all for trees but at the same time we have to understand that I believe we have to look at what we required from them at the beginning and not change our mind as we as we go on and we made this requirement that we would require a certain amount of parking spaces they met that and they've worked real hard to do that so I would have to vote against it simply because it has that additional recommendation there I just want to state that thank you Mr. Christopher back if I may to address Commissioner Sanchez's concern again this isn't going to force them to lose I mean it's not an absolute they have to meet a certain criteria which will probably be difficult to me I can't I can barely hear you I'm speaking right this this recommendation is not something that's going to absolutely reduce the number of parkings there it's just a recommendation that if you find certain trees that meet certain dimensions consider saving them at a loss of parking but there's not a an iron-fisted demand here that they reduce it any more than that so it's just it's just a suggestion to try and find room to preserve more trees if they can but looking at the criteria that's going to be pretty difficult in my opinion so for what it's worth pressure Sanchez I understand that but at the same time we did we have them they already went through that effort we discussed that I mean they followed what we asked them now we're going back and say okay go it's still time money that you know and are they gonna find them she said based on what they did they pretty much there's not gonna be maybe one or two parking spots if maybe that that's my understanding there's not not gonna be that many parking spots and it takes quite a few trees even to cover one spot are they gonna have that many trees it it's money that they've already going to have to invest and they on something that we should have had that from the beginning we we made the decision a long time ago or the city made that these are the number of parking spots we need and I believe it was based on the fact that a lot of these apartment complexes don't have enough parking spots so are we gonna go back up now and say okay we're gonna make an exception here are we gonna start doing that in every apartment complex we need to treat them all the same seeing no other discussion we do have a first and a second from Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Beck for approval I'll call for a vote on the board motion carries six one next item of business is our public hearings first one is item 5a AESA 19 - 0 0 0 1 B this item was previously opened to the public hearing I believe last meeting and so at this point since the item has already been open we're seeking a motion to postpone this item to a date certain of August 21st Christian Smith motion to postpone to date certain of August 21st second emotion we have a first and a second to postpone to a date certain of August 21st any discussion seeing none I call for a vote on the board motion carries six zero with one recuse I'll invite Commissioner Cole back to the dais move us to the next item 5b z 19 - 0 0 0 6 a I'll invite Julie Wyatt for presentation all right good evening this is z 19 6a fireside park so the request before you is to amend ordinance 2 0 1 5 - 2 1 7 to revise overlay conditions on approximately 30 acres of land-zoned neighborhood residential 3 the subject property is outlined in yellow on your screen and it is at the corner of Windsor and Hinkle some background on the site in 2002 it was zoned in our - during the citywide rezoning there was subject of a rezoning case in 2007 at that time it was rezoned from NR 2 to NR 3 with overlay conditions this project was part of a very specific concept plan and as part of that there were those overlay conditions directing how the site would be designed were were put on the property in 2015 that that project was was not developed so a new developer came in in 2015 at that time he was wanting to develop a age-restricted property single-family neighborhood once again also a part of it a pretty specific concept plan that included smaller lots with a lot of common open space particularly around the perimeter of the site that was approved with overlay conditions those overlay conditions are on your screen they were there were four of them and these what kind of related to the overlay conditions from 2007 first that a perimeter fence with a wrought-iron fence would be installed and that the setback of the homes from the existing curb would be 50 foot minimum so that would be from Windsor and Hinkle the and the HOA would maintain the the open spaces it also required 100% masonry for for the single-family homes on the site three car garages could not face the public or private right of way and then any ingress or egress could not remove any bike lanes on Hinkle so that was a part of that that specific site design that was not developed however a new developer came in and in 2018 a plot was a final plot was approved and it was filed of record and it's currently under construction they're putting in the the water and sewer in streets and and as part of his development he is requesting a modification of those overlay restrictions so those those previous concept plans that were specific to those those specific projects were not developed and he's developed it in more of a typical single-family neighborhood pattern with houses backing Windsor and Hinkle so that their backyards would be on those arterial Hinkle's a collector and then and then Windsor is an arterial so he is requesting to modify that perimeter fencing to allow opaque fencing for privacy for homeowners along those rights of way and to reduce the setback those that 50 foot to 40 feet and then that varied exterior building materials he's requesting that instead of that 100% masonry to reduce that to 70% masonry his request would not modify the underlying zoning so it would not increase the density or introduce new uses in fact they're already platted lots so here's here's the the language that he is requesting that that perimeter fence be constructed of a six foot tall board on board cedar fence with a top railing cap that there would be stone and or brick columns constructed every 100 linear feet along the street perimeter and at any corners in any terminus that there would be a vertical landscape element between those 100 feet columns so there would be something every 50 feet and then also street trees would be planted along Windsor and Hinkle they would be alternating shade and ornamental trees and they would be planted every 20 feet on center the HOA would maintain that that perimeter fence if this is approved as well as that landscaping along Windsor and Hinkle as I said he's requested a reduction in that minimum masonry from 100% to 70% but as we've discussed many times that due to a recent House bill and a new state of Texas laws we are no longer as the city of Denton we can't enforce that minimum masonry so staff has actually requested that that just be removed just to prevent confusion in the past because it's just not something we can enforce he's also requesting to reduce that set back from 40 50 feet to 40 feet and then leaving the the provision about cars and ingress and ingress in place so here is a depiction of what if approved the the fencing and the landscaping along Windsor and Hinkle would look like once again the alternating shade trees the cedar board on board fence with the masonry columns and then the landscaping element in the center here's a depiction of what that what the the setbacks look like so so here is here's Hinkle and just as an example I've chosen a lot that that yellow box that represents 50 feet from the curb so that's that would be that rear yard setback if 50 feet stays in place he is requesting a reduction to 40 feet so you can see that that 40 feet is that red and then that's kind of that this hatch line is sort of the depiction of what that would look down the street the current development code only requires a 10-foot rear setback so this portion in green is actually if it was just base minimum code what the minimum rear setback would be so that's on Hinkle on Windsor is a little different because the property lines start very far from that existing curb so the yellow really really wouldn't impact the that 50 feet really wouldn't impact those properties very much and then and then you can see how the other so so that doesn't come into play as much as it does on Hinkle there was a question in work session about what that looks like on the street and so I just added this and just so you can kind of see how Windsor looks up and down the street so these houses are set back about 45 43 to 45 feet that front yard setback this has bowling green park so it has a much larger setback for these houses so so if and I don't have it depicted on here but but that that 40 foot setback would would sort of maintain that line along Windsor except for obviously here because of that park that's separating the Windsor from the residential lots the criteria for approval is in sub chapter 3 of the debt and development code first is it meet the future land use and then second does it provide for adequate public infrastructure so first we look at the future land use element of Denton plan 2030 this is a low residential designation and that is single-family neighborhoods up to four dwelling units per acre the existing zoning of nr3 is consistent with that because it allows three and a half dwelling units per acre and is it is one of our single-family zoning districts we also looked at element 4 which is our urban design portion of our dent plan 2030 and we had some findings based upon that first of all that opaque cedar fence would provide backyard privacy and screening for future homeowners adjacent to the streets so that you people wouldn't be seeing in their backyards those brick columns landscaping and street trees provide visual consistency and rhythm along the rights of way so it creates not only a sense of arrival for the future homeowners within the fireside park development but also would enhance those existing corridors as the overlay is written today street trees aren't required along Windsor and Hinkle so this this would would actually enhance that by adding those street trees along those corridors it provides that it would those street trees would also provide that name that well-defined neighborhood edge and and and enhance those those rights of way the rear setback of 40 feet is not anticipated to reduce the neighborhood quality because it's it's in excess of what the development code requires so it's it's greater than what are any any new subdivision under just standard zoning would be required to put in and that 70% masonry exceeds not only a 2002 and 2019 DDC requirements but once again it's just not something we can enforce anymore we looked at the public improvements because this request would not increase the density or in intensity any new uses on the side a TIA wasn't required as as a result of the development of the site they are required to construct a five foot sidewalk on Hinkle and an eight foot sidewalk on heat on Windsor as part of that the development of the site there are capital improvement projects in the area one of them being the Magnolia Drive drainage which which is is really affecting Hinkle right now they are installing box culverts on Hinkle and West Windsor that's going to carry that stormwater to the south once installed the pavement will be replaced in its current between the the current curb and gutter and then that bike lane will be in restored as well due to resident safety concerns that were discussed at the neighborhood meeting they had the city has installed two stop signs on West Windsor at Hinkle creating a three-way stop there it's intended to calm a traffic on West Windsor also create a safer intersection for for residents pedestrians going to North Lakes Park as well as for vehicles when when you're on Hinkle and trying to turn on Windsor that's not a right angle intersection you almost have to look behind you so that that stop sign gives them a little extra a little a little extra traffic calming there will be impact fees paid with with the building permits about $2,000 per dwelling unit and that's for to provide funding for transportation improvements for the with that for the benefit of the city and to and to implement our mobility plan and they also had to to do dedicate their park requirements at platting and then also at building permit they'll have to pay a park development fee per single-family home water and wastewater is available to the side and is being constructed on the future streets as shown on the on the the aerial here there are schools they the 107 homes on the side is expected to generate 24 elementary students 12 middle school students and 16 high school students this is based on a formula by DISD and so so that is what their anticipated enrollment will be and then there is a fire station nearby it's within their eight minute or minute or less response time boundary public notification was sent out we've received some in opposition only one within that 200 foot boundary as of now and we haven't received any in favor signs were posted on the site and they did hold a neighborhood meeting staff does recommend it recommend approval of the requirement because it does meet the criteria or they recommend approval of the request because it does meet the criteria for approval with the the conditions that I discussed before regarding the six foot tall board on board cedar fence with that top railing cap the brick columns every 100 linear feet with the additional landscaping of street trees one every 20 feet with the alternating shade and ornamental and then that additional landscaping element to be maintained by the homeowners Association the setback would be reduced would be reduced from that 50 feet to 40 feet the three-car garages wouldn't face the street and then any ingress or egress would not remove the on-street bike lane on Hinkle Drive the applicant is here and I will stand for any questions we do have a couple Julie first is Christian back thank you chair thanks Julie just did you get a chance to find out what the linear footage for frontage on both Windsor Hinkle is so this is 1250 feet along here yes and along Hinkle it is 1400 feet okay great thank you Julie have a couple questions for you the I appreciate you pulling yardage or the footage from the street that 40 feet setback that's to the property line not to the house correct for this new development well this development the way the overlay conditions were written is that it's 50 feet from the curb to the house to those structures the way we typically and that's from the existing curb line typically we we see a rear setback from the property line to the house but you're correct that 40 feet would not be to the property line it would be to any structures okay and then how close can and that the backyard faces the collector Street of the secondary is here right yes sir how close can that fence be to Windsor that fence it that's fine it would be on the property line because this would this is then right-of-way and do you know the distance we that that right-of-way is so it looks like from Windsor to the property line where the fence would be I mean it kind of looks like almost 40 feet the right-of-way is much larger than the actual street width is today so it's and they're not required to expand that street as a result of this so so you know I don't know what the future plans are for Windsor in this location but right now it would not expand this is that right-of-way but but yeah there is there's quite a big gap there okay and then the other question I had is is not to oversimplify the request but to hopefully direct the conversation this request ultimately changes two things about the already approved zoning there being the one being a change from a wrought-iron fence to the fence described in your presentation the board on board with 100 foot stone structures and then the other is changing it from 50 feet to 40 feet correct the other conditions are remaining unchanged correct so for discussion purposes tonight this commission is considering should the fence be a wrought-iron or upgraded to a wood or or and should the setback move from 50 feet to 40 feet those that's the two kind of cruxes of the issue that's my understanding correctly yes sir and the landscaping associated with the the tree the fence perfect I see no other questions thank you this is a public hearing anyone wishing to speak may certainly do so I only have one card but everyone here is more than welcome to speak if you have a card will you bring it up when you come down but the first person that had a card is Gail Garber and if you just state your name and address for the record you'll have four minutes to speak and then we'll progress through okay my name is Gail Garber I live at 1200 Meadow Ridge Drive Denton Texas 76201 I've lived in the area for 35 years we've dealt with this piece of property for at least the last 20 having changes done to it originally I don't know if y'all can see this or not yeah we can see that let me just turn the camera on upstairs when this property was first set to change the from NR 2 to NR 3 code originally this was a treed lot area with quite a few trees on it we went to NR 3 the developer started all the trees went away the developer was fine $2,500 for the removal of all the trees we went from what should have been around 72 homes we're now up to 107 homes which the neighborhood was talked you know they couldn't develop it with just two houses per acre they needed more density to make it economically feasible for the developers so that's why the zone changed at the time in the last several divisions when different developers have come in this planning and zoning Commission Julie Wyatt was on part of it the City Council has approved the changes that are on the overlay district when this gentleman bought the property with the overlay district he knew it was there did not ask for a change till six months into the development he advised us at the meeting with the area when they were talking about making these changes one of the home developers is Gann Homes but I think they have over half the lots the other builder were unaware who that was I went home did research on Gann Homes I have printouts if y'all would like off the internet of the shoddy construction and the different complaints from people on their building process how the homes have turned out they do not honor their warranties paint is poorly done the siding is falling off houses now they also have some good comments on here as well but going to the construction in the area it doesn't look very nice for what he's fixing to bring into the neighborhood he complained at our thing that the wrought-iron fence would allow homeowners dogs to bite people as they walked along the track well you know what their homeowners insurance should cover that or they can put their own shrubbery and greenery against the wrought-iron fence to help mitigate some of that he also addressed that the backyards could become sloppy we'd have to look at it through the wrought-iron fence well what's the homeowners Association for it's there to keep the people to maintain their homes so I don't understand why that would be a problem I'm against the fence our neighborhood is not fenced off from others I'd like to see the wrought-iron fence go in to continue the continuity I'd like to see the hundred percent brick stay and I understand why that can't be enforced and I don't understand all the legal ramifications but if the overlay district were already on there if we don't remove it I don't understand why he can't build a hundred percent brick the majority of the homes in the area are already a hundred percent brick very few of them have siding if they do it's on a gable and it's not much just making it conducive to the current neighborhood his comment at our meeting was well I'm gonna meet Denton's minimum code well that sounds pretty yucky to me I'd like to see a developer come in and go above the minimum code the neighborhood it's not at a minimum code it's maintained it's been maintained for 40 and 50 years you bring someone that wants to do minimum code you're gonna have a neighborhood in the donut it's not being kept up and that's exactly what we're fixing to look at we've gone through the neighborhoods been through the density thing we understand there's a cost to develop it but he's trying to bring in someone that wants to do it at the cost to our neighborhood they're gonna be in they're gonna be out they're not gonna be the ones living here they have put in the stop sign to help with the traffic but we're not seeing the full impact of it yet because our streets are shut down so we don't have the neighborhood bill and we don't have the traffic going up to North Lakes Park yet so we have no idea how that's gonna stop our fire and police protection getting down to us on Hinkle plus I don't think that Hinkle's wide enough for these trees and a sidewalk according to their plot plan thank you I appreciate you being here thank you I think it's worth noting because this might be an ongoing point for the citizens this city of Denton no longer can enforce building materials so not to get into legalese of it but our representatives at the state level voted to remove that authority from city ordinances so I think all your points are valid unfortunately of all of those we cannot do anything about enforcing brick the state legislation took that power away from us the defense and stuff back is on the table for discussion this evening the brick unfortunately is not Christian Ellis thank you chair and to that point I did ask in our work session with pre-existing overlay conditions if these this new legislation which takes effect September 1st if that removes the overlay and and the city's ability to enforce that and unfortunately it does Christian back thank you chair I'm hoping the applicant is here that we can address some questions to state your name and address please McGinnis I reside in Frisco Texas okay Casey thank you the one big concern I have I'm a little disappointed too we're gonna lose the wrought iron fence or it's being recommended to this area over there it's not so much that the cedar board-on-board fence that you're recommending is cheap as far as wood fences goes it's probably the line but it takes something away my main concern especially on Windsor it's a secondary arterial it sees a lot of traffic and I understand that the way that you're developing this you are gonna have a lot of backyards facing out there and I can understand the need for privacy I understand Gail's concern too about how that could be dealt with otherwise but I wonder if it wouldn't be amenable to you you wouldn't see value in to accommodate these concerns to at least a long winter consider a masonry wall on that 1250 foot frontage up there I realize it's at a cost that would be added to the to each house but over the long haul if HOA is responsible for this I'm thinking maintenance it's gonna offset maintenance costs down the road plus it's gonna give a more appealing look at least on Windsor I can live with the board on board on ankle because it's a connector Street but is it possible that you would take a serious look at that and give some value to a masonry fence along Windsor yeah mr. Beck I appreciate your opinion when we purchased the property like I said the the overlay was a wrought iron fence and just because of the nature of this property with the drainage requirements that we have you know we've had we've had to add two detention ponds to the site to take off the drainage from the adjacent creeks and from the storm drains in that area that were at the time already taxed so there's additional cost associated with that I will say when we had the neighborhood meeting miss Wyatt after I went if we had the neighborhood meeting and then went met with staff miss Wyatt took meticulous notes on all the concerns from the community and so when we got together we went through these line item by line item by line item to address those legitimate concerns by the community one by one and and that's how you see the the book of work that you saw today with the fence the columns the additional landscaping things that things of that nature and so from a budget perspective and I know people don't like to talk about budgets or hear about them but it was a step up from what we originally were planning to do the the brick thin wall is a cost that's three times what the wrought iron fence is what the wood fences and it just wasn't part of the cost estimates when we purchased the property so unfortunately my answer is it's just it's just not financially feasible for us to do that at this time okay and I do understand that again I was trying to indicate though in the long haul the the maintenance of it that might all set that original cost each homeowner is going to incur that cost up front but down the road maintaining a masonry wall would be a lot less than fences we've seen these areas Teasley Lane comes to mind that stretch from 35 all the way where it loops around hits Lillian Miller is a lot of wood fences some of them board on board some of them are not and they're poorly maintained in time wood fences as good as this one is will deteriorate unless the HOA is on top of this it's going to just look bad on the main arterial so again just I'm probably going to try and see if I can add an amendment to this and see if we can get a masonry wall up there that would be my suggestion otherwise I'm having a hard time approving this loose fence I don't have a problem with the setbacks I think we can live with that but the appearance of a fence long winters important to me and I think in the long run it'll be important to the city and I can't help but feel it would add value to your development too but that's my opinion so but thank you anyway all right well I know when we when we submit the HOA documents we have to do that to the city for their approval for just those types of purposes to make sure that it is positioned and run adequately to take care of those maintenance type items it was approved by the city and so I think from a code enforcement perspective that the city can watchdog those elements about maintenance about the way it looks things of that nature okay thank you sir another question Commissioner Sanchez I just want to say I'm glad you're honest about you know increasing costs I know a lot of times you know I feel that we make recommendations without since it doesn't come out of our pockets it's a lot easier to make recommendations then so I appreciate you recognizing or telling us that you know you didn't make what do you call it you didn't make a considerate you didn't consider that a brick wall and that should have been discussed previously so you wouldn't get caught here trying to make a quick decision so I just want to appreciate what you stated well I appreciate that too and I did want to state you know we have been working with the city on numerous types of items that we have come to the table financially for one of them is with the water system you know we currently were going to bring help to help the city connect their main water system down Windsor we ran into an issue in the right of way because of the trees that were planted in front of the park it just made that unfeasible to take that down Windsor we stepped up and purchased the right of way through the park to take that around through the back we purchased that right away we're going to pay for the installation of that water line that will help feed the rest of the town so there have been instances where we have stepped up financially and I'd like to just you know with that in mind with the detention ponds it really has put a strain on the budget I'd love to put in the brick-thin wall and adhere to your request but it's just not feasible at this time Christian Perdetta you know I understand the the costs and involved in everything and you know you obviously have investments to make and you have to try and make a good return on that investment I I tend to side with Larry on this one and I tend to side with most the people in the room and I do have to admit that I live close to North Lakes Park so we go on on lots of walks along there and you know they made some great progress in terms of the park right now where they're letting natural grasses and things grow and lateral flowers grow to bring in more butterflies to become you because we are a monarch city along those lines I would prefer to see something at least along the road where Windsor is that that seems to be more ornate and in keeping with you know the drive that we have to beautify that area and to make it significantly more more natural we do know that even well constructed wood fences start to look worn down after just a few years and as you know Commissioner Sanchez I think mentioned or not actually it was Larry I think mentioned you know yes this would be a cost it would be born at the very beginning but I think you know homeowners would understand particularly if they were paying into an HOA that this is a cost that they'll wind up saving money on because they won't have you have to keep repairing fences every few years if we have something significantly more stable but I do back Commissioner Beck's you know request to find something that's more in keeping with the aesthetic along North Lakes Park it's it's you know it's a park that a lot of people go to walk along we have our trails there and you know quite frankly I miss the grass field but anyway I'm so toss that out there yeah I will say to you to just comment on you're talking about the aesthetics we are adding over 300 trees to the site 150 of those are in that right way that you just discussed there's not a there's not a tree on the property today that's how we purchased it when we're adding I think 329 trees you know out of our pocket to make that that drive and that aesthetics more of what you're talking about in line with you know the park atmosphere so there has been a dramatic effort to to adhere to that park that park atmosphere that you're describing so I have a quick question for you one I wholeheartedly agree with tree canopies if you look at satellite views over the decades and didn't all new tree growth in the city has come from development so I 100% agree that just looking at satellite imagery of canopy canopy grows where development happens by developers going into planting trees that are diverse and healthy and stable so I appreciate that that that point I do have a question you initially before all this state legislation came in or suggests that we move the brick from a hundred percent to seventy percent is that correct yes obviously we can't do anything about that right is it your intent and your develop your builders intent to not go under seventy percent brick is that going is the intent to stay at that seventy percent I can commit to that yes absolutely so obviously we can enforce that right so just as a citizen and as the chair of this commission I would strongly encourage you to amend your HOA because the HOA can protect that sure so if you were to put in the seventy percent brick requirement into the HOA then it's enforceable from the HOA perspective not the cities sure and so if if you are committed to that I think everyone would appreciate at least that being codified in the HOA so future development that areas is not a 50% break or a hundred percent siding so that's just a suggestion above anything else right right and I could absolutely commit to doing that okay I don't see any other questions we have other people oh never right cuz you're back thank you chair Julie this might be for you but mr. Guinness you'll hang on a second to you let me ask Julie a question we're dealing with cost here if we consider masonry wall the trees he's putting in is that above and beyond what the city would require yes sir so he could remove some of those trees and still meet city minimums with and would all sit in my thinking here is that would help offset the cost of the masonry wall it's developing under the 2002 didn't development code which did not require any street trees along arterials okay so I'd hate to see no trees there but you said all right mr. McGinnis you say you put about 150 trees along the Windsor frontage that's right what at what cost do you know what that is I don't I don't know it's over a thousand caliber inches in all the builder will put in all the trees on the interior as they develop out the property but at 20 feet at roughly we're talking about 3,000 feet so we're you know we're right at 150 trees along Hinkle and Windsor so say we cut that in half though with that suitor budget a little bit at least if we put that masonry I'm trying to work with you and unfortunately unfortunately not we had we had this discussion as we did you this negotiation and I will tell you this was not a one-time sit-down between myself and staff this is a negotiation that went on for several months back and forth on how to accommodate the concerns of the of the adjacent communities as well as the city and this is kind of how we got to this point so it was a step by step by step process we push the envelope push the envelope push the envelope and that's where we are to trust me I appreciate everything you've done I don't mean any disrespect it's just that this is something I'd like to see and if it can't be done it can't be done but I do recognize that you guys have done an awful lot in addition to what we expected first time around so thank you for that sure I appreciate it I do have a couple extra cards that we'll get to and then we have questions we'll call you back out thank you mr. McGinnis the first card or second card I have for this evening is Rebecca Dick Stein and if you could state your name and address for the record you have four minutes I will be quick my name is Rebecca Dick Stein I live at 2224 North Lake Trail Denton Texas 76201 I'm actually not in the zone where we live is not in the zone where we get the notifications about this development but we're real close and I use the park at least weekly sometimes daily and I want to reiterate I very much feel like you know cedar wood fencing breaks down very quickly but I'm also here to bring up another issue that I think is really important until I came here I did not know it was over 200 houses because I don't get the notifications although I've been to some of the neighborhood meetings where I enter the park is Parkside Drive and Windsor and that is in between two stop signs I have already put this request into Julie and writing we need a three-way stop sign at Parkside and Windsor in addition the three-way stop sign at Hinkle and Windsor is great but with now this egress on Windsor Drive we're gonna have a lot more traffic there it's already people are speeding down that road and it's only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt thank you thank you point of clarification it's a hundred and seven homes Craig understood not questioning that I just want to make sure I knew the number right because I was starting to question myself the next card I have is Kirk Pierce and again if you just state your name and now just for the record you got four minutes to speak I'm Kirk Pierce I live at 500 mimosa I did not get a notification either my first of all thank you miss Wyatt for bringing in the stop signs everybody does appreciate that immensely but in regards of traffic that's the one thing I haven't heard and I'm still trying to understand what is going to happen to mimosa drive from that increase because there's it's pretty much a thoroughfare and there is there gonna be any slowdowns and I know that I believe and you can correct me miss Wyatt is we did do a traffic study or something like that or did we not you can correct me what's that you did it I guess you did a traffic study on one day so if we if we get for the audience is keep it that's okay so my question is what we've all talking about the housing but what is how are we solving the increased traffic on the most drive because that's the entrance so that it's more of a question that's what I'm asking for appreciate to be in here Christopher data actually my my statement was going to be to the previous speaker about requesting the the stop sign on arm Parkside and Windsor that that's actually out of our purview but I would recommend you know submitting a request to staff to look into that okay and it's mr. Pierce's question the the the traffic that was studied was for the initial zoning and overlay because we're not changing the density that the houses that are already been plotted and are under construction they're happening we're not changing any of that this evening so under the purview of this evening we haven't looked at the traffic impact on any of the streets that was looked at on a previous vote so we're simply looking at landscape fencing and then the setback so that's kind of what we're focused on this evening but certainly I understand your point and and it's what's well taken the next card I have is for Barbara Lightfoot and if you just take your name and address for the record four minutes Barbara Lightfoot I live at 422 mimosa and I was involved in the earlier stages whenever this development was for senior living we had the alignment still didn't know if it was going to go for the exit from the development into Magnolia probably not North North Ridge but Magnolia or mimosa it ended up being mimosa or Headley either way I live on mimosa I too agree that there should be an additional study and I wanted to state that as well for how many additional cars are going to be going for all of the distance from where you enter on Hinkle until you get down to Carroll there are no stop signs for mimosa so that's an issue the other with the raw down fence there is a really good example of one that has been maintained at the apartment complex that is north of locust north of Windsor on locust wrought-iron fence shrubbery on the inside it's maintained it looks good there is a buffer between people driving up and down the North Locust before you get on to 288 and I think that's the appearance is better we have a lot of chain-link fences open fencing in our neighborhood and that's the appearance I think that would be important as well as that appearance upon driving down Windsor so that you can actually see the park and you're not looking on the other side to just a wooden fence my other concern is the enforcement of the detention ponds or retention ponds whatever they're called as well as any other maintenance issues for the development with the HOA that needs to be stressed those are very I'm very concerned about access so close to the road for those ponds especially the ones that are the one that is right off Hinkle it is full every time it rains I know the feeling my backyard gets that way as well it doesn't drain well in the whole neighborhood and so I'm very concerned about that so the setback could be impacting some of the homes that are along Hinkle once they're constructed and there is a problem with that pond and drainage and that's all I have thank you thank you mr. Beck miss like question for you you and a couple other people from your community keep mentioning the wrought-iron fence and again I'd like to see that too and it would have worked well and we had the development remain the same but I personally have a problem of houses now that are going to back up to Windsor and that privacy is lost and that's why I'm kind of pushing for a masonry fence to you know keep some elegance there and at the same time for the privacy these people would expect I'm just curious do you have a problem with us I have I have masonry on the front of my home part of the fence is masonry the rest is chain link with my neighbor who just left I think a few months ago so okay so if we could get an amendment to this that pass with the masonry fence at least along Windsor that you'd be okay with it what would be the fence then along Hinkle well because that's where the neighborhood is yeah well the main reason I'm arguing for Windsor and I don't disagree with what you're saying it's it's it's it's easier to argue for a masonry fence along what's considered a secondary arterial which is a high traffic area the reason being is so many people pass by there they're going to see that and as opposed to the connector Street to think Liz not that there isn't a lot of traffic that doesn't go up and down there it's a busy connector Street but what I'm doing what I'm going to try to do is going to impose a cost to the developer which actually he can pass on to the individual homeowners that will get assimilated in price which I don't think is going to be that much and will be a volume to them down the road asking for it on Hinkle is probably pushing the envelope okay so my question is on Hinkle or on Windsor wherever the wooden fences is that attached to the responsibility of the individual homeowner if you after the recent winds when you drive down loop 288 towards Collins arena whatever it's called all of the fences along there which were backyard fences were blown over by a recent gust of wind and that's a legitimate concern and again wood fences I think we all agree they don't last as long but as was mentioned the Homeowner Association will be responsible for that the city will enforce that provided that somebody submits a request to have it done but that's something yeah if it is codified within the HOA and the HOA must maintain right right and that's that's effectiveness of an HOA that shouldn't be a problem right if that's part of it right great thank you thank you that's the only cards I have but I welcome any other speaker that wants to come from please sir I'll take it thank you my name is Jeff Pablo I went 2028 Ford and Blaine and Denton I already have concerns the construction that's going on never in my life have I seen drainage pipe installed and taken out four times never in my life have I seen temporary batch plants be shuttled back and forth has anyone from the city paid any attention to what paving is currently happening on that property at the moment is he using fibercrete fibercrete is garbage all you need to do is take a ride around Denton County MHMR property that was entirely fibercrete it broke apart in less than one year especially without reinforcement there are too many other things the already brought up was the retention pond at the southeast corner I have seen that thing overflowing into the adjacent property numerous times already it proves to me that he doesn't know how to build a retention bond he doesn't know who to get there are just too many things along this line what are the widths of the streets are the streets going to be wide enough so that once everything is developed and people have landscapers in place doing work and an emergency vehicle needs to come down through there is there going to be room from what I have seen not so far can consult the NFPA ask the fire department what the requirements are for emergency vehicle access right now I'm not seeing that any accommodation for emergency vehicles is showing up in this development just room for thought thank you I appreciate being here and we can confirm that city compliance and ordinances are being followed engineering plans were approved as part of their final plat in 2018 so it met all city standards and that includes fire access street wits fire access details as far as pavement thickness and the requirements okay thank you Julie this is a public hearing anyone else wishing to speak you can typically we would just allow one time but when you're talking about at our community meeting he informed us that he would be putting up wrought iron around the retention ponds so if the wrought irons already going up around that area I would urge you to please make him continue the wrought iron at least along Hinkle what's good for the goose is good for the gander if you're gonna make him put up masonry make him do it around the whole development or make him do the wrought iron around the whole development and let the neighborhood or the neighbors use like 14 years or something fast-growing to partition their backyard from the street traffic and beautify thank you if you're just speaking we certainly come down to the mic if you just state your name and address you have four minutes I'm Shirley Brown I live at 2304 Vanderbilt Court and I agree with you that I walk my dogs daily from through Bowling Green Park which also have a garden thank the city I want to speak to the width I would like it kept at 50 foot it's just because there's the other part that's very wide I think putting it at 40 is just going to break it up I I would like it kept at 50 some they're all talking about the fences and I know it's I don't like it either we also have so much construction going on in our area Rainy Road behind us Denton High School coming to Bonnie Bray Windsor is a racetrack it really is I had every once in a while I will have some nice person stop and let me and the two dogs run across the across the street but the Denton parks are awesome they do a great job I love living in that area we're an old neighborhood although I only came back in 2000 so anyway I would like to see a little less construction thank you thank you anyone else wish to speak I certainly do so state your name and address for the record I did receive the notification I just didn't quite hear what you said earlier about the overlays do you say they're going away September 1st okay Charles thank you chair they're not going away they're not enforceable with the new state legislation it's what we learned beginning September 1st so though there's an overlay in place that speaks to masonry we were informed today that the city could not enforce that and longer just be more clear that's for building materials only correct any other overlay standard would still be there correct I was confused the only time I hear overlays brought up is when they are being disrespected and I don't know why they exist just to pacify us I guess and they're just turned over and I don't like the fence or the setback amount I think it should be respected because that's why it's there thank you very much anyone else wants to speak they certainly do so seeing that I'll close the public hearing turns the days for discussion or motion Christian Beck thank you chair I want to move to approve the agenda item with an amendment to the fence on Windsor recommending that a masonry wall run along Windsor instead of the wood fence in so doing I would like to comment you know I understand that you'd love to have the masonry fence along Hinkle - and the feeling that the privacy loss of those people it's really up to them to put things in and do if they will if they do they don't you know you could have people in those houses that don't keep their backyards up nice and then you would have a distracted visual there so that's that's a possibility too that's why it's important probably to have a privacy fence it's easier for me to ask for one on a secondary arterial like Windsor than it is on a connector street like Hinkle but so anyway my motion is to approve allowing the setbacks but with replacing the wrought iron fence on Windsor with a masonry fence allowing the board on board cedar fence on Hinkle so we have a first if I understand this correctly out of the four conditions you were just making a change to one to require a mason fence on the Windsor section of the property perimeter correct okay I don't know if the screens are working I don't see a second but I can by a show of hands is there a second seeing none the motion fails Commissioner Smith did you have yeah you were on the board and I had a question for for staff Julie so let's say that we don't we don't vote to approve to change the overlay stays the same wrought iron fencing is what the developer can put up instead the wrought iron fencing what prevents a person who buys a home in the neighborhood what prevents them from tearing that wrought iron fencing down and building a privacy fence around their property or not tearing it down but building a privacy fence behind it if they're if they don't want people seeing back in their backyard and their backyard faces Windsor they don't want people walking by be able to see back there what prevents the private property owner from putting up a privacy fence it's my understanding there would be nothing preventing them so there could be a scenario in which we had we would have a privacy fence on one lot and the next door is another wrought iron fence then another privacy fence in the next lot essentially we could end up with private property owners making the decisions rather than having uniformity along the line correct of the street of Windsor okay thank you Commissioner Sanchez Julie how familiar are you with HOA's they're pretty restrictive when it comes to what they read once some is built it's gonna stay that way is that correct they don't they don't pretty much want everything to be look alike I would imagine it depends on how that HOA structure HOA's works okay I would think it would depend on an each individual HOA how their how their rules are set forth all right I know they're pretty the ones I've been familiar with are pretty restrictive you can't plant a tree unless you get permission from HOA you can't do certain things so it would be hard for me to see everybody doing a different yeah you know putting different items or material in the backyard along Hinkle and even Windsor I would I'm just wondering are you familiar can I speak to the developer following along this this question on a choice if it's gonna be an HOA right yes okay is I my understanding or my experience with a choice they're pretty strict they don't allow you to do on the backyard nobody would be able to do whatever they wanted as a fence along Hinkle and there's no there's no there's not a current restrictive covenant in the HOA that would prevent that and that was I'm glad that was brought up because that was one of the other main reasons for the opaque fence and not having the transparent fence okay there would not be any way to prevent that unfortunately all right just for that and my question to be along the lines of what Commissioner Sanchez was saying so based on what we're talking about right now in theory if we voted against the the changes we would end up with a with a wrought iron fence as it normally would be in theory people purchasing their houses could put up a privacy fence along the back line and along the back and as we don't have HOA guidelines right now we can't say that there's anything that would be restricting people from doing that from from adding on a privacy fence in the future right so I guess so the question on your part was whether or not you believed that it would be restrictive to allow people to add a privacy fence at a future time or well my understanding of an HOA once the houses get developed the HOA is developed okay and they set up their guidelines with that neighborhood all right now you move into that neighborhood and you decide hey I don't like people looking through my backyard I want to do something different the HOA has already been established and they have their rules and you're not going to be able to change do what you want because they already have their rules now if they say you can do whatever you want along Hinkle or along Windsor along that fence you can do whatever you want but the the rules are usually established before the houses are sold so neighbors don't move in there and start doing whatever they want okay when you buy that house you belong to an HOA and that each of those guidelines are set okay and I understand that I guess and I guess this would be something that the developer would have to explore in terms of whether or not people would make those purchases with with this in mind I would imagine that people purchasing a house with a back fence facing Hinkle or Windsor would eventually would actually want a privacy fence and that would be and you know value added on thing at the time of the purchase so most likely I wouldn't imagine that that would be restrictive in terms of us saying let's let's vote for the wrought iron fence knowing that this is something that could possibly be added on at a future time so thanks I just wanted to clarify where we're going on on that one Christian Smith nature I'm gonna make a motion to approve with staff recommendations as they sat the presentation I actually would have liked to see this be a masonry wall all the way around I don't know if I feel comfortable whenever we include Hinkle and Windsor in that making the the developer have to eat that cost even though they could pass it along in the valley of the home but I can't can't sit here and say that I support leaving it as is and then having the developer have to put a wrought iron knowing that then you would then have this inconsistency over time that private property owners will at some point in time not want to have people looking in their backyard you can't you can't depict about what the what the character of the neighborhood is now and how people like it in that neighborhood but people moving into there they're bound to be somebody who's not gonna want it and we'll put up a privacy fence eventually and so the inconsistency is something that I'm just saying going down the line in the future that I'd like to take out of the equation so make a motion to approve. We have a motion to approve with staff recommendations. Commissioner Sanchez. Yeah I would like to second that I also agree with you I think the people are gonna move in there they want it they're they're gonna want privacy in their backyard I know most people do in most neighborhoods that where the backyard does face the street you see you see some type of wall because I think I just I agree with you in the sense that people just don't want people looking in their backyard. So a first and a second any discussion? Commissioner Ellis. Thank you chair I just want to make a couple comments thanks for sharing all your concerns and I understand the frustration with this property clearly when you look at the history of it back in 2002 I'm sure there was concern when the original zoning change was made from NR 2 to NR 3 and there was a great deal of overlay restrictions put on it I'm sure because of that concern however in 2015 most of those restrictions were removed some of the restrictions that remain right now honestly don't make sense for the way this is developed a wrought iron fence along Windsor Drive is not what any homeowner wants right there Windsor Drive is only going to get busier someone called it a thoroughfare now it will get widened it will have more traffic on it a wrought iron fence and again with the concerns brought up that possibly homeowners putting up various other fencing to hide the fact that Windsor is behind them on a wrought iron fence just doesn't make sense so while I understand the frustration because of the past what we're left with right now to consider is we can't go back to 2002 unfortunately we can't go back to 2015 when those overlay restrictions were changed so what we're forced with what is the decision to that we have before us today which is the couple of conditions that is on the board now to vote on thank you Mr. Commissioner Beck thank you chair just want to make some comments to explain my vote considering everything I've said Commissioner Smith makes sense here as much as I'd like to see a masonry wall go up there one thing that's that is going to affect not only the people that live there but the people live around them is the fact that wrought iron fence would expose a lot of things and create conditions that might make it worse than they think I don't like seeing a wooden fence go up there I'm glad it is it's the value of the fences is a high value wood fence the cedar fence with the top rail board on board but down the road we're gonna have to deal with that and I hope it is dealt with with an efficient HOA so I'll be voting along with Commissioner Smith's motion to approve thank you Mr. before we vote I just wanted to thank everyone for coming out and speaking your thoughts and helping us contextualize I don't happen to live in the neighborhood so other Commissioners do and so just having a holistic viewpoint is helpful to kind of walk through this process we don't take any decisions up here lightly it's being on behalf the Commission for that and so I appreciate you'd spend in your Wednesday evening with us I'm gonna be in support of this and just for context Commissioner Beck there's a recent situation in the neighborhood where they had an HOA and a masonry fence along an arterial and the cost to repair the masonry fence was substantial enough that the residents and the HOA are now enrolled in a lawsuit about who pays for that and so I know you mentioned that a masonry fence provides a value long-term except when it goes really bad they're really expensive to fix a cedar board on board is a little bit more accessible to fix and so I would probably push back on you respectfully about the value of a masonry fence when that starts to break who pays for that and how that gets worked out I've seen personally through family members to be a kind of a sticky situation to to go through and so I agree with Commissioner Ellis about the wrought iron I think a uniform privacy fence that's just like the properties to the West when I leave the tennis courts or the driving range and drive down Windsor right when you pass Parkside there's several homes that have the wooden fence and so I don't think it'll be a discrepancy to go for a wooden fence they have a patch of trees back to wooden fences the only thing that I would reiterate to the developer is is to look at the HOA there's a lot of ability to standardize future development and the current development to really make it a high standard someone mentioned quality of the product and I think having a a strong HOA can push back on some of the potential commentary about what's going in in the neighborhood so I think it's a really unique opportunity you have especially with the state legislation to take control of the narrative that you want provides that neighborhood so I would encourage you to look at HOA and amend where needed with the building materials or other opportunities you have and with that I would strongly encourage you within the budget to buy and plant the biggest trees possible initially I know we talked about canopy at growth I just think it'd be a benefit to the parks in Denton that when you're in North Lakes Park and running those trails or at the airfield and you look across and and you have big trees earlier and so we're not waiting a decade to get some good coverage there and that that pathway so again those aren't conditions at all but rather just suggestions for the beautification of Denton and the quality of the development you're putting in but with that I don't see any other discussion so we'll call for a vote on the board motion carries six one congratulations that moves us to the last item of business item 6 P&Z matrix I will let Richard begin and open it up for additions or comments I don't have much to add on to the to the matrix this evening just wanted to highlight a couple items again that the upland habitat that will be coming coming forward when the criteria manual for the ESA is brought forth so that that is still going through through committee I did still leave on and if you've noticed it it will continue to stay on sort of the draft policies and procedures I think as we finalize the the ordinance is related to these bills and in light of the item tonight regarding the attendance just coming back and looking at that in in in totality we did hit the the urban forestry master plan tree fund finally I think I think Gary did a great job sort of going through all the items that they're they're working on and then the staff analysis update I initially was anticipating bringing that actually today as we finalize the ordinances that will be brought forth next week after that you'll see it sort of in all in one so rather than give it to you piece bill you can kind of see how it all how it all fits together but but really it's just simplifying how we how we create our our staff analysis primarily for for plats so I think you'll see a much more one robust but but a little more a little more detail in just what we are what we are looking at inciting for those plat reports that was all ahead thanks for the update Mr. Smith thank you I think we talked a little about today dear to work session but I think as soon as legal and city gets a chance to really look over those those house bills getting up getting a really fully fledged good work session report just on what that is how it's gonna impact us what you know we want to keep on having to ask every single time we get a presentation of Kim can we can we vote on this can we enforce this anymore what kind of things change and specifically the reason I wanted to speak up because I'm sure that the city was good we were gonna go ahead and do that anyways but I would like to see some specific examples if Jerry or planning department can come back and say remember this case you guys voted this way and we did it this way with this stack recommendation this is no longer allowed okay thank you we need just saying the law and and and expounding upon the law is great and all but the Jerry you're a smart guy I'm not so I need you to do it give it to me in the picture book form okay well I need appreciate it Cynthia's even smarter if she's ever joining us she have their license gets down here apparently that mail that mail route from from Minnesota to here is pretty long commissioner Ellis thank you chair I'd like to thank all my fellow commissioners for reconsidering my absence requests so thank you very much for your support in that I definitely would like to discuss that policy as we sent that back before and bring that back before us so we can have some further discussion and how that is poorly written and what needs to happen there so thank you for that also Richard is there any city council updates that we need to know with regard to any recent votes there there was the my apologies because I did take a little vacation so I missed the last council meeting but they did approve the on the 23rd the group two amendments map amendments with the exception of I believe it was area 40 that was a request if you recall I believe that was around loop 288 the property owner I believe did not want that rezoning and I also believe the the item that that the Commission recommended denial of them I believe that also was was not approved by by City Council I will confirm that but I do believe those two were not brought forward Mr. Prunetta and kind of building on what Commissioner Smith said a second ago with the discussion on the the various house bills and particularly how they hobble what we traditionally are allowed to review and discuss with you know the public I just wanted to make sure that when you know we're kind of putting those things together and the impact it's going to have that you know we provide in some way information to disseminate at you know public meetings you know neighborhood meetings on you know future developments coming up so that way you know neighbors people who are concerned about things going up in in you know areas close to them kind of understand that there are restrictions that we have going forward and that they know what the restrictions the city has going forward in terms of you know the things they can oppose the things they can ask for and what's being put in there you know the home is close to them certainly it might even be we can probably put together a even just a simple like FAQ or simple what what can and what can't we do as a as a community yeah Richard I only have one thing I know that does it wasn't pertinent to any of the discussion items today but we we started implementing financial economic consequences and benefits to projects and again it wasn't pertinent tonight and I do realize that there's a former chair of P&Z that would probably prefer to know like every cost developer made to get to that point I don't know if that context is needed but if there's situations where developers doing a quid pro quo with the city that is helpful to know because there is a developer tonight who bought right away and rerouted a city line that type of stuff if there if a developer is helping our city there's a project over by Bill letter forward south of town where they were also helping connectivity if it's possible to include that in the assessment just to understand the willingness of that negotiation that goes on that would be helpful if if it's applicable any other items for the matrix or questions seeing none I'll call this meeting to close at 821